Laserfiche WebLink
<br />C <br />f.0 SUIi1dARY AND COIdCLUSIOHS <br />F.n intensive cultural resources inventory r:as conducted in two <br />study trams near the eov:n of Wucla, in vrestern Montrose County. <br />Together, these two areas total about 546 acres: 116 acres in Tract I <br />and 930 aCr"e.5 in Tract II. About 60 percent of Tract I is relatively <br />undisturbed, and these areas vrere completely inspected on foot. The <br />remaining acreage 5n Trott I consists or' reclaimed mine areas and was <br />less intensively surveyeG. Flost (about 80 percent} of Tract II is under <br />cultivation or used for grazing. Accordingly, this area yeas inspected <br />by vei+icular reconnaissance. The remaining acr¢aee, distributed in in <br />six discrete plots of varying sizes, is relatively pristine and was <br />intensively surveyed. <br />These inspections resulted in the location and rerordatian of 12 <br />cultural resources localities, all in Tract I. Tvru of these resources <br />were classified as prehistoric sites, both being small scatters of <br />chipped store nwterials. F{either one of these sites contained features, <br />tier did they have any diagno5 tic artifacts which would permit the <br />assignation of cultural or temporal affiliations. The remaining 10 <br />resource localities are isolated finds of one to three chipped stone <br />artifacts, including `lakes, unifaces, and a core. bone of these <br />iccalities, sites or IFs, are considered to be 5igr.ificant cr eligible <br />fur nomination to the NRhP because of their smal i size, ntediocr•e <br />artifactual assemblage, and 'absence of buried cultural remains- <br />All of these recorded localities lie on a narrovr, flea-topped mesa <br />betvree,r two larger drainages. An abundance of floral and taunal <br />• resources, and the seasonal availability of potable +.at¢r, suggested <br />that the aboriyinal occupants may have been exploiting one or the other, <br />or all, of these local resources. The information contents of the sites <br />anA 1FS are individually and collectively too n.oager to alloy us to <br />confirr, these interpretations or postulate more elaborate hypotheses. <br />Nu sienificant historic Curoamerican resources vrere recorded in the <br />project areas. However, in an effort to provide some backgrnurd on <br />local historic settlement, tf,e }and patent records maintained by <br />1•lontrose County vrere inspected. This review discovered that nearly all <br />of the land patents in a four mile square area surrounding and incor- <br />porating the project areas were taken nut during a 10 year period <br />beginning in 1904; the greatest number of claims vrere made in 1910 and <br />1911. Tf,ese findings are consistent with local historical records, <br />which relate that the tovrr, of Nucla vras settled in 1909. Apparently, <br />+aithin a short time after their town was established, the iGucla <br />inhabitants strove to increase tl+:ir lard holdings. F;e cannot, hctfever, <br />interpret tally the patterns in these land patents data witht,u t. <br />completing aCditim,al records searches or oral history iatervievrs. <br />L r <br />13 <br />• <br />(Revised July 2006) Attachment 2.04.4-1-26 <br />