PREHISTORIC RNERINE ADAPTATIONS IN THE WESTERN GREAT BASIN: A DISTRIBUTIONAL SURVEY OF THE OWENS RIVER, INYO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA.

William Eric Larson B.A., University ofCalifornia, Davis, 1997

THESIS

Submitted in partial satisfaction of the requirements for the degree of

MASTER OF ARTS

in

ANTHROPOLOGY

at

CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY, SACRAMENTO

SPRING 2009 PREHISTORIC RNERINE ADAPTATIONS IN THE WESTERN GREAT BASIN: A DISTRIBUTIONAL SURVEY OF THE OWENS RIVER, INYO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA.

A Thesis

by

William Eric Larson

Approved by:

__' Committee Chair

:, Second Reader

---" Third Reader avid W. Zeanah, Ph.D ? /2>/:J1 Date

11 Student: William Eric Larson

I certify that this student has met the requirements for format contained in the University format manual, and that this thesis is suitable for shelving in the Library and credit is to be awarded for this thesis.

Date

111 Abstract

of

PREHISTORIC RIVERINE ADAPTATIONS IN THE WESTERN GREAT BASIN: A DISTRIBUTIONAL SURVEY OF THE OWENS RIVER, INYO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA.

by

William Eric Larson

Despite several decades ofarchaeological work in Owens Valley, lands along the river have been neglected. This thesis investigates prehistoric use ofthe Owens River and its surrounding environment. The research seeks to identify how use ofriverine and wetland environments have changed over time.

A distributional or Hnon-site" approach to archaeology was used to survey transects along the river. Spatial associations ofartifacts were recorded and samples collected for analysis. In addition to techno-morphological analysis, some obsidian artifacts were subjected to visual sourcing and obsidian hydration analysis.

Results ofthe analysis identified distinct temporal patterns in riverine use that change in terms ofboth subsistence focus and the duration ofoccupational stays. Causes for these changes may be due in part to technological, environmental, and social factors.

Committee Chair Mark E. Basgall, .D.

S-013-09 Date

lV ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

This thesis could not have been completed without the help and support ofmany individuals and agencies. I would like to acknowledge the Los Angeles Department of

Water and Power (LADWP) for finally granting access to the land. I would also like to thank Kirk Halford ofthe BLM and Tom Mills from CALTRNS for helping with access.

Also, thanks goes to Lee Chavez and Allen Spoonhunter from the Bishop Paiute, Jason

Warren from the Big Pine Band ofOwens Valley Paiute, Carl Dalberg, from the Fort

Independence Paiute, and Loren Joseph and Sandy Y onge from the Lone Pine Paiute­

Shoshone. They were all kind enough to meet with me and express their concerns and offer advice.

Many thanks to my outstanding field crew, which consisted ofRyan Brady, Jesse

Martinez, Michelle Noble, Leandra Lea, Theresa Lechner, Steve Moore, and Amy

Fransen. These individuals endured the heat, bugs, and hangovers and always maintained

a high level ofprofessionalism. A very special thanks to Lynn Johnson and Dave Wagner for being more then generous and providing us with top-notch accommodations.

All my friends and co-workers at the ARC helped in many ways, in particular I want to thank Dave Glover for his help with the GPS and GIS information, Bill Norton for reading the hydration, Bridget Wall for expert graphics help, and Carl Hansen for his help assembling and formatting this document.

I would like to thank my thesis committee Mark Basgall, Michael Delacorte, and

v David Zeanah. Mark served as chair of the committee, helped generously with field supplies and equipment, and went to bat for me to gain access to the river. Michael helped immensely with edits, lent his expertise to the visual sourcing, and shared his knowledge ofthe region. David was generous with his knowledge and support throughout the whole process. Without the support ofall three of these individuals this project could never have been completed.

I would also like to acknowledge some people who were not directly involved, but helped by putting up with me for the past several years and pushed me to finish, these include my parents Ira and Carol Larson, my parents in-law Jon and Sheila Noble, Juan

Cervantes, and Joel Beardsley. Thanks for your help and support.

Finally and most importantly I want to thank my wife Michelle Noble for her support and guidance throughout this process. She has been an instrumental part of finishing this project, from the field to the lab and help with writing. Thanks Michelle!

VI T ABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

Acknowledgements ...... v

List ofFigures ...... xii

List ofTables ...... xiii

List ofPlates ...... xv

Chapter

1. INTRODUCTION...... 1

Elaboration ...... 2

2. NATURAL AND CULTURAL SETTING ...... 7

Physiography ...... 7

The River ...... 15

Modem Climate ...... 16

Paleoenvironment ...... 17

Biological Context ...... 20

Prehistoric Background ...... 23

Archaeological Context ...... 28

Early Research ...... 28

Bettinger ...... 29

Alabama Gates ...... 29

CA-INY-30 ...... 30

Vll Olancha ...... 31

Cottonwood Creek ...... 32

Ash Creek ...... 33

Discussion ...... 33

Ethnography ...... 34

Settlement ...... 35

Subsistence ...... 36

Irrigation ...... 37

History ofthe Owens River ...... 38

3. CONCEPTUAL ASSUMPTIONS ...... 42

Evolutionary Ecology...... 42

Technological Organization ...... 45

Wetland Adaptation ...... 46

Distributional Archaeology ...... 48

4. FIELD METHODS AND ANALYTICAL FRAMEWORK ...... 52

Field Strategies ...... 52

Flaked Stone Analysis ...... 60

Projectile Points ...... " 60

Bifaces ...... 60

Formed Flake Tools ...... 61

Simple Flake Tools ...... 62

Vlll Cores ...... 62

Debitage ...... 62

Ground and Battered Stone Analysis ...... 63

Millingstones ...... 64

Handstones ...... 65

Battered Cobbles ...... 65

Time-Sensitive Artifacts ...... 65

Projectile Points ...... 65

Desert Series ...... 66

Rose Spring Series ...... 66

Elko Series ...... 67

Humboldt Series ...... 67

GateclifI Series ...... 68

Pinto Series ...... 68

Great Basin Stemmed Series ...... 69

Pottery ...... 69

Mussel Shell ...... 70

Obsidian Sourcing ...... 71

Obsidian Hydration ...... 72

5. RESULTS ...... 74

Flaked Stone ...... 74

ix Projectile Points ...... 74

Bifaces ...... 78

Formed Flake Tools ...... 80

Simple Flake Tools ...... 82

Cores ...... 83

Debitage ...... 84

Discussion ...... 84

Ground and Battered Stone ...... 87

Millingslabs ...... 87

Handstones ...... 90

Cobble Tools ...... 92

Discussion ...... 92

Spatial Distribution ...... 94

West-to-East Distributions ...... 97

North-to-South Distributions ...... 102

Select Tool Class Distributions ...... 105

Pottery ...... 111

Mussel Shell ...... " 113

Soil Distribution...... 114

Visual Sourcing ...... 121

Debitage ...... 122

x Projectile Points ...... 124

Obsidian Hydration ...... 125

Fish Springs ...... 125

Truman-Queen ...... 130

Casa Diablo ...... 132

Coso ...... 133

Debitage Summary ...... 133

Projectile Points ...... 134

6. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION ...... 138

Pre-Newberry Era ...... 139

Newberry Period ...... 142

Haiwee Period 144

Marana Period 151

Conclusion ...... 156

Appendix A. Project Catalog ...... 159

Appendix B. Artifact Analysis Data ...... 173

Appendix C. Debitage Hydration Data ...... 195

References Cited ...... 205

Xl LIST OF FIGURES

Page

FIGURE 2.1 Project Location Map ...... 8

FIGURE 4.1 Survey Zones ...... 53

FIGURE 4.2 Distribution of Survey Unit Transects within Survey Zone A ...... 54

FIGURE 4.3 Distribution of Survey Unit Transects within Survey Zone B ...... 56

FIGURE 4.4 Distribution of Survey Unit Transects within Survey Zone C ...... 57

FIGURE 4.5 Debitage Sample Units ...... 58

FIGURE 5.1 Distribution ofFormed Artifacts from the Owens River ...... 95

FIGURE 5.2 West to East Distribution ofFormed Artifacts ...... 99

FIGURE 5.3 Distribution ofProjectile Points ...... 106

FIGURE 5.4 Distribution ofDart and Arrow Points ...... 107

FIGURE 5.5 Distribution ofGround Stone ...... 109

FIGURE 5.6 Distribution ofDebitage ...... 112

FIGURE 5.7 Soils Adjacent to Survey Areas ...... 116

FIGURE 5.8 Distribution ofHydration Readings from Fish Springs Obsidian Debitage ...... 126 FIGURE 5.9 Temporal Distribution ofFish Springs Obsidian Debitage by Survey Zone ...... 128

FIGURE 5.10 Temporal Distribution ofFish Springs Obsidian Debitage by Distance from River ...... 130

FIGURE 6.1 Average Age ofElko Points from Select Projects in Owens Valley .. 147

XlI List ofTables

Page

TABLE 2.1 Common Wetland Plants of Owens Valley ...... 21

TABLE 4.1 Hydration Rates ...... 73

TABLE 5.1 Project Artifact Assemblage Composition ...... 75

TABLE 5.2 Projectile Points Adjusted for Time ...... 77

TABLE 5.3 Select Biface Attribute Data by Location ...... 78

TABLE 5.4 Select Attributes of Formed and Simple Flake Tools ...... 81

TABLE 5.5 Owens River-Blackrock Flaked Stone Comparisons ...... 85

TABLE 5.6 Owens River-Blackrock Biface Use-wear Comparison ...... 86

TABLE 5.7 Select Ground Stone Attributes by Material ...... 88

TABLE 5.8 Distribution of Artifacts in 500m Increments from the River ...... 96

TABLE 5.9 Chi-Square Analysis ofAssemblage Composition ...... 97

TABLE 5.10 West to East Distribution ofArtifacts ...... 100

TABLE 5.11 Chi-Square Analysis of West to East Assemblage Composition ..... 100

TABLE 5.12 Chi-Square Analysis ofW-E Assemblage Composition by Distance. 101

TABLE 5.13 Projectile Point Chi-Square Analysis ...... 108

TABLE 5.14 Flaked Stone to Ground Stone Ratios and Chi-Square Analysis ..... 110

TABLE 5.15 Soil Types and Cultural Attributes ...... 117

TABLE 5.16 Visual Source Distribution ...... 122

TABLE 5.17 Fish Springs Debitage Hydration ...... 129

Xlll TABLE 5.18 Hydration by Time Period ...... 134

TABLE 5.19 Projectile Point Hydration Data ...... 135

TABLE 6.1 Hydration Measurements on Elko Series Points from Select Regional Contexts ...... 145

XIV LIST OF PLATES

Page

PLATE 5.1 Select Projectile Points from Project Areas ...... 76

PLATE 5.2 Select Flaked Stone Artifacts from Project Areas ...... 79

xv 1

Chapter 1

INTRODUCTION

The Owens Valley has been the subject ofnumerous archaeological projects over the past several decades, most associated with either the Highway 395 corridor or various federal land management programs. Lands along the Owens River have seen very little work. What we know about the river comes from occasional, tangential data resulting from these other projects. Very few studies directly address issues related to subsistence activities along the Owens River. Some ofRiddell's early work (Riddell 1951; Riddell and Riddell 1956), Bettinger's probabilistic survey (Bettinger 1975); and Delacorte's

Alabama Gates project (Delacorte et a1. 1995; Delacorte 1999) are the only studies that really attempt to interpret data related to this environment. Even these studies; with perhaps the exception ofAlabama Gates, did not focus on the river exclusively and only touched upon issues related to subsistence activities within this environment. By using a

"non-site" or "distributional" approach to archaeological survey, this study intends to address some basic questions about the Owens River and Great Basin riverine environments in general. It examines whether rivers offered "good" or "bad" opportunities for prehistoric hunter-gatherer groups within the Great Basin, and how factors such as climate or population may have affected their value. Within the Owens

Valley itself, this thesis addresses questions about how the Owens River environment fits into broader regional subsistence-settlement patterns, as well as how and why this may have changed over time. Other factors that may have influenced occupation within the 2 riverine environment, such as geomorphology, will be examined. There are, for example, important geomorphological differences north-to-south and east-to-west in landforms that affected how these areas were used. Technological organization is also discussed, as are the factors that may cause technological change. In sum, this thesis intends to determine how exploitation ofthe Owens riverine environment changed through time, compare how these relate to other environments within the region, and, finally, assess what brought those changes about. How the Owens River situation relates to general patterns ofGreat

Basin riverine/wetland exploitation is also considered.

Elaboration

There has been a long history ofdebate concerned with whether Great Basin wetlands served as good places to live or should be conceived as more marginal areas that were only intensively used when necessary. On the one side ofthis argument is the so­ called limnosedentary hypothesis that claims wetlands are such productive and desirable places to live that people would not leave them for significant amounts oftime unless forced to do so (Heizer 1967; Heizer and Napton 1970; Madsen 1979, 1982, 1988;

Madsen and Janetski 1990; Madsen and Lindsey 1977; Napton 1969; Simms 1988). The limnomobile argument, by contrast, perceives wetland areas as but one stop within a seasonal round, habitats possibly exploited only as back-up when other resources such as pinyon failed (Bettinger 1978; Kelly 1983,1985). The reality is that both views are probably correct to some extent, in that wetland environments can be good places to exploit during some times and bad during other times, which would cause their use to 3 fluctuate through time (Delacorte 1999; Kelly 2001). These differences likely depend on the productivity ofdifferent types ofwetland environments, for example lakes versus rivers. Exploitation would also be influenced by other variables such as the productivity ofsurrounding environments and the reliability oftheir available resources. For instance, the Owens Valley faunal record shows changes through time in the sizes and species of fish being exploited that has been interpreted two ways. First, intensified use ofcertain plant resources created scheduling conflicts with the availability ofsome fish resources

(Delacorte 1999). The other view is that environmental fluctuations favored (or spared) certain species, in turn causing changes in exploitation patterns (Butler 1999). Both views are probably correct to some extent and are not mutually exclusive. The active study ofGreat Basin riverine environments specifically has been limited, though within the Owens Valley certain projects have documented some degree ofriverine resource use throughout the known occupational history ofthe valley (Basgall and McGuire 1988;

Bettinger 1975; Delacorte 1990, 1999; Delacorte et al. 1995).

Previous archaeological studies in the Owens Valley identified valley-wide adaptive shifts from small, highly mobile groups that primarily exploit high-ranked resources to increasingly sedentary populations geared towards intensive procurement of low-ranked resources in high numbers (Basgall and McGuire 1988; Bettinger 1975, 1999;

Delacorte 1999; Delacorte et al. 1995). These changes are consistent with a shift from a

"traveler"-like to a more "processor"-like subsistence strategy (Bettinger 1999; Bettinger and Baumhoff 1982). These broader adaptive shifts should directly effect use ofthe riverine environment. People would have become more dependant on lower-ranked 4 resources such as small seeds and mussels that were readily available within the Owens

River environment. Tool-kits and technology related to the exploitation ofthese resources would also change. For example, greater reliance on seeds should be reflected in the abundance of ground stone implements and their intensity ofuse; also the introduction ofpottery may be related to the storage or processing of seeds and mussels

(Steward 1933). Pottery would also allow people to process resources that required prolonged cooking regiments, for example, roots that require boiling to remove harmful toxins (Pierce 2004). As discussed above, these adaptive shifts should create scheduling conflicts directly impacting riverine use.

Obsidian profiles should reflect issues related to mobility. By looking at how obsidian source variability changes through time, inferences can be made about toolstone procurement strategies and residential mobility. With greater mobility there should be an increase in toolstone raw material diversity due to direct procurement ofthese materials from their sources, and with decreased mobility, materials, especially waste debris, should become more homogenous. Such trends should be evident in the sourcing and hydration profiles ofobsidian artifacts and debitage. Changes in mobility during the

Newberry period in the Owens Valley coincided with a shift in technological organization to a more maintainable biface technology that caused changes in lithic procurement strategies resulting in a reduction oftool-stone diversity (Basgall 1989; Delacorte 1999;

Delacorte and McGuire 1993). People logistically exploited resources including toolstone along a north-south trending corridor, possibly reoccupying the same encampments from year to year, a land-use pattern directly reflected in obsidian profiles 5

(Basgall and McGuire 1988). Alternatively, people may have stayed in one area for most ofthe year exploiting resources to the east and west, with the obsidian profiles reflecting logistical forays to the sources for the primary purpose ofacquiring toolstone (King et al.

2001). Because the river almost directly bisects the valley and the valuable resources associated with this environment, distributions ofarchaeological materials within the riverine corridor will help shed light on the issues discussed above.

Climate can also influence subsistence and settlement behavior. Proxy paleoenvironmental and paleoclimatological data can track trends ofunusually warm and dry periods or unusually cold and wet periods, which can effect land-use. Several fluctuations in climate trends have been identified within Owens Valley, some ofwhich likely influenced subsistence-settlement patterns in the region. For example, recent research suggests that Owens Lake became very shallow or desiccated for several thousand years, beginning ~6800 B.P. and lasting until 4300 B.P. (Bacon et al. 2006).

This would have had detrimental consequences for how people in the area inhabited and exploited the river and its surrounding environments. By comparing paleoenvironmental data against the archaeological record, information about how climate may have affected hunter-gatherer behavior can be studied.

Geomorphology also plays an important role when looking at subsistence­ settlement behaviors. Landforms and soils directly impact resource associations, which in tum affect artifact distributions. For example, lower areas with poor drainage may have flooded or been marshy at different times, supporting many wetland plant species, but making them undesirable places to stay. In contrast, better drained soils may support 6 less resources, but would be more desirable places to live and work. Other factors such as placement from or access to desired resources can also affect artifact distributions.

However, dense vegetation or natural processes such as soil deposition by wind or inundation may obscure surface visibility in some areas. Several different landforms and soil types within the study area are represented and would have directly impacted choices people made. By looking at the pattern of archaeological materials on these different landscapes, behaviors such as people's preference to live or work on certain landforms compared to others and what types ofresources would have been readily available and most likely exploited may be discerned.

By understanding cultural change within the broader Inyo-Mono region, inferences can be made about how the river and its resources would have been exploited.

These inferences can then be tested through archaeological survey. This thesis presents the results of such a survey and how examination ofdifferent sections ofthe riverine corridor disclosed significant variation in the distribution of archaeological remains that imply shifts in how native populations exploited riparian and adjacent desert scrub habitats. These patterns have important implications for current models ofregional subsistence-settlement organization. 7

Chapter 2

NATURAL AND CULTURAL SETTING

Pbysiograpby

Located on the western edge ofthe Great Basin in southeastern California, the

Owens Valley is a narrow strip of land that lies thousands of feet below the jagged peaks ofthe Inyo-White mountains to the east and the Sierra Nevada mountains to the west

(Figure 2.1). The steep mountains on either side ofthe valley are composed of sedimentary, metamorphic, and granitic rocks that are mantled partially by volcanic rocks and glacial, talus, and fluvial deposits (Danskin 1998). The valley is a steep-sided block­ faulted graben, which was formed when the Sierra Nevada and Inyo-White Mountains were uplifted and the valley floor dropped. The bedrock surface runs from the Volcanic

Tablelands in the north to below Owens Lake in the south, extending approximately 130 km with a width between 6-16 km and is divided into two structural basins. The two basins, the Bishop Basin and the Owens Lake Basin, which are separated by east-west­ trending normal faults, the Poverty Hills, and the Big Pine volcanic field (Danskin 1998;

Woolfenden 1996). It is believed that despite the widely fractured bedrock, Owens

Valley is basically watertight or hydrologically closed (Miller 1978; Woolfenden 1996).

At different times in their geologic evolution, both basins supported ancient lake systems, and historically the valley has harbored immense groundwater deposits (Danskin 1998;

Miller 1978). The valley-fill is made up oflate Tertiary and Quaternary alluvium that has eroded from surrounding mountainsides. The Alabama Hills and the Poverty Hills now 8

N

o 1 20 = kilometers

FRESNO TI..'LARE

DAR'MN

FIGURE 2.1. Project Location Map. 9 protect older deposits from more recent fill coming off alluvial fans at the base of adjacent uplands. At the southern end ofthe valley lies the remnant Pleistocene Owens

Lake that was historically fed by the Owens River and numerous Sierran streams to form a large, relatively shallow and saline body ofwater.

Distinct vegetation groupings within Owens Valley are created by the variable climate at different elevations and are segregated by this acclivity (Billings 1951;

Cronquist et al. 1972). The valley can be effectively separated into nine separate biotic communities, which extend from the crest ofthe Sierra Nevada to the crest ofthe Inyo­

White Mountains (Bettinger 1982a; Basgall and McGuire 1988; Delacorte 1999). Some researchers would add an additional Lacustrine community located around the shore of the now dry Owens Lake (Basgall and McGuire 1988; Delacorte 1999).

Starting at the summit ofthe Sierra Nevada and moving east to the valley floor, communities include the Sierran Alpine Tundra (>3350 m [11,000 ft]) which consists of patches ofperennial herbs, including bluegrass (Poa spp.), mountain sorrel (Oxyria digyna), Shockley ivesia (Ivesia shockleyi), darkies (Carex hellen), Brewer cushion cress

(Draba breweri), and lemon cushion cress (D. lemmonii). Common animals include marmot (Marmotajlaviventris), alpine chipmunk (Eutamias alpinus), and mountain sheep (Ovis canadensis) in the summer.

The Subalpine Forest (3350-2895 m [11,000-9500 ft]) community is made up of pine trees, including whitebark (Pinus albicaulis), foxtail (P. balfouriana), limber (P. jlexilis), and lodgepole (P. murrayana) pines intermingled with shrubs and herbs, of which mountain gooseberry/currant (Ribes montegenum) and Sierra buckwheat 10

(Erigonum marifolium) had some economic importance to the local inhabitants (Steward

1933); both ofthese plants grow in other environmental zones as well. Common fauna within this zone includes marmot, alpine chipmunk:, ground squirrel (Spermophilus lateralis), chickaree (Tamiasciurus douglasii), pika (Ochotona princeps), black bear

(Ursus americanus), marten (Martes americana), and a species ofweasel (Mustela erminea). People passed through and/or temporarily camped within this community while hunting large game in the summer and early fall, however, camps would have been located in areas that encompassed other vegetation communities within their catchment

(Bettinger 1982a). Plant procurement would not have been a major draw to this community as the economically important plants grow more abundantly in other vegetation zones, though they probably were collected during times ofeconomic stress when crops in other zones failed.

The Mixed Coniferous Forest (2895-2285 m [9500-7500 ft]) community is predominantly tall forest made up ofJeffrey pine (Pinus jeffreyi), lodgepole pine, white fir (Abies concolor), red fir (A. magnifica), and Sierra juniper (Juniperus occidentalis) trees or dense stands ofshrubs and bushes that include snow bush (Ceanothus cordulatus), bush chinquapin (Castanopsis sempervirens), greenleaf manzanita

(Arctostaphylos patula), and mountain mahogany (Cercocarpus ledifolius). Other notable plants are needlegrass (Stipa occidentalis) and squirreltail (Sitanion hystrix); seeds ofwhich were aboriginally important (Steward 1933). Animals living within this community are mainly small mammals such as shrews (Sorex spp.), moles (Scapanus spp.), chipmunks (Eutamias spp.), pinyon mouse (Peromyscus truei), and bushy tailed 11 woodrat (Neotoma cinerea). Larger creatures include American porcupine (Erethizon dorsatum), black bear, and long tailed weasel (Mustela frenata). The pandora moth

(Coloradia dorsatum), which live in the Jeffrey pine trees, may have been the biggest economic draw ofthis community. The Owens Valley Paiute intensively exploited these insects, which descended from the trees to pupate every other year (Fowler and Walter

1985; Heizer 1950; Liljeblad and Fowler 1986; McCarthy and Johnson 2002; Steward

1933; Weaver and Basgall 1986; Wilke and Lawton 1976). Next to pine nuts, these larvae were the largest bulk crop of food gathered and helped sustain families through winter months. During productive years, family groups camped out in late June and early

July within the Jeffrey pine forests to harvest these insects. Other than collecting larvae, activities within this zone would have been similar to those done in the SUbalpine forest; small hunting parties moving through the area in search oflarge game.

The Pinyon-Juniper Woodland (2830-1980 m [9300-6500 fin community is a pygmy forest dominated by pinyon pine (Pinus monophylla) and Utah juniper (Juniperus osteosperma) with an understory ofbig sagebrush (Artemisia tridentata), tobacco brush

(Ceanothus velutinus), bitterbrush (Purshia glandulosa), mountain mahogany, green ephedra (Ephedra viridis), rabbitbrush (Chryothamnus spp.), gooseberry (Ribes spp.) and elderberry (Sambucus racemosa). Economically important grasses and forbs include wheatgrass (Agropyron smithii), ricegrass (Achnatherum hymenoides), bluegrass (Poa fendleriana), needlegrass, squirreltail, and buckwheat (Erigonum spp.). Mammals and birds living within this environment include pinyon mouse, gold mantled ground squirrel,

Inyo chipmunk (Eutamias umbrinus inyoensis), bushy-tailed woodrat, coyote (Canis 12 latrans), bobcat (Lynx rufus), gray fox (Urocyon cinereoargenteus), mountain lion (Felis concolor), and mountain quail (Oreortyx pictus). myo mule deer (Odocoileus hemionus inyoensis) and bighorn sheep (Ovis spp.) are only seasonal inhabitants ofthe Pinyon­

Juniper Woodland. Pinyon pine nuts were the biggest draw to this community because they were exploited heavily by the Owens Valley Paiute and by the late prehistoric period had become the most important plant food collected (Steward 1933). Although other plants in this zone had economic importance, most occur in greater abundance at lower elevations and would have been procured at these lower zones ifpossible. Hunting was also worthwhile in this community and much ofit probably coincided with pine nut collecting since mule deer were present at the same time.

The Desert Scrub (1980-1065 m [6500-3500 fiD community consists oflow shrubs dominated by shadscale (Atriplex confertifolia), spiny hopsage (Grayia spinosa), big sagebrush, bitterbrush, greasewood (Sarcobatus vermiculatus), mormon tea (Ephedra nevadensis), and rabbitbrush. Economically important plants include ricegrass, wild rye

(Elymus spp.), needlegrass, squirrel tail, wheatgrass, sunflower (Helianthus nuttaii), blazing star (Mentzelia albicaulis), and chia (Salvia columbariae). Distribution ofthese plants within the Desert Scrub can vary depending on elevation and drainage. A wide variety ofanimals lived within this zone, especially during aboriginal times. The pronghorn antelope (Antilocapra americana) lived here year-round, while myo mule deer and bighorn sheep were seasonal inhabitants. Other animals include coyote, black-tailed jackrabbit (Lepus califomicus), cottontail (Sylvilagus nuttallii), pocket gopher

(Thomomys spp.), pocket mouse (Perognathus spp.), kangaroo rat (Dipodomys spp.), 13

ground squirrels (Spermophilus beecheyi, Ammospermophilus leucurus), woodrats

(Neotoma spp.), and skunks (Mephitis mephitis, Spilogale putorius). The California quail

and the occasional sagehen are two of the larger bird species found in this zone. The major draw to this community would be the abundance ofseed bearing plants and numerous animals to hunt and trap. This zone is also situated in proximity to the

Riverine and Pinyon-Juniper Woodland, two ofthe more economically important

vegetation communities to the aboriginal inhabitants ofOwens Valley.

Heading east, above the Pinyon-Juniper Woodland, communities include the

Upper Sagebrush (2590-3048 m [8500-10,000 fiD which is very similar to the lower

Desert Scrub sagebrush and Pinyon Woodland understory, albeit with denser

concentrations of vegetation and the addition of some plants such as the quaking aspen

(Populus tremuloides). Common animals include pocket gophers, meadow mice

(Microtus longicaudus), and jackrabbits (Lepus spp.), with mule deer and bighorn sheep

being seasonal inhabitants. Hunting would probably draw people to this community,

since plant resource procurement would have been more productive within the lower

communities or the Pinyon-Juniper Woodland.

The Bristlecone-Limber Pine Forest (2895-3350 m [9500-11,000 fiD consists of

patchy forests of bristlecone pine (Pinus longaeva) and limber pine trees separated by

expanses of low sagebrush. Animals include pika, marmot, chipmunks, pocket gophers,

and woodrats, as well as mule deer and bighorn sheep during the summer months. There

would not have been much to draw people to this community other than some ofthe

game animals and use would have been similar to the Sierran Subalpine Forest. 14

The Basin Alpine Tundra (>3200 m [10,500 fin is similar to the Sierran Alpine

Tundra with perhaps a few more perineal herbs and a few additional taxa ofsmall fauna.

The most notable resident would be bighorn sheep during the summer months. These animals would have attracted people to this community.

The Lacustrine community (1084 m [3557 fiD contained many salt and alkaline tolerant plants that include saltbush (Atriplex torreyi.), muhly (Muhlenbergia spp.), drop seed (Sporobolus spp.), goosefoot (Chenopodium spp.), and ditchgrass (Ruppia maritima). Fauna in this environment would be similar to that ofthe Desert Scrub community, especially mammals, but there would have been a lot more avifauna or waterfowl. These would include the canvas back (Aythya valisineria), Canada (Branta canadensis) and snow (Chen caerulescens) geese, merganser (Mergus merganser), tundra swan (Cygnus columbianus), grebe (Podicipedidae), mallard (Anas platyrhynchos), pintail (A. acuta), cinnamon teal (A. cyanoptera), green-winged teal (A. crecca), and northern shoveller (A. clypeata). Nonmigratory birds include the mudhen or coot (Fulica americana) and the ruddy duck (Oxyurajamaicensis). Owens Lake was also habitat for brine fly (Hydropyrns hyans) larvae which was a seasonally available and predictable resource that was intensively gathered by native people (Heizer 1950; Steward 1933:

Wilke and Lawton 1976). The obvious draws to this community would be the plants, the plethora ofwaterfowl, and the brine fly larvae. 15

The River

The Owens River begins at the northwest edge ofLong Valley Caldera at Big

Springs, flowing southeast across the Long Valley Caldera, then descends through Owens

River Gorge and into Owens Valley north ofBishop. The river extends, almost bisecting

Owens Valley from north to south, down to Owens Lake where it once emptied. Within the Owens Valley proper, the elevation ofthe slow-moving oxbowed river drops only about five and one-half feet per mile, from an elevation of4300 ft in the north to 3600 ft in the south (Miller 1978). However, the riparian zone is not homogenous along its length, with more woody perennials in the north and larger, marshy areas in the south.

The river is fed by some springs, but mainly by the extensive run-off from the Sierra

Nevada, which makes it a very productive environment supporting a variety ofplants and animals. Early explorers and settlers described a wide flowing river and extensive wetlands with lush vegetative communities (Chalfant 1933; Simpson 1983; Wilke and

Lawton 1976). In modem times the river has become narrowly channelized and marshes small and sparse, after most ofthe water was diverted into the Los Angeles Aqueduct in

1913 to supply the city of Los Angeles. In fact, the river is completely diverted into the aqueduct at some locations, creating stretches ofdry riverbed. The differences in vegetation along the riparian corridor today can be traced to the aqueduct and ground water pumping from the valley (Brothers 1984). Water diversions have caused Owens

Lake to become completely desiccated and by the 1970s, with the additional ground water pumping, the water table has dropped dramatically causing major springs to dry-up, cottonwood trees and other plants to die, irrigated land to become scarce, and dust storms 16 increasingly common (Walton 1992). Nowhere are the affects ofwater diversion more evident than at CA-INY-13841H; a predominately Newberry period site located north of

Bishop, that formerly bordered a major creek and extensive wetlands to the south. Today the creek has changed course or been diverted a good distance away and the wetlands are long since dried up. This once lush area has now become dry and blends in with the surrounding Desert Scrub community (Basgall et al. 2003).

Modern Climate

The modem climate in Owens Valley is marked by hot, dry summers with occasional thunderstorms. Summer daytime temperatures often exceed 100° F with evening temperatures that can drop significantly. The modem winters are cold with temperatures that commonly drop below 0° F. Because ofthe rainshadow caused by the

Sierra Nevada, annual precipitation is low, ranging only from 5-7 inches per year.

Temperature and precipitation vary within the valley based primarily on elevation. The town of Bishop in the north sits at an elevation of4150 ft.; July is typically the hottest month with an average high of 98° F and a low of 56° F, while December is typically the coldest with an average high of54° F and low of22° F. The average annual precipitation is 5.0211 and February is commonly the wettest month with an average of0.97". The town ofLone Pine in the south is 3730 ft. above sea level; July boasts the warmest temperatures with an average high of 100° F and low of 64° F, while January is the coldest month with an average high of55° F and low of27° F. Annual average precipitation in Lone Pine is 5.20", with February being the wettest month, contributing 17 an average of 1.13" ofmoisture. Variation also occurs east to west with elevation, temperatures drop an average of40° F for approximately every 3000 ft. climb in elevation, causing higher elevations to be substantially cooler and have shorter growing seasons.

Paleoenvironment

Numerous types ofstudies conducted by different researchers have been employed to investigate regional trends in paleoenvironment and paleoclimate during the Holocene, some ofwhich are contradictory. This section outlines the trends that are more reliable and/or agreed upon by researchers studying hunter-gatherer behavior in central-eastern

California (e.g., Bettinger 1982a; Elston 1982; Hall 1983; Overly 2003). The types of data are numerous and include pollen studies (Davis et al. 1985; Batchelder 1970;

Wigand and Mehringer 1985), pack-rat midden analyses (Halford 1998; Jennings 1989;

Jennings and Elliot-Fisk 1993; Koehler and Anderson 1995; Reynolds 1996; Spaulding

1990, 1991; Spaulding and Graumlich 1986; Wigand 2002), tree ring and tree line studies

(Graumlich 1993; Hughs and Brown 1992; LaMarche 1973, 1974, 1978; Scuderi 1984,

1987), and lake level data (Bacon et al. 2006; Benson et al. 1990; Enzel et al. 1992; Stine

1990, 1994, 1995). Together, these data detail some ofthe major shifts in climate and/or environment that may have influenced human behavior over the past 10,000 years.

Pack rat midden and lake level studies reveal the early Holocene (l0,000-8000

B.P.) was marked by cool temperatures and a moist atmosphere that caused Owens Lake levels to rise and peak at ~ 7700 B.P., a level that remained unmatched during the rest of 18 the Holocene (Bacon et al. 2006). Wetter conditions especially in the Sierra Nevada would have led to more marsh-like conditions in Owens Valley particularly along the river and its tributaries. This is evidenced by new terraces cut by the Owens river above

the flood plains west ofBishop at -8000 B.P. (Pinter et al. 1994), as well as the formation

ofalluvial fans near Lone Pine Creek and along the Alabama Hills during this same time

(Bierman et a1. 1995). These conditions are slightly contradicted by pollen studies that

suggest aridity until around 8500-8000 B.P. In any case, the abundance ofmoisture in

and around the river during this period must have increased the productivity ofwetland

vegetation which in turn would have attracted more fauna making the riverine

environment even more desirable.

Pack rat midden, tree ring, lake level, and pollen studies all agree that the middle

Holocene (8000-4000 B.P.) was characterized by warmer and drier conditions that

marked the onset ofthe mid-Holocene climatic optimum (~8500-6000 B.P.) or

Altithermal event (Antevs 1948). Tree ring data suggests there may have been a brief

period ofcooler, moister conditions around 6000 B.P., followed by a resumption ofwarm

dry conditions until around 3500 B.P. Sediment cores indicate low flow from the Owens

River into the lake during this time, however, ostracodes found in the samples suggest

that there were some decades and possibly even centuries when river flows were much

higher (Forester 2000). Bacon et a1.'s (2006) stratigraphic analyses offluvio-deltaic and

lacustrine sediments exposed in stream cuts, quarry walls, and deep trenches in Owens

Valley have yielded new data on Owens Lake showing oscillations in lake level not yet

recognized in other pluvial lake basins in the desert west. Their data suggest the lake was 19 very shallow or desiccated between ~6850 and 4300 B.P., close to 2,500 years, which would have dramatically altered all wetland communities in the valley and surrounding areas. Dates on some ofthese events overlap or even contradict one another, however, almost all lines ofevidence suggest that the mid-Holocene was warm and dry in the

Owens Valley for thousands ofyears. This could have had detrimental effects on the environment, though just how much this may have affected human behavior is still uncertain. Marsh-like conditions in the valley probably ceased to exist, the river may not have been as reliable, and the lake was shallow or even desiccated. People in the valley

at this time may have had to rely more on springs and seasonal run-off then in the early or

late Holocene.

The late Holocene (4000 B.P.- Present) begins with a shift to cooler, moister conditions beginning around 3500 B.P., when a 10 C decrease in summer temperature is recorded by tree ring data that suggest a 100 m lowering ofthe tree line in the White

Mountains (LaMarche 1973). This lasted until ~2000-1700 B.P., when conditions became first warm-moist and then warm-dry. These changes are more or less supported

by pack rat, lake level, and tree ring studies, the latter ofwhich suggest a drought around

1700 B.P. After 1700 B.P. conditions returned to cool and moist until around 1000 B.P.

when drought conditions returned, with two periods ofpossible dessication ofOwens

Lake lasting until ~600 B.P. Researchers have labeled this hyperthermal interval the

Medieval Climatic Anomaly (MCA) based on data compiled from different parts ofthe world. The effects ofthis phenomenon within Owens Valley are uncertain, but there is

evidence ofextreme lake level drops that must have reduced the extent ofmarsh-like 20 conditions (Stine 1998). Still, this event was relatively short-lived, and how it affected human behavior is open to debate (Jones et aL 1999). Since around 600 B.P. conditions have been generally mild and sometimes cooler up to the present day.

Biological Context

The riparian woodland consists often woody perennials, which include cottonwood (Populus fremontii) and two types ofwillow (Salix gooddingii) (S. laevigata) tree, as well as the shrubs narrow leafwillow (Salix exigua), wild rose (Rosa woodsii), rabbitbrush, saltbrush (Atriplex spp.), salt cedar (Tamarix ramosissima), Russian olive

(Elaeagnus angustifoUa), and desert olive (Forestiera pubeseens). Salt cedar and

Russian olive are introduced species that have spread throughout the riparian woodland.

The understory is dominated by cattail (Typha sp.), tule (Scirpus spp.), sedge (Carex spp.), and rush (Juneus spp.), along with a perennial sod ofsaltgrass (DistiehUs spieata), alkali sacaton (Sporobilus airoides), and wire grass (Juneus baltieus) (Brothers 1984).

Many other plant resources are known to grow in Owens Valley wetlands, including the river, its tributaries, adjacent marshes, and Owens lakeshore (Table 2.1). The seeds and roots ofmany ofthese plants are known to have been important resources to the Paiute people ofthe valley and were gathered by women during the summer and fall months

(Steward 1933).

The creatures that prehistorically inhabited the RiparianlRiverine community

include four types ofnative fish; sucker (Catostomus fumeiventris), speckled dace

(Rhiniehtys oseulus), Owens pupfish (Cyprinidon radiosus), and Owens chub (Gila 21

TABLE 2.1: Common Wetland Plants ofOwens Valley.

Scientific Name Common Name Native Uses

Agropyron sp. Wheatgrass seeds Atriplex spp. Saltbrush seeds Elymus sp. Wild rye seeds Eragrostis sp. Lovegrass seeds Helianthus sp. Sunflower seeds Juncus spp. Rush seeds Polygonum sp. Smartweed seeds Rorippa spp. Yellow cress seeds Sueda moquinii Seepweed seeds Sporobilus airoides Alkali sacaton seeds Chenopodium spp. Goosefoot seeds/greens Phragmites australis Cane (reed) seeds/sugar Dichelostemma sp. Blue dicks roots/seeds Eleocharis sp. Spikerush roots/seeds Scirpus spp. Tule roots/seeds Typhasp. Cattail roots/seeds/pollen/greens Cyperus spp. Nutsedge roots Trifolium spp. Clover greens/seeds Rosa woodsii Wild rose fruit Anemopsis californica Yerba mansa medicinal Populus fremontii Cottonwood wood Salix spp. Willow wood/basketry Carexspp. Sedge Chryothamnus spp. Rabbitbrush DistichUs spicata SaItgrass Hordeum spp. Cinquefoil

hicolor snyderi), at least two ofwhich were procured by the Paiute using various methods

(Steward 1933). Invertebrates like freshwater mussel (Anodonta californiensis) historically inhabited slow moving, soft-bottom areas ofthe river and its tributaries in great numbers and were also gathered (Taylor 1981, as cited in Basgall and McGuire

1988). Crayfish (Pacifastacus leniusculus), which appear to have been historically introduced, can still be found in relatively large numbers in the river and its tributaries.

The brine fly found in the more saline waters ofOwens Lake were an important native resource because of their predictability (Heizer 1950; Steward 1933; Wilke and Lawton 22

1976). Resident mammals ofthe riverine community include small rodents such as shrews, moles, meadow mice, and cottontail rabbits.

Animals that visit the community included ungulates such as mule deer and pronghorn. Coyote, bobcat, striped and spotted skunks, badger (Taxidea laxus), racoon

(Procyon ZOlor), mountain lion, and various foxes and mustelids are among the carnivores. Smaller mammals like the black-tailed jackrabbit, different types ofsquirrels

(Sciuridae), gophers (Geomyidae), mice (Heteromyidae) and rats (Cricetidae) also frequent the area.

The Riverine environment hosts numerous migratory waterfowl, including the canvas back, Canada and snow geese, merganser, tundra swan, grebe, and several different species ofthe genus Anas. Nonmigratory birds include the mudhen or coot and ruddy duck.

Important subsistence resources that are abundant within the riverine environment include seeds (gathered in summer and fall), roots/greens (gathered in spring), fish

(procured in spring), deer (hunted in winter and spring), antelope (hunted in fall and early winter), and waterfowl (hunted in spring and fall). Of these, only fish and some ofthe

seeds and roots occur in truly significant numbers within this environment. The most important resources within the riparian zone probably include many of the seeds, roots,

fish, and waterfowl, all ofwhich were taken during either the spring, summer, or fall months. OfpartiCUlar importance were species ofplants such as Typha, Scirpus, Carex, and Juncus for their seeds, roots, and stalks. 23

Prehistoric Background

The early Holocene (pre-7500 B.P.), or Lake Mohave period, is not well represented in the Owens Valley area. What is known comes from a few sites scattered throughout the region, including locations in Long Valley (Basgall 1987, 1988), Mono

Basin (Hall 1991), Panamint Valley (Davis 1970), as well as Owens Valley proper

(Basgall and McGuire 1988; Campbell 1949; Delacorte et al. 1995; Harrington 1957;

Meighan 1981). These sites are associated with Great Basin Stemmed and Concave-Base projectile points. Artifact assemblages include formed flake tools, bifaces, and some ground stone. Information from these excavations along with some from the Mojave

Desert that date to the same time period (Basga111993; Basgall and Hall 1992; Hall 1990,

1993) suggest low populations and a subsistence-settlement pattern that included high mobility and the exploitation ofvarious animal resources. The scarcity of ground stone in these assemblages suggests that seeds and vegetal resources were of limited importance.

All of the data appear consistent with small residential groups moving long distances to briefly occupy different areas on the landscape. In the China Lake Basin, where the early

Holocene is better represented, populations aggregated along stream channels, not the main lakeshore. This provided good access to the catchment surrounding these channels and the resource patches it contained (Basgall 2007). The wetter conditions that prevailed during the early Holocene would have made the Owens River more productive and desirable to hunter-gatherers. Thus, early Holocene people moving through Owens

Valley would have camped or remained near the river to exploit the more reliable 24 resource patches associated with this environment. This would have been especially true during spring and fall when larger fish and waterfowl were readily available.

The middle Holocene (7500-3500 RP.) or Pinto period appears to be similar to the Lake Mohave in many characteristics. Once identified mainly by the presence of split-stem Little Lake projectile points (Bettinger and Taylor 1974) dating between 5950 and 3150 RP., this time period now seems to be more complicated, with several types of time-sensitive projectile points spanning longer periods of time. More recent assessments have divided the split-stem points into earlier robust Pinto points that occur as early as

8000 B.P., and more gracile Gatecliffpoints occurring after 5500 RP. (Basgall and Hall

2000). Other point types include Fish Slough Side-notched, which appear to be early

(Basgall et al. 1995), and "thick" Elko comer-notched, which can predate 3150 RP.

(Gilreath and Hildebrandt 1997). Middle Holocene assemblages are similar to those of the Lake Mohave period, with an abundance of formed flake tools. There is an increase, however, in specialized core tools and a significant increase in the amount ofground stone. The subsistence-settlement pattern suggests highly mobile people that stayed in short-term encampments, had wide foraging areas, and subsisted on large and small game, as well as a variety ofplant resources. The pattern differs from the early Holocene in the seemingly greater reliance on plant resources and some evidence ofmore centralized settlements like the Stahl site (Harrington 1957; Meighan 1981). Given the high mobility, most middle Holocene sites are ephemeral and hard to identify, consisting of sparse scatters that are often mixed with assemblages from other time periods.

Because of the warm dry conditions during this period, Owens Lake would have been low 25 or desiccated for thousands ofyears and river flows low to nonexistent. This would have been devastating to riverine vegetation and surrounding wetlands alike. People may have had to hunt and forage in other communities near more reliable water sources, especially during hotter months. Riverine use may have been restricted to seasons of greater run-off from the adjacent mountains. Still, there were probably decades and even centuries when river flows were higher and people would have camped in or near the river to exploit its resources; this would have contributed to a punctuated occupation profile.

The early Newberry period (3500-2000 RP.) is again poorly represented within the valley. Available evidence suggests a pattern very similar to that in previous times, with only subtle changes in the range and intensity ofresources exploited. This period also coincides with the beginning ofintensive exploitation ofcertain obsidian quarries to manufacture bifaces (Gilreath and Hildebrandt 1997; Hall 1983; Singer and Ericson

1977). These tools were manufactured in substantial numbers for either trade, or as a result ofchanges to a more regularized settlement pattern. With a return to cooler, moister conditions the riverine and associated wetland habitats would have been very productive and human use ofthese environments probably similar or more intensive than the early Holocene.

Several sources ofevidence from different sites suggest dramatic changes in the region during the late Newberry period (2000-1350 RP.) (Basgall and Giambastiani

1995; Basgall and McGuire 1988; Bettinger 1991a; Bettinger et al. 1984; Bouscaren

1985; Delacorte and McGuire 1993; Delacorte et aL 1995; Gilreath and Hildebrandt

1997; Hall 1990). Adaptive strategies become more logistical and settlement patterns 26 more regularized (Basgall and McGuire 1988; Bettinger 1989, 1991a,1999; Delacorte

1990; Delacorte and McGuire 1993; Delacorte et al. 1995). Newberry assemblages contain Elko and/or Humboldt series projectile points and tool caches that include highly formal obsidian bifaces and milling gear. Toolstone variability decreases, but foraging ranges remain large, with regular stops at key toolstone quarries to resupply toolkits. In sum, the late Newberry period in Owens Valley was characterized by well organized populations who moved seasonally to logistically exploit a wide variety ofresources, returning to the same encampments along the north-south trending valley corridor. Thus, by following the river up through Long Valley to the Mono Basin and back down to the

Owens Valley, groups would have been able to exploit the river's abundant resources.

An alternative model suggests that residential mobility was seasonal, trending east-west up into the mountains on either side ofthe valley to exploit different biotic communities, and that the variability in obsidian results from logistical forays to distant quarries (King et al. 2001). Warmer temperatures and some drought conditions during this era suggest short periods ofreduced river flows, but nothing compared to the middle Holocene and nothing to suggest it had a lasting affect on subsistence strategies.

The Haiwee period (1350-650 B.P.) saw several ofthe trends begun during the late Newberry era continue. These include increasing settlement centralization and intensification of lower-ranked resources. Sites are distributed over a range ofhabitats including camps in the pinyon and villages in the alpine zones. This coincides with the abandonment oflogistical hunting camps, as hunting activities shifted to residential settlements (Bettinger 1975, 1977; Delacorte 1990). Many ofthese changes may relate to 27 increasing population and/or the introduction ofthe bow and arrow, which may have allowed the household (as opposed to the group) to become the primary economic unit

(Bettinger 1999). It has also been suggested that many ofthese changes resulted from the hypothesized expansion ofNumic speakers across the Great Basin (Bettinger and

Baumhoff 1982). Haiwee period time markers include Rose Spring and Eastgate projectile points. These coincide with a technology shift to more expedient flake and ground stone tools that were used and discarded. The Haiwee period marks the beginning of the "processor"-like strategy described by Bettinger (1999), where labor-intensive resources and particular habitats (e.g. riverine zone) are logistically exploited from comparatively fixed settlements. Climate during this period is again wanner with two possible episodes of lake dessication which would have caused fluctuations in riverine habitat productivity. With increasing residential settlements, growing importance of resources such as pinyon, and unstable climate, sites along the river would be geared more towards specific tasks such as fish camps or seed collecting areas. This assumes that residential settlements were located more centrally to the river and Pinyon-Juniper

Woodland, with people making forays to acquire resources and then returning home.

The Marana period (650-100 RP.) is identified by Cottonwood and Desert Side­ notched projectile points and the appearance ofpottery (Owens Valley Brown Ware).

Initially this period is similar to the Haiwee era, with a widening diet breadth and continued intensification of low-ranked resources. There is a dramatic increase in the exploitation ofwetland resources during this time, especially plants, mussels, and waterfowl (Delacorte 1999). Cooler conditions during this period caused river and 28 wetland habitats to become more productive and, although exploitation strategies would have been similar to those ofthe Haiwee, the increased productivity would have made wetlands a greater draw. People also intensively exploited some wetland plants, spending more time in these environments to procure these lower ranked resources. By the late or terminal Marana period, there are marked changes that appear to be associated with

European contact and the availability ofalternative resources, such as glass and metal, for the manufacture oftools, especially hunting implements (Basgall and Delacorte 2003).

Populations are fairly high in the valley at this time and people were believed to be living

in semi-sedentary or semi-permanent village settings for most ofthe year, similar to the

ethnographic Paiute described by Julian Steward (1933). However, recent research has

questioned when this phenomenon developed and suggests that it may be restricted to post-contact times (Basgall and Delacorte 2003).

Archaeological Context

Early Research

Systematic archaeological investigations within the Owens Valley really began in

the late 1930's, 1940's, and 1950's with the work done by Campbell, Harrington, and

Riddell (see Antevs 1948, 1952; Harrington 1957; Riddell 1951). In 1936 and 1939 the

Campbells conducted a survey ofthe Owens Lake and Little Lake regions. Riddell

excavated at CA-INY-2, the Cottonwood Creek site, which is a large village and the type

site for the Cottonwood series projectile points and Owens Valley Brown Ware pottery

(Riddell 1951). Harrington carried out excavations at a "Pinto" age site near Little Lake 29

(Harrington 1957). Since this early work, numerous projects have been carried out in the valley that helped to characterize the subsistence-settlement patterns described previously. Archaeological investigations along the Owens River are more limited.

What follows are brief descriptions of selected studies that have attempted to understand the use of the Owens River environment and/or associated wetland habitats.

Bettinger

Bettinger's (1975) survey transect through the valley is one ofthe first projects that attempted to understand and interpret changes in use of the riverine environment. He found several deposits along the river spanning most of the Holocene, and concluded that occupation sites moved out of this environment into the desert scrub during the Newberry period, leading to more logistical exploitation ofthe river. Obsidian hydration from a sample of these sites indicates early riverine use with a subsequent shift to desert scrub occupation and a sti11later addition ofpinyon camps (Bettinger 1980). What is interesting here is that there is virtually no overlap between riverine occupation and the pinyon camps, while desert scrub occupation overlaps both. This suggests that as pinyon use intensified, people moved from the river into desert scrub habitats.

Alabama Gates

The Alabama Gates (Delacorte et al. 1995; De1acorte 1999) project included the excavation of several sites located within the southern Owens Riverine environment.

This project documented exploitation of the river dating back to the early Holocene. 30

Based on faunal evidence, the earliest use of this environment was for the seasonal procurement oflarge (>25cm) suckers (Catostomusfumeiventris). The appearance of well-built houses, faunal remains, and plant foods in the late Newberry era indicates a shift to longer mid/late summer and fall/winter occupations for the purpose ofexploiting smaller fish «25cm) and plants that grow within the river flood plain. The next major

shift occurred during the Marana period when there is a dramatic increase in the use of wetland plants, mussels, and waterfowl. By this time people were intensively exploiting more marginal riverine resources, a trend that began during the late Newberry period.

CA-INY-30

Another project that has helped define what we know about human exploitation of wetland resources are the excavations at CA-INY-30 (see Basgall and McGuire 1988).

Although not directly along the river, INY-30 is within the riparian corridor ofLubkin

Creek, a major tributary that formerly drained directly into Owens Lake and supports

wetland flora and fauna similar to the river. Data from INY -30 document use ofthe area

dating back to the early Holocene. The earliest occupation ofthe site is limited but

suggests a focus on large game. Whether early Holocene hunters were exploiting riparian

environments or using INY -30 as a staging area is unclear, but the lack ofground stone

indicates minimal exploitation ofplant resources. During the late Newberry period, INY­

30 was used as a seasonal residential base. Residents procured various resources from

different environmental zones by logistically exploiting different areas. Processing tools

and flotation samples provide evidence that seeds ofmany wetland plants were becoming 31 important resources. Wetland fauna common at the site included waterfowl, mainly grebes, and game from both upland (mountain sheep) and lowland (jackrabbits) habitats.

The Haiwee period is minimally represented at the site, which was evidently used for only short-term processing tasks. Faunal remains reflect a decrease in avifuana and an increase in lagomorphs and fish in the diet. The Marana period at INY-30 chronicles a dramatic increase in the importance ofwetland resources, as evidenced in the plant macrofossils, abundance offreshwater mussel shells, and waterfowl other than grebes.

Thus, by the late prehistoric period, people were intensively exploiting a wider variety of more local resources.

Olancha

The OlanchaiCartago project evaluated 15 prehistoric sites on the southwest margin ofOwens Lake (see Byrd and Hale 2003). Results suggest that sites in this area were small, seasonally occupied residential encampments that were occupied annually over extended periods oftime, primarily between fall and spring. Based on midden accumulation the most intensive use ofthe lake margin appears to be during the

Newberry period. There seems to be a decline in use starting with the Haiwee period, but this may be skewed by the differential length oftemporal units. Dominant resources at these sites include large and small mammals, waterfowl (grebes and ducks), and a variety ofplant remains from different environments. There are interesting temporal patterns in flora: wetland plants dominate the Newberry record; plants from a variety ofhabitats, most interestingly pinyon, during the Haiwee interval; plants from increasingly desert 32 scrub settings during the Marana period. Wetland plants were exploited throughout the sequence and other plants were added more intensively through time. It appears that the

southwestern margin of the lake saw continuous use throughout the late Holocene despite

environmental changes and likely dramatic fluctuations (drops) in lake levels. Although the Olancha investigation did not deal with the river specifically, it lent some insight into how the lake was exploited prehistorically and how it fit into broader regional land-use

patterns.

Cottonwood Creek

Cottonwood Creek is a major tributary ofOwens Lake that drains the Sierra

Nevada through Cottonwood Canyon into the west side ofthe lake. Along this creek is a

late prehistoric village (CA-INY-2), that was originally excavated in the 1950s by Riddell

(1951). Downstream ofthe village are a series ofsites which are believed to have been

satellites located to exploit resources on the valley floor in desert scrub, lacustrine, and

riverine settings (Wilke 1983). There is little freshwater mussel shell at these sites, and

even less at INY -2, where Riddell only reports one shelL Ifthese small camps are indeed

related to INY-2 and people were accessing mussels, they were not transported back to

the village. Flotation samples from these sites produced seeds mainly from non-native

plants (Erodium cicutarium), with only a few coming from native species and even fewer

from wetland taxa. 33

Ash Creek

The Ash Creek project evaluated 13 sites in the Desert Scrub community, all within 2.3 km ofthe western shore of Owens Lake (see Gilreath 1995). There was sparse evidence ofuse during the early and middle Holocene, consisting mainly of flaked stone tools. Interestingly, Newberry period artifacts are rare, suggesting minimal occupation during this interval. Haiwee period use ofthe sites appears to primarily be hunting related, with a lack ofmilling equipment and few plant macrofossils recovered from flotation samples. Faunal remains indicate that people were exploiting Desert Scrub,

Sierran, and Lacustrine habitats. Common Lacustrine remains recovered from Haiwee age sites include grebes and ducks. During the subsequent Marana period, hunting activities appear similar, but there seems to have been an intensification in plant exploitation. This is evidenced by large amounts ofmilling equipment and plant remains recovered from flotation samples. Interestingly, almost all the plant remains come from dryland species with almost no wetland taxa recovered. In all, Marana period people occupying these sites seem to have used wetlands only for hunting, not to exploit the plants.

Discussion

Together, data from these projects reveal how wetland resources were exploited in

Owens Valley throughout the Holocene. Data from the early and middle Holocene suggest a reliance on high-ranked wetland resources, which included large fish, waterfowl, plants, and mammals that inhabited and/or visited these areas. During the 34

Newberry period there was a move to incorporate resources from other environments that had been less intensively exploited previously. Data from the Haiwee period are limited, but seem to continue the trends begun during the Newberry period. The Marana period witnessed an intensification ofwetland resource use, when people intensively exploited lower-ranked wetland plants and animals, including small seeds, roots, waterfowl, small fish, and mussels. In all, these projects highlight the importance ofwetland resources and how they have always been an essential part ofthe subsistence economy ofOwens

Valley.

Ethnography

The project area falls within the ethnographic territory ofthe Owens Valley Paiute

(Heizer 1966; Steward 1933, 1938a), one ofthe most unique groups ofpeople within the

Great Basin. The Owens Valley Paiute have been the subj ect ofextensive ethnographic work, most notably by Julian Steward who spent years collecting information from native consultants on language and culture (cf. Steward 1933, 1934, 1936, 1938a, 1938b, 1941; see also Chalfant 1933; Driver 1937; Kroeber 1925). They are the southernmost ofthe

Northern Paiute, who occupied much ofthe western Great Basin. The Owens Valley

Paiute speak a dialect ofMono, a language ofthe Numic branch ofthe Uto-Aztecan language family (Liljeblad and Fowler 1986). Although Owens Valley Mono is recognized as its own language, several distinct dialects are reported to have existed within the valley proper (Steward 1933). These dialects coincide with "districts" which comprised one to several small villages that maintained certain territorial boundaries 35

(Steward 1933, 1938a). Just prior to European contact Owens Valley was one ofthe most densely populated areas in the Great Basin, with estimates placing the population between

1,000 and 2,000 people (Chalfant 1922; Liljeblad and Fowler 1986; Steward 1933,

1938a; Wilke and Lawton 1976). Some researchers suggest that the higher population and abundance ofresources contributed to greater socio-political complexity than that seen in other parts ofthe Great Basin.

Settlement

At the time ofcontact, the Owens Valley Paiute occupied semi-permanent villages

for most ofthe year, a practice not widely observed in the Great Basin (Liljeblad and

Fowler 1986). However, these are not villages in the traditional sense, but areas occupied by families for much ofthe year, the location changing slightly from one year to the next.

Villages were located on the west side ofthe valley along streams approximately two to

four miles from the Owens River and hosted many ceremonial, religious, and recreational

activities. According to Steward (1933), communal activities included dancing,

gambling, rabbit drives, and, occasionally, cooperative hunting and fishing parties. Most

ofthese activities took place in the fall, when time available from seed collecting.

Despite the existence ofvillages the household remained the basic economic unit.

People spent the summers in valley floor villages or encampments, making forays

around the valley and nearby hills to gather seeds, hunt, and fish. Late spring and

summer was the main seed gathering season and this is when most ofthe communal

activities took place including the rabbit drives. In the late summer and fall, during the 36 pinyon harvest, small groups ofpeople would leave the valley floor and spend the season up in the mountains. When pinyon failed, people would remain on the valley floor and

subsist on stored foods, especially seeds (Steward 1933).

Subsistence

The Owens Valley supported one ofthe richest environments in the Great Basin.

Its natural resources were able to support a large population compared to most ofthe

region. Steward (1933) provides extensive lists ofresources procured by the Owens

Valley Paiute. He names over 50 different plants as food resources, many ofwhich grew

in local wetlands. The Owens Valley Paiute subsistence economy was guided by the

seasonal availability ofcertain plant resources, primarily seeds and pine nuts. The river

and its tributaries played a major role in the subsistence oflocal people. Runoff from the

Sierra Nevada fed numerous streams, especially in the northern valley, and extensive

marshes in the south that provided ample habitat for a plethora ofplants and wildlife that

depended on water for survival. These wetland environments were home to many ofthe

seed crops, tubers, insects, fish, shellfish, waterfowl, and rodents that people exploited for

food. Wetland and irrigated plants provided reliable resources that were important to

native people (Bettinger 1982b; Delacorte 1990).

In the northern part ofthe valley fishing territories were owned by districts, but in

the south there were no property restrictions on fishing rights (Steward 1933, 1938). At

least two species offish (Owens Sucker and Tui Chub) were taken from the Owens River

and were an important part ofthe Paiute diet (Raymond and Sobel 1990; Steward 1933; 37

1938). Fishing was done communally and/or individually using a variety oftechniques

(Fowler 1986; Steward 1933; Wilke and Lawton 1976). Fish were caught with hooks, spears, baskets, and nets, or by diverting streams and stranding or stupifying them with poison (Driver 1937; Steward 1933, 1938). The riverine environment was also visited by many ofthe small and large animals that were important to the diet. Jackrabbits were usually taken on the flats near the Owens River and antelope were communally hunted on the flats east ofthe river (Steward 1933), Although pinyon played a major role in the subsistence economy ofthe Owens Valley Paiute, the river and its environment may have been equally ifnot more important throughout most ofthe year. This would run counter to Bettinger's (1977) idea that settlements within the riverine environment were abandoned in late times.

Irrigation

Recognizing the importance ofwetland resources, the Owens Valley Paiute are

said to have practiced an incipient type ofagriculture that included irrigation. This was done by building simple check dams and digging channels offoftributary streams that ,

fed the river to flood areas ofthe valley bottom and encourage growth ofwild seed and

tuber crops. There is, however, continuing debate as to when this practice started and to

what extent it was practiced. Steward's (1933) consultants describe this practice and use

words for irrigation and irrigator that linguists have determined are ofPaiute origin, not

borrowed or based on English or Spanish words (Lamb 1958). This leads some to believe

that irrigation began as a pre-contact practice. Steward himself initially believed this 38 hypothesis (Steward 1930), but later felt that it may have diffused from European­

Americans or Spaniards who had contact with the area (Steward 1938), eventually returning to his original opinion toward the end ofhis career (Steward 1977). Irrigation was also described by some early visitors to the valley such as Captain J. W. Davidson, who described extensive irrigation canals within the valley and success ofthe practice

(Wilke and Lawton 1976). It has been very difficult to match these historic accounts with actual features left today and to determine the antiquity ofthese features (McCarthy and

Johnson 2002). Although archaeologically it is hard to determine the antiquity ofthis phenomenon, some recent research has shed some doubt on the age or extent ofirrigation

(Basgall and Delacorte 2003). Whether irrigation was a pre-contact or post-contact phenomenon, it highlights the importance ofwetland habitats to the inhabitants of Owens

Valley.

History ofthe Owens River

The first documented European to enter Owens Valley was Peter Skene Ogden, a

British trapper who traversed the valley while traveling from the Columbia River drainage, south to the Colorado River in 1829-1830 (Cline 1963). The first Americans to enter the valley were a party led by Joseph Walker who passed through the region in 1833 on their return from interior California. Walker and Joseph Chiles, guiding one ofthe

first wagon trains to the San Joaquin Valley, again traveled through the Owens Valley ten years later. The valley, lake, and river were all named by Captain John C. Fremont, after his guide, Richard Owens, with whom Fremont traversed the region in 1845. This is also 39 when one ofthe first descriptions ofthe river and its resources was recorded by Edward

M. Kern in his journal:

December 16.-To-day struck Owen's River. It is a fine, bold stream, larger than Walker's.... December 17 and 18- Still on the river; obliged to keep some distance from it on account ofa large marsh. Wild-fowl in abundance. Walker went in search of some salt, which he found, incrusted to the thickness of a quarter ofan inch on the surface ofthe earth.... [Simpson 1983:482)

During this decade Fremont made several other expeditions into the valley. One ofthe more tragic excursions was the Death Valley party of 1849, also referred to as the

Jayhawker party, which left Salt Lake City to find a short route to California and was met with misfortune and suffering when the party became lost in the desert and split into two factions (Chalfant 1933).

It was not until the 1850s that the region caught the interest ofthe U.S. government. With mining, ranching, and farming becoming economically successful in surrounding areas, tensions started to grow with the local indigenous people. This led to a survey ofpublic lands between Mono Lake and Owens Lake by A. W. Von Schmit in

1855, who recorded observations on the natural history and indigenous people ofthe region. In 1859 Captain J. W. Davidson led a military expedition into the Owens Valley searching for alleged horse thieves. Davidson provides some ofthe best early accounts of the Owens River:

Ten miles beyond Kennedy Creek you enter the valley proper ofOwen's River, which empties into the lake at the northern extremity ofits eastern shore.... Owen's River, at points observed, is a muddy stream, with abrupt banks some four feet in height, and flows with a gentle current. It averages 50 feet in width and from 15 to 20 feet in depth .... Evaporation from a surface ofthe extent ofthat ofthe lake does not in my opinion, account for the body ofwater poured into it by the river 40

and other tributaries .... Every step now taken shows that nature has been lavish with her stores. The mountains are filled with timber, the vallies with water, and meadows ofluxuriant grass. Some of these meadows contain, at a moderate estimate, ten thousand acres, every foot ofwhich can be irrigated [Wilke and Lawton 1976:24-25].

Permanent European settlement did not begin in the Owens Valley until the 1860s

(Chalfant 1933), with the report ofgold ore in the Coso area and subsequently other places. This brought a quick end to the indigenous lifeway ofthe valley. In 1861 the first homesteads were established at Laws, Bishop, Big Pine, and Lone Pine. Shortly after, in

1862, ore mills were constructed along the Owens River, and mining camps sprouted up at Bend City, San Carlos, and Owensville (Chalfant 1933).

Settlement did not come about without objections from native peoples. Several isolated incidents and misunderstandings between the settlers and native people led to hostilities that continued through the early part ofthe 1860s. The violence lasted until the military became involved and captured or slaughtered many ofthe people who were viewed as "hostile" by the white settlers (Chalfant 1933).

Historically, the Owens Valley has had its share ofnatural disasters that have affected the river. There was a massive flood in the winter of 1861-1862 ofwhich cattleman Barton McGee gives the following description:

All the streams became impassable, while the river was from one-fourth to one mile in width, about halfice and halfwater, and sweeping on to the lake, paying no respect to the crooks and curves ofthe old channel and its course to the lake, which it raised twelve feet [Chalfant 1933:147].

The 1872 earthquake centered near Lone Pine was a powerful trembler that toppled nearly

every adobe structure in the valley and claimed the lives ofat least 20 individuals. 41

Property loss was devastating, with estimates ranging from $150,000 to $200,000 in damage. The earthquake is said to have caused a dramatic change in the Owens River stream course. The town ofBend City, just east ofIndependence, was left overlooking an empty ravine instead ofthe Owens River (Chalfant 1933).

Most ofthe early pioneers and homesteaders came to the valley with expectations ofmining, but this was soon eclipsed by farming and ranching activities. In 1870, mining was the most important occupation with 26.4% ofworkers, but by 1880 it had declined to only 7.9% (Walton 1992). Needless to say, both mining and agriculture helped to shape the early economy ofthe Owens Valley.

The economy ofthe region changed dramatically during the early 1900s, when the city ofLos Angeles bought most Owens Valley water rights and built an aqueduct to transport the water out ofthe valley. This diverted much ofthe water from the river, restricting its flow and eventually desiccating Owens Lake. Construction of the Los

Angeles aqueduct helped to shape many ofCalifornia's water laws, and led to much controversy and resentment within the valley, spawning sometimes destructive protests.

Much has been written about the struggle between the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power (LADWP) and the residents ofOwens Valley which continues to this day (see

Chalfant 1933; Miller 1978; Nadeau 1997; Walton 1992; Wood 1973).

The modem economy ofOwens Valley is now based on tourism and recreational land use. This has been fueled by a steady growth ofinterest in hunting, fishing, camping, and hiking within the region, which has helped to maintain a healthy economy that continues to grow. 42

Chapter 3

CONCEPTUAL ASSUMPTIONS

This project is guided heavily by evolutionary theory and its ability to create foraging models that can be tested against archaeological field data. Ofthe different forms ofneo-Darwinian theories to draw from, only evolutionary ecology has had any viable applications to field archaeology and is therefore discussed here. This thesis leans towards an evolutionary ecological approach to archaeological analyses oftechnological organization using data collected from a non-site or distributional surface survey to help understand how wetlands or the Owens River specifically has been used by aboriginal peoples and how this has changed through time.

Evolutionary Ecology

Evolutionary ecology operates on the idea that natural selection will choose behaviors that maximize reproductive fitness over other actions. It provides researchers with the necessary theoretical framework to design and build testable models (Zeanah and Simms 1999). All things being equal, hunter-gatherer behaviors and choices will be guided by the desire to maximize efficiency, which in turn can increase fitness (Le., reproductive success [O'Connell et al. 1982]). As with natural selection, successful or more efficient behaviors and adaptations will thrive while less productive choices will perish. It assumes people are adapted to their "techno-environmental" situation and live in a state ofequilibrium until change is necessary or induced by some sort ofstress 43

(Bettinger 1991 b). When change becomes necessary people will make the optimal

choices to insure their genetic fitness. What sets evolutionary ecology apart is that it

works on an individual as opposed to group level. Changes within the group are affected by the actions or decisions ofindividuals and how these actions clash. It is possible for

group selection to supercede individual selection, but only in a limited capacity (Zeanah

and Simms 1999).

Foraging models such as diet breadth and optimal foraging theory are concepts

which stem from evolutionary ecology. Ranking resources by the ratio ofgross caloric

intake to handling time makes it possible to predict what resources should or should not

be taken by hunters and gatherers in different situations or circumstances. Looking at diet

breadth for an area, optimal foraging models can be made based on resource rank,

resource availability, encounter rates, popUlation, and a number ofother variables. These

models should be able to predict when certain resources should enter into the diet and

when others should drop out. Depending on some ofthese other variables the highest

ranked resources are not necessarily the most optimal. These assumptions can then be

tested against the archaeological record (O'Connell et al. 1982; Zeanah and Simms 1999).

With the plethora ofboth terrestrial and aquatic flora and fauna associated with the

Owens River and its surrounding environment optimal foraging models can easily be

developed and then tested against the archaeological record to help in the overall

understanding ofhow this area was used and how that may have changed through time.

With the abundance ofboth high- and low-ranked resources, Bettinger and

Baumhoffs (1982, 1983) Traveler-Processor Model, which is wedded more closely to 44 cultural inheritance, can be applied in conjunction with the Owens River and its surrounding environs. According to this model, forager subsistence strategies are on a continuum between a traveler-like strategy on one end and a processor-like strategy on the other. Travelers possess a narrow diet breadth. They tend to exploit resources with high return rates, high search costs, but low handling costs. This strategy requires travelers to be more mobile so they can seek out the most productive resource patches.

Processors, on the other hand, possess a wide diet breadth. They exploit resources with low return rates, high handling costs, but low search costs. By exploiting lower ranked, more reliable resources such as small seeds, processors can maintain a more sedentary settlement strategy. Because it is a continuum, groups can move between the two extremes as necessary to adapt to their environment. River-specific variables such as access, seasonality, or long term environmental conditions that would effect productivity would be major factors in peoples subsistence strategies.

Most evolutionary foraging models depend on the idea that the most efficient choices or trade-offs people make will be rewarded with reproductive fitness. Ultimately, these successful behaviors will be reflected in the archaeological record as distributions oftool types, raw material, and features. By analyzing changes in these distributions, whether it be in number or form, changes in past human behavior can be understood.

This is true for the Owens Valley, by looking at these changes within the riverine environment and comparing them to data from other environments within the valley, shifts in subsistence and settlement behavior can be observed and explained. 45

Technological Organization

Technological organization is a broad category that deals with how people make, use, transport, and discard their tools and the material they use to manufacture and maintain them (Nelson 1991). It deals with topics like curated technology versus expedient technology, and helps us understand how and why people maintained certain toolkits. Different subsistence-settlement strategies have their own technological needs which will result in different artifact assemblages (Binford 1979, 1980). As strategies change through time so will these assemblages. For example, questions about mobility can be addressed by analyzing shifts in toolstone variability, as well as tool formality.

Using a non-site or distributional approach allows for the grouping ofartifacts and features in a multitude ofways. It provides an opportunity to understand how different tool classes, material types, and features occur together, how they are distributed across different land forms, and an unlimited number ofother possibilities. This method is also effective in identifying the more ephemeral surface deposits that have been overprinted by larger ones, which will help fill in some ofthe chronological gaps that occur within the

Owens Valley. The resources present in and along the Owens River provide a variety of possible exploitation methods that would require different toolkits. Shifts from hunting large game to small game or from casual foraging to intensive gathering and/or processing ofcertain plant resources can be understood by changes in technology and frequencies oftool types left behind. It is also useful in understanding how long people stayed and how they moved around the landscape, or simply put, how the river fit into the overall structure ofOwens Valley subsistence-settlement and how it may have changed. 46

Wetland Adaptation

The question surrounding wetland adaptations is whether such habitats were generally good or bad places to live and/or exploit. The answer is dependant on many variables and is case-specific depending on the nature of the particular area. What is known about wetland adaptation comes from a long history ofresearch within the Great

Basin that seems to have generated more questions than answers. This study focuses on one particular wetland setting with the purpose ofdetermining how it was exploited over time and how it fits into broader regional patterns. This is accomplished by using a distributional survey approach that identifies how cultural resources are patterned on a landscape that has witnessed millennia ofuse, and how these patterns vary within the environment itself.

Based primarily on excavations in and around Lovelock Cave, Heizer (1967) developed what he termed the "Limnosedentary Model." This was a wetland adaptation marked by sedentary or semi-sedentary popUlations that were able to subsist mainly on lacustrine resources all year and only left the prosperous wetlands to exploit other areas on occasion (Heizer 1967; Heizer and Napton 1970; Napton 1969). Madsen (1979) described similar strategies among Fremont cultures ofthe Great Basin based primarily on the work from Backhoe Village in the Sevier River area (Madsen and Lindsey 1977), later expanding the idea to Archaic cultures as well (Madsen 1982). The resources available within Great Basin wetlands, especially cattail, are believed to be rich and abundant enough to support large numbers ofpeople all year. 47

The idea that wetlands are so desirable that people would never want, or find it necessary, to exploit other areas has been dubbed and criticized by Binford (1983) as being similar to an "Eve Hypothesis," comparing the resource rich wetlands to the Garden ofEden. Other critics ofthis theory believe that wetlands were part ofa more mobile strategy that exploited them seasonally andlor as a back-up to failed resources elsewhere

(Bettinger 1978; Kelly 1983, 1985). As stated earlier, the reality is probably in the middle or along a continuum between the two extremes; the amount ofwetland exploitation would vary through time depending on productivity across the whole catchment area of a group. Within the Great Basin as a whole, resources can be highly variable and productivity can change rapidly and often (Fowler 1982, 1986; Thomas

1985; Wheat 1967). Some resources could be good some times and the same resources bad at other times, which would have profound effects on mobility strategies (Delacorte

1999; Kelly 2001). Wetlands can provide excellent foraging patches, especially for women, but this is dependant on the productivity ofother environmental zones within the region (Zeanah 1996). With this in mind, the Owens River and the abundance of

resources it supports has always been a major attraction to people since they first entered

the valley (Basgall and McGuire 1988; Bettinger 1975; Delacorte 1999; Delacorte et al.

1995).

Within the Owens Valley the riverine environment can be among the most

productive. It provides people with access to both large and small game including

waterfowl, fish, and mussels, but most important are wetland plant resources. Many of

the roots, tubers, greens, and seeds produced within this environment were at some point 48 during prehistory integral parts ofthe local aboriginal diet. Depending on environmental conditions riverine resources were also very reliable, save when climatic conditions deteriorated to the extent that wetland resources were diminished and people had to seek food in other ecological zones. Prolonged attachments to resources in other zones could also cause scheduling conflicts that would lead people to make tough choices about where to best spend their time and efforts. In all, when the environmental conditions were right, there was probably no better place to be than near the Owens River.

Distributional Archaeology

Most archaeologists agree that much prehistoric activity did not occur in specific locations characterized as "sites". Many daily activities took place outside or away from the locations where people lived, evidenced by distributions of artifacts scattered across the landscape. For this reason, the surface archaeological record in many areas is continuous and made up ofoverlapping spatial and temporal deposits superimposed over one another and should be recorded, analyzed, and interpreted with this in mind (Dunnell and Dancey 1983; Ebert 1992; Foley 1981; Thomas 1975). The Owens Valley is one such area with a rich and diverse surface archaeological record that is continually being exposed and covered up by aeolian processes. There is also a long surface record that spans thousands of years and in many areas is overlapping or mixed and can best be understood or interpreted using a non-site approach.

Certain areas on the landscape such as springs and wetlands have always been particularly attractive to hunters and gatherers; these locations tend to accumulate large 49 artifact aggregates that overlap through time creating surface assemblages that can be difficult to interpret or understand. Because ofthe abundant resources available in and along rivers, riverine environments can perhaps be included in these areas that generated lots ofactivity. Evidenced by the archaeological, ethnographic, and historical data available, the Owens River and its surrounding environment is one such place.

Historically, it has been the subject ofcontroversy over its water rights and has helped shape California's current water laws (Miller 1978; Nadeau 1997; Walton 1992; Wood

1973). Ethnographically, it was important to the Paiute and was a vital part oftheir daily subsistence (Steward 1933, 1938). Archaeologically, there are data to support this fact with evidence ofsome type ofriverine use throughout the occupation history ofthe valley

(Basgall and McGuire 1988; Bettinger 1975; Delacorte 1990, 1999; Delacorte et al.

1995). The importance of artifact aggregates (or "sites") along the river lies in the interpretation ofthe surface assemblages in areas that would have attracted so much activity for such a long period oftime. Binford (1982) discusses economic zones that describe the way people use the space around their "residential camps." Beyond the residential base, where most daily activities take place, is the "foraging radius," which is exploited by individuals or groups within a single day. The "logistical radius" is the area beyond the foraging radius that is exploited by groups who stay away from the residential base at least one night. Within the foraging radius "locations" (places where resources are exploited with limited processing taking place) accumulate and when residential bases move, these zones and locations begin to overlap. When landscapes are used for millennia the surface archaeological record becomes continuous and consists of 50 overlapping spatial and temporal deposits. Ebert (1992) outlines three conditions that must be present to form a sealed site or deposit: first, there must be a short, relatively simple behavioral episode, followed by geomorphic events that cap or seal the artifacts and features shortly after discard. Finally, an archaeologist must find the site while it still retains integrity. In reality, finding sealed sites and/or deposits is rare, especially in surface contexts. For these reasons a "non-site" or "distributional" as opposed to a "site­ based" approach was the most logical and effective method ofsurvey. This type of approach takes into consideration the idea ofsite catchment (Vita-Finzi and Higgs 1970) and the processes that make up the archaeological record. Foley (1981: 10) defines it as

"the study ofthe archaeological record on a regional scale, based on an assumption of underlying spatial continuity ofarchaeological materials, in the context ofboth behavioural and geomorphological properties." This method recognizes that the "site" is not necessarily the minimal spatial unit (Foley 1981) and that depending on the questions being asked, the catchment area is the primary spatial unit and the artifact the minimal

analytical unit (Thomas 1975). It considers that results ofhuman behavior are deposited

all along the landscape and recognizes that geomorphological and behavioral processes

influence the archaeological record on a regional scale, which can be used with

chronological controls to analyze change. Distributional archaeology realizes that most

"sites" are made up ofaggregates ofartifacts in a continuous distribution and analyzes the

distribution ofthese individual artifacts and artifact types at different scales across a

landscape and interprets what these patterns may mean for human behavior. Successful

uses ofthis approach usually require a very intensive survey strategy that includes the 51 mapping ofevery artifact and feature identified. The growing use ofGIS databases in archaeology has made this type ofdata collection and analysis a more cost-effective method (Ebert et al. 1996; Holdaway et al. 1998). Given this and the rich surface deposits along the Owens River, a distributional or non-site survey was the best method to interpret and understand the surface archaeological record within this environment. 52

Chapter 4

FIELD METHODS AND ANALYTICAL FRAMEWORK

Field Strategies

The Owens Valley is a narrow strip of land bisected by an ever-changing, oxbowed river that varies little in elevation from just north ofthe town ofBishop to

Owens Lake. Although limited, elevation change produces diversity in riverine environments from north to south, with large stream tributaries in the north and more extensive marshlands in the south. Because ofthese differences it was important to obtain a good north to south stratified sample to capture the entire range ofland-use patterns associated with the riverine environment. Moreover, given the continually shifting river channel it was important to run transects west to east to ensure that not only the modem river course would be captured, but prehistoric channels as well. This proved to be the best and most efficient way to capture the data needed to understand man-land relationships associated with the Owens River.

In order to get a north-to-south stratified sample, the river was segregated into three 10 km x 2 km zones (A, B, and C), keyed to areas that would avoid towns and private property (Figure 4.1). The 10 km length provided a sufficient sample ofeach section ofthe river and the 2 km width represents an arbitrary measure ofthe riparian corridor. Zone-A (north) runs the length ofthe river between the towns ofBishop and

Big Pine, extending approximately parallel from Saunders Lake to Klondike Lake (Figure

4.2). This zone was segregated for its northern position within the valley. Zone­ 53

N i kilometers 54

r--·.·.--. 1· , , ! $/ '" · 1/.f9r . .. ·, , /#"'-·•• - ~ . --~- ~- - -" ! I ,/ :1 (?)!y": - :- ---'j \ ­ --i ' \ ..12,1.') /: j 't ~ ' i It ! ' ,- ,, .. ~(j) / .4 -'i::::':: ~ , : I ---,~-· -- t-- T~ ! , r ~ I ' ~ -r'- ~ .. L _ _ _ ---.- ~-~ .. ~- ,, ' ..J 1 -, t l ~ ' ~r-" '. ! ...... , ..j (~. i ,.i. i. 21," J}' 22 \ ,I 23 ~ . ~ .~.:. :r~ ~ ' ~ ... -f ­ ;1 l 1

1,. I 1 ., -18'

LEGEND

Survey Unit Selection Transects Selected 100x2000 m Survey Unit 33 1 ­

N o .5 ~-=-=== KILOMETERS 1 o 112 Magnetic Declination 14' (Poleta Canyon) MILES Magnetic Declination 14' 30' (Big Pine) Contour Interval 20 meters FIGURE 4.2. Distribution of Survey Unit Transects within Survey Zone A. 55

B (central) runs from the Black Rock area towards the town of Independence, extending approximately parallel from Calvert Lake to Goose Lake. This zone is centrally located within the valley and provides an opportunity for comparison with data acquired during other projects conducted in the area (Figure 4.3). Zone-C (south) is located along the river from the Alabama Gates area (above Reinhackle Spring) down towards Owens Lake

(Figure 4.4). The southernmost zone was chosen for its location, as well as the possibility of identifying older artifact aggregates due to its position in relation to the Alabama Hills, and the opportunity for comparison with data from the Alabama Gates project.

Each zone was then further stratified into four 2.5 km x 2 km areas (AI, A2, A3, etc.) to maintain an even sample of each zone. These areas are then divided into twenty­ five 100 m x 2 km transects that run west to east perpendicular across the river. The goal was to examine at least 500 m on either side of the river within the transects. Of these twenty-five transects, one from each area was randomly selected for survey, resulting in four per zone and twelve overall (see Figures 4.2-4.4). The transects are 100 m x 2 km in size and extend from the river for 0.5 to 1.5 km depending on topography, soil, and vegetation. Some extend further on the east or west side to ensure that both past and modem riverine habitats were surveyed.

The survey required a team of people spaced 10m apart to walk straight lines

(n=10) down each transect and pin-flag every formed artifact, feature, and aggregate of

2 debitage (at least 51m ). Starting at the west edge of the transects at every 100 m interval each individual measured out a 10 x 10 m unit and tallied the debitage and tools within 56

LEGEND B Survey Unit Selection Transects Selected 100x2000 m Survey Unit

.5 USGS 75' o,___ L N • Blacl

11 1! ., _ '. \" ' '' ~ ~.. ~, ~ I­ __ _ ..... ___ . J~~ ___ • _ ~!.... . : . ~- -- - A+ :I .

/ !~~./ : / / ;-' ;/,J ;

- ---I

\,

, ~ I ~ ---1------­ ------I I :I

I '

:I :

. ' LEGEND B Survey Unit Selection Transects Selected 100x2000 m Survey Unit

o .5 USGS 7.5' N • Union Wash, CA 1982 KILOMETERS o 112 1 MILES CALIF Magnetic Declination 15° Contour Inter;al 20 meters ~ FIGURE 4.4. Distribution of Survey Unit Transects within Survey Zone C. 58 these units to track variation in debitage densities. The two central units (5 and 6) were collected in order to obtain sufficient obsidian samples along the whole length ofthe transects (Figure 4.5). With a non-site approach, this tight resolution was necessary to collect sufficient distributional data across such narrow transects. These survey teams were followed by a team with handheld global positioning system (GPS) units digitally recording the locations of all flagged items, photographing them with a digital camera,

and conducting any in-field analysis that needed to be documented. Ground stone, battered stone, uncollected flake tools, cores, core tools and features were analyzed in the

... TRANSECT CONTINUES 500 M TO WEST

100 m

ALL DEBITAGE TALLIED

ALL DEBITAGE < COLLECTED

ALL DEBITAGE TALLIED 10 m

10 m

FIGURE 4.5. Debitage Sample Units. 59 field on individual fonns. Analysis included size, fonn, and particular attributes that deal with fonnality, intensity ofuse, and discard. Collection included temporally diagnostic artifacts, including projectile points as well as representative samples of pottery, obsidian debitage, and some freshwater shell. These were collected to help provide temporal controls on artifact distributions and to show how technology varied as people adapted to changes within the environment. Aggregates ofdebitage equaling 51m2 or more that were located in areas that did not get sampled by the control collection units were sampled by placing a I x 1m collection unit in the densest area of the aggregate.

Although this was a "non-site" survey, dense accumulations ofartifacts that might traditionally be labeled as "sites" had their boundaries recorded and estimated debitage densities recorded. Some ofthe collected obsidian artifacts were dated using the obsidian hydration method (see below). Collected obsidian artifacts were visually sourced using low-power magnification; sourcing provided insight into mobility and/or exchange relationships, and along with temporal data, infonnation on how these may have changed over time. Shell can lend insight into the intensity with which resources were being exploited, and in some cases what season the mussels were exploited; the latter was not explored here. Each transect was also mapped by a crew member to record modem vegetation and geomorphology. Spatial infonnation was compiled and entered into a GIS database where it was quantified and analyzed. 60

Flaked Stone Analysis

Flaked stone artifact and debitage analyses were designed to provide information on tool acquisition, use, and discard. Most ofthe analyses were done in the field and the artifacts left in place. The metrical criteria and attributes recorded were guided by methods that have been commonly used in the Owens Valley region (cf. Basgall and

Giambastiani 1995; Basgall and McGuire 1988; Bettinger 1989; Delacorte 1999;

Delacorte et al. 1995).

Projectile Points

A total of 28 projectile points was collected and analyzed from the survey, all manufactured from obsidian. These were bifacially flaked artifacts that retained enough diagnostic proximal hafting elements to be identified as a projectile. The artifacts were characterized as either whole, near-complete, margin, or proximal pieces. Using Thomas

(1981) as a guide, metrical attributes were recorded and when possible, known temporal/morphological types were assigned.

Bifaces

Distal ends and other unidentifiable fragments ofprojectile points were defined as bifaces, along with artifacts that exhibited intentional continuous flake scaring along opposite margins to reduce mass and/or shape the tool. A total of70 bifaces was analyzed for this project. Ofthese, 61 were analyzed in the field and left in place, nine 61 others collected either as misidentified projectile points or as part of a debitage collection unit.

Metrical attributes such as length. width. and thickness were recorded. along with infonnation on material type and artifact condition. A three-stage reduction sequence was used based on morphological and technological criteria. Early stage bifaces are percussion flaked only. have little to no symmetry. margins are usually uneven. and are generally thick in cross-section. Middle stage bifaces are extensively percussion and intennittently pressure flaked, exhibit good planar symmetry, regularized or even margins. and unifonn cross-sections. Late stage bifaces are finished or nearly-finished tools such as projectile points and knives that are extensively pressure flaked on both surfaces along the entire margin. Other attributes recorded include use wear. secondary modifications and, when possible, the probability ofbeing an arrow or dart fragment was connoted.

Formed Flake Tools

A total of 17 fonned flake tools was recorded and analyzed during the survey, one collected as part of a debitage collection unit. These artifacts are defined as flake blanks that usually have some degree of shaping and/or intrusive retouch creating unifonn edges.

In addition to metric attributes and material, analyses included flake type (cortical, interior percussion, biface thinning, or indetenninate), number of worked edges, type of wear and edge modification. 62

Simple Flake Tools

Simple flake tools are pieces ofdebitage that exhibit use wear on one or more edges and little to no signs ofintentional retouch or edge preparation. A total of62 such artifacts was analyzed, 16 collected within the debitage collection units. Metric attributes and material were recorded as well as flake type (cortical, interior percussion, biface thinning, or indeterminate), number ofworked edges, type ofwear and edge modification.

Cores

Only four cores were recorded during the survey, one ofwhich was collected.

Cores are masses of stone that exhibit at least two intentional flake removals, usually off of the same platform. Metric attributes, condition, and material were recorded and type was assigned based on the platform configuration (unidirectional, bidirectional, bifacial,

or multidirectional). The number ofplatforms was noted as well as any use-wear or

secondary modifications.

Debitage

Debitage comprises waste flaking debris from the manufacture, use, and repair of

flaked stone tools. The majority ofthe debitage recorded on this survey was not collected

and therefore not analyzed; the sampling strategy for debitage has already been discussed.

Uncollected flakes were tallied by distribution and material type. Collected debitage was

analyzed by first sorting into five size categories «1.0 em, 1.0-2.0 cm, 2.0-3.0 cm, 3.0­

5.0 em, >5.0 cm) and then being placed into one of four technological categories. 63

Decortication includes primary (more than 70% cortex) and secondary (less than 70% cortex) cortical debris along with shatter that retained any amount ofcortex. Interior percussion flakes are straight in cross-section and includes simple (one dorsal arris), complex (more than one dorsal arris), and linear (twice as long as wide with one dorsal arris and no cortex) interior percussion debris. Biface thinning flakes are curved and

include both early (one or two dorsal arrises) and late (more than two dorsal arrises) stage

biface thinning debris. The pressure flake category can include all edge preparation,

linear, and rounded pressure debris. A fifth, residual category ofpercussion debris was

used for indeterminate and broken percussion flakes, but does not provide information on

technology and is left out ofmost ofthe analyses.

Ground and Battered Stone Analysis

A total of65 ground and battered stone artifacts was analyzed during this project,

which included 44 millingslabs, 12 handstones, and nine battered cobbles. These tools

were analyzed in the field and left in place. The methodology behind the attributes

recorded are designed to assess formality, intensity of use, and secondary modification or

reuse ofthe implements. Assuming these characteristics are the results of function and

situation rather than social or stylistic issues (Basgall et al. 1988; Basgall and Hall 1994;

Nelson and Lippmeier 1993), they should give a good indication ofhow intensively the

tools were utilized and the extent ofthe implement's use-life, including reuse ofbroken

implements. Analytical treatments recognized three basic types of ground and battered

stone tools including millingstones, handstones, and battered cobbles (cobble tools, core­ 64 cobble tools). The category ofmiscellaneous ground stone is a catch-all for pieces of stone that retain at least one ground facet, but are too fragmentary to be classified morphologically. The location and general description ofsuch artifacts were noted, but the artifacts themselves were not analyzed. All ofthe analyzed artifacts were digitally photographed and locations were recorded via GPS.

Millingstones

Millingstones are flat to concave slabs generally used as a netherstone in conjunction with some type ofhandstone or muller for the processing ofvegetal resources. Material identification, tool condition, and general metrics were recorded, including maximum length, width, and thickness. When enough ventral and dorsal surface remained to obtain an accurate thickness, the millings labs were divided into three categories: thin «6 cm), thick (6-13 cm), and block (>13 cm). Using thickness categories has proven successful on other projects in the general region (cf. Basgall et al. 1988).

These data speak to mass and portability and are useful for inter-regional comparisons.

Formality was assessed by the presence or absence ofmargin shaping, number of surfaces, and surface shape (flat, slightly concave, or concave). Observations relating to the intensity ofuse on the working surfaces included texture (smooth or irregular), along with the presence or absence ofpecking, polishing, and striations. Secondary modifications and burning were recorded as indicators ofreuse andlor multi -use ofslabs or slab fragments. 65

Handstones

After material. condition, and general metrics were recorded, handstones were recognized as either shaped (showing purposeful margin modification), unshaped, or indeterminate. Number ofworking surfaces were identified (unifacial, bifacial, or multi­ facial), followed by the surface shape and texture. Shape was connoted as convex, slightly convex, or flat. Texture was either smooth or irregular. Attributes concerning intensity ofuse include the presence or absence ofpecking, polishing, and striations.

Other observations recorded relate to secondary use or reuse and burning.

Battered Cobbles

The battered cobbles were identified as exhibiting damage to cortical (cobble tools) or percussion flaked (core-cobble tools) edges. Other attributes related to use include the type ofwear (flaking, grinding, or battering) and its location (on one or both ends, along the margins, or around the tool perimeter). Finally, each tool was inspected for any concomitant or sequential wear (battering or grinding on broken surfaces) or secondary use, which includes burning.

Time-Sensitive Artifacts

Projectile Points

Ofthe 28 projectile points collected, all can be at least provisionally assigned to temporaVmorphological types common to the Owens Valley region. These include three 66

Cottonwood Triangular, one Cottonwood Leaf-shaped, one Desert Side-notched, five

Rose Spring, six Elko Comer-notched (two "thick" variants per Gilreath and Hildebrandt

[1997]), one Elko Contracting-stem, four Humboldt Concave-base (three small), one

GatecliffSplit-stem, two Pinto, two Lake Mohave, and two provisional Great Basin

Stemmed (cf. Silver Lake) projectile points.

Desert Series

Desert series arrow points are considered late prehistoric forms that date to the

Marana period (650-100 B.P.; Basgall and McGuire 1988; Bettinger 1989; Delacorte

1999). This series includes variations of the Desert Side-notched and Cottonwood projectile points (Baumhoff and Byrne 1959; Heizer and Hester 1978; Thomas 1981).

Desert Side-notched points are small triangular arrow points notched on the sides; the notches can vary in depth and the bases range from slightly concave to notched.

Cottonwood Triangular arrow points are small and triangular with bases that range from flat to slightly concave. Cottonwood Leaf-shaped are small bi-pointed arrow points,

typically with convex margins.

Rose Spring Series

Rose Spring series points are considered to be the first arrow forms in the region, dating to the Haiwee period (1350-650 B.P.; Basgall and McGuire 1988; Bettinger 1989;

Thomas 1981). Rose Spring arrow points are small, comer-notched or contracting­ stemmed points with triangular blades (Heizer and Baumhoff 1961; Lanning 1963; 67

Thomas 1981). This series can also include Eastgate projectile points described by

Heizer and Baumhoff(1961), which are slight variations ofthe Rose Spring forms that mayor may not be segregated by space (Thomas 1981).

Elko Series

Elko series points are thought to date between 3500-1350 B.P. and conform to the early and late Newberry periods (Basgall and McGuire 1988; Bettinger and Taylor 1974;

Heizer and Hester 1978; O'Connell 1967; Thomas 1981). Work in this region, however, suggests that some ofthe larger side- and comer-notched forms or "thick" Elko forms can predate this time period (Basgall 2002; Basgall and Giambastiani 1995; Basgall et al.

1995; Gilreath and Hildebrant 1997). Elko points are large darts with wide blades and are

most commonly comer-notched or eared, but there are also side-notched and contracting

stem variants (Thomas 1981).

Humboldt Series

Humboldt series projectile points are poor time markers, different researchers

assigning age ranges anywhere from 5400 to 650 B.P. More recent research in the Inyo­

Mono region has supported the idea that the Humboldt series points are generally

Newberry period (3500-1350 B.P.) artifacts (Basgall and McGuire 1988; Hall and

Jackson 1989), though the Basal-notched forms may spill into the early Haiwee period

and some Concave-based forms could predate the Newberry period. Humboldt points are

unnotched, lanceolate, basal-notched or concave-based projectile points (Thomas 1981). 68

These points were originally defined by surface artifacts found on the Humboldt Lake site

(Heizer and Clewlow 1968), initially split into three types that included the Humboldt

Concave Base A, Humboldt Concave Base B, and Humboldt Basal-notched forms.

GatecliffSeries

Gatecliff Split-stem points are relatively thin dart forms with gracile stems, well­ defined~ straight to barbed distal shoulders~ and an elongate appearance. They are morphologically similar to Pinto points and are often confused with that series~ but occur

later in time (ca. 5000-3000 B.P. [Basgall and Hall 2000]). GatecliffSplit-stem points are more prevalent in the northern portion of the western Great Basin than Pinto points

and are rare in Owens Valley.

Pinto Series

Pinto series points were first named for a class ofprojectile points that were

recovered from a site in the Pinto Basin in southeastern California (Amsden 1935). They

are highly variable~ but are generally robust darts that have straight-sided to contracting or

even expanding stems and indented or bifurcate bases with prominent basal ears

(Harrington 1957). Pinto points are often confused or lumped with other bifurcate-stem

points that occur to the north. They are, however~ statistically thicker and squatter than

these other points and appear significantly older (Basgall and Hall 2000). Pinto points are

considered time markers for the Pinto period~ dating around 8000-4000 B.P. 69

Great Basin Stemmed Series

Great Basin Stemmed series projectile points display a variety ofmorphological forms and equally as many type names (cf Delacorte 1999). The Lake Mohave variety is a percussion flaked dart point with weak shoulders and long heavy stems that exhibit grinding and rounded bases. The Silver Lake variety has a shorter, wider stem and more demarcated shoulders. Most research suggests that in the Owens Valley region these points date from roughly 9000 B.P. to 6000 B.P. (Basgall 1993; Basgall and Hall 1991,

1992; Gilreath and Hildebrandt 1997; Warren 1984).

Pottery

Hundreds ofOwens Valley Brown Ware (OVBW) sherds were documented during the survey. Riddell (1951) was the first to describe this pottery type during the analysis ofsherds recovered from Cottonwood Creek (CA-INY-2). Although there is intersite ceramic variability across the Owens Valley (Bettinger 1975; Pierce 2004) it is all classified as OVBW and believed to be a late prehistoric phenomenon. Brown Ware from CA-INY-2 was recovered in association with Desert series projectile points (Riddell

1951). Research since then has supported the notion that OVBW shows up late in the archaeological record with all contexts dating to the Marana period (Pierce 2004); this includes CA-INY-30, where one ofthe largest regional pottery collections was recovered and much ofit associated with Marana-age houses that radiocarbon dated to 710 ± 70

B.P. or later (Basgall and McGuire 1988). 70

Distributional data on pottery in the western Great Basin demonstrates that sherds are most commonly found in lowland areas around rivers and especially lakes (Eerkens

2001). This tends to hold true within the Owens Valley, where most ofthe pottery is located on the valley floor. The largest concentrations occur in the southern part ofthe valley near Owens Lake (Eerkens 2001; Pierce 2004). Although mobility may influence attribute variability (Pierce 2004), it does not seem to be the guiding factor behind the overall distribution of sherds. Instead, pottery tends to be located in areas where lower­ ranked resources, namely small seeds and shellfish, are found. This suggests that pottery was used in the processing and/or storage of such resources. There is also some correlation between ground stone and OVBW that suggests the use ofpots in the processing ofsmall seeds. It appears that the development ofceramic technology in the

Owens Valley began some time in the early Marana period as a response to the reliance upon, or the intensification of, lower-ranked resources such as small seeds, roots, tubers, and shellfish (Eerkens 2001; Pierce 2004).

Mussel Shell

Although not technically a time marker, intensive exploitation of freshwater molluscs in the Owens Valley is believed to have begun in late prehistoric times (Basgall

and McGuire 1988; Bettinger 1989; Delacortel999; Delacorte et al. 1995). These

activities are evidenced by small to large shell concentrations within sites throughout the

valley floor and especially close to the river. Freshwater mussel shells provide a unique opportunity to study exactly what season the molluscs were procured (see Chatters 1999). 71

Seasonality studies within the Owens Valley indicate that mussels were taken in late

May/early June and again in late July/early August. This coincides with the beginning and ending ofthe spring river flow and, more importantly, the spawning run ofsuckers in the Owens River. Because the fish are a higher ranked resource and a better source of protein, mussels may have been used as a back-up food when fish arrived late or left early

(Chatters 1999). Alternatively, mussels may have been taken opportunistically when encountered during procurement ofother resources.

Obsidian Sourcing

Obsidian can be assigned to specific geochemical sources using two different methods, X-Ray Fluorescence (XRF) and visual inspection. Although the XRF method is typically more accurate, it is also more costly. In Owens Valley, it has been shown that

XRF may not be as necessary depending upon the resolution or accuracy needed to answer specific questions. Many eastern California obsidian sources can be accurately identified using visual criteria under low-power magnification (Bettinger et al. 1984).

Within the Owens Valley this method has been shown to have success rates in excess of

90% for many ofthe local sources (Bettinger 1982b; Delacorte and McGuire 1993;

Delacorte et al. 1995). For these reasons and cost considerations a macroscopic method ofvisually identifying specific obsidian sources was employed for this project. All collected obsidian tools and debitage were sUbjected to visual source ascription using

low-power magnification. When pieces were too small or did not exhibit source-specific 72 traits needed to accurately assign them to a specific source, they were segregated as

"questionable" and left out ofthe statistical analyses.

Obsidian Hydration

When obsidian is fractured by natural or cultural processes, it begins to absorb water at a constant rate, forming hydration bands that can be measured in microns through microscopic analysis. Because ofthe unique geochemical fingerprints of different obsidian sources, these bands can be used to produce source-specific rates of hydration and used as chronological measures. The rate basically calculates how long it has taken for the width ofthe hydration band to form and on well-understood sources good age estimates can be derived for obsidian artifacts. The rate at which hydration bands form can be affected by temperature and humidity (Friedman and Long 1976;

Friedman et al 1994, 1997). Therefore, before specific rates can be applied, the artifacts need to be adjusted for effective hydration temperature (EHT), which varies depending on where the hydration rate was developed (Lee 1969). The EHT adjusts for differences in temperature that specific artifacts may have been exposed to, correcting the hydration value regardless ofwhere or at what elevation an artifact was recovered from. Over the years, sourcing, along with hydration has proven to be an invaluable resource to researchers studying the region (cf. Basgall 1989; Basgall and Richman 1998; Hall and

Jackson 1989; Hull 2001). It is especially useful when analyzing spatial and temporal trends at local and/or regional levels. For this study, samples ofdebitage assigned to the

Fish Springs, Truman-Queen, Casa Diablo, and Coso obsidian sources were subjected to 73 hydration analysis. The samples consisted of obsidian debitage assigned to one ofthe above sources, but no more than ten pieces of a particular source from any collection unit.

Thus, for any collection unit there could be anywhere from zero to 40 pieces ofdebitage.

Beyond this, all projectile points, two formed flake tools (including a keeled uniface), and a core also underwent hydration analyses. The hydration rates used for this project are summarized in Table 4.1. Some of these rates are better than others, but all have met with some success. Because the rates were developed for different areas within the region, many ofthe samples had to be adjusted for EHT using 6% corrections before they could be applied (Origer 1989; Basgall 1990).

TABLE 4.1: Hydration Rates.

Source Rate Developed by Developed for

Casa Diablo years B.P.=129.656 x microns 1826 Hall and Jackson (1989) Long Valley

Coso years RP.=31.62 x microns232 Basgall (1990) Lone Pine

Fish Springs years RP.=96.54 x microns L90 Basgall and Delacorte (2003) Independence

Truman Queen years RP.=82.74 x microns203 Basgall and Giambastiani (1995) Bishop

B.P. = before present. 74

Chapter 5

RESULTS

In all, twelve transects in three sample areas that encompassed 2.4 km2 were surveyed, resulting in identification of 247 formed artifacts, 1,993 pieces ofdebitage, several hundred pottery sherds, and 16 features, that were variously analyzed, collected, or tallied (Table 5.1). A total of322 pieces ofdebitage, several flaked stone artifacts, and all 28 projectile points was subjected to visual sourcing. Two hundred four pieces of debitage and all the projectile points underwent obsidian hydration analyses. The results ofthese data are presented here and offer new and interesting information about the

Owens River environment and help fill gaps in the overall subsistence-settlement system of the valley and surrounding region.

Flaked Stone

Projectile Points

The 28 projectile points recovered during the survey are all manufactured from obsidian (Plate 5.1). Morphological types include three Cottonwood Triangular, one

Cottonwood Leaf-shaped, one Desert Side-notched, and five Rose Spring series arrow points, along with seven Elko, four Humboldt, one Gatecliff split-stem, two Pinto, two

Lake Mohave, and two provisional Great Basin Stemmed dart points. Dart points outnumber arrow points 18 to 10 (1.8: 1), which might imply that hunting was more important within the riverine environment earlier in time; however, when adjusted for 75

TABLE 5.1: Project Artifact Assemblage Composition.

Transect PPT BIF FFT SFT COR MST HND CBT DEB TOTAL AIW 2 1 + 4 AlE 9 6 7 2 + 27 A2W 5 1 3 + 11 A2E 3 1 + 5 A3W 6 1 4 2 2 + 15 A3E 3 2 1 1 + 8 A4W 5 1 1 1 + 9 A4E 4 5 1 15 12 1 + 38 northern total 8 38 5 28 25 6 7 + 117

BIW 3 5 11 2 + 22 BIE 1 B2W 2 + 3 B2E B3W 2 8 5 2 1 + 18 B3E 1 1 B4W 2 11 + 15 B4E central total 8 17 7 24 1 2 2 + 60

CIW 1 1 CIE + 3 C2W C2E 2 2 6 + 11 C3W C3E 3 4 2 2 2 + 13 C4W 1 4 1 1 1 + 8 C4E 5 7 3 4 1 10 3 1 + 34 southern total 12 16 6 10 3 17 4 2 + 70

Total 28 70 18 62 4 44 12 9 + 247

PPT = projectile point; BIF biface; FFT fonned flake tool; SFT = simple flake tool; MST rnillingstone; HND = hands tone; CBT = cobble tool; DEB = debitaie; W = west; E = east; - = absent; + = l!resent. actual time, these numbers level out and may even favor the arrow points (Table 5.2).

This is not to suggest that hunting was necessarily more important later in time, but was always a worthwhile endeavor within this environment. The numbers may likely reflect 76

PLATE 5.1. Select Projectile Points from Project Areas (a. C3W-269; h. C4E-296; c. A3E-91 ; d. A4E-152; e. BIW-l72; f. C4W-282; g. BIW-160; h. B2W-290; i. AIE-IO; j . C2E-256; k. C4E­ 303; I. C4E-299). 77

TABLE 5.2: Projectile Points Adjusted for Time.

Pts. Per Period Dates #pts. 1000 yrs. Pt. TyPe

Marana 650-150 B.P. 5 10.0 (4 CTW, 1 DSN) Haiwee 1350-650 B.P. 5 7.1 (5 RS) Total Arrow Pts. 10 8.3

Newberry 3500-1350 B.P. 11 5.1 (7 Elko, 4 Hum) Pinto 7500-3500 B.P. 3 0.8 (2 Pinto, I GC-SS) Lake Mohave 11000-7500 B.P. 4 1.2 (2 LM, 2 GBS) Total Dart Pts. 18 1.9

Total ArrowlDart Pts. 28 2.7 pts. =points; yrs. years; B.P. before present; CTW =Cottonwood; DSN Desert Side-notched; RS = Rose Spring; HUM Humboldt; GC-SS = GateclitT Split-stem; LM = Lake Mohave; GBS =Great Basin Stemmed; n =number. increased populations and are also skewed by the effects ofillicit artifact collection within the valley. Also, the ratio ofdart to arrow points used by individual hunters is not fully understood and makes a comparison ofthis sort hard to interpret. Eight ofthe projectile points (29%) are whole or near-complete, while the majority (57%) are proximal ends, and the remainder either margin or medial fragments. Exactly one halfof the whole or near-complete artifacts are darts versus arrows, all ofwhich were probably lost, as opposed to discarded, after use. Conversely, proximal ends were more likely discarded while retooling during or after hunting activities. In this sample proximal dart ends outnumber arrows 12 to 4 (3:1), again implying a prevalence ofhunting or at least anticipation ofhunting activities early in the record. Regardless ofthis, the number of points illustrates the importance ofhunting in riverine contexts early in the occupational history of the valley, though it clearly extends into the Haiwee and Marana eras as well. 78

Bifaces

A total of 70 bifaces was analyzed during the survey effort, most ofthem in the field (Table 5.3; Plate 5.2a-c). Obsidian is by far the dominant material (93%), followed by cryptocrystalline silicate (4%) and igneous (1 %) stone; one artifact was not identified to material type. Nine (13%) are whole or near-complete items, 17 (24%) medial sections, eight (11 %) margin fragments, 16 (23%) distal ends, eight (11 %) proximal ends, seven (10%) are indeterminate end pieces, and three (4%) are indeterminate fragments.

TABLE 5.3: Select Biface Attribute Data by Location.

NW NE CW CE SW SE TOTAL

Condition WHLINC 3 2 2 4 11 PRX 2 3 2 1 8 DST 3 4 3 5 16 END 1 3 3 7 MRGIMED 9 7 6 1 25 FRGIIND 1 1 1 3 Total 18 20 15 4 12 70

Stage Early 2 1 3 6 Middle 5 8 4 5 22 Late 11 10 11 3 4 40 Indetenninate 1 1 2

Probable Point Yes (dart) 1 4 6 1 13 Yes (arrow) 2 3 5 No 7 12 7 2 7 35 Indeterminate 8 1 2 2 4 17

Use Wear Present 10 5 4 4 23 Absent 8 15 11 4 8 47

NW =northwest; NE northeast; CW central west; CE central east; BW =southwest; BE = southeast; WHL = whole; NC near cO!!!£lete; PRX = E!roximal; DBT = distal; MRO = mars!n; MED =medial; FRO = fra~nt; lND =indetenninate. 79

PLATE 5.2. Select Flaked Stone Artifacts from Project Areas [bifaces (a. C4E-336; b. A4W-I02; c. A3E-89); formed flake tools (d. AIE-37; e. B4W-239); flake tools (f. Al W­ 4; g. B4W-229; h. AIE-34)]. 80

Twenty-three (33%) ofthe bifaces showed signs ofmacroscopic damage associated with use. Most common was edge grinding, present on 14 (61 %) specimens, followed by unifacial micro-chipping on nine (39%), bifacial micro-chipping on three (13%), and unifacial or bifacial edge flaking on two each (9%). The majority ofthe bifaces are late­ stage (57%) artifacts, followed by middle-stage (31 %), and early-stage (9%) forms; two

(3%) are indeterminate. Only 19 (27%) ofthe bifaces appear to be projectile point fragments, 13 ofdart-size and five ofarrow-size; one is indeterminate. The biface sample exhibits a relatively high incidence and an interesting pattern ofedge damage. When broken down by reduction stage, late-stage forms account for 43% (n=10), middle-stage

35% (n=8), and early-stage 22% (n=5) ofthe overall damage observed. However, only

25% of the late-stage bifaces possess visible use-wear, while 36% of the middle stage and

83% ofthe early-stage artifacts have edge damage related to use. That even the early­ stage bifaces are being used to process resources, though they are presumably intended for further reduction, highlights the assumption that these tools were brought to this environment in complete or nearly complete form. Overall, biface reduction does not appear to be a major activity within the riverine environment, as most ofthe tools appear to have been discarded or lost during hunting and/or processing activities, not broken during production.

Formed Flake Tools

The majority ofthe 18 formed flake tools analyzed during the survey were manufactured from obsidian (67%), with some cryptocrystalline silicates (17%), basalt 81

(11 %), and general igneous (5%) materials (Table 5.4; Plate 5.2d-e). Many of these tools

(67%) were found in whole or near-complete condition, but three are medial fragments

(17%), two end fragments (11 %), and one a margin. The original flake type is indeterminate on close to half ofthe tools (47%); most diagnostic specimens are interior percussion flakes (80%), with singular examples of biface thinning (10%), and cortical

TABLE 5.4: Select Attributes ofFormed and Simple Flake Tools .

Formed Flake Tools •••• •• ~.~ ••• ~ ...... t ...... ~ ...... ~~~!::.f!~~.I~~~.~...... OBS CCR IGNIBAS OBS CCR SLT IGNIBAS TOTAL

Condition WholelNC 6 3 3 30 3 46 Proximal 4 4 Distal 1 2 3 Margin 1 13 16 Medial 3 5 10 Ind. End 1 1

Flake Type Decortication 1 2 3 Interior Perc. 5 2 10 3 21 Bif. Thinning 23 2 26 Indeterminate 7 19 1 1 30

Edges One 6 3 2 37 2 3 54 Two 6 1 15 1 23 Three 1 1 Indetenninate 1 2

Modification Micro-chip. 9 3 64 4 1 1 82 Edge Flaking 16 3 3 23 1 3 49 Step Fractured 2 2 2 6 Indeterminate 1 2

Total Tools 12 3 3 54 3 1 4 80 Total Edges 18 3 4 70 4 1 3 103

slate; NC = near-complete; Ind. = 82

(10%) flakes. The fact that many ofthe tools are made on interior percussion flakes removed from cores and the generallack ofcores and interior percussion debitage recorded along the river, implies that most ofthese tools were manufactured elsewhere and brought to the riverine environment. All of the tools have either one (65%) or two

(35%) working edges. The most common types ofedge modification and/or use-wear are unifacial edge flaking (68%) and unifacial micro-chipping (55%), with lesser amounts of bifacial edge-flaking (23%) and bifacial micro-chipping (5%). Metrics ranged from 26.2­

71.6 mm in maximum length (average = 42.1 mm), 17.0-52.1 mm in maximum width

(average 31.4 mm), and 3.2-40.6 mm in maximum thickness (average 13.2 mm).

One ofthe near-complete tools can be identified as a keeled uniface, which generally date to the early and middle Holocene in the Inyo-Mono region (Delacorte 1990; Giambastiani et al. 2001).

Simple Flake Tools

Sixty-two simple flake tools or utilized flakes were analyzed during this project.

Of these, 54 (87%) were obsidian, three cryptocrystalline silicate (5%), three igneous

(5%), one basalt (1 %), and one slate (1 %) specimen (Table 5.4; Plate 5.2f-h). Over half

(55%) ofthe flake tools were whole or near-complete, which speaks to the expedient nature and discard ofthese tools. The remainder ofthe artifacts were either margins

(24%), medial fragments (11 %), and proximal (7%) or distal (3%) ends. Most are made from biface thinning flakes (42%), followed by interior percussion flakes (22%), and cortical debris (3%), with indeterminate percussion flakes comprising the rest ofthe tools 83

(33%). Given that most of the bifaces recorded were late-stage forms suggests that some ofthese flakes were probably brought to the river to be used as cutting tools. The majority ofthe flake tools have one working edge (73%), with some possessing two edges (26%) and one specimen having three modified margins (1 %). Edge shapes are dominated by straight-even specimens (61 %). with fewer straight-irregular (6%), concave-even (20%), concave-irregular (2%), convex-even (6%), and convex-irregular

(5%) edges. The most common forms ofedge modification or use-wear are unifacial micro-chipping (68%), unifacial edge-flaking (23%), and occasionally bifacial edge­ flaking (4%), bifacial micro-chipping (3%), and step fracturing (2%). Average tool measurements range from 15.0-56.3 mm in maximum length (average = 32.1 mm). 11.0­

61.5 mm in maximum width (average 22.6 mm), and 3.3-12.7 mm in maximum thickness (average = 6.4 mm). Edge angles were not recorded on all specimens, but measured pieces range from 37° to 75° (average 47.5°).

Cores

Only four cores were encountered during the survey. one ofwhich is manufactured from obsidian, two ofigneous, and one ofquartzite toolstone. The two igneous specimens are fragments ofunidirectional cores that exhibit one platform. The obsidian core is whole and measures 36.9 mm long, 32.6 mm wide, and 15.9 mm thick; it is multidirectional with two separate platforms. The whole quartzite core measures

67.7 mm in length 49.1 mm in width, and 39.9 mm thick. It is bifacial with only one visible platform. 84

Debitage

A total of340 pieces ofdebitage was collected during the project. Ofthese, 322 or 95% are obsidian, ten cryptocrystalline silicates, six basalt or fine-grained igneous, and two are quartzite. The sample includes 184 (55%) flakes that are technologically diagnostic, with the rest being broken or indeterminate percussion debris. Biface thinning flakes comprise the majority (62%) ofthe diagnostic debitage. This is followed by interior percussion or core reduction flakes (19%), pressure flakes (17%), and finally decortication debris (2%). Generally, there seemed to be low densities ofdebitage within the riverine environment, most ofwhich relates to the thinning ofbifaces, whether for manufacture or resharpening. Given the lack ofcortical debris and early stage bifaces it would be safe to say most ofthe lithic reduction involved the finishing or resharpening of bifacial tools that were manufactured outside ofthe riverine environment. This is also apparent when looking at the size ofthe thinning debris: 76% are size 2 (1.0-2.0 cm),

21 % size 3 (2.0-3.0 cm), and only 3% are size 4 (3.0-5.0 cm) flakes. The relatively small size ofthe flakes is more indicative ofresharpening activities than ofmanufacture. The lack ofsize 1 «1.0 cm) flakes is most likely due to the fact that this was a surface survey and very small percussion and pressure flakes would not be as visible on the surface.

Discussion

To get a comparison ofthe surface archaeology within another environment, artifacts recorded from surface contexts at 14 sites in the Desert Scrub zone were looked at. The sites are from the Aberdeen-Blackrock project and were recorded and analyzed 85 by the Archaeological Research Center at California State University, Sacramento (see

Zeanah and Leigh 2002). Comparison ofthe data is somewhat skewed by the fact that

Blackrock was a test phase excavation and not a non-site survey, however, they do lend some insight into the flaked stone technological differences between the two zones. A higher percentage ofwhole or near-complete projectile points was recovered from the

Blackrock area than the Owens River, suggesting more points were lost or left behind within this environment (Table 5.5). However, proximal ends are fairly comparable, indicating that point rehafting was taking place in both environments. Bifaces from

Blackrock have almost double the percentage of early- and middle-stage specimens than that of the Owens River, while the river had significantly more late-stage forms. This implies that more biface reduction was taking place in the Blackrock area. This notion is

TABLE 5.5: Owens River-Blackrock Flaked Stone Comparisons.

Owens River Blackrock

Projectile Point n=28 n=97 WHUNC n=8 29% n=43 44% PRX n=16 57% n=47 48% OTH n=4 14% n=7 7%

Bifaces n=70 n=153 Early-stage n=6 9% n=27 18% Middle-stage n=22 31% n=106 69% (33% stg-3, 36% stg-4) Late-stage n=40 51% n=15 10% Unidentified n=2 3% n=5 3%

Formed Flake Tool n=18 n=l1

Simple Flake Tool n=62 n=85

Cores n=4 n=15 n = number; WHL = whole; NC = near-complete; OTH = other; stg = stage. 86 reinforced by the biface use-wear analysis, with bifaces from both areas displaying extensive use (Table 5.6). Early-stage bifaces from the riverine environment show a higher percentage ofwear than the Blackrock specimens, which suggests that the riverine artifacts are being used as tools and the others are probably unfinished implements meant for further reduction. Percentage-wise, the river had more formed flake tools and fewer cores, implying that more processing activities were taking place. Simple flake tools are fairly comparable in both areas, highlighting the importance ofthese expedient implements. In all, flaked stone comparisons suggest that riverine tools were brought to the area and used for subsistence activities, while those in the Desert Scrub or Blackrock area were intended for further reduction associated with residential activities.

TABLE 5.6: Owens River-Blackrock Biface Use-wear Comparison.

Owens River Blackrock

Bifaces with use-wear n=23 33% n=46 30%

ofstage overall of stage overall Early-stage n=5 83% 22% n=7 26% 15% Middle-stage n=8 36% 35% n=32 30% 70% Late-stage n=lO 25% 43% n=7 47% 15% n=number.

Several patterns emerge from the flaked stone analysis which are relevant to the technological organization and/or subsistence-settlement patterns within the Owens

Valley. Projectile point data suggests that hunting activities were always important in the riverine environment, as evidenced by the presence ofdart and arrow points spanning the entire occupational sequence. Most of these points are proximal ends, which suggests 87 they were used in this environment. This interpretation is strengthened by the biface data that includes likely 13 additional dart and five additional arrow point fragments. The bifaces have a relatively high incidence ofuse-wear especially among early and middle­ stage artifacts, emphasizing the fact that they were being used as tools and were not merely unfinished. Formed flake tools are generally manufactured on percussion flakes, while simple flake tools are made on biface thinning flakes, despite a lack of either cores or early-stage bifaces. This, along with generally low amounts ofdebitage, suggests that lithic reduction was never important in this environment, and the tools were manufactured elsewhere and brought to the riverine zone where they were intensively used and discarded or lost. Obsidian is the toolstone ofchoice, comprising the majority ofthe flaked stone tools and debitage. The flaked stone technology of the riverine environment highlights the productiveness ofthe area and how valuable the resources were to the aboriginal inhabitants ofOwens Valley.

Ground and Battered Stone

Millingslabs

A total of 44 millingslabs was analyzed during the project. They were manufactured from a variety ofmaterials, including igneous stone (57%), granite (27%), schist (14%), and quartzite (2%) (Table 5.7). Eight have intentionally shaped margins and ten ofthe millingslabs are unshaped. Most ofthe artifacts are unifacial (93%), with flat (89%) and sometimes slightly concave (11 %) grinding surfaces. Few ofthe grinding surfaces exhibit striations (21 %) and just over halfare pecked (54%). Two slabs, one 88

TABLE 5.7: Select Ground Stone Attributes by Material.

Handstones'" ...... M~.l.~~~~.~!~~.~ ...... ~ ...... IGN GRN SCH QZT TOTAL GRN IGN TOTAL Condition WHLINC 2 2 4 1 5 MRGIEND 13 5 2 21 2 2 4 Fragment 12 5 4 21 1 1 2

Modification Shaped 2 4 2 8 4 1 5 Unshaped 8 2 10 2 2 4 Indeterminate 15 6 4 26 1 1 2

Surface Frequency One 23 12 5 41 6 3 9 Two 2 1 3 1 1 Three 0 1

Surface Shape Convex 0 2 1 3 Slightly Convex 0 1 4 5 Flat 26 9 5 41 6 6 Slightly Concave 3 2 5 0 Indeterminate 1 0

Surface Texture Smooth 19 7 4 31 7 4 11 Irregular 7 4 3 14 2 1 3 Indeterminate 1 1 2 0

Surface Pecking Present 11 2 2 15 7 1 8 Absent 9 3 1 13 2 1 3 Indeterminate 7 7 4 19 3 3

Secondary Modification Present 2 1 3 2 2 Absent 18 6 2 26 4 4 8 Indeterminate 5 6 3 15 1 1

Fire Affected Present 4 4 1 I Absent 21 12 6 1 40 7 3 10

Total Millingslabs = 44 Total Handstones = 11(12) Total Surfaces 47 Total Surfaces = 14

.. - one handstone missing attribute data; ION quartzite; WHL = whole; NC = near coml!lete; MRO = mar~n. 89 thick and one thin, were near-complete, with the rest being margins or indeterminate fragments. Four tools were sequentially used as hearth stones, as evidenced by traces of burning. Although only two millingslabs have complete measurements, incomplete thickness measurements result in 81 % ofthe slabs being ''thin'' «6 cm) and 19% being

"thick" (6-13 cm ) variantss. When margin and end fragments are separated from interior pieces the numbers remain similar, with 73% "thin" and 27% "thick" examples.

Although incomplete measurements, it is safe to say that most ofthe riverine millingslabs are "thin," and reflect a portable milling technology.

Thin mil1ingslabs are generally manufactured from igneous materials (63%), with some granite (20%) and schist (17%) as well. They tend to be unifacial (91 %) with flat

(94%) grinding surfaces. Some are shaped (42%), and more then half (57%) are resharpened by pecking. Two artifacts are secondarily modified in the form ofedge battering and one is notched to facilitate carrying, further emphasizing the portable nature ofthese slabs. The near-complete specimen is a shaped, granite, unifacial millingslab with a flat grinding surface and measures 405.0 mm long, 226.0 mm wide and 34.0 mm thick. These thin millings labs would have been easy to transport from one resource patch to another along the river. It is unclear ifthe choice ofigneous stone for many ofthese slabs was functional orjust reflects raw material availability.

The thick millingslabs are generally manufactured from granite (63%) with some igneous (25%) and quartzite (13 %) specimens. Exactly halfare shaped and all are unifacial. They generally have flat (75%) grinding surfaces with some (50%) showing signs of rejuvenation via pecking. The near-complete tool is an unshaped, unifacial, 90 granite millingslab with a slightly concave grinding surface and measures 242.0 mm long,

199.0 wide, and 97.0 mm thick. Although these slabs are still portable, they are not as easily moved from place to place and may represent a more cached milling technology, where tools were left in areas people planned to return to. By contrast, thin slabs were probably moved on a regular basis. Millingslab thickness in this case may also be indicative ofthe materials these tools are manufactured from, with granite as opposed to igneous being the dominate toolstone.

Handstones

A relatively small number ofhandstones was documented during the project, just twelve specimens made from either granite (67%) or igneous (33%) materials (Table 5.7).

The average dimensions ofwhole or near-complete specimens (42%) measure 110.0 mm in length, 86.0 mm in width, and 64.0 mm thick. Roughly half(56%) are margin shaped and nearly all (82%) are unifacial. Grinding surface shapes range from flat (43%), to slightly convex (36%), to convex (21 %) and generally have a smooth (79%) not irregular

(21 %) texture. Most surfaces (73%) show signs ofpecking to sharpen or extend the use­ life ofthe tool. Only two handstones exhibited secondary modifications in the form of end battering and one handstone margin fragment was fire-affected, likely recycled as a hearth stone after the tool failed.

Shaped handstones are either intentionally modified along the margins to provide comfort and/or increase efficiency (Nelson and Lippmeier 1993), or are shaped as a bi­ product ofan extended use-life and/or preforming multitudes oftasks (Basgall and 91

McGuire 1988; Brady 2002). Given that three ofthe five shaped handstones are unifacial and none have any secondary modification, it appears that some ofthe tools where shaped intentionally. There is one shaped bifacial igneous handstone fragment with two slightly convex, smooth grinding surfaces and one multi-facial granite handstone fragment with three flat, smooth grinding surfaces; all ofwhich have been pecked to sharpen and/or extend tool life. The shaped mano has also been battered on the ends and the shaping a possible result of extensive and/or multi-use activities. The only near-complete specimen measures 110.0 mm in length, 88.0 mm in width, and 72.0 mm in thickness. Most shaped handstones are manufactured from granite (80%), with one made of igneous materiaL

The surface shapes range from flat (50%), to slightly convex (38%), or convex (13%) and generally have smooth textures (88%) with signs ofpecking (67%) to rejuvenate the grinding surfaces.

Unshaped handstones are represented by four specimens that average 107.0 mm long, 85.0 mm wide, and 68.0 mm thick. Halfare manufactured from granite, half from igneous materials, and all ofthe tools are unifacial. Surface shapes range from flat

(25%), to slightly convex (25%), or convex (50%), with halfpossessing smooth and half irregular textures. The majority (67%) ofthe grinding surfaces have been pecked and one ofthe tools has battering on one end. The mano with battering also has a slightly concave ground surface suggesting it may be a millingslab fragment that was recycled as a handstone. These tools are consistent with the unshaped specimens from CA-INY-30, which are argued to be more expedient and less intensively used than the shaped examples, whose margins are modified from intensive use (Basgall and McGuire 1988). 92

Cobble Tools

The nine cobble tools are manufactured from a variety of materials, mainly quartzite (56%) and basalt (22%), with some igneous stone (11 %) and granite (11 %).

The average size ofwhole specimens is 111.0 mm long, 78.0 mm wide, and 39.0 mm thick. Just over half (56%) ofthe tools are battered on natural or cortical surfaces and were probably used to pound animal or vegetable resources, not as hammerstones for tool manufacture. These represent an expediant technology with virtually no investment in manufacture, but extensive damage that suggests they were intensively used and probably remained in toolkits for an extended period oftime. The rest ofthe cobble tools are battered on percussion flaked edges suggesting more of a chopper-like tool for the cutting or chopping ofvegetal and/or animal matter. One third ofthe tools are damaged on the margins, one third on the ends, and the rest along their perimeters. One ofthe quartzite percussion flaked tools has some grinding on one edge, which probably occurred during some type of food processing activity. The damage on these tools is consistent with other cobble tools from the Inyo-Mono region that are believed to be used with hard nether stones (basin metates) to mash or pulp fibrous roots and tubers (Basgall and McGuire

1988; Bettinger 1989). In all, the cobble tools represent specialized tools used as part ofa toolkit geared toward processing riverine resources especially roots and/or tubers.

Discussion

The ground and battered stone collection from the survey is consistent with a portable toolkit geared toward easy mobility to target resource patches along the river. 93

Most ofthe millingslabs are thin and easily moved from place to place with minimal effort. They are mainly manufactured from local igneous materials and schist, probably derived from the Inyo Mountains to the east, as well as local granites. The high incidence ofunifacial slabs is not uncommon in the region and has been reported at other locations such as CA-INY-30 and CA-INY-1700 (Crater Middens) and given the well ground surfaces is believed to be part ofthe design for processing small seeds, not the result of casual use (Basgall and McGuire 1988; Bettinger 1989). The handstones appear to be relatively small and are manufactured from local granite and igneous materials as well.

Although many ofthe tools were not intentionally shaped, they are more or less intensively used and probably remained in toolkits for extended periods oftime, until they were broken or replaced. While most ofthe millingslabs and handstones are unifacial, many ofthe grinding surfaces have been pecked to resharpen the tools and extend their use-life. Roughly halfofthe manos and metates are margin shaped, not as a bi-product of use, but presumably to improve efficiency reflecting a more curated technology where tools remained in the toolkit and travel from site to site. The cobble tools appear to be split between more "pestle-like" pounding tools and more "chopper-like" planing and cutting implements. These tools are relatively small and portable as well and probably used for the processing ofresources found in the riverine environment. They would have been especially useful for processing roots and/or tubers. The ground and battered stone tools as a whole appear to have been manufactured with mobility in mind, to facilitate movement up and down the river to exploit the best resource patches and process locally available seeds, greens, roots, and tubers. 94

Spatial Distribution

What follows is a look at the distribution of artifacts along the river as a whole.

By looking at how things are deposited on the landscape, general patterns can be developed and help explain how the riverine environment was used and exploited by native people. This first section analyzes distance from the river with the goal of assessing differences in artifact distributions with respect to the river and ifthese have implications for regional subsistence-settlement patterns.

The first spatial analysis used ARC MAP version 8.3, and the modern river course to establish buffers at successive 100 m intervals from the river out to 1500 m. Global positioning system (GPS) data were next imported into the file. This resulted in artifact and feature distribution tables for every 100 m swath away from the river (Figure 5.1).

Artifacts that fell within the individual buffers were tallied with the results showing two major peaks; one at 200-300 m extending to approximately 400 m, and another at 600­

700 m. There is a significant drop at 500-600 m and again after 700 m. Condensing the distributional data into 500 m increments, there is a fairly even distribution oftools extending out to 1 km, after which there is an almost complete fall-off in tool and debitage distribution (Table 5.8). When the numbers are adjusted for actual area surveyed, the patterns are relatively similiar, ifnot stronger. The likely reason for the drop-off in artifacts after 1000 m is that most transects that extended to 1500 m were located in marshy areas that were perhaps even more extensive in prehistoric times before the aqueduct was constructed. For this reason, the 1000-1500 m increment is excluded from most statistical analyses. Interestingly, 60% ofthe formal artifacts occur within 0­ 50

45

40

35

30 cr:: UJ III 25 :2 :::::> z 20

15

10

5

o

,,~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ G..~~ !::>~ ~~ ~~ r§> ~ ,," ~~ ~~ '" ,,~~ ,,":>~ " " " ",,~ " " METERS FROM RIVER

I,Q FIGURE 5.1. Distribution of Fonned Artifacts from the Owens River. VI 96

TABLES.8: Distribution ofArtifacts in SOOm Increments from the River.

from river BIF FTL FFT ARW DRT COR HND SLB CBT DEB

0-500m 45 32 13 7 7 1 11 27 5 1526 500-1000m 25 30 5 2 11 3 1 17 4 463 1000-1500m 1 4

Adjusted for space. 0-500m 45 32 13 7 7 1 11 27 5 1526 500-1000m 28 33 5.5 2.2 12.1 3.3 1.1 18.7 4.4 509 1000-150Om 1.4 5.6

BIF biface; FTL simple flake tool; FFT = fonned flake tool; ARW = arrow point; DRT = dart point; COR core; HND= handstone; SLB = mi\lin~lab; CBT =cobble tool; DEB = debita~e; m = meter.

SOO m ofthe river, along with 77% ofthe debitage. By contrast, the SOO-1000 m interval yielded just 40% of the tools and 23% ofthe unmodified flakes. This indicates that most ofthe tool finishing and maintenance activities occured in closer proximity to the modem river, while general use ofthe environment was more homogenous throughout the surveyed areas. A chi-square test and analysis ofadjusted residuals on all artifacts

(debit age included) indicates that almost all tool classes except for arrow points and handstones are under-represented close to the river (Table S.9). When debitage is excluded from the equation, there is a slightly different outcome, with only flake tools, dart points, cores and cobble tools under-represented. Handstones are significantly over­ represented and dart points the most under-represented category. The SOO-1000 m increment shows just the opposite pattern. This trend is even stronger when adjusted for actual space. Results point to three different patterns. First is that dart points occur further from the river than arrow points, reflecting a possible shift in riverine hunting activity after the introduction ofthe bow when individual hunting forays may have 97

TABLE 5.9: Chi-Square Analysis ofAssemblage Composition.

from river BIF FTL FFT ARW DRT COR HND SLB CBT DEB with debitage 0-500m -2.08 -4.29 -0.26 0.20 -3.54 -2.30 1.34 -2.09 -1.34 5.56 500-1000m 2.08 4.29 0.26 -0.20 3.54 2.30 -1.34 2.09 1.34 -5.56 X2 = 51.29; df= 9 without debitage 0-500m 0.83 -1.59 1.09 1.10 -1.92 -1.45 2.29 0.18 -0.29 500-1000m -0.83 1.59 -1.09 -1.10 1.92 1.45 -2.29 -0.18 0.29 X2 =15.18; df= 8

Adjusted for space, without debitage 0-500m 0.86 -1.63 1.12 1.14 -1.95 -1.47 2.39 0.18 -0.30 500-1000m -0.86 1.63 -1.12 -1.14 1.95 1.47 -2.39 -0.18 0.30 X2 =16.10; df= 8

BIF biface; FTL = simple flake tool; FFT = formed flake tool; ARW = arrow point; DRT = dart point; COR handstone; SLB = millinsslab; CBT =cobble t001i DEB = debitase; m = meters. become more successful. Thus people may have started hunting closer to where they conducted other activities. Second, milling activities appear to be focused closer to the river, where the abundance ofwetland plants made it easier to immediately process resources than carry them back to residential areas. Finally, obsidian deposition was occurring in immediate proximity to the modem river, but probably in the form oftool maintenance/refurbishment, not manufacture.

West-to-East Distributions

This section analyzes the differences in artifact distributions from the west and east sides ofthe river. This is done because there are important landform and resource differences between the two sides that would have likely influenced land-use issues. The west side ofthe river has most ofthe tributaries feeding the river and more extensive 98 marshes especially in the southern portion ofthe valley. The Fish Springs obsidian source is also located on the west side. On the east side ofthe river the Inyo and White

Mountains are closer in some areas and there is a less extensive flood plain than the west side. The goal here is to see how issues like this might have effected land-use by looking at artifact distributions.

When segregated from west to east the artifact distributions discussed previously become stronger on the east side ofthe river with the same two peaks even more pronounced (Figure 5.2). On the west side, however, artifact densities peak at 300-400 m from the river and extend out to 500 m, but there is a more even distribution ofmaterial to a distance of about one kilometer. Looking at numbers, the west side has 43% ofthe artifacts and 80% ofthe debitage, while the east side has 57% ofthe artifacts and only

20% of the debitage (Table 5.10). Adjusting for the actual area surveyed does not alter the overall pattern. Formed artifacts seem evenly split between the west and east sides, but a chi-square test and analysis ofadjusted residuals indicates a significant abundance ofbifaces and a deficit of arrow points and millingslabs on the west side ofthe river

(Table 5.11). In general there appears to be an abundance offlaked stone and a lack of ground stone on the river's west side. Just the opposite is true on the east side where there is a significant quantity ofmillings labs and arrow points and a dearth ofbifaces.

These trends are even more pronounced when adjusted for actual surveyed area. This suggests that intensive milling activities were taking place on the east side ofthe river.

Several places on the east side have semi-stable sand dunes that encroach on the river, areas that would have provided good places to exploit seeds and other plant resources, 50

45

40

35

n:: 30 W CO ~ ::J 25 Z

20

15

10

5

o I.,. 1500 1300 1100 900 700 500 300 100 100 300 500 700 900 1100 1300 1500 METERS WEST OF RIVER METERS EAST OF RIVER

\0 FIGURE 5.2. West to East Distribution of Fonned Artifacts. \0 100

TABLE 5.10: West to East Distribution ofArtifacts. side of river BIF FTL FFT ARW DRT COR HND SLB CBT DEB West 39 32 9 1 9 1 5 7 4 1585 East 31 30 9 8 9 3 7 37 5 408 Adjusted for space West 39 32 9 1 9 1 5 7 4 1585 East 37.2 36 10.8 9.6 10.8 3.6 8.4 44.4 6 490

BIF biface; FTL ~ simple flake tool; FFT ~ fonned flake tool; ARW arrow point; DRT dart point; COR = core; HND hands tone; SLB = millin~lab; CBT =cobble tool; DEB = debita~e. which may explain the abundance ofmilling equipment. This may also have something to do with what appears to be an inflated amount of late prehistoric hunting. The introduction ofthe bow allowed individual hunters to more effectively hunt from camps where other activities (e.g. plant procurement) were staged. By contrast, on the west side of the river there appears to be more intensive flaked stone activity. The western abundance ofbifaces and debitage is not surprising given the proximity to the Fish

Springs obsidian source, where most ofthe raw material is coming from. There tends to be a more diversity of formed tools which is also a sign of a wider range ofactivities taking place and not as much logistical exploitation as on the east side ofthe river.

TABLE 5.11: Chi-Square Analysis ofWest to East Assemblage Composition. side ofriver BIF FTL FFT ARW DRT COR HND SLB CBT West 2.44 1.49 0.58 -2.00 0.58 -0.75 -0.13 -4.07 0.06 East -2.44 -1.49 -0.58 2.00 -0.58 0.75 0.13 4.07 -0.06 X2 = 24.58; df= 8 Adjusted for space. West 2.55 1.56 0.60 -2.02 0.60 -0.77 -0.14 -4.15 0.06 East -2.55 -1.56 -0.60 2.02 -0.60 0.77 0.14 4./5 -0.06 X2 = 25.69; df= 8

BIF = biface; FTL = simple flake tool; FFT ~ fonned flake tool; ARW = arrow point; DRT ~ dart point; COR ~ core; HND = handstone; SLB = millin~lab; CBT = cobble tool. 101

With increasing distance from the river, the patterns become more fine-grained.

Artifacts appear to be evenly distributed on either side ofthe river, but debit age only occurs in abundance from 0-500 m on the west side ofthe river. A chi-square test and analysis of adjusted residuals indicates that the only significant deviation in artifact distribution on the west side ofthe river besides the abundance ofdebit age is a deficit of millingslabs, especially at 0-500 m (Table 5.12). This coincides with an abundance of milling equipment and arrow points on the east side at 0-500 m, along with a significant lack of flake tools and dart points. At 500-1000 m on the east side there is an abundance ofdart points along with a significant lack ofbifaces and handstones. The chi-square test only differs in the significance ofthe amount of arrow points in the 0-500 m sample on the east side ofthe river. Several patterns begin to emerge from these data. First, on the west side of the river artifacts appear to be more homogenous out to 1 km except for a lack of millingslabs and an abundance ofdebitage at 0-500 m from the modem river.

TABLE 5.12: Chi-Square Analysis of W -E Assemblage Composition by Distance.

from river BIF FTL FFT ARW DRT COR lIND SLB CBT 0-500mW 1.62 1.16 1.42 -1.24 0.35 -1.31 0.28 -3.30 -0.50 500-100OmW 1.36 0.61 -1.06 -1.22 0.36 0.65 -0.56 -1.49 0.74 0-500mE -0.72 -2.84 -0.26 2.40 -2.39 -0.24 2.15 3.46 0.19 500-1000mE -2.00 1.30 -0.38 -0.26 1.85 1.10 -2.11 0.97 -0.26 X2 = 50.59; df= 24 Adjusted for space. 0-500mW 1.93 0.89 1.45 -1.17 0.03 -1.36 0.68 -3.31 -0.44 500-100OmW 1.58 0.46 -1.02 -1.19 0.16 0.50 -0.37 -1.55 0.77 0-500mE -0.36 -2.93 -0.19 2.40 -2.50 -0.39 2.64 3.14 0.23 500-1000mE -2.44 1.54 -0.45 -0.33 2.12 1.23 -2.75 1.15 -0.32 X2 = 56.89; df= 24

BIP =biface; FTL = simple flake tool; FFT =formed flake tool; ARW arrow point; DRT =dart point; COR =core; HND = handstone; SLB =millingslab; CBT = cobble tool; W = west; E =east. 102

This indicates that milling activities were not important in these areas, but obsidian reduction or tool maintenance was. On the east side milling activities were conducted closer to the river along with late prehistoric hunting, with a lack ofmilling activity and abundance ofearly hunting further from the river. Again, the abundance ofdebitage on the west side is to be expected given the Fish Springs quarry and on the east side intensive milling activity along with late prehistoric hunting is explained by the local dune landforms.

North-to-South Distributions

This section analyzes the differences in artifact distributions in the north, central, and southern portions ofthe valley. This is done because ofdifferences in geology and hydrology from north to south that effect the environment and availability ofresources.

In the north are numerous Sierra Nevada tributaries that feed the river and formerly supported marshes. Parts ofthe central area have faster-moving river water with fewer oxbows and are near the Fish Springs obsidian source. In the south there are more extensive marshes and proximity to the Owens Lake delta. All ofthese differences could have effected land-use, which should be evident in the artifact distributions.

The northern transects are located between the towns ofBishop and Big Pine.

The northern zone appears to have the most even artifact distribution on both sides ofthe river and the widest variety ofartifacts. The flaked to groundlbattered stone tool ratio is relatively low, 2.16:1, accounting for 47% ofall recorded artifacts (43% ofthe flaked stone and 58% ofthe groundlbattered stone tools). A chi-square test and analysis of 103 adjusted residuals that included debitage, indicates that bifaces, simple flake tools, handstones, millingslabs, and cobble tools are significantly over-represented in the northern transects, while debitage is significantly under-represented. When debitage is removed from the equation, however, only bifaces, millingslabs, and cobble tools are abundant, while formed flake tools, cores, arrow points, and dart points are under­ represented. The overall pattern in the north appears to be a fairly balanced distribution ofartifacts that indicates a variety ofsubsistence activities, with perhaps greater emphasis on milling activities. The larger tributary streams in the north provide good wetland habitats for people to exploit these resources. The abundance ofmillingslabs, cobble tools, and bifaces may reflect a strategy that targeted more fleshy plants like fibrous roots and/or tubers.

The central transects are located between Big Pine and the town ofIndependence.

This area contained only 25% ofthe recorded formed artifacts and 70% ofthe debitage.

Most ofthese materials were located on the west side ofthe river, the eastern expanse contained very few cultural remains. The flaked to ground stone tool ratio is high,

14.25:1, suggesting a lack ofmilling activity in this area. A chi-square test and analysis of adjusted residuals that included debitage indicates a significant under-representation of all tool classes and a correspondingly significant over-representation ofdebitage.

However, when debitage is removed from the analysis there is an abundance offormed flake tools and a significant number ofsimple flake tools, with cobble tools and millingslabs now under-represented. Dart points are slightly over-represented, especially compared to the northern transects. In all, the central units with their high flaked to 104 ground stone ratio and abundant debitage suggest that milling activities were oflimited importance along this portion ofthe river, and lithic reduction a more prominent activity than elsewhere else along the river. Again, the abundance ofdebit age and higher flaked stone counts probably result at least in part from proximity to raw material, while the lack ofmilling activity could reflect the less extensive wetlands and faster river current that supported fewer wetland plant resources.

The southern transects are located below the towns oflndependence and Lone

Pine. This area had a diverse and reasonably even distribution ofartifacts, mainly on the east side ofthe river. This segment contained 28% ofthe artifacts recorded during the survey, but only 8% of the debitage. The southern area has the lowest flaked to ground stone ratio, 2.04: 1, indicating that milling was an important activity in this area. A chi­ square test and analysis of adjusted residuals (including debitage) shows a significant abundance of all tool classes except cobble tools and a corresponding significant lack of debitage. When debitage is excluded there is still an over representation ofcores, millingslabs, and arrow points, with a deficiency ofbifaces and significant lack ofsimple flake tools. Milling activities and late-period hunting appear to be an important part of the subsistence behavior in the southern portion of the project area, a pattern that is especially pronounced on the east side of the river. The extensive marshes on the west side ofthe river and dunes on the east side provide an ideal environment for the exploitation and processing ofwetland plants and animals. 105

Select Tool Class Distributions

This section analyzes the distribution ofsome of select tool classes. The goal here is to focus on specific tools that may be especially informative when examined on another scale. Projectile points were examined because they are temporally diagnostic and provide information on hunting activities. Flaked and ground stone tools are compared to get a better sense ofthe types of activities conducted in various places. Finally, debitage distributions were assessed to gain a better understanding ofthe types oflithic reduction activities performed in the riverine environment.

Projectile point distributions are sporadic, with several peaks at different intervals from the river (Figure 5.3). When dart and arrow points are examined separately, however, certain patterns emerge (Figure 5.4). Arrow points primarily occur on the east side ofthe river, in close proximity to the water and again at distances of600-700 m. In contrast, dart points are primarily distributed on the west side ofthe river at distances of

400-500 m and on the east side at 600-700 m from the water. Thus, dart points are located farther from the river, reaching their maximum density between 600-700 m, while arrow points tend to be clustered closer to the river (Table 5.13). Arrow points are most abundant in the southern portion ofthe project area, especially on the east side ofthe river, whereas dart points tend to be more evenly distributed throughout the survey area.

These data suggest that early activity was concentrated further from the river, and later activity closer to the water. It also suggests that hunting within the riverine corridor may have always been a worthwhile activity, and that late Holocene hunting was especially lucrative in the southeastern portion ofthe study area. 8

7

6

r:r: 5 UJ m ~ ::.l 4 Z

3

2

1500 1300 1100 900 700 500 300 100 100 300 500 700 900 1100 1300 1500 METERS WEST OF RIVER METERS EAST OF RIVER o FIGURE 5.3. Distribution of Projectile Points. 0"1 8 I I DART-SIZED ARROW-SIZED

7

6

I I a: 5 I UJ ;C CO ­ :::2!: < ::l 4 m Z ;C

I I 3 I I I I 2 - I I I I - I I I I

I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1500 1300 1100 900 700 500 300 100 100 300 500 700 900 1100 1300 1500 METERS WEST OF RIVER METERS EAST OF RIVER ...... o FIGURE 5.4. Distribution of Dart and Arrow Points. -J 108

TABLE 5.13. Projectile Point Chi-Square Analysis.

from river ARROW DART

0-500m 1.91 -1.91 500-1000m -1.91 1.91 X2 3.63; df= 1

Adjusted for space. 0-50Om 1.97 -1.97 500-1000m -1.97 1.97 X2 = 3.86; df= 1

Flaked stone tool and milling equipment distributions generally mirror those of other artifacts with peak abundances at 200-300 m and again at 600-700 m. Looking more closely, flaked and ground stone do have somewhat divergent distributions, with ground stone showing a greater deviation from other artifact classes (Figure 5.5). Most ground stone artifacts are located closer to the river, between 0 and 400 m. This is true for both east and west sides ofthe river, although there is more ground stone on the east side, where there is a major peak at 600-700 m that does not occur on the west side ofthe river. Ground stone is also more abundant in the north and slightly less so in the south, with little located in the central transects. Overall, flaked stone tools outnumber ground and battered stone artifacts by a ratio of2.78:1(Table 5.14). When separated west to east, the western ratio increases to 5.69:1, while the eastern ratio decreases to 1.84:1. A chi- square analysis ofthese numbers indicates a significant abundance offlaked stone artifacts on the west side ofthe river. This imbalance is especially pronounced between

0-500 m from the river, with the 500-1000 m zone similar throughout the survey sample.

Conversely, on the east side ofthe river there is a statistically significant abundance of 20

18

16

14

c:: w 12 co ~ :::> 10 z

8

6

4

2

1500 1300 1100 900 700 500 300 100 100 300 500 700 900 1100 1300 1500 METERS WEST OF RIVER METERS EAST OF RIVER o FIGURE 5.5. Distribution of Ground Stone. 1.0 110

TABLE 5.14: Flaked Stone to Ground Stone Ratios and Chi-Square Analysis.

Flaked Stone to Ground Stone Ratios Overall = 2.78:1 West 5.69:1 East = 1.84:1

Flaked Stone Ground Stone

west 3.58 -3.58 east -3.58 3.58 X 2 12.81 df= 1

WO-500m 2.94 -2.94 W 500-1000m 1.25 -1.25 E 0-500m -4.14 4.14 E 500-1000m 0.30 -0.30 X2 =19.41 df=3

W =west; E =east; m = meter; df= degrees offreedom. ground stone. As before, this imbalance occurs between 0-500 m ofthe river, with the

500-1000 m interval having a consistent distribution ofboth tool classes. The distribution of flaked stone tools north-south is relatively even, although, the flaked to ground stone ratio in the central portion ofthe sample area is extremely high (14.25: 1).

These data would seem to indicate that milling activities were generally focused closer to the river, especially in the north and on the eastern side ofthe river. On the west side, milling activities seem to have been associated with other subsistence behaviors and were not as predominant. This is especially true for the central part ofthe survey area, where flaked stone tools seem to be evenly distributed across the river, while ground stone artifacts are weighted heavily toward the northern and southeastern portions ofthe riverine corridor. 111

Debitage illustrates another pattern (Figure 5.6). The highest concentrations are close to the river, peaking at 200 m and tapering offthereafter. The interesting pattern here is that at 600-700 m there is only a slight rise in the quantity ofdebitage versus artifacts. This is especially true when looking at distributions on either side ofthe river, with the west side having decidedly more amounts ofdebris. In areas farther away from the water, where there were spikes in artifact numbers, there appear to be low densities of flakes. Debitage densities are also greatest in the central units on the west side ofthe river. These transects accounted for 70% ofthe all the debitage recorded during the survey. This would suggest that tools arriving at the river from the north, south, and east were predominantly finished and fully serviceable artifacts that required little work and contributed little manufacturing debris. Interestingly, when compared to the projectile point data, much ofthe debitage appears to be associated with arrow, not dart points. If true, this indicates that more stone working/refurbishment was taking place later in time.

Pottery

Nearly all ofthe hundreds ofpottery sherds encountered during the survey were located within 500 m ofthe modem river. In fact, only three sherds were recorded beyond this distance, suggesting that pottery use was confined to close proximity ofthe river. Curiously, most ofthe sherds are on the east side ofthe river, with only 34 ofthe hundreds ofrecorded specimens found on the west side. There also appears to be a division from north to south, with the majority ofthe sherds recorded in the south.

Northern and central units contained fewer than 25 and 50 sherds, respectively. These 900

800

700

600

0::: W III ::2: 500 ::> Z 400

300

200

100

1500 1300 1100 900 700 500 300 100 100 300 500 700 900 1100 1300 1500 METERS WEST OF RIVER METERS EAST OF RIVER ...... FIGURE 5.6. Distribution of Debitage. N 113 occurred as either isolates or small «10) groups ofsherds. By contrast, southern units exhibited an abundance ofpottery with hundreds ofsherds recorded, as isolates or larger concentrations of 10-40 sherds. On balance, pottery in the north seems to be thinly distributed within 500 m ofeither side ofthe river. In the central area pottery occurs in small pockets mainly on the west side ofthe river, with only a few isolated examples on the east.. In the south there are large concentrations ofsherds in proximity « 500 m) of the modem river channel, mainly on the east side of the stream; only one was found on the west. The proximity ofpottery to the river suggests that vessels were used to process certain riverine resources, with the higher distribution ofsherds in the south implying that these resources were more abundant there.

Mussel Shell

Freshwater mussel shell was encountered from the banks ofthe modem river out to 1000 m from the water. There is a fairly even dispersal with small to large pockets being encountered in both the 0-500 m and 500-1000 m intervals. The same is true when looking at shell distributions from west to east; again, the encounter rates seem fairly even. Significant differences emerge, however, when looking at the samples from north to south. In the north, mussel shell is comparatively scarce from 0-500 m east ofthe river, but abundant and sometimes densely concentrated from 500-1000 m west ofthe river. Almost the reverse is true for the southern transects, with abundant shell on the east side ofthe river and only traces on the west, with most ofthe recorded shell within 0­

500 m ofthe river. Interestingly, the central survey units produced little shell on only the 114 west side ofthe river beyond 500 m. In sum, mussel processing appears to be most prevalent in the northwest portion ofthe project area at some distance from the modern river, but close to the water in the southeast sector. Little mussel processing seems to have taken place in the central part ofthe valley on either side ofthe river. Perhaps due to the faster flow ofwater through this section ofthe river. Apart from this, mussel remains in the central and southern areas seem to correspond with pottery distributions, though not always, and not in the north where mussel shell is abundant without pottery.

Ifthere is a functional relationship between the two it appears that it is not a necessary relationship, meaning mussels can be processed without pots and pottery is used to process other resources as well. Mussel shell does seem to be most abundant where other milling activities are taking place and appear to be a resource exploited while people are pursuing other activities.

Soil Distribution

The following section looks at artifact distributions by different soil types within the sample universe. This is done to explore why certain places may have been more desirable than other locations. Some ofthese soils are more productive to plants and other resources, while others are better drained and afford good access to productive resource areas. Artifact distributions areinitially given by soil type and then further examined by area from north to south.

Soils data are compiled from the Moj ave Desert Ecosystem Program database and indicate that the survey transects occur in one or more offive different soil types: coarse 115 sandy loam (Eclipse, Mazourka, and Cajon); mixed fine-coarse sandy loam (Cajon,

Hesperia, and Helendale); fine silty sand loam (Cobatus, Winnedumah, and Numu); fine silty clay loam (Bobnbob, Mazourka, and Torreflurents); and a gravelly skeletal loam

(Mexispring, Rock Outcrop, and Ferroburro) (Figure 5.7). These soils, with perhaps the exception ofthe skeletal loam, supported various plants and animals that were economically important to the native inhabitants. Artifact distributions across these soils, however, varies substantially and illuminates some interesting patterns.

The most common soil is coarse sandy loam that comprises 42% ofthe surveyed area and produced 60% ofthe recorded formed artifacts (Table 5.15). These soils are well drained and formed ofalluvium from mixed rock sources. They occur most commonly on river, stream, and lacustrine terraces with slopes from 0-5%. Common plants growing in these soils include shadscale, greasewood, sagebrush, and Indian ricegrass, with some grasses, and forbs. These soils are present on both sides ofthe river, however, most (69%) ofthe artifacts were recorded on the east side. The coarse sandy loam also contained 57% ofthe recorded milling equipment. This seems to indicate a strong vegetal focus, but the flaked to ground stone ratio on these soils suggest a broader range ofactivity. The overall flaked to ground stone ratio for these soils is 3.0:1, but this drops to 2.0: 1 on the east side ofthe river, suggesting a stronger milling focus there.

Specific artifact distributions within this soil type generally mirror those discussed in previous sections, with peak abundances at the same distances from the river. This suggests that the presence ofresources supported by this soil type was not the only variable influencing human activity along the river. A total of 18 projectile points was 116

N

i 10 0 kilometers

--

LEGEND Gravelly Skeletal Loam

Mixed Fine-Coarse Sandy Loam

Coarse Sandy Loam

Fine Silty Clay Loam

Fine Silty Sand Loam Survey Transect

FIGURE 5.7. Soils Adjacent to SUlVey Areas (adapted from Mojave Desert Ecosystem Program Dd1abase 1992-1995). 117

TABLE 5.15: Soil Types and Cultural Attributes.

flkstn:gmdstn SoilT~e % Transect % Fonned Artifacts % Ground Stone Ratio %DBTG Common Plants

Gravelly Skeletal Loam 3% <1% 0010 N/A <1% needlegrass, sagebrush, bitterbrush, monnon-tea

Mixed Fine-Coarse 14% 17% 23% 1.7:1 4% Creosote, sa1tbrush, Sandy Loam monnon-tea

Coarse Sandy Loam 49% 60% 57% 3.0:1 38% shadscale, greasewood, sagebrush, Indian ricegrass

Fine Silty Clay Loam 18% 14% 17% 2.2:1 6% saltgrass

Fine Silty Sand Loam 16% 9% 3% 10.0:1 51% greasewood, sa1tgrass, shadscale

found in the coarse sandy loam, only five ofwhich were arrow points. This implies that hunting in these areas was of arguably greater importance earlier in time and the increased exploitation ofplants and aquatic resources ofprobably heightened significance later in time.

The mixed fine-coarse sandy loams represented only 12% of the surveyed transects and produced 17% ofthe formed artifacts. These soils are well drained and formed in sandy alluvium from mainly granitic rocks. They occur most commonly on alluvial fans, but can be found on river terraces and slopes ranging from 0-15%.

Common plants includes shadscale, greasewood, sagebrush, and Indian ricegrass, along with annual grasses and forbs. Soils ofthis type are present on both sides ofthe river, but mainly in the south, where the majority ofthe artifacts (83%) were located east ofthe river. An astonishing 23% ofthe overall ground and battered stone was recorded in the 118 mixed fine-coarse sandy loam. The flaked to ground stone ratio is only 1.7:1 and drops to

1.4: 1 on the east side ofthe river. Milling activities again appear to have been important within these soils, especially on the eastern side ofthe river. Six projectile points were also recorded in these settings, indicating that hunting in these areas may have been an important activity as well.

The fine silty sand loams are poorly drained soils fonned in mixed alluvium over lacustrine or playa sediments. They commonly occur on lake plains adjacent to playas with slopes ranging from 0-4%. Dominant plants includes greasewood, saltgrass, and shadscale. These soils represented 21 % ofthe surveyed transects, but only produced 9% ofthe artifacts and 3% ofthe ground stone. All ofthese artifacts were recorded on the west side ofthe river mainly along one transect in close proximity to the river. The

10.0:1 flaked to ground stone ratio in these contexts suggests that little milling activity was conducted in these areas. Four projectile points (one Elko, one Humboldt, two Rose

Spring) were recovered in silty sand loam areas and suggest that some hunting was taking place, the significance ofwhich is hard to assess.

The fine silty clay loams are poorly drained soils fonned in alluvium from mixed rock sources. They occur in flood plains near river or stream terraces with slopes ranging from 0-5%. The dominant vegetation is saltgrass and, to a lesser extent, can shadscale, greasewood, sagebrush, and Indian ricegrass. Soils ofthis type produced a modest, but diverse assemblage from the river to a distance of 1000 m, with only one major drop at

400-600 m. Fine silty clay loams account for 21 % ofthe transects, but only produced

14% ofthe tools and 17% ofthe recorded milling equipment. Most (89%) ofthese 119 artifacts were recorded on the west side ofthe river, in the northern portion ofthe valley.

No projectile points were recorded and flaked to ground stone ratios are relatively low at

2.2:1. This indicates that the processing ofplant resources within these areas was of some importance.

The gravelly skeletal loam made up only 4% ofthe survey area and produced just one artifact « 1%). These soils were restricted to the central-eastern portion ofthe sample area, mainly up against the hillsides. They are shallow, well drained soils formed in colluvium and residuum from granitic rocks. These soils usually occur on hills and mountain sides with slopes ranging from 15-85%. The lone artifact was an isolated biface.

This following section examines how artifacts are distributed within the different soil types from north to south. It provides briefdescriptions of each section (north, central, and south) treating them as separate entities and analyzes the artifact distributions on the different soil types. This is done to help identify the pertinent data that may have implications for understanding human behavior.

In the northern transects, coarse sandy loam makes up 33% ofthe surveyed area and produced 70% ofthe artifacts. The flaked to ground stone ratio is 2.0:1 and dart points outnumber arrows five to one. These numbers suggest that this soil type is among the most productive andlor desired and that the processing ofplant resources was an important activity within such areas. The fine silty clay loam soils comprise 67% ofthe northern survey area, but host only 30% ofthe artifacts. The flaked to ground stone ratio is 2.2: 1 and there were no projectile points recovered. While these soils are obviously 120 productive, they are clearly not the most desirable habitat, although plant resources are still the main focus.

Coarse sandy loam makes up 77% ofthe central transects and has 63% ofthe artifacts recorded in the area. The flaked to ground stone ratio is 18.0:1, highlighting the fact that plant processing is not the main focus in these areas. Four dart and one arrow point were recovered in these areas, indicating that hunting was ofsome significance, especially early in the record. Fine silty sand loam accounts for 13% of the central survey transects, but host 35% ofthe artifacts. The flaked to ground stone ratio is 9.5:1, indicating that plant related activities were ofstill limited importance. There were two dart and one arrow point recovered, suggesting that hunting was a worthwhile activity.

Finally, the gravelly skeletal loam, which comprised 10% ofthe central survey area, produced only one biface, connoting that these soils were not especially productive/desirab Ie.

The coarse sandy loam comprises 19% ofthe southern transects, but boasts 40% ofthe artifacts. The flaked to ground stone ratio is 2.7: 1, which indicates that milling activities were comparatively important within these areas. Three dart and two arrow points were also recovered and suggest that some hunting was taking place. Fine silty sand loam made up 41 % ofthe southern transects, but produced only one arrow and 2% ofthe artifacts. By contrast, the mixed fine-course sandy loam comprised 40% ofthis survey area and produced 58% of all artifacts. The flaked to ground stone ratio is 1.5:1 indicating a heavy prevalence ofmilling activity within these areas. Moreover, that no 121 projectile points were recovered in areas of mixed fine-course sandy loam providing another indication plants were the main focus in these areas.

When all ofthe data are considered. resource exploitation in soils closer to the river may have focused more on aquatic foods (e.g. fish and shellfish) supplemented by vegetal resources that grow in close proximity to the river, and vice versa. The once extensive and productive riparian vegetation community along the Owens River must have been a major attraction and may explain many ofthe artifacts in these soil types. In addition to subsistence resources. the sandier loams are generally located in semi-stable to stable dune areas that have better drainage and would have provided ideal places to live and work. In sum. most milling activity associated with the riverine environment appears to have taken place east ofthe river in areas of sandy loams on adjacent terraces. These terraces seem to have been the focus ofmost river-related activities. Other. generally flood plain soils do not appear to have been located in optimal areas for extended occupations. Ground visibility in some ofthese soils may also have been hampered either by years of flooding and/or dense vegetation in certain areas.

Visual Sourcing

This section presents the results ofvisual obsidian sourcing on both debitage and projectile points. The data are presented from both north to south and from west to east in an effect to gain an understanding ofhow certain obsidian sources are distributed along the river and what this means for toolstone acquisition and mobility. 122

Debitage

A total of 322 pieces ofobsidian debitage was subjected to visual sourcing, 301 specimens were assigned to no fewer than eight local sources, and the other 21 specimens to an indeterminate category (Table 5.16). The most common source is Fish Springs obsidian (50%), followed by Casa Diablo (20%), Truman-Queen (16%), and Coso glass

(7%). The remaining sources, Mono (3%), Mount Hicks (2%), Bodie Hills (1 %), and

Saline Valley (1 %) comprise only 7% ofthe sample.

TABLE 5.16: Visual Source Distribution.

Source ~ ...... ~ ...... Area FS TQ CD CO MO MH BH SA TOTAL

NW 24 12 17 6 4 4 73 NE 23 34 25 3 5 3 2 1 88 subtotal 47 46 42 9 9 7 2 1 163 ._.._ .._­ CW 101 18 10 131 CE subtotal 101 18 10 1 131

SW SE 3 3 7 subtotal 3 3 7

TOTAL 151 47 60 22 10 7 2 2 301

FS =Fish Springs; TQ Truman Queen; CD Casa Diablo; CO =Coso; MO = Mono; MH Mount Hicks; BH =Bodie Hills; SA = Saline; NW = north west; NE = north east; CW = central west; CE central east; SW = south west; SE south east.

The distribution ofthe four main sources is not surprising. Chi-square tests and analysis of adjusted residuals conftrm that Fish Springs (FS) obsidian is signiftcantly over-represented in the western and central units close to the FS quarry. Fish Spring's 123 obsidian is found to the north and east, but is significantly under-represented in these areas. The obsidian debitage sample in the south is small, which hinders interpretation of source variability in those areas.

Casa Diablo (CD) obsidian is significantly over-represented in the northern units, which is hardly surprising given the location ofthat quarry to the north in Long Valley.

Casa Diablo glass is likewise well represented on both the western and eastern sides of the river, with its abundance on the east just slightly over-represented. Casa Diablo debitage is significantly under-represented in the central and the southern units.

Truman-Queen (TQ) obsidian is significantly over-represented in the northern and eastern units and significantly under-represented in the central and western units. This is to be expected given the source location north and east of Owens Valley.

Coso obsidian is over-represented in the southern units, but the significance of this is difficult to assess, as mentioned, given the small sample size. The Coso source is located south ofOwens Valley, so the abundance ofthis material in the south is, again, to be expected. Coso obsidian is found throughout the survey area in small amounts, but the significance ofthis is difficult to assess with the current sample.

The greatest variability in other obsidian sources is in the northern units, where all eight sources are represented. Obsidian variability declines to the south, although non­ obsidian toolstone grows more diverse in the south. All eight obsidian sources are represented on the east side ofthe river, but only six on the west. In short, FS obsidian dominates in the central-western area, CD glass in the north on both sides ofthe river, TQ material in the northeast, and Coso obsidian mainly in the south. The north and the east 124 have the greatest obsidian source variability and the south has the least, although the south has more non-obsidian toolstone debitage.

Projectile Points

Ofthe 28 projectile points recovered, 26 were assigned to one ofsix obsidian sources; two were indeterminate. Fish Springs is the most common source (43%), followed by Coso (18%), CD (14%), TQ (11 %), and finally Saline Valley (3.5%) and

Mono (3.5%) glass. Dart points exhibit the most source variability, containing all six source groups, as well as both indeterminate specimens; arrow points were made from only three source areas represented. Fish Springs, the most local source, accounts for

28% ofthe dart and 70% ofthe arrow points. The other two sources used for arrow points are CD (20%) and Coso (10%), both ofwhich are comparatively local obsidian sources. By contrast, dart points are made up ofvarious, often distant, sources, including

Saline (5.5%) and Coso (22%) glass to the south, Mono (5.5%) and CD (11 %) obsidian to the north and TQ (17%) material to the northeast. Interestingly, the one Saline specimen, a Humboldt Concave-base dart point, was recovered from the northern transects, and the one Mono specimen, a Humboldt as well, was recovered from the southern units. In sum, dart points exhibit more source variability than arrows, implying either more mobile groups who obtained stone during their travels, or more extensive trade networks. Arrow points, by contrast, exhibit less source diversity that is restricted primarily to local glass. This is consistent with more restricted settlement patterns, wherein groups exploited the nearest obsidian quarry. It could also reflect shifts in 125 technology, such that the quality ofraw materials was less important than their accessibility or some combination ofthese factors.

Obsidian Hydration

This section reports the results ofobsidian hydration analyses preformed on 204 pieces ofdebitage and all ofthe projectile points. These data help to provide some temporal controls on artifact distributions, to aid in the understanding ofhow Owens

River environments were exploited at various times in the past. First, debitage data are presented by source, followed by projectile point data by point type. Together, these data furnish interesting insights on riverine land use and broader subsistence-settlement patterns.

Fish Springs

The Fish Springs (FS) hydration sample consists of 101 pieces ofdebitage, of which 43 were recovered from the northern sample area, 55 from the central area, and just three from the southern transects. Ofthe 101 flakes, 76 produced readable hydration bands and three double-bands, yielding a total of 79 hydration readings. One ofthese, however, produced a reading of 34.5J,l, a statistical outlier that was removed from further consideration, leaving a total of78 readings. Micron values range from 2.0 to 12.7 with an average of 7.3 and standard deviation of2.6. As Figure 5.8 shows, the distribution of readings from 2.0 to 10.0J,l is fairly consistent, with only limited gaps between 3.0 and

4.0J,l and 5.0 and 6.0J,l. Interestingly, there are virtually no readings below 2.0J,l, although 126

LATE EARLY LAKE MARANA I HAl WEE INE'M3ERRVI NEWBERRY I PINTO MOHAVE

4

a:: 3 w CD :E :::> z 2

0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 7.0 8.0 9.0 10.0 11.0 12.0 13.0 MICRON VALUES FIGURE 5.8. Distribution of Hydration Readings from Fish Springs Obsidian Debitage. this is consistent with other research in the riverine environment (Bettinger 1980). The

Fish Springs hydration rate used for this project is: years BP 96.54 x micronsl.90

(Basgall et at. 2002). The rate was developed for samples near Independence, California and thus readings from the northern sample area had to be adjusted for the effective hydration temperature (EHT). This resulted in only minor increases to the hydration values from the north and does not appear to alter the pattern significantly. After appropriate corrections were made, the hydration rate was used to assign a date to each of the samples in years before present (B.P.). This produced dates ranging from 395 to

12,040 B.P. with an average of4910 B.P. The 12,040 B.P. date appears to be a statistical outlier, with the vast majority ofthe dates less than 9000 B.P. There is a small gap between 2000 and 3000 B.P., or middle Newberry period, but it might easily reflect the 127 vagaries of sampling. When the data are divided by sample area, however, a slightly different pattern emerges (Figure 5.9). The two readings from the south are early, dating to the early Holocene or Lake Mohave period. The northern and central data appear similar, although the Newberry period gap in the north widens to between 1850 and 3200

B.P. encompassing much ofthe time period. In the central area, the gap all but disappears, suggesting that FS obsidian use during the Newberry period declined in the north, but remained fairly steady in the core area near the source.

Interestingly, there are numerous readings that date to the pre-Newberry interval, especially the middle Holocene or Pinto period (Table 5.17). At first glance, these numbers seem surprisingly large, but when actual length ofthe time periods are considered, they seem more reasonable. The northern and central areas are almost identical from a statistical standpoint, with the only real difference being a decrease in the north during the late Newberry period; the southern units produced so little material they cannot be assessed. For the northern and central samples, there is a burst of activity during the middle Holocene that decreases in the Newberry period and begins to rebound during the subsequent Haiwee and early Marana intervals, before it essentially disappears in late Marana period times (post-395 B.P.). Looking at the hydration data by distance from the river at intervals of0-500 m and 500-1000 m, still other patterns appear (Figure

5.10). Not surprisingly, most ofthe later dates occur within 500 m ofthe river, including

67% ofthe Marana and 84% of the Haiwee period readings. Exactly halfofthe

Newberry and Pinto period readings fall within 500 m of the river, as do 61 % ofthe Lake

Mohave period values. At 500 to 1000 m from the river, until the end ofthe Newberry 128

ZONEA

ex: w co ::2 ::J Z

B. P.

ZONEB 4

ex: w co ::2 ::J Z

"t;§J ,,<:::,<:::' ,,<:::,<:::' ,,<:::,<:::' -",<:::' _",t;§J -",<:::' ,,<:::,<:::' ~ ~ ~ ~ ~- ~- ~~ ~~ YEARS B P.

ZONEC 4

3 ex: w co 2 ::2 ::J Z

"t;§J ,,<:::,<:::' ,,<:::,<:::' ':>'" <0'" '\'" YEARS B.P.

FIGURE 5.9. Temporal Distribution ofFish Springs Obsidian Debitage by Survey Zone. 129

TABLE 5.17: Fish Springs Debitage Hydration.

Hydration Readings by Time Period

Period North Central South Total

Marana 3 3 6 Haiwee 3 3 6 Late Newberry 1 3 4 Early Newberry 4 4 8 Pinto 16 21 37 Lake Mohave 8 7 2 17 Total 35 41 2 78

Hydration Readings Per 1000 Years Marana 5.5 5.5 10.9 Haiwee 4.3 4.3 8.6 Late Newberry 1.3 4.0 5.3 Early Newberry 2.7 2.7 5.3 Pinto 4.0 5.3 9.3 Lake Mohave 2.3 3.8 0.6 3.8 Total 3.2 3.8 0.2 7.2

period and again towards the end ofthe Haiwee, there is a pretty even distribution relative to 0 to 500 m distance, as opposed to the early Holocene where there is a slight drop in favor of the closer distance.

In sum, the FS debitage hydration sample produced no readings under 2.0J,l. or 395

B.P., which is consistent with other riverine studies (Bettinger 1980). This suggests that use of FS obsidian within the riverine environment ceased during the late or terminal

Marana period. There was also a slight drop during the Newberry period, especially in the northern sample area, but a marked increase in use during middle Holocene or Pinto period times. Late and very early hydration readings tend to cluster within 500 m ofthe 130

0-500 m from Owens River 4

3 ex: UJ CD 2 ::2: ::::> z

o IJ cIJ cIJ cIJ cIJ cIJ cIJ cIJ cIJ cIJ cIJ cIJ cIJ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ * ~ ~ ~ ~ YEARS B.P.

500-1000 m from Owens River 4

3 ex: UJ CD ::2: ::::> z

cIJ cIJ cIJ ".;§> cIJ _C\IJ cIJ cIJ cIJ cIJ cIJ ~IJ ~ ~ ~ w ~ ~ ~ * ~ ~ ~ ~ YEARS B.P. FIGURE 5.10. Temporal Distribution ofFish Springs Obsidian Debitage by Distance from River. modem river, while remaining measurements are fairly evenly distributed to a distance of

1000 m.

Truman-Queen

The Truman-Queen (TQ) hydration sample consists of30 pieces ofdebitage, of which only 21 exhibited readable bands. The hydration rate employed here was 131 developed for the Volcanic Tablelands north ofBishop and gives: years B.P.= 82.74 x

2 o3 microns . (Basgall and Giambastiani 1995). All but one ofthe TQ flakes were recovered from the northern sample unit and required no EHT adjustments, while the one from the central area needed to be corrected. Micron values for TQ obsidian ranged from

5.2 to 14.9 with a mean of8.12 and a standard deviation of2.01. Eliminating the 14.911 reading as an obvious outlier lowers the mean to 7.77 ± 1.3011. When the one specimen from the central unit is adjusted for EHT and the entire sample is converted to age estimates it produces dates from 2315 to 9715 years B.P. with an average of 5445 B.P.

Thus, TQ material first appears during Lake Mohave or early Holocene times, remainiing in steady use throughout the middle Holocene or Pinto period, and disappears entirely during the early Newberry. Most (85%) ofthe readings date to the Pinto period, an era lacking in much ofthe archaeology from the region. The sample is split fairly even between the east (60%) and west sides ofthe river. Eastern specimens exhibit lower readings, including the only three from the early Newberry period, but the mean dates for both the east (5260 B.P.) And west (5720 B.P.) sides of the river are very similar. These data show a steady use ofTQ obsidian in the northern riverine environment throughout the Pinto period and no significant use at other times. This is consistent with the idea that

Pinto groups were more mobile, occupying and exploiting habitats near the river during the course oftheir annual round. 132

Casa Diablo

The Casa Diablo (CD) obsidian sample proved to be problematical in that many ofthe flakes had no readable hydration bands. This probably results from the taphonomic problems discussed previously, however, but seems to effect CD obsidian differentially.

Of 51 analyzed specimens, only 19 produced hydration bands and three ~fthese are very

large (12 + microns), but not unreasonable. Similarly large Cas a Diablo readings were reported at the Komodo site, were temperatures are cooler and such readings even older

(Basgall 1987, 1988). The rate used here was developed for Long Valley and gives years

RP.= 129.656 x microns1.826 (Hall and Jackson 1989). This requires that much ofthe

riverine sample be adjusted for EHT. The bands range from 3.3 to 13.5p. with a mean of

8.83!l and a standard deviation of2.81. This highlights the length oftime CD obsidian

was used within this environment. The dates obtained for the sample range from 1135 to

14,700 B.P. and averaged 7380 RP., 42% falling within the Lake Mohave interval, 42%

in the Pinto period, 11 % in the early Newberry, and 5% in the Haiwee period. Thus, Casa

Diablo obsidian appears early in riverine contexts during the Lake Mohave interval and

persists throughout the following Pinto period. Casa Diablo glass is present during the

Newberry and Haiwee periods, but in only trace amounts: two early NeWberry and one

Haiwee period pieces. Moreover, all ofthe flakes come from northern and central survey

units on both sides ofthe river, with no significant pattern in their distribution. These

data highlight the early use ofCD obsidian in riverine settings that continues until the

early Newberry period and then disappears. 133

Coso

The Coso obsidian sample proved equally difficult to assess, consisting of22 pieces ofdebitage, but only 10 with readable bands. Although a small sample, Coso glass is also the most geographically diverse outside ofFS, with pieces collected from the north, central, and southern units and from both sides ofthe river. The hydration rate for

2 32 Coso material (years B.P.= 31.62 x microns . [Basgall 1990]) was developed for the

Lone Pine area, requiring that some ofthe northern specimens be corrected for EHT.

Bands widths range from 4.0 to 13. 1 J..l, with a mean of9.02J..l and standard deviation of

2.50. When all the samples are corrected for EHT and converted to years B.P. they produce age estimates from 920 to 12,320 B.P. with an average of5990. Most (70%) of

the readings fall within the middle Holocene or Pinto period, with a few earlier and one

late hydration rind. Given the small sample size and widespread distribution, few

patterns are apparent, except for the abundance ofmeasurements assignable to the Pinto

period. In sum, Coso obsidian arrives at the river early in time and persists through the

middle Holocene before its use is stopped during the late Holocene.

Debitage Summary

The debitage hydration sample reveals several interesting patterns (Table 5.18).

First, obsidian reduction in this environment occurred throughout the occupational

sequence. Second, Fish Springs is the most abundant source in all time periods and areas

where obsidian was collected. Use ofFS declined slightly during the NeWberry period

and disappears entirely during the late Marana period, the significance ofwhich remains 134

TABLE 5.18: Hydration by Time Period.

Source M H LN EN P LM Total FS 6 5 4 9 36 18 78

TQ 3 15 2 20

CD 2 8 5 16

COSO 7 2 10

Total 6 7 4 14 66 27 124

Per 1000yrs 10.9 10.0 6.2 9.3 16.5 7.7 11.4 *8.4 * Newbe!!}: total M=Marana; H Haiwee; LN late Newberry; EN = early Newberry; P = Pinto; LM = Lake Mohave; FS = Fish Springs; TQ Truman gueen; CD = Casa Diablo.

unclear. Use ofnon-FS obsidian is begins early and is especially pronounced during the

Pinto period, when 53% of all hydration measurements and 65% ofthe non-FS glass was

deposited. Other sources all but disappear after the early Newberry period, with only two

artifacts attributable to the Haiwee interval (CD and Coso) and none to the late Newberry

or Marana periods. These data suggest that early people were moving through the valley

staying close to the river and depositing a variety of lithic debris. Later in time, when

people were more tethered and their movement restricted, the river was targeted for more

specific resources from encampments located away from the river and mainly FS glass

was deposited.

Projectile Points

Of the 28 projectile points recovered during the survey, 22 yielded obsidian

hydration readings and one had two separate bands. Two ofthe points made from Coso 135 glass, an Elko series and a Humboldt Concave-base, yielded readings greater than 17.0 microns and are statistical outliers excluded from the following discussion. The nine arrow points with hydration readings produced no surprises, but the eleven dart points were more problematical (Table 5.19),

TABLE 5.19: Projectile Point Hydration Data.

Cat # Type Hyd Source Area Date

10 DSN 2.4 CD A 641 RP. 47 ELKO 8.7 FS A *6681 RP. 65 RS 3.5 CD A 1277 RP. 91 ELKO 8.4 TQ A 6223 RP. 126 CTW 2.2 FS A *470RP. 141 ELKO 7.1 FS A *4553 RP. 146 HUM 4.8 SALINE A no rate 152 GC-SS 5.5 TQ A 2634 B.P. 159 LM 10.6 TQ B *9789 B.P. 160 RS 2.9 FS B 730 RP. 172 HUM 7.8 FS B 4783 B.P. 199 ELKO 18.2 COSO B 26505 RP. 200 GB-STEM 8.1 FS B 5138 B.P. 227 LM 11.7 FS B 10334 RP. 290 ELKO 11.6/9.7 COSO B 9322/6156 B.P. 291 ELKO 6.6 IND B no rate 256 CTW 3.5 COSO C 578 RP. 257 RS 3.0 FS C 778 RP. 267 GB-STEM CD C no hydration 269 PINTO COSO C no hydration 274 HUM 17.3 COSO C 23563 RP. 282 HUM MONO C no hydration 294 RS 3.5 FS C 1043 B.P. 296 ELKO 7.2 CD C *4647 RP. 297 PINTO lND C no rate 298 RS 2.0 FS C 360B.P. 299 CTW-LEAF 2.8 FS C 683 B.P. 303 CTW 2.0 FS C 360B.P.

* Indicates date after bein& adjusted for effective h!dration te!!!)2erature ~EHT~. DSN Desert Side-notched; RS Rose Spring; CTW = Cottonwood; HUM = Humboldt; GC-SS; Gatecliff-Split-stem; LM = Lake Mohave; GB-Stem = Great Basin-stem; CD =Casa Diablo; FS =Fish S.erin~; Tg =Truman-gueen; IND = indeterminate. 136

Hydration measures on Desert series points ranged from 2.0 to 3.5Jl. or age estimates of350 to 585 B.P. (5< 515 B.P.). All ofthese points fall within the Marana period and were recovered from the northern and southern sample areas. The Rose

Spring arrow points had micron readings between 2.0 and 3.5 and when converted to calendar dates range from 380 to 1035 B.P. (5< 735 B.P.). Thus, apart from the point dated at 380 B.P., all ofthe Rose Spring specimens fall within the Haiwee period and were recovered from the central and southern sample areas.

Elko series dart points were recovered from an three sample areas and possessed

large hydration readings from 7.1 to 9.7Jl. When converted to dates these range from

3275 to 6625 B.P .• or an average of5345 B.P., which falls well before the Newberry

period is conventionally placed. In fact, all but one ofthese points yielded dates older

than the Newberry era. These data suggest four possibilities: (I) the hydration readings

are flawed, (2) the rates are flawed. (3) the points were misidentified, or (4) Elko series

points are ofgreater antiquity than previously thought, including the so-caUed "thin"

varients (Gilreath and Hildebrant 1997).

The two Humboldt series points with viable readings were recovered from the

northern and central sample areas. The first, a small concave-base specimen, was

manufactured from Saline Range obsidian and had a 4.8 micron reading for which there is

currently no available rate. The second is a small concave-base point that was

manufactured from FS obsidian. It had a 7.8 micron reading that converts to an age of

4750 B.P. or middle Holocene Pinto period. 137

The single GatecliffSplit-stem dart point came from the northern sample area. It had a hydration reading of 5.5Jl and was manufactured from Truman-Queen obsidian.

When the hydration rate was applied, the point dated to 2655 B.P., or early Newberry period. A provisional Great Basin Stemmed point recovered from the northern area was manufactured from FS obsidian and had a reading of 8.1 microns, or middle Holocene date of 5175 B.P.

Finally, two Lake Mohave points recovered from the central sample area had readings of 12.0 and 11.7 microns. They were manufactured from TQ and FS obsidian, respectively, and convert to ages of 11,220 B.P. and 10,370 B.P. at the terminal

Pleistocene. These dates may be slightly early for the region and are possibly skewed somewhat by rates that were developed primarily for more recent time frames.

In sum, projectile point hydration from this project reveals some interesting patterns. Hydration measurements on the arrow points placed almost all such artifacts within their proper time periods. Dart points are a little more sporadic. Only two points, an Elko and a Gatecliff Split-stem, dated to the Newberry period and more specifically the early Newberry interval. The rest of the darts fell within middle or early Holocene times. Taken together, these data suggest that hunting within the Owens Valley riverine environment was always an important subsistence activity and began very early in the history of the area. There is a drop in these activities during the late Newberry and again

towards the terminal Marana periods. The data also suggest that Elko series projectile points within the riverine zone may date significantly earlier than forms recovered from other regional environmental contexts. 138

Chapter 6

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION

Most researchers would agree that within the Owens Valley there was a shift from small, highly mobile groups that subsisted on high-ranked resources to larger more sedentary groups that intensively exploited lower-ranked resources, especially small seeds and pinyon (Basgall and Giambastiani 1995; Basgall and McGuire 1988; Bettinger 1975,

1977, 1989, 1999; Delacorte 1999; Delacorte et at 1995). Use ofthe riverine environment, for the most part, resembles that ofother zones within the valley, but there are some marked differences. Land around the river saw very early use during the beginning ofthe Holocene, along with a burst ofactivity during the middle Holocene.

People lived in small highly mobile groups moving up and down the river through the valley. Activity continues through the early Newberry period and all but ceases by the late Newberry intervaL During the Haiwee era people are again making regular forays to this environment, but they are logistical in nature, and by the Marana period there are large-scale riverine resource processing areas, where people are intensively exploiting both plants and animals. The following discussion examines riverine use within the

Owens Valley by time period discussing some ofthe stronger patterns that occur and their implications for broader regional land-use patterns. For the purposes ofthis study, associations include all artifacts that are 50 m or less from one another and are used to give some temporal control to the artifact distributions found within this environment. 139

Pre-Newberry Era

It is widely accepted that the pre-Newberry period in Owens Valley had a low popUlation density comprised of small, highly mobile groups that had extensive foraging ranges (Basgall and Giambastiani 1995; Basgall and McGuire 1988; Bettinger 1975,

1977, 1989, 1999; Delacorte 1999; Delacorte et a1. 1995). These people subsisted on a variety ofplant and animal resources, but hunting was evidently a major focus. This project recovered seven pre-Newberry projectile points within the riverine environment.

These include two Lake Mohave, two generic Great Basin Stemmed series, two Pinto, and one Gatecliff Split-stem form. The two Lake Mohave points were recovered from the central sample area on the west side ofthe river. One ofthe points was in close proximity to debitage that hydration data indicate was deposited during the Pinto and early

Newberry periods. Both points were manufactured from obsidian, one from TQ that dated to 8550 B.P. and one from FS dating to 10,370 B.P., both within the Lake Mohave time period. The Great Basin Stemmed points were manufactured from CD and FS obsidian, but only the latter artifact yielded an intact hydration band that dates to 5175

B.P., or Pinto period. This point was also associated with two bifaces and a small amount of debitage, while the other was an isolate. Hydration data indicate that the debitage was from the Pinto period as well; one ofthe bifaces was a probable dart fragment with edge grinding and the other was a late stage biface with no visible use wear present. The

Gatecliffpoint, which dated to 2655 B.P., was found in association with three simple flake tools, one millingslab, and some debitage that suggest the area is ofmixed early 140

Newberry and Pinto periods. The other projectile points mentioned above were isolated finds and contribute little insight into the nature ofpre-Newberry period assemblages.

Hydration data from this project were able to isolate some mixed Lake Mohave and Pinto period areas on the landscape. These locations occur in all three sample areas and most are at least 400 m from the modem river. Early assemblages include bifaces, formed flake tools, simple flake tools, millingslabs, cobble tools, and handstones. There were also a few isolated potsherds found in some contexts, indicating some were of late prehistoric over-printing. Bifaces outnumber simple flake tools 2.3 to 1 and there are several formed flake tools, suggesting a more formal, perhaps curated flaked stone technology. The flaked to ground stone ratio is 3.5 to 1, not as high as one would expect, but when cobble tools are excluded the ratio rises to 5.6 to 1. This indicates that milling activities were occurring, but were not as prevalent as in later time periods.

Some notable technological aspects of individual tool classes include that bifaces were generally made from obsidian, were in late or middle-stages ofreduction, and were in some cases edge ground. The formed flake tools are manufactured from a variety of materials including obsidian, basalt, and cryptocrystalline silicates. They were generally made on interior percussion flakes and had only one or two used edges. Cobble tools were manufactured from quartzite or granite and generally exhibited battering and step fracturing. The millingslabs are more commonly made from granite and have slightly concave or flat grinding surfaces. Although most thickness measurements are incomplete, at least half the millingstones are "thick" or "block" forms. This seems to indicate a less portable milling technology. 141

Although this is a modest number ofartifacts, their distributions are interesting.

Small Lake Mohave and Pinto assemblages are found in all three sample areas. Most of the collection units where debitage was recovered and hydration analysis was successful yielded some dates ascribable to one ofthese periods. This indicates regular levels of lithic reduction during the early and, especially, middle Holocene. The problem with delineating formal early assemblages lies in the fact that most artifacts are over-printed by later materials. By using a distributional approach, however, some assemblage trends were teased out. The northern units possessed all the cobble tools and the majority ofthe slabs had slightly concave milling surfaces. This could be from the processing ofroots and/or tubers in these northern areas. The formed flake tools were all recovered from central units, where all time periods exhibited an abundance of flaked stone artifacts.

This is probably either a good area to hunt or reflects the fact that it is close to the FS obsidian source. Regardless ofwhy, early assemblages in the central units appear to be geared more towards hunting and show abundances of formed flake tools, bifaces, projectile points, and debitage. The southern assemblages consisted of small pockets of debitage and isolated projectile points. It is apparent that there was substantial activity in the south during the early and middle Holocene, however, many of the accumulations have been mixed or over-printed by large Haiwee and Marana period artifact scatters.

In sum, the early and middle Holocene along the Owens River saw relatively intensive activity. The fact that most of the hydration performed on the debitage samples dated to the Pinto period highlights the importance oflithic reduction or tool maintenance within this environment during this time. It appears that all obsidian sources in and 142 around the valley were used and that people probably moved around the landscape

frequently. This is also illustrated by the small size ofassemblages, many ofwhich are dominated by flaked stone artifacts. During portions ofthe Pinto period environmental

conditions were tough (drought-like), and reliance on higher-ranked resources, especially game, may have focused human activity closer to the river, where animals may have been

more concentrated. The data from this survey are consistent with small mobile bands of

people that moved often, used a variety oftools tone, and survived by exploiting an

assortment ofresources. Hunting was an important activity, but plant resources were

exploited to some extent as well. Data suggest that roots may have been an important

crop in the northern portion ofthe valley. People stayed close to the river and, based on

the obsidian debitage source profiles and small assemblage sizes, they traveled through

the valley as part of a larger seasonal round.

Newberry Period

The Newberry period is one ofthe more complicated periods to decipher within

the riverine environment. As discussed previously, this temporal interval is broken into

early and late because ofchanges in subsistence-settlement organization that occur during

this time. The early Newberry period appears very similar to the previous Pinto period,

with only subtle changes in the range and intensity ofexploited resources. The late

Newberry era, by contrast, exhibits dramatic changes, with settlement becoming more

regularized and subsistence strategies becoming more logisticaL Oddly, early Newberry

remains seem better represented within the riverine corridor than the late Newberry 143 record, which runs counter to other environments in the valley. This project provided some much needed data to understand how people subsisted during the early part ofthe

Newberry period within the Owens Valley.

Typically within the Owens Valley, the Newberry period is represented by Elko and Humboldt series projectile points, however, these two point types exhibit two patterns within the riverine environment. First, Humboldt and Elko points generally occurred as isolates or with small amounts ofassociated artifacts and/or debitage. They appear to have been lost or discarded at small encampments or while on the move, most likely hunting large game within the riverine corridor. The same points also occur in entirely different contexts. Some were found associated with what appear to be large residential areas that contain rich and diverse assemblages, most located in the northern portion of the valley. Flaked stone significantly outnumbers ground stone tools in these areas, though there is an abundance ofboth. For the most part, the flaked stone technology seems expedient, with lots of simple flake tools and only a handful ofbifaces and formed flake tools. Ground stone implements, namely millingslabs, appear curated, consisting of "thin" unshaped slabs manufactured mainly from hard igneous materials with some granite and schist specimens. The milling surfaces are flat and smooth with most showing signs of intensive use and resurfacing via pecking.

Obsidian hydration data from this period are interesting, most debitage dating to the early Newberry era is inter-mixed with larger amounts ofPinto age debitage. The points themselves date mainly to the Pinto period, with only a few attributable to early

Newberry times. While this is not so unusual with the small Humboldt or even "thick" 144

Elko points, all but one Elko point from this project dated well into the Pinto era with an average age of5345 B.P. Looking at other projects in the area the large hydration readings for these points does not seem all that unusual (Table 6.1). It appears that Elko points deposited closer to riverine contexts are potentially ofgreater antiquity regardless ofsub-type or thickness (Figure 6.1). It is during Newberry times when people began to stay at residential locations for longer periods oftime and eventually began to move away from the river into other environments, which some believe was to be more centrally located to exploit different resources such as dryland seeds (Bettinger 1975, 1980).

According to these data, by the late Newberry era, riverine environments were all but abandoned and it is not until the Marana period that people start intensively exploiting this area again.

In sum, the early Newberry period appears to have witnessed longer residential

use ofthe riverine environment along with logistical hunting. Typical projectile point

forms proved to be much older than they date in the rest ofthe valley. As residential

stays got extended, people moved away from the river and eventually human activity

became very sparse within the immediate riverine corridor. This period marks the

beginning ofa major adaptive shift that changed the whole subsistence-settlement system

within Owens Valley.

Haiwee Period

During this time period several important developments occur that had lasting

affects on the subsistence-settlement patterns within Owens Valley. First and foremost, it 145

TABLE 6.1: Hydration Measurements on Elko Series Points from Select Regional Contexts.

Site Source Hyd Age

CA-INY-30 Project CA-INY-30 COSO 9.2 ca. 5445 B.P. CA-INY-30 CD 5.4 ca. 2725 B.P. * CA-INY-30 CD 5.6 ca. 2915 B.P.* CA-INY-30 FS 2.2 ca. 430 B.P. CA-INY-30 CD 4.8 ca. 2190 B.P.* CA-INY-30 COSO 6.3 ca. 2260 B.P. CA-INY-30 COSO 6.8 ca. 2700 B.P. Mean 5.8Jl Std=2.1 CV 36% Ed Powers Project CA-INY-13841H TQ 5.0 ca. 2170 B.P. CA-INY-13841H FS 4.0 ca. 1545 B.P.* CA-INY-13841H CD 7.4 ca. 501 0 B.P. CA-INY-13841H FS 5.3 ca. 2635 B.P. CA-INY-13841H CD 5.0 ca. 2450 B.P. CA-INY-13841H CD 5.3 ca. 2725 B.P. CA-INY-13841H TQ 4.0 ca. 1380 B.P. CA-INY-13841H CD 6.1 ca. 3520 B.P. CA-INY-13841H TQ 5.8 ca. 2935 B.P. CA-INY-13841H TQ 4.7 ca. 1915 B.P. CA-INY-13841H CD 5.5 ca. 2915 B.P. CA-INY-13841H CD 5.4 ca. 2820 B.P. CA-INY-13841H CD 4.5 ca. 2020 B.P. CA-INY-1386 CD 5.1 ca. 2440 B.P. CA-INY-1386 CD 5.8 ca. 3210 B.P. CA-INY-1386 TQ 6.0 ca. 3145 B.P. CA-INY-1386 TQ 7.7 ca. 5215 B.P. CA-INY-1386 CD 7.0 ca. 4530 B.P. CA-INY-1386 TQ 4.3 ca. 1600 B.P. Mean = 5.51J. Std 1.0 CV= 18% Blackrock Project CA-INY-5267 FS 5.8 ca. 2725 B.P. CA-INY-5267 FS 8.1 ca. 5140 B.P. CA-INY-5269 COSO 7.8 ca. 3710 B.P. CA-INY-5276 COSO 13.8/5173 ca. 13945/5175 B.P. CA-INY-5276 FS 8.3 ca. 5380 B.P. CA-INY-5276 TQ 6.8 ca. 3930 B.P. * CA-INY-5276 FS 6.9 ca. 3790 B.P. CA-INY-5276 TQ 4.9 ca. 2085 B.P.* CA-INY-5281 TQ 4.8 ca. 2000 B.P. * CA-INY-5281 FS 6.9 ca. 3790 B.P. CA-INY-5281 FS 3.2/3.8 ca. 88011220 B.P. CA-INY-5875 COSO 6.817.8 ca. 2700/3710 B.P. CA-INY-5281 FS 1.2 ca. 140 B.P. Mean=6.61J. Std=2.8 CV 42% 146

TABLE 6.1: Hydration Measurements on Elko Series Points from Select Regional Contexts (continued).

Site Source Hyd Age Fish Springs Project CA-INY-1241H coso 8.6 ca. 4655 B.P. CA-INY-384 FS 11.8 ca. 10500 B.P. CA-INY-384 COSO 12.9 ca. 11925 B.P. CA-INY-384 FS 8.1 ca. 5140 B.P. CA-INY-384 CD 7.4 ca. 4890 B.P.* CA-INY-4550 COSO 7.1 ca. 2985 B.P. CA-INY -4550 FS 4.1 ca. 1410 B.P. CA-INY-4550 FS 5.5 ca. 2465 B.P. CA-INY -4550 FS 5.6 ca. 2550 B.P. CA-INY-4550 CD 6.7 ca. 4065 B.P. * Mean=7.8~ Std= 2.8 CV 36% Owens River Project Area-A FS 8.7 ca. 6680 B.P.* Area-A TQ 8.4 ca. 6225 B.P. Area-A FS 7.1 ca. 4555 B.P.* Area-B COSO 18.2 ca. 26505 B.P . (excluded) Area-B COSO 9.7111.6 ca. 6155/9320 B.P. Area-C CD 7.2 ca. 4645 B.P.* Mean 8.8~ Std = 1.7 CV= 19%

CD Casa Diablo; FS = Fish Springs; TQ Truman Queen; Hyd hydration value; B.P. before present; * = adjusted for effective hydration temperature. is marked by the introduction ofthe bow and arrow, which is believed to have had a

dramatic impact on hunting strategies and overall subsistence economics (Bettinger

1999). This is also the era in which the Numic spread is believed to have taken place,

again resulting in a dramatic shift in subsistence strategies (Bettinger and Baumhoff 1982,

1983). Finally, there is a relatively long period ofdry, drought-like conditions, known as

the Medieval Climatic Anomaly (MCA), which may have had impacts on land-use

patterns, especially within the riverine environment (Jones et al. 1999). With all this in

mind, there is ample reason to expect changes in the use ofwetland resources during the

Haiwee period. 7000

< 1.5 km from river

6000

avg. 2.5 km from river 5000

c.. 4000 avg. 2.8 km m from river (f) 0::: « avg.2.9km W 3000 5.3km from river >­ from river

INY-30 Ed Powers Blackrock Fish Springs Owens River Project (Basgall and McGuire 1988) (Basgall et al. 2003) (Zeanah and Leigh 2002) (King et al. 2001) (this thesis)

PROJECT ,...... j'.:;.. FIGURE 6.1. Average Age of Elko Points from Select Projects in Owens Valley. -...J 148

A total offive Rose Spring projectile points was recovered, at least one in each sample area. This is a relatively high frequency ofone point type and equals about 7.1 points per 1000 years, one ofthe highest for all time periods represented in the project, in tum implying that hunting (with projectile points) was an important activity within the riverine environment during this interval. Artifacts associated with these points are somewhat limited as two were recorded as isolated finds. Only 22 artifacts appear to be spatially associated (within 50 m) with Rose Spring projectile points, however, 15 of these derive from a mixed or multi-component area that includes two Desert series variants, pottery, and mussel shell. Difficulties in distinguishing Haiwee from Marana artifacts necessitates discussing the overall Haiwee assemblage with and without these 15 items included.

The flaked to ground stone ratio for the Haiwee assemblages is 0.67:1, the large amount of ground stone underscoring the importance ofplant resources within this

environment. When the mUlti-component assemblage is removed, the ratio only changes

to 0.75:1 and still favors the ground stone. However, it is not what is associated with the

Rose Spring points that is significant, but what is not. The near lack ofassociated

artifacts would suggest that people are not spending as much time in this environment or

at least not staying in one place for very long. Hunting is clearly a worthwhile activity

within the riverine corridor, but people are entering the area and leaving again without

making much ofa record. Absent are the hunting camps that were common in previous

time periods, as are the large seed processing areas so prevalent during the Marana

interval. Several factors mentioned above could be contributing to these changes. 149

First, is the introduction of the bow and arrow with its distance and accuracy, which made hunting more successful on an individual level. This may have made larger hunting camps unnecessary, allowing individuals or small groups ofpeople, not big hunting parties, to venture out on shorter forays. This, in tum, made it possible for individuals or small groups to exploit game more logistically and/or while participating in other activities, such as plant processing (Bettinger 1999). Changes in hunting also coincide with other economic activities such as more intensive pinyon use and food storage that allowed for small households as opposed to large groups to compete successfully (Bettinger 1975, 1977, Delacorte 1990, 1999). People may have been residing in the desert scrub zone or in closer proximity to pinyon, only making short trips to the river and returning to more permanent settlements elsewhere.

This is also the proposed time period when Numic speaking peoples spread from this area across much ofthe Great Basin. Some researchers believe this happened by the

Numic people out competing their predecessors by intensively exploiting lower-ranked resources in large numbers. Their strategies were successful enough to support larger populations and eventually replace or absorb existing groups (Bettinger and Baumhoff

1982, 1983). Regardless ofhow the Numic spread happened, the shift to intensive pinyon

exploitation skewed the seasonality ofriverine use by taking people away from the river,

when certain higher ranked resources (i.e. suckers) were available and moving them up

into the pinyon zone. This seasonal conflict apparently did not get resolved until the

Marana period, when wetland plants and small seeds became important dietary staples

along with smaller fish and mussels. There seems little doubt that wetland resources 150

were still being exploited during the Haiwee era, just not with the intensity or to the extent that they were during the late or tenninal prehistoric period. The main activity

within this environment appears to have been hunting supplemented by some plant

processing, but done on short visits to the corridor.

The environment itself probably had something to do with the shift as well.

Bettinger (1975) in his dissertation suggests that perhaps at the beginning ofthe Haiwee

period the desert scrub zone became more productive and enticed people to move offthe

river. However, this is the time period when the MeA is taking place with its drought­

like conditions which would have presumably made wetland resources, especially plants,

less productive and require people to go further from the river to obtain alternative

resources. This period does correspond with the appearance of alpine villages and longer­

term camps in the pinyon zone (Bettinger 1991a). One possible reason there is not

evidence ofdiminished riverine use during the earlier Pinto period when there is similar

evidence ofdrought and possible dessication of Owens Lake is that hunting was a more

central activity for daily subsistence and the drier conditions concentrated animals near

the river where water was available during certain times ofthe year. This may also be

why there appears to be an increase ofhunting in this environment during the Haiwee

period. Put another way, a greater reliance on lower-ranked plant resources later in time

caused people to find alternative resources in other environmental zones during drought

conditions; this was less necessary during the Pinto period when people relied more on

higher-ranked animal resources. Also, larger population densities during the Haiwee 151 period makes shifts out ofthe riverine zone more evident in the surface distributions of artifacts.

Whether these shifts are the products oftechnological, social, or environmental changes is unclear, but all three certainly contributed in some manner to changes in nvenneuse.

Marana Period

Late prehistoric subsistence in the Owens Valley, as we understand it, is marked by a wide diet breadth that involves the intensive use oflower-ranked resources. This includes many wetland resources such as plants, freshwater mussels, and waterfowl. The climate during this period was generally mild, with some cooler intervals but for the most part similar to modem conditions. Populations within the valley are relatively high at this

time and exploitation ofenvironmental zones such as the river seem to have been more

logistical and marked by task-specific procurement strategies in order to procure lower­

ranked resources in high numbers. Some ofthe most important technology associated

with riverine exploitation, fishing for example, is difficult to observe on a surface survey.

For this reason, discussion here, focuses on obsidian hydration and the distributions of

Desert series projectile points, pottery, and mussel shell, along with the associated flaked

and ground stone technologies, as well as landforms and soil units in which these patterns

appear.

Late period assemblages within the riverine environment are relatively diverse and

consist mainly ofsimple flake tools, millingslabs, and bifaces, with some projectile 152 points, handstones, and cobble tools. Simple or casual flake tools outnumber bifaces 1.2 to 1, indicating a more expedient flaked stone technology consistent with other late period assemblages within the region, including Alabama Gates. It is believed that the simple flake tools are part ofa non-specialized, expedient tool-kit that along with other data from this time period suggest less mobile populations that would have intensively exploited only one or a few locations (Delacorte et al. 1995). The overall flaked stone to ground stone ratio is 1.8 to 1, which would indicate a heavy reliance on milling activities. These patterns change from north to south, where ratios in the north drop slightly to 1.6 to 1, rising to 12.0 to1 in the central units, and dropping back to 0.8 to 1 in the south. Looking at the overall distribution this way, there is a significant lack ofground stone and an abundance of flaked stone in the central units, a pattern that reverses in the southern units and shows a more even distribution ofartifacts in the northern study area. Pottery counts are lowest in the north and increase to the south, where potsherds become abundant.

Mussel shell, on the other hand, is abundant in the north and south and almost absent in the central units.

From a technological standpoint, it is notable that simple flake tools are mainly made on biface thinning flakes manufactured from obsidian, except in the south, which has a more diverse flaked stone material profile overall. Bifaces are generally late-stage forms and 90% are manufactured from obsidian. Millingslabs are manufactured from a variety ofmaterials that include igneous, granite, schist, and quartzite specimens. They are generally intentionally shaped, "thin" unifacial tools designed for portability. The grinding surfaces are typically smooth and flat, some being slightly concave in 153 configuration. The millings labs appear to be part of a portable tool-kit used to target dispersed riparian resources.

Major patterns of late prehistoric occupation within the northern section ofthe

Owens River drainage include low flaked to ground stone ratios that are appreciably different than the overall pattern for the project area. While this suggests that milling activities were important along the river, other activities are occurring there as well.

Pottery counts are low and mussel shell is abundant. Millingslabs in these areas have a higher incidence ofslightly-concave grinding surfaces, which coincides with a relative abundance ofcobble tools. This may indicate that some type ofroot processing was taking place along with small seed processing activities. If, indeed, there is a correlation between pottery and small seed processing, the lack ofpottery in the north would further imply that roots and tubers were being more specifically targeted in these areas.

Ethnographically, several root crops were important to the Owens Valley Paiute, especially spike rush and blue dicks. The latter is said to have been a very important plant and grew on irrigated lands near Bishop and Big Pine (Steward 1933). Blue dicks were harvested mainly in the fall and require less marshy lands like those found in the northern sample units, as opposed to the southern area. The Marana assemblages are found mainly on old river terraces within semi-stable dunes ofcoarse sandy loam. They are occurring essentially on high spots that would have overlooked the river or its marshy flood plains. On the east side, the assemblages are within close proximity ofthe river, and in contrast, lie further away on the west due to the extensive flood plains. The flood plains in the north consist offine silty clay loam, which supports mainly saltgrass, while 154 the other areas contain fine silty sand loams, which support saltgrass as well as greasewood and shadscale. The differences in resource distributions within these soils may also hold the key to the differences in technology from north to south. In sum, the northern sites appear more diverse, but seem geared toward the processing of low-ranked resources such as mussels, small seeds, and perhaps roots and tubers.

In the central units the ratio of flaked to ground stone tools jumps up to 12.0 to 1.

Mussel shell all but disappears and there are fair amounts ofpottery. The abundance of flaked stone tools includes mainly simple flake tools and late-stage bifaces. The lack of ground stone makes it clear that processing plant remains was not a major activity in these areas late in time. The assemblages occur in the same types ofsoils on high spots andlor on river terraces. Just about all ofthe assemblages occur on the west side ofthe river with the eastern flank producing a few isolates. This is probably due to the close proximity ofthe mountains on the east and a lack of large drainages and well-developed soils. The differences in these assemblages from other areas could be caused by a combination of factors. It is possible this section ofthe river falls in the middle oftwo separate catchment areas, creating a void ofwetland resource processing debris with the abundance of flaked stone tools and debitage the result ofthe close proximity to the Fish

Springs obsidian source. It may perhaps be guided by differences in the flow ofthe water, as well as the landforms and soils associated with this section ofthe river, which does not seem as conducive to the acquisition and processing ofplant remains and freshwater mussels. Much of this section ofthe river is not as oxbowed, creating faster moving water which is not ideal habitat for mussels or their procurement. The flood 155 plains are also not as extensive in this area affecting the types ofsoils and limiting the distributions ofmany wetland plant species. In sum, the central area does not seem as productive for the acquisition ofthe wetland resources procured in the north or south, as evidenced by the differences in surface artifact distributions.

Late assemblages in the south exhibit the lowest flaked to ground stone ratio at

0.8 to 1, with ground stone actually outnumbering flaked stone tools, highlighting the importance ofmilling activities in these areas. Mussel shell and pottery counts are both high. The assemblages are similar, in many respects, to ones in the north, but occur mainly on the east side ofthe river in close proximity to the water and contain a greater abundance ofpottery and fewer flaked stone tools. The millingslabs tend to have more flat grinding surfaces and there are fewer cobble tools. This may indicate that small seeds were the targeted resource and roots and tubers were not as important as in the north. The assemblages occur on old river terraces within semi-stable coarse sandy loam dunes that overlook the river and its rich flood plains. These areas seem geared towards the intensive exploitation ofseeds with some associated mussel processing.

In summary, late-period riverine use appears to have been largely logistical, intensively targeting lower-ranked resources such as small seeds. The flaked stone tool­ kit is expedient, while ground stone is generally more specialized. Pottery use increases as one moves south, perhaps due to more root and tuber processing in the north and more seed processing in the south, and/or because there may be two separate catchment areas represented that are responsible for these differences. The presence ofhunting technology is limited to mainly the southeast, though activities such as the netting of 156 rabbits and fishing would be difficult to ascertain from surface assemblages. While mussel shell was abundant in many areas, the lack ofdense concentrations would suggest that mussels were opportunistic, secondary resources. This could, ofcourse, have something to do with preservation. Mussels may have been a sort ofprehistoric "fast food" to be taken and eaten while doing other subsistence activities.

Conclusion

This thesis has highlighted many patterns and lent insight into the Owens riverine lifeways throughout the Holocene. What follows here is a brief summary ofthe more significant patterns and data that shed light on questions that affect riverine exploitation and/or larger valley-wide or regional adaptive shifts. In general, hunting was always an important activity within this environment and was especially emphasized during the earlier time periods. Lithic reduction was never prevalent near the river, as evidenced by a lack ofcores, cortical debris, and early stage bifaces. What manufacturing that did take place related to the sharpening or finishing ofalready finished/shaped tools that were transported into the area. Obsidian was the toolstone ofchoice, however, in the south and during the early and middle Holocene there was more lithic variety. Fish Springs obsidian is the most abundant source throughout all time periods, and this is especially true post 2000 B.P., or during the late Newberry period and thereafter. Generally speaking, ground stone was part ofa mobile toolkit with thin portable millingslabs and small handstones predominating. They seem to be adapted mainly to the processing of small seeds, however, in the north there is evidence that roots may have been an 157 important crop during certain time periods. Elko series projectile points proved to be significantly older in this environment than traditionally assumed and researchers may need to rethink the antiquity and persistence ofthis point type; it may be more than a

Newberry period marker.

Occupation ofthe Owens River corridor began during the early Holocene or Lake

Mohave period. It began with small groups ofpeople moving through the area and staying close to the river to exploit its abundant resources. They did not stay in one place long and seem to have maintained a primary focus on hunting; high levels ofmobility are indicated by the variety of toolstone used. There is a burst of activity during the middle

Holocene or Pinto period that was likely due to more groups ofpeople entering the valley and, perhaps, slightly longer stays within the environment. However, the assemblages and behavior they imply remain much like those in the preceding period and change little through the early Newberry era. By the end ofthis period people are beginning to remain at the same locations for longer periods oftime and/or serially revisiting locations.

During the late NeWberry interval the riverine environment experiences a dramatic decline in use. This coincides with the establishment ofdesert scrub settlements that were inhabited for longer periods oftime. Riverine activity increases during the Haiwee period, but is more logistical and targeted specific resources such as animals or wetland plants. Toolstone variability also decreases, with mainly Fish Springs obsidian being used near the river. By the latest Holocene or Marana period, use ofthe riverine environment is again intensive with large logistical sites geared toward the procurement and processing ofriverine resources, especially small seeds and perhaps roots in the 158 northern area. Mussel shell is also being deposited, although the lack oftruly dense shell middens suggests that mussels were more opportunistic resources and/or not especially abundant.

In all, data on the Owens riverine environment comport well with what has been accepted by researchers for the region. There are rich and diverse assemblages along the river, with the Pre-Newberry era being well represented. This environment provides a unique opportunity to explore the early and middle Holocene periods in the Owens

Valley. This thesis has provided data on how people have lived and adapted to an ever­ changing riverine environment throughout the Holocene, and until more work is undertaken along the river, the nature ofregional subsistence-settlement systems will not be fully understood. 159

APPENDIX A

Project Catalog 160

List of Catalog Codes.

ACC Accession # TRANS Transect CAT Catalog # COLL Collection DESCRlP Description MTRL Material COND Condition NUM Number LCOMM Label Comments PP Piece Plot N No CSC Controlled Surface Collection Y Yes CFC Controlled Feature Collection CBBLTL Cobble Tool FLKTL Flake Tool FRMFLKTL Formed Flake Tool DBTG Debitage HNDSTN Handstone MLLGSLB Millingslab PRJPT Projectile Point ASDCBBL Assayed Cobble ART Artifact OBS Obsidian BAS Basalt QZT Quartzite CCR Crytocrystalline Silicate QTZ Quartz IGN Igneous FGI Fine Grained Igneous SCH Schist GRN Granite WHL Whole NC Near Complete PRX Proximal DST Distal MRG Margin MED Medial FRG Fragment INT Interior ACC !TRANS' CAT I AREA ICOLL lYPE I UTM'S \UNIT SIZ§COLq DESCRtP IMTRL ICOHO INUMI LCOMM ORP A1W 1 A1W-1 PP N4128286/E383529 N BIFACE OBS MED ORP A1W 2A1W-1 PP N4128222/E383507 N BIFACE OBS DST 1 A1W-ART-2 IORP A1W 3A1W-1 PP N4128225/E383506 N CBBLTL BAS WHL 1 A1W-ART-3 IORP A1W 4 CSC T5/E383255 10X10 Y FLKTL OBS WHL 1 IORP A1W 5A1W-1 CSC N4128223/E383518 1X1 Y DBTG OBS 5A1W-ART-4 ORPA1W 6A1W-1 CSC N4128223/E383518 1X1 Y DBTG QZT 1 A1W-ART-4 IORP A1W 7 CSC T6/E383745 10X10 Y DBTG OBS 1 ORP A1E 8 PP N4128281/E384326 N FLKTL OBS NC 1 A1E-ART-1 ORP A1E 9 PP N4128204/E384592 N MLLGSLB IGN FRG 1 A1E-ART-2 ORP A1E 10 PP N4128219/E384459 Y PRJPT OBS NC 1 A1E-ART-3 ORP A1E 11 PP N4128219fE384581 N MLLGSLB IGN MRG 1 A1E-ART-4? ORP A1E 12 PP N4128218/E384355 N BIFACE OBS PRX 1 A1E-ART-5 ORP A1E 13 PP N4128257/E384123 N CBBLTL QZT END 1 A1E-ART-6 ORP A1E 14 PP N4128208fE384126 N HNDSTN FGI MRG 1 A1E-ART-7 JORP A1E 15 PP N4128203fE384114 N MLLGSLB IGN MRG 1 A1E-ART-8 ORP A1E 16 PP N4128211 fE384226 N MLLGSLB FGI FRG 1 A1E-ART-9 ORP A1E 17 PP N4128211/E384231 N BIFACE OBS DST 1 A1E-ART-10 ORP A1E 18 PP N4128205fE384234 Y SHERD INT 1 A1E-ART-11 IORP A1E 19 PP N4128206fE304255 Y SHERD INT 1 A1E-ART-12 IORP A1E 20 PP N4128233/E384249 N BIFACE OBS MED 1 A1E-ART-13 IORP A1E 21 PP N4128238/E384249 N BIFACE OBS DST 1 AIE-ART-14 IORP A1E 22 PP N4128273/E384320 N MLLGSLB FGI FRG 1 A1E-ART-15 IORP A1E 23 PP N4128272/E384322 N BIFACE OBS FRG 1 A1E-ART-16 IORP A1E 24 PP N4128277/E384322 N MLLGSLB SCH MRG 1 A1E-ART-17 ORP A1E 25 PP N4128281/E384326 N FLKTL OBS MRG 1 A1E-ART-18 ORP A1E 26 PP N4128275/E384346 N MLLGSLB FGI MRG 1 A1E-ART-19 [ORP A1E 27 PP N4128285/E384342 N BIFACE OBS PRX 1 A 1E-ART-20 ORP A1E 28 PP N4128278/E384340 N HNDSTN FGI MRG 1 A1E-ART-21 ORP A1E 29 PP N4128271fE384322 Y SHERD INT 1 A1E-ART-22 ...... IORP A1E 30 PP N4128221/E384280 Y BIFACE OBS END 1 A1E-ART-23 0\ ...... UTM'S IUNIT SIZ§COLLI DESCRIP IMTRL ICONO INUM I LCOMM PP N4128221/E384280 N BIFACE OBS DST 1 A1E-ART-24 ORP A1E 32 CFC N4128275/E384340 Y SHERD INT 5A1E-FEA-2 jORP A1E 33 CFC T5/E384445 10X10 Y DBTG OBS 1 ORP A1E 34 CFC T6/E384345 10X10 Y FLKTL OBS NC 1 ORP A1E 35 CFC T6/E384345 10X10 Y DBTG IGN 1 PRP A1E 36 CFC T6/E384245 10X1O Y DBTG OBS 7 .ORP A1E 37 CFC T5/E384245 10X10 Y FRMFLKTL OBS NC 1 IORP A1E 38 CFC T5/E384245 10X10 Y BIFACE OBS NC 1 ORP A1E 39 CFC T5/E384245 10X10 Y FLKTL OBS NC 1 ORP A1E 40 CFC T5/E384245 10X10 Y FLKTL OBS MRG 1 ORP A1E 41 CFC T5/E384245 10X10 Y FLKTL OBS MRG 1 ORP A1E 42 CFC T5/E384245 10X10 Y DBTG IGN 1 ORP A1E 43 CFC T5/E384245 10X10 Y DBTG CCR 2 ORP A1E 44 CFC T5/E384245 10X10 Y DBTG OBS 70 ORP A2W 45 PP N4125339/E383148 N BIFACE OBS PRX 1 A2W-ART-1 ORP A2W 46 PP N4125377/E383152 N FLKTL CCR MED 1 A2W-ART-2 ORP A2W 47 PP N4125370/E383175 Y PRJPT OBS PRX 1 A2W-ART-3 ORP A2W 48 PP N4125372/E383197 N MLLGSLB IGN FRG 1 A2W-ART-4 ORP A2W 49 PP N4125328/E383158 N BIFACE OBS MED 1 A2W-ART-5 ORP A2W 50 PP N4125307/E383177 N HNDSTN IGN FRG 1 A2W-ART-6 IORP A2W 51 PP N4125325/E383736 N BIFACE OBS MRG 1 A2W-ART-7 ORP A2W 52 CFC N4125396/E383946 1X1 Y DBTG OBS 5A2W-ART-8 IORP A2W 53 PP N4125364/E383882 N HNDSTN GRN NC 1 A2W-ART-9 IORP A2W 54 PP N4125371/E383856 N BIFACE OBS DST 1 A2W-ART-10 IORP A2W 55 PP N4119766/E384972 N HNDSTN GRN NC 1 A2W-ART-11 IORP A2W 56 CSC T5/E383145 10X10 Y BfFACE OBS MRG 1 IORP A2W 57 CSC T5/E383145 10X10 Y DBTG OBS 19 IORP A2W 58 CSC T6/E383145 10X10 Y DBTG OBS 9 IORP A2W 59 CSC T6/E383145 10X10 Y DBTG CCR 2 -' IORP A2E 60 PP N4125323/E384397 N BIFACE OBS MED 1 A2E-ART-1 0'1 N UTM'S IUNIT SIZ§COLLI DESCRJP IMTRL ICOND INUM I LCOMM PP N4125324/E384342 N PP N4125300/E384337 N MLLGSLB IGN MRG 1 A2E-ART-3 ORP A2E 63 PP N4125347/E384329 Y SHERD INT 1 A2E-ART-4 IORP A2E 64 PP N4125325/E384219 N BIFACE OBS MED 1 A2E-ART-5 ORP A2E 65 pp N4125384/E384750 Y PRJPT OBS MED 1 A2E-ART-6 IORP A2E 66 CSC T5/E384345 Y DBTG OBS 1 ORP A3W 67 PP N4122443/E383866 N MLLGSLB GRN FRG 1 A3W-ART-1 IORP A3W 68 PP N4122434/E383872 N BIFACE OBS MED 1 A3W-ART-2 ORP A3W 69 PP N4122242/E383881 N BIFACE CCR NC 1 A3W-ART-3 ORP A3W 70 PP N4122419/E383885 N MLLGSLB SCH FRG 1 A3W-ART-4 jORP A3W 71 PP N4122423/E383903 N CBBLTL GRN NC 1 A3W-ART-5 ORP A3W 72 pp N4122436/E383896 N FLKTL OBS MED 1 A3W-ART-6 ORP A3W 73 PP N4122431/E384025 Y BIFACE OBS PRX 1 A3W-ART-7 ORP A3W 74 PP N4122448/E384097 N BIFACE OBS MED 1 A3W-ART-8 jORP A3W 75 PP N4122415/E384169 N BIFACE OBS MRG 1 A3W-ART-9 IORP A3W 76 PP N4122449/E384287 N FRMFLKTL OBS WHL 1 A3W-ART-10 IORP A3W 77 PP N4122461/E384084 N FLKTL OBS MRG 1 A3W-ART-11 ORP A3W 78 PP N4122460/E383892 N FLKTL OBS MRG 1 A3W-ART-12 IORP A3W 79 PP N4122449/E383914 N CBBLTL QZT WHL 1 A3W-ART -13 IORP A3W 80 PP N4122485/E383924 N ASDCBBL IGN WHL 1 A3W-ART-14 IORP A3W 81 CSC T5/E383865 10X10 Y BIFACE OBS MRG 1 IORP A3W 82 CSC T5/E383865 10X10 Y FLKTL OBS MED 1 IORP A3W 83 CSC T5/E383865 10X10 Y DBTG OBS 20 IORP A3W 84 CSC T5/E383865 10X10 Y DBTG CCR 1 ORP A3W 85 CSC T6/E383865 10X10 Y DBTG OBS 3 ORP A3W 86 CSC T5/E384065 10X10 Y DBTG OBS 1 iORP A3W 87 CFC N4122419/E383890 1X 1 Y SHELL I IORP A3E 88 PP N4122435/E385152 N FRMFLKTL OBS DST 1 A3E-ART-1 ORP A3E 89 PP N4122446/E385165 Y BIFACE OBS DST 1 A3E-ART-2 ,..... IORP A3E 90 PP N4122492/E385610 N BIFACE OBS END 1 A3E-ART-3 0\ w UTM'S IUNIT SlZQCOlLl DESCRtP 1MTRll COND INUMI lcaMM N4122455/E385702 y PRJPT aBS WHL 1 A3E-ART-4 A3E 92 PP N4122462/E385500 N BIFACE aBS END 1 A3E-ART-5 A3E 93 PP N4122424/E385283 N MllGSLB FGI MRG 1 A3E-ART-6 ORP A3E 94 PP N4122428/E385258 N FRMFlKTL OBS MED 1 A3E-ART-7 ORP A3E 95 PP N4122416/E385847 N CBBLTl IGN WHl 1 A3E-ART-8 jORP A3E 96 CSC T6/E385165 10X10 Y DBTG aBS 1 IORP A3E 97 CSC T5/E385265 10X10 Y DBTG OBS 1 IORP A3E 98 CSC T6/E385265 10X10 Y DBTG OBS 1 IORP A3E 99 CSC T6/E385465 10X10 Y DBTG OBS 1 IORP A3E 100 CSC T6/E385665 10X10 Y DBTG aBS 2 laRP A4W 101 PP N4119718/E384594 N BIFACE OBS MED 1 A4W-ART-1 IORP A4W 102 PP N4119740/E384997 Y BIFACE OBS DST 1 A4W-ART-2 !ORP A4W 103 PP N4119755/E384989 N CBBLTL QZT END 1 A4W-ART-3 ORP A4W 104 PP N4119763/E384985 Y SHERD INT 1 A4W-ART-4 iORP A4W 105 PP N4119715/E384991 Y SHERD INT 1 A4W-ART-5 /ORP A4W 106 PP N4119714/E384994 Y SHERD INT 1A4W-ART~ ORP A4W 107 PP N4119764/E385335 N BIFACE OBS NC 1 A4W-ART-7 ORP A4W 108 PP N4119759/E385028 N MLLGSlB GRN NC 1 A4W-ART-8 ORP A4W 109 PP N4119776/E384980 Y SHERD RIM 1 A4W-ART-9 ORP A4W 110 PP N4119776/E384974 N BIFACE OBS END 1 A4W-ART-10 IORP A4W 111 PP N4119782/E384607 N BIFACE OBS WHL 1 A4W-ART -11 IORP A4W 112 PP N4119765/E384969 N HNDSTN GRN 1 A4W-ART-11 IORP A4W 113 CSC T5/E384990 10X10 Y DBTG OBS 6 IORP A4W 114 CSC T6/E384990 10X10 Y FlKTL OBS WHl 1 IORP A4W 115 CSC T6/E384990 10X10 Y DBTG OBS 1 PRP A4W 116 CSC T6/E384990 10X10 Y DBTG BAS 1 PRP A4W 117 CSC T6/E384890 10X10 Y DBTG OBS 5 ORP A4E 118 PP N4119700/E386551 N BIFACE OBS MED 1 A4E-ART-1 iORP A4E 119 PP N4119721/E386509 N BIFACE OBS MED 1 A4E-ART-2 N4119709/E386503 FLKTL OBS NC 1 A4E-ART-3 ...... IORP A4E 120 PP N 0'1 .j::::.. UTM'S IUNIT SIZ§COLq DESCRtP i MTRL ICOND INUM I LCOMM A4E 121 PP N4119711/E386492 ORP A4E 122 PP N4119773/E386273 N BIFACE OBS MED 1 A4E-ART-5 jORP A4E 123 PP N4119746/E386325 N MLLGSLB IGN FRG 1 A4E-ART-6 ORP A4E 124 PP N4119708/E386502 N FLKTL aBS WHL 1 A4E-ART-7 aRP A4E 125 PP N4119711/E386501 N MLLGSLB FGI FRG 1 A4E-ART-8 aRP A4E 126 PP N4119712/E386501 N FLKTL aBS NC 1 A4E-ART-9 ORP A4E 127 PP N4119708/E386494 N FRMFLKTL aBS MED 1 A4E-ART-10 aRP A4E 128 PP N4119701/E386488 Y PRJPT aBS PRX 1 A4E-ART-11 aRP A4E 129 PP N4119718/E386489 N FLKTL aBS WHL 1 A4E-ART-12 ORP A4E 130 PP N4119703/E386483 N MLLGSLB GRN FRG 1 A4E-ART-13 IORP A4E 131 PP N4119706/E386477 N FLKTL OBS PRX 1 A4E-ART-14 ORP A4E 132 PP N4119706/E386479 N MLLGSLB IGN MRG 1 A4E-ART-15 IORP A4E 133 PP N4119697/E386472 N FLKTL aBS NC 1 A4E-ART-16 ORP A4E 134 PP N4119715/E386472 N CBBLTL QZT FRG 1 A4E-ART-17 iORP A4E 135 PP N4119700/E386470 N FLKTL aBS NC 1 A4E-ART -18 ORP A4E 136 PP N4119707/E386472 N FLKTL aBS MRG 1 A4E-ART-19 iORP A4E 137 PP N4119716/E386475 N MLLGSLB FGI MRG 1 A4E-ART-20 IORP A4E 138 PP N4119715/E386458 N FLKTL aBS WHL 1 A4E-ART-21 ORP A4E 139 PP N4119715/E386468 N MLLGSLB FGI MRG 1 A4E-ART-22 IORP A4E 140 PP N4119710/E386464 N BIFACE aBS PRX 1 A4E-ART-23 ORP A4E 141 PP N4119704/E386463 Y PRJPT aBS PRX 1 A4E-ART-24 IORP A4E 142 PP N4119707/E386451 N MLLGSLB GRN FRG 1 A4E-ART-25 IORP A4E 143 PP N4119701/E386458 N FLKTL aBS WHL 1 A4E-ART-26 ORP A4E 144 PP N4119706/E386447 N MLLGSLB IGN MRG 1 A4E-ART-27 IORP A4E 145 PP N4119700/E386452 N FLKTL OBS NC 1 A4E-ART-28 IORP A4E 146 PP N4119721/E386453 Y PRJPT aBS PRX 1 A4E-ART-29 ORP A4E 147 PP N4119712/E386453 N MLLGSLB FGI FRG 1 A4E-ART-30 IORP A4E 148 PP N4119712/E386456 N MLLGSLB FGI FRG 1 A4E-ART-31 ORP A4E 149 PP N4119751/E386424 N FLKTL aBS WHL 1 A4E-ART -32 IORP A4E 150 PP N4119762/E386440 N MLLGSLB IGN FRG 1 A4E-ART-33 ...... 0\ VI UTM'S IUNIT SlzqcOl..q oeSCRIP IMTRL ICOHD INUMI LCOMM N4119753/E386414 N FLKTL OBS WHL 1 A4E-ART-34 PP N4119762/E386443 Y PRJPT OBS PRX 1 A4E-ART-35 A4E 153 PP N4119763/E386425 N BIFACE OBS WHL 1 A4E-ART-36 ME 154 PP N4119754/E386437 N FLKTL OBS MED 1 A4E-ART-37 A4E 155 CSC N4119703/E386486 1X 1 Y FLKTL OBS WHL 1COLUNIT 1 ORP A4E 156 CSC N4119703/E386486 1X1 Y DBTG OBS 4COLUNIT 1 .ORP A4E 157 CSC N4119790/E386444 1X1 Y DBTG OBS 10COL UNIT 2 IORP A4E 158 CSC T6/E386390 10X10 Y DBTG OBS 3 ORP B1W 159 PP N4092879/E391717 Y PRJPT OBS PRX 1 B1W-ART-1 ORP B1W 160 PP N4092854/E392081 Y PRJPT OBS NC 1 B1W-ART-2 ORP B1W 161 PP N4092890/E392018 Y SHERD INT 1 B1W-ART-3 IORP B1W 162 PP N4092817/E391818 Y SHERD INT 3B1W-ART-4 ORP B1W 163 PP N4092897/E392074 N B/FACE OBS END 1 B1W-ART-5 ORP B1W 164 PP N4092816/E391836 N FLKTL OBS WHL 1 B1W-ART-6 ORP B1W 165 PP N4092887/E392092 N FLKTL OBS MED 1 B1W-ART-7 jORP B1W 166 PP N4092817/E391864 N FLKTL OBS PRX 1 B1W-ART-8 IORP B1W 167 PP N4092897/E392138 Y SHERD lNT 1 B1W-ART-9 ORP B1W 168 PP N4092840/E391896 N SHERD /NT 1 B1W-ART-10 IORP B1W 169 PP ? N BIFACE OBS MRG 1 B1W-ART-11 ORP B1W 170 PP N4092819/E391906 N FLKTL OBS WHL 1 B1W-ART-12 IORP B1W 171 PP N4092816/E392064 N BIFACE ? MED 1 B1W-ART-13 IORP B1W 172 PP N4092871/E391882 Y PRJPT OBS WHL 1 B1W-ART-14 IORP B1W 173 PP N4092856/E392055 N MLLGSLB GRN FRG 1 B1W-ART-15 IORP B1W 174 PP N4092882/E391877 N FLKTL OBS PRX 1 B1W-ART-16 IORP B1W 175 PP N4092875/E391911 N FLKTL OBS MRG 1 B1W-ART-18 ORP B1W 176 PP N4092873/E391917 N SHERD INT 1 B1W-ART-20 ORP B1W 177 PP N4092873/E391918 N B/FACE OBS ? 1 B1W-ART-22 ORP B1W 178 PP N4092878/E391927 N FLKTL OBS WHL 1 B1W-ART-24 IORP B1W 179 PP N4092865/E319928 N SHERD lNT 1 B1W-ART-26 ORP B1W 180 PP N4092865/E391923 N BIFACE OBS DST 1 B1W-ART-28 I 01 -01 UTM'S IUNIT SllaCOlq DE$CRIP IMTRll COND INUMI lCOMM PRP B1W 181 PP N4092860/E391923 N FLKTL OBS WHL 1 B1W-ART-30 ORP B1W 182 PP N4092831/E391916 N FLKTL OBS NC 1 B1W-ART-32 IORP B1W 183 PP N4092856/E391960 N MLLGSLB GRN MRG 1 B1W-ART-34 ORP B1W 184 PP N4092856/E391958 N SHERD INT 2 B1W-ART-36 ORP B1W 185 PP N4092858/E391979 N SHERD INT 1 B1W-ART-38 ORP B1W 186 PP N4092824/E392016 N FLKTL OBS WHL 1 B1W-ART-40 ORP B1W 187 CFC N4092803/E391777 1X1 Y CORE OBS WHL 1 ORP B1W 188 CFC N4092803/E391777 1X1 Y FLKTL OBS WHL 1 ORP B1W 189 CFC N4092803/E391777 1X1 Y DBTG OBS 7 jORP B1W 190 CSC T5/E391875 10X10 Y DBTG OBS 3 IORP B1W 191 CSC T5/E391875 10X10 Y DBTG CCR 1 IORP B1W 192 CSC T6/E391875 10X10 Y DBTG OBS 3 ORP B1W 193 CSC T6/E391975 10X10 Y DBTG OBS 11 IORP B1W 194 CSC T5/E392075 10X10 Y DBTG OBS 46 IORP B1W 195 CSC T6/E392075 10X10 Y DBTG OBS 37 IORP B1E 196 PP N4092899/E392600 N HNDSTN GRN WHL 1 B1E-ART-1 IORP B3W 197 PP N4087562/E394419 N HNDSTN IGN WHL 1 B3W-ART-1 \ORP B3W 198 PP N4087591/E394370 N FLKTL OBS WHL 1 B3W-ART-2 \ORP B3W 199 PP N4087590/E394362 Y PRJPT OBS MED 1 B3W-ART-3 IORP B3W 200 PP N4087593/E394221 Y PRJPT OBS MRG 1 B3W-ART-4 IORP B3W 201 PP N4087587/E394216 N BIFACE OBS MRG 1 B3W-ART-5 ORP B3W 202 PP N4087585/E394216 N BIFACE OBS PRX 1 B3W-ART-6 IORP B3W 203 PP N4087584/E394165 N BIFACE OBS MRG 1 B3W-ART-7 ORP B3W 204 PP N4087588/E394187 N BIFACE OBS DST 1 B3W-ART-8 IORP B3W 205 PP N4087567/E394162 Y SHERD INT 1 B3W-ART-9 IORP B3W 206 PP N4087543/E394169 N FRMFLKTL OBS NC 1 B3W-ART-10 IORP B3W 207 PP N4087571/E394147 N FRMFLKTL OBS WHL 1 B3W-ART-11 ORP B3W 208 PP N4087574/E394147 N FRMFLKTL CCR WHL 1 B3W-ART-12 IORP B3W 209 PP N4087582/E394148 Y BIFACE OBS NC 1 B3W-ART-13 210 PP N4087571/E394139 N FRMFLKTL BAS WHL 1 B3W-ART-14 I ...... IORP B3W 0\ --.J COLLTYPE I UTM'S IUNITSIZ§COLLI OESCRIP I MTRLI CONOI NUMI LCOMM PP N4087580/E394156 N 212 PP N4087594/E394148 N BIFACE aBS END 1B3W-ART-16 B3W 213 PP N4087584/E394135 N BIFACE OBS MED 1B3W-ART-17 B3W 214 PP N4087531/E394148 N FRMFLKTLCCR NC 1 B3W-ART-18 B3W 215 PP N4087538/E394056 N BIFACE OBS MED 1B3W-ART-19 B3W 216 CSC T6/E394050 10X10 Y BIFACE OBS END 1 B3W 217 CSC T6/E394150 10X10 Y DBTG aBS 4 B3W 218 CSC T5/E394250 10X10 Y DBTG aBS 1 B3W 219 CSC T6/E394250 10X10 Y DBTG OBS 3 B3E 220 PP N4087502/E395554 N BIFACE OBS MED 1B3E-ART-1 B4W 221 PP N4085459/E395547 N FLKTL aBS MED 1 B4W-ART-1 B4W 222 PP N4085444/E395462 N FLKTL aBS DST 1B4W-ART-2 B4W 223 PP N4085491/E395293 N FRMFLKTLaBS NC 1B4W-ART-3 B4W 224 PP N4085469/E395200 N FLKTL CCR MRG 1B4W-ART-4 B4W 225 PP N4085477/E395107 N BIFACE aBS PRX 1B4W-ART-5 B4W 226 PP N4085476/E395008 N FLKTL aBS NC 1B4W-ART-6 B4W 227 PP N4085467/E394908 Y PRJPT aBS PRX 1B4W-ART-7 B4W 228 PP N4085496/E394901 N FLKTL CCR WHL 1B4W-ART-B B4W 229 CSC T6/E394500 10X10 Y FLKTL aBS WHL 1 B4W 230 CSC T5/E395000 10X10 Y DBTG aBS 1 B4W 231 CSC T5/E395100 10X10 Y DBTG aBS 2 B4W 232 CSC T6/E395100 10X10 Y DBTG aBS 2 B4W 233 CSC T5/E395200 10X10 Y DBTG aBS 1 B4W 234 CSC T5/E395500 10X10 Y FLKTL aBS NC 1 ORP B4W 235 CSC T5/E395500 10X10 Y FLKTL aBS MRG 1 ORP B4W 236 CSC T5/E395500 10X10 Y FLKTL aBS MRG 1 IORP B4W 237 CSC T5/E395500 10X10 Y FLKTL aBS MRG 1 ORP B4W 238 CSC T5/E395500 10X10 Y FLKTL aBS MRG 1 iORP B4W 239 CSC T5/E395500 10X10 Y FRMFLKTLBAS WHL 1 IORP B4W 240 CSC T5/E395500 10X10 Y DBTG aBS 9 ...... 0\ 00 II , I un6S IUNIT SfZ~COLqOESCRIP IMTRL ICONO INUM I LCOMM ORP B4W 241 CSC T6/E395500 10X10 Y OBTG OBS 1 ORP B4W 242 CSC T6/E395500 10X10 Y OBTG CCR 1 ORP B4W 243 CSC T6/E395600 10X10 Y OBTG OBS 2 IORP C1E 244 PP N4061956/E402749 N FLKTL OBS DST 1 C1E-ART-1 IORP C1E 245 PP N4061975/E402577 N BIFACE IGN WHL 1 C1E-ART-2 ORP C1E 246 PP N4061955/E402740 N CBBLTL BAS WHL 1 C1E-ART-3 IORP C1E 247 CSC T5/E402650 10X10 Y DBTG IGN 1 IORP C1E 248 CFC N4061941/E402537 RANDOM Y SHERO INT 2 SAMPLE F-1 ORP C2E 249 PP N4061135/E402780 N MLLGSLB IGN MRG 1 C2E-ART-1 IORP C2E 250 PP N4061128/E402811 N SHERD 1 C2E-ART-2 IORP C2E 251 PP N4061096/E402874 N FLKTL SLT MRG 1 C2E-ART-3 ORP C2E 252 PP N4061089/E402870 N MLLGSLB IGN FRG 1 C2E-ART-4 IORP C2E 253 PP N4061087/E402869 N FLKTL OBS PRX 1 C2E-ART-5 IORP C2E 254 PP N4061175/E402866 N MLLGSLB SCH MRG 1 C2E-ART-6 ORP C2E 255 PP N4061191/E402814 N HNDSTN GRN FRG 1 C2E-ART-7 ORP C2E 256 PP N4061179/E402782 Y PRJPT OBS WHL 1 C2E-ART-8 ORP C2E 257 PP N4061176/E402843 Y PRJPT OBS PRX 1 C2E-ART-9 IORP C2E 258 PP N4061152/E402852 N MLLGSLB IGN MRG 1 C2E-ART-10 ORP C2E 259 PP N4061180/E402783 N MLLGSLB SCH FRG 1 C2E-ART-11 IORP C2E 260 PP N4061191/E402791 N MLLGSLB IGN FRG 1 C2E-ART-12 IORP C2E 261 CSC T5/E402845 10X10 Y DBTG OBS 1 IORP C2E 262 CSC T5/E402945 10X10 Y DBTG OBS 1 IORP C2E 263 CFC N4061137/E403183 RANDOM Y SHERD MISC. 3 ORP C2E 2642 CFC C2E-AREA-2 RANDOMY SHELL ORP C2W 265 PP N4061166/E402643 N SHERD 1 C2W-ART-1 ORP C3E 266 PP N4058190/E404502 N FLKTL IGN WHL 1 C3E-ART-1 iQRP C3E 267 PP N4058193/E404666 Y PRJPT OBS PRX 1 C3E-ART-2 IORP C3E 268 PP N4058189/E404673 N BIFACE OBS NC 1 C3E-ART-3 ORP C3E 269 PP N4058155/E404676 Y PRJPT OBS PRX 1 C3E-ART-4 IORP C3E 270 PP N4058155/E404688 N BIFACE OBS ? 1 C3E-ART-5 0\ -\0 UTM'S !UMIT SlZ§COLq OESCRIP IMTRll COMO! NUM I LCOMM C3E 271 PP N4058144/E404686 N CaRE IGN FRG 1 C3E-ART-6 ORP C3E 272 PP N4058114/E404705 N FRMFLKTL IGN WHL 1 C3E-ART-7 ORP C3E 273 PP N4058138/E404456 N BIFACE OBS PRX 1 C3E-ART-8 iQRP C3E 274 PP N4058115/E404443 Y PRJPT OBS PRX 1 C3E-ART-9 ORP C3E 275 PP N4058108/E404440 N CORE IGN MRG 1 C3E-ART-10 jORP C3E 276 PP N4058113/E404411 N FRMFLKTL OBS MRG 1 C3E-ART-11 IORP C3E 277 PP N4058184/E404319 N BIFACE aBS DST 1 C3E-ART-12 ORP C3E 278 PP N4058163/E404354 N FLKTL IGN WHL 1 C3E-ART-13 ORP C3E 279 CSC T6/E404300 Y DBTG aBS 1 ORP C3E 280 CSC T5/E404500 Y DBTG aBS 1 jORP C3E 281 CSC T6/E404500 Y DBTG CCR 1 IORP C4W 282 PP N4056468/E403061 Y PRJPT aBS PRX 1 C4W-ART-1 ORP C4W 283 PP N4056444/E403445 N BIFACE aBS WHL 1 C4W-ART-2 ORP C4W 284 PP N4056462/E403361 N BIFACE aBS NC 1 C4W-ART-3 ORP C4W 285 PP N4056466/E403360 N BIFACE aBS MRG 1 C4W-ART-4 jORP C4W 286 PP N4056460/E403360 N BIFACE aBS DST 1 C4W-ART-5 IORP C4W 287 PP N4056467/E403359 N MLLGSLB IGN FRG 1 C4W-ART-6 IORP C4W 288 CSC T5/E403110 Y FLKTL aBS MRG 1 IORP C4W 289 CSC T5/E403110 Y FRMFLKTL aBS NC 2 ORP B2W 290 PP N4089512/E393481 Y PRJPT aBS PRX 1 B2W-ART-1 /ORP B2W 291 CSC T5/E393390 10X10 Y PRJPT aBS NC 1 ORP B2W 292 CSC T5/E393690 10X10 Y DBTG aBS 1 ORP B2W 293 PP N4089591/E393042 N BIFACE aBS DST 1 B2W-ART-2 PRP C1W 294 PP N4061914/E400757 Y PRJPT aBS MED 1 C1W-ART-1 ORP C4E 295 PP N4056431/E404523 N FRMFLKTL aBS END 1 C4E-ART-1 I IORP C4E 296 PP N4056465/E404319 Y PRJPT aBS WHL 1 C4E-ART-2 IORP C4E 297 CSC T5/E404110 10X10 Y PRJPT aBS PRX 1 C4E-ART-3 ORP C4E 2981 PP N4056494/E403842 Y PRJPT aBS PRX 1 C4E-ART-4 IORP C4E 2991 PP N4056434/E403842 Y PRJPT aBS WHL 1 C4E-ART-5 IORP C4E 3001 PP N4056433/E403844 N MLLGSLB aZT MRG 1 C4E-ART-6 -...J 0 ICOLL TYPE unA'S IUNIT StZ§COLL( DESCRIP IMTRL ICOND INUM I LCOMM ITR ~ I ORP C4E 3011 PP N4056494/E403848 N MLLGSLB GRN END 1 C4E-ART-7 IORP C4E 3021 PP N4056499/E403851 N BIFACE OBS DST 1 C4E-ART-8 ORP C4E 3031 PP N4056492/E403855 Y PRJPT OBS PRX 1 C4E-ART-9 IORP C4E 3041 PP N4056491/E403851 N FLKTL IGN MED 1 C4E-ART-10 ORP C4E 3051 PP N4056487/E403848 N B/FACE OBS WHL 1 C4E-ART -11 ORP C4E 3061 PP N4056489/E403858 N MLLGSLB GRN MRG 1 C4E-ART-12 ORP C4E 3071 PP N4056489/E403858 N MLLGSLB GRN NC 1 C4E-ART-13 jORP C4E 3081 PP N4056489/E403858 N HNDSTN GRN END 1 C4E-ART-14 IORP C4E 3091 PP N4056489/E403858 N CBBLTL aZT WHL 1 C4E-ART-15 IORP C4E 3101 PP N4056489/E403858 N MLLGSLB SCH FRG 1 C4E-ART-16 IORP C4E 3111 PP N4056489/E403858 N MLLGSLB GRN MRG 1 C4E-ART-17 ORP C4E 3121 PP N4056489/E403858 N MLLGSLB GRN MRG 1 C4E-ART-18 IORP C4E 313 PP N4056489/E403858 N MLLGSLB IGN MRG 1 C4E-ART-19 jORP C4E 314 PP N4056489/E403858 N MLLGSLB IGN MRG 1 C4E-ART-20 ORP C4E 315 PP N4056502/E403871 N B/FACE CCR WHL 1 C4E-ART-21 IORP C4E 316 PP N405681?JE403885 N FLKTL OBS NC 1 C4E-ART-22 ORP C4E 317 PP N4056542JE403838 N HNDSTN GRN NC 1 C4E-ART-23 C4E 318 PP N4056426JE403822 N FRMFLKTL OBS MED 1 C4E-ART-24 C4E 319 PP N4056403/E403836 N HNDSTN GRN END 1 C4E-ART -25 ORP C4E 320 PP N4056403JE403836 N MLLGSLB GRN FRG 1 C4E-ART-26 jORP C4E 321 PP N4056491JE404013 N CORE aZT WHL 1 C4E-ART-27 IORP C4E 322 PP N4056491/E404020 N B/FACE OBS MED 1 C4E-ART-28 IORP C4E 323 PP N4056843/E404096 N BIFACE CCR DST 1 C4E-ART-29 IORP C4E 324 PP N4056749/E404127 N FRMFLKTL CCR WHL 1 C4E-ART-30 IORP C4E 325 PP N4056475/E404425 N FLKTL BAS WHL 1 C4E-ART-31 ORP C4E 326 PP N4056495/E404482 N FLKTL OBS WHL 1 C4E-ART-32 ORP C4E 327 PP N4056465/E404561 N BIFACE OBS DST 1 C4E-ART-33 ORP C4E 3281 CFC N4056496/E403843 RANDOM Y SHERD FRG 3C4E-FEA-1 jORP C4E 3291 CFC N4056488/E403844 RANDOM Y SHERD FRG 3C4E-FEA-2 IORP C4E 3301 CFC N4056491/E404856 RANDOM Y SHERD FRG 3C4E-FEA-3 ...... -....l ...... UTM'S IUNIT SIZBCOLLt OESCRtP I MTRL I COND I NUM I LCOMM 1 ORP C4E 332 CSC T5/E40391 0 10X10 Y DBTG IGN 1 IORP C4E 333 CSC T5/E40421 0 10X10 Y DBTG BAS 1 ORP C4E 334 CSC T6/E40421 0 10X10 Y DBTG OBS 3 IORP C4E 335 CSC T6/E404010 10X10 Y DBTG OBS 1 ORP C4E 336 CSC T5/E40431 0 10X10 Y BIFACE OBS DST 1 IORP C4E 337 CSC T5/E40431 0 10X10 Y DBTG CCR 1 \ORP B3W 338 CSC T5/E3950 10X10 Y DBTG OBS 2 ORP B3W 339 CSC T6/E3950 10X10 Y DBTG OBS 2

...... -..J N 173

APPENDIX B

Artifact Analysis Data 174

Projectile Point Concordance

TRANS Transect CAT Catalog # DESCRIP Description MTRL Material COND Condition LCOMM Label Comments PRJPT Projectile Point OBS Obsidian WHL Whole NC Near Complete PRX Proximal DST Distal MRG Margin MED Medial FRG Fragment INT Interior ML Maximum Length AL Axial Length SL Stem Length MW Maximum Width BW Basal Width NW Neck Width MTH Maximum Thickness DSA Distal Shoulder Angle PSA Proximal Shoulder Angle NOA Notch Opening Angle WT Weight DSN Desert Side Notch RS Rose Spring CTW Cottonwood HUM Humboldt GC-SS Gatc1iff Split-Stem LM Lake Mohave PGBS Provisional Great Basin Stem LF Leaf CD Casa Diablo FS Fish Spring TQ Truman-Queen IND Indeterminate SOURCE 1E CO W 47PRJPT OBS PRX -13.7 -13.7 10.4 -21.4 18.2 12.5 -6.7 208 114 94 1.6ELKO FS 65PRJPT OBS MEO -21.4 -21.4 999 -17.1 999 999 3.4 999 999 999 1.2RS CO ~~91 PRJPT OBS WHL 46.3 46.3 6 21.9 15.1 11.6 5.9 171 149 22 5.3ELKO TO jA4E 128 PRJPT OBS PRX -13.3 -13.3 888 12.4 12.4 888 3.1 888 888 888 0.5 CTW FS !A4E 141 PRJPT OBS PRX -17.8 -17.8 12.1 -29.8 12.1 12.6 -5.9 185 105 80 2.4ELKO FS . 4E 146 PRJPT OBS PRX -19.2 -18.5 888 -18.7 12.4 888 -5.2 888 888 888 1.9 HUM SALINE .4E 152 PRJPT OBS PRX -18.6 -13.9 888 -12.7 11.9 888 4.4 888 888 888 1 GC-SS TO B1W 159 PRJPT OBS PRX -28 -21.7 -9.7 27 999 24.2 -7.5 999 999 999 5.9 LM TO B1W 160 PRJPT OBS NC -17.3 -16.9 999 -15.1 999 6.9 3.6 149 53 96 0.9 RS FS B1W 172 PRJPT OBS WHL 24.2 22.6 888 13.9 7.3 888 6.5 888 888 888 1.8 HUM FS B3W 199 PRJPT OBS MEO -22.6 -22.6 999 -29.9 999 999 6.5 167 54 113 4.4 ELKO COSO B3W 200PRJPT OBS MRG -33.5 -31.8 -17.8 -26.3 -15.4 -22 -8.7 157 110 47 7.8PGBS FS B4W 227 PRJPT OBS PRX -27.5 -27.2 22.7 -24.4 8.4 21 -6.2 888 888 888 3.7 LM FS jC2E 256 PRJPT OBS WHL 14.8 14.1 888 10.9 10.9 888 3 888 888 888 0.4 CTW COSO C2E 257 PRJPT OBS PRX -18.6 -18.3 5.7 -14.7 7.8 7 -3.7 141 102 39 0.9 RS FS IC3E 267PRJPT OBS PRX -12.2 -12.2 3.2 -20.1 8.510.6 -6.1 888 888 888 1.4PGBS CD IC3E 269PRJPT OBS PRX -19.1 -17.1 9.2 17.7 15.1 15.3 7.1 888 888 888 2.8PINTO COSO C3E 274 PRJPT OBS PRX -18.2 -15.2 888 -13.8 888 888 -6 888 888 888 0.9 HUM COSO IC4W 282 PRJPT OBS PRX -14.6 -11.2 888 -16.3 16.3 888 -4.7 888 888 888 1.1 HUM MONO IB2W 290PRJPT OBS PRX -20.8 -15.2 9 -15.7 -15.4 10.1 3.5 160 120 40 1 ELKO COSO IB2W 291 PRJPT OBS NC -23.6 -23.6 999 19 999 10 5.1 888 888 888 2.2 ELKO INO IC1W 294 PRJPT OBS MEO -23.9 -22.3 -4.7 -14.5 -6.4 -5.7 4.2 180 109 71 1.1 RS FS IC4E 296PRJPT OBS WHL 47.9 47.6 7 28.8 20.4 16.8 6.3 183 119 64 7.7ELKO CD C4E 297PRJPT OBS PRX -15.5 -12.2 7.1 -23.9 15.1 15.3 -5.6 213 113 100 1.8PINTO INO IC4E 298PRJPT OBS PRX -16 -16 -3 -11.1 -4.5 -4.5 3 170 110 60 0.5RS FS C4E 299 PRJPT OBS WHL 20.4 20.4 888 12.8 6.2 888 4.4 888 888 888 1 CTW-LF FS IC4E 303PRJPT OBS PRX -13.3 -12.1 888 10.5 10.5 888 3.3 888 888 888 0.5CTW FS ...... -...l VI 176

Biface Concordance

TRANS Transect CAT Catalog # COLL Collected DESCRIP Description MTRL Material COND Condition OBS Obsidian CCR Cryptocrystalline Silicate WHL Whole NC Near Complete PRX Proximal DST Distal MRG Margin MED Medial FRG Fragment INT Interior ML Maximum Length MW Maximum Width MTH Maximum Thickness IND Indeterminate PROBPT Probable Point SIZ Size STG Stage MID Middle 2 UNI-MICROCHIP 2N BIFACE OBS DST -13 -14 -4 IND IND LATE 12N BIFACE aBS PRX -25 -26 6.2 NO MID 1E 17N BIFACE OBS DST -10 -8 -2.5 YES ARROW LATE 20N BIFACE OBS MED -13 -18 6.4 YES DART LATE 1 EDGE GRND ~1E 1E 21 N BIFACE OBS DST -16 15 -5.3 NO MID 23N BIFACE OBS FRG -27 -19 -9.4 IND IND IND ~1E 1E 27N BIFACE OBS PRX -12 -29 -2.8 NO MID 30Y BIFACE OBS END -23.4 -16.5 4.1 NO LATE ~1E 1E 31 N BIFACE OBS DST -21 -14 -4.1 NO LATE !A1E 38Y BIFACE OBS NC -16.6 16.6 4.2 NO LATE EDGE GRND. UNI-FLK 45N BIFACE OBS PRX -12 -23 6.7 IND LATE UNI-MICROCHIP 49N BIFACE OBS MED -24 -14 5.1 YES DART LATE ~:51 N BIFACE OBS MRG -44 -27 -9 NO MID EDGEGRND jA2W 54N BIFACE OBS DST -10 -9 -3.4 IND IND LATE !A2W 56Y BIFACE OBS MRG -17.6 -7.1 -8.8 IND IND LATE jA2E 60N BIFACE OBS MED -17 -25 6.7 NO MID jA2E 61 N BIFACE OBS MED -17 -22 6 YES DART LATE jA2E 64N BIFACE OBS MED -18 -20 4.6 YES DART LATE !A3W 68N BIFACE OBS MED -14 -20 7.5 IND IND MID 2 EDGEGRND !A3W 69N BIFACE CCR NC 19 17 5.8 IND IND LATE !A3W 73Y BIFACE OBS PRX -16.4 -16.1 -4.2 IND IND LATE !A3W 74N BIFACE OBS MED -35 -22 15.5 NO EARL Y 1 EDGE BIF, 1 EDGE UNI-MICR 75N BIFACE OBS MRG -36 -28 -10.2 IND IND LATE 4W 101 N BIFACE OBS MED -23 -19 6.5 NO MID EDGEGRND rw4W 102Y BIFACE OBS DST -20.7 -12 3.2 YES ARROW LATE 4W 107N BIFACE OBS NC 29 13 5.1 YES IND LATE 1 UNI-MICROCHIP !A4W 110N BIFACE OBS END -16 -9 -5.6 NO MID 1 EDGE GRND

!A4W 111 N BIFACE OBS WHL 18 17 7.5 NO MID UNI-MICROCHIP ...... -...J !A3W 81 Y BIFACE OBS MRG -19.4 -25.5 -11.6 NO EARL Y BIF EDGE FLK. EDGE GRND -...J USE BS END -26 -23 -10.4 NO MID 3E 92N BIFACE OBS END -13 -16 -6.6 NO MID jA3E 89Y BIFACE OBS DST -20.6 -11.8 -4.6 YES ARROW LATE BIF MICROCHIP 1A4E 118 N BIFACE OBS MED -24 -17 7.4 NO MID 119N BIFACE OBS MED -22 -16 3.6 YES ARROW LATE ~4E4E 122 N BIFACE OBS MED -24 -22 7.9 YES DART LATE EDGEGRND 4E 140N BIFACE OBS PRX -15 -18 -6.5 NO MID 1A4E 153N BIFACE OBS WHL 37 24 13 NO EARLY UNI-MICROCHIP, UNI EDGE FL \B1W 163N BIFACE OBS END -16 33 -11 NO MID B1W 169N BIFACE OBS MRG -20 -6 -4 IND IND LATE !B1W 171 N BIFACE ? MED -18 -26 -6 IND IND LATE \B1W 177N BIFACE OBS ? -23.7 -12.1 -4.3 NO LATE EDGEGRND B1W 180N BIFACE OBS DST -8.7 -11.8 -4 YES DART LATE IS3W 201 N BIFACE OBS MRG -24 -17.8 -8 NO LATE IB3W 202N BIFACE OBS PRX -25.1 -27 -7.6 YES DART LATE EDGEGRND IB3W 203N BIFACE OBS MRG -27.5 17 7.5 NO MID B3W 204N BIFACE OBS DST -23.4 -22.5 -4 YES DART LATE IB3W 212N BIFACE OBS END -24.5 -28.1 -8.1 NO MID EDGE GRND, UNI-MICROCHIP IB3W 213N BIFACE OBS MED -24.2 -22.2 -8.7 YES DART LATE IB3W 215N BIFACE OBS MED -18.8 -27.2 -5.7 YES DART LATE IB3W 216Y BIFACE OBS END -17.2 19.9 -8.2 NO MID BIF-MICROCHIP, EDGE GRND IB3E 220N BIFACE OBS MED -21 -24.5 8.4 YES DART LATE IB4W 225N BIFACE OBS PRX -18.5 -23.2 -5 NO LATE C1E 245N BIFACE IGN WHL 42.8 49.4 19.3 NO EARLY IC3E 268N BIFACE OBS NC -28.5 19.9 8.7 NO MID IC3E 270N BIFACE OBS ? -13.8 -26.4 -7.4 IND IND MID jc3E 273N BIFACE OBS PRX -18.6 -29.5 -8.3 NO MID IC3E 277N BIFACE OBS DST -22.6 -12.59 -5.3 YES DART LATE C4W 283N BIFACE OBS WHL 22 22.9 6.9 NO LATE ...... -..l IC4W 284N BIFACE OBS NC 23.3 20.2 6.3 NO LATE 00 IC4W 285N BIFACE OBS 'MRG -17 13 4.5 INO INO INO C4W 286N BIFACE OBS OST -11.8 -8.8 -2.8 INO INO LATE B2W 293N BfFACE OBS OST -25.9 -18.4 -4 YES DART LATE IC4E 302N BIFACE OBS OST -17.2 -10.1 -3.2 INO INO LATE !C4E 305N BfFACE OBS WHL 18 13.6 7.9 NO EARL Y EDGE GRNO IC4E 315N BfFACE CCR WHL 45.3 22.8 12.3 NO MID UNI-MfCROCHIP IC4E 322N BIFACE OBS MEO -17.2 -25.1 -6.4 NO MID IC4E 323N BfFACE CCR OST -50.8 -37.2 -16.4 NO EARLY BATIERING, STEP FRAC. IC4E 327N BIFACE OBS OST -27.1 -29.9 -8.9 INO INO LATE UNIiBIF-MfCROCHIP, EDGE GR C4E 336Y BfFACE OBS OST -45.5 -23.2 -6.8 INO INO LATE

,..... -..J \0 180

Flake Tool Concordance

TRANS Transect CAT Catalog # COLL Collected DESCRIP Description MTRL Material COND Condition OBS Obsidian CCR Cryptocrystalline Silicate SLT Slate IGN Igneous BAS Basalt 181

Simple Flake Tool Attribute Codes

COND ­ condition: WHL, whole NC, near complete PRX, proximal DST, distal END, indeterminate end MED, medial section MRG, margin

ATTRIBUTES WT, weight ML, maximum length MW, maximum width MTH, maximum thickness

FLK - flake type: 1, primary decortication 2, secondary decortication 3, cortical shatter 4, simple interior percussion 5, complex interior percussion 6, linear interior percussion 7, early biface thinning 8, late biface thinning 9, angular percussion 10, percussion fragments II, edge prep (pressure) 12, linear pressure 13, rounded pressure 14, indeterminate percussion 15, indeterminate pressure 20, bipolar cortical 21, bipolar interior

EDG - number of edges, 1-5, the actual number or 9, indeterminate;

SUR - surface used: MOD edge modification: 1, dorsal I, unifacial micro-chipping 2, ventral 2, bifacial micro-chipping 3, both dorsal and ventral 3, rounded 9, indeterminate 4, extreme battering/dulling 5, unifacial edge flaked SHP - edge shape: 6, bifacial edge flaked I, concave 7, step fractured 2, convex 8, burinated 3 straight Modified by .... EDG edge angle a, even b, jagged irregular c, beak present 8N FlKTl 37 18 3a 1;5 3a 25N FlKTl OBS MRG20 12 4.8 14 1 1a 1;5 1E 34Y FlKn OBS NC 28 22 4.3 5 3 3 1a 41 1b 41 1a 35

~1E 39Y FlKTl OSS NC 17.3 21.1 4 5 2 3a 1;5 48 jA1E 40Y FlKTl OBS MRG 18.2 8.8 2.1 10 1 2 3a 1 33 jA1E 41 Y FlKTl OSS MRG 18.3 8.6 2.9 5 1 3 2a 1;6 40 46N FlKTl CCR MED 15 14 4.2 2 2 ~: 72N FlKn OSS MED 21 23 7.6 14 3a jA3W 77N FlKTl OSS MRG 22 23 4.7 14 jA3W 78N FlKTl OBS MRG 22 17 8.1 14 3a jA4W 114 Y FlKTl OSS WHl 30.1 25.8 4.7 8 2 2 2b 1 37 3b 37 jA3W 82Y FlKTl OSS MED 25.1 16.2 3.8 8 2 3a 1;5 45 3a 40 jA4E 120N FlKTl OSS NC 31 23 4.6 8 3a 5

4E 124N FlKTl OSS WHl 22 16 2.3 8 1a 4E 126N FlKTl OSS NC 32 23 4.4 5 3a 4E 129N OSS WHl 29 28 4.6 8 1a ~ FlKn jA4E 131 N FlKTl OSS PRX 15 17 4.2 5 1 3a jA4E 133N FlKn OSS NC 31 14 7.1 5 2 3a 1a jA4E 135N FlKTl OSS NC 37 13 12.7 5 3a jA4E 136N FlKTl OSS MRG 22 22 8.4 14 3a jA4E 138N FlKTl OSS WHl 33 11 6.9 5 3a

4E 143N FlKTl OSS WHl 27 17 5.1 8 1 3a 4E 145N FlKTl OSS NC 35 17 3.3 8 2 3a 1a 4E 149N FlKTl OSS WHl 43 14 8.6 8 2 3b ~ 3a jA4E 151 N FlKTl OSS WHl 30 14 7.9 5 3a jA4E 154N FlKTl OSS MED 19 19 4.2 14 1 3a 1;5 !A4E 155Y FlKTl OSS WHl 35 20.9 7 7 2 3 1a 1 51 3a 1 71 IB1W 164N FlKTl OSS WHl 24.9 23.4 4.4 8 2 1a 1;5 1a 1;5 IB1W 165N FlKTl OSS MED 33 25 7 1 IB1W 166N FlKTl OSS PRX 19.3 24.5 6.2 8 1 3a IB1W 170N FlKTl OSS WHl 31.5 20 5.7 8 2 1a 1a ,..... 1~1~174N FlKTl OSS PRX 27.2 26.6 7 8 3a 00 N B1W 175N FLKTL OBS MRG 31.3 22.6 3.1 14 3a 2;5 B1W 178 N FLKTL OBS WHL 514 25.8 94 1 3b 1;5 B1W 181 N FLKTL OBS WHL 19.8 24.3 6.1 8 3a iB1W 186N FLKTL OBS WHL 15 26.9 7.5 8 3a 1;5 B1W 188 Y FLKTL OBS WHL 31.7 17.2 6.5 10 1 3a 1;5 46 B3W 198N FLKTL OBS WHL 32.5 354 9.6 8 10 1;5 B3W 211 N FLKTL OBS MRG 13.6 21.2 9.6 14 6 B1W 182 N FLKTL OBS NC 27.6 36.1 8.1 5 1 3a B4W 221 N FLKTL OBS MED 18.9 23.4 7.8 14 2 2a 1;5 3a 1;5 B4W 222N FLKTL OBS DST 34.2 12.7 6.5 14 2 3a 3a B4W 224N FLKTL CCR MRG 32.8 22.9 3.3 8 2a B4W 226N FLKTL OBS NC 38.8 19.2 6 14 2;6 B4W 228N FLKTL CCR WHL 33.4 13.9 5.9 8 1 I 229Y FLKTL OBS WHL 51.1 24.8 9.1 2 2 2b 1;5 75 2b 5 71 IB4W B4W 234Y FLKTL OBS NC 24.2 18.1 2.3 8 2 3a 42 3a 1;5 48 10 3a IB4W 235Y FLKTL OBS MRG 15.7 10.2 2.9 2 38 B4W 236Y FLKTL OBS MRG 15.1 9.6 2.7 10 2a 47 237Y FLKTL OBS MRG 17.3 10.7 3.3 7 2 3a 42 3a 41 /B4W B4W 238Y FLKTL OBS MRG 94 10.5 2.6 10 3a 34 244N FLKTL OBS DST 19.5 19.9 4.7 14 1a 1 ~1E 2E 251 N FLKTL SLT MRG 48 40.2 4.4 14 3a 1;5 253N FLKTL OBS PRX 25.2 19.9 3.3 8 1 3a 1;5 ~2E 3E 266N FLKTL IGN WHL 56.3 61.5 12.4 5 10 6;7 3E 278N FLKTL IGN WHL 41.4 35.1 7.8 5 1 3b 1 rC4W 288Y FLKTL OBS MRG 17.6 11.1 2.6 10 2 3a 5 62 jc4E 304N FLKTL IGN MED 37.3 25.6 7.8 14 5 IC4E 316N FLKTL OBS NC 29 17.6 7.5 8 1a IC4E 325N FLKTL BAS WHL 34.3 214 6 5 5;7 IC4E 326N FLKTL OBS WHL 24.8 25 4.1 8

...... 00 w 184 Formed Flake Tool Concordance

TRANS Transect CAT Catalog # COLL Collected DESCRIP Description MTRL Material COND Condition OBS Obsidian CCR Cryptocrystalline Silicate WHL Whole NC Near Complete PRX Proximal DST Distal MRG Margin MED Medial FRG Fragment INT Interior ML Maximum Length MW Maximum Width MTH Maximum Thickness IND Indeterminate #E # Edges EM Edge Modification MOD Modification int-p Interior Percussion bif-t Biface Thinning cort Cortical E1MOD E2MOD 1E 37Y FRMFLKTL aBS NC 26.2 17 11.5 int-p 1 y Y uni-edge tlk, 3W 76N FRMFLKTL aBS WHL 27 24 6 int-p 2y y bi-edge flk uni-micro 94N FRMFLKTL aBS MED -20 -22 3.2ind 2n y uni-edge flk uni-edge flk ~3E 3E 88N FRMFLKTL aBS DST -23 -22 -4.6ind 1 y Y bi-edge flk, uni-micro 127N FRMFLKTL aBS MED -26 -16 7.7ind 1 y Y uni-edge tlk, uni-micro B3W 206N FRMFLKTL aBS NC -32.9 41.5 9.5 int-p 1 y Y perimeter, bi-micro, uni-edge fl B3W 207N FRMFLKTL aBS WHL 45.8 18.2 15 int-p 2y y bi-edge flk, uni-micro uni-micro B3W 208N FRMFLKTL CCR WHL 40.6 42.2 20.6 int-p 1 y Y uni-edge flk, uni-micro r 210N FRMFLKTL BAS WHL 46.6 32 6.6 bit-t 2y convex, reg, uni-edge flk strt, reg, uni-edge tI \B3W Y B3W 214N FRMFLKTL CCR NC -41 -31.6 16.5 int-p 1 y Y perimeter, uni-edge ftk, uni-mic IB4W 223N FRMFLKTL aBS NC 38 -31.2 7.2ind 1 y Y uni-edge ftk, uni-micro IB4W 239Y FRMFLKTL BAS WHL 37.3 30 8.9int-p 1 ind y uni-edge tlk IC3E 272N FRMFLKTL IGN WHL 71.6 52.1 40.6ind 1y y ? C3E 276N FRMFLKTL aBS MRG -34.3 -23.8 -9ind 1 y Y uni-edge tlk IC4E 295N FRMFLKTL aBS END -29.6 -25.2 -4.6 ind 2y y uni-edge ftk, uni-micro bi-edge tlk, step tra IC4E 318N FRMFLKTL aBS MED -22.5 -16.6 -5.4 ind 2y y uni-edge flk, uni-micro bi-edge tlk, uni-micr IC4E 324N FRMFLKTL CCR WHL 46.2 25.2 17.7 cort 1y y uni-edge tlk, uni-micro

...... 00 Vl 186

Core Concordance

TRANS Transect CAT Catalog # COLL Collected DESCRIP Description MTRL Material COND Condition OBS Obsidian ION Igneous QZT Quartzite PLAT Platform WHL Whole NC Near Complete PRX Proximal DST Distal MRO Margin MED Medial FRO Fragment !NT Interior ML Maximum Length MW Maximum Width MTH Maximum Thickness !ND Indeterminate MULTI-D Multi-Directional UNI-D Uni-Directional Ml MW I MTH ICORETYPE I# PLAT B1W 187Y CORE OBS WHl 36.9 32.6 15.9MUlTI-D 2 p3E 271 N CORE IGN FRG -31.5 -52.1 -38.7 UNI-D 1 C3E 275N CORE IGN MRG -31 -51.9 -26.6UNI-D 1 C4E 321 N CORE aZT WHl 67.7 49.1 39.9 BIFACIAl 1

,...... 00 -...l 188

Millingslab Concordance

TRANS Transect CAT Catalog # COLL Collected DESCRIP Description MTRL Material COND Condition SURF Surface TEX Texture STRI Striation POL Polish SEC MOD Secondary Modification IRR Irregular S Smooth SCV Slightly Concave IGN Igneous FGI Fine Grained Igneous GRN Granite SCH Schist WHL Whole NC Near Complete PRX Proximal DST Distal MRG Margin MED Medial FRG Fragment INT Interior ML Maximum Length MW Maximum Width TH Maximum Thickness IND Indeterminate 11 MLLGSLB !GN -167 -111 -27- 1 FLAT + = 1E 15 MLLGSLB IGN MRG -48 -43 -17- 1 FLAT IRR = +

'1E 16 MLLGSLB FGI FRG -92 -68 -42INO 1 FLAT S + + 1E 22 MLLGSLB FGI FRG -92 -45 -371NO 1 FLAT S = INO +

~1E 24 MLLGSLB SCH MRG -138 -83 -17 + 2 SCVlSCV S/IRR -/- = +/- + 26 MLLGSLB FG! MRG -148 -77 -115 - 1 FLAT S = + ~~ 48 MLLGSLB IGN FRG -59 -36 -9 INO 1 FLAT S = + 62 MLLGSLB !GN MRG -156 -64 -11- 1 FLAT IRR = ~~ 67 MLLGSLB GRN FRG -93 -87 -41INO 1 SCV S !NO INO INO ­ 3W 70 MLLGSLB SCH FRG -77 -48 -261NO 1 FLAT IRR !NO INO !NO ­ 3E 93 MLLGSLB FGI MRG -77 -53 -281NO 1 FLAT IRR + = + + ~4W 108 MLLGSLB GRN NC 242 199 97- 1 SCV IRR = 1A4E 121 MLLGSLB SCH FRG -155 -100 -351NO 1 FLAT S = + 1A4E 123 MLLGSLB IGN FRG -104 -74 -311NO 1 FLAT S INO = INO 1A4E 125 MLLGSLB FGI FRG -80 -39 -231NO 1 FLAT S + = + 1A4E 130 MLLGSLB GRN FRG -62 -44 -241NO 1 FLAT IRR = 1A4E 132 MLLGSLB IGN MRG INO 1 FLAT S = /A4E 137 MLLGSLB FGI MRG -88 -75 -22- 2 FLAT/FLAT SIIRR +/+ = +/­ . 4E 139 MLLGSLB FGI MRG -64 -53 -15- 1 FLAT IRR = + 4E 142 MLLGSLB GRN FRG -61 -48 -68- 1 FLAT S = + 4E 144MLLGSLB IGN MRG -85 -68 -44- 1 FLAT S + = + + 4E 147 MLLGSLB FGI FRG -99 -75 -30- 1 FLAT S = + .4E 148 MLLGSLB FGI FRG -105 -25 -521NO 1 FLAT S = + 4E 150 MLLGSLB IGN FRG -47 -48 -251NO 1 FLAT S = + B1W 173 MLLGSLB GRN FRG -123 -78 -841NO 1 FLAT S = + 'B1 W 183 MLLGSLB GRN MRG -81 -43 -211NO 1 FLAT S = \ C2E 249 MLLGSLB IGN MRG -194 -47 -48 + 1 FLAT S INO = INO INO

~_?§______~52__ML~§~~_~~IQ!,!__~RG__ __ -f§2 -25 -49INO 2 FLAT/FLAT SIS -/- = +/­ 00 -\0 C2E 254 MLLGSLB SCH MRG -101 -91 -19+ 1 FLAT S INO = INO INO C2E 258 MLLGSLB IGN MRG -71 -30 -311NO 1 FLAT S INO = INO INO C2E 259 MLLGSLB SCH FRG -76 -60 -191NO 1FLAT IRR INO = 'NO 'NO C2E 260 MLLGSLB IGN FRG -46 -26 -6INO 11NO S = + !C4W 287 MLLGSLB IGN FRG -49 -61 -531NO 1 FLAT 'NO fNO = INO INO IC4E 300 MLLGSLB aZT MRG -192 -105 -931NO 1 FLAT S INO = INO 'NO IC4E 301 MLLGSLB GRN ENO -82 -73 -69+ 1 FLAT IRR INO = INO INO C4E 306 MLLGSLB GRN MRG -131 -130 -82+ 1 SCV S INO = INO 'NO IC4E 307 MLLGSLB GRN NC 405 226 34+ 1 FLAT INO INO = 'NO INO C4E 310 MLLGSLB SCH FRG -137 -101 -9INO 1 FLAT S INO = INO 'NO C4E 311 MLLGSLB GRN MRG -69 -57 -551NO 1 FLAT S INO = 'NO INO C4E 312 MLLGSLB GRN MRG -108 -95 -501NO 1 FLAT IRR INO = INO INO C4E 313 MLLGSLB IGN MRG -95 -109 -321NO 1 FLAT IRR INO = INO INO ,C4E 314 MLLGSLB IGN MRG -321 -95 -79+ 1 FLAT S INO = INO IN,O IC4E 320 MLLGSLB GRN FRG -101 -68 -55+ 1 FLAT S INO = INO INO

...... 'Do 191

Handstone Concordance

TRANS Transect CAT Catalog # COLL Collected DESCRIP Description MTRL Material COND Condition SURF Surface TEX Texture STRI Striation POL Polish SEC MOD Secondary Modification IRR Irregular S Smooth SCVX Slightly Convex CVX Convex IGN Igneous FGI Fine Grained Igneous GRN Granite WHL Whole NC Near Complete PRX Proximal DST Distal MRG Margin MED Medial FRG Fragment INT Interior ML Maximum Length MW Maximum Width TH Maximum Thickness IND Indeterminate 1 SCVX IRR + 28HNDSTN FGI MRG -35 -66 -44IND 1 SCVX S = + + 50HNDSTN IGN FRG -88 -68 -35+ 2SCVXJSCVX SIS = INDIIND INDIIND ­ W 53 HNDSTN GRN NC 118 -10 451ND 1 FLAT S = + /A2w 55 HNDSTN GRN NC 113 95 68- 1 FLAT IRR = + IND 112HNDSTN B1E 196 HNDSTN GRN WHL 92 75 84- 1CVX S = + + rwB3W 197HNDSTN IGN WHL 115 86 51- 1 CVX S = IND IND C2E 255 HNDSTN GRN FRG -66 -78 -29 + 3 FLA TlFLAT/FL S/S/S = -1-1- +1+1+ + IC4E 308 HNDSTN GRN END -87 -67 -58+ 1 FLAT IRR = IC4E 317 HNDSTN GRN NC 110 88 72+ 1 CVX S = + IC4E 319 HNDSTN GRN END -107 -67 -49+ 1SCVX S =

...... \0 N 193

Cobble Tool Concordance

TRANS Transect CAT Catalog # COLL Collected DESCRIP Description MTRL Material COND Condition MOD Modification LOC Location BAT Battering SEC Secondary IGN Igneous QZT Quartzite GRN Granite QTZ Quartz BAS Basalt WHL Whole NC Near Complete IND Indeterminate MRG Margin MED Medial FRG Fragment !NT Interior ML Maximum Length MW Maximum Width MTH Maximum Thickness 1E 13CBBLTL QZT -85 -66 -43 END N END BAT 3W 71 CBBLTL GRN 129 91 48 NC N END BAT jA4W 103CBBLTL QZT -57 -31 -23 END N END BAT/S-FRAC ­ 79CBBLTL QZT WHL F PER BAT/S-FRAC/P ­ ~3W 3E 95CBBLTL IGN 139 105 33 WHL N MRG BAT/S-FRAC ­ jA4E 134CBBLTL QZT -71 -46 -18 FRG N MRG BAT/S-FRAC ­ IC1E 246CBBLTL BAS 78 60 38 WHL F PER BAT/S-FRAC ­ IC4E 309CBBLTL QZT 129 67 48 WHL F PER + BAT/GRND

I-" \0 .j::.. 195

APPENDIXC

Debitage Hydration Data 196

Hydration Table Concordance

TRANS Transect CAT Catalog MTRL Material BP Before Present m-fr-river Meters From River PERC. Percussion INT. Interior DECORT Decortication BIFTHIN Biface Thinning OBS Obsidian FS Fish Springs TQ Truman-Queen CD Casa Diablo OR# 1 A1E 2A4E 157157-2 1 2.1 4 INT. PERC. 08S FS 7.16 6.69 4590 4034 3A4E 156156-1 1 9.8 4DECORT 08S FS 6.96 5.95 4349 3229 4A4W 117117-1 1 4.5 4 INT. PERC. 08S FS 7.99 5653 581W 195195-1 1 5.9 4 INT. PERC. 08S FS 0 681W 193193-1 1 3.1 4INT. PERC. 08S FS 4.17 1458 300 782W 292292-1 1 5.4 481FTHIN 08S FS 8.81 6024 100 883W 339339-1 1 4.9 4 PERC. 08S FS 12.68 12039 800 983W 217217-3 1 4.2 4 I NT. PERC. 08S FS 6.73 3611 600 1083W 217217-2 1 2.8 4 INT. PERC. 08S FS 9.93 7569 600 1183W 217217-1 1 15.5 4DECORT 08S FS 8.32 5406 600 1284W 240240-1 1 2.5 481FTHIN 08S FS 8.34 5435 200 1384W 233233-1 1 4.9 4 PERC. 08S FS 0 500 14A3E 9898-1 1 1.5 381FTHIN 08S FS 8.26 6022 400 15A3W 8383-3 1 0.6 3 PERC. 08S FS 6.2 3491 1000 16A4E 157157-3 1 2.5 3 I NT. PERC. 08S FS 6.35 3654 700 17 A4E 157157-4 1 1.5 3 INT. PERC. 08S FS 2.42 584 700 18A4E 158158-1 1 0.9 381F THIN 08S FS 6.79 4150 800 19A4W 117117-3 1 0.9 381FTHIN 08S FS 0 700 20A4W 113113-1 1 3.1 3 INT. PERC. 08S FS 0 600 21A4W 117117-2 1 1.3 3INT. PERC. 08S FS 6.74 4092 700 22A4W 113113-2 1 0.8 3 INT. PERC. 08S FS 7.64 5192 600 2381W 189189-6 1 1.5 3PERC. 08S FS 6.16 3051 600 2481W 194194-3 1 0.8 3 INT. PERC. 08S FS 8.45 5570 200 2581W 189189-4 1 0.4 3 PERC. 08S FS 8.39 5493 600 I 2681W 189189-5 1 1 3 PERC. 08S FS 9.46 6901 600 I 2781W 190190-1 1 1.7 381FTHIN 08S FS 0 400 I 2881W 190190-2 1 2 381FTHIN 08S FS 6.59 3475 400 194194-1 1 1.1 381FTHIN 08S FS 0 200 L_.. _~~!31W ._ ...... _.J ...... \0 -.J m-fr- river 30S1W 193193-4 1 2.9 31NT. PERC. OSSFS 7 3891 300 31 S1W 195195-8 1 1.8 3PERC. OSS FS 0 200 32S1W 192192-1 1 1.6 3SIFTHIN OSS FS 8.66 5831 400 33S1W 192192-2 1 1.6 3SIFTHIN OSS FS 9.15 6478 400 34S1W 192192-3 1 1.7 3 PERC. OSS FS 7.52 4460 400 35S1W 193193-2 1 0.4 3SIFTHIN OSS FS 0 300 36S1W 194194-2 1 1 3SIFTHIN OSS FS 10.39 8245 200 37S1W 195195-7 1 1.7 3PERC. OSS FS 0 200 38S1W 189189-2 1 3 3 PERC. OSS FS 9.02 6304 600 39S1W 189189-1 1 1.7 3 PERC. OSS FS 5.81 2732 600 40S1W 195195-2 1 2.5 3INT. PERC. OSS FS 4.96 10.21 2027 7974 200 41 S1W 195195-3 1 0.6 3SIF THIN OSS FS 0 200 42S1W 195195-6 1 0.8 3SIFTHIN OSS FS 6.57 3456 200 43S1W 189189-3 1 1.1 3 PERC. OSS FS 0 600 44S1W 195195-4 1 0.4 3SIFTHIN OSS FS 10.47 8370 200 45S3W 219219-1 1 2.8 3PERC. OSS FS 0 500 46S4W 240240-5 1 1.3 3PERC. OSS FS 2.8 685 200 47S4W 240240-3 1 1 3SIF THIN OSS FS 10.08 7781 200 48S4W 240240-4 1 1.1 3SIFTHIN OSS FS 2.37 502 200 49C4E 334334-1 1 1.7 3PERC. OSS FS 10.26 8051 500 50A1E 4444-38 1 0.1 2 PERC. OSS FS 10.21 9007 300 51 A1E 4444-31 1 0.1 2 PERC. OSS FS 2.14 463 300 52A1E 4444-23 1 0.3 2 INT. PERC. OSS FS 3.01 885 300 53A1E 4444-20 1 0.6 2SIFTHIN OSS FS 8.84 6850 300 54A1E 4444-19 1 0.2 2SIFTHIN OSS FS 9.85 8413 300 55A1E 4444-50 1 0.3 2 PERC. OSS FS 6.85 4219 300 56A1E 4444-37 1 0.5 2 PERC. OSS FS 4.44 1851 300 57A1E 4444-39 1 0.3 2 PERC. OSS FS 2.77 755 300 58A2W 5757-9 1 0.2 2 PERC. OSS FS 1.97 395 900 __ ~ •• ___ ""'_N -- -.-.- -- --. ----,- ...... \0 00 OR # ~ranseIcat# I sutrcat # P:!um~'MiJjDht I size I type I mtrt Isource Ihydration! 2 hyd I ~earsBP I ~earsBP 2 Im- fr- river 59A2W 5757-8 1 0.4 2PERC. OBSFS 9.93 8544 900 60A2W 5757-5 1 0.3 2BIFTHIN OBS FS 3.61 1249 900 61A2W 5757-11 1 0.1 2PERC. OBS FS 9.66 8108 900 62A2W 5757-12 1 0.1 2PERC. OBS FS 0 900 63A2W 5757-13 1 0.1 2PERC. OBS FS 0 900 64A2W 5757-10 1 0.4 2 PERC. OBS FS 0 900 65A3E 9797-1 1 0.6 2BIF THIN OBS FS 9.62 8044 400 66A3W 8585-1 1 0.8 2BIFTHIN OBS FS 0 1000 67A3W 8383-6 1 0.3 2BIFTHIN OBS FS 9.6 8012 1000 68A3W 8383-13 1 0.6 2 PERC. OBS FS 7.39 4874 1000 69A4E 157157-7 1 0.4 2BIFTHIN OBS FS 0 700 70A4E 158158-2 1 0.4 2BIFTHIN OBS FS 5.94 3218 800 71A4E 157157-9 1 0.4 2BIF THIN OBS FS 6.19 3481 700 72A4E 156156-2 1 0.2 2BIFTHIN OBS FS 0 700 73A4W 113113-3 1 0.4 2BIFTHIN OBS FS 6.6 3932 600 74A4W 113113-4 1 0.3 2BIFTHIN OBS FS 9.35 7621 600 75A4W 113113-5 1 0.3 2 PERC. OBS FS 7.07 4481 600 76A4W 113113-6 1 0.5 2 PERC. OBS FS 0 600 77A4W 115115-1 1 0.5 2 INT. PERC. OBS FS 0 600 78A4W 117117-4 1 0.4 2BIFTHIN OBS FS 7.29 4749 700 79A4W 117117-5 1 0.1 2 PRES. OBS FS 9.37 7652 700 80B1W 195195-17 1 0.2 2BIFTHIN OBS FS 8.91 6159 200 81 B1W 194194-10 1 0.1 2BIFTHIN OBS FS 9.43 6864 200 82B1W 195195-15 1 0.4 2BIFTHIN OBS FS 10.66 8660 200 83B1W 195195-9 1 0.4 2BIFTHIN OBS FS 0 200 84B1W 194194-9 1 0.2 2BIFTHIN OBS FS 0 200 85B1W 194194-6 1 0.1 2BIFTHIN OBS FS 9.06 6352 200 86B1W 194194-11 1 0.1 2BIFTHIN OBS FS 8.96 6227 200

87B1W 190190-3 1 0.4 2BIFTHIN OBS FS 8.65 5821 __ .._____400~.J - ,-,-,-~",-~,- --- ...... \0 \0 OR # l!!anseICat # Isutrcat # tnumflweight I size I type I mtnI SOUFCe IhydratiOn 12 hyd Iyears BP I~earsBP 2 Im- fr- river 88B1W 194194-5 1 0.4 2BIFTHIN OBS FS 7.05 3948 200 89B1W 193193-5 1 0.4 2BIF THIN OBS FS 2.64 608 300 90B1W 193193-6 1 0.2 2BIF THIN OBS FS 2.47 541 300 91 B1W 1941944 1 0.4 2 BIFTHIN OBS FS 9.78 7347 200 92B1W 189189-7 1 2 INT. PERC. OBS FS 8.03 5059 600 93B1W 194194-12 1 2BIF THIN OBS FS 0 200 94B1W 193193-8 1 2 PERC. OBS FS 0 300 95B4W 240240-7 1 2 BIFTHIN OBS FS 4.01 1352 200 96B4W 243243-1 1 2BIFTHIN OBS FS 4.54 1709 100 97B4W 240240-8 1 2BIF THIN OBS FS 0 200 98B4W 240240-6 1 2BIFTHIN OBSFS 2.96 763 200 99B4W 241241-1 1 0.1 2 BIF THIN OBS FS 10.17 7916 200 100C4E 334334-2 1 2 PERC. OBS FS 34.47 500 101 C4E 334334-3 1 2BIFTHIN OBS FS 10.55 8486 500

N o o 1 209A4E 157157-8 1 0.2 2BIFTHIN OBS TO 0 700 212A1W 55-4 1 0.1 1PRES. OBS TO 0 500 185A1E 3636-1 1 1 3INT. PERC. OBS TO a 300 208A3W 8585-2 1 0.1 2BIFTHIN OBS TO a 1000 192A1E 3636-3 1 0.4 2BIFTHIN OBS TO 0 300 193A1E 3636-6 1 0.3 2 PERC. OBS TO 0 300 187 A1E 4444-3 1 4 3 PERC. OBS TO 0 300 213A2W 5252-3 1 0.1 1 PRES. OBS TO 0 no cut-lost 100 199A1E 4444-17 1 0.2 2BIFTHIN OBS TO 5.16 2314 300 197 A1E 4444-14 1 0.3 2BIFTHIN OBS TO 5.75 2883 300 196A1E 4444-13 1 0.3 2BIFTHIN OBS TO 6.3 3470 300 210A4E 158158-3 1 0.2 2BIFTHIN OBS TO 6.83 4089 800 202A2W 5858-4 1 0.5 2BIFTHIN OBS TO 6.98 4273 900 206A3W 8383-14 1 0.4 2 PERC. OBS TO 7.04 4348 1000 205A3W 8383-9 1 0.4 2 PERC. OBS TO 7.23 4590 1000 200A1E 4444-16 1 0.3 2BIFTHIN OBS TO 7.63 5120 300 184A3W 8383-1 1 3 4 PERC. OBS TO 7.63 5120 1000 203A2W 5858-5 1 0.3 2BIFTHIN OBS TO 7.83 5396 900 191 A1E 4444-18 1 0.1 2BIF THIN OBS TO 7.97 5593 300 195A1E 4444-12 1 0.3 2BIFTHIN OBS TO 8 5636 300 186A1E 3636-2 1 1.6 3 INT. PERC. OBS TO 8.01 5651 300 207 A3W 8383-19 1 0.1 2 PERC. OBS TO 8.17 5882 1000 190A4E 157157-6 1 0.4 3BIFTHIN OBS TO 8.21 5941 700 188A1E 4444-4 1 1.4 3 PERC. OBS TO 8.33 6118 300 189A3W 8686-1 1 1.9 3 PERC. OBS TO 8.52 6405 800 198A1E 4444-15 1 0.3 2BIFTHIN OBS TO 8.93 7046 300 194A1E 4444-6 1 0.2 2BIFTHIN OBS TO 10.23 9285 300 211 B1W 193193-7 1 0.3 2BIFTHIN OBS TO 10.58 9713 adjusted 10 300 201 A1W 55-1 1 0.4 2 PERC. OBS TO 14.9 19920 outlier 5001 tv ,....0 I years comments 1m.. fr- river 8.18 6018 800 134A4E 157157-1 1 5.3 4 INT. PER aBS CD 7.79 5505 700 135B4W 230230-1 1 5.4 4BIF THIN OBS CD 7.02 4552 700 136A1E 4444-5 1 1 3'PERC. OBS CD 0 300 137 A2E 6666-1 1 0.7 3'PERC. OBS CD 7.43 5049 300 138A2W 5757-1 1 1.4 3PERC. OBS CD 6.98 4505 900 139A2W 5858-1 1 0.5 3BIF THIN OBS CD 10.15 8925 900 140B3W 338338-2 1 2 31NT. PER OBS CD 0 800 141 B3W 339339-2 1 1.2 3PERC. OBS CD 0 800 142B3W 219219-2 1 0.3 3PERC. OBS CD 7.87 5492 adjusted 7.78 500 143B4W 231231-1 1 0.6 3BIF THIN OBS CD 12.83 13419 adjusted12.69 600 144B4W 231231-2 1 0.6 3PERC. OBS CD 0 600 145B4W 232232-1 1 0.6 3 BIF THIN OBS CD 0 600 146A1E 4444-10 1 0.2 2 BIF THIN OBS CD 11.45 11122 300 147 A1E 4444-26 1 0.4 2PERC. OBS CD 8.85 6949 300 148A1E 4444-28 1 0.2 2 PERC. OBS CD 10.43 9380 300 149A1E 4444-27 1 0.2 2 PERC. OBS CD 4.87 2335 300 150A1E 4444-11 1 0.2 2 BIF THIN OBS CD 0 300 151 A1E 4444-9 1 0.1 2 BIF THIN OBS CD 0 300 152A1E 4444-8 1 0.1 2 BIF THIN OBS CD 0 300 153A1E 4444-7 1 0.1 2 BIF THIN OBS CD 10.03 8733 300 154A1E 3636-7 1 0.1 2 PERC. OBS CD 0 300 155A1E 3636-5 1 0.4 2 BIF THIN OBS CD 9.89 8512 300 156A1E 4444-24 1 0.9 2 PERC. OBS CD 0 300 157 A1W 77-1 1 0.5 2 PERC. OBS CD 5.14 2576 200 158A2W 5858-2 1 0.1 2 BIF THIN OBS CD 0 no cut 900 159A2W 5757-14 1 0.4 2 PERC. OBS CD 0 check 900 160A2W 5757-15 1 0.1 2 PERC. OBS CD 0 900 161 A2W 5757-16 0.4 2 PERC. OBS CD 0 900 N 162A2W 5858-6 0.1 2 BIF THIN OBS CD 0 9001 0 N comments Im- fr- river 1000 164A3W 8383-8 1 0.2 2 PERC. aBS 1000 165A3W 8383-18 1 0.2 2 PERC. aBS 3.28 1134 1000 166A3W 8585-3 1 0.4 2 BIF THIN aBS o 1000 167A3W 8383-5 1 0.4 2 BIF THIN aBS CD o 1000 168A3W 8383-7 1 0.2 2 PERC. aBS CD o 1000 169A4E 156156-3 1 0.7 2 PERC. aBS CD o 700 170B1W 193193-10 1 0.2 2 PERC. aBS CD o 300 171 B1W 195195-37 1 0.1 2 PRES. aBS CD o no cut 200 172B1W 195195-25 1 0.3 2 BIF THIN aBS CD 13.19 14122 adjusted 13.05 200 173B1W 195195-12 1 0.1 2BIF THIN aBS CD o 200 174B1W 195195-11 1 0.1 2 BIF THIN aBS CD o 200 175B1W 195195-10 1 0.3 2 BIF THIN aBS CD o 200 176B1W 194194-30 1 0.1 2 PERC. aBS CD 13.49 14700adjusted 13.34 200 177B1W 194194-13 1 0.4 2 BIF THIN aBS CD o 200 , 178B1W 194194-26 1 0.1 2 PERC. aBS CD o 200 I 179 B4W 232232-2 1 0.1 2 PRES. aBS CD o no cut 600 I 180 A2W 5252-4 1 0.1 1 PRES. aBS CD o no cut 100 I 181 A2W 5252-5 1 0.1 1 PRES. aBS CD o no cut 100 I 182A3W 8383-20 1 0.1 1 PERC. aBS CD o no cut 1000 L~~3B1W____ ~~4194-43 1 0.1 1 PERC. aBS CD o no cut 200

IV o w OR ,. ItransectlCat., Isub-cat,. InumWweisht Isize I type I .tntrf Isource Ihydration tYENlrSBP I comments Im-fr- river 200 262262-1 1 2.9 4 INT. PERC. OBS COSO 9.44 5780 300 216K2.W 5757-2 1 1.1 3 PERC. OBS COSO 7.98 4544 adjusted 8.91 900 217 A4E 157157-5 1 2 3BIF THIN OBS COSO 4.01 917adjusted 4.27 700 218B1W 193193-3 1 0.4 3BIFTHIN OBS COSO 9.45 5794 300 219B1W 195195-5 1 0.5 3BIFTHIN OBS COSO 12.42 10923 200 220B3W 338338-1 1 2.2 3 I NT. PERC. OBS COSO 0 weath 800 221 B3W 219219-3 1 0.7 3 PERC. OBS COSO 8.65 4719 500 222C3E 280280-1 1 0.5 3 PERC. OBS COSO 7.81 3723weath 400 223A1E 3333-1 1 0.3 2 I NT. PERC. OBS COSO 8.96 5951 adjusted 9.56 500 224A3E 9696-1 1 0.1 2BIF THIN OBS COSO 0 300 225A3W 8383-10 1 0.4 2 PERC. OBS COSO 0 1000 226A3W 8383-11 1 0.1 2 PERC. OBS COSO 0 1000 227A3W 8383-12 1 0.1 2 PERC. OBS COSO 0 no cut too weath 1000 228A3W 8383-17 1 0.4 2 PERC. OBS COSO 0 no cut too weath 1000 229B1W 194194-21 1 0.2 2 PERC. OBS COSO 0 200 230B1W 194194-22 1 0.1 2 PERC. OBS COSO 0 f-d 200 231 B1W 195195-13 1 0.3 2BIFTHIN OBS COSO 0 200 232B1W 195195-14 1 0.1 2BIFTHIN OBS COSO 0 200 233B1W 194194-7 1 0.2 2BIFTHIN OBS COSO 13.08 12317 200 234C3E 279279-1 1 0.5 2 INT. PERC. OBS COSO 0 weath 200 235A1W 55-3 1 0.1 1 PRES. OBS COSO 0 500

No ~ 205

REFERENCES CITED

Amsden, C. A. 1935 The Pinto Artifacts. In The Pinto Basin Site. edited by E. W. C. Campbell and W. H. Campbell, pp. 33-51. Southwest Museum Papers 9.

Antevs, E. 1948 Climatic Changes and Pre-White Man. In The Great Basin with Emphasis on Glacial and Postglacial Times. University ofUtah Bulletin 38(20), Biological Series 10(7): 168-191.

1952 Climatic History and the Antiquity ofMan in California. In Symposium on the Antiquity ofMan in California, Presented Before the Southwestern Anthropological Association, Los Angeles, California, October 27, 1951, edited by W. Goldschmidt, pp. 23-31. Reports No. 16, University of California Archaeological Survey, Berkeley.

Bacon, S. N., R. M. Burke, S. K. Pezzopane, and A. S. Jayko 2006 Last glacial maximum and Holocene lake levels ofOwens Lake, eastern California, USA. Quaternary Science Reviews 25(2006):1264-1282.

Basgall, M. E. 1987 Paleoindian Occupation in Central-Eastern California: The Komodo Site. Current Research in the Pleistocene 4: 50-54.

1988 Archaeology ofthe Komodo Site, An Early Holocene Occupation in Central Eastern California. In Early Human Occupation in Western North America. edited by J. A. Willig, C. M. Aikens, and J. Fagan. Nevada State Museum Anthropological Papers.

1989 Obsidian Acquisition and Use in Prehistoric Central Eastern California: A Preliminary Assessment. In Current Directions in California Obsidian Studies, edited by R. E. Hughes. pp.111-126. University ofCalifornia Archaeological Research Facility Contributions 48.

1990 Hydration Dating ofCoso Obsidian: Problems and Prospects. Paper presented at the 24th annual meeting ofthe Society of California Archaeology.

1993 Early Holocene Prehistory ofthe North-Central Mojave Desert. Ph.D. dissertation, Department ofAnthropology, University ofCalifornia, Davis. 206

2002 Chronometrics. In Results ofPhase II Investigations at 26 Archaeological Sites for the Aberdeen-Blackrock Four-Lane Project on Highway 395, Inyo County, California. D. W. Zeanah and A. T. Leigh. Report prepared for Caltrans, Central California Cultural Resources Branch, Fresno.

2007 Prehistoric People in an Evolving Landscape: A Sample Survey ofthe Lake China Basin and Its Implications for Paleoindian Land Use. Report prepared for Epsilon System Solutions, Inc., San Diego.

Basgall, M. E. and M. G. Delacorte 2003 Phase II Evaluations at Nine Archaeological Sites Near Independence, Inyo County, California. Report submitted to California Department of Transportation, Fresno, California.

Basgall, M. E., M. G. Delacorte, and D. W. Zeanah 2003 An Archaeological Evaluation ofFive Prehistoric Sites Near Bishop, Inyo County, California: Results ofthe Ed Powers Rehabilitation Project. Report submitted to California Department ofTransportation, Central Region Cultural Resources Branch, Fresno.

Basgall, M. E., M. G. Delacorte, and M. C. Hall 1995 Fish Slough Side-notched Projectile Points: An Early Holocene Time Marker in the Western Great Basin. Current Research in the Pleistocene 12:1-4

Basgall, M. E. and M. A. Giambastiani 1995 Prehistoric Use ofa Marginal Environment: Continuity and Change in Occupation ofthe Volcanic Tablelands, Mono and Inyo Counties, California. Center for Archaeological Research at Davis Publication, No. 12. Davis, California.

Basgall, M. E. and M. C. Hall 1991 Relationship Between Fluted and Stemmed Points in the Mojave Desert. Current Research in the Pleistocene 8.

1992 Archaeology ofthe Awl Site (CA-SBR-4562), Fort Irwin, San Bernardino County, California: An Early Holocene Residential Base in the North­ Central Mojave Desert. Report submitted to U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Los Angeles, California.

1994 Variation in Prehistoric Milling Technologies ofthe North-Central Mojave Desert. Paper presented at the Great Basin Anthropological Conference, Elko, Nevada. 207

2000 Morphological and Temporal Variation in Bifurcate-Stemmed Dart Points ofthe Western Great Basin. Journal oJCalifornia and Great Basin Anthropology (22)2:237-276.

Basgall, M. E., M. C. Hall, and W. R. Hildebrandt 1988 The Late Holocene Archaeology ojDrinkwater Basin, Fort Irwin, San Bernardino County, California. Submitted to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Los Angeles, California.

Basgall, M. E. and K. R. McGuire 1988 The Archaeology oJCA-INY-30 Prehistoric Culture Change in the Southern Owens Valley California. Report submitted to California State Department ofTransportation, District 9, Bishop, California.

Basgall, M. E. and J. Richman 1998 Spatial and Temporal Variability in Obsidian Use Within the Western Great Basin: Results from the Analysis of600 Artifacts from 94 Sites in Inyo and Mono Counties, California. Paper presented at the 26th Great basin Anthropological Conference, Bend.

Batchelder, G. L. 1970 Postglacial Ecology at Black Lake, Mono County, California. Ph.D. dissertation, Arizona State University, Tempe.

Baumhoff, M. A. and J. S. Byrne 1959 Desert Side-Notched Points as a Time Marker in California. University oj California Archaeological Survey Reports 48:32-65. Berkeley.

Benson, L. V., D. R. Currey, R. 1. Dorn, K. R. Lajoie, C. J. Oviatt, S. W. Robinson, G. 1. Smith, and S. Stine 1990 Chronology ofexpansion and contradiction of four Great Basin lake systems during the past 35,000 years. Paleogeography, Paleoclimatology, paleoecology 78:241-286.

Bettinger, R. L. 1975 The SurJace Archaeology oJthe Owens Valley, Eastern California: Prehistoric Man-Land Relationships in the Great Basin. Ph.D. dissertation, Department ofAnthropology, University ofCalifornia, Davis.

1977 Aboriginal Human Ecology in Owens Valley, Eastern California: Prehistoric Change in the Great Basin. American Antiquity 43: 3-17. 208

1978 Alternative Adaptive Strategies in the Prehistoric Great Basin. Journal of Anthropological Research 34(1): 27-46.

1980 Obsidian Hydration Dates for Owens Valley Settlement Categories. Journal ofCalifornia and Great Basin Anthropology (2)2:286-292.

1982a Archaeology East ofthe Range ofLight: Aboriginal Human Ecology ofthe Inyo Mono Region ofCentral Eastern California. Monographs in California and Great Basin Antropology No.1. Davis, California.

1982b Aboriginal Exchange and Territoriality in Owens Valley, California. In Contexts for Prehistoric Exchange, edited by J. E. Ericson and T. K. Earle, pp. 103-127. Academic Press, New York.

1989 The Archaeology ofPiiiyon House, Two Eagles, and Crater Middens: Three Residential Sites in Owens Valley Eastern California. Anthropological Papers ofthe American Museum ofNatural History, No. 67. New York.

1991a Aboriginal Occupations at High Altitude: Alpine Villages in the White Mountains ofEastern California. American Anthropologist 93: 656-679.

1991b Hunter-Gatherers: Archaeological and Evolutionary Theory. Plenum Press, New York.

1999 From Traveler to Processor: Regional Trajectories ofHunter-Gatherer Sedentism in the Inyo-Mono Region, California. In Fifty Years Since Viru: Theoretical Advances and Contributions ofSettlement Pattern Studies in the Americas. edited by B. R. Billman and G. M. Feinman. Smithsonian Insitution, Washington D.C.

Bettinger, R. L., and M. A Baumhoff 1982 The Numic Spread: Great Basin Cultures in Competition. American Antiquity 47: 485-503.

1983 Return Rates and Intensity ofresource Use in Numic and Prenumic Adaptive Stategies. American Antiquity 48:830-834.

Bettinger, R. L., M. G. Delacorte, and R. J. Jackson 1984 Visual Sourcing ofCentral-Eastern California Obsidian. In Obsidian Studies in the Great Basin, edited by Richard E. Hughs, pp. 63-78. Contributions ofthe University ofCalifornia Archaeological Research Facility No. 45. Research, Tucson. 209

Bettinger, R. L., M. G. Delacorte, and K. R. McGuire 1984 Archaeological Investigations at the Partridge Ranch Site, Inyo County, California (CA-INY-2146). Report on file, California Department of Transportation, Bishop.

Bettinger, R. L. and R. E. Taylor 1974 Suggested Revisions in Archaeological Sequences ofthe Great Basin in Interior Southern California. Nevada Archaeological Survey Research Papers. 5: 1-26.

Bierman, P. R., A. R. Gillespie, and M. W. Caffee 1995 Cosmogenic ages for earthquake recurrence intervals and debris flow fan deposition, Owens Valley, California. Science 20:447-450.

Billings, W. D. 1951 Vegetational Zonation in the Great Basin of Western North America. In Les Basis Ecologiques de la Reservation de las Vegetation des Zones Andes. Union ofInternational Society ofBiology 9:101-122, Series 5, Paris.

Binford, L. R. 1979 Organization and Formation Processes: Looking at Curated Technologies. Journal ofAnthropological Research 35: 255-273.

1980 Willow Smoke and Dog's Tails: Hunter-Gatherer Settlement Systems and Archaeological Site Formation. American Antiquity 45: 4-20.

1982 The Archaeology of Place. Journal ofAnthropological Archaeology 1(1): 5-31.

1983 In Pursuit ofthe Past: Decoding the Archaeological Record. University of California Press, Berkeley.

Bouscaren, S. J. 1985 Archaeological Excavations in the Lowlands ofNorthern Owens Valley: Report on the Sawmill Road Site (CA -INY-1386). Unpublished Master's Thesis, Department ofAnthropology, University ofCalifornia, Riverside. 210

Brady, R. T. 2002 Ground and Battered Stone. In Results ofPhase II Investigations at 26 Archaeological Sites for the Aberdeen-Blackrock Four-Lane Project on Highway 395, Inyo County, California. D. W. Zeanah and A. T. Leigh. Report prepared for Caltrans, Central California Cultural Resources Branch, Fresno.

Brothers, T. S. 1984 Historical Vegetation Change in the Owens River Riparian Woodland. In California Riparian Systems Ecology, Conservation, and Productive Management, edited by R. E. Warner and K. M. Hendrix. University of California Press, Berkeley.

Butler, V. L. 1999 Fish Remains from the Southern Owens Valley, Alabama Gates Project. In The Changing Role ofRiverine Environments in the Prehistory ofthe Central-Western Great Basin: Data Recovery Excavations at Six Prehistoric Sites in Owens Valley, California., by M. G. Delacorte. Report submitted to CaItrans District 9, Bishop. Far Western Anthropological Group, Inc., Davis.

Byrd, B. F. and M. Hale 2003 Lacustrine Lifestyles Along Owens Lake: NRHP Evaluation of15 Prehistoric Sites for the OlanchalCartago Four-Lane Project, US. Route 395, Inyo County, California. Report submitted to Caltrans Central California Cultural Resource Branch, Fresno.

Campbell, E. W. C. 1949 Two Ancient Archaeological Sites in the Great Basin. Science 109:340.

Chalfant, W. A. 1933 The Story ofInyo. Citizens Print Shop. Los Angeles.

Chatters, J. C. 1999 Mollusk Shell Assemblages from Seven Archaeological in Owens Valley, Inyo County, California. In The Changing Role ofRiverine Environments in the Prehistory ofthe Central-Western Great Basin: Data Recovery Excavations at Six Prehistoric Sites in Owens Valley, California., by M. G. Delacorte. Report submitted to Caltrans District 9, Bishop. Far Western Anthropological Group, Inc., Davis. 211

Cline, G. G. 1963 Exploring the Great Basin. University ofOklahoma Press, Norman.

Cronquist, A., A. H. Holmgren, N. H. Holmgren, and J. L. Reveal 1972 Intermountain Flora: Vascular Plants ofthe Intermountain West, U.S.A., Vol. 1. Hafner Publishing Company, Inc. New York.

Danskin, W. R. 1998 Evaluation ofthe Hydrologic System and Selected Water-Management Alternatives in the Owens Valley, California. U.S. Geological Survey Water- Supply Paper 2370. Hydrology and Soil-Water-Plant Relations in the Owens Valley, California.

Davis, E. L. 1970 Archaeology ofthe Northern Basin ofPanamint Valley, Inyo County, California. Nevada State Museum Anthropological Papers 15: 83-141.

Davis, O. K., R. S. Anderson, P. L. Fall, M. K. O'Rourke, and R. S. Thompson 1985 Palynological evidence for early Holocene aridity in the southern Sierra Nevada, California. Quaternary Research 24:322-332.

Delacorte, M. G. 1990 The Prehistory ofDeep Springs Valley, Eastern California: Adaptive Variation in the Western Great Basin. Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Anthropology, University ofCalifornia, Davis.

1999 The Changing Role ofRiverine Environments in the Prehistory ofthe Central-Western Great Basin: Data Recovery Excavations at Six Prehistoric Sites in Owens Valley, California. Report submitted to California Department ofTransportation, District 9, Bishop, California.

n.d. Some Thoughts Regarding the Subsistence Potential and Adaptive Significance ofGreat Basin Lacustrine and Other Aquatic Habitats. Unpublished paper.

Delacorte, M. G., M. C. Hall, and M. E. Basgall 1995 Final Report on the Evaluation ofTwelve Archaeological Sites in the Southern Owens Valley, Inyo County, California. Report Submitted to California Department ofTransportation, District 9, Bishop, California. 212

Delacorte, M. G. and K. R. McGuire 1993 Archaeological Test Evaluations at Twenty-three Sites Located Along a Proposed Fiber-Optic Cable Route in Owens Valley, California. Report on file, Bureau of Land Management, California Desert District, Riverside.

Driver, H. E. 1937 Culture Element Distributions, VI: Southern Sierra Nevada. University of California Anthropological Records 1(2):53-154.

Dunnell, R. C. and W. S. Dancey 1983 The Siteless Survey: A Regional Scale Data Collection Strategy. Advances in Archaeological Method and Theory 6

Ebert, J. I. 1992 Distributional Archaeology. The University ofUtah Press, Salt Lake City.

Ebert, J. I., E. L. Camilli, and M. J. Berman 1996 GIS in the Analysis ofDistributional Archaeological Data. In New Methods, Old Problems: Geographic Information Systems Modern Archaeological Research. H. D. G. Maschner ed. Center for Archaeological Investigations, Occasional Paper No. 23: 25-37.

Eerkens, J. W. 2001 The Origins ofPottery among Late Prehistoric Hunter-Gatherers in California and the Western Great Basin. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, University of California, Santa Barbara.

Elston, R. G. 1982 Good Times, Hard Times: Prehistoric Culture Change in the Western Great Basin. In Man and Environment in the Great basin, edited by D. B. Madsen and J. F. O'Connell, pp. 186-206. Societyfor American Archaeology Papers 2.

Enze1, Y., W. J. Brown, R. Y. Anderson, L. D. McFadden, and S. G Wells 1992 Short-Duration Holocene Lakes in the Mojave River Drainage Basin, Southern California. Quaternary Research 38:60-73.

Foley, R. 1981 Off-Site Archaeology and Human Adaptation in Eastern Africa: An Analysis ofRegional Artefact Density in the Amboseli, Southern Kenya. Cambridge Monographs in African Archaeology 3, BAR International Series 97. 213

Forester, R. M. 2000 An Ostracode Record ofHolocene Climate Change from Owens Lake, California. In Impacts ofClimate Change on Landscapes ofthe Eastern Sierra Nevada and Western Great Basin. edited by A. S. Jayko and C. 1. Miller, U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 01-202, pp. 7-8.

Fowler, C. S. 1982 Settlement Patterns and Subsistence Systems in the Great Basin: The Ethnographic Record. In Man and Environment in the Great Basin. edited by D. B. Madsen and J. F. O'Connell, pp. 121-l38. Society for American Archaeology Papers No.2.

1986 Subsistence. In Great Basin. edited by W. L. d'Azevedo, pp. 64-97. Handbook ofNorth American Indians, Vol. 11, W. C. Sturtevant, general editor. Smithsonian Insitution, Washington D.C.

Fowler, C. S. and N. P. Walter 1985 Harvesting Pandora Moth Larvae with the Owens Valley Paiute. Journal of California Great Basin Anthropology 7(2):155-165.

Friedman, 1. and W. Long 1976 Hydration Rate of Obsidian. Science 191:347-352.

Friedman, 1., F. W. Trembour, and R. E. Hughes 1997 Obsidian Hydration Dating. In Chronometric Dating in Archaeology. edited by R. E. Taylor and Aitken, pp. 297-321. Plenum Pess, New York.

Friedman, 1., F. W. Trembour, F. S. Smith, and G. 1. Smith 1994 Is Obsidian Hydration Dating Affected by Relative Humidity? Quaternary Research 41: 185-190.

Giambastiani, M. A., M. G. Delacorte, and M. E. Basgall 2001 Contextual and Temporal Associations Between Fish Slough Side-Notched Points and Keeled Unifaces in Eastern California. Paper presented at the 35 th Annual Meeting ofthe Society for California Archaeology, Modesto.

Gilreath, A. J. 1995 Archaeological Evaluations ofThirteen Sites for the Ash Creek Project, Inyo County, California. Report submitted to California Department of Transportation, District 9, Bishop, CA. 214

Gilreath, A. J. and W. R. Hildebrandt 1997 Prehistoric Use ofthe Coso Volcanic Field. Contributions ofthe University ofCalifornia Archaeological Research Facility 56. Berkeley.

Graumlich, L. J. 1993 A 1000-Year Record ofTemperature and Precipitation in the Sierra Nevada. Quaternary Research 39:249-255.

Halford, F. K. 1998 Archaeology and Environment on the Dry Lakes Plateau, Bodie Hills, California: Hunter-Gatherer Coping Strategies for Holocene Environmental Variability. Unpublished M.a. thesis, Department of Anthropology, University ofNevada, Reno.

Hall, M. C. 1983 Late Holocene Hunter-Gatherers and Volcanism in the Long Valley-Mono Basin Region: Prehistoric Culture Change in the Eastern Sierra Nevada. Ph.D. dissertation, Department ofAnthropology, University ofCalifornia, Riverside.

1990 The OXBOWArchaeological Incident: Investigations at Twenty-three Locations Between Owens Valley, Eastern California and Walker Basin, Southwestern Nevada. Report prepared for the Oxbow Geothermal Company, Reno, Nevada.

1991 Early Holocene Archaeological Sites in Mono Basin, East-Central California/Southwestern Nevada. Current Research in the Pleistocene 8.

1993 Final Report on the Archaeology ofthe Tiefort Basin, Fort Irwin, San Bernardino County, California.Report Submitted to U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Los Angeles, California.

Hall, M. C. and R. J. Jackson 1989 Obsidian Hydration Rates in California. In Current Directions in California Obsidian Studies, edited by R. E. Hughes, pp. 31-58. University of California Archaeological Research Facility Contributions No. 48. Berkeley.

Harrington, M. R. 1957 A Pinto Site at Little Lake. Southwest Museum Papers No. 17. Los Angeles. 215

Heizer, R. F. 1950 Kutsavi: A Great Basin Food. Kroeber Anthropological Society Papers 2:35-41. Berkeley.

1966 Languages, Territories, and Names ofCalifornia Indian Tribes. University ofCalifornia Press, Berkeley.

1967 Analysis ofHuman Coprolites from a Dry Nevada Cave. University of California Archaeological Survey Reports 70: 1-20.

Heizer, R. F. and M. A. Baumhoff 1961 Wagon jack Shelter. In The Archaeology ofTwo Sites at Eastgate, Churchill County, Nevada, pp. 119-138. University ofCalifornia Anthropological Records 20.

Heizer, R. F. and C. W. Clewlow, Jr. 1968 Projectile Points from site NV-CH-15, Churchill County, Nevada. University ofCalifornia Archaeological Survey Reports 71:13-18. Berkeley.

Heizer, R. F. and T. R. Hester 1978 Great Basin Projectile Points: Forms and Chronology. Ballena Press Publications in Archaeology, Ethnology, and History 10. Socorro.

Heizer, R. F. and L. K. Napton 1970 Archaeology and the Prehistoric Great Basin Lacustrine Subsistence Regime as Seen From Lovelock Cave, Nevada. Contributions ofthe University ofCalifornia Archaeological Research Facility, Number 10.

Holdaway, S., D. Witter, P. Fanning, R. Musgrave, G. Cochrane, T. Doelman, S. Greenwood, D. Pigdon, and J. Reeves 1998 New Approaches to Open Site Spatial Archaeology in Sturt National Park, New South Wales, Australia. Archaeological Oceania 33:1-19.

Hughes, M. K. and P. M. Brown 1992 Drought Frequency in Central California Since 101 B.C. Recorded in Giant Sequoia Tree Rings. Climate Dynamics 6:161-167.

Hull, K. L. 2001 Reasserting the Utility of Obsidian Hydration Dating: A Temperature­ Dependent Empirical Approach to Practical Temporal Resolution with Archaeological Obsidians. Journal ofArchaeological Science 28: 1025­ 1040. 216

Jennings, S. A. 1989 Late Quaternary Vegetation History ofthe White Mountains Region, California, as Reconstructed from the Analysis ofPackrat Middens. Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Anthropology, University of California, Davis.

Jennings, S. A. and D. L. Elliot-Fisk 1993 Packrat Midden Evidence ofLate Quaternary Vegetation Change in the White Mountains, California-Nevada. Quaternary Research 39:214-221.

Jones, T. L., G. M. Brown, L. M. Raab, J. L. McVickar, W. G. Spaulding, D. J. Kennett, A. York, and P. L. Walker 1999 Environmental Imperatives Reconsidered: Demographic crises in western North America during the Medieval Climatic Anomaly. Current Anthropology 40(2): 137-170.

Kelly, R. L. 1983 Hunter-Gatherer Mobility Strategies. Journal ofAnthropological Research 39(3): 277-306.

1985 Hunter-Gather Mobility and Sedentism: A Great Basin Study. Ph.D. dissertation Department ofAnthropology, The University ofMichigan.

2001 Prehistory ofthe Carson Desert and Stillwater Mountains: Environment, Mobility, and Subsistence in a Great Basin Wetland. University ofUtah Anthropological Papers, No. 123. The University ofUtah Press, Salt Lake City.

King, J. H., K. R. McGuire, and W. R Hildebrandt 2001 Data Recovery investigations at Three Archaeological Sites Near Big Pine, inyo County, California. Report submitted to California Department of Transportation, District 9, Bishop, California.

Koehler, P. A. and R. S. Anderson 1995 Thirty Thousand Years ofVegetation Change in the Alabama Hills, Owens Valley, California. Quaternary Research 43:238-248.

Kroeber, A. L. 1925 Handbook ofthe Indians ofCalifornia. Bureau ofAmerican Ethnology, Bulletin No. 78. 217

LaMarche, V. C. 1973 Holocene Climatic Variations Inferred From Treeline Fluctuations in the White Mountains, California. Journal ofQuarternary Research 3(4): 632­ 660.

1974 Paleoclimatic Inferences From Tree-Ring Records. Science 183(1429): 1043-1048.

1978 Tree-Ring Evidence ofPast Climatic Variability. Nature 276:334-338.

Lamb, S. M. 1958 Linguistic Prehistory in the Great Basin. International Journal of American Linguistics 24(2):95-100.

Lanning, E. P. 1963 The Archaeology of the Rose Spring Site (INY-372). University of California Publications in American Archaeology and Ethnology 49(3):327-336.

Lee,R. 1969 Chemical Temperature Integration. Journal ofApplied Meteorology 8:423-430.

Liljeblad, S. and C. S. Fowler 1986 Owens Valley Paiute. In Handbook ofNorth American Indians, volll: Great Basin, edited by W. L. d'Azevedo, pp. 412-434. Smithsonian Institution, Washington D.C.

Madsen, D. B. 1979 The Fremont and the Sevier: Redefining Agriculturalists North ofthe Anasazi. American Antiquity 44: 711-722.

1982 Get it Where the Gettin's Good: A Variable Model of Great Basin Subsistence and Settlement Based on Data from the Eastern Great Basin. In Man and Environment in the Great Basin. edited by D. B. Madsen and J. F. O'Connell, pp. 207-226. Society for American Archaeology Papers No.2.

1988 The Prehistoric Use ofGreat Basin Marshes. In Preliminary Investigations in Stillwater Marsh: Human Prehistory and Geoarchaeology. Vol. 2, edited by C. Raven and R. G.Elston, pp. 414-419. Cultural Resource Series No. 1 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Portland Oregon. 218

Madsen, D. B., L. Eschler, and T. Eschler 1997 Winter Cattail Collecting Experiments. Utah Archaeology 10(1): 1-19.

Madsen, D. B. and J. C. Janetski 1990 Introduction. In Wetland Adaptations in the Great Basin. edited by J. C. Janetski, and D.B. Madsen, pp. 1-4. Museum ofPeoples and Cultures, Occasional Papers No.1. Brigham Young University.

Madsen, D. B. and L. M. W. Lindsey 1977 Backhoe Village. Antiquities Section Selected Papers Vol. 4, No. 12. Department ofDevelopment Services Division of State History. Utah State Historical Society.

McCarthy, H. and L. Johnson 2002 Ethnography and Ethnohistory: Owens Valley Paiute. In Results ofPhase II Investigations at 26 Archaeological Sites for the Aberdeen-Blackrock Four-Lane Project on Highway 395, Inyo County, California. D. W. Zeanah and A. T. Leigh. Report prepared for Caltrans, Central California Cultural Resources Branch, Fresno.

Meighan, C. W. 1981 The Little Lake Site, Pinto Points, and Obsidian Hydration Dating in the Great Basin. Journal ofCalifornia and Great Basin Anthropology 3: 200­ 214.

Miller, G. D. 1978 Los Angeles and the Owens River Aqueduct. Ph.D. dissertation, Department ofHistory, Claremont Graduate School, Claremont.

Nadeau, R. 1997 The Water Seekers. Crest Publishers, Santa Barbara.

Napton, L. K. 1969 Archaeological and Paleobiological Investigations in Lovelock Cave, Nevada. Kroeber Anthropological Society Special Publication 2. Berkeley.

Nelson, M. C. 1991 The Study ofTechnological Organization. In Advances in Archaeological Method and Theory, vol 3, edited by M. B. Schiffer, pp. 57-100. University ofArizona Press, Tucson. 219

Nelson, M. C. and H. Lippmeier 1993 Grinding-Tool Design as Conditioned by Land-Use Pattern. American Antiquity 58:286-305.

O'Connell, J. F. 1967 Elko EaredfElko Comer-Notched Projectile Points as Time Markers in the Great Basin. University ofCalifornia Archaeological Survey Reports 70:129-140. Berkeley.

O'Connell, J. F., K. T. Jones, and S. R Simms 1982 Some Thoughts on Prehistoric Archaeology in the Great Basin. In Man and Environment in the Great Basin. edited by D. B. Madsen and J. F. O'Connell, pp. 227-240. Society for American Archaeology Papers No.2.

Origer, T. M. 1989 Hydration Analysis ofObsidian Flakes Produced by Ishi During the Historic Period. In Current Directions in California Obsidian Studies, edited by RE. Hughes, pp. 69-78. Contributions of the University of California Archaeological Research Facility 48. University of California, Berkeley.

Overly, S. A. 2003 Using a Comparative Approach to Investigate a Persistently Used Landscape: Site and Off-Site Archaeology at Little Hot Creek, Mono County, California. Unpublished M.A. thesis, Department of Anthropology, California State University, Sacramento.

Pierce, W. N. 2004 The Organization ofPrehistoric Ceramic Technology in the Owens Valley and Adjacent Areas. Unpublished M.A. thesis, Department of Anthropology, California State University, Sacramento.

Pinter, N., E. A. Keller, and R B. West 1994 Relative dating ofterraces ofthe Owens River, northern Owens Valley, California, and correlation with moraines ofthe Sierra Nevada. Quaternary Research 42:266-276.

Raymond, A. W. and E. Sobel 1990 The Use ofTui Chub as Food by Indians ofthe Western Great Basin. Journal ofCalifornia and Great Basin Anthropology 12(1):2-18. 220

Reynolds, L. A. 1996 In the Dwelling Place ofthe Great Spirit: The Prehistory ofthe Inyo-White Mountain Range, Eastern California. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Department ofAnthropology, University ofNevada, Reno.

Riddell, H. S. 1951 The Archaeology ofa Paiute Village Site in Owens Valley. University of California Archaeological Survey Reports 12: 14-28. Berkeley.

Riddell, H. S. and F. A. Riddell 1956 The Current Status ofArchaeological Investigations in Owens Valley. University ofCalifornia Archaeological Survey Reports No. 42. Berkeley.

Hemphill and C. S. Larson, 151-166. Salt Lake City, University ofUtah Press.

Scuderi, L. A. 1984 A Dendrochronologic and Geomorphic Investigation ofLate-Holocene Glaciation, Southern Sierra Nevada, California. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, University ofCalifornia, Los Angeles.

1987 Glacier Variations in the Sierra Nevada, California, As Related to a 1200 Year Tree-Ring Chronology. Quaternary Research 27:220-231.

Simms, S. R. 1988 Some Theoretical Bases for Archaeological Research at Stil1water Marsh. In Preliminary Investigations in Stillwater Marsh: Human Prehistory and Geoarchaeology. Vol. 2, edited by C. Raven and R. G.Elston, pp. 420-426. Cultural Resource Series No. 1 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Portland Oregon.

Simpson, J. H. 1983 Report ofExplorations Across the Great Basin in 1859. University of Nevada Press, Reno.

Singer, C. A. and J. E. Ericson 1977 Quarry analysis at Bodie Hills, Mono County, California: A Case Study. In Exchange Systems in Prehistory. edited by T. K. Earle and J. E. Ericson, pp. 171-190. Academic Press, New York. 221

Spaulding, W. G. 1990 Vegetational and Climatic Development ofthe Mojave Desert: The Last Glacial Maximum to the Present. In Fossil Packrat Middens, edited by J. L. Betancourt, P. S. Martin, and T. S. Van Davender, pp. 166-199. University ofArizona Press, Tucson.

1991 A middle Holocene Vegetation Record from the Mojave Desert and Its Paleoclimatic Significance. Quaternary Research 35:427-437.

Spaulding, W. G. and L. J. Graumlich 1986 The Last Pluvial Climatic Episodes in the Deserts of Southwestern North America. Nature 320:441-444.

Steward, J. H. 1930 Irrigation Without Agriculture. Papers of the Michigan Academy of Science, Arts, and Letters 12:149-156. Ann Arbor

1933 Ethnography ofthe Owens Valley Paiute. University ofCalifornia Publications in American Archaeology and Ethnology 33 (3): 233-250. Berkeley.

1934 Two Paiute Autobiographies. University ofCalifornia Publications in American Archaeology and Ethnology 33:428-438. Berkeley.

1936 Myths ofthe Owens valley Paiute. University ofCalifornia Publications in American Archaeology and Ethnology 34(5):355-440. Berkeley.

[1938a]1999 Basin-Plateau Aboriginal Sociopolitical Groups. Smithsonian Institution Bureau ofAmerican Ethnology Bulletin 120. Washington, D.C. Reprint. The University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City.

1938b Panatlibiji', an Owens Valley Paiute. Anthropological Papers 6, Bureau of American Ethnology Bulletin 119: 183-195. Washington.

1941 Cultural Element Distributions, Xill: Nevada Shoshone. University of California Anthropological Records 4(2):209-306. Berkeley.

1977 Evolution and Ecology: Essays on Social Transformation. University of Illinois Press. 222

Stine, S. 1990 Late Holocene Fluctuations of Mono Lake, Eastern California. Paleogeography, Paleoclimatology, Paleoecology 78:331-381.

1994 Late Holocene Fluctuations ofOwens Lake, Inyo County, California. Report to Far Western Anthropological Research Group, Inc. Davis, California.

1995 Late Holocene Fluctuations ofOwens lake, Inyo County, California. Report to Far Western Anthropological Research Group, Inc. Davis, California.

1998 Medieval Climatic Anomaly in the Americas. In Water, Environment and Society in Times ofClimatic Change. Issar and Brown eds. Kluwer Academic Press, Boston.

Thomas, D. H. 1975 Non-Site Sampling: Up a Creek Without a Site? In Sampling in Archaeology. J. B. Mueler ed. University of Arizona Press, Tucson.

1981 How to Classify the Projectile Points of Monitor Valley, Nevada. Journal ofCalifornia and Great Basin Anthropology 3(1): 7-43.

1985 The Archaeology ofHidden Cave, Nevada. Anthropological Papers of the American Museum ofNatural History 61:1. New York.

Thompson, R. S. 1990 Late Quarternary Vegetation and Climate in the Great Basin. In Packrat Middens: The last 40,000 Years ofBiotic Change. Betencourt, Devender, and Martin eds. The University of Arizona Press, Tucson.

Vita-Finzi, C. and E. S. Higgs 1970 Prehistoric Economy in the Mount Carmel Area ofPalestine: Site Catchment Analysis. Proceedings ofthe Prehistoric Society 36: 1-37.

Walton, J. 1992 Western Times and Water Wars: State, Culture, and Rebellion in California. University of California Press, Berkeley.

Warren, C. N. 1984 The Desert Region. In California Archaeology, by M. Moratto, pp. 339­ 430. Academic Press: New York. 223

Wheat,M.M. 1967 Survival Arts ofthe Primitive Paiutes. University ofNevada Press Reno.

Weaver, R. A. and M. E. Basgall 1986 Aboriginal Exploitation ofPandora Moth Larvae in East-Central California. Journal ofCalifornia and Great Basin Anthropology 8(2):161-179.

Wigand, P. E. 2002 Prehistoric Dynamics ofPinon Woodland in the Norther Owens Valley Region and Beyond as Revealed in Macrofossils from Ancient Woodrat Middens. In Volume II Appendices to Phase II Archaeological Investigations for the Sherwin Summit Rehabilitation Project, U.S. Highway 395, Inyo and Mono Counties, California, edited by J. W. Eerkens and J. H. King. Submitted to Catrans, Central California Cultural Resources Branch, Fresno, California.

Wigand, P .E. and Mehringer 1985 Pollen and Seed Analyses. In The Archaeology ofHidden Cave, Nevada, edited by D. H. Thomas, pp. 108-124. Anthropological Papers of the American Museum ofNatural History 61(1):1-430. New York.

Wilke, P. J. 1983 An Archaeological Assessment ofCertain Sites on Lower Cottonwood Creek, Inyo County, California. Manuscript on file, U.S. Forest Service, Inyo National Forest, Bishop.

Wilke, P. J. and H. W. Lawton (eds.) 1976 The Expedition ofCaptain J. W. Davidson from Fort Tejon to the Owens Valley in 1859. Ballena Press Publications in Archaeology, Ethnology, and History 8. Socorro, New Mexico.

Wood, R. C. 1973 The Owens Valley and the Los Angeles Water Controversy: Owens Valley as I Knew It. Pacific Center for Western Historical Studies Monograph 1. Chalfant Press, Bishop, California.

Woolfenden, W. B. 1996 Late-Quaternary Vegetation History ofthe Southern Owens Valley Region, Inyo County, California. Ph.D. dissertation, Department ofGeosciences, University ofArizona, Tucson. 224

Zeanah, D. W. 1996 Predicting Settlement Patterns and Mobility Strategies: An Optimal Foraging Analysis ofHunter-Gatherer Use ofMountain, Desert, and Wetland Habitats in the Carson Desert. Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Anthropology, The University ofUtah.

Zeanah, D. W. and A. T. Leigh 2002 Final Report on Phase II Investigations at 26 Archaeological Sites for the Aberdeen-Blackrock Four-Lane Project on Highway 395, Inyo County, California. Report submitted to California Department ofTransportation, Fresno, California.

Zeanah, D. W. and S. R. Simms 1999 Modeling the Gastric: Great Basin Subsistence Studies since 1982 and the Evolution ofGeneral Theory. In Models for the Millennium: Great basin Anthropology Today, edited by C. Beck. University ofUtah Press, Salt Lake City.