MMC01 Cultural Resources EvaluationCONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION – NOT FOR PUBLIC DISTRIBUTION
CULTURAL RESOURCES REPORT COVER SHEET
DAHP Project #: 2023-04-02128
Author: Bethany K. Mathews
Title of Report: Cultural Resource Assessment for 906 Rhoton Rd SE, Yelm, Thurston
County, WA
Date of Report: 13 July 2023
County(ies): Thurston Section: 19 Township: 17 N Range: 2E
Quad: McKenna, WA Acres: 3.6
PDF of report submitted (REQUIRED) Yes
Historic Property Inventory Forms to be Approved Online? Yes No
Archaeological Site(s)/Isolate(s) Found or Amended? Yes No
TCP(s) found? Yes No
Replace a draft? Yes No
Satisfy a DAHP Archaeological Excavation Permit requirement? Yes # No
Were Human Remains Found? Yes DAHP Case # No
DAHP Archaeological Site #:
PAGE INTENTIONALLY BLANK
CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION – NOT FOR PUBLIC DISTRIBUTION
Cultural Resource Assessment for
906 Rhoton Rd SE,
Yelm, Thurston County, WA
Prepared by:
Bethany K. Mathews, MA, RPA
Archaeologist & Principal
Antiquity Consulting, LLC
4800 Capitol Blvd SE, Suite A
antiquityconsulting@gmail.com
www.AntiquityConsulting.com
360.819.4998
Prepared for:
MM Rhoton Rd LLC
712 Main St
Buckley, WA 98321
Steve McClung
steve@mcclungconstruction.com
DAHP Project #:
2023-04-02128
Lead Agency:
City of Yelm
2022.0129
Date of Report:
13 July 2023
C ULTURAL R ESOURCE A SSESSMENT FOR
906 R HOTON R D SE,
Y ELM, T HURSTON C OUNTY, WA i
CONTENTS
Executive Summary ............................................................................................................................................... iii
Introduction ............................................................................................................................................................. 1
Project Background ............................................................................................................................................. 1
Project Description.............................................................................................................................................. 1
Tribal Coordination ............................................................................................................................................. 1
Regulatory Context ............................................................................................................................................. 1
Environmental Setting ............................................................................................................................................ 6
Geomorphology .................................................................................................................................................. 6
Water ................................................................................................................................................................... 7
Vegetation and Fauna ......................................................................................................................................... 7
Cultural Setting ..................................................................................................................................................... 10
Precontact and Ethnohistoric Periods ............................................................................................................... 10
Historic Period .................................................................................................................................................. 13
Literature Review.................................................................................................................................................. 24
Archaeological Resources Predictive Model .................................................................................................... 24
Cultural Resource Surveys within 2 Kilometers of Project Area ..................................................................... 24
Historic Properties within 2 Kilometers of Project Area .................................................................................. 25
Cemeteries within 2 Kilometers of Project Area .............................................................................................. 25
Archaeological Sites within 2 Kilometers of Project Area ............................................................................... 25
Research Design.................................................................................................................................................... 26
Expectations ...................................................................................................................................................... 26
Field Methodology Plan .................................................................................................................................... 26
Survey Results ...................................................................................................................................................... 27
Field Methodology ............................................................................................................................................ 27
Survey Findings ................................................................................................................................................ 27
Analysis............................................................................................................................................................. 27
Conclusions and Recommendations ..................................................................................................................... 27
Inadvertent Discovery Protocol ............................................................................................................................ 29
Archaeological Materials Inadvertent Discovery Protocol ............................................................................... 29
Human Skeletal Remains Inadvertent Discovery Protocol ............................................................................... 29
Bibliography ......................................................................................................................................................... 30
Appendix A: Shovel Probe Log ............................................................................................................................ 36
TABLES
Table 1. Soil descriptions of project area. ............................................................................................................... 7
Table 2. Cultural resource surveys completed within 2 kilometers of the project area. ....................................... 24
Table 3. Archaeological sites recorded within 2 kilometers of project area. ........................................................ 25
FIGURES
Figure 1. Project location marked on 1:24,000 McKenna, WA USGS 7.5-minute quadrangle. ............................ 2
Figure 2. Project site plan, courtesy Iris Group. ..................................................................................................... 3
Figure 3. Surface geology of project vicinity (data from WSDNR 2023A). .......................................................... 8
Figure 4. Soil units mapped in project area (soils data from NRCS 2023; LiDAR from WSDNR 2023B). ......... 9
Figure 5. Ethnogeographic locations mapped in project vicinity. Locations are approximate. ............................ 11
C ULTURAL R ESOURCE A SSESSMENT FOR
906 R HOTON R D SE,
Y ELM, T HURSTON C OUNTY, WA ii
Figure 6. Portion of 1856 Township 17N Range 2E GLO Map, with project location indicated (Source: Bureau
of Land Management 2023A). Note the aliquots are slightly skewed within section 19 making the project
area appear to be in the northwest aliquot. ................................................................................................... 18
Figure 7. Portion of 1916 1:125,000 Chehalis Quadrangle topographic map, with project location indicated
(Source: USGS 1916). .................................................................................................................................. 19
Figure 8. Portion of 1944 1:62,500 Yelm Quadrangle topographic map, with project location indicated (Source:
USGS 1944). ................................................................................................................................................. 20
Figure 9. Portion of 1959 1:24,000 McKenna Quadrangle topographic map, with project location indicated
(Source: USGS 1959). .................................................................................................................................. 21
Figure 10. Portion of 1968 1:24,000 McKenna Quadrangle topographic map, with project location indicated
(Source: USGS 1968). .................................................................................................................................. 22
Figure 11. Portion of 1990 1:24,000 McKenna Quadrangle topographic map, with project location indicated
(Source: USGS 1990). .................................................................................................................................. 23
Figure 12. Shovel probe locations illustrated on aerial image. Pedestrian survey is simplified and represents three
technicians less than 15-meter transects. ...................................................................................................... 28
C ULTURAL R ESOURCE A SSESSMENT FOR
906 R HOTON R D SE,
Y ELM, T HURSTON C OUNTY, WA iii
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Antiquity Consulting was contracted by MM Rhoton Rd LLC to conduct a cultural resource assessment for an
industrial office proposed at 609 Rhoton Rd SE, Yelm, Thurston County, WA (Township 17N Range 2E
Section 19; parcel 64300800303). The proponent plans to develop an industrial office, and associated
bioretention facility, parking, access, and utilities on a 3.6-acre parcel. This assessment was conducted during
the City of Yelm State Environmental Policy Act review for the project. The project is situated in an area that
should be considered to have moderately high risk for encountering archaeological resources due to
environmental factors, cultural history, and local archaeological site patterning. Antiquity Consulting completed
a cultural resources survey for the proposed project area in April 2023 and no archaeological resources were
observed in the project area. Antiquity Consulting recommends compliance with a standard inadvertent
discovery protocol during project ground disturbing activities.
C ULTURAL R ESOURCE A SSESSMENT FOR
906 R HOTON R D SE,
Y ELM, T HURSTON C OUNTY, WA 1
IN TRODUCTION
Antiquity Consulting was contracted by MM Rhoton Rd LLC to conduct a cultural resource assessment for an
industrial office proposed at 609 Rhoton Rd SE, Yelm, Thurston County, WA (Township 17N Range 2E
Section 19; parcel 64300800303). The proponent plans to develop an industrial office, and associated
bioretention facility, parking, access, and utilities on a 3.6-acre parcel. This assessment was conducted during
the City of Yelm State Environmental Policy Act review for the project.
Project Background
Antiquity Consulting was contracted by McClung Construction to conduct a cultural resources assessment for
the project. Per the Washington State Standards for Cultural Resources Reporting (Washington State
Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation 2023A), this cultural resource assessment was led by
Secretary of the Interior-qualified Archaeologist Bethany Mathews, MA, RPA.
Project Description
MM Rhoton Rd LLC plans to develop a 60’ by 120’ industrial office, and associated bioretention facility,
parking, access, and utilities on a 3.6-acre parcel. The project is located at 609 Rhoton Rd SE, Yelm, Thurston
County, WA (Township 17N Range 2E Section 19; parcel 64300800303).
Tribal Coordination
The Confederated Tribes of the Chehalis Reservation, Cowlitz Indian Tribe, Nisqually Indian Tribe, Puyallup
Tribe of Indians, and Squaxin Island Tribe cultural resources staff were notified of the archaeological survey
schedule via email on 25 April 2023. At that time, Antiquity Consulting notified the Tribes that pedestrian and
shovel probe surveys would be conducted at 15-meter intervals, with shovel probing planned at 30-meter
intervals. A survey plan was provided via ArcGIS online, and Antiquity requested to incorporate concerns into
the research design and historic context.
Regulatory Context
This survey was completed during permit pre-application review and was designed to meet the requirements of
the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA). SEPA requires that all major actions sponsored, funded, permitted,
or approved by State and/or local agencies provide consideration of the impacts of the planned action on the
environment, which includes properties of historical, archaeological, scientific, or cultural importance
(Washington Administrative Code 197-11-960). The Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation is
the agency with the technical expertise to consider the effects of a proposed action on cultural resources and to
provide formal recommendations to local governments and other State agencies for appropriate treatments or
actions.
Washington Heritage Laws
Washington State protects its archaeology and heritage resources under various laws. In Washington State it is
illegal to knowingly disturb archaeological sites or certain archaeological materials on state and private lands.
Laws protecting these resources include the Archaeological Sites and Resources Law (RCW 27.53), Indian
Graves and Records Law (RCW 27.44), Human Remains Law (RCW 68.50), and Abandoned and Historic
Cemeteries and Historic Graves Law (RCW 68.60). Per RCW 27.53.060 and WAC 25-48-060 the Department
C ULTURAL R ESOURCE A SSESSMENT FOR
906 R HOTON R D SE,
Y ELM, T HURSTON C OUNTY, WA 2
Figure 1 . Project location marked on 1:24,000 McKenna, WA USGS 7.5-minute quadrangle.
C ULTURAL R ESOURCE A SSESSMENT FOR
906 R HOTON R D SE,
Y ELM, T HURSTON C OUNTY, WA 3
Figure 2 . Project site plan, courtesy Iris Group.
C ULTURAL R ESOURCE A SSESSMENT FOR
906 R HOTON R D SE,
Y ELM, T HURSTON C OUNTY, WA 4
of Archaeology and Historic Preservation may issue an archaeological site alteration/excavation permit for
impacts to an archaeological site in accordance with a professional scientific research plan.
Evaluation of Historic Properties for the Washington Heritage Register
The Washington Heritage Register (WHR), which is maintained by the DAHP, is a list of historically
significant districts, sites, buildings, structures, and objects that are considered significant in local or state
history (Washington State Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation 2018). To qualify for listing
on the WHR a building, site, structure, or object must be at least 50 years old, or should have documented
exceptional significance if less than 50 years old. The resource should have documented historical significance
at the local, state, or federal level, and should maintain a high to medium level of integrity of important
character defining features.
Evaluation of Historic Properties for the National Register of Historic Places
Evaluation of historic properties at local levels is typically modeled after evaluation of historic properties for the
National Register of Historic Places. A historic property is defined as “a district, site, building, structure or
object significant in American history, architecture, engineering, archeology or culture at the national, state, or
local level.” These properties are typically evaluated in terms of historic significance, integrity, and the general
stipulation that the property be 50 years old or older (for exceptions see 36 CFR 60.4, Criteria Considerations
[a–g]). National Register Bulletin Guidelines state that to be eligible for listing in the NRHP, a historic property
must represent a significant part of American history, architecture, archaeology, engineering, or culture (Little
and Hardesty 2000; Shrimpton 1990). Additionally, to be considered eligible, a historic property must meet one
or more of the four NRHP criteria:
A) be associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of our history;
or
B) be associated with the lives of persons significant in our past; or
C) embody the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction, or that represent the
work of a master, or that possess high artistic values, or that represent a significant and distinguishable
entity whose components may lack individual distinction; or
D) have yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important in prehistory or history.
Most archaeological sites are evaluated under Criterion D, their potential to yield important information. This
objective is accomplished by developing historic contexts. A historic context is a body of information about the
past and the tangible expressions of past events organized by the elements of theme, place, and time (NPS
1991). The historic context for the project area is summarized in this report and serves as a foundation for
evaluating cultural resources in the project area.
Historic Property Integrity
Integrity is the ability of a historic property to convey its significance. Integrity must be evident through historic
qualities, which may include location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, and association (NPS
1991:1). Degree of integrity should be taken into consideration when evaluating resources under the NRHP
C ULTURAL R ESOURCE A SSESSMENT FOR
906 R HOTON R D SE,
Y ELM, T HURSTON C OUNTY, WA 5
criteria, for example:
• If eligible for its historic associations under Criterion A, then the resource should retain substantial aspects
of its overall integrity, although design and workmanship may not weigh as heavily as those aspects related
directly to its historic associations (NPS 1991:44-48).
• To be eligible for its association with a prominent person under Criterion B, the resource should retain
some aspects of integrity, although design and workmanship may not be as important as the others (NPS
1991:44–48).
• To be eligible for its architectural merits under Criterion C, a resource must retain its physical features that
constitute a significant construction technique or architectural style. Critical aspects of integrity for such
properties are design, workmanship, and materials. Location and setting will also be important for those
resources whose design reflects their immediate environment (NPS 1991:44–48).
• Resources significant under Criterion D may not have the type of integrity described under the other
criteria but are considered to have integrity if these aspects support data potential (NPS 2020:35). Of the
seven aspects of integrity, location, design, materials, and workmanship are generally the most important for
Criterion D properties (NPS 1991:44–48).
C ULTURAL R ESOURCE A SSESSMENT FOR
906 R HOTON R D SE,
Y ELM, T HURSTON C OUNTY, WA 6
ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
The natural and cultural characteristics of a place inform the likelihood for encountering cultural resources at a
geographic location. The natural and cultural characteristics of the project area were the foundation for
establishing a research methodology for this cultural resource assessment. This assessment included a review of
environmental information on the project area, as illustrated in reports on regional geology, local soils data, and
the environmental history of the project vicinity. Post-depositional processes likely to affect any cultural
deposits in the study area were also considered.
Geomorphology
The project is situated on Yelm Prairie, on a Pleistocene Vashon recessional outwash gravel deposit.
Glacial Geomorphology
Puget Lowland landforms were largely shaped by Pleistocene glacial events (Kruckeberg 1991). Beginning two
million years ago, the bedrock in this province was depressed and deeply scoured by glaciers, and sediments
were deposited and often reworked as glaciers advanced and retreated at least seven times. A mantle of glacial
drift and outwash deposits were left across much of the region by the end of this glacial period (Easterbrook
2003). The last glacial advance and retreat to cover the region, the Vashon Stade of the Fraser Glaciation began
around 19,000 BP with an advance of the Cordilleran Ice Sheet into the lowlands (Porter and Swanson 1998).
The Puget Lobe of this ice sheet advanced from the Cascade Mountains down into the Puget Lowland and
reached the Olympia area about 17,350 BP (unknown author 2018). The Puget Lobe began to retreat shortly
after reaching its terminus near Tenino and had retreated to Olympia by 16,650 BP (Porter and Swanson 1998).
Glacial lakes formed around the margins of the Puget Lobe due to the high topography of the southern Puget
Sound and the ice dam of the Puget Lobe which could not yet permit drainage of the glacial meltwater and local
runoff to the Pacific Ocean (Figge 2008). Outflow from glacial-lake outbursts and subglacial fluvial erosion
typically flowed south toward the Chehalis River valley, and later northward-flowing streams filled the deep
glacial outburst troughs with sandy sediments (Walsh et al. 2003).
Local Geologic Units and Soils
The United States Geological Survey identifies the project area as being within geologic unit Qgog (Figure 2;
Washington State Department of Natural Resources 2022A, Polenz 2019). Qgog is a Pleistocene Vashon
recessional outwash gravel deposit, consisting of loose well-sorted pebbles and cobbles. This geologic unit is
typically 60-100 feet (30 meters) thick (Polenz et al. 2019).
Soils in the Puget Lowland typically form in weathered glacial materials. The project area is within two
Spanaway soil units as mapped by NRCS (NRCS 2023; Table 1; Figure 3). The Spanaway series consists of
very deep, somewhat excessively drained soils that formed in glacial outwash, and typically form on terraces
and plains.
C ULTURAL R ESOURCE A SSESSMENT FOR
906 R HOTON R D SE,
Y ELM, T HURSTON C OUNTY, WA 7
Table 1 . Soil descriptions of project area.
Note: derived from Natural Resource Conservation Service 2023.
Map
Unit Soil Horizon Description Depth
(cm) Acidity
110/111 Spanaway stony/gravelly sandy
loam Oa highly decomposed plant material 0-3 unknown
A black gravelly sandy loam 3-38 unknown
Bw dark grayish brown very gravelly
sandy loam 38-48 moderately
acid
2C light brownish gray extremely gravelly
sand 48-150 slightly acid
LiDAR Imagery
LiDAR imagery of the project vicinity indicates that agricultural plowing occurred within Yelm Prairie,
including the eastern portion of the project parcel (see Figure 3). The project area has been impacted by access
roads, but it is unclear if mechanical grading has occurred on the parcel.
Water
The study area is situated in a region that is rich in freshwater and marine resources, however no resources are
in the immediate vicinity. The project is 900 meters southeast of the confluence of Yelm Creek and the
Nisqually River.
Vegetation and Fauna
The project area is located within the Western hemlock (Tsuga heterophylla) vegetation zone (Franklin and
Dyrness 1988). The Puget Lowland forest populated the region shortly after retreat of the glaciers in the late
Pleistocene. Prior to historic-era clearing, western Washington forest overstories were dominated by western
red cedar (Thuja plicata), western hemlock (Tsuga heterophylla), and Douglas fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii).
Spanaway soils typically support Douglas-fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii), Oregon white oak (Quercus garryana),
shore pine (Pinus contorta), and red alder (Alnus rubra) with an understory of salal (Gaulthoria shallon),
western brackenfern (Pteridum aquilinum), western swordfern (Polystichum munitum), scotchbroom (Cytisus
scoparius), common snowberry (Symphoricarpos albus), red huckleberry (Vaccinium parvifolium), Oregon-
grape (Mahonia aquifolium), rose (Rosa spp.), creambush oceanspray (Holodiscus discolor), Osoberry
(Oemleria cerasiformis), False Solomons-seal (Maianthemum racemosum), and Idaho fescue (Festuca
idahoensis) (NRCS 2023).
A wide variety of mammals and fish are adapted to the Puget Sound region. Vertebrate animals common in the
Puget Lowland forests include deer, elk, mice, rabbits, squirrels, numerous bird species, black bear, raccoon,
beaver, opossum, coyote, bats, cougar, bobcats, weasels, mole shrews (Kruckeberg 1991). The Puget Sound
supports 3,000 species of invertebrates including shellfish, 200 species of marine fish, hundreds of species of
birds, and marine mammals including orcas, sea lions, sea otters, gray whales, humpback whales, and harbor
seals (National Wildlife Federation 2019).
C ULTURAL R ESOURCE A SSESSMENT FOR
906 R HOTON R D SE,
Y ELM, T HURSTON C OUNTY, WA 8
Figure 3 . Surface geology of project vicinity (data from WSDNR 2023 A).
C ULTURAL R ESOURCE A SSESSMENT FOR
906 R HOTON R D SE,
Y ELM, T HURSTON C OUNTY, WA 9
F igure 4 . Soil units mapped in project area (soils data from NRCS 2023 ; LiDAR from WSDNR
2023 B ).
C ULTURAL R ESOURCE A SSESSMENT FOR
906 R HOTON R D SE,
Y ELM, T HURSTON C OUNTY, WA 10
CULTURAL SETTING
The project vicinity has hosted a variety of significant historic events of local, regional, and national
importance. The probability for historic properties to be located within the project area is primarily based on a
review of local environmental and cultural contexts, as well as local cultural resource studies and known
cultural, historic, or archaeological sites. Research conducted for this assessment included review of local
histories and ethnographies, and resources available in the DAHP’s Washington Information System for
Architectural and Archaeological Records Data database, United States Surveyor General Bureau of Land
Management’s General Land Office Survey Records database, HistoryLink.org, HistoricMapWorks.com, and
USGS Historical Topographical Map Explorer. Consulted sources included Bancroft 1890, Blankenship 1914,
Carpenter 2002, Crowell et al. 2019, Meany 1923, and Thurston County Historic Commission 1992.
Precontact and Ethnohistoric Periods
The project is located in the traditional territory of the DxwsqwaliɁabš (Nisqually, “people of the river/people of
the grass”), and the vicinity was used intermittently and as a travel corridor by other indigenous peoples of this
region (Carpenter 2002; Smith 1940; Spier 1936:26; Suttles and Lane 1990:485-487).
Ethnogeography Database Review
Antiquity Consulting maintains a geospatial database of ethnographic places described in Carpenter 2002,
Kinkade 1991, Kinkade 1997, Powell and Jensen 1976, Smith 1940, Spier 1936, Waterman et al. 2001, and
Yoke 1940 which includes places in Cowlitz, Grays Harbor, Jefferson, Kitsap, Lewis, Mason, Pierce, and
Thurston Counties. Thomas Talbot Waterman (Waterman et al. 2001:2), who conducted ethnogeographic
fieldwork in the Puget Sound sometime between 1911 and 1920, recorded numerous place names on the Puget
Sound. Marian Smith, who mapped the locations of village sites in the southern Puget Sound and cautions that
these were only the locations of the permanent “headquarters” of a group although people were everywhere on
the local landscape, also recorded many village sites on the Puget Sound.
No ethnogeographic places have been recorded within 2 kilometers of the project area, according to the
referenced ethnogeographic sources, but two DxwsqwaliɁabš villages were located within 3 kilometers of the
project area (Figure 5). Dop-shet (Map ID 6) was located at the confluence of Yelm Creek and the Nisqually
River. Kwod-kwooi (Map ID 10) was located on Murray Creek, some distance upstream from its confluence
with the Nisqually River beyond a marsh.
Coast Salish Settlement and Resource Use Patterns
Traditional use of the region is generally oriented toward resource locations (i.e., fresh water, terrestrial and
marine food resources, forests, and suitable terrain). Before American colonization, settlements were often
located along major waterways and at heads of bays or inlets, where abundant resources of coastal, riverine and
inland environments supported a relatively rich, diverse, and reliable subsistence base. Waterways served as
primary travel corridors between villages located on the coast or rivers, and overland trails to inland resource
locations and villages were also important travel routes.
During the winter months people lived in large villages of cedar large plank houses. Spring and summer months
were spent at seasonal encampments while fishing, hunting, and plant/berry collecting. Spring and summer
months were spent at seasonal encampments while fishing, hunting, and plant/berry collecting. Prairies were
C ULTURAL R ESOURCE A SSESSMENT FOR
906 R HOTON R D SE,
Y ELM, T HURSTON C OUNTY, WA 11
Figure 5 . Ethnogeographic locations mapped in project vicinity. Locations are approximate.
C ULTURAL R ESOURCE A SSESSMENT FOR
906 R HOTON R D SE,
Y ELM, T HURSTON C OUNTY, WA 12
critically important to the Coast Salish economy because they offered diverse resources (Smith et al. 2008:17).
Coast Salish peoples burned prairies every 2 to 3 years to manage plant resources and animal forage (Storm
2004:4). The richness and diversity created by this maintenance of the landscape made these prairies critical
places for hunting and gathering in the region (Storm 2004:2). Women from several villages would congregate
at camas grounds when they were ready for harvesting (Marr 1989:5). Camas bulbs were carried home after
gathering, typically in the late spring and cooked in an outdoor fire pit or boiled. Many other types of roots were
collected on prairies as well. Foothills were also especially important resource locations in the summer and fall
(Carpenter 1986:8). Many other types of roots were collected on prairies as well. Women collected berries,
medicinal plants, and basketry materials, while men hunted for birds and deer.
Fish have always been a staple of local diet (Carpenter 2002). Culturally important fish species include
Chinook, Chum, Humpback, Coho, and Sockeye salmon; trout; smelt; flounder; and herring; as well as less
available kinds of fish such as cod, perch, skate, sole, bullhead, devil fish, and eels. Freshwater fishing typically
occurred in the quieter waters of river tributaries, where fish weirs could safely be constructed without fear of
loss to seasonal flooding. Fishing in marine waters was accomplished by canoe with nettle string nets or a clam-
baited hook on a line. When fishing in a cove or eddy, fish could be speared or clubbed by wading from the
shore. Whales, sharks, seals, and halibut were rarely encountered in the Puget Sound.
Shellfish were also an important staple food for people living along the Puget Sound (Carpenter 2002). Puget
Sound villages hosted clambakes during the late Spring and early Summer, which were attended by relatives
throughout the region. Seafoods were also dried and traded with neighboring bands.
DxwsqwaliɁabš Villages
DxwsqwaliɁabš (Nisqually, “people of the river/people of the grass”), the people of the Nisqually River
watersheds, considered themselves to be an economic, political, and social unit (Carpenter 2002). Nisqually
maintained social and economic ties with neighboring bands and tribes resulting in shared use of local resources
(Smith 1940). Nisqually occupied at least 40 villages along the Nisqually River (Ruby et al. 2010:213). Upper
villages, villages nearest Ta-co-bet (Mount Rainier), were relatively small and are thought to be the first villages
occupied by Nisqually people as they emigrated south and west of Ta-co-bet (Carpenter 1994:61). Trade
regularly occurred between the Yakima east of Ta-co-bet, the Lower villages, and the Upper villages, whose
people were also referred to as the Mountain Nisqually. The middle river segment, which extended from Ohop
Creek to Murray Creek, was primarily used for fishing stations and camping en route to Ta-co-bet or beyond
(Carpenter 2002:27). Lower villages consisted of at least 13 villages between the confluence of the Nisqually
River and Murray Creek down to Puget Sound (Carpenter 2002:27). Carpenter (2002:30) reported that villages
at Rainier and Tenino were autonomous but closely related to Nisqually. Tenino (“junction,” “fork in the trail”
or “meeting place”) was a trading place for Puget Sound, Chehalis, Cowlitz, and Columbia River Tribes
(Dwelley 1989:1). Villages in the Olympia area which were considered to be closely associated with Nisqually
in the Treaty era included Nu-sh-t-sat, on the shores of South Bay/Henderson Inlet, Steh-chass on Budd Inlet,
Sq-uai-aitl on Mud Bay/Eld Inlet, Sa-wa-mish on Oyster Bay/Totten Inlet, and Sa-heh-wa-mish at Hammersley
Inlet (Carpenter 2002:27).
Coast Salish Dwellings
Villages in the southwestern Coast Salish region typically housed a group of 25 to 300 people, usually
C ULTURAL R ESOURCE A SSESSMENT FOR
906 R HOTON R D SE,
Y ELM, T HURSTON C OUNTY, WA 13
consisting of a man and his wife/wives, their unmarried children and adult sons, and their adult son’s families
(Hadja 1990:511). Marriage was exogamous, and children usually retained a strong connection to their mother’s
home village. Winter dwellings at village sites were typically gable-roofed houses large enough to house at least
two to four nuclear families, while temporary summer dwellings were typically constructed of cedar bark slabs
or pole frames covered with mats or boughs (Hadja 1990:509). When heads of households died, the house may
be rebuilt nearby, or the household might disband and establish several new houses.
Three forms of permanent dwellings were used in the Coast Salish region in the ethnohistoric period (Waterman
and Greiner 1921). Quinault, Chehalis, Chinook, Clatsop, and Wishram houses were typically “gabled” and
measured up to 25 by 75 feet, with a single ridgepole in the center, vertically planked walls, vertically or
horizontally planked roofs, and an oval or circular door facing the water. A 3- to 6-foot-deep pit was featured at
the center of the dwelling. The most common form throughout the Puget Sound, and including the Makah,
Chimakum, and Quileute, was the “shed” style, which measured 40- to 90-feet wide by 500- to 1500-foot long.
These dwellings usually paralleled the beach, with entrances facing the water and roofs slanting toward the back
of the dwelling. The “shed” style homes featured a 1-foot-deep trench extending the length of the building, and
some featured one or more central pits. “Gambrel” style houses were also constructed in the Puget Sound area,
featuring lean-tos on one or all sides of a “shed” style dwelling. Large ceremonial or festival houses might be
temporarily dismantled seasonally, and boards were used at temporary shelters. Summer dwellings were
temporary and constructed of cedar bark slabs or pole frames covered with mats or boughs (Hadja 1999:509).
Archaeological Context
Thousands of years of human occupation in the Puget Sound area have been summarized in a number of
archaeological, ethnographic, and historical investigations over the past 60 years, providing a regional context
for evaluating cultural resources in the project area (e.g. Blukis 1987; Greengo 1983; Hajda 1990; Matson and
Coupland 1995; Nelson 1990; and Suttles and Lane 1990). Archaeological context for evaluating resources in
the project area is provided by the local and regional chronological sequence and research problem domains
included in Ames and Maschner (1999), Carlson (1990), Larson and Lewarch (1995), Wessen and Stilson
(1987), and others.
Historic Period
The landscape of western Washington has been radically transformed over the last 150 years, transitioning from
old-growth forest to timberland and farmland, to its current use for residential, recreational, agricultural, and
industrial purposes. This shift of land use is typical of western US settlement patterns. The history outlined in
this report focuses on regional events as they pertain to cultural resources in the project vicinity.
History of Land Ownership in Washington State, 1800s to 1900s
The first non-native immigrants to the area were European, Hawaiian, and Metis employees of the Hudson’s
Bay Company (HBC) who arrived in the early 1800s with the development of HBC trading posts and
agricultural stations (Nisbet and Nisbet 2011). The Puget Sound Agricultural Company (PSAC), an agricultural
subsidiary of the HBC, was established in 1838 (Crooks 2007). PSAC operations focused at two locations: one
at Cowlitz Farm (Toledo, WA) and the other at Fort Nisqually (DuPont, WA). By the mid-nineteenth century,
the PSAC holdings included 150,000 acres between the Puyallup and Nisqually Rivers, much of which was
worked from outstations and satellite farms.
C ULTURAL R ESOURCE A SSESSMENT FOR
906 R HOTON R D SE,
Y ELM, T HURSTON C OUNTY, WA 14
The project vicinity was jointly occupied by the United Kingdom and the United States until the Oregon Treaty
of 1846. The presence of the HBC, a British company, began to decline at this time, being replaced by
American settlement and industry. Few American settlers lived in what would become Oregon Territory by the
1840s. To encourage American settlement in Oregon Territory, the US passed the Donation Land Claim Act of
1850, which amended previous land claim laws and required that land surveys and claims conform to
government standards.
The Donation Land Claim Act was passed prior to treaty discussions with the native peoples of what would
become the Washington Territory. The act granted 320 acres of land to white male citizens over 18 (Riddle
2010). A married man could claim 640 acres. Recipients only needed to prove, within 4 years, that they lived on
and cultivated the land. If a claimant arrived between 1850 and 1855, they could claim 160 acres if single and
320 acres if married. In 1854, an extension of the act also allowed for purchase of the claims at $1.25 an acre
instead of proof of cultivation and residence. About 25% of western Washington lands were claimed through
the Donation Land Claim Act (Mathews 2019A).
In 1862, the United States government passed the Homestead Act, which granted 160 acres to heads of
households (Muhn and Hanson 1998:20). Homestead applicants were issued a patent on their land if they either
proved residence and cultivation after five years, requiring the investment and labor of building a residence,
clearing land, and planting crops; or they could purchase the land via a “cash entry” after only 6 months. Only
about 40% of claims were “proved up” and 20% of lands in Washington State were claimed through this act
(Mathews 2019A). In Thurston County, 4% (n=26) of Homestead Act patents were granted to women, which is
much lower than in other parts of the West but average for Washington (Mathews 2021).
The United States also granted lands directly to railroad companies to encourage the development of
transcontinental rail lines in the 1860s (Muhn and Hanson 1988:21). In 1862, rail companies were granted five
alternate odd-numbered sections for each mile of planned rail railroad, within 10 miles of the planned railroad.
In 1864, this was increased to twenty sections for each mile of railroad. Railroad land grants were considered
controversial, as they limited the potential for settlement of the area, and the policy of granting to railroads
ended in 1871.
The United States passed several land grant acts and amendments to the Homestead Act through the early
1900s, to encourage settlement and industry in the west. The Timber Culture Act of 1873 granted 160 acres to
individuals who planted 40 acres with trees, with trees spaced no more than 12 feet apart (6,750 trees), for a
period of 10 years (Muhn and Hanson 1988:22). In 1877, the Desert Land Law granted 640 acres to individuals
who paid $0.25 an acre and irrigated dry, treeless property within 3 years. The Dawes Severalty Act of 1887
assigned 160-acre allotments to individual tribe members and opened the remainder of lands to homesteaders
(Wilma 2006). The Enlarged Homestead Act of 1909 increased the maximum homestead grant acres to 320
acres for individuals who homesteaded non-irrigable lands (Bradsher 2012). The Stock Raising Act of 1916
granted up to 640 surface acres, to include lands that were deemed only useful for grazing and raising forage
crops (United States Congress 1916).
Early American Settlements in Thurston County
In 1845, the southern Puget Sound was the site of the first American settlement in what would become
Washington Territory (Dougherty 2006). The Simmons-Bush Party, a group of 31 settlers who traversed an
C ULTURAL R ESOURCE A SSESSMENT FOR
906 R HOTON R D SE,
Y ELM, T HURSTON C OUNTY, WA 15
overland trail from Missouri, settled several claims in the Olympia/Centralia area (Crooks 2009:20; Millner
1995:14). The Simmons family established a settlement and mill near Tumwater Falls, which also marked the
beginning of the timber industry on the Puget Sound (Fowler 2009:78). Other members of the Simmons-Bush
part included Isabella and George Bush, and their five sons, emigrated from Missouri in 1844 in hopes of
avoiding racial prejudice and establishing a better life for their family (Olsen and Stevenson 2007). Although
little is known about his early life, George Bush was probably of West Indian and Irish heritage. When the
Simmons-Bush Party, a group of five families and six single men, reached Oregon in 1844 they learned the
Oregon Provisional Government had passed the Black Exclusion Law which banned African American
settlement, and the party decided to settle along the Deschutes River instead (McLagan 2009). The 1850
Donation Land Claim Act excluded all but white men from claiming land, but a petition signed by 55 members
of the Washington Territorial Legislature and resulting Act of Congress permitted the Bush family to retain
legal rights to their claim. The Bush family were finally able to patent the claim of 640-acres in 1879.
The establishment of the settlement at Tumwater Falls attracted newcomers Edmund Sylvester and Levi
Lathrop Smith to the area in 1846 (Kirk and Alexander 1990:356). In January 1850, a meeting of local
American settlers resolved to establish a town site at Olympia (Crooks 2009:21). It was assumed that the
location would be advantageous for shipping and trade, because of its position on Budd Inlet, near Tumwater
Falls, and near good agricultural and timber lands (Bancroft 1945:339). Sylvester offered free lots for
development within the new townsite, and Olympia quickly became a draw for American settlers. Several of the
local settlers relocated to the townsite immediately, and the lands surrounding Budd Inlet were claimed by new
settlers soon after. Michael Troutman Simmons, who had hoped his settlement at Tumwater Falls would rival
the HBC trading post at Fort Nisqually, established the first mercantile in Olympia at Main and First Streets
with Charles Smith (Crooks 2009:22).
American settlers in the region began organizing for self-governance in 1851, resulting in the establishment of
Washington Territory in early 1853. Originally part of Lewis County, Thurston County formed in 1852
(Dougherty 2006). Olympia was declared the territorial capital, and Sylvester donated 12 acres for the
establishment of the Capitol. The legislature began meeting in a two-story wood frame building here in 1854.
The establishment of Olympia as the Territorial Capital encouraged local population growth, and Olympia was
officially incorporated as a town in 1859 (City of Olympia 2019). Washington was admitted to the Union in
1889 (Crowley 2003A).
Yelm
The City of Yelm is located on Yelm Prairie, south of the Nisqually River and 18 kilometers from the Nisqually
delta. The prairie was maintained by DxwsqwaliɁabš through prescribed burns for game hunting and the
preservation of important vegetation since time immemorial. Yelm Creek, which originates from a spring south
of Yelm Prairie, flows north through the prairie and into the Nisqually River (Palmer and Stevenson 1992).
“Yelm” derives from a Salish word meaning “heat waves from the sun” which references heat rising from the
prairie visible on the horizon (Cipalla 2023A; Palmer and Stevenson 1992).
The Puget Sound Agriculture Company (PSAC) established a sheep station on Yelm Prairie in the early 1840s.
Hawaiian and Scottish PSAC employees are considered the first non-Indigenous people to settle in the area.
John Edgar, who had been employed as the Yelm station manager, claimed 648-acres of the sheep station land
with his wife Elizabeth following his retirement from the PSAC after the Oregon Treaty of 1846. Other Hudson
C ULTURAL R ESOURCE A SSESSMENT FOR
906 R HOTON R D SE,
Y ELM, T HURSTON C OUNTY, WA 16
Bay Company and PSAC employees also settled in the Yelm area as Americans following the Oregon Treaty.
The Longmire family, who were instrumental in exploring and mapping Ta-co-bet (Mount Rainier) at the
beginning of American exploration of the region, settled on Yelm Prairie in 1853. As more homesteaders joined
the Longmire family in the prairie environment, sawmills began to dot the community. In 1873, railroad tracks
for the Northern Pacific Railroad were built through the community followed by a train depot in 1912 (Cipalla
2023A; City of Yelm nd.; Crowell and Stirling 2019; Palmer and Stevenson 1992).
Like other regional settlements established in prairie environments, Yelm completed an irrigation project to
improve agricultural production in 1916. The Yelm Irrigation Company relied on Yelm residents to move
250,000 cubic yards of dirt to construct miles of ditches and flumes to draw water from the Nisqually River
(City of Yelm nd.; Crowell and Stirling 2019). A thriving berry industry grew in the next decade and berries
were canned and exported through the Olympia Canning Company to Europe.
The City of Yelm was officially incorporated as a town in 1924 after one of many major fires burnt through the
business district. The new town was able to construct a water and fire response (Cipalla 2023A, 2023B; Crowell
and Stirling 2019; Palmer and Stevenson 1992). In the beginning of the 1930s, the irrigation ditch failed and a
disease took out nearly 80 percent of berry production (Crowell and Stirling 2019). As the Great Depression
persisted, Yelm turned to dairy production, but still held onto berries as a community symbol (Cipalla 2023A).
In 1946, a 50,000-gallon water tower was built in Yelm by the Chicago Bridge and Iron Company to help the
town combat persistent fires. The tower was added to the Washington heritage Register in 2017 and restorations
were completed in 2022 (Cipalla 2023B).
United States Treaties in the Southern Puget Sound Region
In the 1850s, the United States sought to make treaties with Washington tribes and assign them to reservations
in order to open land for American settlement (Richards 2005:343). American colonization and settlement of
indigenous people’s lands began illegally according to the United States’ Nonintercourse Act (U.S.C. § 177). In
1854, the United States entered into the Medicine Creek Treaty with the Nisqually, Puyallup, Steilacoom,
Squawksin, S’Homamish, Stechass, T’Peeksin, Squi-aitl, and Sa-heh-wamish nations (Crowley 2003B). The
Nisqually Reservation was established in 1854, enlarged in 1857, and partially condemned in 1917 for the
creation of Fort Lewis. During the Puget Sound War, an armed conflict that occurred between 1855–1856,
Medicine Creek Treaty Tribes and other bands were forcibly confined to Squaxin and Fox Island (Ruby et al.
2010:318).
In February 1855 the Quinault, Queets, Satsop, Lower Chehalis, Upper Chehalis, Shoalwater Bay, Chinook, and
Cowlitz met with Washington Territorial Governor Isaac Stevens at the Chehalis River Treaty Council (Lane
and Lane 1999). Most of the tribal representatives were unsatisfied with the United States’ proposed relocation
to a poorly defined reservation on the Olympic Peninsula. In February 1855 only the Quinault representatives
initially agreed to the Chehalis River Treaty terms, which were revised in the Quinault River Treaty and signed
by the Quinault in July 1855.
Although the Chehalis had not reached an agreement with the United States, their lands were rapidly claimed by
American settlers in the 1850s to 1860s, causing the United States to establish the Confederated Tribes of the
Chehalis Reservation in 1864 (Hadja 1999:514; Ott 2008). The United States intended for other local tribes to
C ULTURAL R ESOURCE A SSESSMENT FOR
906 R HOTON R D SE,
Y ELM, T HURSTON C OUNTY, WA 17
join the Upper and Lower Chehalis on the Chehalis Reservation, but many did not, although some Cowlitz were
among the people who removed to the Chehalis Reservation. Humptulips, Cowlitz, and Shoalwater Bay people
refused to accept goods distributed by reservation officials, fearing it would be considered payment for unceded
land (Hajda 1990:515; Ruby et al. 2010:130). Many Cowlitz maintained an independent organization, and in the
1870s there were 66 members of the Cowlitz band living at the mouth of the river while 105 “Cowlitz Klickitat”
lived on the Upper Cowlitz and its tributaries (Carpenter 2002:200). Some Cowlitz relocated to the Yakima
Reservation around 1900 (Hajda 1999:515).
Historical Map Review
The project area was included in a 16,224-acre grant to Washington State in 1875 under the authority of the
Enabling Act of 1872, which granted lands to the newly formed State in order to fund charitable, educational,
penal, and reformatory institutions. No homestead improvements or other features are noted in the project area
on the 1856 or later General Land Office plats, however that does not mean the parcel was excluded from early
American land claims (Figure 6; Bureau of Land Management 2023A). A wagon road is mapped about ½ mile
northeast of the project area on the 1856 GLO plat. This wagon road passes by the John Edgar residence, and
also connected the Yelm Prairie to a Nisqually River ford that was located about 1.5 miles southeast of the
project. The John Edgar property included a field that extended up to the boundary of Sections 18 and 19.
Nothing is mapped in the project area on the 1916 USGS topographic map of the area, which indicates that
Yelm was limited to a small development about ½ mile southwest of the project at that time (Figure 7; USGS
1916). Residences are also scattered across the Yelm Prairie, and the Chicago Milwaukee and Northern Pacific
Railroad Prairie Line had been constructed joining Rainier, Yelm, and Roy. Although it is not mapped in 1916,
Rhoton Road had been developed by 1944 (Figure 8; USGS 1944). No other developments are recorded in the
project area or in the immediate vicinity of the project through 1990 (Figures 9-11; USGS 1959, USGS 1968,
USGS 1990). According to Thurston County Assessor data no structures are extant on the parcel (Thurston
County 2023).
C ULTURAL R ESOURCE A SSESSMENT FOR
906 R HOTON R D SE,
Y ELM, T HURSTON C OUNTY, WA 18
Figure 6 . Portion of 185 6 Township 17N Range 2 E GLO Map, with project location indicated
(Source: Bureau of Land M anagement 202 3 A ). Note the aliquots are slightly skewed within section
19 making the project area appear to extend into the northwest aliquot.
C ULTURAL R ESOURCE A SSESSMENT FOR
906 R HOTON R D SE,
Y ELM, T HURSTON C OUNTY, WA 19
Figure 7 . Portion of 1916 1:125,0 00 Chehalis Quadrangle topographic map, with project location
indicated (Source: USGS 1916).
C ULTURAL R ESOURCE A SSESSMENT FOR
906 R HOTON R D SE,
Y ELM, T HURSTON C OUNTY, WA 20
Figure 8 . Portion of 1944 1:62,500 Yelm Quadrangle topographic map, with project location
indicated (Source: USGS 1944).
C ULTURAL R ESOURCE A SSESSMENT FOR
906 R HOTON R D SE,
Y ELM, T HURSTON C OUNTY, WA 21
Figure 9 . Portion of 195 9 1:24,000 McKenna Quadrangle topographic map, with project location
indicated (Source: USGS 1959 ).
C ULTURAL R ESOURCE A SSESSMENT FOR
906 R HOTON R D SE,
Y ELM, T HURSTON C OUNTY, WA 22
Figure 10. Portion of 1968 1:24,000 McKenna Quadrangle topographic map, with project location
indicated (Source: USGS 1968).
C ULTURAL R ESOURCE A SSESSMENT FOR
906 R HOTON R D SE,
Y ELM, T HURSTON C OUNTY, WA 23
Figure 11. Portion of 1990 1:24,000 McKenna Quadrangle topographic map, with project location
indicated (Source: USGS 1990).
C ULTURAL R ESOURCE A SSESSMENT FOR
906 R HOTON R D SE,
Y ELM, T HURSTON C OUNTY, WA 24
LITERATURE REVIEW
The Washington Information System for Architectural and Archaeological Records Data (WISAARD) database
(Washington State Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation 2023B) was reviewed to determine
whether any cultural resource surveys have been conducted in the vicinity of the project (a study radius of 2
kilometers), and whether any archaeological sites, cemeteries, or historic properties have been reported within
the study area.
Archaeological Resources Predictive Model
The DAHP archaeological resources predictive model available in WISAARD indicates the project area has a
moderate risk for containing archaeological resources based on environmental factors, with survey
recommended.
Cultural Resource Surveys within 2 Kilometers of Project Area
According to the WISAARD database, 14 cultural resource surveys have been completed within two kilometers
of the project area since 1996 (the earliest survey data available in WISAARD; Table 2). The closest cultural
resource survey was conducted along Coates Road Southeast near the Yelm Middle School located
approximately 700 meters southwest of the project area. An assessment for the improvement of Yelm Coates
Road SE included pedestrian survey and no subsurface testing due to the disturbed nature of the project area.
The survey revealed two cultural resources, the Samantha Ridge LLC House built in 1914, and the Yelm
Middle School Maintenance/Grounds Office and Bus Garage built in 1933, as well as three previously recorded
historic buildings, the Anna I Ledington House, the Raab House, and the Florence Marshall House. None of
these historic buildings are eligible for inclusion on the NRHP.
The second closest cultural resource survey to the project area was conducted along Yelm Creek located
approximately 750 meters northwest of the project area. An assessment for the proposed SR510 Yelm Loop
project included pedestrian survey and 39 shovel probes. The survey led to the recording of the site 45TN345, a
Windust period camp site.
Table 2. Cultural resource surveys completed within 2 kilometers of the project area.
NADB Title Lead Author Year
Conducted
1340425 Cultural Resources Survey of Sections of the Bonneville Power Administration’s
Olympia- South Tacoma 230kV Transmission Line in Thurston and Pierce Counties
Bryn Thomas 1995
1345644 Yelm Y2/Y3 Corridor Analysis Amy E. Dugas 1999
1347328 SR 510 Bypass Loop Project, Yelm, Archaeological Addendum Steven J.
Greenawalt
2006
1348818 Cultural Resources Investigations for the City of Yelm Stevens Street Improvement
Project
Charles T.
Luttrell
2006
1351371 Cultural Resources Survey for the City of Yelm Coates Road SE Improvement
Project
Ann Sharley 2008
1351466 Results of a Cultural Resource Survey of the Proposed SR510 Yelm Loop Y3 Project Thomas E.
Becker
2008
1353501 Results of an Archaeological Survey of Eight Properties for the Proposed SR510
Yelm Loop Y3 Project, Thurston County, Washington
Thomas E.
Becker
2009
1684862 Cultural Resources Survey for the City of Yelm Community Center Project Stephen
Emerson
2014
1690201 Cultural Resources Survey for City of Yelm Splash Park Karry Blake 2017
C ULTURAL R ESOURCE A SSESSMENT FOR
906 R HOTON R D SE,
Y ELM, T HURSTON C OUNTY, WA 25
NADB Title Lead Author Year
Conducted
1690343 Cultural Resources Survey for Mosman Avenue Phase 2 Project Karry Blake 2017
1693673 2019 Cultural Resource Monitoring of Sites Along the John Day Reservoir Kristen Tiede 2019
1693681 Cultural Resources Inventory for SR 510/Yelm Loop, New Alignment Phase 2
Project, Yelm, Thurston County, Washington
Ron Adams 2020
1694705 Phase II National Register of Historic Places Evaluation of Archaeological Site
45TN345 For the Proposed SR 510/Yelm Loop, New Alignment Phase 2 Project,
Yelm, Thurston County, Washington
Ron Adams 2020
1697366 Archaeological Inventory for the Yelm Prairie Line Regional Trail Phase 2 Project,
City of Yelm, Thurston County, Washington
Brian Durkin 2022
Historic Properties within 2 Kilometers of Project Area
A total of 475 historic-age properties have been recorded within two kilometers of the project area, within the
WISAARD historic property inventory. One register-listed property is recorded in the WISAARD database
within two kilometers of the project area. The Yelm Water Tower, which is located 1.2 km southwest of the
project area, was constructed in 1946 and is listed on the Washington Heritage Register for its association with
the growth and development of Yelm.
Cemeteries within 2 Kilometers of Project Area
No cemeteries have been recorded within two kilometers of the project area.
Archaeological Sites within 2 Kilometers of Project Area
No archaeological sites have been previously recorded within the project area. Nine archaeological sites have
been recorded within two kilometers of the project area (Table 3). These sites are scattered across Yelm Prairie.
Historic period sites include an 1850s homestead site of a George Edwards, a former Hudson Bay Company
employee (1), refuse scatters and dumps (3), and agricultural sites (3). Two precontact sites have been recorded
within two kilometers of the project area, including one lithic isolate (45N521) and a regionally significant site
(45TN345) which is located on a terrace above Yelm Creek.
Table 3 . Archaeological sites recorded within 2 kilometers of project area.
Smithsonian # Description Historic Register Eligibility
TN00260 Ca. 1850-1869 George Edwards Homestead Not determined
TN00331 Ca. 1920-1970 domestic refuse scatter Not determined
TN00345 Windust-period camp site
Ca. 1920-1970 windshield glass fragments (n=2)
Determined eligible
TN00492 Pre-1968 field stone alignment, fence, and harrow Determined not eligible
TN00506 Ca. 1940-1970 field clearing pile and refuse scatter Not determined
TN00507 Ca. 1950-2000 refuse dump Determined not eligible
TN00508 Ca. 1930s-1960s rock wall and refuse scatter Determined not eligible
TN00521 Lithic debitage isolate Determined not eligible
TN00551 Ca. 1920s Historic debris scatter/concentration Determined not eligible
C ULTURAL R ESOURCE A SSESSMENT FOR
906 R HOTON R D SE,
Y ELM, T HURSTON C OUNTY, WA 26
RESEARCH DESIGN
Information on the local environment and cultural setting was considered prior to fieldwork in order to
determine the likelihood of identifying cultural resources in the project area. A thorough pedestrian and shovel
probe survey was planned to assess the potential impacts to cultural resources in the planned project area.
Expectations
The potential for precontact or early historic-period archaeological sites associated with DxwsqwaliɁabš history
should be considered moderately high for the project area. Although no discrete traditional sites were identified
in the vicinity during a review of ethnographic and archaeological information, the project is located in a region
that was highly populated and well-traveled. Prairies were important features on the Coast Salish landscape and
dispersed archaeological materials are expected across these features, with prairie margins being higher
probability portions of prairies to find archaeological features.
The potential for encountering significant historic-age cultural resources in the project area should be
considered low. The project area is situated near an early American land claim, but no history of development
could be established here following a cursory review.
The potential for site preservation due to both environmental and cultural factors should be considered moderate
for the project area, due to limited previous disturbance to the parcel. Holocene sediments were expected to
extend to about 48cmbs based on the Spanaway sandy loam soil description. If soils were intact, it was expected
that they would consist of a black gravelly sandy loam, over a dark grayish brown B-horizon, over a Pleistocene
light brownish gray extremely gravelly sand.
Field Methodology Plan
The archaeological survey was designed to identify archaeological resources in the project area and assess
whether proposed project plans might impact cultural resources. Pedestrian survey was planned across the entire
project area. Given the probability of encountering a significant archaeological site within the project area,
shovel probes were planned at 30-meter (100 feet) intervals across the project area. Survey was expected to
avoid areas of high disturbance. If archaeological materials were encountered during subsurface testing,
additional shovel probes were to be excavated at 5-meter intervals in each cardinal direction, within the project
area. Areas of steep slope or massive disturbance were to be deemed low probability for containing significant
archaeological resources.
Shovel probes (SPs) were planned to extend approximately 100 centimeters below surface (cmbs; 3.3 feet), to
an undisturbed Pleistocene glacial sediment, or until excavation was deemed unproductive, in order to assess
the possible presence and depth of cultural deposits. Hand tools were to include shovels, digging bars, bucket
augers, trowels, and pruners. Excavated materials were to be screened through 1/4” hardware mesh and returned
to the SP. All cultural materials were to be returned SPs upon completion and recordation of the SP data, placed
beneath the sod. SP locations, photographs, and data were to be recorded via ArcGIS Survey123 on a Samsung
Pro Active tablet with a horizontal accuracy of approximately 5 meters.
C ULTURAL R ESOURCE A SSESSMENT FOR
906 R HOTON R D SE,
Y ELM, T HURSTON C OUNTY, WA 27
SURVEY RESULTS
Field Methodology
Archaeological fieldwork was conducted on 28 April 2023 by Archaeological Field Technicians Christa Torres,
BA, Tony Torres, BS, and Patrick Williams, and monitored remotely by cell phone, email, and Survey123 by
Principal Investigator Bethany Mathews, MA, RPA. Weather conditions were warm and clear throughout
survey. Pedestrian survey was completed at less than 15-meter intervals within the planned impact area (Figure
12). Shovel probe survey was completed at 30-meter intervals across the project parcel and were terminated at
the top of the C-horizon where gravels became more compacted and manual excavation became unproductive.
Survey Findings
A total of 17 shovel probes were excavated in the project area at approximately 30-meter intervals, to an
average depth of 52 centimeters below ground surface (cmbs). Shovel probe descriptions are attached to this
report in Appendix A. No cultural materials were observed in the project area. Recent refuse dumping was
observed on the property, and unimproved access routes crossed the property from north to south.
Analysis
The project area was considered moderately high risk for encountering archaeological resources due to the local
historic and archaeological context, and the DAHP predictive model. Thorough pedestrian and subsurface
testing was completed across the project area, and no cultural resources were observed in the project area. It was
anticipated that intact soils would consist of a black gravelly sandy loam, over a dark grayish brown B-horizon,
over a Pleistocene light brownish gray extremely gravelly sand. Shovel probes were terminated deep in the
intact B-horizon when gravel content exceeded 40% of the matrix.
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Background review suggested the proposed project is located in an area of moderately high risk for
encountering precontact archaeological resources. The project area was thoroughly surveyed to assess potential
project impacts to cultural resources, and no archaeological resources were observed. No further cultural
resources work is recommended for this project. Antiquity Consulting recommends the project comply with a
standard inadvertent discovery plan during ground disturbing activities.
C ULTURAL R ESOURCE A SSESSMENT FOR
906 R HOTON R D SE,
Y ELM, T HURSTON C OUNTY, WA 28
Figure 12. S hovel probe locations illustrated on aerial image. Pedestrian survey is simplified and
represents three technicians less than 15-meter transects .
C ULTURAL R ESOURCE A SSESSMENT FOR
906 R HOTON R D SE,
Y ELM, T HURSTON C OUNTY, WA 29
INADVERTENT DISCOVERY PROTOCOL
Archaeological Materials Inadvertent Discovery Protocol
A cultural resource is an object, site, building, or structure that may be eligible for local, state, or national
registers. A cultural resource discovery could be prehistoric or historic and is typically more than 50 years old.
When in doubt, assume the material is a cultural resource. If any employee, contractor, or subcontractor
believes that they have uncovered a cultural resource at any point in the project, all work must stop immediately
in compliance with RCW 27.53. Leave the surrounding area untouched and provide a demarcation adequate to
provide the total security, protection, and integrity of the discovery. Notify on-site project management and
personnel of the work stoppage to ensure security of the discovery. Vehicles, equipment, and unauthorized
personnel will not be permitted to traverse the discovery site. Work in the immediate area will not resume until
treatment of the discovery has been completed.
Contacts
Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation
Stephanie Jolivette
Local Government Archaeologist
360.628.2755 cell
Human Skeletal Remains Inadvertent Discovery Protocol
In accordance with RCWs 68.50.645, 27.44.055, and 68.60.055, if ground disturbing activities encounter human
skeletal remains during the course of construction, then all activity will cease that may cause further disturbance
to those remains. The area of the find will be secured and protected from further disturbance until the State
provides notice to proceed. The finding of human skeletal remains will be reported to the county medical
examiner/coroner and local law enforcement in the most expeditious manner possible. The remains will not be
touched, moved, or further disturbed. The county medical examiner/coroner will assume jurisdiction over the
human skeletal remains and make a determination of whether those remains are forensic or non-forensic.
If the county medical examiner/coroner determines the remains are non-forensic, then they will report that
finding to the Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation (DAHP) who will then take jurisdiction
over the remains. The DAHP will notify any appropriate cemeteries and all affected tribes of the find. The State
Physical Anthropologist will make a determination of whether the remains are Indian or Non-Indian and report
that finding to any appropriate cemeteries and the affected tribes. The DAHP will then handle all consultation
with the affected parties as to the future preservation, excavation, and disposition of the remains."
Contacts
Thurston County Coroner
Gary Warnock
Thurston County Coroner
360.867.2140
Thurston County Sherriff’s Office
360.786.550
State Physical Anthropologist
Guy Tasa
Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation
360.790.1633 cell
Assistant State Anthropologist
Alex Garcia-Putnam
Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation
360.890.2633 cell
C ULTURAL R ESOURCE A SSESSMENT FOR
906 R HOTON R D SE,
Y ELM, T HURSTON C OUNTY, WA 30
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Bancroft, Hubert Howe
1890 History of Washington, Idaho, and Montana, 1845-1889. The History Company, San Francisco, CA.
1945 Edmund Sylvester’s Narrative of the Founding of Olympia. The Pacific Northwest Quarterly
36(4):331–339.
Blankenship, Mrs. George E.
1914 Early History of Thurston County, Washington. Olympia, WA.
https://archive.org/details/earlyhistoryofth01blan.
Bradsher, Greg
2012 How the West Was Settled.
https://www.archives.gov/files/publications/prologue/2012/winter/homestead.pdf.
Bureau of Land Management
2023A GLO Records for Township 17N Range 2E Section 19.
https://glorecords.blm.gov/search/default.aspx#searchTabIndex=0&searchByTypeIndex=0
2023B 1854 GLO Survey Map of Township 17N Range 2E.
https://glorecords.blm.gov/search/default.aspx#searchTabIndex=0&searchByTypeIndex=1.
Carpenter, Cecelia Svinth
2002 The Nisqually, My People: The Traditional and Transitional History of the Nisqually Indian People.
Tahoma Research Service, Tacoma, WA.
Cipalla, Rita
2023A Yelm – Thumbnail History. https://www.historylink.org/File/22653.
2023B Yelm Incorporates on December 8, 1924. https://www.historylink.org/File/22673.
City of Olympia
2019 History of Olympia, Washington. http://olympiawa.gov/community/aboutolympia/history-of-olympia-
washington.aspx.
City of Yelm
n.d. History of Yelm. https://www.ci.yelm.wa.us/live/history_of_yelm/index.php.
C ULTURAL R ESOURCE A SSESSMENT FOR
906 R HOTON R D SE,
Y ELM, T HURSTON C OUNTY, WA 31
Crooks, Drew
2007 The Puget Sound Agricultural Company and Its Farming Outstations near Fort Nisqually. Electronic
resource, washingtonhistoryonline.org/leschi/closeties/psac.htm.
2009 Creating Olympia: American Settlers and the Beginnings of a Frontier Community. In Olympia
Washington: A People’s History, edited by Drew W. Crooks, pp. 20–22. City of Olympia, Olympia, WA.
Crowell, Sandra A., and Shirley A. Stirling, editors
2019 Water, Woods, and Prairies: Essays on the History of Washington’s Capital County. Thurston County,
Olympia, WA.
Crowley, Walt
2003A About Washington State. http://www.historylink.org/File/5315.
2003B Native American tribal leaders and Territorial Gov. Stevens sign treaty at Medicine Creek on
December 26, 1854. http://www.historylink.org/File/5254.
Dougherty, Phil
2006 Thurston County – Thumbnail History. http://www.historylink.org/File/7979.
Easterbrook, Don J.
2003 Cordilleran Ice Sheet Glaciation of the Puget Lowland and Columbia Plateau and Alpine Glaciation of
the North Cascade Range, Washington. In Western Cordillera and Adjacent Areas, ed. T. W. Swanson, pp.
137–157. Geological Society of America, Boulder.
Figge, John
2008 The Glacial Origins of the Puget Basin: The Evolution of the Modern Lowland Landscape.
http://facweb.northseattle.edu/tfurutan/geology111/Puget%20Sound.pdf.
Fowler, Chuck
2009 Olympia Soundings: A Maritime History. In Olympia Washington: A People’s History, ed. Crew W.
Crooks, pp. 77–82. City of Olympia, Olympia, WA.
Franklin, Jerry, and C. T. Dyrness
1988 Natural Vegetation of Oregon and Washington. USDA Forest Service General Technical Report
PNW-8, Portland.
Kruckeberg, Arthur R.
1991 The Natural History of Puget Sound Country. University of Washington Press, Seattle.
C ULTURAL R ESOURCE A SSESSMENT FOR
906 R HOTON R D SE,
Y ELM, T HURSTON C OUNTY, WA 32
Lasmanis, Raymond
1991 The Geology of Washington. In Rocks and Minerals 66:262–277.
Little, Barbara J. and Donald R. Hardesty
2000 Assessing Site Significance: A Guide for Archaeologists and Historians. AltaMira Press, Walnut
Creek.
Marr, Carolyn, Donna Hicks, Kay Francis, and Richard Bellon
1989 The Chehalis People. Confederated Tribes of the Chehalis Indian Reservation, Oakville, WA.
Mathews, Bethany K.
2019A Washington Women Homesteaders: Finding the Underrepresented History of Land Claimants in
Early Washington, Northwest Anthropological Conference, Kennewick, Washington, March 22.
2019B Recommendation of Eligibility for the Hawk’s Prairie Powder Company Wharf, Thurston County,
Washington. Report on file at the Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation, Olympia, WA.
2021 Western Washington Women Homesteaders: Summary Statistics and Spatial Patterns for Nineteen
Counties, Northwest Anthropological Conference, virtual, April 8.
McLagan, Elizabeth
2009 The Black Laws of Oregon, 1844-1857. https://www.blackpast.org/african-american-history/black-
laws-oregon-1844-1857/.
Meany, Edmond S.
1923 Origin of Washington Geographic Names. University of Washington Press, Seattle, WA.
Muhn, James and Hanson R. Stuart
1988 Opportunity and Challenge: The Story of BLM. U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C.
National Parks Service
1991 How to Complete the National Register Multiple Property Documentation Form. National Park
Service Bulletin. www.nps.gov/nr/publications/bulletins/pdfs/nrb16b.pdf.
2000 Guidelines for Evaluating and Registering Archaeological Properties.
https://www.nps.gov/subjects/nationalregister/upload/NRB36-Complete.pdf.
National Wildlife Federation
2019 Puget Sound. https://www.nwf.org/en/Educational-Resources/Wildlife-Guide/Wild-
Places/PugetSound.
C ULTURAL R ESOURCE A SSESSMENT FOR
906 R HOTON R D SE,
Y ELM, T HURSTON C OUNTY, WA 33
Natural Resources Conservation Service
2023 Web Soil Survey. https://websoilsurvey.sc.egov.usda.gov/App/WebSoilSurvey.aspx.
Nisbet, Jack and Claire Nisbet
2011 Hudson’s Bay Company. https://www.historylink.org/file/9881.
Olsen, Winnifred and Shanna Stevenson
2007 George Bush (ca. 1789-1863). https://www.blackpast.org/african-american-history/bush-george-1789-
1863/.
Palmer, Gayle and Shanna Stevenson.
1992 Thurston County Place Names: A Heritage Guide. Thurston County Historic Commission, Olympia,
WA.
Polenz, Michael, Conner H. Toth, Catherine Samson, Andrew J. Sadowski, Rebeca I. Becerra, Todd R. Lau,
Megan L. Anderson, Elizabeth A. Nesbitt, Jeffrey H. Tepper, S. Andrew DuFrane, and Gabriel Legorreta Pulín
2019 Geologic Map of the Rochester 7.5-minute Quadrangle, Thurston and Lewis Counties, Washington.
https://www.dnr.wa.gov/programs-and-services/geology/publications-and-data/publications-and-
maps#geologic-maps.1.
Porter, S. C. and T. W. Swanson
1998 Radiocarbon Age Constraints on Rates of Advance and Retreat of the Puget Lobe of the Cordilleran
Ice Sheet During the Last Glaciation. In Quaternary Research 50:205–213.
Richards, Kent
2005 The Stevens Treaties of 1854–1855. Oregon Historical Quarterly 160(3):342–350.
Riddle, Margaret
2010 Donation Land Claim Act, spur to American settlement of Oregon Territory, takes effect on
September 27, 1850. http://www.historylink.org/File/9501.
Ruby, Robert H., John A. Brown, and Cary C. Collins
2010 A Guide to the Indian Tribes of the Pacific Northwest. University of Oklahoma Press, Norman.
Shrimpton, Rebecca (editor)
1990 How to Apply the National Register Criteria for Evaluation. National Park Service Bulletin. Electronic
resource, www.nps.gov/nr/publications/bulletins/nrb15.
C ULTURAL R ESOURCE A SSESSMENT FOR
906 R HOTON R D SE,
Y ELM, T HURSTON C OUNTY, WA 34
Smith, Marian W.
1940 The Puyallup-Nisqually. Columbia University Contributions to Anthropology, Volume 32. AMS
Press, New York.
Spier, Leslie
1936 Tribal Distribution in Washington. General Series in Anthropology, Number 3 George Banta
Publishing Company, Menasha.
Storm, Linda
2004 Prairie Fires and Earth Mounds: The Ethnoecology of Upper Chehalis Prairies. Douglasia 28(3):6-9.
Suttles, Wayne, and Barbara Lane
1990 Southern Coast Salish. In Northwest Coast, edited by Wayne Suttles, pp. 485–502. Handbook of North
American Indians, vol. 7, W. C. Sturtevant, general editor. Smithsonian Institution, Washington D.C.
Uknown author
2018 Vashon Glaciation. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vashon_Glaciation.
United States Congress
1916 Stock-Raising Homestead Act. 64th Congress. Session II. Chs. 8,9.
United States Geological Survey
1916 1:125,000 Chehalis, WA Quadrangle Map. http://historicalmaps.arcgis.com/usgs/.
1944 1:62,500 Yelm, WA Quadrangle Map. http://historicalmaps.arcgis.com/usgs/.
1959 1:24,000 McKenna, WA Quadrangle Map. http://historicalmaps.arcgis.com/usgs/.
1968 1:24,000 McKenna, WA Quadrangle Map. http://historicalmaps.arcgis.com/usgs/.
1990 1:24,000 McKenna, WA Quadrangle Map. http://historicalmaps.arcgis.com/usgs/.
Waitt, Richard B. Jr., and Robert M. Thorson
1983 The Cordilleran Ice Sheet in Washington, Idaho, and Montana. In The Late Pleistocene, edited by
Stephen Porter, pp. 53–70. Late-Quaternary Environments of the United States, Vol. 1, H.E. Wright, Jr.,
general editor. University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis.
Walsh, Timothy J., Robert L. Logan, Henry W. Schasse, and Michael Polenz
2003 Geologic Map of the Tumwater 7.5-minute Quadrangle, Thurston County, Washington.
https://www.dnr.wa.gov/publications/ger_ofr2003-25_geol_map_tumwater_24k.pdf.
C ULTURAL R ESOURCE A SSESSMENT FOR
906 R HOTON R D SE,
Y ELM, T HURSTON C OUNTY, WA 35
Washington State Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation
2018 Washington Heritage Register Guidebook.
https://dahp.wa.gov/sites/default/files/WHR%20APPLICATION%20COMPLETEguide_1.pdf.
2023A Washington State Standards for Cultural Resources Reporting. https://dahp.wa.gov/project-
review/washington-state-standards-for-cultural-resource-reporting.
2023B Washington Information System for Architectural and Archaeological Records Data.
https://secureaccess.wa.gov/dahp/wisaardp3.
Washington State Department of Natural Resources
2023A Washington Geologic Information Portal. https://geologyportal.dnr.wa.gov/.
2023B Washington LiDAR Portal. http://lidarportal.dnr.wa.gov/.
Waterman, Thomas Talbot, Vi Hilbert, Jay Miller, and Zalmai Zahir
2001 Puget Sound Geography. Lushootseed Press, Federal Way, WA.
Wilma, David
2000 Dawes Severalty Act divides Indian reservations among individual members on February 8, 1887.
http://www.historylink.org/File/2600.
World Forestry Center
n.d. Hubert Schafer, 1872-1931. https://www.worldforestry.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/SCHAFER-
HUBERT.pdf.
C ULTURAL R ESOURCE A SSESSMENT FOR
906 R HOTON R D SE,
Y ELM, T HURSTON C OUNTY, WA 36
APPENDIX A : SHOVEL PROBE LOG
C ULTURAL R ESOURCE A SSESSMENT FOR
906 R HOTON R D SE,
Y ELM, T HURSTON C OUNTY, WA 37
Shovel Probe #1
Date & Time
April 28, 2023 10:29 AM
Probe Diameter
40 cm
Maximum Depth
40cmbs
Reason for Termination
C-horizon/Glacial gravels, Gravel
content/size (>40% volume)
Antiquity Staff
Christa Torres, BA, Tony
Torres, BS
Tribal Staff
n/a
Cultural Materials Present?
None
Stratum I Soil Horizon A: SOIL (zone of
leaching with high organic
content)
0-20 cmbs
Color
Very dark brown
Sediment Texture
Silty sand
Gravel %
25-40%
Gravel Angularity
Sub-rounded
Gravel Size
Pebbles <6cm, Cobbles 6-25cm
Stratum II Soil Horizon B: SUBSOIL
(zone of accumulation)
20-40 cmbs
Color
Yellowish brown
Sediment Texture
Sand
Gravel %
>40%
Gravel Angularity
Sub-rounded
Gravel Size
Pebbles <6cm, Cobbles 6-25cm
Notes
Sp located along west edge of APE. Dense scotchbroom.
C ULTURAL R ESOURCE A SSESSMENT FOR
906 R HOTON R D SE,
Y ELM, T HURSTON C OUNTY, WA 38
Shovel Probe #2
Date & Time
April 28, 2023 11:00 AM
Probe Diameter
40 cm
Maximum Depth
60cmbs
Reason for Termination
C-horizon/Glacial gravels, Gravel
content/size (>40% volume)
Antiquity Staff
Christa Torres, BA, Tony
Torres, BS
Tribal Staff
n/a
Cultural Materials Present?
None
Stratum I Soil Horizon A: SOIL (zone of
leaching with high organic
content)
0-55 cmbs
Color
Very dark brown
Sediment Texture
Silty sand
Gravel %
25-40%
Gravel Angularity
Sub-rounded
Gravel Size
Pebbles <6cm, Cobbles 6-25cm
Stratum II Soil Horizon B: SUBSOIL
(zone of accumulation)
55-60 cmbs
Color
Yellowish brown
Sediment Texture
Sand
Gravel %
>40%
Gravel Angularity
Sub-rounded
Gravel Size
Pebbles <6cm, Cobbles 6-25cm
Notes
Sp located along west edge of APE. Dense scotchbroom.
C ULTURAL R ESOURCE A SSESSMENT FOR
906 R HOTON R D SE,
Y ELM, T HURSTON C OUNTY, WA 39
Shovel Probe #3
Date & Time
April 28, 2023 11:21 AM
Probe Diameter
40 cm
Maximum Depth
100cmbs
Reason for Termination
Gravel content/size (>40% volume),
Loose sediment slumping;
unproductive excavation
Antiquity Staff
Christa Torres, BA, Tony
Torres, BS
Tribal Staff
n/a
Cultural Materials Present?
None
Stratum I Soil Horizon A: SOIL (zone of
leaching with high organic
content)
0-30 cmbs
Color
Brown
Sediment Texture
Silty sand
Gravel %
0-5%
Gravel Angularity
Sub-rounded
Gravel Size
Pebbles <6cm
Stratum II Soil Horizon B: SUBSOIL
(zone of accumulation)
30-60 cmbs
Color
Very dark brown
Sediment Texture
Silty sand
Gravel %
25-40%
Gravel Angularity
Sub-rounded
Gravel Size
Pebbles <6cm, Cobbles 6-25cm
Notes
Sp located along west edge of APE. Dense scotchbroom, tall oregon grape.
C ULTURAL R ESOURCE A SSESSMENT FOR
906 R HOTON R D SE,
Y ELM, T HURSTON C OUNTY, WA 40
Shovel Probe #4
Date & Time
April 28, 2023 11:41 AM
Probe Diameter
40 cm
Maximum Depth
50cmbs
Reason for Termination
Gravel content/size (>40% volume)
Antiquity Staff
Christa Torres, BA, Tony
Torres, BS
Tribal Staff
n/a
Cultural Materials Present?
None
Stratum I Soil Horizon A: SOIL (zone of
leaching with high organic
content)
0-20 cmbs
Color
Very dark brown
Sediment Texture
Silty sand
Gravel %
25-40%
Gravel Angularity
Sub-rounded
Gravel Size
Pebbles <6cm, Cobbles 6-25cm
Stratum II Soil Horizon B: SUBSOIL
(zone of accumulation)
20-50 cmbs
Color
Dark brown
Sediment Texture
Silty sand
Gravel %
>40%
Gravel Angularity
Sub-rounded
Gravel Size
Pebbles <6cm, Cobbles 6-25cm
Notes
Sp located along south edge of APE. Dense scotchbroom.
C ULTURAL R ESOURCE A SSESSMENT FOR
906 R HOTON R D SE,
Y ELM, T HURSTON C OUNTY, WA 41
Shovel Probe #5
Date & Time
April 28, 2023 12:01 PM
Probe Diameter
40 cm
Maximum Depth
45cmbs
Reason for Termination
Gravel content/size (>40% volume)
Antiquity Staff
Christa Torres, BA, Tony
Torres, BS
Tribal Staff
n/a
Cultural Materials Present?
None
Stratum I Soil Horizon A: SOIL (zone of
leaching with high organic
content)
0-20 cmbs
Color
Very dark brown
Sediment Texture
Silty sand
Gravel %
25-40%
Gravel Angularity
Sub-rounded
Gravel Size
Pebbles <6cm, Cobbles 6-25cm
Stratum II Soil Horizon B: SUBSOIL
(zone of accumulation)
20-45 cmbs
Color
Dark brown
Sediment Texture
Silty sand
Gravel %
>40%
Gravel Angularity
Sub-rounded
Gravel Size
Pebbles <6cm, Cobbles 6-25cm, Boulders >25cm
Notes
Dense scotchbroom.
C ULTURAL R ESOURCE A SSESSMENT FOR
906 R HOTON R D SE,
Y ELM, T HURSTON C OUNTY, WA 42
Shovel Probe #6
Date & Time
April 28, 2023 12:25 PM
Probe Diameter
40 cm
Maximum Depth
30cmbs
Reason for Termination
Gravel content/size (>40% volume)
Antiquity Staff
Christa Torres, BA, Tony
Torres, BS
Tribal Staff
n/a
Cultural Materials Present?
None
Stratum I Soil Horizon A: SOIL (zone of
leaching with high organic
content)
0-15 cmbs
Color
Very dark brown
Sediment Texture
Silty sand
Gravel %
25-40%
Gravel Angularity
Sub-rounded
Gravel Size
Pebbles <6cm, Cobbles 6-25cm
Stratum II Soil Horizon B: SUBSOIL
(zone of accumulation)
15-30 cmbs
Color
Dark brown
Sediment Texture
Silty sand
Gravel %
>40%
Gravel Angularity
Sub-rounded
Gravel Size
Pebbles <6cm, Cobbles 6-25cm, Boulders >25cm
Notes
Dense scotchbroom.
C ULTURAL R ESOURCE A SSESSMENT FOR
906 R HOTON R D SE,
Y ELM, T HURSTON C OUNTY, WA 43
Shovel Probe #7
Date & Time
April 28, 2023 12:51 PM
Probe Diameter
40 cm
Maximum Depth
50cmbs
Reason for Termination
C-horizon/Glacial gravels
Antiquity Staff
Christa Torres, BA, Tony
Torres, BS
Tribal Staff
n/a
Cultural Materials Present?
None
Stratum I Soil Horizon A: SOIL (zone of
leaching with high organic
content)
0-15 cmbs
Color
Very dark brown
Sediment Texture
Silty sand
Gravel %
25-40%
Gravel Angularity
Sub-rounded
Gravel Size
Pebbles <6cm, Cobbles 6-25cm
Stratum II Soil Horizon B: SUBSOIL
(zone of accumulation)
15-40 cmbs
Color
Dark brown
Sediment Texture
Silty sand
Gravel %
>40%
Gravel Angularity
Sub-rounded
Gravel Size
Pebbles <6cm, Cobbles 6-25cm
Stratum III Soil Horizon C:
SUBSTRATUM (contains
partly weathered bedrock)
40-50cmbs
Color
Yellowish brown
Sediment Texture
Silty sand
Gravel %
>40%
Gravel Angularity
Sub-rounded, Rounded
Gravel Size
Pebbles <6cm, Cobbles 6-25cm
Notes
Dense scotchbroom and oregon grape, tall grass.
C ULTURAL R ESOURCE A SSESSMENT FOR
906 R HOTON R D SE,
Y ELM, T HURSTON C OUNTY, WA 44
Shovel Probe #8
Date & Time
April 28, 2023 1:15 PM
Probe Diameter
40 cm
Maximum Depth
50cmbs
Reason for Termination
Gravel content/size (>40% volume)
Antiquity Staff
Christa Torres, BA, Tony
Torres, BS
Tribal Staff
n/a
Cultural Materials Present?
None
Stratum I Soil Horizon A: SOIL (zone of
leaching with high organic
content)
0-15 cmbs
Color
Very dark brown
Sediment Texture
Silty sand
Gravel %
25-40%
Gravel Angularity
Sub-rounded
Gravel Size
Pebbles <6cm, Cobbles 6-25cm
Stratum II Soil Horizon B: SUBSOIL
(zone of accumulation)
15-50 cmbs
Color
Dark brown
Sediment Texture
Silty sand
Gravel %
25-40%
Gravel Angularity
Sub-rounded
Gravel Size
Pebbles <6cm, Cobbles 6-25cm
Notes
Dense scotchbroom and oregon grape, tall grass.
C ULTURAL R ESOURCE A SSESSMENT FOR
906 R HOTON R D SE,
Y ELM, T HURSTON C OUNTY, WA 45
Shovel Probe #9
Date & Time
April 28, 2023 1:34 PM
Probe Diameter
40 cm
Maximum Depth
55cmbs
Reason for Termination
C-horizon/Glacial gravels
Antiquity Staff
Christa Torres, BA, Tony
Torres, BS
Tribal Staff
n/a
Cultural Materials Present?
None
Stratum I Soil Horizon A: SOIL (zone of
leaching with high organic
content)
0-15 cmbs
Color
Very dark brown
Sediment Texture
Silty sand
Gravel %
25-40%
Gravel Angularity
Sub-rounded
Gravel Size
Pebbles <6cm, Cobbles 6-25cm
Stratum II Soil Horizon B: SUBSOIL
(zone of accumulation)
15-50 cmbs
Color
Dark brown
Sediment Texture
Silty sand
Gravel %
>40%
Gravel Angularity
Sub-rounded
Gravel Size
Pebbles <6cm, Cobbles 6-25cm
Stratum III Soil Horizon C:
SUBSTRATUM (contains
partly weathered bedrock)
50-55cmbs
Color
Yellowish brown
Sediment Texture
Silty sand
Gravel %
>40%
Gravel Angularity
Sub-rounded
Gravel Size
Pebbles <6cm, Cobbles 6-25cm
Notes
Scotchbroom, oregon grape, tall grass.
C ULTURAL R ESOURCE A SSESSMENT FOR
906 R HOTON R D SE,
Y ELM, T HURSTON C OUNTY, WA 46
Shovel Probe #10
Date & Time
April 28, 2023 1:56 PM
Probe Diameter
40 cm
Maximum Depth
40cmbs
Reason for Termination
Gravel content/size (>40% volume)
Antiquity Staff
Christa Torres, BA, Tony
Torres, BS
Tribal Staff
n/a
Cultural Materials Present?
None
Stratum I Soil Horizon A: SOIL (zone of
leaching with high organic
content)
0-15 cmbs
Color
Very dark brown
Sediment Texture
Silty sand
Gravel %
25-40%
Gravel Angularity
Sub-rounded
Gravel Size
Pebbles <6cm, Cobbles 6-25cm
Stratum II Soil Horizon B: SUBSOIL
(zone of accumulation)
15-40 cmbs
Color
Dark brown
Sediment Texture
Silty sand
Gravel %
25-40%
Gravel Angularity
Sub-rounded
Gravel Size
Pebbles <6cm, Cobbles 6-25cm, Boulders >25cm
Notes
Dense scotchbroom and oregon grape, tall grass.
C ULTURAL R ESOURCE A SSESSMENT FOR
906 R HOTON R D SE,
Y ELM, T HURSTON C OUNTY, WA 47
Shovel Probe #11
Date & Time
April 28, 2023 2:20 PM
Probe Diameter
40 cm
Maximum Depth
50cmbs
Reason for Termination
Gravel content/size (>40% volume)
Antiquity Staff
Christa Torres, BA, Tony
Torres, BS
Tribal Staff
n/a
Cultural Materials Present?
None
Stratum I Soil Horizon A: SOIL (zone of
leaching with high organic
content)
0-15 cmbs
Color
Very dark brown
Sediment Texture
Silty sand
Gravel %
25-40%
Gravel Angularity
Sub-rounded
Gravel Size
Pebbles <6cm, Cobbles 6-25cm
Stratum II Soil Horizon B: SUBSOIL
(zone of accumulation)
15-50 cmbs
Color
Dark brown
Sediment Texture
Silty sand
Gravel %
25-40%
Gravel Angularity
Sub-rounded
Gravel Size
Pebbles <6cm, Cobbles 6-25cm, Boulders >25cm
Notes
Scotchbroom, tall grass.
C ULTURAL R ESOURCE A SSESSMENT FOR
906 R HOTON R D SE,
Y ELM, T HURSTON C OUNTY, WA 48
Shovel Probe #12
Date & Time
April 28, 2023 2:42 PM
Probe Diameter
40 cm
Maximum Depth
50cmbs
Reason for Termination
Gravel content/size (>40% volume)
Antiquity Staff
Christa Torres, BA, Tony
Torres, BS
Tribal Staff
n/a
Cultural Materials Present?
None
Stratum I Soil Horizon A: SOIL (zone of
leaching with high organic
content)
0-15 cmbs
Color
Very dark brown
Sediment Texture
Silty sand
Gravel %
25-40%
Gravel Angularity
Sub-rounded
Gravel Size
Pebbles <6cm, Cobbles 6-25cm
Stratum II Soil Horizon B: SUBSOIL
(zone of accumulation)
15-50 cmbs
Color
Dark brown
Sediment Texture
Silty sand
Gravel %
25-40%
Gravel Angularity
Sub-rounded
Gravel Size
Pebbles <6cm, Cobbles 6-25cm, Boulders >25cm
Notes
Scotchbroom, tall grass.
C ULTURAL R ESOURCE A SSESSMENT FOR
906 R HOTON R D SE,
Y ELM, T HURSTON C OUNTY, WA 49
Shovel Probe #13
Date & Time
April 28, 2023 3:05 PM
Probe Diameter
40 cm
Maximum Depth
45cmbs
Reason for Termination
Gravel content/size (>40% volume)
Antiquity Staff
Christa Torres, BA, Tony
Torres, BS
Tribal Staff
n/a
Cultural Materials Present?
None
Stratum I Soil Horizon A: SOIL (zone of
leaching with high organic
content)
0-10 cmbs
Color
Very dark brown
Sediment Texture
Silty sand
Gravel %
25-40%
Gravel Angularity
Sub-rounded
Gravel Size
Pebbles <6cm, Cobbles 6-25cm
Stratum II Soil Horizon B: SUBSOIL
(zone of accumulation)
0-45 cmbs
Color
Dark brown
Sediment Texture
Silty sand
Gravel %
25-40%
Gravel Angularity
Sub-rounded
Gravel Size
Pebbles <6cm, Cobbles 6-25cm
Notes
SP located near 2-track. Camas patch, young deciduous trees and Scotchbroom.
C ULTURAL R ESOURCE A SSESSMENT FOR
906 R HOTON R D SE,
Y ELM, T HURSTON C OUNTY, WA 50
Shovel Probe #14
Date & Time
April 28, 2023 3:32 PM
Probe Diameter
40 cm
Maximum Depth
60cmbs
Reason for Termination
Gravel content/size (>40% volume)
Antiquity Staff
Christa Torres, BA, Tony
Torres, BS
Tribal Staff
n/a
Cultural Materials Present?
None
Stratum I Soil Horizon A: SOIL (zone of
leaching with high organic
content)
0-10 cmbs
Color
Very dark brown
Sediment Texture
Silty sand
Gravel %
25-40%
Gravel Angularity
Sub-rounded
Gravel Size
Pebbles <6cm, Cobbles 6-25cm
Stratum II Soil Horizon B: SUBSOIL
(zone of accumulation)
10-60 cmbs
Color
Dark brown
Sediment Texture
Silty sand
Gravel %
25-40%
Gravel Angularity
Sub-rounded
Gravel Size
Pebbles <6cm, Cobbles 6-25cm
Notes
SP located near 2-track. Camas observed.
C ULTURAL R ESOURCE A SSESSMENT FOR
906 R HOTON R D SE,
Y ELM, T HURSTON C OUNTY, WA 51
Shovel Probe #15
Date & Time
April 28, 2023 3:57 PM
Probe Diameter
40 cm
Maximum Depth
60cmbs
Reason for Termination
Gravel content/size (>40% volume)
Antiquity Staff
Christa Torres, BA, Tony
Torres, BS
Tribal Staff
n/a
Cultural Materials Present?
None
Stratum I Soil Horizon A: SOIL (zone of
leaching with high organic
content)
0-15 cmbs
Color
Very dark brown
Sediment Texture
Silty sand
Gravel %
25-40%
Gravel Angularity
Sub-rounded
Gravel Size
Pebbles <6cm, Cobbles 6-25cm
Stratum II Soil Horizon B: SUBSOIL
(zone of accumulation)
15-60 cmbs
Color
Dark brown
Sediment Texture
Silty sand
Gravel %
25-40%
Gravel Angularity
Sub-rounded
Gravel Size
Pebbles <6cm, Cobbles 6-25cm
Notes
SP located near 2-track. Dumping with modern trash. Camas observed.
C ULTURAL R ESOURCE A SSESSMENT FOR
906 R HOTON R D SE,
Y ELM, T HURSTON C OUNTY, WA 52
Shovel Probe #16
Date & Time
April 28, 2023 4:21 PM
Probe Diameter
40 cm
Maximum Depth
50cmbs
Reason for Termination
Gravel content/size (>40% volume)
Antiquity Staff
Christa Torres, BA, Tony
Torres, BS
Tribal Staff
n/a
Cultural Materials Present?
None
Stratum I Soil Horizon A: SOIL (zone of
leaching with high organic
content)
0-15 cmbs
Color
Very dark brown
Sediment Texture
Silty sand
Gravel %
25-40%
Gravel Angularity
Sub-rounded
Gravel Size
Pebbles <6cm, Cobbles 6-25cm
Stratum II Soil Horizon B: SUBSOIL
(zone of accumulation)
15-50 cmbs
Color
Dark brown
Sediment Texture
Silty sand
Gravel %
25-40%
Gravel Angularity
Sub-rounded
Gravel Size
Pebbles <6cm, Cobbles 6-25cm
Notes
SP located near 2-track. Dumping with modern trash. Camas, roses, and Scotchbroom.
C ULTURAL R ESOURCE A SSESSMENT FOR
906 R HOTON R D SE,
Y ELM, T HURSTON C OUNTY, WA 53
Shovel Probe #17
Date & Time
April 28, 2023 4:45 PM
Probe Diameter
40 cm
Maximum Depth
45cmbs
Reason for Termination
Gravel content/size (>40% volume)
Antiquity Staff
Christa Torres, BA, Tony
Torres, BS
Tribal Staff
n/a
Cultural Materials Present?
None
Stratum I Soil Horizon A: SOIL (zone of
leaching with high organic
content)
0-15 cmbs
Color
Very dark brown
Sediment Texture
Silty sand
Gravel %
25-40%
Gravel Angularity
Sub-rounded
Gravel Size
Pebbles <6cm, Cobbles 6-25cm
Stratum II Soil Horizon B: SUBSOIL
(zone of accumulation)
15-45 cmbs
Color
Dark brown
Sediment Texture
Silty sand
Gravel %
25-40%
Gravel Angularity
Sub-rounded
Gravel Size
Pebbles <6cm, Cobbles 6-25cm
Notes
SP located along east boundary within rose and Oregon grape patches, blackberry, camas, scotchbroom.