2018-01-03_PERMIT FILE - C1981010 (5)

Home Browse Search

buried in the residual soils. Additional stones are likely masked by the vegetation, or completely buried in soil. Although it is apparent that virtually no earth -moving occurred, it is unclear as to what mechanical means were employed to affect the clearing of the brush that created the linear opening from the maintained dirt road to the end of the prominence. It is, however, highly unlikely that the survey crew would have been able to discover the two stone features had the dense serviceberry and Gamble oak not been cleared away. Additionally, it is unclear as to whether the stones that make up the feature have been displaced at all by the brush clearing activities, however the arrangement of the rocks, and the relative lack of similar stones nearby make the cultural nature of the feature indisputable. The edge of the prominence drops off approximately 24 meters to the southwest of Feature 1. Feature 2, located 65m northeast of Feature 1, consists of a concentration of approximately 30 sandstone cobbles in an area otherwise devoid of rocks. The concentration measures approximately 1.5m in diameter. The rocks range in size from 9 to 40cm in diameter, are notably buried in the soil, and exhibit a small amount of lichen on their exposed surfaces. At 2.4m to the northwest of the concentration is a 165cm diameter, 20cm deep circular depression in the ground surface, which, although it appears to have been there for several years, appears significantly younger in age than Feature 2. Another very similar depression was noted elsewhere on the project that appeared to be an elk, deer, and possible cow "lick." Archival research found a single land patent filed by Hanford Coy in 1923 within the same area as the site. No direct association between Coy and the site could be made. No additional information pertaining to the history of the site was found. The northeastern tip of the site has experienced disturbance from the construction of a an unnamed dirt road. Data recovery was executed on August 27`h, and September 8`h and 91', of 2015. Prior to excavation, the surface was cleared of vegetation to facilitate mapping and photography of the site. Approximately 1-3cm of soil was also cleared off of the buried and partially buried cobbles at Feature 1. The site was then re -mapped in detail using a Trimble Geo XH GPS unit with an accuracy of :L20cm. A GPS reading was created for each individual cobble which was also mapped in plan view using five temporary datums and grid paper. The datums were established in a linear east to west and north to south fashion through Feature 1, one of which was established in a generally central location within the feature. The remaining four datums were set from the central datum at six meters north, five meters south, four meters east, and 3 meters west (Plate 6). After mapping the cobbles at Feature 1, azimuth readings at a declination of 9.8° were taken from the feature to prominent points of the surrounding landscape in order to determine possible archaeoastronomical alignment of Feature 1. If an alignment of cobbles was suggested the alignment must have been composed of a minimum of three or more cobbles associated with the feature and be at least 1.5m in length in order for it to be considered viable for azimuth readings. No definitive evidence of archaeoastronomical alignment was found. 25