My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
PERMFILE128845
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
Permit File
>
300000
>
PERMFILE128845
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 10:25:57 PM
Creation date
11/25/2007 6:43:27 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1980005
IBM Index Class Name
Permit File
Doc Date
12/11/2001
Doc Name
ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEYS 008 POND TR 12
Section_Exhibit Name
TAB 05 APPENDIX 5-3
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.
/
34
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
1B <br />6.2 LABORATORY METHODS <br />• As no cultural materials or samples were collected, no <br />laboratory analyses were undertaken. <br /> <br />7.0 RESULTS <br />One isolated artifact (SRT531) was recorded near the northeast <br />corner of the survey area. It was found in the NE1/4NE1/4- <br />_ NE1/4SW1/4 of Section 6, T.SN., R. 86W. This artifact <br />is an interior chert reduction flake, which is non-diagnostic <br />(see Section 11.0 of this report for the Isolated Find <br />Record form and map). Considering its position relative <br />to a similar artifact (SRT407) recorded during a previous <br />survey (Killam 1984), it may have been transported to <br />this location by alluvial action. <br />Some modern materials were noted in the NE1/4NE1/4SW1/4 <br />of Section 6. This material includes a stock feeding <br />container, several miscellaneous boards, alluminum cans, <br />and several elk skulls and vertebrae, all of obviously <br />recent origin. No other cultural resources were observed <br />in the area surveyed. <br />• 8.0 EVALUATION OF RESEARCH <br />It is felt that the results of the survey are reliable. <br />Because of the rugged nature of the terrain in the project <br />area, the potential for unrecorded cultural resources <br />is considered to be low. The steepness of some of the <br />cliffs and ridges, along with heavy brush cover, prevented <br />the use of close interval pedestrian transects in some <br />portions of the project area. However, these steep slopes <br />would not have been good locations for prehistoric settlement. <br />The areas with a higher site potential, such as flatter <br />and less rugged sections, were adequately inventoried. <br />The survey produced the expected results. One isolated <br />find, a prehistoric piece of debitage, was found. This <br />was predicted by hypothesis N2 in Section 5.2. The artifact <br />(SRT531) is similar to SRT409, which was previously recorded <br />just north of the project area. It is proposed that SRT531 <br />could have been deposited by alluvial action downslope <br />from the higher part of the ridge to the north, and that <br />it may have originally been associated with SRT909. These <br />prehistoric isolated finds indicate that t}ie region was <br />utilized by aboriginal peoples, but that the intensity <br />of this use in rugged areas was probably low. <br />The single flake is the result of lithic reduction for <br />• tool making activities by an unknown prehistoric Native <br />American. The fact that both SRT531 and SRT409 are chert <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.