cultural resource sample survey of river ranches, de baca

Cultural Resource Sample Surveyof

River Ranches,De Baca County, New Mexico

Woods Canyon Archaeological Consultants, Inc.May 2006

Cultural Resource Sample Survey

of

River Ranches Development Project

De Baca County, New Mexico

by

Jerry Fetterman

Woods Canyon Archaeological Consultants, Inc.

PO Box 253

Yellow Jacket, CO 81335

Submitted to

New Mexico Land and Ranches

P. O. Box 448, 113 Abeytia Avenue, Suite A

Socorro, New Mexico 87801

NMCRIS Number 98680

May 2006

i

TABLE OF CONTENTS

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 Personnel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2CHAPTER 2: ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 Topography and Elevation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 Geology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 Hydrology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 Flora . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 Fauna . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4CHAPTER 3: CULTURAL SETTING . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 PaleoIndian Period . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 Archaic Period . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 Puebloan Period . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 Protohistoric and Spanish Colonial Period . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 Mexican Period. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 American Period . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6CHAPTER 4: INVENTORY METHODS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 Literature Search . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 Sample Survey Design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 Field Methods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9CHAPTER 5: RESULTS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 Isolated Occurrences . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 Ax-cut Trees . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 Sites . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13CHAPTER 6: SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57

REFERENCES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58

List of Tables

Table 4-1. Results of Literature Search . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8Table 5-1. Isolated Occurrences Located on Rio Ranches Development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11Table 5-2. Cultural Resource Sites Located on Ranches Development. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13Table 6-1. Summary of Project Impacts, and NRHP and Management Recommendations . . . . . . . . . . . . 57

ii

List of Figures

Figure 1-1. Map illustrating location of River Ranches development. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1Figure 1-2. Topographic map showing project area in relation to local topographic features. . . . . . . . 2Figure 2-1. Photographs of Pecos River Valley (left) and uplands (right) in project area. . . . . . . . . . . 3Figure 2-2. Map showing surficial geologic deposits in project area. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3Figure 3-1. Map showing Bosque Redondo/Fort Sumner and possible extent of reservation. . . . . . . 6Figure 4-1. Map showing location of areas surveyed on River Ranches project. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8Figure 5-1a. Topographic map showing location of isolates on River Ranches project. . . . . . . . . . . 10Figure 5-1b. Topographic map showing location of ax-cut tree isolates on River Ranches project. . 12Figure 5-2. Map showing location of sites on Rio Ranches project.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14Figure 5-3. Aerial photograph showing components of town of Salado. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15Figure 5-4. Plan maps of northeast, northwest and southwest portions of Salado. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16Figure 5-5. Photograph of Structure 5 looking north; note Pecos River Valley in distance. . . . . . . . . 17Figure 5-6. Photograph of Structure 11 looking east. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18Figure 5-7. Photograph of Structure 15 looking west. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19Figure 5-8. Photograph of Structure 17 looking south; note Pecos River Valley in distance.. . . . . . . 20Figure 5-9. Plan map of site LA152328. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21Figure 5-10. Plan map of site LA152329. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22Figure 5-11. Plan map of site LA152330. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23Figure 5-12. Plan map of site LA152331. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24Figure 5-13. Photographs of axes (top) and axe-cut juniper tree (bottom) at site LA152331. . . . . . . 25Figure 5-14. Plan map of site LA152332. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26Figure 5-15. Plan map of site LA152333. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27Figure 5-16. Plan map of site LA152334. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28Figure 5-17. Photograph of Structure 1 at site LA152334.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28Figure 5-18. Plan map of site LA152335. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30Figure 5-19. Plan map of site LA152336 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31Figure 5-20. Plan map of site LA152337. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32Figure 5-21. Plan map of site LA152338. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33Figure 5-22. Plan map of site LA152339. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34Figure 5-23. Plan map of site LA152340. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35Figure 5-24. Plan map of site LA152341. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37Figure 5-25. Plan map of site LA152342. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38Figure 5-26. Plan map of site LA152343. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39Figure 5-27. Plan map of site LA152344. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40Figure 5-28. Plan map of site LA152345. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41Figure 5-29. Plan map of site LA152346. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43Figure 5-30. Plan map of site LA152347. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45Figure 5-31. Plan map of site LA152348. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47Figure 5-32. Plan map of site LA152349. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48Figure 5-33. Plan map of site LA152350. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49Figure 5-34. Plan map of site LA152351. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50Figure 5-35. Plan map of site LA152352. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51Figure 5-36. Plan map of site LA152353. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52Figure 5-37. Plan map of site LA152354. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54Figure 5-38. Plan map of site LA152355. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55Figure 5-39. Plan map of site LA152356. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56

1

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION

At the request of Dan Datolla of New Mexico Land and Ranches, Woods Canyon Archaeological Consultants, Inc. (Woods Canyon) conducted a cultural resource sample survey of the proposed River Ranches development in De Baca County, New Mexico. This development is located in the Pecos River Valley, approximately 75 miles east of the New Mexico-Texas border (see Figure 1-1).

Figure 1-1. Map illustrating location of River Ranches development.

River Ranches is a land development project that will divide a 1,750-acre ranch into 99 separate parcels of 10-20 acres each. In accordance with both De Baca County subdivision ordinances and State regulations, a sample survey was designed (Fetterman 2006) for and undertaken at the proposed development; the results are presented in this report.

project area

PecosRiver Valley

LLano Estacado

SandiaMts

RioGrande

Valley

SangredeCristo

Mts

2

River Ranches is located north of the confluence of the Pecos River and Salado Creek, just southwest of Lake Sumner (see Figure 1-2). The project area encompasses all or parts of nine sections: Sections 2, 3, 4, 5, 9, and 10 of Township 4 North, Range 24 East and Sections 31, 32 and 33 of Township 5 North, Range 24 East.

Figure 1-2. Topographic map showing project area in relation to local topographic features.

Personnel

The archaeological reconnaissance was conducted by Jerry Fetterman, Peter Rohman, Bryan Shanks, and Reed Larson during February and March, 2006.

3

CHAPTER 2: ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING

The River Ranches development is located in the Pecos River Valley and on the Diamond A plain, east of the Llano Estacado. Originating in the Sangre de Christo Mountains, the Pecos River flows south and eventually empties into the Rio Grande. The Llano Estacado is a vast homogenous plateau, generally characterized by little relief, internal drainages, and elevations ranging from 1158 m (3800 ft) above mean sea level to 1524 m (5000 ft) (Stuart and Gauthier 1981).

Topography and Elevation

The topography and elevation of the project area varies by only several hundred feet between the flood plain (4140’) of the Pecos River (see Figure 2-1 left) and the dissected ridges (4420’) above the river (see Figure 2-1 right).

Figure 2-1. Photographs of Pecos River Valley (left) and uplands (right) in project area.

Geology

The flood plain is formed in the Pleiocene Grayburg and Queen Formations composed of sandstone, gypsum, anhydrite, dolomite, and red mudstone (see Figure 2-2 “Pgq”). The upland, northern ridges are composed of Quaternary alluvial deposits, calcic soils and eolian cover sediments (Figure 2-2 “Qoa”). The alluvial deposits have covered the ground with millions of cobbles of quartzite and chert. These cobble beds have attracted people for thousands of years, prehistorically for the purpose of obtaining stone tool materials and historically for the purpose of commercial gravel mining. On the lower slopes where the Quaternary deposits have eroded away, the ridges derive from the Santa Rosa Formation of the Triassic Chinle Group (Figure 2-2 “@s”). Exposures of Santa Rosa sandstones form tabular blocks widely utilized for construction of Historic period features (Four Corners 2006).

Figure 2-2. Map showing surficial geologic deposits in project area.

@g

@s

Pgq

Qa

Qoa

Qoa

Qp

Lake Sumner

Qp

Qoa

@g

Lake Sumner

Pecos R

iverS

alado

Creek

4

Hydrology

The Pecos River provides a permanent source of water, while Salado Creek is an intermittent stream. Several springs are located just west of the project area.

Flora

The project area is situated in the Desert Scrubland vegetation community. Overstory consists of juniper and understory includes mesquite, sumac, snakeweed, nolina, narrow-leaf yucca, prickly pear cactus, side-oats grama and cholla. In the riparian areas along the Pecos River are cottonwoods, sedges, cattails, willow and tamarisk. Years of grazing by sheep and cattle have severely reduced the once-abundant grasslands.

Fauna

A variety of mammals inhabit the project area, including mule deer, cottontail and jack rabbit, antelope, coyotes, foxes and pack rats. Avian species include owls, hawks, ducks and various smaller birds.

5

CHAPTER 3: CULTURAL SETTING

This chapter provides a brief summary of the cultural history of the project area and the upper Middle Pecos River Valley. An extensive cultural overview of the area has recently been completed (Brown and Gregory 2006) and interested readers are encouraged to consult this excellent synopsis.

PaleoIndian Period (ca. 11,000 - 5500 B.C.)

The first known human occupation of the region occurred during the PaleoIndian Period, sometime around 11,000 B.C. The PaleoIndians hunted now-extinct megafauna (e.g., mammoth, bison, horse, camel) using atlatls tipped with distinctive spear points, including points typed as Clovis and Folsom. In addition, they exploited smaller game and undoubtedly gathered a variety of vegetal foods, although evidence for this is sparse.

PaleoIndian sites are generally rare, but several are located within 100 miles of the project area. The type site for the earliest PaleoIndian occupation is located near Clovis, New Mexico, approximately 70 miles southeast of the project area. Five PaleoIndian spear points have been located elsewhere in the middle Pecos River Valley, and two points have been located near Lake Sumner (Meade 2006).

Archaic Period (ca. 5500 B.C. - A.D. 1)

During the late PaleoIndian Period, a drying and warming trend contributed to the extinction of the megafauna, and the subsequent changes in human subsistence patterns are the basis for the succeeding Archaic Period. It is believed that, compared to the PaleoIndian people, the Archaic people incorporated more plant foods into their diet, although they continued to hunt and eat both large and small game.

Based on analysis of spear point typologies, it appears that the middle Pecos Valley was utilized by various groups of people. Spear points found on middle valley Archaic sites suggest that the area was utilized by people from or affiliated with cultures in the Southwest (Jelinek 1967), the Plains (Sebastian and Larralde 1989), and southwest Texas (Laumbach 1980).

Archaic sites recorded near the project area consist primarily of surface scatters of flaked lithic debris. A small number of sites contain surface features and groundstone items. Most of the sites are limited lithic procurement areas or seasonally occupied camps (Kemrer 1994).

Puebloan Period (A.D. 1 - 1400)

The Puebloan Period culture was based on a sedentary lifestyle supported primarily by agricultural production. Agricultural products were introduced to the Archaic people as early as 2000 B.C., but significant changes in lifestyle were not seen until after A.D. 1.

The project area is located on the eastern fringes of the Puebloan world. To the north and west, many Puebloan villages were established prehistorically near the head of the Pecos River, in the Gran Quivira Region and along the Rio Grande. To the south along the Pecos River from Ft. Sumner to Roswell, evidence of a local variant of Puebloan culture has been identified (Jelinek 1967). Here, pithouses and surface architecture are found with both Anasazi and Jornado Mogollon ceramics. Further south along the Pecos, south of Roswell, and in the Rio Hondo/Capitan areas, sites identified as belonging to the Jornado Mogollon variant of the Puebloan are common.

In the project and Sumner Lake areas, evidence of Puebloan occupation consists primarily of ceramic sherds in the surface assemblages of 28 sites. Six of these sites also contain architectural remains, but these sites do not appear to be large-scale residential sites, and there is little evidence that the area saw widespread adoption of agriculture. These six sites all date between A.D. 1200-1300. In general, it appears that the area was utilized by Pueblo people who were either traveling through or conducting logistical forays.

Protohistoric and Spanish Colonial Period

Sometime before 1400, the Puebloan groups that utilized the middle Pecos Valley abandoned much of the region and moved to the Rio Grande and Gran Quivira area. The valley was then used by more nomadic groups from the Plains, such as the Apache and Comanche, who hunted bison and other fauna

6

and gathered floral resources. These groups maintained trading relationships with the Puebloan groups, trading meat, hides, tallow, suet, and salt to the Pueblos for cotton blankets, pottery, maize, and turquoise (Sebastian and Larralde 1989).

In 1541, Francisco Vazquez de Cornado entered into New Mexico and the Spanish Colonial Period began. For the next several hundred years the project area was peripheral to most Spanish activities, except for incursions into the area for exploration or reprisals for raids from nomadic groups.

Mexican Period

After Mexico declared its independence from Spain in 1821, Hispanic settlement in New Mexico increased. The Mexican government, like the previous Spanish one, provided land grants to encourage settlement of areas peripheral to the Rio Grande Valley. North of the project area, two such Hispanic settlements were established on or near the Pecos River. The first Hispanic settlement was Anton Chico, established in 1822 near Santa Rosa. The second settlement was along Alamogordo Creek, established in 1838 approximately 10 miles north of the project area. Jose Sutton, who obtained the grant for Alamogordo Creek, had hoped to use the lands for grazing sheep but later gave up due to raids from the local Apachean residents (Parsons 1981:18).

American Period

In 1848, the New Mexico territory came under control of the United States, and lands not held at that time under land grants were opened for settlement. In the vicinity of the project area, two such settlements were established: the towns of Salado (1849) and Guadalupe (prior to 1885) (Parsons 1981). Although the Anglo and Hispanic occupants of the area were willing to “settle down”, the Apache had no such intentions. They roamed the area hunting and raiding settlements established on their land. To force the Apache to quit raiding settlements, and give up their way of life, the US government built several military forts in eastern New Mexico (Perlman 1996: 17) and carried out an aggressive military campaign.

In 1862 the Mescalero Apache band, along with members of the Jicarilla and Mimbres Apache bands, surrendered and were forced to settle at Bosque Redondo, a newly established reservation along the Pecos River (see Figure 3-1). By March 1863, 400 Apaches had been interned at Bosque Redondo (Pratt and Scurlock 1989:78). Historical uncertainty exists as to the actual size of the reservation, but it may have covered an area 40 miles square, incorporating the project area, the towns of Salado and Guadalupe, and much of the land now covered by Sumner Lake (Perlman 1996:19). The Apache at Bosque Redondo were overseen by soldiers stationed at the newly established Fort Sumner.

Figure 3-1. Map showing Bosque Redondo/Fort Sumner (in circle) and possible extent of reservation.

project area

Bosque Redondo and Fort Sumner

Pecos River floodplain

Possible Reservation Boundary

7

In 1863, the US government began a campaign to forcibly move the Navajo from western New Mexico to Bosque Redondo. By the spring of 1864, the main group of Navajo were on their way to Fort Sumner, in what is known as the “Long Walk”. By 1865 there were 8,491 Navajos at the fort. Conditions were horrible, disease was widespread, crops were ruined by pests, hail, and drought, and the tools, seeds, and clothing provided by the government were inadequate. “To make matters worse, the Navajo and Mescalero were enemies and placing them on the same reservation only increased their hostility” (Perlman 1996:19).

The Navajo and Apache were permitted to settle almost wherever they chose, and they roamed the reservation in search of game and wood. However, game was scarce, it was forbidden to cut the cottonwood trees, and juniper was abundant only in the northern portion of the reservation.

Conditions never improved on the reservation. In 1865 most of the Apache escaped from the reservation, and by 1867, government officials admitted that their solution to the “Indian problem” had failed. In 1868, the US Government and Navajo leaders signed a treaty and gave the Navajos a reservation in their traditional lands mostly in northeast Arizona.

With the “Indian problem” controlled, the area was opened to cattle ranches and Anglo and Hispanic settlement. The era of cattle empires in southeastern New Mexico began in 1866 and lasted about 25 years. All along the Pecos River, small towns were built. The towns residents were mostly subsistence farmers who grew dryland crops and tended small herds of sheep.

The building of the railroad through the area in 1905 provided a means of getting produce to market and easy mechanism for new settlers to enter the area. Many people came to the area to homestead from Texas, Oklahoma, and Arkansas after the building of the railroad.

8

CHAPTER 4: INVENTORY METHODS

Literature Search

A literature search was conducted online of the State Register of Historic Places, ARMS database, and the ARC-IMS database (December 16, 2006). In addition to the ARMS search, a check was conducted at the library at Fort Sumner. Within the general project area, three sites (LA001560, LA141972, and LA141975) had been previously located and six investigations had been previously conducted (see Table 4-1).

Table 4-1. Results of Literature Search

NMCRIS #

Project Name Reference Findings

- Our Mid-Pecos History Living Water: The Families and Events - from Fort to Future

Parsons 1981 History of LA001560

86041 Fort Sumner Human Systems Research 2003

LA141972, LA141975

- Los Ojitos Site Record (1934) Site form on file at Laboratory of Anthropology

LA001560

- Sumner Lake Cultural Resource Inventory Kemrer 1994

87660 NRHP Evaluation of 15 Archaeological Properties at Lake Sumner, Guadalupe and De Baca Counties, New Mexico

Lintz, et al., 2004

46494 Class III Cultural Resource Survey at Sumner Lake, Guadalupe and De Baca Counties, New Mexico

Slaughter, et al., 1996

Sample Survey Design

The sample survey was designed by Woods Canyon in consultation with the New Mexico State Historic Preservation Office. Since construction of access roads to individual house lots will constitute the heaviest project impact, it was decided to survey these proposed roads (to a width of 600’) as the primary means of sampling. In addition, prime locations for sites were investigated, and all previously recorded sites were revisited. A total of 784.60 acres surveyed or (44.8%) were surveyed for the Rio Ranches development (see Figure 4-1).

Figure 4-1. Map showing location of areas surveyed on River Ranches project.

9

Field Methods

The center line of each proposed road was indicated on a GIS file which imported into a portable GPS receiver. Ground visibility was excellent, due to the almost non-existent vegetative cover.

Archaeological survey was conducted by three archaeologists walking parallel to the center line of each proposed road. When a cultural resource was located, it was first determined to be either a site or an isolated occurrence. If a cultural resource consisted of more than 20 items in a 100 square meter area, it was considered an archaeological site; if it was less, it was considered an isolated occurrence.

Sites

Sites were documented on New Mexico State Historic Preservation Site Forms, photographed, mapped and located with a GPS unit and GIS technology. Artifacts were analyzed in the field, photographed if appropriate, and left in place.

After the inventory, recommendations were made to New Mexico Land and Ranches for avoidance of significant sites. The proposed roads were redesigned to avoid these cultural resources, and the new routes were field-checked by an archaeologist from Woods Canyon.

Of the three sites identified during the literature search, two (LA141972, LA141975) are located in the isolated northeast parcel of Rio Ranches where no road development is planned. These sites were examined in the field but are not further discussed in this report, as they appear non-eligible and are not associated with any project roads.

Isolated Occurrences

Isolated occurrences were described in text, photographed if appropriate, and located with a GPS unit and GIS technology. Artifacts were analyzed in the field and left in place.

10

CHAPTER 5: RESULTS

Isolated Occurrences

The cultural resource survey located 65 isolated occurrences (see Figure 5-1 and Table 5-1), not including ax-cut trees, which will be discussed separately. The majority of isolated occurrences are single artifacts or small artifact clusters, typically numbering 10 items or less. Isolated occurrences are considered non-significant and ineligible for inclusion on the National Register of Historic Places.

64

63

9

7

6

4

3

1

65

62

60

59

58

57

56

55

54

53

52

51

48

47

46 43

42

39

38

35

33

32

30

29

28

2726

25

23

22

21

20

19

18

17

1615

1312

11

8

5

2

61

50

49

45 4441

40

37

3634

31

24

14

10

Figure 5-1a. Topographic map showing location of isolates on River Ranches project.

11

IO Description Size (m)1 quartzite flake tool; 6 flakes (chert: 0-3-2; quartzite: 0-0-1) 10 x 102 2 modern sandstone hunting blinds 5 x 153 modern sandstone hunting blind 2 x 54 2 chert cores; 5 flakes (chert: 2-0-3) 10 x 205 2 chert cores; 3 flakes (chert: 3-0-0) 5 x 56 chert biface; 11 flakes (chert: 5-6-0) 20 x 307 chert biface; 6 flakes (chert: 4-2-0) 10 x 108 quartzite: cobble tool, core, flake tool; chert core; 4 flakes (chert: 0-2-0; quartzite: 0-2-0) 35 x 15 9 chert flake tool; 1 flake (chert: 0-1-0) 20 x 510 quartzite core 1 x 111 retouched quartzite flake; 4 flakes (quartzite: 2-2-0) 2 x 212 quartzite flake tool; 19 flakes (chert: 0-0-19) 10 x 1513 chopper 3 x 314 chert biface 1 x 115 quartzite retouched flake, chert biface 5 x 2016 quartzite scraper 1 x 117 quartzite bifacial chopper 1 x 118 chert chopper; quartzite chopper; 2 chert cores; 2 flakes (chert: 0-2-0) 10 x 2519 6 chert core; 10 flakes (chert: 1-8-1) 15 x 2520 6 chert core; 9 flakes (chert: 4-4-1) 15 x 3021 chert middle stage biface, 7 chert cores (5 tested); 13 flakes (chert: 3-6-4) 25 x 1022 3 chert cores; 7 flakes (chert: 3-4-0) 10 x 1523 5 chert cores (2 tested); 12 flakes (chert: 4-5-0; quartzite: 2-1-0) 30 x 4024 5 chert cores (4 tested); quartzite tested core; 14 flakes (chert: 6-6-1; quartzite: 0-1-0) 15 x 2025 chert biface 1 x 126 chert core; chert biface; 2 flakes (chert: 0-2-0) 5 x 1027 chert biface 1 x 128 old stake with 2 angle notch cuts, snare 1 x 129 2 strand barb wire with flat barb spaced 5”, 2 fence strands tied to rocks, posts gone 1 x 2030 4 cores (2 tested); 8 flakes (6-2-0) 30 x 1031 6 chert cores (2 tested); 6 flakes (chert: 2-4-0) 20 x 1032 3 chert cores (1 tested); 13 flakes (chert: 7-5-1) 30 x 1033 single bit metal axe 1 x 134 quartzite flake 1 x 135 siltstone flake 1 x 136 quartzite flake 1 x 137 quartzite uniface 1 x 138 quartzite biface 1 x 139 quartzite chopper 1 x 140 quartzite flake 1 x 141 quartzite flake 1 x 142 quartzite scraper 1 x 143 quartzite scraper 1 x 144 quartzite scraper 1 x 145 chert core 1 x 146 chert utilized flake; quartzite retouched shatter; 12 flakes (quartzite: 0-0-1; chert: 4-3-2); applied lip SCA glass 50 x 3047 purple glass, brown glass, brown glass bottom fragment with “ABCO 69” 3 x 348 quartzite flake tool; 6 flakes (quartzite: 0-3-2; chert: 0-1-0) 10 x 1049 4 flakes (chert: 4-0-0) 5 x 150 polished white ware bowl body sherd with carbon streak and sand temper; chert flake tool; flake (chert: 0-1-0) 30 x 551 unifacially worked quartzite cobble; chert uniface; quartzite core; siltstone core; 13 flakes (chert: 1-4-3;

quartzite: 0-2-0; siltstone: 0-3-0)40 x 30

52 2 tested cobbles; 3 flakes (chert: 0-2-1) 15 x 553 5 flakes (chert: 0-1-4) 20 x 554 3 flakes (chert: 1-1-0; quartzite: 0-1-0) 5 x 555 siltstone core; chert core; chert biface; 2 flakes (chert: 2-0-0) 10 x 1056 chert biface; 3 flakes (chert: 0-2-1) 10 x 557 quartzite uniface; chert tested cobble; flake (quartzite: 0-1-0) 10 x 1058 quartzite tested cobble; chert core; 3 flakes (chert: 0-2-1) 10 x 2059 2 quartzite cores; chert core; siltstone biface; one-hand mano; 2 flakes (chert: 0-2-0) 10 x 2060 5 chert cores (4 bifacial); flake (chert: 0-1-0) 25 x 1061 4 one-hand manos; 6 flakes (chert: 0-3-0; quartzite: 0-3-0) 60 x 1062 2 chert tested cobbles; 10 flakes (chert: 3-7-0) 15 x 563 2 cobble cores (1 chert, 1 quartzite) 5 x 564 fragment of possible mano; 1 flake (chert: 0-1-0) 5 x 665 quartzite: scraper, chopper/ax, 2 cores; 10 flakes (chert: 1-3-0; quartzite: 0-4-2) 50 x 30

Table 5-1. Isolated Occurrences Located on Rio Ranches Development

12

LA152331

Legend

ax-cut tree

site

survey area

project area

Ax-cut Trees

A total of 79 ax-cut juniper trees were noted on the survey. Most of these were clustered in three locations (see Figure 5-1b). These ax-cut trees are thought to represent wood-gathering by either (1) the Apache and Navajo when they were confined to the Bosque Redondo reservation during the l860’s-1880’s, or (2) Hispanic settlers. One cluster was found in association with several stone axes and given a site designation LA152331.

Figure 5-1b. Topographic map showing location of ax-cut tree isolates on River Ranches project.

13

Sites

The cultural resource survey located 30 sites which represent 32 components: 22 prehistoric (five Archaic, one Anasazi, 16 Unknown) and ten historic (eight Hispanic, two Navajo). The prehistoric site assemblage is dominated by lithic scatters of unknown prehistoric cultural affiliation. Most of these sites were related to lithic procurement. The historic site assemblage represents the late 1800’s Hispanic occupation of the area, including the town of Salado, and the Navajo internment at Bosque Redondo.

The following section provides data on each of the 30 sites. Table 5-2 lists the cultural affiliation and site type of each site. Brief descriptions of each site are listed below, and site forms with additional data and photographs are attached.

Table 5-2. Cultural Resource Sites Located on Ranches Development

Site Cultural Affiliation Site TypeLA001560 Unknown Prehistoric; Hispanic Artifact Scatter; Multiple ResidenceLA152328 Anasazi Artifact ScatterLA152329 Hispanic Simple Feature(s)LA152330 Hispanic Single ResidenceLA152331 Navajo Artifact Scatter with FeaturesLA152332 Unknown Prehistoric Artifact ScatterLA152333 Unknown Prehistoric Artifact ScatterLA152334 Hispanic Multiple ResidenceLA152335 Unknown Prehistoric Artifact ScatterLA152336 Unknown Prehistoric Artifact ScatterLA152337 Unknown Prehistoric Artifact ScatterLA152338 Unknown Prehistoric Artifact ScatterLA152339 Archaic Artifact ScatterLA152340 Unknown Prehistoric Artifact ScatterLA152341 Archaic Artifact Scatter with FeaturesLA152342 Archaic Artifact ScatterLA152343 Archaic Artifact ScatterLA152344 Unknown Prehistoric Artifact ScatterLA152345 Unknown Prehistoric; Hispanic Artifact Scatter with Features; Simple Features (s)LA152346 Archaic Artifact Scatter with FeaturesLA152347 Navajo Ranching/AgriculturalLA152348 Hispanic Ranching/AgriculturalLA152349 Unknown Prehistoric Artifact ScatterLA152350 Unknown Prehistoric Artifact ScatterLA152351 Hispanic Single ResidenceLA152352 Unknown Prehistoric Artifact ScatterLA152353 Unknown Prehistoric Artifact ScatterLA152354 Hispanic Ranching/AgriculturalLA152355 Unknown Prehistoric Artifact Scatter with FeaturesLA152356 Unknown Prehistoric Artifact Scatter

15

LA1560

Site Description: The site consists of the remains of Salado, an historic Hispanic town, and a small prehistoric lithic scatter, located on a western bluff above the Pecos River just north of its confluence with Salado Creek (see Figure 5-3). The town contains the remains of at least 20 structures, as well as plazas, middens, features, and a cemetery (see Figure 5-4). The prehistoric component is composed of several dozen debitage flakes located in the northern portion of the site.

Figure 5-3. Aerial photograph showing components of town of Salado.

The town was formed in 1849 by Jesus Ma Casaus. Mr. Casaus was an ox-wagon freighter originally from Las Vegas who came to Salado seeking grass for his herd. He brought with him Miguel Trujillo, his foreman, and members of the Sena family, his constructors. Mr. Casaus and his wife, Josefa K. Martinez, had three sons: Carlos (b. 1840), Theodor (b. 1838), and Manuel (1834-1922). They also had a daughter (1845-1850) who was the first person buried in the Salado Cemetery. Until he passed away in February 2006, Mr. Trujillo’s great-grandson, Eduardo, lived on a ranch near Guadalupe (Parsons 1981).

Carlos Casaus is listed as having a patent on lands in the southwest portion of town and Andrew P. Kewitz and Monico Sena are listed as having patents in the rest of the town. The patents were issued after the Homestead Law of 1862.

In 1934, the town was first assigned the site number LA1560 and recorded, erroneously, as “Boricka” (later crossed out and written in as “Los Ojitos” - also incorrect). The one-page form listed four kinds of prehistoric ceramics; no prehistoric ceramics were noted during Woods Canyon’s 2006 recordation of the town.

While it is known that the town was occupied by members of the Casaus, Trujillo and Sena families, it is not known which structure(s) were occupied by which families. Many of the structures are presently represented only by low rock mounds or alignments. Some structures, however, still have standing walls; several of these are illustrated in the following descriptions.

St ruct ure 19

St ruct ure 20Salad

oC

reek

Peco

sRive

r

Cemet ery

St ruct ures 14-17

St ruct ures 8-13

St ruct ures 1-7, 18

16

A

Bplaza

S18

S3

S2

plaza

plaza

F8

F7

F6

F3 S6

F5F4

S7

A

B

CD

EF

AB

CD

E

F1

F2

S5

S4

S1

LA1560: Town of Salado, NMMap 4: St ruct ures 1-7, 18; Feat ures 1-8

0 50 f t N

LA1560: Town of Salado, NMMap 3: St ruct ures 8-13; Feat ures 9-16 0 50 f t N

F13

S 13F16

F9

F10

F11F12

S10

S12

S11

F15F14

A B

S9

plaza

S8

AB

C

GABCD

E F F19

S14

S15

S16

S17

F18

F17

plaza

plaza

A

BC

LA1560: Town of Salado, NMMap 2: St ruct ures 14-17; Feat ures 17-19 0 50 f t N

0 50 ft

Figure 5-4. Plan maps of northeast (top), northwest (middle) and southwest (bottom) portions of Salado.

17

Structure 1 is the remains of a masonry structure of at least two rooms. The main room is roughly 30’ by 18’ and was built using masonry and upright posts. A smaller room 18’ by 15’ was added to the northwest. It was made of masonry and has been partially dismantled. The structure is flanked to the west by a leveled and cleared plaza area. Located in the vicinity of Structure 1 is a scatter of purple glass, white earthenware, and brown glass.

Structure 2 is a small structure or feature. It is composed of a masonry foundation 6’ by 5’. Located in the vicinity of Structure 2 is a scatter of purple glass, white earthenware, and green glass.

Structure 3 is a small masonry foundation 4’ by 4’ in size, located at the edge of the bluff. In the vicinity of Structure 3 is a scatter of purple glass, a barrel hoop, and white earthenware. A midden area is located to the west.

Structure 4 is a large masonry and adobe structure with at least six rooms evident. It is composed of a main wing (Rooms C,D, and E), an eastern wing (Rooms A and B), a western wing (Room F), two retaining walls, and a upright slab wall (Feature 2). [see site form for additional information]

Structure 5 is located adjacent to Structure 4. It is separated by an 8’ wide open area that might have served as a means of walking between the plaza to the south and the plaza to the north of Structures 4 and 5. Structure 5 is composed of two wings, a retaining wall, and an upright slab feature. [see site form for additional information]

Associated with Structures 4 and 5 is a large cleared and leveled plaza. In the vicinity of the structures and plaza, are numerous artifacts, including purple and green glass, an aqua glass bottle, a brown glass bottle, window glass, white earthenware, porcelain with gold-leaf lettering, a glass button, a metal can lid, a square panel lantern wick holder, a metal toy wheel, a metal buckle, an iron knife handle, a fence staple, cast-iron hardware, an embossed can (“Armour Packing Co. Lard Compound, Kansas City, Mo.”)and several crimped-seam cans with bail handles.

Structure 6 and Feature 3-5 are located on the berm forming the south side of the south plaza. Structure 6 is a small masonry foundation that measures 6’ by 6’. Feature 3 is a scatter of sandstone 12’ in diameter; it may have been a foundation. Feature 4 is a concentration of sandstone 3’ in diameter. Feature 5 is a concentration of rock 4’ by 4’ in size.

Figure 5-5. Photograph of Structure 5 looking north; note Pecos River Valley in distance.

18

Figure 5-6. Photograph of Structure 11 looking east.

Structure 7 is a single masonry room that measures 22’ by 15’. The masonry wall is between 2-4’ in height. There appears to have been a door on the south wall.

Feature 6, 7 and 8 are located west of Structures 4, 5 and 7 at the east end of the plaza. Feature 6 is a high spot with some sandstone that might represent an architectural element. Feature 7 is a concentration of rock 6’ in diameter that may also be an architectural element. Feature 8 is a depression 1-2’ deep and 32’ by 36’ in size.

Structure 8 is a three-room structure. Room A has a masonry foundation and lower walls and probably had jacal upper walls. It measures 20’ by 15’ and has a possible door in the west wall. The south wall appears to have been built primarily of jacal. Room B is an elevated platform of adobe that measures 24’ by 15’. It may be the remains of a room or a porch. Room C is a partial masonry foundation in association with adobe melt. It measures 17’ by 15’.

A plaza surrounds both this structure and the adjacent Structure 9. A possible berm separating the plazas between the structures was noted but not mapped. Artifacts located in association with Structure 8 include a purple drinking glass, a rectangular can, a square can with key, black glaze earthenware, brown glass straight brandy or wine lip, window glass, iron strap, window glass, metal d ring, brown glass, transfer paint earthen ware, and a can with the embossing of “Super Light 10 OZ KC King Powder – For 10 cents, Absolutely Pure.”

Structure 9 is a rectangular structure evidenced by a masonry foundation and adobe melt. It measure 38’ by 18’ and probably was subdivided into several rooms.

Feature 9 is a midden deposit with slab rocks. Feature 10 is a small circular alignment of rocks. Feature 11 is a depression 1’ deep and 30’ in diameter. Feature 12 is a concentration of rocks 6’ in diameter.

Structure 10 is a masonry foundation 6’ by 6’ in size.

Structure 11 is a two-room masonry structure. Room A measures 42’ by 15’. The walls are made of compound masonry and there appears to be no internal walls. A door and two windows are located in the south wall. Room B is represented by a low masonry wall that forms the north and east sides. The east wall of Room A forms the west wall and the south wall is not evident. Room B may have been a ramada.

Approximately 3’ south of Structure 11 is a parallel line of upright slabs. Four feet of the line is visible. It may be from a porch or a flower bed.

19

Figure 5-7. Photograph of Structure 15 looking west.

Artifacts in the vicinity of Structure 11 include a clear bead glass bottle rim, purple glass, galvanized pail, white earthenware, solder dot can with soldered end and crimped side seams, wire nail, a “Armour Lard Compound Can”.

Feature 14 is a 12’ by 9’ concentration of rock that is possibly an outbuilding foundation. Feature 15 is a 24’ by 12’ depression along the north side of Structure 11.

Structure 12 is a masonry foundation 6 by 6’ in size.

Structure 13 is a 24’ by 15’ rectangular masonry foundation built of both upright slab and horizontal masonry. It probably had an adobe superstructure. A parallel upright-slab wall is located 4’ west of the structure’s west wall. The slab wall is composed of 6 slabs in 7’.

Structure 14 is a three-room structure. Room A measures 32’ by 16’. It is represented by masonry foundations and low walls; the upper walls either have been removed or were made of adobe that has melted. Rooms B and C are defined by an 8’-tall masonry wall and remnants of dividing walls. The masonry wall is compound and made of sandstone with cobbles used for chinking. Room B is 14’ by 12’; Room C is 20’ by 14’.

Artifacts in the vicinity of Structure 14 include purple glass, aqua glass, brown ring or oil bottle lip glass, an aqua straight wine or brandy glass bottle lip, and a square can

Feature 17 is a cluster of cobbles that might be a burial. Feature 18 is a depression 35’ in diameter.

Structure 15 is a seven-room masonry structure built on the edge of the bluff overlooking the Pecos River. Room A appears to be one of the first rooms built. It measures 16’ by 16’. Room B was built after Rooms A and C. Room B measures 12’ by 16’ and contains a door on its south wall communicating with Room G. Room C measures 16 by 16’. The masonry walls are only 4’ tall suggesting either that the upper walls were made of adobe or were robbed. Rooms D and E appear to have been built as one room that later was subdivided into two rooms. Doors are present in the west walls of both rooms. Room F is evidenced by an elevated platform and a masonry foundation. Room F measures 15’ by 16’ in size. The foundation is lined by upright slabs 3’ out from the foundations. These might be flower beds. Room G is a plaza located between the structure and the bluff edge. It is delineated by a low masonry wall. Another plaza is located to the north and east of the structure.

Artifacts in the vicinity of Structure 15 include a hole in the cap can with crimped sides, brown, purple, and aqua glass, bail handle can, and white earthenware.

20

Figure 5-8. Photograph of Structure 17 looking south; note Pecos River Valley in distance.

Structure 16 is a masonry foundation 6’ by 6’ in size that incorporated both horizontal masonry and upright slab construction.

Structure 17 is a masonry structure that measures 12’ by 8’. The structure walls were approximately 4’ tall. A door existed on the east side.

Structure 18 is a masonry foundation that is 5’ by 5’ in size. Located in the vicinity of this area were a rifle part, purple glass, and white earthenware.

Structures 19 and 20 are multi-room structures located well to the south of the above-described structures. They were not visited but could be seen from the access road and on aerial photography. It is suspected that smaller structures, features, and plazas also exist in this portion of the site.

A cemetery is located to the southwest of Structures 19 and 20. This is the oldest cemetery in De Baca County (Eldridge 2001), with the Casuas child being buried there in 1850. The two decipherable tombstones in the cemetery are “Manuelia Sena 1838 – 1910” and “Marie Sal?ve Mun??L 1826 – 1898”. Also buried there are the two sisters of Eduardo Trujillo (Rawson 2006).

NRHP Recommendation: The site is recommended as eligible under three criteria, a, c, and d. It is an excellent example of Hispanic architecture; has distinctive style used in the wall masonry, and contains deposits that, if excavated, would be likely to yield important information concerning the history of the area and the activities of the inhabitants.

Assessment of Project Impact: The site is avoided by land development activities.

Management Recommendation: No further work is recommended.

21

LA152328

Site Description: The site consists of a diffuse lithic and ceramic scatter surrounding a small rocky knob. Most of the artifacts are lithics; only two sherds were found. No features were observed.

The lithic artifacts are mostly large primary and secondary flakes of local quartzite and chert. No formal tools were observed. Several large flakes have unifacial retouch along one or two edges indicating use as scrapers. Several cores and choppers were identified. One quartzite cobble appears to have been used as a hammerstone.

The two small ceramic sherds appear to be from a plainware bowl that has a roughened exterior and a smoothed and possibly smudged interior. The paste is an oxidized red with very small glinty components with rare particles of sand incorporated as temper. Based on these sherds, the site is thought to be of Anasazi cultural affiliation.

The site is interpreted as a short-term lithic procurement and processing area. The artifact concentration on the southeast side of the small knob suggests that the inhabitants used this area for protection from the wind and exposure to the sun’s warmth.

NRHP Recommendation: The site is recommended as not eligible to the National Register of Historic Places, as it has little potential for cultural depth. Site recordation has exhausted the site’s data potential.



site tagin shrub

ArtifactConcentration

0 10 20 m

Sandstone Boulders

slope

LA152328

NB. Shanks2/14/06

approx. 200 mto Pecos River

approx. 250 mto large knob

arroyo

rocky knob

flaketool

chopper unifaces

ceramics

hamm

erstone

cores

chopper

proposed road

Figure 5-9. Plan map of site LA152328.

22

LA152329

Site Description: This site is probably the remains of an historic human burial. It consists of a small pile of stones, with a large sandstone slab on top of the pile. The slab may be a fallen headstone; it has a cross pecked into one face.

The burial is located approximately 65 meters south of LA152330, an historic masonry structure. Both sites are probably related to the Hispanic occupation of the town of Salado (LA1560), one mile to the east.

NRHP Recommendation: The site is recommended as eligible as it probably contains data regarding the historic Hispanic occupation of the area.


Management Recommendation: Mark on ground for avoidance and establish location on the individual lotʼs plat for avoidance and protection.

Site tagin juniper

Sandstone Boulders

0 2.5 5 m

Site Boundary

RockPile

Tombstone

Pour Off

Rim

Rim

B.Shanks2/14/06

LA152329

N


23

LA152330

Site Description: The site consists of a the remains of the lower courses of a masonry room (Structure 1). The only artifact found in association is a cut nail, 2.5 inches long.

It appears that the room was never finished. The lower 1-2 courses were built and a sizeable amount of rock was hauled to the building site. At the southwest and northeast corners of the structure are two upright juniper posts; a juniper tree with axe-cut limbs, located east of the structure, may be the source of these posts. On the other two corners of the structure are upright slabs. The slabs and posts probably served as markers for the building’s corners during construction. The walls are built of simple coursed masonry. The exterior rock surfaces are shaped. The rock surrounding the structure is unshaped.

Approximately 65 meters to the south of the building is a grave (LA152329). Perhaps the construction of the building was stopped in association with the untimely death of one of the family members. Both sites are probably related to the Hispanic occupation of the town of Salado (LA1560), one mile to the east.

NRHP Recommendation: The site is recommended as not eligible to the National Register of Historic Places. It is believed that no significant intact deposits exist and that, while originally envisioned by the inhabitants as a long term habitation, it was never completed. The siteʼs data potential has been largely exhausted by site recordation.



Structure 1

0 10 20 m

Sandstone Boulders

slope

Rim Rock

LA152330

NR. Larson2/15/06

LA152329

juniper withaxe-cut branches

relativecontour lines

site boundary

woodencornerpost upright

slab

excess rock piles

to Rio Salado


24

LA152331

Site Description: The site consists of a lithic scatter and a lithic tool concentration (Feature 1) found in association with ax-cut trees. Both tree stumps and branches of live trees exhibit ax cuts.

Feature 1 is located at the base of an ax-cut tree stump. This feature contains four probable axes. The first is a large quartzite cobble with flaked pole and bit and a slightly concave use edge. The second is a large quartzite flake with two parallel flaked hafting notches; both bit and pole are missing. The third is a large quartzite flake that, at the platform end, has a deep concave flaked edge that may once have functioned as a bit and later as a haft. The fourth is a quartzite cobble with a flaked and battered end.

Located elsewhere on the site are three cores, a biface, the proximal end of a possibly hafted knife, two flake tools, and a small thumbnail scraper. The debitage flakes are primarily decortication and reduction flakes of local quartzite, chert, and siltstone. Interior flakes are rare in the assemblage.

Historical data indicates that this area was visited by Navajo people during their stay at Fort Sumner after the Long March. Fuelwood was scarce at Fort Sumner and the Navajo traveled in this area to gather fuel and to hunt. The site is interpreted as a lithic and fuelwood procurement area occupied by the Navajo during the time of Bosque Redondo.

NRHP Recommendation: The site is recommended as eligible to the National Register of Historic Places. It is interpreted as a resource gathering and possible campsite used by the Navajo during the days of Bosque Redondo. Data potential exists in the possibility of subsurface deposits and in dendrochronological samples from harvested trees.



0 10 20 m

Sandstone Boulders

Biface (Possible Knife Base)Uniface Fragment

Ax-Cut Stump

Photojpg.3173

x

Site Boundary

Fea.1

Potential for sub-surface deposits

Numerous juniper trees with ax-cutbranches and stumps

Bedrock Ledge

Salado Creek

P. Rohman2/14/06

LA152331

N


25

Figure 5-13. Photographs of axes (top) and axe-cut juniper tree (bottom) at site LA152331.

26

LA152332

Site Description: The site consists of a diffuse lithic scatter on a ridge above Salado Creek. The scatter is found in association with natural cobbles and pebbles of quartzite and chert. No features or artifact concentrations were noted.

Located on the site were six cores or core/choppers, one early stage biface, and large primary and secondary flakes of gray chert and green-brown metaquartzite. Because no temporally diagnostic artifacts were located, the site was assigned an unknown prehistoric cultural affiliation.

The site is interpreted as a short-term lithic procurement area that probably was utilized throughout prehistory.

NRHP Recommendation: The site is recommended as ineligible to the National Register of Historic Places. The siteʼs data potential has been exhausted by site recordation.



Photo3174

relative contour lines

Sandstone Boulders

x

x

Site Boundary

Hill Top

Chopper

core/chopper

Slope

R. Larson2/14/06

0 10 20 m

LA152332

N


27

LA152333

Site Description: The site consists of a diffuse scatter of flaked lithics in association with natural gravel deposits. Maximum artifact density is roughly three per square meter. The flaked lithic debris is composed of primary and secondary flakes of chert, chalcedony and quartzite. Cores are primarily tested cobbles. Tools consist of one chopper and one biface fragment. Because no temporally diagnostic artifacts were found, the site was assigned an unknown prehistoric cultural affiliation.

NRHP Recommendation: The site is recommended as not eligible to the National Register of Historic Places. The siteʼs data potential has been exhausted by recordation.



Site tag

Rim

Sandstone Boulders

Photo3176.jpg

Arroyo

Rio Salado

B.Shanks2/14/06

0 10 20 m

LA152333

N

prop

osed

road


28

LA152334

Site Description: The site is the remains of an extensive historic Hispanic habitation. Located on the site are the remains of several buildings and 17 features, including a possible burial, a concrete cistern and a large masonry dam.

Sandstone Boulders

Photo3186.jpg

x

x

Site Boundary

x x x xxx

Fea. 6 Fea. 5

Fea.4

Fea.7

Fea. 9

Fea. 12

Fea. 11

Fea. 13

Fea. 10Fea. 8 (midden)

Fea. 2

Fea. 3

Mound

Barb-Wire Fence

Existing Road

Fea. 1

B.Shanks2/14/06

0 10 20 m

LA152334

N

Structure 1

Str. 3

Str. 2

Fea. 16

Fea

14&

15

Fea. 17


Figure 5-17. Photograph of Structure 1 at site LA152334.

Structure 1 is the largest, most complex and best preserved structure on the site. It is composed of six rooms made of compound masonry walls laid in native mortar. Portions of these walls still stand to their original height of more than 10 feet. To the south and west are two more masonry rooms, Structure 2 (approximately 18’ x 14’) and Structure 3 (approximately 21’ x 12). Much of the stone from the upper walls of these structures has been recently robbed.

29

Feature 1 is a dam approximately 50’ long at its highest point, 10’ above the base of the drainage. It was built of two parallel masonry walls infilled with earth. The dam is partially collapsed; the drainage flows only during rains.

Features 2, 3, 6, 9 and 10 are structure foundations or possible foundations. Feature 2 consists of a 5’ x 5’ single course of rocks setting on bedrock. Pieces of tin, a paint can, and a galvanized bucket are found nearby. Feature 3 is 10’ x 6’ and consists of two courses of rock enclosing a earth fill. Feature 6 consists of a 10’ x 8’ single course of rocks. Feature 9 consists of a 7’ x 5’ single course of rocks. Feature 10 consists of several dry-laid courses of unshaped sandstone rocks; these are the remains of a small 7’ x 7’ structure.

Feature 4 is 10’ diameter depression with no associated rocks or artifacts. It is approximately one foot deep and may be a privy hole.

Feature 5 is a pile of rock and earth, 7’ x 4’; it may be a grave.

Feature 7 is a 22’ x 16’ area containing a rock alignment on the west and a single wooden post in the northeast. The post extends 8” above the ground surface. Many nails are found in the area, suggesting that a wooden structure, such as a corral or barn, once stood there.

Feature 8 is a dense midden of historic artifacts. Numerous fragments of purple, aqua, and brown glass bottle fragments are present; the bottles are mostly hand-made with applied lips. Numerous fragments of porcelain china plates and cups, pieces of stoneware, earthenware, and a portion of a micaceous ceramic bowl are also present . Metal items include straps, a flange and coupler, a hinge (gate), a button, a decorative star, round nails, stove parts, and hole-in-the-cap cans.The artifacts indicate a variety of domestic activities occurred at the site over a considerable time.

Feature 11 is a 3’ x 3’ concentration of about 20 small sandstone rocks. Feature 12 is a 5’ x 5’ concentration of about 40 sandstone rocks.

Feature 13 is a 19’ x 13’ x 3’ high mound of earth located about 50’ northeast of Structure 1.

Features 14 and 15 are two alignments of upright stones running parallel to the southeast wall of Structure 2. Feature 14 is approximately 32’ long and is located 4’ from Structure 2. Feature 15 is approximately 20’ long and is located 21’ from Structure 2.

Feature 17 is a circular cistern roughly 10 feet in diameter and at least 10 feet deep. It was built using sandstone masonry and replastered several times with concrete; the masonry walls are roughly level with the ground surface. Currently the bottom of the cistern is filled with rubble (probably from Structure 2).

Feature 16 is the remains of a 15’-long isolated wall, approximately 10’ from, and parallel to, the northwest wall of Structure 3.

NRHP Recommendation: The site is recommended as eligible under three criteria, a, c, and d. It is an excellent example of Hispanic architecture; has distinctive style used in the wall masonry, and contains deposits that, if excavated, would be likely to yield important information concerning the history of the area and the activities of the inhabitants.

Assessment of Project Impacts: The site is avoided by land development activities.


30

LA152335

Site Description: The site is a very large and diffuse scatter of flaked lithic artifacts found in association with cobbles of “knappable” material. It is situated on several gravel-covered ridges and slopes above Salado Creek.

Artifact density ranges from a low of 1 per 500 square meters to a high of 2 per 1 square meter. Artifacts consist of crude bifaces, cores, and primary and secondary debitage flakes of chert and quartzite. These items probably represent multiple visits to the site to test, gather, and occasionally reduce lithic cobbles. Because no temporally diagnostic artifacts were observed, the site was assigned to the unknown prehistoric period.

The site is interpreted as a lithic procurement loci of the local gravel lithic cherts and quartzites.

NRHP Recommendation: The site is recommended as not eligible to the National Register of Historic Places. The site’s data potential has been exhausted by recordation.

Assessment of Project Impacts: The proposed access road will bisect the site. But since the site is so extensive the road will only impact a small percentage of the site area.


Sandstone Boulders

0 25 50 m

Photo3198.jpgxx

SiteBoundary

Bifaces

P. Rohman2/15/06

LA152335

N

gravel-covered ridge

proposed road


31

LA152336

Site Description: The site consists of a scatter of primary and secondary flakes in association with cobbles of chert and quartzite. No features, formal tools or diagnostic artifacts were identified.

Several flakes were retouched, suggesting their use as informal tools. In addition, a cobble was bifacially flaked along one edge to form a chopper.

Because the site lacks diagnostic artifacts, it was assigned an unknown prehistoric cultural affiliation. It is interpreted as a lithic procurement and initial reduction area.

NRHP Recommendation: The site is recommended as not eligible to the National Register of Historic Places. Recordation has exhausted the siteʼs data potential.

Assessment of Project Impacts: A road is proposed to be built through the center of the site.



Sandstone Boulders

slope

slope

Photo3203.jpg

Site Boundary

RimRock

slope

slope

R. Larson2/15/06

0 10 20 m

LA152336

N

Pro

pose

dR

oad

Figure 5-19. Plan map of site LA152336

32

LA152337

Site Description: The site consists of a scatter of flaked lithic artifacts in association with a natural outcrop of red chert. The chert is exposed on the floor of a small canyon and this portion of the site is littered with hundreds of chunks of red chert. While some of these chunks may be angular debris from knapping, much of it is believed to be freeze-fractured.

Although this fractured chert is not a “great” lithic source, it was still utilized prehistorically, as indicated by numerous flakes of this material on the site. Also present on the site are a siltstone cobble with edge battering and flaking, a quartzite pebble with edge battering, a core of white-grey chert, and flakes of common grey chert. One of the grey chert flakes has retouch along one of its edges.

In summary, the site represents a quarry for red chert and a work area. Because no temporally diagnostic tools were found, the site was assigned an unknown prehistoric age.

NRHP Recommendation: The site is recommended as being not eligible to the National Register of Historic Places. The site contains few artifacts and is not likely to contain intact significant deposits. The data potential of the site has been exhausted by site recordation.



slope

Sandstone Boulders

Photo3204.jpg

Site Boundary

Sandstone Boulder Slope

Rim

Canyon Drainage

Chert

Outcr

op

B.Shanks2/15/06

0 10 20 m

LA152337

N


33

LA152338

Site Description: The site consists of an extensive scatter of flaked and ground stone artifacts. This site differs from other sites in the area in two ways: (1) it contains (several hundred) debitage flakes from later stages of reduction, with interior flakes being common and primary flakes being rare; and (2) formal tools are more common, with nine bifaces and two scrapers found on the site.

Flaked lithics include several flake tools, a retouched flake graver, a retouched flake plane, a core/chopper, an expedient flake ‘axe’ with two hafting notches. Groundstone tools consist of two manos and fragments of a possible metate or netherstone.

The site is located on a ridgetop with excellent visibility of the surrounding terrain. It was probably utilized as a camp where a variety of activities such as lithic tool production, scraping, cutting, and vegetal processing were undertaken. The exposed nature of the site would have made occupation difficult during windy times and has left the site with a deflated surface. It probably was occupied for short periods during nonwindy portions of the year. The site is of unknown prehistoric age.

NRHP Recommendation: The site is recommended as not eligible for the National Register of Historic Places. Despite the abundance of surface artifacts, it is believed that no subsurface deposits exist. Since no temporally diagnostic artifacts were located and the probability of intact features is low, it is believed that the site has limited data potential. This data potential has been exhausted by site recordation.

Assessment of Project Impact: An access road will impact the northern edge of the site.


Sandstone Boulders

Photo3212.jpg

x

Site Boundary

Steep Bank

Bifaces

Mano

Scrapers

x

x

xxx

Ham

mer

x x

Test Pit

Cor

e/C

hopp

er

P. Rohman2/15/06

existing 2-track road

0 10 20 m

LA152338

N

Haf

ted

Axe

Mano

Proposed Road


34

LA152339

Site Description: This site consists of an extensive scatter of flaked lithic materials located on a ridge top and on the adjacent southern slope. The scatter is probably the result of many visits to the site over a long period of time.

Within the larger scatter are two artifact concentrations. These concentrations contain core reduction, biface thinning, and pressure retouch flakes of mostly red chert.

Flaked lithic tools include 11 bifaces, several large scraper tools fashioned on quartzite flakes or split cobbles and two projectile points. One is a large white chert corner-notched dart point; it has a straight base, expanding stem, and straight blades, and measures longer than 2.5 cm. The second is probably the base of a stemmed dart point made from green chert; it has a basal notch and two shallow side indentations.

The site is interpreted as a hunting-related work area that was occupied numerous times. Activities on the site included biface tool production and game and hide processing. Based on the presence of the two large dart points, the site is thought to have been occupied during the Archaic period. Given the extent of the site, it is possible that the scatter also includes artifacts from other occupations.

NRHP Recommendation: The site is recommended as not eligible for the National Register of Historic Places. Despite the abundance of surface artifacts, it is believed that no subsurface deposits exist. The blading of two existing roads does not appear to have uncovered any deposits. The probability of intact features is low, and it is believed that the site has limited data potential. This data potential has been exhausted by site recordation.

Assessment of Project Impact: Two proposed roads will be built through the site.



Sandstone Boulders

Site Boundary

Proposed Roads

Exi

stin

gR

oad

Existing Road

LA152339

N

flaked lithic tool

0 25 50m

P. Rohman2/15/06

fenc

e

lithicconcentration

35

LA152340

Site Description: This site consists of a moderately dense scatter of flaked and ground stone artifacts. The artifact scatter is composed mostly of large primary and secondary flakes, but also includes a number of cores and tools. Materials are all locally available cherts, siltstone, and quartzite.

The lithic tool assemblage is composed of four bifaces, five scrapers, seven choppers, 12 flake tools, nine cores and a complete one-hand mano.

One small piece of sun-colored amethyst glass was also found within the lithic scatter. No other historic artifacts were found, and it is thought that the glass is not culturally associated with the lithic artifacts.

The site served as a short-term work area for the production of flaked lithic tools. Lithic procurement was done on the site itself, as evidenced by the presence of several primary and secondary flakes and some cobble cores. Other activities included hide and plant processing. Since no temporally diagnostic artifacts were found, the site was assigned an unknown prehistoric age.

NRHP Recommendation: The site is recommended as not eligible to the National Register of Historic Places, as it appears to lack diagnostic artifacts, features or intact cultural deposits.

Assessment of Project Impacts: A proposed road will impact the eastern edge of the site.


relative contour line

Sandstone Boulders

0 15 30 m

Site Boundary

Arroyo

Arroyo

Knoll

Tool Conc

Sm

all Finger

Ridgeline

slope

R. Larson2/16/06

LA152340

N

proposedroad


juniper, nolina, cholla, and sumac

36

LA152341

Site Description: The site is a large, multi-loci flaked and ground stone scatter situated on a sandy flat above the Pecos River. Each locus contains a feature and an artifact concentration that is viewed as a midden.

Locus 1. Feature 1 appears on the surface as a depression 6 meters in diameter surrounded on three sides by a ring of unburned and burned caliche. The burned caliche is most abundant on the north/northeast, forming a pile 0.3 m tall and 1.0 m wide at its base. On the feature’s south side is a cluster of sandstone slabs 1.5 m by 2 m in size. About 50% of the slabs appear to be thermally altered. The feature might be the remains of a structure or processing area. Support for the processing-feature interpretation is the fact that caliche is not native on the flat and must have been brought to the location from a considerable distance (1 mile), while the slabs would have been available locally.

Locus 2. Feature 2 consists of several concentrations of sandstone and thermally altered cobbles. Artifact density is high in this area of the site, and numerous one-hand manos are located here. It appears to have been a processing area where locally gathered plant materials (possibly grass seeds or mesquite beans) were ground.

The artifact scatter is composed mostly of flakes from core reduction and tool manufacture. Materials are mostly locally available chert and quartzite, with the former being the more common of the two. Siltstone and obsidian flakes are also present, but in very small numbers.

More than 30 flaked lithic tools were observed; they include bifaces, scrapers, choppers, flake tools, and two dart points. One of the dart points is corner-notched; the other is represented only by the distal portion and its hafting could not be determined. Twelve one-hand manos and one possible basin metate were also found. Based on the dart points and one-hand manos, the site was assigned an Archaic age.

NRHP Recommendation: The site is recommended as eligible to the National Register of Historic Places. Excavations would likely yield important information concerning the Archaic occupation of the Pecos River valley. Data concerning chronology, subsistence, and land use patterns could be gathered from the site.



37

rela

tive

cont

our l

ines

Sandstone BouldersSite Boundary

Fea. 1

Fea. 2

flaked lithic

non-flaked lithic

artifact conc.

J. Fetterman3/14/06

0 10 20 m

LA152341

N

proposed road


Sandstone Boulders

0 2 4 m

Mounded Caliche

SlightDepression

Caliche Scatter

P. Rohman2/16/06

Pile of SandstoneRocks

LA152341: Feature 1

N

38

LA152342

Site Description: The site consists of a discrete scatter of flaked lithic materials at the base of a talus slope. Located on the site were a large corner-notched dart point, seven cores, two stage-one bifaces, three retouched flakes, a chopper, a hammerstone, and several primary and secondary flakes.

The lithic materials consist of the local white chert, red chert, and green quartzite. All were probably procured from the cobbles that naturally litter the landscape. The projectile point is made from a beautiful mottled chert that could be either local or nonlocal.

In summary, the site is a short-term lithic procurement and initial reduction area that was occupied during the Archaic time period.

NRHP Recommendation: The site is recommended as not eligible to the National Register of Historic Places. The site is located on a very eroded slope with little soil. Recordation has exhausted the site’s data potential.



rela

tive

cont

our l

ines

Rocky

Slope

0 10 20 m

Sandstone Boulders

Photo3236.jpg

x

SiteBoundary

x

x

xx

x

x

x

x

x

x

BFBF BF

BF

FTC

DP

SCR

CCHO

HS

Arroyo

SmallPour-Off

FT -Flake ToolCHO -ChopperHS -HammerstoneSCR -ScrapperDP -Dart PointC -CoreBF -Biface

LA152342

NB. Shanks2/17/06

Slope

Prop

osed

Roa

d


39

LA152343

Site Description: The site consists of an extensive multi-loci flaked and ground stone scatter. Locus 1 contains numerous flakes (from both decortification and lithic tool manufacture), several early and late stage bifaces, flaked and ground tools, and a few pieces of possible fire-cracked rock. Food preparation and cooking may have occurred in Locus 1. Locus 2 contains a high density of primary and large secondary flakes of local chert. Locus 2 is interpreted as a cobble testing and core reduction area.

Materials on the site are mostly locally available chert and quartzite, but a few pieces of siltstone and obsidian were also found. In addition to cores and flakes, 46 tools were observed during the site recordation. They consist of one projectile point, 20 bifaces, five scrapers, two hammerstones, six choppers, and twelve flake tools. The scrapers are mostly informal tools, but also include one denticulate scraper and one formal thumbnail scraper. The projectile point is a thin chert dart point that is side-notched with concave basal notch. This suggests an Archaic date for the site.

NRHP Recommendation: More data are needed before an adequate assessment can be made of the site’s eligibility to the National Register of Historic Places. The site is potentially eligible to the National Register of Historic Places. While much of the site appears to be surficial and contain limited data potential, intact subsurface deposits could exist in Locus 1.





Sandstone Boulders

Site Boundary

flaked lithic

non-flaked lithicJ. Fetterman3/14/06

0 30 60 mLA152343

N

proposed road

Locu

s2

Locus 1

40

LA152344

Site Description: The site consists of a fairly large scatter of flaked and ground stone items on a south-facing slope. The area is highly eroded and no evidence of subsurface cultural deposits (such as features) was found.

The debitage assemblage is composed of hundreds of flakes; several cores are also present. Most are large primary and secondary flakes, but in addition, a few areas of the site contain concentrations of interior flakes. Materials are mostly chert and quartzite, but also include small amounts of chalcedony, jasper, and siltstone. All of the materials could have easily been gathered locally.

The 44 flaked lithic tools consist of 16 bifaces, five scrapers, three hammerstones, seven choppers, 12 flake tools, and one uniface. The ground stone assemblage contains five one-hand manos and one complete basin metate.

The site is interpreted as a work area where lithic materials were procured, hunting-related tools were produced, and locally gathered plant materials were ground. Those plant resources could have included grass seeds or mesquite beans. Although the site is thought to have been occupied prehistorically, because no temporally diagnostic tools were found, it can not be assigned to a specific time period.

NRHP Recommendation: The site is recommended as not eligible to the National Register of Historic Places. The site is surficial and there is very little possibility of any intact subsurface deposits. The data potential of the site has been exhausted by site recordation.

Assessment of Project Impacts: The site is avoided by project development.



Sandstone Boulders

slope

Biface

0 15 30 m

Photojpg.3241

Site Boundary

Salado Creek

R. Larson2/17/06

LA152344N

41

LA152345

Site Description: The site contains the remains of two components: a prehistoric lithic scatter and feature and a historic corral.

The prehistoric component is represented by several white chert flakes, one of which is on top of an area of charcoal-stained soil (Feature 1). The stain is approximately 50 cm in diameter and may be the remains of a hearth. Since no temporally diagnostic tools were found within the surface assemblage, it can not be assigned to a specific prehistoric time period.

The historic component is represented by a rock corral (Feature 2) built against the face of a curving sandstone ledge. It measures approximately 50’ by 40’. The north and east sides are formed by the rock ledge and the west and south sides are formed by dry-laid sandstone masonry walls. The corral is bisected by a small drainage which flows west through a gap in the west wall; this gap might have been caused by the drainage. A second opening in the wall is present south of the drainage; this gap might have served as access to the corral. Although no historic artifacts were found, the corral is thought to be associated with the nearby Hispanic town of Salado, occupied during the 1800’s.

NRHP Recommendation: The site is recommended as eligible to the National Register of Historic Places. Excavation of Feature 1 could yield prehistoric chronometric and subsistence data. Feature 2 is a very good example of a historic sheep corral, and detailed documentation of its construction could provide further data concerning the early Hispanic occupation of the area.

Assessment of Project Impact: The site is avoided by project development.



Feature 1

Feature 2

Sandstone Boulders

0 2.5 5 m

Sandstone Ledge

Site Boundary

uncoursedstone

wall

coursed masonry wall

boulders

P. Rohman2/17/06

LA152345N

42

LA152346

Site Description: The site consists of a very large scatter of flaked and ground stone artifacts. It is situated on the slopes and around the base of a prominent butte and on a bluff overlooking the Pecos River (see map next page). Materials are locally available chert and quartzite, most of which was probably acquired from the cobbles that litter the slopes in the area.

The artifact scatter contains thousands of debitage flakes, representing all stages of tool production. On the cobble-covered slopes around the north half of the butte are concentrations of primary and secondary flakes in conjunction with tested cobbles and cores. On the bluff between the butte and the river are found smaller flakes from later stage core reduction and tool manufacture.

The numerous tools include 17 bifaces, 7 choppers, 10 cores, 1 stemmed dart point, 2 hammerstones, 4 manos, 1 basin metate, 2 flake tools and 14 scrapers, unifaces or uniface/scrapers. It is likely that other formal tools, including projectile points, were once present on the site and have since been collected by hunters and other site visitors.

A single petroglyph was observed on a boulder. This is a circle approximately 7 cm in diameter.

The site is interpreted as a lithic procurement and hunting related work area. Activities on the site included cobble testing, core reduction, expedient and formal tool manufacture, animal butchering, and hide processing. It is likely that the site also served as an occasional camp, although no evidence of cooking or storage features was found. Based on the presence of the dart point, the site is thought to have been occupied during the Archaic period. Considering the size and breadth of the artifact assemblage, and the presence of five artifact concentrations, it can be assumed that portions of the site were occupied repeatedly over a fairly long period of time.

NRHP Recommendation: More data are needed before an adequate assessment can be made of the site’s eligibility to the National Register of Historic Places. The site is very large and contains a very large assemblage of artifacts on its surface. While no evidence was located for buried cultural deposits on the surface and much of the site is heavily eroded and located in a low depositional environment, it is possible that intact buried deposits exist on the site.

Assessment of Project Impact: The proposed road will pass through the site west and south of the prominent butte. It is located in an area of the site containing moderate erosion. The road will impact less than 4% of the site surface.

Management Recommendation: It is recommended that the blading of the road be monitored by an archaeologist to ensure that significant intact subsurface deposits are not damaged by road construction. If in the unlikely scenario that subsurface deposits are located during construction it is recommended that nature of the deposits be documented and the deposits be left intact and the road be padded over the

43

flaked lithic

non-flaked lithicartifact conc.

J. Fetterman3/14/06

0 37.5 75 m

LA152346

N


Sandstone Boulders

Rock Art

Peco

sR

iver

Site Perimeter

proposed road

prop

osed

road

prop

osed

road


44

LA152347

Site Description: The site consists of several masonry constructions and an artifact scatter. The constructions are a probable hogan, a probable sheep corral, and a discontinuous rock wall. Other features on the site consist of a rock pile, a possible hearth, and a midden.

The probable hogan (Feature 3) is a circular structure, with an outside diameter of approximately 18’. The walls are partially collapsed, but were built of unshaped sandstone rocks with mud mortar. The masonry is uncoursed in most areas, but is coursed in others, notably in a section in the southeast. The wall is currently 1.5’ to 4.5’ high. There is an opening to the south/southeast. No roofing materials are present.

The probable sheep corral (Feature 2) is formed by a natural C-shaped exposure of sandstone bedrock ledge with a partial enclosing wall constructed across the open end. The enclosed area is approximately 50’ by 50’ and is located within a drainage. Sandstone bedrock, at 4 different levels, forms the ground surface in most of the area. The enclosing wall at the south is built of unshaped sandstone rocks, stacked with almost no coursing. It is approximately 30’ long and extends only partly across the opening, starting at the east end. The drainage flows through the area at the extreme southwest corner of the enclosure. The natural rim around the rest of the enclosure is high enough in most areas to form an effective wall; however, a 28’ long segment of dry-laid rock wall, approximately 2.5’ tall, was added on the west side. It was built on top of the ledge. One piece of thin tin was found south of the corral in the drainage.

The discontinuous wall (Feature 5) is located at the west end of the site. It was built along the top of a linear exposure of sandstone bedrock ledge. It is evident as short wall segments of dry-laid tabular sandstone rocks. Part A is approximately 25’ long, with some gaps. It runs in a fairly straight line in a east-southeast by west-northwest orientation. The rocks are 1 to 5 courses high. Part B is approximately 10’ long and forms a slight arc west of Part A. It is built of 3-5 rough courses. The function of the discontinuous wall is not clear. It may be the remains of a partially dismantled sheep pen. A post and wire fence could have been constructed in an arc with its two ends against the ledge/wall. Such a fence would have probably been salvaged and use elsewhere when the site was abandoned.

The rock pile (Feature 1) consists of 15-20 large pieces of tabular sandstone, most of which are set on end and leaning against each other. The pile is approximately 5’ in diameter. It is near an area where it appears that rocks may have been quarried for wall construction material. The pile may be a cache of rocks that were gathered, but never used.

The possible hearth (Feature 4) is visible on the surface as a charcoal stain with small pieces of tabular sandstone. It is approximately 1.5 feet in diameter. Some of the rocks appear burned.

The midden (Feature 6) is a large area of charcoal stained soil containing numerous artifacts and pieces of fire-cracked rock. It is approximately 100’ long north-south and 50’ wide east-west, and is located northwest and upslope from the hogan.

The flaked lithic artifact assemblage is composed mostly of debitage, but also includes 15 cores and several tools. Materials are mostly locally available chert, quartzite, and siltstone. Obsidian is also present, but not common. The tools consist of one scraper, three hammerstones, five choppers, eleven flake tools, one drill, and one corner-notched arrow point. Twelve ground stone items were also found. They are parts of ten one-hand manos and two basin metates.

NRHP Recommendation: The site is recommended as eligible to the National Register of Historic Places. Excavations would likely yield important information concerning the Navajo occupation of the Pecos River valley. Data concerning the chronology of that occupation, subsistence, and land use patterns could be gathered from the site.



45


Sandstone Boulders

Site Boundary

Salado Creek

F1

F2F3

F4

F5

Groundstone

Chipped Stone Tool

Historic Artifact

B. Shanks3/1/06

LA152347N

0 25 50 m


46

LA152348

Site Description: The site consists of the remains of three structures, five features, and a small diffuse artifact scatter (see map on next page). The site is interpreted as a habitation and sheep herding facility associated with the nearby historic Hispanic town of Salado.

Structure 1 is interpreted as the remains of a stone house that measures approximately 22’ by 14’ on the outside. Its walls were constructed of unshaped sandstone rocks and mud mortar, mostly uncoursed but in some areas roughly coursed. A doorway is present in the south wall; no other openings are evident. No roofing materials or other wood construction elements are present; it is likely that they were salvaged long ago, possibly at the time of abandonment.

Structure 2 is a possible structure foundation measuring approximately 9’ by 6’ on the outside. Its northwest wall consists of two large upright sandstone slabs; the northeast and southwest walls are built of piled sandstone rocks. The southeast wall is mostly collapsed. Rocks are present in the fill within the walls.

Structure 3 is also a possible structure foundation, measuring approximately 15’ by 13’. It consists of three low walls built mostly of roughly stacked rocks. In some areas, upright sandstone slabs form the inside, outside, or both sides of the wall. The foundation appears to have been open on the south side, which faces the rest of the site. It is possible that Structure 3 served as a mostly enclosed windbreak rather than the foundation of a standing structure.

Feature 1 measures approximately 22’ by 16’. It is constructed against the north side of Structure 1 and consists of two stacked rock walls extending north-northeast from the house corners. The walls have acted to hold in soil, resulting in an elevated level area on the back side of the house. The soil supports a healthy growth of grass and saltbush. It is possible that the space was used for gardening. However, it is also possible that the soil retention is accidental and that the stone walls served as a foundation for adobe walls that have eroded over time and produced the fill within the area defined by the rock walls.

Feature 2 is a probable sheep corral, adjoining and west of Structure 1 and Feature 1. It is defined by rock walls and measures approximately 90’ by 70’. The enclosing walls are built of stacked sandstone rocks combined with occasional large uprights. The north wall serves as a retaining wall, holding back sediment between the wall and a linear exposure of sandstone ledge to the north. A 15’ wide opening is present in the south wall. A small drainage enters the corral at the northwest corner and flows out the opening at the south.

Features 3, 4 and 5 are probable sheep pens that abutt the west side of the corral. Feature 3 is approximately 27’ by 20’ and consists of low masonry walls with a 3’ wide opening at the west end. The masonry is semicoursed in some areas, roughly coursed in others. The south wall exhibits the best masonry construction of any wall on the site. Feature 4 is 27’ by 20’, consists of rock walls constructed of uncoursed sandstone, and has an opening on the west end. Feature 5 consists of a 20’ by 20’ space defined on the south by the north wall of Feature 4, on the west by a natural sandstone bedrock ledge, on the north by a low wall of stacked sandstone rocks, and on the east by an alignment of slabs at ground level.

A small number of historic artifacts are found scattered on the site. They include glass bottle fragments and metal cans. Small concentrations are present east of Feature 1, south of Feature 2, and on the terrace north of the house/corral/pen complex. No artifacts were found in the vicinity of Structure 3. Several ax-cut trees were found in the area of the site.

The site is interpreted as a habitation and sheep herding facility. The amount of masonry wall construction suggests a serious commitment to the operation, although the small number of artifacts could suggest a short-term occupation. Alternatively, it is possible that the occupants lived largely off the land and did not consume many bought goods that would generate much trash. The site is located less than 1.5 miles west of the Hispanic settlement of Salado. Based on the architecture, the surface assemblage, and the site’s association with sheep ranching, its occupation is thought to be contemporaneous with that settlement.

NRHP Recommendation: The site is recommended eligible under criterion d. It is a good example of a small sheep herding facility, and may contain deposits which if excavated would be likely to yield important information concerning the history of the area and the activities of the inhabitants.



47


Sandstone Boulders

Rim Rock

Photojpg.2960

Site Boundary

0 10 20 m

LA152348

NB. Shanks3/1/06

Str. 3

possible rockborrow area

Str. 2

Str. 1

Fea. 2

Fea. 5

Fea. 4

Fea. 3Fea. 1

48

LA152349

Site Description: The site consists of approximately 150 flaked lithic artifacts. No ceramics, ground stone or historic artifacts were found. The surface artifact assemblage is composed mostly of primary and secondary flakes, but also includes three cores, two scrapers, and two flake tools. Materials are predominantly gray and white chert, although some quartzite and red chert are also present. Probably all the items are made of cobbles from the site itself.

The site is interpreted as a hunting-related work area. Activity on the site appears to have mostly centered on testing the cobbles that cover the area. Other activities may have included hide processing. Although the site is thought to have been occupied prehistorically, because no temporally diagnostic tools were found, the site can not be assigned to a specific time period.

NRHP Recommendation: The site is recommended as not eligible to the National Register of Historic Places. The site is surficial and there is very little possibility of any intact subsurface deposits. The data potential of the site has been exhausted by site recordation.




Sandstone Boulders

x

Photo2943.jpg

x

Site

Bou

ndar

y

x

x

Small BedrockBoulders

Core

Flake Tool

B. Shanks2/28/06

0 10 20 m

LA152349

N

Core

Core

49

LA152350

Site Description: The site consists of a fairly light scatter of flaked and ground stone artifacts. The flaked lithic assemblage is composed of several secondary and tertiary flakes, three cores, one scraper, one hammerstone, one chopper, and five retouched flakes. Materials are locally available cherts and quartzite, represented about equally. Four one-hand manos were also found, all within 10 meters of each other.

The site is interpreted as a work area primarily focused on processing wild plants. The four manos may have been used to grind grass seeds or mesquite beans. Other activities on the site may have included hide processing and tool production. Because no temporally diagnostic tools were found, the site can not be assigned to a specific time period. However, given the fact that only flaked lithics and ground stone items were found on the site, it is thought to have been occupied prehistorically.




Manos


Sandstone Boulders

slope

Photo2944.jpg

x x

Site Boundary

ExistingTw

oTrack

Road

x

R. Larson3/1/06

0 10 20 m

LA152350

N


50

LA152351

Site Description: The site consists of a single structure and a small scatter of artifacts.

Structure 1 is the remains of a 15’ by 15’ one-room house. It was constructed of coursed masonry walls with mud mortar. The rocks in the walls are unmodified pieces of sandstone. No roofing materials are present; it is likely that they were salvaged after abandonment.

A few historic artifacts were found in the vicinity of the house. They include a clear glass jar with a screw lid, a beverage can with an aluminum cap, a can with the lid removed, and a piece of stamp-cut metal of unknown function. The artifacts appear to postdate the occupation of the house.

The site is interpreted as a short-term (possibly seasonal) habitation. It is located approximately one mile west/northwest of the settlement of Salado. Based on its location and similarities between this house and the structures in Salado, this site is thought to have been occupied during the late 1800’s, and to have probably been associated with the Hispanic settlement of the area.

NRHP Recommendation: More data are needed before an adequate assessment can be made of the site’s eligibility to the National Register of Historic Places. Although there is semi-standing architecture on the site, the high probability that the structure has been robbed of nonstone building materials minimizes the value of further architectural documentation. The lack of artifacts suggests that the site occupation was probably brief and that therefore the potential for significant cultural deposits in the house fill is low.




0 5 10 m

Sandstone Boulders

Photo2945.jpg

x

x

Axe CutStump

Can

Bottle

Metal

Rubble

B. Shanks3/1/06

LA152351

N

51

LA152352

Site Description: The site is situated on and around a small rocky knob in the vicinity of small drainages that empty into Salado Creek. The remains of two components, a prehistoric and an historic, are present on the site.

The prehistoric component consists of a fairly small scatter of flaked lithic artifacts. The surface assemblage is composed mostly of flakes from core testing, core reduction, and tool manufacture. Materials are locally available chert and quartzite, with the former being the more common of the two. Twenty tools were observed during recordation. They are six cores, two bifaces, two hammerstones, two choppers, and eight retouched flakes. The artifacts were found in a fairly even distribution around the rocky knob. No evidence was found of associated features. This component is interpreted as a short-term hunting-related work area. Activities probably included tool manufacture and game processing. The flaked lithic artifacts are thought to be the remains of a prehistoric occupation. However, since no temporally diagnostic tools were found in the assemblage, that occupation can not be assigned to a specific period.

The historic component is represented by the single feature. Feature 1 is constructed along the top of the knob. It consists of a 60’ long linear “wall” of stacked rocks placed between and on top of boulders. The wall runs northeast/southwest and is thought to have been the northwest portion of a sheep pen that was located southeast of the knob. Although no other walls were found to complete the enclosure, it is possible that a fence once arced around from one end of the rock wall to the other. Fencing materials, if they included wood posts and wire, could easily have been salvaged and used elsewhere. No historic artifacts were found. The constructed rock wall, if it is part of a sheep pen, may be associated with the Hispanic occupation of the area and may be contemporaneous with the settlement of Salado.





Sandstone Boulders

Photo2947.jpg

Site Boundary

Fea. 1

Knoll

To Rio Salado 130m

artifactconc.

boulders

R. Larson3/1/06

0 10 20 m

LA152352

N

52

LA152353

Site Description: The site consists of a fairly small, but moderately dense, scatter of flaked lithic artifacts. Most of the items are flakes from cobble testing and core reduction. Materials are locally available chert and quartzite, with the former being the more common of the two. The numerous cobbles found naturally on the site are probably the source of most of the material. Thirteen tools were found in addition to the flakes. They are six cores, four bifaces, one chopper, and two retouched flakes.

The site is interpreted as a short-term work area used primarily for the production of hunting-related tools. Because no temporally diagnostic tools were found, the site can not be assigned to a specific time period, but is thought to have been occupied during prehistorically.

NRHP Recommendation: The site is recommended as being not eligible to the National Register of Historic Places. The site appears seriously deflated and is not likely to contain intact significant deposits. The data potential of the site has been exhausted by site recordation.




relativeco

ntour lines

Sandstone Boulders

slope

Rim

Rock

Site Boundary

0 10 20 m

LA152353

NR. Larson3/2/06

proposedroad

53

LA152354

Site Description: The site consists of four stacked rock features (see map on next page), and is thought to be the remains of a fairly large historic Hispanic sheep corral. It is situated along a curving sandstone ledge that forms the upper edge of a small drainage basin open to the west. Soil consists of silt loam, the thickest deposit of which is found in the bottom of the basin. Bedrock is exposed in much of the area.

Feature 1 is represented by several short wall segments on top of the sandstone ledge. The wall segments are built of stacked and roughly coursed sandstone rocks. At present, the wall segments form a discontinuous barrier, approximately 300 feet long. In addition to the intact wall segments, collapsed wall rocks are found in some areas below the ledge. When originally constructed, the barrier was probably complete. The steep face of the rock ledge formed the barrier in some areas, with the constructed walls filling in gaps or supplementing low spots in the ledge.

Feature 2 consists of a north-south alignment of six rock piles located directly south of Feature 1. The alignment is approximately 120 feet long and is thought to be the remains of a fence. As such, it could have served as an extension of the rock wall barrier. The piles are each composed of 7-11 sandstone rocks. At present, they appear to be collapsed or displaced, but may have originally supported upright posts. They are located in an area of exposed bedrock and very thin soil, where digging holes for posts would not be practical. The rock piles are mostly spaced 15-20 feet apart, although the northernmost pile is about 40 feet from the next one to the south. A juniper tree currently grows in the middle between those two piles. It is possible that this tree served in place of the “missing” post. No fencing materials were found in association with the rock piles; it is likely they were salvaged long ago.

Feature 3 is an intact stone pedestal found below the ledge. It consists of six pieces of sandstone stacked in four courses. The upper two courses each consist of one large tabular rock. The function of the pedestal is not known.

Feature 4 is a rock pile similar to the ones that form Feature 2. It is located below the north end of the ledge. If this rock pile also supported a post, it may be the only remains of an enclosing fence that could have been constructed across the bottom of the drainage basin. Sediment deposition is fairly thick in the basin bottom and holes for fence posts could have easily been dug there. If the fence was later dismantled, no sign of it would be found today.

The bottom of the basin is fairly flat and is cut by several small drainages. The largest drainage contains a pool area where it runs off the sloping base of the bedrock ledge. It is possible that the pool area was dug out to hold more water and used as a water hole for the sheep.

In the bottom of the drainage basin was found a horseshoe. It might not be related to the occupation of the site.

The site is located approximately one mile west of the settlement of Salado. These two sites were probably contemporaneous.

NRHP Recommendation: The site is recommended as not eligible to the National Register of Historic Places. The site apparently contains very few artifacts and is not likely to contain intact significant deposits. The data potential of the site has been exhausted by site recordation.



54

Sandstone Boulders

Photo2953.jpg

x

Site

Boundary

Fea. 1

Fea. 2

Fea. 4

Fea. 3

Horse Shoe

Rock

Pile

Rock

Wall F

all

Rock

Wall

B. Shanks3/1/06

0 10 20 m

LA152354

N

sparse juniper, sumac, grasses,snakeweed, yucca, and mesquite


55

LA152355

Site Description: The site consists of two features and two dark green quartzite flakes.

Feature 1 is believed to be a roasting pit. It is evident on the surface as a depression filled with at least 50 cobbles. The cobbles are found inside the depression and surrounding the edge. They were probably gathered in the immediate area. Several of them are oxidized, spalled, and/or fire-cracked. Although no charcoal is visible, it is obvious that the cobbles were heated in the pit and it is likely that charcoal is present in the deeper fill of the pit.

Feature 2 is a small concentration of fire-cracked cobbles. Seven cobbles, most of which are heat-spalled and oxidized, were observed. Two small pieces of small diameter juniper wood, each with one burned end, were found with the fire-cracked rocks. Feature 2 is located on the slope above the east drainage. It is possible that the rocks were burned where they were found. If so, the fire-cracked rock and partially burned wood may be the remains of a hearth that has since eroded into the drainage.

The fact that the pit depression is still evident in Feature 1 suggests that it is probably not prehistoric. Otherwise, it would have probably completely filled with sediment over time. The morphology of the feature, with its pit form and cobble fill, suggests a Native American origin. The site may have been occupied historically by Navajo or Apache. It is interpreted as a short term-cooking area and possible camp.

NRHP Recommendation: The site is recommended as potentially eligible to the National Register of Historic Places. While the artifact scatter on the site is minimal and appears to be entirely surficial, it is very likely that intact deposits exist in Feature 1. Excavation and subsequent analysis of the feature fill could provide data relevant to the historic occupation of the area by the Navajo and Apache.





2-Track

Road

Sandstone Boulders

Photojpg.2974

Site

Boun

dary

0 10 20 m

LA152355

NB. Shanks3/2/06

F2

F1

flake

80 m to cliff rock

juni

per

flake

sparse juniper woodland with sumac,snakeweed, grasses, yucca, and cholla

56

LA152356

Site Description: The site is situated on a bluff overlooking the Pecos River. It consists of a fairly small and well-defined scatter of approximately 150 flaked lithic artifacts.

Artifacts are mostly secondary flakes, but also some tertiary and a few primary flakes. Biface thinning flakes are present, but not abundant. Materials are locally available cherts and quartzite, with the former being much more common. Located on the site were seven tools: two cores, one biface, one scraper, and three retouched flakes.

The site is interpreted as a short-term work area for the production of hunting-related tools. Other activities on the site probably included hide processing. Although the site is thought to have been occupied prehistorically, because no temporally diagnostic tools were found, the site cannot be assigned to a specific time period.





relative co

ntour lines

ArtifactConc.

Sandstone Boulders

slope

Photojpg.2976

Site Boundary

Pecos River

core scraperbiface

0 10 20 m

LA152356

NR. Larson3/2/06

grasses, yucca, and sumacwith sparse juniper

57

CHAPTER 6: SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS

The cultural resource survey located 30 sites, 65 isolated occurrences and 79 ax-cut trees. The majority (16) of sites are lithic scatters of unknown prehistoric cultural affiliation; several (8) are historic sites associated with the Hispanic town of Salado.

With regard to eligibility to the National Register of Historic Places, of the 30 sites, 18 are recommended as not eligible, four need more data before an adequate assessment can be made, and eight are recommended as eligible (see Table 6-1).

Table 6-1. Summary of Project Impacts, and NRHP and Management Recommendations

Site # NRHPRecommendation

Assessment of Project Impact ManagementRecommendation

LA001560 Eligible Avoided No further work

LA152328 Not Eligible Avoided No further work

LA152329 Eligible Avoided Mark on lot plat for avoidance







LA152336 Not Eligible Proposed road will be built through site No further work



LA152339 Not Eligible Two proposed roads will be built through site No further work




LA152343 Need Data Avoided No further work



LA152346 Need Data Proposed road will be built through site Monitor road blading, pad any discoveries










LA152356 Not Eligible Avoided No further work As can be seen from Table 6-1, 25 sites are avoided by proposed development activities. For the five unavoided sites, no further work is recommended for the four Not Eligible sites. For the Need Data site, archaeological monitoring of road blading is recommended; if buried cultural deposits are found, geotextile fabric and gravel padding is recommended. For the grave (LA152329), notation on the lot plat is recommended. If these stipulations are followed, the development of the ranch will not impact significant cultural resources, and it is recommended that archaeological clearance be given for the project.

58

REFERENCES

Brown, Sharon K. and Danny Gregory 2006 Culture History. Chapter 3 in Four Corners Archaeological Overview of the Sumner Lake Region.

Draft report submitted to the United States Bureau of Reclamantion. Four Corners Research, Tularosa.

Eldridge, Susanne 2001 Cemeteries of De Baca County. Private Printing. Ms. on file at Ft. Sumner Library. Ft. Sumner,

NM

Four Corners 2006 Archaeological Overview of the Sumner Lake Region. Draft report submitted to the United States

Bureau of Reclamantion. Four Corners Research, Tularosa.

Jelinek, Arthur J. 1967 A Prehistoric Sequence in the Middle Pecos Valley, New Mexico. Anthropological Papers,

Museum of Anthropology, University of Michigan, No. 31. Ann Arbor.

Kemrer, Meade 1994 Cultural Resources Inventory of Sumner Lake in East-Central New Mexico. Mariah Associates,

Inc., Albuquerque.

2006 Research Domains. Chapter 5 in Four Corners Archaeological Overview of the Sumner Lake Region. Draft report submitted to the United States Bureau of Reclamantion. Four Corners Research, Tularosa.

Laumbach, Karl W., and Patrick H. Beckett 1980 Prehistoric and Historic Indian populations in Southeastern New Mexico. The Artifact 18:4:35-70.

Parsons, H. R., Jr. 1981 Our Mid-Pecos History Living Water: The Families and Events - from Fort to Future. Privately

Printed, Fort Sumner, New Mexico.

Perlman, Susan E. 1996 Historical Overview of Sumner Lake lands, De Baca and Guadalupe Counties, New Mexico.

Report submitted to the USDI, Bureau of Reclamation, Albuquerque Area Office by SWCA, Inc., Albuquerque.

Pratt, Boyd C. and Dan Scurlock 1989 Llano, River, and Mountains: The Southeast New Mexico Regional Overview, vol. 1: Historic

Overview. New Mexico Historic Preservation Division, Santa Fe.

Rawson, Tricia 2006 personal communication). Discussions concerning oral histories with Eduardo Trujillo. Apparently

his two sisters are buried at the Salado Cemetery.

Sebastian, Lynne, and Signa Larralde 1989 Living on the Land: 11,000 Years of Human Adaptation in Southeastern New Mexico. Cultural

Resource Series No. 6. USDI, Bureau of Land Management, Santa Fe

Stuart and Gauthier1981 Prehistoric New Mexico: Background for Survey. University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque.

cultural resource sample survey of river ranches, de baca

Documents