A CULTURAL RESOURCES INVENTORY OF PORTIONS OF SULPHUR SPRINGS VALLEY AND SAN BERNARDINO VALLEY IN COCHISE COUNTY, ARIZONA
Prepared by: Mary Lou Heuett Principal Investigator
Ronald P. Maldonado Project Director
Submitted to: Jim Sober, Line Extension Supervisor Sulphur Springs Valley Electric Cooperative, Inc. P.O. Box 820 Willcox, Arizona 85644
October 1990
Technical Series No. 21 ABSTRACT
A Class III (100% coverage) survey of 58 miles of a 60- and 120-foot-wide right-of-way corridor was conducted by Cultural & Environmental Systems, Inc. (C&ES) for Sulphur Springs Valley Electric Cooperative, Inc. (SSVEC), to assess and record new and previously recorded archaeological sites within and adjacent to the project area as part of SSVEC's planning effort for the proposed right-of-way (Phases A through C). The 436-acre project area, located approximately 7 miles to 15 miles north and east of Douglas, Arizona, in Cochise County, is comprised of private land and land under the jurisdiction of the Arizona State Land Department. The State Land application number for the project is 29-98250; the noncollection survey was conducted under General Permit No. 89-68 issued by the Arizona State Museum (ASM) in Tucson. Legally, the project area is located in Cochise County on nine U.S.G.S. 7.5 Minute quadrangle maps: Leslie Canyon, Arizona (portions of Sections 13, 16-18, 20, 24, 25, and 36 in T21S, R27E and R28E, and Sections 1, 12, 13, and 24 in T22S, R27E and R28E, and Sections 16-18 and 20 in T22S, R28E); Pedregosa Mountains West, Arizona (portions of Sections 15, 16, 21, 22, 26-28, and 33-35 in T21S, R28E); Douglas NE, Arizona (portions of Sections 24, 25, and 36 in T22S, R27E, and Sections 1 and 12 in T23S, R27E, and Sections 7-9 in T23S, R28E); College Peaks, Arizona (portions of Sections 9, 10, and 13-15 in T23S, R28E, and Sections 17, 18, 20-22, and 27 in T23S, R29E); Cinder Hills, Arizona (portions of Sections 13, 18, and 24-27 in T23S, R29E, and Sections 28-30 and 34 in T23S, R30E, and Section 3 in T24S, R30E); San Bernardino Ranch, Arizona--Sonora (portions of Sections 2 and 11 in T24S, R29E, and Sections 3, 10, 11, and 15 in T24S, R30E); West of Guadalupe Canyon, Arizona--Sonora (portions of Sections 5-7 and 12 in T24S, R30E); Lazy J Ranch, Arizona (portions of Sections 12-14, 22, 23, 28, 29, 32, and 33 in T23S, R31E, and Sections 6 and 7 in T23S, R32E, and Sections 3-5 in T24S, R31E); and Guadalupe Spring, New Mexico--Arizona (portions of Section 32 in T22S, R32E, and Sections 5- 8 in T23S, R32E).
The results of the records search at the ASM were positive; 15 previously recorded sites were located adjacent to or within the right-of-way. C&ES surveyed 100 percent of the right-of-way (Phases A through C). The archaeological teams walked the corridor in parallel transects spaced at 20-meter intervals. Located were 7 historic sites (AZ FF:6:20, AZ FF:6:21, AZ FF:10:19, AZ FF:11:4, AZ FF:11:69, AZ FF:11:70, and AZ FF:11:71), 13 prehistoric sites (AZ FF:6:22, AZ FF:11:17, AZ FF:11:37, AZ FF:11:72, AZ FF:11:73, AZ FF:11:74, AZ FF:11:75, AZ FF:11:76, AZ FF:11:77, AZ FF:11:78, AZ FF:11:79, AZ FF:11:80, and AZ FF:12:30), and 29 isolates. (A prehistoric site, AZ FF:12:27, was located adjacent to the right-of-way.) The cultural resources identified represent at least five cultures (Hispanic, Anglo, Archaic, Mogollon, and Salado). With the exception of AZ FF:6:22, all of the recorded sites are considered to be eligible for inclusion on the National Register of Historic Places based upon criterion "d". Management recommendations are for avoidance of all sites through project redesign, movement of the right-of-way, or protection measures. A testing program, including archival research, oral interviews, detailed mapping and photo-documentation, and final report(s) is recommended for any site that will be impacted either directly or indirectly by construction of the SSVEC transmission line. Based upon the results of the testing programs, data recovery is recommended at sites where warranted.
11 TABLE OF CONTENTS
Abstract ......
List of Figures ......
List of Tables ......
Project Area Location ......
Environmental Setting ...... 3 Flora ...... 4 Fauna ...... 5 Soils ...... 5
Culture History ...... 8
Prior Research ...... 13
Methodology ...... 23
Results ...... 24 Phase A ...... 24 Sites ...... 25 Phase A Isolates ...... 25 Phase B ...... 25 Sites ...... 26 Phase B Isolates ...... 32 Phase C ...... 34 Sites ...... 34 Phase C Isolates ...... 35 Phase C Alternate Right-of-Way ...... 35 Cultural Features Outside the Right-of-Way ...... 35 Windmills and Cisterns ...... 35 Cottonwood Creek School ...... 36 Summary ...... 36
Recommendations ...... 39 AZ FF:6:21 ...... 40 AZ FF:6:22 ...... 40 AZ FF:10:19 ...... 42 AZ FF:11:4 ...... 42 AZ FF:11:17 ...... 43 AZ FF:11:37 ...... 43 AZ FF:11:69 ...... 44 AZ FF:11:70 ...... 44 AZ FF:11:71 ...... 45 AZ FF:11:72 ...... 46 AZ FF:11:73 ...... 46 AZ FF:11:74 ...... 47
111 Table of Contents (continued)
AZ FF:11:75 ...... 47 AZ FF:11:76 ...... 48 AZ FF:11:77 ...... 48 AZ FF:11:78 ...... 49 AZ FF:11:79 ...... 49 AZ FF:11:80 ...... 50 AZ FF:12:30 ...... 50 AZ FF:6:20 ...... 51 National Register of Historic Places Eligibility ...... 51 Isolates ...... 51
Appendix A ...... 53
Appendix B ...... 83
References ...... 85
iv LIST OF FIGURES
1. Project area location...... 54
2. Leslie Canyon Quadrangle. Location of Phases A through C right-of-way corridors with AZ FF:6:20, AZ FF:6:21, AZ FF:6:22, and isolates...... 55
3. Pedregosa Mountains West Quadrangle. Location of Phase C (eastern portion of right-of-way corridor)...... 56
4. Douglas NE Quadrangle. Location of Phase B right-of-way corridor and AZ FF:10:19 ...... 57
5. College Peaks Quadrangle. Location of Phase B right-of-way corridor with sites and isolates...... 58
6. Cinder Hill Quadrangle. Location of Phase B right-of-way corridor and isolates...... 59
7. San Bernardino Ranch Quadrangle. Location of Phase B right-of-way corridor with sites and isolates...... 60
8. West of Guadalupe Canyon Quadrangle. Location of Phase B right-of-way corridor...... 61
9. Lazy J Ranch Quadrangle. Location of Phase B right-of-way corridor and isolate...... 62
10. Guadalupe Spring Quadrangle. Location of Phase B right-of-way corridor, AZ FF:12:27, AZ FF:12:30, and isolate...... 63
11. AZ FF:6:21 (SSVEC-13)...... 64
12. AZ FF:6:22 (Isolate #1)...... 65
13. AZ FF:10:19 (SSVEC-1)...... 66
14. AZ FF:11:69 (SSVEC-2)...... 67
15. AZ FF:11:70 (SSVEC-3)...... 68
16. AZ FF:11:71 (SSVEC-4)...... 69
17. AZ FF:11:72 (SSVEC-5)...... 70
18. AZ FF:11:73 (SSVEC-9)...... 71
19. AZ FF:11:73 (SSVEC-9), a milling station...... 72
V List of Figures (continued)
20. AZ FF:11:74 (SSVEC-7)...... 73
21. AZ FF:11:75 (SSVEC-10)...... 74
22. AZ FF:11:76 (SSVEC-11)...... 75
23. AZ FF:11:77 (SSVEC-12)...... 76
24. AZ FF:11:78 (Isolate #10)...... 77
25. AZ FF:11:79 (Isolate #12)...... 78
26. AZ FF:11:80 (Isolate #13)...... 79
27. AZ FF:11:17 (SSVEC-6)...... 80
28. AZ FF:12:30 (SSVEC-8)...... 81
vi LIST OF TABLES
1. List of Plants Identified in the Project Area ...... 6
2. Prior Surveys in the Project Area ...... 14
3. Archaeological Sites within a Mile of the Project Area ...... 15
4. Cochise College 1985 Survey ...... 22
5. Summary of Sites by Phase ...... 37
6. Summary of Site-Specific Recommendations and National Register Eligibility ...... 41
vii A CULTURAL RESOURCES INVENTORY OF PORTIONS OF SULPHUR SPRINGS VALLEY AND SAN BERNARDINO VALLEY IN COCHISE COUNTY, ARIZONA
A cultural resources inventory of 58 miles of a 60- and 120-foot-wide right- of-way corridor located north and east of Douglas, Arizona (see Figure 1 in Appendix A) was conducted by Cultural and Environmental Systems, Inc. (C&ES), for Sulphur Springs Valley Electric Cooperative, Inc. (SSVEC), from September 7 through September 21 and on October 26, 1990. The project area is comprised of 436 acres of both private property and land administered by the State Land Department. The State Land application number for the SSVEC project is 29-98250. The archaeological noncollection survey was conducted under General Permit No. 89-68 issued by the Arizona State Museum (ASM), Tucson, Arizona.
The cultural resources inventory was conducted to (1) identify and locate areas covered by previous surveys within and near the project area, (2) locate and assess previously recorded archaeological sites in or near the project area, and (3) locate and record new and previously unknown archaeological sites in or adjacent to the project area.
This report presents the results of the literature and records search and the Class III (100% coverage) archaeological survey and is divided into seven sections, consisting of project area location, environmental setting, culture history, prior research, methodology, results, and recommendations.
Project Area Location
The transmission line project consists of 58 miles of a 60- .and 120-foot-wide right-of-way corridor that is divided into three phases--A, B, and C. Phase A is a 6- mile-long corridor, 60 feet wide; Phase B is a 47-mile-long corridor, 60 feet wide and 120 feet wide; and Phase C and its alternate route are a 5-mile-long corridor, 60-feet wide.
The entire project area is located approximately 7 miles to 15 miles north and east of Douglas, Arizona. Portions of the right-of-way corridors, Phases A through C, parallel Leslie Canyon and Davis roads, Highway 80, and Geronimo Trail. In addition, the right-of-way corridor transects and/or parallels various private ranch and El Paso Natural Gas Company line roads (see Figures 2-10 in Appendix A). Legally, the project area is located in Cochise County, Arizona, on nine U.S.G.S. 7.5 Minute quadrangle maps:
1. Leslie Canyon, Arizona (Provisional Edition 1986) Township 21 South, Range 27 East and Range 28 East portions of Sections 13, 16, 17, 18, 20, 24, 25, and 36 Township 22 South, Range 27 East and Range 28 East portions of Sections 1, 12, 13, and 24
1 2
Township 22 South, Range 28 East portions of Sections 16, 17, 18, and 20
2, Pedregosa Mountains West, Arizona (Provisional Edition 1986) Township 21 South, Range 28 East portions of Sections 15, 16, 21, 22, 26, 27, 28, 33, 34, and 35
3. Douglas NE, Arizona (photorevised 1978) Township 22 South, Range 27 East portions of Sections 24, 25, and 36 Township 23 South, Range 27 East portions of Sections 1 and 12 Township 23 South, Range 28 East portions of Sections 7, 8, and 9
4. College Peaks, Arizona (Provisional Edition 1985) Township 23 South, Range 28 East portions of Sections 9, 10, 13, 14, and 15 Township 23 South, Range 29 East portions of Sections 17, 18, 20, 21, 22, and 27
5. Cinder Hills, Arizona (Provisional Edition 1985) Township 23 South, Range 29 East portions of Sections 13, 18, 24, 25, 26, and 27 Township 23 South, Range 30 East portions of Sections 28, 29, 30, and 34 Township 24 South, Range 30 East portion of Section 3
6. San Bernardino Ranch, Arizona--Sonora (Provisional Edition 1985) Township 24 South, Range 29 East portions of Sections 2 and 11 Township 24 South, Range 30 East portions of Sections 3, 10, 11, and 15
7. West of Guadalupe Canyon, Arizona--Sonora (Provisional Edition 1985) Township 24 South, Range 30 East portions of Sections 5, 6, 7, and 12
8. Lazy J Ranch, Arizona (Provisional Edition 1985) Township 23 South, Range 31 East portions of Sections 12, 13, 14, 22, 23, 28, 29, 32, and 33 Township 23 South, Range 32 East portions of Sections 6 and 7 Township 24 South, Range 31 East portions of Sections 3, 4, and 5
9. Guadalupe Spring, New Mexico--Arizona (Provisional Edition 1985) Township 22 South, Range 32 East portions of Section 32 3
Township 23 South, Range 32 East portions of Sections 5, 6, 7, and 8
Environmental Setting
The project area (Phases A through C) bisects from west to east the southeastern edge of the Sulphur Springs Valley, portions of the Swisshelm Mountains, Pedregosa Mountains, and Perilla Mountains to San Bernardino Valley (San Bernardino volcanic field), and portions of the bajadas of the Peloncillo and Guadalupe ranges. The latter two mountain ranges continue into New Mexico and south into Sonora, Mexico (see Figures 1-10 in Appendix A).
During the Pleistocene, the Sulphur Springs Valley contained Lake Cochise, a 20-mile-long lake fed by streams from the adjoining mountain ranges (Chiricahua, Dos Cabezas, Pinalerio, Winchester, Dragoon, and Little Dragoons). The modern Willcox Playa is the remnant of prehistoric Lake Cochise. The Sulphur Springs Valley is underlain by precambrian granite with subsequent layers of sedimentary gravels and sands. In places, the pediment and the valley granites are cemented by caliche. The Swisshelm Mountains consist of precambrian granite and escabrosa limestone that cover cretaceous volcanic rocks (Chronic 1983:102-105). Castle Dome, near the northeastern portion of the project (Phase A), is a large volcanic plug that separates the Pedregosa and Swisshelm mountain ranges. The Pedregosa range has a geologic make-up similar to that of the Swisshelm range.
The San Bernardino Valley and its volcanic field are bordered on the west by the Pedregosa and Chiricahua mountains and on the east by the Peloncillo range. The valley is a graben--a long, down-dropped valley bounded by two parallel faults (Chronic 1983:102-105). The San Bernardino volcanic field consists of grass-covered cinder cones and some rnaar craters--broad, shallow, low profile craters resulting from steam explosions (Chronic 1983:104). Small flows emerge from the bases of the cinder cones, but have been largely obscured by erosion and the alluvial filling of the valley. Several of the cinder cones have been mined for commercial purposes, and their original size and shape have been obliterated. Geological drilling in the valley floor indicates that lava flows make up a large portion of the San Bernardino Valley fill.
Drainages from the Sulphur Springs Valley east to the San Bernardino Valley consist of secondary ephemeral drainages fed by runoff from the bajadas of the Swisshelm, Pedregosa, Perilla, and Peloncillo mountains. Springs and artesian lakes are found in both valleys. Leslie Creek and Mud Springs Creek flow west into the Sulphur Springs Valley from the Swisshelm and Pedregosa mountains. Numerous tertiary, unnamed, wet weather drainages flow west from these two ranges through the project area and crosscut Leslie Canyon and Davis roads. An unnamed secondary drainage flows through Hog Canyon in Phase B of the project. Five windmills and tanks are located along its course. Some ripiarian vegetation is present near the margin of this creek where standing water is present. Seven secondary drainages bisect and drain the San Bernardino Valley. These are Wildcat Wash, Silver Creek (which is fed by Deadman's Wash, Danger Wash, and Hackberry Wash), Indian Creek, 4
Black Draw, Cottonwood Creek, Sycamore Creek, and Hay Hallow Wash. All seven streams converge to form the Rio San Bernardino in Sonora, Mexico.
Flora
The project is located in the Apachian Biotic Province that encompasses southeastern Arizona; southwestern New Mexico; northeastern Sonora, Mexico; and northwestern Chihuahua, Mexico. The province is characterized by grassy high plains and mountains (Dice 1943). Brown and Lowe (1980) divide the province into four biotic formations: Grassland Formation (semidesert grassland), Desertscrub Formation (Chihuahuan desertscrub), Woodland Formation (Madrean evergreen woodland), and Forest Formation (Petran Montane-Conifer Forest). Pertinent to the discussion of the project area are the semidesert grassland and Chihuahuan desertscrub plant communities. The Chihuahuan desert is represented in Arizona by small and somewhat isolated areas in the southeastern corner of the state, primarily in Cochise County in parts of the Sulphur Springs Valley, San Bernardino Valley, San Simon Valley, and San Pedro Valley. Portions of all four valleys have well-developed plant communities dominated by tarbush (Flourensia cernua), creosote bush (Larrea divaricata), sandpaper bush (Mortonia scabella), and Chihuahuan whitethorn (Acacia constricta vernicosa). These plants represent the four major association types (Lowe 1977:2d).
In several areas, tarbush, creosote bush, and whitethorn form a mosiac of mixed species associated with all-thorn (Koeberlinia spinosa), desert sumac (Rhus microphylla), shrubby senna (Cassia wislizeni), ocotillo (Fouquieria splendens), and mesquite (Prosopis juliflora). The Chihuahuan desert is essentially a scrub desert like the Great Basin Desert. Although it comprises small areas of Arizona, New Mexico, and Texas, it is centered primarily in the states of Chihuahua and Coahuila in Mexico. In portions of Cochise County, the project area, and in adjoining New Mexico and Sonora and Chihuahua, Mexico, the desert and grassland vegetation are intermixed. Cacti in the Chihuahuan desert of southeastern Arizona are represented by several species of cholla, prickly pear, barrel, pincushion, agave, cereus, and peyote.
Grassland in Arizona is largely confined to the southeastern quarter of the state. The grasses are predominately bunch-growth perennials. The bases of the grass clumps are separated by intervening bare ground. This "patching" pattern was noted along the Leslie Canyon and Davis roads portion of the project (Phases A and B). Bunch grass predominates in portions of the project area and Cochise County as a whole. This type of grassland is commonly located between the desert and evergreen woodland and chaparral ecozones between elevations of 3500 feet and 5000 feet above mean sea level.
In areas of deep soil that are little affected by erosion, perennial grama grasses cover extensive portions of the landscape; for example, black grama (Bouteloua eriopoda), blue grama (Bouteloua gracilis), sideoats grama (Bouteloua curtipendula), slender grama (Bouteloua filiformis), and hairy grama (Bouteloua hirsuta). Other grasses that often are mixed with the grama species are plains lovegrass (Eragrostis intermedia), plains brittlegrass (Setaria machrostachaya), sand dropseed (Sporobolus cryptandrus), cottongrass (Trichachne californica), and three-awn species (Aristida sp.). 5
In shallower rocky soils on hills and slopes, the grass cover is greatly reduced due to competition with prickly pear, cholla, agave, yucca, ocotillo, fairy duster, wait- a-minute bush, catclaw, and mesquite. Sotol (Dasylirion wheeleri) and bear grass (Nolina microcarpa) are occasionally conspicuous in these grasslands. Mesquite and juniper, in addition to shrub life forms, have invaded former desert grasslands. Mesquite-juniper succession was noted along the Hog Canyon portion of the project (Phase B).
A list of major plants observed within the project area during the survey is presented in Table 1. For a complete list of plant species within the project area, see the biological report (Schroff 1990a:1-7, 1990b).
Fauna
Cochise County and the project area are located within the Eastern Plains Faunal area (Lowe 1977:97). This faunal area has geographical limits similar to the Apachian Biotic Province described above. The diverse topography, hydrology, and vegetative ecozones support a divergent population of bird, reptile, and mammal species.
During the survey of Phases A through C of the right-of-way corridor, C&ES staff observed the scat of coyote (Canis latrans), the track and scat of deer, woodrat (Neotoma sp.) nests, and the track of a mountain lion (Felis concolor). Animals actually observed were white-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus cousi) (four individuals); Western diamondback rattlesnake (Crotalus atrox) (5 individuals); black- tailed jack rabbit (Lepus californicus) (3 individuals); desert cottontail (Sylvilagus audubonii) (3 individuals); desert tortoise ( Xerobates agassizi) (2 individuals); turkey vulture (Cathartes aura) (5 individuals); mourning dove ( Zenaida macroura); white- winged dove ( Zenaida asiatica); and quail (Lophortyx sp.). For a more complete report of the fauna found in the project area, see the biological report (Schroff 1990a:1-7, 1990b).
Soils
Soils within the project area (Phases A through C) correspond to topographic features (e.g., valley floor, floodplain, bajada, foothill, and mountain) and consist of the following 12 soil associations: A3 Karro, A4 McAllister, B3 Guest, C2 White House-Tubac-Forrest, C7 Bonita-Sontag, DI Kimbrough-Cave, D4 Graham- Lampshire, D6 Mabray, D7 Krentz, El Luzena-Faraway, and E3 Tortugas.
Soil associations of the valley floor are the Karro and McAllister associations found in both the Sulphur Springs and San Bernardino valleys. The Karro Association consists of deep, well drained, lime soils with underlying layers that have more than 40 percent calcium carbonate. Slopes range from 0 percent to 15 percent. Soils are moderate to finely textured. Natural vegetation supported by these soils consists of fluffgrass, tobosa, alkali sacaton, creosote, tarbush, mesquite, and annual grasses and weeds. Deep, well drained, brown, calcareous soils with lime substrata characterize 6
Table 1
LIST OF PLANTS IDENTIFIED IN THE PROJECT AREA
Agave Agave parryi Cholla Cylindropuntia sp. Cottonwood Populus fremontii Coyote melon (Melon-loco) Apodanthera undulata Creosote Larrea tridentata Devil's claw Proboscidea althaefolia Hackberry Celtis reticulata Hedgehog cactus Echinocereus pectinatus Juniper Juniperus monosperma Mariola Parthenium incanum Mesquite Prosopis juliflora Night-blooming cereus Cereus greggi Ocotillo Fouquieria splendens Prickly pear Opuntia phaeacanta Ratany Kameria sp. Sumac Rhus microphylla Summer poppy Kallstroeirlia parviflora Tarbush Flourensia cernua Turpentine broom Thamnosma montana Whitethorn acacia Acacia constricta Yucca Yucca baccata sp. Yucca Yucca elata sp. Zinnia Zinnia pumila 7 the McAllister Association. Slopes within the assocation are 1 percent or less, and soils are fine to medium in texture. Vegetation is similar to the Karro Association, with the addition of burroweed. These associations are found at elevations between 3600 feet and 4600 feet (U.S.D.A. Soil Conservation Service 1971:4).
The Guest Association is commonly found in river bottoms and on alluvial fans in the Sulphur Springs Valley. These soils are deep, well drained, and fine textured, with slopes of 1 percent or less, and occur at elevations ranging from 4100 feet to 4700 feet. Natural vegetation includes tobosa, mesquite, and annual weeds and grasses (U.S.D.A. Soil Conservation Service 1971:6-7).
The White House-Tubac-Forrest Association is found on the valley slopes and bajadas of the project and is characterized by deep, well drained, fine textured, reddish brown soils. The subsoil and substrat contain 20 percent to 30 percent gravels with accumulation of lime at all soil levels (U.S.D.A. Soil Conservation Service 1971:8). These soils occur on slopes of 0 percent to 30 percent at elevations between 3800 feet and 5400 feet and support several species of grama grass, tobosa, three-awn grass, broomweed, and scattered mesquite and yucca. The Bonita-Sontag Association occurs in the lower end of the San Bernardino Valley at elevations between 3500 feet to 4800 feet. The soils are deep, well drained, cobbly and gravelly reddish-brown clay soils that occur on slopes from 0 percent to 5 percent. Vegetation supported by these soils include tobosa, blue grama, cane beardgrass, black grama and curly mesquite (U.S.D.A. Soil Conservation Service 1971:10).
The project crosscuts a series of foothill soils. The Kimbrough-Cave Association consists of shallow, well drained soils of medium texture that overlay lime-cemented hardpan, limestone hills, or conglomerate. This association occurs at elevations between 4000 feet to 5200 feet on slopes of 0 percent to 25 percent and in limited areas up to 60 percent. The dominate vegetation supported by this association is creosote-tarbush-whitethorn. Other vegetation present in varying density are grama grass species, guajillo, yucca, and mesquite (U.S.D.A. Soil Conservation Service 1971:11).
Steep to moderately steep, shallow, cobbly and gravelly soils over andesitic and rhyolitic bedrock characterize the Graham-Lampshire Association. These soils occur on isolated cone-shaped hills or on hills bordering steeper mountain ranges with slopes of 15 percent to 30 percent at elevations ranging from 4000 feet to 5500 feet. Annual grasses (grama), tanglehead, cane beardgrass, bush muhly, ocotillo, and scattered patches of yucca and mesquite are supported by these soils (U.S.D.A. Soil Conservation Service 1971:12).
The Mabray Association consists of shallow, cobbly and gravelly soils that are high in calcium carbonate. Rock outcrops make up approximately 15 percent to 30 percent of the association. These soils occur at elevations between 4000 feet and 5000 feet on slopes of 15 percent to 30 percent. Grama grass species and fluffgrass with varying quantities of juniper and ocotillo are supported by these soils (U.S.D.A. Soil Conservation Service 1971:13).
Shallow, dark grayish brown, cobbly and gravelly b arns over volcanic cinder characterize soils of the Krentz Association. These soils occur in the lower San Bernardino Valley area on slopes of 0 percent to 30 percent at elevations from 4000 8
feet to 5000 feet within the valley. Small cinder cones also occur in this association. Tobosa, curly mesquite, and side-oats grama are the predominate species. Mountain soils within the project area are shallow, cobbly soils over andesite, rhyolite, or limestone substrates (U.S.D.A. Soil Conservation Service 1971:13-14).
The Luzena-Faraway Association consists of well drained, shallow, cobbly and gravelly soils over andesitic and rhyolitic bedrock. These soils occur on slopes of 30 percent to 60 percent at elevations of 5500 feet to 9800 feet. Vegetation below 6200 feet is an oak-juniper overstory of annual grasses, whereas above 6200 feet, the overstory is pine-oak with an abundance of juniper, locust, and annual grasses (U.S.D.A. Soil Conservation Service 1971:15).
The Tortugas Association is characterized by shallow, cobbly, stony b arns over limestone bedrock. Rock outcrops make up 20 percent to 35 percent of this unit, with bedrock within 20 inches of the present ground surface. These soils are found on slopes of 30 percent to 60 percent between elevations of 5000 feet to 9800 feet. Like the Luzena-Faraway Association, the natural vegetation corresponds to elevational changes, with oak-juniper and grama grass species below 6200 feet and pine-oak, juniper, and locust above 6200 feet (U.S.D.A. Soil Conservation Service 1971:16).
Sites AZ FF:6:21 and AZ FF:6:22 are located in the Kimbrough-Cave Association, whereas AZ FF:6:20, the southern end of the Swisshelm Mountains is part of the Tortugas Association. The historic sites (AZ FF:10:19, AZ FF:11:69, AZ FF:11:70, and AZ FF:11:71) are situated in the White House-Tubac-Forrest and Kimbrough-Cave associations. Many of the farms and ranches in the Sulphur Springs Valley are located within these soil associations.
The Luzena-Faraway and Kimbrough-Cave associations are found in the upper bajada of the Perilla Mountains, Hog Canyon, Silver Creek, and Wildcat Wash areas. The occupants of AZ FF:11:72, AZ FF:11:73, AZ FF:11:74, AZ FF:11:75, AZ FF:11:76, AZ FF:11:77, AZ FF:11:78, AZ FF:11:79, and AZ FF:11:80 utilized the metavolcanic cobbles and rock from these associations for both chipped and ground tools.
Sites AZ FF:11:4, AZ FF:11:17, and AZ FF:11:37 are located within the Karro and Bonita-Sontag associations. The tools, ground stone, and bedrock milling features at AZ FF:11:17 reflect the use of local lithic resources by both the Archaic and Salado occupants of the site.
AZ FF:12:27 and AZ FF:12:30 are located within the Luzena-Faraway and Bonita-Sontag associations. The occupants of both sites utilized the metavolcanic cobbles and rock from these associations for ground and chipped stone tools. Rock outcrops at AZ FF:12:30 were used for bedrock milling.
Culture History
An overview of the prehistory and history of southern Arizona, focusing on the San Bernardino and Sulphur Springs valleys, is presented here for background 9 information. Additional information may be obtained from Sayles and Antevs (1941), Haury et al. (1959), Bannon (1974), McGregor (1982), and Neily and Beckwith (1985).
The earliest period of culture history in southern Arizona is that of Paleo- Indian, which has come to signify hunting and gathering cultures of Late Pleistocene and early Holocene age. The Clovis or Llano tradition, an apparently distinct hunting and gathering culture that focused on the exploitation of now-extinct mega-fauna, has been recognized in the approximately 11,000 to 10,000 years Before Present (B.P.) range in southern Arizona. Several mega-fauna kill sites have been recorded in the San Pedro and San Bernardino valleys. These sites include Naco (Haury 1953), Lehner (Haury et al. 1959), and Murray Springs (Agenbroad and Haynes 1975). Two isolated Clovis points have been recorded in the San Bernardino Valley (Meyers 1967; Huckell 1982). A third isolated point recently was recovered from the San Bernardino Valley (Wendy Glenn, personal communication 1990).
The next period of culture history in southern Arizona is the Archaic, which is associated with a wide variety of hunting-gathering, largely preceramic, and, for the most part, nonagricultural cultures that employed milling stone technology and were ancestral to many of the better-known agricultural societies. Two broad traditions have been defined for the Archaic period: (1) the Cochise culture, first defined in the San Pedro, Sulphur Springs, and San Simon valleys of southeastern Arizona (Sayles and Antevs 1941); and (2) the Amargosa Complex, initially identified in the Mohave Desert of California and adjacent parts of the Great Basin (Haury et al. 1950; Rogers et al. 1966). The Archaic period is generally estimated at about 10,000 to 1500 years B.P. for the Early Archaic, 7000 to 4000 or 3000 years B.P. for the Middle Archaic, and 4000 or 3000 to perhaps 1500 years B.P. for the Late Archaic. The Archaic period may be characterized as a time of increasing sophistication in hunting and gathering techniques, through both technical development and the evolution of the ever complex subsistence-settlement systems, in conjunction with a gradually increasing dependence upon floral food resources. A transition to partial reliance upon agriculture accompanied population growth and the development of more sedentary settlement patterns.
The final prehistoric period of culture history in southeastern Arizona is that of the Mogollon and Animas-Salado. Early identification of the Mogollon was centered in the Mimbres Region of New Mexico--"the area was primarily known for its famous Mimbres Classic Black-on-white pottery, which was recovered from cobble-walled pueblos" (Le Blanc 1986:297). Early research of the Mogollon was initiated by Hough (1907) and Fewkes (1914), which in turn led to several major expeditions that concentrated in the San Juan Basin (Le Blanc 1986:297).
A chronology for the Mogollon has been established based on technological changes in architecture, settlement patterns, dependence on agriculture, and changes in the ceramic styles. The first period of the chronology is the Early Pit House period, A.D. 200 to 550 (Le Blanc 1986:300). Early Mogollon culture is thought to have evolved out of the Late Archaic, retaining many of the same lithic technologies. Mogollon culture was more dependent on agriculture and had developed the use of ceramics. During this time period, most of the villages were located on high knolls or ridges overlooking perenially watered river valleys. Small, loosely knit, pit house villages that were centered around a ceremonial room or kiva, which may have been a 10 direct influence of the Anasazi, began to appear at this time (McGregor 1982:160-166; Le Blanc 1986:300).
The next period was the Late Pit House period, A.D. 550 to 1000. This period is characterized by the abandonment of the high knolls and ridges for river terraces, signifying a growing dependence on agriculture. Other changes are noted in the architectural styles of the pit houses--from predominately circular to rectangular with rounded corners. The types and uses of ceramics were expanded, as well as the trading network. Influences attributed to Mexico and northern Arizona have been identified in the ceramic and architectural styles (McGregor 1982:160-166; Le Blanc 1986:301).
The final period of the chronology is the Classic Mimbres period, A.D. 1000 to 1130. During this period, a change in the architecture occurred in the form of surface pueblos. Surface room blocks began as small clusters of from 2 to 6 rooms and, for 100 years, grew by haphazard accretion to form room blocks of up to 50 rooms each. A typical site had from 4 to 6 room blocks and consisted of a total of 100 to 150 rooms. Great Kivas gradually ceased being built and probably were replaced by open plazas, but smaller kivas came into existence during this period (Anyon and Le Blanc 1980; Le Blanc 1986:302). The Classic period of the Mimbres came to an end between A.D. 1130 to 1150. The following cultural sequence was culturally different from the earlier sequence in terms of ceramics, architecture, settlement patterns, and ceremonial structures. This sequence is not attributed to the Mogollon, but represents new cultural influences in the area (Le Blanc 1986:303).
The post-Mogollon period in southeastern Arizona is known as the Animas phase-Salado period, A.D. 1200 to 1400. During this time period, the area was under influences from several different regions. The Animas phase is characterized by a cultural pattern distinct from that of the previous Mogollon period. Sites of the Animas phase (A.D. 1200 to 1300) occupation consist of puddled adobe room blocks surrounding a central plaza(s) and generally are located in association with permanent surface water along principal drainages (Findlow and DeAtley 1978). During the Salado period (A.D. 1300 to 1400), large pueblos with compound enclosures were common. There appears to be no break between the Animas phase and Salado period (Neily and Beckwith 1985:10-11).
The Spanish Colonial, Mexican, and American history in southern Arizona has been widely researched. Only a short historic sketch focusing on the Sulphur Springs and San Bernardino valleys is offered here.
The first Spanish contact, made in the Pimeria Alta (as southern Arizona was called by Spanish explorers), was that of slave hunting parties (Bannon 1974:12). The Spanish led many raiding parties, capturing the natives and selling them in Mexico. A starting point for many of the raiders was San Miguel de Culiacan, Mexico. In 1531, Nufio de Guzman, working out of Culiacan, was leading a slave raiding party when he met Alvar Nlifiez Cabeza de Vaca, Estevan (a Moorish slave), Andres Dorantes, and Alonso de Castillo Maldonado. These four, along with approximately 100 others, had been shipwrecked off the coast of Florida in 1527 and were trying to make their way back to Mexico City (Bannon 1974:13). 11
Estevan (or El Moro, as he was called) was to play an important role in the exploration of the Southwest. In 1537, Estevan led Fray Marcos de Niza and a small group of Spaniards and Indians through Texas, New Mexico, and Arizona in search of the Seven Cities of Cibola. Arriving ahead of Fray Marcos, Estevan believed that he had found one of the lost cities when he reached the Zuni Pueblo of Hawikuh. It was at Hawikuh that he met his death at the hands of the Zuni. Upon learning of Estevan's death, Fray Marcos returned to Mexico and reported that he had seen one of the cities (Hawikuh) from a distance (C&ES 1987:6).
In April of 1540, Francisco Vasquez de Coronado led a party of 300 Spanish foot and horse soldiers, 3 Spanish women, and 800 Indians to find the Seven Cities of Cibola. They entered southern Arizona through the San Pedro River Valley, crossing the Mogollon Rim up to Hawikuh, arriving in July of 1540. Coronado subsequently was guided by "the Turk," a native of Cicuye (Pecos), to parts of New Mexico, Kansas, and northern Arizona in an unsuccessful search for the Seven Cities of Cibola. Coronado returned to Mexico in July of 1542. No further (documented) explorations of the northern frontier were to occur for 60 years, until 1605.
When the Spanish began to settle in northern Mexico, they encountered a nomadic group of people known as the Apache. The Apache were a hunting and gathering people who were dependent upon wild flora and fauna for food. They banded together in small groups of about 40 individuals. Larger groups (several bands) would gather for ceremonies, protection, or - to form war parties. The Apache ranged from northern Arizona to New Mexico and Mexico. The Apache that the Spanish first encountered in Mexico were the Chiricahua, who would raid into Mexico stealing horses and cattle from the Spanish.
After 1605, the Spanish concentrated on establishing a line of presidios and missions to protect their northern frontier. By 1689, Padre Eusebio Francisco Kino, a Jesuit priest, had established a line of 14 missions from Sonora to California. The Spanish had attempted to settle the San Bernardino Valley, but, by the 1760s, the Apache had pushed them out.
In 1790, a Spanish policy for achieving peace with the Apache was introduced. The policy was to provide the Apache with sugar, flour, liquor, and inferior firearms and gun powder as bribes for not raiding the Spanish presidios and ranches. The plan to placate the Apache was successful, and there was relative peace in the northern frontier for 30 years.
On September 16, 1819, Mexico won independence from Spain and now was pressed to protect its northern borders, because the Apache raids began again. The Mexican government decided to let the settlers and the land owners be responsible for the protection of the frontier. In May of 1822, Lt. Ignacio de Perez acquired from the government of Mexico the San Bernardino Land Grant, which consisted of 73,240 acres. The Mexican government issued the grant to Perez in the hope that the ranch would create a buffer zone between the Apache and the smaller villages in Mexico's northern frontier. The raids continued, and there was no help from the government. By 1831, Perez abandoned the grant, along with several thousand head of cattle. No one else was to permanently resettle the grant area until the 1880s (Christiansen 1988:89-90). 12
In 1846, the United States declared war with Mexico. As part of the war effort, many of the states sent regional battalions to fight. One such group was the Mormon Battalion, which left Iowa in 1846 to go to California to help the Bear Flag Republic in its fight for independence. The first part of the march led the group to Santa Fe, New Mexico, where Philip St. George Cook took over as commander. The battalion left Santa Fe on October 19, 1846, for Janos, Mexico, where it would follow the San Pedro River to the Gila River, and then follow the Gila River to California. The march to Janos brought the group to San Bernardino Valley, and, on December 2, 1846, it camped at the old ruins of the San Bernardino Ranch, which had been abandoned 15 years earlier. The battalion stayed in the area hunting the cattle that had been left by Perez and were now feral. After leaving the area, the group headed west and reached the San Pedro River on December 11. It was on this day that the Mormon Battalion fought its first battle. As the men neared the San Pedro River, they noticed that the number of cattle began to increase and most were bulls. It was early morning when the bulls attacked the battalion, goring one man and killing two mules (Christiansen 1983:1-40).
The San Bernardino Land Grant was uninhabited until 1880, when John Slaughter leased the property. In the 1840s, four years after Texas had won its independence from Mexico, the Texas government was offering free land to encourage people to settle in the area. The Slaughter family moved to Texas from Louisiana to start a cattle ranch. In 1860, the American Civil War began, and Slaughter enlisted in the Confederate Army. He spent the majority of the war fighting the Comanches and the Kiowas.
Following the end of the Civil War, Slaughter left Texas and headed west. It was during his travels in the west as a cattle rancher that he met Viola Howell, whom he married in 1879 in Tularosa, New Mexico. Slaughter next moved to southeastern Arizona to the Sulphur Springs Valley, settling near Hereford, Arizona, where he began supplying beef to the Indian reservations under a government contract and to the nearby mining towns of Bisbee and Tombstone. In 1883, Slaughter sold his cattle ranch to move to Oregon. He and his family traveled through Arizona, Utah, and into Idaho, where Slaughter began to hemorrhage due to tuberculosis. He later recovered his health and returned to Arizona and negotiated a 99-year lease on the San Bernardino Land Grant near the old ruins of the Perez hacienda. He built two adobe houses that later were destroyed in the 1887 earthquake that struck northern Mexico and southern Arizona. John served as sheriff of Cochise County from 1886 to 1890.
Slaughter Ranch, as the land grant was called, became a popular vacation spot for family, friends, and health seekers. The Slaughters lived at the ranch until 1921, when they moved to Douglas, Arizona (Wells 1989:391-415). On February 16, 1922, John Slaughter died; Viola Slaughter died 19 years later on April 1, 1941.
In 1901, Dr. James Douglas, a self-taught geologist and assayer, was asked by Phelps Dodge to pick a site for a new smelter. The smelter that was to be built would be the most modern of its kind. Dr. Douglas picked a site several miles west of present day Douglas for the smelter. Once people knew of the new smelter site, plans were made to establish a community to provide goods and services to the employees of the smelter. The town that was founded was named after Dr. Douglas. 13
The Arizona & Southeastern Rail Road Company (A&SE) was incorporated on May 14, 1888, and began operation on February 2, 1889. The line was built from Bisbee through Charleston and Fairbank to Benson where it hooked into the Southern Pacific Rail Road Company (of Arizona) (SP of Arizona) rail line (Robertson 1986:69). The A&SE, which was established to haul freight to and processed ore from the mining town of Bisbee, was owned and operated by the Phelps Dodge Company, which also owned the Copper Queen Mine. The SP of Arizona was incorporated on October 8, 1878, and began operation on January 8, 1879. It was active to March 10, 1902 (Robertson 1986:104). The railroad ran from southern California through Arizona to New Mexico.
In 1896, Phelps Dodge acquired a small mine in Nacozari, Sonora, from the Guggenheim interest, and plans were made to extend the A&SE railroad. The extension was to take the new line not only to Nacozari, but also to the new smelter site in Douglas. By 1901, the line from Douglas had extended into the Sulphur Springs Valley, followed Silver Creek between the Pedregosa Mountains and College Peak into the San Bernardino Valley. The line, which eventually was extended to Deming, New Mexico, was leased to other railroad companies over the years and eventually was merged into the SP of Arizona on September 23, 1955 (Myrick 1975:190-199; Robertson 1986:81).
Prior Research
Fifteen surveys, including the recent C&ES survey, have been completed within or near the project right-of-way, Phases A through C, as is shown in Table 2. Three (1981-071, 1985-67, and 1989-10) of the 15 surveys were negative; no historic or prehistoric resources were noted. The results of the 12 positive surveys are shown in Table 3.
In the late 1920s, Monroe Amsden (1928) and Carl Sauer and Donald Brand (1930, 1931) conducted regional scale surveys in the San Bernardino Valley on both sides of the international border. Amsden recorded, and made collections from, four sites for Gila Pueblo (Globe, Arizona) and the Southwest Museum (Pasadena, California). Collections and notes for these sites are curated at the Arizona State Museum and the Southwest Museum. Of the four sites, only one reported by Amsden, a 200+-room Mogollon/Animas phase-Salado period site (AZ FF:11:20 [ASM]) along Silver Creek in Sonora, Mexico, is near the project area. Sauer and Brand, in their survey of "pueblo sites" in southeastern Arizona, recorded three sites (two north of and one south of the international border) in the San Bernardino Valley. AZ FF:11:20, the Sacaton Flat Site #8 recorded by Sauer and Brand, also may have been the same site recorded by Amsden that is closest to the Phase B right-of-way. Two additional sites recorded by Sauer and Brand are the Steven's Ranch Site (Site 2), which may or may not be the Slaughter Ranch Site (AZ FF:11:21) and the Slaughter Bull Pasture Site (Site 7) (AZ FF:11:32) (Sauer and Brand (1930). The Slaughter Ranch Site was partially excavated in 1966 by Jack and Vera Mills (Mills and Mills 1971:23-52). Site materials and notes for the Sauer and Brand survey are curated at the Lowie Museum in Berkeley, California (Douglas and Brown 1985:8-9). 1 4
Table 2
PRIOR SURVEYS IN THE PROJECT AREA
ASM Survey I nstitution Project # Results
Gila Pueblo/ Nonrecorded 4 prehistoric sites Southwest Museum (1928)
Louie Museum Nonrecorded 3 prehistoric sites (1928)
ASM (Stacy) Nonrecorded 2 Salado habitation sites, (1974) 4 artifact scatters, 3 lithic scatters 5 historic sites
ASM 1978-039 1 Archaic site
ASM 1981-071 Negative
ASM 1982-196 2 Archaic sites
Archaeological Nonrecorded 1 Mogollon habitation site, Research (1982) 2 prehistoric milling stations, Services 21 historic sites
Cochise College 1984-131 3 historic sites, 15 Mogollon sites, 15 prehistoric sites
ASM 1984-190 6 historic sites, 7 Archaic sites, 9 Salado sites, 11 prehistoric sites
ASM 1985-67 Negative
ASM 1985-165 3 historic sites, 15 Mogollon sites, 15 prehistoric sites
ASM 1986-155 1 site recorded (no cards available for review
ASM 1986-156 2 sites recorded (no cards available for review
ASM 1989-10 Negative
C&ES 1990- 7 Historic sites, 13 Late Archaic/Early Mogollon 15
Table 3
ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITES WITHIN A MILE OF THE PROJECT AREA
Temp. Field Cultural Temporal ASM# Site Type Affiliation Range Source
AZ FF:11:3 Habitation Salado (?) Stacy (1974) complex
AZ FF:11:6 Sherd and Stacy (1974) lithic scatter
AZ FF:11:7 Lithic site Stacy (1974)
AZ FF:11:8 Sherd and Stacy (1974) lithic scatter
AZ FF:11:9 Lithic scatter Stacy (1974)
AZ FF:11:10 --- Lithic scatter Stacy (1974)
AZ FF:11:12 --- Habitation Salado (?) Stacy (1974) complex
AZ FF:11:13 --- Sherd and Stacy (1974) lithic scatter
AZ FF:11:15 --- Sherd and Stacy (1974) lithic scatter
AZ FF:11:2 SB-1 Fortified U.S. Anglo/ Historic Stacy (1974) Military U.S. Military (1914-1915) Stone & Ayres (1982) encampment (1918-1919)
SB-2 Trash scatter Anglo/U.S. 1914-1919 Stone & Ayres (1982) Military
SB-3 Adobe building Anglo/ranch 1880-1887(?) Stone & Ayres (1982) (school house ?)
SB-4 Trash scatter Anglo/ranch 1910-1920 Stone & Ayres (1982)
SB-5 Residence Black/ranch 1910-1920 Stone & Ayres (1982) "Old Bat's House"
S8-6 Trash scatter Anglo/ranch circa 1800s Stone & Ayres (1982) to present 16
Table 3 (continued)
Temp. Field Cultural Temporal ASH # Site Type Affiliation Range Source
SB-7 Stone masonry Mogollon/Salado, Prehistoric, Stone & Ayres (1982) foundation or Anglo/ranch Historic wall
SB-8 Artifact scatter San Simon/ A.D. 700-1200 Stone & Ayres (1982) Mogollon
SB-9 Trash dump Anglo/ranch circa 1900 Stone & Ayres (1982)
SB-10A-C Trash dumps (4) Anglo/ranch 1 886-1915 Stone & Ayres (1982) 1 905-1915
SB-11 Trash scatter Anglo/ranch 1904-1915 Stone & Ayres (1982)
SB-12 House ruin Chinese/ranch 1905-1915 Stone & Ayres (1982)
SB-13 Trash scatter Anglo/ranch, 1903-1915 Stone & Ayres (1982) U.S. Military
SB-14 Mormon House Anglo/ranch 1880-1910 Stone & Ayres (1982) ruin
AZ FF:11:14 SB-15A-C Howell house Anglo/ranch 1 887-1920s Stacy (1974) ruins Stone & Ayres (1982)
58-16 Trash scatter Anglo/ranch 1886-1900s Stone & Ayres (1982)
SB-17 Milling station Prehistoric Stone & Ayres (1982) with bedrock mortars
58-18 Milling station Prehistoric Stone & Ayres (1982) with bedrock mortars
SB-19 Rock alignment Anglo/ranch Historic(?) Stone & Ayres (1982)
SB-20 Trash scatter Anglo/ranch 1905-1915 Stone & Ayres (1982)
SB-21 Trash scatter Anglo/ranch 1895-1915 Stone & Ayres (1982)
SB-22 Trash scatter Anglo/ranch 1895-1915 Stone & Ayres (1982) 17
Table 3 (continued)
Temp. Field Cultural Temporal ASM# Site Type Affiliation Range Source
AZ FF:11:4 SB-23/ Trash dump Anglo/ranch 1905-1916 Stacy (1974) SBFW-8 U.S. Military Stone & Ayres (1982) Neily & Beckwith (1985)
SB-24 House ruin Anglo/ranch 1905-1920 Stone & Ayres (1982)
AZ FF:11:39 SBFW-1 Artifact scatter Anglo/ranch 1920-1929 Neily & Beckwith (1985)
AZ FF:11:40 SBFW-2 Lithic scatter, Prehstoric, Neily & Beckwith (1985) rock features Historic
AZ FF:11:41 S8FW-3 Lithic scatter Prehistoric Neily & Beckwith (1985)
AZ FF:11:29 SBFW-4 Lithic scatter Archaic Archaic Neily & Beckwith (1985)
AZ FF:11:21 SBFW-5 Pueblo, trash Salado/Anglo/ Animas phase Mills & Mills (1971) dump, Astin ranch (A.D. 1200- Neily & Beckwith (1985) tank, adobe house 1425), Historic
AZ FF:11:37 SBFW-6 Lithic scatter Archaic Archaic Neily & Beckwith (1985)
AZ FF:11:38 SBFW-7 Sleeping Neily & Beckwith (1985) circles(?) with lithic scatter
AZ FF:11:3 SBFW-9 Pueblo (4-5 Salado Animas phase Neily & Beckwith (1985) rooms) (post-A.D. 1200)
AZ FF:11:30 SBFW- Artifact Archaic, Archaic, Neily & Beckwith (1985) 10A&B scatters Salado Animas phase (post-A.D. 1200)
AZ FF:11:31 SBFW-11 Artifact scatter Archaic Late Archaic Neily & Beckwith (1985)
AZ FF:12:15 SBFW- Artifact Archaic, Archaic, Neily & Beckwith (1985) 12A&B scatters Sal adoc Animas phase (post-A.D. 1200)
AZ FF:12:16 SBFW-13 Artifact scatter Archaic Archaic Neily & Beckwith (1985)
AZ FF:12:17 SBFW-14 Charcoal lens Prehistoric Neily & Beckwith (1985) 18
Table 3 (continued)
Temp. Field Cultural Temporal ASM # Site Type Affiliation Range Source
AZ FF:12:18 SBFW-15 Lens of chipped --- Prehistoric Neily & Beckwith (1985) stone
AZ FF:12:19 SBFW-16 Charcoal lens Prehistoric Melly & Beckwith (1985)
AZ FF:12:20 SBFW-17 Rock feature Prehistoric Neily & Beckwith (1985)
AZ FF:12:21 SBFW-18 Charcoal lenses Prehistoric Welly & Beckwith (1985) and hearth
AZ FF:12:22 SBFW-19 Charcoal lenses Prehistoric Neily & Beckwith (1985)
AZ FF:11:32 SBFW-20 Pueblo with Salado Animas phase Neily & Beckwith (1985) plaza and house (A.D. 1200- mounds 1425)
AZ FF:11:34 SBFW-21 Structure and Archaic, Archaic, Neily & Beckwith (1985) artifact Salado Animas phase scatters (A.D. 1200- 1425)
AZ FF:11:35 SBFW-22 Lithic scatter Archaic Archaic Neily & Beckwith (1985)
AZ FF:11:36 SBFW-23 Lithic scatter Archaic Archaic Neily & Beckwith (1985)
AZ FF:11:33 SBFW-24 "Carp" pond Chinese(?) circa 1900s Neily & Beckwith (1985)
AZ FF:11:42 SBFW-25 Artifact scatter Salado Animas phase Neily & Beckwith (1985) (A.D. 1200- 1425)
AZ FF:11:43 SBFW-26 Cemetery Anglo, Mexican, Historic Neily & Beckwith (1985) Chinese, Black(?)
AZ FF:11:44 SBFW-27 Boulder Anglo/ranch Historic Neily & Beckwith (1985) alignment
AZ FF:11:45 SBFW-28 Artifact scatter Archaic, Archaic, Stacy (1974) Sal ado Animas phase Neily & Beckwith (1985) (A.D. 1200- 1425)
AZ FF:11:24 SBFW-29 Artifact scatter Salado Animas phase Neily & Beckwith (1985) (A.D. 1200- 1425) 19
Table 3 (continued)
Temp. Field Cultural Temporal ASM# Site Type Affiliation Range Source
AZ FF:11:46 SBFW-30 Artifact scatter --- Prehistoric Neily & Beckwith (1985)
AZ FF:11:47 SBFW-31 Artifact scatter Archaic Archaic Neily & Beckwith (1985)
AZ FF:11:48 S8FW-32 Lithic scatter Prehistoric Neily & Beckwith (1985)
AZ FF:11:49 SBFW-33 Lithic scatter Prehistoric Neily & Beckwith (1985)
AZ FF:12:26 -- Sherd and Mogollon A.D. 1-1200 Douglas & Brown (1985) lithic scatter
AZ FF:12:27 -- Artifact scatter Mogollon A.D. 1-1200 Douglas & Brown (1985)
AZ FF:11:18 -- Artifact scatter Archaic Archaic Urban (1978)
AZ FF:11:50 -- Lithic scatter Prehistoric Douglas & Brown (1985)
AZ FF:11:51 --- Lithic scatter Prehistoric Douglas & Brown (1985)
AZ FF:11:52 -- Lithic scatter Prehistoric Douglas & Brown (1985)
AZ FF:11:53 -- Lithic scatter Prehistoric Douglas & Brown (1985)
AZ FF:11:54 -- Lithic and Prehistoric Douglas & Brown (1985) ground stone scatter
AZ FF:11:55 - Artifact scatter --- Prehistoric Douglas & Brown (1985)
AZ FF:11:56 --- Room block Mogollon A.D. 1-1200 Douglas & Brown (1985) 20
In 1972, V. K. Pheriba Stacy conducted a survey of part of the San Bernardino Ranch owned by Paul Ramsower. Fourteen prehistoric and historic sites were recorded; however, inaccurate map locations and poor site location descriptions make the sites difficult to relocate (Neily and Beckwith 1985:6). The subsequent survey by the Arizona State Museum for the San Bernardino U. S. Fish and Wildlife Refuge in 1985 relocated Stacy's Sites 2 and 3, which were later recorded as AZ FF:11:4 and AZ FF:11:3, respectively. Sites 6 and 7 (AZ FF:11:7 and AZ FF:11:8) also were recorded by Neily and Beckwith (1985), based upon similarities of location and artifact content, as AZ FF:11:45. Sites 5, 8, 9, 10, 11, and 12, located during Stacy's survey, could not be relocated during the survey by Neily and Beckwith. For a more complete discussion of this problem, see Stacy (1974) and Neily and Beckwith (1985:6-7). Stone and Ayres (1982) relocated Stacy's Site 13 as part of their evaluation of the San Bernardino Ranch's (Johnson Historical Museum) archaeological resources and recorded the site as AZ FF:11:14.
In 1982, Lyle M. Stone and James E. Ayres (Archaeological Research Services, Inc. [ARS]) were retained to evaluate the architectural and archaeological resources on 131 acres of the Johnson Historical Museum property, which includes most of the San Bernardino Ranch National Historic Landmark and all of the existing Slaughter Ranch buildings. The research conducted by ARS consisted of a Class III survey, site mapping and documentation, and test excavations. Twenty-four archaeological sites were identified during the project. AZ FF:11:2 (SB-1), the remains of a fortified U.S. military encampment, dates from 1914 to 1918. Three prehistoric Mogollon sites (SB- 8, SB-17, SB-18), consisting of a habitation site and two bedrock milling stations, were recorded. The remaining 20 sites date to the Slaughter Ranch occupation period (1884 through 1922) and consist of trash scatters and dumps, foundations, piles of rock rubble, partial walls, and rock alignments. One site, SB-23 (AZ FF:11:4), a historic trash dump dating between 1905 and 1916, is bisected by a dirt road that connects the Slaughter Ranch (Johnson Historical Museum property) with a utility barn and yard on the San Bernardino U.S. Fish and Wildlife Refuge. A segment of the Phase B right- of-way corridor is proposed for this area and will bisect SB-23.
In 1984 and 1985, the Arizona State Museum inventoried approximately 2000 of the 2308 acres of the San Bernardino U.S. Fish and Wildlife Refuge. Thirty-three prehistoric and historic sites were recorded. These include several sites originally identified by Stacy (1974), but do not include AZ FF:11:4, which was recorded by Ayres and Stone (1982) as discussed above. The sites are comprised of historic trash dumps, a cemetery, a Chinese carp pond, and several historic trash scatters that date to the period of the Slaughter Ranch occupation. Prehistoric sites include Middle to Late Archaic lithic scatters, Mogollon/Salado habitations, artifact scatters, and rock piles. Several hearths and charcoal lenses also were recorded, but their cultural affiliation or temporal range could not be ascertained.
Two sites (AZ FF:11:4 and AZ FF:11:37) located during the ASM survey are located within the proposed right-of-way segment between the San Bernardino U.S. Fish and Wildlife Refuge and the Slaughter Ranch (Johnson Historical Museum property). The sites are bisected by a dirt road on the eastern edge of Mesa de la Avenzada.
The ASM conducted three negative linear surveys within a mile of the SSVEC project right-of-way corridor near Phases A and B. Two (1981-071 and 1982-196) 21 were west of Leslie Canyon Road (1982-196 was conducted between Highway 666 and Leslie Canyon Road). The third survey (1985-67) was completed north of Wildcat Wash.
In addition, a survey of 176 acres (1986-155) was completed by the ASM northwest of Geronimo Trail and above Cottonwood Draw. One site was located, but no site cards have been filed. Two segments of a linear survey (1986-156), perpendicular to Guadalupe Canyon Road, also were completed by ASM for state lease land. Two sites were located; however, site cards have not been filed.
In 1984 and 1985, the Anthropological Resource Center of Cochise College, under the direction of John E. Douglas and Linda J. Brown, inventoried 2000 acres in the San Bernardino Valley using a stratified-random sampling strategy. The project area was divided into three elevation zones, and land blocks were sampled in each. In addition, areas of specific interest were judgmentally sampled within each elevation zone. Sixteen sample and judgmental land blocks were surveyed throughout the San Bernardino Valley in two phases. Douglas and Brown (1985) state that they recorded 12 sites in the project area sampled. Thirty sites are listed in Appendix 3 of their report, and it is unclear, based upon the report discussion, whether the 12 sites were new and the remaining 18 sites were previously recorded. A listing of all 30 sites can be seen in Table 4.
Only one site, AZ FF:12:27, was located adjacent to, but outside, the SSVEC right-of-way corridor. Seven other sites (AZ FF:11:50 through AZ FF:11:56), located in two separate land blocks, are near the Phase B right-of-way. AZ FF:11:50 through AZ FF:11:53 are located in a sample block north of and including a portion of Wildcat Wash. These four sites consist of lithic scatters, including primary and secondary flakes, cores, and blanks made from local cobbles of welded-rhyolite tuff, rhyolite, and phyllite. No cultural affiliation or period were assigned to these sites. In a second sample land block north of Geronimo Trail near Astin Spring, three sites (AZ FF:11:54 through AZ FF:11:56), consisting of two prehistoric artifact scatters and a Mogollon architectural feature, were located near the project right-of-way. In a third sample block south of Geronimo Trail, adjacent to the McDonald Ranch Road and a segment of the Phase B right-of-way, a single site (AZ FF:11:27), a Mogollon artifact scatter, was located. The scatter consists of ground stone, chipped stone, and plain ware sherds.
Charles Di Peso of the Amerind Foundation in Dragoon, Arizona, located three sites near the project area. AZ FF:7:1 (Amerind Foundation) is a 50-room pueblo off Leslie Canyon Creek. The cultural affiliation and/or period of occupation for the site could not be ascertained. AZ FF:11:1 (Amerind Foundation--Sonora) is Sauer and Brand's Sacaton Flat Site #8 and/or Amsden's Site #14 on Silver Creek. AZ FF:11:1, based upon Di Peso's analysis of the ceramics, may have had both Hohokam and Mogollon/Salado occupations. No period of occupation was estimated for the room blocks and compounds. AZ FF:11:2 (Amerind Foundation) is the Slaughter Ranch Site, a Saladoan (Chihuahuan influence) pueblo with 22 rooms. The site dates to the Animas phase (A.D. 1200 to 1425) and the Historic period. 22
Table 4
COCHISE COLLEGE 1985 SURVEY
Area ASM # Site Type Affiliation (sq. ml AZ FF:12:02 Quarry Prehistoric 648
AZ FF:12:03 Artifact scatter Mogollon 10,000
AZ FF:12:04 Artifact scatter Mogollon 10,000
AZ FF:12:05 Sherd and lithic scatter Prehistoric 24,000
AZ FF:12:06 Lithic scatter Prehistoric 400
AZ FF:12:07 Lithic scatter Mogollon 450
AZ FF:12:08 Lithic scatter Prehistoric 2250
AZ FF:12:09 Container break Mogollon, Anglo 10
AZ FF:12:10 Sherd and lithic scatter Mogollon 48
AZ FF:12:11 Sherd and lithic scatter Mogollon 7000
AZ FF:12:12 Sherd and lithic scatter Mogollon 4800
AZ FF:12:13 Sherd and lithic scatter Mogollon, Anglo 1200
AZ FF:08:04 Artifact scatter Mogollon 280,000
AZ FF:08:05 Architectureal feature Anglo 30
AZ FF:11:24 Lithic work station Prehistoric 40
AZ FF:11:25 Container break Mogollon 2
AZ FF:11:26 Isolated feature Prehistoric 5
AZ FF:11:27 Artifact scatter Mogollon 10,000
AZ FF:11:28 Sherd and lithic scatter Mogollon 1800
AZ FF:11:50 Lithic scatter Prehistoric 132
AZ FF:11:51 Lithic scatter Prehistoric 20
AZ FF:11:52 Lithic scatter Prehistoric 20
AZ FF:11:53 Lithic scatter Prehistoric 35
AZ FF:11:54 Lithic scatter Prehistoric 3500
AZ FF:11:55 Artifact scatter Prehistoric 1000
AZ FF:11:56 Architectural feature Mogollon 450
AZ FF:12:14 Artifact scatter Mogollon 1200
AZ FF:12:25 Lithic scatter Prehistoric 10
AZ FF:12:26 Sherd and lithic scatter Mogollon 120
AZ FF:12:27 Artifact scatter Prehistoric 1200
(after Douglas and Brown 1985:Appendix 3) 23
Methodology
Prior to conducting the fieldwork, maps, records, and survey files pertinent to the project area were examined at the Arizona Historical Society and the Arizona State Museum (Tucson), the Amerind Foundation (Dragoon), the Bureau of Land Management Public Room (Phoenix), and the Cochise County Historical and Archaeological Society (Douglas). A number of other archival sources also were examined for information on the project area, including books, journals, articles, and archaeological reports. In addition, residents of Douglas and ranchers in the project area were consulted.
Based upon the results of the research, 15 previously recorded sites were located adjacent to or within the right-of-way for Phases A through C.
*AZ FF:11:4 (SBFW-8/SB-23) AZ FF:11:17 AZ FF:11:21 (SBFW-5) AZ FF:11:29 (SBFW-4) *AZ FF:11:37 (SBFW-6) AZ FF:11:38 (SBFW-7) AZ FF:11:39 AZ FF:11:46 AZ FF:11:54 AZ FF:11:55 AZ FF:11:56 AZ FF:12:26 AZ FF:12:27 SB-4
(*within the proposed right-of-way)
The Class III (100% coverage) survey of 58 miles of a 60- and 120-foot-wide right-of-way corridor was conducted in three phases (Phase A, Phase B, and Phase C) from September 7 through September 21, 1990, by Mary Lou Heuett (Principal Investigator), Ronald P. Maldonado (Project Director), Susan A. Martin (Archaeologist), Kelly J. Schroeder (Archaeologist), and Richard A. Paun (Archaeological Technician). On October 26, 1990, an alternate route was surveyed for Phase C by Mary Lou Heuett and Ronald P. Maldonado. The right-of-way corridor for Phases A through C was walked in alternate sections by two teams of two individuals each. The archaeological teams walked the corridor in parallel transects spaced at 20-meter (65.6 feet) intervals. This 20-meter spacing is standard for Class III survey projects (Teague 1982) and provides maximum visual coverage of the varying right-of-way widths within each survey phase.
Isolated artifacts and archaeological sites and scatters located within or adjacent to the right-of-way were located and plotted on the project map. Each isolated artifact, artifact scatter, and site was marked with biodegradable flagging tape to show its location and demarcate scatter and site boundaries in relation to the right-of-way. Diagnostic artifacts from both isolate and site contexts were collected to determine time ranges and cultural affiliation. 24
Upon conclusion of the survey, the archaeological teams returned to each site. The sites were mapped with a Brunton compass and metric tape or by pacing. Prior to mapping, artifacts and features were pin-flagged so that the maximum areal extent of each site could be determined. Concentrations of artifacts and features within each site or scatter were determined in the same manner. Significant off-site cultural and/or natural features (e.g., roads, washes, utility poles, right-of-way boundaries) also were plotted on the map. General site views of all sites, as well as specific features, were photographed with both black-and-white and color film. Temporary site numbers (e.g., SSVEC-1) were assigned during the mapping phase. Permanent AZSITE numbers were obtained from the ASM following the completion of the survey. Sites previously recorded within the project area retained their original ASM numbers. These sites were not remapped if, in the judgment of the Principal Investigator and the Project Director, the original map and recording of the site were adequate in that they met professional standards and Arizona State Land Department and State Historic Preservation Office guidelines.
Site and isolate classifications developed by the ASM for State Land and used by the Bureau of Land Management (Instruction Memorandum No. AZ 87-289) were followed during the Class III survey. Sites were distinguished by the presence of (1) multiple classes of artifacts (e.g., ceramics, lithics, ground stone, shell) numbering more than 20 items; (2) 30 or more artifacts of a single type, exclusive of pot breaks or lithic test stations; and/or (3) a single feature (e.g., rock alignment, structure, petroglyph). All other cultural resources were recorded as isolates (Slawson 1990:15). The isolate numbers for the project are discontinuous, because several isolated artifact scatters were later assigned ASM site numbers based upon the criteria for sites listed above.
Results
Twenty new and previously recorded sites were recorded during the Class III survey. In addition, 29 isolates (single artifacts, artifact scatters) also were located. A brief description of each site and isolate is provided below by phase. Detailed management recommendations will be provided for all cultural resources (sites and isolates) in the final section of the report.
Phase A
Phase A parallels 5 miles of Leslie Canyon Road and approximately 1 mile of Davis Road from the junction of Leslie Canyon and Davis roads. Two sites (AZ FF:6:21, a historic cattle loading station, and AZ FF:6:22, a lithic scatter) and one isolate (Isolate #2, a tin can scatter) were located within the right-of-way. 25
Sites
AZ FF:6:21. A cattle loading station, AZ FF:6:21 is located near Leslie Creek adjacent to Davis Road at an elevation of 4443 feet. Vegetation at the site consists of scattered grasses, sunflowers, cholla, and scattered mesquite, acacia, cholla, and prickly pear. The site area had been cleared of natural vegetation when the loading chute, corrals, and water tank were built; however, the site has not been utilized for some time and successional vegetation has begun to grow throughout the complex. The station occupies about 0.5 acres and consists of wooden corrals, a loading chute, remnants of a concrete water tank, a pump, and electrical connections. A scatter of historic cans, china, and purple glass was noted on the site surface. None of the cans was diagnostic of any one time period or manufacturer; however, the purple glass indicates that the site area is at least 50 years old. A house is located approximately 1000 feet west of the station, but appears to be unoccupied. Further archival research and oral interviews would be necessary in order to document the ranch or ranchers who used the station and the period of use. The proposed SSVEC right-of-way bisects the eastern edge of the site (see Figures 2 and 11 in Appendix A).
AZ FF:6:22 (Isolate #1). AZ FF:6:22 is located adjacent to Davis road on a gravel terrace at an elevation of 4459 feet. The predominant vegetation is creosote, acacia, several grass species, and cholla. The site consists of a scatter of 30 primary and secondary flakes, which are comprised of a variety of metamorphic materials, including rhyolite, andesite, quartzite, and cryptocrystalline quartz. No cultural features (e.g., roasting pits, hearths, rock alignments) are present on the site surface. The proposed SSVEC right-of-way bisects the eastern edge of the site (see Figures 2 and 11 in Appendix A).
Phase A Isolates
Isolate #2. Isolate #2 consists of a car part and 20 tin cans (tobacco, milk, and baking powder) in an area 40 m east-west by 60 m north-south. The scatter appears to be the result of a single dumping episode. No other cultural features were noted near or within the scatter.
Phase B
Phase B consists of 47 miles of alignment from Leslie Canyon Road east through Hog Canyon to Geronimo Trail and Guadalupe Canyon Road. Phase B terminates at the Taylor Ranch on Geronimo Trail and at the McGoffin Ranch on Guadalupe Canyon Road. Segments of Phase B extend north and south off Geronimo Trail to the Lazy J Ranch (Peterson Ranch), Malapai Ranch, the San Bernardino U. S. Fish and Wildlife Refuge, the Slaughter Ranch (Johnson Historical Museum), and the Rocker M. Ranch (see Figures 2-10 in Appendix A).
Seventeen new and previously recorded sites and 23 isolates were recorded along Phase B from west to east. 26
Sites
AZ FF:10:19. AZ FF:10:19, the Wells Cemetery, is a family cemetery established in 1906 by Sarah H. C. and Hilary M. Wells. The cemetery is located on a hill at an elevation of 4300 feet west of Highway 80 and occupies about 5600 m2 of land. Vegetation on the site are grasses and a single mesquite. The surrounding vegetation consists of creosote, century plants, and yucca. The cemetery is delineated by an ornamental iron and wire fence and a gate. A flagpole, pyramidal stone monument, plaque, and surrounding rock ring are located north of the cemetery fence. The monument displays the names of the founders of the cemetery and the date 1906. A concrete block storage shed with a tin roof and wooden door are located on the southeast corner of the cemetery. A second structure, a wooden outhouse with a tin roof, was located outside the cemetery fence on the southeast corner. Forty-three plots were noted within the cemetery dating from 1901 to the present. The proposed SSVEC right-of-way crosses a portion of the cemetery area (see Figures 4 and 13 in Appendix A).
AZ FF:11:69. AZ FF:11:69, the "Jeffreys or Jeffries Place" is a homestead dating from approximately the 1930s. The General Land Office maps for the area (circa 1905) show the old Arizona & Southeastern Rail Road Company grade and the Douglas to College Peaks Road in Section 15, but no homestead. The 1958 15 Minute U.S.G.S. map for College Peaks indicates a house in Section 15, Township 23 South, Range 28 East, but no name is associated with it. The homestead consists of an adobe house with wooden additions and a detached screened-in porch, three water cisterns, a chicken coop, a windmill, two storage tanks with a system of pipes for water distribution, a barn, a corral, and a second house. The adobe house was built in the Spanish Colonial Revival style that was popular between 1915 and 1945. The barn is a wooden structure without any distinctive architectural features. The second house is constructed of board-and-batten from materials popular in the 1950s. The site complex encompasses 121,000 m2. The entire complex appears to have been abandoned for some time, although modern trash attests to its occasional use by transients. Further archival research in the homestead records and the Cochise County Assessor's Office would be necessary to document the dates the buildings were erected, period(s) of occupation, and the owner(s). The proposed SSVEC right-of-way is adjacent to the site on the north and east (see Figures 5 and 14 in Appendix A).
AZ FF:11:70. AZ FF:11:70 consists of a portion of the abandoned Arizona & Southeastern Rail Road Company (later the Southern Pacific Rail Road Company) grade and a historic trash scatter. The site is located at an elevation of 4219 feet west of Highway 80. Vegetation on the site consists of creosote, mesquite, acacia, and cholla. The artifact scatter and railroad grade encompasses 42,300 m2 (see Figures 5 and 15 in Appendix A). The railroad line was built in segments from the 1890s through the 1920s by Phelps Dodge Corporation to service the mines and smelter at Bisbee and Douglas, Arizona. Service was extended into New Mexico and Texas to provide passenger and freight service to outlying towns and ranches. The line was abandoned in 1961 and the rails and ties removed.
The historic trash scatter dates from 1917 to the 1930s, based upon the range of manufacturers' dates for the 125 artifacts recorded around the railroad grade. The 27 scatter consisted of clam shells; fragments of china plates and bowls; crockery platters; tin cans that may have contained tobacco, condensed milk, meat, baking powder, coffee, syrup, baking soda, and oil; and glass bottle and jar fragments from food, medicine, liquor, and soda containers. Colored glass fragments observed were blue, green, brown, clear, and purple. Numerous pieces of rusted copper wire and iron also were noted along the railroad grade embankment. Three railroad clamps and spokes with manufacturers' dates of 1907 also were located. The proposed SSVEC right-of- way bisects the artifact scatter at AZ FF:11:70.
AZ FF:11:71. AZ FF:11:71 may be a historic cemetery and consists of 15 to 20 graves without markers. The cemetery is located east of Highway 80, west of the Lease Windmill and south of an unnamed tertiary drainage that flows into the Sulphur Springs Valley (see Figures 5 and 16 in Appendix A). The elevation at AZ FF:11:71 is 4320 feet. The vegetation in and around the site consists of short grasses, acacia, mesquite, cholla and prickly pear cacti, devil's claw, sunflowers, and wild poppy. The cemetery area occupies approximately 4200 m2 and has been fenced and used as a cattle corral. Rock cairns over the individual plots have been dispersed and displaced by cattle. The rock cairns with sheet metal covers and the wooden post markers are similar to those observed by the authors at the town of Silverbell, a mining camp located north of Tucson, Arizona, in the Silverbell Mountains (Slawson 1990). Because many of the plots have been disturbed, an exact count of the number of graves could not be made. No dates for the cemetery are known. Local residents were unaware of the cemetery. The Lease Windmill, which is located 50 m to the east, is associated with the Lease family, who had family members in Douglas. The names Bertha Lease (1889 to 1962) and Floyd Lease (1889 to 1966) appear in a listing of cemetery plots in the Calvary Memorial Park in Douglas (Cochise Genealogical Society 1987). In order to ascertain if the cemetery was associated with the Lease family or other ranchers in the area, further archival research and interviews would be necessary. The proposed SSVEC right-of-way is located just south of and outside the site boundary.
AZ FF:11:72 (SSVEC-5). AZ FF:11:72 is located on a bench of the upper bajada of the Perilla Mountains at an elevation of 4481 feet. The bench consists of fine- and coarse-grained sandy soils and cobbles that have been cleared from the bench. A tertiary drainage bounds the site on the south, and the jeep road into Hog Canyon is the northern boundary. Vegetation on the site consists of saltbush, cholla and prickly pear cacti, and bunch grasses. Stands of ocotillo surround the site.
AZ FF:11:72 consists of a 4000 m2 sherd and lithic scatter (see Figures 5 and 17 in Appendix A). Twenty plain ware sherds were noted on the site surface. The lithics consist of cores, primary and secondary flakes, projectile points, and scrapers and were derived from quartzite, andesite, rhyolite, and obsidian sources. The metavolcanic cobbles are available in exposed geological lenses in Hog Canyon. The nearest potential obsidian sources are Antelope Wells (New Mexico) and Mexico. The proposed SSVEC right-of-way bisects the site.
Hog Canyon. The sites and isolates located in Hog Canyon are part of a discontinuous light density scatter that occurs from Bass Tank east to the mouth of Hog Canyon. The Archaic and Mogollon occupants of AZ FF:11:73, AZ FF:11:74, AZ 28
FF:11:75, AZ FF:11:78, AZ FF:11:79, and AZ FF:11:80 were utilizing a series of cobble lenses on the terraces above the unnamed secondary drainage that flows east through Hog Canyon. Several of the isolated scatters (Isolates #8, #9, #11) were located in eroded portions of the cobble lense. The pattern in Hog Canyon appears to be one of spacially overlapping and cyclical reuse of the canyon to procure lithic materials and to harvest agave, grasses, and mesquite as part of a seasonal subsistence round. In addition, the canyon is a natural pass between the Sulphur Springs and San Bernardino valleys that could have facilitated trade, travel, and communication between the two valleys and their settlement systems during the Archaic, Mogollon, and Salado occupations of the region.
AZ FF:11:73 (SSVEC-9). AZ FF:11:73 is an Archaic site located on a flat in Hog Canyon at an elevation of 4500 feet. The site consists of an artifact scatter (110 m north-south by 90 m east-west) and a bedrock milling station consisting of two areas, A and B (20 m north-south by 20 m east-west) (see Figures 5 and 18 in Appendix A). A tertiary drainage on the east and a secondary drainage on the southern edge of the site form the boundaries for AZ FF:11:73. The jeep road through Hog Canyon bisects and divides the site area roughly in half. Vegetation on the site includes mesquite, acacia, agave, numerous grass species, creosote, and prickly pear and cholla cacti. The artifact scatter consists of ground stone, core choppers, hammerstones, cores, primary and secondary flakes, scrapers, and bifaces. The milling station is composed of two areas on bedrock above the artifact scatter. The milling features consist of one mortar, three slicks, and three basin metates (see Figure 19 in Appendix A). The lithics and ground stone were derived from chert chalcedony, andesite, rhyolite, quartzite, and obsidian. The metavolcanics, chert, and chalcedony were derived from sources in Hog Canyon and Guadalupe Canyon. The nearest potential sources for obsidian are Antelope Wells (New Mexico) and Mexico. The site appears to have been used for resource procurement (lithics and agave) processing, perhaps on a seasonal basis. No cultural features were noted on the site surface or in the drainages that bound the site. The SSVEC proposed right-of-way bisects the artifact scatter at AZ FF:11:73.
AZ FF:11:74 (SSVEC-7). AZ FF:11:74 is located at an elevation of 4230 feet on the southeast slope of a hill outside Hog Canyon. The nearest drainage is the secondary stream that flows east through Hog Canyon and into Silver Creek (see Figures 5 and 20 in Appendix A). AZ FF:11:74 consists of a light density scatter with approximately 200 lithics, including primary and secondary flakes, cores, scrapers, bifaces, and projectile points, made from metavolcanic rock, chert, and chalcedony. No cultural features (e.g., roasting pits, hearths) were located on the site surface. Vegetation on the site consists of saltbush, agave, creosote, grass species, and prickly pear cactus. The proposed SSVEC right-of-way bisects AZ FF:11:74.
AZ FF:11:75 (SSVEC-10). AZ FF:11:75 is a lithic scatter consisting of cores, hammerstones, projectile points, and bifaces. The site is located on a bench, above an unnamed secondary drainage that flows through Hog Canyon, at an elevation of 4422 feet (see Figures 5 and 21 in Appendix A). The drainage forms the southern boundary of the site, and an old fence line bounds the site on the north. The entire 29 site area measures 60 m north-south by 40 m east-west. Creosote mesquite and acacia are the predominate site vegetation.
Like AZ FF:11:73, AZ FF:11:75 appears to be an Archaic resource procurement and processing site. No cultural features are present on the site surface or in the embankment of the drainage. The low density of artifacts on the site surface suggests that the site was utilized once, or perhaps twice, on a seasonal basis. The source of the lithic materials appears to be outcrops in Hog Canyon and Guadalupe Canyon. The proposed SSVEC right-of-way bisects the southern portion of the site.
AZ FF:11:78 (Isolate #10). AZ FF:11:78 is a lithic and ground stone scatter located on both sides of the Hog Canyon jeep road and bounded on the north by the secondary drainage that flows through Hog Canyon (see Figures 5 and 24 in Appendix A). The site is situated on a bench above the drainage at an elevation of 4340 feet and is approximately 50 m north-south by 50 m east-west. Vegetation on the site is creosote, acacia, mesquite, cholla and prickly pear cacti, grasses, and devil's claw.
The site consists of a scatter of lithics, including primary and secondary flakes, cores, and scrapers. A single feature, a cairn consisting of metate fragments, two bifacial manos, and three fragments of unidentifiable ground stone were located on a low ridge at the center of the site. No other features were observed within the site boundary. Resource procurement and processing appears to have been the major activity, perhaps as part of a seasonal round. The cache of ground stone suggests that the site was used over several seasons. The proposed SSVEC right-of-way bisects the site.
AZ FF:11:79 (Isolate #12). AZ FF:11:79 is located on the north slope of a hill in Hog Canyon and west of Georges Canyon at an elevation of 4358 feet (see Figures 5 and 25 in Appendix A). Mesquite, prickly pear, acacia, and bunch grasses are the predominate vegetation. AZ FF:11:79 appears to be a Late Archaic lithic scatter. The artifact assemblage consists of 20 primary and secondary flakes, 2 cores, and 1 scraper, all of metavolcanics. No cultural features were located on the site surface. The density of the artifact assemblage suggests seasonal utilization. The proposed SSVEC right-of-way bisects the site.
AZ FF:11:80 (Isolate #13). AZ FF:11:80 is located on the southern slope of a hill at an elevation of 4413 feet east of Georges Canyon at the mouth of Hog Canyon (see Figures 5 and 26 in Appendix A). Vegetation at the site consists of mesquite and bunch grasses. Based upon the artifact assemblage, AZ FF:11:80 may be classified as early Mogollon. The artifact scatter consists of primary and secondary flakes of metavolcanics and plain ware body sherds. No cultural features were noted on the site surface. The proposed SSVEC right-of-way bisects the site.
AZ FF:11:76 (SSVEC-11). AZ FF:11:76 is a sherd and lithic scatter located north of Geronimo Trail and west of Wildcat Wash. The scatter is situated on the eastern slope of a hill adjacent to a jeep road at an elevation of 4200 feet (see Figures 7 and 22 in Appendix A). Vegetation on the site is predominantly creosote, mesquite, 30 acacia, and saltbush. Primary and secondary flakes, cores, scrapers, choppers, hammerstones, and plain ware sherds comprise the assemblage. No cultural features (e.g., hearths, roasting pits) were located on the site surface. The composition and density of the artifact scatter suggests that the site was used for resource procurement, perhaps by Archaic and/or Mogollon groups as part of a seasonal subsistence round. The proposed SSVEC right-of-way bisects the eastern edge of the site.
AZ FF:11:77 (SSVEC-12). AZ FF:11:77 is located on the western slope of a hill at an elevation of 4200 feet north of the Rocker M Ranch headquarters (see Figures 7 and 23 in Appendix A). The predominant site vegetation consists of creosote, mesquite, acacia, and bunchgrass. AZ FF:11:77 is an Archaic lithic scatter that consist of one core, primary and secondary flakes, and one single core chopper, all of metavolcanics. No cultural features (e.g., hearth, roasting pit) were located on the site surface. The composition and density of the artifact assemblage suggests limited utilization, perhaps once as part of a seasonal round. The proposed SSVEC right-of-way bisects the site.
AZ FF:11:17. AZ FF:11:17 is an Archaic (Chiricahua-San Pedro) site previously recorded by Emil W. Haury and Sharon F. Urban along Astin Draw south of Geronimo Trail and 0.25 miles west of Black Draw (Urban 1976). The site consists of a portion of an exposed cutbank (approximately 100 m) with cultural material eroding from the top of the bank and from a broad band (2.5 m to 3.0 m thick) below the present ground surface. Portions of three human burials and artifacts were recovered from a location(s) in the cutbank. The exposure in the cutbank was created by a breach in the Astin Spring Tank that drained the tank (Urban 1976). The Astin Spring Tank, an earthen dam, was built on and incoporated the midden soils and features from a portion of AZ FF:11:21. AZ FF:11:21 consists of the Slaughter Ranch Site, a 40-room Salado pueblo and the remains of a historic adobe house (circa I800s). The site was excavated in the late 1960s by Jack and Vera Mills (Mills and Mills 1971).
Sites AZ FF:11:17 and AZ FF:11:21 appear to be different components of the same site area, albeit from different time periods. C&ES staff, during the SSVEC survey, noted a discontinuous light density scatter between AZ FF:11:17, AZ FF:11:21, and the previously unrecorded bedrock milling station (SSVEC-6) (see Figures 7 and 27 in Appendix A).
The bedrock milling station (SSVEC-6) is located at an elevation of 3834 feet on a flat above Astin Spring Draw at the confluence of Black Draw, Cottonwood Draw, and Astin Spring Draw. The milling station consists of nine mortars and one basin metate. The measurements for the milling features may be seen below:
Feature Diameter Depth Mortar 1 25 cm 34 cm Mortar 2 28 cm 38 cm Mortar 3 26 cm 37 cm Mortar 4 25 cm 35 cm Mortar 5 24 cm 32 cm 31
Mortar 6 14 cm 6 cm Mortar 7 16 cm 8 cm Mortar 8 12 cm 2 cm Mortar 9 17 cm 5 cm Basin 54 cm north-south 11 cm 18 cm east-west
A cache of broken metate fragments was located 100 m north of the milling station. No other cultural features were located in conjunction with the cache. The measurements for the metate fragments are as follows:
Artifact Measurements Metate 1 38 cm by 23 cm by 13 cm fragment dimensions 25 cm by 18 cm by 2 cm milling surface dimensions
Metate 2 10.5 cm by 8.0 cm by 5.0 cm fragment and milling surface dimensions
As stated above, a discontinuous light density artifact scatter (ground stone, lithics, ceramics) connects AZ FF:11:17, AZ FF:11:21, and SSVEC-6. Prehistoric and historic groups were drawn to the confluence of Astin Dfaw, Black Draw, and Cottonwood Wash to utilize the water (springs, floodwater runoff), to collect and process wild plants and grasses, to hunt, and perhaps to cultivate floodwater fields. All three site areas appear to be part of a larger multicomponent (Archaic, Salado, historic) site that is the result of discrete, but continuous and overlapping, cycles of habitation and resource procurement by both prehistoric and historic inhabitants of the San Bernardino Valley. The SSVEC-6 portion of AZ FF:11:17 is adjacent to, but outside, the proposed SSVEC right-of-way.
AZ FF:11:37 (SBFW-6). AZ FF:11:37 was recorded in 1985 as part of the San Bernardino U.S. Fish and Wildlife Refuge Survey by the ASM (Neily and Backwith 1985). The site is located at an elevation of 3800 feet at the base of Mesa de la Avanzada and is bisected by a dirt road between the Johnson Historical Museum property (Slaughter Ranch) and the San Bernardino U.S. Fish and Wildlife Refuge (see Figure 7 in Appendix A). Creosote and mesquite are the predominant site vegetation with lesser stands of acacia, bursage, and saltbush. AZ FF:11:37 is an Archaic lithic scatter of varying density that extends over 10,000 m2. The scatter consists of primary and secondary flakes, projectile points, drills, and bifaces. Neily and Beckwith identified several sherds (type unknown) within the boundary of AZ FF:11:37; however, they considered the sherds to be associated with a later use of the area as a whole and unrelated to the Archaic occupation (Neily and Beckwith 1985:24). The proposed SSVEC right-of-way parallels the dirt road and bisects AZ FF:11:37.
AZ FF:11:4 (SBFW-8). AZ FF:11:4 previously was recorded by V. K. Pheriba Stacy (1974) and, more recently, by Lyle M. Stone and James E. Ayres (SB-23) (Stone and Ayres 1982). The site is situated on a flat bench on the east side of Mesa de la 32
Avanzada at an elevation of 2800 feet (see Figure 7 in Appendix A). A dirt road that extends north from the Johnson Historical Museum property through the San Bernardino U.S. Fish and Wildlife Refuge bisects the site. Vegetation on the site is predominantly creosote, acacia, and mesquite. AZ FF:11:4 is a historic trash scatter (400 m north-south by 50 m to 150 m east-west) associated with AZ FF:11:12, a U.S. Army camp (Slaughter Ranch Outpost) located on top of Mesa de la Avanzada. Stone and Ayres (1982) assigned a use date for the area of between 1905 and 1916 based upon their artifact analysis. Neily and Beckwith (1985) noted other domestic trash on the site surface that suggested that it may also have been used by individuals who worked and lived at the Slaughter Ranch. The proposed SSVEC right-of-way parallels the road and bisects the site area.
AZ FF:12:30. AZ FF:12:30 is an extensive sherd and lithic scatter located at an elevation of 4580 feet on a flat above Cottonwood Creek and south of Geronimo Trail (see Figures 10 and 28 in Appendix A). Short grasses, mesquite, creosote, agave, and prickly pear are the predominant site vegetation. Two features, a small pot drop (20 plain ware sherds) and a cache of four metates, were located within the site boundary. Only one of the four metates was complete. A single mortar was located on a bedrock outcrop on the southeast edge of the site. The scatter consists of primary and secondary flakes, projectile points, a turtle-back scraper, cores, manos, metate fragments, hammerstones, and ceramics. Isolate #28, a small flake scatter located north of AZ FF:12:30 along the SSVEC right-of-way, may be an extension of AZ FF:12:30. The proposed SSVEC right-of-way bisects the site.
Phase B Isolates
Isolate #7. Isolate #7 consists of four kiln-fired commercial red bricks. No manufacturer's mark or name were embedded in the brick. No other cultural features (e.g., foundations, walls) were associated with Isolate #7.
Isolate #8. Isolate #8 consists of a scatter of 6 plain ware body sherds, 10 primary and secondary flakes, 1 core, 1 scraper, and 1 hammerstone. All of the lithic flakes and tools were made from metavolcanic cobbles available in Hog Canyon.
Isolate *9. Isolate #9 consists of a scatter of 15 primary and secondary flakes, a metavolcanic core, and 3 plain ware body sherds.
Isolate #11. Isolate #11 consists of a scatter of eight primary and secondary flakes, one bifacially ground mano, and one core, all made from metavolcanics that may have been derived from a cobble lense in Hog Canyon.
Isolates #16 through #23. Isolates #16 through #23 are a series of lithic scatters located along a ridge line and adjacent to a drainage that flows into Silver Creek. These scatters occur between 4100 feet to 4049 feet (see Figure 6 in Appendix A). The scatters appear to be the product of a series of one-time resource gathering 33 or lithic processing activities. None of the isolates have associated cultural features (e.g., hearths, roasting pits). The predominant lithic source materials were rhyolite, andesite, quartzite, chert, and chalcedony.
Isolate #16. Isolate #16 consists of 10 primary and 2 secondary flakes, 1 core, and 1 scraper, all of metavolcanics.
Isolate #17. Isolate #17 consists of 11 artifacts, 2 primary flakes, 6 secondary flakes, 2 chalcedony cores, and 1 chert scraper.
Isolate #18. Isolate #18 consists of six primary flakes, two bifaces, and one scraper of metavolcanics.
Isolate #19. Isolate #19 consists of five primary flakes of metavolcanics and chert.
Isolate #20. Isolate #20 consists of 15 primary and secondary flakes of metavolcanics.
Isolate #21. Isolate #21 consists of one rhyolite core, and three primary flakes and six secondary flakes of rhyolite and quartzite.
Isolate #22. Isolate #22, located adjacent to a tertiary stream that flows into Silver Creek, consists of two primary flakes and three secondary flakes, all of metavolcanics.
Isolate #23. Isolate #23, located adjacent to a tertiary drainage on the western bank above Silver Creek, is a scatter of 15 primary and secondary flakes and 3 cores, all of metavolcanics.
Isolate #24. Isolate #24 is comprised of two primary flakes and one scraper of metavolcanics. No cultural features (e.g., hearths, roasting pits) are associated with this isolate.
Isolate #25. Isolate #25 is a scatter of 12 primary and secondary flakes of metavolcanics and quartzite. No cultural features are associated with this isolate.
Isolate #26. Isolate #26, located adjacent to the road to the Malapai Ranch headquarters, consists of two primary flakes of metavolcanics. No cultural features are associated with this isolate. 34
Isolate #27. Isolate #27 consists of two secondary metavolcanic flakes with no associated cultural features (e.g., hearths, roasting pits).
Isolate #28. Isolate #28 is a scatter that consists of six primary flakes and one core of metavolcanics, one secondary flake of obsidian, and three plain ware body sherds. This isolate may be an extension of AZ FF:12:30. No cultural features (e.g., roasting pits, rock alignments) are located near this scatter.
Isolate #29. Isolate #29 is a lithic scatter comprised of 15 metavolcanic primary and secondary flakes. No cultural features are located or were noted in the area of the isolate.
Isolate #30. Isolate #30 consists of four secondary flakes of rhyolite and quartize located within a 5-meter radius. No cultural features are associated with this isolate.
Isolate #31. Isolate #31 consists of 12 primary and secondary flakes of metavolcanics and chert. No cultural features are associated with this lithic scatter.
Phase C
Phase C and its alternate route extend 5 miles from Mesa Draw through the southern end of the Swisshelm Mountains in Leslie and Indian canyons to the Sulphur Springs Valley (see Figure 2 in Appendix A). One site (AZ FF:6:20, a mine) and two isolates (#3 and #4) were located in the Phase C right-of-way. A single isolate (#32) was located adjacent to the alternate right-of-way.
Sites
AZ FF:6:20. AZ FF 6:20 is located on a side branch of Leslie Canyon at an elevation of 4600 feet in the southern end of the Swisshelm Mountains (see Figure 2 in Appendix A). The site is situated adjacent to and above a graded jeep road and an unnamed tertiary drainage that flows into the Sulphur Springs Valley. Vegetation on the site consists of mesquite, acacia, cholla and prickly pear cacti, creosote, and numerous grass species. Neither an overall site map nor feature maps were completed for AZ FF:6:20 due to slope and thick vegetative cover. The entire site area extends over approximately 1.5 acres and consists of at least eight features. Other features may be obscured by the vegetation. Features noted through the brush on the canyon hillside include at least two 1- to 2-meter-high native stone retaining walls. The walls are used to support two terraces made from the mine tailings. On the terraced areas are a road, concrete footings or piers for mine equipment, scattered nondiagnostic glass fragments, tin cans, rusted equipment parts, and a stone building. The dimensions of the native stone building are approximately 20 m by 30 m. The wall heights vary between 1 m and 2 m. A concrete water control feature(?), located 35 below the terraces and adjacent to the jeep road, is approximately 30 m by 60 m and consists of three concrete enclosed box terracelike basins and spillways dug into the hillside above the road. It may have been used to direct and store natural runoff from the canyon hillside for later use in the mining process. A mine shaft (depth and size undetermined) and three test pits also were located on a terrace above the jeep road. A brass cap, with "Santa Fe Mining No. 2" stamped onto its surface, was noted near the mine shaft. All of the concrete work observed at the mine complex appears to be handmixed with inclusions of local rock and gravel. This concrete is similar to types seen by both authors in 1930s homes, commercial buildings, and farm buildings in rural areas. The forms for the concrete are handmade and of heavy lumber and the sections are built one on top of another. Inquiries were made about AZ FF:6:20 of local residents. The site may be the remains of the Hiefner Mine, a silver claim that operated from the 1930s but was closed by the 1950s. The Swisshelm Mountains had a number of silver mining claims that date from the 1930s (Wendy Glenn, personal communication 1990). Further archival research would be necessary to document the mine's name, owner, dates of operation, and the type of ore taken from this mine. The proposed SSVEC right-of-way bisects AZ FF:6:20.
Phase C Isolates
Isolate #3. Four primary flakes and a core of metavolcanics comprise Isolate #3. No other cultural features were noted in the area of the scatter.
Isolate #4. Isolate #4 consists of three primary flakes of metavolcanics. No other cultural features were noted in the area.
Phase C Alternate Right-of-Way
Isolate #32. Isolate #32 consists of a scatter of historic artifacts. The scatter includes the remnants of a manual typewriter (circa 1930s), adding machine (circa 1930s), the legs of a wood stove, iron rails, bolts, and cable, tin cans, and assorted scrap metal. Based upon its location and artifact content, Isolate #32 appears to be associated with AZ FF:6:20, a silver mine claim.
Cultural Features Outside the Right-of-Way (Phases A through C)
A number of cultural features were noted outside the SSVEC right-of-way. These features will not be directly or indirectly impacted by the proposed right-of- way, but are pertinent to the history of the region.
Windmills and Cisterns
A series of historic windmills with wooden and metal superstructures, cisterns, pumps, and tanks were noted throughout the project area. The windmills date from 1917 to 1950 and are associated with pioneer, ranch, and farm families in Cochise 36
County. Most, if not all, of the windmills were made by the Aeromotor Company of Chicago, Illinois, which began to manufacture windmills and pumps and tanks in 1888 and supplied steel lookout towers to the U.S.D.A. Forest Service--Southwest Region (Arizona, New Mexico) (Steere 1989). Aeromotor ceased to do business in 1961. The windmills, cisterns, tanks, and pumps in the area may provide information for several historic themes for the period from 1917 to 1950 for Cochise County (water use and control, land use and settlement patterns, livestock and agricultural business, and pioneer families and community development).
Cottonwood Creek School
The Cottonwood Creek School was located near the intersection of Geronimo Trail and the road to the McDonald Ranch headquarters. It has been removed and all that remains are a few bricks. The original location for the school may have been a series of low terraces above Cottonwood Creek and northeast of the Cottonwood Cemetery. Two adobe houses also were located near the school at its original location, perhaps also on the terraces (Wendy Glenn, personal communication. 1990). The terraces have neither cultural debris nor features (e.g., dump, privy). Segments of a wagon or jeep trail were noted that lead up to the terraces. No features were located near the second school location either. At least two rural schools were located in the San Bernardino Valley; one was at Slaughter Ranch and the other was at Cottonwood Creek. The building or buildings for both schools have been removed; however, individuals who attended either the Slaughter Ranch school or the Cottonwood Creek School may have knowledge about the buildings, their locations, other students, teachers, and when the schools opened and closed. Oral histories of one or both of the schools would provide important documentation about one type of cultural resource that is rapidly disappearing from the American landscape; that is, the small rural or "one room" schoolhouse.
Summary
Twenty new and previously recorded sites and 29 isolates were recorded during the Class III survey of the SSVEC right-of-way in Phases A through C. A summary of the sites by phase is presented in Table 5.
The cultural resources identified during the Class III survey are representative of at least five cultures (Archaic, Mogollon, Salado, Anglo, and Hispanic) and two time periods (prehistoric and historic) that are prominent in the culture history of the Sulphur Springs Valley, San Bernardino Valley, and Cochise County as a whole. The prehistoric sites are the product of cyclical periods of both seasonal and permanent habitation, resource procurement and processing (water, clay, lithics, flora, and fauna), and ritual activity by Archaic Mogollon and Salado peoples. Historic sites within the survey area document the utilization of the project area for homesteads (farming), ranches (livestock industry), mines (copper, gold, and silver), and transportation (wagon roads, the El Paso & Southwestern Railroad Company). Like the prehistoric use of the landscape, the historic sites represent overlapping and cyclical use of the land for habitational, natural resource procurement (water, minerals), and commercial (ranches, farms, mines, transportation) purposes. 37
Table 5
SUMMARY OF SITES BY PHASE
Functional Site Area Cultural Temporal Site Classification (m2) Affiliation Affiliation
Phase A AZ FF:6:21 Cattle station 2500 Anglo Historic to recent (1930 to 1950)
AZ FF:6:22 Resource 900 Archaic Late Archaic (1500 B.C. to procurement A.D. 300)
Phase B AZ FF:10:19 Cemetery 5600 Anglo/ Historic to present (1906 to Hispanic present)
AZ FF:11:69 Homestead 121,000 Anglo Historic to recent (1930 to 1950)
AZ FF:11:70 Arizona & South- 42,300 Historic to recent (1907 to eastern Rail Road (1961) grade and trash scatter
AZ FF:11:71 Cemetery 4200 Anglo/ Historic (circa 1800s) Hispanic(?)
AZ FF:11:72 Resource 4000 Archaic/ Late Archaic (1500 B.C. to procurement Mogollon A.D. 300); Mogollon A.D. 1 to 1200)
AZ FF:11:73 Resource 9900 Archaic Late Archaic (1500 B.C. to procurement (scatter) A.D. 300) 400 (milling station)
AZ FF:11:74 Resource 4000 Archaic Late Archaic (1500 B.C. to procurement A.D. 300)
AZ FF:11:75 Resource 2400 Archaic Late Archaic (1500 B.C. to procurement A.D. 300)
AZ FF:11:78 Resource 2500 Archaic Late Archaic (1500 B.C. to procurement to A.D. 300) 38
Table 5 (continued)
Functional Site Area Cultural Temporal Site Classification (m2) Affiliation Affiliation
AZ FF:11:79 Resource 2500 Archaic Late Archaic (1500 B.C. to procurement A.D. 300)
AZ FF:11:80 Resource 2500 Archaic Late Archaic (1500 B.C. to procurement A.D. 300)
AZ FF:11:76 Resource 5600 Archaic/ Late Archaic (1500 B.C. to procurement Mogollon A.D. 300); Mogollon (A.D. 1 to 1200)
AZ FF:11:77 Resource 2500 Archaic Late Archaic (1500 B.C. to procurement A.D. 300)
AZ FF:11:17 Habitation, resource 229,500 Archaic, Middle to Late Archaic (4850 to procurement Salado, 1500 B.C., 1500 B.C. to A.D. Hispanic 300); Animas-Salado (A.D. 1200 to 1425); Historic (circa early 1800s)
AZ FF:11:37 Resource procurement 10,000 Archaic 1500 B.C. to A.D. 300 and processing
AZ FF:11:4 Trash dump 60,000 Anglo, Historic (1905-1916) Hispanic, Chinese, Black
AZ FF:12:30 Habitation/ 14,000 Archaic/ Late Archaic (1500 B.C. to resource Mogollon A.D. 300); Mogollon (A.D. 1 to procurement 1200)
Phase C AZ FF:6:20 Mining operation 90,000 Anglo(?) Historic to recent (1930-1952) 39
Prior research and contract work in the project area have been limited to surveys that have documented portions of the Archaic, Mogollon, and Salado settlement patterns in the southern Sulphur Springs and San Bernardino valleys (Amsden 1928; Sauer and Brand 1931; Arizona State Museum surveys 1981-1989; Douglas and Brown 1985; Neily and Beckwith 1985). Excavation data are either limited (Mills and Mills 1971; Stone and Ayres 1982) or nonexistent for the southern Sulphur Springs and San Bernardino valleys, because no systematic, problem-oriented excavation has been conducted on a local or regional scale for the uplands, valleys, or their associated drainage basins.
Systematic archival research, photodocumentation, and oral histories of ranches, homesteads, schools, mines, mining operations, mine claims, railroads, and railroad stations have been limited to date. However, prior work that is applicable to the project area is research conducted for the San Bernardino/Slaughter Ranch, the Arizona & Southeastern Rail Road Company, and Cochise County cemeteries (Myrick 1975; Hadley 1982, 1987; Stone and Ayres 1982; Christiansen 1983; Reba B. Wells 1985a, 1985b, 1985c, 1989; Cochise Genealogical Society 1990).
Recommendations
This section presents site-specific recommendations and National Register of Historic Places evaluations for each of the 20 cultural resources recorded during the Class III survey in Phases A through C. The recommendations are based upon the potential contributions that the sites can make, either individually or collectively, to the prehistoric and historic data base of Cochise County and the state of Arizona. The recommendations consider present and potential future impacts that may adversely affect the site(s) integrity. Testing and/or data recovery programs are recommended as part of the plan(s) at each site(s) to mitigate adverse impacts (direct or indirect) if sites cannot be avoided. The following procedures and standards should be followed and met as part of either testing or mitigation programs where implemented.
1. A research design(s) should be formulated to define specific research problems and goals pertinent to the site(s) and the region (southeastern Arizona) as a whole.
2. All site materials, including artifacts, ecofacts, field and excavation notes, and photographs should be curated with the Arizona State Museum.
3. All sites, features, and artifacts should be photographed.
4. A professional-quality report or series of reports that discuss the results of the testing and/or data recovery program(s) should be submitted to Arizona State Land Department, Sulphur Springs Valley Electric Cooperative, Inc., and the Arizona State Museum.
As part of the individual site evaluations, historic contexts comprised of a theme, a place, and a time period are identified for the 20 sites that are eligible for 40 listing on the National Register of Historic Places (Dart and Doelle 1984; Dart 1989). Table 6 provides a summary of the management recommendations and National Register of Historic Places eligibility.
AZ FF:6:21
AZ FF:6:21, a historic cattle-loading station, is part of a larger historic ranch operation and has the potential to yield information relevant to three historic context themes for the period from 1920 to 1950 in the Sulphur Springs Valley: (1) Anglo/Hispanic ranch or homestead history, (2) commerce and transportation, and (3) water use and distribution.
Avoidance is recommended for AZ FF:6:21. If destructive impacts cannot be avoided, a program of historic documentation and mapping is recommended that would include the following tasks:
• Archival research and informant interviews with individuals knowledgeable about the cattle-loading station and the ranch or homestead with which it was associated should be conducted.
• The entire site should be instrument-mapped, and an individual map of each feature should be completed.
• A controlled surface collection should be conducted and mapping of diagnostic artifacts should be completed.
• Detailed photodocumentation of the site and its features should be completed.
AZ FF:6:22
AZ FF:6:22, a prehistoric limited activity site, is related to prehistoric resource procurement activities in the southern Sulphur Springs Valley and may be part of a larger local and, as of yet, unrecorded settlement system. The lithic scatter consists of 30 primary and secondary metavolcanic flakes, but lacks apparent surface features or diagnostic artifacts that can be attributed to any one time period or cultural group. No determination could be made regarding the presence or depth of subsurface cultural deposits. Additional fieldwork may yield information to support eligibility to the National Register of Historic Places.
Avoidance is recommended at AZ FF:11:22. If avoidance is not feasible, a testing program to mitigate adverse impacts to the site is recommended that would include the following tasks:
• The entire site area should be instrument-mapped.
• A controlled surface collection of all artifacts should be conducted. 41
Table 6
SUMMARY OF SITE-SPECIFIC RECOMMENDATIONS AND NATIONAL REGISTER ELIGIBILITY
National Register Site Eligibility Criteria Recommended Mitigation Measures and Alternatives
Phase A AZ FF:6:21 Yes Avoidance, archival research, oral interviews, detailed recording, and mapping
AZ FF:6:22 No Avoidance, testing program reconmended to determine National Register eligibility
Phase B AZ FF:10:19 Yes d Avoidance AZ FF:11:4 Yes d Avoidance, archival research, and testing program AZ FF:11:17 Yes d Avoidance, testing program AZ FF:11:37 Yes d Avoidance, testing program AZ FF:11:69 Yes d Avoidance, archival research, oral interviews, detailed recording, and mapping
AZ FF:11:70 Yes d Avoidance, testing program, archival research, oral interviews, detailed recording, and mapping
AZ FF:11:71 Yes Avoidance and preservation, archival research, oral interviews, mapping, exhumation of graves to alternate cemetery
AZ FF:11:72 Yes d Avoidance, testing program AZ FF:11:73 Yes d Avoidance, testing program AZ FF:11:74 Yes d Avoidance, testing program AZ FF:11:75 Yes d Avoidance, testing program AZ FF:11:76 Yes d Avoidance, testing program AZ FF:11:77 Yes d Avoidance, testing program AZ FF:11:78 Yes d Avoidance, testing program AZ FF:11:79 Yes d Avoidance, testing program AZ FF:11:80 Yes d Avoidance, testing program AZ FF:12:30 Yes d Avoidance, testing program
Phase C AZ FF:6:20 Yes Avoidance, archival research, oral interviews, detailed recording, and mapping 42
• Test units should be judgmentally placed within the site boundary in order to determine the presence, extent, and/or depth of subsurface midden soils or cultural features.
a Evaluation of site data should be made in order to determine National Register eligibility.
• Detailed photodocumentation of the site area should be completed.
AZ FF:10:19
AZ FF:10:19, the Wells Family Cemetery, has the potential to yield information relevant to at least three historic context themes for the period from 1906 to 1950 in the Sulphur Springs Valley: (1) mortuary art and mortuary practices, (2) noncommunicable diseases and physical conditions of human populations, and (3) the use of nonhabitation and nonresource extraction sites for special purposes.
Because this cemetery is not only a historic but a contemporary cemetery that is in use today (1990), avoidance is highly recommended.
AZ FF:11:4
AZ FF:11:4, a historic trash dump, has the potential to yield information relevant to several historic context themes for the period from 1905 to 1916 in the San Bernardino Valley: (1) diet and health, (2) exchange and commerce, (3) settlement and land use patterns, (4) special purpose (nonextraction, nonhabitation) sites, (5) food preservation and storage, (6) styles and types of ceramics, and (7) socioeconomic and ethnic patterns.
Avoidance is recommended at AZ FF:11:4. If destructive direct or indirect impacts cannot be avoided, a testing program is recommended that would include the following tasks:
• Archival research should be conducted.
• The site should be instrument-mapped, and all diagnostic artifacts should be point-provenienced and collected.
• A series of test trenches and units should be placed within the boundary of the site to determine its depth and extent.
• Detailed photodocumentation of the site area should be completed.
Depending upon the results of the testing program, a data recovery effort may be recommended. 43
AZ FF:11:17
AZ FF:11:17 encompasses the remnants of Archaic burials, AZ FF:11:21 (Slaughter Ranch Site), SSVEC-6 (an archaic milling station and artifact scatter), and the remnants of a historic adobe house. AZ FF:11:17, a Middle to Late Archaic, Salado, and historic Anglo-Hispanic habitation, resource procurement, and processing site, has the potential to yield information relevant to several historic context themes for the periods from 4850 to 1550 B.C. (Middle Archaic), 1550 B.C. to A.D. 300 (Late Archaic), A.D. 1200 to 1425 (Salado), and 1800 to 1917 (historic) in the San Bernardino Valley: (1) the use of nonhabitation sites for resource procurement, (2) settlement patterns and land use, (3) the role of subsistence in land use and settlement patterns, (4) utilization of wild and domesticated plants and raw lithic resources, (5) utilization and processing of faunal resources, (6) exchange routes and networks, (7) water control features and systems, (8) portable food preservation and storage, (9) architecture, (10) historic settlement patterns and ranch history, (11) ceramic technology and styles, and (12) mortuary practices.
Avoidance is recommended for the Archaic milling station and artifact scatter (SSVEC-6), that component of AZ FF:11:17 that may be potentially impacted by the right-of-way corridor. If avoidance is not feasible, a testing program is recommended that would include the following tasks:
si The milling station and scatter component of AZ FF:11:17 should be instrument-mapped.
• Point-provenienced mapping and collection of all diagnostic artifacts should be completed.
• Test units should be placed within the site component boundary to determine the presence, extent, and depth of midden soils and subsurface features.
• Detailed photodocumentation of the site component should be made.
Depending upon the results of the testing effort, a program of data recovery may be recommended.
AZ FF:11:37
AZ FF:11:37 is a Late Archaic resource procurement and processing site that can provide information relevant to five historic context themes for the period 1500 B.C. to A.D. 300 in the San Bernardino Valley: (1) the use of nonhabitation sites for resource procurement, (2) the role of subsistence and settlement patterns, (3) settlement pattern and land use, (4) utilization of wild plant and raw lithic resources, and (5) artifact manufacturing technologies. 44
Avoidance is recommended at AZ FF:11:37. If adverse direct or indirect impacts cannot be avoided, a testing program is recommended that would include the following tasks:
• The site should be instrument-mapped, and a point-provenienced collection of diagnostic artifacts should be made.
• Test units should be placed within the site boundary to determine the presence, extent, and depth of subsurface midden soils and features.
• Detailed photodocumentation of the entire site should be completed.
Depending upon the results of the testing program, a data recovery effort may be recommended.
AZ FF:11:69
AZ FF:11:69, the historic homestead, has the potential to yield information relevant to at least four historic context themes for the period from 1930 to 1950 in the Sulphur Springs Valley: (1) water use and distribution, (2) Anglo/Hispanic settlement patterns, (3) agriculture and livestock production, and (4) commerce.
Avoidance is recommended at AZ FF:11:69. If avoidance is not feasible, a program of mapping, archival research, and photodocumentation is recommended that would include the following tasks:
• Archival research and oral interviews with individuals knowledgeable about the homestead and/or its occupants should be conducted.
• The entire site should be instrument-mapped, and individual maps of each feature should be completed.
• Controlled mapping and collection of diagnostic artifacts should be made.
• Detailed photodocumentation of the entire site and its individual features should be completed.
AZ FF:11:70
AZ FF:11:70, a portion of the Arizona & Southeastern Rail Road Company grade and the associated trash scatter, has the potential to provide information relevant to historic context themes for the period of 1890 to 1960 in the Sulphur Springs Valley: (1) transportation, (2) commerce, (3) subsistence, and (4) settlement patterns. 45
Avoidance is recommended at AZ FF:11:70. If avoidance of either direct or indirect impacts is not possible, a mitigation program is recommended that would include the following tasks:
• Archival research and interviews with individuals who either worked on the railroad or utilized the line for transportation or commerical purposes should be conducted.
• The site should be instrument-mapped, and point-provenienced collections of diagnostic surface artifacts should be made.
• Detailed photodocumentation of this section of the grade should be completed.
• Documentation nominating not only this portion of the A&SE grade (AZ FF:11:70), but also the entire grade and its stations to the National Register of Historic Places is recommended.
AZ FF:11:71
AZ FF:11:71, a historic cemetery near the Lease Windmill, has the potential to provide information relevant to five historic context themes for the period from 1880 to 1930 in the Sulphur Springs Valley: (1) mortuary practices, (2) noncommunicable diseases and physical conditions of human populations, (3) demography, (4) use of nonresource extraction and nonhabitation sites for special purposes, and (5) homestead history or settlement patterns.
Avoidance is recommended for AZ FF:11:71. If avoidance is not feasible, a program of recording, archival research, and relocation of the cemetery is recommended. The mitigation plan should include the following tasks:
• Archival research and informant interviews should be conducted to determine the names of individuals that are buried in the cemetery and if there are any surviving family members.
• AZ FF:11:71 should be instrument-mapped, and individual graves should be point-provenienced.
• Detailed photodocumentation of the site and its features should be made.
If the site cannot be avoided, a plan should be developed to notify surviving family members and to exhume the burials and relocate them to another cemetery. This alternative is recommended because the cemetery already has been disturbed by cattle. Secondary impacts from brush clearance and/or construction vehicles and equipment increases the likelihood of further disturbance of the cemetery plots. 46
AZ FF:11:72
AZ FF:11:72, a Late Archaic-Mogollon resource procurement site, can provide relevant information to at least three historic context themes for the period 1550 B.C. to A.D. 300 and A.D. 1 to 1200 in the Perilla Mountains and the Sulphur Springs Valley: (1) the use of nonhabitation sites for resource procurement and processing, (2) subsistence activities in the upper bajada of the Perilla Mountains, and (3) the role of subsistence in land use and settlement patterns.
Avoidance is recommended for AZ FF:11:72. If direct or indirect construction impacts cannot be avoided, a testing program is recommended that would include the following tasks:
• AZ FF:11:72 should be instrument-mapped, and all diagnostic artifacts point-provenienced and collected.
• Test units should be placed in the artifact concentration within the boundary of the site to determine the presence, extent, and depth of subsurface midden soils and features.
• Detailed photodocumentation of the site should be completed.
Depending upon the results of the testing program, a data recovery effort may be recommended.
AZ FF:11:73
AZ FF:11:73, a Late Archaic resource procurement and processing station, can yield information relevant to at least five historic context themes for the period 1500 B.C. to A.D. 300 in the Perilla Mountains: (1) the use of nonhabitation sites for resource procurement and processing, (2) subsistence activities, (3) the role of subsistence in land use and settlement patterns, (4) utilization of wild resources, and (5) exchange routes and networks.
Avoidance is recommended for AZ FF:11:73. If adverse direct or indirect impacts cannot be avoided, a program of testing is recommended that would include the following tasks:
• AZ FF:11:73 should be instrument-mapped, and all diagnostic artifacts point- provenienced and collected.
• Test units should be placed within the lithic scatter to determine the presence, extent, and depth of subsurface midden soils and features.
• Detailed photodocumentation of the entire site should be completed.
Based upon the results of the testing program, a data recovery effort may be recommended. 47
AZ FF:11:74
AZ FF:11:74, a Late Archaic processing and procurement site, can provide information relevant to five historic context themes for the period from 1500 B.C. to A.D. 300 in the Perilla Mountains and the San Bernardino Valley: (1) the use of nonhabitation sites for resource procurement and processing, (2) subsistence activities, (3) the role of subsistence in land use and settlement practices, (4) utilization of wild plant resources and raw lithic materials, and (5) exchange routes and networks.
Avoidance is recommended at AZ FF:11:74. If avoidance is not feasible, a testing program is recommended that would include the following tasks:
• AZ FF:11:74 should be instrument-mapped, and all diagnostic artifacts point-provenienced and collected.
• Test units should be placed within the lithic scatter to determine the presence, extent, and depth of subsurface midden soils and features.
• Detailed photodocumentation of the entire site area should be completed.
Depending upon the results of the testing program, a data recovery effort may be recommended.
AZ FF:11:75
AZ FF:11:75 is a Late Archaic resource procurement and processing site that can provide information relevant to five historic context themes for the period 1500 B.C. to A.D. 300 in the Perilla Mountains: (1) the use of nonhabitation sites for resource procurement and processing, (2) subsistence activities, (3) the role of subsistence in land use and settlement patterns, (4) utilization of wild plant and raw lithic materials, and (5) exchange routes and networks.
Avoidance is recommended at AZ FF:11:75. If avoidance is not feasible, a testing program is recommended that would include the following tasks:
• AZ FF:11:75 should be instrument-mapped, and all diagnostic artifacts point-provenienced and collected.
• Test units should be placed within the lithic scatter to determine the presence, extent, and depth of subsurface midden soils and features.
• Detailed photodocumentation of the entire site area should be completed.
Depending upon the results of the testing program, a data recovery effort may be recommended. 48
AZ FF:11:76
AZ FF:11:76 is a Late Archaic/Mogollon resource procurement site that can yield information relevant to three historic context themes for the periods from 1500 B.C. to A.D. 300 and A.D. 1 to 1200 in the San Bernardino Valley: (1) the use of nonhabitation sites for resource procurement, (2) the role of subsistence in land use and settlement patterns, and (3) utilization of wild plant and raw lithic resources.
Avoidance is recommended at AZ FF:11:76. If destructive direct and indirect impacts cannot be avoided, a testing program is recommended that would include the following tasks:
• AZ FF:11:76 should be instrument-mapped, and all diagnostic artifacts should be point-provenienced and collected.
• Test units should be placed within the site boundary in order to determine the presence, extent, and depth of subsurface midden soils and features.
• Detailed photodocumentation of the site should be completed.
Depending upon the results of the testing program, a data recovery effort may be recommended.
AZ FF:11:77
AZ FF:11:77 is a Late Archaic resource procurement site that can provide information relevant to three historic context themes for the period 1500 B.C. to A.D. 300 in the San Bernardino Valley: (1) the use of nonhabitation sites for resource procurement, (2) the role of subsistence in land use and settlement patterns, and (3) utilization of wild plant and raw lithic resources.
Avoidance is recommended at AZ FF:11:77. If avoidance is not feasible, a testing program is recommended that would include the following tasks:
• AZ FF:11:77 should be instrument-mapped, and all diagnostic artifacts should be point-provenienced and collected.
• Test units should be placed within the site boundary to determine the presence, extent, and depth of subsurface midden soils and features.
• Detailed photodocumentation of the site should be completed.
Depending upon the results of the testing program a data recovery effort may be recommended. 49
AZ FF:11:78
AZ FF:11:78, a Late Archaic resource procurement and processing site, can potentially yield information relevant to four historic context themes for the period 1500 B.C. to A.D. 300 in the Perilla Mountains: (1) the use of nonhabitation sites for resource procurement and processing, (2) subsistence activities, (3) the role of subsistence in land use and settlement patterns, and (4) utilization of wild plant and raw lithic materials.
Avoidance is recommended at AZ FF:11:78. If direct and indirect impacts cannot be avoided, a testing program is recommended that would include the following tasks:
• AZ FF:11:78 should be instrument-mapped, and all diagnostic artifacts point-provenienced and collected.
• A separate map should be made of the ground stone cache.
• Test units should be placed within the artifact scatter to determine the presence, extent, and depth of subsurface pidden soils and features.
• Detailed photodocumentation of the entire site should be completed.
Depending upon the results of the testing program, a data recovery effort may be recommended.
AZ FF:11:79
AZ F:11:79, a Late Archaic resource procurement site, has the potential to provide information relevant to three historic context themes for the period 1500 B.C. to A.D. 300 in the Perilla Mountains: (1) the use of nonhabitation sites for resource procurement and processing, (2) the role of subsistence in land use and settlement patterns, and (3) utilization of wild plant and raw lithic resources.
Avoidance is recommended for AZ FF:11:79. If adverse impacts cannot be avoided, a testing program is recommended that would include the following tasks:
• AZ FF:11:79 should be instrument-mapped, and all diagnostic artifacts should be point-provenienced and collected.
• Test units should be placed within the artifact scatter to determine the presence, extent, and depth of subsurface midden soils and features.
• Detailed photodocumentation of the entire site should be completed. 50
Depending upon the results of the testing program, a data recovery effort may be recommended.
AZ FF:11:80
AZ FF:11:80, a Late Archaic resource procurement site, has the potential to yield information relevant to three historic context themes for the period A.D. 300 to 1500 in the Perilla Mountains: (1) the use of nonhabitation sites for resource procurement, (2) the role of subsistence in land use and settlement patterns, and (3) utilization of wild plant and raw lithic resources.
Avoidance is recommended at AZ FF:11:80. If avoidance is not feasible, a testing program is recommended that would include the following tasks:
• AZ FF:11:80 should be instrument-mapped, and all diagnostic artifacts should be point-provenienced and collected.
• Test units should be placed within the artifact scatter to determine the presence, extent, and depth of subsurface midden soils and features.
• Detailed photodocumentation of the entire site should be completed.
Depending upon the results of the testing program, a data recovery effort may be recommended.
AZ FF:12:30
AZ FF:12:30 is a Late Archaic Mogollon habitation, resource procurement, and processing site that can provide relevant information to six historic context themes for the periods 1500 B.C. to A.D. 300 and A.D. 1 to 1200 for the San Bernardino Valley: (1) settlement patterns and land use, (2) the role of subsistence in land use and settlement patterns, (3) habitation sites and site types, (4) utilization and processing of wild plant resources and raw lithic materials, (5) utilization of faunal materials, and (6) exchange routes and networks.
Avoidance is recommended at AZ FF:12:30. If avoidance is not feasible, a testing program is recommended that would include the following tasks:
• AZ FF:12:30 should be instrument-mapped, and all diagnostic artifacts should be collected and point-provenienced.
• Individual maps should be made of each feature.
• Test units should be placed within the boundary of the site to determine the presence, extent, and depth of subsurface midden soils and features. 51
• Detailed photodocumentation of the entire site area and its features should be completed.
Depending upon the results of the testing program, a data recovery effort may be recommended.
AZ FF:6:20
AZ FF:6:20, a historic mine, has the potential to yield information relevant to four historic context themes for the period from 1930 to 1950 in the Swisshelm Mountains of Cochise County: (1) mining history and commerce, (2) mineral utilization, (3) mining extraction processes, and (4) architecture.
Avoidance is recommended at AZ FF:6:20. If either direct or indirect adverse impacts cannot be avoided, a program of mitigation is recommended that would include the following tasks:
• Archival research and oral interviews with individuals knowledgeable about the mine or mining in the Swisshelm Mountains should be conducted.
• The site should be instrument-mapped, including all features and diagnostic artifacts.
• Individual maps and drawings of each site feature (e.g., stone building, terraces, and rock walls) should be completed.
• A controlled surface collection of diagnostic artifacts should be made, and appropriate features should be excavated.
a Detailed photodocumentation of the entire site area and its individual features should be completed.
National Register of Historic Places Eligibility
Nineteen of the new and previously recorded sites are eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places. AZ FF:6:22 is not eligible for nomination at this time, because a testing program would be necessary in order to acquire information that would permit an assessment of the site's eligibility.
Isolates
No additional fieldwork is recommended for the 29 isolates recorded in the project area.
52
Ronald P. Maldonado Principal Investigator Project Director 54
Figure 1. Project area location.
55
, • : , , y. , ', ------T,-- 1 , ...-- i• , • • ..... ! i ----
- ..---- •"-*r'' - ' -' % ..-. - -1 --7--'' -- ... , ib.,--/ '' ,. • - . '4 ;:--.:. \ ' , i - ,,r "- -- - "2,4 1 * „ " i.- . --■-■-- • -----, 7" L 1 ? , , --. I , i...... 7.7,...... -- - ,••-•-•: ,-444 , ,- --- • ,., --r i I ' '`It:TERmtiE... . _. _ ' '7 C- d 1 "" : -,.. ••... — ,22:: ...... 1 • ....,,, - • . R - • _ . \ T : - :, : • -- • • - - ossaari,,A.aatairt% -, •• W ...,..„ ,, , ..-----.. .. A ---;" ; ! x 4 '-\\..."-- ': • " '-•., ' , S 1 • .- . •.„ ,. ,---:',... P t-i-IA4 • , / s ___,__ , .,,;.....:(...., Y ..,_., - ---:-., : • ' -1 _. ,—.—■- 1 %...: R - ___:_ : ..R , - - ....-----...... „ 1 --,--. ____... ._..... - - •
it...... '' .‘ ,. . 1 .a..r - A ,,,, .. --,..-■ _ ,...... ;1 ,.. . ..,o • • S J „ ',..-• , 'IP , is... . at.... ' C - I I ••.. ._ .... N 131 , \ ; 2-_...., • I -, [- , ' r .,.. .1K, ,.... - ' A '• PROPOSED CENTERl_INE OF '14.44KV ItNGLE PHASE DI TRIBUTION L NE--' ' • . ....j--....,,,... ' r" "..-■,. , (01K- ,' I , ,, i^:e„i., ■n -'--- ■ ' I 1 ..0 . 1 ..•■• ...... 4 I :... : _C_/....i...ici, , •• ..--..... " I ...- •. , 1 .).....p.---- • 0*.' ' - , . --. 1, ' '-' ‘',.. ,:''' •....- •• 7 1tl • , i I 4 ... i , / i ,.-1, __/,---7------0' ..... Ii2 •F:F4 :21 .. - L0 .... ------,-..,- --,.. 5 NM , ... ._ _ 75 !... ..0, . -- . . E " -.4 r ..- i• VS • ? , , t,,::1 .." --.L .: ff \ 0 ,,, " -. .* *, , AZFRB:22 .. '' / --- ':"-- ' -4' -= "---- 1, ,„ . 1 , //._,T 4 t, `,... , I 1.____Z .•••• X'• I t - i 0 ,- - -6,011 , 10.2 . ';,.... ---- ■ ••126 1 I - ••••• , , -, mu \,.....7.,...... , , - ,:. - .- ...,- -■,,..r'' ...... ,---...... / , ...... •i...., - ..7. , ....- • i 7." - -- ••••• / /7-' _ - •4- , I (2 s7- ' ' -- :7-1;.... ., ... 7 i -, -W.AtS---. ; ,,c (' , • • - .... . A 1,-- -..... "-,...... 70.,1 ' _ , .,./.3: „A 4 ;-, ' -op -,-,2, :-, - 1 „e_ ___-- __. , ___ ,-. _ I - _ , I : i _.4.__:.,--:.; „ - i _ . ... •-•1 4116 I - -I nver .,-- ,.. r Ts, d l !....2 I a '" e .' :: ------. /' : -- - -_. 1 7 • - - --• . --› ..----4- I --- 4•,•, - * -• , - _0, - A . , 3., 1 .... 1.1\ ,r.;-. , an 4 - --- ; ...... -_,---;*--- •-. I I r 7 / A ---r/ -IV '• - ,-. -.1--. :- ' -4 1
2 . .,, ' e, ,Le',: - ,:1< , 1 ■------' 2')• -:;;; .. .. . •!•• ..., -- ..1..,------• . ' l - _ _ _ - , . . . • ___,-. - , _ , / „---0•- •■ '' I • ' , / - '-a ... '-- .''I.71-•7• / ' -2 1- ::..-..*,'... .5 0 ,-' _ ' ,--- -'..< - --:- .,...... T, -- **-•-• , , .., ...., . ?. / / •• '- I -- - 0 7 - - ..il.• '. - ....Z.:: . ... . ,, ...... \ 4 I •ailo:„.--- ":::„•.,..-_-_;-'1...---4 R;------,-, r. 7: I.„.I.,_:-._ 2 ------, • ,erle --'------, -''?" ------..., . . ..--- [ - "1. '■ -- ' - , • . . , ' ” t. , ... - ( I. ■ / ' _.- ,-_,- 0, I 1 ......
.-_2 ,' L'. 1; I '`-^--- I , i ____.,..„.. 1 ' : ‘---- -d- ■ --•••-, • \_;;I --/ I ,..-.RLL....•••':•-•:...... L . •.- . Z ...... rilir . . / =11rice... ?II 111=111111 ...... ■• ... , - .• ...... • fe01 0 ..--. , ------• -• 111 -.-”,--.-- . ----- 1' , • 1 , , - . : . - 18:.r. • ...... ,.,• 1 / . .. ''' -,.;..„/ ....., , ' ....., . 1 . .* ' . ..f.t: ...... - _ ,, r ' .. • -t I 1I ' . ; I ,....„. ASE _ ;-,. .. ■. ....: i. _ L --T1- --'-' ANIPME1101111.111.1R- J " . - -.."41111111""-...... 1 1, ... ' ,,,- Iii■ 7 / 1 : 1 ---. , I 40 4T,t ,c,,Li WA 003 1 • 1 / `-‘,....,...... 4.7_ ' 1 ■ T:'.....42: / , --- , /H MO Ma 0 HO , I 7.--- • . , 7{11 IOU •■••••" '14N WO 'O.* ...... ; .. 1 .".' 0. I. . l - --..";.---/-4--1-----z ' H S . , / L1.E, - ....., 3 r ' P A E- A440, - 7---• t.....‘,.. \ M 101 .1., MN . to( ( DU corm". 047:10. • /117 ' >. a '-, - M / ', ■ / .--1' 1 ■ .-' ' S le . ' :" \ ' .. 1:
- - way Figure 2. Leslie Canyon Quadrangle. Location of Phases A through C right of
corridors with AZ FF:6:20, AZ FF:6:21, AZ FF:6:22, and isolates.
56
• + • ..... ' I: • ,/ , . ..• 1 , • ..• , .:...... • / ''. . , •;,.. • ___. . —-.. - - -I - ,..- • ' - \ ' ' , -_ ' .-...-. ) , • e PHASE .... • - • / "'",. . • .. ..v,...1 ,•••■ _,., ? .1.4,L,N. K•-, , ---,. i .... ; ''• • - ,.., -..3 '...J \ F S. ''')- '... tI '-„...... • 1 .' • . . .-•_. ) .
- . `•••• PeOPOSED CENTERLINE OF 14.4 K_Y-$12.64. PH.ASt ...... E •1;1/1:11 ; 1 ••'- stir:, — ; ----• • • •••• - , -• ' •4351 . O 11 ACI.L.13 PT A 7_1 N A -•••,5 ...... co ! id I .- - . 7.-R - __,...... -9•■•••- •••' on; •I '.5 . —' - 1„....t.tlf;...... •••..., • ( .,...... 4...... ' -- 77,...... / I 7 • ; -.. • • • \ \ •,1 • • ...... 1..\ ‘ \ - - -7.5--i. - -•••• '74,...,1. ..,R ...... ;30 ' ••••-•' ...... :,...,..-'- • ••••-• / •;•••'•-!7! . • • L..I •••• ,....,..4 ; , • 'LZ•4 '• `" F''' ' ------L'••. •-•.1' , • . : • .: •5!!: .i "7--- ''''.• 1' - _.,,.,-• ../ /- I •-.. ' - - 35 I- ' \ ; F 0' R E S'T 77 • (-T'..t 3S• , ...... , •• 7 . ; 7- '' ''*-:.------, .. -; ,:: -..... 1 4 _ ■ s ' ,;, - < - , .,;,• t . ,-.‘ ‘;, - -z f\.-. • ---- r'• -/ '-''''''.------...... -7---. . , • .• 4, -„, . N.: I ., ..:. .; .- / " \ I '! ;;;__is,...... : ...... 1 ...... - •,,.,- ••- ,., — . -.. ._;--- : • • " ...... • ...., -_ , .•_, • . - '' ...',..,• .? ,.._. .. 7, ---..".1 • — , •• . . . -,-.•,,P7---- -+.: .•--' ‘,;---.z--. .! • Hi • •!•••; e -'•••- \7:• - - 4 - ' 4 -"" -,70z1 \- • -' • `'• --.3 7-- - ' " '41, ,____.,;. .... ,-;,....Z1K I -\ N -:------,: -. ---Z--,-, TS,.., ... r •• ' . . '-:. .-- t.-■ • - ''', • - —4-' .a.se..‘ r- - ,,...... -- - ...... „--4, ; . . .\_ , ..7‘..., N"-i.,.., , ',t...... ;„/.,...T..•••-1,,••-••_,.., i1,; . ,.;/...,../71 ,..,; ,_„,,- ,...- N\ ; • 1,...; •.F .\ ...5•01,,,,_, ''''.4,,.. C.., I 4,,. J -,...... _ ‘.‘, '•,...... ,,,...rJ...... ,../.J , i ,.;; )., • -., s„,..;_...... ______,„,:f --- -, .---- -. .4. _.,. ,,,,. ' -.."4 :--\_■, 'N.4 1 ,--'- i ....._ - .1 - :-.-.0 ' N.I.. , -KB....,... ---°- ,, \ .;.....,", \ \ \,:E__- ■••••, --.,,,'•`,_.„' 1,:' - "0",..;# T, ..-- •' '''..‘ .. ...,, r . 47,....., 1 • ' - . " R . I ' • . .'\.■„.„ • ;- ."- %-■;'": 1,1 i . _ _ „,„E.-„Cd4";' -'4r_ - • • .--<_-.130- 1.'-'1 I ''' ' - r4 \ • (••7:::: , ;14,;. ;; - • :\ • -•-•-, AIr5"---, -<.; .... - -; ' , 7 L,• - -"," - , --- 7 ,.,7„ , e 4.., .., 1 • -ri - - ,-'--L _ , ■ , I, '4', I L.,.., i, •,.) . -'/-' \I .. 1 t, • ••• -..--1 ; Y I, J ;!-- •'. • ...••• 1 •'i.e.:- .., .• .1 • • • • • -_...;•;', 'N. ... 5 _ 1- .;,...-r..7'. ' ....:•..,--_. '... 1 • 1 3,- • , a •'' IC I ' I 1 1 ..", , , .17., R• . ..4 : I ..„...... _, 5.,.-,5"...4 ..1..-.3 ---. -1 ', L t 1-• 1 ... / ,,__ - • 3•14! 40 • 5 I -..=,"7-' - r--- , - --, - r..:"- -1 /4.50 i • ' ,_,.,...... f\ .4..5.. < ' .... : ! ! 4 .1 .5.: • •:.'5" • l' , +MIS, ' -, .:4136..... --•=-1-- :._ ...... 1 - I ? ;S; .. i •:.-__.- - . 4' • - -• -. 1 ,1 ..,...... 7 .--.. , , -...... „. • , - ...IT ' A ,.- -. - : __... „...---=-- . -- - 1 . _ , y • ( • . • ...... r:■ i' . . •■ - .ST , ...... - ----.------/' `-- _ • . I ...- 1 ' 4 . _ .: , IA" r-,:g-•1% •'-," ., " - •.' • . .- I ..,•• — , / • • ,,,. i; - , t ,....._ '0'7-... 4.•E.., , c...... )■• - . . k. . _ - •1- 7 I-- - • - .' - " ' / - ■.... -",:::".. . 'CALI IS2.• AO:1 - a -- -.....L.1 If , , ' . - ..:.- 3 5,1 $5,3 r...... •--;,,,, ...... /-,•,• 5 *3 55 • i...... :,;:a....g- ,... -. s.4,\, i (,):, •=.
FIGURE 3. Pedregosa MOUNTAINS WEST QUADRANGLE. LOCATION OF PHASE C (EASTERN PORTION OF RIGHT-OF-WAY CORRIDOR. 57
20 :3 :0
PROPOSED CENTERLINE OF 14.4 KV SINGLE PHASE DISTRIBUTION LINE
.11...••••• 25 '‘21 ; Sum." Mom
C. 33 •13
SI3EE-0.0 .0CLAS
1
'
336
12
AZ FF:10:19
O. 4011
:6 :3
336
22 Wows. •■■ 23 20
Mal.
29 2 26
7
32 - 33 3\1 • -n1
scAd I 24 cco
•0110 •••7(EVA4 11. 20 FIr ■•■•• .10101.4 .90PC EL WK.. 0•1,0111 11411
Figure 4. Douglas NE Quadrangle. Location of Phase B right-of-way corridor and AZ FF:10:19. 58
`. ••• ' • 7.244
•
•■••••
IO 5 PROPOSED CENTERLINE-OF 14.4 KV SINkE PHASE D-PiTRIikITIONLINE
, 10-6 - •• v t.sa.r
AZ Æ.IÎ:69 - 1599-- AZ FF:11:70
- AZ FF:11:71 . -:. AZ FFT$4:72
AZ FF:11:75 , 25 - - - -25 F.P.11: 78.---
IC ;
•
31.1.9•4•••4 _ .
AZ FF:11:80 ------A1-FF:1117
•••
.4•16 •-•• : • 42 • •'••• • • 1 ••• - 4 • •• ••• • • '4•-'
. • • • 4.2.41 • - '14 4 • , t• , /29• ••• •••'• . • "..Z • — . '": 7 • • • Se 7; • '' '4■ ■11',:-• •, ...... -- 9C A LS L2.4 400 .7 11 • "he ;..r „, 1; . • • 1 \\--) \) • • • .„ • -1 • , - ) t --•••••• 5 . • 'Rs "r • ; \ 1 • • - ". - • COMM.. WITIIVALL S RCIR I - >. ; • ..;$' I /Thu; k • - - • ' ;N4. • r' ; • • .
FIGURE 5. COLLEGE PEAKS QUADRANGLE. Location of Phase B right-of-way corridor WITH SITES AND ISOLATES. 59 4.
- ' -
.40,44 41
•
.;` , ••••• -.- • • ..... t •••72,,,
- •
_ ..„- - _ \ "4•.4. • I , I _ • -
I r 1 • C,..„
.4,217)11 , , / •. ,, t/: /f - •2$11 : -;,•••
--' " --r- - --2 _ i ....„ . I L 1. d_'------1 I B''''';- '""' f K 1 , • -- ! - PHASE ..4., „ ....; - ; .. . . , .4...,_ ..... t... _ . .: 44i. ,rt.4:------. 4,-. - ---_ 7...,...... \ LE ...---' .,...--4..::,. --' .., . 1 •...--, wv14- • .—.4 6 '. .‘._, ...... ,... •-■ 4 / .,.. ' 4.\,,...),:‘ " : 4 4- ; -- 2P ' r -4* • _.-.Y \ 1 - ---": I '''', ",; ' ' i\ . : , , ....)-' '''-' , 1 . ''-' . -- -_-- 1 - - 2 DISTRIDOTION LINE i PRO ED CENTERLINE ' Of 74:4. V SINGLE:1 HW ' .-.._-.4---- 7: I.....„,-.....-. :. , , ,. - -.■ ''I A IN " IlIsI' \ . . • .., . -,I • I . : . . ,. ._ . . . .7! II . . - I . - g I •-. ',, . „,37 ...... 24,. 31 00 I ..: ■•-.- . v I.I. • "...." , . ,• . 44,44 r I ' 4 , . -..ww -,... .., ,.... 09.. ..1 , ''''''' V•• I 7 ..,, • ' I . - 4 . , \ .....• , - -1.------:: ' -...--.. _.■ -...M ..... -,i.....,,- ,.. _„... L I.../-". 10'15 .,- 7 . - :\ • __,.... I - • .. , .. .t I ...... _ ...... , ___..,..., ■...,.21.. , ,_ 1 , •••I' ' ' 4ro I -: : '. ' -- • I .4-- - \--.21)-16-is;47 , .. I 1 \ , - •',..' 1 r ' , .\4; - , N 4. 1 • ' . c: --....,,, - - .21,1 I — ....- I...7 , :.- . i,,, - ,, -..... - •- - N. 1 L., - _ - • -..-) r 4.- \ _ ."-- \--)1 , . •T ,..-_,..," -\:---_------= 7, 2 , 1 _ .C.„.../....,;.\;.. I . - ... • --',..- ! '..-' 1I / • -- -=‘17\--N '-- ,' -r ° i t, - _ - r •-•-• .04.W- s. . _, ,..,...,. . 1 / I • ■ ' . -, '.- --=.t.44 —,-,.....,-, - ',1,';',7 L. ,--. --- ,.... .t ; ---
Figure 6. Cinder Hill Quadrangle. Location of Phase B right-of-way corridor and isolates.
60
-
1 01 0 . • -0 ,00•0/. •.„ . . "Tr-C,;;T • . ., ---- , z ..: ...,„, Y )._-.....1-- — 4 ,•;,. —•—...,,,..,-...,:_ . • .....,:IF , . , ,---0 4 . .---.- ' . 0.... ".." !Nu - .... -.4T- ---:-."" =:MT . ,-...... IIRASILAIRAI SEADIO -•-.-, ., ookiNA - I -.. ' C -"; ..Y...- ...... DZ-": - 4 ../-2 .. , `....,>-... , / ...... R. -...._,' • ...I., _.7 / I )
t
_
NY
,
...t R._ • 0.00.• 001•104 .0 MR "A 101100 0■10 12000.• •0001. NIVITIM .10041 •S.
Figure 7. San Bernardino Ranch Quadrangle. Location of Phase B right-of-way corridor with sites and isolates.
61
, 0 R S.:-: %,.,..47, • _ 7 .-WS-..I„ODYLL , .1. V ...... ', '...... (7." — , . . „ :;„:71-: ....-1, ..„ „„ : „---_-„,.t..._, . - T , 1.-- -t e I- 7- '.7.., V. --'"? -- - . \ - O - = _ , .... _ 1 1 ,-..- 7..;.....- , , -II-' - "...... , • I , , :-...... ; „.?-13.6POSED CENT ERL IN E OF 14..fl.-*/ I - - . • • 0.. :.,„ , _ 1 - - , -.. . -,...... -, : : F.- __ -9'7- . . 11.14W,-- - •t-- --W..1,'• ,1--, -- • • _ _ • HASE • -4*
' • 74r., •
J
'7•1•••
- - ••.51 •
, - • -
• 111 4 111111TATICI014111111e, • ------— 'WITCO% 1. 1Zbj1704,••0r •
- • ,,.. • `"- - . - —, Sac wane ••••• net...... ' -
••••• •rn•
,r) - - -• - Pm.. op. Craw.' 1 • .0•A 5 . - Z . - /1 •••.? - . • • * ' S , . - •
,
1„., ._.__.... •••••• •C5 ,--' . .:, ' - - 7 - . r.- :-.... -_:". . , ' ...277 .;2 . -- ' • ,..„.■• -EV ' .. - ... - - -4.-.-- ---,.-/ ..-•-- -., --. ' ------A, ..... -"" - - C-,, . A -. _.--._....."3 „ - , ------' '.. ., ----_-,,-• 1. • 7 /../.; • Z I - .... •• •. -..-. ..- .. ---•?,...... -4 ,,, ..,_-;:- „„ - .. , , _,..----, .--7,-;:-.:;" , , „,...... „--, -, R.: , _ZIT, • Z 1, i ,../- , ■-...... '-.. ..• /1,-. ..,....„:„...: \ --.' 2 .. 4 " /N..", rifs.) ...„' \ ',Is, •••• V ...., ■••••... - ../., 1 / -., ) ..,,••.,•' ...... ,,,,,„...r . -7-.1 _...._ ,_ : ...... „..... A _, 7 -• ' -C' • ._- ....,-.-, ;,.- .... .__.,..- :_-!,:''''...... - r.. „_„--, ".:::: '„,•;- ,...... --A C'-' - . .::- • '1 -1-•_....- ' - 1 - ,----....„--1 -.' ---•- . '• - , R V ,-F:\.... ---,-- ! :'". • . , -. 1 ...--.-* -.1., ..1 , -, ..• ..• -4 :,.... -- • 1-r J -• •••":•-'• -I 14-.).. , '...... , : ' S' •,...? .7••• .., ,--:,-_•-• --•."-f •'■. t„, ..,- ---.. -,••• ••., -,..,; , ...----, • • , •- .."' • '::•••.> --- - • (.. r.....-4 A \ , ••....•• , ,=1..4 7 <---_,, ... ,...... „, -...../ • .. ,, ,-, T : -, ... ,-. -- • 7'• Š-) ,..„,----„,;-' 01 .. N....,,,.• ri- "- -- 4, , -...?
••, ‘,› •-• scu.a HI. ON
■■■ ■■=1..M. awns 1 . •an .11 • kI • no "‘" . as . L, ...MA 111.7111 lna STATO axiom WOW. .10:12 A
Figure 8. West of Guadalupe Canyon Quadrangle. Location of Phase B right-of-way corridor. 62
, OSED CENTERUNE OF 44 KV SINGLE PHASE DISTRIBUTION/ LINE
Figure 9. Lazy J Ranch Quadrangle. Location of Phase B right-of-way corridor and isolate. •
63
- 7 0.# • "1"1"
"7-
r
- ; , 1
7.47 7 •• • • *.- • Co. , 47 , • $ v • 7,71,44
-••••40•7
- - • - . f , • -
- .•'• • 1.71 s% - • r • _. - • e -‘ • • - — -1 PKASF B ,- L 7-1'7 • • r - , - _ • VIE.... - - 27' A Z FF: ". ' - ", • 1 • .-"" • , , ' _.„ - • - ; •• , • • • . .... ' ' JR • - , . 'PROPDSEA CENTERLINT_ 14*10/14441, an" P,&SE,-OTS•TEFLIDTZW-1,111T.' , - - • -- - ' ..,1 ;...„N -,..far. • _.,,.,. . . r..I, "r , ------, S ,:- -- -- Plr. , A...: r 1 0 N A ,-1.. .".›- ... TT -.....".1 ....•: 1 , -f-0- Ilt... E'S-- T. ' - — • mr7t 5 : -," _ '-'t • 7, --=---`-'44' -S ' ' r -- . ' ''. '-. • - i f ".„;,------7- - ...... ' -- . AZ _ -,-'''';' R .... -•°:',....,, -- - 4 ,, _ -- ',...••• I --. ) - % i. - / t \ 2 1 i -, ....., -, ^.....- 7 ,. ,, , •.,. - t i j, .. t. _ - ■ : .e., ,j ------4 : , '"'' .1+ 1) - -i.,-- 1.--c-1 1'- '-- : _;--- \ i: -_____: 1 •,,,,, A, ..,.,-„, ,.... .= .0 .:_.,..., sit ___, 5 -- ''''SZ li ' : - •4„. : - :7E ...,+ C‘- - - , ' - '-',-, ' 1 . , . s.a. •-••••‘ ussr...... S , ^ - - : ,_ ..,--- ___ ----"E.'. ' 1 '''''".- ,•_!".", r.„.,,,,v____,_ ''. ' , ."3111* 1,- 1.•
-- , : r4:' ...,,,,,..... or• . n.,1- .,-- ...., ..„-4 -,,..,, - .,..,- 4 4•:\...... 4" - ...... z. - --• F - -iiitr4.. 0. - .1 '-'5C 1 .1.1eF." \. - RI,,,,,,,..4''''''-', . 1"_7_.-..- L.,..,....L...... 4/. 2_,.... - .- r). — , 7 • , r -. ----. - —...... _ . - i. -1 - • , .71. / - - ' 11C:f.', -•• 7 - ' ,--.." \_ ILk "41 ...,• -•••.. _1r 1 -F ' ' ,5 -'' - • - . - i. ' ' '' :1•'-- r'.. 1 --1 - 7 , - - . ,..R •. . . - _ - -.41 •..,,..;_I Y• • -'E ) • • ` ---• 1.70•:.T -,..,.. ,....,_"" ,-.-= - ---, 51. V"....'` .122-.7, ! ' ' * ' — 7---- .' 7,..-' Nil," t. '`,/ .7...... -... " : . ....' ,...... , - ---, ,..", ,-• ' .-_,.....,..:_ _• r,. .•: : --,..• ) . ' , - -- _ :,---•••._-, -" •••' i- •,, .....,.." 4, i _-- ' .--- AO, . --, ,---- : - ..to ■ 7 ., - ___...... • - j, ! ' .. { •-•.., ' '',. , -' ' C-'-'.r.' ` '-'''■-• '.' -...'-':'"'-‘. ' \ ffti■ '' N--/ '‘. / . *! ' 1 1 . . L... .L Y ‘ 7 ! 7:: ___„. iT„.,..T "..... ; ."..-..; .--. --',- "' .... „./. ,,,,,f.ar ..,• • ' ', ..,. $ . ..•-.....1,...... 7. • ' E OS , ..... ‘r.'7‘ Rok R R 1 I $ ',./..^ ---.." % , 4 . r )
-
0•7•7 7 . •••• -7 41 4 ' 0e #7.47";;;'1 •>. • •• , , yall •
, 4 • _ , • ■ `‘--• ;
7.'77 is / ' /...4"‘? _ r-,„„ !:3 ..... •Ls k = • 7 - s! • - I ) ' . •:(;3 V , 1
1 1.7, ,77 1‘ ■Z-S• :at .40 .1. no IMP IN.. nil . , • .4 • / / -relir,
FIGURE 10. GUADALUPE SPRING QUADRANGLE. LOCATION OF PHASE B RIGHT - OF - WAY CORRIDOR,
AZ FF:12:27, AZ FF:12:30, AND ISOLATE. 64
AZ FF: 6: 21 SSVEC-I3 0 20 i , 1 A METERS
• Datum
, -, Historic ‘-= trash scatter
Cor r a I
Cattle shute
Right-of-way
Cattle tank
Figure 11. AZ FF:6:21 (SSVEC-13).
65
AZ FF:6:22 I0-1 0 20
METERS
• Datum 4\ —• Site boundary N
4#0.0••••"•••••- •,_._ I -.... . ( \ \ i
•
II •
\..-..„. •-■„.,.
Right-Of-way
Figure 12. AZ FF:6:22 (Isolate #1).
ZV
Monument to the Wells Family
0C) 0 0 ci p Entrance 6I:01:33
• Flagpole D3ASS) - I (
-r • Rows ' of Graves
-t•
AZ FF:10:19 SSVEC -I 0 10
METERS
I I A Datum
/1\
Storage shed
.1. Outhouse
67
9/71 Of Q
•
Water Cistern Screened Porch Fireplace i
Windmill Chicken Sidewalk and Water Tanks Coop
7 HOUSE
—Garage
2 •
AZ FF:11:69 SSVEC-2 0 10 METERS A
• Datum Fence
Figure 14. AZ FF:11:69 (SSVEC-2).
68
AZ FEII70 SSVEC-3 20 mETERS
Arf ItOCt Trash saaTter • Datum
—Ecge of Railroad Grade
a
• a a
A6
Figure 15. AZ FF:11:70 (SSVEC-3).
69
• --......
Cattle Tank •
• nWell `-'(Abandoned) •
• 9
■ Cp * e AZ FF:11:7I\ SSVEC- 4 \ 4\ 10 9 1 N METERS • • Site boundary \ • Wood post cc). Cut down post 0 Steel post • gita Rock piles with possible associated burials -----*----
Figure 16. AZ FF:11:71 (SSVEC-4). 70
•
R 0 AD
2S s ,
Pt
7 • . / • Ch S
•
AZ FF:11:72 SSVEC — 5 0 I METERS
Site boundary Pt Projectile point (Collected) S Sherd L Lithic Chopper
Sherd and lithic concentration/ • Datum A
.•'
vs/ a 5 " -• •
Figure 17. AZ FF:11:72 (SSVEC-5). 71
ROCK OUTCROP
MILLING STATION a AREA A MILLING STATION AREA B 88
Ocp
t :oilec , ec
Sc
..-.... B (Collected) \.,...... c...... „,
6/ ... Of .. iff 0j, Sc Pt (Cotiectett) MT
Sc Sc Sc Sc AZ FF:11: 73 S c Sc :c 3C1 SSVEC -9 2C3C Sc C 0 30 METERS
• Site boundary 13 Bifoce • Core SC • Hornmerstone k. Sc. Mt Mono Fragment Pt Projectile point Sc Scraper csc Sc o Mortar • Datum 8 (Collected)
Sc
Figure 18. AZ FF:11:73 (SSVEC-9). .17
AZ FF11.73 AZ FF11 g3 SSVEC-9 SSVEC -9
Milling Station Area A Piining Station Area B
0 • ••,/, 0 - METER I METER
I BASIN I. SLICK N/S 28 cm N/S 76cm E/W 25cm E/W 85cm Depth. 2 0 cm 2 BASIN 2 SLICK N/S 29cm E/W 32cm N/S 66cm E/W 57cm Depth 2.5 cm 3 BASIN Eroded', N/S 22cm E/W 23cm Rock Depth , 4.0 cm 4 SLICK N/S 48cm E/W 48cm 5 NATURAL DEPRESSION N/S 53cm E/W 32cm Depth II Ocm MORTAR in natural depression N/S I3cm E/W 11 cm Depth 4.0cm
Figure 19. AZ FF:11:73 (SSVEC-9), milling station.
ROAD
• Right -of—way AZ FE: 11 : 74 SSVEC -7 0 10
METERS
• Site boundary Flake B Bifoce ( Collected) A Datum
Figure 20. AZ FF:11:74 (SSVFC-7).
74
AZ FF. 11:75 SSVEC - 1 0 0 20 METERS
• Datum • Site boundary
R OAD
/ Right-of-way
...■•••••••
Figure 21. AZ FF:11:75 (SSVEC-10). 75
AZ FF: 11:76 SSVEC - 11 0 10 ' METERS '
• Site boundary / S Sherd / A / N . / / / / / S
1 3S 2S / ■ / \ t \ I 2S ( Collected) /
...... • ......
Right-of-way
Figure 22. AZ FF:11:76 (SSVEC-11). 76
Ri g ht-of—way
\I . ...••••"'
(F
F F \ .1 I F 3F \ Ch F C F \ C F F \ B C • .1 , I /
AZ FF: I I : 77 SSVEC —12 0 10 METERS 4\ Site Boundary N C Core F Flake Ch Chopper B 8Hr:ice (Collected)
Figure 23. AZ FF:11:77 (SSVEC-12). 77
AZ FF:11:78 10-10 20 A METERS • Datum • Site boundary
• /Right-of-way
R OAD
Figure 24. AZ FF:11:78 (Isolate #10). 78
AZ FF:11:79 10-12 0 20 METERS A • Datum • Site boundary
N. Right-of-way
R 0 A D z
Figure 25. AZ FF:11:79 (Isolate #12). 79
AZ FF:11: 80 10-13 0 20 METERS • Datum Site boundary
N. Right-of-way
•
R O D
11 w 0 5 . . • • •
Figure 26. AZ FF:11:80 (Isolate #13).
. Mt
.„.
Mt
•
25m to R-O-W from Datum
30 m to R-0-W from Datum AZ FF.11:17 SSVEC-6 0 2 METERS
• Site boundary o Grinding slick' O Mortar Mt Metate Fragment • Datum
Figure 27. AZ FF:11:17 (SSV EC-6).
81
, o nwood 11 co .•• •
• M,MtF
2M M MtF .
S M
Sherd ond Litnic Concentration
• 0 - )Lithic • •>• Concentration \sc
4Mt
AZ FF.12.30 • -••••" SSVEC -8 0 20 METERS
Site boundary Pt Projectile point • Mario Mt Metote MIF Metate Fragment • Drill • Chopper Sc Scraper 422 Rock pile A Datum O Mortar
Figure 28. AZ FF:12:30 (SSVEC-8). Appendix B
PROJECT PERSONNEL
Project Personnel
Administrative Personnel
Mary Lou Heuett Principal Investigator Ronald P. Maldonado Project Director
Field Personnel
Ronald P. Maldonado Project Director Mary Lou Heuett Field Supervisor Kelly J. Schroeder Archaeologist Susan A. Martin Archaeologist Richard A. Paun Archaeological Technician
Archaeological Map Team
Ronald P. Maldonado Brunton Mary Lou Heuett Brunton
Report Production
Ronald J. Beckwith Draftsman Wendy Glenn Researcher Mary Ellen Thompson Editor, Word Processor
83 REFERENCES
Agenbroad, Larry D., and Vance Haynes 1975 Bison Remains at Murray Springs. The Kiva 40:309-313.
Amsden, Monroe 1928 Archaeological Reconnaissance in Sonora [Mexico]. Southwest Museum Papers 1. Highland Park, Los Angeles: South West Museum
Anyon, Roger, and Steven A. Le Blanc 1980 The Architectural Evolution of the Mogollon-Mimbres Communal Structures. The Kiva 45:253-277.
Bannon, John Francis 1974 The Spanish Borderlands Frontier, 1513-1821. Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press.
Brown, David E., and Charles H. Lowe 1980 Biotic Communities Map of the Southwest. U.S.D.A. Forest Service.
Christiansen, Larry D. 1983 The Mormon Battalion in Cochise County and Adjacent Areas. The Cochise Quarterly 13(3&4):3-42.
1988 The Extinction of Wild Cattle in Southern Arizona. The Journal of Arizona History 29:89-99.
Chronic, Halka 1983 Roadside Geology of Arizona. Missoula: Mountain Press Publishing Company.
Cochise Genealogical Society 1987 Calvary Memorial Park, Douglas, Arizona. The Tombstone 4(1).
1990 Sources for Cochise County Research: Cemeteries. The Tombstone 7(1).
Cultural & Environmental Systems, Inc. 1987 Historical, Ecological, and Ethnographic Overview. In "The San Xavier Archaeological Project, Section IIIB." Southwest Cultural Series 1(2)1- 120. Tucson: Cultural & Environmental Systems.
Dart, Allen 1989 Using Historic Contexts in Cultural Resource Management Some Examples from the Tucson Basin and Some Cautions. The Kiva 54(4):401-414.
85 86
Dart, Allen, and William H. Doelle 1984 The Pima County Archaeological Inventory Project. Technical Report 87-11. Tucson: Institute for American Research.
Dice, L. R. 1943 The Biotic Provinces of North America. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
Douglas, John E., and Linda J. Brown 1985 Archaeological Resources in the San Bernardino Valley, Southeastern Arizona. Anthropological Resource Center. Douglas: Cochise College.
Fewkes, Jesse W. 1914 Archaeology of the Lower Mimbres Valley, New Mexico. Smithsonian Miscellaneous Collections 63(10). Washington, D.C.: Smithsonian Institution.
Findlow, Frank J., and Suzanne T. DeAtley 1978 Ecological Analysis in Southwestern New Mexico. Journal of New World Archaeology 2:16-18.
Hadley, Diana 1982 Ranch Life, the Border Country, 1880-1940, the Way It Was. The Cochise Quarterly 12(1).
1987 Border Boom Town--Douglas, Arizona 1900-1920. The Cochise Quarterly 17(3):3-47.
Haury, Emil W. 1953 Artifacts with Mammoth Remains, Naco, Arizona 1: Discovery of the Naco Mammoth and Associated Projectile Points. American Antiquity 19:1-14.
Haury, Emil W., Kirk Bryan, Edwin H. Colbert, Norman E. Gabel, Clara Lee Tanner, and T. E. Buehrer 1950 The Stratigraphy and Archaeology of Ventana Cave. Tucson: The [1975] University of Arizona Press.
Haury, Emil W., E. B. Sayles, and William W. Wasley 1959 The Lehner Mammoth Site, Southeastern Arizona. American Antiquity 25:2-30.
Hough, Walter 1907 Antiquities of the Upper Gila and Salt River Valley in Arizona and New Mexico. Bureau of American Ethnology Bulletin 35. Washington, D.C.: Smithsonian Institution.
Huckell, Bruce B. 1982 The Distribution of Fluted Points in Arizona.- A Review and Update. Arizona State Museum Archaeological Series 145. Tucson: University of Arizona.
87
Le Blanc, Steven A. 1986 Development of Archaeological Thought on the Mimbres-Mogollon. In Emil W. Haury's Prehistory of the Southwest, edited by J. Jefferson Reid and David E. Doyel, pp. 179-207. Tucson: The University of Arizona Press.
Lowe, Charles H. 1977 Arizona's Natural Environment. Tucson: The University of Arizona Press.
McGregor, John 1982 Southwestern Archaeology. Urbana: University of Illinois Press.
Meyers, Richard D. 1967 The Folsom Point from the Rising Site, Southeastern Arizona. The Kiva 32:102-105.
Mills, Jack P., and Vera M. Mills 1971 The Slaughter Ranch Site. The Artifact 9(3):23-44.
Myrick, David 1975 Railroads of Arizona, Vol. 1. Berkeley, California: Howell-North Books.
Neily, Robert B., and Ronald J. Beckwith 1985 A Cultural Resource Inventory of the San Bernardino U.S. Fish and Wildlife Refuge. MS, Cultural Resources Management Section, Arizona State Museum. Tucson: University of Arizona.
Robertson, Donald B. 1986 Encyclopedia of Western Railroad History; The Desert States. Caldwell, Idaho: The Caxton Printers, Ltd.
Rogers, Malcolm J., H. M. Wormington, E. L. Davis, and Clark W. Brott 1966 Ancient Hunters of the Far West, edited by Richard J. Pourade. San Diego: Union-Tribune.
Sauer, Carl, and Donald Brand 1930 Pueblo Sites in Southeastern Arizona. University of California Publications in Geography 3(7):415-458.
1931 Prehistoric Settlements of Sonora [Mexico]. University of California Publications in Geography 5(3).
Sayles, E. B., and Ernest Antevs 1941 The Cochise Culture. Medallion Papers 29. Globe, Arizona:. Gila Pueblo. 88
Schroff, Mike 1990a Biological Assessment of the Proposed Utility Line for the San Bernardino Valley. U.S. Department of the Interior. Sasabe, Arizona: Buenos Aires National Wildlife Refuge.
1990b Addendum to the Biological Assessment of the Proposed Utility Line for the San Bernardino Valley. U.S. Department of the Interior. Sasabe, Arizona: Buenos Aires Wildlife Refuge.
Slawson, Laurie V. 1990 A Cultural Resources Inventory of Selected Portions of the Silver Bell Mining District, Pima County, Arizona. Technical Series 20. Tucson: Cultural & Environmental Systems.
Stacy, V. K. Pheriba 1974 Survey of the San Bernardino Ranch, Douglas, Arizona. MS, Arizona State Museum Library. Tucson: University of Arizona.
Steere, Peter L. 1989 Lookouts in the Southwestern Region. Cultural Resources Management Report 8. Albuquerque: U.S.D.A. Forest Service Southwestern Region.
Stone, Lyle M., and James E. Ayres 1982 A Description and Evaluation of the Archaeological Resources, San Bernardino Ranch National Historic Landmark, Cochise County, Arizona. Tempe: Archaeological Research Services.
Teague, Lynn S. 1982 The Arizona State Museum Cultural Resource Management Division Data Recovery Manual. Arizona State Museum Archaeological Series 158. Tucson: University of Arizona.
U.S. Department of Agriculture Soil Conservation Service 1971 Soil Survey of Cochise County. Douglas: U.S.D.A. Department of Agriculture Soil Conservation Service Districts and Cochise County Board of Supervisors.
Urban, Sharon F. 1976 Site card for AZ FF:11:17 (ASM). On file at the Arizona State Museum, University of Arizona, Tucson.
Wells, Reba B. 1985a The Bernardino Ranch. The Cochise Quarterly 15(4):3-29.
1985b Slaughter Ranch Outpost. The Cochise Quarterly 15(4):30-36.
1985c The Mormon House. The Cochise Quarterly 15(4):36-41.
1989 Cora Viola Howell Slaughter; Southern Arizona Ranch Woman. The Journal of Arizona History 30:391-415.