Stage 1 & 2 Archaeological Assessment Kennedy

Stage 1 & 2 Archaeological Assessment Kennedy Pit (Category 1 - Class A Pit Below Water) PIN 04566-0179, Lot 7, Concession 5 being the South West 1/4 Geographic Township of Torbolton City of Ottawa

Licensee: Nick Adams MA

Prepared by: Nick Adams

Date: August 28, 2012

License # P003 PIF# P003-348-2012 report type: Original regulatory process: Aggregates Resources Act, City of Ottawa Zoning By-Law Amendment

ADAMS HERITAGE 3783 Maple Crest Court, Inverary, Ontario K0H 1X0 Phone / Fax (613) 353-1463 email: [email protected] CONTENTS

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1

1.0 PROJECT PERSONNEL 3 2.0 DEVELOPMENT CONTEXT 4 3.0 HISTORICAL CONTEXT 5 4.0 ARCHAEOLOGICAL CONTEXT 8 4.1 Archaeological Potential 14

5.0 ARCHAEOLOGICAL TESTING - Field Methods 16

6.0 RESULTS - RECORD OF FINDS 16

7.0 ANALYSIS AND CONCLUSIONS 16

8.0 RECOMMENDATIONS 17

9.0 REFERENCE / SOURCES 18

10.0 MAPS 21

11.0 IMAGES starting page 31

Tables Table 1: General cultural chronology of the Ottawa Region 13

Figures Figure 1: The Study Area - General Location 21 Figure 2: Section of the 1:40,000 topographical map 22 Figure 3: Section of the 1:20,000 topographical map 23 Figure 4: Air photograph showing surrounding features 24 Figure 5: Surficial geology 25 Figure 6: Soils 26 Figure 7: Air photograph showing location of former river channel 27 Figure 8: Archaeological potential (City of Ottawa) 28 Figure 9: Areas of Archaeological Potential / Areas Tested 29 Figure 10: Locations / Orientations / Photo Plate No.s 30 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The following study was undertaken in support of an application for a Category 1 - Class A Pit Below Water under the Aggregates resources Act.

Stage 1 The site of the proposed Category 1, Class A Pit Below Water within part of Lot 7, Concession 5, Torbolton (Geographic) Township (now City of Ottawa), County of Carleton, Ontario, was assessed by Adams Heritage for its archaeological potential. Specifically; historical research was undertaken, previous archaeological investigations in the area were evaluated, and the geography of the site considered, to determine whether significant historical or prehistoric cultural resources might exist on the property and to determine whether further archaeological investigations are warranted.

The historical research indicates that the property was not the site of significant historic occupation and that, as with much of the township, the poor quality of the land did not support agricultural development.

The whole heavily wooded, property lies less than 300 metres of the edge of Constance Creek and a smaller watercourse to the north. Archaeological potential is therefore indicated for prehistoric sites, with a low potential for historic period archaeological sites. Adams Heritage therefore makes the following Stage 1 recommendations.

C Stage 2 archaeological investigations should be undertaken prior to any pit development work which results in soil disturbance.

Stage 2 Archaeological testing (Stage 2 test pit survey) was conducted throughout the property. All field testing was completed in accordance with the Ministry of Tourism and Culture’s “Standards and Guidelines for Consultant Archaeologists 2011". No evidence of archaeological sites was encountered.

1 Clearance of any archaeological conditions affecting this property is recommended. It is hereby requested that the Ontario Ministry of Tourism, Culture and Sport supply a ‘letter of concurrence’ indicating that the ministry’s concerns for archaeological heritage on this property have been met. the following are standard recommendations included in all archaeological assessment reports:

2. If during the process of development (deeply buried / undetected) archaeological remains are uncovered, the developer or their agents should immediately notify the Archaeology Section of the Ontario Ministry of Tourism, Culture and Sport (416) 314-7132.

3. In the event that human remains are encountered during construction, the proponent should immediately contact the police, the Ministry of Tourism, Culture and Sport, and the Registrar of Cemeteries, Cemeteries Regulation Unit, Ministry of Consumer Services, Consumer Protection Branch (416-326-8404).

1 Kennedy Pit (Part Lot 7, Con 5, Torbolton (Geo) Twp. Stage 1 & 2 Archaeological Assessment Adams Heritage

Advice on compliance with legislation

1. Advice on compliance with legislation is not part of the archaeological record. However, for the benefit of the proponent and approval authority in the land use planning and development process, the report must include the following standard statements: a. This report is submitted to the Minister of Tourism and Culture as a condition of licensing in accordance with Part VI of the Ontario Heritage Act, R.S.O. 1990, c 0.18. The report is reviewed to ensure that it complies with the standards and guidelines that are issued by the Minister, and that the archaeological fieldwork and report recommendations ensure the conservation, protection and preservation of the cultural heritage of Ontario. When all matters relating to archaeological sites within the project area of a development proposal have been addressed to the satisfaction of the Ministry of Tourism and Culture, a letter will be issued by the ministry stating that there are no further concerns with regard to alterations to archaeological sites by the proposed development. b. It is an offence under Sections 48 and 69 of the Ontario Heritage Act for any party other than a licensed archaeologist to make any alteration to a known archaeological site or to remove any artifact or other physical evidence of past human use or activity from the site, until such time as a licensed archaeologist has completed archaeological fieldwork on the site, submitted a report to the Minister stating that the site has no further cultural heritage value or interest , and the report has been filed in the Ontario Public Register of Archaeology Reports referred to in Section 65.1 of the Ontario Heritage Act. c. Should previously undocumented archaeological resources be discovered, they may be a new archaeological site and therefore subject to Section 48 (1) of the Ontario Heritage Act. The proponent or person discovering the archaeological resources must cease alteration of the site immediately and engage a licensed consultant archaeologist to carry out archaeological fieldwork, in compliance with Section 48 (1) of the Ontario Heritage Act. d. The Cemeteries Act, R.S.O. 1990 c. C.4 and the Funeral, Burial and Cremation Services Act, 2002, S.O. 2002, c.33 (when proclaimed in force) require that any person discovering human remains must notify the police or coroner and the Registrar of Cemeteries at the Ministry of Consumer Services.

2. Reports recommending further archaeological fieldwork or protection for one or more archaeological sites must include the following standard statement:

“Archaeological sites recommended for further archaeological fieldwork or protection remain subject to Section 48 (1) of the Ontario Heritage Act and may not be altered, or have artifacts removed from them, except by a person holding an archaeological licence.”

2 Kennedy Pit (Part Lot 7, Con 5, Torbolton (Geo) Twp. Stage 1 & 2 Archaeological Assessment Adams Heritage

1.0 PROJECT PERSONNEL

Project Personnel Project / Field Archaeologist: Nick Adams MA Historical Research: Christine Adams MAC Field Technicians: Sam Adams, Doug Kirk, Chris Cadue, Steve Errington, John Errington Report Authors and Preparation: Nick Adams, Christine Adams

Date of Field Testing July 19th, 20th, 23rd, 24th 2012

Weather Conditions Fine, warm, dry.

Permission for Access Provided by owners Karson Aggregate.

3 Kennedy Pit (Part Lot 7, Con 5, Torbolton (Geo) Twp. Stage 1 & 2 Archaeological Assessment Adams Heritage

2.0 DEVELOPMENT CONTEXT

A Stage 1 and 2 archaeological assessment was carried out on lands scheduled to be developed within parts of Lots 7, Concession 5, Geographic Township of Torbolton. (Figures 1-4). The archaeological assessment is required as part of a submission to the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources for a Category 1 - Class A Pit Below Water under the Aggregates Resources Act, and a City of Ottawa Zoning By-Law Amendment

As indicated in Section 1.0, access to the property for the purposes of the archaeological assessment (including retrieval of artifacts as necessary) was provided by the owners, Karson Aggregate.

The property owned by the clients includes part of the extensive wetland surrounding Constance Creek. This is defined as Provincially Significant Wetland (PSW) which will not form part of the study area and was not tested. It also includes lands which, while not part of the PSW, lie below the defined floodplain boundary (Figure 9). These lands were included in the study, although, because of the nature of the terrain, are of low archaeological potential, being waterlogged and swampy.

The area under investigation, therefore, consists of approximately 24.5 acres (9 Ha.) of heavily forested, undeveloped land lying between the community of Dunrobin and Constance Bay on the Ottawa River (Figures 1-4).

The study area lies between two large former pits, now existing as lakes.

An inspection and testing of the current study property was completed in late July 2012. The whole area is heavily wooded with mixed forest to the extent that it is now unavailable for cultivation. Archaeological assessment using test pit survey methods was the only viable option (S & G’s 2011: Standard 2.1.2.1c).

4 Kennedy Pit (Part Lot 7, Con 5, Torbolton (Geo) Twp. Stage 1 & 2 Archaeological Assessment Adams Heritage

3.0 HISTORICAL CONTEXT

Initially, the lands in the Ottawa Valley were more valuable for their timber than for settlement. Torbolton Township was not surveyed until 1822-23, and was only open for a year, which put a damper on settlement. According to an early history of the area, many of the grants were to officers who held them in speculation for too high a price, given the relative poverty of the land for farming1.

There was very little settlement between 1823 and 18402. No settlement of the study area is indicated on Walling’s map of 18633. By 1879, the lot had been divided into three4. The lands in the study area were the property of R. Taylor. No person of this name is found on either the 1871 or 1881 census5,6, so it seems likely that the owner resided elsewhere. There was one structure on the east half of the lot (outside the study area) shown as the property of G. Major7. A directory of the following decade shows that George Magor was still in possession8. No other farmers are listed on Concession 5, lot 7 at this time, and the entire township had only two pages of listings in total, suggesting that overall, the township did not support intensive agriculture.

1 Gourlay, J.L, History of the Ottawa Valley, Ottawa 1896. http://www.archive.org/stream/cu31924028900864/cu31924028900864_djvu.txt

2 Ibid

3 Walling, Henry Francis: Map of the County of Carleton, Canada West/ from surveys under the direction of H. F. Walling. Surveyed and drawn by O. W. Gray [assisted by] Albert Davis [and] S. S. Southworth : Prescott : D. P. Putnam, 1863.

4 Belden, H., ed. Illustrated historical atlas of the county of Carleton (including city of Ottawa), Ont. Toronto : H. Belden & Co., 1879. p. http://digital.library.mcgill.ca/countyatlas/images/maps/townshipmaps/car-m-torbolton.jp g

5 1871 Census, Torbolton Township, Carleton Co, facsimiles online @www.ancestry.com

6 1881 Census, Torbolton Township, Carleton Co, facsimiles online @www.ancestry.com

7 Belden, H., ed. Illustrated historical atlas of the county of Carleton (including city of Ottawa), Ont. Toronto : H. Belden & Co., 1879. p. http://digital.library.mcgill.ca/countyatlas/images/maps/townshipmaps/car-m-torbolton.jp g

8 The Union Publishing Co.'s Farmers' and Business Directory, for the Counties of Carleton, Dundas, Glengarry, Grenville, Lanark, Prescott, Russell and Stormont, 1885-6. -- Vol. 1. -- Ingersoll : Union Publishing, 1885. P. 292

5 Kennedy Pit (Part Lot 7, Con 5, Torbolton (Geo) Twp. Stage 1 & 2 Archaeological Assessment Adams Heritage

4.0 ARCHAEOLOGICAL CONTEXT Topography and Environment Bedrock / Physiography The Ottawa region is underlain by bedrock deposits of limestone, shale and sandstone of Ordovician age, which, in some areas, have been overlain by relatively recent deposits of glacial till, fluvioglacial and lacustrine deposits. These either pre-date, or date to events associated with the Champlain Sea epoch, which occurred between about 11,500 - 8,500 B.P. (Schut and Wilson 1987).

The study area lies within the Ottawa Valley Clay Plains Physiographic region which extends from near Pembroke, across the northern portion of eastern Ontario to Hawkesbury (Chapman and Putnam 1984: 206). The region consists of faulted and uplifted blocks of bedrock which protrude through the clay plains deposited as sediments of the Champlain Sea. These, in turn, have been incised by broad, former channels cut by the Ottawa River as the land rose through isostatic rebound and which post-date the demise of the Champlain Sea and its fresh water successor, Lake Lampsilis.

The study area lies within a major, former river channel of the Ottawa River which extends from Constance Bay, through the capital region to Mer Blueu east of the City. The floor of the old river channel has been cut into the Champlain Sea clay, while the channel is bordered by stratified sand plains (Ibid. 206).

Surficial geology maps of the region indicate that the study area lies within a zone of stratified, medium grained sands which have been modified slightly into low dunes (St. Onge 2009, Richard 1984, Richard, Gadd and Vincent 1978) (Figure 5). The western portion of the study property consists entirely of organic wetland muck and peat deposits (Ibid.).

Soils Soils within the study area are composed of two types: Mille Ille (MI) and Huntley (H). In the Constance Bay area, the former are described as “the Constance Bay series (Orthic Dystric Brunisol subgroup) with a surface A horizon which is less than 10 cm thick”, and as existing as “predominantly excessive to well-drained soils in combination with significant areas of poorly drained soils found undulating to hummocky topography in which sand knolls dominate. Slopes range from 2to9%.” (Schut and Wilson 1987: 54). Because of their drainage and fertility characteristics, these soils are not suitable for most forms of agriculture and have mostly been left as woodland (Ibid.).

The Huntley soils consist of muck, peat and bog.

Drainage The study area is drained by Constance Creek, which flows across the western end of the property, northwest towards Constance Bay (Ottawa River). A smaller watercourse parallels Constance Creek, to the northeast of the property.

6 Kennedy Pit (Part Lot 7, Con 5, Torbolton (Geo) Twp. Stage 1 & 2 Archaeological Assessment Adams Heritage

Climate The soil climate of the Ottawa region is humic, mild and mesic (Schut and Wilson 1987) with mean annual soil temperatures of between 8 and 15 degrees and a relatively short growing season lasting 200 and 240 days. Rainfall is moderate averaging 850 mm. per year. This climate, while adequate using modern farming techniques, was not particularly favourable for prehistoric agriculture.

Registered Archaeological Sites No registered archaeological sites exist within the study area or within 1 kilometre of the study area9. However, the property lies inland from Constance Bay - an area known to contain a number of well documented and important archaeological sites.

Foremost of these is the Constance Bay Site (BiGa-2), a Middle Woodland settlement radio-carbon dated to 490 ± 75 B.C., excavated by Gordon Watson in 1971/2 (Watson 1972) with additional reporting on the excavated faunal material by Howard Savage (Savage 1972).

The area has been known to be of archaeological significance for more than a century. In 1909 T.W. Edwin Sowter published his observations on the ‘Algonquin and Huron Occupation of the Ottawa Valley’ (Sowter 1909), noting that:

“These traditions account for the human bones washed out some years ago at the foot of the old Indian portage at the Chats, and those that are scattered in great profusion at Big Sand Point, lower down the river; also, for quite a number of brass kettles found at one time near the mouth of Constance Creek,...... ” (Sowter 1909: 65) associating the bones found at Sand Point (on the west side of Constance Bay) as the remains of meals enjoyed by a family of Wendigos who were reputed to have inhabited the area.

Another story said to account for the profusion of human remains in the area relates to the destruction of an Iroquois war party by local traders and First Nations:

A great many years ago, so the story goes, a party of French fur-traders, together with a number of friendly Indians, possibly Algonkin and Huron allies, went into camp one evening at Pointe à la Bataille. Fires were lighted, kettles were slung and all preparations made to pass the night in peace and quietness. Soon, however, the lights from other camp fires began to glimmer through the foliage on the opposite shore of the bay, and a reconnaisance presently revealed a large war-party of Iroquois in a barricaded encampment on the Wendigo Mound at Big Sand Point. Well skilled as they were in all the artifices of forest warfare, the French and their Indian companions were satisfied that something would happen before morning. It was inevitable that the coming night would be crowded with such stirring incidents as would leave nothing to be desired, in the way of excitement. There lay the Iroquois camp, with its fierce denizens crouched like wolves in their lair, though buried in the heart of the enemy's country, yet self-reliant in the pride of warlike achievements, whose military strategy had rendered them invulnerable as the gloom of the oncoming thundercloud, and as inexorable as the fate of the forest monarch that is blasted by a stroke of its lightning.

9 Information courtesy of Robert von Bitter, Ministry of Tourism, Culture and Sport.

7 Kennedy Pit (Part Lot 7, Con 5, Torbolton (Geo) Twp. Stage 1 & 2 Archaeological Assessment Adams Heritage

Now the golden rule on the Indian frontier in those strenuous times, was to deal with your neighbor as you might be pretty sure he would deal with you, if he got the chance. Of course it was customary, among the Indians to heap coals of fire on the head of an enemy, but as it was the usual practice, before putting on the coals, to bind the enemy to some unmovable object, such as a tree or a stout picket, so that he was unable to shake them off, the custom was not productive of much brotherly love. Moreover, when the success of peace overtures could be assured only to the party that could bring the greater number of muskets into the negotiations, it will be readily understood why the French, who were in the minority, did not enter into diplomatic relations with the enemy. On the contrary, it was resolved to fight as soon as the opposing camp was in repose, and attempt a decisive blow from a quarter whence it would be least expected, thus forestalling an attack upon themselves, which might come at anytime before the dawn. The French and their allies knew very well that if their plans miscarried and the attack failed, the penalty would be death to most of their party, and that, in the event of capture, they would receive as fiery and painful an introduction to the world of shadows as the leisure or limited means of their captors might warrant.

Towards midnight, the attacking party left Pointe à la Bataille and proceeded stealthily southward, in their canoes along the eastern rim of Sand Bay, crossed the outlet of Constance Creek and landing on the western shore of the bay advanced towards Big Sand Point through the pine forest that clothed, as it does to-day, the intervening sand hills. This long detour, of about two miles, was no doubt a necessity, as, on still nights, the most trifling sounds, especially such as might have been produced by paddles accidently touching the sides of canoes, are echoed to considerable distances in this locality.

The advance of the expedition was the development of Indian strategy, for, by getting behind the enemy, it enabled the French and their allies to rush his barricades and strike him in the back, while his sentinels and outliers were guarding against any danger that might approach from the river front.

The attack was entirely successful, for it descended upon and enveloped the sleeping camp like a hideous nightmare. Many of the Iroquois died in their sleep, while the rest of the party perished to a man, in the wild confusion of a midnight massacre.

Such is the popular tradition of the great fight at the Wendigo Mound at Big Sand Point, and the bones that are found in the drifting sands at that place, are said to be the remains of friend and foe who fell in that isolated and unrecorded struggle. (Sowter 1909: 67)

A few years later, Sowter conducted some desultory excavations at the ‘Wendigo Mound’ locating fragments of pottery, chert flakes, animal bone and some objects of European manufacture but did not offer any conclusions as to their antiquity (Sowter 1917).

In the light of subsequent scientific investigations in the area, it is clear that Constance Bay was intensively occupied throughout the prehistoric period. It is likely that the remains unearthed by Sowter extended far further into the past than he imagined.

8 Kennedy Pit (Part Lot 7, Con 5, Torbolton (Geo) Twp. Stage 1 & 2 Archaeological Assessment Adams Heritage

Studies of Adjacent Areas Other than the specific archaeological work cited above, relatively few assessmnent projects have been conducted in Torbolton Township. In 2003, Kinickinic Heritage Consultants conducted a Stage 1 & 2 archaeological assessments of proposed Subdivisions on parts of Lots 2 & 3, Conc. 7, and Lots 3 & 4, Torbolton Township, and in the following year examined a property within part Lots 2 & 3, Con. 4 Torbolton and another within part Lot 12, Concession 4 (Swayze 2003a, 2003b, 2004a, 2004b).

None of these studies has a direct bearing on the current study area.

Archaeological Summary Palaeo-Indian Period Archaeologists have called Ontario's first people Palaeo-Indians (meaning 'old' or 'ancient' Indians). The Palaeo-Indian Period is estimated to have begun (in Ontario) about 11,000 years ago, and lasted for approximately 1,500 years (longer in northern Ontario). These people may have hunted migrating herds of caribou along the shores of vast glacial lakes, moving north into Ontario as the ice of the last glaciation receded. They have left little evidence of their passing, except for a few lance-shaped spear-points, and some campsites and places where they made their tools. Although the remains left by Palaeo-Indian people are quite sparse, through careful analysis of what has been found archaeologists are beginning to understand something about the way these ancient people lived. Palaeo-Indian people depended on hunting gathering and probably fishing for their subsistence. They did not raise crops. In order to gain a living from the sub-arctic environment in which they lived, Palaeo-Indian people had to exploit large territories. It is likely that they used toboggans, sleds and possibly watercraft in order to aid them move from one area to the next.

The Palaeo-Indian period has been divided into two subdivisions: the Early Palaeo- Indian period (11,000 - 10,400 B.P.) and the Late Palaeo-Indian period (10,400-9,500 B.P.) based on changes in tool technology. No Palaeo-Indian sites are known in the vicinity of the study area. Indeed, the study area would have been beneath the Ottawa River throughout the Palaeo-Indian Period.

The Archaic Period As the glacial ice continued to recede, the climate gradually became milder and more land became available for exploration and occupation. The Archaic Period spans the time between the end of the Palaeo-Indian Period and the beginning of the use of pottery in Ontario (about 2900 years ago). During the 6,500 years of the Archaic Period the exquisite stone tool workmanship of the Palaeo-Indian period was slowly abandoned. Archaic spear-points rarely reach the quality of workmanship of those of their forebears and are made from a greater variety of rocks. The Archaic period was one of long and gradual change. The long seasonal migratory movements of the Palaeo-Indians seem to have been abandoned as Archaic people focussed more closely on local food resources. They modified the equipment they made to cope with the transition from an open sub-arctic landscape to a more temperate, forested one. Archaic people began to make a wide variety of axes, hammers and other tools by pecking and grinding rocks to the desired shape.

Archaic materials have also been discovered in Leamy Lake Park, near the mouth of the Gatineau River (Watson 1999: 64) however there are no known archaic sites in

9 Kennedy Pit (Part Lot 7, Con 5, Torbolton (Geo) Twp. Stage 1 & 2 Archaeological Assessment Adams Heritage the vicinity of the study area. The study area would have been submerged during the first part of the Archaic period, only becoming accessible for once the Ottawa River had achieved modern levels beginning approximately 8000 years ago.

Early Woodland Period Some time around 1000 B.C. the idea of using fired clay to make pottery containers began to spread into Ontario. This technology probably had little impact on the people of this province, however it is of enormous importance to archaeologists because although pots readily break in use, the broken pieces tend to last extremely well in the ground.

All over the world potters have found the semi-hard clay surface of freshly shaped pots (ie. before firing) to be a canvas for decoration and art. Since fashions and design preferences gradually change through time and from one people to another, the patterns of pottery decoration, and even the shape of the pots themselves provide valuable and accurate clues to the age and culture of the people who made them.

The Early Woodland people of Ontario were the first to use pottery in this province. In may other respects, people of the Early Woodland Period (c. 900 B.C. - 300 B.C.) continued to live in much the same way as their predecessors of the Late Archaic. Like the Late Archaic people, they buried their dead with great ceremony, often including attractive and exotic artifacts in the graves. The Early Woodland people of Ontario appear to have been in contact with, or at least heavily influenced by their neighbours to the south - particularly the Adena people of the Ohio Valley. To date, no Early Woodland archaeological sites have been recorded in the immediate vicinity of the study area.

The Middle Woodland Period The most distinctive way in which the Middle Woodland period (2300 B.P. - 1100 B.P.) differs from the Early Woodland is in the way the people of Ontario had broadened the methods they used to decorate their pots. Changes in the shapes and types of tools used, the raw materials chosen and the ways in which these were acquired and traded are also apparent. However, these subtle technological changes mask more fundamental differences. Evidence from numerous archaeological sites indicate that by the Middle Woodland Period the people of Ontario began to identify with specific regions of the province. The artifacts from Middle Woodland period sites in southwestern Ontario differ quite noticeably, for instance, from those of the people in eastern Ontario. For the first time it is possible to distinguish regional cultural traditions - sets of characteristics which are unique to a part of the province. Archaeologists have named these cultural traditions LAUREL (throughout northern Ontario), POINT PENINSULA (in eastern and south-central Ontario), SAUGEEN (in much of southwestern Ontario) and COUTURE (in extreme southwestern Ontario).

Archaeologists have developed a picture of the seasonal patterns these people used in order to exploit the wide variety of resources in their home territories. During the spring, summer and fall groups of people congregated at lakeshore sites to fish, collect shellfish (in the south) and hunt in the surrounding forests. As the seasons progressed the emphasis probably shifted away from fishing and more towards hunting, as the need to store up large quantities of food for the winter became more

10 Kennedy Pit (Part Lot 7, Con 5, Torbolton (Geo) Twp. Stage 1 & 2 Archaeological Assessment Adams Heritage pressing. By late fall, or early winter, the community would split into small family hunting groups and each would return to a 'family' hunting area inland to await the return of spring.

Some Middle Woodland people may have been influenced by a vigorous culture to the south - the Hopewell. These people buried some of their dead in specially prepared burial mounds, and accompanied the bodies with many and varied objects. Some Ontario people, especially those in the Rice Lake and Bay of Quinte areas adopted this practice, although they tailored it to suit their local needs. Some archaeologists have argued that since not all people were buried in the same way, these rich burials indicate that a hierarchy or class structure was beginning to develop as has been noted among the Hopewell. Such class distinctions do not seem to have lasted long, however, and were not part of Late Woodland life. ignificant evidence of Middle Woodland occupation of the Ottawa region has been discovered at Leamy Lake Park at the mouth of the Gatineau River (Laliberté 1999: 78) and numerous Middle Woodland finds have been made in the vicinity of Constance Bay and more recently along the Rideau River (Jacquie Fisher, Pers Comm.).

The Late Woodland Period The easiest way for archaeologists to distinguish Late Woodland period archaeological sites from earlier Middle Woodland sites is by looking at the pottery. During the Middle Woodland period the people made conical based pottery vessels by the coil method and decorated them with various forms of stamps. By the beginning of the Late Woodland (ie. by A.D. 900) period the coil method had been abandoned in favour of the paddle and anvil method, and the vessels were decorated with 'cord-wrapped stick' decoration. While these transitions are useful to archaeologists they provide only a hint to the more fundamental changes which were occurring at this time.

Sometime after A.D. 500, maize (corn) was introduced into southern Ontario from the south. Initially this cultivated plant had little effect on the lives of people living in Ontario, but as the centuries past, cultivation of corn, beans, squash, sunflowers and tobacco gained increasingly in importance. Not surprisingly, this transition from an economy based on the products of the lake and forest, to one in which the sowing, tending and harvesting of crops was important, also hastened cultural and technological changes.

Initially at least, the changes were small. People were naturally conservative, and the risks of crop failure must have been too high to allow for too much reliance on the products of the field. Some re-orientation of the seasonal movements of these people must have occurred at this time. Fishing and hunting sites continued to be used although the pattern of summer gathering along the shores of the major lakes of the region probably diminished as the small plots of cultigens needed to be tended and harvested during the summer. Gradually however, the settlements adjacent to the corn fields began to take on a greater permanency as cultigens became more of a staple food. The best quality, light, and easily tillable farmland was sought out for cultivation, with village sites located nearby, near a reliable source of water.

As agricultural success increased, it became possible to store a supply of food for the winter. For the first time it was possible to stay in and around the village all year (in

11 Kennedy Pit (Part Lot 7, Con 5, Torbolton (Geo) Twp. Stage 1 & 2 Archaeological Assessment Adams Heritage southern Ontario at least) instead of dispersing into family winter hunting camps. Villages became larger and more heavily populated. Hostilities erupted between neighbouring peoples, so that by A.D. 1000, some people found it necessary to defend their villages with stockades and ditch defences. By the end of the Late Woodland period, the people of southern Ontario had grouped themselves into distinct regional populations separated by vast, unoccupied areas of 'no-mans-land'.

Late Woodland and Contact period occupations have been documented at the multi-component archaeological sites at the mouth of the Gatineau River in Leamy Lake Park (Saint-Germain 1999: 84), however no archaeological sites dating to the Late Woodland period have been recorded in the immediate vicinity of the study area.

12 Kennedy Pit (Part Lot 7, Con 5, Torbolton (Geo) Twp. Stage 1 & 2 Archaeological Assessment Adams Heritage

TABLE 1: Generalized Cultural Chronology of the Ottawa Valley Region PERIOD GROUP TIME RANGE COMMENT

PALAEO-INDIAN

Fluted Point 11000 - 10400 B.P big game hunters Hi - Lo 10400 - 9500 B.P small nomadic groups

ARCHAIC

Early Side Notched 10000 - 9700 B.P. nomadic hunters and Corner Notched 9700 - 8900 B.P. gatherers Bifurcate Base 8900 - 8000 B.P.

Middle Early Middle Archaic 8000 - 5500 B.P transition to territorial Laurentian 5500 - 4000 B.P. settlements

Late Narrow Point 4500 - 3000 B.P. polished / ground Broad Point 4000 - 3500 B.P. stone tools, Small Point 3500 - 3000 B.P. river/lakeshore Glacial Kame ca. 3000 B.P. orientation burial ceremonialism

WOODLAND

Early Meadowood 2900 - 2400 B.P. introduction of pottery Middlesex 2400 - 2000 B.P. elaborate burials

Middle Point Peninsula 2300 B.P. - 1300 long distance trade Sandbanks/Princess Point B.P. burial mounds 1500 B.P. - 1200 agriculture begins B.P.

Late Pickering 1100 - 700 B.P. transition to defended Middleport 670 - 600 B.P. villages, horticulture, Huron / St. Lawrence 600 - 350 B.P. large village sites Iroquois tribal organization, warfare / abandonment

HISTORIC

Early Mississauga 300 - present southward migration

Late Euro-Canadian 225 - present European settlement

13 Kennedy Pit (Part Lot 7, Con 5, Torbolton (Geo) Twp. Stage 1 & 2 Archaeological Assessment Adams Heritage

4.1 Archaeological Potential

In determining archaeological potential, a number of characteristics are considered. In general, these conform to the basic key archaeological site potential criteria identified by the Ontario Ministry of Tourism, Culture and Sport and described in their ‘primer’ document (MTC 1997) and re-emphasized in the recent “Standards and Guidelines for Consultant Archaeologists (MTCS 2011)”.

Pre-Contact Archaeological Sites A number of factors also influence the archaeological potential of this property. According to the criteria employed by the Ontario Ministry of Tourism, Culture and Sport to determine archaeological potential. According to MTCS’s 2011 “Standards and Guidelines” the following are characteristics that indicate archaeological potential:

C Previously identified archaeological sites.

C Water sources. It is important to distinguish types of water and shoreline, and to distinguish natural from artificial water sources, as these features affect site locations and types to varying degrees:

- primary water sources (lakes, rivers, streams, creeks) - secondary water sources (intermittent streams and creeks, springs, marshes, swamps) - features indicating past water sources (e.g., glacial lake shorelines indicated by the presence of raised sand or gravel beach ridges, relic river or stream channels indicated by clear dip or swale in the topography, shorelines of drained lakes or marshes, cobble beaches) - accessible or inaccessible shoreline (e.g., high bluffs, swamp or marsh fields by the edge of a lake, sandbars stretching into marsh).

C Elevated topography (e.g., eskers, drumlins, large knolls, plateaux)

C Pockets of well drained sandy soil, especially near areas of heavy soil or rocky ground

C Distinctive land formations that might have been special or spiritual places, such as waterfalls, rock outcrops, caverns, mounds, and promontories and their bases. There may be physical indicators of their use, such as burials, structures, offerings, rock paintings or carvings.

C Resource areas, including:

food or medicinal plants (e.g., migratory routes, spawning areas, prairie), scarce raw materials (e.g., quartz, copper, ochre or outcrops of chert), early Euro Canadian industry (e.g., logging, prospecting, mining).

14 Kennedy Pit (Part Lot 7, Con 5, Torbolton (Geo) Twp. Stage 1 & 2 Archaeological Assessment Adams Heritage

C Areas of early Euro Canadian settlement. These include places of early military or pioneer settlement (e.g., pioneer homesteads, isolated cabins, farmstead complexes), early wharf or dock complexes, pioneer churches and early cemeteries. There may be commemorative markers of their history, such as local, provincial, or federal monuments or heritage parks.

C Early historical transportation routes (e.g., trails, passes, roads, railways, portage routes)

C Property listed on a municipal register or designated under the Ontario Heritage Act or is a federal, provincial or municipal historic landmark or site Property that local histories or informants have identified with possible archaeological sites, historical events, activities, or occupations. MTCS Standards and Guidelines for Consultant Archaeologists (2011)

Based on these criteria, the archaeological potential for pre-Contact archaeological sites is high. The whole property lies within less than 300 metres of Constance Creek. The property contains well drained sandy soil which could have been occupied at any time since the Ottawa River attained its current levels.

The potential for pre-contact archaeological sites is high.

Historic / Early Euro-Canadian Sites

The property does not front on to any historic settlement roads. No indications of historic occupation of the property were identified. The land has a poor agricultural capability and has remained forested for much of the historic period.

The potential for historic archaeological sites is low.

15 Kennedy Pit (Part Lot 7, Con 5, Torbolton (Geo) Twp. Stage 1 & 2 Archaeological Assessment Adams Heritage

5.0 ARCHAEOLOGICAL TESTING - Field Methods

Archaeological testing was conducted of all areas. Testing followed standard procedures as required in the Ontario Ministry of Tourism, Culture and Sport’s “Standards and Guidelines for Consultant Archaeologists (2011)”.

Since ploughing for surface survey was not an option, all areas were subject to test pit survey. Test pit survey consisted of hand dug, shovel test pits which were excavated by an experienced team of archaeological field technicians. Test pits were at least 30cm x 30cm in diameter and were excavated through the upper soil zones and well into the sterile sand subsoil below. Typically test pits were between 30 and 50cm in depth. A number of test units were dug to a considerably greater depth (up to 1 metre) in order to ensure that no buried ground surfaces were overlooked. Soils from each test pit were sifted through 6mm. hardware cloth screen and the residue examined for any evidence of cultural materials.

Testing was conducted using 5 metre transects throughout the whole property (S & G’s Sect. 2.1.2.2).

6.0 RESULTS - Record of Finds

No evidence of archaeological sites was encountered. No artifacts were recovered.

7.0 ANALYSIS AND CONCLUSIONS

In accordance with the Ministry of Tourism, Culture and Sport’s “Standards and Guidelines for Consultant Archaeologists (2011)”, archaeological potential criteria, the City of Ottawa’s archaeological master plan mapping, and background research / field observation, this property was identified as having a high potential for prehistoric and low potential for historic archaeological sites.

Since all portions of the property lay within less than 300 metres of Constance Creek and/or the edge of a former Ottawa River channel, the whole property was identified as having archaeological potential. Consequently, the whole property was tested for archaeological sites using techniques required by the “S & G’s”.

The study area was fully tested for archaeological sites: none were encountered. Development of a Category 1 - Class A Pit Below Water at this location will have no impact on archaeological resources.

16 Kennedy Pit (Part Lot 7, Con 5, Torbolton (Geo) Twp. Stage 1 & 2 Archaeological Assessment Adams Heritage

8.0 RECOMMENDATIONS

17 Kennedy Pit (Part Lot 7, Con 5, Torbolton (Geo) Twp. Stage 1 & 2 Archaeological Assessment Adams Heritage

9.0 REFERENCES / SOURCES Maps

1863 Map of the County of Carleton, Canada West, from surveys under the direction of H.F. Walling. Published by D.P. Putnam, Prescott C.W. (NMC 0025747).

1879 Illustrated Historical Atlas of the County of Carleton, 1879, H. Belden & Co. (reprinted by Wilson’s Publishing Company, 1997)

Texts (consulted, not necessarily referenced)

Anderson, T.W., Mathewes, R.W., and C.E. Schweger 1989 Holocene climatic trends in Canada with special reference to the Hypsithermal interval; in Chapter 7 of Quaternary Geology of Canada and Greenland. R.J. Fulton (ed.); Geological Survey of Canada, Geology of Canada, no. 1 (also Geological Society of America, The Geology of North America,v K-1).

Chapman, L.J., and D.F. Putnam. 1984 The Physiography of Southern Ontario, Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources, Third edition, 1984.

Ellis, C.J. and Neal Ferris, 1990 The Archaeology of Southern Ontario to A.D. 1650. Occasional Publication of the London Chapter of the Ontario Archaeological Society. Number 5. London.

Harris, R. Cole (ed.) and Geoffrey J. Matthews 1987 Historical Atlas of Canada Volume I: From the Beginning to 1800. University of Toronto Press. Toronto.

Laliberté, Marcel 1999 The Middle Woodland in the Ottawa Valley. in Ottawa Valley Prehistory. Outaouais No. 6. Outaouais Historical Society, Hull, Quebec.

Marshall, I.B., J. Dumanski, E.C. Huffman and P.G. Lajoie 1979 Soil Capability and Land Use in the Ottawa Urban Fringe. Land Resource Research Institute, Research Branch, Agriculture Canada and the Ontario Ministry of Agriculture and Food.

Mason, Ronald 1980 Great Lakes Archaeology. Academic Press

MTC 2010 Standards and Guidelines for Consultant Archaeologists. http://www.mtc.gov.on.ca/en/publications/SG_2011.pdf

1997 Conserving Ontario's Archaeological Heritage: An Educational Primer and Comprehensive Guide for Non-Specialists. Ministry of Citizenship, Culture and Recreation, Cultural Programs Branch, Archaeology & Heritage Planning Unit.

Richard, S H, 1984 Surficial Geology, Arnprior, Ontario-Québec / Geologie Des Formations En Surface, Arnprior, Ontario-Québec. Geological Survey of Canada, , 1599A

18 Kennedy Pit (Part Lot 7, Con 5, Torbolton (Geo) Twp. Stage 1 & 2 Archaeological Assessment Adams Heritage

Richard, S H; Gadd, N R; Vincent, J -S, 1978 Surficial Materials and Terrain Features of Ottawa-Hull, Ontario-Québec / Dépôts meubles et formes du relief d'Ottawa-Hull, Ontario-Québec. Geological Survey of Canada, , 1425A

Roche / NCE 2008 Archaeological Potential Study: Gatineau / Ottawa Area. Interprovincial Crossings Environmental Assessment Study. Final Report. http://www.ncrcrossings.ca/upfiles/Gatineau%20Arch%20ENG%20Final.pdf

Savage, Howard 1972 Faunal Findings at the Constance Bay Site No. 1 (Biga-2), Ontario Archaeology, Vol OA18. Pages 25-36.

St-Onge, D A, 2009 Surficial geology, lower Ottawa Valley, Ontario-Quebec / Geologie des formations en surface, basse vallée de l'Outaouais, Ontario-Québec. Geological Survey of Canada, , 2140A

Saint-Germain, Claire 1999 The End of the Pre-Contact Period in the Ottawa Valley - A Look at the Zooarchaeology of the Leamy Lake Park Sites. in Ottawa Valley Prehistory. Outaouais No. 6. Outaouais Historical Society, Hull, Quebec.

Schut, L.W. and E.A. Wilson 1987 The Soils of the Regional Municipality of Ottawa-Carleton (excluding the Ottawa Urban Fringe). Vols. 1 & 2. Report No. 58 of the Ontario Institue of Pedology.

Sowter Edwin T. W. 1909 Algonkin and Huron Occupation of the Ottawa Valley, The Ottawa Naturalist, Vol. XXIII, No. 4: 61-68 & Vol. XXIII, No. 5:92-104.

1917 Indian Village Sites: Lake Deschenes. Twenty-Ninth Annual Archaeological Report, 1917, Being part of Appendix to the Report of the Minister of Education, Ontario. pp.78-85.

Spence, Michael W, and Robert H. Pihl 1984 "The Early and Middle Woodland Occupations of Southern Ontario: Past, Present, and Future Research." in Arch Notes, March/ April, 1984.

Swayze, Ken 2003a A Stage 1 & 2 Archaeological Assessment of a Proposed Subdivision on Parts of Lots 2 & 3, Conc. 7, Torbolton Township (Geo.), City of Ottawa. Consultants Report.

2003b A Stage 1 & 2 A. A. of a Proposed Subdivision on Parts of Lots 3 & 4, Conc. 7, Torbolton Twp. (Geo.), City of Ottawa

2004a A Stage 1 & 2 Archaeological Assessment of Part Lots 2 & 3, Con. 4, Torbolton Township (Geo), City of Ottawa.

2004b A Stage 1 & 2 Archaeological Assessment of a Proposed Subdivision in Constance Bay on Part of Lot 12, Con. 4 Torbolton Township (Geo), City of Ottawa

19 Kennedy Pit (Part Lot 7, Con 5, Torbolton (Geo) Twp. Stage 1 & 2 Archaeological Assessment Adams Heritage

Trigger, Bruce (editor) 1978 Handbook of North American Indians, Vol 15, Northeast. Smithsonian Institution, Washington.

Watson, Gordon 1972 A Woodland Indian Site at CONSTANCE BAY, Ontario. Ontario Archaeology, Volume: OA18. Pages: 1 - 24.

1999 The Palaeo-Indian Period in the Ottawa Valley. in Ottawa Valley Prehistory. Outaouais No. 6. Outaouais Historical Society, Hull, Quebec.

Wicklund, R.E. & N.R. Richards 1962 Soil Survey of Prescott and Russell Counties. Report No. 33 of the Ontario Soil Survey Research Branch, Canada Department of Agriculture and the Ontario Agricultural College. Guelph, Ontario.

Other Sources

Specific historical references cited in the text as footnotes.

20 Kennedy Pit (Part Lot 7, Con 5, Torbolton (Geo) Twp. Stage 1 & 2 Archaeological Assessment Adams Heritage

10.0 MAPS

Figure 1: General location of the study area.

21 Kennedy Pit (Part Lot 7, Con 5, Torbolton (Geo) Twp. Stage 1 & 2 Archaeological Assessment Adams Heritage

Figure 2: Location of the study area: 1:40,000 (source: Natural Resources Canada: Toporama).

22 Kennedy Pit (Part Lot 7, Con 5, Torbolton (Geo) Twp. Stage 1 & 2 Archaeological Assessment Adams Heritage

Figure 3: Location of the study area: 1:20,000 (source: Natural Resources Canada: Toporama).

23 Kennedy Pit (Part Lot 7, Con 5, Torbolton (Geo) Twp. Stage 1 & 2 Archaeological Assessment Adams Heritage

Figure 4: Air photograph showing the location of the study area in relation to surrounding pits and features.

24 Kennedy Pit (Part Lot 7, Con 5, Torbolton (Geo) Twp. Stage 1 & 2 Archaeological Assessment Adams Heritage

Figure 5: Surficial geology of the study area (Richard 1984) (study area location approximate only). Key: 6b= stratified sand within abandoned river channels, 7= organic deposits (muck, peat, bog etc.), 3a=Champlain Sea sediments.

25 Kennedy Pit (Part Lot 7, Con 5, Torbolton (Geo) Twp. Stage 1 & 2 Archaeological Assessment Adams Heritage

Figure 6: Soils of the study area (Mille Ille (MI) and Huntley (H)) (Schut and Wilson 1987).

26 Kennedy Pit (Part Lot 7, Con 5, Torbolton (Geo) Twp. Stage 1 & 2 Archaeological Assessment Adams Heritage

Figure 7: Air photograph of the region surrounding the study area showing the general location of the former Ottawa River channel.

27 Kennedy Pit (Part Lot 7, Con 5, Torbolton (Geo) Twp. Stage 1 & 2 Archaeological Assessment Adams Heritage

Figure 8: Archaeological Potential (City of Ottawa eMaps, ‘Archaeological Potential Layer’). Green tone indicates archaeological potential. Location of the study area is approximate.

28 Kennedy Pit (Part Lot 7, Con 5, Torbolton (Geo) Twp. Stage 1 & 2 Archaeological Assessment Adams Heritage

Figure 9: Air photograph with property boundary overlay, showing the location and characteristics of the study area and the areas tested. All lands not waterlogged or within the PSW were assumed to have a high archaeological site potential and were fully tested as per MTCS ‘Standards and Guidelines Section 2.1.2.2.

29 Kennedy Pit (Part Lot 7, Con 5, Torbolton (Geo) Twp. Stage 1 & 2 Archaeological Assessment Adams Heritage

Figure 10: Locations, orientations and plate numbers of photographs included in this report.

30 Kennedy Pit (Part Lot 7, Con 5, Torbolton (Geo) Twp. Stage 1 & 2 Archaeological Assessment Adams Heritage

11.0 IMAGES

Plate 1: View of the northwestern edge of the property showing the former sand pit on that side.

31 Kennedy Pit (Part Lot 7, Con 5, Torbolton (Geo) Twp. Stage 1 & 2 Archaeological Assessment Adams Heritage

Plate 2: View of the southeast side of the property showing the active aggregate pit on that side.

32 Kennedy Pit (Part Lot 7, Con 5, Torbolton (Geo) Twp. Stage 1 & 2 Archaeological Assessment Adams Heritage

Plate 3: General view of Constance Creek in the vicinity of the study area showing the extensive wetlands surrounding the creek channel.

33 Kennedy Pit (Part Lot 7, Con 5, Torbolton (Geo) Twp. Stage 1 & 2 Archaeological Assessment Adams Heritage

Plate 4: Doug Kirk testing. Note extremely light, loose sand beneath a thin covering of forest topsoil and roots.

34 Kennedy Pit (Part Lot 7, Con 5, Torbolton (Geo) Twp. Stage 1 & 2 Archaeological Assessment Adams Heritage

Plate 5: Steve and John Errington testing on the southeast side of the property adjacent to an existing pit. Typical view of forest cover.

35 Kennedy Pit (Part Lot 7, Con 5, Torbolton (Geo) Twp. Stage 1 & 2 Archaeological Assessment Adams Heritage

Plate 6: The crew, preparing to resume the battle with ground-nesting yellow-jackets after lunch break.

36 Kennedy Pit (Part Lot 7, Con 5, Torbolton (Geo) Twp. Stage 1 & 2 Archaeological Assessment Adams Heritage

Plate 7: The northeastern edge of the property borders on a seasonally wet, lowland area.

37 Kennedy Pit (Part Lot 7, Con 5, Torbolton (Geo) Twp. Stage 1 & 2 Archaeological Assessment Adams Heritage

Plate 8: Typical view of the forest floor between the Provincial Wetland Boundary and the floodplain boundary. Despite a drought, it was waterlogged, too wet to effectively test, and unlikely ever to have been suitable for human settlement.

38 Kennedy Pit (Part Lot 7, Con 5, Torbolton (Geo) Twp. Stage 1 & 2 Archaeological Assessment Adams Heritage

Plate 9: The only artifact encountered during the archaeological assessment was not retained.