SUPPLEMENTAL REPORTS I-002154 Angel Tract
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
SUPPLEMENTAL REPORTS I-002154 Angel Tract Mine Angel Tract, LLC Hampton County, TMS 188-00-00-030 Latitude: 32.7088 Longitude: -80.9132 Reports submitted for Requested Angel Tract Mine page 1) Cultural Resource Identification Survey of the Angel Tract 2 2) Threatened and Endangered Species Survey Report 74 3) Army Corps of Engineers Wetland Determination Request and maps 92 Cultural Resource Identification Survey of the Angel Tract Hampton County, South Carolina Final Report March 2010 CULTURAL RESOURCE IDENTIFicATION SURVEY OF THE ANGEL TRACT HAMPTON COUNTY, SOUTH CAROLINA FINAL REPORT Prepared for: Angel Tract, LLC Estill, South Carolina c/o Wise Batten, Inc. Estill, South Carolina Prepared by: Charles F. Philips Jr. Senior Historian and Joshua N. Fletcher, RPA Principal Investigator March 2010 Brockington and Associates, Inc. Atlanta • Austin • Charleston • Elizabethtown • Pensacola • Savannah ii Brockington and Associates Abstract In December 2009, Brockington and Associates, Inc., coupled with observations of each of our survey areas conducted a cultural resource identification survey of the Angel Tract during our initial field investigations. (CRIS) of the 1,853-acre Angel Tract in Hampton Approximately 1,099 acres of the Angel Tract possess a County, South Carolina. The investigations were high potential to contain cultural resources. Transects conducted for Angel Tract, LLC. This survey was in the high-potential areas should be spaced at 30-meter requested in compliance with the Memorandum of intervals, with shovel tests excavated at 30-meter Understanding (MOU) between the South Carolina intervals along each transect. Approximately 468 acres Department of Commerce (SCDOC) and the South of the Angel Tract possess a low potential to contain Carolina State Historic Preservation Office (SCSHPO) cultural resources. Transects in the low-potential areas regarding the implementation of guidelines for CRISs should be spaced at 30-meter intervals, with shovel tests conducted for the South Carolina Site Certification excavated at 60-meter intervals along each transect. Program. The purpose of the SCDOC Site Certification Investigators should visually inspect the ground surface Program is to identify and clarify issues pertaining to where possible. No shovel tests will be excavated in the development of a specific commercial or industrial wetlands areas. site. This report presents initial information regarding cultural resources that may be affected by potential development of the Angel Tract Certification Site, as well as recommendations for possible additional cultural resource survey investigations of the Angel Tract. The CRIS of the Angel Tract included background research and archaeological survey. There are no structures within or adjacent to the tract; therefore, an architectural survey was not necessary. Investigators identified six sites (38HA1097– 38HA1102) and three isolated finds (Isolates 1–3) during the CRIS of the Angel Tract. We recommend sites 38HA1097, 38HA1101, and 38HA1102 and Isolates 1–3 not eligible for the NRHP. No further management consideration of sites 38HA1097, 38HA1101, and 38HA1102 and the isolated finds is warranted. We recommend sites 38HA1098, 38HA1099, and 38HA1100 potentially eligible for the NRHP. If sites 38HA1098, 38HA1099, and 38HA1100 cannot be preserved in place, we recommend that evaluative testing be conducted to determine definitively the NRHP eligibility of each site. One of the purposes of the CRIS, as detailed in the MOU, is to provide recommendations for possible additional cultural resource survey investigations of the Certification Site. As detailed in Chapter 3, we base our recommendations for possible additional cultural resource survey investigations of the Angel Tract on research conducted prior to our field investigations, Brockington and Associates iii iv Brockington and Associates AcKNOWLEDGMENTS The authors would like to thank Mr. Wise Batten of Wise Batten, Inc., for his assistance during this project. Charlie Philips served as historian; he conducted the background research for the project tract. Damon Jackson conducted research on the ArchSite program. Paige Wagoner conducted research of previously identified cultural resources at the South Carolina Institute of Archaeology and Anthropology and the South Carolina Department of Archives and History. Kong Cheong, Jimmy Lefebre, Patrick Severts, and Caitlin Uhl completed the archaeological survey. In the laboratory, Lauren Andersen conducted the artifact processing and analysis, under the direction of Nicole Isenbarger. Damon Jackson and Allison Wind prepared the graphics for this document. Jennifer Salo provided editorial assistance. Jennifer Salo and Michael Walsh produced the report. Brockington and Associates v vi Brockington and Associates table of contents Abstract .......................................................................................................................................................................iii AcKNOWLEDGMENTS ...........................................................................................................................................v LIST OF FIGURES.......................................................................................................................................................viii LIST OF Tables ..........................................................................................................................................................ix 1.0 Introduction AND Methods of INvestigation .................................................1 1.1 INTRODUCTION .....................................................................................................................................1 1.2 METHODS OF INVESTIGATION ...................................................................................................1 1.2.1 Project Objective ....................................................................................................................................1 1.2.2 Background Research ............................................................................................................................1 1.2.3 Field Investigations ................................................................................................................................3 1.2.4 Laboratory Analysis and Curation .....................................................................................................7 1.2.5 Assessing NRHP Eligibility ...................................................................................................................7 2.0 ENvironmental AND Cultural OvERview ...............................................................11 2.1 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING ..........................................................................................................11 2.2 BRIEF HISTORY OF THE LAND OWNERSHIP OF THE ANGEL TRACT ...........11 2.3 PREVIOUS CULTURAL RESOURCES INVESTIGATIONS NEAR THE ANGEL TRACT ..........................................................................................................................................18 3.0 Results AND Recommendations .............................................................................................23 3.1 RESULTS OF THE FIELD INVESTIGATIONS ........................................................................23 3.1.1 Etheridge Parcel Area A ........................................................................................................................23 3.1.2 Etheridge Parcel Area B ........................................................................................................................24 3.1.3 Etheridge Parcel Area C ........................................................................................................................25 3.1.4 Etheridge Parcel Area D ........................................................................................................................26 3.1.5 Angel Parcel Area A ...............................................................................................................................26 3.1.6 Angel Parcel Area B ...............................................................................................................................28 3.1.7 Angel Parcel Area C ...............................................................................................................................31 3.1.8 Angel Parcel Area D ...............................................................................................................................34 3.1.9 Angel Parcel Area E ...............................................................................................................................37 3.1.10 Angel Parcel Area F .............................................................................................................................38 3.1.11 Angel Parcel Area G.............................................................................................................................43 3.1.12 Angel Parcel Area H ............................................................................................................................48 3.2 SUMMARY AND MANAGEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS ..............................................49 REFERENCES CITED ................................................................................................................................................51 APPENDIX A: ARTIFACT INVENTORY Brockington and