PERMFILE52991 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

• ed 5 JA163 overlaps the CaYcEC study area, but cursory reexamination of the site did not reveal arty aboriginal remains (see above, page 2). One other isolated find, 5 ja410, was recorded by other archaeologists within the G3dC survey boundaries, but was collected in 1979 (Anderson and Bleacher 1979). The five isolated finds recorded by C~cK include 5 ja378, 380, 381 (re- corded in May 1980), 459 (recorded in August 1980), and l~87 (recorded in Jan- uary 1981) (see Appendix A for IF forms). One IF, 5 ja378, is a unifacially retouched chert gravel fragment located on a southwest-facing slope above a tributary of Bolton Draw and approximately 335 meters south of the lithic scatter site 5 JA163 (Figure:'2). The retouch implies a cutting or scraping function for this IF, and it may well have migrated downslope to its recorded location from the ridge top to the north. Its current location is not suggest- ive of additional subsurface remains in this area. Two other of the IFs, 5 ja380 and 381, are both utili2ed chalcedor~ flakes located on top of the interfluvial ridge between the Bolton Draw drain- age system and Bush Draw, approximately 150 and 180 meters away from the southeast rim of the feature (Figure 2). Isolated Find 5 j$380 is a possible • graver and 5 ja381 exhibits some macroscopic evidence for its use as a light- duty cutting tool. Both of these IFs are within 305 meters of the site 5 JA163, and may possibly be associated with that resource. Neither of these artifacts appear to be in locations with good potential for buried cultural deposits, due to the upland topographic context. The only isolated find collected by C~cK, 5 ja459, is a basal fragment of an Barred projectile point that was recovered From a two-track road bed on a low rise in the bottom of a Bolton Draw tributary drainage, just south of the drainage cut (Figure 2). Though fragmentary, this projectile point type is similar to specimens dated to the Archaic period in southwestern 4~oming (Sharrock 1966). The absence of related cultural materials in the road cuts and the nearby drainage bank cut imply that this artifact is indeed an isolated item and thus it is considered un]ikely that it is reflective of more extensive, buried deposits. Another IF, 5 ja487, is a small chalcedogy decortication flake located on the same ridge feature as 5 ja380 and 381, but closer to the northwest rim than those finds (Figure 2). There is no macroscopic evidence of use of this • flake, and it is thought to be a waste flake produced during tool manufacture. -8-