ARCHEOLOGICAL INVESTIGATIONS AT SITE 42SA20286, 

CANYONLANDS NATIONAL PARK, UTAH 

BY 

Steve Dominguez 

Midwest Archeological Center 

Technical Report No. 36 

United States Department of the Interior 

National Park Service 

Midwest Archeological Center 

Lincoln, Nebraska 

ABSTRACT 

Site 42SA20286 is an open lithic scatter located on the west bank of Salt Creek in the 

Needles District of Canyonlands National Park, Utah. The site is considered eligible for 

nomination to the National Register of Historic Places by consensus with the Utah State 

Historic Preservation Officer. In September 1989, subsurface investigations were conducted 

in and near areas of the site to be impacted by bridge construction. 

Three geomorphic units were identified within the site and can be differentiated by 

depositional conditions. The lowest unit cannot be reliably dated. A single radiocarbon sample 

from the middle unit tentatively places it within the Neoglacial or Late Archaic. The 

uppermost unit and surface deposits appear to contain Anasazi components. Culturally derived 

materials consist of flaked lithics, bone, and charcoal. 

The lithic assemblage indicates dependence on a limited set of formal tools augmented 

by expedient items produced with local materials. Stratigraphic changes in the lithic assemblage suggest chronological shifts in use, technology, and group range. 

The faunal assemblage indicates use of small vertebrates, especially mammals. 

Macrobotanical specimens included Celtis seed coats and fragments of an unidentifiable burned 

seed coat. No features were identified in or near the area investigated. 

Although results indicate the presence of significant archeological deposits on portions 

of this site, none were located in the area of direct impact. As a consequence, the sample 

recovered during these investigations is considered an adequate sample of the area directly 

impacted by construction. 
TABLE OF CONTENTS 

Abstract ....................................................... 1 

. . Table of Contents ................................................ 11 

List of Tables ................................................... iv 

List of Figures ................................................... vi 

Introduction .................................................... 1 

Environment .................................................... 5 

Background Information ............................................ 7 

CultureHistory ............................................... 7 

Previous Archeological Investigations ............................... 8 

Research Contexts ................................................ 9 

Research Orientations ........................................... 9 

Specific Research Questions ..................................... 10 

Methods and Field Investigations ..................................... 15 

DataRecove ry ............................................... 15 

Field Procedures ............................................. 16 

Laboratory Procedures ......................................... 17 

Areas Investigated ............................................ 19 

Description of Investigations ..................................... 19 

Stratigraphy. Geomorphology. Paleoenvironment .......................... 21 

Surface Description ........................................... 21 

Profiles and Stratigraphy ....................................... 22 

Environments and Profile Development ............................. 22 

Intrasite Correlation of Units ..................................... 24 

Dating .................................................... 25 

Natural Levels. Field Specimen Numbers. and Strata .................... 25 
Macrobotanical Materials ....................................... 25 

Molluscs. by Bill Wayne ....................................... 26 

Vertebrates ................................................ 27 

Extrasite Correlations and Paleoenvironmental Implications ............... 29 

Cultural Materials ............................................... 33 

Assemblage Overview ......................................... 33 

Raw Materials and Sources ...................................... 34 

Material Type Definitions ...................................... 34 

Definitions and Descriptive Statistics of Artifact Categories ............... 36 

Artifact Assemblage Material Use Patterns .............................. 43 

Material Use Patterns in Debitage ................................. 43 

Material Use Patterns in Tools ................................... 46 

Summary of Material Use Patterns ................................. 48 

Stratigraphic Distribution of Artifacts .................................. 51 

Thesample ................................................. 51 

Proposed Chronological Variation in Lithic Technology .................. 51 

Descriptions of Assemblages from Individual Strata .................... 55 

Discussion .................................................... 61 

Paleoenvironments and Geomorphological Processes .................... 61 

Chronology and Cultural Affiliations ............................... 63 

Technological Resources and Technology ............................ 64 

Subsistence. Economy. and Adaptation .............................. 66 

Settlement and Spatial Organization ................................ 67 

Cultural Interactions: External Contacts and Trade ..................... 68 

Conclusions ................................................... 69 

Management ............................................ 69 

Research ................................................ 69 

References Cited ................................................ 73 

Tables ....................................................... 81 

Figures ...................................................... 109 
.......................... 121 Appendix A: Soil Profiles and Pit Summaries 

............... 129 Appendix B: Level Assignments for Field Specimen Numbers 

....................... 133 Appendix C: Notes on Identified Mollusc Species 

......................................... Appendix D: Vertebrates 135 

LIST OF TABLES 

1 . Distribution of non-intrusive seed coat fragments by field specimen 

number and by natural level .................................... 81 

2 . Stratigraphic distribution of snails ................................ 82 

3 . Vertebrate taxa by stratum ..................................... 83 

4 . Weathering stage distribution by arbitrary levels ...................... 84 

5 . Weathering stage distribution by strata in FS 21 and 22 ................. 84 

6 . Macrodebitage reductive stage by material type ...................... 85 

7 . Dimension by material type of all macrodebitage ..................... 86 

8 . Dimension by reductive stages .................................. 87 

9 . Dimension by material type of selected reductive stages for chert 

and chalcedony ............................................. 88 

10 . Average ratio of macrodebitage thickness to maximum dimension 

by material type ............................................ 89 

1 1 . Average ratio of thickness maximum dimension by material type 

for selected reductive stages .................................... 89 

12 . Presence of cortex by material type. for macrodebitage ................ 90 

13a . Frequencies of microdebitage. macrodebitage. and tools by material types .... 91 
13b. Chert and chalcedony microdebitage frequencies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 91 

14. Distribution of tool type by material type . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 92 

15. Means and standard deviations for tool and core dimensions by material type . 93 

16. Means and standard deviations for edge angles by material type . . . . . . . . . . . 93 

17. Frequencies of artifact classes by excavation unit in Stratum A ........... 94 

18. Frequencies of artifact classes by excavation unit in Stratum B . . . . . . . . . . . 94 

19. Frequencies of artifact classes by excavation unit in Stratum C . . . . . . . . . . . 95 

20. Distribution of macrodebitage flake type by stratigraphic unit . . . . . . . . . . . . . 95 

21. Distribution of material type by stratigraphic unit for macrodebitage, cores, 

and tools ................................................. 96 

22. Diversity and evenness measures for material types and sources . . . . . . . . . . . 96 

23. Mean dimensions of Interior I flakes by stratum and by material type . . . . . . . 97 

24. Mean dimensions of Interior II flakes by stratum and by material type . . . . . . 98 

25. Macrodebitage flake type by material type in Stratum C . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 99 

26. Interior I and Interior II flake dimensions in Stratum C . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100 

27. Microdebitage frequencies for chert and chalcedony in Stratum C . . . . . . . . . 101 

28. Macrodebitage flake type by material type in Stratum B . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 102 

29. Average dimensions of chert and chalcedony Interior flakes in Stratum B . . . 103 

30. Microdebitage frequencies for chert and chalcedony in Stratum B . . . . . . . . . 104 

31. Distribution of macrodebitage flake type by material type in Stratum A 105 

32. Means and standard deviations for dimensions of Interior I and 

Interior II flakes in Stratum A . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 106 

33. Microdebitage frequencies for chert and chalcedony in Stratum A . . . . . . . . 107 

v 
---------------···--~···-~-·-----------

LIST OF FIGURES 

. Project location ~ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 109 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1. 

2. Location of site 42SA20286 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 110 

3. Map of areas investigated . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111 

4. Map of subsurface investigations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 112 

5. Overview of the site, looking south from road . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 113 

6. Overview of the site, looking north across road . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 113 

7. Profile, 185N322E (Excavation Unit G) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 114 

8. Stratigraphic correlations among excavation units and shovel probes . . . . . . . 115 

9. Cores ~ . . . . ~ . . . ~ . . . . . . ~ . . - . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 116 

10. Utilized and retouched flakes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 117 

11. Bifaces ................................................. 118 

12. Tools and cores arranged by material type 119 

Vl 
INTRODUCTION 

From September 18 to 29, 1989, field investigations were conducted at an archeological 

site to be impacted by construction of the Highway 21 1 bridge over Salt Creek (Utah Project 

No. U-89-NA-210n) in Needles District of Canyonlands National Park, Utah (Figure 1). The 

purpose of archeological work at site 42SA20286 was to evaluate the composition, extent, and 

integrity of cultural remains within the construction area (Figure 2) and to mitigate impacts. 

Site 42SA20286 consists of a large scatter of lithic tools and flakes on a terrace above 

Salt Creek and is bisected by Highway 21 1 (Figure 3). It was determined eligible for the 

National Register of Historic Places by consensus with the Utah State Historic Preservation 

Office because of its size and its location in the Salt Creek Archeological District Expansion 

Area. Construction of a road detour on the north side of the existing road and removal of a 

large boulder from the south side impacted the site after these investigations. 

Located on a low Cedar Mesa Formation sandstone outcrop on the west bank of the 

floodplain of Salt Creek, the site was originally recorded by the cultural resources management 

firm P-I11 Associates, Salt Lake City, from whom no published information is available at the 

time of this writing. The total surface area is approximately 73,000 sq m. Sand dunes (Figure 

4) cover part of the area on and around the outcrop, which is surrounded by alluvial terrace 

deposits. Flaked lithic materials are found on the surface of, and eroding out of, both alluvial 

and aeolian deposits and are also found scattered across bare rock. Five artifact concentrations 

are visible, two of which were probably contiguous prior to bisection by Highway 21 1. One 

possible Rosegate point was recorded, which would suggest use in at least the period A.D. 300 

to 1300 (Holmer 1986). 

Investigations conducted in 1989 included mapping, shovel testing, test excavation, and 

surface collection within and near the areas of planned direct impact (Figures 5 and 6). The 

nature of these investigations was conditioned by the lack of features or stratigraphically 

discernible occupation levels, and by the absence of significant geomorphic or paleoenvironmental data within the area to be directly impacted. However, significant surface and 

subsurface deposits were observed on the site near the areas of planned impact. 

It is believed that the data recovered from the investigated portion of the site constitute 

an adequate sample of the area disturbed by construction of the Salt Creek Bridge. It is 

recommended that the mapping, shovel testing, test excavation, and surface collection in and 

around the direct impact area be considered to constitute mitigation of loss of data due to 

construction activities. This portion of the site was marked with flagging tape and clearance 

recommended for construction within those boundaries. 

The Rocky Mountain Regional Archeologist required that testing and data recovery 

proceed concurrently. Subsurface investigations conducted in the fall of 1989 constituted both 

testing and data recovery for this mitigative effort. As a consequence, our limited, prior 

knowledge of conditions and materials from these deposits was based on the information 

initially recorded by the contractor, P-I11 Associates, and on observations of surface conditions 
made in subsequent separate visits by Susan Vetter and Steve Dominguez of the Midwest 

Archeological Center. The research design for subsurface investigations was necessarily 

general and constructed to cover a wide range of potential contingencies. 

Due to the types of data recovered, the analyses conducted for this report focused on 

stratigraphic correlation of soil and geomorphic units, identification of paleoenvironmental 

conditions, and the characterization of lithic systems and chronologic change within lithic 

systems. A large portion of these deposits cannot be reliably assigned to specific cultures or 

paleoenvironmental events. As a consequence, the components of the sequence proposed here 

should not be viewed as proven inferences but as hypotheses for testing in subsequent 

investigations in the region. 

This project was coordinated by Douglas D. Scott. The field director was Steve 

Dominguez, and the field crew included Jay Satterfield and Roxanne Gissler. Dennis 

Danielson processed constant volume (CV) samples and encoded the flaked lithic and mapping 

data. Molluscs were analyzed by Bill Wayne of the University of Nebraska, Lincoln. Steve 

Dominguez integrated the data and wrote the text. All artifacts and field records are curated 

at the Midwest Archeological Center, National Park Service, Lincoln, Nebraska. 

Overview of Results 

Subsurface investigations consisted of 11 shovel probes, and a total of 14.7 cu m 

excavated in seven 1-x-2-m test units. Surface materials were collected over an area of 1,090 

sq m. Material recovered included 59 flaked lithics from the surface and 668 from subsurface 

investigations. In addition, one radiocarbon sample and 107 CV samples were collected. From 

the 44 CV samples processed, 15 macrobotanical specimens, 36 identifiable fragmentary or 

whole snail shells, and 33 pieces of bone were recovered. 

Data from soils, bone taphonomy, and the molluscan fauna suggest that several shifts 

in available moisture occurred during the period when these deposits were accumulating. 

Three depositional environments were identified in the deposits investigated - aeolian, highenergy overbank, and low-energy overbank. Based on these factors the seven natural soil 

unitsllevels that were discovered (Natural Levels I to VII) were grouped into three geomorphic 

strata (Strata A, B, and C). Unfortunately, dating of levels and strata are dependent upon a 

single radiocarbon sample from Stratum B, which yielded a 2490 + 210 B.P. date (see Dating, 

p. 25). Stratum B is coeval with Richmond's (1962) Neoglacial Lower Gold Basin, Agenbroad 

and Elder's (1986) T,, from upper Salt Creek and T,, from the Bechan Cave area, and Hack's 

(1942) Tsegi alluvium a. The age assignments of the geomorphic units above and below 

Stratum B are based on the inferred depositional conditions matched with paleoenvironmental 

events and are only tentative. The upper unit, Stratum A, may be coeval with a period of 

aeolian deposition that occurred between about 1500 and 750 B.P. in the Bechan Cave area 

(Agenbroad and Elder 1986). Stratum C lies conformably below Stratum B and may 

immediately precede the deposition of Stratum B. 
Cultural materials occurred in varying densities at depths up to 1.1 m below the present 

surface. No features were observed on the site. Datable materials were absent or very thinly 

dispersed, and no diagnostic artifacts were observed. The suggested dates for these deposits 

place them in late Middle or Late Archaic to Late Prehistoric (possibly Anasazi) times. Flaked 

lithic assemblage attributes suggest dependence upon a set of formal tools, especially bifaces, 

that were transported and maintained. They were augmented by expedient items produced with 

local materials and infrequently transported. Stratigraphic changes in lithic assemblages 

suggest that production of formal tools increased in relative frequency through time and that 

foraging ranges enlarged with increase in available moisture. 

ENVIRONMENT 

Canyonlands National Park is located near the center of the Colorado Plateau region, 

and covers much of the area surrounding the confluence of the Colorado River and the Green 

River. It occupies elevations from as low as 3,880 ft within the entrenched canyon of the 

Colorado River to over 7,000 ft in the plateaus to the south. The project covers a very small 

area on one site on the middle portion of Salt Creek, at 4,880 ft in elevation. 

Bedrock throughout this portion of the Colorado River Basin consists of Permian to 

Cretaceous sediments which were originally flat-lying. These were faulted and uplifted 

subsequent to the Mesozoic; current drainage patterns were established by the Miocene (Hunt 

1956). Subsequent dissection of bedrock created mesas, cuestas, and pediments, and produced 

a series of cut-and-fill episodes, of which remnants can be found in some drainages and basins. 

This area lies in the rain shadow between the Rocky Mountains and Sierra Nevadas. 

Only a small portion of the moisture in the air masses from the west and east reaches the area 

and falls as precipitation. Average annual precipitation is less than 25 cm. Humidity is low 

and evaporation rates are high. Most of the park lies between 4,600 and 7,200 ft. Summers 

are hot and winters cold, as typically found in continental interior regions (Hunt 1956). 

Due to the low precipitation, most soils are poorly developed, low in organic content, 

and formed on various aeolian, colluvial, alluvial, and residual parent materials. 

This area is in the Great Basin Desertscrub Biome (Turner 1982). A variety of desert 

vegetation communities are present in and around the project area. Pinyonljuniper woodlands 

tend to occupy rockier soils, while soils of finer textures may bear communities dominated by 

desert shrubs and grasses. Cottonwoods and other deciduous trees dominate riparian habitats. 

Vegetation is very open. Ground visibility varies from 50 to 95 percent and averages around 

90 percent. 

In spite of the severity of the environment, the faunal communities are quite diverse. 

The species richness of the mammals is largely due to the taxonomic diversity of the smaller 

animals such as rodents and bats. 

Water is available from potholes, springs, and drainages. Potholes are dispersed over 

bedrock outcrops, and can occur anywhere. Smaller potholes may have water from spring 

through summer, while supplies in larger potholes can last until much later in the year. Seeps 

and springs occur in many portions of the Cedar Mesa Formation, and can form seasonally 

reliable sources. Squaw Creek and the lower portions of Salt Creek run intermittently, but 

water is usually available in marshes or below the alluvial sands. 

Areas 6 to 15 miles to the east and south include uplands and mountains. The uplands 

are formed on the erosionally resistant Navajo Formation and Wingate Formation. These 

uplands include Hatch Point and Hart Point, and other areas as far east as La Sal Junction. The 

uplands range in elevation from 6,000 to nearly 7,000 feet. Much of this area is covered with 
sand sheets, but it includes frequent exposures of Navajo Formation with remnants and lag 

gravels from the Summerville Formation. Currently there is little water available, most of it 

occurring in small intermittent drainages with little or no riparian habitat. Other biotic 

communities are similar to those in the park. The Abajo (Blue) Mountains lie to the south, 

range up to 11,445 feet in elevation, and are an area of greater moisture and biotic productivity. 

6 
BACKGROUND INFORMATION 

Culture History 

The culture history of Canyonlands is not yet well defined. Results of previous 

investigations suggest that the local sequence conforms to that proposed by Anderson (1978) 

for the region. Research by Sharrock (1966) suggests that Archaic groups, Mesa Verde 

Anasazi, Kayenta Anasazi, Fremont, Paiute, Ute, and Navajo utilized the areas within the park, 

while the regional sequence developed by authors such as Jennings (1978) suggests that 

Paleoindian groups had used the area as well. More recently, Tipps and Hewitt (1989) report 

additional evidence for occupation by Archaic and Mesa Verde Anasazi groups, as well as 

evidence suggesting some use of the area by Fremont. 

Paleoindian groups were the first to use the area, ca. 10,000 - 6000 B.C. Related 

materials have been found in the area around the park, including Clovis, Folsom, and Plano 

points (Copeland and Fike 1988; Nickens 1982) and camps (Davis 1985a; Davis and Brown 

1986). To date, three Clovis points have been found within the park. Two were recovered 

from Horse Canyon in the Maze District (Adrienne Anderson, personal communication 1989). 

The third was found at the base of Squaw Butte, approximately a mile west of 42SA20286 

(Agenbroad, personal communication 1990). 

The subsequent Archaic period (ca. 7000 B.C. - A.D. 500) has been subdivided into 

three shorter periods. The dating for these periods varies to some extent by area and by author. 

The dates used here are consistent with Holmer (1978): Early Archaic (7000 - 4200 B.C.), 

Middle Archaic (4200 - 1700 B.C.), and Late Archaic (1700 B.C. - A.D. 500). Archaic 

materials are numerous, both in the surrounding region and within the park. Cowboy Cave 

(Jennings 1980) is a large excavated site near the park that yielded a culture sequence longer 

than 8,700 years. Other evidence of Archaic occupation includes Barrier Canyon-style rock 

art panels (Schaafsma 1971) and surface remains in Maze District (Lucius 1976). In the 

Needles District, Archaic points at 42SA8489 and 42SA2116 (Dominguez 1988) and a 

radiocarbon date of 3710 + 230 B.P. at 42SA20309 (Beta 34978) provide dating criteria for 

coeval geomorphic units in sites near 42SA20286. A number of Archaic points were recorded 

in the Needles District by Tipps and Hewitt (1989), and many radiocarbon dates on samples 

from sites near 42SA20286 are within the range of the Archaic period (Tipps, personal 

communication 1990). 

The Late Prehistoric (A.D. 300 - 1300) is represented by Anasazi materials and possibly 

by Fremont materials as well. The majority of sites recorded in the park and in the Needles 

District have been attributed to the Anasazi (Anderson 1978), and a large number have been 

recorded (e.g., Griffin 1984; Hogan et al. 1975; Losee and Lucius 1975; Osborn et al. 1986; 

Sharrock 1966). Reinhard (1986) has identified Kayenta Anasazi ceramic types among sherds 

from Lavender Canyon, but the circumstances of their occurrence there are unknown. The 

architectural style seen in the Needles District is reminiscent of Kayenta. However, Tipps and 

Hewitt (1989) believe that these remains result from Mesa Verde Anasazi occupation. They 
assert that the ceramic designs, temper, and paste all indicate Mesa Verde affiliation, and that 

the Kayenta-like architectural styles are due to site function rather than affiliation. 

Data suggest that the Fremont used the area infrequently, if at all. Fremont use of the 

area has been inferred mainly through the presence of Fremont-style rock art and ceramics 

(Lucius 1976; Rudy 1955; Sharrock 1966). In a survey of the Devil's Lane area, Tipps and 

Hewitt (1989) did assign one component to Fremont affiliation, based on the presence of two 

Southern San Rafael Fremont-style anthropomorphs. However, Noxon and Marcus (1982; 

1985) and Sharrock (1966) have asserted that the presence of Fremont rock art styles may be 

due to borrowing by Anasazi. 

Tipps and Hewitt (1989) have refined the information regarding Late Prehistoric use of 

the Needles District. Limited Basketmaker 111 to Pueblo I use and Pueblo I to Pueblo I1 use 

of the region are suggested by a number of sherds and projectile points from the Devil's Lane 

area. Consistent with Sharrock's (1966) inferences, they conclude that the majority of 

materials indicate use by late Pueblo I1 to Pueblo 111 groups. 

There is little evidence for use of the park by Protohistoric groups (A.D. 1300 - 1850) 

such as Ute and Navajo. Their presence has been proposed by Sharrock (1966), based upon 

a possible collapsed hogan. Their presence was also proposed by Lucius (1976), based upon 

rock art panels. No other evidence of protohistoric use of the area has been documented. This 

paucity of evidence is consistent with Steward's (1938) assertion that this region was sparsely 

inhabited in Protohistoric times. 

Historic use of the park has involved mainly mining, ranching, and tourism. Copious 

evidence of the latter is visible. 

Previous Archeological Investigations 

Previous archeological surveys in the immediate area of the proposed construction have 

been conducted by Sharrock (1 966), Marwitt (1970), Lindsay and Madsen (1973), Hartley 

(1980), Tipps and Hewitt (1989), and Dominguez (1988). The area proposed for construction 

was surveyed in 1988 by P-I11 Associates (site forms were provided, but no further information 

is available). No previous testing has been performed on 42SA20286. Dominguez (1 988) 

directed testing of four sites that are 0.6 to 2.0 km from 42SA20286. These bear information 

relevant to several large-scale geomorphic events discussed in the section Stratigraphy, 

Geomorphology, Paleoenvironment (pp. 21-32). 
RESEARCH CONTEXTS 

This section defines the general research contexts for investigations at 42SA20286, lists 

specific research questions, and also lists the types of data to be collected to answer each 

question. Due to the lack of prior testing, the research design was based on surface evidence 

of geomorphological features and cultural remains at 42SA20286. This evidence was 

necessarily general, so the design was constructed to cover a range of potential issues. 

Research Orientations 

The 1989 investigations were approached with three general goals: to determine the 

extent and nature of cultural deposits, to determine the procedures necessary for conducting 

mitigation efforts, and to collect data relevant to the prehistory of the region. Overall, 

investigations were oriented toward recovery and interpretation of data pertinent to 

paleoenvironmental events and cultural processes. The influence of environment in the 

structuring of both synchronic and diachronic cultural processes is stressed. Meeting these 

goals involved several tasks: 

(1) determining the presence and extent of datable deposits and assigning 

archeological units to a chronological framework. 

(2) identifying geomorphic events that acted in the formation of the site and 

determining the timing of these geomorphic events. 

(3) recovering or recording ecofactual materials or the attributes thereof that are 

associated with datable deposits and determining processes responsible for their presence. 

(4) recording and/or recovering manifestations of human activities, including features 

(hearths, concentrations, storage pits, etc.) and portable materials (flaked lithics, ground stone, 

ceramics, faunal remains). 

(5) integrating information derived from geomorphic and ecofactual data with 

information on adaptations (technologic and economic attributes) in order to examine past 

human responses to paleoenvironmental change. 

(6) integrating the data and interpretations with data and interpretations from other 

sites within the region, and elucidating or reconciling similarities and differences in results. 
SpeczJic Research Questions 

Paleoenvironments and Geomorphological Processes 

A. What landforms and geomorphic environments have influenced the development 

of archeological deposits on the site? 

The data used to address this issue include surface observations of landforms and 

subsurface examination of sediments. 

B. What major geomorphic changes have occurred on the site over the datable period 

of occupation? 

Several forms of data were sought, including surface observations of landforms, 

sedimentological information regarding changes in size sorting and bedforms (changes in 

transport mechanisms), pedological information regarding soil horizon development, and 

absolute and/or relative dating criteria for geomorphic units. 

C. How do these changes relate to geomorphic events within the floodplain of Salt 

Creek? How do these respond to the existing system of fluvial and aeolian sedimentary 

exchange? 

Data used to address this consist of surface observations of landforms and sediment 

source areas, a geomorphic sequence for the site, and comparative data for the Salt Creek 

drainage derived from sources such as Agenbroad and Elder (1986). 

D. What gross climatic patterns are implied by the geomorphology on the site? What 

do these imply about paleoenvironmental conditions, and are these implications consistent with 

other lines of evidence? 

Optimal data would consist of identifiable and datable sequences of cut-and-fill 

episodes, with sediments resulting from discernible processes and in identifiable sedimentary 

environments. 

E. How have aggradation and erosional cycles affected the preservation of cultural 

resources? Have substantial portions of the record been lost or obscured? 

Optimally, data would be derived from dated sedimentary units of known extent, within 

both conformable and nonconformable boundaries and within the limits of the site. 

F. What gross climatic patterns are implied by the ecofacts recorded on the site? 

Optimally, data used to address this issue should include taphonomic information from 

faunal materials (conditions of ground surface), identifiable elements from naturally occurring 
molluscs (proxy data for climatic conditions), identifiable elements from naturally occurring 

vertebrates (proxy data for climatic conditions), and plant macrofossils (must be assessed by 

archeological context for inclusion in cultural or ecofactual materials to be proxy data for 

climatic conditions). This also includes absolute andlor relative dating criteria for geomorphic 

units and correlations with paleoenvironmental events identified elsewhere. 

Chronology and Cultural Affiliations 

A. What were the times of occupation? 

Optimally, data would come from materials suitable for absolute dating and from 

diagnostic artifacts, especially diagnostic artifacts in association with materials suitable for 

absolute dating. 

B. To what areas or cultures are these related? 

Necessary data include diagnostic artifacts with known affiliations andlor areal 

distributions. 

Technological Resources and Technology 

A. What geologic resources are available in the region around the park, and how are 

they distributed? Do they bear distinctive attributes that allow identification? Which lithic 

resources were utilized and in what ways? 

Necessary data include field observations and published data regarding the sources in 

the area around the park, including the materials available and whether they are unique and 

identifiable, the distances they occur from the site, and their associations with potential biotic 

resource zones. 

B. Given the material sources in the region, how did stone tool procurement and 

production systems operate? What types of materials were procured, and how were they 

transported, utilized, and discarded? What is the relationship among the "formal" tool and 

"expedient" tool systems with respect to resource distributions? 

Data should include a variety of attributes from assemblages consisting of cores, 

debitage, and tools collected from various archeological contexts within the site, and considered 

in relation to material types and sources. 

C. How do these patterns differ with each period or affiliation represented at the site? 

Can changes in technology be related to changes in settlement or subsistence practices? 

Necessary data would derive from assemblages consisting of cores, debitage, and tools 

collected from various archeological contexts, as well as dating criteria for assemblages. 
Subsistence, Economy, and Adaptation 

A. Plant resources: What do macrobotanical specimens imply about economic 

activities on the site? 

Optimally, data would derive from macrobotanical remains which bear definite signs 

of processing or which are believed to have been utilized as food resources, or from pollen of 

economically important plants derived from samples which have been collected from 

identifiable features or activity areas. 

B. Faunal resources: Are there changes in relative frequencies of large versus small 

animals? Have there been significant, environmentally caused changes in availability of prey? 

Optimally, data would derive from faunal remains with reliable signs of human use or 

processing, including cut marks, burning, systematic element selection, or some forms of 

breakage. Patterns of butchering and transport visible in faunal remains should be identified 

and compared among chronological associations. 

C. Have paleoenvironmental shifts been of sufficient magnitude to alter economic 

patterns seen in the assemblages? 

Optimally, data would consist of statistically significant changes in cultural assemblages 

in association with evidence of well-defmed paleoenvironmental events, andlor evidence for 

hiatuses in the site or local sequence. 

Settlement 

A. What season(s) of occupations is (are) implied by plant remains and other site 

attributes? 

Optimal data would derive from plant macrofossils and pollen of plants with welldefined phenologies collected from activity areas or features, or with definite signs of 

processing. 

B. Binford (1979; 1982), Shott (1986), Osborn and Hartley (1984), and others have 

attempted to define relationships between tool assemblages, environmental attributes, and 

settlement organization. What form of settlement organization is predicted by tool assemblage 

composition and organization? 

Necessary data would derive from large samples of lithic assemblages, including cores, 

debitage, and tools produced from both exogenous and local materials, in datable contexts. 

Ideally these would be contrasted with assemblages from other areas and other affiliations. 
Cultural Interactions: Contact, Transition Zones, and Trade 

A. What materials can be recognized as originating in other areas, and in what forms 

and quantities do these occur on the site? What do these imply about relationships to nearby 

sites? To distant sites? 

The optimal data to address this issue would derive from exogenous materials that can 

reliably be associated with a source and with information on procurement and discard. 

Additional data would come from large numbers of materials less reliably associated with 

sources. 

METHODS AND FIELD INVESTIGATIONS 

During the 1989 fieldwork, the methods of data recovery and analysis described in the 

first part of this chapter were employed to meet the goals listed in the previous chapter. The 

specific quantities and the areas to which these were applied are described in the last section 

of this chapter. Although artifact category definitions might properly be considered "methods," 

these have been included with the assemblage descriptions in the Cultural Materials chapter 

to allow easier access to the reader (pp. 33-41). 

Data Recovery 

Three forms of information were anticipated: 1) artifacts and ecofactual materials, 2) 

vertical (diachronic) distributions of these, and 3) horizontal distributions. Recovery of each 

form of information is briefly described below. 

Several forms of artifacts and ecofactual materials were anticipated. These are discussed in the context of collection and sampling procedures. Processing is discussed below 

in Laboratory Procedures. 

The following materials were to be collected: flaked lithics, including debitage and 

cores; all faunal materials, both naturally deposited and culturally deposited; and all plant 

macrofossils. 

The following types of samples were recovered: radiocarbon (general-level sample 

only) and constant volume samples for flotation (one liter from each 10-cm level of each 

horizontal provenience unit). No features were observed, and consequently no bulk soil or 

pollen samples were collected. 

Various forms of information were collected for interpretation of vertical (diachronic) 

distributions, including cultural sequences and paleoenvironmental change. Specific 

characteristics bearing on this topic are sedimentological (changes in parent materials and 

bedforms), pedological (soil horizon development), and differentiation of cultural materials. 

The first two of these characteristics were recorded as they are interpreted in the field, 

including texture (by manual or "spit" testing), color (Munsell), structure (strength and form), 

bedform, biotic alterations, and geomorphic context within the site. The third, differentiation 

of cultural materials, is necessarily based on both laboratory results and field observations of 

patterns of change across a stratigraphic section, especially changes in the contents of natural 

units. All of these types of information were recorded in the form of profiles, notes, and 

photographs. 

The area of our investigations does not provide a good sample of horizontal artifact 

distributions. As a consequence, little cultural and paleoenvironmental information could be 

recovered from horizontal distributions of cultural materials or other attributes across 
contemporaneous surfaces. Other than the grid, only one form of horizontal recording was 

employed, the site map, which included all defined areas, test units, horizontally oriented 

cultural units, natural boundaries and breaks, and recent disturbances. 

Field Procedures 

Investigations proceeded in the folllowing sequence: identification of areal extent of 

surface materials; identification of geomorphic units and areas they cover; identification of 

relationships between surface artifacts and geomorphology, and assessment of the potential for 

the presence of subsurface materials; identification of direct impact areas to be tested; testing; 

and identification of relationships between geomorphic events and subsurface materials. The 

procedures used are discussed below. 

Description of FS Numbering System 

The format of the Field Specimen (FS) numbers is designed to preserve horizontal and 

vertical provenience information. This functions as a check on locational information and also 

allows rapid data manipulation by computer. A complete FS number includes four forms of 

information separated by decimal points: 1) the Smithsonian site number; 2) a designation 

number for the horizontal unit (excavation unit, shovel probe, or surface location); 3) a 

designation for the vertical unit (arbitrary 10-cm level); and 4) the bag number. For example, 

an artifact from this site may have the number "42SA20286.6.6.2." 

The first nine characters are the site number. Following the first decimal is the 

horizontal location number, "6." Horizontal location numbers were assigned to the individual 

test or excavation units in the order in which they were opened, and each corresponds to a grid 

location. Surface-collected materials each received a unique horizontal location number 

matched to the grid location in the transit book and on the bag. 

Following the second decimal is the vertical location, by increment of 10 cm. Surface 

materials receive a vertical location of "0, " materials from 0- 10 cmbs receive a vertical location 

of " 1," materials from 10-20 cmbs receive a vertical location of "2," etc. 

The number following the third decimal is the bag number. Bag numbers for artifacts 

are assigned for each individual artifact type. For example, several pieces of debitage may 

receive a single bag and single bag number, while other flaked lithic items of other artifact 

classes may receive individual bags and numbers. Bag numbers for samples receive specific 

codes. 

When discussed in the text the FS number will not include the site number. The bag 

number will also be excluded except when relevent to a specific artifact or group of artifacts. 

However, when labeled on an artifact or entered in the catalog an FS number will include all 

four pieces of information. 
Surface Distributions 

Artifacts within 80 m of the road in the eastern half of the site were flagged in order 

to discern surface distributions. East-west baselines were laid out both to the south and to the 

north of the existing road. Artifacts and concentrations up to 60 m from the road were 

mapped. Modern features and significant geomorphic features around the areas of proposed 

construction were mapped. Photographs were taken of the site and artifact concentrations. All 

artifacts within 5 m of the impact area were collected and piece plotted. 

Testing: Shovel Probes and Excavation Units (Test Units) 

Distribution patterns of cultural materials were assessed in relationship to the areas to 

be impacted and to geomorphic features. Areas subject to impact were examined for the 

presence of cultural materials and for conditions indicating that aeolian or alluvial deposition 

had occurred. Locations with either or both of those conditions were tested for buried cultural 

materials. 

Shovel probes consisted of circular pits approximately 40 cm in diameter which were 

dug in 30-cm intervals to bedrock or to 90-100 cmbs. All materials were screened in 114-in 

mesh. Limited soil information was recorded for each probe. These were dug in areas where 

it was suspected that subsurface artifacts were present (based on surface distributions) and 

where it was suspected that soil depths were greater (based upon landform). 

Excavation (test) units consisted of 1-x-2-m squares located on a true north-south grid. 

Each unit was dug in 10-cm intervals on the existing ground contour. Excavation units were 

excavated to bedrock or through at least one sterile level. Some were dug to greater depths 

to obtain geomorphologic information. Constant volume samples were collected from each 

level. Radiocarbon samples and macrobotanical samples were collected from several buried 

soil horizons. Detailed profiles of soil and cultural horizons were drawn, and profiled walls 

were photographed. The majority of the excavation units were dug in areas where shovel 

probes had indicated the presence of subsurface artifacts and deeper soil, while several were 

dug in shallower soil in areas that would be most impacted by construction. 

Laboratory Procedures 

Preliminary Processing 

Chipped-stone items were washed. Bone was brushed. All items were bagged with the 

original field label and a new label. Only the tools were inscribed with site numbers and field 

specimen numbers. Debitage and bones were not directly labeled. 
Samples 

Absolute dating and ancillary studies (analysis of molluscs) were performed by 

specialists. Radiocarbon samples were dried and stored in foil. 

Constant volume samples were processed in-house. Each sample was placed in a 

cylindrical container of 12-cm diameter and 30-cm height. Water was run into the container 

at constant rate and soil peds were gently broken. The light fraction floated over the barrier 

into a 841-micron mesh screen. Both light and heavy fractions were dried and saved. These 

were picked for all lithic, faunal, and botanical remains under a 15-power binocular 

microscope. 

Encoding and Analysis 

Quantifiable data from field records and data from materials analyzed in-house were 

entered on dBASE, which creates ASCII-based files that can be translated to the Automated 

National Catalog System (ANCS). The choices of variables encoded and the specific statistical 

procedures were influenced by the types and sizes of assemblages recovered. 

Analyses of the flaked lithic assemblages were oriented toward identifying material use 

patterns, chronological variations in those patterns, implications for technological organization 

(as discussed by Binford 1979), and chronological changes in organization. Specifically these 

include the areas from which materials had been transported (to the extent that the source areas 

of individual materials could be identified), and differences in assemblage attributes for the 

different material types, including the artifact categories and dimensions in which they 

occurred, and the categories and sizes of reductive debris which resulted from continued 

manufacture and maintenance. 

The variables recorded for debitage include provenience, maximum dimension, 

thickness, material type, category, and type of cortex (if present). The variables recorded for 

tools and cores include provenience, length, width, thickness, edge type, artifact category, 

material type, cortex type, maximum edge angle, and minimum edge angle. Although 

definitions of the lithic material and artifact categories used in analysis might legitimately be 

discussed in this portion of the text, the definitions are given in the Cultural Materials chapter, 

which describes the artifacts and lithic material types (pp. 33-41). 

Analyses of faunal material were oriented toward identification of taphonomic 

conditions, the relationship of the site to the natural biotic communities in the area, and 

technological and economic activities as well as chronological changes in those activities. 

Variables recorded from the molluscs included provenience and taxon. Variables 

recorded from vertebrates include provenience, taxon (to the highest level allowed by the 

nature of the specimen), element, side, portion (if fragmentary), and weathering stage as 

defined by Behrensmeyer (1 978). 
Attributes of the overall site assemblage were examined in relationship to the local 

abiotic and biotic contexts. Spatial patterns of material distributions and patterns of artifact 

associations were not examined, due to the sizes of the assemblages from the three stratigraphic 

units. 

Areas Investigated 

The road alignment cuts through the approximate middle of the site on an east-west line. 

Construction plans were provided by the Federal Highways Administration (Project PRA 

CANY 10(2) NEEDLES ENTR. RD), and NPS personnel participated in making slight 

revisions (Fox 1989). Construction was to affect several areas on the east side and a strip 

along the north side of the existing road. There were three areas to be affected outside the 

existing disturbed area: 

(a) A large piece of bedrock approximately 10 x 33 m in size which lies to the south 

side of the road was to be blasted and replaced as riprap against the bank formed by its 

removal. This would remove approximately 300 sq m of existing ground surface. 

(b) Traffic would be detoured to the north of the existing road during construction. 

This involved disturbance of 180 to 600 sq m of existing ground surface, of which 

approximately 400 sq m does not appear to have been previously disturbed by earth-moving 

activities. 

(c) Fences totaling 500 feet in length would be installed to prevent movement of 

equipment over portions of this and another site. 

A zone of 480 to over 650 sq m was to be affected by the construction activities 

summarized above. Various phases of investigations were conducted in and around this zone 

(Figure 3). Artifacts up to 80 m from the road in the east half of the site were flagged, and 

artifact concentrations up to 60 m from the road were mapped. Subsurface tests were 

conducted within the direct impact areas on the east, and up to seven meters outside of this 

area. Artifacts up to three meters outside of the direct impact areas were surface collected. 

Description of Investigations 

Surface artifact distributions were examined in relationship to visible geomorphic units, 

and mapping and collection proceeded as previously described. 

Prior to departure, all portions of the proposed impact area were determined to bear no 

significant subsurface deposits. All artifactual and ecofactual materials on the entire surface 

of the impact area and a buffer zone of 5 m were collected and provenienced by polar grid 

using a theodolite. This process covered a surface area of 1,100 sq m and yielded a total of 
59 flaked lithic items. Most of this area consists of a 5-m-wide strip along the margin of the 

highway. Consequently, an artifact distribution map was not prepared. 

All of the subsurface excavations were within the areas to be impacted by road cuts and 

removal of the rock from the creek bank. These were consequently concentrated at the east 

side of the site, along the existing creek bank, and up to the dunes at the top of the outcrop 

(Figure 4). Initially, excavation units were located in areas that appeared to have deep 

sedimentary deposits within artifact concentrations. Later, excavation unit locations were 

chosen to give equal representation to all parts of the disturbance area, but they were weighted 

toward deeper deposits. 

A total of 14 sq m was test excavated in 1-x-2-m excavation or test units (Figure 4). 

Eleven shovel probes were scattered throughout the site, covering 1.4 sq m. These two 

techniques tested 1.8 to 2.3 percent of the proposed disturbance area. A total of 107 constant 

volume samples were collected, of which 44 were processed. Data recorded during these 

subsurface investigations are summarized in Appendix A. Results of analysis are discussed in 

the following text. 
STRATIGRAPHY, GEOMORPHOLOGY, PALEOENVIRONMENT 

The first part of this chapter describes the geomorphology and stratigraphy of the site, 

including surface characteristics, profile descriptions from subsurface investigations, and dating 

and correlation of units, and proposes depositional and biotic environments associated with 

each geomorphic unit. The second portion examines evidence regarding the biotic 

environment, including macrobotanical materials, molluscs, and faunal materials. 

Surface Description 

Site 42SA20286 is located in the NW 114 of the NE 114 of Section 20, T30S R20E, on 

the Salt Lake Meridian. It is situated on the west bank of Salt Creek in the Needles District 

of Canyonlands National Park, Utah. The site is part of the terrace system along the left bank 

of Salt Creek. 

The site is in a stretch of Salt Creek in which the gradient decreases and potential 

channel width decreases, both attributes creating good conditions for large-scale sedimentation. 

From the 1,830-m contour to the 1,500-m contour, the upper Salt Creek drainage covers a 

distance of 30.4 km and falls at a gradient of 1.09 percent in canyons that are approximately 

200 meters in width in most areas. Nearer to the site, between the 1,5 10-m and the 1,475-m 

contour, the creek covers a distance of 7.3 km, and the gradient decreases to 0.48 percent. 

This decline in gradient decreases the energy of stream flow, allowing sediments to drop from 

transport. 

In the area 1.5 miles upstream from the site the creek is no longer confined by the 

canyon, and the limits of the drainage increase to 300 m and exceed 600 m in many areas. In 

the area immediately upstream from the site, sediments cover an area more than 700 meters 

in width. At the location of the site the outcrops of bedrock on both the west and the east side 

of the creek constrict the area the channel can occupy to 340 meters. The terraces on the east 

and southeast side of the site have formed within, and upstream from, this constriction. 

Overall, this part of the Salt Creek drainage forms a concave-concave slope. Within 

the site itself the existing slopes are convex to concave in the horizontal axis and convex to 

concave in the vertical axis, allowing sedimentation to occur in many portions of the site. 

Sediments 

Much of the cultural material is either on a bedrock terrace or on and within alluvial 

and aeolian deposits overlying a bedrock erosional terrace. The southern, eastern, and 

northeast sides are at the level of the lowest existing terrace system. This terrace system is as 

yet undated but may be coeval with Middle Archaic occupations (Agenbroad, personal 

communication 1990). The sedimentary deposits surround much of the sandstone outcrop and 

cover at least the lower portions of the east side of the site. They appear to result from marsh, 

overbank, channel, and aeolian depositional environments. These may be coeval with the deep 
sand fills that are found to the west on sites 42SA20309, 42SA8489, 42SA8488, and 

42SA2116. 

Most of the sediments observed on the surface of the site are medium-grained sand, but 

discontinuous lenses of sandy loam to silty clay are found. Except for areas immediately above 

bedrock, the rock fraction is very low and consists of gravel- to pebble-sized subangular to 

angular clasts of sandstone. 

Vegetation and Ground Cover 

On-site vegetation is comprised primarily of Indian rice grass and greasewood. 

Additional elements include snakeweed, senecio, yucca, etc. Ground visibility varies from 50 

to 95 percent. Adjacent areas within the creek bed are occupied by extremely dense stands of 

tamarisk with cattail, sedge, willow, and a diverse group of forbs and grasses. 

ProJiles and Stratigraphy 

Relevant stratigraphic information recorded in the shovel probes and excavation units 

shown in Figure 4 has been summarized in Figure 7 and Figure 8. Profile notes from 

excavation units and notes from shovel probes are presented in Appendix A. Unit G is the 

only excavation unit in which all stratigraphic levels were present, and though thicknesses of 

these levels varied across the site, their general characteristics were fairly constant. 

Consequently the profile from Unit G is the only profile presented in detail in this text 

(Figure 7). 

In the subsequent text, several depositional processes are proposed that may be 

responsible for the deposits investigated. A number of cut-and-fill episodes are recorded in the 

stratigraphy of the area under study, and at least five natural units can be recognized in the 

deposits. As previously stated, the absence of diagnostic materials and the thinly dispersed 

charcoal preclude precise dating of these units. However, these natural units were recognized 

in most of the shovel probes and excavation units, and could be correlated across the site (see 

Intrasite Correlations of Units, p. 24). 

Environments and ProJile Development 

Three factors were recognized that influenced development of the observed units: 

energy of sediment transport to location, average soil moisture, and the variability of soil 

moisture. These are manifested in several soil profile attributes, as described in ProJiles and 

Stratigraphy, above. Sediment types are related to the type of transport process and the energy 

involved, as well as to the surface morphology and vegetation at the area of deposition. 

Average moisture conditions are responsible for development of soil color (grays). Seasonal 

variability of moisture is probably the factor responsible for variability of soil color (mottling). 
The depositional environments suggested by sediments observed within the test pits are 

similar to many of those suggested for the surrounding area, including aeolian and 

overbanWchanne1 deposition in high-energy environments and overbank deposition in lowenergy environments, i.e., slow water deposition associated with moderately dense or very 

dense vegetation. 

The difference between aeolian deposits and high-energy overbank and channel deposits 

was not always discernible due to the homogeneity of parent materials in this area: 

well-sorted, fine- to medium-grained sand, usually unbedded, compacted, and unstructured to 

weakly structured. The recent dunes on top of the terraces appear to have no cultural 

materials. Older aeolian/channel/overbank deposits in lower areas have cultural materials that 

are thick in some places, absent in others. None of these deposits showed evidence of soil 

horizon development, and further distinctions are not necessary in this discussion. 

Low energy overbank deposits with consistent soil moisture, possibly developed in a 

riparian setting with dense vegetation, are characterized by dark red sandy silt to silty clay and 

are moderately structured to very structured. Cultural materials are present. 

Low-energy overbank deposits with seasonally variable moisture are characterized by 

red, medium-grained, weakly structured sand mottled with dark red sandy silt to silty clay, 

often with very structured peds, sometimes thinly lensed. Artifacts occur in varying densities, 

often thick. Charcoal is thinly distributed throughout. 

The general characteristics and proposed environment for each of the natural levels 

identified during excavation are summarized here: 

Level I. Dune, existing surface, low moisture. Loose, well-sorted sand, very low rock 

fraction, no bedding visible. 

Level 11. Dune, low moisture. Compacted, well-sorted sand, very low rock fraction, 

no bedding visible. 

Level 111. Dune, high-energy overbank or channel, unknown moisture conditions. 

Compacted, well-sorted sand, very low rock fraction, no bedding visible. 

Level IV. Low-energy overbank, moist soil. Dark unbedded medium sand with very 

dark mottles of clayey and silty sand. 

Level V. Low-energy overbank with seasonally variable moisture conditions. 

Unbedded medium sand with mottles of clayey and silty sand, similar to IV, but lighter color 

and lower density of mottling. 
Level VI. Low-energy overbank with moist soil. Unbedded, mottled clayey sand to 

silty clay, dark (up to 2.5YR416). Forms a thin, discontinuous lens within Level V. Similar 

lenses are present in other portions of Level V. 

Level VII. Low-energy overbank with moist soil. Lies over bedrock in portions of 

unit, but not completely excavated. Very structured, silty sand, unbedded. 

Intrasite Correlation of Units 

The levels described above could be identified in test units throughout the area tested. 

Figure 8 shows the profiles and the shovel probe information plotted by surface elevation. 

Levels with darker color and higher clay and silt content have been shaded. At least one cut 

and several fill episodes are visible. 

Levels IV and VII were easily recognizable in a large number of the test units. Together 

these result in at least three relatively flat-bedded natural levels which can be traced over most 

of the site, Levels IV, VII, and the intermediate Level V. Overall, the sediments and artifact 

densities of Levels IV and VII are suggestive of several periods with slow sedimentation rates, 

high groundwater, denser vegetation, and high relative density of use by humans. Intermediate 

Levels V and VI suggest a period of more rapid sedimentation or more variable moisture levels 

or both. 

Levels IV through VII are absent in some test units. The units where they are absent 

tend to be either further east or located on the upper dune area. It appears that part of the 

deposits were eroded from the east, the side which lies toward the creek; in Excavation Unit 

G (Figure 7), the boundary which lies between Levels I11 and IV appears to be a cutbank 

which records removal of part of Level IV. It is not known what unit(s) lay above Level IV 

at that time or if this defined the ground surface at that time. This erosional event probably 

removed all of Levels IV, V, VI, and VII from some of the units and probably truncated them 

to a remnant of Level VII in Stratum C (Figure 8; see next page for strata definitions). 

Other units where Levels IV - VII are missing are near the tops of the existing dunes, 

in Shovel Probes 8, 9, 10, and 11 (Figure 8). It is not known whether alluvial or aeolian 

erosion has removed them or if they simply did not extend to these locations. 

The mechanisms and environments of subsequent fill cannot easily be discerned. These 

are possibly dune or overbank deposits. At least one fill event, and possibly two, occurred 

subsequent to that erosional event. These are represented by Level 111, overbank andlor dune 

deposits, and Levels I1 and I, probable dunes. These levels bear a lower density of cultural 

materials than the lower levels. These subsequent fill events cannot be dated with the materials 

collected. Correlations of the levels and geomorphic events with other sites are discussed in 

Extrasite Correlations and Paleoenvironmental Implications (pp. 29-32). 
Dating 

One radiocarbon sample was recovered during the project and processed for dating. It 

came from Stratum B (Level IV) and yielded a radiocarbon age of 2490 * 210 B.P. (Beta33 7 10; wood charcoal; 613C undetermined). The two-sigma calibrated date range is 1 1 10 to 

50 B.C. (intercepts at 760, 680, 650, and 550) using Stuiver and Reimer's (1993) calibration 

program and 20-year data sets. 

The charcoal was sparsely distributed throughout approximately 15 vertical centimeters 

within Stratum B but did not derive from a discrete feature. It was collected from the upper 

portion of level 70-80 cmbs to the upper portion of 80-90 cmbs in Excavation Unit 185Nl322E 

and Excavation Unit 185Nf323E (Excavation Unit G). This was hand-picked by trowel from 

the excavation unit and from the screen. 

Natural Levels, Field Specimen Numbers, and Strata 

Differences between natural levels are subtle. Changes in color and structure caused 

by moisture changes can be as great or greater than changes caused by differences in soil types, 

and variations in texture are often slight. During excavation, natural units were often 

recognized after the fact. As a consequence, collected materials are not originally provenienced 

by natural unit, and must be related back to these units. The fact that materials collected from 

arbitrary levels dug on contour may have some mixing among natural levels is recognized. 

Appendix B shows natural units that correspond to field specimen numbers, and accounts for 

associations among natural units. 

These natural units were lumped into three groups on the basis of buried soil horizon 

sequences and the proposed environmental conditions. During analysis, materials from these 

seven levels were lumped into Stratum A, "undifferentiated aeolian and high-energy overbank 

and channel," consisting of Levels I, 11, and 111; Stratum B, "moist low energy," consisting of 

Level IV; and Stratum C, "variable moisture, low energy," consisting of Levels V, VI, and VII. 

Macrobotanical Materials 

A total of 58 specimens were recovered from 44 constant volume samples. Of those, 

only the 16 specimens listed in Table 1 were considered to be non-intrusive. Botanical 

materials were considered to be intrusive only if they were obviously new and bore no 

evidence of cultural alteration. All others were considered to have been potentially deposited 

by natural means or by cultural means. The intrusive specimens are listed at the end of 

Table 1. 
None of the items considered to be nonintrusive bore any evidence of cultural alteration, 

i.e., none were burned or mechanically altered. Contexts in which these specimens were found 

gave no additional clues as to whether these were culturally deposited. Most specimens are 

fragments of seeds of Celtis sp. All 13 of these specimens were recovered from CV samples 

taken from probable marsh and lower deposits (Stratum B and Stratum C). These were absent 

in the upper levels. Although ethnobotanical records (e.g., Elmore 1944; Whiting 193 9) 

indicate that Celtis sp. (hackberry) seeds were eaten by various historic Native American 

groups, it is not known whether their presence is due to natural or cultural processes. 

In addition, there are two fragments of an unidentifiable seed coat (Reinhard, personal 

communication 1989) from Stratum B. These may have resulted from economic activities, but 

their significance cannot be assessed with existing information. 

Molluscs, by Bill Wayne, Department of Geology, University of Nebraska, Lincoln 

A total of 36 identifiable specimens of snails were recovered from 44 CV samples. Out 

of 38 vials, 14 contained only unidentifiable fragments, and many of the specimens had to be 

considered only tentatively identified because they were broken. 

All specimens are terrestrial gastropods; no aquatic or semi-aquatic forms are 

represented. The 36 specimens identified to species included 9 taxa, most of which are fairly 

widespread in both geographic distribution and ecological requirements. The species 

distribution by stratum is shown in Table 2. Most of the species are pupillids, which can be 

recognized if the apertural whorl is complete, and several were identified in this way. Two 

whole specimens of Vallonia cyclophorella were found, and so all broken and immature 

specimens of Vallonia were identified as the same species. 

All gastropods live in protected areas and can survive only limited desiccation. For that 

reason, even those that seem to be able to survive hot summers in semi-arid regions live 

beneath stones, pieces of wood, or at the bases of plants, where they are inactive on sunny 

days, but they emerge at night to feed, when humidity is higher and temperature is lower. 

Typical habitats in the desert include floodplain surfaces, where vegetation is likely to be more 

abundant; around the margins of springs; and on shaded slopes, where the microclimates are 

more suitable for their survival. Appendix C includes notes on the taxa in this assemblage. 

Both the topographic setting along Salt Creek and the sediments examined in excavation 

units indicate that these snails were collected from floodplain accumulations. It is not certain 

whether they originally lived there, because storm runoff commonly washes shells from higher 

slopes onto floodplains, where they may be buried along with individuals that were living on 

that surface. 

Stratum C, the lowest sedimentary unit, yielded remains of 8 taxa of gastropods. 

Although all of the taxa are regarded as drought tolerant, two of them, Gastrocopta pilsbryana 
and Vallonia cyclophorella, are widely distributed at higher elevations in the mountains of 

southwestern U. S. Two others, Pupoides albilabris and Hawaiia minuscula, are common in 

regions that are cooler and moister, although they can tolerate dry conditions if they have some 

cover. The presence of these species suggests greater effective moisture in the region when 

the sediments from which they were recovered were deposited, sometime prior to 2500 B.P. 

Undoubtedly this location was more moist than it is today, and it is likely this site was part of 

an active floodplain. However, this evidence does not confirm that this location was a marsh. 

The dated bed, Stratum B, yielded mostly broken fragments of shells and a few bones 

of small vertebrates. The only identifiable snails were broken specimens of Vallonia, which 

inhabits moist microclimates and is common at higher altitudes in mountains, where it is found 

in forested areas. 

The uppermost sediments, Stratum A, contain fewer snails than do those in the basal 

material. The presence of a few snail shells in the samples suggests that these sediments are 

floodplain overbank materials or slope colluvium sources rather than dune sand. Alternatively, 

these deposits of sediments and shells may have been deposited in dune deposits derived from 

nearby floodplain or slope sources. If this site was the floodplain of an aggrading stream at 

the time and place these sediments accumulated, the ecologic requirements of all the snails 

found in these samples would have been met. 

Vertebrates 

A total of 33 bone fragments were collected, 26 from CV samples and 7 from 

screening. Raw data recorded from these is in Appendix D. 

Elements and Taxonomy 

All specimens were extremely small, and most were too fragmented to be identifiable. 

The unidentifiable bones include 7 unknown irregular, 3 unknown flat, 12 unknown long (shaft 

fragments), 1 unknown alveolar, and 1 unknown tooth. The 9 identifiable fragments include 

1 femur, 1 vertebra, 2 ribs, 1 squamosal, 1 maxilla, 1 mandible, 1 cheek tooth, and 1 incisor. 

The majority of the specimens could not be identified beyond a very general level. Of 

these, 14 were recorded as unknown microverts, 1 as amphibian, 1 as Serpentes, 1 as mammal 

(unknown size class), 12 as unknown small mammal, 3 as rodent, and 1 as Sylvilagus sp. 

(Table 3). The single amphibian specimen consists of a humerus from an individual 

approximately the size of a wood toad. The specimen of Squamata consists of a vertebral 

fragment from a small snake. One of the rodent specimens is an Ill, left, possibly from 

Neotoma sp. Sylvilagus is represented by a left mandible fragment with deciduous MI123 and 

permanent PI3 erupted (Voorhies, personal communication 1990). No other information could 

be discerned regarding developmental stages. 
Taphonomy 

Excepting one loose 111, all specimens were broken to some degree. Mechanisms 

responsible for breakage could not be discerned. At least 12 specimens were broken while the 

bone was green, which may have resulted from hunting or predation, while the remaining 

breakage may have resulted from trampling of dry bone and from weathering. It is quite likely 

that a substantial portion can be attributed to processing of small mammals by humans, as 9 

(27.3 percent) were burned to some degree. However, it is also possible that naturally 

occurring fragments were incidentally rather than intentionally burned. All of the burned 

fragments consist of either unknown microvert or small mammal. Insufficient numbers of 

identifiable elements preclude assessment of patterns of either carnivore breakage or human 

processing. 

Weathering stages were recorded and interpreted using the criteria defined by 

Behrensmeyer (1978). Of all 33 specimens, only two had differential weathering (FS 22.8.1 

with Stages 2 and 1, and FS 22.9.9 with 4 and 1). The remaining 31 had an even distribution 

of weathering, even on specimens with more advanced weathering stages. This suggests that 

materials in these deposits were constantly churned as they accreted. Weathering stage 

distributions by arbitrary level are shown in Table 4. Specimens with multiple stages were 

entered on the table with the highest stage number. Because of the low number of specimens 

distributed through a large number of proveniences, little can be discerned in the frequency 

distribution across individual arbitrary units. The frequency distribution across the totals at the 

bottom can be considered to represent average conditions in these units. This distribution 

shows an uneven distribution, with a larger portion of the specimens in lower stages of 

weathering. 

When they are analyzed according to the groups previously described (Strata A, B, and 

C), differences in the weathering stage distributions are discernible (Table 5). Specimens in 

Stratum C (Levels V, VI, and VII) are more restricted to Stage 1, with only two items of 

higher stages. This type of distribution is frequently associated with rapidly accumulating 

sediments, where bone is preserved in a lower stage of weathering. Specimens in Level IV 

have a more even distribution across the weathering stages. This type of distribution is 

frequently associated with more slowly accumulating sediments with few or no large filling 

episodes, where the accreting bone assemblage remains exposed. Although the majority of the 

sediments investigated were from Levels I, 11, and 111, only three bone specimens were 

recovered from these strata. This may be due to rapid sedimentation or destruction of bone 

in these overbank and/or dune deposits. 

Summary 

This assemblage derives from a minimum of four small vertebrates: one unknown 

amphibian (probably toad), one unknown Serpentes (snake), one unknown rodent, and one 

individual of Sylvilagus sp. The taxonomic level at which these could be identified precludes 
recovery of specific information regarding habitat type; toads, snakes, rodents, and cottontails 

occupy a variety of habitats. 

There was no definite evidence of human use identified on any of these remains, no 

butchering marks or definite signs of crushing. However, nine bone fragments were burned, 

possibly prior to breakage. It is possible but unlikely that these were incidentally burned in 

the substrate below hearths or natural fires. 

Weathering stage distributions suggest changes in the depositional environments that 

are consistent with information inferred from the soil characteristics. Stage distributions in the 

lowest stratum, Stratum C, tend to be earlier stages, suggesting rapid sedimentation. Stages 

in the middle stratum, Stratum B, are more evenly distributed across the stages, suggesting 

longer exposure on the surface and slower sedimentation. The small size of the sample 

recovered from the upper stratum, Stratum A, may be due to either rapid sedimentation or to 

rapid bone destruction. Due to the small sample the significance of dissimilarities among the 

levels was not statistically tested. 

Extrasite Correlations and Paleoenvironmental Implications 

Prior Investigations Outside of the Needles District 

Although little is known about Quaternary stratigraphy and paleoenvironmental 

sequences in the park, some relevant information has been acquired in other portions of the 

Southwest. Richmond (1962) has identified a series of Neoglacial advances in the nearby La 

Sal Mountains which may correlate with events in the park. Knox (1984) implies that the 

timing of alluvial events in the Southwest matches the paleoclimatic sequence of Bryson et al. 

(1970), but notes that responses of Southwestern drainages to climate change are dissimilar to 

those of other regions. Baker (1983) identifies several large-scale environmental changes that 

correlate among various portions of the Southwest, but asserts that the biotic diversity caused 

by the varied topography of the region has posed problems in interpretation and correlation of 

local events. 

Paleoenvironmental sequences have been interpreted for several areas in this portion of 

the Colorado Plateau. For example, Karlstrom (1988), Hevly (1988), and Dean (1988) have 

examined paleoenvironmental conditions from the Late Archaic through the Late Prehistoric 

on Black Mesa in northern Arizona. Paleoenvironments during a similar range of time have 

also been investigated on Cedar Mesa (Matson et al. 1988) in southeastern Utah, in the Dolores 

Archeological Program area (Peterson 1988) in southwestern Colorado, and on White Mesa 

(Davis 1985b) in southeastern Utah. Results from these are in general agreement on the timing 

of events and cultural processes. In the area near Bechan Cave, Agenbroad (1986) has 

identified an alluvial sequence very similar to that identified by Hack (1942). 
In an area south of the Abajo Mountains, Betancourt (1984) investigated large-scale 

Late Pleistocene to mid-Holocene changes in vegetation zones, but gave little detail relevant 

to the temporal limits of this study. Closer to the park, at Cowboy Cave, Spaulding and 

Peterson (1980) and Lindsay (1980) have investigated Late Pleistocene through Late Holocene 

envl'ronments. Although pollen recovery was poor in some portions of the column, results are 

consistent with the sequence of Bryson et al. (1970). 

Within the park, Cummings (1989) investigated both natural and culturally deposited 

botanical remains on the Island-in-the-Sky. This study identified a number of both wild and 

domesticated plants that were economically used. It also concluded that although the 

environment in the area was marginal for agriculture, corn was probably grown on the 

Island-in-the-Sky . 

Prior Investigations in the Needles District 

In order to establish contexts of the deposits investigated at 42SA20286, discussion of 

prior paleoenvironmental investigations will concentrate on periods immediately prior to and 

coeval with events at that site. Investigation of stratigraphic sequences in the Salt Creek 

drainage have been initiated only in recent years, and little is known about the middle and 

lower reaches of the drainage. A brief review of the chronological and geomorphic 

information collected identifies several useful points regarding the alluvial sequence and 

paleoenvironmental conditions. 

Radiocarbon samples from alluvial terraces in upper Salt Creek, 

+ 

in areas approximately 

12 miles to the south, have yielded dates that range from 8680 120 to 175 f 25 years B.P. 

(Agenbroad 1986). Agenbroad (1986; 1991) has posited the occurrence of a series of cut-andfill episodes that affected the upper portions of Salt Creek, and it is likely that these affected 

the middle portions as well. It appears that these events have affected the preservation or at 

least the visibility of remains from all periods, especially those of Paleoindian and Early 

Archaic occupations. 

The evidence which has been collected to date from the terraces in the middle portion 

of Salt Creek indicates the occurrence of several cut-and-fill episodes which directly impacted 

events at 42SA20286. An erosional event of unknown date formed the channel in which the 

deposits in this study were formed. A limiting date for this erosion is implied by a radiocarbon 

date of ca. 4500 B.P. from a hearth at a site near the top of a nearby terrace (Agenbroad, 

personal communication 1989). This date is within the period of a fill episode in upper 

portions of Salt Creek (Agenbroad and Elder 1986; Agenbroad 1991). Due to the position of 

this hearth higher in the terraces than later-dated deposits, it is necessary that at least one 

erosional episode occurred within the ensuing 1,800 years prior to the fill event at 42SA20286. 

The dating of this event is unknown, but Agenbroad (1991) identified a major erosional 

episode ca. 3800 B.P. in upper Salt Creek, and it is possible that this is coeval with the event 

which affected the lower portion of the drainage. 
Subsequent alluviation in that erosional channel formed the lower levels at 42SA20286, 

and apparently affected a larger area. Radiocarbon dates of hearths near the top of, and on 

deposits on, an extensive terrace 0.6 to 1.6 km to the north and northwest indicate that much 

of the sediment in these younger deposits accumulated prior to approximately 2650 B.P. 

(Tipps, personal communication 1989). 

Radiocarbon dates from hearths near the surface of the terrace date to the time range 

of approximately 2650 to 2200 B.P. (Tipps personal communication 1990). This indicates that 

deposition was slow or non-existent, and that this surface was relatively stable through this 

period (Agenbroad, personal communication 1992). This is coeval with Richmond's (1962) 

Lower Gold Basin of the Neoglacial, a period of glacial advance and stasis associated with a 

decline in average temperatures, increased alluviation, and possibly an increase in precipitation. 

These conditions suggest increased effective moisture for surrounding areas as well. 

Agenbroad (1991) shows four subsequent erosional episodes for the upper Salt Creek 

drainage, but their relationships to conditions in the middle Salt Creek drainage are unknown. 

At least one erosional episode affected the middle drainage, as shown by a cutbank visible in 

Stratum B of Excavation Unit G at 42SA20286. This stratum yielded an uncalibrated 

radiocarbon date of 2490 f 210 B.P. (1 110 - 50 cal B.C.), while a sample from lower within 

a cutbank in younger alluvial deposits on site 42SA20615 yielded a date of 1790 f 90 B.P. 

(Agenbroad, personal communication 1989). The dates for these sediments suggest the 

occurrence of an intervening erosional event. Subsequent episodes of erosion and aggradation 

may be evident in younger deposits at 42SA20286 and other nearby sites, but this cannot be 

assessed with existing information. 

Aeolian deposits can be found overlying both bedrock and the colluvial sands discussed 

previously. The deposits at 42SA20286 probably date later than the erosional episode at 1790 

B.P. A period of aeolian deposition which lasted from ca. 1500 to 800 B.P. is shown in the 

sequence for the Bechan Cave area (Agenbroad 1986), and dune deposits which postdate 2200 

B.P. have been observed on the terraces north of 42SA20286 (Agenbroad, personal 

communication 1 992). 

Correlation of Strata at Site 42SA20286 

Most of the deposits investigated at 42SA20286 can only be dated relative to the single 

radiocarbon sample (2490 f 21 0 B.P., 1 1 10 - 50 cal B.C.). These deposits appear to represent 

only the last 2500+ years of the local sequence. 

The lowest unit, Stratum C, is mottled dark red soil with lenses of silt and clay mixed 

with lenses of sand, and it appears to result from conditions intermittently fluctuating between 

marshy and dry. Its color seems to indicate a higher deposition rate than that implied by 

conditions in Stratum B. The bone weathering stage distribution indicates a burial rate faster 

than that in Stratum B. 
Stratum C is overlain conformably by Stratum B. The boundary between these two 

units is based on increased frequency of the siltfclay lenses, darker color, and more consistent 

color distribution in Stratum B. It appears that these units represent a relatively continuous 

deposition, with rates of deposition decreasing toward the upper boundary of Stratum B. It is 

unlikely that differences between Stratum B and Stratum C are due to Stratum B constituting 

an A horizon for the entire column of Stratum B and Stratum C. The frequency of silt and 

clay lenses are higher within the entirety of Stratum B, suggesting a change in depositional 

environment to less turbulent conditions in that upper unit. 

Stratum B is a dark soil unit with many lenses of silt and clay. It has darker and more 

consistent color, and seems to result from a long period of consistently moist soil conditions 

and slower deposition rates than those seen in Stratum C. The bone weathering distribution 

indicates slower burial rates than Stratum C. Overall, these suggest that Stratum B represents 

a relatively stable surface. The radiocarbon dating falls within the range of dates from the 

previously described stable surface of the terrace to the north, and it is likely that this makes 

up a portion of that terrace system. 

At the east end of the excavation unit, the upper surface of Stratum B is interrupted by 

a small erosional surface which appears to be a portion of a buried cutbank of the creek. The 

position of this cut is consistent with the erosion suggested by the absence of Stratum C and 

Stratum B in other excavation units at the east side of the site. The erosional event recorded 

by this cannot be dated with the data collected here. However, this may be related to the 

erosional event subsequent to 1790 B.P. that was discussed above. 

Stratum A was disconformably deposited over Stratum B. Stratum A is light colored 

sand with little or no silt and clay, which appears to have resulted from overbank and aeolian 

deposition. No soil horizon development was detected and deposition was probably fast, and 

dry average soil conditions are implied. The weathering stages of the few bone specimens 

collected from this unit are consistent with fast deposition. This unit may correlate with the 

period of aeolian activity which Agenbroad and Elder (1986) shows occurring between ca. 

1500 and 800 B.P. 

Although the molluscan assemblage is small and no conclusions can be drawn from 

them, the environmental conditions implied by this assemblage are completely consistent with 

those correlations. The molluscs from Stratum C include species which are associated with 

mountainous habitats; Stratum B includes species associated with cooler, moister habitats. 

These are consistent with the suggestion that these deposits accreted during cooler conditions 

associated with the Neoglacial. Stratum A yielded a limited assemblage which included only 

molluscs with generalized habitat needs and which are common in the area today. 
CULTURAL MATERIALS 

The first part of this chapter is a brief descriptive overview of the cultural materials and 

artifact type definitions, with descriptive statistics for each artifact type. The second part 

describes the lithic materials and examines patterns in material selection, reduction, and 

transport. In the last portion of this chapter, stratigraphic changes in lithic material transport 

and reduction are examined. 

Assemblage Overview 

During these investigations 727 flaked lithic items were collected, including 544 pieces 

of macrodebitage, 8 bifaces, 5 cores, 6 retouched or utilized flakes, and 164 pieces of 

microdebitage. 

The debitage, which included a diverse group of flakes, probably from tool and core 

reduction, is discussed in the section DeJinitions and Descriptive Statistics of Artifact 

Categories (pp. 36-41). The assemblage is dominated by the local red to yellow chert which 

originates in the Cedar Mesa Formation (49.5 percent), but Summerville chalcedony comprises 

a surprisingly large portion (32.3 percent). Other materials were collected in smaller quantities, 

including a chalcedony which compares favorably to that from the Whte Rim Formation, other 

chalcedonies of unknown sources, and quartzites of unknown source. Definitions, sources, and 

use of these materials are discussed further in the section Material Type DeJinitions (pp. 34- 

36). 

On the surface, flakes and tools were observed scattered over a large, irregularly shaped 

area of approximately 56,000 sq m (375 m NE-SW x 225 m SE-NW). There are a large 

number of artifacts, and they are intermittently dense. Cultural materials are deeply buried in 

some places, but no diagnostics were found, and no spatial patterns could be discerned in 

subsurface investigations. 

No evidence of features was observed on the surface or in test pits. The location of the 

"hearth" noted during original recording of the site was identified by the Park Archeologist, 

and the area was searched. No evidence of this feature was found. A number of small patches 

of buried dark soil horizons exposed by erosion were closely examined. However, no charcoal, 

ash, or oxidized sand was observed in these patches, and it is likely that one of these had been 

mistaken for a hearth. 

Slightly more than one gram of charcoal was collected from a volume of 0.5 cu m (2+ 

levels from a 1-x-2-m test pit). Nine pieces of bone and 15 macrobotanical specimens were 

recovered from screening and from CV samples. These were discussed in the previous chapter. 

Only a very small percentage of entire site was sampled. The total surface area 

collected, 1,090 sq m, is 1.5 percent of the total site area (approximately 73,000 sq m). Total 

excavated volume is 14.7 cu m, which comprises an unknown percentage of the buried 
materials. Total surface area with subsurface investigation is 0.02 percent of surface area. 

With this sample, statistical analysis of spatial distribution is not feasible. 

Excluding microdebitage, a total of 563 items was collected from the small area 

sampled. Although this is probably less than 1 percent of the entire assemblage, this is a 

number sufficiently large to allow statistical testing of some assemblage attributes. It is not 

known whether this constitutes a representative sample of the full assemblage that exists on 

the site. 

Raw Materials and Sources 

The types used in the text are defined below. During initial encoding, a larger number 

of material subtypes were defined which express the range of variation in the materials 

observed. However, for subsequent analysis and data presentation these subtypes were grouped 

into a smaller number of types which were constructed to reflect the probable geologic source 

of the raw material. As a consequence, due to the inclusion of multiple subtypes within one 

category, the types defined here obscure the true range of variation. 

Material types found in and near the project area derive from a number of sources. 

Several sources are known within the park and in the region around the park (Tipps and Hewitt 

1989). Only two items bore abraded cortex. Based on the presence of weathered cortex on 

83 percent of the items which bear cortex, it is surmised that a large fraction of the materials 

were from primary context in bedrock sources, or came from materials transported by alluvial 

processes only a very small distance from their original context. 

The only nearby source occurs in outcrops of the Cedar Mesa Formation, including one 

which is 0.7 mile to the east and one which is 1 mile to the west. Other materials are 

necessarily exogenous (for the purposes of this study exogenous materials are those for which 

there are no known sources within 6 miles). These include Summerville chalcedony, a 

chalcedony which compares favorably to White Rim chalcedony, quartzite from unknown 

sources, and other materials. These are described further in the following text. 

Material Type Dejnitions 

Divisions between metamorphosed sediments (quartzite) and siliceous precipitates were 

based on the structure visible under 15x magnification. Most items were determined to consist 

of metamorphosed sand grains and matrix (quartzite) or of a sedimentary precipitate with a 

micro- or cryptocrystalline mass (chert or chalcedony). The distinction between chert and 

chalcedony was based simply on the degree of transparency: items which were opaque to an 

edge ca. 0.5 mm thick were assigned to chert, those on which light was transmitted through 

greater thicknesses were assigned to chalcedony. These definitions were useful for the 

purposes of this archeological study but may not withstand rigorous geological scrutiny. 
Chert 

This was the most common material, numbering 371 items or 5 1.0 percent of the entire 

assemblage. A total of 308 pieces of chert debitage, 13 chert tools, and 50 pieces of chert 

microdebitage were recorded. Divisions among these were based on colors and color patterns, 

inclusions (dendrites, speckling, banding, clouding, crystal pockets), and crystal size (cryptoor microcrystalline). 

Cedar Mesa Chert. This includes homogeneous brown to redlbrown to red, cream, and 

grayltan mottled chert. Total of 367 (50.5 percent). Grades from poor to excellent. Bedrock 

sources are widespread in the Needles and other districts of the park. The nearest known is 

one mile to the west, at the east side of Squaw Butte (site 42SA2116). On the basis of the 

presence of unabraded or "bedrock" cortex on specimens it is surmised that a large fraction of 

the materials were from the bedrock sources. Unaltered materials at the nearby source occur 

in pieces up to 20 cm in maximum dimension. The quality of these materials is quite variable, 

but a fair portion of them appear to be of adequate quality for production of bifaces. 

Unnamed Chert. Black to dark-brown with lighter brown pockets and black flecking. 

Total of 4 (0.6 percent). Source: Unknown. 

Chalcedonies 

These numbered 340 items and constituted 46.8 percent of the entire assemblage. These 

included 226 pieces of chalcedony debitage, 6 chalcedony tools, and 108 pieces of chalcedony 

microdebitage. Divisions among these were based on color and color patterns, inclusions 

(dendrites, speckling, banding, clouding, crystal pockets), and crystal size (crypto- or 

microcrystalline). 

Summewille Formation Chalcedony. Gray with blue or orangeltan mottling, slightly 

translucent to transparent, cryptocrystalline to microcrystalline. Occasional black speckling. 

Total of 185 (25.4 percent). Source: Similar to materials from the Summerville Formation. 

These can be found as large lag cobbles on top of outcrops of the Navajo Formation. They 

occur in portions of the uplands to the east of the park, especially to the north of Photographers 

Point and north of La Sal Junction. 

White Rim Formation Chalcedony. Pink to lavender (some amber) with red dendrites, 

cryptocrystalline. Total of 52 (7.2 percent). Source: These compare favorably to materials 

collected from the White Rim Formation (Susan Vetter and Alan Osborn, personal 

communication 1990). The formation outcrops below the White Rim of the Island-in-the-Sky 

and also in the Maze District. Although the source(s) of this material is uncertain, this material 

is referred to here as White Rim chalcedony. 

Unnamed Chalcedony. Clear to yellow or orange, with or without inclusions. Total 

of 53 (7.3 percent). Source: Unknown. 
Quartzites 

Unnamed Quartzite. Fine-grained to coarse-grained, well metamorphosed to moderately 

metamorphosed. Source: Unknown. These numbered only 16 items, comprising 2.2 percent 

of the entire assemblage, including 10 pieces of quartzite debitage, no quartzite tools, and 6 

pieces of quartzite microdebitage. Due to very large number of types, color was not 

considered. Divisions are based on grain size, size sorting, the consistency of the components 

of sand, and breakage across grains (degree of metamorphosis). Overall, the sources of these 

are unknown, but it is likely that they have been procured from the Colorado River or from 

outcrops of the Morrison Formation. 

Summary of Material Types 

Observations by Tipps and Hewitt (1989) and by this author indicate sources of 

moderate to high quality material within one mile, as well as other sources of moderate to high 

quality within less than thirty miles. Materials that appear to be from these sources occur in 

varying frequencies within the assemblage. The assemblage contains much local material of 

moderate to good quality, but a surprisingly high proportion of the assemblage is exogenous 

material. This high frequency of exogenous material is possibly related to quality, areas used 

in economic activities, functional/morphological requirements, and beginning sizes and forms 

at sources. These issues are covered further in the following section. 

DeJinitions and Descriptive Statistics of Artifact Categories 

Prior to definition of the flaked lithic categories, several terms should be defined: 

Intentional modification: At least one flake initiated subsequent to detachment of item, 

i.e., not a dorsal or platform preparation scar. 

Unintentional modification: Wear or unpatterned damage, trampling. Snap or bending 

fractures. 

Thinning: Flakes directed across the thickest portion of an item. 

Shaping: Flakes that remove a portion of an edge but do not remove thicker portions 

of an item. 

Cortex, weathering: Shows signs of chemical decay of material, no mechanical 

removal; is often flaky, scaly, or powdery. 

Cortex, abraded: Shows signs of mechanical removal of material, rounding, pitting, 

polishing, etc. 
Debitage 

The debitage category includes all flakes which bear no evidence of post-detachment 

alterations due to either intentional modifications or utilization. Variables recorded for these 

include material type, reductive stage, maximum dimension, thickness, cortex type, and 

completeness. Most of the items recorded fall in this category. This large sample has allowed 

several aspects of material use to be examined. 

Reductive stage distributions bear information regarding technological applications of 

various material types and regarding adjustments to the accessibility of lithic resources. 

Several authors (Sullivan and Rosen 1985) have objected to the use of stage-based debitage 

classifications due to difficulties in the application of definitions, and would prefer use of 

"interpretation-free" schemes. However, the utility and validity of such schemes remain 

unproven (Amick and Mauldin 1989; Ensor and Roemer 1989). In this study, assignments of 

categories were based on morphological characteristics that are usually associated with the 

different flaking tasks, from decortication to core reduction to tool production. While flakes 

cannot be categorized by reductive process with complete accuracy, they can be assigned to 

one of four major categories which result from three generalized reductive processes and which 

tend to have the characteristics described below. In order to insure consistency in 

categorization, all of the flaked lithics were encoded by a single individual. 

Microakbitage. This includes all products of flaking that are less than 2 mm in 

maximum dimension. A total of 164 pieces of microdebitage were recorded. Of these, 50 

(30.5 percent) are chert, 108 (65.9 percent) chalcedony, and 6 quartzite (3.7 percent). 

Macrodebitage. This includes all debitage items that are larger than 2 mm in maximum 

dimension. A total of 544 pieces of macrodebitage were collected. This includes the 

categories discussed below. 

Shatter. Angular fragments without recognizable flake or core features such as 

platform, initiation point, bulb, or well-defined ripples. 

A total of 4 pieces of shatter were recorded. Of these, 2 are chert, 1 chalcedony, and 

1 quartzite. These average 13.9 mm (sd = 3.4) in maximum dimension and 7.2 mm (sd = 3.5) 

in thickness. 

Decortication Flake. Any piece of debitage with cortex covering more than 30 percent 

of the dorsal surface is a decortication flake. Associated with early core reduction: removal 

of weathered material and shaping of platform and working faces. 

A total of 6 decortication flakes were recorded. Of these, 5 (83.3 percent) are chert, 

0 chalcedony, and 1 (16.7 percent) quartzite. These average 18.1 mm (sd = 8.8) in maximum 

dimension and 6.5 mm (sd = 4.7) in thickness. 
Interior Flake. Flakes with less than 30 percent cortex are classified as interior. Two 

forms are defined for interior flakes: Interior I, which tend to be produced during core 

reduction, and Interior 11, which tend to be produced during tool thinning and shaping. The 

two interior flake categories are defined below. 

Core Reduction Flake, or Interior I. Tend to be straight in longitudinal axis, thicker, 

have a higher dorsal-face-to-platform angle, less platform preparation, fewer dorsal scars, 

higher average thickness-to-width ratio (> 0.2), larger average surface area, and less dispersed 

bulb. Produced in earlier stages of manufacture. 

A total of 166 Interior I flakes were recorded. Of these, 11 1 (66.9 percent) are chert, 

54 (32.5 percent) chalcedony, and 1 quartzite (0.6 percent). These average 16.8 mm (sd = 7.1) 

in maximum dimension and 3.1 mm (sd = 1.5) in thickness. 

Tool Reduction Flake, or Interior II. Tend to be curved in longitudinal axis, thinner, 

have lower dorsal-face-to-platform angle, more careful platform preparation, more dorsal scars, 

lower average thickness-to-width ratio (< 0.2), smaller average surface area, and more 

dispersed bulb. These are produced in later stages of manufacture. 

A total of 301 Interior I1 flakes were recorded. Of these, 174 (57.8 percent) are chert, 

127 (42.2 percent) chalcedony, and 0 quartzite. These average 13.2 mm (sd = 5.2) in 

maximum dimension and 1.8 mm (sd = 0.8) in thickness. 

Tools and Cores 

These are defined as any flaked lithic item believed to be intentionally altered for use, 

or intentionally altered to yield another usable item, or an item incidentally altered by use, 

including the presence of edge crushing, rounding, and striations, as well as patterned retouch. 

This includes flakes with post-detachment alterations, cobbles altered for use, and cores. The 

specific criteria are listed with each type. Only 19 tools and cores were collected, as described 

below. 

Core. A nucleus from which flakes of a usable size have been removed. May include 

tools that were incidentally used as core as well. Three types of cores/tools were identified, 

based on size, initial shape of the cobble, and resulting morphology. 

Core Tools. Usually unpatterned, irregular flaking with deep scars and highly variable 

edge angles. Edges may or may not be regular or normalized (Ahler 1981). 

Only one was collected (FS 22.4.1; Figure 9a), a multiple-direction core with flake scars 

from use, platform preparation, or retouch along one margin. It is a gray chalcedony with pink 

mottling and gray speckles, Summerville Formation chalcedony. Its length = 54.1 mm, width 

= 29.7 mm, and thickness = 18.9 mm. 
Core, Small. Less than approx. 60 cc. Possibly expended. A total of three of these 

were recorded (FS 22.5.2, 23.0.27, 23.0.24; Figure 9b, 9c, 9d) All of these are the redltan, 

locally available Cedar Mesa Formation chert. Lengths ranged from 39.9 to 55.4 mm, with 

a mean of 47.1. Widths ranged from 26.1 to 43.0 mm, with a mean of 35.9. Thickness ranged 

from 23.8 to 43.8 mm, with a mean of 30.5. 

Core or Core/Chopper. Greater than approximately 60 cc. Coreslchoppers have one 

or more well-defined edges, with damage consisting of small-scale edge crushing and rounding. 

Only one of these was collected (FS 23.0.28; Figure 9e), a multidirectional core from 

which large blocky spalls had been removed. It was made from the local tadred Cedar Mesa 

Formation chert. Its length = 71.1 mm, width = 48.0 mm, and thickness = 57.9 mm. 

Retouched and Utilized Flake. A flake with modifications that affect only the shape, 

angle, and sharpness of an edge(s), and do not alter any other characteristics of the object. 

Unretouched and Utilized Interior I Flake. Interior I flake that has small (less than 1.5 

mm maximum length) unpatterned or random flake scars. Discerned from obviously trampled 

items by lack of large "clam-shell" scars and regularity (Ahler 1981) of edge. 

A total of three of these were collected. One of these (FS 23.0.16; Figure 100 is gray 

chalcedony (Summerville Formation chalcedony, one (FS 23.0.25; Figure lob) the local tadred 

Cedar Mesa Formation chert, and one (FS 23.0.29; Figure 10c) mottled brownlred-brown Cedar 

Mesa Formation chert. Lengths ranged from 32.3 to 66.0 mm, with a mean of 43.7. Widths 

ranged from 15.3 to 44.9 mm, with a mean of 27.1. Thickness ranged from 4.9 to 12.8 mm, 

with a mean of 7.9. 

Unretouched and Utilized Interior 11 Flake. Interior I1 flake which has small (less than 

1.5 mm maximum length) unpatterned or random flake scars. Discerned from obviously 

trampled items by lack of large "clam-shell" scars and regularity (Ahler 1981) of edge. Only 

one of these was collected (FS 21.4.2; Figure lOd), a large bifacial thinning flake with very 

regular retouch or use scars along two margins. It was made from the local tadred Cedar 

Mesa Formation chert. Its length = 50.7 mm, width = 40.2 mm, and thickness = 5.6 mm. 

Retouched Interior 11 Flake. Interior I1 flake which has patterned flake scars larger than 

1.5 mm maximum length. Discerned from obviously trampled items by size and control of 

flaking, by lack of large "clam-shell" scars, and by regularity (Ahler 1981) of edge. 

Only one of these was collected (FS 11.8.2; Figure lOe), a distal fragment of a large 

bifacial thinning flake with very regular bifacial retouch. It was made from the local tadred 

Cedar Mesa Formation chert. Length = 12.7 mm, width = 39.1 mm, and thickness = 3.3 mm. 
Blade. Flake with lengthlwidth ratio greater than 2; often with high dorsal ridge angle, 

roughly parallel edges, roughly parallel flake scars, or lamellar flaking. There are no 

implications regarding formal blade technologies intended in this definition. 

End-retouched Blade. Blade with regular, patterned flake scars larger than 1.5 rnm 

maximum length that produces either a "regular" or a "normalized" edge (Ahler 1981). 

Only one of these was collected (FS 2 1.1.1 ; Figure 1 Oa), a small blade with parallel 

edges and single dorsal ridge, derived from bifacial thinning or multidirectional core. Proximal 

end has been severed. A portion of the distal end bears possible unifacial retouch. It was 

made from the local tadred Cedar Mesa Formation chert. Length = 29.9 mm, width = 14.3 

mm, and thickness = 3.4 mm. 

Bifaces 

This category includes any flaked lithic item bearing flakes initiated from contiguous 

portions of the margin and onto opposing surfaces of the item. A total of eight bifaces were 

collected. Excluding points and bifacial cores, three types of bifaces were defined on the basis 

of the degree of control over flaking and the resulting thinness. It is likely that these divisions 

are artificial and that these items actually represent a continuum of reduction. 

Biface, Thick, Type 2. Unpatterned, large bifacial flaking. Scars do not necessarily cross 

thickest portion of item. Possibly served both as tools and as cores. 

A total of three of these were collected. One (FS 15.9.3; Figure 1 la) is an end 

fragment of light gray chalcedony mottled with tan-orange (Summerville Formation 

chalcedony), with length = 10.3 mm, width = 13.4 mm, and thickness = 5.9 mm. The two 

others are made from the local tadred Cedar Mesa chert. One (FS 23.0.23; Figure llh) 

appears to be a reworked end fragment with length = 45.2 mm, width = 31.3 mm, and 

thickness = 10.6 mm. The other (FS 15.9.2; Figure 1 lg) is complete and appears to be a point 

preform on which thinning could not be completed because of a group of hinge fractures on 

one surface. Length = 52.2 mm, width = 3 1.3 mm, and thickness = 11.4 mm. Surfaces are 

waxy, but none of these bear any evidence of heat treatment. 

Biface, Thick, Type I. Unpatterned, large thinning flake scars, not regular in size or 

direction. Most scars cross thickest portion of item, but it is not well thinned; maximum 

thickness to width ratio is greater than 0.3 and less than 0.4. 

A total of three of these were collected. Two are made from the local tanlred Cedar 

Mesa chert. Of those, one (FS 19.6.1; Figure 1 1 c) is an edge fragment with length = 9.9 mm, 

width = 23.9 mm, and thickness = 6.4 mm. The other (FS 23.0.26; Figure 1 le) is pointed, 

probably a distal fragment, with length = 28.0 mm, width = 22.8 mm, and thickness = 5.7 mm. 

The third (FS 23.0.33; Figure 1 ld) is blue-gray chalcedony with red dendrites (White Rim 
chalcedony), an edge fragment with length = 18.5 mm, width = 14.6 mm, and thickness = 1 1.6 

mm. Surfaces are waxy, but none show evidence of heat treatment. 

Biface, Thin. Bears well-controlled bifacial thinning flakes of regular size and direction. 

Well thinned, maximum thicknesslwidth ratio is less than 0.3. Possibly knives. 

Two of these were collected. Neither is complete. One is pointed and may be a distal 

fragment, and one is a round-based proximal portion. Both of the breaks are slightly diagonal, 

and could have occurred during maintenance or use. The basal fragment is white to blue-gray 

chalcedony (Summerville Formation chalcedony; FS 22.4.2; Figure 1 lf). The length of this 

fragment = 38.4 rnrn, width = 33.6 mm, and thickness = 6.6 mm. The other is a pink 

chalcedony with red dendrites (White Rim chalcedony; FS 11.0.2; Figure 1 lb). The length of 

this fragment = 5.0 mm , width = 11.7 mm, thickness = 3.4 mm. Both have been well thinned, 

and the more complete specimen has thicknesslwidth ratio = 0.20. Both have matte to waxy 

surfaces, and neither displays any evidence of heat treatment. 

ARTIFACT ASSEMBLAGE MATERIAL USE PATTERNS 

The artifacts and the inferred reductive strategies show responses to lithic material 

availability and quality. Based upon the sample recovered, the material procurement and 

reduction strategies appear to be dependent mainly upon maintenance of a set of high-quality 

items for transport, especially bifaces, biface cores, and projectile points. These were 

augmented by unretouched and retouched flake tools produced and discarded in an expedient 

fashion. Artifact sizes are reflective of material type and probable source area. The types of 

artifacts of the various materials also reflect material availability - cores and expedient tools 

tend to consist of local materials, while formal or curated tools consist of a mix of exogenous 

and local materials. 

Local materials were often discarded at early stages of reduction. Decortication flakes 

are not common, but are most frequent among the local material. Interior I flakes tend to be 

of local materials, and differences in flake type frequencies among material types are 

statistically significant. However, based on artifact types and edge angle measurements, the 

end products of the materials appear to be approximately the same types of items and used for 

the same purposes. These attributes are discussed further in the following section. 

Material use patterns were examined by comparing size, variability of sizes, ratios of 

thickness/maximum dimension, reductive tasks applied, frequency of cortex, and tool edge 

angles of items of the different material types. Significant associations among nominal 

variables were tested by chi-square analysis. Differences in means of continuous variables 

(e.g., length, thickness, edge angles) among various nominal categories (e.g., material type, 

flake and tool types, stratigraphic units) were tested by analysis of variance (ANOVA). Both 

tests were run on Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSSPC, Version 4.0.1). 

Material Use Patterns in Debitage 

The distribution of reductive stage by material for debitage is shown in Table 6. 

Reductive stages are as defined in the previous text. The overall assemblage is dominated by 

Interior I1 flakes, which constitute 62.1 percent, while Interior I flakes constitute 35.8 percent, 

decortication 1.2 percent, and shatter 1.0 percent. The high frequency of Interior I1 flakes 

suggests that the overall focus of flaking activities at this site was on reduction of tools or 

bifacial cores. 

In spite of the proximity of a material source in Cedar Mesa Formation outcrops, there 

is a surprisingly low number of decortication flakes and Interior I flakes, which are generally 

associated with procurement activities. Even among Cedar Mesa chert items, the relative 

frequencies of items probably related to core reduction-decortication flakes and Interior I 

flakes-are low, comprising only 1.7 percent and 39.1 percent respectively. Instead, Interior 

I1 flakes constitute the majority (58.3 percent) among the chert items. In comparison with 

exogenous materials, this relative frequency is slightly lower than the relative frequency of the 

chalcedony Interior I1 flakes (69.0 percent). Differences in these were not tested with the 
frequency distribution in Table 6 due to the number of low-expectation cells. Instead, the chisquare and expected values were calculated for frequencies of Interior I and Interior I1 flakes 

by chert and chalcedony only. This test gave a chi-square of 32.06, df = 1, significance = 

0.00, indicating a significant difference in the frequencies of the two flakes types between these 

two material types. 

Among the chalcedony items, Interior I flakes make up 30.5 percent, which suggests 

a high frequency of core reduction on these transported materials when compared with 40.7 

percent Interior I flakes for locally available chert. This is not consistent with expectations for 

relative frequencies of these items among transported materials. 

Overall, the similarities between the assemblages of local chert and exogenous 

chalcedony with respect to flake-type frequencies suggest that the organization of, and the 

trends within, each assemblage were similar. In addition, the fact that so little initial core 

decortication and shaping was performed on the site with the locally available material suggests 

that there was a considerable separation between economic activities performed on the site and 

procurement activities. Other attributes, including dimensions, tend to support both of these 

assertions, as discussed below. 

In contrast, quartzite is represented by materials that should be construed as early 

reductive stage products: three Interior I flakes, one decortication flake, and one piece of 

shatter. This type distribution is consistent with the attributes such as cortex, dimensions, 

relative thickness, and variability of dimensions, which are discussed below, and suggests that 

this was a low-quality, infrequently procured material. 

Additional factors of material use can be seen by comparing the means, the standard 

deviations, and the coefficients of variability of both the maximum dimension and the thickness 

of debitage (Table 7). Results of ANOVA suggest that differences are significant, but due to 

disparity in sample sizes this test cannot be accepted as statistically valid. Average maximum 

dimension of chert debitage is greater than averages for both chalcedony and quartzite. This 

result is consistent with expectations for size differences among exogenous and local materials. 

Average dimensions of transported items should be lower than those of items of locally 

available materials and should be less variable. Values for average thickness are inconsistent 

with the expectation of decreased dimensions among transported items (Table 7). Although 

the average thicknesses of the chalcedony items are lower than averages for chert, as expected, 

the averages for quartzite items are higher and more variable. This suggests that quartzite was 

subjected to much less controlled processing, probably due to the lower quality of the material. 

Differences in dimensions among the various material types show patterns consistent 

with the differences observed in dimensions of the reductive stages. That is, the local materials 

not only have larger average dimensions, but these materials also have greater relative 

frequencies of early-stage flake types. This fact is due to the difference in the average 

dimensions of the various flake types (Table 8). Results of ANOVA suggest that the 

differences are significant, but due to disparity in sample sizes this test cannot be accepted as 
statistically valid. With the exception of shatter, the mean dimensions and the degree of 

variability decrease with the advance through the reductive sequence. 

Differences in dimensions among the three material types (Table 7) and differences in 

dimensions among debitage types (Table 8) suggest that flakes of these various types were 

being reduced at different sizes or that material type dimensions were influenced by the 

presence of different proportions of the various flake types. This is summarized in Table 9, 

which shows average dimension by material type of selected reductive stages for chert and 

chalcedony debitage only (due to the small amount of quartzite debitage). Average dimensions 

of the earlier stage Interior I flakes are significantly larger than those of the later stage Interior 

I1 flakes. Conversely, dimensions of the two material types are slightly, but not significantly, 

different. Therefore, differences in the average dimensions of the two material types result 

from the different reductive stage distributions of these two materials, rather than from different 

size distributions between material types within each artifact type. 

The previous discussion has shown that there are significant variations in flake 

dimensions, including thickness. Flake thickness is not only influenced by maximum 

dimension, but is also influenced by flaking tasks and material quality, with greater relative 

thickness associated with less controlled tasks and lower material quality. Table 10 shows 

average ratio of macrodebitage thickness/maximum dimension by material type. Values for 

chert and chalcedony are quite similar, 0.16, while quartzite has a high value of 0.23. Again, 

this suggests that the chert and chalcedony items are being reduced in a similar way. Ratios 

for these two material types are compared separately in Table 11. The ANOVA shows no 

significant difference in their relative thicknesses. This suggests that the flaking processes are 

similar, although the resulting debitage pieces are of different dimensions. 

The degree of variability in maximum dimension and in thickness gives some indication 

of the consistency of reduction processes and the degree of control over processes. These were 

compared using the coefficient of variability (cov = standard deviationlmean), as shown in 

Tables 9, 10, and 11. Values for chert and chalcedony items are very similar, while values for 

quartzite items are higher. Similarities among the values for chert and chalcedony are 

consistent with the assertion that the technological organization for each of these materials was 

similar. The higher degree of variability for quartzite items suggests that they were subjected 

to a flaking process less consistent in size than the two other materials were. 

Table 12 shows frequency of cortex by material type among the macrodebitage. In spite 

of the proximity of a source area, this attribute was very infrequent, occurring on only eight, 

or 1.5 percent of all macrodebitage. Except for one quartzite flake, all of these are chert and 

potentially local. None is present on known exogenous materials. The majority of the cortex 

on the chert is from chemical weathering, while a smaller portion appears abraded. Chert with 

both types of cortex is available near the site. 

Additional attributes of this lithic system can be discerned from the relative frequencies 

with which microdebitage, macrodebitage, and tools of the various material types occur 
(Table 13a). The largest portion of the collected assemblage consists of macrodebitage (544, 

or 74.8 percent). The second largest portion is microdebitage (164 items, or 22.6 percent), and 

the smallest consists of tools and cores (19 items, or 2.6 percent). 

The low microdebitage frequencies reported here are a product of the sampling method. 

Of the macrodebitage and tools, 63 specimens were collected from a surface area of 1,090 sq 

m, and 432 from a volume of approximately 14.7 cu m. All 164 specimens of microdebitage 

and 68 pieces of macrodebitage were collected from constant volume samples over a total 

volume of 0.05 cu m, or only 0.3 percent of the excavated volume. Given this ratio, the actual 

frequency of microdebitage should be approximately 16,400 items. It is believed that these 164 

items constitute an adequate sample of the microdebitage, but the low frequency with which 

it occurs in some provenience units will limit some comparisons. The additional 68 flakes 

(ranging between 2 and 6 mm recovered from the 0.05 cu m of constant volume samples) 

suggest that a large number of items were missed with the 114-inch mesh. 

Departures from expected frequencies (Table 13a) suggest several additional attributes 

of the overall flaked lithic system. Departures among tools are substantial. The larger 

frequencies of all cores, expedient tools, and finished tools among local materials, and the 

smaller numbers among exogenous materials are consistent with expectations for differences 

between local and exogenous materials. However, these dissimilarities were not subjected to 

statistical testing. 

Departures from expected values among microdebitage and macrodebitage are also 

substantial. A large departure occurs among the quartzite debitage, but the size of this sample 

and the small expected numbers make this difficult to assess. 

Chert and chalcedony occur in sufficiently large numbers to test, and a chi-square was 

calculated for frequencies of the micro- and macrodebitage between these two material types 

(Table 13b). The test yielded a statistically significant difference (df = 1; chi-square = 32.05; 

significance = 0.00; n = 692). The potentially local chert items have 40 percent fewer pieces 

of microdebitage than predicted on this table, while the exogenous chalcedony has 40 percent 

more than predicted. Platform preparation for either core or tool reduction is the most common 

known source of microdebitage. This suggests that, on the average, the exogenous chalcedony 

items were subjected to more frequent or more intense platform preparation than were the 

potentially local chert items. Subsequent discussion of attributes of the tools gives evidence 

consistent with this observation. 

Material Use Patterns in Tools 

A total of 19 cores and tools were collected from excavation and from the surface. Of 

these, 13 (68.4 percent) are Cedar Mesa Formation chert, 4 (21.1 percent) are Summerville 

chalcedony, and 2 (10.5 percent) are White Rim chalcedony. Table 14 summarizes the 

information in the section Dejnitions and Descriptive Statistics of Artifact Categories 
(pp. 36-41) and shows toollcore type by material type. Figure 12 shows all tools and cores 

arranged by position in the reductive sequence and separated by proposed source area. This 

figure shows several dissimilarities that appear to result from the relative proximities of the 

source areas and material availability. It also shows several similarities among the assemblages 

derived from the different source areas that support the contention that the lithic technology 

is dependent upon a limited set of curated tools that were transported and replaced where 

possible, and consisted mainly of bifaces. 

In Figure 12, cores consist mostly of Cedar Mesa chert, although one Summerville 

chalcedony core is also present. Frequencies of utilized and retouched flakes show a similar 

pattern. These observations are consistent with the flake type frequencies for the various 

material types, where Interior I flakes are more frequent among the local materials and less 

frequent among exogenous. In contrast, the formal or curated tool assemblages from the 

different sources are quite similar. All specimens are bifaces of similar types, and they occur 

in more nearly equal proportions. The major difference in the formal assemblages is in the 

dimensions at which these items were discarded; exogenous items have been reduced to a 

smaller size prior to discard. 

Overall, all of the tools and cores show dissimilarities in dimensions at discard. 

Although the sample is small, this difference is visible in the relative sizes of the items in 

Figure 12. Mean sizes of all tools and cores from the various sources are dissimilar (Table 

15). Much of the variability seen in Table 15 is due to the mixing of artifact types, which 

occur in different proportions. Comparisons among only the eight bifaces suggest that there 

are dissimilarities in discard dimensions of materials from the different sources. For bifaces 

of Cedar Mesa chert, average L = 33.8 (sd = 18.4), W = 29.2 (sd = 7.4), T = 8.5 (sd = 2.9); 

for Summerville chalcedony, L = 24.3 (sd = 19.9), W = 23.5 (sd = 14.2), T = 6.2 (sd = 0.5); 

for White Rim chalcedony, L= 11.8 (sd = 9.9, W = 13.1 (sd = 2. l), T = 7.5 (sd = 5.8). These 

differences are consistent with the patterns seen in dimensions of the debitage. 

There appear to be no significant differences among average edge angles for the three 

material types (Table 16). However, this set of averages includes all types of tools, and 

compares items of dissimilar function. Most tool types contain insufficient numbers to 

statistically test differences in edge angles within a single tool type. However, an ANOVA 

was run on the edge angles of the four bifaces of Cedar Mesa chert (average maximum angle 

= 60.8, sd = 25.0; average minimum angle = 43.2, sd = 21.4) and four bifaces of Summerville 

and White Rim chalcedony together (average maximum angle = 62.8, sd = 29.0; average 

minimum angle = 46.5, sd = 20.8). The ANOVA for the differences in average maximum 

angles yielded a significance of 0.75 (F = 0.10, df = I), while the ANOVA for the differences 

in average minimum angles yielded a significance of 0.75 (F = 0.10, df = 1). Although this 

is a small sample, the probable similarities in the edge angles support the contention that 

elements of the formal tool assemblages fulfilled similar functions. 
Summary of Material Use Patterns 

This stage of analysis describes the attributes of the entire assemblage without regard 

to chronological changes, and describes gross patterns for all lithics. Of all debitage, 358 items 

(50.6 percent) are chert and are possibly procured from local sources. Exogenous materials 

include 334 (47.2 percent) chalcedony items and 16 (2.3 percent) quartzite specimens. This 

material type distribution shows use of nearly equal portions of local and exogenous materials 

and suggests frequent use of surrounding upland areas in foraging. 

Few items of debitage are from the lowest stages of core preparation and reduction - 

shatter comprises only 1.0 percent and decortication flakes 1.2 percent. The paucity of items 

deriving from core preparation indicates that materials were prepared to some degree prior to 

transport to the site and suggests a separation between material procurement activities and the 

economic activities conducted at or from the site. In addition, the major portion of debitage 

made up of is Interior I1 flakes (62.1 percent) rather than Interior I flakes (35.8 percent), 

suggesting that tool reduction and maintenance activities played a greater role in technological 

and economic activities at the site than did core reduction and tool manufacture. 

A number of differences were observed in the ways in which the different material 

types were reduced. Locally available chert items are most frequent, with a total of 3 15 macro 

items (302 pieces of debitage, 4 cores, and 9 tools). Debitage type distributions suggest that 

chert was often subjected to tool reduction processes, especially thinning; but the variability 

in debitage and tool dimensions also implies that it was used in many types of items. 

Chalcedony is common, with a total of 214 macro items (210 pieces of debitage, 1 core, 

and 3 tools). Among the items of this material, Interior I flakes represent a very high 

proportion, 69.0 percent, suggesting frequent thinning activities. This interpretation is 

consistent with expectations for reductive activities performed on transported materials. 

Although the tool assemblage is small, it appears to have consisted mostly of bifaces 

and probably projectile points, augmented by additional expedient elements where local 

materials allowed production. It appears that chert and chalcedony were used for manufacture 

of similar items with similar functions. Thickness/maximum dimension ratios for Interior I1 

flakes for these two materials are not significantly different. The dimensions of chert and 

chalcedony Interior I1 flakes are not significantly different. The maximum and minimum edge 

angles for both material types are not significantly different. These facts suggest that these 

materials were reduced and used in very similar ways - probably a result of the similarity 

between the chert and chalcedony in flaking and use. However, the observed similarity 

between the attributes of the transported assemblage and the assemblage produced with locally 

available material does not meet the expectation that transported items would have smaller 

mean dimensions and that artifact type distributions would include a higher proportion of items 

from later reductive stages. The relative and absolute frequencies of chert and chalcedony 

thinning flakes are surprisingly close, considering that one is a transported material. 
The quartzite assemblage is dissimilar to the chert and chalcedony assemblages. 

Quartzite items have smaller maximum dimensions and larger thicknesses, and consist 

predominantly of early-stage flake types with less necessary control and higher concomitant 

thickness to maximum dimension ratio. These attributes, which indicate that quartzite is less 

easily controlled in flaking, may be related to the low frequency with which it is represented 

in the assemblage, and to the low frequency with which it occurs in this area. 

STRATIGRAPHIC DISTRIBUTION OF ARTIFACTS 

An insufficient area was excavated to allow analysis of horizontal distribution. 

Consequently, only the stratigraphic distribution has been analyzed. This section compares 

materials from Stratum C, deposits with variable moisture; Stratum B, marsh deposits; and 

Stratum A, undifferentiated overbank and dune deposits. Although a total of 635 items were 

assigned to these three stratigraphic units, they may not constitute representative samples of 

materials from the two lower stratigraphic units. 

Several changes in the lithic assemblages were identified among stratigraphic units that 

are consistent with other forms of data. These changes include variations in the frequencies 

with which different reductive activities were performed, the raw materials used, and the 

manner in which the raw materials were reduced. Due to the probable inadequacy of the 

sample, these changes will be presented only as hypotheses for subsequent work. 

fie Sample 

Among the 635 items assigned to the three stratigraphic units, 96 were assigned to 

Stratum C, 228 to Stratum B, and 3 11 to Stratum A. Materials from each of these stratigraphic 

units make up an assemblage sufficiently large to perform statistical tests. However, these 

materials came from only seven 1-x-2-m excavation units; while Stratum A occurred in all 

units, Strata B and C were represented in only a few of these (Appendix B). It is possible that 

the assemblages from these excavation units represent only a small portion of the raw material 

types or reductive activities contained in any or all of the stratigraphic units. Casual 

examination of raw artifact frequency distributions among the individual excavation units 

(Tables 17, 18, and 19) discloses some degree of spatial variability in Strata A, B, and C. 

Tables of material type frequencies and reductive activities (not presented) also show 

substantial spatial variability among excavation units. 

Due to the large number of low-frequency cells, these were not subjected to statistical 

tests for significance. This spatial variability indicates a possibility that these excavation units 

have sampled dissimilar portions of the various levels, and consequently, the assemblages are 

not considered adequate samples. However, these data and preliminary interpretations are 

presented here because they are consistent with several other lines of evidence. They also help 

to develop hypotheses for further research. 

Proposed Chronological Variation in Lithic Technology 

Observations concerning chronological variation are based on comparisons of reductive 

activities, material types, and ways in which material types were reduced in the different levels 

among the three major stratigraphic units: Strata A, B, and C. 
Reductive Activities 

Frequencies of flake types are shown in Table 20. As discussed previously, overall 

frequencies suggest that in spite of the proximity of a material source the majority of activities 

involved tool reduction (Interior I1 flakes: 62.0 percent). Core reduction was less common 

(Interior I flakes: 35.9 percent), and decortication rare (decortication flakes: 1.2 percent). 

The frequencies of flakes types collected from these stratigraphic units do indicate 

deviations from those average conditions. The assemblages collected from each stratigraphic 

unit all have very low frequencies of shatter and decortication flakes that deviate little from 

expected values. In contrast, observed frequencies of Interior I and Interior I1 flakes deviate 

substantially from expected values. Due to the large number of low frequency cells in Table 

20, expected values and chi-square were recalculated for the Interior I and Interior I1 flake 

columns alone. This test yielded a statistically significant difference in Interior I and Interior 

I1 flake frequencies (chi-square = 6.25; df = 2; significance = 0.04) among the three 

stratigraphic units. In the lowest unit the percentages of Interior I flakes and Interior I1 flakes 

are nearly equal. In the subsequent upper units this frequency shifts, with an increasing portion 

of the assemblages composed of Interior I1 flakes. 

Values for the diversity measure H show a small change in flake type diversity that is 

consistent with the changes noted above. For general discussions of H, H,,, J, and related 

statistics, the reader should consult such works as Leonard and Jones (1989), Osborn et al. 

(1993), and references cited by them. The diversity measure H was calculated for flake types 

from each stratigraphic unit. The measure for evenness is the value for H divided by the 

maximum possible value for H, which is represented by %,. All stratigraphic units had four 

flake types represented, so that H,,,, = 1.39. Values for H and J show overall moderate values 

for evenness and a slight decline in diversity through time. The highest values are for the 

bottom level, Stratum C, with H = 0.83 and J = 0.60. These values are lower in Stratum B, 

with H = 0.75 and J = 0.54, where Interior I1 flakes increase in relative frequency. The 

minimum values are for Stratum A, with H = 0.74 and J = 0.53, where Interior I1 flakes make 

up nearly two thirds of the assemblage. 

Material Types 

Evidence for stratigraphic change is found in the material type frequencies for all flaked 

stone artifacts, including microdebitage, macrodebitage, cores, and tools, which show 

statistically significant differences (chi-square = 27.1, df = 4, significance = 0.00; table not 

presented). However, only material type frequencies and the resulting chi-square statistics for 

macrodebitage, cores, and tools are presented in this section. The reason for this is that 

frequencies of microdebitage are greatly dependent upon performance of platform preparation, 

and changes in platform preparation affect microdebitage frequencies. 

Microdebitage frequencies are considered later in the context of reductive activities 

performed in the individual stratigraphic units. The purpose of presenting material type 
frequencies is to give counts of individual items and individual fracture events performed on 

items of different material types. The use of tools, cores, and macrodebitage gives a more 

accurate count. Material type frequencies among these items are shown in Table 21. As 

shown at the bottom of the table, the differences among the levels are statistically significant. 

Material type frequencies are briefly reviewed below, and implications for material 

procurement and reduction are expanded in the subsequent section. 

Quartzite is low in frequency in all units. This material is present only in the lower 

units, each of which has higher frequencies of core reduction than expected. The absence of 

quartzite from Stratum A and the deviation from the expected frequency cannot be interpreted, 

since the sample size is so small. 

The most common materials in all units are chert and chalcedony. Among all levels 

combined, the exogenous material, chalcedony, is less frequent than the local material, chert, 

consistent with expectations for exogenous and local materials. A chi-square test of chert and 

chalcedony alone shows significant differences in frequencies of these materials among the 

three strata (chi-square = 14.19; df = 2; p = 0.00). 

In Stratum C, the high frequency of chert, 66.2 percent, and the corresponding low 

frequency of chalcedony, 25.4 percent, may be related to the lower emphasis on tool reduction. 

The collected assemblage has large numbers of local materials subjected to core reduction, and 

lesser numbers of exogenous items which were more frequently subjected to tool reduction. 

In Stratum A, there is a slightly higher frequency of chalcedony, 39.8 percent, but chert 

is still the most frequent material, with 60.2 percent. The assemblage from this stratigraphic 

unit has resulted mainly from tool reduction activities on both local and exogenous materials. 

The assemblage collected from Stratum B has a high frequency of chalcedony items, 

and large deviations from expected values. In this unit chert makes up only 45.7 percent of 

the assemblage, and chalcedony 5 1.8 percent. 

Values for measures of diversity and evenness of material types were calculated from 

the material type frequencies at the finest level of division (Table 22), rather than from the 

collapsed categories shown in Table 21. Values for the diversity and evenness of source use 

were calculated from proportions of items deriving from probable sources of the identified 

materials. Sources of quartzite are unknown. It is likely that the nearest source is the 

Colorado River, so all of these materials were assigned a single source. Other materials are 

known to derive from multiple sources (e.g., Summerville chalcedony) but were assigned a 

source number of one, due to the difficulty of discerning separate sources. 

The Stratum A assemblage, which has 60.2 percent potentially local material and no 

quartzite, has the lowest number of material types and the lowest diversity. The assemblage 

from Stratum B, which bears 54.2 percent exogenous materials, has the highest value for 

diversity and the largest number of material types. The assemblage from Stratum C has 
quartzite but also has the lowest frequency of exogenous materials (33.9 percent). The value 

for this unit is slightly higher than that for Stratum A. The numbers of material types recorded 

are dissimilar; the greater number of types in Stratum B, the lowest number in Stratum A. 

When materials types are grouped by potential source a similar pattern appears, with a 

substantially higher value for the assemblage from Stratum B. 

The values for evenness, J, do not vary substantially. These range from 0.70 to 0.73. 

This similarity in values for evenness indicates that the variation seen in the diversity of 

assemblages results from changes in the number of material types incorporated into 

assemblages, rather than changes in the relative frequencies with which different material types 

were incorporated. This suggests that although the number of source areas contacted varied, 

the manner in which materials were incorporated from them did not. 

The results of the diversity measures also have implications regarding the validity of 

the observed differences among the stratigraphic units. Both n and H are values that can 

increase proportionally with sample size. Consequently it is expected that these values would 

be higher for the assemblage from Stratum A, due to its larger size. This is not the case, and 

the fact that these values are higher in the stratigraphic units represented in fewer pits and with 

lower total frequencies argues for the validity of observed differences in flake type and material 

type. 

Little change was detected in the average dimensions of chert flakes, while several 

dimensions of chalcedony flakes were found to vary. The meaning of these statistically 

significant changes in average dimensions of the Interior I and Interior I1 flakes is difficult to 

assess. Chert Interior I1 flakes do not change in dimensions (Tables 23 and 24). Chert Interior 

I flakes increase in mean thickness in Stratum B. This increase is not matched by a 

corresponding change in thickness of chalcedony Interior I flakes, but the significance of this 

is unknown. 

Mean dimensions of chalcedony flakes do change significantly. The maximum 

dimension of chalcedony Interior I flakes is significantly smaller in Stratum B. There is also 

a small but insignificant decrease in the mean thickness in this unit. Chalcedony Interior I 

flakes from Stratum C were not subjected to ANOVA due to the small sample size, but their 

means are similar to those from Stratum A. 

Similarly, chalcedony Interior I1 flakes from Stratum C were not included in the 

ANOVA because of the disparity in the sample size from that stratum. Results of this test 

show no significant difference in thickness of chalcedony Interior I1 flakes between Stratum 

A and Stratum B, but there is a significant difference between the maximum dimensions. 

Although no ANOVA was run on the Stratum C flakes, it is likely that they do vary 

significantly. Overall, it appears that chalcedony Interior I1 flakes are smaller than chert 

Interior flakes I1 in Stratum C, but they increase in size to approximately the same dimensions 

as the chert Interior I1 flakes in Stratum A. It is possible that this change is related to the 
increasing frequency of Interior I1 flakes through the section, i.e., related to the increasing use 

of bifacial thinning. 

Summary of Chronological Changes 

Overall, there is declining evenness in flake type distribution as the proportion of 

Interior I1 flakes increases. This suggests an increase in the frequency of production of thinned 

tools. Unfortunately, too few tools were recovered from buried deposits to be able to assess 

this interpretation. 

Several changes were detected in the types of material used. Quartzite was never 

common, but there is a possible decline in use of quartzite, and it may be significant that this 

material is missing from the large, well-represented Stratum A assemblage. A larger sample 

is needed to assess this. The lowest level, Stratum C, has a high number of material types, but 

it has lowest frequency of all exogenous materials, suggesting less frequent use of the uplands 

and more frequent use of areas with Cedar Mesa outcrops. The greatest frequency of 

exogenous materials and greatest number of material types were found in the middle unit, 

Stratum B, where the Summerville chalcedony found in the arid uplands becomes very 

common. The lowest number and diversity of material types was found in Stratum A, possibly 

indicating decreased range use. This is consistent with expectations for a horticultural group 

such as the Anasazi, from whom these deposits may have been derived. 

The dimensions of flakes made from locally available chert do not vary substantially; 

only the thickness of chert flakes is significantly greater in Stratum B. However, the average 

dimensions of exogenous (chalcedony) flakes do vary substantially through time; all 

dimensions of chalcedony show significant variation, except in thickness of Interior I flakes. 

An increasing relative frequency of thinning activities may be indicated by this change in 

debitage. 

Descriptions of Assemblages from Individual Strata 

In the following section the overall assemblage characteristics of each stratigraphic unit 

are discussed. It is acknowledged that the assemblages of Stratum B and Stratum C may not 

be adequate, but consistencies among several lines of evidence support these interpretations, 

and they are presented for later testing. 

Stratum C 

Ninety-six items were recovered from this stratigraphic unit. It is not known whether 

the sample is representative, but its size allowed some statistical comparisons to be made 

within the assemblage and with the other two stratigraphic units. 
This assemblage bore the lowest frequency of exogenous materials, since mostly local 

materials were used. A total of 11 material types were identified. Of all artifacts, 52 items 

(54.2 percent) are of locally available Cedar Mesa chert, while 44 items (45.8 percent) are of 

other materials and are necessarily exogenous. The only substantial deviations from expected 

values for frequency of source use are in the low values for "chalcedony-unknown," "other," 

and the high value for "Cedar Mesa Formation-local." Quartzite, infrequent in all units, occurs 

in its highest percentage in this unit (n = 7). However, due to its low representation in all 

units, the significance of this cannot be assessed. Although there are few necessarily 

exogenous materials represented, there are nonetheless many material types and sources, 

indicating frequent use of locally available materials. Evenness of material types is similar to 

eveness from the other units. Material type diversity is moderate. 

The low frequency of shatter and decortication flakes is an attribute shared with Strata 

A and B, indicating that early-stage core preparation activities were infrequent and that items 

were transported to the site in at least a partially prepared state. Material procurement 

activities at nearby sources were quite separate from the economic activities performed at 

42SA20286. The Stratum C assemblage is dissimilar to the other two, due to nearly even 

distribution between debitage suggestive of core reduction and debitage suggestive of tool 

reduction: 50.0 percent are shatter, decortication, or Interior I, while 50.0 percent are Interior 

11. This distribution implies similar frequencies of core and tool reduction flake events. 

Reductive stage distributions for the various material types are dissimilar, suggesting 

differential treatment of the exogenous and locally available materials. Table 25 shows flake 

type by material type for chert and chalcedony. Due to the low frequencies, the material type 

"quartzite" and the debitage types "shatter" and "decortication" were not included. This table 

shows large deviations from expected frequencies. Chert occurs as Interior I flakes more 

frequently and as Interior I1 flakes less frequently than expected. The converse is true of 

chalcedony. These occur more frequently as Interior I1 flakes and less frequently as Interior 

I flakes than expected. The chi-square of 9.14 indicates a 0.003 probability that this 

distribution has occurred by chance. 

It is possible that the presence of quartzite is related to the greater frequency of core 

reduction observed in this unit. The quartzite materials all consist of earlier stage items, which 

require less control over flaking. In addition, the coefficient of variability for dimensions of 

all of the quartzite items from this site is substantially higher than values for chert and 

chalcedony. 

Although the two material types were subjected to different flaking tasks, there were 

no significant differences in the sizes of the flakes that resulted from this reduction. Among 

the Interior I flakes, chalcedony and chert are not significantly different in dimensions (Table 

26). Among the Interior I1 flakes, chalcedony items are slightly, but not significantly, smaller. 

Table 27 shows relative frequencies of chert and chalcedony microdebitage for Stratum 

C. Due to the small number of quartzite microdebitage (one), this material was not included 
in the table. Among the chalcedony items, the observed frequency of microdebitage is high, 

while the observed frequency is low among chert. The value for chi-square indicates that these 

are statistically significant differences. This is consistent with the results for microdebitage 

frequencies for all levels. 

Overall, this assemblage has a relatively even material type distribution across a large 

number of types. Locally available chert dominates this assemblage, and there is a low 

percentage of exogenous materials. There is very little shatter and very few decortication 

flakes. It appears that materials brought to the site from all sources had been previously 

prepared to some extent. All flake types are evenly distributed between types that suggest core 

reduction and types that suggest tool reduction. With the exception of quartzite, the exogenous 

materials have been subjected to tool reduction more frequently than locally available materials, 

but the resulting debitage is not substantially different in size. This suggests that similar 

products were manufactured from local and exogenous materials, and that the reductive 

activities applied to them mainly varied in frequency. 

Stratum B 

A total of 228 items were collected from this unit, which has the highest diversity of 

material types and largest number of probable sources. It is likely that at least seven material 

sources are represented in this assemblage. The value for material type diversity, H = 1.81, 

is the highest value for all three stratigraphic units. This high value can be attributed to a high 

degree of evenness (J = 0.73) and high number of types (n = 12). Some quartzite is present 

in low numbers. 

The frequency of locally available chert is lower than the expected value, while 

exogenous chalcedony is more frequent than expected (Table 28). Several types of change in 

organization could be responsible for this high frequency, but increased use of the uplands 

provides the simplest explanation and links together several facts. The majority of this 

exogenous material appears to be from the Summerville Formation. The nearest known 

sources for Summerville chalcedony are in the uplands to the east of the overlook. These 

uplands are currently quite arid. The presence of high frequencies of this material and the 

presence of characteristics indicative of greater moisture during the formation of this level 

suggest more frequent use of these uplands during this time. 

The value for the evenness of the flake type distribution decreased to a value 

intermediate between Stratum C and Stratum A. The percentage of Interior I1 flakes increased 

to 56.0 percent, suggesting an increase in the production of thinned tools. Again, the low 

frequency of shatter and decortication flakes is an attribute shared with Stratum A and 

Stratum C. This attribute indicates that early-stage core preparation activities were infrequent. 

It further suggests that items were transported to the site in at least a partially prepared state, 

and that material procurement activities at nearby sources were quite separate from the 

economic activities performed at 42SA20286. 
There is a slight decrease in flake type diversity from Stratum C to Stratum B. This 

is due to decreased evenness in the distribution, because the number of types does not change. 

Among all debitage, shatter numbers 1 item (0.7 percent); decortication, 1 (0.7 percent); 

Interior I, 59 (39.1 percent); and Interior 11, 90 (59.6 percent). In contrast with the preceding 

(lower) units, these frequencies suggest an increase in frequency of thinning activities. 

This assemblage is dissimilar to the others in the manner in which exogenous and 

potentially local materials have been reduced. Contrary to expectations, the exogenous 

materials have approximately the same percentage of Interior I (core reduction) flakes as do 

the potentially local materials (Table 28). 

With the very small number of tools and cores recovered from these units it is difficult 

to assess the reason for this similarity in flake type frequencies for the two material types. 

This similarity does not necessarily indicate that the two groups of materials were being 

reduced or used in a similar fashion, and the average dimensions of the two flake types argue 

against this. Table 29 shows two flake dimensions of Interior I and Interior I1 flakes by 

material type, excluding the less common quartzite flakes. Among the Interior I flakes, chert 

flakes are significantly larger. Among Interior I1 flakes, chalcedony flakes are significantly 

smaller in maximum dimension, but not in thickness. These dissimilarities in dimensions are 

consistent with expectations for differences between exogenous and local materials. 

Table 30 shows relative frequencies of chert and chalcedony microdebitage for 

Stratum B. Due to the small number of quartzite microdebitage (three), this material was not 

included on this table. Among the chalcedony items, the observed frequency of microdebitage 

is high, while the observed frequency is low among chert. The value for chi-square indicates 

that these are statistically significant differences consistent with the results for microdebitage 

frequencies for all levels. 

Overall, this assemblage has a relatively even material type distribution across a high 

number of types. Exogenous chalcedony comprises the major portion of this assemblage, but 

there is a large percentage of locally available materials. There is very little shatter and very 

few decortication flakes, and it appears that materials brought to the site from all sources had 

been previously prepared to some extent. The flake type distribution is dominated by Interior 

I1 flakes, which suggests more frequent tool reduction than in the preceding stratigraphic unit. 

With the exception of quartzite, the exogenous materials occur in a flake type distribution 

similar to that of locally available material, suggesting these have been subjected to similar 

reductive tasks. However, the resulting debitage is significantly different in size, with 

exogenous materials smaller than locally available materials. 

Stratum A 

A total of 324 items were collected from this unit. Surprisingly, the material type 

distribution of Stratum A is less diverse than the other levels, as shown on Table 22, in spite 

of an even distribution. This lower diversity is due to the presence of a low number of 
material types (nine). The majority of artifacts are of locally available chert (189, or 

60.8 percent). Quartzites are absent from the macro-artifacts. It is not known whether this 

absence is due to material selection based on reductive activities or due to limited use of areas 

with quartzites. Given the low frequencies of exogenous materials and the decrease in core 

reduction, both explanations are possible. 

Of the three levels, Stratum A has the highest frequency of Interior I1 flakes (65.8 

percent), the lowest frequency of Interior I flakes (3 1.9 percent), and the least even flake type 

distribution. These facts suggest that reductive activities concentrated on tool reduction. 

Again, the very low frequency of shatter and of decortication suggests that materials were 

transported to the site in a partially prepared state. 

Table 3 1 shows the frequencies of chert and chalcedony Interior I and Interior I1 flakes. 

Although the number of chalcedony Interior I flakes is 53 percent of the number of chert 

Interior I flakes, the number of chalcedony Interior I1 flakes is 82 percent of the number of 

chert Interior I1 flakes. This difference is reflected in the expected frequencies and the results 

of the chi-square test, and suggests that chalcedony items were subjected to bifacial thinning 

and other tool reduction tasks in a higher percentage of cases than were chert items. 

Although it appears that chert was more frequently subjected to core reduction than was 

chalcedony, the size distributions of these material types suggest that the products were similar 

at least in dimension. As shown in Table 32, the mean dimensions for chert and chalcedony 

Interior I flakes and Interior I1 flakes from Stratum A are not significantly different. 

Although the mean dimensions of chert Interior I1 flakes do not vary significantly 

through time, the mean dimensions for chalcedony Interior I1 flakes were highest in Stratum 

A. Due to this increase in dimensions of chalcedony Interior I1 flakes, the mean dimensions 

for chert and chalcedony Interior I1 flakes are not significantly different. Chert and chalcedony 

Interior I flakes are also quite similar in size. 

Table 33 shows relative frequencies of chert and chalcedony microdebitage for Stratum 

A. Due to the small number of quartzite microdebitage (two), this material category is not 

included in ths table. Among the chalcedony items, the observed frequency of microdebitage 

is high, while the observed frequency is low among chert items. The value for chi-square 

indicates that these are statistically significant differences. This is consistent with the results 

for microdebitage frequencies for all levels. 

Overall, reductive activities appear to be concentrated on bifacial reduction of a low 

diversity of material types, mostly locally available materials. Although exogenous materials 

were more frequently subjected to tool reduction, the dimensions of debitage from local and 

transported items were similar, and it is likely that the products were also similar. 

DISCUSSION 

The broad goal of the research conducted for this project was to examine human 

responses to paleoenvironrnental changes. The first section of this chapter provides a 

background of paleoenvironmental conditions during the period of development of the deposits 

at 42SA20286. This first section presents much unsynthesized information for two reasons: 

1) little is known about paleoenvironmental events in this area, and 2) the primary goal of this 

project is interpretation of archeological remains. The following sections synthesize 

information regarding the archeological remains and the cultural contexts in which they were 

deposited. The structure of this chapter follows the research design. 

Paleoenvironments and Geomorphological Processes 

This section constructs a sequence of paleoenviromental conditions which may have 

influenced human activities. Probable conditions for this sequence are first constructed through 

sedimentological and pedological data. They are then compared to paleoenvironrnental events 

in nearby areas and to information gained from the biotic remains. 

The site is in a good position to provide both paleoenvironrnental and archeological 

information for this portion of the Salt Creek drainage. This is due to the fortunate coincidence 

that this location constitutes a source of water and food, and is located in a good depositional 

environment. The location is good for both large-scale alluvial deposition and aeolian 

deposition. It is an area where the gradient of Salt Creek decreases from 1.09 to 0.48 percent, 

and the area over which the channel can move becomes constricted by sandstone outcrops to 

a width of 340 m. The terraces at the east and southeast sides of the site have formed within, 

and upstream from, this constriction. Such areas of heavy and rapid deposition of sand can 

also act as good sources for aeolian sediments. 

The substrate of the site is a bedrock sandstone outcrop overlain by a set of alluvial 

terraces and dunes. These deposits form part of the terraces discussed below. The geomorphic 

environments believed to be responsible for these deposits include low-energy overbank in 

moderate to dense vegetation, high-energy overbank, and dunes with at least one erosional 

event recorded. No soil horizon development was observed in the high-energy overbank and 

dune deposits. Soil horizon development in the low-energy overbank deposits indicated periods 

of consistent soil moisture, as well as periods of variable soil moisture. These deposits and 

changes in depositional environments have been provisionally correlated with other events. 

The sequence of alluvial and other paleoenvironrnental events in the middle portions of 

Salt Creek is not currently well known, but a partial sequence has been previously constructed 

in this report. The sequence sets the deposits of 42SA20286 in a context of events prior to and 

coeval with the sequence observed there. Several late Quaternary sequences for nearby areas 

were cited in previous text, and these provide some structure to the sequence constructed here. 
The sequence can be summarized as follows. The sediments at the east side of 

42SA20286 occupy a channel which was eroded later than 4500 B.P. This may be coeval with 

an erosional event in upper Salt Creek dated to approximately 3900 B.P. Most of the fill 

accreted prior to 2650 B.P., as dated by the earliest known hearth near the surface of a nearby 

terrace. Accretion of stratum C is probably coeval with this episode. 

The upper surface of that nearby terrace was relatively stable in the period of 

approximately 2650 to 2200 B.P. The date of 2490 f 210 B.P. from Stratum B at 42SA20286 

falls within this period of stability, and is coeval with the Lower Gold Basin period. The 

Lower Gold Basin period involved decreased temperatures, alluviation, and possibly increased 

precipitation (Richmond 1962). The presence of increased effective moisture in the Salt Creek 

drainage as well is suggested by the soil development and molluscan fauna of Stratum B. 

The Stratum A fill postdates a period of erosion that is visible as a cutbank in the 

profile of Excavation Unit G. The cutbank may be coeval to an erosional event in upper Salt 

Creek which postdates 1790 B.P. The fill of Stratum A consists of undifferentiable 

aeolian/alluvial deposits and may be associated with an episode of aeolian deposition from 

1500 to 800 B.P. (Agenbroad 1986). Pedological, malacological, and taphonomic data are 

consistent with this sequence. 

Stratum C is a mottled dark red sand with lenses of silt and clay and appears to have 

resulted from low-energy overbank deposition and intermittently moist soil conditions. The 

lighter color and the bone weathering stage distributions suggest that burial rates were faster 

than in Stratum B. 

Stratum B conformably overlies Stratum C. The boundary is defined by an increase in 

smaller sedimentary particles and pockets of these, an increase in darkness of the color, and 

a decrease in the degree of color mottling in Stratum B. 

Stratum B is a soil unit with many lenses of silt and clay and a relatively consistent 

dark red color. The change in mottling and texture indicates that the color difference between 

Stratum B and Stratum C is probably not due to A horizon development over these strata. 

Instead, it is likely that the discernible differences result from a decrease in sedimentation rate 

and in the energy of sediment transport. The color seems to result from more consistently 

moist soil conditions and slower deposition rates, an interpretation supported by bone 

weathering stage distributions. 

Due to the presence of a cutbank in Stratum B, Stratum A lies disconformably over 

Stratum B. The location of this cutbank is consistent with erosion suggested by the absence 

of Stratum C and Stratum B in other excavation units at the east side of the site. The erosional 

event recorded by this cannot be dated directly with the data collected here. However, this 

may be related to the erosional event dated after 1790 B.P. discussed above. 
Stratum A is light colored sand with little or no silt and clay, and appears to derive 

from overbank and aeolian deposition. Dry soil conditions or fast deposition are implied by 

the absence of soil horizon development. Although the data are sparse, the bone weathering 

stage distribution suggests that deposition was rapid. 

Overall, Stratum C and Stratum B appear to correlate with Hack's (1942) Tsegi 

alluvium a, and with Agenbroad and Elder's (1986) T,, in the upper Salt Creek and T,, in 

Bown's Canyon. Accumulation of these units may have been coeval with a Neoglacial 

advance (Richmond's [I9621 Lower Gold Basin), suggesting deposition during a cooler and/or 

moister period. The eastern portion of these units was cut by an erosional event which has not 

been dated, but may have occurred after ca. 1790 B.P. Stratum A consists of undifferentiated 

aeolian and overbank deposits that may correlate with Agenbroad and Elder's (1986) aeolian 

component, which dates between ca. 1500 and ca. 750 B.P. 

No direct evidence regarding sedimentary exchange was observed. The site 

undoubtedly received alluvial sediments out of the upper reaches of the Salt Creek drainage. 

These have probably been exchanged by aeolian and alluvial processes acting between the 

creek and dunes. A minimal portion was derived from decay of bedrock. 

Temporal correlations as well as the characteristics of the mollusc assemblage suggest 

that these deposits accumulated during moister and/or cooler conditions than exist now or 

during the accumulation of Stratum A. Specimens of molluscs associated with cooler, moister 

conditions were recovered from Stratum B and Stratum C, while the assemblage of Stratum 

A may indicate drier conditions. 

It is not known whether the presence of Celtis sp. seeds in Stratum B and Stratum C 

are due to cultural or natural processes. Due to the possibility that these were transported to 

the site, their presence gives no reliable information regarding past edaphic conditions. Due 

to the general taxonomic level to which most of the vertebrate assemblage could be identified, 

no paleoenvironmental information could be obtained from this assemblage. 

Chronology and Cultural Afiliations 

Information was sought regarding the chronology of occupation and the affiliations of 

occupants, but the data recovered were limited. Only one diagnostic item was recorded on the 

site by the original investigators. This was a possible Rosegate point, suggesting at least Late 

Prehistoric use of the site, probably by Pueblo I1 to Pueblo I11 Anasazi. This artifact could not 

be relocated during this investigation. 

The only chronological data recovered during testing came from a single radiocarbon 

sample, which yielded a general-level date of 1 1 10 - 50 cal B.C. for Stratum B, as discussed 

previously. Due to the absence of a discernible unconformity between Stratum C and Stratum 

B, it is suspected that materials from the stratigraphically lower Stratum C are either Middle 
or Late Archaic. Materials from the upper stratum have been referred to in this report as 

"undifferentiated later." However, due to the suspected dating of the erosion after 1790 B.P. 

this stratum probably contains Pueblo I11 Anasazi and/or other Late Prehistoric materials, and 

possibly some Late Archaic materials. 

Technological Resources and Technology 

The purpose of this phase of analysis is to characterize patterns of lithic material 

procurement, reduction, and transport, as well as chronological changes therein. This includes 

identification of general source areas and assignment of collected materials to them. 

Assemblages from each source area are characterized by size and artifact type, as well as the 

degree of diversity in the variables considered. Changes in assemblage attributes through time 

were examined with regard to assemblage structure, material use, and material transport. 

Chert is available at site 42SA2116 and in many other areas in the Needles District 

(Tipps and Hewitt 1989). Much of this occurs in the form of chert deriving from lenses within 

the Cedar Mesa Formation. This material can be found on many sites in all stages of 

reduction, including sites in areas to which it had to be transported, such as 42SA20286. The 

nearest sources are 0.7 mile to the east and one mile to the southwest. 

Sources of other materials are known to exist around and in the park. These include 

chalcedony from the White Rim Formation and Summerville chalcedony, which can be found 

in the uplands to the east as lag cobbles above the Navajo Formation. The quartzite might 

come from the Morrison Formation, which outcrops to the north near Moab, or from the 

Colorado River. Additional types of chalcedony and chert were observed which derived from 

undetermined sources. 

It appears that most of the materials, even locally available materials, were at least 

partially reduced prior to transport to the site. This prior preparation suggests separation of 

procurement activities from economic activities at the site. Even among the local materials, 

there was a high percentage of Interior I1 flakes, suggesting that activities involved tool 

reduction and maintenance. 

Approximately half of the material (50.6 percent by count) is of locally available chert. 

Exogenous materials comprise the rest, including 47.2 percent chalcedony and 2.3 percent 

quartzite. In spite of the quality of local materials, there is a high frequency of exogenous 

materials, which suggests frequent use of the upland and other undetermined areas. 

Differences in the attributes of the debitage of different material types suggest 

differences in the ways they were reduced at the site. These differences can be attributed to 

the difference in availability between chert and chalcedony, and to the low quality of the 

quartzites. 
As expected, most decortication flakes are of locally available chert. Interior I flakes, 

which are generally associated with earlier stages, especially with core reduction activities, 

consist most frequently of the locally available chert. Among both the chert and chalcedony 

there is a large percentage of Interior I1 flakes, which are generally associated with tool 

reduction. 

The quartzite items were all lower-stage flake types, low in maximum dimension and 

highly variable in thickness, with high thickness to maximum dimension ratio. Therefore this 

material was infrequently procured and was subjected to flaking processes which required little 

control. 

It appears that chert and chalcedony were utilized in very similar ways to meet needs 

for formal, transported tools, while immediate on-site (expedient) needs for tools were met by 

use of local chert. However, considering the close proximity of the source, the local materials 

had low frequencies of Interior I flakes. It is likely that the high percentage of Interior I1 

flakes of local chert represent production for replacement of formal tools for use in the area 

and for transport elsewhere. The high percentage of Interior I1 flakes of transported 

chalcedony appears to result from maintenance on tools utilized in the area. The absence of 

significant difference in the dimensions (thickness, maximum dimension, and 

thickness/maximum dimension ratios) of the debitage of the two material types supports the 

contention that the materials were used in a similar fashion. The higher percentage of 

chalcedony microdebitage suggests that this material was subjected to greater relative frequency 

of platform preparation. 

In addition, similarities in the tool assemblages of the various material types suggest that 

these materials fulfilled similar functions in the formal tool kit, and that differences in the 

assemblages of the different material types can be attributed to attrition through use and 

maintenance, rather than differential use. "Formal" tools collected during this project consist 

solely of bifaces, but the tool kit apparently included projectile points as well (due to the 

projectile point recorded on the site form). Most of the "expedient" tools were made from the 

locally available Cedar Mesa chert, as were four out of five cores. Differences among the 

dimensions of artifacts made from the various materials which derive from different distances 

show the effects of attrition as items were used and maintained. The small dimensions of the 

single transported core also appear to be the result of this process of attrition. For comparisons 

among all artifact types, or comparisons among bifaces only, there were no' statistically 

significant differences discerned in edge angles among the material types. 

Comparisons among the three strata yielded statistically significant differences in the 

raw materials and the artifacts. These differences have implications regarding chronological 

changes in technology and the areas used for foraging. 

Stratigraphic changes in frequencies of flake categories show statistically significant 

increases in relative frequency of Interior I1 flakes through time, suggesting increasing use of 
thinned tools. An insufficient number of tools was collected to address this issue with 

comparative data. 

Variations observed among material types may be related to changes in technology or 

changes in the areas used for economic activities. Quartzite is most frequent in Stratum C and 

absent in Stratum A. It is possible that this is related to the increased frequency of bifacial 

reduction implied by attributes of this later assemblage. However, due to the low frequency 

with which this material occurs, this issue will require further examination with a larger 

sample. 

Statistically significant changes in the relative frequencies of chert and chalcedony may 

indicate shifts in range use. Stratum A has higher frequencies of chert than expected. This 

unit has an even material type distribution, but the lowest value for diversity due to the small 

number of material types incorporated into the assemblage. This difference may be due either 

to decreased use of the uplands due to aridity or decreased range size due to increased 

sedentism. Although these "undifferentiated later" deposits cannot be reliably assigned to any 

affiliation or time, it is likely that the majority of materials were discarded by Pueblo I1 or 

Pueblo I11 Anasazi. Assignment of these deposits to semisedentary groups could explain the 

low diversity of materials in this assemblage. Alternatively, this lower diversity may be related 

to decreased use of the uplands during a period of drier conditions. 

Stratum B has the lowest frequency of chert, but the highest frequency of exogenous 

materials, almost all of which is chalcedony. Stratum B also has the highest value for material 

type diversity, due to the high number of type categories and the evenness of their frequency 

distribution. This suggests more frequent use of the uplands around the park during this 

period. Other forms of data suggest that this assemblage was deposited during a moist period, 

and it is likely that these currently arid uplands had more available water or more biotic 

resources during this period. 

Stratum C has the lowest relative frequencies of exogenous materials, and the local chert 

is most frequent, giving the stratum a low measure for evenness. These deposits appeared to 

have been deposited during a period slightly less moist or a period with higher sedimentation 

rates than seen in Stratum B. It is possible that ranges were somewhat restricted during this 

period. 

Subsistence, Economy, and Adaptation 

The purpose of this analysis is to place the culturally derived biotic remains recovered 

in this investigation in a context of subsistence, and to identify chronological changes in their 

use. Directly applicable data are limited. 

Little subsistence information can be discerned from the macrobotanical remains 

recovered. Celtis sp. seeds were associated with dense cultural materials. Although all are 
broken, there is no additional evidence that suggests these were processed or otherwise utilized 

by humans. They may have been growing on the site and utilized due to their proximity, they 

may have been included in the deposits due to natural processes, or they may have transported 

from other areas. The fragment of a single burned seed coat recovered from the site was not 

identifiable (Reinhard, personal communication 1990). This may have derived from processing 

of edible seeds or may have been accidentally burned by some other agent. 

Insufficient faunal remains were recovered to address issues regarding types of prey or 

processing. The faunal assemblage included only 33 small vertebrates, most of which are small 

mammals. These included many burned specimens, all of which were too fragmentary to allow 

identification. 

Types of fuel used and relationships to biotic communities were considered, but data 

recovered were inadequate to address this. Although it was sufficiently common to get a 

general-level date, the charcoal did not occur in features. The purposes or the contexts of the 

fire(s) which produced the charcoal could not be ascertained, and data regarding the type of 

wood was deemed superfluous. 

Limited data were recovered that are directly relevant to examining specific 

biogeographic changes which would have altered economic patterns. However, as discussed 

previously, statistically significant changes in material types represented in the flaked lithic 

assemblages suggest that foraging areas were affected by changes in moisture and/or 

temperature. These are indicated by variations in the frequencies of materials from uplands. 

Other changes in the lithic assemblages were detected that may be related to adjustments of 

the system, but the available data cannot be interpreted in regard to this issue. 

Settlement and Spatial Organization 

This phase of analysis addresses relationships of site location to potential biotic resource 

zones and season(s) of occupations implied by biotic remains and other site attributes. 

Currently, information regarding past biotic community distributions in this area is 

limited. Examination of potential biotic resource zones must depend upon several indirect lines 

of evidence and necessarily focuses on general resource types implied by existing and past 

edaphic conditions. Several lines of evidence suggest that during at least part of the Late 

Archaic the areas around the site were more consistently moist than at the present. 

Observations on current vegetation communities and their distributions suggest that edible 

plants such as Typha, Scirpus, Phragmites, Equisetum, and others may have been available 

within the drainage. Vegetation up on the outcrop may have included Celtis, Pinus edulis, 

Oryzopsis, Ephedra, and others. Confirmation of the presence or the use of these will require 

further research. 
No good chronological controls exist for the upper deposits, and there was probably 

much variation in conditions throughout the period of deposition. During the periods with 

much aeolian activity there was probably a variety of ruderals available in the dunes, such as 

Amaranthus, Chenopodium, Helianthus, Oiyzopsis, and Cirsium. 

No information regarding seasonality can be recovered from the biotic remains. The 

phenology of Celtis gives no information, because use by the occupants cannot be ascertained 

with existing information. 

The research design specified that a number of additional issues regarding settlement, 

intrasite distributions, and cultural affiliation should be investigated. However, due to the small 

area investigated, the paucity of datable or diagnostic materials, and the absence of comparable 

data from past research these studies could not be pursued. In particular, models that address 

the relationships between tool assemblage composition, environmental attributes, and settlement 

organization, such as those suggested by Whallon (1973), Binford (1982), Shott (1986), and 

Osborn and Hartley (1984), were not explored due to lack of an adequate sample or adequate 

comparative data from other investigations. 

Cultural Interactions: External Contacts and Track 

This applies to materials which can be recognized as having originated from distances 

greater than 50 miles. The forms and frequencies in which these occur on the site bear 

implications regarding relationships to both nearby and distant sites. However, no materials 

were observed which were necessarily procured from distances greater than 50 miles, and no 

diagnostic artifacts were recovered. 
CONCLUSIONS 

Management 

The areas that were to be disturbed by planned construction are described above in 

Areas Investigated (p. 19) and shown in Figure 3. Results of the 1989 investigations indicate 

that it is unlikely that any of the areas in the proposed direct impact area bear significant 

subsurface deposits that require further excavation, and the excavations performed during this 

phase are considered to be adequate mitigation for the proposed direct impact area. However, 

it is very likely that undisturbed cultural deposits are present within the terrace deposits to the 

north and south of the direct impact area. 

No clearance was given for construction on sensitive portions of the site. The eastern 

boundary of these areas was flagged with red tape tied on shrubs. No ground-disturbing 

activities were allowed to the west of this boundary. An alternative road alignment was 

flagged by MWAC personnel, using blue and green tape tied on shrubs. This alignment 

crosses through a corner of the site that has a very thin scatter of flaked lithics and appears to 

have no buried deposits, as judged by slope morphology and attributes of the rock fraction of 

the soil. The site was avoided by using the flagged alternative alignment. 

This site is within the proposed Salt Creek Archeological District Expansion Area, and 

is determined to be eligible for the National Register of Historic Places by consensus with the 

State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO). Its size, the diversity of the materials observed 

here, and the probability that buried and datable deposits exist in uninvestigated portions 

indicate that this site may yield significant data regarding the prehistoric sequence of the park. 

Overall, the site can yield data relevant to understanding the groups that occupied the park and 

the surrounding region, as well as information regarding prehistoric technologies, adaptive 

systems, and settlement patterns. Currently, data on those issues are quite limited. 

Consequently this site constitutes an important addition to the archeological resources of the 

park. Efforts should be made to protect the uninvestigated portions of this site. 

Research 

In addition to 11 shovel probes, a total of 14.7 cu m were excavated in a 14-sq-m area, 

and surface materials were collected over an area of 1,100 sq m. Material collected included 

59 flaked lithics from the surface and 668 from subsurface investigations. These also included 

15 macrobotanical specimens, 36 identifiable fragmentary or whole snail shells, 33 pieces of 

bone, and one radiocarbon sample. 

Analysis focused on stratigraphic correlation of soil and geomorphic units, identification 

of paleoenvironments, and characterization of lithic systems and chronologic change in lithic 

systems. Because a large portion of these deposits cannot be reliably assigned to specific 

cultures or paleoenvironmental events, the proposed sequence is considered to comprise a set 

of hypotheses for testing in subsequent investigations in the region. 
Three depositional environments were identified, including aeolian, high-energy 

overbank, and low-energy overbank. Soil horizon attributes indicate significant changes in soil 

moisture. From seven individual stratigraphic units three geomorphic units were identified. 

Unfortunately, dating of these is dependent upon a single radiocarbon sample which yielded 

a date of 2490 f 210 B.P. (calibrated date range approximately 1 1 10 - 50 B.C.; see Dating, 

p 25). The dated unit (Stratum B) is coeval with Agenbroad and Elder's (1986) T, from 

upper Salt Creek and T, from the Bechan Cave area, and Hack's (1942) Tsegi alluvium a, and 

is included within Richmond's (1962) Neoglacial Lower Gold Basin. Richmond's radiocarbon 

date of 2800 f 200 B.P. has a calibrated two-sigma date range of approximately 1450 - 400 

B.C. (Shiver and Reimer 1993). The upper unit (Stratum A) may be coeval with a period of 

aeolian deposition that occurred between ca. 1500 and 750 B.P. in the Bechan Cave area 

(Agenbroad 1986). 

Data from soils, bone taphonomy, and molluscan fauna suggest that several shifts in 

available moisture occurred during the period when these deposits were accumulating. 

Conditions include an intermittently moist riparian environment in Stratum C, a more 

consistently moist riparian environment in Stratum B, and a drier environment with 

undifferentiable overbank and aeolian deposits in Stratum A. These apparent shifts in available 

moisture appear to be associated with changes in areas used, as shown in stratigraphic changes 

in the lithics assemblage. 

Cultural materials occurred in variable densities at depths up to 1.1 m. No features or 

diagnostic materials were observed. Datable materials were absent or very thinly dispersed, 

and no diagnostic artifacts were observed. It appears that these remains result from use by late 

Middle Archaic or Late Archaic Anasazi groups. Culturally derived materials consist of flaked 

lithics, bone, charcoal, and one burned seed. Burned specimens in the faunal assemblage 

indicate use of at least small vertebrates, especially mammals. Macrobotanical specimens 

included fragments of a single unidentiflable burned seed coat. The origins and significance 

of this and of seed coats of Celtis which were recovered cannot be assessed. 

Flaked lithic assemblage attributes suggest dependence upon a set of "formal" tools, 

especially bifaces, that were transported and maintained, and augmented by "expedient" items 

produced with local materials and infrequently transported. 

Chronological changes in lithic technologies indicate several shifts in range use and/or 

technology. Statistically significant shifts in material types and type diversity values for lithic 

materials in Stratum B suggest that use of the uplands north andlor east of the park during this 

portion of the Neoglacial was more intensive or more frequent than during the periods 

associated with Stratum A or Stratum C. This may be due to increased water or biotic 

resources in those areas at that time. Materials from Stratum C suggest use of a smaller area 

during the previous period. Materials from Stratum A are low in diversity and suggest 

infrequent use of sources of exogenous materials. 
Changes in other assemblage attributes indicate a trend in reductive technology through 

time. This is visible in a statistically significant change in flake types that shows increased 

frequencies of flakes associated with later stages of reduction, suggesting an increased 

dependence on thinned tools. 

No effort has been made to assign this site to some functional "site type." The area of 

subsurface investigations included only a very small portion of the site, and the presence or 

absence of diagnostic attributes (e.g., Tipps and Hewitt 1989) cannot be determined. In 

addition, no comparisons can be made with other investigations, since for this area there are 

insufficient extant data regarding the nature of artifact assemblages and chronologie and spatial 

variation to make a functional "site type" assignment for 42SA20286 on the basis of its lithic 

assemblage. 

71 

REFERENCES CITED 

Agenbroad, L.D. (compiler) 

1986 Phase 11 Report-Quaternary Studies: Glen Canyon National Recreation Area 

and Canyonlands National Park. Quaternary Studies Program, Northern Arizona 

University. Contract No. CX- 1200-4-A062. Submitted to National Park Service, 

Rocky Mountain Regional Office, Denver. 

199 1 Quaternary Studies of Canyonlanndr National Park and Glen Canyon National 

Recreation Area. Revised. Quaternary Studies Program, Northern Arizona University, 

Flagstaff. Submitted to National Park Service, Rocky Mountain Regional Office, 

Denver. 

Agenbroad, L., and D. Elder 

1986 Alluvium and Geochronology of Upper Salt Creek Drainage. In Phase 11 

Report-Quaternary Studies: Glen Canyon National Recreation Area and Canyonlandrs 

National Park, compiled by L. Agenbroad, pp. 1 18- 127. Quaternary Studies Program, 

Northern Arizona University, Flagstaff. Submitted to National Park Service, Rocky 

Mountain Regional Office, Denver. 

Ahler, S.A. 

198 1 Functional Analysis of Non-obsidian Chipped Stone Artifacts: Terms, 

Variables, and Quantification. In Lithic Use-Wear Analysis, edited by B. Hayden, 

pp. 301-328. Academic Press, New York. 

Amick, D.S., and R. P. Mauldin 

1989 Comments on Sullivan and Rosen's "Debitage Analysis and Archeological 

Interpretation. " American Antiquity 54(1): 166- 168. 

Anderson, A. 

1978 Archeological Resources of Canyonlands, Capitol Reef and Arches National 

Parks, and Natural Bridges National Monument, Southeastern Utah. Manuscript on 

file, National Park Service, Midwest Archeological Center, Lincoln. 

Baker, R.G. 

1983 Holocene Vegetational History of the United States. In Late-Quaternaty 

Environments of the United States, Volume 2, edited by H. E. Wright, pp. 109-127. 

University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis. 

Behrensmeyer, A.K. 

1978 Taphonomic and Ecologic Information from Bone Weathering. Paleobiology 

4(2): 150-162. 
Betancourt, J.L. 

1984 Late Quaternary Plant Zonation and Climate in Southeastern Utah. Great Basin 

Naturalist 44: 1-3 5. 

Binford, L. S. 

1979 Organization and Formation Processes, Looking at Curated Technologies. 

Journal of Anthropological Research 3 5 (3): 25 5 -273. 

1982 The Archaeology of Place. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 1 (1):5-3 1. 

Bryson, B.S., D.A. Baerris, and W.M. Wendland 

1970 The Character of Late-glacial and Post-glacial Climatic Changes. In Pleistocene 

and Recent Environments of the Central Great Plains, edited by W. Dort and J.K. 

Jones, Jr., pp. 53-74. University of Kansas Press, Lawrence. 

Copeland, J.M., and R.E. Fike 

1988 Fluted Projectile Points in Utah. Utah Archeology 1988 l(1): 5-28. 

Cummings, Linda Scott 

1989 Pollen and Macrofloral Analysis from Island-in-the-Sky, Canyonlands National 

Park, Utah. Manuscript on file, National Park Service, Midwest Archeological Center, 

Lincoln. 

Davis, W.E. 

1985a The Montgomery Folsom Site. Current Research in the Pleistocene 2: 1 1- 12. 

1985b Anasazi Subsistence and Settlement on White Mesa, Sun Juan, Utah. University 

Press of America, New York. 

Davis, W.E., and G.M. Brown 

1986 The Lime Ridge Clovis Site. Current Research in the Pleistocene 3: 1-3. 

Dean, J.S. 

1988 Dendrochronology and Paleoenvironmental Reconstruction on the Colorado 

Plateau. In fie Anasazi In a Changing Environment, edited by G.G. Gumerman, pp. 

1 19-1 67. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, England. 

Dominguez, S. 

1988 Preliminary Report on 1988 Canyonlands, Needles District Development, 

Archeological Inventory and Evaluation. Manuscript on file, National Park Service, 

Midwest Archeological Center, Lincoln. 
Elmore, I?. H. 

1944 Ethnobotany of the Navajo. Monographs of the School of American Research 

No. 8. Santa Fe, New Mexico. 

Ensor, H.B., and E. Roemer, Jr. 

1989 Comments on Sullivan and Rosen's Debitage Analysis and Archeological 

Interpretation. American Antiquity 54(1): 175- 178. 

Fox, William 

1989 Memorandum to the Chief, Division of Construction and Maintenance, Rocky 

Mountain Region, from Civil Engineer, Branch of Roads and Architecture, Rocky 

Mountain Region, April 17. Subject: Trip Report, Canyonlands National Park, April 

6-7, 1989. File Code D2623. On file, National Park Service, Rocky Mountain 

Regional Office, Denver. 

Griffin, D.P. 

1984 An Archeological Survey of the Eastern Portions of the Salt Creek 

Archeological District, Canyonlands National Park. Manuscript on file, National Park 

Service, Midwest Archeological Center, Lincoln. 

Hack, J.P. 

1942 The Changing Physical Environment of the Hopi Indians of Arizona. Papers of 

the Peabody Museum of American Archaeology and Ethnology Vol. 35, No. 1. Harvard 

University, Cambridge. 

Hartley, R. 

1980 Cultural Resource Inventory of Specified Areas Within the Needles and 

Island-in-the-Sky Districts of Canyonlands National Park, Utah. Manuscript on file, 

National Park Service, Midwest Archeological Center, Lincoln. 

Hevly, R.H. 

1988 Prehistoric Vegetation and Paleoclimates on the Colorado Plateaus. In The 

Anasazi in a Changing Environment, edited by G. G. Gumerman, pp. 92- 1 1 8. 

Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, England. 

Hogan, P., L. Losee, and J. Dodge 

1975 Archeological Investigations in the Maze District, Canyonlands National Park, 

Utah, Volume I. Manuscript on file, National Park Service, Midwest Archeological 

Center, Lincoln. 

Holmer, R.N. 

1978 A Mathematical Typology for Archaic Projectile Points of the Eastern Great 

Basin. Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Anthropology, University of Utah, Salt Lake 

City. 
1986 Common Projectile Points of the Intermountain West. In Anthropology of the 

Desert West, edited by C. J. Condie and D.D. Fowler, pp 89- 1 15. University of Utah 

Anthropological Papers No. 110. University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City. 

Hunt, C.B. 

1956 Cenozoic Geology of the Colorado Plateau. Professional Paper No. 279. 

U. S. Geological Survey, Washington, D.C. 

Jennings, J.D. 

1978 Prehistory of Utah and the Great Basin. University of Utah Anthropological 

Papers No. 98. University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City. 

1980 Cowboy Cave. University of Utah Anthropological Papers No. 104. University 

of Utah Press, Salt Lake City. 

Karlstrom, T.N.V. 

1988 Alluvial Chronology and Hydrologic Change of Black Mesa and Nearby 

Regions. In The Anasazi in a Changing Environment, edited by G.G. Gumerman, pp. 

45-9 1. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, England. 

Knox, J.C. 

1984 Responses of River Systems to Holocene Climates. In Late-Quaternary 

Environments of the United States, edited by H.E. Wright, Jr. Longman Group 

Limited, London. 

Leonard, R.D., and G.T. Jones (editors) 

1989 Quantzfiing Diversity in Archaeology. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 

England. 

Lindsay, L.W. 

1980 Pollen Analysis of Cowboy Cave Cultural Deposits. In Cowboy Cave, edited by 

J.D. Jennings, pp. 2 13-224. University of Utah Anthropological Papers No. 104. 

University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City. 

Lindsay, L., and R.E. Madsen 

1973 Report of the Archeological Surveys of the Pipe Springs National Monument 

Water Supply System Project, Kaibab Indian Reservation, Mojave County, Arizona; 

Zion National Park Sewer Extension Project, Washington County, Utah; Arches 

National Park Road and Sewage Disposal Area Projects, Grand County, Utah; and 

Canyonlands National Park Road Projects, Needles and Grandview Point Areas, San 

Juan County, Utah. Manuscript on file, National Park Service, Midwest Archeological 

Center, Lincoln. 
Losee, L., and W.A. Lucius 

1975 Archeological Investigations in the Maze District, Canyonlands National Park, 

Utah, Volume 11. Manuscript on file, National Park Service, Midwest Archeological 

Center, Lincoln. 

Lucius, W.A. 

1 976 Archeological Investigations in the Maze District, Canyonlandr National Park, 

Utah. Antiquities Section Selected Papers No. 11. Division of State History, Salt Lake 

City. 

Marwitt, J.P. 

1970 Archeological Inspection of Proposed Road from Squaw Flat to Confluence 

Overlook, Canyonlands National Park, Utah. Manuscript on file, National Park 

Service, Midwest Archeological Center, Lincoln. 

Matson, R.G., W.D. Lipe, and W.R. Haase IV 

1988 Adaptational Continuities and Occupational Discontinuities: The Cedar Mesa 

Anasazi. Journal of Field Archaeology 1 5(3):245-264. 

Nickens, P.R. 

1982 A Summary of the Prehistory of Southeastern Utah. In Contributions to the 

Prehistory of Southeastern Utah, assembled by S.G. Baker, pp. 1 - 1 18. Cultural 

Resources Series No. 13. Bureau of Land Management, Utah State Office, Salt Lake 

City. 

Noxon, J.S., and D.A. Marcus 

1982 Significant Rock Art Sites in Arches and Canyonlands National Parks and in 

Natural Bridges National Monument, Southeastern Utah. Manuscript on file, National 

Park Service, Midwest Archeological Center, Lincoln. 

1985 SigniJicant Rock Art Sites in the Needles District of Canyonlandr National Park, 

Southeastern Utah. Submitted to National Park Service, Rocky Mountain Regional 

Office, Denver. 

Osborn, A., and R. Hartley 

1984 Research Design for Understanding and Interpreting Aboriginal Adaptive 

Responses to Arid Lands in Southeastern Utah. Manuscript on file, National Park 

Service, Midwest Archeological Center, Lincoln. 

Osborn, A., S. Vetter, R. Hartley, and K.J. Reinhard 

1986 Archeological Inventory of Lavender Canyon, Salt Creek Archeological District, 

Canyonlands National Park. Manuscript on file, National Park Service, Midwest 

Archeological Center, Lincoln. 
Osborn, A.J., S. Vetter, J. Waters, and S. Baumann 

1993 Aboriginal Lithic Raw Material Procurement in Glen Canyon and Canyonlan&, 

Southeastern Utah. Technical Report No. 29. National Park Service, Midwest 

Archeological Center, Lincoln. 

Peterson, K.L. 

1988 Climate and the Dolores River Anasazi. University of Utah Anthropological 

Papers No. 1 13. University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City. 

Reinhard, K. J. 

1986 Appendix A: Ceramic Analysis. In Archeological Inventory of Lavender 

Canyon, Salt Creek Archeological District, Canyonlands National Park, by A. Osborn, 

S. Vetter, R. Hartley, and K. Reinhard, pp. 13 8-140. Manuscript on file, National Park 

Service, Midwest Archeological Center, Lincoln. 

Richmond, G.M. 

1962 Quaternary Stratigraphy of the La Sal Mountains, Utah. Professional Paper 324, 

U. S. Geological Survey, Washington, D.C. 

Rudy, J.R. 

1955 Archeological Excavation in Beef Basin, Utah. University of Utah 

Anthropological Papers No. 20. University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City. 

Schaafsma, P. 

1971 The Rock Art of Utah. Papers of the Peabody Museum of Archaeology and 

Ethnology Vol. 65. Harvard University, Cambridge. 

Sharrock, F. 

1966 An Archeological Survey of Canyonlandr National Park. University of Utah 

Anthropological Papers No. 83. Miscellaneous Collected Papers No. 12. University of 

Utah Press, Salt Lake City. 

Shott, M. 

1986 Technological Organization and Settlement Mobility: An Ethnographic 

Examination. Journal of Anthpological Research 42(1): 1 5 -5 1 . 

Spaulding, W. Geoffrey, and Kenneth L. Peterson 

1980 Late Pleistocene and Early Holocene Paleoecology of Cowboy Cave. In Cowboy 

Cave, edited by J.D. Jennings, pp. 165-177. University of Utah Anthropological Papers 

No. 104. University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City. 

Steward, J.H. 

193 8 Basin-Plateau Aboriginal Sociopolitical Groups. Bulletin No. 120. Bureau of 

American Ethnology, Smithsonian Institution, Washington D.C. 
Stuiver, M., and P.J. Reimer 

1993 Extended C-14 Data Base and Revised CALIB 3.0 C-14 Age Calibration 

Program. Radiocarbon 35(1):215-230. 

Sullivan, A.P., and K.C. Rosen 

1985 Debitage Analysis and Archeological Analysis. American Antiquity 50(4):755- 

779. 

Tipps, B.L., and N.J. Hewitt 

1989 Cultural Resource Inventory and Testing in the Salt Creek Pocket and Devils 

Lane Areas, Needles District, Canyonlanh National Park, Utah. Selections from the 

Division of Cultural Resources No. 1. National Park Service, Rocky Mountain Region, 

Denver. 

Turner, R. M. 

1982 Cold-Temperate Desertlands. Desert Plants Vol. 4 (No. 1-4): 144- 155. 

Whallon, R., Jr. 

1973 Spatial Analysis of Occupation Floors I: Application of Dimensional Analysis 

of Variance. American Antiquity 3 8:266-278. 

Whiting, A.F. 

1939 Ethnobotany of the Hopi. Bulletin No. 15. Museum of Northern Arizona, 

Flagstaff. 

Table 1. Distribution of non-intrusive seed coat fragments by field specimen number and by natural level, 

with notes on intrusive macrobotanical specimens. 

FS Level Number Taxon Alteration 

11.5.9 V 2 Celtis sp. 

11.6.9 VI I 1 Celtis sp. 

11.7.9 VI I 3 Celtis sp. 1 burned 

12.8.9 VI I 1 Celtis sp. 

12.9.9 VI I 3 Ceffis sp. 

12.10.9 VII 3 Celtis sp. 

21.7.9 VI I 2 unidentified burned 

22.4.9 I V 1 Ceffis sp. 

Intrusive macrobotanical specimens: 11.1.9 (Level II), unidentified terminal bud; 11.8.9 (Level VII), 36 unidentified 

seeds, not processed and not known to be a taxon economically important to aboriginal groups, probably insect 

cache; 20.7.9 (Level IV), 6 large, unprocessed seeds, Chenopodium sp., appear to be recent, probably insect cache. 
Table 2. Stratigraphic distribution of snails. 

Stratum A 

Pupoides hordaceous 

Gastrocopta pilsbryana 

G. cf. G. riograndensis 

Vallonia sp. 

Succineid fragments 

Stratum B 

Vallonia + pupillid and other fragments 

Stratum C 

Gastrocopta cristata 

G. pellucida 

G. pilsbryana 

Ha waiia minuscula 

Pupoides albilabris 

P. hordaceous 

Vallonia cyclophorella 

Succineid fragments 
Table 3. Vertebrate taxa by stratum. 

Stratum A, Stratum B, Stratum C, 

Levels Level Levels 

Taxon I,II,III I V V,VI ,VI I Total 

Unknown 

Microvert 1 

Amphibian - 

Serpentes 

Mammal 

Small 

Mammal 

Rodent 1 

Total 3 20 10 33 
Table 4. Weathering stage distribution by arbitrary levels. 

Hori- Weathering Stage 

zontal Arbitrary 

Unit Level 1 2 3 4 5 Total 

Total 16 11 3 3 0 33 

Table 5. Weathering stage distribution by strata in FS 21 and 22 (Excavation Unit G). 

Weathering Stage 

Stratum 

1 2 3 4 5 Total 

Total 16 11 3 3 0 33 
Table 6. Macrodebitage reductive stage by material type. 

Chert Chalcedony Quartzite Total Key 

Shatter 3 

(2.9) 

1 .o 

observed 

(expected) 

column % 

Decortication 5 

(3.5) 

1.7 

observed 

(expected) 

column % 

Interior 

I 

118 

(108.1) 

39.1 

observed 

(expected) 

column % 

Interior 

I I 

176 

(1 87.5) 

58.3 

observed 

(expected) 

column % 

Total 

Percent 

302 

58.4 

21 0 

40.6 

5 

1 .O 

51 7 

No chi-square calculated; cells with EF < 5 = 8 out of 12, or 66.7%, which is more than the 25% maximum allowed 

for valid chi-square. 
Table 7. Dimensions (mm) by material type of all macrodebitage. 

Material, Measure Mean Standard Coefficient of n 

Deviation Variability 

Chert 

Maximum Dimension 14.8 8.3 0.56 

Thickness 2.4 1.7 0.71 

Chalcedony 

Maximum Dimension 11.9 6.4 0.54 

Thickness 2.1 1.2 0.57 

Quartzite 

Maximum Dimension 6.3 4.9 0.78 

Thickness 2.6 2.9 1.1 1 

For average maximum dimension of all material types F= 13.70, p = .00, df= 2; for average thickness of all material 

types F = 7.86, p = .03, df = 2; for average maximum dimension of chert and chalcedony only F = 4.37, p = .04, 

df = 2; for average thickness of chert and chalcedony F = 4.24, p = .04, df = 2. 
Table 8. Dimensions (mm) by reductive stages. 

Mean Standard Coefficient of n 

Stage, Measure Deviation Variability 

Shatter 

Maximum Dimension 

Thickness 

Decortication 

Maximum Dimension 

Thickness 

Interior I 

Maximum Dimension 

Thickness 

lnterior II 

Maximum Dimension 

Thickness 

For average maximum dimension by flake type for all material types F = 13.66, p = .00, df = 3; for average thickness 

by flake type for all material types F = 89.73, p = .00, df = 3. 
Table 9. Dimensions (mm) by material type of selected reductive stages for chert and chalcedony. 

Material Mean Standard Coefficient 

Deviation of Variability 

Interior I' 

Chert 

Maximum Dimension 

Thickness 

Chalcedony 

Maximum Dimension 

Thickness 

lnterior 112 

Chert 

Maximum Dimension 

Thickness 

Chalcedony 

Maximum Dimension 

Thickness 

'F~~ average maximum dimension F = 2.26, p = 0.13, df = 1, n = 182; for average thickness F = 0.23, p = 0.64, 

df= 1, n = 182. 

2~or average maximum dimension F = 2.60, p = 0.1 1, df = 1, n = 321; for average thickness F = 0.10; p = 0.76, 

df= I, n = 321. 
Table 10. Average ratio of macrodebitage thickness to maximum dimension by material type. 

Material Ratio Standard Coefficient n 

Deviation of Variability 

Chert 0.16 0.08 0.50 302 

Chalcedony 0.16 0.07 0.44 210 

Quartzite 0.23 0.11 0.49 5 

Table 11. Average ratio of thickness to maximum dimension by material type for selected reductive 

stages. 

Material Ratio Standard Coefficient n 

Deviation of Variability 

1 Interior 1

Chert 0.19 0.08 0.42 118 

Chalcedony 0.20 0.09 0.45 64 

Interior 11 2 

Chert 0.13 0.05 0.39 176 

Chalcedony 0.14 0.06 0.43 145 

1 F = 0.69, p = 0.41, df= 1, n = 182. 

2 F = 2.02, p = 0.16, df= 1, n = 321. 

89 
Table 12. Presence of cortex by material type for macrodebitage. 

Cortex 

Material 

Absent Abraded Weathering Total 

Chert 301 

56.2 

2 

100.0 

5 

83.3 

308 observed 

column % 

Chalcedony 226 

42.2 

0 

0.0 

0 

0.0 

226 o bse wed 

column % 

Quartzite 9 

1.7 

0 

0.0 

1 

16.7 

10 observed 

column % 

Total 

Percent 

536 

98.5 

2 

0.4 

6 

1 .I 

544 

100 

No 2 calculated, cells with EF < 5 = 4 out of 6, or 66.7%, which is more than the 25% maximum allowed for valid 

chi-square. 
Table 13a. Frequencies of microdebitage, macrodebitage, and tools by material types. 

Micro- Macro- Tools Key Total Macrodeb. 

Material debitage debitage to Tool Ratio 

Chert 50 308 13 observed 371 23.7 

(83.7) (277.6) (9.7) (expected) 

13.5 83.0 3.5 row % 51 .O 

Chalcedony 108 226 6 observed 340 37.7 

(76.7) (254.4) (8.9) (expected) 

31.8 66.5 1.8 row % 46.8 

Quartzite 6 10 0 observed 16 

(3.6) (12.0) (0.4) (expected) 

37.5 62.5 0.0 row % 2.2 

Total 164 544 19 

Percent 22.6 74.8 2.6 

Table 13b. Chert and chalcedony microdebitage frequencies. 

Chert Chalcedony Total Key 

Microdebitage 50 

(81.7) 

14.0 

108 

(76.3) 

32.3 

158 

22.8 

total 

(expected) 

percent 

Macrodebitage 308 

(276.3) 

86.0 

226 

(257.7) 

67.7 

534 

77.2 

total 

(expected) 

percent 

Total 

Percent 
Table 14. Distribution of tool type by material type. 

Tool Type 

Cores Utilized Retouched Bifaces Total 

Interior I Flakes & (Percent) 

Material Utilized 

Interior II 

Cedar 4 2 3 4 

Mesa 

Chert (80.0) (66.7) (1 00.0) (50.0) 

Summerville 1 

Chalcedony 

(20.0) 

White 0 0 0 2 

Rim 

Chalcedony (0.0) (0.0) (0.0) (25.0) 

Total 5 3 3 8 19 

Percent (26.3) (1 5.8) (1 5.8) (42.1) (1 00.0) 
Table 15. Means and standard deviations (SD) for tool and core dimensions by material type. 

Len~th Width Thickness n 

Material Mean SD Mean SD Mean SD 

Cedar 33.8 18.9 28.9 11.8 8.5 2.9 

Mesa Chert 

Summerville 24.3 19.9 30.4 13.0 6.2 0.5 

Chalcedony 

White Rim 11.8 9.53 13.1 2.1 7.5 5.8 

Chalcedony 

Table 16. Means and standard deviations (SD) for edge angles by material type. 

Maximum Minimum 

Material Mean SD Mean SD n 

Cedar 60.8 25.0 43.2 21.4 13 

Mesa Chert 

Summerville 

Chalcedony 

White Rim 

Chalcedony 
Table 17. Frequencies of artifact classes by excavation unit in Levels I, 11, Ill; Stratum A. 

Artifact Class 

Excavation Micro- Macro- Tools, Total 

Unit debitage debitage Cores 

A SNP 5 0 5 

B SNP 54 0 54 

C SNP 4 0 4 

D SNP 25 0 25 

E 1 5 1 7 

F SNP 1 0 1 

G 60 95 2 157 

Surface SNP 49 9 58 

Collection 

Total 6 1 238 12 31 1 

SNP = samples not processed. 

Table 18. Frequencies of artifact classes by excavation unit in Level IV; Stratum B. 

Artifact Class 

Excavation Micro- Macro- Tools, Total 

Unit debitage debitage Cores 

Total 64 161 3 228 
Table 19. Frequencies of artifact classes by excavation unit in Levels V, VI, VII; Stratum C. 

Artifact Class 

Excavation Micro- Macro- Tools, Total 

Unit debitage debitage Cores 

Unit C SNP 

Unit E 10 

Unit G 15 

Total 25 70 1 96 

SNP = samples not processed. 

Table 20. Distribution of macrodebitage flake type by stratigraphic unit. 

Stratum Shatter Decort. Interior Interior Total Key 

I I I 

observed 

(expected) 

percent 

observed 

(expected) 

percent 

observed 

(expected) 

percent 

Total 5 6 1 84 31 8 51 3 

Percent 1 .O 1.2 35.9 62.0 
Table 21. Distribution of material type by stratigraphic unit for macrodebitage, cores, and tools. 

Stratum Chert Chalcedony Quartzite Total Key 

324 observed 

(expected) 

percent 

observed 

(expected) 

percent 

observed 

(expected) 

percent 

Total 

Percent 

31 7 

56.7 

232 

41.5 

10 

1.8 

559 

100 

?= 38.0, p = 0.00, df=4. Cells with E.F. < 5=2 of 9, or22.2 %. 

Table 22. Diversity and evenness measures for material types and sources. 

Material Source 

Stratum Type Area 

diversity (H) 

evenness (J) 

richness (n) 

diversity (H) 

evenness (J) 

richness (n) 

diversity (H) 

evenness (J) 

richness (n) 
Table 23. Mean dimensions of lnterior I flakes by stratum and by material type. 

Maximum 

Dimension Thickness 

Stratum Mean SD Mean SD n 

Chert lnterior I Flakes' 

A 16.3 6.5 

B 18.4 8.6 

C 16.9 6.9 

Chalcedony lnterior I Flakes2 

A 16.7 6.9 

B 12.9 6.7 

C 15.7 16.3 

 o or maximum dimension F = 0.82, p = 0.44, df = 2; for thickness F= 5.19, p = 0.001, df = 2. 

2~trata A and B only: for maximum dimension F = 4.28, p = 0.04, df = 1; for thickness F = 0.72, 

p = 0.40, df = 1. 
Table 24. Mean dimensions of lnterior II flakes by stratum and by material type. 

Maximum 

Dimension Thickness 

Stratum Mean SD Mean SD 

Chert lnterior II ~lakes' 

A 13.3 6.0 1.7 0.9 

B 13.8 5.6 1.9 0.9 

C 14.6 9.5 2.0 1.3 

Chalcedony lnterior II ~lakes~ 

A 13.0 5.0 1.7 0.7 

B 10.9 4.4 1.7 0.8 

C 8.9 4.5 1.3 0.3 

 o or maximum dimension F = 0.32, p = 0.73, df =2; for thickness F = 1.14, p = 0.32, df = 2. 

2~trata A and B only: for maximum dimension F = 5.86, p = 0.02, df = 1; for thickness F = 0.40; p = 0.52, 

df = 1. 
Table 25. Macrodebitage flake type by material type in Stratum C. 

Flake Type 

Material Interior I Interior I1 Total Key 

Chert 19 

(25.7) 

43.2 

44 observed 

(expected) 

percent 

Chalcedony observed 

(expected) 

percent 

Total 

Percent 
Table 26. Interior I and Interior II flake dimensions in Stratum C. 

Maximum 

Dimension Thickness 

Type Mean so Mean so n 

Interior I Flakes 1 

Chert 16.9 6.9 2.7 1.4 24 

Chalcedony 15.7 16.3 3.1 3.3 4 

Interior II Flakes 2 

Chert 12.6 3.8 1.8 1.0 18 

Chalcedony 11.1 3.5 1.3 0.3 9 

1

No ANOVA run due to small sample size. 

2For maximum dimension F = 0.91, p = 0.35, df = 1; for thickness F = 2.14, p = 0.16, df = 1. 

100 
Table 27. Microdebitage frequencies for chert and chalcedony in Stratum C. 

Chert 

Material Type 

Chalcedony Total Key 

Microdebitage 

5 

(14.0) 

20.8 

19 

(1 0.0) 

79.2 

24 observed 

(expected) 

percent 

Macrodebitage 

and Tools 

47 

(38.0) 

72.3 

18 

(27.0) 

27.7 

65 observed 

(expected) 

percent 

Total 

Percent 

52 

58.4 

37 

41.6 

89 

100.0 

)(- = 19.12, p = 0.00, df= 1. 

101 
Table 28. Macrodebitage flake type by material type in Stratum B. 

Material 

Flake Type 

Interior I Interior II Total Key 

Chert 36 

(36.9) 

42.9 

48 

(47.1) 

57.1 

84 observed 

(expected) 

percent 

Chalcedony 

Total 

Percent 

-K = 0.02, p = 0.90, df= 1. 

48 

(47.1) 

44.9 

59 

(59.9) 

55.1 

107 observed 

(expected) 

percent 

84 

44.0 

107 

56.0 

191 

100.0 

102 
Table 29. Average dimensions of chert and chalcedony Interior flakes in Stratum B. 

Maximum 

Dimension Thickness 

Mean SD Mean SD 

lnterior I' 

Chert 18.4 (8.7) 3.8 (1.9) 27 

Chalcedony 12.9 (6.7) 2.7 (1.6) 26 

lnterior 112 

Chert 13.8 (5.6) 1.9 (0.9) 44 

Chalcedony 11.3 (4.2) 1.7 (0.8) 44 

 o or maximum dimension F = 6.67, p = 0.013, df = 1; for thickness F = 5.22, p = 0.027, df = 1 

2~or maximum dimension F = 1.29, p = 0.26, df = 1. 
Table 30. Microdebitage frequencies for chert and chalcedony in Stratum B. 

Material Type 

Chert Chalcedony Total 

Microdebitage 

Macrodebitage 

and Tools 

21 

(26.5) 

34.4 

75 

(69.5) 

46.9 

40 

(34.5) 

65.6 

85 

(90.5) 

53.1 

61 

160 

observed 

(expected) 

percent 

observed 

(expected) 

percent 

Total 

Percent 

x?- = 2.79, p = 0.095, df= 1. 

96 

43.4 

125 

56.6 

221 

100.0 

104 
Table 31. Distribution of macrodebitage flake type by material type in Stratum A. 

Material 

Flake Type 

Interior I Interior II Total 

Chert 

Chalcedony 

68 

(60.8) 

37.2 

36 

(43.2) 

27.7 

115 

(122.2) 

62.8 

94 

(86.8) 

72.3 

183 

130 

observed 

(expected) 

percent 

observed 

(expected) 

percent 

Total 

Percent 

104 

33.2 

209 

66.8 

313 

100.0 

-K = 3.07, p = 0.08, df= 1. 

105 
Table 32. Means and standard deviations (SD) for dimensions of Interior I and Interior II flakes in 

Stratum A. 

Maximum 

Dimension Thickness 

SD 

n 

Material Mean SD Mean 

Interior I Flakes 1 

Chert 

Chalcedony 

Interior II Flakes 2 

Chert 

Chalcedony 

16.3 

16.7 

13.3 

13.3 

(6.5) 

(6.9) 

(6.0) 

(4.8) 

2.9 

3.1 

1.7 

1.7 

1.1 

1.6 

0.9 

0.7 

68 

36 

115 

94 

1

For maximum dimension F= 0.077, p = 

2For maximum dimension F = 0. 010, p = 

0.78, df= 1; for thickness F= 0.42, p = 0.52, df= 1. 

0. 92, df = 1; for thickness F = 0. 000, p = 0. 98, df =1. 

106 
Table 33. Microdebitage frequencies for chert and chalcedony in Stratum A. 

Material Type 

Chert Chalcedony Total 

24 49 73 observed 

Microdebitage (40.3) (32.7) (expected) 

32.9 67.1 percent 

Macrodebitage 195 129 observed 

and (178.7) (1 45.3) (expected) 

Tools 60.2 39.8 percent 

Total 21 9 178 397 

Percent 55.2 44.8 100.0 

2 = 17.96, p = 0.00, df = 1. 

Figure 1. Project location. 

109 

CANYONLANDS 

NATIONAL PARK 

L. 

) 

.\ 
Figure 2. Location of site 42SA20286. 

110 

oi'===--r.i1 50m 

Contour lntervol=7m 

~ Areo Investigated 

42SA20290 
Figure 3. Map of areas investigated. 

111 

42SA20286 

N 

t 

--- Edge Of Surface Collection 

----------

Road 

/ 

• Shovel Probe 

® Flagged Limits of Construction 

[) Test Unit 

---Edge of Artifact Concentration 

a 20m C:::==--

- / 

/ / 

,...,~--------- -/ 

'_'I. 

, I :-'.I ;/ 

J 

'/ 

' / 

', II 

__.,.I 

... - ', I 

' I 

' I 

' I 

' I 

' I ', I 

' I 

' I ', I 

', I .................. / ______ .; 

I 

I 

I 

/ 

/ 

I 

/-- I 

/ --------"' 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

r 
Figure 4. Map of subsurface investigations. 

urface cs / 

C- 8 

Dune 9 

. 

< T'\ 

/ =.==== 5=== < \-\- 7 To-\/\ 0 F ,* 

4. @5 E 

- - 1%- 

@ Blowout 

7 

Road 

4 

- 

of - Disturbance - - - 

---- 

200~/310E + 

v 

-L Photo Location/Direction 

Shovel Probe 

@ Flagged Limits of Construction 

u Test Unit 

- - Edge of Artifact Concentration 

0 1 om I 1 

/ 
Figure 5. Overview of the site, looking south from road. 

Figure 6. Overview of the site, looking north across road. 

113 
Figure 7. Profile, 185N322E (Excavation Unit G). 

114 

II 

42SA20286 

185N/322E-323E 

Ill 

/~···· 

L] 

I 

IV ~ 

~ N 

v 

.;_; 

~ 

Bedrock 

Bedrock 1 

I UNEXCAVATED / 

0 20 

CM 

2.5YR4/6, loose to compacted medium sand (nonsticky, nonplastic, gritty), with occasional 

slightly structured ped. Rock fraction << 1% gravel-sized ss clasts. No bedding visible. 

Roots, surface trampling. Lower boundary is 0.2 to 0 em wide, abrupt, clear. 

II 2.5YR3/6, slightly structured medium sand (very slightly sticky, nonplastic, gritty). Rock 

fraction < < 1% gravel and pebbled -sized ss clasts. No bedding visible. Fewer roots. 

Grades to 2.5YR4/6 at bottom. Lower boundary indistinct, 1 -5 em. 

Ill 2.5YR4/6, slightly structured medium sand (nonsticky, nonplastic, gritty). Rock fraction 

<< 1% gravel to pebble-sized ss clasts. No bedding visible. Rodent activity. Lower 

boundary indistinct, but 1 em across. 

IV 2.5YR4/6, slightly structured medium sand (very slightly structured nonplastic, gritty). Rock 

fraction << 1% gravel to pebble-sized ss clasts. No bedding visible. Charcoal layer 0.01 

to 1 em across. Rodent activity. Lower boundary indistinct and consists of darker, 

harder mottling. Layer mottled with lenses of 1 OYR 3/4, structured to very structured medium 

to clayey sand (very slightly sticky to sticky, nonplastic to very plastic, gritty to smooth). 

Lenses are highly irregular and 0.2 to 1 em thick. Mottling constitutes ca. 50% of volume. 

V 2.5YR4/6, slightly structured medium sand (very slightly structured, nonplastic, gritty). Rock 

fraction << 1% gravel to pebbled-sized ss clasts. No bedding visible. Rodent activity. 

Mottling decreases in volume to ca. 5-10%. 

VI 2.5YR3/4, clayey sand to clayey silt, (plastic to very plastic, sticky, smooth to slightly gritty). 

No rock fraction. No bedding visible. Boundaries indistinct, abrupt, ca. 1 em lenses small 

and discontinuous, 0.1 to 1 em thick. Mottles to 2.5YR4/6. 

VII 2.5YR3/ 4, very structured, fine grit sand (plastic, slightly sticky). Rock fraction << 1% 

gravel-sized ss clasts. Not bedding visible. No disturbances. Lower boundary not known. 
Figure 8. Stratigraphic correlations among excavation units and shovel probes. 

SP Shovel Probe 

TU Test Unit 

UD Upper Dune 

AT Alluvial Terrace 

Not to horizontal scale 

SPB SPll TUE SP4 SP9 SP3 SP5 

I I I I I I sp,'O v- lo3r 

100 Arbitrary Datum 

TUF SP6 TUD TUG 

I I I 

TUB SP7 TUC TUA SP1 

lolr I I I I 
Figure 9. Cores: (a) FS42SA22.4.1; (b) FS42SA22.5.2; (c) FS42SA23.0.27; (d)FS42SA23.0.24; 

( e )FS42SA23 .0.28 

116 

a 

c 

0 2in 

0 5cm 

b 
Figure 10. Utilized and retouched flakes: (a) FS42SA21.1.1; (b) FS42SA23.0.25; (c) FS42SA23.0.29; 

(d) FS42SA21.4.2; (e) FS42SA11.8.2; (f) FS42SA23.0.16 

117 

a 

0 2in 

0 Scm 

d 
Figure 11. Bifaces: (a) FS42SA15.9.3; (b) FS42SA11.0.2; (c) FS42SA19.6.1; (d) FS42SA23.0.33; (e)FS42SA23.0.26; 

(f) FS42SA22.4.2; (g) FS42SA15.9.2; (h) FS42SA23.0.23 

118 

~\ ,!J, pr I I b I 

~~'Ud I \ 

I 

\ 

f 

0 

0 

g 

~ 

~(\ ·'~ .- --- --- u c I \ 1 1 I \ 1 I 

e 

3in 

7cm 

Figure 12. Tools and cores arranged by material type. 

119 

~ 

0 

0 

E-< 

~ 

0 

0 

E-< 

~I 

DEWEY BRIDGE 

CHALCEDONY 

I 

,&!J~, ' I \ 

SUMMERVILLE 

CHALCEDONY 

~' /''~j;) 

CEDAR MESA CHERT 

:6\ ', 
APPENDIX A 

SOIL PROFILES AND PIT SUMMARIES 

Test Pit Summaries and Excavation Unit Soil Projle Descriptions 

Excavation Unit A; 201Nl330E: 0.5 m downhill from crack, 3 m west from edge of sand. 

Oriented E-W. 

- Within concentration of artifacts. 

- Maximum depth = 50 cmbs, on bedrock. 

- Maximum 4 flakes in 0-10 cmbs, decreasing to 0 in 20-30. 

Profile notes: 

I. 2.5YR516, loose, unconsolidated, medium-grained sand with very little silt (nonsticky, 

nonplastic, gritty), with << 1% gravel-sized SS clasts, a few SS pebbles. No bedding 

visible. Some roots. 

11. 2.5YR516, consolidated, unstructured sand (nonsticky, nonplastic, gritty), with << 1% 

gravel-sized SS clasts. No bedding visible. Some very small roots and rodent activity. 

Excavation Unit B; 199Nl327E: 0.5 m uphill from crack. Oriented N-S. 

- Within concentration of artifacts. 

- Maximum depth = 80 cm, on bedrock. 

- Total of 54 flakes from test pit; maximum was 16 in 10-20 cmbs; 2 flakes in 70-80 

cmbs. 

Profile notes: 

I. 2.5YR416, nonsticky, nonplastic, gritty sand with some silt, < 2% gravel SS clasts. No 

bedding visible. No disturbances noted. 

11. 2.5YR416, consolidated and weakly structured, gritty sand with some silt. Rock fraction 

< 1% SS clasts. No bedding visible. Some very small roots throughout soil. 

Excavation Unit C; 203Nl331E: 0.5 m downhill from crack, 2 m west of edge of sand 

deposit. Oriented N-S. 

- Within concentration of artifacts. 

- Maximum depth = 74 cm, on bedrock. 

- 8 flakes, 1 per level, except 2 in 40-50 cmbs, and 0 in 60-BR. 
Profile notes: 

I. 2.5YR416, loose, medium-grained sand with some silt, with no rock fraction. No 

bedding visible. Root disturbance. Abrupt 1-cm boundary. 

11. 2.5YR416, consolidated, unstructured, medium-grained sand with undulating beds, with 

no rock fraction. Beds of alternating fine- to medium-grained sand (medium-grained 

2.5YR514, fine-grained 2.5YR416). Undulating beds all approximately 2.5YR416. One 

rodent burrow. Abrupt 1 -cm boundary. 

111. 2.5YR416, consolidated, unstructured fine- to medium-grained sand, with no rock 

fraction. No bedding visible. Insect and rodent tunnels. Level grades to weakly structured at 

bottom. Boundary varies 1-2 cm. 

IV. 10YR416, structured to well-structured massive sand with some clay and silt, with no 

rock fraction. No bedding visible. Insect casts. Has decaying SS areas of 5YR512. 

Excavation Unit D; 201Nl325E: 1.5 m uphill from crack. Oriented E-W. 

- Within concentration of artifacts. 

- Maximum depth = 73 cm, on bedrock. 

- Total of 25 flakes, maximum of 6 in 30-40 cmbs, 0 in 60-BR. Some charcoal. 

Profile notes: 

I. 2.5YR416, nonstructured, slightly silty sand (slightly sticky, nonplastic, gritty), with < 

1% SS gravel-sized clasts. No bedding visible. No disturbances observed. 

11. 2.5YR416, nonstructured, slightly silty sand (slightly sticky, nonplastic, gritty), with no 

rock fraction. No bedding visible. Small roots with some larger decayed roots (0.5 to 1 cm 

dia.). Soil grades from moist to dry, and nonstructured to very slightly structured. 

111. 2.5YR416, nonstructured, slightly silty sand (slightly sticky, nonplastic, gritty), no rock 

fraction. No bedding visible. Small roots throughout. Mottled with 2.5YR316, slightly 

structured extremely hard compacted area. 

Excavation Unit E; 235Nl319E: In deflated dune on top of terrace deposits on north side 

of road. Oriented N-S. 

- Within concentration of artifacts. 

- Maximum depth = 120 cm, on bedrock. 

- Total of 48 flakes, 1-4 per level, but 16 in 60-70 cmbs, 10 in 80-90, 2 in 90-BR. 

Charcoal. 
Profile notes: 

I. 2.5YR416, very loose, nonstructured, medium-grained sand with some silt (nonsticky, 

nonplastic), with < 1% gravel-sized SS clasts. No bedding visible. No disturbances noted. 

11. 2.5YR416, loose, nonstructured, medium-grained sand (nonplastic), no rock fraction. No 

bedding visible. No disturbances. Grades to slightly sticky, very slightly plastic sand with 

silt, and more moist. 

In. 2.5YR416, nonstructured, medium sand with silt (nonsticky, nonplastic), no rock fraction 

noted. No bedding visible. No disturbances. Mottled with 2.5YR316 clayey sand with 

structure (slightly sticky, very slightly plastic), moist. 

IV. 5YR416, structured caliche layer, slightly less sandy (nonplastic), with no rock fraction. 

No bedding visible. Charcoal staining evident. Soil very hard. Ant and root activity. 

Level grades to slightly more structured, pockets of plastic and slightly sticky, clayey silt. 

V. 2.5YR316, slightly structured, sandy silt, very little to no clayey material (nonplastic, 

nonsticky), with no rock fraction. No bedding visible. Probable charcoal staining. Rodent 

and root disturbance. 

Excavation Unit F; 235Nl325E: In deflated dune on top of terrace deposits on north side 

of road. Oriented N-S. 

- Within concentration of artifacts. 

- Maximum depth = 109 cm, on bedrock. 

- One flake in 10-20 cmbs. 

Profile notes: 

I. 2.5YR416, loose to very slightly structured, medium-grained sand, with no rock fraction. 

No bedding visible. Root activity (up to 0.5 cm in dia.). 

11. 2.5YR416, very slightly structured medium grained sand, << 1% gravel-sized SS clasts. 

No bedding visible. Root activity up to 0.3 cm diameter. 

111. 2.5YR416, slightly structured sand with some silt and clay, with << 1% gravel-sized SS 

clasts. No bedding visible. Root disturbance, up to 0.3 cm diameter. Soil mottled with 

2.5YR316. 

IV. 2.5YR416, slightly structured, medium-grained sand, with << 1 % gravel-sized S S 

clasts. No bedding visible. Insect casts and rodent burrow disturbances. Grades to 

2.5YR316, structured, medium-grained sand with fewer gravel-sized SS clasts, but several 

pebble-sized SS clasts. 
V. 2.5YR316, structured, medium-grained sand with some clay (slightly sticky), with 

several gravel- to pebble-sized SS clasts. No bedding visible. Disturbance includes rodent 

burrow and insect casts. 

Excavation Unit G; 185Nl322E: On terrace deposits southwest of crack. Oriented E-W. 

- Within concentration of artifacts. 

- Maximum depth = 120, in soil; uneven bedrock surface. 

- Total of 235 flakes, 2 tool fragments, 1 biface, 1 core fragment, 6 bone fragments; 

highest flake count in 0-10 cmbs, 37 items; and in 30-40 cmbs, 36 flakes + 3 tool 

fragments. 

- One radiocarbon 

to 2490 + sample of 0.1 g, wood charcoal, collected from 15 vertical cm. Dated 210 B.P. 

Profile Notes: 

I. 2.5YR416, loose to compacted medium sand (nonsticky, nonplastic, gritty), with 

occasional slightly structured peds. Rock fraction << 1% gravel-sized SS clasts. No bedding 

visible. Roots, surface trampling. Lower boundary is 0.2 to 0 cm wide, abrupt, clear. 

11. 2.5YR316, slightly structured medium sand (very slightly sticky, nonplastic, gritty). 

Rock fraction << 1% gravel and pebble-sized SS clasts. No bedding visible. Fewer roots. 

Grades to 2.5YR416 at bottom. Lower boundary indistinct, 1 - 5 cm. 

111. 2.5YR416, slightly structured medium sand (nonsticky, nonplastic, gritty). Rock fraction 

<< 1% gravel to pebble-sized SS clasts. No bedding visible. Rodent activity. Lower 

boundary indistinct, but 1 cm across. 

IV. 2.5YR416, slightly structured medium sand (very slightly structured, nonplastic, gritty). 

Rock fraction << 1% gravel- to pebble-sized SS clasts. No bedding visible. Charcoal layer 

0.01 to 1 cm. across. Rodent activity. Lower boundary indistinct and consists of loss of 

darker, harder mottling. Layer mottled with lenses of 10YR314, structured to very 

structured medium to clayey sand (very slightly sticky to sticky, nonplastic to very plastic, 

gritty to smooth). Lenses are highly irregular and 0.2 to 1 cm thick. Mottling constitutes 

ca. 50% of volume. 

V. 2.5YR416, slightly structured medium sand (very slightly structured, nonplastic, gritty). 

Rock fraction << 1% gravel- to pebble-sized SS clasts. No bedding visible. Rodent 

activity. Mottling decreases in volume to ca. 5-10%. 

VI. 2.5YR314, clayey sand to clayey silt, (plastic to very plastic, sticky, smooth to slightly 

gritty). No rock fraction. No bedding visible. Boundaries indistinct, abrupt, ca. 1 cm. 

Lenses small and discontinuous, 0.1 to 1 cm. thick. Mottles to 2.5YR416. 
VII. 2.5YR314, very structured, fine-grit sand (plastic, slightly sticky). Rock fraction << 

1% gravel-sized SS clasts. No bedding visible. No disturbances. Lower boundary not 

known. 

Shovel Probes 

SP-1; 191Nl326E: 1.5 m west of crack. 

- In artifact concentration. 

- Hit bedrock at 70 cmbs. 

- 1 flake in 0-30 cmbs; 2 flakes in 30-70. 

Soil: Changes from loose sand at top to structured at 10 cmbs. From 10 to 30 cm soil is 

slightly browner and fairly hard. Below 30 cm soil color changes back to original brown. 

SP-2; 187Nl323E: 4 m west of south end of crack. 

- In concentration. 

- Hit bedrock at 90 cmbs. 

- 6 flakes in 0-30 cmbs; 7 in 30-60; 13 flakes, 1 biface in 60-bedrock. 

Soil: Upper 7 cm is loose red-tan sand, below this level the soil is compacted. At 50-55 

cm becomes structured, slightly browner. At 75-80 soil less compact (softens). Charcoal 

flecks present from 30 cm to bedrock. 

SP-3; 194Nl320E: 7 m west of crack. 

- Above concentration, at edge of dune. 

- Dug to 100 cmbs, no bedrock. 

- 3 flakes in 0-30 cmbs; 1 in 30-60; 0 in 60-90; 1 in 90-100. 

Soil: Loose red sand to 7 cm then becomes compacted. Below 30 cm soil becomes 

structured to 40 cm then loose. Soil hardens again at 75 cm and mottled. Grades to clayey 

silt. 

SP-4; 233Nl3 10E: In deflated dune over terrace on north side of road. 

- At west end of concentration. 

- Hit bedrock at 80 cmbs. 

- No artifacts. 

Soil: Soil becomes structured to well-structured clayey silt at 20 cm. Grades to a slightly 

structured fine sand at 40 cm. At 60 cm soil grades to very loose sand with lens of less 

structured clayey silt. 

SP-5; 235Nl3 15E: At boundary between deflated area and artifact concentration. 

- North edge of concentration. 
- Hit bedrock at 80 cmbs. 

- 1 flake in 30-60 cmbs. 

Soil: Loose sand to 13 cm, becomes compact to 25 cm, then picked up thin discontinuous 

pockets of redbrown clayey silt, structured to weakly structured, alternating with redltan 

fine sand to 30 cm. Grades to weakly structured redltan sand from 50 cm to 70 cm. 

Discontinuous lens of structured clayey silt from 70 to 75 cm. 

SP-6; 232Nl331E: At east end of deflated area, by creek bank. 

- No surface artifacts, in definite impact area. 

- Dug to 90 cmbs, homogeneous sand. 

- No artifacts. 

Soil: Loose sand to 15 cm, grading to compact, very slightly structured, changes to slightly 

structured ca. 60 cm. 

SP-7; 232Nl331E: At east end of deflated area, by creek bank. 

- No surface artifacts, in definite impact area. 

- Hit bedrock at 73 cmbs. 

- No artifacts. 

Soil: Loose sand to 20 cm, grading to slightly structured medium sand, slightly moist. 

SP-8; 241Nl3 19E: Near crest of dune on north side of road. 

- No surface artifacts. 

- Dug to 100 cmbs. 

- 3 flakes in 60-100. 

Soil: Loose sand to 15 cm, grading to compacted medium sand. Becoming weakly 

structured at 55 cm, grading to more structured ca. 70-75 cm. At 80 cm soil becomes 

structured. A few SS clasts appear at 70 cm. 

SP-9; 240Nl329E: Near crest of dune on north side of road. 

- No surface artifacts. 

- Dug to 90 cmbs, homogeneous sand. 

- No artifacts. 

Soil: Loose medium-grained sand to 10 cm, grading to compact below 20 cm. Weakly 

structured ca. 55-60 cm. 

SP-10; 200Nl321E: Near edge of dune. 

- At uphill side of artifact concentration. 

- Hit bedrock at 90 cmbs. 

- 2 flakes in 0-30 cmbs; 5 flakes in 30-60; 1 flake in 60-90. 
Soil: Loose sand to ca. 12 cm, then grades to compact with structure to 30 cm. Becomes 

weakly structured to ca. 60 cm. Grades to slightly structured to bedrock. A few 

pebble-sized SS clasts between 60-90 cm. 

SP- 1 1 ; 200Nl3 18E: On dune. 

- Uphill from concentration. 

- Dug to 100 cmbs. 

- No artifacts. 

Soil: Loose to slightly structured sand with alkali flecks to 60 cm, grading to 2.5YR314, 

very structured, very plastic, sticky. At 80 cm soil changes to a structured mediumlfmegrained sand. 

APPENDIX B 

LEVEL ASSIGNMENTS FOR FIELD SPECIMEN NUMBERS 

Excavation Unit A 

Grid 201N/330E 

FS Level 

1.1 I- II 

1.2 II 

1.3 II 

1.4 II 

Grid 201N/331E 

FS Level 

2.1 I -II 

2.2 II 

2.3 II 

2.4 II 

Excavation Unit B 

Grid 199N/327E 

FS Level 

3.1 I- II 

3.2 II 

3.3 II 

3.4 II 

3.5 II 

3.6 II 

Grid 198N/327E 

FS Level 

4.1 I - II 

4.2 II 

4.3 II 

4.4 II 

4.5 II 

4.6 II 

Excavation Unit C 

Grid 203N/331E 

FS Level 

5.1 I - II 

5.2 II 

5.3 II 

5.4 II 

5.5 II 

5.6 VII 

5.7 VII 

Grid 204N/331E 

FS Level 

6.1 I- II 

6.2 II 

6.3 II 

6.4 II 

6.5 VII 

6.6 VII 

6.7 VII 

129 
Excavation Unit D 

Grid 201N/325E 

FS Level 

7.1 I -II 

7.2 II 

7.3 II 

7.4 II 

7.5 II 

7.6 II 

7.7 II 

Grid 201N/326E 

FS Level 

8.1 I -II 

8.2 II 

8.3 II 

8.4 II 

8.5 II 

8.6 II 

8.7 II 

Excavation UnitE 

Grid 235N/319E 

FS Level 

11.1 I- II 

11.2 II 

11.3 II 

11.4 IV- V 

11.5 v 

11.6 V- VII 

11.7 VII 

11.8 VII 

11.9 VII 

Grid 236N/319E 

FS Level 

12.1 I -II 

12.1 II 

12.3 II- IV 

12.4 II- IV 

12.5 IV- V 

12.6 IV- V 

12.7 V- VII 

12.8 V- VII 

12.9 VII 

12.10 VII 

12.11 VII 

130 
Excavation Unit F 

Grid 235N/325E 

FS Level 

13.1 I- II 

13.2 II 

13.3 II 

13.4 II 

Grid 23 6N/3 25E 

FS Level 

20.1 I -II 

20.1 II 

20.3 II 

20.4 II 

20.5 II 

20.6 II 

20.7 IV 

20.8 v 

20.9 v 

20.10 v 

20.11 VII 

Excavation Unit G 

Grid 185N/323E 

FS Level 

21.1 I 

21.2 II 

21.3 II, III 

21.4 II, III 

21.5 III, IV 

21.6 III, IV 

21.7 III, IV 

21.8 IV 

21.9 IV 

21.10 v 

21.11 v 

21.12 V, VII 

Grid 185N/322E 

FS Level 

22.1 I 

22.2 I, II 

22.3 II, IV 

22.4 II, IV 

22.5 IV 

22.6 IV 

22.7 IV 

22.8 IV, V 

22.9 IV, V 

22.10 v 

22.11 V, VI 

22.12 V, VII 

131 
Shovel Probe 1, 191N/326E 

FS Level FS Level 

14.1 IV 14.4 v 

14.2 IV 14.5 v 

14.3 IV 14.6 v 

14.7 v 

Shovel Probe 2, 187N/323E 

FS Level FS Level 

15.1 II 15.5 IV 

15.2 II 15.6 IV 

15.3 II 15.7 IV 

15.4 IV 15.8 v 

Shovel Probe 3, 194N/320E 

FS Level FS Level 

16.1 II 16.4 v 

16.2 II 16.5 v 

16.3 II 16.6 v 

16.7 VII 

Shovel Probe 5, 235N/315E 

FS Level FS Level 

17.1 II 17.4 IV 

17.2 II 17.5 v 

17.3 II 17.6 v 

17.7 v 

Shovel Probe 8, 241N/319E: 18.1 to 18.9 =Level I (undifferentiated recent fill) 

Shovel Probe 10, 200N/321E: 19.1 to 19.9 =Level I (undifferentiated recent fill) 

Note: No Field Specimen numbers were assigned to Shovel Probes 4, 6, 7, 9, and 11 

because no artifacts were found in these units. 

132 
APPENDIX C 

NOTES ON IDENTIFIED MOLLUSC SPECIES 

Valloniidae 

Vallonia cyclophorella (Sterki). Fourteen specimens, 2 whole, remainder broken or immature 

(7.9.9, 9.9.9, 1 1.9.9, 12.1.9, 20.1.9, 21.4.9, 22.5.9 - one specimen; 1 1.4.9 - two specimens). 

Beneath bark, logs, stones; most widely distributed Vallonia in the mountain states, 

6,800- 1 1,000 ft., in Arizona, New Mexico, Nevada (Taylor 1960:94). 

Zonitidae 

Hawaiia rninuscula (Binney). Three specimens(2 1.1 1.9 - two specimens; 12.9.9 - one 

specimen). Drought resistant, under logs, sticks, stones, and in clumps of grass, both upland 

and floodplain; widely distributed in North America, also Hawaii, Japan. 

Succinidae 

Fragments found in three samples, not identifiable except to family. 

Pupillidae 

Gastrocopta cf. G. cristata (Pilsbry and Vanatta). One specimen, incomplete, aperture only 

(22.12.9). Drought resistant, sheltered areas, but woodland not needed; valleys, dry washes, 

where vegetation provides some cover; widely distributed in Southern Great Plains (Leonard, 

1959: 180; Taylor and Hibbard 1955; Getz and Hibbard 1965; Pierce 1987). 

Gastrocopta cf. G. pellucida hordeacella (Pilsbry). Four specimens, one with aperture only 

(1 1.7.9, 1 1.8.9, 1 1.9.9). Drought resistant; colonies small, in open areas near shrubs in Kansas. 

Leonard 1959: 180-18 1; Pierce 1987). 

Gastrocopta cf. G. pellucida pawidens (Sterki). Four specimens, broken, apertures only 

(1 1.5.9, 1 1.6.9, 12.8.9) [I'm not certain that hordeacella and parvidens are really distinct 

taxa--1 

Gastrocopta cf. G. pilsbryana (Sterki). Four specimens observed, (2 1.1.9, 2 1.3.9, 2 1.10.9, 

22.12.9). Common in the mountains in the south parts of Arizona, New Mexico. 

Gastrocopta cf. G. riograndensis (Pilsbry and Vanatta). One broken specimen, aperture only 

(21.3.9) 

Pupoides albilabris (Adams). One specimen (1 1.7.9). Can tolerate a wide range of conditions, 

including high summer temperatures; lives at bases of woody plants and even short grass. 

Widespread in eastern North America, westward to the Dakotas, to Arizona, and Mexico 

(Hibbard and Taylor 1960:129; Branson et al. 1962). 
Pupoides hordaceous (Gabb) Four specimens, 3 the apertural whorl only (1 1.1.9, 20.1.9, 

21.2.9, 22.8.9). Arid foothills, plateaus; NE limit is southern Nevada, SW Colorado. (Pilsbry 

1948). 

REFERENCES CITED 

Branson, B.A., John Taylor, and Constance Taylor 

1962 A Pleistocene Local Fauna from Caddo and Canadian Counties, Oklahoma. 

Oklahoma Geology Notes 22:280-295. 

Getz, L.L., and C.W. Hibbard 

1965 Molluscan Faunule from the Seymore Formation of Baylor and Knox Counties, 

Texas. Michigan Academy of Science Arts and Letters 5 0: 275 -297. 

Hibbard, C.W., and D.W. Taylor 

1960 Two Late Pleistocene Faunas from Southeastern Kansas. Museum of Paleontology 

Contributions No. 16. University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. 

Leonard, A.B. 

1959 Handbook of Gastropods in Kansas. Miscellaneous Publication No. 20. 

Department of Zoology, University of Kansas, Lawrence. 

Miller, B.B. 

1964 Additional Mollusks from the Late Pliocene Bender Local Fauna, Meade County, 

Kansas. Journal of Paleontology 3 8: 1 13 - 1 17. 

Pierce, H.G. 

1987 The Gastropods, with Notes on Other Invertebrates. In Late Quaternary Studies 

on the Southern High Plains, edited by E. Johnson, p. 41-48. Texas A & M 

University Press, College Station. 

Pilsbry, H.A. 

1948 Land Mollusca of North America. Monograph 3(2):521-1113. Academy of Natural 

Science, Philadelphia. 

Taylor, D.W. 

1960 Late Cenozoic Molluscan Fauna from the High Plains. Professional Paper No. 337. 

U.S. Geological Survey, Washington, D.C. 

Taylor, D.W., and C.W. Hibbard 

1955. A New Pleistocene Fauna from Harper County, Oklahoma. Oklahoma 

Geological Survey Circular 37:23. 
APPENDIX D 

VERTEBRATES 

FS 12.4.9 

Taxon: Unknown, microvert 

Element: Unknown, long bone 

Side: Unknown 

Portion: Unknown 

Development stage: Unknown 

Break types: Green 

Carnivore or rodent alteration: Unknown, possibly crushed 

Human alteration: None evident 

Weathering stage and sides: 1, all 

FS: 21.7.9 

Taxon: Unknown, microvert 

Element: Unknown, long bone 

Side: Unknown 

Portion: Shaft 

Development stage: Unknown 

Break types: Green 

Carnivore or rodent alteration: None evident 

Human alteration: Burned 

Weathering stage and sides: 1, all 

FS: 21.7.9 

Taxon: Unknown, microvert 

Element: Unknown, long bone 

Side: Unknown 

Portion: Shaft 

Development stage: Unknown 

Break types: Green 

Carnivore or rodent alteration: None evident 

Human alteration: Burned 

Weathering stage and sides: 1, all 

FS: 21.7.9 

Taxon: Squamata 

Element: Vertebral fragment 

Side: R 

Portion: Half of centrum, lateral process, and neural arch 
Development stage: Unknown 

Break types: Dry 

Carnivore or rodent alteration: None evident 

Human alteration: None evident 

Weathering stage and sides: 1, all 

FS: 21.7.9 

Taxon: Unknown, microvert 

Element: Unknown, flat bone 

Side: Unknown 

Portion: Unknown 

Development stage: Unknown 

Break types: Dry 

Carnivore or rodent alteration: Unknown, possibly crushed 

Human alteration: None evident 

Weathering stage and sides: 1, all 

FS: 21.9.9 

Taxon: Unknown, small mammal 

Element: Tooth fragment, unknown 

Side: Unknown 

Portion: Unknown, enamel wldentin 

Development stage: Unknown 

Break types: Unknown 

Carnivore or rodent alteration: None evident 

Human alteration: Burned 

Weathering stage and sides: 1, all 

FS: 21.9.9 

Taxon: Unknown, microvert 

Element: Unknown, irregular bone 

Side: Unknown 

Portion: Unknown 

Development stage: Unknown 

Break types: Green 

Carnivore or rodent alteration: Unknown, possibly crushed 

Human alteration: None evident 

Weathering stage and sides: 1, all 
FS: 21.9.9 

Taxon: Unknown, microvert 

Element: Unknown, irregular 

Side: Unknown 

Portion: Unknown 

Development stage: Unknown 

Break types: Dry 

Carnivore or rodent alteration: Unknown, possibly crushed 

Human alteration: None evident 

Weathering stage and sides: 2, all 

FS: 21.10.9 

Taxon: Unknown, microvert 

Element: Unknown, irregular 

Side: Unknown 

Portion: Unknown 

Development stage: Unknown 

Break types: Green 

Carnivore or rodent alteration: Unknown, possibly crushed 

Human alteration: None evident 

Weathering stage and sides: 1, all 

FS: 21.11.9 

Taxon: Unknown, microvert 

Element: Unknown, long 

Side: Unknown 

Portion: Shaft 

Development stage: Unknown 

Break types: Green 

Carnivore or rodent alteration: Rodent gnawed 

Human alteration: None evident 

Weathering stage and sides: 1, all 

FS: 21.11.9 

Taxon: Unknown, microvert 

Element: Unknown, irregular 

Side: Unknown 

Portion: Unknown 

Development stage: Unknown 

Break types: Green 

Carnivore or rodent alteration: None evident 
Human alteration: None evident 

Weathering stage and sides: 1, all 

FS: 21.12.9 

Taxon: Unknown, microvert 

Element: Unknown, irregular 

Side: Unknown 

Portion: Unknown 

Development stage: Unknown 

Break types: Green 

Carnivore or rodent alteration: Unknown, possibly crushed 

Human alteration: None evident 

Weathering stage and sides: 1, all 

FS: 22.8.9 

Taxon: Rodent 

Element: Cheek tooth, five fragments 

Side: Unknown 

Portion: Enamel and dentin 

Development stage: Unknown 

Break types: Dry 

Carnivore or rodent alteration: None evident 

Human alteration: None evident 

Weathering stage and sides: 3, all 

FS: 22.8.9 

Taxon: Microvert 

Element: Unknown, long 

Side: Unknown 

Portion: Shaft 

Development stage: Unknown 

Break types: Green 

Carnivore or rodent alteration: None evident 

Human alteration: None evident 

Weathering stage and sides: 1, all 

FS: 22.8.9 

Taxon: Small mammal 

Element: Unknown, long 

Side: Unknown 
Portion: Shaft 

Development stage: Unknown 

Break types: Dry 

Carnivore or rodent alteration: None evident 

Human alteration: Charred 

Weathering stage and sides: 2, all 

FS: 22.8.9 

Taxon: Small mammal 

Element: Unknown, flat 

Side: Unknown 

Portion: Unknown 

Development stage: Unknown 

Break types: Dry 

Carnivore or rodent alteration: None evident 

Human alteration: Charred 

Weathering stage and sides: 2, all 

FS: 22.9.9 

Taxon: Small mammal 

Element: Unknown, flat 

Side: Unknown 

Portion: Unknown 

Development stage: Unknown 

Break types: Dry 

Carnivore or rodent alteration: Unknown, possibly crushed 

Human alteration: None evident 

Weathering stage and sides: 2, all 

FS: 22.9.9 

Taxon: Small mammal 

Element: Unknown, long 

Side: Unknown 

Portion: Unknown 

Development stage: Unknown 

Break types: Dry 

Carnivore or rodent alteration: None evident 

Human alteration: None evident 

Weathering stage and sides: 4, all 

FS 22.9.9 

Taxon: Small mammal 
Element: Unknown, alveolus 

Side: Unknown 

Portion: Unknown 

Development state: Unknown, erupted 

Break types: Unknown 

Carnivore or rodent alteration: Unknown, possibly crushed 

Human alteration: None evident 

Weathering stage and sides: 3, all 

FS: 22.9.9 

Taxon: Small mammal 

Element: Possibly rib 

Side: Unknown 

Portion: Proximal, wlmargins missing 

Development stage: Unknown 

Break types: Unknown 

Carnivore or rodent alteration: Unknown, possibly crushed 

Human alteration: None evident 

Weathering stage and sides: 1, 4 opposite 

FS: 22.9.9 

Taxon: Small mammal 

Element: Rib 

Side: Unknown 

Portion: Proximal 

Development stage: Unknown 

Break types: Dry 

Carnivore or rodent alteration: Unknown, possibly crushed 

Human alteration: None evident 

Weathering stage and sides: 2, all 

FS: 22.10.9 

Taxon: Small mammal 

Element: Unknown, long 

Side: Unknown 

Portion: Shaft 

Development stage: Unknown 

Break types: Unknown 

Carnivore or rodent alteration: Unknown, possibly crushed 

Human alteration: None evident 

Weathering stage and sides: 3, all 
FS 22.1 1.9 

Taxon: Microvert 

Element: Irregular, unknown 

Side: Unknown 

Portion: Unknown 

Development stage: Unknown 

Break types: Unknown 

Carnivore or rodent alteration: Unknown, possibly crushed 

Human alteration: None evident 

Weathering stage and sides: 4, all 

FS: 22.11.9 

Taxon: Microvert 

Element: Unknown, irregular bone 

Side: Unknown 

Portion: Unknown 

Development stage: Unknown 

Break types: Green 

Carnivore or rodent alteration: None evident 

Human alteration: Burned 

Weathering stage and sides: 1, all 

FS: 22.11.9 

Taxon: Microvert 

Element: Unknown, long bone 

Side: Unknown 

Portion: Shaft 

Development stage: Unknown 

Break types: Green 

Carnivore or rodent alteration: Unknown, possibly crushed 

Human alteration: None evident 

Weathering stage and sides: 1, all 

FS: 22.12.9 

Taxon: Small mammal 

Element: Unknown, long bone 

Side: Unknown 

Portion: Shaft 

Development stage: Unknown 

Break types: Green 

Carnivore or rodent alteration: None evident 

Human alteration: Charred 

Weathering stage and sides: 1, all 
FS: 22.12.9 

Taxon: Small mammal 

Element: Unknown, long bone 

Side: Unknown 

Portion: Shaft 

Development stage: Unknown 

Break types: Dry 

Carnivore or rodent alteration: None evident 

Human alteration: Charred 

Weathering stage and sides: 1, all 

FS: 2.2.2 

Taxon: Sylvilagus 

Element: Mandible 

Side: L 

Portion: missing angle and ascending ramus 

Development stage: Juvenile, permanent PI3 and deciduous MI123 

Break types: Unknown 

Carnivore or rodent alteration: Unknown, possibly crushed 

Human alteration: None evident 

Weathering stage and sides: 2, all 

FS: 2.6.1 

Taxon: Rodent (possibly Neotoma) 

Element: Incisor 111 

Side: L 

Portion: Whole 

Development stage: Unknown 

Breat types: None 

Carnivore or rodent alteration: None evident 

Human alteration: None evident 

Weathering stage and sides: 2, all 

FS: 21.9.1 

Taxon: Mammal 

Element: Unknown, long bone 

Side: Unknown 

Portion: Shaft 

Development stage: Unknown 

Break types: Green 

Carnivore or rodent alteration: None evident 

Human alteration: Slightly charred 

Weathering stage and sides: 2, all 
FS: 22.7.1 

Taxon: amphibian, approx size of R.M. toad 

Element: Femur 

Side: Unknown 

Portion: Shaft 

Development stage: Unknown 

Break types: Dry 

Carnivore or rodent alteration: None evident 

Human alteration: None evident 

Weathering stage and sides: 2, all 

FS: 22.8.1 

Taxon: Small mammal, probably rodent 

Element: Squamosal 

Side: R 

Portion: Margins partly missing 

Development stage: Unknown 

Break types: Dry 

Carnivore or rodent alteration: Unknown 

Human alteration: None evident 

Weathering stage and sides: 2, 1 opposite 

FS: 22.8.1 

Taxon: Rodent (medium-sized) 

Element: Maxilla 

Side: Both 

Portion: Rostrum 

Development stage: Unknown 

Break types: Unknown 

Carnivore or rodent alteration: Unknown, possibly crushed 

Human alteration: None evident 

Weathering stage and sides: 2, all 

REPORT CERTIFICATION 

Icertifythat "Archeological Investigations at Site 42SA20286, Canyonland

National Park, Utah1' by Steve Dominquez 

-- - 

has been reviewed against the criteria contained in 43CFR Part 7 (a)(l) and upon recommendation of the Regional Archeologist has been classified as 

available 

w&&#U 8/15/94 

Regional Director Date 

Classification Key Words: 

"Available"-Making the report available to the public meets the criteria of 43CFR 7.18 (a) (1). 

"Available (deletions)"-Making the report available with selected information on site locations 

andlor site characteristics deleted meets the criteria of 43CFR 7.18 (a)(l). A list of pages, 

maps, paragraphs, etc. that must be deleted for each report in this category is attached. 

"Not Available"-Making the report available does not meet the criteria of 43CFR (a)(l). 

s