Block B consisted of 20 contiguous 1m2 units excavated to 30 cm below surface. (except unit 58 which was excavated to 35 cm bs to obtain extended soil profile). The block is situated in recent oak and poplar forest at the head of a ravine leading to Jock’s Creek, adjacent to an area cleared for market gardening. As was the case with Block A, the understory is heavily overgrown with hazelnut, chokecherry, saskatoon, and a poison ivy/sarsaparilla ground cover.
The soil levels below the sod in Block B consisted of a black, silty, and gritty loam layer from 5 cm to 23 cm below surface, a yellow and sandy clay from 23 cm to 30 cm below surface, and glacial till at 30 cm below surface. As in Block A, limestone cobbles were found throughout the occupation level around the bone. It is evident that bioturbation – primarily tree roots and rodent burrowing – have significantly altered patterns of original deposition of lithics, ceramics and small bone.
The faunal layer lay close to the surface, situated entirely in the black loam 5 cm – 23 cm below surface. The 23 cm depth also marked the end of the dark silty loam. At 10 cm below surface, a discernible patterning of the bone appeared. Concentrations of bone in narrow rows ran in an irregular pattern from the northwest to the southeast part of the block. This pattern was most apparent in the north end of the block which is the highest point in the block. In the same 1m2 unit, patches of weathered, very poorly preserved bone would be found lying close to patches of well preserved bone. It is believed that this variability in preservation results from uneven rates of burial due to taphic activities of pocket gophers or other agents of bioturbation. The same pattern of uneven preservation occurs over much of the locale but is most evident in Block B.
Diagnostic lithics included eleven projectile points that were predominantly Plains or Prairie Side-notch types, but included two unnotched triangular points. Cord-wrapped impressed rim sherds and body sherds were recovered. The ceramics are variants of the Woodland Blackduck horizon.
RC dates: XU49 – 675/80 BP XU 59 – 705/75BP.
Scope and Content
Sub-sub-sub series contains: Summary information of field methology, number and co-ordinates of excavations, personnel and their staff position; Field journals are daily records of recoveries, features and activities at the site; Site records include excavation level and unit summaries, feature sheets, profiles; sample records and maps; Artifact catalogues are lists and identifications of all artifacts recovered; Photographs are of excavation units, features, the landscape and personnel.
Block A was the most southern site in the locale. The excavation block consisted of 12 contiguous 1m2 units dug in a 3m x 4m rectangle. The block was the least productive of cultural materials, and bone preservation was the poorest. Under the sod, the black loam layer appeared at 5 cm below surface, and the glacial clay at 25 cm below surface. Excavators described the soil matrix as gritty and silty, and it became concrete hard when dried.
The occupation or bone layer extended from 10 to 25 cm below surface and consisted of a contiguous scatter of FCR and unidentifiable large ungulate bone which was heavily processed and intensively scavenged by carnivores. Most cultural materials were recovered within this layer. Fire cracked rock (FCR) and small burnt bone fragments were present but no intact hearths or processing features were evident.
Non-cultural materials included limestone and other natural pebbles derived from the parent till. (These small limestone pebbles were apparent in the occupation layers in other blocks as well). Root and rodent disturbance was extensive throughout Block A. Most units were excavated to gravelly clay till. Nine of the twelve units were dug to level 4b, which ended at 40 cm b.s.
No further excavations were done at this site. No C14 dates were taken.
Scope and Content
Sub-sub-sub series contains: Summary information of field methology, number and co-ordinates of excavations, personnel and their staff position; Field journals are daily records of recoveries, features and activities at the site; Site records include excavation level and unit summaries, feature sheets, profiles; sample records and maps; Artifact catalogues are lists and identifications of all artifacts recovered; Photographs are of excavation units, features, the landscape and personnel.
