HomeMy WebLinkAboutAPA2297REPLY TO
ATTENTION OF:
NPAEN-US
Mr. Curtis McVee
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
ALASKA DISTRICT, CORPS OF ENGINEERS
P.O. BOX 7002
ANCHORAGE, ALASKA 995·10
Bureau of Land Management
555 Cordova
Anchorage, Alaska 99501
Dear ~1r. McVee:
19 DEC 1978
·• ... n
·W
~
.,; _.,
ftS)
I am forwarding a copy of the report .. Archeology in the Upper Susitna
River Basin 11 for your review and comment. The report is based.upon
archeological investigations conducted by Alaskarctic, Fairbanks, Alaska,
in conjunction with geological explorations that were being conducted by
the Corps of Engineers in the Watana Canyon and Devil Canyon areas along the
upper Susitna River during this past summer. These investigations were site
specific and conducted prior to start of any work which would result in
disturbance to the tundra surface. The schedule was designed so that each
proposed drilling or materials sampling site would be checked for anything
of archeological value and cleared prior to the start of actual work. If
anything of significance was encountered then our exploration plans were
modified to avoid that particular locale. Future geological explorations
will follow the same format.
It is hoped that the information presented in this report will be useful in
the development of a meaningful data base of archeological information on
the Susitna River basin. Several prehistoric sites were encountered and
marked as a~result of this investigation. These sites have been marked and
will remQjn untouched until their significance is properly determined.
Again, yo~r comments on this report would be appreciated. Should we not
hear from YoU by 12 January 79 we will conclude that you are in full
agreement on this. Any questions should be directed to Major Allan Wylie,
Susitna Project Manager, telephone 752-2207.
1 Incl (dupe)
As stated
Sincerely yours,
~~rs
District Engineer
t. -· :')
l r-··~~. ~--..
.....__,~ ,_ .!
--·l \
AI_ASKARCTIC
-1 c ONSIJl TANf ARCHEOLOGISTS • CULTURAL RESOURCE SPECIALISTS
'l
I
l
l
]
~1
-) :J
j
l.AcC 1
P. 0. BOX 397
FAIRBANKS, ALASKA 99707
Mr. Jay K. Soper
Chief, Engineering Division
Alaska District, Corps of
Engineers
P.O. Box 7002
Anchorage, Alaska 99510
19071 452-7669
Reference: Contract DACWSS-78-C-0034
Dear Mr. Soper:
November 29, 1978
Enclosed is an oversized original of a map which is a
part of the final report completed under the above
referenced contract. The text of the report is being
forwarded under separate cover.
.... ~ .. '.:·. :
")," . ; ."""' ·~ .: .. ~: ..
cZ-
~)
< ONSIJII ANI ARUIEOLOGI51S • CUL JURAL RESOURCE SPECIALISTS
]
]
]
]
J ~)
]
J
J
]
P. 0. BOX 397
FAIRBANKS, ALASKA 99707
!VIr. Jay K. Soper
Chief, Engineering Division
Alaska District, Corps of
Engineers
P.O. Box 7002
Anchorage, Alaska 99510
1907) 452-7669
November 29, 1978
Reference: Contract DACW85-78-C-0034
Dear Hr. Soper;
Enclosed are five bound copies and one loose, camera
ready copy, of our report entitled "Archeology Near
The Watana Damsite In The Upper Susitna River Basin".
The original of an oversize map is being sent under
separate cover. These copies of our final report
under Contract DACW85-78-C-0034 have incorporated
changes made, to our draft report, in response to
your comments made by letter dated 17 November 1978.
Specifically, we made the following changes to the
draft report.
1. We incorporated your suggested rewording of the
first paragraph, second sentence, on page 1.
~
2. liiJe' incorporated your suggested rewording of the
thi~d paragraph on page 2.
3. ~e ~~eted a portion from the first sentence of
the first paragraph on page 3.
4. We corrected typographical error on page 18.
5. We removed our recommendations from the body of
the report and made them a part of the letter of
transmittal.
~i~ferely,
yJIQPJ .. ~~~( ~J
Glenn B~'d;n
l
]
]
J
~L~SK~RCTIC
CONSULTANT ARCHEOLOGISTS • CULTURAL RESOURCE SPECIALISTS
P. 0. BOX 397
FAIRBANKS, ALASKA 99707
George R. Robertson
Colonel, Corps of Engineers
Alaska District, Corps of
Engineers
P.O. Box 7002
Anchorage, Alaska 99510
19071 452-7669
November 24, 1978
Reference: Contract DACW85-78-C-0034; Archeological
Survey of a Portion of the Watana Dam Site Project
Area
] --~) Dear Colonel Robertson;
I
_j
J
_j
)
It is with great pleasure that we present this final
report on our 1978 survey of a portion of the Watana
damsite project area. Our findings are that contemplated
construction of a camp pad and associated airstrip
will not present a threat to significant cultural
resources. Specific areas surveyed and found to be
clear of significant archeological and historic sites
are shm·m on a map included in a map pocket at the
end of this report.
Although no archeological sites were discovered during
this :c:;urvey, such sites are known to exist in the area
and we' appreciate the opportunity to search for others.
With respect to future activity in the Watana project
area, it will be necessary to plan an appropriate level
of archeology. This archeology will have two general
objectives. One will be to insure that no part of the
feasibility study program will jeopardize significant
cultural resources. A second objective will be an aspect
of the feasibility study, and it will probably focus on
the need for a sample survey of the entire impact area.
We hope that future archeologists will enjoy the same
comfortable working relationship we enjoyed this swmrrer
with Corps personnel.
Sincerely,
~ Glenn Bacon
ARCHEOLOGY
NEAR THE
WATANA DAMSITE
IN THE
UPPER SUSITNA RIVER BASIN
A
Report
Prepared by
Glenn Bacon
Archeologist
for
The Alaska District,
Corps of Engineers
November 1978
under
Contract DACW85-78-C-0034
BLM Reference Number AG-AK 910-297
'fl\BLE OF CONTENTS
Introduction ................................ .
·.rhe Setting ................................. .
Summary of Regional Prehistory •........•......
Research Design .............................. .
Field Plan ................................... .
Methodology .................................. .
Survey Results ............................... .
F.valuation of the Archeological Survey
Probability of Encountering Additional Sites
Known and Projected Impacts on Cultural
Resources
References Cited . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
page 1
4
7
12
13
14
15
17
18
20
21
INTRODUCTION
_j
It is with great interest that archeologists have followed
recent events in Alaska which have led to the proposed
construction of hydro-electric facilities along the Susitna
River. This undertaking potentially threatens archeological
and historical sites presumed to be within the impact area.
The Alaska District, Corps of Engineers, recognized the
need for additional cultural resource information early
on. Consequently, a contractual agreement was signed -,c\
j J between the Corps and the Office of History and Archaeo-
logy, Alaska Division of Parks. The result was a litera-
ture based study designed to predict those areas of high-
est archeological potential within the potential construct-
ion zone, which at the time included a four dam system
(Alaska Division of Parks 1975).
Since the State ar~heological study, plan revisions have
reduced the number of dams under consideration to two,
namely the Devil Canyon and Watana dams. Additional
qeologic studies were desired for these two damsites.
f>ince some of the planned geologic studies included rock
~C' drilling machinery and necessitated other ground surface
altering activities, the Corps of Engineers recognized the
-~
I
J
]
-I
I
J
_\
I
_j
-2-
need for additional archeological evaluations based on
on-the-ground observations.
Speci fica 1ly, the Corps required archeological clearance
or speci [i c sites within the project areas. ·~-~· ~e
specific sites were defined and formed the basis for a
Scope of Work in a contract ultimately awarded to
AJaskarctic (Contract No. DACW85-78-C-0017). Archeo-
logical clearance work began in the spring of 1978 and
was concluded in the autumn of the same year.
Late in the summer we learned of a volume published by
the Alaska District, Corps of Engineers for the Alaska
PoweJ Au tho ri ty entitled _Plan of Study for Sus i tna
Ux_~lropower Feasibility Analysis (June 1978). Contingent
upon funding, the plan outlines a series of analyses
and logistic preparations necessary to initiate
feasihilit.y studies appropriate for Susitna hydro-electric
----..._
de ve 1 ot>ment' .-,
[t was determined that an airstrip and camp would need
to he constructed prior to breakup in the spring of
1979. Much of the area for the airstrip and camp were
not subject to the archeological survey performed earlier
in 1978. We recommended that an additional survey be
conducted to cover those unsurveyed areas in which pre-
breakup construction was contemplated for 1979.
-3-
A contract was awarded to Alaskarctic to conduct the
adrlitional survey. As finally determined the survey would
include (l) a proposed airstrip, (2) a proposed camp pad
location, (3) two proposed material sites, and (4) an
access road connecting all four areas.
Immediately upon learning of the contract award, two
~laskarctic archeologists left for the field. The archeo-
logical survey was conducted between 21 September and 25
September 1978. Archeologists assigned to the project
were Glenn Bacon, lead archeologist for Alaskarctic, and
Assistant Archeologist Lloyd "Joe" Jones. This is a
report on the survey.
-4-
THE SETTING
The Watana damsite lies 62 miles northeast of the commun-
ity of Talkeetna and is located at approximately latitude
0 0
62 49' 37" N and longitude 148 32 '30" W. The .... dmsite, on
the Susitna River, is in an uplands region characterized
by glacier formed topography. Kettle lakes and kame
--'
knolls are numerous. The Susitna River, itself, shoulders
through steep rock walled gorges as it hurries to the
gulf coast. The silt-laden Susitna is joined by dozens
J of cl~arwater tributaries which themselves have cut deep
V-shaped valleys into the soft glacial till of the region.
Vegetation at the damsite ranges from spruce dominated
taiga boreal forest in the lower elevations to alpine
shrub-tundra beginning at about 2500 feet in elevation.
This range in vegetation supports diverse faunal resources
including moose, caribou, brown and black bears as well
as a number of smaller mammals such as wolves and muskrats.
Anadromous fish resources are limited to the river below
Devil Canyon, but many of the region's trout and greyling
populate the streams and lakes above the canyon. Lakes
and ponds also experience seasonal inflights of migratory
waterfowl.
-5-
Climate for the Upper Susitna Basin could be considered
continental, but it is greatly tempered by moderating
influences from the Pacific Culf coast of Alaska.
L __ . I
L.-
'.I
0 5
U.•ha'IC"'*'• .. _..•GNHIIIDIIttl
E•-....,•terto .... •-J'et
UPPER SUSITN~.~V~R PROFILE RIVE~ILES 120-2~
L WIJfOftO Access Rood
I Proposed)
SCAlE
15
~"
r i
/----....__( -.,_ '-------~/\_ /
--v
I
r-·
I
r-/ ,........,
_-1
./ =,
\
\
l
)
I 'P& C7
l .
--v1
' \
/
l
\
\
l
\
cc:7') --
~oo,., Itt: Ocroll
I
LOCATION I!IAP
LEGEND
i -~
I m
I
RESERVOIR
Tyone l~ 1
\( ~----[\~ . '>
~ ACCESS ROAD
-TRANSMISSION ROUTE
5""'~ "'" \~-SO<JTHCERTRAl
lJ Lake.
RAILBELT AREA, ALASKA
UPPER SUSITNA RIVER BASIN
RECOMMENDED IMPROVEMENT
Loke. Lou1se Rood
ALASKA DISTRICT, CORPS OF ENSINEERS
ANCHORAGE, ALASKA
FiGURE 2
-7-
Sur.1.MARY OF REGIONAL PREHISTORY
One interpretive scheme characterizes the archeology of
central Alaska in terms of five major periods: (1) an
early Tundra Period, ending circa 8000 BP; (2\ an Early
Taiga Period, circa 8000 to 4500 BP; (3) a LatE Taiga
Period, circa 4500 years ago to approximately AD 500;
(4) an Athapaskan Period, from approximately AD 500 to
about AD 1900; and (5) a Recent Period from about AD 1900
to the present time.
The Tundra Period in Alaska is still poorly understood,
but it likely represents a time of early postglacial
adaptations. A changeover from steppe (grassland) to
shrub tundra must have had dramatic consequences for
early man's faunal food resources. Precious few archeo-
logical sites are known from this early period in Alaska.
Direct evidence of the people of the Tundra Period comes
from th,ree locales in interior Alaska. One of the locales
referred to is the Tangle Lakes region of the Alaska
Range where Frederick Hadleigh-West has defined an early
complex on the basis of evidence from several small archeo-
logical sites (1967; 1974; 1975). West has argued that
the locations of many of these archeological sites suggest
a primary dependence upon caribou for the people who
~c:
: /
-'
-8-
occupied them. Many of the sites are located on the shores
of lakes which are in turn located in the vicinity of one
of interior Alaska's major caribou herds (Nelchina). In
more recent times caribou were often hunted by chasing
them into the water where they were more easilv killed.
The Healy Lake Village site (Cook 1968; Cook & ~cKennan
1970) contained tools which possibly date back 11000 years.
These tools exhibit similarities to tools from the recently
discovered Dry Creek site near Healy, Alaska. The Dry
Creek site also dates in excess of 10000 years ago (Holmes
1974). The tools from all three of these areas are
reminiscent of tools found in Siberia and dated to an
equivalent age (see Chard 1974).
Forests began postglacial invasion of eastern interior
Alaska perhaps as early as 10000 years ago; and by 6000
years ago spruce was present at the Onion Portage site in
western interior Alaska (Anderson 1971). During this
period a series of boreal adaptations were evident across
northern North America. Many of these adaptations were
expressed in technologies which were characterized, in
part, by side-notched projectile points.
Presently available evidence indicates that, "'i th the
postglacial warming trend, forests replaced the earlier
shrub-tundra in central Alaska by about 8000 years ago
-9-
(hger 1974; ~atthews 1974; Schweger n.d.). Scanty archeo-
logical data from this period suggest that for the next
4000 years a series of forest adapted archaic cultures
inhabited central Alaska (Anderson 1968; MacNeish 1964).
These people probably lived on caribou, moose and fish
since these food resources would have been the most
abundant.
As the effects of the thermal maximum began to diminish,
interior Alaska likely felt the slight retreat of forest
margins. More importantly, conditions for the slight
expansion of shrub-tundra might have improved. This is
a particularly important point when considering the Upper
Susitna River Basin since much of the region is presently
near treeline.
The Late Taiga Period saw the development of Arctic Small
Tool on the western coasts of Alaska. During middle
Arctic £mall Tool times, Boreal Choris continued to be
widesp~ead as indicated by the existence of the later (?)
' ~
Kayuk and Nirniuktuk sites as well as assemblages similar
to that found at the Gallagher Flint Station (north of
the Brooks Range). Data are limited for central Alaska,
but the Healy Lake and Minchumina (Holmes 1972) and other
sites indicate that the late Denali Tradition technology
were also widespread (see Bacon 1977).
-10-
The Late Taiga Period terminated coincident with a surge
of influence to Alaska from the region of the Bering Sea.
Western Thule appears as suddenly on the Alaska mainland
as did Arctic Small Tool earlier. The appearance of
Western Thule, at roughly AD 500, is remarkedly near in
time to the appearance of the Itkillik intrusion in the
Onion Portage sequence (Anderson 1970) and also to the
finale of the Denali Tradition, which after a brief
hiatus was replaced by a technology similar in many
respects to that of the early historic Alaskan Athapaskan.
Occuring as these events did, near in time to both the
Viking expansion in the North Atlantic and the Polynesian
expansion throughout the Pacific, they suggest the
possibility of global climatic change.
The earliest evidence of Athapaskan occupation of interior
Alaska dates several centuries ago to just prior to about
I
AD 500. The relationship between these early Athapaskans
and the people known to have occupied central Alaska at
an evei:!_, earlier time is poorly understood (Cook 1975).
The data are inconclusive as to whether Athapaskan culture
originated in central Alaska (Cook 1968) or elsewhere
perhaps tv the east and south (Bacon 1977) • Whatever the
case, by AD 500 Athapaskan people occupied interior
Alaska and utilized a subsistence strategy similar to that
hypothesized for the earlier Taiga periods.
-11-
The 1978 archeology in the Upper Susitna River Basin
revealed the presence of four prehistoric sites in the
Wataha damsite area. All four of these archeological
sites appear to date from middle to early Holocene times.
(The Holocene is that period following the last ice age,
approximately the last 10000 years.) These data are,
however,' far less than are required to construct a mean-
ingful prehistoric cultural chronology for the Upper
Susitna Basin.
(-,
'"'I \
-J : __ /
...a .... __
-12-
RESEARCH DESIGN
It is assumed, on the basis of previous studies (eg. Boas
1964; Helm 1969; McKennan 1969; Spencer 1959; Watanabe
1968) that for northern hunting/fishing groups there is a
clear correlation between areas of high biomass concentra-
tion and settlement locales. These locales are patterned
(Campbell 1968; Helm 1965; many others) and, due to a
paucity of floral resources in central Alaska, settlement
patterns can be expected to reflect shifting availability
of faunal resources. Thus, it can generally be stated
that regions of high present and/or past biomass concentra-
tion will be regions of high archeological probability.
Ne will consider that regions which exhibit the character-
istic elements of ethnographically observed exploitative
patterns will also exhibit the characteristic elements of
Holocene exploitative patterns in general. We also must
consider evidence of environmental shifts during Holocene
times with the awareness that these shifts might be reflect-
eu in changed settlement patterns.
Thus the archeological research was conducted within the
general framework of culture ecology advanced by Julian
Steward (1955) and Leslie White (1949), who recognized
culture as man's extrasomatic means of adaptation. We
expect that man's adaptation to a changing environment
will be patterned and therefore, within limits, predictable.
~J
]
]
--) J -~
]
J
J
-13-
FIELD PLAN
The field plan was designed to accomplish the goals out-
lined in the Scope of Work. Specifically there was a
need to identify, and thereby offer a measure of protection
to, those cultural resources potentially threarened by
Corps directed exploration activities.
The on-the-ground archeological survey focused on an area
south of Tsusena Butte and bordered on the west by
Tsusena Creek, to the east by Deadman Creek, and on the
south by the Susitna River. Five specific areas were
slated for examination. These were: (1} a proposed
material site near the west bank of Deadman Creek, (2)
"'
an adjacent proposed airstrip, (3) a proposed camp
location, (4) a proposed material site near the east
bank of Tsusena Creek, and (5) an access road alignment
connecting the other four areas.
The ar~as surveyed were traversed on foot. Natural
exposures, such as blowouts and erosion cuts were inspected
for evidence of prior human activity. Additional small
"test" excavations were conducted as necessary to provide
more complete coverage. These excavations were accomplish-
ed with the use of shovels and hand trowels. All test
excavations were backfilled after inspection. They were
not mapped.
-14-
~1E'J'HODOLOGY
Project methodology was an extension of that developed
for prior archeological survey of the Watana damsite area
under contract DACWBS-78-C-0017 with the Ale:.. ~, District,
Corps of Engineers. At the time of the archeo~ugical
survey discussed in this report, a literature, map and
aerial photograph analysis of the project area had already
been completed and augmented by an on-the-ground survey
of portions of the Watana project area.
This aspect of the Watana survey continued to consist of
on-the-ground examinations of selected portions of the
Watana project area. Surficial features were interpreted,
as conditions allowed, for clues to aid in the location
of cultural resources. Occasionally, with the aid of
shovel and trowel testing, sub-surface deposits were
exposed. These nan-made exposures augmented the relatively
small number of naturally occurring exposures and helped
to piece together a small part of the area geologic
history.
-"'C'
~
~c,
. j
~
..
-15-
SURVEY RESULTS
Only one site was discovered during our survey. This
site is a very recent historic site and likely does not
predate 1948. This date was stamped on the ba.e of what
appeared to be an alcohol beverage bottle. An assort-
ment of other empty bottles and cans, along with the
remnents of a tent frame, suggest that this historic
site was formerly a base camp. Its location at the end
of the largest local lake suggests that the camp might
have originally been established by floatplane.
We measured this historic site against criteria listed
under Appendix C, 36 CFR BOO, Procedures for the Protect-
ion of Cultural Properties (Federal Register, vol. 39,
no. 34, February 19, 1974). On the basis of this
evaluation, we concluded that the discovered historic
site is not eligible for inclusion in the National
Register of Historic Places •
·1
0
-< ...
"' ""
,, '._I
!i ! '
', '.\
·'l
/
(
~ n
t.:-:L:. ... I I T--·1 1-: I I· I I.
I
_:_::3-
-i6-
i 10
. ' "· \ ,,
\.
l
I \
'
""\--··I
' ·-·-t
'--I ~__.--J
,.,~
12
'1
~-3
--._:
11 MilES
.-"-1 ... ------··-·--· -
iOO() 600(; q,)VO 12\)()0 1'>000 18000 ~-!IJC.fl• I ( i 1
F'T:·t-3·:-·r:-.-t I ··.1
I I, t)
r-.r·T 1 rJ 1·1" r1 f
f-:.··:..7.. I-. -.-F:·.=:--~i..:..: _17::".=:::L-:" • .:_·:E.:-.. :.-=:l. .:.:· J:::_.:_::-:-r --.l·. · -~ C -:.t ~':-~"""''. -=-~:-..::..3 -
1 3 •l KILOMETRES r _-... T ,-_::._:_~:.=-.::--::--.:.:-:-::::I:.· __ -._:.,::~::::--::-:-_-.::r·::;.:·:..,..-·_-0::::::_:::::::..::;..:~-J
CONTOUR INTERVAL 100 FEET
llOTTfD I JNfr, f~EPf?E~~f N I 11{J. H)Ol CONTOURS
NATIONAL GEODETIC VERTICAL DATUM OF 1929
SURVEY For VICINITY MAP:
covered during the
see the map pocket
detailed map of areas
archeological survey,
at the end of this
report.
,f"''
l ·.; -~~
•
-17-
EVALUATION OF THE ARCHEOLOGICAL SURVEY
The Watana damsite portion of the Upper Susitna River
Basin is a difficult area in which to conduct an archeo-
logical survey. There are relatively few n~-~al
erosion exposures, and standing water caused by high
level permafrost makes test pitting difficult in many
areas. On the other hand, the specific nature of the
goals of the survey described in this report made it
a relatively easy one to complete.
1\l though no archeological survey is 100% rel.iable, we
are confident that our survey detected all significant
sites within the survey area. Such sites, if any, as
may have gone undetected will likely be· small in size
and easily salvaged if discovered at a later date.
-18-
PROBABILITY OF ENCOUNTERING ADDITIONAL SITES
When it comes to archeology there is hardly anything
more easily offered or less defendable than statements
concerning the probability of encountering arL~eological
sites. In the recent past this problem has received
more and more attention in the professional literature.
In Alaska this problem is particularly acute because
developers continue to ask the question while the archeo-
logical data base lags far behind the analogous one for
the continental United States. Current professional
estimates suggest that the Alaskan archeological data
bape may be as much as sixty or seventy years behind the
rest of the country in its development.
Within Alaska, the Watana portion of the Upper Susitna
Basin presents an almost impossible situation. Up until
~--,
this summer we had no local data base with which to work.
The fc)frr prehistoric sites located in 1978 did little to
improve on the situation.
The statistical odds are that no two of the sites found
in 1978 represent human activity in a single prehistoric
year. We know almost nothing of the settlement patterns,
part of which each of those sites reflects. Our under-
-19-
standing of these prehistoric settlement patterns relies
totally on ethnographic and archeological analogy. That
is, we must project from the known to the unknown.
Additional problems are introduced because little paleo-
environmental data are available for the Watana project
area. We know little about local geological and bio-
logical history.
We do know that the 1978 rate of site find per man-day
in the field was on the high end of the experience scale.
We are reasonably certain that the 1978 survey d~tected
only a tiny part of the total range of activity sites we
expect were left by prehistoric populations. This indicates
to us that the site density of the project area is high.
On reflection this should not be too surprising, since
i
the Tangle Lakes Archeological District is not too far
distant. The Tangle Lakes District was entered on the
National Register, in part, because it is reported to
exhibit one of'the highest archeological site densities
in North America.
-20-
KNOWN AND PROJECTED IMPACTS ON CULTURAL RESOURCES
We know that at least one archeological site has already
been directly effected by 1978 exploration activities
near the Watana damsite. Site TLM 016 apparr ~ly has
been punctured by a Corps of Engineers benchmal,~.
We suspect that seismic testing must have some affect upon
archeological sites nearby, but we do not yet know if it ,
is significant. In attempting to further define the nature
of projected impact, we can only offer the following
observations.
All of the cultural resource sites discovered during
the 1978 survey of the project area were either on or
within a few centimeters of the ground surface. If this
pattern holds true for the majority of the area cultural
resources, then we can expect that any alteration of the
ground surface could produce a detrimental impact on
cultur~l resources.
. .l
-~
-21-
REFERENCES CITED
1\ger, T.
1974 Late Quaternary Environmental History of the Tanana
Valley, Alaska. Report No. 54, Institu+-~ of Polar
Studies, Ohio State University.
Alaska Division of Parks /
1975 Heritage Resources Along the Upper Susitna River.
Miscellaneous Publications, History and Archaeology
Series, No. 14.
Anderson, D.
1971 Environmental and Cultural Change in the North
American Arctic. (manuscript)
1970 Athapaskans in the Kobuk Arctic Woodlands, Alaska.
Canadian Archaeological Association, Bulietin No. 2.
1968 A Stone Age Campsite at the Gateway to America.
Scientific American, vol. 218, no. 6.
Bacon, G.
1977 The Prehistory of Alaska: A Speculative Alternative .
Prehistory of the North American Sub-Arctic: The
Athapaskan QUeStion. Proceedings of the Ninth Annual
Conference of the Archaeological Association of the
tlniversity of Calgary, pp. 1-10.
Boas, F.
1964 The Central Eskimo. University of Nebraska Press.
Campbell, J.
1968 Territoriality Among Ancient Hunters: Interpretations
from F.thnography and Nature. Anthropological Archaeo-
~ in the Americas, pp. 1-21. (reprint)
Chard, c.
1974 Northeast Asia in Prehistory. University of Wisconsin
Press.
Cook, J.
1975 Archaeology of the Interior. Western Canadian Journal
of Anthropology, vol. 5, nos. 3-4.
1968 The Prehistory of Healy Lake, Alaska. Ph.D.
dissertation, University of Wisconsin, Madison.
Cook, J. & R. McKennan
1970 The Village Site at Healy Lake, Alaska. (manuscript)
-22-
Giddings, ,T. L.
196 7 Ancient Men of the Arctic. A1ferd A. Knopf, Nev.r York.
1962
Helm,
1969
1965
Onion Portage and Other Flint Sites of the, Kobuk River.
.Arctic Anthropology, vol. 1, no. 1.
J.
Remarks on the H.ethodology of Band Composition
Analysis. contributions to Anthropologv· Band
Societies, David Damas, ed., National 1·1u.-eums of
Canada Bulletin 228, Anthropology Series q4: 212-217.
Bilaterality in the Socio-Territorial Organization
of the Arctic Drainage Dene, Ethnology, vol. 4.
Holmes, C.
1975 A Northern Athapaskan Environment System in Diachronic
Perspective. The Western Canadian Journal of
Anthropology, vol. 5, nos. 3-4.
1974 New Evidence for a Late Pleistocene Culture in
Central Alaska: Preliminary Investigations at
Dry Creek. (manuscript)
deLaguna, F.
1947 The Prehistory of Northern North America as Seen
from the Yukon. American Antiquity, Memoir No. 3.
Larsen H. & F. Rainey
1948 Ipiutak and the Arctic Whale Hunting Culture.
Anthropological Papers of the American Museum of
Natural History, No. 42.
MacNeish, R.
1964 Investigations in Southwest Yukon: Archaeological
Excavations, Comparisons and Speculations. Papers
of ~he Peabody Museum for Archaeology, vol. 6.
1'1cKem1atl, R.
1969 Athapaskan Groupings and Social Organization in
Central Alaska. Contributions to Anthropology:
Band Societies., Dav1d Damas, ed., National Museums
of Canada Bulletin 228, Anthropology Series 84.
Matthews, ,J.
1974 Wisconsin Environment of Interior Alaska: Pollen
and Macrofossil Analysis of a 27 Meter Core from
the Isabella Basin (Fairbanks, Alaska)., Canadian
Journal of Earth Sciences, vol. 11, no. 6.
-23-
Rainey, F.
1939 Archaeology in Central Alaska. Anthropological
Papers of the American Museum of Natural History,
vol. 36, no. 4, pp. 351-405.
Schweger, c.
n.d. Notes on the Palaeoecology of the Northern Archaic
Tradition. (manuscript)
Steward, J.
1955 Theory of Culture Change. University r~ 1llinois
Press.
Spencer, R.
1959 The North Alaskan Eskimo: ~ Study in Ecology and
Society. Smithsonian Institution Press.
Watanabe, H.
1968 Subsistence and Ecology of Northern Food Gatherers
with Special Reference to the Ainu, Man the Hunter,
R. Lee & I. DeVore, eds., Aldine Publishing Co.
West, F.
1975 Dating the Denali Complex. Arctic Anthropology
vol. 12, no. 1, pp. 76-81.
1974 Late Palaeolithic Cultures in Alaska. (manuscript)
1967 The Donnelly Ridge Site and the Definition of an
Early Core and Blade Complex in Central Alaska.
American Antiquity, vol. 32, no. 3.
White, L.
1949 The Science of Culture. Farrar, Straus and Giroux
Publ1shers.
BORR0 1'1 AREA
PROPOSED ACCESS ROAD
•
BF'IC:H'1ARK ''1!1.--<;
VICINrrY
MAP
O'!F' I'!Cf' ; "0 F'"'
'·IA '~'F'" -
-p, ,-, t
N
l,,!\::'"78 7P C ·Cc ,4