DOCSLIB.ORG

Hood County, Texas)

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Hood County, Texas) AN ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY FOR THE PROPOSED CITY OF GRANBURY WATER TREATMENT PLANT (HOOD COUNTY, TEXAS) Antiquities Permit 7273 By William E. Moore Principal Investigator Brazos Valley Research Associates Contract Report Number 271 2015 AN ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY FOR THE PROPOSED CITY OF GRANBURY WATER TREATMENT PLANT PROJECT IN HOOD COUNTY, TEXAS BVRA Project No. 15-04 Principal Investigator William E. Moore Prepared for City of Granbury 116 West Ridge Street Granbury, Texas 76048 Prepared by Brazos Valley Research Associates 813 Beck Street Bryan, Texas 77803 ABSTRACT An archaeological survey of a one-acre tract in Hood County, Texas was conducted by Brazos Valley Research Associates (BVRA) on June 5, 2015. Prehistoric site 41HD11 had been recorded in the Area of Potential Effect (APE), and the purpose of this project was to confirm its presence and identify site boundaries and site significance if possible. William E. Moore was the Principal Investigator and Jesse Todd was the Project Archaeologist who performed the survey. The Texas Historical Commission (THC) issued Antiquities Permit number 7273 to this project. The area was extensively shovel tested and no cultural materials were found. Previous reports by other archaeologists indicated that the site had been disturbed so much that further work was not recommended. All records will be permanently housed at the Texas Archeological Research Laboratory (TARL) on the campus of The University of Texas at Austin. Copies of the final report will be submitted to the THC, TARL, Texas Parks and Wildlife Department (TPWD), the city of Granbury (aka City), Enprotec/Hibbs & Todd, and selected libraries across the state. ii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The success of every project depends on the assistance and cooperation of others. My initial contact was with the Project Geologist, Dan C. Choate and Keith Kindle, P.E. (Project Engineer and Chief Operating Officer at the Abilene office of Enprotec/Hibbs & Todd). They provided the maps and served as our liaison with the City. Alva Cox is the Director of Public Works for the City and he coordinated our visit and offered assistance. Jesse Todd conducted the field survey and read the draft report to ensure that his work was reported correctly. Lili G. Lyddon prepared the figures and edited the report. Jesse Todd took the photographs. iii CONTENTS ABSTRACT ................................................................................................................................................. ii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS .........................................................................................................................iii INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................................................................... 1 ENVIRONMENT ....................................................................................................................................... 4 ARCHAEOLOGICAL BACKGROUND .................................................................................................. 5 PREVIOUS INVESTIGATIONS ............................................................................................................. 8 METHODS ............................................................................................................................................... 11 RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS ........................................................................................................ 13 RECOMMENDATIONS ........................................................................................................................ 14 REFERENCES CITED ........................................................................................................................... 15 Figure 1. General Location Map – Page 2 Figure 2. Project Area – Page 3 Figure 3. North Central Texas Region - Page 6 Figure 4. Shovel Test Locations – Page 12 Appendix I: Significant Sites Appendix II: Shovel Test Log Appendix III: Project Area Photographs iv INTRODUCTION The city has plans to construct a backwash decant water discharge line from their existing water treatment plant site on the east side of Business Highway 377 (aka Pearl Street) to a one-acre tract on the west side of the highway (Figure 1). The property is owned by the Towne Lake Apartment Homes complex, and the water line will be placed in an easement deeded to the City. The site of the proposed construction is on a terrace of the southeast bank of the Brazos River at an elevation of approximately 700 feet above mean sea level. The original channel of the river is about 0.3 km to the northwest. A dam was placed across the river to impound water for the proposed De Cordova Bend Reservoir (now Lake Granbury). When it reached its 155,000 acre-feet of storage capacity in 1969, the result was 103 miles of shoreline and a maximum width of two miles. The proposed construction will include excavation of a trench 30 inches wide to a depth of 40 inches followed by the installation of a 16-inch PVC line, subsequent bedding, compaction, and cover. The City is in the process of assuming ownership, and funding will come from the State Revolving Fund. The project area is depicted on the USGS 7.5’ topographic quadrangle Granbury (3297-234) (Figure 2). The area had been previously surveyed by archaeologists from Southern Methodist University (SMU) and prehistoric site 41HD11 was found to be in the boundaries of the area proposed for the water treatment plant. Since the city is considered to be a municipality of the State of Texas, an Antiquities Permit was required. On May 8, 2015, permit number 7273 was assigned to this project. 1 Figure 1. General Location Map 2 Figure 2. Project Area 3 ENVIRONMENT Hood County is located in North Central Texas and is within the Grand Prairie biotic province (Hayward et al. 1992:9; Jelks 1954). The Grand Prairie forms a belt of grassland and savannah that ranges from the Red River to Burnet County, Texas (Schmidly 2002:14). The eastern and west central portions of the county consist of undulating to hilly terrain covered by loam, whereas the remainder of the county is covered by loam and sand. The Brazos River flows from north to south across the county, and the Paluxy River flows from northwest to southeast. The vegetation consists mainly of bluestems, Indian grass, grama grasses, mesquite, oaks, and juniper. Blair (1950:101-102) places the county in the Texan Biotic Province and Gould (1962) refers to it as part of the Western Cross Timbers. Bedrock throughout the county is Cretaceous limestone of the Comanche Series. Terraces along the Brazos River usually have a surface member of sand that has been widely cultivated for 80 to 90 years. Cotton was the principal crop but emphasis has shifted to peanuts in recent years. Stream valleys are heavily timbered with oaks, pecans, juniper, and some mesquite. The rugged uplands support a fairly heavy cover of juniper, mesquite, and various shrubs. Small relatively flat upland areas sustain grasses that provide excellent pasturage for cattle but goats are the only livestock that can subsist on the rocky hills that are found in most of the county. The above information was taken from Jelks (1954), the Geologic Atlas of Texas (Bureau of Economic Geology 1972), the Texas Almanac (Dallas Morning News 2004-2005), and personal communication with the Project Archaeologist. According to the soil survey for Hood and Somervell counties, the project area is in only one soil type (Coburn 1978). The survey refers to it as Paluxy very fine sandy loam, 1 to 3 percent slopes (35). It is described as a deep, well drained, gently sloping soil on geologic terraces adjacent to and parallel to the flood plain of the Brazos River. Areas are oblong in shape and range from 15 to 100 acres in size. A typical surface layer (undisturbed) consists of about 10 inches of very fine sandy loam. The subsoil is very fine red sandy loam that extends to a depth of 34 inches and neutral yellowish-red very fine sandy loam to a depth of 46 inches. Beneath these strata or horizons there is a continuation of very fine sandy loam that is reddish-yellow to a depth of 62 inches. No mention is made of bedrock or clay underlying the soils mentioned above. Soil blowing is mentioned as one of the hazards of this soil. During the initial survey in 1953, Jelks (1964) observed evidence of site disturbance due to wind and stated that it had a negative effect on sites exposed on the surface. 4 ARCHAEOLOGICAL BACKGROUND According to Biesaart et al. (1985:76), Hood County is located in the North Central Texas Cultural-Geographical Region of Texas (Figure 3). The number of recorded sites in the region in 1985 was 2,678 and that represented 13.25% of the state. At the time, this region was second only to Central Texas based on the number of recorded sites. Fifty-eight sites were known in the county in 1985. That number constituted 2.17% of the region and .29% of the state. There are 39 counties in the region and Hood County was 19th in terms of numbers of recorded sites. These sites were classified as Paleoindian (n=3), Early Archaic (n=2), Middle Archaic (n=1), Late Archaic (n=9), general Archaic (n=18), and Late Prehistoric (n=15). Most of the sites have been disturbed by such actions as erosion, construction, and vandalism. Two sites are described as destroyed. Four sites had been excavated. Unfortunately, this source does not provide site numbers. In 1995, BVRA (Moore 1995b) conducted a review of previous archaeological
Load more

Recommended publications
  • A Review of Archaeological Investigations in Bosque
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Texas A&M Repository A REVIEW OF ARCHAEOLOGICAL INVESTIGATIONS IN BOSQUE, ERATH, HOOD, JOHNSON, AND SOMERVELL COUNTIES, TEXAS By William E. Moore Brazos Valley Research Associates Contract Report 36 1995A REVIEW OF ARCHAEOLOGICAL INVESTIGATIONS IN BOSQUE, ERATH, HOOD, JOHNSON, AND SOMERVELL COUNTIES, TEXAS Principal Investigator: William E. Moore, SOPA Brazos Valley Research Associates Project Number 95-03 Prepared for Museum of Paleontology and Archaeology Post Office Box 1543 Glen Rose, Texas 76043 Prepared by Brazos Valley Research Associates 219 North Main Street Varisco Building - Suite 309 Bryan, Texas 77803 ABSTRACT A review of existing literature revealed Somervell County and its immediate neighbors, Bosque, Erath, Hood, and Johnson, counties, are in a region of Texas containing significant prehistoric and historic sites. In fact, each of these counties has sites listed on the National Register of Historic Places. It was determined that prehistoric and historic sites in the five counties have been recorded primarily by two means: reservoir surveys conducted by professional archaeologists and the efforts of individuals, sometimes avocational archaeologists. As of March 2, 1995, the five counties had the following number of recorded sites at the Texas Archeological Research Laboratory (TARL) in Austin, Texas: Bosque (252), Erath (33), Hood (70), Johnson (12), and Somervell (105). Archaeological sites in the five counties date from Paleoindian times, about 10,000 years ago, through the present. ii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would like to acknowledge the following individuals for their assistance during this project. Peggy Mitchell has been instrumental in creating an interest in the history of Somervell County.
    [Show full text]
  • Comanche Peak, Units 3 & 4
    Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant, Units 3 & 4 COL Application Part 3 - Environmental Report Timber (Canebreak) Rattlesnake (State Listed as Threatened). The timber or canebreak rattlesnake is the second largest pit viper found in Texas. Adults range between 40 and 60 in long (TPWD 2007c) (Werler and Dixon 2000). They have lightly colored bodies with darker colored jagged stripes and solid black tails, culminating with a rattle. Though venomous, timber rattlesnakes rely on their cryptic coloration or avoidance when presented with danger, biting only when escape is not possible (TPWD 2007c) (Werler and Dixon 2000). Timber rattlesnakes are most frequently associated with riparian and bottomland forest or in partially wooded hillsides. Timber rattlesnakes are sit-and-wait predators, sometimes waiting for several hours. They lie alongside fallen trees waiting for small mammals, their primary food source, to come along (TPWD 2007c) (Werler and Dixon 2000). Ground-nesting birds, frogs, and other small vertebrates are also eaten. Population decline of timber rattlesnakes has been blamed on habitat destruction, hunting (market and round-ups), logging, and mortality induced while crossing roads (TPWD 2007c) (Werler and Dixon 2000). This species was not observed on the site during field visits in 2007. Glen Rose Yucca (State Listed as Rare with no Regulatory Listing Status for Hood and Somervell RAI TE-10 Counties (TPWD 2008a and TPWD 2008b)). The Glen Rose yucca (Yucca necopina) is found in the sandy soils of the Western Cross Timbers. It is easily distinguished by its white leaf margins bearing white curly threads and its branched flower stalk. The stalk may rise to nine feet with white to greenish white flowers.
    [Show full text]
  • Luminant Luminant Generation
    Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant, Units 3 & 4 COL Application Part 2, FSAR CHAPTER 2 SITE CHARACTERISTICS TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Title Page 2.0 SITE CHARACTERISTICS.................................................................. 2.0-1 2.1 GEOGRAPHY AND DEMOGRAPHY.................................................. 2.1-1 2.1.1 Site Location and Description........................................................ 2.1-1 2.1.1.1 Specification of Location.......................................................... 2.1-1 2.1.1.2 Site Area Map .......................................................................... 2.1-3 2.1.2 Exclusion Area Authority and Control............................................ 2.1-3 2.1.2.1 Authority................................................................................... 2.1-3 2.1.2.2 Control of Activities Unrelated to Plant Operation ................... 2.1-4 2.1.2.3 Arrangements for Traffic Control ............................................. 2.1-4 2.1.2.4 Abandonment or Relocation of Roads..................................... 2.1-4 2.1.3 Population Distribution................................................................... 2.1-4 2.1.3.1 Population within 10 Mi............................................................ 2.1-5 2.1.3.2 Population between 10 and 50 Mi ........................................... 2.1-5 2.1.3.3 Transient Population................................................................ 2.1-6 2.1.3.3.1 Transient Population to 16 Km (10 Mi) ...................................
    [Show full text]