PREFACE

PaleoindianAs discussed previously, the subsistence strategy employed by Paleoindian groups was most likelyfocused on the procurement of bison and other large game. This adaptation suggests a mobility strategycharacterized by high residential and logistical mobility over large territories, a strategy described byKelly and Todd (1988) as high-technology foraging. They argue that high-technology foraging wastechnology- rather than place-oriented, and relied on a generalized knowledge of animal behavior ratherthan the detailed knowledge of the spatial distribution of food resource characteristic of modern huntergatherers.Taking this model as a hypothesis to be tested, the primary question relating to Paleoindianmobility strategies is:• did Paleoindian groups in southeastern New Mexico employ a high-technology foragingstrategy?Among the implications of the high-technology foraging model suggested by Kelly and Todd (1988:234–239) are: use of the landscape in a short-term and redundant fashion, sites limited to kill sites withassociated camps, sites used repeatedly for short-periods, selective butchering of prey with no evidence ofintensive processing for storage. In general, the available data seem consistent with these implications.Paleoindian kill and butchering sites in the Southern High Plains are most commonly preserved in drawsand playas, while campsites tend to be in upland setting overlook former streams or ponds at a distance ofseveral hundred yards to a mile (Holliday 1997:198). Although outside of the region, Stewart’s CattleGuard in southern Colorado (Jodry and Stanford 1992) has yielded information about how these twotypes of sites are related. At Cattle Guard, the evidence indicates that at least eight bison were killed byFolsom hunters in one or a closely timed series of events near the campsite. Front and hind quarters, ribslabs and some high value axial elements were then transported to the camp for further processing to stripthe meat from the bones and recover marrow. The interpretation is a close match to Kelly and Todds’prediction that high-technology foragers camped near a kill and hunted in the immediately surroundingarea until the declining availability of game precipitated a residential move. The selective use of highvalue meat elements from the bison and lack of intensive processing also appears consistent with thehigh-technology foraging model.ArchaicGiven the near absence of evidence relating to the early and middle Archaic occupations in southeasternNew Mexico, speculation on the mobility strategies employed by Archaic groups is limited to the lateArchaic period. Assuming that climatic conditions after 4500 BP were relatively close to those prevailingat present, general analogy with modern hunter-gatherer groups (Binford 2001; Kelley 1995) suggests thatlate Archaic groups in southeastern New Mexico are most likely to have employed a foraging strategy,emphasizing residential mobility. That assumption is supported by the predominance of domesticfeatures and artifact scatters among Archaic sites documented in the region (Chapter 3). The movementof residential groups during an annual cycle is likely to have varied in different parts of the region,however, owing to environmental variability affected the distribution of food resources. Further, asdiscussed under the subsistence problem domains, mobility options may have been progressivelyconstrained during the period as a result of increased population pressure.4-50