SU0013451 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

BUCKEYE RANCH ( 4- 1-92 ) 3 that the portion of the "RIVER SITE" identified within the project has very little river frontage compared to the "LAKE SITE" . In addition the location of site 11/4/91-1 is closer in relationship to the formerly recorded sites on the south shore of Tracy Lake than that portion of the "LAKE SITE" along the Mokelumne River . what was the rationale for recording C76 unidentified cultural resources along the Mokelumne River and lumping them with several cultural resources along the lake shore into one site . It is also evident that anyone living within the project boundaries would have made frequent trips to the river and/or the lake , probably on a daily basis . Thus the designation lake and river probably have little interpretative meaning in regard to the cultural resources within the boundaries- of the project . The boundary of the "LAKE SITE" , as shown on the site record prepared by Mills and Associates , only touches the periphery of a major midden deposit which contains two large depressions that probably represent the location of former ceremonial structures . On the March 18 . 1992 visit Dwight Dutschke of the Amador Tribal Council said these depressions fit well within the range of dance houses used by the Miwok. These are two of the most significant C77 archaeological features within the proposed project and they are not mentioned by the consulting archaeologists . The midden at this location is well developed, very dark brown , friable , and abundant shell , baked clay and some obsidian was evident on the surface of the deposit . The consulting archaeologists do not provide any description or detailed map of this midden deposit even though it is not contiguous with any of their other " identified" features associated with the LAKE SITE" . It is also surprising that they do not make mention of the other two large structural depressions that might also represent ceremonial activities . In the short statement describing the fieldwork methodology the archaeological consultants indicated that they covered the project lands in transects with 10 to 20 meters between each transect in a survey for cultural resources . This resulted in the discovery of two additional sites . It is clear that they either did n9t . cover all of theproj c� as statedd 1� tiet raft environmental impact report or they edi not tin a o e sites . Extensive addit ,. onal prehistoric cultural resources , not located by the Mills and Associates consulting archaeologists , C78 were found during the two visits to the project dur ng January 1992 by this reviewer . High phosphates , presence of carbonates , pH of 7 . 5 in an area normally acidic, dark brown friable soil , and a baked clay object with several human finger prints clearly indicate that a significant late prehistoric site and other cultural resources went unrecorded. Many of these deposits are along the south shore line of South Tracy Lake and correspond to locations of previously recorded sites and even one location- identified by Angelo Brovelli on some of the maps included in Attachment C of the Draft Report "Archaeological Field Investigation Buckeye . Ranch Project Phase I Study" which was prepared by the consulting archaeologists . January 1992 Field Visit by Professor Jerald J . Johnson The proposed Buckeye Ranch project was visited on January 3 , 1992 C79 between approximately 10 : 00 A.M. to 2 : 30 P . M. Visibility was good and even though green grasses and forbs were growing III-83