+ All Categories
Home > Documents > Archaeological survey along the Mosquito Fork of the Fortymile … · 2020. 6. 18. ·...

Archaeological survey along the Mosquito Fork of the Fortymile … · 2020. 6. 18. ·...

Date post: 29-Sep-2020
Category:
Upload: others
View: 0 times
Download: 0 times
Share this document with a friend
1
Archaeological survey along the Mosquito Fork of the Fortymile River, Eastern Interior Alaska Sam Coffman¹ and Steve Lanford² ¹University of Alaska Museum of the North and ²Bureau of Land Management Results of the survey During this survey, 20 new archaeological sites (14 prehistoric; 6 historic) were identified and documented. The historic sites have assisted in better addressing Euro-American use of the area. Cabin ruins documented along the Gold Creek and Moose Creek have demonstrated how important historical maps (Figure 1) or other historical accounts and documents can be when surveying for archaeological resources. The prehistoric sites documented during this survey ranged from; ephemeral lithic scatters with little deposition, to a large house-like feature, as well as two sites containing microblade technology, that were stratigraphically below the presumed White River Ash (cf. Preece et al. 2014; Workman 1979). The few obsidian artifacts recovered have also shed light on how material traveled from source(s) to site – all in small, tertiary form. Additionally there is a trend or focus on southern obsidian sources (e.g. Edziza, Wiki Peak). Acknowledgements: Thanks to Robin Mills (BLM) for Project Coordination and Funding; Sara Polachek (BLM, SCA Archaeology) About the survey An archaeological survey of the Mosquito Fork of the Fortymile River was conducted by a three person crew using a rowing frame inflatable raft (Figure 1) to travel down the river. The crew and equipment was set down on the river by use of a helicopter (Figure 2). The crew floated to areas to be surveyed and then surveyed on foot with shovel tests at selected points. The survey plans were guided by use of a newly identified map of the area, previously selected points from previous year overflights by helicopter and crew selected points as identified along the river. They also used previously recorded site information and updated files for those locations. A 1918 hand drawn map of the Mosquito Fork drainage by Christian L. Larson (Figure 3) assisted our efforts in surveying for historic features. Bean Creek Prospect Site (EAG-00888): The site consists of two areas where bulldozer-wide trenches have been cut into a terrace overlooking Bean Creek, a small side tributary of the Mosquito Fork of the Fortymile River. A large, Log Cabin Syrup tin (Figure 4) was collected from this area This syrup tin has the potential to refine the chronology of Log Cabin Syrup tins because it uses a different spout than previously reported. Additionally, the Bean Creek Prospect Site has evidence for two periods of prospecting: early-20th century hand prospecting; followed by additional mechanized prospecting using a bulldozer to cut the test trench, probably dating to post-World War II. This creek is not named on current USGS maps but the creek name is based on Buzzell’s Figure 2 map in the 2014 OHA Report Number 151. EAG-00883 is a site that overlooks the Mosquito Fork (Figure 11). This site of interest, in that it contains a cultural occupation that is clearly below the presumed White River ash. The artifact assemblage consists of eight microblades and a single piece of obsidian sourced to Mount Edziza (~975km away). Calcined bone was also recovered and in association with the artifacts. This site may assist in dating and understanding human use of the area prior to depositing of the ash. EAG-00878: occupies a river terrace that overlooks the Mosquito Fork. Two shovel tests at the site yielded microblades and several flakes all recovered from below a presumed representation of the White River ash (Figure 9). Calcined bone was also recovered and in association with the artifacts. Given the artifacts were recovered from below the tephra, this site has potential to shed light on human use prior to the depositional event EAG-00880: is a prehistoric site, situated a top a bedrock knoll on the north side of the Mosquito Fork. The knoll is not heavily vegetated and increases in slope gradually. A single shovel test at the site, yielded numerous lithic flakes. This site had one of the highest densities of artifacts found during the 2016 Mosquito Fork surveys. Artifacts consisted of both high quality dark grey chert and obsidian – sourced to Wiki Peak. The cultural zone occurs just below the root mat, within the A/B-Horizon (Figure 10). Gold Creek Wolf Trap Site (EAG-00886): This site is defined by the wolf trap (Figure 6) found hanging in a spruce tree on a raised “knob” along Gold Creek. The trap is stamped “PROPERY OF THE UNITED STATES” on the underside of the frame, and one jaw is stamped “US”. The pan is stamped with \S. NEWHOUSE\ No 114\ PAT. SEPT. 26, ’11\ ONEIDA COMMUNITY N.Y.\ It was collected and has been assigned UAMN accession number, UA2016-065 at the University of Alaska Museum of the North, Faribanks, The trap was found along a trail marked on a 1957 USGS map. According to local trapping experts, this style of traps was phased out in Alaska in the 1980s or early 1990s. Gold Creek Cabin 2016-1 (EAG-00885): The site consists of two features. Feature 1 is a collapsed cabin ruin measuring 14’X 16’ (Figure 6). Feature 2, approximately 4 meters to the SE of the cabin ruin, is a small rectangular depression. This feature is interpreted as the outhouse location. Based on the apparent age (the use of axe cut logs throughout and the deteriorated condition of the logs), this ruin is likely one of the cabins depicted in the 1918 sketch map by Christian L. Larson (Figure 3). Moose Creek Cabin (EAG-00887): The site consists of two features. Feature 1 is a cabin ruin (Figure 7) which measures 12’ E-W x 14’ 8” N-S. Feature 2, approximately 5 meters to the SW of the cabin ruin, is a 1m square depression. This feature is interpreted as potentially the outhouse location. A metal detector was used to locate metal artifacts scattered outside of the ruin. Some of these included items that provide a date of occupation use for the site, placed in the early 20th century, pre-World War I. This ruin is likely the cabin depicted in the 1918 sketch map by Christian L. Larson. (Figure 3) EAG-00872 sits atop a river terrace overlooking the Mosquito Fork and provides excellent views to the west and south. The site is composed of a large, well mossed, oval depression measuring 640 x 320cm and 80 cm in depth (Fig. 5). Testing of the feature did not yield any artifacts. A single shovel test placed about 17 meters from the depression yielded a single chert flake. Current interpretation of the site is that the feature represents a house-like feature. Mosquito Fork Cabin (EAG-00890): The site consists of one feature, a collapsing log cabin (Figure 8). The cabin measures 13’ 3” x 8’ 6”. The ruin indicates a 1970s reuse of an earlier constructed cabin. The style of construction using wooden pegs in the doorframe, wall pegs in the wall and a closed-in window on the southwest wall near the doorway indicate that it was originally constructed decades earlier. An artifact particular to that earlier period is a square 5 gallon kerosene can that has been split along one side and the edges rolled back to form a “basin” or “dog feeder.” The site may have originally been a prospector’s or trapper’s cabin. Its later reuse may also be trapping related, or else may be associated with the back-to-the-land movement in the 1970s, as witnessed throughout the Fortymile drainage and elsewhere in Alaska. Figure 3. 1918 map by Christian Larson. Figure 1. Figure 2. Figure 4. Log Cabin Syrup tin Figure 5. Oval depression, EAG-00872 Figure 5. Wolf trap, EAG- 00886 Figure 6. Feature 1 from EAG-00885 Figure 7. Cabin ruin, EAG-00887 Figure 8. Cabin ruin, EAG-00890 Figure 9. Stratigraphy at EAG-00878 Figure 10. Stratigraphy at EAG-00878 Figure 11. Overview at EAG-00883 EAG-00886 EAG-00885 EAG-00887 EAG-00888 EAG-00871, 872, 873, 874 EAG-00889 EAG-00890 EAG-00875 EAG-00876 EAG-00877 EAG-00878 EAG-00879 EAG-00880 EAG-00884 EAG-00881 EAG-00882 EAG-00883 References cited Buzzell, Rolf G. 2014 History of Mining in the Mosquito Fork Basin and its tributaries (except Chicken Creek), as reported in Mining Records, Mining Reports and Newspapers, 1898-2014. OHA Report Number 151 Larson, Christian L. 1918 Map of the Mosquito Fork of the Fortymile Drainage: downloaded from https://text-message.blogs.archives.gov/2016/03/01/. Preece, S.J., R.G. McGimsey, J.A. Westgate, N.J.G. Pearce, W.K. Hart, and W.T. Perkins 2014 Chemical complexity and source of the White River Ash, Alaska and Yukon. Geosphere vol. 10; no. 5; p. 1020-1042. Workman, W.B. 1979 The significance of volcanism in the prehistory of subarctic North America, in Sheets and Grayson, eds., Volcanic Activity and Human Ecology: New York, Academic Press, p. 339-371.
Transcript
Page 1: Archaeological survey along the Mosquito Fork of the Fortymile … · 2020. 6. 18. · Archaeological survey along the Mosquito Fork of the Fortymile River, Eastern Interior Alaska

Archaeological survey along the Mosquito Fork of the Fortymile

River, Eastern Interior Alaska

Sam Coffman¹ and Steve Lanford²¹University of Alaska Museum of the North and ²Bureau of Land Management

Results of the survey

During this survey, 20 new archaeological sites (14 prehistoric; 6 historic) were identified and documented. The historic sites have assisted in better addressing Euro-American use of the area. Cabin ruins documented along the Gold Creek and Moose Creek have demonstrated how important historical maps (Figure 1) or other historical accounts and documents can be when surveying for archaeological resources.

The prehistoric sites documented during this survey ranged from; ephemerallithic scatters with little deposition, to a large house-like feature, as well as two sites containing microblade technology, that were stratigraphically below the presumed White River Ash (cf. Preece et al. 2014; Workman 1979). The few obsidian artifacts recovered have also shed light on how material traveled from source(s) to site – all in small, tertiary form. Additionally there is a trend or focus on southern obsidian sources (e.g. Edziza, Wiki Peak).

Acknowledgements: Thanks to Robin Mills (BLM) for Project Coordination and Funding; Sara Polachek (BLM, SCA Archaeology)

About the survey

An archaeological survey of the Mosquito Fork of the Fortymile River was conducted by a three person crew using a rowing frame inflatable raft (Figure 1) to travel down the river. The crew and equipment was set down on the river by use of a helicopter (Figure 2). The crew floated to areas to be surveyed and then surveyed on foot with shovel tests at selected points. The survey plans were guided by use of a newly identified map of the area, previously selected points from previous year overflights by helicopter and crew selected points as identified along the river. They also used previously recorded site information and updated files for those locations. A 1918 hand drawn map of the Mosquito Fork drainage by Christian L. Larson (Figure 3) assisted ourefforts in surveying for historic features.

Bean Creek Prospect Site (EAG-00888): The site consists of two areas wherebulldozer-wide trenches have been cut into a terrace overlooking BeanCreek, a small side tributary of the Mosquito Fork of the Fortymile River. Alarge, Log Cabin Syrup tin (Figure 4) was collected from this area This syruptin has the potential to refine the chronology of Log Cabin Syrup tins becauseit uses a different spout than previously reported. Additionally, the BeanCreek Prospect Site has evidence for two periods of prospecting: early-20thcentury hand prospecting; followed by additional mechanized prospectingusing a bulldozer to cut the test trench, probably dating to post-World War II.This creek is not named on current USGS maps but the creek name is basedon Buzzell’s Figure 2 map in the 2014 OHA Report Number 151.

EAG-00883 is a site that overlooks the Mosquito Fork(Figure 11). This site of interest, in that it contains acultural occupation that is clearly below the presumedWhite River ash. The artifact assemblage consists ofeight microblades and a single piece of obsidian –sourced to Mount Edziza (~975km away). Calcined bonewas also recovered and in association with the artifacts.This site may assist in dating and understanding humanuse of the area prior to depositing of the ash.

EAG-00878: occupies a river terrace thatoverlooks the Mosquito Fork. Two shoveltests at the site yielded microblades andseveral flakes all recovered from below apresumed representation of the WhiteRiver ash (Figure 9). Calcined bone was alsorecovered and in association with theartifacts. Given the artifacts wererecovered from below the tephra, this sitehas potential to shed light on human useprior to the depositional event

EAG-00880: is a prehistoric site,situated a top a bedrock knoll on thenorth side of the Mosquito Fork. Theknoll is not heavily vegetated andincreases in slope gradually. A singleshovel test at the site, yieldednumerous lithic flakes. This site hadone of the highest densities ofartifacts found during the 2016Mosquito Fork surveys. Artifactsconsisted of both high quality darkgrey chert and obsidian – sourced toWiki Peak. The cultural zone occursjust below the root mat, within theA/B-Horizon (Figure 10).

Gold Creek Wolf Trap Site (EAG-00886): Thissite is defined by the wolf trap (Figure 6)found hanging in a spruce tree on a raised“knob” along Gold Creek. The trap isstamped “PROPERY OF THE UNITED STATES”on the underside of the frame, and one jawis stamped “US”. The pan is stamped with

\S. NEWHOUSE\ No 114\ PAT. SEPT. 26, ’11\ONEIDA COMMUNITY N.Y.\

It was collected and has been assignedUAMN accession number, UA2016-065 atthe University of Alaska Museum of theNorth, Faribanks, The trap was found along atrail marked on a 1957 USGS map. Accordingto local trapping experts, this style of trapswas phased out in Alaska in the 1980s orearly 1990s.

Gold Creek Cabin 2016-1 (EAG-00885): The site consists of two features.Feature 1 is a collapsed cabin ruin measuring 14’X 16’ (Figure 6). Feature 2,approximately 4 meters to the SE of the cabin ruin, is a small rectangulardepression. This feature is interpreted as the outhouse location. Based onthe apparent age (the use of axe cut logs throughout and the deterioratedcondition of the logs), this ruin is likely one of the cabins depicted in the1918 sketch map by Christian L. Larson (Figure 3).

Moose Creek Cabin (EAG-00887): The site consists of twofeatures. Feature 1 is a cabin ruin (Figure 7) which measures 12’E-W x 14’ 8” N-S. Feature 2, approximately 5 meters to the SWof the cabin ruin, is a 1m square depression. This feature isinterpreted as potentially the outhouse location. A metaldetector was used to locate metal artifacts scattered outside ofthe ruin. Some of these included items that provide a date ofoccupation use for the site, placed in the early 20th century,pre-World War I. This ruin is likely the cabin depicted in the1918 sketch map by Christian L. Larson. (Figure 3)

EAG-00872 sits atop a river terrace overlooking the Mosquito Fork and providesexcellent views to the west and south. The site is composed of a large, wellmossed, oval depression measuring 640 x 320cm and 80 cm in depth (Fig. 5).Testing of the feature did not yield any artifacts. A single shovel test placedabout 17 meters from the depression yieldeda single chert flake. Current interpretation of the site is that the feature represents a house-like feature.

Mosquito Fork Cabin (EAG-00890): The site consists of one feature, acollapsing log cabin (Figure 8). The cabin measures 13’ 3” x 8’ 6”. Theruin indicates a 1970s reuse of an earlier constructed cabin. The styleof construction using wooden pegs in the doorframe, wall pegs in thewall and a closed-in window on the southwest wall near the doorwayindicate that it was originally constructed decades earlier. An artifactparticular to that earlier period is a square 5 gallon kerosene can thathas been split along one side and the edges rolled back to form a“basin” or “dog feeder.” The site may have originally been aprospector’s or trapper’s cabin. Its later reuse may also be trappingrelated, or else may be associated with the back-to-the-landmovement in the 1970s, as witnessed throughout the Fortymiledrainage and elsewhere in Alaska.

Figure 3. 1918 map by Christian Larson.

Figure 1. Figure 2.

Figure 4. Log Cabin Syrup tin

Figure 5. Oval depression, EAG-00872

Figure 5. Wolf trap, EAG-00886

Figure 6. Feature 1 from EAG-00885

Figure 7. Cabin ruin, EAG-00887

Figure 8. Cabin ruin, EAG-00890

Figure 9. Stratigraphy at EAG-00878

Figure 10. Stratigraphy at EAG-00878

Figure 11. Overview at EAG-00883

EAG-00886

EAG-00885

EAG-00887

EAG-00888

EAG-00871, 872, 873, 874

EAG-00889

EAG-00890EAG-00875

EAG-00876

EAG-00877

EAG-00878

EAG-00879

EAG-00880

EAG-00884

EAG-00881

EAG-00882

EAG-00883

References cited

Buzzell, Rolf G.2014 History of Mining in the Mosquito Fork Basin and its tributaries (except Chicken Creek), as reported in Mining Records, Mining Reports and Newspapers, 1898-2014. OHA Report Number 151

Larson, Christian L. 1918 Map of the Mosquito Fork of the Fortymile Drainage: downloaded from https://text-message.blogs.archives.gov/2016/03/01/.

Preece, S.J., R.G. McGimsey, J.A. Westgate, N.J.G. Pearce, W.K. Hart, and W.T. Perkins2014 Chemical complexity and source of the White River Ash, Alaska and Yukon. Geosphere vol. 10; no. 5; p. 1020-1042.

Workman, W.B.1979 The significance of volcanism in the prehistory of subarctic North America, in Sheets and Grayson, eds., Volcanic Activity and Human Ecology: New York, Academic Press, p. 339-371.

Recommended