PDF (Lo-Res) - Smithsonian Institution Libraries

NUMBER 89 131
TABLE I.—Bird species from Ust' Poluisk (NISP=number of bones;
MNI=minimum number of individuals; *=rare vagrant or rare breeding species
at the Ob' River mouth).
Taxon
Gavia stellata
Gavia arctica
Podiceps cristatus
Cygnus cygnus
Cygnus bewickii
Anser cf. albifrons
Anser cf. fabalis
Branta spp.
Anas platyrhynchos
Anas crecca
Anas penelope
Anas acuta
Anas querquedula
Anas clypeata
Anas spp.
Aythya fuligula
Aythya marila
Melanitta fusca
Melanitta nigra
Clangula hyemalis
Bucephala clangula
Mergus albellus
Mergus merganser
Anatidae indeterminate
Haliaeetus albicilla
Accipiter gentilis
Buteo lagopus
Aquila chrysaetos
Circus cyaneus
Accipitridae indeterminate
Falco peregrinus
Lagopus mutus
Lagopus lagopus
Lagopus indeterminate
Tetrao urogallus
Lyrurus tetrix
Grus grus
Grus leucogeranus
Larus argentatus
Charadriiformes indeterminate shorebirds
Bubo bubo
Nyctea scandiaca
Strix nebuloza
Corvus cornix
Corvus corax
Aves indeterminate
TOTAL
Common name
Red-throated Loon
Arctic Loon
* Great Crested Grebe
Whooper Swan
Bewick's Swan
Greater White-fronted Goose
Bean Goose
small geese
Mallard
Green-winged Teal
Eurasian Wigeon
Northern Pintail
Garganey
Northern Shoveler
teal
Tufted Duck
Scaup
White-winged Scoter
Black Scoter
Oldsquaw
Common Goldeneye
* Smew
* Common Merganser
ducks
White-tailed Eagle
Northern Goshawk
* Rough-legged Hawk
* Golden Eagle
Northern Harrier
kites, hawks, eagles
* Peregrine Falcon
Rock Ptarmigan
Willow Ptarmigan
ptarmigan
Capercaillie
Black Grouse
* Common Crane
Siberian White Crane
Herring Gull
* Eagle Owl
Snowy Owl
* Great Gray Owl
Hooded Crow
* Common Raven
birds
NISP
25
48
8
28
10
132
88
3
12
50
40
24
6
12
6
4
1
1
2
14
7
1
1
46
143
4
1
28
2
1
2
134
653
318
16
1
1
6
65
1
4
12
1
11
11
12
1996
MNI
7
10
2
5
2
41
10
1
5
23
10
4
2
3
2
4
1
1
1
5
2
1
1
18
10
1
1
7
1
1
1
36
144
30
6
1
1
1
10
1
1
2
1
3
2
TABLE 2.—Bird remains analyzed by groups from Ust' Poluisk
(MNI=minimum number of individuals).
Groups
Loons, grebes, shorebirds, gulls
Ducks, geese, swans
Diurnal raptors
Grouse
Cranes
Owls
Crows
TOTAL
Number of species MNI
5
19
6
4
2
3
2
41
30
142
22
217
2
4
5
422
422
MNI%
7.1
33.7
5.2
51.4
0.5
0.9
1.2
100
prise only 1% of all bird bones (Potapova and Sablin, 1994;
O.R. Potapova, pers. obs., 1997). In the northern Urals, Willow
Ptarmigan bones were reported only from the Kaninskaya cave
Bronze-Iron Age site on the upper Pechora River (Kuzmina,
1971).
All skeletal elements of Willow Ptarmigans and Rock Ptarmigans
{Lagopus mutus (Montin)) were found at Ust' Poluisk,
with humeri and femora being the most common (see Figure
2A). The relative abundance of skeletal elements is similar to
that of skeletal elements found at Abri Fontales, Ebbou, and La
Colombiere archaeological sites in France (Mourer-Chauvire,
1983). The numbers of skulls, sterna, and pelvises found at the
Ust' Poluisk site suggest that the birds were delivered to the
site intact, with processing occurring at the site. All the bones
are very well preserved, with unbroken bones constituting almost
88% of the total. The majority of bones belong to adults,
with only 1.5% belonging to young individuals, based on
spongy tissue at the ends of the long bones. Many tibiae and
femora have distinct tooth marks (13% of all Lagopus bones)
that appear as small holes and dents on their ends (these fall
into three size classes: 1.6 x 3.0 mm; 2.0 x 3.7 mm; 2.7 x 2.9
mm). Some of the bones (0.4%) have signs of cuts on the
shafts (femora) and have cuts through the entire articular ends
(humeri).
Willow Ptarmigans probably attracted prehistoric hunters because
their seasonal abundance and behavior patterns made
them relatively easy to obtain. The hunting process required no
special equipment, such as bows or arrows, because nooses,
traps, or nets could be used successfully (Silantyev, 1898; Kolosov
and Shibanov, 1957). Not long ago these methods were
still widely used in the Russian north. In the nineteenth century
Silantyev (1898:367) wrote: "Local hunters get grouse without
guns." Catching grouse with nets in the spring was used in the
tundra of the Lena-Khatanga depression (Romanov, 1934), and
net hunting is still widely applied in the Lower Kolyma
throughout the year (E.R. Potapov, pers. comm., 1997). In
North America, it is still possible to catch large numbers of
grouse in the Great Plains using nets or clubs; nets were used
by nineteenth century Shoshone Indians during rabbit drives,
and fiber nets dating from thousands of years ago have been located
in archaeological sites in the Great Plains and Great
Basin (L.W Rom, pers. comm., 1997). The technology of producing
nets from nettles or willow bast was known to all fishing
peoples from the Neolithic-Bronze Age (Kosarev, 1987a,
1991; Krushanov, 1989). It is possible that the same nets were
employed for fishing and catching molting geese in summer
and for hunting grouse in other seasons. Although not required,
it also is possible that some special equipment was used for
hunting grouse. Besides the more productive hunting in the
fall, winter, and spring, inhabitants could catch grouse during
other seasons by beating or by catching birds by hand in remote
areas, where birds were not afraid of humans (Potapov, 1985).
Except during the breeding period, Willow Ptarmigans live
in flocks. On the Lower Ob' River, the young form small flocks
in August, and flocks of up to 100 birds have been observed in