Cultural Resource Assessment Survey of the Wiggins Prairie Mitigation Bank, Hillsborough County, Florida
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
CULTURAL RESOURCE ASSESSMENT SURVEY OF THE WIGGINS PRAIRIE MITIGATION BANK, HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY, FLORIDA For: Southern States Land & Timber, LLC 2205 W. Pinhook Road, Suite 200 Lafayette, Louisiana 70508 Prepared by: Florida’s First Choice in Cultural Resource Management Archaeological Consultants, Inc. 8110 Blaikie Court, Suite A Sarasota, Florida 34240 (941) 379-6206 Toll Free: 1-800-735-9906 November 2016 CULTURAL RESOURCE ASSESSMENT SURVEY OF THE WIGGINS PRAIRIE MITIGATION BANK, HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY, FLORIDA For: Southern States Land & Timber, LLC 2205 W. Pinhook Road, Suite 200 Lafayette, Louisiana 70508 By: Archaeological Consultants, Inc. 8110 Blaikie Court, Suite A Sarasota, Florida 34240 Marion Almy – Project Manager Elizabeth A. Horvath – Project Archaeologist Katherine Baar – Archaeologist November 2016 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Archaeological Consultants, Inc. (ACI) performed a cultural resource assessment survey (CRAS) of 79 acres of the Wiggins Prairie Mitigation Bank for Southern States Land & Timber, LLC in October 2016. Portions of the 492-acre parcel had been previously surveyed, and the current investigations focused on those areas where subsurface disturbance is anticipated. The purpose of the survey was to locate and identify any archaeological sites and historic resources within the project area of potential effects (APE) and to assess their significance in terms of eligibility for listing in the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP). The archaeological APE consists of those lands that will be subject to subsurface disturbance and have not previously been surveyed for cultural resources. The historical APE consists of the entire property. The survey was requested by the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO), who reviewed U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE) file number SAJ-2016-00429-TMF (Parsons 2016). This work was conducted in compliance with the provision of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (Public Law [PL] 89-665), as amended; the Archaeological and Historic Preservation Act (PL 93-291) as amended; and Chapters 267 and 373, Florida Statutes (FS). The fieldwork meets the standards contained in Florida Division of Historical Resource’s (FDHR) Cultural Resource Management Standards and Operational Manual (FDHR 2003) and the report meets the specifications set forth in Chapter 1A-46, Florida Administrative Code. A review of the Florida Master Site File (FMSF) and NRHP indicated that two archaeological sites (8HI00062, 8HI06412) have been recorded within the project APE and another 10 have been recorded within one mile. 8HI00062, within the APE, is discussed as a temporally indeterminate mound and plotted in the FMSF as a “general vicinity” site, so its actual location is uncertain, and it has not been evaluated by the SHPO. 8HI06412 is also described as a culturally indeterminate lithic scatter determined ineligible for listing in the NRHP by the SHPO. The background research suggested a low to moderate probability for the discovery of additional archaeological sites. As a result of field survey, two archaeological sites (8HI13678 and 8HI13679) and two archaeological occurrences (AO) were discovered. An AO is defined as “one or two non-diagnostic artifacts, not known to be distant from the original context, which fit within a hypothetical cylinder of thirty meters diameter, regardless of depth below surface” (FMSF 1999:10). Each AO consisted of an isolated piece of lithic debitage and is not considered NRHP-eligible. No evidence of previously recorded 8HI00062 or 8HI06412 was discovered within the APE; each FMSF form has been updated to reflect the negative data. Newly discovered 8HI13678 is considered a Middle/Late Archaic lithic scatter and 8HI13679 is an isolated turtleback scraper that likely dates to the Early Archaic period. Although of interest in terms of settlement and land-use patterns, neither site is considered eligible for listing in the NRHP due to the low artifact density and diversity, lack of subsurface features, and subsequent low research potential. A review of the FMSF and NRHP revealed that no historic buildings, bridges, cemeteries, or NRHP-listed sites are located within or proximate to the property. The Hillsborough County property appraisers’ web site listed no buildings within the tract (Henriquez 2016). Field survey verified the absence of historic structures. Based on the background research and survey results, there are no cultural resources within the Wiggins Prairie Mitigation Bank survey areas that are listed or eligible for listing in the NRHP. No further investigations are deemed warranted within the areas examined. If subsurface disturbance is slated to occur in areas not previously surveyed, additional investigations may be warranted. i TABLE OF CONTENTS Page 1.0 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................ 1-1 1.1 Project Description .................................................................................................... 1-1 1.2 Purpose ...................................................................................................................... 1-1 2.0 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING ......................................................................................... 2-1 2.1 Location and Setting .................................................................................................. 2-1 2.2 Physiography and Geology ....................................................................................... 2-1 2.3 Soils and Vegetation .................................................................................................. 2-1 2.4 Paleoenvironmental Considerations .......................................................................... 2-3 3.0 CULTURAL CHRONOLOGY ........................................................................................... 3-1 3.1 Paleoindian ................................................................................................................ 3-1 3.2 Archaic ...................................................................................................................... 3-3 3.3 Formative .................................................................................................................. 3-5 3.4 Mississippian ............................................................................................................. 3-6 3.5 Colonialism ............................................................................................................... 3-7 3.6 Territorial and Statehood ........................................................................................... 3-8 3.7 Civil War and Aftermath ......................................................................................... 3-13 3.8 Twentieth Century ................................................................................................... 3-15 3.9 Project Area Specifics ............................................................................................. 3-16 4.0 RESEARCH CONSIDERATIONS AND METHODS ..................................................... 4-1 4.1 Archaeological Considerations .................................................................................. 4-1 4.2 Historical/Architectural Considerations .................................................................... 4-3 4.3 Field Methodology .................................................................................................... 4-3 4.4 Unexpected Discoveries ............................................................................................ 4-4 4.5 Laboratory Methods and Curation ............................................................................ 4-4 5.0 SURVEY RESULTS ............................................................................................................ 5-1 5.1 Archaeological Survey Results ................................................................................. 5-1 5.2 Historical/Architectural Survey Results .................................................................... 5-4 5.3 Conclusions and Recommendations .......................................................................... 5-4 6.0 REFERENCES CITED ....................................................................................................... 6-1 APPENDICES Appendix A - SHPO/ACOE correspondence Appendix B - FMSF form Appendix C - Survey log ii LIST OF FIGURES, TABLES, AND PHOTOS Figure Page Figure 1.1. Location of the Wiggins Prairie Mitigation Bank and the previously surveyed areas, Hillsborough County. ....................................................................................................... 1-2 Figure 2.1. Environmental setting of the Wiggins Prairie Mitigation Bank....................................... 2-2 Figure 3.1. Florida Archaeological Regions. ..................................................................................... 3-2 Figure 3.2. 1839 sketch map of Fort Sullivan. ................................................................................. 3-10 Figure 3.3. 1845 Plat of Township 28 South, Range 22 East. .......................................................... 3-12 Figure 3.4. 1938 and 1968 aerial photographs showing the property. ............................................. 3-17 Figure 4.1. Location of the previously recorded archaeological sites within one mile of the Wiggins Prairie Mitigation Bank, the previously surveyed areas, and the zones