1.1 Project Scope and Effect

The MCD facility is in Loteria Township, located within the Southwestern Desert region of the Basin and Range physiographic province approximately 50 miles east of the continental divide along the disputed Mexico border in extreme southern New Mexico (Figure 1.1). 

The region features scattered mountain ranges intersected by desert streams which have no outlet and collect in broad basins. In wet years, these form large lakes and playas. This unique abrupt physiology is the result of tectonic extension in the early Miocene about 17 million years ago; large north-south faults were pulled apart in the earth’s crust along which mountains were uplifted and valleys down-dropped.

Figure 1.1. Project location showing regional topography (National Park Service 2012 Imagery).

The primary drainage of Loteria Township is Wamel’s Draw, which flows out of the Cedar Mountain range to the north, and into the Laguna los Moscos south of the facility (Foss 2001)[1]. Wamel's Draw and the lagoon (or the Sierra Alta range to the east) has been the disputed U.S.-New Mexican border since the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo of 1848, ending the U.S.-Mexican War. The Sierra Rica range, west of the draw, dominates the landscape of MCD and Loteria Township. 

The majority of the project lies within typical desert biome with very little rain, hot summers, and cold winters. Common flora include cactus, prickly pear, mesquite, and yucca plants. Fauna are often nocturnal in order to conserve water and include bats, snakes, lizards, scorpions, tarantulas, ants, termites, mice, raven, roadrunners. Much of the approximately 30, 000-ac facility has been historically mined for copper, gold, silver, and barite and other minerals (McCarthy 1985)[2]. Other than mining industry and related boom towns, the area has historically seen very little development in any period prior to the groundbreaking at MCD in 1947. 

The Scope of Work (SOW) for this project called for survey of the entire MCD facility encompassing 30, 000 acres[3], which required that an intensive inventory of cultural resources be conducted prior to the closure of the base and remittance of the land to the public. The purpose of the survey is to assist the Army in their compliance requirements (NEPA, ARPA, NAGPRA, and NHPA Sections 106 and 110) regarding this undertaking by identifying potential impacts to prehistoric cultural resources or historic properties eligible for listing to NRHP. No cultural resources had previously been identified at MCD. 

While no historic sites had yet been registered on base, historical map data from the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries indicated the potential for over a numerous historic properties; although not included exhaustively on county plat books and covered sparingly by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), maps indicate a variety of natural features, such freshwater sources that would be attractive to both prehistoric and historic occupants of the region, as well as a scattering of mines as associated camps and ghost towns evidence of which could have persisted in the archaeological record (Figure 1.2). Several of these potential resources had already been suggested to exist but not ground-truthed by archaeologists or historians (Foss 2001). 

Figure 1.2. Historic USGS topographic imagery, depicting Loteria Township prior to the construction of MCD.

These investigations were undertaken in accordance with specifications for conducting fieldwork and preparing cultural resource assessment reports as outlined via the SOW provided by USACE-EP (2012)[4] and draft guidelines provided by SHS. As no prior formal cultural resources investigations had been performed within the facility (outside of the perfunctory facility building inventory conducted by Foss in 2012), it was anticipated that shovel testing or systematic surface inspection survey in appropriate areas would be conducted across the entire approximately 30, 000-acre area; surface inspection survey would be conducted on an opportunistic basis in areas where ground surface visibility exceeded 40 percent. It was expected that this would include much of the desert pavement, comprising a significant portion of the undeveloped portions of the facility outside of the rugged uplands. Survey transect lines were assigned number designations and shovel tests numbered according to direction of work. The grid system was aligned to a Public Land Survey System (PLSS) grid for Loteria Township; and survey areas were defined via quartered PLSS sections. Shovel tests excavations or surface inspection points were placed at 30 meter (100 foot) intervals along transects spaced 30 meters (100 feet) apart. 

Where prehistoric or historic materials were encountered, additional shovel tests were excavated at 10 m (33 ft) intervals around the find spot to delineate rough boundaries for the archaeological site. Each of the 54 newly identified resources located during the Phase I Survey had a temporary datum plotted on the project maps, as well as the corresponding USGS quadrangle (Table 1.1). In addition, all sites were recorded using Global Positional System (GPS) equipment. Services described in this report were conducted in accordance with state and federal (Secretary of the Interior’s Standards and Guidelines for Archaeology and Historic Preservation [United States Department of the Interior {USDI 1983}]) guidelines for conducting archaeological investigations. The preparation of this report and any recommendations concerning the potential eligibility of archaeological resources identified during the survey were made in accordance with the Department of Interior and the National Park Service’s 36 CFR 60: National Register of Historic Places; the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards and Guidelines for Archaeology and Historic Preservation; and National Register Bulletin 15, How to Apply the National Register Criteria for Evaluation (USDI 1981, 1983, 1991). The Principal Investigator who performed this work meets or exceeds the qualifications described in the Secretary of the Interior’s “Professional Qualifications Standards” (48 FR 44738-9). 

Table 1.1 Field Sites identified within the Phase I investigations of MCD.

[1] Foss, Gene 2001. Mountweazel Chemical Depot Cultural Resources Management Plan. Prepared for the GloboMax, Inc., Richmond, Virginia, under contract with US Army Corps of Engineers, El Paso District. Third Square Consulting, LLC., Philadelphia.

[2] McCarthy, C. 1985. A History of Loteria Township, New Mexico.  Driftless Pueblo, Albuquerque.

[3] The facility is reported at 29, 600-acres based on U. S. Department of Defense Real Property records. Independent GIS valuation is 28, 383-acres. [FJT] 

[4] U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, El Paso District. 2012. Memorandum of Agreement for National Historic Preservation Act Compliance  Regarding the Closure of Montweazel Chemical Depot, under the Recommendation of the Base Closure and Realignment Commission. 

[5] Coordinates redacted.