!"#"$%"&'()*'()++
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email protected](!>1A0B@#)*+,(<=60>[email protected](!>1A0B@(!0>?8@(C6678B.@814#9:$$-$9-9:(<=60>[email protected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Ȃ!S[B!/))-!&/!%1-!#'!+*+,(<=60>[email protected](!>1A0B@(!0>?8@(C6678B.@814#9:$$-$9-9:(<=60>[email protected](!>1A0B@(C7@0>4.@8D02(C4.7E282FG1B ()%).A),!BC4!BCDD E+<)!W (,)6<)!E2+%).)'-!7#-) E1,*&$)!+'6!0))6U!O?#$!*+,-!&/!-?)!)F*),#.)'-+2!*,&G)%-!H#22!)L+21+-)!+**,&+%?)$!/&,!,)61%#'< '+-1,+2!$?&,)2#')!),&$#&'4!)F*+'6#'&$?=&'&' 8,)+U!CJ]W!+%,)$ M)# :&'-+#'.)'-!`,)+=H+-), E1,*&$)!+'6!0))6U!;F*),#)'%)!?+$!$?&H'!-?+-!1'*,&-)%-)6!'+-1,+2!$?&,)2#')$!H#22!),&6)J!7.+22 A,)+=H+-),!*,&G)%-$!#'!&-?),!*+,-$!&/!@+=)!>&$?=&'&' 8,)+U!CJBZ!+%,)$ @)'<-?U!\\C!/))- M)# 8%%)$$ O9*)U!()*)'6)'-!&'!:&'-,+%-&,J!!8%%)$$!*&$$#A#2#-#)$!L+,9!/,&.!1-#2#V#' !"#$%&'()*+,(-(+./0(*123/14145(67.44845(9::;#<=60>[email protected](!>1A0B@#)*+,(<=60>[email protected](!>1A0B@(!0>?8@(C6678B.@814#9:$$-$9-9:(<=60>[email protected](!>1A0B@(C7@0>4.@8D02(C4.7E282FG1B ()%).A),!BC4!BCDD E+<)!Y :+,*!a+-) E1,*&$)!+'6!0))6U!()*)'6#'&$?=&'&' 8,)+U!!CJDW!+%,)$!S[D4CCC!$N1+,)!/))-!/,&.!<+-)!#'$-+22+-#&'!+'6!CJDC!+%,)$!&/!-).*&,+,9 6#$-1,A+'%)!/,&.!%&'$-,1%-#&'!+%%)$$T @&%+-#&'U!"#-?#'!-?)!$.+22!%?+'')2!%&'')%-#'&$?=&'&' 3)$-&,+-#&' O?)!$?&,)2+'6!V&')!S2+'6H+,6!/,&.!-?)!,#*,+*T!H#22!A)!$))6)6!+'6!*2+'-)6!H#-?!H)-2+'6!/&,A$4 <,+$$)$!+'6!$)6<)$J!!0&!-,))$!&,!$?,1A$!H#22!A)!*2+'-)6!+'6!-?)!$*)%#)$!2#$-!#'%216)$!2&H!<,&H-? $)6<)$4!/&,A$!+'6!<,+$$)$!$&!-?)!,#*+,#+'!L#)H$?)6!H#22!'&-!A)!#.*+%-)6J 8!:2+$$!K!O9*)!`!),&$#&' %&'-,&2!.+-!%&'$#$-#' F"(2#"'.3F.&>2:2G&.2$'3H".:&'(3!2I J$##$'3K&#"3 F12"'.2;213K&#"3 3 F""(2'63/&."32'3$GLM&1%" 3#%)!%1-<,+$$! @)),$#+!&,9V)$! B ^&H2!.+''+<,+$$! ! ! a29%),#+!$-,#+-+! ! B "&&2<,+$$! 7%#,*1$!%9*),#'1$! D ^&F!$)6<)! :+,)F!L12*#')+! B I&)P*9)!H))6! ;1*+-&,#1.!.+%12+-1.! ! B `21)!L),L+#'! X),A)'+!?+$-+-+! B 7'))V)H))6! M)2)'#1.!+1-1.'+2)! D R+,$?!.#2=H))6! 8$%2)*#+$!#'%+,'+-+! ! B 7*&--)6!-&1%?P.)P'&-! K.*+-#)'$!%+*)'$#$! ! B b!:+'+6+!H#26!,9)! ;29.1$!%+'+6)'$#$! ! BY b!7#6)P&+-$!<,+.+! ! `&1-)2&1)+!%1,-*)'612+! ! BY !"#$%&'$("%)'*+$",&+$-",-&. !"#$%&'()*+,(-(+./0(*123/14145(67.44845(9::;#<=60>[email protected](!>1A0B@#)*+,(<=60>[email protected](!>1A0B@(!0>?8@(C6678B.@814#9:$$-$9-9:(<=60>[email protected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cccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccc E..&1<#"'.=*3 ,26)%"=3EN4O3E:."%'&.2P"=3QNR !"#$%&'()*+,(-(+./0(*123/14145(67.44845(9::;#<=60>[email protected](!>1A0B@#)*+,(<=60>[email protected](!>1A0B@(!0>?8@(C6678B.@814#9:$$-$9-9:(<=60>[email protected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www.ma-rs.org 839-4422 (608) | www.ma-rs.org COTTAGE 53527 GROVE, WI MONTGOMERY ASSOCIATES: LLC SOLUTIONS, RESOURCE STREET MAIN SOUTH 119 7.5' BREAKER RUN STONE CORE 3.0' RESTORED WITH WISDOT HEAVY DOT RIPRAP FACING ELEVATION = 779' ELEVATION = 778' WETLAND SEED MIX 2 1.5 4.0' 1 1 SEPARATION GEOTEXTILE ELEVATION = 775' BREAKWATER CONTAINMENT SECTION CROSS DETAILED PROJECT EXPERIMENTAL KOSHKONONG LAKE WI COUNTY, JEFFERSON DISTRICT LAKE KOSHKONONG ROCK IF THIS BAR DOES NOT MEASURE 1" THEN DRAWING IS NOT TO SCALE 1 21.5' 0 2 1 SCALE N.T.S. PROJECT NO. DATE CONTAINMENT BREAKWATER SECTION (TYP) 1453 12/16/11 SHEET NO. B P:\1453 RKLD - Lake Koshkonong planning 2009\Experimental Project\2011-05-26 Experimental Project Cross Section.dwg !"#$%&'( )*+),+!&'( !(. 1!. !"+!5+&#"+# #G:C7&>3B&C;G:K 4:JNHQ7&4:;NCED;CL&!G:QRDER !"#$%&'()*+, 40%2504+"(&#--0)6#2+-7 "+-08")+&-0.8260%-9&..) !!"#$%&'(#)*+,#$'-..'#/#0%''*1.#2-%3.4#56#7879: ;<=>?#>8"@AA99#/#BBBCD*@-EC%-1 !"+!5+&/.#)+4+%2 #G:C7&<3@&C;G:K 4:JNHQ7&4:;NCED;CL&/LC;:T:EJ FGHI#HJ$KHJLJL2#MNJOI0P GFPINLGP6QI$#GLGFR$6$ F*X.#H%E(X%,%,1#N.E'%-*'+%, O.YY.-E%,#0%&,'Z4#56 '"+#,$#2+" #G:C7&?3>U&C;G:K .:ERJN7&AA?&V::J 4:JNHQ7&4:;NCED;CL&/LC;:T:EJ ! 6 866 566 766 9&&" -)#.+ 8)#$:;)<)766)=&&" #.2+"%#26P+&> S-.T1+,1 U+VV /"01+)2&%03 !#2+ #QQDJDHECL&QG:QRDER&HS:G&FGHFHK:Q&FGHI:;J3 <@AB !:;&<=9&>?<< W-.*XB*'.- -*++2&%03 -./012-/340)5 4CDE&4CF&/GHI:;JDHE7&$DK;HEKDE&-JCJ:&/LCE:&-HMJN&O&.H;CJHG&4CF&%HJ&JH&-;CL: !"#$%&'( )*+),+!&'( !(. 1!. !"+!5+&#"+# #G:C7&?3=&C;G:K 4:JNHQ7&4:;NCED;CL&!G:QRDER !"#$%&'()*+, 40%2504+"(&#--0)6#2+-7 "+-08")+&-0.8260%-9&..) !!"#$%&'(#)*+,#$'-..'#/#0%''*1.#2-%3.4#56#7879: ;<=>?#>8"@AA99#/#BBBCD*@-EC%-1 !"+!5+&/.#)+4+%2 #G:C7&?3T&C;G:K 4:JNHQ7&4:;NCED;CL&/LC;:U:EJ FGHI#HJ$KHJLJL2#MNJOI0P GFPINLGP6QI$#GLGFR$6$ F*X.#H%E(X%,%,1#N.E'%-*'+%, O.YY.-E%,#0%&,'Z4#56 '"+#,$#2+" #G:C7&?3>?&C;G:K .:ERJN7&@B?&V::J 4:JNHQ7&4:;NCED;CL&/LC;:U:EJ ! 6 966 766 866 :&&" -)#.+ 9)#$;<)=)866)>&&" #.2+"%#26P+&B S-.T1+,1 U+VV /"01+)2&%03 !#2+ ":QM;:Q&QG:QRDER&HS:G&FGHFHK:Q&FGHI:;J3 <@AB !:;&<=9&>?<< W-.*XB*'.- -*++2&%03 -./012-/340)5 4CDE&4CF&/GHI:;JDHE7&$DK;HEKDE&-JCJ:&/LCE:&-HMJN&O&.H;CJHG&4CF&%HJ&JH&-;CL: !"#$%&'( )*+),+!&'( !(. 1!. !"#$%&'()*+, !"+!O+&#"+# #.2+"%#2MN+ !"+!O+&/.#)+?+%2 ! 6 :98 786 966 ;&&" -)#.+ :)#$<=)>)966)?&&" #.2+"%#2MN+&< !"#$%&'% (&)) /"01+)2&%03 !#2+ /J@HGPGB7&EQ&RDGR5G&P@7GDA@J&AB&@&RAQQGDGB7&JEH@7AEB3 ;<=> #45467&89&8:;; -*++2&%03 -./012-/340)5 ?@AB&?@C&/DEFGH7AEBI&$A6HEB6AB&-7@7G&/J@BG&-E47K&L&.EH@7ED&?@C&%E7&7E&-H@JG 7XEXI*IHIVEP%TTPMGEXMSRJSV;EXIV6IKYPEXSV]4IVQMXWERH%TTVSZEPW Form 3500-053 (R 4/01) Page 2 of 2 Drawings of proposed activity 0SGEXMSR7OIXGL (Indicate scale) should be prepared in accordance Show route to project site: include nearest main road and crossroad. with sample drawing. N 1" = _____ ft. Fire Number Proposed Materials 4VSNIGX4PERW (Include top view and typical cross sections. Clearly identify features and dimensions or indicate scale.) Use additional sheets if necessary. N 1" = _____ ft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i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tJVSQERETTVS\MQEXIP]tF]t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c,-%*&Z61,-3&7,(-&R29&B(5,&I&8(1,J&K$/5&(19&L,AA,-3$1&0$21%.,3J&EM #K=7C&RM0=BF LF##FKGZ7&0Z]7N` EMBBZE&8=BF&[]7NM7\&0B]' [_R&']0CR=7&NK]GN [_R&']0CR=7&NK]GN #KF8FKM0C&EF78N CF77FN[&K&CFRBFK LZ7=N[=7&R&K`GNKZR '=KNBF`&L&E=\7FK GNF^F7&L&'ZE=K LZ[7&\&7=BB EF78`&GFF'FK [=K^F`&=BBF7&HZ[BMF K=78`&R&]BKM0[ KZ\FK&\&=78FKGZ7&NK]GN LZ[7&\&7=BB K=78`&R&]BKM0[ N_=&B]0=G&NK]GN CBZ']0=KJ&'=''J KZ'FKN&K=R=MC= L=RFG&8&#]KBF` 8EM\[N&E&R==Gb N=MB#F=N[FK&[]7NM7\&0B]' --/ \KF\ZK`&=&\F7GBFK GZ]N[\=NF&GHZKNRF7G&0B]' 8EM\[N&R==Gb LF##FKGZ7&0Z]7N` 8_C&N[F&B=RH&M70 --. H=NKM0M=&L&Z\KF7&NK]GN KZ7=B8&bZBN=C L=GZ7&B&B=78FKG H=NKM0C&\&b'`B]N KZ\FK&\&=78FKGZ7&NK]GN EMBBZRFKF&M70 N[=88F]G&\=70=Kb KM0[=K8&L&\B='&NK]GNWBFY 234)5+%& KZ'FKN&[=KKMG !"#$%&'()*+, EMBBZRFKF&M70 8]0C&[=^F7&M70 8]0C&[=^F7&M70 GNFH[F7&'KZE7 KZ'FKN&K=R=MC= R]8&B=CF&GHZKNGRF7G&0B]' 8Z]\B=G&K&b=[FK` L=RFG&L&H]HFBMG 8ZBB=GFG&7ZK&G[ZKF&'F=0[ #BZ`8&#&G=CF R_C&7FBGZ7J&C_B&[=KKMGZ7 --0 --1 EMBBZRFKF&M70 NEM7&MGB=78&\]7&0B]'&M70 KZ'FKN&K=R=MC= EMBBZRFKF&M70 8]0C&[=^F7&M70 K=`RZ78&=&E=NCM7G KZ'FKN&0&GNFM7FK NEM7&MGB=78&\]7&0B]'&M70 L=RFG&B&CF[R LF##FKGZ7&0Z]7N` KM^FK#KZ7N&M70 ^FBR=&HZ]\[ EMBBZRFKF&M70 LF##FKGZ7&0Z]7N` KZGF&C7=HH 'KM=7&8&'F7#ZK8 ^FBR=&HZ]\[ LF##FKGZ7&0Z]7N` B=]KMF&\KFF7JGNF^F&HKMGC GNFH[F7&='FK7=N[` RMB#ZK8&LZ[7GZ7 'MBB&B]a LF##FKGZ7&0Z]7N` R]8&B=CF&GHZKNGRF7G&0B]' EMBBM=R&B]a KZ'FKN&K=R=MC= '=77Z7&NK]GN 'FK7FN=&#FBN`&0[KMGNM=7 R=KC&7&'=KNBFNN H_0&^FK[=BF7&NK]GN 8F77MG&N&E[=BF7 CF77FN[&K&\=7G KZ\FK&RZ##MNN 'MBB&B]a LF##KF`&=&C7M\[N LZ[7&G0]BBM7&LK KF7F=&B&C=BGNKZR EMBBM=R&F&B]a L=0C&L&G0[RM8N R]8&B=CF&GHZKNGRF7G&0B]' KM^FK&#KZ7N&KFGZKN H=]B&B&'KZE7 LF##FKGZ7&0Z]7N` 8FHN&7=N]K=B&KFGZ]K0FG EMBBM=R&F&B]a NEM7&MGB=78&\]7&0B]'&M70 BFGNFK&[&[MBB LF##FKGZ7&0Z]7N` 8FHN&7=N]K=B&KFGZ]K0FG 8FHN&7=N]K=B&KFGZ]K0FG R=KN[=&B&CFBBFK H=]B&8&[]7GM0CFK B=GbBZ&^=K\= 8FHN&7=N]K=B&KFGZ]K0FG EMBBM=R&F&B]a 8FHN&7=N]K=B&KFGZ]K0FG L=RFG&E&G]KR= 8Z77=&H=7M0Z H=]B&B&'KZE7 GNFH[F7&0[]K0[MBB L=RFG&0&GF7ZKGCM B&=&EMBGZ7 EMBBM=R&B]a LZGFH[&F&7FBGZ7 8FHN&7=N]K=B&KFGZ]K0FG 8FHN&7=N]K=B&KFGZ]K0FG 8FHN&7=N]K=B&KFGZ]K0FG 8FHN&7=N]K=B&KFGZ]K0FG LZGFH[&F&7FBGZ7 !&.1/)&>&U@@&A,,% !"#"$"%&'()*$+,-&$."/(012$13.4 56711$()*$+,-&$."/(012$13.4 86711$()*$+,-&$."/(012$13.4 9*./&:()132'*."&4 ' 5'' 8K=#N ! )**$ Archaeological Investigations for the Lake Koshkonong Experimental Project, Jefferson County, Wisconsin Prepared By: Richard Kubicek, Principal Investigator Great Lakes Archaeological Research Center, Inc. 1408 North 5th Street Milwaukee, WI 53212 GLARC ROI 776 GLARC Project No. 11.063 Prepared For: Montgomery Associates Resource Solutions, LLC 119 South Main Street Cottage Grove, WI 53527 Department of the Army, Rock Island District Corp of Engineers P.O. Box 2004 Rock Island, Il, 61204-2004 © November 2011, Great Lakes Archaeological Research Center Great Lakes Archaeological Research Center Report of Investigations No. 776 iii Management Summary In September and October of 2011, Great Lakes Archaeological Research Center (GLARC) conducted Phase I archaeological investigations for an Experimental Project in Lake Koshkonong, Stinkers Bay, in Jefferson County, Wisconsin. These investigations were conducted within the area of potential effect for several project areas including: a proposed dredge cut site, a ¿ ll location, two heavy machinery staging areas, and heavy machinery access routes. The project area is coincident with two uncatalogued burial sites, 47JE0782 and 47JE0916. Archaeological investigations were conducted to partially ful¿ ll requirements obtained from the execution of Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (P.L. 89-665) as amended and 36 CFR, Part 800, which serves to implement the Act. Investigations of the project areas were conducted in two stages. The ¿ rst stage consisted of a comprehensive archival and literature review to identify previously documented archaeological and burial sites within one mile of the project areas. The second stage of investigations consisted of archaeological survey of those portions of the project areas potentially affected by ground disturbing activities. Archaeological survey of the project areas included shovel probe testing and cofferdam testing in underwater areas. No archaeological sites, cultural materials, or historic properties were identi¿ ed as a result of archaeological survey within the project areas. It is recommended that the proposed project developments will not adversely affect the cultural resource base of the project areas. iv Great Lakes Archaeological Research Center Report of Investigations No. 776 Table of Contents Management Summary ...... iii Part I: Project Background ...... 1 Introduction ...... 1 Project Description and Area of Potential Effect ...... 1 Part II: Environmental and Cultural Setting ...... 4 Physical Setting ...... 4 Glacial History and Physiography ...... 4 Soils ...... 4 Vegetation ...... 6 Oak Savannah ...... 6 Southern Hardwood Forest ...... 6 Prairie ...... 6 Vegetation in the Project Area ...... 8 Cultural Setting ...... 8 Prehistoric ...... 8 Paleoindian Tradition ...... 8 Archaic Tradition ...... 9 Early and Middle Archaic Stages (9,000 BP to 3,500 BP) ...... 9 Late Archaic Stage (3,500 BP – 2,500 BP) ...... 10 Woodland Tradition ...... 10 Early Woodland Stage (5,000 BP - 2,300 BP) ...... 10 Middle Woodland Stage (2,300 BP – 1,500 BP) ...... 11 Late Woodland Stage (AD 500-1000) ...... 12 Terminal Late Woodland (AD 900 - 1200) ...... 14 Mississippian Tradition ...... 14 Middle Mississippian (AD 1000 - 1250) ...... 14 Oneota (AD 1000 - 1600) ...... 15 Historic ...... 15 Protohistoric and Historic Native American ...... 15 Euro-American History of Wisconsin ...... 16 Part III: Methods and Techniques of Investigation ...... 18 Introduction ...... 18 Archival and Literature Search ...... 18 Field Methodology ...... 19 Phase I Archaeological Survey Methodology ...... 19 Visual Inspection ...... 19 Shovel Probe Testing ...... 19 Underwater Shovel Probe Testing ...... 20 Soil Core Testing ...... 20 Part IV: Results of Archives and Literature Research...... 21 Wounded Vertebrae Burial ...... 21 UWM Collector KS-5 ...... 21 Great Lakes Archaeological Research Center Report of Investigations No. 776 v Part V: Results of the Phase I Archaeological Field Investigations ...... 24 Dredge Site ...... 24 Fill and Breakwater Area ...... 24 Machine Staging Areas ...... 24 Vehicular Access Route ...... 24 Part IV: Summary and Recommendations ...... 29 References Cited ...... 31 Appendix A: Permission from the Wisconsin Historical Society for the Uncatalogued Burial Sites ...... 37 Appendix B: Bibligraphy of Archaeological Report Form ...... 41 List of Figures Figure 1.1 Project location in Wisconsin...... 2 Figure 1.2 Project location...... 3 Figure 2.1 Location of Jefferson County relative to the physiographic regions of Wisconsin...... 5 Figure 2.2 Pre-settlement Vegetation of Jefferson County...... 7 Figure 4.1 Map of previously reported sites within one mile of project area...... 23 Figure 5.1 The location of survey areas for the Lake Koshkonong Experimental Project...... 25 Figure 5.2 Shovel testing the dredge site...... 26 Figure 5.3 Shovel testing the fill site...... 26 Figure 5.4 Shovel testing the vehicular access route...... 27 Figure 5.5 Overview of staging area 2...... 27 Figure 5.6 Testing staging area 1...... 28 Figure 5. 7 Vehicular access route after survey...... 28 List of Tables Table 4.1 Previously recorded archaeological and burial sites within one mile of project area. ....22 vi Great Lakes Archaeological Research Center Report of Investigations No. 776 Great Lakes Archaeological Research Center Report of Investigations No. 776 1 Part I: Project Background Introduction In September 2011 Great Lakes Archaeological Research Center, Inc. (GLARC) conducted Phase I archaeological investigations at terrestrial and underwater locales for the Koshkonong Experimental Project (KEP). Investigations for the KEP proposal included a potential dredge area and ¿ ll site with a connecting vehicular access route and staging area in Stinker’s Bay on Lake Koshkonong, in Jefferson County, Wisconsin (Figure 1.1). Archaeological investigations for this project were conducted on behalf of the United States Army Corps of Engineers, Rock Island District and Montgomery Associates Resource Solutions, LLC The investigations were designed to identify archaeological sites and resources within the area of potential effect for the project. These studies were conducted to partially ful¿ ll responsibilities for identifying, recording, and managing cultural resources under the speci¿ cations of Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (P.L. 89-665) as amended and 36 CFR, Part 800, which serves to implement the Act. The methods and techniques used during the course of these investigations conform to the standards and guidelines set forth by the United States Secretary of Interior in The Secretary of Interior’s Standards and Guidelines for Archaeology and Historic Preservation (48 FR 44716) and the Guidelines for Public Archeology in Wisconsin, as Revised (Wisconsin Archaeological Survey Guidelines Committee 1997). Supporting documentation, ¿ eld notes, and other materials generated during the design and execution of this project are currently on ¿ le at Great Lakes Archaeological Research Center, located at 1408 North 5th Street in Milwaukee, Wisconsin. Project Description and Area of Potential Effect The KEP is located in Township 5N Range 13E in sections 11 and 13. The project seeks to manage the eroding land between Lake Koshkonong and Mud Lake by constructing a breakwater between the lakes. The work would include cutting dredge material from a site in Stinker’s Bay, and placing the material behind a breakwater in the project area. The planned breakwater would protect the Mud Lake Wetland Complex from eroding into Lake Koshkonong. The proposed project activities for the KEP were reviewed in order to de¿ ne an area of potential effect for the archaeological study. Speci¿ cally, all areas of planned ground disturbing activities were used to de¿ ne the area of potential effect. Ground disturbing activities were determined to include the dredging of ¿ ll material, the employment of heavy machinery over unpaved routes, and the construction of a breakwater and ¿ ll site (Figure 1.2). The total area of potential effect includes 4.43 acres. 2 Great Lakes Archaeological Research Center Report of Investigations No. 776 4VSNIGX0SGEXMSR 0SGEXMSRSJXLI0EOI/SWLOSRSRK )\TIVMQIRXEP4VSNIGXMR.IJJIVWSR 08016040 'SYRX];MWGSRWMR Kilometers +VIEX0EOIW%VGLEISPSKMGEP6IWIEVGL 'IRXIV-RG4VSNIGX 0408020 1ETTIH 3GXSFIV Miles (EXE7SYVGIW +0%6' 4VSNIGX0SGEXMSRMR .IJJIVWSR'SYRX] Figure 1.1 Project location in Wisconsin. Great Lakes Archaeological Research Center Report of Investigations No. 776 3 47JE0916 47JE0782 0IKIRH 0EOI/SWLOSRSRK)\TIVMQIRXEP ! Construction Staging Area 4VSNIGX%VIEW Shovel Tested Access Route 1IXIVW +VIEX0EOIW%VGLEISPSKMGEP6IWIEVGL Breakwater 'IRXIV-RG4VSNIGX Dredge Site Fill Site 1ETTIH 3GXSFIV *IIX Previously Recorded Sites selection (EXE7SYVGIW 1%6797+7;,7+0%6' .IJJIVWSR'SYRX] Figure 1.2 Project location. 4 Great Lakes Archaeological Research Center Report of Investigations No. 776 Part II: Environmental and Cultural Setting Physical Setting Glacial History and Physiography The following narrative is intended to provide the reader with a general overview of the project area environment. Reconstructions of the physiographic or topographic characteristics of the project locality may be found in Chamberlin (1877), Martin (1965), Curtis (1959), Hole (1976), Paull and Paull (1977) and in various Wisconsin Geological and Natural History Survey Bulletins. Jefferson County is located within Martin’s (1965) Eastern Ridges and Lowlands physiographic province (Figure 2.1). The Eastern Ridges and Lowlands region corresponds with portions of the state that were covered by the Green Bay and Lake Michigan lobes of the last continental glaciation. In general the region’s topography is marked by north-south trending cuestas, or ridges, of resistant strata that form a series of distinct, but topographically low, upland and lowland sequences. Relief within the Eastern Ridges and Lowlands is minor. As Martin (1965:209) notes “the dominant thing in eastern Wisconsin is the plain”. Topography in the Eastern Ridges and Lowlands region is controlled by a series of four northeast-southwest trending cuestas. The eastern faces of these cuestas generally exhibit gradual gentle slopes while the western faces are steeper and more rugged. Drainage tends to follow the longitudinal axes of the cuestas, although this drainage pattern may be inÀ uenced by morainic features as well. In the absence of dramatic topography characteristic of portions of southwestern Wisconsin, the most notable topographic features of the eastern part of the state are glacially derived. Finley’s (1976) general description of Wisconsin’s glaciated topography provides a particularly appropriate description of the project area environs: In the glaciated areas the pre-glacial surface has been largely obscured by an uneven covering of glacial drift made up of rock and earth debris left behind as the glaciers melted away. Streams have opportunistic routes, widening and narrowing as they seek their way over the disorganized surface. Wetlands are abundant, lakes are numerous, both thickly concentrated in clusters and widely disseminated as individuals. The surface generally consists of undulating country with broad, gentle rises, and wide shallow basins, a swell and swale topography. Interspersed over the area in somewhat broken concentric arcing arrangements are the ribbon-like bands of rough surface, the marginal moraines, built up along the former ice edges. In places they are spectacularly uneven with high knobs and kames intermingled haphazardly with deep pits or kettles, the kame and kettle moraine. In places there are groupings of parallel, linear hills, the drumlins, or so-called whalebacks. Where the advancing glaciers scoured up limestone bedrock, as in the southeast, soils are fertile. Where they ground up crystalline rock, as in the north, or sandstone as in the central areas, the soils are light, coarse, sandy, and infertile (Finley 1976: 21). Soils In a regional perspective, soils of the project area are included in Hole’s (1976) Soils of the Southeastern Uplands and Soils of Stream Bottoms and Major Wetlands soil regions. Largely derived from Woodfordian Great Lakes Archaeological Research Center Report of Investigations No. 776 5 Lake Superior Physiographic Provinces Lowland of Wisconsin NorthernNorthern Highland HIghland Central Plain Eastern R idges and Lowlands N KILOMETERS 0408020 60 100 Western Upland 06020 40 MILES 463.)'8%6)% Figure 2.1 Location of Jefferson County relative to the physiographic regions of Wisconsin. 6 Great Lakes Archaeological Research Center Report of Investigations No. 776 glacial drift, soils of the Southeastern Uplands are found almost entirely within that portion of the state that was once covered by Lake Michigan lobe glacial ice. The parent materials of soils of the region are for the most part composed of heavily weathered clay tills with signi¿ cant components of lithic rubble. Typically, the upland soils of the region are composed primarily of silts, loams, and clays developed over glacial till and drift, while bottomland soils are composed primarily of peats and loams developed over organic deposits. Soils of Stream Bottoms and Major Wetlands include areas of alluvial soils, peat and muck soils, and poorly drained mineral soils (Hole 1976:115). Veg etation The KEP is located near the interface of three plant communities de¿ ned by Curtis (1959): the Oak Savannah, the Southern Hardwood Forest, and the Prairie À oristic communities. Each of these plant communities offered diverse species for exploitation by aboriginal populations. Oak Savannah The oak savanna was one of the most widespread pre-settlement plant communities in southern Wisconsin (Curtis 1959:326). Although trees form an important component of the oak savanna plant community, they are found in such a low density that grasses and other herbaceous species are the dominant plants of the community. Upland areas within the oak savannah consist of bur oaks interspersed among prairie grass species, although black oak and white oak are also present. In lowland areas, the swamp white oak is commonly found spread among wet-mesic prairie grasses. Curtis (1959:461-462), among others, has suggested that the oak openings found in Wisconsin may have been purposely maintained through the burning of grasslands by both prehistoric and historic Native American residents. The suppression of prairie ¿ res by Euro-American settlers led to a closing in of the oak savanna as grassland areas were invaded by young oak trees. Southern Hardwood Forest Curtis (1959:87) estimates that 5,200,000 acres of southern Wisconsin were once covered by stands of the southern hardwood forest. Early accounts of Wisconsin’s southern hardwood forest (Hoyt 1860; Knapp 1871; Lapham 1852) describe it as consisting of oak forests on hills and exposed areas, mixed hardwood species such as sugar maple and basswood on north slopes and other protected areas, and a À ood plain forest of elm and silver maple along major stream courses (Curtis 1959). Removal of the southern hardwood forest has been intensive in southern Wisconsin since the mid-nineteenth century. Presently, only a few pockets of southern hardwood forests remain as agricultural woodlots, nature preserves, and park localities. Prairie Prairies are plant communities that are dominated by grass and forb species rather than trees. Within Wisconsin, true prairie communities are found southwest of the tension zone that divides the two À oristic provinces of the state (Curtis 1959:262). The prairie plant community is noted for its great diversity of species. A study of the remnant prairies of Wisconsin (Curtis and Greene 1949) found species present that were well adapted to dry, thin soils of limestone ridges and steep hillsides, others that were abundant in areas with deep loamy soils and good drainage, and still other species that were common to low inundated À atlands and poorly drained soils. Early settlers commented on the vastness of southern Wisconsin’s prairies, oftentimes comparing them to rolling oceans of grasses (Ruggles 1835; Smith 1837). Several of Great Lakes Archaeological Research Center Report of Investigations No. 776 7 4VSNIGX0SGEXMSR Lake Koshkonong 4VIWIXXPIQIRX:IKIXEXMSRSJ.IJJIVWSR 0IKIRH 'SYRX][MXL0EOI/SWLOSRSRK Lowland hardwoods -- willow, soft maple, box elder, ash, elm, cottonwood, river birch )\TIVMQIRXEP4VSNIGX0SGEXMSRMR Marsh and sedge meadow, wet prairie, lowland shrubs .IJJIVWSR'SYRX];- Oak -- white oak, black oak, bur oak /MPSQIXIVW Oak openings -- bur oak, white oak, black oak +VIEX0EOIW%VGLEISPSKMGEP6IWIEVGL 'IRXIV-RG4VSNIGX Prairie 1MPIW Sugar maple, basswood, red oak, white oak, black oak 1ETTIH 3GXSFIV Swamp conifers -- white cedar, black spruce, tamarack, hemlock Water (EXE7SYVGIW ;MW(26+0%6'&EWIQETEGGIWWMFPIEX JXT KSQETSYXHRVWXEXI[MYWKISHEXESVMKCZIKCGSZ^MT" Figure 2.2 Pre-settlement Vegetation of Jefferson County. 8 Great Lakes Archaeological Research Center Report of Investigations No. 776 the larger and more important prairies in Wisconsin were given distinctive names by early settlers. These include: Barnes Prairie in Racine County; Walworth Prairie in Walworth County; Rock Prairie in Rock County; Arlington Prairie in Columbia and Dane counties; Sauk Prairie in Sauk County; the Military Ridge Prairie, extending from Verona nearly to the Mississippi River; and the Star Prairie in St. Croix County. Vegetation in the Project Area According to maps created from the initial land survey notes undertaken in the mid 1800’s, project area vegetation ¿ ts the category of “marsh and sedge meadow, wet prairie, lowland shrubs” (Figure 2.2). The southern part of the project area still ¿ ts the mid-1800’s description, while the northern part consists of hardwood forest and residential landscaping. Cultural Setting Human occupation of the project area spans both the prehistoric and historic periods. The range of prehistoric archaeological sites documented within the region provides testimony of its use throughout the prehistoric period, while historic modi¿ cations of the landscape speak of more recent land use practices. The following section provides a regional account of the prehistoric and historic occupation of the project area. This account is organized by temporal periods, the last of which transitions into the historic era. Prehistoric Paleoindian Tradition The ¿ rst documented prehistoric inhabitants of Wisconsin were descendents of Upper Paleolithic hunters, generally thought to have migrated to the New World through Beringia, the land beneath what is now the Bering Straits. This land was exposed during the last Ice Age when sea levels were dramatically lowered. An alternative hypothesis holds that Pleistocene peoples may have entered the region at an earlier time by water-craft, or, along shorelines now inundated by current ocean levels. Paleoindians, the ¿ rst people to enter Wisconsin, appear to have arrived from the south and southwest in very small numbers. Presumably they lived in small, mobile groups made up of extended families. Studies in Wisconsin (R. Mason 1986, 1997; Overstreet 1991, 1993a; Salzer 1974; Stoltman 1991; Stoltman and Workman 1969) indicate that Paleoindian peoples tended to occupy the landscapes associated with glacial ice margins as these retreated north into Wisconsin. While isolated Paleoindian ¿ nds have been made throughout Wisconsin there have been few systematically excavated sites. Overstreet (1991, 1993a) has suggested that the Chesrow complex represents the earliest occupation of Wisconsin and may date as early as 13,000 BP. The Chesrow complex was originally de¿ ned as falling late within the Early Paleoindian stage on the basis of excavations at the Chesrow site and surface collections at nearby sites in Kenosha County in southeastern Wisconsin. Overstreet has argued for an early date based on the recovery of mammoth and mastodon remains bearing butchery marks, dated to 12,100-12,600 BP, on the same landforms and within the same geographic constraints as Chesrow complex material (Mason 1997; Overstreet 1991, 1993a). The more widespread early Paleoindian À uted point complexes (Clovis, Gainey, and Folsom) have been dated on the Great Plains and in the Eastern Woodlands to between 11,500 BP and 10,000 BP. These À uted point complexes are distinguished by the presence of lanceolate projectile points, commonly manufactured Great Lakes Archaeological Research Center Report of Investigations No. 776 9 of ¿ ne and exotic materials, which have been carefully thinned at the base by the removal of long, deep À akes that extend for varying lengths along the point and produce a distinctive, À uted appearance. Points belonging to the Clovis complex, dating 11,500-11,000 BP, have À ute scars that extend less than one-third of their length. Folsom points (produced ca. 10,000 BP) have broad À ute scars that extend nearly the entire length of the point. Gainey points fall between the two both morphologically and temporally (Stoltman 1991). Early Paleoindian peoples have been stereotyped as big-game hunters specializing in mammoth and mastodon. While there is abundant evidence that these animals were hunted by humans in Wisconsin, the repeated use of lacustrine or marsh environments for occupation by early Paleoindian people suggests a concern for the availability of small game and aquatic resources. The late Paleoindian stage is characterized by the use of long, slender, lanceolate and stemmed projectile points that were carefully fashioned of ¿ ne chert. While late Paleoindian lifeways have consistently been described as focused on a continuance of earlier big-game hunting strategies, evidence suggests that late Paleoindian peoples practiced a broad range of subsistence activities (Kuehn 1998). As in the early Paleoindian stage, social structure was probably based on small groups of related individuals, who moved frequently on the landscape and preferably occupied lakeshores and stream banks near the outlets of lakes (Mason 1997). Archaic Tradition The Archaic tradition in Wisconsin began at a time when hunting strategies among the Paleoindian peoples began to shift towards the taking of smaller game and the collection of different plant species (Stoltman 1997). This was due largely to changing plant and animal communities resulting from climatic shifts associated with wasting ice and the retreat of glaciers to the north. Most of the large fauna of earlier times became extinct and hunting strategies shifted to the exploitation of smaller game such as elk and deer. As hunting strategies shifted, so did tool technologies. Projectile points intended to bring down larger animals such as the now-extinct big horned bison (Bison antiquis), mastodon (Mammut americanum) and woolly mammoth (Mammuthus primigenius) were redesigned for more effective hunting of smaller, solitary forest animals. Early and Middle Archaic Stages (9,000 BP to 3,500 BP) The Early Archaic stage is characterized by the presence of formally diverse diagnostic projectile types such as Hardin Barbed, St. Charles, Thebes, and a variety of bifurcated base points. Subsistence practices and social organization appear to have been similar to those during the Paleoindian period, and it appears likely that there is no clear line between the Early Archaic stage and the late Paleoindian stage, other than that based on lithic typologies (Stoltman 1986, 1997). The Middle Archaic stage in Wisconsin saw a number of technological innovations, including the ¿ rst use of ground stone technology and copper metallurgy. The stage is primarily identi¿ ed with cultural developments that culminated in the Old Copper complex. The Old Copper complex is known primarily from the excavation of several cemeteries (Freeman 1966; Ritzenthaler 1957). Identifying habitation sites contemporary with Old Copper complex mortuary sites has depended mainly on projectile point morphology. An argument has been made that the cluster of side-notched points diagnostic of the Middle Archaic stage (Raddatz, Godar, Madison, Matanzas, Reigh) are “everyday” variations on the ceremonial Osceola points accompanying Old Copper burials (Stoltman 1997). 10 Great Lakes Archaeological Research Center Report of Investigations No. 776 Most Old Copper complex artifacts have been recovered as surface ¿ nds in the east-central portion of the state, centering on Lake Winnebago (Wittry 1957). It was with the emergence of the Old Copper complex that long-range trade networks between territorial groups were ¿ rst established. The establishment of formal cemeteries hints that group mobility was at a fairly low level and cultural boundaries between groups were beginning to form. Pleger (1998) and Stoltman (1997) have argued that eastern Old Copper burial assemblages contain goods that may have signaled individual status, for example, copper headdresses and jewelry of exotic marine shell. If so, Wisconsin was home to one of the earliest socially complex societies in the Upper Great Lakes. Late Archaic Stage (3,500 BP – 2,500 BP) The arrival of the Late Archaic stage in Wisconsin is signaled by the appearance of the Red Ochre complex, new projectile point types, a decline in the use of copper for utilitarian objects and a lack of identi¿ able cemeteries (Stoltman 1997). Late Archaic projectile points are generally small, stemmed, side or corner-notched dart points. Few other artifacts diagnostic of this phase have been identi¿ ed. The Red Ochre complex is represented by about 20 sites in Wisconsin and is de¿ ned by the nature of burial caches recovered from these sites (Ritzenthaler and Quimby 1962). Red Ochre mortuary sites represent a leap in cultural complexity. The quantity and quality of grave goods is far greater than that found in Old Copper cemeteries. Burials were typically in-the-À esh internments placed in a À exed posture in pits in natural ridges, knolls, and occasionally within arti¿ cially constructed mounds. Some bundle burials, cremations, and extended in-the-À esh inhumations are known. Red ochre (powdered hematite), sometimes mixed with red sand, was liberally sprinkled over corpses and their associated grave goods during the course of burial ceremonies. Large caches of exotic and ¿ nely fashioned burial goods were placed with the remains of both adults and children—a pattern usually associated with the emergence of hereditary status differences (Stevenson et al. 1997) The beginning of the Late Archaic stage seems to coincide with changes in the climate and environment. Starting around 3,500 BP, oak savanna seems to have partially given way to closed oak forest as weather grew cooler and wetter. The impact of this environmental shift on Late Archaic populations is not well understood, as few well-strati¿ ed or single component Late Archaic sites have been scienti¿ cally excavated in Wisconsin. The Late Archaic stage is the ¿ rst prehistoric cultural stage to be well represented throughout Wisconsin. Sites have been located over a broad range of environmental and topographical zones. Based on excavations to date, it would appear that the Late Archaic stage represents a transition between the extremely mobile, small band strategies of the Paleoindian, Early Archaic, and Middle Archaic stages and the less-mobile, seasonally dispersed populations of the Woodland tradition. Woodland Tradition Early Woodland Stage (5,000 BP - 2,300 BP) The Early Woodland stage in Wisconsin encompasses two distinct cultural regimes. Residents of the area during the Early Woodland stage were participants in a variant of the Marion culture, a widespread phenomenon across the northern Eastern Woodlands (Esarey 1986; Green and Schermer 1988; Munson 1982). In many areas, the Marion culture is associated with a continuation of Red Ochre ceremonialism. Great Lakes Archaeological Research Center Report of Investigations No. 776 11 The Marion culture is responsible for the introduction of both ceramic technology and the practice of burial mound construction into Wisconsin. Marion Thick pottery was grit-tempered, cord-paddled inside and out, and took a distinctive conical or “À owerpot” form. Decoration was uncommon, but sometimes consisted of ¿ ngernail impressions on the exterior (Boszhardt et al. 1986). Kramer Stemmed projectile points complete the triad of diagnostic items for the Marion culture. The Hilgen Spring Park Mounds in Ozaukee County represents this early phase of the Early Woodland in Wisconsin (Boszhardt et al. 1986; Kehoe 1975; Van Langen and Kehoe 1971). Three conical mounds were excavated at this site, the largest of which was six feet high and 40 feet in diameter. These mounds were constructed using yellow and red soils to create a layered effect that likely had symbolic meaning for the builders. In addition to human burials, dog burials, hearths, ¿ re pits, and rock concentrations were uncovered. The latter part of the Early Woodland saw an evolution in pottery technology and a minor technological change from square stemmed projectile points (Kramer Stemmed) to Waubesa Contracting Stem points, diagnostic of the late Early Woodland stage in east-central Wisconsin. Late Early Woodland ceramics are sand or grit-tempered cord-marked jars with relatively thin walls and slightly everted upper rim pro¿ les. Decoration is applied directly over cord-marking in the form of bosses, incising, ¿ ngernail impressions, and cord-wrapped-stick impressions. This material is closely related to that produced by the Black Sand culture in Illinois, and has been included within the Prairie phase in southwestern Wisconsin (Stoltman 1990) and the Lakes Phase in south-central Wisconsin (Salkin 1986). Rusch (1988) has de¿ ned the late Early Woodland Onion River phase based on excavations at the Bachman site in Sheboygan County. Sites belonging to the phase may be identi¿ ed by the presence of Onion River Incised pottery and Kramer and Waubesa projectile points. The spatial extents of the Onion River phase have not been de¿ ned and no cognate phase has yet been adequately de¿ ned for other parts of Wisconsin. Excavations of late Early Woodland sites in Wisconsin indicate that late Early Woodland peoples may have lived in large warm-season camps surrounded by specialized resource processing and extraction sites. The large camps would have broken up in the winter, as individual families spread out across the landscape. Though many late Early Woodland phase sites are located near shallow lakes and marshes, recovered faunal remains are curiously lacking in aquatic species (Stevenson et al. 1997). Middle Woodland Stage (2,300 BP – 1,500 BP) The Middle Woodland stage in Wisconsin is generally equated with the Hopewell Interaction Sphere, a widespread exchange system famous for its exotic raw materials, spectacular artwork, elaborate mortuary facilities, and ¿ ne ceramics. The core areas of the Hopewell Interaction Sphere were located to the south of Wisconsin, in Illinois and Ohio. In Wisconsin, the Middle Woodland stage is represented by two distinct phases: The Trempealeau phase in the southwestern portion of the state and the Waukesha phase in the southeast. The Trempealeau phase of southwestern Wisconsin began around AD 100 and appears to have been closely related to Hopewell developments in Illinois. Trempealeau phase sites in Wisconsin include large mound and habitation sites, many of which are located along the Mississippi River (Stoltman 1997). During the nineteenth century, several large Trempealeau phase mounds in the vicinity of Prairie du Chien were excavated by the Smithsonian Institution’s Bureau of Ethnology (Thomas 1894), while other large mounds near Trempealeau were excavated in the 1920s by the Milwaukee Public Museum (McKern 1931). Trempealeau phase mounds along the Mississippi River were among the largest and highest mounds in the region (Stevenson et al. 1997). These mounds were usually conical or circular, and many contained centrally located subÀ oor tombs that held the remains of several individuals. Some mounds contained 12 Great Lakes Archaeological Research Center Report of Investigations No. 776 mortuary artifacts distinctive of the Hopewell Interaction Sphere, including large chipped stone knives manufactured from exotic raw materials, copper implements including axes, earspools, and ornamental breast plates, platform pipes, silver items, and ¿ nely made ceramic vessels (Stevenson et al. 1997). Trempealeau phase pottery is characterized by grit tempering and exterior surfaces decorated by pressing different tools into the surface of the vessel. Recognized types include Kegonsa Stamped, Shorewood Cord Roughened, and local imitations of Havana ware (Stevenson et al. 1997). A few well made pots attributable to imported Hopewell ware have been recovered from mounds along the Mississippi River at Prairie du Chien, La Crosse, and Trempealeau. The most recognizable projectile points attributable to the Trempealeau phase are the large mortuary bifaces recovered from mounds. Because few Trempealeau phase habitation sites have been systematically excavated, relatively little is known regarding the everyday stone tools of the phase. Based on the available data, it appears that Trempealeau phase projectile points were small corner notched forms manufactured from locally available raw materials (Stevenson et al. 1997). Some of the earliest evidence for Waukesha phase people in southeastern Wisconsin was presented by Increase Lapham and Dr. Philo Hoy based on their work in Racine County (Lapham 1855). Waukesha phase peoples practiced mound burial, and interred their dead in rectangular pits covered by large conical mounds. Waukesha phase burials were extended, À exed or bundled. While this is common for most mounds, Waukesha phase burials are occasionally found in an upright, sitting position. This trait is uncommon among other Middle Woodland groups and appears to be unique to the Waukesha phase. Burials also rarely incorporate the elaborate Hopewellian grave goods found in contemporary mounds in southwestern Wisconsin and Illinois. Waukesha phase pottery is characterized by grit tempering and smooth exterior surfaces decorated using a wide variety of techniques. Ceramic types include Kegonsa Stamped, Shorewood Cord Roughened, Havana Zoned, Naples Stamped, Neteler Crescent Stamped and classic Hopewell ware (Goldstein 1992). Projectile point types dating to the Waukesha phase are commonly either corner notched or stemmed and include the Snyders, Steuben, Monona Stemmed, and Norton types. Waukesha phase habitation sites indicate a continued emphasis on hunting and gathering, with increased use of aquatic resources. Lippold (1973) has suggested that Waukesha phase peoples had begun to live in semi-sedentary communities supported in part by shell¿ sh harvesting. A later Middle Woodland phase, the Millville phase (AD 200-500), has been de¿ ned for the Driftless Area (Stoltman 1990), but a cognate phase has not yet been de¿ ned in southeastern Wisconsin, probably due to a lack of appropriate data, poor chronological control, lack of intensive research, or a combination of all three. Late Woodland Stage (AD 500-1000) The Late Woodland stage in the eastern United States has often been viewed as a transitional phenomenon by a number of researchers. This, however, is not the case for Wisconsin where even the earliest archaeological researchers were aware of, and intrigued by, monumental earthworks that dotted the landscape (Lapham 1855; McKern 1928, 1929, 1930; Peet 1890). As research on the Late Woodland has progressed, it has become clear that while the Late Woodland stage is transitional in some aspects, others indicate a unique and well-developed stage with a complexity that is expressed not in material goods, but in ceremonialism and ritual. In other words, it does not represent a decline between two climaxes, but rather reorganization and consolidation of regional and macro-regional networks that laid the groundwork for larger sociopolitical units. The early portion of the Late Woodland was, in essence, a continuation of the lifeways that had been gradually developing over the preceding thousand years. People continued to hunt, gather and ¿ sh, live in small groups and practice a seasonal round (Arzigian 1987; Storck 1974; Theler 1987). Great Lakes Archaeological Research Center Report of Investigations No. 776 13 Some transitional aspects of the Late Woodland stage relate to changes in subsistence strategies, settlement patterns, and technology. It has become increasingly clear that sometime around AD 850 maize began to play a more signi¿ cant role in the diet of some Late Woodland groups (Arzigian 1987). Certainly by AD 1000, maize had become a mainstay for a number of contemporaneous peoples who occupied the Wisconsin landscape. The adoption of more intensive horticultural economies apparently had profound affects on settlement patterns as sedentism become more prevalent among prehistoric peoples (Dirst 1988, 1995; Richards 1992; Salkin 1987, 1993). The establishment of permanent villages at a number of locations in the eastern portion of Wisconsin con¿ rms the impact that the rigors of maintaining a maize-based diet had. Population appears to have increased during the Late Woodland, presumably as a result of changes in diet and settlement patterns. Prior to 1987, the Late Woodland stage was synonymous with the Ef¿ gy Mound culture. As it is recognized today in Wisconsin, the Ef¿ gy Mound culture is used as an umbrella term that incorporates at least two phases, the Horicon phase in south-central Wisconsin (Salkin 1987, 1993) and the Eastman phase in southwestern Wisconsin (Stoltman 1990). The distribution of Ef¿ gy Mound culture sites falls predominantly within the southern three-quarters of Wisconsin. Additional sites are found in far northern Illinois, northeastern Iowa, and southeastern Minnesota. Site types include rock shelters, caves, multi-seasonal open-air villages, short-term encampments, seasonal resource exploitation camps, and the highly visible ef¿ gy mound mortuary complexes typically located on elevated terraces near waterways, marshes, and lakes. Very little is known of Ef¿ gy Mound domestic architecture, although three shallow oval basins excavated at the Sanders site in Waupaca County (47WP026) suggest that small oval wigwam type houses were utilized (Hurley 1975). In addition, several “keyhole” shaped structures with associated Madison ware ceramics were excavated at the Statz site in Dane County (Meinholz and Kolb 1997). Salkin has argued that Horicon phase peoples utilized large habitation sites for socializing and ceremonial purposes and then occupied small sites at other times of the year (Salkin 1993). The size and distribution of sites has been used as support for a band-level hunting and gathering lifestyle for the Ef¿ gy Mound peoples (Mallam 1976). By de¿ nition, Ef¿ gy Mound culture mortuary sites contain one or more earthen, animal-shaped ef¿ gy mounds. Mound shapes include “panthers”, birds, waterfowl, bears, canines, deer, buffalo, “turtles”, and humans (Birmingham and Rosebrough 2000; McKern and Ritzenthaler 1949; Rowe 1956; Stoltman and Christiansen 2000). Ef¿ gy Mound peoples also constructed long “linear” mounds and small conical mounds. Unlike earlier Red Ochre and Hopewellian mounds, these mounds were generally low, contained few, if any, grave goods and contained the remains of only a single individual, though some mounds with multiple interments (and some with none at all) are known. Articulated and bundle burials, cremations, pit burials, primary mound À oor, and primary mound ¿ ll burials were all common. The only consistency in burial regime was the placement of the corpse near the “heart” of the ef¿ gy (Stevenson et al. 1997). Though many excavated Late Woodland mounds contain burial features, not all do. This has led several researchers to suggest that the importance of the mounds lay not only in their use as burial markers, but also in the process and ceremonies accompanying their construction (Mallam 1976). The primary technological innovation of the Late Woodland stage was the widespread adoption of the bow and arrow. The bow and arrow were introduced into Wisconsin circa AD 700, and small arrow points are the most abundant projectile points found in archaeological sites occupied after that date. Lithics from Ef¿ gy Mound culture sites are often made from local till, Silurian, Prairie du Chien and Galena cherts, as well as any of the silici¿ ed sandstones found in northwestern Wisconsin. The lithic tool kit appears to be generalized with a high proportion of utilized and retouched À akes relative to more formal patterned tools. Drills, end scrapers, and spoke shaves are known from rockshelter and open-air sites. Projectile points seem 14 Great Lakes Archaeological Research Center Report of Investigations No. 776 to be present in three forms: triangular, small corner-notched and small, stemmed points. It seems likely that the triangular points (Madison Triangular points) and small corner-notched points (Klunk points) are part of a bow and arrow delivery system, while the small stemmed points may represent spear or atl-atl points. Terminal Late Woodland (AD 900 - 1200) Sometime around AD 900, signi¿ cant changes took place on the landscape of southern Wisconsin. A few ceramic vessels in east central Wisconsin were produced with a distinctive folded rim, which produced the appearance of a “collar” around the pot. Though used in small amounts at ¿ rst, collared pottery became more popular and replaced the earlier Madison ware entirely by AD 1050. The resulting Point Sauble and Aztalan Collared types are the diagnostic hallmarks of the terminal Late Woodland stage. At the same time that this ceramic transition was taking place, maize was introduced into the Late Woodland diet in increasing amounts. By AD 1050 fully horticultural societies had arisen and the ¿ rst sedentary villages in Wisconsin were occupied (Stevenson et al. 1997). Some of these early villages were forti¿ ed with post palisades (Salkin 1993). This set of changes signaled the onset of the terminal Late Woodland in Wisconsin. In the eastern part of the state (east of the Driftless Area), the terminal Woodland has been called the Kekoskee Phase (Salkin 1987, 1993). There are strong indications that the socio-political dynamics of southern Wisconsin became more complicated as sedentism took hold and diverse cultural groups either developed within, or moved into, various parts of the state. By AD 1050, the terminal Late Woodland village of Aztalan in Jefferson County was occupied by a group of Cahokian Middle Mississippians, and Oneota settlements were springing up in northwestern, northeastern, and southeastern Wisconsin. Mississippian Tradition Middle Mississippian (AD 1000 - 1250) Evidence of a Middle Mississippian presence in Wisconsin is con¿ ned to only a handful of sites, which has led researchers to the conclusion that it is largely an intrusive presence. Middle Mississippian peoples were different from surrounding Late Woodland groups in a number of ways. First, they were a fully sedentary agricultural people depending on maize, beans, and squash. Second, they appear to have had a ranked society that was organized around chieÀ y authority. Third, they constructed monumental architecture that included platform temple mounds, large bastioned palisades and specialized public buildings. Fourth, they utilized a very specialized ceramic technology that included the use of crushed freshwater clamshell as a tempering agent. In addition to this new temper, they also made a wider variety of vessel forms that included jars, water bottles, plates, and bowls that were occasionally slipped with red, black, white, or brown pigments. The diagnostic Middle Mississippian ceramic types are Powell Plain and Ramey Incised. Lithic technology was based around a generalized core reduction strategy and the typical projectile point was a small, thin, notched or multi-notched triangular point. Middle Mississippian peoples, or at the very least, ideas, were present in Wisconsin sometime between AD 1000 and AD 1050. It is thought that Middle Mississippian people took at least two routes north, one to the west along the Mississippi River trench and a second from Illinois via the Rock River. The eastern route brought Middle Mississippian peoples into contact with Late Woodland Kekoskee phase people who had already settled at several locations. It appears that some type of relationship was established with these people and the small village of Aztalan metamorphosed into a 22-acre mixed Kekoskee/Middle Great Lakes Archaeological Research Center Report of Investigations No. 776 15 Mississippian village with three platform mounds. Middle Mississippian presence is seen at several other sites in the form of trade goods and locally made imitations of Powell Plain and/or Ramey Incised pottery. Evidence for a Middle Mississippian presence in Wisconsin ceases shortly after AD 1250 when portions of Aztalan were apparently burnt (Barrett 1933). Oneota (AD 1000 - 1600) Some Late Woodland communities appear to have adopted elements of Mississippian material culture and ideology, and evolved into a group of related cultures termed Oneota. Oneota peoples adopted many elements of Mississippian material culture, including the manufacture of smooth surfaced, shell-tempered pottery decorated with trailed geometric and curvilinear motifs, and a heavy reliance on maize horticulture. Like the terminal Late Woodland peoples of eastern Wisconsin, they inhabited large, sometimes forti¿ ed, sedentary villages. Oneota material culture was variable, due in part to the differing responses of local groups to Mississippian ideology and technology. The geographic distribution of Oneota villages was discontinuous, as not every Late Woodland group accepted Mississippianization (Overstreet 1997). The sudden pre-occupation with forti¿ cation systems that developed with the emergence of sedentary societies may be due in part to the close proximity that the culturally dissimilar terminal Late Woodland, Emergent Oneota, and Middle Mississippians found themselves in. However, while terminal Late Woodland and Middle Mississippian sites in the state are frequently forti¿ ed, only a single forti¿ ed Emergent Oneota site has been noted to date (Overstreet 1997). Oneota subsistence revolved around ¿ shing, shell¿ sh harvesting, hunting and trapping of aquatic mammals, and a horticultural system involving corn, beans, and squash. Shell middens, shell¿ sh processing areas, garden beds, and rock piles produced during ¿ eld clearance are common both near and within habitation areas. Wild mast crops, such as hickory, walnut, butternut, acorn, and hazelnut were collected, and there is evidence that deer and elk were hunted (Overstreet 1997). Historic Protohistoric and Historic Native American The Protohistoric period refers to a time just prior to the arrival of Europeans into the western Great Lakes region. Before the actual arrival of Europeans into the region, their presence far to the east was felt primarily through trade goods that were traded inland by Native American groups who had access to them. Along with these trade goods, European contact brought newly introduced diseases that caused massive depopulation throughout the Great Lakes region, thus causing traditional political and social structures to be radically altered. The European foothold on the eastern seaboard and the ¿ erce competition it promoted among native groups over the control of access to trade goods also prompted a migration of eastern peoples westward, which has further complicated our understanding of historic Native American groups in Wisconsin. Oneota culture appears to have persisted into the Protohistoric period, based on excavations at the Astor site in Green Bay where items of European manufacture were found in association with Oneota shell- tempered ceramics (Overstreet 1993b). Fragments of brass kettles, a glass bead, and a clasp knife were recovered from the site; along with a grit-tempered Bell Type I pot (C. Mason 1986; Wittry 1963). Bell Type I pottery has been associated with the historic Potawatomi and Mesquakie. The ethnic af¿ liations of the 16 Great Lakes Archaeological Research Center Report of Investigations No. 776 Oneota communities have not yet been established, but their geographic location and material culture of the eastern Classic Oneota matches early European descriptions of the “Ouinipigou” (Winnebago/Ho-Chunk). It appears that Oneota populations had declined by historic contact (presumably due to epidemic disease and an increase in regional conÀ ict) and contact had been established with the Mesquakie, Potawatomi and other groups being pushed westward by disturbances resulting from Euro-American colonization (Hall 1962; Overstreet 1997). These disturbances, coupled with an increasing reliance on items of European manufacture, resulted in a cessation of pottery and stone tool manufacture. As a result, it is very dif¿ cult in most cases to link historic residents of Wisconsin to prehistoric cultural complexes. The association of the Ho-Chunk with the eastern Oneota, though tentative, still remains the strongest to date. The Historic period refers to the time of actual physical presence of Europeans among the Native American groups of the western Great Lakes region. Ushered in by Jean Nicolet’s landfall at Red Banks, near present-day Green Bay, the Historic Period in Wisconsin is divided into three sections: Early Historic; Middle Historic; and Late Historic. First applied to the western Great Lakes by Quimby (1966), these sections are de¿ ned based on the presence of distinct types of trade goods at archaeological sites and correspond with the periods of French, British, and American inÀ uence over the region. The Early Historic period refers to the years between 1610 and 1670, when European trade goods were relatively scarce in the western Great Lakes and the inÀ uence of French traders was minimal. Early Historic period artifacts recovered from sites in Wisconsin include: iron clasp knives; brass kettles and bracelets; glass bottles, trade beads, and religious medals (C. Mason 1986). The Middle Historic period, spanning the years between 1670 and 1720, corresponds to the period when French inÀ uence throughout the western Great Lakes region was largely unchallenged by other European powers. During the period, characteristic French trade goods including distinctive bead types, Jesuit rings, iron kettles, muskets, and spall gunÀ ints, were brought into the region by French traders and missionaries. During the Middle Historic period, important French settlements were established in Wisconsin at La Pointe on Madeline Island, La Baye (Green Bay), and Prairie du Chien. The Middle Historic period in Wisconsin concluded with the end of the French and Indian War in 1760 after which French forces withdrew from the western Great Lakes (C. Mason 1986:387). The Late Historic period in Wisconsin coincides with a shift to British inÀ uence over the western Great Lakes region. French knives and guns, Jesuit rings, and distinctive varieties of French glass beads were replaced by British trade goods, including silver utilitarian and ornamental items such as spoons, earrings, wristbands, bracelets, brooches, gorgets, armbands, headbands, crosses, and lockets. Other items include patent medicine bottles, an increase of European ceramics, prism-shaped gunÀ ints, and multi-faceted glass trade beads. By Late Historic period times, most of the native arts and crafts had been modi¿ ed or disappeared completely (C. Mason 1986:376-378). The most signi¿ cant archaeological investigation to date relating to the historic period in Wisconsin was conducted on Rock Island near the mouth of Green Bay where evidence of long term Euro–American and Native American occupation has been discovered (R. Mason 1974). Other signi¿ cant sites in northeastern Wisconsin that may contain historic period Native American occupations are the McCauley site on Lake Winnebago, the Astor site in the City of Green Bay, and the Hanson site on the Door Peninsula (Overstreet 1993b). Euro-American History of Wisconsin Nicolet’s arrival in 1634 marks the beginning of a long and rich history of Euro-American presence in Great Lakes Archaeological Research Center Report of Investigations No. 776 17 eastern Wisconsin. Following Nicolet’s landfall, several French explorers resided at one time or another at La Baye (Green Bay), including Nicolas Perrot, who arrived in 1664. In 1671, Jesuit Father Claude Allouez established the ¿ rst permanent mission on the Fox River, the Mission of St. Francis Xavier, at the De Pere rapids. Throughout the French period in Wisconsin, La Baye remained an important, if sparsely populated, center of the French commercial and military presence in the western Great Lakes. Beginning in the latter part of the 1600s, the French fur trade monopoly was threatened by British inroads into fur bearing regions and increased resistance to French policies by Native American groups, particularly the Fox (Mesquakie) Indians. When the French moved to counter British and Iroquois threats to their fur trade interests in the east, the Fox established a series of villages along the Fox River and openly plundered French commerce along the river (Kellogg 1908). Between 1701 and 1716, an open state of warfare existed between the French and Fox Indians, which further disrupted trade along the Fox River and at Green Bay. The war between the Fox and French culminated in the French destruction of Fox villages on the Fox River and the expulsion of the Fox from eastern Wisconsin. The French, however, gained little from their victory over the Fox. As a result of their campaign against the Fox, French credibility was severely eroded among Native American groups sympathetic to the Fox resistance of French domination. With their traditional support base of Indian allies thus worn away, the French were unable to pose much resistance to English inroads into the fur bearing regions of the western Great Lakes. French control over Wisconsin and the western Great Lakes came to a close after the French surrendered Montreal and New France to the English following the conclusion of the French and Indian war in 1760. English rule over Wisconsin began in 1761 when an English garrison occupied the French fort at La Baye. Astutely assessing the situation at Green Bay, the English commander quickly moved to establish friendly relations with the region’s Native American inhabitants and resume the lucrative fur trade. The English maintained a presence at Green Bay until 1763, when the garrison was withdrawn as a precautionary measure following attacks on forts at Detroit and Michilimackinac during Pontiac’s Rebellion. English sovereignty over eastern Wisconsin of¿ cially came to a close following the American Revolution, but English inÀ uence in the region did not wane until American forces actually garrisoned the fort at Green Bay following the War of 1812. The American era in eastern Wisconsin was ushered in with the arrival of American forces at Green Bay in 1816. Shortly after their arrival, American troops began the construction of Fort Howard, which would serve as the center of Green Bay society until its abandonment in the 1850s (Foley 1983). During the American era, several individuals who would become synonymous with the early history of eastern Wisconsin and the Fox River valley began arriving into the region, including Daniel Whitney, Henry Baird, Morgan L. Martin, and Judge James Doty. 18 Great Lakes Archaeological Research Center Report of Investigations No. 776 Part III: Methods and Techniques of Investigation Introduction The methods and techniques employed during archaeological investigations of the Lake Koshkonong Experimental Project (KEP) are consistent with current professional standards relating to historic and archaeological conservation and preservation jointly endorsed by the Wisconsin Historical Society and the Wisconsin Archaeological Survey (Wisconsin Archaeological Survey Guidelines Committee 1997). Furthermore, the methods and techniques utilized in this study meet or exceed the standards established by the United States Secretary of Interior (National Park Service, United States Department of the Interior 1983). Finally, these investigations were designed to ful¿ ll the mandate of Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (P.L. 89-665) as amended and 36 CFR, part 800 which served to implement the act. Two distinct phases of work were conducted prior to preparation of the written report: (1) pre-¿ eld literature and archives research, and (2) ¿ eld survey. Speci¿ c methods, techniques, and sources are detailed in the following narrative. Archival and Literature Search Pre-¿ eld research entails a comprehensive review of the data housed at Great Lakes Archaeological Research Center, regional libraries and historical societies, and at the Wisconsin Historical Society in Madison. Archives and serial ¿ le systems are also searched for site-speci¿ c information. Published literature sources consulted include: The Wisconsin Archeologist, a quarterly journal of the Wisconsin Archeological Society published since 1901; The Wisconsin Magazine of History, the journal of the Wisconsin Historical Society; The Wisconsin Historical Collections consisting of 20 volumes published between the years 1903 and 1920; and the Bulletin of the Public Museum of the City of Milwaukee, several of which detail archaeological investigations conducted in various Wisconsin localities. Unpublished sources subjected to scrutiny are represented by four different formats: (1) serial entry ¿ les; (2) map ¿ les; (3) manuscript ¿ les; and (4) archaeological survey reports. Two serial ¿ le systems were consulted. The ¿ rst of these is the Wisconsin Archaeological Site Inventory (ASI) ¿ les, copies of which are housed at the Anthropology Section, Milwaukee Public Museum and the Museum Division, Wisconsin Historical Society. This ¿ le consists of an inventory of previously reported archaeological sites from both prehistoric and historic times and provides information relating to site locations, cultural af¿ liation, artifacts, and literature sources. The second ¿ le consulted is the Historic Preservation Division inventory ¿ le housed at the Historic Preservation Division, Wisconsin Historical Society. This ¿ le includes both archaeological sites and standing structures that have been identi¿ ed as possessing architectural and/ or historical signi¿ cance. Several map ¿ les were reviewed. They include: (1) The Charles E. Brown Archaeological Atlas; (2) the General Land Of¿ ce survey records; (3) the Trygg map ¿ les; and (4) local plat and deed maps. The Charles E. Brown Archaeological Atlas provides the locations of sites on county plat maps. The prehistoric and historic sites include camps, villages, mounds, springs, rock art, workshops, quarries, cemeteries, trails, and various other types of archaeological manifestations reported to Brown during his long tenure as editor of The Wisconsin Archeologist and as the curator of the Wisconsin Historical Society Museum. The General Great Lakes Archaeological Research Center Report of Investigations No. 776 19 Land Of¿ ce (GLO) records consist of plats and survey notes that may provide information regarding presettlement vegetation, topography, and aquatic features, all important variables in determining potential site locations. In addition, dependent on the interests of individual land surveyors, cultural information such as the locations of Indian trails, camps and villages, maple sugar processing stations (“sugar bushes”), pioneer settlements, and early industrial improvements such as mills, roads, and early homes and farmsteads are frequently noted on these maps. Both map ¿ les are housed at the Archives Division, Wisconsin Historical Society and the latter is available on micro¿ lm at various repositories. The Trygg map ¿ le is a privately published composite of the GLO land survey records. While the Trygg maps are less detailed in scale than the GLO plats, the ¿ le is an important source for understanding the chronology and magnitude of regional development during the late historic period (ca. 1850). Finally, early plats and topographic maps were reviewed to assess historical settlement and development of the project environs. Manuscript¿ les investigated include the Charles E. Brown manuscript¿ les and the State Archaeologist’s county ¿ les. Both of these are housed at the Museum Division, Wisconsin Historical Society. The Brown manuscripts consist of 50 years of notes, correspondence, sketches, maps, and other data relating to historic and prehistoric archaeological sites. The county ¿ les include reports (unpublished), photographs, sketch maps, letters, and information derived from the Museum’s highway archaeology program. Field Methodology Different methods of archaeological survey and data collection, reÀ ecting the different goals of successive phases of archaeological site documentation, are utilized during the course of archaeological investigations. These methods and techniques are detailed in the following section. Phase I Archaeological Survey Methodology Methods and techniques of Phase I archaeological survey are determined primarily by ground cover conditions and sur¿ cial geology of a particular project area. Surface conditions for the KEP dictated the employment of four different Phase I methods: 1). Visual Inspection, 2). Terrestrial shovel probe testing, 3). Underwater shovel probe testing, 4). Soil core testing. Visual Inspection Visual inspection is a technique that is commonly employed to provide an initial assessment of a project area. Attempts are made to identify those portions of the project area that are not surveyable by conventional means. Such areas may include disturbed construction sites, heavily developed commercial or residential zones, paved or massively graveled or ¿ lled surfaces, inundated locales, and deeply ditched roadsides. Visual inspection is also used to identify areas suitable for other survey techniques, such as surface survey or shovel probe testing. Shovel Probe Testing Shovel probe testing is a technique utilized to sample areas where the earth’s surface is masked by vegetation (less than 20 percent surface visibility), ¿ ll, natural sediments, or other materials. It is a labor-intensive technique that results in only a small fraction of the site area being sampled for cultural remains and thus has certain limitations. The technique entails excavating a series of small units placed 20 Great Lakes Archaeological Research Center Report of Investigations No. 776 along predetermined transects or in grid form with speci¿ ed intervals between units. These intervals do not exceed 15 m and, dependent on the speci¿ c purposes or data needs, intervals between probes may be reduced to 10 m, 5 m, or less. Pits approximately 35-45 cm in diameter are dug and the spoil is screened through 1/4” hardware cloth to determine the presence or absence of cultural debris. Upon examination of the stratigraphy and inspection of the screen contents, shovel probe pits are immediately back-¿ lled. Depths of excavation of shovel probes will vary, ranging from a few centimeters to as much as 50-80 centimeters, dependent on local soil conditions. However, units typically penetrate the A horizon and are carried into the B horizon. Underwater Shovel Probe Testing Underwater shovel probe employs a modi¿ cation of the practice of terrestrial shovel testing for shallow lacustrine environments. The challenges of excavating a controlled test underwater involve additional techniques and more intensive labor. A cofferdam is used to control the excavation of a test probe. In this case, a metal garbage can with the bottom cut out was used. The cofferdam is pounded into the surface so that a seal is formed. Water from inside the dam is then removed by hand or pump. A hole is then dug inside the cofferdam. The dam functions to simultaneously prevent the wave action of the lake from ¿ lling in the hole while providing a clean view of the subsurface characteristics of the test probe. The spoil is water screened through 1/4” hardware cloth using lake water in order to determine the presence or absence of cultural debris. After examination of the stratigraphy and inspection of the screen contents the cofferdam is removed and the test pit is ¿ lled in. Depths of excavation vary, ranging from 50-100 centimeters depending on soil conditions. Soil Core Testing Soil core testing is conducted to determine whether the soil in an area is disturbed. The method entails pressing a soil tube into the ground to extract a columnar soil sample. The column is cleaned with a sharp trowel to provide a clean pro¿ le, and an assesment on the integrity of the soil stratigraphy is made. If the area is determined to be undisturbed, shovel probe testing is conducted. Otherwise, observations on the types of disturbances are noted. Great Lakes Archaeological Research Center Report of Investigations No. 776 21 Part IV: Results of Archives and Literature Research Archival and literature research was conducted to document all archaeological and burial sites within one mile of the the Koshkonong Experimental Project. A total of thirty-six sites are located within one mile of the project area (Table 4.1; Figure 4.1). Two sites are coincident with the KEP area. Wounded Vertebrae Burial The Wounded Vertebrae Burial Site (47JE0916, BJE0031) consists of a pre-contact burial. The skeleton had a projectile point lodged in a vertebra. This site is on the northeast shore of Lake Koshkonong on a former gravel pit near Lake Koshkonong. UWM Collector KS-5 The UWM Collector KS-5 (47JE0782, BJE0223) consists of an isolated ¿ nd of a human bone found eroding out of a narrow sand ridge. The site is located approximately 350 feet south of the southern terminus of Lamp Road and 600 feet west of Mud Lake. 22 Great Lakes Archaeological Research Center Report of Investigations No. 776 Table 4.1 Previously recorded archaeological and burial sites within one mile of project area. Great Lakes Archaeological Research Center Report of Investigations No. 776 23 47JE0335 47JE0852 47JE0851 47JE0787 47JE0777 47JE0788 47JE0804 47JE0789 47JE0801 47JE0830 47JE079047JE0082 47JE0803 47JE0079 47JE0800 47JE0786 47JE0784 47JE0829 47JE0781 47JE0828 47JE0821 47JE0779 47JE0827 47JE0785 47JE0780 47JE0916 47JE0783 47JE0782 47JE0165 47JE0084 47JE0164 47JE0198 47JE0193 47JE0197 47JE0908 0IKIRH 4VIZMSYWP]6IGSVHIH%VGLEISPSKMGEP 7MXIW[MXLMR3RI1MPISJ0EOI Staging Area /SWLOSRSRK)\TIVMQIRXEP4VSNIGX Breakwater Brush Clearing 1IXIVW +VIEX0EOIW%VGLEISPSKMGEP6IWIEVGL Dredge Site 'IRXIV-RG4VSNIGX Fill Site Project Access *IIX 1ETTIH .YRI Previously Recorded Sites selection (EXE7SYVGIW 1%6797+7;,7+0%6' .IJJIVWSR'SYRX] Figure 4.1 Map of previously reported sites within one mile of project area. 24 Great Lakes Archaeological Research Center Report of Investigations No. 776 Part V: Results of the Phase I Archaeological Field Investigations A Phase I archaeological survey was conducted within the Koshkonong Experimental Project areas, inclusive of the dredge site, the ¿ ll and breakwater area, two machine staging areas, and the vehicular access routes (Figure 5.1). Dredge Site The dredge site area is located in T5N R13E, in the SW 1/4 of the SW 1/4 and SE 1/4 of the SW 1/4 of Section 11. The proposed dredge encompasses 2.38 acres of Lake Koshkonong. It is situated directly off the boat launch at the end of North Shore Road. No previously recorded archaeological sites were located in this area, however, underwater shovel tests were conducted in order to test the methodology for the ¿ ll and breakwater portion of the survey. A total of four shovel tests were excavated in the dredge site. No cultural material was encountered (Figure 5.2). Fill and Breakwater Area This project area is located in T5N R13E, in the S 1/2 of the NW 1/4 of the NW 1/4 of Section 13. The site is located in Lake Koshkonong, in an area where the wave action of Lake Koshkonong is washing out the land separating it from Mud Lake. Shovel tests were conducted at 15 meter intervals within the ¿ ll area. The areas adjacent to the shore were not tested due to riprap impediments. A total of forty-six shovel tests were conducted. No cultural material was encountered (Figure 5.3). Machine Staging Areas The KEP includes two potential heavy machinery staging areas. One is located in a landscaped park in T5N R13E, in the SW 1/4 of the NE 1/4 of the SE 1/4 of section 11. This area was soil cored and determined to be disturbed by the placement of thick strata of gravel, ¿ ll, and sod over the surface. Heavy machinery staging in this area should not disturb any potentially intact soils located under the ¿ ll layers. The second potential heavy machinery staging area is located in a gravel parking lot in T5N R13E, in the NW 1/4 of the NW 1/4 of the NW 1/4 of Section 13. The area was visually inspected and determined to be disturbed by the construction of a gravel lot. A shovel test could not be conducted through the gravel due to thick layering and compression. Heavy machinery staging in this area should not disturb any potentially intact soils located under the gravel layer (Figure 5.4, Figure 5.5). Vehicular Access Route A potential vehicular access route between the second staging area and the ¿ ll site was shovel tested. This area consists of seasonally wet woodland and a wetland located in T5N R13E, in the W 1/2 of the NW 1/4 of Section 13. The route chosen for testing is coincident with an existing two track dirt trail leading from the gravel parking lot of staging area two to a thick wetland. At the junction of the two track and the wetland, the most direct route was taken though the wetland to the northern terminus of the ¿ ll site. The southern half of the route is within the boundary of burial site 47JE0782/ BJE0223. The northern section of the route was shovel tested at ten meter intervals. The area within the burial site and the woodland was shovel tested at ¿ ve meter intervals, while the area within the burial site and the marsh was shovel tested at ten meter intervals. A total of forty-six shovel tests were conducted. No cultural material was encountered (Figure 5.6 and Figure 5.7). Great Lakes Archaeological Research Center Report of Investigations No. 776 25 47JE0780 47JE0916 47JE0783 47JE0782 0IKIRH 0EOI/SWLOSRSRK)\TIVMQIRXEP Previously Recorded Sites 4VSNIGX%VIEW Shovel Tested Access Route 1IXIVW +VIEX0EOIW%VGLEISPSKMGEP6IWIEVGL Dredge Site 'IRXIV-RG4VSNIGX Breakwater 1ETTIH 3GXSFIV Fill Site *IIX ! Construction Staging Area (EXE7SYVGIW 1%6797+7;,7+0%6' .IJJIVWSR'SYRX] Figure 5.1 The location of survey areas for the Lake Koshkonong Experimental Project. 26 Great Lakes Archaeological Research Center Report of Investigations No. 776 Figure 5.2 Shovel testing the dredge site. Figure 5.3 Shovel testing the fill site. Great Lakes Archaeological Research Center Report of Investigations No. 776 27 Figure 5.4 Shovel testing the vehicular access route. Figure 5.5 Overview of staging area 2. 28 Great Lakes Archaeological Research Center Report of Investigations No. 776 Figure 5.6 Testing staging area 1. Figure 5. 7 Vehicular access route after survey. Great Lakes Archaeological Research Center Report of Investigations No. 776 29 Part IV: Summary and Recommendations In September and October of 2011, Great Lakes Archaeological Research Center (GLARC) conducted Phase I archaeological investigations for the Koshkonong Experimental Project in Jefferson County, Wisconsin. The investigations were conducted within the area of potential effect for a dredge site, a ¿ ll site, two heavy machinery staging areas, and a vehicular access route. Archaeological investigations detailed in this document were conducted on behalf of the United States Army Corp of Engineers-Rock Island District, the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, Montgomery Associates Resource Solutions, and the Rock Koshkonong Lake District to partially ful¿ ll requirements obtaining from the execution of Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (P.L. 89-665) as amended and 36 CFR, Part 800, which serves to implement the Act. Investigations of the project areas were conducted in two stages. The ¿ rst stage consisted of a comprehensive archival and literature review to identify previously documented archaeological and burial sites within one mile of the project areas. The second stage of investigations consisted of archaeological survey of those portions of the project areas potentially affected by ground disturbing activities. Archaeological survey of the project areas included visual site inspection, soil coring, terrestrial shovel testing, and underwater shovel testing. No archaeological sites, cultural materials, or historic properties were identi¿ ed as a result of archaeological survey within any of the project areas. As such, it is recommended that the proposed project developments will not adversely affect the cultural resource base of the project area. These results notwithstanding, it should be noted that current conventional archaeological survey techniques are inadequate to determine the presence of deeply buried archaeological or paleontological deposits. Though the probability is unlikely, in the event that archaeological or paleontological materials are encountered during the course of the project, all construction in the area of the discovery should be halted. If archaeological or paleontological materials are encountered immediate consultation to insure compliance with (1) 36 CFR 800.11, The Regulations of the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation Governing the 106 Process; or (2) S. 44.40, Wis. Stats, may be obtained by contacting: The Compliance Section Historic Preservation Division State Historical Society of Wisconsin Phone #: 608-262-2970 If human remains are encountered immediate consultation to insure compliance with S. 157.70, Wis. Stats may be obtained by contacting: The Burial Sites Preservation Office Historic Preservation Division State Historical Society of Wisconsin Phone #: 1-800-342-7834 30 Great Lakes Archaeological Research Center Report of Investigations No. 776 Great Lakes Archaeological Research Center Report of Investigations No. 776 31 References Cited Arzigian, Constance 1987 The Emergence of Horticultural Economies in Southwestern Wisconsin. In Emergent Horticultural Economies of the Eastern Woodlands, edited by W. F. Keegan. Occasional Paper No. 7. Southern Illinois University at Carbondale, Center for Archaeological Investigations, Carbondale, Illinois. Barrett, Samuel A. 1933 Ancient Aztalan. Bulletin of the Public Museum of the City of Milwaukee XIII, Milwaukee. Birmingham, Robert, and Amy Rosebrough 2000 On the Meaning of the Effigy Mounds. Paper presented at the 65th Annual Meeting of the Society for American Archaeology, Philadelphia, PA. Boszhardt, Robert F., James L. Theler, and Thomas F. Kehoe 1986 The Early Woodland Stage. The Wisconsin Archeologist 67(3-4):243-262. Chamberlin, Thomas C. 1877 Geology of Wisconsin—Survey of 1873-1877. Volumes I-V. Published under the direction of the Chief Geologist by the Commissioners of Public Printing, Madison. Curtis, John T. 1959 The Vegetation of Wisconsin-An Ordination of Plant Communities. The University of Wisconsin Press, Madison. Curtis, John T. and H.C. Greene 1949 A Study of the Relic Wisconsin Prairies by Species-Presence Method. Ecology. 30: 83-92. Dirst, Victoria 1988 Research in Pursuit of the Past in Governor Nelson State Park, Dane County, Wisconsin. Bureau of Parks and Recreation, Department of Natural Resources, State of Wisconsin, Publication No. PR502. 1995 Stockbridge Harbor: A Late Woodland Village on Lake Winnebago. Bureau of Property Management, Department of Natural Resources, Madison. Esarey, Duane 1986 Red Ochre Mound Building and Marion Phase Associations: A Fulton County, Illinois Perspective. In Early Woodland Archaeology, edited by K. Farnsworth and T. Emerson, pp. 231-243. Center for American Archaeology Press, Kampsville. Foley, Betsy 1983 Green Bay: Gateway to the Great Waterway. Winsdor Publications, Woodland Hills, CA. Finley, Robert W. 1976 Geography of Wisconsin, A Content Outline. College Printing & Publishing, Madison. 32 Great Lakes Archaeological Research Center Report of Investigations No. 776 Freeman, J. E. 1966 Price Site III, Ri4, A Burial Ground in Richland County, Wisconsin. The Wisconsin Archeologist 47(2):33-87. Goldstein, Lynn G. 1992 The Southeastern Wisconsin Archaeology Project: 1991-1992. Report of Investigations 112. University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee Archaeological Research Laboratory, Milwaukee. Goldstein, Lynne. 1995. The Southeastern Wisconsin Archaeology Program: 1994-95. UW-Milwaukee ROI #125. Green, William, and Shirley Schermer 1988 The Turkey River Mound Group (13CT1). In Archaeological and Paleoenvironmental Studies in the Turkey River Valley, Northeastern Iowa, edited by W. Green. Office of the State Archaeologist, University of Iowa Press, Iowa City. Hall, Robert L. 1962 The Archaeology of Carcajou Point. 2 vols. University of Wisconsin Press, Madison. Hole, Francis D. 1976 The Soils of Wisconsin. The University of Wisconsin Press, Madison. Hoyt, J. W. 1860 Natural Resources of Wisconsin. Transactions of the Wisconsin State Agricultural Society 6:46- 49. Hurley, William M. 1975 An Analysis of Effigy Mound Complexes in Wisconsin. Anthropological Papers No. 59, Museum of Anthropology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. Kehoe, Thomas F. 1975 Two More Dates for the Hilgen Spring Park Group. The Wisconsin Archeologist 56(4):346-347. Kellogg, L. P. 1908 The Fox Indians during the French Regime. Proceedings of the State Historical Society of Wisconsin 55:142-188. Knapp, J. G. 1871 The Native Vegetation of Wisconsin. Transactions of the Wisconsin State Horticultural Society 1:119-125. Kuehn, Steve R. 1998 New Evidence for Late Paleoindian-Early Archaic Subsistence Behavior in the Western Great Lakes. American Antiquity 63(3):457-476. Lapham, Increase A. 1852 Plants of Wisconsin. Transactions of the Wisconsin State Agricultural Society 2:375-419. Great Lakes Archaeological Research Center Report of Investigations No. 776 33 1855 The Antiquities of Wisconsin as Surveyed and Described. Smithsonian Contributions to Knowledge 4. Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C. Lippold, Lois K. 1973 Animal Resource Utilization at Wisconsin Effigy Mound Sites. The Wisconsin Archeologist 54(3):135-152. Mallam, R. Clark 1976 The Iowa Effigy Mound Manifestation: An Interpretive Model. Report No. 9. Office of the State Archaeologist, University of Iowa, Iowa City. Martin, Lawrence 1965 The Physical Geography of Wisconsin. Third Edition. University of Wisconsin Press, Madison. Mason, Carol I. 1986 The Historic Period in Wisconsin Archaeology. The Wisconsin Archeologist 67(3-4):181-206. Mason, Ronald J. 1974 Huron Island and the Island of the Poutouatamis. In Aspects of Upper Great Lakes Anthropology: Papers in Honor of Lloyd A. Wilford, edited by E. Johnson, pp. 149-156. Minnesota Historical Society, St. Paul. 1986 The PaleoIndian Tradition. The Wisconsin Archeologist 67(3-4):181-206. 1997 The PaleoIndian Tradition in Wisconsin. The Wisconsin Archeologist 78(1-2):78-110. McKern, Will C. 1928 The Neal and McClaughry Mound Group. Bulletin of the Public Museum of the City of Milwaukee 3(2). 1929 Archaeological Fieldwork in La Crosse, Vernon, and Crawford Counties. Year Book of the Public Museum of the City of Milwaukee 9:7-26. 1930 The Kletzien and Nitschke Mound Groups. Bulletin of the Public Museum of the City of Milwaukee 3(4). 1931 A Wisconsin Variant of the Hopewell Culture. Bulletin of the Public Museum of the City of Milwaukee 10(2):189-329. McKern, Will C., and Robert Ritzenthaler 1949 A Trait List of the Effigy Mound Aspect. The Wisconsin Archeologist 30(2):39-48. Meinholz, Norman, and Jennifer Kolb 1997 The Statz Site: A Late Woodland and Archaic Workshop in Dane County, Wisconsin. Report of Investigations Archaeology Research Series Number 5. Museum Archaeology Program, State Historical Society of Wisconsin, Madison. 34 Great Lakes Archaeological Research Center Report of Investigations No. 776 Munson, Patrick J. 1982 Marion, Black Sand, Morton, Havana Relationships: An Illinois Valley Perspective. The Wisconsin Archeologist 63(1):1-17. National Park Service 1983 The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards and Guidelines for Archaeology and Historic Preservation. National Park Service, Washington, DC. Overstreet, David F. 1991 Updated Paleoindian Study Unit for Region 7. The Wisconsin Archeologist 72(3-4):201-244. 1993a Chesrow: A Paleoindian Complex in the Southern Lake Michigan Basin. Great Lakes Archaeological Press, Milwaukee. 1993b McCauley, Astor, and Hanson – Candidates for the Provisional Dandy Phase. The Wisconsin Archeologist 74(1-4):120-197. 1997 Oneota Prehistory and History. The Wisconsin Archeologist 78(1/2):250-296. Paull, Rachell Krebs, and Richard A. Paull 1977 Geology of Wisconsin and Upper Michigan—Including Parts of Adjacent States. Kendal Hunt Publishing Company, Dubuque, IA. Peet, Stephen D. 1890 Prehistoric America—Vol. 2, Emblematic Mounds and Animal Effigies. American Antiquarian Office, Chicago. Perrot, Nicolas 1911 Memoir on the Manners, Customs, and Religion of the Savages of North America. In Indian Tribes of the Upper Mississippi Valley and Region of the Great Lakes, edited by E. H. Blair, pp. 31-272. Pleger, Thomas C. 1998 Social Complexity, Trade and Subsistence During the Archaic/Woodland Transition in the Western Great Lakes (4000-400 B.C.): A Diachronic Study of Copper-Using Cultures at the Oconto and Riverside Cemeteries. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Anthropology, University of Wisconsin-Madison. Quimby, G. I. 1966 Indian Culture and European Trade Goods. University of Wisconsin Press, Madison. Richards, John D. 1992 Ceramics and Culture at Aztalan, A Late Prehistoric Village in Southeast Wisconsin. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Anthropology, University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee. Ritzenthaler, Robert E. 1957 The Osceola Site: An “Old Copper” Site Near Potosi, Wisconsin. The Wisconsin Archeologist 38(4):186-203. Great Lakes Archaeological Research Center Report of Investigations No. 776 35 Ritzenthaler, Robert E., and George I. Quimby 1962 The Red Ochre Culture of the Upper Great Lakes and Adjacent States. Fieldiana Anthropology 36(11):243-275. Rowe, Chandler 1956 The Effigy Mound Culture in Wisconsin. Milwaukee Public Museum Publications in Anthropology No. 3., Milwaukee, Wisconsin. Ruggles, D. 1835 Geological an dmiscellaneous notice of the region around Fort Winnebago, Michigan Territory American Journal of Science. 30:1. Rusch, Lynn A. 1988 The Early and Late Woodland Occupations at the Bachmann site in Eastcentral Wisconsin. State Historical Society of Wisconsin. Salkin, Philip H. 1986 The Lake Farms Phase: The Early Woodland Stage as Seen from the Lake Farms Archaeological District. In Early Woodland Archeology, edited by K. Farnsworth and T. Emerson, pp. 92-120. Center for American Archaeology Press, Kampsville, IL. 1987 Archaeological Mitigation Excavations at Fox Lake, Dodge County, Wisconsin. Report of Investigations 500. Archaeological Consulting and Services, Verona, WI. 1993 Mitigation Excavations in the Kekoskee Archaeological District in Dodge County, pp. 75-79. Report of Investigations 700. Archaeological Consulting and Services, Verona, WI. Salzer, Robert J. 1974 The Wisconsin North Lakes Project: A Preliminary Report. In Aspects of Upper Great Lakes Anthropology-Essays in Honor of Lloyd A. Wilford, edited by E. Johnson, pp. 40-54. Publications of the Minnesota Historical Society, St. Paul. Smith, W.R. 1837 Observations on the Wisconsin Territory; chiefly on that part called the “Wisconsin Land District.” EL Carey and A. Hart, Philadelpha, . Stevenson, Katherine, Robert F. Bozhardt, Charles R. Moffat, Philip H. Salkin, Thomas C. Pleger, James L. Theler, and Constance Arzigian 1997 The Woodland Tradition. The Wisconsin Archeologist 78(1-2):140-201. Stoltman, James B. 1986 The Archaic Tradition. The Wisconsin Archeologist 67(3-4):207-238. 1990 The Woodland Tradition in the Prairie Du Chien Locality. In The Woodland Tradition in the Western Great Lakes: Papers Presented to Elden Johnson., edited by G. Gibbon. Publications in Anthropology No. 4. University of Minnesota, Minneapolis. 36 Great Lakes Archaeological Research Center Report of Investigations No. 776 1991 A Reconsideration of Fluted Point Diversity in Wisconsin. The Wisconsin Archeologist 72(3- 4):245-264. 1997 The Archaic Tradition. The Wisconsin Archeologist 78(1/2):112-139. Stoltman, James B., and George W. Christiansen 2000 The Late Woodland Stage in the Driftless Area of the Upper Mississippi Valley. In Late Woodland Societies, edited by D. McElrath, T. Emerson, and A. Fortier, pp. 497-524. University of Nebraska Press, Lincoln. Stoltman, James B., and Karen Workman 1969 A Preliminary Study of Wisconsin Fluted Points. The Wisconsin Archeologist 50(4):189-214. Storck, Peter L. 1974 Some Aspects of Effigy Mound Subsistence and Settlement Patterns During the Late Woodland Period in Wisconsin. Arctic Anthropology 11:272-279. Theler, James L. 1987 Woodland Tradition Economic Strategies. Report of the Office of the State Archaeologist 117. University of Iowa, Iowa City. Thomas, Cyrus 1894 Report on the Mound Explorations of the Bureau of Ethnology. Annual Report 12, Bureau of American Ethnology, Washington, DC. Van Langen, H., and T. F. Kehoe 1971 Hilgen Spring Park Mound Group. The Wisconsin Archeologist 52(1):1-19. Wisconsin Archaeological Survey Guidelines Committee 1997 Guidelines for Public Archaeology in Wisconsin, as Revised. Wisconsin Archaeological Survey, Madison. Wittry, W. L. 1957 A Preliminary Study of the Old Copper Complex. The Wisconsin Archeologist 38(4):204-221. 1963 The Bell Site, Wn 9: An Early Historic Fox Village. The Wisconsin Archeologist 44(1):1-58. Great Lakes Archaeological Research Center Report of Investigations No. 776 37 Appendix A: Permission from the Wisconsin Historical Society for the Uncatalogued Burial Sites 38 Great Lakes Archaeological Research Center Report of Investigations No. 776 Great Lakes Archaeological Research Center Report of Investigations No. 776 39 40 Great Lakes Archaeological Research Center Report of Investigations No. 776 Great Lakes Archaeological Research Center Report of Investigations No. 776 41 Appendix B: Bibligraphy of Archaeological Report Form 42 Great Lakes Archaeological Research Center Report of Investigations No. 776 Great Lakes Archaeological Research Center Report of Investigations No. 776 43 BIBLIOGRAPHY OF ARCHAEOLOGICAL REPORT FORM WHS/SHSW # COUNTY: Jefferson AUTHORS: Richard H. Kubicek REPORT TITLE: Archaeological Investigations for the Lake Koshkonong Experimental Project, Jefferson County, Wisconsin DATE OF REPORT (MONTH AND YEAR): November 2011 SERIES/NUMBER: ROI 776 PLACE OF PUBLICATION: Great Lakes Archaeological Research Center, Milwaukee, WI LOCATIONAL INFORMATION [LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF SURVEY AREA (T-R-S)] T5N R13E Section 11 and 13 U.S.G.S. QUAD MAP(S): Busseyville SITE(S) INVESTIGATED: 47JE0916 and 47JE0782 ACRES INVESTIGATED: 4.43 AGENCY # U.S. Army Corp of Engineers INVESTIGATION TECHNIQUES COMPLETED (Check all that apply.) Avocational Survey Chance Encounter Controlled Surface Collection Faunal Analysis Floral Analysis Geomorphology Historical Research Interview/Informant Land Use History Literature Background Research Major Excavation Mechanical Stripping Monitoring Osteological Analysis Phase I-Surface Survey Phase II Phase II-Corridor Only Phase III Phase III-Corridor Only Records/Background Records/Background (Pred. Model) Remote Sensing Shovel Testing/Probing (Inten) Soil Core Surface Survey (Intensive) Test Excavation Traditional Knowledge Vandalism Walk Over (Reconnaissance) Unknown Other: Underwater Shovel Testing ABSTRACT Included in report Written in space below In September and October of 2011, Great Lakes Archaeological Research Center (GLARC) conducted Phase I archaeological investigations for an Experimental Project in Lake Koshkonong, Stinkers Bay, in Jefferson County, Wisconsin. These investigations were conducted within the area of potential effect for several project areas including: a proposed dredge cut site, a fill location, two heavy machinery staging areas, and heavy machinery access routes. The project area is coincident with two uncatalogued burial sites, 47JE0782 and 47JE0916. Archaeological survey of the project areas included shovel probe testing and cofferdam testing in underwater areas. No archaeological sites, cultural materials, or historic properties were identified as a result of archaeological survey within the project areas. Office of the State Archaeologist &%6CCCCCCCCCCC