MUSEUM OF NEW MEXICO

OFFICE OF ARCHAEOLOGICAL STUDIES

ROSWELL RELIEF ROUTE: ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY OF CMEs AND FRONTAGE ROADS

Jeffrey L. Boyer

with contributions by

Regge N. Wiseman

Submitted by Yvonne R . Oakes, M.A. Principal Investigator

ARCHAEOLOGY NOTES 155

SANTA FE
[19961

NEW MEXICO

ADMINISTRATIVE SUMMARY

In January 1994, the Office of Archaeological Studies, Museum of New Mexico, conducted an archaeological survey of eight construction maintenance easement locations (CMEs) and two frontage road locations along the northwest Roswell Relief Route, Chaves County, New Mexico. The survey was conducted at the request of William L. Taylor, New Mexico State Highway and Transportation Department (NMSHTD). A total of 4.68 ha (1 1.57 acres) was surveyed during this project. Of this, 2.59 ha (6.41 acres) were included in the eight CMEs, and 2.09 ha (5.16 acres) were included in the two frontage roads. The CME locations are on private land adjacent to the relief route right-of-way. The south frontage road location is on land being acquired by NMSHTD from the city of Roswell. The north frontage road location is on land being acquired by NMSHTD from private sources.
No archaeological sites were recorded during this survey. Four isolated occurrences (10s) were found near the north end of the relief route. Two consisted of fragments of rusted sheet steel resembling corrugated roofing. One IO was a rectangular can. These three 1 0 s may have been associated with a nearby windmill-water tank-corral-shed complex, well outside project limits. The fourth IO was a pair of large, cast iron or steel objects of unknown function. The four isolated occurrences have no data potential beyond that already recovered. Preservation in placeis not necessary.
This report is submitted in fulfillment of Joint Powers Agreement DO3553 betweenthe Museum of New Mexico andthe New Mexico State Highway and Transportation Department. NMSHTD Project ST-(F)-023-2(202) MNM Project 41.439a (Roswell Relief Route)

ii

CONTENTS

.. Administrative Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 The Natural Environment. by Regge N . Wiseman . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 The Cultural Environment. by Regge N . Wiseman . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 Regional Culture History . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 Previous Archaeological Work in the Roswell Area . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 SurveyMethods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 Survey Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 Recommendations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 ReferencesCited . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 Appendix 1: Location of Isolated Occurrences (removed from copies for public distribution) .......................................................... 16 Figures
1. Project vicinity map . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 . Location of CMEs and frontage roads . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 . Isolated Occurrences 1 and 4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 . Location of isolated occurrences . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

3 4 11 17

Tables
1. CME and frontage road survey areas

................................

111

...

INTRODUCTION On January 18 and 19, 1994, the Office of Archaeological Studies (OAS), Museum of New Mexico, conducted an archaeological survey of eight construction maintenance easement locations (CMEs) and two frontage road locations along the northwest Roswell Relief Route, Chaves County, New Mexico (Figs. 1 and 2). Two other CMEs along the relief route were not inspected because theyhadbeenexamined during Wiseman's survey (1992), in whichhe recorded LA 68185 and rerecorded site LA 54347 in the vicinity of these CMEs (Table 1). The CME and frontage road survey was conducted at the request of William L. Taylor, New Mexico State Highway and Transportation Department (NMSHTD). Yvonne R. Oakes, OAS assistant director, acted as principal investigator. Jeffrey L. Boyeractedas project director andwas assisted in the field by Kelly Hoodenpyle. The northwest Roswell Relief Route runs along the northwest side of Roswell from the intersection of U.S. 70 and U.S. 285 north of Roswell to U.S. 70/380(2nd Street) on Roswell's west side. Wisetnan (1992:l-2) provides a list of legal descriptions of parcels crossed by the relief route, which is 12.2 km (7.6 miles) long and 61 m (200 ft) wide. Figure 2 shows the CME and frontage road locations inspected during this survey. Table 1 lists the legal descriptions and UTM locations of the CMEs and frontage roads. A total of 4.68 ha (11.57 acres) were surveyed during this project. Of this, 2.59 ha (6.41 acres) were included in the eight CMEs, and 2.09 ha (5.16 acres) were included in the two frontage roads. The CME locations are on private land adjacent to the relief route right-of-way. The south frontage road location is on land being acquired by NMSHTD from the city of Roswell. The north frontage road location is on land being acquired by NMSHTD from private sources.

Table 1. CME and Frontage road survey areas

Construction vlaintetlance Easements (CMEs)
CME

Dimensions
Hectares

wea
Acres

NMPM: TIOS, R23 E)

Scction 35
S W % ,SWM, SE 'k
Section 35 SWM. SWM, N E W

UTM
(1927NAD: Zone 13) 538570 E
3695030 N

2- I 2-2

46.9 x 15.2 m
153.9 x 50

0.07
0.01

0.18
0.01

fi

6.1 x 9.1 tn 20 x 30 R

538650 E 3695680 N 538650 E 3695830 N

2-3
3-1
3-2

76.2x 15.7, tn 250 x 50 ft

15.1 x 9.1 50 x 30 1 1
111

0.12
0.01

0.29

Sectinn 35
S W % , S W % ,NE%
Section 35

0.03

538640 E N W % , N W % , N E % 3696290 N
538660 E 3696s10 N

39.6 x 6.1 IT^ 130 x 20 ft

0.01

0.06

Scction 26 S W % ,S W % ,SEU

--,

3-3

53.3 x 6 1 m . 175 x 20 ft
45.7 x 12.2 tn 150 x 40 R
243.8 x 50.3 m 800 x 165 ft

0.03

0.08
0.14 3.03

Section 26 538700 E SW%, NW%, SE% 3696820 N Section 26 538750 E SE%, SW%, NE% 3697220 N North cnd: Section 13 SW%, SW%, NE% South end: Scction 13 NE%, NE%, SW% North end: Scction13 SWU, SWU, NE% South end: Scction13 N W U , NE%, S W % North end: Section 8 S E % ,S E % , NWW South end: Section 7 N E U , SEU, SWlk North end: 540220 E 3700560 N South end: 540010 E

3-4 5-1"

0.06
1.27

3700450 N
North end:
540290 E

5-2"

426.7 x 15.7, m 1400 x so n

0.65

1.61

3700500 N South end: 530920 E 3700220 N North end: 543380 E 3702360 N South end: 541750 E 3701520 N

7-3b

121.9 x 38.1 I n 400 x 125 R 593.1 x 30.5 m 1945.7 x 100 It

0.46

1.15

1 .SI

4.47

Tntnl nrcn nf PMFs

1.59

6.41

North cnd: Scction 35 N W % , NWlk, SE% South end: Scction 35 S E % ,SW%,SEN Southcast end: Scction 35 SEW, S W % ,SEW North end: Seclion 14 9 2 % . NEW, SE% South end: Section 14 S W % ,S E % , S E %

North cnd: 536660 E 3695630 N South end: 536660 E 3694860 N Southeast end: 536890 E 3694860 N North end: 539360 E 3700140 N South end: 538680 E 3699930 N

CMEs 5-1 and 5-7,were not inspec,ted during this survcy (see Wisetnan 1992). CME 7-3 and the north frontage road each consist ni"two different size parcels. The dimensions and areas of both parcels arc listcd hcre.

R.23 E.

R.24 E.

R.25 E.

T.9 S.

1.10s.

* T.11 S.

r.12~.

s 01 1.

THE NATURAL ENVIRONMENT Regge N. Wiseman The proposed Roswell Relief Route lies within the broad Pecos Valley. The predominant land form is low rolling hills and flat lands bordering Middle Berrendo Creek, South Berrendo Creek, and North Spring River. Elevations along the survey route average 2,000 m. The surface geology of the project area consists of mixed alluvial sediments deposited by the Pecos River and its tributaries. San Andres Limestone (Permian) outcrops in the low hills to the west and at the north end of the project (Dane and Bachman 1965). A distinctive gray chert, called San Andres chert, can be found eroding from the San Andres formation in many places near theproject.This material was frequently used to make tools by the prehistoric inhabitants of the region. Soils crossed by the project include the Reakor-Tencee association (deep loams and shallow gravelly loams over indurated caliche),the Reakor-Reeves association (deep loams), and the Bigetty-Dev-Pecos association (loams, cobbly loams, and silty clay loams) (Hodson et al. 1980). Beforeintensiveagricultural development in the late 18OOs, surface water inthe Roswell area was especially plentiful. Early pioneers described several spring-fed streams (North, Middle, and South Berrendo creeks and the North and South Spring rivers) full of crystal-clear water (Shinkle 1966). The prehistoric peoples also had the waters and resources of Rio Hondo, which drains the Sierra Blanca to the west; and the Pecos River, its source in the Sangre de Cristo range in north central New Mexico. The ready availability of water gave the Roswell area an oasis-like aspect, reflected in the prehistoric and early historic remains. The vegetation of the Roswell area prior to Euro-Americansettlement consisted of a gramadominated grassland. Trees were common only along the various watercourses (Shinkle 1966). The Roswell area had a variety and abundance of wildlife. Early pioneers described large herds of antelope, cottontails, jackrabbits, and an abundance of fish (Shinkle 1966). The Pecos River formed the western boundary of the range of the great bison herds that frequented the southern Great Plains, though small herds moved west of the river as well. The Pecos is also a minor migratory flyway. The Bitter Lakes Wildlife Refuge outside Roswell harbors migratory ducks, geese, and other species. Roswell's climate today is characterized by mild winters and hot summers. The mean January temperature is 3.3 degrees C; the mean July temperature is 25.9 degrees C; and the yearly mean is 14.7 degrees C. The average frost-free season is in excess of 200 days (Tuan et al. 1973). Precipitation takes place mostly in the summer. The mean annual precipitation is 295 mm, of which 210 mm fall between April and September (U.S. Department of Commerce 1965).

THE CULTURAL ENVIRONMENT

Regge N . Wiseman

The prehistoric occupation of the Roswell region is poorly known. Other than small contract surveys, few projects have been completed there. The area is peripheral to two major culture areas, the Plains to the east and theJornada Mogollon to the west; attempts at relating Roswell archaeological remains to one or the other often yield ambiguous results. Also, artifact collecting, which results in a loss of scientific information, has been a popular activity of Roswell residents over the past 100 years. Thus, the brief culture history that follows is based on work from surrounding regions, and its applicability to the Roswell area must be viewed as tentative. Sites in the immediate vicinity of Roswell reflect the oasis-like character of the area. Local natural resources are especially favorable to more intensive occupation and presumably greater population stability than in surrounding areas. It is not surprising, then, that a number of known and suspected sites with architecture are present and that they have the characterof sites left by the more sedentary Jornada Mogollon peoples to the west: substantial trash deposits, much pottery, pithouses, and pueblo-style dwellings. For this reason, Jane Kelley (1984) has tentatively included Roswell within the geographic reach of her Lincoln phase, fifteenth centuries. whichdates from thelatethirteenth,fourteenth,andperhapsearly Somewhat earlier remains (e.g., the Rocky Arroyo site, Wiseman 1985) also generally fit the Jornada Mogollon configuration and can be included with them. However, other sites with structures from the ceramic period, such as King Ranch (Wiseman 1981) and the Fox Place (Wiseman 1991), are enigmatic and currently unassignable to an existing culture chronology. These remains contrast with the extensive scatters of artifacts that are commonly found in the sand dune country east of the Pecos River and on the Sacramento Plain north, west, and south of Roswell (Stuart and Gauthier 1981). It is currently unclearhow these scatters relate to either the Jornada Mogollon or the Plains manifestations. Given their geographic location, they could have been occupied by peoples from either the Jornada-Mogollon or by huntergatherers bearing a Plains-like culture. Some progress is being made in determining their relationship (Speth 1983; Rocek and Speth 1986), but we are far from the last word on the matter. The following culture history outlineof southeastern New Mexico is distilled from a number of sources. Sources for the prehistoric period include Stuart Gauthier (1981), a and general study of New Mexico archaeology; Kelley (1 984), a more specific study of the Sierra Blanca region west of Roswell; Jelinek (1967), the Pecos River north of Roswell; Katz and Katz (1985a), the Pecos River south of Roswell; and Leslie (1979), east of the Pecos River and especially the southeastern corner of New Mexico. The primary references used for the historic 6

period are Katz and Katz (1985b) and Shinkle (1964). Human occupation of southeastern New Mexico began with theLlanocomplex ("Clovis Man") of the Paleoindian period, which dates to at least 13,000 years ago. These people and their successorsof the Folsom period hunted large mammals such as mammoths and now-extinct forms of bison and maintained a nomadic or seminomadic lifestyle. The retreat of the glaciers and resulting warming of the more southerly latitudes resulted in a shift in human adaptation to what archaeologists call the Archaic period. This adaptation was more eclectic and focused an smaller animals such as deer and rabbits. The appearance of grinding tools and specialized burned-rock features suggests a greater reliance on plant foods. Further south along the Pecos River, in the Carlsbad area, an Archaic sequence has been proposed that may pertain to the Roswell area (Katz and Katz 198Sa). It starts with the Middle Archaic, rather than the Early Archaic, suggesting that, at least along the river, there was an occupational hiatus between the Paleoindian and the Avalon phase (3000-1000 B.C.). Little is known about the peoples of the Avalon phase other than that they inhabited the floodplain near the river channel during at least part of the year, constructed hearths in the open, and consumed one or more species of freshwater shellfish. The subsistence orientation at these sites was clearly riverine. Projectile point styles, if any were used, are currently unknown. The culture of Late Archaic peoples of the succeeding phase, the McMillan (1000 B.C. to A.D. 1) is better known because more sites with more remains have been documented. These people built relatively small hearths (1-m diameter clusters of small rocks) and burnedrock rings. They subsisted on riverine and upland plant and animal species. Previously named projectile point styles associated with the McMillan include the Darland the Palmillas types. The terminal Archaic in the Carlsbad area, called the Brantley phase (A.D. 1 to 750), saw a continuation of the previous patterns and increased use of burned-rock rings. Although this suggests that certain upland resources such as agave and sotol were becoming more important in the diet, the ratio of riverine to upland sites remained the same, with the emphasis still on floodplain living. Projectile point types commonly associated with the Brantley phase include the previously known San Pedro style; a newly described provisional type, the Pecos Point; and several less standardized but nevertheless familiar styles of points commonly found in the region. From A.D. 750 to 1150 (Globe phase), at least in the Carlsbad region, occupationof the floodplain environment reached its zenith. Four major changes also occurred at this time. Brown ware ceramics, the bow and arrow, and a type of rock habitation structure (the stone circle or piledrock structure) appeared for the first time. In addition, the subsistence system changedfrom an emphasis on riverine species supplemented by upland foods to one are emphasizing upland species supplemented by riverinefoods.Projectilepointstyles dominated by the corner-notched arrow tips called Scallorn. In many ways, the Globe phase

appears to have been transitional between earlier and later adaptive patterns. After A.D. 1150, occupation along the river in the Carlsbad area diminished greatly. Those who remained in the area retained their essentially Archaic, hunter-gatherer lifestyle but continued to use pottery. Byway of contrast, prehistoric occupation in the Roswell area involved substantial villages with impressive accumulations of trash (termed, at least in part, the Lincoln phase by Kelley [1984]). Corn agriculture was clearly important to the diet, but hunting, fishing, and gathering of wild plant foods were still important. This occupation ended rather abruptly some time in the fifteenth century when the entire region was apparently abandoned, at least by sedentary peoples. What happened to these people is unknown. The period between the abandonment of southeastern New Mexico in the 1400s and 1500s is the coming of the peoples described by the early Spanish explorers in the late unknown. T is possible that nomadic use of the region continued during this time. From t Spanish contact until after the American Civil War, roaming Apache and other Plains tribes keptSpanish,Mexican, andEuro-American settlement of southeastern New Mexico in abeyance. Following the Civil War, mass westward movement of Americans and eastward drifting of small groups of New Mexico Hispanics led to settlement of the region. Roswell was founded about 1870. Artesian water was discovered in 1891, and its development promoted widespread irrigation and a rapid influx of people. The railroad reached Roswell in 1894, irretrievably setting the course for urbanization of the area. The town's economy, then as today, was based on agriculture and stockraising.

Previous Archaeological Work in the Roswell Area

Except for a number of small-scale contract projects associated with oil and gas exploration, archaeological investigations in the Roswell area have been few. Some of the more significant investigations include sample survey of the Abo Oil Field north of Roswell (Kemrer and Kearns 1984); testing of the Townsend site north of Roswell (Maxwell 1986); survey and excavation along the Middle Pecos River northeast of Roswell (Jelinek 1967); excavations at several sites in the Haystack Mountain area northeast of Roswell (Schermer 1980); excavation of the Garnsey Bison Kill andthe Garnsey Spring Campsite east of Roswell (Speth 1983; Parry and Speth 1984); excavation at Rocky Arroyo south of Roswell (Wiseman 1985); excavation at the Henderson site southwest of Roswell (Rocekand Speth 1986); excavation at Bloom Mound southwest of Roswell (Kelley 1984); survey of the Two Rivers Reservoir southwest of Roswell (Phillips et al. 1981); excavation of the Ontiberos Homestead west of Roswell (Oakes 1983); testing of 20 lithic artifact sites west of Roswell (Hannaford 198 1); and excavation of the Fox Place site at Roswell (Wiseman 1991).

SURVEY METHODS

Using a set of 1 in:100 f and 1 in:200 ft plan-and-profile sheets for the northwest relief t route, archaeologists followed the right-of-way centerline stakes from one CME or frontage road location to another. Each survey area was inspected in parallel transects 10 to 15 m apart. When cultural material was discovered, intensive reconnaissance the surrounding area was conducted of to determine its nature and extent. For management purposes, cultural material discovered during a survey is classified to ensure proper description and appropriate treatment. Normally, two classes of cultural material are recorded: archaeological sites and isolated occurrences (10s). A number of definitions for archaeological sites havebeen suggested. Generally, they emphasize minimumnumbers of surface artifacts, minimum artifact densities, or the presence of identifiable features. Behind the various definitions is the concept that a site contains cultural materialwith the potential to provide additional information beyond that recovered by recording its description and location. In contrast, an IO does not have this data potential. While previous surveys alongthereliefrouterecorded several sites (Nelson 1986; Wiseman 1992), only 10s were discovered during this survey. They were recorded on Isolated Occurrence forms but not collected. The 1 0 s are considered to have no data potential beyond that recovered during this survey. Their locations are shown in Appendix 1. Both the National Registc!r qj Historic P1ucc.s and the Stute Register o Cultural f Proparties havebeen consulted. No properties listedon either register, nor any properties currently under nomination to either register, lie within or adjacent to the project right-of-way.

SURVEY RESULTS
No archaeological sites were recorded during this survey. Four 1 0 s were found in and near CME 7-3 near the north end of the relief route (Appendix 1).
1 1 was a rectangular metal can, 9-75 in (24.76 cm) tall (Fig. 3). Its top and bottom 0 were square, 5.125 in (5 1/8 in; 13.02 cm) on a side. The can had lock-and-lap seams, Its opening was a small, circular pry-out lid, 1.125 in (1 1/8 in; 2.86 cm) in diameter, in the center

of the top. The contents, which were probably liquid, were apparently removed by punching a series of three or four small holes about .125 in (1/8 in; ,32 cm) in diameter, creating a slit in one corner of the top. A small hole .125 in (1/8 in; .32 cm) in diameter was punched in the opposite corner for an air vent. The ply-out lid was apparently not removed. Figure 3 shows the can's top, 10 1 was located on the north side of a large drainage canal, east of Montana Road.
IO 2 consisted of three fragments of rusted sheet steel. The fragments resemble corrugated roofing, but, while they were bent, they were not clearly corrugated. IO 2 was also located on the north side of the drainage canal, east of Montana Road.
1 0 3 was a large fragment of rusted sheet steel. Like IO 2, IO 3 resembled corrugated roofing but was not clearly corrugated. It was also on the north side of the drainage canal, east of Montana Road.

10s 1, 2, and 3 were found near each other. North of the project area, at the northeast corner of Section 7 and the northwest corner of Section 8, is a complex consisting of a windmill, a water tank, and the remains of corrals and small structures. It seems possible, given the general slope of the land and the locations of 10s 1, 2, and 3, that the 1 0 s were associated in some fashion with the structures and other features at the section corners.

IO 4 consisted of a pair of large, cast iron or steel objects of unknown function. Figure 3 shows one of the two objects. Each of the objects consisted of a pair of identical, semicircular halves. Each half was about 25 in (63.5 cm) long, 12.5 in (31.75 cm) deep, and 2 in (5.1 cm) thick. The two halves were bolted together at one end; bolt holes show that the other ends were bolted together at one time. When the halves were bolted together, open triangular spaces in the center of the long side of each half formed a square hole 5 in (12.7 cm) across. The bolt holding the two halves together was a 5/8 in ( I .59 cm) by 6 in (15.24 cm) bolt with a 1 in (2.54 cm) nut. IO 4 was located along the north side of the proposed drainage canal right-of-way (CME 7-3), west of Montana Road.

10

I s o l a t e dO c c u r r e n c e

c o n t e n t s of c o n

IO inches

Figure 3. Isolated Occurrences 1 and 4.

11

RECOMMENDATIONS

No archaeological sites were recorded during this survey. The four isolated occurrences have no data potential beyond that recovered through recording their locations and descriptions. Preservation in place is not necessary.

12

REFERENCES CITED Dane, Carle H., and George 0 . Bachman 1965 Geologic Map oj*NcwMoxico. U.S. Geological Survey, Washington, D.C. Hannaford, Charles A. 1981 The Roswell Sites: Archueological Surv~y and Testing o 24 Sites along U.S. 70 in f Chaves and Lincoln Counties, New Mcxico. Laboratory of Anthropology Notes 275. Museum of New Mexico. Santa Fe. Hodson, Max V., T. E. Calhoun, C. L. Chastain, L. W. Haecker, W. G. Henderson, and C. R. Seagraves 1980 Soil Survey oj'Chaves County, NPW Ml!xic.o,Southern Part. Soil Conservation Service, Bureau of Land Management, and New Mexico Agricultural Research Station, Santa Fe and Las Cruces. Jelinek, Arthur J. 1967 A Prehistoric Squence in thc M d l Pecos Valley, New Mexico. Anthropological ide Papers of the Museum of Anthropology No. 3 1. University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. Katz, Susana R., and Paul Katz 198Sa n e Prc.histoty qftho Curl*shudBasin, Southeastern New Mc?xico: Technical Report o f Pwhistonc Archaco10gic:ul Inv(>stigutions the Brantlcy Project Locality. Bureau of in Reclamation, Southwest Regional Office, Amarillo, Texas.

1985b

The History qf thc) Carlshud Busin, Southustern New Muico: Technical Report o f Historic Archueological Investigations in the Brantley Project Locality. Bureau of Reclamation, Southwest Regional Office, Amarillo, Texas.

Kelley, Jane H. 1984 The Archaeology cf the Siorru Blunl:u Region of Southeastern New Mexico. Anthropological Papers of the Museum of Anthropology No. 74. University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. Kemrer, Meade F., and Timothy M. Kearns 1984 An Archaeological Kmm-c-h Design Project Jbr the Abo Oil und Gus Field, Southeustom NPWMexico. Repor&submitted to the Roswell District Office of the Bureau of Land Management by Chambers Consultants and Planners, Albuquerque. Leslie, Robert A. 1979 The Eastern Jornada Mogollon, Extreme Southeastern New Mexico. In Jomada Mogollon Archuoology: Proredings of'thp First Jornada Confercnce, edited by P. H. Beckettand R. N. Wiseman, pp. 179-199. Cultural Resource Management Division, New Mexico State University, Las Cruces, and the Historic Preservation Bureau, Department of Finance and Administration, Santa Fe. 13

Maxwell, Timothy D. 1986 Archueologicul Test Exruvutions ut thp Townsend Site(LA 341501, Chaves County, Ncw Mcxico. Laboratory of Anthropology Notes 344. Museum of New Mexico, Santa Fe . Nelson, Norman B. 1986 An Arrhucdogicul Survey qf Two NW Roswell Relilif Routes, NMSHTD Project ST-F023-2(202). New Mexico State Highway Department Report No. 86-52. Santa Fe.
Oakes, Yvonne R . 1983 The Ontiberos Site: A Hisp.mil. Hornmaid Neur Roswell, New Mexico. Laboratory of Anthropology Notes 31 1. Museum of New Mexico, Santa Fe.

Parry, William J., and John D. Speth 1984 The Gurnsey Spring Curnpsito: Luto Prehistoric Occupution in Southeastern New Mexico. Museum of Anthropology Technical Reports No. 15. University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. Phillips, David A . , Jr., Philip A. Bandy, and Karen Scholz 1981 Intensivp Survey of Two Rivcrs Dum und Reservoir Project, Chuves County, New Mexico. Report of Investigations No. 60. New World Research, Tucson. Rocek, Thomas R., and John D. Speth 1986 The Henderson Sire Burials: Glimpsos o j u Lute Prehistoric Population in the Pecos Vallljy. Museum of Anthropology Technical Reports No. 18. University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. Schermer, Scott C. (ed.) 1980 Report on the Mitigation o Archueologicul Sites in the Proposed Haystack Mountain f ORV Areu. Agency for Conservation Archaeology, Eastern New Mexico University, Portales. Shinkle, James D. 1964 Ff?y Yc.ur.s o Roswdl History, 1867-19/7. Hall-Poorebaugh Press, Roswell. f
1966

Rcminisccvnces of Roswell Pionwrs. Hall-Poorebaugh Press, Roswell.

Speth, John D. 1983 Bison Kills und Bone Counts: Dtcision Muking by Ancient Hunters. University of Chicago Press.
Stuart, David E., and Rory P. Gauthier Prcjhistoric NCJW Mcm?o: Bur.k#round ji)r Survey. Historic Preservation Bureau, 198 1 Department of Finance and Administration, Santa Fe.

14

Tuan, Yi-Fu, C. E. Everard, J . G. Widdison, and I . Bennett 1973 Climute o New Mexico. Rev. ed. NewMexico State Planning Office, Santa Fe. f

U.S. Department of Commerce, Weather Bureau 1965 Climatic Summary of the United States Supplement for 1951 through 1960: New Mexico. In Climutography ofthe United Stutes No. 86-25. Washington, D.C.
Wiseman, Regge N. 1985 Bison, Fish, and Sedentary Occupation: Startling Data from Rocky Arroyo (LA 25277), Chaves County, New Mexico. In Views o the Jornada Mogollon, edited by f Colleen M. Beck, pp. 30-32. Contributions in Anthropology 12. Eastern New Mexico University, Portales. 1991
The Fox Place and Roswell Country Prohistory: A Preliminury Report. Paper presented at the 7th Jornada Conference, October 1 9 9 1 , in El Paso, Texas, and Ciudad Juarez, Chihuahua, Mexico.

1992

The Roswell Relifl Route P r o j w t , Phasc. 2: Asscwmant und Dum Recovery Plan for Six Prc.historic und Historic Sites, Roswdl, NPW Mexico. ArchaeologyNotes 94. Museum of New Mexico, Santa Fe.