Laserfiche WebLink
• The ridgetop context and the presence of Pleistocene gravels on the surface <br />indicate a low potential for significant subsurface deposits in the vicinity <br />of this isolated find. <br />In summary, two localities of historic vintage, 5 Ja486 and 488, were <br />recorded within the proposed Mine Plan areas and are thought to represent <br />trash dumping and~or recreational littering from ca. 1910 to 1930. Roads in <br />the vicinity of these localities may also date to the turn of the century. <br />Five aboriginal lithic isolated finds, 5 ,ja378, 3~, 381, 459, and 487, were <br />also recorded in the Mine Plan area and represent extensive use of the study <br />area, suggestive of broad-based subsistence lifeways. The only diagnostic <br />artifact recorded by C&K is 5 Ja459, a projectile point fragment that may be <br />of Archaic affiliations. Aboriginal activities that can be inferred Srom the <br />recorded IFs include hunting, cutting, scraping and~or graving tasks, along <br />xith at least early stages of lithic tool manufacture. Some of the isolated <br />finds ma~V be associated with the lithic scatter site 5 JA163, but such associa- <br />tions cannot be clearly demonstrated. As was noted above, reexamination of <br />portions of the 5 JAlb3 surface did not yield a~ clearly cultural prehistoric <br />• remains. <br />Si,4iificance and act Assessment <br />None of the recent cultural evidence noted in the proposed Canadian <br />Strip Mine Extension Permit Boundaries need receive further attention at this <br />time. There is tY.ought to be m~nim~ potential for additional significant sub- <br />surface cultural deposits at either the historic localities (5 Ja486 and :,88) <br />or the aboriginal isolated find locations (5 ,ja378, 3~, 381, 459, and 487)• <br />The recordation of the historic localities, while adding to e.~dsting <br />documentation of ear~V twentieth century Euroamerican activity in North Park, <br />and revealing a certain type of behavioral activity (i.e. the dumping of in- <br />dustrial trash at a site apparent3,y well removed from habitation sites), does <br />not add in a significant way to the existing cultural record. These trash <br />scatters are in no why unique to the area, and their contents lack the poten- <br />tial to contribute important scientific data. For these reasons, 5 Ja486 and <br />. 488 are not ,judged to meet the criteria for nomination to the National Register <br />-9- <br />