A Case Study of Mcfaddin Beach, Texas Volume I
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
OCS Study MMS 99-0068 SPATIAL DATA ANALYSIS OF ARTIFACTS REDEPOSITED BY COASTAL EROSION: A CASE STUDY OF MCFADDIN BEACH, TEXAS VOLUME I U.S. Department of the Interior Minerals Management Service ERRATA SHEET Page 121 (corrects symbol used for latitude and longitude degrees from 0 to 0) Table 10. OPS Coordinates of McFaddin Beach Landmarks Landmark Latitude Longitude Accuracy 1. Water Tank 29° 39' 30.95" N 94° 06' 7.09" W ± 15 meters 2. Cattle Pens (east) 29° 38' 45.02" N 94° 08' 12.94" W ± 15 meters 3. ARCO Pipeline 29° 37' 16.37" N 94° 11' 59.77" W ±9 meters 4. Chevron Facility 29° 36;28" N 94° 14'0l"W ±30meters 5. Salt Cedar Tree 29° 35' 27.02" N 94° 16' 42.66" W ± 15 meters 6. YeHow Trailers 29° 34' 44.06" N 94° 18' 31.41" W ± 12 meters 7. Cattle Pens (west) 29° 34' 04.34" N '94° 20' 15.47" W ± 15 meters 8. Intersection of Highways 87 & 124 29° 32' 58" N 94° 23'17"W ±30meters Page 143 (corrects symbols used in equation and in the text discussing the equation) !e= 1/(2 t{i) where p =(n-l)lA where n is the number ofpoints in the data set where A z's the area in square meters ofthe study area Randomness (R) of the spatial distribution of a data set is determined by the actual mean distance to the nearest neighbor (fo) for the data set divided by the expected mean distance to the nearest neighbor for a random distribution of the same number of points (Fe). If the R value is close to 1.0, the distribution is random; if R is less than 1.0, the distribution tends towards clustering; and if R is greater than 1.0, the distribution tends towards regularity_ OCS Study MMS 99-0068 SPATIAL DATA ANALYSIS OF ARTIFACTS REDEPOSITED BY COASTAL EROSION: A CASE STUDY OF MCFADDIN BEACH, TEXAS by Melanie J. Stright Eileen M. Lear James F. Bennett Prepared for U.S. Department of the Interior Minerals Management Service Herndon, VA December 1999 SPATIAL DATA ANALYSIS OF ARTIFACTS REDEPOSITED BY COASTAL EROSION: A CASE STUDY OF MCFADDIN BEACH, TEXAS BY Melanie J. Stright ABSTRACT This study was undertaken to test the proposition that significant archaeological information can be extracted from a secondary deposit of artifacts found along a rapidly eroding coastline. The study area is McFaddin Beach, a 32-kilometer-long stretch of shoreline along the southeast coast of Texas. The artifacts included in the study were collected over a period of 26 years by five local collectors who kept detailed maps and records of each artifact find. The diagnostic artifacts in the study collection represent all cultural periods from Paleoindian to Historic. The method of analysis used a Geographic Information System, ARC/INFO, to synthesize information on the paleogeography of the coastal area where the lag deposit of artifacts was found and to conduct spatial analysis of the individual artifacts and their attributes. The results of the study indicate that even though the primary archaeological context of the artifacts has been destroyed, by reconstructing the larger paleogeographic context of the eroded sites and studying the attributes and spatial distribution of the artifacts in the lag deposit, some important archaeological conclusions can be drawn. iii These conclusions include information on how the prehistoric human populations of the McFaddin Beach area shifted through time and why, the general activities and the lithic procurement strategies of these populations, and the possible locations of the original archaeological sites from which the artifacts were eroded. iv ACKNOWLEDGMENTS This study was funded entirely by the U.S. Department of the Interior, Minerals Management Service, in support of their sand and gravel leasing program. Words truly are inadequate to express my deep gratitude to the following people for their assistance in completing this study. Without the diligent efforts of Paul Tanner of Port Arthur, Texas, there would have been no useable data upon which to base this study. In 1983, Paul began keeping detailed records of the artifacts he found at McFaddin Beach, including numbering the artifacts, recording each find in a log book, and plotting the artifacts on a base map. Paul also encouraged other collectors to begin keeping similar records. Throughout the study, Paul continued to provide maps, references, photos, and most importantly his ideas, which I hope have been accurately reflected in this final manuscript. I would also like to thank Paul’s wife, Nell, for graciously allowing me the use of their home as a base of operations and for always making me feel welcome. I am also extremely grateful to the other four collectors, whose artifact collections were used in this study, for their diligent efforts in keeping detailed records of their artifact finds, and for entrusting me with their artifact collections for weeks at a time. These include Murray Brown and Joe Coen, both of Groves, Texas; Jessie Fremont of Orange Field, Texas; and Joe Louvier of Port Arthur, Texas. v I am deeply indebted to the following people for their assistance in helping me analyze the artifacts and compile the artifact database. John Greene, archaeologist for the Minerals Management Service, Gulf of Mexico Region, provided invaluable assistance to me in obtaining the GPS positions for the landmarks along McFaddin Beach. John also assisted me in defining the level of mechanical wear and in recording the ultraviolet light responses of the artifacts in the study collection. Larry D. Banks, then Senior Fellow, Institute for the Study of Earth and Man, Southern Methodist University, and Nathan Banks, a graduate student in Anthropology at the University of Texas at Arlington, provided me technical assistance in the identification of the lithic source materials for the artifacts in the study collection. The lithic source identifications were an invaluable addition to the study. Dr. Dee Ann Story, Professor Emeritus in Anthropology, University of Texas at Austin, volunteered her time to assist me in identifying the diagnostic types of the artifacts in the study collection. Dee Ann’s assistance contributed immeasurably to the quality of the study results. Dr. Bob Morton of the Bureau of Economic Geology, University of Texas at Austin, provided much needed background information on the geology of the McFaddin Beach area. He also provided me the ARC/INFO coverages of the historic shoreline positions for McFaddin Beach used in the study. I could not have completed the ARC/INFO analysis for this study without the assistance of James F. Bennett, Environmental Protection Specialist for the Environmental Division, Minerals Management Service, in Herndon, Virginia. Jim was the brains behind vi some of the more difficult ARC/INFO procedures, such as mathematically correcting the distortion in the collector’s artifact locations. Whenever I hit an ARC/INFO wall, Jim was there to pick me up and point me in the right direction. Words really cannot adequately express the thanks I owe to Eileen Lear, Writer/Editor for the Environmental Division, Minerals Management Service, Herndon, Virginia, who prepared all of the figures, tables, and appendices for the report from my very rough drafts. Eileen spent almost as much time working on the report as I did in writing it. Her professionalism and the quality of her work vastly improved the quality of the report. Finally, I would like to thank Professors Richard J. Dent and Charles W. McNett of the American University, Washington, D.C., and Dr. Lawrence E. Aten, for their careful review of the study report and for providing suggestions that greatly improved the quality of the final report. vii TABLE OF CONTENTS VOLUME I ABSTRACT ................................................................................................................... iii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ............................................................................................... v LIST OF TABLES ....................................................................................................... xvi LIST OF FIGURES .................................................................................................... xvii Chapter I. INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................... 1 Research Problem ................................................................................................ 1 Description of the Study Area .............................................................................. 5 Theoretical Framework ........................................................................................ 6 Methodology ........................................................................................................ 8 II. CURRENT STATE OF KNOWLEDGE ............................................................. 10 Previous Research at McFaddin Beach ................................................................ 10 Literature on Disturbed Sites ............................................................................... 11 III. PALEOENVIRONMENTAL SETTING OF THE STUDY AREA .................... 15 Paleogeography ................................................................................................... 15 Paleoshorelines .................................................................................................... 22 Method for Reconstructing Paleoshoreline Positions ................................ 23 Paleoclimate ........................................................................................................ 30 IV. ARTIFACT ANALYSIS ....................................................................................