Laserfiche WebLink
MAY-14-1992 17:12 FROM Mills Associates TO San Joaquin Co P.02 <br /> BUCKEYE RANCH ( 4-1-92 ) 2 <br /> major archaeological site. Present were human , animal and bird <br /> bones , baked clay, two species of freshwater mussel , obsidian and <br /> a variety of other lithic materials . Based on the placement of <br /> these sites by their original recorders ( Schenck and Dawson 19291 <br /> this deposit is probably the location of <br /> tribelet center c I It is now clear that the major <br /> component of Mills and Associates "RIVER SITE" is outside the <br /> boundaries of the Buckeye Ranch oroiect . The midden deaosit <br /> within the probably <br /> that of _ and it is in the approximate location given by <br /> Schenck ana ijawson ( 1929) . This site was not' dug into by Dawson <br /> because he did not consider it to be as large, deep and as <br /> likely to contain human remains compared to <br /> This means that the location of the important riains MiwoX <br /> tribelet center of "SEUA..MNE" is for the most part not within the <br /> project . <br /> The record for the "RIVER SITE" . which was supplied to San <br /> Joaquin County by the archaeological consultants associated with <br /> Mills and Associates . does not meet the standards of the State <br /> Historic Preservation Office and contain numerous errors , <br /> including but not limited to locational information. <br /> The record supplied to San Joaquin County for the "LAKE SITE" <br /> also includes numerous errors in locational <br /> information . In recent years many archaeological resources have <br /> often been lumped. The normal procedure is to assign each <br /> specific location of activity a locus designation so that the <br /> various aspects of the site can be specifically recorded . The <br /> consulting archaeologists in combing several deposits that had <br /> originally been defined as separate entities have obscured rather <br /> than clarified the nature of the cultural resources at the <br /> proposed "LAKE SIT£" . When Dawson visited the project location <br /> in the 1920s he saw it before much of the subsequent levellin <br /> was accomplished. He identified several discrete sites that gad <br /> definable elevations and boundaries and in the case of <br /> . ( "RIVER SITE" ) he excavated at them and treatea each <br /> deposit as separate entities . In addition . however, there is no <br /> indication on the maps on pages 5 through 7 of the site record <br /> ( included in the Phase I Study as part of attachment C) of where, <br /> if any of the midden deposits associated with this site are <br /> located. Also no indicrtion is given on the site records in ' <br /> regard to specifically where Don Mcgeein excavated, even thodgh <br /> he spent time in the field with the investigators . <br /> While there are many well defined structural depressions at some <br /> of the Tracy Lake "SITES" the number shown on the site record is <br /> far from accurate. On the maps 45 "house floors" are depicted <br /> with black circles which apparently represent the approximate <br /> size of the structural depressions ( though they are not drawn to <br /> scale ) . Several depressions observed by this reviewer that might <br /> be archaeological features are not shown on their maps while many <br /> of their identified "house floors" do not appear to be structural <br /> remains . In the field structures are generally identified by the <br /> presence of depressions that are definable and whose depth and <br /> diameter can be measured. It only takes a few minutes to record <br /> this information and every field archaeologist usually has a 30 <br /> meter or longer tape and a two to three meter measuring device as <br /> wel'1 , making this a standard measurement that should and is <br /> usually taken and included in the site data base . This is <br /> ' particularly important information to gather since so few house <br />. pits still exist in Central California. It is also interesting <br /> 11 <br />