Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCultural Resources Survey & Assessment_Lick Creek Park INTERIM REPORT CULTURAL RESOURCES SURVEY AND ASSESSMENT OF LICK CREEK PARK, COLLEGE STATION, TEXAS (Texas Antiquity Permit No. 2305) Submitted to: Mr. Stephen C. Beachy Director, Parks and Recreation Department City of College Station P.O. Box 9960, College Station, Texas 77842 Telephone: [979] 764-3773; FAX: [979] 764-3737 Prepared by: Alston V. Thorns, Ph.D., Principal Investigator and J. Bryan Mason, Research Assistant Center for Ecological Archaeology Texas A&M University College Station, Texas 77843-4352 Submitted through: Texas Engineering Experiment Station The Texas A&M University System College Station, Texas 77843-4352 August 31, 2000 Center for Ecological Archaeology Texas A&M University College Station, Texas 77843-4352 INTERIM REPORT: CUTURAL RESOURCES SURVEY AND ASSESSMENT OF LICK CREEK PARK, COLLEGE STATION,TEXAS Alston V. Thorns and J. Bryan Mason This interim report presents results of an intensive archaeological survey of Lick Creek Park, a mostly undeveloped 527-acre city park located in southern College Station, Brazos County, Texas (Figure 1). Work reported herein was conducted by staff and students at the Center for Ecological Archaeology(CEA), Texas A&M University(TAMU), working through the Texas Engineering Experiment Station(TEES) and under contract to the City of College Station(City Project No. PK9952 and TEES No. C00-00095). Survey and reporting standards follow those established by the Texas Historical Commission(THC), described in the scope of work, and incorporated into Texas Antiquity Peiuiit No. 2305 for the present project. Natural and Cultural Setting The Lick Creek Park project area and vicinity are within the Post Oak Savannah ecological zone. The park can be divided into three main landscape types: upland woods, sandy prairies, and a floodplain forest. Lick Creek Park is drained by both Alum and Lick Creeks whose waters flow into the Navasota River. Deer, rabbits, and, at times, bison, along with native roots, fruits, and nuts, would have been the main food resources for Native Americans. Alternatively, Euroamericans used most of the region as pasturage for livestock and many acres were cultivated, especially along major watercourses. Oak, elm, and native pecan trees with an understory of yaupon make up the vegetation in the upland woods, while prickly pear and little bluestem inhabit small, natural clearings scattered throughout the timberland. Larger open areas are characterized as sandy prairies. These prairies retain their natural vegetation and are filled with brushy and little bluestem. The sandy prairies also contain an abundance of lily and iris family plants such as yellow star grass, blue-eyed grass, copper lily, spring beauty, and false garlic; all these plants have nutritious bulbs or corms that are known to be food sources for Native Americans. Because of their use as pasturage and possibly some agriculture, invader species, such as bitterweed, Croton capitatus, and silver-leaf nightshade are also present. Leading to the floodplain,the terrace slopes of Lick and Alum Creeks support both upland and lowland trees and plants. The floodplain forest contains trees and plants more suited to a wetter environment, such as water oak, cedar, elm, and orchids. It is dissected by small rivulets, old channels, and ox-bows,that hold water during the wet season and occasionally year round. Sedge meadows occur in the wettest parts of the floodplain and consist of an open carpet made up almost entirely of cherokee sedge shaded by water oaks and cedar elms. Soils in the uplands have sandy A and E horizons, varying in depth from 10 to 100 cm, above a gravelly clayey sand Bt horizon,usually less than a meter thick. The Bt horizon is usually 1 tia`es. HO �Np --geek l 1 ,I �i I 44- I CO 70 �I ® \\ I \� 21, U) G9/ 6 BRYAN w s "ksoo ( 1 `)--C 31 1■►. I \\\cee e4)SR) /).6\ / \ \\\ I ( / l / yI I\\ I / 21 8181 1 I P \ r 1,------ s %,. to I : `'7 , Lick ` Creek River �_ [ v 60 Lick `Creek ��COLLEGE \ '�/ Park ''� I L— STATION °/ \°`eek 1 p°i I 0 O c Creek W "P 2154 G'A� 970 N Ia �. ��� ,c.-? MILLICAN —_' Riv ' River L_,-- r) 0 10 20km 1 �di l' ' era ` North 'O �� 0 5 10mi s Figure 1.Map of Brazos County showing the location of Lick Creek Park. underlain by a layer of gravel followed by sandstone bedrock that forms the C horizon. Archaeological material in the uplands will be confined to the sandy mantle above the Bt horizon as has been shown in similar settings within the Post Oak Savannah. Natural outcrops of sandstone and chert cobbles,both prime materials used by Native Americans, occur along the terrace slopes. The soils in the floodplain consist of alluvial clays and silts that have a potential to contain buried archaeological sites. There is ample evidence that Brazos County, including the upland area that surrounds the park, was occupied by Native American people long before the arrival of European and African explorers and immigrants. Chipped-stone projectile points and other tools, along with animal bones and the remains of cooking hearths and earth ovens found throughout the region are evidence of its habitation during the past 12,000 or more years. Remains of a butchered mammoth were found along the Brazos River a few miles northwest of College Station,but most archaeological sites in the region yield deer and rabbit bones. Accounts from the Spanish Colonial era report that bison were hunted by Native Americans in this area(ca. 1685 - 1830), although very few archaeological sites in the Post Oak Savannah region have yielded bison remains. Charred remains of nuts and roots that date to the last few thousand years have also been found at archaeological sites in the region. Archaeological sites are found throughout the Post Oak Savannah, along rivers and streams, as well as in upland settings a mile or more from permanent water. They are especially common on terraces and gentle slopes above tributary streams. These are also the parts of the landscape where early-day French and Spanish explorers reported Indian encampments. All the prehistoric sites discovered during this survey were situated along the terrace edge overlooking Lick and Alum creeks. Land-Use during the Historic Era People of European and African ancestry first settled Texas more than 300 years ago,but it is only within the last 175 years or so that they settled the area around College Station. By 1850, they had displaced the local Indian populations. Throughout much of the 1800s,the uplands, including the area where College Station is located, served as pasture land for herds of cattle and horses. In the late 1800s, many of the prairie patches were placed in cultivation, but the sandy soils were soon depleted, and cultivated fields were converted to pasture land. By the 1950s most of the uplands once again served as pasturage. Portions of Lick Creek Park were utilized during the historic era for both farming and ranching. Rock Prairie Road runs along the north border of the park and has been used for at least 100 years. There is evidence of other roads running through the park and two iron bridges cross both Lick and Alum Creeks near the southwestern edge of the park. Three historic sites were identified during the park survey. One of them is visible on an aerial photo from 1940. None of the historic sites have intact structures, but they all contain evidence of such structures in 2 the form of sandstone piers, a chimney fall, stock ponds, or historic trash dumps. These historic sites date from the late 19th century through to the mid-20th century. Field Methods Surface survey, shovel probes, and mapping began at Lick Creek Park in February 2000 and continued on an intermittent basis through July 2000. A total of 15 person days was spent surveying the 527 acre tract. The intent of the surface survey work at Lick Creek Park was to search for pieces of chipped stone and other Native American artifacts, as well as historic artifacts (e.g., metal, ceramic and glass items and fragments thereof). Artifacts found during surface surveys were recorded, but not collected. Where 70 percent or more of the mineral soil (i.e., bare ground)was obscured by vegetation, subsurface deposits were examined around rodent burrows and tree tip-ups or by excavating shovel probes. Shovel probes were hand dug, about 30 cm in diameter, and from 20 to 100 cm deep, depending upon the depth at which the Bt horizon (culturally sterile) was encountered. The backdirt was screened through 1/4 inch hardware cloth to recover buried artifacts. All artifacts recovered from shovel probes were collected. Cutbanks along Lick and Alum Creek were also carefully inspected for cultural material and were helpful in determining the geological history of the park. Figure 2 illustrates the survey area, the location of shovel probes and cutbank inspections as well as site locations. The frequency and placement of shovel probes varied throughout the park according to a given area's potential to contain archaeological sites. Along the historical Rock Prairie Road,the survey consisted of one 60-meter-wide transect with shovel probes spaced 60 meters apart (equivalent to one probe per acre). A total of 15 shovel probes was dug along Rock Prairie Road. Settings in the upland environment located away from the road were determined to have decreased probability for archaeological sites. The shovel probe grid in this area was expanded to one probe per three acres (i.e., at intersections of an approximately 120 m grid). The landscape also provided ample opportunity to inspect the surface on trails and in clearings, as well as to observe the subsurface along gullies, in tree tip-ups, and rodent burrows. A total of 21 shovel probes was excavated in this area. Since terrace edges are considered areas of high probability for archaeological sites, a more intensive survey was conducted in these settings. Many gullies dissect the terrace and, as a result of depositional and erosional processes, have created toe slopes. The examination of these gullies as well as surface surveys where natural outcrops of sandstone and chert were located made up a large part of the survey in this area. Shovel probes were also dug along the tops of each of these toe slopes at an interval that translated to a 180 m grid. A total of 15 preliminary shovel probes was excavated in this area. Of these probes,three yielded pieces of chipped stone. A fourth positive shovel probe yielded historic artifacts that dated to the turn of the century; however, the associated site was better defined by surface deposits of cultural material. An additional 37 shovel probes was excavated radially around the positive probes to determine the 3 extent of artifact concentrations; 16 of those were also positive. Due to the nature of the depositional process,there is a high potential for buried archaeological sites occurring on the floodplain of Lick and Alum Creeks. Shovel probes assessed the upper meter of deposits. Thirty-one locations along the creeks were profiled to create exposures and search for cultural material in the upper 2 to 3 meters of deposits. Forty- one shovel probes were dug on a 120 m grid and tree tip ups and rodent burrows were carefully examined for artifacts. No artifacts were recovered during the floodplain survey. Survey Results A total of 160 shovel probes and cutbank profiles was inspected at Lick Creek Park; 20 shovel probes contained artifacts. These shovel probes, along with surface surveys, resulted in the identification of four prehistoric sites-41BZ141, 41BZ144, 41BZ145, and 41 BZ 146—and three historic sites-41BZ142, 41BZ143, and 41BZ147. Site 41BZ144 consisted of three concentrations of chipped stone occurring along the terrace edge along Lick Creek. Two concentrations (B and C in Figure 3)were identified using shovel probes; artifacts were found at depths between 20 and 80 cm. The other concentration area(A in Figure 3) is a surface find located where the sandstone and chert cobbles naturally erode from the terrace edge. The entire site covers an area approximately 580 x 50 m in size. Chert flakes (primary, secondary, and heated)were the only artifacts recovered from this site. The majority of the flakes are primary flakes indicating that this may have served as a lithic procurement site. No tools were recovered from the site. Site 41BZ146 (Figure 4) is represented only by artifacts from shovel probes. It covers an area about 50 x 10 m in size along the lower part of the terrace slope of Lick Creek. Primary and secondary flakes were recovered, but no tools were found. This site is best described as a possible prehistoric campsite given the high ratio of secondary and tertiary flakes to primary flakes. Site 41BZ141 is a surface site located on the terrace slope where natural outcrops of sandstone and chert cobbles occur. This site is a lithic procurement and initial reduction area that is approximately 20 x 20 m in size. Portions of the site are found on either side of a buried pipeline. Approximately 50 percent of the site was destroyed by pipeline construction. Artifacts at the site include an early stage biface, flakes and tested cobbles. Artifacts were not collected from this site. Site 41BZ145 is located on the top of a bench-like landform overlooking Lick Creek. This bench is unique in that it is an area devoid of trees and most other vegetation because the sandstone bedrock is near the surface. It is a natural outcrop of both sandstone and chert cobbles approximately 30 x 30 m in size that served as a lithic procurement area and initial reduction site. Flakes,tested cobbles, and cores were observed, but no tools were found. 4 CH ' . ' \\, 11 --------_,,s), ( ' 444444 .44,417 S OSSN.. 1 DIMMWOM =NEM INUMSNEM IROMESILI lanitiftsi unlawas natumma rowstem mama 0 0 • \\44, 0 0( 0 0 6(0 0 0 (//\/-- -7., :::0areleaft /R/1------:":"!",ft, 6-- 0 0 / 0 0 ,i- o Negative shovel probe """"m° .... Site boundary 0 Positive shovel probe - --- Artifact concentration 0 \ 60 120m Al lh . Shovel probe-considered Creek - North $::: ::::t positive in field,negative in lab --------. Treeline 0 200- 400ft s Surface survey :--"" , Trail PREPARED BY TAMU RECREATION&PARKS DEPT. \ AND PARKS PLANNING/CITY OF COLLEGE STATION 9 " MODIFIED BY:THE CENTER FOR ECOLOGICAL ARCHAEOLOGY ion b,,9 ' College itation l' ‘.„ TEXAS A&M UNIVERSITY,AUGUST 2000 Figure 3.Map of archaeological site 41BZ144 showing shovel probes dug and artifact concentration areas identified. 7 ; ___./ I o I � , 0 0 ' 1 S WATER ( / '' NT \ LANiT /, \ /� CONCRETE \/ I H f-2 II Positive shovel probe 0 ---,-_ O Negative shovel probe Archaeological site boundary Treeline ! L_icy<cRE l- --' /-__- Road/Trail �- ,-- — Creek ' PREPARED BY TAMU RECREATION&PARKS DEPT. AND PARKS PLANNING/CITY OF COLLEGE STATION MODIFIED BY:THE CENTER FOR ECOLOGICAL ARCHAEOLOGY / TEXAS A&M UNIVERSITY,AUGUST 2000 0 30 60m / III I', i,, it ! m-tarks& / North ecreation -0 0 100 200ft , College Station , Figure 4.Map of archaeological site 41SZ146 showing shovel probes dug. Site 41BZ147 (Figure 5) is a historic farmstead located near the entrance to the park that has almost completely been destroyed. Clues to its former existence are one sandstone foundation pier(buried in a low mound that appears to have been made by a bulldozer), a scattering of cut nails, "purple" glass, whiteware, and a large stockpond(105 m to the south of the pier). The stockpond includes a dam with a spillway that was repaired many times. The spillway appears to have been originally constructed from naturally occurring sandstone which was subsequently patched with many different types of bricks as well as cement. The site (not including the stock pond) is approximately 15 x 10 m, while the pond itself has an area of about 200 m2. Results of a historic documents search may yield information about the inhabitants of this farmstead. Site 41BZ142 (Figure 6) is a historic farmstead located in an open setting along Rock Prairie Road. This site was identified on 1940 aerial photos, that showed at least two large structures (possibly a house and a barn). Today, the structures are completely destroyed and no foundation elements were found. Remaining evidence includes whiteware fragments, brown and clear glass bottles and jars, pots, bricks, and other metal objects. These artifacts are scattered throughout the trees surrounding a large clearing. There is a depression in the center of the clearing that may have been a cistern. The size of the site is approximately 185 x 70 m. The artifacts can be organized spatially into two groups. Artifacts to the east of the clearing are larger and include items usually associated with a barn or workshed. Artifacts to the west of the clearing are smaller and can best be characterized as a kitchen midden. Artifacts from this site were not collected. A historic records search may yield information about this site. Site 41BZ143 (Figure 7) is a historic farmstead located in a natural clearing in the wooded uplands above Lick Creek. A surface survey of the site revealed sandstone pier foundations for two structures as well as a small,possibly hand-dug stock tank. The smaller of the two structural features consisted of four flat sandstone piers arranged on the corners of a 2.5 x 2.5 m square. The larger foundation was located 40 m to the east of the smaller foundation. It contained 13 flat sandstone piers as well as a sandstone hearth floor and chimney fall. This entire feature was about 10 x 10 m (Figure 8). Artifacts at the site include two thin metal pipe fragments and a small glass jar found on the surface as well as whiteware fragments, cut nail fragments, and"purple" glass fragments recovered from one shovel probe dug near the center of the large foundation feature. The site (not including the stock pond) is approximately 70 x 60 m in size. The stock pond has an area of about 150 m2 and is located 60 m to the west of the site. The small size of both of the structures at the site indicates that the occupants may have been tenant farmers. Results of the survey and analysis phase of the project indicate that the identified sites are not likely to contain significant archaeological deposits. Although we can infer from the types of artifacts found at the prehistoric sites that hunter-gatherers used the project area for a variety of purposes through the millennia, the sites do not appear to contain enough significant inforniation to warrant further investigations. The historic sites indicate that the project area has also been used during relatively recent history. It is possible that both land owners and tenant farmers were utilizing the landscape. Unfortunately,the poor condition of these sites, especially the absence of structural remains, makes them unlikely to significantly add to the history of this area. To 5 ,� `\ Mound 0 Stone \Parking Lot Mound Rock 0 \C\ OModern / \ \ Artifact Structures / \ \ N Concentration / 1 Archery/ / Field / / / / j / City Owned Lick Creek ,-, LI 1 Land �/ Park / N - - Boundary fence 1 t ----- Wooden fence 1 ;Trail I O Tree POND ITreeline 0 20 40m DAM Figure 5.Map of archaeological site 41BZ147 showing the location of the pond and former homesite. N Artifact concentration • Artifact .—,r, Tree line 1 0 Mature tree ,,,rr _ — - Property boundary p Crepe Myrtle Possible cistern (' IIIIIIIII \M 0 20 40m , , Rock •Rock Large sheet metal fragments ■ and a culvert section 1 Bucket Rock 2 Jars 5 Jars • 2 Brick(rags 1 Bottle /7/ Bucket ■ Metal ring \/ Pot ■ Bucke r' s \ ■ �r i i Jar . Wood post 11 / • ,,.,-�-'` Jrr .,,a, i ■ 2 Cans 3 Ceramic frags 1 Bottle \ Buckets 1 Bottle r 3 Jars „„--,-"` ■ 1 Can .,7- Metal strip ■ Jar rr' ■ ,_,rr' Bucket s ' 1 Bucket a,1 Pot %, 1Jar Figure 6.Map of archaeological site 41BZ142 showing the distribution of artifacts identified during the surface survey. Small brown glass jar - '‘v--,.., i \� � �,\ Pond Stovepipe Extraneous large -� sandstone fragments J 17Road ___ Chimney , o,,,, - N r fall , , , m e /Large structu e ii foundation ,, Small structure c ),M, , ,w wr ° , foundation a °' E stove i e N Large sandstone fragment 2 f .1, p p ■ Artifact Gn „ -- Tree line r---.,,,,, Two small sandstone Mature tree j fragments I 0 10 20m Figure 7.Map of the entire archaeological site 41BZ143 showing the distribution of the two structure foundations,the stock pond,and the artifacts. I \ i o ❑ `-, L CD r'/ I F` f\ ,i - .tea ---\/,- Y I^ : summarize, the lack of information at these sites prevents us from discerning what specific activities were conducted in the project area during any given occupation episode or series thereof. Summary and Recommendations Lick Creek Park is a 527-acre tract of well-preserved land, although farming and ranching have occurred there. Seven archaeological sites were identified during the course of the archaeological survey. Of these, four(41BZ141, 41BZ144, 41BZ145, and 41BZ146) were prehistoric sites that contained Native American artifacts, including flakes, tested cobbles, cores, and an early stage biface. These artifacts were found both in buried and surface contexts. The nature of these sites indicates that the project area was used for an as yet undetermined period of time as a lithic procurement area and possibly as a temporary encampment. Three historic sites (41BZ142, 41BZ143, and 41BZ147)were also identified and contained artifacts characteristic of the turn of the century and the mid-20th century. "Purple" glass, whiteware fragments, and cut nails, as well as jars and metal items were found at these sites. Sandstone foundation piers were the only evidence of structures at the sites. The extensiveness of the artifact distribution at 41BZ142 indicated a large, more peuuanent structure. 41BZ147 seems to have been destroyed, possibly by a bulldozer, and artifacts from this site are scarce. However it does contain a large stock pond that was repaired many times, indicating that there may have been substantial structure at the site. 41BZ143 was most likely represents the smaller home of tenant farmers. Given a low overall density of artifacts, especially a paucity of temporally or functionally diagnostic tools none of the sites at Lick Creek Park appear to be eligible for formal listing as a State Archaeological Landmark or for inclusion on the National Register of Historic Places. Currently planned construction will not impact any of the archaeological sites discovered during this survey. Accordingly, additional archaeological field work is not warranted and it is recommended that construction at Lick Creek Park be allowed to proceed. While the sites located on the park property are not likely to be considered significant in terms of state or federal criteria,they nonetheless have considerable public-education potential. The nature and distribution of Native American artifacts found demonstrate how people used the landscape for thousands of years before the arrival of Old World explorers. Euroamerican and African-American immigrants who settled the area within the last 200 years also left evidence of how they used the local landscape, in the form of written and photographic records, along with oral histories and a few scattered fragments of glass, ceramics, and metal. Information presented in this report can be used in an interpretive kiosk that informs the public about cultural heritage and environmental issues, as well as about how people have, throughout the millennia, used the same landscape that eventually became College Station's Lick Creek Park. 6