Appendix H: Archaeology

200 Pages·2010·17.55 MB·English

SACO RIVER AND CAMP ELLIS BEACH

SECTION 111 SHORE DAMAGE MITIGATION STUDY

APPENDIX H

REMOTE SENSING ARCHAEOLOGY SURVEY
FINAL TECHNICAL REPORT

FINAL TECHNICAL REPORT

REMOTE SENSING ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY

Camp Ellis Beach
Saco, Maine

Contract No. W912WJ-09-D-0001-0019

Prepared For:
United States Army Corps of Engineers
New England District
696 Virginia Road
Concord, MA 01742

Prepared By:
Fathom Research, LLC
1213 Purchase Street, Ste 315
New Bedford, MA 02740

For:
Woods Hole Group, Inc.
81 Technology Park Drive
East Falmouth, MA 02536

And:
The Public Archaeology Laboratory, Inc.
210 Lonsdale Avenue
Pawtucket, RI 02860

July 2010
This page intentionally left blank
FINAL TECHNICAL REPORT

REMOTE SENSING ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY

CAMP ELLIS BEACH

Saco, Maine

Prepared by:

David S. Robinson, M.A., R.P.A.
Principal Investigator

Fathom Research, LLC
1213 Purchase Street, Suite 315
New Bedford, Massachusetts 02740

Submitted to:

The Public Archaeology Laboratory, Inc.
210 Lonsdale Avenue
Pawtucket, Rhode Island 02860

Woods Hole Group, Inc.
81 Technology Park Drive
East Falmouth, Massachusetts 02536

Prepared for:

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, New England District
696 Virginia Road
Concord, Massachusetts 01742-2751

May 2010

MANAGEMENT ABSTRACT

A systematic remote sensing archaeological survey was performed in November 2009 for the U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers, New England District’s proposed nearshore breakwaters and jetty-spur project study
area at Camp Ellis Beach, Saco, in York County, Maine. The investigation involved archival research,
field survey to record marine geophysical and geotechnical data, and analysis and synthesis of the
research and survey results to assess the Project study area’s archaeological sensitivity and to determine
the presence/absence of prehistoric and historic period submerged archaeological deposits within it. The
survey was authorized and conducted under contract with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, New
England District to comply with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 as
amended (1976, 1980, 1992, 1999) (36 CFR 800).

Performance of the remote sensing archaeological reconnaissance survey resulted in the conclusions that
Project study area:

 possesses a low archaeological sensitivity for containing contextually intact formerly terrestrial
and/or maritime-related submerged prehistoric archaeological deposits and a moderate
archaeological sensitivity for containing submerged historic archaeological deposits, although
contains no previously identified National Register-eligible or listed prehistoric or historic
archaeological properties;

 contains no remote sensingl or geotechnical evidence of contextually intact paleosols with
prehistoric archaeological sensitivity and:

 contains no remote sensing evidence of submerged historic period shipwrecks or maritime
infrastructure.

Based on the results of this study, no further archaeological investigation of the offshore portion of the
proposed Camp Ellis Beach nearshore breakwaters and jetty-spur project area is recommended.
H-i
TABLE OF CONTENTS

1 INTRODUCTION....................................................................................................................................6
Scope.........................................................................................................................................................6
Authority...................................................................................................................................................6
Project Description....................................................................................................................................7
Nature of Study.........................................................................................................................................7
Project Personnel.......................................................................................................................................7
Disposition of Project Materials...............................................................................................................8

2 METHODOLOGY..................................................................................................................................9

3 ENVIRONMENTAL CONTEXT........................................................................................................14
Bedrock Geology....................................................................................................................................15
Surficial Geology....................................................................................................................................15
Marine Transgression and Site Preservation...........................................................................................17
Post-Glacial Environmental Conditions and Human Settlement Patterns..............................................18

4 CULTURAL CONTEXT......................................................................................................................20
Prehistoric Period Culture History..........................................................................................................20
Paleoindian Period (11,500-9500 B.P.)..............................................................................................20
Archaic Period (9500-3000 B.P.)........................................................................................................22
Ceramic Period (3000-450 B.P.).........................................................................................................27
Historic Period Culture History..............................................................................................................28

5 RESULTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS..........................................................................................36
Archival Research Results......................................................................................................................36
Prehistoric Archaeological Sensitivity................................................................................................36
Historic Archaeological Sensitivity....................................................................................................36
Archaeological Field Survey Results......................................................................................................37
Geotechnical Data Review Results.........................................................................................................37
Recommendations...................................................................................................................................38

BIBLIOGRAPHY.....................................................................................................................................39

FIGURES

APPENDICES

A PROJECT SCOPE-OF-WORK

B CRE SURVEY REPORT

C INVENTORY OF SIDE-SCAN SONAR ANOMALIES

D INVENTORY OF MAGNETIC ANOMALIES

E GEI GEOTECHNICAL BORINGS DATA

H-ii
LIST OF TABLES

Table 2-1. Camp Ellis Beach Survey Area Corner Point Coordinates...............................................10

Table 4-1. Maine’s Comprehensive Planning Prehistoric Period Archaeology Study Units.............21
H-iii
LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1-1. General location of the Camp Ellis Beach project area within the State of Maine (source:
Fathom 2010).

Figure 3-1. Excerpt of USGS quadrangle map showing Camp Ellis Beach project survey area
location at the mouth of the Saco River, Saco, Maine (source: Fathom 2010).

Figure 3-2. Approximate limit of the marine invasion of land following the recession of the
Wisconsin glaciations (source: Kendall 1996:33).

Figure 3-3. Relative sea-level curve for the coast of Maine for the last 14,000 years (source: Crock et
al. 1993).

Figure 4-1. Samuel de Champlain’s 1605 map showing a Native American settlement at the mouth of
the Saco River, Saco, Maine (source: Bourque 2001:116).

Figure 4-2. Map of native tribal territories and European trading posts and settlements 1620-1676
(source: Bourque 2001:130).

Figure 4-3. Map of the original landholdings of the Saco settlement along the east bank of the Saco
River during the early eighteenth century (source: Owen 1891).

Figure 5-1. Bathymetric contours (0.5 ft contour interval) as recorded within the Camp Ellis Beach
project survey area (source: CRE 2009).

Figure 5-2. Side-scan sonar mosaic with inventoried side-scan sonar anomalies and NAE’s proposed
breakwater and jetty-spur structures (source: CRE 2009).

Figure 5-3. Sunken modern geotechnical boring drill-barge and displaced drill bits within the Camp
Ellis Beach project survey area (source: NAE 2009).

Figure 5-4. Ambient magnetic field strength, survey vessel track lines, side-scan sonar and
magnetometer anomaly locations and the NAE’s proposed breakwater and jetty-spur
structures (source: CRE 2009).

Figure 5-5. Contoured acoustic basement depths (2 ft contour interval) as recorded along sub-bottom
profile transects “A” and “B” where substantial acoustic penetration was achieved with
the 10 kHz sub-bottom profiler (source: CRE 2009).

Figure 5-6. Representative examples of 10 kHz sub-bottom profiles recorded in the Camp Ellis
Beach project survey area (source: CRE 2009).
H-iv