Phase I reconnaissance survey of the upland portions of Buck Key owned by Marriner Properties Development, Inc.

MISSING IMAGE

Material Information

Title:
Phase I reconnaissance survey of the upland portions of Buck Key owned by Marriner Properties Development, Inc.
Physical Description:
ix, 67, 10 p. : ill., maps ; 28 cm.
Language:
English
Creator:
Torrence, Corbett McP
Marquardt, William H
Institute of Archaeology and Palecenvironmental Studies
Florida Museum of Natural History
Publisher:
University of Florida
Place of Publication:
Gainesville, Fla
Publication Date:

Subjects

Subjects / Keywords:
Excavations (Archaeology) -- Florida   ( lcsh )
Archaeological surveying -- Florida   ( lcsh )
Calusa Indians -- Anitiquities   ( lcsh )
Mounds -- Florida   ( lcsh )
Antiquities -- Lee County (Fla.)   ( lcsh )
Antiquities -- Buck Key -- Florida   ( lcsh )
Genre:
non-fiction   ( marcgt )

Notes

Summary:
Identifies archaelogical sites in the upland portions of properties on Buck Key, Lee County, Florida.
Statement of Responsibility:
Corbett McP. Torrence and William H. marquardt.
General Note:
"A report submitted to Mariner Properties Development, Inc. by the Institute of Archaeology and Palecenvironmental Studies, Florida Museum of natural History, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida 32611-7800.

Record Information

Source Institution:
University of Florida
Rights Management:
All applicable rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.
Resource Identifier:
oclc - 46608787
ocm46608787
sobekcm - AA00007140_00001
System ID:
AA00007140:00001

Full Text











PHASE I RECONNAISSANCE SURVEY OF
THE UPLAND PORTIONS OF BUCK KEY OWNED BY
MARINER PROPERTIES DEVELOPMENT, INC.


Corbett McP. Torrence and William H. Marquardt



A Report Submitted to Mariner Properties Development, Inc.

by the

Institute of Archaeology and Paleoenvironmental Studies


Florida Museum of Natural History
University of Florida
Gainesville, Florida 32611-7800


November, 1998


Corbett McP. Torrence, Archaeologist
Robert B. Patton, Archaeologist
William H. Marquardt, Ph.D., Principal Investigator





































































































































































































































~















PHASE I RECONNAISSANCE SURVEY OF
THE UPLAND PORTIONS OF BUCK KEY OWNED BY
MARINER PROPERTIES DEVELOPMENT, INC.


Corbett McP. Torrence and William H. Marquardt



A Report Submitted to Mariner Properties Development, Inc.

by the

Institute of Archaeology and Paleoenvironmental Studies


Florida Museum of Natural History
University of Florida
Gainesville, Florida 32611-7800


November, 1998


Corbett McP. Torrence, Archaeologist
Robert B. Patton, Archaeologist
William H. Marquardt, Ph.D., Principal Investigator







MANAGEMENT SUMMARY

The Florida Museum of Natural History, University of Florida conducted systematic

archaeological testing to identify archaeological sites in the upland portions of properties on Buck

Key, Lee County, Florida owned by Mariner Properties Development, Inc. between November

21, 1997 and February 16, 1998. The Mariner properties, as currently defined, comprise an area

of 69.5 acres, which include 26.8 acres of uplands and 42.7 acres of wetlands.

The purpose of this archaeological survey was two-fold:

To identify and locate archaeological deposits on the upland sections of Buck Key

owned by Mariner Properties Development Inc.

To make recommendations regarding the long-term use of the property for

development purposes; these recommendations will serve to balance the

development needs with site preservation needs.

There are at least five archaeological sites contained within the Mariner properties. These

include the three previously known Native American archaeological sites 8LL721, 8LL722,

and 8LL55 and two newly discovered sites 8LL1953 and 8LL1954, which are of

aboriginal and European origin, respectively. In addition, it is possible that segments of the

mosquito control canal adjacent to site 8LL722 may have been aboriginal in origin, but these

areas were not surveyed. No precolumbian or historical cultural material was identified during

subsurface testing in other portions of the upland area. The four Native American sites are

recommended for nomination to the National Register of Historic Places (see below). Future

research on Buck Key promises to contribute significantly to our understanding of precolumbian

culture and land use in this area.







Three of the four known precolumbian sites (8LL55, 8LL722, and 8LL1953) likely

represent a single village area. However, based on the distribution of artifacts, the different site

areas appear to have been used for discrete purposes. In addition, it is possible that portions of

site 8LL721 may also have operated contemporaneously with the larger village area. These four

sites are recommended for nomination to the National Register of Historic Places as elements of a

discontiguous archaeological district. A qualified archaeologist should be on hand to monitor any

land-disturbing activities within 50 meters of the delineated 400-square-meter area of site 8LL55.

If unmarked human remains are discovered there, or elsewhere, they must be dealt with according

to the provisions of Florida law (872.02, 875.05 FS).

In summary, the findings and resource management recommendations of this report are as

follows: A total of five archaeological sites are currently known to exist with the Mariner

holdings. These include four precolumbian Native American sites and one historic-period

homestead dating to the late-nineteenth/early-twentieth-century. All potentially adverse impacts

related directly or indirectly to construction, such as the location of staging areas, should be

avoided in site areas whenever possible. If it proves infeasible to avoid damage to archaeologically

sensitive areas, mitigative data recovery work should be undertaken by qualified archaeologists. It

is also recommended that the four precolumbian sites, as a group, be nominated for inclusion in

the National Register of Historic Places.

Prior to our investigations, there were three known archaeological sites located within the

Mariner Properties Development, Inc. land holdings: 8LL55, 8LL721, and 8LL722. In addition to

these sites, two new sites were identified during our survey; one (8LL1953) is located on the

eastern fringe of the uplands west of site 8LL722 in sampling blocks 27, 32, and 37, and is







precolumbian in origin; the other (8LL1954) is located in sampling blocks 30, 31, 35, and 36 and

is likely the remains of a late-nineteenth/early-twentieth-century homestead.

A site grid was established over the entire upland area by placing two-foot rebar stakes at

90-meter intervals using a conventional transit and fiberglass survey tape. In addition, the site grid

is tied into the concrete survey markers for easy reference to certified property maps. One

hundred sixty-three (163) shovel test pits were excavated. Of these, 102 were situated at 30-meter

intervals in the upland area. An additional 34 shovel tests were excavated along eastern and

western margins of upland areas, and adjacent to the wetlands, consistent with state requirements.

On the western margin of the property, two additional shovel tests were situated judgmentally in

an attempt to evaluate the extent and temporal affiliation of a surf-clam shell deposit. The

remaining 25 shovel tests were excavated in and around the burial site (8LL55) and site 8LL721

in order to delineate the size of these sites. Specifically, 18 pits were excavated at site 8LL55 and

7 were excavated at site 8LL721. Archaeological materials were identified in 11 test pits and 20

artifacts were recovered during surface walkovers. All test pits and surface collections are tied

into the site grid.

Site 8LL55, located in sampling blocks 42 and 48, has been described as a burial mound,

however, this interpretation is misleading. It appears more likely that 8LL55 is a burial ground

located on a sand ridge. Based on our testing, it appears that the mortuary area is contained

within a 20-x-20-m (400 square meter) area, but it is also possible that small discrete clusters of

burials could be encountered elsewhere in the elevated sand ridges.

Surface walkovers combined with ground truthing of aerial maps reveal that the two

upland parcels located on the extreme eastern edge of the Mariner property in sampling blocks 23,

24, 28, 29, 33, and 34 are actually archaeological deposits associated with site 8LL722: a

iii







Caloosahatchee mound complex (periods IA through IV). Archaeological testing of these

deposits by William Marquardt in 1986 yielded significant results and it was recommended that

the site be nominated for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places. In addition to the

elevated deposits 50 meters north of the mounds, Marquardt encountered midden deposits on the

surface only a few centimeters above mean high tide. These deposits extended below the modern

water table. The significance of this discovery is that there may be archaeological deposits in

wetland areas that are not necessarily visible on the surface.

Archaeological testing at site 8LL721 identified numerous small, dense clusters of cultural

material. These artifact loci are dispersed over an approximate 3,600-square-meter area (120 x 30

m), between 0.1 and 0.7 meters above mean sea level. The site area is topographically demarcated

by an elongate elevated ridge in sampling blocks 14 and 18. The types and distribution of artifacts

recovered during our investigations suggest that gastropod and bivalve meat extraction and,

possibly, shell tool manufacture took place in this area. Radiocarbon analysis of one of the

deposits reveals that portions of the site date to A.D. 660-770 (Beta-118007).

A fourth site area (8LL1953) was newly identified due west of site 8LL722 in sampling

blocks 27, 32, and 37. Five shell dipper/vessels and one cutting-edged tool were recovered during

surface walkovers and one additional dipper/vessel was recovered during subsurface excavations.

The site area appears to be situated along the extreme eastern margin of the upland area,

extending into the wetlands to the mosquito control ditch. Based on the large number of

dipper/vessels recovered, it is likely that this area is associated with the mortuary site (8LL55).

The remains of one of the old homestead sites (8LL1954) from the late-nineteenth/early-

twentieth century were likely identified in sampling blocks 35 and 36. Apparently, there were four

family structures and a small school house built on the island in the 1890s. The small community







engaged primarily in citrus farming and, in addition to the school, provided community outings

and Sunday school classes for nearby residents. However, the community was short lived due, in

part, to untimely deaths and the hurricanes of 1921 and 1926.






TABLE OF CONTENTS

MANAGEMENT SUMMARY................................ .. ............. .................... i

LIST O F FIG U R E S .......................................... ........ ......................................................... ....vii

LIST OF TABLES .......................... .......................................................................................... viii

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ........................ .................................................. .....................ix

INTRODUCTION...........................................................................................................................

PROJECT GOAL AND OBJECTIVES ....................................................................................4..

CULTURAL BACKGROUND ....................................... .................................................................6

PREVIOUS INVESTIGATIONS ............................................................................................12

METHODS OFDATARECOVERY...........................................................................................18

SAM PLIN G R E SU L T S ............................................................ ................................................20

Site 8LL 55 ..................... .......................... .... ............... ....................21

Site 8L L 72 1 ........................... ........................................................................................26

S ite 8L L 72 2 ....................................................... ................... ......... ...............................3 2

Site 8L L 1953 ........... ... ... .. ...... ..................................... ..... ............................. ....32

Site 8LL1954 ...................................... ............................... ...............................33

D discussion ......................... .................... .................. ...... ........... ............................37

C O N C L U SIO N S .............................................. ..... ...... .................... ..................................39

RE C O M M EN D A TION S .............................................................................................................40

REFE REN CE S CITED ....................... ... ... ........ ..... .................. ..... ......................... 42

APPENDIX 1: SoilProfileRecords......................................................................................44

APPENDIX2: Artifact Catalogue ............................................................................................64

APPENDIX 3: Site Forms ...............................................................................................67



vi










LIST OF FIGURES

1. Location of Project Area..........................................................................................................2

2. Location of Upland and Wetland Environmental Zones .......................................................3

3. MarinerPropertiesDevelopment, Inc. Landholdings onBuckKey..........................................

4. Location ofM arquardt's Test Units................................................................................ 14

5. Location of SamplingBlocks ............................................................................................... 19

6. Location of Subsurface TestPits........................................................................ ...................22

7. 8LL55 Looking West at the Northern Edge of the Ridge Containing Burials................23

8. Location of Test Pits at Site 8LL55 ............................................................................24

9. South Profile ofN2195 E700 with Pottery Sherds in Context........................................25

10. Location of Test Pits and Surface Scatters at Site 8LL721 ..............................................27

11. Surface Scatter at 8LL721, Locus 1 ..........................................................................28

12. Shell Tools from 8LL721, Loci 1 and 3 .......................................................................... 29

13. Lightning W helk Cup .................. ......................... ......... ................................................ 31

14. Location of Surface Finds and Test Pits at Site 8LL1953 .................................................34

15. Shell Dippers Recovered from 8LL1953 ........................................................................... 35

16. Type A Cutting-Edged Tool from Site 8LL1953 ......................................... ....................35

17. W etland Area Containing Surface Finds .................. ... ......................................... .... 36

18. Spanish Bayonets Marking the Likely Extent of a Structure at 8LL1954 ...........................38

19. Surface Scatter at Site 8LL1954 ...................................................................................38










LIST OF TABLES

1. Generalized Chronology for the Caloosahatchee Area.............................................................

2. Radiocarbon Dates from Buck Key ........................................... .............................15

3. Summ ary of Project Results ...................... .... ................... ................................ 40







ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

We thank Raymond Pavelka and Mariner Properties Development, Inc. for requesting our

services, funding this research, and contributing to knowledge of past Floridians. Dr. William H.

Marquardt served as Principal Investigator and edited the final report. Corbett Torrence and

Robert Patton served as Field Archaeologists. The field work was conducted between November

22, 1997 and February 24, 1998. Theresa Schober and William Marquardt completed final

revision and formatting of this report.

We owe a debt of gratitude to several companies and individuals who contributed labor

and resources to the project. Without the assistance from these people, the project would have

exceeded the boundaries of its funding. Greg LeBlanc and Barbara Reneke of Wildside

Adventures were extremely generous in providing kayaks for access to Buck Key when motorboat

transportation was difficult due to unusual tides and/or windy conditions. We also thank them for

inviting us to stay at their house on Sanibel after long work-days on nearby Buck Key. Daryl

Baumgartner's contribution of"the finest field accommodations an archaeologist could ever

imagine" is greatly appreciated. The Brass Cleat Marina was helpful in providing and lending

various needed equipment. In addition, Bill Stinchcomb was always willing to offer advice on

outboard-motor maintenance and repair. Ed Chapin was also very helpful in this regard, and we

very much appreciate the use of his chain saw over the course of the project. Jack and Anne

Gaddy graciously allowed us to use their dock and we thank Chuck Smith for granting us

permission to use his boat access. We are grateful for comments by Gloria Sajgo, which helped

clarify certain aspects of the report.









INTRODUCTION

Buck Key is a relict barrier island located immediately east of the southern end of

Captiva Island, Lee County, Florida (Figure 1). The island is approximately 2300 m long

north to south and has an average width of about 600 meters. Buck Key contains numerous

microenvironments, but at a broad scale these can be classified into two vegetation zones that

are elevationally determined: wetlands and uplands (Figure 2). The diversity of plant species

within each vegetation zone is remarkable. In addition, many animals, including shellfish,

fish, lizards, snakes, gopher tortoises, birds, marsh rabbits, and raccoons make various use of

each environmental zone.

The wetlands comprise approximately 50 percent of Buck Key's total area and are

comprised of two major vegetation regimes: red and black mangroves. These two distinct

vegetation zones are determined largely by salinity tolerance and thus they are also

differentiated by elevation. Dense red mangrove forests fringe the island's coast line and

occupy almost the entire southern quarter of the island. This vegetation regime is inundated

typically by normal, daily tidal fluctuations and, therefore, can be elevationally defined

between 0.0 and 0.15 meters above mean sea level (m.a.s.1.). Behind this tidal zone, between

0.15 and 0.5 m.a.s.l., the landscape is dominated by black mangroves, buttonwoods, and

numerous other wetland species. This vegetation regime is most evident along the northern,

southern, and eastern (leeward) margins of the island, where the topography is subdued.

The most elevated portions of the island are represented by a series of Holocene sand

ridges or dunes that trend in a somewhat crescent fashion from north to southeast. The dunes

are dominated by a hardwood coastal hammock vegetation characterized by cabbage palm, sea



























CAPE HAZE
PENINSULA


80CA


atarish


&LIND PASS


SCALE


0 i. 10


Figure 1. Location of project area.


C.IeP.T.


SOURCE: FLORIDA ATLAS 8 OAZITEER
S.W.F. PROJECT






















~MN


* AREA OF DETAIL


LEGEND


UPLANDS

EXTENT OF UPLANDS

BLACK MANGROVES

EXTENT OF BLACK MANGR

RED MANGROVES


0 250 500 METERS

0 750 1500 FEET
C.McP.T.

Figure 2. Location of upland and wetland environmental zones.


Li


Li











grape, stopper, gumbo limbo, and mastic (Scarry and Newsom 1992:377). Xeric communities,

including some of the aforementioned species as well as Spanish bayonet and barbed wire

cactus, are also common. In addition to numerous other rare, endangered, and threatened

species, Buck Key also contains the State Champion Jamaican dogwood and mastic trees (Ray

Pavelka, personal communication, 1998).

Land holdings within Mariner Properties Development, Inc. on Buck Key occupy much

of the northern half of the island, but generally exclude properties adjacent to the western

shore. More specifically, Mariner Properties Development, Inc. holds 69.5 acres in five

parcels contained in Government lots One, Two, and Four in Township 45 south, Range 21

east, and Township 46 south, Range 21 east (Figure 3). Of this area, 42.7 acres are classified

as wetlands, leaving 26.8 acres in uplands.

PROJECT GOAL AND OBJECTIVES

The goal of this project was to identify and locate archaeological deposits on the upland

sections of Buck Key owned by Mariner Properties Development, Incorporated, and to make

recommendations for their protection and preservation in relation to the development and

construction activities proposed for the subject area. Any cultural deposits encountered would

be subjected to further testing to determine the horizontal and vertical extent of deposits, their

general integrity, and if the deposits were potentially eligible for inclusion in the National

Register of Historic Places. To accomplish these goals, archaeological subsurface and surface

examinations were employed and a site grid was established over upland areas by placing two-

foot lengths of half-inch rebar rods at approximate 90-meter intervals.










Figure 3. Mariner Properties Development, Inc. landholdings on Buck Key.


'4'
9
a
O


co
*


9
,t
cu
0



CONCRETE MONUMENT

ELEVATED SHELL FEATURE

WETLANDS


0 100 200 METERS

0 00 600 FEET
0 300 600 FEET


C.McP.T.










Knowing the precise locations and extent of archaeological deposits will help avoid

destructive impacts related to land-use and potential development activities on Buck Key

because archaeologically sensitive areas will be preserved or if that is infeasible mitigative data

recovery will be undertaken by qualified archaeologists. In addition, understanding the

distribution, extent, and characteristics of archaeological deposits on Buck Key will aid in

generating a holistic model of cultural land use both on Buck Key and in the region generally.

CULTURAL BACKGROUND

Land holdings of Mariner Properties Development, Inc. contain significant archaeological

deposits (see Marquardt 1992). Native Florida Indians, Spanish fisherfolk, and twentieth-century

European-Americans have all made use of the area, and all altered the landscape in their own

ways. The shell deposits at site 8LL722 are clear, visible examples of Indian land use (Figure 3).

The cultural and natural history of Buck Key is as diverse as its current environmental

composition. Long before Buck Key existed as a barrier island, Native American peoples lived in

southwest Florida. Over twelve thousand years ago, American Indian groups called Paleo-Indians

moved into Florida from the north. They lived near the end of the Pleistocene epoch, a period in

the earth's history when the climate was colder and glaciers advanced from the poles. During this

time, glacial ice tied up so much of the earth's water that sea levels were 80 meters lower than

they are today. Consequently, the Gulf coast was situated many miles further west, and in interior

regions, large animals such as mastodons and giant sloth roamed Florida's cool grassy steppe.

Paleo-Indians hunted big game, but more commonly lived off plants and smaller animals.

By 7000 B.C. the earth's climate had become warmer, and American Indian groups had

adapted to the changing environment. As sea levels rose and the climate became wetter and










warmer in Florida, fresh water became more abundant in interior regions. Rivers and streams

increased in size and estuaries shifted eastward with the changing coastline wherever fresh and

salt waters mixed together.

Coastal Indians developed a thriving culture based on the many resources the estuaries

provided. These people were accomplished fishers who consumed many different species. Some

fish were netted, while others were taken by hook and line. Shellfish were also gathered and

eaten. Certain shells were saved and used to make a variety of tools and ornaments, including net

gauges and weights, sinkers, hammers, adzes, dippers, pendants, and beads (Marquardt 1992;

Torrence 1996).

Although these people depended on the estuaries, they did not overlook the many other

resources available to them. Plants and terrestrial animals continued to be important resources in

daily life. For example, nets were woven from palm fibers, and the leg bones of deer were used to

manufacture tools such as fishing gear and projectile points.

During this time, people likely engaged in a mobile settlement pattern. Villages were

established in locations that minimized the time required to extract seasonally available resources.

Thus people shifted their village locations to be able to exploit specific resources as they became

seasonally available. In this manner, village sites were generally small and would have been

characterized by sheet middens comprised of sea shells, fish bones, and a tool assemblage

reflective of the specific resources being targeted. By "sheet midden" we mean spatially extensive

but shallow deposits of food remains and other discarded materials.

By 4000 B.C., some peoples in southwest Florida were living in permanent settlements

comprised of intentionally constructed shell and earthen mounds as evidenced at Horr's Island








8

(Russo 1991). However, habitation sites characterized by broad sheet middens are more common

for this time period. Consequently, people may have been using a combination of mobile, as

described above, and logistic settlement patterns. In a logistic settlement pattern, people reside in

a single, large base camp year round, but periodically inhabit small satellite camps for the

extraction and collection of specific resources. In this manner, the base camps contain a wide

range of tool types to accomplish all the various tasks conducted throughout the year. By

contrast, the smaller extraction sites are comprised of fewer tools designed to target and process

specific resources.

Around 2000 B.C., Indians in southwest Florida began making clay vessels, settlements

appear to have become more sedentary, and regional variations in cultural expressions became

more evident than they had been before. Buck Key is located in the Caloosahatchee culture

region, which extends from the tidally influenced portions of the Myakka and Peace Rivers south

to the Cocohatchee River. Due to a lack of data, the eastern boundary is placed halfway between

Charlotte Harbor and Lake Okeechobee. The western boundary is demarcated by a series of

elongate barrier islands, and the area is contained principally within Lee, Charlotte, and Collier

counties. The spatial delineation of a culture area is inevitably dynamic, as technological, social,

and political factors shift through time. However, at any particular period, culture areas are useful

for heuristic purposes (Table 1).

According to Stapor, et al. (1987), Buck Key began to emerge as a barrier island around

A.D. 400, and by A.D. 1000 it had likely acquired its current topographic form. If this estimate is

accurate, one would not expect to encounter archaeological deposits dating prior to this time

because wave action and storms would likely have eroded away any prior evidence of occupation.








Table 1. Generalized chronology for Caloosahatchee area (see Marquardt 1992; Olausen 1994).


Date Caloosahatchee Settlement Characteristics
Area
Southwest Florida experiences unprecedented population growth
A.D. 1946-present Late Twentieth and development; most of Buck Key comes into government and
Century private ownership that results in natural and cultural resources
conservation
A.D. 1928-1945 The Great Tamiami Trail links Tampa and Miami via southwest Florida;
Depression and Depression and war slow economic development except for
World War II military activities
The Florida Land Influx of newcomers and investment brings increased population
A.D. 1919-1927 Boom and commercial development to southwest Florida; hurricanes of
1921 and 1926 cause abandonment of Buck Key
Agricultural and Citrus, cattle, fishing, and tourism industries become established
A.D. 1896-1918 Industrial in southwest Florida; Brainard, Knowles, and Ormsby families
Expansion settle on Buck Key; a school is established in 1898
A.D. 1881-1895 Early American The Disston land purchase stimulates growth of railroads,
Development drainage of wetlands, and development of south Florida
Period
Rancho Period Arrival of Cuban fisherfolk; small, self-sufficient homesteads
A.D. 1763-1880 (Muspa-Cuban- including stilt houses, fishing shacks, and farms
Seminole)
Arrival of Europeans; final years of Calusa dominion;
A.D. 1500-1763 Caloosahatchee V continued maintenance of mound-complex villages and
supporting hamlets and use of small extraction sites
A.D. 1350-1500 Caloosahatchee IV Maintenance of large mound-complex villages; large permanent
villages and small extraction sites; logistic settlement patterns.
A.D. 1200-1350 Caloosahatchee III Formation of large mound-complex villages and ceremonial sites;
logistic settlement patterns; small extraction sites
A.D. 800-1200 Caloosahatchee IIB Large permanent villages; increased mound building;
small extraction sites; logistic settlement patterns
A.D. 500-800 Caloosahatchee IIA Formation of large permanent villages; sheet middens
and habitation mounds; logistic settlement patterns
500 B.C.-A.D. Caloosahatchee I Formation of Buck Key barrier island; broad sheet middens;
500 increased sedentism; logistic settlement patterns
1200-500 B.C. Terminal Archaic Continued increase in site sizes and densities; broad sheet
middens; mobile and logistic settlement patterns
2000-1200 B.C. Late (Ceramic) Site sizes and densities increase; broad sheet middens; mobile
Archaic and logistic settlement patterns; first appearance of ceramics
5000-2000 B.C. Middle Archaic Barrier islands form; first appearance of permanent settlements
along present-day coastline; mobile and logistic settlement
patterns
6500-5000 B.C. Early Archaic Small base-camps and extraction sites; mobile settlement pattern
12000-6500 B.C. Paleo-Indian Small hunting camps; mobile settlement pattern









On the basis of a radiocarbon date of A.D. 660-770 from site 8LL721, it is evident that

Native Americans began to use the island as early as the Caloosahatchee HA period. By A.D. 800,

the beginning of the Caloosahatchee IIB period, many village sites in southwest Florida contained

intentionally constructed mounds and ridges. These features are common in Pine Island Sound

and Charlotte Harbor. From these large, socially focal sites, peoples foraged in nearby

environments and, in this manner, created numerous small extraction sites. In addition, small

village sites likely sprang up around the larger centers.

Native American deposits dating to ca. A.D. 1010 to A.D. 1430 have also been

encountered on Buck Key (Marquardt 1992:37, 40). These deposits likely represent a habitation

site because elevated shell and earthen mounds and ridges and a roughly contemporaneous burial

site have been identified (Marquardt 1992). In addition, earlier Indian occupations are also

possible as evidenced by cultural deposits situated below the modem water table. In other words,

the oldest archaeological deposits on Buck Key may have been inundated by rising sea levels.

At the time of Spanish contact in the early sixteenth century, the region was inhabited by

the Calusa, a highly stratified, sedentary, politically complex, maritime chiefdom ruled by a

paramount chief called "Carlos." First hand accounts of Calusa culture are documented in the

writings of Zubillaga (1946), Solis de Meras (1923), Laudonniere (1975), and Fontaneda (1944).

By all accounts the Calusa were the most important group in south Florida in terms of population

size, political importance, and influence on neighboring tribes.

The archival sources provide ample evidence in support of a complex social organization

among the Calusa. These include: social stratification into nobility, commoners, and slaves;

symbols of noble rank; royal sibling marriage; complex ceremonialism; tribute sent to Carlos by

chiefs of towns under Calusa control; accumulation and redistribution of wealth; sophisticated








11

political alliances; militarism; and extensive earthworks, including temple mounds, burial mounds,

domiciliary mounds, plazas, and canals.

Throughout the world, very few groups have adapted this level of social organization

without an economic base of farming. Though much is known about the Calusa during historic

times, the causal factors and timing of events that lead to the formation of their complex social

organization are debated (Marquardt 1986, 1991; Widmer 1988). Whatever the cause, the

abundant quantity and quality of plant and animal resources in the project area allowed the Calusa

to harvest their food from the natural world instead of having to labor to grow it.

In summary, American Indians probably made use of the lands within the Mariner

properties shortly after the island is believed to have emerged around 1500 years ago. Little is

known about the archaeological deposits on Buck Key, but based on our current understanding of

the region's cultural history, it is likely that Buck Key would have been an attractive location for

precolumbian settlement. Consequently, a variety of archaeological deposits could potentially be

encountered within the project boundaries. These deposits might include small extraction sites,

large sheet middens, and elevated mounds and ridges. Certainly, future research promises to

contribute greatly to our understanding of precolumbian land use in this region.

In addition to the precolumbian archaeological deposits on Buck Key, there is also ample

evidence of European land use on the island. Aerial photographs from 1944 show clearly some of

the locations where historic peoples farmed the land in the late-nineteenth and early-twentieth

centuries. According to Dormer (1987:187), Buck Key was named originally for the large number

of deer that inhabited the island. By the early twentieth century, four homes and a school house

had been constructed on the island, which supported three families and a bachelor uncle (Dormer








12

1987:187-191). The settlement, however, was destroyed in the hurricanes of 1921 and 1926, and

the island was never resettled.

PREVIOUS INVESTIGATIONS

So far as we know, the first professional archaeological excavations on Buck Key were

conducted by the Florida Museum of Natural History in 1986, under the direction of William

Marquardt. A team conducted a series of preliminary test excavations in the burial site (8LL55),

the village site (8LL722), and two additional areas situated to the north and west of site 8LL722.

They excavated 9.75 square meters, contained within nine test units. A detailed report of these

investigations is published in Culture and Environment in the Domain of the Calusa (1992).

According to local informants, prior to Marquardt's investigations, human bones had been

looted from the burial site. One informant suggested that the burial site contained two episodes of

interments, which were separated by a thin layer of beach-derived sands. Apparently, both strata

contained flexed individuals representing adult and juvenile burials. Fortunately, most of the

looting has stopped, thanks to the vigilant efforts of federal employees, nature conservancy

groups, and various other members of the local community.

At the burial site (8LL55), Marquardt and his team excavated three one-by-one meter

squares, spaced at five meter intervals, running south to north. The test units were called

Operations E, F, and G (Figure 4). Operations E and F exhibited similar stratigraphic sequences

comprised generally of yellowish-white sands and finely crushed sea shells, overlain by

approximately 20 centimeters of white sand, followed by another 20 centimeters of grey sands,

which were capped by a reddish-brown humic layer. No artifacts were identified in Operation E,

but Operation F proved positive for precolumbian cultural materials. Here, 15 Grog-tempered









Plain and nine St. Johns Plain sherds were recovered from the upper two levels, which extended

to a depth of 30 centimeters below ground surface. No artifacts were recovered below this depth.

Operation G, the northernmost test unit, was excavated immediately adjacent to, and just

above, the wetlands. Stratigraphically, this unit was similar to Operations E and F with one

notable exception: the two intermediary sand layers were separated by a thin stratum of light grey

sands. Within this stratum and resting on top of the stratum below it, human burials were

encountered. The initial 1-x-l-m excavation was subsequently expanded to the south and west in

order to fully expose the interments. At least five individuals were represented, but no artifacts

were encountered. Of the five individuals, four were contained in what appeared to be a single

cluster or, perhaps, a single burial episode. The bones of an adult female were located centrally,

surrounded by an adult male, a sub-adult female, and a child. The central female was the only

interment represented by a fully articulated skeleton. Based on radiocarbon dating and a "C-

adjusted estimation, the burials were probably interred sometime between A.D. 1000 and A.D.

1160 (see Table 2). For a more complete description of the burial deposits and the osteological

analysis that followed see Marquardt (1992) and Hutchinson (1992), respectively.

Further to the north and somewhat more easterly than the burial site are several Indian

habitation mounds which comprise site 8LL722. Here, Marquardt and his team excavated four

one-by-one-meter test units (Operations A, B, C, and I) in order to evaluate the nature of the

archaeological deposits contained in the elevated shell features. For a detailed description of the

excavations, see Marquardt's (1992) report.













LEGEND


EXCAVATION UNIT

ELEVATED SHELL FEATURE

WETLANDS

EXTENT OF UPLANDS


EXCAVATION UNITS NOT TO SCALE


Figure 4. Location of Marquardt's test units.


C.McP.T










Table 2. Radiocarbon dates from Buck Key with estimated 13C/12C adjustments.


'AMS date.


2New date.


3See discussion by Marquardt (1992:44).


Operations A, B, and I were situated in an elevated, predominantly shell feature or ridge

approximately 80 meters long north-south and 30 meters wide (see Figure 4). The stratigraphic

sequences encountered in these operations were varied and complex. However, the deposits

encountered led Marquardt (1992:34) to suggest that the remains of structures represented by

post molds and organic floors were evidenced in the ridge. Ceramic artifacts encountered

included Sand-tempered Plain, SPCB Plain, Belle Glade Plain, Glades Tooled, and St. Johns

Check-stamped sherds. In addition, in Operation B, several bone implements, including an

engraved expanded-head bone pin, a tubular bone bead, and a carved twisted bone object were


Site no. Provenience Material Raw age IC-adjusted Lab no. Calibrated Calibrated
I ____ BP age __ range 2s range Is
8LL722 Shell midden, marine 600 80 1020 80 Beta-16283 AD 1250-1470 AD 1300-1430
Operation B-l, Level 5 shell
8LL722 Shell midden, marine 620 70 1040 70 Beta-16285 AD 1250-1450 AD 1300-1410
Operation A-i, Level 6 shell
Shell midden, marine 700 70 1120 70 Beta-16286 AD 1170-1400 AD 1240-1330
8LL722 Operation A-i, Level 6, shell
Locus 3

8LL722 Shell midden, Busycon 700 60 1120 60 Beta-16282 AD 1190-1390 AD 1250-1320
Operation B-2, Level 9 sinistrum

8LL722 Shell midden, marine 710 60 1130 60 Beta-16284 AD 1180-1380 AD 1240-1320
Operation C-l, Level 3 shell

8LL55 Burial mound, human 750 70 estimated Beta-25471 AD 950-1220 AD 1000-1160
Burial 1-A bone' 967 703

8LL722 Shell midden, marine 910 80 1330 80 Beta-16287 AD 930-1260 AD 1010-1180
Operation A-i, Level 9 shell

Fighting conch deposit, Strombus
8LL721 Shovel Test alatus 1280 60 1690 60 Beta-118007 AD 610-845 AD 660-7702
N2770 E707.5










encountered (Walker 1992a). Other artifacts found include two Type A whelk-shell cutting-

edged tools and several lithic artifacts. Based on radiocarbon dating and the presence of

temporally diagnostic artifacts, Marquardt (1992:38) concludes that the excavated portions of

the ridge dated between A.D. 1010 and A.D. 1430, and are thus attributable to the

Caloosahatchee II, II, IV temporal periods.

Operation C was situated some 50 meters north and slightly west of Operation A in a

smaller ridge deposit. In Operation C, numerous shells and many fish bones were encountered.

In addition, a nearly complete Sand-tempered Plain bowl was recovered. The bowl is 11 cm

high and has a rim-circumference of 30 cm. Although the rim is stylistically similar to Belle

Glade-type pottery, the paste is not. With the exception of this bowl, pottery was encountered

infrequently, although other Sand-tempered Plain, SPCB Plain, Belle Glade Plain, and St. Johns

Plain sherds were encountered. In addition, a Type B cutting-edged tool, a Type D hammer, and

a shell handle were recovered. Radiocarbon dating indicates that the deposit dates between A.D.

1240 and AD. 1320.

Analysis of animal bones recovered from the excavation at 8LL722 revealed a heavy

reliance on estuarine resources and, in particular, the mangrove/seagrass and oyster bed

habitats. The inhabitants at site 8LL722 appear to have relied more heavily on large fish such as

catfish, burrfish, sheepshead, silver perch, snook, jack, seatrout, red drum, black drum, and

mullet than did peoples at other sites in the region. However, small fish such as pinfish, and

perhaps thread herring and pigfish as well, were also significant contributors to the protein diet.

For a more detailed discussion of zooarchaeological investigations on Buck Key, see Walker's

(1992b) chapter.










Regarding Native American plant use at site 8LL722, archaeobotanical analysis of

charcoal identified 13 wood genera including palm, black mangrove, nicker bean, sea grape,

buttonwood, white mangrove, mastic, twinberry, pine, live oak, rapanea, red mangrove, and

possum grape (Scarry and Newsom 1992:384). Scarry and Newsom (1992:389) note that

mangroves and buttonwood are high-density woods that produce steady and intense heat when

burned and, consequently, may have been favored as fuel woods. In addition, many seeds from

edible fleshy fruit, including cocoplum, sea grape, mastic, prickly pear, cabbage palm, saw

palmetto, hog plum, as well as four genera of grasses were also identified, but sea grape and

cocoplum were most abundant (Scarry and Newsom 1992:392).

Marquardt excavated two additional one-by-one-meter test units to the east and north of

site 8LL722, which were called Operations D and H, respectively (see Figure 4). In Operation

D, situated in the upland vegetation zone, no cultural materials were identified. Contrarily,

Operation H, located in the wetlands approximately 50 meters north of Operation C, contained

Native American cultural material. Interestingly, the ground surface at Operation H is situated

only a few centimeters above the water table. This excavation site was selected to evaluate a

small deposit of surf-clam shells and several pottery sherds that were identified on the surface.

During subsequent excavation, a layer of surf-clam shells containing eight Sand-tempered Plain

sherds and one Belle Glade sherd was encountered. Beneath this deposit, and extending below

the water table, a presumably older midden comprised of surf-clam shells, charcoal flecks, and

occasional whelk, oyster, and sea-urchin shells, and lots of bone (mostly fish) was encountered.

Marquardt (1992:40) concluded that the deposit likely represented a Caloosahatchee II period

occupation that had been inundated by Holocene sea level rise. In addition, Marquardt estimated








18

the deposit might potentially date to A.D. 1000 or perhaps even earlier, possibly making it part

of the oldest known archaeological midden deposit on Buck Key at that time.

Site 8LL721 was first reported by Danny H. Clayton in 1984. According to the Florida

Site File records, Clayton identified precolumbian period pottery, worked shell, and sea food

remains over a two-acre area. No artifacts were collected.

In summary, little is known about site 8LL721, but the burial site 8LL55 is

contemporaneous with the deposits encountered at site 8LL722, which is likely a habitation site.

Archaeological deposits are also present within the wetland vegetation zone, and these deposits

extend below the modem water table. Consequently, surface indicators alone in wetland areas

may not be reliable indicators for the absence of archaeological deposits. Furthermore, sites

inundated by sea-level rise are important as they potentially represent Buck Key's oldest cultural

occupations, and information gained from such deposits is crucial for the reconstruction of

regional cultural chronology.

METHODS OF DATA RECOVERY

The Mariner properties were divided into fifty 90-meter sampling blocks numerically

referenced from east to west and north to south (Figure 5). Using a conventional transit and

survey tape, grid stakes represented by two-foot lengths of half-inch rebar metal rods were

placed in the center of all sampling blocks containing natural upland vegetation communities.

Using these grid stakes as reference hubs, nine shovel tests, each measuring approximately

30 cm in diameter, were excavated at 30-meter intervals within upland areas of each

sampling block. Adjacent to wetland areas, additional shovel tests were excavated in order to

establish a fifteen-meter grid. In sampling blocks 22, 25, and 30, a single transect of shovel















12 13 |4 I


0 100 200 METERS

0 300 600 FEET




Figure 5. Location of sampling blocks.


SSITE 8LL722 NOT DELINEATED


C.McP.T.









20

tests spaced at 15-meter intervals and oriented 352 degrees east of magnetic north was situated

along the crest of a narrow ridge in order to fulfill the sampling goals.

In places where natural barriers such as tree trunks and large roots prevented excavation,

shovel tests were slightly off-set from their original grid locations. Shovel tests were terminated

after at least five centimeters of sterile marl or beach sand had been excavated. In other words, in

terms of soil formational processes, all shovel tests were excavated at least five centimeters into

the C horizon. All materials excavated from the shovel tests were passed through 1/4-inch metal

mesh hardware cloth and soil profiles were recorded schematically.

In areas where precolumbian archaeological deposits were encountered, additional shovel

tests were situated judgmentally to establish the horizontal extent of the site area. In addition,

surface walkover surveys were used to aid in the delineation of site boundaries. Artifacts

recovered during surface collections were tied into the site grid using a Brunton

pocket transit and survey tape to record angle and distances to known grid points.

All artifacts recovered during the survey were hand washed, labeled, and analyzed by

trained museum personnel, and are curated at the Florida Museum of Natural History in

Gainesville, Florida, accession numbers 98-1 through 98-4.

SAMPLING RESULTS

Prior to our investigations there were three known archaeological sites located within the

Mariner Properties Development, Inc. land holdings: 8LL55, 8LL721, and 8LL722. In addition to

these sites, two new sites were identified during our archaeological survey; one is located on the

eastern fringe of the uplands west of site 8LL722 in sampling blocks 27, 32, and 37, and is











precolumbian in origin; the other, located in sampling blocks 30, 31, 35, and 36, is likely the

remains of a late-nineteenth/early-twentieth-century homestead.

During subsurface archaeological testing, a total of 162 shovel tests were excavated

(Figure 6). Of these, 102 were situated at 30-meter intervals in the upland area as defined by

Kevin Erwin's wetland survey of 1997. An additional 34 test pits were excavated along eastern

and western margins of upland areas, and adjacent to the wetlands, in order to fulfill state

requirements. On the western margin of the property, two additional test pits were situated

judgmentally in an attempt to evaluate the extent and temporal affiliation of a surf-clam shell

deposit. The remaining 24 test pits were excavated in and around the burial site (8LL55) and site

8LL722 in order to delineate the size of these sites. More specifically, 18 test pits were excavated

at site 8LL55 and 6 were excavated at site 8LL722. Archaeological materials were identified in 11

test pits and 20 artifacts were recovered during surface walkovers. All test pits and surface

collections are tied into the site grid.

Site 8LL55

Site 8LL55, located in sampling blocks 42 and 48, was initially reported as being a burial

mound, however this interpretation may be misleading. It appears more likely that 8LL55 is a

burial ground located at the southern terminus of a crescent shaped sand ridge that extends

northwesterly before turning in a more northerly direction (Figure 7). The distinction between a

burial "mound" and a burial "ground" is important. While a burial "mound" is an intentionally

constructed and visually identifiable topographical feature, a burial "ground" represents a

mortuary area that may not be visually distinct from the surrounding topography.












E510 E600 E690 E 780


LEGEND


NEGATIVE SHOVEL


0 100 200 METERS
I 3 6
0 300 600 FEET


N 2860




N 2770


N 2680


N 2590


i / N2500


8LL 1953

S' / --- N 2410


S" .8 L L 19 4
.'.. ." .. ... .N 2320



.: .. ,. ,, N 2230

'..* : ,' L.

...... N2140



n SITE 8LL722 NOT DELINEATED
SN2195 E685 NOT DELINEATED
E 510 E600 E690 E780
,I I i I I I C.Mc
Figure 6. Location of subsurface test pits.

Figure 6. Location of subsurface test pits.




































Figure 7. 88LL55 Looking west at the northern edge of the ridge containing burials.

During our recent investigations at site 8LL55, over a hundred bone fragments were

identified on the surface and 21 test pits were excavated at five-meter intervals adjacent to and

around these surface finds (three of these test pits were excavated as part of a 15-meter sampling

grid adjacent to wetland areas) (Figure 8). In general, the test pit soil profiles were

stratigraphically consistent. The top layer was a thin, five-centimeter-thick layer of dark brown

organic material. Underneath this humic layer was a twelve-centimeter-thick horizon of grey to

dark-grey sands with whole and crushed shells, which rested on top of a ten-centimeter-thick

layer of grey sands with whole and crushed shells. Next was an eight-centimeter-thick zone of

pale brown sands, which overlay a white sand layer that extended to the base of the excavations











_EI I

I -- /r-ff-V-W IE675


- 0 0


I I
E 680 E 685


I
E690
/
/I
/t


,- 0


O-'S.


0



- t.25


--O
\\





I
1 1 *
S 'S
SII

/ t
/ O d



II






0\




I -

\ \

I 4


LEGEND


NEGATIVE 1998

POSITIVE 1998

NEGATIVE 1986

POSITIVE 1986

SCALE IN METERS


SHOVEL TEST

SHOVEL TEST

EXCAVATION UNIT

EXCAVATION UNIT

ELEVATIONS IN ESTIMATED METERS ABOVE MEAN SEA LEVEL


Figure 8. Location of test pits at site 8LL55.


N 2205 -


''---
0 \
0 /
\ o




0-0




0 -
0 0



-~ -- 1.25--/


N 2200 -





N 2195 -





N 2190 -





N2185 -





N 2180 -


N2175 -


N4-


N2170


ALI


C.McP.T.


(


--s


- -.50










(see Appendix 1). This stratigraphic sequence is similar to the general pattern identified by

Marquardt (1992:41) during his 1986 investigations.

Only one test pit, N2195 E685, located only a few meters away from Marquardt's positive

test, Operation G, contained Native American human remains and artifacts. More specifically, two

human mandible fragments and ten sherds of Belle Glade Plain pottery were recovered between

40 and 50 cm below ground surface. Of the ten sherds recovered, two are rim sherds, and the

entire assemblage appears to represent various parts of a single vessel. In addition, numerous

sherds, likely from the same vessel, were visible in the south profile of the test pit at a depth of 44

cm below the ground surface (Figure 9). The mandible fragments did not appear to be part of an

intact burial. No human remains or artifacts were encountered in the other test pits.


Figure 9. South profile ofN2195 E700 with pottery sherds in context.









Based on these findings, it is probable that the burial ground is contained within a 20-x-

20- meter area (400 square meters). However, Marquardt's investigations demonstrate that

burials were likely interred in small diffuse clusters ca. A.D. 1000 to 1160. Such burial practices

have also been encountered at Boggess Ridge near Big Mound Key, in Charlotte County. The

problem archaeologically with such a burial pattern is that the extent of the mortuary area cannot

be adequately evaluated with small test units. Consequently, it is possible that burials could be

encountered over a larger area within the sand ridges that occupy the Mariner property and

adjacent parcels. In other words, even though our testing procedure meets and exceeds state

recommendations for adequate coverage, it is still possible that additional burials will be

encountered in sand ridges that are near the delineated 400-square-meter area. We recommend

that a qualified archaeologist be on hand to monitor any land-disturbing activities within 50 meters

of the delineated 400-square-meter area of site 8LL55. If unmarked human remains are

discovered, they must be dealt with according to Florida law (872.02, 875.05 FS).

Site 8LL721

During archaeological testing at site 8LL721, surface investigations identified five dense

clusters of cultural material and numerous other more defuse scatters of isolated shells that were

dispersed over an approximate 3,600-square-meter area (120 x 30 m). The surface finds were

situated on a topographically distinct feature characterized by an elongate, elevated platform

between 0.1 and 0.7 meters a.m.s.l. in sampling blocks 14 and 18 (Figure 10). Subsurface testing

suggests that the site is slightly larger, 140 x 30m, or 4,200 square meters.

The dense clusters of cultural material were referenced numerically by locus number from

north to south and shell tools were collected from Loci 1, 3, and 4. Locus 1 extends 44 meters

north to south along the ecotone between the wetlands and uplands (Figure 11). In general, the











I
E 700


I

0
I


o
I


AREA OF DETAIL


I
S E 720


*







LOCUS


LOCUS 2


o LOCUS 3


LOCUS 4 (


LEGEND


LOCUS 5


0 NEGATIVE SHOVEL TEST
/
/ POSITIVE SHOVEL TEST
/
S SURFACE SCATTER
DENSE SURFACE SCATTER
DENSE SURFACE SCATTER


SCALE IN METERS
TEST PITS NOT TO SCALE


C.McP.T.


Figure 10. Location of test pits and surface scatters at site 8LL721.


I
E 680


1
1









1
o








I

t

* I
I
f
/~L


N 2800 -



N 2790 -



N 2780 -



N 2770 -



N 2760 -



N 2750



N 2740 -



N 2730



N 2720


I
* /


--


' 4
I


N2710







28

Figure 11. 8LL721 Looking north at Locus 1 surface-scatter situated in the ecotone between the
uplands (left) and the wetlands (right).


deposit is comprised of lightning whelks, quahog clams, surf clams, and fighting conchs, however,

the relative quantities of these species vary over the course of the deposit. Probing into the

deposit with a trowel, we determined that the deposits extend minimally to a depth of 15

centimeters below the surface.

Two possible shell tool blanks (specimen numbers 98-1-3 and 98-1-7), one possible

dipper/vessel or debitage fragment (specimen number 98-1-6), and six culturally modified

lightning whelk shells were recovered from the central portion of Locus 1. Specimen numbers 98-

1-3 and 98-1-7 may represent forms produced during the initial manufacture of Type A and Type

D shell tools, respectively (Figure 12). Modifications made to the six lightning whelks that were

collected appear to reflect a consistent extraction process characterized by peeling back the shell











Figure 12. Culturally modified shells from 8LL721: Specimen 98-1-3, possible Type A preform
(left); Specimen 98-1-7, possible Type D preform (center); and Specimen 98-1-1, Indeterminate
Type A tool (right).


lip and placing one or two perforations in the outer whorl. Typically, one perforation was situated

on the upper half of the outer whorl adjacent to the smooth surface of the inner whorl. In cases

where there were two perforations, the second perforation was quite small (less than one

centimeter) and was located on the upper portion of the outer whorl on the side of the shell that is

opposite the modified aperture.

Locus 2 is a dense concentration of large lightning whelk shells contained within a three-

by-three-meter area near grid coordinates N2750 E710. Most of the shells appear to have been

modified in a manner similar to those encountered in Locus 1, but none were collected. Locus 3 is

situated just two meters east of test pit N2740 E720 and is characterized by a dense, two-by-







30

three-meter concentration of lightning whelks with an occasional quahog clam, tulip shell, fighting

conch. One indeterminate Type A shell tool (specimen number 98-1-1) was recovered from the

center of the deposit (Figure 12). Locus 4 contained a moderate scatter of lightning whelk shells

dispersed over an approximate 30-square-meter area along the E690 grid line between N2713 and

N2720. Here one dipper (specimen number 98-1-5) and two modified whelk shells were

recovered. The extraction technique exhibited by the modified shells was similar to the proposed

extraction technique described for the shell recovered from Locus 1. Locus 5 is a light scatter of

lightning whelk shells dispersed over a eight-by-five-meter area just north of the N2680 E690 grid

stake, but no artifacts were collected.

Eleven test pits were excavated within site 8LL721 and five of these contained

precolumbian Native American artifacts. In shovel test N2770 E707.5, a dense cluster of 30

fighting conchs and two outer whorl lightning-whelk fragments were recovered between 5 and 22

cm below ground surface, but no other artifacts were encountered. Based on radiocarbon testing,

the fighting conchs were harvested ca. A.D. 610-845 (Beta-118007). In shovel test N2740 E720,

numerous lightning whelk, fighting conch, horse conch, and tulip shells and shell fragments, and a

single unidentifiable fish vertebra were encountered between 14 and 21 centimeters below ground

surface. Counting the number of spires (apexes) represented by each specimen, the minimum

number of individuals represented includes 24 lightning whelks, five horse conchs, two fighting

conchs, and one tulip, but these shells were not collected. In shovel test N2680 E690, a lightning

whelk cup was recovered 10-20 cm below surface (Figure 13). In shovel tests N2800 E720 and

N2792 E712, whole surf-clam shells were encountered and the latter of these shovel tests also

contained quahog clam shells. Based on the presence of unequivocal artifacts in the immediate site

area, it is likely that these materials are cultural in origin.










Test pit soil profiles were generally consistent, comprised of five centimeters of dark

brown humic layer on the surface, a ten-centimeter layer of grey to dark grey sands, and an eight-

centimeter horizon of greyish brown sand with varying quantities of whole and crushed shell

inclusions. At the bottom of the profile was a very pale brown layer of sand and shell marl.

Surprisingly, despite the widespread precolumbian use of this landform, no dark sheet midden

indicative of habitation was identified. This suggests at least two possibilities: (1) site 8LL721 is

not a habitation area, but is a processing area associated with site 8LL722; or (2) site 721 is an

earlier deposit, representing sporadic use of the island as a shellfish-processing area, while site

722 was occupied later and more intensively. The single radiocarbon date we have from site 721

(A.D. 610-845) dates to the late Caloosahatchee IIA/early Caloosahatchee IIB period, whereas

site 722 is known to date to the Caloosahatchee IIB, III, and IV periods. In either case, the types

and distribution of artifacts recovered during our investigations suggest that gastropod meat

extraction and shell tool manufacture took place in the area of site 721.


Figure 13. Specimen 98-1-16, lightning whelk cup from N2680 E690.









Site 8LL722

No archaeological testing was conducted at this previously recorded and partially

investigated site. Surface walkovers, combined with ground truthing of aerial maps, revealed that

the two "upland parcels" located on the extreme eastern edge of the Mariner property in sampling

blocks 23, 24 ,28 ,29, 33, and 34 are actually archaeological deposits associated with this site,

which is a Caloosahatchee II, III, and IV-period composite mound village (see Figure 4).

Archaeological testing of these deposits by William Marquardt in 1986 yielded significant results

and it was recommended that the site be nominated for inclusion in the National Register of

Historic Places.

Based on the topographic investigations conducted during this research, the mounds

associated with site 8LL722 are smaller than initially interpreted but, nonetheless, they are still

archaeologically sensitive and significant. In addition to the elevated deposits or mounds and

ridges, Marquardt's excavation at Operation H, 50 meters north of the mounds, reveals that

midden deposits occur only a few centimeters above mean high tide and extend below the modem

water table. The significance of this discovery is that there may be archaeological deposits in the

wetland areas that are not necessarily visible on the surface. Consequently, the horizontal extent

of site 8LL722 remains uncertain. In addition, it is possible that portions of the mosquito control

ditches in and around the site area could have originally been part of a Calusa canal system. From

historical accounts, it is known that the Calusa and other South Florida Indian people traveled by

canoe and dug canals to facilitate travel both within and between their villages.

Site 8LL1953

Due west of site 8LL722 in sampling blocks 27, 32, and 37, Native American cultural

remains were encountered both on the surface and in shovel test N2365 E690 (Figure 14).










Artifacts recovered on the surface include five shell dipper/vessels and one Type A cutting-edged

tool (Figures 15 and 16). All of the surface finds were recovered from the wetland vegetation

zone between 0.15 and 0.5 meters a.m.s.l. (Figure 17). In addition to these artifacts, numerous

other cultural remains such as perforated lightning whelk shells were identified over a wide area

extending along the eastern edge of the wetlands from grid coordinates N2350 to N2540.

Nine test pits were excavated in the uplands immediately west of the surface finds, but no

Native American artifacts were encountered. However, near the southern terminus of the surface

indicators, a dipper/vessel was encountered between 13 and 21 cm below ground surface in

shovel test N2365 E690, which is situated on a narrow, five-meter wide upland-ridge that extends

northeasterly into the wetlands.

In summary, the site area appears to be situated along the extreme eastern margin of the

upland area, extending into the wetlands to the mosquito control ditch. Based on the large number

of dipper/vessels recovered, it is likely that this area is associated with the mortuary site (8LL55).

Ethnographic and historical accounts, and previous archaeological investigations document that

dippers/vessels were used ritualistically for mortuary ceremonies.

Site 8LL1954

The remains of a homestead site dating to the late-nineteenth/early-twentieth century

occupation of Buck Key were likely identified in sampling blocks 35 and 36 (see Figure 6). Here a

dense, rectangular concentration of Spanish bayonets likely demarcates a relict house foundation

(Figure 18). Unequivocal historic period artifacts associated with the potential homestead site

include a metal bucket located on the surface (Figure 19), a nineteenth-century piece of white

ware ceramic situated between 10 and 19 cm below ground surface in shovel test N2350 E570,



























0 AREA OF DETAIL


E 700


; ,


0


E E 720



S\-




E 740


N 2500 -




N 2490 -


N 2480 -


N 2470 -


N 2460 -


N 2450 -
-^t-


N 2440 -




N 2430 -


LEGEND


I CUTTING-


EDGED TOOL


0


DIPPER

0 SHOVEL TEST

SCALE IN METERS
TEST PITS NOT TO SCALE


C. McP. T.

Figure 14. Location of surface finds and shovel tests at site 8LL1953.


I


1L Q


I

































Figure 15. Shell dippers: Specimen 98-2-7 (left) and Specimen 98-2-4 (right).


Figure 16. Type A cutting-edged tool: Specimen 98-2-8.


































Figure 17. 8LL1953 Looking east across the wetland area containing dippers.


and a piece of container glass located 7 to 15 cm below ground surface in shovel test N2335

E540. In addition, in shovel test N2305 E540, a dense, 40-centimeter-thick deposit of surf-clam

shells accompanied by a few lightning whelk fragments, were encountered at the northern

terminus of sand ridge just south of the potential homestead site. Further west, in shovel test

N2305 E533, surf clams were also encountered along with four medium-sized lightning whelks

and several lightning whelk fragments. However, the deposit was only 16 cm thick. No other

shell deposits were encountered between these tests and the potential homestead site, nor were

any other cultural remains encountered further to the south. Consequently, given the close

proximity of the deposits, it is likely that the surf clams are associated with the homestead.










Further investigation of the relationship between the surf clam deposit and late-

nineteenth/early-twentieth-century economic practices might be intriguing. Apparently, there

were four family structures and a small school house built on the Buck Key in the 1890s. The

small community engaged primarily in citrus farming and, in addition to the school, provided

community outings and Sunday school classes for nearby residents. However, the community

was short lived due, in part, to untimely deaths and the hurricane of 1921 (Dormer 1987:190).

Discussion

Sites 8LL55, 8LL721, 8LL722, and 8LL1953 are all attributable to the Caloosahatchee

period. However, a detailed discussion of contemporaneity is not possible at this time given the

limited number of radiocarbon samples that have been analyzed. Nonetheless, several

observations can be offered. There is a strong likelihood that sites 8LL55, 8LL722, and

8LL1953 are contemporaneous. Radiocarbon samples from the burial site (8LL55) are

contemporaneous with the earlier dates from site 8LL722 (see Table 2), which suggests that

people living at 8LL722 between A.D. 950 and 1220 may have buried some of their dead at site

8LL55.

Although no radiocarbon samples were obtained from site 8LL1953, it is likely that this

site is associated with the burial ground based on what we know about Calusa ceremonialism. It

is also possible given the nature of the burial interments identified at site 8LL55, that other

burials could be encountered in the upland ridges of Buck Key. If such a scenario were to be

correct, ridges closest to site 8LL1953 might yield the highest probability of containing burials.

Site 8LL721, radiocarbon dated ca. A.D. 610-845 with 95% probability, is potentially the oldest

known archaeological deposit on Buck Key. However, the inundated archaeological deposits in

































Figure 18. 8LL1954 Looking southwest at Spanish bayonets marking the likely edge of a
structure.


Figure 19. 8LL1954 Looking southwest at the surface scatter associated with historic-period
homestead.












Operation H at 8LL722 could date between A.D. 400 and A.D. 800, assuming that the deposit

accumulated initially on dry ground. This would imply that the two deposits are roughly

contemporaneous.

CONCLUSIONS

Archaeological deposits were identified at known sites 8LL55, 8LL721, 8LL722, and at

new sites 8LL1953 and 8LL1954. No other cultural material was identified during surface and

subsurface testing in other portions of the upland area. In addition, limited surface examinations

in the wetland areas did not identify any cultural deposits other than those previously

documented by Marquardt (1992). There are at least five archaeological sites contained within

the Mariner properties (Table 3). These include the three previously known Native American

archaeological sites 8LL721 in sampling blocks 14 and 18, 8LL722 in sampling blocks 23, 24,

28, 29, and 34, and 8LL55 in sampling blocks 42 and 48. Two additional archaeological

deposits were identified during this survey. These include a historic-period homestead site in

sampling block 35 and a precolumbian site component in sampling blocks 27, 32, and 37. In

addition, it is possible that segments of the mosquito control canal adjacent to sites 8LL722 and

8LL55 may be aboriginal in origin.

Three of the four known precolumbian sites (8LL55, 8LL722, and 8LL1953) likely

represent a single village area. However, based on the distribution of artifacts, the different site

areas appear to have been used for discrete purposes. In addition, it is possible that portions of

site 8LL721 may also have operated contemporaneously with the larger village area. These four









40

sites are recommended for nomination to the National Register of Historic Places as elements of

a discontiguous archaeological district.


Table 3. Summary of project results.

Site Time period Size in square meters Comments
8LL55 Precolumbian 400 (minimum) Burial ground
8LL721 Precolumbian 4,200 Processing area'
8LL722 Precolumbian 24,000 Habitation area
8LL1953 (new) Precolumbian 6,000 Ceremonial area'
8LL1954 (new) Historic 900 (minimum) Homestead'

'Further testing required to substantiate site function.


RECOMMENDATIONS

Most of the upland areas on Buck Key owned by Mariner Properties Development, Inc.

are apparently devoid of archaeological deposits and thus if ground disturbing activities were to

occur in these areas in the process of development and/or construction, archaeological deposits

likely would not be adversely impacted.

The wetland area northeast of Hurricane Bayou in and around the confluence of the

mosquito control canal and the bayou is a proposed area for a boat basin, dock, and

construction staging area. Based on our upland survey, this area has a low potential for

archaeological deposits. However, the wetland areas were not surveyed during this investigation

and therefore an inspection of wetland areas would be warranted prior to any construction

activities. We think it is doubtful that intact archaeological deposits would be encountered in

this area, however.








41

Likewise, we have not tested the mosquito-control ditches, nor do we have evidence to

suggest that modem mosquito control ditches have been placed in areas of ancient canals, but

this is a possibility. We recommend monitoring by a professional archaeologist of any necessary

ground-disturbing activities in the immediate vicinity of the mosquito control ditches.

A total of five archaeological sites are currently known to exist within the Mariner

holdings. These include four precolumbian Native American sites and one historic-period

homestead dating to the late-nineteenth/early-twentieth-century. All potentially adverse impacts

related directly or indirectly to construction, such as the location of staging areas, should be

avoided in site areas whenever possible. Prior to the initiation of ground disturbing activities,

the limits of the five known sites should be clearly marked on the ground, using Figure 6 of this

report as a guide. This will aid construction personnel in their efforts to avoid known sites. If it

proves infeasible to avoid damage to archaeologically sensitive areas, mitigative data recovery

work should be undertaken by qualified archaeologists. It is also recommended that the four

precolumbian sites, as a group, be nominated for inclusion in the National Register of Historic

Places.

It is important that the results of this survey are not attributed to unsurveyed areas. That

is, the issue of whether or not archaeological deposits exist in wetland areas owned by Mariner

Properties Development, Inc. on Buck Key remains unresolved.

Buck Key is unique regionally for its pristine and diverse cultural and environmental

resources. There are few places in the United States that can boast of containing significant

archaeological deposits, state champion trees, and a plethora of rare, endangered, and

threatened native plant species.










REFERENCES CITED

Dormer, Elinore M.
1987 The Sea Shell Islands: A History of Sanibel and Captiva. Revised edition. Rose
Printing Company, Tallahassee, Florida.

Fontaneda, Do. d'Escalante
1944 Memoir of Do. d'Escalante Fontaneda Respecting Florida, Written in Spain,
About the Year 1575. Translated by Buckingham Smith and with editorial
comments by David O. True. Glades House, Coral Gables, Florida.

Hutchinson, Dale L.
1992 Prehistoric Burials from Buck Key. In Culture and Environment in the Domain
of the Calusa, edited by W. H. Marquardt, pp. 411-422. Institute of
Archaeology and Paleoenvironmental Studies, Monograph 1. University of
Florida, Gainesville.

Laudonniere, Ren6 de
1975 Three Voyages. Translated and edited by Charles E. Bennett. University Presses
of Florida, Gainesville.

Marquardt, William H.
1986 The Development of Cultural Complexity in Southwest Florida: Elements of a
Critique. Southeastern Archaeology 5:63-70.

1991 Introduction. In Missions to the Calusa, by John H. Hann, pp. xv-xix. University
Presses of Florida, Gainesville.

1992 Recent Archaeological and Paleoenvironmental Investigations in Southwest
Florida. In Culture and Environment in the Domain of the Calusa, edited by W.
H. Marquardt, pp. 9-57. Institute of Archaeology and Paleoenvironmental
Studies, Monograph 1. University of Florida, Gainesville.

Olausen, Stephen
1994 Historic Resources of Lee County, 1991-1945. National Register of Historic
Places, Multiple Property Documentation Form, 32 pp. Photocopy on file,
Florida Museum of Natural History, Gainesville, Florida.

Russo, Michael
1991 Archaic Sedentism on the Florida Coast: A Case Study from Horr's Island
Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Anthropology, University of Florida.
University Microfilms, Ann Arbor, Michigan.











Scarry, C. Margaret and Lee A. Newsom
1992 Archaeobotanical Research in the Calusa Heartland. In Culture and Environment
in the Domain of the Calusa, edited by W. H. Marquardt, pp. 375-401.
Institute of Archaeology and Paleoenvironmental Studies, Monograph 1.
University of Florida, Gainesville.

Solis de Merds, Gonzalo
1923 Pedro Menindez de Avilks, Adelantado, Governor, and Captain-General of
Florida: Memorial. Translated, with notes, by J. Conner. Florida State Historical
Society, Deland.

Stapor, Frank W. Jr., Thomas D. Mathews, and Fonda E. Lindfors-Kearns
1987 Episodic Barrier Island Growth in Southwest Florida: A Response to
Fluctuating Holocene Sea Level? Miami Geological Society, Memoir 3:149-
202.

Torrence, Corbett McP.
1996 From Objects to the Cultural System: A Middle Archaic Columella Extraction
Site on Useppa Island, Florida. M.A. Thesis, Department of Anthropology,
University of Florida.

Walker, Karen J.
1992a Bone Artifacts from the Calusa Area. In Culture and Environment in the
Domain of the Calusa, edited by W. H. Marquardt, pp. 229-246. Institute of
Archaeology and Paleoenvironmental Studies, University of Florida, Monograph
1. Gainesville.

1992b The Zooarchaeology of Charlotte Harbor's Prehistoric Maritime Adaptation:
Spatial and Temporal Perspectives. In Culture and Environment in the Domain
of the Calusa, edited by W. H. Marquardt, pp. 265-366. Institute of
Archaeology and Paleoenvironmental Studies, Monograph 1. University of
Florida, Gainesville.

Widmer, Randolph J.
1988 The Evolution of the Calusa: A Non-Agricultural Chiefdom on the Southwest
Florida Coast. University of Alabama Press, Tuscaloosa and London.

Zubillaga, Felix (editor)
1946 Monumenta Antiquae Floridae (1566-1572). Monumenta Missionum Societatis
lesu 3. Rome.















APPENDIX 1

Soil Profile Records


ABBREVIATIONS:

Blk = Black

Bmn = Brown

Gry = Grey

Wht = White

Ylw = Yellow


Lt = Light

Dk = Dark

P = Pale

V =Very


OLF = Organic leaf and fibric layer

S = Sand

CS = Crushed shell

WS = Whole shell

W+CS = Whole and crushed shell











8LL55


C',V42."
OLF

WS fC6
7l-D-G,77 7
%A/ /SCs

"Sryk-wfm -
G" -.
v.P.as<^- V.%i







77777


Na.oo E _9.



10
10 ---ey--

20-


30-

40 -

C^ I 1 7 7 7-/


Na2oo E o


N .,/ E
N,!AE E6J5S


10-
v,, vn -eis

20- Ct* r -

30- g .,).P. s,


N-aooJo E 4s


0 -
OLa

10- bK c

20- vy

30- G,-ve. BS

40-
P. Bo_ S / C!

50

60-

70-

an


80 '


o~C*w- 5
v41l C.S.

~e.4 CS.

C4eVr C$

DcTGry -


VrVt- S wi
C-G


0

10-

20-

30-

40-

50-

60-

70


Vr4J C-s
--Wfs
T.p.s", ww


Avw+ s


N.aLtI. EEr-


80 / [ 1 S


80 1


80- -












3LL55


N.2/95 E o


0-

10-

20-

30-

0 40

50-

60-

70-

80


o"P



IJ C.G s




I C-S
Grry-cy ben S

^Wts
vw/ c-s


1%Kt S


7 I77777


Nol/9S5 E 4,


0


10-

20-

30-


--- ----
&< s i/
Ce,^ cs


40-
B-r'


v.3/ ~Ai-CS


10-

20-

30-

40-

50-

60-

70-

80


SN oE E,(75


\1.P. Is
v.,/ C,

//J S~t
,/ / /


0-

10-

20

30-

40

50-


60 -


70-

80-


'%) w-rCo

on S VAI Ce

c," Lt-cn


3. V. <,, S
V41 r5


/l/IS


"Ins


N2/t.2SE-

NALE-.c7E aPFo


DV.y- P.Brs
3rry- r. %%S
d I w 4- al


70-

80-












SLL55


Nail5E (e_5


N.V8~.sE b0Z~L


N.tgo E (o?_


NA.yS E 4oS


OL-

X.Gnrr V
v4I A- CS

P.. !s wgI
V4+cs

11111 t f 1%-tCg
asm* aw~cC


0-

10-


20-

30-


40-

50-

60


70-

80


OL-F


V~J4 Cs



kviW+CSE
?* S rh-
V-1JH~c~



CjBr\6)


TTT TT


S40


0-

10-

20

30


404


80,












SL.L55


N.2/ E 6o


0-
OL.F

10- 1

20-

30-


40-

50-

60 -
60- ?.e,-,s ,. as /

70-

80


N._-Si E_ &s5






S20- 4 o
20--------
?.^ Sw/ CS
30-
1 .0 .Bs "-Ieaw






60

70-

80


N.2/?o E


0-

10- t>..-e,-

20- .
v,/ W+C 30-


40- ak^s w/

50-

60 -

70-

80


kli.2Iwo E 632.5



OLF
0-

10-
l/ v4c-E s
20-

30 k.4 Vsc-s

40- W-r-v.eg.cs

50-

60 -

70-

80


N.2a.je E to91S


0
0---"------

10- V~ -

20-

30-

40-

50
/... B -v>w+ jr

60-

70

80










Na?-gl/ E To


0-

10-

20-

30-

40-


o 1






v. V. s- 4


77777-


50 1


N. --oE"-oo .


V. Dit4- &I
ti.Dl-rl


s.ms "*I V-r-cd
T7TTT


50'


NNa-+-oE-I a


0-.

10

20-

30-

40-


OL.F




V?. .t ^
7TTTT- cJ


50'--


N. ,oE -oo0


N..0o E 0oo


-T7777T


20- <"'

30 -
v. 4 c0 .4

40 VA
/////c^^


50 '-


0
nI O-
1,_1 owLTY


1


20

30-

40-


0-

10-

20-

30-

40-


OL-F





V, C." s
a7 s I

P. m B w1


N .8oo E 7.-zo


N. -ss-G E o1q


NA.Yo E too


50--







8LL tal

N 3 oE 7-~Fo


0 OLV
10- .
10 GT 1 ./

20-

30- .cs

40
40-717T77

50
LL I- 153
N asooE <,9o


0--

10- Ji/4&csC

20

30-

40-

50


N7-to E .



D- OF-"
Q-tit-er^


W4'A9 r4J CS


Na2e95 E AP7


0
Go S W /
10- fe Au+cs

20 W,/ ,c-cs

30 -7

40-

50


Na.'2O E &9o

n- &'


10-

20

30-

40-

50-


77-/ / /


N atPoE (o



DL q 5
10-

20-
ro4cs
30- / / /


Na'4/o E tooO









/ // / I I
0

10- El&

20-

30- V I i

40-

50


Na.5^, E affo


0 OtV

10-

20- s

30-77 7

40-

50






91--19514

NaStSE 555




10

20- v98s S >l


30 -77

40-

50


NA33S E5Eo


N0E-


N aoE Sqo


0-
o -F
10- w Lt i
S/ W+ce
20

30- 1,,CJ

40-

50


N-.2 s E 5.


0 ,-

10

20--

30-
P. ST"cg'137
40

50


N.30os E51a.


0
oLF

10 -"

20- 6-G^~&

30-

40

50










N'a)o E 4poo


N z5o E (,So


-O/ C

-, S c /

v>P-Bw\-^


20-

30-

40-


10 oIt.-f 9

20-

30-

40-

50


N joE so


10-

20
,o ,i J/
30


N -8o E

01-


20- G'I C'. I'

20- -

30-

40-

50


N a'.io E ('oo


0 41-F


L+. ct- 0.c
20- Jl %4+c4

30-

40-

r n


50 5


N -ao E (o<,o


mATc

)//11/


N o2<,o E ( oO


0 oL

10- w[-c-5
v.P.Bs< E ,/
20- c

30-

40-

50


N a.2aoE tpo


0
o1F

10 .


0-
-

10-

20-

30-

40-


7_-. ,-M,

-t-CS
M.6. ( S
VP. rv\ '
/7T Tr


0-

10 V.vux- 4

20 Gv"1 "IC

30 .v. a /

40-

50


N aSo E 0oo


50 -










N 5?9 E &7o


3)ic-s
?81- $

7W/7 -


-71111--


0

10-

20-

30-

40-

50


N .54,o E (oo


N .a5oo E Eoo


0 --

10 vw- CS
6ry S 6,,
20-
20-~ V, P. 'r
o / i/ ic
30

40-

50





0

10- Db- -,

20
1--t. &T, t V1
30 cS

40 T

50


OLF

C"- &AI


%-4j i4+-S
T/ Tt+O
o.F }/
; +Cs


N asoo E ,o(po


0

10


20- s
%J.F. l,,%- wkt J
30

40-

50


N 530 E <,So


o L. sA







C-
1;+ c"


N a-o E 4o


OI.F

10 -
10- 'V't'*"" t -

20- -

30-

40-

50


ot








V.Lih.Com 5I
Th-feTT


Na.4:o E (oo


0

10-

20-

30-

40

50


N a5oo E aOo


-O F


10-

20-

30-

40

50


Nas5o E (~co










N,2'o E ooo


WOt S
w," s 1


4U /// //

50 --


N Ma.x E ,o


N 2,44o E (..o3o


0_ OLF.

10- bL..i'

20-

30

40-

50


N I. E (,,o


Na.44o E (o(


0-- o-p

10

20-

30 L- sm

40-

50


N aqo E (P-5


N.2Z-SE aW5


0

10-

20-

30

40-


-S
P. B cS5
V ./ -4 -s
SF. P %.B -.5
/Al // C//


50 -


N.a23 E ,7-


10-

20 1,

30
&n*^C~ 1^1

^^S0


50 ---


N *91 E -+o


OL.


P. -q C16

t- u, I-a~mS



71111rl


0

10-

20-

30-

40-


VIl v4i-C-

L.t.ary-. W, Ic9
/ / // /


0

10-

20

30

40-


50 --


0-

10-

20-

30-

40-


OLF





/1/
P. Br

N -o10 E poo


50---


50 1









No...o E (,oo


0-
0 OLF

10- Bitc r/i

20

30- --kT3 a .,t ,,o. -

40-

50


" N aS5oE E poo


O LV

10 -

20- ''c "

30 w I C
S-m-eo Yce
40-// 1

50


N a28o E (,oo


0 -&
OL-

10-

20

30 -
P. G.u S
40-

50


N2311. 5E...L._


OLF

10-

20- clj-~;.s

30-

40-

50


N aso E (oo


oL-F
0 c


10-
30- */ cs




40

50


Na n-o Eso


0 or ^

10 -

20-

30-
+t v4*cs
40-

50 vlhrs wlV4*C
///// /71


N a3soE (Poo


0

10- W '

20

30

40-

50


Nas.aoE Loo


0--
0 OLF

10- \I. D- C"c
20- "V


30 -

40-

50


N aSo. E (oo


0
oDf

10 1Lorv

20- cS

30-

40-

50


Na so E too




10-


L.t s,-WitS


/111777














Ot.F

10-

20-

30-

J.eP. Bvl /

40 T+S



N-a9oE 5-o


0-
OLF



20- V..s

30 Ur 6a, s W/

40 v.C cC

50


N^3,?0 E (Pffs




10-


20-

30- Brm sI

V. F. Sm. .
40-

50 I IZ


N a 9'oE 00oo


0

10- L + Cv. 4cs,

20-

30 -f v)ca


40-

50


w77TT
777T7T7


N .ao E E,90o


0-

10-

20-
V. g,, e
30

40-
r..smB s u-,c
50 // /


N -.290 E -o


0-
OLF
10

20-

30- L-+.,,-s

40-

50 -.lSm-& r<4
Vo Y.C
IIIIIII


N.aso5 E t?55


0-

10-
T 0,Y


20-

30-

40-

50


/ / / I / / /
Gv6

~j7j7;~7


N aaoE ,o60


0
oA-F
10-

20

Sv.u-. 6 m I

40-

50


N oa290 E 540


SOLF

10- "1/ t+ As
10

20-

30 WCJs
fV-Wlvb tACS'
40-

50-


N a.o E AoE


0

10

20~ i.Gv-ess

30

40-

50











N 5E 5o



0 'OLP s'
10 o-uloy p-Gfl
G" S /wl
20 v.'.r s W
w+ cs

30- C.

40-

50


NaeoE ,(oo


0

10- DX-Gs

20

30 l

40- .

50


1I

21


Na.3,ao E o


0-









0 avs.

0






0 .F
0-

n-
Oi-P
0- --


30-
s-


40-

50-


N .2a(Go E 5_?o


0-
OLF

.0-
Gvy- bkGl< -


N-a5 E So


Na.2-oE (Poo


0 ou- F

10-

20- ,1

30-

40- wce

50






0 .
10- ~t,-S. -

20 c,, s v

30- *'- ,,-S


40- 7

50


N Qa(coE <,3o


-0-

10-

20-

30-

40 -Z-

50 wv- s .,


N azso E 5,4o


0 -
OLr
10-

20-

30- V41'

40 -

50


WhtS ,t C-S


f1r1 -scA S
owe I










N axo E 5--o


OLV


30- ,

40-

50


N .3ao E doo


10-

20-

30-

40-


OLF


.7,,. r1


oa#
0 .P


0-

0---


0 -r ifwe

0

N -is E.5


0-

10-

20-

30-

40-


o4r VA -




r)/ C/ /

7777 C7s
7 7 T7 l C


DkL GC $


KI+-I vII
W-W-S
11111T


50N1---


N LaS5 E 45


10-

20 -vs

30 -'v gr,

40-/// 7

-n


N-aa.Q-F,o


N ,.oo E -5S5


0-

10- -

20- --

30-

40

S/ r///


1. Ov l7r
IIS/l^w CS

.a -rst -S

4 Cs
V 4 / r 7


N ..3-SoE (o5S


N>.2 o E- so


N Ea(3oE (0C0N


0

10 i. /

20- -S
L,.J/ L.+ CS
30- ,S
w/ fL+-Os
40- L+ s
,- /11 L1


F7777T

\II I/t











N --o E^S O


0-

10-

20-

30-

40-

50-


l 4 .t-CO


N -aoo E 5--o


olF











"77 77-)


I +.& T-9


N ~_) 5 E5


N _-o E5 o


0-

10, c .


ht 9rrsl


o.F

6^


//7 / /


N a.0oo E oo


0 --

10- --6
(m.-w v oo-."

20-
l, .t 4 i^/ c<
30-

40-

50


N a-1 o E 540




10-
10- ^.r '-r.'

20
\r f3 v l
30- w

40


0
OL-F

10- t)..,iC

20- Gig

30- Va+coS

40 "L~+

50





0- --
OL.F
10-

20

30- .

40-

50


40 -


C- o.S


1 c.b



I / 7/ T]


N aaoo E ,ao


0

10 .

20 I

30 t-+c
v.P.B^ S
40 1l-Ks

50 ke Kcd .
N '1 c)

N,.u~o E (oo










N aito E (_P3o


0~ oL r

10-
10 ~- WS-tci
20-
/ B I C I/I



40-

50


N.L4o E Sto



OLF
10----- -
10

20 v-d

30-

40

50


N o-o E (, oo


0

10 rao)

20-

30-
40 V.P.brA-w ki
40.

50


N^ao E54o


0-

10

20

30

40

50-


N a-is E Sio


0- 1. -

10

20-

30 w

40 s

50


N ag)o E -o


0

10-

20

30-
30 -- -----

40

50


N L5E fS


0-

10

20-

30-




50


N ~E4oE (oo


0-- o
DL t
10- w/ Wct

20- -
y S ,J.
30- c c.'

40 S -

50


N 3.)-o E 4q5


0

10- s

20- S

30- -

40-7 7T

50

Nal,,o E 'o


0

10-

20-

30-

40 L t i I

50










N .;aioE oe 8


N 3j.125 E 5o


NaLoE(.J1..


N a Ioi E 5 o


0- -1 ,
lo-.-^-
OLF
10
6v6
20
J h4i~C
30-

40
Km I .


OL.F
10- LV<**-3J5 roo+0

20- "

30

40- c

50 N/i/ f i~ t


N iLto ES-o


N alIo E S-o


LPaw4j etoo d)
Gyv ,rJ CS

77777T


wVl
V., Pw-. S-rv


50 ---


N llo E ooo


vl FIC / I1

ITt rlC


50 50


7 7 w/


50 -'


N -tIO E jSo


oL&
oL1t,






/lt-/c /// c/
Wtrrm c


Nj E aLo


50


50 1---











N ~alo E p(POo


DLF


rn.m- wv+S WI
c.^r


T t.-L -


O-A


o. l ,S ,


-Lt. 7s



77T 77


0-
-


10-

20-

30-

40-


o-tv


k4/ l+CS


77T7TT


10 wl e-.
10
L*-. vC~ ,t
20

30- m'"-'\ t ,v.
Larr 1 JS&


50 -


0 OLF




20 -
b~& G.j S ,,I

30-

40-

50


10



30 w- v.. sC.s$


40-

Kn


0

10-

20-

30-

40-


50 -


N a-1 o E ?oP9


0-

10- *
&rl kt i+ on-


30-

40-

50-


T 1-a.


T t-3


0

10-

20-

30

40-


STt-5


Q. s~-kJk~
cS wl S










T'i-(


o-D
G?-L-^-t-



v*/ ac

M. P. &V. *g J|

v.ra^-g sm
+c.s
7777T77


0-
--


10-

20-


40-


50- I


Ow-t- Lt ^
vs




7/ / // / / r


0

10-

20-

30-

40-


50- -


T-'-,


*^^OLF

-4- st-r





i* ef>- Ci" &w
7 7
//I II


Tt-to


0 OL-P

10-

20 S r ,

V.P. ,.' -
30-

40-

50


Tr- 1S


--F
o7'77




.P. >v-& wt)
A)c


7/77TTT


a..bcC

bit.N ta-I



77Tk CArT


rs vs--c-


/w -

7P.8" S I 1.S

7 1111


0

10-

20-


01S~-pLj


30o-1TT7T


50-1--


0

10-

20

30-

40-


50 -


TI- .







64





APPENDIX 2

Artifact Catalogue

















811


8LL55


98-4-1 N2195 E685

98-4-2 N2195 E685


L721
98-1-1 N2770 E707.5
98-1-2 N2740 E720
98-1-3 Surface #13, Locus 1
98-1-4 Surface #11, Locus 3
98-1-5 Surface #9, Locus 4
98-1-6 Surface #15, Locus 1
98-1-7 Surface #14, Locus 1

98-1-8 Surface #16, Locus 1
98-1-9 Surface #17, Locus 1

98-1-10 Surface #18, Locus 1


98-1-11 Surface #19, Locus 1


98-1-12 Surface #20, Locus 1

98-1-13 Surface #12, Locus 1
98-1-14 Surface #10, Locus 4

98-1-15 Surface #8, Locus 4
98-1-16 N2680 E690

L1953
98-2-1 N2365 E525
98-2-2 Surface #1
98-2-3 Surface #2
98-2-4 Surface #3
98-2-5 Surface #4
98-2-6 Surface #5

98-2-7 Surface #6
98-2-8 Surface #7


8L1


10-20 cm below surface (BS); large lightning whelk
with perforated front and back
49-59 cm BS; 12 Belle Glade sherds (1 rim) and 2
human mandible fragments (possibly sub-adult female)


30 fighting conchs
2-18 cm BS; 1 fish vertebrae and 1 lightning whelk
Possible Type A blank
Indeterminate Type A tool (27.6 cm)
Dipper with perforated back (19 cm)
Possible dipper with perforated back; right half absent
Possible Type E blank; apex and shoulder whorl cut in
half
Lightning whelk debitage with lip peeled back
Lightning whelk debitage with apex removed and
perforated side at whorl shoulder
Lightning whelk debitage with lip peeled back,
perforated whorl shoulder above the aperture, apex
removed, and small perforated back
Lightning whelk debitage with lip peeled back,
perforated front, and a small perforation on the superior
whorl opposite the aperture
Lightning whelk debitage with lip peeled back and small
perforated back
Lightning whelk debitage with perforated front
Lightning whelk debitage with lip peeled back and apex
and superior whorl removed opposite the aperture
Lightning whelk debitage with lip peeled back
10-20 cm BS; Shell cup


13-21 cm BS; Likely dipper (3 articulating fragments)
Small dipper (14 cm)
Dipper with superior whorl absent (16 cm)
Dipper with perforated back (20 cm)
Dipper with perforated back and apex absent (18 cm)
Possible dipper fragment with perforated back and right
side absent (17 cm)
Dipper with perforated back (22 cm)
Type A cutting-edged tool (16 cm)











N2350 E570
N2335 E540
N2305 E540
N2305 E532


10-19 cm BS; White ware ceramic
7-15 cm BS; Container glass
6-46 cm BS; Surf clams
6-16 cm BS; 4 whelks (1 perforated back, 1 lip peeled
back, and 2 unopened) and 1 outer whorl fragment


8LL1954
98-3-1
98-3-2
98-3-3
98-3-4








67



APPENDIX 3


Site Forms






Page 1 ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITE FORM Site #8 LL -z I
SOriginal FLORIDA SITE FILE Recorder #
SUpdate Verion 2.0 7/92 Field Date _y_/_L/.3
Form Date LL /J./

SITE NAME(S) ,,-u< E --rc iT-" IDIST #8 1
PROJECT NAME ?? ^C 4,.. 0 7, L JUVEVY ff I
OWNERSHIP private-profit private-nnprofit private-individ pri-unspecifd city county state federal unknown
TWP 4ss RANGE.zj SECTION /4 A-% __, /-,/-1/__ IRREG. SECT.? y n
USGSMAPNAME c ,,, COUNTY Le-,
NEAREST CITY c., IN CURRENT CITY LIMITS? y n
[ UTM: ZONE 16 17 EATING I | | | | 0 NOTHING | | | | | 0 -
ADDRESS/VICINITY OF/ROUTE TO

NAME OF PUBLIC TRACT (e.., par) Mwrweyv r .ehP .A.L pev, \w e ,

TYPE OF SITE (Check all choices that apply; if needed write others in at bottom)
SETTING STRUCTURES OR FEATURES FUNCTION DENSITY
lad site aboriginal boat fort rad segment e specified unknown
agic/farm bdg _aidde shell midds ?_apipite single artifact
wetland frsh wtr burial mound mill unspecified selod Jeltractive site Vdiflse scatter
eland alt/tidal building remains _iM _shipwreck habitatnhomestead Vdeuse scatter>2/m2
udwtr (original) cemetery/grave mound unspecified subsurface features farmstead /variable density
udwtr (Orudated) dump/rer e plantation yrface matter ilage'towa
earthworks platform mound _wed quarry
OTHER

HISTORIC CONTEXTS (Check all that apply, except use most specific pubphases only) 1
ABORIGINAL _Fort Walton Hickory Pond _Perico Island Semi: Colonization NONABORIGINAL
Alachua. Glades la Late Archaic Safety Harbor Semi: 1st War to 2d 1st Spanish 1513-99
SArchaic nspecif Glades Ib Late Swift Creek St. Augustine Semi: 2d War to 3d 1st Spanish 1600-99
SBelle Glade I Glades I unspec Leon-Jeffeso St. Johns la Semi: 3d War on 1st Spanish 1700-1763
Bell Glade I Glades Ha _MalabarI St. Johns Ib _Seminole-nspecif 1st Spanish unspecified
Belle Glade I _Glades __ Malabar II St. Johns I unspecif Swift Creek unspec British 1763-1783
BeBe Glade IV GladesIc Manasota St. Johns IIa Transitional 2d Spanish 1783-1821
Belle Glade unspec Glades II unspec Middle Archaic St. Johns lb Weeden Island I Amer.Territor'l 1821-45
_Cade Pond _Glades Ia Mount Taylor St. Johns lI Weeden Island Amer.Civil War 1861-65
_Deptford Glades HIb Norwood St. Johns unspecif Weed Island unsp American 19th Centry
_Early Archaic Glades ic Orange St. Johns unspecified prehistoric nonceram American 20th Contruy
Eary Swift Creek Glade I unsp Paleo-Indian Santa Rosa prehistoric ceramic American unspecified
Englewood Glades unspecif Pensacola Santa Rosa-Swift Crk prehistoric unspecif Afro-American
OTHER (Less common phases are not checklisted. For historic sites also give specific dates if known) /., v L 1 (-o e A~o


SURVEYOR'S EVALUATION OF SITE
Potentially elig. for local designation? _yes no Ansuff.info Local Designation Category
Individually elig. for Nat. Register? _yes _no insuff.info
Potential contributor to NR district? %&es no _insuff.info
EXPLANATION OF EVALUATION (Required if evaluated; limit to 3 lines; attach full justification)

:it, t" t t n^A^tian ,oyl 4Lpr (' t\.ftLyv<>^ [eiv\ Ar^Cw6\iv:[crJ
v 1 /1 &M',& A.. L-A +n, L= ,io 1A I NAeiwcV- -
RECOMMENDATIONS FOR SITE C L I f Q A I, A

e- p'4l.
DHR USE ONLY-= == ==f ==. OFFICIAL EVALUATIONS = == '= =DHR USE .O :::NLY :'
NR DATE KEEPER-NR EUlBfITy.- y a pe ii Date / / ; .
/ / SHPO-NR ELIGIBILITY: y -n pe & Date P /
1 .7 sI P LOCAL DESIGNATION: Daote. __ -, -
R6E04-92 Local o .of Historical Res /Gray 0 S Be FL 3 c 27-
HR6E04506-92 Florida Site Fi/Diiaioo of Historical ReMsourc Gray Bdg/SO S Broaough/Tallaassee FL 32399-0250/904-487-2299/Soncom 277-2299
rDnb riTriimlWo inWnv.Or






Page 2


ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITE FORM Site #8
Division of Historical Resources, Florida Department of State


FIELD METHODS (Check one or more methods for detection and for boundaries)
SITE DETECTION SITE BOUNDARIES
Sno field check exposed ground _screened shovel _bounds unknown remote sensing unscreened shovel
_literature search pesthole digger uRL. Lt\.l- none by recorder -amsp exposed ground screened shovel
Informant report auger-size:_ literature search posthole digger block excavations
- remote sensing unscrend shovel informant report auer-ze:_ estimate or guess
Number, size, depth, pattern of units; screensie r~ t i t\ A :4-. t % .< k t Ve 4r P.iJ,
^3 A 15-e .-- 1 ;e' A #AAG we" Atr. tLa fIrA +Q QA ( a(ftro
SITE DESCRIPTION
EXTENT Size (m2) iZoo Depth/stratigraphy of cultural deposit SuL< +n 7.- C- e .

TEMPORAL INTERPRETATION Components: sinle 'prob single v Ir .uaiple _m tiple uncertain
Describe each occupation in plan (refer to attached large scale map) and stratigraphically. Discuss temporal and functional interpretations.


INTEGRITY Overall disturbance: Vhoneseen minor substantial major _redeposited detroyed-document
Disturbances/threats/protective measures gtlo\ph ,y Este~ \ s k Prr--e.
AREA COLLECTED azox 'm2 Surface: #units_, total area m2. Excavation: #units _j
9% W ri A L L -y
ARTIFACTS a wcMa O ,' .
TOTAL ARTIFACTS #_L (C)ount or (E)stimate? Surface #__ Subsurface #
COLLECTION STRATEGY ARTIFACT/FEATURE CATEGORIES
Sunkown unselective (all artifacts) unspeifed daub nonlocal-exotic bone-mnspecif
/selective (some artifacts) lithics, aborig'l brick/bldg matl metal, nonprecious _Vworked shell
Sncollected general (not by subarea) ceramic-aborig'l glass bone-human workedd shell
S'controlled (by subarea) ceramic-nonabo precious metal/coin _one-animal subsur feats
Other(Strategy, Categories) A I c h4Ah e l'ce-',A< he A_ I <,i-e Qov-A iL.k %rnb^ v- i0rt ,


DIAGNOSTICS (Type and frequency)
1 TiPe a- A tyl R- r PL d ti N= I
2 -iVp o &,_-LL T7,L gP-FwZIX N=L
3 )yp&- &4 S--L -odoL 4jjo,) N= L
4 N=


5
6
7
8
9


ENVIRONMENT
Nearest fresh water (in. relic source) LV Natural community Tr o UrrA 1. -r D rrl nt/o Fl J ma- n--n*1
Local vegetation Si'n.,o k. nL. kA "k yn" cm, N"
Topography le, Elevation-.,- m /ft
Present land use k e_
SCS soil series Soil association C~_r-r t- \ \ c .t ) A~ttVM-n-.t

FURTHER INFORMATION : .
INFORMANT(S): Name/Addr./Phone


LOCATION & FILE NOS. (Field notes, artifacts/accession nos, photographs/negative nos.)
FLovZIoA 1 10 i A 011 C rt 1 Mn4A-T Az1 PthAYZV -*


MANUSCRIPTS OR PUBLICATIONS ON THE SITE (if unpub., give FSF file # or location)
ft\, f V Do e r i/i in I I% I>C .4 &_kJv i/ 't ( 0 + I k r,. rlQ r ^-\\L K Ot1 OALL


k. \f .. ... .. ... p -k --- -l-------4-V
RECORDER(S): Nanie/Addr./Phone Co~ot T Thor e 9?L 9 -S- ? o-- t T, ~-ac~r
Affiliation or FAS Chapter (Zoeioi \ a ep nCo.-,C rioA. o1r i. a54 k",.vt

LARGE SCALE MAP: At 1"-200' or larger scale, show: site boundarie, scale, North arrw, datum, test/collectio units, landmarks.
NARRATIVE DESCRIPTION/CONTINUATIONS: Atach additional sheets with detailed information or with conminmatM.

REQUIRED: USGS MAP OR COPY WITH SITE LOCATION, EXTENT MARKED






Page / ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITE FORM Site #8 _LL-z2
O original FLORIDA SITE FILE Recorder #
Update Verion 2.o 7/92 Field Date M /_L/..3
Form Date __/ ./_3L.

SITENAME(S) ~c t l. L~- z -r eut& lkr M o J 6 IDIST #8 J
PROJECT NAME LE .. ,"" -. ., 9'.., ^ ....^. I ", [SURVEY # /
OWNERSHIP prirvate-profit private-p _i vate-dirid priv-unspecifd city county state federal unknown
TWP s RANGE 9j SECTION IRREG. SECT.? y n
USG SgAPNAME c~,~e COUNTY \L-._e
NEAREST CITY c, m= rcr- IN CURRENT CITY LIMITS? y n
SUTM: ZONE 16 1i EATING | | | | | | NOTHING I I I1 | | 0
ADDRESS/VICINITY OF/ROUTE TO

NAME OF PUBLIC TRACT (e.g., parD ~o 0L .t _.-.ol P \,.

'TY E OF SITE (Check all choices that apply; ifneeded write others in at bott m) '
SETTING STRUCTURES OR FEATURES FUNCTION DENSITY
land site aboriginal boat _fort road segment oe specified unm own
aric/farnm bld yfai midn _l m deB campsite single artifact
Swetland fresh wtr burial mound mi unspecified yhel mound _tractive site _diffuse scatter
wetland salt/tidal buding remains mission shipwreck luabitatn/omestead Ilease scatter>2/m2
Sundwtr (original) cmetery/grave /mound unspecified subsurface features farmstead variable density
adwtr (imdated) dump/refuse _plantation surface scatter v'viage/town
earthworks platform mound _well _quarry
OTHER

HISTORIC CONTEXTS (Check all that apply, except use most specific subphases only)
ABORIGINAL Fort Walto Hickory Pond Perico Island Semi: Colonization NONABORIGINAL
Alachna. Glade la Late Arhaic Safety Harbor Semi: 1st War to 2d 1st Spanish 1513-99
Archaic unspecif Glades Ib Late Swift Creek St. Agustine Semi: 2d War to 3d st Spanish 1600-99
Belle Glade I _Glades I uspec Leon-Jeffeson _St. Johns I Semi: 3d War on 1st Spanish 1700-1763
Belle Glade II Glades Ila _Malabar I _St. Johns lb Seminole-unspecif 1st Spanish unspecified
Belle Glade III _Glades Ib MalabarH St. Johns I unspeif Swift Creek unspec British 1763-1783
Belle Glade IV Glades Ilc _Manasota St. Johns Ia Transitional 2d Spanish 1783-1821
Belle Glade unspec Glades II unspec Middle Archaic _St. Johns IIb Weeden Island I Amer.Territor'l 1821-45
Cades Pond Glades Ia Mount Taylor St. Johns He _Weeden Island H Amer.Civil War 1861-65
SDeptford Glades IIb Norwood St. Johns H unspecif Weede Island unsp American 19th Cetury
SEarly Archaic Glades IHc Orange St. Johns unspecified preistorc nonceram American 201h Cetury
SEarly Swift Creek Glades III unsp Paleo-India Santa Rosa prehistoric ceramic American unspecified
SEnglewood Glades unspecif Pensacola Santa Rosa-Swift Crk prehistoric unspecif Afro-American
OTHER (Lees common phases are not checkbsted. For historic site also give specic dates if known) r('C r\e cA-\ ,A ee. TT TT
'k.A%-l 1e .e A.'_. iQ-, c N1 %eA C (d .\ I -- I --C-

SURVEYOR'S EVALUATION OF SITE .
Potentially elig. for local designation? _yes _no insuff.info Local Designation Category
Individually elig. for Nat. Register? 'yes _no _insuff.info
Potential contributor to NR district? 3jes _no _insuff.info
EXPLANATION OF EVALUATION (Required if evaluated; limit to 3 lines; attach full justification)






DHR fSE ONLY=,===i ===,== OFFICIAL EVALUATION$S == = i= === r DHR USE ONLri
NVR DATE KEPER-NR e C GI BITY: y a p ii D ateC /
/ / SHPO-NR ELIGIBILITY: y n pe 7 Date / .
*'Df2t~' LOCAL DESIGNATION: Date / a
.....s. .. ..Lowa office / :
HR6E04506-92 Florida Site File/Division of Historical Resorce/Gray Bldg/500 S BronoughlTaahasee FL 32399-0250/904-487-2299/Smcom 277-2299
M. db ACwmma .onY DWC






Page 2 ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITE FORM Site #8
pIKS Division of Historical Resources, Florida Department of State

FIELD METHODS (Check one or more methods for detection and for boundaries)
SITE DETECTION SITE BOUNDARIES
no field check V exposed ground screened shovel bounds unknown remote seeing unscreened shovel
literature search posthole digger none by recorder `insp exposed ground Vcreeoed shovel
informant report auger-size:_ literature search posthole digger block excavations
remote ending unscreend shovel informant report ager-sime: estimate or gue
Number, size, depth, pattern of units; screen size k A e e i -A'V pf\ LMfV Q +\ V.W. \ ri oo-AV ICZ.


'SITE DESCRIPTION .. '"
EXTENT Size (m2)zy oo Depth/stratigraphy of cultural deposit u, -b a

TEMPORAL INTERPRETATION Components: single prob ingle prob wauniple ,.uitiple uncertain
Descbe each occupation in plan (refer t attached large scale map) and stratigraphicaly. Discuss temporal and functional interpretations.
!-e- Ma MieI (wi2 W. Catm JP nA Q A er .\n aic -Q krri\

RIN RMTY Overall disturbance: _oneseen v/minor bstantia majorr _redeposited _dested-docum
Disturbances/threats/protective measures ,,'b c Ab XJea rCy PO _
AREA COLLECTED m2 Surface: #units total area m2. Excavation: #units

"ARTIFACTS c.j. cO T..t e"
TOTAL ARTIFACTS # (C)ount or (E)stimate? Surface # Subsurface # -
COLLECTION STRATEGY ARTIFACT/FEATURE CATEGORIES
unknown unselective (all artifacts) uspeciied daub nonlocal-eotic bone-unspecif
/selective (some artifacts) -_ ethics, aborig'l brick/bldg mat metal, nooprecious IAnwotked shell
uncollected general (not by subarea) /ceramic-aborig'l glass bone-human k4orked shell
controlled (by subarea) ceramic-nonabo precious metal/coin bone-animal 4uburf feats
Other (Strategy, Cateories) Cx. c (koj tv wI


DIAGNOSTICS (Type and frequency)
1 N=_
2 N=
3 N=_
4 N=


5 N
6 N
7 N
8 N
9 N


ENVIRONMENT
Nearest fresh water fcd. relic source) .,v\ Dist. (m/ft)/bearing
Natural community UlA.VA n ~ u .A,. e, \ pAcA ,p. I Ilpro.
Local vegetation Topography Le \ e ',,n ,- aL- a,~, \ 19 j,%,Q 1 te Cnhl ,in.\Elevation ft
Present land use ,rA. '
SCS soil series Soil association i PV\nncr Ay- ,nvo. v

FURTHER INFORMATION
INFORMANT(S): Name/Addr./Phone

LOCATION & FILE NOS. (Field notes, artifacts/accession nos, photographs/negative nos.)


MANUSCRIPTS OR PUBLICATIONS ON THE SITE (if unpub., give FSF file # or location)
L T X -vyd -& lip\o 6Aa fbr-kcmA o- Sa(LL

RECORDER(S): Namd/Addr./Phone (ramt -rT weu T7-29 -26Z Z -62. TAr, ,,, -F
Affiliation or FAS Chapter RvoA evr W l -eav Ci ve- PFra Au LUA; n 4 m~ &gyal

LARGE SCALE MAP: At 1-200' or lager scale, show: site boundaries, scale, North arrow, datum, test/collection unit, landmark.
NARRATIVE DESCRIPTION/CONTINUATIONS: Attach additional sheets with detailed information or with contimuatis.

REQUIRED: USGS MAP OR COPY WITH SITE LOCATION, EXTENT MARKED






Page 1 ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITE FORM Site #8 L< -
O original FLORIDA SITE FILE Recorder #
Update erosion 2.0 7/92 Field Date / I
-a laForm Date / /

SITE NAME(S) UC_< e. Auto '*L Grg DIST #8
PROJECT NAME #'r ,' so, C X U R V E Y #J... ,,f,,f i U
OWNERSHIP private-profit priate-onprot privateindivid _priv-nspedfd city comty state federal unknown
TWP SS RANGE 21 SECTION 1 -'A _, '/4-/-14 IRREG. SECT.? -y n
USGS APNAME c RV, COUNTY Lee-
NEAREST CITY r,., re,,-, IN CURRENT CITY LIMITS? y n
[ UTM: ZONE 16 17 CASTING I \ L NOTHING I | | | | |I 0-1 I
ADDRESS/VICINITY OF/ROUTE TO

NAME OF PUBLIC TRACT (e.., aps)

TYPE OF SI (Check aU choices that apply; f needed write ethers in at bottom) :
SETTING STRUCTURES OR FEATURES FUNCTION DENSITY
/lad ite aboriginal boat fort road seget none specified unlmow
ric/farm bld midden _she middle campite single artifact
weand fresh wtr /burial mound? mll unspeified shelll mond etractive site diffuse sctter
wetland sal/tidal building rema mission shipwreck habitatnhomestead _dense scatter>2m2
Sundwtr (original) cemetery/grave mound unspecified subsurface features farmstead variable density
Sndwtr (mandated) dump/renoe plantation surface scatter vriagtown
eathworks platform mound wel quarry
OTHER (LV 0x t1\caIi FOLA.

HISTORIC CONTEXTS (Check all that apply, except use most specific subphases only) '- I, .
ABORIGINAL _Fort Walton Hickory Pond _Perico Island Semi: Colonization NONABORIGINAL
Alacma Glades la Late Archaic Safety Harbor Semi: 1st War to 2d 1st Spanish 1513-99
Archaic unspecif Glades b Late Swift Creek St. Augustine Semi: 2d War to 3d st Spanish 1600-99
Belle Glade I Glades I unspec Leo-Jefferson St. Johns la Semi: 3d War on 1st Spanish 1700-1763
Bele Glade H _Glades Ia Malabar I _St. Johns Ib Sminole-mspecif 1st Spanish unspecified
Belle Glade In Glades Ib Malabar St. Johns I unspecif Swift Creek unspec British 1763-1783
Bele Glade IV Glades Hc Manasota St. Johns IIa Transitional 2d Spanish 1783-1821
_Bele Glade unspec Glades II unspec Middle Archaic _St. Johns b Weeden Island I Amer.Territor'l 1821-45
Cades Pond Glades Ila Mount Taylor St. Johns le Weeden Island II Amer.Civil War 1861-65
_Deptford Glades lb Norwood St. Johs II unspecif Weeden Island np American 19th Century
Early Archaic Glades c _Orange St. Johns unspecified preistorc nonceram American 20th Century
Early Swift Creek Glades III unsp Paleo-Indian _Santa Rosa prehistoric ceramic American unspecified
Englewood _Glades unspecif _Pensacola Santa Rosa-Swift Crk prehistoric unspecif Afro-American
OTHER (Less common phases are not checklisted. For historic sites also give specific dates if known) C f. r)-. T\, Q 1. R I T7


SURVEYOR'S EVALUATION OF SITE .
Potentially elig. for local designation? _yes _no _insuff.info Local Designation Category
Individually elig. for Nat. Register? ,yes _no _insuff.info
Potential contributor to NR district? .^yes _no insuff.info
EXPLANATION OF EVALUATION (Required if evaluated; limit to 3 lines; attach full justification)






DHR D 'S USONLY= ===l = = = = OFFICIAL EVALUATIONS =.=.== = i:.==z-DR USE ON :LY
NR DATEB rEPER-NR EIUGIBILUT: y a pe ii Date.
I / SHPO-NR ELIGIBIflTY. y a pe il Date /./ :..:.,
"li? Af"i'E LOCAL DESIGNATION: .ate / ?.
W'" : W9"' S Loca off Hsoica Re .' ', ".. .. l, ":*' a 277-22
HR6E0450692 Florida Site Fe/ivision of Historical Resome/Gray Bldg/500 S Bronouglhnalahasmee FL 32399-0250/904-487-2299/Suncom 277-2299
.......arrrrAruv.sa carma n~o







Page 2 ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITE FORM Site #8
S Division of Historical Resources. Florida Department of State

FIELD METHODS (Check one or more methods for detection and for boundaries)
SITE DETECTION SITE BOUNDARIES
no field check Vexposed ground Vscreened shovel bounds unknown remote sensing unscreened shovel
literature search posthole digger noe by recorder /_insp exposed ground Ascreened shovel
Informant report auger-size:_ ___ literature search posthole digger block excavations
Remote sensing unscrewed shovel informant report auger-size:_ estimate or gums
Number, size, depth, pattern of units; screen size nTiMle C uiA.iv Q.\ -UlA. m-. ac dI .I AWrs'p
lAC.-- P*ErAoA a oA- .^ .-fi-' a bn ib- ...i.^4 .)rih?

SITE DESCRIPTION .. .... .
EXTFN Size (m2) oo Depth/stratigraphy of cultural deposit 30-o S ka

TEM AL INTERPRETATION Components: /single prob inge t iu"tipp-l "utiple uncertain
Decibe each occupation in plan (refer to attached large scale map) and stratigraphlcaly. Discuss temporal and functional interpretations.

t^e~e g \poA- m c ,le^u-W o7 4-I o, Aeim_' V'!Ay, o.0 CAA 601A Sr-4
INTEGRITY Overall disturbance: _noneseen minor substantial ,ijor _redepited destroyedlocuseu
Disturbances/threats/protective measures L9o-- Vhl ,At ^ <:ceA, .A o S v, ~~A
AREA COLLECTED m2 Surface: #units, total area m2. Excavation: #units Z


ARTIFACTS
TOTAL ARTIFACTS #_j_
COLLECTION STRATEGY
Sinknown Vnselective (all artifacts)
Sselective (some artifacts)
_ nncoected general (not by subares)
controlled (by subarea)
Other (Strategy, Categories) A\. oct_ P


DIAGNOSTICS (Type and frequency)
1 n.eVe GAro Plcs.,
2
3


(C)ounl or (E)stimate? _C Surface # Subsurface # 1L
ARTIFACT/FEATURE CATEGORIES
unspecified daub nonlocal-exotic bone-nspecif
lithics, aborig'l brick/bldg mad metal, nonpredous unworked shell
/ceramicr-aborig'Ja _lpreass V/boae-hman (a _) _worked shell
ceramic-nonabo precious metal/coin bone-animal _subsurf feats
' ka i' \< T -~ r I| L tu (eiA \ <' r \


N=_L
N=
N=
N=


5
6
7
8
9


ENVIRONMENT
Nearest fresh water (mci. relic source) ni \ ol Dist. (m/ft)/bearing
Natural community -TenA I^.hr, LApuA -tr'. i F,-re
Localvegetation Srko vAh c-i rl -i M- -,
Topography n~esi r!)n_ r A: n ky",ncl1 o~- .,, h-Ai Elevation -LzAWft
Present land use at i a_
SCS soil series Soil association b.,,Cla,/ I liC 1 /,^,,. )l dlt j.

FURTHER INFORMATION
INFORMANT(S): Name/Addr./Phone


LOCATION & FILE NOS. (Field notes, artifacts/accession nos, photographs/negative nos.)
plcr'o0 lMuLiAwt 16 1 A4h ms^,-v


I I
MANUSCRIPTS OR PUBLICATIONS ON THE SITE (if unpub., give FSF file # or location)
VcsT. --r Ver vnt;s o r ,,v- ey i oa t ft oL4 1 1, Pa..-4, -/ &tit 4r

RECORDER(S): Nahe/Addr./Phone r (' ,/ ,- rN"r 99-?-Q3-2e,67 .SF- bFT\ e- y,
Affiliation or FAS Chapter J4a4jIk t !. cj-^4 Ffoy i ,A-f dc Ai.h'a l

LARGE SCALE MAP: At 1=200' or larger scale, show site boundaries, scale, North arrow, datum, test/colletion units, landmarks.
NARRATIVE DESCRIPTION/CONTINUATIONS: Attach additional sheets with detailed information or with continuato..

REQUIRED: USGS MAP OR COPY WITH SITE LOCATION, EXTENT MARKED










Page 1
_ original
Update


ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITE FORM
FLORIDA SITE FILE
Version 2.0 7/92


Site #8 LL \S'S
Recorder #
Field Date ?_Is_&
Form Date / /I/' L


SITENAME(S) r .lc t 4 --7 a-ur i- o ,e [DIST #8 _
PROJECT NAME SJ" J C'W" 0-rI'A'C,?W ,SURVEY# I
OWNERSHIP /private-proft priateopro t priate-individ priunspecid city county state federal unown
TWP.Y. RANGE _4L SECTION U, /-- IRREG. SECT.? y n
USGMAPNAME C~~nu v4 COUNTY Lee
NEAREST CITY c. ,,c / IN CURRENT CITY LIMITS? y n
f UTM: ZONE 16 17 FASTING I 10 NOTHING I I I I | | | 01
ADDRESS/VICINITY OF/ROUTE TO


NAME OF PUBLIC TRACT (e.g., p)a ,c n-v PoP...'a /..../- /Im


TYPE OF SITE (Check al choices that apply; if needed write others in at bottom)
SETTING STRUCTURES OR FEATURES FUNCTION
nd site aboriginal boat fort _road segment oe specified
Sagric/farm bd middle shell middle campsite
Sweland fresh wtr burial mound mill nspecifed shell mound etractive site _d
/weland salt/tidal building remains _mission _shipwreck habitatn/homestead _
Sundwtr (original) cmetery/grave mound unspecied subsurface features farmstead
ndwtr (itmdated) dump/refse plantation surface scatter iagetown
earthwors platform mound _wen quarry
0 i e<,- _tr i /


DENSITY
mkmown
ingle artifact
liflse scatter
lease scatter>2/m2
variable density


'- 'Y"y- -* "----,"-------------

HISTORIC CONTEXTS (Check all that apply, except use most specific subphases only) '
ABORIGINAL _Fort Walton Hickory Peod _Perico Island Semi: Colonization NONABORIGINAL
Alachna. Glades Ia _Late Arhaic Safety Harbor Semi: 1st War to 2d 1st Spanish 1513-99
SArhaic unspecif Glades Ib Late Swift Creek St. Augstine Semi: 2d War to 3d 1st Spanish 1600-99


_Bele Glade I
Belle Glade II
- Belle Glade III
BeBe Glade IV
_ Belle Glade nspec
Cades Pond
Deptford
SEary Archaic
Early Swift Creek
Englewood


_ lades I unspec
_ Glades Ila
SGlades lIb
_ Glades He
_ Glades II unspec
_ Glades Ilia
_ Glades IIIb
_ Glades me
_ Glades III msp
Glades unsnecif


Leoo-Jetlerson
Malabar I
Malabar II
Manasota
_ Middle Archaic
_ Mount Taylor
_Norwood
Orange
Paleo-Indian
Pensacola


_St. jols lia
St. Johns Ib
SSt. Johs I unspecif
SSt. Johns IIa
_ St. Johns lib
_ St. Johns Ice
_ St. Johns II unspecif
_ St. Johns unspecified
Santa Rosa


_ emi: 3 war on
_Seminole-mnspecif
_ Swift Creek unspec
_Transitional
_ Weedn Island I
_ Weeden Island II
_ Weeden Island unsp
_ prehistoric noneram
_ prehistoric ceramic


a tnaS Rosa-Swift Crk y( pecif


1st Spanisn 1700-176
1st Spanish unspecifed
British 1763-1783
_ 2d Spanish 1783-1821
_ Amer.Territor' 1821-45
_ Amer.Civil War 1861-5
_ American 19th Century
_ American 20th Cetury
_ American unspecified
Afro-American
pyrt">^iSLv


OTHER (Less common phases are not checklisted. For historic sites also give specific dates if known) ,- LJvt t> i /Al / c,<' _i lia- A 47LL -,7- e Ad.Ko. /a^^-/ /Od


SURVEYOR'S EVALUATION OF SIfTEl. .: .
Potentially elig. for local designation? yes _no insuff.info Local Designation Category
Individually elig. for Nat. Register? _yes no vinsuff.info
Potential contributor to NR district? ayes _no _insuff.info
EXPLANATION OF EVALUATION (Required if evaluated; limit to 3 lines; attach full justification)

g- ay-, At, 4,, 1=41 ptf KI I P'r I-ltl C P1 C. ---

RECOMMENDATIONS FOR SITE -n, g. .,e ^..,, ,,-A-


IDHR USE ONLY= = i i n f f = OFFICIAL EVALUATIONS = n m =i -.i DHK USE ONLY'
NR DATE KEBPER-NR ELIGIBILITY y a pe iM Date / /
/ / SHPO-NR ELIGIBILITY y pe i Date
D3SG-Ai !. LOCAL DESIGNATION: .___ Date_,
SLoc offices"y Bd_/_0_ S r- 2Y7-2 99
HR6E04506-92 Florida Site Flleiivision of Historical Resounces/Gray Bldg/500 S Bronough/Tallahassee FL 32399-02501904-487-2299/Suncom 277-2299
C --D~i.^Bln*LIOIWfcLH*.JCV






Page 2 ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITE FORM Site #8
1 Division of Historical Resources, Florida Department of State

FIELD METHODS (Check one or more methods for detection and for boundaries) '
SITE DETECTION SITE BOUNDARIES
Sno field check exposed ground Vscreened shovel bounds unknown remote seeing unscreeed shovel
Literature search posthole digger __ none by recorder iy~sp exposed ground vicreened shovel
informant report auger-size: literature search posthole digger block excavations
Remote senin unscrewed shovel informant report ager-ze:_ estimate or guess
Number, size, depth, pattern of units; screen size


SSITE DESCRIPTION
EXTENT Size (m2) (o Depth/stratigraphy of cultural deposit mrv -< .,

TEMPORAL INTERPRETATION Components: /single prob gle 6 utiple _- multiple _uncertain
Describe each occupation in plan (refer to attached large scale map) and stratigrapigcally. Discuss temporal and functional interpretations.
IAk A reppa^^ ,fA \. A.^.^ Al c9 s ^Mh\ Aro V0 Aruxkv

INTEGRITY Overall disturbance: one seen _minor o substantial _major _redeposited destroyed-documet
Disturbances/threats/protective measures
AREA COLLECTED 6oo0 m2 Surface: #units total area m2. Excavation: #units

'ARTIFACTS O. .t.ecTD .. ,
TOTAL ARTIFACTS #__ (C)ount or (E)stimate? c Surface # __ Subsurface # I|
COLLECTION STRATEGY ARTIFACT/FEATURE CATEGORIES
Snknown unselective (all artifacts) unspecified daub nonlocal-exotic boe-nspecif
4,elective (some artifacts) lithics, aborig'l brick/bldg mad metal, nonpreciou unworked shell
uncollected general (not by subarea) ceramic-aborig' glass _bone-human ivoked shell C(N,
Controlled (by subarea) ceramic-nonabo precious metalcoin bone-animal subsurf feats
Other (Strategy, Categorie) All cA-h \.A e 4w.k .k <~k A (B 4-Anpe .

DIAGNOSTICS (Type and frequency) 5 N=
1 p,n A rC W eA -r'E \ N= 1 6 N=
2 N= 7 N=
3 N=_ 8 N=
4 N=- 9 N=

ENVIRONMENT
Nearest fresh water mdc. relic source) I~pV~o vi Dist. (m/ft)/bearing
Natural community iuV.^& ?.L r thin g^ + T.t.Vh'tl un het + e %n-ro.d> 4
Local vegetation ,,,. .\, n, t-^Ar" : Shb -
Topography a.,, I levationo.-- o.sf n
Present land tise l J -
SCS soil series Soil association G nr- \c\ ,/A lfr\i 4lA

FURTHER INFORMATION '
INFORMANT(S): Name/Addr./Phone

LOCATION & FILE NOS. (Field notes, artifacts/accession nos, photographs/negative nos.)


MANUSCRIPTS OR PUBLICATIONS ON THE SITE (if unpub., give FSF file # or location)

K&: r.. irt^e L." t AAO6^.'>^g m, 0C I og r \V\- ----------;-A-----
RECORDER(S): Naine/Addr./Phone Gc,' -roT~ ue 4i -2t a -Zo8 2- -. TWe r, F,.
Affiliation or FAS Chapter t .,7., tft. N d AJ /fL

LARGE SCALE MAP: At 1"=200 or larger cale, show: site boundaries, scale, North arrow, datum, test/collection units, landmarks.
NARRATIVE DESCRIPTION/CONTINUATIONS: Attach additional shee with detaed information or with continatins.

REQUIRED: USGS MAP OR COPY WITH SITE LOCATION, EXTENT MARKED







Page 1
SOriginal
Update


ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITE FORM
FLORIDA SITE FILE
Venio 2.0 7/92


Site #8 /LL-I2/S
Recorder #
Field Date _Y I_//
Form Date // //y/


SITE NAME(S) &ciL L v-, IDIST #8 __1
PROJECT NAME^ ?ov z cE' .-, [SURVEY# J
OWNERSHIP private-profit pivnooproft private-individ p_ p-unspecifd city county state federal unknown
TWPvs7 RANGEi SECTION -A_, ~ IRREG. SECT.? _y n
USGSMAPNAME c______, COUNTY Lee
NEAREST CITY c,,p c~ I1 /- c, IN CURRENT CITY LIMITS? y n
[ UTM: ZONE 16 17 EATING} 1 1 I 01 NOTHING I I I I 01-
ADDRESS/VICINITY OF/ROUTE TO

NAME OF PUBLIC TRACT (e.., perk)

TYPE OF SmO (Check an choices that apply; if needed write others iat bo ttom) :
SETTING STRUCTURES OR FEATURES FUNCTION DENSITY
/lad site aboriginal boat _fort _road segment none specified unimknown
ag/farm bid middles sh middes campsite single artifact
wetland fresh wtr burial mound mill unspecified shell mound extractive site diffse scatter
_wetland saltidal building remains m shipwreck vbabitata/homestead vose scatter>2/m2
Sundwtr (original) cemetery/grave mound unspecified subsurface features farmstead variable density
a_ udwtr (Indated) dumpnreftwe platation surface scatter illlaetown
earthworks platform mound _we quarry
OTHER


HISTORIC CONTEXTS (Check all that apply, except use most specific subphases only) ...'" .


ABORIGINAL
Alacha.
_Archaic nspecif
Belle Glade I
Belle Glade H
SBelle Glade Im
Belle Glade IV
_ Belle Glade anspec
Cades Pond
Deptford
Eary Archaic
Early Swift Creek
_Enlewood


Fort Waltoo
_ Glades la
_Gade Ib
_ Glades I nspe
_Glades Ha
_ Glades lb
_ Glades ec
Glades II unspec
_ Glades ma
SGlades Ib
_ Glades MIc
_ Glades III nsp
_ Glades unspecif


_ Hickory Pood
_Late Archaic
_ Late Swift Creek
_ Leon-Jeffer
Malabar I
_ Malabar
Manasota
_ middle Archaic
_ Mount Taylor
_Norwood
Orange
_Paleo-Indian
Pesacola


_ Perico Island
SSafety Harbor
_St. Augustine
SSt. Johns Is
St. Johns Ib
_St. Johns I unspecif
_ St. Johns Ha
St. Johns Iib
St. Johns lie
_ St. Johns unspecif
_ St. Johns specified
Santa Rosa
Santa Rosa-Swift Crk


_Semi: Colonization
Semi: 1st War to 2d
_Semi: 2d War to 3d
Semi: 3d War on
SSeminole-upecif
_ Swift Creek unspec
Transitional
_ Weeden Island I
Weedem Island H1
_ Weeden Island unsp
_ prehistoric nonceram
_ prehistoric ceramic
prehistoric anspecif


NONABORIGINAL
_ 1st Spanish 1513-99
S1st Spanish 1600-99
_ Ist Spanish 1700-1763
_ 1st Spanish unspecified
_ British 1763-1783
S2d Spanish 1783-1821
_ Amer.Territor'l 1821-45
_Amer.Civl War 186145
/American 19th Cntury
American 20th Cntury
_American unspecified
_ Afro-American


OTHER (Les common pass are not checklisted. For historic site also give specific date if known)


SURVEYORSS EVALUATION OF SITE ... "'"il:"
Potentially elig. for local designation? _yes no einsuff.info Local Designation Category
Individually elig. for Nat. Register? _yes _no vinsuff.info
Potential contributor to NR district? _yes _no _insuff.info
EXPLANATION OF EVALUATION (Required if evaluated; limit to 3 lines; attach full justification)



RECOMMENDATIONS FOR SITE s. .-A gc\ ,,, ,-


DHR USE ONLY- ,=-= = == OFFICIAL EVALUATIONS = -= == = DHR USE ONLY"
NR ATE rKEPER-NR EUGIMITYT : y a pe pi Date / I/ .
/ / SHPO-NR ELIGIBILITY: y a pe &i Date m /
I SbST DATE LOCAL DESIGNATION:. Date / r-".

HR6EO04592 Florida Site e/Division of Historical Reoures/Gray Bidg500 S BrosoughTallahassee FL 32399-0250/904-487-2299/Smcm 277-2299
n b gWaDm n ar*&cOmsVA.uVoc


w.






Page 2 ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITE FORM Site #8
ssPage 2 Division of Historical Resources, Florida Department of State

FIELD METHODS (Check one or more methods for detection and for boundaries)
SITE DETECTION SITE BOUNDARIES
an field check _exposed ground Vscreened shovel _bounds unknown remote seeing unscreened shovel
literature search posthole digger none by recorder insp exposed ground /screened shovel
informant report auger-size:_ literature search posthole digger block excavation
remote sensing uncreed shovel informant report auger-size:_ uesimate or gup
Number, size, depth, pattern of units; screen size S. 6 it wAcv\v b Ct.0- e to aQd 3K cuAL ) _
onrJ icK!> CehptkM !4 3o rs c. .SITE DESCRIFIFON ::: ,
EXTENT Size (m2) 0 Depth/stratigraphy of cultural deposit Ai,~h u.- ..e1 c ~L
At ek.i.Lnk ti tIiA A-AA7-P1.XA OJI-Q It IlAAZ.A.- 7Val ?In cL. +WAL
TEMPORAL INTERPRETATION Components: \single prob nge _probau.uple mnuiple _uncertain
Descre each occupation in plan (refer to attached large scale map) and stratigraphicay. Discuss temporal and functional interpretation.
&a W .- V-anp-- Rt '"oL-e aS4 \AtAvJe- S. ^Je l
INTEGRITY Overall disturbance: _noneseen minor substantial _major rpoite destroyed-document
Disturbances/threats/protective measures A .A he u A,\.,-, A
AREA COLLECTED 9 0 m2 Surface: #units, total area m2. Excavation: #units -

ARTIFACTS .'
TOTAL ARTIFACTS # 2. (C)ount or (E)stimate? Surface # Subsurface # 2.
COLLECTION STRATEGY ARTIFACT/FEATURE CATEGORIES
SnkowN unselective (aB artifacts) unspecified daub nolocal-exotic bone-unspecif
slective (some artifacts) hics, aborig'l brick/bg mad metal, nonprecious d
_uncoellcted general (not by subarea) ceramic-aborig'l glass bone-humman _worked sh
Controlled (by subarea) eeramic-nonabo precious metal/coin bone-animal subsrf feats
Other (Strate, Categories)


DIAGNOSTICS (Type and frequency)
1 i .l-, I tP ,. c r ,- v <


N= I

N=-
N=


2 !ACA," \a \P \-
3 14


4


5
6
7
8
9


ENVIRONMENT
Nearest fresh water (inm. relic source) uY\.VCO UO Dist. (m/ft)/bearihg
Natural community r.. k.o,, 4- Lp\O ~Py,\f J clt xey, 6 -t1,-. IQI-.
Local vegetation S o-w i ,E l t \k,,. "-- o,, A -, e
Topography Ae-\'/ uc ~ n e Av-, n11 e ,J_. Elevation LL m/g
Present land ie -o J
SCS soil series Soil association b-- L,(c.,e / cn,,IW dA

FURTHER INFORMATION
INFORMANT(S): Name/Addr./Phone

LOCATION & FILE NOS. (Field notes, artifacts/accession nos, photographs/negative nos.)
MQFSF rde omy-

MANUSCRIPITS OR PUBLICATIONS ON THE SITE (if unpub., give FSF file # or location)


RECORDEt(S): Name/Addr./fhone Qss1g Tr w/g- 2. n<% Ai r/,. <
Affiliation or FAS Chapter fAgd 4./ K'~crc- Cekr. FR.,,',A t,- A_&,l//

LARGE SCALE MAP: At 1P=200' or larger scale, show: site boundaries, scale, North arnow, datum, test/colectio units, landmarks.
NARRATIVE DESCRIPTION/CONTINUATIONS: Attach additional sheet with detailed information or with rcotiuationM.

REQUIRED: USGS MAP OR COPY WITH SITE LOCATION, EXTENT MARKED


4





































































































































































































































~





































































































































































































































~