University of Nevada, Reno If the Desert Blooms: A Technological Perspective on Paleoindian Ecology in the Great Basin from the Old River Bed, Utah A dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Anthropology by Daron Duke Dr. Gary Haynes/Dissertation Advisor August 2011 © by Daron Duke 2011 All Rights Reserved THE GRADUATE SCHOOL We recommend that the dissertation prepared under our supervision by DARON DUKE entitled If The Desert Blooms: A Technological Perspective On Paleoindian Ecology In The Great Basin From The Old River Bed, Utah be accepted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Gary Haynes, Ph.D., Advisor Robert G. Elston, Ph.D., Committee Member David Rhode, Ph.D., Committee Member Ted Goebel, Ph.D., Committee Member Anna K. Panorska, Ph.D., Graduate School Representative Marsha H. Read, Ph. D., Dean, Graduate School August, 2011 i ABSTRACT The earliest inhabitants of the Great Basin adapted to a well‐watered environment that was already set to disappear. This much seems clear from paleoenvironmental data, but a good understanding of how the declining ecosystem affected Paleoindian peoples still eludes us. In the now‐barren expanse of the Great Salt Lake Desert, the Old River Bed (ORB) delta existed as a sprawling distributary wetland at the Pleistocene‐Holocene transition. At its peak, the system would have been one of the largest marshlands in the Great Basin. Paleoindians visited the distal reaches of the wetlands between about 12,100 and 9900 cal BP, when it finally dried up. My study tracks spatial and temporal variability in lithic technology across the distal ORB to address issues of how people coped with the regionally deteriorating environment. Patterns are compared between the west and east sides of the study area, which roughly date to sequential time frames of 12,100‐11,200 cal BP and 11,300‐ 9900 cal BP, respectively, based on dating of buried wetland organics. These subareas correspond with spatially distinct groups of distributary paleochannels. Using a formal technological model, lithic data are examined in terms of reduction strategies, toolstone selection, and morphology as they relate to emphasis on transport efficiency. The results of the analysis show that people were more transport‐efficiency conscious earlier in time than they were later. According to the model, this directly relates to occupation length—viewed here as time spent in the basin, not necessarily at a single site— whereby increasing mobility necessitates the need for transport efficiency in order to reduce the risks of not having enough stone on‐hand and the costs of having to procure more. When the study subareas are compared, west‐subarea assemblages indicate greater ii emphasis on transport efficiency with streamlined toolkits made more often from obsidian than seen in the east subarea, where fine‐grained volcanic (FGV) stone is more common. This strategy placed a buffer of toolstone into relatively large tools that were reduced bifacially through an extended sequence. Parman, Lake Mojave, and Cougar Mountain projectile points tend to be associated with the west subarea and this technological pattern. The technology of the east subarea is “flakier,” with smaller tools being made from transported flake blanks following a more local toolstone profile. This strategy shifts costs from the production and maintenance investments of transport efficiency to the transport of stone directly to its location of use. Bonneville and Pinto projectile points tend to be associated with the east subarea and this technological pattern. A second pattern found predominately in east‐subarea sites is the extreme economization of obsidian. Various small biface fragments and irregular tools are seen, and the extensively reworked Stubby stemmed type is also more common in this subarea. This reduction pattern signals higher predictability in tool‐use requirements and raw material acquisition. These data are interpreted to represent shorter basin occupations earlier and longer basin occupations later in time. Assuming the total ORBa delt was more or less always capable of sustaining people for long periods of time while it existed, any shift in settlement mobility should be driven by conditions in the other regional wetlands they visited. Being in such a large drainage basin, the ORB likely persisted while smaller basin wetlands succumbed to Early Holocene drying more rapidly. Thus, I argue that the shift in lithic technology seen on the distal ORB provides a dynamic model for how people responded to regional environmental decline that is currently missing from Paleoindian studies. iii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I have many people to thank for pushing me toward getting this dissertation finished. My graduate committee was influential in keeping my mind centered on the issues, both directly through their assistance and indirectly by conducting their own brands of research. Drs. Gary Haynes, Bob Elston, Dave Rhode, Ted Goebel, and Anna Panorska all contributed invaluably to my learning, beyond what is reflected in this study. I regard each of them as true scholars who I will continue to look to in the future. This research definitely could not have been completed without the full support of Jaynie Hirschi, Archaeologist at Hill Air Force Base, Utah. Through a litany of cultural resource management projects, she has facilitated just about every sideways research idea I wanted to put to the test. She is a good friend to me and to archaeology. I would also like to thank those working on the Army side of the Old River Bed. Rachel Quist, Archaeologist at Dugway Proving Ground, and the Desert Research Institute team—Dr. David Madsen, David Page, David Schmitt, and Dr. Jack Oviatt—who have all been collegial and gracious in sharing site visits, information, insights, and fun. The folks at Far Western deserve special thanks for waiting this process out and providing some time and resources to help me get done. Dr. D. Craig Young is in this with me to some extent as we have together developed the research program for the Air Force. His geoarchaeological expertise is an important contribution, and I cannot overlook his covering for me when I came back to school. All the smart people at Far Western continue to inspire me as great examples of contract archaeology at its best. Sharlyn Anderson, Mike Lenzi, and Kasey O’Horo all helped with various data‐collating and paper‐chasing jobs as I iv closed in on finishing. I am also grateful to Heather Baron, Nicole Birney, and Wendy Masarweh for helping with the artifact figures and stitching this document together. Finally, I would like to acknowledge my friends and family for their encouragement and support. Several had direct contributions. Jim Carter wove me into his ongoing work for the Air Force at the beginning. Tony Taylor and Sam Coffman were undergraduate lab rats who are rapidly catching up with me, but for at least some brief period at UNR I was able to make them do many of my least favorite data tasks. Mike Lenzi found himself in the same unfortunate position at Far Western. I hope each took something good from it, and I look forward to knowing them for years to come. Verla Jackson’s help on the administrative end at UNR was crucial. Leticia Neal has listened to more conversations about obsidian hydration dating than anyone should be allowed to endure. For the many others who are not mentioned but shared this experience with me, know that you are all remembered fondly. My parents have always supported my career in archaeology, and my final thanks goes to them. v TABLE OF CONTENTS Abstract .................................................................................................................................................. i Acknowledgments ............................................................................................................................ iii Chapter 1: Introduction ..................................................................................................................... 1 Research Pertinence of the Distal Old River Bed and Approach to this Study ....................... 3 Research Approach and Theoretical Orientation .................................................................... 6 Recent Perspectives on Old Objectives in Great Basin Paleoindian Research ......................... 8 The Interpretive Context of Paleoindian Studies: Data versus Theory ................................ 9 Recent Research .......................................................................................................................... 13 The Role of Lithic Studies ............................................................................................................. 17 Formal Modeling of Lithic Reduction and Analytical Approach ....................................... 18 Terminology and Study Organization ........................................................................................ 20 Use of the Term “Paleoindian” ................................................................................................ 20 Chapter Organization ................................................................................................................ 22 Chapter 2: Chronology and Context of the Distal Old River Bed ........................................... 23 Chronology of the Old River Bed and its Delta ........................................................................