My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2016-10-20_PERMIT FILE - C1981035A (18)
DRMS
>
Day Forward
>
Permit File
>
Coal
>
C1981035
>
2016-10-20_PERMIT FILE - C1981035A (18)
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/11/2019 9:37:54 AM
Creation date
11/16/2016 1:41:53 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1981035A
IBM Index Class Name
Permit File
Doc Date
10/20/2016
Doc Name
Cultural and Historic Resources Survey
Section_Exhibit Name
KII Appendix 03
Media Type
D
Archive
Yes
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
61
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Limited -Results Archaeological Survey Form (Page 3 of 3) <br />III. LITERATURE REVIEW (continued) <br />25. Known Cultural Resources - In the project area: None <br />In the general region (summarize): Two sites, one isolated find (IF), and one isolated feature, were <br />previously recorded within Section 36 (outside of the current proiect area). The sites consist of <br />5LP.1418, the Tipotsch Mine recorded in 1985. and 5LP.197, a possible multicomponent site <br />recorded in 1976. The Tipotsch Mine was determined not eligible for the National Register of <br />Historical Places (NRNP) and no determination of eligibility is listed for 5LP.197 the multicomponent <br />site. The isolated feature. 5LP.7831, consists of a historic trash dump recorded in 1985. The site is <br />considered not eligible for the NRHP. The isolated find. 5LP.7830, consists of two prehistoric stone <br />tools and is also considered not eligible for the NRHP. <br />26. Expected Results: Results were expected to be limited, based on the file search. <br />VI. STATEMENT OF OBJECTIVES <br />27. To locate, record, and evaluate any prehistoric and historic cultural resources in the proposed <br />project area. <br />VII. FIELD METHODS <br />28. Definitions: Site A discrete locus of patterned human activity areater than 50 years of aae and <br />consistina of 10 or more artifacts, with or without features. <br />IF One artifact, or very few artifacts, that do not represent patterned behavior. <br />29. Describe Survey Method: This investigation was a Class III. 100 percent, pedestrian survey of the <br />project area. Two SWCA archaeologists completed the pedestrian survey by walking parallel <br />transects spaced approximately 15 m (50 feet) apart. The total surveyed area was 9 acres, which <br />encompassed the nine proposed drill hole locations. Mapping was conducted with a handheld <br />Trimble global positioning system (GPS) unit. <br />VIII. RESULTS <br />30. List IFs if applicable. Indicate IF locations on the map completed for Part III. <br />A. Smithsonian Number: 5LP10542 Description: Isolated Find <br />One IF was identified near proposed drill hole CO -14-4. The IF consists of two fragments of aqua <br />bottle plass. The fragments measured 3.5 X 2.5 X 0.5 cm and 5 X 2 x 0.5 cm. The largest appears to <br />be a bottle base with maker's mark `857." See map below for location. <br />31. Using your professional knowledge of the region, why are there none or very limited cultural remains <br />in the project area? The overall small area of the survey and the rugged terrain most likely account <br />for the lack of cultural remains observed. Is there subsurface potential? Buried cultural remains are <br />unlikely in this erosional environment. <br />King II Appendix 3 (3 ) <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.