PROPOSED SAND AND GRAVEL QUARRY DALMAGARRY

ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT ANNEX F CULTURAL HERITAGE IMPACT ASSESSMENT

August 2014 Proposed sand and gravel quarry, Dalmagarry

Planning reference (scoping): 14/00333/SCOP

Cultural Heritage Assessment

Prepared by G Geddes on behalf of Alba Archaeology () Ltd.

3 May 2014 Key project information

• Project Code: DAL14

• Oasis reference: albaarch1-178246

• National Grid Reference: NH 794 318 (centre)

• Author: George Geddes

• Organisation/contractor: Alba Archaeology (Highland) Ltd

th th • Dates of fieldwork (day/month/year): 5 and 7 April 2014

• Fieldwork conducted by (names of director, supervisor, specialists etc): George Geddes

• Date report written: 3 May 2014

• Commissioning body: Brindley Consulting acting for Pat Munro Ltd

The front cover shows an aerial view of the development site (in the middle ground) from the west. DP074248 © RCAHMS. The hill in the foreground has been burnt to improve cover for birds. In the middle ground, long-occupied areas of improved farmland share the lower ground with plantations.

2

Non-technical summary

This report outlines the results of a cultural heritage assessment undertaken as part of the scoping exercise for a quarry at Dalmagarry. The assessment, informed by discussion with Highland Council’s Historic Environment Team, and by Historic ’s scoping response, comprised a desk-based assessment and field survey.

Situated at the headwaters of the , at the very centre of Mackintosh lands, and at a key pass on the route north and south, there is considerable evidence for human activity in the area. That said, the development site may not have been either cultivated or settled, though it is close to a number of post- medieval townships and evidence for prehistoric agricultural communities .

Two previously unknown archaeological features were discovered on the site. In light of lengthy discussion, these pits are interpreted here as animal-traps, probably used to catch foxes in the late 18th century. One is out with Phase 1 of quarrying, but the other would be destroyed and, therefore, could be subject to a measured survey. The recent history of the site, used as a gravel pit and forested, and the lack of evidence for other features from the 18th century or before, the recommendation is for no further archaeological work.

3

Figure 1 Site location, based on

Figure 2 The development site

4

Introduction This report presents the results of a small cultural heritage assessment undertaken as part of the scoping for a proposed sand and gravel quarry at Dalmagarry (see illus 1 and 2).

The report explains the aims of the project, the methodology that was used, and the results, as well as both placing the development site in its wider archaeological context, and making a recommendation for future work, in this case none.

Figure 3 A general view of the previous area of gravel extraction, from the west

5

Planning background Pat Munro Ltd is considering opening a sand and gravel quarry at a site at Dalmagarry in undulating woodland accessed from the A9 Trunk Road and about 3km north of Tomatin.

This development is classed as a major development under the Town and Country Planning (Hierarchy of Development) Regulations 2009 because it is a mineral working with a site area exceeding 2 hectares. The proposed quarry will require an environmental statement because it falls within Schedule 2 of the Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment)(Scotland) Regulations 2011. A “screening opinion” from Highland Council has confirmed the requirement for an EIA. There are no environmental designations affecting the site or its surroundings. The Ruthven Road bridge crossing the Funtack Burn was listed at Category C in 1986.

6

Figure 4 - Funtack Bridge The Historic Environment Team (HET) of Highland Council have also been consulted and have undertaken a site visit. In an email of 7 March 2014 Kirsty Cameron of HET confirmed to the author that they do not require any work in connection with the scoping application, due in the main to the low potential for survival of archaeological sites in a development site that has been forested and partly quarried in the past. No Written Scheme of Investigation was required by HET.

Historic Scotland also assessed the application and, in a letter dated 18 February 2014, Urszula Szupszynska suggested that ‘the historic environment [within their remit] can be scoped out of any EIA undertaken’ (my brackets). Historic Scotland’s remit, in relation to planning, extends to scheduled monuments and their setting, category A listed buildings and their setting, Inventory gardens and designed landscapes, and Inventory battlefields.

7

Given the responses of Historic Scotland and HET, this report is a basic statement and does not include detailed assessments of significance, impact on setting, or assessment of cumulative impact.

Archaeological background

Aims and objectives (drawn from project brief)

Information on cultural heritage assets at the proposed development site and its environs should be collated by desk based assessment, in particular using information from Historic Scotland, Highland Council’s Historic Environment Records, Ordnance Survey Maps and the records of the Royal Commission on the Ancient Monuments of Scotland.

A walkover survey of the site and its environs should be undertaken to identify the condition of known heritage assets and the potential for unrecorded remains. Study methodology and outputs will require to be discussed with staff of Historic Scotland and Highland Council’s Historic Environment Team.

• Identify the cultural heritage baseline within the proposed development site, and the key heritage assets within a 2km radius of the proposed development site; • Assess the proposed development site in terms of its archaeological and historic environment potential, within the context of relevant legislation and planning policy guidelines; • Consider the potential and predicted effects of the construction, and operation of the development on the baseline cultural heritage resource; • Propose measures, where appropriate, to mitigate any predicted significant adverse effects.

Wider archaeological context

8

The development site is on a gravel river terrace at about 290m OD on the south side of the Funtack Burn, and within a promontory of land between the , flowing from south west to north east, and the Funtack. The course of the Funtack, and the Dalmagarry Burn, which joins it from the west before they merge with the Findhorn, has been modified during agricultural improvements in the late 18th and 19th century, possibly related to major flood events (Lauder 1873). Except for the higher and rough ground to the west, the ground to the north and east is heavily improved (i.e. drained, set out in rectilinear fields and enclosed). Many of the existing farm steadings in the area (e.g. Dalmagarry and Invereen) stand on the site of pre-Improvement townships, multi-tenant mixed farms predating the period 1750-1850. Thus, Invereen and Dalmagarry are both the latest incarnations of holdings with some history, which were part of the Mackintosh estate, the centre of which was the castle on until the 17th century or 18th century. This building on the Loch was replaced by which stood at the north west end of the Loch and that structure was replaced by a 20th century building which still stands. At Milton of Moy (the mill town of Moy), there are the remains of corn mill which was driven by a water wheel on the Funtack, presumably part of a system of estate thirlage, where tenants were required to have their grain milled here and to pay a tax. The Mackintosh’s came to own land in the Findhorn valley in the 12th century, and were involved in numerous important historical events during the decades before a permanent peace in the 18th century. In 1745, while Mackintosh himself fought for the Hanoverians, his wife raised men for the Jacobite cause and sheltered Prince Charles. The passing Jacobite army and the great majority of traffic north and south has long passed through this valley, providing as it does the easiest route. Thus, the 18th century military road survives in stretches nearby, and both the railway and the main road pass through this relatively narrow valley at the head of the Findhorn.

Evidence from the earlier medieval period, before the established pattern of townships and Mackintosh ownership is harder to tease out, though it is of course possible that some of the townships occupy earlier holdings. Whether or not the parish church at Moy is an early foundation is difficult to say. One

9 indication of activity in the 1st millennium AD was the discovery of an incised during ploughing on the farm of Invereen in 1934. Gladly, the stone survived after it was donated to the National Museum, and its location is well known.

Figure 5 The remains of the mill at Milton of Moy

10

Prehistoric settlement in the area is attested by a large number of hut circles, clearance cairns and field banks – elements of an agricultural landscape that may date to the Bronze Age. Two of these hut circles, apparently genuine examples, survive in the garden of the house at Milton of Moy. One other site that might yield evidence for prehistoric occupation is the crannog in Loch Moy, which, though used as a prison in the historic period, is more likely to have its origin in an earlier time.

Figure 6 The slight remains of one of the hut circles at Milton of Moy

Methodology The study involved two components; a desk-based assessment and a field (or walkover ) survey. The desk-based assessment was undertaken using the resources outlined in the brief (HET BRIEF):

• sites and monuments records held at national and regional level: www.wosas.net http://canmore.rcahms.gov.uk

11

• historic map sources, including ordnance survey maps, held at national level http://maps.nls.uk • information held by Historic Scotland in relation to scheduled ancient monuments or listed buildings

A field survey was undertaken by the author on 5th April 2014, with a re-visit on 7th April 2014. The site was walked with the development plan and a copy of the 1st edition of the OS 6 inch map. Photographs were taken with an iPhone 5, and positions were plotted by using a compass and a laser disto to measure from control points on fences.

Desk based assessment

Archaeological records in Scotland are held at both a national and at a regional level, and there is some overlap between the datasets which both derive from a national system developed by the Ordnance Survey. There are two principal resources to consult when considering whether or not there are archaeological sites in a development area; the Canmore database maintained by RCAHMS (national), and the Sites and Monuments record maintained by the Council, in this case by Highland Council HET (regional). Sites below are referred to by their HET number, to aid the interpretation of this information at regional level.

In terms of how this record of monuments has developed, an early reference to the crannog situated on Eilean nan Clach (Stuart 1868; MHG2868) stands apart from the general trend where major archaeological sites, and more recently deserted settlements, were depicted on the 1st edition of the OS 6 inch map, surveyed in 1869-1870 and published in 1871-1875. These included the ruins of the ‘castle’ on the Isle of Moy (MHG2869), and the cairn at Edinchat (MHG2809), as well as the footings of the Ruthven township (now scheduled; MHG14326).

A note on the Pictish stone discovered at Invereen in 1932 was published in 1934 when it was deposited at the National Museum (MHG2865), but the main

12 fieldwork component was executed by the Archaeology Division of the OS at various dates between 1966 and 19811. As well as confirming the position and character of sites surveyed in the 19th century, the field investigators discovered surviving elements of prehistoric settlement on the higher and unimproved ground surrounding the development site, in 1972 and 1974 (e.g. Coire Beag (MHG2852); Dalmagarry (MHG2861). The discovery in 1985 by Gillian Harden, Museum and Art Gallery, of two hut circles in the garden at Milton of Moy added to the picture. Working from desk-based sources, the RCAHMS First Edition Studies Project (FESP; Dixon et al 1998) added a number of ruinous townships to the record in 1996 (e.g. MHG 14253, 25826, 49474), and work by a member of Forestry Commission staff added a record on wolf traps noted on the OS first edition around Loch Moy in 2001 (e.g. MHG51251, 51252). The record of the Funtack Bridge (MHG15899) is derivative of it’s Listing by Historic Scotland.

Designated sites in the area include Funtack Bridge, an early 19th century rubble bridge, Listed Category C (S), which is nearby, and a series of structures at the north west of Loch Moy, all of which are screened by woodland. Scheduled Ancient Monuments include the cairn at Edinchat, the ruined township at Ruthven and both the crannog and the site of the Mackintosh stronghold within Loch Moy.

Maps

Historic maps can often provide very specific information about both individual sites and the development of landscapes. One particularly useful example, made available by the National Map Library of Scotland, is Roy’s Military Map of Scotland, created between 1747 and 1755. The relevant sheet shows the military

1 The Archaeology Division undertook a programme over about 30 years to revise and remap all the antiquities shown on OS maps. In 1983, their function and archive was transferred to RCAHMS and the dataset they created now forms a crucial aspect of Canmore and all Scottish historic environment records. 13 road, the townships and areas of woodland. Both Dalmagarry and Invereen are depicted, but the area between is shown as uncultivated and without woodland.

The accuracy of Roy’s map varies greatly from place to place, as, though capable of producing highly accurate maps, the surveyors were working very quickly, and changed their methodology in different parts of the country; the fact that it does not show the townships in great detail is of no importance. Given it’s proximity to an excellent road, it seems unlikely that the surveyors would have mis-interpreted the topography at Dalmagarry, a lack of detail elsewhere often relating to remoteness.

The 1st edition of the OS 6 inch map (surveyed 1869-70) shows a landscape in the process of rapid change. While some of the townships are not even represented, their remains standing below a level at which the OS surveyors made a record, others are shown as groups of unroofed buildings e.g. the settlement NNW of Milton of Moy at Coire Beag, and the scheduled site at Ruthven. The township at Dalmagarry must have been rebuilt as an Improvement style farmsteading by this date, since a typical u-plan steading is depicted, while at Invereen and Ruthven the dispersed character of the roofed buildings suggested that those farms were yet to be improved. Another notable aspect on this map is the long and straight drain heading south east from Loch Moy, part of a scheme which was presumably aimed at both draining the loch, and at draining the ground around Dalmagarry. The Dalmagarry Burn seems to have been diverted east as part of this scheme, meeting the Funtack further downstream.

The second edition of the 6 inch map is important in two regards. Firstly it shows the drainage scheme of the Dalmagarry/Funtack burns taken to fruition, both having been further straightened in the years after 1870. Secondly, it shows that the majority of the development site had been planted before 1900, part of a wider scheme that included large areas to the south west of Loch Moy and south east of Tullochclury.

14

A small circle depicted on the 1st edition map within the development area could not be found. Possibly a pit, it may well have been ploughed out during forestry operations.

The redeveloped resources of HLAmap provide a dataset of past and current landuse that will become increasingly adopted as a source in desk-based assessments – particularly as a guide to areas previously farmed but now rough grazing, and for areas used for winning peats (e.g. the extensive area north east of Meallmore Lodge, unrecorded by historic environment records; or the large areas of medieval/post-medieval cultivation and settlement recorded). A brief look at the website for current land use shows that the development site is one of a number of plantations in the area, bounded to the north and south east by rectilinear farms and fields, and to the west by rough grazing. Pockets of rough grazing survive (often surrounding previous settlements as at Ruthven), and there is a general correlation between archaeological survival and degree of Improvement.

Field survey

A large swathe of the development site has been previously exploited as a gravel pit, and this area was not systematically searched for archaeological features. In contrast, much of the ground east of this pit has been wooded but, despite what one might think, the woodland has been planted in a series of phases, and the ground to the east of the unnamed burn in particular appears to have been hand- planted at fairly wide intervals. Thus, the likelihood of preservation across the site is quite varied and efforts were concentrated in the areas most likely to yield results.

A slight scarp running along the west edge of the burn that runs through the development site, and at the foot a steep slope. Various interpretations came to mind; part of an earlier road, an edge of cultivation, a boundary of some sort. The scarp had no other edge and followed the burn where there was no room for a

15 road, so that could be discounted. Apart from the negative map evidence, the ground west of the burn was simply too steep for cultivation and there was no other evidence for it, so the scarp simply seems to mark an old boundary, quite possibly a fence of 19th or 20th century date. It can be discounted as of no archaeological significance, and is not noted in the site gazetteer.

Animal-traps

Two other features were noted, both cut into the slope overlooking the Funtack Burn. Best described as unlined pits, they are similar to the features on the south edge of Loch Moy at Tullochclury, which have been classified as wolf traps, and are depicted as such on the 1st edition of the OS 6 inch map. It is worth exploring this classification in some detail since wolf traps have yet to be recorded elsewhere in Scotland. The Highland HET records a number of these wolf traps in the area after they were visited and reported by Brian Duff of Forestry Commission Scotland in 2004. The records also note some of the historical evidence.

While most features that are named on OS maps have an equivalent entry in the original Name Books, the wolf traps do not. The 19th century surveyors seem to have seen them as a feature class, rather than a site with a proper name. The Name Books do give an indication of the sources used by the surveyors and these include both local individuals such as a factor or a minister, tenants and owners, and also secondary sources such as maps and published sources such as the Statistical Accounts for Scotland.

Written in 1836, the New Statistical Account for Moy and Dalarossie includes reference to wolves and ‘traps formed for taking them’ (1845, v14, 102). This 1836 reference was repeated with no additional information in a report of a visit to the area by the Inverness Scientific Society and Field Club in 1881 (Trans. ISSFC 1888, 111) and that account was later referred to by RCAHMS archaeologist R W Feachem in a note discussing the possible uses of a stone-

16 lined at Skelpick, Sutherland (1959, 50; MHG11103). Feachem also referred to stone lined pits at Mullinavadie, near Kinloch Rannoch, and, though these sound rather like potato storage pits, the note that one ‘seems to point to the dangers of typological classification’ is of more than passing interest (Stewart 1956, 20). It is worth bearing in mind that both the features referred to by Feachem were stone-lined.

A further branch of evidence comes from the Statistical Account published in 1793, more than forty years earlier than that mentioned above. This too relies on the minister to describe the parish of Moy and Dalarossie in some detail; indeed the New Account of 1836 owes much to its predecessor in structure and depth. The account of 1793 goes into some detail about the wildlife of the area, without mention of wolves. This goes some way to confirm that wolves were not present in the parish in the second half of the 18th century. In addition, the account makes specific mention of a severe problem with foxes, which were ‘very destructive of sheep and poultry’ (1793 v8, 502). It goes further, describing that ‘of late years, a fox hunter has been hired by the neighbourhood to destroy them’.

A short paper by historian John Harrison recently outlined the evidence for wolves in Scotland and made the point that there is little if any convincing evidence for their survival after the first half of the 17th century. The minister’s note from 1836 records that there were no wolves in the parish by that date, and it is worth considering what may have happened between the 1620s and 1830s that would allow him to recall, not only the nature of the traps, but the specifics of how they were used. Alternative stories on the ‘last wolf’, suggesting that some survived into the 18th century, can be accessed at ‘lastwolf.net’, but it is rather difficult to assess their veracity. One of these stories refers specifically to a event set on the River Findhorn, where a hunter called MacQueen, of ‘Pall-a- chrocain’, killed a wolf after hunting it with his dogs for the Laird of Mackintosh in 1743. The story was recorded in Harting’s British Animals Extinct within Historic Times (1880, 178-180), though this account is derivative of the Stuarts (1848 v2, 244) and of Lauder (1873, 22). Lauder gives the location of MacQueen’s residence as Pollochock, which he describes as lying past Eanack

17

(OS 6 inch: Inach) between the ‘upper boundary’ of an area known as the Streens, and opposite a place called ‘Seannachan’. This is probably in or around the place shown on the 1st edition of the OS map as Polochaig, now shown on current maps as Shenachie (MHG26461), recorded by RCAHMS during the FESP project, only a few kilometres north east of the development site.

Given the difficulty with providing documentary evidence for wolves in Scotland beyond the 1620s, and the notable exception of wolves from the minister’s description of the parish in 1793, it seems likely that the description of traps published in 1836 owes as much to the well-developed local mythology of wolves as it does to fact. The most likely explanation is surely that the traps, some of which are rather small, were used for the capture of foxes.

Two new pits, possibly animal traps, were recorded within the development site, and two traps that had been previously noted were also recorded (see Appendix 1). A description of each of these four sites was prepared and submitted as part of the author’s work at RCAHMS. Thus, the entries below have been edited by archaeologist and entered into the Canmore database.

18

New animal trap 1 (information entered into Canmore database)

Figure 7 A newly recorded animal trap

Site number: NH73SE 38 Canmore id: 340112 NGR: NH 7954 3190 This animal trap is set into a steep east facing slope overlooking the Funtack Bridge. Comprising a pit, it measures 3.6m in diameter at the surface and 0.7m at the base, and is up to 1.2m in depth at the back, but only 0.4m at the front. There is a low bank of upcast material, 1m in thickness and 0.2m high on the downslope edge. 1 This feature is similar to others discovered in the parish (NH73SE 34, NH73SE 36; NH73SE 37; NH73SE 39), and is most likely to have been used to trap foxes.

19

Visited by RCAHMS (GFG) 7 April 2014.

Animal trap 2 (information entered into Canmore database)

Figure 8 A newly recorded animal trap

Site number: NH73SE 39 Canmore id: 340113 NGR: NH 7938 3193 This animal trap is set into a gentle N facing slope at the edge of terrace, and about 40m south of the Dalmagarry burn. It comprises a pit that measures 2.5m in diameter at the surface, tapering to only 0.4m at the base, and is now about 0.8m deep. It is surrounded by a bank of up-cast 1m in thickness and 0.2m in height. This feature is similar to others discovered in the parish (NH73SE 34, NH73SE 36; NH73SE 37; NH73SE 38), and is most likely to have been used to trap foxes. Visited by RCAHMS (GFG) 7 April 2014.

20

Setting In light of the scoping responses by both HES and Historic Scotland, and the guidance provided by HET, there is no formal discussion of of setting discussed in this report.

Cumulative impact In light of the scoping responses by both HES and Historic Scotland, and the guidance provided by HET, there is no formal discussion of setting discussed in this report.

Mitigation One of the two features (No.2) lies out with the proposed area for extraction in phase 1. The other feature (No.1) is within the proposed Phase 1 boundary. If either of the features are to be destroyed, further recording (in the form of a simple measured survey) may be required.

There is no reason to expect the survival of further significant archaeological features given that the development area is relatively small, and the great majority of it has been either quarried or forested in recent times.

Discussion and conclusions

The development site is situated at a nodal point, and surrounded by evidence of settlement and cultivation from prehistoric times up until the present day. The only sites noted on the site appear to be animal traps. They present a rare opportunity to study the interaction of folklore and fact in connection with the interesting subject of the last surviving wolves in Scotland. While there is little

21 doubt that wolves were hunted with dogs in the surrounding area, and one of the last may have been caught nearby, there is little corroborating evidence for the use of pit-traps and the attribution of similar features found near Loch Moy seems to be a case of wishful thinking in the 19th century. That said, even if the traps were only intended for foxes, they are still an interesting discovery, and form a small group for which there are no known comparators.

Sources

DES = Discovery and Excavation, published by the Council for British Archaeology. Dixon, P, Govan, S, and MacInnes, L 1998 But the Walls Remained: A Survey of Unroofed Rural Settlement Depicted on the First Edition of the Ordnance Survey 6- inch Map of Scotland. RCAHMS: . Feachem, R W 1959 ‘Castlehill Wood dun, Stirlingshire’, Proc Soc Ant Scot 90, 24- Harden, G (1985h) 'Milton of Moy (Moy and Dalarossie p) hut circles', Discovery Excav Scot Page(s): 26 Harrison, J G 2012 ‘ The Last Wolf in Scotland, Scottish Local History 82, 48. Harting, J E 1880 British Animals Extinct within historic times: with some account of British wild white cattle. Boston: JR Osgood and Co. ISSFC 1888 ‘Excursion to Craggie and Loch Moy, Saturday 4th June 1881’, Transactions of the Inverness Scientific Society and Field Club v2, 99-118. New Statistical Account v14, 102 Old Statistical Account v8, 502 PSAS 1934 'Donations to and purchases for the Museum and Library', Proc Soc Antiq Scot 68, 56. Stewart, M E C 1956 ‘Kinloch Rannoch’, Discovery and Excavation in Scotland 1956, 19-20. Stuart, J S and C E 1848 Lays of the Deer Forest. Edinburgh and : Blackwood.

22

Map sources (accessed through the website of the National Library of Scotland)

Roy’s Military Survey of Scotland, 1747-1755

Ordnance Survey 6-inch Inverness-shire (Mainland) Sheets XXI, XXXII, XXXII Survey date: 1869-1870 Publication date: 1871-1875

Ordnance Survey 6-inch Inverness-shire (Mainland) Sheets XXI, XXXII, XXXII Publication date: 1904 Revised: 1900

Appendix 1

Animal traps (outwith development area, visited to provide comparison)

Figure 9 A previously recorded animal trap (MHG51251)

23

Site number: NH73SE 36 Canmore id: 340110 Highland HER id: MHG51251 NGR: NH 7783 3368

This animal trap is situated in woodland on the south shore of Loch Moy. It comprises a pit set into the slope measuring 2.4m in diameter at the surface, tapering to 1.6m at its base, and up to 1.2m in depth. There is a low bank of upcast material on the downslope edge. The pit is depicted as a ‘Wolf Trap’ on the 1st edition of the OS 6 inch map (Inverness-shire (Mainland), Sheet XXI, 1871-5) and, although there is no accompanying entry in the Name Book, it is likely that the label derives from a reference to wolves and ‘traps formed for taking them’ written in 1836 (New Stat. Acct. 1845, v14, 102; cf. Trans. of the Inverness Scientific Society and Field Club 1888, 111). One would accept this without comment, but for the fact that wolves may not have survived in Scotland beyond the 17th century (Harrison 2012). Indeed, the Statistical Account for Moy and Dalarossie published in 1793 makes no mention of wolves, instead noting that ‘foxes are very numerous overall in this county and very destructive to sheep and poultry. Of late years, a fox-hunter has been hired by the neighbourhood to destroy them’ (v8, 502), perhaps a more plausible explanation for the high number of well-preserved animal traps in the area (cf NH73SE 34, NH73SE 37; NH73SE 38; NH73SE 39). Visited by RCAHMS (GFG) 7 April 2014.

Further information can be found here: http://her.highland.gov.uk/SingleResult.aspx?uid=MHG51251

24

Figure 10 A previously recorded animal trap (MHG51252)

Site number: NH73SE 37 Highland HER id: MHG51252 NGR: NH 7789 3362

25

This animal trap is set into a slope within woodland at the south shore of Loch Moy. It comprises a pit measuring about 5.5m in diameter at the surface tapering to 1m at its base, and is a maximum of 2m in depth. There is a bank of upcast material on the downslope edge. The pit is depicted as a ‘Wolf Trap’ on the 1st edition of the OS 6 inch map (Inverness-shire (Mainland), Sheet XXI, 1871-5) and, although there is no accompanying entry in the Name Book, we can be confident that the label derives from a reference to wolves and ‘traps formed for taking them’ written in 1836 (New Stat. Acct. 1845, v14, 102; cf. Trans. of the Inverness Scientific Society and Field Club 1888, 111). One would accept this without comment, but for the fact that wolves may not have survived in Scotland beyond the 17th century (Harrison 2012). Indeed, the Statistical Account for Moy and Dalarossie published in 1793 makes no mention of wolves, instead noting that ‘foxes are very numerous overall in this county and very destructive to sheep and poultry. Of late years, a fox-hunter has been hired by the neighbourhood to destroy them’ (v8, 502), suggesting a more plausible explanation for the high number of well-preserved animal traps in the area (cf NH73SE 34, NH73SE 36; NH73SE 38; NH73SE 39). Visited by RCAHMS (GFG) 7 April 2014.

Further information can be found here: http://her.highland.gov.uk/SingleResult.aspx?uid=MHG51252

26

Legend

Application Site Boundary

Animal Traps

Funtack Bridge Listed Category C

Milton of Moy

N

0 50m 100m 200m

Bar Scale

Proposed Sand and Gravel Quarry Dalmagarry, Tomatin

Drawing Title: Cultural Heritage

Date: August 2014

Figure: 07

Pat Munro (Alness) Ltd Caplich Quarry Alness Ross-shire IV17 0XU

Telephone: 01349 882377 Fax: 01349 882019 E-mail [email protected]

Ordnance Survey © Crown Copyright 2011. All rights reserved Licence number 0100048957