SU0013451 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Jones & Stokes Associates will perform the following tasks in reviewing the draft habitat management plan: ■ assess the plan's feasibility, implementation schedule, and thoroughness; ■ coordinate with Pamela Muick, the principal author of the plan, to review and comment on the plan's organizational structure and coverage in its early stages; and ■ provide input to Ms. Muick on presettlement land use and wildlife management. CHAPTER 13. CULTURAL RESOURCES Jones & Stokes Associates has retained the services of Peak & Associates to prepare the cultural resources analysis of the project. The proposed project lies in an area of known sensitivity for the presence of prehistoric cultural resources. The project site was first examined by archaeologists in the 1920s, who recorded four sites (sites 43, 44, 45, and 47) in the project area (Schenck and Dawson 1929). A records search, conducted through the North Central California Information Center of the California Archeological Inventory, revealed that at least eight sites are known within the project boundaries (CA-Sjo-11, -13, -15, 43, -44, -45, 47, and -147). Four of these sites are the same sites reported by Schenck and Dawson. A map on file in Peak & Associates' office indicates that other sites may have been noted but not formally recorded during a nonsystematic survey conducted by John Beck in the late 1960s. Site locations differ between the master maps held by the Information Center and Peak & Associates, creating uncertainty as to the actual location of the previously recorded sites. Additionally, site records identify unrecorded sites reported by Mr. Brovelli, the former landowner. Under the CEQA, public agencies are charged with the responsibility of trying to avoid damaging effects on archeological resources whenever feasible. This study is the first step in this process and consists of identifying and recording the prehistoric and historic sites that are present within the boundaries of the project. In situ preservation of a site is the preferred method of avoiding damage to resources. If a project may affect a resource, the lead agency must determine whether the effect on the environment may be significant. The effect is considered significant if the project would affect a site deemed "important". For the purposes of CEQA, an "important archaeological resource" is one that: A. is associated with an event or person of: 1. recognized significance in California or American history or 2. recognized scientific importance in prehistory; III-18