Laserfiche WebLink
<br />10 <br />So much of the site has already been destroyed that tracing activity patterning <br />is not a realistic goal either. There is no indication that faunal or <br />macrofloral remains are preserved, so subsistence-related questions could not <br />be pursued. Therefore, further excavation would not be likely to increase an <br />understanding of the locus. <br />Locus C <br />Testing in Locus C included 18 shovel probes placed in uneroded areas near <br />where surface artifacts were found. Ten of these were placed in a pocket of <br />- deposition south of Locus A. ST-1 yielded a small, corner-notched projectile <br />point (Figure 4d) made of a milky white chart. The other nine tests, including <br />two very close to ST-1, were sterile. <br />Eight additional shovel tests were placed on a low hummock in an otherwise <br />eroded area where several surface flakes were noted. These tests ranged from <br />15 to 40 cm deep and all were sterile. <br />The projectile point is generally similar to the point illustrated by WCRM <br />(Wheeler 1980a:5-22). The low flake densities on the surface match WCRM's <br />observations of just six in the locus. <br />In view of the meager results of shovel testing and the total lack of <br />cultural remains in the cut bank bordering Locus C, little additional potential <br />is indicated for the locus. The age of the C-14 date from Locus A would appear <br />to match the style of the stray point from ST-1, as well as that of WCRM's <br />surface find, but other than a general temporal affinity and use of similar raw <br />materials, no relationship can be demonstrated. <br />Discussion <br />5RT132 appears to have been the location of one or more short-term camping <br />episodes dating to early in the Late Prehistoric period. Charcoal-laden soil <br />returned a date of 1590 + 80 (Beta-32,900). This date roughly matches the style <br />of all of the projectile points found on the site, but no direct association can <br />be demonstrated. The spokeshave could be used for arrow shaft smoothing, the <br />graver for etching wood or bone. Surface tools included several scrapers and <br />bifaces. Ground stone, probably an indication of plant processing, was also <br />present. The range of flake types represented in the debitage suggests late- <br />stage flint knapping - tool finishing and maintenance, along with expedient tool - <br />manufacture. Taken together, these indicate short-term mixed hunting and <br />collecting use of the site. Unfortunately, no faunal remains or good contexts <br />for pollen or macrobotanical samples were found. - <br />The early Late Prehistoric date and projectile point styles are quite <br />consistent with findings from nearby areas (LaPoint 198'7; Zier et al. 1983). <br />The early Late Prehistoric witnessed an apparent increase in prehistoric <br />population, and more data concerning demographics and subsistence are needed. <br />