Laserfiche WebLink
7 <br />• Re-evaluation of these sites would cause reconsideration ofsome aspects of the present mine- <br />wide treatment plan (McKibbin et al. 1997). Under either scenario (district or no district), sites that <br />met the National Register criteria in their own right would still be evaluated and treated as described <br />by McKibbin et al. (1997). However, most of the sites that would be considered not eligible without <br />a district designation would become contributing properties under Criterion "c" as noted above. <br />Under the Section 106 process, some form of treatment or data recovery at these sites might be <br />appropriate to mitigate the impacts of mine development. It would certainly not be necessary to <br />address each site, but rather a small sample of sites could be selected for additional work. Surface <br />collection, followed by functional, technological and spatial analysis of the collected assemblage of <br />a sample of sites is recommended as an appropriate treatment. This data set could then be compazed <br />among sites, and with sites from which excavated assemblages may be recovered. In this fashion, <br />the placement of these more ephemeral, surface sites within the larger settlement and subsistence <br />system can be better understood. Obviously, such a treatment plan would need to be supported by <br />a reseazch design discussing the goals, methods, and expected results of such investigations. <br />MAC recommends that a district treatment plan and reseazch design be prepazed for <br />implementation starting in the summer of 1998, if the district designation is to be pursued. MAC <br />does not recommend requiring preparation and implementation of this treatment plan for this yeaz's <br />proposed mine developments. Though a few sites that might qualify for treatment under such a plan <br />will be impacted by developments proposed for later this year, these aze a small fraction of the much <br />lazger class of sites of which many representatives will remain undisturbed for several years beyond <br />1997. <br />• <br />References Cited <br />McKibbin, Anne, and Richard F. Carrillo <br />1997 The Jeff Place (SLA7186): Report of Test Excavations, National Register <br />Evaluation, and Treatment Plan, Las Animas County, Colorado. Metcalf <br />Archaeological Consultants, Inc. Prepared for Greystone Development Consultants, <br />Inc., and Lorencito Coal Company, LLC. Ms, on file, Office of Archaeology and <br />Historic Preservation, Denver. <br />McKibbin, Anne, Carole Graham, Grant D. Smith, and Michael McFaul <br />1997 The Lorencito Canyon Mine: Results of a Cultural Resource Inventory, Research <br />Design, and Treatment Plan, Las.4nimasCounty Colorado. MetcalfArchaeologicai <br />Consultants, Inc. Prepared for Greystone Development Consultants, Inc., and <br />Lorencito Coal Company, LLC. Ms. on file, Office of Archaeology and Historic <br />Preservation, Denver. <br />• <br />