I think this discovery, which is referenced within the article you posted, is even more interesting. It’s hypothesized to be a caribou drive lane, currently under 120 feet of water. https://sites.lsa.umich.edu/lakehuron-arch/research/pre-historic-archaeology-on-the-alpena-amberly-ridge/sites/the-drop-45-site/ More on reddit.com

Their "modern" names are early English and French translations of Algonquin and Iroquoian names. Lake Superior and Lake St. Clair comes from European names and not translations. Lake Ontario: Ontarí:io Wendat (Iroquoian), "Great Lake" Lake Erie: Erielhonan Iroquoian, "Long-Tail", it is named after the Iroquoian Erie tribe whom lived along the eastern and southern shores. Lake St. Clair: Named after St. Claire of Asisi by the French. Called Waawiyaataan(ong) by the Mississaugas, "(at) the whirlpool" Lake Huron: French name for the Wendat. Karegnondi "Freshwater Sea" or "Lake" in Wendat. Naadowewi-gichigami "Iroquois' Sea" or Gichi-aazhoogami-gichigami "Great Crosswaters Sea" in Ojibwe (Anishinaabeg) Lake Michigan: Mishi-gami Ojibwe, "Large Water" or "Large Lake". Another name is Ininwewi-gichigami Ojibwe, "Illinois' Sea"; named after the Illinois Confedeation, Illiniwek. Lake Superior: Lac Supérieur French, "Upper Lake"; Anishinaabewi-gichigami Ojibwe, "Anishinaabe's Great Sea" Note: The lakes have many different names in all of the Native American peoples of the Great Lakes, as well as French and English names and translations. If I missed anything or put any wrong information/names in, please lmk! Edit: Spelling More on reddit.com

Hey, thanks for the great question. First, i'd like to point out that the use of canoes, and in some cases relatively large boats, by the Haida, Inuit, Mi'kmaq and many others for military and fishing purposes originated in their respective coastal and sea/river-faring cultures adapting to their immediate needs. As others have also noted, Native American cultures with deep and historic maritime traditions continue to thrive all along the Arctic and Pacific North West coasts. Despite this, however, the disparity in technology you mention can be explained in simple terms. It can be noted that many notable maritime and naval developments in the Old World were driven by the direct competition of rival and neighbouring states. This constant naval arms race, particularily in the Mediterranian and across the English Channel, is a key factor (in my opinion) explaining the disparity you noted. This lack of an immediate, direct and constant maritime threat may have contributed to the limited nature of their maritime needs. Basically, naval technology and advancements didn't develop to the extent of, and parallel to, the Old World because the (primarily) defensive and economic needs were different. This theory of need-driven maritime advancements can also explain how other cultures sharing conditions similar to Native Americans - namely Polynesian and Melanesian - were also able to become expert navigators on the ocean. Adding to that, unlike in North America, the conditions were also there during the earlier Classical era, and later the Islamic Golden Age followed by the Rennaissance, for major scientific breakthroughs in navigation, astronomy and shipbuilding. Edit: Forgot to add that many Old World powers maintained vast, international maritime trade networks, and later colonial holdings. These inevitably required the development of maritime capabilities and comprehensive naval doctrines that drove naval advancements forward. More on reddit.com

I'm an archaeologist and specialist in Pre-Contact indigenous American cultures. I work in the Midwest (among other areas), though, and since I'm in contract work, I do a lot of background and historic research using old maps and other resources as part of my job.

So... indigenous American cultures did use stone construction in some rivers, but I am not aware of any known examples of indigenous American use of stone to create dams specifically. There are many, many examples of what are pretty well known to be fishing weirs (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fishing_weir), particularly in the southeastern US. Many of them can still be spotted on Google Earth where / when water was low. They appear as chevrons / V-shaped sets of rapids in shallow rivers. They were used to direct fish toward a spot where a basket or net could be placed to collect them.

You can see two actual examples in eastern Tennessee here. (Obviously, switch on satellite background.)

That said, fishing weirs are not tall-- they tend to be below the water surface today, even at low water levels. And they also weren't meant to block flow. So you really could never mistake a fishing weir for a dam. Just not the same thing at all.

And as I mentioned, we really don't have any record (or evidence for) the construction of actual dams by Native Americans before European contact, archaeologically speaking.

That said...

People often make the assumption that things that look old are older than they are. It's very important to look at land history and land use when trying to attribute features on the landscape to a particular time period or culture. In this case you would want to look at the land records, parcel history, old maps, etc. Presumably if it was intended to create an artificial pond or reservoir, the artificial body of water might appear on an old map or aerial image of the location.

People also sometimes infer a function for something that may or may not be accurate. Is this stone construction located in a waterway? If so, does it look as though the waterway was ever dammed up (e.g., signs of a waterline / erosion above where the current water level is)?

Does the stone appear dressed or otherwise fitted together in some way, or is it loosely piled? Cobbles? Field stone?

A dam has to be water-tight to function. A pile of rocks won't do much to hold back water in any significant amount.

But... for the sake of argument, let's assume that this might be a dam. Is it likely to have been constructed by Native American folks?

Well, it could have been. But if it was, it's entirely likely that it was done during historic times by an Osage farmer who lived there when the Osage owned that area as a reservation, before selling in 1865 and moving to Indian Territory (what is now Oklahoma). Or it could have been built after 1865.

Again, the way to know this would be to do background research on your property by looking at historic maps dating to that period, deed records, etc. It's likely that it post-dates 1800.

More on reddit.com