Laserfiche WebLink
<br />/~ 4.0 TPITERARc'TATI(1f:5 VF RESULTS <br />t.l 1'rt•historic R.seurres <br />This survey has den:nnstrated that prehistoric activity loci are <br />relativ::l abundant: in the area. r?hcndant theuyh they m.:y he, » one cf <br />three localities are vary large nor du any contain significant ar•ti- <br />factui:l remains. Their restriction to Tract I reflects merely the fact <br />that r.:uch of this area is relativ++ly undisCurbed; i suspect that similar <br />resources were ence found in fleet ]I, brtore the area was plowed a»d <br />gra a:d, The fnllotriug inforozaticn may be gleaned fron Lhe survey dicta: <br /> (1) the individual resources cover very little area, contain fevr <br /> cr•lifacts and no features, and are tridely scaftered; <br /> (~') all resources are located in an area of ger:tlr. Slopes between <br /> tt:o relatively deep drainages; <br /> (3) the au?nCi ties of taatnr carried l,y tl+e two large drainages are <br /> prcbably I~rleraiful dug ing spring rur.rff; <br /> (,4) deer. and probably elk., fi•e~uent Lhe area; end. <br /> (~j vegetal rescurr_es arc abundant i;hrnugheut ±1:E area. <br />.• Tv.o scenarios of prehistoric activity in Ure area can be postulated <br />from tl.c abcva data, Gne, ahcririnal peoples hunted local fauna, these <br /> hunters usint! thr high grcurd to Ivatch fcr animals traveling alurrJ the <br /> d rat nagt• bcttorns aoG iezding or, the succular~t glare. IJhile they waited, <br />- the bunters repaired and/nr l,:anufacturl:d their stone tools. Cncu Lhe <br /> animals had been captured, that' mere carried tc level ern..<_ and <br /> butchered. Here Lhe skins of tL•e animals Wray have been removes end the <br /> hair scraped urf usino large sLUr,e flakes. The animal carcass may hive <br /> beer, tiisrr~en:bered into portable elements and carried back Ca s base camp. <br /> One o; :he probienis with this scenario is that rot even fragments of <br /> projectilt• prints were found, and I presume that rho aboriginal hunters <br /> v:eulcl have 1GSt or broken at~ least some Of these points. It is <br /> lnsibla, hrn,ever, that the area has been well picked over by artifact <br /> collectors. <br /> An alternative scenario is that aboriginal peoples were coliectirry <br /> the euible products of various local plants: pinyon nuts, cattail, <br /> ricegrass, other ores ses, nrd cacti. The few pr-eya r•rd tools found at <br /> the cultural resources loci wire used to process the vegetal regains. <br /> One would expect, huv:ever, to tiird at least a tiew yrowtdstnne artifacts <br /> i1 Lhis scenario were accurate. <br /> Thus, these: cultural resources hold some tar,trai,-irg clues about <br /> prehistoric activicy in thr_ area, L•ut it is toe nzager to permit any <br /> definiLire conclusions. The age of Yhis prehistoric activity is also <br /> uncertain, Ma information col lected rroru the two previously recurdal: <br />• ate,5 SUjl:e5t5 a Rllddlc t0 late RI'Ch9tC OGCIf;:aL1Gn_ (f thi•° agC <br /> assessr..ant is cnrrrct, rhea uL lr:.lst sar.C n+ (hesc sitr--~ r.:::y 0c <br />lb <br />• <br />(Revised July 2006) Attachment 2.04.4-1-23 <br />