Dog Island Shipwreck Survey

1999 Research Design

Chuck Meide

January 1999

You can download the document in PDF or MS WORD97 format.

Introduction and Historical Overview

Dog Island is a barrier island in part of a chain in Apalachicola Bay and St. George Sound (Figure 1). It is positioned about 6 km (3.5 miles) offshore and south of the towns of Carrabelle and Lanarck Village in Franklin County, Florida. It is almost 11 km (7 miles) long, and runs southwest to northeast. To the west of Dog Island, just over 2 miles away across East Pass, is St. George Island. Today, approximately 75% of the island is owned by The Nature Conservancy, and the remainder of the island has around 100 residences, few of which are inhabited year-round.

Human beings have been present on Dog Island for thousands of years. There is some evidence of a human presence on the island as early as 8,000 years ago (at that time the island would have been part of the mainland) and other archaeological evidence suggests habitation intensified over the millennia, through the time of European contact in the 16^th century AD. Many prehistoric archaeological sites have been documented on the island (White et al 1995) and it is likely, due to the mercurial geomorphology of the island over time, that other such sites are now inundated in the waters surrounding the island.

Dog Island has a rich maritime history. The presence of indigenous peoples on the island, and the discovery of a 1,200 year old dugout canoe, attest to the forgotten traditions of prehistoric mariners. It is not known exactly when European seafarers first visited the island, though it is believed that the Spanish conquistador Narváez and his men encountered the island in 1528 while attempting to escape Florida in makeshift watercraft (the second recorded instance of European­style boat building in America) (Weddle 1985: 192). During the 17^th century, the Spanish established a mission system in the region of Apalachee (centered around present-day Tallahassee) and a port was established at nearby San Marcos de Apalache (the modern town of St. Marks). A lucrative trade route was established between San Marcos, Havana, and St. Augustine. It is certain that local Spanish mariners were aware of Dog Island, though it is scarcely mentioned in the historical documentation of the time.

It is probable that Dog Island was used throughout the 17^th and 18^th centuries for the illicit maritime traffic of smugglers and pirates. The 17^th century Spanish authorities in Apalachee were constantly anxious about the vulnerability of their ships and settlements to English and French buccaneers (Hann 1988: 198-199). Pirates successfully raided San Marcos in 1677 and 1682, taking ships, ransoming prisoners, and burning the fort. In addition, it was suspected that local colonists would illegally trade with these foreigners (McCarthy 1994: 27-29). It is likely that pirates such as these would have used the nearby barrier islands, with their desolate, sheltered coves, as hideouts and staging points for raids or trading ventures.

By the 18^th century, Spain¹s French rivals had established the thriving colony of Louisiana (with major settlements at New Orleans and Mobile), and so the waters around Dog Island saw both French and Spanish exploratory and mercantile traffic. In the first half of the 18^th century, the French senior hydrographic engineer Jacques-Nicolas Bellin was charged with improving the known maps of the Gulf coast. He included in his new map Dog Island, "of which no mention is made on any chart, although it is nine or ten leagues long and has, between it and the mainland, a considerable channel where ships can navigate" (Weddle 1991: 340).

The first of two historically significant 18^th century shipwrecks at Dog Island took place in 1766. Le Tigre, a brigantine loaded with merchandise "certain to sell," was on route from St. Domingue (present day Haiti) to New Orleans when she was caught by a vicious storm in the Gulf of Mexico. In danger of sinking, her crew attempted to make it to Mobile and then Pensacola, but the ship ran aground instead 300 yards east of Dog Island, early in the morning on February 16^th, 1766. A best-selling narrative by survivor Pierre Viaud‹Naufrage et Aventures de M. Pierre Viaud‹shocked European audiences with its lurid tale of disaster at sea, betrayal, death, murder, native savages, wild animals, cannibalism, and, eventually, a happy ending (Fabel 1990) (Figure 2). After these (probably much-exaggerated) tribulations, Viaud was rescued by soldiers from the garrison at St. Marks, which was by that time in British hands.

1787 Engraving from Fabel 1990: frontispiece

The second significant shipwreck event was the loss of the English war schooner Fox, which occurred after the Spanish had re-gained control of Florida at the end of the century. HMS Fox set sail from Nassau to the Apalachee region of Florida on September 4^th, 1799. On board was the infamous William Augustus Bowles (Figure 3), the self-proclaimed Director-General of the "independent and sovereign" Creek Indian Nation of Muskogee. Bowles, supported by the British government, used native warriors to conduct land and naval attacks on Spanish Florida (Wright 1967; McCarthy 1994: 59-61). Caught in a storm very near its destination, the Fox ran aground in between St. George and Dog Islands, losing most of its cargo of supplies and munitions for Bowles¹ native supporters. Previous efforts by FSU student archaeologists have been made to locate the Fox, though to date none have been successful (Brewer 1980; Palmer 1997).

Sometime between the latter half of the 18^th century and the mid-19^th century, it is likely that another vessel was lost somewhere in East Pass between Dog Island and St. George Island. The remains of this vessel were accidentally discovered by the local proprietors of Miller Seafoods while shrimping. Two ceramic tiles, believed to be late 18^th century French in origin, were recovered, but this site has not been re-located and remains unknown to archaeologists (James Dunbar, personal communication, 1999). It is likely that for every one of the recorded ship losses in the vicinity of Dog Island, there are many others that occurred and, like the East Pass Wreck (8FR799), have become lost to history.

During the nineteenth century, Euro-Americans periodically visited the island to gather such resources as lumber and pine pitch for ship building. When the Americans gained control of Florida in 1821, port cities such as Apalachicola, St. Joseph, Magnolia, St. Marks, Port Leon, and Newport developed along the coastal region, and merchant shipping by steam and sail increased throughout the Gulf. Lumber and naval stores, along with cotton, grew in importance as trade goods. In 1839 a lighthouse was established on Dog Island, which marked the first known permanent human habitation on the island. Florida¹s entrance into statehood in 1845 bolstered economic growth, and railroad and steamer transportation, along with shipping exports to Atlantic, European, and Caribbean markets, expanded rapidly (Smith et al 1997: 10-13).

Dog Island was of strategic importance to the Union Navy during the Civil War, and it was used as a staging point for the blockade of the port of Apalachicola. Union forces maintained two steam-propelled vessels and many small boats throughout the war. The lighthouse was used as a lookout tower by Union soldiers, and in continued in federal service after the war¹s end until it was destroyed by a hurricane in 1872. The remains of the lighthouse should lie about 100 meters off the Cannonball Acres area (Huntsman 1991).

Another significant wrecking event occurred on 26 February 1899. At that time, there were thirteen large merchant ships on the island, taking on cargoes of "Florida pine, sawn timber, and planks." The wooden-hulled ships were all between 400 and 500 tons, and included six American 3-masted coastal schooners, five Norwegian 3-masted barks, one Finnish schooner, and one Spanish bark. A hurricane or severe squall inundated most of the island, and two ships were wrecked on the neighboring St. George Island. Nine of the remaining vessels were wrecked on Dog Island (Figure 4). One of the surviving Norwegian sailors acquired photographs, copies of which are on file at the Bureau of Archaeological Research. Of the nine vessels lost on Dog Island, four were not re-floated and their remains should still lie in Shipping Cove: the Jafnhar, Vale, Latava, and Cortesia (White et al 1995: 29). Dog Island Wreck # 2 (8FR814), investigated briefly by FSU students in 1990, was interpreted to be one of these 1899 wrecks (Wright 1990).

Another shipwreck lies in the surf zone directly opposite Shipping Cove on the Gulf side of the island. Known as Dog Island Wreck # 1 (8FR813), it was initially investigated in 1987, and is believed to be a late 19^th century/early 20^th century fishing smack, the Priscilla. Built in Maine and owned by a Pensacola seafood company, the Priscilla has very similar dimensions to those of Dog Island Wreck # 1, and records suggest she was wrecked sometime before 1917 (White et al 1995: 27). The Priscilla¹s remains are a testament to the fishing industry that thrived in the area at the turn of the century (as it does to this day).

After the turn of the century, population on Dog Island slowly increased. In addition to logging exploitation, a growing industry at this time was the collection

of oleoresin, used in the production of turpentine (Huntsman 1995). It is known that turpentine leases were in effect during 1938 to 1945 and 1945 to 1947. One of these early- to mid-twentieth century turpentine camps (8FR843) was investigated by archaeologist Nancy White (1995: 32-35). A related maritime site is the remains of a dock used by the turpentine workers which is located on the northwest shore of Tyson Harbor (White et al 1995: 33, Figure 8).

Concentrated military activities took place on the island for the second time during World War II. The U.S. Army Camp Gordon Johnston was established across Franklin County, encompassing all of the barrier islands, in 1942. The island was used for target practice as well as training for amphibious assaults. Additionally, a training camp was located adjacent to the contemporary turpentine camp. After World War II, portions of the island were bought and sold by private individuals. Homes were subsequently built on many of the individual lots. In 1980, the Nature Conservancy bought most of the island for preservation purposes.

The primary objective of the Dog Island Shipwreck Survey is to locate, identify, and catalogue the submerged cultural resources in the waters around Dog Island. The archaeological sites of primary interest are historic shipwreck sites, which likely span the 16^th through 20^th century. Other resources that may be discovered‹such as inundated prehistoric sites, historic dock features, and the Dog Island Lighthouse‹are also of interest and will be recorded as well.

Table 1 is a list of vessels that have wrecked in the vicinity of Dog Island, as well as other historic maritime structures of interest. Of these vessels, the two most historically significant are the wrecks of Le Tigre and HMS Fox. As these two sunken vessels promise to provide the highest research potential, efforts towards surveying and discovering their remains are of highest priority.

Figure 5 is a map of Dog Island, with the overall project area delineated in red. As this area is too large to completely survey in the time allowed, selected areas of high probability will be defined, and remote sensing survey efforts will be concentrated in these areas. The areas that most likely contain the remains of HMS Fox and Le Tigre are outlined in yellow and blue, respectively.

Secondary goals include the re-location of the East Pass Wreck (8FR799), if it exists, the survey of Shipping Cove in order to locate the three or four remaining 1899 merchant vessels, and the survey of the area off Cannonball Acres in order to re-locate the Dog Island Lighthouse. In addition, given the time constraints, it may be possible to select other areas‹such as ballast cove, and selected areas

off the Gulf side of Dog Island and in East Pass‹that are likely to have the remains of unknown historic shipwreck remains.

Any shipwreck sites that are located through remote sensing survey must be assessed by divers in order to determine their physical parameters (nature, extent, and condition) and cultural parameters (age, function, and cultural affiliation). This will be done primarily through the mapping of any exposed surface remains, and by conducting test excavations with limited artifact recovery. The two known shipwreck sites (Dog Island Wrecks #1 and #2), and possibly the 20^th century turpentine dock remains, will also be re-assessed in similar manner. This will provide information on the current state of preservation for these sites, and may confirm their tentative identifications.

The specific methodologies of the magnetic/sonar remote sensing survey and diving/excavation activities are outlined below.

The two types of remote sensing devices that will be used during survey activities will be a Geometrics 866 proton precession magnetometer and a Marine Sonic Sea Scan PC side-scan sonar (both owned by the Department of Anthropology, Florida State University). In order to provide real-time positional control, a NT200D Global Positioning System (GPS) with differential capabilities will also be utilized. The GPS unit will constantly download longitude/latitude information into the side-scan sonar computer unit, where it will be accessible for post-project analysis. The digital imagery generated by the side-scan sonar will also be stored in its built-in computer unit. The magnetometer records its data (gamma readings of the earth¹s magnetic field) on a paper printout chart; it will also be downloading these readings to a portable laptop computer. Both the magnetometer and GPS will provide readings at the rate of one per second.

The primary survey vessel will be a small Privateer, equipped with a fathometer, owned by the FSU Marine Laboratory. The remote sensing equipment will be rigged so that both side-scan sonar and magnetometer can be used simultaneously. In some cases, in the very shallow waters immediately adjacent to Dog Island, an inflatable Zodiac may be used as the survey vessel, depending on sea conditions.

Individual survey areas will be defined around high probability areas determined by historical research and discussion with local informants. The search pattern(s) will be created in the GPS, which has a function allowing easy input and deployment in the field. Survey lanes will be spaced no more than 30 meters apart, which is sufficient for locating a small wooden-hulled shipwreck, even if no iron cannons or anchors are present (Arnold 1996). Lane length and number of lanes will be determined by the overall size of each survey area.

The side-scan sonar will be set at a range of 50 meters, to ensure sufficient overlap for a comprehensive coverage.

Selected areas of interest may be re-surveyed, possibly using lane spacing as narrow as 10 meters, to provide an intensive, intra-site magnetic signature of the shipwreck site. This would probably take place after diver test excavations confirmed the anomaly as the remains of a shipwreck. The resulting data will delineate concentrations of ferrous and other metal material, providing researchers with target areas for further evaluation through ground truthing. Along with metal detection, additional side-scan sonar sweeps at a variety of range settings will provide a high resolution image of the topography of the site and its features.

Diving operations will also take place from small boats, primarily the privateer. Other vessels, such as a pontoon boat owned by the Aucilla River Prehistory Project, may be available for part of the field season. Diving activities will be in compliance with the Standard Operating Procedures of the FSU Academic Diving Program (ADP), who will also be providing the majority of the diving-related equipment. Divers for the most part will be outfitted with standard scuba equipment, though gasoline-powered hookah units may also be employed.

The major pre-disturbance objective for magnetic anomalies and other potential sites is to record any exposed cultural remains through archaeological mapping and, depending on visibility conditions, through photography and videography. Standard underwater archaeological mapping procedures will be employed, and depending on the nature and extent of the individual site, these may involve baseline offsets, trilateration or triangulation from datum points, or the use of mapping frames. Divers may also probe or excavate by hand-fanning to estimate the extent of buried cultural features.

Test excavations of sediments surrounding magnetic anomalies, or within and around exposed cultural remains, will be conducted by induction dredges. Excavation will generally take place after any exposed surface remains have been recorded. Both four inch (8 hp) and six inch (20 hp) induction dredges are available for excavation, and all sediments will be screened through at least *" mesh Test excavation will be limited in scope, with the objective of defining the nature, extent, and condition of the submerged cultural features. Additionally, it will be desirable in some cases to remove sediments from a section of hull remains in order to record and study the construction of the ship. Data of this nature can help assign cultural affinity and/or an approximate date of vessel construction.

Artifacts exposed by dredging activities may be left in situ, or may be temporarily removed for surface recording and photography. Artifacts that appear to be diagnostic, or those which appear to be in imminent danger of degradation, will be recovered for conservation and analysis. Any artifact recovery will be limited in nature, and artifacts will be stabilized in the field for future conservation at the George R. Fischer Conservation Laboratory on FSU Campus.

The 1999 Dog Island Shipwreck Survey will take place from May 03 to August 06. This field season will be divided into two distinctive campaigns, and each will involve both survey and excavation efforts. Campaign I will run from May 03 to June 18. After a week away from the field, Campaign II will run concurrently with the Florida State University Program in Underwater Archaeology (FSU-PUA) field school in underwater archaeology, from June 28 to August 06.

The timeline presented below in Table 2 outlines each week of the project, and states the planned research activity for each week-long session:

The Dog Island Shipwreck Project fieldwork will be directed by a few core staff members, and most participants will be volunteer students or divers. Table 3 lists known staff and volunteer participants at this time.

18^th Century Resources: Le Tigre and HMS Fox

Until the 20^th century, the ship was the most complex technological device in any society¹s economic or sociopolitical systems. In the 18^th century this technology was a response to, and a reflection of, the needs of transportation, sea power, and colonization in the strategy of international trade. At the same time, the ship represented a microcosmic culture, an isolated and autonomous society at sea, complete with a hierarchical status system discernable in the archaeological record. The shipwreck phenomena is also a unique and provocative type of archaeological site; when Le Tigre or HMS Fox sank, their entire body of material culture was instantly engulfed and moved immediately from the systemic to the archaeological context.

All of these factors, along with the differential preservation typically present on underwater sites in a muddy bay environment, make an archaeological investigation of these shipwrecks a truly unique and insightful window into the past maritime lifeways of 18^th century colonial Florida. The material assemblage of these two 18^th century wrecks will not only reflect the full scope of transatlantic trade, naval power, and the Euro-American colonial system, but the cultural diversity of colonial Florida (in this case, English, French, and Native American cultures), and the heterogeneous and hierarchical qualities of the typical 18^th century ship¹s crew.

The wreck of Le Tigre, if discovered, offers a unique opportunity of comparing archaeological data with a rich historical documentation. These two sources, the shipwreck narrative and the shipwreck remains, should compliment each other and provide an insight not only into the sphere of French colonial activity but the psychology of the shipwreck phenomenon itself. In addition, there are few if any other archaeological examples of French merchant ships in the western hemisphere. In fact, if it is found, Le Tigre will be only the second French shipwreck to have ever been discovered in America, and the only one dating to the 18^th century. Archaeological investigations of this site would provide concrete evidence of the economic relations between French colonies in North America and the West Indies. The study of the vessel¹s hull construction will also yield valuable information, as most maritime historians have concentrated on the technology and architecture of military ships, and we know comparatively little about ship building in the 18^th century private sector.

The wreck of HMS Fox is of historic importance due to its direct association with William Augustus Bowles, an important figure in Floridian history, as well as its involvement in an all but forgotten chapter of Florida¹s Native American history. In addition to a schooner¹s armament of 16 guns, it is likely there remain other cannon, personal items, trade goods, and military supplies meant for Bowles¹ native followers. There may also be other archaeological evidence of Native American and English cultural interaction. While a number of other 18^th century Royal Naval shipwrecks have been identified, relatively few have been archaeologically investigated. Of these, HMS Fowey, which also wrecked in Florida (1748), was excavated by FSU and the National Park Service in 1983 (Skowronek 1983). Only limited excavations took place at Fowey, but an impressive amount of data was collected and analyzed quantitativly using an artifact classification system based on South¹s (1977: 95). That body of evidence will make a useful model and comparative tool for the Fox, which sank 51 years after Fowey.

If either or both of these wrecks are discovered, and their identities are confirmed through test excavations, the Florida State University Program in Underwater Archaeology (FSU-PUA) will plan to continue excavations through future field seasons. An anthropologically-oriented investigation of either or both of these wrecks should produce a rich body of contextual data from which various interpretations can be made concerning the conflicting cultures, shipboard hierarchy, and overall socioeconomic system in 18^th century Florida and the circum-Caribbean.

Both Wright (1990) and White (1995) have recommended that the known shipwrecks on Dog Island‹Dog Island Wrecks # 1 and # 2‹be thoroughly re-investigated. Identification of each (as the Priscilla and one of the 1899 wrecks) is tentative, and further archaeological testing may confirm or deny these suppositions. In addition, Dog Island is unique in that is offers a tangible shipwreck database for archaeologists to examine. There is a large number of sunken vessels dating to the late 19^th and early 20^th centuries that represent a variety of local industries‹i.e., fishing, lumber exploitation, and naval stores‹that played a principle role in the burgeoning regional economy at this time. In addition, the recording and analysis of hull construction features will probably provide insight into both local vernacular and cross-regional ship building technologies.

The presence of four vessels wrecked in a single event (the 1899 storm), along with the possibility of two additional wrecks that lie somewhere on St. George Island, provides a potentially powerful comparative tool for the archaeologist. In addition to the ability that these archaeological sites would have to chronicle a specific historical wrecking event, comparing the vessel and cargo remains should provide a wealth of information relating to international shipping and other global socioeconomic systems in place at the turn of the century. There has also been a recent interest by anthropologists in the competition between merchant sailing vessels and steamships, and the ensuing adaptive changes in behavior (see Souza 1998). The late 19^th century sailing ships wrecked on Dog Island, operating well into the age of the steamer, will add to a growing body of archaeological evidence defining this struggle against obsolescence.

There are also a number of 20^th century historic resources in the waters of Dog Island. In addition to Dog Island Wreck # 1, principle areas of interest include the turpentine camp dock and possible cultural remains from the island¹s World War II training camp era.

Arnold, J. Barto III
1996 Magnetometer Survey of La Salle¹s Ship the Belle. International Journal of Nautical Archaeology 25(3): 243-249.

Brewer, David and Henry L. Paul
1980 An Archaeological Survey in Search of HMS Fox. Report prepared by the Academic Diving Program, Florida State University for the Florida Bureau of Archaeological Research, Tallahassee.

Fabel, Robin F. A. (trans. and ed.)
1990 Shipwreck and Adventures of Monsieur Pierre Viaud. University Press of Florida, Gainesville.

Hann, John H.
1988 Apalachee: The Land between the Rivers. Ripley P. Bullen Monographs in Anthropology and History, No. 7. University Press of Florida, Gainesville.

Huntsman, Larry
1991 Did You Know . . . ? The Barrier Island Trust Newsletter 2: 4. (May)
1995 Did You Know . . . ? The Barrier Island Trust Newsletter 4: 3,6. (Spring)

Marx, Robert F.
1985 Shipwrecks in Florida Waters: A Billion Dollar Graveyard. Mickler House Publishers, Chuluota, Florida.

McCarthy, Kevin M.
1994 Twenty Florida Pirates. Pineapple Press, Inc., Sarasota, Florida.

Palmer, Thadra
1997 A Synthesis of Work Conducted on Middle Pass Between Dog Island and St. George Island. Report prepared by the Academic Diving Program, Florida State University for the Florida Bureau of Archaeological Research, Tallahassee.

Singer, Steven D.
1992 Shipwrecks of Florida: A Comprehensive Listing. Pineapple Press, Inc., Sarasota, Florida.

Skowronek, Russell K.
1984 Archaeological Testing and Evaluation of the Legare Anchorage Shipwreck Site, Biscayne National Park, Summer 1983. National Park Service, Southeast Archaeological Center, Tallahassee, Florida.

Smith, Roger C., James J. Miller, Sean M. Kelley, and Linda G. Harbin
1997 An Atlas of Maritime Florida. Florida Bureau of Archaeological Research, and University Press of Florida, Gainesville.

South, Stanley
1977 Method and Theory in Historical Archaeology. Academic Press: New York.

Souza, Donna
1998 The Persistence of Sail in the Age of Steam: Underwater Archaeological Evidence from the Dry Tortugas. The Plenum Series in Underwater Archaeology, Number 2. Plenum Press, New York.

Weddle, Robert S.
1985 Spanish Sea: The Gulf of Mexico in North American Discovery 1500-1685. Texas A&M University Press, College Station.

1991 The French Thorn: Rival Explorers in the Spanish Sea, 1682-1762.
Texas A&M University Press, College Station.

White, Nancy Marie, Keith D. Ryder, Scott M. Grammar, and Karen L. Mayo
1995 Archaeological Survey of Dog Island. Report prepared by the Department of Anthropology, University of South Florida for the Barrier Island Trust, Tallahassee, Florida.

Wright, Chip

1990 Dog Island Wreck # 2 (8FR814). Report prepared by the Academic Diving Program, Florida State University, for the Florida Bureau of Archaeological Research, Tallahassee.

Wright, James Leitch Jr.
1967 William Augustus Bowles: Director General of the Creek Nation. University of Georgia Press, Athens.