Cretaceous Hills Ecological Restoration Project

Heritage Report

Prepared by: Mary McCorvie Heritage Program Manager

for: Hidden Springs Ranger District Shawnee National Forest

Date: October 29, 2015

Updated: July 27, 2017

In accordance with Federal civil rights law and U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) civil rights regulations and policies, the USDA, its Agencies, offices, and employees, and institutions participating in or administering USDA programs are prohibited from discriminating based on race, color, national origin, religion, sex, gender identity (including gender expression), sexual orientation, disability, age, marital status, family/parental status, income derived from a public assistance program, political beliefs, or reprisal or retaliation for prior civil rights activity, in any program or activity conducted or funded by USDA (not all bases apply to all programs). Remedies and complaint filing deadlines vary by program or incident.

Persons with disabilities who require alternative means of communication for program information (e.g., Braille, large print, audiotape, American Sign Language, etc.) should contact the responsible Agency or USDA’s TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TTY) or contact USDA through the Federal Relay Service at (800) 877-8339. Additionally, program information may be made available in languages other than English.

To file a program discrimination complaint, complete the USDA Program Discrimination Complaint Form, AD-3027, found online at http://www.ascr.usda.gov/complaint_filing_cust.html and at any USDA office or write a letter addressed to USDA and provide in the letter all of the information requested in the form. To request a copy of the complaint form, call (866) 632-9992. Submit your completed form or letter to USDA by: (1) mail: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Office of the Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights, 1400 Independence Avenue, SW, Washington, D.C. 20250-9410; (2) fax: (202) 690-7442; or (3) email: [email protected].

USDA is an equal opportunity provider, employer and lender.

Heritage Resource Report Cretaceous Hills Ecological Restoration Project

Contents

Introduction ...... 1 Resource Indicators and Measures ...... 1 Information Sources ...... 3 Affected Environment ...... 3 Cultural History Overview ...... 3 County Historical Overviews ...... 7 Archaeological Inventory ...... 9 Management Direction ...... 9 Environmental Consequences ...... 9 Alternative 1 – No Action ...... 9 Alternatives 2, 3, and 4 ...... 10 Regulatory Framework ...... 13 Land and Resource Management Plan ...... 13 National Historic Preservation Act ...... 14 Short-term Uses and Long-term Productivity ...... 15 Irreversible and Irretrievable Commitments of Resources ...... 15 Compliance with LRMP and Other Relevant Laws, Regulations, Policies and Plans ...... 15 Required Monitoring ...... 15 Summary of Environmental Effects ...... 15 Other Agencies and Individuals Consulted ...... 17 Acronyms ...... 17 References Cited ...... 18

Tables

Table 1: Resource indicators and measures for assessing effects...... 2 Table 2: Resource indicators and measures for alternatives 2, 3, and 4 ...... 11 Table 3. Summary comparison of environmental effects to heritage resources ...... 16

Shawnee National Forest i Heritage Resource Report Cretaceous Hills Ecological Restoration Project

Introduction The primary heritage resource issue in this analysis is the preservation and protection of heritage resources within the proposed Cretaceous Hills Ecological Restoration Project and the assurance that significant heritage resources will not be affected by project implementation. The goal of the proposed action and all the analyzed alternatives is to ensure that management actions that could potentially affect heritage resources comply with applicable laws, executive orders, and regulations (National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended). Toward that end, it is necessary to conduct a heritage resource inventory of all Federal lands included in the Cretaceous Hills Ecological Restoration Project area to determine whether significant historic properties are present that could be adversely affected by the implementation of the proposed project.

Archaeological sites and other historic properties are located on and in the ground and are affected by any activity that disturbs the soil. Ground-disturbing activities adversely affect archaeological sites because they move, remove, or otherwise disturb the soil that archaeological sites have become a part of. Artifacts and other evidence of use or occupation are discarded or lost and are deposited on the surface of the ground. In time, these deposits become buried, either through windblown or water-laid deposits, or other post-occupation deposition.

When the soil in which an archaeological site is located is disturbed, the archaeological site can be seriously damaged or destroyed. Archaeological sites are arranged vertically, as as horizontally. When soil becomes mixed as a result of ground-disturbing activities the information contained within the archaeological site is, at best, compromised, or more frequently lost or destroyed. The small artifacts, such as broken , charcoal, burned daub, chert flakes and carbonized plant remains that archaeologists use to reconstruct daily lifeways and cultural histories are often damaged or lost through these ground-disturbing activities. Likewise, bulldozing farmsteads and destroying stone foundations and breaking delicate housewares are also detrimental to efforts in reconstructing daily 19th and early 20th century farm life and economic development in southern Illinois.

As noted above, all ground-disturbing activities have the potential to effect heritage resources. Ground- disturbing activities associated with ecological restoration include vegetation treatments such as mechanical overstory removal, clearcut and shelterwood establishment cut, and timber stand improvement; prescribed fire including mechanical fire-line construction; wildlife treatments such as vernal pond development; mechanical removal of non-native invasive species; and other project implementation projects such as road construction, reconstruction, and restoration. The equipment used in project implementation includes large and small trucks, bulldozers, skidders, backhoes, utility vehicles, and other heavy equipment as needed.

Many project-implementation activities are not considered to be ground-disturbing, such as prescribed fire alone, fire-line construction with foam, rakes or leaf blowers, and hand-held application of chemical treatments of invasive plant species.

Resource Indicators and Measures The primary heritage resource indicator or measure in this analysis is the preservation and protection of heritage resources within the proposed Cretaceous Hills Ecological Restoration Project and the assurance that significant heritage resources will not be adversely affected by project implementation.

Shawnee National Forest 1 Heritage Resource Report Cretaceous Hills Ecological Restoration Project

Table 1. Resource indicators and measures for assessing effects Measure Used to Source Resource Element Resource Indicator (Quantify if address: P/N, (LRMP S/G; law or possible) or key issue? policy, BMPs, etc.)? Historic properties Preservation/Protection Adverse effects Yes Section 106, NHPA

A heritage resource inventory was conducted on Federal lands included in the Cretaceous Hills Ecological Restoration Project Area to determine whether significant historic properties were present that could be adversely affected by the implementation of the proposed project. The area of potential effects (APE) determined the bounds of analysis for this project. The area of potential effects is defined as “. . . the geographic area or areas within which an undertaking may directly or indirectly cause alterations in the character or use of historic properties, if any such properties exist. The APE is influenced by the scale and nature of an undertaking and may be different for different kinds of effects caused by the undertaking” [36 CFR 800.16(d)]. The APE defines that area within which the identification of historic properties will occur, and in this case, is the project boundary itself. This is the area in which ecological restoration activities would directly affect existing heritage resource sites.

The design criteria developed for the analysis of the project area included methods developed decades ago with the passage of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (NHPA) and its implementing regulations. According to section 106 of the NHPA, “The agency official shall take the steps necessary to identify historic properties within the area of potential effects.” Effect means alteration to the characteristics of a historic property qualifying it for inclusion in or eligibility for the National Register [36 CFR 800.16(i)]. Because Federal planned activities or undertakings may alter, directly or indirectly, any of the characteristics of a historic property that qualify the property for inclusion in the National Register in a manner that would diminish the integrity of the property's location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, or association (36 CFR 800.5), efforts must be made to avoid adversely affecting historic properties during a Federal undertaking. In order to protect heritage resources, a number of design criteria are integrated into the project, primarily including an archaeological inventory of the project area. It is necessary to know what historic properties are present within the APE to determine necessary protection or mitigation measures.

The APE has been inventoried to ensure that all heritage resources are adequately protected from project- related impacts; specific design criteria were developed on a site-by-site basis and included: (1) redesigning the activity to avoid the site whenever possible; and (2) when it is not possible to redesign the activity to avoid the site, sites that will affected by planned project activities will be evaluated against the National Register of Historic Places criteria [National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended, Section 101(a)(2)].

According to 36 CFR 60.4, the National Register criteria for evaluation include: 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

i. that are associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of our history; or ii. that are associated with the lives of persons significant in our past; or iii. 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

Shawnee National Forest 2 Heritage Resource Report Cretaceous Hills Ecological Restoration Project

significant and distinguishable entity whose components may lack individual distinction; or iv. that have yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important in or history.

Ordinarily, cemeteries, birthplaces, or 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.

An adverse effect is found when an undertaking may alter, directly or indirectly, any of the characteristics of a historic property that qualify the property for inclusion in the National Register in a manner that would diminish the integrity of the property's location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, or association. Adverse effects may include reasonably foreseeable effects caused by the undertaking that may occur later in time, be farther removed in distance, or be cumulative.

Information Sources Sources of information used to complete this analysis include Cultural Resources Report 09-08-04-128, An Archaeological Inventory of South Pope County Ecological Restoration Project. Field methods consisted of a complete coverage survey by inspecting the present ground surface when possible (trails and old roads); however, the majority of the inventory was conducted with shovel tests excavated at 15-meter intervals. Other areas were inventoried according to the methods included in the Programmatic Agreement among the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, the United States Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Shawnee National Forest and the Midewin National Tallgrass Prairie, and the Illinois Historic Preservation Officer, regarding the Process for Compliance with the Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act for Undertakings related to the Prescribed Fire Programs on the Shawnee National Forest and Midewin National Tallgrass Prairie. Affected Environment

Cultural History Overview

Pre-Contact Settlement have inhabited and used the Shawnee National Forest from approximately 12,000 years ago until the 1930s. From 10,000 B.C. to approximately A.D. 1500, pre-contact Native Americans occupied or utilized every available environment, including well-timbered uplands, stream bottom rock shelters, riparian areas and floodplains.

In general, the pre-contact period can be characterized by increasing cultural complexity, beginning with small, mobile hunting and gathering societies which evolved through time into more sedentary horticultural societies. Subsistence strategies initially involved hunting and collecting wild plant foods, and culminated with the of three major during the late pre-contact Mississippian period: the three sisterscorn, , and squash.

The Paleo-Indian (12,000 to 9,000 B.C.) and Early Archaic (9,000 to 6,000 B.C.) cultures were the first to inhabit southern Illinois. Paleo-Indian peoples inhabited an environment undergoing dramatic changes as a result of retreating glaciers (Haynes 1980:119). Although they are often referred to as big-game hunters because of the association of their hunting with now extinct mega-fauna (camel,

Shawnee National Forest 3 Heritage Resource Report Cretaceous Hills Ecological Restoration Project

mammoth, mastodon and horse), more recent reconsiderations of Paleo-Indian subsistence patterns deemphasize their reliance on these extinct species. The major part of their diet probably consisted of modern-day species such as caribou, elk and deer, as well as a wide variety of plant foods.

Although there are no known sites from these periods within the boundaries of the Shawnee National Forest, a number of points associated with these cultures have been recovered from various contexts. Evidence from other parts of the state indicate that these ice-age hunters followed seasonal or annual rounds, moving as much as 480 to 640 kilometers (300 to 400 miles) between southern, northern and western Illinois, and eastern Indiana (Koldehoff and Walthall 2001:3). Throughout time, as the Native American population grew, they continued to explore and use the landscape and its various resources with greater intensity than previous inhabitants.

The Middle (6,000 to 3,000 B.C.) and Late Archaic (3,000 to 1,000 B.C.) time periods were marked by considerable growth in population (Jeffries 1987:34, 83; Wiant 2001:5). Though seasonal movements were still necessary, by the Late Archaic time period a more sedentary way of life had developed. As the population continued to increase, these seasonal movements became more and more restricted on the landscape. Concomitantly, archaeological data indicate there was a marked increase in plant resource utilization during this period (Jeffries 1987: 66-68; Wiant 2001:5-6).

Though they provided shelter and short-term occupation to all pre-contact peoples, rock shelters were an especially important of Middle Archaic land use (Butler 2001: 23). Pre-contact occupied rock shelters are generally characterized by lithic waste products from manufacturing, and may contain a few simple flake tools or occasional projectile points and pottery fragments. Longer-term open-air Archaic-era campsites are also present within the Forest. These sites represent raw material processing and subsistence-related activities (e.g., hunting and gathering, food processing, and food preparation). Exploitation of faunal species associated with upland habitats as well as riparian ecosystems followed. The most frequently occurring food remains are white-tailed deer, followed by smaller mammals, fish, and fresh water mollusks.

Early and Middle Woodland (1,000 B.C. to A.D. 400) peoples were semi-sedentary and exploited a wide variety of resources as food. The remains of deer, bear, raccoon, rabbit, opossum, squirrel, fox, beaver, wild cat, muskrat, turkey, mussels, and both drum and bass fish bones have been recovered from archaeological sites dating to this period (Wagner and Butler 1999). Plant resource utilization continued to expand, suggesting that during this period Native Americans were actively “cultivating” such wild plants as lambs quarter (chenopodium), sump weed, erect knotweed and may grass, among others (Wiant 2001:6). Early and Middle Woodland ceramic vessels were very thick-walled and were decorated with cord and fabric impressions. In addition, there are examples of Hopewellian burial mound ceremonialism along both the Ohio and Mississippi River valleys (Farnsworth 2001: 8).

The Late Woodland cultural period (A.D. 400 to 900) is characterized by an intensive exploitation of local resources, supplemented by a variety of cultigens, including corn and squash. One special feature of the Shawnee Hills is the Late Woodland stone forts. Eleven stone fortifications including Stonefort, Murray Bluff, Indian Kitchen, Millstone Bluff, War Bluff, Hogg Bluff, the Pounds site, Trigg, Draper’s Bluff, Giant City, and the Thomas stone fort are scattered across the region on the margins of the region’s most rugged terrain. All of these walled sites are located on high ridge tops which are defined on three sides by a steep and rocky escarpment; access on the remaining fourth side is controlled through the construction of a stone wall. Lithic material representing chipped stone projectile points, pottery fragments and food remains have been recovered from excavations at stone forts. Whether these sites represent ceremonial sites or evidence of social conflict, large numbers of pre-contact Native Americans would have encamped on or near the site. Subsistence activities would have been important in both instances. Food procurement (hunting meat and gathering seasonally available food resources such as nuts, berries, greens, and seeds),

Shawnee National Forest 4 Heritage Resource Report Cretaceous Hills Ecological Restoration Project

processing (skinning and cutting, and grinding), and preparation ( or baking with fire) would have been key activities related to these seasonal aggregations. Use of the stone forts, whether occurring annually or at greater intervals, would have resulted in a significant impact on the natural resources of the area.

The Mississippian period (A.D. 900 to 1600) in southern Illinois is represented by a large number of complex earthen mound centers along the Ohio and Mississippi Rivers (Butler 2001:23), as well as scattered settlements of smaller hamlets and farmsteads. Nearly all of these settlements, including villages and individual farmsteads, occurred on the floodplains, on low ridges, sand dunes or natural levees, or on the bluffs overlooking the river (Griffin 1990:8; Smith 1978:198). Initially, the majority of the population occupied the larger mound centers, which reached their zenith ca. 1250. After this time, however, much of the population began dispersing to occupy smaller settlements scattered throughout the countryside. Individual farmsteads were likely occupied year-round, and functioned as horticultural production units as well as resource extraction sites (Muller 1978:284). As well, hamlets (small villages of 8 to 15 houses) also appear to have been largely centers of farming, hunting and gathering activities (Muller 1978:285). One example of these smaller settlements is evidenced by the occupation at Millstone Bluff, a Mississippian village located on an isolated hilltop on the upper Bay Creek drainage (Butler 2001:23). In addition, Mississippian-era peoples are known to use the interior backcountry of southern Illinois as a major transportation corridor connecting the late pre-contact metropolis of Cahokia on the Mississippi River with the Kincaid site on the Ohio River.

Mississippian culture was characterized by an increased dependency on agriculture as a subsistence strategy, as well as increased social and economic stratification. In the rich floodplain environment, the practice of agriculture fueled population growth. , the primary , constituted approximately 50 percent of the diet (Griffin 1990:8). In addition, individual households had garden plots located adjacent to dwellings. This pattern of garden horticulture seems to have remained relatively constant throughout the early historic period as Williams (1974:435 in Hatley 1989:228) notes, “every dwelling- house has a small field pretty close to it.”

It is widely acknowledged that most pre-contact horticulturists practiced slash-and-burn or swidden farming (Hunt 1992:291). Swidden farming consists of rotating active and fallow fields. Field preparation was achieved through clearing and burning extant vegetation. There are many early historic accounts of field and agricultural clearing, as well as a great deal of archaeological evidence and ethnographic accounts. Archaeological evidence consists of charcoal-mottled soil lenses resulting from sheet erosion of nearby fields (Morse and Morse 1983:287). Native American horticultural activities are also described in historical accounts. In the early 17th century, Spelman wrote, “They take most commonly aplace about their howses to sett ther corne, which if ther be much wood, in that place they cutt doune the greate trees sum half a yard above the ground, and ye smaller they burne at the roote pullinge a good part of the barke from them to make them die” (Arber 1884 in Swanton 1946:304). Other accounts note that bone hoes or mattocks were used to, “weed the maize and cut down the canes in the preparation of a field. When the canes were dry they set fire to them, and to sow with Maize they made a hole with the hand in which they put some grains” (Le Page Du Pratz 1758 in Swanton 1946:310). John Winthrop, Jr., has given us a good idea of what Native American fields looked like, gardens “loading the Ground with as much as it will beare,” with cornstalks serving as beanpoles, squashes sending their tendrils everywhere, thus giving the effect of the entire garden being a dense tangle of food plants (Cronon 1983:44). Such intensive horticulture most certainly severely depleted the mineral and organic content of the soils, thus most likely necessitating the movement of the garden, perhaps every 20 years or so (Hunt 1992:291).

In addition to clearing agricultural fields, Mississippians harvested timber resources for fuel, housing, and tool use. For example, due to natural decomposition of organic building materials and infestation of

Shawnee National Forest 5 Heritage Resource Report Cretaceous Hills Ecological Restoration Project

vermin, Mississippian houses required rebuilding approximately every 20 years. Because Mississippian occupation of lands that were to become the Shawnee National Forest appear to have lasted approximately 200 years (A.D. 1250 to 1450), a substantial number of timber resources would have been used. It is interesting to note, researchers studying fresh water mollusk species have noted a change in the species of mollusks present within many of the drainages from this period. They have attributed this change to Native American utilization of timber resources, which denuded ridge tops resulting in eroded hillsides and increased turbidity in the streambeds.

In summary, from roughly 10,000 B.C. to A.D. 700, pre-contact populations were non-agricultural; their subsistence activities relied entirely on hunting and gathering activities. Beginning about A.D. 700 to 900, however, maize became a staple part of many pre-contact Native Americans’ diets (Griffin 1990:6). The cultivation of corn along with other Native American cultigens lead to a more stable and sedentary lifestyle of many pre-contact groups, most notably the Mississippians. By 1000 A.D., population numbers had risen to levels that left significant imprints on the landscape. The larger population numbers required more housing, fuel, and food, suggesting an increase in the level of resource depletion near their settlements.

Although there are indications of scattered Native American villages as late as the early 1500s, Mississippian occupation in the region appears to have all but disappeared by A.D. 1450 (Butler 2001:23). For the next few centuries, the region seems to have been relatively uninhabited except for sporadic incursions by distant native groups such as the Shawnee, who are documented as crossing the area during the early 1700s (Butler 2001:23).

Historic Settlement The regional historic context for sites included in the Cretaceous Hills Ecological Restoration Project area is that of 19th and 20th century rural agricultural development within interior southern Illinois. Previous surveys within the Shawnee National Forest (Moffat et al. 1985; Pulcher et al. 1987; Wagner et al. 1992) have revealed that rural farmsteads comprise an overwhelming majority of the historical cultural resources contained within the Shawnee National Forest. Farmstead development within this area should be viewed against the background of local environmental, topographical, historic, and cultural factors which interacted with each other to shape the agricultural development and the character of the region.

Within Pope County, the majority of early to mid-19th-century farmsteads consisted of self-sufficient diversified agriculture farms occupied by individual families. The families occupying these farms primarily were immigrants from the Upper South or descended from such immigrants.

Early land records for southern Illinois indicate that from 1800 to 1830, the majority of the pioneer settlers belonged to the Upland South Cultural Tradition. Originating in the Upper South during the 18th and 19th centuries, the Upland South Cultural Tradition spread into southern Illinois with the arrival of immigrants from the Carolinas, Georgia, Tennessee, and other parts of the Southeast during the early 19th century. The main characteristics of this tradition have been described as a reliance upon a diversified farming complex, a wood-oriented , the importance of the family as a cooperative unit, an oligarchic political system directed by the county court, and a stratified social system with slaves as the lowest class (Mason 1984: 92).

From 1830 to 1850, Ohio River traffic brought additional settlers from New England, Ohio, and Indiana, and later, after 1850, immigrants from Europe, particularly Germans, composed almost 80 percent of the foreign-born population in some southern Illinois counties. Ethnic groups represented in smaller numbers included African-Americans, Anglo-Americans, and Germans, among others (Meyer 1976a; 1976b).

Shawnee National Forest 6 Heritage Resource Report Cretaceous Hills Ecological Restoration Project

The early agricultural development of southern Illinois was tied to subsistence agriculture. In 1818, 99 percent of the men in southern Illinois were farmers, including those who raised produce only for home consumption (Buck 1967). These were mainly subsistence farmers who raised grain (generally corn) for both human and livestock consumption supplemented by the hunting and gathering of wild foods, the collection of raw materials, and trade. Early settlers traveled to commercial centers with deerskins, honey, and beeswax to exchange for other goods. Later, these articles of trade were supplemented by cash crops such as , wheat, and livestock, which were in turn transported to the nearest market and traded in a barter economy. Throughout areas where the Upland South culture prevailed, the primary reliance was upon hogs and corn. Hogs were relied upon for both domestic consumption and profit, and during the 19th century, comprised the largest portion of meat consumed in the southern and western parts of the country (Hillard 1972:90; Martin 1942:57, 61). Cattle, sheep, and poultry were also present on southern Illinois farms, but were second in importance to hogs.

In addition to agriculture, other early to late 19th century economic activity in southern Illinois included light . In Gallatin County for example, salt was manufactured at the U.S. Salines Reservation from 1804 to 1847, and then privately until the 1870s (Barnes 1947: 39; Herdrich 1985:5, 32). Other industrial operations included , wool carding mills and gins, tobacco barns, furniture manufacturers, farm implement makers and wagon/buggy factories, saddle and harness manufacturers, and tan yards. Coal mining, although present in southern Illinois as early as the mid-19th century, increased greatly in importance during the late 19th and early 20th centuries.

Agricultural development within the Shawnee Hills peaked between 1870 and 1900. The number of farms in the region, as well as population, steadily decreased throughout the 1920s and 1930s. Both of these declines are related to the soil depletion of agricultural land. The first settlers cleared the narrow ridge tops, gentle slopes, and fertile creek bottoms or hollows which were not subject to overflow. Later steep slopes and less desirable land were settled. By 1900, almost all cultivatable land was planted in row crops, grain, or pasture. With the exception of the recently drained rich bottomlands, a few years of cultivation of the less desirable lands led to heavy losses of topsoil and mineral content. Out of concern for the deteriorating land conditions, the U.S. government invited farmers to sell their lands to the U.S. Forest Service, creating the Shawnee National Forest in 1939 (McCorvie 1994; Soady 1965).

County Historical Overviews The project area is located in both Pope and Massac Counties in extreme southern Illinois. The following county overviews provide additional information about the study area. Much of the material contained in this overview is drawn from previous cultural resources work on the Forest (Hill et al. 1987; McCorvie et al. 1989; Moffat et al. 1985; Pulcher et al. 1987; and Wagner et al. 1992).

Pope County Pope County was originally formed from parts of Johnson and Gallatin Counties on January 10, 1816. The county seat was Sarahville, named for the wife of founder Major James V. Lusk, but later was changed to Golconda. First settled in 1798, it was the first settlement between Kentucky and Kaskaskia on the Mississippi River. An 1807 list of squatters or individuals who had settled on government land without a deed, indicates that individuals initially settled on the major drainages within the county, including Big Bay, Big and Little Grand Pierre, and Dog Creek. Maps of land entries in the period 1814 to 1820 show a concentration of settlement in the bottomland areas in Golconda, Columbus, Alexander, Eddyville, and Jefferson townships.

By 1850, there were 504 farms in Pope County whose average size was 92 acres valued at $368 each. In 1860, there were 776 farms with an average of 146 acres (Fielder and Lindstrom 1939:11). This was the

Shawnee National Forest 7 Heritage Resource Report Cretaceous Hills Ecological Restoration Project

largest average acreage recorded in Pope County between 1850 and 1935. By 1900, the number of farms had increased to 2,000 with an average size of 104 acres, valued at $2,168 each, nearly six times their economic value in 1850. However, farm size also decreased during this same period, decreasing from an average farm size of 146 acres in 1860 to 104 acres in 1900. Agricultural development seems to have peaked in Pope County between 1870 and 1900, with farm production declining primarily as the result of soil exhaustion, until the mid-20th century.

Nineteenth century communities in and near the project area include Hodgeville (1899 to 1903), Holms (1905 to 1917), Roper’s Landing, Rosebud (1869 to 1874), Sandsville (1870 to 1875), Tansill (1884 to 1907), although Azotus (1848 to 1910), Bay City (1846 to 1918), Homberg (1902 to ca. 1930) and Temple Hill (1867 to 1971) were the largest communities. The smaller communities were crossroad communities generally defined by the presence of a post office and a general store, usually in the same building. Roper’s Landing was a port on the Ohio River where farmers could load their grain and livestock onto riverboats for shipment to markets downstream. As simple general stores, these communities seem to have been established to serve the growing population of Pope County during the late 19th century when travel to large towns and villages was difficult and time-consuming.

The large communities also served the growing late 19th-century populations, but they were more than crossroad communities. Azotus had a store, post office, blacksmith shop, saw mill and doctor’s office as well as several houses and the Southern Baptist Church. Bay City consisted of two stores, a blacksmith shop, a warehouse and boat landing and at least 25 houses. Homberg was a stop on the Reevesville- Golconda Branch of the Illinois Central Railroad. There were two general stores, a mill and grain elevator, blacksmith shop, a barber shop, and a Missionary Baptist Church. Temple Hill includes the Cole Baptist Church and a Methodist Church, a school, a store and several houses.

Massac County Massac County was established out of Pulaski and Pope Counties on February 8, 1843 (Anonymous 1989:58-59). Massac County takes its name from Ft. Massac (or Massiac), a French military post established in 1757 by Charles Phillippe Aubry near present-day Metropolis, Illinois. As with most other southern Illinois counties, American settlers, primarily of southern origin, began arriving in present-day Massac County shortly after 1800 (Page 1900). Early transportation facilities within or adjacent to the county consisted of the Cape Girardeau-Kaskaskia Trace and the Ohio River. Massac County lacked a rail line until 1900, when the Chicago and Eastern Railroad constructed a 15-mile-long spur line from Cypress Junction in Johnson County that terminated in Joppa in Massac County (Page 1900:43). Metropolis, the largest city in the county, was established in 1839. Late 19th-century industries within Metropolis included a cooper, steamboat yard, brickyard, saw mills, cigar factory, flour mills, and other light industry. J.W. Kirkpatrick of the famous “Kirkpatrick Pottery” family of Illinois potters also operated a pottery at Metropolis in 1867. This pottery continued in operation under different owners at least until 1900 (Page 1900:132).

By 1850, the value of farmland in Massac County at $4.00 per acre was half that of the state average ($8.00 per acre). By 1900, the farmlands at $21.00 per acre still lagged behind the state average of $54.00 per acre. Farmland values topped out in 1920 at $60.00 per acre compared with $188.00 per acre state- wide. Farm values remained low during and after the Great Depression, when acreage was valued at $108.00. Again, agricultural development peaked in Massac County between 1870 and 1900. Farm production declined thereafter, primarily as the result of soil exhaustion, until the mid-20th century.

The project area is located within Benton and Washington Townships in Massac County. Nineteenth century communities included Jeffersonville/Poco (ca. 1825 to 1906) and Mill Springs also known as Shandsville after Shands Golighltly. The Mill Spring was purchased by Shands Golightly in 1840.

Shawnee National Forest 8 Heritage Resource Report Cretaceous Hills Ecological Restoration Project

Golightly left the area for Kansas in 1870. Both of these communities are located on or near the Pope/Massac County line. Jeffersonville at one time included a cotton gin, a lawyer’s and doctor’s office, a lumberyard, and a post office. Mill Springs had a drugstore, two saloons, three grocery stores, a blacksmith shop, a mill, about 20 houses, and a church. As populations in Massac County declined after the turn of the century, so did these small cross-roads communities.

Archaeological Inventory The Cretaceous Hills Ecological Restoration project area was completely inventoried during 2012 (CRR 09-08-04-128). We forwarded a report detailing our findings and recommendations to the Illinois State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO), in accordance with 36 CFR 800.4; SHPO concurrence was received in a letter dated December 23, 2015. A total of 189 heritage resources/archaeological sites were recorded within or near the current project area, 57 of which were newly discovered sites, while the remaining 132 had been previously recorded. Eighteen sites had only a pre-contact component, 167 had only a historic component, and 4 heritage resources were multi-component. pre-contactpre-contact

Historic sites consist of 142 farmsteads, 11 cemeteries, 3 schools, 1 fire tower, 1 prospecting pit, and 9 isolated finds, which included field clearing piles, historic ceramics and a concrete pad. Pre-contact sites consist of 3 open air sites (Late Woodland), 1 stone box cemetery, 1 lithic scatter, 1 , and 12 isolated finds.

Of the 189 heritage resources inventoried for this project, 115 are not considered to be eligible for inclusion on the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP).

Sites that are not considered to be eligible include isolated finds and sites that have had their physical integrity damaged during pre-1966 management activities or were damaged prior to Federal acquisition. Recording their location exhausts their research potential. In addition, cemeteries are not considered to be eligible for inclusion on the NRHP. The remaining 74 sites, including 6 pre-contact sites have been evaluated and are considered potentially eligible for inclusion.

Management Direction

Desired Condition The primary heritage resource issue in this analysis is the preservation and protection of heritage resources and the assurance that significant heritage resources will not be affected by project implementation. Archaeological sites are located on and in the ground and are affected by any activity that disturbs the soil. All ground-disturbing activities will be confined to the analyzed project area, also known as the area of potential effects (APE), and cemeteries and all sites that are considered to be eligible for inclusion on the NRHP will be avoided during ground-disturbing activities and will be protected and preserved in place (USDA Forest Service 2006: 37). Environmental Consequences

Alternative 1 – No Action There will be no direct, indirect, or cumulative effects to heritage resources as a result of the implementation of this alternative, because no ecological restoration activities will occur, and therefore, ground-disturbing activities associated with this proposal would not take place.

Shawnee National Forest 9 Heritage Resource Report Cretaceous Hills Ecological Restoration Project

Alternatives 2, 3, and 4 Alternatives 2 and 4 include prescribed burning, mechanical treatment of non-native pines and smaller hardwood trees, treatment of invasive plant species, development of vernal ponds and upland water sources for bats and breeding habitat for amphibians, associated roadwork, and fireline construction. Alternative 3 includes the same prescribed burning, vegetation management, and non-native invasive plant work. However, it includes fewer ground-disturbing activities. In particular, trees will be cut and left where felled, there is no road construction or reconstruction, and no development of vernal ponds would occur in alternative 3.

Project implementation includes prescribed burning (the controlled application of fire to the land to accomplish specific land management goals) on up to approximately 15,000 acres of lands administered by the Forest Service.

Within this acreage (on up to approximately 3,000 acres of pine plantations) we would remove non-native shortleaf and loblolly pine, using overstory removal, clearcutting, shelterwood establishment cutting, and commercial thinning. Invasive and intrusive plants (primarily Amur honeysuckle, Chinese yam, garlic mustard, and kudzu) will also be managed with a variety of treatments, such as herbicide, hand pulling, scorching, or by mechanical methods. Mapped infestations in units to be harvested, burned or along access routes would be monitored and treated as funding permits.

Connected activities will include improving or in some cases, reconstructing roads (reconstruction and restoration) and constructing roads to provide access necessary for project implementation, and constructing prescribed fire control lines.

Project Design Features and Mitigation Measures Similar to geology, archaeological methods and theory revolve around the laws of “stratigraphy” and “superposition.” Stratigraphy and superposition are two connected archaeological principles that connect relative antiquity to objects recovered during excavations. Simply put, the closer to the surface artifacts are located, the more recent in time they were manufactured and deposited by humans; the lower or deeper the artifacts, the longer ago the was discarded and buried: if an artifact is lying on top of another, it was put there more recently than the bottom one. If artifacts from a higher soil horizon are mixed through project-related activities with an older, deeper soil horizon, the data regarding past human activities contained at that site are seriously compromised. Those sites that have been severely affected by project-related ground-disturbing activities have little accurate information to contribute to our knowledge of the history or prehistory of southern Illinois, and render those sites ineligible for inclusion on the National Register of Historic Places. That is why protecting heritage resources during project implementation is so important.

Although a wide array of mitigation measures is available to archaeologists, some are used more frequently than others. Evaluating the archaeological site is the most commonly used mitigation measure on the Shawnee National Forest. The evaluation determines whether the site is eligible for inclusion on the NRHP by measuring the site against a set of criteria established by the Secretary of the Interior (see above). If the site is determined to be eligible, it will be preserved and protected in place, removed from the earth (data recovery, or) consensually determined mitigation measure. Given the inherent flexibility of the section 106 process and its emphasis on resolution through consultation, a range of archaeological solutions should be considered.

Another option frequently used in conjunction with site evaluations is redesigning the planned activity to avoid affecting the site. Generally, if an archaeological site or other heritage resource is potentially

Shawnee National Forest 10 Heritage Resource Report Cretaceous Hills Ecological Restoration Project

eligible (or has been determined to be eligible for inclusion on the NRHP), the proposed activity must be redesigned to avoid impacting or otherwise adversely affecting the site.

Initial mitigation measures for indirect effects will include monitoring to determine if sites have been impacted by the implementation of this project. If sites located within the present project area are not being affected, then no mitigation measures will be necessary. If archaeological sites located within the project area are being affected, other mitigation measures might include masking site location by introducing noxious weeds such as poison ivy, or using interpretive signage to raise the public’s awareness of not only the importance of preserving heritage resources, but also the legal consequences of removing artifacts from National Forest System lands or otherwise disturbing archaeological sites and other heritage resources. We have determined through past experience at sites like Millstone Bluff, that a well-informed public is more likely to make appropriate decisions regarding resource protection than less informed users. The Millstone Bluff interpretive trail has been open to the public for approximately 15 years. Since it opened there has been no observable vandalism. Before the interpretive trail was constructed through the site, episodes of vandalism were frequent.

Direct and Indirect Effects of Alternatives 2, 3, and 4 There will be no direct effects on heritage resources as a result of the implementation of an action alternative. Seventy-four sites are potentially eligible for inclusion on the NRHP and will be avoided during all ground-disturbing project-related activities: the project will be redesigned to exclude each potentially eligible site, and a 50-foot buffer will be placed around each site boundary with directional felling of trees away from the site to protect all intact surface and subsurface cultural deposits. In addition, uprooting of woody non-native invasive species such as autumn olive, or construction of vernal ponds will not occur on cemeteries and sites that have been determined to be eligible for inclusion on the NRHP. Therefore, no potentially eligible sites will be affected by ground-disturbing activities (tree felling, skidding, road maintenance, log-landing activities, invasive species removal) associated with alternatives 2, 3, or 4.

In general, project activities associated with hardwood restoration have the potential to indirectly affect heritage resources by opening up, via road improvements, areas of the forest in which cultural resources are located. Because, during this project, additional minimal travelways (three short segments equaling 0.7 mile) are being constructed that will remain open to the public, at least seasonally, it is expected that the sites located in the project area will not be more vulnerable to either intentional or unintentional damage. Therefore, no indirect effects would result from the implementation of any of the three alternatives included in this analysis.

Table 2. Resource indicators and measures for alternatives 2, 3, and 4 Resource Resource Measure Existing condition Alternatives 2, 3, and 4 Element Indicator (Quantify if possible) (Alternative 1) Historic Preservation/ Adverse effects 74 potentially eligible No effect properties protection heritage resources

Resource Indicator and Measure 1 All ecological restoration activities included in alternatives 2, 3, and 4 can be implemented successfully with no effect to heritage resources.

Shawnee National Forest 11 Heritage Resource Report Cretaceous Hills Ecological Restoration Project

Cumulative Effects of Alternatives 2, 3, and 4

Spatial and Temporal Context for Effects Analysis As noted earlier, cumulative effects analysis takes into account all known past actions, other present actions, and any reasonably foreseeable actions that could occur in or cause an impact within the analysis area. The area under consideration is in and around the previously defined APE. The primary heritage resource issue in this environmental impact analysis is the preservation and protection of heritage resources and other properties that are historically significant, and the assurance that significant heritage resources are not affected by the implementation of the planned activity

Heritage resources have been inventoried for all Federal undertakings, both in the Shawnee National Forest in general and this project area in particular prior to ground-disturbing land management activities since 1977. Before 1977, heritage resources were not routinely protected from possible impacts though cultural resource inventories and concomitant mitigation measures. Activities that may have occurred before 1977 and impacted heritage resources in the project areas under analysis include 19th century land clearance activities (logging for agricultural clearing and production, and later for mine and railroad ties) and concomitant inappropriate agricultural activities such as plowing and subsequent erosion (some parts of the undulating Shawnee Hills are too steep for sustainable agricultural productivity, as evidenced by the erosion and subsequent loss of natural fertility by 1900), and mineral prospecting and extraction activities.

In the past, the major impacts to heritage resources were the original land-clearing activities and the cultivation of inappropriate landforms that lead to substantial erosion, and were, in fact, directly related to the formation of the Shawnee National Forest in 1933. Cultivation and erosion degraded many ridge-top pre-contact camp and village sites. In many instances, only isolated chert flakes exist where larger camps or villages may have existed in the past. Or conversely, isolated finds may indeed represent single episodic usage of particular land forms during which a single artifact was deposited in the soil. In addition, historical mining operations have probably obliterated evidence of pre-contact mineral extraction activities.

Spatial and temporal boundaries for analyzing the cumulative effects to heritage resources is the APE and the life of the project itself, not to exceed 15 years. The APE defines that area within which the identification of historic properties has occurred, which in this case is the project boundary itself. This is the area where ecological restoration activities (prescribed burning, mechanical treatment of non-native pines and smaller hardwood trees, treatment of invasive plant species, maintenance of old fields, development of vernal ponds and upland water sources for bats and breeding habitat for amphibians, associated roadwork, and fireline construction) will occur and would most likely affect heritage resources. The temporal boundary is the time period within the spatial boundary during which ground-disturbing activities would potentially directly, indirectly, or cumulatively affect existing heritage resource sites.

Past, Present, and Reasonably Foreseeable Activities Relevant to Cumulative Effects Analysis Present actions in the project area vicinities include prescribed burning, mechanical treatment of non- native pines and smaller hardwood trees, treatment of invasive plant species, maintenance of old fields, development of vernal ponds and upland water sources for bats and breeding habitat for amphibians, associated roadwork, fireline construction, unauthorized all-terrain vehicle and off-highway vehicle use, user-made trail creation, and continued use. All of the above actions are also included in the reasonably foreseeable actions. For the present proposed action and its alternatives, heritage resource inventories have been conducted and heritage resources that may be eligible for inclusion on the NRHP have been identified.

Shawnee National Forest 12 Heritage Resource Report Cretaceous Hills Ecological Restoration Project

Direct effects to heritage resources from this project will be mitigated though the section 106 evaluation process, and as a result, there will be no direct effects on heritage resources as a result of the implementation of any action alternatives. In addition, no indirect effects would result from the implementation of any of the three action alternatives included in this analysis. Therefore, there would be no cumulative effects to heritage resources as a result of the implementation of this project. Regulatory Framework

Land and Resource Management Plan The Shawnee National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan (LRMP) (USDA Forest Service 2006) provides standards and guidelines for heritage resources.

LRMP Standards and Guidelines

FW23.11 (S) Heritage Resource Management The Forest must be managed in accordance with historic preservation legislation and executive orders. Prior to project implementation, decision documents shall confirm compliance with applicable laws and regulations, particularly regarding completion of heritage surveys, establishment of protective measures as necessary, and documentation of mitigation efforts, if required.

FW23.11.1 (S) Disclosure of Locations Heritage resource locations are exempt from the provisions of the Freedom of Information Act and may not be disclosed without line-officer approval.

FW23.11.2 Evaluation

FW23.11.2.1 (S) Heritage resources potentially affected by Forest Service activities shall be evaluated for significance and potential listing on the National Register of Historic Places; however, in-place protection of inventoried heritage resources potentially eligible for the National Register is preferred over evaluation whenever practicable.

FW23.11.2.2 (S) Eligible properties shall be nominated to the National Register of Historic Places.

FW23.11.2.3 (S) Known archaeological sites potentially eligible for the National Register are to be included on the Forest’s heritage resource priority list. These sites shall be managed under the Heritage Resource. Significant site management prescription upon notification by the Keeper of the National Register that they are eligible for listing. In the interim, use of the areas must be consistent with protection of their unique values.

FW23.11.3 (S) Protection Heritage resources that have not been formally evaluated are considered potentially eligible for inclusion on the National Register and must be protected. Ineligible sites do not require protection; however, they may have interpretive potential. All unevaluated, eligible and listed sites shall be protected from ground- disturbing activities.

Shawnee National Forest 13 Heritage Resource Report Cretaceous Hills Ecological Restoration Project

FW23.11.3.1 (S) Mitigation plans shall be developed in consultation with the State Historic Preservation Officer and the National Advisory Council on Historic Preservation for all listed, eligible, and potentially eligible heritage resources that could be affected by management activities. Consulting parties may include tribal and local governments and other interested parties. Protective measures will be implemented as recommended. If a project cannot be redesigned and is expected to adversely affect a National Register-eligible heritage resource, a mitigation plan to minimize the effects will be developed and implemented in consultation with the State Historic Preservation Officer.

FW23.11.3.2 (S) When heritage resources are discovered during project implementation, all activities in the vicinity of the discovery must cease until a professional archaeologist has made an on-site assessment and consulted as necessary with the State Historic Preservation Officer.

FW23.11.5 (G) Native American Human Remains Native American human remains and associated funerary objects should be preserved in place.

National Historic Preservation Act Section 106 of the NHPA requires Federal agencies to take into account the effects of their undertakings on historic properties. The section 106 process seeks to accommodate historic preservation concerns with the needs of Federal undertakings through consultation among the agency official and other parties with an interest in the effects of the undertaking on historic properties, commencing at the early stages of project planning. The goal of consultation is to identify historic properties potentially affected by the undertaking, assess its effects and seek ways to avoid, minimize or mitigate any adverse effects on historic properties.

• Section 106 also allows for the development of alternate procedures to implement section 106, such as a programmatic agreement that would govern the implementation of a particular program or the resolution of adverse effects from certain complex project situations or multiple undertakings. A programmatic agreement (PA) may be developed when effects on historic properties are similar and repetitive, such as prescribed fire. Toward that end, the Shawnee National Forest and Midewin National Tallgrass Prairie developed a PA for both units’ prescribed fire programs. The Programmatic Agreement among the Advisory Council of Historic Preservation, the United States Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Shawnee National Forest and the Midewin National Tallgrass Prairie, and the Illinois Historic Preservation Officer, regarding the Process for Compliance with the Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act for Undertakings related to the Prescribed Fire Programs on the Shawnee National Forest and Midewin National Tallgrass Prairie was signed by all parties in 2008. The PA includes an inventory protocol designed specifically for prescribed fire to locate all heritage resources that might be affected by prescribed fire and mitigate those potential adverse effects. • Objective: Ensure that heritage resources are protected and preserved during and after implementation of this project. • Desired Result: There will be no additional effects to identified heritage resources as a result of project implementation. • Methods: Heritage resources on the Shawnee National Forest are monitored annually to assess the nature and degree of damage to historic properties due to vandalism, visitor use, and natural deterioration, at which time protective measures are identified. After implementation, this project

Shawnee National Forest 14 Heritage Resource Report Cretaceous Hills Ecological Restoration Project

will be included in the Forest monitoring plan. This project will be monitored for 5 years after project implementation to ensure that heritage resources are adequately protected. • Responsibility: Forest Archaeologist

Short-term Uses and Long-term Productivity Direct effects to heritage resources will be mitigated though the section 106 evaluation process and potential indirect effects will be mitigated initially through monitoring. Additional consensually determined mitigation measures may be necessary as time progresses. Therefore, there would be no cumulative effects to heritage resources as a result of the implementation of this project. Because there are no effects to heritage resources, there is no adverse relationship between short-term uses and long- term productivity, or in this case, long-term protection and preservation of heritage resources.

Irreversible and Irretrievable Commitments of Resources There are no irreversible or irretrievable commitments of heritage resources under any of the three alternatives included in this analysis; there are not effects to heritage resources as a result of project implementation.

Compliance with LRMP and Other Relevant Laws, Regulations, Policies and Plans Alternatives 2, 3, and 4 comply with standards and guidelines for heritage resources included in the Shawnee National Forest LRMP. The project has been managed in accordance with historic preservation legislation and executive orders. Prior to project implementation, decision documents shall confirm compliance with applicable laws and regulations, particularly regarding completion of heritage surveys, establishment of protective measures as necessary, and documentation of mitigation efforts, if required.

Required Monitoring • Objective: Ensure that heritage resources are protected and preserved during and after implementation of this project. • Desired Result: There will be no additional effects to identified heritage resources as a result of project implementation. • Methods: Heritage resources on the Shawnee National Forest are monitored annually to assess the nature and degree of damage to historic properties due to vandalism, visitor use, and natural deterioration, at which time protective measures are identified. After implementation, this project will be included in the Forest monitoring plan. This project will be monitored for 5 years after project implementation to ensure that heritage resources are adequately protected. • Responsibility: Forest Archaeologist Summary of Environmental Effects A total of 189 heritage resources were recorded within the current survey area. Of those 189 sites, 57 new heritage resources were discovered, while 132 had been previously recorded. Eighteen sites had only a pre-contact component, 167 had a historic component, and 4 heritage resources were multi-component in nature. Historic sites consist of 142 farmsteads, 11 cemeteries, 3 schools, 1 fire tower, 1 prospecting pit, and 9 isolated finds which included field-clearing piles, historic ceramics, and a concrete pad. Pre-contact sites consist of 3 open-air sites (Late Woodland), 1 stone box cemetery (Mississippian), 1 lithic scatter, 1 rock shelter, and 12 isolated finds (not eligible).

Shawnee National Forest 15 Heritage Resource Report Cretaceous Hills Ecological Restoration Project

Of the 189 heritage resources inventoried for this project, 115 are not considered to be eligible for inclusion on the NRHP. Seventy-four sites have been evaluated and are considered potentially eligible for inclusion. Six pre-contact sites are considered to be eligible for inclusion on the NRHP.

All cemeteries and sites that are eligible or potentially eligible for inclusion on the NRHP will be avoided during planned ground-disturbing activities. Isolated finds include historic features such as field-clearing rock piles, and/or , and single artifacts; pre-contact isolated finds include one to three artifacts, usually chert flakes, or a chipped . These sites contribute little to our understanding of past lifeways; recording their location exhausts their research potential.

Direct effects to heritage resources will be mitigated though the section 106 evaluation process and avoidance, while indirect effects will be mitigated initially through monitoring. Additional consensually determined mitigation measures may be necessary as time progresses. Therefore, there would be no cumulative effects to heritage resources as a result of the implementation of this project.

Table 3. Summary comparison of environmental effects to heritage resources Resource Indicator/ Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Alternative 4 Element Measure Heritage Preservation/ No new ecological Although ground- Although ground- Although ground- Resources protection restoration disturbing activities disturbing activities disturbing activities activities would would take place would take place would take place occur, and under this under this under this therefore, ground- alternative, the alternative, the alternative, the disturbing activities entire area of entire APE has entire APE has associated with potential effects been inventoried been inventoried this proposal (APE) has been and suitable and suitable would not take inventoried and mitigation mitigation place. No effect to suitable mitigation measures have measures have heritage resources measures have been agreed upon been agreed upon been agreed upon by the State by the State by the State Historic Historic Historic Preservation Office Preservation Office Preservation Office (IHPA Log (IHPA Log (IHPA Log #008121813) #008121813) #008121813)

Shawnee National Forest 16 Heritage Resource Report Cretaceous Hills Ecological Restoration Project

Other Agencies and Individuals Consulted Illinois Historic Preservation Agency Acronyms APE Area of potential effects

LRMP Land and Resource Management Plan

NHPA National Historic Preservation Act of 1966

NRHP National Register of Historic Places

PA Programmatic agreement

Shawnee National Forest 17 Heritage Resource Report Cretaceous Hills Ecological Restoration Project

References Cited Arber, Edward (ed.). 1884. The Works of Captain John Smith, 1608-1631. English Scholar's Library, Birmingham.

Buck, Solon. 1967. Illinois in 1818. University of Illinois Press, Urbana, Chicago and London.

Butler, Brian M. 2001. Southern Illinois. Discover Illinois Archaeology. Illinois Association for the Advancement of Archaeology and Illinois Archaeological Survey.

Cronon, William. 1983. Changes in the Land: Indians, Colonists, and the Ecology of New England. Hill and Wang, Publishers, New York.

Farnsworth, Kenneth B. 2001. The Woodland Period. Discover Illinois Archaeology. Illinois Association for the Advancement of Archaeology and Illinois Archaeological Survey.

Fielder, V.B. and D.E. Lindstrom. 1939. Land Use and Family Welfare in Pope County. Department of Agriculture Economics Research in Rural Sociology, Agricultural Experiment Station, University of Illinois, in cooperation with the Division of Land Economics, Bureau of Agricultural Economics, United States Department of Agriculture. Griffin, James B. 1990. Comments on the Late Prehistoric Societies in the Southeast. Towns and Temples Along the Mississippi, edited by David H. Dye and Cheryl Anne Cox, pp 5-15. University of Alabama Press, Tuscaloosa.

Hatley, M. Thomas. 1989. The Three Lives of Keowee: Loss and Recovery in Eighteenth-Century Cherokee Villages. Powhatans' Mantle, edited by Peter H. Wood, Gregory A. Waselkov, and M. Thomas Hatley. University of Nebraska Press, Lincoln.

Haynes, C. Vance, Jr. 1980. The . Canadian Journal of Anthropology 1:115-121.

Hill, Mark A., Leah D. Rogers, and Mary R. McCorvie. 1989. A Thematic Study of Rural Historic Farmsteads, Pope County, IL. Cultural Resources Management Report 118, American Resources Group, Ltd., Carbondale, IL.

Hilliard, Sam B. 1972. Hog Meat and Hoecake: Food Supply in the Old South, 1840-1860. Southern Illinois University Press, Carbondale.

Hunt, Eleazer D. 1992. Upgrading Site-Catchment Analyses with the Use of GIS: Investigating the Settlement Patterns of Horticulturalists. World Archaeology 24(2):283-309.

Jeffries, Richard W. 1987. The Archaeology of Carrier Mills. Southern Illinois University Press, Carbondale.

Koldehoff, Brad and John A. Walthall. 2001. The PaleoIndian Period. Discover Illinois Archaeology. Illinois Association for the Advancement of Archaeology and Illinois Archaeological Survey.

Le Page Du Pratz, Antoine S. 1758. Histoire de la Louisiane. Paris

Martin, Edgar. 1942. The Standard of Living in 1860: American Consumption Levels on the Eve of the Civil War. University of Chicago Press, Chicago

Mason, Roger D. 1984. Euro-American Pioneer Settlement Systems in the Central Salt River Valley of Northeast Missouri. Publications in Archeology No. 2. University of Missouri, Columbia.

Shawnee National Forest 18 Heritage Resource Report Cretaceous Hills Ecological Restoration Project

McCorvie, Mary R. 1994. The Roots of the Shawnee National Forest. Illinois Steward 3(3):28-32.

McCorvie, Mary R., Mark J. Wagner, Jane K. Johnston, Terrance J. Martin, and Kathryn E. Parker. 1989. Phase III Archaeological Investigations at the Fair View Farm Site (11-SA-336): A Historic Farmstead in the Shawnee Hills of Southern Illinois. Cultural Resources Management Report 135, American Resources Group, Ltd., Carbondale, IL.

Meyer, Douglas K. 1976a. Native Born Immigrant Clusters on the Illinois Frontier. Proceedings of the Association of American Geographers 8(1976):41-44.

Meyer, Douglas K. 1976b. Southern Illinois Migration Fields: The Shawnee Hills in 1850. The Professional Geographer 1976 (May):151-160.

Moffat, Charles, Jerome D. Traver, and Kurt Moore. 1985. Archaeological Survey of Timber Sales and Mineral Prospecting Lands on the Shawnee National Forest, 1984. American Resources Group, Ltd., Cultural Resources Management Report Mo. 100, Carbondale, IL.

Morse, Dan F. and Phyllis A. Morse. 1983. Archaeology of the Central Mississippi Valley. Academic Press, New York.

Muller, Jon. 1978. The Kincaid System: Mississippi Settlement in the Environs of a Large Site. Mississippian Settlement Patterns, ed. by Bruce D. Smith, pp. 269-292. Academic Press, New York.

Page, O.J. 1900. History of Massac County, Illinois with Life Sketches and Portraits. O.J. Page, Metropolis.

Pulcher, Ronald, Mary R. McCorvie, and Brad Koldehoff. 1987. An Archaeological Survey of Timber Sales and Land Exchanges on the Shawnee National Forest. Cultural Resources Management Report Mo. 126, American Resources Group, Ltd., Carbondale, IL.

Smith, Bruce D. 1978. Prehistoric Patterns of Human Behavior: A Case Study in the Mississippi River Valley. Academic Press, New York.

Soady, Fred, Jr. 1965. The Making of the Shawnee National Forest. Forest History Society 9(2), Yale University, New York.

Swanton, John R. 1946. The Indians of the Southeastern United States. Bureau of American Ethnology, Bulletin 137. Washington, D.C.

USDA Forest Service. 2006. Land and Resource Management Plan, Shawnee National Forest.

Wagner, Mark and Brian Butler. 1999. Archaeological Investigations at the Rose Hotel (11 HN-116), Hardin County, Illinois. Technical Report 99-3, Center for Archaeological Investigations, Southern Illinois University, Carbondale.

Wagner, Mark J., Charles Foor, Tracey Sandefur, Jane K. Johnston, and Steve Titus. 1992. Archaeological Survey of 5,938 Acres of the Shawnee National Forest. American Resources Group, Ltd., Cultural Resources Management Report No. 172, Carbondale, IL.

Wiant, Michael D. 2001. The Archaic Period. Discover Illinois Archaeology. Illinois Association for the Advancement of Archaeology and Illinois Archaeological Survey.

Shawnee National Forest 19 Heritage Resource Report Cretaceous Hills Ecological Restoration Project

Williams, Samuel Cole. 1974. Adair’s History of the American Indians. Promontory Press, New York (1930 reprint).

Shawnee National Forest 20