ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY OF BANDERA CITY PARK, BANDERA COUNTY, TEXAS

Similar documents
ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY FOR PROPOSED LANDFILL EXPANSION (PHASE I), CITY OF DEL RIO, VAL VERDE COUNTY, TEXAS

AN ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY FOR THE DCP MIDSTREAM THREE RIVERS PLANT TO CGP 51 PROJECT IN LIVE OAK COUNTY, TEXAS

December 13, Kirk Shields Green Mountain Power 163 Acorn Lane Colchester, VT 05446

AN ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY FOR THE EASTHAM STATE PRISON FARM UNIT PROJECT IN HOUSTON COUNTY TEXAS

ADDITIONAL PHASE IA ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY FOR THE UMORE PARK SAND AND GRAVEL MINING ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW SERVICES, DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA

ARCHAEOLOGICAL TESTING (PHASE II) OF PREHISTORIC SITE 41 BX 785 FOR THE WEST SALADO CREEK OUTFALL PROJECT, BEXAR COUNTY, TEXAS

Archaeological Survey and Assessment of Four Wastewater Interceptor Routes in Garner, Wake Co., N.C. (EPA C )

PW Parkway ES Prince William County, Virginia WSSI #

RE: End of Field Letter for the Proposed Milton Mears Farm Road Solar Project, Milton, Chittenden County, Vermont

THE TWO MOST SIGNIFICANT ARCHEOLOGICAL SITES IN KERR COUNTY, TEXAS ARE THE GATLIN SITE AND THE BEARING SINK HOLE SITE.

Archaeological Test Excavations at 41KF118 Kaufman County, Texas

THE CROOKS GAP HOUSEPIT SITE AND OTHER NEARBY MID-HOLOCENE HOUSEPITS

ARCHAEOLOGICAL ASSESSMENTS FOR THE SAN ANTONIO 201 WASTEWATER TREATMENT PROJECT: SURVEYS OF FIVE PIPELINE ROUTES AND TESTING AT SITE 41 BX 333

Appendix I-1: Archaeological Records Search

4.11 CULTURAL RESOURCES

NORTHWEST MENARD COUNTY, TEXAS Prepared for the City of Menard

AN HISTORICAL AND ARCHAEOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT OF THE PROPOSED SAN ANTONIO BOTANICAL CENTER. Stephen L. Black

Table 9. FAI accession log

Archaeological Monitoring of Construction of a Six-Inch Force Main Sewer over Lookout Creek, Chattanooga, Hamilton County, Tennessee

Archaeological Survey and Evaluation at 8954 El Dorado Parkway, El Cajon, San Diego County, California

AN ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY OF THE PROPOSED VETERANS RETIREMENT HOME PROJECT IN CENTRAL SOMERVELL COUNTY, TEXAS. Texas Antiquities Permit Number 2950

An Archaeological Survey of Friedrich Park, Bexar County, Texas

4.3 CULTURAL RESOURCES

LONG PRESTON DEEPS, RIBBLESDALE, NORTH YORKSHIRE

CASE STUDY #9 - Brushy Fork Dam, Sugar Grove, West Virginia

Archaeological Investigations at the Landa Park Golf Course Pro Shop, New Braunfels, Comal County, Texas

SURVEY AND TESTING AT THE PROPOSED DOS RIOS WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT, SOUTH BEXAR COUNTY, TEXAS. San Antonio 201 Wastewater Treatment Project

The Geology of Sebago Lake State Park

A River Runs Through It

Sacred Lands File & Native American Contacts List Request

Remote Sensing and Geographic Information System (GIS) Based Analysis of Historic Resources

STRUCTURAL STABILITY ASSESSMENT

COLORADO CULTURAL RESOURCE SURVEY Management Data Form Rev. 11/10

Starting at Rock Bottom: A Peculiar Central Texas PreClovis Culture

CHAPTER 4. Blue Heron Site (47Je1001) 2003 Investigations. By Chrisie L. Hunter

Additional Testing for Padre Dam Eastern Service Area Secondary Connection- Alternative Site Location, San Diego County, California

ARCHAEOLOGICAL MONITORING AT THREE PREHISTORIC LOCALES IN ZAPATA COUNTY, TEXAS. Joseph H. Labadie

APPENDIX 3B OCCURRENCE OF SIGNIFICANT RIVER ALLUVIUM AQUIFERS IN THE PLATEAU REGION

Appendix 7A. Cultural Resources Documentation

David Moore, PacifiCorp Cultural Resources Coordinator Denise DeJoseph, Project Archaeologist

EEEEEEE. 7 nd-a1?2 ii7 STATEMENT OF NEGATIVE FINDINGS ON THE TEST EXCAVATIONS 1;1

Four Beetles Project Mendocino National Forest

AN ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY FOR THE COLEMAN COUNTY SPECIAL UTILITY DISTRICT PHASE 7 WATER LINE PROJECT IN COLEMAN COUNTY TEXAS

MINNESOTA DEEP TEST PROTOCOL PROJECT

A CULTURAL RESOURCES SURVEY FOR CITY OF NATALIA WASTEWATER IMPROVEMENT PROJECT IN MEDINA COUNTY, TEXAS

DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF STREAM CONDITIONS AND HABITAT TYPES IN REACH 4, REACH 5 AND REACH 6.

Glacial Geology of Moose Point State Park, ME

City of Lockport Historic Resources Survey - Section METHODOLOGY

MEANDER MIGRATION MODEL ASSESSMENT FOR THE JANUARY 2005 STORM, WHITMAN PROPERTY, SAN ANTONIO CREEK, VENTURA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA

1.0 PURPOSE AND FORMAT OF THE FINAL EIR

Evaluation/Monitoring Report No. 152

Which map shows the stream drainage pattern that most likely formed on the surface of this volcano? A) B)

THE BERRYESSA CREEK SITE CA-SCL-593. Robert Cartier Richard San Filippo Archeological Resource Management 496 North Fifth Street San Jose, CA 95112

ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY OF THE PROPOSED UVALDE SANITARY LANDFILL AREA, UVALDE COUNTY, TEXAS. H. Ray Smith

CHAPTER 12 Archaeological Survey at Quinney Farm and Papcke Fields, Walworth County by Jocelyn Boor, Kira Kaufmann, Robert J.

Hydrogeological Assessment for Part of Lots 2 and 3, Concession 5, Township of Thurlow, County of Hastings 1.0 INTRODUCTION. 1.

3.12 Geology and Topography Affected Environment

HISTORY OF CONSTRUCTION FOR EXISTING CCR SURFACE IMPOUNDMENT PLANT GASTON ASH POND 40 CFR (c)(1)(i) (xii)

Gateway Trail Project

Archaeological Survey of the Crystal City Municipal Landfill Extension, Zavala County, Texas

Chapter 5 LiDAR Survey and Analysis in

SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIAL

The Upper Paleolithic Longwangcan Site at Yichuan in Shaanxi

FUTURE MEANDER BEND MIGRATION AND FLOODPLAIN DEVELOPMENT PATTERNS NEAR RIVER MILES 241 TO 235, SACRAMENTO RIVER

Prehistoric Hunter-Gatherers in the Savage River Uplands, Denali National Park and Preserve

Archaeological Testing of 41BXl131 at O. R. Mitchell Dam, Bexar County, Texas

A Phase I Archaeological Survey of Muir Knoll, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Dane County, Wisconsin

IV. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS E. GEOLOGY AND SOILS

Starting at Rock Bottom

Clyde River Landslide

KRIS wsbssm. IBHiiilll

The last three sections of the main body of this report consist of:

Name: Which rock layers appear to be most resistant to weathering? A) A, C, and E B) B and D

IV. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS E. GEOLOGY AND SOILS

Archaeological Survey of the Proposed Uvalde Sanitary Landfill Area, Uvalde County, Texas

STAAR Science Tutorial 40 TEK 8.9C: Topographic Maps & Erosional Landforms

FUTURE MEANDER BEND MIGRATION AND FLOODPLAIN DEVELOPMENT PATTERNS NEAR RIVER MILES 200 TO 191 OF THE SACRAMENTO RIVER PHASE III REPORT

Archaeological Survey of the Proposed Medina River Park, Bexar County, Texas

Chapter 3 Erosion in the Las Vegas Wash

Hydric Rating by Map Unit Harrison County, Mississippi

Soil Map Boulder County Area, Colorado (Planet Blue Grass) Web Soil Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey

The subject paper is being submitted for approval for publication in the annual volume entitled Geological Survey Research.

ADDENDA #1 CONTRACT # C May 3, 2013 Page 1 of 1

Erosion and Deposition

An Archaeological Assessment of the San Antonio 201 Wastewater Treatment Project

MAPS AND THEIR CLASSIFICATION

Preliminary Geotechnical Evaluation Gooseberry Point Pedestrian Improvements Whatcom County, Washington SITE AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION

Laboratory Exercise #3 The Hydrologic Cycle and Running Water Processes

Geospatial Data Model for Archaeology Site Data

Hydric Rating by Map Unit Harrison County, Mississippi. Web Soil Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey

Cattaraugus Creek: A Story of Flowing Water and the Geology of the Channel It Flows Through Presentation to West Valley Citizen Task Force 4/27/16

Selected Archeological Terms

EAGLES NEST AND PIASA ISLANDS

Fluvial Features of the Arkansas River and Floodplain near Dardanelle, Arkansas

New Mexico Register / Volume XVI, Number 15 / August 15, 2005

Carex nudata, a native sedge, as facilitator of restoration goals following passive restoration

Discovery and Occurrence

Waterbury Dam Disturbance Mike Fitzgerald Devin Rowland

2007 Raleigh Colony Investigation: Magnetic Anomaly Identification & Assessment Roanoke Sound and Shallowbag Bay Roanoke Island, North Carolina

Stratigraphy Layers of Time in the Earth by Carol Schlenk

Transcription:

ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY OF BANDERA CITY PARK, BANDERA COUNTY, TEXAS Ronald W. Burkett I / Center for Archaeological Research The University of Texas at San Antonio Archaeological Survey Report, No. 183 1989

ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY OF BANDERA CITY PARK, BANDERA COUNTY, TEXAS Ronald W. Burkett Submitted to Raymond Adamietz, Mayor City of Bandera Texas Antiquities Committee Permit No. 726 Center for Archaeological Research The University of Texas at San Antonio Archaeological Survey Report, No. 183 1989

The following information is provided in accordance with the General Rules of Practice and Procedure, Chapter 41.11 (Investigative Reports), Texas Antiquities Committee: 1. Type of investigation: survey and limited subsurface testing; 2. Project name: Bandera City Park; 3. County: Bandera; 4. Principal investigator: Jack D. Eaton; 5. Name and location of sponsoring agency: Office of the Mayor, City of Bandera, Texas; 6. Texas Antiquities Committee Permit No. 726; 7. Prepared by the Center for Archaeological Research, The University of Texas at San Antonio, 78258-0658, 1989. A list of publications offered by the Center for Archaeological Research can be obtained by sending $1.00 to the Center for Archaeological Research, The University of Texas at San Antonio, Texas 78285-0658.

ABSTRACT On September 23, 1988, a cultural resources survey was conducted within the proposed boundaries of, Bandera City Park, Bandera County, Texas. The archaeological survey was conducted in accordance with the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended, and the Texas Antiquities Code. As a result of a systematic pedestrian survey of the planned ISO-acre park, one prehistoric site (41 BN 94) was identified. Because of the extensive natural disturbance to the locale, no further work is recommended at site 41 BN 94. It is not considered potentially eligible for nomination to the National Register of Historic Places or as a State Archeological Landmark.

TABLE OF CONTENTS ABSTRACT... i LIST OF FIGURES... ii INTRODUCTION... 1 DESCRIPTION OF THE STUDY AREA... 1 HISTORICAL BACKGROUND... 1 ARCHAEOLOGICAL BACKGROUND... 1 FIELD METHODS... '... 1 DESCRIPTION OF SITE 41 BN 94 '"... 3 SUMMARY... 3 REFERENCES CITED... 3 LIST OF FIGURES 1. The Survey Area and Site 41 BN 94... 2 11

INTRODUCTION On September 23, 1988, personnel from the Center for Archaeological Research, The University of Texas at San Antonio (CAR-UTSA), conducted a pedestrian archaeological survey and limited shovel testing at the lso-acre proposed Bandera City Park, Bandera County, Texas (Fig. 1). The work was conducted under contract between the City of Bandera and the CAR-UTSA. The purpose of the survey was to determine whether any cultural resources existed within the proposed park boundaries, and if there were, would they be suitable for nomination to the National Register of Historic Places and to be designated as a State Archeological Landmark. The investigation was carried out by Ronald W. Burkett and Clint Mc-. Kenzie of the Center staff. The project was conducted under Texas Antiquities Committee Permit No. 726. All work was completed under the general direction of Jack D. Eaton, acting director of the Center. All field notes, photographs, and drawings pertaining to this project are on file at the CAR-UTSA. DESCRIPTION OF THE STUDY AREA The study area is a 150-acre tract located within the city limits of Bandera. The park will comprise a 4 km inside curve of a horseshoe bend formed by the modem channel of the Medina River (Fig. 1). Approximately 65% of the park is situated in or alongside the northern bank of the current river channel, while the rest is some 6 to 10 m higher in elevation, but is still within the 1oo-year floodplain. Physiographically, the river channel and adjacent lowlands are within the Orif-Karnes Association (United States Department of Agriculture 1977). These areas are subject to short-term flooding several times a year in most years. Slopes are nearly level to undulating within short distances and are subject to change with each flood. There is some limestone outcropping and large expanses of exposed gravels and gravel bars. Soils are a calcareous fme sandy loam that contain in excess of35% waterworn limestone pebbles. The portion of the proposed park that is located on the higher river terrace is, or was, alluvium formed Frio Series calcareous, clayey soil. Either because of overgrazing or other modem alteration, much of this soil has eroded leaving a silty clay with a high density of waterworn limestone pebbles and chert cobbles. It is on this type of surface that the one prehistoric occupational site (41 BN 94) was found (Fig. 1). HISTORICAL BACKGROUND Bandera County was created out of Bexar CountY in 1856 and was named for the Bandera Mountains located in the northern part of the county. The first settlers were shingle makers who had settled on the Medina River in 1852. They laid out the town of Bandera in 1853, and this town eventually became the county seat. A sawmill was built to process lumber and shingles made out of the cypress trees that grew along the river and the other streams in the area. In 1854, a Mormon colony settled in the town and, in 1855, 16 Polish families arrived to work in the sawmill (Webb 1952). The county continued to grow slowly and by the 1980 census had a population of 7084. Today, lumber products are still manufactured in Bandera, but 95% of the county's income is derived from agriculture. Agricultural activities are primarily the production of beef cattle, sheep, goats, and poultry (Kingston, editor 1983). ARCHAEOLOGICAL BACKGROUND The Bandera City Park site lies within the southwestern portion of the archaeological region known as central Texas (Suhm 1960; Weir 1976; Prewitt 1981). Although there are well over 400 archaeological sites recorded for Bandera County (only about 75 sites are registered in the Smithsonian Trinomial System), none are in the near vicini!)' of the city of Bandera (Labadie 1987). Therefore, the archaeology of the study area is poorly known. Research has shown that prehistoric. peoples have occupied Bandera County from as early as the Paleo-Indian period. However, the majority of recorded sites that have been dated are from the Archaic period. Background on the region can be found in a report by Black and McGraw (1985). An archaeological review of Bandera County will be included in. a report on site 41 BN 33 being prepared by the State Department of Highways and Public Transportation (Henderson, personal communication). FIELD METHODS The survey was conducted following the guidelines suggested by Hester, Heizer, and Graham (1975) and the guidelines of the Council of Texas Archeologists (1987). Survey methods varied as dictated by terrain. An effort was made to reach all accessible portions of the present river channel, although large segments of the river bottom could not be effectively surveyed because of accumulations of flood debris and densely tangled

This page has been redacted because it contains restricted information.

vegetation. All dirt roads, trails, and tracks in the river bottom and leading down to the river bottom were examined for eroding cultural materials. None were found. The relatively level terrace between First and Third Streets and Pecan and Maple Streets was surveyed by 15-m intervals. This resulted in the identification of one site (41 BN 94) immediately to the southwest of the intersection of Hackberry and Second Streets. The results of one shovel test (50 cm 2 dug to a depth of 40 cm) were negative. Additionally, two 50-cm 2 shovel tests were made in the area designated to be the visitor's center to the west of Cypress Street. Shovel test results were negative. Though there was no surface indication of cultural deposits, this is an area scheduled for construction activity. DESCRIPTION OF SITE 41 BN 94 A single site was recorded during the survey. The following description is based on surface examination and one 50-cm 2 shovel test. Type of Site: Prehistoric workshop area Dimensions: The estimated site appears to be approximately 25 x 60 m, with the long axis running northwest to southeast. Location: The site runs alongside and parallel to Second Street immediately across from its intersection with Hackberry Street, just north of the Medina River. Topographic Context: The site is located on a relatively flat area on a river terrace. There is no outstanding topographic feature associated with the site. Elevation: Approximately 1230 feet above mean sea level (msl) Water Source: The site is located on a terrace 125 m from the Medina River. Vegetation and Soil: The area of the site location has been cleared in the past and is now covered with low-growing native grasses and some juniper. The soil is composed of a medium brown silt with a high percentage of waterworn limestone pebbles and chert cobbles 2-5 cm in diameter. Condition: The site is extensively disturbed. In addition to erosion, Second Street was built over part of the site. A residence was built just southeast of the site to replace an earlier one destroyed in the flood of 1978. The site area has been subjected to both extensive natural disturbance in the form of fluvial calcareous deposits and more modern colluvial slope wash. Discussion: The site'is identified as a low density lithic scatter, overlaying an area about 25 x 60 m. Lithic debris is estimated at approximately a single fragment per 25 m 2 This site is immediately adjacent to and appears to be cut by Second Street. The scat- ter is composed of fire-reddened limestone, chert cobbles and debitage. Recovered were 27 primary, secondary, and tertiary chert flakes; two cores; two percussion-flaked scrapers; and three flakes exhibiting edge utilization. None of the chert fragments showed evidence of being waterworn. These cultural materials are permanently stored at the CAR-UTSA. SUMMARY There is no evidence that 41 BN 94 was anything other than a temporary lithic processing center or ephemeral (temporary) occupational site. No diagnostic artifacts were recovered, and no'features were noted. Between the erosion of the topsoil, the deflation of the assemblage, and the impact of the construction of Second Street and the adjacent residence, it is extremely doubtful that any significant conclusions may be drawn from the existing scattered lithic debris. It is possible, given the location, that a more deeply buried site could be present in the vicinity. Therefore it is recommended that should buried cultural resources be uncovered during developments, the Texas Antiquities Committee should be contacted. Site 41 BN 94 is not considered eligible for nomination to the National Register of Historic Places or to be designated as a State Archeological Landmark. REFERENCES CITED Black, S. L. and A. J. McGraw 1985 The Panther Springs Creek Site: Cultural Change and Continuity Within the Upper Salado Creek Watershed, South-Central Texas. Center for Archaeological Research, The University of Texas at San Antonio, Archaeological Survey Reporl 100. Council of Texas Archeologists 1987 Guidelines for Professional Performance Standards. Hester, T. R, R F. Heizer, and J. A. Graham 1975 Field Methods in Archaeology. 6th edition. Mayfield Publishing Company, Palo Alto, California. Kingston, M. T., editor 1983 Texas Almanac. Dallas Morning News, Dallas. 3

Labadie, J. H. 1987 A Reconnaissance of Electrical Transmission Line Rights-of-Way in Bandera and Kerr Counties, Texas. Center for Archaeological Research, The University of Texas at San Antonio, Archaeological Survey Report 164. 1981 Cultural Chronology in Central Texas. Bul-. letin of the Texas Archeological Society 52:65-89. Suhm,D.A. 1960 A Review of Central Texas Archeology. Bulletin of the Texas Archeological Society 29:63-108. United States Department of Agriculture 1977 Soil Survey of Bandera County, Texas. Webb,W.P. 1952 The Handbook of Texas. Twovolumes. The Texas State Historical Association, Austin. Weir,F.A. 1976 The Central Texas Archaic. Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Anthropology, Washington State University, Pullman. University Microfilms, Ann Arbor. 4