DOCSLIB.ORG

Stage 2-3 Archaeological Assessments Report(PDF)

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Stage 2-3 Archaeological Assessments Report(PDF) Ministry of Tourism, Culture and Ministère du Tourisme, de la Culture et du Sport Sport Culture Programs Unit Unité des programmes culturels Programs and Services Branch Direction des programmes et des services Culture Division Division de culture 435 S. James Street, Suite 334 435, rue James sud, bureau 334 Thunder Bay ON P7E 6S7 Thunder Bay ON P7E 6S7 Tel.: 807-475-1628 Tél.: 807-475-1628 Email: [email protected] Email: [email protected] February 1, 2013 Dr. Dean Knight Archaeological Research Associates Ltd. 154 Otonabee Drive Kitchener, ON N2C 1L7 Dear Dr. Knight, RE: Review and Entry into the Ontario Public Register of Archaeological Reports: Archaeological Assessment Report Entitled Stage 2 and 3 Archaeological Assessments Port Ryerse Wind Power Project (FIT F-001579-WIN-130-601) Part of Lots 3–5, Broken Front Geographic Township of Woodhouse Norfolk County, Ontario, Revised Report Dated January 14, 2013, Filed by MTCS Toronto Office January 16, 2013, MTCS Project Information Form Number P089-014-2012 & P089- 018-2012, MTCS File Number HD00097 This office has reviewed the above-mentioned report, which has been submitted to this ministry as a condition of licensing in accordance with Part VI of the Ontario Heritage Act, R.S.O. 1990, c 0.18.1 This review has been carried out in order to determine whether the licensed professional consultant archaeologist has met the terms and conditions of their licence, that the licensee assessed the property and documented archaeological resources using a process that accords with the 2011 Standards and Guidelines for Consultant Archaeologists set by the ministry, and that the archaeological fieldwork and report recommendations are consistent with the conservation, protection and preservation of the cultural heritage of Ontario. The report documents the assessment of the study area as depicted in Maps 21 – 27 of the above titled report and recommends the following: 2.5.1 Findspot 1 (Ryerse 1; AeHb-68) Findspot 1 met at least one of the criteria defined in Section 7.12 of the Standards and Guidelines for Consultant Archaeologists for determining whether an archaeological site warrants a Site Record Form (MTC 2011:160–161). Accordingly, it has been assigned Borden No. AeHb-68 and designated as Ryerse 1. When compared against the criteria in Section 2.2 of the Standards and Guidelines for Archaeologists (MTC 2011:39–40), this archaeological site was found to be of further CHVI. In order to avoid impacts to this site, however, the proponent modified the project location. ARA accordingly recommends that Findspot 1 be subjected to further archaeological assessment only if impacts become a concern. An appropriate Stage 3 assessment strategy would involve a Controlled Surface Pickup of the remaining artifacts and the excavation of an array of 1 x 1 m test units along a 5 m grid across the 54 x 22 m scatter. Although part of Findspot 1’s 20 m protective buffer traverses the project location, this buffer is affected by a permanently disturbed cultural form (Avalon Lane and its associated embankment/ditch). In accordance with the directions set out in Section 3.2.3 Guideline 1a and Section 4.1 Standard 2 of the Standards and Guidelines for Consultant Archaeologists (MTC 2011:50, 68), a modified buffer zone is therefore warranted. Given that the project does not propose any modifications to Avalon Lane in this area, and that the full extent of the project location within the 20 m protective buffer is disturbed, Stage 3 assessment is not required within this part of the buffer. Findspot 1 and its 20 m protective buffer must be subjected to construction monitoring, however. A temporary barrier should be erected along the project location limits in this area to protect the site during construction. All construction activities within 70 m of Findspot 1 must be monitored by a licensed archaeologist to ensure that unintentional project impacts do not occur (see Supplementary Documentation Map 11). 2.5.2 Findspot 2 (Ryerse 2; AeHb-69) Findspot 2 met at least one of the criteria defined in Section 7.12 of the Standards and Guidelines for Consultant Archaeologists for determining whether an archaeological site warrants a Site Record Form (MTC 2011:160–161). Accordingly, it has been assigned Borden No. AeHb-69 and designated as Ryerse 2. When compared against the criteria in Section 2.2 of the Standards and Guidelines for Consultant Archaeologists (MTC 2011:39–40), this archaeological site was found to be of no further CHVI. ARA accordingly recommends that no further archaeological assessment of Findspot 2 be required. 2.5.3 Findspot 3 (Ryerse 3; AeHb-70) Findspot 3 met at least one of the criteria defined in Section 7.12 of the Standards and Guidelines for Consultant Archaeologists for determining whether an archaeological site warrants a Site Record Form (MTC 2011:160–161). Accordingly, it has been assigned Borden No. AeHb-70 and designated as Ryerse 3. When compared against the criteria in Section 2.2 of the Standards and Guidelines for Consultant Archaeologists (MTC 2011:39–40), this archaeological site was found to be of further CHVI. In order to avoid impacts to this site, however, the proponent modified the project location. ARA accordingly recommends that Findspot 3 be subjected to further archaeological assessment only if impacts become a concern. An appropriate Stage 3 assessment strategy would involve a Controlled Surface Pickup of the remaining artifacts and the excavation of an array of 1 x 1 m test units along a 5 m grid across the 40 x 30 m scatter. Although part of Findspot 3’s 20 m protective buffer traverses the project location, this buffer is affected by a permanently disturbed cultural form (Avalon Lane and its associated embankment/ditch). In accordance with the directions set out in Section 3.2.3 Guideline 1a and Section 4.1 Standard 2 of the Standards and Guidelines for Consultant Archaeologists (MTC 2011:50, 68), a modified buffer zone is therefore warranted. Given that the project does not propose any modifications to Avalon Lane in this area, and that the full extent of the project location within the 20 m protective buffer is disturbed, Stage 3 assessment is not required within this part of the buffer. Findspot 3 and its 20 m protective buffer must be subjected to construction monitoring, however. A temporary barrier should be erected along 2 the project location limits in this area to protect the site during construction. All construction activities within 70 m of Findspot 3 must be monitored by a licensed archaeologist to ensure that unintentional project impacts do not occur (see Supplementary Documentation Map 12). 2.5.4 Findspot 4 (Ryerse 4; AeHb-71) Findspot 4 met at least one of the criteria defined in Section 7.12 of the Standards and Guidelines for Consultant Archaeologists for determining whether an archaeological site warrants a Site Record Form (MTC 2011:160–161). Accordingly, it has been assigned Borden No. AeHb-71 and designated as Ryerse 4. When compared against the criteria in Section 2.2 of the Standards and Guidelines for Consultant Archaeologists (MTC 2011:39–40), this archaeological site was found to be of further CHVI. In order to avoid impacts to this site or its 20 m protective buffer, however, the proponent modified the project location. ARA accordingly recommends that Findspot 4 be subjected to further archaeological assessment only if impacts become a concern. An appropriate Stage 3 assessment strategy would involve a Controlled Surface Pickup of the remaining artifacts and the excavation of an array of 1 x 1 m test units along a 5 m grid across the 25 x 22 m scatter. Given that at least one part of Findspot 4 is located between 21 and 70 m away from the project location, unintentional project impacts to the site are a concern. Thus, in accordance with the direction set out in Section 7.8.5 of the Standards and Guidelines for Consultant Archaeologists (MTC 2011:140–141), ARA recommends that Findspot 4 be subjected to construction monitoring. A temporary barrier should be erected along the project location limits in this area to the site during construction. All construction activities within 70 m of Findspot 4 must be monitored by a licensed archaeologist to ensure that unintentional project impacts do not occur (see Supplementary Documentation Map 13). 2.5.5 Findspot 5 (Ryerse 5; AeHb-72) Findspot 5 met at least one of the criteria defined in Section 7.12 of the Standards and Guidelines for Consultant Archaeologists for determining whether an archaeological site warrants a Site Record Form (MTC 2011:160–161). Accordingly, it has been assigned Borden No. AeHb-72 and designated as Ryerse 5. When compared against the criteria in Section 2.2 of the Standards and Guidelines for Consultant Archaeologists (MTC 2011:39–40), this archaeological site was found to be of further CHVI. In order to avoid impacts to this site or its 20 m protective buffer, however, the proponent modified the project location. ARA accordingly recommends that Findspot 5 be subjected to further archaeological assessment only if impacts become a concern. An appropriate Stage 3 assessment strategy would involve a Controlled Surface Pickup of the remaining artifacts and the excavation of an array of 1 x 1 m test units along a 5 m grid across the 56 x 57 m scatter. Given that at least one part of Findspot 5 is located between 21 and 70 m away from the project location, unintentional project impacts to the site are a concern. Thus, in accordance with the direction set out in Section 7.8.5 of the Standards and Guidelines for Consultant Archaeologists (MTC 2011:140–141), ARA recommends that Findspot 5 be subjected to construction monitoring.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Excavating the Past
    What Lies .28 10 Beneath 01 01/ Early hunters in the Toronto region would have sought high vantage points, such as shoreline cliffs, to track herds of caribou and other large game. IMAGE/ Shelley Huson, Archaeological Services Inc. 02/ 11,000-year-old stone points IMAGE/ Museum of Ontario Archaeology, Wilfrid Jury Collection 03/ A 500-year-old human effigy that adorned a ceramic pipe IMAGE/ Andrea Carnevale, Archaeological Services Inc. 04/ A 2,500-year-old artifact made of banded slate IMAGE/ Museum of Ontario Archaeology, Wilfrid Jury Collection Excavating the past TEXT BY RONALD F. WILLIAMSON AND SUSAN HUGHES What Lies .28 11 Beneath For more than 13,000 years, southern in Ontario require archaeological assess - planning guidelines for their management. Ontario has been home to indigenous ments, which are mandated by the Many regional municipalities, such as populations. These indigenous peoples Provincial Policy Statement, for projects Ottawa, Durham, York, and Halton, and once occupied thousands of encampments within their jurisdictions. cities such as Kingston, Toronto, Brantford, and temporary villages. They left no written London, and Windsor, among others, have record of their lives, and their legacy Some projects, however, may not undertaken archaeological management consists of the oral histories and traditions “trigger” a permit requirement. In these plans. In these municipalities, planners passed on to their descendants, as well instances, due diligence is critical, because use the potential mapping to decide which as the archaeological traces of their settle - encountering an archaeological feature projects require assessments. ments. These traces are fragile: whenever during project work can result in costly you dig in the ground, you could be delays.
    [Show full text]
  • A Review of Northern Iroquoian Decorated Bone and Antler Artifacts: a Search for Meaning
    Williamson and Veilleux Iroquoian Decorated Bone and Antler Artifacts 3 A Review of Northern Iroquoian Decorated Bone and Antler Artifacts: A Search for Meaning Ronald F. Williamson and Annie Veilleux The Northern Iroquoian practice of producing finely etched designs on bone and antler tools is examined in the context of conveying symbolic messages, some of which were communicated both privately and pub- licly. This paper presents the results of a review of the archaeological literature, which focused on both the symbolism inherent in the designs and the ideological roles in society of the animals from which the arti- facts were produced. Tables of provenience and descriptive attribute data are provided for each class of arti- fact as well as a summary of the highlights and trends in decoration for each. Introduction Trigger 1976:73), it has been suggested that their disc-shape may have been intended to represent In the winter of 1623-1624, Gabriel Sagard, a the sun and that patterns such as the one in Recollet friar, visited the country of the Huron in Figure 1, found on a late fifteenth or early six- what is now southern Ontario and, based on a teenth century Iroquoian site in southwestern series of encounters the Huron had with their ene- Ontario, represent sunbursts, similar to those mies, he noted that after having clubbed their ene- that are common in the art and cosmology of the mies or shot them dead with arrows, the Huron contemporaneous Southeastern Ceremonial carried away their heads (Wrong 1939:152-153). Complex (Cooper 1984:44; Jamieson1983:166).
    [Show full text]
  • Toronto Has No History!’
    ‘TORONTO HAS NO HISTORY!’ INDIGENEITY, SETTLER COLONIALISM AND HISTORICAL MEMORY IN CANADA’S LARGEST CITY By Victoria Jane Freeman A thesis submitted in conformity with the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Department of History University of Toronto ©Copyright by Victoria Jane Freeman 2010 ABSTRACT ‘TORONTO HAS NO HISTORY!’ ABSTRACT ‘TORONTO HAS NO HISTORY!’ INDIGENEITY, SETTLER COLONIALISM AND HISTORICAL MEMORY IN CANADA’S LARGEST CITY Doctor of Philosophy 2010 Victoria Jane Freeman Graduate Department of History University of Toronto The Indigenous past is largely absent from settler representations of the history of the city of Toronto, Canada. Nineteenth and twentieth century historical chroniclers often downplayed the historic presence of the Mississaugas and their Indigenous predecessors by drawing on doctrines of terra nullius , ignoring the significance of the Toronto Purchase, and changing the city’s foundational story from the establishment of York in 1793 to the incorporation of the City of Toronto in 1834. These chroniclers usually assumed that “real Indians” and urban life were inimical. Often their representations implied that local Indigenous peoples had no significant history and thus the region had little or no history before the arrival of Europeans. Alternatively, narratives of ethical settler indigenization positioned the Indigenous past as the uncivilized starting point in a monological European theory of historical development. i i iii In many civic discourses, the city stood in for the nation as a symbol of its future, and national history stood in for the region’s local history. The national replaced ‘the Indigenous’ in an ideological process that peaked between the 1880s and the 1930s.
    [Show full text]
  • Norfolk County State of the Environment Poster
    Long Point Region Grand River Conservation 20 CON 1 Six Nations IND IAN LI Conservation Authority Authority NE CON 2 C O C K S H U T O T AD L R D O O H A I D D R G H OR W F T A Y Brant County N A 2 CON 3 4 Kelvin BR Bealton H I G H Wilsonville ST W 19 EA AY K 2 COUNTY ROAD R EL CON 1 FOLK O 4 NOR V AD IN Boston C CON 4 O U N T Y LI NE 9 EAST Grand River CON 2 OAD 1 LK COUNTY R NORFO 19 Conservation Authority 1 25 2 C CON 5 O 74 3 C K 4 S H H U 5 I T G T 6 H W R O CON 3 O K 7 AY LD A EL Vanessa 24 D 2 V H 4 8 E 23 I S N RO T I Bill's Corners (Nanticoke) W 19 GH 9 ROAD 22 UNTY 10 K CO W 21 A FOL OR AY D 11 N 2 20 12 4 CON 6 19 Long Point Region 13 18 14 17 15 15 16 E CON 4 S T Conservation Authority W 17 D 19 14 TY ROA COUN 13 18 FOLK NOR T 12 E 19 E T 11 E 20 R V 10 21 IL L 9 CON 7 22 RE O 23 A 8 D 24 D 7 A O 6 R RD 5 FO 4 CONNT 5 3 Teeterville RA State of the Environment B 2 1 M A I N S CON 8 T R E Villa Nova E T H T N H R I O G OAD EAST H SON R W M THOMP AY CON 6 A Waterford I 2 N 4 S T Forestry and Carolinian Canada R E E Legend T H S T O U CON 9 TEETERVILLE RO LPRCA Land THOMPSON Norfolk County has approximately 24 per cent forest cover with CON 7 9 24 ROAD EAST EST MPSON ROAD W more in the western end of Norfolk versus the east.
    [Show full text]
  • York Online Undergraduate Research
    Revue YOUR Review Volume/Tome 3 (2016) York Online Undergraduate Research Intended to showcase York University (Toronto, Canada) student research, Revue YOUR Review is an annual, refereed e-journal offering an opportunity for York University students to prepare a paper for publication. The journal is multidisciplinary, open-access, and bilingual: articles are published in English or in French. Revue York Online Undergraduate Research Review is associated with York University’s annual, multidisciplinary Undergraduate Research Fair. Articles are revised from top essays submitted for York University credit courses and accepted as poster presentations at the juried Research Fair. Submissions are reviewed by an Editorial Board comprised of York University faculty members, writing instructors, librarians, and students, and may also be sent to expert readers within the discipline. Together, the Research Fair and its associated e-journal offer students an educational experience in researching, writing, preparing an abstract, designing and presenting a poster session, and revising a paper for publication—all components in the cycle of scholarly knowledge production and dissemination. Author rights are governed by Creative Commons licensing. La Revue YOUR Review se propose de mettre en valeur la recherche des étudiants de premier cycle et offre aux étudiants de l’Université York (Toronto, Canada) l’occasion de rédiger un article pour la publication. Cette revue annuelle à comité de lecture et à libre accès est pluridisciplinaire et bilingue (anglais/français). La Revue York Online Undergraduate Research Review est liée à la foire annuelle de recherche de l’Université York. Les articles ont été sélectionnés et révisés des meilleures dissertations soumises pour un cours de premier cycle à l’Université et acceptées comme présentation d’affiches à cette foire, elle-même sous la direction d’un jury.
    [Show full text]
  • Stages 1-3 Archaeological Assessment Of
    Stage 1-2 Archaeological Assessment for the Proposed Development of 5155 Mississauga Road Within Part of Lot 1, Concession 4 WHS In the Geographic Township of Toronto (New Survey) Historical County of Peel City of Mississauga Regional Municipality of Peel Ontario Project #: 053-MI1606-16 Licensee (#): Nimal Nithiyanantham (P390) PIF#: P390-0173-2016 Original Report April 29th, 2016 Presented to: City Park (Old Barber) Homes Inc. 950 Nashville Road Kleinburg, Ontario L0J 1C0 T: 905.552.5200 Prepared by: Archeoworks Inc. 16715-12 Yonge Street, Suite 1029 ARCHEOWORKS INC. Newmarket, Ontario L3X 1X4 T: 416.676.5597 F: 647.436.1938 STAGE 1-2 AA FOR THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT OF BARBER HOUSE CITY OF MISSISSAUGA, R.M. OF PEEL, ONTARIO EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Archeoworks Inc. was retained by City Park (Old Barber) Homes Inc. to conduct a Stage 1-2 AA in support of the proposed commercial and residential development of common element townhouses at municipal address 5155 Mississauga Road, which will herein be referred to as the “study area”. The study area is located within part Lot 1, Concession 4 West of Hurontario Street (WHS) (or Centre Street), in the Geographic Township of Toronto (New Survey), historical County of Peel, City of Mississauga, Regional Municipality of Peel, Ontario The Stage 1 AA identified elevated potential for the recovery of archaeologically significant materials within the study area. Elevated archaeological potential was determined based on the close proximity (within 300 metres) of: historic structures, historic transportation routes, designated and listed cultural heritage resources, a cultural heritage landscape, a commemorative marker, a registered archaeological site and secondary water sources.
    [Show full text]
  • History of Toronto from Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia the History of Toronto, Ontario, Canada Begins Several Millennia Ago
    History of Toronto From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia The history of Toronto, Ontario, Canada begins several millennia ago. Archaeological finds in the area have found artifacts of First Nations settlements dating back several thousand years. The Wyandot people were likely the first group to live in the area, followed by the Iroquois. When Europeans first came to Toronto, they found a small village known as Teiaiagon on the banks of the Humber River. Between visits by European explorers, the village was abandoned by the Iroquois, who moved south of Lake Ontario and the Mississaugas, a branch of the Ojibwa settled along the north shore of the lake. The French first set up trading posts in the area, including Fort Rouillé in 1750, which they abandoned as the British conquered French North America. In 1788, the British negotiated the first treaty to take possession of the Toronto area from the Mississaugas. After the United States War of Independence, the area north of Lake Ontario was held by the British who set up the province of Upper Canada in 1791. See also: Name of Toronto https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:DavenportBathurstSoutheast.jpg Davenport Road, as shown here in 1914, does not follow Toronto's standard street grid pattern, as it originated as a First Nations travel route between the Humber River and the Don Valley named Gete-Onigaming, Ojibwe for "at the old portage."[1] Toronto is located on the northern shore of Lake Ontario, and was originally a term of indeterminate geographical location, designating the approximate area of the future city of Toronto on maps dating to the late 17th and early 18th century.
    [Show full text]
  • Norfolk Rotary Clubs with 90+ Years of Community Service!
    ROTARY AROUND THE WORLD IS OVER 100 YEARS OLD IN NORFOLK COUNTY ROTARY HAS SERVED THE COMMUNITY ROTARY CLUB OF FOR SIMCOE ROTARY CLUB OF OVER DELHI ROTARY CLUB NORFOLK SUNRISE YEARS90! NORFOLK ROTARACT CLUB 2 A Celebration of Rotary in Norfolk, June 2018 Welcome to the world of Rotary Rotary in Norfolk County Rotary International is a worldwide network of service clubs celebrating in Norfolk more than 100 years of global community service with a convention in Toronto at the end of June. Among the thousands of attendees will be PUBLISHED BY representatives from Norfolk County’s three clubs, as well as an affiliated Rotary Club of Simcoe, Rotary Club of Delhi, Rotary Club of Norfolk Sunrise and Rotaract Club in Norfolk Rotaract Club. ASSOCIATE PUBLISHER Rotary has had a presence in Norfolk County for more than 90 years. Media Pro Publishing Over that time, countless thousands of dollars have been donated to both David Douglas PO Box 367, Waterford, ON N0E 1Y0 community and worldwide humanitarian projects. 519-429-0847 • email: [email protected] The motto of Rotary is “Service Above Self” and local Rotarians have Published June 2018 amply fulfilled that mandate. Copywright Rotary Clubs of Norfolk County, Ontario, Canada This special publication is designed to remind the community of Rotary’s local history and its contributions from its beginning in 1925 to the present. Rotary has left its mark locally with ongoing support of projects and services such as Norfolk General Hospital, the Delhi Community Medical Centre and the Rotary Trail. Equally important are youth services and programs highlighted by international travel opportunities.
    [Show full text]
  • Status of the Fish Community and Fisheries in Eastern Lake Erie Results from the 2000-2004 East Basin Rehabilitation Plan
    Status of the Fish Community and Fisheries in Eastern Lake Erie Results from the 2000-2004 East Basin Rehabilitation Plan Lake Erie Management Unit State of the Resource Report March, 2006 Table of Contents Forward.......................................................................................................................................... iii List of Figures.................................................................................................................................iv List of Tables..................................................................................................................................ix List of Appendices...........................................................................................................................x 1.0 Introduction ..............................................................................................................................1 1.1 The Five Year Plan for Rehabilitation of Eastern Lake Erie Fisheries .............................1 1.2 Ecology of Eastern Lake Erie ............................................................................................4 1.3 Management of Eastern Basin Fisheries............................................................................7 Quota Management............................................................................................................7 Smelt Harvest Management...............................................................................................8 Walleye Harvest Restrictions
    [Show full text]
  • THE SHARED PATH Foxwell St Terry Dr Symes Rd
    GETTING THERE AND BACK Follow the path of an ancient You can reach the suggested start and end point Aboriginal portage route. Discover 7 MARSHES AND OAK SAVANNAH on public transit by taking the BLOOR / DANFORTH panoramic views, river marshes, and The marsh at the mouth of the Humber River, dating subway to Old Mill station. Other TTC access is back 5,000 years, housed a wide range of plants, provided by a Dundas Street West Bus Route and the former sits of water-powered mills sh, waterfowl, and mammals which made it a vital The Queensway Streetcar. hunting, shing, and gathering site for Aboriginal THE ROUTES peoples. Further up the path, a black savannah tree is a rare remnant of an ecosystem that once ourished FOR MORE INFO SHARED PATH DISCOVERY WALK in the dry, sandy soils at the bottom of former Lake Discovery Walks is a program of self-guided walks Although you can begin this Discovery Walk Iroquois (now known as Lake Ontario). that links city ravines, parks, gardens, beaches and at any point along the route, a good starting neighbourhoods. For more information on Discovery point is at the base of the footbridge over the Walks, including brochures, please call customer Humber River where it enters Lake Ontario. You’ll visit The Shared 9 THE KING’S MILL service at 311, or 416-392-CITY (2489) from outside the beginning of an ancient portage route up the City limits. Information can also be found at toronto. Humber River Valley, sites of early fur trading posts, In 1793, the King’s Mills, the area’s rst water-powered ca/parks/trails/discover.htm.
    [Show full text]
  • Rouge River Rouge River
    Rouge River State of the Watershed Report Cultural Heritage Goal: Recognition, preservation, and celebration of cultural heritage in the Rouge River watershed to increase awareness and understanding of past human relationships with the environment . Cultural Heritage Key Findings: • For 10,000 years, the Rouge River Watershed has been used by humans in some way, beginning with aboriginal hunters and farmers, explorers, traders, men of God, soldiers, surveyors, and finally settlers. • Over 1,360 archaeological and heritage sites located in the Rouge River watershed and historical accounts reveal the watershed is rich in heritage value. Knowledge gained from these sites and many more potential sites can provide an appreciation of past human relationships with the environment. • Early aboriginal inhabitants were nomadic hunters and later farmers and villagers with the introduction of agriculture about AD 700. The 3 acre Milroy site, overlooking Little Rouge River, is an example of a Late Woodland Iroquoian longhouse village, and one of a dozen such sites in the watershed. • European settlement began in Markham Township in the eighteenth century with the German-speaking Berczy settlement. Settlement in other parts of the watershed was slower due to absentee owners. • By 1861 there were 54 mills on the River. • Over 22 architectural styles lend a unique identity to the 19 th century Rouge River landscape. This array of architecture has arisen due to the sophistication and complexity of its Euro-Canadian settlers. • The 2001 Canadian census showed that in the Rouge River watershed people of Canadian or British heritage make up 31% of the population, with the remainder being Chinese (21%), East Indian (9%) and over 35 other cultures.
    [Show full text]
  • Re-Interpreting the Nodwell Site
    mSTORICAL CONTEXT AND THE FORAGERIFARMER FRONTIER: RE-INTERPRETING THE NODWELL SITE By Lisa K. ~ B.A., M.A. A Thesis Submitted to the School ofGraduate Studies in Partial Fulfilment ofthe Requirements for the Degree Doctor ofPhilosophy McMaster University to CopYright by Lisa Rankin, June 1998 mSTORICAL CONTEXT AND THE FORAGERIFARl\JIER FRONTIER Doctor ofPhilosophy (1998) McMaster University (Anthropology) Hamilton, Ontario TITLE: Historical Context and the ForagerlFanner Frontier: Re-Interpreting the Nodwell Site. Author: Lisa K. Rank:in, B.A (University ofBritish Columbia) M.A (Trent University) Supervisor: Dr. Peter Ramsden Number ofPages: 275 11 Abstract This thesis examines the socio-economic transition from foraging to farming in Bruce County, Ontario which culminates with the appearance ofthe NodweU village. The near complete excavation ofthis site determined that the NodweU village had both the fonn (settlement pattern) and contents (material culture and subsistence remains) representative ofa small-scale farming community, and was therefore distinct from the earlier forager habitations in the region. As recently as AD 1000 this region was occupied by mobile hunter-gatherers who followed an annual cycle, inhabiting numerous smaIl sites, in nuclear family units. This strategy allowed the foragers ofBruce county to exploit various natural resources throughout the region during the course ofthe year. In contrast, the Nodwell village was occupied by a much more sedentary community ofpeople, living in extended family groups, and producing domesticated crops. This transition occurred in a maximum of350 years. Until recently, this transition was explained using a migration model which suggested that an intact horticultural community had migrated into Bruce county in the mid-fourteenth century and replaced the indigenous foragers.
    [Show full text]