20231521 Ver 1_HB-0002 - Haywood County - Archaeology Effects Required (2022)_20231108

Project Tracking No.:
F21-05-0006
o
�f
ARCHAEOLOGICAL EFFECTS REQUIRED
This form only pertains to ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES for this project.
`p
c.,
It is not valid for Historic Architecture and Landscapes. You must consult
separately with the Historic Architecture and Landscapes Team.
PROJECT INFORMATION
Project No.
WBS No:
F.A. No:
HB-0002
49622.1.1
Federal Permit Required?
County: Haywood
Document: Federal CE
Funding: ❑ State ❑ Federal
❑Yes ❑No Permit Type: NWP 3 / NWP 14
Project Description:
Replace Bridges 248 and 249 on I-40 over SR 1613 (Beaverdam Road) in Haywood County,
North Carolina.
SUMMARY OF ARCHAEOLOGICAL FINDINGS, RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS
TRC conducted an intensive archaeological survey and evaluation for the proposed replacement
of Bridges 248 and 249 on I-40 over SR 1613 (Beaverdam Road) in Haywood County, North
Carolina (TIP HB-0002, PA 21-05-0006). The APE for the Project encompasses approximately
57.01 acres along the north and south sides of I-40 east and west of Beaverdam Road (SR 1613),
and measures approximately 3,265 feet (997 m) east -west and from 435 to 1,589 feet (133 to 485
m) north -south. There are no federal- or state-owned lands (apart from the existing NCDOT rights -
of -way) within the APE.
An updated review of site and report files at the OSA indicated that there has been no prior
systematic survey within the Project APE. There is one previously identified site (31 HW271)
within the APE, however, as well as others in close proximity or in the general vicinity. The
fieldwork included systematic pedestrian reconnaissance of the entire APE (minus those properties
for which a landowner denied access, see below) and systematic shovel testing at 15-m intervals
of all areas except for wetlands and areas showing visible and severe disturbance. A total of 358
shovel tests and four 1 X 1 m test units were excavated.
The fieldwork identified one previously recorded archaeological site (31 HW271) and four newly
recorded sites (31HW668-31HW671). Four of those sites contain precontact components,
including one (31 HW271) dating from the Late Archaic through the Early Mississippian periods
and one (31 HW668) containing a nondiagnostic precontact ceramic sherd; the other two precontact
sites (31 HW670 and 31 HW671) are represented only by nondiagnostic lithic components. Three
sites contain postcontact components, including one (31HW669) representing a late 19th through
20th century occupation; 20th century artifacts were also recovered on two predominantly
precontact sites (31 HW271 and 31 HW670).
Site 31 HW271 is a large, multi -component precontact lithic and ceramic scatter located across a
terrace that also contains an existing farm. Late Archaic, Middle Woodland, and Early
Mississippian components were recognized, and other precontact occupations may also be present;
there is also a low -density 20th century component associated with the farm. Although most
2020 PROGRAMMATIC AGREEMENT ARCHAEOLOGY TEAM "ARCHAEOLOGICAL EFFECTS REQUIRED" FORM
1 of2

Project Tracking No.:
F1-05-0006
materials were confined to the plowzone, a buried A horizon is also present in some areas, and
three potential cultural features were identified in shovel tests and test units. This site is
recommended eligible for the NRHP under Criterion D due to its potential to provide information
on regional Woodland and Mississippian period occupations, but appears to lack the characteristics
necessary for eligibility under Criteria A—C. Preservation in place does not appear to be required,
and archaeological data recovery excavations would be an appropriate mitigation strategy if this
site cannot be avoided by construction. Information on a proposed data recovery strategy is
provided in Appendix 2.
The remaining four sites (31HW668-31HW671) appear to lack research potential and are
recommended not eligible for the NRHP under Criterion D as defined within the Project APE; the
sites also appear to lack the characteristics needed for eligibility under Criteria A—C. Only one of
those sites (31HW670) is totally contained within the APE, however, and additional delineation
and evaluation of sites 31HW668, 31HW669, and 31HW671 are recommended should the APE
be expanded at those locations.
Finally, much of the southeast quadrant of the project APE (between Beaverdam Road and I-40)
east of Beaverdam Creek was not surveyed due to lack of landowner permission. While most of
this property is disturbed and contains substantial fill deposits, additional survey of a small section
of the floodplain adjacent to Beaverdam Creek is recommended if that area cannot be avoided by
construction.
(This project falls within a North Carolina County in which the following federally recognized
tribes have expressed an interest: Catawba Indian Nation, Cherokee Nation, Eastern Band of
Cherokee Indians, United Keetoowah Band of Cherokee Indians, and the Muscogee (Creek)
Nation. We recommend that you ensure that this documentation is forwarded to these tribes using
the process described in the current NCDOT Tribal Protocol and PA Procedures Manual.)
SUPPORT DOCUMENTATION
See attached: ❑ Map(s)
Other:
SIGNED:
❑ Previous Survey Info ❑ Photos ❑Correspondence
Scott Halvorsen -`�7 7/7/2022
NCDOT ARCHAEOLOGIST
Date
2020 PROGRAMMATIC AGREEMENT ARCHAEOLOGY TEAM "ARCHAEOLOGICAL EFFECTS REQUIRED" FORM
2 of

,ox
�� TrR C
INTENSIVE ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY AND EVALUATION
FOR REPLACEMENT OF BRIDGES 248 AND 249 ON I-40
OVER SR 1613 (BEAVERDAM ROAD),
HAYWOOD COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
NCDOT PA 21-05-0006
TIP HB-0002
TRC ENVIRONMENTAL CORPORATION
June 2022

INTENSIVE ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY AND EVALUATION
FOR REPLACEMENT OF BRIDGES 248 AND 249 ON I-40
OVER SR 1613 (BEAVERDAM ROAD),
HAYWOOD COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
NCDOT PA 21-05-0006
TIP HB-0002
Submitted to:
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
HUMAN ENVIRONMENT SECTION
1598 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1598
Un
TRC ENVIRONMENTAL CORPORATION
705 Dogwood Road
Asheville, North Carolina 28806
Authored by:
Michael Nelson
June 2022

This page intentionally left blank.

CONTENTS
FIGURES...................................................................................................................................................... ii
TABLES...................................................................................................................................................... iv
INTRODUCTION........................................................................................................................................ I
BACKGROUNDRESEARCH.....................................................................................................................4
Previous Archaeological Surveys and Previously Identified Sites.....................................................4
Structures............................................................................................................................................5
Cemeteries........................................................................................................................................... 5
HistoricalMap Review....................................................................................................................... 5
Soils...................................................................................................................................................12
FIELDWORKRESULTS...........................................................................................................................12
31HW271..........................................................................................................................................18
31HW668.......................................................................................................................................... 33
31HW669.......................................................................................................................................... 36
31 HW670.......................................................................................................................................... 41
31HW671..........................................................................................................................................44
UnsurveyedAreas............................................................................................................................. 47
SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS.............................................................................................47
REFERENCESCITED...............................................................................................................................49
APPENDIX 1: Artifact Catalogs
APPENDIX 2: Data Recovery Plan for 31HW271
n

1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10
11
12
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
24.
25.
26.
27.
28.
29.
30.
31
32.
33.
34.
35.
36.
37.
38.
39.
40.
41.
FIGURES
Location of Bridges 248 and 249 APE for archaeology in southwestern North Carolina .................. 2
Location of Bridges 248 and 249 APE for archaeology in Haywood County ....................................
3
Location of Bridges 248 and 249 APE as shown on the 1894 Asheville USGS 1:125,000-scale
topographicmap..................................................................................................................................
6
Location of Bridges 248 and 249 APE as shown on the 1905 Waynesville and its Vicinity within
Radius Twenty-five Miles map............................................................................................................
7
Location of Bridges 248 and 249 APE as shown on the 1922 Haywood County soils map ...............
8
Location of Bridges 248 and 249 APE as shown on the 1935 Canton USGS 1:24,000-scale
planimetricmap...................................................................................................................................
9
Location of Bridges 248 and 249 APE as shown on the 1940 Haywood County soils map.............10
Location of Bridges 248 and 249 APE as shown on the 1967 Canton USGS 1:24,000-scale
topographicmap................................................................................................................................
I I
Large open field in the northeast quadrant of the APE from Wild Rose Lane (small graveled
residentialdrive), facing west..........................................................................................................13
Fill deposits along Freedom Drive north of I-40, facing southeast..................................................13
Shovel testing along open yard at the intersection of Beaverdam Road and North Canton Road,
facingsoutheast.................................................................................................................................14
Hydric areas in open fields on International Paper property on south side of I-40 south of
SilkwoodDrive, facing east..............................................................................................................14
Locations of 31HW271 and 31HW668-31HW671 within the Bridges 248 and 249 APE ..............16
Shovel tests, archaeological sites, and unsurveyed areas within the Bridges 248 and 249 APE ......17
Mapof 311-IW271.............................................................................................................................19
Site 31HW271 from corner of Freedom and Beaverdam roads, facing north ..................................
20
Northern end of 31HW271, facing northeast....................................................................................20
Distribution of lithic artifacts from shovel tests at 31HW271..........................................................
21
Distribution of precontact ceramic sherds from shovel tests at 31HW271.......................................
22
Test Unit 1 at site 31HW271, west profile drawing..........................................................................24
Test Unit 1 at site 31HW271, west profile........................................................................................
24
Test Units 2 and 4 at site 3IHW271, north profile drawing.............................................................25
Test Units 2 and 4 at site 31HW271, north profile...........................................................................25
Test Unit 3 at site 31HW271, west profile drawing..........................................................................
26
Test Unit 3 at site 31HW271, west profile........................................................................................
26
Test Unit 2 base of Level 1 plan view, showing Feature 3 and Shovel Test 237..............................28
Feature 3 profile in Test Unit 2 at 31HW271....................................................................................
28
Feature 4 as exposed in profile and plan in Test Units 2 and 4 at 31HW271...................................29
Representative precontact ceramic sherds from 31HW271..............................................................30
Representative precontact lithic artifacts from 31HW271................................................................
31
Map of 31HW668 and 31HW669.....................................................................................................
34
Site 31HW668 (pink flag in foreground), facing northwest.............................................................
35
ShovelTest 83 at 31HW668.............................................................................................................
35
Residual ceramic sherd from Shovel Test 83 at 31HW668..............................................................
36
South-central end of site 31HW669 within residential yard, facing south ........................................
37
Shovel Test 106 at 31HW669...........................................................................................................
37
Representative historic artifacts from 31HW669..............................................................................39
Mapof 311-IW670.............................................................................................................................42
East -central portion of 31HW670 (pink flags), facing north............................................................43
Shovel Test 149 at 31HW670...........................................................................................................43
Mapof 31HW671.............................................................................................................................45
11

42. Site 31HW671 (pink flag in foreground), facing west......................................................................46
43. Shovel Test 339 at 31HW671...........................................................................................................46
III

TABLES
1. Summary of Archaeological Sites Identified within the Bridges 248 and 249 APE...........................1
2. Previously Recorded Sites within or within One Mile of the Bridges 248 and 249 APE ...................4
3. Archaeological Site Recorded by the Bridges 248 and 249 Survey..................................................15
4. Test Units at 31HW271.....................................................................................................................23
5. Precontact Ceramic Artifacts from 31HW271.................................................................................. 30
6. Precontact Lithic Artifacts from 31HW271...................................................................................... 32
7. Postcontact (Historic Period) Artifacts from 31HW669...................................................................40
8. Summary of Archaeological Sites Identified within the Bridges 248 and 249 APE.........................47
1V

INTRODUCTION
TRC Environmental Corporation (TRC) conducted an intensive archaeological survey and evaluation for
the proposed replacement of Bridges 248 and 249 on Interstate 40 (I-40) over SR 1613 (Beaverdam Road)
in Haywood County, North Carolina (TIP HB-0002, PA 21-05-0006) (Figures 1 and 2). The
archaeological Area of Potential Effects (APE) for the Project encompasses approximately 57.01 acres
along the north and south sides of I-40 east and west of Beaverdam Road (SR 1613), and measures
approximately 3,265 feet (997 m) east -west and from 435 to 1,589 feet (133 to 485 m) north -south. There
are no federal- or state-owned lands (apart from the existing NCDOT rights -of -way) within the APE.
An updated review of site and report files at the Office of State Archaeology (OSA) indicated that there
has been no prior systematic survey within the Project APE. There is one previously identified site
(3IHW271) within the APE, however, as well as others in close proximity or in the general vicinity.
The fieldwork was completed in January 2022 under the direction of Michael Nelson and required
approximately 48 person -days. The fieldwork included systematic pedestrian reconnaissance of the entire
APE (minus those properties for which a landowner denied access, see below) and systematic shovel
testing at 15-m intervals of all areas except for wetlands and areas showing visible and severe
disturbance. A total of 358 shovel tests and four 1 X 1 in test units were excavated.
The fieldwork identified one previously recorded archaeological site (3IHW271) and four newly recorded
sites (31HW668-31HW671) (Table 1). Four of those sites contain precontact components, including one
(31HW271) dating from the Late Archaic through the Early Mississippian periods and one (31HW668)
containing a nondiagnostic precontact ceramic sherd; the other two precontact sites (31HW670 and
3IHW671) are represented only by nondiagnostic lithic components. Three sites contain postcontact
components, including one (31HW669) representing a late 19th through 20th century occupation; 2W
century artifacts were also recovered on two predominantly precontact sites (3IHW271 and 31HW670).
Table 1. Summary of Archaeological Sites Identified within the Bridges 248 and 249 APE.
NRHP Eligibility
Site Component Recommendation
31HW271 Precontact: Late Archaic, Middle Woodland, Mississippian; Eligible
Postcontact: 20a` century
......................................................................_...........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
31HW668 Precontact: nondiagnostic g.
ostic ceramic Not eligible*
......................................................................_.................................................................................. ................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................ ..........................................................
31HW669 .g
Postcontact: late 19a` through 20' cen Not eligible
......................................................................_..................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
31HW670 Precontact: nondiagnostic lithic; Postcontact: probable 20a` cen Not eliible*
..........................................................................................................................................................�..........................................................................................................................................................................................................................g...........................................................
31HW671 Precontact: nondiagnostic lithic Not eligible*
*Recommendation applies only to portion of the site identified within the current Project APE; no additional investigations
recommended within APE as presently defined.
Site 31HW271 is a large, multi -component precontact lithic and ceramic scatter located across a terrace
that also contains an existing farm. Late Archaic, Middle Woodland, and Early Mississippian components
were recognized, and other precontact occupations may also be present; there is also a low -density 20t"
century component associated with the farm. Although most materials were confined to the plowzone, a
buried A horizon is also present in some areas, and three potential cultural features were identified in
shovel tests and test units. This site is recommended eligible for the National Register of Historic Places
(NRHP) under Criterion D due to its potential to provide information on regional Woodland and
Mississippian period occupations, but appears to lack the characteristics necessary for eligibility under
Criteria A—C. Preservation in place does not appear to be required, and archaeological data recovery
excavations would be an appropriate mitigation strategy if this site cannot be avoided by construction.
Information on a proposed data recovery strategy is provided in Appendix 2.

A);
l.NTAIN
R
S
M 0
I
74`8'/12'49
-0002)
H OL LAND
:!OUNTAIN
Lake Junaluska - Clyde
•; 19' Canton
Waynesville
fiNo
.Hazelwood
-- 4
,y O
h 1.
v
VA
A
IW;
GA
Haywood County, North Carolina
:r
P, 11\P
F, 0
c
i tr
?- y
r
N t
`HINIFI�
ROCK
0 to
Miles N
0 40,000
W E
Feet
0 10 S
Kilometers
Figure 1. Location of Bridges 248 and 249 APE for archaeology in southwestern North Carolina.
2

- ° Br.i48/ 249 �• a�=� ,��..,
R� APE (HB-0002)_
oe—
• *III '� �� � % �fleDd iS?5 � 11 � �_c - � ``,.
mmmmmw
% ° '`` - •ice/ /l�� 1�� �.
,a • Bon A-Ven
\ �1��•l._ � aatns,
t ANUo,cK Ca en:/ • :�J l`
783
_@ mot• "Y✓-. ,*y-..�-,, 1 >�
USGS 7.5 Minute series Quadrangle Map 0 1
CANTON, N.C. N
Miles
VA 0 4 000
TN W E
Feet
NC
0 1 GA S
Sc
Kilometers
Figure 2. Location of Bridges 248 and 249 APE for archaeology in Haywood County.
3

The remaining four sites (31HW668-31HW671) appear to lack research potential and are recommended
not eligible for the NRHP under Criterion D as defined within the Project APE; the sites also appear to
lack the characteristics needed for eligibility under Criteria A—C. Only one of those sites (31HW670) is
totally contained within the APE, however, and additional delineation and evaluation of sites 31HW668,
31HW669, and 31HW671 are recommended should the APE be expanded at those locations.
Finally, much of the southeast quadrant of the project APE (between Beaverdam Road and I-40) east of
Beaverdam Creek was not surveyed due to lack of landowner permission. While most of this property is
disturbed and contains substantial fill deposits, additional survey of a small section of the floodplain
adjacent to Beaverdam Creek is recommended if that area cannot be avoided by construction.
BACKGROUND RESEARCH
Previous Archaeological Surveys and Previously Identified Sites
A map review and site file search were conducted by Scott Halvorsen of NCDOT on July 6, 2021
(Halvorsen 2021) and were updated by TRC remotely in December 2021. That research confirmed that
there have been no systematic surveys within the APE but that one previously recorded site, 3IHW271, is
located within the APE. Prior projects within a one -mile radius of the APE include a survey for a
proposed industrial park that documented eight resources (Brown and Rogers 1994a), a survey for the
Beaverdam Creek Industrial Sewer Line that documented two sites (Brown and Rogers 1994b), and an
earlier survey of a proposed water and sewer improvement project (Baker 1990).
Twelve sites (31HW167, 31HW168, 31HW271, 31HW272, and 31HW403-31HW410) have been
previously identified within or within one mile of the APE (Table 2). Two of those sites (31HW 167 and
31HW168) were recorded in the early 1960s by archaeologists affiliated with the UNC-Cherokee Project
as low -density precontact lithic and/or ceramic artifact surface scatters located in plowed fields. Site
31HW167 was revisited in 1985 by David Moore and was documented as having both Archaic and
Woodland style PPKs (particularly Savannah River PPKs) as well as glass beads and other trade items.
Additionally, portions of both sites were later revisited during a survey of the proposed Beaverdam Creek
Industrial Sewer Line (Brown and Rogers 1994b); Late Archaic Savannah River PPKs were recovered
from both sites and unidentifiable ceramic sherds were found at 31HW168.
Table 2. Previously Recorded Sites within or within One Mile of the Bridges 248 and 249 APE.
Site
Component(s)
NRHP Status
Reference(s)*
31HW167
Precontact: unknown ceramic/lithic
Unassessed
Egloff, Sensenig, and Crawford 1964;
........................ .................................
_.............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................g.................................................
Moore 1985; Brown and Rogers 1994b
31HW168
Precontact: unknown lithic
Unassessed
Egloff, Sensenig, and Crawford 1964;
........................ .................................
...........................................................................................................................................................................................................................
..........................._Brown
and Rogers 1.994b ..................................................................
31HW271
Precontact: Archaic
Unassessed
Henry 1990
.................................................._........................................................................................................................
31HW272 Precontact: unknown lithic
.............................................................................................................................................................................
31HW403 Precontact: Archaic
......... ......... ......... ....... ........ .........
31HW404 Precontact: unknown lithic;
Postcontact: 20a` century
.....................................................................................................................................................................................
Unassessed..........................Henry
1990.........................................................
Not Eligible
Brown and Rogers 1994a
Not Eligible
Brown and Rogers 1994a
31HW405
Precontact: unknown lithic
Not Eligible
Brown and Rogers 1994a
31HW406
Postcontact: 201 century
Not Eligible
Brown and Rogers 1994a
31HW407
Postcontact: 201 century
Not Eligible
Brown and Rogers 1994a
31HW408
Postcontact: 191bto 201b century
Not Eligible
Brown and Rogers 1994a
31HW409
Precontact: unknown lithic
Not Eligible
Brown and Rogers 1994a
31HW410
Precontact: Mississinnian
Not Eligible
Brown and Rogers 1994a
*References in italics are site forms and are not listed in the References Cited
4

Sites 31HW271 and 31HW272 were originally recorded by an avocational archaeologist as low density -
surface scatters of primarily Archaic lithic material. Site 31HW271 was revisited and expanded as part of
the Project survey and is discussed below. The remaining eight sites include an Archaic lithic site
(31HW403), two nondiagnostic lithic sites (3IHW405 and 31HW409), a nondiagnostic lithic site with a
single Mississippian period sherd (31HW410), and four sites with late 19t" to 20t" century artifacts and/or
surface features (3IHW404 and 31HW406-31HW408), one of which also contained nondiagnostic lithic
artifacts (31HW404). All eight of those sites were recommended not eligible for the NRHP.
Structures
There are no recorded historic structures within or adjacent to the APE for archaeology, although six
resources have been recorded (but not evaluated for NRHP eligibility) within a one -mile radius
(HPOWEB 2022). Those include the Harley Reno House (HW0484) and the Jim Reno House (HW0485)
north of the APE along Beaverdam Road; the Beaverdam School (HW0320) just west of the APE; the
Williams -Scruggs House (HW0269) (now gone) east of the APE; and the North Canton Houses
(HW0555) and the Giant Dollar Super Market (HW0580) in downtown Canton south of the APE. None
of these resources has the potential to contain associated archaeological deposits within the APE.
Cemeteries
No cemeteries are depicted on historic maps or otherwise known within or adjacent to the APE.
Historical Map Review
Topographic and other historic period maps were examined for information on previous occupations or
structure locations and on natural or cultural variables that might have affected site locations.
The Project APE and the nearby Pigeon River drainage are outside the areas of intensive late precontact
to contact period (i.e., A.D. 1500 to 1750) Native American settlements located to the west and east but are
within an area that was ceded to the United States by the Cherokee Nation in 1798 (Royce 1884). The
earliest examined map is an 1894 USGS Asheville quadrangle (1:125,000-scale topographic map) that is
relatively imprecise but shows Beaverdam Creek running north -south through the middle of the APE and
an unnamed road entering the APE from the south and running west along the northern edge of the APE,
but no other detail (Figure 3). A subsequent map, Waynesville and its Vicinity within Radius Twenty-five
Miles (issued by the Waynesville Factory Site and Electric Power Company in 1905 as a promotional
tool) depicts Beaverdam Creek running north -south through the west -central part of the APE but no other
details (Figure 4) (Jones 1905). A 1922 soils map (Jurney et al. 1925) depicts a similar pattern, but also
shows a north -south trending road running through the middle of the APE paralleling Beaverdam Creek
that is likely an early iteration of Beaverdam Road (Figure 5); no structures are depicted within the APE.
The 1935 Canton planimetric quadrangle (the first 1:24,000 scale USGS map of the area) depicts more
detail within the APE, including Beaverdam Creek running north -south within the east half of the APE,
an unnamed tributary running southeast through the middle of the APE, and a more aligned version of
Beaverdam Road. Just one structure is depicted within the APE, accessed by a short spur southwest of a
curve in what is likely Beaverdam Road. Additionally, Beaverdam School and a few other structures are
depicted just outside the northern end of the APE off North Canton Road, which intersects Beaverdam
Road within the APE (Figure 6). A later soils map (Goldston et al. 1954) depicts a similar configuration
of creeks and roads as the 1935 planimetric map and just the single structure within the APE (Figure 7).
The final map inspected is the 1967 Canton 1:24,000-scale quadrangle, which depicts the current
configurations of I-40, Beaverdam Road, and North Canton Road; only two structures are shown within
the APE, located in the approximate location as the single structure depicted on earlier maps (Figure 8).

Figure 3. Location of Bridges 248 and 249 APE as shown on the 1894 Asheville USGS 1:125,000-scale
topographic map (georeferencing approximate).
3"

I it r
b-4 ��rWd 7 14 r
27Y
D
N
k 606
"'0
, 4 dw
14t G
'W
II 'rsl
ti "
0
-d s 2 4 8 2 4 9,-,"
Ap
E (H,B--0002)
7,
'k
0 9
.vJONRTD
COP
s1f
10
Ee
?OL.F4"
57 A
TZ
C
IX
"I'Re Y'FA OW6.,
Nr ,
'q I
Tp9'?a C& CN M). ct q"
,qb COW—, Ir77
fj I
0
17C -� dy
1 11 '0:�6-7, � I I � t 60700w--Ilk i�4r-' -
The Waynesville Factory Site 0 10
and Electric Power Co. Map (1905) Miles 0!!NiiR!M
VA 0 40,000
TN !!n W— E
Feet
NC
GA 0 10 S
SC
Kilometers
Figure 4. Location of Bridges 248 and 249 APE as shown on the 1905 Waynesville and its Vicinity within
Radius Twenty-five Miles map (georeferencing approximate).
7

P1
Pi
}
USDA Soil Map 0
Ha wood County,N.C. 1922
i
Lmn lain
TN !Tn
NC
;111W
GA
'Sc
----------
rn
N
W E
s
Figure 5. Location of Bridges 248 and 249 APE as shown on the 1922 Haywood County soils map
(georeferencing approximate).

:.lift
x
-
lI`p,1
I
rr�
if
• a
11
•
�i
•� l
."ry espy \`
\
II
11
-'
-- o
Bridges 24�8/249
• �_ i/
GFines Creek 11
• APE ('HB-0002)
\k
�� it--• . •�'�_ If. avei
dam
If
p
It
if
h
•� 4
chi _
• — II
•11
II
If
r�.
•\!�
I II
If
u \\
I Arnold P1 in6\\
Orth Canton Ch
• / �i
Bee
\.
;4•
if
•
• _
RESERVOIR) -ff�--� W��
'
\I 1
it
1\i
H
�' ;
•
(1 r - ,i .---•- -• C P L CO TR
\1 1,
n
•
Il
LIMITS•
,
;4�•. �
/I
1 _ .
_ — . •u
�1
• • `���• 11 t=.
`�14 mop
♦ . ©
4 .�
7.5 Minute series Quadrangle Map �r
F
CANTON, N.C. (1935)
Miles
N
VA 0
TN
NC
4.000
beet
W E
0
GA
1
S
SC
Kilometers
Figure 6. Location of Bridges 248 and 249 APE as shown on the 1935 Canton USGS 1:24,000-scale
planimetric map.

Figure 7. Location of Bnidges 248 and 249APE ao shown outhe 1940 Haywood County soils map
(georeferencing approximate).
10

WON
Brrdges_248/ 249
A,P=E-A 'B-000:2_) e
,C
d .� Qoo • .
•;t�� 1a Ship If
v""I
QuadrangleUSGS 75 Minute series
i
�A���� IA��Feet
NC
GA
sc
Yilometers
Figure 8. Location of Bridges 248 and 249 APE as shown on the 1967 Canton USGS 1:24,000-scale
topographic map.
[- VWI
o- &%Iv
11

Soils
There are several soil types represented within the APE, although many of them constitute less than an
acre each within the APE (USDA NRCS 2022). Most of the soils are mapped as the Udorthents-Urban
land complex, 2-50% slopes (UhE), which is found along both the north and south sides of I-40 and in
most of the southwest quadrant of the APE. These are disturbed soils in which the natural characteristics
have been altered. The next most common soil type present within the APE is Cullowhee-Nikwasi
complex, 0-2% slopes, frequently flooded (CxA) located along the eastern floodplain of Beaverdam
Creek on both the north and south sides of I-40. This soil is described as a poorly drained fine sandy loam
derived from loamy alluvium over sandy and gravelly alluvium found on floodplains. Dillsboro loam 2-
8% slopes, (DsB) is the third most common soil type represented and encompass most of the floodplain
west of Beaverdam Creek and east of Beaverdam Creek Road on the north side of I-40. Other soil types
found within the northeastern, southeastern, and northwestern corners of the APE include Braddock clay
loam, 2-8% slopes (BkB2) and 8-15% slopes, eroded (BkC2), located along the west side of Beaverdam
Creek Road, both are well -drained, moderately eroded, terrace soils derived from old alluvium. Evard-
Cowee complex, 15-30% slopes is located in a disturbed corner of the APE and is described as a well -
drained, gravelly loam found on ridges and slopes. Other soils present include Fannin loam, 30-50%
slopes, eroded (FnE2) formed from weathered mica schist and/or other micaceous metamorphic rock;
Hayesville clay loam, 8-15% (HaC2) and 15-30% (HaD2) slopes, which are well -drained, eroded soils
derived from residuum weathered from hornblende gneiss and/or amphibolite found on ridges and hill
slopes; Hemphill loam, 0-3% slopes, rarely flooded (HmA) found on depressions on stream terraces and
derived from loamy and clayey alluvium; and Saunook loam basin, 8-15% slopes, stony (SdC), a well -
drained colluvium derived from igneous and metamorphic rock (USDA NRCS 2022).
FIELDWORK RESULTS
The APE covers approximately 57 acres adjacent to the north and south sides of I-40, east and west of
Beaverdam Road (SR 1613) and Beaverdam Creek. The area consists of a mixture of NCDOT rights -of -
way, residential properties, and light industrial and/or commercial properties along the I-40 corridor,
Beaverdam Road, Freedom Drive, and Silkwood Drive. While most of the APE is in open residential
yards and/or grassy fields, there is one area of overgrown woods and wooded slopes in the north -central
part of the APE. Additionally, there are large, disturbed, and built-up areas in the southeastern and
southwestern quadrants of the APE, as well as smaller such areas north of I-40 (Figures 9-12).
The archaeological fieldwork was conducted intermittently from December 15, 2021, to January 27, 2022
under the direction of Michael Nelson and required approximately 48 person -days to complete. The
fieldwork included systematic pedestrian reconnaissance of the entire APE (minus those properties for
which a landowner denied access) and systematic shovel testing at 15-m intervals of all areas except for
wetlands and areas showing visible and severe disturbance. Supplemental shovel tests were excavated at
7.5-m intervals to delineate cultural material. Shovel tests measured at least 30 cm in diameter and were
excavated to sterile subsoil or bedrock, or a minimum depth of 75 cm. A total of 358 shovel tests and four
1 X 1 in test units were excavated as part of the Project.
The survey relocated and redefined one previously recorded archaeological site (3IHW271) and
identified four previously unrecorded sites (31HW668-31HW671) (Table 3; Figures 13 and 14).
Additionally, one property owner with multiple properties in the southeast quadrant and one in the
northeast quadrant of the APE denied access.
12

�-- - -
,� ,,
�:r ,�_.
5� � :'l. •r
L ,z,� � G'�',e �
� � � 4j v � 3 T X� 4 � !
� � �/%���.��� H dY �yy, j ,V / � {w
f :, 9'�l'�YF'Y'y�'�k `M��px
;�
d d �
2
t'
� 1
J
...: . _ _
r , � _y fu �..ecn. ,.,A
_ � �
�

Figure 11. Shovel testing along open yard at the intersection of Beaverdam Road and North Canton
Road, facing southeast.
Figure 12. Hydric areas in open fields on International Paper property on south side of I-40 south of
Silkwood Drive, facing east.
14

Table 3. Archaeological Sites Recorded by the Bridges 248 and 249 Survev.
Shovel Tests
Artifacts*
NRHP
Site #
Component(s)
Total
Pre Hist
PCer
Lith
Hist
Total
Recommendation
31HW271
Precontact: Archaic,
174
78
3
121
670
8
799
Eligible
Middle Woodland to
Mississippian;
............................................................
Postcontact: 20a` century
..........................**.......................................
31HW668
Precontact: nondiagnostic
7
1
0
1
0
0
1
Not eligible
ceramic
............................................................
31HW669
Postcontact: late 19a`
.........
40
......... .........
0
19
0
0
108
108
.......................................................................................................
Not eligible**
through 20' century
.........
.........
.........
......... .........
31HW670
Precontact: nondiagnostic
19
7
1
0
21
1
22
Not eligible
lithic; Postcontact: 20'
century
31HW671
Precontact: nondiagnostic
7
1
0
0
1
0
1
Not eligible**
lithic
*Artifact counts from 31HW271 include those from TUs, which yielded 84 precontact ceramic, 384 lithic artifacts and four
postcontact artifacts.
**Recommendation applies to portion of site within APE only; additional survey may be required if APE boundaries change
15

F��
t i �4 •M%cam ��, ) �fr�
`3111W669
31HW668 :)
" •_01 HW67Oy ` 31HW271
31
revisit
Lz-
31HW671
— —Ven
Olt
Bridges 248/ 249'
APSE (HB 000.2)
.O . !A •ll •• 2783
It'. aa4On `• .. fie• •h�+�','.' Ci r
14
•s ;C , ~ $'emsA 0
USGS 7.5 Minute series Quadrangle Map o 1
CANTON, N.C. N
Milcs
VA 0 4,000
rn W E
Feet
NC
cI
0 1 g
sc
Kilometers
Figure 13. Locations of 31HW271 and 31HW668-31HW671 within the Bridges 248 and 249 APE.
W,

Figure 14. Shovel tests, archaeological sites, and unsurveyed areas within the Bridges 248 and 249 APE.
17

31HW271
Component(s):
Precontact: Late Archaic, Middle Woodland, Mississippian; Postcontact: 20a' century
Site Dimensions*:
105 in E-W x 135 in N-S
UTMs (NAD 83):
E334087 N3936344
Landform:
Terrace
Elevation:
ca. 2,636 ft AMSL
Soil Type(s):
Dillsboro loam, 2-8% slopes, (DsB)
Recommendation:
Eligible (Criteria D only)
*Site measurements based on artifact distribution within the Project APE only; site likely extends outside APE to the north/
northeast.
Description. Site 31HW271 is a large precontact site extending across several residential yards and farm
fields at the northeastern corner of the intersection of Freedom Drive and Beaverdam Road, north of I-40
(Figures 15-17; see Figures 13 and 14). Postcontact artifacts are also present in association with the
extant houses/farm complex. Site 31HW271 was originally identified by an avocational archaeologist as a
low -density surface lithic scatter of Archaic (e.g., Morrow Mountain, Savannah River) PPKs and
nondiagnostic tool fragments and debitage around a former sawmill located along the edge of the Project
APE. Based on the Project survey, the site boundaries have been expanded to the south; the site may also
continue outside the APE to the northeast, although much of the area of the former sawmill has been
filled and built upon. As currently defined, 31HW271 measures approximately 135 in north -south by 105
in east -west. The site is bounded to the north (within the area of the recent development) by consecutive
negative shovel tests, to the east by negative shovel tests and the edge of the APE, to the south by
negative shovel tests and Freedom Drive, and to the west by Beaverdam Road.
The soils at 31HW271 are mapped as Dillsboro loam, 2-8% slopes (DsB), which is a well -drained soil of
old alluvium and/or colluvium derived from igneous and metamorphic rock found along terraces and fans
(USDA NRCS 2022). At least three different soil profiles were observed within the shovel tests and test
units (TUs) at 3IHW271. The soils in the southwestern corner of the site, between the existing house and
Freedom Drive and Beaverdam Road, were characterized by a basic Ap horizon (plowzone) of dark
grayish brown (1 OYR 4/2) clay loam to approximate depths of 30-40 cmbs atop light yellowish brown
(1 OYR 6/4) clay to depths of up to 65-78 cmbs, at which point cobbles or the water table was encountered
(see Figures 20 and 21, below). Soils across much of the remainder of the site had a similar profile of
brown (7.5YR 4/3) to reddish brown (5YR 4/4) sandy loam Ap horizon to approximate depths of 22-37
cmbs over a yellowish red (5YR 5/6) clay B horizon to approximate depths of 70-75 cmbs (see Figures
22 and 23, below). One test unit (TU 3) and 12 shovel tests in the north -central and northwestern portions
of the site encountered a thin but distinct truncated buried plowzone (Apb horizon) beneath the modern
plowzone; a similar stratum was present in one shovel test at the eastern end of the site. Those profiles
consisted of a dark brown (7.5YR 3/4) sandy clay loam to 21-27 cmbs over a 5-12 cm thick buried A
horizon of very dark grayish brown (1 OYR 3/2) clay loam. That soil was underlain by brown (7.5YR 4/4)
clay loam to clay B horizon soils over reddish yellow (7.5YR 6/6) clay with gravels to approximately 100
cmbs (see Figures 24 and 25, below).
Shovel Tests, Test Units, and Features. A total of 174 shovel tests were excavated across the site at both
15- and 7.5-m intervals, with 78 (44.8%) yielding totals of 323 precontact artifacts and four postcontact
(20th century) artifacts. The precontact artifact density ranged from 1 to 10 artifacts per shovel test. Most
of the artifacts were recovered from the modern or buried plowzones; only 76 lithic artifacts and four
ceramics were recovered from the B horizon in the combined shovel tests and TUs. While the lithic
artifacts were relatively evenly dispersed across the site (Figure 18), the precontact ceramic artifacts were
primarily recovered in the north -central portion of the site (Figure 19). Their distribution closely follows
that of the buried Ap horizon, although not all sherds were recovered from that horizon.
18

Figure 15. Map of 31HW271.
19

a:
low IV
424
IBF�'�
Gn w a i
Y gy
r
AFli+ i.
� a _
m
a C -
r c
F

' . Freedom
I-40 Westbound
5
Oman) M
per, kEastbound
15 30
Meters
:a
Figure 18. Distribution of lithic artifacts from shovel tests at 3IHW271.
0
31HW271
revisit/expansion
Lithic Density
0
1-2
3-5
• 6-9
0 10+
Test Unit
Site Boundary
Bridges 248 /249
(HB-0002) APE
Contour Interval at 4 Foot
21

Figure 19. Distribution ofprecontact ceramic sherds from shovel tests at 31HW271.
23

Due to the presence of a moderate density of precontact artifacts from the plowzone, the apparent buried
A horizon (which was not clearly visible as a plowzone in shovel tests), and a potential feature
encountered in a shovel test, four 1 X 1 in test units were excavated at 31HW271 (Table 4; Figures 20-
25). TU 1 was placed at the southern end of the site along Freedom Drive, alongside a shovel test that
contained precontact ceramic and lithic artifacts. TU 2 was located in the north -central portion of the site,
atop a shovel test that encountered a potential feature (post), and TU 4 was excavated immediately to the
east to further expose a second potential feature partially exposed in TU 2. TU 3 was placed
approximately 30 in west of TU 2 to investigate the buried A horizon documented in nearby shovel tests.
The test units yielded an additional 468 precontact and four postcontact artifacts (Table 4).
Table 4. Test Units at 31HW271.
TU 1
Level Thickness Death (cmbs) Strat Horizon Ceramics Lithics Historic Comments
1
2
3
Total
30
10
10
0-30
30-40
40-50
I
II
II
A
B
B
0
0
0
0
45
6
3
54
0
0
0
0
TU 2
Level
Thickness
Depth (cmbs)
Strat
Horizon
Ceramics
Lithics
Historic Comments
1
26
0-26
I
Ap
35
148
3
Pigeon sherd
2
10
26-36
I/II
ApB
3
24
0
3
10
36-46
II
B
1
4
0
Pigeon sherd
4
10
46-56
II
B
0
5
0
5
10
56-66
II
B
0
0
0
Fea. 3
17
F. Fill
F. Fill
1
3
0
Possible post, E'/2
Total
40
184
3
TU 3
Level Thickness Depth (cmbs) Strat Horizon Ceramics Lithics Historic Comments
1 27 0-27 I Ab 10 35 1 Soapstone vessel
fragment, unidentified
2 5 27-32 II Ab 5 23 0 PPK fragment
3 10 32-42 III B
0
23 0
4 10 42-52 III B
0
8 0
5 10 52-62 III B
0
2 0
Total
15
91 1
TU 4
Level Thickness Depth (cmbs) Strat Horizon Ceramics Lithics Historic Comments
1 25 0-25 I A 29 55 0 Pigeon sherd; stopped at
base of Ap at top of
Feature 4 (unexcavated)
Total 29 55 0
23

Tu 1
0
20 � I A: Dark grayish brown (1 OYR 412) clay loam
40
II B: Light yellowish brown
60 (IOYR 614) clay F 1
80
100
cm
F 1: Dark brown (1OYR 313) clay
(�—D Cobbles
SCALE
0 Cerhmeters 40
Figure 20. Test Unit 1 at 31HW271, west profile drawing.
i
Figure 21. Test Unit 1 at 31HW271, west profile.
:Yae
d�
m -
4
w
24

TU 2 TU 4
0
I Ap: Brown (7.5YR 4I3) sandy loam with
Yellowish red (5YR 516) clay mottles I
20
40 F 4
II B: Yellowish red (5YR 516) clay F 4: Brown (7.5YR 413) sandy loam with
Yellowish red (5YR 5I6) clay mottles
60
SCALE
$0 a Centimeters 40
III III Bw: Brownish yellow (10YR 616) clay with
100 Yellowish red (5YR 516) sandy clay mottles
cm
Figure 22. Test Units 2 and 4 at 31HW271, north profile drawing.
Figure 23. Test Units 2 and 4 at 31HW271, north profile.
25

TU 3
surface
I Ap: Dark brown (7.5YR 3/4) clay loam
40
60 III B: Brown (7.5YR 4/4) clay
scary 100
o ce me�rs m IV Bw Reddish yellow
120 1 (7.5YR 6/6) clay and gravel
140
cm
Figure 24. Test Unit 3 at 31HW271, west profile drawing.
Figure 25. Test Unit 3 at 31HW271, west profile.
II Ab: Very dark grayish brown
(IOYR 312) clay loam

Features. Three potential cultural features were identified in the TUs, including a potential posthole
(Feature 1) in TU 1 at the southern end of the site and two potential pits (Features 3 and 4) in TUs 2 and 4
in the north -central portion of the site. (Feature number 2 was originally assigned to a stain that proved to
be clearly non -cultural).
Feature 1, located along the west wall of TU 1, was recognized only as it was exposed in the wall profile
during the test unit excavation (see Figures 20 and 21). It was a small (12 x 12 cm) circular stain of dark
brown (IOYR 3/3) clay mottled with oxidized flecks and charcoal that extended to a depth of 36 cm
below the Ap/B horizon interface, with insloping sides that taper to a point. No artifacts were observed
originating within the stain itself. While this stain appears to be a possible post, the fill was slightly
different in texture from typical feature fill, and due to that fact and its tapered nature it is possible that it
is a tree root instead.
Feature 3 was a stain originally observed in a shovel test and was completely exposed at the base of the
plowzone in TU 2 (Figure 26). Feature 3 was roughly oval shaped, measuring 24 by 19 cm with very dark
brown (7.5YR 2.5/3) silty clay loam fill with light charcoal flecking. The feature was bisected along a
north -south axis with the west half collected as a flotation sample (currently unprocessed) and the east
half screened in the field. Feature 3 had a depth of 17 cm with slightly insloping sides and a concave base
(Figure 27). One precontact sherd with an unidentified surface decoration and three quartzite flakes were
recovered from Feature 3.
The presence of a larger mottled stain west of Feature 3 in the northwest corner of the test unit prompted
the excavation of TU 4 to the east to further investigate the stain, designated Feature 4. Although the
feature was not fully exposed by TU 4 and was not investigated further, it appears to represent a sizeable
(i.e., 60+ x 60+ cm) pit that is at least 45 cm deep. Feature 4 was left intact (other than the small portion
in the corner of Test Unit 2) (Figure 28); no artifacts were observed originating solely within the feature.
Artifacts. A total of 799 artifacts were collected from the shovel tests (n=327) and test units (n=472) at
3IHW271. The artifact assemblage includes 121 precontact ceramic sherds, 670 precontact lithic
artifacts, and just eight postcontact artifacts. Most of the sherds are small and cannot be conclusively
assigned to types, but the assemblage includes a Middle Woodland period Pigeon phase (200 B.C.-A.D.
200) check stamped simple everted rim (Figure 29a), four Pigeon check stamped body sherds with
crushed quartz temper (Figures 29b, 29e, and 29f), and two Mississippian period Early Pisgah phase (A.D.
1000-1200) sherds, including a fine -line rectilinear complicated stamped sherd (Figure 29c) and a
rectilinear complicated stamped sherd (Figure 29d). Other sherds include three with an unidentified
stamped surface treatment and one with unidentified surface decoration (Figure 29g). The remaining
precontact ceramic artifacts include 19 eroded sherds and 91 sherds less than two cm in size (Table 5).
27

Figure 26. Test Unit 2 base of Level 1 plan view, showing Feature 3 and Shovel Test 237.
Figure 27. Feattire 3 profile in Test Unit 2 at 31HW271.
28

Figure 28. Feature 4 as exposed in profile and plan in Test Units 2 and 4 at 31HW271.
Ot

Figure 29. Representative precontact ceramic sherds from 31HW271. a: Pigeon check stamped rim, ST 212;
b: Pigeon check stamped body, ST 212; c: Early Pisgah fine line rectilinear complicated stamped body, ST 231; d:
Early Pisgah rectilinear complicated stamped, TU 3, Level 2; e: Pisgah check stamped body, TU 2, Level 3; f:
Pigeon check stamped body, TU 2, Level 1; g: unidentified decorated body, Feature 3, TU 2
Table 5. Precontact Ceramic Artifacts from 31HW271.
Description Count Percent
Pigeon Series
Check Stamped (includes 1 rim sherd) 5 4.1
Subtotal S 4.1
Pisgah Series
Fineline Rectilinear Complicated Stamped 1 0.8
Rectilinear Complicated Stamped 1 0.8
Subtotal 2 1.6
Unclassified
Unidentified Stamped
3
2.5
Unidentified Decorated
1
0.8
Eroded
19
15.7
Subtotal
23
19.0
Residual
91
75.2
Total
121
99.9
30

The lithic artifact assemblage includes 12 chipped stone tools or tool fragments, four groundstone
fragments, and 654 pieces of debitage. The tools include four chert PPK fragments (e.g., Figures 30e and
30f), one of which (Figure 30f) might be a triangular PPK fragment; four quartzite PPK fragments, one of
which is a Late Archaic period (3500-1000 B.C.) stemmed base (Figure 30c); a quartz lanceolate PPK
fragment (Figure 30d); a quartzite core, a quartzite side scraper, and a quartzite scraper. The four
groundstone fragments include two steatite (soapstone) vessel rims with fragmentary lugs (Figures 30a
and 30b) and two other steatite fragments, all likely representative of Late Archaic or Early Woodland
occupations. The 654 pieces of debitage are predominately quartzite (n=496), but also include chert
(n=85), quartz (n=28), metavolcanic material (n=28), and jasper (n=14), as well as low quantities of slate
(n=2) and chalcedony (n=1). Additionally, 91 pieces of fire -cracked -rock (FCR) were also recovered but
were not included in the final artifact count (Table 6).
Figure 30. Representative precontact lithic artifacts from 31HW271. a: soapstone vessel rim, ST 8; b:
soapstone vessel rim with node/lug, TU 3, Level 1; c: quartzite Late Archaic stemmed PPK, ST 309; d: quartz
unidentified lanceolate PPK, ST 260; e: chert PPK fragment, ST 260; f. chert possible triangular PPK fragment, TU
2, Level 1
The postcontact artifacts include three pieces of glass (two amber container fragments and one bright
green container fragment), two pieces of brick, one wire roofing nail, one piece of unidentified sheet
metal, and one possible ceramic insulator fragment (white porcelain). These eight items most likely date
to the 20th century and are likely associated with the numerous structures across the site.
31

Table 6. Precontact Lithic Artifacts from 3111IW271.
Description Chert Quartz Quartzite Other* Total
Chipped Stone Tools
Projectile Points
Unidentified Triangular 1 1
Late Archaic Stemmed 1 1
Unidentified Lanceolate 1 1
Unidentified Fragment 3 3 6
Core/Core Fragment 1 1
Scraper 2 2
Subtotal 4 1 7 12
Chipped Stone Debitage
Flake/Shatter
85
28
496
45
654
Subtotal
85
28
496
45
654
Chipped Stone Total
89
29
503
45
666
Chipped Stone Percentage
13.3
4.3
75.4
7.0
100.0
Ground Stone
Vessel Fragment
2
2
Unidentified Ground Stone Fragment
2
2
FCR
2
89
91
*Other materials represented include chalcedony, jasper, metavolcanic material, and slate
Summary and Recommendations. Site 31HW271 was previously recorded as a low -density artifact scatter
centered around what was then an active sawmill just east of Beaverdam Road along the eastern edge of
the Project APE. The site as currently defined covers a large area encompassing multiple residential yards
and farm fields west of Beaverdam Creek and north of the intersection of Beaverdam Road and Freedom
Drive. The site likely continues outside the Project APE to the northeast, although the originally mapped
site location at the current north/northwest boundary of the APE has been graded and filled and the site is
unlikely to continue in that direction.
As redefined, 31HW271 is a large multicomponent site containing diagnostic Late Archaic period,
Middle Woodland (Pigeon phase), and Mississippian (Early Pisgah phase) components, with other
precontact components likely present as well. Most artifacts were recovered from the plowzone, including
a buried plowzone remnant observed primarily in the north -central portion of the site. A low density of
lithic material and a few sherds were recovered from the upper portions of the B horizon, but it is unlikely
that there are substantial or deeply buried cultural deposits within the B horizon. Three potential cultural
features were identified at the base of the plowzone but cannot be assigned to specific cultural periods.
Portions of 31HW271 contain a moderate density of Woodland and Mississippian period ceramics,
suggesting that it is likely that additional cultural features and possibly structural remains may be present.
Such remains could provide substantial information on the prehistory of the area and provide valuable
comparative data concerning precontact occupations in this part of the Pigeon River drainage. For this
reason, 31HW271 is recommended eligible for the NRHP under Criterion D; however, the site appears to
lack the eligibility requirements for Criteria A—C. Preservation in place does not appear to be required,
and archaeological data recovery excavations would be an appropriate mitigation strategy if this site
cannot be avoided by construction. A proposed data recovery strategy is provided in Appendix 2.
32

31HW668
Component(s):
Precontact: nondiagnostic ceramic
Site Dimensions*:
15 in E-W x 15 in N-S
UTMs (NAD 83):
E334062 N3936582
Landform:
Floodplain
Elevation:
ca. 2,636 ft AMSL
Soil Type(s):
Dillsboro loam, 2-8% slopes, (DsB)
Recommendation:
Not eligible as defined within APE
*Measurements based on artifact distribution within the Project APE only; site likely extends outside APE to the east/northeast.
Description. Site 31HW668 is represented by a nondiagnostic precontact ceramic sherd recovered from a
shovel test within a large open field along the northeastern edge of the APE (Figures 31 and 32; see
Figures 13 and 14). The site measures approximately 15 in north -south by 15 in east -west and is bounded
by consecutive negative shovel tests to the north, south, and west and by the Project APE to the east; it is
possible that the site extends to the east/northeast outside the APE across the field. A large previously
recorded multi -component Archaic to Qualla phase site (31HW167) is located approximately 90-100 in
to the northeast at the northern end of the same field, and it is possible that intensive testing across the
field would link the two sites.
The soils at 31HW668 are mapped as Dillsboro loam, 2-8% slopes (DsB), which is a well -drained soil
formed of old alluvium and/or colluvium derived from igneous and metamorphic rock found along
terraces and fans (USDA NRCS 2022). Two shovel tests at 31HW668 (including the only positive shovel
test) encountered redeposited brown (7.5YR 4/4) slightly rocky clay loam extending up to 17 cmbs atop
the plowzone/buried plowzone of dark brown (7.5YR 3/4) clay loam that extended to a depth of up to 46
cmbs. This was followed by yellowish red (5YR 4/6) clay to approximate depths of 45-55 cmbs (Figure
33). The other shovel tests exhibited the same profile but lacked the redeposited stratum.
A total of 14 shovel tests were excavated across the northeastern corner of the APE, seven of which were
delineating shovel tests at the site. Just one shovel test produced a single nondiagnostic residual sherd
(Figure 34) recovered from the apparent buried A horizon at a depth of from 17 to 30 cmbs.
Summary and Recommendations. Site 31HW668 is a precontact ceramic site represented by a single
residual ceramic sherd recovered from a shovel test along the northeastern edge of the Project APE. The
site may continue outside the APE to the cast/northeast and may be associated with nearby 31HW167. As
currently defined, however, the site lacks evidence of substantial artifact concentrations, intact artifact
deposits, and/or cultural features, and is recommended not eligible for the NRHP under all four eligibility
criteria. No additional consideration of this site is recommended within the presently -defined APE, but in
the event that the Project APE is expanded to the east/northeast, further work is recommended to
determine the full extent of the site in that direction.
34

Figure 31. Map of 31HW668 and 31HW669.
34

Figure 32. Site 31HW668 (pink flag in foreground), facing northwest.
Figure 33. Shovel Test 83 at 31HW668.
35

Figure 34. Residual ceramic sherd from Shovel Test 83 at 31HW668.
31HW669
Component(s): Postcontact: late 191 to 201 century
Site Dimensions*: 35 in E-W x 60 in N-S
UTMs (NAD 83): E333982 N3936574
Landform: Side slope
Elevation: ca. 2,688 ft AMSL
Soil Type(s): Braddock clay loam, 2-8% slopes, erode (BkB2)
Recommendation: Not eligible as defined within APE; no further work for project as presently defined
*Measurements based on artifact distribution within the Project APE only; site likely extends outside APE to the west.
Description. Site 31HW669 is a moderately dense late 19th to 20th century domestic site represented by
108 postcontact artifacts recovered from 19 shovel tests across an open residential yard at the corner of
Beaverdam Road and North Canton Road in the northwestern corner of the APE (Figure 35; see Figures
13, 14, and 31). The site measures approximately 60 in north -south by 35 in east -west and likely
continues outside the APE to the west. The site is bounded by negative shovel tests and the existing road
banks to the east and south and by the edge of the APE to the north and west. There is an existing
residence located just outside the APE in the southwestern corner of the site, and it is possible that the site
is associated with that structure or a previous one at the same location.
The soils at 31HW669 are mapped as Braddock clay loam, 2-8% slopes (BkB2), which is a well -drained
eroded soil derived from old alluvium found along stream terraces (USDA NRCS 2022). Shovel tests
across the site had a similar profile of a 10-50 cm thick (although most ranged from 20-35 cm thick) Ap
horizon (plowzone) of reddish brown (5YR 4/4) clay loam atop slightly rocky red (2.5YR 4/6) clay to
depths of 29-55 cmbs (Figure 36).
Hot

Figure 35. South-central end of site 31HW669 within residential yard, facing south.
Figure 36. Shovel Test 106 at 31HW669.
37

Forty shovel tests (including all transect and delineation tests situated within 30 m) were excavated across
this corner of the APE, with 19 shovel tests yielding a total of 108 postcontact artifacts. The artifacts
recovered are typical of a late 19th to 20th century domestic site and include six ceramic sherds, 83 pieces
of glass, 14 pieces of metal, four brick fragments, and one plastic artifact (Table 7). The postcontact
ceramic artifacts include three whiteware sherds (one with a red handpainted decoration [Figure 37a] and
one molded), one ironstone sherd (a tableware manufactured by the Onondaga Pottery Company, ca. 1925
[Figure 37b]), one Alkaline glazed stoneware sherd, and an insulator fragment. The glass artifacts include
77 pieces of container glass (62 colorless, two amber, two aqua, six green, four white [milk glass], and
one frosted) (e.g., Figure 38d). Other glass artifacts include two milk glass lid liner fragments, two pieces
of flat glass, a blue marble (Figure 37e), and a probable lamp glass fragment. The 14 metal artifacts
include seven nail fragments (five wire, one cut [Figure 37c], and one unidentified), a button from a pair
of Big Blue/Wrangler overalls (Figure 37f), a hexagonal headed bolt, a battery cable end, a piece of wire,
a washer, a mounting flange, and an unidentified metal fragment. The remaining artifacts include four
brick fragments, three of which might be handmade (Figure 37h), and one black four -holed plastic button
(Figure 37g). Several of the artifacts exhibit signs of burning (i.e., melted, discolored). All were recovered
from the Ap horizon.
Summary and Recommendations. Site 31HW669 is a postcontact domestic site represented by a moderate
density of late 19t" to 20th century artifacts recovered from 19 shovel tests across a residential yard at the
intersection of Beaverdam and North Canton roads in the northwestern corner of the APE. While no
architectural remains were observed within the APE, there is an existing house just outside the APE to the
west, and the artifacts are likely associated with that residence or an earlier structure at that location. The
site likely continues outside the APE to the west, but as currently defined lacks evidence of substantial
artifact concentrations, intact artifact deposits, and cultural features. Site 31HW669 is recommended not
eligible for the NRHP under all four eligibility criteria. No additional consideration of this site is
recommended within the presently -defined APE, but in the event that the project APE is expanded to the
west, further work is recommended to determine the full extent of the site in that direction.
38

Figure 37. Representative historic artifacts from 31HW669. a: handpainted (red) whiteware sherd, ST 106; b:
ironstone sherd with Onondaga Pottery maker's mark ca. 1925, ST 112; c: cut nail fragment, ST 112; d: colorless
container glass fragment with embossed parallel line decoration, ST 112; e: blue glass marble, ST 121; f. metal
button (Big Blue/Wrangler overalls), ST 114; g: black plastic 4-hole button, ST 135; h: possible handmade brick
fragment, ST 110
M

Table 7. Postcontact (Historic Period) Artifacts from 31HW669.
Description
Count
Kitchen Group
Ceramics
Stoneware, Alkaline glazed
1
Ironstone
1
Whiteware
3
Container Glass
Amber
2
Aqua.
2
Colorless
62
Frosted
1
Green
6
White/Milk
6
Group Subtotal
84
Architectural Group
Brick
4
Glass, flat
Colorless
2
Nail, cut
1
Nail, wire
5
Nail, unidentified
1
Group Subtotal
13
Miscellaneous Group
Battery cable end
1
Bolt, hex
1
Button, metal (overall)
1
Ceramic Insulator
1
Flange, mounting
1
Glass, thin, lamp glass?
1
Glass, marble, blue
1
Metal, unidentified
1
Synthetic, 4-hole button
1
Washer
1
Wire
1
Group Subtotal
11
Total
108
40

31HW670
Component(s):
Precontact: nondiagnostic lithic; Postcontact: probable 20' century
Site Dimensions:
35 in E-W x 22 in N-S
UTMs (NAD 83):
E333935 N3936260
Landform:
Terrace
Elevation:
ca. 2,644 ft AMSL
Soil Type(s):
Saunook loam basin, 2-8% slopes, (SdQ; Udorthents-Urban land complex, 2-50% slopes,
(UhE)
Recommendation:
Not Eligible (all four NRHP criteria)
Description. Site 31HW670 is a small, low -density lithic scatter identified along a small, wooded terrace
of an unnamed drainage, adjacent to the north side of I-40 (Figures 38 and 39; see Figures 13 and 14).
The site measures approximately 22 in north -south by 35 in east -west and is bounded by consecutive
negative shovel tests to the northwest and southeast, by negative shovel tests and the unnamed drainage to
the north and east, and by negative shovel tests and the sloped I-40 road bank to the south and west. The
area across the creek is disturbed by commercial development. Site 31HW670 is fully delineated within
the Project APE
Two soil types are mapped at 31HW670. Soils at the southern end of the site are mapped as Udorthents-
Urban land complex, 2-50% slopes (UhE), which are disturbed soils in which the natural characteristics
have been altered. Soils at the northern end of the site are mapped as Saunook loam basin, 8-15% slopes,
stony (SdC), a well -drained colluvium derived from igneous and metamorphic rock (USDA NRCS 2022).
While the soils observed in the shovel tests were not obviously disturbed, the sloped road bank at the
southern/southwestern end of the site is artificial. Two different soil profiles were observed at 31HW670.
Shovel tests close to the creek encountered a 6-12 cm thick O horizon of very dark brown (1 OYR 2/2)
loamy leaf litter atop brown (7.5YR 4/4) slightly clayey sandy loam to depths of 48-75 cmbs over strong
brown (7.5YR 4/6) sandy clay to 88 cmbs. The remaining shovel tests contained a brown (7.5YR 4/3)
silty clay loam A horizon to depths of 22-29 cmbs atop a yellowish brown (IOYR 5/8) clay B horizon to
depths of 42-49 cmbs (Figure 40).
A total of 19 shovel tests (including all transect and delineation tests situated within 30 m) were
excavated across the site; seven of which yielded a total of 21 pieces of nondiagnostic lithic debitage and
a piece of 20t" century glass. The 21 pieces of lithic debitage include 17 pieces of quartzite, two
metavolcanic fragments, and single pieces of quartz and chert, all of which were recovered from the A
horizon to depths of up to 75 cmbs. None of the lithic material is diagnostic of a specific time period, but
based on the raw material represented, the site could possibly date to the Archaic period. A single flat
glass fragment was also recovered.
Summary and Recommendations. Site 31HW670 is a small, nondiagnostic lithic site represented by 21
pieces of lithic debitage; the site also contains a low density postcontact component. Site 31HW670 lacks
evidence of substantial artifact concentrations, intact artifact deposits, and/or cultural features, and
appears to have little potential to provide substantial information on the prehistory or history of the area.
This site is recommended not eligible for NRHP under Criterion D, and also appears to lack the
characteristics necessary for eligibility under Criteria A—C. No further work is recommended at
31HW670.
41

Figure 38. Map of 31HW670.
42

Figure 39. East -central portion of 31HW670 (pink flags), facing north.
Figure 40. Shovel Test 149 at 31HW670.
43

31HW671
Component(s):
Precontact: nondiagnostic lithic
Site Dimensions*:
15 in E-W x 15 in N-S
UTMs (NAD 83):
E334085 N3936121
Landform:
Floodplain
Elevation:
ca. 2,624 ft AMSL
Soil Type(s):
Cullowhee-Nikwasi complex, 0-2% slopes, (CxA)
Recommendation:
Not eligible as defined within APE; no further work for Project as presently defined
*Measurements based on artifact distribution within the Project APE only; site likely extends outside APE to the south.
Description. Site 31HW671 is represented by a single piece of precontact nondiagnostic lithic debitage
recovered from a shovel test within a large open field along the southern edge of the APE, on the
floodplain west of Beaverdam Creek (Figures 41 and 42; see Figures 13 and 14). The site measures
approximately 15 in north -south by 15 in east -west and is bounded by consecutive negative shovel tests to
the north, east, and west, and by edge of the APE to the south; it is possible that the site extends south
outside the APE.
The soils at 31HW671 are mapped as Cullowhee-Nikwasi complex, 0-2% slopes (CxA), which is a
frequently flooded, poorly drained fine sandy loam derived from loamy alluvium over sandy and gravelly
alluvium found on floodplains (USDA NRCS 2022). Soils at the site consisted of a 45-60 cm thick brown
(IOYR 4/3) sandy clay loam Ap horizon underlain by dark brown (IOYR 3/2) sandy clay extending to
depths of up to 55-80 cmbs (Figure 43), often ending on hydric soils.
Seven shovel tests (including all transect and delineation tests situated within 30 m) were excavated
across the site boundaries, and just one shovel test produced a single nondiagnostic chert flake from the A
horizon at a depth of up to 60 cmbs. Additionally, 10 transect shovel tests excavated at 15-m intervals
across the open field in this section of the Project APE yielded no additional cultural material.
Summary and Recommendations. Site 31HW671 is represented by a single piece of nondiagnostic lithic
debitage recovered from a single shovel test along the southern edge of the APE. The site is located on the
floodplain west of Beaverdam Creek and may continue south across the lndform. As currently defined,
however, site 31HW671 lacks evidence of substantial artifact concentrations, intact artifact deposits, and
cultural features, and appears to have little potential to provide substantial information on the prehistory
of the area. Site 31HW671 is recommended not eligible for the NRHP under all four eligibility criteria.
No additional consideration of this site is recommended within the presently -defined APE, but in the
event that the project APE is expanded to the south, further work is recommended to determine the full
extent of the site in that direction.
44

Figure 41. Map of 31HW671.
45

Figure 42. Site 31HW671 (pink flag in foreground), facing west.
Figure 43. Shovel Test 339 at 31HW671.
::

Unsurveyed Areas
Much of the southeast quadrant of the project APE (between Beaverdam Road and I-40) east of
Beaverdam Creek was not surveyed due to lack of landowner permission (see Figure 14). While most of
this property is disturbed and contains substantial fill deposits, additional survey of a small section of the
floodplain adjacent to Beaverdam Creek is recommended if that area cannot be avoided by construction.
SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS
TRC conducted an intensive archaeological survey and evaluation for the proposed replacement of
Bridges 248 and 249 on I-40 over SR 1613 (Beaverdam Road) in Haywood County, North Carolina (TIP
HB-0002, PA 21-05-0006). The APE for the Project encompasses approximately 57.01 acres along the
north and south sides of I-40 east and west of Beaverdam Road (SR 1613), and measures approximately
3,265 feet (997 m) east -west and from 435 to 1,589 feet (133 to 485 m) north -south. There are no federal -
or state-owned lands (apart from the existing NCDOT rights -of -way) within the APE.
An updated review of site and report files at the OSA indicated that there has been no prior systematic
survey within the Project APE. There is one previously identified site (3IHW271) within the APE,
however, as well as others in close proximity or in the general vicinity. The fieldwork included systematic
pedestrian reconnaissance of the entire APE (minus those properties for which a landowner denied access,
see below) and systematic shovel testing at 15-m intervals of all areas except for wetlands and areas
showing visible and severe disturbance. A total of 358 shovel tests and four 1 X 1 in test units were
excavated.
The fieldwork identified one previously recorded archaeological site (3IHW271) and four newly recorded
sites (31HW668-31HW671) (Table 8). Four of those sites contain precontact components, including one
(31HW271) dating from the Late Archaic through the Early Mississippian periods and one (31HW668)
containing a nondiagnostic precontact ceramic sherd; the other two precontact sites (31HW670 and
3IHW671) are represented only by nondiagnostic lithic components. Three sites contain postcontact
components, including one (31HW669) representing a late 19th through 20th century occupation; 2W
century artifacts were also recovered on two predominantly precontact sites (3IHW271 and 31HW670).
Table 8. Summary of Archaeological Sites Identified within the Bridles 248 and 249 APE.
NRHP Eligibility
Site Component Recommendation
31HW271 Precontact: Late Archaic, Middle Woodland, Mississippian; Eligible
Postcontact: 20th century
.......................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
31HW668 Precontact: nondiagnostic ceramic Not eligible*
............................................ .........................................................................................................g...................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... ...........................................................
31HW669 Postcontact: late 19a' through g.
h 20' cc Not eligible*
.................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
31HW670 Precontact: nondiagnostic
lithic; Postcontact: probable 20a' cen Not eliible
.......................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................g............................................................
31HW671 Precontact: nondiagnostic lithic Not eligible*
*Recommendation applies only to portion of the site identified within the current Project APE; no additional investigations
recommended within APE as presently defined.
Site 31HW271 is a large, multi -component precontact lithic and ceramic scatter located across a terrace
that also contains an existing farm. Late Archaic, Middle Woodland, and Early Mississippian components
were recognized, and other precontact occupations may also be present; there is also a low -density 20t"
century component associated with the farm. Although most materials were confined to the plowzone, a
buried A horizon is also present in some areas, and three potential cultural features were identified in
shovel tests and test units. This site is recommended eligible for the NRHP under Criterion D due to its
potential to provide information on regional Woodland and Mississippian period occupations, but appears
to lack the characteristics necessary for eligibility under Criteria A—C. Preservation in place does not
47

appear to be required, and archaeological data recovery excavations would be an appropriate mitigation
strategy if this site cannot be avoided by construction. Information on a proposed data recovery strategy is
provided in Appendix 2.
The remaining four sites (3IHW668-31HW671) appear to lack research potential and are recommended
not eligible for the NRHP under Criterion D as defined within the Project APE; the sites also appear to
lack the characteristics needed for eligibility under Criteria A—C. Only one of those sites (31HW670) is
totally contained within the APE, however, and additional delineation and evaluation of sites 31HW668,
31HW669, and 31HW671 are recommended should the APE be expanded at those locations.
Finally, much of the southeast quadrant of the project APE (between Beaverdam Road and I-40) east of
Beaverdam Creek was not surveyed due to lack of landowner permission. While most of this property is
disturbed and contains substantial fill deposits, additional survey of a small section of the floodplain
adjacent to Beaverdam Creek is recommended if that area cannot be avoided by construction.
48

REFERENCES CITED
Baker, Michael C.
1990 An Archaeological Survey and Evaluation of a Proposed Water and Sewer Improvement Project,
Haywood County, North Carolina. Hall and Baker Archaeological Consultants, Weaverville, North
Carolina.
Brown, Jane L., and Anne F. Rogers
1994a An Archaeological Survey of the Proposed Beaverdam Industrial Park, Haywood County, North
Carolina. Archaeology Laboratory, Western Carolina University, Cullowhee.
1994b Archaeological Survey of the Proposed Beaverdam Creek Industrial Park Sewer Line, Haywood
County, North Carolina. Archaeology Laboratory, Western Carolina University, Cullowhee.
Goldston, E.F., W.A. Davis, C.W. Croom, and John Moran
1954 Soil Survey Map, Haywood County, North Carolina. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Washington,
D.C. Electronic document, https://dc.lib.unc.edu/cdm/ref/collection/ncmaps/id/I 174.
Halvorsen, Scott
2021 Archaeological Survey Required Form. AR21-05-0006, Replace Bridges 248 and 249 on I-40 over SR
1613 (Beaverdam Rd) in Haywood County, NC (TIP HB-0002). North Carolina Department of
Transportation, Raleigh.
HPOWEB
2022 North Carolina State Historic Preservation Office GIS Web Service. Electronic document,
http://gis.ncdcr.gov/hpoweb/. Accessed April 2022.
Jones, S.A.
1905 Waynesville and its Vicinity within Radius Twenty-five Miles. The Waynesville Factory Site and
Electric Power Company, Waynesville, North Carolina. Electronic document,
https://dc.lib.unc.educdmrefcollectiomcmapsid95 52.
Jumey, R.C., W.D. Lee, S.F. Davidson, and W.A. Davis
1925 Soil Survey Map, Haywood County, North Carolina. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Washington,
D.C. Electronic document, https://dc.lib.unc.edu/cdm/ref/collection/ncmaps/id/I 143.
Royce, C.C.
1884 Map of the Former Territorial Limits of the Cherokee "Nation of' Indians. Smithsonian Institution,
Washington, D.C.
United States Department of Agricultural (USDA) Natural Resources Conservation Service (MRCS)
2022 Web Soil Survey. Accessed March 2022, https://websoilsurvey.sc.egov.usda.gov/App/HomePage.htm.
United States Geological Survey (USGS)
1894 Asheville, N.C., 1:125,000-scale topographic map.
1935 Canton, N.C., 1:24,000-scale planimetric map.
1967 Canton, N.C., 1:24,000-scale topographic map.

APPENDIX 1. ARTIFACT CATALOGS

\
\\\\))\\))\k)))))\)\)\))vvvvv)\\)6\)k\\)E\)6)
\)))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))

E
C
7
Y o
C
" -aCv-_
m
o
o42
QE
Ec
>
>°x EN
Ec
ov-
v
mi oo>o`
M. W, °
IZ vE o -
E o
N o
m0cw
oUo
-v
_
c
«o _
a
° o`
° +' o Q E ° x
E
`3c� N°
o
°o --o o E °-te° o o W o
3m o
°
LL
5
E
Em
w E
n
ca .-+ ca ^. m m 0
M
1. N m. ti ti ti a N ti ti N m . . ti N N N N ti m N ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti m, ti ti ti ti v. N N N N N N N N N N v.
w w w w w w w uwi � uwi uwi uwi uwi uwi uwi uwi uwi uwi uwi uwi uwi uwi uwi uwi uwi uwi uwi � uwi uwi uwi � uwi � � uwi uwi � uwi � uwi � uwi uwi uwi uwi uwi � uwi � uwi w
o
o m
I V'
O
II U U U V U U U U U U U V U U U U , U U 2 U U�C§ 'C§ V U U U V U V�� U U U V 6'6 V V U U U V
Y F Y Y Q Q w Y F F Y Y F Y Y F Y
LL� LL w w w w w J y=j J w w w LL LL i LL w LL [D
IIm m m m m m m m m m m m m m z K m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m
O O O O O O O O O O O O O O F J 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O
N N N N N N M G M O O O W N .y M V O O O O ci m m m 0 0 of N N O O O O O O O
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 6 66� 6 6 6 6 6 O O O O O O 6 6 6 6 6 4A y m 0 0 0 0 6 6 6 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
IQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQ Q Q QQQ QQQQQQQQQm QQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQ
3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3
3
3
3 3 3
3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3
3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3
x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x
x
x
x x x
x x x x x x x x x x
x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x

I
o
o
o
0
o
> o .y
o d
r a _ o
o
3 E m
no
I
E
i? ry m m m n ry m m n m un m kc .-1 ry v kc m v ry g m ca -1 m rvu� ry m n �c ^. .-I u n ca n ca -I -I ry m rv� .-+ .-1 ca �c -i
ry ^� o ^� o c6 rri o
1. N v. a ti� ry ti ti m. ti ti ti ti m ti ti ry ti ti ti ti m m ti ti m ti ti ti ti ry ti m ti ti m ti ti. ti ti ti ti ti m ti ry ti ti ti ti m ti ti m.
-i -i -i -i -i -i -i -i -i -i -i - - - - - - - - � uWi uWi uWi uWi uWi � uWi uWi uWi uWi � uWi � � uWi uWi uWi uWi uWi uWi uWi uWi uWi uWi uWi uWi uWi uWi uWi uWi uWi uWi uWi uWi uWi
¢0
E
i o
IO�O°OOO��aa ��°OOO�OaO�a�aauOaa �O�u'OF u u�Oaa'OF u u OO°O�O�O O�
�ILLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLW�ww�wLLLLw�wLLLLLLLLLL LLLLLLLLLLLL LL LLLL
x�YY�Y Y�Y
mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm. mmmmmm. mm
•� O1 vCOi vCOi v�0i v�0i ?? N N N N m m m m v `� ��� m v v � v"'i v"'i v"'i �� v�i v�i ry ry ry m v v ry rv� ry ry ��� m ca n o ry
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o m m o 0 0 0 0 0 0 o v o ry m m .°-+' .°-+' o o o r^,� r^,� o 0 0 0 0 0 o m m.. o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
IQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQaaaaaaaaa-6aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa QQQQQQQQ QQ
.. .. ry ry ry ry ry ry ry
vmi vmi vmi vmi �n �n �n o v v v v v v v v v v �n vrvi vmi
R R R R R R R
ry ry ry ry ry ry ry ry ry ry ry ry ry ry ry ry ry ry ry m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m v a a a a v v v a v v
v v v v v �n �n �n
�n �n
n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n
3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3
n n n n n n n n
3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3
n n
3 3
x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x
x x x x x x x x
x x

`o
> m w
o t m E
o7J o - o oc 3
no r o
o a - E o
o «° o 2 -
E >
w o - - - x
c
0
n Y w ° ao °
C0 m ^'. ca �n �c v, ca n �n .� m m v, ry .� n ry .� m ry �? .� .� n .� n `-' �c ry m
v o o rri o6 v ry rri Z o o r; o o Ln o
i
...........
.....rv... .............................
.rv..crv....rv...rv.rv..N...rv.... ..........
.....rv..m .� .....
.... N
w uwi � uwi � uwi uwi uwi uwi uwi uwi uwi uwi uwi uwi uwi uwi � uwi � uwi uwi uwi uwi uwi � uwi � uwi uwi � � � uwi uwi uwi � uwi uwi � uwi uwi uwi � uwi uwi uwi uwi uwi uwi j ywj w w w w w
a LL m LL m LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL m LL m LL LL LL LL LL m LL m LL LL m m m LL LL LL m LL LL m LL LL LL m LL LL LL LL LL LL m LL LL LL LL LL LL F F F F F F F F F F F F F
!I� u u u O O O O O O u u d c u u u u u
IILL w J= J w w w w LL m m w w J= J w J= J w w w J= J w w w w w w w w w w w J= w w J= J w J= J w w w w w LL m w
ilm m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m
m m m m "' om ry ry ry ry ry N N N o o ry ry o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .-+ ry -- v v N" m .... ry m o o ry ry
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 6 6 6 6 LA N N m m m m .rv+ v v v v ory o 0 0 0 0. o 0 0 0 0 0
IQQQQQQQQQQQ aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa<<< aaaaaa- �aaaaaaaa
0 � � .. n n m m m m m m o 0 0 0 0 o o v
............... n n n n n n n n n .....
.. �c �c m m m m m m m
.... m m o 0 0 .......
m m m m m m m m m m m
m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m
m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m
n n n n n n n n n n n
3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3
n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n
3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3
n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n
3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3
x x x x x x x x x x x
x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x
x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x

0
o � w
° E w
E _ o - _
u ic ic x E w
« m m `o um"o
ob m « _ ¢-
o- H- E c w rry w m
3 5 3 - _ _ $
of N w w E E x
o
m m m ca m m N .� m o ca ca ry ^! n m .� m ry .� ^. •� �n C0 n 'I n ^. o4 m co -1 ry m y
m .4 r4 o vi o ry o 0
w w w uwi � uwi uwi uwi � uwi � uwi � uwi uwi � uwi uwi uwi � uwi uwi uwi � uwi uwi � uwi � uwi uwi uwi uwi � uwi � uwi � uwi uwi uwi � uwi uwi uwi uwi uwi � uwi uwi uwi uwi � uwi uwi uwi uwi uwi uwi �
F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F
¢0
¢0
m E E
v o a
lO�°OOO�OO�OOO�OO�OOO°OaaaOOOO���°OOOOO�°OOO�O Oa coo 00 06bu
�ILLwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww���LLwwwwwwwwwwww��������LL �w w N�LLwwwwwwww
V
IIm m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m z m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m z m m m z m m m m m m m m m
6N N N . O O O O O O O O O O O O V V V N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N M M ry m N m N m V V V N N ry N N
O N N N N N M M M
O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O � 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O O
c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I N N m c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I N N N N N m m m V V c-I c-I c-I
W
Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q [D [D [D Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q [D [D [D [D [D [D [D [D [D [D LL Q Q Q
..............
-+m>>>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N
n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n
3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3
x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x

`o 0
w
m -o
n`o
o sic E 3
E w o v
oa E ei
o
m o m m ry
o E `o m `o
„ E ° E
w = -o
oo °' +. E c �_
m m >
n`o w > " w n`o -m n`o .�
3 N s' oc w 3 °1 3 w
=a o o o o -o
n
Iq ": -' m v n cc � ry m n ry ry m ry w .-+ m ry m cc m IN
m m'
o ry o o N vi ai o .4 o o � `^ o 6 6 o v o o6 ry o 6 6 � i M -m c4 o o 6 o .4
.-+ .-+ .-+ .-+ ti .-+ , M N ry N ry N m ry N ry v m. rv� ti ti N N� ry m ry ry N v ry ry N ry N N m Im ry m N N ry ry ti ti ti ti ry ti ti ti
w w w w w w uwi j uwi uwi uwi j uwi uwi uwi uwi uwi uwi uwi uwi uwi uwi uwi uwi uwi uwi uwi j uwi uwi uwi uwi uwi � '^ � � '^ � � uwi uwi j uwi uwi uwi j j uwi uwi uwi uwi uwi uwi uwi uwi uwi j
F F F F F F F F F F F F
no
E
m �
a >
Oaaaua�aaa�°ug auauauu���OOOOO°OOO°aaOO�OOO�OOOO
ILLww�rvJ wwwww� wwwwww ��wwwwwwwwwwwwww������ wwwwwwwwww�ww
mmmm�� .mmmmmmm.mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm.
0 0 0 0 - o - - - - - - - o - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - o - - - - - - - - - - - -
000000 oNNNNNNNNmmmmmm mmaaa66666066666666666 ��0000000000
1������ � ry ry ry ry ry ry ry ry m m m m m m m m a a a � , � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � �
m m m m m m m m m m m m m a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a
v v
m . m m m .
,n m v v a a a a a a a a a a a a a a v v v v v vmi cc
i o 0 0 0 0 0 0 .-+ m N N �n $ ----- m m
ry ry ry ry ry ry ry ry ry ry ry ry ry ry ry ry ry ry ry ry ry ry ry ry ry ry ry ry ry ry ry ry ry ry ry ry o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
ti N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N
n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n
3 3 3 n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n
3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3
x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x

` o
T
E
0
O
v N N o
- O
=
1 Y
o
0
o
v `o v
v ^
-o
Z m o ,v. v
= v
-O m
0
o
`°
`v
>o
E
O
E- n
-O "
N
D
N
w 0 N
C
-O -O
—0C
O
OZ
E
1
Q
°
a v
m o Y
m
o
°n
ol
v
a
O 0
_
-
_ u
E
o a
3
E
-o v> v
E ,: 2 -o ,�
`O
0
m t0
�- `o
v
_
v
E> > v a o -
E v v a
�', --vo m oa
`o x E v
m
0 v
°oa
E Y
Y
v a
v v y v m o N�
> m-0 a o
o
o o v
o
o
E—
O NY O
n>
Oo
sE
rl M M Iq N
I rl O O O ci
M W N Lq ti N
O C O rl ci
aO E
O Iq W Iq r
r N N C
o1
r
O
M
E a
N r M o1 N o1
rl N 01 O O
Ew
rl tq C a1 W N r W Vt M
N N M O M W M W tD tD
Vt N rl
w.
I/1 Vt W
O N rl
wEw,!:
r r In In r
ci N rl ci rl
rl M rl ci
rl ci rl V1
N
v
sE `o
ci ci rl ci N rl ci rl ci rl ci rl N rl ci N M N rl ci
a
N v
v
`o `o T a `o Y `O `O `O 3
rl ci rl M C N M
N
v
Y `o
ci C rl ci N rl ci rl ci
`O `O `O `O
N rl ci rl ci rl
`o `O `O
2
0 0 0
a 0
0 0 v m m 3 s v 0 E 0 0 0 0
°n °n
E 0
-0 0 0 0 0
0 m 0 0
I.
v
°n
`v `v
-
`v`v = v `v ` `v `v `v `v `v v
- s
` `v `v `v `v `v
,. = t0 `v `v `v
s �. 0
0 0 -O o
-O o o
a w o o 0_.3 a o 3 0 0 o o o o
0 3 0 0 0 0 0
3.3 0 0 0 s O
o 0 0 0 0.3
3 3 3 N 33 3333a3w 3w33333a3w w ww33333 333 3 33333
- --- ----------------------- ----------------- ------
_
6 r r r 0 O O.. . tD N tD tD r tD O O M O O O O C
N N N Vt Vt Vt N N N N N N N N M M M N � N N N
v O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O. O O O O O
N
O
•�
Q Q Q Q
Q Q Q Q
Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q
Q
Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q
Q Q Q Q Q Q
2
h0
O
E
u
m vl
- - -
- - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - -
¢ LL
`o `m
i N
`• L
C a s V1
ti . . .
....
. . . .
.. M .. tD r W 01 O O rl N
. . ti N N M tD tD N N O O O O rl ci rl ci
N
rl
N N N N N N N N N N N N N M M C
ci rl ci rl ci rl ci rl ci rl ci rl ci rl ci rl
C V1 V1 tD r r
ci rl ci rl ci rl
N
o E
ate+ Z
O O O
o O O o
N N
0 0 0 0
N N W O a N M C V1 tD r W W 01 O
O O o
O
O O O O O O O O O O O O O N
rn rn
N M M C V1 V1
o
a
ti ti ti a °� °� °� °� °� °� °� °� rn
rn
rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn
rn rn rn rn rn rn
S m
%
. . . .
. . . .
. rn o . . . . . . . . .
rn
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . .
t>D t>D t>D t>D t>D t>D t>D t>D t>D t>D t>D t>D t>D t>D t>D t>D
t>D t>D t>D t>D t>D t>D
a
Q
m m m m
m m m m
m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m
m
m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m
m m m m m m

E
0
0
v 0 O O O Y O
a° 3 i. o o E o
v
— a
3 a 3 E o o o o E `01
v~i v~i v~i v~i v~i v~i v~i v~i v~i v~i v~i v~i v
x x x x x x x x x x x x i
M C rl N M C V1 rl N rl ci N n
x x x x x x x x x x x x 3
Q Q Q Q Q Q Q ¢¢¢¢¢<
cN-I cN-I cN-I cN-I cN-I cN-I cN-I cN-I cN-I cN-I r
rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn o
. . . . . . . . . . . . o
u
x x x x x x x x x x x x i

APPENDIX 2. DATA RECOVERY PLAN FOR 31HW271

APPENDIX 2. PROPOSED DATA RECOVERY EXCAVATIONS AT 3114W271
Site 31HW271 is a moderate -sized (ca. 105 X 135 m) multicomponent site that contains Late Archaic,
Middle Woodland (Pigeon phase), and Mississippian (Early Pisgah phase) period components; other
precontact components are likely present as well. Three potential cultural features were identified at the
base of the plowzone during initial work, but cannot be assigned to specific cultural periods. Most
artifacts were recovered from the plowzone, including a buried plowzone remnant observed primarily in
the north -central portion of the site. A low density of lithic material and a few sherds were recovered from
the upper portion of the B horizon, but it is unlikely that there are substantial or deeply buried cultural
deposits within the B horizon.
This site has been recommended eligible for the NRHP under Criterion D based on the presence of a
moderate density of Woodland and Mississippian period ceramics, primarily in the north -central part of
the site (see Figure 19), which suggest that additional cultural features and possibly structural remains
may be present. Such remains could provide substantial information on the prehistory of the area and
provide valuable comparative data concerning precontact occupations in this part of the Pigeon River
drainage. The site appears to lack the eligibility requirements for Criteria A—C, however. Preservation in
place does not appear to be required, and archaeological data recovery excavations would be an
appropriate mitigation strategy if this site cannot be avoided by construction.
TRC recommends that any necessary data recovery excavations at 31HW271 be limited to those parts of
the site that are to be disturbed by construction associated with the project (the Limits of Disturbance, or
LOD), and be highly focused on exploring the Woodland and Mississippian occupations in those portions
of the LOD that produced precontact ceramics during the survey and evaluation work. TRC does not
recommend excavations targeting the Archaic or postcontact (20th century) components at 3IHW271, as
the associated materials have little to no potential to provide additional information.
TRC recommends that the investigations begin with excavation of up to 10 additional 1 X 1 in units in the
ceramic bearing portions of the LOD in order to gather artifact samples and confirm the stratigraphy in
areas where units were not excavated during the previous work. Those excavations should be followed by
the use of mechanized equipment to remove all plowzones (including buried Ap horizons) from the
ceramic bearing portions of the LOD; based on those results, limited stripping outside that area may also
be conducted. In the unlikely event that substantial unplowed A horizon deposits are encountered, they
should be sampled before mechanically removal. All features should be mapped, and the non -grave
features (including pits, posts, etc.) excavated. All potential graves should be identified so that the
NCDOT and other parties can consult regarding appropriate avoidance and preservation measures.
The following principal research questions are proposed for the work.
Middle Woodland (Pigeon Phase):
• Chronology: What is the time range of the Middle Woodland occupation(s) at 3IHW27I? Is there
any evidence of a Connestee occupation? If so, does that occupation post-date A.D. 600 as has
been proposed at other sites in the area (e.g., Robinson et al. 1994, 1996)?
• Ceramic Typology: What Middle Woodland ceramics are present at 31HW271 besides the Pigeon
series wares identified during the initial work (e.g., Connestee, Swift Creek)? Does the site contain
an unmixed Pigeon phase component, such as was recently documented at the Magic Waters site
(31 JK291) in Swain County (Benyshek 2018), or are mixed Pigeon and Connestee materials present,
as is more common in the region? Can typological analysis, coupled with radiocarbon dating, allow
the temporal seriation of individual pit features or other Middle Woodland contexts at 3IHW27I?

Structures and Features: What sort of Middle Woodland structures, features, and occupation areas
are present at 31HW271, and how do they compare with those present at the Iotla (31MA77)
(Benyshek 2020), Magic Waters (Benyshek 2018), Old Elementary School (Benyshek and Nelson
2022), Garden Creek (Wright 2019), Ela (Wetmore 1989) and other sites in western North Carolina?
What information does 31HW271 contain concerning Middle Woodland settlement patterns, which
at sites documented thus far, represent small villages, isolated households, and feature
concentrations that appear to lack domestic structures?
Subsistence: How does the Woodland period subsistence data from 31HW271 compare with that
from other Middle Woodland contexts in western North Carolina and eastern Tennessee? Does the
evidence suggest a continued reliance on nuts as is present at other sites? What is the evidence for
Middle Woodland horticulture at this site, including use of such native cultigens as maygrass,
chenopod, and cucurbits? Is corn present in Middle Woodland contexts as has been documented at
the Iotla and California Creek sites in western North Carolina (Benyshek 2020; Shumate et al.
1998) and the Icehouse Bottom and Townsend sites in eastern Tennessee (Chapman and Crites
1987; Hollenbach and Yerka 2011)?
Mississippian Period (Pisgah Phase):
• Chronology: What is the timing and duration of the Pisgah phase occupation at 31HW27I? Can one or
more Early or Late Pisgah components be isolated?
• Ceramic Typology: How does the ceramic assemblage from the 31HW271 compare with materials from
other regional sites (e.g., Benyshek and Nelson 2022; Benyshek and Webb 2017; Dickens 1976; Idol i.p.;
Moore 1981; Nelson 2021)? What decorative motifs are represented and are they limited to those defined
by Dickens (1976)? What wares are present? Are Early Pisgah ceramics present that represent two distinct
traditions as have been found at other sites, or are there indications that these wares were in use at different
times during the Early Pisgah phase and have yet to be isolated?
Structures and Features: What is the nature of the Pisgah occupation(s) at 31HW271? What sorts of
structures and pit features are present, and how do they compare with others excavated in the region (e.g.,
Benyshek 2018; Idol i.p.; Moore 2002; Nelson 2021)? Are Early Pisgah features limited to large "storage"
pits as is the case at other sites in the region? Are Early Pisgah flexed pole structures present and if so, do
their forms vary considerably as has been the case with those found elsewhere (e.g., square and rectangular
with rounded ends) (e.g., Benyshek and Webb 2008; Nelson 2021; Shumate et al. 2009)? Can those forms
be demonstrated to vary temporally or are structures with differing footprints in use at the same time? How
do any Late Pisgah structures present compare with those found elsewhere that consist of winter house
basins (e.g., Warren Wilson, 31BN1046, Garden Creek)?
• What evidence is present for Pisgah phase subsistence practices at 31HW271? Is there evidence that Early
Pisgah residents relied on corn agriculture as has been assumed or demonstrated at other sites (e.g.,
Ravensford)?
REFERENCES
Benyshek, Tasha
2018 Management Summary for the Archaeological Data Recovery at the Magic Waters Site (31JK291) for
the Casino Parking Garage Footprint for the Harrah's Cherokee Casino Resort Expansion Project.
Submitted by TRC to the Tribal Casino Gaming Enterprise, Cherokee, North Carolina.
2020 Archaeological Data Recovery Excavations at Jotla (31M477) at the Macon County Airport, North
Carolina. TRC Environmental Corporation, Asheville.
Benyshek, Tasha, and Paul A. Webb
2017 Ceramics from Ravensford, Qualla Boundary, North Carolina. Presented at Uplands Archaeology in the
East Symposium XII, Appalachian State University, Boone, North Carolina.

2008 Mississippian and Historic Cherokee Structure Types and Settlement Plans at Ravensford. Presented at
2008 meeting of the Southeastern Archaeological Conference, Charlotte.
Benyshek, Tasha and Michael Nelson
2022 Archaeological Data Recovery at 31SW595 and 31SW596 at the EBCI Old Elementary School Tract
and for the Downtown Waterline Project, Swain County, Qualla Boundary North Carolina. TRC
Environmental Corporation. Submitted to the EBCI Office of Planning and Management.
Chapman, Jefferson, and Gary Crites
1987 Evidence for Early Maize (Zea mays) from the Icehouse Bottom Site, Tennessee. American Antiquity
52:352-354.
Dickens, Roy S.
1976 Cherokee Prehistory: The Pisgah Phase in the Appalachian Summit Region. University of Tennessee
Press, Knoxville.
Hollenbach, Kandace D., and Stephen J. Yerka (editors)
2011 Archaic and Woodland Occupations in Tuckaleechee Cove. Archaeological Research Laboratory,
University of Tennessee.
Idol, Bruce
i.p. Archaeological Data Recovery Excavations at 31 BN1046, Buncombe County, North Carolina. Report
in preparation.
Moore, David G.
1981 A Comparison of Two Pisgah Ceramic Assemblages. Unpublished M.A. thesis, University of North
Carolina, Chapel Hill, North Carolina.
2002 Pisgah Village Evolution at the Warren Wilson Site. In The Archaeology of Native North Carolina:
Papers in Honor ofH. Trawick Ward, edited by J.M. Eastman, C.B. Rodning, and E.A. Boudreaux III, pp.
76-83. Southeastern Archaeological Conference Special Publication 7.
Nelson, Michael
2021 Management Summary: Archaeological Data Recovery Excavations at 31TV1085, Transylvania
County, North Carolina. TRC Environmental Corporation, Asheville. Submitted to NCDOT, Raleigh.
Shumate, M. Scott, Larry R. Kimball, and Patti Evans -Shumate
1998 Data Recovery at Prehistoric Site 31 ND60 and Archaeological Testing at Prehistoric Site 31 ND289
along the A-10 Connector, Madison County, North Carolina. Appalachian State University Laboratories of
Archaeological Science, Department of Anthropology, Boone, North Carolina. Submitted to the FHA and
the NCDOT.
Shumate, Scott, Lotte Govaerts, and John Paul Preston
2009 Archaeological Discovery at the River Bend Site (31BN867) on the Biltmore Estate, Buncombe
County, North Carolina. Blue Ridge Archaeological Consultants, Arden, North Carolina. Submitted to
Biltmore Estate, Asheville.
Wetmore, Ruth Y.
1989 The Ela Site (31 SW5): Archaeological Data Recovery of Connestee and Qualla Phase Occupations at
the East Elementary School Site, Swain County, North Carolina. (CH-89-C-0000-0424). On file, Office of
State Archaeology, Raleigh.
Wright, Alice P.
2019 Garden Creek: The Archaeology of Interaction in Middle Woodland Appalachia. The University of
Alabama Press, Tuscaloosa.