Cultural_Resources_Survey_and_Report_0001.pdf

CULTURAL RESOURCES REPORT COVER SHEET

Authors: Nicholas M. Hlatky and Samantha Gordon

Title of Report: Cultural Resource Survey for the Abernathy Fish Technology Center

Intake Structure Project, Cowlitz County, Washington

Date of Report: May 13, 2021

County: Cowlitz Section: 26 Township: 9 North Range: 4 West

Quad: Oak Point, WA, 7.5-minute, 2017 Acres: 0.53

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 #:

CULTURAL RESOURCE SURVEY FOR THE

ABERNATHY FISH TECHNOLOGY CENTER

INTAKE STRUCTURE PROJECT,

COWLITZ COUNTY, WASHINGTON

Prepared For KPFF Consulting Engineers

Portland, Oregon

May 13, 2021

REPORT NO. 4604

Archaeological Investigations Northwest, Inc.

3510 NE 122nd Ave. Portland, OR 97230 Phone 503 761 6605 Fax 503 761 6620

Cultural Resource Survey for the Abernathy Fish Technology Center Intake Structure Project May 13, 2021 Cowlitz County, Washington AINW Report No. 4604

CULTURAL RESOURCE SURVEY FOR THE

ABERNATHY FISH TECHNOLOGY CENTER INTAKE STRUCTURE PROJECT,

COWLITZ COUNTY, WASHINGTON

PROJECT: Fishery water intake replacement

TYPE: Cultural resource survey

LOCATION: Section 26, Township 9 North, Range 4 West, Willamette Meridian

USGS QUAD: Oak Point, WA, 7.5 minute, 2017

COUNTY: Cowlitz

PROJECT APE: 0.53 acre

AREA SURVEYED: 0.53 acre

FINDINGS: No Historic Properties Affected

Archaeological Resources:

No surface or subsurface archaeological resources were identified.

Historic Resources:

Three historic resources were identified.

o Two of the resources have been previously determined not eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP).

o The third resource is recommended to be not eligible for listing in the NRHP.

PREPARERS: Nicholas M. Hlatky, M.A., and Samantha Gordon, M.S.

Cultural Resource Survey for the Abernathy Fish Technology Center Intake Structure Project May 13, 2021

INTRODUCTION

Under contract to KPFF Consulting Engineers, Archaeological Investigations Northwest, Inc.

(AINW), conducted a cultural resource survey at the Abernathy Fish Technology Center (Abernathy FTC). The United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) proposes to replace the water intake and improve an existing fish ladder at the Abernathy FTC, Cowlitz County, Washington (Figures 1 and 2).

This work is funded by the USFWS and requires a United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) permit, and as such requires compliance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) (36 CFR§800). The area of potential effect (APE) comprises 0.44 acre surrounding the existing water intake for the fish hatchery and fish ladder as well as the access road, and 0.09 acre proposed for staging at the Abernathy FTC (Figures 1, 2, and 3). Construction will involve the demolition of the existing water intake, construction of a new screened water intake, and improvements to the existing fish ladder and concrete weir which spans the creek.

The archaeological work described in this report resulted in the identification of no archaeological resources. Three historic resources were identified within the APE: a fish intake and ladder structure, screen chamber, and concrete weir, all of which are operated in association with the Abernathy FTC. The intake structure and screen chamber were determined not eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) in 2019, when a study done by USFWS determined that the Abernathy FTC was not eligible for listing in the NRHP as a historic district (Speulda Drews 2019). The concrete weir, which was not included in the 2019 study completed by USFWS, is recommended to be not eligible for listing in the NRHP. AINW recommends a finding of “No Historic Properties Affected.” No further cultural resource work is recommended for the Abernathy Fish Technology Center Intake Structure project.

LOCATION AND ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING

The APE is 19.3 kilometers (km) (12 miles [mi]) northwest of Longview in Cowlitz County, Washington, in the southwestern quadrant of Section 26, Township 9 North, Range 4 West, Willamette Meridian (see Figures 1 and 2). It is bounded to the west by Abernathy Creek Road and a private residence, and to the east by Abernathy Creek. The APE comprises 0.53 acre and includes the limits of construction as well as the gravel access road at the intake structure (0.44 acre) and the staging area at the main Abernathy FTC complex (0.09 acre). The 0.44 acre area at the intake structure is within a USFWS easement on Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife land. The 0.09 acre staging area and the main Abernathy FTC complex are on land owned by USFWS.

The APE is in the Willapa Hills of the Coast Range of southwestern Washington. It is located on a small terrace adjacent to Abernathy Creek, in a heavily timbered valley typical of the Coast Range. The area around the nearby fishery compound was leveled during its construction in 1959 (Speulda Drews 2019). This area is located within the Tsuga heterophylla vegetation zone, characterized by Douglas fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii), western hemlock (Tsuga heterophylla), and western redcedar (Thuja plicata) (Franklin and Dyrness 1973:56). Understory species typically include vine maple (Acer circinatum), huckleberry (Vaccinium parvifolium), barberry (Berberis nervosa), and blackberry (Rubus ursinus), among others (Franklin and Dyrness 1973:58).

Cultural Resource Survey for the Abernathy Fish Technology Center Intake Structure Project May 13, 2021

The Coast Range is composed of Tertiary rock formations; areas adjacent to the Columbia River are dominated by the Columbia River Basalt Group, a Miocene formation with origins in southeastern Washington and northeastern Oregon (McKee 1972:164). During the late Tertiary and early Quaternary, the Coast Range was uplifted and rivers began to incise valleys throughout the area (Franklin and Dyrness 1973). The underlying geology of the Abernathy Creek area consists primarily of volcanic rock with recent alluvial deposits along the valley floodplain.

The pedological context of the APE is mostly Edgewick silt loam along Abernathy Creek, and Germany silt loam where the access road meets Abernathy Creek Road. Edgewick silt loam is described as a very deep, well drained soil formed in alluvium on river terraces and flood plains, typically found on alluvial terraces at elevations of 15 to 152 meters (m) (50 to 500 feet [ft]) (U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service [USDA NRCS] 2011). The typical stratigraphy of Edgewick silt loam is a grayish brown silt loam A horizon overlying a light gray silt loam B horizon and a pale yellow sandy loam C horizon. Germany silt loam is described as deep to very deep, well drained soil formed in weathered basalt and tuff with a mantle of volcanic ash, typically found on foothills, plateaus, and ridgetops at elevations of 61 to 457 m (200 to 1,500 ft) (USDA NRCS 1998). The typical stratigraphy of Germany silt loam is a dark brown silt loam A horizon overlying a yellowish brown silt loam B horizon.

CULTURAL SETTING

Native Peoples – Precolonial Period

Evidence for the earliest occupation of the Northwest Coast near the mouth of the Columbia River is sparse, likely a result of the active geologic history of the area combined with rising sea levels (Ames and Maschner 1999:81). Stemmed and foliate projectile points have been recovered from the Burkholder site (35CLT31) near the mouth of the Columbia River, that while not directly dated, they are stylistically similar to those found at the Roadcut site (Minor 1984). The earliest deposit at the Roadcut site dates to 11,950 to 10,557 calibrated years before present (BP) (Y 340 CRA 9785±220), although it should be noted that this date is derived from “…a composite for the entire stratum” (Cressman et al.

1960:23) and may not be valid. Minor (1984:20) named this technological tradition the Youngs River Complex and posited a date range of 8,000 to 4,000 B.C. (circa 9950 to 5950 BP) based on the stylistic similarities, although it bears repeating that this age is a suggestion and not based on local chronometric data. There is a paucity of data on subsistence strategies along the Northwest Coast during this early period. The earliest occupation at Tahkenitch Landing, along the central Oregon coast, dates to 9026 to 8588 BP (Beta 14870 CRA 7960±90) (Minor and Toepel 1986:40) and contains evidence that suggests fishing and hunting of both waterfowl and mammals were the predominant subsistence activities (Minor and Toepel 1986:104). It should be noted that Moss and Erlandson (1998:18 19) dispute this early date, suggesting that evidence for stratigraphic mixing could have resulted in transportation of artifacts and faunal material downwards into older noncultural strata.

During the middle Holocene (circa 7000 to 3500 BP), settlement patterns began to change from the previous temporary occupation of sites to long term occupation of semi permanent settlements (Aikens et al. 2011:225 226). During this time toolstone appears to have been gathered primarily from bluffs along the coast overlooking cobble beaches (Connolly and Tasa 2008). These raw materials were then reduced into bifaces at the bluffs, resulting in a wide variety of specialized quarry sites. Subsistence during this time began to shift towards exploitation of mollusks, evidenced by the identification of

Cultural Resource Survey for the Abernathy Fish Technology Center Intake Structure Project May 13, 2021 marine shell middens along the central Oregon Coast at the Rocky Creek Wayside site (Tasa and Connolly 2005), the Twin Dunes site (Erlandson and Moss 1993), the Tserdiadun site (Bryam 2005), the Boiler Bay Site (Tasa and Connolly 1995), the Yaquina Head site (Minor 1991), and Tahkenitch Landing (Minor and Toepel 1986).

By the start of the late Holocene (circa 3500 BP), many of the cultural patterns documented by early Euroamerican explorers were in place throughout the Northwest Coast. This includes the proliferation of large plank houses, smaller semi subterranean dwellings, and artistically embellished artifacts (Aikens et al. 2011:257 258). Settlements were typically concentrated around the mouths and lower courses of tidal streams, especially in tidal estuaries. The appearance of wooden fish weirs indicates a reliance on fish for subsistence, although it is possible that this is not a development of the late Holocene and earlier evidence for wooden weirs has not been identified due to site formation and taphonomic processes. Along the lower Columbia River, community social stratification and ranking was based on inherited status, wealth, and resource holdings (Ames and Maschner 1999). The variety of material culture during the late Holocene was vast and complex, with numerous types of fish hooks, fish spears and harpoons, woodworking tools, as well as both ground and chipped stone projectile points (Ames and Maschner 1999).

Ethnographic Context

The APE is located within the traditional territory of the Kathlamet Chinookan speaking people (Silverstein 1990:533 534). Kathlamet Chinookan speakers predominantly lived in permanent villages along the Columbia River floodplain, which allowed them to control access to fish and to control access along waterways. These villages typically consisted of upright cedar plank houses with raised sleeping and storage platforms, and excavated floor fireplaces (Silverstein 1990:537 538). Each village had its own chief, which was a hereditary position. An upper class was comprised of the chief, shamans, warriors and traders.

Chinookan speaking groups’ subsistence was primarily focused on fishing and the gathering of roots, shoots, and berries (Silverstein 1990:536), similar to the regional archaeological evidence discussed above. Chinook and coho salmon, white sturgeon, and eulachon were the focus of fishing activities, while hunting focused on elk, blacktail deer, and whitetail deer. The heaviest fishing season was late spring to summer. While fresh fish was readily consumed during these months, ample amounts were also smoke dried for storage and winter consumption.

In the late eighteenth century Chinookan speaking groups of the lower Columbia River came into contact with European and American fur traders, resulting in a catastrophic upheaval of traditional society. Population loss from introduced diseases decimated the region, and displaced groups formed ad hoc communities, some of which tried to adopt Euroamerican lifeways (Hajda 1984:45 46).

In 1851 seven men representing the Kathlamet Chinookans signed a treaty with Superintendent of Indian Affairs for Oregon Territory, Anson Dart. This treaty was part of the Tansey Point Treaties, and in return for ceding land along the Columbia River they were promised that two islands in the Columbia River would be reserved for their use, and they would be allowed to live in their own community and cut timber above their town for fuel and building (Zucker et al. 1983:83 84). However, this treaty was never ratified by congress, and subsequently the Kathlamet did not receive federal recognition. In the twentieth

Cultural Resource Survey for the Abernathy Fish Technology Center Intake Structure Project May 13, 2021 century the five westernmost Chinookan speaking tribes (Clatsop, Kathlamet, Lower Chinook, Wahkiakum, and Willapa) re organized as the Chinook Indian Nation and petitioned for federal recognition. In 2001 the Department of the Interior recognized the Chinook Indian Nation (66 FR 1690);

however, this was revoked by the Bush administration in 2002 (67 FR 46204). The Chinook Indian nation continues to lobby for federal recognition to this day.

Historical Background

The project APE was surveyed by General Land Office (GLO) surveyors in 1879. Surveyors noted Abernathy Creek (at the time recorded as “Mill Creek”) and other nearby tributaries to the Columbia River (GLO 1879). No roads or other development were noted in 1879, but the land was described as timber rich floodplains (GLO 1879). The George F. Slaughter Donation Land Claim was adjacent to the project area to the north and west (GLO 1884). A 1919 USACE map shows no indication of further development in the area, and there are no GLO resurveys of the area between 1879 and 1919

(USACE 1919).

A 1941 USACE map shows Abernathy Creek Road west of the project area, and a reservoir likely created by the pooling of water north of the concrete weir first appears on U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) maps in 1954, lending credence to a 1951 date of construction for the concrete weir, fish intake and ladder, and screen chamber (Speulda Drews 2019; USACE 1941; USGS 1952). Metsker maps from the period before the construction of the hatchery indicate that the land was previously owned by Weyerhaeuser Timber Company; the company maintained ownership of the surrounding land after the construction of the fish hatchery, although eventually the U.S. Forest Service and Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife purchased the land around the hatchery and are the current owners (Metsker Maps 1956, 1968).

The Abernathy FTC was constructed in 1959 as Abernathy National Fish Hatchery and consisted of three residences (possibly including the house adjacent to the fish intake), a hatchery, two raceway ponds, a holding pond, footbridge, and other minor infrastructure, taking advantage of the existing weir, fish intake, fish ladder, and screen chamber (Abernathy FTC 2021). The fish hatchery’s purpose was to restore and enhance native salmon populations in Abernathy Creek, a tributary of the Columbia River, under an amendment to the Mitchell Act, a 1938 legislative act intended to repair native fisheries adversely affected by hydroelectric power facilities (Speulda Drews 2019). Abernathy FTC was also established as a research facility intended to improve the understanding of native fish biology and human propagation of the animals; renowned zoologist Roger E. Burrows was stationed at Abernathy from 1961 to 1971, using the center as a research facility to study fish diets, disease, life cycles, and other facets of fish hatchery operations (Fowler and Burrows 1971; Speulda Drews 2019).

The Abernathy center was expanded in 1961 with a new hatchery, shop building, water filter tanks, a concrete pad used to host experiments, and a sand settling basin, and the original hatchery was reconstructed (Speulda Drews 2019). Between 1964 and 2010, several original buildings and structures were demolished, or their use was changed, and new wells, research facilities, and an aeration tower were constructed (Speulda Drews 2019). The station was renamed Abernathy Salmon Culture Development Center in 1972, renamed Abernathy Salmon Culture Technology Center in 1984, and finally named Abernathy Fish Technology Center in 2000 (Abernathy FTC 2021; U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 2021).

Cultural Resource Survey for the Abernathy Fish Technology Center Intake Structure Project May 13, 2021

PREVIOUS CULTURAL RESOURCE STUDIES

AINW conducted a review of records on file at the Washington State Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation (DAHP) and Cowlitz County historic resource inventory, and materials in the AINW library, to determine if resources have been identified in or near the project APE and to determine whether cultural resource surveys have been previously conducted near the project APE.

Five cultural resource studies have been conducted within 1.6 km (1 mi) of the APE (Bourdeau 1996; Lehman and Roulette 2017a, 2017b; Munsell 2017; Speulda Drews 2019). Bourdeau (1996) conducted a survey at the main FTC complex, including the area designated as a staging area (see Figure 3), and did not identify any cultural resources. Lehman and Roulette (2017a, 2017b) conducted two surveys approximately 1.4 km (0.87 mi) northeast of the APE and did not identify any cultural resources. Munsell (2017) conducted a survey approximately 1.5 km (0.93 mi) northeast of the APE and did not identify any cultural resources.

Speulda Drews (2019) conducted a cultural resource inventory within the same footprint as Bourdeau (1996) and inventoried the historic built environment of Abernathy FTC, which was constructed in 1959 and is over 50 years old. This inventory included the proposed staging area (see Figure 3). Speulda Drews (2019) identified twelve historic resources, including three residences, two hatchery buildings, a screen chamber, intake structure, workshop, trough building, physiology lab, and genetic lab, all grouped together as a potential historic district. However, the buildings and structures dating to the period of significance (1959 to 1969) have been critically altered, and new buildings have been constructed that outnumber the original smaller facility. Speulda Drews concluded that due to these alterations, the resources associated with the facility have diminished historical integrity and do not adequately convey their historic character. Thus, it has been determined that the facility is not eligible for listing in the NRHP as a historic district, and associated resources are not individually eligible for listing in the NRHP (Speulda Drews 2019:53 54).

ARCHAEOLOGICAL FIELD SURVEYMETHODS AND FINDINGS

The archaeological pedestrian survey and shovel testing were conducted on April 22, 2021, by AINW Supervising Archaeologist/Assistant Project Manager Nicholas M. Hlatky, M.A., R.P.A. The historic resource survey was conducted by Samantha Gordon, M.S. The project was under the overall supervision of AINW Senior Geoarchaeologist Eva Hulse, Ph.D., R.P.A.

The pedestrian survey was conducted by walking parallel transects placed no more than 10 m (33 ft) apart within the 0.53 acre APE, and by inspecting the ground surface for archaeological resources.

Shovel tests consisted of 30 centimeter (cm) (12 inch [in]) diameter holes excavated to a depth of 50 cm (20 in) below the ground surface. Excavated sediments were screened through 3.2 millimeter ( in) hardware mesh to sift for artifacts. Overview, profile, and plan view photographs were taken using Galaxy XCover Pro mobile phones with a 25 megapixel camera, and soils were described in field notes.

The north portion of the APE consists of a gravel access road leading to the intake structure (Photos 1 and 2). A small amount of intact soil is present between the gravel access road and the creek channel (see Photo 2). The southern portion of the APE consists of the screen chamber, creek, and creek

Cultural Resource Survey for the Abernathy Fish Technology Center Intake Structure Project May 13, 2021 bank (Photos 3 and 4). Intact soil is present between the screen chamber and road (see Photo 3). The area between the screen chamber and the creek channel consists of exposed river cobbles with no soil (see Photo 4). The shoulder of Abernathy Creek Rd contains road gravels and evidence of disturbance from road construction. The central portion of the APE consists of the fish ladder leading up to the intake structure and a fish weir extending across the creek (Photo 5). The APE is narrow here and consists almost entirely of the fish ladder and creek channel, with no natural ground surface present within the project boundaries. The proposed staging area at the Abernathy FTC has been previously surveyed for archaeological resources by Bourdeau (1996). The staging area contains a manicured lawn and several subsurface utility lines are present (Photo 6). Because the staging area was previously surveyed and no grading is proposed, it was not shovel tested. No archaeological resources were identified during the surface survey of the APE.

Four shovel tests were excavated throughout the APE at the intake structure where ground disturbance is proposed: two in the north portion and two in the south portion (see Figure 2; Table 1).

Shovel test ST 1 was excavated between the gravel access road and Abernathy Creek (Photo 7) and contained modern glass in the upper 20 cm (7.9 in). Soils consisted of a brown silt loam that is consistent with the description of Edgewick silt loam. Shovel test ST 2 was excavated immediately north of the screen chamber on a gentle slope above the creek channel (Photo 8). A hand auger was used to excavate shovel test ST 2 to a depth of 90 cm (35.4 in). Soils here consisted of a brown silt loam overlying a gray sand (Photo 9). The gray sand is indicative of an active stream environment, and the overlying silt loam suggests that the landform has been stable long enough for a soil to develop. Shovel test ST 3 was excavated south of the screen chamber, adjacent to the road on a small terrace above the creek (Photo 10).

A hand auger was used to excavate shovel test ST 3 to a depth of 70 cm (27.6 in). Soils in shovel test ST 3 were the same as ST 2, a brown silt loam overlying a gray sand. Shovel test ST 4 was excavated adjacent to the gravel access road in the north portion of the APE (Photo 11). This area is more disturbed than others and contained a brown silt loam with abundant subangular cobbles and boulders.

TABLE 1.

RESULTS OF SHOVEL TESTS

Shovel Test No.

Depth at Termination

Notes

ST 1 50 cmbs Modern glass in upper 20 cm

ST 2 90 cmbs No cultural materials

ST 3 70 cmbs No cultural materials

ST 4 50 cmbs No cultural materials

Note: cmbs = cm below the surface.

Cultural Resource Survey for the Abernathy Fish Technology Center Intake Structure Project May 13, 2021

No shovel tests contained any cultural material over 50 years old. In general, soils in the APE are consistent with an active stream environment (shovel tests ST 2 and ST 3), disturbed areas (shovel test ST 4), and an area an area with intact soil and no artifacts along the creek bank (shovel test ST 1). Based on the observed soils as well as general geomorphic setting, the APE is unlikely to contain any unidentified subsurface archaeological resources.

HISTORIC RESOURCE INVENTORYMETHODS AND FINDINGS

The survey for historic resources was conducted on April 22, 2021, by AINW Architectural Historian Samantha Gordon, M.S. For the purpose of this survey, historic resources are defined as buildings, structures, sites, objects, and districts constructed at least forty five years before the date of survey (i.e., on or before 1976) and are within the project APE. Although a resource must generally reach fifty years of age before consideration for listing in the NRHP, this survey held to a forty five year minimum age to ensure that resulting data would remain relevant throughout the project planning and construction phase.

Three historic resources were identified as a result of this survey (see Figure 2; Photos 12 through 18). Each historic resource was photographed to capture its current context and character defining features, and notes were taken to document physical characteristics, integrity, and other details difficult to represent in photographs. Two of the identified historic resources, an intake structure and screen chamber, were documented by USFWS in 2019 and are not eligible for listing in the NRHP. The third historic resource, a concrete weir, is newly identified and discussed in detail below. The weir has been documented in the Washington Information System for Architectural and Archaeological Records Data (WISAARD) database; a copy of the inventory form is appended to this report.

Landscape features and the surrounding built environment were observed to identify potential for a historic district to be present; however, the Abernathy FTC was previously determined to be not eligible for listing in the NRHP as a historic district (Speulda Drews 2019). AINW’s observations of the APE confirm the determination of USFWS and DAHP that the potential historic district at Abernathy FTC is not eligible for listing in the NRHP.

Fish Intake Structure and Screen Chamber (Determined Not Eligible – 2019)

The fish intake structure and screen chamber, both constructed in 1951, are located on Abernathy Creek about a mile upstream from the main Abernathy FTC complex. The intake structure (as documented by USFWS in 2019) includes a screen, diversion pipe, and fish ladder, which would be improved as part of the proposed project. The screen chamber is a separate structure that filters large debris from water as it is diverted from the creek into a pipe to the fish hatchery, and has an associated outfall pipe for overflow.

In 2019, the fish intake structure and screen chamber were determined to be not eligible for listing in the NRHP (Speulda Drews 2019). AINW concurs with the previous determination and recommends that the intake structure and screen chamber will not be affected by the project.

Cultural Resource Survey for the Abernathy Fish Technology Center Intake Structure Project May 13, 2021

Concrete Weir (Recommended Not Eligible)

The 1951 concrete fish weir is located on Abernathy Creek about a mile upstream from the main Abernathy FTC complex, adjacent to the fish intake structure and fish ladder. The poured concrete structure crosses Abernathy Creek on a roughly west northwest to east southeast alignment for the purpose of regulating waterflow and diverting water from the creek to the intake structure. It appears to be constructed of a low concrete wall at the top of a natural bedrock outcropping. The weir has a break near the west end to allow overflow beyond the capacity of the intake structure to flow into Abernathy Creek. The concrete weir measures about 11.1 m (36 ft) in length and 1 m (3 ft) high, roughly 3.5 m (11.48 ft) of which is inside the project APE.

The structure retains integrity of location, design, materials, workmanship, feeling, and association. It retains original materials without any noticeable alterations or additions; the break for overflow appears to be original to the weir design. Its use has remained consistent as part of the hatchery facility since construction. Integrity of setting within the historic district has been partially diminished by alteration of other historic period buildings and structures associated with the Abernathy FTC and construction of buildings and structures that post date the historic period. The immediate setting of the circa 1950 house and surrounding natural land is generally intact.

Due to diminished historical integrity of the overall Abernathy FTC, for which the concrete weir is one component of an overall water management and conveyance system predating the period of significance, the structure does not convey an individual association with a historically significant event or pattern of events (Criterion A). While Abernathy FTC is generally associated with the research focus of Roger E. Burrows, a well known scientist who developed salmon related documentation and fish culture, the weir itself is not strongly associated with Burrows’ productive and historically significant work (Criterion B) (Speulda Drews 2019). The weir is of utilitarian construction, does not display remarkable design or engineering characteristics, and does not embody distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction or engineering (Criterion C). Furthermore, the weir is unlikely to provide a principal source of significant historical information (Criterion D).

It is AINW’s opinion that the weir is not eligible for listing in the NRHP, and it will not be affected by project construction. No further work is recommended for this resource.

SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS

AINW has completed a cultural resource survey of the Abernathy Fish Technology Center Intake Structure project APE. The entire project APE was archaeologically surveyed using pedestrian transects, and four shovel tests were excavated at the intake structure where ground disturbance is planned. The proposed staging area will not undergo grading and has been previously surveyed. No cultural resources were identified during shovel testing. Three historic resources were identified during survey, two of which were previously determined to be not eligible for listing in the NRHP. The third resource, the concrete weir, is recommended to be not eligible for listing in the NRHP. AINW recommends a finding of “No Historic Properties Affected.” No further cultural resource work is required.

Cultural Resource Survey for the Abernathy Fish Technology Center Intake Structure Project May 13, 2021

REFERENCES

Abernathy Fish Technology Center (Abernathy FTC) 2021 About Abernathy FTC. Electronic document, https://fws.gov/aftc/about.cfm, accessed May 11, 2021.

Aikens, C. Melvin, Thomas J. Connolly, and Dennis L. Jenkins 2011 Oregon Archaeology. Oregon State University Press, Corvallis.

Ames, Kenneth M., and Herbert D. G. Maschner 1999 Peoples of the Northwest Coast: Their Archaeology and Prehistory. Thames & Hudson, New York.

Bourdeau, Alex 1996 Cultural Resource Inventory of Buried Fuel Tank Removal at the Abernathy Salmon Culture

Technology Center, Cowlitz County, Washington. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Sherwood, Oregon.

Byram, R. Scott 2005 Archaeological Excavations at Tseriadun, 35CU7 for Garrison Lake Outlet Modification, Port Orford, Oregon. Oregon Parks and Recreation Department, Heritage Conservation Division, Salem, Oregon.

Connolly, Thomas J., and Guy L. Tasa 2008 The Middle Holocene Cultural Record on the Oregon Coast: New Perspectives from Recent

Work along the Central Oregon Coast. In Dunes, Headlands, Estuaries, and Rivers: Current Archaeological Research on the Oregon Coast, pp 73 81. Edited by Guy L. Tasa and Brian L. O’Neill.

Association of Oregon Archaeologists Occasional Papers No . 8. Eugene, Oregon.

Cressman, Luther S., David L. Cole, Wilbur A. Davis, Thomas M. Newman, and Daniel J. Scheans 1960 Cultural Sequences at The Dalles, Oregon: A Contribution to Pacific Northwest Prehistory.

Transactions of the American Philosophical Society 50(10). The American Philosophical Society, Philadelphia.

Erlandson, Jon M., and Madonna L. Moss 1993 An Evaluation, Survey, and Dating Program for Oregon Coast Archaeological Sites on State Lands of the Central Oregon Coast. Prepared for the Oregon State Preservation Office, Salem.

Fowler, Laurie G. and Roger E. Burrows 1971 The Abernathy Salmon Diet. The Progressive Fish Culturist (April 1971):67 75.

Franklin, Jerry F., and C. T. Dyrness 1973 Natural Vegetation of Oregon and Washington. Pacific Northwest Forest and Range Experiment

Station, U.S. Forest Service, Portland, Oregon.

Cultural Resource Survey for the Abernathy Fish Technology Center Intake Structure Project May 13, 2021

General Land Office (GLO) 1879 Survey of Township No. 9 North, Range No. 4 West, Willamette Meridian. Available, https://glorecords.blm.gov/details/survey/default.aspx?dm_id=399116, accessed May 10, 2021.

1884 Land Patent of George F. Slaughter. WAVAA 095471. Electronic document, https://glorecords.blm.gov/details/cdi/default.aspx?doc_id=1601604, accessed May 10, 2021.

Hajda, Yvonne P.

1984 Regional Social Organization in the Greater Lower Columbia, 1792 1830. Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Anthropology, University of Washington, Seattle.

Lehman, Melissa L., and Bill R. Roulette 2017a Cultural Resource Study of the CWCD’s Andrews Property on Germany Creek Project Area, Cowlitz

County, Washington. Applied Archaeological Research, Portland, Oregon. Prepared for Cowlitz and Wahkiakum Conservation District, Longview, Washington.

2017b Cultural Resource Study of the CWCD’s Smith Property on Germany Creek Project Area, Cowlitz County, Washington. Applied Archaeological Research, Portland, Oregon. Prepared for Cowlitz and Wahkiakum Conservation District, Longview, Washington.

McKee, Bates 1972 Cascadia, the Geologic Evolution of the Pacific Northwest. McGraw Hill Book Company, New

York.

Metsker Maps 1956 Metsker’s Atlas of Cowlitz County. Charles F. Metsker, Portland and Tacoma.

1968 Metsker’s Atlas of Cowlitz County. Charles F. Metsker, Portland and Tacoma.

Minor, Rick 1984 An Early Complex at the Mouth of the Columbia River. Northwest Anthropological Research

Notes 18:1 22.

1991 Yaquina Head: A Middle Archaic Settlement on the North Central Oregon Coast. Cultural Resource

Series No. 6. Heritage Research Associates Report No. 100. Submitted to Bureau of Land Management, Oregon State Office, Portland.

Minor, Rick and Kathryn Anne Toepel 1986 The Archaeology of the Tahkenitch Landing Site: Early Prehistoric Occupation on the Oregon Coast.

Heritage Research Associates Report No. 46. Submitted to Siuslaw National Forest, Corvallis, Oregon.

Moss, Madonna L., and John M. Erlandson 1998 Early Holocene Adaptations on the Southern Northwest Coast. Journal of California and Great

Basin Anthropology 20(1):13 25.

Munsell, David A.

2017 Natural Resources Conservation Service Short Report for Cultural Resources Identification Survey.

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. On file, Washington State Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation, Olympia.

Cultural Resource Survey for the Abernathy Fish Technology Center Intake Structure Project May 13, 2021

Silverstein, Michael 1990 Chinookans of the Lower Columbia. In Northwest Coast, edited by Wayne Suttles, pp. 533 546.

Handbook of North American Indians, Vol. 7, William C. Sturtevant, general editor. Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C.

Speulda Drews, Lou Ann 2019 Abernathy Fish Technology Center Water Tank Removal, Cowlitz, County, Washington, National

Historic Preservation Act, Section 106 Historic Properties Identification and Evaluation Report. Cultural Services Region 1 Branch, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Sherwood, Oregon.

Tasa, Guy L., and Thomas J. Connolly 1995 Archaeological Evaluation of the Boiler Bay Site (35LNC45), in the Boiler Bay State Park Section of the

Oregon Coast Highway (US Highway 101), Lincoln County, Oregon. OSMA Report 95 2, State Museum of Anthropology, University of Oregon, Eugene, Oregon. Prepared for the Oregon State Highway Division, Environmental Section, Oregon Department of Transportation, Salem, Oregon.

2005 Archaeological Evaluation of Three Sites in the Whale Cove Otter Crest Loop Section of the Oregon Coast Highway (US 101), Lincoln County, Oregon. OSMA Report 2005 237, University of Oregon Museum of Natural and Cultural History, Eugene, Oregon. Prepared for the Oregon Department of Transportation, Geo Environmental Services Unit, Salem, Oregon.

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service [USDA NRCS] 1998 Germany Series. Electronic document, https://soilseries.sc.egov.usda.gov/OSD_Docs/

G/GERMANY.html, accessed March 25, 2021.

2011 Edgewick Series. Electronic document, https://soilseries.sc.egov.usda.gov/OSD_Docs/

E/EDGEWICK.html, accessed April 12, 2021.

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) 1919 Mayber, Oreg. 15 minute map. Electronic document, https://ngmdb.usgs.gov/ ht bin/tv_browse.pl?id=66449be141f94cffeb1ed74934ea65b9, accessed May 12, 2021.

1941 Clatskanie, Wash. Ore. 15 minute map. Electronic document, https://ngmdb.usgs.gov/ ht bin/tv_browse.pl?id=d5a8721fdce638bee71dbe140cbb3617, accessed May 10, 2021.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 2021 Fish Technology Centers. Brochure. Available, http://npshistory.com/brochures/nwr/ fish technology centers.pdf, accessed May 11, 2021.

U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) 1952 Clatskanie, Oreg. Wash. 15 minute map. Revised 1954. Electronic document, https://ngmdb.usgs.gov/ht bin/tv_browse.pl?id=94583dcd47ce9b15577c31df7f248044, accessed May 10, 2021.

Zucker, Jeff, Kay Hummel, and Bob Hogfoss 1983 Oregon Indians: Culture, History & Current Affairs: An Atlas and Introduction. Western Imprints, Portland.

Figure 1. The Abernathy Fish Technology Center Intake Structure Project is in Cowlitz County, Washington.

Figure 2. Aerial overview showing the results of the archaeological survey, shovel tests ST 1 through ST 4, and the historic resources within the project APE.

Figure 3. Aerial overview showing the proposed staging area and previous surveys of the area.

Ph ot o 1.

O ve rv ie w o f t he g ra ve l a cc es s ro ad

Th e vi ew is to w ar ds th e so ut he as t.

Ph ot o

2.

O ve rv ie w o f t he in ta ke s tr uc tu re a nd g ra ve l a cc es s ro ad

Th e lo ca tio n of s ho ve l t es t S

T-is v is ib le in th e ba ck gr ou nd o n th e cr ee k ba nk

Th e vi ew is to th e no rt h.

Ph ot o 3.

O ve rv ie w o f t he s cr ee n ch am be r f ro m s ho ve l t es t S

T-to w ar ds th e no rt he as t.

Ph ot o 4.

O ve rv ie w o f t he c re ek b an k ea st o f t he s cr ee n ch am be r sh ow in g ex po se d ri ve r c ob bl es a nd la ck o f s oi l.

T he v ie w is to ar ds th e so ut h o 6.

O ve rv ie w o f t he p ro po se d st ag in g ar ea

Th e vi ew ar ds th e no rt hw es t.

to w ar ds th e so ut h.

Ph ot o 7.

O ve rv ie w o f s ho ve l t es t S

T- 1.

T he v ie w is to w ar ds th e no rt h.

Ph ot o

8.

O ve rv ie w o f s ho ve l t es t S T-

2.

T he v ie w is to w ar ds th e no rt h.

ba ck gr ou nd

Th e vi ew is to w ar ds th e ea st

Ph ot o

O ve rv ie w o f s ho ve l t es t S T-

4.

N ot e th e de br is p ile in th e ba ck gr ou nd

Th e vi ew is to w ar ds th e no pa ia l v ie w o f c on cr et e w ei r.

T he v ie w is to w ar ds th e no rt h.

in ta ke p la tfo rm

Th e vi ew is to w ar ds th e so ut h.

Ph ot o

N or th e le va tio n of c on cr et e w ei r.

T he v ie w is to w ar ds so ut o

N or th a nd e as t e le va tio ns o f s cr ee n in ta ke

Th e vi ew ar ds th e so ut hw es t.

Ph ot o

So ut h an d w es t e le va tio ns o f s cr ee n in ta ke a nd p ar tia l vi ew o f c on cr et e w ei r.

T he v ie w is to w ar ds th e no rt he as t.

APPENDIX

HISTORIC PROPERTY INVENTORY FORM

Abernathy Fish Technology Center - Concrete Weir

Location

Address: 1440 Abernathy Creek Rd, Longview, Washington, 98632 Geographic Areas: OAK POINT Quadrangle, T09R04W26, Cowlitz County

Information Number of stories: 1.00

Architect/Engineer:

Category Name or Company

Engineer Washington Department of Fisheries

Historic Context:

Category

Historic Use:

Category Subcategory

Agriculture/Subsistence Agriculture/Subsistence - Fishing Facility or Site

Government Government - Fishing Facility or Site

Agriculture/Subsistence Agriculture/Subsistence - Fishing Facility or Site

Government Government - Fishing Facility or Site

Construction Type Year Circa Built Date 1951

Construction Dates:

Thursday, May 13, 2021 Page 1 of 6

Historic Property Report Abernathy Fish Technology Center - Concrete Weir

724513Resource Name: Property ID:

Project Number, Organization, Project Name

Resource Inventory SHPO Determination SHPO Determined By, Determined Date

2021-04-02289, , Abernathy FTC Intake Structure

4/16/2021 Survey/Inventory

Local Registers and Districts Name Date Listed Notes

Project History

Thematics:

Thursday, May 13, 2021 Page 2 of 6

Historic Property Report Abernathy Fish Technology Center -

South elevation of concrete weir and adjacent fish intake.

The view is toward the north.

North elevation of concrete weir and fish intake. The view is towards the south.

Photos

North elevation of concrete weir. The view is towards the south.

South elevation of concrete weir and adjacent fish intake.

The view is toward the north-northeast.

Thursday, May 13, 2021 Page 3 of 6

Historic Property Report Abernathy Fish Technology Center -

Inventory Details - 4/16/2021

Characteristics:

Category Item

Foundation Concrete - Poured

Form Type Utilitarian

Cladding Concrete - Poured

Structural System Masonry - Poured Concrete

Plan Irregular

Styles:

Period Style Details

No Style No Style

Detail Information

Common name:

Date recorded: 4/16/2021

Field Recorder: Samantha Gordon

Field Site number:

SHPO Determination

Surveyor Opinion

Significance narrative: A 1941 USACE map shows Abernathy Creek Road west of the project area. A reservoir likely created by the pooling of water north of the concrete weir first appears on USGS maps in 1954, lending credence to a 1951 date of construction for the concrete weir, fish intake and ladder, and screen chamber (Speulda-Drews 2019; USACE 1941; USGS 1952).

Metsker maps from the period before the construction of the hatchery indicate that the land was previously owned by Weyerhaeuser Timber Company; the company maintained ownership of the surrounding land after the construction of the fish hatchery, although eventually the US Forest Service and Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife purchased the land around the hatchery and are the current owners (Metsker Maps 1956, 1968).

The Abernathy FTC was constructed in 1959 as Abernathy National Fish Hatchery and consisted of three residences (possibly including the house adjacent to the fish intake), a hatchery, two raceway ponds, a holding pond, footbridge, and other minor infrastructure, taking advantage of the existing weir, fish intake, fish ladder, and screen chamber (Abernathy FTC 2021). The fish hatchery’s purpose was to restore and enhance native salmon populations in Abernathy Creek, a tributary of the Columbia River, under an amendment to the Mitchell Act, a 1938 legislative act intended to repair native fisheries adversely affected by hydroelectric power facilities (Speulda-Drews 2019). Abernathy FTC was also established as a research facility intended to improve the understanding of native fish biology and human propagation of the animals; renowned zoologist Roger E.

Burrows was stationed at Abernathy from 1961 to 1971, using the center as a research facility to study fish diets, disease, life cycles, and other facets of fish hatchery operations

Thursday, May 13, 2021 Page 4 of 6

Historic Property Report Abernathy Fish Technology Center -

(Fowler and Burrows 1971; Speulda-Drews 2019).

The Abernathy center was expanded in 1961 with a new hatchery, shop building, water filter tanks, a concrete pad used to host experiments, and a sand settling basin, and the original hatchery was reconstructed (Speulda-Drews 2019). Between 1964 and 2010, several original buildings and structures were demolished, or their use was changed, and new wells, research facilities, and an aeration tower were constructed (Speulda-Drews 2019). The station was renamed Abernathy Salmon Culture Development Center in 1972, renamed Abernathy Salmon Culture Technology Center in 1984, and finally named Abernathy Fish Technology Center in 2000 (Abernathy FTC 2021; U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 2021).

The concrete weir retains integrity of location, design, materials, workmanship, feeling, and association. It retains original materials without any noticeable alterations or additions; the break for overflow appears to be original to the weir design. Its use has remained consistent as part of the hatchery facility since construction. Integrity of setting within the historic district has been partially diminished by alteration of other historic-period buildings and structures associated with the Abernathy FTC and construction of buildings and structures that post-date the historic period.

Due to diminished historical integrity of the overall Abernathy FTC, for which the concrete weir is one component of an overall water management and conveyance system predating the period of significance, the structure does not convey an individual association with a historically significant event or pattern of events (Criterion A). While Abernathy FTC is generally associated with the research focus of Roger E. Burrows, a well-known scientist who developed salmon-related documentation and fish culture, the weir itself is not strongly associated with Burrows’ productive and historically significant work (Criterion B) (Speulda-Drews 2019). The weir is of utilitarian construction, does not display remarkable design or engineering characteristics, and does not embody distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction or engineering (Criterion C). Furthermore, the weir is unlikely to provide a principal source of significant historical information (Criterion D).

Physical description: The 1951 concrete fish weir is located on Abernathy Creek about a mile upstream from the main Abernathy FTC complex, adjacent to the fish intake structure and fish ladder.

The poured concrete structure crosses Abernathy Creek on a roughly west-northwest to east-southeast alignment for the purpose of regulating waterflow and diverting water from the creek to the intake structure. It appears to be constructed of a low concrete wall at the top of a natural bedrock outcropping. The weir has a break near the west end to allow overflow beyond the capacity of the intake structure to flow into Abernathy Creek.

The concrete weir measures about 11.1 m (36 ft) in length and 1 m (3 ft) high.

Thursday, May 13, 2021 Page 5 of 6

Historic Property Report Abernathy Fish Technology Center -

Bibliography: Abernathy Fish Technology Center (Abernathy FTC) 2021 About Abernathy FTC. Electronic document, https://fws.gov/aftc/about.cfm, accessed May 11, 2021.

Fowler, Laurie G. and Roger E. Burrows 1971 The Abernathy Salmon Diet. The Progressive Fish Culturist (April 1971):67-75.

Metsker Maps 1956 Metsker’s Atlas of Cowlitz County. Charles F. Metsker, Portland and Tacoma.

1968 Metsker’s Atlas of Cowlitz County. Charles F. Metsker, Portland and Tacoma.

Speulda-Drews, Lou Ann 2019 Abernathy Fish Technology Center Water Tank Removal, Cowlitz, County, Washington, National Historic Preservation Act, Section 106 Historic Properties Identification and Evaluation Report. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Sherwood, Oregon.

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) 1919 Mayber, Oreg. 15-minute map. Electronic document, https://ngmdb.usgs.gov/ht-bin/tv_browse.pl?id=66449be141f94cffeb1ed74934ea65b9, accessed May 12, 2021.

1941 Clatskanie, Wash.-Ore. 15-minute map. Electronic document, https://ngmdb.usgs.gov/ht-bin/tv_browse.pl?id=d5a8721fdce638bee71dbe140cbb3617, accessed May 10, 2021.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 2021 Fish Technology Centers. Brochure. Available, npshistory.com/brochures/nwr/fish-technology-centers.pdf, accessed May 11, 2021.

U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) 1952 Clatskanie, Oreg.-Wash. 15-minute map. Revised 1954. Electronic document, https://ngmdb.usgs.gov/ht-bin/tv_browse.pl?id=94583dcd47ce9b15577c31df7f248044, accessed May 10, 2021.

Thursday, May 13, 2021 Page 6 of 6

Historic Property Report Abernathy Fish Technology Center -