Abstract

This report represents the findings of archaeological investigations at CA-LAS-345, a prehistoric and historic site located on Pine Creek in the Eagle Lake Basin, Lassen County, California. The prehistoric component of the site was most intensively occupied during the Middle and Late Archaic Periods (3,500 and 600 years Before Present). The site functioned as a long-term seasonal encampment used to hunt deer and take advantage of the seasonal spawning migration of Eagle Lake Trout in Pine Creek and was probably occupied during the spring and summer months. The site’s location, at an elevation above 5,140 feet, may have been the reason it never developed into a residential site (i.e. village) like sites in the lower elevations. The historic component of the site represents some of the earliest evidence of Euro-American occupation in the Eagle Lake Basin. The Dow Cabin, located on Pine Creek, is cited as first historic settlement in the basin. Archaeological evidence indicates both residential and ranching activities were important to these early settlers.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

I. Introduction.......................................................................................................... 1

II. Project Setting and Background............................................................ 7

Environmental Context.................................................................................................... 7

Physical Setting of the Eagle Lake Basin..................................................................... 7

Local Flora and Fauna.................................................................................................. 7

Paleoenvironment............................................................................................................ 9

Archaeological Context.................................................................................................. 10

Taxonomic Schemes................................................................................................... 10

Early Holocene (7000+ B.P.)................................................................................ 10

Post-Mazama (7000-5000 B.P.)........................................................................... 11

Early Archaic (5000-3500 B.P.)............................................................................ 11

Middle Archaic (3500-1300 B.P.)......................................................................... 11

Late Archaic (1300-600 B.P.)................................................................................ 12

Terminal Prehistoric (600 B.P. – Contact)............................................................ 13

Archaeological Research in the Eagle Lake Basin...................................................... 13

Previous Archaeological Investigations at CA-LAS-345........................................... 15

Ethnographic Context.................................................................................................... 16

Political Culture and Leadership................................................................................ 17

Political Culture: Governance, Crimes and Torts...................................................... 19

Wealth........................................................................................................................ 19

Settlement Patterns and Structures............................................................................ 19

Social Culture and Kinship........................................................................................ 20

Economic and Subsistence Activity.......................................................................... 20

Religion, Mythology, and Cosmology...................................................................... 22

Historic Context............................................................................................................ 23

III. Research Approach......................................................................................... 25

Introduction................................................................................................................... 25

Prehistoric Research Domains....................................................................................... 25

Research Issue 1: Cultural Chronology..................................................................... 25

Background Cultural Chronology.......................................................................... 25

Research Objective Cultural Chronology.............................................................. 25

Data Needs Cultural Chronology.......................................................................... 25

Research Issue 2: Subsistence Strategy..................................................................... 25

Background Subsistence Strategy.......................................................................... 25

Research Objective Subsistence Strategy.............................................................. 25

Data Needs Subsistence Strategy.......................................................................... 25

Research Issue 3: Settlement System........................................................................ 25

Background Settlement System............................................................................. 25

Research Objective Settlement System................................................................. 25

Data Needs Settlement System............................................................................. 25

Research Issue 4: Trade and Exchange....................................................................... 25

Background Trade and Exchange........................................................................... 25

Research Objective Trade and Exchange................................................................ 25

Data Needs Trade and Exchange............................................................................ 25

IV. Field Methods.................................................................................................... 25

Site Mapping and Surface Collection............................................................................ 25

Controlled Hand Excavation.......................................................................................... 25

V. Laboratory Methods..................................................................................... 25

Artifact Catalog and Permanent Curation Preparations................................................ 25

Analytical Studies.......................................................................................................... 25

Flaked Stone Analysis............................................................................................... 25

Debitage................................................................................................................. 25

Simple Flake Tools................................................................................................ 25

Formed Flake Tools............................................................................................... 25

Cores...................................................................................................................... 25

Bifaces................................................................................................................... 25

Projectile Points..................................................................................................... 25

Ground Stone Analysis............................................................................................. 25

Radiocarbon Dating................................................................................................... 25

Obsidian Hydration Dating....................................................................................... 25

Obsidian Source Determination................................................................................. 25

Macrobotanical.......................................................................................................... 25

Faunal Analysis......................................................................................................... 25

Historic Artifact Identification and Classification..................................................... 25

VI. Site Report CA-LAS-345.................................................................................... 25

Flaked Stone.................................................................................................................. 25

Debitage..................................................................................................................... 25

Excavation Unit 4 - Locus A................................................................................. 25

EU4 Obsidian.................................................................................................... 25

EU4 Chert.......................................................................................................... 25

Excavation Unit 19 – Locus B............................................................................... 25

EU19 Obsidian.................................................................................................. 25

EU19 Basalt....................................................................................................... 25

EU19 Chert........................................................................................................ 25

Excavation Unit 10 and 10.5 – Locus C................................................................ 25

EU10 and EU10.5 Obsidian.............................................................................. 25

EU10 and EU10.5 Basalt................................................................................... 25

EU10 and EU10.5 Chert.................................................................................... 25

Comparison of Lithic Technology by Material Class Among Analytical Units....... 25

Projectile Points......................................................................................................... 25

Cottonwood Triangular (post-A.D. 1300)............................................................ 25

Desert Side-notched (post-A.D. 1300)................................................................. 25

Rosegate Series (A.D. 700-1300).......................................................................... 25

Gunther Barbed (A.D. 1 - 1850)........................................................................... 25

Large Side-notched (pre-A.D. 1300)..................................................................... 25

Elko Series (1300 B.C.-A.D. 700)......................................................................... 25

Humboldt Series (ca. 3000 B.C.-A.D. 700)........................................................... 25

Bifaces....................................................................................................................... 25

Projectile Point Fragments..................................................................................... 25

Bifacial Tools......................................................................................................... 25

Modified Flakes......................................................................................................... 25

Simple Flake Tools................................................................................................ 25

Formed Flake Tools............................................................................................... 25

Cores.......................................................................................................................... 25

Ground, Polished, and Battered Stone........................................................................... 25

Hand Stones............................................................................................................... 25

Milling Slabs.............................................................................................................. 25

Pestles........................................................................................................................ 25

Pendant...................................................................................................................... 25

Polished Pebbles........................................................................................................ 25

Discussion of Groundstone Artifacts........................................................................ 25

Baked Clay.................................................................................................................... 25

Historic Artifacts........................................................................................................... 25

Structural Remains..................................................................................................... 25

Food and Beverage..................................................................................................... 25

Personal Items........................................................................................................... 25

Gun Bullet Casings................................................................................................ 25

Metal Suspenders.................................................................................................. 25

Glass Bead............................................................................................................. 25

Tableware.................................................................................................................. 25

Features......................................................................................................................... 25

Rock Ring Features.................................................................................................... 25

Feature 1................................................................................................................ 25

Feature 2................................................................................................................ 25

Feature 3................................................................................................................ 25

Feature 11.............................................................................................................. 25

Fire Hearths............................................................................................................... 25

Feature 9................................................................................................................ 25

Feature 10.............................................................................................................. 25

Historic Features....................................................................................................... 25

Feature 4 - Root Cellar (circa 1860-1880)............................................................. 25

Feature 5 - Dow Cabin (circa 1860)...................................................................... 25

Feature 6 – Livestock Barn (circa 1860-1880)...................................................... 25

Feature 7 – Livestock Barn (circa 1860-1880)...................................................... 25

Feature 8 – Livestock Barn (circa 1860-1880)...................................................... 25

Summary of Historic Features................................................................................... 25

VII. Analytical Studies........................................................................................ 25

Radiocarbon Analysis.................................................................................................... 25

Obsidian Geochemical Source Analysis........................................................................ 25

Obsidian Hydration Analysis........................................................................................ 25

Obsidian Source Analysis.......................................................................................... 25

Comparison of Obsidian Hydration by Geochemical Source.................................... 25

Warner Mountains..................................................................................................... 25

Medicine Lake Highlands.......................................................................................... 25

Northwestern Nevada Sources.................................................................................. 25

Flotation Analysis......................................................................................................... 25

Introduction............................................................................................................... 25

Methods.................................................................................................................... 25

Results....................................................................................................................... 25

Discussion................................................................................................................. 25

Faunal Remains.............................................................................................................. 25

VIII. Synthesis........................................................................................................... 25

Cultural Chronology...................................................................................................... 25

Obsidian Hydration................................................................................................... 25

South Warners....................................................................................................... 25

Bordwell Spring..................................................................................................... 25

East Medicine Lake(EML) and Grasshopper Flat/Lost Iron Well/Red Switchback (GF/LIW/RS)......................................................................................................... 25

CA-LAS-345 Obsidian Hydration Sample................................................................ 25

Locus A................................................................................................................. 25

Locus B.................................................................................................................. 25

Locus C.................................................................................................................. 25

Summary Obsidian Hydration............................................................................... 25

Radiocarbon Dating................................................................................................... 25

Artifact Cross-Dating................................................................................................ 25

Desert Side-notched Points................................................................................... 25

Cottonwood Points............................................................................................... 25

Rosegate Corner-notched Points........................................................................... 25

Gunther Barb Points.............................................................................................. 25

Elko Corner-Notched Points................................................................................. 25

Humboldt Series Points......................................................................................... 25

Large Side-Notch Points........................................................................................ 25

Cultural Chronology Summary...................................................................................... 25

Settlement System......................................................................................................... 25

Settlement System Summary..................................................................................... 25

Subsistence Strategy...................................................................................................... 25

Assemblage Composition.......................................................................................... 25

Faunal Analysis......................................................................................................... 25

Flotation Analysis..................................................................................................... 25

Subsistence Strategy Summary.................................................................................. 25

Trade and Exchange....................................................................................................... 25

Trade and Exchange Summary................................................................................... 25

IX. Summary and Conclusions....................................................................... 25

X. References Cited............................................................................................... 25

List of Tables

Table 1. Excavation Unit Summary................................................................................... 25

Table 2. Flake Stone Artifact Summary............................................................................ 25

Table 3. Summary of Lithic Technology by Material Type............................................. 25

Table 4. Obsidian Source and Hydration for Rosegate Points.......................................... 25

Table 5. Cores Metrical Information................................................................................. 25

Table 6. Summary of Historic Artifacts by Material Class.............................................. 25

Table 7. Summary of .22 Caliber Ammunition Casing...................................................... 25

Table 8. Summary of Age Range for Ammunition Casings............................................... 25

Table 9. Geochemical Source Results................................................................................ 25

Table 10. Obsidian Hydration Analysis Summary........................................................... 25

Table 11. Summary of Obsidian Hydration and Geologic Source Determinations........... 25

Table 12. Seed and Fruit Remains from SP-1, 20-40 cm................................................... 25

Table 13. Obsidian Hydration Brackets by Temporal Period for the South Warners...... 25

Table 14. Hydration Brackets for EML and GF/LIW/RS obsidians................................. 25

Table 15. Obsidian Hydration Rim Values Converted to Years BP for the South Warners, Borwell Springs, and East Medicine Lake/ East Medicine Lake and Grasshopper Flat/Lost Iron Well/Red Switchback...................................................................... 25

Table 16. Obsidian Hydration Values from CA-LAS-345 Converted to Years BP.......... 25

List of Figures

Figure 1. Project Vicinity Map............................................................................................ 3

Figure 2. Project Location Map........................................................................................... 4

Figure 3. CA-LAS-345 Plotted on 2001 Aerial Photo........................................................ 5

Figure 4. Chronological Schemes for the Modoc Plateau and Eagle Lake Basin................ 14

Figure 5. Ethnographic Boundaries.................................................................................... 18

Figure 6 General Land Office Plat Map 1871.................................................................. 25

Figure 7. Topographic Map of CA-LAS-345 with Locations of Units and Loci............. 25

Figure 8. Obsidian Source Locations ................................................................................ 25

Figure 9. Summary of Debitage by Material Class............................................................ 25

Figure 10. Flake Count by Depth for Excavation Unit 4.................................................. 25

Figure 11. EU4 Lithic Technology by Material Class....................................................... 25

Figure 12. Flake Count by Depth for Excavation Unit 19................................................ 25

Figure 13. EU19 Lithic Technology by Material Class..................................................... 25

Figure 14. Flake Count by Depth for Excavation Units 10 and 10.5................................ 25

Figure 15. EU10 and EU10.5 Lithic Technology by Material Class................................. 25

Figure 16. DSN, Cottonwood, Gunther Barbed, and Rosegate and Projectile Points...... 25

Figure 17. Elko Series, Humboldt, and Large Side-Notch Projectile Points...................... 25

Figure 18. Biface Projectile Point Fragments and Bifacial Tools....................................... 25

Figure 19. Simple and Formed Flake Tools....................................................................... 25

Figure 20. Basalt Cores...................................................................................................... 25

Figure 21. Hand Stone 345-329......................................................................................... 25

Figure 22. Hand Stone 345-406......................................................................................... 25

Figure 23. Stone Pendant 345-333..................................................................................... 25

Figure 24. Polished Pebbles............................................................................................... 25

Figure 25. Baked Clay....................................................................................................... 25

Figure 26. Brass Gun Shell Casings................................................................................... 25

Figure 27. Suspender Pulls................................................................................................ 25

Figure 28. Feature 1 Prehistoric Rock Ring....................................................................... 25

Figure 29. Feature 2 Prehistoric Rock Ring....................................................................... 25

Figure 30. Overview of Dow Ranch Buildings and Associated Features.......................... 25

Figure 31. Feature 4 Historic Rock-lined Root Cellar....................................................... 25

Figure 32. Feature 5 Historic Dow Cabin.......................................................................... 25

Figure 33. Feature 6 Historic Cabin................................................................................... 25

Figure 34. Feature 7 Historic Cabin................................................................................... 25

Figure 35. Feature 8 Historic Cabin................................................................................... 25

Figure 36. Obsidian Sources Identified at CA-LAS-345................................................... 25

Figure 37. Obsidian Hydration by Geochemical Source.................................................... 25

Figure 38. Comparison of Obsidian Hydration Rates....................................................... 25

Figure 39. Obsidian Hydration by Locus.......................................................................... 25

Figure 40. Obsidian Hydration Results by Projectile Point Type.................................... 25

Figure 41. Horizontal Distribution of Stylistically Diagnostic Projectile Points ............. 25

Figure 42. Vertical Distribution of Stylistically Diagnostic Projectile Points................... 25

Figure 43. Cultural Chronology for CA-LAS-345............................................................. 25

APPENDICES

Appendix A – Master Catalog CA-CA-LAS-345

Appendix B – Flotation Analysis

Appendix C – Obsidian Hydration Analysis

Appendix D – Obsidian Source Analysis

Appendix E – Radiocarbon Dating Analysis

Appendix F – Projectile Point Analysis Sheets

I. Introduction

This report describes the results of test excavations undertaken at CA-LAS-345 (FS# 05-06-58-01) by the United States Forest Service (USFS), Lassen National Forest. CA-LAS-345 is a multi-component archaeological site located northwest of the town of Spaulding, in Lassen County, California (Figure 1). The site is bisected by Pine Creek and includes areas immediately adjacent to the Pine Creek channel. Archaeological materials are distributed across adjoining ridges and flats (Figure 2).

The California Department of Fish and Game (DFG) is currently under a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with the US Forest Service to maintain and operate the Pine Creek Fish Trap facility, when the DFG conducts biological studies of the fish and takes eggs from Eagle Lake Trout. These actions are necessary to sustain a viable Eagle Lake Trout population. The DFG has recently proposed to make improvements to an existing fish ladder and fish trap. Potential improvements include enhancement of the existing dirt road that provides access to the fish trap, improvement and stabilization of existing footpaths and trails, replacement of the guardrail fence posts above the southern embankment, installation of picnic tables, adding new gravel to the parking area, removal of a small wood cabin, stabilization of the stream embankment above the Fish Trap through seeding, providing for handicap access to the Fish Trap facility, installation of a permanent Sweet Smelling Toilet facility, and provide for a new designated trail and stabilize existing trails. The proposed work has the potential to effect known archaeological deposits at CA-LAS-345.

Phase II archaeological excavations were conducted to assess a number of research issues at CA-LAS-345. Fieldwork was conducted in the context of the Passport in Time (PIT) program in which volunteers participate in archaeological investigations. Fieldwork took place August 9th through 13th, 2004 by USFS staff archaeologists and a volunteer crew of PIT members. A total of 12.35 cubic meters was excavated within the area of the site. The artifact collection will be curated with the Lassen National Forest.

In May 2005, the Eagle Lake Ranger District (USDA Lassen National Forest) retained Sentinel Archaeological Research, LLC (Sentinel) to author a technical manuscript that summaries the field studies, in order to identify whether any portions of CA-LAS-345 that appear to hold significant research potential and to report findings from the test excavations at the site. The resulting document also contains recommendations to assist the Eagle Lake Ranger District in meeting its obligations under Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) of 1966 and imparting regulation of the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation (36 CFR 800).

This report begins with a series of background discussions of the project area’s environmental, ethnographic, prehistoric, and historic contexts, followed by a discussion of relevant research themes. Prefield and field methods are then summarized and archaeological findings of the study discussed. The concluding sections provide a synthesis and management summary. The format of this manuscript follows the Guidelines for Archaeological Resource Management Reports (ARMR). Appendix A presents the complete artifact catalog. Appendix B presents results of flotation analysis. Appendix C presents the results of obsidian hydration analysis. Appendix D presents the results of obsidian geochemical source determinations by X-ray Fluoresce. Appendix E presents the results of radiocarbon analysis. Appendix F presents the projectile point analysis data.

Figure 1. Project Vicinity Map

Figure 2. Project Location Map

Figure 3. CA-LAS-345 Plotted on 2001 Aerial Photo

II. Project Setting and Background

Environmental Context

Environment, human land use, and cultural dynamics are interrelated processes that influence hunter-gatherer behavior. In order to make rational conclusions about human adaptation to a given environment, it is necessary to assess the opportunities and constraints provided by the environment. To establish a contextual understanding of the early inhabitants of CA-LAS-345 the following section focuses on physical setting and the local floral and faunal resources.

Physical Setting of the Eagle Lake Basin

Eagle Lake lies at the southern most end of the Cascade Range of Mountains in Northeastern California, on the southern most edge of the Modoc Plateau. The Modoc Plateau is, in turn, the southern most extension of a large volcanic plateau that expands north into eastern Oregon, Eastern Washington and Southern Idaho. This tableland consists of block faulted Cenozoic basalt flows, smaller rhyolitic domes, shield volcanoes, lake basins, and river drainages. In recent years the bottomlands of this area have been converted extensively to agriculture and pasture. Large lakes such as Eagle Lake and Goose Lake provide abundant sources of water for waterfowl, fish, and agricultural pursuits.

Eagle Lake measures approximately 13 miles from north to south, and averages three miles east to west. Although it is the second largest natural lake within California, Eagle Lake is relatively shallow, averaging 10 feet deep at its northern end and having a maximum depth of 95 feet at the southern end. Eagle Lake is a closed basin outlet, characterized by an internal drainage system encompassing approximately 440 square miles of land, nearly 100 miles of shoreline, numerous natural springs below the lake, and a network of minor streams. Some of the most significant of these streams are Cleghorn Creek at the northern shore, Merrill and Papoose Creeks at the southern shore, and Pine Creek, which is by far Eagle Lake’s largest tributary. Pine Creek has its headwaters at Upper Stephens Meadows located immediately east of Caribou Wilderness area and Lassen Volcanic National Park, over 38 miles southwest from its contact with the Eagle Lake’s north shore. Pine Creek is most active during the spring and winter months. The dynamic relationship between rainfall and evaporation dramatically affects the water levels at Eagle Lake.

Local Flora and Fauna

Eagle Lake is situated within the mixed conifer forest of the southern Modoc Plateau. The lower elevations of the mixed conifer forest are often open pinewoods with chaparral. At higher elevations like Eagle Lake, more rainfall supports more kinds of trees growing larger and closer together. Most adult trees have thick, corky trunk bark and can survive small ground fires. Accumulations of unburned undergrowth and fallen wood may support larger, killing fires.

The mixed conifer forest is composed principally of Ponderosa Pine (Pinus ponderosa), Jeffrey Pine (Pinus jeffreyi), Incense Cedar (Calocedrus decurrens), and Sierra juniper (Juniperus occidentalis). Other trees include White Fir (Abies concolor), Quaking Aspen (Populus tremuloides), and Rocky Mountain Maple (Acer glabrum), which tend to occur in low frequencies within the Eagle Lake Basin. The under story includes various shrubs such as Manzanita (Arcostaphylos sp.) various species of Ceanothus, mountain mahogany (Cercoparpus sp.), sagebrush (Artemsia tridentate), rabbit brush, and numerous types of grass (Poaceae).

Pine Creek is the dominant natural feature in the environment of CA-LAS-345. The spring runoff from storms and melting snow in Pine Creek is sufficient to accommodate the annual spawning migration of the Eagle Lake Trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss aquilarium). This spawning run occurs in late March and/or early April and lasts for about two months. During this time hundreds of large trout are present in the relatively shallow waters of Pine Creek. The Eagle Lake Trout is native to the lake and adapted to the highly alkaline waters.

Mammals known to inhabit the Eagle Lake Basin include: mule deer (Odocoileus hemionus), gray squirrel (Sciurus griseus), spotted skunk (Spilogal putorius), striped skunk (Mephitis mephitis), mountain lion (Felis concolor), bobcat (Lynus rufus), cottontail rabbit (Sylvilagus nuttali), jackrabbit (Lepus townsendii), chipmunk (tamia sp), marmot (Marmota flaviventris), ground squirrel (Spermophius beechyi), beaver (Castor canadensis), mouse (Peromyscus sp.), wood rat (Neotoma fuscipes), pika (Olhotona princeps), porcupine (Erethizon dorsatum), fisher (Martes pennanti), weasel (Mustela mephitis), coyote (Canis latrans), red fox (Vulpes vulpes), black bear (Ursus americanus), and pronghorn (Antilpocapra americana). Grizzly bears (Ursus arctos) and big horn sheep (Ovis canadensis) were once present in the region but historic hunting pressure forced these species to local extinction.

Avian fauna common to the Eagle Lake Basin include bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus), golden eagle (Aquila chrysaetos), osprey (Pandion haliaetus), goshawk (Accipter gentiles), sage grouse (Centrocerus urophasianus), California quail (Callipepla californica) and mountain quail (Oreo picxta). Seasonal migrants to the Eagle Lake Basin include American pelican (Pelecanus erythrorhynchos) and tundra swan (Cygnus columbianus). A variety of ducks are found in the lake in the fall through spring including pintail (Anas acuta), bufflehead (Bruecphala clangula), green-winged teal (Anas creccacarolinensis), and redhead (Anthya americana). Cormorant (Phalacro corazauritus) and common merganser (Mergus merganser) are seasonally present. Four species of goose include Ross’s goose (Anser rossi), snow goose (Anser caerulescens), white-fronted goose (Anser albifrons) and Canadian goose (Branta Canadensis) are present in massive flocks. Year round waterfowl that are present on Eagle Lake include American coot (Fulica americanus), Canadian goose, gadwall, (Anas strepera), mallard (Anas platrhynchos), northern shoveler (Anas clypeata) and ruddy duck (Oxyura jamaicensis).

Paleoenvironment

The Late Quaternary paleoecological record of California that has developed over the last 20 years provides compelling evidence for substantial vegetation changes since the end of the last Ice Age (the Wisconsin or, regionally, the Tahoe Glaciation) (Anderson 1990; Davis and Moratto 1988).

Relatively arid and cold conditions prevailed at lower elevations in California during the Tahoe Glaciation. This began to change by ca. 13,000 BP and vegetation appears to have been in a state of flux over then next 3,000 to 4,000 years. At Clear Lake, Adams (1988) notes that sequential increase in pine, then TCT (cedar and allies), and finally oak between 13,000 and 10,000 BP marks a response by vegetation to the end of limiting cold temperatures. This is in accord with the regional record, which shows that deglaciation climatic change began several millennia before the conventional date of the start of the Holocene at ca. 10,000 BP (Anderson 1990).

At the initiation of Holocene conditions the major feature of the paleoclimatic history of the study area is the relative timing of postglacial aridity. The broad trend of postglacial climatic change in California describes an increase in effective moisture over the last ca. 7,000 radiocarbon years. Most records also display a step-wise vegetation change that appears to be in response to a similar marked increase in effective moisture during the late Holocene. Although there is not enough data to provide conclusive proof, there is some suggestion that this step-wise increase in effective moisture occurred earlier (between 3,000 to 4,000 B.P.) at lower elevations (less than 1,800 m) than it did at higher elevations (between 2,000 and 3,000 B.P.).

During the later half of the late Holocene, or roughly the last ca. 2,000 years, the resolution (and therefore the complexity) of paleoenviromental records increase substantially, with the addition of dendrochronology as a tool in paleoclimatic reconstruction. Evidence of droughts during the Medieval Warm Interval has been interpreted to indicate widespread episodes of aridity between 600 and 740 calibrated years before present (Cal. BP), and between 840 and 1,060 Cal. BP (Stine 1994). These dry periods can be correlated with increases in the frequency of low intensity forest fires in the southern Sierra Nevada (e.g. Graumlich 1993). Subsequent enhanced effective moisture during the Little Ice Age (400 to 100 cal. B.P.) led to a reduction in the frequency of low-intensity forest fires, but an increase in the number of catastrophic fires (ibid).

As part of the archaeological investigation at Pike’s Point (CA-LAS-537), Davis and Pippin (1979) constructed a lake level chronology for the Eagle Lake Basin. Their research, as well as accepted models, indicates fluctuating levels at Eagle Lake over time (Bevill and Nilsson 1995). Geomorphic assessments at Pike’s Point showed a series of rising and falling lake levels. Eagle Lake formed more than 35,000 years ago (Davis and Pippin 1979:38) through a combination of actions of faulting and lava flows. It was once part of a larger water mass known as Lake AcapsuKati (Friedman 1979:6). Eagle Lake reached its highest level, 1,560 feet above mean seal level, at which point waters from the lake were discharged through a natural outlet and the lake levels stabilized (Guyton n.d.; Pippin et al. 1979:52). The end of the Pleistocene era, ca. 12,000 years ago, is thought to have been a period characterized by warmer and dryer climatic trends. Lakes across the region declined in size shrinking to lower levels. Changes in this pattern appear between 2,450 and 2,600 B.C. when lake levels rose to a height of 5,125 feet, and again dropping significantly by A.D. 50 (Mehringer 1986:35; Pippin et al. 1979:52). Sometime before A.D. 450, the water level again rose to near 5,125 feet, and retracted again between A.D. 1450 and 1850 (Pippin et al. 1979:53). Eagle Lake has remained relatively stable since that time.

CA-LAS-345 is located on Pine Creek, at the northwestern portion of Eagle Lake. The average elevation in this area is 5,160 ft above sea level. This elevation is located on the rim of the proposed lake level fluctuation zone. Changes in lake levels through time may have significantly affected the nature and distribution of natural resources available in the environment as well as differentially preserved or destroyed portions of the archaeological record in this area.

Archaeological Context

Taxonomic Schemes

A number of significant studies conducted by Far Western Anthropological Research Group have greatly contributed to a better understanding of the regional prehistory in Northeastern California. Through the efforts of a number of researchers, a six-part taxonomic sequence has been developed for northeastern California. The following cultural chronology is derived primarily from the work of Delacorte (1997) (Figure 4).

Early Holocene (7000+ B.P.)

Investigations of the earliest prehistoric occupation in the western Great Basin have described two temporal aspects of the Early Holocene: an early period characterized by “Clovis-like” fluted projectile points and a later period, termed the Lake Mojave Period (9500-7000 BP) characterized by large Great Basin Stemmed series projectile points. Archaeological assemblages associated with the Lake Mojave cultures contain large lanceolate projectile points, heavy core tools, bifaces, formed and unformed flake tools, and enigmatic flaked stone bifaces shaped into a distinct crescent pattern.

Local studies in the northwestern corner of the Great Basin and southern Klamath basin begin with Bedwell’s work, documenting the so-called “Western Pluvial Lakes Tradition” (Bedwell 1970, 1973). Bedwell hypothesizes that early Holocene inhabitants of the region focused subsistence activity on shrinking pluvial lakes where large prey animals clustered. The association of early Holocene prehistoric sites with remnant Pleistocene lakes, however, may reflect the greater preservation of ancient landforms near these bodies of water. Several investigators have documented early Holocene sites associated with the lakeshore landforms described by Bedwell, in the Madeline Plains region, relatively near the project area (Delacorte et. al. 1997). The shores of Goose and Tule Lake contain early assemblages (Beaton 1992), as does the nearby Black Rock Desert (Clewlow 1968). Stemmed-point assemblages are also reported in sparse numbers on the Modoc National Forest and the shores of Honey Lake (Delacorte et. al. 1997) and at Hog Flat in the immediate area of the LNF.

Post-Mazama (7000-5000 B.P.)

Dating of the Post-Mazama assemblages is primarily identified by the presence of Northern Side-notched projectile points. Post-Mazama assemblages are sparsely represented in northern California. The Northern Side-Notched projectile point series consists of large, side-notched atlatl points that superficially resemble the Desert Side-Notched points, albeit formed on a much larger scale. Several researchers mao Northern Side-notched assemblages in a fan-shaped pattern spread across the Columbia Plateau and northern reaches of the Great Basin, with scant evidence in the Modoc Plateau (Gruhn 1961; Delacorte et. al 1997). Northern Side-notched points may serve as an ethnic marker for a northern population distinct from adjacent southern groups who relied on Gatecliff and other typically Great Basin projectile point types (Delacorte 1997b:168-171; Layton 1985; O’Connell 1975).

The assemblage associated with the Northern Side-notched series points tends to contain T-shaped drills, mortars with V-shaped bowls and pointed pestles, antler wedges, tanged blades and large partially subterranean house structures (Delacorte 1997, Grayson 1976, O’Connell 1971, 1975). Northern Side-notched assemblages appear to begin about 7000 BP and terminate circa 4500 to 5000 BP (Layton 1985, O’Connell 1971, 1975, Sampson 1985, Warren 1968, Wilde 1985, Delacorte et. al. 1997). The presence of Northern Side-notched assemblages in the Eagle Lake Basin is undocumented and little evidence has been documented in the nearby region.

Early Archaic (5000-3500 B.P.)

This section discusses the mid-Holocene occupation of the region. Delacorte’s regional synthesis tabulated significant sites associated with the Archaic period of Northeastern California. Early Archaic sites are known to occur in Surprise Valley (Brown 1964, O’Connell 1975), Secret Valley (Riddell 1960b), and Silent Snake Springs, Falcon Hill, Kramer Cave, and Beaver Creek (Hattori 1982, Layton and Thomas 1979, Manuel 1989), with ancillary work performed at many smaller sites (Delacorte et. al. 1997). Gatecliff Split-stem and Humboldt Concave Base projectile points offer the primary diagnostic artifacts for this period (Delacorte et. al. 1997). Associated assemblage constituents include plentiful flake tools, bifacial knives, heavy core implements, and a wide array of ground stone milling tools. Gatecliff and Humboldt Concave-base point assemblages tend to be plentiful within the Great basin and stop at the crest of the Warner Mountains.

Middle Archaic (3500-1300 B.P.)

The Middle Archaic Period demonstrates a florescence of sites and a dramatic increase in archaeological site visibility in the region. Extensive habitations, midden, grave lots, and house-structures tend to characterize this period indicating an increase in settlement size, duration of settlement, increasing obsidian procurement, and intensive biface reduction.

The Middle Archaic period is characterized by projectile points typical of two geographic regions: Martis series projectile points of the northern Sierra Nevada, and Elko Series projectile points of the Great Basin. The Martis projectile point, first described by Elston, has strong morphological affinities with the Elko series, but is regionally affiliated with the Central and Northern Sierra Nevada (Wohlgemuth 1978). The large (> 2 grams) size of Martis points suggests use with atlatl projectile technology (Wohlgemuth 1997). Points tend to be manufactured from fine-grained basalts and are associated with highly-worked tool types such as formed knives, drills, and scrapers, with smaller quantities of slightly modified or unmodified flake tools (Wohlgemuth 1978). Elston indicates that the Martis assemblages appear circa 2000 BC and terminate at 500 AD, placing them roughly at 4000 BP to 1500 BP.

The Elko projectile point series was defined by Heizer and Hester (1978) and refined by O’Connell (1971, 1975) and Thomas (1981) and is dubbed “Newberry” by investigators working in the western Great Basin (Basgall and McGuire 1988). Newberry deposits appear circa 3000 BP and drop out of the record circa 1350 BP. Basgall and McGuire postulated that Newberry Peoples pursued a highly mobile subsistence system with seasonally occupied habitation sites (Basgall and McGuire 1988). Elko-series projectile point assemblages occur to the east and south of CA-LAS-345 (Delacorte et. al. 1997), and may well be present at the site.

Late Archaic (1300-600 B.P.)

The Late Archaic Period is marked by major changes in land-use and settlement patterns from preceding periods. The elaboration of archaeological assemblages noted in the Middle Archaic Period cease abruptly at approximately 100 B.P. About this time, obsidian production falls off, the number and density of archaeological site is lower, and cultural accumulations become more focused on specific subsistence pursuits. McGuire (2000:30) separates this period into an early Late Archaic (circa 1300-100 B.P.), which has greater similarities with the proceeding Middle Archaic and a terminal Late Archaic (circa 1000-600 B.P.), which bears similarities to the Terminal Prehistoric Period.

The beginning of the Late Archaic Period is defined by technological changes associated with the advent of the bow-and-arrow (Bettinger and Taylor 1974; Delacorte et. al. 1997). Bow-and-arrow technology marks a shift to expedient flake-based tools and smaller residential settlements (Delacorte et. al. 1995, 1997). Projectile points identified as Rose Spring and Gunther Barb series are diagnostic of this period. Higher frequencies of milling equipment in Late Archaic assemblages suggest increased reliance on seed resources (Delacorte et. al. 1995), despite a diet breadth focused on both vegetal and animal resources (Basgall and McGuire 1988). Flaked-stone assemblages reveal a shift from highly curated and worked bifaces to expedient bifacial tools. Ground stone accumulations dating to this period suggest a fundamental reorganization of settlement-subsistence adaptation focused on intensive exploitation of epos root and other plant resources (McGuire 2000:30). This shift co-occurs with a dramatic decline in obsidian biface production and increased use of local tool stone. These changes suggest a decreased foraging mobility and increased territoriality as indicated by semi-permanent lowland settlements with well-built house structures, cache pits, and other domestic facilities. In the Sierra Nevada, this period is typified by intensified use of local plant resources as indicated by the introduction of shallow bedrock mortar and stone hullers (Elston et al. 1994).

Terminal Prehistoric (600 B.P. – Contact)

Investigators working in the Western Great Basin describe two primary projectile point types associated with the terminal prehistoric occupation of the region: the Desert Side- notched series and the Cottonwood Triangular series. Terminal Prehistoric components tend to be comparatively smaller, more ephemeral in nature, and usually represented by isolated ground stone concentrations or hearths with limited debris scatters. Milling equipment tends to occur at higher ratios during these periods and is dominated by large, unshaped blocks with more ephemeral surface wear. Reduction trajectories for obsidian shift from biface reduction to a core/flake technology. The size and relative frequency of obsidian bifaces decrease. In general, this pattern has been interpreted as a response to increased territorial circumscription, which limited access to tool stone material sources, and increasing inter-group competition and conflict (McGuire 2000:32).

Archaeological Research in the Eagle Lake Basin

Two archaeological investigations have greatly contributed to the overall understanding of the prehistory of the Eagle Lake Basin. These include data recovery excavations at the Pike’s Point site, CA-LAS-537 (Pippin et al 1979) and test excavations at the Christie Beach site, CA-LAS-549 (Bevill and Nilsson 1995). Each investigation is individually described in the following sections.

In 1978, Desert Research Institute conducted large-scale data recovery excavations at Pike’s Point (CA-LAS-537) on the southern shore of Eagle Lake. Excavations were conducted to mitigate the adverse effects associated with the planned construction of a marina. One of the major research objectives of the archaeological study was to define the cultural chronology of the Eagle Lake Basin. A total of 330 cubic meters of soil was excavated from 16 backhoe trenches across the site and 80 cubic meters of soil were removed though hand excavation. Based on these findings, Pippin et al (1979) developed a chronological sequence for the Eagle Lake Basin comprised of four phases spanning nearly 5,000 years Figure 4). The earliest period, the Eagle Lake Phase, dated prior to 4,500 B.P., is represented by the Northern Side-notch and Parman style projectile points. The subsequent period, the Aspen Grove Phase (4,500 to 2,000 B.P.) is characterized by Sierra Stemmed, Triangular and Martis Contracting Stem points, as well as bifacial tools, cobble hand stones, and block and slab milling stone assemblages. Burin spalls and a burination biface fragment suggest a burin technology was part of the lithic technology. Basalt constituted the most common material used and obsidian was the most typical material used for making points. The next period in the chronology is the Pike’s Point Phase, (2,000 to 1,000 B.P.) is marked by the appearance of shaped hand stone, bifacial

Figure 4. Comparative Chronological Schemes for the Modoc Plateau and Eagle Lake Basin

tools, milling stones, and small projectile point forms including Rose Spring Corner-notch and Gunther Series points. Pippin et al. (1979:146) suggested that variability in the projectile point forms may represent the site was occupied by several cultural groups during this time. The final phase, simply termed “Later Occupations” (1,000 B.P. to historic times) is characterized by the occurrence of Cottonwood Leaf-shaped points.

In 1994, the Lassen National Forest contracted with Mountain Anthropological Research to conduct a National Register assessment of CA-LAS-547. The research objectives developed for the investigations at CA-LAS-549 focused on six issues: paleoenvironment, site structure, cultural chronology, subsistence orientation, settlement pattern, lithic technology, and obsidian procurement. Fieldwork featured an initial reconnaissance, surface collection, shovel testing, and controlled excavation. A total of 35 Shovel Test Units and 13 Excavation Units were completed resulting in a total excavated volume of 9.55 cubic meters. Testing recovered a total of 713 cultural items including: 547 unmodified flakes, 20 projectile points, 13 bifaces, 21 edge-modified pieces, one core, 40 ground stone artifacts, two batter stones, and 69 faunal remains. In addition, four prehistoric cultural features were recognized, including a shallow depression 3 meters across and 20 centimeters deep representing a living surface, an alignment of stacked rocks, and two bedrock milling slicks (Bevill and Nilsson 1995).

Previous Archaeological Investigations at CA-LAS-345

Two events precipitated the earliest systematic surveys conducted in the area: the development of the Spaulding Tract Subdivision on the southwest side of Eagle Lake and concern over rising lake levels caused by the closing of Bly’s Tunnel.

CA-LAS-345 (FS#05-06-58-001) was first recorded in 1956 by E.A. Riddell while conducting a number of archaeological surveys around Eagle Lake. Local collector Mr. O. Hansen provided locations and site descriptions to Riddell. The site was described as four rock rings, ground and polished stone features, ground stone, and flake stone artifacts, flaking debris, and fire-affected rock. Riddell’s 1956 site record notes that Mrs. Webb of Susanville found a large, perforated, discoidal stone about 3/8” thick and 3 ½” in diameter.

In 1973, R.C Mooring rerecorded CA-LAS-345. At the time Mooring described the site as a “village site at [the] confluence of Pine Creek and Eagle Lake. Three well preserved rock rings in [a] juniper grove west of Sandy Peninsula with abundant artifacts and ashes. Numerous portions of basalt metates, manos and portions of obsidian projectile points were noted in an area measuring 600 by 200 feet (Mooring 1973).

Norman von Werlhof completed an undated site record for CA-LAS-345 that included a relatively detailed topographic map of the three rock ring features indicating their location, size, shape, and direction of openings. Many metates, manos, obsidian “spalls”, and projectile points were also noted in the site record.

Another site record was filed in 1978 by J. Smith, who describes CA-LAS-345 as “a sparse lithic scatter in fairly open brush land adjacent to Pine Creek.” Smith noted that the scatter consisted of 75 percent basalt with the remainder obsidian. One milling stone and two broken basalt projectile points were noted and illustrated.

In 1978, archaeological excavations were undertaken at CA-LAS-345 in advance of a proposed reconstruction project on Spaulding Tract Road (Wohlgemuth 1978). The Archaeological Research Program, California State University Chico, conducted surface collection and test excavations. Testing was focused on determining if a subsurface deposit was present, and whether road development would impact such a deposit. A total of 38 surface collection units were placed within the areas of direct impact along Spaulding Road. All cultural materials noted within the cells were collected. All diagnostic artifacts found on the surface outside of the collection cells were also collected. A total of six 1meter by 1 meter test excavation units were excavated in or near the direct impact areas and one within the midden deposit (See Figure 30, Locus B). Surface collections and test excavations recovered a total of 729 pieces of debitage, 62 utilized flakes, eight projectile point fragments, 14 bifaces, four scrapers, three cores, one hammer stone, four milling stone fragments, four bone fragments, and two pieces of ochre. Projectile point forms were similar to the Pinto, Elko, and Rose Spring series points defined in the Great Basin. The low number of projectile points and other formed tools were used to argue that CA-LAS-345 served primarily as a fishing camp (Wohlgemuth 1978:56) and the three rock rings features located near Pine Creek were interpreted as fish traps (Wohlgemuth 1978:23-25). In the final report Wohlgemuth suggested that the site chronology appeared to represent an early occupation (prior to A.D. 500), and surface materials represented later occupations. In a subsequent addendum Wohlgemuth wrote “In retrospect, many of the inferences drawn are suspect, particularly those from a deep excavation unit on a slope by Spaulding Road. A good deal of disturbance may have occurred there from the road and dam construction. This may have created what had the appearance of culturally differentiated strata units, in terms of artifact classes” (Wohlgemuth 1984).

In 2002, the Archaeological Research Program, CSU Chico was retained by the Spaulding Community Services District to conduct a cultural resources inventory of the proposed wastewater collection and treatment facilities in the Spaulding Tract (Westwood and White 2002). The study identified nine archaeological sites and 33 isolated finds. Initially recorded as two separate sites (CA-LAS-345 and CA-LAS-832/H), it became clear that the two sites overlap and a continuous scatter of cultural material connects the two sites. In order to rectify the confusion created by two overlapping site records, a new site record was completed, which combined CA-LAS-345 and Las-832/H into a single site (Greenberg and Schmidt 2002). This new combined site is quite large, measuring 420 meters north-south by 375 meters east-east and encompassing a surface area of 157,500 square meters.

In May and June 2003, the Lassen National Forest conducted field inspections and test excavations at five sites to determine the nature and extent of sub-surface deposits and to further assess the potential impacts on cultural resources (O’Brien 2003). A total of seven 1 meter by 1 meter surface scrapes units and two excavation units were placed adjacent the southwest side of Spaulding Tract Road within and immediately adjacent the recorded boundaries of CA-LAS-345/832. Excavations were conducted to a depth of just 20 centimeters in all three excavation units. Forty-two pieces of debitage (17 obsidian, 35 basalt) and one small obsidian corner-notch projectile point were recovered. O’Brien (2003:37) concluded that the portion of CA-LAS-345 that was tested is not eligible for listing on the NRHP.

Ethnographic Context

The project area is situated within the ethnographic territory of the Atsugewi people. The Atsugewi and Achumawi peoples comprise the Palaihnihan branch of the Hokan linguistic stock. Achumawi peoples inhabited the northeastern corner of what is now California, claiming a territory approximately 70 miles from east to west and 40 miles from north to south, and centered roughly on Poison Lake. Atsugewi territory is notable for encompassing a range of different ecologies.

The eastern half of the Atsugewi territory intrudes into the Madeline Plains, which exhibit a distinctly xeric ecology associated with the Great Basin. The western half of their territory falls into the southernmost reaches of the Cascade Range, in California, with evergreen trees and alpine vegetation. Figure 4 presents a map showing the ethnographic boundaries of Atsugewi, Northern Piaute, and Maidu peoples as represented by various ethnographic sources (Fowler and Lilebald 1986; Garth 1953, 1978; Riddell 1978). Dixon (1905:124) provides the following description of Maidu territory boundaries in the area of Eagle Lake.

“From Lassen Peak eastwards, the line between Achoma’wi and the Maidu seems to have been rather vague. The region of small lakes, cinder-cones, and lava-flows immediately east of the peak was apparently regarded as Maidu territory. The whole of Susan Creek was also within their control, although permanent settlements did not exist far above the present town of Susanville. Pine Creek and Eagle Lake were continually visited by hunting parties, and were somewhat doubtfully regarded as part of Maidu territory. (Dixon 1905:124)

Political Culture and Leadership

The hybrid territory of the Atsugewi is matched with a commensurate affinity with both their neighbors to the west and east. Atsugewi peoples inhabiting the western region of their territory were dubbed the Atsuge or “pine tree people,” while the Mahuopani or “juniper tree people” occupied the eastern and central reaches. The Atsugewi inhabiting the Warm Springs locale were called Matsíame, or “fish-eaters” (Garth 1978:236). The political and social culture of the Atsugewi is marked by a distinct emphasis on wealth, with wealthy men usually taking the role of village leader, much like the Karuk, Yurok, and Hupa of northwestern California.

Atsugewi political organization existed at the village level. Individual villages were autonomous and sovereign with respect to each other, with headmen controlling or guiding discrete villages (Garth 1978:237). Villages contained between approximately three to twenty-five earth-clad lodges and bark huts. The village asserted nominal control over the surrounding vicinity. The local headman typically owned the village land, and perhaps some surrounding tracts (Garth 1953:176). The headman was typically wealthier than the other villagers and controlled a large sweathouse around which he and his friends and relatives clustered. Garth suggests that this culture trait derives from the Shasta, and who also clustered the dwellings of a given village around the richest member (1953:173).

Individual headmen had more durable authority than the economic leaders of the Numic peoples (Garth 1953:176). The Paiute and Shoshone rabbit boss, for instance, led resource-specific group activities. Headmen had abiding duties and powers, but much depended on their popularity—absent goodwill, people might move to another village. Headmen had no power to impose sanctions or fines, but the disobedience of an individual villager might mean that the chief would not avenge his death or organize labor when it was needed for his family. Chiefs functioned principally to organize economic and military activities. Headmen tracked the availability of resources and initiated communal subsistence activities. Tradition held that the chief’s eldest son

Figure 5. Ethnographic Boundaries

inherited his position, but in practice, community consensus and public will dictated leadership (Garth 1953:178).

Political Culture: Governance, Crimes and Torts

Garth enumerates various grievances under the heading of “torts,” and indicates weregild or blood money was required to extinguish the bad will and compensate the injured party after murders. The primary grievances recognized by the Atsugewi system of settlement were murder, theft, and adultery. The remedy for grievances was payment in clamshell disc beads (Saxidomus sp.) or dentalia. An ancillary remedy for trespass and acquisition of foodstuffs from owned tracts was repatriation of the harvested goods or the skin of the prey animal (Garth 1953:179). Food was particularly prone to theft. While small food thefts were frequently ignored, as a matter of public welfare, larger thefts were compensated with shell beads. The failure to resolve a crime by settlement resulted in warfare between the families of the injured and aggressing parties.

Wealth

In his 1945 article Emphasis on Industriousness Among the Atsugewi Garth examined the Atsugewi focus on wealth and industriousness. “The Atsugewi work-wealth scheme permeated all phases of their social and economic life and gave it a distinct patterning. At every turn hard work was inculcated as the means to success” (Garth 1954:555). An industrious rich man was the ideal character of the culture. One individual, Nohalal (“going all the time”) was famed for staying up most of the night making string or doing other work (Garth 1945:555). The mythical Daylight Woman arises at dawn to pursue plant gathering. Children were counseled to shun laziness and arise before first light. Women suffering birth-pains were reputed to be suffering the ill effects of lying abed past dawn (Garth 1978:237). The social hierarchy described and prescribed the contours of the culture, with the sasyawahéзar or “rich man” marking one end of the social continuum and the prumui or “poor man” marking the other. Subsistence resources, food-bearing patches, beads, and twined blankets and furs formed the currency of the wealth-focus (Garth 1978). A high compliment was “he doesn’t know how to sleep” (Garth 1945:555). The wealth focus is perhaps better understood as a “subsistence focus,” and all wealth-seeking activities as (directly or indirectly) subsistence related. This cultural emphasis was so strong, Garth speculated the Atsugewi were somewhat impermeable to the diffusion of other widespread cultural complexes. For instance, unlike many other California tribes who practiced a plethora of dances and formed complex secret societies such as the Kuksu ritual and cult complex, the Atsugewi practiced only two ceremonies, a war dance and a simple round dance (Garth 1945).

Settlement Patterns and Structures

Atsugewi settlement systems were anchored around large winter villages with seasonal dispersals into surrounding regions. Foraging parties and families manufactured summer camps from circular enclosures of brush or juniper limbs, ten to fifteen feet across with an opening facing the east. There was no roof but a makeshift covering of branches or bark was erected during inclement weather (Garth 1953:144).

Winter houses were permanent structures, requiring larger labor inputs, and were clustered together around the domicile of the village headman (Garth 1953:143). The basic design was an oval, partially excavated below grade. Approximately ten feet from the back wall a ten-foot tall center post was erected that supported horizontal beams reaching to the opposite sides of the house. A post and lintel framework supported the entryway. A smoke hole was left in the roof just in front of the central beam, also serving as an entry, with a ladder. The entire structure was clad in bark with sod and grass placed on the bark, forming an impermeable outer layer (Garth 1953:143). The fire pit was typically located two or three feet in front of the central post. Up to six families shared a winter lodge and utilized a discrete territory within the domicile. Friends and relatives helped erect individual lodges without compensation, unless the structure was for a rich man or served as a sweathouse. The larger structures of the wealthy or for sweat lodges might take a week and twenty-five laborers, with the headman providing food (Garth 1953:143).

Social Culture and Kinship

Atsugewi kinship and marital practices are marked by a strong sense of gender-differentiation (Garth 1953:168). Male and female terms were used to distinguish one’s siblings, the siblings of one’s parents, and the siblings of one’s grandparents. Cousins at greater degrees of distance were not distinguished by gender (Garth 1953:168). The sex-distinction is consistent with the differential value placed on men and women at marriage; women were more valued for their subsistence activity (Garth 1978:239). In practice brides were purchased, by the groom’s family, with the bride’s family reciprocating with gifts of lesser value. The emphasis on the economic value of women is also manifested in payment demanded from the interloping male where a woman abandoned her husband. The Atsugewi practiced the levirate and sororate, thus where a married person died, the surviving spouse and the benefit of their subsistence activity was transferred to the surviving same-sex kin of the deceased (Garth 1953). If a widow’s brothers in law did not exercise levirate privileges, the widow could be purchased for two or three strings of shell beads (Garth 1978:239).

Economic and Subsistence Activity

While the Atsugewi pursued a wide-spectrum of prey animals some were avoided due to religious prohibitions. Mustelids such as martins and minks, gray foxes (Urocyon cinereoargenteus), coyotes (Canis latrans), frogs (Rana sp), eagles (Aquila chrysaetos and Haliaeetus Leucocephalus), buzzards (Buteo buteo), magpies (Pica sp.) and crows (Corvus sp.) were not pursued as food. Fish and acorns were primary staples (Garth 1953:135), but the seasonal subsistence round embraced a wide suite of resources.

Atsugewi pursued spring salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha) and steelhead (Salmo gairneri) runs in their own territory (Garth 1953:136). During the summer Atsugewi intermittently fished for pike (Crenicichla sp.), suckers (Castostomus sp.), whitefish (Prosopium williamsoni), and trout (Salmo sp.). Atsugewi fishermen employed a range of methods to catch salmon and trout. Fishermen stood in streams and caught fish with woven baskets, dip nets, and spears. Stationary devices included baskets suspended from limbs jutting out across waterfalls, gill nets, and conical open-twined traps measuring up to five feet long. Surplus fish were dried without smoking, tied into small bales with skunkbrush (Rhus trilobata) cord, and stored in pits or in the winter lodge (Garth 1953:136). In the fall Atsugewi groups made an expedition to the territory of the Achomawi and paid for the right to fish for salmon. Salmon not eaten during the fall were dried and powdered for storage (Garth 1953:136). Atsugewi used fish harpoons “in the early times” and up to the time of contact.

Fishing was a particularly important subsistence pursuit at Eagle Lake and likely was the primary subsistence focus at CA-LAS-345. “Minnows were numerous in Pine Creek and Eagle Lake. In spring trout swam up the small streams to spawn at Eagle Lake (Garth 1953:136).

“…along Pine Creek, which empties into Eagle Lake, a man could catch fish with his hands and through them out on the bank. Enough fish might be obtained to keep the group in meat for a month or more (from 2 to 10 baskets of fish per man). IP said there might be enough to last all winter” (Garth 1953:136).

“Gill nets (ikarow), varying from fifteen to thirty feet long and about three feet or more high” were reported to have been used at Eagle Lake (Garth 1953:136).

Vegetal subsistence resources included the ubiquitous acorns from a variety of oaks (Quercus sp.). Atsugewi foraging parties made long trips to oak groves across their own territory, and sometimes into the territory controlled by the Yana (Garth 1953:138). Acorns were procured and temporarily stored in baskets “about the size of a nail keg” (Garth 1953) and transported to the winter lodges for storage. Buckeye (Aesculus californicus) and sugar pines (Pinus lambertiana) also provided nuts. The poisonous buckeye was leached of the toxins and eaten without cooking, but was not highly regarded as a desirable food. Sugar pine (Pinus lambertiana) nuts by contrast were sought after, as were gray pine (Pinus sabiniana) nuts (Garth 1953:138).

Epos roots (Pteridendia bolanden) were considered an important part of the seasonal subsistence activities. The roots were treated with sand to wear off the skins, dried and stored for cooking. Roots from the lily family (lilacea) provided another important staple. The bulbs of Cammasia sp. were excavated from the earth, baked, mashed and baked again into cakes. Tiger lilies (Lilium pardalinum) were cooked once in an earthen oven and eaten.

Berries and small fruits added another element to the diverse Atsugewi diet. Skunk berries (Rhus trilobata) were gathered in summer and stored, as were wild plums (Prunus subcordata). Chokecherries (Prunus demissa) were taken in season, mashed and eaten immediately. Serviceberries (Amelanchier alnifolia) were prepared like chokecherries and eaten but were also dried and stored where surpluses were available. Elderberries (Sambucus velutinus) and manzanita berries (Arctostaphylos sp.) were gathered, ground separately, mixed together and stored for use in the manufacturing of small cakes. Juniper berries (Juniperus occidentalis) were eaten fresh and also dried, ground, and stored as flour.

At least five varieties of sunflower seeds were procured (Balsamorhiza sp.) (Garth 1953:138). Women gathered sunflowers in July by knocking seeds into a burden basket with a beater. Tarweed fiddleneck (Amsinkia parviflora), clammy goosefoot (Chenopodium carinatum) and several unidentified seed bearing flora were also gathered with the same methods and stored (Garth 1953:139).

Vertebrate prey animals included deer (Odocoileus hemionus), antelope (Antilocarpa americana) and bears (Ursus arctos and U. arctos horribilis) while elk (Cervus sp.) were rare. Deer were the most sought after for the prestige associated with success as a deer hunter and the value of buckskins (Garth 1953:132). Hunters stalked deer while wearing a deer-head disguise, dispatching the animals with sinew-backed bows at close range. Hunters disguised as deer were sometimes mistaken for prey by mountain lions (1953:132). Deer were also driven by groups of hunters, shot from blinds and ambush locations, and trapped in pits dug with bell-shaped bottoms to keep the prey from escaping. Antelope were “charmed,” and dispatched while docile, or stalked with an antelope head-disguise (1953:133). Small brown bears (Ursus arctos horribilis) were dispatched whenever they were encountered. Larger grizzlies were more difficult to kill. Two men working in concert killed hibernating bears in their caves. The hunters rolled a log in front of them, perhaps as a shield, while approaching the bear in its lair. Upon encountering the bear the hunters dispatched arrows at the animal and then made a hasty retreat (Garth 1953:134). Man-eating bears were not eaten but other bears were eaten without qualms.

Religion, Mythology, and Cosmology

Atsugewi cosmology was populated with countless anthropomorphic nature spirits. These spirits could harm humans and their endeavors or they could also intercede on behalf of a person and aid in an undertaking. Individuals often recognized one or two spirits as their power spirit and frequently asked for its specific intercession. The Atsugewi recognized several uniquely powerful nature spirits including Grey Fox Kawow, the world creator, as well as Coyote, Makida. Despite Grey Fox’s powers of world creation he was frequently bested in mythological contests with Coyote. Certain prominent geographic features also contained various spirits, usually malevolent in nature. De Angulo provides an interesting counterpoint to Garth’s description of the plethora of nature and geographic spirits recognized by the Atsugewi. De Angulo indicates that Atsugewi cosmology was markedly “primitive” and lacked development into ritual complexes or secret societies (1926:352). De Angulo describes Atsugewi religious sentiment in terms of a world-view in the broadest sociological sense (weltanschauung) as one of wonder at the manifestations of metaphysical and natural reality. De Angulo asserts: “the spirit of wonder, the recognition of life as power, as a mysterious ubiquitous, concentrated form of non-material energy, of something loose about the world and contained in a more or less condensed degree by every object,--that is the credo of the Pit River Indian” (1926:354). De Angulo’s (1926) characterization, although highly romantic, captures less of the structure of Atsugewi religious life than Garth’s (1953, 1978) ethnographic accounts.

Historic Context

Lassen County formed on April 1, 1864 when the State legistlature passed an act organizing a new county out of the extreme eastern portion of Shasta County and northerneast portion of Plumas County. The County was named in honor of Peter Lassen, an early pioneer, settler, and explorer (Smith and Farris 1882:363). J. Goldsborough Bruff and Peter Lassen are commonly cited as the first Euro Americans to arrive in the Eagle Lake region. Shortly thereafter, in 1853, Lieutenant E. G. Beckworth of the Third Artillery formally mapped, recorded, and named Eagle Lake during the transcontinental railroad survey. Cattle owned by John Bidwell of Chico were driven into the Eagle Lake Basin for summer grazing in the fall of 1861-1862. William Dow is credited as the first white settler at Eagle Lake who located stock and built a cabin there in 1860. William Dow was born in New Jersey in 1827 and came to California in 1852 on the heels of the Gold Rush (Tibbetts 1997:12). His cabin was constructed near the present site of the Pine Creek Fish Trap (Amesbury 1971:26). Dow became owner of much of the lands around Eagle Lake and constructed several buildings in the area. Mr. Dow’s holdings are depicted on the 1871 GLO map in the southeast quarter of Section 1, Township 32 North, Range 10 East (Figure 6). In 1887, William Dow sold his land holdings at Eagle Lake to a Mr. Gallatin and moved to Susanville (Purdy 1988:79).

The first homestead patent in the Eagle Lake Basin was granted in 1884 to Noah and Katherine Spaulding for a total of 120.17 acres of land. John Spaulding attempted to capitalize on real estate in the Eagle Lake Basin. In 1914, the official map of the Town of Spaulding was surveyed and plotted. This 200- acre town site had named streets and numerous surveyed lots. John Spaulding sold the township to his daughter and son-in-law in 1920. A new plan map was filed with the Lassen County Recorder’s Office in 1924, which created 6,000 lots (Amesbury 1971:91). Shortly thereafter the Spaulding Tract property was deeded to the Bank of Italy (Purdy 1988). In 1925, the newly organized Eagle Lake Cabin site company (based in Los Angeles) acquired the title to the Spaulding tract, and began to advertise real estate. A total of 6,000 lots were established measuring 30 by 50 feet and sold for $25.00 each. The only restrictions that accompanied the purchase were, “no business, no tree cut except for building sites, keep free of garbage, [and] no ownership except white or Caucasian race” (Amesbury 1971:91). Many of the lots were sold site unseen and very few structures were built. By 1927 many of the properties were on delinquent property tax rolls. In the 1930’s many of the remaining lots were purchased by Perry Opdyke, husband of Millicent Grace Spaulding (daughter of John Spaulding), for the purpose of grazing (Purdy 1988).

By the mid 1940s approximately 40 percent of the lands around Eagle Lake including the shoreline, was controlled by the federal government through the US Forest Service or Bureau of Land Management. In 1954, the Department of Fish and Game (DFG) initiated a program to preserve the endangered Eagle Lake Trout. An egg-taking station was constructed on Pine Creek in 1955 for the purpose of sustaining the populations of Eagle Lake Trout. The facility was destroyed in 1958 by an ice storm and a new station was erected that same year using recycled lumber from the Hanson Cabin in the Town of Spaulding. In 1992, the log-crib weir was demolished and a new concrete weir constructed in its place.

Figure 6. General Land Office Plat Map 1871

III. Research Approach

Introduction

The potential significance of CA-LAS-345 is directly tied to the ability of the resource to address local or regional research questions. Based on research issues discussed below, a program of archaeological research and analysis will indicate whether the site contains significant scientific or historical information. The study will also aid in assessing the integrity of the site. The following research approach is directed at four research domains relevant to prehistory and two specific research questions significant to the history of CA-LAS-345. The four prehistoric research domains are: (1) cultural chronology, (2) subsistence strategy, (3) settlement system, and (4) trade and exchange. Historic research questions are: (5) What historic activities took place?; and (6) When was the site occupied during the historic period?

Prehistoric Research Domains

Research Issue 1: Cultural Chronology

Background Cultural Chronology

The cultural chronology of the Eagle Lake area and environs is part of the overall cultural chronology of the Modoc Plateau. Until recently the prehistory of northeastern California was poorly understood and previous cultural chronologies drew heavily on research from nearby regions. A number of significant archaeological studies conducted by Far Western Anthropological Research Group have contributed to a better understanding of the regional prehistory in northeastern California. Through the efforts of a number of researchers a six-part sequence (Delacorte 1997) was developed for understanding Northeastern California prehistory (Figure 4). These temporal periods include: Early Holocene (>7,000 BP), Post Mazama (7,000-4500 BP), Early Archaic (4500-3000 BP), Middle Archaic (3000-1800 BP), Late Archaic (1800-600 BP), and Terminal Prehistoric (600-Contact).

The chronological scheme adopted for this research design places an emphasis on local temporal trends noted within Northeastern California (Pippin et al. 1979; Delacorte 1997). It is not our purpose to construct any new specific localized chronology, nor ignore the importance of examining time-sensitive information within small regional contexts. This research proposes to examine CA-LAS-345 with regard to temporal trends and relevant research issues based on local chronologies (Pippin et al. 1979) regional chronologies (Delacorte 1997), as well as within broader taxonomic frameworks (Kowta 1988; Elston et al. 1987; Thomas 1981).

Research Objective Cultural Chronology

Establishing the time span of site use is fundamental information that must be completed prior to attempting to understand any other aspect of prehistoric behavior. The following research issues will be specifically addressed in this study:

(1) Over how long a period was the site used?

(2) During which period was the site used most intensively?

(3) Are single component areas present at CA-LAS-345 that could be useful in defining cultural assemblages?

(4) Can cultural components be arranged into chronological sequence based on obsidian hydration results, time-sensitive artifacts, archaeological stratigraphy, and/or radiocarbon determinations?

(5) Are cultural assemblages present that could aid in the construction of source-specific obsidian hydration rates?

(6) Where does the archaeological site fit within existing chronologies for the southern Modoc Plateau (Delacorte 1997) and Eagle Lake Basin (Pippin et al. 1979)?

(7) Is there evidence for a cultural shift in the assemblage and if so, does it match what has been identified at other local sites?

Data Needs Cultural Chronology

Investigation of cultural chronology at CA-LAS-345 will require collection of the following data:

• Identification of archaeological contexts retaining integrity of cultural or natural stratigraphy.

• Organic material from reliable archaeological contexts for radiocarbon dating.

• Culturally modified obsidian, including flakes and tools, to be used in obsidian hydration studies.

• Pairing of radiocarbon dates with obsidian artifacts from clearly associated archaeological contexts for source specific obsidian hydration rate calibration.

• Chronological indicators such as stylistically diagnostic artifacts, e.g. projectile points, shell beads, or other temporally discrete items.

Research Issue 2: Subsistence Strategy

Background Subsistence Strategy

Research on subsistence examines ways in which plant and animal resources were exploited for food and raw materials for the fabrication of items of material culture. This topic emphasizes the study of sources of food, diet, and technological assemblages associated with food acquisition, processing, or consumption. Traditionally, particular attention has been directed at the influence of past environmental conditions on subsistence strategy (Baumhoff 1963). Contemporary research on the topic of subsistence has focused on the effects of over-exploitation of natural resources and its effect on human cultural processes (Basgall 1987; Broughton 1987, 1994; Cohen 1981). Several large-scale studies have been completed, many of which involved development and testing of regional subsistence and settlement models (Baumhoff 1963; Broughton 1994: Jones 1997; Hildebrandt 1997; Schultz 1981; Simons 1993; Wohlgemuth 1996, 2002; White 2002).

In general, subsistence research interests and goals have traditionally focused on: (1) describing the dietary focus and/or breadth, (2) subsistence change through time, (3) correlation of subsistence choice, and technology with environmental variables, and (4) examining the profitability of subsistence choice (e.g. intensification, prey choice models, and catchment area studies).

Research Objective Subsistence Strategy

Subsistence is best addressed by examining the direct evidence of prehistoric diets such as floral and faunal remains. Indirect sources for the study of subsistence include artifacts, features, site function, bioarchaeology, or environmental information. Specific objectives to be pursued in the analysis of subsistence at CA-LAS-345 will include:

(1) What is the dietary composition, diversity, and emphasis noted in the archaeological assemblage?

(2) What is the degree of specialization or generalization of subsistence pursuits?

(3) Are dietary changes indicated in the archaeological record through time?

(4) Are there indications of technological evolution associated with food production through time?

Data Needs Subsistence Strategy

Investigation of subsistence research problems at CA-LAS-345 will require collection of the following data:

• Samples of lithic artifacts, including flaked and ground stone tools and debitage that will allow characterization of site assemblages in terms of subsistence focus.

• Identification of discrete site components through which potential changes in subsistence patterns may be tracked.

• Archaeological deposits containing a substantial sample of faunal or floral remains.

Research Issue 3: Settlement System

Background Settlement System

Research into prehistoric settlement systems is greatly concerned with examining how past peoples were differentially distributed across space. Investigation of settlement systems is part of the larger issues related to prehistoric economies and the relationship between settlement pattern and modes of resource acquisition. Studies of settlement strategy on the Modoc Plateau have sought to address the nature of regional land use with respect to physical geography (Kowta 1988), understanding the nature of land use changes though time (Baumhoff and Olmsted 1963:279-281; Kelly et al. 1987:272-275; Delacorte 1997; McGuire 2000), and examining how the organization of technology may account for land use patterns (Delacorte 1997).

Models of prehistoric settlement patterns on the Modoc Plateau often are built upon middle range hypothesis testing or evolutionary ecology. The forager/collector model first posited by Binford (1978, 1979, 1980) and later adapted by numerous researchers in California (Bettinger 1991; Bettinger and Baumhoff 1982; Hildebrandt 1984; White 1989) has served to understand if settlement patterns involve use of short-term camps from which seasonally-available resources were obtained, or is settlement involved longer term occupational sites and from which logistically organized resource acquisition forays were staged.

In this study, research at CA-LAS-345 will investigate the relationship of stone tool technologies in archaeological contexts to past economic behaviors, site function, and use. Tool life and use strategies are assumed to represent patterns in the archaeological record to the extent that the organization of technology and settlement are also patterned. Patterns formed by the transportation of stone tool materials will be especially evident in reduction trajectories, economics of production, and discard of individual tool types. Clearly, the pattern of tool production, use and discard would shift most radically in relation to settlement patterns (Binford 1980; Schiffer 1976; White 1984). This analysis will focus on issues of tool diversity, use, maintenance, and discard activities.

Research Objective Settlement System

(1) What are the range and emphasis of behavioral activities represented at CA-LAS-345?

(2) How did this site function within a broader settlement system?

(3) Is there evidence for a change in site function though time?

(4) How does the organization of technology account for land use patterns and/or what is the nature of land use with respect to environmental conditions in the area?

Data Needs Settlement System

Investigation of settlement strategy at CA-LAS-345 will require collection of the following data:

• Flake stone samples representative of the extent and variability of tool stone production, use, and discard at the site.

• Recognition of discrete activity areas which demonstrate the range or emphasis of site function(s).

• Definition of single component assemblages, strata, or loci that can be used to understand diachronic shifts in site function.

Research Issue 4: Trade and Exchange

Background Trade and Exchange

Trade goods and trading customs are important aspects of the process of cultural dynamics. A number of items were traded among the prehistoric inhabitants of the Modoc Plateau, including yew bows, arrows, anadromous and lacustrine fish, fresh water clams, clamshell disc bead money, Dentellia shell, acorns, furs, skins, and especially obsidian. These items were an important part of a cultural pattern that satisfied various economic, sociopolitical, ceremonial, religious, and subsistence needs. Because obsidian is prolific at prehistoric archaeological sites on the Modoc Plateau, it is a valuable resource for addressing questions regarding trade and exchange. The following section focuses the discussion on obsidian as a trade item.

Obsidian has proven to be a valuable source of information for understanding the nature of trade, exchange, and social relationships of prehistoric occupants of the state and has been a focus of archaeological investigations for nearly two decades (Jackson 1989; Layton 1990; Tremaine 1986). The use of obsidian hydration analysis as a relative dating technique has fostered diachronic studies of settlement strategy, territoriality, and exchange systems (Hildebrandt and Hayes 1983, 1984; Layton 1990; White 1984; White 2002).

Obsidian was a widely used and valuable commodity for the Pit River and Atsugewi tribes. Archaeological sites in the region generally demonstrate high percentages of obsidian tool stone relative to other material classes in Late Archaic and Terminal Prehistoric assemblages.

Research Objective Trade and Exchange

(1) Do obsidian source ratios at CA-LAS-345 correlate with observations of Bevill and Nilsson (1995) and Pippin et al. (1979) for other prehistoric archaeological sites in the Eagle Lake Basin?

(2) Is there evidence for diachronic shifts in obsidian source use in the archaeological assemblage?

(3) Present evidence suggests that obsidian exchange systems in the northeastern were formalized and most intense during the Late Archaic. Do obsidian hydration profiles depict relatively high frequencies of northeastern California obsidian relative to other time periods?

(4) Is there evidence of other types of trade and exchange systems, e.g. clamshell beads, magnesite, mussel or abalone shell, etc.?

Data Needs Trade and Exchange

Investigation of trade and exchange at CA-LAS-345 will require collection of the following data:

• Obsidian flaked stone tools and debitage for geologic source determination.

• Obsidian artifacts to compare temporal trends evident in pairing hydration rind and geologic source.

IV. Field Methods

The evaluation and treatment of CA-LAS-345 involved a limited program of site mapping, surface collection, and controlled hand excavation. The purpose of this testing program was to more fully ascertain the nature and extent of the archaeological deposit, to recognize the range of artifact constituents, to determine the temporal characteristics of the site, and to evaluate the significance of the site with regard to the previously presented research design (Chapter 3).

Site Mapping and Surface Collection

Field investigations began with an intensive surface reconnaissance of site area to identify any possible features or artifacts. Surface collection was conducted to determine the surface extent of the deposit and to locate areas of concentrated cultural materials.

As found, each artifact was pin flagged and plotted onto the site base map. All diagnostic artifacts were collected and listed in a field artifact log. These data were used in the identification of site boundaries and subsequent placement of Excavation Units (EU). As a result of the surface collection, three loci of concentrated cultural materials were identified (Figure 7).

One primary datum was established by affixing rebar into earth and served as a permanent mapping reference. Eight subdatums (or reference points) were established to supplement mapping information and provide a clear line of sight between various areas of the site. These reference points were tied into the primary datum. Mapping was completed with a theodolite mapping tool, stadia, and 100 meter tape. Mapping measurements were shown on a base map depicting area topography, prominent vegetation, natural features, site datum(s), locations of excavation units, diagnostic artifacts and/or cultural features. A detailed map was generated using a combination of theodolite mapping data, aerial photos, and Global Positioning Satellite (GPS) data (Figure 6).

Controlled Hand Excavation

Archaeological excavations featured controlled hand excavation. A total of 23 EUs 1-x-1 meter in size were excavated for a total of 11.25 cubic meters of soil matrix (Table 1). EU 10.5 was 1-x-0.5 meters in size and added to Unit 10. Five EUs were located in Locus A, one and one-half in Locus B, and seven in Locus C. In addition, three excavation units featuring ¼ inch screens were located in historic features including the Dow Cabin and an associated historic root cellar. All EUs were excavated using hand tools in 10cm arbitrary levels measured below ground level at each corner of the unit. All excavated soils were screened using either 1/4-inch (0.25 opening) or 1/8 inch (0.125 opening) hardware cloth. Ten EUs were excavated using 1/8 inch screens that processed 4.95 m3 of soil and 14 EUs were excavated using ¼ inch screens that processed 6.30 m³ of soil. One shovel probe excavated a total volume of 0.1m³ of soil. Excavated soils were transferred to buckets in the unit and passed to screener(s) or shoveled directly from the unit into screens. All cultural materials or items of interest were picked out and bagged by the excavation team. Field observations were recorded on EU forms for each unit, noting the types and quantity of materials retrieved from each level and the soil characteristics. EUs were situated across particular areas of the site in order to plot artifact density distributions and discover patterns related to horizontal stratigraphy. Select profile walls were delineated stratigraphically, photographed, and illustrated upon completion of the excavation unit. All units were dug to a maximum depth of cultural deposits whenever possible.

A single Shovel Probe (SP) 50 x 50 cm was excavated within the midden area of Locus A (see Figure 6). The SP was dug to a maximum depth of 40 cm. All midden soils excavated between 20 and 40 cm were transferred directly into a sterile trash bag and placed into a 5-gallon bucket. This soil column was submitted for flotation analysis to Dr. Eric Wohlgemuth (refer to Chapter 6).

Table 1. Excavation Unit Summary

Locus	Feature	Unit	Unit Size (m)	Mesh Size (Inch)	Depth (cm)	Volume (cubic meters)
A	-	1	1x1	1/8	40	0.4
A	-	2	1x1	1/8	80	0.8
A	-	3	1x1	1/8	60	0.6
A	-	4	1x1	1/8	110	1.1
-	-	5	1x1	1/8	60	0.6
-	-	6	1x1	1/4	60	0.6
-	7	7	1x1	1/4	40	0.4
-	8	8	1x1	1/4	30	0.3
-	-	9	1x1	1/4	40	0.4
C	2	10	1x1	1/8	30	0.3
C	2	10.5	1x0.5	1/8	30	0.15
B	-	12	1x1	1/8	60	0.6
B	-	17	1x1	1/4	40	0.4
B	-	18	1x1	1/4	60	0.6
B	-	19	1x1	1/4	50	0.5
B	-	20	1x1	1/4	50	0.5
B	-	21	1x1	1/4	40	0.4
B	-	22	1x1 </