Laserfiche WebLink
• areas and was less intensively surveyed. Most (about 80%) of Tract II is under cultivation or used <br />for grazing. Accordingly, this area was inspected by vehicular reconnaissance. The remaining <br />acreage, distributed in six discrete plots of varying sizes, is relatively pristine and was intensively <br />surveyed. <br />These inspections resulted in the location and recordation of 12 cultural resources localities, all in <br />Tract I. Two of these resources were classified as prehistoric sites, both being small scatters of <br />chipped stone materials. Neither one of these sites contained features, nor did they have any <br />diagnostic artifacts which would permit the assignation of cultural or temporal affiliations. The <br />remaining 10 resource localities are isolated finds of one to three chipped stone artifacts, including <br />flakes, unifaces, and a core. None of these localities, sites or IFs, are considered to be significant <br />or eligible for nomination to the NRHP because of their small size, mediocre artifactual assemblage, <br />and absence of buried cultural remains. <br />All of these recorded localities lie on a narrow, flat-topped mesa between two larger drainages. An <br />abundance of floral and faunal resources, and the seasonal availability of potablewater,suggested <br />that the aboriginal occupants may have been exploiting one or the other, or all, of these local <br />resources. The information contents of the sites and IFs are individually and collectively too <br />• meager to allow us to confirm these interpretations or postulate more elaborate hypotheses. <br />No significant historic Euroamerican resources were recorded in the project areas. However, in an <br />effort to provide some background on local historic settlement, the land patent records maintained <br />by Montrose County were inspected. This review discovered that nearly all of the land patents in <br />a four mile square area surrounding and incorporating the project areas were taken out during a <br />10 year period beginning in 1904; the greatest number of claims were made in 1910 and 1911. <br />These findings are consistent with local historical records, which relate that the town of Nucla was <br />settled in 1904. Apparently, within a short time after their town was established, the Nucla <br />inhabitants strove to increase their land holdings. We cannot, however, interpret fully the patterns <br />in these land patents data without completing additional records searches or oral history interviews. <br />Tract l1A is an irregularly shaped area of 112 acres, located primarily in the SEY. of Section 6, <br />T.46N, R.15W. It is situated immediatelywest of Nuclaand includes almost entirely disturbed land, <br />mostly of an agricultural nature. Tract III, a rectangular area, lies northwest of the town and just <br />south of the present mining area in the SW Y, of Section 31, T.47N, R.15W and the SE'/. of Section <br />36, T.47N, R.16W. This tract is also primarily agricultural acreage; however, some smaller parcels <br />of undisturbed land occur. The six drill sites are randomly distributed to the west of Tracts II and <br />• IIA. All of the survey areas lie on private property. <br />(ReviseQ July 2006) <br />2.04.4-6 <br />