Cultural Resources Assessment of 117 Archaeological Sites for the Fannin-McFarland and Tucson Aqueducts, Central Arizona Project Canal: Photo Log
Part of the Cultural Resources Assessment of 117 Archaeological Sites for the Fannin-McFarland and Tucson Aqueducts, Central Arizona Project Canal, Maricopa, Pinal, and Pima Counties, Arizona project
Author(s): Walter R. Punzmann; Jennifer Rich; Archaeological Consulting Services, Ltd.
Year: 2017
Summary
In compliance with Section 106 of the NHPA, the Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation), Phoenix Area Office (PXAO) began cultural resource surveys along the Central Arizona Project (CAP) main stem alignment shortly after the CAP was authorized. For the next 25 years, various cultural resource management contractors conducted inventories of the CAP, recording several hundred archaeological sites. From the 1970s to the 1980s, some of these sites were tested and/or excavated as mitigation for the construction of the CAP main stem canal. While many sites were determined eligible or not eligible for the National Register of Historic Places (Register), some did not receive eligibility determinations and some were located outside of the construction corridor and not affected by construction activities. The legacy survey data and site records from these various investigations have a number of errors and are sometimes contradictory.
In an effort to better manage cultural resources on Reclamation land, PXAO has developed an archaeological site database for the CAP canal. The database was developed using all the previous main stem survey data; however, the Register eligibility status of the majority of these sites was unknown following completion of the CAP. Additionally, an unknown number of sites were either destroyed by construction or excavation, while others are no longer within Reclamation’s CAP ROW. It is necessary that the database accurately reflects the current Register eligibility status of all archaeological sites within the CAP ROW to ensure that PXAO can effectively manage these sites. To this end, PXAO has been updating its database and conducted consultation with the Arizona State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) in 2015, seeking to resolve the eligibility status of sites within the CAP ROW. Following this consultation, the SHPO and PXAO agreed that based on the assessment data provided, further work was required on 117 sites along the Fannin-McFarland and Tucson Aqueducts. For 24 sites determined eligible for the Register, the maps from the original surveys were insufficient. For another 93 sites, the data provided was insufficient to determine whether a site was eligible or ineligible for inclusion in the Register.
During ACS’ efforts to relocate 117 previously recorded sites along the Fannin-McFarland and Tucson Aqueducts, eligibility for 10 sites could not be determined and so eligibility testing was conducted at these 10 sites to determine Register eligibility or the extent to which subsurface deposits are likely present with the CAP ROW.
Following this work, additional survey was conducted in selected portions of the CAP corridor to try and relocate 15 sites that could not be found due to destruction or misplotting.
This file is the log of photographs taken during this project.
Cite this Record
Cultural Resources Assessment of 117 Archaeological Sites for the Fannin-McFarland and Tucson Aqueducts, Central Arizona Project Canal: Photo Log. Walter R. Punzmann, Jennifer Rich, Archaeological Consulting Services, Ltd.. 2017 ( tDAR id: 440011) ; doi:10.6067/XCV8R21450
This Resource is Part of the Following Collections
Keywords
Culture
Archaic
•
Early Archaic
•
Euroamerican
•
Historic
•
Historic Native American
•
Hohokam
•
Late Archaic
•
Middle Archaic
•
PaleoIndian
Material
Building Materials
•
Ceramic
•
Chipped Stone
•
Fire Cracked Rock
•
Glass
•
Ground Stone
•
Metal
•
Shell
•
Wood
Site Name
AZ AA:11:26(ASM)
•
AZ AA:11:29(ASM)
•
AZ AA:12:1163(ASM)
•
AZ AA:12:125(ASM)
•
AZ AA:12:209(ASM)
•
AZ AA:12:325(ASM)
•
AZ AA:12:329(ASM)
•
AZ AA:12:353(ASM)
•
AZ AA:12:354(ASM)
•
AZ AA:12:355(ASM)
•
AZ AA:12:357(ASM)
•
AZ AA:12:368(ASM)
•
AZ AA:12:384(ASM)
•
AZ AA:12:452(ASM)
•
AZ AA:12:453(ASM)
•
AZ AA:12:457(ASM)
•
AZ AA:12:458(ASM)
•
AZ AA:12:463(ASM)
•
AZ AA:12:464(ASM)
•
AZ AA:12:483(ASM)
•
AZ AA:12:484(ASM)
•
AZ AA:12:485(ASM)
•
AZ AA:12:520(ASM)
•
AZ AA:12:579(ASM)
•
AZ AA:12:624(ASM)
•
AZ AA:12:644(ASM)
•
AZ AA:12:645(ASM)
•
AZ AA:16:158(ASM)
•
AZ AA:16:174(ASM)
•
AZ AA:16:304(ASM)
•
AZ AA:16:307(ASM)
•
AZ AA:3:10(MNA)
•
AZ AA:3:18(ASM)
•
AZ AA:3:19(ASM)
•
AZ AA:3:2(MNA)
•
AZ AA:3:21(ASM)
•
AZ AA:3:23(ASM)
•
AZ AA:3:24(ASM)
•
AZ AA:3:26(ASM)
•
AZ AA:3:3(MNA)
•
AZ AA:3:326(ASM)
•
AZ AA:3:327(ASM)
•
AZ AA:3:328(ASM)
•
AZ AA:3:329(ASM)
•
AZ AA:3:330(ASM)
•
AZ AA:3:331(ASM)
•
AZ AA:3:332(ASM)
•
AZ AA:3:339(ASM)
•
AZ AA:3:340(ASM)
•
AZ AA:3:37(ASM)
•
AZ AA:3:4(MNA)
•
AZ AA:3:47(ASM)
•
AZ AA:3:49(ASM)
•
AZ AA:3:50(ASM)
•
AZ AA:3:53(ASM)
•
AZ AA:3:54(ASM)
•
AZ AA:3:55(ASM)
•
AZ AA:3:56(ASM)
•
AZ AA:3:58(ASM)
•
AZ AA:3:59(ASM)
•
AZ AA:3:62(ASM)
•
AZ AA:3:63(ASM)
•
AZ AA:3:9(ASM)
•
AZ AA:6:352(ASM)
•
AZ AA:7:15(ASM)
•
AZ AA:7:27(ASM)
•
AZ AA:7:46(ASM)
•
AZ AA:7:47(ASM)
•
AZ AA:7:48(ASM)
•
AZ AA:7:53(ASM)
•
AZ AA:7:57(ASM)
•
AZ AA:7:59(ASM)
•
AZ AA:7:62(ASM)
•
AZ AA:7:64(ASM)
•
AZ AA:7:66(ASM)
•
AZ AA:7:68(ASM)
•
AZ AA:7:70(ASM)
•
AZ AA:7:85(ASM)
•
AZ AA:7:87(ASM)
•
AZ U:10:10(MNA)
•
AZ U:10:11(MNA)
•
AZ U:10:12(MNA)
•
AZ U:10:13(ASM)
•
AZ U:10:13(MNA)
•
AZ U:10:14(ASM)
•
AZ U:10:17(ASM)
•
AZ U:10:19(ASM)
•
AZ U:10:2(MNA)
•
AZ U:10:3(ASM)
•
AZ U:10:4(MNA)
•
AZ U:10:5(ASM)
•
AZ U:10:5(MNA)
•
AZ U:10:51(ASU)
•
AZ U:10:6(ASM)
•
AZ U:10:6(MNA)
•
AZ U:10:7(ASM)
•
AZ U:14:2(MNA)
•
AZ U:14:30(ASU)
•
AZ U:14:31(ASU)
•
AZ U:14:46(ASM)
•
AZ U:14:73(ASM)
•
AZ U:15:10(ASM)
•
AZ U:15:10(ASU)
•
AZ U:15:10(MNA)
•
AZ U:15:100(ASM)
•
AZ U:15:102(ASM)
•
AZ U:15:104(ASM)
•
AZ U:15:12(ASU)
•
AZ U:15:13(ASM)
•
AZ U:15:13(MNA)
•
AZ U:15:15(ASM)
•
AZ U:15:19(ASM)
•
AZ U:15:19(MNA)
•
AZ U:15:2(MNA)
•
AZ U:15:20(MNA)
•
AZ U:15:21(MNA)
•
AZ U:15:22(MNA)
•
AZ U:15:23(MNA)
•
AZ U:15:24(MNA)
•
AZ U:15:26(MNA)
•
AZ U:15:27(MNA)
•
AZ U:15:28(ASU)
•
AZ U:15:28(MNA)
•
AZ U:15:29(ASU)
•
AZ U:15:29(MNA)
•
AZ U:15:3(ASU)
•
AZ U:15:3(MNA)
•
AZ U:15:30(ASU)
•
AZ U:15:30(MNA)
•
AZ U:15:32(MNA)
•
AZ U:15:33(MNA)
•
AZ U:15:38(MNA)
•
AZ U:15:39(MNA)
•
AZ U:15:4(MNA)
•
AZ U:15:40(MNA)
•
AZ U:15:41(MNA)
•
AZ U:15:43(MNA)
•
AZ U:15:46(ASM)
•
AZ U:15:48(ASM)
•
AZ U:15:5(MNA)
•
AZ U:15:57(ASM)
•
AZ U:15:59(ASM)
•
AZ U:15:6(MNA)
•
AZ U:15:61(ASM)
•
AZ U:15:62(ASM)
•
AZ U:15:63(ASM)
•
AZ U:15:64(ASM)
•
AZ U:15:65(ASM)
•
AZ U:15:66(ASM)
•
AZ U:15:665(ASM)
•
AZ U:15:69(ASM)
•
AZ U:15:7(ASU)
•
AZ U:15:71(ASM)
•
AZ U:15:73(ASM)
•
AZ U:15:74(ASM)
•
AZ U:15:75(ASM)
•
AZ U:15:76(ASM)
•
AZ U:15:77(ASM)
•
AZ U:15:81(ASM)
•
AZ U:15:83(ASM)
•
AZ U:15:834(ASM)
•
AZ U:15:84(ASM)
•
AZ U:15:845(ASM)
•
AZ U:15:85(ASM)
•
AZ U:15:87(ASM)
•
AZ U:15:872(ASM)
•
AZ U:15:873(ASM)
•
AZ U:15:875(ASM)
•
AZ U:15:876(ASM)
•
AZ U:15:97(ASM)
•
AZ U:15:99(ASM)
•
AZ U:6:2(ASU)
•
NA15261
•
NA15611
•
NA15613
•
NA15614
•
NA15615
•
NA15619
•
NA15620
•
NA15622
•
NA15627
•
NA15628
•
NA15629
•
NA15630
•
NA15631
•
NA15632
•
NA15636
•
NA15647
•
NA15648
•
NA15649
•
NA15653
•
NA15654
•
NA15655
•
NA15656
•
NA15657
•
NA15660
•
NA15663
•
NA15664
•
NA15665
•
NA15666
•
NA15667
•
NA15668
•
NA15669
•
NA15756
•
NA15772
•
NA15775
•
NA16646
•
NA18004
•
NA18005
•
NA18008
•
NA18009
•
NA18010
•
NA18011
•
NA18012
•
NA18013
•
NA18014
•
NA18020
•
NA18022
•
NA18024
•
NA18031
•
NA18037
•
NA18039
•
NA18056
•
NA18268
•
The Florence to Picacho Road
Show More
Site Type
Agricultural or Herding
•
Ancient Structure
•
Archaeological Feature
•
Artifact Scatter
•
Domestic Structure or Architectural Complex
•
Encampment
•
Hamlet / Village
•
Hearth
•
Petroglyph
•
Pit
•
Quarry
•
Resource Extraction / Production / Transportation Structure or Features
•
Road
•
Road, Trail, and Related Structures or Features
•
Roasting Pit / Oven / Horno
•
Rock Alignment
•
Rock Art
•
Settlements
•
Structure
•
Water Control Feature
Investigation Types
Archaeological Overview
•
Site Evaluation / Testing
•
Systematic Survey
Geographic Keywords
Maricopa County
•
Pima County
•
Pinal County
Temporal Keywords
Archaic Period
•
Ceramic Period
•
Classic Period
•
Colonial Period
•
Formative Period
•
Paleo Indian
•
Pioneer Period
•
Preclassic Period
•
Proto-Historic
•
Sacaton Phase
•
Santa Cruz Phase
•
Sedentary Period
Temporal Coverage
Calendar Date: 1800 to 1900 (Historic/EuroAmerican)
Calendar Date: -12000 to 1500 (Prehistoric/Native Archaeological Culture)
Spatial Coverage
min long: -112.143; min lat: 31.747 ; max long: -110.814; max lat: 33.715 ;
Individual & Institutional Roles
Contact(s): USDI Bureau Reclamation, Phoenix Area Office, Archaeologist
Contributor(s): Emily Higgins Keppler; Jennifer Rich; Walter R. Punzmann; Zachary Rothwell; Kristen David; Thomas Jones; Gary Huckleberry; Andrea Gregory; Lesley Hudson
Field Director(s): Peg Davis
Principal Investigator(s): Douglas Mitchell
Landowner(s): Bureau of Reclamation
Sponsor(s): Bureau of Reclamation
Repository(s): Center for Archaeology and Society, Arizona State University
Submitted To(s): USDI Bureau Reclamation, Phoenix Area Office
Record Identifiers
ACS Project No.(s): 16-145:CSUR/TEST
U.S. Bureau of Reclamation Delivery Order No.(s): R16PS00682
GSA Contract No.(s): GS10F0224P
ASM Accession No.(s): 2017-384.ASM; 2012-541.ASM
File Information
Name | Size | Creation Date | Date Uploaded | Access | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Photo-Log.pdf | 53.20kb | Dec 21, 2017 | Dec 21, 2017 11:02:34 AM | Public | |
In compliance with Section 106 of the NHPA, the Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation), Phoenix Area Office (PXAO) began cultural resource surveys along the Central Arizona Project (CAP) main stem alignment shortly after the CAP was authorized. For the next 25 years, various cultural resource management contractors conducted inventories of the CAP, recording several hundred archaeological sites. From the 1970s to the 1980s, some of these sites were tested and/or excavated as mitigation for the construction of the CAP main stem canal. While many sites were determined eligible or not eligible for the National Register of Historic Places (Register), some did not receive eligibility determinations and some were located outside of the construction corridor and not affected by construction activities. The legacy survey data and site records from these various investigations have a number of errors and are sometimes contradictory. In an effort to better manage cultural resources on Reclamation land, PXAO has developed an archaeological site database for the CAP canal. The database was developed using all the previous main stem survey data; however, the Register eligibility status of the majority of these sites was unknown following completion of the CAP. Additionally, an unknown number of sites were either destroyed by construction or excavation, while others are no longer within Reclamation’s CAP ROW. It is necessary that the database accurately reflects the current Register eligibility status of all archaeological sites within the CAP ROW to ensure that PXAO can effectively manage these sites. To this end, PXAO has been updating its database and conducted consultation with the Arizona State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) in 2015, seeking to resolve the eligibility status of sites within the CAP ROW. Following this consultation, the SHPO and PXAO agreed that based on the assessment data provided, further work was required on 117 sites along the Fannin-McFarland and Tucson Aqueducts. For 24 sites determined eligible for the Register, the maps from the original surveys were insufficient. For another 93 sites, the data provided was insufficient to determine whether a site was eligible or ineligible for inclusion in the Register. During ACS’ efforts to relocate 117 previously recorded sites along the Fannin-McFarland and Tucson Aqueducts, eligibility for 10 sites could not be determined and so eligibility testing was conducted at these 10 sites to determine Register eligibility or the extent to which subsurface deposits are likely present with the CAP ROW. Following this work, additional survey was conducted in selected portions of the CAP corridor to try and relocate 15 sites that could not be found due to destruction or misplotting. This file is the log of photographs taken during this project. |