Is it natural or worked

[WendyK]

My son pulled this out of a local stream, thought was a fossil, but after washing in creek, looks worked and not from nature. Any help, am in SW WI. First pic is regular view, second is a negative. Can't seem to get a good scan or pic.

Wendy

[dprice]

I would say It hasbeen worked. Very Nice

[Cannonman17]

I can't say for sure, in the top picture it kind of looks like a piece of chewed up bone but then the second picture looks like it could be something, a better picture or a scan would be a great help. Oh yes, Welcome to the forum fellow Wisconsinite!

[WendyK]

Hope these are better. Cannonman, greetings from SW WI. I like to fossil hunt, and thought it was a crinoid stem or some sort or bryzoan, then cleanded it off, just not looking nature made. here's a few more pics.
thanks
Wendy

[Cannonman17]

Well I'm really not sure.. my GUESS would be it's natural. The breakage along the edge in the second group of pictures appears to be natural and if it was intentional it is very worn. Sorry I can't say for sure, I would think there would be others to tell ya something about it here also, for the time being I vote geofact.

[Neanderthal]

Geofact. I can see no flake scars or signs of human modification from the pics. Kewl piece though.

Matt

[Cannonman17]

No offense to anybody here but this piece is positively not a scottsbluff. It really doesn't show any signs of having been worked on or being broken in the process of. All the scottsbluff points that I have seen are really something to see, usually relatively thin and well made- even ones that I have seen made out of less than ideal quality material have had amazing craftsmanship. Scottsbluff points are one of the few paleo type points that are "common" in Wisconsin though. I have only seen a very small number of clovis or clovis-like like points from Wisconsin but I have seen a couple of dozen scottsbluffs. Really amazing points.