Faunal Remains
by Jonathan C. Driver
Introduction
1
                        The analysis of the Woods Canyon Pueblo fauna is part of a larger
                        project on faunas from archaeological sites in the northern San Juan region.
                        Previous and current work in the region includes a study of domestic turkey
                        (Munro 1994*1); analysis of animal
                        bone from Sand Canyon Pueblo (Muir 1999*2),
                        Castle Rock Pueblo (Driver 2000*1),
                        and a dozen small Pueblo III sites in the Sand Canyon locality (Driver
                            1996*1, 1997*1; Driver
                            et al. 1999*1; Muir 1999*2);
                        and a general overview of spatial and temporal variation (Driver
                            2002*1). The Woods Canyon sample is of interest because the site is
                        located in an area with one of the densest concentrations of Pueblo III
                        sites in the region (Varien 1999*1)
                        and therefore allows for comparisons between this site and numerous surrounding
                        sites.
2
                        Many of the publications cited above discuss the methodological
                        problems inherent in any zooarchaeological analysis conducted in this
                        particular region. Therefore, this report does not discuss the characteristics
                        of individual taxa, recording methods, or taphonomy. The emphasis instead
                        is on intrasite and intersite variation.
Methods and Results
3
                        Specimens were identified and described by the author and research
                        assistants using a standardized recording system (see Driver
                            et al. 1999*1). We analyzed all faunal specimens, except those identified
                        as human, and they included specimens that had been modified as artifacts
                        (for example, awls and tubes). Each specimen was described on a separate
                        line in the database. In addition to recording provenience information,
                        analysts described each specimen in terms of taxon, skeletal element and
                        portion, length, and modification (including breakage, burning, and cut
                        marks). Few specimens were identified to the level of species, but about
                        half could be considered "identifiable" to some extent. The complete
                            database is available on Crow Canyon's Web site. The number of identified
                        specimens is presented, by taxon, in Table
                            1. I did not calculate values for minimum numbers of individuals,
                        although this could be done using the information in the database.
4
                        The animals represented in Table 1 either can be found today within
                        a few kilometers of the site or could have been found until the introduction
                        of modern agricultural practices. The taxa identified at Woods Canyon
                        are normally found in any assemblage of comparable size in the region.
                        As is common in Pueblo III assemblages, the Woods Canyon sample is dominated
                        by turkey and lagomorphs (cottontail and jackrabbit). When compared with
                        assemblages from other sites in the region, the Woods Canyon sample has
                        relatively few rodents, especially those in the squirrel family, Sciuridae,
                        which includes both prairie dogs and various species of ground squirrel.
Intrasite Analysis
5
                        The intrasite analysis was driven by two main questions:
- If different areas of the site were used at different times, is there evidence of change in faunal use through time, perhaps similar to that described for the nearby Sand Canyon locality (Driver et al. 1999*1; Muir 1999*2)?
 - Are there differences among faunal assemblages associated with different types of structures, such as those between domestic and public architecture described by Muir (1999*2) at Sand Canyon Pueblo?
 
6
                        The site was divided into four spatial zones, or sections, by the
                        archaeologiststhe canyon bottom, the upper west side, the east talus
                        slope, and the canyon rim (see "Architecture
                            and Site Layout"). Of these, the canyon bottom is thought to have
                        been occupied earliest and longest. The rim complex, on the canyon rim,
                        was occupied latest, and it might include more public architecture (in
                        the form of towers and a D-shaped structure) than is present in other
                        parts of the site. Table 2 compares
                        three major categories of animals from these four main subdivisions of
                        the site. "All lagomorph" includes specimens that were identified as either
                        cottontail rabbit (Sylvilagus) or jackrabbit (Lepus),
                        or simply as "lagomorph" (usually broken bones or bones of immature animals
                        that could not be assigned confidently to either genus). For reasons described
                        elsewhere (Driver et al. 1999*1),
                        all specimens identified as "large bird" are assumed to be from turkey
                        (Meleagris gallopavo), and these are combined into a single category
                        (turkey/large bird) for analysis. The third category, "artiodactyls,"
                        includes any specimens from even-toed ungulates such as deer, sheep, or
                        pronghorn antelope. In the assemblage from Woods Canyon Pueblo, only four
                        such specimens were identified, and none could be assigned to a genus.
7
                        Table 2 reports the combined
                        totals from structures and nonstructures (areas outside buildings that
                        probably include midden material) for each of the four main sections of
                        the site. The bulk of the assemblage was excavated from the canyon bottom
                        and the upper west side. There is little difference in the collections
                        from these areas, both of which are dominated numerically by the turkey/large
                        bird category. Of the two much smaller assemblages, that from the rim
                        complex is very similar to those from the upper west side and canyon bottom,
                        and the very small sample from the east talus slope has somewhat less
                        turkey/large bird. However, given the variation in sample size, there
                        is little reason to think that differences among the various sections
                        of the site are significant.
8
                        Table 2 also shows the relative
                        frequency of taxa from structures and nonstructures. Looking at the two
                        largest assemblages (canyon bottom and upper west side), one can see that
                        the dominance of the turkey/large bird category is more marked in middens,
                        whereas lagomorphs increase in relative importance within structures.
                        This pattern has been observed consistently at sites in the region, and
                        possible explanations have been explored elsewhere (Driver
                            2000*1; Driver et al. 1999*1).
                        One hypothesis is that lagomorphs (especially cottontails) may have been
                        attracted to abandoned and collapsed masonry structures and that postoccupational
                        natural deaths account for some lagomorph bones in structures. An alternative
                        explanation is that human behavior favored the deposition of lagomorph
                        bones in rooms, perhaps because rabbits were stored or processed there.
Intersite Analysis
9
                        In previous studies, I and others have investigated patterns of
                        faunal representation within much of the northern San Juan region (Driver
                            2002*1), as well as on a much smaller scale, within the Sand Canyon
                        locality (Driver 1996*1, 1997*1;
                        Muir 1999*2). In this analysis,
                        I consider an area of intermediate size where Woods Canyon Pueblo is located.
                        This area is defined by the triangle formed by the modern communities
                        of Montezuma Creek, Utah; Dove Creek, Colorado; and Cortez, Colorado;
                        it is in the center of the area that has been referred to as the "central
                        Mesa Verde region" (Varien 2000*1:Figure
                        1). It is a plateau dissected by canyons, and during Pueblo III times
                        it supported a relatively dense concentration of large and small settlements
                        (Varien 1999*1; Varien
                            et al. 2000*1).
10
                        In the Southwest, it is common for zooarchaeologists to study intersite
                        variability by examining relative frequencies of the lagomorphs (sometimes
                        combined and sometimes as separate taxa), turkey, and artiodactyls. Table
                            3 presents these data for assemblages in the study area that have
                        at least 200 specimens of "lagomorphs" and "turkey/large bird" combined.
                        Only sites with "pure" Pueblo III assemblages have been included, resulting
                        in the exclusion of sites where some mixing may have occurred. One must
                        contend with a variety of problems when comparing assemblages reported
                        by different analysts; the most serious is probably that different analysts
                        have different criteria for identifying specimens (Driver
                            1992*1). Intersite comparison therefore must be approached with some
                        caution.
11
                        In Table 3, sites are
                        arranged in order of the relative frequency of "lagomorphs" and "turkey/large
                        bird." The sample is not distributed evenly across the study area, and
                        there is a preponderance of assemblages from the Sand Canyon locality.
                        It is evident that all the assemblages that my students or I analyzed
                        form a group in the middle of Table 3 (from Woods Canyon Pueblo to Kenzie
                        Dawn). Green Lizard, however, is also in the middle of the table, and
                        although it is located in Sand Canyon, it was studied by Walker
                            (1990*2), who did not use the same recording system. Thus, the clumping
                        of sites that were studied using the same methods is not necessarily a
                        product of the recording system.
12
                        Perhaps the most striking feature of the assemblages is the great
                        range of relative values for "lagomorphs" and "turkey/large bird." For
                        example, turkey dominates the Pueblo III faunal assemblage from Nancy
                        Patterson Village, located in Montezuma Canyon to the west, whereas lagomorphs
                        outnumber turkey at Wallace Ruin to the southeast. Interestingly, there
                        appears to be some sort of relationship between the ratio of lagomorphs
                        to turkey/large bird and the percentage of artiodactyls in the assemblage.
                        All the assemblages in which turkey/large bird makes up at least two-thirds
                        of the combined lagomorph, artiodactyl, and turkey/large bird total have
                        only 1 percent or less of artiodactyl specimens. In assemblages with greater
                        relative frequencies of lagomorphs, artiodactyls become somewhat more
                        common. I should note, however, that all Pueblo III sites in the study
                        area have low artiodactyl values when compared with earlier sites and
                        when compared with Pueblo III sites on Mesa Verde (Driver
                            2002*1). Thus it appears that sites that emphasized the domestic production
                        of turkey over the hunting of lagomorphs were also the least likely to
                        be involved in hunting large game.
13
                        The site where artiodactyl hunting has been investigated most thoroughly
                        is Sand Canyon Pueblo (Muir 1999*2).
                        Muir's analysis of the faunal assemblage demonstrated that the higher
                        frequency of artiodactyls (mainly deer) was not characteristic of all
                        deposits at the site. In fact, assemblages associated with domestic structures
                        and middens were similar in composition to assemblages from nearby sites
                        where there was little evidence of deer hunting. At Sand Canyon Pueblo,
                        artiodactyls were most commonly associated with architecture (notably
                        towers) that did not resemble domestic structures. Muir argued that the
                        structures were associated with ritual organization and that hunting of
                        artiodactyls was undertaken by particular groups of people within the
                        pueblo. The conclusion drawn by Muir is more specific than my earlier
                        argument that the increase in deer hunting at Sand Canyon Pueblo was the
                        result of a larger population using its political power to exclude small
                        settlements from its hunting territory (Driver
                            1996*1). Although this might have been the case, Muir's analysis demonstrates
                        the likely mechanism whereby this was achieved and also raises the possibility
                        that influential groups within Sand Canyon Pueblo might have had better
                        access to artiodactyl meat.
14
                        Hurth's (1986*1) analysis of a small
                        domestic settlement in the Yellow Jacket complex (Site 5MT3) yielded results
                        consistent with what has been documented for many other Pueblo III sites.
                        However, preliminary data from the Crow Canyon Archaeological Center's
                        recent excavations at Yellow Jacket Pueblo (Site 5MT5) indicate that more
                        artiodactyl bones were found in association with towers and D-shaped structures
                        and that the overall Pueblo III assemblage from this site is similar to
                        that from Sand Canyon Pueblo (see Table
                            3). This contrasts with Woods Canyon and Castle Rock pueblos (Driver
                            2000*1), which seem to have been community centers (Varien
                            1999*1:Figure 7.5). Neither of those sites, however, has artiodactyl
                        values approaching those of Sand Canyon and Yellow Jacket pueblos, and
                        the few artiodactyl remains at Woods Canyon and Castle Rock pueblos are
                        not associated with particular types of structures. There appears to be
                        a size threshold in the central Mesa Verde region, with only the very
                        largest sites displaying evidence for more than occasional hunting of
                        artiodactyls in Pueblo III times.
Conclusions
15
                        Analysis of the faunal assemblage from Woods Canyon Pueblo reveals
                        that the inhabitants of the village relied on domestic turkey and hunted
                        or trapped lagomorphs for their supply of animal protein and fat. When
                        compared with other sites in the same area, Woods Canyon is notable for
                        a relatively high ratio of turkey to lagomorphs and a low overall frequency
                        of artiodactyls. Intrasite analysis indicates no significant differences
                        among the four sections of the site, suggesting that neither temporal
                        change nor differences in the use of space had much effect on faunal assemblages.
                        Although Woods Canyon Pueblo was a relatively large site and might have
                        functioned as a community center, its faunal assemblage is not distinctively
                        different from the faunas of smaller sites in the region. Faunal data
                        for the two largest pueblos in the central Mesa Verde region suggest that
                        only the very largest sites have faunal assemblages that display significant
                        intrasite variation. These large sites are also notable for the increased
                        quantities of artiodactyls in their faunal assemblages.
Copyright © 2002 by Crow Canyon Archaeological Center. All rights reserved.
								
								DONATE TODAY
							