ARCHAEOLOGICAL DATA RECOVERY AT THE NAPA CREEK SITE (CA-NAP-916), STATE ROUTE 29, NAPA, CALIFORNIA...

ARCHAEOLOGICAL DATA RECOVERY AT THE

NAPA CREEK SITE (CA-NAP-916),

STATE ROUTE 29, NAPA, CALIFORNIA

12

121

29 128

12

221

San Pablo Bay

Napa R

iver

Sonoma

Napa

116

Prepared for the California Department of Transportation

Cover: Vicinity of CA-NAP-916; an obsidian projectile point (cat. no. 26-18) recovered during the archaeological excavations at the site.

ARCHAEOLOGICAL DATA RECOVERY AT THE

NAPA CREEK SITE (CA-NAP-916),STATE ROUTE 29, NAPA, CALIFORNIA

04-NAP-29, PM 11.75 (KP 18.9)EA 04-120613

Contract No. 04A208, Task Order No. 7

Prepared by

Thomas Martin, M.A., RPAJack Meyer, M.A., RPA

with a contribution byDavid Bieling, M.A.

Anthropological Studies CenterSonoma State UniversityRohnert Park, California

Prepared for

Todd JaffkeOffice of Cultural Resource Studies

California Department of Transportation, District 4Oakland, California

September 2005

CONFIDENTIAL This report contains confidential cultural resources location information; report distribution should be restricted to those with a need to know. Cultural resources are nonrenewable, and their scientific, cultural, and aesthetic values can be significantly impaired by disturbance. To deter vandalism, artifact hunting, and other activities that can damage cultural resources, the locations of cultural resources should be kept confidential. The legal authority to restrict cultural resources information is in California Government Code 6254.1 and the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Section 30.

ii

SUMMARY OF FINDINGS

This report presents the methods and findings of archaeological data-recovery investigations at buried prehistoric site CA-NAP-916, and relates the findings to research issues of importance to the prehistory of the lower Napa Valley. The Anthropological Studies Center (ASC) conducted these investigations at the request of the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) as part of the Trancas Street Interchange and Drainage Pipe Project (Nap-29 KP 18.7/21.7, EA120611), which required that a drainpipe be placed through a portion of the site. The site had been previously determined eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) under Criterion D (Jaffke and Meyer 1998). With the Federal Highway Administration as the lead agency, the project was conducted under Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act, which requires consideration of the effects of an undertaking on properties eligible to the NRHP.

Two temporal components were identified at the Napa Creek site based on stratigraphic and chronological evidence: (1) a Lower Component associated with a well-developed Middle Holocene-age soil (Stratum I) buried at depths of 140 to 240 cm, and (2) a Upper Component associated with a moderately developed Late Holocene-age soil buried at depths of 80 to 140 cm. The Lower Component yielded Middle Archaic radiocarbon dates, but hydration evidence suggests a Late Archaic-age for the Napa Valley obsidian (mean of 3.6 microns). Two lanceolate projectile points are generally consistent with the Middle Archaic-period assignment for the Lower Component. The Upper Component, which contained fewer temporally diagnostic artifacts, is dominated by Late Archaic obsidian (mean of 3.1 microns Napa Valley obsidian). Given the disparities between the chronometric datasets, this study compares the chronostratigraphy of other sites buried in the southern North Coast Ranges, and examines the issue deep and/or prolonged burial as a factor in affecting obsidian-hydration as an important regional research issue; the first of its kind for the region.

Overall, the assemblage of archaeological materials from NAP-916 is dominated by flaked-stone items of Napa Valley obsidian that were often obtained as waterworn cobbles, and then reduced for the manufacture of biface tools and cores, and the production of simple flake tools. The relatively low frequency and diversity of archaeological materials from NAP-916 attests to the limited duration and intensity of settlement at the site, which appears to reflect repeated, perhaps seasonal, use of the location as a temporary base camp or processing station over time. As such, the NAP-916 deposits may represent a �background scatter� associated with a larger village or camp, possibly also buried, located elsewhere along Napa Creek. Analysis of charred plant remains from two cultural features at the site indicates that the inhabitants may have seasonally targeted and processed acorns at the site more than 5,500 years ago, which is thousands of years earlier than previously documented in the Napa Valley. In sum, the archaeological remains from NAP-916 are neither rare nor particularly unusual, but they serve as a reminder that a great portion of the early archaeological record lies beneath the floor of the lower Napa Valley.

Archaeological Data Recovery 04-NAP-29 at the Napa Creek Site (CA-NAP-916) iii PM 11.75

CONTENTS

Summary of Findings ............................................................................................................... iii

Introduction .................................................................................................................................. 1Project Description and Background .................................................................................. 1

Natural and Cultural Contexts .................................................................................................. 5Site Location and Setting ...................................................................................................... 5Climate and Vegetation ......................................................................................................... 6Regional Landscape Evolution ............................................................................................ 7Buried sites in the Coast Ranges .......................................................................................... 8Local Geology and Soils ........................................................................................................ 9Ethnography ......................................................................................................................... 14Prehistoric Archaeology ...................................................................................................... 14

Previous Studies ............................................................................................................ 15Lower Napa Valley Sites .............................................................................................. 19

CA-NAP-14 (Las Trancas) ..................................................................................... 19CA-NAP-15/H (Suscol) .......................................................................................... 19CA-NAP-16 (Suscol mound) ................................................................................. 20CA-NAP-33/CA-NAP-34 ....................................................................................... 21CA-NAP-39 (Tulukai) ............................................................................................. 21CA-NAP-261 (River Glen) ..................................................................................... 21CA-NAP-411 ............................................................................................................ 22CA-NAP-516 ............................................................................................................ 23

Summary ......................................................................................................................... 23Research Issues for CA-NAP-916 ...................................................................................... 23

Geoarchaeological Research Issues ............................................................................ 24Human Occupation and Landscape Evolution .................................................. 24Local and Regional Stratigraphic Comparisons ................................................. 24EHT, Soil Temperatures, and Obsidian-hydration Age Corrections .............. 25

Settlement and Subsistence Issues .............................................................................. 25Lithic Procurement and Reduction Strategies .................................................... 25

Land Use, Settlement, and Mobility Patterns ........................................................... 26

Methods ....................................................................................................................................... 28Field Methods ....................................................................................................................... 28

Methods of Previous Fieldwork .................................................................................. 28Methods for Data-recovery Phase .............................................................................. 29Stratigraphic Identification and Description ............................................................ 34

Lab Methods ......................................................................................................................... 34Processing and Cataloging ........................................................................................... 34Analytic Studies ............................................................................................................. 35

Radiocarbon Dating ................................................................................................ 35Other Studies ........................................................................................................... 35

Curation .......................................................................................................................... 35

Data-Recovery Results and Findings ..................................................................................... 36Site Stratigraphy and Disturbances ................................................................................... 36

Stratum III � A and Cu Horizons ................................................................................ 36Stratum II � 2Ab, 2Bwb, and 2Cox Horizons ............................................................ 36

Archaeological Data Recovery 04-NAP-29 at the Napa Creek Site (CA-NAP-916) iv PM 11.75

Stratum I � 3Ab, 3ABtb, and 3Btb Horizons .............................................................. 38Site Disturbances ........................................................................................................... 38

Cultural Materials and Distributions ................................................................................ 39Flaked Stone ................................................................................................................... 40Heat-affected Rock (HAR) ........................................................................................... 42Shell ................................................................................................................................. 42Baked Clay ...................................................................................................................... 42 Features ........................................................................................................................... 44Flaked-stone Tools ......................................................................................................... 45

Cores ......................................................................................................................... 47Modified Flakes ....................................................................................................... 47Uniface ...................................................................................................................... 50Bifaces ....................................................................................................................... 50Projectile Points ....................................................................................................... 52

Battered Stones .............................................................................................................. 53Abrader .................................................................................................................... 53Hammerstones ........................................................................................................ 53Other Battered Stones ............................................................................................ 54

Manuport ........................................................................................................................ 56 Analytic Studies ................................................................................................................... 56

Archaeobotanical Analysis .......................................................................................... 56Radiocarbon-dating Results ......................................................................................... 56Obsidian Sourcing ......................................................................................................... 57Obsidian-hydration Analysis ...................................................................................... 57Flaked-stone Analysis ................................................................................................... 60

Analytic Samples .................................................................................................... 60Napa Valley Obsidian Subgroups ........................................................................ 62Flaked-stone Analysis Summary .......................................................................... 62

Site Summary and Discussion ................................................................................................ 67Site Chronology .................................................................................................................... 67

Depositional History, Site Formation, and Chronostratigraphy ............................ 67Cultural Stratigraphy .................................................................................................... 68

Lower Component .................................................................................................. 69Upper Component .................................................................................................. 69

Diagnostic Projectile Points ......................................................................................... 69Stone Bead ...................................................................................................................... 70 Other Chronologic Considerations ............................................................................. 70

Site Structure and Artifact Assemblage ............................................................................ 71Site Use and Function .......................................................................................................... 72

Regional Research Issues ......................................................................................................... 74Geoarchaeological Research Issues ................................................................................... 74

Human Occupation and Landscape Evolution ......................................................... 74Local and Regional Stratigraphic Comparisons ....................................................... 75EHT, Soil Temperatures, and Obsidian Hydration Age Corrections .................... 81

Settlement and Subsistence Issues .................................................................................... 88Lithic Procurement and Reduction Strategies .......................................................... 88Land Use, Settlement, and Mobility Patterns ........................................................... 90

References Cited ........................................................................................................................ 92

Archaeological Data Recovery 04-NAP-29 at the Napa Creek Site (CA-NAP-916) v PM 11.75

Appendixes A. Project Personnel B. Site Record Update, CA-NAP-916 C. Official Soil Descriptions (USDA 2004) D. CA-NAP-916 Flaked-stone Studies E. Artifact Catalog, Stone Tool Proveniences and Metrics, for CA-NAP-916 F. Radiocarbon-dating Methods and Results G. Charred Plant Remains from CA-NAP-916 H. X-ray Fluorescence Results I. Obsidian-hydration Results J. Regional Obsidian Hydration Data

Figures 1. Site Vicinity ............................................................................................................................. 22. Site Location ............................................................................................................................ 33. Site Map ................................................................................................................................... 44. Geoarchaeological Test Trench 4-7-5 ................................................................................... 55. Selected Napa Valley archaeological sites ........................................................................ 106. Late Quaternary geological deposits in the vicinity of CA-NAP-916 ......................... 127. Surface soils in the vicinity of CA-NAP-916 .................................................................... 138. Cultural chronology of Napa Valley and the southern North Coastal Ranges .......... 179. Excavation units at the Napa Creek site (CA-NAP-916) ............................................... 31

10. Areal exposure at beginning of fieldwork, looking southwest .................................... 3211. Areal exposure at end of fieldwork, looking south ........................................................ 3212. Areal exposure, looking north ........................................................................................... 3313. Northern half of areal exposure, looking northwest ...................................................... 3314. Stratigraphy of the Napa Creek Site (CA-NAP-916) ...................................................... 3715. Artifact frequencies by depth ............................................................................................ 4016. Flaked-stone frequencies by depth from Units 11 and 14 ............................................. 4117. Frequency of heat-affected rock by depth ....................................................................... 4318. Weight of heat-affected rock by depth ............................................................................. 4319. Feature 1 at CA-NAP-916 ................................................................................................... 4420. Feature 2 at CA-NAP-916 ................................................................................................... 4621. Horizontal and vertical distribution of stone tools ........................................................ 4722. Obsidian cores from CA-NAP-916 .................................................................................... 4823. Obsidian uniface and selected modified flakes from CA-NAP-916 ............................ 4922. Obsidian projectile points and bifaces .............................................................................. 5025. Obsidian and �obsalt� (TS-1) bifaces from CA-NAP-916 .............................................. 5126. Battered stones, from CA-NAP-916 .................................................................................. 5427. Hammerstones and battered stone, from CA-NAP-916 ................................................ 5528. CA-NAP-916 hydration results by stratum ..................................................................... 5929. Width of flakes by component at CA-NAP-916 .............................................................. 6430. Stone bead from 1998 Test Trench 4-2-5 ........................................................................... 7031. Radiocarbon dates from NAP-916 compared with others

from southern North Coast Range sites ........................................................................... 7732. Natural and cultural stratigraphy of selected

lower Napa Valley archaeological sites ............................................................................ 7833. Annual fluctuations in soil temperature with depth ..................................................... 83

Archaeological Data Recovery 04-NAP-29 at the Napa Creek Site (CA-NAP-916) vi PM 11.75

34. Adjusted hydration ages for obsidian fromCA-NAP-916 Upper and Lower components ................................................................. 87

35. Comparison of obsidian-hydration results fromselected sites in the southern North Coast Ranges ......................................................... 89

Tables 1. Hand-excavated Soil Volumes ........................................................................................... 302. Excavated Prehistoric Artifacts by Provenience ............................................................. 393. Flaked-stone Materials ........................................................................................................ 41 4. Radiocarbon-dating Results ............................................................................................... 575. Obsidian Sourcing Results .................................................................................................. 586. Obsidian-hydration Ranges and Means ........................................................................... 597. Analyzed Flaked-stone by Stratum and Unit .................................................................. 618. Debitage Sample by Material and Stratum ...................................................................... 629. Description of Napa Valley Glass Groups ....................................................................... 63

10. Napa Valley Subgroups by Sample Size and Component ............................................. 6511. Proportion of Cortex on Napa Valley Debitage

and Modified Flakes by Subgroup .................................................................................... 6512. Surface Soils and Geological Deposits at Selected Lower Napa Valley Sites ............. 7613. Difference between Calibrated Radiocarbon and

Converted Obsidian-hydration Ages from Selected Site Contexts .............................. 7914. Comparison of Effective Hydration Temperatures

in the Santa Rosa and Napa Areas .................................................................................... 8215. Unadjusted and Adjusted Micron Ages for Selected Values ........................................ 8516. Unadjusted and Adjusted Obsidian-hydration Ages

from NAP-916, Upper and Lower Components ............................................................. 86

Archaeological Data Recovery 04-NAP-29 at the Napa Creek Site (CA-NAP-916) vii PM 11.75

INTRODUCTION

PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND BACKGROUND

In 2001, the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) undertook traffic improvements at the intersection of State Route 29 and Trancas Street in Napa, California. The Trancas Street Interchange and Drainage Pipe Project (Nap-29 KP 18.7/21.7, EA120611) included the installation of a roughly 1.75-mile-long drainpipe that heads south from the intersection and terminates at Napa Creek. The pipe measures 1.05 m in diameter and parallels the east side of the highway in a buried trench measuring 1.65 m wide and from 2 to 5 m deep, effectively redirecting water runoff from the intersection to the creek.

With FHWA as the lead agency, the project was conducted under Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act, which requires consideration of the effects of an undertaking on properties eligible to the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP). FHWA and Caltrans delineated an Area of Potential Effects (APE) for the project that included all properties that might be affected by this undertaking, such as any lying within Caltrans right-of-way, through which the pipe was placed. Geoarchaeological survey work conducted for the project in 1997 and 1998 resulted in the discovery of three primary-landform deposits and one archaeological site within the APE: CA-NAP-916, the Napa Creek site. The site was found during a geoarchaeological-trenching phase of the survey near the south end of the project area (Figures 1 and 2). It appeared as a light to moderately dense deposit of prehistoric lithic debris composed mostly of obsidian waste flakes and heat-affected rock within a buried stratum of soil. Subsequent examination and testing of the site resulted in a determination of its eligibility to the NRHP under Criterion D, a Finding of Effect, and a Data Recovery Plan designed to mitigate pipeline impacts and ensure a No Adverse Effect for the proposed construction project upon this eligible property (Jaffke and Meyer 1998).

Caltrans contracted with the ASC to conduct data-recovery fieldwork at NAP-916 during the autumn of 2000. Data recovery consisted of an archaeological excavation that relied upon manual and mechanical means, conducted in accordance with the Secretary of the Interior�s Standards and Guidelines (NPS 1983); see Appendix A for a list of ASC personnel roles and qualifications. The excavation was intended to be of sufficient size and scope to produce a body of information capable of addressing pertinent regional research issues to which the site was considered capable of contributing. This report presents the natural and cultural context; field, laboratory, and analytical methods; and description, analysis, and interpretation of the results of the data-recovery phase investigations at CA-NAP-916. Discussion relates findings from the investigations to a select set of research issues important to the prehistory of the lower Napa Valley. A site record update for the NAP-916 is provided in Appendix B.

Archaeological Data Recovery 04-NAP-29 at the Napa Creek Site (CA-NAP-916) 1 PM 11.75

Oregon Archaeological Data Recovery at the Napa Creek Site (CA-NAP-916)

Figure 1 Site Vicinity

04-NAP-29 PM 11.75 (KP 18.9)

EA 04-120613Contract No. 04A208, Task Order No. 7

N 0 2.5 5 10 15 20 miles

0 2.5 5 10 15 20 25 30 kilometers

SacramentoSacramento

StocktonStockton San FrranciscoSan F ancisco

Pacific

Ocean

Nevada

*scale for project area

Los AngelesLos Angeles

Arizona

Mexico

Lake Co. Yolo Co.

Napa County

29

128

Calistoga 29 128

St. Helena 128

Sonoma Co.

Yountville 29

121

Napa Solano Co. 121

12

CA-NAP-916 221

12

29

2

Figure 2 Site Location

SCALE 1:24000

0 1/2 1 km

0

04-NAP-29 PM 11.75

N

base map: USGS 7.5' Quad, Napa, Calif., 1951 (photorevised 1968 and 1973)

CA-NAP-916

1/2 mile

Archaeological Data Recovery at the Napa Creek Site (CA-NAP-916)

(KP 18.9)

EA 04-120613 Contract No. 04A208, Task Order No. 7

Trancas interchange

3

4-2-5 4-7-5

4-7-4

4-7-3

Datum

Reference point 2***

Reference point 1**

CA-NAP-916* site boundary

*extent of site undetermined

**13.6 m @ 248° from Reference point 1 to Stake 1

***13 m @ 240° from Reference point 2 to Stake 2

Figure 3 Site Map

04-NAP-29 PM 11.75

0 20 40 m

0N

1

2

scale is approximate

Archaeological Data Recovery at the Napa Creek Site (CA-NAP-916)

(KP 18.9)

EA No. 04-120613 Contract No. 04A208, Task Order No. 7

100 feet

4

NATURAL AND CULTURAL CONTEXTS

Portions of the following descriptions of the natural setting and ethnographic and archaeological contexts of the Napa Creek site were adapted and/or modified from the site�s NRHP evaluation report (Jaffke and Meyer 1998).

SITE LOCATION AND SETTING

The Napa Creek site is located in northern California about 50 miles southwest of Sacramento and 40 miles northeast of San Francisco. The site is on the floor of the lower Napa Valley, within the city and county of Napa, where it occupies a small area on the east side of State Route 29, about 1-1/2 miles west of the Napa River and about 100 m2

north of Napa Creek (Figures 2 and 3). There, it lies beneath a nondescript stretch of roadway between the First Street overpass and the Lincoln Avenue exit, at roughly the location of PM 11.75. At that location it occupies approximately 450 m2 of the narrow Caltrans right-of-way between the paved highway shoulder and a chain-link fence. At the time of data-recovery fieldwork, a small above-ground concrete pad was on the west side of the deposit, 3.3 m from the highway shoulder; the center of this pad, which had supported a metal light standard in 1998, became the site�s excavation datum (Figure 4); the datum was 135 m due northeast of a concrete bridge abutment at Napa Creek. A discontinuous row of planted trees and other vegetation currently lines the fence.

The highway and a residential neighborhood on the east side of the fence had left only a narrow strip of land available for study, preventing a full horizontal delineation of the site. The site is covered with recent alluvium and a dense mat of low-growing, non-native vegetation, and its deposits are not visible on the ground surface. Surface and

Figure 4. Geoarchaeological Test Trench 4-7-5 (1998). Base of light pole in mid-photo is site datum for data-recovery phase.


near-surface soils in the site area have been impacted over the years by post-World War II construction of a residential housing development and the highway, which itself replaced a prominent historic road. Napa Creek, however, appears to maintain a vibrant riparian zone, and an open, undeveloped streamside terrace lies to the southeast of the known limits of NAP-916, opposite the chain-link fence. It is not known whether the site extends into that area.

Napa Valley is a large topographic and structural depression that trends southeast within the southern North Coast Ranges. Its main waterway, the Napa River, feeds San Pablo Bay to the south. The valley is bounded by prominent mountains that include Mount George (1,876 ft. above mean seal level [amsl]) in the Howell Mountains on the east, and Hogback Mountain (1,968 ft. amsl) in the Mayacmas Mountains on the west. The central part of the valley consists of a nearly level floodplain and a series of coalescing alluvial fans. At an elevation of 55 ft. amsl, NAP-916 occupies a broad alluvial fan that gently slopes southward to Napa Creek and eastward to the Napa River. The Napa River valley is described as follows:

The Napa River heads on the south flank of Mount St. Helena and is intermittent throughout most of its course. In the lower few miles, however, it is perennial, probably owing to discharge of ground water, and it is tidal downstream from a point about half a mile above Napa. The central alluvial plain of Napa Valley is about 32 miles along and ranges in width from less than 1 mile at the north end to nearly 4 miles just north of Napa. About 1 mile south of Napa the plain narrows to about 2,000 feet between the encroaching valley sides at the head of the tidal marsh. Thus, the greater part of Napa Valley is separated from the marshlands, and brackish water from the bay has access to the valley only along the tidal part of Napa River [Kunkel and Upson 1960:4]

CLIMATE AND VEGETATION

The climate of Napa Valley is characterized by warm, dry summers and cool, moist winters. Summer temperatures are moderated by cool, moist air that enters the valley from the Pacific Ocean, and by the coastal mountain ranges that insulate the valley from the hotter Central Valley air masses. Most rainfall occurs between November and April, with the average annual precipitation ranging from 20 to 25 inches at Napa. Recorded temperatures at Napa have ranged from 109 degrees F. in the summer to 17 degrees F. in the winter, with an average annual temperature of about 58 degrees F. (Lambert and Kashiwagi 1978:93�98).

Annual grasses and forbs have replaced most of the native perennial species that once dominated the vegetation of the southern Napa Valley. The valley also contains scattered areas of valley oak, black oak, and live oak. The moister hills and mountains west of the project area support a greater variety of tree species that include coast redwood, Douglas fir, black oak, live oak, madrone, buckeye, and big leaf maple. The drier slopes east of the project area support scrub oak, buckbrush, mountain mahogany, manzanita, and gray pine (Lambert and Kashiwagi 1978:94).


REGIONAL LANDSCAPE EVOLUTION

Because the Napa Creek site was found in a buried context�an uncommon occurrence for the Napa Valley�the following contextual discussion of geological and geomorphologic settings is presented with respect to regional landscape evolution and buried sites in the Coast Ranges. This information serves as a backdrop for further consideration and discussion of NAP-916�s formation processes and history.

The landscape of the San Francisco Bay area has changed dramatically since humans first entered and occupied the region more than 13,000 years ago. These changes include rising sea levels, higher hydrologic baselines, and increased sedimentation rates in streams and rivers that drained into the Bay and Sacramento�San Joaquin Delta (Helley et al. 1979). These processes led to the formation of an �alluvial apron around the bay plain and the extensive valleys of the region� that is graded to the present sea level (Helley et al. 1979:18). As a result, many Late Pleistocene and Early Holocene land surfaces were overlain by thick deposits of younger alluvium that are generally less than 5,000 years old. These older land surfaces usually exhibit well-developed buried soil profiles (paleosols) that represent a significant stratigraphic boundary in the region. A paleosol is an �old soil� that formed as a result of weathering at or near the ground surface during an interval of relative landform stability, making it available for human use and occupation in the past.

Geological studies in central California demonstrate that many valleys in the region were partially filled with alluvium by two or more cycles of deposition that were separated by periods of land stability and soil formation (Lettis 1982; Marchand and Allwardt 1981; Pape 1978; Rogers 1988). In Contra Costa County, successive episodes of sediment deposition and land stability in the Walnut Creek drainage were found to be Holocene in age and considered �regional in scope� (Banks et al. 1984:8.28). In the alluvial valleys of eastern Contra Costa County, a geoarchaeological study found that long periods of floodplain stability were interrupted by short depositional episodes in the Early, Middle, and Late Holocene that buried the Early and Middle Holocene land surfaces and any associated prehistoric sites (Meyer 1996a). Subsequent investigations along Kellogg Creek in the Los Vaqueros Reservoir area led to the discovery of buried archaeological deposits dating to the Early, Middle, and Late Holocene that were associated with buried soils (Meyer and Rosenthal 1997, 1998). Taken together these studies illustrate that,

While there is slight variation in the exact timing of these episodes, the sequence of alluvial deposition is roughly synchronous among separate valleys. The apparent correspondence between the timing of the stratigraphic record and the climatic record indicates that large-scale environmental changes may have been responsible for alternations between stable and unstable landscape processes. These findings suggest that the cyclic deposition of alluvium in these valleys is the geomorphic expression of large-scale environmental changes that occurred throughout the region during the past 15,000 years [Meyer and Rosenthal 1997:V-13].

As the landscape changed, significant portions of the archaeological record were either removed by erosion or buried by sediment deposition, leaving the record fundamentally incomplete and biased toward younger temporal periods. Viewed from this perspective, early archaeological sites are generally under-represented because they were destroyed or buried, while younger sites are comparatively over-represented at or near the present ground surface. For this reason, prehistoric human settlement and


demographic patterns in the Napa Valley must be carefully evaluated against the backdrop of regional landscape evolution if these problems are to be understood and overcome.

BURIED SITES IN THE COAST RANGES

The problem of buried archaeological sites has directly or indirectly been confronted by studies within the interior valleys of the Coast Ranges. Many of these studies were initiated when buried archaeological materials were uncovered by construction activities (e.g., Fredrickson 1966; Heizer 1950; Wiberg 1988, 1996). In an archaeological overview of the region, Fredrickson noted that �a significant number of archaeological sites recorded within the . . . area apparently did not contain identifiable surface markings but were found buried beneath non-archaeological alluvial soils� (1980:5). Following Fredrickson, Banks et al. (1984) evaluated the age, depth, and distribution of 20 archaeological sites located primarily in the Walnut Creek floodplain. In their study, more than one-half (13) of these sites were buried or contained a buried cultural component, and 4 of the sites (CCO-30, -137, -308, -431) were associated with �buried land surfaces� (paleosols) that were capped by culturally sterile alluvium.

More recent studies further emphasize the strong correlation between buried soils and buried archaeological deposits throughout central California (Meyer 2000; Meyer and Dalldorf 2004; Rosenthal and Meyer 2004a, 2004b). These studies demonstrate that the present distribution, preservation, and visibility of the archaeological record have been strongly influenced by large-scale landscape changes in the valleys of the Coast Ranges and surrounding region.

Numerous buried sites and cultural components have been identified in the alluvium-filled valleys of the Coast Ranges. In the San Ramon Valley, buried components have been identified at both CA-CCO-30 and CA-CCO-308 in association with middle to late Holocene buried soils (Fredrickson 1966; 1968). A similar sequence of buried soils was found at the CA-CCO-431 (Murwood site), a buried site along Walnut Creek (Banks et al. 1984). One of the best known buried archaeological sites in the Walnut Creek�San Ramon drainage is the Monument or �Concord Man� site (CA-CCO-137), where several deeply buried human graves were originally thought to have great antiquity (Heizer 1950). While the artifacts and interments are associated with a buried soil, however, they are judged to be no more than about 2,500 years old (cf., Bennyhoff 1994; Jones 1992). Additional buried archaeological sites and/or components have since been identified with buried soils at many locations in the northern Diablo Ranges (Bard et al. 1992; Gmoser 1998; Gmoser et al. 1999; Meyer 2005; Meyer and Rosenthal 1997, 1998; Wiberg 1988, 1996).

Buried sites have also been found throughout the southern North Coast Ranges, including locations in Lake, Marin, Napa, and Sonoma counties. At site CA-LAK-261 in Lake County, a 4,000-year old cultural component was found at a depth of about 2.3 m in a buried soil (Fredrickson 1961). Near Clear Lake, components dating from the Early to Late Holocene were documented along Kelsey Creek at site CA-LAK-380 (Mostin), where they were associated with a soil buried by 4 to 6 m of alluvium (White and King 1993). Also near Clear Lake, buried Early to Middle Holocene-age archaeological deposits were associated with buried soils in the Anderson Flat floodplain (White 2000). Geoarchaeological investigations at this location determined that a strong relationship exists between climatic changes, geological processes, and the nature and completeness of the archaeological record (Waters 2000).


Buried archaeological remains have been identified in the lower of two soils beneath about 1.0 m of alluvial deposits along the banks of Chileno Creek in Marin County (Wilen 1999, 2001). Also in Marin, buried archaeological deposits were found in association with an upper buried soil, and possibly a lower buried soil, at Olompali State Historic Park (Meyer 1996b). In Sonoma County to the north, buried archaeological deposits have been documented at a depth of 2.5 m at site CA-SON-1384 (White 1982), and at 1.5 to 3.1 m depths at site CA-SON-2098 (Origer 1993); both are located in Santa Rosa. The stratigraphic sequence at SON-2098 included two buried soils, with the lower dating to the Early Holocene and the upper dating to the Middle Holocene (Meyer 1993:119). The upper soil contained a Middle to Late Holocene-age archaeological deposit that was overlain by floodplain alluvium and channel deposits during the latest Holocene (1,000 years or less).

Buried sites identified in the Napa Valley include CA-NAP-15/H, located east of the Napa River along Suscol Creek, and CA-NAP-129 and CA-NAP-399/863, both located west of the Napa River in St. Helena (see Figure 5). At NAP-129, basalt flakes and core tools are reported to originate from a soil buried beneath a Late-period midden deposit (Fredrickson 1984:513; Meighan 1953:315). To the south at NAP-399/863, recent investigations found buried artifacts concentrated at about 3 to 4 m and 5 to 6 m below the ground surface (Bartoy 2005), which may or may not be associated with buried soils. Preliminary hydration and radiocarbon evidence suggests that the upper deposit is Late Archaic in age, while the lower is Middle Archaic in age, though the analysis of this site is not yet complete. At NAP-15/H, artifacts and cultural features were found to occur in soils buried at depths of 1.5 to 3.0 m below surface of the floodplain north of Suscol Creek. Radiocarbon and obsidian-hydration evidence suggests that the buried deposits are about 2,000 to 4,000 years old (Late Holocene-age), while the overlying natural and cultural deposits are less than 1,500 years old (Stradford and Schwaderer 1982). The significance of buried sites in the Napa Valley is discussed below in the Human Occupation and Landscape Evolution section of this report.

LOCAL GEOLOGY AND SOILS

Geologic mapping indicates that the hillslopes in the upper Napa Creek drainage are underlain by volcanic and sedimentary (marine) bedrock that ranges from upper Jurassic to Pliocene in age (Wagner and Bortugno 1982). The bedrock includes mudstone, siltstone, and sandstone of the Great Valley Sequence (upper Jurassic to lower Cretaceous), sandstone of the Domengine Formation (Eocene), and basalt, andesite, rhyolite, and tuff of the Sonoma Volcanics (Pliocene).

Although obsidian does not occur in the bedrock formations of the Napa Creek drainage, a large formation of obsidian is located in the Glass Mountain area, which lies east of the Napa River about 18 miles northwest of NAP-916 near St. Helena. This obsidian is estimated to be about 2.78 million years old, or Pliocene-age, based on recent isotopic and tephrochronology studies (Sarna-Wojcicki et al. 2005). The presence of waterworn obsidian gravel and cobbles in the stream and river channels of the Napa Valley suggests that Glass Mountain obsidian was transported southward by the Napa River, and stored in local alluvial deposits. The significance of local obsidian is explored further in the Land Use, Settlement, and Mobility Patterns section later in this report.

Small isolated areas of �Early to Middle Pleistocene alluvium� or �Pleistocene alluvial fan deposits� are located near the valley margins in upper Napa Creek, but also occur as


12

121

29 128

121

12

128 29

221

N

San Pablo Bay

Lake

Hennessey

Napa R

iver

Napa R

iver

Lake

Berryessa

0

0 4 NAP-131

NAP-1

NAP-32

NAP-399/863

NAP-129

NAP-916 NAP-261

NAP-14

NAP-39

NAP-15/H

NAP-16

NAP-33

NAP-34

Sonoma

Napa

St. Helena

116

4 miles

8 km

NAP-411

Yountville

Figure 5. Selected Napa Valley archaeological sites

10

larger discontinuous areas on the valley floor (see Figure 6, Sowers, Noller, and Lettis 1998). North and south of lower Napa Creek are larger, relatively continuous areas of �Late Pleistocene to Holocene alluvial fan deposits� (see Qf on Figure 6). These fan deposits are divided along lower Napa Creek in the vicinity of NAP-916 by a narrow but continuous area of undifferentiated �Holocene alluvium� (see Qha in Figure 6). These two deposits were mapped and described as follows,

Qf This unit is mapped on gently sloping, fan-shaped, relatively undissected alluvial surfaces where late Pleistocene vs Holocene age was uncertain or where the deposits of different age interfingered such that they could not be delineated at the map scale. Sediments include sand, gravel, silt, and clay, that are moderately to poorly sorted, and moderately to poorly bedded. Soils are typically inceptisols, mollisols, and alfisols. [Sowers, Noller, and Lettis 1998:13]

Qha Alluvium of Holocene age, deposited in fan, terrace, or basin environments. Unit is mapped where separate types of deposits could not be delineated either due to complex interfingering of depositional environments or the limited size of the area [Sowers, Noller, and Lettis 1998:12].

Notably, the late Quaternary alluvial fans are consistently larger west of the Napa River than they are east of the river (Figure 6). The textural composition and extent of these fan deposits have exerted �a fundamental control on the course and location of the mainstem Napa River� (Stillwater and Dietrich 2002:10). Consequently, it appears that the western fans have �forced� the Napa River to the eastern side of the valley, where it is generally confined against bedrock or older consolidated alluvial deposits.

At the confluence of Napa Creek with the Napa River, about one-mile southeast of NAP-916, is an area of �Latest Holocene to Historic alluvium� (see Qhay in Figure 6) that marks the active Napa River floodplain (latest Holocene defined as 1,000 years or less). Directly east of the confluence is a small area of �Latest Holocene to Historic estuarine deposits� (see Qhbm in Figure 6) that reflects the influence of ocean tides along this part of the Napa River. Because these deposits are still forming, they do not necessarily represent the depositional environments that may have existed prehistorically in these locations.

The surface soils adjacent to the lower Napa Creek are currently mapped as the Bale clay loam (Lambert and Kashiwagi 1978), which closely corresponds with the area mapped as Holocene alluvium by Sowers, Noller, and Lettis (1998). The Bale clay loam is a Cumulic Ultic Haploxeroll that consists of younger alluvium derived from rhyolite and basic igneous rock that form alluvial fans, floodplains, and low terraces. Three separate strata are recognized in the Bale series, indicating that it was formed by multiple depositional episodes. A buried soil horizon (2Ab), formed during a period of relative floodplain stability, is recognized at depths of about 24 to 44 inches (0.6 to 1.1 m) below surface in the middle stratum of the profile (Lambert and Kashiwagi 1978:8); a complete description of the Bale clay loam is provided in Appendix C (Official Soil Descriptions).

The strip of Bale clay loam is bordered by areas of Cole silt loam in the vicinity of NAP-916 (Figure 7), which generally corresponds with the area mapped as late Pleistocene to Holocene fan deposits by Sowers, Noller, and Lettis (1998). The Cole silt loam is a Pachic Argixeroll that consists of older alluvium derived from mixed sources that form river terraces, basins, floodplains, or alluvial fans (Lambert and Kashiwagi 1978). The Cole series exhibits a well-developed subsurface horizon of accumulated clay (Bt horizon) at depths of about 13 to 51 inches (33 to 130 cm) below surface, indicating that it underwent a much longer period of weathering at the ground surface than did the Bale series; a


Qh

bm

Q

hbm

br

br

br

br

br

br

CA-NAP-916

KEY

Qhbm

Qhay - Latest Holocene alluvial deposits

Qha

Qf - Late Pleistocene to Holocene alluvial fan deposits

Qpf - Pleistocene alluvial fan deposits

Qoa - Early to Middle Pleistocene alluvium

br - Pre-Quaternary Bedrock

0 mile1

0 1 2 km

N

CA-NAP-39

CA-NAP-14

- Holocene estuarine deposits

- Holocene alluvium (undifferentiated)

CA-NAP-261

(Adapted from Sowers, Noller, and Lettis 1998)

CA-NAP-411

Figure 6. Late Quaternary geological deposits in the vicinity of CA-NAP-916

12

Napa Creek

Haire loam

CA-NAP-14

CA-NAP-39

CA-NAP-261

CA-NAP-916

N 0 1/2 mile1

0 1/2 2 km1

Clear Lake clay

Cole clay loam

Cole silt loam

Bale loam

Cole clay loam

Clear Lake clay

Cole silt loam

Egbert silty clay loam

Coom

bs

gra

vel

ly l

oam

Clear Lake clay

Haire loam

Bale clay loam

Cole silt loam

Coombs gravelly

loam

(Adapted from Lambert and Kashiwagi 1978)

1 1/2

CA-NAP-411 Bale clay loam

Yolo loam

Yolo loam

Figure 7. Surface soils in the vicinity of CA-NAP-916

13

complete description of the Cole silt loam and other soils noted in Figure 7, are provided in Appendix C.

Although the soils and geologic deposits in and around NAP-916 are judged to be Late Pleistocene to Holocene in age, their actual age has not been previously determined using radiocarbon dating or other methods. Even so, it is clear that the Cole series is associated with an older alluvial fan that was partially cut, filled, and buried by younger alluvium of the Bale series along the present course of Napa Creek. While the late Quaternary depositional history of the Napa Valley is not well understood, it is obvious that some sizable portions of the valley floor were formed during the past several thousand years or less.

ETHNOGRAPHY

The project area is in the vicinity of the documented ethnographic boundary of the Yukian-speaking Wappo and the Penutian-speaking Patwin (Johnson 1978; Sawyer 1978). This boundary was first described by Powers (1877) as being in the vicinity of the town of Calistoga, but was subsequently moved south to the north side of the city of Napa (Barrett 1908; Heizer 1953; Johnson 1978; Kroeber 1925, 1932; Sawyer 1978). Bennyhoff (1994) however, states that he believes Merriam�s boundary (Heizer 1966:Map 5) is the most accurate, depicted at or around the town of Yountville.

This boundary issue is addressed in detailed ethnohistorical research conducted by Milliken (1978), who delves into documentary historic, ethnographic, linguistic, and mission records relevant to the lower Napa Valley. Milliken favors the sociopolitical unit of the �tribelet� (Kroeber 1932), with fluid boundaries, to describe Native American inhabitants at the time of contact with Euroamericans. He identifies a Napa tribelet encompassing the lower Napa Valley with Patwin or Coast Miwok language-group affiliation (Milliken 1978).

Three ethnographic Patwin villages are located within the lower Napa Valley. Tulukai, on Tulucay Creek, is attributed to archaeological site CA-NAP-39 (Heizer 1953); Suskol, on Suscol Creek, is attributed to CA-NAP-15/H (Stradford and Schwaderer 1982).

Excellent summaries of the available ethnography and ethnohistory of the native peoples of the lower Napa Valley are provided in Jackson (1978) and Schwaderer, Stradford, and Fredrickson (1979). Ethnographic references for the Patwin include McKern (1922, 1924), Merriam (1955), and Heizer and Hester (1970). Wappo ethnography is most completely presented by Driver (1936). For the Miwok see Kroeber (1925), Barrett and Gifford (1933), Kelly (1978), and Bennyhoff (1977).

PREHISTORIC ARCHAEOLOGY

Although the Napa Valley has been the subject of archaeological investigations for over 60 years, the area�s prehistory is only partially understood. The synthetic approach adopted by many of the earlier studies has been replaced over time by a series of site-specific, management studies that are largely disconnected and inconsistent in their research approaches. Although regional research has been sporadic in nature, some gains in knowledge have been made in recent years. The following is a limited overview of


previous archaeological studies at sites in the lower Napa Valley, which provides a framework for understanding the Napa Creek site.

Previous Studies Robert F. Heizer�s 1953 publication, The Archaeology of the Napa Valley Region, describes

the extent of archaeological work completed in the area at the time. While the documentation of the surveys and excavations conducted by the University of California at Berkeley during the 1930s and 1940s has been criticized for its omissions and its less than adequate attention to detail (Bennyhoff 1994), it nonetheless comprises a significant body of archaeological information from the Napa Valley. Five excavated sites are reported in the 1953 publication: the Goddard site (CA-NAP-1), the Las Trancas site (CA-NAP-14), the Suscol site (CA-NAP-16), the Tulukai site (CA-NAP-39), and the Kolb site (CA-NAP-32). Additionally, Appendix III of that publication reports Meighan�s excavation descriptions for sites CA-NAP-129 and CA-NAP-131. The various classes of artifacts recovered from these sites are compared with other Napa Valley, San Francisco Bay, and Sacramento Valley assemblages.

Heizer made few conclusive statements regarding the prehistory of the Napa Valley. He generally identified relationships with Middle and Late horizon cultures of the lower Sacramento Valley (cf. Beardsley 1948; Lillard, Heizer, and Fenenga 1939) and projected dates of 2,000 years or more for the Middle horizon levels at CA-NAP-1 and CA-NAP-32. He and Meighan both emphasized the distinctiveness and antiquity of the assemblages recovered at CA-NAP-129 and CA-NAP-131.

The basalt core tools and handstones recovered at CA-NAP-129 and CA-NAP-131 coupled with the geological context suggested to Meighan that this unique assemblage represented the �basement culture� in the Napa Valley (Meighan 1953:315). He associated �fluted� and �willow leaf� points of CA-NAP-131 with artifacts recovered at the Borax Lake site (LAK-36), which was subsequently designated as the type site for Meighan�s (1955) Borax Lake complex. The Borax Lake complex was considered by Meighan to be the oldest in the North Coast Ranges, but he cautiously estimated the age of the complex as �probably more than 2000 years old� (Meighan 1955:Figure 4).

Meighan�s summary of North Coast Ranges archaeology proposed that two additional complexes extended into the Napa Valley area: the Wooden Valley complex and the Clear Lake complex (Meighan 1955). The Wooden Valley complex was based on the artifact collections of avocationalist D.T. Davis from CA-NAP-57 in the narrow, upland, Wooden Valley, some 7 miles northeast of the city of Napa (Meighan 1955:Figure 7). The assemblage was generally comparable to artifacts from Phase 2 of the Sacramento Valley Late horizon (cf. Beardsley 1948) but contained small painted stone tablets found only in Wooden, Napa, and Capay valleys (Heizer 1953; Meighan 1955). The Wooden Valley complex was proposed to occur from A.D. 1500 to 1800. The Clear Lake complex represented the terminal cultural manifestation of the area of the Pomo and their surroundings, including almost all of Napa County (Meighan 1955: Figure 7). The complex was based on artifacts collected from Pomoan peoples around 1900, as well as collections from ethnographic Pomo villages on Rattlesnake Island in Clear Lake. Meighan saw similarities in the artifacts from the Clear Lake and Wooden Valley complexes suggesting a relationship, but was unable to determine the nature of the relationship with the extant information.

Meighan also noted that small samples of artifacts from the lower levels of NAP-1 and NAP-32 indicated another complex (Meighan 1955:33). He listed known traits of the


complex and likened it to Middle horizon cultures of the San Francisco Bay, but lacked sufficient data to affiliate or define the complex. Meighan considered all of his complexes tentative and encouraged refinement and redefinition.

In his 1973 dissertation, David Fredrickson�s extensive research into the archaeology of the Central Valley, San Francisco Bay, and North Coast Ranges coalesced into a new integrative framework for the characterization of the region�s archaeological cultures. His introduction, use, and development of the concepts of pattern, aspect, and phase, and his segregation of spatial and temporal units have generally supplanted previous taxonomic systems. As reported by Fredrickson (1984), J. A. Bennyhoff worked out a detailed cultural sequence for the Napa District back in 1977. More recently, a cultural chronology covering the past 10,000 years has been proposed for the Napa region by Wohlgemuth, Berg, and Carpenter (2004), which incorporates the work of earlier researchers as shown in Figure 8.

Three patterns are represented in the Napa Valley: the Borax Lake pattern, the Berkeley pattern, and the Augustine pattern. The oldest, Borax Lake pattern, is represented by the Hultman phase, or the assemblage of basalt core tools, handstones, and concave-base points originally excavated and reported by Meighan (1953) at CA-NAP-131. The Berkeley pattern is represented by the Houx aspect (Fredrickson 1984), and expressed as five phases spanning approximately 3,000 years. The affiliation of the Yount phase is indeterminate between the Berkeley and Augustine patterns as characterized by only four unprovenienced ear spools from CA-NAP-1. The Augustine pattern is represented by four phases of the St. Helena aspect spanning 1,300 years and terminating at the Historic Wappo phase.

Bennyhoff (1994) outlined and described the currently conceived phases, and perhaps more importantly, pointed out the deficiencies in the archaeological record. He reviewed the collections of the Hearst Museum at the University of California, Berkeley, which contain the artifacts reported by Heizer (1953), to construct the Napa District sequence. Regarding these collections and the inaccuracies in Heizer�s publication, Bennyhoff contended that, �a complete and repetitious reanalysis will have to be done� (1994:50). He concluded that, �many problems of phasing and function can only be resolved by new, carefully controlled excavations in addition to rigorous typological and laboratory analyses� (1994b:50).

The sequence as a whole is considered tentative. The sole representative phase of the Borax Lake pattern is the Hultman phase, identified at type-site CA-NAP-131. The subsequent early phases of the Berkeley pattern (Bale, Rutherford, and Kolb) are represented by artifacts recovered from a deeply stratified site (CA-NAP-32, the Kolb site) near the town of Rutherford (Bennyhoff 1994:52, Figure 4.2). The subsequent Goddard phase is distinguished by a component at CA-NAP-1 near Oakville. Bennyhoff considered the definition of the later phases of the Middle horizon/ Berkeley pattern a major problem in the Napa District (1994:52). Only one phase, the River Glen phase at CA-NAP-261, has been defined. The subsequent Yount phase assemblage is minimal from CA-NAP-1, and may represent the terminal Middle horizon or Middle/Late Transition. The Augustine pattern phases (Bridge, Oakville, Davis, and Lyman) are somewhat better defined and represented in the Napa Valley, with the Oakville phase described as �widespread� and the Lyman phase as �abundant� (Bennyhoff 1994:52�53).


Distinct Cultural

Entity

Hultman

Bale

Rutherford

Kolb

Goddard

River Glen

Bridge Oakville

Davis

Houx

St. Helena

?

Post

Borax Lake

Berkeley

Augustine

Early Archaic

Paleoindian

Middle Archaic

Late Archaic

Mendocino Hultman

Local

PhaseAspectPatternsPeriod 0 Cal BP

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

7000

8000

9000

10000

2.6 µ

3.6 µ

4.4 µ

5.1 µ

5.7 µ

6.3 µ

6.8 µ

7.2 µ

7.7 µ

8.1 µ

Obsidian

Yount

Lyman

Lower Emergent

Upper Emergent

Hydration Value

Figure 8. Cultural chronology of Napa Valley and the southern North Coastal Ranges. Hydration values based on Origer's (1987) Napa Valley obsidian rate.

Adapted from Wohlgemuth, Berg, and Carpenter 2004: Figure 3

17

Because of the focus on Wappo prehistory, Bennyhoff�s cultural sequence for the Napa District includes only the watershed of the Napa River north of Yountville. This boundary corresponds to his ethnographic division of the Wappo and the Patwin. The River Glen phase (CA-NAP-261) of the sequence is the only site represented south of Yountville. While the lower Napa Valley is ethnographic Patwin territory, the Patwin�s arrival is generally considered subsequent to the Wappo and their Yukian and Miwokan predecessors (see Moratto 1984). As such, prior to ethnographic times, boundaries between the groups may have differed substantially. Bennyhoff favors a Wappo presence in the Napa Valley at the beginning of the Emergent period as the St. Helena aspect of the Augustine pattern. Their arrival separated the Lake and Coast Miwok, while the intrusive Patwin displaced Coast and Bay Plains Miwok groups and brought in key Augustine pattern elements (Bennyhoff 1994:56). The Houx aspect of the Berkeley pattern was thought to represent ancestral Lake Miwok, but may also represent ancestral Yukian speakers (Bennyhoff 1994:56). The Morse aspect was thought to be representative of ancestral Bay-Plains Miwok.

A manuscript reporting a significant body of data recovered from the Napa Valley in the early 1960s has surfaced in the past few years (Phebus 1990). George Phebus Jr., formerly with San Francisco State University and the Natural History Museum of the Smithsonian Institution, conducted surface examinations and excavations of many of the large Napa Valley sites, including CA-NAP-1, NAP-32, NAP-33, NAP-16, and NAP-127, as a private research endeavor. Unfortunately these investigations were reported without reference to or incorporation of the work of Fredrickson (1973, 1984) and Bennyhoff (1977) or anyone else after 1978, indicating that the document was probably written around that date. As such it falls within the realm of Heizer�s early work�significant, but in need of reanalysis. Phebus curated the collections at the Smithsonian Institution sometime after 1966 (Phebus 1990:ix), and it is doubtful that California archaeologists have examined them since they were accessioned.

Issues of cultural chronology are paramount to most other archaeological research foci. The Napa Valley chronology is only tentatively established, and is in need of further refinement through collection and integration of new data and reanalysis of old. A recent master�s thesis (Rosenthal 1996) on the adjacent southwestern Solano County area has integrated data reported by Phebus (1990), Snoke (1965), and McGonagle (1966). while more recent investigations (Rosenthal and White 1994; Shapiro and Tremaine 1995; Wiberg 1993) have attempted to establish a detailed and up-to-date cultural phasing of the predominantly Berkeley-pattern sites excavated in the area.

A major, iconic feature in the prehistoric cultural landscape of Napa Valley is the natural obsidian source associated with Glass Mountain, near St. Helena in the upper Napa Valley. The Glass Mountain area, a collection of quarry loci located in peripheral hills roughly 18 miles north of the Napa Creek site, is well known for having produced high-quality glass that was extensively used and transported throughout northern and central California for thousands of years. Napa obsidian has been examined in detail in numerous off-quarry workshops, but due largely to private ownership, the quarries themselves have generally escaped intensive study since their initial recording in the 1940s. An exception is Far Western Anthropological Research Group�s recent research at the mountain�s Lemmon�s Quarry locus (CA-NAP-117/118), which forms essentially the first systematic, focused study of the quarries. Far Western conducted excavations on a portion of the Lemmon�s Quarry during an evaluation and mitigation study in anticipation


of a timberland-to-vineyard conversion (Gilreath and Wohlgemuth 2004). In doing so, they addressed basic research issues concerning the nature, timing, extent, and purpose of Napa obsidian exploitation as expressed at the quarries, as well as aspects of cultural affiliation and technological organization.

Far Western tentatively concluded that quarry use spanned Archaic through late prehistoric times, with hydration values (2.7 to 4.0 microns in Area 2) indicating activity was greatest during the Late Archaic period of some 2500 to 1000 years ago. Reduction efforts at the quarry during that time focused mostly on the manufacture of large, early-stage bifaces and some preforms for transport elsewhere, a contrast with a focused exportation of unmodified cobbles during the late period.

Lower Napa Valley Sites

CA-NAP-14 (Las Trancas) This site lies on the west bank of the Napa River about 2 km east of the Napa Creek

site. It has been partially excavated a number of times since being recorded by the University of California Archaeological Survey in 1936. Excavations first occurred in 1947, with Robert Heizer�s (1953:251) students examining a large volume of �unstratified� habitation deposit. Recoveries included three human burials and about 150 artifacts, including a stone mortar found embedded in a house floor. Classification of some of the artifacts recovered appears in comparative table format, but little site-specific interpretation is provided.

NAP-14 was also investigated by Phebus (1990), who collected 49 artifacts; by Fredrickson (1967), who visually inspected the site; by Moratto (1974), who conducted a surface reconnaissance; by Rosensen (1975), who augered and excavated one unit; and by Morris and Banks (1980), who also augered. Multiple recommendations for additional excavation were not met until Beard (1991) sampled the deposit prior to site capping, followed by Far Western�s limited data recovery at the site in 2003, in response to a recreational bike/pedestrian path being constructed through the site by the City of Napa. While NAP-14 appears to have been occupied from Archaic through early historic times, the shallow midden and temporally diagnostic artifacts such as clamshell disc beads and small, stemmed, serrated, obsidian projectile points have tended to associate the site with generally late prehistoric periods. Indeed, Beard�s and Far Western�s work provide evidence for a predominately Emergent-period use, primarily during the Upper Emergent from ca. 450 to 175 B.P., and, less intensively, during the Lower Emergent, from about 1000 to 450 B.P. Not resolved thus far is Fredrickson�s (1967) and Morris and Banks� (1980) concern with determining Wappo or Patwin affiliation. Bennyhoff�s (1994) Napa District boundary seems to agree with Heizer�s presumption, based on geographic grounds, that the site reflects Patwin occupation.

CA-NAP-15/H (Suscol) Described by Heizer (1953) as a historic village site, CA-NAP-15/H lies on Suscol

Creek, where it crosses the current State Route 29 some 5 km southeast of the city of Napa. CA-NAP-15/H is the most extensively investigated site in the lower Napa Valley due to its proximity to state highway construction projects. The highway work has sponsored numerous investigations, including initial survey (King 1973) and testing (King 1974), a monitoring and extensive auguring program (Tamez 1978), extensive testing in


additional areas (Schwaderer, Stradford, and Fredrickson 1979), and data-recovery investigations resulting in the final report (Stradford and Schwaderer 1982).

This site was determined to be the ethnographic Patwin village of Suskol described by Barrett (1908), but radiocarbon dates, obsidian-hydration readings, and diagnostic artifacts also demonstrated Native American use over the past 4,000 years (Stradford and Schwaderer 1982:i). It is further indicated that the most intensive site use occurred during the Middle and Late Archaic periods, from approximately 1800 B.C. to A.D. 600. Elements of the Berkeley pattern were identified in the Archaic-period deposits representing seasonal resource-procurement activities. Augustine pattern assemblage markers at the site represented Upper Emergent (Protohistoric) seasonal use, with evidence of increased sedentism into the Historic-period ethnographic village site of Suskol (Stradford and Schwaderer 1982:8.22�8.27). Although not formally identified, obsidian-hydration evidence from the Knoll locus suggests that an Early Holocene-age component is also represented at the site.

The scale of work conducted at NAP-15/H, culminating in the 1982 report, has not been equaled in the lower Napa Valley. The investigation recovered thousands of artifacts, from basalt cores to glass trade beads, through controlled excavation of almost 200 m3 of soil. More than 15 features were documented, 10 radiocarbon assays obtained, hundreds of obsidian-hydration rim values and source determinations generated, and intensive faunal, pollen, and soil-chemistry analyses conducted as part of the investigation. The investigation documented a large important site and contributed to the archaeological record for numerous avenues of research.

CA-NAP-16 (Suscol mound) Located only about 50 meters up Suscol Creek from NAP-15/H, this late prehistoric

village site was first excavated by Heizer (1953) in 1945. It is again cursorily reported by Heizer, who described the deposit as 80 inches in depth, heavily disturbed by rodents, containing a large quantity of disarticulated human remains, fire-cracked rock, mussel shells, little evidence of grinding implements, and scanty amounts of animal bone (1953:251,255). His data tables indicate mortars, pestles, charmstones, hammerstones, scrapers, and small obsidian projectile points were recovered from the site.

Phebus (1990) collected some 470 artifacts from the surface of NAP-16 in the early 1960s. The artifacts included 176 projectile points, 21 charmstones, and numerous Olivella, clamshell disc, magnesite and steatite beads (1990:78). Phebus�s analysis and comparison of the artifacts indicated a Late horizon Phase 2 occupation, with more affinity towards the assemblages in the San Francisco Bay than contemporaneous deposits in Wooden Valley and Solano County. He suggests that the site may reflect Bay Miwok rather than Patwin residents.

T.R. Hester of the University of Texas, San Antonio, reportedly directed a field school at the site in 1974 (Fowler 1974). In addition to artifacts similar to those recovered by Heizer and Phebus, cremations and a flexed burial were excavated. Documentation of these excavations has not been located.

No radiocarbon dates or obsidian-hydration analyses are reported from any of the investigations conducted at NAP-16. Available information regarding the recovered artifacts indicates the site was a significant late prehistoric village. Stradford and Schwaderer (1982:8.25�8.26) even suggest that the nearby contemporaneous NAP-15/H


may have been a secondary settlement of lower-status individuals associated with NAP-16.

CA-NAP-33/CA-NAP-34 On the west side of the lower Napa Valley, Heizer (1953) documented two habitation

sites along Carneros Creek, CA-NAP-33 and NAP-34, and noted only obsidian flakes; neither of these sites were excavated. Phebus visited both sites and found NAP-34 �to barely qualify as a midden� (1990:81). NAP-33, the Ramsey site, was surface-collected by Phebus, who recovered 49 artifacts from the site, including 28 projectile points, some charmstones, and an Olivella bead. These artifacts were similar to those at NAP-16, but the absence of clamshell disc beads and triangular obsidian blades suggested to Phebus a Late horizon Phase 1 component. The recovered projectile points included some large nonstemmed types, two of which had concave bases, indicating earlier use of the site.

CA-NAP-39 (Tulukai) This site is located at the juncture of Route 121 and Tulucay Creek, about 1.9 miles

southeast of NAP-916, and has long been thought to be the ethnographic Patwin village of Tulukai as described by Kroeber (1932). Heizer�s students excavated approximately 750 cubic feet of the deposit in 1947 (Heizer 1953), but little documentation of the deposit�s nature and materials was provided except for a discussion of the extensive site disturbances caused by highway construction and commercial development. The excavation did expose three human burials, while evidence was found during construction activities in 1951 for a Late horizon Phase 2 cremation that was associated with a mortar and clamshell disc beads (Heizer 1953:255). Abundant elk and bird bone were noted at the site, and some Olivella beads and projectile points were recovered. These artifacts, and presumably others from the site, are curated at the Hearst Museum of Anthropology at Berkeley.

In the early 1960s, Phebus (1990:82) noted the almost complete destruction of the site by construction activities related to the highway, bridge, and commercial enterprises. He questioned the designation of the site as the village of Tulukai due to its lack of historic-period materials, and suggested that the village may be to the south at Imola (NAP-69) or nearby to the north on the grounds of the Juarez Adobe.

In 1999, Caltrans and the ASC investigated portions of NAP-39 for its National Register eligibility due to impending bridge-replacement work. It was described at that time as a complex, mounded village site that contained midden soils, a wide variety of ground- and flaked-stone artifacts, at least seven additional human burials and numerous disassociated human bones, faunal remains, glass trade beads and other historic items, shell beads and ornaments, and other items. Primary occupation of the site was estimated to have spanned from about 2500 to 500 B.P., and by late prehistoric times it seems to have been a permanent village. A total of 167 hydration readings ranged from 0.9 to 8.6 microns, with the highest frequencies dating to the Upper Archaic and Upper Emergent periods (2.8 to 3.8 microns and 0.9 to 1.8 microns, respectively).

CA-NAP-261 (River Glen) Located on the west bank of the Napa River about 500 m south of NAP-14, the River

Glen site was first officially recorded in 1959 by E. Robinson, who described it as a large, ashy midden that had been heavily disturbed by agriculture and flood-control measures. The threat of flood has intermittently generated archaeological investigation of the site for the past 30 years. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers solicited a series of site assessments


and recommendations (Fredrickson 1967; Moratto 1974; Rosensen 1975) before sponsoring large-scale, data-recovery excavations at NAP-261. Based on a research design prepared by Fredrickson (1976), archaeological excavations began in October 1976, but were halted prior to completion due to a lack of funding authorization for the flood-control project.

The investigation, documented by Jackson (1978), had progressed sufficiently to recover an assemblage of artifacts indicative of the Berkeley pattern and distinguished as the River Glen phase in the Napa District cultural sequence (Figure 8). Along with Olivella beads, bone needles, scapula saws, and an obsidian bangle, the site produced some typologically unique charmstones. The temporal placement of these diagnostic artifacts was corroborated through obsidian-hydration rim measurements. Radiocarbon assay yielded dates of 2505 ± 95 years B.P. and 1965 ± 170 years B.P.; both of these dates were acquired from soils at the base of the midden. The River Glen phase deposit lay relatively intact beneath a heavily disturbed upper component that contained artifacts indicative of late prehistoric use. With four human interments identified during the excavation (Jackson 1978:4.29), the River Glen component is considered a Middle horizon village that may contain a substantial cemetery complex.

Additional studies undertaken as part of the excavation included faunal and pollen analyses and a lithic procurement study based on the percentage and type of cortex found on the Napa Valley obsidian recovered from the site.

More recently, three separate small-scale excavation projects have been conducted at NAP-261. Windmiller (1993) reported upon the excavation of four 1 × 1 meter test units for the Napa River Flood Control Project. A wide range of artifacts was recovered at that time, which verified the integrity and the continued National Register eligibility of the Berkeley-pattern deposit at the site, and mitigation of impacts through excavation was recommended. The following year, Roop et al. (1994) removed for reinterment a human burial discovered during maintenance of a water pipe, and assigned it a similar Late Archaic age on the basis of associated shell beads. In 2003 Far Western excavated a little over 5 m3 in response to impending impacts for the City of Napa�s trail improvement project. Hydration bands and temporally diagnostic artifacts from the work of Far Western, Jackson, Windmiller, and Roop et al. suggest site occupations dating from the Late Archaic through the Historic periods, with primary use during the Late Archaic. Fifty-one Napa Valley hydration values ranged from 1.1 to 4.6 microns, with a mean of 2.73 microns, and were taken to represent a mean date of 1143 cal B.P. These findings equated with occupation during the Late Archaic period (Wohlgemuth, Berg, and Carpenter 2004), corresponding fairly well with hydration results obtained during Jackson�s earlier work.

CA-NAP-411 This site, the nearest recorded site to NAP-916, is located on the south bank of Napa

Creek east of State Route 29. It was excavated in anticipation of private development and found to consist of a shallow midden deposit containing obsidian and basalt flaking debris, flake tools, and faunal remains mixed with historic-era remains, including worked bottle glass (Flynn 1979; Melander 1974). While it was thought that the site represented late prehistoric and even historic-era use by Native Patwin or Wappo, no diagnostic artifacts were reported (Melander 1974). A complete report of the findings is not available.


CA-NAP-516 A small test excavation was conducted in 1980 at CA-NAP-516 in the lower reaches

of Congress Valley, approximately 3 km southwest of NAP-916 (Wiberg 1980). The site was highly disturbed and, other than a mortar, few diagnostic artifacts were recovered. Two perforated charmstones, a net sinker, and large projectile points from the site appear to be representative of the Berkeley pattern.

Summary The project area lies at the proposed ethnographic and archaeological boundary

between the territory of the Wappo and the Patwin. The detailed, yet tentative and incomplete, cultural sequence for the Napa District (Bennyhoff 1994; Fredrickson 1973, 1984) is based primarily on artifacts recovered and cursorily documented by Heizer (1953) and directed towards the prehistory of the Wappo. The biggest gap in the sequence lies in the lack of phase definition for the later Middle horizon/Upper Berkeley pattern, currently represented only by the River Glen phase, and the paucity of artifacts attributed to the possible Terminal Middle horizon Yount phase.

No synthetic analyses have been conducted that integrate the archaeological data from the ethnographic Patwin territory of the lower Napa Valley. Although most of the sites from which we have any data likely represent late prehistoric, protohistoric and historic Patwin occupation (CA-NAP-14, -16, -33, -39 and -411) they are for the most part inadequately analyzed or reported. Berkeley-pattern, or Middle-horizon, components are tentatively identified by a small sample from NAP-516, from a limited assemblage representing seasonal occupation at NAP-15/H, and from the small but significant assemblage from NAP-261 (River Glen). No Borax Lake pattern or other early components have been formally identified in the lower Napa Valley.

RESEARCH ISSUES FOR CA-NAP-916

Based on the evaluation studies of Jaffke and Meyer (1998), the Napa Creek site was considered eligible to the National Register of Historic Places under Criterion D because the site yielded important chronological and stratigraphic information suggesting that (1) the archaeological materials are buried in a distinct stratigraphic unit (i.e., buried soil); (2) the deposit contains organic materials (i.e., charcoal, charred seeds, and buried soils) suitable for radiocarbon-dating; (3) the recovered artifacts appeared to be contemporaneous with the River Glen phase of the Berkeley pattern, which is underrepresented and poorly defined in the cultural sequence of the region; and (4) the site had the potential to yield additional temporally and/or culturally diagnostic artifacts such as projectile points, beads, and obsidian for hydration analysis. Thus, Jaffke and Meyer (1998:40�45) considered cultural chronology, archaeobotanical studies, obsidian studies, and studies of buried soils and archaeological sites as the most relevant research issues for data-recovery investigations at NAP-916. As the data potential of the site was revealed by current study, it became clear that some of the original research issues should be expanded, narrowed, and/or refocused in order to emphasize the most salient and important aspects of the site. As such, the revised research issues are presented below.


Geoarchaeological Research Issues

Human Occupation and Landscape Evolution Given that the cultural deposits at NAP-916 appeared to be associated with a buried

soil, the original data-recovery plan recommended that a geoarchaeological landscape approach be part of future studies at the site. This approach incorporates information from available geologic and archaeological studies with an analysis of the existing landscape. The ultimate goal of this approach is to understand human social and economic change within the framework of an inclusive environmental and evolutionary context (Rossignol 1992:14), which requires an understanding of geologic processes (e.g., geomorphology, stratigraphy, soil formation) and changes in prehistoric human settlement and subsistence patterns over time. Landforms and geological processes are recognized as being significant factors in regulating the structure and function of natural ecosystems (Stafford 1995:76). Natural landscapes are composed of multiple landforms created at different times in the past, which together form the physical platform on which people interact with their environment (Waters 1992:88).

Soil formation is a by-product of sustained or prolonged land stability (i.e., surface weathering). The degree of soil formation is directly related to the amount of time a landform has been stable and subject to near-surface weathering processes. In this regard, landforms with well-developed soils have been stable and available for human use or occupation longer than those with weakly or moderately developed soils. The identification and dating of buried soils is a crucial part of this approach because they represent formerly stable land surfaces that were once available for human use and occupation. Conversely, landscape instability is evidenced by erosional unconformities or by a lack of soil formation, indicating relatively rapid deposition. Since evidence of past human use and/or occupation of a landform are subject to the same processes that affect the preservation, destruction, or burial of natural geological deposits (Bettis 1992:119), the evolution of the landscape ultimately determines whether archaeological remains will be preserved, destroyed, or redeposited (Kuehn 1993; Waters 1992).

Given this, the findings from NAP-916 should be compared with the stratigraphic sequences from other sites to assess the influence of local or regional landscape evolution on the nature and completeness of the lower Napa Valley archaeological record. For example, most of the sites identified at the surface of the lower Napa Valley appear to date to the Emergent period. Does the predominance of these sites indicate that the valley was not intensively occupied until the past several hundred years, or is it an indication that natural geologic processes have buried the older sites? From this perspective, it is important to understand if the buried archaeological deposits at NAP-916 represent some rare or unusual circumstance, or if they are a small part of a much larger record that is yet to be identified beneath the surface of the lower Napa Valley.

Local and Regional Stratigraphic Comparisons Comparisons of local and regional stratigraphic sequences are considered a necessary

and important aspect of any research that attempts to address the larger issue of Human Occupation and Landscape Evolution. In the case of NAP-916, the surface geology, subsurface stratigraphy, radiocarbon, and obsidian-hydration data can be compared with other archaeological sites in the region to provide a context for assessing (1) the chronological placement of the site; (2) its relative importance as a buried site; and (3) the


potential effects of landscape change on the nature and completeness of the archaeological record in the lower Napa Valley.

Critical to this research is the age of the deposits, which had to be determined so the natural and cultural components could be placed in their temporal sequence. This control was to be achieved by radiocarbon-dating the stratigraphic sequence of buried paleosols containing the deposit and any potential cultural features within the deposit. Previously uncalibrated radiocarbon dates from other sites should be calibrated according to Stuiver and Reimer (1993) to facilitate consistent age comparisons and accurate chronologic assignments. Hydration analysis of obsidian artifacts and flaking debris would provide a relative measure of chronometric control. In addition, radiocarbon and obsidian-hydration data from buried sites in the region should be compared to assess the internal consistency of the two datasets to address the related issue of obsidian-hydration age corrections (see below).

EHT, Soil Temperatures, and Obsidian-hydration Age Corrections Hydration analysis of obsidian artifacts has been used as a relative dating technique

by archaeologists working in the southern North Coast Ranges for nearly 30 years (Fredrickson 1976; Jackson 1978). While our understanding of the hydration process has become more sophisticated (Ambrose 2001; Friedman, Trembour, and Hughes 1997; Hughes 1989; Taylor 1976; Tremaine 1989), it seems that the goal of converting hydration readings to absolute ages has only grown more complicated as one recognizes the many physical and environmental variables that can influence the rate of hydration for obsidian from different sources, or even specimens from the same source (Ambrose 2001; Friedman, Trembour, and Hughes 1997; Hughes 1989; Origer 1982; Taylor 1976; Tremaine 1989, 1993), including lower effective hydration temperatures caused by deep and/or prolonged burial (Ambrose 1976, 2001; Jones, Sheppard, and Sutton 1997; Riddings 1991).

These issues are particularly relevant for the investigations at NAP-916, where obsidian artifacts were recovered from buried strata that were also radiocarbon-dated. Because of the need to correct obsidian-hydration readings for variations in effective temperature, and the various difficulties of converting these readings into calibrated years, this study specifically examines and evaluates the issue of deep and/or prolonged burial as a factor in determining the rate of obsidian hydration at NAP-916 and other buried sites in the region.

Settlement and Subsistence Issues

Lithic Procurement and Reduction Strategies During the identification and evaluation phases, obsidian flaking debris was the

most numerous constituent recovered and served dual roles of providing temporal control (through hydration analysis) and indicating some on-site activities (biface manufacturing). It was also recognized that sufficient recoveries of obsidian artifacts during data-recovery should aid regional chronology building efforts and help to identify aspects of technological organization by providing a basis for comparison of lithic procurement and reduction strategies of obsidian from different sources or subgroups. This includes an apparent increase in the acquisition, use, and exchange of Napa Valley obsidian during the Late Archaic, both from primary sources (Gilreath and Wohlgemuth 2004:24-25) and secondary sources, such as streambeds and other locations with locally available cobbles


(Jackson 1978; Origer 1994; Stradford and Schwaderer 1982; Wohlgemuth, Berg, and Carpenter 2004).

Archaeological flaked-stone analysis requires distinguishing between various subsets of tools and byproducts. Flaked-stone tools, tool fragments, and manufacturing/ maintenance byproducts are distinguished on the basis of several categories of attributes that, singly or in combination, reveal a range of information about toolstone material trajectories and human behavior (Andrefsky 1998). Tools and debitage are organized into temporally discrete assemblages to evaluate cultural patterns and their archaeological manifestations across landscapes.

Because obsidian artifacts can be dated and geochemically fingerprinted they can thus be traced both synchronically and diachronically. Like other flaked-stone materials, obsidian can be examined for a variety of attributes that can provide information essential to reconstructing manufacture strategies, tool functions, repair episodes, and material recycling. Additionally, discard patterns can provide data about social structure (whether a population was mobile or sedentary) and social distance (whether materials were obtained locally in raw form or as pre-shaped items from neighboring peoples). In this manner obsidian contributes essential information to studies of past exchange systems and aids in reconstructing archaeological assemblages. Appendix D provides additional information about flaked-stone analysis and the theoretical basis of studies.

Populations characterized by high residential mobility usually schedule tool-material replacement at a number of lithic sources (Gramly 1980). The resulting material variability, in some instances, extends to specific tool classes and can be addressed through the quantitative analyses of individual lithic groups. As an adaptive response to certain environmental variables, the mode of technological organization can include greater or lesser degrees of material curation (Binford 1979; Kelly 1988; Shott 1989a, b), with implications for the origin of items such as projectile point blanks and duration of tool use life. In addition, lithic procurement and reduction strategies are viewed as an outgrowth of land use, settlement and mobility patterns, as discussed below.

Land Use, Settlement, and Mobility Patterns Within the lower Napa Valley, there is a tendency for prehistoric settlements to be

located on the valley floors, parallel to the river and its smaller streams and tributaries (Heizer 1953:228). NAP-916 is likewise located on the valley floor near the banks of Napa Creek. However, unlike the majority of previously identified sites on the floor of the Napa Valley, the NAP-916 site is Archaic in age, and buried well below the present ground surface. Thus, the Napa Creek site is useful for evaluating the pattern of land use at a greater time depth than afforded by most surface sites. At the same time, the settlement pattern of later periods can be indirectly addressed using the well-dated stratigraphic sequence at NAP-916.

As noted above, the procurement and reduction of flaked-stone materials, particularly obsidian, can be used to infer aspects of land use, settlement, and mobility patterns. For instance, the toolkits of highly mobile groups tend to have greater material variability because they can exploit broad areas, as compared with relatively sedentary groups who exploit smaller territories. The presence of primary and secondary sources of Napa Valley obsidian, combined with variability within the source, provides an avenue for detecting patterns of land use, settlement, and/or mobility as reflected in the variability of the flaked-stone materials recovered from NAP-916.


Initial archaeobotanical analysis of flotation samples from the site only tentatively identified grass seeds, but it was considered likely that better-controlled contexts, such as intact features, would be present to offer more robust samples of plant remains. Such samples could help illuminate the site�s function and seasonality of occupation as well as contribute to regional research on changes in economic behaviors (such as Late Archaic acorn-intensification models) by providing comparative data for examining exploitation of various plant species. In addition, plant remains recovered from the cultural and natural deposits contribute to various lines of research regarding paleoenvironmental conditions, subsistence practices, and, again, resource intensification. With these goals in mind, archaeobotanical remains from NAP-916 may be used to assess (1) the relative availability of plant resources over time, (2) the adaptive response of Archaic populations to significant environmental changes (i.e., alluvial deposition), and (3) whether the site was used seasonally in response to fall-ripening acorn crops as part of a larger pattern of mobility and settlement.

The extent to which NAP-916 might contribute to each of these research issues ultimately depended on the quantity, variety, and context of the artifacts and other data recovered from the deposit.


METHODS

FIELD METHODS

Methods of Previous Fieldwork Agency plans to improve the formerly lighted, four-way intersection at State Route

29 and Trancas Street saw a variety of incarnations between the 1950s and their implementation in 2001. Design changes in the 1990s prompted new survey work along the highway in anticipation of the newly proposed drainpipe installation. No cultural resource discoveries were made during a surface reconnaissance of the APE in 1997. CA-NAP-916 was not discovered until personnel from Caltrans and the ASC conducted intensive geoarchaeological efforts in early 1998. The subsurface survey included the excavation of 50 backhoe trenches that produced evidence for three primary-landform deposits and the Napa Creek site. At the site, cultural materials were initially found in geoarchaeological Test Trench 4-2-5 about 2 meters below ground surface, within buried A and B horizons of Cole series floodplain sediments. In the site area, these soils are overlain by what were thought to be buried alluvial soils of the Yolo unit and by recent flood deposits of the Bale unit. Three additional backhoe trenches (4-7-3, 4-7-4, and 4-7-5) were placed nearby to determine the nature, extent, and integrity of the archaeological deposit, with Trench 4-7-3 also producing artifacts. The four trenches measured 1 m wide each, 2 to 4 m in depth, and 2.5 to 7 m in length (Figure 3). Displaced from these trenches and examined for archaeological materials were approximately 32 m3 of soil. In addition, some 0.2 m3 of site soil was wet-screened through 3-mm (1/8-in.) wire mesh, and other soils were dry-screened on-site through 6-mm (1/4-in.) shaker screens. Some artifacts were collected from in situ contexts in trench walls, and soil samples were collected from major stratigraphic units.

The subsurface investigations yielded obsidian flaking debris, heat-affected rock, baked clay, charcoal, imported cobbles, a carbonized seed, and one stone disc bead (Jaffke and Meyer 1998). Some 74 items of debitage, including 71 obsidian flakes, were retrieved from depths ranging from about 145 to 220 cm below surface. Flake attributes suggested a considerable range of on-site tool production and maintenance activities, including biface manufacturing and a certain reliance on obsidian cobbles or pebbles over quarry-obtained pieces. The small amount of controlled excavation produced an equivalent of 147 artifacts per cubic meter. Hydration rim readings for 17 obsidian flakes included an Annadel measurement of 1.6 microns and 16 Napa Valley specimens that ranged from 1.1 to 5.2 microns; the latter had a mean of 3.1 microns and an 11-item cluster that ranged from 2.7 to 3.7 microns. The cluster suggested that main site occupation occurred from about 2,100 to 1,100 years ago. The bead, which was found in trench spoils from approximately 2 m in depth, was unique in material (an igneous stone); it was tentatively associated with the Middle period/Berkeley pattern. Heat-affected rock, unmodified imported cobbles, and chunks of baked clay were common and were found intermittently or in loose concentrations throughout the deposit. Although no stone concentrations were sufficiently coherent to warrant designation as a feature, there was thought to be the potential to identify intact features at the site.

As experienced during the later data-recovery efforts, full site dimensions could not be determined at the time due to adjacent highway and private property features, dense vegetation to the north, and the buried nature of the deposit; trenching results, however,


did provide a firmer sense of the southern boundary. All archaeological materials then discovered had been restricted to approximately 70 cm of the Cole series soil unit (from about 145 to 220 cm below ground surface) in an area measuring about 50 m north-south and 15 m east-west, and were considered to have been well insulated from the effects of more recent landform changes and modern development. Findings indicated that the site was a buried deposit composed primarily of a light to moderate density of obsidian flaking debris and heat-affected rock, and was characterized as a location at which prehistoric inhabitants of the local area conducted specific tasks or temporarily camped during Late Berkeley times, which is associated locally with the tentatively defined River Glen phase. The site was considered likely to contain stratigraphically discrete opportunities for addressing issues of component definition and assemblage building for the regionally underrepresented Late Berkeley pattern of the Napa District cultural sequence. On the basis of the site�s integrity and information potential, CA-NAP-916 was determined eligible to the National Register of Historic Places under Criterion D, and a plan for mitigating upcoming pipeline impacts was established to ensure a No Adverse Effect for the proposed construction project.

Methods for Data-recovery Phase Data-recovery fieldwork was conducted from mid-October to mid-November, 2000.

ASC field crew numbered up to about one dozen on any given workday (see Appendix A). Mr. Earl Couey, representing the Mishewal-Wappo Tribe of Alexander Valley, served as the Native American monitor and provided valuable field support each workday. Caltrans archaeologists Jennifer Darcangelo and Mick Hayes visited the site periodically to assist in the investigations and address management issues.

The data-recovery phase examined the deposit in a more rigorous fashion than was afforded during site identification and testing phases. Efforts were focused where the site was known to exist�that is, within a 4�m-wide strip of the impact area between the highway shoulder and the 1998 backfilled Test Trench 4-2-5. Activities included removing culturally sterile overburden soils, establishing an excavation datum, determining unit locations atop buried soil strata, hand excavating almost 19 m3 of soil from a dozen control units, and processing soil with both wet- and dry-screening methods. Artifacts and samples were collected in a standard fashion for follow-up cataloging and analysis.

To adequately sample the deposit, a tractor-mounted backhoe exposed a large subsurface area of archaeologically productive soil next to the highway (Figure 3). The exposure measured 20 m long and 7 m wide at ground surface, contained a half-meter-wide bench about 70 cm below the surface, a floor that measured 4 × 18 m, and a total available working area of 72 square meters. The floors of the northern and southern thirds of this area were established at roughly the contact of the two buried soils, or at about 130 cm below the ground surface; the floor in the north-central area was left higher in order to avail a portion of the upper buried soil, and was thus formed at about 90 cm. The west-central edge of the exposure contained a concrete column that had supported the light pole mentioned above. From the top of the column protruded a short metal post, and a spot on the post about 20 cm above ground surface was used as the project�s excavation datum. The exposure paralleled the highway in an approximate north/south alignment, and the floor was divided into 36 contiguous 1 × 2 m control units (Figure 9) for potential excavation. Surface elevations of each excavated unit were measured from the datum, with a 20-cm downward adjustment made to account for the difference in elevation. Safety concerns were addressed with the placement of concrete K-rail between the highway


�� ¡��

�� £� � ��

¡ ¡ ¡

� ¡ � ¡

¡ � ¡

¡ � ¡ �� ¡

¡ ¡ ¡

��

� ��

shoulder and the exposure. Excavation units did not require shoring due to their maximum depths and the stepped nature of the exposure.

Beginning in the northwest corner of the exposure, the available deposit was sampled using a �hopscotch� approach to unit selection, with periodic adjustments to unit choices and excavation depths made on the basis of archaeological recoveries. Twelve units and one column sample were dug, resulting in an examined surface area of 20.07 m2 (27.9% of the total area) and the removal of some 18.93 m3 of soil, or about 27% of the 70 m3 of deposit expected to be impacted. Hand-excavation was conducted from 90 to 230 cm, with most soil removal occurring below 120 cm (Table 1). Indeed, the investigation emphasized the deeper natural strata across the deposit, where 15.17 m3, or 80.1% of the total excavated materials, were removed from 140 to 230 cm. Most units were clustered, however, in the north-central portion of the deposit in order to sample the upper buried soil, to take advantage of relatively high artifact counts observed in this area, and to expose more ground in the vicinity of two deeply buried stone features that were also located there (Figures 10, 11, 12, and 13).

All units were dug in 10-cm arbitrary levels with volume controlled by line levels oriented to datum. Most units were dug as full 1 × 2 m rectangles, but project goals or time constraints restricted others to partial-unit, 1 × 1 m squares. The column sample (Unit 15-CS) measured 0.3 × 0.25 m and was also removed in 10-cm increments; it was placed in the otherwise unexcavated southern half of Unit 15, adjacent to the deeply excavated Unit 14 and recovered soils from 120 to 230 cm. As it turned out, low artifact recoveries in the first three levels of Units 11 and 14 gave cause to remove and discard the corresponding uppermost soil in the subsequently dug, nearby Units 9, 10, 12, 15, and 15-CS.

Excavation was conducted with standard tools that included picks, shovels, and trowels. Soils were bucketed and labeled by provenience for processing outside of the exposure. For Units 1, 3, 6, and the upper third of Unit 11 and the upper half of 14, soils were �pre-screened� dry through 6-mm wire-mesh shaker screens, and their remaining


4 m

1 2 3 4

5 6 7 8

9

21 m

18 m

Hig

hw

ay 2

9 s

ho

uld

er

Datum

Feat. 2

10 11 12

Concrete footing of former light pole

13 14 15 16

17 18 19 20

21 22 23 24

25 26 27 28

29 30 31 32

33 34 35 36

Feat. 1

1998

bac

khoe

tren

ch (

4-2-

5)

right-

of-

way fe

nce

Column sample

14C samples

Hig

hw

ay 2

9 s

ho

uld

er

6 m

7 m

private

pro

pert

y

right-

of-

way fe

nce

Excavated Not

Excavated

GN

MN

TN

0 1 2 4

Scale (meters)

Overburden removed by backhoe

Overburden removed by backhoe

(15 CS)

Key

. 5

Figure 9. Excavation units at the Napa Creek site (CA-NAP-916)

31

Datum

11

13

22

6

Figure 10. Areal exposure at beginning of fieldwork, looking southwest; note unit locations

Datum

13

6

31

22 26

(backfilled)

Highway 29

Figure 11. Areal exposure at end of fieldwork, looking south

32

Datum

31

22

Looter-caused sidewall damage

Figure 12. Areal exposure, looking north

Datum

14 11

6

1

3

(metal post atop concrete column)


9 (S 1/2)

15 CS (column sample in S 1/2)

15 (N 1/2)

12 (S 1/2)

Highway 29


Figure 13. Northern half of areal exposure, looking northwest. Note unit locations; B. Mischke and G.

Hellman standing in Unit 10.

33

soils were 6-mm wet-screened just off-site. Clayey conditions and the onset of rainy weather, however, necessitated transference of all subsequently dug soils to a nearby Caltrans field office, where an efficient wet-screening operation was established. Unprocessed soil remaining at the end of the excavation was transported to Sonoma State University for wet-screening at the ASC. All soils from Units 10 and 15 were wet-screened through 3-mm mesh in order to capture a representative sample of smaller site constituents, and soils from Unit 15-CS soils were similarly processed with a combination of 6-mm, 3-mm, and 1.5-mm mesh.

Stratigraphic Identification and Description Subsurface deposits at the site were examined, photographed, and described in detail

in the original backhoe trench (4-2-5) and in the west sidewall of Unit 14. In addition, soil samples were collected for radiocarbon-dating analysis (see Results and Findings). Stratigraphic units (strata) were identified on the basis of physical composition, superposition, relative soil development, and textural transitions. Each stratum was sequentially assigned a Roman numeral (I, II, III, etc.), beginning with the oldest, or lowermost, stratum.

Master soil horizons were designated by upper-case letters (A, B, or C) that may be preceded by Arabic numerals (2, 3, etc.), indicating that the horizon is associated with a different parent material (number 1 is understood but not shown). An A horizon is a near-surface zone where organics tend to accumulate (e.g., �topsoil�); a B horizon is a subsurface zone where clay, carbonates, or materials accumulate as they are leached from the overlying horizons; a C horizon is a subsurface zone that represents the parent material.

Subordinate soil horizons were designated by lower-case letters as follows: �b� is a buried horizon at the location where it was described (not used with C horizons); �t� is a subsurface (illuvial) accumulation of silicate clay; �u� is relatively unweathered parent material (C horizon); and �ox� indicates the presence of iron-oxide mottles. The combination of these numbers and letters indicates the important characteristics of a particular soil horizon. These designations are consistent with those outlined by Birkeland, Machette, and Haller (1991), Schoeneberger et al. (1998), and the Soil Survey Staff (1998).

Buried soils or paleosols, representing formerly stable ground surfaces, were identified in the field on the basis of color, structure, horizon development, bioturbation, lateral continuity, and the nature of the upper boundary (contact) with the overlying deposit (Birkeland, Machette, and Haller 1991; Retallack 1988). Well-developed paleosols often exhibit considerable horizontal continuity that can be traced across a site or an entire area. It was on this basis that the strata identified in the original backhoe trench were correlated with the strata exposed in the hand-excavated units.

LAB METHODS

Processing and Cataloging Following fieldwork, the column sample and the remaining, unprocessed control-

unit soils were wet-screened at the ASC. Conducted there as well was water flotation of feature matrices, in which 1.5-mm mesh was used to capture nonfloating, �heavy� fractions, while �light� fractions (floating organic matter) were recovered with 0.4-mm screen using a Flowmaster 2000 machine; the mesh and its contents were air-dried and stored for potential analysis of charred-seed or other archaeobotanical remains.


All recovered artifacts were washed, air-dried, and cataloged according to provenience, artifact group and class, part and condition, material, quantity, weight, and other pertinent characteristics. These information sets were entered into an electronic database designed by the ASC to help manage and analyze prehistoric materials (see Appendix E). Each artifact or group of similar artifacts from the same provenience was assigned a unique catalog number that was prefixed with ASC accession number 2001-2. Selected artifacts were illustrated or photographed (see Results and Findings). The artifact catalog from the 1998 fieldwork (accession number 99-4), which contained some 30 entries, was appended to the data-recovery catalog; it also remains as a stand-alone catalog.

Analytic Studies

Radiocarbon Dating The radiometric analysis was conducted to establish the chronology of the cultural

and noncultural deposits at the site. Radiocarbon (14C) is produced primarily by the interaction of cosmic radiation with nitrogen in the earth�s atmosphere. After mixing with carbon dioxide, 14C is readily assimilated by plants and other living organisms (Geyh and Schleicher 1990). Soils and sediments can often be dated because they contain biogenic carbon in the form of organic matter, or humates (i.e., soil organic matter, or SOM). The differential decomposition, humification, and translocation of biogenic carbon in a given deposit determine the type and amount of SOM available for dating.

The radiocarbon age of a soil or sediment reflects the apparent mean residence time (AMRT) of the total organic content of the analyzed material. Since soil formation is a time-transgressive process, the AMRT of a soil does not mark a single time or event, but reflects the influence of multiple processes that affect the soil�carbon system over time. The accuracy of soil dates depends on the researcher�s ability to select samples that will minimize potential contaminants (Scharpenseel 1979) and to properly interpret the context of the sample (Matthews 1985). Understood in this way, radiocarbon dates obtained from soil are almost always younger than the age of the strata in which they formed. Therefore, soil dates from alluvial deposits are usually interpreted as a stratum�s minimum age (e.g., approximate time of burial), rather than maximum age (e.g., time of deposition).

Four samples from NAP-916 were submitted to Beta Analytic in Miami, Florida, for radiocarbon dating. The technical methods and radiocarbon lab results are provided in Appendix F and are discussed below.

Other Studies Besides radiocarbon dating, selected artifacts and samples were subjected to analytical

studies that included archaeobotanical analysis, X-ray fluorescence, obsidian-hydration analysis, and flaked-stone analysis. The findings of these studies are described in the following section, while the technical methods and data results appear in Appendixes G through I.

Curation Upon completion of cataloging and analysis, artifacts selected for curation were sealed

in new 4-mm-thick, clear plastic bags that were labeled and stored in archive-quality boxes at the Archaeological Collections Facility at Sonoma State University, under Accession number 2001-2. A copy of the artifact catalog was also prepared for storage with the artifacts. After being counted and weighed, all heat-affected rock was discarded.


DATA-RECOVERY RESULTS AND FINDINGS

This section presents the results and findings of the archaeological data-recovery investigations at NAP-916 under three general categories: Site Stratigraphy and Disturbances, Cultural Materials and Distributions, and Analytic Studies. Additional information about the results and findings is presented in the Site Summary and Discussion section that follows.

SITE STRATIGRAPHY AND DISTURBANCES

Three major stratigraphic units were identified by geoarchaeological field studies at the site and were designated, from oldest to youngest, as Strata I through III. The strata were found to be fairly uniform throughout the site and occurred at similar depths below the existing ground surface. They were divided based on the presence of unconformable contacts as represented by two buried soils. The nature and extent of the strata are described below as they occurred from the top to the bottom at the site.

Stratum III � A and Cu Horizons This stratum consists of a silty clay loam that exhibits a weakly developed A horizon

and unweathered Cu horizon formed in floodplain alluvium. The A horizon is very dark grayish brown (Munsell 10YR 3/2, moist), with a strong granular to weak subangular blocky structure, and many active roots. In some locations the A horizon had been disturbed and/or covered with construction debris (i.e., Ap horizon). The Cu horizon is yellowish brown (Munsell 10YR 5/4, moist), with a massive structure and common active roots. The A horizon has a gradual and smooth lower boundary at a depth of about 35 cm, while the stratum�s lower boundary (base of Cu horizon) is clear and smooth at a depth of about 85 cm below surface (Figure 14).

No archaeological remains were associated with this stratum. A radiocarbon date from the underlying stratum suggests that Stratum III is Late Holocene in age (see Radiocarbon Dating, below, and Appendix F). The characteristics of this stratum are largely consistent with the upper part of the Bale clay loam as described by Lambert and Kashiwagi (1978).

Stratum II � 2Ab, 2Bwb, and 2Cox Horizons This stratum is the site�s upper buried soil and consists of a silty clay loam that

exhibits a moderately developed soil formed in floodplain alluvium. The 2Ab horizon is a very dark grayish brown (Munsell 10YR 3/2, moist) with a moderate subangular blocky structure, and few active root and common inactive root holes. The 2Bwb horizon is dark grayish brown (10YR 4/2, moist) with an angular blocky structure, many active and abandoned root holes, a few faint clay films, and a few yellowish brown (Munsell 10YR 5/ 6, moist) iron-oxide mottles. The 2Cox horizon is light olive-brown (Munsell 2.5Y 5/4, moist) with a weak subangular blocky structure, and common yellowish brown (Munsell 10YR 5/6, moist) iron-oxide mottles. The 2Ab and 2Bwb horizons have gradual and smooth lower boundaries at depths of about 115 cm and 125 cm respectively, while the stratum�s lower boundary (base of 2Cox horizon) is clear and slightly wavy at a depth of about 140 cm below surface (Figure 14). The oxidized iron found in the lower part of this stratum is probably the result of groundwater that is temporarily (seasonally?) confined or �perched�


37

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

200

220

240

Depth

(cm)

Representative

Site

Strat. III - A

Figure 14. Stratigraphy of the Napa Creek Site (CA-NAP-916)

North wall of Trench 4-7-3;

Bale clay loam surface soil Strata Descriptions

Stratum III Ð A horizon: Very dark grayish brown silty clay loam (10YR 3/2, moist); strong granular to weak subangular blocky structure, many fine to large active roots; some modern debris and trash; gradual and smooth lower boundary.

Stratum III - Cu horizon: Yellowish brown silty clay loam (10YR 5/4, moist); massive structure, <10% small gravel; common active roots; clear and smooth lower boundary.

Stratum II Ð 2Ab horizon: Very dark grayish brown silty clay loam (10YR 3/2, moist); moderate subangular blocky structure; <10% small gravel; few fine active roots and common inactive root holes; few archaeological materials; gradual and smooth lower boundary.

Stratum II - 2Bwb horizon: Dark grayish brown (silty clay loam (10YR 4/2, moist); moderate, medium angular blocky structure, <10% small gravel; many fine active and abandoned root holes; few faint clay films coating ped faces, few iron oxide mottles; few archaeological materials; gradual and smooth lower boundary.

Stratum II - 2Cox horizon: Light olive brown silty clay loam (2.5Y 5/4, moist); weak subangular blocky structure, and common yellowish brown (10YR 5/6, moist) iron oxide mottles; common archaeological materials; clear and wavy lower boundary.

Stratum I Ð 3Ab horizon: Very dark gray clay loam (10YR 3/1, moist); strong medium angular blocky structure; <10% small gravel; few fine active roots and common inactive root holes; common archaeological materials; gradual and smooth lower boundary.

Stratum I - 3ABtb horizon: Very dark gray clay loam (10YR 3/1, moist); moderate medium to coarse prismatic blocky structure; <10% small gravel; few active and many abandoned root holes; common yellowish brown (10YR 5/6, moist) iron oxide mottles; few distinct clay films coasting ped faces; common archaeological materials; gradual and smooth lower boundary.

Stratum - 3Btb horizon: Very dark grayish brown clay loam (10YR 3/2, moist); strong coarse prismatic angular blocky structure; <10% small gravel; few active and many abandoned root holes; common yellowish brown (10YR 5/6, moist) iron oxide mottles; common distinct clay films coating ped faces and root holes.

Strat. III - Cu

Strat. II - 2Ab

Strat. II -

3740 + 70 B.P.,

or 4090 cal B.P.

(Beta-169303)

5000 + 60 B.P.,

or 5730 cal B.P.

(Beta-169304)

4760 + 40 B.P.,

or 5530 cal B.P.

(Beta-169305)

Strat. II - 2Cox

Strat. I - 3Ab

Feature 2

Feature 1

Strat. I - 3ABtb

Strat. I - 3Btb

4780 + 40 B.P.,

or 5520 cal B.P.

(Beta-205142)

Dated materials:Soil

Charred acorn nutshells(Features 1 and 2)

Charcoal

above Stratum I, which is less permeable. The characteristics of this stratum are consistent with the lower part of the Bale clay loam as described by Lambert and Kashiwagi (1978).

A radiocarbon date of 4090 cal B.P. was obtained from this stratum. Over 250 archaeological items, dominated by obsidian flakes and heat-altered rock, were recovered from Stratum II. The upper part of the stratum represents the surface of a formerly stable floodplain.

Stratum I � 3Ab, 3ABtb, and 3Btb Horizons This stratum is the site�s lower buried soil and consists of a clay loam that exhibits a

well-developed soil formed in floodplain alluvium. The 3Ab horizon is very dark gray (Munsell 10YR 3/1, moist) with an angular blocky structure and few active roots. The 3ABtb horizon is very dark gray (Munsell 10YR 3/1, moist) with a moderate prismatic blocky structure, few active and many abandoned root holes, common yellowish brown (Munsell 10YR 5/6, moist) iron-oxide mottles, and a few distinct clay films (Figure 14). The 3Btb horizon is very dark grayish brown (Munsell 10YR 3/2, moist) with a strong prismatic angular blocky structure, few active and many abandoned root holes, common yellowish brown (Munsell 10YR 5/6, moist) iron-oxide mottles, and common distinct clay films. The 3Ab horizon has a gradual and smooth lower boundary at 205 cm below the surface, while the 3ABtb horizon has a gradual and smooth lower boundary at a depth of 230 cm. The excavations did not expose the base of the 3Btb horizon, or the base of Stratum I. The oxidized iron in the 3Btb horizon probably reflects periodically (seasonally?) high groundwater levels in the lower part of the stratum. Except for higher clay content, the characteristics of this stratum correspond with the Cole silt loam as described by Lambert and Kashiwagi (1978).

Radiocarbon dates of 5730 cal B.P., 5520 cal B.P., and 5530 cal B.P. were obtained from Stratum I. Two cultural features and over 2,000 archaeological remains, dominated by obsidian flakes and heat-affected rock, were identified from this stratum. The upper part of Stratum I represents the surface of a formerly stable floodplain.

Site Disturbances Very few sites disturbances were observed during excavations, and most signs were

limited to the uppermost, archaeologically sterile soils of Stratum III; there, small amounts of modern debris and trash were encountered within the first 35 cm of depth. Exceptions were the three small pieces of glass mentioned earlier, one of which was a mirror fragment. Found between 150 and 210 cm in the northern half of the exposure, they attest to a certain amount of recent disturbance throughout most depths of the deposit. Disturbances due to biogenic processes did not appear to be significant, as no obvious rodent runs or large root holes were evident, nor were pockets of soil clearly displaced from one stratum noted. Both strata contained some small roots, while many small and larger roots were noted in Stratum III (see Figure 14). As such, the cultural deposits at the site appear to be relatively intact.


CULTURAL MATERIALS AND DISTRIBUTIONS

Data-recovery efforts produced a moderate quantity and diversity of artifacts that included 1,608 heat-affected rocks (HAR), 868 items of flaked-stone debitage and tools, 5 battered stones, 1 stone manuport, 6 pieces of baked clay, and a single shell fragment. Two deeply buried concentrations of stone were also encountered that were treated as cultural features. Total cataloged items numbered 2,492, which equated to about 132 items recovered per cubic meter of excavated soil, or about 46 items per cubic excluding the HAR. All were prehistoric in origin, with the exception of three small pieces of modern glass that were found within Stratum I in Units 6, 9, and 15-CS. All were from excavated contexts, except for the following three artifacts: one obsidian flake (cat. no. 2001-2-19-01) collected from the surface of Unit 19 (an unexcavated unit); and one basalt biface (TS-01) and one obsidian flake (TS-02) found on the surface of exposed, remnant spoils from Test Trench 4-2-5. Flaked-stone tools, discussed below, included projectile points, bifaces, a uniface, cores, and modified flakes.

Table 2 displays proveniences of all prehistoric artifacts irrespective of size, but exclusive of HAR. Recoveries from Units 10, 11, and 14 demonstrate that artifact frequencies were lowest in the three uppermost levels excavated, which corresponded to a 6-mm artifact density of only 3.8/m3 in the A and B horizons of Stratum II (see Figure 14). Counts increased significantly between the third and fourth levels and generally increased with depth through the C horizon of Stratum II and well into the A horizon of Stratum I. After reaching a zenith in the 180�190 cm level, frequencies gradually tapered until 210 cm, where they dropped rapidly as soils transitioned to the B horizon of

�� ¢ �� ¡��

��

��

�

��

��

��


0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280 300 320 340

Strat II

Strat I

90-100

100-110

110-120

120-130

115-130

125-130

125-140

130-140

135-140

135-150

140-150

150-160

160-170

170-180

175-190

180-190

183-193

190-200

200-210

210-220

220-230

Depth

(cm

bs)

Count

Figure 15. Artifact frequencies by depth (6-mm recovery only)

Stratum I. Strata between 120 and 210 cm contained an aggregate density of 44.5 per cubic meter for 6-mm-sized artifacts, while a 28.6/m3 recovery was observed below 210 cm. The 180�190 cm level yielded the greatest per-level accumulation of artifacts at 54.4/m3 for 6-mm sized items (see Figure 15).

An effort was made to identify horizontal patterns in the distribution of various artifacts and obsidian-hydration values from the site. While some minor variations are apparent in the frequency of certain artifact types (as described below), no substantial patterns were detected in the distribution of artifacts or toolstone types. The recovery rate of artifacts, however, was generally greater in the northern portion of the deposit than in the southern.

Flaked Stone The 868 collected items of flaked stone represent 98.5 percent of the non-HAR data-

recovery artifacts. Not surprisingly, given the site�s geographic setting, obsidian was the most frequently recovered material type, accounting for some 812 pieces, or 93.2 percent of the flaked stone. The remaining 59 artifacts are formed of tuff, basalt, dacite, rhyolite, and chalcedony (Table 3). Debitage dominates the assemblage (nN = 814); the 54 flaked-stone tools are discussed below. About half of the obsidian and all of the non-obsidian flaked-stone specimens were technologically characterized and analyzed; 15 percent of the obsidian items were submitted for hydration analysis, and a still smaller sample was geochemically sourced using X-ray fluorescence. Descriptions and analyses are provided below.

Flaked stone was distributed widely throughout the deposit. For the deposit as a whole, the 6-mm fraction was found at an average frequency of 35.2 artifacts per cubic


��

��

��

��

��

��

��¢��

��¢

��

meter (nN = 666). In contrast with Stratum II soils, which contained only 21.5/m3 (nN = 81), flaked stone in Stratum I was found at an average of 38.8/m3 (nN = 588), or 77.6 percent more frequently. Figure 16 demonstrates that per-level frequencies of flaked stone from Units 11 and 14 (two volumetrically comparable units representing the entire vertical extent of the sampled deposit) were greatest in the 120�130 and 140�150 cm levels (both with 57.5/m3); these were levels that corresponded to the transition from the B to C horizon in Stratum II, and the upper A horizon in Stratum I, respectively.

Obsidian was found in high frequencies in both soil strata and all areas of the exposure, and its distribution is discussed in greater detail in the Flaked-stone Analysis section, below. Non-obsidian materials were also found throughout all parts of the deposit but most were recovered from the northern half, where about three-quarters of the volume was dug; recovery rates of non-obsidian materials, however, are relatively homogenous

90-100

100-110

110-120 Strat II

120-130

130-140

140-150

150-160

Depth

(cm

bs)

Strat I

160-170

170-180

180-190

190-200

200-210

210-220

220-230

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24

Count

Figure 16. Flaked-stone frequencies by depth from Units 11 and 14 (6-mm recovery only)

Archaeological Data Recovery at the Napa Creek Site (CA-NAP-916) 41

04-NAP-29 PM 11.75

throughout the site, with some variations as follows. Tuff flakes were the most numerous of these and also the most widespread. They were found from one end of the exposure to the other and about half were found deeper than 190 cm; five were found in Stratum II.

Twenty-four percent of the flaked stone (n = 209) retained at least one cortical surface. Of these, 203 items were obsidian, which accounted for 25 percent of the obsidian assemblage. Of the six other cortical items, 3 were made of tuff, 2 were basalt, and 1 was dacite. Cortex is also discussed in the Flaked-stone Analysis section.

Heat-affected Rock (HAR) Heat-affected rock was the most commonly encountered site constituent by both

quantity and weight. Some 1,608 pieces were identified, accounting for 64.5 percent of the cultural materials; at 33 kg, they constituted 95.7 percent of the total weight. Many were baseball-sized or larger, but the majority was the size of pebbles and gravels. Most of the stones were of local igneous materials (some were sandstone), and many of the larger pieces contained water-worn cortical surfaces, suggesting their collection from Napa Creek or another nearby stream. Almost all were fragmentary and were visibly affected by heat, displaying oxidized or discolored surfaces, incomplete cracking, and/or roughly textured angular fractures. HAR was prevalent throughout the deposit, being found in virtually every level dug, and averaging about 1,744 g/m3 for the deposit as a whole.

Though HAR was ubiquitous, stratigraphic patterns are apparent. Stratum I was richest in HAR, where a mean weight of 1,700 g/m3 was 7.5 times higher than that of the 225 g/m3 observed in Stratum II. Across the deposit, 82 percent of the HAR weight was concentrated between 180 and 210 cm, in the lower-A and upper-B horizons of Stratum I; average individual stone sizes were much greater in that zone than elsewhere. (Features 1 and 2, discussed below, accounted for some of the majority.) Two 10-cm excavation levels contained intriguingly high frequencies of HAR, with (1) the 180�190 cm level producing 26 percent of the total recovered HAR weight, and 17 percent of the count (even to the exclusion of feature materials; see below); and (2) the 120�130 cm level yielding a disproportionably high quantity (n = 78) of HAR within the otherwise low-density Stratum II soils. There, average individual stone sizes were small (about 4 g each; see Figures 17 and 18), but the higher quantities mirrored those of flaked stone in that level. The northern half of the exposure contained about 3.5 times the weight of heat-affected rock as did the southern half allowing for differences in the excavated volume.

Shell One fragment of shell (15-47) was found while wet-screening the 150�160 cm level

of Unit 15-CS, the column sample. Encountered in the 1.5-mm mesh, it was a very small and fragile item that broke into three pieces during discovery. It was the only evidence of shellfish recovered at the site, and its size and fragmented nature precluded taxonomic identification. It is not known whether it represented a fresh- or saltwater species of mollusk.

Baked Clay Six small pieces of baked clay were collected during data-recovery efforts, for a total

weight of 12.4 grams. They were found in 6-mm mesh from the northern half of the exposure, in Units 1, 3, and 14, and from depths ranging from 90 to 170 cm; five were from Stratum I. The only noteworthy aspect of distribution for baked clay was the retrieval of two each (66%) from the 160�170 cm level of close-proximity Units 1 and 3; otherwise,


0 120 140 160 180 220 240 260 280 300

n

Strat II

Strat I

Note: 31 additional HAR not included (from 115-130, 125-140, and 175-190 cmbs levels)

20 40 60 80 100 200

90-100

100-110

110-120

120-130

130-140

140-150

150-160

160-170

170-180

180-190

183-193

190-200

200-210

210-220

220-230

Dep

th (

cm

bs)

Count ( = 1577)

(Fea. 2)

Figure 17. Frequency of heat-affected rock by depth

Weight (g)

0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 9000

90-100

100-110

110-120

120-130 Strat II

130-140

140-150

150-160

De

pth

(cm

bs)

Strat I

160-170

170-180

180-190

183-193 (Fea. 2)

190-200

200-210

210-220

220-230

Note: 165.4 g not included (from 115-130, 125-140, and 175-190 cmbs levels)

Figure 18. Weight of heat-affected rock by depth

43

Stratum II

Stratum I

4780 ± 40 B.P., or 5520 cal BP (Beta-205142)

Figure 19. Feature 1 at CA-NAP-916; note that depths shown are

from below datum.

the six pieces were not meaningfully associated with patterns of HAR distribution or stone features, such as one might expect with a living surface or cooking area.

Features Two rock concentrations were identified at the site and designated as Feature 1 and

Feature 2. The two were located about 1 m apart in units 10 and 11 (Figure 9) from the 180 to 210 cm levels in Stratum I, but were separated vertically by at least 7 cm, with Feature 2 being the upper and Feature 1 the lower (Figure 14).

Feature 1 was exposed in Unit 11 at a depth of about 201�206 cm within the 3ABtb horizon of Stratum I (Figure 19). It was composed of 41 heat-affected rocks that weighed 3,800 g, which accounted for nearly all the stone removed from the 200�210 cm level.


Most of the rock was located in the south half of the unit, and ranged in size from medium gravel to small cobbles; none was morphologically distinct from other HAR found elsewhere in the deposit. Roughly two dozen of the feature stones were arranged in a somewhat circular cluster that was surrounded by a loose scatter of other HAR. Associated with the feature were six items of debitage, including a large rhyolite flake and five visually sourced Napa Valley obsidian flakes, four of which yielded hydration rim readings of 2.5, 3.2, 3.9, and 4.4 microns, or an average of 3.5 microns. Five obsidian flakes were found in the southeast corner of the unit, and non-feature artifacts included two obsidian flakes with rim readings averaging 3.2 and 3.3 microns each (also visually Napa), and one small edge-modified obsidian flake that was not cut for hydration. No charcoal or burned earth was observed, but a sample of the feature matrix was collected for flotation sampling and analysis (see below). As a result, charred acorn nutshell was recovered from the matrix sample and submitted for radiocarbon dating, along with acorn nutshell from Feature 2 (see Radiocarbon Dating Results, below).

Feature 2 was exposed just west of Feature 1 in the north half of Unit 10 at a depth of 183�193 cm within the A horizon of Stratum I. This feature had more HAR (7,900 g) that was more discrete and densely clustered than Feature 1 (Figure 20). The feature yielded only one Napa Valley obsidian �flake, with a hydration rim value of 2.6 microns. The 180� 190 cm level of Unit 10 also produced about 700 g of HAR and 9 Napa Valley obsidian flakes, 2 of which returned mean hydration rim values of 3.2 and 3.9 microns each. No charcoal or burned earth was observed in the feature, but a sample of the feature matrix was collected for flotation sampling and analysis. As a result, charred acorn nutshell was recovered from the matrix sample and submitted for radiocarbon dating, along with a charcoal sample that was collected from below the feature in Unit 10 (see Radiocarbon Dating Results, below).

Flaked-stone Tools Of the 59 stone tools recovered during fieldwork, 54 were formed by percussion or

pressure flaking. Fifty-three of the flaked-stone tools were obsidian, and 1 was basalt. The flaked-stone tools include the following:

3 projectile points 12 bifaces (11 obsidian, 1 basalt) including several possible projectile point fragments 1 uniface 9 cores 29 modified flakes

The battered stone includes 2 hammerstones, a possible abrader, and 3 less distinctive items that display worn or battered surfaces.

Stone tools represent 6.7 percent of the overall artifact collection (excluding HAR). They were encountered at a rate of 3.1/m3 of excavated soil, with modified flakes making up the single greatest category (49%) of tools. Tools were found from 100 to 230 cm, and were retrieved from almost all areas and levels in the exposure (Figure 21), including 8 items from Stratum II (2.1/m3) and 51 items (3.4/m3) from Stratum I; no stone tools were recovered from the column sample (Unit 15-CS). Tools and their distributions are discussed in greater detail below, and proveniences and metrical data appear in Appendix E.


Figure 20. Feature 2 at CA-NAP-916; note that depths shown are from below datum.

46

90

100

110

120

130

140

150

160

170

180

190

200

210

220

230

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

modified flake biface core point bat. stone - other hammerstone uniface abrader

Strat II

Strat I

10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31

Unit

Depth

(cm

bs)

Figure 21. Horizontal and vertical distribution of stone tools

Cores The nine cores were found within both strata and in all areas of the exposure, but

were mostly (56%) from the north end, in Units 1, 3, and 6; their depths ranged from 130 to 220 cm, but only one was found in Stratum II. Many of the cores are multidirectional forms and items made from small cobbles (Figure 22). Cortex was present on 67 percent of the items; two of the remaining three non-cortical pieces were thick and could instead represent split cobbles. At least one core (cat. no. 22-24) is characterized by as few as three percussion scars, while two (14-33, 15-19) exhibit as many as a dozen. Two also possess scars with sheared faces (01-20, 03-25) indicating reduction through anvil support. Two of the cores are made on flakes (03-28, 15-19), retaining remnant ventral or dorsal surfaces.

Modified Flakes The 29 modified flakes were found throughout the exposure from 100 to 220 cm; all

but 3 (90%), however, were found in the northern half and all but 4 (86%) were from Stratum I. Those 3 at the south end (all between 175 and 210 cm in Units 22 and 31) equated to a density of about 0.6/m3, while the remaining 26 (in the northern half) equated to an overall density of 2.8/m3. Twenty-four of the modified flakes (83%) were classed as simple flake tools (Figure 23). The remaining 5 items are characterized by some form of retouch, most of it pressure flaking. None of the modified flakes exhibit attributes characteristic of early-stage biface forms, such as appropriate sizes or shapes and regularity of margins.


3-25

3-28 15-19

31-10

3-6

1-20

14-33

6-25 22-24

c

e-m

c

c

c

c

e-m

0 1 2 cm

Key: e-m = edge-modified; c = cortex

Figure 22. Obsidian cores from CA-NAP-916. Note cortex patches marked by"c".

48

c

e-m

14-30

14-42

10-8

10-23

6-1

15-23

c

c

c

e-m

e-m

Most intensive modification

0 1

11-04

11-41

11-30


Uniface (articulating halves)

2 cm

Figure 23. Obsidian uniface and selected modified flakes from CA-NAP-916

49

Uniface Two halves of a single obsidian uniface were recovered in the screen from adjacent

Units 11 and 15, one from 210�220 cm and the other from 220�230 cm (Figure 23), indicating their horizontal separation by anywhere from 0 to 3 m and approximately 0 to 20 cm in elevation. The items were assigned two catalog numbers prior to being refitted (11-30, 15-23). Rejoined as a single tool, the item is characterized by steep spine-plane angles along the lateral margins created by pressure flaking to the dorsal face. Several pressure or edge-abrasion scars to the ventral face might attest to an episode of edge rejuvenation.

Bifaces Eleven of the 12 bifaces were found in subsurface contexts from throughout the

deposit, mostly within Stratum I between 140 and 220 cm (Figures 24 and 25). Two were found in Stratum II between 110 and 140 cm, and one (TS-01) was found atop remnant spoils from Test Trench 4-2-5; it appeared to have come from a depth of between 40 and 130 cm. Five of the 12 bifaces exhibit morphological or technological attributes consistent with those typifying projectile points. These include the pointed or arched ends, pressure flaking, and biconvex cross sections that are typically considered to represent the later stages of biface manufacture. All are also noncortical.

One of these biface fragments (09-15) is a distal tip made on Borax Lake glass (Figure 24). It is pressure flaked and has a blade constriction angle less than 30 degrees. It is marked by a perverse fracture originating at one margin. Attributes are consistent with a projectile point or formal biface tool that broke during maintenance or modification. Another biface fragment that could represent a projectile point tip is artifact 14-18 (Figure 25). This piece also has an acute blade-constriction angle (~30 degrees) and has been pressure flaked to a biconvex cross section. It is marked by a lateral bend break.

Two biface fragments that are morphologically consistent with lanceolate projectile point proximal ends are 10-13 and 14-04 (not illustrated). Both are pressure flaked,

characterized by blade constriction angles of about 50 degrees, and marked by lateral bend breaks. The latter item retains a remnant ventral face scar documenting its origin from a flake blank. The remaining formal biface fragment (31-17) is a margin and end segment that could be the result of a projectile point damaged through impact (Figure 25). Its original form, however, is equivocal. Turned one way, it might be consistent with a lanceolate base. Turned 180 degrees, it resembles the lateral margin and tang of a concave-base point. This latter assignment would be consistent

Figure 24. Obsidian projectile points (upper row) and bifaces with the direction of force as (lower row) marked on the fracture surface

1-14 14-10

26-18

10-15 9-15 14-4

0 1 2 cm


26-01 26-22

31-17

c e-m

TS-01

3-17

14-18

e-m

01-21c

31-13 11-12

0 1 2 cm


Figure 25. Obsidian and "obsalt" (TS-1) bifaces from CA-NAP-916

51

and a slight indentation on the margin would be compatible with similar features resulting from hafting or resharpening concave-base forms. This item has been re-used as a scraper, evidenced by a series of micro-scars along one exterior face of the fracture surface.

Bifaces that lacked sufficient attributes for consideration as possible projectile points included six obsidian items and one classed as basalt. The latter (TS-01) consists of a vitreous basalt (�obsalt�) biface form, percussion shaped from a flake blank. It is characterized by a remnant ventral face scar and fractures that could have resulted from percussion manufacture or use-related force at one end. Though one lateral margin exhibits directional spalling, the thickness, irregular outline, and limited shaping of the piece is generally not consistent with use as a projectile. No cortex is present on this item.

Other obsidian biface forms include a small noncortical end fragment (01-21) marked by a break generated by percussion from a lateral margin, and a larger biface fragment (03-17) shaped by percussion from a cobble. The amount of cortex and limited invasiveness of percussion scars are typical of early-stage reduction forms. It is marked by a lateral bend break.

A noncortical margin and medial fragment of a larger biface (11-12) appears to be a remnant of a late-stage form. The remnant also appears to have been re-used as a core� as evidenced by direction of force on fracture faces�and then a scraper. A series of micro-scars is present on the edge of one fracture face.

A fragment of a noncortical middle-stage biface (26-22) is marked by evidence of percussion reworking through use as a core. It is characterized by a truncated lateral bend break at one end and recent damage at the other. Another noncortical middle-stage biface fragment (26-01) is predominantly pressure flaked to a biconvex cross section; limited percussion flaking is evident on one end. A lateral bend break characterizes the other end. An early-stage biface end characterized by one cortical face (31-13) is made on a primary flake detached from a cobble. It is marked by a bend break that might be a direct fracture caused by percussive force at the margin.

Projectile Points Three projectile points composed of Napa Valley obsidian were recovered from NAP-

916 (Figure 24). Two of these are morphologically and stylistically compatible with recognized forms in the North Coast Ranges, falling within the Excelsior Foliate series as first observed in the Clear Lake basin by Harrington, later defined by Fredrickson, and further refined by White (2002:230�234). Another, a blade fragment, is characterized by morphological attributes and a technologically diagnostic fracture consistent with use as a projectile. Several items classed as bifaces also exhibit particular aspects of shape and manufacture that are consistent with projectile points, and are discussed above under Bifaces. All three of the points were recovered from Stratum I at depths ranging from 160 to 210 cm.

A complete projectile point (26-18), shaped predominantly by pressure flaking, was found in Unit 26 in the 200�210 cm level. Its form and width appear consistent with its classification as an Excelsior Type 1A (a small bipointed type) according to the maximum-width and morphology scheme proposed by White (2002:240). The item appears to have a remnant of a dorsal surface scar on the basal half of one face and a cortex �patch� on the opposite. These attributes could be consistent with manufacture from a small cobble or tabular piece. There is no evidence of use on this item, with the possible exception of a


somewhat asymmetrical distal blade. This specimen produced a hydration rim value of 3.7 microns (NV).

Another complete point (14-10) was found in Unit 14 in the 160�170 cm level. It exhibits a sequence of pressure-flake scars, though a small remnant of cortex is present at the proximal end. This piece also does not exhibit any evidence of use. The item�s form is generally consistent with the Excelsior Type 1D as defined by White (2002:236), which is a small non-shouldered variant within the Excelsior series. This specimen produced a hydration rim value of 3.3 microns (NV).

The tip of a projectile point (01-14) was recovered from Unit 1 in the 190�200 cm level. It is marked by a margin-spalling scar characteristic of impact damage. A lateral bend break across the blade may also have occurred as part of this same impact event. The item retains no cortex and does not show any other diagnostic evidence of use or repair. This specimen produced a hydration rim value of 1.9 microns (NV).

Battered Stones Five of the stone tools unearthed at NAP-916 were purposefully or incidentally the

result of battering, hammering, or abrading actions; they were made on locally available volcanic or sedimentary materials, including rhyolite and sandstone. These artifacts are broadly classed as battered stones on the basis of typological distinctions provided in Stewart (2004). The items are robust and range in size from coarse gravels to small cobbles, and reflect site activities that required grinding or smoothing, and pounding or tapping, such as stone knapping. Included are 1 abrader, 2 hammerstones, and 3 other battered stones of less immediately identifiable function. Four of the 5 artifacts were from the northern half of the exposure, and, like most of the flaked-stone tools, were mostly from within Stratum I, in this case between 150 and 210 cm.

Abrader Artifact 26-26, from Stratum I in the southern third of the exposure, is from the same

provenience as that of projectile point 26-18, the 200�210 cm level of Unit 26. It is a fist-sized item with a ground edge and at least one surface that has been distinctively smoothed and scratched (Figure 26). It is a rounded, reddish-brown volcanic stone with a soft, powdery texture that, despite being complete and showing no signs of fracturing, exhibits a burned appearance suggestive of heat alteration. Although much of the stone is unmodified and unremarkable, it is noteworthy for containing a distinctively worn margin that has been bifacially smoothed and ground to form steep spine-plane angles and a distinctive but blunt-edged lip. The lip is convex and measures about 7 cm long; whether its formation was purposeful or incidental to use of the stone is unknown, but its morphology suggests intentional shaping. One face in particular contains a smooth surface and numerous substantial, noncontiguous scratches that are aligned perpendicular to the lip in at least two separate areas. Modification resulted from a grinding or a rubbing action, and the artifact seems to have been used in some sort of abrading capacity.

Hammerstones Two distinctive hammerstones (11-25, 26-09) were found in Stratum I in the central and southern parts of the exposure, in relative proximity to the cores and modified flakes that were found in higher density in that general area. The hammerstones are formed of water-smoothed sandstone, with size, form, and wear patterns consistent with the effects of the percussive reduction of flaked stone. Item 11-25 is a small, tabular, somewhat oblong


fracture

crushed and battered edge

with step

crushed and battered edge

0 1 2 cm

Other battered stone (2001-2-11-43); opposite faces shown

unmodified surface

0 1

formed lip

smoothed and ground surface with bi-directional scratches formed lip

2 cm

Abrader (2001-2-26-26)

Figure 26. Battered stones, from CA-NAP-916

cobble that was recovered from the 190�200 cm level of Unit 11; one end of this complete specimen was rounded through use and the other end was battered to the point of flattening (Figure 27). Artifact 26-09, from the 160�170 cm level of Unit 26, is one-half of a small, elongated cobble that also contains multiple worn surfaces, including pecked, battered, and flattened areas on the remnant end (Figure 27). Unlike the other hammerstone, scratches and grooves mark the opposing faces, which likely resulted from abrading and edge preparation for stone knapping. The scratches are diagonal and unidirectional, and a distinctive, parallel groove on one surface measures about 20 mm long, 2 mm deep, and 3 mm wide; the opposite side of the rock has a much smaller groove. The position of some of the facial wear indicates that the stone broke during or after its use as a hammer.

Other Battered Stones Artifact 11-43 is a chunky, ash-colored, subangular stone with at least one protruding

surface that was used in a percussive fashion. Found in the same location as hammerstone 11-25, it is complete, formed of a local igneous material, and has a protruding �point� on an otherwise thin margin that exhibits bifacial step-fracturing and crushing, most likely


groove flattened surface

0 1

groove

light scratches battered surface

battered and

2 cm

battered and flattened surface

battered surface

scale for plan view end view

Hammerstone (2001-2-26-09)

worn surface

battered end

battered and

Hammerstone (2001-2-11-25)

worn

ed

ge

0 1

fractured edge

fractured edge 2 cm

worn edge

end view

Other battered stone (2001-2-6-28)

Figure 27. Hammerstones and battered stone, from CA-NAP-916

55

from direct blows against an object. It is otherwise unmodified. Artifact 06-28, from the 170�180 cm level of Unit 6, in the northern third, is a thin, somewhat triangular spall from a water-rounded cobble that shows a light amount of unifacial wear at its larger end (Figure 27). After original cleavage of the stone had occurred, the interior edge was beveled (and one flake detached, possibly accidentally), which was probably the result of scraping or abrading motions that made use of this wide end of the rock; such wear is not present elsewhere along the circumference. Including the small flake scar, the wear measures about 4 cm long and is not immediately obvious, and the stone is otherwise unremarkable in appearance.

Manuport This item consists of a small blocky, elongated, igneous cobble recovered from the

190�200 cm level of Unit 14. It appears unmodified, except for a recent nick at one end. The size and context of the stone suggest that people imported it to the site, though its possible use or function is unclear.

ANALYTIC STUDIES

Archaeobotanical Analysis Three light fractions from flotation samples were submitted to Dr. Eric Wohlgemuth

of Far Western Anthropological Research Group of Davis, California, for identification of charred plant remains. These fractions included one each from Features 1 and 2, as well as one previously floated and stored, smaller sample from 1998 Test Trench 4-2-5. Identifications were made of nutshell and small-seed dietary remains: 66 nutshells representing three genera, 15 seeds identified to the level of family or genus, and 9 additional unidentified seeds or seed fragments. Nuts included acorn and California Bay, and seeds include wild cucumber, fiddleneck, hairgrass, hare leaf, tarweed species, and of the Asteracaceae (sunflower) and Poaceae (grass) families. Methods and results can be found in greater detail in Appendix G.

Radiocarbon-dating Results Four soil and charcoal samples were collected and submitted to Beta Analytic, Inc.,

in Miami, Florida, for radiocarbon-dating analysis (Table 4). Two were bulk soil samples from each of the artifact-bearing strata, one was unassociated charcoal from Stratum I, and a fourth was comprised of acorn nutshells obtained during macrobotanical analysis in Stratum I. A soil sample collected from Unit 14 at a depth of 100 to 110 cm (Stratum II) produced a date of 3740 + 70 B.P., or 4090 cal B.P. (Beta-169303), which is Middle Holocene in age. A date of 5000 + 60 B.P., or 5730 cal B.P. (Beta-169304) was obtained from another soil sample collected from 180 to 205 cm (Stratum I) in Unit 14. A charcoal sample collected from a depth of 210 to 230 cm in the sidewall of Unit 10, below Feature 2, yielded a date of 4760 + 40 B.P., or 5530 cal B.P. (Beta-169305). Lastly, acorn recovered in flotation samples from Features 1 and 2 (201 to 206 cm in Unit 11 and 183 to 203 cm in Unit 10, respectively) yielded a �composite� Middle Holocene date of 4780 + 40 B.P., or 5520 cal B.P. (Beta-205142). The specific methods used to date and calibrate these samples, along with more detailed dating results, are provided in Appendix F.


��

�� ¡ �� ¡ � ��

��£�� ¢��

� � � � � � � ��

� � ��

� ��

��

��

��

��

��

��

�

��

��

��

��

��

��

� ��

��

�� ¢ �� ¢�� ¡ �

Obsidian Sourcing Almost all of the obsidian from NAP-916 bears resemblance to the Napa Valley glass

group, with some 98 percent being visually assigned to this group on the basis of macroscopic characteristics. Exceptions were limited to a few items that appeared to be from the Borax Lake and Annadel sources. Attribute variability in Napa Valley obsidian that was encountered during the project�s flaked-stone studies, described below, prompted the subdivision of this glass in the flaked-stone analytic sample into seven sequentially numbered subgroups.

To test the efficacy of visually sourcing recovered obsidian, a small sample was submitted for geochemical trace-element analysis via energy-dispersive X-ray fluorescence (XRF) to Dr. Richard Hughes of the Geochemical Research Laboratory in Portola Valley, California (Appendix H). Selections were made with consideration of artifact classes and proveniences, possible geochemical differences between subgroups, and the possible representation of nonlocal obsidian by formal tools, such as projectile points and bifaces that may have been imported from outside the region. A total of 17 artifacts were sourced by XRF means, including all 3 projectile points, 3 of the bifaces, 1 uniface, 2 cores, 3 modified flakes, and 5 pieces of debitage. Table 5 displays the visual and XRF source ascriptions for these artifacts. The XRF analysis generally confirmed the overall effectiveness of the visual macroscopic sourcing of the obsidian with the following exceptions: (1) one piece visually identified as Napa was identified as Annadel by XRF; (2) one item visually identified as Napa was tentatively attributed to the Napa source by XRF; and (3) two artifacts visually identified as Napa could not be assigned to a known geochemical source by XRF (see Appendix H).

Obsidian-hydration Analysis A total of 122 obsidian items collected during data-recovery efforts were submitted

for hydration rim measurement to Origer�s Obsidian Laboratory, then in Rohnert Park, California. These items, representing 15 percent of the obsidian collection, included 78 items of debitage and 44 tools. The samples were submitted in two batches, with 66 items


��

�� ¢ �� ¢��

�

�

�

��

��

� � � ��

��

�� ¢�� ¢��¡ ��

in Batch 1 containing 30 unmodified flakes and 33 tools, and a follow-up, 59-item Batch 2 that contained 48 unmodified flakes and 11 tools (Appendix I).

Given the site�s relatively low diversity of temporally diagnostic artifact types, hydration analysis was emphasized in the quest to gain chronological control and to help define cultural components. Specimens were initially selected in order to sample site deposits horizontally and vertically and to represent most of the recovered tools. Batch 1 tentatively met these goals by including almost two-thirds of the tools and a small percentage of the obsidian debitage from throughout the deposit, although most of the debitage samples were from the lower half of Stratum I in Units 10 and 11. Batch 2 was assembled and submitted partly to evaluate patterns and other results that were encountered in the first batch, and to further sample selected or underrepresented proveniences and artifact types or characteristics; more emphasis, for instance, was placed on cortical pieces and certain flake types, and, with few tools left to test, the debitage count was increased and spread more evenly among all locations of the deposit.

Of the 122 artifacts, 123 hydration cuts were made, three secondary bands were measured, and 107 positive readings on 104 items were obtained. Nineteen attempted readings (15%) yielded no measurable hydration bands, or bands that were diffuse or of variable width; the cut surfaces of most of these were considered too weathered for production of positive results, though one specimen (core 15-19) contained a diffuse band on one surface and a measurable band on a second surface. Nine items that yielded positive results were also considered weathered, but their measurements were not excluded from consideration of site dating. In contrast, 3 of the 107 readings were second bands and were excluded because each was a significantly larger measurement than the item�s first band (i.e., 3.0/5.7µ for 9-05, 3.4/4.8µ for 9-10, and 4.2/7.9µ for 22-19). Thus, due to the


possibility of off-site artifact scavenging and re-use in prehistoric times, earlier artifact use could not be confidently associated with earlier periods of site use. All hydration measurements gathered by Origer�s Obsidian Laboratory are provided in raw form in Appendix I.

Table 6, below, presents general hydration ranges and means, including those by soil stratum, and Figure 28 displays rim values for all data-recovery Napa Valley obsidian artifacts by stratum (n = 98). Removing three statistically outlying measurements of 1.4, 6.4, and 6.6 microns each indicates that, across strata, values ranging from 3.0 to 3.9 microns account for some 60 percent of the population (n = 95), and that the range of 2.0 to 2.7 microns contains the next largest representation, at just over 22 percent. Almost two-

�� ¢��

�� P �� P ��

��

�� ¢ �� ¢

��

��

��

�� ¢ �� ¢��

�� ¢ ��

�� ¢ �� ¢ �� ¡�� µ ��

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

�� ¢ ��

1.4

1.5

1.6

1.7

1.8

1.9

2.0

2.1

2.2

2.3

2.4

2.5

2.6

2.7

2.8

2.9

3.0

3.1

3.2

3.3

3.4

3.5

3.6

3.7

3.8

3.9

4.0

4.1

4.2

4.3

4.4

4.5

4.6

4.7

4.8

4.9

5.0

5.1

5.2

5.3

5.4

5.5

5.6

5.7

5.8

5.9

6.0

6.1

6.2

6.3

6.4

6.5

6.6

Microns

Co

un

t (n

= 9

8)

140-230 (Stratum I)

100-140 (Stratum II)

Figure 28. CA-NAP-916 hydration results by stratum (Data-recovery Napa Valley obsidian only)


thirds of the readings from Stratum I fall between 2.5 and 4.4 microns (n = 61, or 64.2%), with readings of 3.4 microns dominating this cluster (n = 13, or 21.3%). Somewhat similar is the group of six (46.1%) readings from Stratum II that are found within the range of 3.1 to 3.9 microns. Regarding individual excavation levels, 13 Napa Valley artifacts from the artifact-rich 180�190 cm level had a mean of 3.5 microns.

Flaked-stone Analysis This section summarizes results and interpretations derived from a technical analysis

of the flaked-stone assemblage from NAP-916. The section defines the samples used for the analysis, and describes the methods used to classify different types of Napa Valley obsidian. This section also addresses the procurement and reduction of toolstone as one of the primary activities practiced at the site, and as one of the revised Research Issues (see above). The flake-stone assemblage from NAP-916 is compared with others in the region in the Lithic Procurement and Reduction Strategies section below.

The overall interpretive potential of the site�s flaked-stone assemblage was linked to the identification of technological characteristics and functional forms from analytic samples associated with particular strata and/or temporal components. The initial objectives of this analysis were (1) to identify the functional and technological characteristics of tools and flakes from two different strata (components) recovered from a well-sampled part of the site; (2) to conduct an attribute analysis of all non-obsidian flaked-stone artifacts, regardless of their provenience; and (3) to examine and provide relevant analytic perspectives on all flaked-stone tools, regardless of their provenience.

Attribute analysis formed the basis of identifying core, biface, or uniface reduction trajectories as well as tool resharpening (maintenance of edges), reshaping (altering specific forms but retaining general form; e.g., points still points), or reworking (transforming or converting items into different forms; e.g., bifaces used as cores or scrapers). The attributes examined by the flaked-stone study are consistent with those developed and defined by other lithic studies in North America, as discussed in Appendix D. Additional flaked-stone information provided by Appendix D includes (1) the theoretical basis for flaked-stone studies; (2) a discussion of some relevant research issues; (3) artifact definitions and technical abbreviations; and (4) the detailed results and raw data tables generated for this study.

Analytic Samples ASC lithic analyst David Bieling examined about 55 percent of the flaked-stone

assemblage from NAP-916, which included all formed tools and a large sample of debitage. Some 477 items from throughout the deposit were selected on the basis of type, material, or provenience. Included were the project�s 54 points, bifaces, cores, unifaces, and modified flakes described above, and 423 items of debitage. The majority of the items were obsidian (n = 421, 88%), with all but 5 of these from the Napa Valley source (visual and XRF sourcing), and the rest from Annadel, Borax Lake, or an unidentified source. Other toolstones examined were volcanic tuff (n = 32), basalt (n = 8), dacite (n = 6), rhyolite (n = 6), chalcedony (n = 3), and a vitreous basalt, or �obsalt� (n = 1). For purposes of recording artifact attributes, the 29 modified flakes were grouped with waste flakes for a total debitage sample of 452 items.

Of these, 373 items were selected for a focused debitage analysis, including all 358 waste flakes and 15 modified flakes from Strata I and II in Units 9, 10, 11, 14, and 15. This


��¢£�� ¢ ��

��

��

��

�

��

��

��

��

�� ¢£��

area was chosen for comparative study due to the higher artifact frequencies, two stone features, and the 3-mm sample recovered from this area. Within this group, 342 items were assigned to the Napa Valley source (92%) and 2 to the Annadel source, 13 were classed as tuff, 5 were basalt, 5 were rhyolite, 4 were dacite, and 2 were chalcedony. Table 7 provides proveniences of all analyzed artifacts by stratum and unit, and Table 8 displays material types by stratum in the debitage sample from Units 9-15.

The volumes of soil comprising these samples differed significantly, with 2.65 m3 of soil (30% of sample) excavated from Stratum II and 6.1 m3 of soil (70% of sample) excavated from Stratum I, for a total of 8.75 cubic meters. Thus, the volume of the Stratum II sample is 43 percent less than that of Stratum I, or a 1:2.3 ratio of difference. This relationship and its effect on the analysis are discussed below. Furthermore, the 3-mm sample was obtained from a total of 2.2 m3 of excavated earth: 0.4 m3 from Stratum II and 1.8 m3 from Stratum I. As such, they should not be considered directly comparable to the 6-mm datasets or


�� ¢ ��

�� ¢��

� ��

�� ¢ �� ¢��

��

representative of the technologies identified. The debitage and tools are also quantified according to strata, size, and other characteristics in Appendix D.

Napa Valley Obsidian Subgroups In addition to analyzing technological attributes of flaked stone, the study also

undertook to identify macroscopic variations in Napa Valley obsidian. It is understood that the Napa Valley area contains potentially unrecognized obsidian sources and that the well-documented Napa Valley Glass group contains a considerable amount of intrasource variability with respect to opacity, color, constituents, and structure. It may be that segregating these variants can provide a means of addressing cultural differences in material acquisition and use or reveal potential differences in glass hydration rates; see Appendix D for more discussion of this regional issue. For the present study, examination of the 394 Napa Valley obsidian artifacts yielded seven �subgroups,� which are described in Table 9.

Flaked-stone Analysis Summary Flaked-stone reduction trajectories at NAP-916 are represented by all stages of biface

manufacture. With at least one possible exception (3-17), bifaces appear to have been produced from flakes and it seems reasonable to presume a few of the modified flakes and cores represent abandoned attempts to initiate biface forms. Flake blanks were undoubtedly produced from locally available glass cobbles in many instances, with early-stage biface forms developed through percussion flaking. Late-stage finishing was accomplished through pressure flaking. Though few in number, the two Excelsior projectile points recovered from the site appear to be the end products of this manufacturing sequence. Reduction trajectories further included tool-fragment recycling through anvil-supported and direct freehand percussion on damaged or exhausted pieces. Ad hoc use of core or cobble fragments also occurred as necessitated by perceived tasks. Additionally,


�� ¢ ��

�� ¢ ��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

�� ¢ �� ¢

�� ¢��

�� ¢ �� ¢

��¢ ��¢

�� £�� ¢ �� ¢

�� ¢ �� ¢ ��¢ �� ¢

�� ¢

��

many flake-tool forms appear expedient or opportunistic, as some were made on core fragments and broken biface forms.

Several large core-reduction flakes were recovered from Stratum I, and one large biface-thinning flake (54 mm long) was derived from Stratum II. Six flakes from Stratum I were larger than 40 mm in length: three are dacite, one is rhyolite, and two are NV7. The four non-obsidian items were all noncortical, while the NV7 pieces retained cortex. The large thinning flake from Stratum II was made on NV5 glass and retained cortex. Flakes made of Napa Valley glass exhibit a size pattern showing emphasis on smaller widths (Figure 29), though this might be partially biased by the inclusion of the 3-mm sample. Though larger flakes are present in both strata, the emphasis is clearly skewed towards very small percussion and pressure flakes, a pattern reflecting the small size of most core and tool forms worked.

Debitage from biface reduction was more prevalent than flakes from core reduction in the 3-mm and 6-mm samples from both strata, but to a small degree in some contexts. When considering the addition of small pressure flakes from the 3-mm sample as one element of biface working, the numbers become unrealistically inflated. Typically, biface working generates a greater amount of debitage than core flaking and the proportions represented in the 6-mm samples of each component appear to be slightly skewed in favor of that technology. On the other hand, there might be a tendency to attribute more flake fragments to the simple dorsal-surface category due to limitations of flake size. Technologically nondiagnostic interior flakes lacking platforms have been omitted from the technology groupings in an effort to minimize this tendency.

Artifact fractures reveal patterns characteristic of manufacture, use, reshaping and recycling, and discard at NAP-916. Lateral bend fractures dominate the fracture types on biface forms, substantiating inferences about flaked-stone reduction activities gained from the debitage analysis. Biface forms that have been percussion-struck along lateral margins


0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

Co

un

t

Upper

10

Flake Width (cm)

Lower

Figure 29. Width of flakes by component at CA-NAP-916

or fracture faces correlate with patterns of material recycling (e.g., 1-21, 11-12, 26-22). Some reworked items exhibit evidence of secondary use as scrapers (e.g., 11-12, 31-17), while a single bilateral crested scraper might attest to curation of simple tools. Distal impact fractures on several of the late-stage biface forms are attributable to hunting activities and subsequent discard of damaged points (e.g., 1-14, 31-17), while two other points exhibit no sign of damage or reshaping (14-10, 26-18).

The frequency of glass from each subgroup was also quantified by sample size and stratum as shown in Table 10. The results of this analysis indicate that subgroup NV5 accounts for about 50 percent of the 6-mm sample, about 42 percent of the 3-mm sample, or about 46 percent overall. Obsidian assigned to the NV1 subgroup makes up 18 percent of the sample, with the other subgroups make up even less of the total sample as they range from only 1 to 12 percent (Table 10). Each subgroup is represented almost equally in both size samples with a few notable exceptions: (1) the 3-mm sample has about twice as much of the NV3 group (19%) than was found in the 6-mm sample (7%); and (2) the NV6 subgroup is represented in the 6-mm sample (2%), but absent in the 3-mm sample. Higher quantities of each subgroup were recovered from Stratum I than Stratum II, which reflects differences in the volume of materials excavated from each stratum. Slightly more of subgroup NV3 is present in the 6-mm sample of Stratum II than Stratum I, however, while NV4, NV6, and NV7 obsidian are not represented at all in the 3-mm sample from Stratum II (Table 10). This general pattern is still apparent after the samples from the two components are adjusted for differences in the excavated volumes from the two strata.

While the differences are small, it suggests that the Lower Component (Stratum I) has more material variability, as represented by seven Napa Valley subgroups, than does the Upper Component (Stratum II). If this was so, then it follows (1) that a wider variety of obsidian was available for procurement earlier in time as represented by the Lower Component, or alternatively, (2) that a broader (perhaps more mobile) material-


�� ¢ �� ¢ �� £� ��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

�� ¢ ��

�� ¡ �� ¢ �� ¢ ��

��

��

�� ¡ �� ¡ ��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

�� ¢ ��

procurement strategy is reflected in the Lower Component than the Upper Component. At the same time, the reduced material variability of the Upper Component suggests (1) that fewer types (subgroups) of Napa Valley obsidian were available for procurement later in time, or alternatively, (2) that the Upper Component reflects a more geographically circumscribed (perhaps more sedentary) adaptation that limited the procurement of different subgroups. Though the alternatives are not mutually exclusive, they are avenues for further research.

Proportions of flakes and fragments retaining cortex in the 6-mm samples are high in both strata. Each set comprises almost 40 percent, which is higher than some quarry workshop sites in the region, such as the Annadel Quarry, CA-SON-29 (Bieling 1988, 1993) and the Lemmon Quarry, NAP-117/118 at Napa Glass Mountain (Gilreath and Wohlgemuth 2004:25). Proportions of flakes and modified flakes with cortex varied little among the subgroups (Table 11). Cortical materials ranged from 17 percent to 39 percent,


figures that differed little from stratum-specific amounts using the 6-mm sample. Quantities from the Stratum II 6-mm sample were insufficient for meaningful comparison; only NV5 might have had enough items (n = 18; 22% cortical). Very low numbers also characterize the Lower Component with the possible exceptions of NV1 (n = 30) and NV5 (n = 74). These material groups were 27 percent and 41 percent cortical, while the Napa obsidian from Stratum I (6 mm) was 39 percent cortical overall. If any of these glasses originated at the Glass Mountain source area, it is expected that the percentage of materials retaining cortex would be lower than those found at NAP-916. As such, the high percentage of cortical items from the subgroups and both strata supports the contention that obsidian was, for the most part, being procured from relatively local sources, primarily in the form of waterworn cobbles.

In sum, the flaked-stone tool forms reveal that a diverse range of activities occurred at NAP-916 over time. Activities included initial cobble reduction for subsequent manufacture of biface tools and cores, as well as the production of flakes for simple scrapers and cutting implements. Hunting and game processing undoubtedly occurred and appropriate tools were produced, used, and discarded as a result.


SITE SUMMARY AND DISCUSSION

This section summarizes and discusses the findings of this study under three broad categories: Site Chronology, Site Structure and Artifact Assemblage, and Site Use and Function. Emphasis is given to the data that is important for addressing the research issues identified above, and discussed in the following section.

SITE CHRONOLOGY

Depositional History, Site Formation, and Chronostratigraphy The depositional history and processes responsible for the formation of the Napa

Creek site can be inferred from the stratigraphic sequence. The sequence records three cycles of sediment deposition, floodplain formation, and soil development that, together with the radiocarbon and obsidian-hydration evidence, define the site�s chronostratigraphy. This sequence of landscape changes is described and interpreted below from the earliest to most recent.

During the Early to Middle Holocene, fine-grained, clay-rich sediments were deposited in and around the Napa Creek, which was likely a low-energy setting such as a distal alluvial fan or inter-fan floodplain. As the floodplain became more stable, smaller amounts of sediment were deposited less frequently, which allowed soil development to out-pace, or keep pace with, deposition. This resulted in the formation of the over-thickened (cumulic), organic-stained A horizon in the upper part of Stratum I. While the exact causes remain uncertain, the gradual transition from active deposition to floodplain stability may reflect (1) the warmer and drier climatic conditions associated with the Middle Holocene (West 1993); (2) the incision of the Napa Creek channel (perhaps in response to reduced run-off and flow during the Middle Holocene), and/or (3) that the creek channel was located farther away from the site (during the deposition of Stratum I) than it is today.

In any case, the date of 5730 cal B.P. from the Stratum I 3Ab horizon indicates that the floodplain was relatively stable by this time, while a date of 5530 cal B.P. from the stratum�s 3ABtb horizon confirms that prehistoric people occupied the site during the Middle Holocene. Archaeological materials deposited on the surface of Stratum I during sustained periods of floodplain stability and soil development would have been buried by the incremental deposition of sediments. Since both processes were time-transgressive, archaeological remains from more than one time period were incorporated into the soil profile, as indicated by the vertical distribution of artifacts and cultural features (Figure 14). The presence of multiple cultural components within Stratum I is further suggested by the Middle Archaic-age date of 5530 cal B.P. from near Feature 2, and the hydration values on Napa obsidian that range (excluding one outlier of 6.6µ) from 5.7 to 2.0 microns (mean of 3.5µ Napa Valley), or from about 4985 to 615 cal years B.P. (mean of ~1950 cal B.P.), based on Origer�s (1982) Napa hydration conversion rate. While a few hydration readings from this stratum are consistent with a Middle Holocene (Middle Archaic) age assignment (5.3 to 5.7µ, or ~4310 to ~4985 cal B.P.), the majority of the readings range from 3.0 to 3.9 microns (~1380 to ~2330 cal B.P.), which places them in the early Late Holocene, or Late Archaic. The temporal disparity between the hydration results and the stratigraphic and radiocarbon evidence from Stratum I is considered problematic, and may be related to a lowering of the effective hydration temperature (EHT) due to the depth and length of


time that the stratum was buried. This chronological issue is addressed further in the EHT, Soil Temperature, and Obsidian Age Corrections section below.

Stratum I was buried by sediment deposition sometime before 4090 cal B.P., based on the radiocarbon date from the overlying Stratum II. If this date is correct, then the active deposition of Stratum II must have occurred during the later part of the Middle Holocene. At the same time, the relative degree of soil development (e.g., organic staining, illuvial clay accumulation, etc.) indicates that Stratum II was stable for much less time than Stratum I. It is possible that the 4,000-year old date from Stratum II reflects some contamination from older organic materials, especially if Stratum I was eroded and redeposited to form Stratum II. Hydration values on Napa obsidian, however, support a Late Holocene age for Stratum II, ranging from 4.9 to 1.4 microns (mean of 3.1µ, excluding one outlier of 6.4µ), or from about 3685 to 300 cal B.P. (mean of ~1600 cal B.P.), which also points to the presence of multiple cultural components. The hydration evidence also suggests that Stratum II remained stable until at least 1,000 years ago (e.g., ~2.5µ NV). Finally, the weakly developed cambic horizon (2Bwb) observed in this stratum normally requires about 2,000 to 3,000 years to form (Birkeland, Machette, and Haller 1991), so it appears that the Stratum II floodplain was stable during much of the Late Holocene, which is consistent with the 4,000-year old radiocarbon date.

A final cycle of alluvial deposition resulted in the burial of Stratum II and the formation of Stratum III at the site. The degree of soil development observed in Stratum III is significantly less than that of Stratum II, which suggests that Stratum III has been stable for an even shorter interval than was Stratum II. Based on this and the hydration data from the underlying Stratum II, it appears that Stratum III was deposited less than 1,000 years ago (e.g., ~2.5µ), and perhaps as recently as 600 to 700 years ago (e.g., 2.0 to 2.2µ). As such, Stratum III effectively capped and sealed the underlying archaeological deposits, which prevented the introduction of younger archaeological materials and protected the deposits from near-surface weathering and disturbances, such as cultivation and road construction.

Taken together, the evidence indicates that the Napa Creek site contains two relatively intact and stratigraphically distinct archaeological deposits, each associated with a buried soil (formerly stable floodplain). The lower deposit is Middle Holocene in age, and was buried by about 60 cm of alluvium sometime during the Late Holocene. The upper deposit is Late Holocene in age, and was buried by about 80 cm of alluvium during the latest Holocene (<1000 cal B.P.). The overlying alluvial deposits not only buried and protected the underlying archaeological materials, but also made them undetectable from the present ground surface. These findings demonstrate that significant landscape changes have occurred since prehistoric people occupied and reoccupied the Napa Creek site, and quite possibly other parts of the lower Napa Valley.

Cultural Stratigraphy Two spatio-temporal components, designated as upper and lower, were identified

at the Napa Creek site based on the stratigraphic and chronological evidence. Given the disparities between the obsidian-hydration results and other chronological indicators, however, formal age assignment for these components is somewhat problematic. For example, the soil and radiocarbon data indicate that Stratum I (lower) contains a Middle Archaic component, while Stratum II (upper) contains a Late Archaic component. If, however, the obsidian-hydration results are taken at face value, the Stratum I component


is Middle to Late Archaic, and the Stratum II component is also Late Archaic (just slightly younger than the one below). Thus, depending on which datasets are most favored and/ or trusted, the two components can have different formal age assignments.

Given that many of the obsidian-hydration readings from the Lower Component appear too young, completely unreliable (e.g., Annadel rim values), and/or inconsistent with the soil and radiocarbon evidence, it is suggested that the deep and prolonged burial of obsidian below surface may have caused them to hydrate at a slower rate. While the radiocarbon dates, alluvial stratigraphy, and relative soil development seem internally consistent, it is possible that the date from the Upper Component (Stratum II) is too old due to the presence of older (detrital) organic material introduced at the time of deposition. Given these problems, it was decided that �Upper� and �Lower� component designations would be used instead of formal component assignments for purposes of this report. With this important caveat in mind, the following section describes the primary chronostratigraphic characteristics of each component.

Lower Component The Lower Component at NAP-916 is directly associated with Stratum I, which was

buried at depths of 140 to 240 cm throughout the site. This stratum is a well-developed Middle Holocene-age soil that yielded radiocarbon dates of 5730, 5530, and 5520 cal B.P. A date of 4090 cal B.P. from the overlying Stratum II further supports the age of this stratum. Although there is a slight �stratigraphic reversal� in the dates from Stratum I given the slightly greater depth (about 5 cm) of the younger samples, the calibrated intercepts of all three dates are only 210 years apart, and either meet or nearly so at the 2-sigma range (i.e., 5600 and 5590 cal B.P., see Table 4). The minor differences between these dates most likely reflect normal variations between the apparent mean residence-time of the soil organic matter (5730 cal B.P.) as compared to the age of the charcoal sample (5530 cal B.P.), and composite acorn sample (5520 cal B.P.). Based on these and the adjusted hydration ages (see EHT, Soil Temperature, and Obsidian-hydration Age Corrections below), the lower cultural component appears to be Middle Archaic in age and, therefore, probably corresponds with the Early Berkeley pattern (Figure 8).

Upper Component The Upper Component at NAP-916 is directly associated with Stratum II, which was

buried at depths of 80 to 140 cm throughout the site. This stratum is a moderately developed Late Holocene-age soil that yielded a radiocarbon date of 4090 cal B.P. This date is stratigraphically consistent with the dates from the underlying Stratum I. The majority of archaeological materials from this component were recovered from Units 9, 10, 11, 14, and 15 at depths of 90 to 140 cm (Figure 9). Based on these and the adjusted hydration ages (see EHT, Soil Temperature, and Obsidian Hydration Age Corrections below), the upper cultural component appears to be Late Archaic in age and, therefore, probably corresponds with the Late Berkeley pattern (Figure 8).

Diagnostic Projectile Points NAP-916 yielded two complete Excelsior series projectile points (14-10 and 26-18)

composed of Napa Valley obsidian that are considered temporally diagnostic. Both were recovered from Stratum I, or the Lower Component. Though the entire Excelsior series may span most of Archaic period, it has been shown that �the series as a whole decreased in average size� over time in the region (White 2002:234). Thus, the largest variants of the


series appear to date to the Lower or Middle Archaic, while smaller variants, like those from NAP-916, seem to be Late Archaic in age. This general temporal assignment is supported by hydration rim values of 3.3 and 3.7 microns (mean of 3.5 µ) from the two NAP-916 points, which correspond to a date of about 1880 cal B.P. using the micron-to-year correction factor developed by Origer (1987). Thus, at face value the projectile points suggest that the Lower Component is Late Archaic in age. However, these points have mean hydration value of 4.2 microns when adjusted for a lower temperature (i.e., -3° C) due to the depth and length of burial (see EHT, Soil Temperature, and Obsidian-hydration Age Corrections below), which places them at about 2666 cal B.P., or Middle Archaic in age.

Stone Bead In terms of site dating, a brief consideration should be given

to the age of the stone bead found during geoarchaeological work at the site in 1998. Jaffke and Meyer (1998) described the bead as a circular disk with rounded edges, a diameter of 6.5 mm, a thickness of 1.6 mm, and a slightly offset perforation measuring 2.1 mm in

Figure 30. Stone beaddiameter (Figure 30). It was fashioned from light-colored igneous rock (probably andesite from the local Sonoma Volcanics), which from 1998 Test Trench

is unusual given that most stone beads of this type are made of 4-2-5 (actual size)

steatite (i.e., soapstone). The only bead of any kind found at the site, it was recovered from backdirt removed from 1998 Test Trench 4-2-5 at about 200 cm below surface. Largely on the basis of obsidian-hydration values (mean = 3.1 µ) and site stratigraphy, Jaffke and Meyer (1998) tentatively associated the bead with the Middle period/Berkeley pattern.

Elsewhere in Napa Valley, Heizer and Squire reported that at least four steatite disk beads were found at NAP-32 (the Kolb Site) that �are apparently both early and late� (1953:318). Later work at the site by Phebus (1990) suggests that the midden has a Middle-horizon core with a thin overlay of Late-horizon materials. In St. Helena, a steatite disk bead that was retrieved from 130 to 140 cm below surface at site NAP-863 (Origer 1994) bears morphological similarities to the bead from NAP-916. Although Origer was hesitant to place this bead in time, the site�s obsidian-hydration mean of approximately 3.7 microns is similar to that for the Lower Component at NAP-916, suggesting that the NAP-863 bead marks a Late Archaic (Middle-horizon) component. A similar, biconically drilled soapstone disk bead (cat. no. 2003-13-257) was recovered from the 10�20 cm level of Unit 2 at site NAP-261 (Wohlgemuth, Berg, and Carpenter 2004:46, Figure 10). In neighboring Solano County, a seriation analysis demonstrated that steatite disk beads, regardless of size, co-occur with and then replace Olivella Class G saucers (cf. Bennyhoff and Hughes 1987) in the Middle horizon (Rosenthal 1996).

Given that the bead from the Napa Creek site appears to be associated with the Lower Component, it could be Middle Archaic in age, as suggested by radiocarbon dates of over 5500 cal B.P. from that portion of Stratum I (~200 cm). With the obvious lack of temporal control for this bead type in Napa Valley (due to poor provenience control and inadequate cross-dating), the precise chronological placement of this bead type remains uncertain and a matter for further study.

Other Chronologic Considerations Having assessed the overall diversity of tools and debitage recovered from Strata I

and II at NAP-916, it is useful to ask what is absent from this assemblage? The absence of


concave-base points and diagnostic stemmed points might be an indication that this site bears little association with Mendocino pattern assemblages. In support of this conclusion, no notching flakes were identified among the debitage, and the frequency of cryptocrystalline or igneous stone (commonly occurring in Mendocino pattern assemblages) is extremely low at NAP-916. Although one biface fragment bears some morphological resemblance to a concave-base form (31-17), the 0.9 hydration rim value taken off a pressure-flaked margin suggests it is a more recent form (Figure 25). It is also worth noting that no diagnostic drills were recovered and formed flake tools were few.

Another question that can be posed is, �What are some of the salient attributes of this collection?� These include the number of small, cobble-based tool forms, including a stage 1 biface (3-17), cores (notably 22-24), and modified flakes (e.g., 1-20, 3-06, 3-25, 10-08, 10-23). Additionally, the use of multidirectional and seemingly ad hoc core forms is another common aspect of this collection, though perhaps less a distinguishing feature. The use of anvil-supported percussion and artifact reworking as characterized by fracture types found on a number of tools (e.g., 1-20, 1-21, 3-25, 3-28, 6-01, 9-15, 11-12, 14-30, 22-24, 26-22) is also characteristic of this collection. Furthermore, the high proportion of cortex and diversity of Napa Valley glass types also characterize this collection and might prove to be a useful adjunct trait for distinguishing a potential temporally diagnostic assemblage in this locality, as noted above in the Flaked-stone Analysis Summary section.

SITE STRUCTURE AND ARTIFACT ASSEMBLAGE

CA-NAP-916 was originally characterized as a light to moderately dense deposit of mostly stone artifacts situated in buried streamside alluvium. Initial work was sufficient to offer suggestions of site age, activities, and function. Data-recovery efforts were undertaken with the supposition that primary site use occurred over a period of about a thousand years, during the Middle to Late Archaic period, and that the location witnessed short-term encampments or specific tasks, such as biface manufacturing using small, locally collected obsidian cobbles or pebbles. The larger scope of the data-recovery project enabled fuller assemblage building, component definition, identification of site-formation processes and depositional history, and greater application of site data to regional research issues. Because the site was only partially sampled and its horizontal extent not fully defined (due to depth of burial and other constraints), characterization of NAP-916 remains preliminary. This section summarizes the site�s known material assemblage and offers expanded chronostratigraphic and functional interpretations.

The investigated portion of NAP-916 is relatively sparse when viewed against the backdrop of well-known �village� sites and lithic workshops found throughout Napa Valley, where artifact frequencies often far exceed those of the Napa Creek site (~100/m3

for 6-mm in size and larger). Artifact frequencies of the 6-mm size group at NAP-916 ranged from 76/m3 in the upper stratum to 125/m3 in the lower stratum. Horizontally, artifacts are in greatest frequency in the northern half of the sampled deposit, where they average 134/m3, as opposed to 71/m3 in the southern half. It is also in the northern half that two deeply buried rock concentrations were found in close proximity to one another, along with elevated artifact counts.

The Napa Creek site lacks midden soils and good preservation of organic materials, being dominated instead by a moderate variety of flaked, battered, and heat-affected stone artifacts; also found were small amounts of baked clay and a single small piece of


unidentifiable shell, as well as a stone bead. Heat-affected rocks and flaked-stone debitage are the most common site constituents. Stone tools are varied but relatively uncommon, averaging 3.1/m3, and about half are simple flake tools. The remaining artifacts include bifacial tools consistent in form with the variants of the Excelsior Foliate Series of projectile points (see White 2002), including complete and impact-damaged specimens; some early-but mostly middle- and late-stage bifaces formed from flake blanks and cobbles; and multidirectional cores formed from small cobbles. Also included are two well-formed sandstone hammerstones that display wear consistent with percussively reducing flaked stone, as well as two small cobbles shaped by rubbing or grinding, and one other with a battered surface. Obsidian comprises over 93 percent of the flaked stone, and is almost entirely Napa Valley in origin; about 25 percent of the obsidian artifacts retain cortical surfaces, suggesting their procurement from local streambeds. Only a few artifacts are of other toolstones, including rhyolite, volcanic tuff, basalt, chalcedony, and dacite, all of which were probably available nearby.

SITE USE AND FUNCTION

From the present vantage point, it appears that NAP-916 was repeatedly used during the Archaic period by small hunter-gatherer groups as a short-term camp and/or residential base as part of a larger subsistence strategy geared to the acquisition of fall-ripening plant resources, such as acorn. Absent are the distinctive markers of a large or permanent �village� site (e.g., midden soil development, nonutilitarian (aka ideotechnic) artifacts, housefloors, storage pits, or human graves), such as those found elsewhere in the lower Napa Valley (Heizer 1953). Similarly missing are characteristics unique to intensively used task-specific locations, such as the dense accumulation of flaked stone found at sites identified as quarry workshops in the Upper Napa Valley near Glass Mountain.

Instead, the site contains evidence for a relatively narrow range of activities and behaviors that includes the manufacturing and discard of stone tools, the harvesting of certain plants and possibly animals, and the processing, cooking, and presumably the consumption of food. The assemblage is dominated by obsidian flakes, many with water-worn cortex, which were probably derived from cobbles collected from local streambeds, and not from the primary source at Glass Mountain. Stone working was conducted at the site to create or maintain a variety of utilitarian stone tool forms, such as projectile points, expedient flake tools, and possibly scrapers, which also resulted in the discard of the many waste flakes generated by this activity. Obsidian reduction trajectories included all stages of biface manufacture, with tools mostly formed from small, cobble-based flake blanks through both percussive and pressure flaking; anvils were used to rework some bifaces. Specific uses of the site�s non-obsidian flaked stone are less clear due to their low numbers, but debitage of those materials appears to have derived primarily from the percussion reduction of cores and bifaces; almost all are noncortical. The low number of projectile points and large, late-stage bifaces relative to the high number of purposefully or incidentally modified flakes suggest that plant harvesting and processing was the primary activity practiced at the Napa Creek site, while hunting and related pursuits played a secondary role there.

Though the archaeobotanical samples from the site are small, they confirm that nuts of oak and bay, and seeds of wild cucumber, fiddleneck, hairgrass, hare leaf, tarweed, sunflower, and various grasses were consumed on-site (see Appendix G). No groundstone


artifacts were recovered by this investigation, but it is suspected that further sampling would reveal their presence at the site. Likewise, it is believed that additional flotation sampling and analysis would probably yield a more varied array of archaeobotanical remains (e.g., Gray Pine nuts, Manzanita berries, etc.), which could better illuminate the nature and intensity of plant-processing activities conducted and season of occupation at the site (Appendix G).

The presence of several battered stones also provides some limited insight into the nature of site activities. The percussive use of three items, and the apparent rubbing/ abrading functions of two others are not inconsistent with the manufacturing of stone tools or processing of plant resources, but may have also been used in conjunction with antler, bone, hide, wood, or other materials that were not preserved. Similarly, the occurrence of two heat-affected rock concentrations (Features 1 and 2) and the presence of these materials throughout much of the deposit indicate that fires were created and maintained by the site�s inhabitants for various activities, which probably included cooking.


REGIONAL RESEARCH ISSUES

As stated above, the original research issues outlined by Jaffke and Meyer (1998) were variously expanded, narrowed, and refocused in accord with the data potential of the archaeological materials recovered from NAP-916. As a result of this revision, subsets of the general geoarchaeological and settlement and subsistence issues are addressed below as specific research themes. In doing so, the following discussion attempts to emphasize the most interesting and important aspects of NAP-916 that can help archaeologists and the general public better understand the prehistory of the lower Napa Valley region.

GEOARCHAEOLOGICAL RESEARCH ISSUES

Human Occupation and Landscape Evolution As described in the Depositional History, Site Formation, and Chronostratigraphy

section above, the Napa Creek site contains two separate archaeological deposits, each associated with stratigraphically distinct buried soils. The radiocarbon results indicate the site was first occupied around 5,500 years ago, during a period of relative floodplain stability in the Middle Holocene. People continued to use and occupy this floodplain as it remained stable for at least another 1,500 years, and possibly two to three times that long if the obsidian-hydration data are an accurate indication. During this time, artifacts and other cultural materials were deposited on the floodplain surface and buried by the incremental deposition of sediments, which accounts for their vertical distribution within Stratum I at the site (Figure 14). Together, these processes resulted in the formation of the site�s lower cultural component, which is Middle Archaic in age.

This period of site use and floodplain stability was interrupted by the deposition of alluvial sediments (Stratum II) sometime during the Late Holocene, as supported by the radiocarbon and hydration evidence. Once this new floodplain stabilized, it was occupied by people and remained stable for at least 1,000 years, and possibly twice that long based on the obsidian-hydration data. Artifacts and other cultural materials deposited at the surface were incorporated into this floodplain by incremental deposition and biogenic disturbances, which accounts for their distribution within Stratum II (Figure 14). These processes led to the formation of the site�s upper cultural component, which is primarily Late Archaic in age.

The second period of site use and floodplain stability was again interrupted by an episode of alluvial deposition (Stratum III) sometime during the latest Holocene (~1,200 to 700 years ago) based on the soil development and hydration evidence. As a result, the archaeological deposits were buried and protected by alluvial deposition, which made them undetectable from the present ground surface.

Thus, the Napa Creek site stratigraphic sequence indicates that three cycles of sediment deposition and soil development occurred during the Middle to latest Holocene. Yet despite these landscape changes, the cultural remains demonstrate that people repeatedly used and occupied the Napa Creek site during the Archaic. This suggests that not only were Archaic populations flexible and mobile enough to adapt to these changes, but that available resources and land-use patterns remained relatively constant in the face of these environmental changes.


On a larger scale, the predominance of Emergent-period surface sites and the burial of Middle and Late Archaic period sites suggests that alluvial deposition was widespread in the lower Napa Valley during the latest Holocene, or roughly between 1,200 and 700 years ago. The extent of this deposition is marked in part by the distribution of Bale and Yolo soils at the surface, which cover large portions of the valley floor. The age and extent of these soils suggests that many older archaeological sites are likely buried beneath these latest Holocene alluvial deposits, with no visible evidence of them at the present ground surface. As such, it appears that the buried Archaic-period components identified at NAP-916 may have many unidentified counterparts in the lower Napa Valley. Given this, future studies should view and evaluate the nature and completeness of the lower Napa Valley archaeological record within the context of local and regional landscape evolution, which is the focus of the following section.

Local and Regional Stratigraphic Comparisons This section briefly compares the surface geology, subsurface stratigraphy,

radiocarbon, and obsidian-hydration data from NAP-916 with those of other archaeological sites in the lower Napa Valley and surrounding region. The comparisons provide a context for assessing (1) the chronological placement of NAP-916; (2) importance as a buried archaeological site; and (3) the effects of landscape change on the nature and completeness of the region�s archaeological record. To facilitate consistent age comparisons, previously uncalibrated radiocarbon dates were calibrated according to Stuiver and Reimer (1993) using CALIB version 4.3. The obsidian hydration data discussed below is compiled in Appendix J (Regional Obsidian Hydration Data).

The Napa Creek site is buried beneath Holocene-age alluvium that coincides with an area mapped as the Bale series soil (Figures 6 and 7). As shown in Table 12, at least five other sites in the lower Napa Valley are also associated with Bale soils, all of which have Emergent-period archaeological components (e.g., <1,000 years old) identified at their surface. Site NAP-32 also has a Late Horizon surface component but is associated with Yolo series soils formed in Holocene-age alluvium. This suggests that the Bale and Yolo soils are at least 500 to 1,000 years old, given the Phase 1 and/or Phase 2 Emergent-period components found at the surface of these sites.

The River Glenn site (NAP-261) is one of the few Archaic sites identified at or near the ground surface on the floor of the lower Napa Valley. This site lies well above the active floodplain of the Napa River, on an Early to Middle Pleistocene alluvial fan, as do sites NAP-14 and NAP-39 (Figure 6), but well-defined Archaic �components, have not been reported from the latter two sites. While a Lower to Middle Archaic component was identified at or near the surface of the Hultman site (NAP-131), the site is located above the Napa River floodplain on a bedrock hillslope that is pre-Quaternary in age.

Significantly, the sites with buried archaeological components are all associated with either the Bale or Yolo series soils formed in Holocene alluvium (Table 12). These components are generally Middle or Late Archaic in age based on radiocarbon assays and artifact cross-dating (Figure 31). Other than NAP-916, NAP-129 is the only site with a possible buried Lower to Middle Archaic component so far reported in the lower Napa Valley, although it is possible that one was recently identified at NAP-399/863 (see below). Although no artifacts were reportedly recovered from the deeply buried �gray clay� at the Kolb site (NAP-32), the overlying cultural stratigraphy suggests this stratum is a


�� ¢ ��

�� ¢ ��

��

��

��

��

��

��

�� ¢ ��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

�� ¢ ��

��

��

��

��

��

��

�� ¢ ��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

�� ¢ ��

�� ¡ ��

probable Middle Holocene-age buried soil, with the potential to contain a Lower to Middle Archaic component.

At the Suscol site (NAP-15/H), buried Archaic-components were identified in association with a buried soil (i.e., �clay loam� and �clay loam with orange mottles�) at depths ranging from about 160 to 230 cm in the northern Suscol Creek floodplain (Figure 32). A buried Middle Archaic component is marked by radiocarbon dates that range from 3145 to 3755 cal B.P. (Figure 31) and mean hydration values of 4.2 to 4.9 microns (Unit B, 210 to 220 cm and N17/18:E3/4, 200 to 260 cm respectively), while a buried Late Archaic component appears to be represented by a mean hydration value of 3.4 microns (Unit B, 190�210 cm). The apparent age and depth of the buried components at NAP-15/H are similar to those at NAP-916, and like NAP-916, the age of the radiocarbon dates and hydration values obtained from the same strata (i.e., level/depth) at NAP-15/H appear inconsistent (Table 13), again suggesting that burial may have slowed the hydration rate.


77

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

4000

4500

5000

5500

6000

6500

7000

NA

P-1

5,

Suscol

NA

P

261,

Riv

er

Gle

n

NA

P

261,

Riv

er

Gle

n

NA

P-1

5,

Suscol

NA

P-1

5,

Suscol

NA

P-1

5,

Suscol

NA

P-1

5,

Suscol

SO

L

391,

Cord

elia

SO

L

391,

Cord

elia

LA

K

261,

Copsey

Cre

ek

NA

P

916,

Nap

a

Cre

ek

SO

L

391,

Cord

elia

SO

L

391,

Cord

elia

SO

N

2098,

Santa

Rosa

SO

N

2098,

Santa

Rosa

NA

P

916,

Nap

a

Cre

ek

NA

P

916,

Nap

a

Cre

ek

SO

N

2098,

Santa

Rosa

NA

P

916,

Nap

a

Cre

ek

MR

N-1

7,

DeS

ilva

Isla

nd

MR

N-1

7,

DeS

ilva

Isla

nd

Min

. 2-s

igm

a

Cal In

terc

ept

Max. 2-s

igm

a

(Th

is s

tud

y)

(Th

is s

tud

y)

(Th

is s

tud

y)

.

Note

: B

S

BS

BS

Acorn

Charcoal

Cal Years B.P

Late Archaic period Middle Archaic period

= d

ate

on b

uried s

oil;

all

oth

ers

on c

ultura

l m

ate

rials

; all

date

s n

ot calib

rate

d b

y the lab w

ere

calib

rate

d a

ccord

ing to S

tuvie

r and R

eim

er

(1993)

usin

g C

ALIB

v.4

.3.

Fig

ure

31.

Co

mp

aris

on

of

rad

ioca

rbo

n d

ates

fro

m C

A-N

AP

-916

wit

h t

ho

se f

rom

oth

er s

ou

ther

n N

ort

h C

oas

t R

ang

e si

tes

78

De

pth

(cm

) C

A-N

AP

-91

6,

Na

pa

Cre

ek

Sit

e

(Th

is r

ep

ort

)

(Bale

series s

urf

ace s

oil)

Str

at.

III

- C

u,

silty

cla

y lo

am

(Late

st H

olo

cene a

lluviu

m, ste

rile

)

or

57

30

ca

l B

.P.

(Be

ta-1

69

30

4)

or

55

30

ca

l B

.P.

(Be

ta-1

69

30

5)

Fe

atu

re 1

0

20

40

60

80

10

0

12

0

14

0

16

0

18

0

20

0

22

0

24

0

De

pth

(cm

) 0

25

50

75

10

0

12

5

15

0

17

5

20

0

22

5

25

0

0

25

50

75

10

0

12

5

15

0

17

5

20

0

22

5

25

0

27

5

30

0

32

5

35

0

37

5

40

0

42

5

De

pth

(cm

) C

A-N

AP

-32

(P

it 4

0/N

8)

(ad

ap

ted

fro

m H

eiz

er

19

53

:32

3)

Fe

atu

re 2

Mid

de

n(L

ate

ho

rizo

n,

Ph

ase

II

Bale

series s

urf

ace s

oil)

Silty

Mid

de

n

or

31

45

ca

l B

.P.

Ro

cks

Gra

ve

l co

nce

ntr

atio

n

Kro

tavin

a

Kro

tavin

a

Kro

tavin

a

rod

en

t

dis

turb

an

ce

Cla

y lo

am

Cla

y lo

am

with

ora

ng

e m

ott

les

Co

mp

act

sa

nd

an

d

co

bb

les

(Channel deposit?)

or

37

55

ca

l B

.P.

(UG

a-2

76

9)

Wh

ite

ash

So

ft,

bla

ck,

ash

y m

idd

en

Kolb

phase)

Bro

wn

mid

de

n(E

arly H

orizon -

Ruth

erf

ord

phase)

(Early h

orizon -

Bale

phase)

La

ye

rs o

f p

ea

gra

ve

l a

nd

ye

llo

w lo

am

Pe

a g

rave

l(C

hannel deposit)

Gra

y c

lay

(pro

bable

Mid

dle

Holo

cene b

uried s

oil)

So

ft,

bla

ck,

ash

ym

idd

en

(Be

ta-1

69

30

3)

Str

at.

I -

3A

b/3

AB

tb/3

Btb

, cla

y lo

am

(Mid

dle

Holo

cene b

uried s

oil

and low

er

com

ponent)

(Late

Holo

cene b

uried s

oil

and E

arly h

orizon d

eposit)

or

55

20

ca

l B

.P.

(Be

ta-2

05

14

2)

CA

-NA

P-1

5/H

(N

18/E

4)

(ad

ap

ted

fro

m

Str

ad

ford

an

d S

ch

wad

ere

r 1982:F

ig. 5)

Str

at.

II

- 2

Ab

/2B

wb

/2C

ox,

silty

cla

y lo

am

(La

te H

olo

ce

ne

bu

rie

d s

oil

an

d u

pp

er

co

mp

on

en

t)

Str

at.

III

- A

, silty

cla

y lo

am

50

00

+ 6

0 B

.P.,

47

60

+ 4

0 B

.P.,

(Late

horizon -

Phase I

)

29

80

+ 1

80

B.P

.,

(UC

R-1

13

9)

34

85

+ 7

0 B

.P.,

(Early to M

iddle

Tra

nsitio

n -

Ye

llo

w lo

am

37

40

+ 7

0 B

.P.,

or

40

90

ca

l B

.P.

47

80

+ 4

0 B

.P.,

Fig

ure

32.

Nat

ura

l an

d c

ult

ura

l st

rati

gra

ph

y o

f se

lect

ed l

ow

er N

apa

Val

ley

arc

hae

olo

gic

al s

ites

(n

ote

var

iab

le s

cale

s)

�� ¢�� ¡��

� ��

��¡� ��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

�� ¢��

�� ¢�� ¢ ��¢ �� ¢ �� ¢ �� ¢�� ¢��

��

��

Buried Archaic components have also been reported at site CA-NAP-399/863 (Bartoy 2005; Origer 1994), which is located on the west side of the Napa River in the town of St. Helena (Figure 5). Excavations conducted at the site in the early 1990s found that cultural materials were most concentrated at depths of 70 to 140 cm below surface, in association with a dark alluvial soil that may represent a buried soil (Origer 1994:15�16). While no radiocarbon dates were obtained, hydration analysis of 59 Napa Valley obsidian artifacts yielded values that range from 1.2 to 5.2 microns (mean of 3.4µ), which is identical to the mean hydration from the Lower Component at NAP-916. The majority of the Napa readings (n = 42) were clustered between 2.8 and 3.8 microns (Late Archaic), with the next largest cluster of readings (n = 10) between 3.9 and 4.9 microns (Middle Archaic). The type and variety of artifacts and the presence of a human burial and rock feature suggests that the site �was at least a habitually occupied seasonal camp and perhaps a year-round occupied camp or village� (Origer 1994:32). Given the extensive subsurface deposits at this site, Origer predicted that �buried archaeological deposits could be present anywhere along this segment of the Napa River bank, and perhaps elsewhere� (Origer 1994:15), as recent investigations by Pacific Legacy proved at site CA-NAP-399 (Bartoy 2005), which lies just south of NAP-863 (see below).


Looking outside the lower Napa Valley, it is useful to compare the radiocarbon and hydration results from NAP-916 with a few other buried Archaic deposits in the southern North Coast Ranges. The first is De Silva Island site (CA-MRN-17), which is located along the shores of Richardson Bay in Marin County. Archaeological excavations conducted in the early 1980s indicate that a thick shell midden is present at or near the site�s surface, while a deeply buried cultural deposit was identified some 400 to 600 cm below the midden surface. Although the stratigraphy of this site was not described or documented in great detail, photographs clearly show a fine-grained deposit at the base of Unit 12N/2W, where the deep component was identified (Pahl 2003: Appendix I), which appears to be a buried soil.

Radiocarbon dates, obsidian hydration, and artifact cross-dating recently reported by Pahl (2003) indicate that the shell midden at MRN-17 is generally Late Archaic to lower Emergent (Phase 1) in age (~2400 to ~600 cal B.P.). The buried deposit appears to be early Middle Archaic in age, based on radiocarbon dates of 6345 and 6285 cal B.P (from charcoal recovered from apparently cultural contexts), or Middle Archaic in age, based on the hydration values (mean 5.1µ Napa Valley) on obsidian from the same depth as the dates (Table 13); three Annadel obsidian specimens yielded anomalously small rim values of 1.9, 2.5, and 4.0µ (mean 2.8µ). Here again, the lack of agreement between radiocarbon and hydration evidence may signal that the depth and/or duration of burial functioned to slow the obsidian-hydration rate. If the early dates from MRN-17 are cultural, the buried component is among the oldest yet identified around the margins of San Francisco Bay (Moratto 1984:277; Pahl 2003). Given that the early component at MRN-17 may pre-date the Lower Component at NAP-916 by several hundred years (Figure 31), it serves to document the acquisition and/or exchange of obsidian from Napa Valley during the Middle Archaic, and points out just how deeply buried sites of this age may be.

Next is CA-SON-2098, located in the city of Santa Rosa in Sonoma County. Archaeological investigations conducted in the early 1990s found cultural deposits beneath some 200�300 cm of sterile alluvium, in association with a buried Middle Holocene-age soil (Origer 1993). Cultural charcoal from the buried deposit yielded Middle Archaic radiocarbon dates of 5590, 5390, and 5130 cal B.P. (Figure 31), which are quite similar to the Lower Component dates from NAP-916 (i.e., 5730 and 5530 cal B.P.). Napa Valley obsidian artifacts recovered from the buried deposit yielded hydration values that range from 4.2 to 5.5 microns (n = 37, mean 4.8µ), while smaller values of 1.0 to 3.7 microns (n = 22, mean 2.3µ) were obtained on Annadel obsidian artifacts from the same deposit. Origer interpreted the evidence �at face value� as indicating the presence of two different cultural components at the site; an older Napa obsidian component dating between about 4600 and 2700 years ago, or Middle Archaic in age, and a younger Annadel obsidian component dating between about 2500 and 700 years ago, or Late Archaic to Early Emergent. Thus, there is also a disparity between radiocarbon-derived ages and the obsidian-hydration-derived ages from SON-2098, which is discussed below.

In addition to these sites, it is worth noting the age and stratigraphic context of the few other Archaic-age sites identified elsewhere in the region. The oldest of these is the Green Valley site (CA-SOL-391) near Cordelia, where radiocarbon dates ranging from 4480 to 3380 cal B.P. were obtained from cultural pit features excavated into a buried Early Holocene-age paleosol (Harlan Tait Associates 1994; Wohlgemuth 2004). Napa Valley obsidian from these features yielded hydration values of 5.6 to 5.9 microns (mean 5.7µ) that convert to about 4810 cal B.P., making them about 500 to 1,400 years older than their


associated radiocarbon dates. Thus, while the dates from SOL-391 are comparable to the 4090 cal B.P. date from the Upper Component at NAP-916 (Stratum II), the hydration rims are thicker and hence older, which suggests that the hydration process may not have been affected by burial�perhaps because the obsidian was not buried deep enough, or was buried relatively recently.

The dates from SOL-391 also overlap with those from the deeply buried Middle Archaic (i.e., Lower Berkeley pattern) component at NAP-15/H (Stradford and Schwaderer 1982), and the buried Middle Archaic (Borax Lake pattern) component at the Houx site (CA-LAK-261) in Lake County (White and Fredrickson 1992; Figure 31). Napa Valley obsidian from LAK-261 yielded hydration values of 3.9 to 4.8 microns (mean ~4.3µ) that converts to about 2835 cal B.P., consistent with the Middle Archaic age of the buried component.

Another site that deserves mention is the Reservation Road site (CA-COL-247), which is located outside of the southern North Coast Ranges, west of the Sacramento River in Colusa County. Archaeological investigations at this site found cultural deposits in association with a soil that was buried by about 75 cm of sterile alluvium (White 2003). Charcoal and artifacts from the buried deposit produced radiocarbon dates that range from 4385 to 1550 cal B.P., or Middle to Late Archaic in age. A Middle Archaic component was identified at depths of about 125 to 240 cm below surface, based on the sequence of radiocarbon dates and artifact types. However, Napa Valley obsidian from the lowermost component yielded only Late Archaic hydration values ranging from 3.0 to 5.2 microns (n = 5, mean 4.0µ). Thus it appears that burial may have affected the hydration rate at this site as well.

EHT, Soil Temperatures, and Obsidian Hydration Age Corrections There is a wealth of available information on the use and interpretation of obsidian-

hydration data in California, and no attempt is made to review it in this section. The focus, instead, is on the issue of deep and/or prolonged burial as a factor in affecting the rate of obsidian hydration, which is an important regional research issue.

First, because many obsidian researchers emphasize the importance of temperature in determining hydration rates, it is necessary to address the role of ambient air temperatures as a factor in determining the effective hydration temperature (EHT) of obsidian in a given area. In the case of Napa obsidian, the micron-to-year conversion rate was first developed using archaeological data from the Santa Rosa area in Sonoma County (Origer 1982). For this reason, the EHT of the Santa Rosa area serves as the reference point for determining the EHT of Napa obsidian recovered in other areas.

As shown in Table 14, the difference in the EHT for the Napa area (16.6º C) is only 0.23º C warmer than the Santa Rosa area (16.4º C), which amounts to a difference of less than 0.01 micron when adjusted by the 6 percent per degree of difference recognized by Origer (1987). Given that hydration readings may have an error factor of +0.2 micron or more (see Friedman, Trembour, and Hughes 1997:304�307; Meighan 1976:112), the difference in the EHT of the Santa Rosa and Napa areas is statistically insignificant and, therefore, inconsequential for the hydration results obtained for this study.

While the influence of ambient surface temperatures on obsidian-hydration rates can be dismissed, the potential effects of reduced temperatures due to burial cannot. Studies of soil temperature generally indicate that average annual temperatures are


�� ¢��

� ��¢ � ��

�� ¡ ��

��

�

��

��

��

��

��

�

�

�

��¡ ��

��

��

��

relatively uniform below the ground surface (Tremaine 1989:33). Mean soil temperatures are not constant with depth, however, because the amplitude of fluctuation is greater at shallower depths, particularly within the upper 60 cm (~2 ft.) or less (see Figure 33). As a measure of amplitude, the mean exponential temperature (MET) of a soil has been found to decrease �significantly and linearly with soil depth� (Bocock et al. 1982:59. as cited in Tremaine 1989:33). Soil temperature amplitudes vary, however, depending on the capacity of a soil to conduct and retain heat, which are determined by such factors as soil texture, soil moisture, and the nature and extent of the surface cover (e.g., asphalt, vegetation, plowed field). Generally speaking, dry, coarse-textured soils conduct heat faster than wet, fine-textured soils at a given depth, but do not retain heat as long as soils that are fine-textured do, and/or those that are moist or saturated (Figure 33). Thus, while it is generally accepted that the MET of a soil decreases with depth, the mean temperature of a certain soil at a given depth in a particular location must either be measured directly using subsurface monitors, or estimated using a complex, sinusoidal function formula (Nofziger and Wu 2005).

Studies of soil MET in Papua, New Guinea found a difference of �4º C at depths of 18 to 90 cm below surface (Ambrose 1976), while differences of �1.6º to 2.9º C were documented at depths of 0.5 to 2 m below surface at locations in and near Yellowstone National Park (Friedman and Obradovich 1981). The New Guinea study suggests that a temperature difference of 4º C could result in a dating error of about 1,000 years for a 2,000-year-old obsidian artifact, while the Yellowstone study suggests that obsidian exposed at the surface to the sun can �hydrate at a rate five times as fast as samples buried to a depth of 2 m,� due to differences in soil MET (Friedman and Obradovich 1981:4). If the latter estimate can be accurately extrapolated, then obsidian buried at 1 m depth would hydrate about 2.5 times (or 25%) slower than obsidian at the surface. As such, it appears that the rate of hydration could be impeded by as much as 25 to 50 percent for obsidian that is buried between 1 and 2 m in depth.

If depth of burial does function to impede hydration rates, then some substantial disparities should exist between the radiocarbon and obsidian-hydration results obtained from deeply buried sites in California. Such disparities have in fact been recognized at


Dry soil

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

0 D

epth

in

met

ers

+5 +10 +15-15 -10 -5 Mean

Wet soil

Average soil

Temperature in degrees C

Temperature

(Adapted from Virginia Department of Mines Minerals and Energy 2005)

Figure 33. Annual fluctuations in soil temperature with depth

the Skyrocket site (CA-CAL-629/630) in the lower Sierra foothills (LaJeunesse and Pryor 1996), the Los Vaqueros Dam site (CA-CCO-696) in the northern Diablo Ranges (Meyer and Rosenthal 1997), and the Squaw Creek site (CA-SHA-475) in the upper Sacramento Valley (Bevill 2004), where in each case obsidian from deposits buried at depths ranging from about 130 to 400 cm are overwhelmingly younger than radiocarbon dates from the same deposits. Given the importance of radiocarbon for calibrating the micron-to-year conversions of obsidian rim values, the relationship between radiocarbon and hydration results is examined in more detail for selected buried sites in the southern North Coast Ranges.

In Table 13, the radiocarbon ages are shown at their high and low 2-sigma range (in keeping with convention), along with the calibrated intercept for single dates, and the mean intercept for multiple dates. The obsidian-hydration ages, however, are shown at their high and low 1-sigma range, along with a mean age, because they are all derived from contexts with multiple readings, some with a wide range of rim values.

Comparisons of these two datasets reveal a consistent lack of temporal overlap in the age of the site contexts, with the exception of NAP-261 (70�100 cm), which is the shallowest site context, and NAP-15/H (160�170 cm), which has a 3,775-year range in obsidian-hydration age at 1-sigma. Without exception, the mean hydration age lags behind the calibrated/mean intercept age from each of the site contexts, ranging from a minimum


of 566 years at NAP-15/H (160�170 cm) to a maximum of 3,542 years difference between the two datasets in the Lower Component at NAP-916, with an overall average of 1,804 years.

When the difference in years is converted to percentages, these range from a low of about 10 percent at NAP-15/H (160�170 cm) to a high of 47 percent in both the Upper and Lower Components of NAP-916, with an overall average of about 26 percent. Thus, the difference in radiocarbon and hydration ages from NAP-916 is at least two, to nearly five times as much as the age differences at the other site contexts. This disjunction suggests that the radiocarbon and obsidian hydration from NAP-916 are temporally distinct datasets that represent different aspects of site use, material discard, and formation.

In his work at SON-2098, Origer recognized that radiocarbon and obsidian-hydration evidence were not in accord and suggested that �the hydration measurements should be adjusted to allow for changes in the thermal exposure of the obsidian specimens,� thus taking into consideration the �potential thermal difference between specimens obtained from shallow, warmer, proveniences in contrast to those taken from greater depths marked by cooler (hydration-inhibiting) temperature regimes� (1993:41). He noted that ambient temperatures may be 3 to 4º C less at depths of 1.5 m to 2.5 m than those at the ground surface, which would require that hydration measurements be adjusted (in this case, increased) by 6 percent (compounded) for each degree of reduced temperature. For example, a reading of 4.8 microns would adjust to about 5.1 microns if the temperature was 1º C cooler, and about 6.1 microns if 4º C cooler (Table 15).

Even so, Origer only adjusted the hydration values from SON-2098 by 6 percent (-1º C) under the assumption that the cultural deposits were not buried until about 1,000 years ago, apparently based on the younger Annadel obsidian readings. In doing so, Origer concluded that the adjusted hydration placed the initial date of occupation of the site at around 5,250 years ago (congruent with the oldest hydration readings), which was �very agreeable,� though still less than the mean age of three radiocarbon dates (Origer 1993:41). It should be noted, however, that if the average 4.8-micron (~3534 cal B.P., or Middle Archaic) Napa Valley reading from SON-2098 is increased by only 6 percent, it yields an adjusted age of 3990 cal B.P. (5.1 microns, or Middle Archaic), which is about 1,380 years younger than the mean age (5370 cal B.P.) of the three dates. Alternatively, if the obsidian and radiocarbon dates are assumed to be contemporaneous, then reduced temperatures of 3 to 4º C (best fit at 3.5º C) are required in order for the average hydration value to match the Middle Archaic radiocarbon dates (i.e., ~5.8�6.1 microns, see Table 15). Thus, the -3 to -4º C temperature adjustment originally suggested by Origer is actually more plausible than the -1º C adjustment that was applied.

In an effort to evaluate what, if any, temperature adjustment might be appropriate for the hydration values from NAP-916, we calculated the mean hydration values for Napa Valley obsidian specimens and associated radiocarbon dates (if more than one) from MRN-17, SON-2098, NAP-15, and NAP-916 (Table 15). The table shows that a temperature of -4º C would put the 5.1-micon hydration from the lower component at MRN-17 at about 6.4 microns, the deepest of the deposits considered here, placing it squarely within the 2-sigma range of the radiocarbon date (6065�6405 cal B.P.) from a depth of 540 to 560 centimeters. At SON-2098, a temperature of -3.5º C would adjust the 4.8-mean hydration to about 5.9 microns, or well within 2-sigma age range of the associated radiocarbon dates. Reduced temperatures of -3º C bring the 4.1- and 4.2-mean hydration from the lower component at NAP-15 into very close correspondence with the associated



Ta

ble

15

. U

na

dju

ste

d a

nd

Ad

just

ed

Mic

ron

Ag

es

for

Se

lect

ed

Va

lue

s

Sit

e,

Co

nte

xt

Un

ad

just

ed

Mic

ron

s

At

-1º

C

Mic

ron

s

Cal

B.P

.

At

-3º

C

Mic

ron

s

Cal

B.P

.

At

-3.5

º C

Mic

ron

s

Cal

B.P

.

At

-4º

C

Mic

ron

s

Cal

B.P

.

At

-8.5

º C

Mic

ron

s

Cal

B.P

.

At

-9º

C

Mic

ron

s

Cal

B.P

.

1.0

1.1

172

1.2

218

1.2

231

1.3

244

1.6

413

1.7

438

1.5

1.6

388

1.8

490

1.8

519

1.9

550

2.5

930

2.5

985

2.0

2.1

689

2.4

870

2.5

923

2.5

978

3.4

1654

3.

4 17

51

2.5

2.7

1077

3.

0 13

60

3.1

1443

3.

2 15

28

4.1

2584

4.

2 27

37

3.0

3.2

1551

3.

6 19

58

3.7

2078

3.

8 22

00

4.9

3721

5.

1 39

41

NA

P-9

16,

Up

per

3.

1 3.

3 16

56

3.7

209

1

3.8

2218

3.

9 23

50

5.1

3973

5.

2 42

08

3.5

3.7

2111

4.

2 26

66

4.3

2828

4.

4 29

95

5.7

5064

5.

9 53

64

NA

P-9

16,

Lo

wer

3.

6 3.

8 22

34

4.3

282

0 4.

4 29

92

4.5

3169

5.

9 53

58

6.1

5675

4.0

4.2

2758

4.

8 34

82

4.9

3694

5.

0 39

12

6.6

6615

6.

8 70

06

NA

P-1

5/H

, lo

wer

1

4.1

4.3

2897

4.

9 36

58

5.0

3881

5.

2 41

10

6.7

6950

6.

9 73

60

NA

P-1

5/H

, lo

wer

2

4.2

4.5

3040

5.

0 38

38

5.2

4072

5.

3 43

13

6.9

7293

7.

1 77

24

4.5

4.8

3490

5.

4 44

06

5.5

4675

5.

7 49

51

7.4

8372

7.

6 88

67

SO

N-2

098,

all

4.

8 5.

1 39

71

5.7

5014

5.

9 53

19

6.1

5633

7.

9 95

25

8.1

1008

8

5.0

5.3

4309

6.

0 54

40

6.1

5771

6.

3 61

12

8.2

1033

6 8.

4 10

946

MR

N-1

7, l

ow

er

5.1

5.4

4483

6.

1 56

60

6.3

6004

6.

4 63

59

8.4

1075

3 8.

6 11

389

5.5

5.8

5214

6.

6 65

82

6.7

6983

6.

9 73

96

9.0

1250

6 9.

3 13

245

6.0

6.4

6205

7.

1 78

34

7.4

8311

7.

6 88

02

9.8

1488

3 10

.1

1576

3

No

tes:

Sit

e co

nte

xts

sh

ow

nat

th

eir

mea

nv

alu

e; l

igh

t-g

ray

cel

ls a

reth

e “b

est

fit”

bet

wee

n t

he

tem

per

atu

re-a

dju

sted

hy

dra

tio

n v

alu

e an

d r

adio

carb

on

dat

e(s)

; th

e

bla

ck c

ells

sh

ow

th

e p

refe

rred

tem

per

atu

re/a

ge

adju

stm

ents

for

NA

P-9

16,

bec

ause

th

e g

ray

-cel

l ad

just

men

tsar

eto

o e

xtr

eme

to b

e ac

cep

tab

le; N

AP

-15/

H,

low

er 1

is

Un

it N

17/1

8, 1

60–1

70cm

and

lo

wer

2 i

s U

nit

B,

210–

220

cm;

mic

ron

sco

nv

erte

dto

yea

rs a

cco

rdin

gto

Ori

ger

(19

82).

�� ¢��

��

�� ¡� ��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

�� ¢ �� ¢��

��

radiocarbon dates. Thus, the -3 to -4º C temperature adjustment brings the obsidian-hydration values into line with the radiocarbon dates from each of these buried sites, just as suggested by Origer (1993).

In comparison, a dramatic temperature adjustment of -8.5 to -9º C would be required to achieve a reasonable overlap between the calibrated radiocarbon and converted hydration ages from the Upper and Lower Components at NAP-916. This means that soil temperatures at NAP-916 would have been more than two times cooler than those at the base of MRN-17, which was presumably cooler near San Francisco Bay at depths two to three times greater than NAP-916. Even more, NAP-916 soil temperatures would have been three times cooler than those at site NAP-15, which is located at about the same elevation and depth as NAP-916.

Since there is no known or obvious reason why soil temperatures at NAP-916 should have been two to three times cooler than those of other buried sites in the region, it appears that the discrepancies between the hydration and radiocarbon results cannot be attributed solely to temperature differences caused by deep or prolonged burial. Given the reasonable correspondence between the radiocarbon and adjusted hydration ages at NAP-15, MRN-17, and SON-2098, however, it appears that a conservative temperature adjustment of at least -3º C may be applied to the hydration results from NAP-916, especially when micron-to-year comparisons are at issue.

As summarized in Table 16, a -3º C adjustment of the mean hydration ages from NAP-916 makes the Upper Component�s hydration readings about 615 years older, and those for the Lower Component more than 830 years older. These adjustments place the Upper Component more squarely in the Late Archaic, with some Middle Archaic overlap, and places the Lower Component in the later Middle Archaic, with some Late Archaic overlap (Table 16 and Figure 34). In both cases, the adjustments amount to an overall increase of 17 percent in age, which agrees with the average of an 18 percent difference noted between radiocarbon and hydration results at other buried site contexts in the region (Table 13). While further studies are needed to evaluate the validity and application of such temperature adjustments, the evidence assembled here appears to justify the correction of obsidian-hydration ages from buried deposits like those at NAP-916.


1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

4.0

4.5

5.0

5.5

6.0

6.5

7.0

1

Unadjusted Microns

Adjusted Microns (-3 deg. C)

2%

2%

Emergent Period

Late Archaic

Middle Archaic

Count (n = M

icro

ns

Upper Component adjusted hydration by cultural periods

Lower

Component

Upper

Component

Lower Component adjusted hydration by cultural periods

Emergent

7%

7%

Emergent

Late Archaic

41%

Middle Archaic

55%

Middle Archaic

36%

Late Archaic

50%

11 21 31 41 51 61 71 81 91 101 111

Note: Readings from this data-recovery study and Jaffke and Meyer (1998) included

Archaic/Emergent Transition

113)

A/E Transition

A/E Transition

Figure 34. Adjusted hydration ages for obsidian from Upper and Lower components at CA-NAP-916

87

Some researchers have suggested that mean exponential ground temperature, as a measure of amplitude, may be more important for determining obsidian-hydration rates than the ambient air temperatures on which most EHT calculations are based (Ambrose 1976, 2001; Jones, Sheppard, and Sutton 1997; Riddings 1991). In fact, various lines of empirical evidence suggest that this may be the case whether specimens are deeply buried or located near the surface. For example, obsidian from high-altitude sites do not appear to hydrate as quickly as obsidian from low-elevation sites, which is generally explained as being a result of lower/cooler EHTs at high altitudes. Inconsistent and/or unacceptable hydration results, however, have also been reported from some low-elevation sites, most notably along the California coast (see Jones and Ferneau 2002), where annual temperatures are warmer than those at high altitudes, but more uniform overall.

Thus, it appears that lower temperature amplitudes might at least in part explain why hydration does not proceed as fast and/or uniformly in some environmental settings. This suggests that certain temperature regimes must be reached and/or maintained in order to activate and/or perpetuate the hydration process, much in the same way that water responds to other types of temperature thresholds (e.g., dew point, boiling point, etc.). If prevailing environmental conditions determine the frequency and/or duration of threshold attainment for any given specimen, whether buried or at the surface, then it is conceivable that hydration may proceed in a more step-like fashion (with irregular starts and stops). While this remains hypothetical, it does offer an avenue for further studies that seek to convert hydration readings to calibrated years.

In any case, the unadjusted obsidian-hydration results from NAP-916 indicate the buried cultural deposits are at least Late Archaic in age. Based on unadjusted hydration evidence, the chronological relationship of NAP-916 with other selected sites in the region is compared in Figure 35. As the figure shows, the hydration from NAP-916 is most comparable with the Late Archaic hydration profiles from NAP-15, NAP-863, and NAP-261. It is also worth noting that each of these sites, including NAP-916, have yielded similar quantities of Middle Archaic hydration values in the 4.0 to 4.4 micron range (Figure 35).

SETTLEMENT AND SUBSISTENCE ISSUES

The limited nature of the archaeological assemblage recovered from NAP-916 does not warrant a highly detailed or far-reaching theoretical discussion of the many inter-related issues regarding prehistoric settlement or subsistence practices. The flaked-stone assemblage identified at NAP-916, however, is useful for addressing the issue of lithic procurement and reduction strategies, and some aspects of local land use and mobility patterns (discussed below). Furthermore, the stratigraphic and archaeobotanical data from the site are important for understanding patterns of land use, settlement, and mobility in the lower Napa Valley during the Archaic period (see below).

Lithic Procurement and Reduction Strategies Analysis of the flaked stone recovered from archaeological investigations at NAP-

916 has revealed important information about technological organization during the Late Archaic period in the Napa locality. Despite the site�s proximity to the Napa Glass Mountain source and the abundance of large cobbles of black glass available, residents of NAP-916 regularly exploited locally available cobbles of glassier material obtained from nearby


89

35

25

15 5

1.0

-

1.4

1.5

-

1.9

2.0

-

2.4

2.5

-

2.9

3.0

-

3.4

3.5

-

3.9

4.0

-

4.4

4.5

-

4.9

5.0

-

5.4

5.5

-

5.9

6.0

-

6.4

6.6

-

6.9

7.0

-

7.4

7.5

-

7.9

8.0

-

8.4

8.5

-

8.9

9.0

-

9.4

9.5

-

10

35

25

15 5

35

25

15 5

35

25

15 5

35

25

15 5

35

25

15 5

25

15 5

Frequency (no. of rim values)

CA

-NA

P-1

5/H

CA

-SO

N-2

098

CA

-NA

P-8

63

CA

-NA

P-9

16

CA

-NA

P-2

61

CA

-MR

N-1

7

Em

erg

en

t

CA

-NA

P-1

4

Late

Arc

haic

M

idd

le A

rch

aic

E

arl

y A

rch

aic

P

ale

oin

dia

n

Mic

ron

Ran

ges (

un

ad

juste

d N

ap

a V

alley o

nly

)

Fig

ure

35.

Co

mp

aris

on

of

ob

sid

ian

-hy

dra

tio

n r

esu

lts

fro

m s

elec

ted

sit

es i

n t

he

sou

ther

n N

ort

h C

oas

t R

ang

es

riverbeds or the surrounding land. High proportions of cortical materials characterize the flaked obsidian samples from both the Upper and Lower components. Inasmuch as the amount of cortex on materials in a collection can be taken as a measure of both the intent of the toolmaker and the distance from the source, this collection documents the individual practice of exploiting materials found within a short distance of their residence as well as the perceived longevity of the tools� use-life.

A full range of reduction activities pertaining to the manufacture of a variety of tools and rejuvenation and the recycling of damaged items, attests to a degree of adaptability exhibited by people living in the Napa locality more than a millennium ago. Although biface reduction was well represented in the assemblages of both components, core reduction played a significant role in the technological organization characterizing the occupants of NAP-916. The presence of this technology documents that the early stages of tool manufacture occurred on site and, along with the range of activities represented by various flaked-stone datasets, suggests that the site was the location of repeated occupations.

Land Use, Settlement, and Mobility Patterns It has been observed that valleys in the Napa region �offered attractive locations for

settlement, as shown by the concentration of village sites in the valley floors along the watercourses� (Heizer 1953:228). Within the lower Napa Valley, prehistoric sites are either located parallel to the Napa River or along many of the river �s smaller streams and tributaries. Thus, the location of NAP-916 near the present course of Napa Creek reinforces the larger pattern of prehistoric settlement observed in the region from a synchronic perspective.

Unlike the majority of previously identified sites on the floor of the Napa Valley, however, the NAP-916 site is Archaic in age, and buried well below the present ground surface. While a few buried Archaic deposits are known in the lower Napa Valley, such as the lower components of NAP-15/H, NAP-399/863, and possibly, NAP-32, the sites themselves were first identified based on the presence of Late-period (i.e., <750 cal B.P.) surface deposits. Thus, from a diachronic perspective, the repeated use and/or occupation Napa Creek site is interesting because it suggests (1) that the pattern of streamside use and settlement was already established during the Middle Archaic period; (2) that Archaic populations responded (i.e., adapted) to some fairly large-scale landscape changes, such as the deposition of thick alluvial deposits; and (3) that there was little, if any, use or occupation of the site during the Late period, as seen at the other sites in the valley.

At the same time, the relatively low frequency and diversity of archaeological materials from NAP-916 attests to the limited duration and intensity of settlement at the site, which appears to reflect repeated, perhaps seasonal, use of the site over time. The sparse nature of the archaeological deposit suggests that the site served as a temporary base camp, or processing station, as part of a broader land-use strategy associated with a larger village or residential center. Alternatively, this pattern of limited use and settlement could suggest that the environmental setting of the site was relatively marginal and unproductive compared to other nearby areas that may have offered ample supplies of the plant and animal resources targeted by these prehistoric populations.

The presence of obsidian artifacts with water-worn cortex from both components suggests a practice of relatively local land use that may have coincided with the lower Napa Creek drainage. The greater material variability associated with the Lower


Component compared to the Late Archaic component may indicate that a wider variety of materials were locally available for use during the Middle Archaic, or that a more mobile strategy was used to obtain these materials. By implication, this suggests that prehistoric populations in the lower Napa Valley were more sedentary and/or geographically restricted during the Late Archaic compared to the previous period.

The predominance of obsidian flaking debris suggests that hunting was one of the primary activities practiced by the site�s inhabitants, while the recovery of fall-ripening acorns as the dominant archaeobotanical remains suggests another important use of the site. The recovery of at least two dozen modified flakes from the Lower Component supports the idea that plants were expediently processed at the site. If this was the case, then it is consistent with a larger pattern of seasonal movements, with settlement in fixed lowland residential bases from fall through spring, and dispersal to other more temporary locations during the summer months, as documented at Middle and Late Archaic sites in the Clear Lake area (White 2000), and as practiced by the Wappo and other ethnographic groups in the region (Heizer 1953:236). It is quite possible that the deposits at NAP-916 represent a �background scatter� associated with a larger village or camp, possibly also buried, located elsewhere along Napa Creek

In sum, the archaeological remains from NAP-916 are neither rare nor particularly unusual, but the age and stratigraphic context of the deposits are important for understanding the burial of Archaic period sites in the region. As such, NAP-916 serves as a reminder that a great portion of the early archaeological record lies beneath the floor of the lower Napa Valley.


REFERENCES CITED

Andrefsky, William, Jr. 1998 Lithics: Macroscopic Approaches to Analysis. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

Ambrose, Wallace R. 1976 Intrinsic Hydration Rate Dating of Obsidian. In Advances in Obsidian Glass Studies:

Archaeological and Geochemical Perspectives, edited by R.E. Taylor, pp. 81�105. Noyes Press, Park Ridge, New Jersey.

2001 Obsidian Hydration Dating. In Handbook of Archaeological Sciences, edited by D.R. Brothwell and A.M. Pollard, pp. 81�100. John Wiley & Sons, New York.

Banks, Peter M., Robert I. Orlins, and Helen McCarthy 1984 Final Report Walnut Creek Project: Test Excavation and Evaluation of Archaeological Site CA-

CCO-431, Contra Costa County, California. California Archaeological Consultants, Inc., Oakland, California. Submitted to Department of the Army Corps of Engineers, Sacramento District, and Sacramento.

Bard, James C., Colin Busby, Michael R. Fong, Robert M. Harmon, Melody E. Tannam, Donna M. Garaventa, Angela M. Banet, Sondra A. Jarvis, Steven J. Rossa, and Ranbir S. Sidhu

1992 Archaeological Site Testing Report, CA-ALA-483, Laguna Oaks Project, Pleasanton, Alameda County California. Basin Research Associates, Inc., San Leandro, California.

Barrett, S.A. 1908 The Ethnogeography of the Pomo and Neighboring Indians. University of California

Publications in American Archaeology and Ethnology 6(1):1�332. Berkeley.

Barrett, S.A., and E.W. Gifford 1933 Miwok Material Culture. Bulletin of the Public Museum of the City of Milwaukee 2(4):117�

376.

Bartoy, Kevin 2005 Archaeologist with Pacific Legacy, Inc. Personal communication with Thomas Martin

on 15 March 2005.

Beard, V.R. 1991 Archaeological Investigations at CA-NAP-14, City of Napa. Napa County, California. Report

on file at the Northwest Information Center of the California Historical Resources Information System, Rohnert Park, California.

Beardsley, R.K. 1948 Culture Sequences in Central California Archaeology. American Antiquity 14(1):1�28.

Bennyhoff, J.A. 1977 Ethnogeography of the Plains Miwok. Center for Archaeological Research at Davis

Publication Number 5. University of California, Davis.

1994 The Napa District and Wappo Prehistory. In Toward a New Taxonomic Framework for Central California Archaeology: Essays by James A. Bennyhoff and David A. Fredrickson, assembled and edited by R.E. Hughes, pp. 49�56. Original date of article 1977; revised 1986. Contribution of the University of California Archaeological Research Facility 52, Berkeley.


Bennyhoff, J.A., and R.E. Hughes 1987 Shell Bead and Ornament Exchange Networks between California and the Great Basin.

Anthropological Papers of the American Museum of Natural History 64(2). New York.

Bettis, E.A. III 1992 Soil Morphologic Properties and Weathering Zone Characteristics as Age Indicators in

Holocene Alluvium in the Upper Midwest. In Soils in Archaeology, edited by V.T. Holliday, pp. 119�144. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, D.C.

Bevill, Russell W. 2004 Obsidian Hydration: The Squaw Creek Site Revisited. In Proceeding of the Society for

California Archaeology 17:133�138.

Bieling, David G. 1988 Preliminary Analysis of an Upper Archaic Period Workshop at the Annadel Obsidian

Quarry. Paper presented at the Society for California Archaeology, Northern Data Sharing Conference, Sacramento State University, Sacramento.

1993 Draft Report on CA-SON-29, Analysis of an Obsidian Quarry at Annadel State Park. On file at the California State Department of Parks and Recreation, Sonoma, California.

Binford, Lewis R. 1979 Organization and Formation Processes: Looking at Curated Technologies. Journal of

Anthropological Research 35:255�273.

Birkeland, Peter W., Michael N. Machette, and Kathleen M. Haller 1991 Soils as a Tool for Applied Quaternary Geology. Miscellaneous Publication 91-3, Utah

Geological and Mineral Survey Division of Utah Department of Natural Resources.

Driver, H.E. 1936 Wappo Ethnography. University of California Publications in American Archaeology and

Ethnology 36(3):179�220. Berkeley.

Flynn, K. 1979 Results of Limited Test Excavations on 04-NAP-411, First Street, Napa, California.

Report on file at the Northwest Information Center of the California HistoricalResources Information System, Rohnert Park, CA.

Fowler, D.D. 1974 Current Research (M.E. King, ed.). American Antiquity 39(4):Part I.

Fredrickson, David. A. 1961 The Archaeology of LAK-261: A Stratified Site near Lower Lake, Lake County,

California. Manuscript in author�s possession.

1966 CCO-308: The Archaeology of a Middle Horizon Site in Interior Contra Costa County,California. Master�s thesis, Department of Anthropology, University of California,Berkeley.

1967 Appraisal of the Archaeological Resources of the Napa River (Trancas Road to Edgerley Island) and Three Potential Reservoir Areas in the Napa River Basin. Report submitted to the National Park Service, Western Region.

1968 Archaeological Investigation at CCO-30, near Alamo, Contra Costa, California. Center for Archaeological Research at Davis, Publication No. 1. University of California, Davis.


Fredrickson, David. A. (continued)1973 Early Cultures of the North Coast Ranges, California. Doctoral dissertation, Department of

Anthropology, University of California, Davis.

1976 Proposed Research and Excavation Designs for Archaeological Investigations at CA-NAP-261, City of Napa, California. Report submitted to the United States Army Corps of Engineers, San Francisco District.

1980 Archaeological Overview and Research Design for the Walnut Creek Project, Contra Costa County, California. Sonoma State University Academic Foundation, Inc., Rohnert Park, California. Anthropological Studies Center, Sonoma State University, Rohnert Park, California. Submitted to the District Corps of Engineers, San Francisco. On file (S-2969), Northwest Information Center of the California Historical Resources Information System, Rohnert Park, California.

1984 The North Coastal Region. In California Archaeology, by Michael J. Moratto, pp.471�527. Academic Press, Orlando, Florida.

Friedman, Irving, and John Obradovich 1981 Obsidian Hydration Dating of Volcanic Events. Quaternary Research 16:37�47.

Friedman, Irving, Fred W. Trembour, and Richard E. Hughes 1997 Obsidian Hydration Dating. In Chronometric Dating in Archaeology, edited by R.E. Taylor

and M.J. Aitken, pp. 297�231. Plenum Press, New York.

Geyh, M.A., and H. Schleicher 1990 Absolute Age Determination: Physical and Chemical Dating Methods and their Application.

Springer-Verlag, New York.

Gilreath, Amy J. and Eric Wohlgemuth 2004 Investigations at the Lemmon�s Quarry, CA-NAP-117/118. Far Western

Anthropological Research Group, Davis, California. Report on file at the Northwest Information Center of the California Historical Resources Information System, Rohnert Park, CA.

Gmoser, G. 1998 Results of Archaeological Test Excavations at CA-ALA-566 for the Proposed Route 238

Hayward Bypass Project: An Extended Phase I Archaeological Survey and Phase II Evaluation of Significance and Determination of Effect. California Department of Transportation, District 4, Oakland. On file at the Northwest Information Center of the California Historical Resources Information Systems, Rohnert Park, California

Gmoser, G., J. Rosenthal, W. Hildebrandt, and P. Mikkelsen 1999 Archaeological Survey of the I-680 Corridor between Dublin and Milpitas in Alameda and

Santa Clara Counties for the Sunol Grace Southbound Improvement Project, with Results of Extended Phase I/Phase II Archaeological Investigations at ALA-574, 575, 576. Far Western Anthropological Research Group, Davis, California. Prepared for California Department of Transportation, District 4, Office of Environmental Planning, South, Oakland.

Gramly, Richard M. 1980 Raw Materials Source Areas and �Curated� Tool Assemblages. American Antiquity

45(4):823�833.


Harlan Tait Associates 1994 Fault and Limited Geotechnical Investigation North Fairfield Site, Fairfield, California.

Harland Tait Associates, San Francisco. Prepared for the City of Fairfield, California.

Heizer, Robert F. 1950 Archaeology of CCO-137, the �Concord Man� Site. Reports of the University of California

Archaeological Survey 9:15�20. Berkeley.

1953 The Archaeology of the Napa Region. University of California Anthropological Records 12(6):225�358. Berkeley.

1966 Languages, Territories and Names of California Indian Tribes. University of California Press, Berkeley and Los Angeles.

Heizer, Robert F., and T.R. Hester 1970 Names and Locations of Some Ethnographic Patwin and Maidu Indian Villages.

University of California Archaeological Research Facility Contributions 9(5):79�118. Berkeley.

Helley, E.J., K.R. LaJoie, W.E. Spangle, and M.L. Blair 1979 Flatland Deposits of the San Francisco Bay Region, California�Their Geology and

Engineering Properties, and Their Importance to Comprehensive Planning. U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 943. Washington D.C.

Hughes, Richard E., editor 1989 Current Direction in California Obsidian Studies. Contributions of the University of

California Archaeological Research Facility No. 48. Department of Anthropology, University of California, Berkeley.

Jackson, T.L. 1978 Report of Archaeological Excavations at the River Glen Site (CA-NAP-261), Napa

County, California. Report on file at the Northwest Information Center of the California Historical Resources Information System, Sonoma State University, Rohnert Park, California.

Jaffke, Todd, and Jack Meyer 1998 Results of Archaeological Investigations for the Proposed Trancas Street Interchange Drainpipe

Project Napa County, California. California Department of Transportation, District 10, Oakland, and Anthropological Studies Center, Sonoma State University, Rohnert Park, California. Report on file at the Northwest Information Center of the California Historical Resources Information System Sonoma State University, Rohnert Park, California.

Johnson, P.J. 1978 Patwin. In California, edited by R.F. Heizer, pp. 350�360. Handbook of North American

Indians, vol. 8, William C. Sturtevant, general editor. Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C.

Jones, T.L. 1992 Settlement Trends along the California Coast. In Essays on the Prehistory of Maritime

California, edited by Terry L. Jones, pp. 1�37. Center for Archaeological Research at Davis No. 10. University of California, Davis.


Jones, T. L., and J. Ferneau 2002 De-intensification along the Central Coast. In Catalysts to Complexity: Late Holocene

Societies of the California Coast, edited by J. M. Erlandson and T. L. Jones, pp. 204�231. Institute of Archaeology, University of California, Los Angeles.

Jones, M., P.J. Sheppard, and D.G. Sutton 1997 Soil Temperature and Obsidian Hydration Dating: A Clarification of Variables

Affecting Accuracy. Journal of Archaeological Science 24:505�516.

Kelly, Isabel 1978 Coast Miwok. In California, edited by R.F. Heizer, pp. 414�425. Handbook of North

American Indians, vol. 8, William C. Sturtevant, general editor. Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C.

Kelly, Robert L. 1988 The Three Sides of a Biface. American Antiquity 53(4):717�734.

King, T.F. 1973 Archaeological Impact Evaluations: Routes 29 & 121, Imola Ave.�Suscol Road; Route

128 Napa River and Hopper Slough Bridge, Napa County, California. Report Submitted to the California Department of Transportation, District 4.

1974 Suscol Village (4-NAP-15): An Archaeological Study for Highway Planning. Report Submitted to the California Department of Transportation District 4.

Kroeber, A.L. 1925 Handbook of the Indians of California. Bureau of American Ethnology Bulletin 78.

Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C. Reprinted 1976, Dover, New York.

1932 The Patwin and Their Neighbors. University of California Publications in AmericanArchaeology and Ethnology 29(4):253�423.

Kuehn, D.D. 1993 Landforms and Archaeological Site Location in the Little Missouri Badlands: A New

Look at Some Well-Established Patterns. Geoarchaeology 8(4): 313�332.

Kunkel, Fred, and J.E. Upson 1960 Geology and Ground Water in Napa and Sonoma Valleys, Napa and Sonoma Counties,

California. U.S. Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper 1495. Washington, D.C.

LaJeunesse, Roger M., and John H. Pryor 1996 Skyrocket Chronology Appendix. Draft report. California State University, Fresno.

Lambert, G., and J. Kashiwagi 1978 Soil Survey of Napa County, California. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil

Conservation Service, Washington, D.C. Available on-line at http://www.ca.nrcs.usda.gov/mlra02/napa/main.html (accessed May 2005).

Lettis, William R. 1982 Late Cenozoic Stratigraphy and Structure of the Western Margin of the Central San Joaquin

Valley, California. U.S. Geological Survey, Open File Report 82�526.

Lillard, J.B., R.F. Heizer, and F. Fenenga 1939 An Introduction to the Archaeology of Central California. Sacramento Junior College

Department of Anthropology, Bulletin 2. Sacramento.


Marchand, Dennis E., and Alan Allwardt 1981 Late Cenozoic Stratigraphic Units, Northeastern San Joaquin Valley, California. U.S.

Geological Survey Bulletin 1470.

Matthews, J.A. 1985 Radiocarbon Dating of Surface and Buried Soils: Principles, Problems and Prospects. In

Geomorphology and Soils, edited by K.S. Richards, R.R. Arnett, and S. Ellis, pp. 269�288. Allen and Unwin, London.

McGonagle, R.L. 1966 The Cook Site: A Middle Horizon Site in Central California. Master�s thesis, University of

California at Davis.

McKern, W.C. 1922 Functional Families of the Patwin. University of California Publications in American

Archaeology and Ethnology 13(7):235�238. Berkeley.

1924 Patwin Houses. University of California Publications in American Archaeology andEthnology 20(10):159�171. Berkeley.

Meighan, C.W. 1953 Archaeology of Sites NAP-129, and NAP-131. In The Archaeology of the Napa Region, by

Robert F. Heizer, pp. 315�317. University of California Anthropological Records 12(6). Berkeley.

1955 Archaeology of the North Coast Ranges. University of California Archaeological Survey Reports 30:1�39. Berkeley.

1976 Empirical Determination from Archaeological Evidence. In Advances in Obsidian Glass Studies: Archaeological and Geochemical Perspectives, edited by R.E. Taylor, pp. 106�119. Noyes Press, Park Ridge, New Jersey.

Melander, R.N. 1974 Archaeological Impact Evaluation: The Wine Lodge Project Part II. Report on file at the

Northwest Information Center of the California Historical Resources Information System, Sonoma State University, Rohnert Park, California.

Merriam, C.H. 1955 Studies of California Indians. The Staff of the Department of Anthropology of the

University of California, eds. University of California Press, Berkeley.

Meyer, Jack 1993 Geoarchaeological Investigation of CA-SON-2098: A Buried Archaeological Site in

Sonoma County, California. Appendix F in The Archaeology of CA-SON-2098: A Buried Archaeological Site in Santa Rosa, Sonoma County, California, by Thomas M. Origer. Tom Origer & Associates, Cotati, California. Submitted to Memorial Hospital, Santa Rosa, California. On file (S-15744) at the Northwest Information Center of the California Historical Resources Information System, Sonoma State University, Rohnert Park, California.

1996a Geoarchaeological Implications of Holocene Landscape Evolution in the Los Vaqueros Area of Eastern Contra Costa, California. Master�s thesis in Cultural Resources Management, Department of Anthropology, Sonoma State University, Rohnert Park, California.


Meyer, Jack (continued)1996b Preliminary Geoarchaeological Assessment for the Marin Municipal Water District Project at

Olompali State Park, Marin County, California. Anthropological Studies Center, Sonoma State University, Rohnert Park, California. Prepared for California Department of Parks and Recreation, Sacramento, California.

2000 A Geoarchaeological Study of the Guadalupe Parkway Corridor, State Route 87, San Jose, Santa Clara County, California. Anthropological Studies Center, Sonoma State University, Rohnert Park, California. Prepared for California Department of Transportation, District 4, Oakland.

2005 Geoarchaeological Study of the Marsh Creek Site (CA-CCO-18 and CA-CCO-548), Eastern Contra Costa County, California. Anthropological Studies Center, Sonoma State University, Rohnert Park, California. Prepared for California Department of Parks and Recreation, Sacramento, California.

Meyer, Jack, and G. Dalldorf 2004 Geoarchaeological Investigations for Stage 2 of the East Sonora Bypass Project, State Route

108, Tuolumne County, California. Anthropological Studies Center, Sonoma State University, Rohnert Park, California. Prepared for California Department of Transportation, District 10, Stockton, California.

Meyer, Jack, and J.S. Rosenthal 1997 Archaeological and Geoarchaeological Investigations at Eight Prehistoric Sites in the Los

Vaqueros Reservoir Area, Contra Costa County. Los Vaqueros Final Report 7. Anthropological Studies Center, Sonoma State University, Rohnert Park, California. Prepared for the Contra Costa Water District, Concord, California.

1998 An Archaeological Investigation of Artifacts and Human Remains from CA-CCO-637, Los Vaqueros Project Area, Contra Costa County, California. Los Vaqueros Final Report 8. Anthropological Studies Center, Sonoma State University, Rohnert Park, California. Prepared for the Contra Costa Water District, Concord, California.

Milliken, R. 1978 Ethno-History of the Lower Napa Valley. In Report of Archaeological Excavations at The

River Glen Site (CA-NAP-261) Napa County, California, by T. L. Jackson. Report on file at the Northwest Information Center of the California Historical Resources Information System, Sonoma State University, Rohnert Park, California.

Moratto, Michael J. 1974 An Archaeological Survey of Possible Dredge Spoil Disposal Sites for the Napa River

Channel Improvements Project. Prepared for U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, San Francisco.

1984 California Archaeology. Academic Press, Orlando, Florida.

Morris, J., and P. Banks 1980 The Las Trancas Site, CA-NAP-14: A Management Plan. Prepared for Pegasus

Development Co. Oakland, CA. Report on file at the Northwest Information Center of the California Historical Resources Information System, Rohnert Park, California.

National Park Service (NPS) 1983 Archaeology and Historic Preservation; Secretary of the Interior�s Standards and

Guidelines. Federal Register 48(190):44716�44742.


Nogziger, D.L., and J. Wu 2005 Soil Temperature Variation with Time and Depth. Oklahoma State University, Okmulgee.

http://soilphysics.okstate.edu/software/SoilTemperature/document.pdf (accessed May 2005)

Origer, Thomas M. 1982 Temporal Control in the Southern North Coast Ranges of California: The Application of

Obsidian Hydration Analysis. Master�s thesis, Department of Anthropology, SanFrancisco State University, San Francisco.

1987 Temporal Control in the Southern North Coast Ranges of California: The Application of Obsidian Hydration Analysis. Papers in Northern California Anthropology, Publication 1. Northern California Anthropological Group, Berkeley, California. [Revision of 1982 Masters Thesis, Department of Anthropology, San Francisco State University.]

1993 The Archaeology of CA-SON-2098: A Buried Archaeological Site in Santa Rosa, Sonoma County, California. Tom Origer & Associates, Cotati, California. Submitted to Memorial Hospital, Santa Rosa, California. On file (S-15744) at the Northwest Information Center, California Historical Resources Information System, Rohnert Park, California.

1994 Investigations at CA-NAP-863: A Prehistoric Archaeological Site on the West Bank of the Napa River in the City of St. Helena, Napa County, California. Tom Origer & Associates, Cotati, California. Submitted to City of St. Helena, California.

Pahl, Gary 2003 The Archaeology of De Silva Island. Treganza Museum Publication 17, Tiburon

Archaeological Research Group Publication 2, San Francisco State University, SanFrancisco.

Pape, Donald Alan 1978 Terraced Alluvial Fills in Contra Costa County, California. Master�s thesis, University of

California, Berkeley.

Phebus, G. 1990 Archaeological Investigations in the San Pablo-Suisun Region of Central California.

Printed Privately. Astoria, Oregon.

Powers, S. 1877 Tribes of California. Contributions to North American Ethnology 3. U.S. Geographical and

Geological Survey of the Rocky Mountain Region, Washington.

Retallack, Greg J. 1988 Field Recognition of Paleosols. In Paleosols and Weathering through Geologic Time:

Principles and Applications, edited by Juergen Reinhardt and Wayne R. Sigleo, pp. 1�20. Geological Society of America, Special Paper 216, Boulder, Colorado.

Ridings, Rosanna 1991 Obsidian Hydration Dating: The Effects of Mean Exponential Ground Temperature

and Depth of Artifact Recovery. Journal of Field Archaeology 18:77�85.

Roop, W., C. Chattan, D. Bacchetti, K. Flynn, and G. Moore 1994 �The Great, Old Chief�: A Report on Human Remains Recovered from NAP-261.

Submitted to Public Works Department, City of Napa.


Rogers, J. David 1988 Pleistocene to Holocene Transition in Central Contra Costa County, California. In Field

Trip Guide to the Geology of the San Ramon Valley and Environs, edited by Ron Crane, pp. 29�51. Northern California Geological Society, San Ramon, California.

Rosenson, Martin 1975 Field Notes of Archaeological Reconnaissance Made on the �Chinatown,� NAP-261,

and NAP-14 Sites Situated along the Napa River Basin. Prepared for U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, San Francisco.

Rosenthal, Jeffrey S. 1996 A Cultural Chronology for Solano County, California. Master�s thesis in Cultural Resources

Management, Department of Anthropology, Sonoma State University, Rohnert Park, California.

Rosenthal, Jeffrey S., and Jack Meyer 2004a Landscape Evolution and the Archaeological Record: A Geoarchaeological Study of the

Southern Santa Clara Valley and Surrounding Region. Center for Archaeological Research at Davis No. 14. University of California, Davis.

2004b Geoarchaeological Study: Landscape Evolution and the Archaeological Record ofCentral California. In Cultural Resources Inventory of Caltrans District 10 RuralConventional Highways, Volume III. Far Western Research Group, Davis, California.Prepared for California Department of Transportation, District 10, Stockton.

Rosenthal, Jeffrey S., and Greg White 1994 Archaeological Investigations at the Pheasant Run Site: CA-SOL-363. Report on file at

the Northwest Information Center of the California Historical Resources Information System, Rohnert Park, California.

Rossignol, Jacqueline 1992 Concepts, Methods, and Theory Building. In Space, Time, and Archaeological Landscapes,

edited by Jacqueline Rossignol and LuAnn Wandsnider, pp. 3�16. Plenum Press, New York.

Sarna-Wojcicki, A.M., R.J. Fleck, E. Wan, A. Deino, and D. Wagner 2005 Chronostratigraphic Framework for the Sonoma Volcanics and Associated Sediment, Long-

Term Fault Displacement Rates, and Areal Dispersion of Tephra from the Source Area, Central Coast Ranges, California. Abstract of Paper 35-7 Presented in the Cordilleran Section of the Geological Society of America 101st Annual Meeting (April 29�May 1, 2005). http:// gsa.confex.com/gsa/2005CD/finalprogram/abstract_85316.htm (accessed April 2005).

Sawyer, J. O. 1978 Wappo. In California, edited by R.F. Heizer, pp. 256�263. Handbook of North American

Indians, vol. 8, William C. Sturtevant, general editor. Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C.

Schapiro, W., and K.J. Tremaine 1995 Final Report for the Archaeological Investigation of the Wiegand Property, Dixon,

California. Biosystems Analysis Inc. Report on file at the Northwest Information Center of the California Historical Resources Information System, Sonoma State University, Rohnert Park, California.


Scharpenseel, H.W. 1979 Soil Fraction Dating. In Radiocarbon Dating, edited by Rainer Berger and Hans E. Suess,

pp. 279�283. University of California Press, Berkeley.

Schwaderer, R., R.A Stradford, and D.A. Fredrickson 1979 An Archaeological Study of the Suscol Village, CA-NAP-15, Napa County, California.

Cultural Resources Facility, Sonoma State University, Rohnert Park, California. Prepared for California Department of Transportation, District 04.

Schoeneberger, P.J., D.A. Wysocki, E.C. Benham, and W.D. Broderson 1998 Field Book for Describing and Sampling Soils. National Soil Survey Center, Natural

Resources Conservation Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Lincoln, Nebraska.

Shott, Michael J. 1989a Diversity, Organization, and Behavior in the Material Record: Ethnographic and

Archaeological Examples. Current Anthropology 30(3):283�315.

1989b On Tool-Class Use Lives and the Formation of Archaeological Assemblages. American Antiquity 54(1):9�30.

Snoke, J.M. 1965 The Archaeology of Solano 11: A Middle Horizon Site in Green Valley, California. Master�s

thesis, University of California at Davis.

Soil Survey Staff 1998 Keys to Soil Taxonomy. Eighth edition. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural

Resources Conservation Service. Washington, D.C.

Sowers, J.M., J.S. Noller, and W.R. Lettis 1998 Maps Showing Quaternary Geology and Liquefaction Susceptibility, Napa, California,

1:100,000 Quadrangle: A Digital Database. U.S. Geological Survey Open File Report 98-460. http://wrgis.wr.usgs.gov/open-file/of98-460/ (accessed May 2005).

Stafford, C.R. 1995 Geoarchaeological Perspectives on Paleolandscapes and Regional Subsurface

Archaeology. Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory 2(1): 69�104.

Stewart, Suzanne 2004 Ground and Battered Stone Analysis. In Status Report for Geoarchaeological Data

Recovery at Four Prehistoric Sites (CA-TUO-2640, -2643, -4556, -4559) for Stage 1 of the East Sonora Bypass Project, State Route 108, Tuolumne County, California, edited by Jack Meyer, pp. 63�100. Anthropological Studies Center, Sonoma State University, Rohnert Park, California. Prepared for California Department of Transportation, District 10, Stockton.

Stradford, Richard A., and Rae Schwaderer 1982 Remembrance of Things Bypassed: Archaeological Investigations at CA-NAP-15/H, Napa

County, California. Sonoma State University, Rohnert Park, California. Prepared forCalifornia Department of Transportation, District 4, Oakland, California.


Stillwater Sciences and William Dietrich 2002 Napa River Basin Limiting Factors Analysis: Final Technical Report. Stillwater Sciences,

Berkeley, California. Prepared for San Francisco Bay Water Quality Control Board. Oakland, California. http://www.waterboards.ca.gov/sanfranciscobay/TMDL/ draft%20technical%20report.pdf (accessed May 2005).

Stuiver, M., and P. J. Reimer 1993 Extended 14C Database and Revised CALIB Radiocarbon Calibration Program.

Radiocarbon 35:215�230.

Tamez, S. 1978 Archaeological Investigations at Suscol, CA-NAP-15. Manuscript on file, California

State Department of Transportation, District 04, Oakland.

Taylor, R.E. 1976 Advances in Obsidian Glass Studies: Archaeological and Geochemical Perspectives. Noyes

Press, Park Ridge, New Jersey.

Tremaine, Kimberly J. 1989 Obsidian as a Time Keeper: An Investigation in Absolute and Relative Dating. Master�s

thesis in Cultural Resources Management, Department of Anthropology, Sonoma State University, Rohnert Park, California.

1993 Temporal Ordering of Artifact Obsidians: Relative Dating Enhanced through the Use of Accelerated Hydration Experiments. In There Grows a Green Tree: Papers in Honor of David A. Fredrickson, edited by Greg White, Pat Mikkelsen, William R. Hildebrandt, and Mark E. Basgall. pp. 265�275. Center for Archaeological Research at Davis No. 11. University of California, Davis.

U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) 2004 Official Soil Series Descriptions. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources

Conservation Service. Available online at http://ortho.ftw.nrcs.usda.gov/cgi-bin/osd/ osdname.cgi. (accessed May 2005).

Virginia Department of Mines Minerals and Energy 2005 Earth Temperature and Site Geology. http://www.geo4va.vt.edu/A1/A1.htm (accessed

September 2005).

Wagner, D. L., and E. J. Bortugno 1982 Santa Rosa Quadrangle, Map 24 (Geology). California Division of Mines, California State

Printing Office, Sacramento.

Waters, Michael R. 1992 Principles of Geoarchaeology: A North American Perspective. University of Arizona Press,

Tucson.

2000 Geoarchaeological Investigation of the Anderson Flat Area. In Final Report of the Anderson Flat Project, Lower Lake, Lake County, California: Volume 1, prepared by Greg White, pp. 115�127. Anthropological Studies Center, Sonoma State University, Rohnert Park, California. Prepared for Caltrans Environmental Studies Office, District 1, Eureka, California.


West, G. James 1993 The Late Pleistocene-Holocene Pollen Record and Prehistory of California�s North

Coast Ranges. In There Grows a Green Tree: Papers in Honor of David A. Fredrickson, edited by Greg White, Pat Mikkelsen, William R. Hildebrandt, and Mark E. Basgall, pp. 219-236. Center for Archaeological Research at Davis, Publication No. 11. University of California Press, Davis, California.

Western Regional Climate Center (WRCC) 2005 Northern California Climate Summaries. Available online at http://www.wrcc.dri.edu/

summary/climsmnca.html (accessed May 2005).

White, Greg 1982 An Archaeological Survey of the 16.1-Acre Quantas Development Corporation Range

Avenue Condominium Project, Range Avenue, Santa Rosa, Sonoma County, California. Anthropological Studies Center, Sonoma State University, Rohnert Park, California. On file (S-2845), Northwest Information Center of the California Historical Resources Information System, Sonoma State University, Rohnert Park, California.

2000 Final Report of the Anderson Flat Project, Lower Lake, Lake County, California: Volume 1. Anthropological Studies Center, Sonoma State University, Rohnert Park, California. Prepared for Caltrans Environmental Studies Office, District 1, Eureka.

2002 Cultural Diversity and Culture Change in Prehistoric Clear Lake Basin: Final Report of the Anderson Flat Archaeological Project. Center for Archaeological Research at Davis, Publication Number 13. University of California, Davis.

2003 Population Ecology of the Prehistoric Colusa Reach. Doctoral dissertation, Department of Anthropology, University of California, Davis.

White, Greg, and David A. Fredrickson 1992 A Research Design for The Anderson Flat Project, Archaeological Data Recovery Investigations

at Site CA-LAK-72, 509, 536, 538, 542, and 1375, Lake County, California. Anthropological Studies Center, Sonoma State University Academic Foundation, Rohnert Park, California. Prepared for California Department of Transportation, District 1, Eureka.

White, Greg, and Ronald F. King 1993 The Mostin Site Revisited. In There Grows a Green Tree: Papers in Honor of David A.

Fredrickson, edited by Greg White, Pat Mikkelsen, William R. Hildebrandt, and Mark E. Basgall. pp. 121�140. Center for Archaeological Research at Davis No. 11. University of California, Davis.

Wiberg, Randy S. 1980 Stonebridge: Archaeological Excavations at CA-NAP-516 near Napa, California. Report on

file at the Northwest Information Center of the California Historical Resources Information System, Sonoma State University, Rohnert Park, California.

1988 The Santa Rita Village Mortuary Complex (CA-ALA-413): Evidence and Implication of aMeganos Intrusion. Coyote Press Archives of California Prehistory No. 18. Salinas,California.

1993 Final Report: Archaeological Data Recovery at Prehistoric Site CA-SOL-355/H, Green Valley, Solano County, California. Holman and Associates Archaeological Consultants, San Francisco. Report on file at the Northwest Information Center of the California Historical Resources Information System, Sonoma State University, Rohnert Park, California.


Wiberg, Randy S. (continued) 1996 Archaeological Excavation and Burial Removal at Sites CA-ALA-483, CA-ALA-483

Extension, and CA-ALA-555, Pleasanton, Alameda County, California. Holman & Associates Archaeological Consultants, San Francisco. Submitted to Davidon Homes, Walnut Creek, California.

Wilen, James E. 1999 Lithostratigraphic and Pedostratigraphic Profile of a Portion of the Jacobsen Ranch,

Marin County, California: Buried Soils and Their Potential for Locating Cultural Resources in the Chileno Creek Drainage Area. Paper submitted for Anthropology 495, Special Studies, Sonoma State University, Rohnert Park, California. Manuscript in author�s possession.

2001 Lithostratigraphic and Pedostratigraphic Profile � Jacobsen Ranch, Marin County, California: Buried Soils and the Implications for Cultural Resources Management along Chileno Creek. Abstract of paper presented at the Geological Society of America Cordilleran Section Meeting, April 9�11, 2001, Universal City, California.

Windmiller, Ric 1993 Cultural Resources Status Report for the River Glen Site (CA-NAP-261). Napa River

Flood Control Project; Napa, Napa County, California. Report on file at the Northwest Information Center of the California Historical Resources Information System, Sonoma State University, Rohnert Park, California.

Wohlgemuth, Eric 2004 The Course of Plant Food Intensification in Native Central California. Doctoral dissertation,

Department of Anthropology, University of California, Davis.

Wohlgemuth, Eric, John Berg, and Kimberly Carpenter 2004 Archaeological Excavations at Sites CA-NAP-14 and CA-NAP-261 for the Napa River Trail

Improvement Project, City of Napa, California. Far Western Anthropological Research Group, Davis, California. Report on file at the Northwest Information Center of the Historical Resources Information System, Rohnert Park, California.


APPENDIX A

Project Personnel

PROJECT PERSONNEL

Name Title Qualifications* Responsibilities

Adrian Praetzellis

Mary Praetzellis

Jack Meyer

Thomas Martin

David G. Bieling

Suzanne Stewart

Sunshine Psota

Michael Meyer

Margo Meyer

Maria Ribeiro

Mike Konzak

Dina Coleman

Annita Waghorn

Richard Schultz

Brian Gassner

Christina MacDonald

Sandra Massey

Barbra Siskin

Nina Caputo

Principal Investigator

Operations Manager

Archaeologist

Archaeologist

Flaked-stone Analyst/ Archaeologist

Editor/Archaeologist

Archaeologist

Archaeologist

Production Coordinator

Graphics Specialist

Archaeological Specialist









Ph.D., Anthropology; RPA

M.A., CRM; RPA; CCPH

M.A., CRM; RPA

M.A., CRM

M.A., CRM

M.A., CRM; RPA

M.A., CRM; RPA

M.A., CRM; RPA

B.A., Art History

B.A., Anthropology

M.A., Archaeology

CRM graduate student, B.A., English

M.A., CRM

CRM graduate student, B.A., Anthropology

B.A., Anthropology




CRM graduate student, B.A., Communications/ Marketing

Overall supervision

Project management

Project supervision, fieldwork direction, geomorphology, report writing and graphics

Fieldwork direction, report writing and graphics

Flaked-stone analysis

Report editing

Fieldwork

Fieldwork

Fieldwork

Fieldwork, report graphics and production

Graphics

Fieldwork (including geomorphology)

Fieldwork

Fieldwork

Fieldwork

Fieldwork

Fieldwork, labwork

Fieldwork

Labwork (including photography)

A.1

--

Appendix A. Project Personnel (continued)

Name Title Qualifications* Responsibilities

Bryan Mischke Archaeological Specialist B.A., Anthropology Fieldwork

Virginia Hellman Archaeological Specialist B.A., History Fieldwork

Nelson Thompson Archaeological Specialist B.A., Anthropology Fieldwork

Sue-Ann Schroder Archaeological Specialist B.A., Anthropology Fieldwork

Melinda Button Archaeological Specialist B.A., Anthropology Labwork

Michael Stoyka Archaeological Specialist A.A., Marine Sciences Fieldwork

David Makar Archaeological Labwork Technician

*Qualifications: CCPH = Registered Professional Historian; CRM = Cultural Resources Management; RPA = Registered Professional Archaeologist. Note: Titles and qualifications for current ASC personnel are as of Spring 2005; list includes current and former ASC employees.

A.2

APPENDIX B

Site Record Update CA-NAP-916

State of California ⎯ The Resources Agency Primary # P-28-000967 DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #

CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial CA-NAP-916 Page 1 of 2 Napa Creek Site*Resource Name or #:

*Recorded by T. Martin & J. Meyer *Date September 2005 Continuation ⌧ Update

Update for CA-NAP-916 (Napa Creek Site)

2005 Archaeological Data Recovery at the Napa Creek Site (CA-NAP-916), State Route 20, Napa, California.

At the request of the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans), the Anthropological Studies Center (ASC) conducted archaeological data-recovery investigations at buried prehistoric site CA-NAP-916 as part of the Trancas Street Interchange and Drainage Pipe Project (Nap-29 KP 18.7/21.7), which required that a drainpipe be placed through a portion of the site. The site had been previously determined eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) under Criterion D (Jaffke and Meyer 1998). With the Federal Highway Administration as the lead agency, the project was conducted under Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act, which requires consideration of the effects of an undertaking on properties eligible to the NRHP.

Two temporal components were identified at the Napa Creek site based on stratigraphic and chronological evidence: (1) a Lower Component associated with a well-developed Middle Holocene-age soil (Stratum I) buried at depths of 140 to 240 cm, and (2) a Upper Component associated with a moderately developed Late Holocene-age soil buried at depths of 80 to 140 cm. The Lower Component yielded Middle Archaic radiocarbon dates, but hydration evidence suggests a Late Archaic-age for the Napa Valley obsidian (mean of 3.6 microns). Two lanceolate projectile points are generally consistent with the Middle Archaic-period assignment for the Lower Component. The Upper Component, which contained fewer temporally diagnostic artifacts, is dominated by Late Archaic obsidian (mean of 3.1 microns Napa Valley obsidian).

Overall, the assemblage of archaeological materials from NAP-916 is dominated by flaked-stone items of Napa Valley obsidian that were often obtained as waterworn cobbles, and then reduced for the manufacture of biface tools and cores, and simple flake tools. The relatively low frequency and diversity of archaeological materials from NAP916 attests to the limited duration and intensity of settlement at the site, which appears to reflect repeated, perhaps seasonal, use of the location as a temporary base camp or processing station over time. As such, the NAP-916 deposits may represent a “background scatter” associated with a larger village or camp, possibly also buried, located elsewhere along Napa Creek. Analysis of charred plant remains from two cultural features at the site indicates that the inhabitants may have seasonally targeted and processed acorns at the site more than 5,500 years ago, which is thousands of years earlier than previously documented in the Napa Valley. In sum, the archaeological remains from NAP-916 are neither rare nor particularly unusual, but they serve as a reminder that a great portion of the early archaeological record lies beneath the floor of the lower Napa Valley.

The findings from NAP-916 are addressed in terms of important regional research issues that include human occupation and landscape evolution, lithic procurement and reduction strategies, and land use, settlement and mobility patterns. In addition, the chronostratigraphy of NAP-916 is compared with other sites buried in the southern North Coast Ranges, and the issue deep and/or prolonged burial as a factor in affecting obsidian-hydration is examined as an important regional research issue.

The information above is summarized from a report titled:

Martin, Thomas, Jack Meyer

Anthropological Studies Center, Sonoma State University, Rohnert Park, California. Prepared for California Department of Transportation, District 4, Oakland.

DPR 523L (1/95) *Required information

4-2-5 4-7-5

4-7-4

4-7-3

Datum

Reference point 2***

Reference point 1**

CA-NAP-916* site boundary

*extent of site undetermined

**13.6 m @ 248° from Reference point 1 to Stake 1

***13 m @ 240° from Reference point 2 to Stake 2

2

1

0 20 40 m

0N

scale is approximate

DPR 523K (1/95) *Required Information

Primary # HRI#

SKETCH MAP

Page of

*Drawn by: *Date:

*Resource Name or #2 2 Napa Creek Site

T. Martin & J. Meyer September 2005

P-28-000967

CA-NAP-916

100 feet

State of California — The Resource Agency DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION

Trinomial

APPENDIX C

Official Soil Descriptions (USDA 2004)

OFFICIAL SOIL DESCRIPTIONS (USDA 2004)

BALE SERIES (MAP UNITS: 103, 104, 105, 106) The Bale series consists of somewhat poorly drained soils on alluvial fans, flood

plains, and low terraces. Slope is 0 to 5 percent. Elevation is 100 to 300 feet. These soils formed in alluvium derived from rhyolite and basic igneous rock. The plant cover is oak, blackberry, annual grasses, poison-oak, and willows. Mean annual precipitation is 25 to 35 inches. Mean annual air temperature is 58° to 61° F. Summers are hot and dry, and winters are cool and moist. The frost-free season is 220 to 270 days.

Permeability is moderate. Temporary ponding is common during periods of high rainfall. The effective rooting depth is 60 inches or more. The available water capacity is 6 to 9 inches. Bale soils are used mainly for vineyards, but some small areas are used for irrigated pasture and prune orchards.

TAXONOMIC CLASS: Fine-loamy, mixed, superactive, thermic Cumulic Ultic Haploxerolls

TYPICAL PEDON: Bale loam – cultivated. (Colors are for dry soil unless otherwise noted).

In a representative profile the surface layer is dark gray, slightly acid loam 6 inches thick. The subsoil is 18 inches thick. The upper 11 inches is grayish brown, slightly acid loam, and the lower 7 inches is brown, slightly acid loam. Between depths of 24 and 60 inches or more are stratified layers of gray and pale brown slightly acid loam, gravelly sandy loam, and sandy loam. Representative profile of Bale loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes, 950 feet south of Silverado Trail from Picket Road and 100 feet west along vineyard, NE1⁄4NE1⁄4 sec. 6, T. 8 N., R. 6 W.:

Ap – 0 to 6 inches, dark gray (10YR 4/1) loam, black (10YR 2/1) moist; weak fine granular structure; hard, very friable, slightly sticky and slightly plastic; common very fine roots; many very fine tubular and interstitial pores; 10 percent gravel; slightly acid (pH 6.3) clear smooth boundary.

B21 – 6 to 17 inches, grayish brown (10YR 5/2) loam, very dark grayish brown (10YR 3/2) moist; weak fine subangular blocky structure; hard, friable, slightly sticky and slightly plastic; few coarse and common fine roots; common medium and fine tubular and interstitial pores; 10 percent gravel; slightly acid (pH 6.3); clear smooth boundary.

B22 – 17 to 24 inches, brown (10YR 5/3) loam, very dark grayish brown (10YR 3/2) moist; weak fine subangular blocky structure; very hard, friable, slightly sticky and slightly plastic; few very fine roots; common very fine and fine tubular and interstitial pores; 10 percent gravel; slightly acid (pH 6.3) gradual smooth boundary.

A11b – 24 to 33 inches, gray (10YR 5/1) loam, black (10YR 2/1) moist; moderate fine subangular, blocky structure; extremely hard, friable, slightly sticky and slightly plastic;

C.1

few fine and coarse roots; few fine and very fine tubular and interstitial pores; common thin clay films on peds and in pores; slightly acid (pH 6.3); gradual smooth boundary. [Buried soil]

A12b – 33 to 44 inches, gray (10YR 5/11) loam, very dark grayish brown (10YR 3/2) moist; weak fine subangular blocky structure; extremely hard, friable, slightly sticky and slightly plastic; few fine roots; common very fine tubular and interstitial pores; slightly acid (pH 6.3); gradual smooth boundary.

IICI – 44 to 50 inches, pale brown (10YR 6/3 gravelly sandy loam, dark brown (10YR 3/3) moist; moderate medium granular structure; hard, friable, nonsticky and nonplastic; many fine interstitial pores; 20 percent gravel; slightly acid (pH 6.3); clear smooth boundary.

IIIC2 – 50 to 60 inches, pale brown (10YR 6/3) sandy loam, dark brown (10YR 3/3) moist; moderate medium granular structure; hard, friable, nonsticky and nonplastic; many fine interstitial pores; slightly acid (pH 6.3).

The Ap horizon is dark gray, very dark gray, grayish brown, or dark grayish brown (10YR 4/1, 3/1, 5/2, and 4/2) loam or clay loam. Structure is granular or subangular blocky. Reaction is mainly medium acid or slightly acid, but it is moderately alkaline in places.

The B2 horizon is dark grayish brown, grayish brown, dark brown, or brown (10YR 4/2, 5/2, 4/3, and 5/3) loam, gravelly heavy loam, clay loam, or gravelly clay loam. Gravel content is as much as 20 percent in some small areas. Structure is weak, fine or moderate, subangular blocky. Reaction is mainly medium acid, but it is moderately alkaline in places.

The B2 horizon is underlain by light gray to dark grayish brown (10YR 7/1, 7/3, 6/1, 6/2, 5/1, 5/2, 4/2, 6/3, and 5/3), stratified sandy loam, loam, or clay loam. Gravel content is 10 to 20 percent. Structure is granular or subangular blocky. Reaction is mainly medium acid or slightly acid, but it is moderately alkaline in places.

103-Bale loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes. This nearly level soil is on alluvial fans and flood plains. It has the profile described as representative for the series. Included with this soil in mapping were small areas of Cole, Clear Lake, Cortina, and Yolo soils. Also included are areas of Bale soils near Calistoga that have a surface layer of gravelly loam. Runoff is slow, and the hazard of erosion is slight. The water table is at a depth of more than 4 feet. This soil is mainly used for vineyards. A few small areas that have not been drained are in pasture.

104-Bale clay loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes. This nearly level soil is on alluvial fans and flood plains. It has a profile similar to the one described as representative for the series, but the surface layer is clay loam. Included with this soil in mapping were small areas of Clear Lake, Cole, and Yolo soils. Also included were areas of soils that have a hardpan at a depth of more than 40 inches. Runoff is slow, and the hazard of erosion is

C.2

slight. The water table is at a depth of more than 4 feet. This soil is used mainly for vineyards.

105-Bale clay loam, 2 to 5 percent slopes. This gently sloping soil is on flood plains and low terraces. It has a profile similar to the one described as representative of the series, but the surface layer is clay loam. Included with this soil in mapping were small areas of Cole, Cortina, and Yolo soils. Runoff is slow, and the hazard of erosion is slight. The water table is at a depth of more than 4 feet. Nearly all the acreage of this soil is used for vineyards.

106-Bale complex, 0 to 2 percent slopes, seeped. This complex consists of nearly level, stratified loam, clay loam, and gravelly loam. Included with these soils in mapping were areas of slowly permeable soils that are stratified with clay. Permeability is moderate, and runoff is slow. There is little or no hazard of erosion. The water table is at a depth of 2 to 4 feet. Reaction is neutral to moderately alkaline. Boron toxicity is strong. These soils are not suited to cultivation because of the excessive boron content. Most areas are in saltgrass and star thistle.

MLRA OFFICE RESPONSIBLE: Davis, California

SERIES ESTABLISHED: Napa Area, California, 1933.

REMARKS: Bale soils formerly were classified as Brunizems. The classification is changed from Typic Umbraqualfs to Cumulic Ultic Haploxerolls. No other soils are presently placed in the fine-loamy, mixed, thermic family.

C.3

COLE SERIES The Cole series consists of very deep, somewhat poorly drained soils that formed

in alluvium from mixed sources. Cole soils are on river terraces, basins, flood plains, or on alluvial fans with slopes of 0 to 5 percent. The mean annual precipitation is about 40 inches and the mean annual air temperature is about 60 degrees F.

TAXONOMIC CLASS: Fine, mixed, superactive, thermic Pachic Argixerolls

TYPICAL PEDON: Cole clay loam – on a 1 percent slope in an irrigated walnut orchard at 1,360 feet. (Colors are for dry soil unless otherwise noted. When described on April 28, 1976, the soil was slightly moist throughout).

Ap – 0 to 6 inches; grayish brown (10YR 5/2) clay loam, very dark grayish brown (10YR 3/2) moist; moderate fine and medium subangular blocky structure parting to strong fine and medium granular; hard, firm, sticky and plastic; common very fine, fine and medium roots; common fine and medium tubular pores; few worm casts; slightly acid (pH 6.5); abrupt smooth boundary. (6 to 15 inches thick)

Bat – 6 to 13 inches; grayish brown (10YR 5/2) clay loam, very dark gray (10YR 3/1) moist; moderate fine and medium subangular blocky structure parting to strong fine and medium granular; hard, firm, sticky and plastic; common very fine, fine and medium roots; many fine and medium tubular pores; common thin clay films on peds and in pores; few worm casts; slightly acid (pH 6.3); clear smooth boundary. (0 to 8 inches thick)

Bt1 – 13 to 35 inches; gray (10YR 5/1) clay loam, very dark grayish brown (10YR 3/2) moist; weak medium and coarse angular blocky structure; very hard, firm, sticky and plastic; common very fine, fine and medium roots; common very fine and fine and few medium tubular pores; many thin and common moderately thick clay films on peds and in pores; 2 percent pebbles 5 to 15 mm in diameter; moderately alkaline (pH 8.0); clear wavy boundary. (10 to 22 inches thick)

Bt2 – 35 to 51 inches; brownish yellow (10YR 6/6) clay loam, yellowish brown (10YR 5/4) moist; grayish brown (10YR 5/2) clay films on peds and in pores; dark grayish brown (10YR 4/2) moist; weak medium prismatic structure; hard, firm, sticky and plastic; common medium coarse and few fine roots; common very fine, fine and few medium tubular pores; many thin clay films bridging mineral grains and common moderately thick clay films on peds and in pores; moderately alkaline (pH 8.0); clear wavy boundary (6 to 17 inches thick).

BCt – 51 to 62 inches; variegated brown (10YR 5/3) and pale brown (10YR 6/3) clay loam, yellowish brown (10YR 5/4) moist; grayish brown (10YR 5/2) clay films; weak medium prismatic structure; hard, firm, sticky and plastic; common medium, coarse and few fine roots; many very fine, fine and common medium tubular pores; few thin and moderately thick clay films bridging mineral grains, on peds, and in pores; moderately alkaline (pH 8.0); clear smooth boundary. (0 to 15 inches thick)

C.4

C – 62 to 71 inches; variegated brown (10YR 5/3) and pale brown (10YR 6/3) clay loam, yellowish brown (10YR 5/4) moist; grayish brown (10YR 5/2) clay films; weak medium prismatic structure; hard, firm, sticky and plastic; few fine and medium roots; common very fine, fine and few medium tubular pores; common thin clay films on peds, bridging mineral grains and in pores; 4 percent pebbles 2 to 20 mm in diameter; moderately alkaline (pH 8.0).

TYPE LOCATION: Lake County, California; about 5 miles southeast of Lakeport, 75 feet northwest of the junction of Argonaut Road and Thomas Drive; NE1/4, section 8, T.13 N., R.9 W.

RANGE IN CHARACTERISTICS: The mean annual soil temperature is 59 to 65 degrees F, and the soil temperature usually is not below 47 degrees at any time. The soil between depths of 4 and 12 inches is usually dry from July 1 to October 1 and is moist in all parts from December 1 to April 30. The soils usually increase in alkalinity with increasing depth but are noncalcareous. The particle-size control section has 35 to 45 percent clay. Organic carbon is 1 to 2 percent to a depth of 20 to 35 inches. Gravel content ranges from 0 to 15 percent throughout.

The A horizon dry color is 10YR 3/2, 4/1, 4/2, 4/3, 5/1, 5/2, 5/3; 2.5Y 4/1, 4/2, 5/1 or 5/2. Moist colors are 10YR 2/1, 2/2, 3/1, 3/2, 3/3; or 2.5Y 3/2. It is loam, silt loam, clay loam, or silty clay loam and has granular or subangular blocky structure. It is slightly hard to very hard and is neutral to moderately acid. Some pedons have A3 horizons, B1 horizons or Blt horizons.

The Bt horizon dry color is 10YR 2/1, 2/2, 3/1, 3/2, 4/1, 4/2, 4/3, 5/1, 5/2, 5/3, 5/4, 6/3; 2.5Y 3/2, 4/2, 5/2 N 3/0, or N 4/0. Moist colors are 10YR 2/1, 2/2, 3/1, 3/2, 3/3, 4/1, 4/2, 4/3 4/4; 2.5Y 3/2, 4/2 or 5/2. In some pedons the lower part has dry colors of 10YR 6/2, 6/3, 6/4 or 6/6. Moist colors are 4/4, 5/3 or 5/4 and some also have mottles. It is silty clay loam, clay loam, silty clay or clay and averages 35 to 50 percent clay in the upper 20 inches. It is slightly acid to moderately alkaline.

The C horizon dry color has hues of 10YR, 2.5Y or 5Y and values 3 through 6 dry and 2 through 6 moist. Chroma is 1 through 3 dry and 2 through 4 moist. It is clay loam, clay loam, silty clay loam or clay and is mildly or moderately alkaline. Some pedons are underlain by gravel.

GEOGRAPHIC SETTING: Cole soils are on flood plains and fans and in basins at elevations of 50 to 1,500 feet. Slopes are 0 to 5 percent. The soils formed in alluvium from mixed sources. The climate is subhumid with warm or hot dry summers and cool moist winters. Mean annual precipitation is 25 to 50 inches. Average January temperature is 55 to 61 degrees F. The frost-free period is 150 to 290 days.

GEOGRAPHICALLY ASSOCIATED SOILS: These are the Bale, Botella, Soquel, Clear Lake, Cortina, Pajaro, and Yolo soils. Clear Lake soils are clayey throughout and have intersecting slickensides. Cortina soils have an ochric epipedon and have a loamy-skeletal control section. Pajaro soils lack an argillic horizon, have a fine-loamy control

C.5

section, and have an aquic moisture regime. Yolo soils have an ochric epipedon, lack an argillic horizon, and have a fine-silty control section.

DRAINAGE AND PERMEABILITY: Somewhat poorly drained; slow runoff; slow permeability. Many areas have been artificially drained or have drainage altered by gullying.

USE AND VEGETATION: Used mostly for production of orchards, vineyards, truck crops, and irrigated pasture. Uncultivated areas have oak-grass vegetation with some shrubs and forbs.

DISTRIBUTION AND EXTENT: North coastal counties, California. The soils are moderately extensive.

SERIES ESTABLISHED: Lake County, California. Clear Lake Area 1927.

Diagnostic horizons and features recognized in this pedon are:

• Mollic Pachic epipedon – the zone from 0 to 35 inches (Ap, BAt, Bt1)

• Argillic horizon – the zone from 6 to 62 inches (BAt, Bt1, Bt2, Bct)

C.6

COOMBS SERIES The Coombs soils are well-drained, moderately slowly permeable soils on gravelly

terraces. They formed in gravelly alluvium from mixed sources. Slopes are nearly level to gently sloping. Mean annual precipitation is about 30 inches. Mean annual soil temperature is about 59 to 62 degrees F

TAXONOMIC CLASS: Fine-loamy, mixed, active, thermic Ultic Haploxeralfs

TYPICAL PEDON: Coombs gravelly loam – cultivated. (Colors are for dry soil unless otherwise noted).

Ap – 0 to 4 inches; brown (10YR 5/3) gravelly loam, dark brown (10YR 3/3) moist; fine to coarse subangular blocky structure; hard, friable, nonsticky, slightly plastic; very fine roots; 15 to 25 percent gravel; moderately acid (pH 6.0); abrupt wavy boundary. (3 to 8 inches thick)

A3 – 4 to 13 inches; pale brown (10YR 6/3) clay loam, very dark grayish brown (10YR 3/2) moist; massive; hard, friable, slightly sticky, slightly plastic; common very fine roots; many very fine tubular pores moderately acid (pH 6.0); clear smooth boundary. (7 to 11 inches thick)

B1t – 13 to 25 inches; brown (10YR 5/3) clay loam, dark brown (10YR 3/3) moist; weak fine subangular blocky structure; hard, friable, slightly sticky, slightly plastic; common very fine roots; many very fine, few fine tubular pores; common this clay films on peds and in pores; strongly acid (pH 5.5); clear smooth boundary. (8 to 12 inches thick)

B21t – 25 to 35 inches; light brown (7.5YR 6/4) clay loam, dark brown (7.5YR 3/4) moist; weak fine subangular blocky structure; slightly hard, friable, slightly sticky, plastic; few very fine roots; many very fine, few fine tubular pores; many thin clay films on peds and in pores; strongly acid (ph 5.5); clear smooth boundary. (8 to 12 inches thick)

B22t – 35 to 43 inches; light brown (7.5YR 6/4) heavy clay loam, dark brown (7.5YR 4/4) moist; massive; slightly hard, friable, slightly sticky, plastic; few very fine roots; many very fine, few fine tubular pores; many thin clay films in pores; strongly acid (pH 5.5); clear smooth boundary. (7 to 11 inches thick)

B3t – 43 to 54 inches; pink (7.5YR 7/4) clay loam, dark brown (7.5YR 4/4) moist; massive; slightly hard, friable, slightly sticky, plastic; few fine tubular pores; many thin clay films in pores; strongly acid (pH 5.3); clear smooth boundary. (6 to 14 inches thick)

IIC – 54 to 58 inches; very gravelly loamy sand, few very fine roots; strongly acid (pH 5.2); about 85 percent gravel.

TYPE LOCATION: Napa County, California; 100 feet south of Tanita Ranch entrance road and 200 feet northeast of Big Ranch Road in prune orchard; in the NW 1/4 of sec. 27 (projected) T. 6 N., R. 4 W.

C.7

RANGE IN CHARACTERISTICS: The mean annual soil temperature is about 59 to 62 degrees F, and the soil temperature usually is not below 47 degrees F at any time. The soil between depths of 4 to 15 inches is usually dry from June 15 until October 15 and is moist in some or all parts the rest of the year.

Rock fragments make up about 5 to 25 percent of the A and Bt horizons and 50 to 90 percent of the very gravelly C horizons. Fragments consist mostly of 1/4 to 1 inches rounded pebbles with some ranging up to 3 inches. The A horizon is massive and hard, has less than 1 percent organic matter in the surface 8 to 10 inches, or has value of 6 dry or 4 moist.

The Coombs soils have brown and pale brown, medium acid gravelly loam and clay loam A horizons, light brown strongly acid clay loam B2t horizons underlain by a strongly acid very gravelly substratum at a depth of 54 inches.

The A horizon has 10YR or 7.5YR hue and has value of 5 to 6 dry, 3 or 4 moist and chroma of 2 or 3. It is usually gravelly and is heavy loam, loam or clay loam and ha subangular blocky structure or is massive. This horizon is slightly hard or hard and is medium or slightly acid.

The Bt horizon has hue of 10YR or 7.5YR, value of 5 through 7, 3 or 4 moist and chroma of 3 or 4 moist and dry. It is clay loam in the upper part and heavy clay loam or clay in the lower part. The upper 20 inches has about 28 to 35 percent clay.

The B2t horizon has subangular blocky structure or it is massive. It is slightly hard or hard and is moderately to strongly acid.

The C horizon varies considerably in texture, thickness of horizons, and coarse fragments over short distances and some pedons are underlain by very weakly consolidated tuff.

COMPETING SERIES: These are the Arbuckle, Auberry, Butte, Churn, Sierra, and Wisheylu series. Arbuckle and Auberry soils have over 75 percent base saturation in the argillic horizon. Butte and Wisheylu soils have a paralithic contact at depths of 20 to 40 inches. Churn soils have 18 to 28 percent clay in the upper 20 inches of the Bt horizon and have moist hue of 5YR in the B2t horizon. Sierra soils have a paralithic contact at depths of 40 to 80 inches.

GEOGRAPHIC SETTING: The Coombs soils are nearly level to gently sloping. They are on gravelly terraces at elevations of 100 to 500 feet. They formed in gravelly alluvium from mixed sources. The climate is subhumid mesothermal with warm dry summers and cool moist winters. Mean annual precipitation is about 30 inches. Mean annual temperature is 59 to 62 degrees F, average January temperature about 47 degrees F and average July temperature about 67 degrees F. The frost-free season is 220 to 260 days.

GEOGRAPHICALLY ASSOCIATED SOILS: These are the clear Lake, Cole, Haire, and Yolo soils. Clear Lake soils are clayey throughout and have intersecting slickensides. Cole soils have thick mollic epipedons and fine particle-size class. Haire soils have less

C.8

than 35 percent base saturation in the lower horizons and clayey particle-size class. Yolo soils lack argillic horizons.

DRAINAGE AND PERMEABILITY: Well-drained; medium runoff; moderately slow permeability.

USE AND VEGETATION: Most soils are cultivated in orchards, vineyards, irrigated pasture and dryland grain. Natural vegetation was annual grasses and forbs with scattered oak trees.

DISTRIBUTION AND EXTENT: Napa County, California. The soils are not extensive.


SERIES ESTABLISHED: Napa Area, California, 1938.

C.9

HAIRE SERIES The Haire series is a member of the clayey, mixed, thermic family of Typic

Haploxerults. Typically, Haire soils have gray and grayish brown, neutral or slightly acid, light clay loam A horizons, pale brown, strongly acid, clay B2t horizons, and pale yellow, strongly acid, gravelly clay loam C horizons.

TAXONOMIC CLASS: Fine, mixed, superactive, thermic Typic Haploxerults

TYPICAL PEDON: Haire clay loam – pasture (Colors are for dry soil unless otherwise noted.)

Ap – 0 to 7 inches; gray (10YR 5/1) light clay loam, very dark grayish brown (10YR 3/2) moist; distinct brown mottles; hard, friable, nonsticky, plastic; many very fine roots; many very fine tubular pores; neutral; clear smooth boundary. (4 to 8 inches thick)

A12 – 7 to 12 inches; grayish brown (10YR 5/2) light clay loam, very dark grayish brown (10YR 3/2) moist; massive; hard, friable, slightly sticky, plastic; common fine roots; many very fine and common fine tubular pores; few thin clay films lining pores; slightly acid; clear smooth boundary. (3 to 7 inches thick)

A3 – 12 to 24 inches; grayish brown (10YR 5/2) clay loam, very dark grayish brown (10YR 3/2) moist; common fine distinct dark reddish brown mottles; massive; hard, friable, sticky, plastic; few very fine roots; many very fine and fine, few medium tubular pores; few thin clay films lining pores; common worm casts; slightly acid; abrupt wavy boundary. (9 to 14 inches thick)

B2t – 24 to 36 inches; pale brown (10YR 6/3) clay, dark grayish brown (2.5Y 4/2) moist; upper part weak medium columnar structure with thin discontinuous bleached capping on columns, lower part is massive; extremely hard, very firm, sticky, very plastic; few very fine roots; common very fine tubular pores; continuous thick clay films; upper two to three inches of peds have black colloidal stains on faces; strongly acid; gradual wavy boundary. (8 to 15 inches thick)

IIC – 36 to 60 inches; pale yellow (5Y 7/3) and pale brown (10YR 6/3) very gravelly clay loam, variegated dark brown (10YR 3/3) and olive brown (2.5Y 4/4) moist; massive; sticky, plastic; few fine roots; strongly acid (pH 5.2).

TYPE LOCATION: Sonoma County, California; in the NW1/4 NE1/4 sec. 2, T.4N., R.SW.

RANGE IN CHARACTERISTICS: The mean annual soil temperature is 59 degrees to 63 degrees F. Soil between depths of about 4 and 12 inches usually is dry from May until November and usually is moist the rest of the year.

The A horizon is gray to dark grayish brown (10YR 5/1, 5/2, 4/1, 4/2). It is loam or light clay loam and in some pedons it is gravelly. It is neutral to moderately acid. Fine mottles are present in some pedons.

The B2t horizon is pale brown to dark grayish brown (10YR 6/3, 5/3, 7/3, 7/4, 6/4, 6/2, 5/3, 5/2, 4/2; 2.5Y 6/2) or olive gray (5Y 5/2). It is light clay, sandy clay or clay. This

C.10

horizon has blocky, prismatic or columnar structure. It is moderately to strongly acid and has 20 to 35 percent base saturation.

The C horizon has dry value of 6 or 7 and is loam or clay loam with 2 to 75 percent rock fragments of various sizes. It is strongly or very strongly acid.

COMPETING SERIES: These are the Cotati, Huichica, Rilarc, Santa Ynez, San Ysidro, Sebastopol, Tierra, and Wright series. Cotati soils have an albic horizon and a mean soil temperature of 57 degrees to 58 degrees F. Huichica soils have a duripan. Rilarc and Sebastopol soils have a mean soil temperature of less than 59 degrees F. Santa Ynez soils have an argillic horizon that has more than 35 percent base saturation and more than 35 percent rock fragments. San Ysidro and Tierra soils have base saturation of more than 35 percent in the argillic horizon. Wright soils are wet, have mottles, and have more than 35 percent base saturation in the argillic horizon.

GEOGRAPHIC SETTING: Haire soils are on nearly level to moderately steep hills at elevations of 20 to 2,400 feet. They formed in terrace deposits and in part in residuum weathered from arkosic sandstone and granodiorite. The climate is subhumid mesothermal with warm dry summers and cool moist winters. The mean annual precipitation is 20 to 45 inches. Average July temperature is about 70 degrees F., average January temperature is about 46 degrees F., and the mean annual temperature is about 54 degrees to 60 degrees F. The freeze-free season is 200 to 300 days.

GEOGRAPHICALLY ASSOCIATED SOILS: These are the Competing Cotati soils and the Arbuckle, Clear Lake, Santa Lucia, and Sheridan soils. Arbuckle soils have less than 35 percent clay and more than 75 percent base saturation in the argillic horizon. Clear Lake soils have clay texture to the surface; the soil cracks and has slickensides. Santa Lucia and Sheridan soils have mollic epipedons more than 20 inches thick and lack an argillic horizon.

DRAINAGE AND PERMEABILITY: Moderately well drained; slow to rapid runoff; very slow permeability.

USE AND VEGETATION: Principal use is pasture, dry and irrigated. Uncultivated vegetation is mostly annual grasses and forbs.

DISTRIBUTION AND EXTENT: Sonoma and Monterey Counties, California. These soils are of moderate extent.


SERIES ESTABLISHED: Monterey County, California, 1972.

REMARKS: The Haire soils formerly were classified Noncalcic Brown soils

Last revised by state 10/74.

C.11

YOLO SERIES The Yolo series is a member of the fine-silty, mixed, nonacid, thermic family of

Mollic Xerofluvents. Yolo soils have thick grayish brown, neutral silt loam A horizons and brown and pale brown mildly alkaline silt loam C horizons.

TAXONOMIC CLASS: Fine-silty, mixed, superactive, nonacid, thermic Mollic Xerofluvents

TYPICAL PEDON: Yolo silt loam – cultivated (Colors are for dry soil unless otherwise noted.)

Ap1 – 0 to 2 inches; Grayish brown (2.5Y 5/2) silt loam, very dark grayish brown (10YR 3/2) moist; moderate thick platy structure; hard, friable, slightly sticky, plastic; many very fine roots; many very fine interstitial and tubular pores; neutral (pH 6.7); abrupt wavy boundary. (2 to 10 inches thick)

Ap2 – 2 to 8 inches; Grayish brown (2.5Y 5/2) silt loam, dark brown (10YR 3/3) moist; massive; hard, friable, sticky, plastic; many very fine roots; common very fine tubular pores; neutral (pH 7.1); clear wavy boundary. (3 to 10 inches thick)

A1 – 8 to 19 inches; Grayish brown (2.5Y 5/2) silt loam, dark brown (10YR 3/3) rubbed, very dark grayish brown (10YR 3/2) coatings moist; weak coarse subangular blocky structure; hard, friable, slightly sticky, plastic; common very fine roots; many very fine tubular and clusters of interstitial pores associated with worm casts; few thin clay films on peds and continuous thin clay films in pores; neutral (pN 7.2); clear wavy boundary. 6 to 12 inches thick)

A2 – 19 to 26 inches; Grayish brown (2.5Y 5/2) silt loam, very dark grayish brown (10YR 3/2) moist; massive; slightly hard, friable, slightly sticky, plastic; many very fine and few fine roots; many very fine tubular pores; neutral (pH 7.3); clear irregular boundary. (6 to 13 inches thick)

C1 – 26 to 33 inches; Brown (10YR 5/3) silt loam, olive brown (2.5Y 4/4) moist; massive; slightly hard, friable, slightly sticky, plastic; common very fine roots; common very fine tubular and clusters of interstitial pores associated with worm casts; mildly alkaline (pH 7.4); clear irregular boundary. (7 to 24 inches thick)

C2 – 33 to 41 inches; Pale brown (10YR 6/3) silt loam, olive brown (2.5Y 4/4) moist, dark grayish brown (2.5Y 4/2) stains in root channels moist; massive; soft, very friable, slightly sticky, slightly plastic; few very fine roots; common very fine tubular and many very fine interstitial pores; mildly alkaline (pH 7.4); abrupt wavy boundary. (8 to 30 inches thick)

Ab – 41 to 58 inches; Grayish brown (2.5Y 5/2) silty clay loam, very dark grayish brown (2.5Y 3/2) moist; massive; slightly hard, friable, very sticky, plastic; few very fine roots; common very fine tubular pores; mildly alkaline (pH 7.4); clear wavy boundary. (0 to 8 inches thick) [Buried soil]

C.12

C3 – 58 to 65 inches; Pale brown (10YR 6/3) silt loam, mottled olive brown (2.5Y 4/4) and olive (5Y 4/3) moist; massive; slightly hard, very friable, slightly sticky, slightly plastic; few very fine roots; many very fine tubular and interstitial pores; mildly alkaline (pH 7.5).

TYPE LOCATION: Yolo County, California; 90 feet east of center of field road, 3,150 feet west of State Highway 113 and 160 feet south of center of Hutchinson Drive, on the property of the University of California at Davis.

RANGE IN CHARACTERISTICS: The mean soil temperature ranges from about 60 degrees to 64 degrees F. and the soil temperature is continuously above 47 degrees F. Some or all parts of the 4 to 12-inch section become moist sometime in November and remain moist until sometime in May. The soils remain dry, unless irrigated, the rest of the year. Little or no gravel is present. The 10- to 40-inch section averages 20 to 35 percent clay and averages less than 15 percent material coarser than very fine sand. The A horizon is grayish brown, dark grayish brown and brown in hue of 10YR or 2.5Y and has value of 4 or 5 dry, 3 or 4 moist, and chroma of 2 or 3 dry and 2, 3, or 4 moist. The upper part of the A horizon ranges from loam or silt loam to silty clay loam and includes sandy loam. It is slightly acid or neutral. Organic matter is approximately 1.5 to 3 percent. The surface is massive or platy and is hard or very hard. The C horizon is pale brown, light yellowish brown, brown, dark grayish brown and grayish brown in 10YR or 2.5Y hue and has value of 4, 5, or 6 dry, 3 or 4 moist and chroma of 2 or 3 dry and 3 or 4 moist. It is usually silt loam or silty clay loam and has thin strata of loam, very fine sandy loam and fine sandy loam in some pedons. This horizon is dominantly slightly acid to mildly alkaline but some portions in some pedons include medium acid and moderately alkaline. Free lime is below depth of 40 inches in some pedons. A few thin clay films are present in some pedons. There is no significant weathering of primary minerals into clay size minerals.

COMPETING SERIES: These are the Balcom, Castaic, Garretson, Nocko, Reiff, Salinas, Sorrento, and Zamora series. Balcom and Castric soils are on shale and sandstone and have a paralithic contact at depths of less than 40 inches. Garretson soils have more than 15 percent material coarser than very fine sand. Nocho, Salinas, Sorrento and Reiff soils have less than 18 percent clay in the 10- to 40-inch section. Zamora soils have an argillic horizon.

GEOGRAPHIC SETTING: Yolo soils are on nearly level to moderately sloping alluvial fans. The soils formed in fine-loamy alluvium derived from sedimentary formations. They are at elevations of near sea level to 2400 feet in a dry subhumid, mesothermal climate having a mean annual rainfall of 12 to 40 inches with hot dry summers ant cool moist winters. The average January temperature is about 45 degrees F., average July temperature is about 75 degrees F., and the mean annual temperature is about 58 degrees to 63 degrees F. The average freeze-free season is about 220 to 300 days.

PRINCIPAL ASSOCIATED SOILS: These are the competing Reiff, Sorrento, and Zamora soils and the Arbuckle, Brentwood, Capay, Cole, Pleasanton, Soboba, and

C.13

Sycamore soils. Arbuckle and Pleasanton soils are on older landscapes and have gravelly argillic horizons. Brentwood soils are fine-textured and have cambic horizons. Capay soils are fine-textured and have intersecting slickensides. Cole soils have thick mollic epipedons and fine argillic horizons. Soboba soils have more than 35 percent coarse fragments. Sycamore soils have mottles due to poor drainage within 20 inches of the surface.

DRAINAGE AND PERMEABILITY: Well-drained; slow to medium runoff; moderate permeability. Tillage pans have developed over broad areas and tend to restrict permeability.

USE AND VEGETATION: The soil is used for intensive row, field and orchard crops. Original vegetation was annual grasses, forbs, and some scattered oak.

DISTRIBUTION AND EXTENT: West site of Sacramento Valley, central California, and in the valleys of the California Coast Range. The series is extensive.


SERIES ESTABLISHED: Woodland Area, California, 1909.

REMARKS: The Yolo soils were formerly classified as alluvial soils. The classification is changed from Typic Xerochrepts to Typic Xerorthents.

Last revised by state on 10/74.

C.14

APPENDIX D

CA-NAP-916 Flaked-stone Studies by David G. Bieling

FLAKED-STONE STUDIES: THEORETICAL APPROACH, REGIONAL RESEARCH ISSUES,

DEFINITIONS, AND RESULTS

Archaeological flaked-stone analysis requires distinguishing between various subsets of tools and byproducts. Flaked-stone tools, tool fragments, and manufacturing/maintenance byproducts are distinguished on the basis of several categories of attributes that, singly or in combination, reveal a range of information about toolstone material trajectories and human behavior (Andrefsky 1998). Tools and debitage are organized into temporally discrete assemblages to evaluate cultural patterns and their archaeological manifestations across landscapes. This appendix presents the artifact definitions used to classify the materials in the collection and the analytical strategies used to develop models of technological organization.

TECHNOLOGICAL ORGANIZATION AND EXCHANGE SYSTEMS Technological organization comprises investigation of a variety of cultural

behaviors (Nelson 1991). These can include changes in seed- or other vegetal-processing technologies; adaptations in fishing or hunting technology; the acquisition, manufacture, use, and subsequent discard of flaked-stone materials; or the use of other materials, such as bone or wood. Among these, the study of obsidian flaked-stone materials can provide the greatest diversity of information. Because obsidian can be dated and geochemically fingerprinted, its use can be traced both synchronically and diachronically. Like other flaked-stone materials, obsidian can be examined for a variety of attributes that can provide information essential to reconstructing manufacture strategies, tool functions, repair episodes, and material recycling. Additionally, discard patterns can provide data about social structure (whether a population was mobile or sedentary) and social distance (whether materials were obtained locally in raw form or as pre-shaped items from neighboring peoples). In this manner obsidian contributes essential information to studies of past exchange systems and aids in reconstructing archaeological assemblages.

Flaked-stone assemblages as elements of cultural systems have been analyzed with respect to procurement, exchange, technology, and social organization (Ericson 1984). Lithic production system, a term employed by Ericson, has been defined as "the total of synchronous activities and locations involved in the utilization and modification of a single source-specific lithic material for stone tool manufacture and use in a larger social system" (Ericson 1984:3). Trajectory (cf. Clarke 1968; Elston et al. 1974), a related concept but different in scope, is defined as the total synchronic record of a single item or group of like items traced through a cultural system, from acquisition or manufacture to discard. It is characterized specifically by variations in use, modification, repair, and possibly re-use. Individually identifiable trajectories collectively characterize a lithic production system.

D.1

For the present purposes, the definition of the term technological organization follows that of Kelly:

The spatial and temporal juxtaposition of the manufacture of different tools within a cultural system, their use, reuse, and discard, and their relation not only to tool function and raw-material type and distribution, but also to behavioral variables which mediate the spatial and temporal relations among activity, manufacturing, and raw-material loci. Research on the organization of technology aims to elucidate how technological changes reflect large-scale behavioral changes in a prehistoric society [1988:717].

Although much like the lithic production system, this concept incorporates more sophisticated associations applicable to higher levels of behavior, such as those defining adaptive strategies and culture change. As such, it applies to the systemic organization of toolstone technology, in part by articulating various trajectories (cf. Nelson 1991).

Archaeological studies incorporating models of technological organization can examine issues pertaining to social distance and adaptive pose. Social distance (Kay 1975; Wilmsen 1973) can be inferred by examining proportions of specific flaked-stone categories of various lithic materials. The structure of intergroup relationships often influences or dictates what material is used for various tools. For example, certain materials might be unavailable to one group due to poor relations with another.

Models of social distance are often associated with the distance-decay hypothesis. Stated simply, this hypothesis predicts that materials from a given source will diminish in frequency of occurrence the farther the site is from the source. Archaeologically, sites situated near the source will have a higher proportion of the material than those at a distance. Applied to technological and economic studies, artifact size and proportion of cortical materials will decrease the farther the site is from the source area.

Increased social complexity during the Late period in California prehistory was attended by development of regularized exchange systems and changes in technological organization (Jackson and Ericson 1994). A wide range of perishable and nonperishable materials, including many items in various stages of production, were used as mediums of exchange among native populations (Bennnyhoff and Hughes 1987; Jackson and Ericson 1994; Jackson and Schultz 1975). In effect, "no single model would be appropriate to describe 'California exchange' because there would have been no such cultural phenomenon. Down-the-line exchange, direct access, or various other distribution mechanisms all would have been operating contemporaneously any place in the region" (Jackson and Ericson 1994:409).

Regarding adaptive strategy, populations characterized by high residential mobility schedule tool-material replacement at a number of lithic sources (Gramly 1980). The resulting material variability, in some instances, extends to specific tool classes and can be addressed through the quantitative analyses of individual lithic groups. As a response to adaptive strategy, mode of technological organization can include greater or lesser degrees of material curation (Binford 1979; Kelly 1988; Shott 1989a, b), with

D.2

implications for the origin of items such as projectile point blanks and duration of tool use-life.

REGIONAL RESEARCH ISSUES

Technological Organization Among the research issues pertinent to flaked stone collections from the Napa

Valley region are those pertaining to temporally distinct aspects of technological organization, as defined above. Specifically, how did the occupants of the Napa Creek site use the lithic materials available to them to structure subsistence related activities essential to survival, and how might this have differed from neighboring contemporaneous groups or those of earlier or later time periods? This question presents a number of avenues for research including those specific to flaked-stone tool function, material acquisition and discard, potential exchange relationships and the implications for studies of social distance, as well as addressing stylistic variability in tool forms across time and space. The present investigation focuses on the recovered materials, defining the individual data sets within the tools and debitage, and concludes with brief comparisons to select assemblages.

Analyses below examine flaked stone materials – predominantly obsidian – with respect to the topics outlined above and the following research questions:

1. Which obsidian sources are represented in the collection, in what forms, and in what proportions?

2. What time periods are indicated by diagnostic artifacts and obsidian hydration tests results?

3. What flaked stone reduction strategies and tool manufacture and use trajectories are represented for specific material?

4. In sum, what do these studies reveal about the technological organization of the occupants of the Napa Creek site?

Napa Valley Obsidian Variability Volcanic glass, i.e., obsidian, was the dominant material used for flaked stone tools

throughout prehistory in much of the southern North Coast Ranges (NCR). Four major obsidian sources have been identified in the NCR: Annadel and Napa Valley in the southern area; and Borax Lake and Mt. Konocti in the Clear Lake region. Recently, researchers have characterized two additional geochemical groups, Franz Valley and Blossom Creek; both have been identified in archaeological contexts (Jackson 1978, 1986; Psota 1992a, b). Although these obsidians may not have been used as extensively as the four dominant glass sources, they may have been economically important within particular localities close to the source.

Studies have shown that some of the NCR obsidian sources are not geographically restricted. Naturally occurring cobbles from the Napa Valley geochemical group are

D.3

distributed over a wide area. Obsidian pebbles and small cobbles, constituents of the lower and upper members of the Sonoma Volcanics, are incorporated in localized Quaternary alluvial and fluvial deposits throughout much of the southern NCR (see Fox 1983, Jackson 1978 and 1986). These constituents, redeposited or otherwise displaced from their original context, have been termed float (Bates and Jackson 1984:187). To date, it appears these float materials are most often characterized by geochemical fingerprints similar to Napa Valley, Blossom Creek, or Franz Valley glass groups (see Jackson 1986, Hughes 1992).

Regarding the difficulties of identifying geologic origins of archaeological obsidian, Jackson stated

“Mixing of materials from different original geological sources must be commonplace in Napa Valley. Obsidian is ubiquitous in the soils on the valley floor, and occurs as a common constituent in the gravels of the Napa River as far south as the city of Napa (Jackson 1978). Obsidian is also found in Quaternary fan deposits along the valley fringe, suggesting that the glass has been actively reworked since its late Pliocene creation. Until the extent of this mixing has been determined, precise assignments of obsidian used in artifacts to specific quarry sources should be approached with caution” [Jackson 1986:56–57].

Additionally, it is likely many sources of obsidian, some potentially indistinguishable from Napa Valley, remain unmapped. For instance, Jackson (1986:58) suggests the Glen Ellen Formation near Santa Rosa contains a mixture of Napa Valley and Franz Valley obsidians with a majority of the former.

Variability within the Napa Valley Glass group has also been documented in previous archaeological studies within the region (Jackson 1986; Bieling 1992b, 1993b, 1996). Considerable variability within this group is recognized in attributes such as opacity, color, constituents, and structure. Segregation of these variants might provide a means of addressing cultural differences in material acquisition and use or reveal potential differences in glass hydration rates.

FLAKED-STONE DEFINITIONS

Projectile Point Typology Projectile point classification is drawn from several major studies conducted in

California and the Great Basin. A number of metric attributes are recorded for each specimen, including length, width, thickness, axial length, haft length, neck width, base width, and proximal and distal shoulder angle (PSA and DSA). Morphological and technological attributes, such as impact damage, missing or damaged elements, fracture types, amount of flake-scar cover, and remnant ventral face scars and cortex are also recorded.

D.4

For a biface form to be classed as a projectile point, it must have at least one of the following: (1) a diagnostic hafting element (e.g., shoulder, base, notch); (2) blade serrations; or (3) evidence of an impact fracture; otherwise. it is classified as a biface. These criteria follow that presented by Jackson et al. (1994) in the Framework for Archaeological Research and Management (FARM) report: “To be included [as a projectile point], an artifact must have a hafting element in the form of either a notched or indented base, shoulders that indicate hafted resharpening, or some other diagnostic characteristic” (1994:8-6). This applies to apiculate pressure-flaked tips as well as shaped proximal ends. Exceptions might apply to those shaped biface forms consistent with documented regional projectile point types (e.g., squared proximal ends consistent with certain base forms, ogival ends resembling lanceolate bases, and bipoints such as those defined as “Copsey” in the Clear Lake locality); items displaying distinguishable impact fracture are individually evaluated. Bipointed, triangular, and leaf-shaped forms tend to be problematic in many regions. These categories will be examined for evidence of impact damage to verify classification as projectile points. Essentially, point types recognized from site or locality assemblages will govern decisions about classification of other formal biface fragments.

Some dimensions are more critical than others for defining projectile point types: basal width, neck width, hafting length, PSA and DSA—all of which pertain to haft sizes and basal configurations (Thomas 1970, 1981). Less critical are length and blade width— dimensions that are far more subject to significant changes during tool use-life. Axial length and total length are useful measurements, despite missing distal portions, as these dimensions can be used to establish Basal Indentation Ratios. In the archaeological literature, it is apparent some point types have been defined partially on the dimension of point-of-maximum-width. This dimension, however, is based on the relative length of the hafting element to the blade length, making it a dependent variable and less suitable for rigorous analysis.

If a point is asymmetrical, measurement for the DSA is obtained from the smaller of the two angles, just as PSA is defined from the larger (see example). Although researchers have traditionally sought standardization in recording these attributes and generally recommend obtaining the measurements from the same side, PSA and DSA of Archaic-period side-notched and corner-notched points frequently can be highly variable on a single specimen as a result of use-damaged barbs and basal corners, or due to manufacturing errors that cause small elements to be snapped off. By measuring the lesser DSA and greater PSA, regardless of side, we ensure recording the dimension assumed to represent the original intent of the manufacturer, not an accidental flaking error or use-damaged attribute. The only exceptions are those items clearly identifiable as preforms or otherwise unfinished points.

On side-notched points, neck widths were measured at the smallest dimension across the neck. On corner-notched points, this dimension is generally more distal, at a location close to the notch. Some variability between different analysts’ measurements is accepted as unavoidable; statistical analysis of large samples tends to smooth this out.

D.5

It is also important to assess the relative stage in the life history of the point. Attributes that suggest the item represents a manufacturing failure might include excurvate blade margins, a plano-convex cross section, minimal flaking, asymmetry but no evidence of resharpening, an unfinished notch, a fracture originating at a notch, or a lateral bend break associated with one or more of these other attributes. An unrepaired specimen broken during use can be characterized by an impact fracture, but with no evidence of resharpening or previous repairs. An item marked by extensive repair or even reworked into a different form will exhibit virtually complete scar coverage and possibly steep edges or a sequence of overlapped scars. Projectile points are often made on flakes of sufficient size and can retain unmodified areas of original ventral and dorsal surfaces. Others are made on thicker flakes requiring more bifacial reduction before achieving a desired size. In the collection from the Skyrocket site (CAL-629/630/H), a stemmed point was recognized as having been made on a laterally snapped biface. The stem, which retained a small remnant of the snapped surface, was formed by alternate pressure flaking from the lateral edges of the biface adjacent to the snap. By carefully examining and documenting the range of attributes, variations in projectile point form can sometimes reveal aspects of the artifact’s life history.

Biface Reduction Trajectories A biface is an artifact with flake scars on two faces and remnant platforms

intersecting the same, continuous margin. For the purposes of preliminary identification, each biface is simply described by the portion, reduction stage, and fracture type represented; the presence or absence of cortex is also recorded. Additional attributes, many similar to those identified on points, are also recorded.

It is important to recognize that the definition of biface used here excludes early-stage forms characteristic of all biface reduction trajectories. Using the descriptions presented below, many Stage 1 bifaces, some Stage 2 forms, and even some fragments of later-stage forms would be classified as flake tools, retouched flakes, or edge-modified flakes under certain classificatory systems. Technological analysis of individual items and collections is an essential tool for defining assemblages, and reconstructing flaked-stone tool trajectories and organizational strategies. Because many of the diverse characteristics of biface forms are related to manufacturing objectives or adjustments made during flaking, a flexible analytical strategy is employed. Edge-modified flakes (EMFs) and retouched flakes (RTFs) and fragments that are morphologically recognizable as elements of biface reduction trajectories are not classified as flake tools. EMF and RTF are descriptive nonprejudicial terms that include both flaked-stone subsets: flake tools and broken early-stage biface forms.

Biface Manufacturing Stages As demonstrated by replication studies and archaeological analysis of large

collections, biface reduction processes can be divided into a series of reduction stages. Due to the vagaries of stone materials and reductive technologies, stages are not considered sequentially absolute; the characteristics of individual stone pieces present a

D.6

series of obstacles to be overcome by the manufacturer. Presented below is Skinner’s (1990) stage-sequence model, based on Callahan (1979), which can be applied to cobble or flake-blank strategies.

A Stage 1 biface generally has deep, wide cortical flake removals (if a cobble with cortex was used) that cover less than half the width of the biface, and the cross section is irregular or blocky. This is the stage during which the blank is given an edge, termed initial edging. In cobble reduction, the width-to-thickness ratio may be near 2:1 or 3:1; in flake reduction this ratio is more variable and may exceed 6:1. This edging "is necessary for subsequent primary thinning but it produces a biface which, if work were to continue with the same strategy beyond initial edging, would become narrow at a more rapid rate than it would become thin" (Callahan 1979:36).

Stage 2 is primary thinning, the stage during which a lenticular cross section is achieved. Flake scars travel to or slightly beyond the center of the biface, contacting or slightly undercutting similar flake scars removed from the opposite margin. The width-to-thickness ratio is generally between 3:1 and 4:1 (for cobble reduction) by the end of this stage. Major lumps, ridges, hinges, and step fractures should be eliminated during this stage. During Stage 2 reduction "the width-thickness ratio is stabilized so that, were work to continue with the same strategy, the biface would become narrow at about the same rate as it would become thin" (Callahan 1979:37). According to Callahan (1979:91), this form is the most easily transportable because it has the most strength and thus, the most resistance to breakage; for certain materials, heat-treating is best accomplished after this stage.

Stage 3, secondary thinning, is the stage in which a flattened cross section is achieved by removing flakes that considerably undercut prior flake scars from the opposite margin. The cross section becomes more lenticular and the width-to-thickness ratio falls between 4:1 and 5:1 (for cobble-based bifaces). "…surfaces without significant humps, hinges, step-fractures, or median convexity should prepare for optimum reduction in subsequent stages. The secondarily thinned biface should become thin at a more rapid rate than it becomes narrow" (Callahan 1979:37). The eventual shape may be generalized at the same time thinning is taking place during this stage, and shaping the basal end may be done here.

Stage 4, shaping to preform, is the stage in which the shape or outline is specified. Shaping results in regular flake removals and uniform lateral edges. The cross section is very lenticular and the optimal width-to-thickness ratios are reached, between 5:1 and 6:1 or more. This stage may be accomplished by either percussion or pressure, or both. Certain flake blank forms might also be pressure flaked during early thinning stages when bulbs and irregularities need to be removed.

Stage 5, finishing, is when the preform is finished by any number of means including creating notches, serrations, shoulders, basal constriction or expansion, etc. This stage may also consist only of edge alignment or retouching to prepare the implement for use without further specialization of

D.7

shape. Alternatively, in very specialized traditions, a number of subsequent stages may be necessary to complete a projectile point.

Stage 6 may be reworking or rejuvenation of a tool when broken or dulled by use. This stage may change the morphology and/or function of the tool. Evidence of reworking might include steepened blade margins, percussion scars overlapping regularized pressure scars, or incurvate blade margins (Skinner 1990:216–220).

Callahan’s model was designed explicitly as part of a nine-stage sequence, with Clovis projectile points in the Eastern Fluted Point tradition in mind. As such, there is a greater emphasis on thinning than might apply to biface forms associated with later traditions. Likewise, the model has less direct applicability to the manufacturing sequences characterizing small arrow points made on flake blanks requiring minimal thinning and little to no percussion flaking (see below). While the principles of reduction apply to a wide variety of biface forms, large collections of flaked-stone materials in which biface reduction is a prominent component will undoubtedly contain multiple reduction trajectories. These trajectories can often be simplified to describe cobble-blank systems or flake-blank systems, however, more detailed analysis will usually reveal considerable variability within these systems, reflecting flexible adaptive responses to variations of size or shape of initial blanks or adjustments to obstacles encountered due to complications within the form.

In most circumstances, analysis of flaked-stone artifacts is achieved by employing a “top-down” approach, in contrast to a “bottom-up” strategy. Initial classification during the cataloging phase follows a traditional strategy of separating tool forms into conservative categories; e.g., projectile point, biface, uniface, core, flake tool (or retouched flake), and used flake (or edge-modified flake). During analysis, the large number of items recovered can display such variation in form that many of the categories grade into one another. This is particularly noticeable in the broad range of variation exhibited by classes of formal and informal bifaces. Diagnostic biface forms typically encompass a wide variety of sizes and shapes, many aspects of which could be recognized as indicative of several reduction trajectories clearly evidenced by the diversity exhibited by later-stage forms. Recognition of this variability can influence further analysis and reclassification of minimally retouched pieces and fragments as elements of early-stage biface forms, a considerable number of which might be shaped on only one face.

To qualify as a biface fragment and be incorporated into the stage reduction system, a retouched or edge-modified item must possess attributes of shape or size consistent with previously established forms. Due to the imposition of these criteria, the flake tool or RTF category is often reduced to a small number of items, and used flakes or EMFs are restricted to smaller, thinner items; these are often too small to sustain the amount of modification required to produce any of the representative forms. A number of other modified flakes, though small relative to established biface forms, could represent items selected, minimally modified, and then quickly rejected after being

D.8

deemed inadequate for further alteration. These would be classified primarily as Stage 1 or occasionally Stage 2 forms.

Flake Preform/Arrow Point Manufacturing Stages A series of manufacturing stages described by Whittaker (1994) are often used to

describe bifacially worked flakes in a collection. A flake preform is a flake that is flaked on at least one margin. Specimens smaller in size than bifacial specimens described by Callahan (1979) and Skinner (1990) are interpreted to represent the manufacture of small, light arrow points. Larger pieces or fragments of same are interpreted as the result of initial shaping, the objective being biface forms or projectile points.

Stage 0 – The Blank. A unmodified flake that is relatively flat rather than curved or twisted. These are usually not recognized in archaeological sites due to their lack of modification, except in special contexts such as caches.

Stage 1 – Edged Blank. The sharp featheredge of the flake is removed by abrasion or unifacial or bifacial flaking along all or a portion of the margin. Flake scars do not extend far into the interior of each face (e.g., noninvasive microscars or minimally invasive scars). The thick platform might be thinned during this stage.

Stage 2 – Preform. The specimen is thin and has regular margins. Flake scars extend into the interior of each face.

Stage 3 – Unfinished Point. Final thinning and outline of the specimen is achieved. Flake scars extend beyond the specimen’s mid-line, but portions of the initial blank ventral or dorsal surface may remain. Specimen lacks hafting elements.

Stage 4 – Finished Point. Specimen has completed hafting elements, such as corner or side notches.

Cores These flaked-stone artifacts comprise a variety of forms that exhibit scars from

flake detachment. Cores are characterized by one or more flake scars at least 7 mm or larger; those marked by less than four flake scars can be considered assays, items tested for the quality of material. Cores are further separated into morphological types based on platform attributes. Multiple-platform cores are characterized by flakes detached in different directions from multiple, noncontiguous platforms. Single-platform cores are marked by few noncontiguous scars detached from a single face or platform, whereas those with contiguous flake scars are classed as unifacial platform cores. Bifacial platform cores have flakes detached from opposing faces on the same margin. Bipolar cores display sheared faces, bidirectional flake scars on the long axis, and frequently platform or distal-end crushing as a result of compressive forces created during anvil-supported reduction.

D.9

Fractures The terms used to identify specific fracture types are also adopted from Crabtree

(1972), Johnson (1979), and Skinner (1990) and are similar to those described by Whittaker (1994).

A bending fracture, or indirect fracture, is the result of hyperflexion, where the lower surface (the one facing down during knapping) of the specimen is compressed. As the fracture progresses through the specimen, increased tensile stress across the longitudinal axis of the specimen tends to extend the fracture in a plane parallel to the lower surface (Faulkner 1974). A bending fracture has no Hertzian-cone features, has smooth fracture surfaces, a recognizable termination, often characterized by a "finial" – an inflexed hinge termination (Cotterell and Kamminga 1986; Woods 1987). Bending fractures can result from either manufacture or use, but the location of the fracture and its termination can be diagnostic (Woods 1987). Cotterell and Kamminga (1986:452) further suggest that short finials often occur with simple bending stresses, and longer finials result from adding mass and velocity to the bending stress (i.e., use/impact).

Perverse fractures occur when the size of the Hertzian cone exceeds the thickness of the biface. Instead of removing a flake from the surface of the specimen, the fracture travels through the biface (Johnson 1979). The fracture originates from the margin of the specimen and is twisted in cross section (Crabtree 1972). When viewing the surface of the fracture, the cone is located not on the margin, but on one face near the margin. The compression rings radiate from the cone at an angle, and all terminate on one face. According to Frison and Bradley, "Almost without exception these [perverse fractures] indicate manufacture breaks" (1980:43).

Burin fractures are fractures resulting from percussive impact; they resemble burin scars. The most common type is marginal burination, where one or more flakes resembling burin spalls are detached from a lateral margin. These scars exhibit a point of contact and compression rings indicating the location of fracture initiation. Burination most commonly originates from the tip, but can originate from the base or on any projection, such as shoulders and ears. According to Bergman and Newcomer (1983), burination can also occur on the corners of a snapped blade section when bending causes one section to press off burin-like spalls on the other. Facial burination, also called "flute-like" fracture (Bergman and Newcomer 1983), travels down the face of the specimen and terminates in either a step or hinge, with heavy compression rings. This type of fracture may actually be a bending break with a long finial. These occur most often at the tip of the biface, in conjunction with marginal burination fractures, but can also occur at the base or shoulders. Burin fractures, including facial burination, occur with impact/use.

Outrepassé, or overshot, fractures occur when the fracture plane is normal on its proximal end, but turns abruptly toward the center of the specimen and takes away a part of the opposite margin (Tixier 1974). This generally occurs when excessive force is used at too low an angle. Overshot fractures are nearly always associated with

D.10

manufacture, but those originating from the distal end of projectile points or formal bifaces could be considered use-related impact fractures.

Crenated fractures and potlids are both associated with heating and cooling. A crenated fracture is caused by excessive exposure to heat or rapid, uneven cooling after thermal alteration (Purdy 1975; Woods 1987). It is characterized by undulating, scalloped margins lacking Hertzian-cone features and identifiable location of initiation. A potlid fracture is a type of crenated fracture, but results in removal of stone from the surface, leaving a cone-shaped hole.

Radial fractures occur when an item is struck sharply on one face away from the margin. The fracture initiates at the point of the blow and travels toward the margins in a radial pattern (Frison and Bradley 1980:44). The characteristics of the fracture face are the same as those on perverse breaks, but the fracture initiates away from the margin rather than close to the margin. Radial fractures are nearly always intentional breaks, although they can result from unintentional manufacturing errors (Frison and Bradley 1980) or from post-depositional disturbances. Radial fractures produce fragments that have edge angles close to 90 degrees and are suitable as wood, antler, or bone-working tools (Frison and Bradley 1980).

Debitage Classification and Analytic Strategy Flake type definitions were adopted from the two-part classification system

developed by R. Jackson (1994) for the California Archaeological Resource Identification and Data Acquisition Program: Sparse Lithic Scatters (CARIDAP) in the National Forests of the north-central Sierra Nevada. The first part is a refinement of the initial CARIDAP flake classification that replaced the ubiquitous interior/cortical flake categories with observations on the flake platform and dorsal surface complexity. Virtually all debitage can be placed within the five descriptive categories derived from these attributes. The second part employs technologically distinct flake type definitions used in the Forest's Eureka! database as presented in the FARM (Jackson, with Jackson et al. 1994). These definitions allow distinction of technologically diagnostic debitage apart from the generally descriptive categories that are based on dorsal surface and platform attributes.

The flake definitions used in the current study are excerpted from the FARM to show the flake types considered during flake identification and to provide definitions for the codes used in the database catalog.

Debitage Condition Flakes and flake fragments were classified into several categories based on the

item’s degree of intactness. Flakes that retained platforms and most of their margins were classified as complete. Incomplete flakes include those items missing platforms or a small area of margin; resulting dimensions might not therefore be accurate, but technological classification could still be correct. Flake fragments include those pieces lacking significant amounts of surface area. Fragments might consist of proximal ends (platforms and a portion of flake), distal ends, medial sections, and so on. Another

D.11

category includes all items classified as shatter: angular pieces lacking diagnostic ventral surfaces (see ANG below). A variety of other forms of non-flake debitage, such as potlids, eraillures, splinters, and scales, are classified under miscellaneous. The latter items, like shatter, all lack evidence of points of applied force and would have been created as secondary byproducts.

Size Classification Individual pieces of debitage were size-sorted regardless of condition. Size

classification was achieved by placing each piece—proximal end up—within a series of 3 mm squares. The item’s length and width were recorded as the smallest box into which it fit. Thus, length might be classed as 12 mm, while width might be 9 mm. In this manner, individual dimensions of intact flakes as well as those with only one intact dimension could be evaluated. This method is used in part to rectify one of the problems encountered in debitage analysis: lack of sufficient quantities of intact flakes. This method increases the number of usable flakes, at least with regard to particular attributes. Additionally, this method provides general information about flake shape— whether an item is longer than wide or vice versa.

Dorsal and Platform Complexity Two flake attributes have been selected as most useful in describing the majority of

flakes in an assemblage: dorsal surface complexity and flake platform complexity. Dorsal surface complexity refers to the number of negative flake scars evidencing previous flake detachment. In general there is a relationship between the number of flake scars on a dorsal surface and the amount of reduction that occurred prior to detachment of the subject flake. In turn, an assemblage that contains a large percentage of flakes with complex dorsal surfaces may indicate later stages of stone-tool manufacture. The complexity of flake platforms can reflect the nature and amount of core modification prior to flake detachment. When dorsal and platform complexity are both considered, the sequence of flake detachment can be discerned. For example, flake production from unidirectional cores is likely to produce high relative frequencies of simple/simple (dorsal/platform) flakes during initial and early reduction, with increasing proportions of simple/complex flakes during later-stage flake production; these categories may be refined through size analysis. When combined with flake size and cortex presence/absence, these attributes are sufficient for characterizing flaked-stone reduction activities in certain contexts, although collections representing a range of diverse events can obscure specific reduction trajectories.

Categories for technologically diagnostic flake types can be added to the analysis when such flake types are observed in an assemblage. All complete, technology-specific flakes can be placed in one of these general descriptive categories: Simple/Simple, Simple/Complex, Complex/Simple, and Complex/Complex, and Simple and Complex/Platform Unidentifiable (each with or without cortex). Flakes must be recorded in only one category, preferably the category that is most technologically specific.

D.12

SS – Simple/Simple Flakes. Simple/Simple flakes are those that have dorsal surfaces with about three or fewer remnant negative flake scar segments, and intact flake platforms that are unifaceted (retain a single facet platform). The proximal end of dorsal surfaces may also bear evidence of platform preparation in the form of microflaking and abrasion. Discriminating edge preparation from previous flake detachments (i.e., negative dorsal scars) is not always possible, particularly in smaller flake-size categories. Some judgment is necessary when counting dorsal scars for classification. Simple/simple flakes are produced during early-stage reduction in a number of techniques, including core/flake and biface production. While they are not technologically specific, they can often reflect a relative stage of production.

SC – Simple/Complex Flakes. Simple/Complex flakes have three or fewer negative dorsal flake-scar segments, but also retain faceted platforms. Discriminating edge preparation from previous flake detachments (i.e., negative dorsal scars) can also be difficult for this category, since platform faceting may result from edge preparation, as opposed to shaping, thinning, or flake production on the core face from which the platform derived. While the platform either is or is not faceted, some judgment is necessary when counting dorsal scars for classification. This flake type is common in advanced stages of core/flake production using a single platform core. Such flakes are also produced in the "unifacial biface" reduction technique of biface production (Skinner and Ainsworth 1990).

CS – Complex/Simple Flakes. These flake types have four or more negative dorsal flake-scar segments but unifaceted platforms. Such flakes are also produced in secondary stages of the "unifacial biface" reduction technique of biface production (Skinner 1990).

CC – Complex/Complex Flakes. This category of flake exhibits four or more negative dorsal scar segments with faceted platforms. A number of reduction techniques and stages can produce complex/complex flakes. Multidirectional core/flake production and biface reduction are two examples. Complex/complex flakes indicate that substantial previous reduction has occurred prior to production of the subject flake. Many biface-thinning flakes that do not bear distinctive combinations of diagnostic attributes will fall into this category.

SA/CA/SI/CI – Simple and Complex/Platform Absent/Incomplete Flakes (i.e., Less Diagnostic Flakes). Striking platforms often collapse, snap off, or are too small to discern whether they have retained faceted platforms. Depending on the reduction technique and nature of raw material, flakes with collapsed, broken, or unidentifiable platforms may outnumber those with diagnostic platforms. Ground platforms are classed as indeterminate and noted in Comments. Flakes in this category might be incomplete (lacking platforms or small areas) or fragments (small remnants with little diagnostic value). Therefore, this is a category under which fragments and incomplete flakes – often otherwise non-diagnostic items – can be placed.

D.13

Furthermore, platforms can be classed as dihedral (“D”), cortical (“R”), bifacial (“B”), or unifacial (“U”). The latter category contains those items clearly derived from a formed unifacial tool as revealed in part through platform angle. Three versions of uniface edge rejuvenation flakes have been recognized (Frison and Bradley 1980:31; Shafer 1970): 1) those struck from the dorsal surface of a uniface (Shafer’s Method C); 2) those detached by striking the ventral surface (Shafer’s Method B); and 3) those caused by striking the tool parallel to the linear axis along the intersecting faces thereby detaching a piece retaining portions of both surfaces (Shafer’s Method A). Cortical platforms are common attributes characterizing certain cobble reduction techniques. They can be found on flakes generated during primary cobble reduction or certain types of cores, or on flake blanks typifying “unifacial bifaces” or plates when cobbles are sectioned. Dihedral platforms – those marked by two facets – are typically found on certain early stage pieces (Nilsson et al. 1989). Bifacial platforms are those clearly defined by bifacial flake scars representing a tool edge.

Flake-type Abbreviations and Definitions ANG – Angular Shatter. Defined by Binford and Quimby as, "Cubical and

irregular shaped chunks that lack any well-defined bulbs of percussion or systematic alignment of cleavage scars on the various faces. Angular shatter can occur as a by-product of reduction when the force applied during reduction exceeds the material's capabilities, or where material constraints interfere with controlled or intended fracture success” (1972:347).

One can expect shatter to occur in small amounts with any lithic reduction technology, particularly during initial stages of percussion flaking when relatively large amounts of force and velocity are applied. While an abundance of shatter may indicate early stages of reduction, the physical properties of specific lithic materials will play an important role in the amount of shatter that is produced. The greater the number of inclusions and impurities in a lithic material, the less predictable the outcome of imparted force and the greater the amount of shatter.

BIO – Flake, Biface Overshot (Outrepassé). A flake produced when too much force is applied to the edge of a biface during thinning – by percussion or pressure – resulting in the removal of the opposite margin. The flake's platform is one edge of the biface while its distal end (termination) removes a portion of the opposite bifacial margin. This type is often identified solely through recovery of the distal portion. Often signaling a manufacturing error, this technique can also be purposely used to intentionally remove excess mass from the opposite margin of a biface; evidence of this is apparent in various Paleoindian assemblages (e.g., Gramly 1993).

EMF – Flake, Edge Modified. A flake having minimal flaking or edge attrition on its margin(s) that could be the product of intentional modification or use. Scars are frequently sequential, typically less than 3 mm long, though modification is insufficient to place the specimen into more formalized flaked-stone tool categories. Also referred to as a "utilized flake" in the literature, this terminology is more descriptive than functional

D.14

(Nilsson et al. 1989). Often EMFs are the representation of the first steps in altering a flake blank scheduled for manufacture into an arrow point. Thin flake blanks are easily broken during the early stages of modification resulting in fragments characterized as EMFs. Morphology and tool trajectories identified in the assemblage are required to categorize EMFs as strata of an arrow-point technology.

ERA – Eraillure. A lens-shaped piece detached indirectly from the bulb area of a flake as a result of bending forces caused by percussive force.

FAL – Flake, Alternate. A pressure or percussion flake on which the platform is either a remnant flake scar from a previously detached alternate flake removed in the opposite direction or the proximal edge of that flake scar. These flakes are generally much wider than long, triangular in cross-section. Alternate flaking is a strategy used to create a bifacial edge from a square or thick margin (Flenniken 1987:52). This method is often used in initial biface edging of flake blanks and the rejuvenation of broken tool edges. This flake type can be included as an “edge-preparation flake,” one of several edge-modification flake types).

FBA – Flake, Biface Thinning. Biface-thinning flakes can exhibit a number of characteristics, and a combination of such attributes is sufficient to classify it as such. These include platforms that bear remnant flake scars representing the proximal ends of thinning flake scars on the opposite face of the (predetachment) biface; excurvate longitudinal cross section; and distal dorsal flake scars representing the termination or distal ends of flakes detached from the opposing edge and same face of the biface. In other words, one can see evidence on the flake platform that flakes similar to those on the dorsal face were detached from the opposite side of the biface. Biface-thinning flakes are characteristically produced after the biface has obtained at least a rough oval to leaf-shaped plan and lenticular profile. Biface-thinning flakes are produced by percussion thinning and shaping.

FBE – Flake, Biface Thinning, Early Stage. A percussion flake removed from a biface during primary reduction activities. The flake exhibits few dorsal scars, is slightly curved or twisted in long section, has a single-faceted or multifaceted platform, and is usually the largest type of thinning flake produced during biface manufacture. This type of flake is produced as a result of making large bifaces symmetrical (Flenniken 1987:53).

FBL – Flake, Biface Thinning, Late Stage. Produced during the final stages of percussion flaking, this type of biface-thinning flake has numerous scars on its dorsal surfaces, is almost flat in longitudinal cross section, usually exhibits feather terminations, and has a multifaceted platform (Flenniken 1987:54).

FBP – Flake, Bipolar. A flake produced by placing raw material (generally small pebbles) on a hard anvil with the opposite end struck by a percussor, creating simultaneous lines of force that travel through the material from both ends. The resultant flake and core often exhibit extensive crushing, step fractures, and negative flake scars at one or both ends of the same piece. Other characteristics can include

D.15

cortical platform or dorsal surface, and convexo-triangular cross section (i.e., flakes shaped like the sections of an orange).

FBS – Flake, Burin Spall. A flake detached during the manufacture of a burin. It is removed from the lateral edge of a blank by striking the platform, which is located at one end of the blank and oriented perpendicular to the plane of the piece, at an oblique angle to the burin's chisel-like bit (Tixier 1974:9–14).

FCA – Flake, Core Reduction, Stage not determined. A percussion flake having attributes associated with core reduction, yet insufficient for stage classification.

FCE – Flake, Core Reduction, Early Stage. A percussion flake removed from a core during primary reduction activities. The flake exhibits few dorsal scars, is straight in longitudinal profile, has a single-faceted platform that exhibits a smooth, flat, planar surface (Flenniken 1987; Nilsson et al. 1989).

FCL – Flake, Core Reduction, Late Stage. Characterized by a planar, unifaceted, and slightly angled platform, this flake type is removed during later sequences of core reduction.

FCO – Flake, Cortical. A flake retaining the outer rind or weathered surface (cortex) of the stone. Cortical flakes are among the easiest to identify. Cortex is analogous to the rind, or skin, on an orange. Cortex often contains cracks, impurities, and irregularities, in addition to obscuring the often-attractive visual qualities of the stone. While flaked-stone tool manufacture generally results in the progressive removal of cortex, as it is a subtractive process, one cannot always assume that an early goal of stoneworking was/is the removal of this outer cortex, or "decortication." Depending on the technique of reduction and the goals of the craftsperson, cortex can be retained until late in manufacture.

Cortex varies greatly in appearance, depending upon the type of material involved, the geologic formation in which the stone formed or was deposited, or the duration and type of weathering to which the stone was subjected. Cortex can exhibit pitting, rough texture, patination, dull surfaces, crustiness, or embedded impurities. It is important to note that some of these features, such as heavy patina and embedded impurities, are not exclusive to cortex. Cortex will, however, generally lack evidence of concoidal fracture, although external surfaces can appear sinuous as a result of conditions during cooling of the mass. Cortex on some materials is difficult to distinguish from interior stone, requiring familiarity with regional geology or the parent material to identify.

In general, the quantity and frequency of cortical flakes and the degree to which cortex covers the dorsal surfaces convey information regarding the stage of flaked-stone reduction that occurred at a location. A large number of cortical flakes often indicates the initial or early-stage detachment of flakes from parent stone. If the examined sample of debitage contains large-sized cortical flakes (relative to other flakes), the interpretation of early-stage stone tool manufacture is further supported. Not surprisingly, stone quarries contain relatively high frequencies of cortical flakes. Cortical

D.16

flakes have also been called decortication flakes. It should be noted that such flake types as Biface Thinning flakes and Biface Overshot flakes can also possess cortex but should not be classified solely as decortication flakes; the presence of cortex can, however, be used in other aspects of the analysis.

FCP – Flake, Cortical, Primary. A cortical flake possessing cortex on its entire dorsal surface, excluding small scars near the platform removed as a result of percussive force or other small, incidentally detached flakes. Characteristically among the first pieces removed from a cortical bearing block or parent material, these flakes are sometimes referred to as primary decortication flakes.

FCS – Flake, Cortical, Secondary. A cortical flake possessing cortex over a portion of its dorsal surface (anywhere from 1 to 99% cortex). Sometimes referred to as secondary decortication flakes. Technologically diagnostic types of flakes possessing cortex will classed accordingly (e.g., FBE with cortex).

FEP – Flake, Edge Preparation (Edging). A flake removed from the edge of a flake blank or artifact in order to prepare or rejuvenate the item for further reduction. On flake-blank edging flakes, the original dorsal surface of the flake blank serves as the platform of this flake (see FRV below). The original detachment scar is visible on the distal end of the dorsal surface of the flake (Flenniken 1987:53). Edging flakes removed from artifacts or blanks tend to be smaller than most pressure flakes, are slightly wider than they are long, and can be detached through light pressure flaking, buffeting, or abrading the edge. Other edge-preparation flakes include FAL, though these can be classed separately. In the present classification, only those appearing to be the result of edge abrasion are classed as FEPs since most other forms of this flake type can be classed to more meaningful categories (e.g., FPE, FPL, FAL).

FER – Flake, Edge Removal. A half-moon-shaped fragment of a bifacial edge, produced as a mistake when the knapper strikes the biface too hard and far from the margin (Flenniken 1987:53–54). Not to be confused with a biface margin section detached as a result of bending forces from a location not contiguous with the point of applied force (i.e., a remote fracture characteristic of end-shock; Crabtree 1972; Johnson 1979).

FFL – Flake, Flute. The last flake or series of flakes intended to become the actual hafting-accommodation scar. It is not to be confused with end-thinning flakes, removed prior to this final stage (Callahan 1979). A flute flake exhibits a carefully prepared platform, compression rings along the ventral face in the direction of the projectile tip, and distal flake scars on its dorsal surface that terminate along the midline of the flake, corresponding to the midline of the projectile point. A flute flake is generally shaped like a blade, though most break during detachment.

FIN – Flake, Interior. Debitage that exhibits no cortex or patination on the dorsal surface. This category includes other flake types, such as biface-thinning and pressure flakes, and is generally more useful as an inclusive category for fragmentary specimens when more precise categorization is impossible (Flenniken 1987:54). This category has

D.17

been largely replaced by Simple and Complex flakes without cortex, which yields more information than a single interior-flake category.

FLI – Flake, Linear (Blade). The byproduct of most flaked-stone technologies, with formal attributes identical to those of blades. Crabtree defines a blade as a flake having parallel or subparallel lateral edges, where the length is equal to or more than twice the width. This class of flake often has one or more distinct crests or ridges (Crabtree 1982:16). Bladelike flakes are an incidental byproduct of almost any flaked-stone technology, but are technologically salient when they comprise a significant proportion of a lithic assemblage and/or correspond to the appropriate core technology. Linear flakes can be incidentally produced during biface production, core/flake production, and bipolar reduction, to name a few relevant technologies.

FPA – Flake, Pressure. A flake detached by pressing on the tool edge with a suitable device, usually and antler tine or shaped implement of bone or hardwood. Although rigorous diagnostic attributes for identifying pressure flakes appears to be lacking (Andrefsky 1998:115), unpronounced bulbs coupled with small apiculate platforms on small flakes, generally thin flakes that often exhibit slight curvature constitutes a valid description. They differ from edge-preparation flakes caused by abrading the tool edge which tend to be thinner at the bulb and wider than long.

FPC – Flake, Pressure, Collateral. A flake with a teardrop shape, ventral curvature, and the platform perpendicular to the longitudinal axis, it is generally short relative to the width (Skinner 1990; Crabtree 1972).

FPE – Flake, Pressure, Early Stage. A flake removed as part of the first series of pressure flakes taken off a biface. It has multiple scars on the dorsal surface, is twisted in long section, is small in size, and its platform exhibits oblique angles. It results from regularizing a bifacial edge by pressure flaking (Flenniken 1987:53).

FPL – Flake, Pressure, Late Stage. Produced during the final pressure-flaking episodes, this flake type is small and parallel-sided, with one dorsal arris, is slightly twisted in long section, and often has a multifaceted, abraded platform.

FPT – Flake, Pressure, Transverse Parallel. A flake that is comma-shaped in plan; it generally has a single dorsal ridge and a platform offset from the longitudinal axis (Skinner 1990).

FRV – Flake, Ventral Remnant. A flake that contains evidence of the ventral detachment scar of the larger previous flake on the dorsal surface. Similar to bulb-removal flakes but can occur at nonbulb areas of the flake. A ventral remnant flake indicates a technology that uses a flake or plate as the production material (Skinner 1990). Also subsumable under the edge-preparation flake types.

FUR – Flake, Uniface Rejuvenation. A flake that is characterized by remnants of the uniface tool edge. Three types have been identified by researchers: those struck from the dorsal face; those struck from the ventral face; and those struck parallel to the

D.18

uniface edge subsequently removing a linear piece that retains the tool edge along one of the flake margins (Frison and Bradley 1980:31; Schafer 1970:481).

IMP – Impact Flake. A piece of debitage resulting from impact-related compressive force associated with projectile point use. These items can be represented by certain biface tip remnants or flakes with complex dorsal surfaces lacking platforms and bulbs. The latter are produced from bending forces acting on the face of the point from distal to proximal end (as indicated by ventral surface ripples). These flakes are typically thin, and dorsal surface scars are “proximally truncated,” that is, the dorsal surface scars lack direct evidence of points of applied force (Bergman and Newcomer 1983; Cotterell and Kamminga 1986; Frison and Bradley 1980; Titmus and Woods 1986; White 1984:401–408).

NOT – Flake, Notching. A pressure flake, lunate in plan view, with its platform located in a depression, produced as a result of notching a biface (Flenniken 1987:54). Notching flakes are produced when notches or pronounced (narrow) indentations are made on bifaces. The identification of notching flakes in a debitage assemblage usually signals the late stages of projectile point manufacture at a site, although they can also indicate serrating blade margins. In some instances, the size and configuration of notching flakes can yield insight into the morphology (type) of projectile point, making this flake type potentially useful for determining the time period of site use. Notching flakes are usually produced by pressure flaking. Skinner (1986:491) has stated, “They are characterized in their ideal form by a circular shape with a lunate platform area: ‘In planar view they are shaped like a pie with 1/6 to 1/3 removed' [Gilreath 1984:157] . . . . In reality they can be quite varied, depending upon the size and configuration of the biface being notched. The one attribute they do have in common is that nearly all are removed form an area of low mass." Notching flakes are usually smaller than 10 mm in diameter.

PLB – Platform, Bifacial. A striking surface formed by two intersecting faces of a bifacial margin; the size of the scars could document the approximate biface reduction stage.

PLC – Platform, Cortical. A striking surface possessing cortex, the PLC is generally attributable to earlier reduction stages, such as those characterizing modification of cores and biface blanks from cobbles or tabular pieces.

PLD – Platform, Dihedral. A striking surface formed by two intersecting planes, faces, or sides (Nilsson et al. 1989). It is generally attributable to earlier reduction stages, such as those characterizing modification of cores and biface blanks.

PLF – Platform, Faceted. A striking surface that exhibits numerous small, smooth planar surfaces in random distribution. It often reflects the number of flakes removed during platform preparation, or may be part of a bifacial edge (Nilsson et al. 1989).

D.19

PLL – Platform, Lisse (Flat). A striking surface that exhibits a single, smooth planar area, frequently rectangular in plan view and with no or minimal platform preparation (Nilsson et al. 1989).

PLU – Platform, Unifacial. A striking surface formed by the intersection of the ventral face of a uniface and the scars documenting the working edge. Generally attributable to Shafer’s (1970) Method C uniface-edge rejuvenation, in which the striking platform is the working edge and the direction of force is to the ventral face (Clark 1954; Frison 1968; Shafer 1970).

POT – Potlids. Lenticular pieces incidentally detached from the surface of a stone item, generally as a result of exposure to temperature extremes.

RTF – Flake, Retouched. Flake having minimal pressure or percussion flaking on its margin(s) that documents intentional alteration. Scars are frequently sequential and more than 3 mm in length, although modification is insufficient to place specimen into more formalized flaked-stone tool categories. RTFs can represent the early stages of establishing a flake blank scheduled for manufacture into a biface form or projectile point or various types of scrapers or similar implements. Flake blanks are easily broken during the early stages of modification, resulting in fragments distinguishable solely as RTFs. Morphology and tool trajectories identified in the assemblage are required to categorize RTFs as strata of a bifacial reduction technology.

Other Abbreviations and Definitions CAF – Core/core Fragment. The parent piece from which flakes are removed. A

core is the byproduct of flaking and indicative of the technology of flake production. Cores are defined as central lithic masses (typically thick relative to their length and width) from which three or more flakes have been detached. Items marked by fewer than three prior detachments are classified as assay cores, representing either discarded test pieces or expedient sources of raw material (see CIS below). Core fragments are usually cubical and exhibit portions of two or more negative flake scars. During the course of manufacturing flakes from a core, fragments of that core may be intentionally or accidentally detached. These core fragments are characterized by two or more surfaces that exhibit previous fracture, usually in the form of negative flake scars, and are often quite thick relative to their width. Although there is some morphological overlap with shatter on occasion, shatter is generally less patterned and lacks diagnostic indications of intentional detachment.

CBF – Core, Bifacial. A core from which flakes have been detached from two faces (Skinner 1990; Crabtree 1972).

CBP – Core, Bipolar. A core that is the result of using the technique of resting the piece on an anvil and striking the core with a percussor (Crabtree 1972). Bipolar cores can be identified by the presence of exaggerated compression rings, battering on one or more edges, and often by flake scars on opposing ends (Skinner 1990).

D.20

CIS – Core, Initially Struck. A core with one or two primary flakes removed to test the quality and intrinsic characteristics of the parent material (Close 1977).

CMT – Core, Multiple Platform, Patterned. A core with three or more platforms whose relative positions can be easily described (e.g., two pairs of opposed platforms, etc.; Close 1977).

CMU – Core, Multiple Platform, Unpatterned. A core with three or more platforms whose relative positions cannot be easily described (Close 1977).

COP – Core, Opposed Platform. A core that bears scars resulting from flake detachment from two directions, generally at a 90-degree angle. The surfaces flaked from each platform may occur on the same side, on adjacent sides, or on opposite sides of the core. The angle between the two directions of flaking is usually 180 degrees, but may be less (Close 1977).

CSP – Core, Single Platform. A core with flakes removed in a single direction from one platform (Close 1977).

FTB – Fracture, Bending. A tension/compression fracture resulting from impact or shock caused by (1) a manufacturing error; (2) excessive force without support (such as during manufacture of biface); (3) use (e.g., projectile point); or (4) excessive force to a surface, exceeding the object’s tensile strength (Crabtree 1972; Flenniken 1987:52; Johnson 1979). Bending fractures are predominantly caused by force applied at a location remote from the point of failure (Crabtree 1972; Johnson 1979). Bending fractures generally characterize biface fragments, such as ends or halves, although small margin sections might fail due to the presence of inclusions or other impurities. Bending fractures are common on percussion flakes, which frequently flex as the energy of applied force radiates through them during detachment.

FTC – Fracture, Crenated (Pot Lid). Fracture caused by rapid, uneven cooling and characterized by undulating, scalloped surfaces lacking Hertzian cone features and compression rings (Purdy 1975). This is an indirect fracture and has no identifiable location of initiation (Skinner 1990). Pot lids are not necessarily evidence of purposeful heat treatment, only heat alteration.

FTF – Fracture, Facial Burination (Impact Fracture). A fracture that generally originates from the distal end of a projectile point, which detaches a flake or margin upon impact or causes other damage. Flakes detached as a result of this impact often leave a characteristic "facial burination" on the point's surface. Margin sections are also commonly detached through impact force. Most resulting pieces, including the projectile point, will lack the area of initiated force due to the processes involved in the transfer of energy through the piece.

FTP – Fracture, Perverse. A helical, spiral, or twisted break initiated at the margin of a biface (Crabtree 1972). This is a manufacturing error caused by the application of excessive force to a margin at an acute angle (Flenniken 1987:55; Johnson 1979).

D.21

EDS – Edge Serration. Indented edges formed by alternating the removal of flakes or by repeating notches at regular intervals (Skinner 1990).

HET – Heat Treatment. Heat can be used to alter some raw material (e.g., chalcedony, chert) to make it easier to work and less likely to shatter during reduction. When siliceous material is affected by heat, physical changes can occur, including circular depressions (crenated fracturing/potlids); marbled appearance (crazing); a change from a dull to a lustrous or shiny surface; and/or color changes. Although these features are evidence of heat alteration, they are not necessarily evidence of purposeful heat treatment. Color changes and luster are more commonly associated with heat treatment, while potlids and crazing may be evidence of natural or cultural (poorly controlled) heating processes, particularly when they are present on ventral flake surfaces.

INR – Inverse Retouch. Flake scars appearing on the ventral surface of an artifact resulting from intentional percussion or pressure flaking. The direction of flake removal is from the dorsal surface to the ventral surface (Close 1977).

OBR – Obverse Retouch. Flake scars appearing on the dorsal surface of an artifact resulting from intentional percussion or pressure flaking. The direction of flake removal is from the ventral surface to the dorsal surface (Close 1977).

PEF – Percussion Flaking. The detachment of flakes using a percussor from a core or mass. Flake-removal techniques include impact, collision, or concussion (Crabtree 1982).

PRF – Pressure Flaking. The process of forming and shaping stone by removing surplus material from the artifact, in the form of flakes, by a pressing force rather than by percussion (Crabtree 1982).

REJ – Rejuvenation. Reworking an artifact into a functional tool of the same original form.

TRF – Transformation. Reworking a finished tool into a functional tool other than the original form.

TRV – Transverse Parallel. Diagonal parallel-flaking technique.

UNF – Unifacial Biface Reduction. A reduction strategy where the ventral surface of a large flake is used as a platform (single platform core) to shape and thin the object piece by removing the dorsal surface through a sequence of repetitive detachments (Skinner and Ainsworth 1990). Removals are begun on the ventral surface to produce the biface only after the dorsal surface is largely shaped and thinned. At this stage, the biface would be plano-convex in transverse cross section.

Biface and Uniface Fragments Formal flaked-stone tools are relatively symmetrical in plan outline and usually

exhibit intrusive secondary flake scars. A tool fragment is a portion of a recognizable and technologically complex end–product, whose original form is at least generally

D.22

reconstructable from the fragment. In most cases, tools and tool fragments are classified by morphological attributes that avoid functional implications. Bifaces have been defined as artifacts "bearing flake scars on both faces" (Crabtree 1971:38). In most instances, bifaces are thin relative to their width (thickness is usually less than twice the width). Unifaces, artifacts "flaked on one surface only" (Crabtree 1971:97), need not be thin relative to width or length, but are often thin and plano-convex and exhibit intrusive, secondary flake scars.

Flake Tools This category is generally reserved for minimally modified flakes exhibiting

evidence of alteration or use but displaying little regularization in form; frequently, these are considered informal tool types. Typically, these items are classed as edge-modified flakes (EMFs) and retouched flakes (RTFs) to avoid the implications associated with the functionally loaded term flake tool. The EMF and RTF categories are generally equivalent to divisions presented by Gilreath (1993): Flake Tool A and Flake Tool B, respectively. In post-analysis discussion, once minimally modified items representing elements of biface-reduction systems are omitted, the term flake tool can be used to summarize all used flakes and formal scraping tools.

EMFs are characterized by microscars restricted to the flake's margin. They frequently exhibit no evidence of intentional shaping but evince edge damage typical of light scraping or cutting tasks. Microscars can be oriented in a variety of directions, including unifacial, bifacial (intermittently or alternately), or bidirectional. For most analyses, modification is recorded as unilateral, bilateral, end, or various combinations; in some instances, edge microscars are no more than 3 mm in length.

RTFs exhibit evidence of intentional modification through applied force to remove a flake from a face or margin. Retouch is recognized as any flake scar greater than 3 mm in length; scalar flake scars 3 mm or greater are not defined as retouch but the result of intensive application. Frequently, retouch scars consist of no more than a few detached flakes that do not overlap (i.e., are not indicative of use-wear scars). Many of these items, however, might also exhibit edge microscarring consistent with use wear similar to EMFs. This factor provides substantiating evidence for the multiple functions of simple flake tools.

Despite characterization as simple tools, many of these kinds of implements exhibit complex edge–units (i.e., more than one portion of the tool's perimeter shows use or modification. In general, however, most flake tools are recognized as expedient tools selected for a specific purpose(s) for a limited period of time; in most assemblages, few specimens exhibit rejuvenation scars (if they did, they might be classified as formal tool types). As such, flake tools are differentiated from formalized tools on the basis of both morphological and metrical attributes. Formalized tools—shaped items that may have been curated and transported between sites as part of a portable toolkit—can include items described as unifaces, or end-scrapers, or combination end- and side-scrapers, and might be diagnostic of particular archaeological assemblages (Wilmsen 1970).

D.23

STUDY RESULTS

Stratum II A total of 61 items from 2.65 m3 of earth represent this stratum. The 6 mm sample is

comprised of 44 pieces averaging 24 items per cubic meter. The 3 mm sample (n = 17) was recovered from 15 percent of the total excavated volume for this stratum.

Napa Valley Glass The Napa Valley flake sample (n = 58) consists of 17 complete flakes, 13 incomplete

flakes, and 27 flake fragments; one additional item was too small to classify. The 6 mm sample included 41 items (71%) while the 3 mm sample included 17 pieces (29%). Altogether, the 6 mm sample was characterized by a predominance of biface reduction (41%), while core reduction accounted for 27 percent (indeterminate pieces comprised 32%). Flakes and flake fragments attributed to biface reduction had a mean weight of 0.48 g, slightly greater than the 0.45 g mean weight exhibited by core-reduction pieces. While this appears to be atypical of these reduction technologies, the most reasonable explanation is that the sample size is too small to be considered representative and that the number of flake fragments has caused the average weights to be less than expected.

The 58 pieces of Napa Valley glass from Stratum II were divided into eight glass sub-groups. Most of the sample derived from the 6 mm screen sorting (71%). The following discusses and summarizes the 6 mm and 3 mm samples, and is followed by an evaluation of individual subgroups.

6-mm Sample. This sample was composed of 41 pieces of Napa Valley glass debitage including 12 intact flakes, 11 incomplete flakes, and 18 flake fragments. Altogether, these items had a total weight of 18.45 g with a mean weight of 0.45 gram. Complete and incomplete flakes yielded mean weights of 0.66 g and 0.39 g, respectively, while fragments had a mean weight of 0.35 gram.

FINs dominated the technologically diagnostic flake types (34%) and were followed by FCS (22%), FBL (12%), and FBE (7%). In sum, the 6 mm sample was characterized by a predominance of biface reduction (41%), while core reduction accounted for 27%, and the remainder was classed as indeterminate (32%). Flakes and flake fragments attributed to biface reduction had a mean weight of 0.48 g (n = 17), a figure similar to that the 0.45 g mean weight exhibited by core reduction pieces (n = 11). The number of pieces included in this analysis, however, is too small to generate more meaningful distinctions.

Cortex was present on 37 percent of the Napa Valley materials from this sample. These items had a mean weight of 0.60 gram. Noncortical materials yielded a mean weight of 0.36 gram.

3-mm Sample. The 3-mm sample contained 17 pieces of Napa Valley glass debitage comprised of 5 intact flakes, 2 incomplete flakes, and 9 flake fragments; one additional piece was too small to characterize. The total weight of these items was 0.68 g with a mean weight of 0.04 gram. Complete and incomplete flakes yielded mean

D.24

weights of 0.05 g and 0.04 g, respectively, while fragments were 0.04 grams (the indeterminate piece was 0.03 g).

Though few in number, FINs dominated the technologically diagnostic flake types (53%). This group was followed by FEPs and FPLs – each representing 18 percent. The majority of the 3 mm sample was classed as Indeterminate (47%) while biface reduction comprised 41 percent; core-reduction accounted for twelve percent. Flakes and flake fragments attributed to biface reduction had a mean weight of 0.05 g (n = 7), while two core reduction pieces yielded a mean weight of 0.06 gram. Mean weight values have little utility for a 3-mm sample because the flakes and fragments are so small.

Cortex was present on 12 percent of the Napa Valley materials from this sample. The items in this sample had a mean weight of 0.09 gram. Noncortical materials yielded a mean weight of 0.03 gram.

Other Flaked Stone One noncortical basalt flake fragment contained in the 6 mm sample was recovered

in Stratum II. This piece was small (0.38 g) and was classifiable solely as a FIN. It is attributed to core reduction.

Two pieces of debitage were made of tuff. Both were non-cortical and relatively close in size but varied considerably in weight. One was a FIN weighing 1.07 g, while the other was classed as a late stage core flake fragment that weighed 5.85 g. Both were the product of percussion flaking attributed to core reduction.

Stratum I This component represents 70 percent of the excavated earth yielding the analytic

sample (6.1 m3). Artifact quantities are slightly higher per cubic meter than Stratum II. For the 6 mm analytic sample, 28 pieces were recovered per cubic meter in Stratum I versus less than 17 from Stratum II. The 3 mm sample derived from 1.8 m3 of excavated earth, or less than a third of the total volume.

Napa Valley Glass The collection of Napa Valley glass from Stratum I totaled 284 pieces divided into

seven glass subgroups. More than half of the sample derived from the 6 mm screen sorting (n = 145). The following discussion presents a summary of the 6 mm sample first and then provides information about the 3 mm sample. The results of these analyses are then presented in a summary. Individual subgroups are evaluated following this summary.

6-mm Sample. This sample was comprised of 145 pieces of Napa Valley glass debitage that included 58 intact flakes, 26 incomplete flakes, and 61 flake fragments. Altogether, these items had a total weight of 105.03 g, with a mean weight of 0.72 gram. Complete and incomplete flakes each yielded a mean weight of 0.84 g, while fragments had a mean weight of 0.57 grams.

D.25

FINs dominate the technologically diagnostic flake types at 35 percent, followed by FCS (19%), FBE (8%), and FEP (<8%). Altogether, the 6 mm sample was characterized by a predominance of biface reduction (39%), while core reduction accounted for 37 percent, and one piece was attributed to bipolar reduction (1%); (indeterminate pieces comprised 23%). Flakes and flake fragments attributed to biface reduction had a mean weight of 0.41 g (n = 57), much less than the 1.28 g mean weight exhibited by core reduction pieces (n = 53). Greater weight for core reduction flakes constitutes a pattern relatively typical of these technologies and would be expected in an assemblage containing a sufficient number of pieces.

One flake made on NV1 glass was classified as bipolar (FBP). Sufficient mass remained to recognize this piece as deriving from a small cobble; it retained cortex and weighed 3.8 grams. There was some doubt, however, as to the authenticity of this item and whether it was of recent derivation.

Cortex was present on 39 percent of the Napa Valley materials from this sample. The items in this sample had a mean weight of 1.35 grams. Non-cortical materials yielded a mean weight of 0.33 gram.

3-mm Sample. The 3-mm sample contained 139 pieces of Napa Valley glass debitage comprised of 67 intact flakes, 14 incomplete flakes, and 57 flake fragments; one additional piece was too small to characterize. The total weight of these items was 5.69 g with a mean weight of 0.04 gram. Complete and incomplete flakes yielded mean weights of 0.04 g and 0.03 g, respectively, while fragments had a mean weight of 0.04 gram.

FINs dominate the technologically diagnostic flake types at 42 percent, followed by FEPs at 37%. Altogether, the 3 mm sample was characterized by a predominance of biface reduction (60%), while core reduction accounted for 4% (indeterminate pieces comprised 36%). Flakes and flake fragments attributed to biface reduction had a mean weight of 0.04 g (n = 83), while six core reduction pieces yielded a mean weight of 0.07 gram. Mean weight values are considerably less meaningful for this sample than they are for the 6 mm sample simply because the flakes and fragments are so small.

Cortex was present on 6 percent of the Napa Valley materials from this sample. The items in this sample had a mean weight of 0.07 gram. Noncortical materials yielded a mean weight of 0.04 gram.

Other Flaked Stone Two pieces of noncortical debitage assigned to the Annadel glass group were

classed as biface reduction flakes; one a late-stage form and the other indeterminate. Both were the products of biface reduction using percussion flaking.

Four basalt items were included in Stratum I; one retained cortex. All were small, ranging in weight 0.4 – 0.31 g (mean = 0.14 g). Three were classifiable solely as FINs, two were fragments and one was incomplete. The cortical flake was complete but classifiable

D.26

only as FCS due to its small size. Two of the FINs were attributable to percussion flaking and core reduction, while the other items were indeterminate.

Two flakes made from chalcedony are included in Stratum I sample. Both were noncortical and missing platforms. One incomplete flake was attributable to late stage core reduction; it was 30 mm in width and weighed almost 3.0 grams. The other piece was a flake fragment weighing 0.4 g and classifiable solely as a FIN. Each was the result of percussion flaking.

Three complete noncortical dacite flakes were classed as percussion core reduction. Two were classed as early stage core flakes and one derived from late stage core reduction. Another dacite flake was classed solely as an interior fragment. The complete flakes ranged in weight from 20.9 to 47.0 grams (mean = 31.7 g); mean length was 59 mm. The fragment was considerably smaller, weighing 1.77 grams.

Five pieces of rhyolite were identified in the debitage assemblage; all were noncortical and attributable to percussion reduction. Two incomplete items were classifiable solely as FINs, each weighing less than a gram. One was attributed to biface reduction (C/S) but the other was indeterminate. The other three items included two complete flakes and a fragment; all were diagnostic as late stage core reduction flakes. Two of these were smaller, weighing less than 3.0 grams, while one was significantly larger (weight = 36.98 g, length = 60 mm).

Eleven pieces of debitage were classified as tuff. At least 10 of the pieces were noncortical; the other was indeterminate. Nine were attributed to core reduction: 2 were early stage, six were late stage, and one S/S FIN was not staged. The other 2 were classed solely as FINs (S/A fragments). With the exception of one FIN that was indeterminate, all were attributed to percussion flaking. Tuff flakes ranged in length from 12 to 36 mm, and weighed 0.9 to 6.5 grams.

Flaked-stone Tools One biface end (14-04) was attributed to Stratum II. It was characterized as a

noncortical pressure flaked item made on a flake of NV5. Stratum I yielded 4 biface end fragments. Three were made on Napa Valley glass (NV, NV1, and NV5) while 1 was made from Borax Lake obsidian (9-15). The 3 Napa Valley glass items consisted of one tip (14-18), 1 probable base (10-13), and a margin segment (11-12).

Two of the obsidian biface fragments retained cortex; both were very-early-stage forms (03-17, 31-13). The majority of biface forms was noncortical, either as a result of retaining minimal cortex when initiated or having lost much through extensive modification. One item made on Borax Lake glass (9-15) was irreparably broken during either an attempt at rejuvenation or through intentional recycling.

Modified flakes weighed 0.05 to 5.10 grams (mean weight = 1.5 g); 69 percent were fragments. Most of these items appear to be expedient tools used as unidirectional scrapers. One piece (10-08) exhibits one ventral face edge unit with a series of microscars; an adjacent section has retouch, while the dorsal face has a percussion scar

D.27

suggesting the item last functioned as a core or was marked by an attempt to rejuvenate the retouched margin. Another item might represent an edge-modified flake blank (1430) created when a misdirected attempt to percussion shape the form resulted in a margin spall. About half of the modified obsidian flakes had remnant areas of cortex (n = 13), and the majority of those were correlated with core reduction (69%). Of the noncortical modified flakes, 4 were attributed to core reduction while 5 corresponded to biface working and the remaining 7 were indeterminate.

Four modified flakes derived from Stratum II including 1 each of NV1 and NV3, and 2 NV5 pieces. Eleven items from Stratum I included 1 NV1, 3 NV4, and 6 NV5 glasses.

A modified flake classed as a uniface was recovered in two pieces from adjacent units affiliated with Stratum I (11-30, 15-23). This item was classed as NV1 obsidian and was steeply pressure-retouched, predominantly to the dorsal face around much of its circumference. Scars indicating edge rejuvenating were apparent on one end of the dorsal face and the opposite end of the ventral face.

Two cores, both of NV5 glass, were recovered from Stratum I (14-33, 15-19); Stratum II did not yield any. Both are noncortical multidirectional forms that differ little from retouched flakes in size and degree of use. As such, it is possible they began as thick flakes, and might have been initiated with the intent of producing a biface form. If this was the case, they might have obtained their last configuration through a series of shifting priorities or failed attempts to salvage a form following a manufacture error.

One projectile point made on NV1 glass was attributed to Stratum I (14-10) while none were affiliated with Stratum II. This item is a small pressure-flaked leaf form that retains a patch of cortex at its base. It shows no sign of damage or reshaping.

D.28

REFERENCES CITED

Andrefsky, William, Jr. 1998 Lithics: Macroscopic Approaches to Analysis. Cambridge University Press. U.K.

Bennyhoff, James A., and Richard E. Hughes 1987 Shell Bead and Ornament Exchange Networks between California and the Western

Great Basin. American Museum of Natural History Anthropological Papers 64(2):79–175. New York.

Bergman, Christopher A., and Mark H. Newcomer 1983 Flint Arrowhead Breakage: Examples from Ksar Akil, Lebanon. Journal of Field

Archaeology 10:238–243.

Binford, Lewis R. 1979 Organization and Formation Processes: Looking at Curated Technologies. Journal of

Anthropological Research 35:255–273.

Binford, Lewis R., and George I. Quimby 1972 Indian Sites and Chipped Stone Materials in the Northern Lake Michigan Area. In An

Archaeological Perspective, by L. R. Binford with G. I. Quimby, pp. 346–372. Seminar Press, New York.

Callahan, Errett 1979 The Basics of Biface Knapping in the Eastern Fluted Point Tradition: A Manual for

Flintknappers and Lithic Analysts. Archaeology of Eastern North America l (1).

Clarke, David L. 1968 Analytical Archaeology. Methuen and Co., Ltd., London.

Clark, J. Grahame D. 1954 Excavations at Star Carr: An Early Mesolithic Site at Seamer near Scarborough, Yorkshire.

Cambridge University Press, London.

Close, Angela E. 1977 The Identification of Style in Lithic Artifacts from North East Africa. Memoires de

L'Institut d’Egypte, Vol. 61. Geological Survey of Egypt, Cairo.

Cotterell, Brian, and Johan Kamminga 1986 Finials on Stone Flakes. Journal of Archaeological Science 13:451–46.

1987 The Formation of Flakes. American Antiquity 52(4):675–708.

Crabtree, Don E. 1972 An Introduction to Flintworking. Idaho State University Museum, Occasional Paper 28.

Pocatello.

D.29

Elston, Robert G., Jonathan O. Davis, and Gail Townsend 1974 An Intensive Archaeological Investigation of the Hawkins Land Exchange Site (FS-05-17-57-

33) 4-NEV-184. Nevada Archaeological Survey, University of Nevada, Reno. Prepared for Tahoe National Forest, Nevada City, California.

Ericson, Jonathon E. 1984 Toward the Analysis of Lithic Production Systems. In Prehistoric Quarries and Lithic

Procurement, edited by J.E. Ericson and B.A. Purdy, pp. 1–9. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

Faulkner, A. 1974 Flintworking Mechanics: Fracture Forms and Processes. Paper presented at the

Symposium of Primitive Technology and Art, University of Calgary, Canada.

Flenniken, Jeffrey J. 1987 The Lithic Technology of the East Lake Site, Newberry Crater, Oregon. Manuscript on file

with the U.S. Forest Service, Deschutes National Forest, Bend, Oregon.

Frison, George C. 1968 A Functional Analysis of Certain Chipped Stone Tools. American Antiquity 33:149–155.

Frison, George, and Bruce Bradley 1980 Folsom Tools and Technology at the Hanson Site, Wyoming. University of New Mexico

Press, Albuquerque.

Gilreath, Amy 1993 Flaked Stone. In Archaeological Test Excavations at Fourteen Sites along Highways 101 and

152, Santa Clara and San Benito Counties, California. Volume 1: Prehistory, by William Hildebrandt and Patricia Mikkelsen, pp. 57–63. Far Western Anthropological Research Group, Davis, California. Prepared for California Department of Transportation, District 4, Oakland.

Gramly, Richard M. 1980 Raw Materials Source Areas and "Curated" Tool Assemblages. American Antiquity

45(4):823–833.

1993 The Richey Clovis Cache: Earliest Americans along the Columbia River. Persimmon Press Monographs in Archaeology. Printed by Partner’s Press, Kenmore, New York.

Jackson, Robert 1994 A Program for the Identification and Management of an Archaeological Resource Class: Low

Density-Low Variability Flaked Stone Artifact Scatters. BioSystems Analysis, Santa Cruz, California. Prepared for U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Sacramento. On file at Northwest Information Center, Sonoma State University, Rohnert Park.

Jackson, Robert, Michael Boynton, William Olsen, and Richard Weaver 1988 California Archaeological Resource Identification and Data Acquisition Program: Sparse Lithic

Scatters. Office of Historic Preservation, Sacramento.

D.30

Jackson, Robert J., with Thomas L. Jackson, Charles Miksicek, Kristina Roper, and Dwight Simons 1994 Framework for Archaeological Research and Management [FARM]: National Forests of the

North-Central Sierra Nevada. Biosystems Analysis, Sacramento. Prepared for USDA Forest Service, Eldorado National Forest.

Jackson, Thomas L., and Jonathon E. Ericson 1994 Prehistoric Exchange Systems in California. In Prehistoric Exchange Systems in America,

edited by T.G. Baugh and J.E. Ericson, pp. 385–415. Plenum Press, New York.

Jackson, Thomas L., and Peter D. Schultz 1975 Typology, Trade, and Trace Analysis: A Test of Local Manufacture of Sacramento

Valley Obsidian Tools. Journal of New World Archaeology 1(2):1–8.

Johnson, Jay K. 1979 Archaic Biface Manufacture: Production Failures, a Chronicle of the Misbegotten. Lithic

Technology 8(2):25–35.

1981 Further Additional Biface Production Failures. Lithic Technology 10(2):26–28.

Kay, Marvin 1975 Social Distance among Central Missouri Hopewell Settlements: A First Approximation.

American Antiquity 40(1):64–71.

Kelly, Robert L. 1988 The Three Sides of a Biface. American Antiquity 53(4):717–734.

Nelson, Margaret C. 1991 The Study of Technological Organization. In Archaeological Method and Theory, vol. 3,

edited by M.B. Schiffer, pp. 57–100. University of Arizona Press, Tucson.

Nilsson, Elena, Karen M. Banks, and Greg Greenway 1989 Archaeological Data Recovery Investigations at CA-SIS-900: A Late Prehistoric Site in Shasta

Valley, California. Manuscript on file with the Siskiyou County Department of Public Works, Yreka.

Purdy, Barbara A. 1975 Fractures for the Archaeologist. In Lithic Technology: Making and Using Stone Tools,

edited by E.H. Swanson, pp. 133–141. Mouton, The Hague.

Sanders, Thomas N. 1990 Adams: The Manufacturing of Flaked Stone Tools at a Paleo-Indian Site in Western Kentucky.

Persimmon Press, Buffalo.

Shafer, H.J. 1970 Notes on Uniface Retouch Technology. American Antiquity 35(4):480–487.

D.31

Shott, Michael J. 1989a Diversity, Organization, and Behavior in the Material Record: Ethnographic and

Archaeological Examples. Current Anthropology 30(3):283–315.

1989b On Tool-Class Use Lives and the Formation of Archaeological Assemblages. American Antiquity 54(1):9–30.

Shafer, Harry J. 1970 Notes on Uniface Retouch Technology. American Antiquity 35(4):480–487.

Skinner, Elizabeth J. 1986 Appendix A: Analysis of Flaked Stone from the Crane Valley Hydroelectric Testing

Program. In Cultural Resources of the Crane Valley Hydroelectric Project Area, Madera County, California, by S.K. Goldberg, S.S. Salzman, E.J. Skinner, J. Burton, M.E. Scully, J.J. Holson, M.J. Moratto, pp. 419–594. Infotec Research, Inc. Prepared for Pacific Gas and Electric Company, San Francisco.

1990 Appendix A: Flaked Stone Analysis. In Archaeological Excavations at Sites CA-MNO-574, -577, -578, and -833: Stoneworking in Mono County, California, by S.K. Goldberg, E.J. Skinner, and J.F. Burton, pp. 213–342. INFOTEC Research, Inc., Sonora. Prepared for California Department of Transportation, Bishop.

Skinner, Elizabeth, and Peter Ainsworth 1990 Unifacial Bifaces: More Than One Way to Thin a Biface. Paper presented at the 43rd

Northwest Anthropological Conference, Eugene, Oregon.

Titmus, Gene L. and James C. Woods 1986 An Experimental Study of Projectile Point Fracture Patterns. Journal of California and

Great Basin Anthropology 8(1):37–49.

Tixier, Jaques 1974 Glossary for the Description of Stone Tools with Special References to the Epipaleolithic of the

Maghreb. Translated by M. H. Newcomer, ed., Newsletter of Lithic Technology, Special Publication Number 1.

Thomas, David H. 1970 Archaeology's Operational Imperative: Great Basin Projectile Points as a Test Case.

Annual Report of the Archaeological Survey 12:29–60. University of California, Los Angeles.

1981 How to Classify the Projectile Points from Monitor Valley, Nevada. Journal of California and Great Basin Anthropology 3(1):7–43.

Whittaker, John C. 1994 Flintknapping: Making and Understanding Stone Tools. University of Texas Press, Austin.

Wilmsen, Edwin N. 1970 Lithic Analysis and Cultural Inference: A Paleo-Indian Case. Anthropological Papers of the

University of Arizona, No. 16. Tucson.

D.32

Wilmsen, Edwin N. (continued) 1973 Interaction, Spacing Behavior, and the Organization of Hunting Bands. Journal of

Anthropological Research 29(1):1–31.

Woods, James C. 1987 Manufacturing and Use Damage on Pressure-flaked Stone Tools. Master's thesis, Idaho State

University, Pocatello.

D.33

CA-NAP-916 FLAKED-STONE DATA

Cat. No.

Lot No.

Item No

Component Material Dorsal Platform Condition Flake Type

Cortex Length (mm)

Width (mm)

Weight (g)

Tech Mode

Comments

01 01 0.01 none NV5 C C C FCS P 18 18 0.78 P 01 02 0.01 none Tuff S S C FCE A 15 21 1.6 P

D.34

01 02 0.02 none Tuff S A F FIN A 15 21 0.77 P 01 05 0.01 none Tuff S I F FIN A 15 39 3.4 P 01 08 0.01 none NV5 C C F FBL A 33 18 2.23 P 01 10 0.01 none NV1 C R C FBA P 15 15 0.18 P 01 11 0.01 none Tuff? S S I FCE P 21 21 2.4 P 01 15 0.01 none NV5 R R F FCS P 18 18 1.95 P cobble fragment 01 15 0.02 none NV7 C C I FCS P 24 15 0.72 P 01 16 0.01 none Tuff S C C FCE P 15 27 2.95 P 01 16 0.02 none Tuff S S C FIN A 18 27 1.42 P 01 17 0.01 none Basalt S S C FCL P 12 15 0.33 P 01 19 0.01 none Basalt C A I FBA P 12 24 0.59 P 01 22 0.01 none NV6 S A I FIN A 24 21 1 P E-M DOR DIST 03 01 0.01 none NV2 S C C FCS P 18 12 0.38 P 03 01 0.02 none NV1 S A F FIN A 15 15 0.24 P 03 02 0.01 none Tuff NA NA NA FCR NA 0 0 1.6 03 04 0.01 none Dacite S S C FCE A 15 21 1.06 P 03 07 0.01 none NV5 C C C FBE A 12 21 0.48 P 03 10 0.01 none NV1 C S C FCL P 24 12 0.5 P 03 12 0.01 none NV3 C C C FBA A 18 12 0.2 P 03 14 0.01 none NV5 C A I FBL P 27 21 0.76 P 03 15 0.01 none Tuff S S I FCE A 18 15 0.97 P 03 18 0.01 none NV3 C C C FBE A 30 18 1 P 03 20 0.01 none NV5 C C C FBL A 15 24 0.69 P 03 20 0.02 none NV5 C R F FCS P 21 18 0.68 P 03 22 0.01 none NV5 C A F FCS P 9 36 0.75 P 03 24 0.01 none NV5 C R F FCL P 15 15 0.05 P 03 26 0.01 none NV4 C A F FBE A 18 30 1.2 P

E-M RT LAT DOR E-M DIS VEN? BDR

CA-NAP-916 Flaked-stone Data (continued)

Cat. Lot Item Component Material Dorsal Platform Condition

Flake Cortex

Length Width Weight Tech Comments

No. No. No Type (mm) (mm) (g) Mode

03 27 0.01 none NV4 S A F FCE A 21 24 1.5 P E-M LF LAT DOR

D.35

06 01 0.01 none NV4 C A F FIN A 12 18 0.4 P LAT DOR?

06 06 0.01 none Tuff C A F FCL A 39 27 10.5 P 06 09 0.01 none NV5 R A I FCP P 21 15 0.62 P cobble fragment 06 09 0.02 none NV5 S R C FCL P 12 15 0.25 P 06 12 0.01 none NV5 C C C FBE P 24 27 1.92 P 06 13 0.01 none Tuff S S F FCL A 12 18 0.6 P 06 15 0.01 none NV1 S R C FCE P 21 18 0.64 P 06 16 0.01 none Rhyolite S S F FIN A 12 12 0.27 P 06 19 0.01 none NV5 C C C FBL A 18 15 0.29 P 06 22 0.01 none NV5 C C C FBL A 15 9 0.14 P 06 23 0.01 none Tuff S A I FIN A 15 15 0.54 P 06 26 0.01 none NV2 S A F FCS P 27 18 1.3 P 06 27 0.01 none NV5 S A F FIN A 21 12 0.7 IND 06 29 0.01 none NV5 S C F FCE A 15 21 0.6 P 06 30 0.01 none NV5 S A F FCE A 39 21 4.5 P

VEN; R-T PRX 06 31 0.01 none NV5 C S C FCL A 18 12 0.7 P E-M DIS DOR 09 03 0.01 upper NV5 S A I FIN A 12 12 0.1 P 09 05 0.01 lower NV5 S A I FIN A 12 12 0.11 P secondary flake 09 10 0.01 lower NV7 C A I FIN A 9 12 0.07 P 09 12 0.01 lower NV5 C A I FIN A 18 15 0.23 P 09 13 0.01 lower Chalcedony S A F FIN A 15 12 0.4 P 09 16 0.01 lower NV1 C C C FBL A 15 24 0.56 P 09 17 0.01 lower Dacite S A F FIN A 18 24 1.77 P 09 19 0.01 lower NV7 S A F FCS P 24 9 0.85 P cobble fragment 09 23 0.01 lower Tuff S S I FIN A 21 15 0.9 P 09 25 0.01 lower NV5 C C C FBL A 12 27 0.6 P 10 01 0.01 upper NV5 C A F FIN A 6 6 0.02 IND 10 01 0.02 upper NV3 C A NA FIN A 9 9 0.03 IND 10 03 0.01 upper NV3 S C C FPL A 12 6 0.09 PR linear

E-M? LF LAT VEN/RT

E-M RT LAT VEN E-M RT LAT DOR E-M LF LAT DOR E-M DIS DOR/LF LAT

E-M LF LAT DOR



Flake Cortex



10 03 0.02 upper NV3 S A F FCS P 12 12 0.17 P

D.36

10 04 0.01 upper Tuff S D F FCL A 24 33 5.85 P 10 06 0.01 upper NV3 C A F FIN A 12 15 0.21 P 10 06 0.02 upper NV3 C A F FIN A 9 15 0.2 P 10 06 0.03 upper NV2 C R F FCL P 15 15 0.66 P 10 08 0.01 lower NV4 R R I FCP P 18 33 5.1 P

DIS DOR 10 09 0.01 lower NV1 S A F FIN A 15 15 0.29 P 10 09 0.02 lower NV1 C A F FIN A 12 12 0.12 P 10 09 0.03 lower NV1 C C C FIN A 9 9 0.09 P 10 09 0.04 lower NV2 S C I FEP A 9 12 0.05 ABR 10 09 0.05 lower NV5 C C C FBL A 27 15 0.96 P 10 11 0.01 lower NV2 S C C FPE P 21 9 0.29 PR 10 11 0.02 lower NV4 C C C FPL A 12 9 0.1 PR 10 14 0.01 lower NV4 S A F FCP P 15 21 0.66 P 10 14 0.02 lower NV4 C C F FIN A 12 12 0.31 P 10 14 0.03 lower NV5 C A F FIN A 9 15 0.2 P 10 14 0.04 lower NV4 C C C FIN A 12 9 0.1 P 10 16 0.01 lower NV2 R A F FCP P 12 18 1.35 P cobble fragment 10 16 0.02 lower NV5 C A F FIN A 12 9 0.08 IND 10 16 0.03 lower NV1 S A F FRV A 9 15 0.14 IND 10 16 0.04 lower NV2 C A I FBA A 15 12 0.12 IND 10 18 0.01 lower NV1 C R F FBL A 15 12 0.21 P 10 20 0.01 lower NV1 C A F FBA A 18 15 0.63 P 10 20 0.02 lower NV5 S C C FCL P 15 9 0.19 P 10 20 0.03 lower NV3 S C C FCS P 18 12 0.22 PR 10 21 0.01 lower Basalt S A F FIN A 6 9 0.06 P 10 23 0.01 lower NV5 C A F FCS P 15 30 2.1 P

V&D 10 24 0.01 lower NV5 C C C FBE P 18 15 0.24 P 10 25 0.01 lower Tuff C S I FCL A 21 24 2.46 P 10 27 0.01 lower NV5 S A F FIN A 18 18 1.53 P RTF

R-T DIS VEN, PERC

E-M LAT DOR, R-T



Flake Cortex



10 27 0.02 lower NV2 S R C FCE P 18 15 1.1 P

D.37

10 27 0.03 lower NV5 S A F FCS P 15 12 0.37 P 10 27 0.04 lower NV1 C S C FIN A 12 9 0.08 IND 10 27 0.05 lower NV5 C C C FPL A 12 9 0.08 PR 10 27 0.06 lower NV1 S C C FIN A 15 9 0.15 P 10 27 0.07 lower NV1 R C F FCP P 9 9 0.16 P 10 27 0.08 lower NV1 S R C FCS P 24 15 0.89 P cobble fragment 10 29 0.01 lower NV1 C C C FIN A 9 12 0.16 P 10 29 0.02 lower A C A F FBA A 18 30 0.9 P 10 31 0.01 lower NV5 NA R NA NA A 0 0 0.01 NA 3 tiny pieces 10 33 0.01 upper NV3 C A F FIN A 15 12 0.4 P

DOR 10 34 0.01 lower Tuff C C F FCL A 18 33 3.6 P 10 35 0.01 upper NV3 C S C FPL A 9 9 0.03 PR 10 35 0.02 upper NV? C S C FPL A 9 6 0.03 PR 10 35 0.03 upper NV3 S A F FIN A 6 6 0.01 IND 10 36 0.01 upper NV3 S A I FPE P 12 9 0.4 PR linear 10 36 0.02 upper NV2 S R C FPE P 9 9 0.08 PR plat heat affect 10 36 0.03 upper NV2 C A F FIN A 9 9 0.04 IND 10 36 0.04 upper NV2 C C I FEP A 6 9 0.03 ABR 10 36 0.05 upper NV2 C A F FIN A 9 6 0.04 IND 10 36 0.06 upper NV2 S A F FIN A 6 9 0.03 IND 10 36 0.07 upper NV3 S S F FIN A 6 6 0.03 IND 10 37 0.01 lower NV3 C A F FIN A 12 12 0.09 IND 10 37 0.02 lower NV1 S C C FRV A 9 9 0.09 ABR 10 37 0.03 lower NV1 C S C FIN A 9 12 0.1 IND 10 37 0.04 lower NV3 C S C FPL A 9 6 0.05 PR 10 37 0.05 lower NV4 C A F FIN A 9 9 0.09 IND 10 37 0.06 lower NV4 C C C FEP A 6 12 0.07 ABR ABR? 10 37 0.07 lower NV4 C A F FIN A 6 9 0.05 IND 10 37 0.08 lower NV3 S A I FPL A 9 6 0.04 PR linear 10 37 0.09 lower NV3 S A I FPL A 9 6 0.02 PR

E-M RT LAT & DIS



Flake Cortex



10 37 0.1 lower NV3 S S C FPE P 9 6 0.03 PR

D.38

10 38 0.01 lower NV4 C A F FIN A 9 9 0.06 IND 10 38 0.02 lower NV3 C I C FPL A 9 6 0.04 PR 10 38 0.03 lower NV1 C C C FPE A 9 6 0.04 PR 10 38 0.04 lower NV3 C C C FEP A 6 6 0.01 ABR 10 39 0.01 lower NV3 C R C FPE P 12 9 0.07 PR 10 39 0.02 lower NV6 S R F FCS P 12 9 0.13 IND 10 39 0.03 lower NV1 S A F FIN A 9 6 0.05 IND 10 39 0.04 lower NV1 S C F FIN A 9 6 0.06 IND 10 39 0.05 lower NV1 C A F FIN A 6 6 0.02 IND 10 40 0.01 lower NV1 S A F FIN A 9 9 0.09 IND 10 40 0.02 lower NV3 S I C FCS P 9 9 0.09 IND 10 40 0.03 lower NV5 S C F FIN A 6 9 0.1 IND 10 40 0.04 lower NV3 C A F FIN A 6 6 0.03 IND 10 40 0.05 lower NV3 S S C FPE A 6 9 0.03 PR 10 40 0.06 lower NV3 S A F FIN A 6 9 0.03 IND 10 40 0.07 lower NV4 C S C FPL A 9 6 0.01 PR 10 40 0.08 lower NV3 S A I FIN A 6 6 0.02 PR 10 40 0.09 lower NV3 S C C FEP A 6 6 0.02 ABR 10 41 0.01 lower NV5 S A F FIN A 6 6 0.03 IND 10 41 0.02 lower NV4 S A F FIN A 6 9 0.02 IND 10 42 0.01 lower NV7 C C I FIN A 9 12 0.08 PR 10 42 0.02 lower NV4 S R F FCS P 9 9 0.1 IND 10 42 0.03 lower NV1 C S C FEP A 9 6 0.04 ABR 10 42 0.04 lower NV5 C S F FPL A 9 9 0.03 PR 10 42 0.05 lower NV5 C I C FPL A 9 6 0.03 PR 10 42 0.06 lower NV3 S I C FPL A 9 6 0.03 PR 10 42 0.07 lower NV5 S A I FIN A 9 6 0.02 IND 10 42 0.08 lower NV5 C S C FIN A 6 9 0.02 IND 10 42 0.09 lower NV3 S S I FPL A 6 6 0.03 PR 10 42 0.1 lower NV5 S S C FEP A 6 6 0.02 ABR 10 42 0.11 lower NV1 S A F FIN A 6 9 0.03 IND



Flake Cortex



10 42 0.12 lower NV4 S A I FEP A 6 6 0.02 ABR

D.39

10 42 0.13 lower NV4 S A F FIN A 6 6 0.01 IND 10 43 0.01 lower NV5 S C C FEP A 9 9 0.06 ABR 10 43 0.02 lower NV2 S C C FEP A 9 9 0.09 ABR 10 43 0.03 lower NV7 R A F FCP P 9 9 0.09 IND 10 43 0.04 lower NV5 S S C FEP A 9 6 0.04 ABR 10 43 0.05 lower NV5 C C C FPL A 9 6 0.03 PR 10 43 0.06 lower NV1 C C C FEP A 6 6 0.03 ABR 10 43 0.07 lower NV3 S A I FIN A 6 6 0.01 IND 10 44 0.01 lower NV5 S C C FPE A 9 9 0.08 PR 10 44 0.02 lower NV5 S C F FPE A 9 6 0.05 PR 10 44 0.03 lower NV1 C I C FPL A 9 6 0.03 PR 10 44 0.04 lower NV3 C C C FEP A 9 6 0.03 ABR 10 44 0.05 lower NV5 C C C FPL A 12 6 0.02 PR 10 45 0.01 lower NV7 S I C FEP A 12 6 0.06 ABR 10 45 0.02 lower NV5 C C C FEP A 9 9 0.04 ABR 10 45 0.03 lower NV7 S C C FEP A 9 6 0.04 ABR 10 45 0.04 lower NV5 C A I FEP A 6 6 0.02 ABR 10 45 0.05 lower NV2 S A F FIN A 6 6 0.02 IND 11 04 0.01 upper NV5 C R C FBE P 54 18 3.2 P

11 05 0.01 upper NV5 R R C FCP P 24 27 2.29 P cobble fragment 11 06 0.01 upper NV5 C A F FIN A 12 12 0.09 P 11 08 0.01 upper NV2 C A F FIN A 21 12 0.43 P 11 08 0.02 upper NV3 C C I FIN A 12 12 0.3 P 11 08 0.03 upper NV5 S C C FCS A 12 12 0.45 P cobble fragment 11 08 0.04 upper NV5 S A F FIN A 12 15 0.33 P 11 08 0.05 upper NV5 C C C FBL A 15 9 0.17 P 11 08 0.06 upper NV5 C C I FBL A 9 15 0.1 P 11 08 0.07 upper NV1 S C C FPE A 12 9 0.15 PR 11 08 0.08 upper NV5 C C C FIN A 9 12 0.13 P 11 08 0.09 upper NV5 S A F FCS P 12 9 0.13 IND

E-M ENTIRE BILAT DOR, MIN ON VEN

banding



Flake Cortex



11 08 0.1 upper NV1 S A F FCS P 9 12 0.1 IND

D.40

11 08 0.11 upper NV4 C C C FPL A 12 9 0.06 PR 1/8" 11 08 0.12 upper NV1 C C C FEP A 6 9 0.04 ABR 1/8" 11 08 0.13 upper NV4 C C C FBL A 21 12 0.33 P 11 08 0.14 upper NV4 S A F FCS P 9 9 0.08 IND 11 10 0.01 upper NV5 C A I FBL A 24 27 1.39 P 11 10 0.02 upper NV5 C C C FBA A 21 15 0.57 P 11 10 0.03 upper NV5 S A I FIN A 12 12 0.23 P 11 10 0.04 upper NV1 C R I FCS P 12 15 0.6 P 11 10 0.05 upper NV1 C A F FCS P 15 12 0.19 P 11 10 0.06 upper NV5 C R F FBE P 12 12 0.19 P 11 10 0.07 upper NV6 S A F FIN A 12 15 0.17 P 11 10 0.08 upper NV5 C A F FIN A 12 15 0.13 P 11 10 0.09 upper NV7 C A I FCS P 12 12 0.16 P 11 13 0.01 lower NV1 C A F FBE A 30 21 1.8 P 11 13 0.02 lower NV5 C A F FBL A 12 12 0.13 P 11 13 0.03 lower NV5 C C C FEP A 12 12 0.1 ABR 11 13 0.04 lower NV5 S A F FCS P 12 9 0.12 IND 11 13 0.05 lower NV3 S C C FCL A 12 9 0.11 P 11 13 0.06 lower NV5 S A I FEP A 9 9 0.15 ABR 11 13 0.07 lower NV4 C S C FEP A 9 9 0.05 ABR 11 13 0.08 lower NV5 C A F FIN A 12 6 0.03 IND 11 14 0.01 lower Dacite C D C FCL A 57 48 27.2 P 11 16 0.01 lower NV6 C A F FBL A 24 18 0.86 P 11 16 0.02 lower NV5 C C I FBE P 21 21 1.19 P E-M PRX & DIS DOR 11 16 0.03 lower NV4 S S F FRV A 15 9 0.19 P secondary FRV 11 16 0.04 lower NV5 S A I FIN A 9 15 0.12 IND 11 16 0.05 lower NV1 S A F FCS P 9 12 0.14 IND 11 16 0.06 lower NV5 S R C FAL P 9 9 0.11 PR 11 18 0.01 lower NV1 C C C FIN A 9 18 0.25 P 11 18 0.02 lower NV4 C R I FCE P 9 12 0.25 P 11 18 0.03 lower NV3 C A F FIN A 9 12 0.12 IND



Flake Cortex



11 20 0.01 lower NV5 C A F FCA A 21 18 1.54 P

D.41

11 20 0.02 lower NV5 S A F FIN A 12 24 0.53 P 11 20 0.03 lower NV5 C A F FIN A 15 18 0.25 P 11 20 0.04 lower NV7 S C C FBE A 15 9 0.22 P 11 20 0.05 lower NV5 C A F FIN A 12 12 0.11 P 11 20 0.06 lower NV5 S R F FCS P 12 12 0.38 P 11 20 0.07 lower NV5 C A I FBA P 15 6 0.11 PR 11 20 0.08 lower NV5 C C C FEP A 9 12 0.1 ABR 11 20 0.09 lower NV7 C A F FIN A 12 9 0.08 IND 11 20 0.1 lower NV5 S C C FCS P 9 9 0.19 IND 11 20 0.11 lower NV1 S A F FCS P 15 9 0.22 IND 11 22 0.01 lower NV7 C C C FBE P 21 18 0.72 P 11 22 0.02 lower NV1 S A F FIN A 12 12 0.31 P 11 22 0.03 lower NV5 C A F FCS P 15 9 0.16 IND 11 22 0.04 lower NV5 C A F FIN A 12 12 0.13 IND heat affected 11 22 0.05 lower NV5 C C C FEP A 6 12 0.05 ABR 11 23 0.01 lower Dacite C S C FCL A 57 51 47 P 11 26 0.01 lower NV5 S C F FCS P 9 12 0.14 PR 11 26 0.02 lower NV7 S C C FIN A 12 12 0.1 P 11 26 0.03 lower NV1 S A F FIN A 15 15 0.21 P 11 28 0.01 lower NV5 S S C FRV A 12 9 0.19 P 11 28 0.01 lower NV7 S I C FCP P 51 18 10.8 P 11 28 0.02 lower NV5 C A F FCS P 12 12 0.38 P 11 28 0.02 lower NV5 S S F FCS P 9 9 0.21 IND 11 28 0.03 lower NV5 S I I FIN A 12 12 0.2 P 11 31 0.01 lower NV5 S A F FIN A 27 12 0.96 P heat affected 11 31 0.02 lower NV5 C C F FIN A 15 12 0.29 P 11 31 0.03 lower NV5 S S C FIN A 9 15 0.12 P small pc in bag might

have popped off this 11 31 0.04 lower NV5 S C C FEP A 12 9 0.08 ABR 11 31 0.05 lower NV5 C C F FEP A 9 9 0.08 ABR 11 32 0.01 lower Tuff C S F FCL A 33 33 6.53 P

FBP cobble



Flake Cortex



11 34 0.01 lower NV1 C R I FCL P 24 30 4.74 P

D.42

11 34 0.02 lower NV5 S A F FCL A 12 12 0.47 P 11 35 0.01 lower Rhyolite C S F FCL A 15 21 2.25 P 11 37 0.01 lower NV5 S C I FEP A 9 6 0.08 ABR 11 37 0.02 lower NV7 S C I FCE P 42 24 3.48 P 11 37 0.03 lower NV5 C A I FBE A 27 18 1.38 P 11 37 0.04 lower NV5 C C I FBE P 24 15 0.5 P 11 37 0.05 lower NV5 C S C FIN A 15 9 0.33 P 11 38 0.01 lower Rhyolite C S C FCL A 60 48 36.98 P 11 39 0.01 lower Rhyolite C S I FIN A 12 15 0.38 P 11 40 0.01 upper Basalt S S F FIN A 9 18 0.38 P 11 41 0.01 upper NV5 S A F FIN A 27 18 2.6 P

DOR; LF LAT VEN & RT DIS VEN?

11 42 0.01 lower NV5 C A I FBE P 24 21 1.4 P "PLAT"

11 44 0.01 lower NV4 S R F FCS P 15 15 0.6 P 11 45 0.01 lower NV5 S A F FCS P 15 12 0.4 P 11 46 0.01 upper NV1 S R C FLI P 24 9 0.4 P 14 05 0.01 upper NV3 C A I FBE P 18 15 0.39 P 14 06 0.01 upper Tuff S S I FIN A 21 15 1.07 P 14 11 0.01 lower NV1 R R C FCP P 21 15 2.26 P cobble fragment 14 12 0.01 lower Dacite S S C FCE A 63 39 20.88 P 14 15 0.01 lower Rhyolite S A I FIN A 24 12 0.68 P 14 23 0.01 lower Rhyolite S S C FCL A 24 27 2.84 P 14 28 0.01 lower Tuff S S F FCL A 30 24 5.49 P 14 28 0.02 lower Tuff S S C FCE A 24 24 2.79 P 14 30 0.01 lower NV5 C A F FIN A 30 15 2 P

LAT VEN 14 34 0.01 lower NV5 C C F FBA A 21 21 1.06 P 14 36 0.01 lower Chalcedony C A I FCL A 24 30 2.95 P 14 40 0.01 lower NV1 C A F FIN A 12 30 0.7 P R-T DIS DOR

E-M LF LAT DOR? RT

E-M BILAT DOR &

E-M RT LAT DOR E-M RT LAT DOR E-M RT LAT DOR

E-M RT LAT DOR/LF



Flake Cortex



14 41 0.01 lower NV5 S A F FCS P 6 18 0.2 IND E-M DIS VEN

D.43

14 42 0.01 lower NV4 S A F FCS P 24 21 2.7 P

14 45 0.01 lower NV5 S R F FCE P 30 18 1.5 P 15 01 0.01 upper NV1 S A F FCS P 9 9 0.11 IND 15 02 0.01 upper NV5 C A I FBL A 21 15 0.49 P 15 02 0.02 upper NV1 S C I FEP A 12 12 0.11 ABR 15 02 0.03 upper NV5 S A F FIN A 6 15 0.11 IND 15 04 0.01 lower A C C F FBL A 12 12 0.23 P 15 04 0.02 lower NV5 S C I FCS P 12 15 0.38 P 15 04 0.03 lower NV1 S I C FCS P 15 12 0.37 P 15 04 0.04 lower NV1 S C C FIN A 9 12 0.14 P 15 06 0.01 lower NV1 S C C FCL A 12 15 0.25 P 15 06 0.02 lower NV5 C C C FPL A 15 9 0.14 PR 15 06 0.03 lower NV5 C C C FPL A 15 9 0.11 PR 15 08 0.01 lower NV1 C C F FIN A 15 15 0.35 P 15 08 0.02 lower NV7 C C C FIN A 15 12 0.19 P 15 08 0.03 lower NV7 C A F FCS P 15 12 0.21 IND 15 08 0.04 lower NV3 C A I FIN A 15 9 0.11 IND 15 10 0.01 lower NV5 S C F FBE A 24 24 1.4 P 15 10 0.02 lower NV5 C C C FIN A 12 12 0.13 P 15 10 0.03 lower NV5 C S C FIN A 15 12 0.21 P 15 10 0.04 lower NV5 S C C FCS P 15 9 0.39 P 15 10 0.05 lower NV5 S A F FCS P 21 9 0.43 P 15 10 0.06 lower NV5 C A F FIN A 12 12 0.13 P 15 10 0.07 lower NV4 S A F FIN A 9 9 0.11 IND 15 11 0.01 lower Basalt S S I FIN A 9 12 0.31 P 15 11 0.02 lower Basalt S A F FIN A 6 9 0.04 IND 15 12 0.01 lower Tuff C C C FCL A 24 27 2.52 P 15 14 0.01 lower NV5 C R C FBL P 33 21 1.87 P Plat=C w/some R 15 14 0.02 lower NV5 C C I FCS P 21 15 0.86 P 15 14 0.03 lower NV3 C C C FBE A 21 15 0.74 P

E-M PRX & LF LAT DOR, STEEP R-T PRX E-M RT LAT DOR

recent breaks

remnant FRV



Flake Cortex



15 14 0.04 lower NV5 C R C FBE P 18 18 0.38 P

D.44

15 14 0.05 lower NV5 C S C FCL A 15 15 0.62 P 15 14 0.06 lower NV7 R R I FCP P 15 18 0.56 P cobble fragment 15 14 0.07 lower NV5 S S F FCS P 24 9 0.95 P 15 14 0.08 lower NV1 C C C FIN A 15 9 0.11 P 15 14 0.09 lower NV7 S A F FIN A 12 12 0.11 IND 15 14 0.1 lower NV3 S C C FEP A 9 15 0.15 ABR 15 14 0.111 lower NV1 C C C FEP A 12 9 0.09 ABR 15 14 0.12 lower NV4 S A I FIN A 9 12 0.11 P 15 14 0.13 lower NV5 C C C FPL A 9 9 0.08 PR 15 14 0.14 lower NV5 R R C FCP P 36 27 15.28 P cobble fragment 15 14 0.15 lower NV5 C A F FBE P 24 27 0.99 P 15 16 0.01 lower NV4 S R C FCE P 24 18 0.83 P 15 17 0.01 lower Tuff S S F FCL P? 36 21 6.06 P 15 20 0.01 lower NV7 S A F FCE P 15 27 1.48 P 15 20 0.02 lower NV5 C S C FCL P 15 9 0.38 P 15 20 0.03 lower NV5 C C C FIN A 15 12 0.18 P 15 20 0.04 lower NV5 S S C FRV A 12 15 0.12 P (FSV) 15 20 0.05 lower NV1 S I I FIN A 9 18 0.27 P 15 21 0.01 lower Tuff S C C FCE A 18 33 2.95 P 15 21 0.02 lower Tuff S A F FIN A 15 33 2.68 P 15 24 0.01 lower NV2 C A F FIN A 9 15 0.24 P 15 24 0.02 lower NV7 C S C FBA A 9 18 0.2 P 15 43 0.01 lower Basalt S D C FCS P 12 9 0.13 IND 15 44 0.01 lower NV1 S I C FBP P 30 12 3.8 P 15 44 0.02 lower NV2 S S C FIN A 15 15 0.34 P 15 45 0.01 lower Tuff S A F FIN A 12 9 0.18 IND 15 48 0.01 upper NV3 S C C FEP A 6 6 0.03 ABR 15 49 0.01 upper NV5 S C C FPL A 9 9 0.09 PR round 15 49 0.02 upper NV5 C A I FEP A 12 6 0.04 ABR 15 49 0.03 upper NV1 S A F FCS P 6 9 0.09 IND 15 49 0.04 upper NV5 C A F FIN A 9 6 0.04 IND

recent? Cobble



Flake Cortex



15 49 0.05 upper NV5 S A F FIN A 9 6 0.02 IND

D.45

15 50 0.01 lower NV5 S S C FPL A 9 9 0.08 PR 15 50 0.02 lower NV1 C A I FIN A 12 6 0.1 IND 15 50 0.03 lower NV5 S S C FPL A 12 6 0.07 PR 15 50 0.04 lower NV5 C I C FEP A 6 6 0.02 ABR 15 50 0.05 lower NV5 S C C FEP A 6 9 0.02 ABR also FRV 15 50 0.06 lower NV5 C A F FIN A 6 6 0.02 IND 15 51 0.01 lower NV5 S C C FEP A 6 9 0.09 ABR 15 51 0.02 lower NV3 S C I FEP A 6 9 0.03 ABR 15 51 0.03 lower NV7 C C C FEP A 9 6 0.03 ABR 15 51 0.04 lower NV5 S S C FEP A 12 6 0.05 ABR 15 51 0.05 lower NV1 S A F FIN A 9 6 0.04 IND 15 51 0.06 lower NV5 S A F FIN A 6 6 0.01 IND 15 51 0.07 lower NV5 C A F FIN A 9 6 0.01 IND 15 51 0.08 lower NV4 C S C FEP A 6 6 0.04 ABR 15 51 0.09 lower NV1 C A F FIN A 6 6 0.03 IND 15 51 0.1 lower NV5 C A F FIN A 9 6 0.02 IND 15 51 0.11 lower NV1 S S C FEP A 6 6 0.01 ABR 15 51 0.12 lower NV2 S S C FIN A 6 6 0.01 IND 15 52 0.01 lower NV5 S C C FCS P 9 12 0.1 P 15 52 0.02 lower NV5 C C C FEP A 9 9 0.04 ABR 15 52 0.03 lower NV5 S C C FEP A 9 6 0.04 ABR 15 52 0.04 lower NV1 S C C FEP A 6 6 0.03 ABR 15 52 0.05 lower NV3 S S C FEP A 9 9 0.02 ABR 15 52 0.06 lower NV7 S D C FEP A 6 9 0.04 ABR 15 52 0.07 lower NV5 S C C FEP P 9 6 0.03 ABR 15 52 0.08 lower NV7 S A F FIN A 9 6 0.03 IND 15 52 0.09 lower NV5 S I C FEP A 6 6 0.02 ABR 15 52 0.1 lower NV5 S C C FEP A 6 6 0.03 ABR 15 52 0.11 lower NV5 S I F FIN A 6 6 0.01 IND 15 53 0.01 lower NV5 C S C FEP A 6 6 0.02 ABR 15 53 0.02 lower NV7 C A F FIN A 9 6 0.02 IND



Flake Cortex



15 53 0.03 lower NV1 C A F FIN A 6 9 0.03 IND

D.46

15 53 0.04 lower NV2 C C C FEP A 6 9 0.03 ABR 15 53 0.05 lower NV4 S A F FIN A 6 9 0.06 IND 15 53 0.06 lower NV5 S C F FEP P 6 9 0.03 ABR 15 54 0.01 lower NV5 S A F FIN A 12 9 0.09 IND 15 54 0.02 lower NV5 S A F FIN A 9 6 0.05 IND 15 54 0.03 lower NV5 S S C FIN A 6 9 0.05 IND 15 54 0.04 lower NV5 C C F FEP A 6 9 0.04 ABR 15 54 0.05 lower NV5 S A F FIN A 9 9 0.04 IND 15 54 0.06 lower NV4 S C C FEP A 6 9 0.04 ABR 15 54 0.07 lower NV5 S A F FIN A 6 6 0.02 IND 15 54 0.08 lower NV5 S C C FEP A 6 6 0.02 ABR 15 54 0.09 lower NV5 C A F FEP A 6 9 0.02 ABR 15 54 0.1 lower NV5 C I C FEP A 6 6 0.02 ABR 15 54 0.11 lower NV5 S S C FEP A 6 6 0.01 ABR 15 54 0.12 lower NV5 S A F FIN A 6 9 0.01 IND 15 54 0.13 lower NV5 S I C FIN A 6 6 0.01 IND 15 55 0.01 lower NV3 C C F FPL A 9 9 0.07 PR 15 55 0.02 lower NV5 S S C FCS P 9 9 0.12 P 15 55 0.03 lower NV5 S C C FEP A 6 12 0.06 ABR 15 55 0.04 lower NV5 C A I FIN A 12 9 0.11 IND 15 55 0.05 lower NV1 C A I FIN A 6 12 0.11 P 15 55 0.06 lower NV5 C A F FIN A 9 9 0.05 IND 15 55 0.07 lower NV1 C A I FIN A 9 9 0.03 IND 15 55 0.08 lower NV5 S A F FIN A 9 6 0.03 IND 15 55 0.09 lower NV5 S C I FEP A 6 9 0.03 ABR 15 55 0.1 lower NV5 S S I FEP A 9 6 0.03 ABR 15 55 0.11 lower NV3 S A F FIN A 6 6 0.01 IND 15 55 0.12 lower NV4 S I F FPL A 6 6 0.02 PR 15 56 0.01 lower NV1 S I C FIN A 12 12 0.1 IND 15 56 0.02 lower NV5 C A F FIN A 9 9 0.09 IND 15 56 0.03 lower NV3 C A F FIN A 6 15 0.09 IND



Flake Cortex



15 56 0.04 lower NV5 S C F FPL A 9 9 0.04 PR

D.47

15 56 0.05 lower NV3 S S C FEP A 9 6 0.03 ABR 15 56 0.06 lower NV5 S S C FEP A 6 6 0.03 ABR 15 56 0.07 lower NV4 S S C FEP A 9 6 0.01 ABR 15 57 0.01 lower NV5 C C C FEP A 12 9 0.07 ABR 15 57 0.02 lower NV7 S A F FIN A 6 9 0.05 IND 15 57 0.03 lower NV7 C A F FEP A 6 6 0.02 ABR 15 57 0.04 lower NV5 S C F FEP A 9 6 0.05 ABR 15 57 0.05 lower NV1 S A F FEP A 6 9 0.04 ABR 15 57 0.06 lower NV1 S A F FIN A 6 6 0.03 IND 15 58 0.01 lower NV1 S A F FIN A 6 15 0.1 P 15 58 0.02 lower NV5 C S C FPL A 12 6 0.03 PR 15 58 0.03 lower NV1 S A F FIN A 9 12 0.04 IND 15 58 0.04 lower NV4 S S C FEP A 9 9 0.02 ABR 15 58 0.05 lower NV1 S C C FEP A 6 6 0.02 ABR 15 58 0.06 lower NV5 S A F FIN A 6 9 0.02 IND 15 58 0.07 lower NV2 S A F FIN A 6 6 0.02 IND 15 58 0.08 lower NV2 S A F FIN A 6 6 0.02 IND 22 03 0.01 none NV5 S R F FCE P 21 18 1.92 P cobble fragment 22 04 0.01 none Tuff C A F FIN A 24 27 2.6 P 22 07 0.01 none Chalcedony C C C FCL P 24 39 7.6 P 22 09 0.01 none Tuff C A F FIN A 18 15 0.8 IND 22 10 0.01 none NV4 C R I FCL P 21 12 0.74 P 22 12 0.01 none NV7 C I C FPL A 12 9 0.1 PR 22 14 0.01 none NV5 S A F FIN A 9 15 0.1 P 22 15 0.01 none Tuff C S C FCL A 48 21 7.36 P 22 19 0.01 none NV5 C S C FCS P 42 9 2.7 P 22 19 0.02 none NV4 S C C FCS P 12 21 1.2 P 22 21 0.01 none NV3 C S C FCS P 12 12 0.18 P 22 23 0.01 none NV5 C A F FBL A 21 27 1.1 P E-M DIS DOR & LF

LAT DOR 22 25 0.01 none Obsalt C S C FCL P 21 21 1.98 P called "basalt"

FBP cobble fragment


Cat. No.

Lot No.

Item No

Component Material Dorsal Platform Condition Flake Type

Cortex Length (mm)

Width (mm)

Weight (g)

Tech Mode

Comments

26 02 0.01 none NV5 C A F FBA A 12 18 0.27 P

D.48

26 11 0.01 none NV5 S A F FCS P 9 27 1.38 P cobble fragment 26 12 0.01 none Dacite S A F FIN A 24 21 0.78 P 26 14 0.01 none NV5 C S C FCL A 21 21 0.59 P 26 19 0.01 none NV7 S C I FCS P 15 12 0.19 P 26 20 0.01 none Tuff C I I FCE P 66 84 49.87 P 26 20 0.02 none Tuff C A I FIN A 27 15 1.37 P 26 23 0.01 none NV5 C A I FEP A 12 9 0.05 ABR 26 23 0.02 none NV1 C A F FIN A 9 15 0.15 P 26 25 0.01 none Tuff C S C FCE A 24 15 1.6 P 31 03 0.01 none NV4 C R C FCL P 15 12 0.24 P 31 03 0.02 none NV1 C I F FIN A 9 9 0.06 IND 31 06 0.01 none Tuff C S C FCE A 21 21 1.57 P 31 08 0.01 none NV5 R R C FCP P 24 18 1.41 P cobble fragment 31 14 0.01 none NV1 S A F FIN A 15 21 0.63 P 31 15 0.01 none Tuff C S C FCL A 36 36 5.9 P 31 18 0.01 none NV5 C C C FIN A 21 9 0.18 P 31 20 0.01 none NV5 C C F FBE A 39 24 4.4 P

31 21 0.01 none NV4 C R C FBE P 30 15 0.9 P 31 22 0.01 none NV5 C C C FBL A 21 18 1 P

LF LAT VEN

E-M RT LAT DOR & PRX VEN E-M BILAT DOR E-M LF LAT DOR &

APPENDIX E

Artifact Catalog, Stone Tool Proveniences

and Metrics, for CA-NAP-916

ARTIFACT CATALOG, CA-NAP-916

Acc. Cat. Lot Sub Artifact Group Artifact Class Artifact Part Condition Material Count Weight Cortex Hyd Source Unit Unit Size Mesh Depth No No No Lot Type (gm) Type (cmbs)

E.1

1/4" 130–140 1/4" 130–140 1/4" 130–140 1/4" 130–140 1/4" 140–150 1/4" 140–150 1/4" 140–150 1/4" 140–150 1/4" 150–160 1/4" 150–160 1/4" 150–160 1/4" 160–170 1/4" 160–170 1/4" 160–170 1/4" 160–170 1/4" 160–170 1/4" 170–180 1/4" 170–180 1/4" 170–180 1/4" 170–180 1/4" 170–180 1/4" 170–180 1/4" 170–180 1/4" 140–150 1/4" 150–160 1/4" 150–160 1/4" 150–160 1/4" 130–140 1/4" 130–140 1/4" 130–140 1/4" 130–140 1/4" 150–160 1/4" 150–160 1/4" 150–160 1/4" 160–170 1/4" 160–170 1/4" 160–170 1/4" 160–170 1/4" 160–170 1/4" 170–180 1/4" 170–180 1/4" 170–180

2001-2 01 01 - Flaked Stone Debitage Flake -2001-2 01 01 A Flaked Stone Debitage Flake -2001-2 01 02 - Flaked Stone Debitage Flake -2001-2 01 03 - Thermally Altered Rock - - -2001-2 01 04 - Flaked Stone Debitage Flake -2001-2 01 05 - Flaked Stone Debitage Flake -2001-2 01 06 - Thermally Altered Rock - - -2001-2 01 07 - Other Baked Earth - -2001-2 01 08 - Flaked Stone Debitage Flake -2001-2 01 08 A Flaked Stone Debitage Flake -2001-2 01 09 - Thermally Altered Rock - - -2001-2 01 10 - Flaked Stone Debitage Flake -2001-2 01 10 A Flaked Stone Debitage Flake -2001-2 01 11 - Flaked Stone Debitage Flake -2001-2 01 12 - Thermally Altered Rock - - -2001-2 01 13 - Other Baked Earth - -2001-2 01 14 - Flaked Stone Projectile Point - End 2001-2 01 15 - Flaked Stone Debitage Flake -2001-2 01 15 A Flaked Stone Debitage Flake -2001-2 01 15 B Flaked Stone Debitage Flake -2001-2 01 16 - Flaked Stone Debitage Flake -2001-2 01 17 - Flaked Stone Debitage Flake -2001-2 01 18 - Thermally Altered Rock - - -2001-2 01 19 - Flaked Stone Debitage Flake -2001-2 01 20 - Flaked Stone Core - -2001-2 01 21 - Flaked Stone Biface - End 2001-2 01 22 - Flaked Stone Modified Flake EMF -2001-2 03 01 - Flaked Stone Debitage Flake -2001-2 03 01 A Flaked Stone Debitage Flake -2001-2 03 01 B Flaked Stone Debitage Flake -2001-2 03 02 - Flaked Stone Debitage Flake -2001-2 03 03 - Flaked Stone Debitage Flake -2001-2 03 04 - Flaked Stone Debitage Flake -2001-2 03 05 - Thermally Altered Rock - - -2001-2 03 06 - Flaked Stone Core - -2001-2 03 07 - Flaked Stone Debitage Flake -2001-2 03 07 A Flaked Stone Debitage Flake -2001-2 03 08 - Thermally Altered Rock - - -2001-2 03 09 - Other Baked Earth - -2001-2 03 10 - Flaked Stone Debitage Flake -2001-2 03 10 A Flaked Stone Debitage Flake -2001-2 03 11 - Thermally Altered Rock - - -

- Obsidian 1 0.20 NV (v) Unit 1 m x 2 m - Obsidian 1 0.90 1 NV (v) Unit 1 m x 2 m - Tuff 2 2.40 Unit 1 m x 2 m - Other 9 39.80 Unit 1 m x 2 m - Obsidian 6 1.20 1 NV (v) Unit 1 m x 2 m - Tuff 1 3.40 Unit 1 m x 2 m - Other 17 109.40 Unit 1 m x 2 m - Baked Clay 1 3.70 Unit 1 m x 2 m - Obsidian 4 1.30 3 NV (v) Unit 1 m x 2 m - Obsidian 1 2.30 3.9 NV (v) Unit 1 m x 2 m - Other 19 96.60 Unit 1 m x 2 m - Obsidian 4 1.10 1 NV (v) Unit 1 m x 2 m - Obsidian 1 0.20 3.3 NV (v) Unit 1 m x 2 m - Tuff 1 2.40 Unit 1 m x 2 m - Other 27 96.90 Unit 1 m x 2 m - Baked Clay 2 5.30 Unit 1 m x 2 m Fragment Obsidian 1 1.60 1.9 Unknown Unit 1 m x 2 m - Obsidian 12 2.70 1 NV (v) Unit 1 m x 2 m - Obsidian 1 2.00 1 4.3 NV (v) Unit 1 m x 2 m - Obsidian 1 0.70 1 2.5 NV Unit 1 m x 2 m - Tuff 2 4.40 Unit 1 m x 2 m - Basalt 1 0.40 1 Unit 1 m x 2 m - Other 24 263.00 Unit 1 m x 2 m - Basalt 1 0.60 Unit 1 m x 2 m Complete? Obsidian 1 6.00 1 3.5 NV (v) Unit 1 m x 2 m Fragment Obsidian 1 0.60 NV (v) Unit 1 m x 2 m Complete Obsidian 1 1.00 1.1 A Unit 1 m x 2 m - Obsidian 0 1 NV (v) Unit 1 m x 2 m - Obsidian 1 0.40 1 1.4 NV (v) Unit 1 m x 2 m - Obsidian 1 0.30 2.5 NV (v) Unit 1 m x 2 m - Tuff 1 1.60 Unit 1 m x 2 m - Obsidian 5 1.80 2 NV (v) Unit 1 m x 2 m - Dacite 1 1.10 Unit 1 m x 2 m - Other 16 84.50 Unit 1 m x 2 m Complete Obsidian 1 12.00 1 3.4 NV Unit 1 m x 2 m - Obsidian 12 1.90 NV (v) Unit 1 m x 2 m - Obsidian 1 0.50 2.5 NV (v) Unit 1 m x 2 m - Other 25 43.00 Unit 1 m x 2 m - Baked Clay 2 1.80 Unit 1 m x 2 m - Obsidian 9 2.50 NV (v) Unit 1 m x 2 m - Obsidian 1 0.50 3.2 NV (v) Unit 1 m x 2 m - Other 22 156.10 Unit 1 m x 2 m

Artifact Catalog, CA-NAP-916 Acc. Cat. Lot Sub Artifact Group Artifact Class Artifact Part Condition Material Count Weight Cortex Hyd Source Unit Unit Size Mesh Depth No No No Lot Type (gm) Type (cmbs)

2001-2 03 12 - Flaked Stone Debitage Flake - - Obsidian 10 3.20 1 NV (v) Unit 1 m x 2 m 2001-2 03 12 A Flaked Stone Debitage Flake - - Obsidian 1 0.20 2.5 NV (v) Unit 1 m x 2 m 2001-2 03 13 - Thermally Altered Rock - - - - Other 32 491.40 Unit 1 m x 2 m 2001-2 03 14 - Flaked Stone Debitage Flake - - Obsidian 8 1.40 2 NV (v) Unit 1 m x 2 m 2001-2 03 14 A Flaked Stone Debitage Flake - - Obsidian 1 0.80 1 3.4 NV (v) Unit 1 m x 2 m 2001-2 03 15 - Flaked Stone Debitage Flake - - Tuff 1 1.00 Unit 1 m x 2 m 2001-2 03 16 - Thermally Altered Rock - - - - Other 47 279.70 Unit 1 m x 2 m 2001-2 03 17 - Flaked Stone Biface - End Fragment Obsidian 1 6.70 1 4.3 NV Unit 1 m x 2 m 2001-2 03 18 - Flaked Stone Debitage Flake - - Obsidian 13 4.50 1 NV (v) Unit 1 m x 2 m 2001-2 03 18 A Flaked Stone Debitage Flake - - Obsidian 1 1.00 3.4 NV (v) Unit 1 m x 2 m 2001-2 03 19 - Thermally Altered Rock - - - - Other 21 151.10 Unit 1 m x 2 m 2001-2 03 20 - Flaked Stone Debitage Flake - - Obsidian 2 0.60 NV (v) Unit 1 m x 2 m 2001-2 03 20 A Flaked Stone Debitage Flake - - Obsidian 1 0.70 NV (v) Unit 1 m x 2 m 2001-2 03 20 B Flaked Stone Debitage Flake - - Obsidian 1 0.70 1 NV (v) Unit 1 m x 2 m 2001-2 03 21 - Thermally Altered Rock - - - - Other 8 35.40 Unit 1 m x 2 m 2001-2 03 22 - Flaked Stone Debitage Flake - - Obsidian 2 1.20 2 NV (v) Unit 1 m x 2 m 2001-2 03 22 A Flaked Stone Debitage Flake - - Obsidian 1 0.80 1 NV (v) Unit 1 m x 2 m 2001-2 03 23 - Thermally Altered Rock - - - - Other 5 34.00 Unit 1 m x 2 m 2001-2 03 24 - Flaked Stone Modified Flake EMF - Fragment Obsidian 1 0.50 1 3.2 NV (v) Unit 1 m x 2 m 2001-2 03 25 - Flaked Stone Core - - Complete Obsidian 1 3.60 1 NV (v) Unit 1 m x 2 m 2001-2 03 26 - Flaked Stone Modified Flake EMF - Fragment Obsidian 1 1.20 NV (v) Unit 1 m x 2 m 2001-2 03 27 - Flaked Stone Modified Flake EMF - Fragment Obsidian 1 1.50 2.5 NV (v) Unit 1 m x 2 m 2001-2 03 28 - Flaked Stone Core - - Complete Obsidian 1 3.10 3.4 NV (v) Unit 1 m x 2 m 2001-2 06 01 - Flaked Stone Modified Flake Ret. Flake - Fragment Obsidian 1 0.40 3.1 NV (v) Unit 1 m x 2 m 2001-2 06 02 - Thermally Altered Rock - - - - Other 3 5.40 Unit 1 m x 2 m 2001-2 06 03 - Flaked Stone Debitage Flake - - Obsidian 3 0.70 1 NV (v) Unit 1 m x 2 m 2001-2 06 04 - Thermally Altered Rock - - - - Other 14 39.30 Unit 1 m x 2 m 2001-2 06 05 - Flaked Stone Debitage Flake - - Obsidian 8 2.30 2 NV (v) Unit 1 m x 2 m 2001-2 06 06 - Flaked Stone Debitage Flake - - Tuff 1 10.50 Unit 1 m x 2 m 2001-2 06 07 - Thermally Altered Rock - - - - Other 35 233.10 Unit 1 m x 2 m 2001-2 06 08 - - - - - - - 0 0.00 2001-2 06 09 - Flaked Stone Debitage Flake - - Obsidian 8 2.00 2 NV (v) Unit 1 m x 2 m 2001-2 06 09 A Flaked Stone Debitage Flake - - Obsidian 1 0.70 1 3.8 NV (v) Unit 1 m x 2 m 2001-2 06 09 B Flaked Stone Debitage Flake - - Obsidian 1 0.30 1 3.8 NV (v) Unit 1 m x 2 m 2001-2 06 10 - Thermally Altered Rock - - - - Other 23 169.00 Unit 1 m x 2 m 2001-2 06 11 - - - - - - - 0 0.00 2001-2 06 12 - Flaked Stone Debitage Flake - - Obsidian 8 4.50 4 NV (v) Unit 1 m x 2 m 2001-2 06 12 A Flaked Stone Debitage Flake - - Obsidian 1 2.00 1 3.4 NV (v) Unit 1 m x 2 m 2001-2 06 13 - Flaked Stone Debitage Flake - - Tuff 1 0.60 Unit 1 m x 2 m 2001-2 06 14 - Thermally Altered Rock - - - - Other 25 310.50 Unit 1 m x 2 m 2001-2 06 15 - Flaked Stone Debitage Flake - - Obsidian 9 1.50 1 NV (v) Unit 1 m x 2 m 2001-2 06 15 A Flaked Stone Debitage Flake - - Obsidian 1 0.60 1 3.9 NV (v) Unit 1 m x 2 m 2001-2 06 16 - Flaked Stone Debitage Flake - - Rhyolite 1 0.30 Unit 1 m x 2 m 2001-2 06 17 - Thermally Altered Rock - - - - Other 52 1928.10 Unit 1 m x 2 m

1/4" 180–190 1/4" 180–190 1/4" 180–190 1/4" 190–200 1/4" 190–200 1/4" 190–200 1/4" 190–200 1/4" 200–210 1/4" 200–210 1/4" 200–210 1/4" 200–210 1/4" 210–220 1/4" 210–220 1/4" 210–220 1/4" 210–220 1/4" 220–230 1/4" 220–230 1/4" 220–230 1/4" 180–190 1/4" 130–140 1/4" 150–160 1/4" 180–190 1/4" 190–200 1/4" 130–140 1/4" 130–140 1/4" 140–150 1/4" 140–150 1/4" 150–160 1/4" 150–160 1/4" 150–160

1/4" 160–170 1/4" 160–170 1/4" 160–170 1/4" 160–170

1/4" 170–180 1/4" 170–180 1/4" 170–180 1/4" 170–180 1/4" 180–190 1/4" 180–190 1/4" 180–190 1/4" 180–190

E.2


2001-2 06 18 - - - - - - - 0 0.00 - -2001-2 06 19 - Flaked Stone Debitage Flake - - Obsidian 14 1.90 3 NV (v) Unit 1 m x 2 m 2001-2 06 19 A Flaked Stone Debitage Flake - - Obsidian 1 0.30 3.4 NV (v) Unit 1 m x 2 m 2001-2 06 20 - Thermally Altered Rock - - - - Other 25 456.20 Unit 1 m x 2 m 2001-2 06 21 - Other Glass Mirror - Fragment Glass 1 0.10 Unit 1 m x 2 m 2001-2 06 22 - Flaked Stone Debitage Flake - - Obsidian 14 2.00 3 NV (v) Unit 1 m x 2 m 2001-2 06 22 A Flaked Stone Debitage Flake - - Obsidian 1 0.20 4.2 NV (v) Unit 1 m x 2 m 2001-2 06 23 - Flaked Stone Debitage Flake - - Tuff 1 0.50 Unit 1 m x 2 m 2001-2 06 24 - Thermally Altered Rock - - - - Other 16 229.60 Unit 1 m x 2 m 2001-2 06 25 - Flaked Stone Core - - Fragment Obsidian 1 4.00 1 NV (v) Unit 1 m x 2 m 2001-2 06 26 - Flaked Stone Modified Flake EMF - Fragment Obsidian 1 1.30 1 NV (v) Unit 1 m x 2 m 2001-2 06 27 - Flaked Stone Modified Flake EMF - Fragment Obsidian 1 0.70 NV (v) Unit 1 m x 2 m 2001-2 06 28 - Battered Stone Cobble Tool - - Complete Sandstone 1 50.10 Unit 1 m x 2 m 2001-2 06 29 - Flaked Stone Modified Flake EMF - Fragment Obsidian 1 0.60 3.7 NV (v) Unit 1 m x 2 m 2001-2 06 30 - Flaked Stone Modified Flake EMF - Fragment Obsidian 1 4.50 3.9 NV (v) Unit 1 m x 2 m 2001-2 06 31 - Flaked Stone Modified Flake EMF - Complete Obsidian 1 0.70 NV (v) Unit 1 m x 2 m 2001-2 09 01 - Flaked Stone Debitage Flake - - Obsidian 2 1.00 1 NV (v) Unit 1 m x 1 m 2001-2 09 02 - Thermally Altered Rock - - - - Other 10 18.70 Unit 1 m x 1 m 2001-2 09 03 - Flaked Stone Debitage Flake - - Obsidian 1 0.10 3.4 NV (v) Unit 1 m x 1 m 2001-2 09 04 - Thermally Altered Rock - - - - Other 2 4.10 Unit 1 m x 1 m 2001-2 09 05 - Flaked Stone Debitage Flake - - Obsidian 1 0.10 3.0/5.7 NV (v) Unit 1 m x 1 m 2001-2 09 06 - Thermally Altered Rock - - - - Other 9 12.80 Unit 1 m x 1 m 2001-2 09 07 - Flaked Stone Debitage Flake - - Obsidian 1 0.10 NV (v) Unit 1 m x 1 m 2001-2 09 08 - Thermally Altered Rock - - - - Other 16 76.30 Unit 1 m x 1 m 2001-2 09 09 - Other Glass - Fragment - Glass 1 0.40 Unit 1 m x 1 m 2001-2 09 10 - Flaked Stone Debitage Flake - - Obsidian 1 0.40 NV (v) Unit 1 m x 1 m 2001-2 09 10 A Flaked Stone Debitage Flake - - Obsidian 1 0.10 3.4/4.8 NV (v) Unit 1 m x 1 m 2001-2 09 11 - Thermally Altered Rock - - - - Other 15 26.50 Unit 1 m x 1 m 2001-2 09 12 - Flaked Stone Debitage Flake - - Obsidian 3 0.80 1 NV (v) Unit 1 m x 1 m 2001-2 09 12 A Flaked Stone Debitage Flake - - Obsidian 1 0.30 NV (v) Unit 1 m x 1 m 2001-2 09 13 - Flaked Stone Debitage Flake - - Chalcedony 1 0.40 Unit 1 m x 1 m 2001-2 09 14 - Thermally Altered Rock - - - - Other 17 189.80 Unit 1 m x 1 m 2001-2 09 15 - Flaked Stone Biface - End Fragment Obsidian 1 1.00 3.5 BL Unit 1 m x 1 m 2001-2 09 16 - Flaked Stone Debitage Flake - - Obsidian 3 0.50 NV (v) Unit 1 m x 1 m 2001-2 09 16 A Flaked Stone Debitage Flake - - Obsidian 1 0.60 3.7 NV (v) Unit 1 m x 1 m 2001-2 09 17 - Flaked Stone Debitage Flake - - Dacite 1 1.80 Unit 1 m x 1 m 2001-2 09 18 - Thermally Altered Rock - - - - Other 21 299.80 Unit 1 m x 1 m 2001-2 09 19 - Flaked Stone Debitage Flake - - Obsidian 7 1.90 1 NV (v) Unit 1 m x 1 m 2001-2 09 19 A Flaked Stone Debitage Flake - - Obsidian 1 0.90 1 2.7 NV (v) Unit 1 m x 1 m 2001-2 09 20 - Thermally Altered Rock - - - - Other 16 291.20 Unit 1 m x 1 m 2001-2 09 21 - - - - - - - 0 0.00 2001-2 09 22 - Flaked Stone Debitage Flake - - Obsidian 6 0.90 NV (v) Unit 1 m x 1 m 2001-2 09 23 - Flaked Stone Debitage Flake - - Tuff 1 0.90 Unit 1 m x 1 m 2001-2 09 24 - Thermally Altered Rock - - - - Other 17 42.30 Unit 1 m x 1 m

1/4" 190–200 1/4" 190–200 1/4" 190–200 1/4" 190–200 1/4" 200–210 1/4" 200–210 1/4" 200–210 1/4" 200–210 1/4" 140–150 1/4" 150–160 1/4" 150–160 1/4" 150–160 1/4" 160–170 1/4" 170–180 1/4" 160–170 1/4" 115–130 1/4" 115–130 1/4" 130–140 1/4" 130–140 1/4" 140–150 1/4" 140–150 1/4" 150–160 1/4" 150–160 1/4" 150–160 1/4" 160–170 1/4" 160–170 1/4" 160–170 1/4" 170–180 1/4" 170–180 1/4" 170–180 1/4" 170–180 1/4" 180–190 1/4" 180–190 1/4" 180–190 1/4" 180–190 1/4" 180–190 1/4" 190–200 1/4" 190–200 1/4" 190–200

1/4" 200–210 1/4" 200–210 1/4" 200–210

E.3


2001-2 09 25 - Flaked Stone Modified Flake EMF - Complete Obsidian 1 0.60 NV (v) Unit 1 m x 1 m 2001-2 10 01 - Flaked Stone Debitage Flake - - Obsidian 1 0.00 NV (v) Unit 1 m x 1 m 2001-2 10 01 A Flaked Stone Debitage Flake - - Obsidian 1 0.10 6.4 NV (v) Unit 1 m x 1 m 2001-2 10 02 - Thermally Altered Rock - - - - Other 5 17.30 Unit 1 m x 1 m 2001-2 10 03 - Flaked Stone Debitage Flake - - Obsidian 1 0.10 1 NV (v) Unit 1 m x 1 m 2001-2 10 03 A Flaked Stone Debitage Flake - - Obsidian 1 0.20 1 2.7 NV (v) Unit 1 m x 1 m 2001-2 10 04 - Flaked Stone Debitage Flake - - Tuff 1 5.90 Unit 1 m x 1 m 2001-2 10 05 - Thermally Altered Rock - - - - Other 14 56.20 Unit 1 m x 1 m 2001-2 10 06 - Flaked Stone Debitage Flake - - Obsidian 2 0.40 1 NV (v) Unit 1 m x 1 m 2001-2 10 06 A Flaked Stone Debitage Flake - - Obsidian 1 0.70 1 NV (v) Unit 1 m x 1 m 2001-2 10 07 - Thermally Altered Rock - - - - Other 9 20.80 Unit 1 m x 1 m 2001-2 10 08 - Flaked Stone Modified Flake Ret. Flake - Complete Obsidian 1 5.10 1 3.7 NV? Unit 1 m x 1 m 2001-2 10 09 - Flaked Stone Debitage Flake - - Obsidian 4 0.60 NV (v) Unit 1 m x 1 m 2001-2 10 09 A Flaked Stone Debitage Flake - - Obsidian 1 1.00 3.7 NV (v) Unit 1 m x 1 m 2001-2 10 10 - Thermally Altered Rock - - - - Other 10 13.40 Unit 1 m x 1 m 2001-2 10 11 - Flaked Stone Debitage Flake - - Obsidian 2 0.40 1 NV (v) Unit 1 m x 1 m 2001-2 10 12 - Thermally Altered Rock - - - - Other 11 93.50 Unit 1 m x 1 m 2001-2 10 13 - Flaked Stone Biface - End Fragment Obsidian 1 1.20 3.9 NV (v) Unit 1 m x 1 m 2001-2 10 14 - Flaked Stone Debitage Flake - - Obsidian 4 1.30 NV (v) Unit 1 m x 1 m 2001-2 10 15 - Thermally Altered Rock - - - - Other 6 70.80 Unit 1 m x 1 m 2001-2 10 16 - Flaked Stone Debitage Flake - - Obsidian 3 1.60 1 NV (v) Unit 1 m x 1 m 2001-2 10 16 A Flaked Stone Debitage Flake - - Obsidian 1 0.10 3.0 NV (v) Unit 1 m x 1 m 2001-2 10 17 - Thermally Altered Rock - - - - Other 12 47.50 Unit 1 m x 1 m 2001-2 10 18 - Flaked Stone Debitage Flake - - Obsidian 1 0.20 1 3.2 NV (v) Unit 1 m x 1 m 2001-2 10 19 - Thermally Altered Rock - - - - Other 13 694.20 Unit 1 m x 1 m 2001-2 10 20 - Flaked Stone Debitage Flake - - Obsidian 2 0.80 1 NV (v) Unit 1 m x 1 m 2001-2 10 20 A Flaked Stone Debitage Flake - - Obsidian 1 0.30 1 5.6 NV (v) Unit 1 m x 1 m 2001-2 10 21 - Flaked Stone Debitage Flake - - Basalt 1 0.10 Unit 1 m x 1 m 2001-2 10 22 - Thermally Altered Rock - - - - Other 12 156.90 Unit 1 m x 1 m 2001-2 10 23 - Flaked Stone Modified Flake Ret. Flake - Fragment Obsidian 1 2.10 1 5.3 NV (v) Unit 1 m x 1 m 2001-2 10 24 - Flaked Stone Debitage Flake - - Obsidian 1 0.20 1 NV (v) Unit 1 m x 1 m 2001-2 10 25 - Flaked Stone Debitage Flake - - Tuff 1 2.50 Unit 1 m x 1 m 2001-2 10 26 - Thermally Altered Rock - - - - Other 21 535.80 Unit 1 m x 1 m 2001-2 10 27 - Flaked Stone Debitage Flake - - Obsidian 7 3.50 3 NV (v) Unit 1 m x 1 m 2001-2 10 27 A Flaked Stone Debitage Flake - - Obsidian 1 0.90 1 4.4 NV (v) Unit 1 m x 1 m 2001-2 10 28 - Thermally Altered Rock - - - - Other 6 99.70 Unit 1 m x 1 m 2001-2 10 29 - Flaked Stone Debitage Flake - - Obsidian 1 0.20 NV (v) Unit 1 m x 1 m 2001-2 10 29 A Flaked Stone Debitage Flake - - Obsidian 1 0.90 1.1 A Unit 1 m x 1 m 2001-2 10 30 - Thermally Altered Rock - - - - Other 2 2.40 Unit 1 m x 1 m 2001-2 10 31 - Flaked Stone Debitage Flake - - Obsidian 1 0.00 1 2.6 NV (v) Fea. 2 1 m x 2 m 2001-2 10 32 - Thermally Altered Rock - - - - Other 44 7916.50 Fea. 2 1 m x 2 m 2001-2 10 33 - Flaked Stone Modified Flake - - Fragment Obsidian 1 0.40 2.5 NV (v) Unit 1 m x 1 m 2001-2 10 34 - Flaked Stone Debitage - - Fragment Tuff 1 3.60 Unit 1 m x 1 m 2001-2 10 35 - Flaked Stone Debitage Flake - - Obsidian 3 0.10 NV (v) Unit 1 m x 1 m

1/4" 160–170 1/8" 110–120 1/8" 110–120 1/8" 110–120 1/4" 120–130 1/4" 120–130 1/8" 120–130 1/8" 120–130 1/4" 130–140 1/4" 130–140 1/8" 130–140 1/4" 140–150 1/4" 140–150 1/4" 140–150 1/8" 140–150 1/8" 150–160 1/8" 150–160 1/4" 160–170 1/4" 160–170 1/8" 160–170 1/4" 170–180 1/4" 170–180 1/8" 170–180 1/4" 180–190 1/8" 180–190 1/4" 190–200 1/4" 190–200 1/8" 190–200 1/8" 190–200 1/8" 200–210 1/4" 200–210 1/8" 200–210 1/8" 200–210 1/4" 210–220 1/4" 210–220 1/8" 210–220 1/4" 220–230 1/4" 220–230 1/8" 220–230 1/8" 183–193 1/8" 183–193 1/4" 130–140 1/8" 160–170 1/8" 120–130

E.4


E.5

2001-2 10 2001-2 10 2001-2 10 2001-2 10 2001-2 10 2001-2 10 2001-2 10 2001-2 10 2001-2 10 2001-2 10 2001-2 10 2001-2 10 2001-2 11 2001-2 11 2001-2 11 2001-2 11 2001-2 11 2001-2 11 2001-2 11 2001-2 11 2001-2 11 2001-2 11 2001-2 11 2001-2 11 2001-2 11 2001-2 11 2001-2 11 2001-2 11 2001-2 11 2001-2 11 2001-2 11 2001-2 11 2001-2 11 2001-2 11 2001-2 11 2001-2 11 2001-2 11 2001-2 11 2001-2 11 2001-2 11 2001-2 11 2001-2 11 2001-2 11 2001-2 11

36 37 38 39 40 41 41 41 42 43 44 45 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 08 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 26 27 28

------A B ------------A B ------------A ------A --

Flaked Stone Flaked Stone Flaked Stone Flaked Stone Flaked Stone Flaked Stone Flaked Stone Flaked Stone Flaked Stone Flaked Stone Flaked Stone Flaked Stone Thermally Altered Rock -Thermally Altered Rock Flaked Stone Flaked Stone Flaked Stone Thermally Altered Rock Flaked Stone Flaked Stone Flaked Stone Thermally Altered Rock Flaked Stone Thermally Altered Rock Flaked Stone Flaked Stone Flaked Stone Thermally Altered Rock Flaked Stone Thermally Altered Rock Flaked Stone Thermally Altered Rock Flaked Stone Flaked Stone Thermally Altered Rock Flaked Stone Flaked Stone Thermally Altered Rock Battered Stone Flaked Stone Flaked Stone Thermally Altered Rock Flaked Stone

Debitage Debitage Debitage Debitage Debitage Debitage Debitage Debitage Debitage Debitage Debitage Debitage ---Modified Flake Debitage Debitage -Debitage Debitage Debitage -Debitage -Biface Debitage Debitage -Debitage -Debitage -Debitage Debitage -Debitage Debitage -Hammerstone Debitage Debitage -Debitage

Flake Flake Flake Flake Flake Flake Flake Flake Flake Flake Flake Flake ---EMF Flake Flake -Flake Flake Flake -Flake --Flake Flake -Flake -Flake -Flake Flake -Flake Flake --Flake Flake -Flake

-------------------------End ------------------

---------------Complete ---------Fragment -------------Complete ----

Obsidian Obsidian Obsidian Obsidian Obsidian Obsidian Obsidian Obsidian Obsidian Obsidian Obsidian Obsidian Other -Other Obsidian Obsidian Obsidian Other Obsidian Obsidian Obsidian Other Obsidian Other Obsidian Obsidian Dacite Other Obsidian Other Obsidian Other Obsidian Obsidian Other Obsidian Dacite Other Sandstone Obsidian Obsidian Other Obsidian

7 10 4 5 9 6 1 1 13 7 5 5 2 0 4 1 1 1 1 12 1 1 34 9 32 1 8 1 13 5 13 3 22 10 1 21 5 1 22 1 2 1 28 2

0.40 2 0.60 0.10 0.30 2 0.40 1 0.20 1 0.00 0.10 1 0.50 0.40 0.20 0.20 55.40 0.00 2.60 3.20 1 2.30 1 0.20 12.10 2.50 4 0.30 1 0.10 1 120.80 3.70 2 170.00 3.00 2.50 2 27.20 56.70 2.40 2 14.30 0.60 1 157.20 3.50 2 0.30 1 75.00 1.30 2 47.00 992.70 76.30 0.20 0.20 816.60 0.40 1

3.9

2.2

3.9

4.2

3.4

3.6

NV (v) NV (v) NV (v) NV (v) NV (v) NV (v) NV (v) NV (v) NV (v) NV (v) NV (v) NV (v)

NV (v) NV (v) NV (v)


NV (v)

NV (v) NV (v)

NV (v)

NV (v)

NV (v) NV (v)

NV (v)

NV (v) NV (v)

NV (v)

Unit Unit Unit Unit Unit Unit Unit Unit Unit Unit Unit Unit Unit

Unit Unit Unit Unit Unit Unit Unit Unit Unit Unit Unit Unit Unit Unit Unit Unit Unit Unit Unit Unit Unit Unit Unit Unit Unit Unit Unit Unit Unit Unit

1 m x 1 m 1 m x 1 m 1 m x 1 m 1 m x 1 m 1 m x 1 m 1 m x 1 m 1 m x 1 m 1 m x 1 m 1 m x 1 m 1 m x 1 m 1 m x 1 m 1 m x 1 m 1 m x 2 m

1 m x 2 m 1 m x 2 m 1 m x 2 m 1 m x 2 m 1 m x 2 m 1 m x 2 m 1 m x 2 m 1 m x 2 m 1 m x 2 m 1 m x 2 m 1 m x 2 m 1 m x 2 m 1 m x 2 m 1 m x 2 m 1 m x 2 m 1 m x 2 m 1 m x 2 m 1 m x 2 m 1 m x 2 m 1 m x 2 m 1 m x 2 m 1 m x 2 m 1 m x 2 m 1 m x 2 m 1 m x 2 m 1 m x 2 m 1 m x 2 m 1 m x 2 m 1 m x 2 m 1 m x 2 m

1/8" 130–140 1/8" 140–150 1/8" 150–160 1/8" 160–170 1/8" 170–180 1/8" 180–190 1/8" 180–190 1/8" 180–190 1/8" 190–200 1/8" 200–210 1/8" 210–220 1/8" 220–230 1/4" 90–100

1/4" 100–110 1/4" 100–110 1/4" 100–110 1/4" 110–120 1/4" 110–120 1/4" 120–130 1/4" 120–130 1/4" 120–130 1/4" 120–130 1/4" 130–140 1/4" 130–140 1/4" 140–150 1/4" 140–150 1/4" 140–150 1/4" 140–150 1/4" 150–160 1/4" 150–160 1/4" 160–170 1/4" 160–170 1/4" 170–180 1/4" 170–180 1/4" 170–180 1/4" 180–190 1/4" 180–190 1/4" 180–190 1/4" 190–200 1/4" 190–200 1/4" 190–200 1/4" 190–200 1/4" 200–210


E.6

2001-2 2001-2 2001-2 2001-2 2001-2 2001-2 2001-2 2001-2 2001-2 2001-2 2001-2 2001-2 2001-2 2001-2 2001-2 2001-2 2001-2 2001-2 2001-2 2001-2 2001-2 2001-2 2001-2 2001-2 2001-2 2001-2 2001-2 2001-2 2001-2 2001-2 2001-2 2001-2 2001-2 2001-2 2001-2 2001-2 2001-2 2001-2 2001-2 2001-2 2001-2 2001-2 2001-2 2001-2

11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 12 12 14 14 14 14 14 14 14 14 14 14 14 14 14 14 14

28 A 28 B 28 C 29 -30 -31 -32 -33 -34 -34 A 34 B 35 -36 -37 -37 A 37 B 37 C 37 D 38 -39 -40 -41 -42 -43 -44 -45 -46 -01 -02 -01 -02 -03 -04 -05 -05 A 06 -07 -08 -09 -10 -11 -11 A 12 -13 -

Flaked Stone Flaked Stone Flaked Stone Thermally Altered Rock Flaked Stone Flaked Stone Flaked Stone Thermally Altered Rock Flaked Stone Flaked Stone Flaked Stone Flaked Stone Thermally Altered Rock Flaked Stone Flaked Stone Flaked Stone Flaked Stone Flaked Stone Flaked Stone Flaked Stone Flaked Stone Flaked Stone Flaked Stone Battered Stone Flaked Stone Flaked Stone Flaked Stone Flaked Stone Thermally Altered Rock Thermally Altered Rock Other Thermally Altered Rock Flaked Stone Flaked Stone Flaked Stone Flaked Stone Thermally Altered Rock Flaked Stone Thermally Altered Rock Flaked Stone Flaked Stone Flaked Stone Flaked Stone Thermally Altered Rock

Debitage Debitage Debitage -Uniface Debitage Debitage -Debitage Debitage Debitage Debitage -Debitage Debitage Debitage Debitage Debitage Debitage Debitage Debitage Modified Flake Modified Flake Cobble Tool Modified Flake Modified Flake Modified Flake Debitage --Baked Earth -Biface Debitage Debitage Debitage -Debitage -Projectile Point Debitage Debitage Debitage -

Flake Flake Flake --Flake Flake -Flake Flake Flake Flake -Flake Flake Flake Flake Flake Flake Flake Flake EMF EMF -EMF EMF EMF Flake -----Flake Flake Flake -Flake -Lanceolate Flake Flake Flake -

----End ---------------------------End -----------

----Fragment ----------------Fragment Complete Complete Fragment Fragment Complete -----Fragment ------Complete ----

Obsidian Obsidian Obsidian Other Obsidian Obsidian Tuff Other Obsidian Obsidian Obsidian Rhyolite Other Obsidian Obsidian Obsidian Obsidian Obsidian Rhyolite Rhyolite Basalt Obsidian Obsidian Other Obsidian Obsidian Obsidian Obsidian Other Other Baked Clay Other Obsidian Obsidian Obsidian Tuff Other Obsidian Other Obsidian Obsidian Obsidian Dacite Other

1 1 1 41 1 6 1 21 0 1 1 1 18 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 4 2 5 1 6 1 5 1 1 24 2 5 1 8 1 1 10

10.80 1 0.40 1 0.20 3779.20 1.10 1.60 1 6.60 198.20 0.00 4.80 1 0.50 1 2.30 91.80 0.10 3.50 1 1.40 0.50 1 0.30 34.10 0.40 0.40 2.60 1 1.40 1 156.30 0.60 0.40 1 0.40 1 4.20 1 22.20 14.4 1.60 14.3 1.80 2.90 2 0.40 1 1.00 135.0 1.70 2 43.7 3.10 1 1.80 2 2.30 1 20.90 44.3

3.3

3.2

2.3

4.4

2.5 3.9 4.4 3.2

4.9 3.4

3.7

4.9

3.2

3.3

3.7


NV (v) NV (v)


NV (v) NV (v) NV (v) NV NV (v)

NV (v) NV (v)

NV (v) NV (v) NV (v) NV (v)


NV (v)

NV NV (v) NV (v)

Unit Unit Unit Unit Unit Unit Unit Unit Unit Unit Unit Unit Unit FEA. 1 FEA. 1 FEA. 1 FEA. 1 FEA. 1 FEA. 1 Unit Unit Unit Unit Unit Unit Unit Unit Unit Unit Unit Unit Unit Unit Unit Unit Unit Unit Unit Unit Unit Unit Unit Unit Unit

1 m x 2 m 1 m x 2 m 1 m x 2 m 1 m x 2 m 1 m x 2 m 1 m x 2 m 1 m x 2 m 1 m x 2 m 1 m x 2 m 1 m x 2 m 1 m x 2 m 1 m x 2 m 1 m x 2 m 1 m x 2 m 1 m x 2 m 1 m x 2 m 1 m x 2 m 1 m x 2 m 1 m x 2 m 1 m x 2 m 1 m x 2 m 1 m x 2 m 1 m x 2 m 1 m x 2 m 1 m x 2 m 1 m x 2 m 1 m x 2 m 1 m x 1 m 1 m x 1 m 1 m x 2 m 1 m x 2 m 1 m x 2 m 1 m x 2 m 1 m x 2 m 1 m x 2 m 1 m x 2 m 1 m x 2 m 1 m x 2 m 1 m x 2 m 1 m x 2 m 1 m x 2 m 1 m x 2 m 1 m x 2 m 1 m x 2 m

1/4" 200–210 1/4" 200–210 1/4" 200–210 1/4" 200–210 1/4" 210–220 1/4" 210–220 1/4" 210–220 1/4" 210–220 1/4" 220–230 1/4" 220–230 1/4" 220–230 1/4" 220–230 1/4" 220–230 1/4" 200–210 1/4" 200–210 1/4" 200–210 1/4" 200–210 1/4" 200–210 1/4" 200–210 1/4" 140–150 1/4" 130–140 1/4" 100–110 1/4" 140–150 1/4" 190–200 1/4" 200–210 1/4" 210–220 1/4" 120–130 1/4" 120–130 1/4" 120–130 1/4" 90–100 1/4" 90–100 1/4" 100–110 1/4" 120–130 1/4" 120–130 1/4" 120–130 1/4" 120–130 1/4" 120–130 1/4" 130–140 1/4" 130–140 1/4" 140–150 1/4" 140–150 1/4" 140–150 1/4" 140–150 1/4" 140–150


E.7

2001-2 2001-2 2001-2 2001-2 2001-2 2001-2 2001-2 2001-2 2001-2 2001-2 2001-2 2001-2 2001-2 2001-2 2001-2 2001-2 2001-2 2001-2 2001-2 2001-2 2001-2 2001-2 2001-2 2001-2 2001-2 2001-2 2001-2 2001-2 2001-2 2001-2 2001-2 2001-2 2001-2 2001-2 2001-2 2001-2 2001-2 2001-2 2001-2 2001-2 2001-2 2001-2 2001-2 2001-2

14 14 14 14 14 14 14 14 14 14 14 14 14 14 14 14 14 14 14 14 14 14 14 14 14 14 14 14 14 14 14 14 14 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15

14 -15 -16 -17 -18 -19 -20 -21 -22 -23 -24 -25 -26 -27 -28 -29 -30 -31 -32 -33 -34 -34 A 35 -36 -37 -38 -39 -40 -41 -42 -43 -44 -45 -01 -02 -03 -04 -05 -06 -07 -08 -09 -10 -11 -

Flaked Stone Flaked Stone Flaked Stone Thermally Altered Rock Flaked Stone Flaked Stone -Thermally Altered Rock Flaked Stone Flaked Stone Thermally Altered Rock Flaked Stone Thermally Altered Rock Flaked Stone Flaked Stone Thermally Altered Rock Flaked Stone Flaked Stone Thermally Altered Rock Flaked Stone Flaked Stone Flaked Stone Flaked Stone Flaked Stone Thermally Altered Rock Flaked Stone Thermally Altered Rock Flaked Stone Flaked Stone Flaked Stone Other Flaked Stone Flaked Stone Flaked Stone Flaked Stone Thermally Altered Rock Flaked Stone Thermally Altered Rock Flaked Stone Thermally Altered Rock Flaked Stone Thermally Altered Rock Flaked Stone Flaked Stone

Debitage Debitage Debitage -Biface Debitage --Debitage Debitage -Debitage -Debitage Debitage -Modified Flake Debitage -Core Debitage Debitage Debitage Debitage -Debitage -Modified Flake Modified Flake Modified Flake Manuport Debitage Modified Flake Debitage Debitage -Debitage -Debitage -Debitage -Debitage Debitage

Flake Flake Flake --Flake --Flake Flake -Flake -Flake Flake -Ret. Flake Flake --Flake Flake Flake Flake -Flake -Ret. Flake EMF Ret. Flake -Flake EMF Flake Flake -Flake -Flake -Flake -Flake Flake

----End -----------Margin ---------------------------

----Fragment -----------Fragment --Complete -------Fragment Fragment Complete Complete -Fragment -----------

Obsidian Rhyolite Dacite Other Obsidian Obsidian -Other Obsidian Rhyolite Other Obsidian Other Obsidian Tuff Other Obsidian Obsidian Other Obsidian Obsidian Obsidian Tuff Chalcedony Other Obsidian Other Obsidian Obsidian Obsidian Other Tuff Obsidian Obsidian Obsidian Other Obsidian Other Obsidian Other Obsidian Other Obsidian Basalt

7 1 1 13 1 5 0 9 7 1 9 9 76 15 2 13 1 5 12 1 3 1 1 1 5 5 14 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 3 5 4 8 3 3 4 15 7 2

1.50 0.70 0.50 1 132.0 0.60 1.90 3 0.00 100.9 1.50 3 2.80 21.6 1.70 1 3684.4 10.70 5 8.30 605.8 2.00 1.20 2 183.5 5.20 0.80 1 1.10 18.10 1 2.90 113.6 2.70 135.5 0.70 0.20 1 2.70 1 158.00 20.90 1 1.50 1 0.10 1 0.70 11.50 1.10 3 18.90 0.50 11.80 0.90 1 38.70 2.80 2 0.30

3.0

3.1

5.7

2.6

3.5 6.6

NV (v)

NV (v) NV (v)

NV (v)

NV (v)

NV (v)

NV (v) NV (v)


NV (v)



NV (v)

NV (v)

NV (v)

NV (v)

Unit Unit Unit Unit Unit Unit -Unit Unit Unit Unit Unit Unit Unit Unit Unit Unit Unit Unit Unit Unit Unit Unit Unit Unit Unit Unit Unit Unit Unit Unit Unit Unit Unit Unit Unit Unit Unit Unit Unit Unit Unit Unit Unit

1 m x 2 m 1 m x 2 m 1 m x 2 m 1 m x 2 m 1 m x 2 m 1 m x 2 m -1 m x 2 m 1 m x 2 m 1 m x 2 m 1 m x 2 m 1 m x 2 m 1 m x 2 m 1 m x 2 m 1 m x 2 m 1 m x 2 m 1 m x 2 m 1 m x 2 m 1 m x 2 m 1 m x 2 m 1 m x 2 m 1 m x 2 m 1 m x 2 m 1 m x 2 m 1 m x 2 m 1 m x 2 m 1 m x 2 m 1 m x 2 m 1 m x 2 m 1 m x 2 m 1 m x 2 m 1 m x 2 m 1 m x 2 m 1 m x 1 m 1 m x 1 m 1 m x 1 m 1 m x 1 m 1 m x 1 m 1 m x 1 m 1 m x 1 m 1 m x 1 m 1 m x 1 m 1 m x 1 m 1 m x 1 m

1/4" 150–160 1/4" 150–160 1/4" 150–160 1/4" 150–160 1/4" 160–170 1/4" 160–170

1/4" 160–170 1/4" 170–180 1/4" 170–180 1/4" 170–180 1/4" 180–190 1/4" 180–190 1/4" 190–200 1/4" 190–200 1/4" 190–200 1/4" 200–210 1/4" 200–210 1/4" 200–210 1/4" 210–220 1/4" 210–220 1/4" 210–220 1/4" 210–220 1/4" 210–220 1/4" 210–220 1/4" 220–230 1/4" 220–230 1/4" 150–160 1/4" 160–170 1/4" 180–190 1/4" 190–200 1/4" 210–220 1/4" 210–220 1/4" 120–130 1/4" 130–140 1/8" 130–140 1/4" 140–150 1/8" 140–150 1/4" 150–160 1/8" 150–160 1/4" 160–170 1/8" 160–170 1/4" 170–180 1/8" 170–180


2001-2 15 12 - Flaked Stone Debitage Flake - - Tuff 1 2.50 Unit 1 m x 1 m 2001-2 15 13 - Thermally Altered Rock - - - - Other 10 78.40 Unit 1 m x 1 m 2001-2 15 14 - Flaked Stone Debitage Flake - - Obsidian 13 6.70 5 NV (v) Unit 1 m x 1 m 2001-2 15 14 A Flaked Stone Debitage Flake - - Obsidian 1 15.40 1 4.3 NV (v) Unit 1 m x 1 m 2001-2 15 14 B Flaked Stone Debitage Flake - - Obsidian 1 1.00 1 2.5 NV (v) Unit 1 m x 1 m 2001-2 15 15 - Thermally Altered Rock - - - - Other 36 360.30 Unit 1 m x 1 m 2001-2 15 16 - Flaked Stone Debitage Flake - - Obsidian 1 0.80 1 NV (v) Unit 1 m x 1 m 2001-2 15 17 - Flaked Stone Debitage Flake - - Tuff 1 6.00 1 Unit 1 m x 1 m 2001-2 15 18 - Thermally Altered Rock - - - - Other 6 49.90 Unit 1 m x 1 m 2001-2 15 19 - Flaked Stone Core - - Complete Obsidian 1 6.10 4.2 NV (v) Unit 1 m x 1 m 2001-2 15 20 - Flaked Stone Debitage Flake - - Obsidian 5 2.40 2 NV (v) Unit 1 m x 1 m 2001-2 15 21 - Flaked Stone Debitage Flake - - Tuff 2 5.70 Unit 1 m x 1 m 2001-2 15 22 - Thermally Altered Rock - - - - Other 38 1026.40 Unit 1 m x 1 m 2001-2 15 23 - Flaked Stone Uniface - - Fragment Obsidian 1 3.50 2.5 NV Unit 1 m x 1 m 2001-2 15 24 - Flaked Stone Debitage Flake - - Obsidian 1 0.20 NV (v) Unit 1 m x 1 m 2001-2 15 24 A Flaked Stone Debitage Flake - - Obsidian 1 0.20 3.4 NV (v) Unit 1 m x 1 m 2001-2 15 25 - Thermally Altered Rock - - - - Other 2 54.20 Unit 1 m x 1 m 2001-2 15 26 - Thermally Altered Rock - - - - Other 4 1.10 CS 25 cm x 30 cm 2001-2 15 27 - Flaked Stone Debitage Flake - - Obsidian 1 0.00 NV (v) CS 25 cm x 30 cm 2001-2 15 28 - Thermally Altered Rock - - - - Other 1 0.40 CS 25 cm x 30 cm 2001-2 15 29 - Flaked Stone Debitage Flake - - Obsidian 1 0.00 NV (v) CS 25 cm x 30 cm 2001-2 15 30 - Thermally Altered Rock - - - - Other 5 0.70 CS 25 cm x 30 cm 2001-2 15 31 - Other Glass - - Fragment Glass 1 0.00 CS 25 cm x 30 cm 2001-2 15 32 - Flaked Stone Debitage Flake - - Obsidian 7 0.20 NV (v) CS 25 cm x 30 cm 2001-2 15 33 - Thermally Altered Rock - - - - Other 1 0.50 CS 25 cm x 30 cm 2001-2 15 34 - Flaked Stone Debitage Flake - - Obsidian 2 0.20 NV (v) CS 25 cm x 30 cm 2001-2 15 35 - Thermally Altered Rock - - - - Other 2 4.70 CS 25 cm x 30 cm 2001-2 15 36 - Thermally Altered Rock - - - - Other 2 16.00 CS 25 cm x 30 cm 2001-2 15 37 - Thermally Altered Rock - - - - Other 2 25.20 CS 25 cm x 30 cm 2001-2 15 38 - Flaked Stone Debitage Flake - - Obsidian 1 0.00 NV (v) CS 25 cm x 30 cm 2001-2 15 39 - Thermally Altered Rock - - - - Other 1 0.20 CS 25 cm x 30 cm 2001-2 15 40 - Flaked Stone Debitage Flake - - Obsidian 1 0.00 NV (v) CS 25 cm x 30 cm 2001-2 15 41 - Flaked Stone Debitage Flake - - Obsidian 2 0.40 NV (v) CS 25 cm x 30 cm 2001-2 15 42 - Thermally Altered Rock - - - - Other 1 0.10 CS 25 cm x 30 cm 2001-2 15 43 - Flaked Stone Debitage Flake - - Basalt 1 0.10 Unit 1 m x 1 m 2001-2 15 44 - Flaked Stone Debitage Flake - - Obsidian 2 4.20 2 NV (v) Unit 1 m x 1 m 2001-2 15 45 - Flaked Stone Debitage Flake - - Tuff 1 0.20 Unit 1 m x 1 m 2001-2 15 46 - Thermally Altered Rock - - - - Other 4 213.10 Unit 1 m x 1 m 2001-2 15 47 - Faunal Mollusca - - Fragment Shell 1 0.00 CS 25 cm x 30 cm 2001-2 15 48 - Flaked Stone Debitage Flake - - Obsidian 1 0.00 NV (v) Unit 1 m x 1 m 2001-2 15 49 - Flaked Stone Debitage Flake - - Obsidian 5 0.30 1 NV (v) Unit 1 m x 1 m 2001-2 15 50 - Flaked Stone Debitage Flake - - Obsidian 6 0.30 NV (v) Unit 1 m x 1 m 2001-2 15 51 - Flaked Stone Debitage Flake - - Obsidian 12 0.40 NV (v) Unit 1 m x 1 m 2001-2 15 52 - Flaked Stone Debitage Flake - - Obsidian 11 0.40 2 NV (v) Unit 1 m x 1 m

1/8" 170–180 1/8" 170–180 1/4" 180–190 1/4" 180–190 1/4" 180–190 1/8" 180–190 1/4" 190–200 1/8" 190–200 1/8" 190–200 1/8" 200–210 1/4" 200–210 1/8" 200–210 1/8" 200–210 1/8" 220–230 1/4" 220–230 1/4" 220–230 1/8" 220–230 1/16" 120–130 1/16" 130–140 1/16" 130–140 1/16" 150–160 1/16" 150–160 1/16" 150–160 1/16" 160–170 1/16" 160–170 1/16" 170–180 1/16" 170–180 1/16" 180–190 1/16" 180–190 1/16" 200–210 1/16" 200–210 1/16" 210–220 1/16" 220–230 1/16" 220–230 1/8" 210–220 1/4" 210–220 1/8" 210–220 1/8" 210–220 1/16" 150–160 1/8" 125–130 1/8" 130–140 1/8" 140–150 1/8" 150–160 1/8" 160–170

E.8


2001-2 15 53 - Flaked Stone Debitage Flake - - Obsidian 6 0.20 1 NV (v) Unit 1 m x 1 m 2001-2 15 54 - Flaked Stone Debitage Flake - - Obsidian 13 0.50 NV (v) Unit 1 m x 1 m 2001-2 15 55 - Flaked Stone Debitage Flake - - Obsidian 12 0.70 1 NV (v) Unit 1 m x 1 m 2001-2 15 56 - Flaked Stone Debitage Flake - - Obsidian 7 0.40 NV (v) Unit 1 m x 1 m 2001-2 15 57 - Flaked Stone Debitage Flake - - Obsidian 6 0.30 2 NV (v) Unit 1 m x 1 m 2001-2 15 58 - Flaked Stone Debitage Flake - - Obsidian 8 0.30 NV (v) Unit 1 m x 1 m 2001-2 19 01 - Flaked Stone Debitage Flake - - Obsidian 1 0.40 NV (v) Unit (overburden) 2001-2 22 01 - Flaked Stone Debitage Flake - - Obsidian 4 0.90 1 NV (v) Unit 1 m x 2 m 2001-2 22 02 - - - - - - - 0 0.00 - -2001-2 22 03 - Flaked Stone Debitage Flake - - Obsidian 3 0.30 1 NV (v) Unit 1 m x 2 m 2001-2 22 03 A Flaked Stone Debitage Flake - - Obsidian 1 2.00 1 3.8 NV Unit 1 m x 2 m 2001-2 22 04 - Flaked Stone Debitage Flake - - Tuff 1 2.60 Unit 1 m x 2 m 2001-2 22 05 - Thermally Altered Rock - - - - Other 4 22.70 Unit 1 m x 2 m 2001-2 22 06 - Flaked Stone Debitage Flake - - Obsidian 3 0.50 NV (v) Unit 1 m x 2 m 2001-2 22 07 - Flaked Stone Debitage Flake - - Chalcedony 1 7.60 Unit 1 m x 2 m 2001-2 22 08 - Thermally Altered Rock - - - - Other 2 40.80 Unit 1 m x 2 m 2001-2 22 09 - Flaked Stone Debitage - - - Tuff 1 0.80 Unit 1 m x 2 m 2001-2 22 10 - Flaked Stone Debitage Flake - - Obsidian 7 8.80 5 NV (v) Unit 1 m x 2 m 2001-2 22 10 A Flaked Stone Debitage Flake - - Obsidian 1 0.80 1 2.0 NV (v) Unit 1 m x 2 m 2001-2 22 11 - Thermally Altered Rock - - - - Other 9 78.00 Unit 1 m x 2 m 2001-2 22 12 - Flaked Stone Debitage Flake - - Obsidian 14 2.20 2 NV (v) Unit 1 m x 2 m 2001-2 22 12 A Flaked Stone Debitage Flake - - Obsidian 1 0.10 3.0 NV (v) Unit 1 m x 2 m 2001-2 22 13 - Thermally Altered Rock - - - - Other 21 65.40 Unit 1 m x 2 m 2001-2 22 14 - Flaked Stone Debitage Flake - - Obsidian 3 0.60 1 NV (v) Unit 1 m x 2 m 2001-2 22 14 A Flaked Stone Debitage Flake - - Obsidian 1 0.10 3.7 NV (v) Unit 1 m x 2 m 2001-2 22 15 - Flaked Stone Debitage Flake - - Tuff 1 7.50 Unit 1 m x 2 m 2001-2 22 16 - Thermally Altered Rock - - - - Other 5 256.00 Unit 1 m x 2 m 2001-2 22 17 - Flaked Stone Debitage Flake - - Obsidian 8 2.70 3 NV (v) Unit 1 m x 2 m 2001-2 22 18 - Thermally Altered Rock - - - - Other 13 699.80 Unit 1 m x 2 m 2001-2 22 19 - Flaked Stone Debitage Flake - - Obsidian 6 0.90 1 NV (v) Unit 1 m x 2 m 2001-2 22 19 A Flaked Stone Debitage Flake - - Obsidian 1 2.70 1 NV (v) Unit 1 m x 2 m 2001-2 22 19 B Flaked Stone Debitage Flake - - Obsidian 1 1.20 1 4.2/7.9 NV (v) Unit 1 m x 2 m 2001-2 22 20 - Thermally Altered Rock - - - - Other 21 126.10 Unit 1 m x 2 m 2001-2 22 21 - Flaked Stone Debitage Flake - - Obsidian 2 0.70 NV (v) Unit 1 m x 2 m 2001-2 22 21 A Flaked Stone Debitage Flake - - Obsidian 1 0.20 3.1 NV (v) Unit 1 m x 2 m 2001-2 22 22 - Thermally Altered Rock - - - - Other 5 128.00 Unit 1 m x 2 m 2001-2 22 23 - Flaked Stone Modified Flake EMF - Fragment Obsidian 1 1.10 3.4 NV (v) Unit 1 m x 2 m 2001-2 22 24 - Flaked Stone Core - - Complete Obsidian 1 16.10 1 1.7 Unknown Unit 1 m x 2 m 2001-2 22 25 - Flaked Stone Debitage Flake - - Basalt 1 2.00 1 Unit 1 m x 2 m 2001-2 26 01 - Flaked Stone Biface - End Fragment Obsidian 1 2.50 3.2 NV (v) Unit 1 m x 2 m 2001-2 26 02 - Flaked Stone Debitage Flake - - Obsidian 1 0.20 2.0 NV (v) Unit 1 m x 2 m 2001-2 26 03 - - - - - - - 0 0.00 2001-2 26 04 - Thermally Altered Rock - - - - Other 7 58.70 Unit 1 m x 2 m 2001-2 26 05 - Flaked Stone Debitage Flake - - Obsidian 5 0.90 NV (v) Unit 1 m x 2 m

1/8" 170–180 1/8" 180–190 1/8" 190–200 1/8" 200–210 1/8" 210–220 1/8" 220–230 - 120–130 1/4" 135–150

1/4" 150–160 1/4" 150–160 1/4" 150–160 1/4" 150–160 1/4" 160–170 1/4" 160–170 1/4" 160–170 1/4" 160–170 1/4" 170–180 1/4" 170–180 1/4" 170–180 1/4" 180–190 1/4" 180–190 1/4" 180–190 1/4" 190–200 1/4" 190–200 1/4" 190–200 1/4" 190–200 1/4" 200–210 1/4" 200–210 1/4" 210–220 1/4" 210–220 1/4" 210–220 1/4" 210–220 1/4" 220–230 1/4" 220–230 1/4" 220–230 1/4" 180–190 1/4" 210–220 1/4" 210–220 1/4" 135–150 1/4" 135–150

1/4" 140–150 1/4" 150–160

E.9


E.10

2001-2 26 06 - Thermally Altered Rock - - - - Other 9 57.20 Unit 1 m x 2 m 2001-2 26 07 - Flaked Stone Debitage Flake - - Obsidian 5 1.00 2 NV (v) Unit 1 m x 2 m 2001-2 26 08 - - - - - - - 0 0.00 2001-2 26 09 - Battered Stone Hammerstone - End Fragment Sandstone 1 59.80 Unit 1 m x 2 m 2001-2 26 10 - Thermally Altered Rock - - - - Other 9 54.70 Unit 1 m x 2 m 2001-2 26 11 - Flaked Stone Debitage Flake - - Obsidian 4 0.50 NV (v) Unit 1 m x 2 m 2001-2 26 11 A Flaked Stone Debitage Flake - - Obsidian 1 1.40 1 2.7 NV (v) Unit 1 m x 2 m 2001-2 26 12 - Flaked Stone Debitage Flake - - Dacite 1 0.80 Unit 1 m x 2 m 2001-2 26 13 - Thermally Altered Rock - - - - Other 9 12.70 Unit 1 m x 2 m 2001-2 26 14 - Flaked Stone Debitage Flake - - Obsidian 2 0.80 NV (v) Unit 1 m x 2 m 2001-2 26 14 A Flaked Stone Debitage Flake - - Obsidian 1 0.60 3.0 NV (v) Unit 1 m x 2 m 2001-2 26 15 - Thermally Altered Rock - - - - Other 9 71.10 Unit 1 m x 2 m 2001-2 26 16 - Flaked Stone Debitage Flake - - Obsidian 4 2.80 NV (v) Unit 1 m x 2 m 2001-2 26 17 - Thermally Altered Rock - - - - Other 18 240.10 Unit 1 m x 2 m 2001-2 26 18 - Flaked Stone Projectile Point Lanceolate - Complete Obsidian 1 7.20 1 3.7 NV Unit 1 m x 2 m 2001-2 26 19 - Flaked Stone Debitage Flake - - Obsidian 1 0.30 1 NV (v) Unit 1 m x 2 m 2001-2 26 19 A Flaked Stone Debitage Flake - - Obsidian 1 0.20 2.7 NV (v) Unit 1 m x 2 m 2001-2 26 20 - Flaked Stone Debitage Flake - - Tuff 2 51.40 Unit 1 m x 2 m 2001-2 26 21 - Thermally Altered Rock - - - - Other 12 514.20 Unit 1 m x 2 m 2001-2 26 22 - Flaked Stone Biface - Midsecti Fragment Obsidian 1 2.70 4.7 NV (v) Unit 1 m x 2 m

on 2001-2 26 23 - Flaked Stone Debitage Flake - - Obsidian 1 0.20 1 NV (v) Unit 1 m x 2 m 2001-2 26 23 A Flaked Stone Debitage Flake - - Obsidian 1 0.00 3.4 NV (v) Unit 1 m x 2 m 2001-2 26 23 B Flaked Stone Debitage Flake - - Obsidian 1 0.10 3.0 NV (v) Unit 1 m x 2 m 2001-2 26 24 - Thermally Altered Rock - - - - Other 19 298.50 Unit 1 m x 2 m 2001-2 26 25 - Flaked Stone Debitage Flake - - Tuff 1 1.60 Unit 1 m x 2 m 2001-2 26 26 - Battered Stone Abrading Stone - - Complete Other 1 215.90 Unit 1 m x 2 m 2001-2 31 01 - Flaked Stone Debitage Flake - - Obsidian 4 0.60 NV (v) Unit 1 m x 2 m 2001-2 31 02 - Thermally Altered Rock - - - - Other 7 80.40 Unit 1 m x 2 m 2001-2 31 03 - Flaked Stone Debitage Flake - - Obsidian 0 NV (v) Unit 1 m x 2 m 2001-2 31 03 A Flaked Stone Debitage Flake - - Obsidian 1 0.20 1 2.7 NV (v) Unit 1 m x 2 m 2001-2 31 03 B Flaked Stone Debitage Flake - - Obsidian 1 0.10 4.8 NV (v) Unit 1 m x 2 m 2001-2 31 04 - Thermally Altered Rock - - - - Other 4 31.00 Unit 1 m x 2 m 2001-2 31 05 - Flaked Stone Debitage Flake - - Obsidian 7 2.80 3 NV (v) Unit 1 m x 2 m 2001-2 31 06 - Flaked Stone Debitage Flake - - Tuff 1 1.60 Unit 1 m x 2 m 2001-2 31 07 - Thermally Altered Rock - - - - Other 6 53.10 Unit 1 m x 2 m 2001-2 31 08 - Flaked Stone Debitage Flake - - Obsidian 3 0.50 NV (v) Unit 1 m x 2 m 2001-2 31 08 A Flaked Stone Debitage Flake - - Obsidian 1 1.50 1 3.8 NV Unit 1 m x 2 m 2001-2 31 09 - Thermally Altered Rock - - - - Other 8 73.20 Unit 1 m x 2 m 2001-2 31 10 - Flaked Stone Core - - Fragment Obsidian 1 7.00 1 NV (v) Unit 1 m x 2 m 2001-2 31 11 - Flaked Stone Debitage Flake - - Obsidian 14 6.20 3 NV (v) Unit 1 m x 2 m 2001-2 31 12 - Thermally Altered Rock - - - - Other 14 66.30 Unit 1 m x 2 m 2001-2 31 13 - Flaked Stone Biface - - Fragment Obsidian 1 9.60 1 NV (v) Unit 1 m x 2 m 2001-2 31 14 - Flaked Stone Debitage Flake - - Obsidian 5 1.20 NV (v) Unit 1 m x 2 m

1/4" 150–160 1/4" 160–170

1/4" 160–170 1/4" 160–170 1/4" 170–180 1/4" 170–180 1/4" 170–180 1/4" 170–180 1/4" 180–190 1/4" 180–190 1/4" 180–190 1/4" 190–200 1/4" 190–200 1/4" 200–210 1/4" 200–210 1/4" 200–210 1/4" 200–210 1/4" 200–210 1/4" 210–220

1/4" 210–220 1/4" 210–220 1/4" 210–220 1/4" 210–220 1/4" 180–190 1/4" 200–210 1/4" 125–130 1/4" 125–130 1/4" 140–150 1/4" 140–150 1/4" 140–150 1/4" 140–150 1/4" 150–160 1/4" 150–160 1/4" 150–160 1/4" 160–170 1/4" 160–170 1/4" 160–170 1/4" 175–190 1/4" 175–190 1/4" 175–190 1/4" 190–200 1/4" 190–200

Artifact Catalog, CA-NAP-916 Acc. No

Cat. No

Lot No

Sub Lot

Artifact Group Artifact Class Artifact Type

Part Condition Material Count Weight (gm)

Cortex Hyd Source Unit Type

Unit Size Mesh Depth (cmbs)

2001-2 31 14 A Flaked Stone Debitage Flake - - Obsidian 1 0.60 3.0 NV (v) Unit 1 m x 2 m 2001-2 31 15 - Flaked Stone Debitage Flake - - Tuff 1 5.90 Unit 1 m x 2 m 2001-2 31 16 - Thermally Altered Rock - - - - Other 9 65.10 Unit 1 m x 2 m 2001-2 31 17 - Flaked Stone Biface - - Fragment Obsidian 1 0.90 0.9 A Unit 1 m x 2 m 2001-2 31 18 - Flaked Stone Debitage Flake - - Obsidian 11 3.40 4 NV (v) Unit 1 m x 2 m 2001-2 31 18 A Flaked Stone Debitage Flake - - Obsidian 1 0.20 3.4 NV (v) Unit 1 m x 2 m 2001-2 31 19 - Thermally Altered Rock - - - - Other 14 273.70 Unit 1 m x 2 m 2001-2 31 20 - Flaked Stone Modified Flake Ret. Flake - Fragment Obsidian 1 4.40 NV (v) Unit 1 m x 2 m 2001-2 31 21 - Flaked Stone Modified Flake EMF - Fragment Obsidian 1 0.90 1 2.7 NV Unit 1 m x 2 m 2001-2 31 22 - Flaked Stone Modified Flake EMF - Complete Obsidian 1 1.00 3.5 NV (v) Unit 1 m x 2 m 2001-2 TS 01 - Flaked Stone Biface - - Fragment Basalt 1 12.90 - -2001-2 TS 02 - Flaked Stone Debitage Flake - - Obsidian 2 0.60 NV (v) - -99-4 01 - - Flaked Stone Debitage Flake - - Obsidian 1 0.10 0 3.4 NV (v) Trench 99-4 02 - - Flaked Stone Debitage Flake - - Obsidian 1 0.10 0 5.2 NV (v) Trench 99-4 03 - - Flaked Stone Debitage Flake - - Obsidian 1 0.05 0 NV (v) Trench 99-4 04 - - Flaked Stone Debitage Flake - - Obsidian 1 0.05 0 NV (v) Trench 99-4 05 - - Flaked Stone Debitage Flake - - Obsidian 1 0.05 0 3.1 NV (v) Trench 99-4 06 - - Flaked Stone Debitage Flake - - Obsidian 1 0.05 0 3.0 NV (v) Trench 99-4 07 - - Flaked Stone Debitage Flake - - Obsidian 1 0.05 0 2.9 NV (v) Trench 99-4 08 - - Flaked Stone Debitage Flake - - Obsidian 1 0.05 0 3.7 NV (v) Trench 99-4 09 - - Flaked Stone Debitage Flake - - Obsidian 23 0.20 0 NV (v) Trench 99-4 10 - - Sample - Flotation - - - 1 2.82 0 Trench 99-4 11 - - Thermally Altered Rock - - - - Other 11 9.30 0 Trench 99-4 12 - - Other Bead/ - - - Andesite? 1 0.05 0 Trench

Ornament 99-4 13 - - Flaked Stone Debitage Flake - - Obsidian 1 0.05 0 3.7 NV (v) Trench 99-4 14 - - Flaked Stone Debitage Flake - - Obsidian 1 0.05 0 2.7 NV (v) Trench 99-4 15 - - Flaked Stone Debitage Flake - - Obsidian 1 0.10 0 4.6 NV (v) Trench 99-4 16 - - Flaked Stone - - - - - 0 0.00 0 99-4 16 ~ - Flaked Stone Debitage Flake - - Obsidian 1 0.10 0 2.0 NV (v) Trench 99-4 17 - - Flaked Stone Debitage Flake - - Obsidian 1 0.05 0 NV (v) Trench 99-4 18 - - Flaked Stone Debitage Flake - - Obsidian 1 0.00 0 3.0 NV (v) Trench 99-4 19 - - Flaked Stone Debitage Flake - - Obsidian 1 0.07 0 1.6 AN (v) Trench 99-4 20 - - Flaked Stone Debitage Flake - - Obsidian 1 0.05 0 3.3 NV (v) Trench 99-4 21 - - Flaked Stone Debitage Flake - - Obsidian 1 0.05 0 3.0 NV (v) Trench 99-4 22 - - Flaked Stone Debitage Flake - - Obsidian 1 0.07 0 NV (v) Trench 99-4 23 - - Flaked Stone Debitage Flake - - Obsidian 1 0.01 0 1.1 NV (v) Trench 99-4 24 - - Flaked Stone Debitage Flake - - Obsidian 1 0.01 0 1.5 NV (v) Trench 99-4 25 - - Flaked Stone Debitage Flake - - Obsidian 3 0.02 0 NV (v) Trench 99-4 26 - - Flaked Stone Debitage Flake - - Obsidian 10 0.30 0 NV (v) Trench 99-4 27 - - Thermally Altered Rock - - - - Limestone? 1 1.50 0 Trench 99-4 28 - - Flaked Stone Debitage Flake - - Tuff 3 0.30 0 Trench 99-4 29 - - Other - - - - Clay 1 1.10 0 Trench 99-4 30 - - Flaked Stone Debitage Flake - - Obsidian 1 0.04 0 2.8 NV (v) Trench

E.11

1/4" 190–200 1/4" 190–200 1/4" 190–200 1/4" 200–210 1/4" 200–210 1/4" 200–210 1/4" 200–210 1/4" 175–190 1/4" 200–210 1/4" 200–210 - 40–130 - 40–130

200+ 200+ 200+ 200+ 200+ 200+ 200+ 200+ 200+ 200–220 200+ 200+

145–170 145–170 145–220

145–220 145–220 145–220 190–200 190–205 190–205

1/8" 190–205 1/8" 205–215 1/8" 205–215 1/8" 205–215 1/8" 145–220

145–220 145–220 145–220 160+

N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

N/A N/A N/A

N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

N/A N/A N/A N/A

STONE TOOL PROVENIENCES AND METRICS

Cat. No.Tool Type

(2001-2-) Provenience

Length Width Thickness Weight Remarks

(cm) (cm) (cm) (g)

Projectile Point

Projectile Point

Projectile Point

Biface

Biface

Biface

Biface

Biface

Biface

Biface

Biface

Biface

Biface

Biface

Biface Uniface

Uniface

Core

Core

Core

Core

Core

01-14

14-10

26-18

01-21

03-17

09-15

10-13

11-12

14-04

14-18

26-01

26-22

31-13

31-17

TS-01 11-30

15-23

01-20

03-25

03-06

03-28

06-25

Unit 1 170–180 Unit 14 140–150 Unit 26 200–210 Unit 1

150–160 Unit 3

200–210 Unit 9

180–190 Unit 10 160–170 Unit 11 140–150 Unit 14 120–130 Unit 14 160–170 Unit 26 135–140 Unit 26 210–220 Unit 31 190–200 Unit 31 200–210 40–130 Unit 11

Unit 15

Unit 1 150–160 Unit 3

130–140 Unit 3

160–170 Unit 3

190–200 Unit 6

140–150

2.51

3.55

5.14

1.28

3.26

2.52

1.38

3.79

2.25

1.4

1.75

1.31

3.35

2.81

4.76 1.72

2.76

2.76

2.08

3.23

2.62

2.36

1.36

1.61

1.87

1.42

2.12

1.15

1.64

1.18

1.95

1.15

1.97

1.92

2.91

1.02

2.09 1.01

1.45

1.55

1.5

2.68

1.7

1.6

0.55

0.65

1.07

0.52

0.9

0.5

0.63

1

0.55

0.49

0.8

1

0.99

0.55

1.38 0.73

0.96

1.16

0.9

1.28

0.65

1.27

1.6

3.1

7.2

0.6

6.7

1.0

1.2

3.0

1.8

0.6

2.5

2.7

9.6

0.9

12.9 1.1

3.5

6

3.6

12

3.1

4

Trench spoils1st of 2 halves 2nd of 2 halves

E-12

Stone Tool Proveniences and Metrics (continued)

Tool Type Cat. No. (2001-2-)

Provenience Length

(cm) Width (cm)

Thickness (cm)

Weight (g)

Remarks

Core 14-33 Unit 14 2.3 2.09 1.08 5.2 210–220

Core 15-19 Unit 15 2.85 2.5 1.07 6.1 200–210

Core 22-24 Unit 22 3.62 2.6 1.78 16.1 210–220

Core 31-10 Unit 31 3.57 2.38 0.89 7 175–190

Modified Flake 01-22 Unit 1 23.66 16.06 2.15 1 150–160

Modified Flake 03-24 Unit 3 1.53 1.39 0.25 0.5 180–190

















E-13

Stone Tool Proveniences and Metrics (continued)

Tool Type Cat. No. (2001-2-)

Provenience Length

(cm) Width (cm)

Thickness (cm)

Weight (g)

Remarks












Manuport 14-43 Unit 14 11.28 3.66 2.62 158.0 190–200

Abrader 26-26 Unit 26 8.0 7.29 4.27 215.9 200–210

Hammerstone 11-25 Unit 11 7.42 4.13 1.8 76.3 190–200

Hammerstone 26-09 Unit 26 4.82 3.72 2.5 59.8 Fragment 160–170

Battered cobble 11-43 Unit 11 9.25 6.16 3.55 156.3 190–200

Battered cobble 6-28 Unit 6 7.01 4.63 1.05 50.1 150–160

E-14

APPENDIX F

Radiocarbon-dating Methods and Results

Beta Analytic Inc. Mr. Darden Hood 4985 SW 74 Court Director Miami, Florida 33155 USA Tel: 305 667 5167 Mr. Ronald Hatfield Fax: 305 663 0964 Mr. Christopher Patrick [email protected] Deputy Directors Www.radiocarbon.com

Consistent Accuracy...

Delivered On Time. Analytical Procedures

Final ReportFinal Report

The final report package includes the final date report, a statement outlining our analytical procedures, a glossary of pretreatment terms, calendar calibration information, billing documents (containing balance/credit information and the number of samples submitted within the yearly discount period), and peripheral items to use with future submittals. The final report includes the individual analysis method, the delivery basis, the material type and the individual pretreatments applied. The final report has been sent by mail and e-mail (where available).

Pretreatment

Pretreatment methods are reported along with each result. All necessary chemical and mechanical pretreatments of the submitted material were applied at the laboratory to isolate the carbon, which may best represent the time event of interest. When interpreting the results, it is important to consider the pretreatments. Some samples cannot be fully pretreated, making their 14C ages more subjective than samples, which can be fully pretreated. Some materials receive no pretreatments. Please look at the pretreatment indicated for each sample and read the pretreatment glossary to understand the implications.

Analysis

Materials measured by the radiometric technique were analyzed by synthesizing sample carbon to benzene (92% C), measuring for 14C content in one of 53 scintillation spectrometers, and then calculating for radiocarbon age. If the Extended Counting Service was used, the 14C content was measured for a greatly extended period of time. AMS results were derived from reduction of sample carbon to graphite (100 %C), along with standards and backgrounds. The graphite was then detected for 14C content in one of 9 accelerator-mass-spectrometers (AMS).

The Radiocarbon Age and Calendar Calibration

The "Conventional 14C Age (*)" is the result after applying 13C/12C corrections to the measured age and is the most appropriate radiocarbon age. If an "*" is attached to this date, it means the 13C/12C was estimated rather than measured (The ratio is an option for radiometric analysis, but included on all AMS analyses.) Ages are reported with the units “BP” (Before Present). “Present” is defined as AD 1950 for the purposes of radiocarbon dating.

Results for samples containing more 14C than the modern reference standard are reported as “percent modern carbon” (pMC). These results indicate the material was respiring carbon after the advent of thermo-nuclear weapons testing (an is less than ~ 50 years old).

Applicable calendar calibrations are included for materials between about 100 and 19,000 BP. If calibrations are not included with a report, those results were either too young, too old, or inappropriate for calibration. Please read the enclosed page discussing calibration.

Beta Analytic Inc. - 4985 SW 74 Court, Miami, Florida 33155 USA - Tel: 305-667-5167 - Fax: 305-663-0964 - [email protected]

PRETREATMENT GLOSSARY Standard Pretreatment Protocols at Beta Analytic

Unless otherwise requested by a submitter or discussed in a final date report, the following procedures apply to pretreatment of samples submitted for analysis. This glossary defines the pretreatment methods applied to each result listed on the date report form (e.g. you will see the designation “acid/alkali/acid” listed along with the result for a charcoal sample receiving such pretreatment).

Pretreatment of submitted materials is required to eliminate secondary carbon components. These components, if not eliminated, could result in a radiocarbon date, which is too young or too old. Pretreatment does not ensure that the radiocarbon date will represent the time event of interest. This is determined by the sample integrity. Effects such as the old wood effect, burned intrusive roots, bioturbation, secondary deposition, secondary biogenic activity incorporating recent carbon (bacteria) and the analysis of multiple components of differing age are just some examples of potential problems. The pretreatment philosophy is to reduce the sample to a single component, where possible, to minimize the added subjectivity associated with these types of problems. If you suspect your sample requires special pretreatment considerations be sure to tell the laboratory prior to analysis.

"acid/alkali/acid"

The sample was first gently crushed/dispersed in deionized water. It was then given hot HCI acid washes to eliminate carbonates and alkali washes (NaOH) to remove secondary organic acids. The alkali washes were followed by a final acid rinse to neutralize the solution prior to drying. Chemical concentrations, temperatures, exposure times, and number of repetitions, were applied accordingly with the uniqueness of the sample. Each chemical solution was neutralized prior to application of the next. During these serial rinses, mechanical contaminants such as associated sediments and rootlets were eliminated. This type of pretreatment is considered a "full pretreatment". On occasion the report will list the pretreatment as "acid/alkali/acid - insolubles" to specify which fraction of the sample was analyzed. This is done on occasion with sediments (See "acid/alkali/acid - solubles"

Typically applied to: charcoal, wood, some peats, some sediments, and textiles "acid/alkali/acid - solubles"

On occasion the alkali soluble fraction will be analyzed. This is a special case where soil conditions imply That the soluble fraction will provide a more accurate date. It is also used on some occasions to verify the present/absence or degree of contamination present from secondary organic acids. The sample was first pretreated with acid to remove any carbonates and to weaken organic bonds. After the alkali washes (as discussed above) are used, the solution containing the alkali soluble fraction is isolated/filtered and combined with acid. The soluble fraction, which precipitates, is rinsed and dried prior to combustion.

"acid/alkali/acid/cellulose extraction"

Following full acid/alkali/acid pretreatments, the sample is bathed in (sodium chlorite) NaCIO2 under very controlled conditions (Ph = 3, temperature = 70 degrees C). This eliminates all components except wood cellulose. It is useful for woods that are either very old or highly contaminated.

Applied to: wood

"acid washes"

Surface area was increased as much a possible. Solid chunks were crushed, fibrous materials were shredded, and sediments were dispersed. Acid (HCI) was applied repeatedly to ensure the absence of carbonates. Chemical concentrations, temperatures, exposure times, and number of repetitions, were applied accordingly with the uniqueness of each sample. The sample was not be subjected to alkali washes to ensure the absence of secondary organic acids for intentional reasons. The most common reason is that the primary carbon is soluble in the alkali. Dating results reflect the total organic content of the analyzed material. Their accuracy depends on the researcher's ability to subjectively eliminate potential contaminants based on contextual facts.

Typically applied to: organic sediments, some peats, small wood or charcoal, special cases

Beta Analytic Inc. - 4985 SW 74 Court, Miami, Florida 33155 USA - Tel: 305-667-5167 - Fax: 305-663-0964 - [email protected]

PRETREATMENT GLOSSARY Standard Pretreatment Protocols at Beta Analytic

(Continued)

"collagen extraction: with alkali” or “collagen extraction: without alkali”

The material was first tested for friability ("softness"). Very soft bone material is an indication of the potential absence of the collagen fraction (basal bone protein acting as a "reinforcing agent" within the crystalline apatite structure). It was then washed in de-ionized water, the surface scraped free of the outer most layers and then gently crushed. Dilute, cold HCI acid was repeatedly applied and replenished until the mineral fraction (bone apatite) was eliminated. The collagen was then dissected and inspected for rootlets. Any rootlets present were also removed when replenishing the acid solutions. “With alkali” refers to additional pretreatment with sodium hydroxide (NaOH) to ensure the absence of secondary organic acids. “Without alkali” refers to the NaOH step being skipped due to poor preservation conditions, which could result in removal of all available organics if performed.

Typically applied to: bones

"acid etch"

The calcareous material was first washed in de-ionized water, removing associated organic sediments and debris (where present). The material was then crushed/dispersed and repeatedly subjected to HCI etches to eliminate secondary carbonate components. In the case of thick shells, the surfaces were physically abraded prior to etching down to a hard, primary core remained. In the case of porous carbonate nodules and caliches, very long exposure times were applied to allow infiltration of the acid. Acid exposure times, concentrations, and number of repetitions, were applied accordingly with the uniqueness of the sample.

Typically applied to: shells, caliches, and calcareous nodules

"neutralized"

Carbonates precipitated from ground water are usually submitted in an alkaline condition (ammonium Hydroxide or sodium hydroxide solution). Typically this solution is neutralized in the original sample container, using deionized water. If larger volume dilution was required, the precipitate and solution were transferred to a sealed separatory flask and rinsed to neutrality. Exposure to atmosphere was minimal.

Typically applied to: Strontium carbonate, Barium carbonate (i.e. precipitated ground water samples)

"carbonate precipitation"

Dissolved carbon dioxide and carbonate species are precipitated from submitted water by complexing them as ammonium carbonate. Strontium chloride is added to the ammonium carbonate solution and strontium carbonate is precipitated for the analysis. The result is representative of the dissolved inorganic carbon within the water. Results are reported as "water DIC".

Applied to: water

"solvent extraction"

The sample was subjected to a series of solvent baths typically consisting of benzene, toluene, hexane, pentane, and/or acetone. This is usually performed prior to acid/alkali/acid pretreatments.

Applied to: textiles, prevalent or suspected cases of pitch/tar contamination, conserved materials.

"none"

No laboratory pretreatments were applied. Special requests and pre-laboratory pretreatment usually accounts for this.

Beta Analytic Inc. Mr. Darden Hood 4985 SW 74 Court Director Miami, Florida 33155 USA Tel: 305 667 5167 Mr. Ronald Hatfield Fax: 305 663 0964 Mr. Christopher Patrick [email protected] Deputy Directors Www.radiocarbon.com

Consistent Accuracy...

Delivered On Time.

Calendar Calibration at Beta Analytic

Calibrations of radiocarbon age determinations are applied to convert BP results to calendar years. The short-term difference between the two is caused by fluctuations in the heliomagnetic modulation of the galactic cosmic radiation and, recently, large scale burning of fossil fuels and nuclear devices testing. Geomagnetic variations are the probable cause of longer-term differences.

The parameters used for the corrections have been obtained through precise analyses of hundreds of samples taken from known-age tree rings of oak, sequoia, and fir up to about 10,000 BP. Calibration using tree-rings to about 12,000 BP is still being researched and provides somewhat less precise correlation. Beyond that, up to about 20,000 BP, correlation using a modeled curve determined from U/Th measurements on corals is used. This data is still highly subjective. Calibrations are provided up to about 19,000 years BP using the most recent calibration data available.

The Pretoria Calibration Procedure (Radiocarbon, Vol 35, No.1, 1993, pg 317) program has been chosen for these calendar calibrations. It uses splines through the tree-ring data as calibration curves, which eliminates a large part of the statistical scatter of the actual data points. The spline calibration allows adjustment of the average curve by a quantified closeness-of-fit parameter to the measured data points. A single spline is used for the precise correlation data available back to 9900 BP for terrestrial samples and about 6900 BP for marine samples. Beyond that, splines are taken on the error limits of the correlation curve to account for the lack of precision in the data points.

In describing our calibration curves, the solid bars represent one sigma statistics (68% probability) and the hollow bars represent two sigma statistics (95% probability). Marine carbonate samples that have been corrected for 13C/12C, have also been corrected for both global and local geographic reservoir effects (as published in Radiocarbon, Volume 35, Number 1, 1993) prior to the calibration. Marine carbonates that have not been corrected for 13C/12C are adjusted by an assumed value of 0 %0 in addition to the reservoir corrections. Reservoir corrections for fresh water carbonates are usually unknown and are generally not accounted for in those calibrations. In the absence of measured 13C/12C ratios, a typical value of -5 %0 is assumed for freshwater carbonates.

(Caveat: the correlation curve for organic materials assume that the material dated was living for exactly ten years (e.g. a collection of 10 individual tree rings taken from the outer portion of a tree that was cut down to produce the sample in the feature dated). For other materials, the maximum and minimum calibrated age ranges given by the computer program are uncertain. The possibility of an "old wood effect" must also be considered, as well as the potential inclusion of younger or older material in matrix samples. Since these factors are indeterminant error in most cases, these calendar calibration results should be used only for illustrative purposes. In the case of carbonates, reservoir correction is theoretical and the local variations are real, highly variable and dependent on provenience. Since imprecision in the correlation data beyond 10,000 years is high, calibrations in this range are likely to change in the future with refinement in the correlation curve. The age ranges and especially the intercept ages generated by the program must be considered as approximations.)

____________________________________________________________________________________

____________________________________________________________________________________

____________________________________________________________________________________

____________________________________________________________________________________

Mr. Jack Meyer

Report Date: 9/9/02

Sonoma State University Material Received: 7/29/02

Sample Data Measured 13C/12C Conventional Radiocarbon Age Ratio Radiocarbon Age (*)

Beta - 169303 3750 +/- 70 BP -25.1 o/oo 3740 +/- 70 BPSAMPLE : TRANCAS #1, Unit 14, 2Ab-2Bwb, 1.2-1.3 m bdaANALYSIS : Radiometric-Standard delivery (bulk low carbon analysis on sediment)MATERIAL/PRETREATMENT : (organic sediment): acid washes2 SIGMA CALIBRATION : Cal BC 2340 to 1940 (Cal BP 4290 to 3900)

Beta - 169304 5000 +/- 60 BP -25.0 o/oo 5000 +/- 60 BPSAMPLE : TRANCAS #2, Unit 14, 3ABtb, 2.0-2.25 m bdaANALYSIS : Radiometric-Standard delivery (bulk low carbon analysis on sediment)MATERIAL/PRETREATMENT : (organic sediment): acid washes2 SIGMA CALIBRATION : Cal BC 3960 to 3660 (Cal BP 5900 to 5600)

Beta - 169305 4780 +/- 40 BP -26.3 o/oo 4760 +/- 40 BP SAMPLE : TRANCAS #3, Unit 10, 3Btb, 2.3-2.4 m bda ANALYSIS : AMS-Standard delivery MATERIAL/PRETREATMENT : (charred material): acid/alkali/acid 2 SIGMA CALIBRATION : Cal BC 3640 to 3500 (Cal BP 5590 to 5450) AND Cal BC 3440 to 3380 (Cal BP 5390 to 5330)

CALIBRATION OF RADIOCARBON AGE TO CALENDAR YEARS

Rad

ioca

rbon

age

(BP)

(Variables: C13/C12=-25.1:lab. mult=1)

Laboratory number: Beta-169303

Conventional radiocarbon age: 3740±70 BP

2 Sigma calibrated result: Cal BC 2340 to 1940 (Cal BP 4290 to 3900) (95% probability)

Intercept data

Intercept of radiocarbon age with calibration curve: Cal BC 2140 (Cal BP 4090)

1 Sigma calibrated results: Cal BC 2270 to 2260 (Cal BP 4220 to 4210) and (68% probability) Cal BC 2220 to 2030 (Cal BP 4170 to 3980)

3740±70 BP Organic sediment4000

3950

3900

3850

3800

3750

3700

3650

3600

3550

3500

3450 2400 2350 2300 2250 2200 2150 2100 2050 2000 1950 1900

Cal BC

References: Database used

INTCAL98 Calibration DatabaseEditorial Comment

Stuiver, M., van der Plicht, H., 1998, Radiocarbon 40(3), pxii-xiii INTCAL98 Radiocarbon Age Calibration

Stuiver, M., et. al., 1998, Radiocarbon 40(3), p1041-1083 MathematicsA Simplified Approach to Calibrating C14 Dates

Talma, A. S., Vogel, J. C., 1993, Radiocarbon 35(2), p317-322

Beta Analytic Radiocarbon Dating Laboratory 4985 S.W. 74th Court, Miami, Florida 33155 • Tel: (305)667-5167 • Fax: (305)663-0964 • E-Mail: [email protected]

mailto:[email protected]

CALIBRATION OF RADIOCARBON AGE TO CALENDAR YEARS

Rad

ioca

rbon

age

(BP)

(Variables: C13/C12=-25:lab. mult=1)

Laboratory number: Beta-169304Conventional radiocarbon age: 5000±60 BP

2 Sigma calibrated result: Cal BC 3960 to 3660 (Cal BP 5900 to 5600) (95% probability)

Intercept data

Intercept of radiocarbon age with calibration curve: Cal BC 3780 (Cal BP 5730)

1 Sigma calibrated results: Cal BC 3920 to 3870 (Cal BP 5870 to 5820) and (68% probability) Cal BC 3810 to 3700 (Cal BP 5760 to 5650)

5000±60 BP Organic sediment5200

5150

5100

5050

5000

4950

4900

4850

4800

4750 4000 3950 3900 3850 3800 3750 3700

Cal BC


Calibration DatabaseEditorial Comment




Beta Analytic Inc. 4985 SW 74 Court, Miami, Florida 33155 USA • Tel: (305) 667 5167 • Fax: (305) 663 0964 • E-Mail: [email protected]

3650


CALIBRATION OF RADIOCARBON AGE TO CALENDAR YEARS (Variables: C13/C12=-26.3:lab. mult=1)

Laboratory number: Conventional radiocarbon age:

2 Sigma calibrated results: (95% probability)

Intercepts of radiocarbon age with calibration curve:

1 Sigma calibrated result: (68% probability)

4760±40 BP

Beta-1693054760±40 BP

Cal BC 3640 to 3500 (Cal BP 5590 to 5450) andCal BC 3440 to 3380 (Cal BP 5390 to 5330)

Intercept data

Cal BC 3620 (Cal BP 5580) andCal BC 3580 (Cal BP 5530) andCal BC 3530 (Cal BP 5480)

Cal BC 3640 to 3520 (Cal BP 5580 to 5470)

Charred material

Rad

ioca

rbon

age

(BP)

4900

4880

4860

4840

4820

4800

4780

4760

4740

4720

4700

4680

4660

4640

4620 3700 3650 3600 3550 3500 3450 3400 3350

Cal BC


Calibration DatabaseEditorial Comment




Beta Analytic Inc. 4985 SW 74 Court, Miami, Florida 33155 USA • Tel: (305) 667 5167 • Fax: (305) 663 0964 • E-Mail: [email protected]

3300


FROM: Darden Hood, Director (mailto:mailto:[email protected])(This is a copy of the letter being mailed. Invoices/receipts follow only by mail.)

June 27, 2005

Mr. Jack Meyer Sonoma State University Anthropological Studies Center 1801 East Cotati Avenue Building 29 Rohnert Park, CA 94928 USA

RE: Radiocarbon Dating Result For Sample FT1/200-210

Dear Jack:

Enclosed is the radiocarbon dating result for one sample recently sent to us. It provided plenty of carbon for an accurate measurement and the analysis went normally. As usual, the method of analysis is listed on the report sheet and calibration data is provided where applicable.

Note that this of the sample (FT1/200-210, Beta-205142) does not have a Measured Radiocarbon Age and 13C/12C Ratio reported. This is because the sample was too small to do a separate 13C/12C ratio and AMS analysis. The only available 13C/12C ratio available to calculate a Conventional Radiocarbon Age was that determined on a small aliquot of graphite. Although this ratio corrects to the appropriate Conventional Radiocarbon Age, it is not reported since it includes laboratory chemical and detector induced fractionation.

As always, no students or intern researchers who would necessarily be distracted with other obligations and priorities were used in the analysis. It was analyzed with the combined attention of our entire professional staff.

If you have specific questions about the analyses, please contact us. We are always available to answer your questions.

The cost of analysis was previously invoiced. As always, if you have any questions or would like to discuss the results, don’t hesitate to contact me.

Sincerely,


____________________________________________________________________________________

Mr. Jack Meyer Report Date: 6/27/2005

Sonoma State University Material Received: 5/20/2005

Sample Data Measured 13C/12C Conventional Radiocarbon Age Ratio Radiocarbon Age(*)

Beta - 205142 NA NA 4780 +/- 40 BP SAMPLE : FT1/200-210 ANALYSIS : AMS-Standard delivery MATERIAL/PRETREATMENT : (charred material): acid/alkali/acid 2 SIGMA CALIBRATION : Cal BC 3650 to 3510 (Cal BP 5600 to 5460) AND Cal BC 3420 to 3390 (Cal BP 5370 to 5340) Comment: the original sample was too small for a 13C/12C ratio measurement. However, a ratio including both natural and laboratory effects was measured during the 14C detection to derive a Conventional Radiocarbon Age, suitable for applicable calendar calibration.

CALIBRATION O F RADIOCARBO N AGE TO CALENDAR YEARS

(Variables: C13/C12=-25:lab. mult=1 )

La borato ry num ber:

Conventio nal radiocarbon age: 2 Sigma calibrated results:

(95% probability)

Intercepts of radiocarbon age with calibration curve:

1 Sigma calibrated results: (68% probability)

4780± 40 BP

Beta-2051 42

4780±40 BP

Cal BC 3650 to 3510 (C al BP 5600 to 5460) andCal BC 3420 to 3390 (C al BP 5370 to 5340)

In tercep t data

Cal BC 3630 (Cal BP 558 0) andCal BC 3560 (Cal BP 552 0) andCal BC 3540 (Cal BP 549 0)

Cal BC 3640 to 3 620 (Cal BP 5590 to 5 570) andCal BC 3600 to 3 520 (Cal BP 5540 to 5 470)

C h ar re d m a te ri al

Rad

ioca

rbon

age

(BP)

4 920

4900

4880

4860

4840

4820

4800

4780

4760

4740

4720

4700

4680

4660

4640 3700 3650 3600 3550 3500 3450 3400 3350

C a l B C

References: Database u sed

INTC AL 98 Calibration D atabase Editorial Comm ent

Stui ver, M., v an de r Pl icht, H ., 1998, R adi oc arbon 40(3) , pxii -xi ii INT CAL 98 Radiocarbon Age C al ibration

Stui ver, M., e t. a l., 1998, R adiocarbon 40(3), p1041-1083 M athe matics A Sim pl ifi ed Approac h to Calibratin g C14 D ates

T alma, A . S ., V ogel, J . C., 1993, R adiocarbon 35(2), p317-322

Beta Ana lytic Radio carbo n Datin g Laboratory 4 98 5 S.W . 7 4th Co ur t, M iam i, Flor id a 33 15 5 • T el: (3 05 )66 7- 51 67 • F ax: (3 05 )6 63 -09 64 • E-M ail: b eta@r a dio car bo n.co m

3300

APPENDIX G

Charred Plant Remains from CA-NAP-916

CHARRED PLANT REMAINS FROM CA-NAP-916 by Eric Wohlgemuth

Far Western Anthropological Group, Inc.

Three flotation samples, comprising 25 liters of sediment, were flotation-processed from archaeological investigations at NAP-916. This section reports on charred plant remains recovered from this mid-Holocene deposit. The focus is on charred seed remains; wood charcoal was not identified.

METHODS One large, 12-liter sample each was collected from features 1 and 2. A smaller, 3

liter non-feature sample was collected from 200-220 cm in Trench 4-2-5. The non-feature sample was floated by Brian Gassner using a flot machine modeled after the IDOT device (see Pearsall 1989). Samples from the features were floated using the Flowmaster 2000 machine. The minimum screen size used to recover floatable was 0.4 mm (40/inch), while heavy fractions were washed through 1 mm grade.

Light fractions were size-sorted using 2 mm, 1 mm, 0.7 mm, and 0.5 mm mesh. All grades larger than the 0.4 mm residue were examined using a 7-30X magnification binocular microscope. All wood charcoal was isolated from 2 mm and 1 mm grades except for Feature 1, where it was sorted only from the 2 mm grade due to superabundant heavy fraction contaminants in the 1 mm grade. Due to this problem, only 1/3 of the 0.7 mm grade and 1/5 of the 0.5 mm grade was examined from Feature 1. All larger grades from the Feature 1 sample, as well as all grades from the two other samples, were completely sorted. For the sub-sampled grades from Feature 1, estimates of total sample counts and weights were derived by multiplying by the sampling reciprocal. E.g., the 14 0.7 mm grade and the single 0.5 mm grade acorn nutshell fragments were multiplied by 3 and 5, respectively, and these products (42 and 5, respectively) were added to the 4 1 mm grade fragments, for a total of 51 (see Table 1). All seed and fruit remains, including modern contaminants, were segregated from sorted portions. Heavy fractions were not sorted for plant remains. All nutshell and wood charcoal recovered was counted and weighed to 0.1 mg, while all small seeds were merely counted.

RESULTS Only a small array of charred seed and fruit remains was identified (Table 1). From

all three flotation samples, I identified 32 nutshell fragments representing three genera of nuts, and 9 small seeds identified to family, of which 7 could be identified to one of four genera. All specimens are familiar constituents of central California archaeological sites (Wohlgemuth 2004), and are clearly cultural residues, all probably dietary debris.

G.1

-- -- -- --

-- -- -- --

-- --

-- -- -- --

-- -- -- -- -- --

Table 1. Raw Counts of Charred Seed and Fruit Remains from CA-NAP-916

Sample Feature 1 Feature 2 Non-Feature Unit 11 Unit 10 Trench 4-2-5

200–210 cm 183–193 cm 200–220cm Volume (liters) 12.0 12.0 3.0 Taxon Common Name Nutshell Quercus sp. Oak acorn

count 51 8 3 mg 10.7 0.9 0.2

Umbellularia californica Bay nut count 3 mg 1.2

Marah sp. Wild cucumber Count 1 mg 1.0

Total Nutshell count 54 9 3 mg 11.9 1.9 0.2

Small Seeds Genus

Amsinckia sp. Fiddlenect 1 Deschampsia sp. Hairgrass 5 2 1 Cf. Lagophylla sp. Hare Leaf 1 Madia sp. Tarweed 1

Family Asteraceae Sunflower 3 Poaceae Grass 1 Unidentified seeds 1 Unidentified fragments 3 4 1 Total Small Seeds Identified to Genus 7 3 1 Identified to Family 10 4 1

Wood Charcoal 2 mm (mg) 29.4 9.3 14.1 1 mm (mg) nd 51.3 21.0

DISCUSSION Table 1 shows that Feature 1 has higher counts and diversity of nuts and small

seeds than Feature 2 or the non-feature sample (though sample volume of the latter is only 25% of that processed from the features). Feature 1 may have been the location of activities more focused on processing plant foods and disposing of resultant debris than the other sampled locations.

G.2

As a whole, the NAP-916 plant remains are largely consonant with other mid-Holocene assemblages analyzed from interior central California (Wohlgemuth 2004). In general, mid-Holocene deposits do not feature the dense accumulations of plant remains found in Late Holocene sites. But sites of this age consistently contain plentiful acorn nutshell, which dominates the seed and fruit assemblage at NAP-916. The diversity of small seeds, with four genera represented among the 11 small seeds identified here, is usually broad in mid-Holocene. Atypical for mid-Holocene sites, however, is the absence of charred Brodiaea group bulbs, which tend to be more common relative to nut and seed debris than in sites dating to the Late Holocene; whether this is significant is unclear, however, as the small sample of identified materials from NAP-916 may be insufficient to recover these low-frequency finds.

The high proportion of acorn of all nut remains (84.3%) at NAP-916 is interesting. Comparative archaeobotanical data (Wohlgemuth et al. 2004) from nearby Late Holocene sites NAP-261 (Upper Archaic; 90.1%) and NAP-14 (Upper Emergent; 83.5%) show no real difference in acorn proportion over a long period. Unfortunately, the small sample from NAP-916 precludes serious assessment of long-term stability or change in the use of acorn, as do the few data from NAP-261. It is certainly conceivable that an acorn-intensive economy may have developed relatively early in a favored location like lower Napa Valley, as argued by White for the Clear Lake Basin (2002). But more samples and more data are necessary from mid-Holocene sites like NAP-916 to genuinely address this issue.

If further archaeological investigations are made at NAP-916, a serious effort should be made to collect additional archaeobotanical data to flesh out the small sample of charred plant remains identified here.

G.3

REFERENCES CITED

Pearsall, Deborah M. 2000 Paleoethnobotany: A Handbook of Procedures. 2nd Edition. Academic Press, New York.

White, Greg 2002 Cultural Diversity and Culture Change in Prehistoric Clear Lake Basin: Final Report of

the Anderson Flat Project. Center for Archaeological Research at Davis Publication Number 13.

Wohlgemuth, Eric 2004 The Course of Plant Food Intensification in Native Central California. Unpublished

Ph.D. Dissertation, Department of Anthropology, University of California, Davis.

Wohlgemuth, Eric, John Berg, and Kimberley Carpenter 2004 Archaeological Excavations at Sites CA-NAP-14 and CA-NAP-261 for the Napa River

Trail Improvement Project, City of Napa, California. Report on file at Northwest Information Center, California Historical Resources Information System, Rohnert Park, California.

G.4

APPENDIX H

X-ray Fluorescence Results

APPENDIX I

Obsidian-hydration Results

APPENDIX J

Regional Obsidian Hydration Data

J.1

REGIONAL OBSIDIAN HYDRATION DATA

Obsidian Hydration Data from Selected Southern North Coast Range Archaeological Sites*

Site No. Job # Catalog # Description Unit Depth (cm) Remarks Microns Source Reference

CA-MRN-17 Bifaced point CA-MRN-17 Bifaced point CA-MRN-17 Lanceolate biface CA-MRN-17 Bifaced point CA-MRN-17 Debitage CA-MRN-17 Projectile point CA-MRN-17 Debitage CA-MRN-17 Debitage CA-MRN-17 Biface CA-MRN-17 Biface CA-MRN-17 Biface CA-MRN-17 Scraper CA-MRN-17 Debitage CA-MRN-17 Debitage CA-MRN-17 Debitage CA-MRN-17 Not given CA-MRN-17 Lanceolate CA-MRN-17 Lanceolate biface CA-MRN-17 Debitage CA-MRN-17 Projectile point CA-MRN-17 Lanceolate point CA-MRN-17 Serrated point CA-MRN-17 Lanceolate point CA-MRN-17 Lanceolate point CA-MRN-17 Debitage CA-MRN-17 Lanceolate point CA-MRN-17 Debitage CA-MRN-17 Lanceolate CA-MRN-17 Lanceolate CA-MRN-17 Lanceolate CA-MRN-17 Lanceolate point CA-MRN-17 Lanceolate biface CA-MRN-17 Lanceolate biface CA-MRN-17 Not given CA-MRN-17 CN serrated point CA-MRN-17 Not given CA-MRN-17 Projectile point CA-MRN-17 Lanceolate CA-MRN-17 Side-notched point CA-MRN-17 Debitage CA-MRN-17 Lanceolate point

N12/W2 N12/W2 N12/W2 N12/W2 N12/W2 N12/W2 N12/W2 N12/W2 N12/W2 N12/W2 N12/W2 N12/W2 N12/W2 N12/W2 N12/W2 N21W1 N21W1 N21W1 N21W1 N21W1 N21W1 N21W1 N21W1 N21W1 N21W1 N21W1 N4/W2 N4/W2 N4/W2 N4/W2 N4/W2 N4/W2 N4/W2 N4/W2 N8/W2 N8/W2 N8/W2 N8/W2 N8/W2 N8/W2 N8/W2

070–070 070–070 070–070 070–070 070–090 070–090 070–090 070–090 340–360 340–360 340–360 480–500 540–560 540–560 540–560 010–020 059–059 089–089 120–140 120–140 140–160 140–160 160–180 200–220 200–220 220–230 040–040 040–060 050–050 060–080 080–080 080–100 080–100 110–110 017–017 017–017 038–038 053–053 058–058 062–062 110–120

2.6 2.7 3.0 3.2 2.3 2.8 3.0 3.1 3.1 3.2 3.3 4.3 4.6 5.1 5.8 2.3 2.0 2.0 2.2 2.3 2.5 3.1 2.3 2.8 3.2 3.2 2.6 2.0 2.3 2.4 2.5 2.2 2.4 2.6 2.6 2.7 2.5 2.4 2.4 3.3 2.3

NV (xrf?) Gary Pahl (2003) NV (xrf?) Gary Pahl (2003) NV (xrf?) Gary Pahl (2003) NV (xrf?) Gary Pahl (2003) NV (xrf?) Gary Pahl (2003) NV (xrf?) Gary Pahl (2003) NV (xrf?) Gary Pahl (2003) NV (xrf?) Gary Pahl (2003) NV (xrf?) Gary Pahl (2003) NV (xrf?) Gary Pahl (2003) NV (xrf?) Gary Pahl (2003) NV (xrf?) Gary Pahl (2003) NV (xrf?) Gary Pahl (2003) NV (xrf?) Gary Pahl (2003) NV (xrf?) Gary Pahl (2003) NV (xrf?) Gary Pahl (2003) NV (xrf?) Gary Pahl (2003) NV (xrf?) Gary Pahl (2003) NV (xrf?) Gary Pahl (2003) NV (xrf?) Gary Pahl (2003) NV (xrf?) Gary Pahl (2003) NV (xrf?) Gary Pahl (2003) NV (xrf?) Gary Pahl (2003) NV (xrf?) Gary Pahl (2003) NV (xrf?) Gary Pahl (2003) NV (xrf?) Gary Pahl (2003) NV (xrf?) Gary Pahl (2003) NV (xrf?) Gary Pahl (2003) NV (xrf?) Gary Pahl (2003) NV (xrf?) Gary Pahl (2003) NV (xrf?) Gary Pahl (2003) NV (xrf?) Gary Pahl (2003) NV (xrf?) Gary Pahl (2003) NV (xrf?) Gary Pahl (2003) NV (xrf?) Gary Pahl (2003) NV (xrf?) Gary Pahl (2003) NV (xrf?) Gary Pahl (2003) NV (xrf?) Gary Pahl (2003) NV (xrf?) Gary Pahl (2003) NV (xrf?) Gary Pahl (2003) NV (xrf?) Gary Pahl (2003)

*(sorted by Site/Unit/Depth/Microns)

Obsidian Hydration Data from Selected Southern North Coast Range Archaeological Sites (continued)


CA-MRN-17 Lanceolate point N8/W2 110–120 3.2 NV (xrf?) Gary Pahl (2003) CA-MRN-17 Lanceolate point N8/W2 150–180 2.0 NV (xrf?) Gary Pahl (2003) CA-MRN-17 Bifaced point N8/W2 320–340 3.3 NV (xrf?) Gary Pahl (2003) CA-MRN-17 Stemmed point N8/W2 360–380 2.5 NV (xrf?) Gary Pahl (2003) CA-MRN-17 Stemmed point N8/W2 360–380 3.5 NV (xrf?) Gary Pahl (2003)

CA-NAP-14 91-4-350 Debitage N10;W0 000–010 none 2.2 A (v) Beard (1991) CA-NAP-14 91-4-374 Debitage N10;W0 000–010 none 3.0 BL (v) Beard (1991) CA-NAP-14 91-4-06a Debitage N10;W0 010–020 none 1.3 NV (v) Beard (1991) CA-NAP-14 91-4-06d Debitage N10;W0 010–020 none 1.5 NV (v) Beard (1991) CA-NAP-14 91-4-06e Debitage N10;W0 010–020 none 2.0 NV (v) Beard (1991) CA-NAP-14 91-4-06c Debitage N10;W0 010–020 none 2.1 NV (v) Beard (1991) CA-NAP-14 91-4-06b Debitage N10;W0 010–020 none 2.2 NV (v) Beard (1991) CA-NAP-14 91-4-77 Serrated point N10;W0 020–030 none 1.3 NV (v) Beard (1991) CA-NAP-14 91-4-84 Flake tool N10;W0 020–030 none 1.3 NV (v) Beard (1991) CA-NAP-14 91-4-75 Corner notched point N10;W0 020–030 none 1.4 NV (v) Beard (1991) CA-NAP-14 91-4-85 Flake tool N10;W0 020–030 none 1.4 NV (v) Beard (1991) CA-NAP-14 91-4-67 Serrated point N10;W0 020–030 none 2.0 NV (v) Beard (1991) CA-NAP-14 91-4-78 Serrated point fragment N10;W0 020–030 no visible band - NV (v) Beard (1991) CA-NAP-14 91-4-95 Point N10;W0 040–050 none 1.2 NV (v) Beard (1991) CA-NAP-14 91-4-86 Serrated point fragment N10;W0 040–050 none 1.9 NV (v) Beard (1991) CA-NAP-14 91-4-90 Serrated point fragment N10;W0 040–050 none 2.0 NV (v) Beard (1991) CA-NAP-14 91-4-95 Concave base N10;W0 040–050 DH - NV (v) Beard (1991) CA-NAP-14 91-4-11b Debitage N10;W0 060–070 none 1.7 NV (v) Beard (1991) CA-NAP-14 91-4-11a Debitage N10;W0 060–070 none 1.8 NV (v) Beard (1991) CA-NAP-14 91-4-11c Debitage N10;W0 060–070 none 1.9 NV (v) Beard (1991) CA-NAP-14 91-4-11d Debitage N10;W0 060–070 none 2.1 NV (v) Beard (1991) CA-NAP-14 91-4-11e Debitage N10;W0 060–070 none 4.9 NV (v) Beard (1991) CA-NAP-14 91-4-360 Debitage N30;W0 000–010 none 1.5 A (v) Beard (1991) CA-NAP-14 91-4-4 Corner notched point fragment N30;W0 000–010 none 1.7 NV (v) Beard (1991) CA-NAP-14 91-4-5 Serrated point fragment N30;W0 000–010 none 2.3 NV (v) Beard (1991) CA-NAP-14 91-4-370 Debitage N30;W0 010–020 none 1.7 A (v) Beard (1991) CA-NAP-14 91-4-11 Corner notched point fragment N30;W0 010–020 none 1.8 NV (v) Beard (1991) CA-NAP-14 91-4-29 Corner notched point fragment N30;W0 020–030 none 2.0 NV (v) Beard (1991) CA-NAP-14 91-4-34 Biface N30;W0 020–030 DH - NV (v) Beard (1991) CA-NAP-14 91-4-371 Debitage N30;W0 040–050 none 1.9 A (v) Beard (1991) CA-NAP-14 91-4-2 Flake tool N49;W10 010–020 none 1.8 NV (v) Beard (1991) CA-NAP-14 91-4-1 Serrated point fragment N49;W10 010–020 none 2.5 NV (v) Beard (1991) CA-NAP-14 91-4-22a Debitage N50;W10 020–030 none 1.8 NV (v) Beard (1991) CA-NAP-14 91-4-22d Debitage N50;W10 020–030 none 2.0 NV (v) Beard (1991) CA-NAP-14 91-4-22b Debitage N50;W10 020–030 Band 1 2.1 NV (v) Beard (1991) CA-NAP-14 91-4-22e Debitage N50;W10 020–030 none 2.3 NV (v) Beard (1991) CA-NAP-14 91-4-22c Debitage N50;W10 020–030 none 2.4 NV (v) Beard (1991) CA-NAP-14 91-4-22b Debitage N50;W10 020–030 Band 2 3.1 NV (v) Beard (1991) CA-NAP-14 91-4-118 Biface N50;W10 040–050 none 2.2 NV (v) Beard (1991) CA-NAP-14 91-4-372 Debitage N50;W10 050–060 none 2.2 A (v) Beard (1991)

J.2



CA-NAP-14 91-4-373 Debitage N50;W10 060–070 weathered 2.2 A (v) Beard (1991) CA-NAP-14 91-4-150 Biface N50;W10 070–080 none 1.3 NV (v) Beard (1991) CA-NAP-14 91-4-161 Flake tool N50;W10 080–090 none 2.0 NV (v) Beard (1991) CA-NAP-14 91-4-175 Serrated point fragment N50;W10 090–100 none 1.9 NV (v) Beard (1991) CA-NAP-14 91-4-33b Debitage N50;W10 130–140 none 1.6 NV (v) Beard (1991) CA-NAP-14 91-4-33e Debitage N50;W10 130–140 none 1.6 NV (v) Beard (1991) CA-NAP-14 91-4-33a Debitage N50;W10 130–140 none 2.2 NV (v) Beard (1991) CA-NAP-14 91-4-33d Debitage N50;W10 130–140 none 2.4 NV (v) Beard (1991) CA-NAP-14 91-4-33c Debitage N50;W10 130–140 Band 2 3.5 NV (v) Beard (1991) CA-NAP-14 91-4-187 Biface N50;W10 130–140 none 3.9 NV (v) Beard (1991) CA-NAP-14 91-4-33c Debitage N50;W10 130–140 Band 1 4.2 NV (v) Beard (1991) CA-NAP-14 91-4-195 Biface fragment N50;W10/STU none 2.0 NV (v) Beard (1991) CA-NAP-14 91-4-02d Debitage S20;W23 010–020 none 1.5 NV (v) Beard (1991) CA-NAP-14 91-4-02a Debitage S20;W23 010–020 none 1.7 NV (v) Beard (1991) CA-NAP-14 91-4-02b Debitage S20;W23 010–020 none 2.3 NV (v) Beard (1991) CA-NAP-14 91-4-02c Debitage S20;W23 010–020 none 2.3 NV (v) Beard (1991) CA-NAP-14 91-4-02e Debitage S20;W23 010–020 none 2.8 NV (v) Beard (1991)

CA-NAP-15 80-H42-88 79-28-2706 Biface BRM locus backdirt none 3.1 A Stradford & Schwaderer (1982) CA-NAP-15 80-H42-84 79-28-2702 Flake BRM locus backdirt none 3.2 A Stradford & Schwaderer (1982) CA-NAP-15 80-H42-86 79-28-2707 Point BRM locus backdirt none 3.6 N Stradford & Schwaderer (1982) CA-NAP-15 80-H42-85 79-28-2702 Flake BRM locus backdirt none 4.4 N Stradford & Schwaderer (1982) CA-NAP-15 80-H42-87 79-28-2702 Flake BRM locus backdirt none 5.1 N Stradford & Schwaderer (1982) CA-NAP-15 80-H42-89 79-28-2705 Modified lithic BRM locus backdirt NVB: weathered - N Stradford & Schwaderer (1982) CA-NAP-15 80-H42-53 79-28-2462 Flake N0;W2 020–bedrock none 2.7 A Stradford & Schwaderer (1982) CA-NAP-15 80-H42-55 79-28-2462 Flake N0;W2 020–bedrock none 3.0 A Stradford & Schwaderer (1982) CA-NAP-15 80-H42-54 79-28-2462 Flake N0;W2 020–bedrock none 3.9 N Stradford & Schwaderer (1982) CA-NAP-15 80-H42-51 79-28-2462 Flake N0;W2 020–bedrock none 4.7 N Stradford & Schwaderer (1982) CA-NAP-15 80-H42-49 79-28-2469 Flake N0;W2 020–bedrock none 5.8 N Stradford & Schwaderer (1982) CA-NAP-15 80-H42-48 79-28-2469 Flake N0;W2 020–bedrock none 5.9 N Stradford & Schwaderer (1982) CA-NAP-15 80-H42-47 79-28-2473 Biface fragment N0;W2 020–bedrock none 6.7 N Stradford & Schwaderer (1982) CA-NAP-15 80-H42-56 79-28-2462 Flake N0;W2 020–bedrock none 7.3 N Stradford & Schwaderer (1982) CA-NAP-15 80-H42-50 79-28-2469 Flake N0;W2 020–bedrock none 8.0 N Stradford & Schwaderer (1982) CA-NAP-15 80-H42-52 79-28-2462 Flake N0;W2 020–bedrock none 9.0 N Stradford & Schwaderer (1982) CA-NAP-15 80-H42-95 79-28-228 Flake N0;W6 010–020 none 1.2 N Stradford & Schwaderer (1982) CA-NAP-15 80-H42-96 79-28-231 Flake N0;W6 020–030 none 2.5 N Stradford & Schwaderer (1982) CA-NAP-15 80-H42-97 79-28-235 Flake N0;W6 030–040 none 1.6 N Stradford & Schwaderer (1982) CA-NAP-15 80-H42-98 79-28-1510 Flake N0;W6 040–050 NVB: weathered - N Stradford & Schwaderer (1982) CA-NAP-15 80-H42-99 79-28-1513 Flake N0;W6 050–060 none 1.2 A Stradford & Schwaderer (1982) CA-NAP-15 80-H42-100 79-28-1516 Flake N0;W6 060–070 NVB: weathered - N Stradford & Schwaderer (1982) CA-NAP-15 80-H42-101 79-28-1536 Point fragment N1;W6 000–020 none 1.6 N Stradford & Schwaderer (1982) CA-NAP-15 80-H42-93 79-28-46 Point N1;W6 020–030 none 1.1 MK Stradford & Schwaderer (1982) CA-NAP-15 80-H42-121 79-28-1337 Flake N15;E1 010–020 none 6.7 N Stradford & Schwaderer (1982) CA-NAP-15 80-H42-120 79-28-1348 Flake N15;E1 030–040 none 5.0 N Stradford & Schwaderer (1982) CA-NAP-15 80-H42-119 79-28-1385 Flake N15;E1 040–050 very thick bank - N Stradford & Schwaderer (1982) CA-NAP-15 80-H42-118 79-28-1398 Flake N15;E1 060–070 none 7.0 N Stradford & Schwaderer (1982)

J.3

J.4



CA-NAP-15 80-H42-117 79-28-1414 Flake N15;E1 CA-NAP-15 80-H42-107 79-28-1428 Biface fragment N15;E1 CA-NAP-15 80-H42-108 79-28-1431 Flake N15;E1 CA-NAP-15 80-H42-91 79-28-1442 Point N15;E1 CA-NAP-15 80-H42-106 79-28-1440 Burin spall N15;E1 CA-NAP-15 80-H42-105 79-28-1447 Point fragment N15;E1 CA-NAP-15 80-H42-104 79-28-1448 Flake N15;E1 CA-NAP-15 80-H42-126 79-28-1111 Flake N16;W13 CA-NAP-15 80-H42-125 79-28-1123 Flake N16;W13 CA-NAP-15 80-H42-124 79-28-1135 Flake N16;W13 CA-NAP-15 80-H42-123 79-28-1143 Flake N16;W13 CA-NAP-15 80-H42-122 79-28-1149 Flake N16;W13 CA-NAP-15 80-H42-16 79-28-527 Flake N17;E3 CA-NAP-15 80-H42-15 79-28-528 Flake N17;E3 CA-NAP-15 80-H42-17 79-28-527 Flake N17;E3 CA-NAP-15 80-H42-05 79-28-696 Point tip N17;E3 CA-NAP-15 80-H42-21 79-28-3033 Biface fragment N17;E3 CA-NAP-15 80-H42-24 79-28-3038 Modified lithic N17;E3 CA-NAP-15 80-H42-25 79-28-3042 Modified lithic N17;E3 CA-NAP-15 80-H42-90 79-28-408 Biface N17;E4 CA-NAP-15 80-H42-13 79-28-436 Flake N17;E4 CA-NAP-15 80-H42-12 79-28-435 Biface fragment N17;E4 CA-NAP-15 80-H42-14 79-28-439 Flake N17;E4 CA-NAP-15 80-H42-22 79-28-3053 Flake N17;E4 CA-NAP-15 80-H42-11 79-28-525 Biface fragment N18;E3 CA-NAP-15 80-H42-06 79-28-674 Flake N18;E3 CA-NAP-15 80-H42-04 79-28-684 Biface fragment N18;E3 CA-NAP-15 80-H42-03 79-28-687 Biface fragment N18;E3 CA-NAP-15 80-H42-20 79-28-3059 Modified lithic N18;E3 CA-NAP-15 80-H42-12 79-28-435 Biface fragment N18;E4 CA-NAP-15 80-H42-10 79-28-600 Biface fragment N18;E4 CA-NAP-15 80-H42-01 79-28-638 Flake N18;E4 CA-NAP-15 80-H42-09 79-28-655 Flake N18;E4 CA-NAP-15 80-H42-01 79-28-638 Flake N18;E4 CA-NAP-15 80-H42-02 79-28-642 Flake N18;E4 CA-NAP-15 80-H42-08 79-28-645 Flake N18;E4 CA-NAP-15 80-H42-07 79-28-644 Flake N18;E4 CA-NAP-15 80-H42-23 79-28-3067 Flake N18;E4 CA-NAP-15 80-H42-19 79-28-3074 Modified lithic N18;E4 CA-NAP-15 80-H42-26 79-28-3074 Modified lithic N18;E4 CA-NAP-15 80-H42-18 79-28-3074 Modified lithic N18;E4 CA-NAP-15 80-H42-94 79-28-1553 Biface fragment N2;W6 CA-NAP-15 80-H42-116 79-28-2109 Flake N29;W24 CA-NAP-15 80-H42-115 79-28-2120 Flake N29;W24 CA-NAP-15 80-H42-114 79-28-2130 Flake N29;W24 CA-NAP-15 80-H42-113 79-28-2139 Flake N29;W24

080–090 none 7.9 N Stradford & Schwaderer (1982) 100–110 none 10.0 N Stradford & Schwaderer (1982) 110–120 none 4.1 A Stradford & Schwaderer (1982) 120–130 none 5.7 N Stradford & Schwaderer (1982) 120–130 very weathered - MK Stradford & Schwaderer (1982) 130–140 none 6.8 N Stradford & Schwaderer (1982) 140–150 none 9.0 N Stradford & Schwaderer (1982) 010–020 no visible band/diffuse - N Stradford & Schwaderer (1982) 030–040 none 4.6 N Stradford & Schwaderer (1982) 050–060 none 6.1 N Stradford & Schwaderer (1982) 070–080 none 2.6 N Stradford & Schwaderer (1982) 090–122 none 6.7 N Stradford & Schwaderer (1982) 160–170 none 3.1 N Stradford & Schwaderer (1982) 160–170 none 3.6 N Stradford & Schwaderer (1982) 160–170 none 5.5 N Stradford & Schwaderer (1982) 170–180 none 3.4 N Stradford & Schwaderer (1982) 220–230 no visible band/diffuse - N Stradford & Schwaderer (1982) 240–250 none 4.5 N Stradford & Schwaderer (1982) 250–260 none 4.6 N Stradford & Schwaderer (1982) 080–090 none 3.8 N Stradford & Schwaderer (1982) 160–170 none 3.0 N Stradford & Schwaderer (1982) 160–170 Band 2 3.2 N Stradford & Schwaderer (1982) 160–170 none 4.3 N Stradford & Schwaderer (1982) 230–240 none 3.6 N Stradford & Schwaderer (1982) 160–170 weathered surface 6.6 N Stradford & Schwaderer (1982) 170–180 none 4.2 N Stradford & Schwaderer (1982) 190–190 none 3.1 N Stradford & Schwaderer (1982) 200–210 none 5.9 N Stradford & Schwaderer (1982) 220–230 none 4.3 A Stradford & Schwaderer (1982) 160–170 Band 1 2.3 N Stradford & Schwaderer (1982) 160–170 none 3.4 N Stradford & Schwaderer (1982) 180–190 Band 1 3.6 N Stradford & Schwaderer (1982) 180–190 none 4.0 N Stradford & Schwaderer (1982) 180–190 Band 2 4.7 N Stradford & Schwaderer (1982) 190–200 none 4.5 N Stradford & Schwaderer (1982) 200–210 none 1.9 A Stradford & Schwaderer (1982) 200–210 none 5.0 N Stradford & Schwaderer (1982) 230–240 none 6.1 N Stradford & Schwaderer (1982) 250–260 none 3.8 N Stradford & Schwaderer (1982) 250–260 none 4.7 N Stradford & Schwaderer (1982) 250–260 none 6.0 N Stradford & Schwaderer (1982) 040–050 none 4.3 N Stradford & Schwaderer (1982) 000–010 none 3.5 N Stradford & Schwaderer (1982) 020–030 none 6.6 N Stradford & Schwaderer (1982) 040–050 no visible band/diffuse - N Stradford & Schwaderer (1982) 060–070 no visible band - N Stradford & Schwaderer (1982)

J.5



CA-NAP-15 80-H42-112 79-28-2149 Flake N29;W24 CA-NAP-15 79-H4-23 78-19-32 Flake none CA-NAP-15 80-H42-59 79-28-2248 Flake S3;W0 CA-NAP-15 80-H42-62 79-28-2871 Flake S3;W0 CA-NAP-15 80-H42-60 79-28-2248 Flake S3;W0 CA-NAP-15 80-H42-62 79-28-2871 Flake S3;W0 CA-NAP-15 80-H42-61 79-28-2248 Flake S3;W0 CA-NAP-15 80-H42-57 79-28-2248 Flake S3;W0 CA-NAP-15 80-H42-58 79-28-2248 Flake S3;W0 CA-NAP-15 80-H42-83 79-28-155 Biface S4;E36 CA-NAP-15 80-H42-82 79-28-713 Flake S4;E36 CA-NAP-15 80-H42-80 79-28-720 Biface fragment S4;E36 CA-NAP-15 80-H42-81 79-28-728 Biface S4;E36 CA-NAP-15 80-H42-78 79-28-726 Flake S4;E36 CA-NAP-15 80-H42-79 79-28-725 Flake S4;E36 CA-NAP-15 80-H42-77 79-28-732 Flake S4;E36 CA-NAP-15 80-H42-76 79-28-741 Flake S4;E36 CA-NAP-15 80-H42-76 79-28-741 Flake S4;E36 CA-NAP-15 80-H42-75 79-28-2199 Flake S4;E36 CA-NAP-15 80-H42-73 79-28-2203 Flake S4;E36 CA-NAP-15 80-H42-63 79-28-2045 Biface fragment S4;W0 CA-NAP-15 80-H42-72 79-28-198 Flake S5;E42 CA-NAP-15 80-H42-72 79-28-198 Flake S5;E42 CA-NAP-15 80-H42-70 79-28-189 Flake S5;E42 CA-NAP-15 80-H42-71 79-28-189 Flake S5;E42 CA-NAP-15 80-H42-69 79-28-192 Flake S5;E42 CA-NAP-15 80-H42-67 79-28-200 Flake S5;E42 CA-NAP-15 80-H42-66 79-28-200 Flake S5;E42 CA-NAP-15 80-H42-64 79-28-202 Biface? S5;E42 CA-NAP-15 80-H42-65 79-28-200 Flake S5;E42 CA-NAP-15 80-H42-68 79-28-200 Flake S5;E42 CA-NAP-15 80-H42-111 79-28-844 Flake S7;E33/10-20 CA-NAP-15 80-H42-110 79-28-853 Flake S7;E33/30-40 CA-NAP-15 80-H42-109 79-28-1649 Flake S7;E33/40-50 CA-NAP-15 80-H42-128 Flake site W of Suscol CA-NAP-15 80-H42-134 Flake site W of Suscol CA-NAP-15 80-H42-129 Flake site W of Suscol CA-NAP-15 80-H42-102 79-28-1920 Biface STU 5 CA-NAP-15 80-H42-103 79-28-2883 Biface STU 6 CA-NAP-15 79-H16-02 79-14-106a Unit 1 CA-NAP-15 79-H16-01 79-14-9 Point Unit 1 CA-NAP-15 79-H16-03 79-14-106b Unit 1 CA-NAP-15 79-H16-04 79-14-106c Unit 1 CA-NAP-15 79-H16-05 79-14-17 Unit 1 CA-NAP-15 79-H16-06 79-14-111a Unit 1 CA-NAP-15 79-H16-07 79-14-111b Unit 1

080–bedrock none 3.7 N Stradford & Schwaderer (1982) 2.4 NV Stradford & Schwaderer (1982)

010–020 none 1.6 N Stradford & Schwaderer (1982) 010–020 Band 1 3.3 N Stradford & Schwaderer (1982) 010–020 none 4.0 N Stradford & Schwaderer (1982) 010–020 Band 2 4.1 N Stradford & Schwaderer (1982) 010–020 none 4.3 N Stradford & Schwaderer (1982) 010–020 none 7.3 N Stradford & Schwaderer (1982) 010–020 no visible band - N Stradford & Schwaderer (1982) 150–160 none 4.7 N Stradford & Schwaderer (1982) 210–220 none 4.4 N Stradford & Schwaderer (1982) 220–230 no visible band/diffuse - N Stradford & Schwaderer (1982) 230–240 faint band 2.7 A Stradford & Schwaderer (1982) 230–240 none 3.2 A Stradford & Schwaderer (1982) 230–240 none 4.5 N Stradford & Schwaderer (1982) 240–250 none 7.5 N Stradford & Schwaderer (1982) 260–270 Band 1 5.8 N Stradford & Schwaderer (1982) 260–270 Band 2 7.2 N Stradford & Schwaderer (1982) 280–290 none 4.5 N Stradford & Schwaderer (1982) 300–310 none 1.9 N Stradford & Schwaderer (1982) 010–020 none 5.9 N Stradford & Schwaderer (1982) 130–140 none 2.4 N Stradford & Schwaderer (1982) 130–140 none 2.4 N Stradford & Schwaderer (1982) 140–150 none 3.1 N Stradford & Schwaderer (1982) 140–150 none 3.1 N Stradford & Schwaderer (1982) 140–150 none 6.2 N Stradford & Schwaderer (1982) 150–160 none 2.2 A Stradford & Schwaderer (1982) 150–160 none 3.1 N Stradford & Schwaderer (1982) 150–160 none 3.4 N Stradford & Schwaderer (1982) 150–160 none 5.2 N Stradford & Schwaderer (1982) 150–160 none 5.2 N Stradford & Schwaderer (1982) 010–020 none 4.1 N Stradford & Schwaderer (1982) 030–040 none 3.4 N Stradford & Schwaderer (1982) 040–050 none 5.3 N Stradford & Schwaderer (1982)

none Band 1 of 2 cuts 1.7 N Stradford & Schwaderer (1982) none Band 2 of 2 cuts 2.8 N Stradford & Schwaderer (1982) none none 3.1 N Stradford & Schwaderer (1982)

000–020 none 2.0 N Stradford & Schwaderer (1982) 000–020 none 2.8 N Stradford & Schwaderer (1982) 010–020 none 1.6 NV Stradford & Schwaderer (1982) 010–020 none 1.9 NV Stradford & Schwaderer (1982) 010–020 none 1.9 NV Stradford & Schwaderer (1982) 010–020 no visible band/diffuse - NV Stradford & Schwaderer (1982) 050–060 none 2.7 NV Stradford & Schwaderer (1982) 060–070 none 1.4 NV Stradford & Schwaderer (1982) 060–070 none 1.9 NV Stradford & Schwaderer (1982)

J.6



CA-NAP-15 79-H16-08 79-14-111c Unit 1 CA-NAP-15 79-H16-11 79-14-116b Unit 1 CA-NAP-15 79-H16-10 79-14-116a Unit 1 CA-NAP-15 79-H16-09 79-14-26 Biface fragment Unit 1 CA-NAP-15 79-H16-12 79-14-27 Point Unit 1 CA-NAP-15 79-H16-13 79-14-36 Flake Unit 1 CA-NAP-15 79-H16-14 79-14-1219 Biface fragment Unit 1 CA-NAP-15 79-H16-16 79-14-121c Biface fragment Unit 1 CA-NAP-15 79-H16-15 79-14-121b Biface fragment Unit 1 CA-NAP-15 79-H16-18 79-14-123b Flake Unit 1 CA-NAP-15 79-H16-19 79-14-123c Flake Unit 1 CA-NAP-15 79-H16-17 79-14-123a Flake Unit 1 CA-NAP-15 79-H16-20 79-14-124 Flake Unit 1 CA-NAP-15 80-H42-92 79-28-1898 Point Unit 12 CA-NAP-15 79-H4-21 Chunk Unit A CA-NAP-15 79-H4-25 78-19-35 Flake Unit A CA-NAP-15 79-H4-26 Flake Unit A CA-NAP-15 79-H4-29 78-19-38 Flake Unit A CA-NAP-15 80-H42-130 78-19-41 Flake Unit B CA-NAP-15 80-H42-131 78-19-43 Flake Unit B CA-NAP-15 80-H42-132 78-19-45 Flake Unit B CA-NAP-15 80-H42-133 78-19-46 Flake Unit B CA-NAP-15 79-H4-36 Flake Unit B CA-NAP-15 79-H4-38 Flake Unit B CA-NAP-15 79-H4-39 78-19-224 Flake Unit B CA-NAP-15 79-H4-41 Flake Unit B CA-NAP-15 79-H4-48 Flake Unit B CA-NAP-15 79-H4-47 Flake Unit B CA-NAP-15 80-H42-27 78-19-172 Flake Unit B CA-NAP-15 80-H42-28 78-19-172 Flake Unit B CA-NAP-15 80-H42-29 78-19-172 Flake Unit B CA-NAP-15 80-H42-35 78-19-172 Flake Unit B CA-NAP-15 80-H42-32 78-19-172 Flake Unit B CA-NAP-15 80-H42-34 78-19-172 Flake Unit B CA-NAP-15 80-H42-30 78-19-172 Flake Unit B CA-NAP-15 80-H42-31 78-19-172 Flake Unit B CA-NAP-15 80-H42-33 78-19-172 Flake Unit B CA-NAP-15 80-H42-30 78-19-172 Flake Unit B CA-NAP-15 80-H42-46 78-19-172 Flake Unit B CA-NAP-15 80-H42-36 78-19-172 Flake Unit B CA-NAP-15 80-H42-45 78-19-172 Flake Unit B CA-NAP-15 80-H42-38 78-19-172 Flake Unit B CA-NAP-15 80-H42-41 78-19-172 Flake Unit B CA-NAP-15 80-H42-37 78-19-172 Flake Unit B CA-NAP-15 80-H42-42 78-19-172 Flake Unit B CA-NAP-15 80-H42-40 78-19-172 Flake Unit B

060–070 none 2.3 NV Stradford & Schwaderer (1982) 110–120 none 2.6 NV Stradford & Schwaderer (1982) 110–120 none 3.0 NV Stradford & Schwaderer (1982) 110–120 none 5.1 NV Stradford & Schwaderer (1982) 120–130 none 2.5 NV Stradford & Schwaderer (1982) 160–170 none 2.7 NV Stradford & Schwaderer (1982) 160–170 none 4.2 NV Stradford & Schwaderer (1982) 160–170 none 6.6 NV Stradford & Schwaderer (1982) 160–170 no visible band - NV Stradford & Schwaderer (1982) 180–190 none 3.3 NV Stradford & Schwaderer (1982) 180–190 none 4.2 NV Stradford & Schwaderer (1982) 180–190 none 5.2 NV Stradford & Schwaderer (1982) 190–200 none 5.7 NV Stradford & Schwaderer (1982)

060–bedrock none 6.0 N Stradford & Schwaderer (1982) 090–100 none 2.4 NV Stradford & Schwaderer (1982) 090–100 none 3.4 NV Stradford & Schwaderer (1982) 100–110 none 3.5 NV Stradford & Schwaderer (1982) 140–150 none 3.9 NV Stradford & Schwaderer (1982) 000–010 none 1.4 N Stradford & Schwaderer (1982) 010–020 faint band 1.7 N Stradford & Schwaderer (1982) 020–030 none 2.4 A Stradford & Schwaderer (1982) 030–040 none 2.1 A Stradford & Schwaderer (1982) 040–050 none 2.5 NV Stradford & Schwaderer (1982) 060–070 none 2.5 A Stradford & Schwaderer (1982) 080–090 none 2.5 NV Stradford & Schwaderer (1982) 130–140 none 4.4 NV Stradford & Schwaderer (1982) 170–180 none 6.1 NV Stradford & Schwaderer (1982) 180–190 none 4.2 NV Stradford & Schwaderer (1982) 190–200 none 1.9 N Stradford & Schwaderer (1982) 190–200 none 3.3 N Stradford & Schwaderer (1982) 190–200 none 5.0 N Stradford & Schwaderer (1982) 200–210 none 1.4 N Stradford & Schwaderer (1982) 200–210 none 1.7 A Stradford & Schwaderer (1982) 200–210 none 3.1 N Stradford & Schwaderer (1982) 200–210 Band 1 3.6 N Stradford & Schwaderer (1982) 200–210 none 3.6 N Stradford & Schwaderer (1982) 200–210 none 4.1 N Stradford & Schwaderer (1982) 200–210 Band 2 4.2 N Stradford & Schwaderer (1982) 200–210 none 5.6 N Stradford & Schwaderer (1982) 200–210 no visible band/diffuse - N Stradford & Schwaderer (1982) 210–220 none 1.7 A Stradford & Schwaderer (1982) 210–220 none 2.4 N Stradford & Schwaderer (1982) 210–220 none 3.9 N Stradford & Schwaderer (1982) 210–220 faint band 4.5 N Stradford & Schwaderer (1982) 210–220 none 4.6 N Stradford & Schwaderer (1982) 210–220 Band 1 4.7 N Stradford & Schwaderer (1982)



CA-NAP-15 80-H42-39 78-19-172 Flake Unit B 210–220 none 4.7 N Stradford & Schwaderer (1982) CA-NAP-15 80-H42-43 78-19-172 Flake Unit B 210–220 none 4.7 N Stradford & Schwaderer (1982) CA-NAP-15 80-H42-40 78-19-172 Flake Unit B 210–220 Band 2 5.4 N Stradford & Schwaderer (1982) CA-NAP-15 80-H42-44 78-19-172 Flake Unit B 210–220 NVB: weathered - N Stradford & Schwaderer (1982) CA-NAP-15 79-H4-03 78-19-174 Flake Unit C 010–020 none 1.2 NV Stradford & Schwaderer (1982) CA-NAP-15 79-H4-08 78-19-174 Flake Unit C 090–100 none 8.8 NV Stradford & Schwaderer (1982) CA-NAP-15 79-H4-11 Flake Unit E 070–080 none 3.1 NV Stradford & Schwaderer (1982) CA-NAP-15 79-H4-14 Nodule fragment Unit E 090–100 none 2.5 NV Stradford & Schwaderer (1982) CA-NAP-15 79-H4-16 Flake Unit E 110–120 none 3.4 NV Stradford & Schwaderer (1982) CA-NAP-15 80-H42-127 78-19-101 Flake Unit E 180–190 none 5.1 N Stradford & Schwaderer (1982) CA-NAP-15 79-H4-46 none 1.0 A Stradford & Schwaderer (1982) CA-NAP-15 79-H4-20 none 1.0 NV Stradford & Schwaderer (1982) CA-NAP-15 79-H4-02 none 1.8 NV Stradford & Schwaderer (1982) CA-NAP-15 79-H4-09 none 1.9 NV Stradford & Schwaderer (1982) CA-NAP-15 79-H4-24 none 2.3 NV Stradford & Schwaderer (1982) CA-NAP-15 79-H4-28 none 2.6 NV Stradford & Schwaderer (1982) CA-NAP-15 79-H4-18 none 2.7 BL Stradford & Schwaderer (1982) CA-NAP-15 79-H4-27 none 3.1 NV Stradford & Schwaderer (1982) CA-NAP-15 79-H4-35 none 3.3 NV Stradford & Schwaderer (1982) CA-NAP-15 79-H4-37 none 3.3 NV Stradford & Schwaderer (1982) CA-NAP-15 79-H4-22 none 3.4 NV Stradford & Schwaderer (1982) CA-NAP-15 79-H4-43 none 3.7 NV Stradford & Schwaderer (1982) CA-NAP-15 79-H4-04 none 4.9 NV Stradford & Schwaderer (1982) CA-NAP-15 79-H4-42 none 6.9 NV Stradford & Schwaderer (1982) CA-NAP-15 79-H4-05 none 7.2 NV Stradford & Schwaderer (1982) CA-NAP-15 79-H4-06 none 8.7 NV Stradford & Schwaderer (1982)

CA-NAP-261 N100/E102 000–010 1.2 NV? Jackson (1978) CA-NAP-261 N100/E102 010–020 3.4 NV? Jackson (1978) CA-NAP-261 N100/E102 020–030 2.7 NV? Jackson (1978) CA-NAP-261 N100/E102 050–060 3.0 NV? Jackson (1978) CA-NAP-261 N102/E87 010–020 2.0 NV? Jackson (1978) CA-NAP-261 N102/E87 020–030 4.3 NV? Jackson (1978) CA-NAP-261 N102/E87 030–040 3.2 NV? Jackson (1978) CA-NAP-261 N102/E87 040–050 3.0 NV? Jackson (1978) CA-NAP-261 N102/E87 040–050 3.5 NV? Jackson (1978) CA-NAP-261 N102/E87 050–060 2.3 NV? Jackson (1978) CA-NAP-261 N102/E87 050–060 4.3 NV? Jackson (1978) CA-NAP-261 N102/E87 070–080 3.0 NV? Jackson (1978) CA-NAP-261 N102/E87 070–080 3.8 NV? Jackson (1978) CA-NAP-261 N102/E88 020–030 1.1 NV? Jackson (1978) CA-NAP-261 N102/E88 020–030 2.4 NV? Jackson (1978) CA-NAP-261 N106/E87.5 000–010 3.8 NV? Jackson (1978) CA-NAP-261 N106/E87.5 000–010 4.7 NV? Jackson (1978) CA-NAP-261 N106/E87.5 010–020 3.0 NV? Jackson (1978) CA-NAP-261 N106/E87.5 020–030 2.9 NV? Jackson (1978)

J.7



J.8

CA-NAP-261 N106/E87.5 CA-NAP-261 N106/E87.5 CA-NAP-261 N106/E87.5 CA-NAP-261 N107/E100 CA-NAP-261 N107/E100 CA-NAP-261 N107/E100 CA-NAP-261 N107/E100 CA-NAP-261 N107/E100 CA-NAP-261 N107/E100 CA-NAP-261 N107/E100 CA-NAP-261 N107/E100 CA-NAP-261 N107/E100 CA-NAP-261 N107/E100 CA-NAP-261 N107/E102 CA-NAP-261 N107/E102 CA-NAP-261 N107/E102 CA-NAP-261 N107/E102 CA-NAP-261 N107/E102 CA-NAP-261 N107/E102 CA-NAP-261 N107/E102 CA-NAP-261 N107/E102 CA-NAP-261 N107/E102 CA-NAP-261 N107/E102 CA-NAP-261 N107/E88 CA-NAP-261 N107/E88 CA-NAP-261 N107/E88 CA-NAP-261 N107/E88 CA-NAP-261 N107/E94 CA-NAP-261 N107/E96 CA-NAP-261 N107/E98 CA-NAP-261 N107/E98 CA-NAP-261 N107/E98 CA-NAP-261 N111/E123 CA-NAP-261 N111/E123 CA-NAP-261 N111/E123 CA-NAP-261 N111/E123 CA-NAP-261 N111/E123 CA-NAP-261 N111/E123 CA-NAP-261 N111/E123 CA-NAP-261 N98/E88 CA-NAP-261 N98/E88 CA-NAP-261 N98/E88 CA-NAP-261 N98/E88 CA-NAP-261 N98/E88 CA-NAP-261 N98/E88 CA-NAP-261 N98/E88

030–040 050–060 050–060 000–010 010–020 020–030 020–030 030–040 050–060 060–070 070–080 070–080 090–100 010–020 020–030 050–060 050–060 050–060 060–070 060–070 070–080 070–080 080–090 010–020 030–040 030–040 040–050 030–040 000–010 010–020 020–030 030–040 000–010 020–030 020–030 030–040 030–040 040–050 050–060 000–010 020–030 030–040 030–040 040–050 040–050 050–060

2.3 3.0 3.9 3.5 3.9 2.8 3.5 4.1 3.1 3.2 3.9 4.2 3.9 2.1 2.8 3.1 3.2 4.0 3.2 4.1 1.8 2.9 2.5 4.1 3.1 3.4 3.3 2.9 2.5 5.1 5.0 4.0 1.2 1.2 3.0 2.3 3.0 3.0 3.5 1.2 2.9 2.7 3.3 3.9 4.0 1.5

NV? NV? NV? NV? NV? NV? NV? NV? NV? NV? NV? NV? NV? NV? NV? NV? NV? NV? NV? NV? NV? NV? NV? NV? NV? NV? NV? NV? NV? NV? NV? NV? NV? NV? NV? NV? NV? NV? NV? NV? NV? NV? NV? NV? NV? NV?

Jackson (1978) Jackson (1978) Jackson (1978) Jackson (1978) Jackson (1978) Jackson (1978) Jackson (1978) Jackson (1978) Jackson (1978) Jackson (1978) Jackson (1978) Jackson (1978) Jackson (1978) Jackson (1978) Jackson (1978) Jackson (1978) Jackson (1978) Jackson (1978) Jackson (1978) Jackson (1978) Jackson (1978) Jackson (1978) Jackson (1978) Jackson (1978) Jackson (1978) Jackson (1978) Jackson (1978) Jackson (1978) Jackson (1978) Jackson (1978) Jackson (1978) Jackson (1978) Jackson (1978) Jackson (1978) Jackson (1978) Jackson (1978) Jackson (1978) Jackson (1978) Jackson (1978) Jackson (1978) Jackson (1978) Jackson (1978) Jackson (1978) Jackson (1978) Jackson (1978) Jackson (1978)



CA-NAP-261 N98/E88 050–060 3.1 NV? Jackson (1978)

CA-NAP-863 94-H1371 d1 Debitage Disturbed Disturbed none 2.8 NV (v) Origer (1994) CA-NAP-863 94-H1371 e1 Debitage Disturbed Disturbed none 3.2 NV (v) Origer (1994) CA-NAP-863 94-H1371 b1 Debitage Disturbed Disturbed none 3.4 NV (v) Origer (1994) CA-NAP-863 94-H1371 c1 Debitage Disturbed Disturbed none 3.5 NV (v) Origer (1994) CA-NAP-863 94-H1371 a1 Debitage Disturbed Disturbed DH - NV (v) Origer (1994) CA-NAP-863 94-H1371 94-34-58 Preform (arrow ?) Spoils Spoils none 1.5 NV (v) Origer (1994) CA-NAP-863 94-H1371 94-34-177 Preform (arrow) Spoils Spoils none 1.7 NV (v) Origer (1994) CA-NAP-863 94-H1371 94-34-50 Serrated point Spoils Spoils none 2.1 NV (v) Origer (1994) CA-NAP-863 94-H1371 94-34-56 Serrated point Spoils Spoils none 2.1 NV (v) Origer (1994) CA-NAP-863 94-H1371 94-34-54 Serrated point Spoils Spoils none 2.3 NV (v) Origer (1994) CA-NAP-863 94-H1371 94-34-201 Blank fragment Spoils Spoils none 2.4 NV (v) Origer (1994) CA-NAP-863 94-H1371 94-34-2 Corner notched point Spoils Spoils none 3.1 NV (v) Origer (1994) CA-NAP-863 94-H1371 94-34-219 Blank Spoils Spoils none 3.2 NV (v) Origer (1994) CA-NAP-863 94-H1371 94-34-201 Biface fragment Spoils Spoils none 3.4 K (v) Origer (1994) CA-NAP-863 94-H1371 94-34-199 Preform fragment Spoils Spoils none 3.4 NV (v) Origer (1994) CA-NAP-863 94-H1371 94-34-10 Point shaped lanceolate Spoils Spoils none 3.5 NV (v) Origer (1994) CA-NAP-863 94-H1371 94-34-90 Preform fragment Spoils Spoils none 3.5 NV (v) Origer (1994) CA-NAP-863 94-H1371 94-34-266 Point lanceolate Spoils Spoils none 3.6 A (v) Origer (1994) CA-NAP-863 94-H1371 94-34-57 Point shaped lanceolate Spoils Spoils none 3.6 NV (v) Origer (1994) CA-NAP-863 94-H1371 94-34-68 Preform Spoils Spoils none 4.1 NV (v) Origer (1994) CA-NAP-863 94-H1371 94-34-9 Blank Spoils Spoils none 4.7 NV (v) Origer (1994) CA-NAP-863 94-H1371 94-34-4 Point shaped lanceolate Spoils Spoils none 4.8 NV (v) Origer (1994) CA-NAP-863 94-H1371 94-34-53 Serrated point Spoils Spoils none 5.2 NV (v) Origer (1994) CA-NAP-863 94-H1371 94-34-203 Blank fragment Spoils Spoils DH - NV (v) Origer (1994) CA-NAP-863 94-H1371 C Debitage Unit 1 020–030 none 1.2 NV (v) Origer (1994) CA-NAP-863 94-H1371 E Debitage Unit 1 020–030 none 1.2 NV (v) Origer (1994) CA-NAP-863 94-H1371 G Debitage Unit 1 020–030 Band 1 1.4 NV (v) Origer (1994) CA-NAP-863 94-H1371 J Debitage Unit 1 020–030 none 2.4 NV (v) Origer (1994) CA-NAP-863 94-H1371 G Debitage Unit 1 020–030 Band 2 2.4 Origer (1994) CA-NAP-863 94-H1371 D Debitage Unit 1 020–030 none 3.5 NV (v) Origer (1994) CA-NAP-863 94-H1371 A Debitage Unit 1 020–030 none 3.6 NV (v) Origer (1994) CA-NAP-863 94-H1371 B Debitage Unit 1 020–030 none 3.7 NV (v) Origer (1994) CA-NAP-863 94-H1371 I Debitage Unit 1 020–030 none 3.7 NV (v) Origer (1994) CA-NAP-863 94-H1371 F Debitage Unit 1 020–030 no visible band - NV (v) Origer (1994) CA-NAP-863 94-H1371 H Debitage Unit 1 020–030 no visible band - NV (v) Origer (1994) CA-NAP-863 94-H1371 94-34-40 Point lanceolate Unit 1 040–050 weathered 3.0 A (v) Origer (1994) CA-NAP-863 94-H1371 MM Debitage Unit 1 090–100 none 2.3 NV (v) Origer (1994) CA-NAP-863 94-H1371 R Debitage Unit 1 090–100 none 2.4 A (v) Origer (1994) CA-NAP-863 94-H1371 H Debitage Unit 1 090–100 none 2.4 NV (v) Origer (1994) CA-NAP-863 94-H1371 NN Debitage Unit 1 090–100 none 2.4 NV (v) Origer (1994) CA-NAP-863 94-H1371 AA Debitage Unit 1 090–100 none 3.1 NV (v) Origer (1994) CA-NAP-863 94-H1371 L Debitage Unit 1 090–100 none 3.2 NV (v) Origer (1994) CA-NAP-863 94-H1371 CC Debitage Unit 1 090–100 none 3.2 NV (v) Origer (1994) CA-NAP-863 94-H1371 N Debitage Unit 1 090–100 none 3.3 NV (v) Origer (1994)

J.9



CA-NAP-863 94-H1371 X Debitage Unit 1 090–100 none 3.3 NV (v) Origer (1994) CA-NAP-863 94-H1371 II Debitage Unit 1 090–100 none 3.3 NV (v) Origer (1994) CA-NAP-863 94-H1371 K Debitage Unit 1 090–100 none 3.4 NV (v) Origer (1994) CA-NAP-863 94-H1371 DD Debitage Unit 1 090–100 none 3.4 NV (v) Origer (1994) CA-NAP-863 94-H1371 C Debitage Unit 1 090–100 none 3.5 NV (v) Origer (1994) CA-NAP-863 94-H1371 D Debitage Unit 1 090–100 none 3.5 NV (v) Origer (1994) CA-NAP-863 94-H1371 W Debitage Unit 1 090–100 none 3.5 NV (v) Origer (1994) CA-NAP-863 94-H1371 FF Debitage Unit 1 090–100 none 3.5 NV (v) Origer (1994) CA-NAP-863 94-H1371 A Debitage Unit 1 090–100 none 3.5 NV ? (v) Origer (1994) CA-NAP-863 94-H1371 Y Debitage Unit 1 090–100 Band 1 3.6 NV (v) Origer (1994) CA-NAP-863 94-H1371 GG Debitage Unit 1 090–100 Band 1 3.6 NV (v) Origer (1994) CA-NAP-863 94-H1371 G Debitage Unit 1 090–100 none 3.6 NV (v) Origer (1994) CA-NAP-863 94-H1371 P Debitage Unit 1 090–100 none 3.6 NV (v) Origer (1994) CA-NAP-863 94-H1371 Q Debitage Unit 1 090–100 none 3.6 NV (v) Origer (1994) CA-NAP-863 94-H1371 JJ Debitage Unit 1 090–100 none 3.6 NV (v) Origer (1994) CA-NAP-863 94-H1371 KK Debitage Unit 1 090–100 none 3.6 NV (v) Origer (1994) CA-NAP-863 94-H1371 EE Debitage Unit 1 090–100 Band 1 3.7 NV (v) Origer (1994) CA-NAP-863 94-H1371 I Debitage Unit 1 090–100 none 3.7 NV (v) Origer (1994) CA-NAP-863 94-H1371 O Debitage Unit 1 090–100 none 3.7 NV (v) Origer (1994) CA-NAP-863 94-H1371 S Debitage Unit 1 090–100 none 3.7 NV (v) Origer (1994) CA-NAP-863 94-H1371 HH Debitage Unit 1 090–100 none 3.7 NV (v) Origer (1994) CA-NAP-863 94-H1371 LL Debitage Unit 1 090–100 none 3.7 NV (v) Origer (1994) CA-NAP-863 94-H1371 B Debitage Unit 1 090–100 none 3.8 NV (v) Origer (1994) CA-NAP-863 94-H1371 M Debitage Unit 1 090–100 none 3.8 NV (v) Origer (1994) CA-NAP-863 94-H1371 BB Debitage Unit 1 090–100 none 3.8 NV (v) Origer (1994) CA-NAP-863 94-H1371 E Debitage Unit 1 090–100 none 3.9 NV (v) Origer (1994) CA-NAP-863 94-H1371 T Debitage Unit 1 090–100 none 3.9 NV (v) Origer (1994) CA-NAP-863 94-H1371 U Debitage Unit 1 090–100 none 4.1 NV (v) Origer (1994) CA-NAP-863 94-H1371 F Debitage Unit 1 090–100 none 4.2 NV (v) Origer (1994) CA-NAP-863 94-H1371 Z Debitage Unit 1 090–100 none 4.2 NV (v) Origer (1994) CA-NAP-863 94-H1371 V Debitage Unit 1 090–100 none 4.6 NV (v) Origer (1994) CA-NAP-863 94-H1371 GG Debitage Unit 1 090–100 Band 2 4.7 Origer (1994) CA-NAP-863 94-H1371 EE Debitage Unit 1 090–100 Band 2 4.8 Origer (1994) CA-NAP-863 94-H1371 Y Debitage Unit 1 090–100 Band 2 4.9 Origer (1994) CA-NAP-863 94-H1371 J Debitage Unit 1 090–100 no visible band - NV (v) Origer (1994) CA-NAP-863 94-H1371 C Debitage Unit 1 160–170 none 2.9 NV (v) Origer (1994) CA-NAP-863 94-H1371 D Debitage Unit 1 160–170 none 3.0 NV (v) Origer (1994) CA-NAP-863 94-H1371 J Debitage Unit 1 160–170 none 3.6 NV (v) Origer (1994) CA-NAP-863 94-H1371 H Debitage Unit 1 160–170 none 3.7 NV (v) Origer (1994) CA-NAP-863 94-H1371 I Debitage Unit 1 160–170 none 3.7 NV (v) Origer (1994) CA-NAP-863 94-H1371 E Debitage Unit 1 160–170 none 3.8 NV (v) Origer (1994) CA-NAP-863 94-H1371 A Debitage Unit 1 160–170 none 4.2 NV (v) Origer (1994) CA-NAP-863 94-H1371 F Debitage Unit 1 160–170 none 4.2 NV (v) Origer (1994) CA-NAP-863 94-H1371 G Debitage Unit 1 160–170 none 4.7 NV (v) Origer (1994) CA-NAP-863 94-H1371 B Debitage Unit 1 160–170 none 4.9 NV (v) Origer (1994) CA-SON-2098 93-H1248 Debitage Unit 4 260–270 none 4.7 NV (v) Origer (1993)

J.10



CA-SON-2098 93-H1248 Debitage Unit 4 260–270 none 4.7 NV (v) Origer (1993) CA-SON-2098 93-H1248 Debitage Unit 4 260–270 none 4.7 NV (v) Origer (1993) CA-SON-2098 93-H1248 Debitage Unit 4 260–270 none 4.8 NV (v) Origer (1993) CA-SON-2098 93-H1248 Debitage Unit 4 260–270 none 4.8 NV (v) Origer (1993) CA-SON-2098 93-H1248 Debitage Unit 4 310–320 none 4.7 NV (v) Origer (1993) CA-SON-2098 93-H1248 Debitage Unit 4 310–320 none 4.8 NV (v) Origer (1993) CA-SON-2098 93-H1248 Debitage Unit 4 310–320 none 4.9 NV (v) Origer (1993) CA-SON-2098 93-H1248 Debitage Unit 4 310–320 none 5.2 NV (v) Origer (1993) CA-SON-2098 93-H1248 Debitage Unit 4 310–320 none 5.4 NV (v) Origer (1993) CA-SON-2098 93-H1248 Debitage Unit 5 250–260 none 4.2 NV (v) Origer (1993) CA-SON-2098 93-H1248 Debitage Unit 5 250–260 none 4.2 NV (v) Origer (1993) CA-SON-2098 93-H1248 Debitage Unit 5 250–260 none 4.9 NV (v) Origer (1993) CA-SON-2098 93-H1248 Debitage Unit 5 250–260 none 5.2 NV (v) Origer (1993) CA-SON-2098 93-H1248 Debitage Unit 5 250–260 none 5.3 NV (v) Origer (1993) CA-SON-2098 93-H1248 Debitage Unit 5 300–310 none 4.9 NV (v) Origer (1993) CA-SON-2098 93-H1248 Debitage Unit 5 300–310 none 5.0 NV (v) Origer (1993) CA-SON-2098 93-H1248 Debitage Unit 5 300–310 none 5.0 NV (v) Origer (1993) CA-SON-2098 93-H1248 Debitage Unit 5 300–310 none 5.0 NV (v) Origer (1993) CA-SON-2098 93-H1248 Debitage Unit 5 300–310 none 5.2 NV (v) Origer (1993) CA-SON-2098 93-H1248 Debitage Unit 13 250–260 none 4.3 NV (v) Origer (1993) CA-SON-2098 93-H1248 Debitage Unit 13 250–260 none 4.6 NV (v) Origer (1993) CA-SON-2098 93-H1248 Debitage Unit 13 250–260 none 5.1 NV (v) Origer (1993) CA-SON-2098 93-H1248 Debitage Unit 13 250–260 none 5.5 NV (v) Origer (1993) CA-SON-2098 93-H1248 Debitage Unit 13 300–310 none 4.5 NV (v) Origer (1993) CA-SON-2098 93-H1248 Debitage Unit 13 300–310 none 4.5 NV (v) Origer (1993) CA-SON-2098 93-H1248 Debitage Unit 13 300–310 NVB, weathered - NV (v) Origer (1993) CA-SON-2098 93-H1248 Debitage Unit 13 310–320 none 5.3 NV (v) Origer (1993) CA-SON-2098 93-H1248 Biface fragment Spoils none none 4.5 NV (v) Origer (1993) CA-SON-2098 93-H1248 Biface fragment Spoils none none 4.6 NV (v) Origer (1993) CA-SON-2098 93-H1248 Lanceolate point Spoils none none 4.6 NV (v) Origer (1993) CA-SON-2098 93-H1248 Biface fragment Spoils none none 4.7 NV (v) Origer (1993) CA-SON-2098 93-H1248 Biface fragment Spoils none none 4.7 NV (v) Origer (1993) CA-SON-2098 93-H1248 Lanceolate point Spoils none none 4.8 NV (v) Origer (1993) CA-SON-2098 93-H1248 Biface fragment Spoils none none 5.0 NV (v) Origer (1993) CA-SON-2098 93-H1248 Biface fragment Spoils none none 5.0 NV (v) Origer (1993) CA-SON-2098 93-H1248 Biface fragment Spoils none none 5.1 NV (v) Origer (1993)

J.11

Date post:	29-Nov-2023
Category:	Documents
Upload:	independent
View:	0 times
Download:	0 times

ARCHAEOLOGICAL DATA RECOVERY AT THE NAPA CREEK SITE (CA-NAP-916), STATE ROUTE 29, NAPA, CALIFORNIA...

Documents