Search

In compliance with Section 106 of the NHPA, the Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation), Phoenix Area Office (PXAO) began cultural resource surveys along the Central Arizona Project (CAP) main stem alignment shortly after the CAP was authorized. For the next 25 years, various cultural resource management contractors conducted inventories of the CAP, recording several hundred archaeological sites. From the 1970s to the 1980s, some of these sites were tested and/or excavated as mitigation for the construction of the CAP main stem canal. While many sites were determined eligible or not eligible for the National Register of Historic Places (Register), some did not receive eligibility determinations and some were located outside of the construction corridor and not affected by construction activities. The legacy survey data and site records from these various investigations have a number of errors and are sometimes contradictory. In an effort to better manage cultural resources on Reclamation land, PXAO has developed an archaeological site database for the CAP canal. The database was developed using all the previous main stem survey data; however, the Register eligibility status of the majority of these sites was unknown following completion of the CAP. Additionally, an unknown number of sites were either destroyed by construction or excavation, while others are no longer within Reclamation’s CAP ROW. It is necessary that the database accurately reflects the current Register eligibility status of all archaeological sites within the CAP ROW to ensure that PXAO can effectively manage these sites. To this end, PXAO has been updating its database and conducted consultation with the Arizona State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) in 2015, seeking to resolve the eligibility status of sites within the CAP ROW. Following this consultation, the SHPO and PXAO agreed that based on the assessment data provided, further work was required on 117 sites along the Fannin-McFarland and Tucson Aqueducts. For 24 sites determined eligible for the Register, the maps from the original surveys were insufficient. For another 93 sites, the data provided was insufficient to determine whether a site was eligible or ineligible for inclusion in the Register. During ACS’ efforts to relocate 117 previously recorded sites along the Fannin-McFarland and Tucson Aqueducts, eligibility for 10 sites could not be determined and so eligibility testing was conducted at these 10 sites to determine Register eligibility or the extent to which subsurface deposits are likely present with the CAP ROW. Following this work, additional survey was conducted in selected portions of the CAP corridor to try and relocate 15 sites that could not be found due to destruction or misplotting. This file is the log of photographs taken during this project.

In compliance with Section 106 of the NHPA, the Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation), Phoenix Area Office (PXAO) began cultural resource surveys along the Central Arizona Project (CAP) main stem alignment shortly after the CAP was authorized. For the next 25 years, various cultural resource management contractors conducted inventories of the CAP, recording several hundred archaeological sites. From the 1970s to the 1980s, some of these sites were tested and/or excavated as mitigation for the construction of the CAP main stem canal. While many sites were determined eligible or not eligible for the National Register of Historic Places (Register), some did not receive eligibility determinations and some were located outside of the construction corridor and not affected by construction activities. The legacy survey data and site records from these various investigations have a number of errors and are sometimes contradictory. In an effort to better manage cultural resources on Reclamation land, PXAO has developed an archaeological site database for the CAP canal. The database was developed using all the previous main stem survey data; however, the Register eligibility status of the majority of these sites was unknown following completion of the CAP. Additionally, an unknown number of sites were either destroyed by construction or excavation, while others are no longer within Reclamation’s CAP ROW. It is necessary that the database accurately reflects the current Register eligibility status of all archaeological sites within the CAP ROW to ensure that PXAO can effectively manage these sites. To this end, PXAO has been updating its database and conducted consultation with the Arizona State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) in 2015, seeking to resolve the eligibility status of sites within the CAP ROW. Following this consultation, the SHPO and PXAO agreed that based on the assessment data provided, further work was required on 117 sites along the Fannin-McFarland and Tucson Aqueducts. For 24 sites determined eligible for the Register, the maps from the original surveys were insufficient. For another 93 sites, the data provided was insufficient to determine whether a site was eligible or ineligible for inclusion in the Register.

In an effort to better manage cultural resources on Reclamation land, PXAO has developed an archaeological site database for the CAP canal. The database was developed using all the previous main stem survey data; however, the Register eligibility status of the majority of these sites was unknown following completion of the CAP. Additionally, an unknown number of sites were either destroyed by construction or excavation, while others are no longer within Reclamation’s CAP right-of-way (ROW). PXAO has been updating its database and conducted consultation with the Arizona State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) in 2015, seeking to resolve the eligibility status of sites within the CAP ROW. Following this consultation, the SHPO and PXAO agreed that based on the assessment data provided, further work was required on 117 sites along the Fannin-McFarland and Tucson Aqueducts. ACS revisited the 117 sites in 2016. Eligibility for 27 sites could not be evaluated. This group includes sites that could not be relocated within the CAP ROW due to misplotting, destruction in the ROW, or were found outside the ROW. This group also includes three sites whose components within the ROW are not contributing to the site’s eligibility. Ten of the 27 sites that could not be evaluated for eligibility based on their surface manifestations are recommended for testing. Eligibility testing is recommended for these 10 sites and this document presents a Plan for eligibility testing.

ACS conducted testing at 10 sites within Reclamation’s CAP ROW seeking to resolve the National Register of Historic Places (Register) eligibility status of sites within the CAP ROW. This document presents the results of that testing.

In February 2017, Archaeological Consulting Services, Ltd. (ACS) conducted a site relocation effort (Mitchell et al. 2017) of 117 sites that had not been evaluated for eligibility to the National Register of Historic Places (Register). Fifteen sites were not relocated at the plotted site location or within 200 meters around the site boundary within the Central Arizona Project (CAP) ROW. It was decided that additional survey would be beneficial to determine if these sites were misplotted and could be located by additional survey in their general locations. Survey was conducted around and between sites AZ U:10:5(ASM), AZ AA:3:24(ASM), AZ AA:3:47(ASM), AZ AA:3:62(ASM), AZ AA:3:63(ASM), AZ AA:11:29(ASM), AZ AA:12:125(ASM), AZ AA:12:353(ASM), AZ AA:12:354(ASM), AZ AA:12:355(ASM), AZ AA:12:453(ASM), AZ AA:12:579(ASM), AZ AA:12:624(ASM), AZ AA:16:158(ASM), and NA 18009. Additional survey was also conducted to examine other areas not surveyed since the 1960s and 1970s.