Watershed Conservation Plan - Destination Erie

evised paleoenvironmental picture, and the development of more sophisticated theoretical frameworks to
interpret Paleoindian assemblages (e.g., Curran 1984, 1986; Meltzer 1984, 1988).
Whitley and Dorn (1993), for example, have convincingly demonstrated that the population increase and
occupational-spread rates employed by Haynes (1966) and Martin (1973) range from "entirely inappropriate"
to "pushing the limits of plausibility" when compared to those rates in ethnographically observed huntergatherer
populations (Whitley and Dorn 1993:638–629). Interestingly, when Haynes's (1966) occupationalspread
rate of 6.4 km/year (3.97 mi/yr) is considered in light of 17 accepted South American Paleoindian
localities, a first migration into the southwestern United States is necessitated some 2,058 years before the
accepted dates for Clovis (Whitley and Dorn 1993:633).
In respect to the sharpening focus on paleoenvironmental factors influencing Paleoindian populations,
syntheses by Meltzer (1988, 1993:301–302) and, more recently, Custer (1996:97–100), have noted that
eastern North America and the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania specifically were characterized by
successions of both periglacial tundra or open spruce parkland and extensive, complex boreal deciduous
forest, and that this mosaic of environmental conditions played a role in far more diverse Paleoindian
adaptations than had been previously thought. Meltzer, in fact, believes "it is most unlikely that [eastern North
American] Clovis groups were all specialized big game hunters or even that all Clovis groups utilized the
same adaptive strategy," and instead suspects that these groups were probably generalized foragers (Meltzer
1993:303).
Indeed, despite the fact that the vast majority of the fluted points documented to date come from east
of the Mississippi River (Anderson and Faught 1998:170), direct associations between eastern Paleoindian
points and extinct large herbivores are extremely rare. In a recent review of all known North American sites
claimed to provide evidence for the association of Clovis-age archaeological material with the remains of
now-extinct Pleistocene mammals, only 14 were found to have convincing evidence of such Clovis-age
predation with only three of these associations from eastern North America (Grayson and Meltzer 2002:2).
Recent research in eastern North America also indicates that the seemingly uniform Clovis stylistic
horizon is more apparent than real (Stothers 1996:177), with the term Clovis often applied widely and loosely
to encompass considerable morphological variability (Anderson and Faught 1998:171). Regionally distinct
fluted biface variations within the generalized Clovis horizon and regionally specific fluted biface type names
have replaced the generalized "Clovis" taxon in areas such as the lower Great Lakes and New England
(Stothers 1996:177). In the lower Great Lakes region, a series of distinctive and time-sequential fluted biface
types has been defined, and comprise one of the best-documented Paleoindian point sequences in eastern
North America (Anderson and Fraught 1998:172). From earliest to most recent this sequence consists of
Gainey, Barnes, and Crowfield types, respectively (Deller and Ellis 1984, 1988:255, 1992; Shott 1986, 1993;
Storck 1983, 1991:154). Recently, these type names have been extended to phase designations with the
Gainey phase (ca. 12,000–10,600 B.P. [10,050–8650 B.C.]) applied to assemblages characterized by Gainey
fluted bifaces; the Parkhill phase (ca. 10,600–10,400 B.P. [8650–8450 B.C.]) applied to assemblages
characterized by Barnes fluted bifaces; and the Crowfield phase (ca. 10,400–10,300 B.P. [8450–8350 B.C.])
applied to assemblages characterized by Crowfield fluted bifaces (Stothers 1996:178–179). These three early
Paleoindian fluted biface types/phases are succeeded in the lower Great Lakes by two late Paleoindian nonfluted
biface types/phases called Holcombe (ca. 10,300–10,000 B.P. [8350–8050 B.C.]) and Hi-Lo (ca.
10,000–9600 B.P. [8050–7650 B.C.]), respectively (Stothers 1996:179).
In a 1996 study, Carr and Adovasio found that the Pennsylvania Archaeological Site Survey (PASS)
files listed 226 sites that contain one or more fluted points or radiometrically dated Paleoindian materials
(Carr and Adovasio 1996:8). Of these sites, 132 are located on the Appalachian Plateaus physiographic
province, 66 are in the Ridge and Valley physiographic province, and 28 are located on the Piedmont
physiographic province. No sites have been recorded for the Eastern Lake section (Carr et al. 1996:8–9). Sites
on the Appalachian Plateaus are at slightly lower densities than the eastern part of the state and densities are
lower in its glaciated portions than they are in its unglaciated portions (Carr et al. 1996:8).
Despite the relatively high density of fluted points within the Commonwealth, synthetic treatments of
the Paleoindian period are few. Much of the Paleoindian research in Pennsylvania, when not site-specific,
has taken the form of site distribution studies such as those by Mayer-Oakes (1955) in the upper Ohio River
drainage, Kinsey (1956, 1958, 1959) in the Susquehanna drainage, and Mason (1956, 1957, 1959) in the
18