PERMFILE139694 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Wayne Sowards 7/16/31 page 2 ~''! • useful in interpreting the culture of the people who lived there. 5MF950: This historic site has the potential to contribute information on wood and concrete construction methods and activity areas associated with historic sub- sistence. It is associated with events ~ahich were locally important in the formation of the present- day community. B. Sites 5MF945, 5t•1F946, and SMF947 do not appear to be eligible for the tr'ational Register. All available surface data have been collected during the initial survey a+hen the site was totally surface collected, gridded, and shovel tested. The sites were extensively pt~oi;cgraphed, and sketch maps were made of their location. Sites 5MF946 and 5t•1F947 were tested because immediate impact was planned for the site areas, and it was necessary to ascertain immediately their National Register eligibility. No significant subsurface cultural materials were found, and the possibility of additional, undetected materials appears to be slight. ~~ An artifact density map was completed for 5t•fF;47 only. This map was previously sent to be included with the original report. An inventory of all collected artifacts for this site was also sent at that time. Assessment of the effects of blasting on sates within one mile of any proposed blasting area: The type and location of blasting are not known to the archeolyoist, nor are the effects of blasting near arch- eological sites (we know of no published evaluative studies of this sort). It is felt, however, that blasting not on a site proper v+ill probably not affect such open sites as surface scatters or sites with buried deposits or features. Nor should blasting adversely affect architectural sites, unless the blasting location is near enough to cause debris to be thrown onto tfie site (thus causing possible architectural damage, or rock debris visual impact to the site by cluttering). Blasting along the ridge in the vicinity of the rockshelters and rock art sites could conceivably cause reekfall or collapse of the shelter wall, which thereby would cause irreparable damage to the pictograph panels ao,d probably disturbance of the thin, fragile cultural layers of the shelter floor. 2 '~S~~t• ~• :~;