Laserfiche WebLink
as a result, very badly obscured and access is difficult. They are, <br />• however, the only alcoves known from East Roatcap Creek which are large <br />enough to have been utilized by prehistoric man. There are sere larger <br />ones to the southeast of these around the edge of a large rock outcrop <br />(Figure 4) which face south and Overlook the confluence of Fast and West <br />Roatcap Creek. These alcoves possess very little fill and evidence no <br />sign of oc~~aation. They are quite high above the creek and there is do <br />alternate source of water. It is believed that the alcoves near SDT271 <br />may contain archaeoloyical deposits which may be eligible for the <br />National Register. In the event that the area of proposed i~acts was to <br />exterul to these alcoves, then they should be subjected to test <br />excavations. The archaeological inventory should not be considered <br />c~lete until this step is acconq~lished. These alcoves were scheduled <br />for limited test excavations in 1986 but these plans were cancelled. <br />Roatcap Creek Lithic Source <br />A natural exposure of chert exists in the high bluffs in the SW; of <br />the Nt~91 of Sec. 23 (Figure 4) . This chert is white with a dark grey to <br />grey-blue banding and can be found among the oolluvium on the upper <br />slopes of the south side of the bluff. The chert appears to be oonung <br />fran eroding veins of metannrphased sedimentary rocks. Detailed <br />geological studies have not been attatQted and the only analysis has <br />simply been to record the source area and collect a few sales. There <br />sere rw clear indications of lithic reduction in the area where the <br />material is exposed and the breakage noted may be natural. The material <br />• appears to be of pretty good quality but of limited quantity and <br />individual specimen size. Similar dark grey to grey-blue banded chert <br />seems, in prel~m~~~*y analysis, to occur at SDT271 which was intensively <br />tested in August 1986 and for which a report is now in preparation (Baker <br />1986a and 1987). <br />Feoomiendations <br />This lithic source area does not evidence any meaningful lithic <br />workshop and is insignificant as an archaeological resource. Its <br />existence needs to be recorded and sales of the lithic material should <br />be curated for oai~arative study. These steps have been acco~lished and <br />it does rot need to be accorded further consideration. <br /> <br />;i 7 <br />