Submitted to. Canada Building Materials Company 55 Industrial Street, Toronto, Ontario, M4G 3W9 Phone: (416) , Fax: (416)

Transcription

1

2 Archaeological Assessment (Stages 1 & 2) Huxley Pit Part of Lots 29 and 30, Concession 8 Geographic Township of Erin, Town of Hillsburgh, Wellington County, Ontario Submitted to Canada Building Materials Company 55 Industrial Street, Toronto, Ontario, M4G 3W9 Phone: (416) , Fax: (416) and Ontario Ministry of Culture Prepared by ARCHAEOLOGIX INC. 14 Oxford Street West, London, Ontario, N6H 1P9 Tel: (519) Fax: (519) Archaeological License Number P084 CIF # P Corporate Project Number June 2007

3 ii Table of Contents Personnel Acknowledgments Project Summary iii iii iv 1.0 PURPOSE STUDY METHODS Stage 1 Background Research Stage 2 Field Assessment Methods RESULTS Stage 1 Background Research Natural Environment Previously Known Archaeological Resources Potential for Historic Archaeological Sites Stage 2 Field Assessment Results RECOMMENDATIONS 9 References Cited 10 APPENDIX A: Qualifications of Principal Investigator 11

4 iii Personnel Project Coordinator Report Production Field Directors Field/Office Assistants Jim Wilson, M.A. Tracie Carmichael, B.A. Arthur Figura, M.A. Sean Thompson Kurt Kostuk Jessica Figura Kaye-Lynn Boucher Bear John Chris Gervais Kevin Gohm Acknowledgments The completion of this report was facilitated by the assistance of the following individuals: Paul Hartnett, Lands Manager, Canada Building Materials Company; and, Rob Von Bitter, Archaeological Data Coordinator, Archaeology Unit, Heritage Branch, Ontario Ministry of Culture, Toronto.

5 iv Project Summary An archaeological assessment (Stages 1 & 2) was conducted for an approximate 153 acre property located on part of Lots 29 and 30, Concession 8, Geographic Township of Erin, This assessment was undertaken as part of the aggregate pit licensing process, as outlined in Sections and of the provincial standards under the Aggregate Resources Act. The study area consists primarily of ploughed agricultural fields, with lesser areas of woodlot, horse paddocks and overgrown lawn. The study area also has some areas of previous disturbance due to the construction and landscaping surrounding the existing residential and agricultural structures. The areas of ploughed agricultural field were assessed using the pedestrian survey method at a five metre interval. The remaining portions of the subject property that were not previously disturbed were assessed using the standard shovel test pit method at an interval of five metres The Stage 2 field assessment did not result in the identification of any archaeological material. As a result, no further archaeological assessment is recommended. The Ontario Ministry of Culture is asked to review the results presented in this report and inform the Ministry of Natural Resources that the provincial concerns for cultural heritage resources for this project have been met.

6 1.0 PURPOSE Archaeological Assessment (Stages 1 & 2) Huxley Pit Part of Lots 29 and 30, Concession 8 Geographic Township of Erin, Town of Hillsburgh, Wellington County, Ontario An archaeological assessment (Stages 1 & 2) was conducted for an approximate 153 acre property located on part of Lots 29 and 30, Concession 8, Geographic Township of Erin, This assessment was undertaken as part of the aggregate pit licensing process, as outlined in Sections and of the provincial standards under the Aggregate Resources Act. The Stage 2 field assessment was conducted on April 11 th and May 1 st 2007 under archaeological consulting license P084, issued to Adam Hossack by the Ministry of Culture. The Stage 2 field assessment did not result in the identification of any archaeological material. As a result, no further archaeological assessment is recommended. The Ontario Ministry of Culture is asked to review the results presented in this report and inform the Ministry of Natural Resources that the provincial concerns for cultural heritage resources for this project have been met. 2.0 STUDY METHODS 2.1 Stage 1 Background Research In compliance with the provincial regulations set out in the Archaeological Assessment Technical Guidelines (MCzCR 1993), the Stage 1 Archaeological Overview/ Background Study included; a review of the land use history, including pertinent historic maps; and an examination of the National Site Registration Database to determine the presence of known archaeological sites in and around the project area. In addition to the visual evaluation of the subject property, background research was conducted at the Ministry of Culture Office in Toronto, the University of Western Ontario Map Library, and the corporate library of

7 2 Figure 1: Location of the Study Area N W E S. Study Area Meters

8 3 2.2 Stage 2 Field Assessment Methods The study area consists primarily of ploughed agricultural fields, with lesser areas of woodlot, horse paddocks and overgrown lawn. The study area also has some areas of previous disturbance due to the construction and landscaping surrounding the existing residential and agricultural structures. The areas of ploughed agricultural field were assessed using the pedestrian survey method at a five metre interval. In the event that an artifact was encountered during the pedestrian transect survey, study intervals were reduced to one metre within a twenty metre radius of the find. The remaining portions of the subject property that were not previously disturbed were assessed using the standard shovel test pit method at an interval of five metres. The eastern most portion of the study area could not be ploughed due to excessive surface rock which would have damaged farm implements. Permission to test pit this are was sought and received from the Ministry of Culture. Each test pit was excavated to subsoil, and all soil was screened through six-millimetre hardware cloth to facilitate the recovery of artifacts. Each test pit was approximately 30 centimetres in diameter, and was back filled. The Stage 2 field assessment did not result in the identification of any archaeological material. As a result, no further archaeological assessment is recommended. Figure 3 maps the areas assessed and the techniques employed. The weather during the assessment was overcast and cool and there were no conditions detrimental to the recovery of archaeological remains. Permission to enter the property and to remove artifacts was granted by Mr. Paul Hartnett of CBM. 3.0 RESULTS 3.1 Background Research The Natural Environment The study area is situated within the Guelph Drumlin Field physiographic region (Chapman and Putnam 1984: ). The drumlins of this field are not so closely grouped as those of some other areas and there is more intervening low ground, which is largely occupied by fluvial materials. The till in these drumlins is loamy and calcareous, and was derived mostly from dolostone of the Amabel Formation so strategically exposed along the Niagara Cuesta The till throughout is rather stony, with large surface boulders being more numerous in some localities than others The ice which moulded this drumlin field advanced from the southeast and the front of the melting receding glacier was at right angles to this, that is, down slope of the plain. The drainage of the ice front was consequently able to find progressively lower and lower outlets, so that the drumlin field is furrowed by more or less parallel valleys running almost at right angles to the trend of the drumlins themselves. There are also numerous interconnecting cross valleys which occupy deeper depressions between drumlins. Along the sides of these valleys there are broad sand and gravel terraces, while the bottoms are often swampy Incidental to this pattern are the several gravel ridges or eskers which cross the plain in the same general direction as the drumlins. Chapman and Putnam 1984:

9 4 Figure 2: A Portion of the 1877 Illustrated Map of Erin Township W N E S. Study Area

10 5 The soils of the property consist of sandy clay loam with some gravel on the surface. The closest source of potable water is a small branch of the Credit River which runs in between the two southern portions of the study area (Figure 1) Pre-Contact Aboriginal Archaeological Resources & Potential Table 1 provides a general outline of the culture history for Wellington County drawn from Ellis and Ferris (1990). Previous archaeological assessments and research surveys have demonstrated that the area of Erin Township was intensively utilized by precontact Aboriginal peoples however there are no registered pre-contact Aboriginal sites within 2 kilometres of the study area. Due to the lack of a substantial water course in the immediate vicinity of the current study area the potential for pre-contact Aboriginal archaeological resources was judged to be moderate to low. Table 1: Cultural Chronology for Wellington County PERIOD CHARACTERISTICS TIME COMMENTS Early Paleo-Indian Fluted Projectiles B.C. spruce parkland/caribou hunters Late Paleo-Indian Hi-Lo Projectiles B.C. smaller but more numerous sites Early Archaic Kirk and Bifurcate Base Points B.C. slow population growth Middle Archaic Brewerton-like points B.C. environment similar to present Late Archaic Lamoka (narrow points) B.C. increasing site size Broadpoints B.C. large chipped lithic tools Small Points B.C. introduction of bow hunting Terminal Archaic Hind Points B.C. emergence of true cemeteries Early Woodland Meadowood Points B.C. introduction of pottery Middle Woodland Dentate/Pseudo-Scallop Pottery 400 B.C. - A.D.500 increased sedentism Princess Point A.D introduction of corn Late Woodland Early Ontario Iroquoian A.D emergence of agricultural villages Middle Ontario Iroquoian A.D long longhouses (100m +) Late Ontario Iroquoian A.D tribal warfare and displacement Contact Aboriginal Various Algonkian Groups A.D early written records and treaties Historic Euro-Canadian A.D present European settlement Potential for Historic Archaeological Sites The historic map of Erin Township in the H. R. Page Illustrated Historical Atlas of Wellington County lists the owner of the north half of Lot 30 as A. White and the owners of the south half of Lot 30 as J. Geer and T. Huxley. The owner of Lot 29 is also listed as T. Huxley (Figure 2). One historical structure is indicated in A. White s half of Lot 30. Due to the close proximity of the study area to the historic town of Hillsburgh, the historic archaeological potential of the study area was judged to be moderate to high. 3.2 Stage 2 Field Assessment results The Stage 2 field assessment did not result in the identification of any archaeological material. As a result, no further archaeological assessment is recommended.

11 6

12 7 Figure 4: Stage 2 Survey Conditions, Area of Pedestrian Assessment Figure 5: Stage 2 Survey Conditions, Area of Test Pit Assessment

13 8 Figure 6: Stage 2 Survey Conditions, Area of Test Pit Assessment Figure 7: Stage 2 Survey Conditions, Area of Previous Disturbance, Not Assessed

14 9 4.0 RECOMMENDATIONS An archaeological assessment (Stages 1 & 2) was conducted for an approximate 153 acre property located on part of Lots 29 and 30, Geographic Township of Erin, Town of Hillsburgh, Wellington County, Ontario. This assessment was undertaken as part of the aggregate pit licensing process, as outlined in Sections and of the provincial standards under the Aggregate Resources Act. The Stage 2 field assessment did not result in the identification of any archaeological material. As a result, no further archaeological assessment is recommended. Should deeply buried archaeological material be found on the property during excavation activities, the Ministry of Culture should be notified immediately (416) In the event that human remains are encountered during excavation, the proponent should immediately contact both the Ministry of Culture and the Registrar or Deputy Registrar of the Cemeteries Regulation Unit of the Ministry of Consumer and Commercial Relations, (416) The Ontario Ministry of Culture is asked to review the results presented in this report and inform the Ministry of Natural Resources that the provincial concerns for cultural heritage resources for this project have been met. Submitted by Jim Wilson M.A., Professional Archaeology Licence P-001

15 10 References Cited Chapman, Lyman John and Donald F. Putnam 1984 The Physiography of Southern Ontario (Third Edition). Ontario Geological Survey Special Volume 2. Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources, Toronto. Ellis, Chris J. and Neal Ferris (editors) 1990 The Archaeology of Southern Ontario to A.D Occasional Publication of the London Chapter, Ontario Archaeological Society, Number 5. Government of Canada 1995 Topographic Map Sheet 40 P/16 (Edition 5). Surveys and Mapping Branch, Department of Energy, Mines and Resources, Ottawa. Government of Ontario 1993 Archaeological Assessment Technical Guidelines. Archaeology & Heritage Planning Unit, Cultural Programs Branch, Ministry of Culture, Tourism and Recreation. n.d. Archaeological Data Base Files. Heritage Branch, Ministry of Culture, Toronto. Walker & Miles 1877 Illustrated Historical Atlas of the County of Wellington, Ontario.

16 11 Appendix A: Qualifications of Principal Investigator

17 12 Jim Wilson, M.A. President, Education History: 1988 Honours B.A., University of Western Ontario, London, Ontario Canada. Department of Anthropology Master's Degree, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario Canada. Department of Anthropology. University Lecturing Positions: 1993 McMaster University: 1994 McMaster University: 1995 University of Western Ontario: Archaeological Experience: President, Principle Field Investigator, Mayer Heritage Consultants Inc. 94/95 City of London Archaeologist Planner Principle Field Investigator, Mayer Heritage Consultants Inc Ontario Heritage Foundation Research: Research Assistant on the Middle Sydenham River Survey. McMaster University: Project Director for the Thames River Middle Woodland Settlement/Subsistence Project. Wilson Heritage Services: Project Director, Aldborough Township Archaeological Resource Assessment McMaster University: Project Director for the Thames River Middle Woodland Settlement/Subsistence Project Mayer, Poulton and Associates: Field Director for the Edenridge Subdivision Assessment. Archaeological Research Associates: Field Assistant.

18 McMaster University: Field Assistant on the Mixteca Alta Archaeological Survey; Oaxaca, Mexico McMaster University: Project Director of the Boresma Site excavations. Mayer, Poulton and Associates. Field Assistant on the Rosedale Subdivision Assessment Mayer, Pihl and Poulton: Field Assistant for the Ontario Hydro Longwoods Transformer Station Project. Mayer, Pihl and Poulton: Assistant on the Union Gas Hamilton to Niagara Falls pipeline survey and subsequent mitigations. McMaster University: Field Assistant for the Harvie Site mitigation, a 19th century pioneer cemetery Mayer, Pihl and Poulton: Field Assistant on the Vaughn Master Plan Survey. Museum of Indian Archaeology: Field Assistant for the Matthew's Wood's Project. Mayer, Pihl and Poulton: Field Assistant on the Ontario Hydro Longwoods Transformer Station Assessment, Phase One. University of Western Ontario Field School Museum of Indian Archaeology: Field Assistant at the Crawford Lake Site. Publications: 1988 The Snake Creek Burial. KEWA 88(7):2-6. (With Dr. M.W. Spence) A Bad Analogy?: Northern Algonquian Models and the Middle Woodland Occupations of Southwestern Ontario. KEWA: 91(6): The Kittmer Site: A Middle Woodland Camp on the Upper Thames Drainage. KEWA: 91(6): Archaeological Investigations at the Duncan McGugan Middle Woodland Site. Annual Archaeological Review of Ontario, (With Dr. C. Ellis) The Preliminary Investigations at the Pocock Site and the Meadowood Phase along the Middle Thames Drainage. KEWA: 93(3):2-21.

19 The Rice Lake Phase Reconsidered. KEWA: 93(6): The Racher Site (AfHi-141): More Evidence Concerning Large Riverine Middle Woodland Sites Along the Middle Thames River Drainage. KEWA: 94(4): Summary of an On-Going Archaeological Assessment, Lt.-Colonel John Butler Homestead (AgGu-66), Niagara-on-the-Lake. In Arch Notes Vol.2(5):6-14. (With R.G. Mayer and S. Gouglas) Cherry Hill: A Kirk Corner-Notched Site at Fonthill, Ontario. KEWA : 97(7):2-11. (With B. Wimmer and A. Figura) Osteological Analysis of an Early Woodland Burial: Mo Pierce site, South bay Marina Complex, Township of Pelee, Essex County, Ontario (AnHq-20). Arch Notes: 3(3): The Pocock Site: Exploring the Early Woodland/Middle Woodland Transition in Southwestern Ontario. KEWA: 99(1): The Greg Tarry Site (AeHf-38), A Small Uren Sub-Stage Camp in Aylmer, Ontario. KEWA: 99(3): The Moyer s Flat Site Pot. KEWA: 00(7): The Fregg Site (AhGx-390), A Small Point Late Archaic Occupation in Ancaster. KEWA: 02(8):1-16 Presentations: 1989 An Introduction to the Boresma Site: A Middle Woodland Occupation in the Middle Thames River Drainage. At: The Ontario Archaeological Society Annual Meeting; London Ontario The Middle Woodland Period in the Thames River Drainage. For: McMaster Anthropology Society The 1989 Excavations at the Boresma Site: A Middle Woodland Basecamp. For: London Chapter of the Ontario Archaeological Society The Prehistory of the Delaware Area from the Late Archaic to the Early Late Woodland. For: London Chapter of the Ontario Archaeological Society Early Woodland and Middle Woodland Settlement Systems: Exploring Two Distinct Adaptive Strategies. At: The Ontario Archaeological Society Annual Meeting. Niagara Falls, Ontario

20 Which Way to the Lawson Site? Late Woodland Settlement Patterns West of the Caradoc Sand Plain. At: The Ontario Archaeological Society Annual Meeting; Niagara Falls, Ontario. (With D. Riddell) Identifying Reductions in Residential Mobility in the Early and Middle Woodland Periods in Southwestern Ontario. At: The Canadian Archaeological Society Annual Meetings; Kelowna, British Columbia GIS applications and archaeological master plans. At: The Annual ESRI Canada Arc/Info Users Conference; Waterloo, Ontario GIS Worshop. At The 10 th Annual Canadian Association of Professional Heritage Consultants Meetings; Toronto, Ontario Archaeological Master Planning, the London Experience. At: The 1999 Ontario Professional Planners Institute Annual Meetings, Kingston, Ontario The Van Bree Site: Young Phase/Glen Meyer Interaction near Arkona. For: London Chapter of the Ontario Archaeological Society The Don Crich Site: A Princess Point Camp on the North Branch of the Thames River. For: London Chapter of the Ontario Archaeological Society.