Document Front Sheet
Contract or Purchase Number and Description: Contractor/Supplier Name: LC-EV-107 Golder Associates Ltd. Document Title: Total Number of Pages Historic Resources Assessment (Stage 2) – Labrador-Island Incl. Front Sheet 144
Transmission Link (Newfoundland Segment) Contractor Document Number: Revision Number: 1312500043-3-002 A1 Supplier Document Number: Revision Number: /Supplier
NE-LCP Document Number: NE-LCP Issue Number:
ILK-GA-CD-0000-EV-RP-0001-01 B1
LCP Contractor
- Approver’s Signature: Date (dd-mmm-yyyy): Review Class:
NE 12-May-2014
Comments: Equipment Tag or Model Number:
REVIEW DOES NOT CONSTITUTE APPROVAL OF DESIGN DETAILS, CALCULATIONS, TEST METHODS OR MATERIAL DEVELOPED AND/OR SELECTED BY THE CONTRACTOR, NOR DOES IT RELIEVE THE CONTRACTOR FROM FULL COMPLIANCE WITH CONTRACTUAL OR OTHER OBLIGATIONS. 01 – REVIEWED AND ACCEPTED – NO COMMENTS 02 – REVIEWED – INCORPORATE COMMENTS, REVISE AND RESUBMIT 03 – REVIEWED - NOT ACCEPTED 04 – INFORMATION ONLY 05 – NOT REVIEWED
Lead Reviewer: Date (dd-mmm-yyyy): Project Manager: Date (dd-mmm-yyyy):
LCP
- NE-LCP Management: Date (dd-mmm-yyyy): NE
General Comments:
LCP-PT-MD-0000-IM-FR-0001-01 REV. B3
DOCUMENT REVIEW
Comment Sheet
Completed by LCP Representative Completed by LCPDCC Document Title: Record Number: Historic Resources Assessment (Stage 2) – Labrador-Island Transmission Link (Newfoundland Segment) NE-LCP Document Number: Revision: 3RD Party Document Number: Revision: Transmittal Number: ILK-GA-CD-0000-EV-RP-0001-01 A1 13-1250-0043-3-002 A1 LCP Department of Origin: Purchase Order/Contract Number: Transmittal Date: Environment & Regulatory Compliance LC-EV-107 Distribute Comment Sheet to: Date returned to LCPDCC
Peter Madden 24-Mar-2014
LCP Representative: Peter Madden Lead Reviewer: Peter Madden
Comments: Section / Paragraph Item No. Comment Response Status / Page / Sheet 1 Title Change: Change made as requested. Historic Resources Impact Assessment Report – Labrador-Island Transmission Link (Newfoundland Segments) 2 Pg 12 -Introduction Add: Change made as requested. 1st sentence “Newfoundland Segments of the” before … Labrador-Island Transmission Link are to be built… 3 Pg 37 – Last sentence Comment: was the winter cabin location in PA-1E reported to Added sentence: “The existence of the cabin was Nalcor at the time? If so, please indicate. reported to Nalcor by e-mail on 31 October.”
4 Pg 39 – last paragraph Correct spelling of Stantes’s to Stantec’s. Corrected.
LCP-PT-MD-0000-IM-PR-0009-01 Rev. B1 External Revision Controlled Documents Review and Acceptance Process 1
Historic Resources Impact Assessment Report Labrador-Island Transmission Line (Newfoundland Segments) Archaeological Investigation Permit #13.47 (Shoal Cove to Soldiers Pond) Golder document #13-1250-0043-3-002
Testing a suitable area for a campsite, near PA12, Tote River (CN.6142).
Submitted to Marion Organ Lower Churchill Project Delivery Team
Submitted by Golder Associates Limited 62 Pippy Place, Suite 204, St. John’s, NL, A1B 4H7
On behalf of Gerald Penney Associates Limited P.O. Box 428, St. John's, NL, A1C 5K4
22 April 2014
Labrador-Island Transmission Line Permit #13.47 GOLDER DRAFT II GPA 2014
CONTENTS
List of Figures, Tables and Plates ...... 4 Letter of Transmittal ...... 7 Executive Summary ...... 9 Participants ...... 11
1 Introduction...... 12
2 Previous Archaeological Results ...... 13 Relative sea-level history...... 13 Pre-contact cultures of Newfoundland ...... 16 Stage 1 field testing of the ROW ...... 21
3 Historic Aboriginal Use ...... 24 Beothuk ...... 24 Inuit and Innu ...... 25 Mi’kmaq ...... 25
4 European Patterns of Settlement ...... 27 Northern Peninsula ...... 27 Central ...... 29
5 Work Plan ...... 32 Methodology ...... 32
6 Field Investigations ...... 35 PA1 – Corridor Ponds ...... 35 PA2 – Western Brook Pond ...... 44 PA3 – Ten Mile Narrows...... 47 PA4 – Leg Pond ...... 51 PA5 – River of Ponds ...... 54 PA6 – Six Mile Pond ...... 58 PA7 – Outside Pond ...... 62 PA8 – Birchy Lake ...... 65 PA9 – Badger [Exploits River] ...... 69 PA10 – Lemottes Lake ...... 72 PA11 – Rattling Brook ...... 75 PA12 – Tote River ...... 78 PA13 – Dead Wolf Brook ...... 81 PA14 – Terra Nova River ...... 84 PA15 – Southwest Brook ...... 87 PA16 – Goose Pond ...... 90 PA17 – Harbour Main Pond ...... 92
2
Labrador-Island Transmission Line Permit #13.47 GOLDER DRAFT II GPA 2014
7 Health and Safety ...... 94
8 Discussion ...... 96
9 Sources ...... 98
Appendix A: Project Execution Plan ...... 106 Appendix B: Stage 1 & 2 Standard Operating Procedures (PAO) ...... 124
3
Labrador-Island Transmission Line Permit #13.47 GOLDER DRAFT II GPA 2014
List of Figures, Tables and Plates
Figures Figure 1: Location of Project Areas ...... 8 Figure 2: PA1 Corridor Ponds ...... 36 Figure 3: PAs 1A to 1E, Corridor Ponds ...... 40 Figure 4: PAs 1G and 1F, Corridor Ponds ...... 41 Figure 5: PA-1H, Corridor Ponds ...... 42 Figure 6: PA2 Western Brook Pond ...... 45 Figure 7: PA3 Ten Mile Narrows ...... 48 Figure 8: PA4 Leg Pond ...... 53 Figure 9: PA5 River of Ponds ...... 55 Figure 10: PA6 Six Mile Pond ...... 59 Figure 11: PA7 Outside Pond ...... 63 Figure 12: PA8 Birchy Lake ...... 67 Figure 13: PA9 Badger [Exploits River] ...... 70 Figure 14: PA10 Lemottes Lake ...... 73 Figure 15: PA11 Rattling Brook ...... 76 Figure 16: PA12 Tote River ...... 79 Figure 17: PA13 Dead Wolf Brook ...... 82 Figure 18: PA14 Terra Nova River ...... 85 Figure 19: PA15 Southwest Brook ...... 89 Figure 20: PA16 Goose Pond ...... 91 Figure 21: PA17 Harbour Main Pond ...... 93
Tables Table 1: Approximate former sea-level heights ...... 15 Table 2: Test pits per PA ...... 33
Plates Testing, PA12, near Tote River ...... Cover Plate 1: Coastline at the mouth of Hawkes Bay ...... 14 Plate 2: Aerial view of River of Ponds ...... 16 Plate 3: Indication of the distribution of Palaeoeskino sites ...... 19 Plate 4: Surface investigation, south side of Birchy Lake ...... 23 Plate 5: Distribution of Beothuk archaeological sites ...... 24 Plate 6: A former French/Basque fishing room on Old Ferrolle Island ...... 27 Plate 7: Map showing French fishing rooms in 1888 ...... 28 Plate 8: Example of a test pit at PA15, Southwest Brook ...... 34 Plate 9: Testing in cutover near the existing ROW ...... 35 Plate 10: Terrace at PA-1B ...... 37 Plate 11: Landing, PA-1F ...... 38 Plate 12: Terrace at southern end of PA-1H...... 39
4
Labrador-Island Transmission Line Permit #13.47 GOLDER DRAFT II GPA 2014
Plate 13: Cabin, PA-1E ...... 43 Plate 14: 1980s cut-line ...... 43 Plate 15: Cabin and sawmill, near Western Brook Pond ...... 44 Plate 16: Well-used path west of the ROW ...... 46 Plate 17: Grass-ground SW of the ROW...... 46 Plate 18: Surface examination of helicopter landing site ...... 47 Plate 19: Shoreline characteristic of MZ 051 ...... 49 Plate 20: Interior, north shore of Ten Mile Narrows ...... 49 Plate 21: Clearing/camp on the south side of Ten Mile Narrows ...... 50 Plate 22: Winterhouse/logging camp/cabin area, Leg Pond ...... 51 Plate 23: East end of Leg Pond ...... 52 Plate 24: Helicopter landing, Leg Pond ...... 52 Plate 25: Looking from River of Ponds towards Blue Mountain ...... 54 Plate 26: Fish fence, looking west ...... 56 Plate 27: Likely fisheries cabin site ...... 56 Plate 28: Aerial view of PA6 ...... 58 Plate 29: Flagging, north side of Six Mile Pond ...... 60 Plate 30: NE side of PA6 ...... 60 Plate 31: Flagging on ‘Hunters Hill’ ...... 61 Plate 32: East end of Outside Pond ...... 62 Plate 33: Flagging PA7, Outside Pond ...... 62 Plate 34: Tilt on Outside Pond ...... 64 Plate 35: Boggy conditions, Outside Pond ...... 64 Plate 36: ‘Drowned Point,’ south side of Birchy Lake ...... 65 Plate 37: Boom chain, north side of Birchy Lake ...... 66 Plate 38: Test-pitting near chert find, Birchy Lake ...... 66 Plate 39: Cut pine, south side of Birchy Lake ...... 68 Plate 40: Aerial view, PA9 ...... 69 Plate 41: Fill or sterile ground, PA9 ...... 71 Plate 42: Swamp north of the Buchans Highway ...... 71 Plate 43: Looking west across the north end of Lemottes Lake ...... 72 Plate 44: PA10 is just south of a transmission line ROW ...... 72 Plate 45: Some of the debris found near a collapsed camp ...... 74 Plate 46: Rattling Brook ...... 75 Plate 47: West side of Rattling Brook ...... 75 Plate 48: East side of Rattling Brook ...... 77 Plate 49: Looking north along Tote River ...... 78 Plate 50: At centre, the cove at the NE corner of the pond ...... 78 Plate 51: Possible historic feature in the beachy cove ...... 80 Plate 52: Indicated TL crossing site, at centre ...... 81 Plate 53: Contemporary midden, east side of Dead Wolf Brook...... 83 Plate 54: The more inviting west side of the river ...... 84 Plate 55: East side of the Terra Nova River ...... 84 Plate 56: Test pit at PA14 ...... 86 Plate 57: The bend in Southwest Brook ...... 87 Plate 58: Surface conditions on the west side of the brook ...... 88
5
Labrador-Island Transmission Line Permit #13.47 GOLDER DRAFT II GPA 2014
Plate 59: A terrace above the bend...... 88 Plate 60: The NW cove of Goose Pond ...... 90 Plate 61: Looking NW across Harbour Main Pond ...... 92 Plate 62: Flagged protruding telegraph wire at PA8 ...... 95
6
Labrador-Island Transmission Line Permit #13.47 GOLDER DRAFT II GPA 2014
Letter of Transmittal
22 April 2014
Michel Wawrzkow Golder Associates Limited 62 Pippy Place, Suite 204, St. John’s, NL, A1B 4H7
Mr. Wawrzkow:
Please find enclosed the final report on GPA’s Stage 2 Historic Resources Assessment of transmission line corridors on the Island of Newfoundland, Shoal Cove to Soldiers Pond, Archaeological Investigation Permit #13.47 (Golder Associates Limited document #13-1250- 0043-3-002).
Sincerely,
Gerald Penney President
/encls
7
Labrador-Island Transmission Line Permit #13.47 GOLDER DRAFT II GPA 2014
Figure 1: Location of Project Areas
8
Labrador-Island Transmission Line Permit #13.47 GOLDER DRAFT II GPA 2014
Executive Summary
The subject of this Stage 2 Historic Resources Inventory Assessment (hereinafter “HRIA”) is the proposed route for an overhead hydroelectric transmission line approximately 700 kilometres (hereinafter, “km”) long, to be built from a landing site at Shoal Cove on the Strait of Belle Isle, down the Northern Peninsula and across the Central interior to a converter station at Soldiers Pond on the Avalon Peninsula (see Figure 1). The proposed transmission line is part of the 1100 km long Labrador-Island Link, integral to an agreement reached in November 2010 between Emera Inc. and Nalcor Energy regarding power to be generated from the Lower Churchill Project (colloquially, Muskrat Falls) in central Labrador.
Nalcor is required to submit an HRIA to the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador for approval by the Minister of Tourism, Culture and Recreation. HRIAs are conducted under the authority of the Province’s Historic Resources Act (RSNL 1990 c. H-4) and regulations pursuant. Archaeological Investigation Permit #13.47 was issued by the Newfoundland and Labrador Provincial Archaeology Office (hereinafter, “PAO”). See Appendix 2 for the PAO’s standard operating procedures for permit holders.1
It may be useful to conceive of the 17 Project Areas (hereinafter, “PAs,” see Figure 1), spread as they are across much of Newfoundland, as falling into three landform regions. Under Archaeological Investigation Permit #13.47, the field team of Gerald Penney Associates Limited (hereinafter GPA) conducted three expeditions, totalling 20 days of fieldwork, in the fall of 2013. GPA’s team worked primarily on the Northern Peninsula PAs from 22 September to 2 October, and returned to the Shoal Cove area for additional assessment 30 October to 2 November. The Central PAs were accessed 13 to 17 October.2
1 In the regulatory regime of the Act the term “historic resources” is employed, perhaps confusingly, to refer to material remains of both pre-contact and historic-era cultures:“ [H]istoric resource means a work of nature or of humans that is primarily of value for its archaeological, prehistoric, historic, cultural, natural, scientific or aesthetic interest, including an archaeological, prehistoric, historic or natural site, structure or object” (Historic Resources Act, s.2e). Gerald Penney Associates Limited employs the term “historic resources” in reporting, in the sense of its definition in the Act under the authority of which GPA conducts our investigations. Cultural or historic resources are referenced as being either pre-contact [prior to AD 1500], historic [AD 1500-1960], or contemporary [post-1960]. The PAO further employs AD 1960 as the cut-off date in distinguishing archaeological sites from ethnographic sites. 2 Goose Pond was assessed on 17 October, while returning to St. John’s from Central. The other Avalon Peninsula PA [#17 Harbour Main Pond] was assessed on 25 October by a day-trip. 9
Labrador-Island Transmission Line Permit #13.47 GOLDER DRAFT II GPA 2014
Northern Peninsula m asl3 tidewater4 date(s) investigated testpits 1 Corridor Ponds 30m 1-5 km 26 Sept; 31 Oct; 1 Nov 73 2 Western Brook Pond 75m 11.5 km 27 Sept 29 3 Ten Mile Narrows 57m 16 km 28 Sept 69 4 Leg Pond 80m 14 km 29 Sept 1 5 River of Ponds 43m 20 km 30 Sept 30 6 Six Mile Pond 420m 23.5 km 1 Oct 11 7 Outside Pond 364m 28.5 km 24 Sept 11 Central/Interior 8 Birchy Lake 86m 28 km 23 Sept; 1 Oct 79 9 Badger [Exploits River] 98m 56 km 13 Oct 9 10 Lemotte’s Lake 80m 30 km 15 Oct 34 11 Rattling Brook 72m 32 km 14 Oct 27 12 Tote River 90m 32 km 14 Oct 48 13 Dead Wolf Brook 127m 78 km 16 Oct 35 14 Terra Nova River 91m 20 km 16 Oct 35 15 Southwest Brook 28m 8 km 16 Oct 23 Avalon Peninsula 16 Goose Pond 74m 8 km 17 Oct 14 17 Harbour Main Pond 90m 6 km 25 Oct 12
A total of 540 test pits were excavated (30+ per PA on average). In certain areas where less than 20 test pits were dug this was based on field observation of either: 1. Wet conditions not conducive to human habitation (such as PAs 6, 7 and 16); 2. Steep slopes giving rise to safety concerns (PA4 and the south side of PA15).
No pre-contact remains were identified in any Project Area.5 Surface observation of detritus and/or ruins identified historic or contemporary occupation and use at PAs 1, 3, 5, 8, 10, 12, 13 and 16. There was evidence of contemporary domestic wood cutting in most PAs (particularly PAs 1, 2 and 10) and of historic commercial cutting of white pine at Birchy Lake (PA8) and Tote River (PA12) and contemporary pulpwood cutting at Dead Wolf Brook (PA13).
Based on testing within the proposed transmission ROW, and contextual assessment of the ground conditions existing in the region generally, GPA concludes that further testing within the
3 Elevation, in metres above sea level. 4 Approximate distance of tested areas from the high water mark. 5 Possible lithics identified at PA 8 Birchy Lake (north side) on 1 October were determined upon analysis not to have been shaped by human agency. 10
Labrador-Island Transmission Line Permit #13.47 GOLDER DRAFT II GPA 2014 corridor route6 is not indicated. In instances where re-routing of the transmission line by more than 100 m may be contemplated as engineering proceeds, GPA recommends desk-based assessment regarding those river crossings where there is likely historic aboriginal and/or 19th century European use, as an indicator of possible pre-contact use in the following PAs: - PA3 Ten Mile Narrows; - PA5 River of Ponds; - PA8 Birchy Lake; - PA9 Badger [Exploits River]; - PA12 Tote River; - PA14 Terra Nova River; and - PA15 Southwest Brook.
Should desk-based assessment indicate heightened expectations at these hypothetical future re- routing locations, monitoring of works may be considered on a case-by-case basis for access roads to the right-of-way, or if it is contemplated to grade or ramp proposed fording sites.
Participants
Gerald Penney, M.A. principal investigator; project management
Kyle Crotty, B.A. field archaeologist Robert Cuff, M.A. health and safety manager; historical research; report preparation; field assistance Susan Kelleher, B.A. clerical/editorial support Blair Temple, M.A. lead field archaeologist Toby Simpson, B.A. drafting/digital mapping; field assistance
William Cavers, Hugh Daechsel, Daryl Johannesen and Michel Wawrzkow of Golder Associates Ltd. assisted in preparation and/or offered editorial suggestions.
6 Including the transmission ROW and route changes as supplied to GPA by Golder to 1 November 2013. 11
Labrador-Island Transmission Line Permit #13.47 GOLDER DRAFT II GPA 2014
1 Introduction
As part of an agreement reached in November 2010 between Emera Inc. and Nalcor Energy (hereinafter, “Nalcor’) regarding power to be generated from the Lower Churchill hydro-electric project, Newfoundland Segments of the Labrador-Island Transmission Link are to be built from a landing site at Shoal Cove, down the Northern Peninsula and across the Central interior to a converter station at Soldiers Pond on the Avalon Peninsula. Gerald Penney Associates Limited (hereinafter “GPA”) was contracted by Golder Associates Ltd. (hereinafter, “Golder”) to conduct archaeological screening and reconnaissance – a Stage 2 Historic Resource Inventory Assessment (hereinafter “HRIA”) – under the Historic Resources Act, of the proposed transmission line right-of-way (hereinafter “ROW”) and potential infrastructure on the Island. A Stage 1 assessment of the corridor as then conceived was conducted, primarily in 2008, by Stantec Consulting.7 Using the objective-criteria potential mapping developed for the Stage 1 assessment, Nalcor supplied Golder and GPA with mapping of Stantec’s High Potential Map Zones where they were intersected by the proposed ROW, for Stage 2 Historic Resources assessment. Subsequently, the Provincial Archaeology Office (PAO) requested assessment of certain other areas identified as having medium potential,8 to which Nalcor and GPA agreed at a meeting held on 11 September 2013. The construction corridor proposed for 2013 assessment under permit #13.47 is discussed by GPA in light of background research into three sub-regions, each with a distinct geomorphology, human history and factors of site advantage: - The Northern Peninsula; - The Central interior; and - The Avalon Peninsula.
Of the 31 Map Zones identified, 11 are on the Northern Peninsula, 17 are in the Central interior and two on the Avalon Peninsula. Nalcor also requested that GPA review a re-routing of transmission line corridor interior of Portland Creek, a Stage 1 (or desk-based) assessment.9
7 “Labrador-Island Transmission Link Environmental Assessment Historic and Heritage Resources Component Study.” Stantec Consulting Ltd., St. John’s (2011). 8 The PAO requested assessment of medium potential areas which abutted high potential zones at PAs 5, 9, and 10- 15. The two Avalon Peninsula PAs (16 and 17) were investigations of zones previously identified as medium potential, at the request of the PAO. 9 Stantec did not assess this area as it was then outside the proposed transmission line corridor. The Stage 1 assessment interior of Portland Creek is reported on separately (GPA 2014).
12
Labrador-Island Transmission Line Permit #13.47 GOLDER DRAFT II GPA 2014
2 Previous Archaeological Results
Relative sea-level history. The effect of changing Relative Sea Levels (hereinafter RSL) is potentially of relevance for project areas within 50 m of present sea level. The role of changing RSL and its effect on current archaeological site locations has been understood for decades in Newfoundland and Labrador.10 In some places sites are eroding, while sites of the same age in other parts of the Province are found inland. Interdisciplinary research by M.A.P. Renouf (Archaeology Unit) and Trevor Bell (Department of Geography) at Memorial University adds much to our knowledge of pre-contact landforms on the Northern Peninsula.11 Using geomorphological data acquired specifically for that area, a (new) RSL curve was constructed and a proposed sea-level history of Port au Choix during the period of human habitation developed. A pointed archaeological survey using this data resulted in the recording of a previously elusive Maritime Archaic Indian (hereinafter MAI) habitation site.12 This information was then combined with data from other Maritime Archaic sites across the Island, to produce a better picture of site location/choice: an informative tool for future research and survey.13
The south, northeast and most of the west coasts of the Island have Type B RSL curves, which depict an initial emergence followed by submergence. This has resulted in the erosion and submersion of MAI sites, as observed in the Burgeo area for example, where many MAI sites are submerged.14 Back Harbour on Twillingate Island has experienced a similar RSL change, with many such sites now underwater (though sometimes accessible during low tide).15 Much of the Avalon Peninsula has a Type C RSL curve (a continuous submergence) and a constantly rising RSL,16 resulting in the erosion or submergence of older sites, often at a greater rate than those with a Type B RSL curve.
The RSL history of the Northern Peninsula (Plate 1) is quite distinct as rates of emergence and/or submergence differ throughout Newfoundland, producing different results. The Northern
10 Harp (1951, 1963); McGhee and Tuck (1975). 11 See Bell and Renouf (2003); Bell et al (2005); Renouf and Bell (2000, 2006) 12 Renouf and Bell (2000). 13 Renouf and Bell (2006). 14 Rast et al (2004). 15 Temple (2008). 16 Catto et al (2000). 13
Labrador-Island Transmission Line Permit #13.47 GOLDER DRAFT II GPA 2014
Peninsula has what is referred to as a Type A RSL curve, meaning the area exhibits a continuous emergence since glacial retreat 11,000 years ago, resulting in older sites being at elevations on the modern landscape much higher than they were at the time of their occupation.
Plate 1: “Emerging” coastline at the mouth of Hawkes Bay. Keppel Island is at centre, Port Saunders at right. An archaeological site on Keppel Island (EdBh-1) includes a possible historic Inuit component (NP.5948).
These RSL changes occurring with Type B and C RSL curves primarily affect MAI sites. By the time Paleoeskimo and later Amerindian (Recent Indian) groups arrived on the Island, the rate of RSL change was greatly reduced and its effect often minimal. Most Maritime Archaic sites in areas with Type B and C RSL curves are now either damaged through erosion or inundated with water, affecting the number of recorded sites outside the Northern Peninsula.17 Overall, Type B and C RSL curves produce broadly similar results with regards to their modern location and in particular, condition of archaeological sites – erosion and submergence of MAI sites.
No geomorphological research has been conducted specifically in the Flower’s Cove-Shoal Cove area (see Table 1 for proximate locations). PA1 is approximately 80 km NE of Port au Choix.
17 Bell and Renouf (2003:357-359). 14
Labrador-Island Transmission Line Permit #13.47 GOLDER DRAFT II GPA 2014
Table 1: Approximate former sea-level heights for portions of the Flowers Cove-Shoal Cove study area.18 ka (thousand RSL (m asl) years ago) Port au Choix Strait of Belle Isle Belburns 4 4.5 5 4 5 7 8 7 6 11 12-13 10 7 16 17-18 13 8 23 24-24 19
Admittedly, close proximity does not necessarily mean similar curves: regional variations are common, and the gradual changes in RSL observed elsewhere show that any distance could result in slightly different RSL histories. Cow Head for example, c. 95 km SW of Port au Choix, exhibits a Type B curve.19 However, as a general guide for interpretive purpose data from nearby locations will suffice.
Data extrapolated from the constructed sea-level curve for Port au Choix suggests that the past shoreline during the MAI period was between c. 4.5 m asl and c. 10 m asl.20 The Gould site, located on a terrace between 6 to10 m asl,21 gives some indication as to the height of MAI sites above the contemporary shoreline. An interesting comparison is at L’Anse au Meadows, where most of the landscape lies below 8 m asl, and has comparatively little MAI material.22 The differences in the RSL during Paleoeskimo and Recent Indian times would have been far less apparent; at c. AD 1000, the sea level would have been c. 1 m higher than today.23 At L’Anse au Meadows, Paleoeskimo and Recent Indian occupations are at 2-5 m asl.24
The effect of changing RSL is of relevance for those project areas within 50 m of present sea level. Most PAs investigated in 2013 are in the interior, and would have been little impacted
18 Elevations are extrapolated from RSL curves for Port au Choix (Bell, Smith and Renouf 2005:21), Strait of Belle Isle (Grant 1992: 55), and Bellburns (Bell et al 2005:33). They are meant to be approximations only. 19 Bell et al (2005:23). This conflict’s somewhat with an early interpretation of archaeological data from the South Brook Park area (Pasadena area), where a possible post-MAI sea-level fall had been suggested (Reader 1996:126). 20 Bell, Smith and Renouf (2005:21); Renouf and Bell (2006:8). 21 Renouf and Bell (2000:59). 22 See Kristiansen and Curtis (2012:69-71). 23 Bell et al (2003:216). 24 Kristiansen and Curtis (2012:70-71). 15
Labrador-Island Transmission Line Permit #13.47 GOLDER DRAFT II GPA 2014 except in extreme circumstances. The PAs where changing RSL could be an issue are PA1 (Shoal Cove/Corridor Ponds) and to a lesser degree PA5 (River of Ponds).
It is known from research that RSL history has had a significant effect on the present location archaeological sites, in particular MAI sites. The oldest MAI site is at Port au Choix dated to c. 6300 Before Present25 with the next oldest sites (at Port au Choix and South Brook Park for example) dating to c. 5500 BP. This leaves two millennia of potentially earlier Archaic presence, as recorded in southern Labrador, but unaccounted for on the Island. Cherts from Newfoundland have been found on early MAI sites (c. 7000-6500 BP) in Blanc Sablon, Quebec,26 proving some form of contact, either Labrador groups moving back and forth, or interaction between Labrador groups and a yet unrecorded early MAI group on the Island. The absence of recorded sites from this period is partly the result of limited archaeological survey in higher elevations throughout the Northern Peninsula.27 This is emphasised by a possible early MAI axe found inland from River of Ponds (see Plate 2), 15 km from the modern shoreline, at an elevation of c. 30 asl.28
Plate 2: Aerial view of the general area of a spot find on River of Ponds [EcBh-01] (NP.5942).
Pre-contact cultures of Newfoundland. The earliest known inhabitants of the Island of Newfoundland are the Maritime Archaic Indians (MAI). The earliest evidence comes from the
25 The baseline year for radiocarbon dating Before Present (hereinafter BP) is established by convention as AD 1950. 26 Pintal (2006:113). 27 Bell and Renouf (2003:357-364). 28 Bell and Renouf (2003:364). 16
Labrador-Island Transmission Line Permit #13.47 GOLDER DRAFT II GPA 2014
Gould Site at Port au Choix, where one component has been dated to c. 6240 BP.29 The next oldest sites date are located at Port au Choix (5390 BP),30 and South Brook Park31 on shore of Deer Lake near Pasadena. Port au Choix is also home to a well-known MAI burial site excavated in the 1960s after having been accidentally discovered during mechanical excavations for a building foundation.
No early32 MAI material has been conclusively identified in Newfoundland, but an axe found inland from River of Ponds (40 km south of Port au Choix, but only 3 km NW33 of PA5) was recovered at an elevation of c. 30 m asl and may evidence this early presence. MAI sites are known throughout the Province. The uneven distribution of their sites has been attributed to regional differences in relative sea-level, rather than reflective of their range, which is presumed to have been the whole Island.
On much of the Northern Peninsula, MAI sites are located several metres above sea level, depending on the topography, inland from currently settled areas. This difference in relative sea level was the principle rationale in devoting increased attention to those PAs located below 50 m asl on the coastal plain (PAs 1 and 5). On the west coast (between the Port au Port and Cape Ray), northeast coast, south coast and the Avalon, the opposite has occurred. The RSL histories have resulted in many sites becoming eroded (a common cause of site discovery) or totally submerged by rising sea levels.
The MAI disappear from the Island c. 3200 BP. Early interpretations of this and other cultural “disappearances” hypothesized that these groups became extinct due to meager and precarious food sources, particularly terrestrial animals.34 Recently, other scholars have suggested that groups under such stress probably moved off the Island.35 The various cultural groups in Newfoundland likely still had connections with kin in Labrador, as evidenced by the continuous
29 Renouf (2011:3). 30 Port au Choix is 46 km SW of PA4 and 32 km NW of PA5. 31 While South Brook Park is 66 km SW of the nearest PA (#8), it is in the same [Humber] drainage basin. 32 8000-5500 BP. 33 GPA employs abbreviations of the ordinal and intermediate points of the compass to roughly indicate relative position of features (i.e. SE for southeast; NNW for north-northwest). 34 Tuck and Pastore (1985). 35 Schwarz (1994). 17
Labrador-Island Transmission Line Permit #13.47 GOLDER DRAFT II GPA 2014 trade and movement of lithic materials back and forth.36 Palaeo-environmental data suggest that this was a period of warming,37 potentially effecting sea ice, and thus seal populations and their migrations.
The Maritime Archaic disappearance may have been the beginning of a c. 300 year period in which there was no human presence on the Island. In Labrador, the MAI are hypothesized to have been succeeded temporally by the Intermediate Indians. (The relationship between these groups is still unclear). However, with the exception of possible finds at Big Brook and Garden Cove, Woody Point on the Northern Peninsula, no Intermediate Indian sites have been identified on the Island.38
The Island was repopulated c. 2990 BP by the Groswater Palaeoeskimo (hereinafter, “Groswater”), who arrived from Labrador, where they had been for some two centuries previous. This era appears to have been a period of fluctuating temperatures, characterized by overall cooling throughout the region. These fluctuations may account for high mobility of the Groswater, suggested by small site size. Like all Newfoundland’s pre-contact cultures, the Groswater had a predominantly marine-based economy, focusing mainly on seals and supplemented by fish and seabirds. At Port au Choix, a ritualistic element has been identified regarding their subsistence. The absence of seal crania in faunal assemblages at Phillip’s Garden West, and the presence of a distinct Groswater tool kit at that same site, indicates an element to their food supply beyond simple subsistence.39
Recent research has identified Groswater sites in the interior, although the degree of interior use is still open to interpretation.40 The Groswater “disappeared” from the Island c. 1800 BP, during a period of slight warming, which could have affected sea ice, and both the size and migration patterns of seal populations.
36 Renouf (1999). 37 Bell and Renouf (2011:35-36). 38 Beaton (2004). 39 Renouf (2005); Wells (2011). 40 Holly and Erwin (2009). 18
Labrador-Island Transmission Line Permit #13.47 GOLDER DRAFT II GPA 2014
During the last centuries of Groswater occupation, two additional groups “moved” to Newfoundland from Labrador: the Dorset Paleoeskimo, and the first of two Recent Indians groups. Dorset Paleoeskimos (hereinafter, “Dorset”) who moved to the Island are temporally the same as the people who have been classified elsewhere, such as in Labrador and Nunavut, as “middle” Dorset. (No sites containing “early” or “late” Dorset material have been identified on the Island). They first arrived c. 2000 BP, spreading throughout and becoming possibly the most populous and widely distributed pre-contact group in Newfoundland (Plate 3). There are known Dorset sites virtually all along the coast of the Island, as well as a few interior sites on the Humber, Exploits, Gander and Gambo River systems. They had a marine oriented subsistence similar to the Groswater, focusing on seals, supplemented by birds and fish. The majority of their sites are therefore located tight to the coast, often in the most exposed outer coastal areas. How the warming period (suggested to have caused the Groswater to leave the Island) affected the Dorset is uncertain.
Plate 3: Indication of the distribution of Palaeoeskimo sites (PAO).
Dorset use of the interior is presently poorly understood. It has been suggested that Recent Indian groups who made more frequent use of the interior may have discouraged the Dorset from
19
Labrador-Island Transmission Line Permit #13.47 GOLDER DRAFT II GPA 2014 entering the distal interior.41 Regional distinctions are posited, evidenced by differing endblade styles. Over time discrete populations developed in specific regions, such as adjacent bays, or opposite sides of an isthmus. This development suggests limited mobility, movement primarily within a specific region, possibly following seasonal food resources, with forays inland.42
Dorset populations began to wane 1200 to 1100 BP, coinciding with a rise in temperature which would have affected sea-ice and seal populations, evidenced through a greater variety of food resources in faunal collections.43 They eventually disappeared, approximately 1100 BP, possibly retreating to Labrador,44 or suffering extinction.45 While there may not have been a catastrophic extinction, the similarities in “late” dates across various regions of the Island suggest a quite significant population collapse. 46
Meanwhile, a second wave of Amerindians – referred to as Recent Indians – arrived c. 2100 BP. The first Recent Indian group, the Cow Head complex (c. 2110-930 BP), moved onto the Island a short time before the Dorset, and were followed shortly by the Recent Indian Beaches complex (c. 2000-910 BP). Despite a relative lack of sites (especially the Cow Head complex), these early Recent Indian complexes are thought to have had mixed subsistence (involving coastal and interior resource exploitation). The location of substantial inner coastal sites such as the Beaches may indicate easy access to a variety of resources within the interior and outer coast.47
Also uncertain is from where they arrived. The Cow Head complex is now thought to have as much in common with contemporary Quebec groups as with Labrador.48 Regardless, it is presumed that Recent Indians first populated the Northern Peninsula, spreading to the northeast coast over time. The broadly contemporary dates of the Cow Head and Beaches complexes, coupled with differing lithic styles, has led to the conclusion that they are probably not part of a cultural continuum, but contemporaneous.
41 Holly (2005); Holly and Erwin (2009:77-78). 42 LeBlanc (2010). 43 Bell and Renouf (2011:37); Renouf and Bell (2009). 44 LeBlanc (2010). 45 Tuck and Pastore (1985). 46 Renouf and Bell (2009:269). 47 Holly (2008:172-174); Schwarz (1994). 48 Hartery (2007). 20
Labrador-Island Transmission Line Permit #13.47 GOLDER DRAFT II GPA 2014
The Beaches Complex is said to have developed into the Little Passage complex (c. 1100-360 BP). The overlapping date between the end of the Beaches and start of the Little Passage complexes (approximately 200 years) may be a result of the way archaeologists classify gradual stylistic changes in stone tool making. The Little Passage complex had a mixed interior-coastal subsistence pattern similar to their predecessors.
The Little Passage may be thought of as “ancestral Beothuk,” as the term Beothuk is generally reserved to apply to Indian people of Newfoundland post-contact. In other words, they are the same peoples encountered by Europeans in the late 15th and 16th centuries. These encounters and the effects on their material culture through the adoption of European materials distinguish Beothuk from the Little Passage.
From the 16th century onward, the expansion of the European fishery and eventually settlement resulted in a contraction of the area typically inhabited by the Beothuk. They became concentrated in Notre Dame Bay and were eventually forced into the interior, primarily on the Exploits River system. Red Indian Lake would become the home of the Beothuk. It is at Red Indian Lake that Demasduit was captured in 1819 and her husband, Nonosbawsut, killed. Shanawdithit, before her death in 1829, famously sketched memories of Red Indian Lake, providing an important ethnographic and historic tool. Her death traditionally marks the end of the Beothuk, and while it has been debated whether she was in fact the last, Beothuk culture more or less died with her.
Stage 1 field testing of the ROW. Testing conducted by Stantec (primarily in 2008) in the course of Stage 1 assessment resulted in 774 test pits being excavated in 25 Map Zones on the Island portion of the transmission corridor. Most were at river crossings which had been judgementally determined to be high potential and/or where there were pre-contact archaeological sites in proximity (the Exploits and Gander river systems and at Birchy Lake).49
On the Northern Peninsula, the majority of test-pitting was at two narrows in major inland waterways: Ten Mile Lake (GPAs PA3) and Portland Pond [NTS Portland Creek Pond]. The
49 Stantec (2011). 21
Labrador-Island Transmission Line Permit #13.47 GOLDER DRAFT II GPA 2014
Portland Pond narrows was eliminated from consideration by re-routing the ROW 15 km inland. A third area of extensive Stage 1 testing in 2008 was the Middle Pond/Western Brook Pond area interior of Hawkes Bay.50 However, the projected ROW does not now intersect High Potential Map Zones in this area.
Two sites, each identified as such on the basis of a single flake observed in disturbed context, were located by Stantec during Stage 1 testing on the Northern Peninsula: Portland Creek Pond (EbBi-01) and Middle Pond (EdBg-01). Stantec also located a single flake at three sites in close proximity to the present PAs at Birchy Lake and Badger. None of these five sites lie in the present transmission corridor.
EdBg-01 (Middle Pond) is comprised of a single Ramah chert flake, collected during surface survey on the western shoreline of Middle Pond. Extensive testing of the shoreline above the find-spot identified no further historic resources. Sand cover was identified extending into the woods, suggesting spring overflow. Its presence was interpreted as deposit by erosion or ice action.51
EbBi-01(Portland Creek Pond) on the eastern end of Portland Creek Pond, consists of a worked black chert flake and a water worn quantize (possible Ramah) flake. The lithics were collected during investigation of a small beach, fronting a steep shoreline above. They are believed to have been deposited there due to ice movement or some other natural action, as the immediate area appeared to be an unlikely location for a habitation or even an over-night camp.52
DhBf-01 (Tea Bay 1) consists of a single large Ramah chert flake, collected from the shoreline of Birchy Lake, 300 m east of the Trans-Canada Highway (hereinafter “TCH”) and the bridge crossing at Birchy Narrows. It is approximately 3.5 km WSW of PA8. The site is on a point of land along the eastern side of a small bay known as Tea Bay, on the north side of the lake. The flake is retouched on one side, and shows no sign of water-wear, suggesting recent deposition onto the beach. The cultural affiliation of the object is not known, but the size and material
50 Stantec (2011). 51 Stantec (2011:72). 52 Stantec (2011:72). 22
Labrador-Island Transmission Line Permit #13.47 GOLDER DRAFT II GPA 2014 suggests that it may be Maritime Archaic. Testing along the shoreline above the findspot, which has been eroding for many years, exposed no further pre-contact resources.53
DhBe-04 (South Side 1) originated with a single black, water-worn chert flake, surface collected on a beach along the south shore of Birchy Lake, approximately 250 m NW of the TCH and just east of PA8 (south side, see Plate 4). It is suggested that this artifact may have been deposited from elsewhere along the shoreline, as the site shows signs of extensive erosion and ice scouring. Birchy Lake has been a focus of interest over the past number of years due to its strategic interior location, based on the identification of possible Groswater material here providing additional insight into interior use by pre-contact peoples.54
Plate 4: Surface investigation of previously-reported site DhBf-04, south side of Birchy Lake (NP.8863).
DfBa-13 (Two Mile 1) was identified after considerable test-pitting along the north and south side of the Exploits River adjacent to the Buchans Highway, guided by previously identified sites on nearby Two Mile Island. At DfBa-13 a single patinated chert flake was recovered, with all other nearby testing proving negative; its cultural affiliation is unknown.55
53 Stantec (2011:74). 54 Stantec (2011:74); Holly and Erwin (2009). 55 Stantec (2011:75). 23
Labrador-Island Transmission Line Permit #13.47 GOLDER DRAFT II GPA 2014
3 Historic Aboriginal Use Beothuk. Ingeborg Marshall has summarized the distribution of the Beothuk (see also Plate 5): The evidence leaves no doubt that Beothuk and their prehistoric forebears, the Little Passage Indians, had at one time or another exploited resources in every major bay of the island and had hunted inland from these bays, particularly in the watershed of the Exploits River. Eighteenth- and nineteenth-century accounts give a fairly convincing picture of the Beothuk’s wide distribution and subsequent exclusion from many parts of their traditional land and coast. Already by the end of the seventeenth century the Beothuk had been pressured away from the south coast, from Placentia, St. Mary’s and Conception bays. A few decades later, the Beothuk from Trinity Bay had been replaced by English settlers. They continued to visit a few areas in Bonavista Bay and to have access, no longer exclusive, to the coast and islands of Notre Dame Bay. Although Beothuk made trips to the bird islands in eastern Notre Dame Bay into the early 1800s, it was the large islands and hinterland of western Notre Dame Bay that became their last refuge. Some Beothuk may have lived on the Northern Peninsula and survivors may have gone from there across to Labrador. On the west coast, areas such as St. George’s Bay and Bonne Bay were taken over by the Micmac between about 1720 and 1740. These territorial changes severely diminished the Beothuk’s resource base which became too small and did not include sufficient access to major species to support their population.56
Plate 5: Distribution of Beothuk archaeological sites (PAO).
56 Marshall (1996:278). 24
Labrador-Island Transmission Line Permit #13.47 GOLDER DRAFT II GPA 2014
Other than a site with some possible Beothuk material at Grandois (on the White Bay side of the Northern Peninsula, about 70 km SE of Shoal Cove, the most northerly site indicated on Plate 5) there are no known Beothuk archaeological sites on the Northern Peninsula. However ,there are fragmentary accounts from the early 18th century of encounters between Innu and Beothuk at Hare Bay, and also of early 19th century encounters between Beothuk and settlers near Quirpon.57 There is also a view that a remnant population of Beothuk may have “escaped” from central Newfoundland to Labrador in the 1820s, which would have involved crossing the Strait of Belle Isle.58
Inuit and Innu. Both Inuit and Innu from Labrador frequented the Northern Peninsula early in the historic period, trading with and/or pilfering from fishermen near Quirpon (primarily Inuit, c. 1590 to 176559) and Port aux Choix (primarily Innu, after 173060). A Passage des sauvages along the Straight Coast from Savage Cove to Cape Norman first appears on maps in the 17th century and there are records of Innu frequenting the Northern Peninsula interior, trapping during winters from as early as 1713 and as late as 1889. There are few references to Indians or Eskimos living on the Northern Peninsula after permanent settlement occurred c. 1800, although there are census records from the late 19th century indicating Indians living at Brig Bay and “infidels” at Brandy Island in Pistolet Bay. There are archaeological sites with possible historic Inuit components near Quirpon, Grandois, Bird Cove and Port au Choix. There are also family traditions of Innu or Inuit from Labrador being brought to Northern Peninsula communities as spouses of early settlers.61
Mi’kmaq. Mi’kmaq62 oral tradition indicates that their activities in western Newfoundland prior to 1763 included regular use of sites within St. George’s Bay, while the Mi’kmaq of the Bay of
57 Grandois is near Fischots Islands, at the southern headland of Hare Bay. Quirpon and Griquet, two other locales where there was report of Beothuk nearby in 1800 and 1838, are also on the White Bay side of the Northern Peninsula – about 30 and 35 km north of Hare Bay. 58 See Howley (1915:256-257); Marshall (1996:277-278). 59 Martijn (2009). 60 Martijn (1989). 61 Martijn et al (2001); Richards (1953). 62 Míkmaq (with an acute over the “i”) is the plural, non-possessive form, in the Smith-Francis orthography, which was developed in 1980 and is the orthography supported by the Míkmaw Grand Council. Míkmaw is singular, and also the adjectival form to describe a singular noun. As the Nova Scotia Provincial Archives has it, “It is a limitation of the English language that we cannot represent the complexity of the Mi'kmaq language without risking 25
Labrador-Island Transmission Line Permit #13.47 GOLDER DRAFT II GPA 2014
Islands, Bonne Bay and the Northern Peninsula are an undeniable, yet sporadic, presence in the historic record. There are several references from the 1740s indicative of their presence, further suggestive of them regularly frequenting the Bay of Islands and inner White Bay. In May 1767 Captain James Cook, R.N. surveyed western Newfoundland and, while he recorded Mi’kmaq wigwams at St. George’s, his map includes the course of the Humber River, including the Upper Humber and “Lake Mickmack” [Grand Lake]. His contemporary, Lt. John Cartwright, informs us that “This River & Lake Mickmack are laid down by Cook from the authority of the Mickmack Indians.”
On those occasions where their presence is documented, in the early 19th century the Mi’kmaq are recorded as primarily resident at St. Georges Bay although multiple sources make it clear that the west coast Mi’kmaq roamed the interior widely and regularly: to Bay d’Espoir and Grandys Brook [near Burgeo] on the south coast, and White Bay, Halls Bay, the Bay of Islands, and Bonne Bay through the Humber River/Grand Lake system. In 1822, William E. Cormack concluded his trek across the Island with Mi’kmaq Sylvester Joe at St. Georges Bay. Cormack estimated that there were 150 Mi’kmaq, and 27-28 families who “dispersed in bands” at six regular sites (St. George’s, Codroy River, White Bear Bay, Bay d’Espoir, Gander Bay and Clode Sound [Bonavista Bay]) and “occasionally at Bonne Bay and the Bay of Islands.” His description of their way of life recognizes the interrelationship of “the various tribes” and regular travel between Gander Bay, the Exploits River and Clode Sound on the northeast coast and across the central interior to Bay d’Espoir on the south coast. These patterns of travel, land use, trapping territories, and family interrelationships survived into the early 20th century.
All PAs in the central interior and especially those in the Exploits River drainage basin (PAs 9 to12) are presumed to have been used by Beothuk and Mi’kmaq in the historic era. Otherwise, only PAs 15 and 16 (Southwest Brook and Goose Pond) can be presumed on documentary evidence to have had a historic aboriginal presence.
grammatical inconsistencies, a high incidence of error and unnecessary confusion.” The Nova Scotia solution, which GPA has adopted, is to use the plural, non-possessive form “Mi’kmaq” in English (note the use of an apostrophe instead of an acute over the “i” to represent the long vowel). Correct grammar and form are to be used for quotations, or phrases written in the Mi’kmaq language. Orthographies and original spellings used in historical documents are not changed.
26
Labrador-Island Transmission Line Permit #13.47 GOLDER DRAFT II GPA 2014
4 European Patterns of Settlement
For Europeans who visited Newfoundland in the 16th, 17th, and 18th centuries, the focus of all economic activity was seaward, and so such visitor accounts as have survived tend to regard northern and western Newfoundland as an undifferentiated wilderness. There are few early records that distinguish the harbours or even bays being used by these migratory fishers.
Northern Peninsula. The French (Bretons and Basques) were present seasonally on the west coast at an early date, their most lucrative fisheries being in the Strait of Belle Isle (see Plate 6). The earliest French/Breton presence was on the eastern side of the Northern Peninsula. During Jacques Cartier’s first voyage to Canada, in 1534, he visited established fishing stations on the eastern side, including Cape Rouge [Crouse] Harbour and Quirpon. However, on the west side of the Peninsula, Cartier did not record any established place names and the few names that he bestowed on features there (Cap Pointu for present-day Cow Head and les monts des Granches for Doctors Hills [NTS the Highlands of St. John]) have not survived.63
Plate 6: A former French/Basque fishing room on Old Ferrolle Island (EgBf-5), off Plum Point (NP. 5852).
63 Seary (2000:21-22). By preference GPA employs local nomenclature when known. Where a feature’s National Topographic Service designation is at variance with local use, GPA records the ‘map name’ in parenthesis on first use, as above. 27
Labrador-Island Transmission Line Permit #13.47 GOLDER DRAFT II GPA 2014
By the late 1600s the area around St. John’s Bay was being regularly fished by the French, primarily from Port aux Choix, St. John’s Island and Old Ferrolle [Plum Point] (see Plate 7). There are few good ship harbours on the Northern Peninsula otherwise.64
Plate 7: Map showing French fishing rooms in 1888. The numbers 24-28 indicate lobster canneries established by Nova Scotia firms (from Prowse [1895]).
The first place permanently settled was probably St. Barbe Bay, where there was a French sealing establishment in 1738 and an English presence by 1760. However, the first “settlers” at Anchor Point (Bartlett and Genge) seem to have trapped and fished the entire area from Flowers
64 The only other regular resort of the French fishers was French Island Harbour [Flowers Cove], which was occasionally reported as a French fishing room throughout the 19th century. 28
Labrador-Island Transmission Line Permit #13.47 GOLDER DRAFT II GPA 2014
Cove to Bartletts Harbour, to the north of the main French summer station at Port au Choix. Year-round settlement began early in the 19th century, by English salmoniers and furriers, as an adjunct to the trading establishments of J. Bird and Company at Bonne Bay (in 1800), Forteau, Labrador (1805), and at Anchor Point in partnership with the Genge family (1823). By the 1830s there were also small settlements at Cow Head, Port au Choix, River of Ponds and Savage Cove, although the tiny “English” population was vastly outnumbered by the French, who continued to fish in the summers out of Port au Choix and St. John’s Island throughout the 19th century. Indeed, many of the earliest settlers were in fact Irish, employed as gardiens of French rooms.65
A second wave of settlement, 1850 to1890 came primarily from eastern Newfoundland and the southwest coast. By 1900, most of the present-day settlements on the west coast of the Northern Peninsula were inhabited by one or two families. Many inhabitants of the Peninsula are descended from fishers who became familiar with the coast while seasonally exploiting the cod and other resources of the southern Labrador coast. While salmon-fisheries at the mouths of rivers and trapping furs during fall and winter were brought regularly into the proximal interior, the practice of “winterhousing,” or moving into the forest seasonally for better access to wood for fuel and boat-building, became widespread during the 19th century. The earliest winterhouse areas were close to the community’s harbour, often up a brook or at the head of a bay, but over time slide paths to ponds within a day’s journey of the parent community “opened up” the interior considerably. The practice of winterhousing continued well into the 20th century, where it overlaps with the beginning of commercial logging, particularly at Plum Point/Ten Mile Lake and interior of Hawkes Bay.66
Central. Although locating early European interior archaeological sites has rarely been successful, the most compelling interior resources for both settlers and aboriginals include salmon (most easily accessed at the mouths of brooks, and hence attracting both pre- and post- contact populations to the “bottoms of the bays”) and caribou. Still, several locales in the central interior can be demonstrated from documentary evidence to have been employed for a variety of activities, including winterhousing.
65 Thornton (1977). 66 GPA (2008); Smith (1994). 29
Labrador-Island Transmission Line Permit #13.47 GOLDER DRAFT II GPA 2014
Although 18th century settlement at the inner bays of the northeast coast may be considered poorly documented, there were a number of official expeditions to the Exploits River. These attempts to initiate contact with and/or capture Beothuk between 1768 and 1827 resulted in a number of journals, charts, and reports which are of some assistance to the current enquiry. A French fishery on the northeast coast in the 16th and 17th centuries, particularly as based at Fogo and Twillingate, doubtless led to some French familiarity of the Bay’s inner reaches. However, there is little certain knowledge of that era, other that the tradition in French cartography of showing Newfoundland nearly bisected by a bay and river running roughly northeast from deep in the interior (vide Samuel de Champlain 1632).
Fogo and Twillingate (100 and 75 km NE of the mouth of the Exploits, respectively), were first settled year-round between 1728 and 1732. It has been stated by some authorities – after Prowse, who offers no citation – that the Exploits River was frequented by English furriers and salmon catchers shortly thereafter. According to Thomas Peyton in 1902, the first two Europeans were named Hodge and Hallett, seemingly about 1750. A Beothuk boy, given the name Tom June, was captured at Exploits Bay in 1758, by fur trappers from Fogo.67
The earliest records of English commercial activity on the northeast coast relate to a salmon fishery established by George Skeffington of Bonavista at Freshwater Bay [present-day Gambo] and Indian Bay. Between 1705 and 1729 his operation extended as far west as Gander Bay and Dog Bay. In 1724, Skeffington complained of interference by natives, who had killed one of his men at an unidentified red ochre quarry located in a fishing area frequented by natives twice a year.68
Although European settlement in Bonavista Bay originally focused on the cod-fishing grounds in the outer reaches of the Bay in the late 17th century, Freshwater Bay with its penetration into the interior and salmon rivers, was one of the earliest “inland” areas used regularly by fishers of European descent. Alexander Bay and the mouth of the Terra Nova River [Glovertown] as well
67 Marshall (1996:83-89). 68 Ibid. 30
Labrador-Island Transmission Line Permit #13.47 GOLDER DRAFT II GPA 2014 as Clode Sound and the mouth of Southwest Brook [Port Blandford] were also being frequented regularly by salmoniers and furriers and for winterhousing by residents of headland fishing communities such as Bonavista, Keels, Salvage and Greenspond.
Virtually all the Central PAs were logged repeatedly for fuel, lumber and pulpwood, beginning in the late 19th century. The building of the trans-insular railway through the central interior 1896-97 also had the effect of drawing the focus of settlement away from the outer coast somewhat, from the estuaries of the rivers to logging communities which grew up around sidings, such as Badger and Terra Nova. Pulp and paper mills built at Grand Falls and Bishops Falls early in the 20th century resulted in many parts of the Exploits River drainage being cut for pulpwood (including areas proximate to PAs 9 to 12), while areas interior of Bonavista Bay (PAs 13-15) were first cut for pulpwood in the 1930s.
31
Labrador-Island Transmission Line Permit #13.47 GOLDER DRAFT II GPA 2014
5 Work Plan
In consultations prior to making application to the PAO for a 2013 Archaeological Investigation Permit, GPA proposed field investigation of 14 PAs. These were identified by Nalcor, where the 60-m-wide proposed ROW intersected Map Zones previously identified by Stantec as having high potential.69 Meanwhile, a change in the proposed landing site since 2008 added approximately 10 km of line within 5 km of the Straits, across high potential Map Zone 617, interior of Shoal Cove and Flowers Cove.
At a meeting with the PAO on 11 September 2013 GPA proposed to test the identified PAs in the field by marking the centre line at the shoreline of the water feature that gave rise to a determination of high potential, then shovel-testing 50 m either side (30 m, plus a 20 m failsafe), coupled with a contextual survey of natural or cultural features within 100 m of the centre line. Both sub-surface and contextual surveys could be expanded if either historic resources or natural features suggestive of elevated70 potential were identified in the field.
After initial fieldwork on the Northern Peninsula, GPA proposed that the “added” area interior of Shoal Cove (MZ 617, our PA1) be field-tested under an amendment of permit #13.47. At a meeting on 11 October 2013, the PAO accepted a GPA/Nalcor proposal for judgemental or strategic test-pitting at seven further locales in PA1, based on estimated intersections between possible pre-contact shorelines in the 15 and 30 m contour interval and the transmission line ROW.
Methodology. For linear HRIA investigations, field methodology typically involves a combination of surface and sub-surface survey (see Appendix B). The surface (or “contextual”) survey involves a walkover and visual investigation of both specific locales where there will be an identified project effect on the surrounding area. This allows for the identification of any exposed above-ground ethnographic or historic material (i.e., tilt, campsite, etc.), or
69 Stantec (2011). 70 Typically, objective geographic criteria are employed to classify study areas as possessing high, medium, or low potential for historic resources. As GPA was asked to investigate only Map Zones which Stantec had previously classified as high or medium potential, GPA employed the subjective term “elevated” potential with reference to areas or features suggestive of increased potential based on field observation. 32
Labrador-Island Transmission Line Permit #13.47 GOLDER DRAFT II GPA 2014 archaeological resource (i.e., eroding lithics, etc.). It also provides a contextual examination of the project area’s surroundings. The intensity of sub-surface survey (test pitting) varied across the 17 PAs, depending on natural surroundings and presumed historic resource potential (see Table 2).
Table 2: Test pits per PA. Project Area Location Map Zone Test pits Total test pits 1 “Corridor Ponds” MZ 619H 35 35 2 Western Brook Pond MZ 029 29 29 MZ 051 27 3 Ten Mile Narrows 69 MZ 053 42 4 Leg Pond MZ 073 1 1 MZ141 7 5 River of Ponds 30 MZ140 & 142 23 MZ 211 8 6 Six Mile Pond 11 MZ 224 3 7 Outside Pond MZ 233 11 11 MZ 267 29 8 Birchy Lake 79 MZ 268 50 9 Badger [Exploits River] MZ 350 9 9 MZ 367E 15 10 Lemotte’s Lake 34 MZ 367W & 369 19 MZ 379 13 11 Rattling Brook 27 MZ 380 14 MZ 385 & 387 33 12 Tote River 48 MZ 388 15 MZ 434 & 440 21 13 Dead Wolf Brook 35 MZ 433 & 438 14 MZ 467 15 14 Terra Nova River 35 MZ 469 & 470 20 15 Southwest Brook MZ 484 23 23 16 Goose Pond MZ 527 14 14 17 Harbour Main Pond MZ 544 12 12 MZ 619A 0 MZ 619B 17 MZ 619C 3 1 Shoal Cove MZ 619D 2 38 MZ 619E 9 MZ 619F 4 MZ 619G 3
33
Labrador-Island Transmission Line Permit #13.47 GOLDER DRAFT II GPA 2014
When warranted, 40 cm x 40 cm test pits were excavated at c. 10 m intervals by two field investigators 10 m apart. Test pit locations were selected based on ground cover and surface, areas with flat dry ground being the most suitable (see Plate 8). All test pit locations and test areas were recorded with a hand-held GPS. All test pits were excavated to a depth whereby sterile ground was reached, or where excessive water was encountered. Steep hillsides and boggy/marsh areas were test pitted with far less intensity.
Plate 8: Example of a test pit at PA15, Southwest Brook (IMGP0391).
Sub-surface testing typically extended back from the shorelines of ponds and rivers no more than 50 m unless contextual survey indicated favourable conditions. All surface and subsurface finds were photographed. All test pits were subsequently backfilled.
Comprehensive helicopter surveys were completed to cover those areas most difficult of access. Flights were selected for the best day forecast, in consultation with the pilot, with those PAs or portions thereof with viable walk-in access being held back for “weather days.” Throughout the program there was only one day, 25 September, lost to weather. GPA generally worked from north to south on the Northern Peninsula and then from west to east.
34
Labrador-Island Transmission Line Permit #13.47 GOLDER DRAFT II GPA 2014
6 Field Investigations
PA1 – Corridor Ponds (assessed 26 September; 31 October; 1 November 2013 – Figures 2-5).
The transmission line ROW interior of Shoal Cove was first investigated at a Project Area interior of Flowers Cove. It was given fieldname “Corridor Ponds”71 (later designated PA1H, see Figures 2 and 3) due to the proximity of an existing transmission-line ROW to two small ponds. Here, the ROW intersects High Potential Map Zone NTL0619 in three places, which total approximately 2.8 ha in area. After initial fieldwork on the Northern Peninsula, GPA proposed that the general area interior of Shoal Cove, which had been previously proposed for Stage 1 assessment, be field-tested under an amendment of permit #13.47. At a meeting on 11 October 2013, the PAO accepted a GPA/Nalcor proposal for judgemental or strategic test-pitting at seven further locales in PA1, based on estimated intersections between possible pre-contact shorelines in the 15 and 30 m contour interval and the ROW. For ease of reference GPA designated the locale closest to Shoal Cove PA-1A and the others in sequence, so that our original Corridor Ponds project area became PA-1H. PAs 1A to 1D were in an area where there was no existing ROW, but PAs 1E to 1H paralleled an existing power line ROW (Plate 9). Each PA was selected based on its elevation and its presumed location relative to the shoreline during the Maritime Archaic period. Areas of standing water and bog were excluded, and areas viewed as being potential shorelines in the past were investigated.
Plate 9: Testing in cutover near the existing ROW (NP.8896).
71 Local fire chief Hank Dunne, who has a cabin in the area, indicated that our ‘Corridor Ponds’ did not have a local name that he was aware of, being “only mud holes.”
35
Labrador-Island Transmission Line Permit #13.47 GOLDER DRAFT II GPA 2014
Figure 2: PA1 Corridor Ponds. 36
Labrador-Island Transmission Line Permit #13.47 GOLDER DRAFT II GPA 2014
PA-1A was found to be wet ground and a poor prospect, a marsh which offered a low likelihood of habitation. No test pits were excavated.
PA-1B was similarly wet ground in the north and south, but a dry ridge/terrace (Plate 10) was tested without encountering historic resources other than detritus associated with recent cutovers (within 50 m of the centre line) and the well-marked main snowmobile trail from Flowers Cove to Eddies Cove. At the southern end of the cut over area, the land slopes off at the edge of a recent firewood cut. This south-facing terrace would have been a prominent physical feature in the past, possibly forming a beach on the north side of a small cove or inlet, or possibly the shore on an island. Its elevation was c. 16 to 17 m asl. No other area investigated had such a prominent physical feature which could clearly be viewed as part of a past shoreline. A total of 17 test pits were excavated in the likeliest places along the top of this terrace, with no results. Test pits encountered c. 10-15 cm of peat, overlying light- to dark-brown sandy gravel.
Plate 10: Terrace at PA-1B (SC2:9679).
The assessment of PAs 1C to 1G was completed on 31 October. There were no cultural resources encountered other than the current use of areas off the existing transmission line ROW for domestic cutting. GPA noted a winter cabin in PA-1E, which appears to be close to the ROW centre line but not posted. It was photographed, its location recorded. The existence of the cabin was reported to Nalcor by e-mail on 31 October.
37
Labrador-Island Transmission Line Permit #13.47 GOLDER DRAFT II GPA 2014
Most of the areas investigated showed limited change in elevation. Changes in grade were obvious, but typically gradual and not notable enough to denote physical features such as a terraces or evidence of a past shoreline. PA-1D, PA-1E and PA-1G all had undifferentiated topography, with no other distinguishing features. PA-1G, for example, was located within a patchy cutover on gently sloped topography. Three test pits were excavated in PA-1G with no results. PAs 1C, 1D and 1F received 3, 2 and 4 test pits, respectively, also with no results. PA-1F was located next to a pond and brook, but largely surround by bog (Plate 11).
Plate 11: Landing, PA-1F (SC2:0023).
Our original PA1, Corridor Ponds [hereinafter referenced as PA-1H] was investigated on 26 September 2013. After consulting local Regional Fire Chief Hank Dunne at Flowers Cove, GPA’s team headed inland along a community walking trail (White Rocks Trail) to a maintained skidoo/quad trail, known as Flowers Cove Path. The field team followed the Path to the existing transmission line ROW.
Three sub-areas (all within the southern end of MZ 619) were investigated at PA-1H. The eastern sub-area was tested first. Much of the PA was found to be marsh and bog, with the test area located partially within a wooded area. Seven test pits were excavated in this location, most 38
Labrador-Island Transmission Line Permit #13.47 GOLDER DRAFT II GPA 2014 above the shore of the adjacent pond. Another sub-area was investigated further westward, and 14 test pits were excavated. Like the previous areas investigated, extensive bog and marsh was located throughout. The southeast portion of this sub-area was dryer, though more sloped, and was the focus of testing. The final sub-area at PA-1H was to the southward, on a level terrace running roughly NE/SW (Plate 13). This terrace lay at c. 30 m asl and 13 test pits were excavated. No historic resources were identified during sub-surface testing.
Plate 12: Terrace at southern end of PA-1H (IMGP0106).
PA1 (Stantec’s MZ 619) was rated high potential because of its proximity to the coast at the Strait of Belle Isle and its rich pre-contact human history. Area selected for testing were between the 15 and 30 m contours. Hence, these features would be much closer to or on the conjectured coast during the early habitation era. Tracing the 15 m contour indicated an inlet interior of Flowers Cove (c. 6500 BP), in the early Maritime Archaic period.
39
Labrador-Island Transmission Line Permit #13.47 GOLDER DRAFT II GPA 2014
Figure 3: PAs 1A to 1E, Corridor Ponds.
40
Labrador-Island Transmission Line Permit #13.47 GOLDER DRAFT II GPA 2014
Figure 4: PAs 1G and 1F, Corridor Ponds.
41
Labrador-Island Transmission Line Permit #13.47 GOLDER DRAFT II GPA 2014
Figure 5: PA-IH, Corridor Ponds.
42
Labrador-Island Transmission Line Permit #13.47 GOLDER DRAFT II GPA 2014
Historic use from Flowers Cove and Savage Cove since the mid-19th century was likely limited to transit, in that PA1 is barren/marsh, without significant relief and/or water features that would suggest use for winterhousing. However, a cabin noted at PA-1E (see Plate 13) is a suitable site for a winterhouse.
Plate 13: Cabin, PA-1E, wpt “Twocamps” (SC2:0033).
Finally, at PA-1H, in the area of interest farthest southwest, the old Gull Island ROW cutline from the 1980s (wpt “Cutlorig,” Plate 14) was encountered, a contemporary land use feature of passing interest.
Plate 14: 1980s cut-line (NP.5723).
43
Labrador-Island Transmission Line Permit #13.47 GOLDER DRAFT II GPA 2014
PA2 – Western Brook Pond (assessed 27 September 2013 – Figure 6)
High Potential Map Zone NTL0029, on the north shore of Western Brook Pond, is approximately 11 km east of St. Barbe Harbour. The pond drains west into the south arm of St. Barbe Harbour via Western Arm Brook [NTS West River]. Mapping of the likely Maritime Archaic-era coastline, using the 15-30 m asl interval, suggests that West Brook once extended inland as much as 8 km east of its present course, making it a possible corridor of access into the distal interior via Western Brook Pond, Ten Mile Lake and Round Lake. In the historic era, each of the arms of St. Barbe Harbour was used for winterhousing by residents of Anchor Point, which is the oldest community on the Straits.72 One of the former winterhouses of Anchor Point on St. Barbe Bay, Deep Cove [NTS Winter Cove], is designated a site of National Historic Significance.73
Being near a small cove on a pond approximately 12 km from the coast with some shelter from a NW wind, this PA was considered to be a prospect for a historic-era winterhouse. Upon investigation, areas around the Western Brook Pond PA were found to have been cut recently, with a sawmill and cabin nearby (wpt “Donway,” see Plate 15). There were also some much older cuts, suggesting past use for winter work. Testing encountered no significant historic resources.
Plate 15: Cabin and sawmill, near Western Brook Pond, wpt “Donway” (NP.5750).
72 See Thornton (1977) and Richards (1953) for the origins of present-day settlements in the Flowers Cove area. 73 For patterns of winterhousing see Smith (1987a; 1994a) and GPA (2008). 44
Labrador-Island Transmission Line Permit #13.47 GOLDER DRAFT II GPA 2014
Figure 6: PA2 Western Brook Pond.
45
Labrador-Island Transmission Line Permit #13.47 GOLDER DRAFT II GPA 2014
While the contextual survey found areas proximate with good hard ground (i.e. wpts “Campstik” and “Bbirch,” see Plates 16 and 17), the actual construction corridor in this PA was quite wet.
Plate 16: Well-used path (wpt “Hwbp”) west of the ROW at Western Brook Pond (NP.5747).
Much of MZ 029 was bog and marsh, with the exception of its northern end, furthest from the shoreline of the pond. A boggy brook or rill runs through PA2 from the NE. A total of 29 test pits were excavated throughout. No historic resources were identified.
Plate 17: Grass-ground SW of the ROW, Western Brook Pond, near wpt “Bbirch” (NP.5753).
46
Labrador-Island Transmission Line Permit #13.47 GOLDER DRAFT II GPA 2014
PA3 – Ten Mile Narrows (assessed 28 September 2013 – Figure 7)
High Potential Map Zones NTL0051 and NTL0053 are on either side of a narrows between Ten Mile Lake and Round Lake, 051 to the north and 053 to the south (Plate 18). The Ten Mile Lake system is the largest freshwater system north of Portland Creek, and has been a major means of access to caribou herds in the historic era as well as being used for winterhousing and commercial logging, accessed from both Anchor Point/St. Barbe and the Flowers Cove area. Consequently, Ten Mile Narrows is one of two Northern Peninsula PAs (with #5) which GPA considered to have “elevated” potential. While this PA has several attributes suggestive of pre- contact site advantage, no archaeological sites have been identified on the Ten Mile Lake system to date. Intensive historic use may have obscured an earlier presence.
Plate 18: Surface examination of helicopter landing site, north side of Ten Mile Narrows, wpt “L57” (NP.8970).
Since 1928, when the International Power and Paper Company (hereinafter IP&P) established a headquarters at Plum Point, there was a woods road following the present course of the Roddickton Road (Route 432) to the SW end of Ten Mile Lake. This lake was integral to pulpwood-cutting operations in the area by IP&P and, in the 1940s and 1950s, by Bowaters Limited. An ethnographic site (Round Lake ethno 1) identified approximately 3 km south of this PA during Stage 1 testing is presumed to date from this era. MZ 051 was test-pitted without result during Stage 1 (69 testpits at three locales), but was not apparently tested where this MZ is intersected by the ROW.
47
Labrador-Island Transmission Line Permit #13.47 GOLDER DRAFT II GPA 2014
Figure 7: PA3 Ten Mile Narrows.
48
Labrador-Island Transmission Line Permit #13.47 GOLDER DRAFT II GPA 2014
Upon investigation, GPA found no cultural material on the north side of the ROW crossing, it being an irregular cliffy shoreline with no truly level places on top (Plates 19 and 20). On the south side there was no tenable landing for watercraft at the ROW crossing itself (our “Windy Point”), although there were several possible landings east toward Round Lake. There was considerable evidence of historic-era logging east of MZ 053, including a cribbing used to anchor a boom (wpt “Crib”), a boom chain (wpt “Chain”) and a clearing in the woods about 100 m SE of the ROW where there were indications of a structure, perhaps a logging camp (wpt “Setup,” see Plate 21). This is in keeping with the known use of the lake for commercial logging since the 1930s. There were also two marten box traps found on the south side of the Narrows.
Plate 19: Shoreline characteristic of MZ 051, north shore of Ten Mile Narrows (NP.5773).
Plate 20: Interior, north shore of Ten Mile Narrows, a blowdown showing characteristic moss-covered, fractured rock (NP.5781).
49
Labrador-Island Transmission Line Permit #13.47 GOLDER DRAFT II GPA 2014
Plate 21: Clearing/camp on the south side of Ten Mile Narrows, wpt “setup”(NP.8988).
MZ 051 (north side) proved difficult to access. The shoreline is steep and rocky at the MZ, and access was gained by walking a distance eastward until the bank could be scaled. Above the rocky shoreline is a 25-30 m wide section of dry ground, backing into a boggy area. Large sections of bedrock protruded from the surface in places, giving the area a “terraced” appearance. A total of 27 test pits were excavated at this MZ. On the south side of the Narrows (MZ 53), the test area was covered in extensive tree-fall. The bedrock was more prominent and visible, with little soil or turf cover in places. The surface rock often had deep fissures, making careful walking a necessity. A total of 42 test pits were excavated. No historic remains were identified.
50
Labrador-Island Transmission Line Permit #13.47 GOLDER DRAFT II GPA 2014
PA4 – Leg Pond (assessed 29 September 2013 – Figure 8)
High Potential Map Zone NTL0073 is interior of the east end of Leg Pond, approximately 12 km inland (east) of tidewater at the community of Castor River South. The pond is at an elevation of 69 m, and is a principal source of Castor River. This PA is near the base of the Long Range Mountains, which rises a further 200 m in elevation 1000 m east of MZ 073. Leg Pond has historically been a winterhouse area of St. John’s Island and Bartlett’s Harbour (see Plate 22). A valley which extends 30 km SW towards the Torrent River and Hawkes Bay, inland of Doctors Hills has also historically been a corridor of winter access to the interior. These factors may also be somewhat suggestive of pre-contact site advantage.
Plate 22: Winterhouse/logging camp/cabin area, west end of Leg Pond (NP.5816).
Leg Pond was test-pitted in 2008 without result (Stantec 2011), at the mouth of an in-flowing brook on the south side of the pond (see Plate 23), approximately 700 m WSW of the ROW, 47 test pits were exacavated at three locales. In the ~250 m between the east cove of Leg Pond and the woods road there is a rise of approximately 40 m in elevation.
From the late 1930s there were pulpwood cutting operations centred on Hawkes Bay which established interior winter camps for 30 to 40 men, but it does not appear that areas around Leg Pond were cut commercially for pulp in the “camp” era, but rather with the construction of a woods road from Squid Cove in the 1960s.
51
Labrador-Island Transmission Line Permit #13.47 GOLDER DRAFT II GPA 2014
Plate 23: East end of Leg Pond, PA4 at centre, right, between the woods road and the east cove of the pond. Test-pitting in 2008 was primarily near the mouth of the brook at centre, left (NP.9055).
GPA’s team found this PA to be a most challenging area to access, due to blowdowns and steep slopes (see Plate 24). There was nowhere in this PA where human habitation was conceivable, with no level dry ground. One test pit was excavated. No historic resources were identified.
Plate 24: Helicopter landing, Leg Pond, wpt “Lp5” (NP.5826).
52
Labrador-Island Transmission Line Permit #13.47 GOLDER DRAFT II GPA 2014
Figure 8: PA4 Leg Pond.
53
Labrador-Island Transmission Line Permit #13.47 GOLDER DRAFT II GPA 2014
PA5 – River of Ponds (assessed 30 September 2013 – Figure 9)
High Potential Map Zones NTL0140, NTL0141 and NTL0142 and moderate potential MZ NTL0138 are on the River of Ponds system, approximately 16 km ESE of tidewater at the community of River of Ponds. The PA is just upriver of a small pond, unlabelled on the current NTS sheet, and is about 7 km NW of Bluey Hill (NTS Blue Mountain), a local landmark (see Plate 25).
Plate 25: Looking SE from the River of Ponds PA towards Blue Mountain. Foreground, right of centre, one of several ridges (wpt “Othknoll”) denuded by hemlock looper (NP.5906).
Approximately 3.5 km NNW from the study area at River of Ponds is registered archaeological site EcBh-01 (see Plate1; Plate 32). It is a Maritime Archaic Indian axe find-spot, nearly 15 km inland, at an elevation of 30 m asl. This would have been just above the 8500 BP shoreline and has been interpreted as possibly representative of an as-yet-elusive early Maritime Archaic presence on the Island.74
74 Bell and Renouf (2003:363-364). 54
Labrador-Island Transmission Line Permit #13.47 GOLDER DRAFT II GPA 2014
Figure 9: PA5 River of Ponds.
55
Labrador-Island Transmission Line Permit #13.47 GOLDER DRAFT II GPA 2014
At 43 m asl, PA5 is closer to sea level than other PAs, excepting Project Areas 1 and 15. Further, plotting the 30 m contour indicates that during the early pre-contact period River of Ponds Lake would have been an inlet, with tidewater approximately 3 km downstream of PA5, and hence a plausible pre-contact route for access to interior resourecs such as salmon and caribou.
GPA encountered no historic resources (for which there were poor prospects) in the ROW. Some 250 m downstream, across from a salmon-fishing lodge on an island in the pond, there were remnants of a fish fence (Plate 26), the footprint of a collapsed cabin (plate 27), and two bunk bed frames tossed in the woods. These historic remains could potentially relate to a government fisheries cabin (c. 1950s).
Plate 26: Fish fence, looking west towards the island. This feature and the associated cabin site had noticeable “old age” when observed and photographed by GPA in the 1990s (NP.5909).
Plate 27: Likely fisheries cabin site, wpt “Smclear,” outside the PA (NP.5911).
56
Labrador-Island Transmission Line Permit #13.47 GOLDER DRAFT II GPA 2014
PA5 is accessable overland via a 25 km woods road from Hawkes Bay. This road passes within 500 m of the west side of the pond, where there is an access road/quad trail to a dock, presumably built by the owner of a salmon-fishing lodge on an island in the middle of the pond. While this island has characteristics of site advantage for the taking of salmon, it is outside the PA. Meanwhile, four proximate Map Zones (135, 136, 143 and 144) were field tested in 2008, without result (Stantec 2011). In 2013 three MZs were investigated at this project area: one on the west side (MZ 141) and two on the east side (MZ 140 and MZ 142). At MZ 140 and 142, the ground above the water was relatively dry for a short distance inland (10 to 20 m), where it flattened out and became quite boggy. A total of 23 test pits were excavated on this side. On the opposite side (MZ 141), the ground cover was boggy throughout, with a small number of dry locations identified. Surface conditions tended to be rockier as well. Seven test pits were excavated on this western side. Despite its perceived potential, the immediate PA was not judged to be a suitable location for habitation. No historic resources were identified.
57
Labrador-Island Transmission Line Permit #13.47 GOLDER DRAFT II GPA 2014
PA6 – Six Mile Pond (assessed 1 October 2013 – Figure 10)
This 4.5 km long pond interior of Parsons Pond is unnamed on the current NTS map sheet, but locally known as Six Mile Pond. Here the ROW crosses an 80 m wide narrows in the pond (see Plate 28) with High Potential Map Zones NTL0211 and NTL0224 on its NE side and High Potential Map Zone NTL0230 on its south side. At an elevation of 420 m, Six Mile Pond is the highest elevation PA investigated in the Long Range Mountains. Six Mile Pond drains south and east into White Bay via Four Ponds and the Main River system.
Plate 28: Aerial view of PA6, looking north. ‘Hunters Hill’ is at centre, with the construction corridor to its right (NP.9208).
As there is no tenable overland access, and because of high elevation, PAs 6 and 7 were scheduled to be investigated first, but in practice were judgementally selected in consulation with Canadian Helicopter pilot Doug Whiting for the most favourable flying days. On 1 October 2013 GPA’s team went first to the NE side of Six Mile Pond, and completed a survey there. Observing moose hunters on the south side, it was decided to leave and pick up the north side of Birchy Lake (PA8) until the area was clear. Later that day, GPA came back and did the south side.
58
Labrador-Island Transmission Line Permit #13.47 GOLDER DRAFT II GPA 2014
Figure 10: PA6 Six Mile Pond.
59
Labrador-Island Transmission Line Permit #13.47 GOLDER DRAFT II GPA 2014
Because of its elevation and distance inland, Six Mile Pond was considered a poor prospect for pre-contact sites, while MZ 211 was tested in 2008 (12 test pits at one locale), without result.75
There was little dry ground appropriate for productive sub-surface testing. However, GPA did find a tree which had been saw-cut (wpt “Cutwood”) and a moose skeleton were found, as well as flagging of the ROW centre line on either side of the pond (see Plates 29 and 30).
Plate 29: Flagging, north side of Six Mile Pond, looking along the ROW to ‘Hunters Hill,’ top right (NP.9120).
Plate 30: NE side of PA6, viewed from the south side of Six Mile Pond (NP.6033).
75 Stantec (2011: Appendix C, p. 8). 60
Labrador-Island Transmission Line Permit #13.47 GOLDER DRAFT II GPA 2014
The NE side was a large boggy area, with standing water throughout, surrounded by a small brush-covered area lining the shore above the pond. Only these areas proved remotely dry. Eight test pits were excavated, and no historic resources were found. On the south side of the pond, MZ 230 is located on a small point where the land rises considerably within metres from shore (Plate 31). A total of three test pits were excavated with no historic resources being identified.
Plate 31: Flagging on ‘Hunters Hill,’ looking along the ROW across Six Mile Pond, wpt “Boyzflag” (NP.9213).
61
Labrador-Island Transmission Line Permit #13.47 GOLDER DRAFT II GPA 2014
PA7 – Outside Pond (assessed 24 September 2013 – Figure 11)
Just over 3 km south of Six Mile Pond, a 2.5 km long pond has the local name “Outside Pond of the Four Ponds” (shortened to Outside Pond for ease of reference, see Plate 32). Although the other three of the Four Ponds drain east into White Bay via the Main River, Outside Pond drains west into Parsons Pond.
Plate 32: East end of Outside Pond of the Four Ponds (NP.6024).
No historic resources were encountered on the ROW, which was primarily quite waterlogged (see Plate 33). In doing contextual assessment GPA visited an old moose-hunting tilt and a slipway (more than 500 m from the centre line, on a cove in the pond at centre right on Plate 32, above, wpt “Tilts e” – see also Plate 34). GPA also found a couple of blazes, about 20 years old. GPA was later informed that there were hunting cabins on both Freakes Pond, west of Outside Pond, and Second Pond of the Four Ponds to the east.
Plate 33: Flagging PA7, Outside Pond (NP.568).
62
Labrador-Island Transmission Line Permit #13.47 GOLDER DRAFT II GPA 2014
Figure 11: PA7 Outside Pond.
63
Labrador-Island Transmission Line Permit #13.47 GOLDER DRAFT II GPA 2014
Plate 34: Tilt on Outside Pond (NP.5690).
A shallow stream runs through the MZ and both sides were investigated. On the west side of the stream the surface is composed entirely of terraced bog (see Plate 35). A narrow brush-covered area separates the bog adjacent to the stream, from a larger bog at west. Six test pits were excavated on the west side of the stream, with no results. On the east side, conditions were generally similar to the west side. A smaller stream flows into a larger bog on this side, draining the bog to the east. A total of five test pits were excavated on this side, with no results.
Plate 35: Boggy conditions characteristic of the Outside Pond PA (NP.0072).
64
Labrador-Island Transmission Line Permit #13.47 GOLDER DRAFT II GPA 2014
PA8 ‒ Birchy Lake (assessed 23 September & 1 October 2013 – Figure 12)
The Birchy Lake PA is at a narrows in a long, narrow lake on the Humber River system. Known historic and pre-contact aboriginal usage of Birchy Lake, and the many potential landings and campsites along its shores, made Map Zones NTL0267 and NTL0268 of particular interest. Birchy Lake is one of the PAs which GPA identified as having elevated potential prior to field investigation. Narrows in Birchy Lake are known to have been significant ‘caribou crossings.’ The lake also figures in historic aboriginal (and, presumably, pre-contact human) migrations, between western Notre Dame Bay via in the Indian River system and Bay St. George (via Grand Lake) and the Bay of Islands (via the Humber River). Birchy Lake has been the focus of repeated archaeological investigation in recent years. The recording of numerous Amerindian sites, one with a possible Palaeoeskimo component, has highlighted the importance of inland surveys. On the SE side of the narrows, MZ 268 is within 500 m of site South Side 1 (DhBf-04, MZ# 275, see Plate 3). In 2008 Stantec dug 55 testpits at five locales in three map zones on the south side after one worn chert flake was found on the beach.
The principle historic resources encountered were in relation to logging, including evidence of the harvesting of pine c. 1900 and the raising and lowering of water levels associated with damming for pulpwood operations since 1925. Other than an abundance of stumps at our “Drowned Point” (see Plate 36), the most visible evidence of historic activity consisted chains and cables for a boom across the narrows (see Plate 37). A presumed telegraph line encountered on the north side of Birchy Lake may also be related to this boom.
Plate 36: ‘Drowned Point,’ south side of Birchy Lake (NP.5672).
65
Labrador-Island Transmission Line Permit #13.47 GOLDER DRAFT II GPA 2014
Plate 37: Boom chain, north side of Birchy Lake (NP.9170).
On the north side of Birchy Lake, however, testing found possible lithics (two pieces that fit together), in a test pit within 10 m of the ROW centre line (see Plate 38). On our return to St. John’s and further analysis it was determined that this was more likely an unworked piece of chert, having been given an edge when struck by the shovel. GPA retained this possible artifact and the PAO subsequently concurred that it was not cultural.
Plate 38: Test-pitting near chert find, north side of Birchy Lake (NP.6005).
66
Labrador-Island Transmission Line Permit #13.47 GOLDER DRAFT II GPA 2014
Figure 12: PA8 Birchy Lake.
67
Labrador-Island Transmission Line Permit #13.47 GOLDER DRAFT II GPA 2014
MZ 267 is located on the northern side of the narrows at the west end of the lake. The area inland from the shoreline has tree and alder growth for a width of c. 10 to 20 m. A total of 29 test pits were excavated, without result.Further inland, there is limited tree growth; ground cover is caribou moss and stumps.
On the south side of the narrows (MZ 268), ground and surface conditions were noticeably different. Forest cover was much thicker (see Plate 39). Much of the MZ tested is at an elevation much closer to the water level than on the north side. The effect of rising water levels and ice movement is more pronounced here, and would have had an adverse impact on historic resources. The ground was not wet, but was comprised of a damp peat or peat-like material. Fifty test pits were excavated, without result. Surface survey along the shoreline in the area of DhBe- 4 identified no additional lithics.
Plate 39: Cut pine, south side of Birchy Lake, near wpt “Nice” (NP.5670).
68
Labrador-Island Transmission Line Permit #13.47 GOLDER DRAFT II GPA 2014
PA9 – Badger [Exploits River] (assessed 13 October 2013 – Figure 13)
High Potential MZ NTL0350 and Moderate Potential MZ NLT0347 are on the NW bank of the Exploits River, about 3.5 km SW of the town of Badger, just downstream of Two Mile Island. At PA9 the ROW touches on the eastern extremity of MZ 350 between Route 370 (Buchans Highway) and the riverbank (see Plate 40). Although the High Potential area is the smallest of all PAs (less than 70 m²), there are four registered archaeological sites within 1500 m, on Two Mile Island and on either the banks of the Exploits. Nearby. Badger is one of four PAs (PA3, PA5, PA8 and PA9) which GPA considered to have “elevated” potential.
Plate 40: Aerial view, PA9 (CN.6233).
During the course of Stage 1 testing in 2008, 80 test pits were dug in two locations near Two Mile Island.76 Testing in an “overgrown bulldozer cut” off Route 370 – approximately 350 SW of PA9 – unearthed a single worked piece of patinated chert, resulting in its being designated DfBa-13. PA8 and PA9 are the only PAs identified in this assessment where there is a known site. As with Birchy Lake, access from public highways facilitated full investigation without being constrained by weather and/or logistics of helicopter access.
76 Stantec (2011: Appendix C, p. 8). 69
Labrador-Island Transmission Line Permit #13.47 GOLDER DRAFT II GPA 2014
Figure 13: PA9 Badger [Exploits River].
70
Labrador-Island Transmission Line Permit #13.47 GOLDER DRAFT II GPA 2014
Testing determined that the portion of the MZ closest to the river was either fill or exposed sterile gravel and sand (Plate 41). Nine test pits were excavated, without result. Inland, on the opposite side of the road, the remaining portion of the MZ was found to be tree covered swamp and marsh (Plate 42); no test pits were excavated.
Plate 41: Fill or sterile gravel between the Buchans Highway and the Exploits River (CN.9340)
Plate 42: Swamp north of the Buchans Highway (CN.9354).
71
Labrador-Island Transmission Line Permit #13.47 GOLDER DRAFT II GPA 2014
PA10 Lemottes Lake (investigated 15 October 2013 – Figure 14)
High Potential MZ NTL0369 and Moderate Potential MZ NLT0367 are near the north end of Lemottes Lake, 6 km WSW of Grand Falls-Windsor. The northern arm of Lemottes Lake is only 300 m from the south bank of the Exploits River and a plausible aboriginal access route to the interior between Sandy Brook (3 km to the west) and Stoney Brook.
Although a location proximate to both pre-contact and historic-era archaeological sites is a significant factor, expectations were diminished by poorly-drained soils and the proximity of an existing transmission line ROW, located 50 m north of the present PA, (see Plates 43 and 44) and a dam at the north end of the lake.
Plate 43: Looking west across the north end of Lemottes Lake (CN.6220).
Plate 44: PA10 is just south (right) of transmission line ROW (CN.6187).
72
Labrador-Island Transmission Line Permit #13.47 GOLDER DRAFT II GPA 2014
Figure 14: PA10 Lemottes Lake.
73
Labrador-Island Transmission Line Permit #13.47 GOLDER DRAFT II GPA 2014
Two areas at Lemottes Lake were investigated: MZ 369 on the west side and MZ 367 on the east side. MZ 369 was quite large in area, because it runs parallel with the shore of the NW corner of the lake. The eastern end of the MZ proved to be the only suitable ground within the assessed area. A total of 19 test pits were excavated, though no historic resources were identified. The remainder of the MZ was water-logged, boggy ground, or sloped. Near the existing transmission line ROW to the north, the remains of a mid-20th century shack and debris (gas cans, etc.) were identified, and probably represent a personal hunting and/or wood-cutting camp. (see plate 45). At MZ 367 on the eastern side, the ground rises immediately above the rocky beach. Towards the north there is slightly more suitable terrain. The area appears to be frequented by trout fishers, as evidenced by a broken rod observed on the shore. The area has extensive sign of beaver activity. A total of 15 test pits were excavated, without result.
Plate 45: Some of the debris found near a collapsed camp, wpt “Tilt” (CN.6218).
74
Labrador-Island Transmission Line Permit #13.47 GOLDER DRAFT II GPA 2014
PA11 Rattling Brook (investigated 14 October 2013 – Figure 15)
Rattling Brook is tributary of the Exploits River, and as such is part of one of Newfoundland’s most exploited waterways during the pre-contact and historic periods. Moderate Potential MZs NLT0379 and NLT0380 are located on the west and east sides, respectively, of Rattling Brook, c. 270 m west of Route 360, and c. 13 km SE of Grand Falls (see Plate 46).
Plate 46: Rattling Brook (CN.6183).
Although it is quite close to Route 360, with many cabins nearby, access to PA11 was by helicopter, given the need to assess both west and east banks of the river. Review of aerial photography suggest that the east bank (MZ 380) was a better prospect than the uneven ground on the west side (see Plate 47).
Plate 47: West side of Rattling Brook (CN.9387).
75
Labrador-Island Transmission Line Permit #13.47 GOLDER DRAFT II GPA 2014
Figure 15: PA11 Rattling Brook.
76
Labrador-Island Transmission Line Permit #13.47 GOLDER DRAFT II GPA 2014
At MZ 379, on the west side, the ground rises above the shoreline, with few flat areas in the vicinity. The ground surface is irregular. Thirteen test pits were excavated without result. MZ 380 is on the eastern side of the brook and the test area located above a wide cobble beach that was clearly submerged during high water (Plate 48). The surface conditions appeared more suitable for human occupation, being dry and flat. A total of 14 test pits were excavated, with no results. The exposed bank along the entire length of the test area adjacent to the beach was investigated for cultural material, but none were identified.
Plate 48: East side of Rattling Brook (CN.6166).
77
Labrador-Island Transmission Line Permit #13.47 GOLDER DRAFT II GPA 2014
PA12 Tote River (investigated 14 October 2013 – Figure 16)
High Potential MZ NTL0387, Moderate Potential MZ NLT0385, and High Potential MZ NTL0388 are located on the east and west sides respectively of a steady between two small ponds south of Tolt Hill [NTS Tote Hill], about 16 km SE of Grand Falls-Windsor. The ponds on Tote River drain north and west into Rattling Brook, a tributary of the Exploits River (see Plate 49). The Rattling Brook system is known to have been a significant aboriginal corridor of access to the interior south of the Exploits River. While the present High Potential MZs were not tested during Stage 1 investigations, MZ 385, just SE of MZ 387, was tested without result near a small cove on the NE corner of the pond.
Plate 49: Looking north along Tote River (CN.6154).
Plate 50: At centre, the cove at the NE corner of the pond (CN.9370).
78
Labrador-Island Transmission Line Permit #13.47 GOLDER DRAFT II GPA 2014
Figure 16: PA12 Tote River.
79
Labrador-Island Transmission Line Permit #13.47 GOLDER DRAFT II GPA 2014
Three MZs were investigated at Tote River: MZ 385 and MZ 387 on the east side, and MZ 388 on the west side (plate 70). MZs 385 and 387 extend over a lengthy area, from a north flowing brook, to a small cove along the NE corner of the pond . Most of the area is covered in medium to large boulders, resulting in an irregular surface. A total of 33 test pits were excavated in these two MZs, most (n=27) excavated along the eastern side of the cove. This area had some relatively dry, flat ground above a sandy beach and appeared suitable for an encampment (see cover, Plate 51). During the contextual survey, a prospective location was observed approximately 250 m south, next to a brook flowing into the pond from the east (wpt “Brk”). This area lay outside PA12 and was not tested. Its location should be borne in mind for future development.
Plate 51: Possible historic feature in the beachy cove (CN.6136).
80
Labrador-Island Transmission Line Permit #13.47 GOLDER DRAFT II GPA 2014
PA13 Dead Wolf Brook (investigated 16 October 2013 – Figure 17)
High Potential MZs NTL0440 and NTL0438 and Moderate Potential MZs NTL0434 and NTL0433 are located either side of Dead Wolf Brook, a tributary of the Southwest Gander River (see Plate 52). At 75 km inland of tidewater at Gander Bay, this PA is the farthest inland of those proposed for Stage 2 investigation.
Plate 52: Indicated TL crossing site, at centre (CN.6306).
Dead Wolf Brook was named by geological surveyor James P. Howley in 1887, after he found the skeleton of a (now extinct) Newfoundland Wolf near the confluence of Dead Wolf Brook and the Southwest Gander, 5 km NNW of the present PA.77
There is access via a little-used woods road that leads from Gambo Pond to the east bank of Dead Wolf Brook. On either bank of the brook there is a network of overgrown roads and clearings suggestive of a logging camp, and a ford across the brook. Both MZ 438 and MZ 439 were tested during Stage 1 investigations in 2008, when 27 test pits were dug at two locations without result. Four MZs were investigated at Dead Wolf Brook in 2013. On the eastern side, flat and dry ground was encountered above the brook, but exhibited signs of disturbance from either grubbing or dozer action related to logging activities in the past.
77 Howley (2009). 81
Labrador-Island Transmission Line Permit #13.47 GOLDER DRAFT II GPA 2014
Figure 17: PA13 Dead Wolf Brook.
82
Labrador-Island Transmission Line Permit #13.47 GOLDER DRAFT II GPA 2014
Mid 20th century debris was identified throughout the MZ, including the tail-gate from an old Jeep, and a number of apple juice cans (plate 53). Fourteen test pits were excavated, with no positive results. Along the north edge of the MZ, the ground drops off slightly and becomes boggy. On the west side of the brook, MZs 434 and 440, the ground rises steeply above the water for a distance, and continued inland along irregular, marshy ground. The shoreline above the MZ is generally rocky, with few places to gain easy access. A total of 21 test pits were excavated without result.
Plate 53: Contemporary midden, east side of Dead Wolf Brook (CN.6314).
83
Labrador-Island Transmission Line Permit #13.47 GOLDER DRAFT II GPA 2014
PA14 Terra Nova River (investigated 16 October 2013 – Figure 18)
High Potential Map Zone NTL0470 and Moderate Potential MZs NLT0467 and NLT0469 located on both banks of the Terra Nova River (see Plate 54), approximately 16 km SW of Terra Nova village, and 3 km upriver from the Terra Nova River bridge. PA14 is approximately 40 km inland of tidewater at Glovertown, but only 15 km inland (WNW) of Clode Sound.
Plate 54: The more inviting west side of the river, at right, as seen from the east side landing (CN.6295).
MZs 469 and 470, on the east bank of the river, are above a wide bedrock beach, with gradually sloping, irregular ground (Plate 55). Some dry ground was encountered, but this bank of the river appeared otherwise unsuitable for habitation. For uncertain reasons, root growth was particularly thick and extensive. A total of 20 test pits were excavated, without result.
Plate 55: East side of the Terra Nova River (CN.9483).
84
Labrador-Island Transmission Line Permit #13.47 GOLDER DRAFT II GPA 2014
Figure 18: PA14 Terra Nova River.
85
Labrador-Island Transmission Line Permit #13.47 GOLDER DRAFT II GPA 2014
On the west side of the Terra Nova River, MZ 467 is located on a small point (or islet at high water, see Plate 56). The ground here was relatively flat and dry, and a more suitable location than the other side. A total of 15 test pits were excavated, without result. Extensive sign of beaver activity was identified on both sides.
Plate 56: Test pit at PA14, northwest side of the Terra Nova River (IMGP0407).
86
Labrador-Island Transmission Line Permit #13.47 GOLDER DRAFT II GPA 2014
PA15 Southwest Brook (investigated 16 October 2013 – Figure 19)
High Potential Map Zone NTL0484 is located on the west bank of Southwest Brook (NTS Southwest River), which empties into the southern extremity of Bonavista Bay at Clode Sound (Port Blandford), 7 km NNE of PA15. Medium potential MZ 482 is on the SE bank of the river opposite (at left on Plate 57, below).
Plate 57: The bend in Southwest Brook, looking south (CN.6262).
Pre-contact use of Southwest Brook is presumed, while a historic aboriginal (Mi’kmaq) presence has been recorded. It was crossing the river near here that William E. Cormack wrote in 1822 that he found where the Mi’kmaq of Clode Sound left their canoes in order to venture into the caribou hunting grounds to the west (now, the Bay du Nord Wilderness Area). Early in the day, on September 10th, the ground descending, we came unexpectedly to a rivulet, about 70 yards wide, running rapidly over a rocky bed to the northeast, which we forded… . The roaring of a cataract of some magnitude was heard in the northeast… we inferred that it was a branch of the river which runs into Clode Sound, in Bonavista Bay; and my Indian supposed, from his recollections of the reports of the Indians concerning Clode Sound River, that canoes could be brought up from the sea-coast to near where we were.78
MZ 484 is just west of a bend in the brook. It is a relatively flat, dry area at the bend, rising to the NW, where the ROW is proposed to make the crossing. A total of 23 test pits were excavated at the bend, without result. Parts of PA15 show signs of flooding, with beach gravel observed
78 Cited in GPA (2012:12). 87
Labrador-Island Transmission Line Permit #13.47 GOLDER DRAFT II GPA 2014 several metres in from the bank (Plates 58 and 59). MZ 484 was also extensively tested (62 test pits) in 2008, without result.79
Plate 58: Surface conditions on the west side of the brook (CN.9469).
Plate 59: A terrace above the bend, west side (CN.6264).
MZ 482 was earlier identified as being of lesser historic resource potential, but a visual field assessment was requested by the PAO to determine if sub-surface testing was necessary. From the landing at MZ 484, the shoreline opposite was seen to be too steep for habitation, quickly rising to 20 m above the brook.
79 Stantec (2011: Appendix C, p. 7). 88
Labrador-Island Transmission Line Permit #13.47 GOLDER DRAFT II GPA 2014
Figure 19: PA15 Southwest Brook. 89
Labrador-Island Transmission Line Permit #13.47 GOLDER DRAFT II GPA 2014
PA16 Goose Pond (investigated 17 October 2013 – Figure 20)
Moderate potential Map Zone 527 is located at the north end of Goose Pond, 4 km north of Whitbourne, 2.7 km east of the former Whitbourne/Blaketown intersection (“the Crossroads”). PA15 is adjacent to the TCH. The principal indicator of potential is proximity to a significant multi-component archaeological site (Russell’s Point, CiAj-01, on Dildo Pond), located 4.5 km NW.
Assessment of PA16 was requested by the PAO at a meeting held on 11 September 2013, based on proximity to the Recent Indian and Beothuk site (CiAj-1) at Russell’s Point in Blaketown. MZ 527 encompasses the northern 1/3 of the pond; however, only two small coves at its north end were in any proximity to the ROW, which is projected to lie north of the pond, on the far side of the TCH. The proximity of this PA to the TCH and Whitbourne, has resulted in extensive evidence of camps, cabins, an abandoned van, and other debris associated with trout fishing and dumping garbage. The areas assessed were comprised of thick tree cover, coupled with bog and standing water (Plate 60). Limited dry, flat ground was identified. A total of 14 test pits were excavated, without result, excepting contemporary garbage.
Plate 60: The NW cove of Goose Pond (CN.9533).
90
Labrador-Island Transmission Line Permit #13.47 GOLDER DRAFT II GPA 2014
Figure 20: PA16 Goose Pond.
91
Labrador-Island Transmission Line Permit #13.47 GOLDER DRAFT II GPA 2014
PA17 Harbour Main Pond (investigated 25 October 2013 – Figure 21)
Moderate potential Map Zone 544 is located near the south end of Harbour Main Pond, southwest of the community of Harbour Main. Here the ROW crosses this map zone approximately 700 m NE of the TCH. Both the east and west sides of the pond were investigated, walking in from the TCH.
On the east side, a seldom-used trail was observed along the edge of the shoreline above the water. This was clearly used by trout fishers as it provided the easiest access to the water, but was only partially employed for PA access as it was heavily grown-over. The east MZ area was located on sloped ground, that ranged from marshy to relatively dry (Plate 61). The surface was typically irregular. Eleven of 12 test pits at this MZ were excavated on the east side, without result.
On the west side, surface conditions were not suitable for habitation, with the only evidence of local use being a couple of locations where fires had been built, and billy kettles constructed of juice cans left behind (wpt “Icecamp”). Some evidence of sawlog cutting was observed as well. However, there were no paths on the west side of Harbour Main Pond, so it was apparent that these areas were only accessed during the winter when the pond was frozen. Surface conditions ranged from wet to steep, with extensive tree-fall throughout.
Plate 61: Looking NW across Harbour Main Pond (BTC.0427).
92
Labrador-Island Transmission Line Permit #13.47 GOLDER DRAFT II GPA 2014
Figure 21: PA17 Harbour Main Pond.
93
Labrador-Island Transmission Line Permit #13.47 GOLDER DRAFT II GPA 2014
7 Health and Safety
The survey team arrived at Pasadena on 22 September 2013. On meeting with Canadian Helicopter pilot Doug Whiting early on the morning of 23 Sept, two isssues were raised: - That it was unlikely that weather conditions would permit flying on that day. - That Mr. Whiting felt that with a fifth person and the extra gear necessary for remote locations the helicopter could potentially be overloaded.
These two issues were quickly resolved, in that GPA had identified the south side of Birchy Lake (PA8) as a potential “walk-in” alternative for weather days. Golder’s health and safety investigator, William Cavers (who was the fifth person scheduled to fly on 22 September) instead accompanied GPA’s team on the Birchy Lake walk-in.
On 24 September GPA’s team flew in to ‘South Elbow Pond’ (which was later learned had the local name Outside Pond of the Four Ponds, shortened above as ‘Outside Pond’). The following day, 25 September, the weather was again unsuitable for flying out of Pasadena, so it was decided to move the base of operations to the Northern Peninsula, hoping to walk-in to PA4 (Leg Pond) en route. This plan was aborted because of a bridge outage and water levels too high for safe crossing (wpt “Turnagain”).
Thereafter, there were no scheduling or safety concerns until the last day of Phase 1, 1 October, when moose hunting activity was noted on the south side of Six Mile Pond. GPA surveyed the north side and then moved on to survey the north side of Birchy Lake, returning to Six Mile Pond later in the day. By that time the hunters had moved on to the NW end of the pond, 2 km distant.
Areas A and B interior of Shoal Cove (PA1) were assessed on 1 November. GPA’s team attempted to fly in to these PAs, but were turned back just SW of St. Anthony airport when freezing rain was encountered. The team then drove from St. Anthony to Shoal Cove and walked in.
94
Labrador-Island Transmission Line Permit #13.47 GOLDER DRAFT II GPA 2014
GPA’s team drove to Grand Falls on 13 October, our base for the field survey of PAs 9 to 15. The 15 October was overcast with periodic rain and Mr. Whiting was dubious about flying any great distance to the SE. GPA decided to assess PA10, Lemotte’s Lake, which was close to Grand Falls and from which there was a ‘walk-out’ option should the weather deteriorate. Otherwise, GPA were able to stay on schedule.
The only environmental concerns noted during the field suvey were at Lemotte’s Lake (PA10), a collapsed tilt, a scrapped skidoo and gas cans. These were reported to Nalcor by e-mail on 15 October and in a “Summary Report Phases II and II” on 7 November 2013.
On the north side of Birchy Lake (PA8) GPA noted and flagged a potential field hazard , a protruding telegraph(?) wire (Plate 62). Although GPA generally removes temporary flags before leaving a project area, this flag and a flag on a nearby alder bush were left in place, to mark a potential hazard proximate to the construction corridor. The hazard was reported to Nalcor at a debriefing meeting on 9 October 2013.
Plate 62: Flagged protruding telegraph wire at PA8 (NP.9184).
95
Labrador-Island Transmission Line Permit #13.47 GOLDER DRAFT II GPA 2014
8 Discussion
Our knowledge of the pre-contact peoples of the Island of Newfoundland is derived primarily from archaeological sites located at, or near, the coast. Early historic archaeology is likewise primarily coastal: European use and seasonal occupation of headland fishing stations such as St. John’s, Bonavista and Port au Choix occurred early in the post-contact period. Year-round settlement by fishing families of European origin or descent began in the 18th century at sites on the outer northeast coast such as Fogo and Twillingate, with increasing seasonal use of the proximal interior80 as population increased and settlement spread throughout the 19th century. By the late 19th century land-based industry (agriculture, mining and logging) and communications (telegraph, rail and road) had considerably increased the impact of settled populations on the proximal interior and at certain industrial locations in the distal interior. Increasing reliance on land-based industry and communications as the 20th century progressed had a profound effect on patterns of settlement, in that the most exposed headland locations were abandoned or resettled, the siting of new homes and industry governed by access to the Province’s road system rather than by access to fishing grounds.
Only five of the 17 PAs are located less that 16 km from the coast (PAs 1, 4 and 15-17), while only three are at less than 50 metres above sea level (PAs 1, 5 and 15). By these criteria PA1 (Shoal Cove/Corridor Ponds) was a good prospect for pre-contact and/or early historic use and three days were dedicated to this field investigation.
The Humber River system (of which PA8, Birchy Lake is a part) and the drainage basin of the Exploits River system (PAs 9 to 12) are of heightened archaeological interest in comparison to most of the Island’s distal interior, in that both were primary corridors of access/transit by both pre-contact and historic aboriginal peoples.
80 GPA defines the proximal interior as that lying within 16 km [10 miles] of the coast, a day’s journey with good travelling. 96
Labrador-Island Transmission Line Permit #13.47 GOLDER DRAFT II GPA 2014
Based on testing within the proposed transmission line ROW, and contextual assessment of the ground conditions existing in the region generally, GPA concludes that further testing within the ROW81 is not required. In instances where re-routing of the transmission line ROW by more than 100 m may be contemplated as engineering proceeds, it is recommend desk-based assessment be completed regarding those river crossings where there is likely aboriginal and/or 19th century European use of the watercourse, as an indicator of possible pre-contact use at the following PAs: - PA3 Ten Mile Narrows; - PA5 River of Ponds; - PA8 Birchy Lake; - PA9 Badger [Exploits River]; - PA12 Tote River; - PA14 Terra Nova River; and - PA15 Southwest Brook.
Should desk-based assessment indicate heightened expectations at future re-routing locations, monitoring of works may be considered by the PAO as a mitigation strategy, on a case-by-case basis, particularly if there are potential works that could include grading or ramping of proposed fording sites, or the construction of access roads.
81 Including the transmission ROW and route changes as supplied to GPA by Golder on 1 November 2013 . 97
Labrador-Island Transmission Line Permit #13.47 GOLDER DRAFT II GPA 2014
9 Sources
Auger, Réginald 1991 “Labrador Inuit and Europeans in the Strait of Belle Isle From the Written Sources to the Archaeological Evidence.” Centre d'études nordiques Université Lava, Collection Nordicana, no. 55, Quebec City.
Barkham, Selma 1982 “The documentary evidence for Basque whaling ships in the Strait of Belle Isle.” In G.M. Story (ed.). Early European Settlement and Exploitation in Atlantic Canada, Memorial University of Newfoundland, St. John’s. 1989 The Basque Coast of Newfoundland. Great Northern Peninsula Development Corporation, Plum Point.
Bates, Alison C. 1993a “Parsons Pond,” in Encyclopedia of Newfoundland and Labrador Volume Four. J.R. Smallwood Heritage Foundation/Harry Cuff Publications, St. John’s. 1993b “Plum Point,” in Encyclopedia of Newfoundland and Labrador Volume Four. J.R. Smallwood Heritage Foundation/Harry Cuff Publications, St. John’s. 1993c “River of Ponds,” in Encyclopedia of Newfoundland and Labrador Volume Four. J.R. Smallwood Heritage Foundation/Harry Cuff Publications, St. John’s.
Beaton, Gregory 2004 “A Chip off the Old Block: Investigations of a Maritime Archaic Lithic Workshop/Quarry site in Big Brook (EjBa-02), Northwestern Newfoundland.” Unpublished M.A. thesis, Department of Anthropology, Memorial University, St. John’s.
Bell, Trevor, Julia Day, Martin J, Batterson, David G.E. Liverman, John Shaw, and I. Rod Smith 2005 “Late Quaternary Relative Sea-Level Change on the West Coast of Newfoundland.” Géographie Physique et Quaternaire 59(2-3).
Bell, Trevor, Joyce B. Macpherson, and M.A.P. Renouf 2003 “ ‘Wish you were here…’: A Thumbnail Portrait of the Great Northern Peninsula AD 1000.” In Vinland Revisited: The Norse World at the Turn of the First Millennium, edited by Shannon Lewis-Simpson. Historic Sites Association of Newfoundland and Labrador, St. John’s.
Bell, Trevor and M.A.P. Renouf 2003 “Prehistoric cultures, reconstructed coasts: Maritime Archaic Indian site distribution in Newfoundland.” World Archaeology, v35 #3. 2011 “By Land and Sea: Landscape and Marine Environmental Perspectives on Port au Choix Archaeology.” In The Cultural Landscapes of Port au Choix: Precontact Hunter-Gathers of Northwestern Newfoundland, edited by M.A.P. Renouf. Springer, New York.
98
Labrador-Island Transmission Line Permit #13.47 GOLDER DRAFT II GPA 2014
Bell, Trevor, I. Rod Smith, and M.A.P. Renouf 2005 “Postglacial Sea-Level History and Coastline Change at Port au Choix, Great Northern Peninsula, Newfoundland.” Newfoundland and Labrador Studies 20(1).
Biggin, Scott 1985 “Prehistoric Indian Sites at Portland Creek: EbBj-4, 5.” On file, Provincial Archaeology Office, St. John’s.
Cartwright, John 1773 “A Map of the Island of Newfoundland.” National Archive of Canada, NMC 14033.
Catto, N.R., H. Griffiths, S. Jones and H. Porter 2000. “Late Holocene Sea Level Changes, Eastern Newfoundland.” Current Research, edited by C.P.G. Pereira and D.G. Walsh. Newfoundland Department of Mines and Energy, Geological Survey, Report 2000-1.
Chappell, Edward 1818 Voyage of His Majesty's ship Rosamond to Newfoundland and the southern coast of Labrador, of which countries no account has been published by any British traveller since the reign of Queen Elizabeth. J. Mawman, London.
Cuff, Robert 1984 “Hawkes Bay,” in Encyclopedia of Newfoundland and Labrador Volume Two. Newfoundland Book Publishers (1967) Ltd., St. John’s. 1994 “Savage Cove,” in Encyclopedia of Newfoundland and Labrador Volume Five. J.R. Smallwood Heritage Foundation/Harry Cuff Publications, St. John’s. 2012 “The Journey of William E. Cormack and Joseph Sylvester Joe, 3 September – 2 November, 1822.” Gerald Penney Associates, St. John’s.
Cuff, Robert H. and Derek Wilton (eds.) 1993 Jukes’ Excursions. Harry Cuff Publications, St. John’s.
Gerald Penney Associates Limited 1988 “An Archaeological Survey of Western Notre Dame Bay and Green Bay. On file, the Provincial Archaeology Office, St. John’s. 2002 “Churchill River Power Project LHP 98.18 Historic Resources (Newfoundland), Final Report.” On file, Provincial Archaeology Office, St. John’s. 2008 “Historic Resources Impact Assessment (Stage 1) Daniels Harbour Bypass Road Archaeological Investigation Permit #08.06.” On file, Provincial Archaeology Office, St. John’s. 2010a “Butts Pond/Gambo Pond Cabin Developments, Historic Resourcs Impact Assessment (Stage 1), Permits #10.38 and #10.38.01.” On file, Provincial Archaeology Office, St. John’s. 2010b “Red Indian Lake Cabin Development, Historic Resources Impact Assessment (Stage 1), Archaeological Investigation Permit #10.39.” On file, Provincial Archaeology Office, St. John’s.
99
Labrador-Island Transmission Line Permit #13.47 GOLDER DRAFT II GPA 2014
2012 “Riverfront Park, Grand Falls-Windsor, NL - Historic Resources Overview Assessment.” On file, Provincial Archaeology Office, St. John’s. 2014 “Proposed Labrador-Island Transmission Line (Newfoundland Portion) - Historical Resources Desk-Based Assessment (Portland Creek Pond [interior]).” Golder document # 13-1250-0043-3-003.
Grant, Douglas R. 1992 Quaternary Geology of St. Anthony-Blanc Sablon Area, Newfoundland and Quebec. Geological Survey of Canada Memoir 427. Ottawa.
Harp, Elmer Jr. 1951 “An Archaeological Survey in the Strait of Belle Isle Area.” American Antiquity 16(3). 1963 Evidence of Boreal Archaic Culture in Southern Labrador and Newfoundland. National Museum of Canada, Bulletin No. 193, Contributions to Anthropology 1961-62, Pt. 1. Dept. of Northern Affairs and National Resources, Ottawa.
Harvey, M[oses] 1879 Across Newfoundland with the Governor. Centre for Newfoundland and Labrador Studies, Memorial University, St. John’s.
Hartery, Latonia 2007 The Cow Head Complex and the Recent Indian Period in Newfoundland, Labrador and the Quebec Lower North Shore. Copetown Press, St. John’s.
Heilemann, Barbara 1985 “Cultural Resources of Gros Morne National Park.” Parks Canada, Rocky Harbour.
Holly, Donald H. Jr. 2005 “The Place of “Others” In Hunter-Gather Intensification.” American Anthropologist 107(2):207-220. 2008 “Social Aspects and Implications of “Running for the Hills”: The Case of the Beothuk Indians of Newfoundland.” Journal of Island and Coastal Archaeology 3(2).
Holly, Donald H. Jr., and John Erwin. 2009 “Terra Incognita, Still: Archaeological Investigations in the Interior of the Island of Newfoundland.” Archaeology of Eastern North America 37.
Howley, James P. 1915 The Beothucks or Red Indians: the aboriginal inhabitants of Newfoundland. University Press, Cambridge. 1928 Geological Map of Newfoundland. Newfoundland Geological Survey, St. John’s. 1997 Reminiscences of James P. Howley, Selected Years. Champlain Society, Toronto. 2009 Reminiscences of forty-two years of exploration in and about Newfoundland. English Language Research Centre, Memorial University, St. John’s.
100
Labrador-Island Transmission Line Permit #13.47 GOLDER DRAFT II GPA 2014
Hustins, Donald 2010 River of Dreams: the Evolution of Fly-Fishing and Conservation of Atlantic Salmon in Newfoundland and Labrador (1700-1949). Tight Lines Publishing, St. John’s.
Kristensen, Todd J. and Jenneth E. Curtis 2012 “Late Holocene Hunter-Gatherers at L’Anse aux Meadows and the Dynamics of Bird and Mammal Hunting in Newfoundland.” Arctic Anthropology 49(1).
LeBlanc, Sylvie 2010 Middle Dorset Variability and Regional Cultural Traditions: A Case Study from Newfoundland and Saint-Pierre and Miquelon. BAR International Series 2158. Archaeopress, Oxford.
McGhee, Robert and James A. Tuck 1975 An Archaic Sequence from the Strait of Belle Isle, Labrador. Archaeological Survey of Canada, Paper No. 34. National Museum of Man, Ottawa.
Mannion, John J. 1977 “Settlers and traders in western Newfoundland.” In J.J. Mannion (ed.), The Peopling of Newfoundland: Essays in Historical Geography. Social and Economic Papers No. 8, ISER/Memorial University, St. John’s.
Marshall, Ingeborg 1996 A History and Ethnography of the Beothuk. McGill-Queens University Press, Montreal and Kingston.
Martijn, Charles A. 1989 “Innu (Montagnais) in Newfoundland.” In W.J. Cowan (ed.), Papers of the Twenty- First Algonquian Conference, Carleton University, Ottawa. 1996 “Netuklemuk (On the Country): Miawpukek Mi’kamawey Mwi’omi Land Claim and Self-Government Submission.” Conne River. 2003 “Early Mi’kmaq Presence in Southern Newfoundland: An Ethnohistorical Perspective, c.1500-1763.” Newfoundland Studies, Vol 19 #1. 2009 “Historic Inuit Presence in Newfoundland, circa 1550-1800 CE.” In Painting the Past with a Broad Brush – Papers in Honour of James Valliere Wright, edited by David Keenleyside and Jean-Luc Pilon. Archaeology Paper 170, Canadian Museum of Civilization, Gatineau.
Martijn, Charles A., and Louis-Jacques Dorais 2001 “Eighteenth Century L Inuit and Innu (Montagnais) Toponyms in the Northern Peninsula of Newfoundland.” Newfoundland Studies Vol 17 #2.
Pastore, Ralph T. 1978 Newfoundland Micmacs: A history of their traditional life. Newfoundland Historical Society Pamphlet #4, St. John's.
101
Labrador-Island Transmission Line Permit #13.47 GOLDER DRAFT II GPA 2014
1986 “The spatial distribution of late Palaeo-Eskimo sites on the Island of Newfoundland: Palaeo-Eskimo Cultures in Newfoundland, Labrador and Ungava.” Memorial University Reports in Archaeology, 1, St. John’s . 1992 Shanawdithit’s People: The Archaeology of the Beothuks. Atlantic Archaeology, St. John’s.
Payne, Floyd 2013 Interview, Parsons Pond NL, 25 October 2013.
Pimlott, Douglas H. 1956 “The Way of Life of Moose and Caribou,” typescript of Department of Mines and Resources broadcasts, Centre for Newfoundland Studies, St. John’s.
Pintal, Jean-Yves 2006 “The Archaic Sequence of the St. Lawrence Lower North Shore, Quebec.” In The Archaic of the Far Northeast, edited by David Sanger and M.A.P. Renouf. University of Maine Press, Orono.
Pitt, Janet E. Miller 1981 “Anchor Point,” in Encyclopedia of Newfoundland and Labrador Volume One. Newfoundland Book Publishers (1967) Ltd., St. John’s.
Rast, Tim, M.A.P. Renouf and Trevor Bell 2004 Patterns of Precontact Site Location on the Southwest Coast of Newfoundland. Northeast Anthropology 68(Fall).
Reader, David 1996 Interior Occupation: A Maritime Archaic Site at South Brook Park, Western Newfoundland. Canadian Journal of Archaeology 20.
Renouf, M.A.P. 1999 “Prehistory of Newfoundland Hunter-Gatherers: Extinctions or Adaptations?” World Archaeology 30(3). 2005 “Phillip’s Garden West: A Newfoundland Groswater Variant.” In Contributions to the Study of the Dorset Paleoeskimo, edited by Patricia D. Sutherland. Mercury Series, Archaeology Paper 167. Canadian Museum of Civilization, Gatineau.
Renouf, M.A.P. (Ed.) 2011 The Cultural Landscape of Port au Choix: Precontact Hunter-Gathers of Northwestern Newfoundland. Springer Science, New York.
Renouf, M.A.P. and Trevor Bell 2000 “Integrating Sea Level History and Geomorphology in Targeted Archeological Site Survey: The Gould Site (EeBi-42), Port au Choix, Newfoundland.” Northeast Anthropology 9(Spring).
102
Labrador-Island Transmission Line Permit #13.47 GOLDER DRAFT II GPA 2014
2006 “Maritime Archaic Site Locations on the Island of Newfoundland.” In The Archaic of the Far Northeast, edited by David Sanger and M.A.P. Renouf. University of Maine Press, Orono. 2009 “Contraction and Expansion in Newfoundland Prehistory, AD 900-1500.” In The Northern World AD 900-1400, edited by H. Maschner, O. Mason and R.J. McGhee. University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City. 2011 “By Land and Sea: Landscape and Marine Environmental Perspectives on Port au Choix Archaeology.” In The Cultural landscape of Port au Choix: Precontact Hunter-Gathers of Northwestern Newfoundland, edited by M.A.P. Renouf. Springer, New York.
Richards, Canon J.T. 1953 “The First Settlers on the French Shore,” Newfoundland Quarterly 52(3) and 52(4).
Robbins, Doug T. 1985 “Stock Cove, Trinity Bay: The Dorset Eskimo Occupation of Insular Newfoundland from a Southeastern Perspective.” Unpublished M.A. Thesis, Department of Anthropology, Memorial University, St. John’s. 1986 “ ‘Newfoundland Dorset’ Culture?”, in Palaeo-Eskimo Cultures in Newfoundland, Labrador and Ungava. Memorial University Reports in Archaeology , St. John’s.
Robinson, Commander George 1877 “Report of a Journey Across the Island of Newfoundland,” in Journal of the Royal Geographical Society. J. Murray, London.
Schwarz, Frederick 1992 “Archaeological Investigations in the Newfoundland Interior.” On file, Provincial Archaeology Office, St. John’s. 1993 “Archaeological Investigations in the Exploits Basin: Report on the 1992 Field Survey.” On file, Provincial Archaeology Office, St. John’s. 1994 “Palaeo-eskimo and Recent Indian Subsistence and Settlement Patterns on the Island of Newfoundland.” Northeast Anthropology 47(Spring).
Seary, E.R. 2000 Place Names of the Northern Peninsula A New Edition. ISER, Memorial University, St. John’s.
Smith, Philip E.L. 1987a “In Winter Quarters.” Newfoundland Studies 3 (1). 1987b “Transhumant Europeans Overseas: the Newfoundland Case.” Current Anthropology 28 (2). 1994 “Winter-houses and Winter Migrations,” in Encyclopedia of Newfoundland and Labrador, Volume Five. J.R. Smallwood Heritage Foundation/Harry Cuff Publications, St. John’s.
103
Labrador-Island Transmission Line Permit #13.47 GOLDER DRAFT II GPA 2014
South, G. Robin, ed. 1983 Biogeography and Ecology of the Island of Newfoundland. Dr. W. Junk Publishers, The Hague.
Speck, Frank 1922 Beothuk and Micmac. Museum of the American Indian, New York.
Stantec Consulting 2011 “Labrador-Island Transmission Link Environmental Assessment Historic and Heritage Resources Component Study.” Stantec Consulting Ltd., St. John’s.
Stewart, Dorothy [Anger] and Marlene Companion 2002 “The Micmac Shore: Micmac Family History in Western Newfoundland.” Federation of Newfoundland Indians, Corner Brook.
Temple, Blair 2007 “The 1966-69 Archaeological Excavations at Back Harbour, North Twillingate Island, Newfoundland.” On file at the Provincial Archaeology Office, Government of Newfoundland and Labrador, St. John’s.
Thomson, H.C. 1905 “Notes of a Journey Through the Northern Peninsula of Newfoundland.” Centre for Newfoundland and Labrador Studies, St. John’s (corrected typescript).
Thornton, Patricia A. 1977 “The Demographic and Mercantile Bases of Initial Permanent Settlement in the Straight of Belle Isle.” In The Peopling of Newfoundland: Essays in Historical Geography, John J Mannion, (ed.) Institute of Social and Economic Research, St. John’s.
Tuck, James A. 1978 “Excavations at Cow Head, Newfoundland: An Interim Report.” Etudes/Inuit/Studies Vol. 2 #1. 1979 “Archaeological Potential of the Gull Island to Soldier’s Pond Transmission Line Route.” On file, Provincial Archaeology Office, St. John’s. 1981 “Final Report: Lower Churchill Development Corporation Muskrat Falls Generating Project: Archaeological Report. On file, Provincial Archaeology Office, St. John’s.
Tuck, James A. and Ralph T. Pastore 1985 “A Nice Place to Visit, but…Prehistoric Extinctions on the Island of Newfoundland.” Canadian Journal of Archaeology Vol. 9 #1.
Wells, Patricia J. 2005 “Animal Exploitation and Season of Occupation at the Groswater Paleoeskimo site of Phillip’s Garden West.” Newfoundland Studies Vol. 20 #1. 2011 “Ritual Activity and the Formation of Faunal Assemblages at Two Groswater Paleoeskimo Sites at Port au Choix.” In The Cultural Landscapes of Port au Choix:
104
Labrador-Island Transmission Line Permit #13.47 GOLDER DRAFT II GPA 2014
Precontact Hunter-Gathers of Northwestern Newfoundland, edited by M.A.P. Renouf. Springer, New York.
White, Captain Thomas 1810 “Report of the Fisheries in Newfoundland Avenger.” PANL MG 204 [Duckworth Papers] reel 5/f 4691.
105
Labrador-Island Transmission Line Permit #13.47 GOLDER DRAFT II GPA 2014
Appendix A – Project Execution Plan
Muskrat Falls Regulatory Compliance: Island Construction Corridor Historic Resources, Stage 1 and Stage 2 Assessment Project Areas / Execution Plan RFP LC-EV-107
Submitted to Stephen Pellerin Lower Churchill Project Delivery Team
Submitted by Golder Associates Limited 62 Pippy Place, Suite 204, St John’s, NL, A1B 4H7
On behalf of Gerald Penney Associates Limited P.O. Box 428, St. John's, NL, A1C 5K4
10 September 2013
106
Labrador-Island Transmission Line Permit #13.47 GOLDER DRAFT II GPA 2014
CONTENTS
1.0 Introduction ...... 4
2.0 Project Summary Information...... 5 2.1 Agreement number and executing division(s) ...... 5 2.2 Client ...... 5 2.3 Consultant ...... 5
3.0 Project Scope ...... 6 3.1 Meeting with regulators ...... 6 3.2 Stage 1 desk-based assessment ...... 6 3.3 Stage 2 field investigation ...... 6 3.4 Fieldwork schedule ...... 7 3.5 Reporting ...... 7
4.0 Project Execution ...... 8 4.1 Roles and responsibilities of key project staff ...... 8 4.2 Safe work procedures (SWPs) ...... 8
5.0 Project Administration...... 9 5.1 Assignment of personnel ...... 9 5.2 Training and orientation...... 9 5.3 Travel ...... 9 5.4 Project communications ...... 9 5.5 Meetings...... 9 5.6 Reporting...... 9 5.7 Regulatory management ...... 9 5.8 Project closeout ...... 10
6.0 Technical Work/Field Investigations ...... 11 6.1 Objectives ...... 11 6.2 Planning of field investigations ...... 11 6.3 Relation to previous archaeology ...... 13
7.0 Procurement and Project Administration ...... 14
8.0 Health and Safety ...... 15 8.1 Project health and safety plan ...... 15 8.2 Emergency response plan ...... 15 8.3 Project specific remote locations ...... 15
107
Labrador-Island Transmission Line Permit #13.47 GOLDER DRAFT II GPA 2014
9.0 Environment ...... 15 9.1 Statutory requirements ...... 15 9.2 Site clean-up and sign-off ...... 15
10.0 Project Controls ...... 16 10.1 Project review ...... 16 10.2 Scope changes ...... 16 10.3 Provincial benefits ...... 16
Appendix 1 – Stage 1 & 2 Standard Operating Procedures (PAO) ...... 17
Appendix 2 – Discussion of Stage 2 Project Areas ...... 33
Appendix 3 – Remote Fieldwork Health and Safety Plan ...... 60 A.3.1 Helicopter ground safety precautions ...... 74 A.3.2 Field level hazard assessment form ...... 75 A.3.3 Remote fieldwork form ...... 76
108
Labrador-Island Transmission Line Permit #13.47 GOLDER DRAFT II GPA 2014
1.0 Introduction Gerald Penney Associates Limited (GPA) had been retained by Golder Associates Ltd. (Golder), on behalf of Nalcor Energy (Nalcor), to undertake a Historic Resources Assessment (Stage 1) and Historic Resources Assessment (Stage 2) of specified Project Areas (PAs) on the Island Transmission Link portion, Strait of Belle Isle to Soldier’s Pond, of the proposed Lower Churchill Project (LCP) transmission line construction corridor.
109
Labrador-Island Transmission Line Permit #13.47 GOLDER DRAFT II GPA 2014
2.0 Project Summary Information The official title of the project is Lower Churchill Project Historic Resources Assessment, or LCP HRA. 2.1 Agreement number and executing divisions(s) Nalcor’s Agreement Number is LC-EV-107 (Golder project number 13-1250-0043). The Project will be managed by the Golder’s St. John’s office and the technical execution will be managed by GPA. 2.2 Client The client for this project is Nalcor Energy’s Lower Churchill Project. Nalcor’s Engineering Procurement and Construction Manager (EPCM) is SNC Lavalin, referred to henceforward as the ‘Engineer.’ 2.3 Consultant The prime consultant for the project is Golder, who will be supported by GPA as sub-consultant.
110
Labrador-Island Transmission Line Permit #13.47 GOLDER DRAFT II GPA 2014
3.0 Project Scope GPA and Golder understand that Nalcor is required to submit Stage 1 and Stage 2 Historic Resource Assessments (HRAs) to the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador for approval by the Minister of Tourism, Culture and Recreation. HRAs are conducted pursuant to the Province’s Historic Resources Act (RSNL 1990 c. H-4) under Archaeological Investigation Permits as issued by the Provincial Archaeology Office (PAO). See Appendix 1. The primary deliverable of the Stage 1 assessment is a review based on background research, or Desk-Based Assessment (DBA). GPA has developed a fieldwork plan for Stage 2 Historic Resources testing of 24 identified locales where the proposed transmission-line corridor intersects Map Zones identified as having high or medium historic resources potential. Identification of high potential areas along the 100 m wide construction corridor was provided by Nalcor, based on geographic criteria and on the results of a Stage 1 assessment conducted 2008-10 (Stantec 2011). 3.1 Meeting with regulators GPA and Golder will meet with the PAO to orient them to and summarize the proposed HRAs. Feedback from such meetings will be used to adapt and amend the DBA and Field Assessment components as required prior to proceeding to the next steps. It is understood that the primary contact person with the PAO for the LCP is Delphina Mercer. 3.2 Stage 1 desk-based assessment For the Stage 1 DBA all existing archaeological data, as well as relevant cartographic, documentary, and ethnographic data will be employed in conjunction with topographic mapping and aerial photography, to assess and determine areas of high historic resource potential within the 120 hectare Island Transmission Link Stage 1 project area(s) (to be identified by Nalcor). GIS mapping will be produced indicating all areas of high historic resources potential. The PAO may require Stage 2 field assessment of such areas upon completion of the Stage 1 assessment. Stage 1 research will not involve field testing. 3.3 Stage 2 field investigation We have identified 17 Project Areas (PAs) through grouping locales by proximity, and have assigned each PA a field name after a nearby water feature.82 We have further grouped the PAs geographically (Northern Peninsula, Central and Avalon), it being our intention to organize fieldwork in three segments. Although primary access to remote areas is to be by helicopter, in the Northern Peninsula and Central fieldwork segments we have identified PAs which can be accessed by road, for “weather” days when it is not advisable to fly. We have allocated one field day per locale.
82 Where features are unnamed GPA assigns temporary field names (Corridor Ponds/Elbow Ponds), which appear in single quotes. 111
Labrador-Island Transmission Line Permit #13.47 GOLDER DRAFT II GPA 2014
3.4 Fieldwork schedule The Avalon fieldwork is projected at two days. As we will be departing from and returning to St. John’s each day, there are no travel days allocated. Our current intention is to assess this segment during the week of 16-20 September. The Northern Peninsula fieldwork segment is projected at ten days (two of which are travel days). Our current intention is to commence this segment on the 21st of September (2013) and return to our office on the 30th of September to begin mapping and assessment of the results. The Central fieldwork segment is projected at ten days, two of which are travel days. We plan to commence the fieldwork on the 10th of October and conclude the work on the 19th of October. 3.5 Reporting Under the Historic Resources Act and Regulation 143/91 (Archaeological Investigation Permit Regulations under the Historic Resources Act (O.C. 574-91) completed Site Record Forms (SRFs) and mapping of site locations surveyed are to be submitted to the PAO 30 days after the expiry of the Archaeological Investigation Permit (currently projected as 22 December 2013). Record forms from field work are required to be submitted to the PAO 180 days after the permit expires (22 May 2014) and final reports are to be submitted one year after the permit expires (22 November 2014). In practice, GPA endeavours to make a preliminary report and submit SRFs five working days after the completion of fieldwork (currently projected as 15 October 2013) and a final report 30 days after the expiry of the Archaeological Investigation Permit (22 December 2013).
112
Labrador-Island Transmission Line Permit #13.47 GOLDER DRAFT II GPA 2014
4.0 Project Execution 4.1 Roles and responsibilities of key project staff Project Manager Michel Wawzkow, P. Eng., P. Geo. Michel is a Senior Geotechnical/Environmental Engineer and geoscientist based in Golder’s St. John’s NL office. He will fulfil the role of Project Manager and ensure quality and completion of the work on time and on budget. Principal Investigator Gerald Penney, M.A. Gerry is an archaeologist and president of GPA. He will manage the DBA and field investigations throughout the field program, coordinate technical aspects in consultation with Golder, be the primary contact with the permitting authority (PAO) and will be the designated Permit Holder. Field Archaeologist Blair Temple, M.A. Blair is an archaeologist with GPA. He will act as the lead field investigator and be the in-house coordinator for the Northern Peninsula sector of field investigations. Archaeological Surveyor / CAD technician Toby Simpson, B.A. (Hons) Toby is an archaeologist, surveyor and CAD technician with GPA. He will act as support field investigator and be coordinator for the Central sector of field investigations. He is GPA’s team leader for Health and Safety field programs. Research and Report Coordinator Robert Cuff, M.A. Bob is a historian with GPA. He will be the coordinator for preliminary background research and coordinate report writing upon completion of field investigations. Bob will accompany the field investigators as record-keeper, photographer, first-aid provider and field assistant. 4.2 Safe Work Procedures (SWPs) GPA’s Safe Work Procedure associated with remote field activities are provided in Appendix 3.
113
Labrador-Island Transmission Line Permit #13.47 GOLDER DRAFT II GPA 2014
5.0 Project Administration 5.1 Assignment of personnel Project personnel indicated above have been assigned their roles, responsibilities and tasks for the Stage 1 and Stage 2 HRAs. 5.2 Training and orientation A Health and Safety review and briefing session will be delivered by Golder’s project manager to all field personnel prior to the commencement of fieldwork. 5.3 Travel GPA field staff will travel to fieldwork bases (Pasadena, Port au Choix, Gander and Grand Falls) by company vehicle. Fieldwork will be conducted by helicopter, arranged by Nalcor, or by company vehicle and thence overland. See Appendix B – Detailed Review by Project Area. 5.4 Project communications The primary form of project communications shall be via e-mail. It is understood that GPA and Golder may communicate directly with the PAO but Nalcor shall be cc’d on all communications with the PAO, or any other outside regulatory or government agency. Golder’s PM shall be cc’d on all communications between GPA and other third parties (suppliers, subcontractors, helicopter providers, provincial departments, etc.). Communications between various GPA field staff and Golder staff shall be by e-mail and/or mobile phone. Field staff in areas without cell phone coverage shall be provided with a satellite phone for emergency use. 5.5 Meetings Daily tailgate meetings shall be held at the start of each field day to carry out a task risk analysis and identify appropriate H&S and Environmental mitigation measures. Informal meetings between the Engineer and Golder’s Project Manager and/or GPA’s Principal Investigator will be carried out, as required, to ensure all work complies with the Engineer’s requirements. 5.6 Reporting Daily and weekly field reports shall be prepared by the Field Archaeologist and Archaeologcial Surveyor to record Environmental and Health and Safety issues, and work progress. These shall be submitted to Golder’s Project Manager by noon on the day following the reporting period for distribution to Nalcor and the Engineer. 5.7 Regulatory management Golder’s Project Manager shall review all required permit documentation and applicable regulations for regulatory compliance during project execution. Specific provisions of permits, permit conditions, and applicable regulations shall be discussed at tailgate meetings, as required, to make field staff aware of the regulatory requirements.
114
Labrador-Island Transmission Line Permit #13.47 GOLDER DRAFT II GPA 2014
5.8 Project closeout Project closeout will follow submission and acceptance of the final report (forecast submission date is 22 December 2013), final invoice and completion certificate.
115
Labrador-Island Transmission Line Permit #13.47 GOLDER DRAFT II GPA 2014
6.0 Technical Work/Field Investigations 6.1 Objectives The primary objective is to undertake a Stage 1 HRA for the evaluation of Project Areas that in total consist of 120 hectares (which are presently unidentified). Consultation with the permitting authority (PAO) will then be carried out and recommendations concerning Stage 2 assessments, if required, will be made to Nalcor and the Engineer. For the 26 hectares identified for Stage 2 HRA’s, the objective is to field-test specified High Potential and Moderate Potential Map Zones where they are intersected by the 60 m-wide proposed construction corridor. For both required HRA’s, a report will be developed within the scheduled timeframe that offers recommendations for Historic Resources mitigation and/or further assessment. 6.2 Planning of field investigations The Northern Peninsula fieldwork segment is projected at ten days and the project areas are indicated in the following table. PA Fieldname NTS Land Access Elevation (m) 1 ‘Corridor Ponds’ 12P/2 Y 26 m 2 Western Brook Pond 12P/2 N 72 m 3 Ten Mile Narrows 12P/1 N 57 m 4 Leg Pond 12I/10 Y 65 m 5 River of Ponds 12I/6 ~N83 43 m 6 ‘Elbow Pond’ 12I/3 N84 420 m 7 ‘Elbow Pond South’ 12I/3 N 365 m 8 Birchy Lake 12H/7 ~Y85 86 m
We plan to commence the Northern Peninsula segment of fieldwork on the 21st of September and conclude fieldwork on the 30th of September. Helicopter support will be required for six days for the Northern Peninsula work. The field team will be initially based in Pasadena, until PAs 6 and 7 have been assessed, and then at Port au Choix. To allow for the possibility of scheduling adjustments and/or weather delays, GPA will apply for an Archaeological Investigation Permit valid for the period 13 September 2013 to 29 November 2013.
83 This PA can likely be accessed by woods road from Hawkes Bay. We will consult locally. 84 Interior of Parsons Pond the ‘Elbow Ponds’ are the PAs most difficult of access. 85 Only 200 m by boat from MZ# 268. 116
Labrador-Island Transmission Line Permit #13.47 GOLDER DRAFT II GPA 2014
PA Fieldname NTS Land Access elevation (m) 9 Badger 12A/16 Y 100m 10 Lemotte’s Lake 2D/13 Y 80 m 11 Rattling Brook 2D/14 N 72 m 12 Tote River 2D/14 ~N86 90 m 13 Dead Wolf Brook 2D/15 N 127 m 14 Terra Nova 2D/8 N 91 m 15 Southwest Brook 2D/8 Y 29 m
We plan to commence on the 10th of October and conclude fieldwork on the 19th of October. Helicopter support will be required for five days. The field team will be based in Gander until those locales requiring helicopter support have been assessed, and then based in Grand Falls- Windsor. To allow for the possibility of scheduling adjustments and/or weather delays, GPA will apply for an Archaeological Investigation Permit valid for the period 13 September 2013 to 29 November 2013.
PA Fieldname NTS Land Access elevation (m) 16 Goose Pond 1N/5 Y 74 m 17 Hr Main Pond 1N/6 Y 89 m
For the Avalon segment, we plan to commence on the 17th of September and conclude fieldwork on the 18th of September. Helicopter support will not be required. The field team will be based in St. John’s. To allow for the possibility of scheduling adjustments and/or weather delays, GPA will apply for an Archaeological Investigation Permit valid for the period 13 September 2013 to 29 November 2013 Helicopter support will tentatively be required on the following days and at the locations indicated in the following table: Date Base Location 22 September Pasadena (overview, PA7) 23 September Pasadena (PA6/7) 25 September Port au Choix (PA2) 26 September Port au Choix (PA3) 27 September Port au Choix (PA5)
86 PA 11 can be accessed overland if need be. 117
Labrador-Island Transmission Line Permit #13.47 GOLDER DRAFT II GPA 2014
28 September Port au Choix (PA4) 11 October Gander (overview, PA13) 12 October Gander (PA14) 13 October Gander (PA14) 14 October Gander (PA14) 15 October Gander (PA12) 16 October Gander (PA11)
6. 3 Relation to previous archaeology Testing conducted (primarily in 2008 by others) in the course of Stage 1 assessments resulted in 774 test pits being excavated in 25 Map Zones on the Island portion of the transmission corridor. The testpit investigations carried out are summarized in the following table PA Fieldname MZ TPs locations 3 Ten Mile Narrows 051 tested 16 3 Ten Mile Narrows 052 tested 15 2 4 Leg Pond 073 tested 47 3 5 River of Ponds 136 tested 13 1 6 ‘Elbow Pond’ 211 tested 12 1 8 Birchy Lake 267 tested 00 (walkover) 268 tested 07 1 272 tested 28 3 275 tested 20 1 DhBf-01 9 Badger 349 tested 75 1 350 tested 06 1 DfBa-13 12 Dead Wolf 438 tested 10 1 439 tested 17 1 14 Southwest Brook 480 tested 12 2 481 tested 10 2 484 tested 62 1
118
Labrador-Island Transmission Line Permit #13.47 GOLDER DRAFT II GPA 2014
More than half of the test pits were excavated at river crossings which had been judgmentally determined to be high potential and/or where there were known pre-contact archaeological sites proximate (the Exploits and Gander river systems and at Birchy Lake). On the Northern Peninsula, the majority of test-pitting was at two narrows in major inland waterways: Ten Mile Lake and Portland Creek Pond. Portland Creek Pond has since been eliminated from consideration by re-routing the transmission corridor. The construction corridor does however impinge on the Ten Mile Lake/Round Lake narrows. A third area of extensive Stage 1 testing was the Middle Pond/Western Brook Pond87 area interior of Hawkes Bay. However the projected construction corridor does not intersect High Potential Map Zones in this area. Known sites at, or in close proximity to, the present PAs, are briefly discussed below: PA8 - DhBf-01 (Tea Bay 1) - A single large Ramah chert flake, collected from the shoreline of Birchy Lake, 300 m east of the TCH and the bridge crossing at Birchy Narrows. The site is located on a point of land along the eastern side of a small bay known as Tea Bay, on the north side of the lake. The flake is retouched on one side, and shows no sign of water-wear, suggesting recent deposition onto the beach. The cultural affiliation of the object is not known, but the size and material suggests that it may be Maritime Archaic Indian. Testing along the shoreline above the findspot exposed no further historic resources (Stantec 2011:74). The area has been eroding for many years, resulting in site damage and probable movement of artifacts. PA8- DhBe-04 (South Side 1) - A single black, water-worn chert flake, surface collected on a cobble beach along the south shore of Birchy Lake, approximately 250 m NW of the TCH. It is suggested that this artifact may have been deposited from elsewhere along the shoreline, as the site shows signs of extensive erosion and ice scouring (Stantec 2011:74). Birchy Lake has been the focus of interest over the past number of years due to its strategic interior location, and the identification of possible Groswater Paleoeskimo material, providing additional insight into interior usage by pre-contact peoples (Holly and Erwin 2009). PA9 - DfBa-13 (Two Mile 1) - Considerable test-pitting along the north and south site of the Exploits River adjacent to the Buchans Highway in 2008 was guided by there being three previously identified sites on nearby Two Mile Island. At DfBa-13 a single patinated chert flake was recovered, with all other nearby testing proving negative. The cultural affiliation is unknown (Stantec 2011:75). PA9 - DfBa-02 (Two Mile Island) - A site recorded previous to the Labrador/Island transmission testing is located on Two Mile Island in the Exploits River, approximately 170 m east of the Buchans Highway (Route 370) and 3.5 km SW of Badger. The cultural affiliation of the site is unknown.
87 Two archaeological sites, each identified as such on the basis of a single flake observed in disturbed context, were located during Stage 1 testing on the Northern Peninsula: Portland Creek Pond (EbBi-01) and Middle Pond (EdBg- 01). 119
Labrador-Island Transmission Line Permit #13.47 GOLDER DRAFT II GPA 2014
7.0 Procurement and Project Administration Procurement of sub-consultant services shall be through a sub-consultant contract with GPA and change orders, if required.
120
Labrador-Island Transmission Line Permit #13.47 GOLDER DRAFT II GPA 2014
8.0 Health and Safety Golder and GPA understand and share Nalcor’s view on the importance of maintaining a healthy and safe work environment during field activities. Golder’s H&S Management System requires training of all field staff, supervisors, and project managers to reduce the risk of H&S accidents. 8.1 Project health and safety plan A project-specific Health and Safety Plan has been developed which aligns with Nalcor’s and Golder’s Health and Safety Management plans. See Appendix 3. 8.2 Emergency response plan In addition to the project H&S plan, Golder has developed a Project Emergency Response Plan (ERP), see Appendix 3. 8.3 Project specific remote locations GPA has developed a project Remote Locations Plan, see Appendix 3.
121
Labrador-Island Transmission Line Permit #13.47 GOLDER DRAFT II GPA 2014
9.0 Environment 9.1 Statutory requirements There are regulatory requirements at the provincial, federal and municipal levels that apply to the design and construction of the LCP. Regulatory compliance throughout the Stage 2 Historic Resources Assessment will be evaluated through a program of environmental compliance monitoring by Golder. The LCP has adopted Nalcor’s Corporate Environmental Policy and Guiding Principles and its Environmental Management System meets the requirements of ISO 14001:2009 (Environment). All work undertaken during the field investigations shall be in accordance with these requirements. 9.2 Site clean-up and sign-off Upon conclusion of the investigation of each Project Area, GPA will remove all equipment and waste from the site. Test-pits will be back-filled and levelled. Golder’s Project Manager will review the site condition with GPA prior to demobilising.
122
Labrador-Island Transmission Line Permit #13.47 GOLDER DRAFT II GPA 2014
10.0 Project Controls 10.1 Project review Throughout the duration of the Historic Resources Assessment, the Scope of Work, instructions from the Engineer, and the Project Execution Plan will be reviewed. Reports will be subject to internal review to ensure consistency with standard methods and the Scope of Work. 10.2 Scope changes Variations from the cost proposal with respect to the scheduling of reporting, fieldwork, and helicopter access to remote locations will be tracked and reported, and trends will be noted to identify potential impacts to the estimated cost and schedule. Nalcor will be provided with sufficient information as work progresses through daily and weekly reporting that identifies potential impacts to the proposed cost and schedule, so that variations can be approved in a timely fashion. Any changes in scope required by the PAO, such as increases in the number of test locations, test pits, or the extension of Stage 2 testing resulting from the Stage 1 HRA/DBA, shall be documented in e-mails submitted by Golder’s Project Manager. Change requests will then be submitted for review and approval by Nalcor prior to executing such extra work. 10.3 Provincial benefits Provincial benefits shall be reported monthly as required by Exhibit 13 of the Agreement.
123
Labrador-Island Transmission Line Permit #13.47 GOLDER DRAFT II GPA 2014
Appendix B – Stage 1 & 2 Standard Operating Procedures (PAO)
Stage 1 – Historic Resources Overview Assessment Introduction A Historic Resources overview assessment is normally the initial step in the Historic Resources assessment process. That assessment will serve as a necessary basis for determining the level of continued involvement required within the Historic Resources assessment process. The overview assessment is intended to: identify and assess Historic Resources potential or sensitivity within the study area, and recommend the appropriate methodology and scope for detailed impact assessment studies in Stage 2. Although this may entail locating some Historic Sites in the field, a comprehensive inventory of the project area is not required at this stage. The overview assessment will, on occasion, involve one or more supplemental objectives. For example, where detailed inventory and impact assessment are clearly required in Stage 2, it may be appropriate at this time to test the feasibility of implementing certain site survey strategies. The objective is to determine the most efficient and effective approach given local conditions. Document Search This aspect of background research should involve a thorough review of library and archival literature and other relevant data sources. The research should include, but need not be limited to: A check of extant records including the Newfoundland & Labrador Archaeological Site Inventory, the Canadian Inventory of Historic Buildings, legal land survey records, and other pertinent records and inventory files. A review or summarization of all previous Historic Resources investigations or surveys in the study area, or in immediately adjacent areas. A review of relevant information from published and unpublished sources on local and regional history, prehistory, architectural history, ethnohistory, cultural geography, palaeontology, and other pertinent disciplines. A review of relevant paleoecological studies to assess past environmental conditions that may have influenced cultural adaptations. Examination and interpretation of aerial photographs and geomorphological and pedological information as an aid for assessing potential for human habitation. Direct Consultation Individuals and organizations with knowledge of the Historic Resources in the study area should be contacted where appropriate. The research objective shall be to compile information
124
Labrador-Island Transmission Line Permit #13.47 GOLDER DRAFT II GPA 2014 concerning the location, distribution, and significance of reported sites. In particular, interviews should be designed to elicit information which may facilitate constructing or confirming ethnographic and historic patterns of settlement, land use, and subsistence. Among those who should be consulted are local informants such as native groups, heritage societies, "Oldtimers', and specialists having local or regional expertise in the area. Specialists may include archaeologists, historians, ethnohistorians, palaeontologists, among others. Interviews with various persons will provide the researcher with an opportunity to document public or community attitudes toward impacts on local historic resources which the proposed development may impose. These local perceptions and attitudes may have a significant bearing on resources management decision-making, and therefore must be reported. This is especially true when there is strong local interest and concern regarding the safety of a particular site, or a group of such sites. In some cases, it may be more appropriate to reserve this phase of research until Stage 2, when impacts are better understood. Preliminary Field Reconnaissance The Historic Resources overview assessment may require some preliminary field reconnaissance. Preliminary reconnaissance may involve a simple over-flight of the study area, or, if greater intensity is demanded, a field survey. Reconnaissance survey is intended to supplement background research and should be undertaken in the event that historical, ethnological, or other documentary sources necessary for assessing historic resources potential are insufficient or unavailable. It is also warranted in the case where many alternatives are under consideration for location of project facilities. In this case, an overview statement of resources potential in an area, based entirely on background research, may be inadequate for providing effective guidance in project planning. Historic Resources Division will provide assistance in determining the need or the appropriate intensity of preliminary field reconnaissance for specific development projects. Reconnaissance survey should be primarily designed to provide a sufficient indication of Historic Resources potential in the study area and to identify both the need and the appropriate scope for further field studies. Although this may involve some ground reconnaissance, area coverage will usually be quite small relative to the overall size of the area being studied. The survey will seldom provide sufficient data to ensure an adequate estimate of all sites in an area. Information resulting from preliminary field reconnaissance should however, confirm or refute the existence of sites reported or predicted from background allow further predictions to be made about the distribution, density and potential significance of sites within the study area, identify areas where sites are apparently absent, implying low or no potential, verify, wherever possible, potential impacts imposed by the development projects, and suggest the most appropriate survey methods or techniques to be used in an intensive field survey should such a survey be necessary.
125
Labrador-Island Transmission Line Permit #13.47 GOLDER DRAFT II GPA 2014
By accomplishing these research objectives, the reconnaissance survey serves as a useful preliminary for designing and subsequently implementing a more effective and efficient site inventory survey in Stage 2. Techniques employed in reconnaissance survey will vary depending on such factors as terrain, vegetation, land use, ease of access, urbanization, the size of the project area, or the types of historic resources being sought. Where archaeological sites are anticipated, reconnaissance survey may require an on the ground inspection of selected areas. It may also be necessary for archaeologists to undertake some subsurface testing at this time to locate sites lacking surficial evidence, to delineate site boundaries, or, where necessary, to obtain sufficient information for preliminary site evaluation. For structural and architectural resources, a different approach from reconnaissance survey is normally required. A comprehensive drive-through or pedestrian inspection of areas having potential historical or architectural value would be generally appropriate for preliminary field reconnaissance. In undertaking a historic resources overview assessment, the development proponent, or his consultant, is encouraged to develop innovative approaches to predicting or evaluating overall resource sensitivity or potential within the study area. In this respect, it is important to consult all relevant data sources. Furthermore, the services of varied specialists such as ethno-historians, architectural-historians, cultural anthropologists, and paleontologists should be drawn upon so as to make the fullest use of the information. Extended efforts at this initial stage in the assessment process will result in more efficient and cost-effective research in Stage 2.
126
Labrador-Island Transmission Line Permit #13.47 GOLDER DRAFT II GPA 2014
HRIA Summary Stage 2 – Detailed Impact Assessment Introduction and objectives For most proposed development projects, detailed impact assessment is the standard procedure following the historic resources overview study. The detailed impact assessment is designed to gain the fullest possible understanding of the historic resource and its interactions with the proposed development. The study shall define the appropriate action to be taken, should the historic resources assessment process proceed to Stage 3 and 4. Normally, by Stage 2 in the project planning process various design alternatives have been assessed and subsequently rejected in favour of a preferred project alternative. Although minor design plan modifications are, in many cases, still viable considerations throughout this stage, the area(s) of project impact should be relatively well defined. These areas become the focus for detailed historic resources impact assessment studies. Detailed impact assessment should provide the most comprehensive information possible for effectively managing endangered historic resources before project implementation. The primary management objectives of the assessment are to conduct appropriate field and laboratory studies as necessary. to identify and evaluate historic resources within the specified development project area(s), to identify and assess all impacts on historic resources imposed by the development, and, based on the results of these activities, to recommend viable alternatives or options for managing unavoidable adverse impacts, including a preliminary program for: o implementing and scheduling these impact management actions in Stage 3, and o where necessary, conducting surveillance or 'impact monitoring', or both, in Stage 4. The information provided by detailed impact assessment is intended to assist the proponent in determining an optimum approach to designing, planning, and managing the proposed development project while giving appropriate consideration to historic resources. In the course of fulfilling these basic resource management objectives, it is usually possible to conduct problem-oriented research aimed at enhancing public understanding and appreciation of Newfoundland and Labrador's heritage. The effective and responsible integration of both management and research needs is an especially desirable quality of detailed impact assessment design and should be recognized as an integral part of such projects. Problem-oriented research objectives will vary depending primarily on the particular nature of the proposed development and the current state of research and resource management priorities and needs. However, it should be appropriate to address problems relating to the range of historic site variability or distribution, or to patterns of prehistoric or historic settlement and land use.
127
Labrador-Island Transmission Line Permit #13.47 GOLDER DRAFT II GPA 2014
Problem-oriented research, within the context of detailed impact assessment, will add credibility and confidence to recommendations of the report and greatly facilitate its review. Research activities Intensive inventory, site evaluation, and impact identification and assessment are the basic research activities at this stage in the historic resource assessment process. Normally, these studies will have been preceded by adequate background research and preliminary field reconnaissance in Stage 1. It is particularly important to recognize that Stage 2 research builds directly upon these latter studies. Moreover, the basic research design will be significantly influenced by findings made in Stage 1. The scope or level of intensity at which Stage 2 research activities should be undertaken will again vary depending on such factors as the particular nature of the proposed development, the extent of its probable impact, and the level or quality of previous historic and archaeological studies conducted in the area. This latter factor is especially true when designing the inventory survey strategy. The Historic Resources Division will provide assistance in defining the most suitable level of study, for specific development projects. The importance of employing the services of varied resource specialists at this stage of assessment cannot be overstated. This is especially true of site evaluation. For obvious reasons, the evaluation of any historic resource (e.g. archaeological, paleontological, historical, or architectural) should be performed by individuals professionally qualified in that particular field. The involvement of investigators with varied expertise throughout this stage will help ensure that potentially significant data are not inadvertently overlooked due to inadequate treatment. Finally, site evaluation and impact assessment need not necessarily be undertaken for all recorded historic and archaeological sites. These research activities are primarily intended for sites characterized by unavoidable adverse impacts. They are not required wherever the development proponent can ensure or guarantee the protection of such sites by relocating or redesigning certain project facilities, altering the level or intensity of development, or otherwise avoiding adverse impacts. Historic sites within the project area which will be avoided by land modifying actions are, for all practical purposes, exempt from further consideration at this stage of assessment. However, these sites may be of local importance for surveillance activity during project implementation and operation (Stage 4). Any development project changes, designed to ensure the protection of identified historic sites through avoidance, must be rigorously documented in the historic resources impact assessment report. Intensive inventory Identification of historic resources is an obvious prerequisite to site evaluation, impact assessment, and development of a viable impact management plan. Thus, the initial step in a detailed impact assessment is to compile a comprehensive inventory of historic sites occurring within the area of project impact. The site inventory must be sufficiently thorough to permit detailed, reliable statements to be made concerning the relative density, distribution and categories of heritage sites within the project area. The inventory phase of research shall involve:
128
Labrador-Island Transmission Line Permit #13.47 GOLDER DRAFT II GPA 2014
field survey, designed to locate historic sites in the field, and the complete, on-site recording or documentation of each identified site. Field Survey Field Survey refers to the visual inspection of land for locating archaeological, paleontological, historic and architectural sites. There are many different approaches to field survey, any one or more of which may be appropriate in different situations. Consequently, it is not possible to broadly prescribe which approach is most suitable for any specific types of developments. In most cases, this can be reasonably determined only after having gained familiarity with the particular environmental and cultural setting through background research and preliminary field reconnaissance in Stage 1. The intensity of field survey in Stage 2 depends on two important factors: the projected impact of the proposed action(s), and the quality of any existing historic site inventory in the project area. For example, a project whose actions will be negligible and diffuse may require less intensive survey than one in which direct, physical impacts are clearly discernible. Similarly, an area which has received substantial inventory survey may also require a less intensive approach than an area which has undergone no previous survey. Field survey will also likely differ, both in its basic strategy and scope, depending on the particular kind of historic sites being sought. For this reason, the following discussion on basic approaches to field survey will frequently distinguish between historic resources of an archaeological nature and those more commonly associated with the built environment. The former category includes historic, prehistoric, and paleontological sites whose proper investigation requires the use of established archaeological techniques. The latter primarily includes buildings or other structures of historical or architectural value. Whether one or other category of historic sites can be expected to occur in any project area, will have been reasonably ascertained from research undertaken in Stage 1. It is not inconceivable, however, to expect examples of each site type in any one area. Field survey shall involve complete or sample coverage of the project area, and employ accepted site survey techniques. Subsurface testing must be used, where necessary, to assist in locating historic sites and recording their precise dimensions. Complete Survey Ideally, the historic resources inventory should be based on intensive survey of every portion of the impact area. Maximum area coverage would naturally provide the most comprehensive understanding of resource density and distribution. However, in many cases, the size of the project area may render a complete inventory survey impractical, particularly with respect to time and cost considerations. Sample Survey More often than not, it will be more practical to survey intensively only a sample of the entire project area. The selection of the sample area will be approached systematically and based on statistical criteria, or judgmentally, relying primarily on subjective criteria. In historic and
129
Labrador-Island Transmission Line Permit #13.47 GOLDER DRAFT II GPA 2014 architectural site surveys, survey areas are usually selected on the basis of direct or indirect evidence from documentary and other sources. Systematic Sampling The preferred survey strategy is one based on accepted statistical sampling practices and site survey techniques designed to obtain a representative sample of historic resources in the project area. A statistically valid sample will allow reliable predictions to be made regarding total resource density, distribution, and variability. In systematic sample surveys, it may occasionally be necessary to exempt certain areas from intensive inspection owing to such factors as excessive slope, minimal land surface, excessive land altercation or modification by natural or artificial agents, land ownership, or current land use. These areas must be explicitly defined. On the other hand, unless the absence of sites can be unequivocally demonstrated, areas characterized by an absence of road access or poor ground surface visibility owing to dense vegetation should not normally be exempted. The proponent is encouraged to seek specialist consultation to ensure that the statistical sampling methods selected for historic resource survey are both appropriate and accurately applied. Previous studies of sample size, survey intensity, and statistical design and application under similar environmental and development project conditions, should also be consulted. Judgmental Sampling Under certain circumstances it may be appropriate to select a portion or sample of the project area based entirely on professional judgment regarding the location of sites. In judgmental sample surveys, only those areas are selected which can reasonably be expected to contain historic sites. Judgmental sampling may be a suitable strategy for archaeological and paleontological site surveys where the cultural and biophysical factors which influenced the distribution of these sites over the landscape are sufficiently known. Some factors which should be sufficiently understood if judgmental sampling is to be an effective and productive strategy include ethnographic and ethno-historic patterns of settlement, land use, and resource exploitation, the kinds and distribution of aboriginal food sources, and restrictions on site location imposed by physical terrain or climatic regimes. Even so, a judgmental sample is usually less desirable than one based on systematic sampling methods, in that the former has little, if any, predictive capability. If this method is used, rationale such as the above must be included in the report. Judgmental sampling is commonly employed in surveys of historical and architectural sites. Selection of the survey area is often based on documentary evidence, reports made by knowledgeable persons, or other sources which identify specific or approximate locations of potential historic sites. In other cases, inventory survey is conducted in areas suspected of having high potential for containing historic or architectural sites although no such sites have necessarily been referenced in the literature or otherwise reported. Site surveys of this sort are often conducted on a district lot-by-lot basis, with particular emphasis placed on those areas of earliest recorded development. It may also be appropriate to survey only particular kinds of historic or
130
Labrador-Island Transmission Line Permit #13.47 GOLDER DRAFT II GPA 2014 architectural properties such as domestic, "high-style", or industrial buildings, or vernacular architecture, or only properties representing particular themes. Basic Components of Site Surveying Site surveying is the process by which historic sites are actually located and identified on the ground. For most historic site surveys, this activity will consist of two basic components: surface survey and subsurface testing. For a more thorough account of these technical field aspects of heritage resource impact assessment, the reader is advised to consult appropriate procedure manuals. Surface Survey Surface survey refers to the actual visual inspection of the survey area. The precise approach may again differ somewhat depending on the type of historic site being sought. Surveys designed to locate sites of an archaeological nature normally involve a foot traverse along pre-defined linear transects spaced at systematic intervals across the survey area. This systematic approach is designed to achieve representative area coverage. Alternatively, an archaeological site survey may involve a non-systematic or random walk across the survey area. Surveys designed to locate sites of historic or architectural value need not be restricted to foot traverse, but may often be satisfactorily conducted using more rapid means of transportation. The survey design itself may or may not be of systematic nature. In the strictest sense, the term "surface survey" does not apply to survey of historically or architecturally important buildings or other facilities. Instead, this aspect of field survey usually involves scanning interior and/or exterior features of the site. \In some cases, it may be appropriate to employ a combination of systematic and judgemental sampling and surface survey methods. Mixed strategies of this sort may involve systematic sampling and judgemental or random surface survey, or alternatively, judgemental sample selection and systematic surface coverage. In some situations, it may be useful to utilize different survey strategies in different parts of the project area. For example, intensive systematic survey may be appropriate in areas of direct adverse impact, and judgemental survey in areas of minimal or indirect impact. Subsurface Survey Subsurface testing, relevant where sites of an archaeological nature are concerned, is recognized as an integral part of site surveying. It serves two basic functions: assists, where necessary, in locating historic sites, and assists in ascertaining a site's horizontal and vertical dimensions and other internal characteristics. In the present context, subsurface testing should not be confused with "evaluative testing" discussed below.
131
Labrador-Island Transmission Line Permit #13.47 GOLDER DRAFT II GPA 2014
Subsurface testing is regarded as an extremely useful field technique for locating sites, particularly in heavily vegetated areas with minimal surface exposure. In such cases, it should be consistently employed as a supplement to surface survey. Subsurface testing should be especially intensive in areas suspected of having high historic site potential, regardless of ground surface conditions. Additionally, subsurface testing may be useful on the site for adequately recording horizontal extent, as well as the depth of cultural deposits or degree of internal stratification. Recognizing that any form of excavation causes irreversible disturbance to a historic site, subsurface testing should be used only when necessary, and in moderation. All test units placed on a site must be accurately recorded and mapped. Although commonly referred to as "shovel testing", subsurface testing may also be accomplished using augers and core-samplers provided conditions are suitable. Except where these latter techniques are used, test units averaging 40 cm by 40 cm will be generally appropriate. These will be placed systematically and/or randomly throughout the survey area, depending on the surface survey strategy being employed. Screening the debris from test units, particularly those placed on a site, is recommended. The precise location, frequency, size, depth, and interval spacing of the test units will depend on the nature of the survey design, as well as various biophysical factors. Site Recording The intensive inventory phase of research in Stage 2 also includes the full documentation or recording of each identified site. All historic sites shall be recorded on standard site inventory forms. The A.S.C. Site Inventory and the Canadian Inventory of Historic Building forms shall be used for archaeological and historic-architectural sites, respectively. Paleontological site inventory forms are currently in preparation. Site surveyors are advised to consult the Canadian Inventory of Historic Building: Exterior Training Manual when recording architectural sites. These manuals identify various kinds of information which must be recorded and outline specific instructions or procedures to follow in this regard. In addition to various site characteristics which must be recorded, photographs and a map or sketch of the site (drawn to scale) are also required. For archaeological, and many historic sites, the map must illustrate both the arrangement or plan of the site, as well as its precise location relative to the nearest recognizable and permanent landmark. Because these sites are often situated in remote areas, the sketch must be of sufficient quality to ensure that the site can be readily relocated in the field. Once completed, site inventory forms must be forwarded to Historic Resources Division in St. John's, Newfoundland in order that each site may be assigned its appropriate "Borden" identification number, or geocode. All archaeological sites in Canada are assigned a Borden code. This identifies each specific archaeological site on the basis of its geographical coordinates, defined as a four letter sequence, and its numerical order of discovery (e.g. EeBl-2).
132
Labrador-Island Transmission Line Permit #13.47 GOLDER DRAFT II GPA 2014
The geocode is a unique 12 digit number assigned by Parks Canada to every building or other structure of historic or architectural importance. Site recording also includes a thorough description of all cultural material observed at a site. A representative selection of diagnostic artifacts or features should be drawn to scale or photographed in situ, or both. Drawings and photographs must be submitted with the site inventory forms. Site evaluation Site evaluation is the process of objectively determining the value or significance of an identified historic resource. The results of this evaluation are used as a principle basis for making resource management decisions. For example, the decision as to which remedial action, if any, should be taken in the event disturbance to a site is imminent, will be largely based on the degree of significance placed on the site. Site evaluation is, therefore, a vital aspect of detailed impact assessment. Site evaluation is required wherever an identified historic site will be adversely affected by a proposed development action. Normally, this will include all historic sites located within the area of project impact which are in unavoidable conflict with a land modifying action. There are many kinds of significance that need to be taken into account when evaluating historic resources. These "types" of significance, which serve as frames of reference for site evaluation, are measured for each site using explicit criteria. Once the basic types of significance and their related criteria are specified, the actual process of evaluating significance is reasonably straightforward. Basically, the evaluation is accomplished simply by measuring the characteristics of a site against the prescribed set of criteria. The fit between the criteria and the historic site is then evaluated. Be weighing the types of significance considered and identified, and the specific criteria themselves, a final judgment of site significance may be reached. Several comments pertaining to the conduct of site evaluation require particular attention. Firstly, the importance of employing professional historic resource specialists for site evaluation must be recognized. Evaluation should be performed conscientiously by persons knowledgeable or familiar with the type of resource being evaluated. This will ensure that potentially relevant data for evaluating historic sites are not omitted. Secondly, the process of arriving at a final judgement regarding a site's significance must be rigorously documented, and all aspects of the methodological approach justified. In particular, documentation shall include the nature of the ranking system used, for example, qualitative grading or numerical scoring, and the actual weights placed upon various criteria. Finally, the proponent is encouraged to develop innovative approaches to site evaluation which emphasize quantitative analysis and objectivity. Such approaches would greatly facilitate impact assessment review and decision-making processes. Types of Significance A number of basic kinds of significance may be used in evaluating historic resources within an impact assessment and management context.
133
Labrador-Island Transmission Line Permit #13.47 GOLDER DRAFT II GPA 2014
The following types, which will be generally appropriate for all historic resources, should be given particular consideration. scientific significance public significance integrity/condition Scientific Significance: Historic resources may be scientifically significant in two respects. A site's potential to yield information which, if properly recovered, will substantially further our understanding of Newfoundland-Labrador heritage, is one appropriate measure of scientific significance. In this respect, historic sites should be evaluated in terms of their capability or potential to help resolve current heritage research problems. Scientific significance should also refer to a site's potential for making substantive contributions to other disciplines, or for providing information which may be used by industry for practical purposes. The relevance of historic resource data to private industry may also be interpreted as a particular kind of public significance. Public Significance: Public significance refers to a site's relative potential for enhancing the public's understanding and appreciation of the past. In this respect, a site's interpretive, educational, and recreational potential are valid indications of a site's public significance. Unlike those criteria for measuring scientific significance, public significance criteria such as ease of access, land ownership, or scenic setting, are often external to the site itself. Integrity/Condition: Both the integrity and condition of an historic site are important considerations for significance evaluation. However, an assessment of integrity and condition alone is not sufficient to establish significance. These factors are probably best viewed as specific criteria for measuring certain types of significance (e.g. public significance). Integrity refers to a site's degree of authenticity, and, in this respect, pertains chiefly to historic buildings or architectural sites. These heritage properties may possess integrity of design, workmanship, materials, and/or location or setting. Condition, on the other hand, applies to all historic sites, and refers to the degree of disturbance or dilapidation of a site. Although usually more restricted to particular types of heritage resources, the following areas of significance may also be of use for site evaluation purposes. ethnic significance historical significance economic significance Ethnic Significance: Ethnic significance applies to historic sites which have religious, mythological, social, or other special symbolic value to an ethnically distinct community or group of people. Archaeological, historical, and architectural sites may have some degree of ethnic significance. Determining the ethnic significance of an historic site may require consulting those groups who occupy or have occupied the site, the descendants of such groups, or people who presently own or live near the site.
134
Labrador-Island Transmission Line Permit #13.47 GOLDER DRAFT II GPA 2014
Historical Significance: Historically significant sites can be readily associated with individuals or events that made an important, lasting contribution to the historic development of a particular locality or larger area. Historically important sites are also those which reflect or commemorate the historic socioeconomic character of an area. This type of significance applies to both architectural and historic sites, including those of an archaeological nature. Normally, sites having high historical significance will also have high social or public significance. Economic Significance: The economic or monetary value of an historic site, if calculable, is also an important indication of significance. In some cases, it may be possible to project monetary benefits derived from the public's use of an historic site as an educational or recreational facility. This may be accomplished by employing established benefit estimation methods, most of which have been developed for evaluating outdoor recreation. The objective is to determine the willingness of users, including local residents and tourists, to pay for the experiences or services the site provides even though no payment is presently being made. Calculation of user benefits will normally require some study of the visitor population. Factors to consider when evaluating historic resource significance are provided for each site type in Appendices I - IV. These checklists of criteria are not intended to be exhaustive or inflexible. Rather the user should revise and add to them as necessary. It should also be recognized that these and other significant criteria will likely change as both public and professional values, interests, and priorities change. Information Sources Information on which a determination of site significance is based can be derived from evaluation testing, surface collecting, as well as several other sources. Evaluation Testing Evaluative testing, commonly referred to as "test excavation", is appropriate at sites containing buried cultural or paleontological materials. Evaluative testing implies "controlled" excavation of a portion of such sites using established data recovery techniques. The objective is ~to gain a sufficient impression of a site's content and context so that a reliable assessment of significance can be made. Concurrently, evaluative testing can provide proper cost information for formal excavation or mitigation should this latter activity be necessary. Evaluative testing shall involve: placement of one or more excavation units (normally 1m by 1m, or 2m by 2m), excavation by systematic levels (e.g. stratigraphic or arbitrary), mapping, measuring, and recording horizontal and vertical provenances of all cultural items or other relevant materials observed within the excavation unit, and recovery and cataloguing of all recorded materials. Profile drawings, or scaled maps of the stratigraphy and features exposed in the walls of an excavation unit, should also be prepared where appropriate. The subsequent analysis and
135
Labrador-Island Transmission Line Permit #13.47 GOLDER DRAFT II GPA 2014 interpretation of the recovered materials and the context in which they were found will provide an indication of site significance. Evaluative testing should not be interpreted as a full-scale data recovery or salvage operation. As it is not intended to alleviate adverse impacts or resolve conflicts with a proposed development it is far less intensive than full-scale data recovery. The appropriate number of units to excavate for evaluation purposes will vary as a function of the site's particular characteristics, especially it's horizontal and vertical dimensions and depositional complexity. In some cases, a single excavation unit will be appropriate for significance evaluation, while in other cases, several units, systematically or judgmentally placed across the site area, will be required. Natural and artificial exposures should also be used where possible to supplement or even to replace actual excavation units. Surface Collecting Surface collecting may be employed as a means of obtaining site evaluation information wherever archaeological, historical, or paleontological remains are evident on the ground surface. However, where these sites contain buried deposits, some degree of evaluating testing will also be required. Surface collecting shall involve: placement of an appropriate grid network (normally 2m x 2m units) over the site area, or portion thereof, mapping, measuring, and recording of all cultural items and other relevant materials observed within the grid system, and collection and cataloguing of recorded material (often from systematically selected grid units). Systematic surface collections from archaeological sites should be limited, as far as possible, to a representative sample of materials necessary to aid in site evaluation. Surface collecting from paleontological sites should normally be restricted to a representative sample of diagnostic specimens. Unless a site is exceptionally small and limited to surface distribution, no attempt should be made at this stage of assessment to collect all or a major portion of the surface materials. Intensive surface collecting should be reserved for full-scale data recovery operations if required in Stage 3. Impact identification and assessment This integral and final phase of Stage 2 assessment is necessarily concerned with identifying development related impacts on historic resources and assessing their effect upon future uses of the resource. The identification and assessment of historic resource impacts follows directly from intensive inventory and significance evaluation. In order to properly assess the effect of a development action on an historic site, it is necessary to compare the anticipated state of the resource following project implementation against some initial reference state. Anticipated impacts upon historic sites and the rate of resource depletion
136
Labrador-Island Transmission Line Permit #13.47 GOLDER DRAFT II GPA 2014 in the absence of the proposed development should be taken into account when defining the initial reference state. The impact assessment phase of research should commence with a thorough discussion of the kinds of impacts imposed by the development and proceed with a comprehensive evaluation of their level of effect. Impacts must be identified, assessed and reported for each phase of the undertaking in which they are expected to occur, such as preconstruction, construction, operation and maintenance. Describing Impacts An historic resource impact may be broadly defined as the net change between the condition or integrity of an historic site "with" and "without" the proposed development project. This change in condition or integrity may be either beneficial or adverse. Beneficial Impacts: Beneficial impacts occur whenever a proposed development action actively protects, preserves, or enhances an historic resource. For example, a development action may have a beneficial impact by removing or lessening natural erosion of a site. Similarly, an action may serve to preserve a site for future use, by covering it with a protective layer of sand or fill. In other cases, the public or economic significance of a heritage site may be enhanced by a development action which facilitates or encourages its non-destructive public use. Beneficial effects upon resources are unlikely to occur frequently, but should nevertheless be thoroughly documented and discussed. Adverse Impacts: More commonly, the effects of a development project on heritage sites will be of an adverse nature. Adverse impacts occur under conditions that include: destruction or alteration of all or part of an historic site, isolation from its natural setting, and introduction of physical, chemical, visual, audible, or atmospheric elements that are out of character with the historic resource and its setting. Adverse impacts can be more specifically defined as either direct, indirect or potential impacts. Direct Impact: Direct impacts are the immediately demonstrable effects of a project which can be directly attributed to particular land modifying actions. They are directly caused by the development project or its ancillary facilities, and occur at the same time and place. Examples include all project-related land disturbances associated with coal or metal mining, dam construction, linear developments such as pipelines, transmission lines, railway, and roads, and intensive land uses including agricultural, recreational, industrial, residential, or forestry use. The immediate consequences of these sorts of major developments, such as slope failure following reservoir inundation, should also be regarded as direct impacts. Indirect Impact: Indirect or secondary adverse impacts result from activities other than actual development actions. Nevertheless, they are clearly brought about by the development project, and would not occur without it. Indirect impacts will normally occur at the same time as the development, but not necessarily in the same immediate area. For example, the accelerated erosion of an historic site resulting from alterations in normal flow patterns downstream from the
137
Labrador-Island Transmission Line Permit #13.47 GOLDER DRAFT II GPA 2014 development site would constitute an indirect impact. Increased vandalism of historic sites, resulting from improved or newly introduced access, would also be considered an indirect impact. Potential Impact: Potential impacts may occur either as a direct or indirect result of a development project. However, unlike direct or indirect impacts, potential impacts are removed in time and possibly in distance from the project. In other words, although potential impacts occur as a result of a project, and are predictable, they are not immediately evident. Potential impacts normally occur in relation to other factors, particularly socioeconomic changes in an area. Changes in land use patterns or population density, such as increased urban or industrial development, intensification of farming, or increased recreational use, are sources of potential adverse impact on historic sites. Assessing Level of Effect Besides merely identifying project-related impacts, it will be necessary to ascertain their individual level of effect on historic resources. Previous evaluations of site significance are of fundamental importance and concern in this analysis. The level of effect analysis or impact assessment, is intended to determine the extent or degree of which future opportunities for scientific research, preservation, or public appreciation are foreclosed or otherwise adversely affected by a proposed action. In doing so, the assessment can provide a reasonable indication of an impact's relative significance or importance. Impact assessment should include careful consideration of the following level-of-effect indicators: magnitude severity duration range frequency diversity cumulative effect rate of change Impact magnitude refers to the size or force of impact which can be expected to occur. The resultant loss of historic resource value may be measured (in amount or degree) in relation to actual physical alteration or destruction of the site. The severity of an impact refers to its degree of irreversibility. Unavoidable adverse impacts which present a totally irreversible and irretrievable commitment of heritage property are of the highest severity.
138
Labrador-Island Transmission Line Permit #13.47 GOLDER DRAFT II GPA 2014
Duration of impact refers to the length of time an adverse impact persists. Impacts may be of a short-term or temporary nature. Conversely, particular actions may impose more persistent or long-term effects on historic sites. Range refers to the spatial distribution of an impact, for example, whether widespread or site- specific. Frequency of impact refers to the number of times an impact is expected to occur. For example, an adverse impact of variable magnitude, severity, and duration may occur only once. On the other hand, an impact such as cultivation or project maintenance may be of a recurring or ongoing nature. Diversity of impact reflects the number of different kinds of development or development-related actions expected to impact historic site. Cumulative effects imply a progressive alteration or destruction of site owning to the repetitive or recurring nature of one or more impacts. Cumulative effects should also be addressed when discussing rate of change. The rate of change in integrity or condition of an historic resource will usually be difficult to predict at this stage of project planning. This parameter is normally accounted for in the context of impact monitoring during and following project implementation. Nevertheless, the anticipated rate of change should be determined at this time if possible as it will provide an important and useful indication of level of effect. Level of effect analysis must be conducted and reported in a quantitative and objective fashion. As with site evaluation, all aspects of the methodological approach used, particularly the system of ranking and scoring level-of-effect indicators, must be rigorously documented and justified. Areas of uncertainty in impact assessment must also be identified, and means of dealing with or managing this uncertainty should be recommended. Source: http://www.tcr.gov.nl.ca/tcr/pao/hria_summary/hria_summary_stage2.html
139