Utah Archaeology Site Form Manual

UTAH ARCHAEOLOGY SITE FORM MANUAL

CACHE RICH

BOX ELDER

WEBER MORGAN DAVIS

DAGGETT

SUMMIT SALT LAKE TOOELE

WASATCH DUCHESNE UINTAH

UTAH

JUAB

CARBON

SANPETE MILLARD EMERY

GRAND

SEVIER

BEAVER

PIUTE

WAYNE

IRON

GARFIELD SAN JUAN

WASHINGTON

KANE

Interagency Heritage Resources Work Group May 2018

Table of Contents INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 PART A (Administrative Data) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 PART B (Prehistoric Component) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 PART C (Historic Component) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31 PART D (Rock Art/Inscriptions) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37 MAPS AND PHOTOGRAPHS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43 REFERENCES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48 APPENDIX A (Utah Archaeology Site Form) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51 APPENDIX B (Environmental Context—IMACS 1992) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61 APPENDIX C (Prehistoric Artifacts—Projectile Points) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 85 APPENDIX D (Prehistoric Artifacts—Ground Stone) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 95 APPENDIX E (Historic Artifacts—Cans) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 93 APPENDIX F (Historic Artifacts—Glass) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 101 APPENDIX G (Historic Artifacts—Ceramics) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 119 List of Figures Figure 1. Map of principal meridians and base lines governing the United States Public Land Surveys . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 Figure 2. Example of a site location map. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44 Figure 3. Example of a site sketch map. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45 Figure 4. Example of a less effective site overview photograph. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46 Figure 5. Example of an effective site overview photograph. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46 Figure 6. Example of a less effective artifact photograph. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47 Figure 7. Example of an effective artifact photograph. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47 Figure 8. General shape of large fluted and stemmed points . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 86 Figure 9. General shape of large projectile points . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87 Figure 10. General shape of small projectile points . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 88 Figure 11. Metate styles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 92

Figure 12. Can types . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 95 Figure 13. Probable contents based on can shape . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 96 Figure 14. Tin can openings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 97 Figure 15. Characteristics of a typical bottle . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 105 Figure 16. Examples of pontil scars on bottle bases . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 107 Figure 17. Examples of various types of bottle mold seams . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 108 Figure 18. Examples of seams on various mold-manufactured bottles . . . . . . . . . . . . . 109 Figure 19. Examples of various types of bottle finishes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 110 Figure 20. Major diagnostic characteristics of a typical machine-made bottle . . . . . . . . . 112 Figure 21. Example of: (a) Owen’s cutoff or suction scar; (b) valve mark . . . . . . . . . . . 113 Figure 22. Examples of white earthenware decorated with: a) flow blue; b) decal . . . . . . . 122 Figure 23. Examples of white earthenware decorated with: a) painted design; b) molded-relief. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 122 Figure 24. Examples of white earthenware decorated with transfer printing . . . . . . . . . . 124 Figure 25. Examples of hotelware . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 126 Figure 26. Examples of colored earthenware . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 126 Figure 27. Examples of stoneware . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 128 Figure 28. Examples of porcelain . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 128 List of Tables Table 1. Historic categories and examples for Site Type (#15) on Part A of the Utah Archaeology Site Form . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8

INTRODUCTION This manual contains guidance for recording archaeological sites in Utah using the Utah Archaeology Site Form and is meant to replace the Intermountain Antiquities Computer System (IMACS) forms previously used throughout the state (IMACS 1992; Schroedl 2008). The creation of the Utah Archaeology Site Form was undertaken in consultation with state and federal agencies, the private sector, and the academic community in an effort to create a system more compatible with 21st century technology and land management practices (Yoder 2012; 2016).

The Utah Archaeology Site Form consists of four separate parts: Part A—Administrative Data; Part B—Prehistoric Component; Part C—Historic Component; and Part D—Rock Art/ Inscriptions. Each part of the form is available in Appendix A. Those familiar with IMACS will recognize in the Utah Archaeology Site Form a similarity of overall layout and key categories.

This was done in a conscious effort to retain some consistency in style and in recognition that critical site data does not change regardless of the recording system. A key difference between the two systems, however, is a focus on details. In general, IMACS encouraged recorders to document specific, detailed environmental and artifact attribute data. In contrast, the Utah Archaeology Site Form and associated manual encourages recorders to take a more balanced approach and focus on information necessary to help determine NRHP eligibility, basic site characteristics, and temporal and cultural context.

Thanks are given to the many individuals who contributed to the development of this manual and associated forms.

Proper citation for the Utah Archaeology Site Form and Manual is as follows: Interagency Heritage Resources Work Group (IHRWG) 2018 Utah Archaeology Site Form Manual. Interagency Heritage Resources Work Group, Salt Lake City.

1

PART A (ADMINISTRATIVE DATA) Part A contains administrative data such as site number, location, land status, National Register of Historic Places eligibility determination, site description, etc. The individual entries and categories used in Part A are described below.

1. Smithsonian Trinomial: Enter the Smithsonian Trinomial for the site as assigned by the Antiquities Section of the Utah Division of State History. The Smithsonian Trinomial system consists of three parts: state, county, site. Utah is coded as 42, county abbreviations are listed below, and each new site is assigned a sequential number in its respective county. For example, site 42GA5863 is the 5,863rd site to be recorded in Garfield County, Utah.

BE: BO: CA: CB: DA: DV: DC: EM: GA: GR:

Beaver Box Elder Cache Carbon Daggett Davis Duchesne Emery Garfield Grand

IN: JB: KA: MD: MO: PI: RI: SL: SA: SP:

Iron Juan Kane Millard Morgan Piute Rich Salt Lake San Juan Sanpete

SV: SM: TO: UN: UT: WA: WS: WN: WB:

Sevier Summit Tooele Uintah Utah Wasatch Washington Wayne Weber

2. Temporary Site No.: Use this entry if a temporary site number is assigned in the field or used in any related documentation.

3. Site Name: Enter the local name or archaeologist’s designation for the site (if any).

4. Date Recorded: Enter the date the site was recorded or revisited using a month/day/year format (MM/DD/YYYY).

5. Type of Recording: Enter the type of recording using the categories listed below.

• First Recording: Used when a site has not been previously documented.

• Full Re-record: Used when a previously documented site has significantly changed, when previous site forms have insufficient information, or if the current recorder or responsible agency feels that a new record is necessary.

3

• Update: Used when a previously documented site has associated records that are still acceptable, but minor changes or the fact that it has been recently visited/evaluated need to be noted. New segments of linear features (e.g. canals, transmission lines, roads) that already have a Smithsonian Trinomial should be recorded under this category (but should not be done in an abbreviated manner).

6. Project Name: Enter the name of the project that is spurring the recording of the site.

7. State Report Number: Enter the report number assigned by the Antiquities Section of the Utah Division of State History. This number is composed of four parts: state, year, organization, and sequentially assigned number. State Report Numbers always begin with a ‘U’ designating that the report number was assigned by the Antiquities Section in Utah. Next are the last two digits of the calendar year the project was assigned. Third is the code for the organization requesting the report number (same as the ‘Survey Organization Code’ in IMACS 1992) (contact the Antiquities Section for a current listing). Fourth is a four-digit sequential number assigned to the individual project. For example, State Report Number U13UA0195 occurred in Utah (U), was assigned in 2013 (13) to the University of Utah (UA), and was the 195th project (0195) assigned by the Antiquities Section in that year.

8. Land Status: Enter all land managers or owners the site is associated with (e.g. BLM, SITLA, Private).

9. USGS 7.5’ Quad Map Name and Date: Enter the name and date of the primary USGS 7.5-minute quadrangle map on which the site is located (example: Jenny Canyon, Utah; 1991). If a datum has been placed, the map reference should refer to this location. If no datum exists, and the site boundary crosses multiple maps, list the map that the majority of the site is located on (for example, if 70% of a site is on Map A and 30% on Map B, only Map A need be entered).

10. Township, Range, Section, 1/4, County: Enter the primary township, range, section, quarter, and county for the site’s location. If a datum has been placed, the township, range, section, quarter, and county should refer to this location. If no datum exists, and the site boundary crosses multiple divisions, list only the township, range, section, quarter, and county that the majority of the site is located in. For linear sites with no datum that cross multiple divisions, use the township, range, section, quarter, and county that best correlates with the project undertaking.

11. Meridian: Enter the principal meridian to which the site is associated. The majority of Utah is associated with the Salt Lake Meridian; however, a small portion of the state is covered by the Uintah Meridian (Figure 1).

4

Figure 1. Map of principal meridians and base lines governing the United States Public Land Surveys (from Bureau of Land Management 2013).

12. UTMs: Using the Universal Transverse Mercator (UTM) grid system, enter the Zone, easting, and northing coordinates for the site location. The UTM coordinates will optimally reference a datum on site; alternatively, they may refer to the approximate center of a property. The vast majority of Utah is in Zone 12, although the extreme western portion of the state is in Zone 11. While most USGS 7.5-minute maps depict North American Datum (NAD) 27, the more modern NAD 83 ensures better consistency across regions, is in use by most land surveying organizations, and can easily be selected on GPS units. Therefore, unless there are exceptional circumstances (which must be explained in the Additional Part A Comments section), UTM coordinates should always be recorded using NAD 83. Additionally, when re-recording or updating previously recorded sites, UTMs should always be checked to ensure that NAD 83 coordinates are represented.

13. Site Dimensions: Record the dimensions of the site in meters and calculate the area. Usually the area should be calculated using GIS or other high precision tools, and when such is the case, this is noted by marking the ‘GIS’ option. If the site’s area is calculated using a rough estimate only (for example multiplying one-half the length by one-half the width times 3.1416 for an oval shaped site [IMACS 1992]), this is noted by marking the ‘Estimate’ option.

5

14. Site Class: Label the site using the categories listed below. Check all that apply; meaning that multicomponent sites will have at least two (and possibly three) categories marked. When documenting multicomponent or Ethnohistoric sites the recorder should complete both Part B and Part C forms as necessary.

• Prehistoric: Sites associated with Indigenous Peoples prior to contact with Non-Native Peoples.

• Ethnohistoric: Sites associated with Indigenous Peoples after contact with Non-Native Peoples and through the Historic Period.

• Historic: Sites primarily associated with Non-Native Peoples during the Historic Period.

15. Site Type: Choose the single option below that best characterizes the site being recorded. Implicit in this category is the understanding that the site may have served multiple functions but that only the primary one is being noted here. Additional uses of the site or associated activities should be discussed in the ‘Site Description’.

Prehistoric/Ethnohistoric • Long-Term Residential: Sites whose primary purpose revolves around residence (i.e. the place in which a person lives or resides) and that are generally interpreted as being occupied for extended periods of time. A wide array of activities took place at such sites as is evidenced by the high density and/or diversity of artifact classes and likely presence of features. Such evidence may include flaked stone debris, formal tools, ground stone, bone, ceramics, and features.

• Temporary Camp: Sites that are interpreted as being occupied for a short to moderate length of time, often by a group carrying out a more limited range of activities. Used seasonally or for a brief duration, the density and diversity of artifacts at temporary camps is less than at long-term residential sites, but often greater than at task specific sites. While features may be present, they usually do not represent significant investments of time or energy.

• Task Specific: Sites whose characteristics are related to a specific activity primarily associated with subsistence or resource procurement. Occupied for only a short period of time, such sites may be most directly associated with collecting and/or processing plant and animal resources, lithic reduction, quarrying, etc. When features are present they are usually related to the performance of a specific task and may be reutilized seasonally.

Artifact scatters with limited diversity often fall within this category.

• Specialty Site: Sites whose primary purposes relate more to the symbolic or strategic realm than subsistence and settlement. Examples may include rock art, cairns, caches, trails, burials, etc.

• Unknown: Sites in which the primary pattern of use is prehistoric or ethnohistoric, but the nature of use cannot be confidently determined.

• Other: Sites not subsumed by one of the other categories. Enter a short one to three word description, and describe in greater detail in the ‘Site Description’ entry.

6

Historic Categories for historic sites are drawn directly from “Data Categories for Functions and Uses” in National Register Bulletin #16A (Table 1; National Park Service 1997). While all categories from this source are shown below, for brevity sake only the ones most commonly used for Utah resources are listed on the Part A form. In addition, a communication aspect was added to the transportation category to create the ‘Transportation/Communication’ category. Examples of communication may include telegraph lines, telephone lines, mail routes, and associated artifacts and features. The ‘Other’ category should be completed in the same manner as in the Prehistoric/Ethnohistoric section discussed above.

• • • • • • • •

Domestic Commerce/Trade Social Health Care Government Education Religion Funerary

• • • • • • • •

Recreation and Culture Agriculture/Subsistence Industry/Processing/Extraction Defense Landscape Transportation/Communication Unknown Other

16. Site Characteristics: Record the site’s characteristics using the categories listed below. Check all that apply.

• Artifact Scatter: Contains either a single type of artifact or a mixed assemblage of materials.

• Architectural Feature(s): Contains features that are considered buildings, structures, or complex constructions. Examples include pit or surface structures, granaries or other storage structures, towers, walls, wikiups, ramadas, hogans, bridges, buildings, dugouts, foundations, corrals, tent platforms, etc. As all archaeological remains are in a process of decay, it is incumbent upon the recorder to interpret a feature as to whether they believe it should be recorded as architectural or not. Although a large rubble mound could easily be recorded as a non-architectural feature, it may be clear to the recorder that the remains are those of a collapsed masonry structure and should therefore be recorded as an architectural feature. Similarly, dark staining in a large depression may be indicative of a pit house and not simply a depression. Recorders are encouraged to use their best judgment when assessing whether a feature is architectural, and it should be expected that differences of opinion between professionally trained individuals may occur.

• Non-Architectural Feature(s): Contains features that are not considered buildings or complex structures. Examples include artifact concentrations, non-diagnostic depressions or mounds, middens, fire-cracked rock concentrations, thermal features, soil stains, agricultural fields, fences, cairns, adits, tailing piles, etc.

• Rock Art/Inscription: Contains petroglyphs, pictographs, arborglyphs, historic inscriptions, or any other image or illustration in either the natural or built environment.

• Lithic Source/Quarry: Exhibits evidence of extraction and processing of lithic raw materials.

7

Table 1. Historic categories and examples for Site Type (#15) on Part A of the Utah Archaeology Site Form (from National Park Service 1997:20–23).

Category

Subcategory

Examples

Domestic

Single dwelling

Rowhouse, mansion, residence, rockshelter, homestead, cave

Multiple dwelling

Duplex, apartment building, pueblo, rockshelter, cave

Secondary structure

Dairy, smokehouse, storage pit, storage shed, kitchen, garage, other dependencies

Hotel

Inn, hotel, motel, way station

Institutional housing

Military quarters, staff housing, poor house, orphanage

Camp

Hunting campsite, fishing camp, summer camp, forestry camp, seasonal residence, temporary habitation site, tipi rings

Village site

Pueblo group

Business

Office building

Professional

Architect's studio, engineering office, law office

Organizational

Trade union, labor union, professional association

Financial institution

Savings and loan association, bank, stock exchange

Specialty store

Auto showroom, bakery, clothing store, blacksmith shop, hardware store

Restaurant

Cafe, bar, roadhouse, tavern

Warehouse

Warehouse, commercial storage

Trade (archaeology)

Cache, Site with evidence of trade, storage pit

Meeting hall

Grange, union hall, Pioneer hall, or hall of other fraternal, patriarchal or political organization

Clubhouse

Facility or literary, social, or garden club

Civic

Facility of volunteer or public service organizations such as the American Red Cross

Capitol

Statehouse, assembly building

City hall

City hall, town hall

Correctional facility

Police station, jail, prison

Fire station

Firehouse

Government office

Municipal building

Diplomatic building

Embassy, consulate

Custom house

Custom house

Post office

Post office

Public works

Electric generating plant, sewer system

Courthouse

County courthouse, federal courthouse

School

Schoolhouse, academy, secondary school, grammar school, trade or technical school

College

University, college, junior college

Library

Library

Research facility

Laboratory, observatory, planetarium

Education-related

College dormitory, housing at boarding schools

Commerce/Trade

Social

Government

Education

8

Table 1. Continued.

Category

Subcategory

Examples

Religion

Religious facility

Church, temple, synagogue, cathedral, mission, mound, sweathouse, kiva, dance court, shrine

Ceremonial site

Astronomical observation post, intaglio, petroglyph site

Church school

Religious academy or schools

Church-related residence

Parsonage, convent, rectory

Cemetery

Burying ground, burial site, cemetery, ossuary

Graves/burials

Burial cache, burial mound, grave

Mortuary

Mortuary site, funeral home, cremation area, crematorium

Theater

Cinema, movie theater, playhouse

Auditorium

Hall, auditorium

Museum

Museum, art gallery, exhibition hall

Music facility

Concert-hall, opera house, bandstand, dancehall

Sports facility

Gymnasium, swimming pool, tennis court, playing field, stadium

Outdoor recreation

Park, campground, picnic area, hiking trail

Fair

Amusement park, county fairground

Monument/marker

Commemorative marker, commemorative monument

Work of art

Sculpture, carving, statue, mural, rock art

Processing

Meatpacking plant, cannery, smokehouse, brewery, winery, food processing site, gathering site, tobacco barn

Storage

Granary, silo, wine cellar, storage site, tobacco warehouse, cotton warehouse

Agricultural field

Pasture, vineyard, orchard, wheatfield, crop marks, stone alignments, terrace, hedgerow

Animal facility

Hunting and kill site, stockyard, barn, chicken coop, hunting corral, hunting run, apiary

Fishing facility or site

Fish hatchery, fishing grounds

Horticultural facility

Greenhouse, plant observatory, garden

Agricultural outbuilding

Wellhouse, wagon shed, tool shed, barn

Irrigation facility

Irrigation system, canals, stone alignments, headgates, check dams

Manufacturing facility

Mill, factory, refinery, processing plant, pottery kiln

Extractive facility

Coal mine, oil derrick, gold dredge, quarry, salt mine

Waterworks

Reservoir, water tower, canal, dam

Energy facility

Windmill, power plant, hydroelectric dam

Communications facility

Telegraph cable station, printing plant, television station, telephone company facility, satellite tracking station

Processing site

Shell processing site, toolmaking site, copper mining and processing site

Industrial storage

Warehouse

Hospital

Veteren's medical center, mental hospital, private or public hospital, medical research facility

Funerary

Recreation and Culture

Agriculture/Subsistence

Industry/Processing/ Extraction

Health Care

9

Table 1. Continued.

Category

Subcategory

Examples

Health care (cont.)

Clinic

Dispensary, doctor's office

Sanitarium

Nursing home, rest home, sanitarium

Medical business/office

Pharmacy, medical supply store, doctor or dentist's office

Resort

Baths, spas, resort facility

Arms storage

Magazine, armory

Fortification

Fortified military or naval post, earth fortified village, palisaded village, fortified knoll or mountain top, battery, bunker

Military facility

Military post, supply depot, garrison fort, barrack, military camp

Battle site

Battlefield

Coast guard facility

Lighthouse, coast guard station, pier, dock, life-saving station

Naval facility

Submarine, aircraft carrier, battleship, naval base

Air facility

Aircraft, air base, missile launching site

Parking lot

—

Park

City park, state park, national park

Plaza

Square, green plaza, public common

Garden

—

Forest

—

Unoccupied land

Meadow, swamp, desert

Underwater

Underwater site

Natural feature

Mountain, valley, promontory, tree, river, island, pond, lake

Street furniture/object

Street light, fence, wall, shelter, gazebo, park bench

Conservation area

Wildlife refuge, ecological habitat

Rail-related

Railroad, train depot, locomotive, streetcar line, railroad bridge

Air-related

Aircraft, airplane hangar, airport, launching site

Water-related

Lighthouse, navigation aid, canal, boat, ship, wharf, shipwreck

Road-related (vehicular)

Parkway, highway, bridge, toll gate, parking garage

Pedestrian-related

Boardwalk, walkway, trail

Defense

Landscape

Transportation

Work-in-progress

Use this category when work is in progress

Unknown

—

Vacant/Not in Use

Use this category when property is not being used

Other

—

10

• Rock Shelter/Cave: Contains artifacts or features within a rock shelter, alcove, or cave (be sure to describe the physical characteristics of the rock shelter/cave in the site description).

• Linear: Contains a feature or some aspect that is primarily linear in nature. Examples include prehistoric or historic trails, roads, ditches and canals, railroads, transmission lines, etc. Use of the linear site guidance developed by the Utah Professional Archaeological Council (UPAC 2008) is recommended when recording sites with linear characteristics.

17. Impacting Agents: Note any impacting agents that may be altering or negatively affecting the site using the categories below. When recording impacting agents, minor impacts need not be noted. For example, although many sites are open to grazing by domestic animals, their mere presence does not de facto indicate the site is being negatively impacted by livestock. Similarly, all landscapes undergo natural erosion or aggradation, but the ‘Erosion’ option listed below should not be selected unless these processes are noticeably/significantly damaging a site.

Other agents not listed may include impacts caused by agricultural or industrial development, fire and associated effects, etc.

• • • •

None Erosion Livestock Concentration Recreation

• Road/Trail • Vandalism/Looting • Other___________________

18. Site Condition: Record the overall condition of the site using the categories listed below. Future project related impacts do not factor into determining site conditions. For example, if a site is in 'Stable' condition, but a proposed project may destroy it next year, it should not be recorded as 'Imminently Threatened'.

• Stable: The condition of the site is stable, with erosion, decay, or alteration by humans or forces of nature occurring at what would be an expected pace.

• Deteriorating: If current conditions continue, the site is in danger of significant damage within a three to 15 year time frame.

• Imminently Threatened: If current conditions continue, the site will likely be destroyed or have significantly reduced archaeological values within a three year time frame.

• Destroyed: The site may be completely destroyed with no physical evidence remaining; or has been so significantly altered or damaged that it now lacks the integrity or significance to be eligible for listing in the NRHP. 19. Description: As needed, describe the individual impacting agents and overall site condition. Sites classified as ‘Stable’ will often need no further explanation; however, some impacting agents (and sites classified as deteriorating, imminently threatened, or destroyed) will require additional description.

11

20. Recorded By: Enter the primary individual responsible for recording the site in the field. This is the individual on the ground actively directing the recording of the site; usually a crew chief or staff archaeologist.

21. Organization: Enter the name of the organization recording the site.

22. Material Collected / Repository: If material has been collected from the site it should be noted here and the repository at which the artifacts are curated should be listed. Be sure to describe the materials recovered, their context, and reasons for collection in the ‘Site Description’.

NRHP Evaluation All sites recorded using the Utah Archaeology Site Form should be evaluated for recommendation to the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) using the principles outlined in National Register Bulletin #15: How to Apply the National Register Criteria for Evaluation (National Park Service 2002).

23. Is the Site Significant: Record whether the site being documented is considered significant or not; and if significant, note under which criteria (A, B, C, or D) (check all that apply). Remember that the significance of a property must be evaluated within a historic context (NPS 2002:3,7-11). Be sure to take into account the following: “To qualify for the National Register, a property must be significant; that is, it must represent a significant part of the history, architecture, archeology, engineering, or culture of an area, and it must have the characteristics that make it a good representative of properties associated with that aspect of the past” (NPS 2002:7).

Criteria for Evaluation: The quality of significance in American history, architecture, archeology, engineering, and culture is present in districts, sites, buildings, structures, and objects that possess integrity of location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, and association, and: A. That are associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of our history; or B. That are associated with the lives of significant persons in our past; or C. That embody the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction, or that represent the work of a master, or that possess high artistic values, or that represent a significant and distinguishable entity whose components may lack individual distinction; or D. That have yielded or may be likely to yield, information important in history or prehistory.

12

Criteria Considerations: Ordinarily cemeteries, birthplaces, graves of historical figures, properties owned by religious institutions or used for religious purposes, structures that have been moved from their original locations, reconstructed historic buildings, properties primarily commemorative in nature, and properties that have achieved significance within the past 50 years shall not be considered eligible for the National Register. However, such properties will qualify if they are integral parts of districts that do meet the criteria or if they fall within the following categories: a. A religious property deriving primary significance from architectural or artistic distinction or historical importance; or b. A building or structure removed from its original location but which is primarily significant for architectural value, or which is the surviving structure most importantly associated with a historic person or event; or c. A birthplace or grave of a historical figure of outstanding importance if there is no appropriate site or building associated with his or her productive life; or d. A cemetery that derives its primary importance from graves of persons of transcendent importance, from age, from distinctive design features, or from association with historic events; or e. A reconstructed building when accurately executed in a suitable environment and presented in a dignified manner as part of a restoration master plan, and when no other building or structure with the same association has survived; or f. A property primarily commemorative in intent if design, age, tradition, or symbolic value has invested it with its own exceptional significance; or g. A property achieving significance within the past 50 years if it is of exceptional importance.

[NPS 2002:2] 24. Does it Retain Integrity: Record whether the site being documented retains integrity, and if so, note which aspects of integrity are present. Consider the following when determining whether a property retains integrity: Integrity is the ability of a property to convey its significance. To be listed in the National Register of Historic Places, a property must not only be shown to be significant under the National Register criteria, but it also must have integrity. The evaluation of integrity is sometimes a subjective judgment, but it must always be grounded in an understanding of a property’s physical features and how they relate to its significance.

Historic properties either retain integrity (this is, convey their significance) or they do not.

Within the concept of integrity, the National Register criteria recognizes seven aspects or qualities that, in various combinations, define integrity.

To retain historic integrity a property will always possess several, and usually most, of the aspects. The retention of specific aspects of integrity is paramount for a property to convey its significance. Determining which of these aspects are most important to a particular property requires knowing why, where, and when the property is significant.

[NPS 2002:44] 13

In referring to the seven aspects of integrity, King (2004:114) states, “One can go into great detail about what this means, but the bottom line is that the place can’t be so screwed up that it no longer contains or exhibits whatever made it significant in the first place.” Listed below are abbreviated descriptions of the aspects of integrity (complete descriptions can be found in NPS 2002:44-49).

Location: The place where the historic property was constructed or the place where the historic event occurred. The relationship between the property and its location is often important to understanding why the property was created or why something happened.

Design: The combination of elements that create the form, plan, space, structure, and style of a property. It results from conscious decisions made during the original conception and planning of a property (or its significant alteration) and applies to activities as diverse as community planning, engineering, architecture, and landscape architecture.

Setting: The physical environment of a historic property. Whereas location refers to the specific place where a property was built or an event occurred, setting refers to the character of the place in which the property played its historic role.

Materials: The physical elements that were combined or deposited during a particular period of time and in a particular pattern or configuration to form a historic property. The choice and combination of materials reveal the preferences of those who created the property and indicate the availability of particular types of materials and technologies.

Workmanship: The physical evidence of the crafts of a particular culture or people during any given period in history or prehistory. It is the evidence of artisans’ labor and skill in constructing or altering a building, structure, object, or site.

Feeling: A property’s expression of the aesthetic or historic sense of a particular period of time. It results from the presence of physical features that, taken together, convey the property’s historic character.

Association: The direct link between an important historic event or person and a historic property. A property retains association if it is the place where the event or activity occurred and is sufficiently intact to convey that relationship to an observer.

25. NRHP Status: Choose the category that describes the recorders recommendation of the site’s eligibility for inclusion to the NRHP. Unless noted in an addendum (see addendum discussion below), the recorders recommendation will also represent the responsible government agency’s official NRHP determination.

• Not eligible: The site is not significant or does not retain integrity.

• Eligible: The site is significant and retains integrity.

• Listed: The site is officially listed on the NRHP. 14

Should the responsible government agency disagree with a recorders recommendation, or have a need to change a recommendation after the site form has been submitted to the appropriate authorities, it is incumbent upon the agency official to submit a short addendum noting the agency’s current NRHP determination and why it differs from the previous recommendation/ documentation.

26. NRHP Justification: Justify the recommendation/determination for NRHP eligibility through a discussion of significance and integrity. Consider the following examples (both of which should NOT be thought of as templates, but only as possibilities for how justification may be discussed).

Example 1: A lithic scatter situated in a farmer’s field that had previously been recommend as eligible to the NRHP due to its ability to yield information important in prehistory.

While at one point the site was recommended as eligible for inclusion in the NRHP under Criterion D, it has since been heavily disturbed by looting and plowed multiple times.

These activities have destroyed the natural stratigraphy as well as the spatial relationships between artifacts and sediments. Shovel tests show no evidence of subsurface deposits, suggesting the site is a surface scatter only. In addition, well known artifact collecting by local property owners has significantly changed the composition of the assemblage by removing all formal tools. These factors have reduced the aspects of association and materials to a degree that the site no longer retains integrity and is therefore not eligible for inclusion to the NRHP. Example 2: A historic aqueduct that allowed for the development and growth of a rural town and was therefore associated with events that made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of local history and also embodied the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction.

The site is recommended as eligible for inclusion in the NRHP under Criteria A and C. The aqueduct provided the main source of water to Marysvale in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, without which the town would not have been established. The aqueduct, therefore, contributed to both the settlement of Marysvale and the area in general and is important in local and regional history (Criterion A). The iron hoop-bound, woodstave construction of the feature embodies distinctive characteristics of type, period, and method of construction (Criterion C) and is the only remaining example of this style of construction in the town. Although portions of the water line have deteriorated over time (leaving some sections entirely destroyed), it was abandoned at the end of its use life and has not been altered by modern improvements. The property retains the key aspects of location, design, materials, workmanship, and association and therefore retains sufficient integrity to convey its significance.

15

27. Site Description: Describe the site in detail. Information about the site may include an interpretation or description of its function(s); its basic size and shape; whether it is prehistoric, ethnohistoric, historic, or multicomponent (if multicomponent, describe the basic size and shape of each component and how/if they overlap); environmental context (including topographic setting, landforms, vegetation, ground visibility, depositional context and soil description); description of artifact and feature assemblage; diagnostic artifacts; material types; spatial relationships on site; cultural/ethnic affiliation and dating; site condition and any natural or culture agents that are impacting the site; and descriptions of previous work (NRHP eligibility recommendations, collection, testing, or excavation). A site description need not contain all of the information listed above just as it need not be restricted to only the information listed above. The recorder should attempt to strike a balance between necessary detail and brevity.

Consider the following examples of site descriptions (both of which should NOT be thought of as templates).

Example 1: The site is a medium-sized lithic scatter measuring roughly 80 m N/S by 50 m E/W and is composed of approximately 400 pieces of chipped stone debitage, two early stage bifaces, and two Elko Corner-notched projectile points. Located on a broad, flat terrace between Simpson Spring and South Creek, the site is in the Pinyon-Juniper zone and ground visibility is generally good as there is only a small amount of understory. No cultural agents are impacting the site and the alluvial deposits on which it sits appear undisturbed (although not tested). Debitage is distributed evenly over the site with no concentrations. Obsidian is the only material type present, with the exception of one of the projectile points (made of a tan colored chert). The lack of features and the limited nature of the assemblage suggest the site was used as a short-term logistical camp (possibly for hunting) and may have been occupied for only a couple of days.

Example 2: Site 42GA2016 is a Fremont residential site and associated artifact scatter on a small north/ south trending ridge near the southern slopes of Boulder Mountain. The site conforms to the contours of the ridge and measures ~40 m N/S by 25 m E/W. The soil is relatively rocky (mostly residual) and has a maximum depth of 10 cm (ascertained by trowel scrape). The thin soils result in good ground visibility as there is very little plant cover (only a few sagebrush and minor grasses), despite being on the edge of the Pinyon-Juniper zone. The remains of two rectangular stacked rock surface structures (Features 1 and 2) are located in the northern portion of the site, and a dark soil stain (Feature 3) is found near the center. Artifacts are concentrated around Feature 3 and include approximately 200 lithic flakes (mostly Boulder Jasper), 300 Emery Gray ceramic sherds, four ground stone fragments, and seven lithic tools. Based on the features and the artifact assemblage it is likely that the site functioned as a seasonal residence for Fremont populations sometime between A.D. 800 to 1100.

16

42GA2016 was previously recorded in May 1994 by YAR Inc. and was recommended as eligible for inclusion to the NRHP under Criterion D. Four months later YAR Inc. returned to the site and excavated three 1-x-1 m test units in its center (see attached map) and curated the resulting artifacts (27 pieces of debitage, 18 ceramic sherds, and 1 metate fragment) and a brief site report (Dent et al. 1995) at the Edge of the Cedars State Park Museum in Blanding.

28. Environmental Context: Describe the environmental context for the site and surrounding area. This may include a description of the topographic setting, landforms, vegetation, depositional context, soil description, and ground visibility. Often this entry will be populated (copy and paste) with information already recorded in the site description. Consider the following example (pulled from the fictional site description of 42GA2016 above): 42GA2016 is located on a small north/south trending ridge near the southern slopes of Boulder Mountain. The site conforms to the contours of the ridge and measures ~40 m N/S by 25 m E/W. The soil is relatively rocky (mostly residual) and has a maximum depth of 10 cm (ascertained by trowel scrape). The thin soils result in good ground visibility as there is very little plant cover (only a few sagebrush and minor grasses), despite being on the edge of the Pinyon-Juniper zone.

Some of the more common descriptors for environmental contexts are summarized below (from IMACS 1992:410, 420, 430, 455) and detailed descriptions of vegetation communities can be found in Appendix B. Topographic Setting: Mountain: A landmass that projects conspicuously above its surroundings; usually over 1000 ft. in elevation.

Foothills: Hilly region at the base of a mountain range.

Hill: A usually rounded prominence less than 1000 ft. in elevation.

Butte/Mesa/Plateau: Landforms with a flat top and steep sides; buttes are generally considered small, mesas moderate sized, and plateaus large.

Ridge: An elevated, relatively narrow landform with steep sides; usually a feature of a mountain or hill.

Terrace/Bench: A linear, relatively level area of soil or rock on a ridge, canyon side, or other sloping surface.

Saddle/Pass: A saddle is generally a low point on a ridge or spine; a pass is generally a gap or relatively low break in a mountain range.

17

Canyon: Any steep-walled feature cut by running water into bedrock, the sides of which are composed of steep slopes or cliffs.

Arroyo: A water-carved gully or channel in an arid region.

Ephemeral Wash: Watercourse that is usually dry; flows only for a short time in direct response to precipitation.

Cliff: A very steep, vertical, or overhanging face of rock or earth.

Alcove/Rock Shelter: A space within or below a natural overhang or relatively shallow cavity in rock, all of which receives direct or indirect sunlight.

Cave: A natural cavity in bedrock, deep enough that at least part of it is in total darkness year round.

Valley: Low-lying land surrounded by mountains that is either transversed by a stream or river, or contains a lake or playa.

Plain: A region of generally uniform slope, comparatively level, and of considerable extent.

Alluvial Fan: A cone or fan shaped deposit of alluvium made by a stream where it changes gradient (usually where a stream leaves the mountains and discharges into a valley).

Playa: A dry lake or pond composed of clays and silts with a high salt content; may periodically fill with water to form a temporary lake.

Dune: A mound or ridge of sand or other loose sediment formed by wind action.

Depositional Context: Aeolian Deposits: Wind-transported materials that consist primarily of sand or silt-sized particles.

Alluvium: Fine grained, well-sorted materials transported and deposited by running water.

Colluvium: Rock and soil that is moving down, or has been deposited at the foot of steep slopes and cliffs, transported mainly by gravity rather than water.

Residual Deposits: Rock and soil material formed in place by the weathering of the bedrock immediately beneath it.

Scree/Talus: Rocks that form concentrations that run down slopes, form cone or fan shaped features, or accumulate at the base. Scree is generally pebble to gravel size while talus consists of rocks that range from cobble to boulder sized.

18

Life Zone: Elevations are only approximate and any zone may be up to 1000 ft. lower in the north of the state than in the south.

Lower Sonoran: Warm desert; sagebrush, rabbitbrush, cacti, creosote; under 6000 ft.

Upper Sonoran: Cool desert foothills or high valleys; pinyon-juniper, sagebrush, grasses; 6000 to 7000 ft.

Transitional: Foothills and drier mountain areas; mountain mahogany, oak brush, some ponderosa pine; 7000 to 8000 ft.

Canadian: Mountain conifers; douglas fir, ponderosa and lodgepole pine, aspen; 8000 to 9000 ft.

Hudsonian: High mountain forest; alpine fir, spruce, willows; 9000 to 11000 ft.

Artic-Alpine: Above timberline; mostly grasses.

Vegetation Community: Descriptions of each community can be found in Appendix B. Barren Riparian Creosote Bush Blackbush Shadscale/Greasewood Sagebrush Pinyon-Juniper Oak-Maple Shrubland

Dry Meadow Wet Meadow Ponderosa Pine Aspen Douglas Fir Lodgepole Pine Spruce/Fir Alpine Tundra

29. Notes Regarding Access: If access to the site is straightforward or easily determined using standard means (e.g. electronic or print maps, GIS, Google Earth), a written description is not required. However, if access is unusual, difficult, or restricted; describe how to reach the site using local landforms, features, and other directions. The use of exact mileage, mile-posts, compass directions (e.g. ‘turn north’ instead of ‘turn right’), and other specifics are useful (e.g. gate is locked; road is extremely rocky and 4-wheel drive is required; proceed on foot on bearing of 34º following the stream bed for 1.4 km).

30. Additional Part A Comments: Include any additional comments that may be relevant to the recording of the site but that do not fit under other categories.

19

PART B (PREHISTORIC COMPONENT) Whenever possible, the listed options for each category below should be used; however, when appropriate (and listed as a choice) the ‘Other ___________’ option may be chosen. When doing so, do not write ‘Other’ on the form, but instead write a short two to three word descriptive term.

Smithsonian Trinomial: Enter the Smithsonian Trinomial assigned by the Antiquities Section.

Temporary Site No.: If applicable, enter the temporary site number from Part A. 1. Cultural/Temporal Affiliations: Enter the cultural/temporal affiliations for each prehistoric component of the site using the categories below. Multiple entries are allowed. For example, a site that contains Emery Gray ceramics, Desert Side-notched projectile points, and Intermountain Brown Ware may be recorded as Fremont and Late Prehistoric.

• • • • • • • • •

Unknown Prehistoric Paleoarchaic/PaleoIndian Archaic Early Archaic Middle Archaic Late Archaic Fremont Anasazi (undifferentiated Basketmaker/Pueblo) Basketmaker II

• • • • • • • • •

Basketmaker III Pueblo I Pueblo II Pueblo III Pueblo IV Promontory Late Prehistoric Ethnohistoric Other ___________________

2. Architectural Features: Architectural features are considered buildings, structures, or complex constructions. As all archaeological remains are in a process of decay, it is incumbent upon the recorder to interpret a feature as to whether they believe it should be recorded as architectural or not. Although a large rubble mound could easily be recorded as a non-architectural feature, it may be clear to the recorder that the remains are those of a collapsed masonry structure and should therefore be recorded as an architectural feature. Similarly, dark staining in a large depression may be indicative of a pit house and not simply a depression. Recorders are encouraged to use their best judgment when assessing whether a feature is architectural, and it should be expected that differences of opinion between professionally trained individuals may occur.

Type: Enter the type of architectural feature using the categories below. Be sure to label features on site maps.

Description: Enter a description of the feature. Features that are given unique designations or numbers should have those designations included in the description and keyed on site maps.

21

• • • • •

Cist Granary Hogan/Earthen Lodge Pitstructure Surface structure (single-room)

• • • • •

Surface structure (multi-room) Tower Wall Wickiup/Tipi/Ramada Other ___________________

3. Non-Architectural Features: Features that are not considered buildings or complex structures. As all archaeological remains are in a process of decay, it is incumbent upon the recorder to interpret a feature as to whether they believe it should be recorded as non-architectural or not. Although a large rubble mound could easily be recorded as a non-architectural feature, it may be clear to the recorder that the remains are those of a collapsed masonry structure and should therefore be recorded as an architectural feature. Similarly, dark staining in a large depression may be indicative of a pit house and not simply a depression. Recorders are encouraged to use their best judgment when assessing whether a feature is non-architectural, and it should be expected that differences of opinion between professionally trained individuals may occur.

Type: Enter the type of non-architectural feature using the categories below. Be sure to label features on site maps.

• • • • • • • •

Artifact Concentration Burial Cairn Depression Earthen Mound Fire-cracked Rock Concentration/Burned Stone Midden Modified Rock Surface (e.g. bedrock mortar, grinding slick, grooved rock, cupule)

• • • • • • • •

Rock Alignment Rock Art/Inscription Rock Concentration/Ring Rubble Mound Stained Soil Thermal Feature/Hearth Trail/Road Other ___________________

• Pit Description: Enter a description of the feature. Features that are given unique designations or numbers should have those designations included in the description and keyed on site maps.

4. Feature Comments: Additional comments relevant to the prehistoric features.

5. Flaked Stone (lithics): Flaked stone (aka chipped stone; lithics) can generally be defined as stone tools and debris that are primarily manufactured through percussion or pressure flaking.

22

Debitage—Estimated Quantity: For small quantities enter the actual number of flaked stone debitage pieces present; for larger numbers enter an estimate. Estimates should be in the form of a total (e.g. 500); not a range (e.g. 400-600). If estimates are based on a sampling strategy, the methods used should be described in the ‘Flaked Stone Comments’.

Abundance: For each lithic material type present enter its relative abundance using the categories below. Multiple material types may be classified as common or rare on any one site.

In cases where there is an equal representation of lithic materials and no one type dominates, list the competing materials as common and explain in the ‘Flaked Stone Comments’.

• Dominant (D) • Common (C) • Rare (R) Material Type: Enter the material types represented in the flaked stone assemblage (e.g. obsidian, chert, quartzite, basalt, sandstone). When possible, add more specific information regarding recognizable source materials (e.g. Green River chert, Morrison petrified wood, Boulder jasper) or short descriptive characteristics (e.g. white chert, brown coarse-grained quartzite, snowflake obsidian).

6. Tools: Quantity: Enter the quantity of the type of flaked stone tool present.

Type: Enter the type of flaked stone tool using the categories below. See Appendix C for illustrations of the general shape of projectile point types frequently found in Utah.

• • • • • •

Biface Burin/Graver Core Chopper Drill Hammerstone/Peckingstone

• • • • •

_________________ Proj. Point* Scraper Uniface Utilized Flake Other ______________________

*Insert type of projectile point using categories below

Projectile Points: Use generic categories (e.g. Large Fluted, Large Corner-notched, Small Side-notched, Small Triangular) when the artifact cannot be further typed. See Appendix C for illustrations of the general shape of projectile point types frequently found in Utah.

Some individuals may find the following listing of projectile points incomplete. Should the recorder wish to document a type that is not listed below they are encouraged to use the ‘Other ___________’ category. For example, multiple types of small side-notched projectile points from southeastern Utah are sometimes categorized under the broadly defined ‘Pueblo Sidenotched Cluster’. As morphologically these overlap with well-defined types found in much 23

greater numbers throughout the majority of Utah, when recording Pueblo side-notched points in the SE portion of the state the more commonly used Great Basin point names can be employed (with the understanding that this refers to morphological characteristics only). However, some recorders may feel more comfortable using the ‘Other ___________’ entry to give more precise type names (e.g. Pueblo Side-notched concave base; Awatovi Side-notched).

Description: As needed, give a basic description of the flaked stone tool. Be aware, however, that many artifacts do not need to be recorded in detail and in many cases things like individual Dart/Spear points Fluted • Large Fluted • Clovis • Folsom Stemmed • Large Stemmed • Bajada • Western Stemmed (includes Lake Mojave, Silver Lake, Parman, Cougar Mt., etc.)

Lanceolate • Large Lanceolate • Humboldt Concave Base • McKean Lanceolate Contracting Stem • Large Contracting-stem • Gatecliff Contracting-stem (aka Gypsum) Arrow Points Corner-Notched • Small Corner-notched • Eastgate Expanding-stem • Dolores Series (aka Abajo Stemmed) • Rose Spring Corner-notched

Bifurcate-Stemmed • Large Bifurcate-Stemmed • Gatecliff Split-stem • Pinto Series • San Jose Corner-Notched • Large Corner-notched • Basketmaker Corner-notched • Elko Corner-notched • Elko Eared Side-Notched • Large Side-notched • Basketmaker Side-notched • Elko Side-notched • Hawken Side-notched • Northern Side-notched • Rocker Side-notched • San Rafael Side-notched • Sudden Side-notched • Desert Side-notched • Nawthis Side-notched • Uinta Side-notched Triangular • Small Triangular • Bull Creek • Cottonwood Triangular • Parowan Basal-notched

Side-Notched • Small Side-notched • Bear River Side-notched Other Projectile Points • Other ______________ 24

measurements are unnecessary. Simple descriptions such as those in the example below often suffice. Additional information for projectile points or unique items may be warranted, and could include measurements or a more specific artifact name than what is allowed in the type category. For example, although ‘Great Basin Stemmed’ may be the flaked stone tool ‘Type’, the recorder may more specifically describe the point as Cougar Mountain in the description.

Artifacts that are given unique designations or numbers should have those designations included in the description and keyed on site maps.

Example:

7. Flaked Stone Comments: Additional comments relevant to the flaked stone assemblage.

8. Ceramics: A number of factors can make accurately assigning ceramic sherds to formally named types while in the field difficult (even for professional ceramists). As such, ceramic documentation focuses on recording the level of data that can be done competently and confidently. Recording is based on the idea that more general (but reliable) data are preferable to more specific (but potentially unreliable) information.

Prehistoric ceramics are recorded using a tiered system. At the initial level (Tier 1), sherds are identified in broad categories that focus on color and surface finish. Next, if the pottery is complete enough and the analyst is experienced enough, sherds are classified using stylistic or type categories under Tier 2. In practice, many sherds will only be identified to the first tier of analysis, but second tier identification should always be completed when enough diagnostic features are present that it can be confidently done. Useful references for ceramic types most commonly found in Utah include Abel 1955; Allison 2008; Breternitz et al. 1974; Colton 1952, 1953, 1955, 1956; Lyneis 2008; Lyneis and Hays-Gilpin 2008; Madsen 1977; Watkins 2009; and Wilson and Blinman 1995.

Documentation of ceramics should regularly include photographs of selected sherds to enable others to assess the reliability of the data and to identify diagnostic types not recognized by the original recorder.

25

Estimated Quantity: For small quantities enter the actual number of ceramic sherds present; for larger numbers enter an estimate. Estimates should be in the form of a total (e.g. 500); not a range (e.g. 400-600). If estimates are based on a sampling strategy, the methods used should be described in the ‘Ceramic Comments’ section.

Quantity: Enter the quantity of the type of ceramic sherds present.

Tier 1: Enter the types of ceramics present using the categories below for initial classification.

Tier 1 should be completed for all ceramics on site, including those that can be typed to Tier 2.

In the classification scheme used below, ‘Gray ware’ categories include only unpainted, culinary gray ware. The ‘White ware/Painted gray ware’ categories include all white wares and gray wares that have been painted and/or slipped. Also keep in mind that ware names are descriptive of normal colors, but are not dependably diagnostic. Actual colors overlap different wares, and colors can be “off” due to firing (e.g. grayware pottery is not always gray, and not all gray colored pottery is grayware). Recorders should have basic ceramic proficiency and be able to differentiate between graywares, whitewares, redwares, and brownwares.

• • • • •

Gray ware Gray ware (neckbanded) Gray ware (corrugated) White ware/Painted gray ware White ware/Painted gray ware (corrugated) • Red/Orange ware • Red/Orange ware (with red paint)

• • • • • • •

Red/Orange ware (with black paint) Red/Orange ware (polychrome) Brown ware Brown ware (fingernail impressed) Brown ware (corrugated) Yellow ware Unknown/Other

Tier 2: If conditions allow and the analyst is confident about the classification, record the kinds of ceramics present using the more specific categories below. The more generic, overarching categories (e.g. Fremont Gray Ware, Moapa Gray Ware, Shinarump White Ware) should be used when the recorder cannot classify the ceramics into a specific type, but can identify them to the broader classification. The requirement that all ceramics on site be recorded using Tier 1, and that the more specific Tier 2 be used whenever possible, is demonstrated in the example below where the recorder was able to confidently classify some of the ceramic sherds to type, but not others.

Example:

26

Gray Ware (Unpainted, culinary gray ware only) • Fremont Gray Ware • Emery Gray • Emery Corrugated • Snake Valley Gray • Snake Valley Corrugated • Uinta Gray • Great Salt Lake Gray • Undetermined Fremont

• Tusayan Gray Ware Kayenta Series • Obelisk Utility • Tusayan Gray Ware • Lino Gray • Kana-a Gray • Coconino Gray • Medicine Gray • Coombs Gray • Tusayan Corrugated • Moenkopi Corrugated

• Moapa Gray Ware • Boulder Gray • Moapa Corrugated

• Mesa Verde Gray Ware (Abel’s San Juan Gray Ware) • Mesa Verde Gray • Chapin Gray • Moccasin Gray • Mancos Gray late • Mummy Lake Gray • Mancos Corrugated • Dolores Corrugated • Mesa Verde Corrugated

• Logandale Gray Ware • Logandale Gray • Logandale Corrugated • Shivwits Gray Ware • Shivwits Plain • Shivwits Corrugated • Shinarump Gray Ware • Shinarump Plain • Shinarump Corrugated

• Athabaskan gray series • Promontory Gray • Dinetah Gray • Navajo Utility • Pinyon Utility • Navajo Painted

• Tusayan Gray Ware Virgin Series • North Creek Gray • North Creek Corrugated

White Ware/Painted Gray Ware (Includes painted or slipped white and gray wares) • Fremont painted types • Emery Black-on-gray • Ivie Creek Black-on-white • Snake Valley Black-on-gray

• Shinarump White Ware • Vermillion Black-on-white • Wygaret Black-on-white • Cottonwood Black-on-white

• Moapa Gray Ware painted series • Boulder Black-on-gray • Boysag Black-on-gray • Slide Mountain Black-on-gray • Trumbull Black-on-gray • Moapa Black-on-gray • Poverty Mountain Black-on-gray

• Tusayan White Ware Virgin Series • Mesquite Black-on-gray • Washington Black-on-gray • Hildale Black-on-gray • St. George Black-on-gray • North Creek Black-on-gray • Glendale Black-on-gray 27

• Tusayan White Ware Kayenta Series • Lino Black-on-gray • Kana-a Black-on-white • Wepo Black-on-white • Black Mesa Black-on-white • Sosi Black-on-white • Dogoszhi Black-on-white • Flagstaff Black-on-white • Tusayan Black-on-white • Kayenta Black-on-white • Garfield Black-on-white

• Mesa Verde White Ware (includes Abel’s San Juan and Mesa Verde White Wares) • Chapin Black-on-white • Intermediate Mesa Verde White Ware • Piedra Black-on-white • White Mesa Black-on-white • Cortez Black-on-white • Mancos Black-on-white • Tin Cup Polychrome • McElmo Black-on-white • Mesa Verde Black-on-white

RED WARE/ ORANGE WARE • San Juan Red Ware • Dolores Red • Abajo Red-on-orange • Abajo Polychrome • Bluff Black-on-red • Deadmans Black-on-red

• • • • • •

• Tsegi Orange Ware • Tallahogan Red • Tusayan Black-on-red • Cameron Polychrome • Citadel Polychrome

• Shinarump Red Ware Series • Kanab Black-on-red • Middleton Black-on-red • Nankoweap Polychrome

Tusayan Polychrome Kayenta Polychrome Kiet Siel Polychrome Tsegi Orange Tsegi Red-on-orange Tsegi Black-on-orange

BROWN WARE • Brown Ware • Obelisk Brown

• Apachean Brown Ware • Sangre de Cristo Micaceous

• Intermountain Brown Ware • Southern Paiute Utility • Shoshoni Brown

• Navajo Utility Ware (See Gray Ware list; sometimes fires brown)

• Uncompahgre Brown Ware • Uncompahgre Brown YELLOW WARE • Awatovi Yellow Ware • Jeddito Corrugated • Jeddito Tooled

• Jeddito Black-on-yellow • Awatovi Polychrome • Sikyatki Polychrome

• Jeddito Yellow Ware • Awatovi Black-on-yellow/orange • Jeddito Plain Yellow 28

9. Ceramic Comments: Additional comments relevant to the ceramic assemblage.

10. Ground Stone: Ground stone can be defined as “any stone item that is primarily manufactured through mechanisms of abrasion, polish, or impaction, or is itself used to grind, abrade, polish, or impact” (Adams 2002:1). This includes, but is not limited to, artifacts such as manos, metates, mortars, pestles, abraders, polishing stones, and any number of ornaments, pipes, figurines, etc. that are shaped through abrasion or grinding.

Estimated Quantity: For small quantities enter the actual number of ground stone pieces present; for larger numbers enter an estimate. Estimates should be in the form of a total (e.g.

35); not a range (e.g. 30–40).

Quantity: Enter the quantity of the type of ground stone present.

Type: Enter the type of ground stone using the categories below. See Appendix D for illustrations of the basic shape of metate types frequently found in Utah. The more generic ‘Mano’ or ‘Metate’ categories should be used when the recorder is confident that the artifact is either a mano or a metate, but there are not enough characteristics to assign it a more specific category.

• • • • •

Mano Mano (one handed) Mano (two handed) Metate Metate (basin)

• • • • •

Metate (slab) Metate (trough) Ornament Unidentified fragment Other _____________

Description: Record a basic description of the ground stone artifact. Artifacts that are given unique designations or numbers should have those designations included in the description and keyed in site maps.

Example:

29

11. Ground Stone Comments: Additional comments relevant to the ground stone assemblage.

12. Additional Artifacts/Debris: Note any additional artifacts or debris present using the categories below. Building materials may include shaped stones, jacal, wattle-and-daub, wood, etc. Material that is not culturally associated to the component being recorded should not be noted in this entry, but should be mentioned in the site description. For example, modern cow bone on the surface of a prehistoric site, or charcoal left from a recent wildfire, should not be recorded here.

• • • •

Basketry/Textile Bone Burned Stone/FCR Building Materials

• • • •

Charcoal Maize Shell Other ________________

13. Additional Artifacts/Debris Description: Describe the additional artifacts and debris present.

14. Additional Part B Comments: Include any additional comments that may be relevant to the prehistoric component of the site.

30

PART C (HISTORIC COMPONENT) All artifacts and features in Part C should be recorded using the standard system of measurement (e.g. inches, feet, gallons). Whenever possible the listed options for each category below should be used; however, when appropriate (and listed as a choice) the ‘Other ___________’ option may be chosen. When doing so do not write ‘Other’ on the form, but instead write a short two to three word descriptive term.

Smithsonian Trinomial: Enter the Smithsonian Trinomial assigned by the Antiquities Section.

Temporary Site No.: If applicable, enter the temporary site number from Part A. 1. Primary dates of site use: ___________ to ___________: Estimate the primary date of use or occupation of the site based on all available evidence.

Recorders should not simply use the absolute earliest and latest artifacts for dating, but should use all available evidence to estimate the period the site was most intensively utilized. For example, if a site contained 200 artifacts, five of which dated from 1860-1890, 170 of which dated from 1890-1920, and 25 of which dated from 1940-1970, the primary dates of use or occupation would likely be from 1890-1920.

2. Secondary dates of site use: ___________ to ___________: Estimate the dates of use for any secondary occupation or component of the site based on all available evidence. In the example give above, the secondary dates of site use may be estimated as 1940-1970.

3. Architectural Features: Type: Enter the type of architectural feature using the categories below. Be sure to indicate features on site maps. Generally speaking, ‘industrial’ suggests a focus on manufacturing of goods, while ‘commercial’ suggests selling of goods and services.

• • • • • • • •

Bridge Building Building (agricultural) Building (commercial) Building (industrial) Building (residential) Cabin/Shack Corral/Pen

• • • • • • • •

Dugout Foundations Hogan/Earthen Lodge Outhouse Mine Shaft/Adit Tent Platform Wickiup/Tipi/Ramada Other _____________

Description: Enter a description of the feature. Features that are given unique designations or numbers should have those designations included in the description and keyed on site maps.

31

4. Non-Architectural Features: Type: Enter the type of non-architectural feature using the categories below. Be sure to indicate features on site maps.

• • • • • • • • • • • • •

Agricultural Field Artifact Concentration Cemetery/Burial Cairn Depression Ditch/Canal Earthen Mound Fence Head Frame Headgate Midden Mine Shaft/Adit/Prospect Hole Pit

• • • • • • • • • • • •

Reservoir/Dam Rock Alignment Rock Concentration Rock Art/Inscription Railroad Grade/Bed Stained Soil Tailings Thermal Feature/Hearth Trail/Road Utility Pole(s) Well Other _______________

Description: Enter a description of the feature. Features that are given unique designations or numbers should have those designations included in the description and keyed on site maps.

5. Feature Comments: Additional comments relevant to the historical features.

6. Cans: See Appendix E for can descriptions and illustrations.

Total Quantity: For small quantities enter the actual number of cans present on site; for larger numbers enter an estimate. Estimates should be in the form of a total (e.g. 150); not a range (e.g.

100-200). If estimates are based on a sampling strategy, the methods used should be described in the ‘Can Comments’.

Quantity: Enter the quantity of the type of can present.

Type: Enter the type of can present using the categories below.

• Hole-in-cap • Hole-in-top • Sanitary

• Undetermined • Other ____________

Description: Give a concise description of the artifacts (e.g. can form or function, size, markings).

In-depth description and measurements should be reserved for unique or exceptional cans.

32

Example:

7. Can Comments: Additional comments relevant to the can assemblage.

8. Glass Bottles: See Appendix F for glass descriptions and illustrations.

Total Estimated Number of Vessels (ENV): For small quantities enter the actual number of glass bottles represented on site; for larger numbers enter an estimate. Estimates should be in the form of a total (e.g. 30); not a range (e.g. 20-40). This number is not a count of individual glass shards, but is the recorders’ estimate of the original number of bottles needed to account for all fragmentary specimens. Assemblage characteristics that can help in estimating this number include the number and size of individual bottle fragments, glass color, bottle form, and manufacture method. Keep in mind that except for very small assemblages, Total ENV is meant to be only a quick approximation. If estimates are based on a sampling strategy, the methods used should be described in the ‘Glass Bottle Comments’.

ENV (Estimated Number of Vessels): Enter the estimated number of bottles represented for each category. This number is not a count of individual glass shards, but is the recorders’ estimate of the original number of bottles needed to account for all fragmentary specimens.

Assemblage characteristics that can help in estimating this number include the number and size of individual bottle fragments, glass color, bottle form, and manufacture method. Keep in mind that except for very small assemblages, ENV is meant to be only a quick approximation.

Manufacturing Method: Enter the type of manufacturing method using the categories below.

• • • •

Hand Finished Machine Made Undetermined Other _____________________ 33

Description: Give a concise description of the artifacts present (e.g. bottle forms or functions, sizes, markings, glass color). In-depth description and measurements should be reserved for unique or exceptional artifacts.

Example:

9. Glass Bottle Comments: Additional comments relevant to the bottle assemblage; including diagnostic attributes such as embossing.

10. Ceramics: See Appendix G for historic ceramic descriptions and illustrations.

Total Estimated Number of Vessels (ENV): For small quantities enter the actual number of ceramic vessels represented on site; for larger numbers enter an estimate. Estimates should be in the form of a total (e.g. 30); not a range (e.g. 20-40). This number is not a count of individual ceramic sherds, but is the recorders’ estimate of the original number of ceramic vessels (including all forms of tableware) needed to account for all fragmentary specimens.

Assemblage characteristics that can help in estimating this number include the number and size of individual sherds, vessel form, manufacture method, surface treatments and decoration, and body characteristics (e.g. color and temper) (while Voss and Allen [2010] focus on the minimum instead of the estimated number of vessels, their discussion of methods is apropos).

Keep in mind that except for very small assemblages, Total ENV is meant to be only a quick approximation. If estimates are based on a sampling strategy, the methods used should be described in the ‘Ceramic Comments’.

ENV (estimated number of vessels): Enter the estimated number of ceramic vessels represented for each category. This number is not a count of individual ceramic sherds, but is the recorders’ estimate of the original number of ceramic vessels needed to account for all fragmentary specimens. Assemblage characteristics that can help in estimating this number include the number and size of individual sherds, vessel form, manufacture method, surface treatments and decoration, and body characteristics (e.g. color and temper) (while Voss and Allen [2010] focus on the minimum instead of the estimated number of vessels, their discussion of methods is apropos). Keep in mind that except for very small assemblages, ENV is meant to be only a quick approximation.

Ware: Enter the ceramic ware by using the categories below. See Appendix G for ceramic descriptions and illustrations.

34

• • • •

Earthenware White earthenware Colored earthenware Stoneware

• Porcelain • Undetermined • Other _______________

Description: Give a concise description of the artifacts present (e.g. vessel form or function, surface treatment and decoration, color, maker’s marks, counts). Attach photos or drawings as appropriate (especially of maker’s marks). In-depth description and measurements should be reserved for unique or exceptional artifacts.

Example:

11. Ceramic Comments: Additional comments relevant to the ceramic assemblage.

12. Additional Artifacts/Debris: Note any additional artifacts or debris present using the categories below. Material that is not culturally associated to the component being recorded should not be noted in this entry, but should be mentioned in the site description. For example, modern trash from the 1980s should not be recorded here.

• • • • • • • •

Ammunition/Firearms Bone Building Materials Car/Car Parts Ceramics (non-tableware) Clothing Glass (non-bottle) Hardware

• • • • • •

Nails (cut) Nails (wire) Plastic Stove Parts Toys Other ______________

13. Additional Artifacts/Debris Description: Describe the additional artifacts and debris present.

14. Additional Part C Comments: Include any additional comments that may be relevant to the historical component of the site.

35

PART D (ROCK ART/INSCRIPTIONS) Rock art and inscriptions include petroglyphs, pictographs, arborglyphs, or any other type of inscription, image, or illustration in either the natural or built environment. A general description of the rock art/inscription present on the site should be included in the site description (Part A).

Smithsonian Trinomial: Enter the Smithsonian Trinomial assigned by the Antiquities Section.

Temporary Site No.: If applicable, enter the temporary site number from Part A. 1. Number of panels at this site: Indicate the total number of panels present at the site. A panel is defined as a group of figures that together form a distinct unit because of their proximity. A single isolated figure is defined as one panel.

2. This form is for panel number: Indicate which panel the form documents.

3. Panel is situated on: Indicate the type of landform where the panel is located. Portable rock art is defined as handheld stones or small flat slabs of rock that are incised, scratched, pecked, painted, etc. Where several portable stones are found together at one site and are on the same type of rock or background include them all on one rock art site form.

• • • • •

Bedrock Boulder Cave interior Cliff face Outcrop

• • • •

Portable—small stones Rock shelter interior Structure Other

4. Worked surface is: Indicate the slope of the worked surface. A panel is considered vertical or horizontal if it is within the limits of approximately 10° plus or minus from true vertical or horizontal.

• • • • •

Vertical ~ ± 10º Sloping Horizontal ~ ± 10º Overhead Multiple facing

37

5. Type of rock: Indicate the type of rock that a panel is on, also provide the formation name if known.

• • • • •

Basalt Granite Limestone Sandstone Shale

• • • •

Tuff Unknown Other N/A

6. Background: Indicate the nature of the background. Under ‘Additional Information’ describe color, texture, depth, etc.

• Natural • Painted • Patinated

• Plastered • Smoke blackened • Other

7. Category and technique: Indicate the categories and techniques present on the panel.

• Petroglyphs: Images created by removing part of a rock surface through various methods (described below).

• Abraded: Figures were formed by rubbing or wearing away the rock surface. Generally, a smooth stone was used to produce a smooth uniform figure or line.

• Cupule: These are small round depressions that may be found on boulders, bedrock, cliff faces, etc.; and may be either smooth or rough.

• Incised: Figures were formed by grooves cut into the rock. They appear to have been made with a sharp tool going repeatedly over the same line.

• Scratched: Figures were formed from single sharp distinct lines. These often have the appearance of having been created with the point of a knife; but may also be indistinct.

• Solid pecked: Figures were formed by removing the entire surface area of the figure by repeatedly striking it with a pointed tool, knocking away small amounts of stone and leaving identifiable dint marks.

• Stipple pecked: Figures were formed from individual dints (dots) or short lines that do not touch or overlap. Stipple pecked figures may be outlined with a solid line.

• Pictographs: Images created with some form of pigment or paint. Indicate under ‘Additional Information’ any observations relative to colors or techniques used to apply paint. Examples of techniques may include thickly brushed, troweled, sprayed, or finger daubed.

• Monochrome • Polychrome • Outlined

• Solid • Sprayed • Stipple

38

• Other: This category includes rare or unusual figures, such as painted petroglyphs, arborglyphs, pictographs with parts of the paint removed, drilling, inlay, bas-relief, etc. Be sure to describe the other technique and images in the ‘Additional Information’.

8. Petroglyph repatination: Indicate the degree of repatination. Repatination refers to the amount of rock varnish that has reformed on petroglyphs. Rock varnish, or patina, is generally a manganese and iron oxide/ clay mineral coating that accretes on rock surfaces deepening and darkening with age. When a petroglyph is formed, the rock varnish is removed exposing the lighter-colored underlying rock.

It then begins to repatinate, eventually reaching a plateau where the final color is dependent on a number of factors. These include variability of exposure, availability of dissolved minerals, water runoff, etc. The difference in color between the petroglyph and the surrounding rock is an indicator of the relative age of the petroglyph.

• • • • • • •

None (~0–5%) Light (~5–30%) Medium (~30–60%) Dark (~60–95%) Total (~95–100%) Varies across panel N/A

9. Number of figures: Indicate the approximate total number of figures in the panel. A figure is defined as any design, pattern, symbol, diagram, representation, signature, etc.

• • • • • •

1–10 11–20 21–30 31–40 41–50 51–60

• • • • •

61–70 71–80 81–90 90–100 100+

10. Figures superimposed: Superimposition refers to the placing of one figure partly or totally over another, thus indicating relative age differences. Describe any superimposed figures and indicate their presence on the panel sketch.

11. Incorporation of natural features: Natural features such as cracks, holes, edges, knobs, etc., are occasionally embodied in the makeup of visual images or inscriptions. Describe any that are present and indicate their location on the panel sketch.

39

12. Surface preparation prior to image creation: Visual images are occasionally placed on a surface that has been previously modified. For example, surfaces may have been ground smooth before being painted. Describe and indicate on the panel sketch any areas that appear to be have been prepared.

13. Prehistoric figure modification: Describe and indicate on the site sketch the presence of any modification to figures that may have been done prehistorically.

• Covered with pigment or paint • Covered with plaster or mud • Obliteration—part or total

• Reworking / addition • Other • None

14. Direction panel faces: Record the direction (aspect) the panel faces. Aspect is measured clockwise in compass degrees from 0 (due north) to 360 (again due north, coming full circle). For a panel that faces in more than one direction, check multi-directional and indicate the general direction.

15. Panel dimensions: Record the approximate ‘Length’ and ‘Height’ of the panel in meters, and the estimated total ‘Area’ in meters squared.

16. Distance to the top of the panel from ground level: Indicate the distance (in meters) from the present ground surface to the top of the highest image. If the panel is above a rock ledge where there is no soil or fill, write in ‘N/A’.

17. Distance to the bottom of the panel from ground level: Indicate the distance (in meters) from the present ground surface to the bottom of the panel. If the panel is above a rock ledge where there is no soil or fill, write in ‘N/A’. Where figures are at ground level or appear to extend below the ground surface, write in ‘0’.

• • • • • • •

____% Bird & insect nests ____% Cracks, fractures, breaks ____% Dust deposits ____% Eroded surface ____% Exposure (wind/rain) ____% Lichen growth ____% Mineral deposits

• • • • • •

____% Mud deposits ____% Spalling ____% Vegetation abutment ____% Water runnoff (streaks) ____% Other None

18. Natural destructive agents: Indicate how much of the panel has been affected by the natural related impacts listed below using multiples of 10 percent (rounding up or down). Mark all that apply. For example, if about half of a panel had been impacted by lichen growth and 36 percent had been impacted 40

• • • • • • • • •

____% Alteration or defacing ____% Bullet marks ____% Chalking ____% Construction activities ____% Graffiti ____% Latex mold residue ____% Livestock ____% Names, initials, dates ____% Obliteration

• • • • • • •

____% Paint ____% Attempted removal ____% Removed ____% Removal of soil to expose figures ____% Smoke blackening ____% Other None

by spalling, the recorder would document these natural destructive agents as: 50% Lichen growth and 40% Spalling.

19. Cultural destructive agents: Indicate how much of the panel has been affected by the human related impacts listed below using multiples of 10 percent (rounding up or down). Mark all that apply. For example, if about half of a panel had been impacted by gunfire and 34 percent had been defaced with graffiti, the recorder would document these cultural destructive agents as: 50% Bullet Marks and 30% Graffiti.

Photograph and Field sketch: Be sure to include both overview and close up photographs of each rock art/inscription panel on site. As needed, include a field sketch of the panel that indicates manufacturing techniques, destructive agents, superimposed figures, colors (using a Munsell or other color chart if possible), or any other applicable comments as necessary. Close up photographs and sketches should include a scale and north arrow.

20. Additional Part D Comments: Include any additional comments that may be relevant to the rock art, visual image, or inscription component of the site.

41

MAPS AND PHOTOGRAPHS Since individual state and federal agencies have differing specifications for mapping and photographic documentation of sites, recorders are encouraged to contact the responsible agency to determine their requirements. However, the general practices outlined below often apply. (Note that the maps used in Figures 2 and 3 should NOT be thought of as templates, but are examples only).

Site documentation should always include a map (based on USGS 7.5 minute series) that clearly depicts the site location (Figure 2). Sketch maps of all but the simplest sites are also expected, and should show major landforms, features, important artifacts, modern disturbances, etc. (Figure 3).

Each site should be documented with a minimum of two overview photographs. Overviews should give a sense of the general setting and location of the site and how it relates to the surrounding environment (Figures 4 and 5).

Additional photographs of features, artifacts, or other aspects of the site are often appropriate, and are particularly important when describing temporally diagnostic artifacts (especially those the recorder is unable to confidently identify). Photographs of objects should include a scale and be composed against a background from which the artifact will stand out. Check digital images to ensure they are well framed and in focus (Figures 6 and 7). All photographs should be accompanied by a brief description which includes a minimum of the site number and direction facing (as appropriate).

43

Figure 2. Example of a site location map.

44

Figure 3. Example of a site sketch map.

45

Figure 4. Example of a less effective site overview photograph.

Figure 5. Example of an effective site overview photograph.

46

Figure 6. Example of a less effective artifact photograph.

Figure 7. Example of an effective artifact photograph.

47

REFERENCES Abel, Leland J. 1955 Pottery Types of the Southwest, Wares 5A, 10A, 10B, 12A, San Juan Red Ware, Mesa Verde Gray Ware, Mesa Verde White Ware, San Juan White Ware. Museum of Northern Arizona Ceramic Series No. 3. Northern Arizona Society of Science and Art, Flagstaff.

Adams, Jenny L. 2002 Ground Stone Analysis. The University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City.

Allison, James R. 2008 Shinarump Red Ware and Other Red Ware North and West of the Colorado River.

Pottery Southwest 27(1):21–34.

Breternitz, David A., Arthur H. Rohn, Jr., and Elizabeth A. Morris 1974 Prehistoric Ceramics of the Mesa Verde Region. Museum of Northern Arizona Ceramic Series No. 5. Northern Arizona Society of Science and Art, Flagstaff.

Bureau of Land Management 2013 Principal Meridians and Base Lines Map. Electronic document, http://www.blm.gov/ wo/st/en/prog/more/cadastralsurvey/meridians.1.html, accessed July 18, 2013. U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management.

Colton, Harold S. 1952 Pottery Types of the Arizona Strip and Adjacent Areas in Utah and Nevada. Museum of Northern Arizona Ceramic Series No. 1. Northern Arizona Society of Science and Art, Flagstaff.

1953 Potsherds: An Introduction to the Study of Prehistoric Southwestern Ceramics and Their Use in Historic Reconstruction. Museum of Northern Arizona Bulletin 25.

Northern Arizona Society of Science and Art, Flagstaff.

1955 Pottery Types of the Southwest: Wares 8A, 8B, 9A, 9B Tusayan Gray, and White Ware, Little Colorado Gray, and White Ware. Museum of Northern Arizona Ceramic Series No. 3. Northern Arizona Society of Science and Art, Flagstaff.

1956 Pottery Types of the Southwest: Wares 5A, 5B, 6A, 6B, 7A, 7B, 7C San Juan Red Ware, Tsegi Orange Ware, Homolovi Orange Ware, Winslow Orange Ware, Awatovi Yellow Ware, Jeddito Yellow Ware, Sichomovi Red Ware. Museum of Northern Arizona Ceramic Series No. 3C. Northern Arizona Society of Science and Art, Flagstaff.

IMACS (Intermountain Antiquities Computer System) 1992 Intermountain Antiquities Computer System User’s Guide. University of Utah, Bureau of Land Management, U.S. Forest Service.

King, Thomas F. 2004 Cultural Resource Laws and Practice. AltaMira Press, Walnut Creek, California.

Lyneis, Margaret M. 2008 New and Revised Prehistoric Pueblo Pottery Wares and Types from North and West of the Colorado River: Part 1, Gray Wares from the Western Area. Pottery Southwest 27(1):3–20.

48

Lyneis, Margaret M., and Kelley Hays-Gilpin 2008 Prehistoric Pueblo Pottery North and West of the Colorado River: Museum of Northern Arizona Ceramic Conference November 9–10, 2007. Pottery Southwest 26(3):12–20.

Madsen, Rex E. 1977 Prehistoric Ceramics of the Fremont. Ceramic Series No. 6. Museum of Northern Arizona, Flagstaff.

National Park Service 1997 How to Complete the National Register Registration Form. National Register Bulletin #16A. National Park Service, Washington D.C. 2002 How to Apply the National Register Criteria for Evaluation. National Register Bulleting #15. Electronic document, http://www.nps.gov/nr/publications/bulletins/ nrb15/, accessed August 29, 2012.

Schroedl, Alan R. 2008 A Personal Perspective on the IMACS Site Form and the Next Generation of a Utah Site Database. Utah Archaeology 21(1):89–105.

UPAC (Utah Professional Archaeological Council) 2008 Linear Sites. Guidance for Identifying and Recording under Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act. Electronic document, http://www.upaconline. org/files/UPACLinearGuidance2008.pdf, accessed July 22, 2013. Utah Professional Archaeological Council.

Voss, Barbara L. and Rebecca Allen 2010 Guide to Ceramic MNV Calculation Qualitative and Quantitative Analysis. Technical Briefs in Historical Archaeology 5:1–9.

Watkins, Christopher N. 2009 Type, Series, and Ware: Characterizing Variability in Fremont Ceramic Temper.

Journal of California and Great Basin Anthropology 29 (2):145–161.

Wilson, C. Dean, and Eric Blinman 1995 Ceramic Types of the Mesa Verde Region. In Archaeological Pottery of Colorado: Ceramic Clues to the Prehistoric and Protohistoric Lives of the State’s Native Peoples, edited by Robert H. Brunswig, Jr., Bruce Bradley, and Susan M. Chandler, pp. 33–88.

Colorado Council of Professional Archaeologists Occasional Papers No. 2, Denver.

Yoder, David T. 2012 The 50 Year Rule, IMACS, Curation, and Other Invigorating Topics. Why We Have to Change. Paper presented at the 33rd Biennial Great Basin Anthropological Conference, Lake Tahoe, NV. 2016 IMACS and Site Recording in Utah: A Retrospective of Trying to Change an Entrenched System. Paper presented at the 35th Biennial Great Basin Anthropological Conference, Reno, NV.

49

APPENDIX A Utah Archaeology Site Form

UTAH ARCHAEOLOGY SITE FORM

PART A – Administrative Data 1 Smithsonian Trinomial:________________________ 2 Temporary Site No :__________________________ 3 Site Name:__________________________________

4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11

Date Recorded:________/________/______________ Type of Recording: □First Recording □Full Re-record □Update Project Name: _______________________________________________________________________________________ State Report Number:_________________________________________________________________________________ Land Status: ________________________________________________________________________________________ USGS 7.5’ Quad Map Name and Date: ___________________________________________________________________ Township:_______ Range:_______ Section:_______ (¼):_______ County: ____________________________

12

Meridian: □Salt Lake □Uintah UTMs: Zone _ _ 0 __ __ __ __ __ __ E

13

Site Dimensions:

Length:___________m

14 Site Classa: □Prehistoric □Ethnohistoric Prehistoric/Ethnohistoric 15 Site Type:

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ N Width:___________m

NAD 83

Area:_______________m2

□GIS

□Estimate

□Historic Historic

□Long-Term Residential □Task Specific □Domestic □Transportation/Communication □Temporary Camp □Specialty Site □Agriculture/Subsistence □Defense □Unknown □Industry/Processing/Extraction □Unknown □Other_______________________________ □Otherb _________________________ 16 Site Characteristicsa: □Artifact Scatter □Rock Art/Inscription □Lithic Source/Quarry □Rock Shelter/Cave □Architectural Feature(s) □Non-Architectural Feature(s) □Linear 17 Impacting Agentsa: □None □Erosion □Livestock Concentration □Recreation □Road/Trail □Vandalism/Looting □Other_________________________________ 18 Site Condition:

□Stable

□Deteriorating

□Imminently Threatened

□Destroyed

19

Description (as needed): ________________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________________________________

20

Recorded By:________________________________

22 Material Collected:

□No

NRHP Evaluation 23 Is the Site Significant:

21 Organization: _____________________________________

□Yes (describe in Site Description)

□No □No

Repository: ________________________________________________

□Yes, under criteriona: □A (event) □B (person) □C (design/construction) □D (important information) □Yes, aspects presenta: □Location □Design □Setting □Materials □Workmanship □Feeling □Association □Eligible □Listed

24

Does it Retain Integrity:

25

NRHP Status:

26

Justification (include discussion of historic context, significance, and integrity):______________________________________________

□Not eligible

___________________________________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________________________________ a b

Check all that apply See manual for additional categories

1

UTAH ARCHAEOLOGY SITE FORM

PART A – Administrative Data Smithsonian Trinomial: _________________________ Temporary Site No :____________________________

27 Site Description (interpretation, context, size, artifact and feature assemblage, dating, previous work and curation, etc.): ___________________________________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________________________________ 28 Environmental Context (topography, vegetation, ground visibility, depositional context): ___________________________________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________________________________ 29 Notes Regarding Access (as needed): _______________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________________________________ 30 Additional Part A Comments:__________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________________________________ a b

Check all that apply See manual for additional categories

2

UTAH ARCHAEOLOGY SITE FORM

1 2

PART B – Prehistoric Component

Smithsonian Trinomial:________________________ Temporary Site No :__________________________ Cultural/Temporal Affiliations: _______________________________ _______________________________ _______________________________ _______________________________ Architectural Features Type Description ____________________

___________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________

____________________

3

___________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________ Non-Architectural Features Type Description

____________________

___________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________

____________________

4

5

___________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________ Feature Comments:__________________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________________________________ Flaked Stone (lithics) Debitage - Estimated Quantity:_______________ Abundance Material Type (D, C, R¹)

6

_____ _____ _____ Tools Quantity _____

7

__________________________________ __________________________________ __________________________________ Type __________________________

Abundance (D, C, R)

_____ _____ _____

Material Type __________________________________ __________________________________ __________________________________

Description

______________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________ _____ __________________________ ______________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________ _____ __________________________ ______________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________ _____ __________________________ ______________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________ _____ __________________________ ______________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________ Flaked Stone Comments: _____________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________________________________ 1 ¹ D-dominant, C-common, R-rare

UTAH ARCHAEOLOGY SITE FORM

PART B – Prehistoric Component Smithsonian Trinomial:________________________ Temporary Site No :__________________________

8

Ceramics - Estimated Quantity:_______________ Quantity Tier 1 _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____

9

10

12

_________________________________________ _________________________________________ _________________________________________ _________________________________________ _________________________________________ _________________________________________

__________________________________________ __________________________________________ __________________________________________ __________________________________________ __________________________________________ __________________________________________

Ceramic Comments: _________________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________________________________ Ground stone - Estimated Quantity:_______________ Quantity Type Description _____

11

Tier 2

__________________________

______________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________ _____ __________________________ ______________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________ _____ __________________________ ______________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________ _____ __________________________ ______________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________ Ground Stone Comments: ____________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________________________________ Additional Artifacts/Debris: □ Basketry/Textile □ Bone □ Burned stone/FCR □ Other___________________________________

□ Building Materials

□ Charcoal

□ Maize

□ Shell

13

Additional Artifact/Debris Description: _________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________________________________

14

Additional Part B Comments: _________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________________________________ ¹ D-dominant, C-common, R-rare

1

UTAH ARCHAEOLOGY SITE FORM

PART C – Historic Component Smithsonian Trinomial:________________________ Temporary Site No :__________________________

1 2 3

Primary dates of site use: ______________ to ______________ Secondary dates of site use: ______________ to ______________ Architectural Features Type Description ____________________

___________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________

____________________

___________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________

____________________

4

___________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________ Non-Architectural Features Type Description

____________________

___________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________

____________________

5

6

7

___________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________ Feature Comments:__________________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________________________________ Cans - Total Quantity:_______________ Quantity Type Description _____ ____________________ ___________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________ _____ ____________________ ___________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________ _____ ____________________ ___________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________ _____ ____________________ ___________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________ _____ ____________________ ___________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________ Can Comments: _____________________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________________________________ 1

UTAH ARCHAEOLOGY SITE FORM

PART C – Historic Component Smithsonian Trinomial:________________________ Temporary Site No :__________________________

8

9

10

11

12

Glass Bottles - Total ENV:_______________ ENV Manufacturing Method Description _____ ____________________ ___________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________ _____ ____________________ ___________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________ _____ ____________________ ___________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________ _____ ____________________ ___________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________ Glass Bottle Comments: ______________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________________________________ Ceramics - Total ENV:_______________ ENV Ware Description _____ ____________________ ___________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________ _____ ____________________ ___________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________ _____ ____________________ ___________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________ _____ ____________________ ___________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________ Ceramic Comments: _________________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________________________________ Additional Artifacts/Debris: □ Car/Car parts □ Ammunition/Firearms □ Bone □ Ceramics (non-tableware) □ Clothing □ Building Materials

□ Glass (non-bottle) □ Hardware □ Nails (cut)

□ Nails (wire) □ Plastic □ Stove Parts

□ Toys □ Other _____________________

13

Additional Artifact/Debris Description: _________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________________________________

14

Additional Part C Comments: _________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________________________________ 1

UTAH ARCHAEOLOGY SITE FORM

PART D – Rock Art/Inscriptions Smithsonian Trinomial:________________________ Temporary Site No :__________________________

1 Number of panels at this site:________ 2 This form is for panel number:________ 3

Panel is situated on:

□ Bedrock □ Boulder

□ Cave interior □ Cliff face

□ Outcrop □ Portable – small stones

□ Vertical ~ ± 10º □ Sloping

□ Horizontal ~ ± 10º □ Multiple facing □ Overhead

□ Basalt □ Granite

□ Limestone □ Sandstone

□ Shale □ Tuff

□ Natural □ Painted

□ Patinated □ Plastered

□ Smoke blackened □ Other

□ Rock shelter interior □ Structure

□ Other

Additional Information:________________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________________________________ 4 Worked surface is:

Additional Information:________________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________________________________ 5 Type of rock:

□ Unknown □ Other

□ N/A

Formation name if known and additional information:________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________________________________ 6 Backgrounda:

Additional Information:________________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________________________________ 7 Category and techniquea:

□ Petroglyphs □ Abraded □ Scratched □ Cupule □ Solid pecked □ Incised □ Stipple pecked

□ Pictographs □ Monochrome □ Polychrome □ Outlined

□ Solid □ Sprayed □ Stipple

□ Other (e g painted petroglyphs, arborglyphs, drilling, inlay)

Additional Information:________________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________________________________ 8 Petroglyph repatination: □ None (~ 0-5%)

□ Medium (~ 30-60%) □ Dark (~ 60-95%)

□ Light (~ 5-30%)

□ Total (~ 95-100%) □ Varies across panel

□ N/A

Additional Information:________________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________________________________

□ 1-10 □ 11-20 10 Figures superimposed: □ Yes □ No 9 Number of figures:

□ 21-30 □ 31-40

□ 41-50 □ 51-60

□ 61-70 □ 71-80

□ 81-90 □ 90-100

□ 100+

Describe:___________________________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________________________________

11 Incorporation of natural features: □ Yes □ No Describe:___________________________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________________________________

a

Check all that apply

1

UTAH ARCHAEOLOGY SITE FORM

PART D – Rock Art/Inscriptions Smithsonian Trinomial:________________________ Temporary Site No :__________________________

12 Surface preparation prior to rock art/inscription creation: □ Yes □ No Describe:___________________________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________________________________ 13 Prehistoric figure modificationa: □ Covered with pigment or paint

□ Covered with plaster or mud

□ Obliteration – part or total □ Reworking / additions

□ Other □ None

Describe:___________________________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________________________________ 14 Direction panel faces: ________º

□ Multi-directional (indicate general direction: ________º )

15 Panel dimensions: Width or length:________m

Height:________m

Area:__________m²

16 Distance to the top of the panel from ground level:________m 17 Distance to the bottom of the panel from ground level:________m 18 Natural destructive agentsa (indicate percent of panel affected using multiples of 10%) _____% Bird & insect nests _____% Eroded surface _____% Mineral deposits _____% Cracks, fractures, breaks _____% Exposure (wind/rain) _____% Mud deposits _____% Dust deposits _____% Lichen growth _____% Spalling

_____% Vegetation abutment _____% Water runoff (streaks) _____% Other

□ None

Describe:___________________________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________________________________ 19 Cultural destructive agentsa (indicate percent of panel affected using multiples of 10%) _____% Alteration or defacing _____% Graffiti _____% Obliteration _____% Bullet marks _____% Latex mold residue _____% Paint _____% Chalking _____% Livestock _____% Attempted removal _____% Construction activities _____% Names, initials, dates _____% Removed

_____% Removal of soil to expose figures _____% Smoke blackening _____% Other

□ None

Describe:___________________________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________________________________ **Include a field sketch of the panel. Indicate on the sketch: different manufacturing techniques, destructive agents, superimposed figures, colors (using a Munsell or other color chart if possible), and any other applicable comments.

Include photographs with a scale showing panel setting, overview, and details.** 20 Additional Part D Comments:_________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________________________________ a

Check all that apply

1

APPENDIX B Environmental Context (from IMACS 1992)

460 - On-Site Community Codes (Page 1)

GUIDE TO VEGETATION COMMUNITY CODES The following guide supplies information for filling out 310 - Part A, Environmental Data - 34.

Vegetation Definitions are supplied for the various vegetation communities The definitions are ordered on the basis of ascending elevation, as shown on the chart below.

Community

Code

Creosote Bush

Y

Blackbrush

V

Shadscale

O

Big (Tall) Sagebrush

P

Little (Low) Sagebrush

Q

Pinyon-Juniper

H

Oak-Maple Shrubland

K

Dry Meadow

J

Wet Meadow

I

Ponderosa Pine

E

AspenA Douglas Fir

C

Lodgepole Pine

F

Spruce/Fir

B

Alpine Tundra

D

62

460 - On-Site Community Codes (Page 2)

460 - VEGETATION COMMUNITY GUIDE The following is either paraphrased or verbatim from Intermountain Flora by A. Cronquist, A. Holmgren, N. Holmgren, and J. Reveal, Volume 1, 1972, Hafner Publishing Company, Inc. pp.

109-131 We have modified Cronquist, et al. "zones" somewhat and used here to illustrate what is called "community" in IMACS. They are only roughly equivalent. Following the community code name is the appropriate IMACS code This breakdown of the Intermountain Region into vegetation zones is taken in part from Billings (1951) who subdivided the Great Basin into zones that can easily be recognized. For a good review of different treatments of vegetation zones in the Intermountain Region, see Graham (1937), who reviews the concepts of Merriam (1898), Jones (1910), Rydberg (1916, 1922), Tidestrom (1925), Shantz (1925), Sampson (1925), Cottam (1929), Svihla (1932), and Dixon (1935) A vegetation zone is, according to Billings (1951, p.103), "a large climax unit whose boundaries are caused primarily by the effects of climate and soil on the distribution of the dominant species of the zone."

In the Intermountain Region the boundaries are irregular, due to topographic and geologic variation and their consequent effects on microclimates Adding to the complexity of delineating a vegetation zone is the mosaic of smaller groupings of species due to even smaller environmental differences. Also, throughout most of any given zone there is a gradient from one environment to another which is often gradual so that the climax vegetation shows gradual shifts in composition from place to place. There are, on the other hand, a vast amount of instances of sharp differences between vegetation types where there are water courses, steep mountain slopes, or abrupt edaphic (soil) changes. The exact boundaries in the kind of macro-classification into which a vegetation zone fits are necessarily arbitrary, since the different influences suggested above result in the merging or interfingering of different zones In Intermontane Valley Zones are Creosote Bush (Warm Desert Shrub), Shadscale (Salt Desert Shrub), Sagebrush, and Pinyon-Juniper. They replace each other more or less latitudinally from south to north, and altitudinally from low to high elevations. The Creosote Bush Zone is replaced approximately along the 37th parallel by the Shadscale Zone. The Shadscale Zone extends northward in the valley bottoms. In the low depressions of the Lahontan and Bonneville basins it extends up to the 42nd parallel. The northernmost Sagebrush Zone extends south along the slopes of the mountains so that the boundary between this and the Shadscale Zone tends to dovetail considerably. The Pinyon-Juniper Zone is more or less associated with the mountains but is common enough in the higher valleys to be considered with the Valley Zones.

63

460 - On-Site Community Codes (Page 3)

The community descriptions presented here are generalized to cover many different local environmental variations. It would be a rare case to find that a community description and plant list duplicates the field situation The guide should be used to help the field archeologist make a reasonable assessment of community type by comparing the field situation to the community descriptions and encoding the best match On-Site Community Codes: (A) (B) (C) (D) (E) (F) (G) (H) (I) (J) (K) (L) (M)

Aspen Spruce/Fir Douglas Fir Alpine Ponderosa Lodgepole Pine Other/Mixed Conifer Forest Pinyon-Juniper Wet Meadow Dry Meadow Oak-Maple Shrubland (deciduous tree/shrub) Riparian Grassland/Steppe (bunch grasses)

(O) (P) (Q) (R) (S) (T) (U) (X) (W) (2) (Z)

Shadscale/Greasewood big Sagebrush Little Sagebrush (Low (Low Sagebrush) Barren Marsh/Swamp Lake/Reservoir Agricultural/Developed/ Seedings Prairie (short grasses) Mountain Brush Juniper/Sage Unknown

(A) Aspen Community Aspen (Populus tremuloides), is scattered throughout the upper levels of the Douglas fir zone, but at lower levels may be restricted to stream-side sites. Aspen often forms pure stands or dominates a community consisting of smaller trees and shrubs. The aspen, frequently found in burned-over areas, has the reputation of being an invader of burns Aspen is common and often forms large clones throughout the mountainous areas of Wyoming, mostly at 6,0/0/0/ -10/ ,0/0/0/ feet but at somewhat lower elevations in the Black Hills of northeastern Wyoming Some of the associated plants are: Acer glabrum (Rocky Mountain maple) Acer grandidentatum (big tooth maple) Berberis repens (Oregon grape) Betula occidentalis (western water birch) Bromus anomalus (nodding brome) Carex geyeri (elk sedge) Geranium spp (geranium) Hydrophyllum capitatum (waterleaf) Juniperus communis (creeping juniper) Lupinus spp (lupine) Melica spp (onion grass)

64

460 - On-Site Community Codes (Page 4)

Nemophila breviflora (nemophila) Penstemon subglaber (penstemon) Phacelia sericea (phacelia, purple fringe) Poa pratensis (Kentucky bluegrass) Poa nervosa (Wheeler bluegrass) Populus angustifolia (narrow leaf cottonwood) Salix spp. (willow) Scorphularia lanceolata (figwort) Smilacina spp (false soloman's seal) Stipa columbiana (columbia needlegrass) Symphoricarpos oreophilus (snowberry) Thalictrum fendleri (meadow-rue) Wyethia amplexicaulis (mules-ear) (B) Spruce/Fir Forest This is the characteristic element at the upper limit of trees, but may extend downward along streams into lower valleys. Near its upper limit the trees are scattered, but the main belt is almost continuous forest The chief trees are englemann spruce (Picea engelmannii) and subalpine fir (Abies lasiocarpa), but in northwestern Wyoming whitebark pine (Pineus albicaulis) is a frequent constituent, particularly on rocky or exposed sites. In mature stands the understory is frequently composed of grouse whortleberry (Vaccinium scoparium). At the upper limit of this forest the trees become dwarfed, forming characteristic wind-timber islands of trees contorted by high winds and blowing snow. Within the forest, in more open situations or along streams, we find numerous willows and aspen (Populus tremuloides) Abies lasiocarpa (subalpine fir) Picea engelmannii (englemann spruce) Pinus albicaulis (whitebark pine) Pinus flexilis (limber pine) Populus tremuloides (aspen) The most common understory taxa are: Artostaphylos uva-urse (manzanita, bearberry) Arnica cordifolia Artemisia tridentata (big sagebrush) Camanula rotundifolia (common harebell) Cares spp (sedge) Chrysothamnus viscidiflorus (rabbitbrush) Calamogrostis spp (pinegrass) Fragaria virginiana (strawberry) Juniperus communis var depressa (common juniper) Penstemon whippleannus (penstemon) Phlox spp (phlox) Pyroela spp Ribes cereum (wax or squaw currant) Ribes montigenum (mountain currant) Rebus ideaeus (raspberry) Sambucus racemosa (red elderberry)

65

460 - On-Site Community Codes (Page 5)

Stipa spp (needlegrasses) Symphoricarpos oreophilus (mountain snowberry) Trisetum spicatum (spike trisetum) Vaccinium scoparium (grouse whortleberry) (C) Douglas Fir Community Douglas fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii), has a wide ecological amplitude, usually dominating most of the areas under different climatic and edaphic influence within the Canadian zone and often extending to lower elevations than other tree species of the zone. The blue spruce, Picea pungens, is common to this community in the southern parts of the region but is only found along the extreme western edge of Wyoming and in the southern parts of the Medicene Bow Mountains. In dry areas and exposed slopes in the upper reaches of this zone, the limber pine (Pinus flexilis) is common. Similar habitats at lower elevations are often occupied by ponderosa pine (Pinus ponderosa) Common trees are: Abies concolor (white fir) Picea pungens (blue spruce) Pinus flexilis (limber pine) Pinus ponderosa (ponderosa pine) Populus tremuloides (aspen) Pseudotsuga menziesii (Douglas fir) As one ascends in elevation, winds become stronger. The dense stands of Douglas fir and aspen growing close together receive mutual protection from their own kind thus acting as windbreaks against toppling in the highwinds. The canopy allows less light to penetrate than in the open ponderosa pine forests Only shrubs and trees that can tolerate the reduced shade produced by the fir and aspen can survive here Such plants, among others, are: Amelanchier alnifolia (serviceberry) Berberis repens (Oregon grape) Cornus stolonifera (red osier dogwood, kinnikinnik) Lonicera spp (honeysuckle) Pachistma myrsinites (mountain clover, myrtle) Prunus virginiana (chokecherry) Ribes cereum (wax currant) Ribes montigenus (mountain gooseberry) Rubus parviflorus (thimbleberry) Rubus ideaus (raspberry) Salix spp. (willow) Sambucus cerulea (blue elderberry) Sorbus scopulina (mountain ash) Vaccinium scoparium (grouse whortleberry)

66

460 - On-Site Community Codes (Page 6)

(D) Alpine The alpine tundra typically consists of low perennial herbs. The climatic forces are too severe for the growth of trees. Most of the communities represent early successional stages because not only have they recently been exposed by the retreat of the Pleistocene glaciers, but the plants have such short growing seasons and are exposed to freezing night temperatures. The soils are usually shallow and poorly decomposed. Also the ruggedness of the mountain top terrain allows few places for soil to develop. Most alpine situations in the Intermountain Region are limited to the tops of mountain peaks and consist almost entirely of rock slides and deep piles of loose boulders with very few environments suitable for the development of vegetation. In the Uinta Mountains, however, a good proportion of this alpine area consists of gently undulating terrain providing an environment more similar to that found in the arctic regions. A good source for more information on this zone is Lewis (1970).

In Wyoming this zone is mostly above 10/ ,50/0/ feet in elevation. It is composed of alpine tundra, rocky summits, scree slopes, alpine lakes, meadows, stream channels, permanent or temporary snowbanks, and in some places glaciers. The vegetation is chiefly herbaceous, with a few low or dwarf shrubs.

Woody species found here include: Juniperus communis (common juniper) Potentilla fruticosa (shrubby cinquefoil) Ribes montigenum (mountain currant, gooseberry) Phleum aplinum (alpine timothy) Salix brachycarpa (barren ground willow) Salix spp. (dwarf or shrubby willows) Other associated plants include: Agropyron spp. (wheatgrass) Agrostis variabilias (red top) Carex spp (sedge) Deschampsia cespitosa (oatgrass, tufted hairgrass) Festuca ovina (sheep fescue) Juncus spp (rush) Muhlenbergia filiformis (pull-up muhly) Phleum aplinum (alpine timothy) Poa alpina (alpine bluegrass) Polygonum spp. (bistorts, knotweed, smartweed) Trifolium spp (clover) Trisetum spicatum (spike trisetum) Many of these plants are found in all the alpine zones of Wyoming, but some of them have thus far been observed only in northwestern Wyoming, where the best development of this zone occurs in the Wind River Range and on the Beartooth Plateau

67

460 - On-Site Community Codes (Page 7)

The principal forbs are: Astragalus playtopis (milkvetch) Castilleja spp (Indian paintbrush) Draba spp. (whitlow-wort) Erigeron compositus (daisy) Geum rossii var turbinatum (avens) Lewisia pygmaea (pigmy bitterroot) Lupinus argenteus (lupine) Mertensia ciliata (tall bluebell) Oxyria digyna (alpine sorrel) Penstemon spp Polemonium viscosum (sky pilot) Polygonum bistortoides (knotweed) Potentilla diversifolia (cinquefoil) Rannunculus eschscholtzii var alpinus (subalpine buttercup) Saxifraga caespitosa (matted saxifrage) Senecio werneriaefolius (golden ragwort) Silene acaulis (moss-pink) Smelowskia calycina var americana (smelowskia) Vaccinium caespitosum (blueberry) (E) Ponderosa Pine Community Both the oak-maple schrub (chaparral) and ponderosa pine occupy more or less the same altitudinal belt, which lies between 5,0/ 0/0/ and 7,0/0/0/ feet in the Wasatch Range and between 650/ 0/ and about 90/0/0/ feet at the more southern latitudes. Ponderosa pine, Pinus ponderosa, is called yellow pine by some authors. The ponderosa pine communities are open forest with medium tall to tall trees (up to 10/0/ feet tall with a relatively sparse understory of various admixtures of shrubs and herbs. Even though the sunlight reaches the ground in almost all parts of such a forest, the shrub layer is relatively spotty compared to its development in the ponderosa pine forests of the Northwest. The soil is relatively dry and sandy, containing little or no humus. The trees are straight and evenly spaced with the forest consisting of widely spaced individuals or the trees may grow in relatively open, parklike stands on rather dry hillsides and plateaus. On the cool north slopes, the stands of ponderosa pine tend to be thicker, and the douglas fir intermingles with them, and in the upper parts, aspen creeps downward to associate with the ponderosas.

Characteristic shrubs are: Acer glabrum (Rocky Mountain maple) Amelanchier alnifolia (serviceberry) Arctostaphylos spp. (manzanita, bearberry) Berberis repens (Oregon grape) Ceanothus fendleri (Fendler buckbrush) Chrysothamnus parryi (rabbitbrush, montane) Crataegus rivularis (hawthorn) Juniperus scopulorum (Rocky Mountain juniper) Purshia tridentata (bitterbrush, antelope brush) Ribes cereum (wax currant)

68

460 - On-Site Community Codes (Page 8)

Robina neomexicana (New Mexican locust) Subus spp (raspberry) Sambucus coerluea (blue elderberry) Symphoricarpos spp. (snowberry) The most common grasses are: Agropyron spp. (wheatgrasses) Blepharoneuron tricholepis (hairy dropseed) Calamagrostis spp (pinegrasses) Muhlenbergia montana (muhly) Sitanion hystrix (squirreltail) Stipa spp (needlegrasses) Common forbs are: Astragalus spp (milkvetch) Castilleja linariaefolia (Wyoming paintbrush) Erigeron divergens (spreading fleabane, daisy) Eriogonum spp. (buckwheat) Lewisia rediviva (bitterroot) Lupinus spp (lupine) Potentilla spp (cinquefoil) Prunus virginiana (chokecherry) Rosa woodsii (woods rose) (F) Lodgepole Pine Forest The lodgepole pine, Pinus contorta var. latifolia, dominates an altitudinal belt between 9,0/0/0/ and 10/ ,0/0/0/ feet in the Uinta Mountains. It is known to invade recently burned areas. The Rocky Mountain lodgepole pine is a closed-cone species Such cones retain the seeds for long periods of time but readily release them following a fire or a cutting. The resulting forests are characterized by uniformly thick stands "thick as hairs on a dogs back" where the dense shade prevents the propagation of its own seedlings. The trees are so crowded together that it is almost impossible to push through them. The trunk diameter is commonly no more than a foot, with "doghair" stands averaging more like 5 to 6 inches. In such groves, the trees seldom exceed 75 feet in height and bear branches only near their tops (Elmore 1976:181) The lodgepole pine invades the burns in the lower levels of the Englemann spruce-Subalpine Fir zone where its role as the preclimax is evident for the climax species are seen gradually replacing the lodgepole pine Lodgepole pine is present only in small quantities in the Wasatch Range In the mountains just north of the Wasatch it dominates as it does in the Uinta Mountains Common taxa in the understory are: Arctostaphylos uva-ursi (manzanita) Arnica cordifolia (arnica) Betula occidentalis (western water birch)

69

460 - On-Site Community Codes (Page 9)

Ceanothus velutinus (sticky-laurel) Cercocarpus montanus (alderleaf mountain mahogany) Chrysothamnus viscidiflorus (rabbitbrush) Gutierrezia sarothrae (snakeweed) Juniperus communis var depressa (common juniper) Pachistima myrsinities (mountain lover) Pedicularis racemosa var alba (lousewort) Populus angustifolia (narrowleaf cottonwood) Prunus virginiana (chokecherry) Purshia tridentata (bitterbrush) Rhus trilobata (squawbrush) Ribes cereum (wax currant) Ribes spp (currant) Rosa woodsii (woods rose) Rubus parviflorus (thimbleberry) Salix spp. (willow) Sambucus cerula (red elderberry) Sambucus racemosa var microbotrys (elderberry) Symphoricarpos oreophilus (mountain snowberry) Vaccinium scoparium (broom huckleberry) The common herbaceaous species are: Agropyron spp. (wheatgrass) Delphinium nelsonii (larkspur) Elymus cinereuss (giant wild rye) Erigeron flagellaris (trailing fleabane) Geranium fremontii (fremont geranium) Poa pratensis (Kentucky geranium) Stipa spp (needlegrass) Vigueria multiflora (showy goldeneye) Wyethia amplexicaulis (mules-ear) In Wyoming: Occupying the middle part of the timbered mountain slopes there is usually present a broad and dense forest of lodgepole pine (Pinus contorta spp latifolia) This belt of coniferous forest is often the most conspicuous part of the mountain slopes. Occasional mature stands occur, with well-spaced trees and an understory of shrubs such as Canadian buffaloberry (Shepherdia canadensis) and common juniper (Juniperus communis). But commercial logging as well as fire have resulted in most of the stands being less mature and more dense. After fire, particularly, this forest returns as a very dense and slowly maturing stand of closely spaced, slender trees, with very little development of an under-story. Here, also, we find numerous streams, ponds, and lakes that are highly productive of plant life. There are frequent openings or parks that are grassy or are occupied by sagebrush (Artemisia tridentata) Aspen occurs as a conspicuous element around the edges of the forest, and in moist situation along streams are numerous willows.

70

460 - On-Site Community Codes (Page 10)

Common trees are: Pinus contorta (lodgepole pine) Populus tremuloides (aspen) Common understory taxa are: Abies lasiocarpa (subalpine fir) Artemisia tridentata (big sagebrush) Juniperus communis (common juniper) Picea engelmannii (englemann spruce) Shepherdia canadensis (Canadian buffaloberry) Vaccinium scoparium (grouse whortleberry) (G) Mixed Conifer Forest This forest type marks the lower limit of the tree-clad mountain slopes, occurring below the lodgepole pine forest and extending downward in a rather narrow belt to the open foothills. In northeastern Wyoming, however, and in scattered areas in eastern Wyoming generally, this is often a broad belt extending out onto the plains The chief trees are ponderosa pine (Pinus ponderosa var scopulorum) and Douglas fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii var glauca), but we find limber pine (Pinus flexilis) and aspen (Populus tremuloides) associated with them in many places. The forest is more open than the lodgepole pine forest, the trees often being widely spaced. The common understory is sagebrush (Artemisia tridentata) and bitterbrush (Purshia tridentata) On the more sheltered and moister slopes there is sometimes an almost pure stand of Douglas fir. Limber pine is usually associated with exposed, rocky sites. Along the lower streams balsam poplar (Populus balsamifera) may occur as scattered individuals or a nearly pure stand Some of the associated plants are: Artemisia tridentata (big sagebrush) Pinus flexilis (limber pine) Pinus ponderosa (ponderosa pine) Populus balsamifera (balsam poplar) Populus tremuloides (aspen) Pseudotsuga menziesii (Douglas fir) Purshia tridentata (bitterbrush, antelope brush) (H) Pinyon-Juniper Community The Pinyon-Juniper zone is often treated as a montane zone This forest type occupies more area in the Intermountain Region than all the other forest types combined The elevational range of the zone varies, but it usually is found between 50/ 0/0/ and 80/0/0/ feet, with the lower limits determined by lack of moisture. The pinyon-juniper woodland develops in areas where the annual precipitation is usually in excess of about 12 inches. This zone has been variously called the Upper Sonoran Zone, Plains or Woodlands Zone.

71

460 - On-Site Community Codes (Page 11)

Structurally the pinyon-juniper community consists of low, evergreen trees which rarely exceed 20 feet in height, are usually spaced far enough apart that their branches do not touch, and have an understory of varying admixture of shrubs and herbaceous plants, often with nearly bare ground.

Although rather uniform in basic structure throughout the Region, the p-j woodland changes composition both altitudinally and geographically. The juniper is found in pure stands at the lower elevational limits of the zone and often extends into the Sagebrush Zone along the side of draws. At somewhat higher elevations the pinyon enters the association, forming a mixed woodland throughout the middle part and eventually replacing the juniper in the extreme upper limits The singleleaf pinyon, Pinus monophylla, is the pinyon throughout most of the Great Basin. It is replaced in the mountain ranges along the eastern side of the Basin by Pinus edulis, two needle pinyon, which is the pinyon throughout the Colorado Plateau and the Uinta Mountains.

The Utah juniper, Juniper osteosperma, is the most common species of juniper in the Intermountain Region It is a relatively short tree rarely exceeding 20/ feet in height, is typically shrub like in form, with more than one main branch arising at or near the ground level In all except the western part of the Region, the Rocky Mountain juniper, Juniperus scopulorum, occurs along streams and in dry washes where it often extends up into the next zone. Apparently it is less drought-enduring then J. osteosperma and is less frequent. The Rocky Mtn. juniper is a larger tree, up to 30 or 40 feet in height with a central trunk.

Just entering our Region in southeastern Utah (San Juan and Kane counties), the one-seed juniper, J. monosperma, a small shrubby tree, dominates the drier sites. In this region it is the first arborescent species that one sees going from lower to higher elevations, where the Utah juniper and pinyon replace it.

Big sagebrush (Artemisia tridentata) is the common undercover shrub of the p-j woodland. Cacti and yuccas creep upward into the lower reaches and scraggly ponderosa pines edge downward into the upper border along with Gambel oaks. Along the streams grow cottonwoods, walnuts and sycamores, while on drier sites you can find such as rabbitbrush, fernbush, cliffrose, Apache-plume, squaw bush and scrub oak, any of which may assume local dominance (Elmore 1976:13).

Dominant trees: Pinus edulis (two-needle pinyon) Pinus monophylla (single-needle pinyon) Juniperus monosperma (one-seed juniper)

72

460 - On-Site Community Codes (Page 12)

Juniperus osteosperma (Utah juniper) Juniperus scopulorum (Rocky Mountain juniper) Some of the other more or less common shrubs are: Acer glabrum (Rocky Mountain maple) Amelanchier alnifolia (serviceberry) Ceanothus velutinus (mountain lilac) Cercocarpus ledifolius (curl-leaf mountain mahogany) Chrysothamnus nauseosus (big rabbitbrush) Chrysothamnus viscidiflorus (rabbitbrush) Cowania mexicana var stansburiana (stansbury cliffrose) Ephedra viridis (Mormon tea) Gutierrezia sarothrae (snakeweed) Holodiscus dumosus (rock spiraea) Purshia tridentata (bitterbrush) Quercus gambelii (Gambel oak) Ribes cereum (wax gooseberry) Ribes velutinum (gooseberry) Sambucus racemosa (red elderberry) Symphoricarpos oreophilus (mountain snowberry) Tetradymia canescens (horsebrush) The most common grasses, which are more abundant in the northern parts of the Region are: Agropyron smithii (western wheatgrass) Agropyron spicatum (bluebunch wheatgrass) Bouteloua gracilis (blue grama) Festuca idahoensis (bluebunch fescue) Koeleria cristata (prairie junegrass) Oryzopsis hymenoides (Indian ricegrass) Poa fendleriana (muttongrass) Poa sandbergii (sandberg bluegrass) Sitanion hystrix (squirreltail) Sporobolus cryptandrus (sand dropseed) Stipa columbiana (subalpine needlegrass) Stipa comata (needle and thread) Stipa thurberiana (thurber needlegrass) Some of the common forbs are: Astragalus spp (milkvetch) Balsamorhiza sagittata (arrowleaf balsamroot) Erigeron spp (daisy) Eriogonum spp. (buckwheat) Gilia aggregata (skyrocket) Grindelia squarrosa (gumweed) Lupinus sericeus (silky lupine) Penstemon spp (penstemon)

73

460 - On-Site Community Codes (Page 13)

(I) Wet Meadow Community The wet meadow community typically occupies level to nearly level stream valley bottoms and lowlands with a fairly high water table. Meadows and lakes are also frequently found associated with spruce-fir forests. The majority of these wet meadows represent advanced stages in the gradual filling in of the shallower glacial lakes.

In the wet meadows bordering the lakes, streams, and filled in lakes are such plants as: Agrostis thurberiana (thurber redtop, thurber bentgrass) Betula spp (birch) Caltha leptosepala (marsh marigold) Castilleja spp (paintbrush) Cares spp (sedge) Deschampsia cespitosa (tufted hairgrass) Erigeron spp (daisy) Juncus spp (rush) Kalmia polifolia var microphylla (swamp laurel, bog laurel) Lonicera involucrata (bush honeysuckle) Luzula spp. (wood-rush) Menyanthes trifoliata (buckbean, bog bean, marsh trefoil) Mertensia ciliata (tall bluebells) Mimulus lewisii (monkey flower) Pedicularis groenlandica (elephantella, elephanthead lousewort) Phleum alpinum (alpine timothy) Poa spp (bluegrass) Polygonum bistortoides (knotweed, bistort) Potentilla fruticosa (shrubby cinquefoil) Primula parryi (parry primrose) Ranunculus spp (buttercup) Rumex spp (dock) Salix phylicifolia (planeleaf willow) Sparganium angustifolium (narrow-leaf bur-reed) Vaccinium occidentale (blueberry) (J) Dry Meadow "Dry" meadows, also called mountain parkland meadows, typically occur on level to sloping topography of 20/ percent or less along drainages and basins at elevations from 8,50/0/ to 10/ ,0/0/0/ feet This community type often exhibits frost hummocks and usually intergrades with the spruce/fir and other conifer forests. They are characterized by an abundance of forbs, cool season grasses, and sedges. The species composition of these herbaceous dry meadows varies greatly from place to place, depending on the angle and direction of the slope, the physical properties of the soils, altitude, and moisture availability. The dominant vegetation varies from a sedge/willow aspect on moist sites to a grass/forb aspect on the drier areas

74

460 - On-Site Community Codes (Page 14)

They may contain the following taxa: Achillea millefolium var lanulosa (yarrow) Agropyron spp. (wheatgrass) Agrostis spp. (redtop, bentgrass) Artemisia frigida (fringed mountain-sage, pasture mountain-sage) Artemisia michauxiana Aster foliaceus (aster) Bromus spp (brome) Carex spp (sedge) Castilleja sulphurea (yellow paintbrush) Cirsium spp (thistle) Delphinium barbeyi (subalpine larkspur) Deschampsia cespitosa (tufted hairgrass) Festuca spp (fescue) Geranium richardsonii (white geranium) Lewisia pygmaea (pigmy bitterroot) Ligusticum filicinum (fern-leaf lovage) Muhlenbergia filiformis (pull-up muhly) Pedicularis racemosa var alba (curled lousewort) Penstemon spp (penstemon) Phacelia heterophylla (caterpillar plant, varileaf phacelia) Phleum alpinum (alpine timothy) Poa spp (bluegrass) Polygonum bistortoides (knotweed, bistorts) Ranunculus escholtzii (alpine buttercup) Rumex paucifolius (dock) Saxifraga rhomboidea (saxifrage, diamondleaf) Stipa columbiana (subalpine needlegrass) Stipa lettermanii (letterman needlegrass) Taraxacum officinale (common dandelion) Trisetum spicatum (spike trisetum) Vaccinium spp. (blueberry, huckleberry) Viguiera multiflora (showy goldeneye) Viola spp (violet) (K) Oak-maple Shrubland Community The oak-maple shrubland (chaparral or shrub woodland) consists of deciduous or semi-deciduous large shrubs that form dense to open vegetation The dominant species over most of the area are Gambel oak (Quercus gambelii) and big-tooth maple (Acer grandidentatum) In northern Utah this zone is transitional between the sagebrush zone and the typical Wasatch chaparral from further south.

Big sagebrush (Artemisia tridentata) may dominate the lower limits and mountain mahogany (Cercocarpus ledifolius) the upper, with a deep penetration from the zone above of Douglas Fir (pseudotsuga menziesii) and aspen (Populus tremuloides)on the north-facing slopes Further south in the Wasatch Range, on the lower slopes overlooking Salt Lake and Utah valleys, is the more characteristic Gambel oak/bit-tooth maple vegetation which extends from about the highest shoreline of old Lake Bonneville at about 510/0/ feet to an average of 750/0/ feet There is the usually extension of the zone upwards on the southern-facing slopes and downward on the cooler north-facing slopes. It is

75

460 - On-Site Community Codes (Page 15)

characterized by thickets of tall shrubs when the Gambel oak is the dominant species.

Throughout the range of the chaparral formation, mountain mahogany usually dominates the upper limits, sometimes forming a woodland. In the loccolithic mountains the Gambel oak forms interrupted communities between 60/0/0/ and 80/0/0/ feet in the draws, alternating variously with pinyon-juniper woodland and ponderosa pine forest.

In Wyoming: The typical oak-maple shrubland as described in the IMACS Guide is not found in Wyoming Gambel oak (Quercus gambelii) is not known to occur in the State except possibly in the extreme southwest corner of the State and in the Big Horn Mountains. Big-tooth maple is known almost exclusively from the western slopes of the Big Horn Mountains in association with mountain mahogany.

Most Wyoming "shrub-woodland" communities would more appropriately be categorized as (W) (mountain brush); however, there are many areas of the State where deciduous trees and shrubs are found in sufficient quantities to be considered communities. Areas of the Black Hills, for example, where bur oak (Quercus macroparpa) and boxelder (Acer negundo) dominate should be coded to this community The following taxa are found here: Acer grandidentatum (big-tooth maple) Acer glabrum (Rocky Mountain maple) Acer negundo (boxelder) Amelanchier alnifolia (serviceberry) Amelanchier utahensis (Utah serviceberry) Artemisia arbuscula var nova (black sagebrush) Artemisia tridentata (big sagebrush) Cercocarpus ledifolius (curlleaf mountain mahogany) Quercus macroparpa (bur oak) Quercus gambelii (Gambel oak) (L) Riparian Riparian communities are those in which the vegetation is related to, living on, or located on the bank of a natural watercourse. The term riparian is sometimes, but rarely, applied to lakes. Along major drainages such as those of the North Platte, Powder, Big Horn, and Green rivers, the bottom land is usually wooded, the chief tree being plains cottonwood (Populus sargentii), often associated with boxelder (Acer negundo) and peach-leaved willow (Salix amygdaloides) In northeastern Wyoming there are also bur oak (Quercus macroparpa), elm (ulmus americana), and green ash (Fraxinus pennsylvanica) In many places thickets of lower trees and shrubs occur, composed largely of silverberry (Elaeagnus commutata), buffaloberry (Shepherdia argentea), rose (Rosa spp.), sand-bar willow (Salix exigua), and rubber rabbitbrush (Chrysothamnus nauseosus). In many places in the introduced and weedy salt cedar (Tamarix pentandra) occurs in stream channels or along sandbars In some places there are extensive marshy areas occupied by cattail

76

460 - On-Site Community Codes (Page 16)

Typha latifolia) and various rushes (Juncus spp ) andsedges (Cares spp ) Numerous large reservoirs and a few natural lakes occur here containing beds of elodea (Elodea canadensis), pondweed (chiefly Potamogeton pectinatus), bullrush (Sarpus spp.), and rushes (Juncus spp ) The ground cover of the bottoms is largely grassland where there is sufficient moisture, but in drier areas the desert flora extend right up to the stream margins Common woody taxa are: Acer negundo (boxelder) Chrysothamnus nauseosus (rubber rabbitbrush, big rabbitbrush) Elaeangnus commutata (silverberry) Fraxinus pennsylvanica (green ash) Populus sargentii (plains cottonwood) Populus angustifolium Quercus macroparpa (bur oak) Rosa spp (rose) Salix amygdaloides (peach-leaved willow) Salix exigua (sandbar willow) Shepherdia argentea (buffaloberry) Ulmus americana (elm) (M) Grassland/Steppe This is a broad belt of grassland extending from southeastern Wyoming, east of the Laramie Range, northward toward the Black Hills. These rolling hills and plains lying at an elevation between 450/0/ and 60/0/0/ feet, are covered with a rather uniform stand of relatively tall grasses and forbs, the belt constituting an extension westward of the Nebraska sandhills flora and that of the Great Plains. Characteristic here are several species of tall grasses, such as needlegrass (Stipa spp.), little bluestem (Andropogon scoparius), big bluestem (Andropogon gerardi), and sand bluestem (Andropogon hallii) The andropogons are rather patchy in most upland areas and are located mostly on hillsides and/or in valleys Characteristic also are patches of lower grasses such as buffalograss (Buchloe dactyloides) and blue grama (Bouteloua gracilis), together with other grasses of more general distribution. Soapweed (Yucca glauca) is often common on exposed, arid sites, along with prickly pear (Opuntia polyacantha and O. fragilis) Lupines (Lupinus spp.), purple loco (Oxytropis lambertii), and a white-flowered beardtongue (Penstemon albidus) are showy forbs, and in sandy soils there is abundance of scurfpea (Psoralea tenuiflora) and Calamovifla longifolia Common plants found here are: Agropyron smithii (western wheatgrass) Andropogon scoparius (little bluestem) Andropogon gerardi (big bluestem) Andropogon hallii (sand bluestem) Buchloe dactyloides (buffalograss) Cares spp (sedges) Koeleria macrantha

77

460 - On-Site Community Codes (Page 17)

Poa sandbergii (sandberg bluegrass) Stipa spp (needlegrass) (O) Shadscale/Greasewood This zone has been called the Saltbush Zone by many authors. Shadscale vegetation has been considered an edaphic climax on somewhat saline valley soils. Shadscale does tolerate salt much better than does sagebrush, but apparently it thrives best where the salt content of the soil is relatively low (Kearney et al. 1914). Its presence in valley bottoms of western Nevada where the salt concentration is high is probably just as related to its adaptation to a low moisture requirement as it is a salt tolerance (Billings 1949). In the valley bottoms of western Utah, where the precipitation is higher than 7 inches, the predominance of shadscale may perhaps be explained by its tolerance to periodic drought The shadscale community has three principle regions of development, western Nevada (Lahontan Basin), western Utah (Bonneville Basin) and eastern Utah (Uinta Basin and canyonlands). This desert community is typically dominated by low, widely spaced, more or less spiny, grayish, small-leaved shrubs which cover only about 10/ % of the ground area.

Shrubby species comprisng this community are: Atriplex confertifolia (shadscale) Allenrolfea occidentalis (pickleweed, iodine bush) Artemisia filifolia (sand sage) Artemisia spinescens (budsage) Atriplex canescens (4 wing saltbush) Atriplex nuttallii (saltbush) Chrysothamnus viscidiflorus (rabbitbrush) Ephedra nevadensis (Mormon tea) Eurotia lanata (winterfat) Grayia spinosa (hopsage) Gutierrezia sarothrae (snakeweed) Kochia americana (gray molly) Lycium cooperi (wolfberry) Sarcobatus baileyi (greasewood) Tetradymia glabrata (Horsebrush) Perennial grasses and forbs: Hilaria jamesii (galleta grass) Oryzopsis hymenoides (Indian ricegrass) Sitanion hystrix (squirreltail grass) Sporobolus airoides (alkali sacaton) Stipa speciosa (desert needlegrass) Cardaria draba (whitetop) Eriogonum ovalifolium (wild buchwheat) Machaeranthera glabriuscula var villosa (aster) Opuntia spp (prickly pear cacti)

78

460 - On-Site Community Codes (Page 18)

Sphaeralcea ambigua (desert globemallow) Sphaeralcea graossulariaefolia (gooseberryleaf globemallow) Annuals (maturing in spring when autumn precipitation has been sufficient): Bromus tectcrum (cheat grass) Cryptantha circumscissa (cateye) Distichlis spicata var stricta (saltgrass) Eriogonum spp. (wild buckwheat) Festuca octoflora (sixweeks fescue) Halogeton glomeratus (halogeton) Iva nevadensis (mash-elder) Lepidium perfoliatum (pepper-grass) Oenothera spp (evening-primrose) Salsola kali (Russian thistle) Where the salt concentration gets too high for greasewood, the iodine bush or pickleweed (Allenrolfea) or saltgrass (Distichlis) associations develop These communities are commonly found forming the inner fringe of vegetation around the barren playas, or separating upland communities from salt marsh communities Another common community within the Shadscale Zone is southern Utah is the sand sage (Artemisia filifolia) community It is common in sandy soils In Wyoming: In highly alkaline places, which are common here, are large communities dominated by greasewood (Sarcobatus vermiculatus) and sea blite (Suaeda spp ) Bud sage (Artemisia spinescens), shadscale (Atriplex confertifolia), and kochchia (Kochia americana) are common elements Dry or intermittent stream courses are often marked by large clumps of basin wild ryegrass (Elymus cinereus) Agropyron smithii (western wheatgrass) Artemisia spinescens (budsage) Artemisia pedatifida (birdfoot sage) Atriplex spp (saltbush) Atriplex confertifolia (shadscale) Atriplex nuttallii (nuttall saltbush) Chrysothamnus spp (rabbitbrush) Chrysothamnus nauseosus (rubber rabbitbrush, big rabbitbrush) Distichlis stricta (desert saltgrass) Elymus spp (ryegrass) Oryzopsis hymenoides (Indian ricegrass) Sarcobatus vermiculatus (greasewood) Sitanion hystrix (bottlebrush squirreltail) Sporobolus airoides (alkali sacaton, hairgrass dropseed) Suaeda spp. (sea blite, seep weed)

79

460 - On-Site Community Codes (Page 19)

(P/Q) Sagebrush Community - P (Big/Tall sagebrush) -

Q (Little/Low Sagebrush)

This is the climatic climax of desert areas where the annual precipitation is usually greater than 7 inches. It occupies the broad valleys and lower foothills, forming a distinct zone.

Sagebrush communities extend to nearly 10/ ,0/0/0/ feet in many areas Such high elevation communities are not the typical desert or desert-steppe communities Steep rocky slopes and areas with shallow soils are commonly dominated by low sagebrush (Artemisia arbuscula var arbuscula) or black sagebrush (Artemisia arbuscula var nova) The tall sagebrush communities are best developed on deep, permeable, salt-free soils of well-drained valleys and bases of mountain ranges, especially on the alluvial fans. The aspect of the typical sagebrush community is fairly dense to open vegetation with relatively large (2-6 feet high) non-spiny shrubs, and with perennial and annual grasses and forbs. The ground cover of sagebrush is from 15 to 40/ percent Some of the important shrubs in this zone are: Artemisia pedatifida (birdfoot sage) Artemisia frigida Artemisia arbuscula (low sagebrush) Artemisia tridentata (big sagebrush) Chrysothamnus nauseosus (big rabbitbrush, rubber rabbitbrush) Chrysothamnus viscidiflorus (rabbitbrush) Eurotia lanata (winterfat) Grayia spinosa (hopsage) Leptodactylon pungens (prickly phlox, prickly gilia) Purshia tridentata (bitterbrush, antelope brush) Ribes velutinum (gooseberry) Symphoricarpos spp. (snowberry) Tetradymia spp (horsebrush) Perennial grasses and forbs: Agropyron spicatum (bluebunch wheatgrass) Poa sandbergii (sandberg bluegrass) Festuca idahoensis (bluebunch fescue) Agropyron smithii (western wheatgrass) Agoseris spp. (mountain dandelion, false dandelion) Allium acuminatum (wild onion, tapertip onion) Aristida longiseta (red 3 awn) Astragalus spp (milkvetch) Balsamorhiza sagittata (arrowleaf balsamroot) Calochortus nuttallii (sego lily) Castilleja chromosa (Indian paintbrush) Delphinium spp (larkspur)

80

Often co-dominants with sagebrush

460 - On-Site Community Codes (Page 20)

Elymus cinereus (wild rye) Eriogonum spp. (wild buckwheat) Koeleria cristata (junegrass) Lomatium spp. (desert parsley, biscuit root) Lupinus sericeus (silky lupine) Oryzopsis hymenoides (Indian ricegrass) Phlox hoodii (Hood's phlox) Phlox longifolia (longleaf phlox) Poa fendleriana (muttongrass) Sporobolus airoides (alkali sacaton) Stipa comata (needleandthread grass) Wyethia amplexicaulis (mules-ears) Annuals: Collinsia parviflora (blue-eyed Mary) Eriogonum spp. (wild buckwheat) Festuca octaflora (six-week's fescue) Mimulus spp. (monkey flower) Phacelia adenophora (phacelia) Weeds found in disturbed habitats throughout the sagebrush zone: Amaranthus retroflexus (pigweed, redroot) Apocynum cannabinum (Indian hemp, dogbane) Bromus rubens (foxtail) Bromus tectorum (cheatgrass, downy chess) Chenopodium album (goosefoot) Convolvulus arvensis (field bindweed) Cuscuta spp (dodder) Descurainia sophia (tansy mustard, flixweed) Helianthus annuus (sunflower) Lactuca serriola (wild lettuce) Lepidium perfoliatum (clasping peppergrass) Mentzelia albicaulis (whitestem stickleaf, blazing star) Polygonum aviculare (prostrate knotweed) Salsola kali (Russian thistle) Sisymbrium altissimum (Jim Hill mustard, tumbling hedge mustard) Taraxacum officinale (common dandelion) Verbascum thapsus (great mullein, flannel mullein) Some of the bunchgrasses are abundant enough that the prevailing vegetation is a sagebrush-grass or sagebrush-steppe community The reason sagebrush tends to dominate some areas and bunchgrass others may be differences in the climate A significant factor may be the time of precipitation If it comes mostly in the winter the climax may be sagebrush and if it comes mostly in the summer it may be sagebrushgrass

81

460 - On-Site Community Codes (Page 21)

(R) Barren The barren community type is primarily intended for those areas where insufficient vegetation exists on-site to be able to assign it to any of the other community types. Barren areas are those in which vegetative cover is sparse or nonexistent and can typically be found in badlands (with dense clay or clayey soils), scree (with very shallow or no soil development), and cliffs, rock outcrops, and boulderfields (primarily areas of bare rock and rock rubble) Barren areas can be found in various topographic positions and elevations (S) Marsh/Swamp Marshes, swamps, and bogs are classified as wetlands. These lands are where water-saturated soil is the dominant factor determining the types of plants living on the surface Wetlands are distinguished from riparian areas by the lack of primary association with a natural watercourse. Marshy and swampy areas surrounding lakes or ponds are generally placed in this category. marshes and swamps in Wyoming are generally less than 20/ acres in size, lack active wave-formed or bedrock shoreline features, and have a water depth in the deepest part of the basin less than 2m at low water. Marshes and swamps have at least a 30/ percent areal vegetation cover (T) Lake/Reservoir The lake/reservoir code should be used for those locations where the immediate area is covered by water most of the year and where limited vegetation (or no vegetation) has developed. An example of a situation where this may occur would be where an archeological site is exposed on the lake bed after lake waters recede.

(U) Agricultural/Developed/Seedings This category should be used for any area in which the vegetation has been altered and utilized on a continuing basis by direct human action. This would include cropland, cultivated fields, human habitations, urban/industrial development, and waste areas. Areas that have been abandoned and (at least partially) reclaimed by native vegetation would not generally fit in this category.

(V) Blackbrush Community The blackbrush community is more or less transitional between the creosote bush and shadscale communities. Because it may occur in several zones we have here listed it separately.

Blackbrush grows on non-saline, often sandy soils, where the rainfall is usually below six inches.

The community appears as dense

82

460 - On-Site Community Codes (Page 22)

to open stands of evergreen shrubs, often interspaced with galleta grass (Hillaria) Its best development is in southeastern Utah at low altitudes along the Colorado and lower Green Rivers. In southern Nevada (Beatley 1969) this community lies altitudinally between the creosote bush and the sagebrush communities (commonly 450/0/ -50/0/0/ ft.) and latitudinally between the creosote bush (Mojave Desert) and shadscale (Great Basin) communities Species commonly associated are: Coleogyne ramosissima (blackbrush) Artemisia filifolia (sandsage) Artemisia parryi Artemisia tridentata (big sagebrush) Atriplex confertifolia (shadscale) Brickellia oblongifolia var linifolia (bricklebush) Dalea fremontii (prairie clover) Encelia frutescens (encelia) Ephedra spp (Mormon tea) Eriogonum fasciculatum var polifolium (California buckwheat) Gutierrezia microcephala (snakeweed) Haplopappus linearifolius (narrowleaf goldenweed) Hilaria jamesii (Galleta grass) Opuntia ramosissima and other spp (prickley pear cacti) Yucca baccata var vespertina (datil yucca) Yucca brevifolia (Joshua tree) (W) Mountain Brush On the lower slopes of the mountains there is often a zone of shrubs and small trees. In some places, particularly in limestone areas, this consists mainly of mountain mahogany (Cercocarpus montanus in eastern Wyoming and C. ledifolius to the west), while big sagebrush (Artemisia tridentata ) is a characteristic and often dominant element where there is good soil development and adequate moisture from snow accumulation in the winter. Juniper (Juniperus scopulorum in eastern Wyoming and J. osteosperma in central and western Wyoming) may occur as scattered small trees or shrubs along with the preceding species, but it often forms an extensive woodland. In valleys, along major streams, a streamside forest, or sometimes only scattered trees, of narrowleaf cottonwood (Populus angustifolia) may be found, as well as shrubs such as willows (Salix spp.), roses (Rosa spp.), and dogwood (Cornus stolonifera). A common, conspicuous, tall grass of these sites is wild ryegrass(Elymus cinereus) Common taxa are: Amelanchier spp (serviceberry) Artemisia tridentata (big sagebrush) Cercocarpus ledifolius (curlleaf mountain mahogany) Cercocarpus montanus (mountain mahogany) Juniperus osteosperma (juniper)

83

460 - On-Site Community Codes (Page 23)

Juniperus scopulorum (juniper) Prunus virginana (chokecherry) Purshia tridentata (bitterbrush, antelope brush) Symphoricarpos spp. (snowberry) (X) Prairie The extensive Laramie Plains and similar grasslands of the interior of Wyoming are of a somewhat different character than the eastern plains, being shortgrass plains. Dominant grasses here are blue grama (Bouteloua gracilis), several species of bluegrass (Poa spp.), junegrass (Koeleria cristata), needlegrass (Stipa spp.), and several species of wheatgrass. * (Y) Creosote Bush Community (Warm desert shrub) Larrea tridentata, the creosote bush, is the dominant shrub on the broad alluvial fans (bajadas) and flats of southern Nevada where some underground water is available.

Some of the associated shrubs are: Larrea tridentata (creosote bush) Acamptopappus shockleyi (goldenhead) Ambrosia (Franseris) dumosa (bur sage) Atriplex confertifolia (saltbush) Dalea fremontii (indigo bush) Encelia farinosa (encelia) Eurotia lanata (winterfat) Grayia spinosa (hopsage) Krameria parvifolia (ratany) Lycium andersonii (Anderson wolfberry) Lycium sockleyi (wolfberry) Opuntia spp (prickley pear cacti) Yucca shidigera Found in Upper limits of Creosote Bush Zone: Yucca brevifolia (Joshua tree) Coleogyne ramoisissima (blackbrush) Of six different Larrea communities the most common one in the high Mojave Desert (Lower Sonoran) is the Larrea-Lycium-Grayia (creosote bush-wolfberry-hopsage) association. In other parts of the Mojave Desert the typical association is Larrea-Ambrosia (creosote bush-bur sage) The general appearance is a mixture of somewhat evenly spaced medium tall and dwarf shrubs. Higher on the alluvial fans, toward the upper limits of the Zone, Yucca brevifolia (Joshua tree) forms open groves This association extends up into the Shadscale and Sagebrush zones Also coming in at these upper limits of the Creosote Bush Zone is Coleogyne ramosissima (blackbrush)

84

APPENDIX C Prehistoric Artifacts—Projectile Points

Figure 8. General shape of large fluted and stemmed points: (a) Clovis; (b) Folsom; (c) Cougar Mountain; (d) Haskett; (e) Windust; (f) Parman; (g) Lind Coulee; (h) Lake Mohave; (i) Silver Lake; (j) Bajada. (c-i adapted from Beck and Jones 2010:Fig. 12) (not to scale)

86

Figure 9. General shape of large projectile points: (a) Elko Corner-notched; (b) Elko Eared; (c) Elko Side-notched; (d) Northern Side-notched; (e) Hawken Side-notched; (f) Rocker Side-notched; (g) Sudden Side-notched; (h) San Rafael Side-notched; (i) Gatecliff Contracting-stem (Gypsum); (j) Pinto; (k) Gatecliff Split-stem; (l) San Jose; (m) McKean Lanceolate; (n) Humboldt Concave-base. (all but l adapted from Holmer 1978:Fig. 5) (not to scale)

87

Figure 10. General shape of small projectile points: (a) Rose Spring Corner-notched; (b) Eastgate Expanding Stem; (c) Bear River Side-notched; (d) Uinta Side-notched; (e) Nawthis Side-notched; (f) Desert Side-notched; (g) Parowan Basal-notched; (h) Bull Creek; (i) Cottonwood Triangular. (adapted in part from IMACS 1992:440.2) (not to scale)

88

REFERENCES / ADDITIONAL READING Beck, Charlotte and George T. Jones 2010 Clovis and Western Stemmed: Population Migration and the Meeting of Two Technologies in the Intermountain West. American Antiquity 75(1):81–116.

Bettinger, Robert L., and Jelmer Eerkens 1999 Point Typologies, Cultural Transmission, and the Spread of Bow-and-Arrow Technology in the Prehistoric Great Basin. American Antiquity 64(2):231–242.

Bettinger, Robert L., James F. O’Connell, and David H. Thomas 1991 Projectile Points as Time Markers in the Great Basin. American Anthropologist 93:166–172.

Goebel, Ted and Joshua L. Keene 2014 Are Great Basin Stemmed Points as Old as Clovis in the Intermountain West? A Review of the Geochronological Evidence. In Archaeology in the Great Basin and Southwest, edited by Nancy J. Parezo and Joel C. Janetski, pp. 35–60. University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City.

Hildebrandt, William R., and Jerome H. King 2012 Distinguishing between Darts and Arrows in the Archaeological Record: Implications for Technological Change in the American West. American Antiquity 77(4):789–799.

Holmer, Richard N. 1978 A Mathematical Typology for Archaic Projectile Points of the Eastern Great Basin.

Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Anthropology, University of Utah, Salt Lake City.

1986 Common Projectile Points of the Intermountain West. In Anthropology of the Desert West: Essays in Honor of Jesse D. Jennings, edited by Carol J. Condie and Don D. Fowler, pp. 91–116. University of Utah Anthropological Papers No. 110. Salt Lake City.

2009 Field Guide: Projectile Points of Eastern Idaho. Idaho Museum of Natural History, Idaho State University, Pocatello.

IMACS 1992 Intermountain Antiquities Computer System User’s Guide. University of Utah, Bureau of Land Management, U.S. Forest Service.

Jones, George T., and Charlotte Beck 2014 Moving into the Mid-Holocene: The Paleoarchaic/Archaic Transition in the Intermountain West. In Archaeology in the Great Basin and Southwest, edited by Nancy J. Parezo and Joel C. Janetski, pp. 61–84. University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City.

Justice, Noel D. 2002 Stone Age Spear and Arrow Points of California and the Great Basin. Indiana University Press, Bloomington.

2002 Stone Age Spear and Arrow Points of the Southwestern United States. Indiana University Press, Bloomington.

89

Smith, Geoffrey M., Pat Barker, Eugene M. Hattori, Anan Raymond, and Ted Goebel 2013 Points in Time: Direct Radiocarbon Dates on Great Basin Projectile Points. American Antiquity 78(3):580–594.

Thomas, David H. 1981 How to Classify the Projectile Points from Monitor Valley, Nevada. Journal of California and Great Basin Anthropology 3(1):7–43.

2013 Great Basin Projectile Point Typology: Still Relevant? Journal of California and Great Basin Anthropology 33(2):133–152.

90

APPENDIX D Prehistoric Artifacts—Ground Stone

Metate Styles (adapted from Adams 2002) Slab: Includes metates in which the grinding surface is completely flat edge-to-edge because associated manos are the same width as the metate surface OR metates in which the grinding surface starts flat, but because associated manos are shorter than metate width, over time a depression forms (Figure 11:a). Sometimes referred to as ‘flat’ or ‘concave’ metates.

Basin: Grinding surfaces are circular or elliptical basins (Figure 11:b). Associated manos are used in a combination of circular and reciprocal strokes.

Trough: Intentionally manufactured rectangular basins or troughs (Figure 11:c) (includes Utah style metates [trough and shelf]). Associated manos can only be moved in reciprocal strokes.

Adams, Jenny L. 2002 Ground Stone Analysis. The University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City.

Figure 11. Metate styles: (a) slab; (b) basin; (c) trough. (adapted from Adams 2002)

92

APPENDIX E Historic Artifacts—Cans

HISTORIC CANS This guide is intended to provide sufficient information to allow for consistent descriptions of historic cans. Good artifact descriptions are essential for making chronological and functional interpretations, as well as evaluating the significance of sites. For additional information on historic cans see the Jim Rock Historic Can Collection (Rock 2015), Berge 1980; Busch 1981; Horn 2005; IMACS 1992:471; Martells 1976; Miller et al. 2000; Maxwell 1993; and Rock 1984, 1988.

There are numerous sizes, types, and shapes of cans (Figures 12–14). Several changes in can manufacture technology occurred during the late 1800s and early 1900s making cans good temporal markers. Manufacture method is the most important attribute of the can to document, although can markings (if present) can also help determine a date range. The can’s shape, type of opening (e.g., cut-around, ice pick, knife cut), type of seams (if discernible), and type of top/lid may also be useful to document. These secondary traits indicate what type of food or product the can contained.

The three basic types of cans found in Utah include hole-in-cap, hole-in-top, and sanitary cans.

Can Type Hole-in-cap (soldered dot inside of soldered ring; typically for food) (Figure 12) Prior to 1820, cans were manufactured by cutting and hand soldering the sides, bottom, and top of the can together. The can was filled through a hole in the lid; a cap was then soldered into the lid after filling and the can was heated (this pre-1820s method is commonly referred to as the holeand-cap method). Because of internal pressure, cans often swelled and burst during production or afterwards due to food spoilage.

In 1820, the problem of can swelling/bursting was solved by adding a small vent hole into the middle of the cap. The addition of a vent hole was termed the hole-in-cap method and allowed containers to be filled, heated, and then vented to drive out excess air and moisture through the hole. The vent hole was closed with a small drop of solder after venting. The hole-in-cap method was common from 1820 until the early 1900s (c. 1904–c.1914). The vent hole is also often informally termed a “match-stick” filler hole and cans with the vent hole are often referred to as “match-stick filler” cans.

The soldered cap ranged from roughly ½ inch to 2 inches in diameter, with a 2 inch diameter being very common. Hole-in-cap cans have a diagnostic circle of lead solder around the cap with a lead solder dot in the middle. Prior to the early 1880s, hole-in-cap side seams were soldered by hand and the hand-soldered seams are thick, crude, irregular, and may stand as much as 1/8 in. high in relief. Machine-soldered side seams are common after 1883 and seams produced by machine are more uniform and generally thinner. Can ends were machine-soldered beginning in the 1870s. Later hole-in-cap cans have been found with crimped side seams. Variants of the type also included caps with two vent holes.

94

Figure 12. Can types. (adapted from Rock 1984) 95

Figure 13. Probable contents based on can shape. (adapted from Rock 1984, 1987, and various sources) 96

Figure 14. Tin can openings. (from IMACS 1992:471–477) 97

Hole-in-top (soldered dot only, typically for milk) (Figure 12) Carnation introduced the hole-in-top can about 1900. The hole-in-top can did away with the soldered cap and used only a small hole in the middle of the lid for venting. The hole-in-top can lid has stamped ends and a small vent hole in one end that was sealed with a drop of solder after being heated.

Hole-in-top cans generally resemble hole-in-cap cans but lack the filler hole, cap, and circular ring of lead solder (though hole-in-top can lids are often stamped with circular ridges that, at first glance, resemble circular filler holes). Hole-in-top cans are commonly called “match-stick filler,” “solder-dot,” or “vent hole” cans. Hole-in-top cans were used predominantly for evaporated or condensed milk—with some milk producers using the method into the modern era (1990s).

Sanitary (Figure 12) The Sanitary, or open-top can, was initially developed in Europe, where can ends were attached to the body by hand crimping the two edges together. A rubber gasket was placed between the edges to create an airtight seam. In 1896, in the United States, Charles Ams patented a seal of rubber and gum to replace the gasket. In 1888, Max Ams made a manufacturing breakthrough with the invention of the double seam method for side seaming cans. This new locking seam held the can sides together better than the earlier plumb and/or lap seams, and can failure due to internal pressure was greatly reduced. In 1897, Charles Ams and Julius Brenzinger improved their can manufacturing technique by crimping both the top and bottom of the can to the sides, thereby forming a sealed double seam and eliminating the need for solder. The new can became known as the “solder-less can.”

After these manufacturing inventions and improvements, the Sanitary can, marketed as the “sanitary enamel lined can,” was first introduced in 1904 by the Sanitary Can Co. of Fairport, New York. By 1911, the Sanitary can was the most common can type and, by 1914, it had completely replaced hole-in-cap cans.

Dating Cans Can technologies overlap, but in general, hole-in-cap cans at a site indicate a pre-1914 date. A hole-in-cap can with hand-soldered side seams pre-dates 1880. Hole-in-cap cans with machinesoldered side seams were manufactured between 1880 and the early 1900s. A combination of several can types can provide an excellent means of dating a site. For example, an assemblage that includes only hole-in-cap cans likely dates prior to 1904. A combination of hole-in-cap and holein-top cans, but no Sanitary cans likely dates between 1900 and 1904. A combination of all three types of cans would date between 1900 and 1914. An assemblage containing only hole-in-cap and Sanitary cans would likely date after 1900. Date ranges can be refined by researching embossed marks (if present) and taking into account other diagnostic artifacts at the site.

Things to Remember Of particular interest for archaeologists, the terms hole-in-cap and hole-in-top (as well as the pre1820s hole-and-cap) are often used interchangeably in the literature. As a result—and because the terms are very similar—significant confusion and inconsistency abound in the archaeological 98

literature. Similarly, the terms match-stick filler, solder-dot, and vent hole are used interchangeably to refer to cans with a vent hole. However, because both hole-in-cap and hole-in-top cans have vent holes, the use of these terms is imprecise and causes confusion. The terms matchstick-filler, solder dot, and vent hole should therefore be avoided—as they only refer to a can with a vent hole.

The most consistent source of can terminology, and apparently the terminology that most closely conforms to that used by the can industry itself, is found in James Rock’s works (especially Rock 1984). Rock uses hole-and-cap to refer to the 1810 to 1820 method of manufacture with a cap but no vent hole, hole-in-cap to refer to post-1820 cans with caps and vent holes, and hole-in-top to refer to cans with only a vent hole. Following Rock’s terminology, few, if any, hole-and-cap cans should be found in Utah due to large scale settlement occurring only after 1847.

The late 1800s and early 1900s were a period of trial and error in can manufacturing. A small number of hybrid “Franken-cans” were produced during this period, including lead-soldered cans with crimped ends (similar to sanitary cans), lead-covered vent holes (similar to hole-in-top cans), and cans with two vent holes.

Other Items of Note Can Company Information • Max Ams (of Ams Machine Co.) developed a double side seam and gasket for cylindrical cans in 1888. These developments eventually led to the Sanitary can.

• Sprinkler top (powder/spice) cans introduced in 1890.

• Ams Machine Company begins small-scale manufacturing of the locked, double-seamed can in 1894.

• Hecking Can Co. began operations in 1901. Their logo was an H inside a circle.

• The Sanitary Can Co. (cans marked “SANITARY) was founded in 1904. The Continental Can Co. (C.C.Co) was also founded in the same year.

• The American Can Co. absorbed the other original manufactures of Sanitary cans in 1908.

Evaporated/Condensed Milk Cans • Gail Borden granted first patent for canning condensed milk in 1856 and began canning milk in hole-in-cap cans that same year. These cans were distinctively marked with the “Eagle Brand” name around the perimeter of the can end and had an unusual filler hole.

• Evaporated milk was first canned in the U.S. in 1885; milk was removed by punching two holes on opposite sides of the lid or top.

• “Borden” embossed on evaporated milk cans began in 1900; “New York” was embossed prior/until 1900.

Tobacco Tins • The flat-top, hinged-lid tobacco can was introduced in 1892.

• The Prince Albert upright flat tobacco tin was introduced circa 1906/1907 by the R. J. Reynolds Tobacco Company.

• Beginning in 1901, Tuxedo Tobacco was sold in upright, kidney-profile pocket cans with a striker on the bottom.

99

• The flat-sided, hinged-lid tobacco can came into use in 1910. Wire hinges were also added to the lid around 1910.

• Complex, multi-piece tobacco can lids were introduced in 1948.

Baking Powder • Calumet Baking Powder Company was founded in 1889 and their early embossing included “CALUMET BAKERS BAKING POWDER MADE IN THE USA”.

• KC Baking Powder was first marketed in July 1890, but not patented until November 20, 1911. The year of manufacture can be determined by adding the number of years stated on the can lid to 1890 (Ward et al. 1977:240).

Meat Tins • Large-scale meat canning began in Chicago in 1872.

• The tapered meat tin was developed in 1875.

• In 1895, the tapered meat tin was improved by adding a scored key-wind strip to the large end of the can.

• The American Can Company (AC Co.) formed in 1901. By 1910 they were using “CANCO” as their logo, which was often stamped on the can or bucket bases and lids.

• Canned ham introduced in 1926.

Can Openings • Key-wind openings introduced in 1866, though the method did not gain widespread use.

• The key-opened collar-can for coffee was introduced in 1917.

• Geared rotary can openers were introduced in 1925.

• Church-key openers were introduced in 1935.

• First beverage can pull tab introduced in 1962.

Fish Cans • Sardines were first canned in North America beginning in 1871. Before 1880 sardine cans were a three-piece body; between 1880 and 1918 sardine cans were a one-piece body; sardine cans have had a depressed lid since 1884; and sardine cans have been double seamed since 1918.

• Tuna canning began in California in 1909.

Miscellaneous Can Information • Kerosene canned beginning in 1865.

• The log cabin-shaped can was patented in 1897.

• Embossing on cans becomes more common during the late 1800s and early 1900s.

• Hills Brothers vacuum packed the first coffee in pound—or “squat”—cans in 1903.

• The modern paint can came into use in 1906.

• Canned citrus juice was first shipped from Florida in 1921.

• Canned dog food was available beginning in 1922.

• All-metal quart motor oil cans were introduced in 1933.

• Cone-top beer cans with crown-cap finishes were introduced in 1935.

100

• Large hole-in-cap food cans were provided by the U.S. Government to the Civilian Conservation Corps (and possibly military) during the 1930s (hole-in-cap cans were out of production by 1940 and were completely gone by WWII).

• The first aerosol can was marketed in 1945.

• A soft aluminum top was added to flat-top beer cans beginning in the 1950s.

• All-aluminum cans were produced by 1957.

101

REFERENCES / ADDITIONAL READING Berge, Dale, L. 1980 Simpson Springs Station: Historical Archaeology in western Utah. 1974–1975. Bureau of Land Management Cultural Resource Series Publication Number 6. Utah State Office.

Busch, Jane 1981 An Introduction to the Tin Can. Historical Archaeology 15(1):95–104.

Horn, Jonathon C. 2005 Historic Artifact Handbook. Electronic document, http://www.alpinearchaeology.com/ cms/reports/, accessed January 1, 2013. Alpine Archaeological Consultants, Inc. IMACS 1992 Intermountain Antiquities Computer System User’s Guide. University of Utah, Bureau of Land Management, U.S. Forest Service.

Martells, Jack 1976 The Beer Can Collector’s Bible. Ballantine Books, New York.

Maxwell, B. S. 1993 Beer Cans: A Guide for the Archaeologist. Historical Archaeology 27(1):95–113.

Miller, George L., Patricia Samford, Ellen Shlasko, and Andrew Madsen 2000 Telling Time for Archaeologists. Northeast Historical Archaeology 29(1):1–22.

Rock, James T. 1984 Cans in the Countryside. Historical Archaeology 18(2):99–111.

1988 Tin Canisters: Their Identification. Published privately by the author.

2015 Jim Rock Historic Can Collection. Electronic document, http://digital.hanlib.sou.edu/ cdm/landingpage/collection/p16085coll5, accessed January 15, 2015. Hannon Library Digital Collections, Southern Oregon University.

Ward, Albert E., Emily K. Abbink, and John R. Stein 1977 Ethnohistorical and Chronological Basis of the Navajo Material Culture. In Settlement and Subsistence Along the Lower Chaco River: the CGP Survey, edited by Charles A. Reher. The University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque.

102

APPENDIX F Historic Artifacts—Glass

GLASS Glass manufacture has a long, complicated history that includes numerous technological inventions, refinements, and dead-ends. Within the historical archaeological record, bottles often dominate the glass assemblage because they were an early and widely used container for foods, beverages, and medicines that allowed for the transportation and temporary storage of the contents. Although bottles, jars, and window glass are considered the most common glass artifacts found at historic sites, other common glass artifacts include lamp chimneys, lantern globes, lamp reservoirs, light bulbs, mirrors, drinking glasses, door knobs, serving bowls, dishes, ornamental glassware, marbles, and vehicle parts, such as windshield fragments, tail and headlamp lenses, mirrors, and reflectors. Summaries of the history of glass manufacture technology, maker’s marks, and other facets of glass technology are readily available and the reader is encouraged to consult these documents for further research. Many of these documents were written by amateurs and collectors, so that the quality, consistency, and terminologies used in these documents vary widely.

Bill Lindsey’s (2010) ‘Historic Glass Bottle Identification & Information Website’ (http://www. sha.org/bottle/) hosted by the Society for Historical Archaeology is particularly useful and is used as one of the primary sources for this section.

The goal of this section is to focus the discussion of glass artifacts to allow for the correct identification of key glass-manufacture techniques and characteristics for dating purposes and to assist preparation of consistent artifact descriptions.

Several innovations in glass manufacture—especially bottle manufacture—happened during the late 1800s and early 1900s making glass containers good temporal markers. Manufacture method is a very important attribute to document. Maker’s marks (if present) can provide relatively narrow manufacture ranges and are especially useful in determining a date range for a site.

Review of additional sources (such as Toulouse 1971) is usually needed to identify glass maker’s marks. Several glass colors can also be used as temporal markers. Additional attributes (e.g. form, decoration, closure type) are useful for determining date ranges and a bottle’s function or contents.

Most bottles are made up of six basic elements: finish, neck, shoulder, body, heel, and base (Figure 15). Familiarity of these will assist in properly describing bottle fragments that might be found.

Manufacturing Methods Several technological changes occurred in the glass manufacture industry between the mid-1800s and early 1920s. Prior to the mid-1800s, glass-making was relatively static and followed many of the same general processes that had been in use for centuries. This discussion of glass manufacture will focus on glass manufacture techniques during the period of greatest innovation (mid-1800s to early 1900s) and manufacture practices relevant to the archaeological record of Utah (beginning ca. 1847).

Hand Finished In general, glass vessels manufactured between 1847 and 1904 were mouth blown, usually into a mold, and finished by hand. During manufacture, vessels were blown free-hand or in a mold by gathering a glob of molten glass on a blowpipe and blowing air through the blowpipe to create a 104

Figure 15. Characteristics of a typical bottle. (adapted from Lindsey 2010)

105

hollow vessel whose form was shaped by an assistant or a mold; the neck portion of the resulting bottle was then cut from the blowpipe and a finish added. Some bottles blown free hand or in a turn mold had their base end attached to a pontil rod to facilitate handling. When the pontil was removed, a ragged, raised circular bead of glass on the base (referred to as a pontil scar) was often left (Figure 16). In some cases, such as on champagne bottles, the bottle bases were pushed upward into the bottle with the pontil, resulting in a cup-shaped base (kick-up) before being removed. After 1865 the snap case (essentially metal tongs on a rod) largely replaced the use of pontils, and because it did not leave marks, the use of the snap case allowed lettering or decoration to be molded into bottle bases (Kendrick 1966:29).

Mold types varied from one-piece dip molds—which could be as simple as a bucket—to molds having up to nine interlocking sections. Most glass bottles found in 1800s-era Utah were manufactured using a two- piece (or more) cup or post bottom mold (Figure 17). Though less common, bottles from other types of molds might also be present in Utah, including turn-molds, rickets molds, bottom hinge molds, and three-part leaf molds. The various mold types leave characteristic seams.

Mold-manufactured glass typically (though not always) has raised seams that extend from the bottle’s heel and/or base, up the body, and terminate in the neck area of the bottle. The quantity and location of these seams vary depending on the type of mold used during the manufacture process (Figure 18).

Numerous different methods were used to finish bottles, including grinding the lip or mouth smooth, re-heating and fire polishing, and shearing the bottle neck. The most common method of finishing a bottle from the mid-1800s to early 1900s was to apply additional glass to the neck and form the shape of the finish with a “lipping” or “finishing” tool. The lipping tool could also be used to shape the finish without applying additional glass. Several terms exist for finishes made with a tool, but for simplicity, we refer to the application of additional glass followed by tooling as applied and tooling without the addition of glass as tooled (see the SHA’s bottle website for a detailed discussion of “applied” versus “tooled” finishes) (Figure 19). In both cases, the simplest term to be used is “hand finishing.”

Applied finishes were common between 1840 and 1885 and most tooled finishes typically date from ca. 1885 to the 1920s. Some tooled finishes, as described here, can date back to the 1870s, such as on druggist bottles. All hand finishing of bottles ceased by 1920 when automatic bottling machines completely replaced mouth blown production.

Applied and tooled finishes are usually identified by a lack of vertical seams. The lipping tool, which incorporated the desired shape of the finish, was inserted into the neck opening and rotated while the glass was still molten. The rotation of the lipping tool resulted in obliteration of the mold seam on the neck, sometimes twisting the seam below in the direction of rotation, and often left horizontal striations as part of the bottle finish. Where additional glass was added as part of an applied finish, sometimes irregular remnants of glass project below the area affected by the lipping tool. Applied finishes are frequently also characterized by finishes of cruder appearance that are irregular, differentially thick, “globby,” or lopsided (when viewed straight-on).

106

Figure 16. Examples of pontil scars on bottle bases. (adapted from Lindsey 2010)

Machine Made Glass manufacture, like most craft-based manufacturing industries, underwent mechanization beginning in the late 1800s. The semi-automatic bottling machine was introduced in the 1890s and the revolutionary Owens automatic bottle machine—the first fully automatic bottle-making machine—was introduced in 1904.

The main difference between fully- and semi-automatic machines was the degree of mechanization, not the appearance of the container. Semi-automatic machines gradually replaced workers at various steps in the production process, but always had a worker feeding it molten glass, whereas a fully automatic machine supplied itself with molten glass from a vat. The only visible difference between bottles made by semi- and fully automatic machines is the presence of an Owen’s suction scar on the latter. Both machines could produce similar vessels, with similar evidence of 107

Figure 17. Examples of various types of bottle mold seams. (redrawn from IMACS 1992:472.3)

108

Figure 18. Examples of seams on various mold-manufactured bottles. (adapted from Lindsey 2010)

109

Figure 19. Examples of various types of bottle finishes: (a-c) applied finish; (d) tooled finish; (e) comparison of tooled vs. applied finish. (adapted from Lindsey 2010)

110

manufacture and the same general look and “feel” (see http://www.sha.org/bottle/glassmaking. htm#B for a detailed discussion of semi-automatic and fully automatic bottle making machines).

For simplicity, the Utah Archaeology Site Form uses the term machine-made for semi- and fullyautomatic machines.

An automatic bottle machine (or the worker, if the machine is semi-automatic) feeds molten glass into the machine, which was then blown into a mold that forms the whole vessel. Machinemade bottles are produced through a complex, multi-step process that forms the whole vessel by machine. The manufacture process leaves seams around the base, up the sides to the finish, horizontally around and just under the mouth, and around the bore (Figure 20).

Early machine-made vessels often also have vertical “ghost” seams on the body—which is a seam that is thin, weak, wanders, and disappears— bowing out from and nearly parallel to the main seam (Figure 20). A ghost seam is left by parison mold halves.

Bottles produced in an Owen’s automatic bottling machine between 1904 and about 1969, but primarily on earlier bottles, will often have an Owen’s suction scar (aka ‘Owens ring’) on their base. This scar is a shallow wrinkle or irregular circular mark on the base of the bottle that will often have ‘feathery’ edges (Figure 21). The scar might be off center, irregularly shaped, or wander onto the heel of the bottle. The Owens scar is caused when molten glass sucked into the mold is cut off by the glass feeder mechanism (Kendrick 1966:81).

A small (less than 1 inch), round indention—called a valve mark—may appear on the base of wide-mouth vessels (e.g. milk bottles, canning jars) (Figure 21). This mark is from the valve that pushes a vessel out of the mold to be transferred to a blow mold for completion. Valve marks date from the early 1900s until the mid-1950s (Bill Lindsey, personal communication 2013). Other than the presence of an Owen’s suction scar or a valve mark, the two types of machine-produced glass (semi-automatic or-fully automatic) can look the same and have the same “feel.”

The Hartford-Empire Company introduced the “gob feeder” machine in 1917 (James 1956:21–23; Kendrick 1966:83). The gob feeder provided a way to form a measured amount of molten glass from which a bottle could be blown. In this process, a gob of glass was drawn from the tank and then cut off by shears. Bottles that have been manufactured using a gob feeder will have a “V”-shaped mark in the center of the base with straight lines radiating out from the “V” at right angles. Glass made with a gob feeder dates from 1917 to sometime in the mid-1900s. Gob feederproduced bottles, at least in Utah, seem to be relatively rare.

Most semi-automatic machines were in production from the 1890s to about 1926. The use of fully automatic machines dates from 1904 to present. Mouth-blown bottles and hand finishing lasted until 1920, gradually diminishing beginning in the middle 1890s. The Owen’s automatic bottling machine was introduced in 1904 and it and other competing automatic bottling machines quickly gained control of American bottle production. In 1925, the Individual Suction Machine (ISM) was invented, and by 1947 only 30 percent of bottles were produced in Owens machines. By 1969, use of the Owens machine had largely been supplanted by more modern equipment.

111

Figure 20. Major diagnostic characteristics of a typical machine-made bottle. (adapted from Lindsey 2010)

112

Figure 21. Example of: (a) Owen’s cutoff or suction scar; (b) valve mark. (adapted from Lindsey 2010)

Color Despite some utility in application, modern bottles in nearly all of the colors used in historic bottle production are currently being manufactured. Therefore, when considering color, caution should be used and temporal classification should not be made based solely on color. Purple and yellowtinted glass are relatively reliable colors for dating glass because these colors are the result of mineral additives that react to exposure to sunlight and are not currently being reproduced.

Purple (aka amethyst or “sun colored amethyst” [SCA]): Use of manganese as a clearing agent in glass began about 1876 and became very common by 1885. Although the vessels started out clear in color, exposure to the sun resulted in a purple tint, varying in intensity depending on the amount of manganese used. By 1920, all but manufacturers of specialty bottles had ceased using manganese (Lockhart 2006). The switch by soft drink bottle manufacturers seems to have been more rapid, between 1912 and 1914 (Lockhart 2005). Dates ca. 1880 to 1920.

Yellow Tinted (aka light amber): Yellow-tinted glass is the result of selenium used as a clearing agent to produce clear glass. In some cases, selenium imparted a yellowish tint to the glass when exposed to the sun and has been described by some as “the color of ripened wheat” or honey (Kendrick 1966:59–61). Yellow-tinted glass may appear as early as the 1910s, is most common during the 1920s, and may continue into the early 1930s (Rosenberg and Kvietok 1981:28; Gillio et al. 1980). The change in color from a clear to a yellowish hue is much lighter than a true amber or brown and should not be confused with such. Dates ca. 1910 to 1930.

Milk Glass: Opaque, white colored glass. Common in medicines, cosmetic, toiletry, canning lid liners, some food and specialty items. Dates ca. 1890 to 1960. Milk glass is often mistakenly identified as ceramic.

113

Aqua: Common in beer, soda water, medicine, and household bottles but also used in many other categories. Dates ca. 1800 to ca. 1910.

Green: General use, common in soda and wine vessels. Dates ca. 1860 to present.

Dark Amber or Brown: General use; common in beer, whiskey, and medicine bottles. Dates ca.

1860 to present.

Blue or Cobalt: Specialty color, mostly used in medicines and cosmetics. Dates ca. 1890 to 1960; although sometimes used today.

Clear: General use ca. 1875 to present.

Other Items of Note • Nursing bottle patented in 1841.

• Mason jar patented in 1858; the home canning craze spanned the late 1800s to early 1920s (but continues today with lessened intensity).

• Cod stopper (an internal glass ball stopper located in the bottles neck that rolls back when inverted to drink, and forward to close when the bottle is vertical) is patented in 1860.

• Embossing began on American-made bottles by 1810 and was a common attribute by the late 1840s. Embossing provides information about contents, manufacturers, distributors, slogans, and messages. The practice of embossing product names on bottle bodies nearly died out with the advent of automatic bottle machines, as paper labels were used almost extensively on bottles made by machines (Kendrick 1966:71). However, maker’s marks on bottle bases proliferated.

• Bitters/patent medicine craze 1860 to ca. 1915. Patent medicine bottles were usually aqua, clear, or light green in color, but other colors, such as amber and cobalt blue, were also used.

Patent medicine bottles, almost without exception, continued to use cork closures after the advent of automatic bottling machines. Many patent medicine bottles often had recessed panels for paper label and were often embossed.

• Hutchinson stoppers date from 1879 to 1915. The Hutchinson stopper is an internal rubber gasket with a wire loop that protrudes from bottle top. To open the closure, the iron wire loop was struck, breaking the seal by driving the stopper into the bottle and creating a popping sound. Thus, the term “soda pop.”

• Lightning stoppers were common from 1882 to 1920. They consist of a wire bail that forms a lever that clamps a lid or rubber-lined stopper over or in the finish. Common on canning jars and beer bottles.

• Milk bottles were introduced in 1884, but were slow to be accepted. They were only completely accepted after WWI but were in decline by the 1950s due to the introduction of paper milk cartons.

• Crown cap closure was patented in 1892 and was commonplace by about 1912.

114

• Turn- or paste-molded glass is blown into a mold in which the inside surface has been coated with a paste that absorbs water. The interior surface of the mold is wetted before use. While the bottle is being blown, it is rotated with the blowpipe inside the mold, riding on the paste and steam created by the water. This process erases all mold seam marks. Usually found in nicer, high-quality darkly colored wine, champagne, brandies, or other liquor bottles. Also used in lamp chimneys, light bulbs, and tumblers.

• Bottles made in turn molds are circular in horizontal cross section. No embossing or seams will be present and some bottles should exhibit a high gloss or polish, not the texture common to other mold-blown bottles. Faint horizontal lines encircle the exterior surface from contact with the grit paste. The bottle will likely have a kick-up or push-up on its base. In the U.S., this technique was used from ca. 1870 to ca. 1920.

• Continuous thread closures were standardized in 1924 (Lief 1965:26-29). Molded plastic screw caps began to be manufactured in quantity in 1927. Initially, they were used on highpriced toiletries and cosmetics and were black, dark red, or brown in color. New plastics enabled a wide variety of colors to be manufactured in a few years, as well as a wider variety of applications. Bakelite was the first of the plastics to be used for screw caps; they were introduced in 1927.

• Applied Color Label (ACL), which are baked-on enamel color designs or labels, is common on soda and milk bottles from 1934 to the present.

115

Glass and Bottle Chronology: (from Berge 1980; Buckles 1978; Lorrain 1968; Rock 1981) 1850s–1870s

Mold-made bottles (applied finishes, few maker’s marks or lettered panels).

1857

“Snap” case (eliminates use of “pontils”).

1858

The Mason fruit/canning jar.

1870s–1903

Mold-made bottles (applied and tooled finishes, maker’s marks and lettered panels).

1860s

Kerosene lamps appear.

1861

First lead glass medicine bottles. First “French squares” (tall, four-sided bottles).

1860–1915

Bitters bottle period (patent medicine) craze.

1879

Edison’s first light bulb - hand blown.

ca. 1884

First milk bottles; (In full use after World War I).

ca. 1891

Safety glass embedded w/ wire mesh.

1894

Bottled Coca-Cola.

1900

Metal screw-type closures.

1912

Crown cap (became universal for carbonated beverages—patented 1892). Particle cork liners in crown caps.

1920

First radio tubes. Transition to crown caps for beverages complete.

1920–1930

Era of commercial closures (cork stoppers replaced).

1920–1933

Prohibition (alcoholic beverage bottles negligible).

1922–1926

Introduction of the plastic closures (Bakelite).

1924

8 oz. and 10 oz. bottles for soft drinks.

1926

Baby food era (by 1939 largely in glass).

1933–1964

“Federal Law Prohibits the Sale or Reuse of this Bottle” embossed on liquor bottles.

1934

First 12 oz. soft drink bottles.

1938

Non-returnable beer bottles.

1940

“No Deposit -No Return” embossed on soda pop bottles.

1948

Larger-capacity soft drink bottles.

1953

Synthetic sweeteners.

1954–1958

First plastic coated bottles for aerosols.

1959–1961

First rigid polyethylene containers.

1963

Low-calorie soft drinks.

116

REFERENCES / ADDITIONAL READING Berge, Dale, L. 1980 Simpson Springs Station: Historical Archaeology in western Utah. 1974-1975. Bureau of Land Management Cultural Resource Series Publication Number 6. Utah State Office.

Buckles, William G. 1978 Anthropological Investigations near the crest of the Continent. 1975-1978, Vol. II, Chapters 7–11. Ms. On file Department of Anthropology, University of Southern Colorado, Pueblo, Colorado.

Deiss, Ronald William 1981 The Development and Application of a Chronology for American Glass. Published privately by author.

Ferraro, Pat and Bob Ferraro 1964 The Past in Glass. Western Printing and Publishing Company, Lovelock, Nevada.

1966 A Bottle Collector’s Book. Western Printing and Publishing Company, Lovelock, Nevada.

Fike, Richard E. 1965 Handbook for the Bottle-ologist. Richard E. Fike, Ogden, Utah.

1966 Guide to Old Bottles, Contents and Prices. Richard E. Fike, Ogden, Utah.

1987 The Bottle Book: A Comprehensive Guide to Historic, Embossed Medicine Bottles.

Peregrine Smith Books, Salt Lake City, UT. Giarde, Jeffrey L. 1989 Glass Milk Bottles: Their Makers and Marks. Bryn Mar: The Time Traveler Press.

Gillio, David, Francis Levine, and Douglas Scott 1980 Some Common Artifacts Found at Historical Sites. Cultural Resources Report No. 31.

USDA Forest Service, Southwest Region, Albuquerque, New Mexico.

IMACS 1998 Intermountain Antiquities Computer System User’s Guide. University of Utah, Bureau of Land Management, U.S. Forest Service.

James, Daniel J. 1956 The Evolution of the Glass Container Industry. University of Arkansas, Fayetteville.

Jones, Olive and Catherine Sullivan, with contributions by George Miller, E. Ann Smith, Jane E. Harris, and Kevin Lunn 1985 The Parks Canada Glass Glossary: For the Description of Containers, Tableware, Flat Glass, and Closures. Studies in Archaeology, Architecture, and History, National Historic Parks and Sites Branch, Parks Canada.

Kendrick, Grace 1966 The Antique Bottle Collector. Western Printing and Publishing Company, Sparks, Nevada.

Lief, Alfred 1965 A Close-Up of Closures: History and Progress. Glass Manufacturers Institute, New York.

117

Lindsey, Bill.

2010 Historic Glass Bottle Identification & Information Website. Electronic document, http:// www.sha.org/bottle/index.htm, accessed May 1, 2013.

Lockhart, Bill 2005 A Tale of Two Machines and a Revolution in Soft Drink Bottling. Bottles and Extras 17(2):2–8.

2006 The Color Purple: Dating Solarized Amethyst Container Glass. Historical Archaeology 40(2):45–56.

Lockhart, Bill, and David Whitten 2006 The Dating Game. Bottles and Extras 17(1):2–10.

Lorrain, Dessamae 1968 An Archaeologist’s Guide to Nineteenth Century American Glass. Historical Archaeology 2:35–44.

Miller, George L. and Anthony Pacey 1985 Impact of Mechanization in the Glass Industry: The Dominion Glass Company of Montreal, a Case Study. Historical Archaeology 19(1)38–50.

Miller, George L., Patricia Samford, Ellen Shlasko, and Andrew Madsen 2000 Telling Time for Archaeologists. Northeast Historical Archaeology 29(1):1–22.

Miller George L. and Catherine Sullivan 1984 Machine-Made Glass Containers and the End of Production for Mouth-Blown Bottles.

Historical Archaeology 18(2):83–95.

Munsey, Cecil 1970 The Illustrated Guide to Collecting Bottles. Hawthorn Books, Inc, New York.

Newman, T. Stell 1970 “A Dating Key for Post-Eighteenth Century Bottles”, Historical Archaeology, Society for Historical Archaeology, Bethlehem. (See Olive Jenes review in Society for Historical Archaeology Newsletter Vol. 4, No. 3, October 1971.)

Rock, James T. 1981 Glass Bottles: Basic Identification. Klamath National Forest, Region 5, U.S.D.A. Rosenberg, Robert G. and D. Peter Kvietok.

1981 A Guide to Historic Artifacts. Privately published by authors.

Toulouse, Julian Harrison 1967 When Did Hand Bottle Blowing Stop? Western Collector, Aug. 1967 41–45.

1969 A Primer on Mold Seams: Part I. Western Collector, Nov. 1969 526–535.

1969 A Primer on Mold Seams: Part II. Western Collector, December 1969 578–587.

1971 Bottle Makers and their Marks. Thomas Nelson, Inc., New York.

1977 Fruit Jars: A Collectors Manual with Prices. Everybody’s Press: PA. Wilson, Rex 1968 Bottles on the Western Frontier. University of Arizona Press, Tucson.

118

APPENDIX G Historic Artifacts—Ceramics

HISTORICAL CERAMICS This section provides general information on historical ceramics to aid in identification and documentation in the field and to provide a starting point for any necessary further research. It focuses on the types of ceramics most likely to be found on archaeological sites in the western United States, particularly those most common during the 19th and early 20th centuries.

Identifying the type of ware, decoration, and vessel form is helpful in determining the nature of the habitation, use of the site, status or social structure, economic scaling, and consumption patterns.

All of these various factors aid in evaluating site significance.

Historical ceramics have a wide temporal and geographic distribution in archaeological sites, and care must be taken when using them to estimate dates of site use. Temporal information from ceramics types or decoration can be applied only generally and should be used in conjunction with other cross dating methods and analyzed according to the context within which they are found.

Maker’s marks can further refine a site’s chronology; but provide only general occupation dates as ceramics are often created and used for long periods of time. For additional information on historic ceramics see Majewski and O’Brien 1987; IMACS 1992:473; Miller et al. 2000; Stelle 2001; and Florida Museum of Natural History 2013.

Classification of Ceramics Ceramics are described and classified according to the following attributes: paste, glaze, and decoration. The following will be helpful in artifact descriptions on site forms.

Paste is the material used to form the vessel. It is composed primarily of a clay matrix and comes in a variety of colors. Texture and porosity can range from soft and crumbly to hard and nearly glass-like. Grains can range from very fine to coarse. Paste characteristics are generally what determine the type of ware and are the first step in classifying ceramics.

Glaze is a silica based coating that covers the exterior of most vessels. It allows a vessel to hold liquids and can also serve as decoration or increase the strength or durability. It is generally clear but can also be colored, and can range from glossy and vitreous to opaque and matte. Sometimes agents were added to the glaze before firing to alter the final appearance, either giving the glaze a slight colored cast or adding a degree of opacity or luster. (Note that “slip” is different than glaze.

A slip is a diluted clay liquid applied to the outside of the vessel, but does not produce a vitreous finish or increase impermeability.)

Decoration is the embellishment or motif applied to the ceramic surface and can be done in a variety of techniques, including painting, transfer print, decal, colored slip or glaze, or moldedrelief. Decoration can be placed either under or over the glaze. All such forms of decoration were used for long periods of time and are still in use today, although transfer print and decal do provide some general temporally diagnostic information.

Transfer printing is one of the most prevalent decoration techniques for decorated tablewares during the 19th century and is a good temporal indicator (general dates: 1812 to 1900). Developed

by English potters during the 18th century, transfer printed wares began to dominate the American 120

market after the War of 1812 and remained incredibly popular until the late 1800s (although still in use today). Transfer printing involves using an engraved copper plate to print a design onto tissue paper, then placing the tissue paper onto a ceramic vessel, thereby transferring the design to the vessel. The vessel is then glazed and fired. The transferring of the pattern results in a stippled or dotted appearance and the edges of the transfer pattern are often visible (as disruptions in the pattern or offset sections). What is most characteristic of transfer printing are single color designs of scenes depicting landscapes, domestic and rural life, and historical events. Oriental, floral, and animal motifs are also common. Blue was the most widely used color, as it was the easiest to print; with brown, red, green, and mulberry common after the 1830s. Two color printing dates to post1830s. Popular patterns include Willow, Blue and White, and Asiatic Pheasants; though thousands exist. Flow blue is a variation of Blue and White in which the blue is deliberately blurred during firing (Figure 22).

Decal decoration was invented during the late 1800s, but didn’t reach popular use until the early 1900s and is rarely found before that time (general dates: 1900 to present). This process involved creating a pattern or image on paper which was transferred to the ceramic vessel. It allowed for consistent and more detailed designs in greater range of colors (Figure 22). Images are more precise than transfer printing and do not have the stippled appearance. Decals are enameled images, often placed over the glaze, not stickers applied to the vessel. Floral and geometric motifs are common.

Painted designs can be free-form, abstract, realistic, or geometric and done with a variety of methods including brush, sponge, splatter, mottle, or banded (Figure 23). These can be done in single or polychrome colors. Painting was the most widespread form of decoration before transfer printing was developed in the mid-1700s, though it has remained in use through today.

Another common decoration technique is molded-relief which is seen as edge designs or applied motifs (Figure 23). It is used throughout the historical period and continues to be used today. Edge designs include shaped rims (scallop or shell) and impressed border designs (basket weave, dot, scroll/swirl, rope, or floral). Motifs featuring leaves, flowers, grains, animals, or abstract patterns can also be applied to handles or sides of larger vessels, such as pitchers, tureens, or bowls.

Molded-relief was often used in combination with other techniques, such as transfer printing or painting. Feather Edge (sometimes called Shell Edge) was a popular pattern featuring an impressed feather border design painted over with blue (most common, other colors exist as well).

In artifact descriptions, it is important to also include the vessel form and function, if known— tableware (dishes, bowls, serving pieces), crockery (jars, storage vessels), bottles, chamber pots, spittoons, decorative pieces, etc. This is often most easily discernible from edge or rim sherds, bases, and handle fragments. Note, however, that rim sherds for plates, bowls, and platters can look very similar, depending on the thickness, degree of curvature, and style of a particular ware.

Context and association are also helpful to document.

Types of Ceramics Historical ceramic typologies are often based on ceramic types found in the eastern United States, particularly during the Colonial Period, which are rarely found in the western United States. This 121

Figure 22. Examples of white earthenware decorated with: a) flow blue; b) decal. (courtesy of the Maryland Archaeological Conservation Laboratory 2011)

Figure 23. Examples of white earthenware decorated with: a) painted design; b) molded-relief. (courtesy of the Maryland Archaeological Conservation Laboratory 2011)

122

guide attempts to simplify classification by describing the main types of ceramics found in the West and, more specifically, in Utah.

Note that ceramic manufacturers often invented new “types� to distinguish themselves from competitors or to appeal to a particular segment of the market. This is most obvious during the 19th century when mass-produced tablewares began to take a stronghold in America (of note are American potters in East Liverpool, Ohio) and when manufacturers were experimenting with different types of white tablewares. These are more reflective of brand names or marketing strategies rather than separate categories of ceramic types (for example, ironstone, a variation of white-bodied earthenware, is known by dozens of different brand names). This is most evident in the various names used in maker’s marks.

Ceramics fall into three main categories: earthenware, stoneware, and porcelain. These are the most commonly accepted and most widely used categories and will be the ones used here for site documentation. Additional sub-classification may be possible by a knowledgeable ceramicist or through additional research. Temporally, all of the ceramic categories were present in Utah during the historic period.

Earthenware Earthenware ceramics are fired at relatively low temperatures and are more porous than either stoneware or porcelain. Earthenware is often broken into two general categories: white earthenware (sometimes referred to as whiteware) and colored earthenware. White earthenware is a broad category featuring paste that is generally white in color, porous in an unglazed state and features fine- to medium-grained pastes, thin to medium thicknesses, clear glazes, and a variety of decorations. It is the most common type found in the West because it was easily manufactured, widely available, and commonly used for tablewares by households, military settlements, and mining and railroad camps. White earthenware found in Utah generally dates from the early 1800s and was used into the 20th Century.

White earthenware consists of refined factory-produced tablewares (plates, bowls, mugs and cups, serving pieces, etc). Paste can vary in color from white or cream to pale grey or pale buff in color, and is fine to medium textured. Glazes are clear and highly vitreous with a glassy appearance.

Vessels tend to have fairly thin walls but are not translucent. White earthenwares were available both plain and highly decorated.

Decorated white earthenwares include painted, transfer, decal, and molded-relief techniques in a variety of patterns, colors, and combinations. More refined decorations often indicate more expensive pieces and can suggest family household use. Transfer printing in landscape, domestic, or historical scenes was very common on white earthenware, mostly in blue but brown, green, red, and polychrome are found as well (Figure 24). English potters often imitated Chinese designs with either painted motifs or transfer printed scenes. Molded-relief on edges, handles, and rims are also common, featuring leaves, flowers, grains, animals, or abstract designs such as swirls, dots, and bands.

123

Figure 24. Examples of white earthenware decorated with transfer printing. (courtesy of the Maryland Archaeological Conservation Laboratory 2011) 124

Nineteenth-century white earthenwares were produced primarily by English potters until American potters began to dominate the market during the mid to latter part of the century. Johnson Brothers, Staffordshire, Spode, Wedgewood, and Doulton are well-known English potters producing white earthenwares. American potters include Homer Laughlin, Knowles, and Trenton.

White earthenwares can be subdivided further (i.e., pearlware, creamware, etc.), although this is difficult without comparative type collections and manuals, and these types are more common in the east than in the west. Classification is further complicated by the variety of white earthenwares available during the 19th century and the number of manufacturers producing them. For the purposes of site documentation, classifying these types of white paste ceramics in a general white earthenware category is sufficient.

Of note, however, is hotelware, often called ironstone in the literature. Hotelware is a distinct variation of white earthenware that is semi-vitreous, features heavy, thick walls, and was used for sturdy durable tablewares, both domestic and commercial (Figure 25). Hotelware was intended for service and was widely used at mining and labor camps, military installations, restaurants, and railroads. It generally has a more utilitarian, basic style than other white tablewares. Paste is white, highly vitrified, and fine textured. It may appear bright white or have a slight blue or grey cast.

Glaze is clear and very glossy, often thicker than other white-bodied earthenwares. Decoration was most often molded-relief (leaves, vines, grains, floral), and octagonal or angular-shaped pieces were common. Plain undecorated wares were also common. Transfer printed and decal designs were also used. Early examples (1800–1850) tend to be less refined and coarser than late 19th century and early 20th century examples. Vessel forms include large serving pieces, pitchers, tureens, and wash basins, in addition to typical tablewares.

Hotelware was first produced in England in the early 1800s and was patented as “ironstone” by Charles Mason in England in 1813. By the 1850s it was widely produced in America by potters in Trenton, New Jersey, and remained popular into the 20th century. It dominated the middleclass market during the latter part of the 19th century. Hotelware is also known as hotel china, ironstone, stone china, semi-porcelain, granite ware, white granite, new stone, opaque china, and opaque porcelain. Manufacturers often created their own names for their particular version of hotelware. Maker’s marks are common, often featuring the British Royal Arms, lions, unicorns, crowns, and shields.

Colored earthenwares include all other earthenwares not categorized as white earthenware (Figure 26) (including terracotta). Colored earthenwares are porous in an unglazed state and feature fineto medium-grained pastes, thin to medium thicknesses, clear glazes, and a variety of decorations.

Colored earthenwares are less common than white earthenwares in the West.

Paste can be yellow, red, tan, buff, grey, and brown in color. Glazes can be clear or colored, either matching or contrasting the color of the paste. Decoration is occasional, often molded-relief or banded designs. These types of earthenwares are generally less refined and coarser than white earthenware, and were often utilitarian in function. Typical vessel forms include larger serving pieces (platters, pitchers), mugs, crocks, molds, and wash basins. Colored earthenwares were also used for tablewares, although this was less common in the West post-1850.

125

Figure 25. Examples of hotelware. (courtesy of the Maryland Archaeological Conservation Laboratory 2011)

Figure 26. Examples of colored earthenware. (courtesy of the Maryland Archaeological Conservation Laboratory 2011)

126

Common types in this category are redware, brownware, yellowware, and Rockingham ware, mostly from English potters. These are much more common in the eastern United States but may occasionally be found in the West (general dates: late 1700s to 1900). Redwares (light red to reddish brown paste) from American potters are slightly more common, especially those from local potters in the Great Basin and western Southwest (general dates: post-1850). Utah contained a strong local pottery production industry in the 1850s–1920s, with local LDS Potters operating out of dozens of communities in the Great Basin (Scarlet et al. 2007). These earthenwares are usually yellow or redware pastes, and served utilitarian and storage functions, and share common morphological traits that appear Danish in style.

Stoneware Stoneware is fired at a high temperature resulting in a very hard, extremely strong, nonporous vitrified vessel. It is frequently used for utilitarian vessels such as storage crocks, jugs, jars, bottles, spittoons, chamber pots, or sewer/water pipes (Figure 27). Paste and glaze are often tan, buff, grey, or brown in color and may contrast with each other. Glazes are often opaque and somewhat matte in appearance (as opposed to glossy glazes on earthenware and porcelain). Salt glaze (created by throwing salt into the kiln when firing) is common and gives the surface a dimpled appearance, similar to an orange rind. Decoration is limited and vessels can have painted (including sponge, spatter, and mottling techniques) or banded designs.

Chinese or Japanese archaeological sites in the American West contain dozens of varieties of imported stoneware that served utilitarian and storage function. Most Overseas Chinese stoneware possesses a dark brown glaze and comes in a variety of forms (Wegars 1993).

Porcelain Porcelain is the most refined of the ceramic types and was used as fancier tableware, tea sets, and decorative pieces (Figure 28). It is generally thin and translucent, although it can be thick and heavy (mostly bathroom fixtures and toilet wares). Paste can be soft or hard and is white, ivory, pale grey or pale buff in color. Hard-paste porcelain is extremely hard, highly vitreous, translucent, and often appears almost glass-like. Comparatively, soft-paste porcelain is somewhat more porous with a fine-grained texture. Glaze is clear and vitreous. Decoration is very common with painted, transfer, and decal being the most common.

Porcelain can be of Asian (Chinese being the most common) or European (English being the most common) origin. Chinese porcelain tends to be harder, hand painted, and may include rice bowls and opium pipes. English porcelain often features transfer-print designs and is most often tea sets or novelty decorative items. Although Chinese settlements were common in the West, the presence of Chinese ceramics does not automatically indicate Chinese habitation. Chinese porcelain was widely available in the American market and many English potters based some white earthenware designs on Chinese motifs to mimic Chinese porcelain. Similarly, Japanese porcelains became very popular decorative items in American households between about 1900 and 1920, so should not be considered indicative of a Japanese presence.

127

Figure 27. Examples of stoneware. (courtesy of the Maryland Archaeological Conservation Laboratory 2011)

Figure 28. Examples of porcelain. (courtesy of the Maryland Archaeological Conservation Laboratory 2011)

128

Maker’s Marks Maker’s marks are often found on the bases of earthenware and porcelain or impressed or stenciled on the sides of stoneware vessels, especially mass-produced wares. Marks provide useful diagnostic information regarding the name, date, and sometimes place of manufacture.

Each is unique to specific manufacturers, were often changed as companies expanded or entered new markets, and sometimes modified depending on factory location or pattern. Some manufacturers used a detailed coding system to indicated date and place of manufacture.

English ceramics produced after 1842 often feature diamond-shaped registry marks that provide detailed information regarding manufacturing dates. Marks can be printed, stamped, impressed, or handwritten or drawn. Manufacturers may include terms such as china, semi-porcelain, or granite ware, which are usually more of a marketing term than an indication of the type of ware.

Several manuals are available to assist in identifying maker’s marks. A few excellent examples are Kovel’s New Dictionary of Marks (Kovel and Kovel 1986), Encyclopedia of British Pottery and Porcelain Marks (Godden 1991), and the Encyclopedia of U.S. Marks on Pottery, Porcelain, and Clay (Lehner 1988).

129

REFERENCES / ADDITIONAL READING Florida Museum of Natural History 2013 Digital Type Collections. Electronic document, http://www.flmnh.ufl.edu/histarch/ gallery_types/, accessed May 28, 2013. Historical Archaeology at the Florida Museum of Natural History.

Godden, Geoffrey 1991 Encyclopedia of British Pottery and Porcelain Marks. Random House. London.

IMACS 1992 Intermountain Antiquities Computer System User’s Guide. University of Utah, Bureau of Land Management, U.S. Forest Service.

Kovel, Ralph and Terry Kovel 1986 Kovel’s New Dictionary of Marks. Crown Publishers, New York, New York.

Lehner, Lois 1988 Encyclopedia of U.S. Marks on Pottery, Porcelain, and Clay. Collectors Books, Schroeder Publishing. Paducah, Kentucky.

Majewski, Teresita and Michael J. O’Brien 1987 The Use and Misuse of Nineteenth Century English and American Ceramics in Archaeological Analysis. Advances in Archaeological Method and Theory 11:97–209.

Maryland Archaeological Conservation Laboratory 2011 Diagnostic Artifacts in Maryland. Maryland Archaeological Conservation Laboratory, Jefferson Patterson Park & Museum, State Museum of Archaeology. http://www.jefpat. org/diagnostic/index.htm Miller, George L., Patricia Samford, Ellen Shlasko, and Andrew Madsen 2000 Telling Time for Archaeologists. Northeast Historical Archaeology 29(1):1–22.

Scarlett, Timothy J., Robert J. Speakman, and Michael D. Glascock 2007 Pottery in the Mormon Economy: An Historical, Archaeological, and Archaeometric Study. Historical Archaeology 41(4):72–97.

Stelle, Lenville J. 2001 An Archaeological Guide to Historic Artifacts of the Upper Sangamon Basin.

Electronic document, http://virtual.parkland.edu/lstelle1/len/archguide/documents/ arcguide.htm, accessed May 28, 2013. Center for Social Research, Parkland College.

Wegars, Priscilla 1993 Hidden Heritage: Historical Archaeology of the Overseas Chinese. Baywood Publishing Company, Inc. Amityville, New York.

130