Stage 1 & 2 Archaeological Assessment

Stage 3 Archaeological Assessment Jackson Harvest Farms Aggregate Extraction Site 1 (AiHd-171), Site 2 and Review of Recommendations for Site 3 (AiHd-172) 1894 Witmer Road, Township of Wilmot Regional Municipality of Waterloo Lot 10, German Block South of Bleams Road Geographic Township of Wilmot Waterloo County, Ontario

Submitted to

Jackson Harvest Farms c/o Rick Esbaugh 2819 Herrgott Road St. Clements, Ontario N0B 2M0

and The Ontario Ministry of Tourism, Culture and Sport

Prepared by

@ the Museum of Ontario Archaeology 1600 Attawandaron Road, London, ON N6G 3M6 Phone: (519) 641-7222 Fax: (519) 641-7220

Archaeological License: James Taylor Sherratt, M.A., P074 Our File: 2018-158 PIF Numbers: P074-0017-2018 (Site 1 AiHd-171), P074-0018-2018 (Site 3 AiHd-172), P074-0049-2019 (Site 2)

September 2019 Original Report submitted to Ministry of Tourism, Culture and Sport 13 September 2019 TMHC Stage 3 Archaeological Assessment, Jackson Harvest Farms Site 1 (AiHd-171), Site 2 and Site 3 (AiHd-172), Wilmot Twp., Waterloo County, ON ii ______

Executive Summary

In the fall of 2018, Timmins Martelle Heritage Consultants Inc. (TMHC) was contracted by Jackson Harvest Farms to complete a Stage 3 archaeological assessment of the two Indigenous archaeological sites (Site 1 AiHd-171) and Site 2 within a proposed new aggregate pit and found during the Stage 1 and 2 assessment of the subject property completed by Archaeological Research Associates (ARA) Ltd. earlier the same year. In addition, TMHC was asked to review the Stage 3 recommendations for Site 3 (AiHd- 172), a 19thcentury archaeological site associated with an extant farm lot on the property. The Stage 3 assessment was carried out in accordance with the Ontario Heritage Act R.S.O. 1990 and to meet the provisions of the Aggregate Resources Act R.S.O. 1990 as required by Policy No. 2.01.08 of the Aggregate Resources Policies and Procedures Manual (MNRF 2015).

Stage 3 assessment for Site 1 (AiHd-171) consisted of a controlled surface pick- up (CSP) and the excavation of 27 1 m2 test units over an area approximately 25 m2. A total of 39 artifacts were recovered of which 15 are Indigenous. Two potential cultural features were also identified. The Indigenous component of Site 1 dates to the Woodland Period and has further Cultural Heritage Value or Interest (CHVI). The historic component of Site 1 is interpreted to be associated with Site 3 which dates to the late-19th to 20th century domestic site. It does not have further CHVI under the provincial framework.

The Stage 3 assessment of Site 2 consisted of a CSP and the excavation of nine 1 m2 units over an area approximately 10 m2. A total of two Indigenous artifacts were recovered. Site 2 is an isolated Indigenous find spot for which a more specific cultural or temporal affiliation cannot be assigned. It has no further CHVI under the provincial framework.

Site 1 (AiHd-171) contained both a 19th century and Indigenous component. The 19th century component has no further CHVI and no further work is recommended. The Indigenous component of Site 1 (AiHd-171) meets provincial criteria for Stage 4 assessment based on the recovery of Indigenous ceramics and identification of a possible culture feature. Two options are available: 1) long-term protection and avoidance; and 2) excavation. Avoidance and long-term protection is always the preferred mitigation strategy. In this case, the proponent has indicated that the site falls within the extraction area for the proposed aggregate pit and cannot be avoided. As such, excavation is the only viable mitigation strategy.

The Stage 4 excavation strategy for Site 1 (AiHd-171) was developed in consultation with the participating Indigenous communities. The recommended Stage 4 excavation strategy entails:

______

TMHC Stage 3 Archaeological Assessment, Jackson Harvest Farms Site 1 (AiHd-171), Site 2 and Site 3 (AiHd-172), Wilmot Twp., Waterloo County, ON iii ______

• a small block excavation shall be undertaken around the two units (300N 495E:1 and 300N 495E:3) containing possible features, using standards established in Section 4.2.2 for hand excavation (MTC 2011:76). Unit excavation must continue until the per-unit count is less than 10, with fewer than two formal tools, diagnostic artifacts, burnt artifacts, and fire-cracked rock (Section 4.3 Standard 1 Table 4.1). If subsurface features are identified the excavation should be extended 2 m beyond the edge of the feature; features must be cleaned, mapped, photo- documented and excavated according to Section 4.2.2. Standard 7. • following block excavation, mechanical topsoil stripping should be undertaken for the portion of the site containing cultural features. This should follow Section 4.2.3 of the Standards and Guidelines (MTC 2011:78-79) and involve the use of an excavator with a flat-edged ditching bucket to expose the ploughzone/subsoil interface. Stripping should extend a minimum of 10 m beyond any confirmed cultural feature. The subsoil surface should be shovel shined to assist in the identification of cultural features. Any identified cultural features should be documented and excavated following Section 4.2.2., Standard 7 (MTC 2011:77). Jackson Harvest Farms Site 2 is a small, low-yielding Indigenous site for which a more specific age or cultural affiliation can be attributed due to a lack of diagnostic artifacts. As the Stage 3 per-unit excavations did not identify any units containing 10 or more artifacts, diagnostic artifacts, Indigenous ceramic sherds, or cultural features (MTC 2011:58, Section 3.4.1.1), Site 2 does not have further CHVI under the provincial framework. Therefore, the site does not meet provincial criteria for Stage 4 mitigation and no further assessment is recommended.

Jackson Harvest Farms Site 3 (AiHd-172) was subject to additional background research to contextualize the site and identify its occupants. After further background research and a re-evaluation of the overall date for the artifact collection using an assemblage-based approach in keeping with The Archaeology of Rural Historical Farmsteads Bulletin (MTCS 2014), Site 3 (AiHd-172) is determined to be a ca. 1855 or 1862-1900 domestic site related to the occupation of the property largely by the Wilhelm family. Given the above and the fact that less than 80% of the site occupation pre-dates 1870, AiHd-172 has no further CHVI within the provincial framework. As such, the site does not meet provincial standards for further Stage 3 assessment and no additional work is recommended.

These recommendations are subject to the conditions laid out in Section 5.0 of this report and to Ministry of Tourism, Culture and Sport review and acceptance of this report into the Ontario Public Register of Archaeological Reports.

______TMHC Stage 3 Archaeological Assessment, Jackson Harvest Farms Site 1 (AiHd-171), Site 2 and Site 3 (AiHd-172), Wilmot Twp., Waterloo County, ON iv ______

Table of Contents

Executive Summary ...... ii Table of Contents ...... iv Project Personnel…………………………………………………………………….. vii Acknowledgements ...... vii List of Images ...... Error! Bookmark not defined. List of Maps ...... v List of Tables ...... v Indigenous Territorial Acknowledgements ...... viii 1.0 PROJECT CONTEXT ...... 1 1.1 Development Context ...... 1 1.1.1 Introduction ...... 1 1.1.2 Purpose and Legislative Context ...... 1 1.2 Archaeological Context ...... 2 1.2.1 Site Areas: Overview and Physical Setting ...... 2 1.2.2 Summary of Registered or Known Archaeological Sites ...... 3 1.2.3 Summary of Past Archaeological Investigations within 50 Metres ...... 4 1.2.4 Dates of Archaeological Fieldwork ...... 6 1.3 Historical Context ...... 7 1.3.1 Indigenous Settlement in Waterloo County ...... 7 1.3.2 19th Century and Municipal Settlement...... 7

2.0 SITE 3 (AiHd-172) RECOMMENDATIONS REVIEW ...... 13

3.0 STAGE 3 ARCHAEOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT ...... 14 3.1 Field Methods ...... 14 3.1.1 Site 1 (AiHd-171) Site Specific Field Methods ...... 16 3.1.2 Site 2 Site Specific Field Methods ...... 17 3.2 Record of Finds ...... 18 3.2.1 Site 1 (AiHd-171) ...... 18 3.2.2 Site 2 ...... 21 3.3 Analysis and Conclusions ...... 21 3.3.1 Site 1 (AiHd-171) ...... 22 3.3.2 Site 2 ...... 22 3.3.3 Site 3 (AiHd-172) ...... 23 2.4 Recommendations ...... 24 4.0 SUMMARY ...... 26 5.0 ADVICE ON COMPLIANCE WITH LEGISLATION ...... 26 6.0 BIBLIOGRAPHY ...... 28 7.0 IMAGES ...... 32 8.0 MAPS ...... 43 APPENDIX A: Illustration of Grid Coordinate System ...... 63 SUPPLEMENTARY DOCUMENTATION ...... 64

______TMHC Stage 3 Archaeological Assessment, Jackson Harvest Farms Site 1 (AiHd-171), Site 2 and Site 3 (AiHd-172), Wilmot Twp., Waterloo County, ON v ______

List of Images

Image 1: Surface Visibility at Site 1 (AiHd-171) ...... 33 Image 2: Surface Visibility at Site 2 ...... 33 Image 3: CSP in Progress at Site 1 (AiHd-171) October 30th, 2018 ...... 34 Image 4: CSP in Progress at Site 2 on October 30th, 2018 ...... 34 Image 5: Establishing Excavation Grid at Site 1 (AiHd-171) ...... 35 Image 6: Recording Excavation Grid at Site 1 (AiHd-171) ...... 35 Image 7: Site 1 (AiHd-171) Unit Excavation in Progress ...... 36 Image 8: Site 1 (AiHd-171) Unit Excavation in Progress ...... 36 Image 9: Site 1 (AiHd-171) Typical Stage 3 Test Unit (295N 500E:1) ...... 37 Image 10: Site 1 (AiHd-171) Typical Stage 3 Test Unit (290N 510E:1) ...... 37 Image 11: Site 1 (AiHd-171) Potential Feature 1 in 300N 495E:1 ...... 38 Image 12: Site 1 (AiHd-171) Potential Feature 2 in 300N 495E:3 ...... 38 Image 13: Site 1 (AiHd-171) Disturbance in 285N 500E:1 ...... 39 Image 14: Site 2 Unit Excavation in Progress ...... 39 Image 15: Site 2 Unit Excavation in Progress ...... 40 Image 16: Site 2 Typical Stage 3 Test Unit (195N 395E:1) ...... 40 Image 17: Site 2 Typical Stage 3 Test Unit (205N 406E:1) ...... 41 Image 18: Site 1 (AiHd-171) Indigenous Artifacts...... 41 Image 19: Site 1 (AiHd-171) 19th Century Artifacts ...... 42 Image 20: Site 2 Chipping Detritus ...... 42

List of Maps

Map 1: Location of the Subject Property in Wilmot Twp., ON ...... 44 Map 2: Aerial Photograph Showing the Location of the Subject Property in Wilmot Twp., ON ...... 45 Map 3: Physiography Within the Vicinity of the Subject Property ...... 46 Map 4: Soils Within the Vicinity of the Subject Property ...... 47 Map 5: Drainage Within the Vicinity of the Subject Property ...... 48 Map 6: Facsimile Map of 1824 Settlement of New Hamburg (Roth 1972) ...... 49 Map 7: Segment of 1861 Tremaine Map of Wilmot Township Showing the Subject Property ...... 50 Map 8: Historic 1877 Map of Waterloo Showing Subject Property ...... 51 Map 9: 1946 Aerial Image Showing Subject Property ...... 52 Map 10: 1955 Aerial Image Showing Subject Property ...... 53 Map 11: 1966 Aerial Image Showing Subject Property…………………………………………………… 54 Map 12: 1927 Topographic Map Showing the Subject Property …………………………………………. 55 Map 13: 1933 Topographic Map Showing the Subject Property …………………………………………. 56 Map 14: 1938 Topographic Map Showing the Subject Property …………………………………………. 57 Map 15: 1969 Topographic Map Showing the Subject Property …………………………………………. 58 Map 16: Site 1 (AiHd-171) Stage 3 Unit Excavation Results…………………………………………….. 59 Map 17: Site 1 (AiHd-171) Stage 3 Unit Excavation Results by Artifact Type………………………….. 60 Map 18: Site 2 Stage 3 Unit Excavation Results ………………………………………………………… 61 Map 19: Unaltered Proponent Map ………………………………………………………………………. 62

Supplementary Documentation

SD Map 1: Alder Heritage Assessments (2007) Stage 2 Assessment Map ...... 68 SD Map 2: ARA's 2018 Stage 2 Assessment Methods and Results……………………………………… 69 SD Map 3: Stage 3 Test Unit and Detailed Site Locations for Site 1 (AiHd-171) and Site 2 ………….. 70 SD Map 4: Stage 3 Test Unit and Detailed Site Locations for Site 1 (AiHd-171) and Site 2 Shown on Proponent Map……………………………………………………………………………….. 71 ______TMHC Stage 3 Archaeological Assessment, Jackson Harvest Farms Site 1 (AiHd-171), Site 2 and Site 3 (AiHd-172), Wilmot Twp., Waterloo County, ON vi ______

List of Tables

Table 1: Archaeological Sites Registered within 2 km of the Subject Property ...... 4 Table 2: Fieldwork Summary ...... 7 Table 3: Cultural Chronology for Indigenous Settlement in Waterloo County ...... 7 Table 4: Relevant Land Registry Data for Lot 10, German Tract South of Bleams Road ...... 11 Table 5: Documentary Records ...... 18 Table 6: Site 1 (AiHd-171) Stage 3 Indigenous Artifacts and Faunal Remains Catalogue ...... 19 Table 7: Site 1 (AiHd-171) 19th Century Artifact Catalogue ...... 21 Table 8: Site 2 Stage 3 Indigenous Artifacts Catalogue ...... 21 Table 9: Summary of Evaluation of the CHVI of Site 3 (AiHd-172) Based on Table 3.2 of the Standards and Guidelines ...... 24

______

TMHC Stage 3 Archaeological Assessment, Jackson Harvest Farms Site 1 (AiHd-171), Site 2 and Site 3 (AiHd-172), Wilmot Twp., Waterloo County, ON vii ______

Project Personnel

Project Coordinators: Jim Sherratt, M.A. (P074)

Report Production: Jim Sherratt, M.A. (P074) Liam Browne, M.A. (R1048)

GIS Technicians: David Gostick, B.A. John Moody, Ph.D.

Field Directors: Marya D’Alessio, M.A. (R1163) Jennifer Langille, B.A. (R1198)

Field/Lab Technicians: Liam Browne, M.A. (P1048) Johnathan Freeman, B.A. (R274) Ramsay MacFie, B.A. (R1022) Patryk Weglorz, B.A. (R1170) Amelia Pilon, M.A. Breanne Reibl, M.Sc. Emily Vella, M.Sc. Heidi Applin, B.A. David Gostick, B.A. Olivia Johnson, B.A. Alexandra Kisielewski, B.A. Joseph Motley, B.Sc. Kirsten Bell Kat Schiller-Doerksen, B.Sc. Elton (Bear) John Peter (Tyr) Koersvelt James Syme George Smoudianis

Artifact Analysis: Jim Sherratt, M.A. (P074) Nicole Brandon, M.A. (P302) Rachelle Carter, B.A.

Acknowledgements

Rich Esbaugh Landowner Jackson Harvest Farms

Malcolm Horne Plans Review Officer Ministry of Tourism, Culture and Sport

______

TMHC Stage 3 Archaeological Assessment, Jackson Harvest Farms Site 1 (AiHd-171), Site 2 and Site 3 (AiHd-172), Wilmot Twp., Waterloo County, ON viii ______

Indigenous Territorial Acknowledgements

Mississaugas of the Credit First Nation (MCFN)

The archaeological fieldwork reported here was undertaken within the Treaty Lands and Territory of the Mississaugas of the Credit First Nation; the Mississaugas of the Credit First Nation are the stewards of the lands, waters and resources of their territory, including archaeological resources and cultural heritage values.

Six Nations of the Grand River (SN)

We acknowledge that the archaeological fieldwork documented in this report was completed within the Treaty and Territorial lands of the Six Nations of the Grand River. Six Nations of the Grand River have asserted and established rights within these lands as affirmed by the Crown through formal agreements including the July 19, 1701 Fort Albany/Nanfan Treaty and the Haldimand Treaty of 1784. Six Nations of the Grand River are part of the Iroquois Confederacy who have lived, farmed, hunted, fished and traded throughout these lands for many generations and continue to do so today. Six Nations of the Grand River have a deep connection to the lands now defined as Ontario as protectors and keepers of Mother Earth. This stewardship includes cultural heritage: spiritual and sacred sites, archaeological sites, built heritage and cultural heritage landscapes. It also includes care and protection for the Ancestors and their resting places.

Indigenous Community Participants

Six Nations of the Grand River (SNEC)

Coordinator: Joanne Thomas, Dawn LaForme

Fieldwork Monitors: Tyler Jamieson John Miller

Haudenosaunee Development Institute (HDI)

Coordinator: Wayne Hill

Fieldwork Monitors: Tyler Hill Coleman Hill Caroline Miller

Mississaugas of the Credit First Nation (MCFN)

Coordinators: Megan DeVries, Joelle Williams

Fieldwork Liaisons: Rachele King Tony LaForme Rasondra Mendes

______

1.0 PROJECT CONTEXT

1.1 Development Context

1.1.1 Introduction

All archaeological consulting activities were performed under the Professional Archaeological License of Jim Sherratt, M.A. (P074) and in accordance with the Standards and Guidelines for Consultant Archaeologists (MTC 2011, “Standards and Guidelines”). Permission to access the subject property to conduct all required archaeological fieldwork activities, including the collection of artifacts when present, was provided by Rick Esbaugh of Jackson Harvest Farms.

1.1.2 Purpose and Legislative Context

The Ontario Heritage Act R.S.O. 1990 makes provisions for the conservation of heritage resources in the Province of Ontario. Heritage concerns are recognized as a matter of provincial interest in Section 2.6.2 of the Provincial Policy Statement (2014) which states:

TMHC Stage 3 Archaeological Assessment, Jackson Harvest Farms Site 1 (AiHd-171), Site 2 and Site 3 (AiHd-172), Wilmot Twp., Waterloo County, ON 2 ______

development and site alteration shall not be permitted on lands containing archaeological resources or areas of archaeological potential unless significant archaeological resources have been conserved …..

In the PPS the term conserved means:

the identification, protection, management and use of built heritage resources, cultural heritage landscapes and archaeological resources in a manner that ensures their cultural heritage value or interest is retained under the Ontario Heritage Act. This may be achieved by the implementation of recommendations set out in a conservation plan, archaeological assessment and/or heritage impact assessment.

The Aggregate Resources Act, R.S.O. 1990, also calls for the conservation of heritage resources and all class-specific license applications filed with the Ministry of Natural Resources must provide technical reports that outline measures for the identification and mitigation of archaeological resources within proposed extraction areas. Thus, cultural heritage resources must be considered within the licensing approval process. Aggregate extraction may only take place on properties that have been cleared of archaeological concern. A Stage 1 background review is carried out to determine if there is potential for the discovery of archaeological sites within a proposed licensed area. If a property demonstrates archaeological potential, a Stage 2 field survey must be carried out. If potentially significant sites are found during the field review, subsequent Stage 3 and Stage 4 assessments may be required.

1.2 Archaeological Context

1.2.1 Site Areas: Overview and Physical Setting

The subject property is a proposed new aggregate pit comprising Part of Lot 10, German Block South of Bleams Road, Township of Wilmot, Waterloo County, Ontario (Maps 1 and 2). It is located southeast of the intersection of Sandhills Road and Bleams Road and directly south of the historic community of Shingletown, in a primarily rural area. It consists primarily of agricultural land and is bounded to the south by Witmer Road, to the east and west by treelines marking field edges and extends north to a woodlot. The central and southern portions of the property once housed farmsteads, and a number of dilapidated modern farm structures are still standing.

The subject property falls entirely within the Waterloo Hills physiographic region, as defined by Chapman and Putnam (1984:136-137; Map 3). The surface of this region is composed of sandy hills, some of them being ridges of sandy till, while others are kame or kame moraine with outwash sands occupying the intervening hollows (Chapman and Putnam 1984:136). In the vicinity of the subject property the geology is characterized by glaciofluvial ice-contact deposits, which primarily consist of gravel and sand in the form

______

TMHC Stage 3 Archaeological Assessment, Jackson Harvest Farms Site 1 (AiHd-171), Site 2 and Site 3 (AiHd-172), Wilmot Twp., Waterloo County, ON 3 ______of esker, kame, end moraine, ice marginal delta and subaqueous fan features (Azimuth 2012:5).

The subject property contains three distinct and well-draining soil types: Lisbon sandy loam, Fox sandy loam, and Burford sandy loam (Map 4). The Lisbon series consists of well-drained soils developed on sandy loam and gravelly sandy loam. Most Lisbon soils in occur on the fluted outwash plain between the Grand and Speed Rivers, and in the southern part of the Waterloo Sandhills (Wicklund and Presant 1971). Fox soils are developed on well-drained, mainly medium- and coarse-sized sands. Fox sandy loam is a coarse and medium outwash sandy soil (Wicklund and Presant 1971). Burford soils are developed on 12 inches or less of loam or sandy loam overlying gravelly soil materials (Wicklund and Presant 1971).

The subject property falls within the Alder Creek drainage basin (Map 5). The Newmaster drain flows approximately 250 m to the west and Hofstetter Lake lies approximately 1.2 km to the north. A small unnamed kettle pond lies immediately to the east of the subject property and another is shown in the southern portion of lot.

1.2.2 Summary of Registered or Known Archaeological Sites

A search of Ontario’s Past Portal showed only one registered archaeological site, AiHd-148, within 1 km of Jackson Harvest Farms property. It is an isolated find spot of a Middle Archaic Brewerton projectile point (AHA 2007, Find Spot 6; SD Map 1) found during a pedestrian survey of lands to the north of the subject property but over 50 m away from it. To better understand the archaeological record within this area, the search radius was expanded to 2 km. This expanded search radius of 2 km resulted in 10 archaeological sites being identified (Table 1). Half of the sites within 2 km date to the Late Woodland Period, similar to Jackson Harvest Farms Site 1 (AiHd-171). AiHd-81, AiHd-85, and AiHd-87 are similarly situated in close proximity to a kettle pond.

______

TMHC Stage 3 Archaeological Assessment, Jackson Harvest Farms Site 1 (AiHd-171), Site 2 and Site 3 (AiHd-172), Wilmot Twp., Waterloo County, ON 4 ______

Table 1: Archaeological Sites Registered within 2 km of the Subject Property

Borden Site Name Time Period Affinity Site Type Number Indigenous, Other camp/campsite, AiHd-90 Ranger Woodland, Late Iroquoian midden AiHd-87 Warren Cattleland 4 Woodland, Late Indigenous Unknown AiHd-85 Warren Cattleland 2 AiHd-84 Warren Cattleland 1 Other Other camp/campsite AiHd-83 Hunsburger Creek Archaic Indigenous Other camp/campsite AiHd-82 Sluyter Woodland, Late Indigenous village AiHd-81 Hofstetter Indigenous Indigenous burial, cemetery Woodland, Late, AiHd-74 Baechler Woodland, Indigenous Other camp/campsite Middle Indigenous AiHd-18 Baden Hill Woodland, Late village Neutral AiHd-172 Post-Contact Euro-Canadian farmstead AiHd-148 Freeman Archaic, Middle Indigenous findspot

1.2.3 Summary of Past Archaeological Investigations within 50 Metres

Based on the available data, two previous archaeological assessments have occurred within 50 m of the subject property, one of which is the Stage 2 assessment that resulted in the discovery of Jackson Harvest Farms Sites 1, 2 and 3. As the MTCS does not currently maintain an accessible database of previous reports, this list may not be comprehensive.

In 2007, Alder Heritage Assessments (AHA) completed a Stage 1-2 archaeological assessment for proposed building lots on the northern portion of Lot 10, Concession South of Bleams Road, north of the subject property. The Stage 1 assessment provided an overview of soils, topography and drainage, in addition to historical background information on the area and subject property. The AHA assessment noted that there was an 1855 farm house still standing adjacent to Bleams Road, as also shown on historic mapping. The report also noted that the R.M. of Waterloo’s Archaeological Master Plan indicates there was an 1830s cabin site on Location 11, one lot west of their property and the Jackson Harvest Farms property. The 1855 house is described as a two- storey rectangular structure with a fieldstone foundation that has been added to over the years (AHA 2007:6-7). The assessment resulted in the discovery of six archaeological find spots of isolated artifacts. Of these, five were 19th century artifacts and one was an Indigenous Brewerton Side Notched projectile point, registered in the provincial database as AiHd-148. No further assessment was recommended for any of the archaeological resources that were found.

______

TMHC Stage 3 Archaeological Assessment, Jackson Harvest Farms Site 1 (AiHd-171), Site 2 and Site 3 (AiHd-172), Wilmot Twp., Waterloo County, ON 5 ______

The results of the Stage 1-2 assessment were detailed in a report entitled Stage 1 & 2 Archaeological Assessment of Consent Application B01/07; B02/07; B03/07, Part Lot 10, Concession South of Bleams Road, 2215 Bleams Road East, Shingletown, Township of Wilmot, Regional Municipality of Waterloo (AHA 2007; Licensee Elizabeth Alder, P082; P082-005-2007).

Previous Archaeological Assessment of Subject Property

In May of 2018, ARA was contracted by IBI Group Inc. to conduct a Stage 1-2 archaeological assessment for a proposed new aggregate pit comprising the current subject property. During this assessment four archaeological sites were identified (Site 1 – AiHd-171; Site 2; Site 3 – AiHd-172; and Site 4) during pedestrian survey (SD Map 2).

Jackson Harvest Farms Site 1 (AiHd-171) was a small scatter of three artifacts in a 2.5 m x 1 m area. The artifact assemblage consisted of a single ceramic sherd, a biface and a brachiopod shell. The ceramic sherd dated the site to the Woodland period, but a more specific date was not assigned. Jackson Harvest Farms Site 2 was similarly small in size, measuring 3.7 m x 1 m and consisted of two pieces of chipping detritus. Site 2 is an Indigenous site but could not be assigned a more specific time period or cultural affiliation. The two sites were located 80 m apart on the opposite sides of a knoll. Jackson Harvest Farms Site 3 was found to be a large (198 m x 72 m) scatter of domestic material dating to the 19th and early 20th century. The site was found in close proximity to Site 1. Jackson Harvest Farms Site 4 was an isolated scraper made on Onondaga chert. Site 4 is an Indigenous site but could not be assigned to a more specific time period or cultural affiliation.

Based on the results, Stage 3 assessment was recommended for Site 1 (AiHd- 171), Site 2 and Site 3 (AiHd-172) The results of the Stage 1-2 assessment were detailed in a report entitled Stage 1 and 2 Archaeological Assessments Jackson Harvest Farms Aggregate Extraction 1894 Witmer Road Township of Wilmot Regional Municipality of Waterloo Lot 10, German Block South of Bleams Road Geographic Township of Wilmot Waterloo County, Ontario (ARA 2018; Licensee Paul Racher, M.A., P007; P007-0898- 2018). Specifically, the report recommends:

ARA recommends that Site 1 (AiHd-171), Site 2 and Site 3 (AiHd-172) be subject to Stage 3 site specific assessments in accordance with the requirements set out in Section 3.2, Section 3.2.2 and Section 3.2.3 of the S&Gs (MTC 2011:47, 50–53). Given that the sites are located within an agricultural field, test unit excavation must be preceded by a CSP as set out in Section 3.2.1 of the S&Gs (MTC 2011:48). If ground surface visibility has decreased since the Stage 2 survey, the field must be re-cultivated and weathered. Detailed documentary research must also be carried out for Site 3 as per Section 3.1 of the S&Gs (MTC 2011:46–47).

______

TMHC Stage 3 Archaeological Assessment, Jackson Harvest Farms Site 1 (AiHd-171), Site 2 and Site 3 (AiHd-172), Wilmot Twp., Waterloo County, ON 6 ______

Given that Site 1 (AiHd-171) and Site 2 are located on either side of the same knoll and may comprise a site complex, the Stage 3 assessments of these sites should share a common grid and be investigated together (it is quite possible that these sites will merge and become one larger site). An appropriate assessment method would comprise test unit excavation using the strategy for plough-disturbed, large, multi- or single-component sites (MTC 2011:Table 3.1, Numbers 5–7). This would involve the excavation of grid test units at a 5 m interval across the identified site extents, additional test units amounting to at least 20% of the grid unit total both within and between the site extents and further additional test units amounting to at least 10% of the grid unit total on the periphery of the scatters. Additional intensification at a 5 m interval with 20% infill would be required if any new artifact concentrations are identified and further information is needed to address the objectives set out in Section 3.2.3 of the S&Gs (MTC 2011:50).

An appropriate assessment method for Site 3 would comprise test unit excavation using the strategy for Pre-Contact or Post-Contact sites where it is not yet evident that the level of CHVI will result in a recommendation to proceed to Stage 4 (MTC 2011:Table 3.1, Numbers 1 and 2). This would involve the excavation of grid test units at a 5 m interval across the site extent and additional test units amounting to at least 20% of the grid unit total in areas of interest. If it becomes evident during the excavation of Stage 3 test units that the site should proceed to Stage 4, then the strategy for Pre-Contact or Post-Contact sites where it is clearly evident that the level of CHVI will result in a recommendation to proceed to Stage 4 can be followed (MTC 2011:Table 3.1, Numbers 3 and 4). As discussed in Section 3.3.3 of the RHF (MTCS 2014:10), this would involve finishing the grid test units at a 10 m interval and completing additional test units amounting to at least 40% of the grid unit total in areas of interest. The test unit excavation strategy at Site 3 should therefore be developed with the objective of meeting the requirements of Table 3.1, Numbers 3 and 4, with further test units being excavated according to Table 3.1, Numbers 1 and 2 only if necessary to support the argument that the site should not proceed to Stage 4 (MTCS 2014:10). (ARA 2018: 23)

1.2.4 Dates of Archaeological Fieldwork

The Stage 3 fieldwork of Jackson Harvest Farms Site 1 (AiHd-171) and Site 2 began October 30, 2018 but was suspended until the spring 2019 due to the onset of poor weather. Table 2 lists weather conditions and field directors for each date of fieldwork.

______

TMHC Stage 3 Archaeological Assessment, Jackson Harvest Farms Site 1 (AiHd-171), Site 2 and Site 3 (AiHd-172), Wilmot Twp., Waterloo County, ON 7 ______

Table 2: Fieldwork Summary

Date Weather Activity Field Director SITE 1 (AiHd-171) Oct. 30, 2018 CSP; Grid Marya D’Alessio, M.A. (R1163) Nov. 12, 2018 cold and overcast Unit Excavation Jennifer Langille, B.A. (R1198) Nov.15, 2018 cold and overcast Unit Excavation Jennifer Langille, B.A. (R1198) May 15, 2019 sunny and warm Unit Excavation Jennifer Langille, B.A. (R1198) May 16, 2019 mix sun and cloud Unit Excavation Jennifer Langille B.A. (R1198) SITE 2 Oct.30, 2018 CSP; Grid Marya D’Alessio, M.A. (R1163) Nov. 28, 2018 cold and cloudy check site conditions Marya D’Alessio, M.A. (R1163) May 17, 2019 mix sun and cloud Unit Excavation; CSP Jennifer Langille, B.A. (R1198)

1.3 Historical Context

1.3.1 Indigenous Settlement in Waterloo County

The previous Stage 1 and 2 assessment reports (ARA 2018) provided detailed summaries of the Indigenous settlement in Waterloo County. As such, the same information is only provided in tabular format here (Table 3).

Table 3: Cultural Chronology for Indigenous Settlement in Waterloo County

Period Time Range (circa) Diagnostic Features Complexes Paleoindian Early 9000 - 8400 B.C. fluted projectile points Gainey, Barnes, Crowfield Late 8400 - 8000 B.C. non-fluted and lanceolate points Holcombe, Hi-Lo, Lanceolate Archaic Early 8000 - 6000 B.C. serrated, notched, bifurcate base points Nettling, Bifurcate Base Horizon Brewerton, Otter Creek, Middle 6000 - 2500 B.C. stemmed, side & corner notched points Stanly/Neville Late 2000 - 1800 B.C. narrow points Lamoka Genesee, Adder Orchard, 1800 - 1500 B.C. broad points Perkiomen 1500 - 1100 B.C. small points Crawford Knoll Terminal 1100 - 950 B.C. first true cemeteries Hind Woodland Early 950 - 400 B.C. expanding stemmed points, Vinette pottery Meadowood Middle 400 B.C. - A.D. 500 dentate, pseudo-scallop pottery Saugeen Transitional A.D. 500 - 900 first corn, cord-wrapped stick pottery Princess Point Late Early A.D. 900 - 1300 first villages, corn horticulture, longhouses Glen Meyer Middle A.D. 1300 - 1400 large villages and houses Uren, Middleport Late A.D. 1400 - 1650 tribal emergence, territoriality Neutral Iroquois Contact Indigenous A.D. 1700 - present treaties, mixture of Native & European items Haudenosaunee, Mississauga Settler A.D. 1796 - present English goods, homesteads European settlement, pioneer life

1.3.2 19th Century and Municipal Settlement

The subject property is situated within part Lot 10, German Block South of Bleams Road in the former Geographic Township of Wilmot, Waterloo County, Ontario. It is located south of the historic settlement of Shingletown or Schindlesteddle, once also known as Victoriaburg. A brief discussion of 19th century and early municipal settlement ______

TMHC Stage 3 Archaeological Assessment, Jackson Harvest Farms Site 1 (AiHd-171), Site 2 and Site 3 (AiHd-172), Wilmot Twp., Waterloo County, ON 8 ______in these places is provided below, as a means of providing general context for understanding former land use.

Waterloo County

Waterloo County is reported to be the first inland county to be settled in Ontario (RWAD 1989). It originally formed part of the Wellington District, established in 1838, which incorporated all of Wellington, Waterloo and Grey Counties and a portion of Dufferin (Parsell & Co. 1881:2). Following the abolishment of the district system in 1849, Waterloo County was established as its own independent political entity. Over a century later, in 1973, it was redefined as the Regional Municipality of Waterloo.

Waterloo County held its first council meeting in January of 1853, although settlement had begun in the county many decades earlier. At that time the County consisted of five townships: Woolwich, Wellesley, Wilmot, Waterloo and Dumfries. In 1784, Sir Frederick Haldimand negotiated the purchase of roughly three million acres of land from the Mississaugas. The newly acquired tract extended six miles on either side of the Grand River from Port Maitland on Lake Erie to Pilkington Township in Wellington County (Bloomfield 2006:19). It was Haldimand’s intent that these lands would be used by the Six Nations and given to them in compensation for the loss of their traditional lands in New York State following the American Revolutionary War. The grant was strategic for the British in that it rewarded the loyalty of their native supporters who had fought alongside them in their colonial battles and created a vast buffer zone between the capital of Upper Canada at York and the British-American borders in Detroit and Niagara. Led by Joseph Brant (Thayendanegea), hundreds of people from the Six Iroquoian Nations (the Mohawk, Cayuga, Oneida, Onondaga, Seneca and Tuscarora) trekked to the Grand River purchase and established permanent settlements along the Grand River near “Brant’s Ford,” now the City of Brantford. Alongside them were a small number of other United Empire Loyalists (UELs), many of English descent, who too had suffered personal losses for their loyalty to the Crown and sought a new life outside of the American colonies.

Following this initial land grant, Joseph Brant proceeded to negotiate the transfer of some of the Six Nations land grant to Euro-Canadian settlers. Some of the transferred lands were small tracts and lots which would come to be settled by United Empire Loyalists, largely ex-military men and their families, many of whom were friends, companions or associates of Brant. Other more substantial blocks, all north of Brantford, were surveyed and sold to local entrepreneurs. Block 1, comprising some 94,305 acres from Paris to just north of Galt, was sold to Philip Stedman in 1795 (McLaughlin 1987:16-17) and would eventually become “Dumfries.” Block 2, at 94, 012 acres, was sold to Richard Beasley, James Wilson and John Baptiste Rousseau and would later become Waterloo Township, encompassing Hespeler, Preston and Galt (McLaughlin 1987:17).

______

TMHC Stage 3 Archaeological Assessment, Jackson Harvest Farms Site 1 (AiHd-171), Site 2 and Site 3 (AiHd-172), Wilmot Twp., Waterloo County, ON 9 ______

Early on, settlement within these blocks was hindered by the fact that the Crown, taken aback by Brant’s land sales, were reluctant to recognize the validity of the sales transactions. Government officials were unsure that the thusly granted Six Nations land could in fact be sold and many were concerned that properties might ultimately end up in the hands of American sympathizers (McLaughlin 1987:13). Many of the Six Nations land sales were not formally recognized by the Crown until the 1830s.

At the time of the Haldimand Proclamation much of Waterloo County was uncleared wilderness. One of the County’s first European settlers, George Clemens, noted when he arrived in 1798 that most of the county was woods except for a few clearings (Eby 1895). Early settlers described the area as dense forest, impassible swamp inhabited by wolves, bears and foxes (Eby 1895). Most early settlement centered on agricultural pursuits, as the land in the region could be easily cleared, contained favourable soils, was well-draining and close to water (RWAD 1989). By 1801 a significant quantity of land was in the process of being cleared and new roads were being constructed (Eby 1895). After the grist mills were erected in 1816 in Berlin (Waterloo), the settlers traded bread and milk to the Indigenous peoples in the area in exchange for venison and speckled trout (Eby 1895).

Bleam’s Road (also Bliem, Bliehm’s) was one of the three early settlement roads running east-west through Waterloo Township, and in 1825 it was considered a ‘statute road’ (Bloomfield 2006:76). The construction of Huron Road (Highway 8) in 1828 made travel easier into the Region and encouraged settlement (RWAD 1989).

Wilmot Township

Early settlement in Wilmot Township occurred in the late-1820s and was oriented to Erb Street, Snider Street and Bleam Street (now Bleams Road). The earliest settlers were primarily Amish Mennonites (Roth 1972:53). The Michael Schwartzentruber family is thought to have been the first family to have arrived from Germany. The families of Jacob Gingerich and Christian Honderich arrived in 1825, followed by John Oesch. Christian Nafziger, who had previously visited the area in 1822 returned in 1826 with his family, Christian Steinman and others (Roth 1972:53). The earliest homesteads were erected in the ¼ lots abutting both sides of the three main thoroughfares. The government offered the land to the settlers for $2.50 per acre with 50 acres of land free (except for the patent fee of $9.00) if they completed their settlement duties within 18 months after receiving their settlement ticket. These duties included: clearing five acres for each 100 acres leased, opening a road in front of the lot and building a log cabin of specific dimensions (Roth 1972:53). In 1830, Samuel Wilmot reported that 53 settlers qualified for the patents to their 50 acres.

Shingletown ______

TMHC Stage 3 Archaeological Assessment, Jackson Harvest Farms Site 1 (AiHd-171), Site 2 and Site 3 (AiHd-172), Wilmot Twp., Waterloo County, ON 10 ______

To the north of the subject property, along Bleams Road, is a small historic community once known as Victoriaburg, thought to be named after Queen Victoria. Shingle manufacturing was a prominent industry in the community between 1852 and 1882. From this, the village also became known as Schindlesteddle or Shingletown (Wilmot Township 2019). As noted in the earlier ARA (2018) report, Shingletown was known to have included a hotel, a cider mill and a Baptist Church established in 1843.

Lot 10, German Tract South of Bleams Road

The patent for the north ¼ of Lot 10, German Tract South of Bleams Road was issued in September 1835 to Christian Klinckhardt. A hand drawn sketch of Samuel Wilmont’s 1830 survey map shows Lot 10 had been previously assigned in 1824 to Joseph Hewil (Map 6). As Roth (1972:53) suggests, the earlier association with Hewil may reflect the fact that Mennonite settlers from Waterloo often claimed lots in Wilmot but in many cases did not settle on them. The same map also shows Lot 10 as one of only a few with no log cabin yet erected; the road allowance fronting the property was only chopped and not cleared (Roth 1972:54-55). Lot 10 became part of the historic settlement of Shingletown.

The 1837 patent plan for Wilmot Township shown in the ARA (2018:Map 2) report shows that the original 50 acre lots immediately adjacent to Bleams Road were settled by that time, with most of the hinterland held by King’s College as clergy reserve or by the Canada Company. The southern ¾ of Lot 10, containing the subject property and fronting Witmer Road, were held by King’s College at that time. No other lots along this section of Witmer Road were settled either. As shown on the Tremaine map (Map 7), by 1861 the majority of the lots have been sold and were subdivided. By the late-19th century when Jackson Harvest Farms Site 3 (AiHd-172) was occupied, settlement in this area was well established.

A review of the land registry records was used to summarize the ownership history of the southern 150 acres of Lot 10 comprising the subject property (Table 4). The southern ¾ of Lot 10 continued to be held by King’s College (University of Toronto) until 1851 when it was sold to Jacob Hallman. However, the sale was not formally registered until July 1862 by which time the land had change hands multiple times. In 1854 the deed for the full 150 acres is transferred from Jacob Hallman to John S. Hallman. In 1855, the southern ¾ of the lot was sold by John S. to Archibald McColl and Hallman held a mortgage on the property. The 1861 Tremaine’s map captures Archibald McColl’s brief ownership of the southern ¾ lot, where no structures are depicted at that time (Map 7). McColl sells the entire 150 parcel in 1862 to Jacob Wilhelm and registers a mortgage on the property; the mortgage was assigned to Wm. G. Miller in 1863 and discharged in October 1872. Wilhelm held the entire 150 property until 1872 when he sold 25 acres in the southeast portion to Christian Wagler. The Wilhelm family retained the 125 acre parcel until 1900 when it is sold to Joseph and William Arnold.

______

TMHC Stage 3 Archaeological Assessment, Jackson Harvest Farms Site 1 (AiHd-171), Site 2 and Site 3 (AiHd-172), Wilmot Twp., Waterloo County, ON 11 ______

Although land ownership is easy to establish, the occupancy of the property is more difficult to reconstruct from formal records alone. Jacob Hallman (Halman), the earliest owner of the southern ¾ of the lot, is recorded in the 1851 census although the location of his occupancy is not indicated. By 1861 Jacob Hallman owns Lot 7 on the north side of Bleams Road as shown on the Tremaine and historic atlas maps (Maps 7 & 8). Although the name is difficult to decipher, he may have been listed as the patentee for Lot 7 north of Bleams Road on the 1837 patent map (ARA 2018: Map 2). The 1864 County of Waterloo Gazetteer records him living in Lot 7 as a freeholder. Therefore, it does not seem likely that he actually lived on Lot 10. The 1851 census reported Jacob to be 49 years old in that year meaning he was born around 1802-3; family history records indicate he came to Canada in 1822 (http://douglas.boddy.com/genealogy/hallman/canada/children.htm) and became a minister in the Mennonite Church in 1837. The fact that Jacob also transferred the deed to John S. Hallman suggests Jacob did not live on the property. The same can be said for John S. in that there are no records that indicate he actually lived on the property; again, records list his family’s homestead elsewhere in Wilmot, on Conc. 2 Lot 9.

It seems Archibald McColl likely did reside on Lot 10 during his land ownership. While no clear record exists for this, the 1861 census lists Archibald and his family just after George Carpenter who, on the Tremaine map (Map 7), owns the lot to the west (Lot 11); this suggests they were residing on the lot at the time. The McColl’s are reported as living in a one storey log residence. This suggests that a mid-century residence was present within the subject property. Unfortunately, neither the 1851 nor 1871 census, bracketing the McColl ownership, record any information about residences.

There is ample evidence to support the occupation of the property by the Wilhelm family. Both the 1864 County of Waterloo Gazetteer and 1867 Waterloo County Directory and Gazetteer record Jacob Wilhelm as a freeholder on Lot 10. The 1871 census records Jacob living with his family Magdalena (45), Peter (22), George (20), Margaret (19), Michael (16), Leanhard (11), Daniel (11), Mary (10), Jacob (8), Caroline (7) and Herman (3). Jacob and Magdalena were born in Germany with the children having been born in Ontario. They are listed as Lutherans. The 1881 census lists Jacob and Magdalena still living with their youngest children, sons Jacob and Herman, and daughters Mary and Caroline. By the time of the 1891 census, son Jacob is no longer living with the family. In 1901, the family has moved to New Hamburg. Jacob is listed as a widower, living with his sons Jacob and Herman and their sister Margaret, now a widow. The 1901 census states that Jacob Sr. immigrated to Canada in 1837 when he was 10 years old.

Table 4: Relevant Land Registry Data for Lot 10, German Tract South of Bleams Road

______

TMHC Stage 3 Archaeological Assessment, Jackson Harvest Farms Site 1 (AiHd-171), Site 2 and Site 3 (AiHd-172), Wilmot Twp., Waterloo County, ON 12 ______

Instrument Grantor Grantee Date Date of Description Registration No. Type n/a Patent Crown Christian Klinckhart 5 Sept 1835 same 50 acres N ¼ part 221 Deed Jacob Halman et ux John S. Halman 27 Feb 1854 4 Mar 1854 150 acres ¾ S. Part 222 Deed for a Andrew Farnwald John S. Halman 3 Jul 2 1853 4 Mar 1854 103 perches N. road Part 452 B&S John S. Hallman et ux Archibald McColl 27 Jan 1855 3 Mar 1855 150 acres 2 rods 23 perches 453 Mortgage Archibald McColl et John S. Hallman 27 Jan 1855 3 Mar 1855 same ux 1832 B&S Archibald McColl et Jacob Wilhelm 8 Feb 1862 same 150 acres 2 rods ux 23 perches 1833 Mortgage Jacob Wilhelm et ux Archibald McColl 8 Feb 1862 same 150 acres 2 rods 23 perches 1851 Rel of John S. Halman Archibald McColl 15 Feb 1862 15 Feb 1862 150 acres 2 rods Mortgage 23 perches 1852 B&S University Toronto Jacob Hallman 31 Jul 1851 15 Feb 1862 150 acres 1989 Assign of Archibald McColl Wm G Miller 13 Mar 1863 13 Mar 1863 150 acres Mortgage 3848 Dis. William G. Miller Jacob Wilhelm 8 Oct 1872 9 Oct 1872 Mortgage 3849 B&S Jacob Wilhelm et ux Christian Wagler 9 Oct 1872 9 Oct 1872 25 acres 3878 Mortgage Christian Wagler jr et Wm. G. Miller 15 Nov 1872 13 Dec 1872 25 acres ux 4740 Dis Wm. G. Miller Christian Wagler jr. 4 Dec 1876 9 Dec 1876 Mortgage 4834 Mortgage Jacob Wilhelm et ux Jacob Ratz 12 Mar 1877 13 Mar 1877 150 acres 5619 Dis Jacob Ratz Jacob Wilhelm 14 March 1881 14 Mar 1881 Mortgage 9747 B&S Jacob Wilhelm Joseph Arnold and 5 Feb 1900 10 Feb 1900 125 acres widower William 9786 B&S Christian Wagler et ux Jonathan Jantzi 5 Apr 1900 6 Apr 1900 25 acres

Historic aerial photographs (Maps 9-11) and historic topographic maps (Maps 12- 15) pinpoint the location of a homestead in the central portion of Lot 10, with an access road leading north to Bleams Road and south to Witmer Road. The 1927 topographic map (Map 12) shows a structure was located in the approximate location of the farm buildings that still stand in the central portion of the subject property. A review of subsequent versions of the topographic map (Maps 13-15) show the structure continues to be present into the 1960s when the farm complex directly adjacent to Witmer Road begins to develop. A series of historical aerials from 1946 (Map 9), 1955 (Map 10) and 1966 (Map 11) show the farmstead continues to be present through that period. No other buildings are depicted elsewhere on the lot on any of the historic maps and aerial photographs reviewed.

In sum, occupation of the southern portion of Lot 10 appears to begin with Archibald McColl after he purchases the property in 1855 and continues into the second half of the 20th century.

______

TMHC Stage 3 Archaeological Assessment, Jackson Harvest Farms Site 1 (AiHd-171), Site 2 and Site 3 (AiHd-172), Wilmot Twp., Waterloo County, ON 13 ______

2.0 SITE 3 (AiHd-172) RECOMMENDATIONS REVIEW

According to the 2018 Archaeological Research Associates (ARA) report, Site 3 (AiHd-172) was a large scatter of over 1,000 19th and 20th century artifacts found in the vicinity of a former farmstead on the property; all diagnostic categories were sampled and a representative assemblage of nondiagnostic archaeological materials were collected to form a representative sample (n=524) for dating and interpretation. The majority of the collected assemblage consisted of tablewares (n=256, 48.85%) and unclassifiable storage containers (n=97, 18.51%) and was reported as aligning with the use of the area as a farmstead with associated agriculture industry related outbuildings (ARA 2018:21). ARA concluded that the time frame of occupation for the site was ca. 1840–early 1900s.

The rationale for recommending Stage 3 assessment was: “at least 20 artifacts were recovered that when analyzed as an assemblage can date the period of occupation of the site at least in part to before 1900” (ARA 2018:21). This represents the standard recommendation when only the minimum background study has been undertaken for that stage of work. The 2018 report recommendations for Site 3 were as follows:

Based on the results of the survey, an appropriate assessment method for Site 3 would comprise test unit excavation using the strategy for Pre-Contact or Post-Contact sites where it is not yet evident that the level of CHVI will result in a recommendation to proceed to Stage 4 (MTC 2011:Table 3.1, Numbers 1 and 2). This would involve the excavation of grid test units at a 5 m interval across the site extent and additional test units amounting to at least 20% of the grid unit total in areas of interest. If it becomes evident during the excavation of Stage 3 test units that the site should proceed to Stage 4, then the strategy for Pre-Contact or Post-Contact sites where it is clearly evident that the level of CHVI will result in a recommendation to proceed to Stage 4 can be followed (MTC 2011:Table 3.1, Numbers 3 and 4). As discussed in Section 3.3.3 of the RHF (MTCS 2014:10), this would involve finishing the grid test units at a 10 m interval and completing additional test units amounting to at least 40% of the grid unit total in areas of interest. The test unit excavation strategy at Site 3 should therefore be developed with the objective of meeting the requirements of Table 3.1, Numbers 3 and 4, with further test units being excavated according to Table 3.1, Numbers 1 and 2 only if necessary to support the argument that the site should not proceed to Stage 4 (MTCS 2014:10).

From an archaeological perspective, the overall site area is quite large (198 m x 72 m NE-SW; 14,256 m2) and has a high artifact frequency, both of which are characteristic of long-term occupations and ones dating to the late-19th and 20th century. The long-term occupation of the site does reduce the overall integrity and information value of the site, as does the abandonment and post abandonment site formation processes. While the date for the site is provided in the ARA report as 1840s to 1900s, an assemblage-based review of the material indicates that it is more characteristic of the later ______

TMHC Stage 3 Archaeological Assessment, Jackson Harvest Farms Site 1 (AiHd-171), Site 2 and Site 3 (AiHd-172), Wilmot Twp., Waterloo County, ON 14 ______part of the 19th century (ca. 1860 to 1900) and primarily post-dates 1870. The assemblage also shows the long-term nature of the occupation of Jackson Harvest Farms Site 3.

A review of Table 8 in the Stage 1-2 archaeological assessment report shows that approximately 42% of the assemblage exclusively dates post 1850. The entire assemblage of datable glass artifacts (foodways and personal) date post 1850, with some (Dominion Glass, Enameled Labeled and Carnival Glass) dating exclusively in the 20th century. Of the architectural items, wire nails and yellow brick date to the late 19th century. The Bannerman pipe fragment in the assemblage also dates to the late 19th century (1858- 1870). Of the ceramic foodways artifacts, the assemblage is dominated by types that date from the 1840s to 1900s (ARA 2018:20). While the majority of the remaining types of ceramic foodways artifacts have earlier initial production dates, many did not become common until the late 19th century. The assemblage also includes an alphabet pattern transfer whiteware sherd which dates to the late 19th century (1881-1895).

In consideration of the historical documentation that has been reviewed in this report and existing knowledge of landownership and land use, Site 3 does not appear to align with the earliest occupation of Lot 10 nor its first generation of occupants. As noted, the earliest deed for Lot 10 lands occurs for the parcel along Bleams Road and it was not until 1851 that King’s College sells the property for settlement. The AHA 2007 reports describes the early structure on this portion of Lot 10 which was still standing. Further, the 1824 settlement map shown in Map 6 records early cabins on Lots 9 and 11 but not Lot 10 (see also AHA 2007). Given the previously identified structure associated with the earliest settlement of the lot, Site 3 (AiHd-172) represents later generation(s) of occupation on the lot, in the southern portion, sold in 1851 but likely not occupied until c. 1855. A late-19th century date also places Site 3 late in the overall settlement sequence for this area and historic Shingletown, which began in the 1820s with the survey and opening of the road to Goderich.

3.0 STAGE 3 ARCHAEOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT

3.1 Field Methods

The Stage 2 site locations were re-identified through GPS coordinates, landscape features and details provided in Stage 2 draft archaeological report (ARA 2018).

A controlled surface pick-up (CSP) was undertaken for Site 1 (AiHd-171) and Site 2 on October 30, 2018 in keeping with the Standards and Guidelines. As the sites were located within a recently ploughed agricultural field, they were subject to a pedestrian survey at a 1 m interval or less, under conditions of good weathering and 80% surface visibility or better (Images 1-4).

It was anticipated that at each archaeological location, when artifacts were identified on the surface, these would be flagged and their location mapped using a Topcon GRS-1 RTK GPS/Glonass Network Rover, a high precision survey unit that

______

TMHC Stage 3 Archaeological Assessment, Jackson Harvest Farms Site 1 (AiHd-171), Site 2 and Site 3 (AiHd-172), Wilmot Twp., Waterloo County, ON 15 ______advertises subcentimetre accuracy. Each artifact or immediate cluster of artifacts that would be given a unique station or point identifier for use in cataloguing and in preparing a detailed surface distribution map. Additional landscape markers and tie in points were also recorded. Survey continued for a minimum of 20 m beyond all artifacts identified on the surface and beyond the Stage 2 GPS coordinates for each site. The proposed collection strategy at Site 1 (AiHd-171) and Site 2 was to collect all surface artifacts given the ephemeral nature of the sites. All fieldwork was carried out under suitable lighting and weather; there were no conditions detrimental to the recognition and collection of artifacts. No artifacts were recovered at either Site 1 (AiHd-171) or Site 2 during the initial CSP.

Following the CSP at Site 1 (AiHd-171) and Site 2 a 5 m grid was established across the sites using a high precision Topcon GRS-1 RTK GPS/Glonass Network Rover, measuring tapes and a Total Station (Image 5 and 6). Grid stakes were used to mark 5 m intervals along the east-west and north-south transect lines. Each 5 m by 5 m grid unit was assigned a unique alphanumeric identifier based on north and east grid references of the southwest corner. Each 5 m grid unit was then subdivided into 25 individual 1 m2 excavation units that were given sub-unit designations of 1 to 25 working sequentially from west to east along each row, then moving northward (Appendix A). Two datums were established at Site 1 (AiHd-171): 300N 500E (Datum 1) and 300N 505E (Datum 2). Two datums were established at Site 2: 200N 400E (Datum 1) and 200N 405E (Datum 2). The locations of significant landscape markers and grid stakes were recorded using a high precision Topcon RTK GRS Network Rover unit that records points with up to subcentimetre accuracy.

Following the completion of the CSPs, unit excavation was undertaken (Images 7 and 8). The ploughzone from each 1 m square unit at Site 1 (AiHd-171) and Site 2 was excavated by hand and passed through 6 mm hardware cloth; the same process was carried out for the first 5 cm of subsoil. If was anticipated that if artifacts were found in the subsoil excavations would proceed down by 5 cm increments until counts of five or fewer artifacts were yielded per 5 cm soil layer. Artifacts were bagged by 1 m provenience units and observed soil layers (when appropriate) and taken to the laboratory for processing. For each 1 m unit, artifacts belonging to the same class were grouped and given a single catalogue number. When unit excavation was completed, the floor of each unit was cleaned by shovel shining and troweling and inspected for subsurface features. Following documentation, the squares were backfilled. It was anticipated that when potential features were encountered during the unit excavations, these would be mapped in planview, photographed and then covered with geotextile fabric before units were backfilled.

Subsequent to the CSP and during the course of Stage 3 unit excavation, three Indigenous lithic artifacts were noted on the surface in the general vicinity of Site 1 (AiHd-171) and Site 2. These were flagged and their location mapped using a Topcon GRS-1 RTK GPS/Glonass Network Rover. Each artifact was mapped was given a unique

______

TMHC Stage 3 Archaeological Assessment, Jackson Harvest Farms Site 1 (AiHd-171), Site 2 and Site 3 (AiHd-172), Wilmot Twp., Waterloo County, ON 16 ______station or point identifier. These artifacts were each assigned an affiliation to Site 1 (AiHd-171) or Site 2 based on their proximity to either site.

The results of the Stage 3 unit excavation and the locations of any surface artifacts at Site 1 (AiHd-171) are presented in Map 10 and 11. The results of the Stage 3 unit excavation and the locations of any surface artifacts at Site 2 are presented in Map 11. The Supplementary Documentation (SD) portion of this report includes maps showing more detail on the location of archaeological finds during ARA’s Stage 2 assessment (SD Map 2) as well as the location of TMHC’s test unit excavation and surface finds during the Stage 3 assessment (SD Maps 3 and 4). No proponent mapping was provided in the Stage 1-2 assessment report (ARA 2018). Map 13 is an unaltered copy of the current existing features plan for the proposed pit.

3.1.1 Site 1 (AiHd-171) Site Specific Field Methods

Based on the Stage 2 findings, Site 1 (AiHd-171) was identified as a Woodland Period Indigenous site covering 2.5 m x 1 m consisting of an Onondaga chert biface, a pottery fragment and brachiopod shell.

The Site 1 (AiHd-171) Stage 3 excavation strategy began following the strategy previously recommended for the site (ARA 2018). However, the strategy was modified as the excavations progressed. Although the previous recommendations were to excavate units between Site 1 (AiHd-171) and Site 2 (AiHd-172) that are separated by a distance of 80 m, the paucity of surface artifacts identified at both sites during both the Stage 2 fieldwork and Stage 3 CSP did not indicate that this was warranted or that the sites were either geographically or culturally connected in any way. In fact, unit yields were extremely low at both locations demonstrating that the archaeological deposits were very isolated.

Units were excavated at 5 m intervals within the area of the Stage 2 surface finds in for both Site 1 and Site 2. A greater number of units were placed around Site 1 than is usual for this type of site, in an attempt to collect a larger and better sample of artifacts, determine the spatial distribution of fragmentary ceramics, and determine if cultural features were present. The two surface artifacts that were recovered during the Stage 3 CSP brought the total number of actual surface artifacts to four (one scraper, one flake, one biface, one pottery sherd). The Stage 3 CSP finds were 14 m distant from the closest Stage 3 unit (containing only a fragmentary piece of mammal bone) and 20 m distant from the closest unit with Indigenous pottery. For this reason, these were considered outliers and no unit was excavated in their vicinity.

Given the recovery of a ceramic sherd in Stage 2 survey, it was anticipated that this site would require Stage 4 excavation of some kind. Therefore, the Stage 3 unit excavation strategy was to first excavate units at 5 m intervals across the Stage 2 surface finds, followed by the excavation of additional units. The site was small and ephemeral and given the previous Stage 2 recommendation to test a wider area, a decision was made ______

TMHC Stage 3 Archaeological Assessment, Jackson Harvest Farms Site 1 (AiHd-171), Site 2 and Site 3 (AiHd-172), Wilmot Twp., Waterloo County, ON 17 ______to systematically excavate units across a larger area at 5 m intervals. In addition, three offset infill units (295N 495E:13, 300N495E:3 and 300N490E:15) were excavated in close proximity to the units containing potential features (also containing ceramics). This testing strategy was utilized in order to provide a uniform sample of the site area which would better inform placement of the infill units. The ploughzone from each 1 m2 unit was excavated by hand and passed through 6 mm hardware cloth; the same process was carried out for the first 5 cm of subsoil (Images 7 and 8).

A total of 27 1 m2 units were excavated across a 25 m (north-south) by 25 m (east-west) site area; 24 on the 5 m grid, with three placed around an initial excavation unit containing a possible cultural feature at 300N 495E.

One soil layer (ploughzone) was encountered at Site 1 (AiHd-171). The ploughzone consisted of brown sandy loam, with depths ranging from 20 cm to 56 cm (Images 9 and 10). The shallow soils were on the top of the knoll, with the deeper deposits at the base, representing the accumulation of soils that had eroded downslope. The subsoil consisted of orange sandy loam.

Two potential cultural features (designated Feature 1 and Feature 2) were identified during the Stage 3 excavation of Site 1 (AiHd-171). Feature 1 was located in unit 300N 495E:1 (Image 11) and consisted of dark brown-black sandy loam over the entire floor of the unit. Feature 2 was identified in unit 300N 495E:3 (Image 12), 2 m away from Feature 1. It also consisted of dark brown-black sandy loam across the entire floor of the unit, but also had pottery on the surface. Features 1 and 2 were photographed and recorded then covered in geotextile fabric before backfilling occurred. It seems possible that these are both one and the same deposit.

Unit 285N 500E:1 in the southern end of the site contained a disturbed layer which consisted of mixed brown sandy loam and orange sandy loam subsoil overtop of a trench dug for a modern pipe which was found embedded in the subsoil (Image 13).

3.1.2 Site 2 Site Specific Field Methods

Based on the Stage 2 findings, Site 2 was identified as an Indigenous site of indeterminate age and cultural affiliation. It consisted of one biface thinning flake and one flake fragment within a 3.7 m x 1 m area. The Stage 3 test strategy employed was that appropriate for small sites where it is not yet evident that the level of CHVI will result in a recommendation to proceed to Stage 4 (MTC 2011:51, Table 3.1). Given this, 1 m2 units were proposed to be excavated at 5 m intervals across the area encompassed by the Stage 2 surface finds, with units amounting to 20% of the 5 m grid total excavated in areas of interest. The ploughzone from each 1 m2 unit was excavated by hand and passed through 6 mm hardware cloth; the same process was carried out for the first 5 cm of subsoil (Images 14 and 15).

______

TMHC Stage 3 Archaeological Assessment, Jackson Harvest Farms Site 1 (AiHd-171), Site 2 and Site 3 (AiHd-172), Wilmot Twp., Waterloo County, ON 18 ______

A total of nine 1 m2 units were excavated across a 10 m (north-south) by 10 m (east-west) area that extended well beyond the original Stage 2 surface finds; because of the small size of the site, all of these were placed on a 5 m grid; seven as original grid units and two as infill units (~30% of the initial grid units). Test units were first excavated on the 5 m grid around the original Stage 2 surface finds at Site 2.

One soil layer (ploughzone) was encountered at Site 2 and consisted of dark brown sandy loam, with depths ranging from 22 cm to 75 cm (Images 16 and 17). The shallow soils were on the top of the knoll, with the deeper deposits at the base, representing the accumulation of soils that had eroded downslope. The subsoil consisted of orange sandy loam.

3.2 Record of Finds

Complete catalogues of the artifacts collected during the Stage 3 testing of Site 1 (AiHd-171) and Site 2 are presented below. Table 3 provides an inventory of documentary records for Site 1 (AiHd-171) and Site 2.

Table 5: Documentary Records

Field Notes and Field Maps Dated Oct. 23, 30, 2018, Nov.12 and 15, 2018, May 15-17, 2019 Photo Catalogue October 23 (5 Digital Photos), October 30 (6 Digital Photos), November 12 (20 Digital Photos), November 15, 2018 (8 Digital Photos), May 15 (28 Digital Photos), May 16 (31 Digital Photos), May 17, 2019 (28 Digital Photos) Artifact Collection Artifacts are bagged individually with paper labels, sorted into larger bags according to context or artifact type and organized by catalogue number. Bag 1: Esbaugh – Jackson Harvest Farms, 2018-158, Stage 3, AiHd-171, Site 1, All Artifacts Bag 2: Esbaugh – Jackson Harvest Farms, 2018-158, Stage 3, AiHd-172, Site 2, All Artifacts All within a larger project bag with project label: Large Bag: Esbaugh – Jackson Harvest Farms, 2018-158, Stage 3, All Locations, All Artifacts This bag is located within a “Various Small Projects Completed in 2019” banker’s box, along with other small projects held at the Museum of Ontario Archaeology, 1600 Attawandaron Road, London, Ontario N6G 3M6. Location of Records Timmins Martelle Heritage Consultants Inc., @ the Museum of Ontario Archaeology, 1600 Attawandaron Road, London, Ontario N6G 3M6 3.2.1 Site 1 (AiHd-171)

A total of 27 Stage 3 test units were excavated across the extent of Site 1 (AiHd- 171). A total of 39 artifacts were recovered during the Stage 3 assessment. Of these, 15 were Indigenous artifacts and nine were 19th century artifacts. A total of 15 pieces of animal bone were also recovered. While some of the faunal remains can be attributed to the 19th century occupation of the site, the fragmentary nature of many of the remains makes it impossible to identify and attribute them to either the Woodland Period or 19th ______

TMHC Stage 3 Archaeological Assessment, Jackson Harvest Farms Site 1 (AiHd-171), Site 2 and Site 3 (AiHd-172), Wilmot Twp., Waterloo County, ON 19 ______century occupations. A catalogue of Indigenous artifacts and faunal remains is presented below in Table 4 while a catalogue of 19th century artifacts is presented in Table 5.

Indigenous Artifacts

The Indigenous artifact collection consists of three chert flakes, one piece of non- chert detritus, one scraper and 10 undecorated fragmentary ceramic sherds (Table 6; Image 18). Of the 15 Indigenous artifacts, two were recovered from the surface and the remainder were recovered during unit excavation. The per-unit count of Indigenous artifacts ranged from zero to four, and 20 units were sterile. The positive Stage 3 units have a linear distribution through the site, working downslope, with the highest count (n = 4) being in the northwest corner of the site and associated with the potential subsurface feature.

A single side/end scraper made on Onondaga chert was recovered (cat. 15; Image 18a). This scraper measures 30.3 mm in length, 15.5 mm in width and 3.4 mm in thickness. This tool was made through unifacial retouch of the dorsal face of a biface thinning flake notable for its curvature. Retouching extends around the entire margin of this scraper.

The chert debitage consisted three flake fragments of Onondaga chert (Image 18b). It should be noted that there was an abundance of natural till chert within the site area. One of the small flake fragments (cat. 16; Image 18b) appears to be burnt. The dominance of flake fragments suggests that tool finishing and rejuvenation were activities at the site; however, the small number of flakes recovered suggests a very limited amount of knapping took place here. A single piece of non-chert detritus (cat. 2; Image 18d) was recovered suggesting that materials other than chert were utilized by the site’s inhabitants.

A total of 10 undecorated fragmentary ceramic sherds were recovered (cat. 3; Image 18e). All of these sherds are exceedingly small and fragmentary and display no discernable evidence of decoration. None of the fragments have both surfaces present, but those with the exterior surface show that it has been smoothed. Five of the 10 sherds were recovered from units that contained potential cultural features (300N 295E:1 and 300N 295E:3), and the remainder were found in two units downslope to the east (290N 505E:1 and 285N 510E:1).

Table 6: Site 1 (AiHd-171) Stage 3 Indigenous Artifacts and Faunal Remains Catalogue

Cat. Context Layer/Depth Artifact n Comments

1 295N 500E:1 pz, 0-33cm chipping detritus 1 Onondaga? 2 295N 500E:1 pz, 0-33cm non-chert detritus 1 3 295N 500E:1 pz, 0-33cm faunal remains 2 1 burnt; 1 saw cut ______

TMHC Stage 3 Archaeological Assessment, Jackson Harvest Farms Site 1 (AiHd-171), Site 2 and Site 3 (AiHd-172), Wilmot Twp., Waterloo County, ON 20 ______

4 295N 500E:1 ss, 33-38cm faunal remains 1 miscellaneous bone 5 300N 490E:1 pz, 0-22cm 1 artifact On the surface of a 6 300N 495E:1 pz, 30cm fragmentary sherd 4 potential feature 7 305N 500E:1 pz, 0-27cm faunal remains 1 8 300N 495E:3 pz, 0-22cm fragmentary sherd 1 9 300N 495E:3 pz, 0-22cm faunal remains 5 2 burnt 10 305N 495E:1 pz, 0-22cm faunal remains 3 1 saw cut; 1 burnt?

E side of site, 11 surface chipping detritus 1 Onondaga possible washout

12 285N 505E:1 pz, 0-35cm faunal remains 2 1 calcined 13 290N 505E:1 pz, 0-40cm fragmentary sherd 2 14 285N 510E:1 pz, 0-38cm fragmentary sherd 3

Onondaga (13m East and 15 Map ID 10 surface scraper 1 10m North of 305N 500E)

16 280N 515E:1 pz, 0-50cm chipping detritus 1 Onondaga; burnt? Total 30

Potential Cultural Features

Two potential cultural features were identified during the Stage 3 excavation of Site 1 (AiHd-171). Feature 1 (300N 495E:1; Image 11) and Feature 2 (300N 495E:3; Image 12) both characterized by dark brown-black sandy loam with some fire reddened soil that reflects a possible burn layer. The ploughzone above Feature 1 in 300N 495E:1 produced the largest quantity of Indigenous ceramics from unit excavations at AiHd-171, and Feature 2 had pottery on the surface. Given that these two features are within units separated by only 1 m, it is likely they relate to a larger contiguous feature and form part of the same deposit. It is not clear at this point whether the soils form a distinct cultural layer (i.e., midden, paleosol) or are part of a more isolated subsurface feature.

19th Century Artifacts

A total of nine 19th century artifacts were collected from three units in the northwestern portion of Site 1 (AiHd-171) (Table 7): two sherds of refined white earthenware (RWE) tableware ceramic, two sherds of coarse stoneware ceramic used for kitchen storage, and five machine-cut nails (Image 19). One of the units (300N 495E:1) contained five artifacts, and the other two units (305N 495E:1 and 295N 500E:1) each had one artifact. RWE was used throughout much of the 19th century and was the dominant ware in the mid-19th century. Fully machine-cut nails were produced after 1825 and were the dominant nail type until the late-19th century when wire nails became common (Franklin 1989:20; Wells 2000:326-327).

______

TMHC Stage 3 Archaeological Assessment, Jackson Harvest Farms Site 1 (AiHd-171), Site 2 and Site 3 (AiHd-172), Wilmot Twp., Waterloo County, ON 21 ______

Table 7: Site 1 (AiHd-171) 19th Century Artifact Catalogue

Depth Datable Cat. Context Lv. n Material Class Object Comment (cm) Attribute small sherd, 17 295N 500E:01 pz 0-33 1 Ceramic Food & Bev. Tableware RWE blue décor small sherd, purple décor, 18 300N 495E:01 pz 0-30 1 Ceramic Food & Bev. Hollowware RWE possible stamped grey fabric, C STNW, 19 300N 495E:01 pz 0-30 2 Ceramic Food & Bev. Hollowware grey-green Salt-glaze glaze 20 300N 495E:01 pz 0-30 2 Ferrous Architectural Nail Cut 21 300N 505E:01 pz 0-35 1 Ferrous Architectural Nail Cut bent 22 305N 495E:01 pz 0-22 2 Ferrous Architectural Nail Cut Total 9

3.2.2 Site 2

A total of nine Stage 3 test units were excavated across the extent of Site 2. Eight of these were sterile. One unit in the centre of the site produced a single piece of Onondaga chert chipping detritus. The only other artifact from the site was an Onondaga chert flake recovered from the surface nearly 15 m to the south of the positive Stage 3 test unit (Table 8). Because of the overall low yields of the units, the surface artifact was considered an outlier and no units were placed in its vicinity. Both of the pieces of Onondaga chert chipping detritus are secondary flakes. One of the flakes (cat. 1; Image 20a) is comprised largely of cortex.

Table 8: Site 2 Stage 3 Indigenous Artifacts Catalogue

Cat. Context Layer/Depth Artifact n Comments

1 200N 400E:1 pz, 0-57cm chipping detritus 1 Onondaga Onondaga (10m South of 2 surface 0 cm chipping detritus 1 195N 400E) Total 2

3.3 Analysis and Conclusions

Stage 3 archaeological assessments were carried out in keeping with the Standards and Guidelines at Site 1 (AiHd-171) and Site 2. Section 2.2 of the Standards and Guidelines establishes criteria whereby the cultural heritage value of archaeological finds can be evaluated and the need for follow up Stage 3 testing and/or Stage 4 mitigation of construction impacts established. Section 3.4 establishes provincial criteria for determining if archaeological locations require Stage 4 mitigation of development ______

TMHC Stage 3 Archaeological Assessment, Jackson Harvest Farms Site 1 (AiHd-171), Site 2 and Site 3 (AiHd-172), Wilmot Twp., Waterloo County, ON 22 ______impacts. Based on these criteria the requirement for Stage 4 mitigation can be evaluated and is outlined below.

3.3.1 Site 1 (AiHd-171)

Site 1 (AiHd-171) is a multi-component site with a Woodland Period Indigenous component and a low-yielding 19th century component. The Stage 3 unit excavation of Site 1 (AiHd-171) tested a 25 m by 25 m area encompassing the Stage 2 surface finds. A total of 39 artifacts were recovered during the Stage 3 assessment. Of these, 15 were Indigenous artifacts, nine were 19th century artifacts, and 15 were faunal remains.

The 19th century component of Site 1 (AiHd-171) consists of nine domestic artifacts. As no structures are present on historic mapping in the vicinity of Site 1 (AiHd- 171), the 19th century component of Site 1 (AiHd-171) likely represents dispersed refuse from the late-19th century occupation of Site 3 (AiHd-172) which is found to the southeast of Site 1 (AiHd-171) on Lot 10, and could also relate to the modern disturbance in the southern end of the site. The fact that only a small number of artifacts were collected and that these are not particularly temporally diagnostic, it is difficult to assign a more specific time period for this aspect of Site 1 (AiHd-171). Based on provincial criteria, the 19th century component of Site 1 (AiHd-171) does not have further CHVI and does not meet standards for further investigation (MTC 2011:59; Section 3.4.2, Standard 1.a and MTCS 2014:8; Section 7.2.1).

The Indigenous component of Site 1 (AiHd-171) consists of a biface and a ceramic sherd recovered during the Stage 2 assessment, as well as three chert flakes, one piece of non-chert detritus, one scraper, and 10 undecorated fragmentary ceramic sherds recovered during the Stage 3 assessment. In addition, two potential cultural features were identified during the unit excavation. Despite the fact that per unit yields are quite low, the Indigenous component has further CHVI and meets provincial standards for Stage 4 mitigation based on the presence of Indigenous ceramic sherds and potential cultural features (MTC 2011: Section 3.4.1 Standard 1.c).

3.3.2 Site 2

Site 2 is a small, low yielding Indigenous site. Based on the CSP and test units excavated, these appear to be separate sites. The Stage 3 artifact assemblage consists of two chert flakes, neither of which are more culturally or temporally diagnostic. Given that only one flake was identified in the Stage 3 units and one additional flake was recovered from the surface, this site is interpreted as a small chipping station. As the Stage 3 per- unit artifact counts were fewer than 10 and no cultural features were recovered during the Stage 3 excavations (MTC 2011:58, Section 3.4.1.1), Site 2 does not have further CHVI and does not meet provincial standards for Stage 4 assessment. Further, there are numerous examples of non-description, low-yielding Indigenous find spots across Ontario so the site is not unique in that way.

______

TMHC Stage 3 Archaeological Assessment, Jackson Harvest Farms Site 1 (AiHd-171), Site 2 and Site 3 (AiHd-172), Wilmot Twp., Waterloo County, ON 23 ______

3.3.3 Site 3 (AiHd-172)

The Archaeology of Rural Historical Farmsteads (RHF Bulletin) draft technical bulletin (MTCS 2014) provides the licensed archaeologist with the opportunity to complete a full CSP and detailed archival research as part of the Stage 2 assessment for this specific type of site in support of a recommendation for no further archaeological assessment required. The intent of the RHF Bulletin was to allow for some additional work to be done in the Stage 2 assessment, for the collection of a sufficient sample to confidently date the archaeological site and for further detailed archival research to be completed so that Section 3.4.2 – Standard 1 can be applied and a site evaluated before proceeding to full scale test excavations. Section 3.4.2 – Standard 1 indicates that further assessment is required only when most (80% or more) of the time span of the occupation of the site dates to before 1870; Table 3.2 of the Standards and Guidelines for Archaeologists can also be utilized to fully evaluate CHVI. Although not all nondiagnostic artifacts were recovered during the ARA 2018 Stage 2 fieldwork, all the diagnostic artifacts were collected, amounting to a significant sample of 524 artifacts. Therefore, that work meets the RHF Bulletin requirements for the collection of a large enough sample of artifacts to adequately date the site and the further historic background information provided in this report meets the requirement for research and allows for a comparison of occupation records and archaeological data.

The revised occupation date of ca. 1860 to 1900 for the Site 3 (AiHd-172) assemblage directly aligns with the ownership of this portion of Lot 10 by the Wilhelm family who were the longest occupants of the property in the 19th century, as they purchased it in 1862 and sold it in 1900. Although the Stage 2 report suggested a start date of 1840, archival records do not provide evidence of occupation of the property until 1855. If the site directly aligns with the Wilhelm occupation it would date between 1862 and 1900, with only 8 years (21%) of the 38 years of occupation pre-dating 1870. The archaeological assemblage could potentially also encompass the McColl occupation beginning in 1855, extending the occupation of both families to 1855 through 1900, a period of 45 years only 15 of which (33%) pre-date 1870. Further, the actual buildings associated with the farmstead stood until well into the second half of the 20th century, extending the physical manifestation of the farm more than a half century.

Both the archaeological and historical background information align to support a ca. 1855 or 1862-1900 date for Site 3 (AiHd-172). Given this, far less than 80% of the occupation dates prior to 1870. Based on Section 3.4.2 – Standard 1 criteria alone, AiHd- 172 does not have further CHVI under the provincial framework.

In consideration of the criteria identifying further CHVI within Table 3.2 of the Standards and Guidelines (Table 9), AiHd-172 also would not be considered to have further CHVI.

______

TMHC Stage 3 Archaeological Assessment, Jackson Harvest Farms Site 1 (AiHd-171), Site 2 and Site 3 (AiHd-172), Wilmot Twp., Waterloo County, ON 24 ______

Table 9: Summary of Evaluation of the CHVI of Site 3 (AiHd-172) Based on Table 3.2 of the Standards and Guidelines

Criteria Comments Cultural Historical Value • Given the late-19th century date of Site 3 and its long-term occupation, the cultural historical value to the community (German Mennonite) would be considered low. The Wilhelm family were German Lutherans who arrived later in the overall settlement sequence for this area. Historical Value • Site 3 is not associated with any oral history of the property, early settlement, life or activity of a significant historical figure or significant historical event. As a result, the value is low. Scientific Value • The scientific value of Site 3 is deemed to be low given the long-term nature of the occupation. Rarity or frequency • Site 3 is not considered to be a rare archaeological site or unique locally, regionally, provincially or nationally. • This type of site has been extensively studied and offers no unique value for comparison with similar sites in the region. Productivity • The archaeological site does contain a large quantity of artifacts, none of which are rare or exotic. Integrity • Site 3 is plough-disturbed and has been modified by the abandonment and post-abandonment reclamation as farmland. Value to the community • Site 3 is not considered to have intrinsic value to the community Value as a public resource • Site 3 has low value for public use, education, recreation or tourism.

After further background research and a re-evaluation of the overall date for the artifact collection using an assemblage-based approach, in keeping with The Archaeology of Rural Historical Farmsteads Bulletin (MTCS 2014), Site 3 (AiHd-172) is determined to be a ca. 1855 or 1862-1900 domestic site related to the occupation of the property largely by the Wilhelm family. Given the above and the fact that less than 80% of the site occupation pre-dates 1870, AiHd-172 has no further CHVI within the provincial framework.

3.4 Recommendations

______

TMHC Stage 3 Archaeological Assessment, Jackson Harvest Farms Site 1 (AiHd-171), Site 2 and Site 3 (AiHd-172), Wilmot Twp., Waterloo County, ON 25 ______

The Stage 4 excavation strategy for Site 1 (AiHd-171) was developed in consultation with the participating Indigenous communities. The recommended Stage 4 excavation strategy entails:

______

TMHC Stage 3 Archaeological Assessment, Jackson Harvest Farms Site 1 (AiHd-171), Site 2 and Site 3 (AiHd-172), Wilmot Twp., Waterloo County, ON 26 ______

1862-1900 domestic site related to the occupation of the property largely by the Wilhelm family. Given the above and the fact that less than 80% of the site occupation pre-dates 1870, AiHd-172 has no further CHVI within the provincial framework. As such, the site does not meet provincial standards for further Stage 3 assessment and no additional work is recommended.

4.0 SUMMARY

Stage 3 archaeological assessments consisting of a CSP and test unit excavation were conducted for Jackson Harvest Farms Site 1 (AiHd-171) and Site 2, discovered during a 2018 Stage 2 assessment by ARA (2018). Site 1 (AiHd-171) was determined to be a multi-component Woodland Period and 19th century site, with the former component qualifying for Stage 4 mitigation. Site 2 was determined to be a small, low-yielding Indigenous site for which a more specific age and cultural affiliation cannot be assigned. The site does not have further CHVI under the provincial framework and no further investigation is recommended. Additional background research was also carried out for Site 3 (AiHd-172), a late-19th to 20th century domestic site. The research indicated the site was related to a ca. 1855 or 1862-1900 occupation largely by the Wilhelm family. Given that the site primarily post-dates 1870, it does not qualify for further investigation based on provincial standards and no further work is recommended.

5.0 ADVICE ON COMPLIANCE WITH LEGISLATION

This report is submitted to the Ministry of Tourism, Culture and Sport as a condition of licensing in accordance with Part VI of the Ontario Heritage Act, R.S.O 1990, c 0.18. The report is reviewed to ensure that it complies with the standards and guidelines that are issued by the minister, and that the archaeological fieldwork and report recommendations ensure the conservation, protection and preservation of the cultural heritage of Ontario. When all matters relating to archaeological sites within the project area of a development proposal have been addressed to the satisfaction of the Ministry of Tourism, Culture and Sport, a letter will be issued by the ministry stating that there are no further concerns with regard to alterations to archaeological sites by the proposed development.

It is an offence under Sections 48 and 69 of the Ontario Heritage Act for any party other than a licensed archaeologist to make any alteration to a known archaeological site or to remove any artifact or other physical evidence of past human use or activity from the site, until such time as a licensed archaeologist has completed archaeological fieldwork on the site, submitted a report to the minister stating that the site has no further cultural heritage value or interest, and the report has been filed in the

______

TMHC Stage 3 Archaeological Assessment, Jackson Harvest Farms Site 1 (AiHd-171), Site 2 and Site 3 (AiHd-172), Wilmot Twp., Waterloo County, ON 27 ______

Ontario Public Register of Archaeology Reports referred to in Section 65.1 of the Ontario Heritage Act.

Should previously undocumented (i.e., unknown or deeply buried) archaeological resources be discovered, they may be a new archaeological site and therefore subject to Section 48(1) of the Ontario Heritage Act. The proponent or person discovering the archaeological resources must cease alteration of the site immediately and engage a licensed consultant archaeologist to carry out archaeological fieldwork, in compliance with Section 48(1) of the Ontario Heritage Act. Further, archaeological sites recommended for further archaeological fieldwork or protection remain subject to Section 48 (1) of the Ontario Heritage Act and may not be altered, or have artifacts removed from them, except by a person holding an archaeological licence.

The Funeral, Burial and Cremation Services Act, 2002, S.O. 2002, c.33 requires that any person discovering human remains must notify the police or coroner and Nancy Watkins, the Registrar of Burial Sites, War Graves, Abandoned Cemeteries and Cemetery Closures, Ontario Ministry of Government and Consumer Services. Her telephone number is 416 212-7499 and her e-mail address is [email protected].

______

TMHC Stage 3 Archaeological Assessment, Jackson Harvest Farms Site 1 (AiHd-171), Site 2 and Site 3 (AiHd-172), Wilmot Twp., Waterloo County, ON 28 ______

6.0 BIBLIOGRAPHY

Archaeological Research Associates (ARA) 2018 Stage 1 and 2 Archaeological Assessments Jackson Harvest Farms Aggregate Extraction 1894 Witmer Road Township of Wilmot Regional Municipality of Waterloo Lot 10, German Block South of Bleams Road Geographic Township of Wilmot Waterloo County, Ontario. Report on File, Ministry of Tourism, Culture and Sport. (PIF P007-0898-2018; Licensee Paul Racher, P007)

Alder Heritage Assessments (AHA) 2007 Stage 1 & 2 Archaeological Assessment of Consent Application B01/07; B02/07; B03/07, Part Lot 10, Concession South of Bleam’s Road, 2215 Bleams Road East, Shingletown, Township of Wilmot, Regional Municipality of Waterloo. Report on File, Ministry of Tourism, Culture and Sport. (PIF P082-005-2007; Licensee Elizabeth Alder, P082).

Bloomfield, Elizabeth 2006 Waterloo Township through Two Centuries. Waterloo Historical Society: Waterloo.

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

Eby, Ezra 1895 A Biographical History of Early Settlers and their Descendants in Waterloo Township. Kitchener: AlJon Print Craft.

Franklin, Ursula M. 1989 Old Iron Nails. In All that Glitters: Readings in Historical Metallurgy. Michael L. Wayman, editor, pp.18-21. Montreal: The Canadian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy.

Government of Canada 1851 Personal Census for Canada West, District of Waterloo, Subdistrict Wilmot (http://data2.collectionscanada.gc.ca/e/e095/e002370956.jpg)

1861 Personal Census, for Canada West, District of Waterloo, Subdistrict Wilmot (http://data2.collectionscanada.gc.ca/1861/jpg/4391953_00231.jpg)

1871 Personal Census for Ontario, District of Waterloo South, Subdistrict Wilmot (http://data2.collectionscanada.ca/1871/jpg/4396613_00260.jpg).

______

TMHC Stage 3 Archaeological Assessment, Jackson Harvest Farms Site 1 (AiHd-171), Site 2 and Site 3 (AiHd-172), Wilmot Twp., Waterloo County, ON 29 ______

1881 Personal Census for Ontario, District of Waterloo South, Subdistrict Wilmot (http://data2.collectionscanada.gc.ca/e/e328/e008196208.jpg)

1891 Personal Census for Ontario, District of Waterloo South, Subdistrict Wilmot (http://central.bac-ac.gc.ca/.item/?app=Census1891&op=img&id=30953_148177- 00590)

1901 Personal Census for Ontario, District of Waterloo South, Subdistrict Wilmot (http://data2.collectionscanada.ca/1901/z/z003/jpg/z000111874.jpg).

1927 Stratford, Ontario. 1:63,360. Map Sheet 040P07, [ed. 1],Geographical Section, General Staff, Department of National Defence. Date published: 1927-01-01. (http://geo1.scholarsportal.info/#r/details/_uri@=564032357&_add:true)

1938 Stratford, Ontario. Map Sheet 040P07, [ed. 1],Geographical Section, General Staff, Department of National Defence. Date published: 1938-01-01. (http://geo1.scholarsportal.info/#r/details/_uri@=564032357&_add:true)

1969 Stratford, Ontario. Map Sheet 040P07Department of Energy, Mines and Resources.

Hayes, Geoffrey 1997 Waterloo County: An Illustrated History. St. Jacobs Printery. Region of Waterloo.

IBI Group 2019 Jackson Harvest Farms. Part Lot 10 Concession South of Bleam’s Road, Part 1 58R19981, Township of Wilmot, Regional Municipality of Waterloo. Proponent map dated September 9, 2019.

Irwin & Burnham, Publishers 1867 Gazetteer and Directory of the County of Waterloo, 1867.

McLaughlin, Kenneth 1987 Cambridge: The Making of a Canadian City. Burlington: Windsor Publications.

Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry 2015 Aggregate Resources Policies and Procedures. Accessed online at https://www.ontario.ca/rural-and-north/aggregate-resources-policies-and- procedures.

Ministry of Northern Development and Mines (MNDM) 2007 Physiography of Southern Ontario. Chapman, L.J. and D.F. Putnam, authors. GIS map data layer distributed by the Ontario Geological Survey as Miscellaneous Release – Data (MRD) 228. Queen’s Printer for Ontario.

______

TMHC Stage 3 Archaeological Assessment, Jackson Harvest Farms Site 1 (AiHd-171), Site 2 and Site 3 (AiHd-172), Wilmot Twp., Waterloo County, ON 30 ______

Ministry of Tourism and Culture (MTC; now Ministry of Tourism, Culture and Sport) 2011 Standards and Guidelines for Consultant Archaeologists. Queen’s Printer for Ontario: Toronto.

Ministry of Tourism, Culture and Sport (MTCS) 2014 The Archaeology of Rural Historical Farmsteads. Queen’s Printer for Ontario: Toronto.

Mitchell & Co. 1864 County of Waterloo Gazetteer and General Business Directory, for 1864.

Natural Resources Canada (NRC) 2012 Stratford, Ontario. 1:50,000 Scale Topographic Map. Section 40 P/7. Electronic version.

Ontario Department of Mines and Northern Affairs 1972 Physiography of the Southwest Portion of Southern Ontario. Map 2225. Ontario.

Ontario Fundamental Dataset, Ministry of Natural Resources (2012) and CanVec Geospatial Database (2012) 2013 Base Mapping for the Province of Ontario.

Ontario Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs (OMAFRA) 2006 GIS Layers for Soils and Physiography in the Province of Ontario.

Parsell & Co. 1881 Illustrated Atlas of Waterloo County. Toronto, Ontario. Reprint Edition

Regional Municipality of Waterloo - Archaeology Division (RWAD) 1989 The Regional Municipality of Waterloo Archaeological Facilities Master Plan. Archaeology Division, Planning and Development Department, Ontario.

Roth, Lorraine 1972 150 Years of Amish History. Waterloo Historical Society Volume 60: 52-57.

Tremaine, G.R and G.M. Tremaine 1861 Map of the County of Waterloo, Canada West.

Wells, Tom 2000 Nail Chronology: The Use of Technologically Derived Features. Approaches to Material Culture Research for Historical Archaeologists. Ronald Michael, editor. The Society for Historical Archaeology:318-339.

______

TMHC Stage 3 Archaeological Assessment, Jackson Harvest Farms Site 1 (AiHd-171), Site 2 and Site 3 (AiHd-172), Wilmot Twp., Waterloo County, ON 31 ______

Wicklund, R.E and E.W. Presant 1971 The Soils of Waterloo County. Ontario Soil Survey Report 44. Department of Agriculture, Research Branch.

Wilmot Township 2019 Shingletown. http://www.wilmot.ca/en/living-here/History-of-Wilmot-Township.aspx#

______

TMHC Stage 3 Archaeological Assessment, Jackson Harvest Farms Site 1 (AiHd-171), Site 2 and Site 3 (AiHd-172), Wilmot Twp., Waterloo County, ON 32 ______

7.0 IMAGES

______

TMHC Stage 3 Archaeological Assessment, Jackson Harvest Farms Site 1 (AiHd-171), Site 2 and Site 3 (AiHd-172), Wilmot Twp., Waterloo County, ON 33 ______

Image 1: Surface Visibility at Site 1 (AiHd-171)

Image 2: Surface Visibility at Site 2

______

TMHC Stage 3 Archaeological Assessment, Jackson Harvest Farms Site 1 (AiHd-171), Site 2 and Site 3 (AiHd-172), Wilmot Twp., Waterloo County, ON 34 ______

Image 3: CSP in Progress at Site 1 (AiHd-171) October 30th, 2018 (looking northwest)

Image 4: CSP in Progress at Site 2 on October 30th, 2018 (looking south)

______

TMHC Stage 3 Archaeological Assessment, Jackson Harvest Farms Site 1 (AiHd-171), Site 2 and Site 3 (AiHd-172), Wilmot Twp., Waterloo County, ON 35 ______

Image 5: Establishing Excavation Grid at Site 1 (AiHd-171) (looking southeast)

Image 6: Recording Excavation Grid at Site 1 (AiHd-171) (looking northwest)

______

TMHC Stage 3 Archaeological Assessment, Jackson Harvest Farms Site 1 (AiHd-171), Site 2 and Site 3 (AiHd-172), Wilmot Twp., Waterloo County, ON 36 ______

Image 7: Site 1 (AiHd-171) Unit Excavation in Progress (looking east)

Image 8: Site 1 (AiHd-171) Unit Excavation in Progress (looking west)

______

TMHC Stage 3 Archaeological Assessment, Jackson Harvest Farms Site 1 (AiHd-171), Site 2 and Site 3 (AiHd-172), Wilmot Twp., Waterloo County, ON 37 ______

Image 9: Site 1 (AiHd-171) Typical Stage 3 Test Unit (295N 500E:1) (looking north)

Image 10: Site 1 (AiHd-171) Typical Stage 3 Test Unit (290N 510E:1) (looking north)

______

TMHC Stage 3 Archaeological Assessment, Jackson Harvest Farms Site 1 (AiHd-171), Site 2 and Site 3 (AiHd-172), Wilmot Twp., Waterloo County, ON 38 ______

Image 11: Site 1 (AiHd-171) Potential Feature 1 in 300N 495E:1 (looking north)

Image 12: Site 1 (AiHd-171) Potential Feature 2 in 300N 495E:3 (looking north)

______

TMHC Stage 3 Archaeological Assessment, Jackson Harvest Farms Site 1 (AiHd-171), Site 2 and Site 3 (AiHd-172), Wilmot Twp., Waterloo County, ON 39 ______

Image 13: Site 1 (AiHd-171) Disturbance in 285N 500E:1 (looking north)

Image 14: Site 2 Unit Excavation in Progress (looking east)

______

TMHC Stage 3 Archaeological Assessment, Jackson Harvest Farms Site 1 (AiHd-171), Site 2 and Site 3 (AiHd-172), Wilmot Twp., Waterloo County, ON 40 ______

Image 15: Site 2 Unit Excavation in Progress (looking northeast)

Image 16: Site 2 Typical Stage 3 Test Unit (195N 395E:1) (looking north)

______

TMHC Stage 3 Archaeological Assessment, Jackson Harvest Farms Site 1 (AiHd-171), Site 2 and Site 3 (AiHd-172), Wilmot Twp., Waterloo County, ON 41 ______

Image 17: Site 2 Typical Stage 3 Test Unit (205N 405E:1) (looking north)

Image 18: Site 1 (AiHd-171) Indigenous Artifacts

B & C are flake fragments

______

TMHC Stage 3 Archaeological Assessment, Jackson Harvest Farms Site 1 (AiHd-171), Site 2 and Site 3 (AiHd-172), Wilmot Twp., Waterloo County, ON 42 ______

Image 19: Site 1 (AiHd-171) 19th Century Artifacts

A & B) RWE, cat.17 & 18; C) coarse stoneware, cat.19; D) machine-cut nail, cat.20

Image 20: Site 2 Chipping Detritus

______

TMHC Stage 3 Archaeological Assessment, Jackson Harvest Farms Site 1 (AiHd-171), Site 2 and Site 3 (AiHd-172), Wilmot Twp., Waterloo County, ON 43 ______

8.0 MAPS

______

TMHC Stage 3 Archaeological Assessment, Jackson Harvest Farms Site 1 (AiHd-171), Site 2 and Site 3 (AiHd-172), Wilmot Twp., Waterloo County, ON 44 ______

Map 1: Location of the Subject Property in Wilmot Twp., ON

______

TMHC Stage 3 Archaeological Assessment, Jackson Harvest Farms Site 1 (AiHd-171), Site 2 and Site 3 (AiHd-172), Wilmot Twp., Waterloo County, ON 45 ______

Map 2: Aerial Photograph Showing the Location of the Subject Property in Wilmot Twp., ON

______

TMHC Stage 3 Archaeological Assessment, Jackson Harvest Farms Site 1 (AiHd-171), Site 2 and Site 3 (AiHd-172), Wilmot Twp., Waterloo County, ON 46 ______

Map 3: Physiography Within the Vicinity of the Subject Property ______

TMHC Stage 3 Archaeological Assessment, Jackson Harvest Farms Site 1 (AiHd-171), Site 2 and Site 3 (AiHd-172), Wilmot Twp., Waterloo County, ON 47 ______

Map 4: Soils Within the Vicinity of the Subject Property ______

TMHC Stage 3 Archaeological Assessment, Jackson Harvest Farms Site 1 (AiHd-171), Site 2 and Site 3 (AiHd-172), Wilmot Twp., Waterloo County, ON 48 ______

Map 5: Drainage Within the Vicinity of the Subject Property ______

TMHC Stage 3 Archaeological Assessment, Jackson Harvest Farms Site 1 (AiHd-171), Site 2 and Site 3 (AiHd-172), Wilmot Twp., Waterloo County, ON 49 ______

Map 6: Facsimile Map of 1824 Settlement of New Hamburg (Roth 1972) ______

TMHC Stage 3 Archaeological Assessment, Jackson Harvest Farms Site 1 (AiHd-171), Site 2 and Site 3 (AiHd-172), Wilmot Twp., Waterloo County, ON 50 ______

Map 7: Segment of 1861 Tremaine Map of Wilmot Township Showing the Subject Property

______

TMHC Stage 3 Archaeological Assessment, Jackson Harvest Farms Site 1 (AiHd-171), Site 2 and Site 3 (AiHd-172), Wilmot Twp., Waterloo County, ON 51 ______

Map 8: Historic 1877 Map of Waterloo Showing Subject Property

______

TMHC Stage 3 Archaeological Assessment, Jackson Harvest Farms Site 1 (AiHd-171), Site 2 and Site 3 (AiHd-172), Wilmot Twp., Waterloo County, ON 52 ______

Map 9: 1946 Aerial Image Showing Subject Property

______

TMHC Stage 3 Archaeological Assessment, Jackson Harvest Farms Site 1 (AiHd-171), Site 2 and Site 3 (AiHd-172), Wilmot Twp., Waterloo County, ON 53 ______

Map 10: 1955 Aerial Image Showing Subject Property

______

TMHC Stage 3 Archaeological Assessment, Jackson Harvest Farms Site 1 (AiHd-171), Site 2 and Site 3 (AiHd-172), Wilmot Twp., Waterloo County, ON 54 ______

Map 11: 1966 Aerial Image Showing Subject Property

______

TMHC Stage 3 Archaeological Assessment, Jackson Harvest Farms Site 1 (AiHd-171), Site 2 and Site 3 (AiHd-172), Wilmot Twp., Waterloo County, ON 55 ______

Map 12: 1927 Topographic Map Showing the Subject Property

______

TMHC Stage 3 Archaeological Assessment, Jackson Harvest Farms Site 1 (AiHd-171), Site 2 and Site 3 (AiHd-172), Wilmot Twp., Waterloo County, ON 56 ______

Map 13: 1933 Topographic Map Showing the Subject Property

______

TMHC Stage 3 Archaeological Assessment, Jackson Harvest Farms Site 1 (AiHd-171), Site 2 and Site 3 (AiHd-172), Wilmot Twp., Waterloo County, ON 57 ______

Map 14: 1938 Topographic Map Showing the Subject Property

______

TMHC Stage 3 Archaeological Assessment, Jackson Harvest Farms Site 1 (AiHd-171), Site 2 and Site 3 (AiHd-172), Wilmot Twp., Waterloo County, ON 58 ______

Map 15: 1969 Topographic Map Showing the Subject Property

______

TMHC Stage 3 Archaeological Assessment, Jackson Harvest Farms Site 1 (AiHd-171), Site 2 and Site 3 (AiHd-172), Wilmot Twp., Waterloo County, ON 59 ______

Map 16: Site 1 (AiHd-171) Stage 3 Unit Excavation Results

______

TMHC Stage 3 Archaeological Assessment, Jackson Harvest Farms Site 1 (AiHd-171), Site 2 and Site 3 (AiHd-172), Wilmot Twp., Waterloo County, ON 60 ______

Map 17: Site 1 (AiHd-171) Stage 3 Unit Excavation Results by Artifact Type

______

TMHC Stage 3 Archaeological Assessment, Jackson Harvest Farms Site 1 (AiHd-171), Site 2 and Site 3 (AiHd-172), Wilmot Twp., Waterloo County, ON 61 ______

Map 18: Site 2 Stage 3 Unit Excavation Results

______

TMHC Stage 3 Archaeological Assessment, Jackson Harvest Farms Site 1 (AiHd-171), Site 2 and Site 3 (AiHd-172), Wilmot Twp., Waterloo County, ON 62 ______

Map 19: Unaltered Proponent Map (IBI 2019)

______

TMHC Stage 3 Archaeological Assessment, Jackson Harvest Farms Site 1 (AiHd-171), Site 2 and Site 3 (AiHd-172), Wilmot Twp., Waterloo County, ON 63 ______

APPENDIX A: Illustration of Grid Coordinate System

______