My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
PERMFILE52991
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
Permit File
>
600000
>
PERMFILE52991
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 10:56:34 PM
Creation date
11/20/2007 3:33:03 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1981026
IBM Index Class Name
Permit File
Doc Date
12/11/2001
Doc Name
CULTURAL AND HISTORIC RESOURCES INFORMATION
Section_Exhibit Name
APPENDIX B
Media Type
D
Archive
No
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
55
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
• 5 ~a380 and 48'1, maY be subject to indirect impacts such as vandalism or <br />disturbance due to increased vehicular and pedestrian activity in the area, <br />and to blasting, but the minimal significance of these IFs allows for a de- <br />tP*mi*=tion of No Effect to these resources from such impacts. <br />As was mentioned in the preceding section, during cursory reP~=min=tion <br />of the lithic scatter 5 JA163 (Figure 2) GBeK field crews failed to note arm <br />aboriginal artifacts on the surface. Though the entire site was not reinvesti- <br />gated, there is some question about the density of aborio nnl remains noted <br />by Anderson (Anderson and Bleacher 1979:20, 35) in 1979 following the 1977 <br />1~ surface collection by I.ischka. The NRHP eligibility for 5 JA163 was <br />changed from "definite],y not eligible" to "may be eligible" on the basis of <br />the 1979 surface evidence, and the recommendations xere changed from "no <br />further work" to "conscientiously avoid impact" by prohibiting vehicular traf- <br />fic and surface collection in the site area if possible, and testing iS the <br />site is directly threatened by mine development (Ibid.). The apparently <br />contradictory survey results and significance assessments lead this film to <br />recommend that a thorough reinvestigation of the 5 JA163 surface be required <br />• prior to a~ mine development in oiler to determine xhether more intensive <br />mitigation strategies, such as those suggested by Anderson, are necessary, <br />and to allox for reassessment of the question of National Register eligibility. <br />According to proposed direct impact area maps provided to G&K by <br />Wgoming Fuel Compares (Figure 2), 5 JA163 lies outside of areas currently <br />slated for direct impacts, though it is like],y to be indirectly affected by <br />increased activities and by blasting. The adversity of such effects is de- <br />pendent upon final determination of National Register eligibility of this re- <br />source. <br />Recortcnendations <br />As none of the historic localities or aboriginal isolated finds re- <br />corded by C&K within the proposed ~?ine Plan boundaries are considered eligible <br />for National Register nomination, and as a]1 proposed impacts to these re- <br /> sources are threatening no detrimental effects, no further archaeological at- <br />. tention need be afforded 5 Ja486, 488, 5 .i~378, 330, 381, 459, or 4E'1. Their. <br />-11- <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.