3A .1 etunvnyt
.i I ‘ .I ,
.aL/mfitw‘ ; 32

V

Y:

.5”.
#2

 

 

.L} .1 If
:1... 7.. .4 .
[.56 I .

93.2 o» ”'6‘. {fl 1 I»
hmfimmn 3.. kg
I v. 9.1:”. W
2:. yrmnflinnvu :8
.u..r 3m .
31.

x a. ..
‘ v. :52
. . 11%“?

a . V ‘ _. .37;

.7!

i.

L .. .
EM. 4

i. I...
:.II. 5
T." .
Lari.

. Ind “.510 5
0 to) 5.1 [I ‘13-!- I.
‘ a. aha... h, 21.53;. v. hfibhuntaun
its $3.151 filx . is} e
. '23 i...'\6tJtv- If}! .y V c.
Y n 5 ‘ In I l I 5|; c Q
V 3». in. inn b. v
‘xiexmnl....s Yumé....J Kama“...
5:3! can”... . hung . .M
5.1.. s. .
a? tl
.1:

an. flit. m

I..\_. ,

 

This is to certify that the
thesis entitled

FAUNAL ANALYSIS AND SHIFTING NICHE EXPLOITATION
STRATEGIES AT THE SCHULTZ SITE 20$A2 IN THE
SAGINAW VALLEY OF MICHIGAN

presented by r
ERICA LYN BONKOSKY SHIPMAN

has been accepted towards fulfillment
of the requirements for the

Master of degree in Department of Geological
Science Sciences

WW

f Major Professor's‘Signature

LII‘Sc Iohl

 

 

 

Date

MSU is an Aflinnative Action/Equal Opportunity Institution

-
-u—o-.-.~.— ......

7"-.—

 

 

 

LIBRARY
Michigan State
University

 

 

 

PLACE IN RETURN Box to remove this checkout from your record.
To AVOID FINES return on or before date due.
MAY BE RECALLED with earlier due date if requested.

 

DATE DUE DATE DUE DATE DUE

 

gtgflgs'td'os

 

I I|(:‘:]4d'1,'70nl111

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

6/01 c:/CIRC/DateDuo.p65-p. 15

FAUNAL ANALYSIS AND SHIF TING NICHE EXPLOITATION STRATEGIES AT
THE SCHULTZ SITE ZOSAZ IN THE SAGINAW VALLEY OF MICHIGAN

By

Erica Lyn Bonkosky Shipman

A Thesis
Submitted to
Michigan State University
in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of
MASTER OF SCIENCE

Department of Geological Sciences

2004

ABSTRACT

FAUNAL ANALYSIS AND SHIFTING NICHE EXPLOITATION STRATEGIES AT
THE SCHULTZ SITE 2OSA2 IN THE SAGINAW VALLEY OF MICHIGAN

By

Erica Lyn Bonkosky Shipman

Faunal assemblages can reveal changing paleoenvironmental conditions, the seasonality
of site occupancy, and, indirectly, climatic fluctuations. The Schultz Site (ZOSAZ),
located in the Saginaw Valley of Michigan, with stratified occupational units spanning
the period 2,600 B.P. through 800 BR, presents a detailed geoarchaeological sequence
that was analyzed in the context of changing aquatic environments and associated
changes in faunal exploitation. Four important conclusions can be summarized from this
analysis of the Schultz Site fauna. First, the refined recovery facilitated by the flotation
technique does not significantly decrease the rate of identification at this site. Second, the
Schultz Site environment varied seasonally and temporally over the course of several
hundred years, affecting the habitability of the site and the intensity of occupation and its
utilization through time. Third, this fluctuation resulted in multiple season usage of the
site through time and a changing subsistence strategy that included clear resource
targeting of aquatic habitats at particular times. Finally, the analysis of these faunal

samples confirms, supports, and broadens earlier analyses.

To my father for introducing me to Lucy and friends so many years ago.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

I should like to thank the many individuals who contributed to this project for their many
hours of assistance. I would first and foremost like to thank the members of my graduate
committee: Dr. Michael Gottfried for allowing me the freedom to pursue a rather unusual
twist on paleontology, Dr. William Lovis for allowing me to utilize the fauna specimens
collected during his field work, Dr. Beverley Smith for her many hours of private tutelage
in the finer points of faunal analysis, and to Dr. Grahame Larson for his traditional
geological support of this endeavor. I would also like to thank the MSU Museum for
allowing me to utilize their extensive comparative anatomy collection. Many thanks also
to Dr. Alan Holman for the verification of identification of reptile remains. Overall, I
would like to thank the entire MSU Department of Geological Sciences for allowing me
the opportunity to pursue this degree and research. My appreciation also to Dr. James
Martin for showing me the practicality of this type of work and giving me reason to
continue. Lastly, I should like to thank my family for their ongoing patience and

encouragement.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

LIST OF TABLES ................................................................................. vi
LIST OF
FIGURES ........................................................................................... vii
CHAPTER 1
THE SCHULTZ SITE ................................................................................ 1
Introduction .................................................................................. 1
1991 Michigan State University Excavation ............................................. 3
Field Recovery Methods .................................................................... 4
Prior Research ................................................................................ 7
Modern Local Environments ............................................................. 10
Cultural Context ............................................................................ 1 1
CHAPTER 2
FAUNAL ANALYSIS THROUGH TAPHONOMY. SEASONALITY, AND
IDENTIFICATION ................................................................................. l6
Taphonomy and Faunal Preservation .................................................... l6
Seasonality .................................................................................. 20
Methodology ................................................................................ 3 l
Flotation Sample ................................................................... 32
Screened Sample ................................................................... 55
Trends .............................................................................. 66
CHAPTER 3
WORKED BONE AND ARTIFACTS .......................................................... 71
Antler Artifacts ............................................................................. 71
Bone and Tooth Artifacts ................................................................. 75
CHAPTER 4
SITE ANALYSIS AND CONCLUSIONS ...................................................... 77
Paleoenvironment .......................................................................... 77
Resource Targeting ........................................................................ 79
Flotation vs. Screening ..................................................................... 81
Conclusions ................................................................................. 86
APPENDIX .......................................................................................... 89
BIBLIOGRAPHY ................................................................................. l 12

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1: Archaeological Cultural Chronology of the Schultz Site .......................... 12

Table 2: Summary Statistics (NISP) for F aunal Remains by Unit from the Schultz Site
Flotation Material ................................................................................. 22

Table 3: Column 26N Summary Statistics (NISP) for Faunal Remains by Unit from the
Schultz Site Flotation Material .................................................................. 33

Table 4: Column 34.5N Summary Statistics (NISP) for F aunal Remains by Unit from the
Schultz Site Flotation Material .................................................................. 35

Table 5: Column T 91-2 Summary Statistics (NISP) for Faunal Remains by Unit from the
Schultz Site Flotation Material .................................................................. 36

Table 6: Column T 91-3 Summary Statistics (NISP) for Faunal Remains by Unit from the
Schultz Site Flotation Material ................................................................... 38

Table 7: Column Summary Statistics (NISP) for Faunal Remains by Level from the

Schultz Site Screened Material ................................................................... 57
Table 8: Summary Statistics (NISP) for F aunal Remains by Level from the Schultz Site

Screened Material .................................................................................. 85
Table 9: Taxa Identified at the Schultz Site 20SA2 .......................................... 92
Table 10: Freshwater Fish Habitat Preferences ................................................ 95

vi

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1: Location of the Schultz Site in the Saginaw Valley of Michigan ................... 2
Figure 2: Excavations at the Schultz Site .......................................................... 6
Figure 3: Schultz Site Unit Correlations ........................................................... 8
Figure 4: Eastern Spiny Soft-shell Turtle Carapace ............................................. 26
Figure 5: Lake Trout Dentary Tooth ............................................................... 27
Figure 6: Lake Trout Dentary Fragments ......................................................... 27

Figure 7: Lake Trout Left Articular ............................................................... 27
Figure 8: Worked Bear Tooth ..................................................................... 28
Figure 9: Worked Bear Tooth Close-Up ......................................................... 28
Figure 10: Worked Deer Skull and Antler Fragment ........................................... 28
Figure 11: Spatial Stratigraphic Correlation of the Schultz Site ............................... 41
Figure 11a: East-West Spatial Stratigraphic Correlation of the Schultz Site ............... 42

Figure 11b: North-South Spatial Stratigraphic Correlation of the Schultz Site ............ 43

Figure 12: Composite of Faunal Remains ....................................................... 44

Figure 13: Composite of F aunal Remains (Flotation Column 26N) ......................... 45

Figure 14: Composite of F aunal Remains (Flotation Column 34.5N) ........................ 46
Figure 15: Composite of Faunal Remains (Flotation Column T 91-2) ....................... 47
Figure 16: Composite of F aunal Remains (Flotation Column T 91-3) ....................... 48

Figure 17: Composite of F aunal Remains Summary of Faunal Remains by Column
(Flotation Columns 26N, 34.5N, 91-2, 91-3) ................................................... 50

Figure 18: Composite by Column (Flotation Columns 26N, 34.5N, 91-2, 91-3) ........... 51

Figure 19: Composite of Reptilian Remains by Column
(Flotation Columns 26N, 34.5N, 91-2, 91-3) .................................................... 52

vii

Figure 20: Composite of Osteichthyes Remains by Column

(Flotation Columns 26N, 34.5N, 91-2, 91-3) .................................................... 53
Figure 21: Composite of Mammalian Remains by Column

(Flotation Columns 26N, 34.5N, 91-2, 91-3) .................................................... 54
Figure 22: Composite of Remains by Column (Screened Columns) ......................... 56
Figure 23: Mammalian Remains Identified to Family Level or Lower ...................... 67
Figure 24: Elk Antler Fragments .................................................................. 72
Figure 25: Worked Elk Antler Close-Up ......................................................... 72
Figure 26: Worked Antler Harpoon ............................................................... 74
Figure 27: Worked Bone Tool ..................................................................... 74
Figure 28: Composite of Mammalian Remains ................................................. 83
Figure 29: 12 Families of Osteichthyes .......................................................... 84
Figure 30: Fisher Jaw Fragments .................................................................. 87
Figure 31: Longnose Gar Scales .................................................................. 97
Figure 32: Longnose Gar Vertebrae .............................................................. 97
Figure 33: Catfish Pectoral Spine ................................................................. 97
Figure 34: Freshwater Drum Pharyngeal Toothplate ........................................... 97
Figure 35: Freshwater Drum Pharyngeal Tooth ................................................. 97
Figure 36: Beaver Incisor ......................................................................... 108
Figure 37: Muskrat Left Mandible ............................................................... 108

viii

CHAPTER 1: THE SCHULTZ SITE

Introduction

The analysis of faunal remains has become an essential and at times primary component
of contemporary archaeological research. Animal remains can provide direct insights into
the food resources available to and procured and selected by past populations. Faunal
assemblages can, furthermore, reveal changing paleoenvironmental conditions, the

seasonality of site occupancy, and, indirectly, climatic fluctuations.

The occurrence of animal remains at an archaeological site allows assessment of the
relative abundance of the elements of a specific fauna or suite of faunas. Notable
absences in collections of faunal assemblages, where particular animals would be
expected, may be indicative of either human selection, or of environmental variations in a
local region. Often, the correlation of faunal and cultural remains can provide insights
into the patterns of decision-making and economy of the people using the area.
Frequencies of faunal remains can also be indicative of the relative intensity, or variation
in intensity, of habitation or use of a particular site, and the targeting of individual or

groups of species.

This thesis focuses on the faunal assemblages of the Schultz Site (20SA2), located in the
Saginaw Valley of Michigan (Figure 1), at the confluence of the Tittabawassee and

Saginaw rivers (Fitting ed. 1972). The Schultz Site, with stratified occupational units

     

MIDLAND
c, .
I. I
‘ .'.
“'o.
O
f SCHULTZ SITE/ - -'
. .0 _ I
00° w
s; ‘4“
l ‘
I f\\°‘
E
.l
2 mm
‘0
0 25
MIIES
4o

0 20
r1222“

«HOWE—{rust

Figure 1: Location of the Schultz Site in the Saginaw Valley of Michigan (From Lovis et al. 1994)

spanning the period 2,600 B.P. through 800 B.P., presents a detailed geoarchaeological
sequence that can be analyzed in the context of changing aquatic environments and

associated changes in faunal exploitation (Lovis et a1. 2001).

Fluctuations of the base plane in the lower Lake Huron/Michigan basin resulted in local
aggradation and degradation of levees that may relate to local shifts in channel position
(Speth 1972: 67-68, 74). Such changes had a marked impact on local aquatic and river-

edge environments utilized by human populations during the span of site occupation.

The focus of this thesis is to link the identification of vertebrate faunal remains to
changes in the environment and human exploitation patterns throughout the Schultz Site
occupation. Paleoenvironmental and geological data are used to interpret past
environments, animal habitats and distributions, and to address the implications of the
faunal assemblage for determining seasonality of site occupation. Results from this
faunal analysis will be compared with earlier research by Cleland (1966), Luxenberg
(1972), and Lovis et a1. (2001). Finally, a comparison of sampling strategies will be

made with reference to earlier work.

1991 Michigan State University Excavation

The Schultz Site faunal assemblages have been studied in a series of analyses and

excavations since the 19605, by C. E. Cleland in the mid-19605 (Cleland 1966), B.

Luxenberg in the early 19705 (Luxenberg 1972), and L. Palsgaard in the early 19803

(Ozker 1982). The Schultz Site (20SA2; Figure 2), was most recently excavated in 1991
by a Michigan State University (MSU) team led by W.A. Lovis (Lovis et al. 1994).
Because of its location and relatively undisturbed condition, 20SA2 provides an excellent
reference for changing economic, environmental, and technological conditions in the

region over an extended time span.

One goal of the 1991 excavation was to collect comprehensive environmental data and
apply that data to interpretation of spatial and temporal changes at the site and in the
region (Lovis et al. 2001: 3). A second goal was to address changing subsistence patterns
as a result of environmental fluctuations as the people changed from a hunting and
gathering to a horticultural society (Lovis et al. 2001: 4). The third primary goal was to
further evaluate the differences in identification rate between samples recovered by

screening methods and those recovered through flotation (Lovis et al. 2001: 4).

Field Recovery Methods

Methods used during the 1991 excavation of the Schultz Site (2OSA2), which are briefly
summarized here, are detailed in the preliminary report submitted in 1994 (Lovis et al.
1994) as well as in a more recent article (Lovis et al. 2001). The collection strategy
consisted of four components. First, a machine trench (designated T 91-1) was excavated
through the center of the site, paralleling a trench from earlier excavations. The purpose
of this parallel trench was the correlation and verification of previously defined

stratigraphic units. Next, five separate one square meter units (N25, N35, N45, N55,

N65) were excavated and screened using 'A” (5mm) mesh at 10 meter increments along
the T 91-1 trench. Three additional, smaller trenches (T 91-2, T 91 -3, T 91-4) were
machine excavated, perpendicular to T 9l-l, for further stratigraphic and temporal control
(Figure 2). Finally, five flotation columns were collected; two in Trench 9l-1(Lovis et al.

1994) and one from each of the other trenches.

A summary of the stratigraphic units, cultural horizons, geologic units, and ages of the
levels sampled during the 1991 excavation is shown in Figure 3. The level immediately
below the uppermost stratum (or plow zone) dates to circa 800 B.P., well prior to any
contact with Europeans. As a whole, human occupation of the Schultz Site extends back
in time at least another 1,700 years, to ca. 2,500 B.P., covering the cultural horizons of
the Late Woodland Period back to the Late Archaic/Early Woodland transition (Lovis et

al. 1994).

Geological and depositional units were defined by their contacts with differentiated
sedimentary layers above and below, or by unconformities in the layers. The stratigraphic
units were determined in the field and are based on several observable characteristics of
the strata (Boggs 1995). The characteristics can be physical, such as sediment color,
grain size, and chemical composition; biological, i.e. animal remains or cultural i.e.
artifacts found within the stratigraphic units. The stratigraphic units may be as broad as

the geologic units or some smaller portion thereof.

 

8/
2
O
(I
,4
\

 

 

 

/“"£—< I”.
a
/ II. ..
- \
5‘ 5’ 9"
$3
'2“ b ‘.' r.. / I
_' .t' 7" 01:31.”,
:: .j;. N’ "2‘
. ‘ _:~ \
. .: :-.:. Q E.
r .
SMIU ““3 xi rm
\
w -—--s--- s.
"'4"... 1'91 T‘T ”° I

 

 

 

 

 

ISL!
I 1991

\1964

 

 

 

i

 

   

 

 

 

 

Figure 2: Excavations at the Schultz Site (From Lovis et al. 1994)

Stratigraphic units at archaeological sites may also be correlated with cultural units.
Cultural units can be characterized by the artifacts found within each layer and the
manner in which the artifacts vary in their concentration through time. Some of the
carbon-based artifacts and animal remains may be datable by chronometric assay,

allowing correlations between stratigraphic units, cultural horizons, and calendrical ages

(Figure 3).

Prior Research

Environmental factors that can be interpreted include ancient drainage connections, water
quality (e. g., turbidity, flow rate, and relative oxygen level), substrate type, seasonality,
and climate change (Olsen 1971, Shackley 1981). Analysis of the Schultz Site by Cleland
(1966) and Luxenberg (1972) indicated variations in the environment, sediment
deposition rates, and human exploitation of the site through the represented time span.
Correlation of different flotation samples from the 1991 excavation with the geologic

units (Figure 3) will facilitate environmental reconstruction.

Research by Eschman and Karrow’s (1985) pointed to an “outlet controlled” model for
the geological development of the Great Lakes region, and by extension, the vicinity
around the Schultz Site. Beginning approximately 10,000 years ago, with the retreat of
the Huron lobe of the Wisconsinan ice sheets, the Saginaw Bay region was shaped by

several episodes of fluctuating depositional events (Eschman and Karrow 1985). As the

«8.8.2.8 55 26 2.2.8 a. 28.“.

9:28 .5 mote) «E... comm Lo fiaou .mBo< .uoEEom 9.83.8 =2 .0 3285 cm u. soon. Rocco .oomtsm 50.3 50 c. 8582: 2 580 $550 “.202 .

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

88m 8288 8
2.5.2885
3:0.me fl=w 590 N
S. X
82805 5820362 23 m .3 88
02-02 2.5 {no .28..
82805 2.3 2.36m 4 .am 88.82..
832 8.2.2.2» 8 . . 8mm- 8
82805 5:3 88.23.52.358 a m o N
83:
8285 58m 88.2325 0 am 33.88
m F 73 55.28.. 95.302,
28.5. 88.232.388.85 5 mm 82.9.?
2.5 565 58m 882.25
mwnmh 3_E._9C8w_0 COEmCEP UGO—80>) . .
.25.me 28.5. 88582.» 8.8 820 8 a m 8:
2-8
8285 28.2 .28 :86 8
8-8
2.6 80 28.2 82805 28.2 8.2. 820 8 mm 82
09mm 5.235:
2.5 80 22822:. 5...: 38.8w. 82805 23 m mm 8:
5:3 588% 82805 28.2 23
mm- 82.8 2.2.2885
.8033 2.6 {no 88: 82805 23 5,: 38.8w 8 an own
8&5»
2.3 8.x. o8~ so... :
.558 :2. 28.80 82.2.. 83.8 :2. o? 8:828
.8230 2:35:85.

glacial lobes of ice retreated, proglacial lakes developed in the moraine-rimmed lowland

basins.

Early Holocene lacustrine deposits underlie the cultural strata at the Schultz Site and the
faunal materials (Lovis et al. 1994: 7). By 3000 B.P., isostatic rebound, outlet incisions,
and shifting outlets had decreased lake levels in the Lake Huron basin (Lovis et al. 1994:
7-8). As lake level stabilized, new drainage patterns developed between the Saginaw

River and Lake Huron (Lovis et al. 1994: 8).

Contrary to Eschman and Karrow (1985), a more detailed basin-wide variation model has
been proposed for the Great Lakes region by Larsen (1985). This model suggests that
variation in precipitation and/or temperature and evaporation rates periodically raised lake
level in the Huron/Michigan basin (Larson and Schaetzal 2001). Based upon fluvial
dynamics, streams grading to higher base lake levels would have led to flooding in the
adjacent riverine areas. At other times, streams grading to lower base lake levels would
have led to further down-cutting events, creating a depositional sequence such as that
found at the Schultz Site 20SA2 (Lovis et al. 1994: 9)(Figure 3). Overall, it is likely that
a combination of the two models affected the changing lake levels at the Schultz Site

(Larson and Schaetzal 2001).

Modern Local Environment

The Schultz Site 20SA2 (Figure l) is nestled inland from Saginaw Bay between the
confluence of the Tittabawassee and Saginaw rivers, just down-stream of the Cass and
Shiawassee rivers. Politically located within the city of Saginaw, Michigan, the site is
contained by a local levee (Ozker 1982: 7) and is situated within an extensive moraine-
bounded drainage basin, (Speth 1972: 67)(Figure 1). The waters of four rivers-«the
Tittabawassee, Shiawassee, Flint, and Cass-«converge to form the Saginaw River before
flowing into Saginaw Bay. The area is low-lying and notable for its minimal gradient.
Sandy dunes mark the shorelines of past lake stages. The Schultz Site is near the
confluence of this dendritic river system, towards the northwest comer of the Shiawassee

Flats.

The Shiawassee Flats are often overlain by water, creating a large wetland and swamp
environment around the Schultz Site. The resulting wetlands, past and present, support a

diverse population of aquatic and semi-aquatic animals (Ozker 1982).

Properly defined, the Schultz Site is bounded by the Tittabawassee River to the northwest
and the Shiawassee River on the southwest (Fitting 1972: 5). The Shiawassee, Flint, and
Cass Rivers drain the land to the south and east of the site (Figure 1), reaching maximum
discharge much earlier in the spring than the Tittabawassee River draining the land to the

north and west flitting 1972: 43). Often, the confluence of flood periods caused the area

to be underwater, creating ponds between moraine ridges as the Saginaw River slowly

emptied into Saginaw Bay (Fitting 1972: 44).

Cultural Context

The post-glacial fluctuations of lake levels in the Great Lakes region can be related to
changes in habitation patterns within the region (Table 1). People were clearly in
Michigan at least as early as the Paleo-Indian period of ca. 12,000 to 10,000 B.P. (Shott
and Wright 1999: 61). There are archaeological data from nearby sites within the
Saginaw Valley showing occupation as early as 10,400 B.P. (Shott and Wright 1999: 63).
Fluctuations in lake level would have caused the Paleo-Indian peoples to move about

frequently (Shott 1986).

Within Michigan and the Great Lakes area, the Saginaw Valley provides the best-dated
Archaic sequence in the region (Lovis and Robertson 1989). Lovis and Robertson (1989)
propose an Archaic chronology of the Saginaw Valley in which a resident population of
humans is assumed, although much of the data, including sites and artifacts from the
Early and Middle Archaic Periods, are likely unrecoverable and underwater at present
(Lovis 1999: 83-124). Terrned the Dehmel Road Phase, the late Middle Archaic between
6,200 and 4,500 B.P. is characterized by a series of large, side-notched points. The
Archaic archaeological remains suggest “diffuse” economic activities that include a

diverse range of subsistence resources (Lovis 1999: 110).

ll

.33: 9.3.”. 50:2 >=moE mofiu ucm 23205.52 .682

 

mm 8%

 

.m oommévmm

 

 

 

 

 

n
.n .m owmmémmm
n .m ovwwéwmm

 

 

 

coEmcmF 986003 22.22 "23353sz >c_on_ combo

 

 

82805 0.8.5. Eon. 820

 

 

 

E5: 38.

 

 

 

 

 

 

no.4. coamommm ho 3205.20 H.330 5052820? ”F 05m...

12

The use of cherts, greywacke, and argillite to produce stem-styled points, are dated to
between 4,500 and 3,500 B.P., in the Late Archaic. The next 1,000 years leads into the
Early Woodland ceramic-producing culture around 2,500 B.P. Several local stylistic
variations of projectile points are evidenced throughout the region in the late Archaic
period. Most notable, at ca. 2,500 B.P., are the Meadowood points. These points,
however, do not correspond directly with the Early Woodland ceramics associated with

the Schultz complex (Lovis and Robertson 1989).

Wilkinson (1971: 7-10) defines the term “Woodland” in the context of chronologies
emerging from the region.

The term “Woodland” refers to the prehistoric groups in the
Eastern United States whose culture was characterized by
relatively simple grit-tempered pottery and a subsistence
level based primarily upon hunting and gathering, although
agriculture became increasingly important during the later
periods. Woodland populations are further characterized by
regional variations in this basic pattern, and are
differentiated from the earlier, pre-pottery Archaic groups
and the later, strongly agricultural groups of the Mississippi
Valley. This generalized Woodland culture is commonly
broken down into three divisions; Early, Middle and

Late. . . .as there are marked cultural differences between
them.

Late Archaic, Early Woodland, and Middle Woodland periods are present at the Schultz
Site 20$A2 (Figure 3). From ca. 2,500 to 2,200 B.P., the Early Woodland populations
used burial mounds, built earthworks, developed a basic, rough pottery form, and

incorporated cultigens in their subsistence strategies (Halsey 1999: 125-146).

13

Around 2,200 B.P. and continuing for approximately 600 years, pottery styles increased
in variability, as did the cultivation of agricultural products. In addition, mortuary and
ceremonial activities increased in frequency as well as in degree of elaboration (Kinglsey

1999: 159). This marks the Middle Woodland period (Wilkinson 1971 :9), one of the

peak cultural periods at the Schultz Site.

The Schultz Site occupation was slightly later than other areas, due to high water levels.
However, once the lake levels receded, due to its highly favorable location and unique
environment, the Schultz Site was even more heavily occupied than neighboring regions

(Kinglsey 1999).

Following the Middle Woodland peak of development, an increase in sedentary cultural
activity in the Saginaw Valley marks the end of the Middle Woodland period and the
beginning of the Late Woodland period, ca 1600 BR (Kingsley 1999: 172).
Archaeological data shows that by 1000 B.P., few Late Woodland sites remained in the
Saginaw Valley. Lovis et al. (1994) suggest this decrease may be due to a logistical shift
to smaller scale, transient hunting-and-fishing activities in the Saginaw Valley. They
further suggest that the transition may be due to the development of intensive horticulture
in the region indicative of increased seasonal exploitation of resources, shifting settlement
patterns, and general movement to upland areas for maize cultivation (Lovis et al. 1994:

22).

One of the primary goals of the 1991 excavation was to collect comprehensive
environmental data and apply that data to interpretation of spatial and temporal changes at
the site and in the region (Lovis et al. 2001: 3). Prior research indicated variability in the
environment both across the Saginaw Valley as well as through time, although current
research supports a basin-wide variation model as the cause (Larsen 1985). As the
environment changed as a result of changing temperature, precipitation, and evaporation
rates in the area, so did habitation patterns. Frequent fluctuations in lake level would
have spurred frequent movement as indicated in the Paleo-Indian Period both of which
reduced over time. Movements became seasonally based, as lake and climatic

fluctuations stabilized and the horticultural practices developed in the Saginaw Valley.

15

CHAPTER 2: FAUNAL ANALYSIS THROUGH TAPHONOMY, SEASONALITY,
AND IDENTIFICATION
Faunal analysis is often undertaken as a means of examining the relative importance of
major classes of fauna. Review of the death assemblage as a whole, both temporally and
spatially, can illustrate changing patterns of exploitation. However, several factors can
greatly influence the recoverability of species. These factors may include taphonomy and

related faunal preservation, seasonality, and the identification rates of the remains.

Taphonomy and F aunal Preservation

Data obtained from faunal analyses are important in paleoecological and
paleoenvironmental studies. The taphonomy of animal remains from archaeological sites
often reflects cultural activity, or selective cultural pressures, in addition to natural

phenomena (Gifford 1981).

If a death by natural causes is assumed, rather than a culturally derived one, several
factors can affect the remains prior to burial (Schiffer 1976). Initially, scavenging may
disarticulate the skeleton, removing skin and muscle tissue that could have enhanced
preservation by protecting the bones and keeping them intact. The exposed bones are
then exposed to further weathering or erosional actions on a daily and seasonal scale

(Micozzi 1991 :5).

l6

Diagenesis may be much more extensive in climatically diverse regions that experience
periods of heat and freezing temperatures. Freezing and thawing of the ground around
the remains cause the ground to swell and contract and can cause periods of burial and re-
exposure through time. Action by burrowing animals in and around the remains can also
disrupt the bones, causing some to be buried more quickly than others, and consequently
allowing some of the bones to be better preserved than others when rapidly buried and

undisturbed (Micozzi 1991: 72).

According to Gifford (1981), soil conditions can also be an important factor in
preservation. In regions of highly acidic soils, the chance for long-term preservation is
reduced, as the acid in the soil begins to leach away the calcium in the bones. In the
Great Lakes region, coniferous forests are numerous and widespread. Conifers are
notorious for their removal of nutrients from the surrounding forest floor, leaving the
slight soil cover very acidic. In coniferous regions, the high soil acidity is coupled with
poor soil quality and soil depth, reducing the probability of burial and recovery because
soil formation is hindered (Smith 1996). The longer the bones are exposed to the surface
elements, the fewer there will be to recover. Once deposited in the soil, the bones are
degraded by the acidic soil, so the longer the bones have been within a coniferous region,

the fewer there will be remaining and susceptible to recovery in the future (Smith 1996).

Preservation near water margins is, however, much more likely (Gifford, 1981).
Shoreline regions with deep soils and rapid burial processes at work are likely to be better

places for long-term survival of bone. Unlike many other areas in the Great lakes Region,

the Saginaw Valley near Lake Huron, where several river drainages merge, is therefore

potentially a good place for preservation of skeletal remains.

Bone survivability can also be affected by many intrinsic factors (Micozzi 1991: 55). The
age of the deceased animal affects suture patterns and fusion between bones. The bones
of younger animals are more susceptible if the epiphyses are still unfused. Mature adult
animals will have more robust bones that are likely to survive longer. These older animal
bones are also likely larger, and tend to preserve better because there is more material to

preserve.

Strong, thick limb bones often preserve well. Small bones, such as phalanges,
disarticulate easily and are likely to break down more quickly. The health of the animal
at death can also be an important factor in its preservation (Micozzi 1991: 55-7). If an
animal is in poor nutritional health, or starved, the minerals and nutrients in the bones
will be reduced, as will the muscle mass surrounding them, leading to a quicker

breakdown of the tissue and the bones.

Some animals characteristically have dense bones, e.g. mammals and turtles, while
others, such as birds and fishes (Casteel 1976: 88), have relatively hollow or brittle bones,
and are not as likely to preserve (Smith 1996: 44-45). Dentition, which is high in hard
crystalline dentine and enamel, has the highest degree of survivability in faunal remains

(Hillson 1986).

Cultural activities affecting taphonomy include prey selection by hunters and gatherers,
burning associated with cooking, and waste disposal (Smith 1996: 46). Cultural selection
by seasonality and animal type can skew assemblages of faunal remains, leading to a
misrepresentation of the local paleoenvironment if bones have been transported (Needs-
Howarth 1999: 28). Evidence of transportation may be evident in assemblages of

environmentally unrelated fauna.

Culturally related bone transportation is usually due to the butchering associated with
killing large animals away from the campsite, and transporting selected valuable pieces
over long distances (Smith 1996: 46). The butchering can also lead to fragmenting of
certain elements when extracting marrow or brains for eating. Assemblages of elements
associated with high nutrient value are therefore likely in some situations (Cleland 1966:

128).

Bones that have a white-blue coloration are indicative of intense burning over an
extended period of time (Smith 1996: 45). This is likely a clear indicator of cultural
action. Flash forest fires move quickly and pass on, whereas fire pit burning may occur
repeatedly in one place over long periods. The white-blue coloring of the bones occurs as
the bones are hardened by the fire, and increases the likelihood of preservation as the
fragments are flame-hardened and preserved. However, they are often fragmentary, and

relatively useless for later identification purposes.

19

The impact of taphonomy on the faunal remains from the Schultz Site are likely more
cultural in nature, rather than a result of natural phenomenon. As the site is located in a
near-shore environment, a moderate preservation would be expected. A large number of
mammal remains were recovered in the same sedimentary units as fish remains,
indicating transportation of killed animals. Furthermore, the majority of the mammal
bones were highly fragmented, and many of the bones recovered were calcined.

Therefore, it is likely that remains reflect cultural activities or selective cultural pressures.

Seasonality

Tracing seasonal migration, behavior, and behavior patterns of target species can provide
additional information on the season of resource exploitation at archaeological sites. Key

seasonal indicators vary by taxonomic class.

Reptiles and amphibians normally hibernate in the winter months, following the first
frost, until the spring thaw. Therefore, the presence or lack of herpetological specimens
in an assemblage can provide seasonal information as well.

The reptile remains from this sample reveals that there may have been a spring to summer
occupation or utilization of the Schultz Site, during the Early Woodland Transition period

(2330-2500 13.9.).

Many species of fish engage in seasonal behavior. Most fish spawn in the spring, so

deep-water fish species may normally be found in the shallows in the springtime. A large

20

number of one type of fish remains may be indicative of spring spawning season
targeting. However, the deep-water lake trout is one species that spawns in the fall. The
presence of lake trout therefore likely indicates a fall collection method, when they may

be easily caught in shallower water.

Black bears average four months of dormancy each year (Cleland 1966: 163). They will
awaken or leave their den to defecate or eat during winter warm spells and when
disturbed. Following the dormancy period, the black bear goes through one seasonal
spring molt (Baker 1983: 438). If black bears are targeted as prey for their pelts, it would

be less likely for them to be hunted during the molting period.

Black bear, have been suggested to have been hunted only during the late fall or early
winter months when they were both the fattest and least dangerous to hunt, although

opportunistic or culturally driven hunting cannot be discounted (Egan 1993: 74).

The Early Woodland periods at the Schultz Site lack diagnostic animal remains for
determination of seasonality. The first clear evidence for seasonality of occupation
occurs in Stratigraphic Unit 5A, dating to around 2,530-2,380 B.P. in the Early Woodland
Period, with reptile and lake trout specimens (Table 2). Since reptiles are indicative of a
warm weather occupation and lake trout can be indicative of a fall occupation, the Early
Woodland period may show evidence of a dual season occupation. However, the low

number of specimens precludes a definitive determination.

21

 

 

N o N o o o o o o 0 282.3 535.. 2.8.32. «.5222
F o o F o o o o o o 32...... 2.02.. .5 $.85 2:222 .5
8 N NN F N o o o o N 22.52%... 32222
N o o N o o o o o o .3 8.28. .3 5286.2
N v —. o o o o o o 0 59.0.5 omocmco_ .FEtomeEEOo szQmonO
mr m 0.. N o o o o o 0 .am 29.25 .aw manumoumO
NF F N N F o F o o c 28.52%... 82528.8
F o o o o o F o o o 22.5528... «35:96
N o N F. o o F o o o 2.5 5252 36:. am.
N o F N F o F o o o 55. 2.2 58.555: 2.5.9.8
wa hm v NC. mow ON m m _. o 0 5mm mmocmcg mammwo magmomfimq
34 N3 8 2: N N N o o o 5893.... 2.2 28825 .8523.

3:3 NNNN 8N 9N 8N NNF 8 N». F N F 355.: .53
82 VNN 80 02 02 mm mm F o c 22.52%... .5522

2: NF 8 3 NN N F. o a F .5325
N o N o o o o o o c 22.52%... 29.58
N o o N o o o o o o 53 202“. F0 35855.... 2.2: .t
m o o m o o o o o o .mwn xomB matmotmEm @593
NF o F. NF F o F o o o 5% 3.2.25; .5 $5255.: $2.880 .Fo
NN F N NF N o F o o o 5% 3.2.25; $5255.... 22.880
m o v r N N o o o o Nm>mmn mNmtmbmtmo Nouwmo
o o N N F F o o o o .2235 .3 @2522 5.250 .6
NF F NF NN 2. N o N o o o .2235 3258.2 2.220
N N N F F o o o o F 22.55285. 2526”.
F o F o o o o o o c 22.52%... 32.522»:

38... NN N NF N N N N a N N EB .88.
NN N NF N N o F o F N 22.5228. 83..
2.5.88 .83 8 8 «N N N <5. F. N N

.88. No .x. 3.5 2.395ng 252 .5ng a. :98...

 

 

.2222 8.222”. 26 2.2.8 2.. 59F 25: .3 255mm .23“. .2 £22. 8.2.5 .5558 N 2.5

22

 

 

NNNFN NNF NF NN FN F. N F. N N N 2.3:. .53
F F N N N N N N N N 2.25 835.25.. .0 .5 25.855: .5
NF v N N N N F N N N 2.55 885.25.. .5. 25.255:
N N e N N N N N N N 25.52%... 32528
F N N N N N F N N N N... 252 .0 .3 28.2.0 .5
E N NF NN N N N N N N .3 28250
N N N N N N N N N N 25.. 28.22.. .N 55.82.. 82235.”. .o
N N F N N N N N N N 25.. N.NN.NNN.N .5555... 82025.“.
N F N N N N N N N N 2.. a N222. 20... 9.58.50
F o o F o o o o o 0 0:5. 9.5005 .6 mEEmBmm 0.2.9.0 .6
NF N N NF F N N N N N 2.5. 9.5.2... 2.58.8 53.2.0
F N F N N N N N N N 252 5.3 22.5% 80.8...

2.3.3 NNNNN NNNF NSFN NNNNF NNNF NNNF NNN NN N N :2“. .53
NNNNN NNNNF NNNNN FNNNF FNNF NNNF NFN NN «N «N .NN 8550.28

NNNF NNN NNF. FNN NN NN NF N N N .55....»
«N NN N... v F F N N N N 5a.. .2352. 2.255.... 38.3%
N v F v N N N N N N 22.2.. 32.2. .0 5:2... 8.8.825 .0
FNF .VN FN NN NN N N F N N 2.2.2., 32.2. 5:2... 8528.25
F. o o N F o o o o 0 20.00 32.0.. 2.0009. NF. span.
F N F N N N N N N N 222.52%... 3228
F o o F o o o o o o N000 0.00. 300ch 2.008.
N o o F o F o o o 0 .3 0.30.0 .9. 208800
N o N N N o o o o 0 am ammo .3 02235....
N o o F. o o o o o o ammo 530E205. mmbNoNEmm WEmNQoNQNE
NN N FF NF F N N N N N 22.52%... 2.25.350
F N N N N N F N N N 653 20. 23
F N N F N N N N N N .9. NNNNNN.
V o F. m o o o o o o cmcumo 35550 No $23053 «3.5.9.2 .3
N o _. _. o o o o o o .358 35.520 9.3.053 92382

2.5.88 .53 8 NN 5. N N .3 F. N N

.50... F0 .8 2:: 0.5029255 oEaz FEE—=00 a. :98»

 

5.58. N 223

23

~33 Qonmdm N\NNm.ov N\wa.mN $00.»... $moN N\Nmo.F $8.0 $3.0 N\Nmo.o 0:05.025 .50... .0 N\..
0c .3 an N. c m v n N

 

 

FE: 2822:3N
N33. NNNvF NNNNN N83 NNNF SFF NNN NNN NN NN 5.3 ..<. .83
.N..NN.N NNN NFF Nm FF v N F N N N 28.82%..686
28.88 .33 0.. 8 «N N N 5. F. N N
.83... NF

 

FE: 02.385385 2:02 55:80 a. :98...

 

“6.80. N 833

24

Two turtle bones were recovered from Stratigraphic Unit 4, four reptile specimens, turtle
and snake, were recovered from Unit 5A, and four turtle specimens were recovered from
Unit 7 (Table 2). During the Middle Woodland Periods spanning Stratigraphic Units 8a-
8c, 98 reptile specimens were recovered (Figure 4)(Table 2). Of the 109 reptile remains
reviewed in this thesis sample, 98 of them date to the Middle Woodland period (Table 2).
This large percentage seems indicative of a spring to summer occupation or utilization of

the Schultz Site region during the Middle Woodland period.

Lake trout were recovered in Stratigraphic Units 5A, 7, 8a, and 8b (Figures 5-7)(Table 2).
Although only one specimen is positively identified for Units 5A (Figure 5), 7 (Figure 6),
and 8b (Figure 6), there are five specimens from Unit 8a (Figure 6 & 7). These remains
could suggest a fall occupation or utilization for the Schultz Site region during the Early

Woodland and Middle Woodland periods, particularly around 300 AD (Figure 3).

Positively identified black bear remains were recovered only from Stratigraphic Unit 8a,
column 91-2, in the flotation samples (Figures 8 & 9), and possible black bear remains
were recovered in Unit 4, column 91-2, of the screened material. Therefore, the black
bear remains may indicate a late fall or winter occupation during the Middle Woodland

period, and possibly during the Early Woodland Period.

In the sample studied, deer are rare during Early Woodland period. However, during the

Early-Middle Woodland period they are much more numerous. A fragment of deer skull

25

 

 

‘Hl'fiillll‘ll'_‘il':i“li.’!!‘1h|iill ‘1
CM 1 2 3 4

FIGURE 4:
Eastern Spiny Softshell Turtle (Apalone splnlfera)
Carapace (fragment)

26

:‘y. -
"i My)

||||||||HHI1H

 

. CM 1
FIGURE 5:
Lake Trout (Salveliuus namaycusll)
Dentary Tooth
Unit 5

          

,V lununmmuw

. mmm mmm mmm n11... .

NW“ 0M1 2
Unit8a Unit8b
Figure6:

Lake Trout (Salvelinus namaycush)

Dentary Fragments

   

, Immumnmm,m.'me

FIGURE 7:
Lake Trout (Salvelinus namaycush)
Left Articular (fragment)
Unit 8a

 

27

 

FIGURE 8:
Worked Bear (Ursa: amicanus)
ooth

 

FIGURE 9:
Worked Bear (Ursus amerlcauus)
Tooth Close-Up

 

FIGURE 10:
Worked Deer (Odocolleus Virginian”)
Skull and Antler Fragment

28

and attached antler was recovered from Stratigraphic Unit 8a, also indicating a fall

occupation for the Middle Woodland occupation of the site (Figure 10).

Cleland (1966) and Fitting (1972: 268) suggested a winter occupation of the Early
Woodland Schultz Site. Ozker (1982) contradicted Cleland and Fitting, suggesting a dual
season occupation in both early summer and autumn. The Column 11 identified
specimens were similar to the remains identified in the remaining five columns and
screened material, suggesting either a warm weather or multiple season utilization of the

site, but no conclusive evidence is currently available (Lovis et al. 2001: 21-22).

The sample from Stratigraphic Unit 6 lacks seasonally significant bones, although
snapping turtle was recovered in the Column 11 sample (Lovis et a1. 1994). Lake trout
and reptile remains recovered from Stratigraphic Unit 7 spanning 1840-1700 B.P. of the
Shiawassee Early Woodland/Tittabawassee Middle Woodland Transitional period also

suggest a dual warm weather and fall occupation.

Remains from Unit 8a, of the Middle Woodland Period, include both seasonally warm
weather fauna including 51 turtle bones, as well as fall fauna including the
aforementioned deer antler (Figure 10), black bear bones, and five lake trout bones
(Figures 5-7)(Table 2). Stratigraphic Unit 8a, dating to approximately 1,700 B.P., may
therefore reflect a year-round or minimally a multiple-season occupational period of the

Schultz Site.

29

Remains from Unit 8b, of the Middle Woodland Period, also represent a multi-seasonal
assemblage, including 26 turtles, nine snakes, and one lake trout (Table 2). The remains
recovered from Unit 8c include 12 reptile bones, indicative of a warmer season (Table 2).
Therefore, it is possible that the Schultz Site was being occupied primarily during the

spring and summer months during this interval.

Fitting (1972: 269) proposed that during the Middle Woodland Period, the Schultz Site
was occupied during both the summer and the fall on the basis of artifactual, faunal,
floral, and cultural densities. Column N11 fauna] and floral data support a late summer-
early fall encampment during the Middle Woodland Period (Lovis et al. 2001: 22). The
fauna reviewed in this thesis suggest a multiple season occupation during the Middle
Woodland Period. These more recent findings corroborate Cleland’s (1966: 143)
argument for a spring/summer/fall occupation of the Schultz Site during the Middle

Woodland Period.

Like the N11 faunal sample, the bird remains reviewed in this faunal sample were
relatively unimportant, as no elements could be meaningfully identified to a more specific
identification taxon than class (Lovis et al. 1994: 21). Avian bone is present only in
Stratigraphic Units 3, 5A, 7, 8a, 8b, and 8c (Table 2). There was only one avian bone
recovered from each of Units 3 and 5A and two avian bones recovered from Unit 7. The
majority of the avian remains were recovered from the Middle Woodland Units. There

were eight bones from both Unit 8a and Unit 8c, and 13 bones recovered from Unit 8b.

30

Methodology

Column N11, from Trench 91 -1 has previously been analyzed and described in Lovis et
al. 1994 and 2001 (Figure 2). Identification of the remaining material from the
aforementioned screened and the other four flotation samples followed the
zooarchaeological methods established by Beverley A. Smith in preparation of those

reports (Lovis et al., 1994, 2001).

Identifications include documentation of the specimen’s provenience, taxon
identification, skeletal element, side and portion of the element, and other observations
such as age, cultural and/or natural modification and other notes as appropriate (Lovis et

al. 1994).

This research was facilitated by Dr. Beverley A. Smith, University of Michigan-F lint,
who directed the analysis and verified the identifications. The extensive comparative
skeletal collections at the Michigan State University Museum were the key resource used
to identify the faunal material as precisely as possible. Literature on comparative
osteology was also used (Gilbert 1990, Gilbert et al. 1985, Olsen 1971, Rackham 1994).
Snake vertebrae were identified by Dr. J .A. Holman of the Michigan State University

Museum.

Previous analysis of the Schultz Site by C leland (1966), Luxenberg (1972) and Lovis et

al. (1994) suggested notable differences in both the intensity of occupation and the faunal

31

utilization through time, although the faunal density is fairly high throughout (Lovis et al.
1994). The relative density of the fauna recovered from each unit is an indicator of the
intensity of occupation (Lovis et al. 1994). The earlier work suggested a lower density
occupation during the Early Woodland, Transitional, and Late Woodland periods, with
maximum occupational density occurring during the Middle Woodland period (Cleland

1966, Luxenberg 1972).

The 1991 Michigan State University excavation faunal sample size was over 100,000
specimens, mostly bone fragments, none of which were articulated or associated. Over
55,000 fragments were reviewed for the 1994 report from Column N11, leaving
approximately 54,000 fragments for review in this thesis. The N11 fragments previously

reviewed had an identification rate of 6.5% (Lovis et al. 1994).

Flotation Sample

The faunal flotation sample from column N1 1 totaled 55,145 specimens, whereas
columns 26N, 34.5N, 91-2, 91-3 cumulatively totaled 54,447 specimens (Tables 3-6). All
vertebrate classes, with the exception of amphibians, are represented in this sample
(Figure 12). As with the N11 sample (91.2%), fish (Osteichthyes) dominate the sample
(columns 26N, 34.5N, 91-2, 91-3) and comprise 96.3 percent of the overall total in all

stratum levels.

9)
IN)

 

 

 

$NN.NN 2.8 0 0 N00 NNNF 0 FE NNN 00 o 00... .80...
NmmN o o NNN NNNF 0 N00 NNN 00 o .00 090000.200

2. 0 0 0N N0 0 3. N 0 0 .83000
F N N N F N N N N N .88 8.0;..ch 0888 00.8.8.0...
FN o o N 0N o o F o o 00:03 0.0..0.A 0000.0. 0000.00.00
N o o F F o o o o c 00.00 32.0.. 000009.00 00.01
N N N N F N N N N N .8 N80 .8 08.88....
F o o F o o o o o o 0000 5000.090. 000.2500 0000.00.00...
F o o o F o o o o o 0000.0000005 000.080.0000
F o o o o o F o o 0 000.00 0.0. 0.0..
N o o N N o o o o o 0000.80.00... 00002000.
N o o o F o F o o o 900.000.000. 000000000000
F o o o o o F o o o 0.00.0...00000. 000.0005
F o o o o o F o o o 00:0 0.05.00 00.00. .80.".
F o o o F o o o o o .00.. 00.0. 000000000 000000.00
ON 0 o N m o N F o o .00 0000000. 000000 008000.000
N o o N N o N o o 0 000930 00.0. 00000000. 00000.0(

$2.0 NNN 0 0 00 03 0 N0 F 0 0 .2500: .80...
NON o 0 N0 N0 0 N... F o 0 0.00.0023... 00.605.

3 0 o N N N F. 0 0 0 .800000
F o o o o o F o o o .000 00.00.0000... .00 0000.590. 000000000 .00
N o o o N o F o o o .000 00:00-00...) 0000.590. 000000000
F o o o F o o o o o .0>000 000000000 .9000
N o o F F. o N o o 0 0.0.00... 000.0.00..N 000000
N N N F F N N N N N 0.0200200... 0.0880

$00.0 N 0 0 0 F 0 F 0 0 N 0.00 .30...
N o o o F o F o o 0 000.8000... 00><
«88.800 .53 0.. 0N NN N N <0 N N N
.50... 3 8

00... 0.008038.» 00.02 00.00.00 o. 00.3...

08.0.... 8.88.. 0.0 0.2.00 N... .8... 0...: .3 2.0.80 .88. 8100.08.00.90 8280 28 85.00 .N 0.03

33

$00.0 $006 .0392” $3an $906 .0000: o\omo.m $9..." 00.8.0 0:08.000“ .30... N000.

 

 

 

0.. 00 5. N N 0 e N N
.05 00.022050
NFNN N N NNNF NNNF N NNN NNN 00 N 53.. ..< . .53
0.8.0 NF N N 0 v N F N N N 0.2.5.300... 80.0
0035 N N N N N N N N N N 2.0.3.. .53
N N N N N N N N N N 0.2.0058... 00.2.0200
F N N N N N F N N N .00 0.0:. .0 .9. 0.8.5.0 .0
N N N F N N N N N N .00 0.8020
F N N F N N N N N N 0...... 00.55. 0.0.0 00E0000W
2.20.800 .53 8 0.. «N N 0 <0 0 N N
.53 .0 0.
:0: 0.000.325 00.02 00.00.00 a. 00x0...

x0008. N 0.00...

34

{'0}

$00.0 $00.0 $35.3 REYNV .xbod N\NNo.N N\N©vN £0me N\NNN.m 0:0E_oonm_50._. Fox.
on an 0a N o (m V N N

 

 

 

.05 0.030.050

00N N N FNF FNF N NN N FF 0N 5.3 _.< - .53
.086 N N N N N N N N N N 0.2.5.500... 000.0

.N.NN.N N N N F N N F N N N 2.5.3. .53
F N N N N N F N N N 9.55 0800.00.00 .00 00.02503
F N N F N N N N N N .3 0.80.00

0.00.8 NNN N N 8 2. N NF N NF N 00... .53
NNN N N NN FN N NF N NF N .00 8.56.000

F F N N N NF N F N N N .55....0
F N N N F N N N N N 0.0.05 52.0. 500...... 8.00.800
F o o o F o o o o o .00 0000 .00 00.0.0900).
F N N N N N F N N N 52. 9.0. 00000500.. 00.00000
N o o o N o o o o o .00 00009.0. 000000 003000.000
F o o o F o o o o 0 £000.30 0x3 0:80.023 00000300.

0.8.3 N0 N N NF NN N N N N F .0552... .53
NF N N N N N N N N N 0.055.500... .0550...

NN N N N .N N N N N F .58000
F N N N F N N N N N .000 8.5.5....) .0 000005.... 000.0080 .0
m o o N F o o o o o .m>mmn w..w:mbm:mo gonmo
F N N N F N N N N N 5.0.05... .0 08.0.8.0 5.0000 .0
FN N N N FN N N N N N 0.0.5... 08.0.3.0 5.0000
F N N N N N N N N F 0.2.5.500... 0.0.080

0.000 F N N N N N N N F N 2.0 .53
F N N N N N N N F N 0.2.8.500... 00><
3.5.800 .53 8 00 5. N 0 <0 0 N N
.53 .o .0

:0: 0.008208% 0.002 005.0% a. 09.0...

 

 

.0050... 02.50.“. 5.0 5.2.00 5.. EN... .05 .0 2.0500 .550”. a. 80.2. 8.0050 000.050 20.3 5.5.00 5 0.03

 

 

N o o F o F o o o o .00 0.0000 .00 0080.00
F o o F o o o o o o .00 0000 .00 00.0.0900).
mm m N 0F 0 o o o o o 0.00.E.0.000_ 000.00.00000
F o o F o o o o o o .00 000000.
0 o F v o o o o o 0 000.00 .000000 00 00.0.0000 00.0.0.0. .0
F o F o o o o o o 0 000.00 .000000 00.0.0000 00.0.0.0.
0 o 0 o o o o o o 0 0000.50 00.0.0 0000.0000 00.0.0.0.
mm m 0F 0F 0 o o o o 0 000000.000. 00000.06.
N o o m o o o o o o .00 00.0000. .00 00.0.0985.
N F F o o o o o o o .0000 0000000. ....0000.0EE00 0000.00.00
0F 0 0 F o o o o o o .00 .00000 .00 0200.00.00
FF F v 0 o o o o o o 0.00.0..0000. 002.00.00.00
v o o v o o o o o o 0.00 0.00000 00.00. .800
0 o F m o o o o o o .00.. 0x0. 000000.000 000000.00
mow 00 0N 00 o o o o o o .00 0000000. 000000 000.000.0000
0N0 00 F0 00F o m o o o o 00090.0 0.00. 000000.00. 00000.00.
$00.0 003 00.. ~00 3.0 0 «N 0 o 0 0 30.0.0.2 .80...
me 00F 03. cum 0 mm o o o 0 0.0500280. 00.0.0.2
00.. n 00 3. 0 0 0 o 0 0 3.0.000
F o F o o o o o o o 0.00.0..0.000. 0620.00
m o o m o o o o o o .000 0.00.0 000000050 0005
0F 0 F 0F 0 o o o o o .000 00.0.0000. .0 0000.06...) 000000000 .0
0F F m 0F 0 o o o o o .000 00.0.0000. 0000000.... 000000000
N o F F o o o o o o .0>000 0.0000000... 0.000
m o F m o o o o o o .0.x00E .0 0020.00... 000000 .0
00 m om N... o o o o o o .0200... 000.....00..N 0..0000
$3.0 «N v FF 0 0 0 0 o 0 o 000 .30...
mm F. FF 0 o o o o o 0 0.0500902. 00><
0000.800 00°F 00 00 00 N 0 <0 0 N N
.SOF .0 .\.

000 0.0005000...

 

0.002 020.000

o. 09.0...

000.0... 0000.0... 000 00.000 00. 0.0.. .05 .5 00.00.00 .0000. .o. .002. 80000.0 000.050 N-F0 F 00.200 .0 0_00F

 

36

o\oNN.vm o\omo.mm o\omo.mm $8.0 o\oNN._. o\ooo.o $3.0 o\owo.o $5.0 3:950QO Each “—0 o\o

 

 

8 no .3 N o m e n N
3:: 3.33933...”

mmnmN NmNN ”Ne: 88. N 3... o c a N 38: __< - .30:
33.3 E w v N o o o o o 323.3%5 $20

3.3... Na N NP 3. o o o o o a 2332 .38
5 o m mN o o o o o o 3m 2828
N o o N o o o o o 0 2:3 296:5 .5 25:33:33 83033.3 .6
N o F m o o o o o 0 2:3 23:53 3:353 83033.2
m 3 N N o o o o o 0 2:3 3353 32g 3:835
N o o N o o o o o o 22.3 93qu .8 mEEmEmm 99¢ch .30
B o m E o o o o o 0 2:3 95:35 33:38 3320
3 o F o o o o o o 0 2:3 5% 3.35% 823$

$2.3 cNNNN 82 83: 88 N on" o v m N :2". .33
mmmNN 5% 388 88 o VNN o o o 0 am 832238

:N 3: SN 3N N N. o v n N .3225
V? m: NN N o o o o o 0 E35 :mumgcmmt 9.5.5250 wEoEUQQcN
m o F v o o o o o o .323; 32.23 3o 3:33.: 5.33833 30
8 3 o: 2 o N o o o o $2.3) 26:3 333.: 533836
N o o N o o o o o o :88 32% 3289.33 8ng
N o o N o o o o o 0 $3 209 30993 maggot

22:83 .30... 3 .3 .3 N o (m e N N
.32. No .N.

:5 3.339335

 

$502 COEEOU

a. :93:

“8.383 m 233.

 

37

 

v v o o o o o o o o 2.2.2; 32...; .0 5:3... 5.8.83.2 .0
on 0.. Nm 2 o m o o o o 32:23 32.2.. E323... 552.83%
N o o N o o o o o o no.8 26:2) 2.20296... 8.21
N o N o o o o o o o 2.25E.2.2u5 2250.2...
N o N o o o o o o o .9. $3. an 33.92....
N m w o o o o o o o 2.258.922... 2255.23.50
N o o N o o o o o o 22520 .2555 2332...... 23.530.
N o N o o o o o o o 325.2. 5.6... 238.32.. 23.3.32.
mN N 9 m o o o o o 0 2.258.935 225.292.
2 N m N o o o o o o .22 .2232 .3 23822220
v o m N o o o o o 0 2.255.920... 220.50.29.20
m o m o o o o o o o 9.... 52:2. 35:. x82
NNN No SN Nv v o o o o o .3 229.96. 232220 232.2833
mm N B D. NN N v o o o 0 52932 2...... 2.22222... .2236...
sand «3 Na 2..» an n on o o o o .355! .80...
Non 2N 2mm Nm m mm o o o o 2.258.220... .mEEmS
; .2. cu m o n c o o o .5826
N o N o o o c o o o 2.258.222. 2.02520
m o m o o o o o o o .22u “v2.5-2.2; .No 23:359.... m:2...808 ..o
m. o m N o o o o o o .22.. 8.5.2.2.... 22:359.... 233.808
m o N o o N o o o o .2522 2.2223222 .2220
N o N o o N o o o o .2522... .No 28.5293. 8.2.3.0 .No
NN NN N m o o o o o o .35sz 23.5223 8.29.0
m N m o o o o o o 0 2.258.935 mzcmuom
N o N o o o o o o o 32.3.38... $250.32..
$36 a c N N N c o o o a 3m .80...
w v N N N o o o o o 2.258.222. 223.
2.25% .80... on an no N 2 (n v n N
Each .0 «a

3.5 ozaaafism

 

2522 305500

0- COXQP

 

.2322 8332. 3.2 3.3.8 3.. 29. 2:: .3 23:02 .23... .3 $22. 83332 $5332 33 N 5:28 2 23¢

38

 

$v0dm $N0.Nm $08: $5.0 $mN.m $00.0 $N0.0 $5.0 $3.0 2.25000“ Each 3.x.
00 00 an N 0 n v n N

 

 

 

:5 02.59852
NNNNN 8.: N82 3.: NNN 3.. .. v N N 85 ._< . .53
$3... NNN SN 8 .V o N o o o o 2.2.5.922. 8m...
32 N... NN NN 2 N. N o o .. .. .. 2.33. .53
N N o o o o o o o o 9.95 5...... .o .3 2.32....ch .0
N v N o o o o o o o 9.9... 8.8.3.5.. .3 2885...:
v o v o o o o o o o 2.2.5.222. 8.2528
NN N N .V N o o o o o .3 2.8.5
N o N o o o o o o o 2...... 8.5.... «.0... 9.2.35.0
N o o o N o o o o o 2...... 9.3%.... 2.829% $2.22
.818 NNNNN NNNN NNNNN NNNN SN 8.. o N. N N 5.... .30..
NN8N N82 NNNoN NNNN NNN 2N. o o o o .9. 8.56.2.8
8» EN NNN N» 2 NN .. c N N .5832
NN N N NN N o N o o o o as... .2328... 82.83.... 3.053%
235.8% .53 8 e. «N N N .3 v N N
.88 .o s
2.5 oinfluzgm 2822 :oEEom 0. :98...

 

 

.38... 2 233

The faunal remains in this sample also reflect an intense increase in site occupation
during the Middle Woodland time period (Table 2). Recovered faunal specimens in Units
2-7 increase gradually from 25 to 1668 specimens. The remains then increase sharply
into the tens of thousands of specimens during the Middle Woodland period. Unit 8a
produced 14,092 specimens, Unit 8b produced 22,278 specimens, and Unit 8c produced

14,303 specimens.

F aunal remains described in this study indicate an increasing occupational intensity in the
area from the Early to Middle Woodland Period. The numbers of recovered specimens in
Stratigraphic Units 2-7 reflect a gradual temporal increase (Table 2); faunal specimens in
Units 2-7 increase gradually from 25 to 1668 specimens. Figure 11 also shows increasing
evidence of habitation spatially across the site. Figure 113 and 11b illustrate the East-
West and North-South correlation of Stratigraphy. Stratigraphic Unit 2 is only evidenced

in two flotation columns, whereas Unit 7 is represented in five flotation columns.

Although present in the Early/Middle Woodland Periods, birds (Aves), and turtles and
snakes (Reptilia), are only minor components of this faunal assemblage, comprising less
than one percent of the total assemblage and diversity (columns 26N, 34.5N, 91-2, 91-3)
of any unit (Figures 12-16)(Tables 2-6). Overall, the highest level of faunal concentration

occurs in Unit 8b, which yielded nearly 41 percent of the total sample.

Also mirroring the N11 results, flsh increase in occurrence during the Early Woodland

and the Early-Middle Woodland transition, and constitute over 90 percent of the faunal

40

2% 5.33m 05 do coca—0:00 2:923:25 Fawn—m L _ Eswi

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

£ 4 a
a
m f h N
N
o N \\\\1 mm n
v
n m m . .
[ am an
w E»
v :9» e
um v N . =5» 5
/ / NW # a”
a mm am pm
3 o /. on
a
o. _ _ e—
. _ _ _ 2 Z
:
NAa h. mémz eNZ :2 r}; a. .575

 

 

 

41

ozm 5.23m 05 mo zeta—250 oEQszfium 35QO “83-8%. ”2 _ ouswE

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

42

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

v :—
mm
N N
c an n
. v
N.
\dfl /o am am
. . ..£ 5“
\_:pm\ . n :3 e
111.1111 :3» b
a» i
. £ .
ow a on
o_ a
a
AK 3 _ _ c—
_ _ _ _ Z
N-3 h. :Z méa H @575

 

 

ozm gszom 2: mo coca—280 2:923:35 fizomA—toz 5: 053m

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

.2
f 3 v
N
N
N an
m v
m am
e e
v v N. b
AI/I
am am
mm mm
./ am an
n n ow an
mm mm a
a
o—
_ _ _ _ c—
_ _ :
@va eNZ :Z mar—75

 

 

43

8-3 $5 .203. .28 2228 8:52":
258mg .mczmm u.o 2_monEoo .mtmfis. acafloE 25 5.328 “N_. 0.39...

$5.8
832233

{and
m__mEEm_>_

 

  

$3.0
2m£§8ou£ $8.0
mm><

/

$9.0
953m

8325.00 «3.0

A28 5:28 8:92“:
meEom .556". “.0 238800 .3052 5:30.“. 25 5328 “9 2:9“.

.x. Ed
93%”. - $8.0

. roamsctouwuc.

i- $8.0
. mo><

t .53
m__mEEm_2

   

./ / $§Nm

(358558

0:39:00 ans—o 23 55:00

45

23m 55.8 8:32”:
2.6601 ficsmu 00 2309200 3.6%: c0082". 25 Bizom “3 230E

$05G $090
magnum I 2m:_E.w.ovc_ B $00.0
_ . -. 83. u \ $8.2

.. SEE—52D

  

$8.8
mgsfioamon

£2528 820 2mg 528

46

$.60 ._. c8200 c0330.“:
msmEom .mcamn. be 258800 .0552 c0050.“. 3% Escom Hm? 2:9...

_ ciao
£58m I $85

\ \I flmsctflooc. a .l $3.0 $010
\ Eihxx 00>< I x X ll- N=NEENS D

    

  

 

.\. .
.\

_.
$2.8
85220580

8.3.58 8.20 «-3 h 528

47

$25
95%”. I

 

8-3 p :528 8:50.":
25801 .23“. “.0 268500 3:292 5030.“. 25 fiscom “or £30K

$3.0 .
.7 32.8.23... I 1 $3 0

.\ 82 I

\l
\

\.. $3“

\.

\\ - m__aEEa2n_

/

J
$3.8
”$553580

 

83888 $20 ”.3 h 5:28

48

assemblage throughout the Middle Woodland occupations (Figure 3). Although the fish
remains do increase in representation in Units 2-7, they increase most dramatically during
the Middle Woodland Green Point Units (Units 8a-8c). Like the column N11 sample,
Unit 8a of this sample reflects a significant increase, over 800%, in the absolute number
of fish bones from unit 7 (Lovis et al. 2001: 20). The maximum peak for fish

representation occurs in level 8b (Table 2).

The faunal flotation sample was also analyzed by excavation column (26N, 34.5N, 91-2,
91-3) (Figure 17). The results indicate a spatial variation in occupation as well as the
temporal variation indicated by unit. Overall, more than 90 percent of the faunal remains
were recovered from North-South columns 91-2 and 91-3 (Figure 18). The largest
percentage of faunal material was recovered from column 91-2, representing 54.2 percent
of the sample, column 91-3 represented 39.2 percent, column 26N represented 6.1
percent, and column 34.5 reflected a minimal representation at 0.5 percent of the entire
sample. The distribution of the faunal remains by class shows a similar pattern spatially
across the columns. The largest proportion of fauna] remains are from Class
Osteichthyes, for which the distribution across the columns is 91-3: 54.2 percent, 91-2:
39.4 percent, 26N: 5.9 percent, and 34.5: 0.5 percent (Figure 20). Mammalian and
Reptilian remains also indicated similar ratios (Figures 19, 21). Tables 3 through 6
provide a summary of the flotation sample faunal remains recovered from each column,

and are identified by Unit.

49

8-5 $8 .203 .23 255.8 c0222“:
c5200 3 2:251 Ream". ho buEan £89.60 .5555. cozfloE mam 535m 5 239“.

$3 - , $3
28 I 23ml

 

$N.mm
n- 3 k D {omém

N40 .Eu

.5530 3 o£an¢ .255". “—0 003.520; ”EaEan .3380.“—

50

8-6 .05 .203. .28 2528 censor:
25.8 .3 £838 items. 8:32". 2% 5.2.8 ”2 23E

 

2.0.3.. «.0

5:200 >3 £8.50an cow—33....— 00 003.820.".

51

 

23ml ‘

3-3 .N- 3 .Zmém .ZoN macs—co c0330.”:
:E=_oo 3 2580”. cm==num yo ogmanoo 3:222 5:50.“. SE 5.38 5.. 0.59“.

$wn
$3”.

$9
2mm I

5:200 3 2.250on cow—30.". 52:30”. .0 33:83;

Wan.‘

52

8-3 $5 .293 .28 2528 censor:
c8200 3 mEmEmm $532060 ho mumanoo .mtoams. c0380.“. 25 Bicow ”on 23mm

{own
NémD

 

«a
23m- $0

ZON I

5:200 >3 2.250QO .5330."— mo>5s£3no .0 85:3on

53

8-3 .Ném .Zmém .ZON 95.200 9.0592“:
5:200 3 22080”. :EfiEEms. 00 2300800 3:205. :oaSoE 85 5:28 “Pu 059...

 

I .7 $8 ‘
0 3mm

2min. {amp
Zow I

5:200 3 2.220000 :0380_..._ 5:25:02 “_0 093:0an

54

Screened Sample

Screened material was recovered over a much broader spatial area at the Schultz Site.
Within the screened samples, the largest proportion of material was recovered in columns
55N, 25N, 35N, 45N respectively (Figure 22). Over 80 percent of the screened materials
were recovered from these four columns. Smaller percentages of remains were recovered
from the areas between 15-25N, 25-35N, 35-45N, 65N, 91-1, 91-2, 91-3, 91-4, and the
plow zone and surface areas. Table 7 provides a summary of the screened sample faunal

remains recovered from each column, identified by Unit.

The proportion of identifiable to unidentifiable fish remains reflects a slightly different
trend. There are no fish remains identifiable to family level or below in Units 2 or 3.
Identifiable remains were slightly higher in Units 4-6, peak at 4% in Unit 7, and average

2.5% in Units 8a-8c.

As fish increase in importance in Units 2-8b, the relative proportion of mammals varies
across strata or depositional units. During the Early Woodland period (Units 3-4) the
mammal remains constitute less than 1% of the total of the fish remains. The maximum
percentage (11%) of mammal compared to fish occurs during the Early Woodland
Transitional Period (Unit 5a). Mammal remains decrease to 5% in Unit 6, rise slightly to

9% in Unit 7, before tapering off to 2% by Unit 8c.

55

5:200 2n mEmEom 238500 3:065. 00:09am 25 uscow “mm 0.59“.

$0
25 l .xa . #3. I «a.
~-3l 3mm “Eam-
l $0
o\oN l . .. me-m F I
Em- . s . ; ,,, l .2; 02am
0\om l l . . . l . . a . me-mN- ZmND

 

 

as: l . .2;
2m... l $8 l x 23.3 a
23 l

5:200 >0 «co—50000 00:00:0w m0 38:020....

56

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

$0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $NN 2.3 $0.9 $0.0 $0.3 $0... $3 2.2.02.0 .5920 .N.
a a N o m v N N P so...
_0>o._

o: o r o n a N. F 8 o F 88» ._< - .88
$3... 0 o o o F N o o N o o 22.5.93... $0.0
$3.3 S o F o N m m c on a F 5... .33

.3 o o o . m m o 0.. o . 0.2.5.202. 856.28
N o F o F a N o a o c .3220
F o F o o o o o o o o 9.2.0; 32.0.. .0 .3 8.8.85.0
N o o o o o N o o o o 9.2.0; 32.0.. 2.20.... 3.8.80.0
N o o o F o o o o o o .00 0000 .am 02030.25. W
$8.8 mm o o o a N N F 3 o o .0555. .28
om o o o o N v o 3. o 0 0.2.5.22... .352).
m o a c a a n F F a o .3220
v o o o o o r o o o o .009 x005 .wo wzcmothm m:m..D #0
. o o o o o o F o o o 8.. 8.5-9.5; .0 2.5.59... 82.880 .0
F o o o o o . a o o o .00.. 02.9.0.2... 3:02.92 03.68.00
F o o O o o o o r o o .0>mmn 0.02300th NONWNO
. o o o o o P o o o 0 6.0.3... 08.58: 9.0.2.0
205.0on .83 a a N 0 m e n N F :6...
.30... .0 .x. .0>04 0502 :05500 o. :32.
$90 2...... 2.0.02 2.0.0 2.0.0 $0.0 $0... 2.0... 2.0.0 2.0... 22:32.0 .3020 .x.
a a N 0 m N. n N p 26...
_o>ou_ I.
N o o N o o o o a o o 33.. ..< - .33 ....
$8.2: N o a N a c o a o o a so... .88 .7...
N o o N o o o o o o o 0.2.6.200... 8.52298 N
05......on .50.. m a N o m c N N w :6...
.80... .0 Q. .26.. 2:02 :05500 o. :93...

 

 

 

.0220: 00:00.00 0:0 53:00 05 50... .0>0.. .5 05050”. .050". .0. $0.2. 0020.005 2.05530 5:200 .N 0.00%

57

 

 

 

30.0 000.0 .2.0.0 2.0.0 2.00 $0.00 0000 .2.0.0 5000 $000 205.800.33.03
0 0 N 0 m e n N F 26.0
.0>0._

0 0 0 0 0 0 N 0 0 0 v 33 _.< - .33
$00.00 N 0 0 0 0 0 N 0 0 0 0 0.2.2.300... $0.0
$8.8 N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N 00.0.33 n

r 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0.8.8.32... 8.500.300 0.

F 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 F .3320 m

r o o o o o o o o o 3 500920 00.0_ 00000022 00:00.90. .0
.0800 N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N .3052... .33

N o o o o o o o o o N 0.055.900... .0552). .

«coesoam .33 0 0 N 0 0 0. n N P so...
.30... 00 .x. .0>0._ 0502 :05500 a. :05...

 

 

 

20.0.8. N 0.03

58

 

 

 

 

$3 30... 3o... $0... $3. 3N0 NOON 30.8 $0.00 33 055.030 .33 .o .x.
0 0 N 0 0 N. 0 N N 30:.
_0>0._

8 N o o c o N. N 0N 00 N 3.3 ..< - .33
.N.NN..0N 0N o o o o o N o NN o 0 32.55.35 08.0

38.0 N. N o o a o N o o o a 2.33. .33
N. N o o o o N o o o o 2.5. 5% 33.5% 95.3....

38.0 0 o o o a o o o N N o so... .33
0 o o o o o o o N N o 32.55%... $56.28

a a a o a a a o o o o .3330
o o o o o o o o o o o commsum 0x5 mtmommée NmmthEeN

$3.: 8 c a o o o o N 0 8 N .5552... .33
N0 0 o o o o o N N 00 N 32.55%; .meems.

N a c o a o c N N N. o .3220
w o o o o o o o o N o .0>mmn mNmtwbmtmo .9060
N o o o o o o N o o c 32.53%... 9.580
0 o o o o o o o o m o 5:35 08....8.N 3.020
N o o o o o o o N o o .20.. .0 =5...qu 0.30:... .0
N o o o o o o o N o o .20.. .Emsaq 0.30:...

055.030 .33 0 0 N 0 0 N. N. N N 25.“.

.30... No .x. .05.. 0:52 :oEEoo o. cox-fl.

N99

 

 

”6.28. N can...

59

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

NOON CNN... oNNN §N oNNN 3N9 3N? oNNNN ..\°N.NN «EN 3.35080 .333 .x.
N N N N N v N N N :6...
.0>0._
NN N N N N N. NN N NN «N N 35 ..< - .38
35.2 NN N N N N N. N N N N N 32.53%... 330
.N.NNNN 3 N N N N N N N N N N :0: .32
9 N N N N N N N N N N 33.53%... 82.6.38
N N N N N N N N N N N .32....0
N N N N N N N N N N N 3.3.3., 32.3. .0 .NN 863830 n
F o o o o o o o o F o cwEmo .mccmco mEQOCBQ 0.3.332 N
38.: N0 N N N N N N N NN N N .353... .38
0.. N N N N N 0 N NN NN N 32.53%... .3555.
«N N N N N N N N N N N .3220
N N N N N N N N N N N .03. 3.3.3.53 £2333... 33.880
N o O o o O N o o o o .m>m®n w..m:mbm:mo .8me
NN N N N N N N N N N N 523.... NNN....NN.N 3.3.5
3.2.32.0 .33 N N N N N N N N N 26....
:32. No .x. .0>0._ 0502 :oEEoo a. :98...
$3 NNN nNNNNN $NN aN.N.N NNN oNNN nNNN nNNN n.\..N.N 055.080.3050...
0 N N N 0 v N N N .3...
_o>¢u_
N N N N N N N N N N N 33:2. .30.. s
NNNNNNN N N N N N N N N N N N .NEEN: .33 s
N N N N N N N N N N N 32.5.33... .2532 w
N N N N N N N N N N N .32....0 N
N N N N N N N N N N N 888. No .3... 53$. No
23.030 .33 N N N N 0 N. N N N :6...
Each. no N\.. _o>¢4 oEaz :OEEOO O. :Oxah

 

”6.28. N 33¢

60

 

 

 

 

oNNN oNNN 3E 30... 3NNN 3N3. oNNN 3.... 300 NNN 35553.0 .38 .o 3
N N N 0 N v N N N so...
:53
NNN N N N. N NNN 3 N NN N N 38 ..< . .38

.\.NN.N N N N N. N N. N N N. N N 33.53%... 0320
..\.NN.N N N N N N NN NN N N N N N0... .38

N. N N N N N N N N N N 33.53%... 8.56.300

0 N N N N N... NN N N N N .3230

. N N N N N N N N N N 3.3.3.. 32.3. .0 .3 853830

N. o o o o N o o o o o 50:50 _0ccm£o 0.380:qu 0.3.3.32 .

N N N N N N N N N N N N... 53.50.. 03%. .63. m

N N N N N N N N N N N $253358
.NNNNN NNN N N N N 3. NN N N N N 555...... .38

NNN N N N N N... NN N N N N 32.53%... 5553...

N N N N N N N N N N N .3320

N N N N N N N N N N N 5% 3.3-3.5.. 02.353... 05.880

N N N N N N. . N N N N 53.3.5 08.5%..N 3.3.5
.N.NN.N N N N N N N N N N N N 3.0 .38

N N N N N N N N N N N 33.53%... 032

35553.0 .38 N N N N N v N N N 3o...
.50.. No .\. .30.. 0:52 :oEEoo o_ :98...

 

 

“6.58. N 038

61

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

3NN nNNN o\..N.NN $NN eNNN 35d 33 nNNN nNNN 3NNN 35553.0 .385...
N N N N N N N N N .3...
_o>o._
NN N N N N N N N N N N 38 _.< . .38
.N.NN.N N N N N N N N N N N N 33.53%... 830
.N.NN.NN N N N N N N N N N N N 5....38 s
N N N N N N N N N N N 33.53%...8.5.5.38 ....
N N N N N N N N N N N .3350 L
. N N N N N N N N N N N355.
nN..NN.NN N N N N N N N N N N N 555...: .38
N N N N N N N N N N N 555.53%... 5553....
25553.0 .38 N N N N N N N N N 32...
:30... .0 .N. .0>0._ 0Euz :oEEoo o. 3.8..
33 oNNN NNN nN..N.NN.N..NNN .NoNN 3N... nNNN .NoNNN 3NN 255530.385...
N N N N N N N N N 25...
.0>o|_
NN N N N N S N F N N N 38 ..< - .38
.N.NN.N N N N N N N N N N N N 32.53%... NNN...
35.8 N N N N N N N N N N N .5... .38
N N N N N N N . N N N 325.3%... 5.5.5.38 9
N N N N N N N N N N N .3830 m
N N N N N N N N N N N 5%..232
.N.NN.NN NN N N N N N N N N N N 5553... .38
N. N N N N N N N N N N 33.53%... 555......
N N N N N N N N N N N .3230
N N N N N N N N N N N 5% 8.3-35... NNNN.N.N.... 83.880
35553.0 .38 N N N N N N N N P :6...
.30h No .x. .0>0._ 2:02 :oEEoo a. :88...

 

 

 

”5.58. N 058

62

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

NONN NoNNN NOON nNNN .N..N.N NONN 3NN NOON N°NN NON: 255530.385...
N N N N N N N N N 26...
.0>0._
N N N N N N N N N N N 38 ._< - .38
3.3.: N N F N N N N N N N N .5... .38
N N . N N N N N N N N 32.5.33... 8.5.5.38 w
eNNNNN N N N N N N N N N N N 5555.....38 N.
N N N N N N N N N N N 33.53%... 5555....
N N N N N N N N N N N .3320
N N N N N N N N N N . 5% 53.3-35... NNNN....N... NNN..8%o
05553.0 .38 N N N N N N N N N 26..
Each. a0 .x. _w>04 uEaZ :OEEOU D. :Oxah
39o oN.N.NN .NNN 33 oNNN nNNN oNNN 3NN NOON 3.98 255530.385...
N N N N N N N N N .3...
_u>ou_
N N N N N N N N N N N 38 ..< - .38
.N.NN.NNN N N N N N N N N N N . 55532.38 m
N N N N N N N N N N N .3320 .c
N N N N N N N N N N . 53. .55... N35855:... NNN...
. N N N N N N N N N N 5% 8.3-35... 3.5.5.3.... N335850
05553.0 .38 N N N N N N N N N .6...
3.0% No .x. _0>0._ 0:52 :oEEoo n: :98...

 

 

 

”€2.08 5 030..

63

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

N°NN N..N.N 33 33 33 NNN 33 .N..N.N 33 35.8. 35553.0 .3853
N N N N N N N N N to...
.95.—
N N N N N N N N N N N 38.2. .38 w
3862 N N N N N N N N N N N 5555: .38 r
N N N N N N N N N N F 33.53%... 5553...
35553.0 .38 N N N N N N N N N 3o...
.305. .0 o\o .0>o._ 2:02 :OEEOW m. coxa_

 

.558. N 3.5»

 

64

 

 

 

 

NNNN 33 33 NNNN .N..N.N 3N.N NNNN cNNN NNNN .38. 25553.0 .385 N.
N N N N N N N N N to...
.30..
NN N N N N N N N N N NN 38 _.< - .38
N.NN.NN N N N N N N N N N N N .5... .38
N N N N N N N N N N N 35.53%... 8.5.5550
F N N N N N N N N N N .3350
N o o o o o o o o o _. .mm omocmco. 050mg 030.060...qu
38.8 NF N N N N N N N N N NF 5553... .38 m.
N N N N N N N N N N N 35.53%... 55555. a
N N N N N N N N N N N .3850
N N N N N N N N N N N .5 35.55 3:50
F N N N N N N N N N . 5.. 5.3.3.5... .5 055.55.... 05.580 .5
. N N N N N N N N N F 5% 3.3.3.... 0:555... 53.880
N o o o o o o o o o N .0>mmn $9.33th .0300
. N N N N N N N N N F 5883 55. 855i...
.5588 .38 N N N N N N N N N to...
.80... No .x. .03.. 05.02 :OEEow a. :98...

 

 

 

”5.58. N 558

 

65

The number of faunal specimens for each class by unit, illustrated in Table 2, clearly
demonstrates that Unit 8b, during the Green Point occupation, represents the highest
absolute number of specimens in the Schultz Site sequence. This matches the findings
from Column 11 (Lovis et al. 2001: 19-20). The notable increase in fish remains likely
reflects an increased targeting of aquatic habitats through time (Table 2). The increase in
aquatic targeting is supported by the large number of muskrat and fish remains occurring
in Units 7, 8a, 8b, 8c. Overall, 71% of the mammal remains identifiable to a family level
or lower were muskrat (Figure 23). This large percentage of concentrated muskrat

remains demonstrates clear resource targeting by the indigenous population.

Trends

The examination of faunal remains from flotation samples suggests additional trends in
utilization through time at the Schultz Site. Mammalian species are listed by the number
of identified specimens (N ISP) and the percent of identified mammalian assemblage in
Table 2. As previously noted, muskrat (0ndatra zibethicus) is the most common
mammalian species with a total of 113 elements identified; muskrat is present in Unit 5A
and Units 7-8c. White-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus) reflect a similar trend,
increasing in importance during the Middle Woodland period and reaching a maximum in
Unit 8a. Like the Column 11 results, white-tailed deer outnumber the muskrat in absolute
frequency. Beaver (Castor canadensis) are present in Units 6-8a. Black bear (Ursus

americanus) are only represented in the Middle Woodland Transition Unit 8a.

66

ANNN NNN .233 .28 3.5200 832”:
526.. No _o>o._ 2E3". 9 3:532 0:563. cm=mEEm2 5:305. couSoE 25 55:8 “mm 059“.

9N. NN
35555.5 355.6

 

N\..NN

03:03.9: 0:3.6850

gm
emotaow ax; oxo N

exam $2.50 .No

wmu_>Eo.mNmI
wacmotoEw 0:05

67

The assemblage of fish species reflects a similar trend toward increased diversity in the
Middle Woodland period. Major fish species are listed by NISP and by percent of
identified fish assemblage in Table 2. Like the Column N11 sample, the most commonly
identified fish species in this sample is gar (Lepisosteus Sp. ), seconded closely by lake
sturgeon (Acipenserfulvescens). Similar to the Column 11 remains, fish species are
minimal in Units 2-4, increase slightly in Unit 5a, and begin to increase notably in Unit 6.
By Units 8a-8c, all fish species, except the burbot (Lora Iota), are represented in their

highest levels of occurrence.

While gar and yellow walleye appear to be important during the transitional period (Unit
7) the centrarchids, ictalurids, suckers, and freshwater drum increase in occurrence in the
Middle Woodland periods (Units 8a-8c). However, the occurrences of these fish species
is minimal compared to the comparatively large number of gar and lake sturgeon remains

that dominate the sample during the Middle Woodland Periods (Table 2).

The only small concentration of bird remains was in Unit 8b, and they are entirely lacking
in Units 2, 4, and 6. Reptiles in this faunal assemblage include both snakes and turtles.
The maximum is in Unit 8a, in which the reptilian fauna is entirely represented by turtles
(Table 2). Reptile remains are absent from the sample in Units 2-4 and 6. Snapping
turtle (Chelydra serpentina) is identified in Units 7-8b, with a maximum in Unit 8a.
Spiny soft-shell turtle (Apalone spinifera) was present as a single specimen in Unit 8b.
Painted turtle (Chrysemys picta) and Blanding’s turtle (Emydoidea blandingii) occur

during the Middle Woodland Period. Snake remains were identified only in Units 5a, 8b,

68

and 8c. Two unidentifiable snake vertebras were recovered from Unit 5A, as well as one
vertebra identified as Thamnophis, the Eastern ribbon snake and/or the common garter
snake. Four additional unidentifiable snake vertebras were recovered in Unit 8b, along
with 5 additional T hamnophis vertebrae. Unit 8c produced 4 additional T hamnophis

vertebrae and one vertebra that was likely Thamnophis as well.

Some fraction of the difference in density of forest living mammalian versus near-shore
and aquatic species may be attributable to taphonomy and/or sedimentation rates. The
remains of mammals such as black bear, fisher, and elk that tend to inhabit more highly
acidic, forested areas would be less likely to preserve compared to the near shore animals
such as the muskrat, reptile, and fish species. However, this is unlikely as an overlying

scenario as all of these remains were deposited in the near shore sediments.

Much of the mammalian material was highly fragmented, weathered, or otherwise
unidentifiable below class level. Out of 2076 total mammal bones recovered from the
flotation sample, 171, or 8.2%, of them were calcined or charred. In contrast, 542, or 1%,
of the 52,023 fish bones were charred (Table 2). The considerable volume of highly
fragmented bone, as well as the presence of fragmented charred bone indicates proximity

to a cooking area while the remains themselves simply represent discarded refuse.

The occurrence of episodic flooding events, particularly during the Middle Woodland
occupation of the site, may also have been a factor in the apparent resource targeting of

the inhabitants. The Early Woodland occupations occurred while a relatively dry, stable

69

flood plain environment was present at the Schultz Site (Lovis et al. 2001: 9). This
relatively dry period was followed by a period of intense flooding during the deposition
of Units 8a-8c (Lovis et al. 2001: 10). The resulting increase in sedimentation rates, due
to the episodic flooding, is concurrent with the relative abundance of animal material in

these units (Lovis et al. 2001: 11).

Fish comprised a large portion of the diet of Schultz Site residents, compared with the
relative abundance of other animals recovered. The large number of fish remains
recovered at the Schultz Site do not initially seem to support the above basin-wide
variation model (Larsen 1985), because lake levels varied, and the people in the region
were eating substantial amounts of fish. The fluctuating occupation intensity indicated by
cultural remains and changing abundance of faunal remains does, however, lend support

to the basin-wide variation model (Lovis et al. 1994: 926).

As a second goal of the 1991 MSU excavation was to address changing subsistence
patterns as a result of environmental fluctuations as the people changed from a hunting
and gathering to a horticultural society (Lovis et al. 2001: 4). Overall, the faunal remains
recovered at the Schultz Site are sufficient indicators of culturally selective taphonomy in
the death assemblages as well as seasonal exploitation of resources. The faunal analysis
seems to indicate seasonally variable resource targeting as a means to fulfill certain

subsistence goals.

70

CHAPTER 3: WORKED BONE AND ARTIFACTS

The Schultz Site excavation in 1991 yielded several pieces of modified bone, tooth, and
antler. A variety of implements were fashioned out of the animal remains of several
species of local, Saginaw Valley mammals. Unlike previous excavations and artifact
analyses (Cleland 1966, Luxenberg 1972) from the Schultz Site, in which the artifacts

came from reptiles as well as mammals, this sample is entirely mammalian.

Similar to earlier findings, the condition of the artifacts is quite well preserved,
suggesting that the sample is representative of the site during the Middle Woodland
Period (Murray 1972). Five artifacts were identifiable and has been categorized below by

material, function, and finally by type, following the methodology of Murray (1972).

Antler Artifacts

Elk antler remains were found in the plow zone, indicating a likely deposition within the
last 800 years. Three pieces of elk antler were recovered (Figure 24). One of the three
pieces is a small, socketed handle (Figure 25). The end of the antler has been drilled to
receive a narrow, pointed implement, such as an awl (Murray 1972). The larger, slightly
bent piece of antler may also have been utilized as a handle. However, the shape and lack
of additional alteration suggests it may not have been shaped for utilization efficiency.

The third, and final piece of elk antler is un-worked and likely a discarded fragment.

7]

 

FIGURE 24: Elk (Cervus elaplms) Antler Fragments

 

FIGURE 25: Worked Elk (Cams elaplms) Antler Close-Up

72

The next possible artifact is a fragment of a deer antler, with the antler base still firmly
attached to a portion of the cranium (Figure 10). The skull fragment shows striations
along it edges that suggest the skull fragment was modified by human-made tools during
butchering (Figure 10). It is unclear if the cut marks are simply from butchering or

represent an artifact in process (Murray 1972).

The antler and skull piece provides evidence of an early fall hunt because the deer had not
yet shed its antlers for the season. The antler fragment was found in stratigraphic Unit 8a,
in Trench 91-3, supporting a fall occupation for the Middle Woodland occupation of the

site.

Another notable artifact is a toggling harpoon fragment made from antler, found in
Trench 91-2, also from stratigraphic Unit 8a (Figure 26). The harpoon has a hole gouged
into one side, for line attachment, and the center has been hollowed out. Similar to the
harpoon described by Murray (1972), there is evidence of a barb, cutting away about half

of the base, leaving the rest to project at an angle over the shafi.

The harpoon may have been used for spearing large fish during spawning. The most
frequently occurring fish in Stratigraphic Unit 8a are the Lake Sturgeon and the Longnose
Gar (Table 2). Both species frequent the shallows in the spring to spawn, suggesting a

spring occupation of the site, as well as the aforementioned fall occupation.

73

 

FIGURE 26: Worked Antler Harpoon

 

FIGURE 27: Worked Bone Tool

74

Bone and Tooth Artifacts

The one-quarter-inch screened sample also recovered several animal bone artifacts. The
first is a worked bear tooth (Figures 8 & 9). The tooth is a canine from an adult black
bear (Ursus americanus), recovered from the west wall of Trench 91-1, 60 cm below the
surface. The tooth shows a cut notch on one side, approximately 1/2 cm wide, in the area
where the tooth enamel ends proximally (Figure 9). This worked bear tooth may have
been used as an awl, or similar tool, the notched area used for attachment to another

implement.

The final bone artifact recovered from the Schultz Site is a fragment of a small worked
bone tool of unknown function (Figure 27). The bone tool was recovered from Trench
91-3, in Stratigraphic Unit 8b. The tool is triangular in shape, approximately 2 cm long
and displays a triangular groove along one side, while being flat and smooth on the other
side. This artifact may have been a flat bone projectile point, however, it is unclear from

what large mammal the bone derived.

Murray (1972) indicates that by the Middle Woodland Period, all four projectile point

categories and toggle head harpoons were in use. In addition, the toggle head harpoons
were limited to Units 8a-8b. The presence of large game—related artifacts may indicate
the exploitation of large game, particularly during the fall. The presence of the worked

bear tooth may further support a winter exploitation of black bear as a resource. Finally,

75

the presence of the toggle head harpoon may be indicative of a well-developed fishing

economy.

76

CHAPTER 4: SITE ANALYSIS AND CONCLUSIONS

Paleoenvironment

The hypothesis put forth by Lovis et al. (2001) indicated that the Early Woodland period
was a relatively drier period, with lower water levels and fewer episodic floods. They
further suggest that there was a distinctive change during the Middle Woodland period,
during which time the Huron basis lake levels rose considerably, flooding was frequent
and extensive, and the overall climatic environment was warmer. By the Late Woodland
period, the environment became drier once again, although much of the region was still a
wetland type habitat. Their overall conclusion was that microenvironmental changes
affected the region and associated wetland habitat and that these changes thereby affected

the subsistence alternatives available to the people utilizing the site.

The location of the Schultz Site is geologically significant in regards to its placement in
the Saginaw Valley. The Schultz Site, is at the confluence of several major rivers which
are cumulatively responsible for the drainage of the northwest, west, and south.

However, all of the drainage must be funneled in-between the moraine immediately to the
northwest of the Schultz Site and the Port Huron moraine, southeast of the site across the
Saginaw River. Therefore, these regions were subject to seasonal flooding of the region
behind the moraines, creating an additional lake environment above the moraines as well

as the river discharge and higher Lake Huron levels downstream.

77

Review of the Early Woodland fauna, Stratigraphic Units 3-5a, in this sample include
minimal amounts of bird and reptile material, some mammal remains, and proportionally
larger amounts of fish material (Table 2). The abundance of fauna increase from 75
specimens in Unit 3, 273 specimens in Unit 4, and 593 specimens in Unit 5a. The species
of fish present include longnose gar, burbot, lake trout, lake sturgeon, northen pike and
some species of sucker. These types of fish are indicative of a range of weedy near-shore
and deep-water habitats, with cool to moderate temperature, relatively calm water

conditions (Table 3).

The Middle Woodland fauna, Stratigraphic Units 6-8, are much more diverse and more
numerous. The primary fauna are still fish, however, a broader range of near-shore
mammals are also present. In particular, there is a substantial amount of muskrat remains
contained within the Middle Woodland sample. The fish remains are primarily Ictalurids,
Centrarchids, and Yellow Walleye indicating the presence of warmer, weedy, near-shore,
relatively calm water conditions (Table 3). In addition, there is the largest percentage of

reptile remains during this period, of which Turtle remains, are the majority.

Overall, it is likely that as lake levels increased, due to precipitation and other climatic
factors, flooding filled much of the Saginaw Valley region surrounding the Schultz Site.
This flooding, over the minimally increasing gradient present in the area, likely created
large areas of wetlands with large areas of shallow, vegetated, bodies of water. The
presence of these fauna and the relative lack of bird material, suggest that these areas

were quite unlike the broad, tree-less, flat expanses that are present further downstream.

78

The area surrounding the Schultz site was partially wooded, with extensive wetlands and
aquatic environments, but lacked the expanses necessary for utilization by large flocks of

migratory birds.

The combination of the unique geology present at the Schultz Site and surrounding area
created several different habitats over time. It may be assumed that the exploitation
strategies of the site’s occupants must also have shifted as a result. Therefore, the results
of this paleoenvironmental reconstruction generally support the Lovis et al. (2001)

conclusions.

Resource Targeting.

The species recovered from the Schultz Site provide an indication of the resource
procurement strategies during the sequence of occupations at the site. The second goal of
the 1991 MSU excavation was to address changing subsistence patterns as a result of
environmental fluctuations as the people changed from a hunting and gathering to a
horticultural society (Lovis et al. 2001: 4). Intensity of site occupation during the Early
Woodland periods, Units 3-4, is very low and the minimal faunal component of the
archaeological record suggests minimal site usage. There is little evidence to support
intensive or even regular exploitation of the aquatic habitat during these early

occupations.

79

Similar to the Column N11 findings, and consistent with prior research, the findings of
this faunal analysis indicate an increased targeting of aquatic resources during the
Transitional period, represented by Units 5-7 (Lovis et al. 2001: 22). Muskrat, beaver,
lake sturgeon, gar, and yellow walleye are the increasingly important faunal
representatives during this time period and the Middle Woodland period to follow (Table
2). Also indicative of aquatic habitat targeting is the presence of snapping ttutle remains

in Unit 7.

By the Middle Woodland Period, represented in Units 8a-8c, bone density reaches
maximum levels and aquatic faunal elements dominate the sample. The large number of
gar, yellow walleye, perch, centrarchid and ictalurid remains suggest that the targeted
habitat was a relatively shallow, clear, quiet, warm aquatic environment with a muddy
bottom and abundant vegetation (Table 3). The large number of lake sturgeon and
freshwater drum would have been found proximal to that, in slightly deeper water (Table
3). This type of aquatic habitat would also have been ideal for a significant muskrat and
beaver population. Additional evidence for aquatic targeting is provided by the fact that
the majority of turtle remains were recovered from the Middle Woodland Units. Nearly

25% of the identifiable turtle remains during this period were snapping turtle (Table 2).

White-tailed deer were exploited throughout the Middle Woodland sequence, and would

have been found near the forest edge and water margins. Lovis et al. (2001) suggest that

the presence of this mobile, terrestrial species in low to moderate frequency throughout

80

the Middle Woodland units attests to its importance as a targeted food resource (Lovis et

al. 2001 :23).

The idiosyncratic presence of black bear in the Unit 8a faunal assemblage suggests at
least some terrestrial exploitation of resources near the Schultz Site, although terrestrial

animals were clearly not a primary resource (Table 2)(Lovis et al. 2001 :25).

Although the resources utilized during the early occupational sequence at the Schultz Site
are minimal and varied, by the Middle Woodland period the environment proximal to the
site was clearly both productive and diverse in terms of its aquatic resources, allowing

intensive exploitation of the region by the site’s inhabitants (Lovis et al. 2001 :26).

Flotation vs. Screening

The third primary goal of the 1991 MSU excavation was to further evaluate the
differences in identification rate between samples recovered by screening methods and
those recovered through flotation (Lovis et al. 2001: 4). Flotation samples may
intuitively be thought to have a higher percentage of unidentifiable specimens and
difference in taxon proportions in the sample, due to the smaller recoverable fragment
size of specimens, and increased volume of material (James 1997). However, the initial
N11 flotation sample, compared to screened materials in the previous Cleland (1966) and
Luxenberg (1972) analyses, did not show this trend, but rather showed similar

percentages between flotation and screened samples.

81

One means of calculating the rate of identification is to determine the ratio of specimens
identified to the Family level or lower versus those identifiable only to Order or higher.
Identification to the Family level has become the standard in zooarchaeological procedure

as meaningful in using the identification for additional purposes.

The remaining composite (columns 26N, 34.5N, 91-2, 91-3) of faunal remains does
reflect a difference in identification rates. From the 54,468 total specimens, only 1,437
were identifiable to family level or below, an identification rate of less than 3%. The
Schultz Site flotation material (Columns 26N, 34.5N, 91-2, 91-3) minimally reflects four
species of mammals (Figure 28), 16 species of fish in 12 families (Figure 29), and five

species of reptiles (Table 8).

Cleland (1966) had an identification rate of 8.5%; Luxenberg (1972) had an identification
rate of 6.7% using coarse screening methods. In the N11 sample, there was a flotation
sample identification rate of 6.5%, similar to those found by Cleland and Luxenberg,

although differing recovery methods were employed.

The screened samples reported by Cleland (1966) and Luxenberg (1972) also suggested a
higher diversity of species, although represented in smaller quantities. Indeed, the
analysis of 1991 excavation Schultz Site remains does show a broader mammalian
species range than the screened samples. The 1991 excavation screened sample shows a

lower number of overall specimens, only 501 total elements and an identification rate of

82

3-3 .N-Nm .Zmém .ZCN 05.5.00 c2500.“:
05083. 5.36605. .0 8.02.500 3.0.0.2 c0030.“. 3.0 5.2.00 .8 2:9“.

       

NNNN \

.00 0.50 .No 00!:
. 0==0E§3 0:0...8050
$8.0
002......920...
$3.0
$86 3.53.5 0:030
03:09:30 030.5

NNNNN
555.com .533.

Nov... .mEEms.

8.02.800 .uEEas.

83

5.3 0.5 .230 .sz 35550 N832“:
0.05.5550 5 03.55”. «N 38.50 5.55.2 8:32”. 3.0 3.250 .8. 05...“.

$00.00
00050522

    

N\omw.NN
00220.".

        

002:0.0

N\Nwm.vm
\ . 0 - 30.08.00.
QNVV...“

0025.90.
N\Nno.m
002220.250

$00.0

  

N\omo.o

o . .
\000 N 35 0 0022.05

5 . $00.0
002820200 00280m 5.00

00258.00 002:0...00

03:50“. .5...

84

 

 

 

F8 $8.0 $8.0 $2.0 $2.0 $3.3 $FF.0F $2.0 $3.8 $9.00 $00... 8.5.02.0 .83 .o $
0 0 F 0 0 v 0 N F :6...
.26..

F8 o 2. 0F 3 3F F0 3 3: FoF 0... 8.3 ..< - .83
$8.: 00 o o F F 2 v F X. o 0 0.2.5.800... 000.0

$8... 0 o o o a a u o a o o 0.0000 .83
0 F o o o o N o o o o 0.515% 80......00 08.8....

$00.3 00 o u a F 8 F" 5 F0 0 0 so... .83
0. o F 0 F F F 0 00 N 0 0.2.5.200... 003220.00

FF 0 F a o 00 8 F a o o .88....0
0 o F o o F o F o o o 0.2.0; 32.0.. .0 .00 5.8.80.0
N o o o o o N o o o o 0.0..03 32.0.. 530...... 8.00.800
F o o o o o o o o o F 000.20..
F o o o o o o o o o F .00 009.95. 030000 032000.53
N o o o o . o o o F o .058 .0505 050.0%... 33.0.0.
F o o o o F o o o o o 002.280.
N o o o o o F o F o o 0x... 0.05.9. 3.0:. .80.”.
F o o o o o o o o o F .00 000.. .00 3.0.8.0.:
0 o o o o F o o F o 0 0026.82.00
0 o o o o o . o o o F 800.30 9.0. 0:882... .00533

$00.00 «3. o 0 0 «F 3 F0 0 2. 00 a .0258... .83
50 o F N FF 00 FF. 0 00 F0 0F 0.05.50.00... .0550...

0.. o F F F 0 0 n FF 0 0 .82....0
0 o o o o o o o o o 0 0:0 0200.0 0:200
F o o o o o F o o o o .00.. x00... .0 03000050 0:05 .0
F o o o o o o o o o F .00.. .00... 0300550 0:05
N o o o o o o F o o P .00.. 00.8-0.2; .0 02.0.59... 0:0...808 .0
F o F o F F F o o N F .00.. 02.8.0.2; 02.0.50...) 30.68.00
m o o o o o N o F F N .0>mun 0...»:wbmcmo .9me
. o o o o o o F o o 0 0.056.200... 0.2.080
ow o o o o v N F 0 0 o .023... 083.00.: 8.09.0
P o o . o o o o o o o 8800. .0 .20. 8..er .0
F o o o o o o o o o F 8800. .20. 8.890
. o o o o o o o F o o .05.. .0 205.8 00:03. .0
F o o o o o o o F o o .050... .00....8 00:03.

$8... F a o a o a F o c a o 2.0 .83
F o o o o o F o o o o 0.2.5.200... 00%
205.800 .83 .83 a 0 F 0 0 v n a F :6...

yo 8 .03 2:02 coEEob :98...

 

3.0.0.2 00:00.00 0.0 8.350 0... Se. .05. S 2.0500 .050“. .o. 80.2. 8.3.0.0 raeea0 0 0.03

85

12% (Table 8). The screened samples include: 7 species of mammal, 7 fish, and l reptile

(Table 8).

The animals identified from the flotation material include muskrat, beaver, white-tailed
deer, black bear, indeterminate rodent species, lake sturgeon, longnose gar, lake trout,
northern pike, suckers, several species of catfish, burbot, large and smallmouth bass,
crappie, yellow perch, yellow walleye, freshwater drum, eastern spiny soft-shell turtles,

snapping turtles, painted turtles, Blanding’s turtle, and garter snakes (Table 2).

The screened material contains fisher, raccoon, muskrat, beaver, white-tailed deer, black
bear, elk, lake sturgeon, bass, northern pike, catfish, longnose gar, perch, yellow walleye,

and spiny turtle (Table 8).

Although the screened sample is less than one percent of the frequency of the flotation
sample, the diversity of mammals is clearly higher. Most notable in the screened material
is the presence of fisher and elk. A partial left mandible, with most of the associated

teeth, of a fisher was recovered from Level 4 (Figure 30)(Powell 1993).

86

 

fun ,
,.

5’17”

 

FIGURE 30: Fisher (Mustela penaud) Jaw Fragments

87

Conclusions

The focus of this thesis was to link the identification of vertebrate faunal remains to
changes in the environment and human exploitation patterns throughout the Schultz Site

occupation. Four important conclusions can be summarized from this analysis of the

Schultz Site fauna as derived from columns 26N, 34.5N, 91-2, and 91-3.

First, the refined recovery facilitated by the flotation technique does not significantly
decrease the rate of identification at this site, and in fact supports the Lovis et al. (2001)

perception of the relative importance of fishes and mammals, versus the earlier Cleland

(1966) and Luxenberg (1972) analyses.

Second, the Schultz Site environment varied seasonally and temporally over the course of
several hundred years, affecting the habitability of the site and the intensity of occupation
and its utilization through time. The Middle Woodland Period reflected a warmer
period, during which time flooding was frequent and extensive throughout the Saginaw

Valley, due to its unique geology.

Third, this fluctuation resulted in multiple season usage of the site through time, and a

changing subsistence strategy that included clear resource targeting of aquatic habitats at

particular times, to fulfill certain subsistence goals.

88

Finally, the analysis of these faunal samples from the 1991 Michigan State University
excavation of the Schultz Site confirmed, supported, and broadened the earlier analyses

of the column 11 of Lovis et al. (1994, 2001).

89

 

APPENDIX

90

APPENDIX: HABITAT PREFERENCES OF COMMON SCHULTZ SITE FAUNA

Certain animals are found in specific habitats, and a coexisting group of animals and
plants comprises an ecological community. Relative abundances of animals found
together can often be indicative of a particular habitat. Some of these animal
communities have keystone species, such that the identification of a particular animal can

be important in recreating the habitat (Rackham 1994).

By the first recorded habitation of the Schultz Site, circa 2600 B.P., essentially modern
faunas were present in the Saginaw Bay area (Fitting 1975). The inhabitants of the
Schultz Site hunted animals in aquatic, near-shore, and woodland habitats; these habitats
likely existed proximal to the Schultz Site, or at least within a short distance (Lovis et al.
2001). The faunal analysis presented here assumes that the habitat preferences of the
animals at that time were similar to those that exist now, as were the taste preferences of

the people using the animals.

The following species recovered from the Schultz Site were common aquatic, semi-
aquatic, and forest animals that inhabited the Great Lakes Region during the Schultz
Site’s occupational periods, and were hunted, trapped, or collected for use by human

populations (Table 9).

9]

Table 9: Taxa Identified at the Schultz Site ZOSAZ.

 

Taxon

OSTEICHTHYES

Acipenseriformes: Acipenseridae

Acipenser fulvescens

Semionotiformes: Lepisosteidae

Lepisosteus osseus
Amiiformes: Amiidae
Amie calva
Salmoniformes: Salmonidae
Salve/inus namaycush
Esocifonnes: Esocidae
Esox lucius

Esox sp.

Cypriniformes: Cyprinidae
Cypriniformes: Catostomidae
Catostomus commersoni
Catostomus sp.

Moxostoma sp.
Siluriformes: lctaluridae
Ictalurus melas

Ictalurus nata/is

Ictaluris nebu/osus

Ictalurus sp. (large)
Ictalurus puctal‘us

lctalurus sp.

Gadiformes: Gadidae

Lota Iota

Perciformes: Centrarchidae
Roccus chrysops

Lepomis sp.

Micropterus dolomieu
Micropterus salmoides
Mocropterus sp.

Pomoxis sp.

Percifonnes: Percidae
Perca flavescens
Stizostedion vitreum
Stizostedion sp.
Perciformes: Scianidae
Aplodinotus grunniens

Common Name

lake sturgeon
longnose gar
bowfin

lake trout

northern pike
northern pike, muskellunge. or hybrid

longnose sucker
longnose or white sucker
redhorse sucker

black bullhead

yellow bullhead

brown bullhead

yellow or brown bullhead

channel catfish

yellow or brown bullhead or channel catfish

burbot

rock bass

green sunfish, pumpkinseed, bluegill, or hybrid
smallmouth bass

largemouth bass

smallmouth or largemouth bass

black or white crappie

yellow perch
walleye
sauger or walleye

freshwater drum

92

Table 9 (cont'd).

 

 

Taxon Common Name
REPTILIA

Chelonia: Cholydridae

Che/ydra serpentina snapping turtle
Chelonia: Emydidae

Emydoidea blandingi blanding's turtle
Chrysemys picta painted turtle

Chelonia: Trionychidae
Apa/one spinifera
Squamata: Colubridae
Thamnophis sp.

MAMMALIA

Rodentia: Sciuridae
Rodentia: Heteromyidae
Rodentia: Castoridae
Castor canadensis
Rodentia: Cricetidae
Ondatra zibethicus
Camivora: Canidae
Carnivora: Ursidae
Ursus amen'canus
Camivora: Procyonidae
Procyon Iotor
Camlvora: Mustelidae
Mustela pennanti

Lutra canadensis
Artiodactyla: Cervidae
Cervus elaphus
Odocoi/eus virginianus

eastern spiny softshell turtle

garter or ribbon snake

beaver

muskrat

black bear
raccoon

fisher
fiverofier

elk
white-tailed deer

 

Note: Taxonomy follows Scott and Crossman (1973) for fish;
Harding (1997) for reptiles; and Baker (1983) for mammals.

93

FISH

Fish are often targeted as a food source and although subject to taste, most are caught
based upon availability. The large presence of fish in the faunal assemblage indicates a
strong reliance on fish as a food source, however, the assemblage also offers additional

information on the availability of fish as a food source throughout the year.

Some species of fish are very habitat specific, living within narrow ranges of temperature,
pH, depth, water flow, water clarity, and vegetative conditions (Table 10). Seasonal and
other changes in water conditions can cause fish to migrate, become dormant, or perish.

The following fish were present in the faunal assemblage at the Schultz Site (ZOSAZ).

Lake sturgeon (Acipenserfulvescens)

Sturgeon are one of the most long-lived fish, living in excess of 100 years (Scott and
Crossman 1973: 82), reaching lengths over five feet, and weights of over 100 pounds
(Table 10). These large fish spawn in the shallows of large lakes and rivers in the spring
(Scott and Crossman 1973: 82). In the past, lake sturgeon aggregated in huge numbers
and were speared or netted (Cleland 1966: 171). Sturgeon are prized for the large amount

of meat they can provide.

Longnose gar (Lepisosteus osseus)
The longnose gar is one of the most habitat-specific species found in the Great Lakes
region, inhabiting shallow, weedy bays and back waters (Table 10)(Scott and Crossman

1973: 108). In particularly turbid waters, gars use their special air bladders to obtain air

94

A‘s-munch new “All! Magm-

 

«5.528 @539 E 380% 2.96:3 go: «_ 5c «5 «2865 «E.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

«85535 Exam: :«E 35359... ”or «fish

«35> :63 «35> 293.520 3232: .5 F .5 8.? 09m :55 333:3:
«35> :63 «song 593.520 $8ouoE.Bo=o:« .«n. n v .5 8.9. 8.0 .v «>23! 30::
cargo—«u? «E8 6:3 ._«>«._m £02: 263 _ooo..E«3 520 26.35 .5 r v .5 3.0 no N :22. 30:0»
>62 .99 3% Eu; .«2 3235 .2 N: v .5 2a 8 «23 “.09
c3539 >>moc 6:3 £03.: 5035 EB? 520 26.35 .2 F v .5 02. «m .m 29.80 «.83
«new; «not? :63 EB; 3930:. 32.93 .a. r v .5 m5 590:...
28 £09 .«2 SSouoE .920 «Emacs .«n. N v .5 «To «one 5:05...an
couSoW? >285 .503ng ;o_« can; .3: 26.3% .«n. N v .5 «Ta am noon 5:05.09!
.Qém .23 .«E .08 .«E 33.29305 «2 N .5 9 «m «09:...
8:53? «.5. ._«>m._m 6:8 98ng 98ng .620 2839: «5 TN c N-" 3.3 .358 35.2.0
c8839 ‘93; ._«>Em £an 26.« .9: 350 32.93 .2 r v .5 $.w 8.3 .353 two—=39
.265 .23 9930.: 29305 Loo-o 30:93 «a. Nv .5 9.3 «m «to—=8.— 3053..»
«not? 9939: 9930:. «not? «nor? «5 m v .5 EN? on .8 «9.23 «00:93.
«new; 20:5 26.« ES; 820 «aflouoEégfifi .«2 9 c N 3.3 .«m 9.3 Eogtoc
>59 .9. 28.68 .«E 8% .3. 2 a a; 84. .3 So... 9.2
«now; «not? 330 EB; «3:9 26.3% .«n. or v u «N one :3 30:93.
«30:? .«E 99305 .«E 28035 .«n. 8.2. c m.m om.m .3093» 9.!
25 58.8 8.5326 as: 3:20 .33 .825 £925 £93.. 3...: .252 35:30.
«8.3 .355 .825 3223 89.23 02:25:25 8.00am

8..» 5.30m

95

from the surface, so they can survive in water with lower oxygen content than can most

other species (Scott and Crossman 1973: 108).

Gars spawn in late spring to early summer, in shallow water, among aquatic vegetation or
on gravelly or stony shoals (Scott and Crossman 1973: 107). Males remain to protect the
nests until the young reach several inches in length. Adult gars may reach sizes
exceeding 2 feet in length. Gars prey largely upon other fish, either as predator or

scavenger, and often lurk near the surface.

Longnose gar tend to be caught by netting methods rather than typical angling methods
(Cleland 1966: 172). Although Lepisosteus osseus are not preferentially eaten today, they
were a primary food source in the past (Scott and Crossman 1973: 109). Gar can be
identified on the basis of their vertebrae (Figure 32), which are convex in front and
concave behind, rather than concave at both ends, and by their large, thick, diamond-

shaped, enamel-covered scales (Figure 31).

Gars are voracious eaters and will feed on nearly any fish sharing their warm water
habitat. Prey can include sunfish, bass, suckers, perch, darters, catfish, and pike. Gar will

also devour amphibians and invertebrates (Scott and Crossman 1973: 109).

Bowfin (A mia calva)
Amia calva is found in the Great Lakes region, although it is rarer than either Acipenser

fulvescens or Lepisosteus osseus (Scott and Crossman 1973: 1 15). This carnivorous fish

96

"WM 1111me

C M

FIGURE 31:
Longnose Gar (Leplsosteus osseus)
Scales

llll llll Ill

CM 1

FIGURE 32:
Longnose Gar (Leplsosteus osseus)
Vertebrae

this)» 'x.

 

FIGURE 33:
Catfish (Ictalurus sp.)
Pectoral Spine

Rig-34,35,
" mum

ICM 1

 

W“ 1* =
"'Qi,

2

FIGURE 34:
Freshwater Drum (Aplodinotus grunniens)
Pharyngeal Toothplate

 

mu

0
1m lulu

 

FIGURE 35:
Freshwater Drum (Aplodinotus grunnlens)
Pharyngeal Tooth

97

inhabits relatively warm sluggish rivers, often taking to the shallows to spawn in the
spring (Scott and Crossman 1973: 113). It is said to have a jelly-like consistency to the
meat, and so has not been highly favored for eating by most peoples. Like gars, the
bowfin can utilize surface air in poorly oxygenated water (Scott and Crossman 1973:

115).

Lake Trout (Salvelinus namaycush)

Of notable size, lake trout are one of a few deep-water species in the Great Lakes region.
They require cool, well-oxygenated, rocky depths for survival, only leaving those depths
for the shallows to spawn in the fall (Table 10)(Cleland 1966: 172). Spawning season is

the best time to catch lake trout, using gill nets (Scott and Crossman 1973: 227).

Northern Pike (Esox lucius)

Esox lucius (northern pike) can be found in marshy areas, sandbars, and channels between
lakes (Scott and Crossman 1973: 360). This species typically inhabits very shallow
water, rarely exceeding depths of 20 feet (Table 10). Pike grow to a large size and can be

caught through the ice in the winter months (Scott and Crossman 1973: 362).

Pike are very solitary fish, perhaps as a factor of their large size and voracious feeding
habits (Walden 1964). Growing in excess of four feet and 20 pounds, they are certainly
worth the effort in capturing (Cleland 1966: 174). Pike may travel large distances into
the shallows and tributary rivers in the spring months to spawn, then abandon their eggs

as they continue swimming (Scott and Crossman 1973: 359). During spawning, pike can

98

be readily caught in nets. Summer heat tends to make the pike sluggish and less
responsive to bait. Pike are ofien caught in the winter months, when people can fish far

offshore on the ice (Walden 1964).

Catfish (Ictaluridae)

Several species of catfish, Family Ictaluridae, inhabit tributaries and lakes. Ictalurus
nubulosus, I. melas, and I. natalis (northern brown, black, and yellow bullhead catfish
respectively) are very flexible in the range of environmental conditions in which they can
survive (Table 10). These species are found in mud-bottomed, weedy near-shore regions,
in slowly flowing rivers, and in faster cold-water streams (Cleland 1966: 173). Ictalurids

are generally tolerant of high temperatures and low oxygen levels (Scott and Crossman

1973: 588-603).

Most catfish species, including the three mentioned above, are somewhat nocturnal,
moving shoreward or into faster-moving water to feed at dusk (Scott and Crossman 1973:
588). Catfish meat is firm and flaky, with a rich flavor. These fish can be caught using a
wide variety of net or rod and line methods. The above-mentioned catfish species are
about a foot in length and a pound or two in weight (Scott and Crossman 1973: 601 ).
They can be readily identified by their large, serrated pectoral fin spines (Figure 33)(Scott

and Crossman 1973: 591-599).

The bullhead (northern brown, black, and yellow) catfish are spring spawners, making

large saucer-shaped nests in well-protected areas. Both parents protect the eggs and the

99

fry until the young catfish can move about independently (Scott and Crossman 1973:

593).

Burbot (Lola Iota)

Burbot have an average weight of one to three pounds, and can occur throughout deep-
water lakes (Table 10)(Scott and Crossman 1973: 643). Deep-water netting is the most
common form of capture. They are winter spawners, in rocky shallows, with no parental
care (Scott and Crossman 1973: 643). The meat is distastefiil to most people, although
the liver oil can be used in a fashion similar to cod liver oil (Scott and Crossman 1973:

645).

Bluegill (Lepomis macrochirus)

Sunfishes (Family Centrarchidae), particularly bluegill, are schooling species and are
relatively abundant. Dwelling in warm, weedy waters of ponds and lakes, they are
tolerant of high water temperatures but require high levels of oxygen for survival (Table
10). Increased levels of turbidity in the water, which can affect oxygen-gathering

abilities, can be fatal to centrarchids (Scott and Crossman 1973: 722).

Bluegill are spring spawners, usually in June in the northern regions (Scott and Crossman
1973: 721). They may also spawn multiple times in one season. Bluegill are not
particularly valuable as food sources, usually weighing less than a pound and only 7-8
inches in length. Bluegill will take bait during all seasons, and can be caught in large

numbers, to make up for a smaller body size (Scott and Crossman 1973: 723).

l00

Largemouth bass (Micropterus salmoides)

Smallmouth bass (Micropterus dolomieui)

The species of Micropterus (large and small-mouth bass) generally inhabit clean, cool
waterways and gently flowing streams (Table 10). These fish often dwell in slightly
deeper water than bluegills, 25-30 feet, and slightly offshore. Smallmouth bass are much
less often associated with dense growths of aquatic vegetation than the largemouth bass
and prefer a lower water temperature (Cleland 1966: 174). These two species of bass

rarely overlap in their habitats.

Both large and smallmouth bass are evening feeders, preferring shady or deeper waters
during the day, and the open shallows during the night. These tend to be dormant during
the winter months. Weighing in at a couple of pounds apiece, they have flaky, tender
meat. They strike at moving bait and lures readily, making them easy prey for human

anglers (Scott and Crossman 1973: 733).

Bass are late-spring spawners, usually in May or June (Cleland 1966: 174). Male bass are

very territorial during their spawning period, and although they cease feeding, they often

fall prey to anglers due to their aggression towards lures near the nest (Walden 1964).

101

Yellow Perch (Percaflavescens)

Yellow Walleye (Stizostedion vitreum)

Percaflavescens (yellow perch) are often found associated with the centrarchids, both
because of similar habitat preferences, and because they are part of a reciprocal food web
with the Micropterus species (Scott and Crossman 1973). Perch can tolerate slightly
reduced levels of oxygen, but suffocate with added turbidity or silty conditions that are

favorable to the walleye (Table 10).

Many species of Percidae, including Stizostedion vitreum (yellow walleye) require
flowing water for breeding and for transgressing tributary rivers (Scott and Crossman
1973: 772). Percids spawn in early to mid-spring in the Great Lakes region (Scott and
Crossman 1973: 757). Perch do not remain to tend their eggs or young (Scott and
Crossman 1973: 758). The perch often travel large distances up tributary rivers during
the spawning run, making them easy prey, in large quantities, for spring anglers (Scott

and Crossman 1973: 757).

Yellow perch are generally about a foot in length, and close to a pound in weight (Cleland
1966: 174). Being schooling flSh, perch are readily caught in numbers using basic lures
and bait methods (Scott and Crossman 1973: 761). Yellow walleye, on the other hand,
obtain lengths of several feet, and can weigh up to 25 pounds, making them a highly
prized catch (Cleland 1966: 174). However, because they frequent deeper waters during
most of the year, the best angling techniques involve deep-water trolling (Scott and

Crossman 1973: 773-774).

102

Freshwater Drum (Aplodinotus grunniens)

Freshwater drum are relatively large fish, although their meat is said to get tougher as
they mature. The meat is not normally eaten but is edible (Scott and Crossman 1973:
816). These bottom dwellers live in the muddy or sandy shallows of many rivers and
lakes (Table 10)(Cleland 1966: 175). They are early summer spawners, with no parental
care, and can be caught by typical angling methods, often using nets. Their remains are
readily identified by the presence of their distinctive pharyngeal teeth and pharyngeal
toothplates, which are used to grind up freshwater mussels (Figures 34 & 35)(Scott and

Crossman 1973: 813).

REPTILES

Reptiles are not commonly targeted as a food source, but subject to taste, collected when
easily accessible. Reptiles may also have been harvested for cultural purposes unrelated
to subsistence. The presence of reptiles in the faunal assemblage would thereby indicate
that the reptiles were relatively abundant and, therefore, opportunistically available.
Remains from the following reptiles were present in the faunal assemblage at the Schultz

Site (20SA2).

Common Snapping Turtle (Chelydra serpentina)
Snapping turtles are large, robust, aquatic turtles. They can achieve shell diameters of 18

inches and a weight of over 10 pounds. Common snapping turtles can be found in a

103

variety of freshwater habitats, although they prefer quiet, mucky-bottomed areas with

dense vegetation (Harding 1997: 169).

Snapping turtles are bulky enough that they rarely leave the water to bask, preferring to
float at the surface. They hibernate from October to April, near shore, often just sitting

on the bottom (Harding 1997: 170).

Adult snapping turtles do not have many natural predators, although their eggs and young
can easily become prey to raccoons, minks, foxes, large fish, herons, and larger water

snakes (Harding 1997: 170-171).

Adult snapping turtles were certainly large enough to be utilized as a food resource.

Approximately 50% of the turtle’s body weight is edible meat (Cleland 1966: 136).

Blanding’s Turtle (Emydoidea blandingii)

Blanding’s turtles are smaller turtles, usually not exceeding 10 inches in diameter
(Harding 1997: 201 ). They prefer quiet water, and live in and around shallow, weedy
areas and marshes (Cleland 1966: 171). Blanding’s turtles will venture out onto land in
the spring and fall months, and spend considerable time basking in the sun. They avoid
summertime heat extremes, preferring to limit summer activity to mornings and evenings
(Harding 1997: 204). These turtles hibernate from late October to early spring, hidden

under debris near the water’s edge.

104

Primary predators of Blanding’s turtle include raccoons, foxes, herons, fish, and snakes
(Harding 1997: 204). The young are particularly prone to predation as nesting sites are
built away from water in more upland areas. These small turtles are surprisingly long-

lived and virile. Active breeding life spans of 50 years are not uncommon (Harding 1997:

205).

Painted Turtle (C hrysemys picta)

The painted turtle is a small, brightly colored aquatic turtle that prefers quiet, weedy
waters (Cleland 1966: 171). Hibernation for painted turtles, like most of the Great Lakes
turtles, takes place underwater from October to early spring (Harding 1997: 213). These
small turtles spend considerable time basking during the cooler fall and spring months,

and limit their summer basking to morning and evening hours (Harding 1997: 213).

Painted turtle eggs and juveniles are frequent prey to raccoons, herons, and other wetland
predators, but they are largely protected in the water as adults, becoming prey only when
leaving the water (Harding 1997: 214). These small turtles are unlikely to be sought for
human consumption; even as adults, their shell diameters rarely reach 10 inches (Harding

1997: 215).

Eastern Spiny Soft-shell Turtle (Apalone spim’fera)
The spiny soft-shell turtle is almost entirely aquatic, inhabiting rivers and larger streams,
inland lakes, and bays (Harding 19972223). These turtles can adapt to most current types

but require a muddy or sandy bottom with little or no vegetation. Spiny soft-shell turtles

105

spend large amounts of time basking on logs and riverbanks. They are dormant from
October to April, buried in the shallow bottom substrate (Harding 1997: 224). Predators
include raccoons, herons, and large fish. They are easily caught in traps and set hooks, by
hand collection in the sediment, and with bow and arrow (Harding 1997: 226). A 13-inch

long soft-shell turtle may weigh up to seven pounds.

Garter Snake ( T hamnophis sp.)

There are several species of the colorful garter snake. Garter snakes can reach lengths of
over 4 feet, although they are slender (Harding 1997: 269). Most species of garter snake
are found near the water’s edge and nearby grassy areas (Harding 1997: 271). They
hibernate from late fall until early spring near the waters edge, often partially submerged
in the water (Harding 1997: 272). Garter snakes often become prey to fish, frogs, turtles,

other snakes, birds, raccoons, rodents, and bears (Harding 1997: 272).

MAMMALS

White-Tailed Deer (Odocoileus virginianus)

Deer are large mammals, ranging in weight from 100-300 pounds. They roam over large
areas, and are found throughout Michigan. They thrive in areas bordering forests,
feeding on sprouting vegetation, shrubs, and leaves (Cleland 1966: 165). In the fall they

eat large quantities of fallen acorns when available (Baker 1983: 588).

106

Female deer tend to live together in small herds with their fawns (Baker 1983: 585).
Although usually isolated from females during much of the year, the males can be found
together with does in pairs and groups in the fall (Baker 1983: 583). Deer mate in the

fall, following a period of rutting behavior by the males.

During the rutting season male antler growth is at its peak for display (Baker 1983: 586).
Following mating, in late fall, the males will lose their antlers, to be regrown the
following year. The presence or lack of antler material in faunal assemblages can thus be

a good indicator of seasonality (Figure 10).

Deer provide a substantial amount of meat. From an average adult deer of 200 pounds,
approximately 50% of the weight will be edible meat (Cleland 1966: 136). Deer could be
hunted and utilized on a year-round basis for meat, as well as more intensively during the
fall rutting season. Although there is little direct evidence regarding the method by which
the people of the Schultz Site targeted deer, they were likely hunted by driving, stalking,

and trapping (Cleland 1966: 140).

Beaver (Castor canadensis)

One of the largest of all rodents, the beaver is easily recognizable by its flat tail. In fossil
records, it is readily identifiable by it long, yellowish-orange incisors (Figure 36). Beaver
are highly sought after for both their plush pelt and their edible meat. Approximately

70% of the beaver’s 45-pound weight is usable as a food source (Cleland 1966: 135).

107

 
     

3

 

 

“1111‘.“

FIGURE 36:
Beaver (Castor canadensis)
Incisor

     

AK :1 ..'
.. vs,
~— I‘
. .j 1.". j . j
. 4,. .,_.¢; --
' ‘ If ’ 'u _ 3"
l ‘ .

a"?

, WWII mum! lllllllllllllllllllll

3

 

 

FIGURE 37:
Muskrat (0ndatra zibethicus)
Left Mandible

108

They are most commonly trapped near their dam, and can be found near any flowing

waterway (Baker 1983: 253).

Beaver live in family groups of parents and kits, and previous year’s offspring, in groups
of up to 12 (Baker 1983: 257). They breed during the late winter months, with the kits
being born in the late spring. Their regional density is controlled by the availability of
food resources. Their ability to consume vast acres of foliage in a season often forces

them to change location.

The ponds created by beaver dams can adversely affect fish species, such as trout, by
blocking their waterways, or altering water flow (Baker 1983: 260). However, muskrats,
turtles, frogs, and aquatic snakes can flourish in the associated ponds. Camivores are
often found living near the beaver, including mink and river otter, as well as great blue

herons and bittems (Baker 1983: 260).

Muskrat (0ndatra zibethicus)

The muskrat inhabits wetland and semi-aquatic environments year round (Cleland 1966:
165). Like the beaver, it is prized for its pelt and edible meat. Approximately 70% of the
muskrat’s three-pound weight is usable as a food source (Cleland 1966: 135). Muskrat
must be trapped near their burrows, or along the shore, as they are adept swimmers.
Muskrat eat aquatic vegetation, and must be in water deep enough to prevent solid

freezing in the winter months (Baker 1983: 327).

109

This territorial species lives in family groups in its tunneled burrows. They move
seasonally, searching for fresh habitats to occupy (Baker 1983: 327). These movements
usually correspond to higher water levels. Muskrats are sensitive to weather fluctuations;
dry, hot weather, as well as very cold weather, have an adverse effect (Baker 1983: 329).
Muskrat remains are often identified by their unique star-shaped vertebrae, or lower jaws

(Figure 37).

Black bear (Ursus americanus)

The black bear is a large mammal, weighing 250-500 pounds (Baker 1983: 431). They
inhabit both hardwood and coniferous forests near water, where they can forage easily
(Baker 1983: 433). Black bears will eat meat on occasion, but prefer insects, fruits, nuts,
berries, and honey. Black bears vary their foraging routine with extremes in temperature,
and seasonally (Baker 1983: 437). They are active at twilight in the spring, diurnal in the

summer, nocturnal in the fall, and relatively inactive during the winter.

Black bears reproduce slowly compared to many other large mammals (Baker 1983: 436-
437). Adult females usually only have offspring every other year, and are not receptive to
males during summer months. The gestation period of black bears is also prolonged, 210

days, resulting in young being born in mid-winter.

Black bears are prized for their large size, which provides an abundance of rich food and
a large thick pelt (Baker 1983: 439). Approximately 70% of the bear’s body weight is a

usable meat source (Cleland 1966: 135). Black bears can be easily tracked either by

110

following their tracks or by following paths of broken and overturned logs. They are
largest in the late fall months, prior to denning, when they accumulate fat deposits of up
to 40% of their normal body weight (Baker 1983: 436). Black bears are usually dormant

from early November until April (Baker 1983: 436).

111

BIBLIOGRAPHY

112

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Baker, Rollin H. (1983) Michigan Mammals. Michigan State University Press. East
Lansing. 1-642.

Boggs Jr., S, (1995) Principles of Sedimentology and Stratigraphy. Prentice-Hall.
Englewood Cliffs. 564-726.

Brashler, J .G. and Holman, MB. (1985) Late Woodland Continuity and Change in the
Saginaw Valley of Michigan. Arctic Anthropology. Vol. 22, No. 2, 141-152.

Casteel, R.W. (1976) Fish Remains in Archaeology and Paleo-Environmental Studies.
Academic Press, New York. 1-142.

C leland, CE. (1966) The Prehistoric Animal Ecology and Ethnozoology of the Upper
Great Lakes Region. Anthropological Papers No. 29. Museum of
Anthropology, University of Michigan. Ann Arbor. 117-274.

Egan, KC. (1993) Hunter-Gatherer Subsistence Adaptation in the Saginaw Valley of
Michigan. Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Anthropology, Michigan State
University, East Lansing. 50-82, 192-238.

Eschman, D.F. and Karrow, PF, (1985) Huron Basin Glacial lakes: A Review. In:
Quartemary evolution of the Great Lakes, Geological Society of Canada Special
Paper 20, PF. Karrow and PE. Calkin [eds], 79-93.

Fitting, J .E. (1972) The Schultz Site at Green point: A Stratified Occupation Area in
the Saginaw Valley of Michigan. Memoirs No. 4. Museum of Anthropology,
University of Michgan. Ann Arbor. 1-271.

Fitting, J .E. (1975) The Archaeology of Michigan. Cranbrook Institute Press,
Bloomfield Hills. 1-245

Gifford, DP. (1981). Taphonomy and Paleoecology: A Critical Review of
Archaeology's Sister Disciplines. Advances in Archaeological Method and
Theory. 365-438.

Gilbert, BM. (1990) Mammalian Osteology. Missouri Archaeological Society.
Columbia. 1-333.

Gilbert, B.M., Martin, L.D., and Savage, H.G. (1985) Avian Osteology. Modern
Printing Company. Laramie. 1-250.

113

Halsey, J .R. [ed] (1999) Retrieving Michigan’s Buried Past: The Archaeology of the
Great Lakes State. Cranbrook Institute Press. Bloomfield Hills. 1-220.

Harding, J .H. (1997) Amphibians and Reptiles of the Great Lakes Region. University
of Michigan Press. Ann Arbor. 163-332.

Hillson, S. (1986) Teeth. Cambridge University Press. New York. 1-340.

James, SR. (1997) Methodological Issues Concerning Screen Size Recovery Rates and
Their Effects on Archaeofaunal Interpretations. Journal of Archaeological
Science 24: 385-397.

Kingsley, R.G. (1999) The Middle Woodland Period in Southern Michigan. In:
Retrieving Michigan’s Buried Past: The Archaeology of the Great Lakes State,
edited by J .R. Halsey. Cranbrook Institute Press. Bloomfield Hills. 148-172.

Larsen, CE. (1985) Lake Level, Uplift, and Outlet Inclusion, the Nipissing and
Algoma Great Lakes. In: P.F. Karrow and PE. Calkin [eds], Quartemary
evolution of the Great Lakes, Geological Society of Canada Special Paper 20, p.
63-77.

Larson, G. and Schaetzl, R. (2001) Review: Origin and Evolution of the Great Lakes.
Journal of Great Lakes Research 27 (4): 518-546.

Lovis, WA. (1999) The Middle Archaic: Learning to Live in the Woodlands. In:
Retrieving Michigan’s Buried Past: The Archaeology of the Great Lakes State,
edited by J .R. Halsey. Cranbrook Institute Press. Bloomfield Hills. 83-124.

Lovis, W.A., Egan, K., Smith, B., and Monaghan, G.W. (1994) Muskrat and Fish,
Wild Rice and Goosefoot: Changing Subsistence Strategies and the Origins of
Indigenous Horticulture at the Schultz Site. Report to National Geographic
Society, Grant No. 4491-91. by Michigan State University. 1-48.

Lovis, W.A., Egan-Bruhy, K., Smith, 3., and Monaghan, G.W. (2001) Wetlands and
Emergent Horticultural Economies in the Upper Great Lakes: A New Perspective
from the Schultz Site. American Antiquity. 66 (4). 615-32.

Lovis, WA. and Robertson, J .A. (1989) Rethinking the Archaic Chronology of the
Saginaw Valley, Michigan. Midcontinental Journal of Archaeology, Vol. 14,
No.2, 226-259.

Luxenberg, B. (1972) Faunal Remains. In the Schultz Site at Green Point: A
Stratified Occupation Area in the Saginaw Valley of Michigan, edited by J .E.
Fitting, Memoirs No.4 Museum of Anthropology. University of Michigan.
Ann Arbor. 91-115.

114

Micozzi, MS. (1991) Postmortem Change in Human and Animal Remains : A
Systematic Approach. C.C. Thomas. Springfield. 1-104.

Murray, RF. (1972) Bone, Antler and Shell Artifacts. In The Schultz Site at Green
Point: A Stratified Occupation Area in the Saginaw Valley of Michigan, edited by

James E. Fitting. Museum of Anthropology, University of Michigan, Memoir 4:
225-243.

Needs-Howarth, S. (1999) Native Fishing in the Great Lakes - A Multidisciplinary
Approach to Zooarchaeological Remains from Precontact Iroqouian Villages Near
Lake Simcoe, Ontario. PhD Dissertation. [On-Line Resource]. Retrieved 2000-
2004 from World Wide Web: http://www.ub.rug.nl/eldoc/dis/arts/s.j.needs-
howarth

Olsen, SJ. (1971) Zooarchaeology: Animal Bones in Archaeology and their
Interpretation. Addison-Wesley, Phillipines. 1-30.

Ozker, D. (1982) An Early Woodland Community at the Schultz Site 20SA2 in the
Saginaw Valley and the Nature of the Early Woodland Adaptation in the Great
Lakes Region. Anthropological Papers No. 70, Museum of Anthropology,
University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. 1-69, 157-222.

Powell, R. A. (1993) The Fisher. University of Minnesota Press. Minneapolis. 1-
214

Rackham, J. (1994) Animal Bones. University of California Press, Berkeley. 1-64.

Savage, C. (1985) Wings of the North. University of Minnesota Press. Minneapolis.
1-178.

Schiffer,M.B. (1976) Behavioral Archaeology. Academic Press, New York. 1-199.

Scott, W.B. and E]. Crossman (1973) Freshwater Fishes of Canada. Bulletin 184.
.Fisheries Research Board of Canada, Ottawa. 20-774

Shackley, M. (1981) Environmental Archaeology. George Allen and Unwin, London,
P. 161-198.

Shott, MJ. (1986) Settlement Mobility and Technological Organization among Great
Lakes Paleoindian Foragers. In: Retrieving Michigan’s Buried Past: The
Archaeology of the Great Lakes State, edited by J .R. Halsey. Cranbrook
Institute Press, Bloomfield Hills. 65.

Shott, MJ. and HT. Wright (1999) The Paleo-Indians: Michigan’s First People. In:

Retrieving Michigan’s Buried Past: The Archaeology of the Great Lakes State,
edited by J .R. Halsey. Cranbrook Institute Press. Bloomfield Hills. 59-70.

115

Smith, BA. (1996) Systems of Subsistence and Networks of Exchange in the Terminal
Woodland and Early Historic Periods in the Upper Great Lakes. Unpublished
Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Anthropology, Michigan State University.
East Lansing. 40-49.

Speth, J. (1972) Geology at the Schultz Site. In The Schultz Site at Green Point: A
Stratified Occupation Area in the Saginaw Valley of Michigan, edited by James
E. Fitting. Museum of Anthropology, University of Michigan, Memoir 4: 53-75.

Walden, HT. (1964) Familiar Freshwater Fishes of America. Harper & Row. New
York. 1-310.

Wilkinson, R.G. (1971) Prehistoric Biological Relationships in the Great Lakes

Region. Anthropological Papers No. 43. Museum of Anthropology, University
of Michigan. Ann Arbor. 1-19, 97-103.

116

l111111111111111