My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
PERMFILE58022
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
Permit File
>
600000
>
PERMFILE58022
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 11:00:21 PM
Creation date
11/20/2007 5:39:48 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1996084
IBM Index Class Name
Permit File
Doc Date
12/11/2001
Section_Exhibit Name
EXHIBIT 05 CULTURAL RESOURCES REPORT 1
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.
/
14
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
• ABSTRACT <br />Lorencito Coal Company LLC contracted with Greystone Environmental Consultants to conduct an <br />intensive cultural resource inventory for an amended mine permit application. This report is an <br />Addendum to the report ofJune 2001 (Spath and Walth 2001). The cultural resource inventory forthis <br />Addendum report consists ofazeas not surveyed in the above inventory or in the inventory in 1996 by <br />MetcalfArchaeological Consultants, Inc. (McKibbin et al 1997). A total of 100 acres of new survey <br />was completed in the valley floor ofLorencito Canyon, along the south side ofPicketwire Valley, and <br />in the lower portions ofLittle JeffCanyon (Figure 1). In addition to the cultural resources inventory, <br />testing oftwo previously recorded sites was conducted. The cultural resource inventory resulted in the <br />recording of tluee newly discovered isolated finds and the re-evaluation of three previously recorded <br />sites. Two re-evaluated sites contain eagle trap features and remain unevaluated for the National <br />Register of Historic Places (Register) until the Native American consultation is completed. One re- <br />evaluatedsite isconsidered eligible for the Register. The two sites that were tested aze considered not <br />eligible for the Register. Cultural resource clearance is recommended with the stipulation that eligible <br />and unevaluated sites be avoided. For the sites that must be avoided, it is recommended that protective <br />fencing be erected to prevent inadvertent damage and to ensure that all construction activity stay <br />outside site boundaries. <br />• <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.