 |
|
Head-Smashed-In Site |
Trapping in the conventional sense is often associated with the actual tool used in the capture of game. In this paper it is meant as the method in which land is modified or utilized for the purpose of trapping game in a contained area where butchering can take place. One advantage of this type of hunting strategy over individual attempts is that it is more energy-efficient, demanding less energy expenditure per individual in the hunting process as well as involving all members of the community in the butchering and preparation of meat in one contained area. In small game hunting, an individual could easily capture and transport a day's kill but larger land forms required a great deal of energy as well as a lower success rate. (Roll & Deaver; pages 89-92)
Capitalizing on existing land features is an integral part of this process as the building of corrals and pounds tended to be labor intensive. For this reason arroyos, canyons, and marshes became the preferred areas for communal trapping of large game herds. Archaeologists often have a difficult time determining a communal trapping site under natural conditions until excavations reveal substantial animal remains, these are often more identifiable where land modification was needed.
Where natural features were not sufficient or available, areas had to be modified through the construction of corrals and pounds with one or more lanes used to drive the herds into the enclosed area. Excavations at the Ruby site in central Wyoming gave good evidence for the practice of bison trapping through corral building. Used in the late plains archaic phase, hunters were able to capture a large amount of bison on one or more occasions. This is evidenced by a clustering of bison skulls located near the opening and near the eastern wall of the pound. The excavated driving lane further supports the evidence for planned capture. At the Ramillies site in southwestern Alberta, at least three driving lanes were constructed of stone and used to manipulate bison herds into a pound which was large enough to hold up to 30 animals at one time. This pound appears to have been used repeatedly from AD 150-965, seasonally in the spring, summer, and fall months. Although much controversy surrounds the issue of winter trapping, it does not seem to be the case at the Ramillies site due to the dental eruption patterns found on the bison remains.
This technology rested heavily upon the hunter's keen insight into the prey's seasonal behavior and location, the ability to identify natural features on the land which would be conducive to trapping larger game in large numbers, and having sufficient ecological resources. These factors explain why this hunting strategy is a form of technology rather than an occasional activity. Whether communal hunting was assisted by land formations or by modification, it was a practice requiring planning and insight.
The results of this technology had many social implications for members of the group. It allowed for larger winter encampments, the demand for and intensity of labor in land modification increased to supply this larger population with meat, some division of labor by gender occurred between trapping and butchering and preparation of meat, it encouraged a shift to more cooperative behavior, it motivated further technological innovations, and several interpretations of communal trapping sites include ritual practices in conjunction with pound construction (Rolls & Deaver; pages 90-100).
Image Credit http://www.head-smashed-in.com/archaeol.html
Roll & Deaver; 1978
IAS Investigative Reports Bootlegger Trail Site: A Spring Bison Kill. Heritage Conservation and Recreation Service. Interagency Archeological Services. Montana State University Endowment.