Archeological Survey

A Cultural Resource Inventory of 247 acres of the Old Fort Lewis,

La Plata County, Colorado

By

Mona C. Charles

James Gustine

Danielle Sheptow

Alexis Schank

Department of Anthropology and Office of Community Services

Fort Lewis College

1000 Rim Drive

Durango, CO 81301

Report Prepared for the State Historic Fund

SHF 2007-02-019

Deliverable 3

Denver, CO

September 2008

i

Abstract

A cultural resource inventory of 247 acres surrounding and including the Old Fort Lewis

Complex near Hesperus, Colorado, was undertaken by the Anthropology Department at Fort

Lewis College. The archaeological inventory was but one component of a larger State Historical

Fund grant awarded to the Office of Community Services, at Fort Lewis College. The goal of the

project is to establish a multi-year program to protect the historic and archaeological resources at

the Old Fort Complex while accommodating the existing use of the facility. The other

components of the assessment and preservation plan include a historic buildings survey of

standing architecture and a structure conditions assessment of the buildings. As a result of the

cultural resource inventory, 21 newly recorded archaeological sites were identified, 14 isolated

finds were recorded, and a single site 5LP1968 was reevaluated. One prehistoric site was

recorded and the remaining sites are historic. The dominant historic site type is general artifact

scatters. The sites are related to the use of Fort Lewis from its incipient occupation in 1881 as a

military outpost through its tenure as a junior college until the college moved to its present

location in Durango in 1956. The 21 newly recorded sites are recommended as contributing to a

potential historic district under Criterion A of the National Register of Historic Places. Each site

is also evaluated individually for potential nomination to the National Register of Historic

Places. The 14 isolated finds are not recommended as eligible for inclusion in the National

Register of Historic places. The Old Fort Lewis Complex, which includes both the educational

and military facilities, is assigned one site number-Smithsonian number 5LP1968. Twenty-eight

features were recorded within the Complex. These include building foundations, side-walks,

artifact scatters, ski-lift, skating pond, rodeo grounds, entrance gates, and a retaining wall.

ii

Table of Contents

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

Culture History . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

Prehistoric . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

Protohistoric . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7

Historic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7

Literature Review . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8

Methods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9

Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11

Conclusions and Management Recommendations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73

References Cited . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 77

Appendix I Feature Msps, 5LP1968

Appendix II Site Forms

iii

List of Figures

Figure 1. General location of the Old Fort Lewis archaeological inventory . . . . . . . . . . 2

Figure 2. Cultural resources documented for the Old Fort Lewis archaeological survey 12

Figure 3. Site 5LP1968, Educational Complex, Old Fort Lewis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13

Figure 4. Conversion of survey data to the GIS Geodatabase . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20

Figure 5. Southern entrance gates (Feature 1) looking north at 5LP1968 . . . . . . . . . . . 21

Figure 6. Portion of sidewalk on the main campus (Feature 4) at 5LP1968 . . . . . . . . . 22

Figure 7. Portion of the old ski lift (Feature 5) at 5LP1968 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23

Figure 8. Foundation of Feature 8 at 5LP1968 (old carriage house in background) . . . 24

Figure 9. Grass outline of foundation of Feature 9 at 5LP1968 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24

Figure 10. Unknown foundation of Feature 12 at 5LP1968 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25

Figure 11. Feature 13, experimental farm at 5LP1968 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26

Figure 12. Feature 18, former faculty residence at 5LP1968 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28

Figure 13. Foundation attached to a sidewalk (Feature 19) at 5LP1968 . . . . . . . . . . . . 28

Figure 14. Headgate of the H & H Ditch (Feature 1) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31

Figure 15. Plan map of Feature 1, site 5LP8426.1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32

Figure 16. Headgate for the H & H Ditch (Feature 2) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33

Figure 17. Recording Station for the H & H Ditch (Feature 3) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33

Figure 18. View of 5LP8427 looking east . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34

Figure 19. Plan map of 5LP8427 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35

Figure 20. View of 5LP8428 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36


Figure 22. View of 5LP8429 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38

iv


Figure 24. View of 5LP8430 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40


Figure 26. Site overview of 5LP8431 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42

Figure 27. Plan map of Locus A at site 5LP8431 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43

Figure 28. Overview of 5LP8432 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44


Figure 30. View of 5LP8433 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46


Figure 32. View of rock-lined features (graves?) at 5LP8434 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49

Figure 33. View of depression features (graves?) at 5LP8434 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49

Figure 34. Plan map of old cemetery, site 5LP8434 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50

Figure 35. Overview of the main dump area, 5LP8435. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51

Figure 36. Plan map of 5LP8435 with Features A through D . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52

Figure 37. Wooden structure (Feature 1) at 5LP8436 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53


Figure 39. Site overview of 5LP8437 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55


Figure 41. View of 5LP8438, looking north toward Red Mesa Power Station . . . . . . 57


Figure 43. View of 5LP8439 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59


Figure 45. View of 5LP8440 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61

v

Figure 46. Plan map of 5LP8440 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62

Figure 47. Concrete and cobble feature at 5LP8441 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63

Figure 48. Plan map of rock and concrete feature, 5LP8441 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64

Figure 49. Site overview of 5LP8442 from the east . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65


Figure 51. Overview of broken down plow at site 5LP8443 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67


Figure 53. Lory Spring gate, site 5LP8444 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69

Figure 54. Plan map of headgate at Lory Spring site 5LP8444 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70

Figure 55. Site overview of 5LP8445 looking southwest . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71


Figure 57. Overview of target staging area at site 5LP8446 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73


List of Tables

Table 1. Cultural Resources documented, Old Fort Lewis archaeological survey . . . . . 14

Table 2. Collected Artifacts from the Old Fort Lewis archaeological survey. . . . . . . . . . 17

.

1

1.0 Introduction

A cultural resource inventory around and including the Old Fort Lewis complex was

conducted in May through July of 2007 as part of State Historical Fund grant 2007-02-019

awarded to the Office of Community Services (OCS) at Fort Lewis College (FLC). The first

documented use of the Old Fort Lewis in Hesperus, Colorado was as a U.S. military post. In

August of 1880 the original Fort Lewis in Pagosa Springs moved to the Hesperus location where

it was active until it was decommissioned in 1891. At this time, the land and the buildings were

transferred to the Secretary of Interior to be used as an Indian boarding school. The boarding

school operated until 1911. Declining enrollment in boarding schools in general along with the

construction of schools on the reservations brought a close to the period of Indian boarding

schools. Many of the buildings constructed by the military were reused during the boarding

school tenure while others were demolished. New buildings were constructed to accommodate

the boarding school staff and students. In January 1911, the boarding school closed and the

6318-acre military reservation and infrastructure were transferred to the state of Colorado where

it was converted to a rural high school. In 1927, college courses were added to the high school

curriculum and it became a two-year college in 1933. The two-year college was housed at the

Old Fort Lewis until 1956 when it moved to its present location in Durango. Throughout this

time, many new buildings were added and a few older ones were destroyed or remodeled. Today

the campus houses Colorado State Universitys San Juan Basin Research Center (SUBRC), one

of ten experimental stations in the state. Other uses of the campus include hands-on teaching by

the biology and physics departments at Fort Lewis College and general use of the campus by

members of the community at large. The Mesa Verde Interagency Helitak fire crew and the San

Juan Hot Shots used the property for office space, living quarters, and training grounds.

Prior to the militarys presence, this part of the La Plata Valley was used extensively

during prehistoric and protohistoric times. Archaic, Basketmaker, and Puebloan sites are found

on the terraces and mesas above the La Plata River. Previous archaeological work shows that the

heaviest prehistoric occupation was in the lower reaches of the river near its confluence with the

San Juan River during the Pueblo II and Pueblo III periods. Earlier, the Basketmaker and Pueblo

I people preferred the higher elevations of the upper La Plata River where a series of stepped

terraces with deep, well-drained soils, adequate water supplies, land for crops, and plenty of fuel

and construction materials were readily available and inviting. The Ute and Navajo camped in

the valley and their sites, although much less visible than the earlier settlers, are present in the

form of lithic and ceramic scatters and scarred Ponderosa pine trees. It is even rumored that early

Spanish explorers passed through the valley very near the site of the Old Fort Lewis.

Given this long history of use, reuse, and abandonment it was anticipated that the 247

acre survey area surrounding and including Old Fort Lewis would yield a high number of sites

most of which would relate to the historic occupation. Additionally, it was predicted that a

number of prehistoric sites would be encountered on the terraces above the river.

The survey area includes land on either side of the La Plata River on the floodplain, the

T1 terrace, and some areas on the T2 terrace (Figure 1). A somewhat arbitrary polygon

encompassing approximately 247 acres is designated as a local historical district (Francis 2006).

3

2.0 Culture History

Prehistoric

The prehistory of this project falls within the broader prehistory of the Colorado Plateau and

adjacent cultural regions including the Greater Southwest and the Great Basin. The earliest Paleo

Indian presence is from groups described by Pitblado (1993) as a Foothills/Mountain adaptation.

A study of projectile points from the San Juan National Forest (SJNF) north of the Old Fort

Lewis site suggests that resident populations possessed a material culture inventory that

evidenced the influences of both Great Basin and Oshara complexes (Charles 1998). Black

(1991) argues for an in situ origin for the mountains of Colorado, which he names the Mountain

Tradition. Regardless of the specific origins, Native American occupation and utilization of the

project area began with the end of the last glacial retreat about 13,000 years ago and continued

until the late 1800s with the arrival of the large numbers of EuroAmericans.

Paleo Indian

The earliest definitive human occupation in North America is referred to as the Paleo

Indian period (9500-6000 BC). Seasonal occupation, a subsistence economy of large game

hunting, gathering wild plants, and a distinctive flaking technology define this period. There is

little evidence of Paleo Indian occupation in the project area, although projectile point fragments

of Paleo Indian points are reported from the nearby SJNF (Charles 1998; Charles and Curtis

1997; Pitbaldo 1993; York 1991). Bonnie Pitblado (1993) analyzed 166 projectile points from

110 locations in both public and private collections from 13 counties in Western and Southwest

Colorado. She concluded that Paleo Indian occupation in southwest Colorado developed from

resident Foothills-Mountain adapted groups, who practiced a generalized subsistence strategy, as

opposed to the specialized big-game hunters of the Plains. Unfortunately, the Paleo Indian period

is inconclusive in the archaeological record for the immediate area around the Old Fort Lewis,

and it can only be assumed that the paucity of Paleo Indian artifacts from the area reflects,

among other things, a sampling bias. Perhaps further work will lend insight into this little known

period in Southwestern Colorado.

Archaic

The next major period of human occupation is referred to as the Archaic period (6000

BC 500 BC). The Archaic period is separated into three sub-periods: early, middle, and late.

The Archaic economy was chiefly based on hunting and gathering. Archaic hunters relied on a

diverse flaked-lithic tool kit, increased social organization and seasonal sedentism. The Archaic

period is known for an increase in population as well as overall population dispersion. The

Archaic period is well represented from Ridges Basin, near the present study area, with

temporary hunting and gathering sites, as well as seasonal habitation sites (Charles 1992;

Nickens and Chandler 1981; Smiley 1995, Winters et al. 1986) and in the San Juan Mountains to

the north (Charles 1998, Duke 1998, Hibbets and Wharton 1980) where it has been suggested

that projectile point types loosely reflect Oshara typologies (Charles 1998). In the nearby

Durango area, terminal dates for the Archaic period occur around 300 - 500 BC (Charles 2000;

Smiley 1995).

The three periods are not equally represented in the area or in the nearby San Juan

Mountains. Instead, there is a relatively small number of sites that are attributed to the Early

Archaic Period. Presently, there are very few Early Archaic sites recorded in the area.

4

Beginning with the Middle Archaic Period, there is a substantial increase of sites over

that of the Early Archaic. Most of the diagnostic projectile points assigned to the Middle

Archaic most closely resemble the Bajada points of the Oshara Tradition to the south and large

side-notched varieties (Sudden Side-Notched and San Rafael Side-Notched) from the Great

Basin (Charles 1998). It has been speculated by many (Benedict) that the increase in Middle

Archaic sites from the mountains and higher elevations coincides with the Altithermal (Antevs

1955), a period of warmer temperatures and less effective moisture on the surrounding lower

elevations. The Late Archaic Period in the area is perhaps the least well understood of any of the

three, particularly because of the confusion surrounding the terminal Archaic/Basketmaker II

transition. Irwin-William (1973) introduced the En Medio phase (800 BC to AD 400) of the

Oshara Tradition to include the Late Archaic. It is certainly the case that many projectile points

from the immediate area resemble the En Medio types. However, if one considers a date of circa

300 to 500 BC for the emergence of the Baskemaker Tradition, then many sites previously

considered to be Late Archaic could be reassigned to the Basketmaker II period. There are sites

that lack evidence for cultigens but date to the period under discussion (Fuller 1988) in the

immediate area.

Basketmaker II (BM II)

The project area witnessed a major transitional development known as the Basketmaker

II period, beginning perhaps as early as 500 BC but no later than 300 BC and extending through

AD 450. This period is significant in the prehistory of the Southwest (Matson 1991) and

specifically in the Upper San Juan Drainage (including the Pine, Piedra, Animas, La Plata, and

San Juan Rivers and their tributaries), which includes the project area. Sites around Durango

specifically represent the largest settlements of Basketmaker II thus far known for Southwest

Colorado. Other nearby areas of concentrated Basketmaker II sites include the Navajo Reservoir

(Charles, Hovezak and Sesler 2006; Sesler and Hovezak 2006; Eddy 1966), less than 30 miles

from Durango. Scattered Basketmaker II habitation sites were excavated in the La Plata River

Valley (Reed and Horn 1988; Brown 1991) and in the Dolores River Valley (Gross 1988). This

period is defined by use of domesticated crops for subsistence (namely corn, and squash), which

may have led to permanent, year-round settlements. If the sites were not occupied year-round,

they were at least occupied for longer periods of time than the preceding Archaic habitations.

The Basketmaker II period is viewed as a developmental phase in southwest agriculture

from mobile hunters and gatherers of the Archaic period to sedentary farmers of later

Basketmaker and Puebloan periods. The transition from forager to farmer in the American

Southwest assumes a pivotal role in understanding the American agricultural system, and in the

Durango area, this transition is visible at sites such as Talus Village (Morris and Burgh 1954),

the Darkmold Site (Charles 2000), and the Falls Creek Shelters (Morris and Burgh 1954).

The Basketmaker II of the Durango area was first identified by Zeke Flora and Earl

Morris in the late 1930s and early 1940s. The work by Morris (Morris and Burgh 1954) resulted

in bringing to the discipline a more comprehensive view of Basketmaker II culture than was

available from the works of Kidder and Guernsey (Kidder and Guernsey 1919; Guernsey and

Kidder 1921). Up to this time, Basketmaker II sites were mostly represented by cave sites in

southwestern Utah (Grand Gulch) and northeastern Arizona (Atkins 1993; Blackburn and

Williamson 1997). The presence of habitation structures at the open site of TalusVillage and the

5

along with those from the Falls Creek Shelters suggested that habitation was either year-round or

at least semi-permanent indicating a greater subsistence upon cultigens that previously thought.

Morris and Burgh (1954) recognize differences between the Durango Basketmaker II and

those to the west in Utah and Arizona. These distinctions involve architecture, landscape

position, and artifact styles. Nevertheless, Morris and Burgh defend general cultural associations

by demonstrating that eastern and western groups possess 70% shared traits. Matson (1991)

recognizes the distinctions first identified by Morris and Burgh (1954) and notes that distinctive

differences in material culture and symbolic markers associated with architecture, projectile

point morphology, basketry, cordage, and rock art are sufficient to consider these two groups as

different but related traditions. More recently, Florence Lister (1997) reports early radiocarbon

dates for corn at the Falls Creek Shelters and notes the possibility of a relationship with Archaic

hunter-gatherers of the Uncompahgre Complex (Wormington and Lister 1956; Buckles 1971).

Charles and Cole (2006) believe that the Basketmaker II all across the American Southwest are

typical of a large population with individual differences that reflect their Archaic origins rather

than representing distinctively different ethnic groups.

Basketmaker III (BMIII)

Around AD 450, the area witnessed the end of the Basketmaker II period, which was

accompanied by an overall decrease in population that minimally lasted until AD 650 and

probably more like AD 700 to 750. The main cause for this drop in population has been

interpreted as climatic. It is generally accepted that pottery was introduced during this period,

although there is increasingly convincing evidence that pottery may have been introduced a bit

earlier during the Basketmaker II period (Wilson and Blinman 1993; Hovezak 2001). Two

sherds were found in the fill of a Basketmaker II burial from the Darkmold Site (Charles 2000).

Charcoal from this fill was dated to 1,78050 years BP (AD 120-390). Basketmaker III pottery

was either plain gray wares (Rosa Gray), lead-based glaze wares (Rosa Black-on-White), or

plain brownwares (Sambrito Brown). It is generally held that the bow-and-arrow replaced the

atlatl during this time period (see Reed and Kainer 1978 for an opposing argument). Pit

structures became larger and deeper for the most part, with more complex entryways and

antechambers. This period is known as the Basketmaker III period (AD 450-AD 700).

While there are Basketmaker III sites from the La Plata River valley, most of these are

further downstream and closer to the confluence of with the San Juan River. The Basketmaker III

occupation of the Animas Valley is equally scarce from the upper reaches. There are, however, a

few sites from the general area that date to the Basketmaker III period and certainly as one

travels west and south this occupational period becomes much better represented (Wilshusen

1999 b, c). The lack of well-dated sites has led to an inability to separate the defining qualities of

Basketmaker III from Pueblo I periods in the Durango area. This confusion has resulted in the

commonly accepted term Basketmaker III Pueblo I transitional period to categorize most sites in

this area. Lastly, not disregarding the above, there appears to have been a valid hiatus at this

time. Although, recent work by Curtis (1998) suggests the Durango area was not entirely

abandoned at this time, the archaeological evidence indicates that the area most certainly

witnessed a major period of reduced population if not abandonment.

6

Basketmaker III (BMIII) Pueblo I (PI) Transitional and Pueblo I

The most visible occupational period represented in the area occurs between about AD

725 and AD 800. (Charles 1994; Charles and Schriever 1999; Duke 1985; Fuller 1988; Gooding

1980; Gregg et al. 1995; Hibbets 1976; Wilshusen 1999 c; Winter et al. 1986). We have chosen

to lump Basketmaker III/Pueblo I Transitional with Pueblo I because it is becoming ever more

obvious that sites originally referred to as BMIII/PI Transitional should be singularly designated

as Pueblo I period sites based on architecture, social integration, and chronology. This period is

defined by aggregation into larger village communities consisting of two or more pit structures

and increased surface structures most likely used for storage. This period of aggregation is

believed by many to have occurred because of continued climactic stress. According to Gooding

(1980), these villages are primarily situated on higher elevations, most likely to take advantage

of increased moisture. This period is most conspicuous in Bodo Industrial Park (Applegarth

1975; Charles 1994; Gooding 1980; Hibbets 1975), in Ridges Basin (Duke 1985; Fuller 1988;

Nickens and Chandler 1981; Smiley 1995; Winter et al. 1986), along Blue Mesa (Fetterman and

Honeycutt 1982; Hibbets 1975), in Hidden Valley (Carlson 1963), and along the La Plata River

Valley (Morris 1939; Wilshusen 1999 c).

The ceramic assemblage continued to be dominated by Rosa Gray and Rosa Black-on-

White with the introduction of neck-banded varieties.

Hunting undoubtedly played a major role in the lives of the Pueblo I population, and

almost certainly it is assumed that during this period there was a commitment to agriculture as

well. The importance of hunting (wild game may have supplied a smaller proportion of the total

diet), socially or politically should not be underestimated. Possibly the population participated in

limited residential mobility as suggested for other groups with similar subsistence and economic

strategies (Kent 1989). Regardless of subsistence strategies or mobility patterns, local Pueblo I

populations were fairly healthy (Martin and Goodman 1995). Dental data show frequencies of

caries to be consistent with other agricultural groups, but also that diet varied and was not

exclusively reliant upon maize.

Perhaps with continued climactic stress the inhabitants of the Durango area left to seek

areas where moisture was more abundant or where communal support was available. The La

Plata canyon, the Dolores River Valley, Navajo Reservoir, and Mesa Verde are all examples of

areas that were inhabited during later Pueblo I times ([AD 800-AD 900] Eddy 1966; Eddy et al.

1984; Hovezak 2001; Fuller 1988; Wilshusen 1999 c; Winters et al. 1986) after the Durango area

was abandoned. There is controversy over the presence of late Pueblo I occupations in the

Ridges Basin and Bodo Industrial Park areas, however, more terminal dates of occupation for the

region and additional clarifying information are still needed.

Pueblo II (PII) and Pueblo III (PIII)

The next time periods established for the Four Corners region are Pueblo II and Pueblo

III (AD 900-AD 1300) periods. These periods are associated with the monumental architecture

of Chaco Canyon, Chimney Rock Pueblo, and Mesa Verde. There are no major habitation sites

associated with these time periods in the immediate vicinity of the project, but as one travels

south and west, sites belonging to these period become common. The lower reaches of the La

7

Plata River and the Mancos and Johnson canyons are host to numerous large and small Pueblo II

and Pueblo III sites. The sites of Aztec Ruins, Solomon Ruins, and Mesa Verde are but a few of

the more popular of these. The La Plata River valley itself is home to several large sites

including the Holmes Group, Morris 39, and Morris 41 (Morris 1939). Most of these large sites

were heavily vandalized during the latter part of the 19th

century and first part of the 20th

century.

Protohistoric

After the major exodus of the Four Corners region about AD 1300, the area was likely

populated by Ute and Navajo tribes into the Protohistoric (AD 1500 - AD 1800) and historic

periods (Baker et al. 2007). This information is speculative because few archaeological remains

have been documented (Duke 1998; Hibbets and Wharton 1980; Heikes 1979; Morris and Burgh

1954). Historic accounts document the presence of Weeminuche and Capote Utes in direct

contact with Navajos in the vicinity of the La Plata Mountains (Hibbets and Wharton 1980;

Winter et al. 1986). Perhaps the lack of documented protohistoric sites is in part the result of the

inability of archaeologists to recognize these sites in the archaeological record (Duke and

Charles 1994). Early Navajo (Dinetah) sites are common in the surrounding areas, and sites with

probable Navajo affiliations have been excavated in the Navajo Reservoir District (Hester 1962),

lower in the La Plata Valley (Brown 1991; Reed and Horn 1988) and in the vicinity of Aztec,

New Mexico (Honeycutt and Fetterman 1994; Wilshusen 1995). Site LA49498, located on

properties leased by the La Plata Mine, was recorded by the Division of Conservation

Archaeology, Bloomfield, New Mexico as a possible burned hogan. The site was

subsequently excavated by Nickens and Associates and the remains of burned construction

beams produced radiocarbon dates with a range from AD 1437 to AD 1466 (Reed and Horn

1988:286). It has been argued, however, that these dates reflect the old wood problem and that

more appropriately the region was settled by the Navajo in the 16th

to 17th

centuries and by the

Ute closer to the 17th

century.

Historic

Early Historic

The project area began to be developed by Anglos and Hispanics beginning around the

1870s because of extensive mining operations in Durango and farther to the north in Silverton.

The city of Durango was established in 1880 by the Denver and Rio Grande Railroad.

Originally, the railroad had intended to make Animas City its destination, but when Animas City

failed to grant the railroad the demanded concessions, the railroad bought land to the south and

established the town of Durango in September of 1880 (Duke and Matlock 1999:53). Durango

soon became a primary economic center for the region. A narrow-gauge railroad (still in

operation today) linked Durango with Silverton to carry ores and supplies to and from this

isolated mining town. In addition, Durango claimed two smelters, San Juan and New York. Coal

was mined from La Plata and nearby counties to supply the smelters. A series of toll roads

connected Durango to the coal fields and to Silverton. These were quickly replaced by rail lines.

The history of the property on which Old Fort Lewis is located is discussed in detail in

the complementary report by Jill Seyfarth. The reader is referred to this report for the historical

overview of the project area.

8

3.0 Literature Review

The culture history of the project area is discussed in several large reports including early

works by Earl Morris along the La Plata District (Morris 1939) and archaeological mitigation

reports for the La Plata Highway (Toll no date). Several archaeological surveys of substantial

size provide a very thorough section on environment and culture history of Ridges Basin in their

survey report for the first Animas-La Plata Project. Complete Archaeological Service Associates

[CASA (Fuller 1988)] produced an excellent report summarizing the results of excavations from

several sites within the uranium tailings relocation project just north of the Bodo alluvial fan

between Ridges Basin and the Bodo Industrial Park. John D. Gooding (1980) edited a report on

the excavations of two Late Basketmaker III sites located within the highway relocation project

for Federal Highway 550 near the Bodo Industrial Park. These reports provide excellent culture

overviews of the Durango area.

The Colorado Council of Professional Archaeologists (CCPA) sponsored a series of

regional culture resource contexts intended to serve as guidelines for archaeological work within

the areas. The Southern Colorado River Basin prehistoric context (Lipe et al. 1999) is the source

for a broad cultural/historical perspective while providing details on specific sites throughout

southwestern Colorado including sites in the La Plata river valley. An older version of the

Colorado Prehistoric Context for Southwest Colorado (Eddy et al. 1984) provides useful

information as well even if it is a bit dated.

An excellent seven-set volume on the Animas-La Plata project in Ridges Basin is

available from Northern Arizona University. These volumes include synthetic reports of data and

literature research from previous investigations, including but certainly not limited to the

reexamination of cultural remains from the collections at FLC and the analysis and

interpretations of ceramics and flaked-lithic artifacts from surface collections performed since

the initial cultural resource investigations for the Animas-La Plata Project.

An overview of the archaeological resources for the United States Forest Service (USFS)

was spearheaded by Philip Duke of the Department of Anthropology at FLC. In this report Duke

(1998) provides an overview of the current state of knowledge regarding the cultural resources

located on USFS lands in southwest Colorado. Among its other valuable contributions are

several chapters devoted to quantifying and explaining the various culture historical periods

represented in the region.

Other reports that have synthesized information for specific time periods in and around

Durango include those written by Charles (2000, 2002a, 2002b), Charles and Schriever (1999),

Fetterman and Honeycutt (1982), McAndrews, et al. (2000), and Woods Canyon Archaeological

Consultants (1999). Two recent publications one by Lister (2000) and one by Duke and Matlock

(1999) are written for the general public and focus on the prehistory of Durango specifically. The

aforementioned reports are available at Reed Library on the FLC campus, the Durango Public

Library, or through interlibrary loan, and they are recommended for those interested in more

detailed information.

9

It is anticipated that the forthcoming multi-volume report by SWCA on the results of

survey, testing, and data recovery for the Animas La-Plata project will project much needed data

to our growing information on the prehistoric settlement of the Animas Valley. This multi-year

project emphasized sites dating to the Pueblo I period and how these sites fit in the overall

scheme of the settlement and abandonment of the upper portions of the Animas river drainage.

4.0 Methods

Archival work for the survey began in April and May of 2007 with a site file search from

the Colorado Historical Society (CHS), a search of the archives at the Center of Southwest

Studies (CSWS) and a visit to the Old Fort Lewis. The CHS search on Compass showed only

two sites had been recorded in the 247 acre tract. Site 5LP1968 and 5LP1969 were both recorded

in 1974. No information was provided on who recorded these sites nor was there any substantial

information on the sites themselves. 5LP1968 is named as the CSU Agricultural Experiment

Station and the site type is listed as Educational Complex with a date range from 1910 to 1919.

5LP1969 is recorded as a Fort with a date of 1880 to 1889. The name on the site form was Fort

Lewis Old No. 2, CSU AG Experiment.

The Center of Southwest Studies at FLC is the repository for most of the Fort Lewis

archival information including the military and boarding school records. Several maps are

housed in the Delaney Library along with historical photographs and various written records that

pertain to the Old Fort. Several days were spent with the maps and written documentation before

the field work.

Field work began with a reconnaissance of the property by Dr. Catherine Ortega and

myself. Dr. Ortega had spent a significant amount of research time at the Old Fort. The primary

objectives of our visit were to look over the project area, find some of the survey boundaries, and

to begin formulating a plan for conducting the survey. This visit was especially important to

decide on an area for the archeological field school to survey.

Field work followed on May 24th

with the FLC archaeological field school. We spent

four days conducting survey, site documentation, and remote sensing at Old Fort Lewis. William

Tsosie and Danielle Sheptow served in the capacity of teaching assistants along with Mona

Charles as the field school director. Participating field school students included the following:

Melissa Goade, James Gustine, Jon Hedlund, Kevin Lacy, Katherine Miterko, Marin Millen,

Cimarron Peterson, Jesse Robbins, Jonathan Sanford, Alexis Schank, Gerry Swickard, and

Crystal Tewell. Survey was conducted in transects with spacing about five meters apart. When

an artifact was found, the students were pulled from their transects to pin flag significant

artifacts, features, and the site boundaries. Maps were made of the sites with compass and tape.

Maps were drawn to true north, which was declinated to 14 degrees east. This was taken from

the Kline, CO. 7.5 U.S.G.S. quadrangle map. Map scales were variable and depended on the

size of the site and how much detail was needed. Each site datum and each isolated find were

mapped with both a Trimble III and a Garmin GPS. Students were trained in the use of both

instruments. Colorado Cultural Resource Survey forms for sites and isolated finds were

completed in the field. The appropriate supplemental forms were also completed. Site and

10

isolated find locations were plotted on the Kline, CO. 7.5U.S.G.S. quadrangle map as well as on

the aerial photograph provided by OCS. Black- and-white photographs were taken of each site

and each feature. Digital images were taken of individual artifacts.

In general, this same methodology was followed during the formal survey. The transect

width, however, was increased to 15 meters for the formal survey. Most of the survey was

conducted by following azimuth angles that corresponded to the angle of the survey block.

The inventory included sites, features, and isolated finds. An isolated find was usually

defined as a concentration of less than five artifacts. Sites were defined as loci of cultural activity

that are represented by more than five artifacts and/or features that indicate human presence.

Features could also include structures, foundations, graves, etc. Diagnostic artifacts or unusual or

exotic items were sketched in the field or photographed. A few diagnostic artifacts were

collected for further study in the lab.

The formal survey began on July 9th

and continued until July 26th

. Four crew members

and Mona Charles, the principal investigator, completed the survey. The crew members included

Danielle Sheptow, William Tsosie, James Gustine, and Alexis Schank. At the end of the survey,

we had completed a pedestrian survey of all 247 acres. Some areas were not surveyed if the

vegetation was too thick to see the ground such as along the river, or if the ground was too

swampy to walk. It should be noted that the heavy spring rains and winter snowmelt resulted in

thick grass and weed cover making visibility difficult. Undoubtedly we missed artifacts due to

this heavy vegetation. In particular cheatgrass was ubiquitous and other tall grasses obscured the

ground surface in some areas.

It became readily apparent that one adjustment had to be made during the formal survey.

It was decided that we would use one site number for the Old Fort Lewis Educational Complex,

whether discussing the military or the educational. In a few cases, the buildings of the earlier fort

were reused during the educational period. More often, however, buildings were torn down and

new ones constructed on the same location. A concerted attempt was made to locate any remains

of the buildings or features present on the historic maps and historic aerial photographs. In most

cases, nothing remained except for sidewalks, artifact scatters, and less commonly, left-over

foundations. We used our judgment to determine if the structures/features were part and parcel of

the original Old Fort Lewis Complex and whether they appeared on the historical maps which

would indicate their use and time range. In these cases, we recorded each feature/structure as a

Historic Feature within the larger Old Fort Lewis Complex. Historic Archaeological Component

forms were completed for each of these. We did not, however, map in any standing architecture

as this was the task of Jill Seyfarth, who conducted the standing architectural assessment survey.

Judgment was used to designate specific areas as sites rather than as features of the larger

complex. Reasons for deciding that an area was a site instead of a feature were based on

proximity to the complex, on whether it could be identified on any historic map, whether it was

used by members of the community at large and not specific to the Old Fort Lewis Complex, or

if we could not determine the use or function of the area. These areas include the shooting range,

the cemetery, the large dump, the prehistoric site, the H&H ditch, and several general artifact

scatters.

11

Laboratory work on the survey began with the field school results. Site forms that were

completed in the field were digitized into Word by the field school students and maps were

scanned and digitized into AutoCad. The GPS waypoints were differentially corrected and were

exported to ArcView shapefiles and then brought into ArcGIS. Location maps were made in

ArcGIS and individual sites maps were printed from the AutoCad drawings.

As a rule, artifacts were not collected. In many cases they were drawn or photographed in

the field. However, we did collect artifacts which we considered as temporally or culturally

diagnostic, that were unique and could provide more information about the function of the site or

that were in danger of begin lost, collected or eroded. Collected artifacts were given field

specimen (FS) numbers by site and/or feature number. Each artifact to be collected was bagged

separately, given the appropriate FS number, and the location taken with a GPS.

All collected artifacts were studied, photographed and/or drawn. Standard laboratory

procedures were implemented to adequately document these artifacts. The majority of artifacts

collected were glass, cartridges casings, and buttons. Miscellaneous artifacts collected included a

curry comb, metal spike, ceramics, a projectile point, a casket handle, and other miscellaneous

items. A spreadsheet in Microsoft Excel was created to record all of the important information

from the artifacts.

5.0 Results

Results of archaeological inventory are summarized in Tables 1 and 2. A total of 21 sites

were recorded along with 15 isolated finds (Figure 3). During the four days of field school we

recorded five sites and four isolated finds and the remainder was recorded during the formal

survey. All but one of the sites is historic and all most likely relate to the occupation of the Old

Fort Lewis Complex at some point throughout its 126 years of occupation. One site number,

5LP1968, was applied to the Old Fort Lewis Complex. Originally there were two site numbers

for the Old Fort Lewis Complex5LP1968 and 5LP1969. One was used specifically for the two

remaining military buildings. In discussion with Mary Sullivan at the OAHP, we made the

decision to use only site number 5LP1968 and to disregard the second number. We recorded a

total of 27 features that belong to 5LP1968 (Figure 4). Most of these are the ephemeral remains

of buildings that were destroyed or that burned. Examples of features within the Old Fort Lewis

Complex, 5LP1968 include the following: the skating pond, the tennis courts, the football field,

noted grounds, the entrance gates, the ski tow, the experimental farm, the side walk system, and

others.

A total of 76 artifacts were collected from the field for more detailed analysis. Table 3

summarizes the collected artifacts and provides date ranges, place of manufacture, and other

pertinent information when possible.

12

Figure 2. Cultural resources documented for the Old Fort Lewis archaeological survey.

FS # Northing Easting Site No.

1 4124315 762312 5LP8428

2 4124315 762312 5LP8428

3 4124285 762284 5LP8428

4 4124293 762291 5LP8428

5 4124288 762285 5LP8428

6 4124286 762285 5LP8428

7 4124323 762309 5LP8428

8 4124292 762287 5LP8428

9 4124294 762258 5LP8428

10 4124315 762312 5LP8428

11 4124308 762302 5LP8428

1 n/a n/a 5LP8429

2 n/a n/a 5LP8429

1 4124170 762202 5LP8431

2 4124174 762189 5LP8431

3 4124170 762189 5LP8431

4 4124170 762189 5LP8431

5 4124154 762170 5LP8431

6 4124193 762203 5LP8431

7 4124212 762222 5LP8431

8 4124206 762211 5LP8431

9 4124175 762209 5LP8431

10 4124232 762258 5LP8431

11 4124239 762262 5LP8431

1 4123833 761754 5LP8432

2 4123834 761766 5LP8432

3 4123843 761771 5LP8432

4 4123839 761763 5LP8432

5 4123840 761765 5LP8432

6 4123835 761759 5LP8432

7 4123866 761806 5LP8432

8 4123903 761859 5LP8432

9 4123897 761816 5LP8432

17

OFL-011

OFL-011

OFL-011

OFL-011

OFL-011

OFL-07C

OFL-07C

OFL-011

OFL-011

OFL-011

OFL-011

OFL-07A

OFL-07A

OFL-07B

OFL-07B

OFL-07B

OFL-07B

OFL-02

OFL-03

OFL-03

OFL-07A

OFL-07A

OFL-07A

Unknown

OFL-02

OFL-02

OFL-02

OFL-02

OFL-02

OFL-02

OFL-02

OFL-02

OFL-02

Unknown

Mid-late 1900s

Whiskey Bottle

W.F. Murray and CO., Glasglow, 1870-1898

May 1886, Rifle: Frankfort Arsenal

Late 1800's-Early 1900's

Looks Reworked

Unknown

Unknown

Unknown

Civil War Era

Serving Bowl pre-1920

Unknown

32 oz Vitreous Stone Ink Bottle Circa 1862

Possible Derby pottery, Salt Glaze pre-1920

Unknown

Unknown

April,1882:Carbine Rifle: Frankford Arsenal

Unknown

Unknown

Blue Willow Pattern

Unknown

Whiskey Bottle Top

Possible Inkwell Top 1885-1917

Unidentified White Ball

OFL-02 1930-Present

California Fig Syrup Co. 1880's

Unknown

45 Colt Government Benet Primer

Bead neck Finish 1985-1917

BR: Owens Illinois Glass Co. 1929-1930

Unknown

Unknown

Metal Stake

Curry Brush

Brown Bottle Top

Stamped Crockery

Cartridge Casings

Milk Glass Button

Projectile Point

Shell Fragment

Decorative Cast Iron Piece

Ax Head Fragment

Ceramic Bottle Tops

Blue and White Crockery

Cast Iron Piece with Lettering

Crockery Fragment w/mark

Crock Lid w/Handle-Unknown Object

Cast Iron Piece with Lettering

Keyhole

Cartridge Casing

Piece of a Marble

Decorative Cast Iron Piece

Blue and White Porcelain

Worked Clear Glass

Brown Bottle Top

Solarized Glass Bottle Neck

Clear Bottle Bottoms

Brass Cartridge Casing

Solarized Glass Bottle Neck

Brown and Clear Bottle Bottoms

Porcelain Doll Head

Crockery with Mark

Table 2. Collected artifacts from the Old Fort Lewis archaeological survey.

Artifact Temp No. Research Information

Plastic Button

Glass with Writing


10 4123891 761829 5LP8432

11 4123893 761840 5LP8432

1 4124504 762271 5LP8434

2 4124540 762287 5LP8434

1 4124483 762358 5LP8435

1 4124026 761690 5LP8438

2 4123999 761716 5LP8438

3 4124006 761707 5LP8438

1 4123934 761490 5LP1968

2 4123972 761515 5LP1968

3 4123973 761515 5LP1968

4 4123983 761511 5LP1968

5 4123979 761505 5LP1968

6 4173974 761508 5LP1968

7 4123974 761504 5LP1968

8 4123971 761502 5LP1968

9 4123967 761509 5LP1968

10 4123967 761509 5LP1968

11 4123977 761523 5LP1968

12 4123977 761523 5LP1968

24 4123976 761507 5LP1968

25 412397 761516 5LP1968

26 4123980 761522 5LP1968

27 4123953 761503 5LP1968

28 4124183 761543 5LP1968

29 4124187 761545 5LP1968

30 4124182 761549 5LP1968

33 4124618 761683 5LP1968

1 4123924 761553 5LP1968

2 4123890 761553 5LP1968

13 4124088 761556 5LP1968

14 4124091 761533 5LP1968

18


Clear Glass Bottle Neck OFL-011 Prescription Bottleneck

Military Button OFL-011 Schoville, 1850's-1865

OFL-023 Feat. 27 44-70 Maynard, 45/70 Govt. 1880, and Jan. 1884

Casket Handle OFL-013 Unknown

Ceramic and Metal Wheel OFL-013 Unknown

Military Button OFL-018 Horstmann Bros. Co 1859-1863

Black on Red Pottery Sherd OFL-014 Pueblo I-II 700 -1100 AD

Bone Toothbrush OFL-018 1780-1917: Cow Thighbone

Dressing Bottle Bottom OFL-018 Dressing: New York, USA

Glass Bottle Bottom OFL-023 Feat. 15 PAT. July 16, 1872

Hole in Top Can Lid OFL-023 Feat. 15 1810-1920

Green Bottle Neck and Lip OFL-023 Feat. 15 Prescription Bottleneck

Cartridge Casing OFL-023 Feat. 15 Unknown

Solarized Glass Bottle Neck OFL-023 Feat. 15 Prescription Bottleneck 1885-1917

Square Nail OFL-023 Feat. 15 Before 1850

Owens Illinois Glass Co. 1934

Military Button OFL-023 Feat. 15 1850-1865

Cartridge Casing OFL-023 Feat. 15 Unknown

OFL-023 Feat. 15 Cunninghams & Co. 1889-1907

Aqua Milk Bottle Lid OFL-023 Feat. 15 Cohensey Co. Philadelphia, 1876-1900

Aqua Glass Bottle Top OFL-023 Feat. 15 Straight Wine/Brandy 1800-1920

Whole Clear Bottle OFL-023 Feat. 15

Solarized Glass Bottom w/Cross OFL-023 Feat. 17 1885-1917

Bitters Brown Bottle Bottom OFL-023 Feat. 15 Saxlehner Bitterquelle 1863

Solarized Glass Bottle Neck OFL-023 Feat. 15 Prescription Bottle 1885-1917

Square Nail OFL-023 Feat. 17 Square Cut, Type B 1820 - 1890

Metal Pulley OFL-023 Feat. 17 Unknown

Marble OFL-023 Feat. 6 1926

Whole Clear Bottle OFL-023 Feat. 19 Whiskey Bottle

Aqua Glass Bottle Bottom OFL-023 Feat. 27 Burlington Glass Works 1877-1909

3 Cartridge Casings

White Marble OFL-023 Feat. 6 Mid 1800's to 1915

Research InformationTemp No.Artifact

Possible Perfume Atonizer 1919-1930OFL-023 Feat. 15Rose Glass Bottom

Cartridge Casing OFL-023 Feat. 15 Morse Casing-Meant for Reloading

Aqua Bottle Bottom


15 4124091 761533 5LP1968

16 4124084 761536 5LP1968

17 4124566 761645 5LP1968

18 4124335 761909 5LP1968

19 4124335 761909 5LP1968

20 4124335 761909 5LP1968

21 4124348 761895 5LP1968

22 4124426 761817 5LP1968

23 4124400 761812 5LP1968

31 4124295 761859 5LP1968

32 4124297 761859 5LP1968

34 4124174 761654 5LP1968

1 4124800 761901 5LP8445

19

Aqua Bottle Top OFL-023 Feat. 6 Flat or Patent 1800-1920's


Small Bottle OFL-023 Feat. 6 Possible Iodine Bottle

Artifact Temp No. Research Information

Whole Brown Bottle OFL-023 Prescription

Brown Bottle Bottom OFL-023 Modes Glass Company 1895-1904

Aqua Bottle Neck OFL-023 Double Ring Neck 1800-1920's

Crockery with Mark OFL-023 Unknown

Boy Scout Knife OFL-023 Pen Knife

Brass Disc OFL-023 Tack Ornament

Cartridge Casing OFL-023 Remington-Peters Cartridge Co. January 1800's

Unfired Bullet OFL-023 Remington-Federal Cartridge Co. Dec., 1883

Clear Glass Bottle Bottom OFL-023 Cannington and Shaw Co. 1875-1913

Cartridge Casing OFL-023 45 Colt

Spoon OFL-27 1847 Rogers Bros. Nickel and Silver

20

A stand-alone GIS was developed by James Gustine for the archaeological inventory. A

geodatabase that included the digitized AutoCad maps of the sites and the features from

5LP1968, the isolated finds, collected artifacts and their field specimen numbers, GPS datum and

boundary information, and associated raster were integrated into the GIS (Figure 4). This GIS is

one portion of a larger Old Fort Lewis GIS currently being constructed by the Office of

Community Services.

Survey to Geodatabase

GPS

DataConversion to Shapefile

OFL ArchaeologicalGeodatabase

Boundary

Differential Correction

Datum IF FS Feature SidewalkSurvey Parcel

Feature Classes

Remote Sensing

Data

Research

infoPhotos

CAD Maps

Figure 4. Conversion of survey data to the GIS geodatabase.

In the following section of the report, the individual sites, features and artifacts from the

sites are briefly discussed. The isolated finds are reported in Table 1 and this information is not

repeated in the following text. This sections begins with a discussion of the Old Fort Lewis

Complex, 5LP1968 and includes descriptions of the 28 associated features. Discussion of site

5LP1968 is following by a brief description of the twenty-one newly recorded sites.

5LP1968

5LP1968 consists of the military and educational complex of Fort Lewis up until the

colleges move to its current location in 1956. It is situated along the T2 and T3 terraces at an

elevation of 2317m (7600 ft) asl. It appears on the U.S.G.S. Kline 7.5 Quadrangle as the CSU

San Juan Basin Branch Agricultural Experimental Station, and consists of 84.4 acres (Figure 3).

On-site vegetation includes scrub oak, native grasses, and a large variety of introduced weeds,

trees, shrubs, and flowers. Riparian vegetation along with pinion and juniper trees can also be

found surrounding the site.

This site is now part of grazing land and a research center for cattle at the CSU

Agricultural Station. Within this site twenty-eight features were identified and recorded. The site

and its features are associated with the early occupation of the Old Fort Lewis beginning around

1881 and continuing up to at least 1956 when the education operation was moved to Durango.

Each of the 28 features is discussed separately. Computer maps of each feature are included in

21

Appendix A of this report. Photos are included in the following discussion when they enhance

the discussion. In many cases, the features are barely discernible from the ground. In these

instances, photos are not included in the text but are available in the individual site forms in

Appendix B.

Feature 1 consists of two gated entryways

located at the northern and southern ends of

the complex (Appendix A). The southern

entrance consists of two rock and concrete

pillars approximately 5.5m apart, along

with two metal poles, a concrete

foundation, and a nearby rock

alignment/foundation (Figure 5). Artifacts

include eleven pieces of scrap metal and a

gate/fence. The northern entryway is built

in the same construction style as the

southern gate, with the exception of four

metal pipes about 5 cm in diameter that

were included in the construction. These

stone pillars are 9.8 m apart, and measure 5

m in length. This gateway is still in use and

has suffered some damage. Artifacts

included with the feature are 13 pieces of

clear and light blue glass, fifteen wire

drawn and square nails, a metal stake, and

scrap metal. No artifacts were collected

from either gate entrance.

Feature 2 consists of a concrete slab and

pieces of foundation still in place with a

short distance of sidewalk (Appendix A).

This feature is believed to have been the

location of the gymnasium. It is located

just to the east and north of the rodeo

grounds, and 50 m north of the southern

gated entrance. A 9 cm inscription with no date is located on the northeast corner of the concrete

slab, and consists of the letters CHG. No artifacts were collected from Feature 2. Artifacts

recorded include clear and solarized glass, an aqua glass insulator, numerous square, wire drawn,

and roofing nails, a sanitary can, plaster, milled lumber, ceramic and cast iron pipe, mesh

reinforcement, and tar paper.

Feature 3 is the foundation remains of a large building, 100 m x 80 m, which could possibly have

been the Art building. There are remnants of a concrete foundation, bricks that were used in the

construction of the building, and a sidewalk (Feature 4) leading to the foundation. No artifacts

were collected from this feature. Artifacts noted include numerous pieces of different colored

glass (including solarized glass), whiteware, square and wire drawn nails, and a large density of

Figure 5. Southern entrance gates (Feature 1). Looking

north at 5LP1968.

22

concrete, brick, and plastic. There may be other artifacts located beneath the irrigation pipes that

are stored on top of the feature (Appendix A).

Feature 4 is the sidewalk system that runs

throughout 5LP1968 (Figure 6). The sidewalk

is constructed of concrete and is, in places,

overgrown with vegetation. Roads now cross

the sidewalk in areas and parts of it are no

longer there (Appendix A). Where visible, the

sidewalk was walked with a GPS unit. No

artifacts were recorded.

Feature 5 is the remains of a small ski-lift. It is

located on the terrace just behind the main

buildings on the west side of the parade

grounds (Figure 6). A hill on the northwest end

of the field, and a glass scatter to the north help

to establish the feature boundaries. This feature

consists of a straight line of two standing

wooden poles with a ski lift engine/motor to

the northwest (Appendix A). No artifacts were

collected from this feature. Artifacts reported

were numerous pieces and colors of glass, an

insulator, whiteware, wire drawn nails, milled

lumber, nuts, bolts, sheet metal, pipe, wire

cable, and a flywheel. Most of the artifacts

located within this site pertain to the ski lift.

Feature 6 consists of a concrete and sandstone

foundation that measures 4 m north-south x 1

m east-west, which is thought to be the

remains of the old military hospital and girls

dormitory (Appendix A). There is also a metal pipe with a cover coming out of the ground

approximately 23 m to the south of the foundation. There are sidewalk remnants that seem to

lead to the foundation to the northwest. Artifacts observed include numerous colors of glass

(solarized glass included), ceramic sewer pipe, blue and white porcelain with a lion emblem and

the word iron on it, roofing nails, scrap metal, bricks, plaster, and a pipe with kt valve No. 6

1/2 /Hemp/B6B inscribed on the lid. Collected artifacts include two marbles, a small bottle, and

an aqua bottle top.

Figure 6. Portion of sidewalk on the main campus (Feature 4)

at 5LP1968.

23

Figure 7. Portion of the old ski lift (Feature 5) at 5LP1968.

Feature 7 is located at the far southwest end of the complex and north of the old football

field/rodeo arena. Two sidewalks lead to and from the few pieces of foundation that remain of

Lory Hall (Appendix A). The sidewalk on the southern end is flanked by three pine trees on

either side, which have been planted. No artifacts were collected from this feature. Artifacts

documented include several colors of glass, porcelain, milled lumber, plaster, sheet metal,

concrete, and bricks (one with the word Pueblo on it).

Feature 8 is comprised of a rectangular concrete foundation that levels out a slight west-facing

slope, and meets ground level on the eastern edge (Appendix A). The concrete foundation lies

directly behind (west of) the carriage house, and could have possibly been a stable of some sort

due to its proximity (Figure 8). The north and south walls of the foundation consist of solid

concrete, and the east wall is broken up into nine rectangular pieces of concrete. Inside the

foundation, five square pieces of concrete can be seen on the northeast and southwest ends of the

foundation. There were no artifacts collected at this feature. Artifacts observed include clear

and window glass, wire cut nails, an oil can, concrete, milled lumber, sandstone blocks, bolts,

metal pipe, an electrical outlet connected to wire, a black button, a metal square tub with holes,

and two bricks with THE DE/HIFH/FIRE L.

Feature 9 was located by a change in vegetation (Figure 8). It lies directly to the northeast of the

stone warehouse building. A small section of concrete is exposed at the northern end of the

foundation (Appendix A). No artifacts were collected from Feature 9. Artifacts were observed

and include brick, milled lumber, and sandstone. The original use was most likely a chicken

house.

24

Figure 8. Foundation of Feature 8 at 5LP1968 (old carriage house in background).

Figure 9. Grass outline of foundation of Feature 9 at 5LP1968.

Feature 10 consists of an exposed foundation (30 m east-west x 32 m north-south) that lies to the

east of Feature 9, and about 50 m from the access road on Hwy 140 (Appendix A). A utility post

25

can be seen next to a tree on the western side of the foundation. Plaster is visible on the

foundation that lies next to the utility pole that is no longer in use but which has ceramic

resisters. Three evergreen trees to the southwest of the foundation were most likely planted there.

No artifacts were collected from Feature 10. Artifacts reported include numerous colors of glass

(including solarized glass), three pieces of white porcelain, a square nail, a piece of scrap metal,

and concrete.

Feature 11 is located to the west of Hwy 140. It consists of a cement foundation (4.6 m x 3.1 m)

with a line of fencing that extends from the southeast corner of the foundation (Appendix A).

About 20 m to the east lays a pile of milled lumber with metal rings around pieces of it and scrap

metal. Tall grasses and scrub oak cover parts of this feature, and artifacts are sparse in this area,

aside from the trash from Hwy 140. No artifacts were collected, but those observed include

square and wire cut nails, metal pipe, ceramic sewer pipe, pumice, and scrap metal.

Feature 12 consists of a large rectangular concrete foundation that measures approximately 45 m

x 10 m (Figure 10). The foundation sits level with the ground, but has been filled in with manure

Figure 10. Unknown foundation of Feature 12 at 5LP1968.

that in some places obscures the boundary. A large earthen mound lies to the east of the

foundation and runs parallel with it. Part of the sidewalk (Feature 4) parallels the foundation

along the west wide (Appendix A). Few artifacts are present and none were collected. The

26

condition of the grass was cut but dense, and more artifacts could be obscured in the vegetation.

Artifacts observed include numerous colors of glass (including solarized glass), porcelain,

ceramic sewer pipe, square headed nails, metal pipe, rebar, concrete, and scrap metal.

Feature 13 is comprised of the experimental farm remains (Figure 11). A set of two concrete

foundations and scattered artifacts define the boundaries of this feature (Appendix A)). A huge

scrap metal scatter is located to the southeast of the second foundation. To the northwest, 19

square concrete footers can be observed, and are in no specific order. No artifacts were collected

from this site but a few did yield diagnostic information. These include a metal auto jack

stamped with USA/Joseph SJ050, a seed can lid with Plant g. No.300A, a clear glass bottom

with Lange FD, and a Colorado license plate with 1920-140. Other artifacts observed

included numerous other pieces of glass, wire drawn nails, concrete foundation, concrete pylons

with rebar (five ripped out), milled lumber, brick, wire mesh, farm machinery, and pipe fittings.

Figure 11. Feature 13, experimental farm at 5LP1968.

Feature 14 consists of the old football field/rodeo grounds. The field measures 50 m x 100 m and

runs northwest-southeast (Appendix A). The field may have been turned into the rodeo grounds

during the high school or two year college era. It has a cattle chute on the northwest end with

barbed wire surrounding the field. The field is overgrown with weeds and invasive grasses, and

the fences have not been maintained. Artifacts that were recorded include wire drawn nails

associated with fencing, woven sheep fencing, barbed wire, milled lumber, and fence posts. No

artifacts were collected.

27

Feature 15 is located just west of Hwy 140 and on the southeast boundary line of the local

historical district (Appendix A). It is fairly large and is covered with tall grasses, sage, oak brush,

cottonwood trees, and cheatgrass. It lies on a slight slope from the terrace of the old highway to

the new highway. This feature is littered with numerous objects of interest including multiple

colors and pieces of glass (including solarized and rose glass), whiteware, porcelain, crockery,

wire drawn and square nails, sanitary cans, milled lumber, scrap metal, a metal shovel head,

stove leg and lid, metal strapping, and narrow gauge railroad line. Numerous artifacts were

collected, which include three cartridge casings, a hole-in-top lid, a glass bottle bottom, a green

bottleneck and lip, two solarized glass bottlenecks, a square nail, a military button, two aqua

glass bottlenecks, a whole clear bottle, an aqua bottle bottom, a bitters brown bottle bottom, and

a rose glass bottom. Feature 15 is thought to represent one of the early trash dumping areas

beginning as early as the military occupation and continuing through the Indian boarding school

period.

Feature 16 includes the two tennis courts that date to 1918. The tennis courts run northeast-

southwest and measure 11.7 m x 25.7 m (Appendix A). They may have originally been grass but

are now concrete pads, which are overgrown and used as storage for farm equipment and straw

bales. They parallel one another and are 3 meters apart. In the center of the two courts are two

metal pipes that would have held the nets. On the southwest end of the courts are three standing

poles. This may have held a net to catch the balls or could also have housed lights. An electrical

pole is present to the east of the courts. No artifacts were collected, and the only recorded

artifact was a can.

Feature 17 consists of a large scatter of artifacts on the southwest corner of the military parade

grounds (Appendix A). There are high density areas of coal and artifacts. A metal pipe/pole is

located to the southwest of the artifact scatter, and measures 7.6 m long by .5 m in diameter. This

is thought to be the location of the little boys dorm due to its location on military and boarding

school maps. Three artifacts were collected and they include a solarized glass bottom with a

cross, a square nail, and a metal pulley. Other artifacts observed include numerous colors of

glass, a Pepsi bottle, whiteware, crockery, wire drawn and square head (2 -6) nails, sanitary

cans, a crushed cartridge casing, milled lumber, wire, scrap metal, and a marble.

Feature 18 is located near the northeast corner of the parade grounds and approximately 80 m

northwest of the helipad. It consists of a concrete foundation with a sidewalk (Figure 12).

The foundation measures 14.7 m x 8 m and has a modern clothes line to the northeast (Appendix

A). No artifacts were collected in this feature. Others recorded were 3 inch wire cut nails, a large

coffee can, milled lumber, gas piping, a harrow plow, wheel barrow wheel, and laundry line

poles.

Feature 19 consists of a foundation that is attached to a sidewalk (Figure 12). It is located near

the northeast corner of the parade grounds and is approximately 30 m north of Feature 18. The

28

Figure 12. Feature 18, former faculty residence at 5LP1968 (Feature 14 in background).

Figure 13. Foundation attached to a sidewalk (Feature 19) at 5LP1968.

29

foundation exposure only measures 2.9 m, and has a concrete slab and a 2 m depression to the

west of it (Appendix A). One artifact was collected, and it was a complete clear whiskey bottle.

Other artifacts associated with this feature include bricks, milled lumber, concrete, and gas/water

pipes.

Feature 20 is located in the middle of the parade grounds and is known as the skating pond. This

feature consists of a shallow depression 22 m northeast-southwest by 72 m northwest-southeast

(Appendix A). The depression is lined by a small bank of pine trees to the north, west, and east.

The south boundary slopes up into a field. No artifacts were found in or around this feature.

Feature 21 consists of a foundation that appears as a concrete pad measuring 38 m north/south by

18 m east/west (Appendix A). There are two levels, which could point to an addition or to two

sheds next to one another, each with ramps/docks entering them. The larger section of concrete

has a small section of wall made of brick and mortar still standing at the northeast corner, while

the smaller section has sandstone footers. The foundation is now used as a storage pad for trailers

and other machinery. What is believed to be a flag pole is located to the southeast of the

foundation. No artifacts were collected. Recorded artifacts include clear and light green glass,

window glass, wire drawn nails, a can lid, brick, concrete, sandstone blocks, metal pipe, milled

lumber, scrap metal, plastic pipe, and bolts and screws in the foundation.

Feature 22 is located to the west of Hwy 140 and south of the fire district entrance sign. It lies

directly behind Feature 21 and consists of a raised cement foundation that measures 27 m

north/south x 22 m east/west (Appendix A). It is used as a parking area for farm equipment and

machinery and has a sewer pipe that runs directly east. Several small foundations lie around it

and may at one time have been a part of the larger piece. A few artifacts are scattered around and

include clear glass, five brown ceramic insulators, ten wire drawn nails, five tin cans, bricks,

plaster, scrap metal, metal pipe, metal roof shingles, and milled lumber. No artifacts were

collected from this feature.

Feature 23 is comprised of a concrete foundation that measures 26 m east/west x 9 m north/south

and is 1 m tall (Appendix A). Concrete steps lead off of the foundation on the northeast corner.

To the north is a concrete square line which may house a water or sewage pipeline. Wooden

planks cover holes in the foundation in a few places, and much of this feature has been filled in

with manure and is overgrown with various tall grasses. No artifacts were collected. Recorded

artifacts include clear glass, chicken wire, five wire drawn nails, cement, milled lumber, tin

shingles, plaster, corrugated tin, rebar, a ceramic insulator, barbed wire, and a wooden hinged

door.

Feature 24 consists of a concrete foundation with two sidewalks leading into itone in the front,

and one in the back (Appendix A). It is located west of Hwy 140, and west of Feature 22. This

feature is covered with tall grasses, including cheatgrass, and hawthorn trees. This feature is

being used as a housing area for irrigation pipes and black stall lines. No artifacts were collected,

and the artifact scatter was medium in density. Artifacts recorded include, clear, amber, and

window glass, a piece of whiteware with a blue stripe, roofing nails, wire drawn nails, scrap

metal, bricks, plaster, sandstone blocks, milled lumber, metal pipe, and a light fixture.

30

Feature 25 is comprised of a historic sidewalk (Feature 4) that connects to an entrance

foundation/sidewalk. A new machine shed straddles most of the foundation. The southeast corner

of the foundation juts out onto a road. Pumice and vegetation cover most of the feature, and the

structure measures 28 m x 36 m (Appendix A). No artifacts were collected from this feature, but

artifacts recorded include a piece of purple glass, brown and clear glass, and concrete.

Feature 26 is located on the west side of Hwy 140 and directly south of the present day office.

This feature lies directly in the middle of a new road and very little of the foundation can be

seen. Two sidewalks lead up to what used to be a building (Appendix A). The main sidewalk

crosses the road and meets up with the circular sidewalk of the library. No artifacts were

collected and very few were recorded due to the scarcity of the objects. The only artifacts

recorded include clear glass, milled lumber, and concrete.

Feature 27 is possibly related to the processing of sewage/waste from the Old Fort. It seems the

ceramic pipe leads across Hwy 140 towards the main complex. Feature 27 consists of a

rectangular foundation 15.1 m x 4.2 m and 1.5 m deep with a ceramic pipe that extends from and

continues to the north (Appendix A). It is divided into four sections, and some of the walls have

started to give way. It is overgrown with cottonwood trees and other heavy vegetation. It is

located to the east of Hwy 140 and to the west of the La Plata River. The feature boundary

measures 92.5 m x 40 m as determined by the extent of the artifact scatter. Four artifacts were

collected from this feature. These include three cartridge casings and an aqua-colored glass bottle

bottom. Other artifacts that were observed were numerous colors of glass (including solarized

glass), ceramic sewage pipe, porcelain, whiteware, one handmade nail, bricks, concrete, scrap

metal, cast iron pipe, and a metal shovel.

Feature 28 consists of a retaining wall that is located on the southeast end of the historical

district, and on the west side of Hwy 140. It is constructed of sandstone blocks that range in size

from 10 cm to 70 cm in diameter (Appendix A). River cobbles of various lithologies and

concrete were also used in the construction. The entire length of the wall is 50 m, and ranges

from 15 cm to 2 m tall and is 50 cm thick. It runs somewhat east to west at 230 degrees, and is

capped with concrete. The concrete cap bears the inscription JEHH, and JBW. Four cast iron

pipes can be seen on the top of the wall, along the base, and on the eastern most end of the

retaining wall. Each pipe is filled with concrete and is 10 cm in diameter. No artifacts were

collected and the few recorded include cast iron pipes and wire.

The 247-acre parcel including and surrounding the Old Fort Lewis Complex is included

in the La Plata County Historical Record. The Old Fort Lewis Complex is recommended as

potentially eligible under Criterion A for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places as

a contributing site to a larger historic district that includes the Old Fort Lewis Complex as well

as individual sites. The complex is also eligible for nomination under Criterion D for its potential

to yield significant archaeological information.

The following section includes brief discussions, maps, and often illustrations of the 21

sites that were recorded during the archaeological inventory of the 247 acre parcel designated as

the Old Fort Lewis Historic District and included in the La Plata County Historical Register.

31

5LP8426.1

This site includes the portion of the H & H Ditch running through the survey area. It runs

approximately 600 m from the head gate to the southeast corner of the survey area. The ditch

diverts water from the east side of the La Plata River and generally parallels the edge of the first

terrace. There are three head gates/gauging stations associated with the H & H Ditch that were

recorded with this survey. Riparian vegetation is associated with this site.

Feature 1 is the main head gate that comes off the La Plata River (Figure 14 and Figure 15). It is

constructed of concrete, diamond-plated steel, and angle iron. The structure measures 5.7 m

north/south by 22.28 m east/west, and stands 2.2 m from the river bottom. Feature 2 is the gate

that diverts some of the water back to the La Plata River (Figure 16). It is constructed from the

same materials as Feature 1. It is located underneath a wooden bridge that allows access across

the ditch. It measures 3.7 m north-south by 4.9 m east-west. Feature 3 is a gate along the H & H

Ditch that acts as a recording station with a concrete and wooden storage hut associated (Figure

17). No artifacts are associated with the ditch.

All of the head gates along the H & H Ditch appear to have recent upgrades and upkeep.

The ditch played a large role in the settlement and economic development of the Fort Lewis

Mesa. It is recommended as eligible for inclusion under Criterion A in the NRHP as contributing

to a potentially eligible historic district. This segment of the H & H ditch is also recommended

as eligible for nomination to the NRHP under Criterion A as a separate site.

Figure 14. Headgate of the H & H Ditch (Feature 1).

32

Figure 15. Plan map of Feature 1, site 5LP8426.1.

33

Figure 16. Headgate for the H & H Ditch (Feature 2).

Figure 17. Recording Station for the H & H Ditch (Feature 3).

34

5LP8427 (Red Brick Site)

This site is a historic brick and artifact scatter located on a T1 terrace to the east of the La

Plata River on the U.S.G.S. 7.5 Kline Quadrangle. It was recorded with the 2007 Fort Lewis

Archaeological Field School. The site is in an open meadow with various grasses, Gamble oak,

thistle, fringe sage, and yellow composite. It is also associated with the riparian environment

approximately 40 meters to the northwest (Figure 18). Site elevation is 2497 m (7610 ft) asl,

with a floodplain soil depth greater than 50 cm. The boundary of the site is the extent of

concentrated artifacts and is 76 m north-south by 45 m east-west with a slope of 2 degrees and a

slight southern aspect (Figure 19).

No artifacts were collected from 5LP8427. Artifacts recorded include the following:

broken glass, crockery and cans, two cartridge casings, sheet metal, cast iron, wire cable, one

piece of prehistoric lithic debitage, and a large concentration of bricks. Two types of brick are

present; a high-fire gray brick and low-fire adobe brick. The brick is concentrated in a central

area (Feature 1) but

also spreads thinly

across the site. Two

other features consist

of river rock

concentrations that

may have been used

as foundations. One

of the cartridge

casings was identified

as a .22 Winchester

rim fire that was

manufactured in the

1890s. A thick piece

of solarized glass was

also recorded (pre-

1915). These artifacts

date from the late

1800s to early 1900s.

The original use for 5LP8427 is unknown. It is part of a larger scattering of historic

artifacts throughout the meadow and near the main bridge crossing the La Plata River to the Old

Fort Lewis campus. The site is now part of grazing land for cattle at the CSU Agricultural

Station. The site is most likely associated with the early occupation of Fort Lewis at least up until

the early 1900s. The site is recommended as contributing to a potential historic district under

Criterion A. It is recommended as eligible for inclusion in the NRHP under Criterion D for its

archaeological potential.

Figure 18. View of 5LP8427 looking east.

35

Figure 19. Plan map of 5LP8427.

36

5LP8428

5LP8428 is a historic artifact scatter with a concrete foundation. It was recorded with the

2007 Fort Lewis Archaeological Field School. It is located on the edge of a T1 terrace to the east

of the La Plata River on the 7.5 U.S.G.S. Kline Quadrangle. The site is in an open meadow on

the edge of the floodplain with cottonwoods, scrub oak, various grasses, and rabbit brush (Figure

20). Elevation is 2316 m (7600 ft) als, with a rocky soil depth of 10 to 20 cm. The boundary of

the site is the extent of concentrated artifacts and is 90 m north-south by 60 m east-west with a

slope of 1 degree and a slight southern aspect (Figure 21).

The artifact scatter is moderate with one concentration that appears possibly to be a trash

dumping station. Observable artifacts include broken glass, decorated porcelain, crockery, a

railroad tie nail, seamed cans, a cartridge case, cast iron, and railroad ties. Dated artifacts include

a white plastic button whose date is unknown but began manufacture in 1870s, a small broken

rectangular California Fig Syrup bottle dated to the 1880s, solarized glass manufactured pre-

1915, a brown glass bottom with the inscription Illinois glass co. dated from 1929-1930, and a

ceramic marble piece dated to 1926. Eleven diagnostic artifacts were collected at this site.

Concrete slabs make up a small foundation (Feature 1) that measures 25 m x 5 m in size

with an unknown function. The railroad ties are an interesting component to this site, as rumors

lead that a small rail was built off the main railway line to the Old Fort Lewis to transport goods.

This site is near the main bridge across the La Plata River and main route that ran from the

railroad to the Old Fort Lewis campus.

Figure 20. View of 5LP8428 looking northwest.

37

Figure 21. Plan map of 5LP8428.

38

The original use for 5LP8428 is unknown but perhaps it is related to the rail system

present during the early days of Fort Lewis. This site is now part of grazing land for cattle at the

CSU Agricultural Station. The site is most likely associated with the early occupation of Fort

Lewis at least up until the early

Documents

Archeological Survey