1

Thesis

Soil Erosion and Transport of Archaeological Sites and

Artifacts on a Small Watershed in Northern New Mexico

Submitted by

Shannon Chauncey Smith

Department of Anthropology

In partial fulfillment of the requirements

for the Degree of Master of Arts

Colorado State University

Fort Collins, Colorado

Fall 2001

ii

iii

ABSTRACT OF THESIS

SOIL EROSION AND TRANSPORT OF ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITES AND

ARTIFACTS ON A SMALL WATERSHED IN NORTHERN NEW MEXICO

Natural and human induced changes to the landscape in Northern New Mexico

have caused increased erosion and disruption to archaeological sites. During a study of

erosion, an experiment was conducted to analyze the effects of erosion on archaeological

sites. Sediment yield measurements were collected from a rapidly eroding hillslope

(Frijolito Watershed Study Area) in Bandelier National Monument, NM. During the

early stages of study, significant numbers of artifacts were noted in the sediment yield.

From 1995-1997, all artifacts were collected from the sediment yield. In the three year

study, 1515 artifacts were recovered from sediment yields. The majority of artifacts were

yielded from three major runoff events. Artifacts on the modern ground surface within

the watershed were mapped and compared to the numbers of artifacts leaving the

watershed with the sediments. Results reveal that the lithic flakes and ceramic artifacts

on the watershed were leaving the watershed at similar rates.

It is clear from these numbers that archaeological integrity of the sites is being rapidly

compromised. A sedimentary grain-size comparison of artifacts showed consistent

sorting of archaeological material. The artifacts yielded from sediments leaving the

catchment were smaller than those remaining on the watershed in the archaeological

sites. The erosion processes acting on the watershed are having different consequences

on the three types of sites represented. Channel morphology, storm event characteristics,

soil type and cover, artifact characteristics, and erosion history all affect the result on

archaeology from hillslope erosion. The context of the archaeological sites is changing

iv

as the smaller fraction of materials is preferentially removed. The results of this

experiment suggest that archaeological site integrity is rapidly being compromised by

erosion.

Shannon Chauncey Smith Anthropology Department Colorado State University

Fort Collins, CO 80523 Fall 2001

v

Acknowledgements.

First, I wish to apologize. This thesis project has taken far too long. Second, I

wish to thank everyone who thought that I would actually finish someday. I would like

to thank Bradford P. Wilcox, John Pitlick, and Craig Allen for their detailed, inspiring

introduction into the physical and biological processes of the Pajarito Plateau while I was

working at Los Alamos National Laboratory. I am especially thankful to Brad for the

chance to work at LANL and for allowing me to set up my archaeological experiment

within his existing hydrologic study. I would also like to acknowledge the members of

‘Team Brad’ for more than three years of assistance and friendship. These include

Marvin O. Gard, Kevin D. Reid, Nicole L. Gotti, Jonathan R. Ferris and so many other

LANL students, technicians, and scientist.

I’d also like to thank the employees of Bandelier National Monument for their

kindness and help. I’d like to single-out Elizabeth Oster (aka Elizabeth O. Mozzillo) for

the many hours she spent speaking with me about archaeology. Kay Beeley was always

helpful in providing GIS info and assistance. I wish to thank Peter M. Dudey who

provided considerable friendship, enthusiasm, and knowledge about archaeology and

geology.

On a more personal note, I’d like to thank Christine M. Karbiwnyk, who gave me

quiet and firm badgering to finish. Thank you to all field workers who helped me to

collect data; Jonathan R. Ferris and Jennifer Martin, (Chris)Topher Tape, and the other

Smiths (Melissa and Dave). I would not have nearly the quality of graphics in this thesis

without help from Jim Frenzel, who made my line drawings into presentable figures. I

could not have found the time to finally write this document without the time off from the

vi

Forest Service that Jeff Overturf allowed. Finally, I wish to thank my committee

members for their time and patience.

For further reading on hydrology from LANL please see the other ‘TEAM

BRAD’ students: see (Gotti 1995) and (Reid 1997).

To obtain an electronic version of this entire document, please check with the

Colorado State University - Anthropology Department. An electronic copy of this

document is contained in the Anthropology Department’s thesis copy. In addition, the

author my be contacted at shannoncsmith@yahoo.com.

vii

Table of contents

Acknowledgements............................................................................................................. v

Table of contents............................................................................................................... vii

List of Figures and Tables.................................................................................................. ix

List of Archaeologic Sites.................................................................................................. xi

Part I Erosion of Archaeological sites ......................................................................... 1

Chapter One Introduction......................................................................................... 1

1.1 The Project – Evaluating Archaeological Site Erosion................................... 3

1.2 Organization of the Thesis .............................................................................. 5

2.0 Geoarchaeology ............................................................................................. 7

2.1 Geoarchaeology in the FWSA ....................................................................... 9

Chapter Three Background...................................................................................... 16

3.1 Geography, Ecosystem, Climate, and Hydrology of the Study Area .......... 16

3.2 Geography.................................................................................................... 16

3.3 Environmental Setting: Piñon-Juniper, Ponderosa ecosystem..................... 18

3.4 Climate......................................................................................................... 20

3.5 Soils and Hydrology ..................................................................................... 21

3.6 Archaeology................................................................................................. 25

3.7 Archaeology and FWSA............................................................................... 25

Chapter Four Research Domain ............................................................................. 26

4.0 Research Problems....................................................................................... 26

4.1 Erosion: changing landscape........................................................................ 26

Chapter Five Theory and Research Orientation .................................................... 30

viii

5.0 Introduction: Asking Questions .................................................................... 30

5.1.0 Research Questions and Methods for answering each.............................. 30

5.1. Erosion and Context...................................................................................... 30

5.2 At what rate is archaeological context being altered? ................................. 32

5.3 Has the rate of archaeological alteration changed over time? ...................... 33

5.4 Future erosion and artifact loss. ................................................................... 33

Chapter Six Methods................................................................................................ 34

6.1 The Catchment Map and Locational information......................................... 34

6.2 Event Based Procedures and Rationales ....................................................... 39

6.3 Laboratory procedures .................................................................................. 47

Part III The Data....................................................................................................... 48

Chapter Seven Results.............................................................................................. 48

Chapter Eight Discussion........................................................................................ 67

Chapter Nine Conclusions...................................................................................... 74

Part IV............................................................................................................................... 78

Chapter Ten Future Directions ................................................................................. 78

Part V Supplemental Information ................................................................................ 80

Appendix A – Tabular Data.......................................................................................... 80

Appendix B – Site Summary and Preexisting Site Data............................................. 123

ix

List of Figures and Tables

Figures

Figure 1. Frijoles Watershed Study Area, Bandelier National Monument, Los Alamos, NM.

Figure 2 A Conceptual 3D image of the FWSA and associated Archaeological

Sites. Trees are at approximately 50% of actual density. Watershed boundary is in black, and site boundaries are in red. Sediment traps 1-4 and their catchments are labeled. The vertical scale is not exaggerated. East-west length of FWSA is 210 meters. The north-south dimension is 70 meters.

Figure 3. Aerial Photo of the FWSA Figure 4. GPS and Total Station map of the FWSA and associated archaeological

sites. Sites are in red, channels are in blue, main watershed and sediment trap watershed boundaries are in black. Sediment traps are black boxes.

Figure 5. Site sketch map of LA 569 from 1987 survey and recording. Transcribed

here by author. Figure 6. Site sketch map of LA60261. Originally drawn by BAS crews in 1987.

Transcribed here by author. Figure 7. Site sketch map of LA60262. Originally drawn by BAS crews in 1987.

Transcribed here by author. Figure 8 (Above) Example of a sediment trap. Sediment trap 4 upstream view after

event. Photo taken on 8-14-1995. (Below) Sediment Trap 4. View of accumulated sediment from rainfall

runoff event. Note rodent escape stick in center of sediment trap. Figure 9 (Above) Example of sediment yield from a single rainfall runoff event.

Sediment drying before final measurement and sieving/screening for artifacts.

(Below) Artifact screening. Jon Ferris and Jennifer Martin are assisting. Figure 10 (Above) Artifact transects being conducted above Sediment Trap 1.

Artifacts data collection assisted by volunteers: Dave & Melissa Smith (no relation).

(Below) Artifact transects within LA 569. Close-up of handmade PVC 1 meter grid square with Plugger™ GPS in background.

x

Figure 11 Summary of rainfall events on the FWSA. Only events greater than 3 mm are shown

Figure 12. Sediment Trap 4 artifact distributions. Cumulative percent distribution of

all artifacts from Sediment Trap 4. Figure 13 Sediment Trap 4 artifact distributions. Cumulative percent distribution of

all artifacts from Sediment Trap 4 by artifact type. Figure 14. Sediment Trap 1 artifact distributions. Cumulative percent distribution of

all artifacts from Sediment Trap 1. This sample is almost entirely lithics. Yield is not consistently smaller.

Figure 15. (Above) An obsidian flake on the edge of the main channel. Quarter in

front of flake for scale. The flake is pedestalled >3 mm. (Below) Same obsidian flake later in the same summer. Pedestal is ~10 mm.

Figure 16 (Above) Site overview of LA60262 from 1987 BAS recording. (Below) Site overview of LA60262 from 1997 during thesis project.

Tables

Table 1 Pajarito Plateau Chronology after (Mozzillo 1997) Table 2 Event Description Table Table 3 Sediment Yield for Frijolito Watershed Study Area: 1995 to 1997 Table 4 Sediment Trap Information: Characteristics of the Catchments Table 5 Artifact Yields for Frijolito Watershed Study Area 1995 to 1997 Table 6 Archaeological Site Description Table Table 7. Student t-test Results Table A.1. Artifact Transect Data – Source Artifacts Table A.2. Artifacts from the Sediment Traps – Yield Artifacts

xi

List of Archaeologic Sites

LA 569 — Pueblo

LA 60261 — Small Structure

LA 60262 — Lithic Scatter

1

Part I Erosion of Archaeological sites

Chapter One Introduction

Archaeology in the Southwestern United States generally has good preservation and a

unique quality of archaeological material that is because of the semi-arid climate.

Materials that would otherwise suffer the ravages of time in more humid climates are

preserved in semi-arid regions for archaeologists.

The same semi-arid climate that has preserved archaeological materials from the

past is contributing to present conditions of rapid erosion and disruption of archaeological

sites. While archaeological materials are well preserved, their context is presently being

rapidly reworked by erosional processes brought about by large-scale landscape changes.

The causes of these massive landscape changes over the last 100 years are both human

induced and natural (Allen 1989). Erosion at Bandelier National Monument is far

outpacing the natural processes of soil formation. Hillslopes, in some areas, are expected

to be devoid of soil in less than 50 years (Wilcox et al. 1996a).

Intense fluvial action and the resulting erosion are cause for concern to

archaeologists. Removal of materials to off-site locations makes interpretation of

archaeological materials problematic, limiting the possible cultural interpretation. With

continued unsustainable hillslope erosion, the eventual result is the destruction of the

archaeological record (Wainwright n.d.).

For Bandelier National Monument, there is a separate but related concern. The

monument was founded for the preservation of unique cultural and environmental

resources. The monument is meant to preserve the cultural heritage for science, the

2

public, education, and for the future. The first step in archaeological preservation is an

understanding of the processes involved with preservation and site stability (or

instability). Researchers at the monument have collected data on erosion at

archaeological sites in the past, but there are no ongoing studies of erosion directly

related to archaeology. This thesis will help address that need.

“In terms of process, artifacts can be considered sedimentary particles that

contribute to the final character of the archaeological record” (Rapp and Hill 1998: 18).

Since archaeological material and sediment are linked by original and post-depositional

processes, the alteration of one is directly connected to the other. Sediment yield is the

product produced when fluvial processes remove sediment from the hillslope, down

channels and out of the catchment. As Langbein and Schumm (1958) described in their

seminal paper, there is a distinct relationship between mean annual precipitation and

sediment yield from a watersheds where the semi-arid climate has the highest sediment

yield (Langbein and Schumm 1958). As rainfall increases from zero to the values found

in semi-arid regions, vegetative cover remains low. The erosion or sediment yield is

highest in semiarid regions where vegetative cover is low and not stabilized against the

impact of rainfall and runoff. As average yearly rainfall totals increase, vegetative cover

rapidly increases, thus stabilizing the soil.

Over the last century, human land use practices in the landscape of Bandelier

National Monument have severely altered the condition of the monument (Allen

1989:305-306). Changes to the modern landscape have drastically modified the

conditions of archaeological site preservation within Bandelier. With a loss of effective

ground cover, the level of erosion has dramatically increased within the Monument.

3

Subsequently, though individual artifacts remain in good preservation, site context is

severely altered by increased erosion.

Landscape scale erosion in Bandelier National Monument is an extreme problem

for the management of the National Monument (Sydoriak 1995:7, 230). The erosion

taking place within the monument threatens the integrity of natural and cultural

resources. Soil loss has been brought about by a combination of human induced causes

and drought, which has significantly changed the vegetative communities in some areas

of the Monument (Allen 1989). Piñon-Juniper (P-J) communities have expanded while

ponderosa and grasslands communities have decreased.

Within the P-J zone, it appears that a threshold for soil erosion has been breached

(Wilcox 1996a:62, 1993). The majority of Bandelier’s archaeological sites are within

this Piñon-Juniper zone (Archaeology Program 1997: Oster 1997) Of those sites in the

P-J vegetative zone, approximately 70 to 80% were documented by Bandelier

Archaeological Survey (BAS) to have erosion problems (Archaeology Program 1997;

Head 1992). During compliance work for the Monument’s Piñon-Juniper Restoration

Program, the author encountered substantial erosion on the majority of archaeological

sites. During another project in 1997, at least one site encountered by the author. was

reduced to nothing but shaped tuff blocks on bedrock.

1.1 The Project – Evaluating Archaeological Site Erosion

Bandelier National Monument, in conjunction with Los Alamos National Laboratory, and

later with help from the USGS Biological Survey, conducted an approximately one

hectare watershed study within Bandelier National Monument to evaluate the threats and

conditions associated with rapid erosion in the Piñon-Juniper vegetative community.

4

This watershed study has had several names associated with it. However, for the rest of

this thesis it will be referred to as the Frijolito Watershed Study Area (referred to as

FWSA or the catchment). Numerous scientific papers and a MIT graduate thesis have

been written concerning this watershed. To date the written material has dealt with

hydrology, soils, and ecology. This thesis introduces the study of archaeology into the

FWSA.

Rainfall, runoff, soil erosion and sediment yield measures were conducted in the

Frijolito Watershed Study Area from 1993 to 2000. This 1.2 hectare catchment is within

the semi-arid Piñon-Juniper woodland zone of Bandelier national Monument. High

intensity erosion (sediment and water yield) was documented on the FWSA from 1993-

2000 (Wilcox et al.1996a, 1996b and personal observation). As a hydrology student at

Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL), the author noted substantial alteration of the

archaeological sites within the catchment during the initial stages of the FWSA project.

Artifacts moved significant distances down slope during large rainstorm runoff sediment

producing events. In contrast, during small rainfall events of less than ten millimeters,

artifacts did not move significant distances. Artifacts were found in the sediment yield

collected in the channel sediment traps during 1993 and 1994. The hydrological study

originally had no protocols for dealing with archaeological materials.

During 1993 to 1995, the author recorded general field information, with no

formal plan to study the archaeological materials and erosion. After two years of

hydrological data collection and observation, the author asked permission to implement a

geoarchaeological study to assess the effects of rapid erosion on archaeological sites

within the FWSA. Using the original existing experimental setup and some additional

5

instrumentation, the author developed a proposal to evaluate artifact movement and

possible site disruption. Some of the more labor-intensive data collection was done with

the help of Bandelier National Monument and LANL staff. The majority of work that

contributed to this thesis was performed by the author and volunteers. No additional

work was imposed on the National Monument or LANL by this project. This thesis

project would not have been possible without the existing experimental setup and

permission from Bandelier National Monument and Los Alamos National Laboratory.

From 1995 to 1997, the author collected sediments and archaeological data from

within and at the outlet of the catchment in accordance with the Special-Use Permit

obtained for this thesis (Smith 1997). Artifacts were screened and collected from the

sediment yields after each rainstorm event. Artifacts were measured and documented,

then all of the artifacts were returned to Bandelier in 1999. The number of artifacts

collected in the sediment leaving the catchment revealed rapid artifact migration out of

the watershed. In total, 1515 artifacts were removed by fluvial processes during the three

year project.

The production of this thesis is one of the requirements stipulated by the Special-

Use Permit.

1.2 Organization of the Thesis

This thesis is organized into eleven Chapters. Chapter one introduces the reader to the

project, general goals and the organization of the thesis. Chapter two presents the

theoretical framework upon which the project is based. Chapter three provides the

background setting for the project. Chapter four begins this section by defining the

precise topics to be discussed and limit the scope of the research to achievable goals.

6

Chapter five defines research questions and hypotheses. Chapter six explains the method

by which data was collected. Chapter seven is a summary of the data analysis or results.

Chapter eight is a discussion of the data and how it applies to the archaeological sites.

Chapter nine presents the conclusions from this project. Chapter Ten specifies future

research that could be done related to this thesis. I intend to lay out some possible lines

of inquiry that would be helpful to archaeology in general and to Bandelier National

Monument managers.

7

Chapter Two Theoretical Orientation

2.0 Geoarchaeology

Geoarchaeology is the application of geological concepts and techniques to

archaeological questions (Rapp and Gifford 1982; Rapp and Hill 1998; Butzer 1980).

For example, an archaeologist may want to know how far individuals from a community

traveled to procure lithic tool making materials. In this case, geological maps of obsidian

and chert outcrops, as well as, specific sourcing techniques, which relate the distribution

of specific chemical elements contained in lithic materials, would greatly assist the

archaeologist. In the case of this thesis, the questions relate sediment transport to artifact

transport and site disruption. These questions are focused on both archaeological site

preservation and analysis of site formation processes.

Archaeology is a science, which by its nature, bridges many other sciences.

Archaeologists ask questions of human behavior through the study of the material record

(Schiffer 1983). This thesis addresses the condition of archaeological sites within a small

catchment in northern New Mexico. The condition of archaeological sites can be seen

through the concept of their associations, or context. The context of archaeological sites

is the spatial and temporal relationship among the archaeological materials (Butzer 1980).

Context is how archaeologists relate materials to human behavior and to cultures.

Without spatial context an individual artifact loses much its potential meaning.

Therefore, the questions being asked by this thesis are related primarily to archaeological

spatial context. How fast are the archaeological materials moving out of primary and

secondary spatial context into a tertiary context? (Rapp and Hill 1998: 18) How long

will the sites remain in their present condition? How are the archaeological sites being

8

altered by runoff and erosion? What are the hydrological event conditions that promote

sites destruction?

The arrangement of the material record is usually within or above a sedimentary

matrix. The processes that affect archaeological materials and sediments are the same.

As Rapp and Hill state, artifacts can be thought of as sediments (Rapp Jr. 1998: 5).

Therefore, to analyze the effects of erosion on artifacts, the same methods from

geomorphology and hydrology can be applied. In other words, the artifacts are simply a

‘special interest’ class of sediments. Wainwright (1994) sounds a cautionary note about

using bulk sediment transport rates when speaking about artifact transport. Artifacts can

be treated as a type of sediment, but it is important to know that artifacts range within

specific size classes and with unique physical properties. Due to their special nature,

there is the possibility of sampling bias and other conditions that may not be addressed by

geomorphic methods. The geoarchaeologist applying these methods must watch for the

possible problems associated with both. Specific results or effects of physical processes

for artifacts may be different from the average sedimentary particle on the hillslope, but

the basic processes remain the same.

The arrangement of geomorphic processes should leave a pattern on the ‘artifact

class’ of sediments in ways discernable through geomorphic methods. This is similar to

how archaeologists attempt to evaluate the patterning of artifacts found in sites to human

practices. Stein and Teltser (1989) summarize several geoarchaeological studies that

were conducted using grain-size distributions of artifacts and sediments to determine

characteristics of the archaeological record. Most of these studies attempt to deal with

the reconstruction of human behavior from archaeological materials. This thesis deals

9

with the patterning imposed on the original archaeological record by hydrologic and

geomorphic processes.

2.1 Geoarchaeology in the FWSA

Geoarchaeology is defined as the application of geological techniques and theories to

archaeological research problems. In the case of this thesis, one goal is to determine the

geomorphic effects and processes that apply to archaeological sites and artifacts within

the Frijolito Watershed Study Area. The major geomorphic processes under study are

hillslope-scale processes of runoff and erosion. Many other physical processes, such as

frost heaving, bioturbation, and wind, affect the condition of the archaeological sites in

the FWSA, but these will only be covered briefly. The main focus is on the hydrologic

processes. The effect of the non-hydrologic processes is not within the scope of this study

because of their low magnitude compared to runoff and erosion events. Most of these

non-hydrologic processes can make the artifacts more susceptible to hydrological

transport but do not apply intense force primarily in the downslope direction.

For geoarchaeologists, the archaeological questions are and should be their

prominent concern. Geology and related fields can be seen as tools to solve

archaeological questions (Butzer 1980). For this thesis, the concern is for the ‘condition’

of the archaeological remains.

The connections between archaeology and geomorphology are obvious and has a

long history. Archaeological materials interact directly with the earth and surface

processes from the point of original deposition. Archaeological materials lay on or are

contained within geological materials. As George ‘Rip’ Rapp Jr. and Christopher Hill

aptly state “in terms of process, artifacts can be considered sedimentary particles that

10

contribute to the final character of the archaeological record” (Rapp and Hill 1998: 18).

Conversely, for archaeologists it is inherent that the sediments involved with a site be

considered in interpretation of the site context. Any process that affects the sediments

around artifacts will invariably affect the archaeological component and artifacts. Soils

and sediments themselves can be ecofacts when associated with archaeological materials

in primary context. Ecofacts are physical evidence in the form of soil, sediments, pollen,

or other deposits. Ecofacts and site soils reveal information about the depositional

environment from before occupation through the time of abandonment to the present. In

addition, microartifacts and ecofacts can be indistinguishable from sediments without the

aid of microscopes. Sediments that can reveal information about the site itself and about

events after original deposition, are lost from site context to the same erosion that is

moving larger artifacts. Unfortunately, the scope of this study prevents a detailed

analysis of micro-artifacts and ecofacts. Sediment samples were collected and saved for

future research on this subject.

From deposition to exposure and transport, artifacts are linked to the soil and

sediments surrounding them. Thus, in order to observe some aspects of archaeology we,

as archaeologists, must work within and through geological materials. Sometimes this

consists of excavating a site, other times it is by the analysis of a soil sample that

archaeological questions are answered.

For this thesis, the basic question is of context. Is the archaeological context of

these sites being changed by the geomorphic processes acting on the soils and sediments

within the FWSA?

11

2.1.3 Sites boundaries versus watersheds.

There are complications to using geological methods in archaeology. One of the

most significant is the spatial boundary of each science. The boundaries for each science

are constructed differently. In order to relate data from one discipline to the other it is

necessary to understand how each is obtained.

Sites are the basic and arbitrary unit of measure for archaeologists. Size can

range from a few square meters (lithic scatter or small structure) to tens of square

kilometers. Generally, site size depends on the clustering of archaeological remains or

the material connections between them. It also depends on the archaeologist or resource

manager who records them. Within Bandelier National Monument, the criteria for

determining site boundaries consists of a rather close association of artifacts and features.

Bandelier National Monument has abundant archaeological resources that require an

arbitrarily defined artificial cutoff between sites. There is a continuous light density of

artifacts throughout the entire Monument punctuated by high density areas or ‘sites’. In

addition, archaeological sites are defined by what can be seen on the surface and recorded

by the archaeologist, not by what originally was there. The site parameters used for this

thesis reflect the original site recordings within the area under study. It is important to

note that the site boundaries defined here represent a concentration of archaeological

materials and not the exact boundary of artifacts. Site boundaries grade outward from a

central activity or focal location. Within the landscape of Bandelier artifacts are

continuous and a site boundary may represent approximately 80 or 90 percent of the

artifacts from that site that remain in the area. The remaining artifactual materials are

distributed outside of the site boundary.

12

Hydrology has a more precise definition for a spatial boundaries for study which

is the watershed boundary or catchment. The catchment is defined as the area where any

water falling via snow or rain would run downhill via channels and hillslope areas until it

reaches the outlet. This unit is equally arbitrary in actual application and depends on

where the catchment outlet is placed. In the case of the Frijolito Watershed Study Area,

the placement of the runoff measuring flume (Sediment Trap 5) determines the watershed

boundary.

The scale of archaeology sites and hydrologic catchments are not necessarily

linked and can be completely independent. In the case of the FWSA, the catchment and

sites are on a comparable scale and generally overlap. The sites within Bandelier are

approximately 10 to 10,000 m2. The FWSA boundary is approximately 12,000 m2.

There are two sites that are partially contained within the catchment (FWSA) and one that

is completely within the catchment. Figure 1 shows the relationship of the hydrologic

catchments and the archaeological sites.

On long-term time scales, sites and watershed boundaries change. Channels

migrate laterally and carve the landscape. In the case of the FWSA, the land is being

severely eroded (Wilcox et al. 1996a) and the catchment boundaries are in a state of flux

(personal observations 1993 to 1999). In some areas, the hillslope is behaving like a

braided channel (or alluvial fan) and is shifting laterally. The near surface bedrock is

limiting the channel's ability to down-cut and the hillslope is planar in cross section with

a small elevation change from across slope boundary to channel. Figure 2 shows that

general orientation of the catchment.

13

Figure 1: Frijoles Watershed Study Area, Bandelier National Monument, Los Alamos, NM

.

14

Figure 2. A conceptual 3D image of the FWSA and associated archaeological sites. Trees are at approximately 50% of actual density. Watershed boundary is in black, and site boundaries are in red. Sediment traps 1-4 and their catchments are labeled in blue. The vertical scale is not exaggerated. East-west length of FWSA is 210 meters. The north-south dimension is 70 meters.

15

Sites also change size over time. Added layers or occupations can expand a site

while massive disruption can obliterate a site. In the case of the sites in Bandelier, the

FWSA in particular, the site components are migrating downslope from the primary

context to secondary and tertiary context. Under this kind of erosion, many sites may

eventually become indiscernible from the background. At this point the site is for all

intent and purposes gone.

16

Chapter Three Background

3.1 Geography, Ecosystem, Climate, and Hydrology of the Study Area

In 1993, Bradford P. Wilcox, John Pitlick, and Craig D. Allen installed a hydrologic

study in Bandelier National Monument. The project area is known as the Frijolito

Watershed Study Area. The FWSA was intended to study hillslope processes within the

eroding Piñon-Juniper zone. The Frijolito Watershed Study Area was intended to be

complementary to several other hillslope and plot studies of runoff and erosion processes

on the Pajarito Plateau. The project started in 1993 with the installation of the flume to

measure runoff and with the mapping of the watershed boundary. Several smaller-scale

sets of experimentation were initially installed to measure runoff and erosion. Erosion

was much higher than initially expected and the experimental set-up was therefore

modified to include larger-scale sediment collectors. The large sediment collectors are

hereafter referred to as sediment traps. During this time, the author observed that the

archaeological sites within the watershed were being severely affected by the same

physical processes that were causing hillslope erosion. While the hydrological set-up

was being perfected, the author developed a general strategy for measuring the effects of

erosion on the archaeological sites. In 1995, the hydrologic study reached its final

configuration and the author began collecting data on the archaeological materials being

removed from the catchment.

3.2 Geography

The FWSA is located within Bandelier National Monument (Figure 1) in northern New

Mexico. The study area ranges from an elevation of 1963 meters (6440 feet) to 1993

17

meters (6540 feet). The exact location of the watershed is not revealed due to the

sensitive nature of the archaeological materials involved and the ongoing hydrologic

study. The Frijolito Watershed is located on the southwest aspect on the eastern part of

the Pajarito Plateau. The Jemez Mountains and the Valle Caldera are just to the west.

The Pajarito Plateau is a volcanic tuff curtain resulting from the eruption of the Valle

Caldera.

3.2.1 Maps

All site-specific maps have geo-reference information available. Any request for site-

specific information must be made through Bandelier National Monument and the Park

Archaeologist (phone 505-672-3861 extension: 543).

3.2.2 Political Location

The project area is located within the main administrative unit of Bandelier National

Monument. The area surrounding Bandelier is a mix of USDA Forest Service, Bureau of

Indian Affairs, Los Alamos National Laboratory, and the city of Los Alamos. Figure 1

shows the nearest land ownerships. Bandelier National Monument was founded in 1916

and was administered by the United States Forest Service until 1932, when the National

Park Service took over administration (Rothman 1988: v).

18

Numerous parties had a vested interest in Bandelier National Monument even

before it was created. Land use within the monument has varied greatly over the years.

Homesteaders, ranchers, the Forest Service, and other local interests have had a great

effect on the present condition of Bandelier National Monument (Allen 1989, Rothman

1988:1).

3.3 Environmental Setting: Piñon-Juniper, Ponderosa ecosystem

3.3.1 Flora

The flora at Bandelier consists of a variety of communities, changing from the low

elevation at the Rio Grande to the high elevation areas near Cerro Grande. The lowest

elevation areas adjacent to the Rio Grande consist of cottonwood trees and an assortment

of brush and shrubs. At slightly higher elevations, in poorly drained soils and sandy

areas, juniper is the major component of the flora. Sparse cacti, forbs, and grasses are

found in this area. On the mesa tops, a Piñon-Juniper woodland community exists with

sparse grasses between the trees. The FWSA falls in this zone. The FWSA was a mixed

zone of ponderosa forest with mixed grasses and some Piñon-Juniper until the 1950’s.

The combination of drought, fire suppression, and over grazing by large fauna

contributed to the loss of all the ponderosa on the FWSA (Allen 1989, 1993). The

remains of the dead ponderosa are presently acting as sediment dams. Piñon and juniper

trees make up the vast majority of living vegetation with 45% canopy cover (Wilcox et

al. 1996a). The aerial photo in Figure 3 accurately represents the location of the

catchment and associated sites with respect to tree canopy cover. Note the Southwestern

aspect to FWSA and 45% tree canopy cover. The 1987 Aerial Photo provided

19

Figure 3. Aerial Photo of the FWSA

20

by the USGS through Microsoft’s Terra Server [Microsoft, 2001]. The scale for Figure 3

is approximately 5000:1. Approximately 30% of the catchment is bare ground. The

remainder is composed of cryptogamic soils, litter, and herbaceous plants (Wilcox et al.

1996a: 5). Inter-canopy conditions within the watershed have contributed to accelerated

erosion.

At higher elevations, the vegetative community consists of ponderosa pine with

an understory of grass. On the slopes of Cerro Grande, the vegetation turns to mixed

conifer. Dramatic changes in the vegetative communities on the Pajarito Plateau have

been documented by Allen (1989).

3.4 Climate

Climate within the monument is typically semi-arid with annual precipitation between 30

– 36 cm (12 to 14 inches) as averaged from totals in Los Alamos and White Rock, New

Mexico (Bowen 1990). The Bandelier Meteorological station reports an average of 41

cm per year (Bandelier National Monument, records on files). Typically, the majority of

rainfall occurs in July and August during the monsoon (Bowen 1990: 5). The summer

monsoon events are brief but can be very intense, leaving greater that 25 mm (1 inch) of

rain in one hour. These are the storms that produce a typical runoff event on the FWSA.

Longer duration frontal storms also produce runoff.

The southern exposure on the FWSA and the moderate climate means that snow

typically remains on the watershed for only a few days in a typical year.

21

3.5 Soils and Hydrology

The soils on the plateau are derived primarily in-situ and from eolian processes

(Davenport et al. 1996, Davenport et al. 1994, Davenport et al. 1995, Nyhan 1978: 6).

Soils on the FWSA are generally less than 1 meter thick and consist of sandy loam,

loamy sand and loam (Davenport 1997; Gotti 1995). The A horizon is missing in several

portions of the catchment (Davenport 1997).

The FWSA is on a southwest slope, and starts from the top of one of the many

fingerlike mesas and runs to the steep drop into an approximately twenty meter deep

canyon. Mesas in this area are generally 100 to 1000 meters wide running generally

southeast. The mesas generally have slopes running perpendicular to the long axis of 5 to

15 percent on the top and terminate at a near vertical canyon wall.

The channels within the catchment are restricted in vertical migration by the near

and surface bedrock composed of volcanic tuff. Channel bottoms are often covered with

sandy sediment on the lower reaches of the catchment where the slope is generally less

steep. The channels in the upper reaches are cut directly into the A and B soil horizons.

These channels are constantly forming and have fresh exposed roots after each large

rainstorm. The channels within the FWSA only have flowing water during rainfall events.

Two episodes of snowmelt were observed during this project, but neither of the snowmelt

events produced significant amounts of runoff or sediment yield. Generally, for the

channels to have flowing water a rainstorm must contribute ten or more millimeters of

rain must fall in less than one hour.

22

From 1995 to 1997 there were ten rainfall events that produced sediment in one or

more of the sediment traps. All other rainfall events during this time produced no runoff

for catchment areas of 300 m2, or greater catchment area.

Figure 2 is a conceptual three dimensional image of the FWSA showing the

arrangement of the watershed, sub-catchments, and channels.

The FWSA is composed of an area defined by the placement of an outlet flume

that measures runoff during events. Just upstream of the flume, a sediment trap was

installed to catch the sediment leaving the watershed. The flume sediment trap is

numbered ST-5. The total catchment area is approximately 12,000 square meters, and this

catchment has four smaller sub-catchments within it. These sub-catchments are defined

by the additional sediment traps on the hillslope. The additional sediment traps are

numbered: ST-1 through ST-4. Sediment traps are located at the downstream end of the

areas outlined in blue on Figure 2. The main catchment is outlined in black with ST-5 in

the center of the lower right edge of the figure.

The FWSA has a relatively low slope at the top and increases in steepness through

the mid-section and then slope is reduced near the outlet. Tree density also varies across

the catchment. Generally, the channel areas have formed where the tree density is

lightest and the tree roots and duff are lightest.

There are three archaeological sites that partially or completely overlap the

FWSA. Site LA 569 is a small mesa top pueblo. The pueblo caps the top of the

catchment and extends outside into other catchments. The majority of artifacts recorded

on this site are ceramic sherds. Lithic flakes are the next most common artifact class.

23

Artifact density is very high on this site. Structural stones composed of shaped tuff

blocks make up the majority of the pueblo itself.

Site LA 60261 consists of a small structure and associated lithic and ceramic

scatter. Artifact density is low. Site LA 569 and 60261 are spatially and temporally

similar and are clearly associated. Both of these sites are in loose sandy soils that are

highly erodible. Site LA 60261 is located on the steepest portion of the catchment at

greater than 10 percent and is completely inside the catchment.

The other site, LA 60262, is a lithic and ceramic scatter located on the lower

portion of the catchment. The site artifacts are primarily lithic flakes. Soils in this area

are more cohesive and contain more abundant fine sediments.

The red site boundaries on figure 2 indicate the site boundaries as defined by the

original recorders of the site. The actual limits of the sites extend out past these arbitrary

limits. These sites have gradational boundaries, with the areas marked in red at

approximately 90% of the visible surface artifacts associated with a particular site.

The association of sites and sub-catchments allows for the properties of the sites

to be directly related to the sub-catchments. Figure 4 shows the spatial relationship of

sites and catchments. Figures 2 and 4 also display the upslope relationship of the sites to

the sediment traps. Artifact size measurements were taken from artifact transects within

the FWSA on the hillslope. These measures are referred to as source data. Data from

artifacts taken from the sediment traps are referred to as yield data. All sources of

artifacts in the FWSA feed to sediment trap 5. Sediment trap 1 is only supplied with

artifacts from LA 60262 and sediment traps 3 and 4 are supplied with artifacts from LA

569. Sediment Trap 2 has no site within its catchment.

24

LA 60261 LA 569

LA 60262

ST 2

ST 1

ST 3

ST 4

ST 5

Figure 4. GPS and total station map of the FWSA and associated archaeological sites. Sites are in red, channels are in blue, main watershed and sediment trap watershed boundaries are in black. Sediment traps are black boxes.

25

3.6 Archaeology

The Pajarito Plateau has been occupied from Paleo-Indian times through to the

present. The majority of archaeological sites within Bandier date within the Ancestral

Puebloan time period, ranging from 600 A.D to 1600 A.D. Table 1 depicts the general

chronology from the Pajarito Plateau.

Table 1 Pajarito Plateau Chronology after (Mozzillo 1997) Dates Period Name

10000-5500 B.C. Paleo-Indian

5500 B.C.- A.D.600 Archaic

A.D. 600 – 1175 Developmental

A.D. 1175 – 1325 Coalition

A.D. 1325 – 1600 Classic

A.D. 1600 – Present Historic

The ceramic materials within the FWSA sites were dated to the Coalition and Classic

Periods from 1200 to 1375 A.D.

3.7 Archaeology and FWSA

The geoarchaeological study conducted on the FWSA is unique for several reasons.

There is an abundance of artifacts and sites within the FWSA. The lithic materials (chert,

basalt, and obsidian) are not found naturally in this location due to the geological position

of the source materials. Therefore, all of the lithic materials found in the catchment were

transported by humans to the sites. There is no confusion about manuports (human

transported objects). All the lithics and ceramics are easily discernable from background

sediments.

26

Part II Research

Chapter Four Research Domain

4.0 Research Problems

The primary goal of this thesis is to evaluate the effects of erosion on the archaeological

sites within one small watershed. The secondary goal is to describe the geomorphic

processes involved.

4.1 Erosion: changing landscape

The semi-arid desert Southwest is a vast area of low annual rainfall. As Langbein

and Schumm (1958) pointed out, mean annual rainfall is related to the sediment yield

through aspects of vegetative cover. Bandelier National Monument’s rainfall is near the

peak in the sediment yield curve proposed by Langbein and Schumm. As Allen (1989)

and others (Davenport 1998) have noted, the previous land use practices at Bandelier

have exacerbated this trend by altering the vegetative conditions. A shift to Piñon-Juniper

woodland has created an unstable set of conditions compared to the preceding century

(pre-1900) (Allen 1989).

Erosion rates are highest on the south facing slopes of the mesa tops in what is

presently the Piñon-Jumiper woodland. These areas are drier and hotter than north-facing

slopes due to increased solar radiation. The watershed has a low southwest slope

exposing the catchment to solar radiation for most of the day.

27

4.1.3 Context: decreasing integrity

The increased erosion on archaeological sites can affect many aspects of what can

be termed the quality of the archaeological record (Schiffer 1983; Wandsnider 1989).

The process of erosion can be seen in numerous different ways. Sheet-wash, rilling,

gullying, and channel formation are the dominating factor in the movement of soils and

sediments.

It is important here to explain the varying levels of archaeological context

associated with materials. I will follow Rapp and Hill’s (1998:18) general definition of

primary and secondary context. I will add a final tertiary context to this theme. Rapp

and Hill define primary context as artifacts found in the exact location were they were

last used. Secondary context is materials that have been moved by a geologic or biologic

agent. The extent of transportation is not determined.

I propose that secondary context is one in which the material may still be inferred

back to an archaeological site or to at least a general area. I define tertiary context as the

moving of the artifacts completely out of their general site associations. Tertiary context

by this definition is archaeological materials completely disassociated from the original

location of deposition. Artifacts in tertiary context can not be assigned to the site from

which they originated.

Re-deposition on hillslopes after erosion leaves the materials in a secondary

context. This secondary context is relatively near the original depositional zone and may

still be within the site boundary. Hillslope erosion and re-deposition produces inverted

sequences. This material can still be used by archaeologists to define site characteristics

and possibly infer human behavior. Materials in tertiary context are far less useful. In

28

the case of this project, fluvial processes are moving materials downstream at high rates.

The further down stream the materials travel the weaker the inferences that can be drawn

from them. Artifacts from several sites are combined and discrete site differences are lost.

In the FWSA, there are three sites of different types. Artifacts recovered at the

flume cannot be assigned to specific source sites within the catchment. Yet materials

from the smaller sub-catchments still retain some of the properties of the original site.

Channels act as a combining force by mixing artifacts from many sites.

I will attempt to determine which erosion processes (sheetwash, rilling, gullying,

or channel erosion) are the primary cause of artifact movement through sediment samples

and visual observations. Some of these processes are well documented by photographs of

the catchment.

Which processes change the landscape greatly affect how and in what way the

archaeological record is being altered. Fluvial processes have an intense unidirectional

force associated with it, particularly when channels are involved. Over the relatively

small scale of the FWSA, the erosional properties of rills and channels changes

dramatically. Rills may dominate laterally for several meters and then a new gully (<3

years old) could become the dominating process (Gotti 1995). Gullies then can readily

transport material over longer distances.

Given enough time the total result of erosion is likely to be the same in the case of

Bandelier. Wilcox and others have estimated that within one hundred years there will be

no soils in certain areas of the Pajarito Plateau (Wilcox et al.1996a). Periodic fluctuations

in erosion are not unknown for this area, but previous to the present high erosion rates, a

case can be made for relatively stability (Davenport et al.1997).

29

Context in terms of archaeology can be seen from several different angles.

Vertical and horizontal relationships reveal different information. Spatial relationships,

through mapping and excavation, can enable archaeologists to determine temporal and

physical associations of past peoples and behavior. Intact coherent sites contain these

relationships. The problem with the sites under study, is that the spatial relationships

among artifacts are being altered.

As the primary spatial relationships of artifacts, ecofacts, and features are lost by

erosional processes, information potential of the sites is greatly reduced. In a profession

that can never collect all the available data, the alteration of potential data is catastrophic.

This thesis is concerned with present conditions and not with those directly after

abandonment. There is nothing we can do about the changes to site that have occurred

since abandonment. In addition to the loss of data, other more subtle losses occurs. For

example, the visual aspects of sites on the landscape are reduced to the public.

As a science, archaeology must consider the limited resources at its disposal as a

non-renewable resource. Few other professions deal with this same problem. As a

corollary, the extinction of a species is similar to the destruction of sites and materials.

Once the archaeological material is moved out of its primary or secondary contexts and

into a tertiary context, the material loses most aspects of value to archaeological study.

This project is intended to address the effects of fluvial erosion on archaeological

sites and the alteration that occurs due to water born transport on hillslopes. Other forms

of alteration come into play on these sites as well. It is important to note that the possible

effects of any specific disturbance sources were noted as the study progressed. Incipient

(antecedent) conditions on the watershed are noted when it was possible to do so.

30

Chapter Five Theory and Research Orientation

5.0 Introduction: Asking Questions

How is the archaeology of Bandelier affected by sediment movement? How are

archaeological resources at risk to alteration through the erosion of soils in Bandelier? It

is the author's intention to ask the research questions from the view of an archaeologist

looking at site condition. In order to obtain coherent answers, however, it is necessary to

put a hydrological framework to some of these questions. The wording of these research

questions is intended to reflect material suitable for an archaeology thesis. The data sets

for each of the research questions will be introduced. This section will also specify how

the data will be used and the specific purpose for doing so in each case.

The scope of this thesis is to interpret results from one watershed within Bandelier

National Monument. The effects of the sediment movement on archaeology will be

determined. Other altering agents and effects on archaeology are not be discussed here.

Hence, this thesis addresses the following questions related to erosion and sediment

transport in a watershed located in Bandelier National Monument.

5.1.0 Research Questions and Methods for answering each.

5.1. Erosion and Context.

Is Sediment movement altering archaeological context within the FWSA? Does the

process of erosion on this particular catchment actually change the association of

archaeological materials within and between the sites in the catchment? Can it be said

that the context is changing because archaeological materials are leaving the watershed?

31

Context is the physical association of archaeological objects to each other and the

environment in which they are located. Is the arrangement of materials changing at a rate

that is detectable with the experimentation available?

Does material leaving the watershed remain in context with itself? That is, is the

association of transported artifacts different from the distribution of artifacts on the

hillslope and within the site boundaries? This question will be addressed in the discussion

chapter. Is this process unidirectional, or are sites ending up downstream in the same

configuration as within the original site? Is there loss of context? Is the net result erosion

and deposition or erosion then re-deposition? This question asks if some, most, or all of

the significant human influence on the original deposition has been removed.

The preliminary answer to this question will be found in a simple input and output

model of the watershed and the archaeological materials found within it. From even

preliminary data the answer is an obvious yes. Part of the reason for this question is to

set up the logic that the remaining questions will follow. The reasoning behind this

model is simple. Archaeological resources on the watershed are finite and are not being

produced or replaced at the present. The archaeology under study is restricted to

ancestral puebloan archaeology, in particular the three known sites on the watershed and

the low density artifacts of similar types found throughout the watershed.

Figure 2 shows the location of the sites (the source of artifacts), the outputs

(sediment traps), and storage for sediment and artifacts (the hillslope). There are no

present inputs for ancestral puebloan artifacts. Soil creation and accumulation rates are

presently far exceeded by the rate of erosion, presently estimated at 4 mm per year

32

(Wilcox et al. 1996a). The outputs are the sediment and artifacts recovered from the

sediment traps.

The outputs are exceeding the inputs, since there are no archaeology inputs.

Therefore evidence of erosion of artifacts out of the watershed shows this question to be

true. The answer to 5.1 is that the artifacts recovered from the sediment traps are out of

context (association) with the ones remaining on the watershed.

Sediment (Artifacts) distributions are compared using the size data collected from

Artifacts on the watershed (source artifacts) and sediment (yield artifacts) yielded in the

sediment traps.

5.2 At what rate is archaeological context being altered?

How fast are the artifacts and their matrix being moved from the archaeological

site context? How fast are the associations between the archaeological materials, soil, and

the landscape changing? The reason for this question is obvious. When will there be no

discernable contextual archaeological information remaining for future archaeologists?

For this thesis, this rate can only be estimated on the scale of the watershed and or sub-

catchment, not for individual micro-areas. Archaeological site areas within the watershed

will be used to scale and reference the data to specific sub-catchments.

The rate of archaeological alteration can only be determined within the scope of

the hydrological processes that drive erosion. Therefore, rainfall events are the best

choice to frame the measurement of these processes.

There are limitations resulting from framing archaeology in terms of rainfall

runoff events. Due to this, I will answer frame questions via data collected by the year

and by the rainfall runoff event (hereafter known as an event).

33

5.3 Has the rate of archaeological alteration changed over time?

Have these sites been eroding at the present rate since abandonment? Has the rate of

erosion increased?

This is a long-term question ranging from ancestral puebloan occupation to

present. This question is framed as a general logic question. It is apparent from the

dating of the sites and measured erosion rates within the watershed that the present rate of

erosion could not be sustained since the period of abandonment. The information from

site forms and from previous research is enough to answer this question.

5.4 Future erosion and artifact loss.

Can these rates of artifact loss (context loss) be extrapolated into the future? In reality, it

is not possible to construct an accurate rate due to the enormous variability in the data

and because the data are short-term. The idea is to find events of similar magnitude to

those that produced the rainfall runoff events on the watershed. Then estimate how many

artifacts would be lost to the watershed in a average year. Again the variability with

respect to artifact yield is enormous. From the present conditions of the catchment, it can

be determined that the rate will not improve in the near term.

34

Chapter Six Methods

6.1 The Catchment Map and Locational information

Catchment survey - Maps

There have been several different topographic surveys on this watershed. Two of these

surveys were conducted using total station surveying equipment, one with a GPS, and a

few using a Brunton compass and tape. The maps created using ARCView (Figures 3 and

4) for this thesis are a combination of these data sources and USGS coverage provided by

Kay Beeley at Bandelier National Monument. The North American Datum 1927 and

Vertical Datum 1929 is the origin for the geographic coordinates employed in this

project.

In 1993, John Pitlick and Shannon Smith surveyed the Frijolito Watershed Study

Area using a Topcon Total Station. A second survey was conducted in 1995 by John

Pitlick and Kevin Reid. The total station survey equipment is accurate to within a

centimeter in elevation. Horizontal distances were measured using a cloth tape. These

original maps were created in AutoCAD ™ and then imported into ARCView™ as

independent themes. The locations of the archaeological sites within the Frijolito

Watershed Study Area were obtained from the original site forms and a GPS survey

conducted by the author. The original site maps were then scanned and transcribed using

PowerPoint. The site boundaries were then copied into ARCView using known points

from the GPS survey as reference points. The site boundary dimensions were transferred

from the site sketch maps to the GIS maps using the site datum points drawn on the

original site maps and the GPS point references from 1987 BAS Survey. The site sketch

35

maps that contain the original Bandelier Archaeological Survey information and data

collected by the author are in Figures 5 through 7. The site sketch maps provide a

detailed view of the area within the site boundaries, including any artifact transects that

were conducted by the author. Figures 5 through 7 can be referenced directly to Figures

3 or 4 and are larger scale maps with site specific information.

36

Figure 5. Site sketch map of LA 569 from 1987 survey and recording. Transcribed here by the author.

Meters

Legend

0 10 20 30

NO

RTH

LA 569 Site Sketch MapBAS 1987 Project

UnplattedUSGS Frijoles 7.5’ Quadrangle (1984)

Bandelier National MonumentSandoval County, New Mexico

K. Fuller7-29-1987Redrawn 1-15-2001S.C.Smith

Rubble Area62-02

To Frijilito and Visitors Center

- Tree

Sample Core Area01-22-01

- Tuff Rubble

Historic Hearth

Historic Hearth

NPS Trail

To Lower Alamo Canyon

Site Boundary & Extent of Refuse Scatter01-22-01

- Datum

Photo Point 15

Artifact Transect 6

37

Figure 6. Site sketch map of LA60261. Originally drawn by BAS crews in 1987. Transcribed here by the author.

Meters

Legend

0 2.5 5.0 7.5

NO

RTH

LA 60261 Site Sketch MapBAS 1987 Project

UnplattedUSGS Frijoles 7.5’ Quadrangle (1984)

Bandelier National MonumentSandoval County, New Mexico

- Tree

- Tuff Rubble

- Datum

LA 60261K. Fuller 7-28-1987Redraw byS.C. Smith 1-15-2001

Drainage

Drainage

Photo Point 9

Slight Uphillto Frijilito Ruin

(this is wrong:the site is actuallyLA569)

Site Boundary& Extent of RefuseScatter 01-22-01

Swale

Gentle M

esa Slopes

Small Structure01-04-01

Contour LinesWithout a scale

Downslope

Meters

Legend

0 2.5 5.0 7.5

NO

RTH

LA 60261 Site Sketch MapBAS 1987 Project

UnplattedUSGS Frijoles 7.5’ Quadrangle (1984)

Bandelier National MonumentSandoval County, New Mexico

- Tree

- Tuff Rubble

- Datum

LA 60261K. Fuller 7-28-1987Redraw byS.C. Smith 1-15-2001

Drainage

Drainage

Photo Point 9

Slight Uphillto Frijilito Ruin(this is wrong:the site is actuallyLA569)

Site Boundary& Extent of RefuseScatter 01-22-01

Swale

Gentle M

esa Slopes

Small Structure01-04-01

Downslope >10%Not to scale contours removed from Map

Artifact Transect 4

Transect 5

38

Figure 7. Site sketch map of LA60262. Originally drawn by BAS crews in 1987. Transcribed here by the author.

Meters

Legend

0 10 20 30

NORTH

LA 60262 Site Sketch MapBAS 1987 Project

UnplattedUSGS Frijoles 7.5’ Quadrangle (1984)

Bandelier National MonumentSandoval County, New Mexico

- Tree

- Tuff Rubble

- Datum

LA 60262K. Fuller 7-28-1987Redraw byS.C. Smith 1-15-2001

Site Stake

Area of densestscatter

Down

slope

5%

Slig

ht

Sherd and Lithic Scatter01-22-01

Photo Point 10

Mesa Ridge

Sample Area Core

Artifact Transect 1

Transect 1

Artifact Transect 7

Contour lines

39

6.2 Event Based Procedures and Rationales

All of the projects being conducted in the FWSA are based on rainfall events. Most

measurements on the watershed are taken after significant rainfall events (usually greater

than 10 mm). Because this project was based on the existing hydrological study, the

event based nature was continued for the archaeological study. After each rainfall runoff

event during the Frijolito Watershed Study Area (FWSA) project, a series of cleanup,

maintenance, and measurement procedures were conducted. In the following section, the

Standard Operating Procedures (SOP) are presented for each procedure. The SOPs are

modified from the format used for actually conducting the fieldwork.

6.2.1 Sediment measurement and collection

SOP: Sediment yield measurement data collection

The five sediment traps built into channel beds are identified as ST1-5 (Figure 2 and 4).

Sediment Trap 5 is also referred to as the flume by other FWSA literature. Traps 1-4 are

approximately one cubic meter in volume. These traps were installed in 1995 by Shannon

C. Smith, John Hogan, and others. Traps are composed of wood lined pits measuring 1.4

m x 1.0 m x 0.7 meters.

The fifth sediment trap is located just upstream of the outlet flume. The flume

sediment trap was originally installed in 1993 by Shannon C. Smith, Randy Johnson, and

Nicole Gotti. The original capacity of this trap was approximately 500 liters (130

gallons) of sediment. This trap was built directly into bedrock. This trap was modified in

1995 by the addition of a larger bedrock-lined sediment trap just upstream from the

original trap. The new total combined capacity is approximately 1140 liters (300 gallons).

40

SOP sediment trap cleaning

After each rainstorm which yields sediment to any of the sediment traps, the following

procedures should be followed:

1. If possible, wait for the traps to drain of the standing water. If the sediment is free of

standing water proceed to 4. Figure 8 shows a photo of Sediment Trap 4 after an

event.

2. Using a five-gallon bucket, carefully dip standing water out of trap. Take care not to

mix sediments in the trap into the water being removed. Using a short rubber hose,

attempt to siphon remaining standing water from trap. The sediment will still be

saturated. Do not attempt further removal of water from sediment. Let the water drain

slowly.

3. Using a shovel and five gallon bucket remove sediment from trap.

4. Keep track of the number of five gallon buckets removed on the ‘Post-event Sheet’.

5. Dump sediment onto a tarp. Take care that the water draining away does so slowly.

Avoid water flowing off the tarp, as sediment and artifacts may be lost. Figure 9

shows how the sediment is piled on the tarps.

6. Cover sediment with another tarp and allow to dry. This may take more than a week.

7. Repeat for each sediment trap.

8. Record the total sediment recovered from the trap on the Post-event sheets.

Note that the sediment volume is re-measured during artifact sieving.

41

Figure 8 (Above) Example of a sediment trap. Sediment Trap 4 Upstream view after event. Photo taken on 8-14-1995.

(Below) Sediment Trap 4. View of accumulated sediment from rainfall runoff event. Note rodent escape stick in the center of the sediment trap.

42

Figure 9 (Above) Example of Sediment yield from a single rainfall runoff

event. Sediment drying before final measurement and sieving/screening for artifacts.

(Below) Artifact Screening. Jon Ferris and Jennifer Martin are assisting.

43

6.2.2 Artifact collection

Artifact collection occurred only at the sediment traps after a sediment-producing event

or when being cleaned at the beginning of each summer. The sediment and artifacts

recovered from these traps are referred to as yields. Sediment traps were emptied of

sediment after each rainfall runoff storm event. Most rainfalls events did not produce any

sediment yield at the traps; but those events which did caused all traps to be inspected

and cleaned. Sediment was measured and set out in the sun on tarps to dry for one day to

two weeks depending on the quantity and the water content. Sediment on tarps was

covered to prevent wind changing the sediment grain-size distributions. The sediment

was dried to a point were it can be easily passed through a 0.25 inch (0.61 cm) square-

holed sieve (Figure 9).

The sediment was screened by hand and artifacts were collected. All materials

that had the possibility of being an artifact were collected. Often, due to dust or a thin

layer of mud, materials that were not artifacts were collected. These materials were

removed during the laboratory phase of processing. Artifacts include those smaller than

0.25 inch were collected if they were noticed during screening.

Artifacts collected during sediment sieving were bagged separately and labeled

with the specific sediment trap location, date of collection and associated rainfall event

date.

Artifact collection SOP

1. This process begins after the SOP sediment trap cleaning.

2. Sediment is transferred from the tarp into a 5-gallon food bucket.

44

3. Keep track of the number of sieved buckets.

4. Slowly pass sediment through an aluminum framed 0.25 inch steel screen.

5. Artifacts are removed from the screen by hand. Often the sediment is muddy or still

wet which causes balls of mud to form. These mud balls are crushed by hand until

they pass through the screen.

6. All artifacts are collected in plastic bags labeled with the date, location (sediment trap

number), and storm date if known.

7. Artifacts are stored in the archaeologist’s office at Bandelier National Monument.

8. All events which produce artifacts are given an accession number by the Curation

Specialist at Bandelier National Monument.

6.2.3 Weather data collection

A plastic graduated rain gage was used to determine the amount of rain for each runoff

event. After each event the total rainfall was measured as soon as possible after the

event. In addition, there is a meteorological station on the edge of the FWSA that is a

fully automated data collection device using a cellular phone, various sensors, and a 21X

™® Datalogger.

6.2.4 Artifact Transects

Field measurement of artifacts were conducted at seven locations in the FWSA or in the

associated sites. These data are referred to as source data. The locations were selected

using a map of the catchment before fieldwork could proceed. Transects within site

boundaries were duplicated from the ones taken in 1987 by the BAS crews. In addition,

several new transects were located upslope of the sediment traps.

45

Artifact Transect SOP

1. Fix a meter tape on at one end of the transect using a pin flag. Lay the tape

across the watershed using a compass to get the azimuth. Record the distance

and any interruptions in the tape.

2. Place the one meter grid square on the tape, starting at zero. See Figure 10 for

a photo of the procedure.

3. Record all of the visible artifacts. Records include length, width, thickness

and artifact type. Follow the same procedure as in the laboratory recording.

4. Move the grid square one meter at a time across the tape repeating step 3 each

time. Stop when a tree or other obstacle prevents further recording.

46

Figure 10 (Above) Artifact transects being conducted above Sediment Trap 1.

Artifacts data collection assisted by volunteers: Dave & Melissa Smith (no relation).

(Below) Artifact transects within LA 569. Close-up of handmade PVC 1 meter grid square with Plugger™ GPS in background.

47

6.3 Laboratory procedures

6.3.1 Artifacts

All of the artifacts collected from sediment traps (artifact yields) were processed in the

laboratory setting. Length, width, thickness and weight were measured. The three

dimensions were measured starting with the longest axis then rotating 90 degrees to

measure the second axis. This is repeated for the third axis. For ceramic artifacts the

dimensions to measure are obvious. The thickness is always the same and is the same as

would be measured on a whole vessel. Lithics are less obvious, but in general the longest

dimension was usually in the direction of the flake scar (direction of force applied to

remove the flake from the core). Weight was measured to 0.1g using a Ohaus Scout™

digital scale. Each artifact was cleaned of sediment before being measured. In addition

to the basic measures, the artifacts were divided into two main categories: lithic materials

or ceramics. More detailed classification was conducted but will not be used for this

thesis. Typing was limited to describing the physical properties of the artifacts. All data

were entered into MS Excel spreadsheets. Tables of these data are found in Appendix A

Table A.2.

48

Part III The Data

Chapter Seven Results

General Data Summary

The main data are divided to two types: event-based data (yield) and site-based data

(source). The event-based data were collected or recorded after a rainfall event that

produced runoff. All of these data are referred to by the date of the event or the date of

data collection. Sediment amounts and artifacts collected from these events are referred

to as yields. The data collected includes sediment volumes and artifact counts. The

characteristics of each rainfall event are listed in Table 2. Ten rainfall events yielded

runoff and sediment during the three years of this study. Four events were monsoon

storms that usually occurred during the early afternoon in July or August. Several of the

events occurred in two episodes or over two separate days. The three storms which

caused the greatest runoff, sediment and artifact yield also have the highest hourly

rainfall intensities. All three of these storms also occurred during the months of June,

July and August (the monsoon). Longer-term storms which did not achieve high

intensity, even when rainfall storm totals were high, did not move the same high volumes

of artifacts or sediments.

Figure 11 shows all rainfall events greater than 3 mm total rainfall. Sediment

producing events are labeled for reference. Figure 11 shows the events which produced

runoff are typically larger events, but there are at least six events that produced more than

15 mm of rain with no sediment yield or detectable runoff. The variability of these

conditions within the FWSA is typical of the surrounding area.

49

Summary of precipitation events from 1995 - 1997

9/20/1

997

9/10

/199

78/

13-1

7/97

7/22

/97

7/29

/199

7

8/22

/199

6

7/18/9

5

6/29/1

995

5/29/1

995

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

1/1/

1995

3/1/

1995

5/1/

1995

7/1/

1995

9/1/

1995

11/1

/199

5

1/1/

1996

3/1/

1996

5/1/

1996

7/1/

1996

9/1/

1996

11/1

/199

6

1/1/

1997

3/1/

1997

5/1/

1997

7/1/

1997

9/1/

1997

11/1

/199

7

Figure 11 Summary of rainfall events on the FWSA. Only events greater than 3 mm are shown. Dates are shown for those rainfall events that generated runoff.

50

Table 2 Summary of rainfall events that generated runoff, 1995-1997.

Event Date

5/29

/95

6/29

/95

7/18

/95

8/13

/95

8/22

/96

7/22

/97

7/31

/97

8/13

-17

/97†

9/10

/97

9/20

/97

Precipitation Amount (mm)

42 35 31 14 11

+ 16

11 32 16

+ 27

13 44

Storm Type Convective/ Frontal

F C F C F ? F C

F

C F

Duration (hours)

6 9 4.3 0.25

+7

11 2 >24 3.5

+ 2

0.25 24

Max Hourly Intensity (mm/hr)

14 17 6 10 11 7 11 13

+11

10 5

+6

Multi-day continuous events Y / N

N N Y N Y N Y Y N N

Multiple Storms Events Y / N

Y N Y Y Y N Y Y Y Y

† - two separate storms occurred without cleaning between them.

Many of the larger events that did not produce runoff occurred during winter and

are in the form of snow or low-intensity rainfall. Conditions which contribute to large

runoff events include rain in the preceding days, high intensity rainfall or long duration

rainfall.

Sediment collected from the traps was measured twice: once during initial

cleaning and once before screening for artifacts. These numbers generally agreed. In the

51

few cases where the data did not match the second number was used. Table 3 is a

summary of these data. The data in table three is divided by location and by date. The

date format is similar to Table 2 in order to allow direct comparisons of the data. The

numbers listed in the table are in liters of sediment recovered from the sediment traps.

These totals are the volume as removed from the sediment traps during cleaning. In some

cases the totals refer to more than one rainfall event (see Table 2).

General information about the individual sediment traps and their catchments is

included in Table 4. The catchment range from 300 to 10,000 square meters in size, with

the largest as the entire FWSA minus the four smaller catchments. Slope within the

catchments is an average over the entire contributing area. The dominant ground cover in

the entire FWSA is bare ground (exposed soil). Individual sub-catchments have

dominant cover types of pumic soil or exposed outcrops of unweathered pumic (ST-2),

cryptogamic soils (ST-1), or bare ground (ST-3 and 4). Table 4 also shows which artifact

transects were sampled within each catchment. The contributing area of each catchment

is listed in square meters, with the entire FWSA being the total of ST 1 through ST-5.

52

Table 3: Sediment Yield for Frijolito Watershed Study Area: 1995 to 1997.

Total Sediment Volume (liters)

Sediment traps

5/29

/95

6/29

/95

7/18

/95

8/13

/95

8/22

/96

7/22

/97

7/31

/97

8/13

-17/

97

9/10

/97

9/20

/97

ST-1 85 306 13 19 66 0 90 95 33 19 726

ST-2 0 344 6 28 38 0 128 132 47 19 742

ST-3 107 170 57 9 76 0 66 142 19 9 655

ST-4 0 662 76 38 151 19 222 284 151 28 1631

ST-5 (flume) 454 491 236 274 491 3 595 879 359 378 4160

Table 4 Sediment Trap Information: Characteristics of the Catchments.

Sediment traps

Dominant Ground cover

Mean Slope (%)

Artifact Transects

Contributing Area (m2 )

ST-1 Cryptogramic soil

10 1 and 7 1,000

ST-2 Pumic rocks/soil

6 2 350

ST-3 Bare Ground 18 N/A 300

ST-4 Bare Ground 10 5, (6)‡ 1,150

ST-5 (flume)

All 10 3, 4, 6 10,000

‡ Not in contributing area but assumed to be representative.

53

The number of artifacts screened from the sediment is summarized in Table 5. Detailed

information on size and characteristics is found in Table A.2.

Table 5. Artifact yields for Frijolito Watershed Study Area, 1995 to 1997.

Total number of artifacts from each sediment trap by event date. Spring

Snowmelt†

Sediment

traps 5/29

/95

6/29

/95

7/18

/95

8/13

/95

8/22

/96

7/22

/97

7/31

/97

8/13

-17/

97

9/10

/97

9/20

/97

5/23

/97

6/9/

97

Tota

ls

ST-1 0 121 8 3 0 0 41 35 7 0 3 2 220

ST-2 0 20 0 0 0 0 8 9 0 0 0 0 37

ST-3 0 27 0 2 0 0 5 6 0 0 0 0 40

ST-4 0 548 4 27 2 2 54 56 26 0 3 0 722

ST-5 (flume) 28

‡

183 31 32 18 2 89 87 0 2 0 2 474

† - no sediment yield

‡ - The 28 artifacts were counted and not collected for further measurement.

The numbers in Table 5 represent the counts of each artifact recovered from the

sediment traps after the event cleaning process. The three largest artifact-producing

events occurred on June 29th 1995, July 31st 1997, and the multiple event on August 13th

and 17th 1997. Many of the events which produced sediment in the sediment traps did

not produce artifacts. Interestingly, there were two spring snowmelt occurrences that did

produce a few artifacts but less than one liter of sediment. In both cases, only a few

54

artifacts were recovered from the snowmelt events. The author was not present during

either of these collections.

Sediment Trap 5 was the largest contributor of artifacts during all but one of the

artifact producing rainfall runoff events. ST-4 and then ST-1 are next in contributing

artifacts during events. The contributing areas listed in Table 4 correspond directly to the

increasing contribution of artifacts for all but the June 29th 1995 storm.

The second main type of data is the archaeological site data. General data about

the three sites are in Table 6. Detailed data on the source artifacts are in Appendix A

Table A.1. These data vary considerably by site association. Transects 1 and 7 are

entirely lithic materials. Transects 5 and 6 are distinctly skewed toward ceramic

materials due to their location in Pueblo habitation site types.

Table 6 Archaeological Site Description Table

Site Numbers

Site Type

AssociatedArtifact

Transect

Area

(m2)

Area in FWSA (m2)

Contributes artifacts to Sediment

Trap LA 569 Small

Pueblo 6 3100 1000 3,4,5

LA 60261

Small Structure

4 130 130 5

LA 60262

Lithic and Ceramic Scatter

1, 7 2950 2400 1, 5

The three largest sediment-producing storms also produced the most artifacts.

Sediment Traps 1, 4, and 5 produced the most artifacts. These traps also correspond to

the largest number of potential contributing artifacts (that is the largest number of

artifacts per area available to transport) from sites areas and the largest proportions of

55

contributing archaeological site area. The amount of site area contributing to each

sediment trap is displayed in Figure 4.

It is clear from the numbers of artifacts, that the associations within the FWSA are

being changed on an extreme scale. Artifacts are moving rapidly out of the watershed.

From these numbers it is not possible to determine how far specific artifacts have traveled

during each event. Far longer sampling times would be required for this. It can be

assumed that it is a continuing process from site to channel to sediment traps. In the case

of sediment trap 1, there are only a few artifacts within the first few meters of the trap.

In this case at least, the artifacts are moving several meters per event. Artifacts in the

main sandy-bottomed channel were noted to move several tens of centimeters between

rainfall events. On at least two occasions the main channel bed had almost all sediment

removed during a single event. During these events the artifacts were cleared from the

channels for tens of meters up the channel.

Cluster analysis

An analysis of the size and weight data from the artifact yields resulted in a

grouping of data into three clusters using the K-mean squared cluster analysis (SPSS n.d.)

(Table A.2). Size and weight data shows significant clustering between lithics and

ceramics in the artifact yield data, although no artifact class data was included in the

cluster analysis. The majority of the lithics are contained in a single cluster. The

ceramics are mostly contained in the two remaining clusters.

Density is the main contributor to the clustering between lithics and ceramics.

The obsidian, basalt, and chert lithics have densities of 2.4 - 2.8, 2.4 - 3.1, and 2.63 g/cm3

56

respectively (Weast 1980: Table F1). The ceramics are generally less dense than the

lithics with a pre-fired density range of 1.8 - 2.6 g/cm3 centimeter (Weast 1980: Table

F1). As Shepard (1985) points out, porosity in ceramics varies from less than ten percent

to well over forty percent due to changes during firing. The data from Shepard are from

the same types of Rio Grande ceramics as found in the FWSA. The final calculated

density can range from 1.1 to 2.4 g/cm3 (Shepard 1985: 128; Weast 1980). Shepard also

noted that distinct changes in ceramic density (porosity) occurred from one production

time period to another, and between different ceramic ware types. In addition, because

ceramic materials are porous, moisture has the potential to change the ceramic sherd

density over short time periods.

The third internal clustering of the ceramics comes from the third dimension

(thickness). Ceramic sherd thickness was noted in field and laboratory work to have two

general values. Specifically, utility ware and painted wares were noted to vary in

thickness among the samples collected. From type collections and the ceramic guides

used at Bandelier, it is clear that ceramic types vary in thickness (Elliott 1999). Each

type has a typical range. The same K-mean Squared Cluster analysis could not be

performed on the artifact source data due to a lack of weight measurements taken in the

field. No accurate field measure of weight is possible at the accuracy achieved in the

laboratory. Artifact collection on site was not permitted for this project. Artifact yield

data can be found in Table A.2.

57

Z-test 2 Sample for means

In order to determine if archaeological context is being modified on the

catchment, the ratios of ceramics to lithics was statistically analyzed to determine if the

ratios differed between sources and yields. The ratio of lithics and ceramics yielded from

the sediment traps showed no significant differences from ratios of the source artifacts

found on the FWSA and in the sites. Using the z-test for comparing the means of

samples, no discernable difference between population could be found for the two

locations where data were sufficient to test. Both tests failed to exceed the critical value

of Z. Therefore the hypothesis that the proportion of ceramics and lithics change during

transport can not be accepted. In this case the association of materials (ratio of ceramics

to lithics) on the catchment and those leaving appear to be statistically the

indistinguishable. In this case at least, using the proportions of artifact type does not

reveal a change in the associations of artifacts that are moving from the site to the

channel. That is, the groups of artifacts leaving the catchments appear with respect to the

type counts of yield and source group to be similar.

Using this statistical analysis, counts for artifact source data were compared to

count data for yields. For sediment trap 1 and 4 there were enough events to make a

statistical analysis of the data and enough source artifacts to compare. Sediment Traps 2

and 3 had very little artifact yield. A larger sample size could reveal a possible

difference. Sediment Trap 4 is heavily weighted to ceramics. Sediment Trap 1 is exactly

the opposite with far more lithics than ceramics. The z-test is considered weak when the

samples are in the extremes. With the numbers near the extremes in range, a far larger

58

sample size would be needed than was acquired during this project. Longer-term data is

clearly needed.

Size distributions and Student t-test

To further investigate the differences between source by yields of artifacts, the size 2

dimension (see Tables A.1 and 2.) was utilized in a t-test of the source and yield artifact

populations (student t-test with different variances). Size 2 (width) measures were used

to evaluate artifact distributions in concordance with standard grain-sizing techniques in

geomorphology. Sieving methods depend on the middle axis to determine which ‘grain

size’ is measured when using both square and round holed sieves (Shackley 1975: 43 –

49; Lewis, 1994: 94).

In all but one case, the width of artifacts from the yield group were smaller on

average than the widths from the source group. Comparisons were made based on the

spatial relationships of artifact transects (source) and sediment trap catchments (yields).

The t-test is applied with the assumed difference in population to be zero.

The t-test revealed that when lithics were involved and sample sizes were large,

the populations were statistically different (that is that the assumption that there is no

difference in populations in rejected). Populations in these cases were statistically

different at a 95% confidence interval.

Ceramic artifacts distribution generally showed a consistent pattern of being

skewed to smaller sizes in the yield populations. However, ceramic artifacts were far less

consistent in this sorting between separate sediment traps. Figures 12, 13 and 14 show

the relationship of artifact populations associated with specific sediment trap catchments.

59

In the samples composed primarily of lithic artifacts, such as sediment trap 1,

there is an inversion of the skewing in the smallest sizes of artifacts. Even with this

cross-over the difference in sorting is statistically evident. The cross over at the base of

the lithics in Table 14 is most likely due to the breaking during transport and screening of

the smallest fraction of lithics due to their very thin cross-section.

These data clearly shows that the artifacts are being sorted by the processes

moving them downstream. In terms of archaeological context, the action of fluvial

processes is acting on both the sites sediments and on the transported sediments. Sites

sediments a differentially loosing the smaller fractions of artifacts at a higher rate than the

larger fraction of artifacts. Therefore the artifact assemblage on the sites is changing in a

specific pattern. The fluvial processes are imprinting patterns onto the site context. The

change appears consistent in most cases in this catchment.

Table 7. Student t-test results

Student t-test Mean Size Variance Sample SizeSediment

Trap 1Significant

p<0.05 Source Yield Source Yield t ValueCritical t

valueDirection of

skew Source YieldLithics Y 1.2188 1.0843 0.6046 0.1333 2.2038 1.9723 Smaller 193 227Ceramics n/a 0 7Both N 1.2188 1.1006 0.6046 0.1515 1.9214 1.9723 Smaller 193 234Sediment Trap 2Lithics n/a 0 37Ceramics n/a 0 2Both n/a 0 39Sediment Trap 3Lithics n/a 1.3754 0.9567 0.4552 0.1109 1.8147 2.7765 28 3Ceramics N 1.5913 1.3880 0.3494 0.3566 1.7601 2.0025 Smaller 111 35Both N 1.5478 1.3539 0.3751 0.3476 1.7808 1.9996 Smaller 139 38Sediment Trap 4Lithics N 1.3797 1.2844 0.4357 0.3144 0.6446 2.0032 Smaller 30 43Ceramics Y 1.6176 1.4057 0.3342 0.2633 3.8313 1.9747 Smaller 125 684Ground- stone n/a 1 0Both Y 1.6033 1.3985 0.5147 0.2667 3.3813 1.9725 Smaller 156 727Sediment Trap 5Lithics Y 1.7042 1.2226 0.9572 0.2450 5.3382 1.9749 Smaller 131 294Ceramics Y 1.2820 1.4872 0.6179 0.4049 -2.9776 1.9656 Larger 244 183Both Y 1.4431 1.3241 0.8416 0.3222 2.2039 1.9640 Smaller 376 477

60

Figure 12. Sediment Trap 4 Artifacts Distributions. Cumulative percent distribution of the widths of all artifacts from Sediment Trap 4.

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4

Size in cm

Perc

ent

Source All

Yield all

61

Figure 13 Sediment Trap 4 Artifacts Distributions. Cumulative percent distribution of the widths of all artifacts from Sediment Trap 4 by artifact type. Yield is consistently smaller.

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4

Size in cm

Perc

ent

source ceramicyield ceramicSource lithicYield lithic

62

Figure 14. Sediment Trap 1 Artifacts Distributions. Cumulative percent distribution of the widths of all Artifacts from Sediment Trap 1. This sample is almost entirely lithics. Yield is not consistently smaller.

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4

Size in cm

Perc

ent

Source allYield All

63

The figures clearly show that the fluvial processes are sorting the populations of

artifacts. Even when the statistics fail to show a significant difference in the populations

of artifacts, the graphical method shows consistent sorting. Lithics are most consistently

sorted toward the smaller classes as they move from the sites on the hillslope to the

channel traps. The smallest fraction of the lithic flakes is actually skewed in the opposite

direction from the total sample. There may be several reasons for this, including

breakage during transport and sampling error. The same skewing is not evident in the

ceramic populations. Ceramic items are thicker and less likely to fracture as the thin

lithic flakes.

General watershed stability

The runoff events that occurred during the study were extremely variable. While

that total rainfall amounts for each year were in the range of expected values, the

distribution of sediment yields and runoff events make extrapolating these rates

untenable. The single largest sediment and artifact-producing event occurred in June

1995. In this event, channels formed from the top of the watershed on down in several

locations within the catchment. This released a large amount of sediment into the

sediment traps. Many of the artifacts released in this event were probably under the

surface preceding this event. No other event had this characteristic. It is likely that this

type of event is not predictable. It certainly is not within this limited three year study.

The volume of sediment removed during this project is inconsistent with the long

term that the sites have remained on the watershed. Wilcox has determined that the

present rates of erosion are 4 mm per year (Wilcox et al. 1996a). This rate is clearly

inconsistent with the 600 plus years that the archaeological sites have remained in situ.

64

The resulting 2.5 meters of potential erosion is not consistent with the known soil depths

on the FWSA. The soil depth on the FWSA today is between 10 cm and 1.7 meters.

Wilcox estimated that most of the soil will be gone from the catchment in under 50 years.

Rainfall and site disruption are correlated within the FWSA. Large numbers of

artifacts are moving downstream from their source and out of the FWSA into tertiary

context during large rainfall events. In the three years of this study 1515 artifacts were

recovered from all five sediment traps. The actual volumes of sediment and artifacts vary

over several orders of magnitude. Factors such as slope and soil cover make direct

comparisons of the sub-catchments difficult at best. Far longer-term data are needed to

obtain strong correlations between rainfall events and sediment and artifacts yields. Only

ten events yielded sediment runoff during this project. Sample size is low and the

fluctuations in magnitude are great.

It is clear from the data that only rainfall events greater than 10 mm result in

transport of sediment in the channels to the sediment traps. Results are that small events

do not contribute to sediment and artifact yield at the sediment traps.

One set of data that does have a clear correlation is the relationship between

sediment yield to artifact yield when compared at a sub-catchment level. Sediment Trap

1 has a r2 of 0.98 between sediment production and artifact yield. Figure 15. show the

relationship between these two variables. Figure 16 shows the comparable data for

Sediment Trap 4. These data shows that for small distances and large densities of

artifacts, the number of expected artifacts can be predicted from the sediment volumes.

On the scale of the FWSA or Sediment Trap 5, the regression r2 is a poor fit of 0.44.

65

Finally, the proportions of lithics to ceramics from the sub-catchments are similar

to the source distributions. Since no other source of artifacts is possible on these

catchments, this is reasonable. In fact, from the artifacts removed from traps 1, 3, and 4 it

is clear which types of sites the materials came from. The large proportion of lithic

flakes in Sediment Trap 1 came from the predominantly lithic scatter of LA 60262. The

large proportions of ceramics in Sediment Traps 3 and 4 came from the predominantly

ceramic scatter of LA 569 and 60261. The flume sediment tell a different story.

Artifacts from all sites are mixed in this trap. No proportion dominates. The mixture of

artifacts can not be readily compared to a singe site and its artifacts. At this point

(sediment trap 5) the artifacts are in tertiary context. They are out of relation to any site.

No artifact in this group can be traced directly back to the source from which it came.

66

Figure 15 Sediment Trap 1: Artifact to Sediment volume regression.

Figure 16 Sediment Trap 4: Artifact to Sediment volume regression.

67

Chapter Eight Discussion

It is evident from the cluster analysis that the lithics and ceramic in this study have

distinct physical characteristics. Shape, size, surface area, and density all help contribute

to the erosion potential of each artifact. Without larger numbers of events and artifacts it

is not possible to fully evaluate the effects of these properties on artifact erosion and

transport. Ceramic artifacts have high porosity and low density when compared to

lithics. Ceramics are the quintessential platy sediment. The shape of ceramic sherds

contributes to a higher surface area to weight/volume ratio.

Less dense materials with higher surface areas should have higher friction effects

in stream flow. Artifacts of differing density may travel differently. Thus, ceramics may

move out of the watershed at a higher rate than the lithics. In addition, ceramics from

different periods differ in thickness and density. That means ceramics of certain time

periods may be selected to leave the site preferentially over others artifacts.

Shape may be another determining factor. Lithics are platy in one dimension

while they are ‘triangular’ along the other axis. The bulb of percussion provides a heavy,

thick end while the other end is thin and light. In transportation by water the shape, size,

surface area, and density play a role in how water will affect the individual object. Lithic

flakes are also subject to breakage due to the fragility of small lithics and the original thin

shape.

In the case of the FWSA, the largest sediment and artifacts producing events were

events where flows were quick and deep. The overall power of the channel may simply

transport everything from the channels to the traps in a slurry. Channels are constantly

being modified due to the highly friable nature of the loose sandy soils. All of the

68

artifacts in the study displayed characteristics of platy particles (Shackley 1975). In fast

deep runoff events platy objects, once entrained by the flow, flip and tumble and edge

effects are constantly re-entraining them. Such artifacts are unlikely in this steep sandy

channel system to be re-deposited during high flow. The channel flow that produced the

largest numbers of artifacts also cleared the channel bottoms of the sandy sediments in

the lower reaches of the catchment.

Large artifacts, such as shaped-tuff building materials, have remained in place

during the course of this study. There is simply not enough stream power on this small

catchment to move these materials directly with overland flow. The channels in the

FWSA do not encounter any large sediments. However, the larger materials are moving

by the removal of the soil matrix by overland flow is slowly reducing the materials under

the objects. Large artifacts are at least moving vertically as the remaining material

around them is removed. If they are on a slope the larger artifacts are slowly being

dispersed down slope.

Based on observation in the field, the author is able to propose a general scheme

of how erosion is occurring on this catchment.

Channels

Hillslope

Differing combinations of processes occur across the watershed. Within the site

boundaries and on the hillslopes, the matrix (soil and sediment) is removed from around

artifacts, and the artifacts settle down to a lower elevation. Rainsplash and freeze-thaw

cycles also contribute to slow movement downslope. On the hillslopes, rainsplash and

shallow runoff removes the fine matrix from around archaeological materials. Artifacts

69

greater than a quarter inch in diameter are generally not directly affected by rainsplash or

transported by this shallow runoff. Loose well drained sandy soils on the upper reaches

prevent runoff from achieving significant depth outside of channels. The weight of the

materials is enough to keep them from moving directly from the flow. Thus, the power

of rainsplash and shallow runoff is not enough to overcome the inertia associated with

larger artifacts in and on a soil matrix.

The depths of flow across the hillslope will be the determining factor to how

much and which contents of materials will be moved during an event. Depth of flow is

non-linearly proportional to the power of flow. Therefore the depths of flow will

determine which materials are removed from their direct context. As the archaeological

matrix of the site is slowly removed, artifacts form a pavement across the sites. If

artifacts are on a steep slope they will slowly move across and down slope from their

origin. Artifacts on low slopes tend to remain in place as the site matrix is removed

below them.

The above is true for the sandy areas of the catchment. In the sub-catchment area

of Sediment Trap 1 the soil contains more fines and cohesive materials. The soil is also

stabilized in inter-rill areas by the dominance of cryptogamic soils. In this area the runoff

is quickly concentrated in narrow rills. The artifacts in this area are primarily lithic and

can be more readily moved by this concentrated flow.

The distribution of artifacts on a site has a tendency to become less and less dense

as you move out from the center and downhill. While this may seem obvious, it is

important to note why this occurs. A major part of this could be result of post

depositional processes and not from human-induced processes.

70

Streambed

In channels, headward erosion is coupled with downstream erosion. Channel

formation within the project area is constantly occurring. Channels were observed to

form and disappear at a scale of one to five years. Within the channels, there are two

types of runoff events. One event type is the low intensity storm runoff event. During

these events the power of water running through the channels is minimal. Often it

appears that most of the flow is occurring beneath the surface of the channel. Much of

the water may in fact be traveling through the sandy channel bottom. During these events

only the finest materials will be transported. Intensity and duration of flow are both low

due to the lack of total rainfall and intensity. These events appear to move smaller

particles of clay, mud, silt and fine sand. Artifacts located in channels during these low

scale events have been observed to stay in place or move only extremely limited

distances. One artifact, a serrated edged projectile point, was observed to move less than

10 cm down channel after several small events. The same projectile was observed to

move upstream during the mid-scale event. The channel movement occurred when

sediment upstream of the artifact was preferentially removed by flowing water. This

anomalous behavior makes sense when the relative shapes and sizes of the rest of the

material observed are understood. The difference between the sand, clay and silt and the

relatively large and heavy projectile point caused the observed movement.

Larger-scale events move all the materials within the channel down to bedrock or

to hard cohesive soil. These events can be thought of as bed mobilizing events. Any

artifacts within the channel and all loose sediment are removed from the channel beds

and deposited downstream. The major sediment producing events were all of this type.

71

Streambank

Channel bank or stream bank erosion is an important component of erosion in this

watershed. Due to the nature of erosion with rapid stream migration both lateral and on

slope large volumes of sediment can be released into the channels and transported out of

the watershed. It should be noted that the major tributaries of this watershed were

observed to increase in depth, width, and length during the project. Most of the changes

in the channel distribution and morphology were not directly documented. One channel,

however, on the far creek right was observed during one storm event to increase in length

more than 50 feet after the June 1995 event. Because bedrock is so near the surface in

this watershed and all of Bandelier, channels have a tendency to move laterally instead of

vertically. The bedrock controls are therefore partly responsible for lateral movement.

Figure 15 shows the results of channel formation and lateral movement on artifacts.

Lateral movement of channels can cause large volumes of artifacts and sediments to

become entrained during a single event. The materials entrained in these types of events

do not go through the gradual process of down slope movement described above.

The data indicate that the archaeology in the FWSA is under severe threat. The

present strategy of benign neglect of the archaeology in the backcountry (P-J erosive

zone) at Bandelier is completely unacceptable. Paid research, with the goal of

understanding the effects of erosion on archaeological materials in Bandelier, is

desperately needed. With good data and a process-based understanding of erosion on

archaeological remains, coherent management decisions can be made. This is critical if

the monuments archaeological resources at Bandelier National Monument are to remain

for the future.

72

Figure 15. (Above) An obsidian flake on the edge of the main channel. Quarter in front of flake for scale. The flake is pedestalled >3 mm. (Below) Same obsidian flake later in the same summer. Pedestal is ~10 mm.

73

Figure 16 Same obsidian flake removed later in the same summer by rainfall runoff event. Note lateral channel migration from left to right in previous two photos. Main channel is filled with sandy sediment.

74

Chapter Nine Conclusions

Severe site disruption is occurring on the sites in the FWSA. A total of 1515 artifacts

were removed from the study area in a three year period. More than three thousand liters

of sediment were removed from the channels and hillslopes. This rate of erosion on the

archaeological sites is unsustainable without the complete destruction of the sites.

On the shorter term, the transport of lithic and ceramic artifacts appears to be

similar. The fluvial processes are removing ceramics and lithics at comparable rates.

Artifact selection is, however, occurring. Smaller-sized lithics are being removed from

sites faster than larger ones. The archaeological sites are being stripped of the smaller

artifacts and leaving the larger classes of materials on the sites or in the hillslopes. The

behavior of ceramics is less clear. They are being sorted but in a less consistent way than

the lithic materials.

The sorting of materials from one site and sub-catchment combine further

downstream to blur the associations of material by site and site type. Even at the bottom

of a less than 200 meter long catchment the original associations from sites are mixed

with those of other sites. A site composed primarily of one class of artifact (lithics) is

blended with a site composed of primarily of another kind (ceramics). From the

downstream artifacts it is not possible to draw conclusions about the individual upstream

sources. The further the artifacts travel the less connection they have to their original

source site context.

Sediment to artifact ratios are consistent in the sub-catchment area, but not in the

FWSA as a whole. It is possible to predict the numbers of artifacts carried by sediment

75

under some conditions: including close proximity to an abundant artifact source, limited

storage areas and short transport distances.

The present rates of sediment yield will leave very little in the way of sediment

and archaeological materials in the next 50 years or so. If no measures are taken to

mitigate erosion, the context of the archaeological record will rapidly be transformed

from the present condition to one where the human influences of the original patterning

will be replaced by fluvial patterning. It is critical that if erosion mitigation procedures

are taken in an area of archaeological sites that some form of analysis of effect be

conducted. The original human patterning of the sites is already experiencing severe

erosion and sorting, and if further processes are to affect the sites, then study should be

conducted to evaluate the results.

Archaeological sites are a non-renewable resource and will continue to be

destroyed by processes of change (natural processes, human destruction, and climate

change). Experimentation in this highly eroding environment should continue to be

conducted to evaluate potential mitigating measures. Any pro-active approach to

minimizing the effects of erosion in the Monument should take into account the possible

effects on the archaeological materials. Wherever possible on archaeological sites in the

Monument, data should be collected about erosion and site stability. Even if these data

are only qualitative, it can further the understanding of the processes of site alteration

through erosion.

It is apparent that the present condition of the landscape in large sections of

Bandelier will be dramatically altered in the next 50 years. The number of sites under

threat from erosion is not presently known, but some hints come from the Bandelier

76

Archaeological Survey. If hydrological and biological conditions are studied within the

Monument, the study of the archaeological site stability should be included. Archaeology

is a finite resource that is rapidly washing down slope and will be gone soon. Figure 16

shows the results of inaction on one site.

77

Figure 17 (Above) Site overview of LA60262 from 1987 BAS recording. (Below) Site overview of LA60262 from 1997 during thesis project.

78

Part IV

Chapter Ten Future Directions

The next step in this type of research would be to evaluate the sediments in a similar way

to the artifacts using grainsize comparisons. Sediment samples were collected from each

event and have been stored for further research. In 1996, Davenport conducted a detailed

analysis of sediments that could be used as comparison materials. In addition to the grain

size work, a micro-artifact/ecofact transport study is possible with the same sediment

samples. These studies would provide an initial analysis of the continuous spectrum of

artifacts and sediments on the FWSA. The incorporation of artifacts directly into

sediment grainsize distribution may reveal a more detailed view of how processes affect

the special class of ‘artifact’ sediments.

Modeling of potential artifact yields through surface density comparisons to

sediment yields in a limited number of conditions would be useful for estimating

‘original’ site conditions. In order to achieve sufficient levels of data, observations at

numerous sites could be used to reduce the need for long term projects.

Downstream Issues

I recommend that a project be initiated to determine how far archaeological materials

are moving downstream. In this experiment 1515 artifacts moved out of predefined

watersheds of from 300 to 12,000 m2. A major question is the ultimate deposition

location. Does the channel continue to transport these artifacts at a high rate of speed or

do they end up in channel deposits, streambeds, or alluvial fan type deposits at the

interface of steep changes in grade? Downstream excavations of channel deposits could

reveal the answer of re-deposition.

79

Hillslope concerns

The artifact transects recorded for this project were recorded with location data for

transects and artifacts. These transects can be re-measured to confirm that artifacts are

being sorted within the context of the sites boundaries. Artifacts surface distributions are

one way of evaluating the effects of erosion or erosion mitigation techniques. Repeating

fixed transect measures of artifacts may also provide a baseline for evaluating site

disruption.

Due to the close proximity of LANL, a large number of high quality aerial photos

have been taken of the eastern edge of Bandelier National Monument. A coupling of

these data with the existing GIS data available at the monument could make quick work

of finding the most at-risk sites. Any treatments could be selectively applied to these

sites first. Additionally, new site exposure from erosion and vegetative change could

reveal areas of risk.

80

Part V Supplemental Information

Appendix A – Tabular Data

Table A.1. Artifact Transect Data – Source Artifacts

Corr = Corrugated surface texture

Unk = Unknown or undetermined for any field in table

B/W = Black on White Ceramic G/G = Gray on Gray Ceramic

B/G = Black on Gray Ceramic B/R = Black on Red Ceramic

Transect number

Size 1 (cm)

Size 2

(cm)

Size 3 (cm)

Artifact type

Material Type

General shape

Muncell Color

Ground cover type

Notes

1 1.24 0.92 0.18 Lithic Obsidian Square n1 Sand 1 1.56 1.31 0.26 Lithic Obsidian Square n1 Bare Soil1 1.59 0.8 0.21 Lithic Obsidian Rectangle n1 Bare Soil1 0.65 0.63 0.17 Lithic Obsidian Square n1 Bare Soil1 1.94 1.47 0.34 Lithic Basalt Triangle n3 Bare Soil1 1.15 0.81 0.17 Lithic Obsidian Square n1 Sand 1 1.78 1.15 0.43 Lithic Obsidian Rhomboid n1 Bare Soil1 1.08 0.99 0.14 Lithic Obsidian Rhomboid n1 Bare Soil1 1.29 1.07 0.22 Lithic Obsidian Triangle n1 Bare Soil1 2.07 2.03 0.31 Lithic Obsidian circle n1 Gravel 1 1.87 1.63 0.58 Lithic Obsidian Triangle n1 Gravel 1 1.14 0.85 0.27 Lithic Basalt Square n3 Sand 1 1.23 0.8 0.17 Lithic Obsidian Diamond n1 Sand 1 2.33 1.18 0.42 Lithic Obsidian Triangle n1 Sand 1 1.59 1.39 0.27 Lithic Obsidian Square n1 Sand 1 0.92 0.71 0.14 Lithic Basalt Triangle n3 Sand 1 2.27 1.92 0.29 Lithic Basalt Square n3 Sand utilized

flake 1 6.42 4.3 1.33 Lithic Basalt Triangle n3 Crypto-

gam just visible

1 1.67 1.34 0.34 Lithic Obsidian Square n1 Sand 1 1.57 1.02 0.37 Lithic Obsidian Rhomboid n1 Sand 1 0.99 0.51 0.12 Lithic Basalt Rectangle n3 Sand 1 1.02 0.68 0.22 Lithic Obsidian Triangle n1 Bare Soil1 1.36 1.05 0.56 Lithic Flow

obsidian Triangle n1/n4 Bare Soil Mostly

buried 1 0.8 0.46 0.09 Lithic Obsidian Rectangle n1 Gravel 1 1.51 0.95 0.27 Lithic Obsidian Rhomboid n1 Gravel

81

1 1.09 0.86 1.21 Lithic Obsidian Rectangle n1 Bare Soil1 1.54 1.34 0.5 Lithic Obsidian Square n1 Bare Soil cortex 1 1.63 1.53 0.35 Lithic Obsidian Triangle n1 Bare Soil1 2.57 1.91 0.51 Lithic Obsidian Rectangle n1 Bare Soil1 2.05 2 0.5 Lithic Obsidian Triangle n1 Bare Soil1 1.84 1.67 0.4 Lithic Obsidian Triangle n1 Bare Soil1 1.65 1.23 0.34 Lithic Obsidian Triangle n1 Bare Soil1 2.24 2.99 0.57 Lithic Obsidian Square n1 Bare Soil1 1.39 1.14 0.25 Lithic Obsidian Square n1 Bare Soil1 2.69 1.59 0.64 Lithic Obsidian Triangle n1 Bare Soil1 2.64 1.35 0.52 Lithic Obsidian Rectangle n1 Bare Soil1 2.06 1.06 0.21 Lithic Obsidian Square n1 Bare Soil1 1.9 1.25 0.39 Lithic Obsidian Triangle n1 Bare Soil1 1.67 1.59 0.32 Lithic Obsidian Square n1 Bare Soil1 1.18 2.62 0.62 Lithic obsidian triangle n1 litter 1 1.85 1.57 0.39 Lithic Obsidian Rectangle n1 Bare Soil1 2.2 0.92 0.18 Lithic Obsidian Triangle n1 Litter 1 2.94 2.28 0.041 Lithic Obsidian Triangle n1 Litter 1 1.9 1.9 0.14 Lithic Obsidian Triangle n1 Litter 1 1.45 0.59 0.19 Lithic obsidian Triangle n1 Litter 1 2.21 1.73 0.39 Lithic Obsidian Triangle n1 Litter 1 2.04 2.92 0.41 Lithic Obsidian Triangle n1 Litter 1 1.43 1.2 0.19 Lithic Obsidian Rectangle n1 Bare Soil1 2.25 1.25 0.37 Lithic Obsidian Triangle n1 Bare Soil1 1.27 0.92 0.49 Lithic Obsidian Square n1 Bare Soil1 1.45 1.06 0.16 Lithic Obsidian Triangle n1 Bare Soil1 2.45 1.69 0.84 Lithic Obsidian Triangle n1 Bare Soil1 1.09 0.82 0.25 Lithic Obsidian Triangle n1 Bare Soil1 1.04 0.85 0.34 Lithic Obsidian Triangle n1 Bare Soil1 1.66 1.01 0.31 Lithic Obsidian Triangle n1 Bare Soil1 2.03 1.33 0.38 Lithic Obsidian Square n1 Bare Soil1 1.79 1.13 0.24 Lithic Obsidian Triangle n1 Bare Soil1 2.95 1.05 0.35 Lithic Obsidian Rectangle n1 Bare Soil1 2.21 0.91 0.37 Lithic Obsidian Rectangle n1 Bare Soil1 1.78 1.41 0.59 Lithic Obsidian Square n1 Bare Soil1 1.12 0.86 0.38 Lithic Obsidian Square n1 Bare Soil weathered

1 1.1 0.96 0.33 Lithic Obsidian Square n1 Bare Soil1 1.96 1.62 0.57 Lithic Obsidian Square n1 Bare Soil1 2.06 1.72 0.42 Lithic Obsidian Square n1 Bare Soil1 2.26 0.99 0.56 Lithic Obsidian Rectangle n1 Bare Soil1 1.24 1.16 0.35 Lithic Obsidian Square n1 Bare Soil1 1.95 1.55 0.35 Lithic Obsidian Triangle n1 Gravel 1 1.45 1.1 0.41 Lithic Basalt Triangle n3 Gravel 1 2.15 1.11 0.45 Lithic Obsidian Triangle n1 Gravel 1 1.4 1.14 0.41 Lithic Obsidian Triangle n1 Gravel 1 2.65 1.58 0.65 Lithic Obsidian Rectangle n1 Bare Soil weathered

82

1 1.95 1.59 0.42 Lithic Obsidian circle n1 Gravel 1 0.92 0.77 0.15 Lithic Obsidian Triangle n2 Bare Soil1 1.64 1.12 0.26 Lithic Obsidian Rectangle n1 Bare Soil1 1.96 121 0.48 Lithic Obsidian Triangle n1 Gravel 1 1.94 1.29 0.37 Lithic Obsidian Triangle n1 Bare Soil1 1.56 1.1 0.26 Lithic Obsidian Rhomboid n1 Bare Soil1 1.62 1.17 0.27 Lithic Obsidian Diamond n1 Gravel 1 0.78 0.75 0.14 Lithic Basalt Square n1 Gravel 1 1.71 0.94 0.37 Lithic Obsidian Square n1 Gravel 1 0.69 0.61 0.13 Lithic Obsidian Square n1 Bare Soil1 1.61 1.25 0.27 Lithic Obsidian Rectangle n1 Bare Soil1 1.25 0.57 0.19 Lithic Obsidian Rectangle n1 Gravel 1 0.73 0.56 0.18 Lithic Basalt Triangle n3 Bare Soil1 2.11 1.42 0.31 Lithic Obsidian Rectangle n1 Gravel 1 2.45 2.1 0.5 Lithic Obsidian circle n1 Gravel 1 2.2 0.98 0.3 Lithic Obsidian Rectangle n1 Gravel 1 1.08 0.89 0.23 Lithic Obsidian Triangle n1 Sand 1 1.37 0.92 0.44 Lithic Obsidian trapezoid n1 Gravel 1 2.29 2.01 0.57 Lithic Obsidian circle n1 Gravel 1 2.94 2.26 0.86 Lithic Obsidian Square n1 Bare Soil buried 1 0.9 0.8 0.24 Lithic Obsidian Square n1 Gravel 1 1.05 1.22 0.27 Lithic Obsidian Square n1 Gravel 1 1.92 1.59 0.46 Lithic Obsidian Triangle n1 Bare Soil1 1.12 0.99 0.35 Lithic Obsidian Square n1 Bare Soil1 1.72 1.25 0.36 Lithic Basalt Triangle n3 Gravel 1 1.62 0.91 0.45 Lithic Obsidian Triangle n1 Gravel 1 1.5 1.1 0.35 Lithic Obsidian Square n1 Gravel 1 2.7 1.81 0.4 Lithic Obsidian Square n1 Gravel 1 1.05 0.71 0.12 Lithic Obsidian Triangle n1 Gravel 1 0.8 0.65 0.15 Lithic Obsidian Square n1 Gravel 1 1.12 1.07 0.14 Lithic Obsidian Triangle n1 Gravel 1 1.14 1.07 0.14 Lithic Obsidian Triangle n1 Gravel 1 1.56 1.23 0.2 Lithic Obsidian Triangle n1 Litter 1 1 0.72 0.2 Lithic Obsidian Rectangle n1 Gravel 1 2.06 1.59 0.44 Lithic Obsidian Rectangle n1 Bare Soil1 2.07 3.17 0.62 Lithic Obsidian Triangle n1 Bare Soil1 3.05 1.7 0.41 Lithic Obsidian Triangle n1 Bare Soil1 1.87 1.55 0.78 Lithic Obsidian Square n1 Bare Soil1 1.53 0.78 0.3 Lithic Obsidian Trapezoid n1 Bare Soil1 1.37 0.76 0.13 Lithic Obsidian Rectangle n1 Bare Soil1 2.38 1.57 0.4 Lithic Obsidian Rhomboid n1 Bare Soil1 2 1.6 0.37 Lithic Obsidian Triangle n1 Bare Soil1 1.48 1.49 0.27 Lithic Obsidian Triangle n1 Bare Soil1 0.91 0.88 0.2 Lithic Obsidian Triangle n1 Bare Soil1 0.83 0.84 0.18 Lithic Obsidian Square n1 Bare Soil1 1.27 0.78 0.58 Lithic Obsidian Triangle n1 Bare Soil

83

1 1.52 1.06 0.27 Lithic Obsidian Triangle n1 Bare Soil1 2.21 2.06 0.54 Lithic Obsidian Rectangle n1 Bare Soil1 1.65 0.81 0.31 Lithic Obsidian Triangle n1 Bare Soil1 0.79 0.8 0.19 Lithic Obsidian Square n1 Bare Soil1 1.79 1.25 0.4 Lithic Obsidian Diamond n1 Bare Soil1 1.7 1.13 0.32 Lithic Obsidian Triangle n1 Bare Soil1 1.66 0.98 0.29 Lithic Basalt Triangle n3 Bare Soil1 1.62 1.49 0.37 Lithic Obsidian Square n1 cryptogam

1 0.74 0.46 0.12 Lithic Obsidian Rectangle n1 Bare Soil1 0.78 0.38 0.2 Lithic Obsidian Rectangle n1 Bare Soil1 0.79 0.49 0.08 Lithic Obsidian Rectangle n1 Sand 1 2.06 1.33 0.43 Lithic Obsidian Rectangle n1 Bare Soil1 1.41 1.03 0.02 Lithic Obsidian Rectangle n1 Bare Soil1 1.01 9 0.18 Lithic Obsidian Square n1 Bare Soil1 1 0.99 0.35 Lithic Obsidian Rhomboid n1 Bare Soil1 2.2 1.22 0.29 Lithic Obsidian Rectangle n1 Bare Soil1 0.94 0.66 0.2 Lithic Obsidian Triangle n1 Bare Soil1 1.13 0.81 0.12 Lithic Obsidian Triangle n1 Bare Soil1 1.11 0.84 0.15 Lithic Obsidian Triangle n1 Sand 1 0.93 0.89 0.23 Lithic Obsidian Triangle n1 Bare Soil1 1.6 0.79 0.019 Lithic Obsidian Triangle n1 Bare Soil1 1.59 1.56 0.49 Lithic Obsidian Square n1 Bare Soil1 1.41 1.39 0.19 Lithic Obsidian Rectangle n1 Bare Soil1 1.06 0.66 0.23 Lithic Obsidian Triangle n1 Sand 1 1.96 1.3 0.27 Lithic Obsidian Rectangle n1 Bare Soil1 0.81 0.8 0.17 Lithic Obsidian Square n1 Gravel 1 1.58 1.41 0.39 Lithic Obsidian Triangle n1 Sand 1 1.21 1.03 0.22 Lithic Obsidian Triangle n1 Sand 3 1.8 1.16 0.28 Lithic Obsidian Triangle n1 Pumice 3 1.24 0.85 0.23 Lithic Basalt Rectangle n1 Pumice 3 2.53 1.93 0.51 Lithic Basalt Square n3 Pumice 3 1.48 0.71 0.22 Lithic Obsidian Rectangle n1 Pumice 3 1.35 0.8 0.42 Lithic Obsidian Triangle n1 Pumice 3 2.26 1.76 0.64 Lithic Obsidian Triangle n1 Pumice 3 3.38 4.75 1.79 Lithic Obsidian 6 n1 Pumice cortex 3 2.89 2.11 0.65 Lithic Obsidian Triangle n1 Pumice 3 2.44 1.75 0.34 Lithic Basalt Square n3 Pumice 3 3 2.54 0.61 Lithic flow

obsidian Square n1 Pumice

3 1.66 0.78 0.2 Lithic Obsidian Square n1 Pumice 3 3.6 1.95 0.77 Lithic Basalt Square n3 Pumice concave 3 2.01 1.24 0.28 Lithic Obsidian Rectangle n1 Pumice 3 2.61 1.87 0.46 Lithic Obsidian Triangle n1 Pumice 3 3 1.62 0.69 Lithic Obsidian Rectangle n1 Pumice 3 1.47 1.42 0.32 Lithic Obsidian Square n1 Sand channel 3 1.74 1.36 0.39 Lithic Obsidian Triangle n1 Sand

84

3 3.29 2.9 0.67 Lithic Basalt Triangle n3 Sand 3 2.78 1.94 0.95 Lithic Obsidian Triangle n1 Sand 4 1.21 1.07 0.21 Lithic Basalt Square n3 Gravel 4 2.5 1.45 0.66 Ceramic Gray Rectangle 5y61 Sand slip 4 2.44 1.8 0.51 Ceramic B/G Rectangle 5y61 Sand most

paint gone

4 1.87 1.55 0.52 Ceramic Corr 6 10yr42 Gravel 4 2.81 1.7 0.57 Lithic Obsidian Triangle n1 Bare Soil4 10.57 10.5 0.59 Ceramic Corr Triangle 10yr42/1

0yr54 Bare Soil

4 4.4 3.79 0.71 Ceramic B/R Triangle 10r46 Pumice shark fin 4 2.21 1.95 0.55 Ceramic Corr Triangle 10yr54 Gravel 5 3.17 2.18 0.61 Ceramic Corr Rectangle 5yp64 Sand 5 2.24 2.16 0.53 Ceramic Corr Triangle 10yr22 Sand 5 4.22 2.8 0.42 Ceramic Corr Rectangle 10yr22 Gravel 5 2.74 1.83 0.45 Ceramic Corr Rectangle 5yp64 Gravel 10yr22 5 2.25 1.82 0.45 Ceramic B/G Triangle n6 Gravel n1 5 1.83 1.45 0.5 Ceramic B/G Triangle 10yr62 Bare Soil5 1.76 1.35 0.37 Ceramic Gray Rectangle n6 Bare Soil fractured5 1.64 1.17 0.45 Ceramic Corr Rectangle 10yr62 Gravel 10yr42 5 2.09 2.03 0.43 Ceramic Corr Square n6 Rock 5 2.07 1.7 0.48 Ceramic Corr Rectangle 10yr52 Bare Soil5 2.2 1.85 0.43 Lithic Obsidian Triangle n0 Bare Soil5 2.33 1.64 0.35 Ceramic Corr Rhomboid 10yr62 Gravel 10yr42 5 2.21 1.82 0.47 Ceramic Corr Rhomboid 10yr32 Gravel 10yr32 5 2.45 1.46 0.76 Ceramic Corr Triangle 5yr61 Sand 5 2.5 2.16 0.73 Ceramic Corr Parallagra

m 5yr61 Rock 5yr62

5 1.48 1.03 0.32 Lithic Obsidian Rectangle n0 Bare Soil5 7.41 6.52 3.21 Ground

stone Basalt Rectangle n4 Bare Soil Broken

axe head, back half, hafting evident

6 3.12 2.5 0.69 Lithic Basalt Square 2.5y20 Sand 6 1.65 1.07 0.38 Ceramic Unk Rectangle 10yr52 Gravel 6 1.59 1.15 0.53 Ceramic Corr Rectangle 10yr53 Gravel rim 6 3.33 2.27 0.46 Lithic Basalt Triangle 2.5y20 Sand 6 1.25 1.09 0.52 Ceramic Corr Square 10yr53 Litter 6 2.5 1.68 0.57 Ceramic Corr Rectangle 10yr52 Bare Soil6 1.76 1.61 0.53 Ceramic Corr Triangle 10yr52 Bare Soil6 1.37 1.15 0.52 Ceramic plain Square 10yr62 Bare Soil6 1.93 1.27 0.59 Ceramic Unk Triangle 10yr63 Sand 6 1.85 1.44 0.5 Ceramic Corr Triangle 10yr51 sherd 6 2 1.51 0.55 Ceramic Corr Triangle 10yr52 Sand 6 1.95 1.94 1.57 Ceramic Gray Square 10yr51 Litter rim

85

6 3.01 2.59 0.57 Ceramic Corr trapezoid 10yr53 Gravel 6 1.89 1.81 0.45 Ceramic Corr Triangle 10yr41 Bare Soil6 2.34 1.19 0.27 Lithic Basalt Triangle 2.5y20 Sand 6 2.23 1.97 0.53 Lithic andesite Square 10yr51 Sand 6 1.82 1.75 0.5 Ceramic Corr Triangle 7.5yr54 Sand 6 3.16 2.59 0.65 Ceramic Corr trapezoid 7.5yr40 Sand 6 2.74 1.89 0.55 Ceramic Corr Triangle 10yr52 Sand 6 2.14 1.74 0.4 Ceramic Corr Triangle 7.5yr40 Rock 6 2.81 2.53 0.52 Ceramic Corr Square 10yr63 Rock 6 1.47 1.08 0.35 Ceramic B/W Triangle 10yr81 Sand chip 6 1.62 0.72 0.52 Ceramic Unk Triangle 10yr52 Sand 6 2.09 1.03 0.41 Ceramic Corr Rectangle 10yr63 Sand 6 2.76 2.03 0.43 Ceramic Corr Pentagram 10yr41 Sand 6 2.48 1.54 0.57 Ceramic G/G Triangle 2.5y40 Sand 6 2.24 1.98 0.55 Ceramic Corr Rhomboid 10yr62 Sand 6 1.69 1.27 0.4 Ceramic Corr Triangle 10yr72 Sand 6 2.1 1.4 0.5 Ceramic Corr Rectangle 10yr72 Sand 6 3.18 1.63 0.58 Lithic Basalt Triangle 2.5y20 Sand 6 1.64 1.28 0.52 Ceramic B/G trapezoid 10yr71 Sand 6 1.39 1.16 0.54 Ceramic Corr Rectangle 7.5yr72 Sand 6 1.69 1.18 0.19 Lithic Basalt Triangle 2.5y20 Sand 6 2.07 1.19 0.55 Ceramic Corr Square 10yr64 Sand 6 2.15 1.79 0.46 Ceramic Corr trapezoid 10yr52 Sand 6 1.57 1.35 0.37 Ceramic Unk Triangle 2.5y40 Sand 6 1.77 0.96 0.69 Ceramic G/G Rectangle 2.5y62 Sand 6 2.05 1.34 0.48 Ceramic Corr Romboid 5y41 Sand 6 1.49 0.88 0.46 Lithic Basalt Triangle 2.5y20 Grass 6 3.12 2.91 0.45 Ceramic Corr 5 10yr63 Litter 6 2.51 1.69 0.74 Lithic Basalt Triangle 2.5y20 Bare Soil6 2 1.24 0.52 Ceramic Corr Rectangle 10yr42 Bare Soil6 1.47 1.47 0.52 Ceramic Unk Rectangle 10yr42 Bare Soil6 1.59 1.12 0.52 Ceramic Unk Rectangle 10yr52 Bare Soil6 3.43 3.36 1.25 Lithic Basalt Triangle 2.5y20 Sand 6 2.99 1.62 0.37 Lithic Obsidian Rectangle 2.5yr20 Sand 6 2.18 1.61 1.05 Lithic Basalt Square 2.5y20 Bare Soil6 1.15 1.05 0.46 Ceramic Plain

orange trapezoid 7.5yr54 Sand

6 1.77 0.97 0.56 Ceramic Corr Rectangle 5y61 Bare Soil and sand6 1.07 1.01 0.32 Lithic p chert Square 5yr81 Pumice 6 1.44 0.87 0.44 Ceramic Corr trapezoid 10yr51 Sand 6 1.29 0.7 0.42 Ceramic Unk Rectangle 2.5y30 Sand 6 2.12 0.91 0.52 Ceramic Corr Triangle 10yr53 Sand 6 1.3 0.54 0.31 Lithic p chert Triangle 5yr81 Sand 6 1.35 0.93 0.31 Lithic Basalt Triangle 2.5y20 Sand 6 0.82 0.34 0.2 Lithic Basalt Triangle 2.5y20 Sand 6 1.54 1.03 0.58 Ceramic Corr Trapezoid 10yr64 Sand

86

6 1.26 0.9 0.27 Lithic Basalt Trapezoid 2.5y20 Sand 6 1.54 1.25 0.4 Ceramic Unk Romboid 10yr51 Sand 6 1.25 0.88 0.47 Ceramic plain Triangle 10yr51 Sand 6 2.75 2.02 0.59 Ceramic Corr Triangle 5y51 Litter 6 1.82 1.2 0.54 Ceramic Corr Rectangle 5y51 Sand 6 2.65 2.25 0.51 Ceramic plain Triangle 2.5y54 Sand 6 2.35 1.71 0.55 Ceramic Corr Triangle 10yr61 Sand 6 1.46 1.43 0.63 Ceramic Chert Trapezoid 5y41 Sand 6 0.7 0.67 0.2 Lithic Basalt Trapezoid 2.5y20 Sand 6 2.81 1.57 0.62 Ceramic B/G Rectangle n4 Sand 6 0.71 0.65 0.43 Ceramic Gray Pentagram n4 Sand 6 1.5 0.91 0.55 Ceramic Corr Triangle 2.5y54 Sand 6 2.92 2.68 0.48 Ceramic Corr Triangle 10yr64 Sand 6 2.22 1.9 0.49 Ceramic Corr Trapezoid 10yr64 Sand 6 4.22 2.38 0.44 Ceramic Corr Rhombus 2.5y52 Sand 6 1.64 1.48 0.52 Ceramic Gray Square 2.5y62 Sand 6 2.36 2.22 0.43 Ceramic Corr Triangle 2.5y62 Sand 6 2.16 1.6 0.52 Ceramic Corr Triangle 2.5y40 Sand 6 1.15 0.94 0.23 Ceramic Unk Triangle 5y81 Sand 6 1.22 1.14 0.41 Ceramic Corr Rhomboid 5y41 Sand 6 2.61 1.69 0.7 Ceramic Gray Rhomboid 10yr64 Sand 6 1.81 0.59 0.55 Lithic Chert Cylinder 5yr81 Sand 6 2.04 1.27 0.52 Ceramic Corr Triangle 2.5y30 Rock 6 1.17 1 0.25 Lithic Obsidian Rhomboid 2.5y20 Sand 6 1.14 0.7 0.46 Ceramic Corr Triangle 2.5y40 Sand 6 2.57 1.81 0.57 Ceramic Corr trapezoid 2.5y52 Sand 6 2.28 2.1 0.59 Ceramic Corr Triangle 2.5y52 Sand 6 1.52 1.45 0.56 Ceramic Corr Square 5y61 Bare Soil6 4.33 3.17 0.07 Ceramic Corr Pentagram 2.5y52 Bare Soil6 2.71 2.07 0.65 Ceramic Corr Triangle 2.5y52 Sand 6 1.52 1.48 0.57 Ceramic Corr Square 2.5y6.2 Bare Soil6 1.27 1.01 0.55 Ceramic Corr Rectangle 2.5y54 Sand 6 1.89 1.22 0.6 Ceramic Corr Rectangle 2.5y62 Sand 6 1.11 0.9 0.5 Ceramic Corr trapezoid 10yr54 Sand rim 6 4.37 2.31 1.1 Lithic Basalt Triangle 2.5y20 Bare Soil6 2.14 1.51 0.49 Ceramic Gray Triangle 10yr62 Bare Soil6 2.42 2.13 0.48 Ceramic Corr Triangle 10yr72 Bare Soil6 1.94 1.21 0.41 Ceramic Corr Rhomboid 10yr51 Pumice 6 2.24 1.22 0.39 Ceramic Unk Rhomboid 10yr61 Bare Soil6 2.68 2.34 0.61 Ceramic Gray Square 10yr61 Bare Soil6 2.19 1.95 0.44 Ceramic Corr Square 7.5yr56 Litter 6 1.29 1.27 0.48 Ceramic Corr Square 10yr62 Bare Soil6 2.04 1.5 0.37 Lithic Basalt Rhomboid 2.5y20 Gravel 6 1.92 1.39 0.59 Ceramic B/W trapezoid 10yr63 Litter 6 1.94 1.65 0.4 Lithic Basalt Triangle 2.5y20 Litter 6 1.48 1.06 0.52 Ceramic Corr Rectangle 10yr52 Bare Soil

87

6 1.43 1.25 0.35 Lithic Basalt Triangle 2.5y20 Litter 6 2.8 1.24 0.68 Lithic Basalt Triangle 2.5y20 Litter 6 2.59 2.35 0.52 Ceramic Corr Square 10yr41 Litter 6 1.75 1.51 0.6 Ceramic Corr trapezoid 10yr41 Litter 6 2.69 2.1 0.75 Ceramic Corr trapezoid 10yr53 Bare Soil broke in

half during measure

6 0.91 0.71 0.52 Ceramic Gray Square 10yr31 Sand 6 2.13 1.97 0.41 Ceramic Corr trapezoid 10yr62 Sand 6 0.94 0.66 0.21 Lithic Chert Triangle 5yr81 Sand 6 1.9 1.56 0.56 Ceramic Corr trapezoid 10yr53 Gravel 6 1.92 1.51 0.56 Ceramic Corr Rhomboid 7.5yr46 Sand 6 2.16 1.6 0.49 Ceramic Corr trapezoid 10yr51 Sand rim 6 1.5 1.36 0.44 Ceramic Gray trapezoid 10yr62 Bare Soil6 1.5 1.02 0.51 Ceramic Gray Rectangle 10yr61 Bare Soil6 1.64 1.37 0.48 Ceramic Gray trapezoid 10yr51 Bare Soil6 2.28 1.37 0.53 Lithic Chert Triangle 5yr81 Sand 6 2.04 1.35 0.55 Ceramic Corr Rhomboid 10yr51 Sand 6 2.1 0.98 0.49 Lithic Basalt Triangle 2.5y20 Sand 6 2.32 1.96 0.47 Ceramic Corr trapezoid 2.5yr40 Sand 6 1.3 1.07 0.42 Ceramic Corr Triangle 2.5yr40 Sand 6 1.76 1.39 0.43 Ceramic Corr Triangle 10yr51 Sand 6 1.02 0.8 0.12 Ceramic B/G Square 10yr61 Sand paint chip6 1.6 1.32 0.53 Ceramic Corr Triangle 10yr41 Sand 6 2.82 2.65 0.65 Ceramic Corr Pentagram 10yr41 Gravel 6 3.05 2.6 0.57 Ceramic Corr trapezoid 10yr52 Sand 6 4.88 2.78 0.45 Ceramic Gray Triangle 10yr52 Sand 6 3.12 2.22 0.49 Ceramic B/G Triangle 10yr61 Bare Soil6 3.92 3.43 0.59 Ceramic Corr Square 10yr52 Bare Soil6 1.56 1.44 0.5 Ceramic Corr Pentagram 10yr21 Bare Soil rim 6 2.07 1.67 1.15 Lithic Basalt Rectangle 2.5y20 Bare Soil flake 6 2.3 2.02 0.55 Ceramic Corr Triangle 10yr63 Bare Soil6 2.2 2.05 0.47 Ceramic Corr trapezoid 10yr52 Bare Soil6 3.64 2.94 0.64 Ceramic B/G Square 10yr62 Sand 6 3.71 2.56 0.65 Ceramic Corr Rhomboid 10yr52 Sand rim 6 2.71 1.65 0.49 Ceramic Corr Triangle 10yr62 Sand 6 1.72 1.15 0.3 Ceramic Unk Rectangle 10yr62 Sand 6 1.85 1.83 0.55 Ceramic Corr Triangle 10yr53 Sand 7 1.35 1.1 0.44 Lithic Obsidian Square Pumice 7 1.56 1.57 0.41 Lithic Obsidian Square Sand 7 1.06 0.67 0.17 Lithic Obsidian Triangle Litter 7 1.11 0.8 0.12 Lithic Obsidian Rhomboid Bare Soil7 1.72 0.81 0.25 Lithic Obsidian Triangle Sand 7 1.41 0.79 0.35 Lithic Obsidian Triangle Bare Soil7 1.11 0.47 0.22 Lithic Obsidian Rectangle Litter

88

7 0.7 0.6 0.1 Lithic Obsidian Rectangle Litter 7 1.3 1.01 0.33 Lithic Obsidian Triangle Pumice 7 0.81 0.52 0.06 Lithic Obsidian trapezoid Pumice 7 1.18 1.1 0.29 Lithic Obsidian Triangle Pumice 7 2.57 1.53 0.55 Lithic Obsidian Rectangle Pumice 7 1.43 1.06 0.31 Lithic Basalt Triangle Pumice 7 1.02 0.68 0.18 Lithic Obsidian Rectangle Bare Soil7 1.1 0.85 0.27 Lithic Obsidian Rectangle Bare Soil7 0.55 0.51 0.1 Lithic Obsidian Square Bare Soil7 2.03 1.07 0.37 Lithic Obsidian Triangle Pumice 7 2.12 1.42 0.31 Lithic Obsidian Rectangle Pumice 7 0.5 0.5 0.5 Lithic Obsidian Rectangle Pumice 7 2.21 0.96 0.31 Lithic Obsidian Rectangle Pumice 7 0.97 0.61 0.12 Lithic Obsidian Square Bare Soil7 2.9 2.21 0.75 Lithic Obsidian Rectangle Pumice 7 2.03 2.25 0.56 Lithic Obsidian Square Pumice 7 0.81 0.73 0.21 Lithic Obsidian Triangle Pumice 7 1.93 1.59 0.46 Lithic Obsidian Triangle Pumice 7 1.1 0.87 0.23 Lithic Obsidian Triangle Bare Soil7 1.6 1.25 0.23 Lithic Basalt Triangle Pumice 7 1.44 0.81 0.37 Lithic Obsidian Triangle Pumice 7 0.67 0.53 0.07 l Obsidian Triangle Sand 7 1.22 0.6 0.2 Lithic Obsidian Rectangle Bare Soil7 1.58 1.02 0.19 Lithic Obsidian Triangle Pumice 7 1.71 1.3 0.27 Lithic Obsidian Triangle Pumice 7 2.26 2.05 0.5 Lithic Obsidian Square Bare Soil7 1.77 1.37 0.22 Lithic Obsidian Rectangle Sand 7 1.92 0.88 0.31 Lithic Obsidian Rectangle Bare Soil7 1.24 1.08 0.35 Lithic Obsidian Rectangle Bare Soil7 1.2 1 0.19 Lithic Basalt Triangle Sand 7 1.28 0.69 0.17 Lithic Obsidian Triangle Pumice 7 0.55 0.5 0.12 Lithic Obsidian Square Pumice 7 2 1.63 0.4 Lithic Obsidian Boot shape Bare Soil7 1.58 1.29 0.37 Lithic Obsidian Rectangle Bare Soil7 1.52 0.79 0.21 Lithic Obsidian Rectangle Bare Soil7 0.98 0.71 0.2 Lithic Obsidian Triangle Pumice 7 1.92 1.09 0.2 Lithic Obsidian Rectangle Bare Soil7 0.82 0.62 0.16 Lithic Obsidian Rectangle Bare Soil7 1.8 1.23 0.29 Lithic Obsidian Rectangle Sand 7 1 0.86 0.29 Lithic Obsidian Square Sand 7 1.52 1.25 0.52 Lithic Obsidian Square Bare Soil

Table A.2. Artifacts from the Sediment Traps – Yield Artifacts

89

Event date

Sediment Trap(#)

Size 1 (cm)

Size 2 (cm)

Size 3 (cm)

Weight(gm)

Artifact Type

Material Type Notes

6/29/95 1 0.88 0.08 0.15 0.1 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 1 1.60 0.56 0.32 0.3 lithic Obsidian even

thickness 6/29/95 1 0.88 0.65 0.17 0.1 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 1 1.13 0.65 0.19 0.1 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 1 0.89 0.68 0.17 0.1 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 1 1.22 0.70 0.26 0.2 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 1 1.94 0.70 0.25 0.2 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 1 0.76 0.71 0.16 0.1 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 1 1.04 0.73 0.17 0.1 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 1 1.06 0.74 0.10 0.1 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 1 0.84 0.76 0.24 0.1 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 1 0.95 0.76 0.15 0.1 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 1 1.18 0.77 0.17 0.1 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 1 0.81 0.78 0.15 0.1 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 1 0.90 0.78 0.15 0.1 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 1 1.37 0.79 0.19 0.1 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 1 0.85 0.80 0.20 0.1 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 1 1.08 0.81 0.16 0.2 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 1 1.21 0.81 0.10 0.1 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 1 1.35 0.81 0.19 0.1 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 1 1.54 0.81 0.19 0.1 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 1 1.85 0.81 0.27 0.3 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 1 1.36 0.82 0.25 0.2 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 1 1.57 0.82 0.21 0.2 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 1 0.94 0.83 0.19 0.1 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 1 1.21 0.83 0.29 0.1 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 1 1.23 0.83 0.28 0.2 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 1 0.93 0.84 0.23 0.1 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 1 0.85 0.85 0.17 0.1 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 1 0.90 0.85 0.12 0.1 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 1 1.35 0.85 0.26 0.2 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 1 1.07 0.87 0.23 0.1 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 1 1.16 0.87 0.27 0.1 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 1 1.32 0.88 0.29 0.3 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 1 1.88 0.88 0.28 0.4 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 1 2.00 0.88 0.22 0.5 lithic Obsidian striated 6/29/95 1 0.42 0.89 0.28 0.1 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 1 1.37 0.89 0.17 0.2 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 1 1.45 0.89 0.21 0.3 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 1 1.50 0.89 0.40 0.4 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 1 1.48 0.90 0.36 0.4 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 1 1.24 0.91 0.20 0.1 lithic Obsidian

90

6/29/95 1 1.32 0.93 0.24 0.2 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 1 1.58 0.93 0.29 0.2 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 1 1.13 0.95 0.14 0.1 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 1 1.39 0.95 0.17 0.1 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 1 1.41 0.95 0.26 0.2 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 1 1.48 0.96 0.16 0.1 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 1 1.02 0.97 0.15 0.1 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 1 1.29 0.97 0.22 0.2 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 1 1.08 1.00 0.33 0.2 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 1 1.24 1.00 0.90 0.7 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 1 1.36 1.00 0.17 0.2 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 1 1.69 1.03 0.17 0.2 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 1 1.79 1.03 0.35 0.6 lithic Obsidian striated 6/29/95 1 2.05 1.03 0.44 0.7 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 1 1.62 1.04 0.23 0.3 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 1 1.20 1.05 0.25 0.3 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 1 1.22 1.05 0.29 0.3 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 1 1.93 1.05 0.42 0.6 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 1 1.35 1.07 0.14 0.2 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 1 1.53 1.07 0.35 0.6 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 1 1.56 1.07 0.25 0.4 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 1 1.62 1.08 0.35 0.4 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 1 1.75 1.08 0.25 0.4 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 1 1.25 1.09 0.24 0.3 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 1 1.11 1.10 0.25 0.3 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 1 2.58 1.10 0.44 1.0 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 1 3.05 1.10 0.71 2.3 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 1 1.20 1.11 0.26 0.3 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 1 2.10 1.11 0.29 0.5 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 1 1.29 1.13 0.33 0.6 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 1 1.28 1.14 0.25 0.2 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 1 1.87 1.14 0.15 0.4 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 1 1.19 1.16 0.25 0.3 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 1 1.30 1.16 0.52 0.6 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 1 1.37 1.16 0.17 0.2 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 1 1.54 1.17 0.49 0.9 ceramic Unknown 6/29/95 1 1.70 1.20 0.28 0.5 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 1 1.32 1.22 0.22 0.3 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 1 1.26 1.26 0.27 0.4 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 1 1.60 1.26 0.34 0.5 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 1 2.04 1.26 0.36 0.7 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 1 2.14 1.27 0.51 0.9 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 1 1.40 1.32 0.26 0.5 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 1 1.22 1.34 0.24 0.2 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 1 1.64 1.34 0.37 0.4 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 1 1.35 1.35 0.31 0.5 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 1 1.53 1.36 0.28 0.4 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 1 1.50 1.37 0.34 0.6 lithic Obsidian

91

6/29/95 1 1.70 1.39 0.22 0.4 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 1 1.45 1.40 0.28 0.5 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 1 1.89 1.40 0.22 0.5 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 1 2.24 1.45 0.36 0.8 lithic Obsidian flakes 6/29/95 1 1.60 1.47 0.29 0.6 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 1 1.85 1.52 1.05 2.0 lithic Obsidian shatter 6/29/95 1 2.60 1.54 0.33 1.1 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 1 1.84 1.55 0.35 1.0 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 1 1.98 1.55 0.40 1.1 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 1 1.85 1.57 0.21 0.5 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 1 3.24 1.57 0.55 2.3 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 1 1.85 1.59 0.33 0.9 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 1 1.95 1.60 0.64 1.9 ceramic Corr 6/29/95 1 2.08 1.61 0.53 2.1 ceramic Corr Gray 6/29/95 1 2.00 1.62 0.41 1.2 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 1 2.70 1.65 0.31 1.4 lithic Obsidian striated 6/29/95 1 1.68 1.66 0.63 1.2 lithic Obsidian shatter 6/29/95 1 2.02 1.67 0.38 1.2 lithic Obsidian striated 6/29/95 1 2.37 1.72 0.52 1.9 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 1 1.94 1.77 0.56 1.7 lithic Obsidian inclusions6/29/95 1 2.82 1.78 0.41 2.1 lithic Basalt 6/29/95 1 2.17 1.83 0.32 1.0 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 1 2.46 1.86 0.38 0.6 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 1 2.09 2.02 0.34 1.3 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 1 3.37 2.09 0.78 4.6 lithic Basalt shatter 6/29/95 1 2.33 2.13 0.42 2.4 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 1 3.29 2.24 0.75 4.0 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 1 3.20 2.30 0.46 2.7 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 1 2.47 2.35 0.65 2.3 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 1 2.72 2.48 0.50 3.5 ceramic Corr 6/29/95 1 2.75 2.72 0.45 0.4 ceramic B/O 6/29/95 2 1.00 0.77 0.15 0.1 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 2 1.08 0.77 0.17 0.1 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 2 1.05 0.83 0.13 0.2 lithic Obsidian thin 6/29/95 2 0.93 0.84 0.40 0.3 lithic Basalt Tri x-sect 6/29/95 2 1.22 0.87 0.32 0.2 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 2 1.16 0.95 0.22 0.2 lithic Basalt 6/29/95 2 1.24 1.00 0.13 0.2 lithic Obsidian thin 6/29/95 2 1.56 1.07 0.39 0.5 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 2 1.45 1.12 0.27 0.3 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 2 1.80 1.15 0.22 0.4 lithic Basalt 6/29/95 2 1.28 1.20 0.28 0.3 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 2 2.05 1.35 0.51 0.9 lithic Obsidian thick

shatter 6/29/95 2 1.68 1.36 0.22 0.4 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 2 2.43 1.43 0.48 1.3 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 2 2.66 1.53 0.47 1.2 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 2 2.20 1.77 0.63 1.8 lithic Obsidian shatter

92

6/29/95 2 4.62 1.98 1.13 4.3 lithic Basalt shatter 6/29/95 2 3.46 2.46 0.55 3.7 lithic Obsidian flat 6/29/95 2 3.72 3.23 0.98 7.5 lithic Basalt 6/29/95 2 3.93 20.10 1.08 5.4 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 3 2.04 0.74 0.62 0.8 ceramic Black 6/29/95 3 1.13 0.82 0.25 0.1 ceramic B/G chip 6/29/95 3 1.18 0.85 0.39 0.3 ceramic B/G rim 6/29/95 3 1.68 0.85 0.18 0.1 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 3 1.37 0.93 0.51 0.5 ceramic Orange 6/29/95 3 1.28 0.94 0.49 0.7 ceramic Corr Black 6/29/95 3 1.71 0.98 0.44 0.7 ceramic Black Micaceous6/29/95 3 1.20 1.05 0.52 0.5 ceramic Corr 6/29/95 3 1.49 1.06 0.51 0.7 ceramic Corr Black 6/29/95 3 1.75 1.10 0.54 0.6 ceramic Plain 6/29/95 3 2.32 1.11 0.44 1.0 ceramic B/G 6/29/95 3 2.05 1.20 0.57 1.6 ceramic Gray No paint 6/29/95 3 1.55 1.24 0.62 1.0 ceramic Plain 6/29/95 3 1.87 1.27 0.43 1.1 ceramic Corr Orangish 6/29/95 3 1.76 1.28 0.43 0.8 ceramic Plain 6/29/95 3 1.31 1.31 0.46 0.8 ceramic Black Plain 6/29/95 3 1.40 1.35 0.38 0.8 ceramic Black No paint 6/29/95 3 1.87 1.51 0.57 1.9 ceramic Corr Indent 6/29/95 3 1.67 1.54 0.52 1.4 ceramic Gray No paint 6/29/95 3 1.58 1.59 0.47 1.2 ceramic Corr Indent 6/29/95 3 1.82 1.64 0.49 1.8 ceramic Corr 6/29/95 3 1.75 1.66 0.42 1.3 ceramic B/G Paint chip6/29/95 3 1.81 1.66 0.53 1.9 ceramic Plain Gray 6/29/95 3 2.69 1.79 0.61 3.0 ceramic Black Plain 6/29/95 3 2.22 1.93 0.59 2.6 ceramic Corr Smeared 6/29/95 3 2.46 1.98 0.63 2.8 ceramic Corr 6/29/95 3 3.87 3.26 0.53 5.9 ceramic Corr 6/29/95 4 1.79 0.45 0.41 1.0 ceramic Unknown Buff 6/29/95 4 1.11 0.60 0.48 0.3 ceramic Corr Black 6/29/95 4 1.08 0.62 0.28 0.1 ceramic Unknown Blk chip6/29/95 4 1.29 0.62 0.47 0.3 ceramic Corr gray/ buff 6/29/95 4 1.11 0.63 0.42 0.2 ceramic Unknown Black 6/29/95 4 1.35 0.63 0.61 0.4 ceramic Corr gray 6/29/95 4 1.24 0.67 0.28 0.1 ceramic Unknown gray chip 6/29/95 4 1.74 0.70 0.55 0.8 ceramic Unknown Blk 6/29/95 4 1.43 0.70 0.75 0.5 ceramic plain black/plain

gray 6/29/95 4 1.90 0.70 0.40 0.5 ceramic Corr Buff 6/29/95 4 1.12 0.70 0.22 0.2 lithic Basalt 6/29/95 4 1.22 0.70 0.18 0.1 lithic Basalt 6/29/95 4 0.96 0.71 0.49 0.2 ceramic Unknown buff chip 6/29/95 4 1.26 0.71 0.47 0.4 ceramic Corr black/gray 6/29/95 4 0.86 0.73 0.17 0.1 ceramic B/W Chip

93

6/29/95 4 1.04 0.73 0.17 0.1 ceramic Plain Black chip

6/29/95 4 0.94 0.74 0.29 0.1 ceramic B/W chip 6/29/95 4 0.80 0.75 0.22 0.1 ceramic B/W chip 6/29/95 4 1.06 0.75 0.31 0.2 ceramic Plain White

chip 6/29/95 4 1.37 0.75 0.44 0.4 ceramic Unknown Orange

chip 6/29/95 4 0.91 0.75 0.32 0.2 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 4 0.99 0.77 0.50 0.4 ceramic Unknown 6/29/95 4 1.11 0.77 0.23 0.1 ceramic Plain Black

chip 6/29/95 4 1.10 0.77 0.23 0.1 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 4 1.20 0.78 0.51 0.5 ceramic Unknown Gray / Buff6/29/95 4 1.37 0.78 0.50 0.5 ceramic Unknown Black 6/29/95 4 1.45 0.78 0.18 0.1 ceramic B/G 6/29/95 4 1.22 0.79 0.42 0.3 ceramic Unknown Plain /

Rough 6/29/95 4 1.47 0.79 0.51 0.4 ceramic Corr gray 6/29/95 4 1.32 0.79 0.29 0.2 lithic Basalt 6/29/95 4 0.95 0.80 0.44 0.3 ceramic Unknown Buff chip6/29/95 4 1.04 0.80 0.43 0.3 ceramic Corr Black 6/29/95 4 0.99 0.80 0.45 0.4 ceramic Unknown black 6/29/95 4 1.05 0.80 0.50 0.3 ceramic Corr black 6/29/95 4 1.24 0.80 0.56 0.6 ceramic plain black 6/29/95 4 1.75 0.80 0.50 0.6 ceramic plain gray 6/29/95 4 0.87 0.80 0.40 0.2 lithic Obsidian shatter 6/29/95 4 1.31 0.81 0.47 0.5 ceramic Corr Buff 6/29/95 4 1.10 0.82 0.58 0.4 ceramic Corr black/ buff6/29/95 4 1.35 0.82 0.44 0.6 ceramic Unknown 6/29/95 4 1.77 0.82 0.28 0.4 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 4 0.86 0.83 0.17 0.1 ceramic Plain Orange

chip 6/29/95 4 0.89 0.83 0.22 0.1 ceramic Plain Gray

chip 6/29/95 4 1.70 0.83 0.51 0.7 ceramic B/G 6/29/95 4 1.39 0.83 0.33 0.2 lithic chert white &

orange 6/29/95 4 1.29 0.84 0.45 0.5 ceramic Unknown Buff 6/29/95 4 1.16 0.84 0.39 0.2 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 4 1.59 0.85 0.56 0.6 ceramic Plain Black paint6/29/95 4 1.01 0.85 0.44 0.3 ceramic Unknown black/buff 6/29/95 4 1.04 0.85 0.46 0.3 ceramic Unknown gray/buff 6/29/95 4 0.95 0.86 0.38 0.2 ceramic Unknown Black / Buff6/29/95 4 0.98 0.86 0.14 0.1 ceramic Plain Black

chip 6/29/95 4 2.00 0.86 0.38 0.3 ceramic Black 6/29/95 4 1.17 0.86 0.54 0.5 ceramic Corr black/black6/29/95 4 1.38 0.87 0.45 0.5 ceramic Unknown black/white 6/29/95 4 1.50 0.88 0.45 0.5 ceramic Plain Gray

94

6/29/95 4 1.02 0.89 0.55 0.7 ceramic Unknown Gray / Buff6/29/95 4 1.51 0.89 0.41 0.6 ceramic Corr Black / Buff6/29/95 4 1.17 0.89 0.59 0.6 ceramic Corr black 6/29/95 4 1.62 0.89 0.56 0.7 ceramic Corr buff 6/29/95 4 0.91 0.90 0.46 0.4 ceramic Unknown black/gray 6/29/95 4 2.08 0.90 0.19 0.4 lithic Basalt 6/29/95 4 1.21 0.91 0.30 0.2 ceramic Plain Gray 6/29/95 4 1.12 0.91 0.47 0.5 ceramic plain gray 6/29/95 4 1.30 0.91 0.59 0.5 ceramic Unknown buff 6/29/95 4 1.30 0.91 0.46 0.3 ceramic B/W chip 6/29/95 4 1.36 0.91 0.41 0.4 ceramic Corr black 6/29/95 4 1.00 0.92 0.43 0.4 ceramic Plain Black

chip 6/29/95 4 1.04 0.92 0.53 0.3 ceramic Unknown gray 6/29/95 4 1.15 0.92 0.51 0.5 ceramic Corr Black /

Buff 6/29/95 4 1.77 0.92 0.52 0.8 ceramic Unknown Black / Buff6/29/95 4 1.34 0.92 0.55 0.5 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 4 1.13 0.93 0.48 0.5 ceramic Unknown 6/29/95 4 1.40 0.93 0.50 0.6 ceramic Corr Black / Buff6/29/95 4 1.26 0.93 0.62 0.5 ceramic Unknown black/buff6/29/95 4 1.09 0.94 0.45 0.4 ceramic Corr Gray 6/29/95 4 1.18 0.95 0.50 0.6 ceramic Corr Black

Rim 6/29/95 4 1.27 0.95 0.58 0.6 ceramic Unknown Buff 6/29/95 4 1.28 0.95 0.36 0.4 ceramic Corr Black 6/29/95 4 1.41 0.95 0.50 0.7 ceramic Unknown Buff 6/29/95 4 1.58 0.95 0.44 0.7 ceramic Unknown Buff / Black6/29/95 4 1.69 0.95 0.50 0.7 ceramic Unknown Buff 6/29/95 4 1.46 0.95 0.51 0.6 ceramic Corr black 6/29/95 4 1.57 0.95 0.42 0.5 ceramic plain black 6/29/95 4 1.58 0.95 0.50 0.8 ceramic Unknown no paint 6/29/95 4 1.39 0.96 0.47 0.5 ceramic Corr black 6/29/95 4 1.46 0.96 0.53 0.6 ceramic Unknown buff 6/29/95 4 0.99 0.97 0.21 0.1 ceramic B/G 6/29/95 4 1.92 0.97 0.51 0.8 ceramic Corr Black 6/29/95 4 2.00 0.97 0.48 1.2 ceramic Plain Black / Buff6/29/95 4 1.49 0.97 0.58 0.5 ceramic Corr black/gray 6/29/95 4 1.66 0.97 0.49 0.6 ceramic Unknown black 6/29/95 4 1.36 0.98 0.54 0.8 ceramic Corr Gray / BN6/29/95 4 1.43 0.98 0.58 0.6 ceramic Plain White 6/29/95 4 1.76 0.98 0.49 0.7 ceramic Corr buff 6/29/95 4 1.04 0.98 0.53 0.3 ceramic Unknown black chip6/29/95 4 1.35 0.98 0.41 0.3 ceramic Unknown white chip6/29/95 4 1.43 0.98 0.60 0.7 ceramic plain gray 6/29/95 4 1.59 0.99 0.58 1.1 ceramic Plain Black 6/29/95 4 1.68 0.99 0.48 0.8 ceramic Unknown 6/29/95 4 1.71 0.99 0.44 0.7 ceramic Plain Gray / Buff6/29/95 4 2.17 0.99 0.58 1.2 ceramic Corr Gray 6/29/95 4 1.50 0.99 0.47 0.7 ceramic plain black/gray

95

6/29/95 4 1.68 0.99 0.52 0.9 ceramic Unknown black/buff6/29/95 4 1.36 1.00 0.47 0.5 ceramic Corr black 6/29/95 4 1.34 1.01 0.44 0.5 ceramic Unknown Black 6/29/95 4 1.27 1.01 0.48 0.6 ceramic Unknown black 6/29/95 4 1.40 1.01 0.51 0.6 ceramic B/G black/plain

gray 6/29/95 4 1.46 1.02 0.45 0.6 ceramic Plain Gray 6/29/95 4 1.20 1.02 0.50 0.5 ceramic Corr gray/buff 6/29/95 4 1.42 1.02 0.39 0.4 ceramic plain buff chip 6/29/95 4 1.63 1.02 0.54 0.8 ceramic plain buff 6/29/95 4 1.08 1.02 0.27 0.2 lithic Basalt 6/29/95 4 1.07 1.03 0.45 0.5 ceramic Corr Black 6/29/95 4 1.63 1.03 0.50 0.8 ceramic Unknown Black 6/29/95 4 1.95 1.03 0.48 0.8 ceramic Corr black 6/29/95 4 1.20 1.03 0.43 0.5 ceramic Corr buff 6/29/95 4 1.16 1.04 0.51 0.6 ceramic Corr Black 6/29/95 4 1.27 1.04 0.35 0.4 ceramic Plain 6/29/95 4 1.47 1.04 0.54 0.8 ceramic Corr Gray

/Black 6/29/95 4 1.78 1.04 0.42 0.5 ceramic Corr 6/29/95 4 1.18 1.04 0.54 0.6 ceramic Unknown black 6/29/95 4 1.74 1.05 0.40 0.8 ceramic Corr Orange /

Black 6/29/95 4 1.75 1.05 0.62 0.8 ceramic Corr Buff 6/29/95 4 1.97 1.05 0.52 1.1 ceramic Unknown black/buff6/29/95 4 1.20 1.06 0.55 0.6 ceramic Corr Black

Rim 6/29/95 4 1.70 1.06 0.53 0.7 ceramic Unknown Gray 6/29/95 4 1.30 1.06 0.54 0.7 ceramic plain gray/buff 6/29/95 4 1.45 1.06 0.43 0.7 ceramic Unknown black/buff 6/29/95 4 1.37 1.07 0.49 0.6 ceramic Unknown Black / Buff6/29/95 4 1.40 1.07 0.41 0.6 ceramic Unknown Black / Buff6/29/95 4 1.63 1.07 0.55 0.7 ceramic Corr 6/29/95 4 1.13 1.07 0.53 0.6 ceramic Corr buff 6/29/95 4 1.51 1.07 0.52 0.7 ceramic Corr black/black6/29/95 4 1.63 1.07 0.68 0.7 ceramic Unknown black/gray 6/29/95 4 1.70 1.07 0.54 0.9 ceramic Corr black/buff6/29/95 4 1.38 1.08 0.55 0.8 ceramic Unknown Buff 6/29/95 4 1.51 1.08 0.55 0.7 ceramic Plain 6/29/95 4 1.89 1.08 0.49 1.0 ceramic Unknown Buff 6/29/95 4 1.37 1.08 0.43 0.6 ceramic Corr black 6/29/95 4 1.69 1.08 0.52 0.9 ceramic Corr gray/black6/29/95 4 1.12 1.08 0.34 0.2 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 4 1.74 1.09 0.44 0.7 ceramic unknown black rim 6/29/95 4 1.29 1.09 0.49 0.6 ceramic Corr gray 6/29/95 4 1.24 1.10 0.49 0.6 ceramic Corr Buff / Black6/29/95 4 1.39 1.10 0.22 0.2 ceramic B/G Gray 6/29/95 4 1.39 1.10 0.17 0.2 ceramic B/W chip6/29/95 4 1.44 1.10 0.44 0.4 ceramic Unknown Black /

Gray

96

6/29/95 4 1.46 1.10 0.50 0.7 ceramic Corr Black 6/29/95 4 1.26 1.12 0.46 0.6 ceramic Unknown black 6/29/95 4 1.68 1.12 0.55 0.9 ceramic Corr Gray / Buff6/29/95 4 1.23 1.12 0.57 0.6 ceramic B/G b/g 6/29/95 4 1.32 1.12 0.16 0.3 lithic chert 6/29/95 4 1.46 1.13 0.41 0.7 ceramic Plain Gray 6/29/95 4 1.65 1.13 0.57 1.0 ceramic Corr Black / Buff6/29/95 4 1.54 1.13 0.48 0.9 ceramic Unknown gray/buff 6/29/95 4 1.58 1.13 0.47 0.8 ceramic Corr black/buff6/29/95 4 1.66 1.14 0.53 0.9 ceramic Corr Gray 6/29/95 4 1.92 1.14 0.48 1.1 ceramic Corr Buff 6/29/95 4 1.17 1.14 0.47 0.7 ceramic plain black/black6/29/95 4 1.21 1.14 0.51 0.7 ceramic Corr black/gray 6/29/95 4 1.31 1.14 0.44 0.4 ceramic Unknown black/black6/29/95 4 1.45 1.14 0.50 0.7 ceramic B/G 6/29/95 4 1.71 1.14 0.60 0.8 ceramic Unknown gray 6/29/95 4 1.33 1.15 0.49 0.8 ceramic Plain Black 6/29/95 4 1.40 1.15 0.39 0.6 ceramic Corr Buff / Black6/29/95 4 1.43 1.15 0.52 0.9 ceramic Corr Black 6/29/95 4 1.43 1.15 0.52 0.8 ceramic Corr Gray / Buff6/29/95 4 1.44 1.15 0.48 0.7 ceramic Unknown Black / Buff6/29/95 4 2.24 1.15 0.41 1.5 ceramic Orange/yellow Black

outside 6/29/95 4 1.40 1.15 0.40 0.7 ceramic Corr black/gray 6/29/95 4 1.73 1.15 0.39 0.7 ceramic Corr gray 6/29/95 4 2.12 1.16 0.45 1.1 ceramic Corr Gray / Buff6/29/95 4 1.30 1.17 0.58 0.9 ceramic Unknown Black

Rim 6/29/95 4 1.46 1.17 0.38 0.5 ceramic Corr Gray

Oxidized 6/29/95 4 1.54 1.17 0.58 0.8 ceramic Corr Buff 6/29/95 4 1.57 1.17 0.44 0.5 ceramic Corr White 6/29/95 4 1.97 1.17 0.56 1.4 ceramic Plain Black /

Gray 6/29/95 4 2.10 1.17 0.43 0.6 ceramic Plain 6/29/95 4 1.17 1.17 0.60 0.7 ceramic Corr black 6/29/95 4 1.35 1.17 0.20 0.3 ceramic Unknown black chip6/29/95 4 1.32 1.17 0.37 0.4 lithic chert yellow to

white 6/29/95 4 1.35 1.17 0.29 0.4 lithic Basalt 6/29/95 4 1.28 1.18 0.58 0.8 ceramic Corr Black /

Gray 6/29/95 4 1.96 1.18 0.51 1.0 ceramic Unknown Black / Buff6/29/95 4 1.59 1.18 0.51 0.8 ceramic Corr white/buff6/29/95 4 1.30 1.20 0.48 0.7 ceramic Unknown 6/29/95 4 1.59 1.20 0.42 0.7 ceramic Unknown Buff 6/29/95 4 2.17 1.20 0.58 1.7 ceramic Corr Black 6/29/95 4 1.57 1.20 0.42 0.6 ceramic plain b/w 6/29/95 4 1.92 1.20 0.58 1.0 ceramic black 6/29/95 4 1.47 1.21 0.54 0.7 ceramic Unknown Black / Buff

97

6/29/95 4 1.57 1.21 0.51 0.8 ceramic Unknown Black 6/29/95 4 1.75 1.21 0.56 1.0 ceramic Orange Plain Paiint6/29/95 4 1.86 1.21 0.47 0.9 ceramic Unknown Gray 6/29/95 4 1.35 1.21 0.47 0.5 ceramic Corr buff 6/29/95 4 1.44 1.21 0.48 0.8 ceramic plain gray (rim)6/29/95 4 1.56 1.21 0.47 0.8 ceramic plain gray 6/29/95 4 1.61 1.21 0.52 1.0 ceramic plain gray/buff 6/29/95 4 1.60 1.22 0.41 0.7 ceramic plain gray/white 6/29/95 4 2.50 1.22 0.57 1.5 ceramic Corr black 6/29/95 4 1.84 1.23 0.53 1.2 ceramic Plain Buff /

Orangish 6/29/95 4 1.94 1.23 0.53 1.3 ceramic Corr Black 6/29/95 4 1.32 1.23 0.45 0.7 ceramic Unknown black/black6/29/95 4 1.50 1.23 0.50 0.6 ceramic Unknown unk 6/29/95 4 1.65 1.23 0.43 0.8 ceramic Corr black/buff6/29/95 4 1.87 1.24 0.61 1.3 ceramic Corr Black 6/29/95 4 1.31 1.24 0.52 0.8 ceramic Corr black 6/29/95 4 1.68 1.24 0.52 1.1 ceramic plain black 6/29/95 4 1.35 1.25 0.49 0.8 ceramic Corr black/buff6/29/95 4 1.73 1.25 0.53 1.2 ceramic Corr Buff 6/29/95 4 1.80 1.25 0.71 1.2 ceramic B/W 6/29/95 4 1.21 1.25 0.40 0.5 ceramic plain black/buff6/29/95 4 1.50 1.25 0.41 0.7 ceramic Corr white/buff 6/29/95 4 1.55 1.25 0.35 0.4 ceramic b/? 6/29/95 4 1.74 1.25 0.38 0.7 ceramic plain black 6/29/95 4 1.60 1.26 0.52 1.1 ceramic Corr black 6/29/95 4 1.93 1.26 0.46 1.1 ceramic Unknown Black 6/29/95 4 2.53 1.26 0.54 1.7 ceramic Plain Buff 6/29/95 4 1.42 1.26 0.45 0.9 ceramic Corr gray/buff 6/29/95 4 1.54 1.26 0.42 0.8 ceramic Unknown black 6/29/95 4 1.63 1.26 0.55 1.0 ceramic Unknown buff 6/29/95 4 2.02 1.26 0.41 1.1 ceramic Corr buff/buff 6/29/95 4 1.34 1.27 0.63 1.2 ceramic Corr Gray 6/29/95 4 1.96 1.27 0.47 1.1 ceramic Corr Black 6/29/95 4 2.28 1.27 0.49 1.4 ceramic Corr Black /

Gray 6/29/95 4 1.35 1.27 0.51 0.7 ceramic plain gray 6/29/95 4 1.52 1.27 0.55 1.0 ceramic Corr black 6/29/95 4 1.54 1.27 0.18 0.2 ceramic plain gray 6/29/95 4 1.57 1.27 0.51 1.0 ceramic Corr black/black6/29/95 4 1.61 1.27 0.59 1.0 ceramic plain black 6/29/95 4 1.71 1.27 0.52 1.0 ceramic Corr black 6/29/95 4 1.78 1.28 0.45 0.9 ceramic Corr Buff 6/29/95 4 2.02 1.28 0.51 1.4 ceramic Corr Black 6/29/95 4 1.42 1.29 0.52 0.8 ceramic Corr Buff 6/29/95 4 1.44 1.29 0.46 0.8 ceramic Corr Gray 6/29/95 4 1.77 1.29 0.38 0.8 ceramic Corr Black /

Gray 6/29/95 4 2.00 1.29 0.20 0.5 ceramic Black 6/29/95 4 1.45 1.30 0.69 1.2 ceramic Unknown

98

6/29/95 4 1.57 1.30 0.58 1.2 ceramic Corr Gray / Buff6/29/95 4 1.89 1.30 0.39 1.0 ceramic Unknown Black / Buff6/29/95 4 1.37 1.30 0.46 0.7 ceramic Corr black 6/29/95 4 1.58 1.30 0.54 1.0 ceramic Unknown gray 6/29/95 4 1.62 1.30 0.42 0.7 ceramic Corr gray 6/29/95 4 1.71 1.31 0.28 0.4 ceramic B/W chip 6/29/95 4 2.17 1.31 0.54 1.4 ceramic B/W w/rim tick

marks 6/29/95 4 1.52 1.31 0.51 1.2 ceramic Unknown buff 6/29/95 4 2.16 1.31 0.52 1.5 ceramic Corr black/buff6/29/95 4 1.62 1.31 0.43 0.8 lithic Basalt 6/29/95 4 1.72 1.32 0.50 1.0 ceramic Corr Black 6/29/95 4 1.50 1.32 0.24 0.4 ceramic B/G chip 6/29/95 4 1.60 1.32 0.48 0.9 ceramic Corr buff/gray 6/29/95 4 1.61 1.32 0.45 0.9 ceramic Corr buff/gray 6/29/95 4 1.83 1.32 0.50 1.2 ceramic Corr black 6/29/95 4 2.09 1.32 0.49 1.1 ceramic Corr gray 6/29/95 4 1.40 1.33 0.48 0.9 ceramic Corr black 6/29/95 4 1.70 1.33 0.46 1.1 ceramic Unknown black/buff6/29/95 4 1.30 1.34 0.48 0.9 ceramic Unknown Gray 6/29/95 4 1.64 1.34 0.40 1.0 ceramic Corr Black 6/29/95 4 1.71 1.35 0.61 1.3 ceramic Corr Buff 6/29/95 4 1.85 1.35 0.52 1.3 ceramic Plain Black 6/29/95 4 2.05 1.35 0.68 1.7 ceramic Corr Gray 6/29/95 4 2.27 1.35 0.47 1.2 ceramic Plain Gray / wh6/29/95 4 1.42 1.35 1.47 1.0 ceramic Corr black/gray 6/29/95 4 1.58 1.35 0.48 1.2 ceramic plain buff 6/29/95 4 1.76 1.35 0.49 1.0 ceramic Corr buff/black6/29/95 4 1.84 1.35 0.44 1.0 ceramic Corr gray 6/29/95 4 1.62 1.36 0.52 0.7 ceramic Corr Black 6/29/95 4 1.85 1.36 0.56 1.6 ceramic Corr Black 6/29/95 4 2.64 1.36 0.40 1.4 ceramic Plain Black 6/29/95 4 1.65 1.36 0.59 1.2 ceramic Corr gray/buff 6/29/95 4 1.85 1.36 0.40 0.8 lithic Basalt 6/29/95 4 2.54 1.37 0.50 1.4 ceramic B/W 6/29/95 4 1.74 1.37 0.55 1.0 ceramic plain buff 6/29/95 4 1.75 1.37 0.54 1.3 ceramic Corr gray 6/29/95 4 1.75 1.38 0.44 1.2 ceramic Plain Black /

Gray 6/29/95 4 2.34 1.38 0.50 1.5 ceramic Corr Gray / Buff6/29/95 4 2.82 1.38 0.54 1.6 ceramic Corr Black / Buff6/29/95 4 1.71 1.39 0.41 0.8 ceramic Unknown Black 6/29/95 4 1.85 1.39 0.47 1.2 ceramic Corr Black 6/29/95 4 1.56 1.40 0.62 1.0 ceramic Plain Buff 6/29/95 4 2.44 1.40 0.51 1.4 ceramic Plain Gray Rim6/29/95 4 2.54 1.40 0.62 2.2 ceramic Corr Buff 6/29/95 4 1.81 1.40 0.54 1.2 ceramic Unknown black/gray 6/29/95 4 1.84 1.40 0.52 1.4 ceramic Corr gray/buff 6/29/95 4 1.51 1.41 0.55 1.2 ceramic Corr Black 6/29/95 4 2.14 1.41 0.52 1.5 ceramic Corr Black

99

6/29/95 4 2.20 1.41 0.48 1.2 ceramic Corr Buff 6/29/95 4 2.44 1.41 0.56 1.8 ceramic Corr Black / Buff6/29/95 4 1.83 1.42 0.50 1.1 ceramic Corr Black 6/29/95 4 1.90 1.42 0.75 2.1 ceramic Plain Buff 6/29/95 4 2.02 1.42 0.59 1.3 ceramic Corr Black / Buff6/29/95 4 2.02 1.42 0.60 1.5 ceramic Corr gray 6/29/95 4 2.04 1.42 0.56 1.5 ceramic Corr black/gray 6/29/95 4 2.08 1.42 0.61 1.7 ceramic Corr black/buff6/29/95 4 1.87 1.43 0.54 1.5 ceramic Plain Gray 6/29/95 4 1.49 1.43 0.42 0.9 ceramic Unknown black/buff6/29/95 4 1.49 1.43 0.56 1.2 ceramic Corr black 6/29/95 4 1.74 1.43 0.50 1.1 ceramic Corr 6/29/95 4 2.19 1.43 0.61 2.2 ceramic Corr gray/black6/29/95 4 1.36 1.43 0.42 0.7 lithic Basalt 6/29/95 4 1.51 1.44 0.48 1.1 ceramic Corr Black 6/29/95 4 2.05 1.44 0.50 1.7 ceramic Plain Black 6/29/95 4 2.13 1.44 0.66 1.8 ceramic Corr Black 6/29/95 4 2.58 1.44 0.65 2.4 ceramic Corr Gray / Buff6/29/95 4 1.46 1.44 0.53 1.0 ceramic Unknown gray 6/29/95 4 1.63 1.44 0.50 1.1 ceramic Corr gray/buff 6/29/95 4 1.95 1.44 0.58 1.4 ceramic plain gray/black 6/29/95 4 1.85 1.45 0.44 1.1 ceramic Corr Black 6/29/95 4 2.31 1.45 0.50 1.8 ceramic Corr Black / Buff6/29/95 4 2.58 1.45 0.54 1.7 ceramic Unknown Black / Buff6/29/95 4 1.93 1.45 0.56 1.4 ceramic Corr black 6/29/95 4 2.27 1.45 0.48 1.3 ceramic plain black (rim)6/29/95 4 1.69 1.46 0.61 0.7 ceramic Plain Gray

chip 6/29/95 4 1.51 1.46 0.46 0.8 ceramic Corr black/gray 6/29/95 4 1.94 1.46 0.51 1.0 ceramic B/W 6/29/95 4 1.77 1.46 0.23 0.6 lithic chert white 6/29/95 4 2.15 1.47 0.47 1.5 ceramic Plain Black 6/29/95 4 1.61 1.48 0.58 1.2 ceramic Unknown Brown 6/29/95 4 1.88 1.48 0.47 1.2 ceramic Unknown gray 6/29/95 4 1.69 1.49 0.32 0.9 ceramic Corr Black 6/29/95 4 2.18 1.49 0.47 1.5 ceramic Corr Wt / Buff 6/29/95 4 2.69 1.49 0.51 1.7 ceramic Corr Black / Buff6/29/95 4 2.02 1.49 0.46 1.3 ceramic Unknown white 6/29/95 4 1.71 1.50 0.47 1.1 ceramic Corr Black / Buff6/29/95 4 2.19 1.50 0.60 2.1 ceramic Plain Black 6/29/95 4 1.84 1.50 0.42 1.0 ceramic Corr 6/29/95 4 1.88 1.51 0.54 1.7 ceramic Corr Black 6/29/95 4 2.15 1.51 0.50 1.3 ceramic Unknown Black 6/29/95 4 2.31 1.51 0.48 1.5 ceramic Unknown Gray / Buff6/29/95 4 2.37 1.51 0.53 2.3 ceramic Corr Buff / Gray6/29/95 4 2.74 1.51 0.58 1.8 ceramic Plain Gray 6/29/95 4 1.67 1.51 0.44 1.1 ceramic Unknown black 6/29/95 4 1.71 1.51 0.55 1.6 ceramic Unknown black/four

rim 6/29/95 4 2.31 1.51 0.40 1.3 ceramic plain brown

100

6/29/95 4 1.60 1.52 0.52 1.4 ceramic Corr Gray 6/29/95 4 2.25 1.52 0.47 1.8 ceramic Unknown Black / Wt6/29/95 4 2.31 1.52 0.51 1.8 ceramic Unknown Gray / Buff6/29/95 4 2.40 1.52 0.50 1.4 ceramic Unknown Black / Buff6/29/95 4 2.44 1.52 0.48 2.0 ceramic Corr Buff 6/29/95 4 2.54 1.52 0.47 1.5 ceramic Unknown buff 6/29/95 4 1.81 1.52 0.35 0.7 lithic chert white/black6/29/95 4 1.78 1.54 0.68 1.7 ceramic Plain Brown /

Gray 6/29/95 4 1.87 1.54 0.47 1.2 ceramic Corr Gray / Buff6/29/95 4 1.90 1.54 0.56 1.5 ceramic Corr Black /

Gray 6/29/95 4 2.00 1.54 0.56 1.3 ceramic Corr Black / Buff6/29/95 4 2.11 1.54 0.50 1.0 ceramic Plain chip 6/29/95 4 2.34 1.54 0.56 2.2 ceramic Corr White /

Gray 6/29/95 4 1.89 1.55 0.45 1.4 ceramic Corr Gray 6/29/95 4 1.99 1.55 0.54 1.6 ceramic Corr Gray

Rim 6/29/95 4 2.11 1.55 0.47 1.4 ceramic Corr Black / Buff6/29/95 4 2.72 1.55 0.52 2.3 ceramic Corr Black / Buff6/29/95 4 1.69 1.55 0.52 1.3 ceramic Corr black/buff6/29/95 4 1.75 1.56 0.51 0.8 ceramic B/G 6/29/95 4 2.08 1.56 0.56 1.5 ceramic Corr Black /

Black 6/29/95 4 2.77 1.56 0.45 1.8 ceramic B/W 6/29/95 4 1.80 1.56 0.51 1.3 ceramic Unknown gray/black 6/29/95 4 1.85 1.57 0.52 1.4 ceramic Plain Buff 6/29/95 4 2.16 1.57 0.57 1.9 ceramic Unknown Gray 6/29/95 4 1.56 1.58 0.67 1.6 ceramic Unknown Gray /

Black 6/29/95 4 1.65 1.58 0.45 1.4 ceramic Plain Black 6/29/95 4 1.73 1.58 0.40 1.3 ceramic Orange Plain Paint6/29/95 4 1.80 1.58 0.59 1.7 ceramic Unknown Gray /

Black 6/29/95 4 2.05 1.58 0.55 1.7 ceramic Corr Black 6/29/95 4 2.11 1.58 0.51 1.7 ceramic B/W 6/29/95 4 2.05 1.58 0.27 0.7 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 4 1.89 1.59 0.56 1.8 ceramic Corr black 6/29/95 4 1.83 1.60 0.50 1.4 ceramic Corr Gray 6/29/95 4 2.14 1.60 0.51 1.9 ceramic Corr Black /

White 6/29/95 4 2.24 1.60 0.42 1.6 ceramic Unknown Buff 6/29/95 4 2.26 1.60 0.55 2.3 ceramic Corr Gray 6/29/95 4 2.37 1.61 0.67 1.5 ceramic Plain 6/29/95 4 2.66 1.61 0.57 2.1 ceramic Corr Gray 6/29/95 4 2.82 1.61 0.58 2.5 ceramic Corr Gray 6/29/95 4 2.01 1.62 0.45 1.8 ceramic Corr Gray 6/29/95 4 2.11 1.62 0.47 1.3 ceramic Corr Black / Buff

101

6/29/95 4 2.23 1.62 0.52 1.5 ceramic Corr Black / Gray

6/29/95 4 2.46 1.62 0.49 1.7 ceramic Corr Black / Gray

6/29/95 4 1.83 1.62 0.78 1.6 ceramic Corr gray/black6/29/95 4 1.83 1.62 0.45 1.5 ceramic Corr buff 6/29/95 4 1.79 1.63 0.51 1.3 ceramic Corr Black /

Gray 6/29/95 4 2.36 1.63 0.50 2.2 ceramic Corr Black /

Black 6/29/95 4 2.70 1.63 0.69 2.6 ceramic Corr Buff / Black6/29/95 4 2.99 1.63 0.58 3.2 ceramic Corr Black 6/29/95 4 2.01 1.64 0.54 1.7 ceramic Corr Black 6/29/95 4 2.17 1.64 0.50 1.1 ceramic Corr Black / Buff6/29/95 4 2.51 1.64 0.49 1.8 ceramic Corr gray/ buff 6/29/95 4 1.95 1.65 0.59 1.8 ceramic Corr Black /

Gray 6/29/95 4 2.61 1.65 0.47 2.1 ceramic Plain Gray 6/29/95 4 1.74 1.65 0.51 1.7 ceramic Unknown black/buff6/29/95 4 2.08 1.65 0.51 2.0 ceramic Corr black 6/29/95 4 2.00 1.66 0.44 1.4 ceramic Plain Gray / Buff6/29/95 4 2.17 1.66 0.47 1.3 ceramic Corr black 6/29/95 4 1.56 1.67 0.48 1.4 ceramic Plain Black /

Orange 6/29/95 4 1.89 1.67 0.47 1.5 ceramic Corr Black /

Buff 6/29/95 4 2.79 1.67 0.36 1.9 lithic Basalt Cortex 6/29/95 4 1.84 1.68 0.60 1.9 ceramic Corr Black /

Black 6/29/95 4 1.87 1.68 0.52 1.5 ceramic Plain Gray 6/29/95 4 2.08 1.68 0.44 1.6 ceramic Unknown Black 6/29/95 4 2.31 1.68 0.54 1.6 ceramic Corr black/gray 6/29/95 4 2.30 1.69 0.47 1.7 ceramic Plain Gray 6/29/95 4 2.38 1.69 0.49 2.2 ceramic Corr White /

Orange 6/29/95 4 2.56 1.69 0.57 2.3 ceramic Corr Gray 6/29/95 4 2.19 1.70 0.52 2.0 ceramic Unknown Black / Buff6/29/95 4 1.85 1.70 0.58 1.6 ceramic Unknown buff 6/29/95 4 2.31 1.70 0.54 1.5 ceramic Corr buff 6/29/95 4 1.88 1.71 0.51 1.7 ceramic Corr Black 6/29/95 4 1.90 1.71 0.55 1.8 ceramic Corr Black 6/29/95 4 2.06 1.71 0.55 2.3 ceramic Corr Black /

Gray 6/29/95 4 2.22 1.71 0.72 2.8 ceramic Unknown Gray 6/29/95 4 2.29 1.71 0.54 2.5 ceramic Corr Buff / Black6/29/95 4 2.00 1.72 0.62 2.5 ceramic Corr Gray / Buff6/29/95 4 2.09 1.72 0.55 1.6 ceramic Corr Black 6/29/95 4 2.34 1.72 0.50 1.8 ceramic Unknown Buff 6/29/95 4 2.41 1.72 0.45 1.7 ceramic Corr Gray /

Black 6/29/95 4 2.62 1.72 0.40 1.7 ceramic Corr Black

102

6/29/95 4 2.80 1.72 0.46 2.7 ceramic Corr w/ Buff hue6/29/95 4 1.79 1.74 0.51 1.7 ceramic B/G Park Gray6/29/95 4 1.88 1.74 0.46 1.6 ceramic Unknown Black 6/29/95 4 2.18 1.74 0.55 2.2 ceramic Corr Black /

Gray 6/29/95 4 2.22 1.74 0.48 1.8 ceramic Plain Gray / Buff6/29/95 4 1.76 1.74 0.49 1.4 ceramic Unknown black 6/29/95 4 1.71 1.75 0.46 1.5 ceramic Corr Black / Buff6/29/95 4 1.77 1.75 0.50 1.5 ceramic Unknown Black / Buff6/29/95 4 2.20 1.75 0.50 2.3 ceramic Plain Black 6/29/95 4 2.77 1.75 0.63 2.6 ceramic Unknown 6/29/95 4 2.82 1.75 0.59 2.8 ceramic Plain Black /

Gray 6/29/95 4 3.44 1.75 0.54 3.3 ceramic Unknown 6/29/95 4 2.35 1.76 0.58 2.3 ceramic Corr 6/29/95 4 2.26 1.77 0.49 2.5 ceramic Corr Buff 6/29/95 4 2.28 1.77 0.44 1.6 ceramic Corr Gray 6/29/95 4 2.51 1.77 0.52 2.3 ceramic Corr 6/29/95 4 1.99 1.77 0.54 1.7 ceramic Corr black 6/29/95 4 2.00 1.78 0.50 1.8 ceramic Unknown Buff 6/29/95 4 2.30 1.78 0.55 2.1 ceramic Corr Gray / Buff6/29/95 4 2.79 1.78 0.57 2.6 ceramic Corr Black 6/29/95 4 2.44 1.78 0.50 2.0 ceramic Corr three/buff6/29/95 4 1.88 1.80 0.53 1.9 ceramic Unknown Buff 6/29/95 4 2.40 1.80 0.49 2.1 ceramic Corr Gray irr

side 6/29/95 4 2.75 1.81 0.67 3.1 ceramic Unknown Buff 6/29/95 4 2.44 1.81 0.52 2.2 ceramic Corr White /

Black 6/29/95 4 1.95 1.82 0.48 1.9 ceramic Corr Buff / Black6/29/95 4 2.36 1.82 0.45 1.6 ceramic Corr Black 6/29/95 4 2.37 1.82 0.56 2.8 ceramic Black 6/29/95 4 2.16 1.83 0.65 2.9 ceramic Corr Black / Buff6/29/95 4 1.92 1.84 0.60 2.3 ceramic Corr 6/29/95 4 2.21 1.85 0.46 1.7 ceramic Plain Orange 6/29/95 4 2.34 1.85 0.48 2.6 ceramic Corr Black 6/29/95 4 2.97 1.85 0.58 2.4 ceramic Corr Black /

Gray 6/29/95 4 3.04 1.85 0.54 3.4 ceramic Corr Black 6/29/95 4 2.65 1.85 1.11 3.5 lithic Obsidian shatter 6/29/95 4 1.22 1.88 0.42 0.4 ceramic Unknown Black / Oki6/29/95 4 2.13 1.88 0.46 1.9 ceramic B/W 6/29/95 4 2.75 1.89 0.60 2.8 ceramic Corr Black 6/29/95 4 3.09 1.89 0.62 3.5 ceramic Corr Black 6/29/95 4 2.32 1.89 0.66 3.0 ceramic Corr black/buff

6/29/95 4 2.47 1.90 0.59 2.3 ceramic Unknown Gray 6/29/95 4 2.22 1.90 0.50 2.7 ceramic Corr Black 6/29/95 4 2.41 1.90 0.52 2.8 ceramic Corr Gray

103

6/29/95 4 3.09 1.90 0.39 2.2 lithic Basalt to curved sides

6/29/95 4 2.40 1.91 0.45 2.3 ceramic Corr Black 6/29/95 4 2.40 1.91 0.49 2.1 ceramic Corr Black /

Gray 6/29/95 4 2.45 1.91 0.57 2.2 ceramic Unknown Gray 6/29/95 4 2.63 1.91 0.48 2.1 ceramic Unknown Black 6/29/95 4 2.03 1.93 0.48 2.2 ceramic Corr Black 6/29/95 4 1.92 1.94 0.59 2.1 ceramic Corr Black /

Gray 6/29/95 4 3.08 1.94 0.70 4.1 ceramic Corr Black / Buff6/29/95 4 3.11 1.94 0.51 2.9 ceramic Corr Black /

White 6/29/95 4 2.11 1.94 0.57 2.3 ceramic Corr black 6/29/95 4 1.99 1.95 0.48 1.9 ceramic Unknown Black / Buff6/29/95 4 1.86 1.97 0.62 1.8 ceramic Unknown Gray / Buff6/29/95 4 2.39 1.97 0.57 2.4 ceramic Corr Buff / Black6/29/95 4 2.58 1.97 0.61 3.0 ceramic Corr Buff 6/29/95 4 2.23 1.98 0.49 3.0 ceramic B/G Rim 6/29/95 4 2.51 1.98 0.55 2.8 ceramic Corr Black 6/29/95 4 2.30 2.00 0.54 2.2 ceramic Unknown Gray 6/29/95 4 2.33 2.00 1.04 3.9 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 4 3.35 2.02 0.48 3.3 ceramic Corr Buff 6/29/95 4 3.33 2.02 1.78 10.0 lithic chert white

shatter 6/29/95 4 2.23 2.03 0.68 3.4 ceramic B/G 6/29/95 4 2.34 2.03 0.52 2.6 ceramic B/G Oxidized 6/29/95 4 3.71 2.06 0.51 4.2 ceramic Corr W/ Buff

hue 6/29/95 4 3.91 2.07 0.46 3.6 ceramic Corr Black /

Gray 6/29/95 4 2.42 2.08 0.51 3.3 ceramic Corr Black 6/29/95 4 2.52 2.08 0.58 3.3 ceramic Corr Gray /

Black 6/29/95 4 3.73 2.08 0.52 4.7 ceramic Plain Buff 6/29/95 4 3.84 2.08 0.58 5.4 ceramic Corr Micatious6/29/95 4 2.60 2.10 0.51 2.4 ceramic Unknown Black / Buff6/29/95 4 3.23 2.10 0.57 3.4 ceramic Corr Black 6/29/95 4 2.80 2.10 0.91 3.8 lithic chert white/black6/29/95 4 2.85 2.11 0.47 2.7 ceramic B/W 6/29/95 4 2.93 2.11 0.52 4.0 ceramic Corr Black / Buff6/29/95 4 2.31 2.12 0.52 2.8 ceramic Corr Black /

Gray 6/29/95 4 2.57 2.12 0.52 2.3 ceramic Corr Black 6/29/95 4 3.06 2.12 0.59 3.8 ceramic Corr Gray / Buff6/29/95 4 3.32 2.15 0.63 4.4 ceramic Corr Black / Buff6/29/95 4 2.43 2.17 0.59 2.7 ceramic Corr Buff / Black6/29/95 4 2.66 2.17 0.72 4.5 ceramic Unknown Black 6/29/95 4 3.06 2.17 0.67 4.0 ceramic Corr Buff / Black6/29/95 4 3.15 2.17 0.48 3.5 ceramic Corr Black / Buff

104

6/29/95 4 2.49 2.17 0.55 3.0 ceramic Unknown buff 6/29/95 4 2.75 2.18 0.47 3.0 ceramic Corr White /

Black 6/29/95 4 3.30 2.18 0.57 4.2 ceramic Corr Black 6/29/95 4 3.38 2.18 0.60 4.5 ceramic Corr Black 6/29/95 4 2.51 2.19 0.57 2.8 ceramic Gray 6/29/95 4 2.25 2.22 0.50 3.3 ceramic Corr Blackk /

Buff 6/29/95 4 2.64 2.22 0.60 2.9 ceramic Corr Black 6/29/95 4 2.89 2.22 0.57 4.0 ceramic Plain Black 6/29/95 4 2.74 2.23 0.42 3.0 ceramic Corr Gray /

Black 6/29/95 4 4.12 2.23 0.70 5.2 lithic Basalt 6/29/95 4 2.48 2.24 0.52 2.9 ceramic Plain Black / Buff6/29/95 4 3.00 2.25 0.67 4.7 ceramic B/G 6/29/95 4 2.53 2.26 0.59 3.8 ceramic Plain Gray 6/29/95 4 2.45 2.27 0.50 2.7 ceramic Corr Black 6/29/95 4 2.41 2.28 0.53 2.6 ceramic Corr Gray /

White 6/29/95 4 2.95 2.29 0.62 3.6 ceramic Corr Black /

Gray 6/29/95 4 3.49 2.29 0.56 4.3 ceramic Corr Black 6/29/95 4 2.90 2.38 0.70 3.3 ceramic Plain Gray 6/29/95 4 2.12 2.40 0.47 1.7 ceramic B/G 6/29/95 4 2.96 2.40 0.51 3.9 ceramic Corr 6/29/95 4 3.12 2.40 0.67 4.4 ceramic Unknown 6/29/95 4 2.51 2.42 0.59 3.4 ceramic Plain White 6/29/95 4 3.21 2.43 0.57 4.6 ceramic B/Buff 6/29/95 4 2.28 2.50 0.58 3.1 ceramic Corr Buff 6/29/95 4 2.72 2.50 0.58 4.9 ceramic Corr Black / Buff6/29/95 4 3.03 2.50 0.51 4.3 ceramic Plain Black / Buff6/29/95 4 3.52 2.50 0.62 5.4 ceramic B/G Faded

colors 6/29/95 4 2.60 2.51 0.60 4.3 ceramic Plain Black /

Gray 6/29/95 4 3.25 2.52 0.50 5.7 ceramic Corr Gray / Buff6/29/95 4 4.16 2.57 0.57 6.2 ceramic Plain Black / Buff6/29/95 4 3.04 2.64 0.47 3.9 ceramic Corr Buff / Black6/29/95 4 3.30 2.65 0.70 5.9 ceramic Orange 6/29/95 4 2.79 2.67 0.59 4.0 ceramic Corr Gray /

Gray 6/29/95 4 3.45 2.68 0.53 5.8 ceramic Corr 6/29/95 4 2.91 2.72 0.48 4.1 ceramic Corr Black / Buff6/29/95 4 2.67 2.73 0.55 4.2 ceramic Plain Gray 6/29/95 4 3.40 2.85 0.55 5.1 ceramic Corr Buff 6/29/95 4 3.13 2.97 0.62 5.7 ceramic Corr Buff 6/29/95 4 3.08 2.99 0.54 5.3 ceramic Plain Gray 6/29/95 4 3.25 2.99 0.51 5.3 ceramic Corr Black /

Gray 6/29/95 4 3.48 2.99 0.54 6.3 ceramic Corr Black

105

6/29/95 4 3.46 3.12 0.57 7.4 ceramic Corr Black 6/29/95 4 3.11 3.14 0.53 3.6 ceramic B/G 6/29/95 4 3.50 3.33 0.77 9.6 ceramic B/G 6/29/95 4 4.08 3.44 0.43 5.7 ceramic Corr Gray 6/29/95 4 4.60 3.72 0.55 13.2 ceramic B/G Thick &

Thin 6/29/95 4 3.96 3.88 0.69 14.4 ceramic B/O 6/29/95 4 1.18 10.30 0.58 0.6 ceramic Unknown Buff / Black6/29/95 5 0.73 0.32 0.17 0.1 lithic Chert Gray 6/29/95 5 1.25 0.47 0.14 0.1 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 5 2.24 0.49 0.51 1.7 ceramic Corr Black / Buff6/29/95 5 1.14 0.56 0.22 0.1 lithic Basalt 6/29/95 5 0.95 0.66 0.13 0.1 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 5 1.02 0.66 0.16 0.1 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 5 1.27 0.68 0.15 0.1 lithic Obsidian curved 6/29/95 5 0.84 0.73 0.17 0.1 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 5 1.05 0.73 0.13 0.1 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 5 0.99 0.75 0.38 0.3 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 5 1.19 0.75 0.22 0.2 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 5 1.28 0.75 0.25 0.2 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 5 1.40 0.75 0.40 0.4 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 5 1.50 0.75 0.16 0.2 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 5 0.86 0.77 0.20 0.1 lithic Basalt 6/29/95 5 0.85 0.78 0.35 0.2 lithic Obsidian Cortex 6/29/95 5 0.87 0.78 0.16 0.1 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 5 1.02 0.78 0.14 0.1 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 5 1.26 0.79 0.19 0.2 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 5 1.33 0.80 0.22 0.2 lithic Basalt 6/29/95 5 1.46 0.81 0.21 0.1 lithic Basalt 6/29/95 5 1.23 0.82 0.32 0.2 ceramic Plain Black

chip 6/29/95 5 0.89 0.82 0.12 0.1 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 5 1.20 0.84 0.08 0.1 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 5 0.95 0.85 0.18 0.1 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 5 1.09 0.85 0.26 0.2 lithic Basalt 6/29/95 5 1.13 0.86 0.22 0.2 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 5 1.57 0.86 0.26 0.3 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 5 1.57 0.86 0.26 0.3 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 5 1.98 0.86 0.23 0.3 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 5 1.06 0.87 0.27 0.2 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 5 1.17 0.88 0.31 0.3 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 5 1.91 0.88 0.37 0.4 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 5 1.45 0.89 0.36 0.5 lithic Obsidian Cortex 6/29/95 5 1.69 0.89 0.25 0.3 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 5 1.25 0.90 0.42 0.4 ceramic Plain Black /

Gray 6/29/95 5 1.25 0.90 0.16 0.1 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 5 1.22 0.91 0.41 0.5 ceramic Black Micaceous

106

6/29/95 5 2.17 0.91 0.36 0.6 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 5 1.47 0.92 0.24 0.2 lithic Obsidian Con cave

edge 6/29/95 5 1.59 0.92 0.20 0.3 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 5 1.09 0.93 0.46 0.5 ceramic Unknown Black 6/29/95 5 1.31 0.93 0.31 0.2 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 5 1.56 0.94 0.34 0.4 lithic Basalt Cortex 6/29/95 5 1.03 0.95 0.23 0.2 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 5 1.32 0.95 0.25 0.2 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 5 1.33 0.96 0.21 0.3 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 5 1.37 0.96 0.15 0.2 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 5 1.14 0.97 0.56 0.5 ceramic Black 6/29/95 5 1.47 0.97 0.22 0.3 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 5 1.53 0.97 0.27 0.4 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 5 1.84 0.97 0.20 0.4 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 5 1.45 0.98 0.16 0.2 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 5 1.47 0.98 0.37 0.5 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 5 1.53 0.98 0.28 0.4 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 5 1.13 0.99 0.17 0.2 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 5 0.92 1.00 0.32 0.3 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 5 1.04 1.00 0.19 0.2 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 5 1.23 1.00 0.23 0.3 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 5 1.04 1.01 0.17 0.2 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 5 1.33 1.01 0.21 0.3 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 5 1.61 1.01 0.35 0.4 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 5 1.64 1.01 0.49 0.5 lithic Obsidian curved in

x-y 6/29/95 5 1.66 1.01 0.37 0.5 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 5 1.05 1.02 0.37 0.3 lithic Obsidian Curved 6/29/95 5 1.57 1.02 0.35 0.5 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 5 1.09 1.03 0.50 0.4 ceramic Plain Gray / Buff6/29/95 5 2.10 1.03 0.48 0.9 ceramic Plain Black 6/29/95 5 2.91 1.03 0.67 1.4 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 5 1.65 1.05 0.46 0.5 ceramic Plain Gray 6/29/95 5 1.27 1.05 0.21 0.2 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 5 1.46 1.06 0.25 0.3 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 5 1.38 1.08 0.26 0.4 lithic Basalt 6/29/95 5 1.46 1.08 0.55 0.7 lithic Basalt 6/29/95 5 2.27 1.08 0.27 0.5 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 5 1.92 1.12 0.42 1.2 ceramic Orange 6/29/95 5 1.73 1.12 0.45 0.7 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 5 1.30 1.15 0.40 0.5 ceramic Plain Gray 6/29/95 5 1.50 1.16 0.16 0.2 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 5 1.54 1.17 0.20 0.4 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 5 1.67 1.18 0.48 1.0 ceramic Plain Black 6/29/95 5 2.06 1.18 0.38 0.6 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 5 1.68 1.19 0.50 0.8 ceramic Plain Gray 6/29/95 5 1.73 1.19 0.28 0.4 lithic Obsidian

107

6/29/95 5 1.23 1.20 0.37 0.4 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 5 1.55 1.21 0.23 0.5 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 5 1.62 1.21 0.29 0.6 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 5 1.52 1.22 0.37 0.5 ceramic Plain White

chip 6/29/95 5 1.67 1.22 0.31 0.5 lithic Obsidian curved 6/29/95 5 2.42 1.23 0.50 1.2 lithic Obsidian Cortex 6/29/95 5 1.85 1.24 0.39 0.6 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 5 1.75 1.25 0.27 0.6 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 5 2.44 1.25 0.60 1.7 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 5 2.36 1.26 0.51 1.7 ceramic Corr Black 6/29/95 5 1.76 1.26 0.26 0.5 lithic Chert Gray 6/29/95 5 1.93 1.27 0.52 1.2 ceramic Unknown Black /

Gray 6/29/95 5 1.95 1.27 0.56 0.9 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 5 2.12 1.29 0.42 0.9 lithic Obsidian inclusions6/29/95 5 1.61 1.31 0.48 0.8 ceramic Plain Gray 6/29/95 5 2.20 1.32 0.34 0.9 lithic Obsidian Cortex 6/29/95 5 2.23 1.33 0.47 1.4 ceramic Unknown Black /

Gray 6/29/95 5 1.14 1.33 0.20 0.3 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 5 1.47 1.33 0.67 0.8 lithic Obsidian shatter 6/29/95 5 1.52 1.34 0.28 0.4 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 5 1.47 1.35 0.32 0.8 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 5 1.51 1.35 0.22 0.5 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 5 1.56 1.35 0.27 0.5 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 5 1.81 1.35 0.35 0.9 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 5 1.98 1.36 0.31 0.6 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 5 1.89 1.38 0.55 1.2 ceramic Corr Gray 6/29/95 5 1.79 1.39 0.30 0.7 lithic Basalt 6/29/95 5 2.55 1.40 0.45 1.8 ceramic Corr Buff 6/29/95 5 1.43 1.41 0.35 0.5 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 5 2.01 1.42 0.53 1.7 lithic Obsidian Cortex 6/29/95 5 1.75 1.45 0.46 1.0 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 5 3.61 1.47 0.30 1.3 lithic Obsidian curved 6/29/95 5 1.65 1.48 0.25 0.5 lithic Obsidian concave

side 6/29/95 5 1.84 1.48 0.28 0.6 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 5 2.25 1.48 0.52 1.6 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 5 1.72 1.50 0.44 1.2 ceramic Corr Black 6/29/95 5 2.03 1.50 0.38 0.6 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 5 1.83 1.51 0.50 1.4 ceramic Unknown 6/29/95 5 1.62 1.51 0.45 0.8 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 5 2.49 1.52 0.61 2.3 ceramic Plain Pearly

made 6/29/95 5 1.87 1.54 0.55 1.4 ceramic Plain Buff 6/29/95 5 2.47 1.54 0.45 1.6 ceramic Corr Black 6/29/95 5 1.42 1.55 0.44 1.0 ceramic Corr Black 6/29/95 5 1.81 1.56 0.27 0.7 lithic Obsidian

108

6/29/95 5 2.44 1.58 0.27 0.9 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 5 2.27 1.61 0.46 1.7 ceramic Black No slip at

all 6/29/95 5 2.17 1.63 0.56 2.6 ceramic B/G 6/29/95 5 1.84 1.67 0.55 1.1 lithic Obsidian Cortex 6/29/95 5 1.71 1.68 0.23 0.3 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 5 2.90 1.68 0.58 2.0 lithic Basalt 6/29/95 5 2.42 1.70 0.22 1.0 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 5 1.85 1.71 0.45 0.7 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 5 1.90 1.71 0.27 0.6 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 5 2.35 1.72 0.57 1.9 ceramic Corr Black /

Gray 6/29/95 5 2.35 1.73 0.37 1.1 lithic Obsidian curved 6/29/95 5 2.27 1.74 0.50 2.0 ceramic Corr Gray 6/29/95 5 2.10 1.74 0.24 0.7 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 5 2.06 1.75 0.38 1.5 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 5 2.40 1.76 0.53 1.6 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 5 1.90 1.79 0.63 2.3 ceramic Corr Gray /

Black 6/29/95 5 2.18 1.80 0.54 2.2 ceramic Corr Gray 6/29/95 5 2.54 1.82 0.57 3.1 ceramic Corr Black /

Gray 6/29/95 5 2.69 1.82 0.43 2.5 ceramic Black 6/29/95 5 2.17 1.88 0.57 1.9 ceramic Corr Black / Buff6/29/95 5 2.52 1.90 0.51 2.5 ceramic Corr Black / Buff6/29/95 5 2.22 1.93 0.41 1.5 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 5 2.68 1.97 0.66 2.8 lithic Obsidian Cortex 6/29/95 5 2.77 1.97 1.28 6.2 lithic Chert White

shatter 6/29/95 5 1.90 1.98 0.45 1.6 ceramic Corr Gray 6/29/95 5 3.59 2.00 1.23 11.9 lithic Basalt shatter 6/29/95 5 5.08 2.00 1.32 9.2 lithic Obsidian Cortex 6/29/95 5 3.18 2.02 0.84 4.2 lithic Chert 6/29/95 5 2.71 2.06 0.59 3.6 ceramic Corr Gray 6/29/95 5 2.80 2.15 0.64 3.5 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 5 2.58 2.17 0.46 2.3 ceramic Corr Gray 6/29/95 5 4.47 2.18 0.90 7.7 lithic Obsidian Tri x-sect 6/29/95 5 2.98 2.19 0.54 3.3 ceramic Corr Black 6/29/95 5 2.63 2.27 0.57 3.3 ceramic Plain Unk, Gray6/29/95 5 3.44 2.28 0.57 5.3 ceramic Corr Buff 6/29/95 5 3.08 2.31 0.33 2.8 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 5 2.86 2.33 0.54 3.3 lithic Basalt 6/29/95 5 3.38 2.39 0.56 3.7 lithic Obsidian curved 6/29/95 5 3.33 2.46 0.81 5.5 lithic Obsidian Cortex -

curved 6/29/95 5 2.75 2.50 0.49 3.1 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 5 4.69 2.71 0.54 9.8 ceramic O / B 6/29/95 5 3.35 2.71 2.21 16.9 lithic Obsidian Cortex

shatter

109

6/29/95 5 3.58 2.73 0.54 5.0 ceramic Plain No Slip 6/29/95 5 3.20 2.74 0.54 6.0 ceramic Corr Black 6/29/95 5 4.42 2.94 0.66 8.7 ceramic B/G 6/29/95 5 3.69 2.95 0.54 6.4 ceramic Corr Black 6/29/95 5 3.98 2.99 0.65 7.2 ceramic Corr Mications6/29/95 5 3.48 3.05 1.23 11.5 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 5 3.66 3.11 0.55 7.7 ceramic Corr Black 6/29/95 5 4.13 3.11 1.41 15.6 lithic Basalt shatter 6/29/95 5 3.43 3.25 1.13 11.4 lithic Obsidian 6/29/95 5 4.22 3.89 0.59 12.2 ceramic Plain curved - no

slip 6/29/95 5 4.28 3.93 0.48 10.9 ceramic Corr Black 6/29/95 5 5.34 4.21 0.61 14.4 ceramic Corr Black

w/prints 6/29/95 5 4.92 4.31 0.52 10.6 ceramic Plain 7/18/95 1 0.85 0.78 0.41 0.2 lithic obsidian 7/18/95 1 1.14 0.79 0.15 0.1 lithic obsidian 7/18/95 1 1.05 0.95 0.13 0.1 lithic obsidian 7/18/95 1 1.05 1.02 0.19 0.2 lithic obsidian 7/18/95 1 2.24 1.30 0.32 0.5 lithic obsidian 7/18/95 1 1.72 1.43 0.37 1.0 lithic obsidian 7/18/95 1 2.42 1.53 0.46 1.1 lithic obsidian 7/18/95 1 2.47 2.04 1.11 3.9 lithic obsidian with cortex7/18/95 4 1.00 0.73 0.28 0.2 ceramic plain gray 7/18/95 4 2.09 1.22 0.50 1.0 ceramic black 4 sided 7/18/95 4 1.48 1.45 0.50 0.8 ceramic black 7/18/95 4 2.61 2.21 0.58 3.2 ceramic plain gray 7/18/95 5 1.68 0.64 0.47 0.5 lithic obsidian shatter 7/18/95 5 1.02 0.71 0.19 0.1 lithic obsidian 7/18/95 5 1.10 0.76 0.15 0.1 ceramic black paint chip7/18/95 5 0.95 0.87 0.27 0.2 lithic obsidian 7/18/95 5 1.19 0.88 0.38 0.3 ceramic B/G 7/18/95 5 1.17 0.96 0.22 0.2 lithic obsidian 7/18/95 5 1.18 0.96 0.37 0.3 lithic obsidian shatter 7/18/95 5 2.03 0.96 0.33 0.4 lithic obsidian very irreg 7/18/95 5 1.30 0.98 0.20 0.3 lithic obsidian 7/18/95 5 1.40 1.03 0.52 0.7 ceramic black 4 sided

irregular 7/18/95 5 1.60 1.04 0.33 0.5 lithic obsidian 7/18/95 5 1.54 1.06 0.27 0.3 lithic obsidian 7/18/95 5 1.69 1.07 0.16 0.2 lithic obsidian 7/18/95 5 1.19 1.09 0.25 0.3 lithic obsidian 7/18/95 5 1.85 1.12 0.40 0.7 lithic obsidian 7/18/95 5 1.90 1.19 0.20 0.4 lithic obsidian 7/18/95 5 2.27 1.22 0.45 1.1 ceramic Corrr gray

corragated7/18/95 5 1.30 1.22 0.39 0.5 lithic obsidian 7/18/95 5 1.66 1.23 0.49 0.8 ceramic black 7/18/95 5 1.45 1.30 0.41 0.6 lithic obsidian

110

7/18/95 5 2.24 1.31 0.56 1.7 ceramic plain gray 7/18/95 5 1.49 1.33 0.23 0.5 lithic chert white chert7/18/95 5 1.70 1.33 0.49 0.9 lithic obsidian shatter 7/18/95 5 4.05 1.61 0.37 1.8 lithic obsidian blade like7/18/95 5 2.22 1.79 0.22 0.7 lithic obsidian rounded 7/18/95 5 2.04 1.85 0.57 1.7 ceramic B/G 7/18/95 5 2.53 1.85 0.25 1.0 lithic obsidian almost

olval 7/18/95 5 2.31 2.07 0.63 2.7 ceramic plain gray 7/18/95 5 2.53 2.11 0.40 1.6 lithic obsidian 7/18/95 5 3.18 2.74 0.92 4.9 lithic obsidian shatter 7/18/95 5 3.27 2.75 0.55 3.8 lithic quartizite 8/13/95 1 1.60 1.03 0.30 0.3 lithic obsidian 8/13/95 1 1.75 1.51 0.13 0.3 lithic obsidian 8/13/95 1 1.63 1.62 0.31 0.7 lithic basalt 8/13/95 4 1.25 0.74 0.64 0.4 ceramic Unknown 8/13/95 4 1.30 1.05 0.46 0.5 lithic obsidian 8/13/95 5 1.17 0.67 0.20 0.1 lithic obsidian 8/13/95 5 1.05 0.77 0.23 0.1 ceramic Unknown chip of

sherd 8/13/95 5 0.83 0.79 0.41 0.3 lithic dasite 8/13/95 5 0.92 0.79 0.15 0.1 lithic obsidian 8/13/95 5 0.93 0.80 0.27 0.1 lithic Unknown 8/13/95 5 1.03 0.82 0.18 0.1 lithic basalt 8/13/95 5 1.88 0.89 0.63 0.7 lithic obsidian lithic

shatter 8/13/95 5 1.93 0.92 0.23 0.3 lithic basalt 8/13/95 5 1.69 0.94 0.46 0.3 lithic dasite 8/13/95 5 1.29 0.96 0.16 0.1 lithic obsidian 8/13/95 5 2.21 0.96 0.37 0.7 lithic chert 8/13/95 5 1.28 0.99 0.20 0.2 lithic basalt 8/13/95 5 1.13 1.06 0.30 0.2 ceramic Unknown 8/13/95 5 1.62 1.07 0.26 0.4 lithic obsidian 8/13/95 5 1.26 1.10 0.39 0.5 ceramic B/W could be

b/g 8/13/95 5 1.36 1.12 0.26 0.2 ceramic Unknown chip of a

sherd 8/13/95 5 1.26 1.12 0.43 0.5 lithic obsidian thick 8/13/95 5 1.35 1.18 0.50 0.8 lithic obsidian 8/13/95 5 1.31 1.19 0.23 0.2 lithic obsidian 8/13/95 5 2.51 1.26 0.53 1.6 ceramic B/G 8/13/95 5 1.77 1.33 0.24 0.6 lithic obsidian 8/13/95 5 1.40 1.36 0.56 0.6 lithic obsidian 8/13/95 5 1.49 1.47 0.61 0.0 lithic dasite 8/13/95 5 2.34 1.50 0.53 1.8 ceramic Corrr 8/13/95 5 2.08 1.58 0.62 2.0 ceramic plain 8/13/95 5 2.54 1.61 0.34 1.2 lithic obsidian 8/13/95 5 2.68 1.70 0.52 2.0 ceramic plain gray mica 8/22/96 1 0.86 0.73 0.22 0.1 lithic Obsidian

111

8/22/96 1 1.32 0.75 0.17 0.1 lithic Obsidian 8/22/96 1 1.50 0.76 0.68 0.6 lithic Obsidian chuck 8/22/96 1 1.30 0.77 0.17 0.1 lithic Obsidian thin 8/22/96 1 1.01 0.86 0.15 0.1 lithic Obsidian thin 8/22/96 1 1.14 0.90 0.35 0.3 lithic Obsidian 8/22/96 1 1.76 0.93 0.38 0.5 lithic Obsidian 8/22/96 1 1.18 0.95 0.17 0.3 lithic Basalt thin 8/22/96 1 1.08 1.02 0.27 0.2 lithic Obsidian 8/22/96 1 1.17 1.04 0.25 0.2 lithic Obsidian Inclusions8/22/96 1 1.63 1.18 0.30 0.5 lithic Obsidian 8/22/96 1 1.24 1.20 0.25 0.3 lithic Obsidian 8/22/96 1 1.53 1.33 0.34 0.6 lithic Obsidian 8/22/96 1 1.73 1.42 0.49 0.8 lithic Obsidian 8/22/96 2 1.44 1.13 0.38 0.4 lithic Obsidian 8/22/96 2 1.43 1.17 0.18 0.2 lithic Obsidian 8/22/96 4 1.63 0.54 0.49 1.5 ceramic Corr Buff 8/22/96 4 0.82 0.70 0.24 0.1 ceramic B/G chip 8/22/96 4 1.03 0.71 0.20 0.1 ceramic Gray chip 8/22/96 4 1.27 0.82 0.34 0.2 lithic Basalt 8/22/96 4 1.16 0.83 0.51 0.4 ceramic Unknown Black /

Gray 8/22/96 4 1.03 0.84 0.50 0.5 ceramic Unknown Gray 8/22/96 4 1.44 0.87 0.39 0.5 lithic Chert Red /

White 8/22/96 4 1.39 0.95 0.46 0.6 ceramic Black 8/22/96 4 1.00 0.98 0.19 0.1 ceramic Gray chip 8/22/96 4 1.11 1.01 0.31 0.3 ceramic Black chip 8/22/96 4 1.74 1.01 0.58 1.1 ceramic Plain Black 8/22/96 4 1.40 1.05 0.35 0.3 ceramic Gray Paint chip8/22/96 4 1.52 1.06 0.48 0.7 ceramic Unknown Black /

Gray 8/22/96 4 1.19 1.07 0.25 0.2 ceramic B/Buff chip 8/22/96 4 1.56 1.08 0.55 0.8 ceramic Black 8/22/96 4 1.34 1.12 0.37 0.6 ceramic Gray 8/22/96 4 1.44 1.16 0.67 1.1 ceramic Black 8/22/96 4 1.50 1.17 0.63 1.1 ceramic Corr B / Buff 8/22/96 4 1.54 1.18 0.50 1.0 ceramic Corr Black 8/22/96 4 1.58 1.25 0.51 0.7 ceramic Black Micecous8/22/96 4 2.18 1.30 0.50 1.4 ceramic Unknown Buff 8/22/96 4 1.34 1.32 0.51 0.7 ceramic Plain Black / Buff8/22/96 4 1.48 1.34 0.48 0.9 ceramic Corr Buff 8/22/96 4 2.21 1.38 0.51 1.5 ceramic Unknown Buff 8/22/96 4 1.61 1.49 0.51 1.1 ceramic Plain Black / Buff8/22/96 4 3.46 1.55 0.65 3.4 ceramic Plain Gray 8/22/96 4 2.36 1.78 0.56 2.2 ceramic Corr Black 8/22/96 4 1.89 1.81 0.45 1.6 ceramic Corr Black 8/22/96 4 2.09 1.81 0.56 2.2 ceramic Corr Black 8/22/96 4 2.26 2.21 0.51 3.1 ceramic Corr (4) sides

Black

112

8/22/96 4 2.66 2.29 0.58 3.0 ceramic Corr Black 8/22/96 4 4.18 3.08 0.58 9.2 ceramic B/G 8/22/96 5 1.22 0.55 0.50 0.3 ceramic Unknown B / Buff 8/22/96 5 1.15 0.67 0.18 0.1 lithic Obsidian 8/22/96 5 1.33 0.78 0.26 0.2 ceramic B/G 8/22/96 5 1.46 0.84 0.23 0.2 lithic Obsidian 8/22/96 5 0.99 0.87 0.17 0.1 lithic Obsidian cortex 8/22/96 5 1.03 0.93 0.20 0.1 ceramic Unknown chip / Gray8/22/96 5 1.54 0.93 0.19 0.2 lithic Obsidian 8/22/96 5 1.15 0.96 0.39 0.4 ceramic Unknown Black 8/22/96 5 1.75 0.96 0.35 0.6 lithic Obsidian 8/22/96 5 1.81 0.99 0.46 0.7 ceramic Unknown 8/22/96 5 1.18 1.01 0.45 0.5 ceramic Unknown b/buff 8/22/96 5 1.28 1.22 0.22 0.2 lithic Obsidian 8/22/96 5 1.34 1.25 0.33 0.4 lithic Obsidian 8/22/96 5 1.58 1.26 0.51 1.2 ceramic Corr 8/22/96 5 1.54 1.26 0.29 0.4 lithic Obsidian 8/22/96 5 2.31 1.27 0.22 0.5 lithic Obsidian 8/22/96 5 1.55 1.41 0.57 1.1 ceramic Black Black Mica8/22/96 5 1.77 1.42 0.41 1.0 ceramic Plain Gray 8/22/96 5 1.45 1.44 0.26 0.5 lithic Obsidian 8/22/96 5 2.15 1.44 0.29 1.0 lithic Obsidian 8/22/96 5 1.84 1.45 0.50 1.2 ceramic Black Black Mica8/22/96 5 2.04 1.46 0.57 1.8 ceramic B/G thin lines 8/22/96 5 2.93 1.49 0.93 2.2 lithic Basalt shatter 8/22/96 5 1.73 1.60 0.60 1.1 ceramic Plain Possible

Corr 8/22/96 5 2.14 1.60 0.46 1.7 ceramic Corr Smeared 8/22/96 5 1.52 1.62 0.44 0.7 lithic Basalt 8/22/96 5 1.59 1.65 0.34 0.8 lithic Obsidian 8/22/96 5 1.92 1.82 0.55 2.4 ceramic Plain B / Buff 8/22/96 5 1.67 1.83 0.49 1.2 lithic Basalt 8/22/96 5 2.47 1.93 0.48 2.5 lithic Obsidian 8/22/96 5 2.21 1.96 0.65 3.6 ceramic B/Buff Buff = Tan8/22/96 5 2.40 1.99 0.51 1.6 lithic Obsidian 8/22/96 5 2.86 2.13 0.55 4.3 ceramic Corr Smeared 8/22/96 5 2.42 2.18 0.56 2.6 ceramic Corr Smeared 8/22/96 5 3.17 2.62 2.07 19.6 lithic Ground stone 8/22/96 5 2.99 2.75 0.57 4.7 ceramic Corr 5/23/97 1 1.14 0.49 0.20 0.1 lithic obsidian 5/23/97 1 1.15 0.67 0.19 0.1 lithic obsidian 5/23/97 1 1.23 1.12 0.44 0.4 lithic obsidian 5/23/97 4 1.47 0.99 0.41 0.5 ceramic Unknown 5/23/97 4 1.68 1.11 0.50 1.0 ceramic Corr 5/23/97 4 2.09 1.82 0.51 2.0 ceramic Corr

6/9/97 1 1.21 0.79 0.22 0.5 lithic obsidian thin odd shape.

6/9/97 1 1.88 1.36 0.63 1.5 lithic obsidian shatter

113

6/9/97 5 1.74 1.07 0.26 0.8 lithic obsidian 6/9/97 5 2.20 1.68 0.63 2.9 ceramic plain

7/22/97 4 2.00 1.54 0.55 1.1 ceramic Corr 7/22/97 4 1.63 1.56 0.50 0.6 ceramic Unknown 7/31/97 1 1.31 0.63 0.18 0.1 lithic Obsidian 7/31/97 1 1.56 0.65 0.26 0.2 lithic Basalt 7/31/97 1 0.81 0.70 0.20 0.1 lithic obsidian 7/31/97 1 1.14 0.70 0.33 0.1 lithic Obsidian shatter 7/31/97 1 0.85 0.72 0.14 0.1 lithic obsidian 7/31/97 1 0.87 0.75 0.17 0.1 lithic obsidian 7/31/97 1 1.71 0.76 0.22 0.2 lithic Obsidian 7/31/97 1 1.62 0.79 0.25 0.4 lithic Basalt 7/31/97 1 1.13 0.80 0.28 0.2 lithic Obsidian 7/31/97 1 1.20 0.80 0.52 0.4 lithic obsidian shatter 7/31/97 1 1.21 0.80 0.13 0.1 lithic obsidian 7/31/97 1 0.96 0.81 0.12 0.1 lithic obsidian 7/31/97 1 1.30 0.87 0.68 0.6 lithic obsidian 7/31/97 1 1.31 0.88 0.35 0.3 ceramic Plain Gray 7/31/97 1 1.22 0.90 0.19 0.1 lithic Obsidian 7/31/97 1 1.07 0.91 0.18 0.1 lithic Obsidian 7/31/97 1 1.21 0.91 0.22 0.1 lithic Obsidian 7/31/97 1 1.26 0.92 0.23 0.2 lithic Obsidian 7/31/97 1 1.19 0.93 0.25 0.2 lithic Obsidian 7/31/97 1 1.42 0.93 0.27 0.2 lithic obsidian 7/31/97 1 0.94 0.94 0.21 0.1 lithic obsidian 7/31/97 1 1.48 0.94 0.26 0.3 lithic Obsidian 7/31/97 1 1.43 1.00 0.28 0.3 lithic Obsidian 7/31/97 1 1.49 1.00 0.24 0.3 lithic Obsidian 7/31/97 1 1.45 1.01 0.29 0.4 lithic Obsidian 7/31/97 1 1.43 1.03 0.30 0.3 lithic Obsidian 7/31/97 1 1.62 1.06 0.25 0.4 lithic Obsidian 7/31/97 1 1.06 1.13 0.20 0.2 lithic Obsidian 7/31/97 1 1.27 1.24 0.40 0.4 lithic Obsidian 7/31/97 1 2.05 1.24 0.44 0.7 lithic Obsidian sm cortex7/31/97 1 1.48 1.26 0.25 0.5 lithic Obsidian 7/31/97 1 1.58 1.32 0.40 0.7 lithic Obsidian 7/31/97 1 1.35 1.33 0.35 0.6 lithic Obsidian 7/31/97 1 2.40 1.45 0.60 1.3 lithic Obsidian 7/31/97 1 1.30 1.47 0.20 0.3 lithic Obsidian 7/31/97 1 1.82 1.49 0.33 1.0 lithic Obsidian 7/31/97 1 2.33 1.49 0.51 1.4 lithic Obsidian 7/31/97 1 1.85 1.55 0.47 1.2 lithic Obsidian 7/31/97 1 1.83 1.58 0.41 1.1 lithic Obsidian sm cortex7/31/97 1 1.79 1.76 0.30 0.5 lithic Obsidian 7/31/97 1 2.53 1.77 0.32 1.3 lithic Obsidian 7/31/97 2 0.54 0.51 0.08 0.1 lithic Obsidian 7/31/97 2 1.35 0.71 0.39 0.2 lithic Obsidian shatter

114

7/31/97 2 0.91 0.78 0.50 0.2 ceramic B/O Black & Orange

7/31/97 2 1.36 0.81 0.23 0.1 lithic Obsidian 7/31/97 2 1.56 1.16 0.23 0.3 lithic Obsidian 7/31/97 2 1.55 1.19 0.29 0.5 lithic Obsidian 7/31/97 2 1.30 1.25 0.20 0.3 lithic Obsidian 7/31/97 2 1.35 1.34 0.21 0.4 lithic Obsidian 7/31/97 3 1.19 0.69 0.28 0.2 lithic Obsidian 7/31/97 3 1.52 1.09 0.37 0.3 ceramic B/G chip 7/31/97 3 1.66 1.49 0.53 0.9 ceramic B/G 7/31/97 3 2.20 1.95 0.55 2.3 ceramic Plain Black /

Gray 7/31/97 3 3.11 2.91 0.63 4.7 ceramic Corr 7/31/97 4 0.73 0.63 0.27 0.1 lithic Obsidian shatter 7/31/97 4 1.04 0.67 0.48 0.3 ceramic Plain Black /

Gray 7/31/97 4 1.03 0.71 0.55 0.3 ceramic Plain Black 7/31/97 4 0.90 0.73 0.17 0.1 ceramic Plain Gray 7/31/97 4 1.49 0.74 0.26 0.2 ceramic Plain Gray 7/31/97 4 1.26 0.75 0.21 0.1 ceramic Plain Gray 7/31/97 4 1.16 0.76 0.28 0.2 ceramic B/O Light Black

(almost) 7/31/97 4 1.25 0.80 0.12 0.1 ceramic B/O Bright

Paint 7/31/97 4 1.27 0.80 0.38 0.3 ceramic Plain Black 7/31/97 4 1.52 0.80 0.38 0.3 ceramic Plain Black 7/31/97 4 1.52 0.80 0.37 0.4 ceramic Plain Black 7/31/97 4 0.87 0.81 0.17 0.1 ceramic Plain chip

Gray 7/31/97 4 1.37 0.81 0.31 0.2 ceramic Plain Black 7/31/97 4 0.95 0.85 0.45 0.3 lithic Chert shatter 7/31/97 4 1.55 0.86 0.40 0.3 lithic Obsidian 7/31/97 4 1.33 0.87 0.56 0.7 ceramic Plain Black 7/31/97 4 1.18 0.91 0.41 0.3 ceramic Plain 7/31/97 4 1.22 0.92 0.43 0.5 ceramic Corr 7/31/97 4 1.59 0.92 0.57 0.6 ceramic Plain Gray 7/31/97 4 1.07 0.93 0.20 0.2 ceramic Plain Gray 7/31/97 4 1.34 0.96 0.40 0.3 ceramic Orange 7/31/97 4 1.31 0.98 0.44 0.5 ceramic Corr Black /

Gray 7/31/97 4 1.00 0.99 0.56 0.9 ceramic Plain Orange 7/31/97 4 1.16 1.00 0.61 0.5 ceramic Plain Gray 7/31/97 4 1.22 1.00 0.25 0.2 ceramic Plain Black 7/31/97 4 1.68 1.00 0.39 0.4 ceramic Plain Gray 7/31/97 4 1.81 1.04 0.58 0.9 ceramic Corr Gray /

Black 7/31/97 4 1.62 1.10 0.47 0.9 ceramic Plain Gray 7/31/97 4 1.45 1.11 0.55 0.9 ceramic Plain Orange /

Black

115

7/31/97 4 1.28 1.12 0.58 0.5 ceramic Plain Black / Black

7/31/97 4 1.58 1.13 0.45 0.6 ceramic Plain Gray 7/31/97 4 1.37 1.16 0.47 0.8 ceramic Plain Gray 7/31/97 4 1.49 1.16 0.38 0.6 ceramic Corr Black /

Gray 7/31/97 4 2.30 1.27 0.59 1.9 ceramic Corr Gray /

Gray 7/31/97 4 1.60 1.29 0.34 0.5 ceramic Plain Black 7/31/97 4 1.91 1.29 0.52 1.4 ceramic Plain 7/31/97 4 2.06 1.29 0.44 0.9 ceramic Plain Orange 7/31/97 4 2.03 1.33 0.59 1.5 ceramic Corr Black /

Gray 7/31/97 4 1.96 1.34 0.58 1.5 ceramic Plain Black 7/31/97 4 1.44 1.44 0.52 1.1 ceramic Plain Gray 7/31/97 4 1.56 1.44 0.57 1.2 ceramic Corr Black 7/31/97 4 2.31 1.44 0.58 1.6 ceramic Plain 7/31/97 4 1.82 1.54 0.00 1.2 ceramic Plain Black /

Gray 7/31/97 4 2.40 1.71 0.54 2.1 ceramic Plain Gray 7/31/97 4 2.06 1.88 0.61 2.3 ceramic Plain large

inclusions7/31/97 4 2.33 1.93 0.54 2.1 ceramic Corr Gray 7/31/97 4 1.97 1.97 0.55 2.5 ceramic Plain Black /

Gray 7/31/97 4 2.59 2.05 0.61 2.4 ceramic B/G thin lines 7/31/97 4 2.89 2.05 0.45 2.2 ceramic B/G 7/31/97 4 3.17 2.05 0.79 4.4 lithic Basalt shatter 7/31/97 4 2.71 2.08 0.47 1.9 ceramic O / G 7/31/97 4 3.18 2.29 0.60 3.4 ceramic Plain Gray rim7/31/97 4 4.52 2.75 0.57 8.7 ceramic Plain Gray 7/31/97 4 5.64 3.12 1.23 19.8 lithic Basalt thick 7/31/97 5 1.40 0.42 0.17 0.1 lithic Obsidian 7/31/97 5 0.96 0.60 0.16 0.1 lithic Obsidian 7/31/97 5 1.31 0.60 0.21 0.1 lithic Basalt 7/31/97 5 1.21 0.65 0.12 0.1 lithic Obsidian 7/31/97 5 1.19 0.66 0.25 0.1 lithic Obsidian 7/31/97 5 1.03 0.69 0.18 0.1 lithic 7/31/97 5 0.99 0.74 0.20 0.1 lithic Obsidian 7/31/97 5 0.89 0.76 0.10 0.1 lithic Obsidian 7/31/97 5 1.04 0.77 0.21 0.1 lithic 7/31/97 5 1.17 0.77 0.25 0.2 lithic Obsidian 7/31/97 5 1.73 0.77 0.60 0.9 lithic Chert Oval x-sect7/31/97 5 0.93 0.79 0.59 0.5 ceramic Plain Black 7/31/97 5 1.11 0.80 0.20 0.1 lithic 7/31/97 5 1.25 0.81 0.15 0.1 lithic Obsidian 7/31/97 5 1.03 0.83 0.20 0.1 lithic Obsidian 7/31/97 5 0.86 0.84 0.13 0.1 ceramic Plain chip

116

7/31/97 5 1.65 0.84 0.41 0.4 lithic Obsidian shatter cortex

7/31/97 5 1.58 0.85 0.27 0.2 ceramic Plain chip 7/31/97 5 1.20 0.85 0.33 0.2 lithic Obsidian 7/31/97 5 1.13 0.87 0.24 0.2 lithic Obsidian 7/31/97 5 1.72 0.89 0.53 0.5 ceramic Plain Black / Buff7/31/97 5 1.59 0.91 0.28 0.4 lithic Obsidian 7/31/97 5 1.23 0.92 0.27 0.2 ceramic Gray chip

Gray 7/31/97 5 0.99 0.94 0.18 0.1 lithic Obsidian 7/31/97 5 1.34 0.96 0.35 0.2 lithic Basalt curved 7/31/97 5 1.35 0.96 0.28 0.2 lithic Obsidian 7/31/97 5 1.14 0.98 0.45 0.5 ceramic Plain 7/31/97 5 1.32 0.98 0.32 0.4 lithic Chert 7/31/97 5 1.40 0.98 0.22 0.2 lithic Basalt 7/31/97 5 1.60 0.99 0.37 0.4 lithic Obsidian 7/31/97 5 1.29 1.01 0.22 0.3 lithic Basalt curved 7/31/97 5 1.20 1.03 0.50 0.4 lithic Obsidian shatter 7/31/97 5 1.39 1.04 0.64 0.6 ceramic chip 7/31/97 5 1.40 1.04 0.47 0.7 ceramic Plain Buff 7/31/97 5 1.40 1.04 0.37 0.4 lithic Obsidian 7/31/97 5 1.45 1.06 0.30 0.4 lithic Obsidian 7/31/97 5 1.29 1.07 0.34 0.4 lithic Obsidian 7/31/97 5 1.60 1.08 0.28 0.5 lithic Basalt 7/31/97 5 1.25 1.09 0.18 0.2 lithic Obsidian 7/31/97 5 1.28 1.10 0.39 0.2 lithic Obsidian curved 7/31/97 5 1.34 1.10 0.18 0.2 lithic Obsidian 7/31/97 5 1.30 1.11 0.34 0.4 ceramic Plain chip

Black 7/31/97 5 1.29 1.12 0.49 0.6 ceramic Corr Gray 7/31/97 5 1.48 1.13 0.39 0.6 ceramic Plain 7/31/97 5 1.80 1.13 0.35 0.5 lithic Obsidian 7/31/97 5 1.82 1.13 0.26 0.5 lithic Obsidian 7/31/97 5 1.21 1.14 0.44 0.6 ceramic Unknown Black / Buff7/31/97 5 1.23 1.15 0.55 0.5 lithic Obsidian 7/31/97 5 1.62 1.15 0.31 0.4 lithic Basalt 7/31/97 5 1.52 1.17 0.27 0.4 lithic Obsidian curved 7/31/97 5 1.57 1.20 0.27 0.4 lithic Obsidian curved 7/31/97 5 1.92 1.20 0.35 0.7 lithic Obsidian curved 7/31/97 5 1.68 1.21 0.29 0.5 lithic Basalt 7/31/97 5 1.91 1.21 0.35 0.6 lithic Obsidian cortex 7/31/97 5 1.39 1.22 0.19 0.3 lithic Obsidian 7/31/97 5 2.05 1.22 0.40 0.7 lithic Obsidian curved 7/31/97 5 1.61 1.26 0.44 0.6 ceramic Plain Black / Buff7/31/97 5 1.43 1.30 0.23 0.3 lithic Obsidian 7/31/97 5 1.36 1.32 0.44 0.6 ceramic Plain Buff / Buff7/31/97 5 3.09 1.32 0.51 1.7 ceramic Corr Buff rim7/31/97 5 2.00 1.33 0.57 1.5 ceramic Corr Black 7/31/97 5 2.25 1.35 0.56 1.4 ceramic Corr Gray

117

7/31/97 5 1.78 1.38 0.56 1.6 ceramic Black Mications 7/31/97 5 2.77 1.40 0.46 2.0 ceramic Corr Buff / Buff7/31/97 5 2.37 1.40 0.36 0.9 lithic Obsidian 7/31/97 5 1.42 1.41 0.26 0.5 lithic Obsidian 7/31/97 5 1.61 1.41 0.33 0.4 lithic Obsidian curved 7/31/97 5 1.47 1.43 0.70 1.1 ceramic Plain Black 7/31/97 5 1.75 1.52 0.51 1.4 ceramic Corr 7/31/97 5 1.90 1.59 0.38 1.0 lithic Obsidian 7/31/97 5 2.20 1.60 0.52 1.6 lithic Obsidian 7/31/97 5 1.89 1.67 0.55 1.4 lithic Basalt 7/31/97 5 1.99 1.70 0.51 2.1 ceramic B/G thin lines 7/31/97 5 1.99 1.70 0.57 2.0 ceramic Corr Black 7/31/97 5 1.78 1.71 0.45 1.7 ceramic Black 7/31/97 5 1.72 1.71 0.32 0.7 lithic Obsidian Orange 7/31/97 5 2.89 1.71 0.47 1.7 lithic Obsidian 7/31/97 5 2.05 1.74 0.51 2.5 ceramic B/G 7/31/97 5 2.61 1.78 0.50 2.2 ceramic Corr Gray 7/31/97 5 2.78 1.85 0.55 2.9 ceramic Corr Gray 7/31/97 5 2.08 1.86 0.58 2.2 ceramic Corr Black 7/31/97 5 2.26 1.87 0.40 2.6 ceramic Plain Gray 7/31/97 5 3.97 1.89 0.34 2.0 lithic Obsidian 7/31/97 5 2.68 2.00 0.66 3.4 ceramic Black 7/31/97 5 3.41 2.12 0.53 3.1 lithic Obsidian 7/31/97 5 2.27 2.13 0.62 2.2 lithic Obsidian 7/31/97 5 2.61 2.28 0.67 3.5 lithic Obsidian 7/31/97 5 2.31 2.41 0.56 3.0 ceramic Corr Smear /

Buff 7/31/97 5 2.63 2.64 0.47 2.7 lithic Obsidian 8/13/97 1 1.36 0.10 0.19 0.5 lithic Obsidian 8/13/97 1 1.47 0.55 0.12 0.4 lithic Obsidian 8/13/97 1 1.31 0.64 0.13 0.4 lithic Obsidian 8/13/97 1 1.04 0.70 0.12 0.3 lithic Obsidian 8/13/97 1 1.35 0.71 0.20 0.4 lithic Obsidian 8/13/97 1 0.96 0.74 0.22 0.1 lithic Obsidian 8/13/97 1 1.17 0.75 0.15 0.4 lithic Obsidian 8/13/97 1 1.16 0.77 0.18 0.4 lithic Obsidian 8/13/97 1 1.02 0.80 0.20 0.4 lithic Obsidian 8/13/97 1 1.14 0.80 0.17 0.2 lithic Obsidian 8/13/97 1 0.97 0.82 0.21 0.1 lithic Obsidian 8/13/97 1 0.92 0.85 0.15 0.3 lithic Obsidian 8/13/97 1 1.39 0.87 0.15 0.5 lithic Obsidian 8/13/97 1 1.32 0.89 0.18 0.4 lithic Basalt 8/13/97 1 1.69 0.89 0.57 0.7 lithic Obsidian 8/13/97 1 1.11 0.90 0.24 0.4 lithic Obsidian Irreg Trap8/13/97 1 1.10 0.92 0.13 0.4 lithic Obsidian 8/13/97 1 0.98 0.93 0.18 0.4 lithic Obsidian 8/13/97 1 1.66 0.94 0.54 1.2 ceramic Brown 8/13/97 1 1.38 0.95 0.32 0.6 lithic Obsidian with cortex

118

8/13/97 1 1.52 0.95 0.25 0.6 lithic Obsidian 8/13/97 1 1.51 0.99 0.28 0.7 lithic Obsidian 8/13/97 1 0.99 1.00 0.31 0.5 lithic Obsidian 8/13/97 1 1.67 1.02 0.32 0.7 lithic Obsidian 8/13/97 1 1.23 1.03 0.13 0.5 lithic Obsidian 8/13/97 1 1.43 1.04 0.25 0.6 lithic Obsidian 8/13/97 1 1.12 1.09 0.25 0.5 lithic Obsidian 8/13/97 1 1.39 1.15 0.19 0.5 lithic Obsidian 8/13/97 1 1.32 1.17 0.17 0.5 lithic Obsidian 8/13/97 1 1.82 1.20 0.25 0.7 lithic Obsidian 8/13/97 1 1.61 1.25 0.17 0.6 lithic Obsidian 8/13/97 1 1.61 1.45 0.24 0.9 lithic Obsidian 8/13/97 1 1.78 1.52 0.37 1.0 lithic Obsidian 8/13/97 1 2.72 1.55 0.56 1.6 lithic Obsidian with cortex8/13/97 1 2.01 1.59 0.30 1.2 lithic Basalt 8/13/97 2 1.10 0.62 0.16 0.1 lithic Obsidian 8/13/97 2 0.92 0.74 0.17 0.1 lithic Obsidian 8/13/97 2 1.04 0.76 0.17 0.1 lithic Obsidian 8/13/97 2 0.95 0.85 0.24 0.2 lithic Obsidian 8/13/97 2 1.25 0.86 0.22 0.2 lithic Obsidian 8/13/97 2 0.92 0.87 0.13 0.1 lithic Obsidian 8/13/97 2 1.60 1.03 0.26 0.4 lithic Basalt 8/13/97 2 1.25 1.07 0.51 0.7 ceramic White 8/13/97 2 2.91 2.11 0.57 1.6 lithic Obsidian 8/13/97 3 0.83 0.38 0.22 0.1 ceramic Gray 8/13/97 3 0.97 0.70 0.40 0.1 ceramic Gray chip 8/13/97 3 1.28 0.84 0.53 0.5 ceramic Black 8/13/97 3 1.82 1.12 0.35 0.5 ceramic Gray 8/13/97 3 2.01 1.33 0.84 1.1 lithic Chert White 8/13/97 3 2.38 2.31 0.60 3.0 ceramic B/G 8/13/97 4 1.16 0.66 0.52 0.3 ceramic Black 8/13/97 4 1.02 0.68 0.31 0.2 ceramic B/G Gray 8/13/97 4 1.22 0.68 0.39 0.3 ceramic Black Micacious8/13/97 4 0.92 0.73 0.73 0.2 ceramic Black 8/13/97 4 1.07 0.73 0.15 0.1 ceramic Black Paint chip8/13/97 4 1.31 0.77 0.38 0.3 ceramic Black 8/13/97 4 0.88 0.78 0.29 0.1 ceramic Gray paint chip8/13/97 4 1.21 0.78 0.27 0.2 lithic Obsidian 8/13/97 4 0.98 0.80 0.49 0.3 ceramic Corr 8/13/97 4 1.14 0.83 0.36 0.3 ceramic gray 8/13/97 4 1.22 0.83 0.43 0.1 ceramic Black 8/13/97 4 1.17 0.85 0.47 0.4 ceramic Gray 8/13/97 4 1.50 0.87 0.41 0.5 ceramic Black 8/13/97 4 1.28 0.89 0.57 0.6 ceramic Black Micacious

rim 8/13/97 4 1.34 0.91 0.48 0.6 ceramic Gray 8/13/97 4 1.05 0.93 0.22 0.1 ceramic Gray Paint chip8/13/97 4 0.96 0.94 0.40 0.3 ceramic Unknown

119

8/13/97 4 1.34 0.95 0.44 0.5 ceramic Gray 8/13/97 4 1.15 0.96 0.58 0.4 ceramic Corr 8/13/97 4 1.22 0.96 0.46 0.5 ceramic Black imicacious8/13/97 4 1.24 0.96 0.49 0.6 ceramic Gray 8/13/97 4 2.46 0.98 0.45 1.1 ceramic Gray 8/13/97 4 1.41 1.01 0.59 0.7 ceramic Black 8/13/97 4 1.28 1.03 0.31 0.3 ceramic White Paint chip8/13/97 4 1.45 1.03 0.41 0.6 ceramic Gray chip 8/13/97 4 1.38 1.05 0.58 0.9 ceramic Black Micacious8/13/97 4 1.69 1.05 0.31 0.4 ceramic Gray Paint chip8/13/97 4 1.32 1.06 0.28 0.3 ceramic B/G Paint chip8/13/97 4 1.72 1.10 0.52 0.9 ceramic Black 8/13/97 4 1.37 1.11 0.39 0.6 ceramic Gray chip 8/13/97 4 1.15 1.12 0.43 0.5 ceramic Gray 8/13/97 4 1.67 1.13 0.39 0.7 ceramic Black 8/13/97 4 1.57 1.14 0.31 0.4 ceramic Gray chip 8/13/97 4 1.60 1.14 0.49 0.6 ceramic Gray 8/13/97 4 1.63 1.15 0.46 1.0 ceramic Gray 8/13/97 4 1.17 1.17 0.45 0.5 ceramic Black Micacious8/13/97 4 1.61 1.17 0.49 0.9 ceramic Gray 8/13/97 4 1.48 1.18 0.42 0.7 ceramic Black Micacious8/13/97 4 1.40 1.21 0.55 0.8 ceramic Gray chip 8/13/97 4 1.35 1.23 0.50 0.6 lithic Obsidian 8/13/97 4 1.71 1.26 0.67 0.9 ceramic Gray 8/13/97 4 1.35 1.30 0.45 0.6 ceramic Black 8/13/97 4 2.28 1.30 0.49 1.6 ceramic Gray 8/13/97 4 1.45 1.32 0.39 0.5 ceramic Black chip 8/13/97 4 1.47 1.32 0.68 1.0 ceramic Black Micacious8/13/97 4 1.94 1.32 0.47 1.1 ceramic Gray 8/13/97 4 1.63 1.34 0.47 1.2 ceramic Corr Black 8/13/97 4 2.41 1.47 0.53 1.5 ceramic Gray 8/13/97 4 1.68 1.53 0.54 1.1 ceramic Corr Gray 8/13/97 4 3.03 1.60 0.52 2.3 lithic Obsidian 8/13/97 4 2.10 1.62 0.54 1.9 ceramic Black 8/13/97 4 1.98 1.77 0.51 2.1 ceramic Black 8/13/97 4 2.27 1.89 0.53 2.2 ceramic Black 8/13/97 4 3.04 2.01 0.53 3.4 ceramic Corr 8/13/97 4 3.49 2.88 0.61 7.1 ceramic Corr Smeared 8/13/97 4 3.88 3.64 0.37 8.1 ceramic Gray smeared

indent 8/13/97 5 2.11 0.43 0.61 1.7 ceramic Corr Gray 8/13/97 5 0.93 0.51 0.78 0.3 ceramic Black 8/13/97 5 0.97 0.68 0.13 0.1 lithic Obsidian 8/13/97 5 1.16 0.71 0.16 0.1 lithic Obsidian 8/13/97 5 1.10 0.72 0.17 0.1 lithic Obsidian 8/13/97 5 1.10 0.76 0.17 0.1 lithic Obsidian thin 8/13/97 5 2.29 0.77 0.23 0.4 lithic Obsidian 8/13/97 5 1.86 0.78 0.23 0.2 lithic Obsidian Long Thin

120

8/13/97 5 1.16 0.79 0.36 0.2 ceramic B/G chip 8/13/97 5 1.47 0.79 0.39 0.3 lithic Obsidian 8/13/97 5 1.07 0.80 0.48 0.4 ceramic B/G 8/13/97 5 1.22 0.80 0.16 0.1 lithic Basalt 8/13/97 5 0.98 0.84 0.39 0.3 ceramic Unknown 8/13/97 5 0.94 0.86 0.43 0.3 ceramic Unknown 8/13/97 5 0.99 0.87 0.22 0.2 lithic Obsidian 8/13/97 5 1.17 0.87 0.10 0.1 lithic Obsidian 8/13/97 5 0.97 0.90 0.21 0.2 lithic Obsidian 8/13/97 5 1.12 0.93 0.22 0.1 ceramic Gray chip paint8/13/97 5 1.10 0.93 0.23 0.2 lithic Obsidian 8/13/97 5 1.69 0.95 0.54 0.6 ceramic Unknown chip 8/13/97 5 1.11 0.96 0.08 0.1 lithic Obsidian Very Thin8/13/97 5 1.30 0.96 0.20 0.2 lithic Obsidian 8/13/97 5 1.33 0.96 0.17 0.1 lithic Obsidian 8/13/97 5 1.16 1.00 0.49 0.5 ceramic B/G 8/13/97 5 1.45 1.00 0.44 0.4 ceramic Gray chip 8/13/97 5 1.12 1.01 0.37 0.2 ceramic Gray chip 8/13/97 5 1.02 1.02 0.39 0.4 ceramic Corr 8/13/97 5 1.11 1.02 0.42 0.3 ceramic Gray chip 8/13/97 5 1.18 1.03 0.35 0.3 lithic Obsidian striated 8/13/97 5 1.21 1.03 0.13 0.1 lithic Obsidian 8/13/97 5 1.48 1.03 0.36 0.3 lithic Obsidian 8/13/97 5 1.15 1.04 0.50 0.4 ceramic Black Micacious8/13/97 5 1.05 1.04 0.18 0.1 lithic Obsidian 8/13/97 5 1.35 1.04 0.35 0.3 lithic Obsidian 8/13/97 5 1.70 1.05 0.59 0.9 ceramic Black Micacious8/13/97 5 1.76 1.05 0.36 0.4 ceramic Gray Paint chip8/13/97 5 1.95 1.05 0.62 1.0 ceramic Gray 8/13/97 5 1.58 1.05 0.27 0.3 lithic Obsidian 8/13/97 5 1.19 1.06 0.24 0.2 lithic Obsidian 8/13/97 5 1.55 1.09 0.19 0.2 lithic Obsidian 8/13/97 5 1.20 1.10 0.51 0.6 ceramic Corr 8/13/97 5 2.16 1.10 0.50 1.0 ceramic B/Red 8/13/97 5 1.40 1.10 0.21 0.2 lithic Obsidian 8/13/97 5 1.47 1.12 0.43 0.6 ceramic Black Micacious8/13/97 5 1.96 1.13 0.48 1.1 lithic Obsidian 8/13/97 5 1.61 1.14 0.32 0.5 lithic Obsidian 8/13/97 5 1.42 1.18 0.19 0.3 lithic Obsidian 8/13/97 5 1.84 1.20 0.71 1.4 ceramic Black Micacious8/13/97 5 1.45 1.20 0.26 0.4 lithic Obsidian 8/13/97 5 1.35 1.25 0.43 0.7 ceramic Blade 8/13/97 5 1.28 1.26 0.49 0.8 ceramic Corr 8/13/97 5 1.90 1.28 0.54 1.2 ceramic Gray 8/13/97 5 2.25 1.28 0.50 1.6 ceramic Corr 8/13/97 5 1.49 1.29 0.36 0.6 lithic Obsidian 8/13/97 5 1.37 1.32 0.44 0.6 ceramic Gray Chip 8/13/97 5 1.66 1.32 0.23 0.4 lithic Obsidian

121

8/13/97 5 1.95 1.34 0.46 1.0 ceramic Black 8/13/97 5 1.78 1.35 0.57 1.3 ceramic Gray 8/13/97 5 2.08 1.35 0.46 1.1 ceramic Gray 8/13/97 5 1.41 1.37 0.56 0.8 ceramic Black Micacious8/13/97 5 1.51 1.37 0.52 1.2 ceramic Corr Gray 8/13/97 5 1.85 1.37 0.56 1.3 ceramic Corr 8/13/97 5 1.79 1.38 0.69 1.0 lithic Obsidian 8/13/97 5 1.80 1.40 0.40 0.9 ceramic Unknown chip no

paint 8/13/97 5 1.97 1.40 0.38 0.9 ceramic Corr 8/13/97 5 1.91 1.42 0.61 1.5 ceramic B/G 8/13/97 5 1.90 1.51 0.47 1.6 ceramic Gray 8/13/97 5 2.68 1.52 0.53 1.8 ceramic B/G Irreg Trap8/13/97 5 1.79 1.53 0.43 1.3 ceramic Black Micacious8/13/97 5 1.92 1.55 0.46 1.4 ceramic Corr Gray 8/13/97 5 2.47 1.59 0.48 1.5 ceramic Corr Gray 8/13/97 5 2.02 1.61 0.44 1.5 ceramic Gray 8/13/97 5 2.40 1.64 0.47 1.1 lithic Obsidian 8/13/97 5 2.14 1.69 0.42 1.1 lithic Obsidian 8/13/97 5 1.97 1.70 0.57 1.5 ceramic B/G 8/13/97 5 1.85 1.75 0.47 1.7 ceramic Black Micacious8/13/97 5 2.09 1.85 0.54 1.9 ceramic Gray 8/13/97 5 2.13 1.89 0.49 2.4 ceramic Black Rim 8/13/97 5 1.98 1.90 0.44 1.9 ceramic Gray 8/13/97 5 2.83 2.01 0.87 4.2 lithic Obsidian shatter 8/13/97 5 2.61 2.07 0.47 3.3 ceramic Corr / Black 8/13/97 5 2.65 2.10 0.60 3.0 ceramic Corr / Black 8/13/97 5 2.93 2.10 0.61 3.5 lithic Obsidian c-shaped 8/13/97 5 2.92 2.20 0.49 3.1 ceramic Corr 4 sided 8/13/97 5 2.44 2.44 0.45 2.3 ceramic Corr / Gray 8/13/97 5 2.76 2.50 0.63 2.8 lithic Obsidian 8/13/97 5 3.03 2.51 0.33 2.1 lithic Obsidian 9/11/97 1 1.09 0.55 0.14 0.1 lithic obsidian 9/11/97 1 1.07 0.59 0.19 0.1 lithic basalt 9/11/97 1 1.21 1.00 0.22 0.2 lithic obsidian 9/11/97 1 1.10 1.10 0.22 0.5 lithic obsidian 9/11/97 1 1.96 1.12 0.27 0.6 lithic obsidian 9/11/97 1 1.39 1.19 0.40 0.3 lithic obsidian 9/11/97 1 1.73 1.45 0.30 0.7 lithic basalt 9/11/97 4 1.70 0.68 0.47 0.5 ceramic Corrr tan 9/11/97 4 1.01 0.76 0.16 0.1 lithic obsidian 9/11/97 4 1.60 0.83 0.42 0.6 ceramic Corr 9/11/97 4 1.18 0.88 0.20 0.2 ceramic Unknown paint chip9/11/97 4 1.31 0.94 0.46 0.5 ceramic black 9/11/97 4 1.65 0.96 0.49 0.6 ceramic plain gray 9/11/97 4 1.31 1.01 0.55 0.8 ceramic black 9/11/97 4 1.37 1.06 0.32 0.4 ceramic B/W paint chip9/11/97 4 1.16 1.08 0.45 0.6 ceramic black

122

9/11/97 4 1.56 1.09 0.46 0.7 ceramic black 9/11/97 4 1.14 1.10 0.46 0.3 ceramic black 9/11/97 4 1.46 1.13 0.52 0.7 ceramic plain gray 9/11/97 4 1.35 1.26 0.30 0.4 ceramic B/W paint chip9/11/97 4 1.63 1.33 0.51 0.9 ceramic Corr 9/11/97 4 1.64 1.44 0.48 1.1 ceramic Corr tan 9/11/97 4 2.08 1.45 0.62 1.9 ceramic black 9/11/97 4 2.12 1.48 0.70 2.3 ceramic plain tan 9/11/97 4 1.87 1.54 0.49 1.0 ceramic plain black possible

Corr 9/11/97 4 2.19 1.55 0.58 2.0 ceramic plain tan 9/11/97 4 1.66 1.60 0.30 0.7 lithic obsidian thin 9/11/97 4 1.99 1.74 0.49 1.8 ceramic plain gray 9/11/97 4 2.45 1.76 0.52 2.4 ceramic Corr indented 9/11/97 4 1.75 1.80 0.50 1.6 ceramic plain tan 9/11/97 4 2.73 1.87 0.59 2.9 ceramic plain tan 9/11/97 4 2.27 1.88 0.52 1.5 ceramic plain tan 9/11/97 4 3.20 2.20 0.98 5.1 lithic obsidian 9/11/97 5 0.95 0.82 0.37 0.2 ceramic black 0 9/11/97 5 0.84 0.82 0.15 0.1 lithic obsidian 9/11/97 5 0.98 0.87 0.12 0.1 lithic obsidian 9/11/97 5 1.20 0.95 0.23 0.2 lithic obsidian 9/11/97 5 1.08 0.98 0.53 0.5 ceramic black 9/11/97 5 1.36 1.01 0.52 0.6 ceramic plain tan 9/11/97 5 1.18 1.03 0.38 0.5 ceramic Unknown could be a

rock 9/11/97 5 1.10 1.07 0.72 0.7 ceramic black 9/11/97 5 1.26 1.07 0.27 0.2 ceramic plain tan paint chip9/11/97 5 1.21 1.13 0.51 0.6 ceramic Corr 9/11/97 5 1.72 1.18 0.38 0.7 lithic basalt 9/11/97 5 1.42 1.25 0.50 0.9 ceramic plain gray 9/11/97 5 1.62 1.27 0.51 1.1 ceramic black five sided9/11/97 5 1.31 1.30 0.45 0.5 ceramic Corr finger print9/11/97 5 2.53 1.33 0.35 1.0 lithic obsidian 9/11/97 5 2.09 1.34 0.62 1.5 ceramic plain tan 9/11/97 5 2.25 1.44 0.51 1.8 ceramic plain gray 9/11/97 5 1.57 1.45 0.32 0.6 lithic obsidian 9/11/97 5 1.75 1.49 0.50 1.4 ceramic black 9/11/97 5 2.06 1.68 0.42 1.4 ceramic plain white 9/20/97 5 0.80 0.79 0.25 0.3 lithic obsidian 9/20/97 5 1.26 0.91 0.35 0.6 lithic obsidian

123

Appendix B – Site Summary and Preexisting Site Data

Site Data

The site forms associated with the sites in the watershed were recorded during the first

season of the Bandelier Archaeological Survey (BAS)in 1987. The BAS research design

promoted intensive collection of field data. The data collected are of good quality and

the forms were filled out completely. The original site recording made this thesis easier

and much appreciation is expressed to those in 1987 took the time to record this detailed

and tedious data.

Strangely, with minimal input from archaeologists or myself (I was still a student at the

time) the FWSA was placed in an area with a good example of the general types of

archaeological sites represented at the park.

LA 569

General Site Description

The site is a small pueblo located on a ridgeline above the rim of Frijoloes Canyon. The

elevation of the site is 6550 ft. The number of rooms is between 5 and 8. The structure is

completely to grade. The structural wall stones are composed of a highly friable tuff and

most of them are highly deteriorated. The site was originally dated between 1250 and

1325 AD. This site may have had two other site number LA 222 and LA 3755. The site

designation LA 3755 was reassigned to a site near Corral Hill.

Unlike what the site form says, the aspect is generally open. The site is on the ridge top

and slopes away in all directions. Site has an overall slope of 5% and the west and

124

southwest side of the site are in the FWSA (approximately 25 percent of the site). The

majority of the site slopes to the east and out of the catchment area.

The structure is collapsed to-grade with two large trees growing in it. The NPS trail

runs through the site to the east of the FWSA watershed.

The site may have been vandalized due to its proximity to the NPS trail. In 1987, the

field crews noted a depression as a possible site of ‘potting’ (pot-hunting). The site also

has several stone rings that are likely modern fire rings. The stones for the rings were

probably taken from this pueblo (LA569) or from the larger nearby pueblo.

Artifact Samples

A total of 523 Ceramic sherds were analyzed for type within a one by six meter sample

area. It appears that all of the ceramics with the sample area were examined at (this

cannot be confirmed but at the least the number is a minimum for the area.) The sample

area is out side of the FWSA, but there is no reason to assume that the type and number is

different from the FWSA. No size information was collected for these items.

Some 183 lithics artifacts were counted. Of these. 40 were measured within the same

sample area. The sub-sample of 40 artifacts were measured in all three dimensions.

Lithics items consist of eight chert flakes and 32 basalt or andesite flakes.. In addition,

eight other archaeological materials were described. These materials are larger than the

rest and consist of Bandelier Tuff, vesicular basalt and one piece of diorite.

LA60261

General site Description

125

Site LA 60262 is a small structure consisting of only one inferred room. The structure

has deteriorated completely to-grade. There is a tree is located next to the structure that

provides stability to the structure but not for the associated midden.

This site is located 32 meters due west and downslope from LA569. The site was dated

in a range of 1250 to 1375 AD. The date range for this site covers the same range as

LA569 with an extra 50 years on the later side. Site LA 60261 is likely associated with

LA569.

Slope on site is 11%. The site is located on the steepest section of the FWSA. Aspect on

the site is WSW.

Artifact Samples

Due to the light artifact scatter and small site size, artifact samples were taken from the

entire site (20 meters east-west by 11 meters north-south). A total of 28 Ceramic sherds

were picked-up and analyzed.

Only seven lithic materials were observed. These materials consist of four basalt or

andesite flakes, two obsidian flakes and a single piece of Pedernal chert.

LA60262

General Site Description

Site LA 60261 is a sherd and lithic scatter with no structural elements. The site area is

highly eroded. No subsurface features were noted. There is a cluster of trees in the

middle of the site which lay on the border of the FWSA. The north side of the trees is in

the FWSA with the remainder out side of this study.

126

This site is located 150 meters southwest and downslope from LA569 and

LA60262. The site was dated in a range of 1250 to 1350 AD, which makes it

contemporaneous with LA569 and LA60262. Site LA 60262 is possibly associated with

LA569 and LA60261.

Slope on the site is 8%. The site is located on the lower section of the FWSA. Aspect

on the site is WSW.

Artifact Samples

Two sample methods were employed on this site. Lithic samples were taken from the

core sample area of two meters by sixteen meters. Ceramics samples were taken from the

entire site (40 north-south by 86 meters east-west). Only 66 ceramic sherds were picked-

up and analyzed.

Thirty two lithic artifacts were recorded. This represents a small portion of the lithics on

the site as a whole.

127

List of References

Allen, C. D. 1989 Changes in the Landscape of the Jemez Mountains, New Mexico.

Unpublished Dissertation, University of California. Allen, C. D. 1993 Personal Communication. Bandelier National Monument. Archaeology-Program 1997 Bandelier Archaeological Survey Database. unknown edition.

Unpublished data on file at Bandelier National Monument, Bandelier National Monument.

Bowen, B. M. 1990 Los Alamos Climatology. Los Alamos National Laboratory. Los Alamos,

NM. Copies available from LA-11735. Butzer, K. W. 1980 Context in Archaeology: an Alternative Perspective. Journal of Field

Archaeology 7:417-422. Davenport, D. W., Bradford P. Wilcox, and David D. Breshears 1996 Soil Morphology of Canopy and Intercanopy Sites in a Piñon-Juniper

Woodland. Soil Science Society of America 60(6):1881-1887. Davenport, D. W. 1997 Soil Survey of Three Watersheds on South Mesa, Bandelier National

Monument. Report on file at Bandelier National Monument. Davenport, D. W., David D. Breshears, Bradford P. Wilcox, and Craig D. Allen 1998 Viewpoint: Sustainability of Piñon-Juniper Ecosystems - a unifying

perspective of soil erosion thresholds. Journal of Range Management 51:231-240. David W. Davenport, B. P. Wilcox., and B. L. Allen 1994 Micromorphology of Pedogenically-Derived Fracture Fills in Bandelier

Tuff, Pajarito Plateau, New Mexico. Los Alamos National Laboratory. Submitted to LA-UR. Copies available from 94-757.

David W. Davenport, B. P. W., and David D. Breshears 1995 Soil Morphology as Influenced by a Piñon-Juniper Woodland. Los

Alamos National Laboratory. Submitted to LA-UR. Copies available from 95-2623.

128

Elliott, M. 1999 Personal Communication. Bandelier Ceramic Training: Ceramics of the

Pajarito Plateau. Gotti, N. 1995 Testing A physically-Based Distributed Model (KINEROS): Predicting

Runoff and Erosion from a Semi-Arid Hillslope in the Southwestern United States. M.S., Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

Head, G. N. 1992 The Bandelier Archaeological Survey: 1991 preliminary report. Submitted

to Unpublished Park Service report of file at Bandelier National Monument. Langbein, W. B. and S. A. Schumm. 1958 Yield of Sediment in Relation to Mean Annual Precipitation.

Transactions, American Geophysical Union 39(6):1076-1084. Mozzillo, E. O. 1997 Culture-History Overview of Bandelier National Monument and the

Pajarito Plateau Region. vol. 2001. Mozzillo, Elizabeth O. Jemez Mountain Research web site.

Nyhan, J. W., L. W. Hacker, T. E. Calhoun, and D. L. Young 1978 Soil Survey of Los Alamos County, New Mexico. Los Alamos Scientific

Laboratory of the University of California, Los Alamos, N.M. Copies available from LA-6779-MS.

Oster, E. 1997 Personal Communication Rapp, G. J., and John A. Gifford 1982 Archaeological Geology: at the Interface of Geology and archaeology a

new discipline is taking shape, with a wide variety of research methods and an eclectic approach to data. American Scientist 70:45-53.

Rapp Jr., G. R., and Christopher L. Hill 1998 Geoarchaeology: the Earth-Science Approach to Archaeological

Interpretation. Yale University Press, New Haven. Reid, K. D. 1997 Runoff and Sediment Yield in a Semiarid Piñon-Juniper Woodland, New

Mexico, Colorado State University. Rothman, H. 1988 Bandelier National Monument: an administrative history Professional

Papers No. 14. Southwest Cultural Resources Center, Santa Fe, NM.

129

Schiffer, M. B. 1983 Toward the Identification of Formation Processes. American Antiquity

48(4):675-707. Shackley, M. L. 1975 Archaeological Sediments: a Survey of Analytical Methods. John Wiley &

Sons, New York. Shepard, A. O. 1985 Ceramics for the Archaeologist Publication 609. Carnegie Institution of

Washington, Washington, D.C. Smith, S. C. 1997 Artifact Transport at Bandelier National Monument. Unpublished Special-

Use Permit on file at Bandelier National Monument. SPSS SPSS computer program Available through CSU statistics department. Stein, J. K. and . P. A. Tesler. 1989 Size Distribution of Artifacts Clases: Combing Macro- and Micro-

Fractions. Geoarchaeology:an international Journal 4(1):1-30. Sydoriak, C. (editor) 1995 Resource Management Plan: Bandelier Management Monument.

unpublished internal government document, Bandelier National Monument. Wainwright, J. Date Unknown Chapter 20 Assessing the Impact of Erosion on Semi-arid

Archaeological Sites. In Past and Present Soil Erosion: Archaeological and Geographical Perspectives, edited by M. B. a. J. Boardman. Oxbow Monograph 22. Oxbow.

Wainwright, J. 1994 Erosion of Archaeological Sites: Results and Implications of a Site

Simulation Model. Geoarchaeology: an International Journal 9(3):173-201. Wandsnider, L. 1989 Long-term Land Use, Formation Processes, and the Structure of the

Archaeological Landscape: a Case Study from Southwestern Wyoming. Dissertation, University of New Mexico.

Weast, R. C. (editor)

130

1980 CRC Handbook of Chemistry and Physics: A Ready-Reference Book of Chemical and Physical Data, 60th addition. 60th ed. CRC Press, inc., Boca Raton, FL.

Wendorf, F., and Erik K. Reed 1955 An Alternate Reconstruction of Northern Rio Grande Prehistory. El

Palacio 62(5-6):131-173. Wilcox, B. P. 1993 Personal Communication. Wilcox, B. P., John Pitlick, Craig D. Allen, and David W. Davenport 1996a Runoff and Erosion from a Rapidly Eroding Pinyon-Juniper Hillslope. In

Advances in Hillslope Processes, edited by a. S. M. B. M. G. Anderson, pp. 61-77. 1 ed. vol. 1. John Wiley and Sons Ltd., N/A.

Wilcox, B. P., Craig D. Allen, Brent D. Newman, Kevin D. Reid, David Brandes, John

Pitlick, and David W. Davenport 1996b Runoff and Erosion on the Pajarito Plateau: Observations from the Field.

Los Alamos National Laboratory. Copies available from Publication number LA-UR-96-794.