Westcoast Energy Inc.
T-North 2012 Expansion Project
Environmental and Socio-economic Assessment
November 2011 / 7261
APPENDIX 8
ARCHAEOLOGICAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT
WESTCOAST ENERGY INC.
T-NORTH 2012 EXPANSION PROJECT
PREPARED BY LANDSONG HERITAGE CONSULTING LTD.
Page A8-1
Archaeological Impact Assessment
Westcoast Energy Inc.
T-North 2012 Expansion Project
October 2011
BC Heritage Inspection Permit 2011-0059
Interim Report
H
E R
I T A G E
C O
N
S
U
L T I N
G
L T D
.
H E R I T A G E CO N S U L T I N G L T D .
British Columbia
Heritage Inspection Permit 2011-0059
Archaeological Impact Assessment
INTERIM REPORT
October 2011
prepared for:
BC Ministry of Forests, Lands and Natural Resource Operations,
Archaeology Branch, Permitting and Assessment Section
#3-1250 Quadra St., Victoria, BC V8W 2K7
(phone) 250-955-3334, (fax) 250-955-3340
Westcoast Energy Inc., carrying on business as
Spectra Energy Transmission
nd
3985 22 Avenue, Prince George, BC V2N 1B7
(phone) 250-960-2036, (fax) 250-960-2080, (email) [email protected]
prepared by:
Landsong Heritage Consulting Ltd.
Box 70, 2262 Hwy 29, Moberly Lake, BC V0C 1X0
(phone) 250-788-3813, (fax) 250-788-3816, (email) [email protected]
2011-0059 permit holder:
Beth Hrychuk, M.A., RPCA
interim report authors:
Beth Hrychuk, M.A., RPCA
Joanna Zoffmann
© 2011 Landsong Heritage Consulting Ltd., Beth Hrychuk
copyright consent
I, Beth Hrychuk (owner and director of Landsong
Heritage Consulting Ltd.), confirm that I am the
copyright owner of this permit report. For good and
valuable consideration I irrevocably grant a nonexclusive license to the Province of British Columbia,
for a term equal to the life of the copyright
commencing on the date of execution below, to make
copies of the reports, including all appendices and
photos, and to provide such copies to anyone, at the
discretion of the Province, either at no charge or at
the cost incurred by the Province in making and
distributing the copies. All parties, except the party
for whom the report was prepared, acknowledge that
any use or interpretation of this report is at the sole
risk and liability of the subsequent user(s).
date: October 14, 2011
place: Moberly Lake, BC
project summary
At the request of Westcoast Energy Inc., carrying on business as Spectra Energy
Transmission (Westcoast), Landsong Heritage Consulting Ltd. (Landsong)
conducted an Archaeological Impact Assessment (AIA) under BC Heritage
Inspection Permit 2011-0059 on the proposed Westcoast T-North 2012
Expansion Project (Project), in northeastern BC. The proposed Project consists
of approximately 24km of pipeline loop, on a variable width right-of-way, to
provide incremental firm transmission service from receipt points along
Westcoast’s Fort Nelson Mainline in the vicinity of Compressor Station N5 (CSN5) for delivery to Compressor Station 2 (CS-2) and the NOVA Gas
Transmission Ltd. (NGTL) Groundbirch Pipeline. Commencing at CS-N5 within
c-67-I/94-B-1, the pipeline parallels the existing Westcoast right-of-way for the
majority of its length and terminates within d-7-I/94-B-1.
In addition to the
pipeline right-of-way, the proposed Project will include sixty-three (63)
workspaces, fifteen (15) log decks and up to seven temporary access roads all of
various dimensions.
Fieldwork for the assessment was undertaken in the
months of April, June, July, August, September and October 2011.
An archaeological site file search was conducted prior to the field assessment.
Thirty-one (31) previously recorded archaeological sites are located within 5km of
the proposed Project. One of these sites, HaRm-4, is located within 500m of the
proposed Project and was therefore revisited during the AIA.
The proposed Project was subject to pedestrian traverse.
A total of one
thousand five hundred eighty-two (1582) subsurface tests were conducted at
forty-three (43) areas of moderate to very high archaeological potential. The
proposed Project was also surveyed for Culturally Modified Trees (CMTs). No
page 1
CMTs protected under the British Columbia Heritage Conservation Act (HCA)
were identified during the assessment.
Two newly identified archaeological sites, HaRm-18 and HaRm-19, were
recorded during this AIA.
See section 4.4 Data Recovery for a detailed
description of each site and a summary of impact mitigation recommendations.
page 2
project personnel
permit holder:
Beth Hrychuk, M.A., RPCA
field directors:
John Cormier, B.A.
Elenore Hood, B.A.
Beth Hrychuk, M.A., RPCA
field supervisors:
Mark Amundrud, B.A.
George Brons, B.A.
Keyna Burden, B.A.
Christine Foreman, M.A.
Vincent Jankunis, B.A.
Cory Janzen, M.A.
Tammi Mills, M.Sc.
Whitney Mosher, B.Sc.
Derek Sorkilmo, B.A., B.Ed.
field archaeologists:
Nicholas Chesworth, B.A.
Laura Pick, M.A.
field assistants:
Shawn Bissett
Cody Bougerolle
Adam Gentry
A.J. Hills
Barry Mierau
Roman Nelson
Travis Nelson
Jason Sawchuk
Halfway River First Nation:
David Achla
David Fox
Rene Metacheah
page 3
McLeod Lake Indian Band:
Albert Chingee
Beatrice Gauthier
Barry Solonas
West Moberly First Nation:
Warren Desjarlais
report authors:
Beth Hrychuk, M.A., RPCA
Joanna Zoffmann
report graphics:
Tammi Mills, M.Sc.
page 4
table of contents
copyright consent
page
project summary ................................................................................................. 1
project personnel ................................................................................................ 3
table of contents ................................................................................................. 5
list of figures ....................................................................................................... 6
list of plates ......................................................................................................... 7
1. introduction ................................................................................................... 10
2. project description........................................................................................ 15
3. background information ............................................................................... 18
3.1 ecological landscape ........................................................................ 18
3.2 archaeological resources ................................................................. 22
4. project results ............................................................................................... 26
Westcoast T-North 2012 Expansion Project
4.1 record review..................................................................................... 26
4.2 participation of aboriginal communities ......................................... 27
4.3 field reconnaissance ........................................................................ 28
4.4 data recovery..................................................................................... 61
5. summary & recommendations..................................................................... 94
6. references cited ............................................................................................ 97
page 5
list of figures
page
figure 1
BC Heritage Inspection Permit 2011-0059 - Permit Area
(1:150,000) .................................................................................... 14
figure 2
Westcoast T-North 2012 Expansion Project - Project Area
(1:150,000) .................................................................................... 17
figure 3
Westcoast T-North 2012 Expansion Project – Biogeoclimatic
Zones (1:150,000) ......................................................................... 21
figure 4
Westcoast T-North 2012 Expansion Project – Survey Plan,
Sheet 1 of 7 (1:11,000) ................................................................. 66
figure 5
Westcoast T-North 2012 Expansion Project – Survey Plan,
Sheet 2 of 7 (1:11,000) .................................................................. 67
figure 6
Westcoast T-North 2012 Expansion Project – Survey Plan,
Sheet 3 of 7 (1:11,000) .................................................................. 68
figure 7
Westcoast T-North 2012 Expansion Project – Survey Plan,
Sheet 4 of 7 (1:11,000) .................................................................. 69
figure 8
Westcoast T-North 2012 Expansion Project – Survey Plan,
Sheet 5 of 7 (1:11,000) .................................................................. 70
figure 9
Westcoast T-North 2012 Expansion Project – Survey Plan,
Sheet 6 of 7 (1:11,000) .................................................................. 71
figure 10
Westcoast T-North 2012 Expansion Project – Survey Plan,
Sheet 7 of 7 (1:11,000) .................................................................. 72
figure 11
Site Map of Archaeological Site HaRm-18 (1:550) ....................... 73
figure 12
Site Map of Archaeological Site HaRm-19 (1:325) ....................... 74
page 6
list of plates
page
plate 1
View south along proposed pipeline right-of-way from ~KP 0+100
showing typical terrain and vegetation ............................................... 75
plate 2
View south along proposed pipeline right-of-way from ~KP 0+361
depicting hummocky terrain and white spruce, pine and willow ......... 75
plate 3
View north of proposed pipeline right-of-way from ~KP 1+020
showing terrain change toward drainage crossing ............................. 76
plate 4
View east of subsurface test location 2, an area of moderate
archaeological potential located on a ridge between two drainages .. 76
plate 5
View north along proposed pipeline from ~KP 2+400 showing
dense vegetation cover resulting in no ground visibility .................... 77
plate 6
View north along proposed pipeline right-of-way from
~KP 3+211 showing level terrain and typical vegetation .................... 77
plate 7
View west of Mackie Creek which crosses the proposed
development at KP 3+321 .................................................................. 78
plate 8
View south of subsurface tests location 7, located on a bank
above a drainage and beaver pond ................................................... 78
plate 9
View south along proposed pipeline from ~KP 4+111 showing
disturbance from existing pipeline and agricultural activities .............. 79
plate 10 View south along proposed pipeline right-of-way from
~KP 5+213 showing featureless terrain and white poplar, white
spruce and willow forest cover ........................................................... 79
plate 11 View south along proposed pipeline from ~KP 5+380 showing
previous disturbance from oil and gas development and
agricultural activities ........................................................................... 80
plate 12 View north along proposed pipeline right-of-way from
~KP 6+340 showing level and featureless terrain .............................. 80
page 7
page
plate 13 View south of proposed pipeline right-of-way from ~KP 7+001
towards Lynx Creek showing dense vegetation cover ....................... 81
plate 14 View southeast of Archaeological Site HaRm-19 from outside
northwest boundary............................................................................ 81
plate 15 View north of proposed pipeline right-of-way from ~KP 7+450
showing gently undulating terrain and previous disturbance .............. 82
plate 16 View north along proposed pipeline right-of-way from KP 9+076
at Beryl Prairie Road crossing showing level, disturbed terrain ......... 82
plate 17 View southeast of proposed pipeline right-of-way from
KP 10+329 showing featureless terrain ............................................. 83
plate 18 View north along proposed pipeline right-of-way from
~KP 11+529 showing agricultural disturbance and lack of forest
cover .................................................................................................. 83
plate 19 View east of Archaeological Site HaRm-18 from existing
pipeline right-of-way showing disturbance on west boundary of
site. .................................................................................................... 84
plate 20 View south of Brenot Creek crossing showing undulating to
rugged terrain ..................................................................................... 84
plate 21 View north of proposed pipeline right-of-way from ~KP 14+400
showing imperfectly drained, featureless terrain ................................ 85
plate 22 View east of subsurface test location 19, on an imperfectly
drained area of moderate archaeological potential located on
the edge of a gully .............................................................................. 85
plate 23 View north of proposed pipeline right-of-way from KP 16+328
showing previous agricultural disturbance ......................................... 86
plate 24 View north along proposed pipeline right-of-way from
~KP 17+906 showing steeply sloping terrain. .................................... 86
plate 25 View south of pipeline right-of-way from KP 17+959 showing
Portage Creek within hummocky, poorly drained terrain. ................... 87
plate 26 View south of subsurface test location 22, located on the bank
of a drainage ...................................................................................... 87
page 8
page
plate 27 View south of proposed pipeline right-of-way from ~KP 19+000
showing no ground visibility during April fieldwork owing to
snow cover ......................................................................................... 88
plate 28 View south of proposed pipeline right-of-way from ~KP 20+800
showing featureless terrain and typical forest cover .......................... 88
plate 29 View south of subsurface test location 25, located on a ridge
exhibiting moderate archaeological potential ..................................... 89
plate 30 View south of subsurface test location 30, located on a bench. ......... 89
plate 31 View south of proposed pipeline right-of-way from ~KP 23+130
showing typical forest cover of pine, white poplar, white spruce,
birch and willow .................................................................................. 90
plate 32 View southeast of subsurface test location 38, a bench
exhibiting high archaeological potential.............................................. 90
plate 33 View east of proposed 25m x 620m temporary access from
west end showing featureless terrain and previous agricultural
disturbance ........................................................................................ 91
plate 34 View northwest of subsurface test location 41, located on a
bank above Mackie Creek.................................................................. 91
plate 35 View west of proposed 25m x 1406m temporary access road
from ~KP 0+700 which is located within an unconstructed road
allowance with white poplar and willow forest cover .......................... 92
plate 36 View west of subsurface test location 42, located on a
topographic rise within otherwise featureless terrain. ........................ 92
plate 37 View west of proposed 25m x 1232m temporary access road
from end showing previous disturbance and white poplar and
willow forest cover .............................................................................. 93
plate 38 View east of subsurface test location 43, a well drained knoll
within an agricultural field. .................................................................. 93
page 9
1. introduction
From April to October 2011, Landsong Heritage Consulting Ltd. (Landsong)
conducted an Archaeological Impact Assessment (AIA) on the proposed
Westcoast Energy Inc., carrying on business as Spectra Energy Transmission
(Westcoast) T-North 2012 Expansion Project (Project), under BC Heritage
Inspection Permit 2011-0059. Permit 2011-0059 was issued to Beth Hrychuk on
April 14, 2011, with reporting to be completed by April 30, 2012 (figure 1). Field
directors Beth Hrychuk, John Cormier and Elenore Hood were either on site
during the assessment or were working in the area and available to the field
supervisors to discuss assessment details.
The proposed Project is located on Crown and private lands and is located (from
CS-N5) ~77km west of the city of Fort St. John, ~24km northwest of the village of
Hudson’s Hope, ~26km northwest of Highway 29 and ~14km north of the
Williston Reservoir, in northeastern British Columbia. The proposed Project can
be accessed by 4x4 vehicle from the village of Hudson’s Hope, travelling west on
Canyon Drive for ~8.5km to the Beryl Prairie Road, continuing north on the Beryl
Prairie Road for ~12.7km to the Beryl Prairie FSR and continuing west and north
for ~12km to the CS-N5.
This area is located within Treaty No. 8 (1899) BC and is within the overlapping
traditional territories of Halfway River First Nation (HRFN), McLeod Lake Indian
Band (MLIB), Saulteau First Nations (SFN) and West Moberly First Nations
(WMFN).
Participants from HRFN, MLIB, SFN and WMFN were invited to
participate in the field assessment conducted by Landsong. HRFN participated
in a helicopter over-flight of the proposed Project to accommodate their review of
the
proposed
Project.
Archaeological
fieldwork
was
undertaken
by
page 10
archaeologists and field assistants from Landsong and representatives from
HRFN, MLIB and WMFN.
Landsong staff included Mark Amundrud, George
Brons, Keyna Burden, Nicholas Chesworth, John Cormier, Christine Foreman,
Elenore Hood, Beth Hrychuk, Vincent Jankunis, Cory Janzen, Tammi Mills,
Whitney Mosher, Laura Pick, Derek Sorkilmo, Shawn Bissett, Cody Bougerolle,
Adam Gentry, A.J. Hills, Barry Mierau, Roman Nelson, Travis Nelson and Jason
Sawchuk. Aboriginal community participants included Albert Chingee, Beatrice
Gauthier and Barry Solonas of MLIB, David Achla, David Fox and Rene
Metacheah of HRFN and Warren Desjarlais of WMFN.
Fieldwork for the AIA was undertaken on April 14 – 15, May 3 – 6, 9, 10 & 17,
June 13 – 17 & 20, July 7, 9 – 13, August 2 & 22, September 12 – 14 and
October 8 & 11 – 12, 2011. The proposed Project area was accessed by 4x4
trucks and UTVs. Fieldwork was conducted on foot.
As per BC Heritage Inspection Permit 2011-0059, the primary objectives of the
Archaeological
Impact
Assessment
were
met
through
a
three-part
methodological strategy:
1. pre-field project planning:

review of published and unpublished literature relevant to the natural
and cultural history of the region

site file search of previously recorded archaeology sites within 5000m
of the proposed Project, using Heritage Resource Inventory Application
(HRIA) and the Remote Access to Archaeological Data (RAAD)

desk-top study of archaeological potential within and adjacent to the
proposed
Project
through
review
of
available
mapping,
orthophotography and archaeological potential modelling

discussion of land use interests with Aboriginal communities and/or
land owners in proximity to the proposed Project
page 11
2. field reconnaissance program:

assessment of archaeological potential within and adjacent to the
proposed Project

re-visit of known archaeological sites within 500m of the proposed
Project

subsurface testing and/or visual inspections of surface exposures
within and adjacent to the proposed Project as required

identification and recording of archaeological sites within or adjacent to
the proposed Project

evaluation of the significance of archaeological sites and establish site
boundaries
3. impact mitigation recommendations:

recommend site-specific impact mitigation options based on site
significance, planned and unplanned proposed Project disturbance
factors and in consideration of the requests of participating Aboriginal
communities

liaise with the BC Archaeology Branch and the client to determine sitespecific impact mitigation commitments. The BC Archaeology Branch
determines all final archaeological site impact mitigation strategies
and/or compensatory measures for all federally regulated NEB projects
British Columbia’s Heritage Conservation Act (HCA) protects archaeological
resources located on both public and private land throughout the province and is
administered by the BC Ministry of Forests, Lands and Natural Resource
Operations, Archaeology Branch (the Branch). Sites and objects are protected
under Section 13 by virtue of their antiquity (pre-1846) or under Section 9 of the
HCA as Provincial Heritage Sites if designated as such by an order-in-council.
The HCA necessitates that a Permit (Section 12 and/or 14) issued by the
page 12
Minister or designate must be in place prior to the altering of any protected
archaeological sites.
Section 14 Heritage Inspection Permit applications are reviewed by the Branch
and by applicable Aboriginal communities and are issued by the Branch. Section
12 Alteration Permit applications for archaeological sites relevant to federally
regulated NEB Pipelines are also reviewed by the Branch and applicable
Aboriginal communities and are issued by the Branch.
page 13
q
094B/08
094A/05
094B/01
094A/04
BC Heritage Inspection
Permit 2011-0059
Permit Area
Westcoast Development
Permit Area
Rivers/Creeks
Roads
NTS Mapsheets 93 P/13, 93 O/16, 94 A/4, 94 A/5,
94 B/1 & 94 B/8
0
2,500
5,000
7,500
10,000
Meters
Map Scale 1:150,000
figure 1
093O/16
093P/13
BC Heritage Inspection Permit 2011-0059 - Permit Area (1:150,000)
page 14
2. project description
The proposed Project consists of approximately 24km of pipeline loop, on a
variable width right of way, to provide incremental firm transmission service from
receipt points along Westcoast’s Fort Nelson Mainline in the vicinity of
Compressor Station N5 (CS-N5) for delivery to Compressor Station 2 (CS-2) and
the NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. (NGTL) Groundbirch Pipeline. Commencing at
CS-N5 within c-67-I/94-B-1, the pipeline parallels the existing Westcoast right of
way for the majority of its length and terminates within d-7-I/94-B-1.
The
proposed Project will also include sixty-three (63) workspaces, fifteen (15) log
decks and up to seven temporary access roads all with various dimensions.
The proposed Project was assessed within a 65m corridor. Subsurface testing
was generally conducted within a 30m corridor, except on some Crown lands
where the entire 65m was subject to testing. The remaining 35m of the corridor
was not
subject
to subsurface
testing; however, areas of
increased
archaeological potential were recorded to accommodate the placement of
workspaces and log decks into areas of low archaeological potential and to
provide for pipeline right of way realignments and Project revisions. When areas
of
increased
archaeological
potential
conflicted
with
proposed
Project
components, these areas were tested accordingly.
The proposed Project is located within Block A, Units 7, 16, 17, 26, 36, 46, 55,
56, 65, 75, 85 and 95, Block H, Units 5, 15, 25, 35, 45, 46, 56, 66, 76, 86 and 96,
Block I, Units 6, 16, 17, 27, 37, 47, 57 and 67 of NTS mapsheet Group 94 B/1
(figure 2).
The proposed Project crosses a mixture of forested lands and agricultural lands
with areas utilized for forestry, ranching, farming and other oil and gas industry
page 15
activities (plates 9, 11, 18). Forested areas range from featureless to hummocky
terrain with some moderate to steeply rolling terrain in association with Mackie
Creek and Lynx Creek (plates 2, 6, 7, 10, 12, 15, 16, 17, 20, 21, 24, 25 & 28).
Forest cover throughout the non-agricultural portions of the proposed Project
consists mainly of white poplar, white and black spruce and willow, with some
pine, tamarack, alder, fir and birch (plates 2, 5, 27, 31, 35 & 37). Some forest
cover is also found within agricultural lands and consists mainly of white poplar,
white spruce and willow (plates 6, 10, 13 & 28). A diverse ground cover was
found throughout the proposed Project area and was comprised of mosses,
grasses, prickly rose, horsetail, clover, peavine, aster, bedstraw, soapberry,
strawberry, fireweed, colt’s foot, vetch, plantain, yarrow, burdock, kinnikinnick,
lichens, juniper, blueberry, huckleberry, lowbush and highbush cranberry, cow
parsnip, bunchberry, toad’s pelt, sarsaparilla, gooseberry, mushrooms, ferns,
bluebell, alfalfa, Saskatoon berry, wild rhubarb, wintergreen, raspberry, Indian
paintbrush, Labrador tea, false Solomon’s seal, tall larkspur, twinberry,
baneberry, bog violet and bog birch.
Areas of moderate to very high archaeological potential within the proposed
Project are located in proximity to Mackie Creek (plate 7), Lynx Creek (plate 13)
and Brenot Creek (plate 20). Additionally, areas in association with topographic
highs, ridges, knolls, breaks-in-slope and other drainages within the proposed
Project are considered to have increased archaeological potential.
A detailed description of the proposed Project archaeological assessment is
included in Section 4 Project Results.
page 16
q
HbRm-4
#
*
094B/08#*
094A/05
HbRm-3
HbRm-8
HbRm-7
#
*
#
*
HbRl-9
HbRl-5 HbRl-4 HbRl-11
HbRl-17 HbRl-18
#
*
#
*
#
*
HbRl-8
HbRk-2
#
*
#
*#
*
#
*
HbRl-14 HbRl-13
#
*
#
*
HbRl-16
#
*
#
*HbRl-7
HbRl-15
#
*
#
*
HbRl-12
HbRm-12 HbRm-9
HbRm-10
HbRm-13
#
*
*
##
*
HbRm-11
#
*
HbRm-6
#
*
HbRm-2
#
*
HbRm-5
#
*
HaRm-19
#
*
094B/01
Westcoast Energy Inc.,
carrying on business as
Spectra Energy Transmission
HaRk-4 HaRk-5
Westcoast T-North 2012 Expansion Project
#
*#
*
Project Area
094A/04
HaRm-11 HaRm-16
*
#
*#
HaRm-18
#
*
HaRk-9
Westcoast Development
HaRk-36
Permit Area
#
*
HaRk-33#
*
#
*HaRk-26
#
**
HaRk-22 #
HaRk-25
HaRl-12 HaRk-2
#
*
HaRl-13
Newly Recorded
#
* HaRl-14
#
*
#
* HaRk-39
#
* Site
HaRl-15
Archaeological
#
*
#
*
#
Previously Recorded
*HaRl-18
#
*
Archaeological Site
HaRm-10
#
*HaRm-17
#
*
#
*
HaRn-2
HaRm-3
#
*
GlRm-10
figure 2
GlRm-8
GlRm-6
GlRm-7
GlRm-5
#
*#
*#
#
**
#
*#
*
HaRl-26
#
* HaRn-3
#
*HaRn-1
HaRm-8
HaRm-5
#
* HaRm-13
#
#
*#
* HaRm-9
*
*
#
*#
#
*
HaRm-12
HaRm-7
#
* #
*
HaRm-1 HaRm-6
HaRm-4
*#
#
*#
*HaRm-2 #
*
HaRm-4
093O/16
HaRl-19
#
*
Rivers/Creeks
HaRl-8 HaRl-1Roads
HaRl-2
HaRl-4 HaRl-9
NTS Mapsheets 93 P/13, 93 O/16,
HaRl-6 HaRl-5
94 A/5, 94 B/1 & 94 B/8
HaRl-22 HaRl-20
0
2,500
5,000HaRl-177,500
HaRl-3
HaRl-7
HaRl-28
Meters
HaRl-27
#
*
*
*#
##
*
*
#
*#
#
*
*
*#
# #
#
*
* #
*
94 A/4,
10,000
*#
#
*#
*
Map Scale 1:150,000
Map from: Map Connection Ltd., Etopo NEBC
Digital Maps, 2001
093P/13
GlRk-1
#
*
GlRm-2
#
*
#
*
Westcoast Energy Inc., carrying on business as Spectra Energy Transmission; Westcoast T-North
#
*
2012 Expansion Project - Project Area (1:150,000)
page 17
#
*#
#
*
*
3. background information
3.1 ecological landscape
The proposed Project is located within the Boreal White and Black Spruce
(BWBS) Biogeoclimatic zone (figure 3).
The BWBS Biogeoclimatic zone is characterized by cold winters, with snow from
late October to early May. This zone is also noted for drier climates contributing
to the extensive history of forest fire cycles in BWBS forests.
Whereas
permafrost is found in some of the northernmost sections of the BWBS zone, it is
not found within the 2011-0059 Permit Area (Alldritt-McDowell 1998a).
BWBS forests cover the lower elevation foothills and northern valleys east of the
Rocky Mountains and include the fertile agricultural regions in the Peace River
Valley. BWBS forests typically include two types of ecosystems: upland forests
and low-lying muskeg areas.
Upland forests are characterized by mixed
canopies of white spruce and lodgepole pine with black spruce sometimes
occurring in the main canopy. Upland forests host trees and vegetation suited to
primarily well-drained soils. Black spruce and tamarack bogs with white spruce
and trembling aspen stands characterize level muskeg or lowland areas. These
areas are generally poorly drained and may have expanses of standing water
(Alldritt-McDowell 1998).
Common plants found within northeastern British Columbia include: junipers,
willows, swamp birch, alder, prickly wild rose, devil’s club, honeysuckle, birchleaved spirea, shrubby cinquefoil, false-azalea, white rhododendron, western
mountain-ash, dogwood, Labrador tea, swamp-laurel, four-angled mountainheather, pink mountain-heather, kinnikinnick, peavine, chickweed and pussy
page 18
toes. Bryophytes include feathered clubmoss, common tree moss and various
liverworts.
Berries include several varieties of: bunchberry, gooseberry,
huckleberry, currants, blueberry, Saskatoon berry, cranberries, black elderberry,
common snowberry, black twinberry, choke cherry, pin cherry, crowberry,
thimbleberry, wild red raspberry, red baneberry, wild strawberry and loganberry.
Wildflowers include several examples of the lily, orchid, and buttercup families,
yarrow, monkey flower, goldenrod, tall larkspur, arnica, aster, fireweed, common
paintbrush, red clover, twinflower, plantain and monkshood.
Aquatic plants
include marsh cinquefoil, common cattail, arrow-grass and pondweed (AlldrittMcDowell 1998; DeLong et al 1990; Johnson et al 1995).
Carnivore and omnivore populations include grizzly bear, black bear, cougar,
lynx, wolf, wolverine, coyote, marten, fox, fisher, mink, otter and weasel.
Herbivore populations include moose, elk, caribou, mountain goat, stone and
Dahl’s sheep, mule deer, white-tail deer, hare and various rodents including
beaver, muskrat and squirrel (Alldritt-McDowell 1998; DeLong et al 1990; Gadd
2003).
Birds and waterfowl include: the black capped chickadee, tree swallow, redbreasted nuthatch, red-winged blackbird, purple finch, swainson’s thrush, yellow
warbler, American robin, darkened junko, mountain bluebird, white-crowned
sparrow, Bohemian waxwing, raven, crow, magpie, whiskey-jack, yellow-bellied
sapsucker, northern flicker, pileated woodpecker, American bald eagle, golden
eagle, goshawk, red-tailed hawk, gyrfalcon, great horned owl, barred owl,
kestrels, fisher, Canada goose, loon, trumpeter swan, mallards, buffleheads, blue
winged teals, Barrow’s goldeneye, grouse and ptarmigan (Alldritt-McDowell
1998; DeLong et al 1990; Gadd 2003).
Bull trout, northern pike, lake whitefish, arctic grayling, mountain whitefish, white
sucker, burbot, longnose sucker, goldeye, walleye, yellow perch and rainbow
page 19
trout are present in many of the streams, rivers and lakes throughout
northeastern British Columbia (Gadd 2003).
page 20
q
Westcoast Energy Inc., carrying on
business as Spectra Energy Transmission
Westcoast T-North 2012 Expansion Project
Biogeoclimatic Zone
Westcoast Development
Permit Area
Roads
Rivers/Creeks
Biogeoclimatic Zone
BWBS
ESSF
NTS Mapsheets 93 O/16, 93 P/13, 94 A/4, 94 A/5
94 B/1 & 94 B/8
0
2,500
5,000
7,500
10,000
Meters
Map Scale 1:150,000
Map from: Map Connection Ltd, Etopo NEBC
Digital Maps, 2001
figure 3
Westcoast Energy Inc., carrying on business as Spectra Energy Transmission; Westcoast T-North
2012 Expansion Project - Biogeoclimatic Zone (1:150,000)
page 21
3.2 archaeological resources
During the late Pleistocene and early Holocene epochs, as the Laurentide and
Cordilleran ice sheets receded from the British Columbia landscape, small
groups of people traveled along the eastern slopes of the Rocky Mountains, also
known as the Rocky Mountain Trench (Burns 1996, Mandryk et al. 2001,
McMillan and Yellowhorn 2004, Meltzer 2009). Newly re-established flora and
fauna (often concentrated along the shores of proglacial lakes and major
waterways) provided resources for hunter-gatherer populations (Pielou 1991,
Fladmark et al. 1988, Kauffman and Judson 1990, Driver 1992). Archaeological
evidence of human occupation has been recovered from a number of sites in
northeastern British Columbia.
A fluted projectile point recovered from the
Charlie Lake Cave Site (HbRf-39), near Fort St. John, is associated with a
radiocarbon age of c.10,400BP (Fladmark et al.1988). Archaeological sites at
Pink Mountain (HhRr-1) north of Fort St. John (Wilson 1989), the Halfway River
Valley (Wilson & Carlson 1987) and the Trutch-Sikanni Chief River area (Walde
1994) provide further archaeological evidence for early Holocene occupation.
The identification of hundreds of archaeological sites dating to various periods
since this time suggests that northeastern British Columbia has been occupied
continuously for at least ten thousand years (Fladmark 1981, Carlson 1996,
McMillan and Yellowhorn 2004, Howe and Brolly 2008).
Gradual environmental changes linked to the Altithermal climatic episode
approximately 6,000 years ago resulted in the establishment of the modern
boreal forest cover and parkland-like setting including large areas of floodplains,
meadows, muskeg and alpine tundra at higher elevations (Pielou 1991, Burley et
al 1996, McMillan and Yellowhorn 2004). The encroachment of the boreal forest
necessitated a swift and complex adaptation to new resources, as the grazing
areas of the wood bison were curtailed and their populations declined (Driver
1992, Fladmark 1996). A rich and diverse animal population including moose,
page 22
elk, bear, wolf, wolverine, lynx, beaver, mink, martin, hare, weasel, otter and
waterfowl thrived in this environment (Pielou 1991, Driver 1992).
The Aboriginal peoples of northeastern British Columbia were, and some largely
remain, hunters and gatherers. They were nomadic and thus their economic
realization of the land’s resources was balanced with its sustainable utilization
(Jenness 2003, Howe and Brolly 2008). Oral accounts suggest that life prior to
the influence of European contact in the South Peace, followed the cycles of the
seasons, animal migrations, and the cultural patterns of resource utilization that
had existed in the Eastern Slopes and Peace Region for thousands of years.
Tools for both utility and survival were furnished from stone, wood, bone and
antler.
Microblades, Knives, scrappers, prepared cores and projectile points
were common elements within the prehistoric toolkit (McMillan and Yellowhorn
2004).
Deadfall traps, snares and brush fences (designed for efficiency and
mobility) were utilized to trap small mammals such as hare and beaver. Animals
provided food, furs and hides. Fish were procured and cached for winter use.
Seasonal salmon runs were frequented seasonally, a staple food of the historic
Carrier people (McMillan and Yellowhorn). Traditional ecological knowledge of
plants allowed for the harvest of foods and the preparation of medicines
(Riddington 1981).
The archaeological record of northeastern British Columbia demonstrates the
patterns of nomadic hunter and gatherer life through the hundreds of small,
single component archaeological sites identified (Helmer 1978, Fladmark 1986,
Howe and Brolly 2008). Such sites are often comprised of small, lithic debitage
scatters or isolated artifact finds.
Larger and multicomponent sites may
represent seasonal extended family gatherings or the re-occupations of favoured
areas. Oral accounts that survive through the Aboriginal communities within the
Treaty No. 8 Territory (1899) also relate that life prior to the influence of
Europeans followed the cycles of the seasons, animal migrations, and the
cultural patterns of resource utilization that are evidenced in the archaeological
page 23
record. Because of this, ethnoarchaeology and ethnographic studies are often
significant in interpreting patterns in the archaeological record and creating
predictive site potential models (Gould 1990; Yellen 1977).
Today, the
importance of Aboriginal communities’ knowledge of traditional resource
utilization and patterns of regional Aboriginal lifestyle is recognized in their active
participation in archaeology in northeastern British Columbia.
The prehistoric chronology of northeastern British Columbia, and more
specifically the Peace River district, is defined by comparison of local recovered
archaeological material with those in neighbouring regions, such as Sub-Arctic
cultures of the Yukon and Northwest Territories, the Northwest Coast, Southern
Plateau and Northern Great Plains (Howe and Brolly 2008). This culture-history
is further delineated through analysis of the few stratified sites in the area, most
notably the Charlie Lake Cave Site (Driver et al. 1996, Howe and Brolly 2008).
Based on this analysis, archaeological material is separated into an Early, Middle
and Late Prehistoric Period. Throughout all three periods the tool assemblages
are characterized by an overwhelming percentage of black chert, as well as,
extensively re-sharpened tools (McMillan and Yellowhorn 2004).
It is
conceivable that this is the result of a lack of more easily knapable materials.
The Early Prehistoric Period that spans from the emergence of human groups in
the area around 10,500 BP (as defined by Charlie Lake Cave radio-carbon
dates) to around 7,000 BP includes both fluted points associated with the Clovis
Culture, as well as, plano points. One undated Clovis-like point was recovered
from excavations at the Pink Mountain Site (HhRr-1) (Wilson 1989). Several
undated surface collections similar to Scottsbluff, Alberta, Eden and Plainview
have been collected throughout the area including an almost complete Alberta
type point found 7km northeast of Fort St. John (Fladmark 1981, Howe and Brolly
2008). Plano has come to be known as an assemblage exhibiting lanceolate
points with parallel flaking (Peck 2011). These early Plano points appear most
similar to complexes associated with Northern Plains cultures.
page 24
The Middle Prehistoric Period spans from roughly 7,000-4,300 BP. This date is
once again based on those from the Charlie Lake Cave Site (Driver et al. 1996),
and differs from the Great Plains Middle Period end date in that the latter is
associated with the emergence of bow and arrow technologies while this does
not appear to be the case in northeastern British Columbia.
Microblade
technologies similar to those found further north in Alaska at least 10,700 years
ago is found in the Peace region around this time (McMillan and Yellowhorn
2004). Middle to Late points appears similar to Northern Sub-Arctic Complexes
(Howe and Brolly 2008). For example, Taye Lake Phase points (4,700 BP) found
at several sites, including the Callison Site (IeSh-1), are similar to those in the
Yukon (MacNeish 1960, Howe and Brolly 2008). Northeastern British Columbia
is within the Sub-Arctic archaeological region (Clark 1991, McMillan and
Yellowhorn 2004).
There still remain projectile points analogous with lithic
assemblages of the Northern Plains including Oxbow-like points found at several
localities, including Component 7 of the Charlie Lake Cave Site (HbRf-39),
Component 3 of the Farrell Creek Site (HaRk-1) and the Gwillim Lake Site (GiRi4) (Ball 1978, Spurling 1978, Fladmark 1996).
The Late Prehistoric Period spans from 4,500 to the Historic Period.
Consequently, Aboriginal subsistence became focused on smaller game hunting,
gathering and seasonable mobility in a land of “relative plenty” (Burley et al 1996,
McMillan and Yellowhorn 2004). Once again there are comparable assemblages
to those found further east on the Northern Plains. Component 2 of the Farrell
Creek Site (HaRk-1) resembles Besant, dated to 1630±100 BP (Spurling 1978).
Conversely, more localized point types become more common in this period.
page 25
4. project results
Westcoast T-North 2012 Expansion Project
4.1 record review
Thirty-one (31) previously recorded archaeological sites, GlRm-5, GlRm-6,
GlRm-7, GlRm-8, HaRm-1, HaRm-2, HaRm-3, HaRm-4, HaRm-5, HaRm-6,
HaRm-7, HaRm-9, HaRm-10, HaRm-11, HaRm-12, HaRm-13, HaRm-14, HaRm15, HaRm-16, HaRm-17, HbRm-2, HbRm-5, HbRm-6, HbRm-7, HbRm-8, HbRm9, HbRm-10, HbRm-11, HbRm-12, HbRm-13 and GlRm-10, are located within
five kilometres of the proposed Project.
Five of these previously recorded
archaeological sites, HaRm-4, HbRm-9, HbRm-10, HbRm-12 and HbRm-13, are
located within one kilometre of the proposed Project and are discussed in detail
below.
Archaeological Site HaRm-4
HaRm-4 was recorded in 1991 by I.R. Wilson Consultants Ltd. as part of a
Heritage Resource Inventory and Impact Assessment for Westcoast Energy Fort
Nelson Gas Pipeline and BC Hydro main W.A.C. Bennett power transmission
right of ways. Surface lithics were observed and left in situ including a quartzite
cobble core, several possible flakes and fire broken rock. Four subsurface tests
were conducted with negative results. HaRm-4 is located within the proposed
Project area at 23+688. The site was revisited during the AIA but could not be
relocated and is thought to be destroyed.
A subsurface test location was
conducted in the area of the site; no cultural materials were identified.
page 26
Archaeological Site HbRm-9
HbRm-9 was recorded in 2009 by Heritage North Consulting Ltd. as part of an
AIA for Canbriam Energy. Twenty-one (21) black chert flakes were collected and
the site is considered recent and representing a short term campsite. HbRm-9 is
located ~721m southwest of the proposed development and will not be impacted
by the proposed Project.
Archaeological Site HbRm-10
HbRm-10 was recorded in 2009 by Ecofor Consulting Ltd. as part of a PostImpact Assessment for the Farrell Creek 3D seismic program.
Two primary
flakes, four secondary flakes six tertiary flakes and four pieces of shatter were
collected. HbRm-10 is located ~792m southwest of the proposed development
and will not be impacted by the proposed Project.
Archaeological Site HbRm-12
HbRm-12 was recorded in 2010 by Northwind Archaeological Consulting as part
of an AIA for a Canbriam pipeline.
Two black chert flakes were collected.
HbRm-12 is located ~628m southwest of the proposed development and will not
be impacted by the proposed Project.
Archaeological Site HbRm-13
HbRm-13 was recorded in 2010 by Northwind Archaeological Consulting as part
of an AIA for a Canbriam pipeline. Six black chert flakes were collected. HbRm13 is located ~599m southwest of the proposed development and will not be
impacted by the proposed Project.
4.2 participation of aboriginal communities
HRFN, MLIB, SFN and WMFN were notified of the proposed Project fieldwork
and invited to accompany the Landsong field crew. Participants were welcome
to either participate in the AIA (with training and assistance from Landsong
archaeologists) or to observe the AIA work.
Participation of Aboriginal
page 27
representatives, while encouraged by Landsong, is at the discretion of the
proponent
Representatives from HRFN, MLIB and WMFN accompanied the Landsong field
crew on the AIA. Aboriginal community participants included David Achla, David
Fox and Rene Metacheah of HRFN, Albert Chingee, Beatrice Gauthier and Barry
Solonas of MLIB and Warren Desjarlais of WMFN.
4.3 field reconnaissance
The fieldwork for the proposed Project was undertaken on April 14 – 15, May 3 –
6, 9, 10 & 17, June 13 – 17 & 20, July 7, 9 – 13, August 2 & 22, September 12 –
14 and October 8 & 11 – 12, 2011.
The proposed development area was
accessed using 4x4 trucks and UTVs. Ground reconnaissance of the proposed
development area was conducted via pedestrian traverse (figures 4 - 10).
The proposed Project is located within terrain ranging from featureless to rugged
with gentle to steep slopes of various aspects (plates 2, 3, 6, 10, 12, 15, 16, 17,
20, 21, 24, 25, 28 & 33). Forested areas are dominated by white poplar, white
and black spruce and willow, with some black poplar, diamond willow, pine,
tamarack, fir, birch and alder (plates 2, 5, 27, 31, 35 & 37). Forest cover was
generally absent in agricultural areas with some willow, white spruce and white
poplar (plates 6, 10, 13, 18 & 28).
Soils were predominantly imperfectly to
moderately well drained, with small areas exhibiting very poor to poor drainage
(plates 21 & 25).
attributed to
Previous disturbances within the proposed Project are
geophysical exploration, forestry, road allowances, hydro,
agricultural and oil and gas development activities (plates 9, 11, 16, 18, 23, 33 &
37). A diverse ground cover of mosses, grasses, prickly rose, horsetail, clover,
peavine, aster, bedstraw, soapberry, strawberry, fireweed, colt’s foot, vetch,
plantain, yarrow, burdock, kinnikinnick, lichens, juniper, blueberry, huckleberry,
page 28
lowbush and highbush cranberry, cow parsnip, bunchberry, toad’s pelt,
sarsaparilla, gooseberry, mushrooms, ferns, bluebell, alfalfa, Saskatoon berry,
wild rhubarb, wintergreen, raspberry, Indian paintbrush, Labrador tea, false
Solomon’s seal, tall larkspur, twinberry, baneberry, bog violet and bog birch was
found with the proposed Project area.
Subsurface tests conducted within the proposed Project development area were
approximately 35cm x 35cm and excavated to depths of ~30cm below surface
(DBS).
All subsurface tests were spaced approximately 1m to 5m apart
depending on the size of the topographic feature under consideration and on the
archaeological potential the landform was considered to possess. Sediments
were screened through ¼ mesh.
The field assessment for the proposed Project consisted of one thousand five
hundred eighty-two (1582) subsurface tests conducted at forty-three (43) areas
exhibiting moderate to very high archaeological potential. Individual results for
development areas and subsurface test locations #1 through #43 are detailed
below.
Pipeline Right-of-Way from KP 0+000 to KP 1+010 and Associated
Workspaces
The proposed Project from KP 0+000 to KP 1+010 commences at the CS-N5,
running south through a cutblock towards a class S6 drainage. The terrain is
featureless to hummocky with gentle eastern aspects (plate 2). Soils are poorly
to imperfectly drained.
Mixed forests contain white poplar, white spruce,
tamarack, pine, alder, willow and fir (plate 1). A diverse ground cover consists of
grasses, mosses, lichens, prickly rose, Labrador tea, bunchberry, kinnikinnick,
colt’s foot, strawberry, raspberry, highbush cranberry, lowbush cranberry,
soapberry, horsetail, fireweed, gooseberry, peavine, wild rhubarb, bluebell and
scattered bog birch.
Ground visibility was negated by surface vegetation.
Previous disturbances are attributed to geophysical exploration, oil and gas
page 29
development and forestry activities.
One area of moderate archaeological
potential was identified (subsurface test location #1).
Subsurface Test Location #1
Moderate Archaeological Potential
Subsurface test location #1 is ~5m SE-NW x 15m SW-NE in size, located
on a ridge at 10V 0556686E 6230280N ±2.4m. A total of twelve (12)
subsurface tests were conducted along with pedestrian transects spaced
at 1m to 2m intervals. Forest cover consists of white spruce, white poplar
and willow. Ground cover is comprised of raspberry, fireweed, highbush
cranberry, grasses, mosses and bunchberry. Soils are imperfectly drained
and there was no ground visibility at the time of assessment owing to
dense vegetation cover. Soils consists of a 2cm litter mat over 1cm of
black (10YR2/1) loam and 29cm of yellowish brown (10YR5/4) clay. No
cultural materials or CMTs were identified.
Pipeline Right-of-Way from KP 1+010 to KP 2+588 and Associated
Workspaces and Log Decks
The proposed Project from KP 1+010 to KP 2+588 crosses two class S6
drainages, continuing in a south/southeast direction across undulating terrain
gradually changing to rugged terrain with moderate slopes of eastern, northern
and southern aspects (plate 3). Soils are imperfectly to moderately well drained.
Forest cover is dominated by white poplar, white spruce, willow and alder with
sparse birch and black poplar. Ground cover consists of grasses, mosses, cow
parsnip, prickly rose, bunchberry, colt’s foot, raspberry, highbush cranberry,
soapberry, ferns, vetch, fireweed, tall larkspur, gooseberry, bedstraw, false
Solomon’s seal, twinberry, baneberry, bluebell, wintergreen and bog violet.
Previous disturbances are attributed to geophysical exploration, oil and gas
development and forestry activities.
Five areas of moderate archaeological
potential were identified (subsurface test locations #2 - #6).
page 30
Four areas of high archaeological potential were identified adjacent to the
proposed Project and were not subject to subsurface testing (figure 4):
1) 20m x 100m north-south trending ridge overlooking a drainage
(continuation of STL #2) @ UTM 10V 0556713E 6230048N
2) 20m x 100m north-south trending ridge overlooking a drainage
(continuation of STL #2) @ UTM 10V 0556740E 6230084N
3) 15m x 50m north facing ridge overlooking a drainage @ UTM 10V
0556750E 6229972N
4) 15m x 150m north-south trending ridge @ UTM 10V 0556810E 6229260N
Adherence to development plans is recommended to avoid impacting potential
archaeological resources in these areas. Further archaeological assessment will
be required should development plans be revised to encompass these areas.
Subsurface Test Location #2
Moderate Archaeological Potential
Subsurface test location #2 is ~47m E-W x 77m NE-SW in size, located on
a northeast-southwest trending ridge between two drainages at 10V
0556700E 6230089N ±7m (plate 4).
A total of eighty-eight (88)
subsurface tests were conducted along with pedestrian transects spaced
at 1m to 2m intervals. Forest cover consists of white spruce, white poplar
and scattered birch and alder. Ground cover is comprised of bunchberry,
false Solomon’s seal, wintergreen, mosses, prickly rose and soapberry.
Soils are imperfectly drained and there was no ground visibility at the time
of assessment owing to dense vegetation cover. Soils consist of a 6cm
litter mat over 30cm of light olive brown (2.5YR5/6) wet clay. No cultural
materials or CMTs were identified.
Subsurface Test Location #3
Moderate Archaeological Potential
Subsurface test location #3 is ~6m N-S x 20m E-W in size, located on a
ridge overlooking a drainage at 10V 0556684E 6229974N ±6m. A total of
page 31
sixteen (16) subsurface tests were conducted along with pedestrian
transects spaced at 1m to 2m intervals. Forest cover consists of white
poplar and white spruce. Ground cover is comprised of mosses, grasses,
prickly rose and fireweed. Soils are imperfectly drained and there was no
ground visibility at the time of assessment owing to dense vegetation
cover. Soils consist of a 4cm litter mat over 3cm of black (10YR2/1) loam,
22cm of greyish brown (10YR5/2) wet clay and 5cm of yellowish brown
(10YR5/4) wet clay. No cultural materials or CMTs were identified.
Subsurface Test Location #4
Moderate Archaeological Potential
Subsurface test location #4 is ~12m N-S x 25m E-W in size, located on an
east-west trending ridge overlooking a drainage at 10V 0556709E
6229974N ±6m. A total of twenty (20) subsurface tests were conducted
along with pedestrian transects spaced at 1m to 2m intervals. Forest
cover consists of white poplar, white spruce and alder. Ground cover is
comprised of prickly rose, highbush cranberry, colt’s foot, gooseberry and
soapberry. Soils are moderately well drained and there was no ground
visibility at the time of assessment owing to dense vegetation cover. Soils
consist of a 7cm litter mat over 2cm of black (10YR2/1) wet loam, 3cm of
greyish brown (10YR5/2) wet clay and 25cm of yellowish brown (10YR5/4)
wet clay. No cultural materials or CMTs were identified.
Subsurface Test Location #5
Moderate Archaeological Potential
Subsurface test location #5 is ~15m N-S x 20m E-W in size, located on an
east-west trending ridge at 10V 0556692E 6229955N ±5.4m. A total of
thirteen (13) subsurface tests were conducted along with pedestrian
transects spaced at 1m to 2m intervals. Forest cover consists of white
poplar, white spruce and alder. Ground cover is comprised of prickly rose,
colt’s foot, false Solomon’s seal, bunchberry, highbush cranberry, bluebell
page 32
and raspberry.
Soils are moderately well drained and there was no
ground visibility at the time of assessment owing to dense vegetation
cover.
Soils consist of a 4cm litter mat over 1cm of very dark grey
(2.5YR3/1) wet silty loam and 29cm of light olive brown (2.5YR5/2) wet
clay. No cultural materials or CMTs were identified.
Subsurface Test Location #6
Moderate Archaeological Potential
Subsurface test location #6 is ~7m N-S x 15m E-W in size, located on a
ridge at 10V 0556680E 622943N ±2.8m. A total of twelve (12) subsurface
tests were conducted along with pedestrian transects spaced at 1m to 2m
intervals. Forest cover consists of white poplar, white spruce and willow.
Ground cover is comprised of grasses, mosses, bunchberry and fireweed.
Soils are imperfectly drained and there was no ground visibility at the time
of assessment owing to dense vegetation cover. Soils consist of a 4cm
litter mat over 3cm of black (10YR2/1) loam, 22cm of greyish brown
(10YR5/2) wet clay and 5cm of yellowish brown (10YR5/4) wet clay. No
cultural materials or CMTs were identified. No cultural materials or CMTs
were identified.
Pipeline Right-of-Way from KP 2+588 to KP 3+223 and Associated
Workspaces and Log Decks
The proposed Project from KP 2+588 to KP 3+223 continues southeast across
level, featureless terrain towards Mackie Creek. In the vicinity of the creek the
terrain becomes increasingly rugged with gentle to steep slopes with southern
aspects. Soils are predominantly imperfectly drained with some areas of poor
drainage. Forest cover consists of white poplar, white spruce, willow and pine
(plate 6). Ground cover is comprised of grasses, mosses, cow parsnip, yarrow,
prickly rose, bunchberry, kinnikinnick, colt’s foot, strawberry, raspberry,
soapberry, horsetail, fireweed, gooseberry, peavine, wild rhubarb and bluebell.
Previous disturbance is attributed to oil and gas development activities. Ground
page 33
visibility at the time of the assessment ranged from none to poor owing to dense
vegetation cover in most areas.
No areas of moderate to very high
archaeological potential were identified within or adjacent to this portion of the
proposed Project.
Pipeline Right-of-Way from KP 3+223 to KP 4+155 and Associated
Workspaces and Log Deck
The proposed Project from KP 3+223 to KP 4+155 commences at Mackie Creek
within rugged terrain with gentle to steep slopes with predominately southern and
northeastern aspects. The terrain becomes featureless and level as it continues
southeast from Mackie Creek into agricultural lands (plate 7). Soils range from
poorly to moderately well drained. Forest cover consists of white poplar, white
spruce, willow and alder.
Ground cover is comprised of grasses, mosses,
yarrow, vetch, aster, horsetail, colt’s foot, Indian paintbrush, cow parsnip,
peavine, lowbush cranberry, prickly rose, Labrador tea, bunchberry, kinnikinnick,
strawberry and alfalfa. Previous disturbance is attributed to agricultural and oil
and gas development activities (plate 9). There was no ground visibility at the
time of the assessment owing to dense vegetation cover.
Three areas of
moderate archaeological potential were identified (subsurface test locations #7 #9).
Two areas of moderate archaeological potential were identified adjacent to the
proposed Project and were not subject to subsurface testing (figure 5):
1) 20m x 35m bank of a Mackie Creek @ UTM 10V 0556955E 6227807N
2) 10m x 15m bank of Mackie Creek @ UTM 10V 0556890E 6227882N
Adherence to development plans is recommended to avoid impacting potential
archaeological resources in these areas. Further archaeological assessment will
be required should development plans be revised to encompass these areas.
page 34
Subsurface Test Location #7
Moderate Archaeological Potential
Subsurface test location #7 is ~8m E-W x 30m N-S in size, located on a
bank of Mackie Creek and beaver pond at 10V 0556880E 6227925N
±5.7m (plate 8). A total of forty-six (46) subsurface tests were conducted
along with pedestrian transects spaced at 1m to 2m intervals. Forest
cover consists of white spruce and scattered willow.
Ground cover is
comprised of mosses, grasses, vetch, aster, strawberry, bunchberry,
prickly rose, lowbush cranberry, horsetail and colt’s foot.
Soils are
moderately well drained and there was no ground visibility at the time of
assessment owing to dense vegetation cover. Soils consist of a 10cm
litter mat over 2cm of very dark brown (10YR2/2) wet loam and 28cm of
dark yellowish brown (10YR3/4) wet silty clay. No cultural materials or
CMTs were identified.
Subsurface Test Location #8
Moderate Archaeological Potential
Subsurface test location #8 is ~8m N-S x 35m E-W in size, located on a
bank of Mackie Creek at 10V 0556933E 6227879N ±3m.
A total of
twenty-three (23) subsurface tests were conducted along with pedestrian
transects spaces at 1m to 2m intervals. Forest cover consists of white
spruce, white poplar and willow. Ground cover is comprised of grasses,
prickly rose, cow parsnip, lowbush cranberry, Indian paintbrush and
peavine. Soils are imperfectly drained and there was no ground visibility
at the time of assessment owing to dense vegetation cover. Soils consist
of a 10cm litter mat over 30cm of yellow brown (10YR5/8) dry silty clay.
No cultural materials or CMTs were identified.
page 35
Subsurface Test Location #9
Moderate Archaeological Potential
Subsurface test location #9 is ~15m E-W x 80m N-S in size, located on a
bank above Mackie Creek and beaver pond at 10V 0556889E 6227819N
±2.7m. A total of thirty-four (34) subsurface tests were conducted along
with pedestrian transects spaces at 1m to 2m intervals.
consists of white and black spruce.
Forest cover
Ground cover is comprised of
mosses, grasses, bunchberry, horsetail, peavine and strawberry. Soils
are moderately well drained and there was no ground visibility at the time
of assessment owing to dense vegetation cover. Soils consist of a 4cm
litter mat over 3cm of very dark grey (10YR3/2) dry silty clay, 2cm of dark
yellowish brown (10YR4/4) dry silty clay and 25cm of dark yellowish brown
(10YR3/6) dry clay. No cultural materials or CMTs were identified.
Pipeline Right-of-Way from KP 4+155 to KP 5+213 and Associated
Workspaces and Log Decks
The proposed Project from KP 4+155 to KP 5+213 travels southeast across
agricultural lands characterized by featureless to gently undulating, imperfectly to
moderately well drained terrain (plate 10). Forest cover consists of white poplar,
white spruce and willow.
Ground cover is comprised of grasses, mosses,
yarrow, prickly rose, bunchberry, kinnikinnick, strawberry, Saskatoon berry,
soapberry and horsetail.
Previous disturbance is attributed to geophysical
exploration, agricultural and oil and gas development activities. There was no
ground visibility at the time of the assessment owing to dense vegetation cover.
No areas of moderate to very high archaeological potential were identified within
or adjacent to this portion of the proposed Project.
Pipeline Right-of-Way from KP 5+213 to KP 7+001 and Associated
Workspaces
The proposed Project from KP 5+213 to KP 7+001 traverses agricultural lands
which exhibit level and featureless, imperfectly to moderately well drained terrain
page 36
(plate 12). There is no forest cover present. Ground cover is comprised of
grasses, prickly rose, vetch, fireweed and clover.
Previous disturbance is
attributed to oil and gas development and agricultural activities (plate 11). There
was no ground visibility at the time of the assessment owing to dense vegetation
cover. No areas of moderate to very high archaeological potential were identified
within or adjacent to this portion of the proposed Project.
Pipeline Right-of-Way from KP 7+001 to KP 8+957 and Associated
Workspaces and Log Deck
The proposed Project from KP 7+001 to KP 8+957 commences north of Lynx
Creek within featureless terrain which becomes steadily more rugged towards
the creek. The creek has moderate to steep banks with north and south aspect
slopes. After Lynx Creek, the terrain becomes gently undulating to featureless
as it crosses agricultural fields (plate 15). Soils are generally moderately well to
well drained, with small areas of imperfect drainage.
This portion of the
proposed Project traverses both forested and agricultural lands, with forested
areas consisting of white and black poplar, white spruce and willow. Ground
cover is comprised of grasses, mosses, cow parsnip, prickly rose, bunchberry,
highbush cranberry, lowbush cranberry, ferns, horsetail, vetch, fireweed,
kinnikinnick, colt’s foot, strawberry, raspberry, soapberry, bedstraw, wintergreen,
clover and peavine (plate 13). Previous disturbance is attributed to agricultural
and oil and gas development activities. There was no ground visibility at the time
of the assessment owing to dense vegetation cover. Seven areas of moderate to
very high archaeological potential were identified (subsurface test locations #10 #16).
Ten (10) areas of moderate to very high archaeological potential were identified
adjacent to the proposed Project and were not subject to subsurface testing
(figure 6):
1) 10m x 75m bank of Lynx Creek @ UTM 10V 0557791E 6224107N to 10V
0557791E 6224098N
page 37
2) 13m x 20m east-west trending terrace @ UTM 10V 0557837E 6223796N
3) 12m x undetermined north bank of Lynx Creek @ UTM 10V 0557904E
6223903N
4) 15m x 32m upper bank of Lynx Creek @ UTM 10V 0557904E 6223998N
5) 11m x 21m knoll @ UTM 10V 0557916E 6223925N
6) 15m x undetermined upper bank of Lynx Creek @ UTM 10V 0558007E
6223953N
7) 6m x 10m spur adjacent Lynx Creek @ UTM 10V 0557986E 6223812N
8) 25m x 35m north bank of a low-lying area @ UTM 10V 0557983E
6223227N
9) 5m x 5m break-in-slope @ UTM 10V 0557984E 6223842N
10) 8m x undetermined south bank of Lynx Creek @ UTM 10V 0557998E
6223869N
Adherence to development plans is recommended to avoid impacting potential
archaeological resources in these areas. Further archaeological assessment will
be required should development plans be revised to encompass these areas.
Subsurface Test Location #10
Very High Archaeological Potential
Subsurface test location #10 is 7m N-S x 21m E-W in size, located on a
bank above a creek at 10V 0557741E 6224121N ±2.5m. A total of twentynine (29) subsurface tests were conducted along with pedestrian transects
spaced at 1m to 2m intervals. Forest cover consists of white poplar and
white spruce.
Ground cover is comprised of prickly rose, bunchberry,
vetch, wintergreen and soapberry. Soils are well drained and there was
no to poor ground visibility at the time of assessment owing to dense
vegetation cover. Soils consist of a 3cm litter mat over 12cm of greyish
brown (10YR5/2) dry sand, 3cm of very dark grey (10YR3/1) dry sand and
15cm of greyish brown (10YR5/2) dry sand.
No cultural materials or
CMTs were identified.
page 38
Subsurface Test Location #11
High Archaeological Potential
Subsurface test location #11 is 20m NE-SW x 34m NW-SE in size, located
on an upper bank of Lynx Creek at 10V 0557931E 6223970N ±2.5m (plate
14).
A total of one hundred thirty-eight (138) subsurface tests were
conducted along with pedestrian transects spaced at 1m to 2m intervals.
Forest cover consists of white poplar and white spruce. Ground cover is
comprised of grasses, prickly rose, bunchberry, kinnikinnick, mosses,
peavine, fireweed, cow parsnip and soapberry. Soils are moderately well
drained and there was no ground visibility at the time of assessment owing
to dense vegetation cover. Soils consist of a 5cm litter mat over 3cm of
very dark grey (10YR3/1) dry very fine silt, 17cm of yellowish brown
(10YR5/6) dry very fine silt and 10cm of light grey (10YR7/2) dry fine silt.
Archaeological Site HaRm-19 was identified during the assessment
of STL #11.
A detailed description of the site, artifacts analysis
results and recommendations for impact mitigation is included in
section 4.4 data recovery.
Subsurface Test Location #12
High Archaeological Potential
Subsurface test location #12 is 12m N-S x 30m E-W in size, located on
the north bank of Lynx Creek at 10V 0557955E 6223890N ±5m. A total of
thirty-one (31) subsurface tests were conducted along with pedestrian
transects spaced at 1m to 2m intervals. Forest cover consists of white
poplar and cottonwood. Ground cover is comprised of grasses, prickly
rose, fireweed, peavine and highbush cranberry. Soils are well drained
and there was no ground visibility at the time of assessment owing to
dense vegetation cover. Soils consist of a 3cm litter mat over 3cm of very
dark brown (10YR2/2) dry very fine silt, 16cm of very dark greyish brown
page 39
(10YR3/2) dry very fine silt and 9cm of dark greyish brown (10YR4/2) dry
fine sand. No cultural materials or CMTs were identified.
Subsurface Test Location #13
High Archaeological Potential
Subsurface test location #13 is 15m N-S x 10m E-W in size, located on a
bank above Lynx creek at 10V 0557819E 6223796N ±4m. A total of ten
(10) subsurface tests were conducted along with pedestrian transects
spaced at 1m to 2m intervals. Forest cover consists of white poplar and
white spruce. Ground cover is comprised of prickly rose, fireweed, colt’s
foot, strawberry, grasses, bunchberry and vetch. Soils are well drained
and there was no ground visibility at the time of assessment owing to
dense vegetation cover. Soils consist of a 4cm litter mat over 1cm of very
dark grey (10YR3/1) dry silt and 29cm of yellowish brown (10YR5/6) dry
silt. No cultural materials or CMTs were identified.
Subsurface Test Location #14
Moderate Archaeological Potential
Subsurface test location #14 is 8m N-S x 45m E-W in size, located on a
break-in-slope at 10V 0557946E 6223797N ±4m. A total of thirty-two (32)
subsurface tests were conducted along with pedestrian transects spaced
at 1m to 2m intervals. There is no forest cover present. Ground cover is
comprised of grasses and mosses. Soils are moderately well drained and
there was no ground visibility at the time of assessment owing to dense
vegetation cover. Soils consist of a 5cm litter mat 30cm of light grey
(10YR6/2) dry clayey silt. No cultural materials or CMTs were identified.
Subsurface Test Location #15
Moderate Archaeological Potential
Subsurface test location #15 is 5m N-S x 30m E-W in size, located on a
bank of a drainage at 10V 0557943E 6223240N ±3m (plate 8). A total of
page 40
twenty (20) subsurface tests were conducted along with pedestrian
transects spaced at 1m to 2m intervals. Forest cover consists of white
poplar and white spruce. Ground cover is comprised of grasses, prickly
rose and bedstraw. Soils are moderately well drained and soil visibility
ranged from none to poor owing to dense vegetation cover. Soils consist
of a 4cm litter mat over 11cm of pale yellow (2.5YR7/3) dry silt and 19cm
of mottled light olive brown (2.5YR5/4) dry silt. No cultural materials or
CMTs were identified.
Subsurface Test Location #16
Moderate Archaeological Potential
Subsurface test location #16 is 7m N-S x 22m E-W in size, located on a
bank of a seasonal drainage at 10V 0557944E 6223181N ±3m. A total of
fifteen (15) subsurface tests were conducted along with pedestrian
transects spaced at 1m to 2m intervals. Forest cover consists of white
spruce. Ground cover is comprised of grasses. Soils are well drained and
soil visibility ranged from none to poor owing to dense vegetation cover.
Soils consist of a 4cm litter mat over 2cm of very dark grey (10YR3/1) dry
silty loam, 7cm of pale brown (10YR6/3) dry silt and 21cm of light olive
brown (2.5YR5/6) dry silt. No cultural materials or CMTs were identified.
Pipeline Right-of-Way from KP 8+957 to KP 10+329 and Associated
Workspaces
The proposed Project from KP 8+957 to KP 10+329 continues southeast through
agricultural lands crossing the Beryl Prairie Road at 9+076.
The terrain is
featureless and soils are moderately well drained. Ground cover is comprised of
grasses, hay crop and alfalfa. Previous disturbance is attributed to agricultural,
road construction and oil and gas development activities (plate 16). There was
no ground visibility at the time of the assessment owing to dense vegetation
cover. No areas of moderate to very high archaeological potential were identified
within or adjacent to this portion of the proposed Project.
page 41
Pipeline Right-of-Way from KP 10+329 to KP 13+132 and Associated
Workspaces and Log Decks
The proposed Project from KP 10+329 to KP 13+132 runs south through
agricultural lands within featureless (plate 17), moderately well drained terrain
towards Brenot Creek. Towards Brenot Creek, the terrain becomes undulating to
rugged with gentle to moderate northern aspect slopes (plate 20). These areas
are partially forested with a forest cover consisting of white poplar, white spruce
and willow. Ground cover is comprised of grasses, cow parsnip, yarrow, prickly
rose, bunchberry, colt’s foot, strawberry, Saskatoon berry, highbush cranberry,
soapberry, vetch, fireweed, gooseberry, peavine, alfalfa, clover and wild rhubarb.
Previous disturbance is attributed to agricultural and oil and gas development
activities and a road allowance (plate 18). There was no ground visibility at the
time of the assessment owing to dense vegetation cover. Two areas of high
archaeological potential were identified (subsurface test locations #17 - #18).
Three areas of moderate to very high archaeological potential were identified
adjacent to the proposed Project and were not subject to subsurface testing
(figure 7):
1) 20m x 100m north-south trending ridge @ UTM 10V 0558218E 6220342N
2) 20m x 30m upper bank of Brenot Creek @ UTM 10V 0558296E
6218719N
3) 10m x 50m north bank of Brenot Creek @ UTM 10V 0558308E 6218678N
Adherence to development plans is recommended to avoid impacting potential
archaeological resources in these areas. Further archaeological assessment will
be required should development plans be revised to encompass these areas.
Subsurface Test Location #17
High Archaeological Potential
Subsurface test location #17 is 54m N-S x 58m E-W in size, located on
north bank of Brenot Creek at 10V 0558232E 6218689N ±2.9m (plate 19).
page 42
A total of five hundred twenty-five (525) subsurface tests and one 1m x 1m
evaluative unit were conducted along with pedestrian transects spaced at
1m to 2m intervals. Forest cover consists of white poplar, willow and
alder. Ground cover is comprised of grasses, prickly rose, strawberry,
vetch, soapberry, Saskatoon berry and peavine. Soils are imperfectly to
moderately well drained. There was no ground visibility at the time of the
assessment owing to dense vegetation cover. Soils consist of a 9cm litter
mat over 30cm of brown (10YR5/3) dry silty clay.
Archaeological Site HaRm-18 was identified during the assessment
of STL #17.
A detailed description of the site, artifacts analysis
results and recommendations for impact mitigation is included in
section 4.4 data recovery.
Subsurface Test Location #18
High Archaeological Potential
Subsurface test location #18 is 7m N-S x 12m E-W in size, located on
south bank of Brenot Creek at 10V 0558232E 6218506N ±3m. A total of
twelve (12) subsurface tests were conducted along with pedestrian
transects spaced at 1m to 2m intervals. Forest cover consists of white
poplar and willow. Ground cover is comprised of grasses, prickly rose,
clover, strawberry, vetch, peavine and alfalfa.
Soils are imperfectly
drained. There was no ground visibility at the time of the assessment
owing to dense vegetation cover. Soils consist of a 1cm litter mat over
30cm of dark greyish brown (10YR4/2) wet clay. No cultural materials or
CMTs were identified.
Pipeline Right-of-Way from KP 13+132 to KP 16+328 and Associated
Workspaces and Log Deck
The proposed Project from KP 13+132 to KP 16+328 continues south through
agricultural lands crossing a gully ~14+600. The terrain is generally featureless
page 43
with and exhibits imperfectly drained soils (plate 21). Forest cover consists of
white poplar, white spruce and willow. Ground cover is comprised of grasses,
yarrow, prickly rose, bunchberry, kinnikinnick, peavine, mushrooms, colt’s foot,
ferns, fireweed and clover. Previous disturbance is attributed to agricultural and
oil and gas development activities (plate 23). There was no ground visibility at
the time of the assessment owing to dense vegetation cover. Two areas of
moderate archaeological potential were identified (subsurface test locations #19 #20).
Two areas of moderate archaeological potential were identified adjacent to the
proposed Project and were not subject to subsurface testing (figure 8):
1) 5m x 30m edge of gulley @ UTM 10V 0558310E 6216951N
2) 10m x 35m edge above gulley @ UTM 10V 0558323E 6216877N
Adherence to development plans is recommended to avoid impacting potential
archaeological resources in these areas. Further archaeological assessment will
be required should development plans be revised to encompass these areas.
Subsurface Test Location #19
Moderate Archaeological Potential
Subsurface test location #19 is 10m NE-SW x 45m NW-SE in size, located
on the south edge of a northwest-southeast trending gulley at 10V
0558300E 6216959N ±3 (plate 22). A total of twenty-nine (29) subsurface
tests were conducted along with pedestrian transects spaced at 1m to 2m
intervals. Forest cover consists of white poplar and willow. Ground cover
is comprised of kinnikinnick, prickly rose, peavine and bunchberry. Soils
are imperfectly drained. There was no ground visibility at the time of the
assessment owing to dense vegetation cover. Soils consist of a 5cm litter
mat over 3cm of dark yellowish brown (10YR4/4) wet fine grained silty clay
and 27cm of yellowish brown (10YR5/6) wet medium grained silty clay. No
cultural materials or CMTs were identified.
page 44
Subsurface Test Location #20
Moderate Archaeological Potential
Subsurface test location #20 is 8m N-S x 45m E-W in size, located on the
north edge of a northwest-southeast trending gulley at 10V 0558301E
6216861N ±2.6m.
A total of thirty-three (33) subsurface tests were
conducted along with pedestrian transects spaced at 1m to 2m intervals.
Forest cover consists of white poplar and white spruce. Ground cover is
comprised of peavine, colt’s foot, mushrooms, prickly rose and
bunchberry. Soils are imperfectly drained. There was no ground visibility
at the time of the assessment owing to dense vegetation cover. Soils
consist of a 3cm litter mat over 28cm of brown (10YR4/3) wet medium
grained silty clay and 2cm of dark grey (2.5YR4/1) wet coarse grained
clay. No cultural materials or CMTs were identified.
Pipeline Right-of-Way from KP 16+328 to KP 18+778 and Associated
Workspaces
The proposed Project from KP 16+328 to KP 18+778 travels south/southwest
across partially forested agricultural lands, crosses Portage Creek and then
continues towards a class S6 drainage adjacent to a cutblock.
The terrain
ranges from featureless to steeply sloping. Soils are poorly to moderately well
drained (plates 24 & 25). Forest cover consists of white poplar, white spruce,
pine, birch, diamond willow and willow. Ground cover is comprised of grasses,
mosses, yarrow, prickly rose, bunchberry, kinnikinnick, colt’s foot, highbush
cranberry, fireweed, clover, peavine, ferns, horsetail, mushrooms and bluebell.
Previous disturbance is attributed to agricultural and oil and gas development
activities. There was no ground visibility at the time of the assessment owing to
dense vegetation cover. Four areas of moderate to high archaeological potential
were identified (subsurface test locations #21 - #24).
Two areas of moderate archaeological potential were identified adjacent to the
proposed Project and were not subject to subsurface testing (figure 9):
page 45
1) 9m x undetermined upper south bank of a drainage @ UTM 10V
0558580E 6212756N
2) 12m x undetermined upper north bank of a drainage @ UTM 10V
0558577E 6212795N
Adherence to development plans is recommended to avoid impacting potential
archaeological resources in these areas. Further archaeological assessment will
be required should development plans be revised to encompass these areas.
Subsurface Test Location #21
High Archaeological Potential
Subsurface test location #21 is 12m N-S x 15m E-W in size, located on
north bank of a drainage at 10V 0558546E 6212797N ±5m. A total of
seventeen (17) subsurface tests were conducted along with pedestrian
transects spaced at 1m to 2m intervals. Forest cover consists of white
poplar and white spruce. Ground cover is comprised of grasses, prickly
rose, bunchberry, colt’s foot, peavine, fireweed and highbush cranberry.
Soils are moderately well drained. There was no ground visibility at the
time of the assessment owing to dense vegetation cover. Soils consist of
a 1cm litter mat over 1cm of black (10YR2/1) dry loam, 5cm of light grey
(10YR7/1) dry silty sand and 24cm of brownish yellow (10YR5/8) dry silty
sand. No cultural materials or CMTs were identified.
Subsurface Test Location #22
Moderate Archaeological Potential
Subsurface test location #22 is 10m N-S x 30m E-W in size, located on
north bank of a drainage at 10V 0558530E 6212780N ±2.3m (plate 26). A
total of twenty-three (23) subsurface tests were conducted along with
pedestrian transects spaced at 1m to 2m intervals. Forest cover consists
of white poplar, white spruce and willow. Ground cover is comprised of
grasses, prickly rose, bunchberry, colt’s foot, peavine and mushrooms.
Soils are imperfectly drained. There was no ground visibility at the time of
page 46
the assessment owing to dense vegetation cover. Soils consist of a 4cm
litter mat over 8cm of brown (10YR5/3) wet medium grained silty sand and
22cm of dark yellowish brown (10YR4/4) wet medium grained silty sand.
No cultural materials or CMTs were identified.
Subsurface Test Location #23
High Archaeological Potential
Subsurface test location #23 is 9m N-S x 15m E-W in size, located on
south bank of a drainage at 10V 0558539E 6212693N ±5m. A total of
fourteen (14) subsurface tests were conducted along with pedestrian
transects spaced at 1m to 2m intervals. Forest cover consists of white
poplar and white spruce. Ground cover is comprised of grasses, prickly
rose, bunchberry, colt’s foot, peavine, highbush cranberry and fireweed.
Soils are imperfectly drained. There was no ground visibility at the time of
the assessment owing to dense vegetation cover. Soils consist of a 1cm
litter mat over 3cm of light grey (10YR7/1) dry silty sand, 12cm of
brownish yellow (10YR6/8) silty sand and 15cm of brownish yellow
(10YR6/6) dry silty sand. No cultural materials or CMTs were identified.
Subsurface Test Location #24
Moderate Archaeological Potential
Subsurface test location #24 is 8m N-S x 30m E-W in size, located on
south bank of a seasonal drainage at 10V 0558532E 6212671N ±2.8m. A
total of fifteen (15) subsurface tests were conducted along with pedestrian
transects spaced at 1m to 2m intervals. Forest cover consists of pine,
white spruce, white poplar and willow. Ground cover is comprised of colt’s
foot, yarrow, bunchberry, peavine, highbush cranberry and grasses. Soils
are imperfectly drained. There was no ground visibility at the time of the
assessment owing to dense vegetation cover. Soils consist of a 8cm litter
mat over 5cm of greyish brown (10YR5/2) wet medium grained silty sand
page 47
and 25cm of dark yellowish brown (10YR4/4) wet medium grained silty
sand. No cultural materials or CMTs were identified.
Pipeline Right-of-Way from KP 18+778 to KP 20+344 and Associated
Workspaces and Log Decks
The proposed Project from KP 18+778 to KP 20+344 continues south for ~200m
and then turns southwest, travelling through a cutblock and ending at Bullhead
Mountain Road.
The terrain is featureless to undulating with imperfectly to
moderately well drained soils. Forest cover consists of white and black poplar,
white spruce, fir, birch, alder and willow. Ground cover is comprised of grasses,
mosses, prickly rose, bunchberry, colt’s foot, strawberry, raspberry, blueberry,
fireweed, soapberry, horsetail, vetch, gooseberry, peavine, sarsaparilla, freckle
pelt and highbush cranberry. Previous disturbance is attributed to forestry, oil
and gas and geophysical exploration activities. There was no ground visibility at
the time of the assessment owing to ~40cm of snow cover (plate 27). No areas
of moderate to very high archaeological potential were identified within the
proposed pipeline right of way.
One area of moderate archaeological potential was identified adjacent to the
proposed Project and was not subject to subsurface testing (figure 9):
1) 10m x 30m ridge above a low-lying saturated wet area @ UTM 10V
0558369E 6211470N
Adherence to development plans is recommended to avoid impacting potential
archaeological resources in this area. Further archaeological assessment will be
required should development plans be revised to encompass this area.
Pipeline Right-of-Way from KP 20+344 to KP 23+039 and Associated
Workspaces and Log Decks
The proposed Project from KP 20+344 to KP 23+039 continues southwest from
Bullhead Mountain Road through a cutblock, crosses the Portage Mountain
Highway and then crosses through a second cutblock. The terrain ranges from
page 48
featureless to undulating, with imperfectly to moderately well drained soils.
Forest cover consists of pine, white and black poplar, white spruce, birch and
willow (plate 28). Ground cover is comprised of grasses, mosses, lichens, prickly
rose, bunchberry, lichens, kinnikinnick, highbush cranberry, fireweed, soapberry,
toad’s pelt and huckleberry. Previous disturbance is attributed to geophysical
exploration activities, road construction, forestry and oil and gas development
activities. There was no ground visibility at the time of the assessment in April
owing to ~40 - 60cm of snow cover and dense surface vegetation in September.
Seven areas of moderate archaeological potential were identified (subsurface
test locations #25 - #31).
Eight areas of moderate to high archaeological potential were identified adjacent
to the proposed Project and were not subject to subsurface testing (figures 9 10):
1) 10m x 30m ridge above a low-lying saturated wet area @ UTM 10V
0558369E 6211470N
2) 15m x 15m knoll @ UTM 10V 0558257E 6210876N
3) 10m x 40m ridge @ UTM 10V 0558152E 6210541N
4) 5m x 40m ridge @ UTM 10V 0557965E 6209742N
5) 10m x 50m ridge @ UTM 10V 0557930E 6209640N
6) 7m x 15m knoll @ UTM 10V 0557851E 6209186N
7) 10m x 100m bench @ UTM 10V 0557822E 6208888N
8) 5m x 25m bench @ UTM 10V 0557707E 6208521N
Adherence to development plans is recommended to avoid impacting potential
archaeological resources in these areas. Further archaeological assessment will
be required should development plans be revised to encompass these areas.
Subsurface Test Location #25
Moderate Archaeological Potential
Subsurface test location #25 is 10m N-S x 40m E-W in size, located on an
east-west trending ridge at 10V 0558221E 6210917N ±3m (plate 29). A
page 49
total of twelve (12) frozen subsurface tests were conducted along with
pedestrian transects spaced at 1m to 2m intervals. Forest cover consists
of white and black poplar and willow.
Ground cover is comprised of
mosses and bunchberry. Soils are moderately well drained. There was
no ground visibility at the time of the assessment owing to ~60cm of snow
cover. Soils consist of a 3cm litter mat over 30cm of brown (10YR5/3)
brown clayey sand. No cultural materials or CMTs were identified.
Subsurface Test Location #26
Moderate Archaeological Potential
Subsurface test location #26 is 5m E-W x 14m N-S in size, located on
topographic high at 10V 0558161E 6210595N ±1.5m. A total of ten (10)
subsurface tests were conducted along with pedestrian transects spaced
at 1m to 2m intervals. Forest cover consists of pine, white spruce and
white poplar.
Ground cover is comprised of prickly rose, highbush
cranberry, kinnikinnick, fireweed, soapberry, mosses, toad’s pelt and
bunchberry. Soils are moderately well drained. There was no ground
visibility at the time of the assessment owing to dense vegetation cover.
Soils consist of a 7cm litter mat over 5cm of light grey (10YR7/2) sand and
25cm of yellowish brown (10YR5/4) sand. No cultural materials or CMTs
were identified.
Subsurface Test Location #27
Moderate Archaeological Potential
Subsurface test location #27 is 30m N-S x 30m E-W in size, located on a
north-south trending terrace at 10V 0558093E 6210504N ±3m. A total of
twenty-two (22) frozen subsurface tests were conducted along with
pedestrian transects spaced at 1m to 2m intervals. STL #27 is located
within a logged cut block.
Forest cover consists of immature pine.
Ground cover is comprised of mosses and bunchberry.
Soils are
moderately well drained. There was no ground visibility at the time of the
page 50
assessment owing to ~40cm of snow cover. Soils consist of a 10cm litter
mat over 20cm of pale brown (10YR6/3) clayey sand and 10cm of
(10YR5/4) yellowish brown clayey sand. No cultural materials or CMTs
were identified.
Subsurface Test Location #28
Moderate Archaeological Potential
Subsurface test location #28 is 10m N-S x 10m E-W in size, located on a
knoll at 10V 0557900E 6209670N ±3m.
A total of twelve (12) frozen
subsurface tests were conducted along with pedestrian transects spaced
at 1m to 2m intervals. Forest cover consists of white poplar and white
spruce. Ground cover is comprised of mosses, prickly rose, huckleberry
and bunchberry. Soils are moderately well drained. There was no ground
visibility at the time of the assessment owing to ~40cm of snow cover.
Soils consist of 4cm of black (10YR2/1) loam over 16cm of (7.5YR3/4)
pale brown sandy silt and 5cm of strong brown (7.5YR4/6) sandy silt. No
cultural materials or CMTs were identified.
Subsurface Test Location #29
Moderate Archaeological Potential
Subsurface test location #29 is 6m NE-SW x 11m NW-SE in size, located
on a portion of a ridge at 10V 0557911E 6209643N ±4.3m. A total of ten
(10) subsurface tests were conducted along with pedestrian transects
spaced at 1m to 2m intervals. Forest cover consists of white spruce and
white poplar. Ground cover is comprised of prickly rose, grasses and
mosses. Soils are imperfectly drained. There was no ground visibility at
the time of the assessment owing to dense vegetation cover. Soils consist
of a 3cm litter mat over 30cm of tan brown (10YR) sandy silt. No cultural
materials or CMTs were identified.
page 51
Subsurface Test Location #30
Moderate Archaeological Potential
Subsurface test location #30 is 10m N-S x 100m E-W in size, located on a
bench at 10V 0557754E 6208890N ±4m (plate 30). A total of eighteen
(18) frozen subsurface tests were conducted along with pedestrian
transects spaced at 1m to 2m intervals. Forest cover consists of white
poplar, white spruce, pine, birch and willow. Ground cover is comprised of
mosses, lichens, kinnikinnick, highbush cranberry and bunchberry. Soils
are moderately well drained. There was no ground visibility at the time of
the assessment owing to ~45cm of snow cover. Soils consist of a 10cm of
litter mat over 30cm of dark yellowish brown (10YR4/6) clayey sand. No
cultural materials or CMTs were identified.
Subsurface Test Location #31
Moderate Archaeological Potential
Subsurface test location #31 is 8m N-S x 15m E-W in size, located on a
knoll at 10V 0557709E 6208669N ±4m. A total of sixteen (16) frozen
subsurface tests were conducted along with pedestrian transects spaced
at 1m to 2m intervals. Forest cover consists of white poplar and white
spruce. Ground cover is comprised of mosses, lichens, prickly rose and
bunchberry. Soils are moderately well drained.
There was no ground
visibility at the time of the assessment owing to ~30cm of snow cover.
Soils consist of an 8cm of litter mat over 30cm of dark yellowish brown
(10YR4/6) clayey sand. No cultural materials or CMTs were identified.
Pipeline Right-of-Way from KP 23+039 to KP 24+301 and Associated
Workspaces
The proposed Project from KP 23+039 to KP 24+301 continues southwest
across a hydro powerline right of way and pipeline right of way to the terminus
page 52
point. The terrain is featureless to undulating with moderately well drained soils.
Forest cover consists of pine, white and black poplar, white spruce, birch and
willow (plate 31). Ground cover is comprised of bunchberry, grasses, mosses,
blueberry, fireweed, kinnikinnick, prickly rose, huckleberry, juniper, highbush
cranberry, lichens and cow parsnip. Previous disturbance is attributed to oil and
gas development and hydro activities. There was no ground visibility at the time
of the assessment owing to ~30cm of snow cover in April and dense vegetation
cover in September. Seven areas of moderate to high archaeological potential
were identified (subsurface test locations #32 - #38).
One area of high archaeological potential was identified adjacent to the proposed
Project and was not subject to subsurface testing (figure 10):
1) 15m x 100m bench @ UTM 10V 0557723E 6208402N
Adherence to development plans is recommended to avoid impacting potential
archaeological resources in this area. Further archaeological assessment will be
required should development plans be revised to encompass this area.
Subsurface Test Location #32
High Archaeological Potential
Subsurface test location #32 is 15m N-S x 100m E-W in size, located on
an east-west trending bench at 10V 0557670E 6208402N ±4m. A total of
ten (10) frozen subsurface tests were conducted along with pedestrian
transects spaced at 1m to 2m intervals. Forest cover consists of white
poplar, white spruce and willow. Ground cover is comprised of mosses,
prickly rose and bunchberry. Soils are moderately well drained. There
was no ground visibility at the time of the assessment owing to ~30cm of
snow cover. Soils consist of a 6cm of litter mat over 5cm of dark grey
(10YR3/3) sandy loam and 25cm of yellowish brown (10YR4/6) sandy silt.
No cultural materials or CMTs were identified.
page 53
Subsurface Test Location #33
Moderate Archaeological Potential
Subsurface test location #33 is 8m N-S x 50m E-W in size, located on the
edge of a break at 10V 0557584E 6208061N ±4m. A total of thirty (30)
subsurface tests were conducted along with pedestrian transects spaced
at 1m to 2m intervals. Forest cover consists of white poplar, white spruce
and scattered pine. Ground cover is comprised of mosses, prickly rose
and grasses. Soils are imperfectly drained. There was no ground visibility
at the time of the assessment owing to dense vegetation cover. Soils
consist of a 4cm of litter mat over 15cm of tan (10YR) sandy silt and 15cm
of reddish yellow (10YR) sandy silt. No cultural materials or CMTs were
identified.
Subsurface Test Location #34
Moderate Archaeological Potential
Subsurface test location #34 is 10m N-S x 100m E-W in size, located on
an east-west trending ridge at 10V 0557573E 6208062N ±4m. A total of
twenty-three (23) frozen subsurface tests were conducted along with
pedestrian transects spaced at 1m to 2m intervals. Forest cover consists
of white poplar, white spruce and pine. Ground cover is comprised of
mosses and prickly rose. Soils are moderately well drained. There was
no ground visibility at the time of the assessment owing to ~40cm of snow
cover. Soils consist of a 2cm of litter mat over 10cm of very dark grey
(10YR3/1) loamy sand and 20cm of yellowish brown (10YR5/6) clayey
sand. No cultural materials or CMTs were identified.
Subsurface Test Location #35
Moderate Archaeological Potential
page 54
Subsurface test location #35 is 7m N-S x 20m E-W in size, located on a
low ridge at 10V 0557588E 6208011N ±4m.
A total of twenty (20)
subsurface tests were conducted along with pedestrian transects spaced
at 1m to 2m intervals. Forest cover consists of white poplar, white spruce,
willow and scattered pine. Ground cover is comprised of mosses, prickly
rose, bunchberry and grasses. Soils are imperfectly drained. There was
no ground visibility at the time of the assessment owing to dense
vegetation cover. Soils consist of a 3cm of litter mat over 25cm of tan
(10YR) sandy silt and 5cm of yellow (10YR) sandy silt.
No cultural
materials or CMTs were identified.
Subsurface Test Location #36
Moderate Archaeological Potential
Subsurface test location #36 is 8m N-S x 12m E-W in size, located on a
knoll at 10V 0557659E 6208003N ±5m. A total of ten (10) subsurface
tests were conducted along with pedestrian transects spaced at 1m to 2m
intervals. Forest cover consists of white poplar, white spruce and willow.
Ground cover is comprised of mosses, prickly rose, bunchberry and
grasses. Soils are imperfectly drained. There was no ground visibility at
the time of the assessment owing to dense vegetation cover. Soils consist
of a 3cm of litter mat over 30cm of tan brown (10YR) sandy silt. No
cultural materials or CMTs were identified.
Subsurface Test Location #37
High Archaeological Potential
Subsurface test location #37 is 15m N-S x 150m E-W in size, located on
an east-west trending bench at 10V 0557530E 6207801 ±2m. A total of
twenty-three (23) frozen subsurface tests were conducted along with
pedestrian transects spaced at 1m to 2m intervals. Forest cover consists
of white poplar, white spruce and pine. Ground cover is comprised of
juniper, prickly rose, bunchberry, mosses and lichens.
Soils are
page 55
moderately well drained. There was no ground visibility at the time of the
assessment owing to ~30cm of snow cover. Soils consist of a 4cm of litter
mat over 5cm of very dark brown (10YR2/2) silty loam and 25cm of
yellowish brown (10YR5/8) sandy silt. No cultural materials or CMTs were
identified.
Subsurface Test Location #38
High Archaeological Potential
Subsurface test location #38 is 15m N-S x 150m E-W in size, located on
an east-west trending bench at 10V 0557477E 6207471N ±4m (plate 32).
A total of twenty (20) frozen subsurface tests were conducted along with
pedestrian transects spaces at 1m to 2m intervals. Forest cover consists
of white poplar, white spruce and pine. Ground cover consists of prickly
rose, bunchberry, mosses and lichens. Soils are moderately well drained.
There was no ground visibility at the time of the assessment owing to
~35cm of snow cover. Soils consist of a 4cm of litter mat over 5cm of very
dark brown (10YR2/2) silty loam and 15cm of yellowish brown (10YR5/8)
sandy silt. No cultural materials or CMTs were identified.
Temporary Access within Block I, Units 26 & 27, 94-B-1 (25m x 620m)
The proposed temporary access runs along an unconstructed road allowance
east from the proposed right of way for ~620m, bordering forested Crown lands
on the north side and agricultural lands on the south side. Approximately 150m
of the access from the east end is located within featureless, poorly drained
terrain except at the crossing of Mackie Creek where soils are moderately well
drained and the banks of the creek exhibit archaeological potential (plate 33).
The remaining ~470m of the proposed temporary access is located within
featureless, moderately well drained terrain.
poplar, white spruce and willow.
Forest cover consists of white
Ground cover is comprised of grasses,
kinnikinnick, soapberry, prickly rose, strawberry, colt’s foot, fireweed, vetch,
plantain, yarrow, burdock and clover.
Previous disturbance is attributed to
page 56
agricultural and geophysical exploration activities. There was no ground visibility
at the time of the assessment owing to dense vegetation cover. Three areas of
high archaeological potential were identified (subsurface test locations #39 #41).
Four areas of high archaeological potential were identified adjacent to the
proposed access and were not subject to subsurface testing (figure 5):
1) 10m x undetermined bank of Mackie Creek @ UTM 10V 0557599E
6227163N
2) 10m x undetermined bank of Mackie Creek @ UTM 10V 0557566E
6227163N
3) 10m x undetermined bank of Mackie Creek @ UTM 10V 0557685E
6227070N
4) 10m x undetermined bank of Mackie Creek @ UTM 10V 0557693E
6227084N
5) 10m x undetermined bank of Mackie Creek @ UTM 10V 0557649E
6227098N
Adherence to development plans is recommended to avoid impacting potential
archaeological resources in these areas. Further archaeological assessment will
be required should development plans be revised to encompass these areas.
Subsurface Test Location #39
High Archaeological Potential
Subsurface test location #39 is 10m E-W x 25m N-S in size, located on a
bank overlooking Mackie Creek at 10V 0557546E 6227120N ±2.7m. A
total of twenty-two (22) subsurface tests were conducted along with
pedestrian transects spaced at 1m to 2m intervals. Forest cover consists
of white poplar, white spruce and willow. Ground cover is comprised of
grasses, kinnikinnick, soapberry, strawberry, prickly rose and clover. Soils
are moderately well drained. There was no ground visibility at the time of
the assessment owing to dense vegetation cover. Soils consist of a 4cm
page 57
of litter mat over 5cm of mottled very pale brown (10YR7/3) dry silt and
25cm of mottled yellowish brown (10YR5/6) silty clay.
No cultural
materials or CMTs were identified.
Subsurface Test Location #40
High Archaeological Potential
Subsurface test location #40 is 12m N-S x 75m E-W in size, located on
the lower and upper banks of Mackie Creek at 10V 0557592E 6227145N
and 0557665E 6227089N ±1.4m. A total of sixty (60) subsurface tests
were conducted along with pedestrian transects spaced at 1m to 2m
intervals. Forest cover consists of white poplar and willow. Ground cover
is comprised of grasses, soapberry, prickly rose, fireweed, colt’s foot and
clover. Soils are moderately well drained. There was no ground visibility
at the time of the assessment owing to dense vegetation cover. Soils
consist of a 6cm of litter mat over 28cm of dark olive brown (2.5YR3/3)
wet silty loam and 2cm of brown (10YR4/3) clay. No cultural materials or
CMTs were identified.
Subsurface Test Location #41
High Archaeological Potential
Subsurface test location #41 is 10m N-S x 40m E-W in size, located on a
bank overlooking Mackie Creek at 10V 0557679E 6227120N ±2m (plate
34). A total of thirty-one (31) subsurface tests were conducted along with
pedestrian transects spaced at 1m to 2m intervals. Forest cover consists
of white spruce and willow.
Ground cover is comprised of grasses,
soapberry, prickly rose, fireweed, colt’s foot, vetch, plantain, yarrow,
burdock and clover. Soils are moderately well drained. There was no
ground visibility at the time of the assessment owing to dense vegetation
cover. Soils consist of a 7cm of litter mat over 8cm of dark yellowish
brown (10YR4/6) dry silt and 23cm of mottled dark brown (10YR3/3) dry
silt. No cultural materials or CMTs were identified.
page 58
Temporary Access within Block I, Units 86 & 87, 94-B-1 (25m x 1376m)
The proposed temporary access runs along an unconstructed road allowance
through agricultural lands and crosses a tributary of Lynx Creek. At this location,
the creek does not have well defined banks and has no associated topographic
features exhibiting archaeological potential. The terrain is featureless and soils
are imperfectly to moderately well drained.
Ground cover is comprised of
grasses, mosses, clover, bedstraw, soapberry and strawberry.
Previous
disturbance is attributed to agricultural activities. There was no ground visibility
at the time of the assessment owing to dense vegetation cover. No areas of
moderate to very high archaeological potential were identified within or adjacent
to the proposed temporary access.
Temporary Access within Block H, Units 54 & 55, 94-B-1 (25m x 1406m)
The proposed temporary access runs along an unconstructed road allowance
through agricultural lands and crosses a seasonal drainage. The banks of the
drainage
and
associated
archaeological potential.
topography
were
not
considered
to
exhibit
The terrain is generally featureless and soils are
moderately well to well drained. Forest cover consists of white poplar and willow
(plate 35).
Ground cover is comprised of grasses, prickly rose, horsetail,
peavine, aster and clover.
Previous disturbance is attributed to agricultural
activities. There was no ground visibility at the time of the assessment owing to
dense vegetation cover.
One area of moderate archaeological potential was
identified (subsurface test location #42).
One area of moderate archaeological potential was identified adjacent to the
proposed access and was not subject to subsurface testing (figure 7):
1) 10m x80m north-south trending ridge @ UTM 10V 0558296E 6220726N
Adherence to development plans is recommended to avoid impacting potential
archaeological resources in this area. Further archaeological assessment will be
required should development plans be revised to encompass this area.
page 59
Subsurface Test Location #42
Moderate Archaeological Potential
Subsurface test location #42 is 10m N-S x 40m E-W in size, located on a
topographic high at 10V 0558350E 6220696N ±2.1m (plate 36). A total of
twenty-seven (27) subsurface tests were conducted along with pedestrian
transects spaced at 1m to 2m intervals. Forest cover consists of white
poplar and willow. Ground cover is comprised of grasses, prickly rose,
horsetail, clover, peavine and aster. Soils are well drained. There was no
ground visibility at the time of the assessment owing to dense vegetation
cover.
Soils consist of a 3cm of litter mat over 30cm of light grey
(10YR6/2) silty clay. No cultural materials or CMTs were identified.
Temporary Access within Block A, Units 94 & 95, 94-B-1 (25m x 1232m)
The proposed temporary access runs along an unconstructed road allowance
through agricultural lands exhibiting featureless terrain. Soils were moderately
well to well drained. Forest cover consists of white poplar and willow. Ground
cover is comprised of grasses, prickly rose and hay crop. Previous disturbance is
attributed to agricultural activities (plate 37). There was no ground visibility at the
time of the assessment owing to dense vegetation cover. One area of moderate
archaeological potential was identified (subsurface test location #43).
Subsurface Test Location #43
Moderate Archaeological Potential
Subsurface test location #43 is 13m E-W x 20m N-S in size, located on a
knoll at 10V 0558659E 6215067N ±2.4m (plate 38). A total of twenty (20)
subsurface tests were conducted along with pedestrian transects spaced
at 1m to 2m intervals. There is no forest cover present. Ground cover is
comprised of grasses and hay crop. Soils are well drained. There was no
ground visibility at the time of the assessment owing to dense vegetation
page 60