Nancy J. Akins and James L. Moore

190 Pages·2012·23.38 MB·English

T E E S
EST XCAVATIONS AT IGHT ITES
S A F ,
AT THE PACEPORT MERICA ACILITY
S C , N M
IERRA OUNTY EW EXICO
Nancy J. Akins and James L. Moore
Office of Archaeological Studies Museum of New Mexico
Archaeology Notes 435
2012

MUSEUM OF NEW MEXICO
OFFICE OF ARCHAEOLOGICAL STUDIES
Test Excavations at Eight Sites at the
Spaceport America Facility, Sierra County, New Mexico
Nancy J. Akins and James L. Moore
with contributions by
Matthew J. Barbour
Donald E. Tatum
Stephen S. Post
Robert Dello-Russo, Ph.D.
Principal Investigators
A N 435
RCHAEOLOGy OTES
S F 2012 N M
ANTA E EW EXICO

Administrative Summary
At the request of the New Mexico Spaceport and LA 112374) were found to contain few surface
Authority (NMSA) of the Economic Development artifacts and no evidence of subsurface deposits,
Department, the Office of Archaeological Studies and are thus recommended as not eligible to the
(OAS), New Mexico Department of Cultural National Register. LA 112371 was found to contain
Affairs, completed testing at eight archaeological more surface and subsurface artifacts than the
sites at Spaceport America in Sierra County, other three sites in this category and exhibits the
New Mexico. The sites are on New Mexico potential to provide significant information on
State Land Office trust land and Bureau of Land the past use of the area. It has been recommended
Management land. All excavation took place only as eligible to the National Register.
on state trust land managed by the New Mexico Three of the sites—LA 111420, LA 111432,
State Land Office. and LA 111429—had been previously determined
Test pits and auger holes were placed at seven as “eligible,” and investigations at these sites
sites—LA 111420, LA 111421, LA 111429, LA assessed areas of potential future disturbance
112370, LA 112371, LA 111432, and LA112374— within either a proposed utility or a road
to assess their nature, extent, condition, and corridor. The data collected during assessment
data potential. In addition, surface-artifact of LA 111420, LA 111432, and LA 111429 has
distributions and features at LA 111429 and confirmed that these sites exhibit considerable
LA 155963 were investigated to aid in selecting potential to provide significant information about
features and artifact concentrations for future the prehistory of the area and should continue to
research-driven excavations. Mechanically be evaluated as eligible to the National Register.
excavated geomorphology trenches were placed Exploration of the research potential exhibited
at all sites except LA 111429. As described in the by LA 111429 and an additional site, LA 155963
pages that follow, while all field and laboratory (also previously determined as eligible to the
procedures and methodologies conformed to the National Register), represented the third goal of
standards outlined in the previously approved the research reported here. Initial investigations
testing plan, three different goals informed the at these sites were designed to aid in planning
approaches employed for the archaeological future research-driven excavations and have
analyses of these sites and the data collected from identified areas for investigations during the next
them (Moore et al. 2010a). phase of excavation.
Investigations at LA 111421, LA 112370,
LA112371, and LA 112374 were designed to MNM Project No. 41.917.
evaluate the sites for National Register eligibility by General Archaeological Investigation Permit for
assessing their nature, extent, condition, and data State Land (NM-10-27-T).
potential. Of these, three (LA 111421, LA 112370, NMCRIS Activity No. 120320.
ADMINISTRATIvE SUMMARy iii

Contents
Administrative Summary ................................................................................................................................iii
1. Introduction .....................................................................................................................................................1
2. The Physical Environment .............................................................................................................................7
3. Overview of the Culture History of the Jornada Mogollon Region ......................................................19
4. Eligibility and Assessment Sites .................................................................................................................51
5. Research Sites ................................................................................................................................................81
6. Chipped Stone Analytic Methods and General Discussion ..................................................................117
7. Euroamerican Artifact Analysis ................................................................................................................129
8. Summary and Recommendations ............................................................................................................133
References Cited ..............................................................................................................................................139
Appendix 1. Summary of Artifact Data .......................................................................................................157
Appendix 2. Summary of Feature Data .......................................................................................................177
Appendix 3. Site Location Information ........................................................................................................183
FIGURES
1.1. Location of Spaceport America in relation to surrounding areas .........................................................2
2.1. Geologic periods and time scale ................................................................................................................8
3.1. Chronological timeline for the project area ............................................................................................20
4.1. LA 111420 site plan, including boundaries proposed by HSR and Zia .............................................52
4.2. The north wall of Test Pit 1, LA 111420 ..................................................................................................54
4.3. LA 111421 site plan, including boundaries proposed by HSR and Zia .............................................58
4.4. Test Pit 3, LA 111421 ..................................................................................................................................60
4.5. LA 111432 site plan, including boundaries proposed by HSR and Zia .............................................62
4.6. The north wall of Test Pit 2, LA 111432 ..................................................................................................64
4.7. LA 112370 site plan, including boundaries proposed by HSR and Zia .............................................67
4.8. Profile of the east wall of Test Pit 4, LA 112370 .....................................................................................69
4.9. LA 112371 site plan, including boundaries proposed by HSR and Zia .............................................72
4.10. Test Pit 3, LA 112371 ................................................................................................................................74
4.11. Profile of the east wall of Test Pit 4, LA 112371 ...................................................................................74
4.12. LA 112374 site plan, including boundaries proposed by HSR and Zia ...........................................77
4.13. Overview of LA 112374 ...........................................................................................................................78
4.14. The north wall of Test Pit 2, LA 112374 ................................................................................................79
4.15. Test Pit 4, LA 112374 ................................................................................................................................80
5.1. LA 111429 site plan, showing boundaries proposed by HSR and Zia ...............................................83
5.2. Detailed plan of the north area of LA 111429 ........................................................................................84
5.3. Detailed plan of the south area of LA 111429. .......................................................................................85
5.4. Profile of the south wall of Test Pit 3, LA 111429 ..................................................................................88
5.5. Test Pit 4, LA 111429, showing thick dune formation over Pleistocene soils ...................................89
5.6. Test Pit 7, LA 111429 ..................................................................................................................................90
5.7. Feature 3, LA 111429, a fire-cracked rock concentration with dispersed scatter ..............................92
5.8. Feature 11, LA 111429, a fire-cracked rock concentration with scatter and stain .............................93
5.9. Paleoindian stone tools recovered during testing .................................................................................96
5.10. LA 155963 site plan ..................................................................................................................................99
5.11. Plan of northwest quadrant, LA 155963 .............................................................................................100
5.12. Plan of southwest quadrant, LA 155963 .............................................................................................101
5.13. Plan of east half, LA 155963 ..................................................................................................................102
5.14. Backhoe trench, showing extent of caliche deposit, LA 155963 ......................................................104
CONTENTS v
5.15. Feature 18, slab-lined feature, LA 155963 ...........................................................................................106
5.16. Feature 43, historic rock pile, LA 155963 ............................................................................................106
5.17. Feature 40, fire-cracked rock in an interdunal location, LA 155963 ...............................................109
5.18. Feature 84, fire-cracked rock with little or no remaining fill, LA 155963 ......................................109
5.19. Feature 14, LA 155963 ............................................................................................................................110
6.1. Polythetic set for defining biface flakes ................................................................................................120
6.2. Number of chipped stone artifact per site plotted against number of tasks represented .............126
7.1. 35 mm motion picture reels, LA 111429 ...............................................................................................130
7.2. Lard cans, LA 155963 ...............................................................................................................................130
7.3. Cartridges and ammunition belt link, LA 155963 ...............................................................................131
A3.1. Site location map, Horizontal Launch Area ......................................................................................188
A3.2. Site location map, Vertical Launch Area. ..........................................................................................189
vI TEST EXCAvATIONS AT SpACEpORT AMERICA
1. Introduction
Nancy J. Akins and James L. Moore
The Office of Archaeological Studies (OAS), New December 2010. James L. Moore was the senior
Mexico Department of Cultural Affairs, tested project director, assisted by Nancy J. Akins and
eight sites at Spaceport America at the request of Matthew J. Barbour. The field crew included
the New Mexico Spaceport Authority (NMSA). Isaiah Coan, Vernon Foster, Guadalupe Martinez,
The investigations followed procedures that were Mary Weahkee, and Karen Wening. Stephen S.
detailed in a testing plan that was approved by Post and Robert Dello-Russo were the principal
the New Mexico State Land Office (SLO) and investigators. Geomorphological investigations
State Historic Preservation Division (Moore were conducted by Stephen A. Hall of Red Rock
et al. 2010a). Work was conducted under the Geological Enterprises.
testing provisions of the General Archaeological
Investigation Permit for State Land (NM 10-27-T).
Spaceport America is in the Jornada del
GENERAL METHODS
Muerto in Sierra County, southeast of Truth or
Consequences and east of Caballo Reservoir (Fig.
A detailed description of field methods can be
1.1). All of the tested sites are on New Mexico
found in the testing plan for this project (Moore
state trust land, with portions of LA 111420
et al. 2010a). Field methods were generally
and LA 111432 falling within Bureau of Land
the same for all sites, though some exceptions
Management (BLM) property. No archaeological
occurred because of unique site conditions.
testing was conducted in portions of these sites
Before excavation began, a professional surveyor
occurring on Bureau of Land Management
established datums and backsights for horizontal
property.
and vertical control. These are plotted in NAD 83
Four of these sites (LA 111421, LA 112370, LA
and do not correspond to the NAD 27 locations
112371, and LA 112374) have an undetermined
used by earlier surveys. The number and
National Register eligibility status, and work at
location of the datums depended on site size and
those locations was conducted primarily to test
topography. All datums consist of 2 ft lengths of
the nature and extent of associated deposits. LA
1/4-inch rebar topped with aluminum caps that
111420 and LA 111432 have been determined
are marked with the site and datum number.
eligible for inclusion on the National Register,
and testing at those locations was conducted to
Mapping
examine the nature and extent of cultural deposits
within the proposed Infrastructure Corridor F, as
Boundaries and artifact densities were
it was termed during the 2007 survey (Quaranta
established for the six smaller sites by a detailed
and Gibbs 2008), and to assess the potential for
search of the site area. Crew members walked
future research-driven excavations. LA 111429
and LA 155963 were also determined eligible closely spaced transects (about 2 m intervals)
for the National Register and are known to have and marked the locations of surface artifacts,
research potential. Most of the effort at these artifact clusters, and features with pinflags.
sites was directed toward recovering information By necessity, the boundaries of the two larger
on features and artifact distributions to aid in sites were determined by examining the artifact
planning research-driven excavations in the distributions and feature locations in the areas
next year (Moore et al. 2010b). In addition, test designated as boundaries by Zia Engineering and
excavations within a buffer zone adjacent to an Environmental Consultants, LLC (Quaranta and
existing road corridor at LA 111429 were used to Gibbs 2008), rather than marking all artifact and
evaluate the nature and extent of deposits within feature locations.
that corridor. A total station was used to produce scaled
Fieldwork took place in November and maps depicting the locations of site datums,
INTRODUCTION 1
Figure 1.1. Location of Spaceport America in relation to surrounding areas.
2 TEST EXCAvATIONS AT SpACEpORT AMERICA