D. PROJECT DESCRIPTION

D.1. INTRODUCTION

	The Laboratory of Tree-Ring Research (LTRR) at the University of Arizona is the only institution active in most aspects of dendrochronological research including world-wide chronology building, dendroclimatic and dendrohydrologic reconstruction, dendroecology, isotopic and trace element analysis, and integrating different measures of environmental variability. A major component of the Laboratory's research program is the analysis and dating of wood and charcoal from prehistoric and historic archaeological contexts. In pursuit of this activity, LTRR has become the leading processor of archaeological tree-ring materials, the only source of dendrochronological dates in western North America, and the largest repository of archaeological tree-ring samples in the world. The integration of the dating program into the full range of dendrochronological activity at the Laboratory creates a unique interdisciplinary context that maximizes the scientific value of archaeological tree-ring samples and chronologies.

	Since 1950, LTRR has maintained an analysis program that processes all archaeological tree-ring material submitted for study and produces all valid dendrochronological dates now available to scientists working in western North America and other regions. Only the continuing support of the National Science Foundation has made it possible to sustain this important service to the archaeological profession. Therefore, we request renewal of the Archaeometry Program Laboratory Support Award (BCS-0413438) to help maintain an analytical operation of demonstrated anthropological significance. Continued NSF funding would be used to support one of the two dendrochronologists responsible for analyzing archaeological tree-ring samples and provide minimal support for Co-PI Ronald H. Towner who supervises the day-to-day operation of the dating program..

D.2. TREE-RING LABORATORY ARCHAEOLOGICAL DATING PROGRAM

D.2.1. Introduction

	Archaeological tree-ring dating originated in 1917 when Andrew Ellicott Douglass, the founder of dendrochronology, first examined prehistoric wood samples. Twelve years later, the "bridging of the gap" at Show Low, Arizona (Haury 1962), joined dated living-tree and "floating" archaeological chronologies and inaugurated routine archaeological tree-ring dating. In 1937, the University of Arizona established the Laboratory of Tree-Ring Research to perpetuate Douglass' dendrochronological research. After World War II, the Laboratory acquired all other Southwestern archaeological tree-ring collections -- Museum of Northern Arizona, Gila Pueblo, Laboratory of Anthropology, Navajo Land Claim, and I.F. Flora -- and the Robert E. Bell Collection of samples from the eastern United States. At the same time, LTRR's own Douglass Collection continued to grow through regular submissions. As a result, the Laboratory has become the repository for all Southwestern archaeological tree-ring material and many samples from elsewhere. LTRR houses nearly 400,000 archaeological samples from the Southwest, the Great Basin, the Great Plains, the Midwest, Alaska, Mexico, Peru, and the Near East. These research collections provide the ultimate certification of the dates and constitute an unmatched reservoir of materials for further archaeological and dendrochronological research.

	The consolidation of archaeological tree-ring collections at LTRR provided the opportunity for an integrated study of all Southwestern tree-ring material. Between 1963 and 1975, the "Dendrochronology of Southwestern United States" project (supported by NSF Grants GS-247, 908, 2232, and 35086) organized and reanalyzed the extant collections, an exercise that quadrupled the numbers of dated samples and sites. Between 1966 and 1975, the results of this work were published in 16 "Quadrangle Reports" that list all valid dates available at the times of publication. As a result of these and subsequent analyses, the continuous regional ring chronology has been extended back to 322 B.C., and more than 60,000 dates have been derived for more than 5,000 sites (Robinson and Cameron 1991; Robinson and Towner 1993).

D.2.2. Regional Perspective

	Dendrochronology, like archaeology, is a regional discipline. Environmental factors that produce ring-width characteristics suitable for dendrochronological analysis impart to western North America a natural dendrochronological unity. Because of these factors and the congruence between the number of annual submissions from this region and our analytical capacity, the archaeological research program is focused on material from western North America, with emphasis on the Southwest. During the last ten years, samples from Arizona, Colorado, New Mexico, Utah, Texas, Nevada, California, Alaska, Idaho, Oklahoma, Oregon, Wyoming, Montana, South Dakota, Illinois, Sonora, Chihuahua, Durango, Zacatecas, and coastal Peru have been examined.

D.2.3. Relevance to Significant Archaeological Problems

	Dendrochronology is pertinent to a wide range of archaeologically significant issues (Dean 1997). First and foremost, of course, are matters of chronology. Tree-ring dates are employed on site (Ahlstrom et al. 1991; Crown 1991; Dean 2006; Dean and Russell 2002; Lightfoot 1992; Street 2001; Towner, Grow, Psaltis, and Falzone 2001), locality (Ababneh et al. 2000; Damp and Kotyk 2000; Kearns et al. 2000), and regional (Ahlstrom 1985; Berry 1982; Duff 2002; Towner 2003; Varien 1999) levels to elucidate subtle temporal and spatial relationships. Second, the temporal control provided by dendrochronology allows archaeologists to focus on problems that transcend space-time systematics. For example, precise dating minimizes many of the ambiguities that otherwise beset attempts to deal with social organization, intergroup interaction, and behavioral adaptation to variability in physical and social environments (Dean 1997). Third, archaeological tree-ring materials, when analyzed as collections of artifacts, contribute directly to understanding various aspects of past human behavior (Dean 1996b; Dean and Russell 2002; Robinson 1967; Towner et al. 1998), such as the exploitation of trees as a natural resource, the treatment of wood as a raw material, woodworking technology, and numerous aspects of wood use. Finally, archaeological tree-ring collections are prime sources of information about past environmental variability as indicated by the species in a collection (Dean 1969) or dendroclimatic analysis (Fritts 1976) of the ring series (Dean 1996a; Dean and Funkhouser 1995, 2002; Dean and Van West 2002; Graybill et al. 2006; Salzer and Kipfmueller 2005; Van West 1994, 1996; Van West and Dean 2000).

	LTRR furthers these applications to archaeological research in several ways. The most elemental of these is the dating of archaeological tree-ring samples submitted by archaeologists. Second, Laboratory personnel commonly consult with other scientists on dendrochronology's potential contributions to their research, advise on the collection and documentation of tree-ring samples, and aid in the evaluation of the dates. Table 1 lists 83 institutions that availed themselves of this opportunity in the last three years. Third, the Laboratory is a repository of archaeological tree-ring samples and data that are accessible to archaeologists and other researchers. The samples and tree-ring data are frequently used for original research including (1) reanalyzing existing collections such as those from Casas Grandes in Chihuahua (Dean and Ravesloot 1993), Hohokam sites in southern Arizona (Dean et al. 1996), and Wetherill Mesa sites in Mesa Verde National Park (Dean 2001; Street 2001); (2) studies of heartwood-sapwood relationships for estimating cutting dates (Nash 1997); (3) determining prehistoric species use (Tennessen et al. 2002); (4) sourcing prehistoric construction beams (Durand et al. 1999; English et al. 2001; Hatch 1994; Reynolds et al. 2005), and (5) dendroclimatic reconstructions (Dean and Van West 2002; Graybill et al. 2006; Salzer and Kipfmueller 2005; Van West 1994, 1996; Van West and Dean 2000). Similarly, the site files constitute a unique source of archaeological data that is frequently consulted by scholars interested in a wide range of problems such as site distributions in time and space (Lipe 1995; Schlanger et al. 1993; Towner 2003; Varien 1999), wood use behavior (Windes and McKenna 2001), and calibrating the archaeomagnetic time scale. Fourth, the Laboratory conducts original archaeological-dendrochronological research oriented toward problems of archaeological chronology, dendrochronology's contribution to archaeological analysis, the relevance of tree-ring dates to past events, integrating dendrochronology into interdisciplinary projects, and dendroclimatic reconstruction. Examples of in-house research include (1) archaeological-chronological studies in Tsegi (Dean 1969, 2006; Wright 1997), Johnson (Harrill and Breternitz 1976), and Chaco Canyons (Dean and Warren 1983), on Mesa Verde (Dean 2001; Parks and Dean 1999; Street 2001, 2002), at the Pueblos of Walpi (Ahlstrom et al. 1991) and Acoma (Robinson 1990), and in early Navajo sites in northwestern New Mexico (Ababneh et al. 2000; Towner 1992, 2003; Towner and Dean 1992; Towner, Grow, Psaltis, and Falzone 2001; Towner and Johnson 1998); (2) sourcing construction beams in Chaco Canyon (Betancourt et al. 1986; English et al. 2001; Reynolds et al. 2005), (3) analyzing trees buried in Holocene alluvium on the Colorado Plateau (Dean 1988, 1995; Karlstrom 1988) and the Great Plains (Davis et al. 1995); (4) studies of the effects of wood use behavior on tree-ring dating (Dean 1996b; Dean and Russell 2002; Russell and Dean 1985); (5) dendroclimatic analyses for the Grasshopper (Dean and Robinson 1982; Reid et al. 2006), Arroyo Hondo (Rose et al. 1981), Socorro (Betancourt et al. 1993; Parks et al. 2006), Silver Creek (Kaldahl and Dean 1999), Mesa Verde (Dean and Van West 2002; Van West and Dean 2000), San Francisco Peaks (Salzer 2000; Salzer and Kipfmueller 2005), Chaco Canyon (Force et al. 2002), and Zuni (Dean, in press) areas; and (6) dendrohydrologic reconstructions of Salt, Verde, and Gila River streamflow (Graybill 1989; Graybill et al. 2006).
	
D.2.4. Sample Processing and Analysis

	As the sole source of tree-ring dates in the region, the LTRR dating program considers itself obligated to accept all material submitted from western North America. Established fees -- currently a minimum of $240.00 or $20.00 per sample for more than twelve samples -- reflect the actual cost of analysis. Only about 40 percent of the submissions are fully funded; the rest are underfunded relative to actual costs of analysis or totally unfunded. In the past, the higher priority given to funded submissions resulted in slow and unpredictable turnaround time for unfunded material. NSF support has stabilized this situation so that unfunded projects receive prompt attention with a turnaround time equal to that of funded analyses.

	Sample analysis occupies two dendrochronologists (Technicians 1 and 2) who work 3000-4000 samples per year (Table 2). Other LTRR dendrochronologists occasionally are engaged to perform specific tasks for the dating program. “Technician 3" listed in Table 4 is a composite of Christopher H. Baisan and Jeffrey S. Dean who took on high priority projects that could not be accommodated by the regular analysis schedule in time to meet impending deadlines. As a result, analysis just keeps pace with the average of 4000+ samples received per year. Technician 1 is supported by the University of Arizona; Technician 2 has been funded by NSF Grants BNS-8504241, DBS-9002235, SBR-9503516, SBR-9805413, BCS-0104242, and BCS-0413438; when needed and available, other technicians are supported in part by fee income and in part by other sources. No qualified replacements for Technicians 1 and 2 are available, and at least one year's intensive training and two years' experience would be required to imbue a talented person with the minimal skills necessary for these positions. Furthermore, analysis could not be automated without substantial and permanent reductions in speed and increases in cost and turnaround time. Thus, these skilled technicians constitute a unique and irreplaceable chronometric resource; the loss of either of them would cripple archaeological tree-ring dating in the New World.

	Laboratory procedures outlined in previous proposals (Dean and Towner 2003) have been maintained. Standard dendrochronological techniques (Dean 1986, 1997; Stokes and Smiley 1968) are used to date archaeological samples. Dating consistency and accuracy are maintained by routine checking of work by other technicians or supervisors. Species identification for all samples, dates for those samples amenable to tree-ring dating, comments on aspects of the dates (clustering, evidence for reuse or repair, etc.), and observations of samples' nonchronological attributes (tool marks, fire scars, growth anomalies, etc.) are reported to the submitters. Other information and detailed assessments of the dates are provided on request. Additional studies, such as dendroclimatic reconstructions, are not part of the normal analysis package and are undertaken only under special circumstances. The Principal Investigators supervise the analytical work and reporting. All samples, dated or undated, with any dendrochronological potential are added to LTRR's Douglass Collection of archaeological tree-ring samples where they are available for further study.

D.3. CURRENT STATUS OF ARCHAEOLOGICAL TREE-RING DATING
IN WESTERN NORTH AMERICA

	Several important changes have affected the dating program since the proposal for Grant BCS-0413438 was written (Dean and Towner 2003). First, were important personnel adjustments. In July 2003, Dennie O. Bowden III, formerly the NSF-sponsored Technician 2, retired from the University, which left a void of unmatched skill and experience. Fortunately, we were able to replace Bowden with David J. Street, a skillful dendrochronologist recently graduated from the University of Sheffield in England (Street 2001). When family obligations compelled Street to return to Great Britain after only a year, we were able to move James A. Parks, a dendrochronologist with more than 20 years’ experience in archaeological tree-ring dating into the position so that sample analysis continued without a break. The retirement to half-time of Technician 1, Richard L. Warren, reduced our sample-dating work force from three individuals in 2003 to one-and-one half persons at present. Renewal of Grant BCS-0413438 will maintain the Research Technician position currently occupied by Parks and continue the flow of archaeological tree-ring sample dating.

	Second, the new fee structure implemented in response to changing economic circumstances and recommendations by NSF proposal reviewers (Dean and Towner 2003) proved unworkable because it was impossible for prospective sample submitters to calculate in advance the likely costs of analysis. Therefore, we changed our standard analysis charges to a minimum of $240.00 for one-to-twelve samples and $20.00 per sample for more than twelve samples. For the time being, this rate reflects the actual cost of analysis but will be increased as costs rise. Our established policy of accepting all submissions, funded or unfunded, will not change, and charges for individual shipments will remain negotiable depending on available funds and other factors.

	The threats to LTRR's archaeological dating program enumerated in the previous proposal (Dean and Towner 2003) have diminished only slightly. A few statistics illustrate the nature of the current situation (Table 2) compared to that of three years ago (Table 3) and exemplify the problems involved in archaeological tree-ring dating in western North America. Four factors are responsible for these difficulties: the large number of samples submitted annually, weakening institutional support for the dendrochronologists who analyze the samples, large increases in institutional ERE rates, and the growing shortfall of fee income relative to the actual costs of the dating service.

	The amount of material submitted annually for analysis exceeds the long-term 3300 sample per year production capacity of the one-and-a-half-time dendrochronologists primarily responsible for archaeological dating (Table 2). The numbers reflect a demand for tree-ring analysis that is met chiefly by committing both technicians' efforts to archaeological dating without diversion into other activities. The use of other LTRR analysts “Technician 3" to meet special demands helps reduce the supply of unworked tree-ring samples (Table 4).

	The disparity (Table 2) between the percentage of funded accessions (37.2 percent) and that of funded samples (15.2 percent) shows that small accessions tend to be fully funded while larger ones generally are underfunded. Despite the increase in per sample analysis fees, a substantial gap still exists between per sample income and per sample costs of analysis. Therefore, it will remain difficult to maintain the current high levels of production and may, in the worst case, become necessary to curtail service if technicians have to be diverted to other projects for want of adequate archaeological funding. Because fee income is insufficient to support Technician 2 (Table 2), NSF funding remains crucial to keeping the dating program accessible to all archaeologists.

	The instability inherent in total reliance on state and fee funding drastically reduces the quality of the service to the archaeological community. Reduced analysis time increases turnaround time, especially for unfunded projects displaced by funded ones. As the rate of analysis drops, work on unfunded collections lags, and the backlog of delayed analyses grows rapidly. This situation worsens as institutional commitments decrease and demand by other Laboratory programs for skilled daters grows. Retrogression from the high production levels maintained during the last ten years can be averted only through the continued analytical stability, faster data processing, and enhanced reporting capability allowed by NSF funding.

	Only the continuity provided by NSF funding of Technician 2 has allowed us to maintain the dating program, increase its productivity, and train future replacements for the extant technicians. Unfortunately, this progress is endangered by the fact that other financial support for the dendrochronologists involved in archaeological tree-ring analysis has declined. Due to state-mandated budget cuts and increasing University administrative service fees, institutional commitment to the dating program has waned. Another source of financial pressure is growth in technician salaries due to cost of living adjustments, merit raises, and promotions. Even with these increments, both technicians remain grossly underpaid relative to their expertise in dendrochronology and their contributions to the dating program.

	Finally, the scheduling and reporting problems caused by Dean’s having to assume duties of retired faculty members and undertake enlarged administrative responsibilities remain acute. Only Towner’s taking on most of the management operations allows the program to remain on schedule.

D.4. RESULTS FROM PRIOR NSF SUPPORT

D.4.1. Introduction

	During the last five years, Dean has been involved as a Principal or Co-Principal Investigator in five NSF-sponsored projects: “Dendroarchaeology of the Navajo Occupation of the Southwest (BCS-9910773), "Southwestern Archaeological Tree-Ring Dating" (BCS-0104242, BCS-0413438), "Expanding Dendroarchaeology into Northern Mexico" (BCS-0210346), "Absolute Chronology of the Pazyryk Culture and Climatic Variability in the Altai Mountains Inferred from Tree Rings" (BCS-0207654), and an IGERT award "Archaeological Sciences: An Integrated Approach to Graduate Training in Human Use of Ancient Landscapes Through Chronometry, Paleoecology, and Technology" (DGE-0221594). During the last five years, Towner has been involved as a Principal or Co-Principal Investigator on four NSF-sponsored projects: “Dendroarchaeology of the Navajo Occupation of the Southwest (BCS-9910773), "Expanding Dendroarchaeology into Northern Mexico" (BCS-0210346), “Dendroarchaeology of the Range Creek Fremont” (BCS-0523995), and "Southwestern Archaeological Tree-Ring Dating" (BCS-0413438). Because this proposal is for the renewal of "Southwestern Archaeological Tree-Ring Dating," work accomplished under NSF Grant BCS-0413438 ($234,486) for the period from 1 August 2004 to 31 July 2007) entitled "Southwestern Archaeological Tree-Ring Dating" is described in detail here for both PIs.

	It is important to stress that NSF partial funding of the archaeological dating program involves much more than just support for a dating service. Rather, it has fostered much significant "pure" research of local, regional, theoretical, and methodological significance. Over the duration of the project this support has led to numerous scientific advances resulting directly from the NSF funding or indirectly from research activities that were made possible by the program stability afforded by NSF sponsorship. NSF funding for Technician 2 directly and indirectly supports five activities beyond routine sample dating (Section D.4.2): (1) professional development of the technicians, (2) preparing tree-ring samples for other types of study, (3) increasing consultation with archaeologists, (4) special research projects (Section D.4.3), and (5) geographic expansion (Section D.4.4). The first of these provided Technician 2 with experience in sampling bristlecone pine trees for building long chronologies, collecting environmental samples used in chemical studies of tree rings, and amassing tree-ring data for resolving boundary disputes. The second involved selecting and preparing samples for isotope analyses, frost damage studies, dendroclimatic analysis, and museum exhibits. The third objective occupied a large part of the Principal Investigators’ time; advice on many aspects of archaeological tree-ring dating was supplied to scholars representing a wide spectrum of institutions (Table 1).

D.4.2. Sample Analysis and Dating

	Analysis results achieved since the last proposal in 2003 are summarized in Table 4. NSF funded Technician 2 (Parks) processed 1,220 samples representing 34 "jobs" (Table 5) and produced 434 dates. Seventy-four percent of these submissions were unfunded or underfunded. Technician 1 derived 1,152 dates from 3,756 samples representing 57 submissions, 56 percent of which were underfunded or unfunded. The two analysts lumped as “Technician 3" derived 217 dates from 259 samples representing three underfunded jobs. In total, our technicians analyzed 5,253 samples and produced 1,803 dates from 177 sites. NSF support substantially increased the rate of sample analysis and allowed us to hold turnaround time to two to six months, depending on the size of the shipment and the existing backlog of prior submissions. Rapid turnaround facilitated the prompt integration of tree-ring dates into archaeologists' analyses and accelerated publication of archaeological research results (Section D.4.6). These results show that the stability provided by NSF support allowed the dating program to maintain production levels necessary to keep pace with submissions.

	Embedded in the dating statistics are several notable achievements. Analysis of especially large submissions illuminated the archaeological chronologies of the Natural Bridges, Durango (CO), Mesa Verde, Chaco Canyon, Aztec, Quemado (NM), upper Pecos River, Cuba (NM), Fort Wingate, and Dinétah areas. A large number of dates firmly anchored the Cox Ranch Chacoan outlier near Quemado in time and established its temporal relationship to developments in the Chaco Canyon core locality. Dates from numerous sites in the Fort Wingate and Dinétah areas help characterize the spatial and temporal structure of Navajo activities across the northern Southwest. A study of peeled ponderosa pine trees in the Zuni Mountains documents the patterned removal of bark from these trees in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. Finally, collections from historic period sites illuminate activities of Spanish, Mexican, and Anglo groups in the upper Pecos River Valley and the Cuba and Cebolla Creek areas of New Mexico.
	Although no archaeological tree-ring collections archived at other institutions were acquired during this reporting period, samples from the LTRR collections were used in the Chaco Canyon construction beam sourcing study described below (Section D.4.3). In addition, we currently are engaged in two cooperative projects that exploit LTRR collections. The first of these involves archaeologists and dendrochronologists at the University of Tennessee in a reanalysis of archaeological samples collected from the Norris Basin (TN) by Florence Hawley in the 1930s and housed in the LTRR’s Hawley-Bell Collection of Midwestern tree-ring samples. Second, archived samples from Mesa Verde sites are being studied by Howard Arnott, University of Texas at Arlington, for evidence of frost damage to juniper growth rings. Caused by freezing during the growing season, “frost rings” (Brunstein 1996; LaMarche and Hirschboeck 1984; Salzer 2000) identify years in which cold temperatures during the growing season may have severely reduced agricultural crop yields. Finally, another LTRR program combined ring-width data from archived archaeological samples with measurements from living trees and deadwood remnants into a Douglas-fir dendroclimatic chronology for the Nine Mile Canyon UT area that extends back to 300 B.C.

D.4.3. Specialized Studies

	The stability afforded by NSF support endowed the dating program with the flexibility to pursue important investigations as opportunities arose from the dating operation or through contact with outside individuals. An analysis of wooden elements in structures at the Lyndon B. Johnson Homestead in Texas failed to produce dates. Undertaken in cooperation with the Cibola National Forest, a study of peeled ponderosa pine trees documents the systematic removal of bark from ponderosa pine trees in the Zuni Mountains in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. A continuing project with the National Park Service documents the age structure, succession rates, and fire history of the pinyon-juniper woodland on Mesa Verde (Floyd et al. 2003). In cooperation with  Mesa Verde National Park, we are beginning a project to establish exact ages for ancient living Douglas-fir trees and date the prehistoric removal of limbs for construction beams from these trees (Nichols and Smith 1965; Schulman 1947). Finally, a project with Centuries Research, Inc. in Montrose CO to date deadwood fragments in the pinyon-juniper woodlands of western Colorado in order to quantify the “old wood” problem in archaeological chronometry (Schiffer 1982) radiocarbon and tree-ring dating is well along. Results so far establish that most deadwood elements are old enough (up to 900+ years) to seriously skew firewood dates from archaeological sites.

	NSF support also allowed the program to engage in several large cooperative ventures. In a continuation of a study of prehistoric construction beam procurement in Chaco Canyon, New Mexico (English et al. 2001), the dating program cooperated with the U.S. Geological Survey, the UA Geosciences Department, the National Park Service, and the Navajo Nation  to identify sources of ponderosa pine construction beams in Chaco Canyon, New Mexico. Comparison of strontium isotope ratios in trees, soil, and water in the mountains surrounding the San Juan Basin with strontium ratios in archaeological tree-ring samples identified the Chuska, La Plata, and San Juan Mountains and the Lobo Mesa/Hosta Butte area as sources of ponderosa pine construction beams in Chaco Canyon sites (Reynolds et al. 2005).  Thus, ponderosa pine timber acquisition covered a much broader area than the more localized Chuska Mountains-Mount Taylor sources of spruce and fir beams (English et al. 2001). These results clarify the scope of Chacoan resource procurement activities and the level of social organization attained by the Chacoan regional system. In cooperation with another LTRR program, Northern Arizona University, and Desert Archaeology, Inc., samples provided by the project are being used to identify morphological and dendrochemical signals for the eruption of Sunset Crater in order to refine the dating of that event, which had a profound effect on the prehistoric residents of the Flagstaff area. Finally, a long-term project, in cooperation with the Bureau of Land Management, continues to generate new dates for Navajo pueblito and hogan sites in northwestern New Mexico (Towner 2003).

D.4.4. Geographic Expansion
	Geographic expansion of archaeological tree-ring dating is a major aspect of the project. This mission was facilitated by acquisition of additional samples from northern Mexico, southern Arizona, the Great Basin, and Texas. A related NSF-sponsored LTRR archaeological research effort , "Absolute Chronology of the Pazyryk Culture and Climatic Variability in the Altai Mountains Inferred from Tree Rings" (BCS-0207654, Irina Panyushkina PI) has demonstrated the feasibility of archaeological tree-ring dated of wood from frozen Pazyryk tombs in southern Siberia.

D.4.5. Human Resources Development

	The scholarly growth and scientific achievements of the four graduate students that have been supported by the NSF Laboratory Support Awards are among the foremost accomplishments of the "Southwestern Archaeological Tree-Ring Dating" Project. Currently, Stephen E. Nash is Chair of the Department of Anthropology and Curator of Archaeology at the Denver Museum of Nature and Science, Ronald H. Towner is Adjunct Assistant Professor of Dendrochronology at the University of Arizona, Matthew W. Salzer is a Research Associate in the Laboratory of Tree-Ring Research, and David J. Street is an independent dendrochronologist in Bristol, England. Each has made important research advances, devoted much effort to communicating with the general public, and undertaken important teaching obligations. It is safe to predict that these talented and dedicated individuals will contribute to science, archaeology, and dendrochronology for many years to come.

	The accomplishments of the graduate assistants outlined above represent only part of the project's contribution to education at the University of Arizona and elsewhere. This contribution includes teaching, academic advising, individual instruction, service on examination and dissertation committees, advising students on research, and providing research data. Graduate students who assisted with research directly related to the project since 2004 include Linah Ababneh (Agnese Nelms Haury Scholar from Jordan), Kevin Anchukaitis (IGERT scholar), Bruce Bachand, Brandon Gabler, David Mehalik, Amanda Reynolds (IGERT Scholar), Christopher Roos, Kerry Thompson, and AJ Vonarx (IGERT scholar) (University of Arizona); Severin Fowles (University of Michigan); Elizabeth Bagwell (University of New Mexico); Scott Ingram (Arizona State University); Andrew Yentsch (University of Utah); and Susana González (California State University, Long Beach). Undergraduate development was fostered by incorporating research results into teaching in departments ranging from Anthropology to Geosciences, providing material and data for class projects, and integrating undergraduates into the research activities of the dating program. Undergraduate students directly involved in project research include David Trautman (UA Undergraduate Research Fellowship Grantee), Rachael Novak, and Lori Young. The project also has developed individual training programs for visiting students and scholars from around the world. Finally, numerous training sessions broadened the dendrochronological and dendroarchaeological knowledge of academic, government, private, and Native American archaeologists and land managers.

D.4.6. Publications

	Excavation reports that merely list tree-ring dates derived by the project are too numerous, and often too obscure, to be effectively tracked. Even detailed analyses of the dates and their archaeological implications have appeared in so many publications that only a few of them can be indicated here. The previous renewal proposal (Dean and Towner 2003) identified 209 publications that report analyses of data generated by the project. Since that time, an additional 30 major publications that utilize data derived by the project have been identified. The most significant and/or innovative of these include Adams and Duff 2004; Baker 2004; Bernardini 2005; Bernardini and Brown 2004; Creel 2006; Dean 2003, 2006; Duff 2004; Floyd et al. 2003; Kantner and Kintigh 2006; Lekson 2006a, 2006b; Lekson et al. 2006; Parks et al. 2006; Reynolds et al. 2005; Shafer 2003; Sinkey 2004; Sullivan and Ruter 2006; Toll 2006; Vivian et al. 2006a, 2006b; Wilshusen and Van Dyke 2006. These and other publications that present results related to the project are in bold type in the References Cited section.

D.5. PROPOSAL FOR RENEWED SUPPORT FOR THE ARCHAEOLOGICAL DATING PROGRAM

D.5.1. Introduction

	LTRR requests renewal of Laboratory Support Award BCS-0413438 in order to maintain at a satisfactory level of effort a program of demonstrated value to archaeological research. Continued NSF support, which would supplement rather than replace University of Arizona funding, would continue to stabilize the archaeological dating service by underwriting a crucial portion of the Laboratory's archaeological research program. Specifically, we request renewed support for one of the two dendrochronologists who analyze archaeological tree-ring samples and for minimal support for Co-PI Ronald H. Towner who will undertake vital supervisory, data management, and reporting functions. Renewed support will maintain the dating program, allow continued exploitation of specialized research opportunities, and fuel efforts to expand dendroarchaeology into other research domains and other areas of the world.

D.5.2. Tree-Ring Sample Analysis and Dating

	In order to maintain the stability of the archaeological tree-ring dating situation, we request continued full-time funding for an additional three years for Technician 2. Such support would secure for the dating program the services of two dendrochronologists, a level of commitment necessary to keep pace with submissions and undertake specialized studies as opportunities arise. Submissions would be worked more rapidly, and unfunded samples would be done concurrently with rather than after funded material. Three years of support would provide the continuity required for the efficient and productive operation of the dating program. As during the past three years, Technician 2 would concentrate on unfunded and underfunded material, thereby freeing Technician 1 to focus on funded projects and specific requests, outside projects, and special research opportunities as they arise. Fee income would be used primarily to employ nonproject technicians when necessary and to facilitate interaction with outside individuals and projects that require dendrochronological assistance, a particularly fruitful aspect of the project (Section D.4.1; Table 1). Fee income also would continue to allow prompt response to requests for information and wood samples to be used in other studies of archaeological significance, such as climate reconstruction, frost ring studies,  radiometric analyses, wood sourcing, and dating natural events like volcanic eruptions. Thus, renewal would allow us to sustain the efficiency levels achieved during the life of the project and to keep turnaround time between receipt of material and final report to a minimum.

	Laboratory policies, standards, and procedures would remain basically the same as outlined in Section D.2.4. We would continue to accept all funded and unfunded archaeological tree-ring material from western North America. Direction of the dating program and supervision of the sample work would remain the responsibility of the senior faculty and staff in the archaeological program. Interaction with archaeologists would include consultation prior to sample collection, field visitations, and occasional participation in the research. Automated data control and reporting procedures and formats would continue to be upgraded to speed the dissemination of research results to submitters and other interested parties.

	We also would continue to seek out extant sample collections that have not yet been systematically analyzed. Notable among these are materials from sites in northern Mexico that could help resolve chronological problems that impede the understanding of prehistoric interactions among Southwestern and Mexican populations (Dean and Ravesloot 1993). For example, curated samples collected in the 1930s from Quarenta Casas, Chihuahua (Scott 1966), have considerable potential that will be realized through the accumulation of more comparative archaeological tree-ring material from northern Mexico and living-tree chronology extensions by the University of Arkansas Tree-Ring Laboratory (Diaz et al. 2002). Second, recent breakthroughs in Hohokam tree-ring dating (Dean et al. 1996) advance the potential of as yet unstudied collections from desert sites for developing accurate, high resolution Hohokam chronologies.

D.5.3. Specialized Studies

	NSF support for the archaeological dating program will allow us to capitalize on several research opportunities that otherwise would remain unexploited. First, we will actively pursue in-house analyses designed to expand the scope of archaeological tree-ring dating in the Southwest. Planned activities include continued restudy of archived Hohokam tree-ring samples, additional dendroarchaeological work in Mesa Verde National Park, expansion of research in the Dinétah area of northwestern New Mexico, and the development of master tree-ring chronologies to support expanded dating of Fremont Culture sites in Utah and northwestern Colorado.

	Second, we will continue cooperating with other LTRR faculty, volcanologists from Northern Arizona University, and archaeologists from Desert Archaeology, Inc., in an investigation of the eruption of Sunset Crater in the Flagstaff AZ area. Archived tree-ring samples from Flagstaff-area archaeological sites will be searched for dendrochemical and tree-growth signals of volcanic eruptions identified by studies of the similar Parícutin volcano in Michoacan, Mexico, which erupted from 1943 to 1952. Using these signals to more accurately date the eruption of Sunset Crater will enhance understanding of the impact of this geological event on the eleventh and twelfth century human populations of the area.

	Third, we will continue to provide chronological and/or paleoenvironmental information for large scale computer modeling projects in the Southwest including the Artificial Anasazi Project (Dean et al. 2000; Kohler et al. 2005), Washington State University's agent-based model of prehistoric settlement in the Mesa Verde region (supported by NSF Biocomplexity Grant 0119981) (Johnson et al. 2005; Kohler et al. 2005), and Arizona State University's efforts to model (1) the social consequences of irrigation on Hohokam society in the Phoenix Basin and (2) interactions between populations of the Phoenix Basin and upland areas to the north (NSF Grant BCS-0613201).

	Fourth, as an offshoot of the strontium isotope studies that identified sources of spruce, fir, and ponderosa pine construction beams in Chaco Canyon (Section D.4.3; English et al. 2001; Reynolds et al. 2005), we are cooperating with volcanologists from Northern Arizona University and archaeologists from Desert Archaeology, Inc., to use strontium isotope ratios to identify possible sources of roof timbers in Wupatki Ruin and to isolate chemical signals of the eruption of Sunset Crater. The dating program is identifying suitable archaeological samples for analysis and providing them to NAU for analysis and comparison to living-tree growth sites.

	Finally, the archaeological dating program is involved with Centuries Research, Inc., in Montrose CO in a study to quantify the “old wood” problem (Schiffer 1982), which commonly is thought to seriously  bias archaeological tree-ring and radiocarbon dates on wood. Collection and dating of living-tree cores and firewood-sized deadwood fragments (1) provide master tree-ring chronologies for dating deadwood elements and (2) specify the range, central tendencies, and variability of the differences between deadwood element ages and the times of their procurement. This study will reveal the potential sizes of the disparities between old wood dates and actual times of wood use and is expected to produce a series of factors that can be used to statistically “correct” dates on old wood elements. 

D.5.4. Geographic Expansion

	We will maintain our efforts to extend archaeological tree-ring dating into the Great Basin, Rocky Mountains, Great Plains, Alaska, and Mexico. This endeavor already has dated sites in Utah, California, Oregon, central Colorado, and Alaska. Continued efforts to acquire and analyze extant collections and new material from Chihuahua and Sonora will help attain the "critical mass" of samples necessary to produce archaeological dates in the region. Other efforts to extend the scope of archaeological tree-ring dating include presentations at scientific meetings and conferring with scientists working in Great Britain, Peru, Mexico, Algeria, Morocco, Tunisia, and Turkey. Prospects are particularly promising in Algeria, Morocco, and Tunisia where an NSF sponsored (Grant ATM-0317288) LTRR dendroclimatic project has disclosed an abundance of structural wood representing a long time span (Ramzi Touchan, personal communication, 2003).

D.5.5. Graduate and Undergraduate Student Research

	Although the NSF funded graduate assistantship has been one of the major successes of the dating program (Section D.4.5), changing financial circumstances required elimination of this part of the project. Graduate students will remain an important part of the program but will be funded from other sources such as fellowships made available by the NSF IGERT program in archaeological sciences. Undergraduate student training and assistance, supported primarily by fee income, is an integral part of the dating program. Undergraduate student help with organizing submissions and collections and sorting and preparing samples for study free the technicians to concentrate on sample analysis. Student assistance with routine data management and preparing analytical results for dissemination allows senior personnel to focus on more important aspects of the project. Without undergraduate assistance, these operations would be slowed considerably, thereby greatly reducing efficiency, slowing sample analysis and reporting, and increasing turnaround time. Finally, undergraduate students participate in the program’s research and undertake special projects of their own.

D.5.6. Administration

	The PI and Co-PI will provide general direction for the program and manage the sample processing and reporting operations, professional contacts, public outreach, and cooperative research. Dean will provide general supervision of the program and the activities connected with it. Towner will focus on accessions, site and sample control and documentation, collections management, sample analysis, and report production. Both PIs will continue to respond to the ever-increasing requests from the archaeological community for information. The Laboratory will maintain the collections and provide administrative support.

D.5.7. Merit Review Criteria

Intellectual Merit. The project's primary contribution to archaeological research involves exact dating and chronology building, topics crucial to understanding human behavior, human-environment interactions, and processes of sociocultural stability, variation, change, and evolution. In addition, the project generates data used in dendroclimatic retrodictions that are integrated with reconstructions produced by other paleoenvironmental disciplines such as geology, palynology, volcanology, and trace element analysis. The unequalled accuracy and annual resolution of tree-ring dates advance archaeological dating theory by illuminating the dating potential of particular archaeological contexts and helping to develop assumptions and principles for evaluating independent dates of all kinds.

Broader Impacts. The findings of the project are almost immediately integrated into University of Arizona classes including an Undergraduate General Education Tier II science course for nonscience majors and undergraduate/graduate courses in the departments of Anthropology, Geosciences, and Renewable Natural Resources. The project is fully integrated into an NSF IGERT program in archaeological sciences. The project contributes directly to extensive outreach activities, which include K-12 programs, visiting scholars from around the world, and field training for governmental, private, and Native American cultural resource management programs. The project engages in cooperative research and training with many universities, government agencies, and private consulting firms. The LTRR tree-ring sample collections and data archives are unparalleled, easily accessed resources for archaeological research, and we are building a digital database to enhance the research value of these resources. To date, more than 220 scientific reports that incorporate project data have been identified. Project results are distributed to the public through lectures, newspapers, radio, television, and the internet. We prepare, document, and annotate tree-ring samples for museums. Societal benefits of the research derive from the increased understanding of long-term human adaptation to sociocultural and environmental variability and from knowledge of past environmental variability, both of which are necessary to develop and implement environmental and social policy. Project personnel have contributed directly to formulating policy for documenting and sampling cultural resources by federal, local, and tribal land management agencies.

TABLE 1. Institutional Consultations or Contacts, 2004/2005 - 2006/2007.

University of Arizona
University of Cincinnati
University of Colorado
University of Delaware
University of Michigan
University of Minnesota, St. Paul
University of Munich
University of Nevada, Las Vegas
University of New Mexico
University of Oklahoma
University of Tennessee
University of Texas, Arlington
University of Utah
Arizona State University
Brigham Young University
Cornell University
Eastern Illinois University
George Mason University
Northern Arizona University
Utah State University
Washington State University
Fort Lewis College
San Juan College
Crow Canyon Archaeological Center
American Museum of Natural History
Arizona State Museum
Field Museum of Natural History
Museum of New Mexico
Museum of Northern Arizona
Peabody Museum, Harvard
San Juan County Museum Association
USDA Forest Service
USDI Bureau of Indian Affairs
USDI Bureau of Land Management
USDI National Park Service
U.S. Geological Survey
Apache-Sitgreaves National Forest
Cibola Natural Forest
Coronado National Forest
Gila National Forest
Gila River Indian Community
Navajo Nation Archaeology Department
White Mountain Apache Tribe

Uncompahgre Valley Ute Project
Zuni Cultural Resource Enterprise
NPS Western Archaeology and Conservation Center
Chaco Culture National Historical Park
Mesa Verde National Park
Pecos National Historical Park
Aztec Ruins National Monument
Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument
Great Sand Dunes National Monument
LBJ Homestead National Monument
Navajo National Monument
Sunset Crater-Wupatki National Monument
Tumacacori National Monument
Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory
Los Alamos National Laboratories
Alpine Archaeological Consultants
Archaeological Consulting Services, Ltd.
Center for Desert Archaeology
Center for Land Grant Studies
Centuries Research
Cornerstones Community Partnership
Desert Archaeology, Inc.
Desert Research Institute
Eco-plan Associates
Historic Santa Fe Foundation
HRA, Inc.
Manzanares Research
Montgomery Archaeological Consultants
Office of Archaeological Studies
Rio Salado Archaeology
RMC Consultants
Statistical Research Inc.
SWCA, Inc.
TRC Environmental
Western Cultural Resource Management
Woods Canyon Archaeological Consultants
Zia Engineering
Archdiocese of Santa Fe
Casa de Gavilan
Philmont Scout Ranch

TABLE 2. Archaeological Tree-Ring Sample Analysis, Income, and Technician Costs, FY 2004/2005, 2005/2006, and 2006/2007 (Four Months).

S U B M I S S I O N S
						
			ACCESSIONS

		     SAMPLES

INCOME

TECHNICIAN 2

Year

Funded

Under
Funded

Un-
Funded

Total

Funded

Under
Funded

Un-
Funded

Total

Fee
Income

Income/
Sample

Salary

04/05

05/06

06/07
18

14

3
11

12

3
14

12

7
43

38

13
268

360

166
1,399

1,684

214
374

322

348
2,041

2,366

820
$15,505

$27,570

$12,920
$7.60

$11.65

$15.76
$32,450.00

$33,002.00

$11,550.00

Totals

Percent
35

37.2
26

27.7
33

35.1
94

100.0
794

15.2
3,397

64.9
1,044

19.9
5,235

100.0

TABLE 3. Archaeological Tree-Ring Sample Analysis, Income, and Technician Costs, FY 2001/2002, 2002/2003, and 2003/2004.

S U B M I S S I O N S

			ACCESSIONS

SAMPLES

INCOME

TECHNICIAN 2

Year

Funded

Under
Funded

Un-
Funded

Total

Funded

Under
Funded

Un-
Funded

Total

Fee
Income

Income/
Sample

Salary

01/02

01/03

03/04
17

21

23
17

13

14
18

22

28
52

56

65
664

399

516
4,081

590

1,515
483

637

854
5,228

1,626

2,885
$29,081

$24,798

$27,859
$5.56

$15.25

$9.66
$43,575.00

$45,025.00

$31,000.00

Totals

Percent
61

35.3
44

25.4
68

39.3
173

100.0
1,579

16.2
6,186

63.5
1,974

20.3
9,739

100.0

TABLE 4. Summary of Annual Production, 2004/2005 - 2006/2007.

			TECHNICIAN 2 (NSF)				TECHNICIAN 1 (UA)

Year
Jobs
 	Worked
Samples
 	Analyzed
Dates
Jobs
Worked
Samples
Analyzed
Dates

04/05

05/06

06/07

TOTALS
12

16

6

34
545

332

343

1,220
120

40

274

434
31

21

5

57
1,496

2,002

258

3,756
340

632

180

	1,152

			TECHNICIAN 3 (Fees)		

Year
Jobs
Worked
Samples
Analyzed
Dates

	
04/05

05/06

06/07

TOTALS
0

1

2

3
0

32

227

259
0

32

185

217

Total Number Samples Analyzed = 5,253

Total Number Dates Derived = 1,803

TABLE 5. Jobs Processed by Technician 2, 2004/2005 - 2006/2007.

PROJECT

Uncle Albert Porter Pueblo
Bluff Archaeological Field School
El Morro Valley Prehistory Project
Dunlap-Salazar Site
Marana Platform Mound
Canjilon NM Church
Pot Creek Pueblo
Range Creek Fremont
Peralta NM Church
Canjilon NM Church
Aztec and Salmon Ruins
Fort Wingate Navajo Sites
42 CB 1916
El Morro Valley Prehistory Project
Marana Platform Mound
LA 1511, NM-Q-30-129
LA 119350
La Gila Encantada
Casa de Gavilan
LA 139244, LA 149506
LA 119530
Uncle Albert Porter Pueblo, Lancaster House
AR-03-12-04-371
Madera Quemada Pueblo
Mount Trumbell Area
AZ CC:2:203 (ASM)
Palace of the Governors, Santa Fe
Mescal Wash
Cebolla Creek Sites and Lost Lake Peeled Trees
Chiricahua Mountains Sites
R. J. Walnut Tree
Los Alamos Live Trees
Madrid NM Mine
LA 97945
DONOR

Crow Canyon Archaeological Center
University of Colorado
Arizona State University
University of Delaware
Arizona State Museum
Center for Land Grant Studies
University of Michigan
University of Utah
J. Taylor
Center for Land Grant Studies
Center for Desert Archaeology
Navajo Nation Archaeology Department
Utah State University
Arizona State University
Arizona State Museum
TRC Environmental
Office of Contract Archaeology
University of Nevada, Las Vegas
D. E. Emery
La Plata Archaeological Consultants
Office of Contract Archaeology
Crow Canyon Archaeology Center
Eco-Plan Associates
Geo-Marine
Desert Research Institute
SWCA-Tucson
Office of Archaeological Studies
Statistical Research, Incorporated
Laboratory of Tree-Ring Research
M. Sechrist
Gila National Forest
Laboratory of Tree-Ring Research
J. Young
TRC Environmental