HomeMy WebLinkAboutSUS329PJ..ASKA PC7t'ER Al.1Tl-m ITY
SUSITNA HYDR<E..ECTRIC PROJECT
ENVI R<D'fNTAL STUDIES
PROCEDURES rw4LIAL
SUBTASK 7.~
CULTURAL RESOORCES INVESTIGATION
Tettelttial
E nvitonmental
Speciali1t1, Inc.
ALASKA POER ~llY
SUSITNA HYDRCELECTRIC PROJECT
ENVI Ra-KNTAL STIJDI ES
PROCEDURES ~U6.l
SUBTAS'K 7 I (l)
OJLTl.JRAL REscx.RCES INVESTIGATION
Submi tted by
Terrestrial Envirornrental Specialists, Inc .
and
University of Alaska Museum
to
Acres Arrerican, Inc .
~ /, Quality Assurance Coord.ina.tor (TES ) v
July 1980
Copy No. _;\~6 __ _
This procedures manual is a controlled document. Each copy is
numbered and issued in trust to an individual whose name is
recorded on a distribution log maintained by Terrestrial
Environmental Specialists, Inc., irn Phoenix, New York. Amendments
to this document, as they are issued, will be sent to the
authorized holder of each copy. Upon completion of the project
(or by December 31, 1982) all copies of the manual are to be
returned to Terrestrial Environmental Specialists, Inc.
PROCEDURES MANUAL/RESEARCH DESIGN
SUBTASK 7.06 CULTURAL RESOURCES INVESTIGATION
FOR THE SUSITNA HYDROPOWER PROJECT
Prepared By:
E. James Dixon , Jr., Ph.D.
Principal Investigator
George S. Smith, M.A.
Project Supervisor
David C. Plaskett, M.A.
Research Associate
University of Alaska Museum
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Table of Contents
List of Figures
I. Introduction
A.
B.
Description of Study
Legal Basis
II. Technical Procedures
A.
B.
Introduction
The Data Bas e
Geology
Glacial Units
Non-Glacial Units
T1.me Units
Flora
Fauna
Archeology
Previous Research
Regional History
Central Alaska Range
a. Dry Creek
b . Carlo Creek
c . Teklanika Sites
d. Nenana River Gorge
Tanana Valley
a. Lake Minchumina
b. Campus Site
c. Healy Lake
d. Dixthada
e. Donnelly Ridge
f. Ft. t-lainWTigh t
Denali Highway Area
a. Tangle Lakes
b. Ratekin Site
Talkeetna Mountains
a. Lo n g Lake
Copper River Valley
i
Site
i
iii
1
1
2
4
4
4
4
5
7
8
8
11
12
12
13
13
13
14
14
15
15
15
16
16
16
17
17
17
17
18
18
18
18
Cook Inlet
a. Beluga Point
b. Kachemak Bay Sequence
Ethnographic Information
History
c. Application of the Data Base
Cultural Chronology
Research Strategy
1980 Field Survey Units
D. Paleontology
Lower Wata na Creek
Other Study Areas (Paleozoic and
Mesoz o ic r o cks)
III. Data Procedures
IV. Quality Control
V. Schedule
VI. Personnel
VII. Literature Cited
u
19
19
20
21
24
26
26
29
33
38
38
38
45
6)
64
68
7 0
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1. Native Languages and Peoples in and near the Susitna Study
Area 22
Figure 2. Speculative Cultural Chronology and Inferred Glacial,
Climatological and Vegetational Regimes of the
Susitna Valley 27
Figure 3. Location of Geological/Morphologic al Units Within the
Impoundment Limits on the Talkeetna Mountains D-5 Quad 39
Figure 4. Location of Geological/Morphological Units tofithin the
Impoundment Limits on the Talkeetna Mountains D-4 Qu~d 4o
Figure 5. Location of Geological/Morphological Units Within the
Impoundment Limits on the Talkeetna Mountains D-3 Quad 41
Figure 6. Location of Geological/Morphological Units Within the
Impoundment Limits on the Talkeetna Mountai!ls D-2 Quad 42
Figure 7 . Location of Geological/Morphological Units Within the
Impoundment Limits on t he Talkeetna Mountains C-2 Quad 43
Figure 8 . Location of Geological/Morphological Units Within the
Impoundment Limits on the Talkee~na Mountains C-1 Quad 44
iii
1
I. INTRODUCTION
A. DESCRIPTION OF STUDY
The cultural resources investigation for the Susitna Hydropower
Project has two objectives: 1) identification of archeological, historical
and paleontological resources in the project area; and 2) testing and
evaluation of these resources in order to propose mitigation measures and
lessen the impact of ground disturbing preconstruction activities. To meet
these objectives the following five step research effort has been developed:
1. Preparation for field studies.
2. Reconnaissance level archeological survey of project area.
3 . Intensive testing of archeological and historic sit~s
discovered during Step 2.
4. Analysis and Final Report preparation.
5. Curation of cultural and paleontological materials.
In preparation for field studies it is necessary to develop a research
desigr. based on the current data base, literature review, and other pertinent
information. For this project the research design integrates the current
data base into a cultural chronological framework, and develops a research
strategy that is structured to gather data necessary to predict site locations
in relation to physical and topographic features in the project area.
Ultimately . the research design: 1) will allow the identification of many
of the resources located in the project area; 2) will target areas demonstra-
ting high probability of site presence which should be considered areas of
high risk for site disturbance ; and 3) will provide a basis for the evaluation
of site significance based on research potential. In addition to development
of the research strategy, other prefield tasks must be performed. These
include the acquisition of State and Federal Antiquities Permits, recruitment
of personnel, staging of fieldwork, and development of the procedures
manual.
The reconnaissance level archeological survey, Step 2, for the project
area will consist of on-the-ground survey and sampling. Sampling will
allow the reconnaissance survey effort to make predictions concerning site
density in each samplin~ strata. The sampling design to be employed will
be a stratified random sampling procedure and is discussed in the Technical
Procedures Section. Survey will be conducted in certain areas that will be
directly affected by preconstruction activities such as s eismi c lines and
trenches, borrow areas, access roads, drilling sites, and aircraft landing
sites as well as the proposed impoundment areas for the Devil's Canyon and
Watana Dams. Projected construction areas for the dams and related faci-
lities will also be examined.
Intensivt! testing, Step 3, will be conducted at sites located during
·:he Step 2 survey . The majority of this testing will occur in the second
field season . Metric grids will be superimposed on these sites and metric
units selected for excavation. Each unit selected for testing will be
systematically excavated. All artifacts and features will be recorded
using standard archeological field methods. Site maps and soil profiles
2
will be prepared. Photographs will be taken to document artifacts, features,
and site location. Site limits will be delineated and data will be recovererl
for analysis and evaluation based on the analysis of this material. Intensive
testing will provide the data necessary for evaluating the effects of the
preconstruction and construction phases of the Susitna Hydropower Project
on cultural resources. Each site will be evaluated and mitigating measures
recommended and incorporated into the Final Report.
Analysis and Report Preparation, Step 4, entails compilation and
analysis of the individual reports for the other phases of the project.
The analysis of recovered data will include rec omm endations for mitigation
of adverse effects to sites when appropriate. The specific objective of
this step is the presentation of a detailed summary of the results of the
cultural resource investigation and recommendations concerning this project .
The Final Report will include the location, description, and a mitigation
recommendation for each site located. Estimated oanpower requirements will
be provided for the archeological excavation of specific sites. The overall
analysis will be evaluated and discussed.
As presently scheduled, the FERC license application will be prepared
prior to the completion of the Cultural Resources Analysis. The cultural
resources section of the exhibit will be based on the Phase I Final Report.
This report will include recommendations for as many sites as possible and
will be based on information which is available at the time the report is
prepared (i.e. immediately following the 1981 field season). There are,
however, constraints which will make it impossible to provide certain
critical information prior to submission of the report. One such constraint
is the time required to obtain radiocarbon determinations from sam?les
collected during the 1981 field season. Another is the limited analysis
time. Additional data will be provided when available.
Curation of recovered artifactual material and associated contextual
data, Step 5, will be an ongoing program throughout the project. All
recovered material and supporting documentation will be housed at the
University of Alaska Museum and curated in accordance with State and Federal
requirements pertinent to the preservation of antiquities.
B. LEGAL BASIS
The Susitna Hydropower Project is a federally licensed project for the
State of Alaska. As such, the legal framework and authority for the c o nsi-
deration of cultural resources are spelled out in a number of Federal and
State regulations. As early as 1906 , the Antiquities Act (P.L. 59-209)
directs the preservation of properties "of national, historical or archeo-
logical significance and authorizes interagency, intergovernmental, and
interdisciplinary efforts for the preservation of such resources." The
Reservoir Salvage Act of 1960 (P .L. 86-523) provides for the recovery-ind
preservation of 11historic and archeological data" that might be lost or
destroyed as a result of the construction of federallv funded or licensed
dams, reservoirs, and attendant facilities and activities.
The Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (P.L. 89-655) declares it to be
a national policy to preserve and protect historic and prehistoric sites,
buildings, and objects of national significance. Continuing with this
policy the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (P.L. 91-180) requires
evaluation of the effects of major federal actions on the environment
including cultural resources. The Archeological and Historic Preservation
Act of 1974 (P.L. 93-391) is an amend~ent to the Reservoir Salvage Act
of 1960. The 1974 Act provides for the protection of historic and archeo-
logical sites:
• • • which might otherwise be irreparably lost or destroyed
as a result of (1) flooding, the building of access roads,
railroads and highways, and other alterations of terrain,
caused by the construction of a dam by any agency and
(2) any alteration of the terrain caused as a result of any
federal construction project or federally licensed activity
or program. (Sec. 1)
Section 7 of this Act authorizes that up to 1% of the total budget of
a federally funded or licensed project may be allocated for archeological
survey, recovery, analysis, and publication. The Alaska Historic Preser-
vation Act of 1975 specifies that prior to any construction or public
improvement by a State agency, or by a private concern under contract with
or licensed by the State, cultural resources must be considered. Cultural
resource preservation efforts are required by Federal and State law to
satisfy li~ensing requirements for the Su~itna Hydropower Project. These
tasks are: I) identification and documentation of cultural resources
3
within project areas; and 2) formulation and explication of recommendations
for mitigation for each historic or archeological site identified. However,
it is also recognized that the initial studies essential to meet licensing
requirements may have direct impact on cultural resources which may pose
immediate adverse effects. Examples of such activities are construction of
camps to house study personnel, test holes to locate proposed borrow areas,
access roads to study locale, etc.
This study will recommend measures which can mitigate potential damage
to archeological and historic sites during the course of the engineering
and environmental studies. If such mitigation procedures are not incor-
porated into the proposed action for historic preservation, needless delays
and unnecessary additional costs will be inevitable . This has been repeatedly
demonstrated in other large construction projects which have required t h e
identification and mitigation of cultural resources for licensing. This
research design foresees this need and provides methods by which these
delays can be avoided. The proposed cultural resource investigations
should be conceptually divided into objectives: 1) the effort necessary to
identify and propose mitigation measures for possible adverse effects
during the course of the preconstruction and construction activities; and
2) the effort necessary to mitigate damage to all historic and prehistoric
sites that will be disturbed either directly or secondarily, by dam
construction. This study is concerned with the first of these objectives .
II. TECHNICAL PROCEDURES
A. INTRODUCTION
The research design for the Susitna Hydropower Project consists of
analysis and application of the relevant data base in order to define a
cultural chronology for the project area, develop a research strategy that
will allow areas demonstrating actual or high probability of site presence
within the project area to be identified and targeted for miti~ation recom-
mendations, and implement a field strategy that will achieve the objectives
4
of the research strategy. The data base relevant to cultural resources in
the project area includes the geology, flora, f a una, history, ethnographic
informatio~and archeology. This data base consists of professio nal
literature, unpublished manuscripts, files, fieldnotes, and museum systematic
collections. A summary of the data base analysis is presented below,
fo l lowed by a discussion of data base application ~nd a detailed presentation
of the field strategy to be used. The paleontological study of the project
is discussed separately in the final section of Technical Procedures.
Geology
Detail~d studies of the surficial geology do not exist for t h e project
area and data concerning the different types of surface topography land
forms, glacial history, and associated dates were not available. Information
about the surficial geology can aid the research strategy in several important
ways. Limiting dates can be determined for the archeological potential of
certain geologic strata, the preservation potential for archeological sites
within certain strata can be inferred, and the geology can also contribute
to paleoenvironmental interpretations for sites of various ages. A brief
study and analysis of the geology was oade by the project geologist using
air photos. This study is speculative and requires additional field study
and verification; however, it has provided the necessary framework within
which the archeological field strategy can be developed.
Five flight lines of 60,000' high-resolution false color inf·ared
imagery were examined. They extend from the Chulitna River on the west to
the Tyone River on the east, and cover a swath 5-10 miles wide on both
sides of the Susitna River. After examination of the photos, units were
selected which would best differentiate various types of surface topography
and different ages of landforms. Happing was first done directly on the
photos with a grease pencil, and later traced off on a mylar base map.
Because the air photos have built in distortion, it was unavoidably
transferred to the mylar base. Distortion is most evident along the tops
and bottoms of adjoining flight lines. Time did not permit a transfer
directly to the 1:63,360 scale topographic maps. Such transfer can be
routinely done with a zoom transfer scope or a map-a-graph. For this phase
of the archP.ological research design, the mylar base may be accurate enough.
s
Units were ~pped at a scale that was suitable to the archeological
objectives and size of the study area. Small topographic features such 1s
individual ~oraine crests were generalized and included within more extensive
units, such as morainal topography. Because minor individual features can
be easily located on the air photos, they were not mapped.
The surficial geologic units throughout the 3usitna River Canyon area
consist of two basic end members and all variations between them. One f:nd
member i s the steep rocky slopes that have been completely unmodified b:•
glacial processes. In contrast the most glacially modified surfaces ar•!
the thick accumulations of ice-contact-stratified drift that mantle bas.ll
lodgment till and glacially scoured bedrock. Below the highest peaks w'1ich
extend above the ice limit are steep glacially carved valley walls. ~b~ve
the clearly defined valley wall, ye t below the upper limit o f ice, may oe
narrow or broad "shoulders" of glacially-smoothed (sloping and eroding)
rock which still exhibit considerable relief. ~ear the base of t he well
defined glacial trough, the sloping surface gra~ually becomes increasirgly
mantled with undifferentiated glacial drift, whi ,·h is generally expres~.ed
as undulating ground moraine. Hills of bedrock along the valley floor are
also common, and extensive areas of glacial moraine are present in SOIUf:
areas.
Surfaces younger than the period of extensive glaciation are of ~~o
widely different types. There are the steep irregular slopes that res·Jlted
from recent stream incision, and the recent-mode rn alluvial gravel whi:h
lies at the base of recent stream cuts.
The map units which follow give a two fold designation with upper case
and lower-case letter. The upper case letters indicate the relative (not
absolute) age of the surface and the lower case indicates the surface
morphology or type of deposit. For instance, the unit "G '' refers to m morainal deposit ~armed during glacial time (undifferentiated) and the Jnit
"R " refers to recent alluvium. Although the relative age differences ::or
su~faces have been est:iJnated, the following general succession of ages fo r
common deposits can be inferred because of glacier downwasting:
Glacial Units (Keyed to Figures 3-8)
b. Surfaces mapped as "b" are sloping bedrock surfaces that fonne•i
the valley walls of glacial troughs. In most cases slopes are very steep,
and usually bedrock is exposed directl y underneath the thin recent soil
mantle. In some places patchy thin drift may be present within the boun··
daries of areas mapped with the subscript "b". This unit c01t1monly grades
both upward and downward in elevation to rock slopes above the glacial
troughs (r) or to drift mantles slopes (d, d/b). Minor windblown sedi-
mentation and solifluction processes have occurred, but in most cases the
glacial troughs are relatively unmodified.
r. Surfaces mapped as "r" are extremely common in the Susi tna Canyc ·n
area. These are rock surfaces that have been sm.oothed and rounded by
glacial erosion. In many cases, the lithology of the bedrock controls the
surface topography. In all cases the rock surfaces are rounded and smoothed
and the local relief is less than several hundred feet. All of these
surfaces are very well drained, solifluction is absent, and al ~ost no
sediment cover exists. In topographic depre s sions bet~een rock knobs a
minor amount of sediment of diverse origin ~y be present. The charac-
teristic expression of tnis unit is con t rolled partly by its topographic
height but largely by the rock lithology. Surfaces above glacial trough
valley walls ''b" are less rounded becau~e glacial e rosion is less effectiv e
there. The local expression of this unit is controlled largely by rock
structure. In areas of v arying rock hardness (near Indian River), a ridge
and swale (corrugated) topography develops. In upland areas (south of
Devil's Canyon Damsite) topography is more gentle, and secondary relief is
controlled by rock fractures.
d. Surfaces mapped as "d" includ!! those areas thickly mantled with
glacial drift. Relief is generally very low and the unit can have a mono-
tonous gradually sloping undulating expression . Drainage is typically
6
poor , with small ponds forming in a few places. The surface character is
controlled largely by the varying thickness and composition of the till
mantle . Most of the sediment underlying the surfaces !!lapped "d" is probably
stony, clayey, dense till, which may be overlain by thin gravel cap .
d/b. Surfaces mapped as "d/b" are underlain by thin or patchy drift
which-overlies bedrock. Both ice-scoured bedrock and a mantle of po orly
drained drift can occur locally . The topographic relief is usually lower
than "r" surfaces because the drift fills in the original depressio ns . It
is higher than "d" surfaces because the surface irregularities are not
completely masked by a drift mantle. Locally, this unit can be well drained
(as in the gravelly areas), but usually well drained bedrock areas are
randomly interspersed with poorl y drained drift areas. Minor areas of
subdued morainal topography can be p resent locally .
m. Surfaces mapped as "m" are underlain by hummocky irregular,
commonly gravelly drift which extends to some depth. The surface expression
is morainal. Topographic relief is generally less than 100 feet, but
numerous chaotic small ridges (morain al) or isolated mounds (kames) typically
less than 100' relief may be present. In most areas, the surfaces mapped
as "m" are well drair.ed and gravelly . Small lakes ~re commonly present,
and large irregular poorly drained areas may be present as well. Very
little morainal topography is present west of the Watana Dam Site . Extensive
areas near the Tyone River, although morainal in form (m), are more subdued
and poorly drained, possibly because they are partly buried by eolian
sediments.
m2 . Surfaces mapped as "m2" are similar to "m" surfaces and grade
directly into them. They are, however, more irregular in form, with more
prominent ridges, and better drained topography. In the vicinity of Tsisi
Creek and the Oshetna River, "m2" surfaces include some prominent valley
lateral moraines.
o. Surfaces mapped as "o" are outwash terraces with flat uniform
surfaces that are usually well drained. Several small terrace scarps in
the units mapped "o" were not differentiated. Outwash gravel is present in
very small areas in the valley floors of Tsisi Creek and Oshetna River, hut
these areas were too small to be mapped individually. Outwash is also
present in large quantities along the western portion of the map area
(unit L ), but its surface is so highly collapsed that it is included as
moraina'f topography. In addition, some of the un-its mapped as "d" and
"d/b" in l-latana Creek Valley may include some outwash.
Non-Glacial Units
.&· Surfaces mapped as "g" include all areas of steep, rubbly slopes
at higher altitudes than the inferred late Wisconsin glacial limit. The
ice appears to have reached about 3,500-4,000 feet altitude over most of
the canyon. Angular bedrock ridges, steep slopes, and accumulations of
blocky talus were included within this unit. Near the heads of cirques,
the graduation from glacial trough (b) and unglaciated mountains (g) is
only approximately mapped. Although these surfaces projected above the
glacial limit, modern frost shattering and talus accumulation has rendered
most of these surfaces essentially modern.
7
v. Surfaces mapped as "v" include all bedrock surfaces that were
formed by recent incision of tributaries and the Susitna River. The surfaces
are very steep, commonly gullied, and are still commonly in the process of
being eroded. The boundary between "v" surfaces and the next higher surface
is usually sharp. "v" surface also includes some colluvium, scall talus
cones, and a few possible landslides •
.!.· Surfaces mapped as "a" include all alluvium of modern or relatively
recent age . The alluvium is generally well drained and vegetation covered,
especially in the Susitna Cauyon . Alluvium in the tributaries may contain
minor colluvial debris an~ some fi.ne material, but along the Susitna and
Chulitna River "a" is indistinguishable from outwash. The alluvium is
derived largely from reworked outwash, hence the similarity. The contact
between alluvium (a) and steep gullied slopes (v) is usually abrupt, but
difficult to map because of the narrow outcrop pattern .
s. Surfaces mapped as "s" include those mantled by solifluction
sediments. These areas are poorly drained, with broad open unbroken slopes.
No bedrock knobs or gravel patches are present above the solifluction
surface.
1. Surfaces mapped as "1" include all lacustrine deposits. Only two
small exposures near Stephan Lake were found. Drainage is very poor, and
the sediments appear largely peaty.
f. Surfaces mapped as "f" include several large alluvial fans southeast
of Portage Creek. Slopes are fairly shallow, with well drained gravel
surfaces.
t. Surfaces mapped as "t" include several exposures of talus rubble
abov e Devil Creek. Drainage is excellent, but slopes are very steep and
irregular.
Time Units
No radiocarbon dates or any other age dates are available for the
deglacial chronology of the Susitna Canyon area. Review of deglacial and
Holocene chronologies elsewhere suggests that nearly all of the Susitna
Canyon area was inundated with ice until about 13,000-14,000 years ago, the
end of the climatic Wisconsin Stade. At about this time glaciers in many
areas experienced rapid retreat. Soce regions in Alaska may have been
nearly ice free by about 11,000 years B.P., whereas in other regions
deglaciation occurred some tice prior to about 8,000 years B.P. At about
that time minor advances occurred in tributary valleys. In addition,
renewed aggradation of major river valleys may have occurred at this time
owing to increased rates of frost-shattering.
Based on this inferred deglacial history for the Susitna Canyon area,
the time since full glacial conditions can be broken into two major units:
the Glacial Interval (13,000-14,000 years B.P. to about 8,000-11,000 years
B.P.) and the Holocene Interval (8,000-11,000 years B.P. to 0 years B.P.)
The Glacial Interval can be broken into two subunits: the time of full
glaciation (13,000-14,000 years B.P. to 10,000-12,000 years B.P.). The
Holocene Interval can be subdivided into early Holocene (1,000-3,000 years
B.P. to 8,000-11,000 years B.P.) and late Holocene time (1,000-3,000 years
B.P. to present). These inferred age boundaries are overlapping because a
firm chronological sequence has not been established for the Susitna area.
8
Based on existing data it cannot be determined exactly when deglaciation
of the Susitna Canyon occurred. Ice wastage, which began 13,000-14,000
years B.P. was accompanied by downwasting and terminal retreat up the major
tributary valleys. Therefore, higher areas and areas further up large
tributary valleys were first exposed. Ice-free conditions in the canyon
floor must have occurred some tice after the broad bedrock shoulders (r)
were first expo~ed.
Temporal units since the time of full glaciation are divided into the
following two major units: "G" (glacial time) and "H" (Holocene time).
The glacial time has been subdivided into full-glacial (F) and late-glacial
(L) relative ages. The boundary dates are inferred ages only. The Holocene
Interval is also represented by two subdivided relative ages: early Holocene
(e) and late Holocene (R) time. Boundary ci ates here are also inferred.
Flora 1
The geologic data above, especially inferred deglacial history, provide
a baseline from which to evaluate probable vegetational resources available
to humans and fauna in the prehistoric past. Although floral distributions
have probably changed through time, many plant species have been available
in varying degrees since the late Pleistocene when most of the region was
covered by massive glaciers. Information on past flora can be used to
develop a picture of the resource base available for human exploitation of
the upper Susitna region. Available flora, as well as faunal distributions,
and topographic and climatic factors are presumed to have influenced movements
and settlement patterns of prehistoric hunter/gatherers in the area.
1. This background information for the cultural resource investigation s tudy
area refers to a region l arger than the Upper Susitna ~asin. Thus, in some
cases, statements may not be applicable to the study area of the wildlife
ecology and plant ecology studies (Subtasks 7 .11 and 7.12). Other statements
will be superceded by findin~s of these other s u btasks.
Preliminary geologic analysis suggests that regional deglaciation ~as
~ell under~ay by 8 to 10 thousand years B.P. Ho~ever, so little is known
of early climatic and vegetational regimes in the regions that reconstruc-
tions are largely speculative in nature and constitute extrapolations from
other regions ~hich may or may not be applicable. Data from the Tanana
9
Valley north of the Alaska Range suggest that adequate floral and faunal
resources for humans could exist in very close proximity to glaciers (Po~ers
and Hamilton 1978). In the middle Tanana Valley a shrub tundra vegetational
regime ~as giving way to spruce-paper birch forest by 9,000 years B.P.
(Ager 1975:87-88). Although data are absent for the upper Susitna, shrub
tundra may i1ave existed over portions of the region at a similar time with
spruce-paper birch forest beginning to enter less elevated parts of the
area. The suggestion that vegetation of the Tanana lowland and adjacent
upland areas has remained fairly stable for the past 6,500 years (Ager
1975:88) may also apply to the upper Susitna region. Optimally, the modern
vegetational patterns could have relevancy for patterns of human exploitation
over the past 6,500 years and perhaps as early as 10,000 years B.P. At a
minimum the modern flora provide a framework from which to compare prehistoric
data and test for similarities and differences.
Five major ecosystems occur within the study area. These are bottomland
spruce-poplar forest, lowland spruce-hard~ood forest, upland spruce-hardwood
forest, moist tundra and alpine tundra. Each of these are briefly charac-
terized below. Bottomland spruce-poplar forest is a tall dense system
primarily composed of white spruce (~ glauca), locally mixed with large
black cotton~ood (Populus balsamifera sp. trichocarpa), on level to nearly
level floodplains, lo~ river terraces, and deeply thawed south slopes. It
is generally not found at elevations above 1,000 feet (Arctic Environcental
Information and Data Center 1975). Paper birch (Betula papyrifera ), and
quaking aspen (Populus tremuloides) are also common to this forest.
Lowland spruce-hardwood forest consists of black and white spruce
(Picea mariana,!· glauca), tamarack (~ laricina), paper birch (Betula
papyrifera), aspen (Populus tremuloides), and poplar (Populus balsamifera
sp. balsamifera). Soils supporting this system are deep, wet, silty, and
loamy with thick surface peat layers.
Upland spruce-hardwood forest is a mixed forest cooposed of white
spruce (Picea glauca), paper birch (Betula papyrifera), quaking aspen
(Populus tremuloides), black cottonwood (Populus balsamifera ssp.
trichocarpa), and balsam poplar (Populus balsamifera ssp. balsamifera). It
is generally found in the study area at elevations between 1,000 and 3,500
feet. Soils supporting the system are well-drained, shallow to moderate
deep gravelly loams, and silt loams. Black spruce (Picea mariana) occupies
locales with poor drainage, especially north slopes with permafrost. This
forest is commonly found in areas of extensive burns. The young trees and
associated shrubs provide excellent moose browse for several years following
fires.
Lowland spruce-hardwood forest is a dense to open forest of conifers
and deciduous trees including white spruce (~ glauca), paper birch
(Betula papyrifera), aspen (Populus tremuloides), and poplar (Populus
balsamifera sp. balsamifera) in drier south facing slopes. Black spruce
(~mariana), occurs on areas of shallow peat, glacial deposits, outwash
plains, and north facing slopes with permafrost. Open forest stands with
lichens provide excellent winter range for caribou. Willows and other
brush species furnish shelter and browse for ooose. The upper Susitna
Valley contains extensive stands of this forest (Arctic Environmental
Information and Data Center 1975).
Moist tundra is a low-growing community which usually forms complete
ground cover. Composition varies from almost continuous cotton grass
(Eriophorum sp.) with a sparse growth of sedges (Carex sp.) and several
dwarf shrubs, to stands where dwarf shrubs dominate. The latter usually
contains numerous cottongrass tussocks. Dwarf shrubs include: willow
(Salix sp.), dwarf birch (Betula nana), Labrador tea (Ledum palustre),
alder (Alnus crispa), blueberry {Vaccinium sp.) and other berries. Under-
lying soils vary from wet, shallow and loamy with thin peat layers on upper
slopes to deep, wet, clayey soils with peat.
10
Alpine tundra is composed of low plants, both herbaceous and shrubbv.
including resin birch (Betula glandulosa), dwarf birch (Betula~), willow
(Salix arctica sp.), heather (Phyllodoce sp.). Several low ~erry shrubs
as well as numerous grasses and herbs are present. It is typically found
interspersed with rock and rubble on mountains above 2,500 feet and occurs
at all elevations over 4,000 feet on the mountains adjacent to the study
area (Joint Federal-State La nd Use Planning Commission for Alaska 1973).
White mountain avens (~ sp.) may cover entire ridges and slopes in the
Alaska Range. Soils supporting this system are well-drained, shallow,
stoney, gravelly loams, and silt loams over coarse rubble and bedrock.
Alpine tundra is of prime impor-tance to Dall sheep and mountain goats in
the study area.
A vegetational analysis of the study area has shown that the major
factors influencing the distribution of plant communities are elevation,
soils, drainage, and proximity to existing rivers and streams (Alaska
Department of Fish and Game 1975). Bottomland spruce-hardwood forest is
present on the Talkeetna River fl0odplain to the confluence of Prairie
Creek and along the Susitna below Devil's Canyon. Lowland spruce-hardwood
forest is found in the Tyone River drainage, lower portions of the Oshet'na
River drainage and along the Susitna between these rivers. Upland spruce-
hardwood forests parallel the Susitna and lower portions of its tributary
streams below De~il's Canyon to the Oshetna River and the Susitna near the
McLaren River. This ecosystem also parallels the Talkeetna River and its
tributaries including Prairie Creek and Stephan Lake. Moist tundra is
found over large portions of the study area at elevations between 4,000-
5,000 feet in the northern foothills of the Talkeetna ~ountains south of
the Susitna and an area west of Stephan L~ke. To the north large areas of
4,000-5,000 feet in elevation are also part of this vegetational regime.
Alpine tundra is found in large isolated pockets above 3,500-4,000 feet on
exposed ridges and upper portions of the Talkeetna Mountains and mountains
north and south of the Watana Dam Site.
2 Fauna
11
Previous sections outlining the geological and floral regimes of the
upper Susitna area suggest that the steppe-tundra flora, similar to that of
the unglaciated Tanana Valley during late Pleistocene, may have largely
disappeared by the time the study area was becoming deglaciated approxi-
mately 8,000-10,000 years B.P. If so, it seems unlikely that the Pleistocene
megafauna associated with a steppe-tundra environment would have expanded
into the upper Susitna region as deglaciation progressed. Although it is
possible that some remnant populations of Pleistocene megafauna survived in
localized marginal habitats (Ager 1975:86), present information suggest
that these large mammals were probably not important to early resource
patterns in the region.
While distribution and movements of species have probably changed
through time, available faunal resources have probably been sufficient to
support human populations since the advent of deglaciation, circa 8,000-
10,000 years B.P. The possibility that ecosystems in the study area have
been relatively stable for the past 6,500 (Ager 1975:88) years may suggest
that associated faunal resources were s imilar to modern fauna,. at least
during this period. Modern faunal resources provide a baseline for the
examination of prehistoric resource utilization, sett l ement patterns, and
strategies of movement.
Fauna in the study area cons.ist of numerous species of mammals, birds,
and fish. Large mammals include moose (Alces alces), black bear (~
americanus) ,. grizzly bear (Ursus arctos)-:--caribou (Rangifar tarandus),
mountain goat (Oreamnos americanus), and Dall sheep (Ovis dalli). The wide
variety of ecological zones within the study area provide su i table ha bitat
for a number of s~all mammals subject to human exploitat i on as well,
including pika (Ochotona collaris.), snowshoe hare (Lepus americanus), hoary
marmot (Marmota caligata), arctic ground squirrel (Spermophilus parryi), red
squirrel (Tamiasciurus hudsonicus), pine marten (Martes americana), porcupine
(Erethizon dorsatum), muskrat (Ondatra zibethicus), mink (Mustela vison),
wolf (~lupus), red fox (Vulpes vulpes), weasel (~ustela ermin;ar:-
river otter (Lutra canadensis), wolverine (Gulo gulo), and lynx (Felis
~) (Manville and Young 1965).
Data published by the Alaska Department of Fish and Game in Alaska
Wildlife and Habitat (1973) provide information about po pulation distri-
butions and movements of large mammals. Moose concentrate during fall and
winter at several locales within the study area. These are the Susitna
Valley below Devil 's Canyon, the Upper Talkeetna River Valley, the t.Jatana
Creek dra~nage and a large portion of the upper Susitna d rainage from J ay
Creek to the McLaren River. In spring and summer moose tend to concen~r~te
in an area east of St ephan Lake.
Caribou winter rang.~ extends along the entire northern portion of the
study area and to the south in the upper drainage of the Talkeetna River.
Caribou are found in the vicinity of the Susitna and northeastern slopes of
the Talkeetna Mountains in spring and summer. The latter region is also a
calving area. During July the caribou migrate between calving gro unds
south of the Susitna Valley to summer range on the north side of the river.
This migration crosses the Susitna a short dist a nce downstream fr om the
Watana Dam site near Deadmun Creek.
2 . See note on page 8.
Sheep can be found at higher elevations north of the Susitna in the
mountains between drainages of Watana and Jay creeks and to the south
around Ht. Watana and throughout the Talkeetna Mauntains. Mountain goats
12
are also present in the Talkeetna Mountains in the vicinity of Wells Mountain
and on slopes north of Sheep Creek. Grizzly bears occur throughout the
study area and concentrate only along Prairie Creek south of Stephan Lake
and along Portage Creek north of Devil's Canyon. Denning areas are reported
south of the McLaren River on the upp~r Susitna and in a small area in the
mountains west of Stephan Lake. Black bear are present throughout the
study area but specific areas of denning or concentration are unknown.
Waterfowl are present throughout the study area in summer but important
nesting concentrations are known only for eastern portions of east-west
waterfowl migration route and ~ay provide seasonal concentrations of birds
during migratory periods. The major fish resources in the area are salmon
(Onchorhynchus sp.) and several species are present, especially in the
Susitna below Devil's Canyon. Other fish found in the area include northern
pike (Esox lucius), and arctic grayling (Thynallus arcticus). Rainbow
trout (Salmo gairdneri), lake trout (Salvelinus namavcush), and burbot
(Lota Iota) are found in lakes.
Archeology
Previous Archeological Research
Scientific archeological investigation of the upper Susitna River
Valley began over 27 years ago; however, research during the intervening
years has been sporadic. In 1953, Ivar Skarland c o~d~cted an aerial
reconnaissance of the region in preparation for a survey conducted by
William Irving in that same year. This work was done under contract to the
National Park Service. Irving's survey was designed to investigate impound-
ment areas of dams proposed for the Susitna River (Irving 1957:37). His
efforts were focused on the proposed Devil's Canyon Dam, and near Lakes
Susitna, Louise~ and Tyone. The lakes were investigated because the proposed
Vee and Denali dams were to be located above the present Watana dam site
and expected to inundate these areas (Irving 1957).
Eleven sites were found on the lakes and a twelfth site was discovered
approximately three miles abov e the confluence of Tyone Creek and the Tyone
River (Irving 1957). Five o f the sites contained remains of semi-subterranean
houses which Irvi ng thought resembled houses that Rainey (1939) found along
tributaries of the upper CJpper River. Both post-contact and early pre-
contact site ~ were reported b y Irving. A multicomponent site, site 9, was
found north ot the outlet of Lake Susitna and was reported to contain late
prehistoric Athapaskan, Arctic Small Tool Tradition, Northern Archaic
Tradition, and Denali Complex components (Irving 1957).
Frederick Radleigh-West conducted a brief survey in the study area
during the summer of 1971 and located five sites adjacent to Stephan Lake
(West 1971). Survey for the proposed Denali State Park was the reason for
this survey and consequently the report contains little data on the Stephan
Lake sites. TI1e files of the Alaska State Archeologist contain information
which indicate that one site (TLM-007) is multicomponent and has been
radiocarbon dated to 4,000 B.C.
13
A recent study, Bacon (1975a), utilized an aerial reconnaissance of
the study area to delineate several locales of high archeological potential
along the upper Susitna utilizing an ecotone model to predict probable site
locations. Host recent ly, Bacon (1978a; 1978b) conducted surveys near the
Devil ' s Canyon and the l-latana Dam sites . No sites were found at the proposed
Devil's Canyon Dam site but in the vicinity of the ~atana Dam site prehistoric
sites were discovered. Site TLM-016 was radiocarbon dated to 3,675 t 160
B.P.: ca. 1,725 B.C. Bacon (1978a:23) suggests occupation as early as
8,000 to 10,000 years ago at site TLH-015 and a possible Norton influence
at site TLH-018. A brief aerial reconnaissance of the entire impoundmen t
area from Devil's Canyon to the Tyone River and Stephan Lake was conducted
in the spring of 1980 by E. James Dixon, Jr. and George S. Smith of the
University of Alaska Museum . The purpose of the fly-over was to familiarize
research personnel with the terrain and characte r of the study area.
Fifteen historic and prehistoric archeological sites are known from
surveys in the study area . It is reasonable to assume that more concen-
trated effort will discover many oore sites. Preliminary geologic analysis
of the study area suggests that it has been ice free for approximately the
last 13,000-11,000 years. Archeological sites dating from late Pleistocene
to historic times are probable within the project area. The earliest Cl4
dates from the immediate project area document human occupation as early as
4,000 B.C.
Regional Prehistory
Data available from the study area are inadequate to accurately define
t he cultural historical sequence. Consequently, it is necessary to draw on
data from adjacent areas to construct a speculative prehistory for the
upper Susitna River. Past studies of this type have proven to be fairly
reliable indicators of cultural periods within a given area (Dixon, Smith,
and Plaskett 1980). The following regions adjacent to the study area will
be considered: the Tanana ·Ialley, Nenana River, the areas near Lakes
Susitna, Louise, Tyone, and Tangle Lakes, the upper Copper River Valley,
and the upper Cook Inlet region.
It is not necessary to discuss all sites within each area to project a
probable cultural chronology for the upper Susitna because many sites
within each area represent similar temporal and cultural periods and others
lack diagnostic artifacts or have not been subject to absolute or relative
dating techniques.
Cent~al Alaska Range
a . Dry Creek
The Dry Creek site is located 10 miles north of Mt. McKinley National
Park. It is a multicomponent site representing exploi~ation of a shrub
tundra environment prior to 9,000 B.C. (Powe rs and Hamilton 1978:72). The
latest component dates between 2,400 and 1,400 B.C . and may provide the
best known temporal documentation for a notched projectile point horizon in
Interior Alaska (Dixon, Smith and Plaskett 1980). The projectile points
together with end scrapers forms, and time of occupation are suggestive of
the Northern Archaic Tradition. This and other notched point sites in the
Interior support Workman's (1978) hypothesis that Northern Archaic groups
spread throu ~h the Yukon Territory and northward along the Brooks Range to
14
the Onion Portage site by 4,000 B.C. and later spread into southern Interior
Alaska. These data suggest that notched points and Northern Archaic Tradition
artifact material could be found within the Susitna study area.
An older component at Dry Creek dates to ca . 8,500 B.C. and contains a
microblade core and microblade industry which is comparable to the Denali
Complex of Interior Alaska (West 1967) and the Akmak level at Onion Portage
on the Kobuk River (Anderson 1968a). The similarity of these assembl~es
with the late Pleistocene Diuktai culture of northeastern Siberia has been
noted by Powers and Hamilton (1978:76).
b. Carlo Creek
The Carlo Creek site is just east of Mt . McKinley National Park, and
dates to ca. 8,500 years ago (Bowers 1978:14). The oldest of two components
produced percussion-flaked elongate bifaces, biface fragments, retouched
flakes, several thousand waste flakes and a possible bone awl (Bowers
1978:1}. Cooponent II consists of a few rhyolite waste flakes and is older
than ca. 3 ,700 B.C.
Granulometric analysis of Component I sediment "indicates that human
occupation occurred on a former sandbar/levee of the Nenana River, during a
period of early postglacial downcutting and terrace formation" (Bowers
1978:16). Analysis of Component I faunal remains suggests that this site
may have been a fall/winter hunting camp. Component I may contain evidence
of heat-treatment of lithic material to improve flaking (Bowers 1978:6).
Although Component I tools are nondiagnostic and the sample size
small, Bowers (1978) compared this material with assemblages from other
sites. He suggests that Component I at Carlo Creek may have some affinity
with Component II at the Dry Creek site (ca . 8,600 B.C.) (Powers and
Hamilton 1978:74), and the McKinley Park Teklanika River sites (West 1965)
on the basis of similar morphology of bifacial industries (Bowers 1978:14).
General similarities were also noted with the "early horizon" at Healy Lake
(Cook 1969), various Denali Complex sites (West 1965, 1967) and possibly
with the Akmak assemblage from Onion Portage (Anderson 1970; Bowers 1978:14).
c. Teklanika Sites
Sites, Teklan ika 1 and 2, were excavated by Frederick Hadleigh-West in
Mt . McKinley National Park in 1961, and are located within a half mile of
each other. Teklanika 1 occupies a knob overlooking the Teklanika River
and is west-northwest of Teklanika 2, which is on a nearby ridge. They
produced sufficient cultural material to support the supposition that these
were habitation sites (West 1965:5). It appears that they functioned as
game lookouts and flaking stations, a point confirmed by Tragan~a (1964).
Teklanika 1 and 2 contain projectile points (t~in1y tips), leaf-shaped
knives, end scrapers, side scrapers, tabular blade cores, microblade cores
(similar to Campus cores), microblades (prismatic blades), burins, scrapers
or end blade tools, one polished adze blade (Teklanika 2) and a pebble
hammer (Teklanika 2).
West interprets this material as coeval with Anangula (ca. 8,500 B.C.)
or slightly earlier than the Campus site (Wes t 1971:73). He suggests that
they date betwe€~ 8,000 and 10,000 B.C. In ligh~ of recent work and t~e
cultural chronology suggested by this report, it would appear that these
dates are not unreasonable, although, the oldest known site in Alaska,
Moose Creek, is 9,700 years B.C. (Hoeffecker 1979). The dating of the
Moose Creek site is based on a single Cl4 determination and may b e subjec t
to reinterpretation as additional dates become available. Moose Creek
appears to lack microblade and blade or microblade co re technology and
these are associated with both Teklanika sites. These forms indicate
affiliation with the Denali Complex which dates as early as 8,600 B.C. at
Dry Creek. The Teklanika sites may be closer in age to West's 8,000 B.C.
projection than 10,000 B.C. However, microblade sites may extend into the
Christian era from 500 A.D. to 1,000 A.D. (Cook 1969; Holmes 1976) and the
Teklanika sites could be quite recent in age, as may possibly be suggested
by the polished adze blade.
d. Nenana River Gorge Site
The Nenana River Gorge Site is located at the northwest boundary of
15
Mt. McKinley National Park. The prehistoric component at the site represents
a seasonal hunting campsite of Athapaskan Indians and has been radi ocarbon
dated to approximately 1,600 A.D. (Plaskett 1977). It is not certain which
Athapaskan subgroup occupied the site. Prehistoric archeoJ ogical material
found includes obsidian and pottery thought to have originated north of the
Alaska Range and copper and chalcedony from south o f the Alaska Range;
suggesting that trade and communication among d ifferent Athapaskan groups
occurred prehistorically.
Tanana Valley
a. Lake Minchumina
Several sites on the shores of Lake Minchumina in the western Tanana
Valley document human occupation spanning approximately the past 2,500
years (Holmes 1976, Hosley 1967, West 1978). The oldest site known is
HMK-Q04 where a lower level was dated to ca. 500 E.C. and an upper level
dated to ca. 1,000 A.D. (Ho lmes 1976:2). The site is thought to represent
a continuous sequence between these dates (Holmes 1 ~76:2). Noteworthy is
an apparent late persistence of microblade core and ~urin techno l ~gy which
dates to between 800 A.D. to 1,000 A.D . Notched poinr s were recovered in
addition to microblades in Holmes' level one, but the ~'act association of
these artifacts is not clear and late persistence of micr~core technology
and affiliations with the earlier Denali Complex of Interior Alaska are
unresolved questions. Until further research is conducted it may be prudent
to consider that two traditions, i .e., Northern Archaic and Late Qe,:~li,
may have coexisted during this time.
Holmes (1978) presents some comparative data on the assemblage from
HMK-Q04. Point/knives from the lowest level res~ble Choris points, and
have been equated with the Norton period (Holmes 1976:5). A relationship
between HMX-004 and forest adapted lpiutak/Norton cultures similar to those
from Onion Portage and Hahanudan Lake has also been suggested (Holmes
1976:8; Dumond 1978:14).
The ~jority of obsidian from ~-004 is from the Batza Tena source
near the Koyukuk River to the north and indicates trade over considerable
distance in Interior Alaska. The obsidian is als& present at Gulkana in
the Copper River Valley and suggests widespread trade in that direction as
well. Several other sites, the Birches site with a date of ca. 520 A.D.
(West 1978), and ~-Q12 dating to ca. 50 A.D. (Holmes 1976:8), demonstrate
more recent occupations at Lake Minchumina.
b. Campus Site
The Campus site on the Fairbanks campus of the University of Alaska
appears to contain a Denali Complex component of microblades, microblade
cores and burins . Also present are notched points and other materials
characteristic of the Northern Archaic Tradition. Stratigraphic control at
the site is poor and dating has not been establi ~~ed .
c. Healy Lake
16
The Village site at Healy Lake has yielded evidence for huoa n occupation
of Interior Alaska by ca . 9,000 B.C . (Cook 1969). Five components have
been identified at the site. The upper level, just below the sod, contained
stemmed and notched points, and microblades, a situation similar to the
Minchumina site MMK-004 and suggestive of both the Northern Archaic and
Denali peoples. Below this level are two components similar to the Denali
Complex defined by West (1967). The lowest level named the Chindadn complex
was characterized by triangular projectile points, tear-dropped shaped
knives, and possibly an absence of microblades.
d. Dixthada
The Dixthada site on Mansfield Lake consists of nine housepits, an
associated midden, several storag~ pits, and 11 tent rings. The site was
originally excavated by Rainey (1939:364-371) who interpreted the site as
an Athapaskan settlement of the last few hundred years, although, based on
presence of a microblade industry, he sugges ted a relationship with the
Campus Site. In 1953 Rainey amended his original evaluation of site age by
assigning the microcores and microblades to an earlier component based o n
comparison with sites of known age (Rainey 1953). Additional excavations
by Cook and McKennan in 1971 indicate that a yellow silt horizon located
under the middens at Dixthada contained the core and microblade industry
(Shinkwin 1975:149-150). These excavations supported the conclusion that
the site was multicomponent, as suspected by Rainey.
Shinkwin (1975) 9tudied materials from both components at Dixthada.
The upper component, a!~h ough mixed, contains an array of corper implements,
bone and antler artifacts, bifacial knives, scrapers, whetstones, hammer-
stones, grinding stones, an adze and ~wo axes (Shinkwin 1975:151-152) and
represents a late prehis·:oric/early ~istoric Athapaskan group as suggested
by Rainey (Shinkwin 1974:153). Shinkwin notes similarity of the upper
level lithic and bone industries to the Klo-kut site in the Yukon Territory.
The lower component contains a microcore and microblade industry dating
470 t 60 B.C.
17
e. Donnelly Ridge
The Donnelly Ridge site is located over 2,600 feet above sea level in
the northern foothills of the Alaska Range . The site is situated on one of
the highest points in the area and provides an excellent view of the myriad
of lakes and ponds which surround it (liest 1967:15). A total of 1,512
stone artifacts were recovered, of which 533 show various degrees of use
(West 1967:15). Stone artifacts recovered include bifacial biconvex knives,
end scrapers, large blades and blade-like flakes, prepared cores, core
tablets, microblades, burins, burin spalls , and worked flakes (West 1967:
17-25)
West interprets the site as a seasonal hunting camp used for a short
period of time, possibly only one season (\.lest 1967:27). The age of the
site is uncertain although two radiocarbon dates (1,830 ! 200 B.P.
(120 A.D. ! 200) (B-649) and 1,790! 300 B.P . (160 A.D. ! 300) (0-650) have
been recorded. However, West feels that these actually date a later tundra
fire and not the cultural material (1967:32). Based on comparison of the
Donnelly Ridge material with other Dena:4 Complex sites, West suggests an
age of at least 10,000 B.C. The Minchumina ~ite, the Village site at Healy
Lake, and Dixthada have produced Denali Complex components with dates much
more recent than West's projections .
f. Ft. Wainwright
A 1979 archeological survey of Ft. Wainwright Reservation in the
Tanana Valley led to th.e discovery of 48 pret-.istoric and four historic
sites (Dixon, Smith, and Plaskett 1980). Sampling areas for this project,
delineated by the research design, corresponded to most of the major elevat .~ons
within the military reservation. Site locations included : lake shores
(Blair Lakes), outlets of streams draining lakes, knolls near streams and
rivers, and high bluffs and buttes. Several of the sites were more than
300 m above the Tanana flats and provided excellent views of the surrounding
area.
Three sites on the north shore of Blair Lake South were systematicaily
tested : FAI-044, FAI-045, and FAI-048. Site FAI-044 contained historic,
late prehistoric Athapaskan, Northern Archaic and possible Denali components.
Site FAI-045 contained the same recent historic component documented at
FAI-044, and possible Denali component . Samples of radiometric dating were
not recovered but the Denali component was infe rred from the recovery of
microblades and microcores . Only one of four squares tested produced
Denali material and two occupations are suggested. In addition to these
sites, 10 Denali, 10 Northern Archaic, and 3 historic period sites were
documented on the military reservation (Dixon, Smith, and Plaskett 1980).
Denali Highway Area
a. Tangle Lakes
The Tangle Lakes are 80 km northeast of the study area and accessible
from the Susitna via the McLaren River. Over 220 sites spanning the past
12,000 years have been documented in this area (West 19 73). The s i tes
represent several periods including late Athapaskan belonging to the last
3,000 years and an early period which \/est divides into groups. Denali
Complex sites are located on or near old lake shorelines which are about
100 feet above present lake levels {West i975:79). The Denali occupation
at Tangle Lakes may have occurred as early as 10,000 B.C. but radiocarbon
dates suggest a more recent date of 8,200 B.C. with the occupation ending
about ca. 6,200 B.C. Denali hunters appear to have abandoned the area
after that time. There is a hiatus in the Tangle Lakes archeological
18
record until the appearance of the Northern Archaic Tradition (~est 1973).
The Northern Archaic Tradition was originally defined as a boreal forest
adapted culture (Anderson 1968a); however, it may have thrived along the
forest edge or even within the tundra forest ecotone (Hickey 1976). Appear-
ance of the Northern Archaic peoples may be associated with a warming trend
~a. 5,000 years ago (Anderson 1968b) and raised tree line elevation (Hopkins
1967). The most recent cultural period represented at Tangle Lakes was
that of protohistoric Athapaskans (West 1975:20).
b. Ratekin Site
The Ratekin site, near the Denali Highway, is located about 75 miles
west of Paxson Lake. Although few artifacts have been recovered in situ,
several surface collections have been oade. Based on the collections by
Skarland and Keim (1958), it is difficult to assess the significance of the
site. Notched points suggestive of the Northern Archaic Tradition are
present. Based on the type of notching and comparison with the notch e d
point sequence developed by Anderson (1968a), an age of ca. 2,900 to
2,600 B.C. seems a reasonable inference since side notched, stemmed, and
lanceolate forms are present.
The site appears to consist of a number of flaking stations and Skarland
and Keim (1 9 58:80) suggest that it functioned as a kill site rather than a
camp be~ause of the large number of unbroken arrowheads which they think
were lost during the hunt. They also suggest that caribou were funnelled
through a narrow corridor near the site created by muskeg to the south anci
steep hills to the north. Photographs on file at the University of Ala~ka
Museum show a low rock wall at or near the site which may have functioned
as a hunting blind. Age of this structure and its association with the
Ratekin site have not been determined.
Talkeetna Mountains
a. Long Lake
The Long Lake site is in the Southern Talkeetna Mountains and contains
a microblade and microcore industry which is similac to that of the Denali
Complex. Bacon suggests that the site represents "a displacement of the
Denali technology to the southern highlands of southern Interior Alaska", a
region which "represented a sort of tundra refugium that was pushed southward
(but higher in elevation) by invading Taiga Forests" (1975b:4).
Copper River Valley
Archeological investigations in the Copper River Valley began with
Rainey's survey of the region in 1936. Most recently a number of historic
and prehistoric sites have been located and several excavated (VanStone
19
1955; Shinkwin 1974; Workman 1976; Clark 1974; Arndt 1977; and others).
Workman (1976:8) has synthesized the available data into a four period
sequence for the area: historic (1850-present), protohistoric (1770-1850),
late prehistoric (1000 A.D.-1770 A.D.), and early prehistoric (? to 1000 A.D.).
The following sites, some which were previously discussed in this
report, can be placed within Workman's (1977:9-30) categories, Historic
Period: Taral (VanStone 1955), site on Taral C ~eek (VanStone 1955:121),
Susitna site 3A and 6C (Irving 1957:40), village near Batzulnetas (Rainey
1939:362). Protohistoric Pe~iod: Dakah D'nin's Village (Shinkwin 1974),
VAL 146 (State of Alaska, Division of Parks), feature 77-3-4 at the BUL 077
site (Workman 1976:26-28), Paxson Lake site (Workman 1976:14), Gakona
Airstrip Site (Rainey 1939:350), Alana Site (Rainey 1939:361). Late Pre-
historic Period: GUL 077 (Workman 1976), MS 23-0 (Clark 1974, 1976),
Gulkana River site (Rainey 1939:360), Susitna 3A (Irving 1957:41),
Susitna 3B and 3C (Irving 1957:41), Susitna 3D (Irving 1957:41-42),
Susitna 6A (Irving 1957:42), Susitna 6B (Irving 1957:42), c aches near
Batzulnetas (Rainey 1939:361-362), Tangle La ke s caches (Workman 1976:28),
Portage site upper component (Workcan 1976:28). Early Prehistoric Period:
no sites representing this time period have been positively document~d in
the Copper River Valley, although the Copper River Basin would have been
free of ice dammed lakes and available for human occupation by ca. 9,000
years ago (Workman 1976:31). Workman suggests that , when documented, the
prehistory of the Copper River Basin will probably span most of the Ho l ocene
times (1976:31). At present, however, there are only traces of occupations
predating 1,000 A.D. (Workman 1976:31).
Cook Inlet
a. Beluga Point
Beluga Point is a multicomponent site compos e d of two localities on
the n orthern shore of Turnagain Arm in upper Cook Inlet. Beluga Point
North contains three components. Component I includes a microblade and
core industry associated with the Denali Complex . Comparative data from
Denali sites in Interior Alaska and the Alaska Per.insula suggest a tentative
date between 4,500 and 7,000 years B.C. for this component (Reger 1977).
Component II contains stemmed points and points with tapering bases (Reger
1977). An estimated age is 1,000 to 2,000 years B.C. bas ed on typologi cal
comparisons (Reger 1977:9). Components IIIa and IIIo from Beluga Point
North are similar to the third period of the Kachemak Bay Sequence as
evidenced by ground slate points and stone ringed hearths filled with
gravel (Reger 1977). A radiocarbon date for Ilia indicates an age of
790 ~ 120 B.P. (960 ~ 120 A.D.) while IIIb is estimated to be 1,000 years
older (Reger 1977).
Beluga Point South, Component I, includes a few nondiagnostic specimens
and dates to 4,155 ~ 160 B.P . (2 ,205 ~ 160 B.C.). Reger notes similarities
between Beluga Poin t South Component II and Norton collections from the
Iyatayet site. Similarities include steeply retouched end-scrapers, end
blades, burin-like scrapers and ground slate points (Reger 1977).
b. Kachemak Bay Sequence
Little is known about prehistory of Cook Inlet during the late
Pleistocene, ca. 10,000 years ago. The Kachemak Bay Sequence provides an
organized data base which can be applied to this study.
The Kachemak Bay tradition first appears in the second millenium B.C .
and continues until just before historic contact. Kachemak settle~ents
were usually along rugged coasts with deep water offshore and mountains
inland (Reger 1977). Rouses were semi-subterra nean and made oi whalebone,
stone, or wood. Economic exploitation concentrated on sea resources,
although inland resources were also utilized.
Kachemak I is a poorly defined phase (Workman 1977 :35 ) and absence of
reliable dates makes it difficult to place it in a specific time frame.
However, relationships with Alaskan Peni nsula material and t he Takli Beach
Phase places it in the second millenium B.C. (Workman 1977:35). Manifes-
tations are known only on Yukon Island and are characterized by a
predominance of flaked stone tools, grooved stone weights, and both toggle
and dart harpoon heads.
Kachemak II dates from 400 B.C. to as late as 1200 A.D . Typically the
assemblage contains large notched stones, grooved stone weights, primarily
a flaked stone industry, houses of wood and whalebone and the possible
beginnings of grave goods {Workman 1977:35).
A transitional phase called Kachemak Sub III (Workman 1977:35) existed
from approximately 400 B.C . to A.D . 0 and flaking was still the primary
lithic technology. Stone saws appeared and there was a continuation of
elaborate burial practices with the embellishments in later periods. This
phase is known from Chugachik Island (SEL-033 ) and Yukon Island in Kachemak
Bay.
Kachemak II began about 800 A.D. (Workman 1977:35). Considering the
climax of the tradition, this phase is characterized by an elaborate burial
cult indicating dismemberment of the dead, a predominance of ground slate
and a florescence of artists' skills. Titis phase is found at Cottonwood
Creek and the Great Midden on Yukon Island.
The Kachemak sequence terminated in a poorly understood Kachemak IV
phase during the second millenium A.D. and what is known comes from the
upper level of the Great Midden on Yukon Island and the upper component at
Cottonwood Creek (Workman 1977:33). Some pottery and native copper has
been recovered from Yukon Island, while from Cottonwood Creek (KEN-029)
come triangular stemless slate end-blad~s. an intricate bone knife handle,
a barbed bone point and evidence of cannibalism (Workman 1977:33).
The Merrill site, KEN-029, n~ar the Kenai River about 25 miles from
20
the present river channel is on a former meander channel (Reger 1977:37). The
lowest level dates to 2,245 ~ 115 radiocarbon years or 295 B.C. Reger
(1977:50) notes similarities of adze blades, straight based lanceolate
points, and stemmed points to the Norton component at the Iyatayet site.
Applicable to this study is the fact that the site conforms to locational
data from other Norton period sites, i.e., riverine (Reger 1977:51). The
riverine adaptation is suggested by evidenc•! for fishing in nearly every
Norton period site =eported (Reger 1977:51).
21
Ethnographic Information
Ethnographic data suggest that the study are~ was inhabited by bands
of Northern Athapaskan Indians during late prehistoric, protohistoric and
historic times. Several subgroups speaking variant dialects of the Athapaskan
language cay have been present in the area at various times. The immediate
study area falls within known historical geographic limits of the region
exploited by Tanaina Athapaskans; however, the present area is near other
regions occupied by the Ahtna and Tanana Athapaskan groups (Figure 1). Since
the known geographic and linguistic distribution of these groups at the time
of historic contact cannot be inferred to extend very far backward in time,
ethnographic information relevant to all three groups will be included
here.
Of importance in developing the research design is e:hnographic infor-
mation concerning subsistence activities of Athapaskans, and how they
affect site location and distribution.
For most non-coastal Athapaskan groups, the annual subsistence cycle
largely depended on the availability of resources. ~ajor animal resources
available throughout the yearly cycle to the groups con~idered here were
~oose, caribou, sheep, fish, and waterfowl (McKennan 1959; Guedon 1975;
Andrews 1975). During the summer months, fishing was the most important
economic activity. Villages would move to fish camps, generally located on
clear water tributaries, to catch and dry salmon, much of which was cached
for winter u se (Va nStone 1974; McKennan 1959; Helm 1975; Guedon 1975).
Moose and sheep were also hunted in upland and alpine regions during su~mer
months. Spring activities involved muskrat, beaver, and waterfowl hunting
and trapping From camps usually located along l~ke margins or slow-moving
streams (McKennan 1959). Small hunting parties also pursued large game
during the winter months (Guedon 1975).
Caribou drives took place mainly in the fall or early winter. During
this time, long "caribou fences" were constructed to guide them to enclosures
where they were snared and killed. Smaller game such as hares were taken
throughout the year (VanStone 1974; Nelson 1973). The annual subsistence
cycle kept populations mobile within a given territory or range, while
focusing them at specific geographic locales at specific points in time to
harvest seasonally abundant animal resources. The seasonal round thus
created a variety of settlement locales of vary ing size, function, and
duration.
A number of accounts have described interior Athapaskau material
culture (McKennan 1959; Guedon 1975; Nelson 1973; Pitts 1972; Vi tt
1973). House construction, as it applies to both permanent and temporary
structures, would indicate t .1e location of winter settlements. Several
types of houses have been de!lcribed for the early historic period (McKennan
1959; Pitts 197:~; Guedon 1975; Shinkwin 1974). One type ~f winter house
was a dome-shaped structure covered with moose or caribou skins. Another
form was a rectangular, semi-subterranean log structure covered with bark
and sod. Temporary structures consisted of siople brush shel te rs or
lean-tos. The caches used for storing food were of two types--underground,
and elevated with logs. Many of these features should be identifiable
archeologically if present in the proj(ct area.
50
I I
' ' ' \
TANANA
\ KOYUKON \
' ' ' ' -----~ ---~~~ ~-~ ---~... v~~~ .. >........ ~~<~ I
.,, o,e ~ l
TANAIN A
FigurE: 1. Native La n p.ua gt!S ami Pt!oo l cs in a nd lh:ar th~.: ~usitna Study Area.
(From : Alaska Native Cent er 1974)
23
The upper Susitna drainage was occupied by Western Ahtna at the time
of historic contact. Their subsistence pattern differed in important
respects from that of the Ahtna groups whose seasonal •ound was centered
more to the west where fishing on the Copper River and its major tributaries
was a primary subsi.stence activity and winter villages were located at the
river (Workman 1976). The absence of the salmon resource base in the upper
Susitna drainage resulted in a greater emphasis on hunting of caribou and
moose (Irving 1957). Mid-summer through December was primarily devoted to
fishing from lakes, their outlets or larger rivers. In late summer and
earlr fall caribou and moose were hunted using fences, snares and surrounds.
At mid-winter extensive hunting of moose, bear, and beaver occurred and was
possibly accolllpanied by dispersal into family units from larger multi-family
fall villages (Irving 1957). In spring, hunting moved into the hill country
south as far as the Talkeetna Mountains where caribou were hunted until
mid-summer when fishing resumed. Contacts between the upper Susitna/Lake
Louise Ahtna and villages on the Tanana side of the Alaska Range were
frequent but the nature of contacts is unkn own (Irving 1957). The seasonal
round and subsistence strategy of the l-lestern Ahtna appears to have more
closely resembled that of interior Tanana Athapaskans than that for most
Ahtna centered on the central Copper River.
The Tanaina Athapaskans may have been the first Athapaskan group to
come in contact with Europeans and Russians who began to heavily influence
their culture by the late eighteenth century (Osgood 1937). Tanaina groups
were concentrated on or near the shores of Cook Inlet and in the Iliamna-
Lake Clark area as well as inland and are known to have occupied permanent
villages containing semi-subterranean houses (Smith and Shields 1977), an
atypical settlement pattern for Northern Athapaskans. Richness of salmon
runs in the area probably had much to do with the unusual subsistence and
settlement pattern (Osgood 1937; VanStone 1974). Uniquely some Tanaina
groups were also heavily dependent upon coastal, tidal, and sea mammal
resources for their su.bsistence, a pattern more closely resembling Eskimo
rather than other Athapaskan groups (Townsend 1973).
The Tanaina are known to have traveled widely throughout their territory
and trade, as well as warfare, resulted in contact with other Interior.
Alaskan Athapaskan groups (Townsend 1973; Hosley 1966; Plaskett 1977).
·t"wever, little is known concerning aboriginal Tanaina exploitation of the
mo . interior portions of their territory which included the upper Susitna,
Talkeet:na Mountains and the Alaska Range . It is probabl~ that at certain
times of the year, i.e., fall and spring/early summer, hunting parties mov~d
into these regions to hunt sheep, caribou and bear. Moose would appear to
have been rarely present, at least in the mid-nineteenth century (Osgood
1937; VanStone 1973). Camps of hunting parties would probably have consisted
of temporary shelters of skins over a wood frame, simple brush shelters or
lean-tos.
During the early historic period, it appears that a gradual shift in
subsistence activity occurred as a result of increased contact with non-
Natives, anJ led to a general shift in the settlement pattern (VanStone
1970; Townsend 1973). The:efore, site locations which reflect late
prehistoric subsistence activities may differ significantly from those
activity-rel~ted sites of the historic period. Settlements and camps of
late prehistoric and protohistoric times often were located near the mouths
24
of clear water streams and rivers, as well as al&ng lake margins and locations
strategically suited for resource exploitation (McKennan 1959; Andrews
1975; VanStone 1974; Workman 1976; Irving 1957). Early historic Tanaina
settlements were reported at several locations near the study area including
Talkeetna (Townsend 1973), Valdez Creek (McKennan 1959), and on the shores
of Lakes Susitna and Louise, Tyone,and Grayling (Irving 1957).
History
It is probable that late prehistoric and historic sites in the upper
Susitna area date to as early as 1770 and may contain evidence of Western
trade ~terials and influences. Historic, ethnohistoric and archeological
data suggest that a widespread network of Native trade routes existed prior
to Western contact. Western trade goods doubtless penetrated the upper
Susitna region soon after the first exchanges occurred in coastal areas.
Following 1900, gold discoveries in the region produced a flurry of explora-
tion and mining activity which probably resulted in historic sites containing
associated material in the upper Susitna study area. The chronology of
Western man's exploration and penetration into the study area is summarized
below.
Shortly after Bering's 1741 voyage, Russian fur traders began exchanging
Western goods for pelts. Glass beads and iron were traded for fox and sea
otter pelts by Glattov on Kodiak Island as early as 1762 (Bancroft 1886)
and although such trade occurred far from the study area, Native trade
networks soon disp~rsed such goods widely to Natives who had no direr.t
contact with Europeans. The first explorer tn Cook Inlet, Captain James
Cook, observed metal and glass beads among the Tanaina during his visit in
1778 (Cook 1785). By 1786 a Russian trading settlement had been established
at St . George (Kasilof) in Tanaina territory and trade contacts soon expanded
rapidly with the Tanaina.
Increased dependence upon trade and the wealth provided by lJestern
luxury goods resulted in changes in the a.boriginal settlement and hunting
patterns (Townsend 1970). The Tanaina began to be drawn more intensively
into the Russ i an fur trade, occasionally as hunters but also as middlemen
in the fur trade with peoples in the interior of Alaska. There was increased
hunting of certain desirable fur bearers and modification of the subsisto!nce
cycle to accomodate such hunting and subsequent travel to trade for Western
goods . Thus, it is probable that the location of hunting and trapping
sites as well as times of seasonal movements known from the ethnographic
present differ from those of slightly older late prehistoric times.
The first explorations of the Susitna River country did not occur
until 1834 when Malakoff ascended the river. It is believed that he also
explored the Susitna in 1843 but little is known of his work (Bacon 1975a).
In any event, it is certain that by 1845 the Russians had better knowledge
of the upper Susitna reg~.on than could have been obtained via Native infor-
mants (Brooks 1973). Dur~ng the next 50 years very little exploration or
other activity by Westerne~s appears to have occurred in the upper Susitna
River country which was virtually unexplorP.d until nearl y 1900 (Cole 1979).
During this time one exploration of note occurred to the east of the study
area. In 1885, Lt. Henry Allen and his party aseended the Copper River,
crossed the Alaska Range and descended the Tanana River to the Yukon.
Allen's observations of Native lifeways, villages and their locations
provide data regarding Ahtna and Tanana Athapaskans at the time of early
direct contact With White men (Allen 1887).
25
The discovery of g o ld in Cook Inlet in 1895 precipitated the first
extensive and lasting ~vements of White men into the upper Susitna study
area. In the summer of 1896, over 2,000 prospectors swarmed the shores of
Cook Inlet and over 100 parties entered the Susitna Riv~r but only five
continued any distance up the river (Cole 1979). William Dickey and Allen
Monks ascended the river as far as Devil's Canyon in 1886 and encountered
Natives at a fish camp at the mouth of Portage Creek. W.A. Jack and eight
others ascended the Susitna to the "head of boating" on the upper Susitna
in 1897 and became the first recorded party to exp l ore nearly the entire
river. The Jack party avoided Devil's Canyon by ascending Portage Creek,
crossing a divide to Devil Creek, and descending the latter to the Susitna
(Cole 1979). Jack guided George Eldridge of the USGS, up the Susitna, over
Broad Pass and down the Nenana River in 1898 but their route avoided the
upper Susitna area (Eldridge 1900). In 1901, H. Jack Pamo and Al Campbell
tried to make an overland trip from the mouth of the Tanana River to Valdez.
They descended the Susitna from its "headwaters" and Campbell apparently
starved to death at an Indian hunting cabin some 50 mil~s above Devil's
Canyon (Valdez News, 7/20/01). On the south side of the Susitna other
overland routes which by-passed Devil's Canyon existed. One route went up
the Talkeetna River to Prairie Creek, past Stephan Lake to the Susitna,
while another crossed low passe s at the headwaters of Kosina Creek and
descended the latter to the Susitna (Cole 1979).
The difficult passage around Devil's Canyon greatly reduced gold
prospector traffic on the upper Susitna River and it was not until 1903
that a more feasible route from the Copper River drainage was pioneered.
In that year, Pete Monahan and four others from Valdez reached the upper
Susitna headwaters area. Their route took them over Valdez Glacier, down
Klutina Ri 1er, across Klutina Lake , along St. Anne Riv er and thence up the
Susitna. They prospected for gold along several creeks in the upper Susitna
drainage and struck pay gravel on a small stream the Indians called ''Galin.a"
and later renamed Valdez Creek (Moffit 1912) The next year numerous
claims \Jere staked along this creek and its tribu taries. These diggings in
late-:-years had as many as 150 men (Bacon 1975a } and ·:ontinued t o att r act
miners until the 1930's . Other. later routes, to these gold fields roughly
paralleled the modern Denali Highway from Cantwell in the west and Paxson on
the east. Another route followed the West Fork of the Gulkana from the
Copper River to the MacLaren and thence up the Susitna (Cole 1979).
Mining equipment and supplies utilized all of these routes to the gold
fields on Valdez Creek. It is possible that historic structures and features
related to these gold mining activities may be present along any or all of
the routes used by miners during prospecting a~d subsequent mining in the
Valdez Creek area. Additionally, Indian hunting cabins were reported at
several localities on the upper Susitna drainage by the first g o ld prospectors
and explorers, i.e., Jack, Eldridge, Pamo, and o~hers. It is po s sible that
remains of these log structures may be encountered during cultural resource
survey of the study area as well.
26
C. APPLICATION OF THE DATA BASE
The data base can be used to develop a tentative cultural chro nology
for cultural resources in the study area, provide data for the delineation
of a predictive model for archeological potential of various project areas,
and explicate hypotheses that can aid in the evaluation of sites located
during survey and testing. Each of these applications is d i scussed separately
below.
Cultural Chronology
A tentative cultural chronology can he constructed u t ilizing archeo lo-
gical data from known sites in or adjacent to the study area. Archeological
sites of several cultural periods spanning the past ca. 10,000 years and
several cultural/historical periods are known (Figure 1). This data is
incorporated and will be applied to the field strategy .
Archeological sites which may occur in the upper Susitna region are
not expected to exceed 9,000 B.C. in age, based on the sequence of deglacia-
tion that occurred in the area. The earliest sites that are expected in the
study are those representing the American Paleoarctic Trad i tion,
speciflcally the Denali Complex for which ~est (1975) ascribed a date o f
ca. 10,000 B.C . to 4 ,500 B.C. This distinctive and long lasting stone tool
industry is characterized by wedge-shaped micro blade cores, microblades,
core tablets, bifacial knives, burins, burin spalls and end scrapers.
Incorporation of Denali into the American Paleoarctic Tradition follows
Dumond (1977) who has suggested that the Denali Complex is a regional
variant of the American Paleoarctic Tradition as defined by Anderson
(l968a). The Denali Complex has been dated to between 8,600 and 4,000 B.C.
in Interior Alaska. There appea~s to be a hiatus of Denali sites in the
Interior archeological record after 4,000 B.C.; however, several sites in
the Tanana Valley which contain elements thought to be distinctive of the
Denali Complex date to between 2,400 B.C . and A.D. 1,000. This may suggest
a late persistence of this stone industry. Sites representative of the
Denali Complex are located in areas adjacent to the study area. The oldest
dated Denali Complex site in the Alaska Range area is Component II, at the
Dry Creek site which dates to ca. 8,600 B.C. (Powers and Hamilton 1978:76).
Other sites containing the Denali Complex in surrounding regions are
Teklanika 1 and 2 near Mt. McKinley , MMK-004 at Lake Minchumina, the Campus
site, the Village site at Healy Lake, site FAI-062, the Donnelly Ridge
site, several undated Denali sites on the Ft . Wainwright Reservation in the
central Tanana Valley, several sites at Tangle Lakes, two sites near Lake
Susitna and upper Cook Inlet, the Beluga Point site, and the Long Lake site
in the Talkeetna Mountains . These sites suggest that the Denali peoples
were extremely widespread and occupied both inland and coastal zones. If a
continuum between early and late Denali proves to be real, a time span of
over 9,000 years would exist for Denali peoples. The available information
suggests that sites representing the Denali period exist within the study
area.
The question of ~ .• ·e late duration of the Denali Complex is not settled .
Several sites in ~~g i ~ns adjacent to the study area have yielded materials
similar to those of ~he Denali Complex, i.e., microblades, microblade
cores, and burins, which have late dates . Ttese are the Village site at
Tirnt: Cultural Chrc.:1 ::>lon v (;l ,,ci.ltiO:'l (""~:~.:atn .. . ·-.. ~ •. !"; .0 :".
I I I
% I I I
1850 ;2 I I I
I I I I en I I < I I I I f ol. I 1500 7 1 7 1 5 7 I I
I I I I f= I I I
1000 . I I I Modern I -~ -·· -~] J
z I I I vegetation 0 I I I 7
500 A. I .... 1 7 Li ttle Ice 1\ge I I t I I
0 I • I I I
0 ~ I I I • fo ? I ?
500 8.( .:I I I I
' § I I I ' .
1 ~. • I I I . I I 1,000 ' I 7 ? .:I Glaciers possibly cool r:r Shrub
I 'I .:I I ~ expanded slightly I tundra
1,500 I I I --en I
I I I u I 1 I ..... 2,000 u t; I I 7 ... I I I :$ a:
2,500 u z .$._ I I I
I I 1 I
H I I I
? 7 I I 3 ,000 I I I Possibly t...•armer Boreal
I I I and drier ~orest I
3,500 ~a.ximum qlada1 I I
, I "' retraction I I 0
4,000 I I ~ I I I 1 ? I I I I I I I
<;. 500 --' -I I I • • I ' I I I ? 7 ? 5,000 -' I I I I ... I . I 1 I
5,500 <: I
z ' I "' 0 I I !;,00 0 -Ice retreat l ii<e l y
;z: . I
0 ? ? 6,500 -?ossi ble' Holo cene i-I -readvance I 0
;2 ' I ?
7,000 .... Ice tong'ue receding I
u up valley I ....
7. 500 i-I u ' "' ' I <
6,000 0 t..: I I .... 7 I <:
8, 500 c.. I
I z ' < I I
9,000 u Unglaciated Shrub -a:: I ~ t undra u
9,500 ~ ? I
I I
:--. ' I I l.O ,OOC Glacial retraction
I I I I ? 1 ? 10,500 I I I I I I I
I I
11,000 ? I
I I
11,500 I Tundra
I
I steppe
12,000 Ice covered valley I
?
ca. 13,0 00 to 30 .000 I
Figure 2 . Speculative Cu l tural Ch r onology and Inferred Glac.ial,
Climatological and Vegetational Regimes of the Susitna
Valley .
27
Healy Lake with a date of ca. 500 A.D. (Cook lS·r:~), and ~!MK-004 .Jt Lake
Minchumina dated to ca. 800-1000 A.D. (Holmes 1978). At the Dixthada site
similar material has been dated to ca. 470 B.C. Several as yet undated
sites containing Denali-like material were also located during a 1979
survey in the Tanana Valley (Dixon, Smith, and Plaskett 1980) and could
represent late Denali occupation. Sites potentially of late Denali age in
areas near the upper Susitna study area suggest that late Denali sites
could also exist in the study area.
Areas surrounding the study area have produced sites representative 0f
the Northern Archaic Tradition as defined by Anderson (1968a) and which
date from ca. 4,500 B.C. Northern Archaic sites include Lake Minchumina,
Dry Creek, the Campus site, the Village site at Healy Lake, several sites
found at Ft . IJainwright in 1979, Tangle Lakes, Lake Susitna, Beluga Point,
and the Ratekin site . The distribution of these sites is similar to that
for the Denali Complex sites . This tradition is characterized by notched
projectile points, notched pebbles, a v ariety of bifaces, end scrapers, and
boulder chip scrapers. It is possible that sites representing the Northern
Archaic Tradition exist within the study area. A site on Stephan Lake
dating to ca. 4000 B.C. may already document the presence of a Northern
Archaic Tradition site in the study area.
The Arctic Small Tool Tradition is characterized by assemblages con-
taining microblade cores, microblades, burins, burin spall artifacts, flake
knives, and bifacial end blades . This tradition is represented by coastal
and non-coastal sites, several of the latter being known from the Alaska
Interior. Dumond (1977) suggests that the Arctic Small Tool Tradition can
broadly encompass a Denbigh-Choris-Norton continuum, and this is how the
tradition is used here. One site in the immediate study area, Lake Susitna
Site 9, has been suggested as a possible Arctic Small Tool Tradition Site.
A date of 2,200 to 1,800 B.C. has been documented for the Arctic Small Tool
occupation at Onion Portage (Anderson 1968a) and may be somewhat l a ter i n
the southern Interior.
Norton period sites, the late end of the Arctic Small Tool Tradition
continuum, first appear on the Bering Sea coast about ca. 500 B.C . Norton
does not predate 400 B.C. in the upper portion of the Naknek d r ainage, and
lasts to ca. 1000 A.D. around much of the Bering Sea area (Dumond 1977:
106-108). Shortly after its appearance (ca. 500 B.C.) Norton may be
represented in Interior Alaska archeological sites. This is suggested by
artifacts from Lake Minchumina, TLM-018 in the upper Susitna Basin, and the
Beluga Point site in upper Cook Inlet.
It should also be noted that Norton period sites in the Bristol Bay
region tend to occur well up major salmon streams, presumably exploiting
28
this rich resource (Dumond 1977:113). Inland Norton period sites demon-
strate the importance of caribou in the Norton subsistence strategy (Dumond
1977:113). The Beluga Point site in upper Cook Inlet may represent the
maritime portion of the Norton subsistence cycle. Norton populations
employed a subsistence pattern that included the seasonal exploitation of
both coastal resources (sea mammals, shell fish, and fish) and interior
resources (caribou, moose, salmon, etc.). This shift in subsistence strategy
may have been a response to climatic amelioration T..rhi c h occurre d after
1,000 B.C. and preceded the "Little Ice Age". This change in resource
exploitation may be reflected by the occurrence of Norton period archeo-
logical sites in the Susitna study area.
29
Late prehistoric Athapaskan and historic period sitE:s have also bet!n
documented in areas adjacent to the study area. Late prehistoric AthapHskan
sites are represente1 at Lake ~inchumina, the up~er component at the He .1ly
Lak~ Village site, the upper component at Dixthada, several sites at Ta:tgle
Lakes, other sites on Lakes Susitna, Louise and Tyone, a site on the Ty.me
River, and another site in the vicinity of upper Cook Inlet. These l ate
prehisto ric Athapaskan sites indicate widespread occupation of several
regions in Alaska by these groups. Du~ond and ~ace (1968) have suggested,
based on archeol0gical and historical data, that Tanaina Athapaskans may
have replaced the Pacific Eskimo in upper Cook Inlet sometime between
1650 A.D. and 1780 A.D. Possibly this replacement occurred somewhat e<.rl ier
in the study area.
The chronology presented here is speculative and is intended to p1:ovide
a basel i ne from which archeological sites of different periods in the
project area can be expected. This chr o~ology should be tested and refined
by archeological sites located in the present area .
In o rder to evaluate the significance of arc heological sites lo~ated
during survey and testing, as well as aid in the analysis of archeological
materials colle cted, it is necessary to explicate hypotheses which car be
tested and evaluated utilizing the project data.
The most fundamental hypothesis to be examined is the validity of the
C'ultural chronology which has been proposed. To test the cultural chJ'onology
each period must be examined separately against archeological data fr<a
sites located during survey. To evaluate a site against a proposed ptriod
in the chronology it is necessary that the full range of artifactual ~aterial
from t~e site, not just selected types, and non-artifactual contexts be
compared against the known range of artifactual material from sites of the
period and the at tempt made to explain the range of variability and th·!
anomalies. 'This should lead to a fuller understanding of periods inv.):~ved,
cr the elimination of invalid periods for the study area and possibly 1:he
delineation of others presently unknown. It is anticipated that the proposed
cultural chronology will be modified and refined through testing.
Research Strategy
An analysis of the data derived from the literature search focusing on
site locales has established that archeological sites occur in a non-random
pattern in relation to associated physical, topographic, and ecological
features. Based on the analysis of site locational data from regions
aJjacent t o the study area, the features characteristically associated ~ith
archeological site occur~ence are:
1) Overlooks -locales of higher topographic relief than much of t~!
surrounding terrain. They are characteristically well drained and command
a panoramic view of the surrounding region. It is generally inferred thut
overlooks served as hunting locales and/or possibly short term camp site~.
Because these sites occur in elevated areas , soil deposition is zenerally
thin and they are frequently easily discovered through subsurface testing
or examination of natural exposures. Examples of sites ascribed to the
Denali Complex which occur in this setting are the Campus Site, Donnelly
Ridge, Susitna Lake, and the Teklanika sites. Northern Archaic Tradition
sites also known to occur on over:.ooks are the Cam pus Slte, som e sites in
the Tangle Lakes area, Susitna Lake, the Ratekin Site, and a site near the
Watana Dam project area. Archeological sites as~ribed to the Arcti ~ Smal l
Tool Tradition frequently occur on overlooks; ho~ever, no positively
identified Arctic Small Tool sites situated on ove rlooks have yet been
reported from the study area o r r~gions immediately adjacent to it. The
Nenana River Gorge site, some of the Tangle Lakes sites , and Lake Susitna
are all Athapaskan period sites ~hich occur on overlooks.
2) Lake Margins -sites ascribed to all defined traditions have been
discovered on the margins of major lakes. It is generally inferred that
30
they are frequently more permanent seasonal camps and that fishing, the
exploitation of fresh ~ater aquatic resources and large mammal hunting ~ere
the primary economic activities associated with these sites. These inferences
are r ··imarily based on the location of these sites rather than an analysis
of faunal and artifactual material. Sites on lake margins may exhibit
greater soil deposition than overlooks because of their lower topographic
position. Sites in this setting are frequently d iscovered through sub-
surface testlng, the observation of surface features, or through the
examination of natural exposures . Athapaskan sites on lake margins include
those at Lake Minchumina, Healy Lake, Tangle Lakes, Lake Susitna, Lake
Louis e, an~ Lake Tyone. Archeological sites ascribed to the Arctic Small
Tool Tradition are reported to occur on lake cargins and an example is the
Norton component reported at Lake Minchumina. At Lake Minchumina, Healy
Lake, Tangle Lakes, Susitna ~ke and Stephan Lake sites which may be ascribed
to the Northern Archaic Tradition are known to occur on lake margins.
Denali Complex sites which have been found near lakes include the Tangle
Lakes sites, Lake Minchumina, Healy Lake, Long Lake, and Lake Susitna.
3) St~eam and River Margins -numerous sites have been reported along
the banks or abandoned channels of streams and ri·1e rs. They vary from
large semi-permanent seasonal camps to what appear to be brief transient
camps. Soil deposition at such locales may be greater than either lake or
overlook sites because of the low topographic setting of streams and an
active agent (the stream or river) for soil deposition . Sites may be
discovered through the examination of natural exposures, subsurface testing,
and visual observation of cultural features. Denali Complex sites reported
along stream and river margins or abandoned channels include Dry Creek,
Carlo Creek, and the Campus site. Northern Archaic Tradition sites found
in this type of locale are Dry Creek and the Campus site. The Merrill
site, which is ascribed to the Norton period o f the Arctic Small Tool
Tradition, is a former meander of the Kenai River. Athapaskan si tes on
stream and river margins include Dixthada, Dakah De'nin's Village and the
Nenana River Gorge site.
It can easily be noted in the review of site locational data that many
sites have been subject to reoccupation and share more than one of the
defined physical, topographic, or ecological features characteristic of
archeological site locales. It would appear that there may be a compounding
effect in human utilization of a locale, if more than one of the s e major
variables occur, thus possibly increasing the probability of its use and
subsequent reuse. It is also recognized that this analysis is limited
because it does not address known chronological a nd settlement pattern gaps
in the archeological record. Additionally, sites such as caves, rock
shelters, quarry sites, etc., are not reported immediately adjacent to the
study area, although they may occur in the Susitna region. By focusing
initial survey efforts in these loca les as well as natural exposures, it is
antic ipa ted that mo st of the archeological sites which can be easily dis-
covered will be found during intial stages of the project, thus providing
maximum time for evaluation and planning to insure their protection.
~owever, a problem in the delineation of the topographic, ph ys ical,
31
and ecological features listed above is that a variety of specific sett~ngs
are subsumed under these ge~eral categories ~.td little precise detail about
individual sites is available. One objective of the 19L1 research s trategy
is to attempt to obtain more precise data relevant to prehistoric settlement
patterns and the juxtaposition of individual sites in relation to the
natural environment. It is anticipated that analysis of this data will
increase predictability for locating archeological sites. Additionally,
this examination may permit detailed analysis of shifting subsistence
patterns during various cultural historical peri~ds which in turn may
enable correlation of changing settlemenL patterns with environmental
changes.
Field work will attemp t to gather detailed information such as the
kind of feature on which a site is located, topographic position and elevation,
slope, exposure, view, stratigraphy, as well as details about the surrounding
terrain. This specif ic kind of information should enable an analysis of
settlement patterns in relation to lakes, streams, rivers and areas of high
topographic relief . Kinds of streams, lakes, and rivers on which sites are
found will be recorded as well. A Site Survey form has been developed
which outlines the specific kinds of information that field personnel will
record. This form is presented in the Data Procedures section of this
report. Similar information will also be recorded at locales where test
pits do not yield cultural evidence to facilitate analysis of areas where
sites do not occur.
The research strategy is based on a two field season plan designed to
provide feedback data throughout the ?roject so that new data can be used
to modify, refine and further develop the cultural resources investigations.
There are three primary objectives of the 1980 field research program.
These are: 1) examination of areas which will be immediately affected by
study of the Susitna Hydropower project (proposed air strips, bc rrow areas,
drilling locales, etc.); 2) a tho rough s urvey and testing o f the documented
archeological site locales explica:ed above by r··stematically surveying the
eleven surficial geological /morphological units defined during the air
photo analysis and interpretation; and 3) an o n-the-ground evaluation of
all the geologic/morphologic units within the study area will occur simul-
taneously with the archeolog ical reconnaissance. The criteria used to
eva l uate these areas are presented in Form 1 in the Procedures Section of
this report . This ~11 permit field verificatio.1 or reinterpretation of
uniformity, variability, and nature of these units which will be anal yzed
and compared in developing sampling strata which will be tested during the
1981 field season.
The efforts of the 1981 field season will focus on: 1) survey of
additional areas slated for construction or preconstruction disturbance;
2) rigorous testing of sites discovered during the 1980 fi1!ld season to
determine spatial limits, depth of deposits, stratigraphic placement of
cultural materials, possible age and function of sites, etc.; and 3) the
implementation o f a statistically valid field sa~pling procedure applied to
each of the strata developed from the analysis o~ th~ geologic/morphologic
units.
32
Reconnaissance survey data from the 1980 season will be used to develop
the sampling strategy employed in the second season, and to ini tially
analyze archeological site distribution and locales within the project
area. The second season's sampli·ng and intensive testing will provide a
basis for the assessment of individual site significance, and obtain data
which will hopefully enable a specific and thorough analysis of settlement
patterns through time •
. An attempt will be made to evaluate each of the identified s•Jrficial
geological/morphological units in the impoundment areas, including those
isolated w~thin larger units. This fi:::-::;~ :·ea r reco1.naissance will have
three goals: 1) The geological/morphological units will be evaluated
on-the-ground using a series of criteria which are listed on the unit
evaluation form presented in the Procedures Section of this report . This
evaluation is necessary to obtain information on the uniformity and varia-
bility of each unit. Areas within the units can then be compared and
analyzed to define the sampling strata to be tested during the second
season; 2) The on-the-ground survey will allow the identification of specific
locales within each unit for which visual reconnaissance alone may be
adequate. Such areas may include natural or human subsurface disturbance,
standing water, vertical cliffs, etc.; and 3) During the reconnaissance, an
effort will be mad e to locate as many archeological and historic sites as
possible by concentrating on the examination of natural subsurface exposures
such as eroding bluff edges and blowouts, visual reconnaissance for surface
cultural features, and subsurface testing in locales previously described
which are known to contain archeological sites.
During the second field season a sampling design will be used to test
for subsurface archeological sites. The sampling design will be developed
for the Devil's Canyon and Watana Dam construction sites and impoundment
areas, since the actual location of these have been established. The
sampling design will follow standard stratified random sampling procedures
for the defined sampling strata. The p~rpose of the 1981 sampling will be
to test for archeological site occurrence in a represe n tative number of
randomly selected locales for each strata in an attempt to obtain additional
data pertinent to prehistoric settlement and land use patterns within
different physical and topograph ic settings through time. In addition to
sampling the second season, testing will be conducted at sites located
during both seasons. Testing is necessary to evaluate these sites for
archeological significance , define the spatial and temporal limits, and
propose mitigati~g measures.
In summary, the first season's field effort should result i n the
location of as many sites as possible, given current knowledge of site
locations, and an evaluation of the surface morphology in the geological/
morphological units in the area. This evaluation will provide a basi~ for
dev~loping strata for stratified random sampling. Additionally, an attempt
will be made to examine sutsurface exposures, conduct subsurface testing at
selected locales, and identify areas not amenable for archeological testing
or survey using standard archeological field techniques.
33
1980 Field Survey Units
The project area has been divided into nine surficial geological/
morphological units based on air photo analysis and interpretation. The
location of these units is shown on Figures 3-8 and t h e de f inin g c rit eria for
each of the eleven units identified are given in the geology section of
this report. These units are not continuous in the project area, but
rather occur as isolated segments. For instance, on the ~aps it can be
seen that Rv although defined as one unit occurs discontinuously throughout
the project area. Since most units are distributed discontinously , the
individual areas of each unit are numbered separately. These number~ are
necessary for identification and recording procedures and are also shown on
Figures 3-8. A breakdown of the geological /morphological un i ts that h ave been
identified in the two impoundments are shown on Figures 3-8.
Devil's Canyon Impoundment Area
Six surficial geological/morphological units have been identified
within the Devil's Canyon impoundment area. These are Gd/b, Gb, Gm, Ra,
Rv, and Ma. Each of these units consists of a number of isolated areas
on-the-ground, and the areas have been numbered separately within each
unit. The location, USGS Quad reference, and approximate size of these
units is given below:
Gd/b Unit: A total of two isolated areas of this unit have been
identified in the Devil's Canyon impoundment:
Gd/b #1: located on the south side of the Susitna River. Talkeetna
Mtns. Quad. D-5. Approximate size 1.5 ~ .1 miles.
Gd/b #2a: located on the north side of the Susitna River. Talkeetna
Mtns. Quad. D-4. Approximate size 1 x .1 miles.
Gb Unit: a total of three isolated areas of this unit have been
identified in the Devil's Canyon impoundment :
Gb 01:
Gb 02:
Gb 03:
located on the north side of the Susitna River. Talkeetna
Mtns. Quad. D-5. Approximate size .5 x .25 miles.
located on the south side of the Susitna River. Talkeetna
Mtns. Quad. D-5 and D-4. Approximate size 5.5 x .25 miles.
located on the north side of the Susitna River. Ta l keetna
Mtns. Quad. D-4. Approximate size 2.5 x .2 miles.
Gm Unit: only o ne isolated area of this unit has been identified in
the Devil's Canyon i mpoundment:
Gm #1: located on the north side of the Susitna River. Talkeetna
Mtns. Quad. D-4. Approximate size 1 x .1 miles.
Ra Unit : a total of six isolated areas of this unit have been identified
in the Devil's Canyon impoundment :
Ra 01: located on the south side of the Susitna River . Talkeetna
Mtns. Quad. D-4. Approximate size 1.5 x .4 miles.
Ra 112:
Ra 83:
Ra fl4:
Ra 85:
Ra IJ6:
located on the north side of the Susitna River. Talkeetna
Htns. Quad. D-4. Approximate size 3.5 x .25 miles.
located ~n the south side of the Susitna River. Talkeetna
Htns. Quad. D-4. Approximate size 3 x .4 miles.
located on the north side of th~ Susitna River. Talkeetna
Htns. Quad . D-4. Approxi~ate size 2.5 x .25 miles.
located on the south side of the Susitna River. Talkeetna
Htns. Quad. D-4. Approximate size 3 x .4 miles.
located on the north side of the Susitna River. Talkeetna
Htns. Quad. D-4. Approximate size 5 x .2 miles.
Rv Unit: a total of eight isolated areas of this unit have been
identified in the Devil's Canyon impoundment.
Rv Dl:
Rv 112.
Rv l13a:
Rv IJ3b:
Rv f14a:
Rv ll4b:
Rv IJ4c:
Rv US:
located on the north side of the Susitna Riv er . Talkeetna
Htns. Quad. D-5 and D-4. Approximate size 13.5 x .2 miles.
located on the south side of the Susitna River. Talkeetna
Htns. Quad. D-5. Approximate size 10 x .3 miles.
located on the north side of the Susitna River. Talkeetna
Mtns. Quad . D-4 . Approximate size 3 x .25 miles.
located on the north side of the Susitna River. Talkeetna
Mtns. Quad. D-4 . Approximate size 1 .5 x .1 miles.
located on the south side of the Susitna River. Talkeetna
Mtns. Quad. D-4. Approximate size 4 x .1 miles.
located on the south side of the Susitna Riv er. Talkeetna
Mtns. Quad. D-4. Approximate size .25 x .1 miles.
located on the south side of the Susitna River. Tal keetna
Mtns. Quad. D-4. Approximate size 4.5 x .1 miles .
located on the north side of the Susitna River. Talkeetna
Mtns. Quad. D-4. Approximate size .5 x .1 mile s .
Ma Unit: a total of eight isolated areas, four of which are islands ,
34
of this unit have be~n identified within the Devil's Canyon impoundment.
Ma Ill:
Ha /12a:
Ma 112b:
located on the north side of the Susitna River. Talkeetna
Mtns. Quad . D-4. Approximate size .5 x .1 miles .
located on the north side of the Susitna River. Talkeetna
Mtns. Quad. D-4. Approximate size .5 x .1 miles ..
located on the north side of the Susitna River . Talkeetna
Mtns. Quad. D-4. Approximate size 1 x .25 miles.
Ma f13:
Ma 117:
Ma 118:
Ma 19:
Ma QlO:
located on the nor th side of the Susitna River. Talkeetna
Mtns. Quad. D-4. Approximate size 2 x .25 miles.
an island located in the Susitna River. Talkeetna Mtns.
Quad. 0-5 and D-4. Size is very small.
an island located in the Susitna River . Talkeetna Mtns.
Quad. D-4. Size is very small.
an island located in the Susitna River. Talkeetna Mtns.
. Quad. D-4 • Size is ve ry small.
an island located in the Susitna River. Talkeetna Mtns.
Quad. 0-4. Size is very small.
Watana Impoundment Area
Nine surficial geo logical/morphological units have been identified
within the t.Jatana impoundment area, six of which also occur in the Devil' s
Canyon impoundment. These nine units are Gd/b , Gb, Gd, Gm, Lm, 1m2 , Ra,
Rv, and Ma. As was the case for the Devil's Canyon impoundment area, each
of these units consists of a number of isolated areas on-the-ground and
these areas have been numbex·ed separately within each unit. The location,
USGS Quad. reference, and approximate size of these units is presented
below.
Gd/b Unit: a total of six isolated areas of this unit have been
identified in the Watana impoundment:
Gd/b #2b: located on the north side of the Susitna River. Talkeetna
Mtns. Quad. D-4 and D-3. Approximate size 3 x .3 miles.
35
GH/b #2c: located on the north side of the Susitna River (lower Deadman
Creek). Talkeetna Mtns. Quad. D-3. Approximate size 1 x .1
!Diles.
Gd/b #3: located on the south side of the Susitna River . Talkeetna
Mtns. Quad. D-4 and D-3. Approximate size 10 x .5 miles.
Gd/b D4a: located on the north side of the Susitna River (west side of
WatanL Creek). Talkeetna Mtns. Quad D-3. Approximate size
8 mile circumference .
Gd/b #4b: located on the north side of the Susitna River (east side of
Watana Creek). Talkeetna Mtns. Quad. D-3. Approximate size
14 mile circumference .
Gd/b #5: located on the south side of the Susitna River. Talkeetna
Mtns. Quad. D-2. Approximate size 4 x .5 miles.
Gb Unit: a total of three isolated areas of this unit have been
identified in the Watana impoundment:
Gb #4: located on the north side of the Susitna River (upper Watana
Creek). Talkeetna Mtns. Quad. D-3. Approximate size 10
x .3 miles.
Gb OS: located on the north side of the Susitna River. Talkeetna
Mtns. Quad . D-3 and D-2. Approximate size 12 x .4 miles.
Gb 86: located on the south side of the Susitna River. Talkeetna
Mtns . Quad D-2 and C-2. Approximate size 10 x .4 miles.
36
Gd Unit: a total of two isolated areas of this unit have been identified
in the Watana impoundment:
Gd Ill: located on the north side of the Susitna River (east of
Delusion Creek). Talkeetna Mtns. Quad. 0-3 . Approximate
size 1 x .25 miles.
Gd 02: located on the south side of the Susitna River. Talkeetna
Mtns. Quad 0-3 and D-2. Approximately 10 x .25 miles.
Gm Un i t: only one isolated area of this unit has been identified in
the Watana impoundment:
Gm 12: located on the north side of the Susitna River. Talkeetna
Mtns. Quad. D-3. Approximate size 10 x .4 miles.
Lm Unit: a total of two isolated areas of this unit have been ident i fied
in the Watana impoundment.
Lm Dla:
Lm 111b:
located on the south side of the Susitna River (east of
Oshetna River). Talkeetna Mtns. Quad. C-1. Approximate
size 1 x .1 miles.
locat~d on the south side of the Susitna River. Talkeetna
Mtns. Quad C-1. Approximate size 6.5 x .1 miles.
Lm, Unit: only one isolated area of t hi s unit has been identified in
the Watana impounG~ent:
located on the north side of the Susitna Ri.ver . Talkeetna
Mtns. Quad. C-1. Approximate size 1.5 x .1 miles.
Ra Unit: a total of seven isolated areas of this unit have been
identified in the Watana impoundment:
Ra #7:
Ra #8a:
located on the nor~h side of the Susitna River. Talkeetna
Mtns. Quad. D-3. Approximate size 7 x .4 miles.
located on the sou~h side of the Susitna River . Talkeetna
Mtns. Quad . D-3. Approximate size 3 x .4 miles.
Ra 08b:
Ra 19:
Ra #10:
Ra Ill:
Ra 112:
located on the south side of the Susitna River. Talkeetna
Mtns. Quad. D-3. Approximate size 10 x .5 miles.
located on the north side of the Susitna River. Talkeetna
Mtns. Quad. ~-3 and D-2. Approximate size 2 x .5 miles.
located o~ the n0rth side of the Susitna River. Talkeetna
Htns. Quad D-2. Approximate size 1.5 x .5 miles.
located on the north side of the Susitna River (confluence
of Jay Creek). Talkeetna Htns. Qua e . D-2 . AForoximate size
3 x .25 miles.
located on the north side of the Susitna River. Talke~tna
Htns. Quad. D-2 . Approximate size 2 x .2 miles.
Rv Unit: a total of seven isolated areas of this unit have been
identified in the Watana impoundment:
Rv U4d: located on the south side of the Susitna River. Talkeetna
Htns. Quad. D-4 and D-3. Approximate size 3 x .25 miles.
37
Rv 06: located on the north side of the Susitna River (lower Delusion
Creek). Talkeetna Mtns. Quad. D-3 . Approximate size 16 x .25
miles.
Rv 17:
Rv 18:
Rv 09:
Rv #10:
Rv #11:
located on the south side of the Susitna River. Talkeetna
Htns. Quad. D-3. Approximate size 4 x .4 miles.
located on the south side of the Sus ~tn a River. Talkeetna
Mtns. Quad . D-3. Approximate size 2.5 x .25 miles .
located on the north side of the Susitna River. Talkeetna
Htns. Quad~ D-3. App roximate size 7 x .35 mi les.
located on the north sid~ of the Susitna River. Talkeetna
Htns. Quad. D-2, C-2, and C-1. Approximate size 35 x .1
to .S miles.
located on the south side of the Susitna River. Talkeetna
Htns. Quad. D-2, C-2, and C-1 . Approximate size 31 x .1
to .S miles.
Ma Unit: a total of twenty isolated areas of this unit have been
identified in the Watana impoundment:
Ha #4:
Ha #5:
Ha #6:
located on the south side of the Susitna River. Talkeetna
Htns. Quad. D-2 . Approximate size 1.5 x 2.5 miles.
located on the north side of the Susitna River. Talkeetna
Htns. Quad . D-2. Approximate size .25 x .1 miles.
located on the south side of the Susitna River. Talkeetna
Htns. Quad. D-2. Approximate size .2 x .1 miles.
Ma #11-
Ma 127:
D. PALEONTOLOGY
these areas all consist of islands in the Susitna River.
Ma #11-25 are located on the Talkeetna Mtns. Quad. 0-3.
Ma #26 is located on Talkeetna Mtns. Quad. D-2, and Ma 027
is located on Talkeetna Mtns. Quad. C-2. All islands are
small.
Lower l-latana Creek
38
The primary study area comprises a bank up to one mile wide, on either
side of Watana Creek, extending from the mouth of the creek to approximately
10 miles above the mouth. Study procedures involve detailed measurement of
selected sections in this band, perhaps 10 in all. Anticipated sampling
consists of occasional individual rock units (hand samples) within r~c
measured sections, more intensive sampling of coal seams and plant fossil
bearing beds, and random samples elsewhere in the exposure area. Specific
collecting sites cannot be determined until initial ground survey of the
entire band is completed.
A secend small outcrop of similar rocks exposed in an area approximately
~ mile wide and 1 mile long will also be studied and samplP.d. This is
exposed at and above the mouth of the first unnamed creek west of \-latana
Creek on the north side of the Susitna River . Similar study and sampling
techniques will be employed here.
Other Study Areas (Paleozoic a nd ~esozoic rocks)
Field procedures involve exa mina t ion of selected outcrops within the
area immediately adjacent to the proposed impoundment. Collection of hand
samples from specific locales is anticipated, exact locations depending
upon on-site findings. Visible fossils will be collected in abundance
depending upon the nature and preservation of material and upon on-site
assessment of what material and information will b e needed in order to
fully assess the scientific importance of the occurrence . Specific rock
types (shales and cherts) anticipated in the impoundment area will also be
examined for their potential microfossil content. Sampling methods in this
type of survey involve collection of fossils and blocks of fossils where
visible, and of hand samples for microfossils .
TALKEETNA MOUNTAIN S
D-5
~··f ;:;;-------------------------------·------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------J ......
F'igure 3. Location o f Geo l og i ca l /Horphol o~ica l Units Within the la:~poundment Li111it s
o n the Talkee tna Mo untains D-5 Quad .
.. ..
TA l K E E TN A M 0 U :: T A INS
o-~
~~~--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------_j ....... .,. ••f ..
F i g ure lJ . Locat i o n o f G eo l ogica l /~1 or ph o l ogica l Un t ts Wi t h in t h e Impou n dm e nt Li mit s
o n t h e Talkee tna Ho u n t a i n s D-4 Qu ad .
..
..
TAlKEETNA MOUNTAINS
0-3
IM,OU•DWUH
LIMIJI
Figur e 5 . Location of Geological/Horoholostical Unito Withir• the Impoundment Limits
on tlu• ~.::!:,ccLIIa l'lountains D-3 Quad.
. ,,
TALKEETNA MOUNTAIN$
o-a
Figure 6 . Location of Geological/Morphological Units Within the Impoundment Limits
on the Talkeetna Mountains D-2 Quad.
... TALKEETNA MOUNTAIN$
c-a
Figure 7. Location of Geological/Morphological Units Within the Impoundment Limits
on the Talkeetna Moutains C-2 Quad.
....... ~ r-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------~r-------------------------------------------------------~~~-:-
, .. ,ou•owiNf
l UUfl
TALKEETNA MOUNTAINS
C-1
Figure 8 . Location of Geological/Horphological Uuits IHthin the Impoundment Limits
on the Talkeetnct Mountains C-1 Quad.
III . DATA PROCEDURES
To insure consistent data collection in the field and provide a s y stematic
format for data retrieval, a Site Survey Form will be used for this proj ect (see
Form 1). The form will serve as a basis for recording specific information on
each site located during the reconnaissance level survey as well as a basis for
further intensive testing or excavation, if necessary .
The form is organized into major categories including: site location,
~nvironment, site description and condition, photographic records a nd additional
information such as a site map, and location of test pits. Subcategories within
each of these headings provide specific data on these topics. Use of the form
45
is discussed in the Technical Procedures Section as mentioned in the previous
section. Although the form will organize a large quantity of data, it is designed
to supplement field notebooks, not to replace them.
Daily field notes will be kept by each crew member. Each page will be
numbered in the upper right hand corner along with the date or dates included on
that page. Each site will be noted by BOLD underlined numbers (i.e.," UA-80-23)
at the beginning of the notes associated with that site. Field notebooks for
survey will record much of the same information found on the Site Survey Forms,
such as site location, topography , vegetation, soils, extent of site, and photo-
graphs taken. Field notebooks for testing will also record a detailed description
of soils, stratification of soils, drawings of significant features or artifacts
in situ, horizontal and vertical placement of artifacts and features excavated
~ the site, site maps, methods of excavation, and collection of non-archeological
samples (soil, pollen, radiocarbon). A space will be left on each page for
additional notes and corrections . Crew leaders will keep a continuous log of
all areas surveyed, noting both the location of all test pits and natural exposures
and the presence and absence of cultural material.
Once an archeolog i cal site is located, additional test pits •ill be exc avated
to the north, south, east, and ~est of the test pit Which first documented the
site. This testing is des~gned to assist in determining extent of the site as
well as to locate additional cultural material. Due to the possibility of
destruction to sites, preliminary testing at each site will be limited. Actual
number of tests made at each site will depend on site specific information. All
site tests will be numbered, mapped, and backfilled.
The locatiJn of all excavated and surface collected artifacts will be
recorded. Specimens will be bagged by arbitrary 5 em levels, unless natural
stratification is encountered. Each bag will contain the following information:
location (i.e ., Devil'.s Canyon), date, University of Alaska Site Number (i.e.,
UA-80-23), name of excavator, test number (as recorded on site map , i.e., Test #1),
depth, and specimen(s) in bag. Radiometric samples collected will be double
wrapped in aluminum foil and placed in ziplock bags with data on each recording
location, date, site number, name, test number, depth , specimen. All individual
bags from each test will be placed in a large test pit bag with site number,
name, date, and location on the outside. All test pit bags will be placed in a
site bag with the site number and date on the outside. All site bags will be
organized by sampling locale and stored at the Watana Ba se Camp until transported
to the University of Alaska Museum in Fairbanks for cataloging and anal ysis.
A site specific and regional map will be made for each s i te. Site ma ps
will include horizontal and vertical datum points, ~ite grid, all test pits
made, location of surface artifacts, features (s uch a! hearths, cabin remains,
house pits), distance and direction to other sites or major land features, a
scale, date, person drawing map, person recording data, and refere nce to pag es
in field notebooks on which additional information is recorded . ~egional maps
~ill show the site in relation to a larger portion of the s t u dy area including
nearby rivers, lakes, topographic features, and vegetatio n communities.
Photographs will be taken of each sit~ located . The first picture at ~ach
site will b e an identification shot indicating site number, date, and crew.
Other photographs will record the environment around the site, features at the
site, soil profiles exposed in test pits, and artifacts or features in situ
before removal by excavation. Each photograph will be recorded by rOll and
frame and recorded on the survey form. Direction of view, if applicable, will
be noted for each photograph taken along with a short statement of content, and
any other data pertinent to the photograph. When practical, a metric sca )e or
other reference object will be included in the pho t ograph . Care will b e
taken to produce quality photographs.
Detailed soil profiles will be drawn of soil deposits exposed during exca-
vation. These will include a description of color, grain size, consistency, and
moisture of each unit . Measurements recording depth a nd thickness for each unit
will also be recorded.
46
A catalog of all specimens collected in the field during survey or excavation
will be prepared during Step V, Curation. Pertinent data will be recorded for
each specimen, including its Museum catalog number, description of specimen,
excavation or collection unit, level or depth from which it was collected, dat e
of collection, and collector or excavator. Site information collected and
recorded during survey and testing will be r ~corded on Alaska Heritage Resource
Site Survey long forms a copy of which is presented as Form 2 . These become a
permanent public record of the State of Alaska.
The 1980 reconnaissance will be directed toward on-the-ground evaluation of
geological/morphological units that have been identified for the project area .
The purpose of these evaluations is to provide a basis for the development of
sampling strata . Along with these evaluations the attempt will be made in the
field to identify areas that potentially may be eliminated from further survey,
and the location of as many obvious site locales as possible. Form 3 has been
developed to aid these unit evaluations.
FORM 1
ARCHEOLOGICAL SITE SURVEY FORM
47
48
ARCHEOLOGY
UNIVERSITY MUSEUM
UNIVERSITY OF ALASKA
FIELD SITE NO.: ______ _
SITE NAME: ______ _
AHRS NO: ____________ _
SUSITNA HYDROPOWER PROJECT
I. SITE LOCATION:
A. USGS QUAD: Talkeetna Mountains Scale: 1:63,360
B. A .~R PHOTO REFERENCE: Roll Frames
c. TWP • RNG • Seward Meridian---
~ of the ~ of the ~ of Section
D.
E.
~~~-------UTM: Zone 6 Easting Northing
LATITUDE: • ·----::.,,..---~LONGITUDE: ------r----"
F.
G.
GEOLOG .~CAL UNIT:
REGION: Devil' s Canyon
No. ______ _
Watana -------Other : -----------------------
II. ENVIRONMENT:
A. Site morphology. (See back of form for information required.)
B. Surrounding terrain morphology. (See back of form for information required .)
FIELD SITE N0. ______ 4_9_
C. Ecosystem. (See back of sheet for descriptions.)
1. Moist Tundra High Brush Other:
_____ Lowland spruce-hardwood _____ Upland spruce-hardwood
2. Site vegetation and surface description:
3. Vegetation in surrounding area and surface description:
so
nELD SITE NO. --------
III. SITE:
A. Description:
1. Characteristics. {lithic scatter, st!'atified site, cabin, etc.)
2. Number, size and spatial relationship of features, etc .
3. Stratigraphy (if relevant):
FIELD SITE NO.
B. Artifact inventory.
1. Surface:
a. Artifacts collected :
b. Artifacts observed but not collected:
2. Systematically excavated artifacts:
c. Period: Unknown Precontact
___ .Sisto ric: Native Non-Native
D. Size:
1. Observed Size : X meters
Justification for boundaries:
2 . Estimated Size: x meters
Justification for boundarieS:
E. Site disturbance (current and anticipated ).
1. Natural: -------------------------------
2. Human :
51
FIELD SITE NO.
52
----------------
F. What prompted you to survey this location?
G. Draw and attach map(s) of site with location of tests and surface features;
soil profile(s); and general location and vegetation map.
IV. PHOTOGRAPHIC RECORD:
Frame I Direction Content
Site ID with date and Crew
V. CREW: .
A. Names:
B. Date(s) visited:
VI. Field Recommendation for further testing:
II. A.
II. B.
Site
1.
2.
morphology.
What terrain feature is the site on: flat plain, sloping plain,
continuous ridge, hill, point, shoreline, terrace, valley, etc.
What is the topographic context:
a. no topographic relief relative to surro unding terrain, higher
topographic relief than surrounding terrain, lower topogr aphic
relief than surrounding terrain.
b. give elevPtion : 1) above sea level; 2. Relative to surrounding
terrain.
3. Is the terrain feature continuous or discrete?
4 . What is the size, shape and direction of this feature?
5 . What is the relative position of the site on this feature ?
6. Field of view :
a. direction and range o f view;
b. what is in view?;
c. would a change i n the present vegetation increase or decrease
view? How?
7. Describe any special attributes that make this site location unique .
8 . Are there other settings similar to that of this site in the unit?
Where?
Surrounding terra i n morphology.
Describe surrounding landforms and water features in relation to the sit!.
What is the direction, distance, a nd difference in elevation of surrounding
features ? The following characteristics sh~uld provide a guide:
1. Streams and rivers :
a. proximity to site
b. access from site
c. are any in view from site?
d . has downcutting created valley wall constriction in this area?
e. is stream or river (1) shallow with rapids and sandbars, or (2 )
deep and smooth in this vicinity, etc.
f. is water clear or turbid?
g. what is the general width in this vicinity?
h. is terracing present?
i. in this area is the river course:
1. straight;
2. bending;
3. serpentine.
j . are confluences with other streams or rivers nearby? How far?
53
k. what kind of terrain does this stream or river drain? (lakes, hills,
marsh)
2. Lakes:
a. size in hectares using template.
b. inlet present? outlet present?
c . single lake or part of lake system?
d. characterize terrain surrounding lake (low, wet, steep, etc.)
e. is there any evidenca that lake size is changing (vegetation ovet-
growth, old shorelines, etc.)
f. characteristics of shoreline. Old shorelines present?
54
ECOSYSTEMS LIKELY TO BE ENCOUNTERED IN PROJECT AREA
MOIST TUNDRA: Moist tundra ecosystems usually form a complete ground cover and
are extremely productive during the growing season. They vary from almost
continuous and uniformly developed cottongrass tussocks with sparse growth
of other sedges and dwarf shrubs to stands where tussocks are scarce or
lacking and dwarf shrubs are dominant. Associated specie s ar~ arctagrostis,
bluejoint, tufted hairgrass, mosses, alpine azalea, wood rush, mountain-
avens, bistort, low-growing willows, dwarf birch, Labrador tea, green alder,
Lapland rosebay, blueberry and mountain cranberry.
HIGH BRUSH: These are dense to open deciduous brush systems . Floodplain
thickets: The subsystem is similar from the rivers of the southern coastal
areas to the broad-braided rivers north of the Brooks Range. It develops
quickly on newly exposed alluvial deposits that are periodically flooded.
The dominant shrubs are willows and alders . Associated shrubs are dogwood,
prickly rose, raspberry, buffaloberry and high bush cranberry . Birch-alder-
willow thickets: This subsystem is found near timberline in interior Alaska.
It consists of resin birch, American gre~n alder, thinl~af . alder, and
several willow species . Thickets may be extremely dense, or open and
interspersed with reindeer lichens, low heath type shrubs, or patches of
alpine tundra ecosystems. Other associated species are Sitka alder,
bearberry, cro~berry, Labrador tea, spirea, blueberry, and mountain
cranberry .
UPLAND SPRUCE-HARDWOOD FOREST: This ecosystem is a fairly dense interior forest
composed of white spruce, birch, aspen and poplar. Black spruce typically
grows on north slopes and poorly drained flat areas. Root depths are shallow.
Fire scars are common. White spruce averaging 40 to eo feet in height
and up to 16 inches in diameter occurs in mixed stands on south facing slopes
and well drained soils~ forms pure stands near streams . Aspen and birch
average 50 feet in height. Poplar averaging 80 feet in height and 24 inches
in diameter occurs in scattered stands along streams . Undergrowth
consists of mosses with grasses on drier sites and with brush on moist slopes.
Typical plants are willow, alder, ferns, rose, high and low bush cranberry,
raspberry, current and horsetail.
LOWLAND SPRUCE-HARDWOOD FOREST: This ecosystem is a dense to open interior lowland
forest of evergreen and deciduous trees, including extensive pure stands
of black spruce . Black spruce are slow growing and seldom exceed 8 inches
in diameter or 50 feet in height. Cones of this tree are opened by f ire and
spread abundant seed, enabling black spruce to quickly invade burned areas.
The slow-growing stunted tamarack is associated with black spruce in the
wet lowlands. It seldom reaches a diameter of more than 6 inches.
Rolling basins and knolls in the lowlands have a varied mixture of white
spruce, black spruce, paper birch, aspen and poplar. Small bogs and
muskegs are found in the depressions. Undergrowth species include willow,
dwarf birch, low bush cranberry, blueberry, Labrador tea, crowberry, bear-
berry, cottongrass, ferns, horsetail, lichens and a thick cover of sphagnum
and other mosses . Large areas burned since 1900 are covered by willow brush
and very dense black spruce sapling stands.
AFTER: Major Ecosystems of Alaska. Joint Federal-State Land Use Planning
Commission for Alaska. July 1973.
FORM 2
ALASKA HERITAGE RESOURCES
SITE SURVEY FORM
ss
;,r.,·,sY..A HERITAGE RESOURCES SITE SURVEY FORM (ARCHAEOLOGY)
CA~tuch continua~ion sheets as needed.)
RECORDER:
56 OH&A 5/76 Page 1
l.Name(s) ___________________________________________________ 2. Date ________ __
3.Address --------------------------------------------------------------------
4.Project ________________________________________ 5. Permit Number ____________ _
SITE REFERENCE/LOCATION:
!.Field Designation ________________________ __ 2. (AHRS) Designation __________ _
3.Name(s) of Site ------------------------------------------------------------
4.Map Name ______________________________________ , Map Scale ____________________ _
S.Latitude _____ Deg. _____ Min. _____ Sec ./Longitude _____ Deg. _____ Min. _____ Sec.
6 .Legal Description __________________________________________________________ __
7 .Aerial Photo Reference __________________________ , Photo Scale ______________ _
S.UTM Grid Reference-----------------------------------------------------------
9.Bibliographic References (manuscripts, etc.) ______________________________ __
LAND USE CONDITIONS:
!.Present Land Use-------------------------------------------------------------
2.Recent Surface Modifications ______________________________________________ ___
3.Natural Erosion: Kind ____________________________ ~Extent __________________ __
4.Vandalism: No Yes ____ ; Heavy ____ Medium ____ Light __ __
5 .Past Surface Modifications ________________________________________________ ___
6.Future Surface Modifications -----------------------------------------------
7 . Property Owner /l-Unal)er ____________________________________________________ _
ENVIRONHENTAL DESCRIPTION:
l .Vege~ation at Site ____________ ·-----------------------------------------------
2.Surrounding Vegetation ____________________________________________________ _
3.Toposraphy at Site __________________________________________________________ _
4.Surrounding ~apograph~ ------------------------------------------------------
5. Geology (surface/bedrock) ________________________________________________ ___
6.Neare~~ Water to Site: Distance Direction Type --------~ ----------------------
ALASKA HERITAGE RESOURCES SITE SURVEY FORM (ARCHAEOLOGY) 57 OH&A 5/76 Page 2
(Att~ch continuation sheets as needed.) Site Reference ------From Page 1
SOIL HATRIX:
!.Thickness (sod) , (soil) , Descri_ption ------------------------
3.Samples Taken: No Yes ____ ; Number/Description ____________________________ __
l.Field Book(s) ________________ ~Pages ______________ _
2.Photographs Taken: B&W Color Slides Color Prints ___ , Description of
Subject(s ) _______________________________________________________________ ___
ARCHAEOLOGICAL OBSERVATIONS /DATA COLLECTED:
!.Estimated Extent of Site (use sketc h map) ---------------------
2.Number of Cultural Components ________________________ ~-------------------------
).Stratigraphy: No ___ Yes ____ (attach profile)
4.Number of Test Pits Dug ___ (indicate their relative positions on sketch map)
S .Organic Preservation : No Yes __ ; Good ____ Moderate Poor
6. Faunal : No Yes ___ ; Description (ID) _______________________________________ __
7.Human Remains: No Yes ___ ; Description _______________________________ __
S .Charcoal: No Yes Collected Description/Pl··wenience ----------
9.0ther Features ____________________________________________________________ __
l O.Arti facts: No Yes Collected Description
S!CF:TCH HAP ATTACHED:
l.Indicate North, give scale, provide appropriate labels, a nd inc luce la r.~~ar ~:s.
58
FORM 3
UNIT EVALUATION FORM
Museum Archeology
University of Alaska
Fairbanks , Alaska 9970i
SUSITNA HYDROPOWER PROJECT
UNIT EVALUATION FORM
Geol o gical Unit : ___________ 59
Number : -----------
This form is intended to insure that four kinds of data for each unit are recorded. These
data will guide additional survey, the development of strata for 1981 sampling, evaluation of
areas that may need no further work, and document areas surveyed and tested on-the-ground . If
supplementary information to this form is included in fieldnotes, please note this on the form
along with your name(s) and field book page number(s).
I. A field comparison of the geological/morphological unit and its definition (given on the
back of this form) is needed. The field description of the unit should include the uniformity
and variability of surface morphology. The information which you record will be used to
compare this unit with other units to determine s1milarity and aid in the development of
strata for sampling:
a. Describe the surface morphology noting topographic features, drainage, s o ils, variation
in surface slope, etc .
60
Geological Unit:
Number :-----
b. What, if any, are the discrepancies between the definition of the unit (based on air
photo interpretation) and the field observation of the ~it? Would you characterize
the total area as a single unit based on the homogeneity of surface morphology?
II. Identify areas within the unit that potentially may be eliminated from further archeo-
logical survey. Please provide objective criteria in your evaluation s·uch as: 1) areas
where testing is not feasible using standard archeological field techniques (areas of
standing water, talus rubble); 2) areas where the substrata has been removed by natural
erosion (indicate whether these areas have been surface examined for archeological
materials); and 3) Overly steep slopes. This would include slopes of greater than 15° to
horizontal which you deem unlikely for site occurrence (describe and measure slope angle).
61 Geological Unit : ________ __
Numbe r: ----------
III. Identify locales vithin the unit which may have high archeological po tential, based on
known site locales from other areas and your field experience, including ov erlooks, river
terrace and bluff edges, lake and stream margins, etc. D&Scribe the location, ext e nt,
salient features, and tests (if applicable) for these locales, record these locations on
USGS maps.
IV. Locate on maps where the survey team actually vent on-the-ground, and
location, number , size, and depth of test pits excavated and natural exposures
examined. Describe the topographic setting, and relation to other physical
features, such as lakes, streams, rivers, bluff, edges, nearby hills, elevation,
etc., for sterile test pits.
NAMES OF FIELD TEAM:
Date -----------------------Date ------------------·---------
Date ------------------~ ~---------Date -----------------------------
Date Date ----------------------------------------------------------
62 G • Glacial L • Late Glacial R • Recent H • Modern
b . Surfaces mapped as "b" are sloping bedrock surfaces that f o rmed the valley
walls of glacial troughs. In most cases slopes are very steep, and usually bedrock is
exposed directly underneath the thin recent soil mantle. In some places patchy thin
drift may be present within the boundaries of areas mapped with the subscript "b".
This unit commonly grades both upward and downward in elevation to rock slopes above
the glacial trough (r) or to drift mantle slopes (d, d/b). Minor windblown sedimentation
and solifluction processes have occurred, but in most cases the glacial troughs are
relatively unmodified.
d. Surfaces mapped as "d" include those areas thickly mantled with glacial
drift. Relief is generally very low and the unit can have a monotonous gradually
sloping undulating expression. Drainage is typically poor, with small ponds forming
in a few places. The surface character is controlled largely by the varying thickness
and composition of the till mantle. Host of the sediment underlying the surfaces
mapped "d" is probably stony, clayey, dense till, which may be overlain by a thin
gravel cap.
d/b. Surface mapped as "d/b" are underlain by thin or patchy drift which overlies
bedrock. Both ice-scoured bedrock and a mantle of poorly drained drift can occur
locally. The topographic. relief is usually lower than "r" surfaces because the drift
fills in the original depressions. It is higher than "d" surfaces because the surface
irregularities are qot completely masked by a drift mantle. Locally, this unit can be
well drained (as in the gravelly areas), but usually well drained bedrock areas are
randomly interspersed with poorly drained drift areas. Minor areas of subdued morainal
topography can be present locally.
m. Surfaces mapped as "m" are underlain by hummocky irregular, commonly gravelly
drift which extends to some depth. The surface expression is morainal . Topographic
relief is generally less than 100 feet, but numerous chaotic small ridges (morainal)
or isolat~d mounds (kames) tjpically less than 100 1 relief may be present. In most
areas, the surfaces mapped as "m" are well drained and gravelly. Small lakes are
commonly present, and larg~ irregular poorly drained areas may be present as well .
Very little morainal topography is present west of the Yatana Dam Site. Extensive
areas near the Tyone River, although morainal in form (m), are more subdued and poorly
drained, possibly because they are partly buried by eolian sediments.
m2. Surfaces mapped as "m2" are similar to "m" surfaces and grade directly into
them. They are, however, more irregular in form, with more prominent ridges, and
better drained topography. In the vicinity of Tsisi Creek and the Oshetna River, "m2"
surfaces include some prominent valley lateral moraines.
v. Surfaces mapped as "v" include all bedrock surfaces that were formed by
recent incision of tributaries and the Susitna River. The surfaces are very steep,
commonly gullied, and are still commonly in the process of being eroded. The boundary
between "v" surfaces and the next higher surface is usually sharp. "v" surface also
includes some colluvium, small talue cones, and a few possible landslides.
a. Surfaces mapped as "a" include all alluvium of modern or relatively recent
age. The alluvium is generally well drained and vegetation covered, especially in the
Susitna Canyon. Alluvium in the tributaries may contain minor colluvial debris and
some fine material, but along the Susitna and Chulitna River "a" is indistinguishable
from outwash. The alluvium is derived largely from reworked outwash, hence the
similarity. The contact between alluvium (a) and steep gullied slopes (v) is usually
abrupt, but difficult to map because of tbe narrow outcrop pattern~
IV . QUALITY CONTROL
Quality control will be the responsibility of the principal investigator
and the project supervisor or their appointed representative. In the field it
will be the responsibility of the project supervisor to direct field duties and
coordinate with other project personnel .
The inspection of the quality of data recorded in field notebooks, site
63
maps, and soil profiles, Site Survey Forms, as well as adherence to systematic
professional standards of testing will be the responsiblity of the project
supervisor and the crew leader. Photographs will provide additional documen-
tation of information recorded in the field notes. All forms of documentation
will be stored in waterproof boxes while in the field. Artifacts collected will
be documented and inventoried in the field and stored at the Watana Base Camp
until transported to the University of Alaska Museum in Fairbanks. When specimens
are received at the Museum they will be inventoried again. Pertinent information
for each specimen will be recorded in Museum catalogs. Maintenance of quality
control during laboratory analysis of data will be the responsibility of the
project supervisor. All specimens and related documentation will be permanently
stored in the University of Alaska Museum.
Areas designated as having low, moderate, or high potential for containing
and preserving sites will be tested in the field in order to check the validity
and quality of the sampling strata . Testing procedures are discussed in the
Technical Procedures section.
Quality control for all phases of the project, including the final report,
is ultimately the responsibility of the principal investigator.
V. SCHEDULE
The following schedule is intended to provide a general outline for the
five project steps. More specific schedules for individual steps will be
developed separately as the project progresses.
Step I :
1.
2.
3.
4.
s.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
Step II:
1.
Prefield Season Tasks -January to May 1980
Receive notification to proceed.
Obtain Federal Antiquities permit and any State documents
necessary to proceed.
Determination of locations of known archeological and his toric
sites.
Literature search of history, prehistory, ethnography, geology,
flora, fauna, and late Pleistocene and Holocene geology.
Air photo analysis.
Aerial reconnaissance.
Analysis of data base.
Development of sampling strategy.
Development of research design/procedures manual.
Personnel recruitment.
Staging.
Archeological Reconnaissance Survey -June to August 1980
Identify, locate, document and inventory historic and archeo-
logical sites through surface and subsurface testing.
a. In the impoundment area: in locations as determined by
sampling strategy.
b. At areas affected by preconstruction activity: as determined
by sequence of construction events.
c. Areas of secondary im~act.
Step III : Intensive Testing -June to Augu~t 1980 as necessary
Sampling 3nd Intensive Testing -June to Au gust 1981
1. Personnel recruitment.
2. Staging.
3. Systematic archeological excavation, including:
a. Grid site
b. Sampling scheme for site
c. Excavation
d. Mapping
e. Photographic documentation
f. Soil profiles
64
Step IV: Analysis and Report Preparation3-July 1980 to ~arch 1982
Step
1. Continuous analysis of data as it is received.
2 . Monthly reports -lOth of each month.
3. SeMiannual report -August 1980, August 1981
4. Annual Report -February 1981
5 . Draft final report -January 1982; i ncludes:
6 .
V:
1.
2.
3.
4.
s.
6.
a . Compilation of indiv idual steps of project .
b. Synthesis of all data.
b. Report on vegetation, fauna, geology, history, prehistory
and Native populations.
d. For each site located and tested:
-location
-description
-recommendations for mitigation
-eligibility for inclus i on in National Register
of Historic Places
e. Overall effectiveness of project .
Final report -March 1982
Curation -July 1980 and in perpetuity
Receiving material from field.
FuMigation.
Cleaning.
Cataloging.
Report to Federal and State agencies on sites located and
materials acquired.
Storage.
A month-by-month schedule for all personnel known at this time who will be
involved in the project is given on the following pages.
3. Dates refer to re-r.o rt s ubmiss ion b y Univers ity of AlHs ka :-!u seum t o TES .
65
PERSONNEL SCHEDULE 1980
J F H A H J J A s 0 N D
E. James Dix on (3 months)
George S. Smith ( 1 2 months)
Martha Johnson (9 months)
Ge ne West (2 months )
Charl es Utermoh le (3 months)
Alan Ziff II II
Martha Ca s e ..
Bob Betts II II
Les Baxter II II
Robert 'Jhorson (6 months )
Cl erk Specialist (3 mon ths )
Re s earch Associate (5 months)
Steve Ha rdy (?months)
Jane Smith (6 weeks)
Carol Allison (2 rronths)
Mikey Payne (1 mo n th)
PROPOSED PERSONNEL SCHEDULE 1 981
J F M A M J J A s 0 N D
E . James Dixon ( 3 months )
George s. Smith (12 100n ths )
Martha Johns on (9 100nths)
C:.ene West (2 months )
Crew Leader (May 28-August 30, 3 100nths)
Crew Leader II II
Crew Leader II II
Crew Member II II
crew Member II II
crew Member II II
Cre w Member .. II
Crew Membe r II ..
Crew Menber ..
Clerk Specialist ( 3 mon t hs)
Researc h Associate (6 months)
Geologis t (6 mo nths)
Steve Hardy (4 months)
a-
~
VI. PERSONNEL
A. PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR (PI)
The Principal Investigator (PI) bears overall responsibility for the
project including research design, obtaining necessary permits, scheduling,
crew selection, prefield training, quality assurance, communication with
other professionals, data collection and analysis, report preparation and
editing, and curation of artifacts. He will have overall responsibility
for seeing that the project complied with proposed scheduling, budgeting
and all State and Federal regulations that apply to cultural resource
management. It is expected that due to administrative responsibilities,
68
the PI will not be available for long periods in the field during this
portion of the project. In this case, the PI will delegate responsibilities
to the Project Supervisor.
The PI for the project will be Dr. E. James Dixon, Jr. (Ph.D ., Brown
University, 1979). Dr. Dixon is Curator of Archeology and Assistant Professor
at the University of Alaska Museum, Fairbanks, and has over 12 years of
archeological experience in Alaska . He is a member in good standing of the
Society of Professional Archeologists (SOPA) and meets all the requirements
for membership in this organization. Dr. Dixon has published numerous
articles on Alaskan archeology and anthropology, has administered several
large archeological contracts, and has prepared comprehensive reports for
them. Dr. Dixon possesses the necessary archeology background and adminis-
trative experience to fulfill the requirements of this project.
B. PROJECT SUPERVISOR (PS)
The Project Supervisor (PS) will have responsibility for directly
supervising all phases of t he field work and analysis. He will collaborate
in designing the research, sampling strategy, and personnel hiring, and
will implement programs in the field. Initial preparation of all reports
will be the responsibility of the PS. The PS will direct all field crews
and act on behalf of the PI in dealing with other project personnel. He
will be responsible for all field equipment, food, and supplies and will
direct field logistics ~ He will also be responsible for quality assurance
and safety in the field. It will be the responsibility of the PS to see
that all data necessary for the completion of the archeological section of
the Susitna Hydropower Project Feasibility Studies are collected in a
manner which meets professional standards.
The PS for this project will be Mr. George S. Smith (M.A . University
of Alaska, 1978). Mr. Smith is a Research Associate in Archeology at the
University of Alaska and has over 7 years experience in Alaskan archeology,
having been PI and PS on a number of large archeological projects in remote
coastal and interior areas of Alaska. He is experienced and competent in
research design, sampling strategy, personnel management, supply, field
logistics, data collection, analysis, and report preparation. He is also
one of the leading experts on zooarcheology in the State.
69
C. CREW LEADER ( CL)
The Crew Leader (CL) will be responsible foe directing field operations
under the direct supervision of the Principal Investigator and the Project
Supervisor. In the absence of either the PI or the PS the Crew Leader will
be responsible for continuing field operations. The Crew Leader will have
at least two field seasons of archeological survey and/or excavation
experience and have knowle1ge of New World archeology and report writing .
D. CREW MEMBER (CM)
Crew Members for this project will assist the PI, PS, and CL in locating
and recor~ing historic and archeological resources located within the
Susitna study area. Crew Members will have a basic knowledge of archeological
field methods and at least one field season's experience in archeological
survey or excavation.
E. GROUP LEADER ( GL)
The Group Leaaer will have responsibility for superv~s~ng the cultural
resources investigation effort, and for ensuring consistency of this effort
with overall project objectives and procedures. The Group Leader will be
directly responsible to the Environmental Study Director (ESD). The
duties of the Group Leader will be to:
(1) ensure completeness and effectiveness of discipline-specific
studies in meeting study objectives,
(2) provide direction of .and assistance with the initiation of all
field sampling efforts ,
(3) maint ain active supervision of project staff efforts on a
day-to-day basis,
(4) recommend approval/disapproval of adjustments to d iscipline-
specific studies,
(5) approve minor program/sampling procedure adjustments to make the
program more compatible with existing conditions,
(6) inform the ESD of program activities on a regular basis,
(7) provide program design recommendations to the ESD, and
(8) assure that subtask reports have a format and contents
appropriate for incorporation into the Environmental Study
(task) reports.
The Group Leader for this cultural resources investigation will be
fvlr. Lewis M. Cutler (r-1.S. State University of New York College of
Environmental Science and Forestry, 1975). Mr. Cutler has coordinated and
managed archeological efforts on other projects in the continental United
States.
VII. LITERATURE CITED
Alaska Department of Fish and Game. 1973. Alaska's Wildlife and
Habitat. LeResche, R., and R. A. Himman, eds. State of Alaska,
Department of Fish and Game. 144pp.
Alaska Department of Fish and Game. 1975. Plant Community Studies in the
Blair Lakes Range, Map. State of .Alaska, Department of Fish and Game.
Alaska Division of Parks. 1978. Alaska Heritage Resource Survey
Index. Alaska Division of Parks, Anchorage, Alaska.
Alaska Native Language Center. 1974. Native Peoples and Languages
of Alaska. Map. Center for Northern Educational Research, University
of Alaska, Fairbanks, Alaska.
Allen, H.T. 1887. Report of an expedition to the Copper, Tanana,
and Koyukuk Rivers in the Territory of Alaska, in the year 1885.
U. S. Army, Department of the Columbia, U.S. Government Printing
Office, Washington.
Anderson, D.C. 1968a. A Stone Age Campsite at the Gateway to America .
Scientific American 218(6) :24-33.
Anderson, D.C. 1968b. Early Notched Point and Related Assemblages in
the Western American Arctic. Manuscript on file in the University
of Alaska Museum, Fairbanks, Alask.a.
Anderson, D. D. l968c. Archeology O·f the Northwestern Arctic .
Manuscript, Brown University, Providence, Rhode Island.
Anderson, D.C. 1970. Microblade Traditions in Northwest Alaska.
Arctic Anthropology 7(2) :2-16.
Andrews, E .F . 1975. Salcha: An Athapaskan Band of the Tanana River
and its Culture. M.A. Thesis, Department of Anthropology, University
of Alaska, Fairbanks, Alaska.
Arctic Environmental Information and Data Center. 1975. Alaska
Regional Profiles: Southcentral Region . L. Selkregg, ed.
University of Alaska, Anchorage, Alaska. pp.122-131
Arndt, K. 1977. Structure of cache Pits at GUL-077, a late prehistoric
archeological site near Gulkana, Alaska. M.A. Thesis , Department
of Anthropology, University of Alaska, Fairbanks, Alaska.
Bacon, G., ed. 1975a. Heritage Resources along the Upper Susitna River.
Miscellaneous Publications History and Archeology Series, No. 14,
Alaska Division of Parks, Anchorage, Alaska. pp. 61
Bacon, G. 1975b. Preliminary Testing at the Long Lake Archeological
site. Manuscript on file University of Alaska, Fairbanks, Alaska.
70
Bacon, G. l978a. Archeology near the Watana Dam site in the upper
Susitna River basin. Report prepared for the Alaska District, Corps
of Engineers under contract DACW85-78-C-0034. Manuscript on file
University of Alaska Museum, Fairbanks, Alaska. 23pp.
Bacon, G. l978b. Archeology in the upper Susitna River basin. Repor~
to the Alaska District, Corps of Engineers under contract DACQ85-78-0017.
Manuscript on file University of Alaska Museum, Fairbanks, Alaska. 6lpp.
Bancroft, H.H. 1886. History of Alaska 1730-1885. Antiquarian Press,
New York (1959 reprint).
Bowers, P.M. 1978. Research summary: 1977 investigations of the Carlo
Creek archeological site, central Alaska. Report submitted to the
University of Alaska Museum, Fairbanks, Alaska. 24pp.
Bro~s, A.H. 19 ~:. Blazing Alaska's trails. Second edition. University
Ol Alaska Press, Fairbanks, Alaska. 567pp.
Clark, G.H. 1974. Archeological survey and excavation along the
southernmost portion of the Trans-Alaska Pipeline system. Final
report to the Alyeska Pipeline Service Company, Anchorage, Alaska. 99pp.
Cole, T. 1979. The history of the use of the upper Susitna River, Indian
River to the headwaters. Report prepared for the State of Alaska,
Department of Natural Resources, Division of Research and Development 27pp.
Cook, J. 1785. A voyage to the Pacific Ocean, etc. Second edition,
II, London, England.
Cook, J.P. 1969. The Early Prehistory of Healy Lake, Alaska. Ph.D.
Dissertation, University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wisconsin.
Cook, J.P. and R.A. McKennan. 1970. The Village site at Healy Lake, Alaska:
an interim report. Paper presented at the 35th Annual Meeting of the
Society for American Archeology, Mexico City.
deLaguna, F . 1975. The archeology of Cook Inlet, Alaska. Second edition,
Alaska Historical Society, Anchorage, Alaska.
Dixon, E.J.; Smith, G., and D. Plaskett. 1980. Archeological survey
and inventory of cultural resources, Ft. Wainwri ght, Alaska. final
draft report. Preparerl for Department of the Army, Alaska District,
Corps of Engineers under contract DACA85-78-0047. University of
Alaska, Fairbanks, Alaska.
Dumond, D.E. 1977. The Eskimos and Aleuts. Thames and Hudson, London, 180pp.
Elridge, G.H. 1900 . A reconnaissance in the Susitna Basin and adjacent
territory, Alaska in 1898. In 20th Annual Report of the United States
Geological Survey, pt. 7:1-29. Government Printing Office, Washington.
71
Guedon, M.F. 1975 . People of Tetlin, Why Are You Singing? Ethnology
Division Paper No. 9, National Museums of Canada, Ottawa.
Helm, J ., et al. 1975. The contact history of the subarctic Athapaskans:
an overview. ~ Proceedings: Northern Athapaskan Conference, 1971
pp. 302-349. A. Clark , ed. National Museums of Canada, Ottawa.
Hickey, C.G. 197~. The effects of treeline shifts on human societies:
crazy quilt variability vs. macrozonal adaptation pp . 87-89. International
Conference on the Prehistory and Paleoecology of North American Arctic
and Subarctic (second edition), s. Raymond and P. Schledermann, eds.
Archaeological Association, Department of Archaeology, University of Calgary,
Calgary, Alberta
Hoeffecker, J.F. 1978. A report to the National Geographic Society and the
National Park Service on the potential of the north Alaska Range for
archeological sites of Pleistocene Age. Manuscript on file in the University
of Alaska Museum, Fairbanks, Alaska. 19pp .
Hoeffecker, J.F. 1979. The search for early man in Alaska. results and
recommendations of the North Alaska Range Project. A Report to the
National Geographic Society and the National Park Service.
Holmes, C.E. 1976 . 3000 Years of prehistory at Minchumina: the question
of cultural boundaries . Paper presented at the 9th Annual Conference of
the University of Calgary Archaeological Association, Calgary, Alberta.
Holmes, C.E. 1977. Progress report: archaeological research at Lake
Minchumina, central Alaska. Manuscript in the University of Alaska
Museum, Fairbanks, Alaska.
Holmes, C.E. 1978. Report on archaeological research at Lake Minchumina,
Alaska during 1977. Manuscript in ~e University of Alaska Museum, Fairbanks
Hopkins, D.M. 1967. The Berin~ Land Bridge. Stanford University Press,
Stanford, California.
Hosley, E.H. 1967. The McGrath Ingalik Indians, central Alaska. pp 544-547
in Yearbook of the American Philosophical Society.
Hosley, E.H . 1966. The Kolchan: Athapaskans of the upper Kuskokwim .
Manuscript in the University of Alaska Museum, Fairbanks, Alaska.
Irving, W.N. 1957. An archaeological survey of the Susitna Valley.
Anthropological Papers of the University of Alaska, Fairbanks 6(1) :37-52.
Irving, W.N . 1978. Pleistocene archeology in eastern Beringia.
A.L. Bryan, ed. in Early Man in America, Occasional Paper No. 1,
Department of Anthropology, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta.
Manville, R.H. and S.P. Young. 1965. Distributions of Alaskan m&~ls.
U.S Department of the Interior, Bureau of Sports Fisheries and Wildlife,
Circular 221.
72
Mauger, J.E.
collection.
1970. A study of Donnelly Burins in the Campus archaeological
M.A. Thesis. Washington State Un iversi~, Pullman, Washington.
McKennan, R.A. L959. The Upp.Jr Tanana Indians. Yale t;niversity Publications
in Anthropology, No. 55. Yale University Press, New Haven, Conn.
Moffit, F.H. 1912. Headwater regions of the Gulkana and Susitna Rivers, Alaska.
7 3
U.S. Geological Survey Bulletin 498. Government Printing Office, Washington D.C.
Morlan, R.E. 1978. Early man in northern Yukon Territory: perspective as of
1977. pp 78-95. ~ A.L. Bryan, ed. Early Man in America, Occasional Paper
No. 1, Department of Anthropology, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta.
Nelson, N.C. 1935. Early migrations of man to North America. Natural
History 35:356.
Nelson, N.C. 1937. Notes on cultural relations between Asia and America.
American Antiquity 2(4) :267-272.
Nelson, R.K. 1~73 . Hunters of the northern forest. University of Chicago
Press, Chicago, Illinois.
Osgood, c. 1937. The e~mography of the Tanaina. Yale University Publications
in Anthropology, No. 16. Yale University Press, New Haven, Conn.
Pitts, R.S. 1972. The changing settlement patterns and house types of the
Upper Tanana Indians. M.A. Thesis, University of Alaska, Fairbanks, Alaska.
Plaskett, D.C. and E.J. Dixon, Jr. 1978. Men out of southeast Asia.
an alternative hypothesis for the early peopling of the Americas. Pape r
Presented at the 5th Annual Meeting, Alaska Anthropological Association,
Anchorage, Alaska.
Powers, W.R. and T.D. Hamilton. 1978. Dry Creek: A late Pleistocene human
occupation in central Alaska. pp. 72-77. in A.L. Bryan , ed. Early Man
in America, Occasional Paper No. 1, Department of Anthropology, University
of Alberta, Edloonton, Alberta.
Rainey, F. 1939. Archeology in central Alaska. Anthropological Papers
of the American Museum of Natural History 36 (4) :351-405.
Rainey, F. 1940. Archeological discoveries o n the Denali Highway, Alaska.
Anthropological Papers of the University of Alaska 6 (2) :79-88.
Rainey, F. 1953. The significance of recent archeological discoveries
in inland Alaska. Society for American Archeology Memoir No. 9, pp 43-46.
Reger, D.R. 1977. Prehistory in the upper Cook Inlet, Alaska. in J.W.
Helmer, s. VanDyke, and F. J. Kense, eds. Problems in the Prehistory of
the North American subarctic: the Athapaskan question. Proceedir.gs of the
9th Annual Conference of the Archeological Association of the university
of calgary, Archeological Association, Department of Archeology, University
of Calgary, Alberta.
Schwager, C.L. nd. Notes on the ra.leoecology of the Northern Archaic
Tradition. Manuscript on file in the University of Alaska Museum,
Fairbanks, Alaska.
Shinkwin, A.D. 1974. Archeological report: Dekah De'nin's Village.
an early nineteenth century Ahtna village, Chitna, Alaska. Department
of Anthropology, University of Alaska, Fairbanks, Alaska.
Shinkwin, A.D. 1975. The Dixthada site: results of 1971 excavations.
The Western Canadian Journal of Anthropology 5 ( 3-4): 148-158.
Skarland, I . and C. Keim. 1958. Archeological discoveries on the Denal '.
Highway, Alaska. Anthropological Papers of the University of Alaska,
6(2):79-88.
Smith, G.S. and H.M. Shields. 1977. Archeological survey of selected
portions of the proposed Lake Clark National Park: Lake Clark, Lake
Telaquana, Turquoise Lake, Twin Lakes, Fishtrap Lake, Lachbuna Lakes,
and Snipe Lake. Occasional Paper No. 7, Anthropology and Historic
Preservation, Cooperative Park Studies Unit, University of Alaska,
Fairbanks, Alaska.
Townsend, J.B. 1970. Tanaina e~~~ohistory: an example of a method for
the study of culture change . pp . 71 -102 in M. Lantis, ed . Ethnohistory
in Southwestern Alaska and the Southern Yukon. universi ty Press of
Kentucky, Lexington, Kentucky.
Townsend, J.B. 1973. Eighteenth and nineteenth century Eskimos and Indian
movements in southwestern Alaska. Paper presented to the Society for
American Archeology Annual Meeting, San Francisco.
Traganza, A.E. 1964. An archeological survey of Mount McKinley National Park.
Manuscript on file, Mt. McKinley National Park Library, Mt. McKinley
National Park, Alaska.
Valdez News. 7/20/1901.
VanStone, J.W . 1955. Exploring the Copper River country. Pacific
Northwest Quarterly 46(4) :115-123.
VanStone, J .W. 1970 . Ethnohistorical research in southwestern Alaska:
a methocological perspective . pp. 46-49 in M. La ... tis, ed, Ethnohistory
in Southwestern Alaska and the Southern Yukon: Method and content,
University Press of Kentucky, Lexington, Kentucky.
VanStone, J.W. 1974. Athapaskan adaptations. Aldine Publishing Co. Chicago, Ill.
Vitt, •,. 1 973. Hunting practices of the Upper Tanana Indians. M.A. Thesis
Department of An thropo logy, University of Alaska, Fairbanks, Alaska.
West, C.E. 1978. Archeology of the Birches site, Lake Minchumina, Alaska.
M.A. Thesis, Department of Anthropology, University of Alaska, Fairbanks, Alaska.
West, F.H. 1965. Excavation at two sites on the Teklanika River, Mt. McKinley
National Park, Alaska. Report to the National Park Service.
West, F.H. 1967. The Donnelly Ridge site and the definition ~f a early
core and blade complex i n central Alaska . American Antiquity 32(3) :360-382.
West, F.H. 1971. Archeological reconnaissance of Denali State Park, Alaska.
Report to State of Alaska, Division of Parks, Anchorage, Alaska.
West, F.H. 1973. Old World affinities of archeological complexes from Tangle
Lakes, central Alaska. Paper read at the International Conference on t h e
Bering Land Bridge and its Role for the History of Holarctic Floras and
Faunas in the Late Cenozoic, Khabarovsk.
West, F.H. 1975 . Dating the Denali Complex. Arctic Anthropology 12(1) :75-81.
Workman, W.B. 1976. A late prehistoric Ahtna site near Gulkana, Alaska.
Paper presented at the 3rd Annual Conference of the Alaska Anthropological
Association, Anchorage, Alaska.
Workman, W.B . 1977. New data on the radiocarbon chronology of the Kachemak
Bay sequence. Anthropology Papers of the University of Alaska 18(2) :31-36.
Workman, W.B. 1978. Prehistory of the Aishihik-Kluane area, southwest
Yt~on Territory. Mercury Series No . 74, National Museums of Canada, ottawa.
75
Literature Cited Addendum
Ager, T. A. 1975. Late Quaternary environmental history of the Tanana
Valley, Alaska. Ohio State University Institute of Polar Studies,
Report 54, Columbus, Ohio . 117pp.
Clark, G. 1976. Archeological survey and excavat ions in the Copper
River Basin, 1974. (MS). Paper presented at the ~i rd Annual
Meeting of the Alaskan Anthropological Association, March 26-27 ,
Anchorage.
Dumond, D. E. 1979. Eskimo-Indian relations: a view from prehistor/·
Arctic Anthropology 16(2):3-22.
Dumond, D. E. and R. L. Mace. 1968. An archeological survey along
Knik Arm. Anthropological Papers o f the Un iversity of Alaska
14 (1):1-21.
Joint Federal State Land Use Planning Commission for Alaska. 1973.
Major ecosystems of Al aska: ecosystems information . Compiled
by the Joint Federal-State Land Use Planning Commission for Alaska .
Plaskett, D. C. 1977. The Nenana River Gorge Site, a late prehistoric
Athapaskan campsite in Central Alaska. M.A. Thesis, Department of
Anthropology, University of Alaska, Fairbanks, Alaska. 280pp .
76