The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About1.10 Sensitive area surveyM A C Metcalf Archaeological Consultants, Inc. July 18, 2005 Ruth Aim Morss EnCana Oil and Gas (USA), Inc. 950 17`h Street, Suite 2600 Denver, CO 80202 RE: Class III Cultural Resource Inventory for the proposed Rulison Access Re -Route Development in Garfield County, Colorado. Ruth Ann, Enclosed is a copy of the above referenced report. Fieldwork was completed on July 13, 2005. One isolated find was discovered during the inventory. Isolated finds, by definition, are not eligible for the National Register of Historic Places. MAC recommends a finding of no historic properties for the project as staked at the time of inventory. Two copies of the report have been sent to Cheryl Harrison at the BIN - Glenwood Springs Field Office. She will forward one to the Colorado Office of Archaeology and Historic Preservation in Denver. I have also forwarded one copy to Dennis Hansen in Rifle. Thank you for the opportunity to perform this work and should you require any further assistance, please do not hesitate to contact our office. Sincerely, apt[ Tracy Butt Staff Archaeologist enclosure cc: Cheryl Harrison, BLM - Glenwood Springs Field Office Dennis Ilansen, EnCana - Rifle Office (970) 328-6244 (701) 258-1215 FAX: (970) 328-5623 FAX: (701) 258-7156 P.O. Box 899 P.O. Box 2154 Eagle, GO 81531 Bismarck, ND 58502 mac@ metcaftarchaeology.com macnodak ) btinet.net OAIIP Use Only: OAHP Doc. No. OAHP Project No. Colorado Office of Archaeology and Historic Preservation Limited -Results Cultural Resource Survey Form (page 1 of 4) Small scale limited results projects include block surveys under 160 acres with linear surveys under four miles. Additionally, there should be no sites and a maximum of four Isolated Finds. This form must be typed. I. IDENTIFICATION 1. Report Title (include County): A Class 111 Cultural Resource Inventory for EnCana Oil and Gas (USA) Inc.'s proposed Rulison Access Re -Route Development in Garfield County, Colorado. 2. Date of Field Work: July 13, 2005 3. Form Completed by: Tracy I3ott Date: July 1 5, 2005 4. Survey Organization/Agency: Metcalf Archaeological Consultants, Inc. Principal Investigator: Michael Metcalf Principal Investigator's Signature: Other Crew: Stephanie Slaughter Address: P.O. Box 899, Eagle, CO 81631 5. Lead Agency / Land Owner: BLM - Glenwood Springs Field Office Contact: Cheryl Harrison Address: 50629 Highway 6 and 24, Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 6. Client: EnCana Oil and Gas (USA) Inc. 7. Permit Type and Number: C-39290 expires 9-8-07 8. Report / Contract Number: 9. Comments: II. DESCRIPTION OF UNDERTAKING 1 PROJECT 10. Type of Undertaking: EnCana Oil and Gas (USA), Inc. proposes 855 feel of access re-route for the Rulison access development project. 11. Size of Undertaking (acres): 9.6 acres Size of Project (if different): 12. Nature of Anticipated Disturbance: The project involves the construction of a crowned and ditched road. 13. Comments: One isolated find was discovered during the inventory. Isolated finds by definition arc not eligible for inclusion to the National Register of Historic Places. MAC recommends a finding of no historic properties for the project as staked at the time of inventory. Limited -Results Cultural Resource Survey Form (page 2 of 4) XII. Project Location. Please attach a photocopy of USGS Quad. clearly showing thc project location. The Quad. should be clearly labeled with the Principal Meridian, Township, Range, Section(s), Quad. map name, and date. Please do not reduce or enlarge the photocopy. 14. Description: Thc project area is located south of the Colorado River southwest of Rifle, Colorado. More specifically, the project area is situated along the western slope at the tenninal end of Log Mesa overlooking Porcupine Creek 15. Legal Location: Quad. Map: North Mamm Peak Date(s): 1960 P.R. 1982 Principal Meridian: 6th X NM — Ute NOTE: Only generalized subdivision (quarter -quarters) within each section is needed. Township: 7S Range: 94W Sec.: 2 %s: SW/SE/SE Township: Range: Sec.: 11 '/s: NE/NE, SE/NW/NE If section(s) is/are irregular, explain alignment method: section 11 align with NE corner, section 2 align with SE corner south edge. 16. Total number of acres surveyed: 5.6 17. Comments: Four acres of the project area lie within a previously surveyed block (BLM project # 1217 and OAIIP project # GFLM.R56) and were not re -surveyed for this project. IV. ENVIRONMENT 18. General Topographic Setting: The project area lies in the Southern Rocky Mountain physiographic province in the uplands south of the Colorado River Valley six miles southwest of Rifle, Colorado. The proposed road contours along the steep western slope of Long Mesa, which extends north from Battlemer' Mesa. It overlooks Porcupine Creek to the west. The landscape is characterized as steep slopes cut deeply eroded drainages, interspersed with more level benches. Numerous intermittent drainages cross proposed re-route and flow northwest into Porcupine Creek, a tributary of the Colorado River which lies to the north. Current Land Use: Recreation and energy development 19. Flora: Vegetation is dominated by an open pinyon/juniper woodland. Both tall and low sagebrush dominate the open meadows as well as the understory. Other species include: mountain mahogany, mixed grasses, cactus and (orbs. 20. Soils/Geology: Surface sediments are eroded residuum composed of yellow-brown to reddish -brown sandy clay. Bedrock is close to the surface on all surrounding ridgetops with some fans of colluvial soils at the drainage margins. Slopes are eroded residuals and bedrock with no potential for buried cultural deposits. 21. Ground Visibility: Ground visibility is moderate to good with coverage between 30-60%. 22. Comments: V. LITERATURE REVIEW 23. Location of Files Search: Colorado Office of Archaeology and Historic Preservation Date: 7-12-2005 BLM- Glenwood Springs Field Office Date: 7-13-2005 24. Previous Survey Activity In the project area: BIN projects #I217 (GF.I.M.R56), #94102 (GF.LM.NR512), 111092 (MC.LM.R 16), #1104-4, #94109, and #1295-2 : all energy related projects In the general region: OAHP projects: GF.I.M.NR415, GF.LM.NR457, GF.LM.NR463, GF.LM.NR468, GF.LM.NR469, GF.LM.NR470, GF.LM.NR478, GF.LM.NR479, GF.LM.RI71, GF.LM.R34, GF.LM.R55 GF.LM.R66, GF. €.M.R75, and MC.LM.R68. Limited -Results Cultural Resource Survey Form (page 3 of 4) LITERATURE REVIEW (continued) 25. Known Cultural Resources In the project area; none In the general region: 5GF.2061, 50F.1580, 5GF.1291, 5GF.1292, 5GF.1293, 5 GF1326, 5GF.1233, 5GF.1298, 5GF.2058, 5FD,2059, 5GF.2060, and 5GF1750 26. Expected Results: MAC expected a low potential to find prehistoric isolates or sites in the area with a lower expectation of historic sites or isolates. VI. STATEMENT OF OBJECTIVES 27. Identify and assess any cultural resources within potential area of effect VII. FIELD METHODS 28. Definitions: Site: five or more artifacts or a feature, structure or trail, or any combination of these elements meeting OAHP criteria in a discrete location that is believed to represent the locus of patterned human activity. IF: four or fewer artifacts without evidence of or potential for additional cultural rnaterials or features in the immediate vicinity. 29. Describe Survey Method: Two zig-zag pedestrian transects 25 meters wide, one on each side of the staked centerline, were walked in areas where the slope was in excess of 30%. Parts (northern third) of the road are on steep slopes and the transects were slightly narrower and were walked, mostly to log the road with a handheld GPS unit (Magellan Gold). Survey was mainly concentrated on the more level slopes and ridges. The road begins at an existing wellpad and the area within the previously survey 20 -acre block was not re- surveyed. Vill. RESULTS 30. List IFs, if applicable. Indicate IF locations on the map completed for Part III. A. Smithsonian Number: 50F3706 Description: projectile point fragment, corner -notched made of Kremmling chert. 31. Using your professional knowledge of the region, why are there none or very limited cultural remains in the project area? The project arca is very small. Additionally, the arca is very steep with few water resources close by. Is there subsurface potential?: No 37 Limited-Results Cultural Resource Survey Form (page 4 of 4) EnCana Cil and Gas (USA) Inc. Rulison Access Re -Route North Mamm Peak (1982) USGS quad Garfield County, Colorado T 7S, R 94W 0.5 0 0.5 0°J•�; S -7;3 L' ti ?;•.": :r._ `•e:2;*--. X11 �`V 7l - •'l]'; �."..-ti rte_ ". ! c -r _LL 41 '1 ;�l —. , yl j. re -\--L-C[J 1 Miles (i 1 2. • ire;� r4+ �i 1 : fl • ;! e// i 1 0; ,i r1 J` ti i _- i. - ( r • ' •�:[ 'r 11, % 1 1,../Ii,--p•f , t , '' 1 it 1','(L) / +I 1111 :J isn-0 -!r 1 • ',�✓ -yam-�/ f l Li • • �Jr r 7, Legend j= Previously Survey Block ley Proposed Access Re-route • ••-7777-•.' i r MAC Metcalf Archaeological Consultants, Inc. June 1, 2005 Ruth Ann Morss Encana Oil and Gas (USA), Inc. 950 - 17' Street, Suite 2600 Denver, CO 80202 Re: Proposed Parachute PB -30-7-95 and PG -30-7-95 well, access, and pipeline developments, Garfield County, Colorado Dear Ruth Ann, Enclosed is one copy of our report of findings for archaeological inventory of the above referenced project. Fieldwork was done on May 17, 2005, Inventory resulted in re-evaluation of one previously recorded historic homestead (5GF310) and documentation of one historic ditch (5GF3638) and one historic isolated find (5GF3546). Isolated finds by definition are not eligible for the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP). Site 50F310 is now recommended as not eligible for inclusion on the NRHP, a change from the previous evaluation of field eligible noted in the OAHP Compass on-line database. Site 5GF3638, the Isch Ditch, is recommended as not eligible for inclusion on the NRHP. Based on these results, MAC recommends a finding of no historic properties for the project area as staked at the time of this survey. We have FedEx'd two copies of the report to Cheryl Harrison at the BLM Glenwood Springs Field Office. She will forward one copy to the Colorado Office of Archaeology and Historic Preservation in Denver for review and comment. Thank you for the opportunity to conduct this inventory. As always, please do not hesitate to contact . our office if you have any questions or concerns about the enclosed report, other aspects of our involvement in this project, or if we can be of further assistance. Sincerely, Paz*. h Patrick K. O'Brien Senior Staff Archaeologist enclosures cc Cheryl Harrison, BLM Glenwood Springs ,970) 328-6244 FAX: (970) 328-5623 P.O. Box 899 Eagle, CO 81631 mac@metcaltarchaeology.com (701) 258-1215 FAX: (701) 258-7156 P.O. Box 2154 Bismarck, ND 58502 macnodak r_7 btigate.com EnCana Oil and Gas (USA) Inc.: A Class III Cultural Resource Inventory for the Proposed Parachute PB -30-7-95 and PG -30-7-95 Well, Access and Pipeline Developments in Garfield County, Colorado by Patrick O'Brien prepared for, EnCana Oil and Gas (USA) Inc. 950 17t'' Street, Suite 2600 Denver, CO 80202 prepared by Metcalf Archaeological Consultants, Inc. Eagle, CO 81631 Principal Investigator Michael Metcalf BI.M Cultural Resource Use Permit # C-39290 (expires 09-08-07) June 2005 Abstract Metcalf Archaeological Consultants, Inc. (MAC) of Eagle, Colorado conducted a Class III cultural resource inventory of EnCana Oil and Gas (USA) Inc. 's proposed Parachute PB -30-7-95 and PG -30-7-95 well pad, access, and pipeline developments in Garfield County, Colorado. The proposed project includes the construction of two approximately 3 -acre earthen well pads and about 2190 feet of proposed access/pipeline. This project is located in T7S, R95W, sections 19 and 30. Inventory included 40 acre inventory blocks centered on the proposed centerstakes and approximately 410 feet of 150 foot -wide access/pipeline corridor outside the survey blocks. Nearly all of the project area (81.4 acres) is on privately owned land. However, approximately 4.4 acres of federal land administered by the BLM-Glenwood Springs Field Office is included along the east and south edges of the 40 acre block for the proposed PG -30-7-95 location. In addition, 12.2 acres were not intensively inventoried due to slopes in excess of 30%. Inventory resulted in re-evaluation of one previously recorded historic homestead (5GF310) and documentation of one historic ditch (5GF3638) and one historic isolated find (5GF3546). Isolated finds by definition are not eligible for the National Register of Historic Places (NRNP). Site 5GF310 is now recommended as not eligible for inclusion on the NRNP, a change from the previous evaluation of field eligible noted in the OAHP Compass on -lint database. Site 5GF3638, the Isch Ditch, is recommended as not eligible for inclusion on the NRHP. Based on these results, MAC recommends a finding of no historic properties for the project area as staked at the time of this survey. iii Table of Contents Abstract Introduction Effective Environment 1 Culture History and Previous Work 2 Statement of Objectives 2 Field Methods 3 Results and Management Recommendations 3 5GF310-The A. Isch Cabin 4 5GF3638-The Isch Ditch 5 Isolated Find 5GF3546 5 Summary and Conclusions G References Cited 6 Appendix A: Resource Location Map (agency copies only) 7 Appendix B: OAIIP Forms (agency copies only; under separate cover) 8 List of Figures Figure 1 Project arca map vii iv Colorado Historical Society - Office of Archaeology and Historic Preservation COLORADO CULTURAL RESOURCE SURVEY Cultural Resource Survey Management information Form Please complete this form and attach a copy behind the Table of Contents of each standard survey report, 1. Project Size Total federal acres in project: 4.4 Acres surveyed: 3.8 Total state acres in project: Acres surveyed: Total private acres of project: 77.0 Acres surveyed: 65.4 Other : 11.6 ac. private and 0.6 ac. federal land were not systematically surveyed due to slopes in excess of 30% Total acres surveyed: 69.2 11. PROJECT LOCATION County: Garfield Principal Meridian: USGS Quad map name(s) and date(s): 6th Parachute (1962) NOTE: The legal location information below is meant to summarize the location of the survey and does not need to be precise. Township: 7S Range: 96W Sec: 19 1/4s SE/SE/SW: S/SW/SE: anchored SE car., S. edge Township: 7S Range: 95W Sec: 30 1!4s EIE/NE/NW; NW/NE., SWINE; WIWISE/NE; N/NINW/SE; NW/NE/SE., anchored SE cor., E. edge v 111. SITES Smithsonian Number, Resource Type Eligibility Management Recommendations y $ a + R C % Q. Tx C e a a t �' Ex a CL 2 a 2 Contributes to a National Register District ■ * 2 a H a Q Yb. Li. r R a Q Other 56F310 mournmilm. ENE M 5GF3638 •uii X IIIII ®11111 MN IV. ISOLATED FINDS Please note that by definition lis are not eligible to the National Register and require no further work. Smithsonian Number Resource Type L V G a Tx C e a a 5GF3546 X vi •7.3i utv an EnCana Oil and Gas (USA) Inc. Parachute PB -30-7-95 and PG -30-7-95 well , access, and pipeline developments Garfield County, Colorado N A 0.5 1 Miies (r r LILY L N. s ,4 ,, m r, ..„? - ,•..- 1. Jam` S sch kwfr G '56 ■ Legend proposed centerstake survey block --'"'--' proposed access/pipeline existing road >30% slope; not inventoried Figure 1 Project area map Introduction Metcalf Archaeological Consultants, Inc. (MAC) of Eagle, Colorado conducted a Class III cultural resource inventory of EnCana Oil and Gas (USA) Inc.'s proposed Parachute PB -30-7-95 and PO -30-7-95 well pad, access, and pipeline developments in Garfield County, Colorado. The proposed project includes the construction of two approximately 3 -acre earthen well pads and about 2190 feet of proposed accesslpipeline. This project is located in T7S, R95W, sections 19 and 30. Inventory included 40 acre inventory blocks centered on the proposed centerstakes and approximately 410 feet of 150 foot -wide access/pipeline corridor outside the survey blocks. Nearly all of the project arca (81.4 acres) is on privately owned land. However, approximately 4.4 acres of federal land administered by the BLM-Glenwood Springs Field Office is included along the east and south edges of the 40 acre block for the proposed PG -30-7-95 location. In addition, 12.2 acres were not intensively inventoried due to slopes in excess of 30%. Inventory resulted in re-evaluation of one previously recorded historic homestead (5GF310) and documentation of one historic ditch (50F3638) and one historic isolated find (50F3546). Isolated finds by definition are not eligible for theNational Register of Historic Places (NRHP). Site 5GF3 1 0 is now recommended as not eligible for inclusion on the NRHP, a change from the previous evaluation of field eligible noted in the OAHP Compass on-line database. Site 5GF3638, the Isch Ditch, is recommended as not eligible for inclusion on the NRNP. Based on these results, MAC recommends a finding of no historic properties for the project area as staked at the time of this survey. In accordance with policies and regulations implementing the National Historic Preservation Act (Public Law 89-665), as amended, the cultural resource inventory was completed to locate, identify, and evaluate any cultural resources that might be affected by the proposed undertaking. The study was conducted on May 17, 2005 by MAC archaeologists John Brogan and Tim Rehusch under the stipulations of BLM Cultural Resource Use Permit #C-39290 (expires 09-08-07). All field documentation, original records and copies of this report are on file at the MAC office in Eagle, Colorado. Effective Environment The project area is located at the foot of Grand Mesa and on the South side of the Colorado River approximately 2.8 miles south of the town of Parachute. The proposed well pad and accesslpipeline developments are on the High Mesa north of Dry Creek. Geologically, the project area lies within the unconsolidated surficial deposits of the Pleistocene that include some older gravel and alluvial deposits. The area is then surrounded by the Wasatch Formation of Tertiary age (Tweto 1979), The project area is just west of Battlement Mesa at the edge of the Colorado Plateau. Vegetation in the project area is dominated by sagebrush shrubland, which includes sagebrush, grasses, prickly pear cactus, and a few greasewood. Piiion-juniper woodland is also 2 present, primarily on steeper slopes along the edge of the mesa. Surface visibility was good with about 70% or better ground visibility. Sediments consist of brown loamy silt of residual and colluvial origin with lots of small (pea-sized) to cobble and boulder sized surface gravels. Soil depth is unknown, but Holocene deposits are presumed to be quite thin to non-existent in places. Typical land use in the area is gracing, natural gas/oil exploration and extraction, and recreation. Culture History and Previous Work Files searches were conducted at the BLM, Glenwood Springs Field Office on April 20, 2005 and through the Colorado Office of Archaeology and Historic Preservation (OAHP) Compass site on April 19 and 27, 2005. Eleven projects and 18 cultural resources have been recorded in the sections searched (sections 19 and 30, T7S, R9SW). Of the 11 projects previously conducted in the area, nine were associated with oil and gas development, one was a land use planning study, and one was part of a wildlife habitat improvement study. Eight of the 18 cultural resources are isolated finds. Of the remaining 10 resources, four sites (two historic homesteads, one collapsed historic dugout, and one prehistoric open camp) are recommended as field not eligible. Four sites (one prehistoric sheltered camp, two prehistoric open camps, and one historic bunkhouse) arc recommended as field needs data. One site, a cow camp with some foundation remains and water control features, is recommended as officially needs data. Finally, one site (50F310, a historic homestead) is recommended as field eligible for the NRI IP. Of these 10 sites, only 50F310 is within the current project's area of potential effect (APE). The project area is within the area discussed in the Northern Colorado River Basin prehistoric context (Reed and Metcalf 1999) and Colorado Plateau Country Historic RP3 Context (Husband 1984). The reader is referred to these documents for a more in-depth discussion of the culture history and research issues of the general area. Statement of Objectives Following state and federal policies and regulations implementing the National Historic Preservation Act (Public Law 89-665) as amended, the project area was inventoried to identify any cultural resources within the APE for the various proposed facilities. Any discovered cultural resources were to be evaluated for eligibility to the NRHP under the Criteria for Eligibility (36 CFR §60.4). Register eligibility is evaluated in teens of the integrity of the resource; its association with significant persons, events, or patterns in history or prehistory; its engineering, artistic, or architectural values; or its information. potential relative to important research questions in history or prehistory. Prehistoric resources are most often evaluated under Criterion d, for their potential to yield information important to studies of prehistory. Significant information potential in a prehistoric site requires that the site contain intact cultural deposits or discrete activity areas that can be securely associated with a temporal period or named cultural group. The potential for intact deposits or 3 cultural/temporal associations may he inferred frorri surface evidence of cultural features or undisturbed Holocene deposits, and the presence of temporally or culturally diagnostic artifacts. Ilistoric resources may be evaluated under any of the Criteria. However, in the absence of structural features or documented association with significant historic events or important contributions of persons significant in history, historical resources are evaluated under essentially the same criteria as prehistoric resources. Based on information available from files searches and previous research experience in the arca, MAC anticipated that both prehistoric and historic cultural resources could be present within the current project area. The area is close to the Colorado River which would sustain wildlife and plant resources that could be exploited. The region has outcrops of sandstone bedrock which could provide shelter for short-term campsites. Recorded prehistoric sites are open and sheltered camps, open lithic scatters, and many isolated finds. Recorded historic resources in the region are trails or unpaved roads, homesteads, and camps. Field Methods Standard field methods were used for block and linear surveys. The 40 acre blocks were centered on the proposed well centerstakes. When possible, the area was inventoried by walking parallel transects spaced no more than 20 meters apart. Slopes greater than 30% were not systematically inventoried. Proposed access/pipeline route outside the blocks was inventoried using two zig-zag pedestrian transects, one on each side of the proposed pipeline/access centerline, for a 150 foot corridor. When cultural materials were discovered, standard transects were temporarily halted and the immediate vicinity of the find was more intensively investigated in order to determine the nature and extent of the resource. Sites are defined as five or more artifacts or a feature, structure or trail, or any combination of these elements meeting OAHP criteria in a discrete location that is believed to represent the locus ofpattcmed human activity. Isolated finds are four or fewer prehistoric artifacts, or 49 or fewer historic artifacts without evidence of, or potential for, additional cultural materials or features in the immediate vicinity. Resources were plotted on the appropriate 7.5' USGS quadrangle with the aid of topographic features and a handheld GPS receiver (set to UTM meters, NAD 83), and recorded on the appropriate OAHP site forms. If a site was encountered, it was sketched and photographed. No artifacts were collected. Results and Management Recommendations The conditions in the field were considered acceptable, affecting neither methods nor results. Inventory resulted in re-evaluation of one previously recorded historic homestead (5GF3 10) and documentation of one historic ditch (5GF3638) and one historic isolated find (5GF3546). The resource locations are shown in Appendix A (agency copies only). Cultural resource forms for these resources are included in Appendix B (agency copies only; under separate cover). 4 50F310 -The A. lsch Cabin This site consists of an L-shaped log cabin, a rectangular stone foundation (with interior depression) and a light historic artifact scatter surrounding the features and extending downslope to the north. It is at the northeastern margin of High Mesa above a steep slope that descends into the Colorado River Valley. This site was originally recorded by the Grand River Institute in 1979, but the description and sketch map are quite rudimentary. The site is shown as the "A. lsch Cabin" on the 1914 GLO map for T7S, R95W. MAC revisited the site during inventory for the Parachute PB - 30 -7-95 well pad because it is within the 40 acre block. The soil on-site is a sheetwashed, reddish brown, sandy inix of residuum and colluvium with a few cobbles and small boulders of basalt. Based on observation of 1) the two -track road ruts, 2) the nearby edge of the mesa top, and 3) a cattle wallow, it appears that deposition is about 50 em deep and lacks potential for intact cultural deposits. Vegetation on-site includes primarily grasses, but sparse sagebrush and junipers are also present. There are three features at 5GF310. Feature 1 is the remains of a largely collapsed, L-shaped log cabin approximately 25 feet x 25 feet in size and constructed of hand-hewn logs and milled lumber. Only the north wall and portion of the east wall of the cabin are still standing. It appears that the walls were about 6 feet high at the eaves, but there is no roof on the structure anymore and only remnants of the roof joists and decking are left in the structure's interior. Based on the extant remains of the cabin, it appears that some construction materials have been removed f rorri the site. Feature 2 is a rectangular stone foundation treasuring approximately 12 feet x 15 feet and constructed of native, round basalt boulders and cobbles. This feature is about 30 feet northwest of Feature 1, on the west side of a small drainage that flows north through the site. Feature 2 is likely the remains of an outbuilding rather than a residential structure, but its function is unknown. Feature 3 is a small depression about 12 feet in diameter about 10-15 feet southwest of Feature 1. It does not appear to have been deliberately excavated and is probably a cattle wallow. In addition to the three features at 5GF310, there is a sparse scatter of historic artifacts in a 60 Til x 30 m arca, primarily north of Feature 1. The assemblage includes clear, brown, and green vessel glass, earthenware and stoneware ceramics, various sizes of wire nails, galvanized roofing nails, various fragmentary sanitary and hole -in -top cans, and scattered pieces of hand-hewn and milled lumber. In addition, MAC archaeologists noted some plywood fragments, cast iron stove pieces, barrel hoops, and some modem carpet and a dishwasher. MAC recommends that the current evaluation of "eligible -field" for this site be changed to not eligible. Even the best preserved feature (# 1) retains almost none of its physical integrity. The nature of the deposition on site and the degree of erosion that is evident indicates that the artifact assemblage is Iargely in secondary context and that there is little to no potential for significant, intact, buried cultural deposits. Although it is interesting that the site is shown on the 1914 GLO with its presumed owner's name, it is unlikely that the construction and occupation of the property contributed significantly to the area's historic development. Neither is there evidence that the site is associated with specific persons or events that arc significant in history. Finally, the sites lacks evidence for unique or notable design or construction elements. The proposed access road/pipeline corridor for the Parachute PB -30-7-95 proceeds from southeast to northwest approximately 30 m south of the site and the proposed well centerstake is approximately 360 feet northwest of the site. 5 It is unlikely that 5GF310 will be impacted by the proposed well, access, and pipeline development. MAC recommends no further work for 5GF310. 50F3638 -The Isch Ditch This linear resource is the remaining portion of a historic ditch running northeast down a gentle slope near the east edge of High Mesa. The ditch is shown on the 1914 GLO map for T7S, R95W, which identifies High Mesa as Isch Mesa. The ditch is presumably associated with the A. Isch Cabin (5GF310), also shown on the GLO. The length of the identifiable/intact portion of the ditch measures approximately 1020 feet long. Its southwest end is at a modern road and the ditch proceeds downslope to the northeast until it either ends or has been obliterated by an existing two - track. The ditch varies in width from about 50em to 100cm and its depth averages 30cm. It has been abandoned for some time and it appears that the channel has experienced significant, natural in- filling. Vegetation along the ditch is dominated by grasses and sagebrush and there are quite a few small sagebrush that are growing within and adjacent to the channel. The sediment in the area is light yellow brown, fine textured silty loam with rounded cobbles. Examination of the database records at the Colorado Division of Water Resources indicates that this ditch is probably one remaining element of the ditch that is now called the Number One Ditch, with a diversion gate on Dry Creek approximately one-half mile to the southeast. That ditch has been fully modernized, but was adjudicated in 1907 for 0.60 cubic feet per second (cfs), in 1910 for an additional 2.0 cfs, and in 1914 for an additional 1.26 cfs. The total decreed capacity of the current Number One Ditch is 3.86 cfs and it serves to irrigate about 285 acres on High Mesa. Rased on the location and orientation of the Isch Ditch as observed on the ground and as shown on the 1914 GLO, it is likely that this part of the historic irrigation system was intended not to carry water along the mesa contour, but to deliver it downslope to an area to be irrigated. MAC recommends this ditch as not eligible for the NRI IP. It is a short, abandoned remnant of a feature shown as the Isch Ditch on the 1914 GLO for T7S, R95W. Whatever additional portions of the ditch that may have at one time existed have either been totally destroyed or have been modified and/or relocated to form the modern manifestation of the Number One Ditch. The extant portion of the Isch Ditch fails to meet any of the NRHP criteria for eligibility and MAC recommends no further work for this resource. Isolated Find 5GF3546 This isolated find consists of three lengths of hand hewn log, with wooden "chinking" attached to two logs. The largest log measures 140 inches long x 6 inches wide. There are several 16 penny nails in all three logs. The resource was found on an open grassy mesa top, very slightly sloping to the north. 6 Summary and Conclusions MAC of Eagle, Colorado conducted a Class III cultural resource inventory of EnCana Oil and Gas (USA) Inc.'s proposed Parachute PB -30-7-95 and PG -30-7-95 well pad, access, and pipeline developments in Garfield County, Colorado. Inventory resulted in re-evaluation of one previously recorded historic homestead (50F310) and documentation of one historic ditch (5GF3638) and one historic isolated find (50F3546). Isolated finds by definition are not eligible for the NRHP. Site 5GF310, the A. Isch Cabin, is now recommended as not eligible for inclusion on the NRHP, a change from the previous evaluation of field eligible noted in the OAHP Compass on-line database. Site 5GF3638, the Isch Ditch, is recommended as not eligible for inclusion on the NRHP. Based on these results, MAC recommends a finding of no historic properties for the project area as staked at the time of this survey. References Cited Husband, M. B. 1984 Colorado Plateau Country Historic Context. State Historical Society of Colorado, Denver. Reed, A. D. and M. D. Metcalf 1999 Colorado Prehistory: A Context for the Northern Colorado River Basin Colorado Council of Professional Archaeologists, Denver. Tweto, 0. 1979 Geologic Map of Colorado. U.S. Geological Survey, Denver, CO. Appendix A: Resource Location Map (agency copies only) Appendix B: OAIHP Forms (agency copies only; under separate cover) EnCana Oil and Gas (USA) Inc.: A Class III Cultural Resource Inventory for the Proposed Parachute PH -25-7-96 Well, Access and Pipeline Development in Garfield County, Colorado by Tracy Bott and Patrick O'Brien prepared for, EnCana Oil and Gas (USA) Inc. 950 17th Street, Suite 2600 Denver, CO 80202 prepared by Metcalf Archaeological Consultants, Inc. Eagle, CO 81631 Principal Investigator Michael Metcalf BLM Cultural Resource Use Permit # C-39290 (expires 09-08-07) May 2005 Abstract Metcalf Archaeological Consultants, Inc. (MAC) of Eagle, Colorado conducted a Class III cultural resource inventory of EnCana Oil and Gas (USA) Inc.'s proposed Parachute PH -25-7-96 wellpad, access and pipeline development in Garfield County, Colorado. The proposed project includes the construction of an approximately 3 -acre earthen wellpad, and about 4390 feet of proposed access/pipeline. This project is located at T7S, R95W Section 30 and T7S, R96W, Section 25. Inventory included a 40 acre inventory block centered on the proposed PH 25-7-96 centcrstakc and approximately 3707 feet of 150 foot -wide access/pipeline corridor outside the survey block. The 40 -acre survey Mock is mostly located on federal lands administered by the i3LM-Glenwood Springs Field Office (1.9 acres arc on private land) and the access/pipeline corridor (12.8 acres) outside the survey block is located on privately held, fee surface with federal mineral ownership. Therefore, the project area encompassed 52.8 acres (38.1 acres BLM, 14.7 acres Private), of which 11.9 acres were not intensively inventoried due to slopes in excess of 30%. Two isolated finds (5GF3628 and 5GF3629) and one site (5GF3549) were recorded during this inventory. Isolated finds by definition arc not eligible for the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP). Site 5GF3549, a historic trash scatter with a small prehistoric component, is recommended as not eligible for the NRI IP and a finding of no historic properties is recommended for the project area as staked at the time of this survey. iii Table of Contents Abstract iz Introduction 1 Effective Environment 1 Culture History and Previous Work 2 Statement of Objectives 2 Field Methods 3 Results and Management Recommendations 3 5GF3549 4 5GF3628 4 5GF3629 4 Summary and Conclusions 5 References Cited 5 Appendix A: Resource Location Map (not for public distribution) Appendix R; OAHP Forms (not for public distribution; under separate cover) List of Figures Figure 1 Project area map vii iv Colorado Historical Society - Office of Archaeology and Historic Preservation COLORADO CULTURAL RESOURCE SURVEY Cultural Resource Survey Management Information Form Please cornplete this form and attach a copy behind the Table of Contents of each standard survey report. I. Project Size Total federal acres in project: 38.1 Acres surveyed: 26.4 Total state acres in project: Acres surveyed: _ Total private acres of project: 14.7 Acres surveyed: 14.5 Other : 11.7 ac. federal and 0.2 acprivate land were not systematically surveyed due to slopes in excess of 30% Total acres surveyed: 40.9 II. PROJECT LOCATION County: Garfield Principal Meridian: 6th USGS Quad map name(s) and date(s): Parachute (1962) NOTE: The legal location information below is meant to summarize the location of the survey and does not need to be precise. Township: 7S Range: 96W Sec: 25 1/4s SE/NE Township: 75 Range: 95W Sec: 30 _ 1/4s S/SINW, NW/SW/NW, S/SW/NE M. SITES v Resource Type Eligibility Management Recommendations j Smithsonian Number .— . ti: - t a R _, R •t J — a c t c C R 0. ._.. c c C _ . a ._ ti __._. e .c to LL L 2 r— a Q C a Contributes to a National Register District ¢ t: Cf. — .____ ` Gtc a C a — t _, _ a n N i4 ___, V a .4 Other 50F3549 X X X v IV. ISOI.AThU FINDS Please note that by definition Ws are not eligible to the National Register and require no further work. Smithsonian Number Resource Type C c c x 5GF3628 x 5GF3629 x vi - i V • ',2,, „_.• i %-. Encana Oil and Gas (USA) Inc. \------- ,i, ParachuteP11PI1 25-7-96 well and access/pipeline development .--..J-----.: , Garfield County, Colorado .,..6k...cr ..•;.!. ,.!. .. -1\ -._:•\._., • c : 1 Mil es N ) :61=7--- / r i . i 'fr,,14.'g,"•?,,,.-,N,..,.-7:,;/),-*f :21 i ; i, --. :7 -.' •:•g; -:!.t, -e,-,=.44-. -,-,,,--' 0 0.5 : ')J ' '-.. SS )•f .1 \ ,---,:-.....k.,9-'•-•-1-•":".---.1.f..tV :i - , :...S.' • ‘-..•.-• ....- •-',.--.--k ' - ' %. ..,..ji..r.,' ,:, .L: •-' , _,.,--.7.-±-,::(d.-.-2, i.,4-. . -..i. -'r ..-`-',-'...`‘'. , •,,_. -.1-•=-. , r .„ i ..;:l 5......0 - , ,..',..„•., ' , ..) ....-' -• ‘ .., 1-1: • ,c c4.1.7 P ' • go, y- • 1,egend centerstake survey block access/pipeline corridor BLM private >30% slope, not inventoried - • • 1 • ii;_?.1( Figure 1 Project area map ‘d5gr /t. • ‘."1:'• Introduction Metcalf Archaeological Consultants, Inc. (MAC) of Eagle, Colorado conducted a Class III cultural resource inventory of EnCana Oil and Gas (USA) Inc.'s proposed Parachute PH -25-7-96 wellpad, access, and pipeline development in Garfield County, Colorado. The proposed project includes the construction of an approximately 3 -acre earthen wellpad, and about 4390 feet of proposed access/pipeline. This project is located at T7S, R95W Section 30 and T7S, R96W, Section 25. Inventory included a 40 acre inventory block centered on the proposed PH 25.7-96 centerstake and approximately 3707 feet of 150 foot -wide access/pipeline corridor outside the survey block. The 40 -acre survey block is mostly located on federal lands administered by the BLM-Glenwood Springs Field Office (1.9 acres are on private land) and the access/pipeline corridor (12.8 acres) outside the survey block is located on privately held, fee surface with federal mineral ownership. Therefore, the project area encompassed 52.8 acres (38.1 acres BLM, 14.7 acres Private), of which 11.9 acres (11.7 acres federal; 0.2 acres private) were not intensively inventoried due to slopes in excess of 30%. Two isolated finds (5GF3628 and 5GF3629) and one site (5GF3549) were recorded during this inventory. Isolated finds by definition are not eligible for the NRHP. Site 5GF3549, a historic trash scatter with a small prehistoric component, is recommended as not eligible for the NRHP and a finding of no historic properties is recommended for the project area as staked at the time of this survey. In accordance with policies and regulations implementing theNational Historic Preservation Act (Public Law 89-665), as amended, the cultural resource inventory was completed to locate, identify, and evaluate any cultural resources that might be affected by the proposed undertaking. The study was conducted on April 20, 2005 by MAC archaeologists John Brogan and Tracy Bott under the stipulations of BLM Cultural Resource Use Permit #C-39290 (expires 09-08-07). All field documentation, original records and copies of this report are on file at the MAC office in Eagle, Colorado. Effective Environment The project area is located at the foot of Grand Mesa and on the South side of the Colorado River approximately 2.8 miles south of the town of Parachute. The proposed wellpad and access/pipeline development is situated on the northern side of the finger ridge projecting northwest from High Mesa. Geologically speaking the project arca lies within the unconsolidated surficial deposits of the Pleistocene that include some older gravel and alluvia] deposits, The arca is then surrounded by the Wasatch Formation of Tertiary age (Tweto 1979). The project area is just west of Battlement Mesa at the edge of the Colorado Plateau. Most ofproject area covered with pinyon juniper woodland with a few patches of sage in the survey block and with the access corridor being mostly a sagebrush community. Species include mixed grasses, cactus, yucca, sagebrush, rabbitbrush, pinyon, and juniper. Surface visibility was 2 good with about 80% or better ground visibility. Sediments consist of brown loamy silt of residual and aeolian origin with lots of small (pea sized) to cobble and boulder sized surface gravels, Soil depth is unknown, but presumed shallow with basalt boulders eroding throughout. Typical Iand use in the area is grazing, natural gas/oil exploration and extraction, and recreation. Culture History and Previous Work Files searches were conducted at the BLM, Glenwood Springs Field Office on April 20, 2005 and through the Colorado Office of Archaeology and Historic Preservation (OAHP) Compass site on April 19 and 27, 2005. Twelve projects and 28 cultural resources have been recorded in the sections searched (section 25, T7S, R96W and section 30, T7S, R95W). Of the twelve projects found in the area, ten are associated with well pad or access developments, one is a paleontological report and the other, GF.LM.R178, is a "Cultural Resource Inventory for the High Mesa Wildlife Habitat Improvement Project" by the BLM. Fourteen of the cultural resources are isolated finds. Of the remaining 14 resources, eight sites arc recommended as not eligible for inclusion on the NRNP, five are recommended as needing data (5GF306, 5GF447, 5GF2602, 5GF2611, and 5GF2642), and one (5GF310) is eligible for the NRHP. 5GF2611 and 5GF2642 are prehistoric open camps, 5GF306 is a prehistoric sheltered camp, 5GF2602 is a tipi ring/stone enclosure/rock pile, and 5GF447 is a historic cow camp. 56F310 is a historic house. None of the 28 previously recorded cultural resources are within the current project's area of potential effect (APE), although four sites (5GF2599, 5GF2601, 5GF2602, and 50F2603 are within one-quarter mile of the west edge of the survey block. The project area is within the area discussed in the Northern Colorado River Basin prehistoric context (Reed and Metcalf 1999) and Colorado Plateau Country Historic RP3 Context (Husband 1984). The reader is referred to these documents for a more in-depth discussion of the culture history and research issues of the general area. Statement of Objectives Following state and federal policies and regulations implementing the National Historic Preservation Aet (Public Law 89-665) as amended, the project area was inventoried to identify any cultural resources within the APE for the various proposed facilities. Any discovered cultural resources were to be evaluated for eligibility to the NRHP under the Criteria for Eligibility (36 CFR §60.4). Register eligibility is evaluated in terms of the integrity of the resource; its association with significant persons, events, or patterns in history or prehistory; its engineering, artistic, or architectural values; or its information potential relative to important research questions in history or prehistory. Prehistoric resources are most often evaluated under Criterion d, for their potential to yield information important to studies ofprehistory. Significant information potential in a prehistoric site requires that the site contain intact cultural deposits or discrete activity areas that can be securely 3 associated with a temporal period or named cultural group. The potential for intact deposits or cultural/temporal associations may be inferred from surface evidence of cultural features or undisturbed Ilolocene deposits, and the presence of temporally or culturally diagnostic artifacts. Ilistoric resources may be evaluated under any of the Criteria. However, in the absence of structural features or documented association with significant historic events or important contributions of persons significant in history, historical resources are evaluated under essentially the same criteria as prehistoric resources. Based on information available from files searches and previous research experience in the area, MAC anticipated that both prehistoric and historic cultural resources could be present within the current project area. The area is close to the Colorado River which would sustain wildlife and plant resources that could be exploited. The region has outcrops of sandstone bedrock which could provide shelter for short-term campsites. Recorded prehistoric sites are open and sheltered camps, open lithic scatters, and many isolated finds. Recorded historic resources in the region are trails or unpaved roads, homesteads, and camps. Field Methods Standard field methods were used for block and linear surveys. The 40 acre block was centered on the proposal well ccnterstake. When possible, the arca was inventoried by walking parallel transccts spaced no more than 20 meters apart. Slopes greater than 30% were not systematically inventoried. The proposed access/pipeline route was inventoried using two zig-zag pedestrian transects, one on each side of the proposed pipeline/access centerline, for a 150 foot corridor. When cultural materials were diseovcrcd, standard transects were temporarily halted and the immediate vicinity of the find was more intensively investigated in order to determine the nature and extent of the resource. Sites are defined as five or more artifacts or a feature, structure or trail, or any combination of these elements meeting OAHP criteria in a discrete location that is believed to represent the locus of patterned human activity. Isolated finds are four or fewer artifacts without evidence of, or potential for, additional cultural materials or features in the immediate vicinity. Resources were plotted on the appropriate 7.5' USGS quadrangle with the aid of topographic features and a handheld GPS receiver (set to UTM meters, NAD 27), and recorded on the appropriate OAI IP site form. If a site was encountered, it was sketched and photographed. No artifacts were collected. Results and Management Recommendations The conditions in the field were considered acceptable, affecting neither methods nor results. During this survey two isolated finds and one site were newly recorded. Isolated finds, by definition, are not eligible for the NRHP. The resource locations are shown in Appendix A (not for public distribution). Cultural resource forms for these resources are included in Appendix B (under separate cover). 4 5GF3549 This site is a sparse historic trash dump located in a 60 m X 41 m area on an open sagebrush mesa top that slopes very gently to the north on High Mesa. Most of the site is to the south of an east -west trending two -track paralleled on the south side by a small, modern irrigation ditch. A small portion of the site extends into an existing, disturbed buried pipeline corridor north of the two -track. Finally, there is a 3 -inch aboveground pipeline that passes the southern site boundary from northwest to southeast. The historic artifacts include various glass shards (amethyst, green, aqua, amber, and clear), one square nail, one round nail, five pieces of an old iron stove, one .22 caliber rifle casing, one .30 caliber shell casing, 11 hole in cap cans, one rectangular can, one condensed milk can, and one friction lid. There are also two miscellaneous pieces of wire and a metal strap fragrnent from a barrel hoop. In addition to the historic scatter, the site also includes a small prehistoric component consisting of a small white shell bead and a stage 3 biface of pink chert within 50 em of one another. These prehistoric artifacts are approximately22 meters east-southeast ofthe PVC site datum, outside the historic scatter. The vegetation consists of sagebrush and various short grasses. The aeolian and residual deposition is shallow and deflated. The northern portion of the site has experienced heavy disturbance from use of the two -track and construction of the irrigation ditch and buried pipeline. The proposed access/pipeline route for the P11-25-7-96 well location follows the two -track. MAC recommends this site as not eligible for the NRHP. The historic artifact assemblage consists of only residential refuse, with no visible structures or foundations in the immediate vicinity. The debris is also widely scattered and there is no indication of a formal dump or trash pit with the possibility of intact deposition. The modern irrigation ditch running through the site indicates a sediment depth of at least 50 cm, but the ditch also revealed no buried trash or cultural horizon. Moreover, the depositional setting also suggests that there is no potential for intact buried prehistoric cultural materials and it is unlikely that further investigations would result in significant information about the area's history or prehistory. In short, MAC recommends that this site lacks integrity and research potential. No further archaeological investigations are recommended for 5GF3549. 5GF3628 Isolated find 5GF3628 is located on the northern edge of the finger ridge proj ecting northwest from High Mesa. This prehistoric isolated find consists of a single tertiary flake of a tan siltimudstone. 5GF3629 Isolated find 50F3629 is located on the top of the finger ridge projecting northwest from High Mesa. This prehistoric isolated find consists of a single tertiary flake of a greenish colored, fine-grained quartzite. 5 Summary and Conclusions MAC of Eagle, Colorado conducted a Class III cultural resource inventory of EnCanaOil and Gas (USA) Inc.'s proposed Parachute PH -25-7-96 wellpad, access, and pipeline development in Garfield County, Colorado. Inventory resulted in discovery and documentation of two isolated finds (50F3628 and 5GF3629) and one site (5GF3549). isolated finds by definition are not eligible for the National Register of Historic Places. Site 5GF3549 is recommended by MAC as not eligible for the NRHP and a finding of no historic properties is recommended for the project area as staked at the time of this survey. References Cited Husband, M. B. 1984 Colorado Plateau Country Historic Context_ State Historical Society of Colorado, Denver. Reed, A. D. and M. D. Metcalf 1999 Colorado Prehistory: A Context for the Northern Colorado River Basin Colorado Council of Professional Archaeologists, Denver. Tweto, 0. 1979 Geologic Map of Colorado. U.S. Geological Survey, Denver, CO. Appendix A: Resource Location Map (not for public distribution) 5056 j- Encana Oil and Gas (USA) Inc. Parachute P1125-7-96 well and access/pipeline development Garfield County, Colorado 0 0.5 1 Miles , 4. • •• , • _ • ,. .. 0 1 11/4.__ ., t5:rqt ‘1,. • - — 4:— i ..-• •-,' L - .,• •.,.,.•• .-.. • . . ,..•-•,-_,-,,,..-....., , f ..,---,..,7-..:,•‘- :. 4 c,., • • •••• • . , '• (1 - ..; cCL1 ••= .egend anterstake survey block access/pipeline corridor BLM private site isolated find tes ,gt :4as:„ - unify; • e-et•we-" _et'At fl= Appendix B: OAHP Forms (not for public distribution; under separate cover)