heritage impact assessment bar/brandvlei_dbar_appg3_hia.… · cellular: 082 321 0172 email: ......

HERITAGE IMPACT ASSESSMENT

PROPOSED CULTIVATION OF AGRICULTURAL

LAND AT THE BRANDVLEI CORRECTIONAL

CENTER NEAR WORCESTER WESTERN CAPE

HWC Case No. 131030RN01E

Assessment conducted under Section 38 (3) of the National Heritage

Resource Act (No. 25 of 1999)

Prepared for:

BOLAND ENVIRO Att: Ms Marizanne Vos

PO Box 250 Worcester

6849 E-mail: [email protected]

Applicant:

DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONAL SERVICES

By

Jonathan Kaplan

Agency for Cultural Resource Management 5 Stuart Road, Rondebosch, 7700

Ph/Fax: 021 685 7589 Cellular: 082 321 0172

Email: [email protected]

NOVEMBER

2013

Heritage Impact Assessment proposed Brandvlei agricultural development near Worcester

ACRM 2013 1

Executive summary ACRM was appointed to conduct a Heritage Impact Assessment (HIA) for the proposed cultivation of about 80 ha of agricultural land at the Brandvlei Correctional Centre near Worcester in the Western Cape. The HIA forms part of the Basic Assessment process that is being conducted by Boland Enviro. The applicant (Department of Correctional Services) intends expanding the existing agricultural footprint at the Brandvlei Prison by developing 10 blocks of land for the cultivation of feed crops (oats). Existing agricultural development at the prison includes a dairy, beef farming, vegetables, fruit and oats. The aim of the project is to increase the production capacity of the dairy and meat farming enterprise, in order to ensure a consistent supply to the prison and to prisons in the surrounding region. As required, a Notification of Intent to Develop (NID) was submitted to Heritage Western Cape (HWC) for comment, who requested that a HIA, consisting of an archaeological, study must be done. A 2-day survey was undertaken by ACRM in October in which the following observations were made: Archaeology A very small number of isolated, Early and Middle Stone Age tools were encountered during the survey, although it must be mentioned that most of the proposed landholdings are covered in very dense vegetation, resulting in low archaeological visibility. However, indications are that the proposed development will not have an impact of great significance on the archaeological heritage and that the proposed 10 blocks of agricultural land do not constitute a sensitive or threatened archaeological landscape. Graves Ten graves were recorded (in Block 6) during the survey, completely hidden among dense Renosterveld vegetation. The cluster of graves, appear to be located just outside the western boundary of the proposed development site. The graves, most likely that of Kweekraal Farm workers (before the farm was acquired by Correctional Services), comprise large sandstone boulders which have been intentionally stacked. No noticeable headstone or footstones are present, and no grave goods were found, but it is clear that the graves are quite old, as many of the rocks are covered in lichen. The graves are quite close to each other suggesting they may be part of a small informal cemetery. According to a spokesperson for the prison, several farm workers graves (on the farm Kweekraal) were apparently destroyed, when agricultural development was first initiated at the prison in the late 1970s. With regard to the proposed development, the following recommendations are made:

1. The project is deemed to be viable. 2. No archaeological mitigation is required.


ACRM 2013 2

3. Graves in Block 6 must not be damaged, or destroyed during vegetation clearing operations, even though they appear to be located outside the boundary of the proposed development site. A buffer of at least 10m must be established around each grave. Alternatively, the graves, which are relatively close to each other, should be fenced off. If possible, the Department of Correctional Services should try and establish who the graves may have belonged too, and if there are any surviving family members living on surrounding farms (before Kweekraal was purchased by the National Government), who may have claim `ownership’ of the graves.

4. Monitoring of vegetation clearing operations for archaeological heritage is not

required.

5. Should any (more) graves, or unmarked human remains be uncovered or exposed during vegetation clearing operations or excavations and preparation of the site for cultivation, these must immediately be reported to the archaeologist (Jonathan Kaplan 082 321 0172) or Heritage Western Cape (Troy Smuts 021 483 9692)


ACRM 2013 3

Table of Contents

Page Executive summary 1 1. INTRODUCTION 4 2. HERITAGE LEGISLATION 6 3. TERMS OF REFERENCE 6 4. DESCRIPTION OF THE RECEIVING ENVIRONMENT 6 4.1 Block 1 6 4.2 Block 2 8 4.4 Block 3 9 4.5 Block 4 12 4.6 Block 5 13 4.7 Block 6 14 4.8 block 7 15 4.9 Block 8 16 4.10 Block 9 17 4.11 Block 10 19

5. STUDY APPROACH 5.1 Method of survey 20 5.2 Constraints and limitations 20 5.3 Identification of potential risks 20 5.4 Results of the desk top study 20

6. RESULTS OF THE SURVEY 21 6.1 Block 1 21 6.2 Block 2 21 6.3 Block 3 21 6.4 Block 4 21 6.5 Block 5 21 6.6 Block 6 21 6.7 Block 7 21 6.8 Block 8 21 6.9 Block 9 21 6.10 Block 10 21 6.11 Significance of the archaeological remains 21 6.12 Graves 23 7. IMPACT STATEMENT 26

8. CONCLUSION 26 9. RECOMMENDATIONS 26 10. REFERENCES 27


ACRM 2013 4

1. INTRODUCTION ACRM was commissioned by the Department of Correctional Services to conduct a Heritage Impact Assessment (HIA) for the proposed Brandvlei agricultural development near Worcester (Breede Valley Municipality) in the Western Cape (Figures 1 & 2). The HIA forms part of the Basic Assessment process that is being conducted by Boland Enviro. The Department of Correctional Services manages existing agricultural production within the Brandvlei Correctional Centre which is located on the south western shore of the Kwaggaskloof Dam. The centre is a maximum, medium and youth offender facility established in the late 1970s. Agricultural development at the prison started in the late 1970's/early 1980s (Duncan Jackson, pers. comm.) and the prison currently operates a dairy, and produces milk, red meat, vegetables and fruit. In order to increase agricultural production, additional landholdings are required for the cultivation of oats for grazing. Ten blocks of land have therefore been identified for further agricultural production (Figure 3). The total area of the land to be developed is about 80 ha. The aim of the project is to increase the production capacity of the dairy and meat farming enterprise in order to ensure a consistent supply to the prison and to prisons in the surrounding region. As required, a Notification of Intent to Develop (NID) was submitted to Heritage Western Cape (HWC) for comment, who requested (Case No. 131030RN01E) that a HIA, consisting of an archaeological study must be done.

Figure 1. Regional locality map. Proposed cultivation of agricultural land at the Brandvlei Correctional Centre, near Worcester. Red block indicates the study area

N


ACRM 2013 5

Figure 2. Google Earth map showing Brandvlei Correctional Centre in relation to Worcester and Rawsonville.

Figure 3. Locality map indicating proposed 10 land parcels to be developed

N


ACRM 2013 6

2. HERITAGE LEGISLATION The National Heritage Resources Act (Act No. 25 of 1999) makes provision for a compulsory Heritage Impact Assessment (HIA) when an area exceeding 5000 m² is being developed. This is to determine if the area contains heritage sites and to take the necessary steps to ensure that they are not damaged or destroyed during development 3. TERMS OF REFERENCE The terms of reference for the archaeological study were: • To determine whether there are likely to be any important archaeological sites or

remains that might be impacted by the proposed development; • To assess the sensitivity and conservation significance of archaeological

sites/remains; • To identify measures to protect any valuable archaeological sites/remains that may

be impacted by the proposed development 4. DESCRIPTION OF THE RECEIVING ENVIRONMENT Brandvlei Correctional Centre is located on the south western shore of the Kwaggaskloof Dam, about 16kms south west of Worcester, and about 11kms south east of Rawsonville, in the Breede River Valley. The maximum, medium and youth correctional facility was established in the mid-1970s, while agricultural production on the farm commenced in the early 1980s. Currently the prison has a dairy, and produces red meat, vegetables, feed (oats) for grazing, and fruit (peaches, guavas and prunes – some of which are dried). In order to increase the overall production capacity at the facility, 10 Blocks of land have been identified for cultivation of oats (Figure 4). 4.1 Block 1

The proposed site is located immediately to the east of the existing dairy. According to Mr. Duncan Jackson (pers. comm.), only about 2-3 ha of the estimated 10ha parcel of land is suitable for cultivation of oats, as much of the proposed development site comprises wetland and is very water logged in parts. The proposed development site is covered in very dense kweek grass, Lupens, Restio and natural grasses on a mostly sandy substrate. The proposed site is slightly elevated in the south where a number of alien Blue gum trees have been removed (Figures 5-7). There are no significant landscape features on the proposed site. Surrounding land use is vacant agricultural land and the above-mentioned prison dairy. The Kwaggaskloof dam is located about 1km to the east.


ACRM 2013 7

Figure 4.

Figure 5. Block 1. View facing north west

Block 1

Block 2

Block 3

Block 4

Block 5

Block 6

Block 7

Block 8

Block 9

Block 10

N

Kwaggaskloof Dam


ACRM 2013 8


Figure 7. Block 1. View facing east. Brandvlei Dam is in the foreground

4.2 Block 2

The proposed site is located directly alongside the main gravel road that connects all the proposed land parcels. The site slopes steeply to the east and is very densely vegetated with a mix of Sand Olives and Renosterveld, while large number of alien trees has recently been removed. The upper slopes are very stony and gravelly, while the lower slopes are sandy and carpeted in grasses and Restio (Figures 8 & 9). A densely vegetated drainage channel runs alongside the southern boundary of the proposed development site. Existing infrastructure includes two small earth dams. A portion of the proposed site between the dams has been cultivated in the past. The north western corner is very, degraded as a result of construction of one of the dams. There are no significant landscape features on the proposed site and the surrounding land use is agriculture.


ACRM 2013 9

Figure 8. Block 2. View facing east. The Brandvlei Dam is in the background

Figure 9 4.3 Block 3 According to Mr. Duncan Jackson (pers. comm.), most of the proposed development site was previously covered in dense alien vegetation (mainly Rooikranz) of which a large portion has since been removed. However, there are large patches of ground in the northwest of the site which are still densely vegetated, and much of the area across the northern portion is covered in extremely thick Restio grasses. The southern portion of the site is also covered in Restio, while the central portion, through which a drainage channel run is covered in dead alien vegetation, including tree trunks, branches, twigs and leaf litter. Apart from the cultivated field in the south west, most of the proposed development is still densely vegetated (Figures 10-15). The substrate is mainly sand and is ideal for the cultivation of oats. There are no significant landscape features on the proposed site and the surrounding land use is agriculture, including large tracts of vacant land. An Eskom substation is located about a kilometer to the east, while an, Eskom servitude is located fairly close to the site in the north east.


ACRM 2013 10

Figure 10. Block 3. View facing north west. Note the thick Restio

Figure 11. Block 3. View facing north east



ACRM 2013 11

Figure 13. Block 3. View facing north west. Note the dense Restio

Figure 14. Block 3. View facing south

Figure 15. Block 3. View facing north. Brandvlei Dam is in the background


ACRM 2013 12

4.4 Block 4 The proposed development site is located east of an orchard of fruit trees and west of some cultivated fields (part of Block 3). The relatively small parcel of land is mostly covered in very dense Renosterveld, while the south western portion comprises old fields that have not been worked for some years (Figures 16 & 17). Piles of stone have been cleared from these old fields, where a few ESA tools were noted. There are no significant landscape features on the proposed site and the surrounding land use is agriculture.

Figure 16. Block 4. View facing north east with the dam in the distance



ACRM 2013 13

4.5 Block 5 The proposed development site is located immediately to the south east of Block 4. Most of the site comprises cultivated lands, but a small strip along the western boundary is undeveloped and covered in Restio grasses, ground cover and Rooikrantz, underlain by soft, loose sands (Figures 19 & 20). A few small tracks and footpaths occur here as well. There are no significant landscape features on the site and the surrounding land use is agriculture.


Figure 20. Block 5. View facing north west. Arrow indicates the strip of undeveloped land


ACRM 2013 14

4.6 Block 6 This triangular-shaped piece of ground is located directly alongside the gravel road, and is covered in mostly extremely dense Renosterveld vegetation (Figure 21). The site is fairly flat, but slopes gently from west to east. The northern portion is covered in very thick Restio grasses, while a larger drainage channel that cuts across the northern portion is very densely vegetated (Figure 22). The substrate in the north is sandy, while the soils across the southern portion are quite gravelly and compact. There are several test pits that have been excavated on the site, while a track has also been cleared with a bush cutter. There are no significant landscape features on the proposed site, and surrounding land use is agriculture. A Telkom line runs alongside the western boundary of the proposed development site.


Figure 22. Block 6. View facing east


ACRM 2013 15

4.7 Block 7 The proposed site is situated alongside the main gravel road and is bounded by cultivated fields to the north and the west. Across the northern portion, the proposed development site is covered in dense Renosterveld, while the southern and south eastern (degraded) portion is covered in thick grasses, shrubs and ground cover. A few patches of sand occur in places. A large stand of Blue Gums has been cut down in the south west alongside a drainage channel and many dead tree stumps, branches, and leaf litter cover this portion of the site which is almost inaccessible (Figures 23-25). The vegetation alongside the drainage channel is extremely dense. A line of old Oak trees occurs here as well. Apart from a few small outcroppings of rock, there are no significant landscape features on the proposed site. Surrounding land use is agriculture. There are sections of the site that are also quite waterlogged.

Figure 23. Block 7. View facing south west



ACRM 2013 16


4.8 Block 8

Block 8 is long, narrow strip of land that slopes steeply from west to east. The proposed development site is covered in dense Renosterveld vegetation and some Restio grasses, while the substrate comprises gravel and stone (Figures 26 & 27). A stream alongside the southern boundary drains into a dam alongside the road. There is a thick patch of Protea in the upper south western corner of the site. Apart from a few small outcroppings of quartzite there are no significant landscape features on the site. An Eskom powerline cuts down and alongside the proposed site. Surrounding land use is agriculture and a small (old road) quarry.



ACRM 2013 17

Figure 27. Block 8. View facing east. 4.9 Block 9

The proposed site is located directly alongside the main gravel road and slopes fairly steeply from west to east. The southern (dog leg) portion has recently been cleared of large alien Blue Gum trees, and is covered in dead wood, tree trunks, branches and leaf litter. A small stream is also situated along this portion of the site, bordered by fields of oats and fruit orchards in the south. Pioneer Restio and other grasses have colonized this area which is still densely vegetated (Figures 28-31). The substrate is sandy and there is little visible surface stone in this area. Several small tracks intersect this area, while a number of deep sandy test pits have also been excavated. The strip of land alongside the gravel road is covered in very thick Renosterveld vegetation. There is an extremely thick and large patch of Protea on the upper central slopes. A few areas alongside the road have been opened with a bush cutter, but is otherwise, virtually inaccessible. Two deep excavated drainage channels discharge into a dam on the northern boundary of the proposed site. There are no significant landscape features and the surrounding land use is agriculture – fields of oats, fruit trees, and centre pivots. A Telkom line runs alongside the eastern portion adjacent the gravel road.



ACRM 2013 18

Figure 29. Block 9. View facing west

Figure 30. Block 9. View facing north west alongside the gravel road

Figure 31. Block 9. View facing south alongside the gravel road


ACRM 2013 19

4.10 Block 10

The proposed development site slopes from west to east and is covered with extremely dense Renosterveld, and is mostly inaccessible (Figures 32 & 33). A few cattle tracks intersect the site in the north, while a several areas have been opened up with a bush cutter in order to excavate a number of test pits. The substrate is mainly soft sand but some gravel, clay and stone does occur in places. There is a small stream on both the northern and southern boundary of the proposed site which drains into a dam in the north eastern corner. These stream areas are infested with Sand Olives, grasses and other riparian vegetation. There is much dead wood and timber lying around where aliens have also been cleared. There are no significant landscape features on the proposed site, although a few small outcroppings of sandstone occur in places. The surrounding land use is agriculture (oats and grazing)

Figure 32. Block 10. View facing south west

Figure 33. Block 10. View facing west


ACRM 2013 20

5. STUDY APPROACH

5.1 Method A site visit took place on the 17th and 18th November, 2013. Archaeological occurrence located during the study were plotted using a hand held GPS device set on the map datum WGS 84 (refer to Table 1 in Appendix I). A track path of the survey was also created (refer to Figures 50-57 in Appendix II). 5.2 Constraints and limitations While the archaeologist was able to gain access to the proposed development sites (i.e. Blocks 1-10), most of the affected landholdings were very densely vegetated, resulting in low to zero archaeological visibility. 5.3 Identification of potential risks Early and Middle Stone Age implements may be uncovered during vegetation clearing operations, but indications are that the numbers will be very low. The result of the study suggests that there are no significant archaeological risks associated with the proposed project. A number of farm worker graves (possibly an old informal cemetery) were identified in Block 6, and these will have to be protected during implementation of the project. 5.4 Results of the desk top study More than a dozen studies have been undertaken by the archaeologist in Worcester, Rawsonville, Goudini, Slanghoek and on surrounding farms in the region (see for example Kaplan 2012a, b, 2011, 2010a, b, c, d, 2009, 2008a, b, 2006a, b, c, 2005, 2004, 2003, 2002, 2001). Most of the remains encountered during these studies comprise stone implements assigned to the Early Stone Age (ESA), and were recovered from highly transformed landscapes such as vineyards, grazing lands and wheat fields, and other degraded areas such as river gravels, borrow pits and quarries. Extensive scatters of Middle Stone Age (MSA) tools have also been recorded on several farms in the Breede Valley region, and appear to dominate landscapes where little or no disturbance has taken place (Kaplan 2012a, b, 2011). Later Stone Age (LSA) sites appear to be less visible in the region, but evidence for the LSA has been found near Worcester, Goudini and Rawsonville (Kaplan 2012a, 2011, 2010b, 2006d, e). Rock paintings have been recorded at the Goudini Spa (Kaplan 2003), alongside the Brandvlei/Kwaggaskloof Dam (Yates 2004), and in the Slanghoek Valley (personnel observation). An in-situ scatter of LSA implements that included cores, hammerstones, anvils, flakes and a pecked metal disc were recorded on a farm south west of the R60 (Kaplan 2012a) and pottery found on a farm alongside the R60 (Kaplan 2011), might confirm the presence of Hassequa Khoekhoe Herders who were known to have seasonally occupied the Worcester area during the late 17th Century (Martin 2006). A possible Khoekhoen herder campsite was also recorded alongside the Modderrivier during a study for a proposed wind energy farm about 3kms south of the Kwaggaskloof Dam (Kaplan 2010d).


ACRM 2013 21

6. RESULTS OF THE SURVEY 6.1 Block 1 No archaeological heritage was encountered in Block 1. 6.2 Block 2 No archaeological heritage was encountered in Block 2. 6.3 Block 3 No archaeological heritage was encountered in Block 3. 6.4 Block 4 A few ESA tools were found among piles of stone cleared from the surrounding fields. These comprise a round core, large flakes, and several flaked/irregular chunks. All the tools are made on river quartzite (Figures 34 & 35). 6.5 Block 5 No archaeological heritage was encountered in Block 5. 6.6 Block 6 One MSA quartzite flake (074) was found in a bush cut path, and one ESA quartzite flake (078) was encountered, in Block 6 (Figure 36). 6.7 Block 7 One small piece of Annular ware was found alongside the vegetated stream in Block 7. 6.8 Block 8 A large, weathered & retouched quartzite chunk (072) was found in Block 8 (Figure 37). 6.9 Block 9 A snapped MSA weathered blade/flake (071) was found in Block 9 (Figure 38). 6.10 Block 10 One ESA quartzite flake (066) was found alongside the small dam, one ESA quartzite core was found in a test pit, and one ESA quartzite (broken) core was found near the archaeologist’s vehicle (Figure 39). 6.11 Significance of the archaeological heritage The very small numbers and the mostly isolated context in which they were found mean that the archaeological remains are rated as having low (Grade 3C) significance.

Figure 34. ESA tools among piles of stone in Block 4

Figure 35. ESA core (077) in Block 4. Scale is in cm

Figure 36. ESA flake in Block 6 (078) Scale is in cm

Figure 37. ESA retouched chunk (072) - Block 8. Scale in cm

Figure 38. MSA flake (071) in Block 9. Scale in cm

Figure 39. ESA tools in Block 10. Scale is in cm

6.12 Graves Ten graves were recorded in Block 6, completely hidden among dense Renosterveld vegetation (Figures 40-49). The graves are located just outside the western boundary of the proposed development site (refer to Figure 53 in Appendix II) and most likely belong to that of farm workers (from Kweekraal) before the farm was acquired by the National Government. Each grave comprises large sandstone boulders which have been intentionally stacked and arranged, although some appear to have collapsed. The graves measure about 2.2m x 1.3m. No headstone or footstones were visible, and no grave goods were found. It is clear that the graves are quite old, as many of the boulders are covered in lichen. The graves are also quite close to each other suggesting they may be part of small informal cemetery that once existed on the farm. According to Mr. Duncan Jackson (pers. comm.), several farm workers graves (on the farm Kweekraal) were destroyed, when agricultural development first commenced at the prison in the late 1970s.

Figure 40. Grave (075) facing north.

Figure 41. Grave (079) facing south.



Figure 48. Grave (086) facing south

Figure 49. Grave (087) facing south


ACRM 2013 26

7. IMPACT STATEMENT Indications are the proposed development will not have an impact of great significance on the archaeological heritage. 8. CONCLUSION The HIA has identified no significant impacts to pre-colonial archaeological material that will need to be mitigated prior to proposed development activities. Graves in Block 6 are protected under the National Heritage Resource Act (Act 25 of 1999), and may not be damaged or interfered with. 9. RECOMMENDATIONS With regard to the proposed cultivation of agricultural land at the Brandvlei Correctional Centre, the following recommendations are made:

1. The project is deemed to be viable. 2. No archaeological mitigation is required.

3. Graves in Block 6 must not be damaged, or destroyed during vegetation clearing

operations, even though they appear to be located outside the western boundary of the proposed development site. A buffer of at least 10m must be established around each grave. Alternatively, the graves, which are relatively close to each other, should be fenced off. If possible, the Department of Correctional Services should try and establish who the graves may have belonged too, and if there are any surviving family members living on surrounding farms (before Kweekraal was purchased by the National Government), who may have claim `ownership’ of the graves.

4. Monitoring of vegetation clearing operations for archaeological heritage is not

required.

5. Should any (more) graves, or unmarked human remains be uncovered or exposed during vegetation clearing operations or excavations and preparation of the site for cultivation, these must immediately be reported to the archaeologist (Jonathan Kaplan 082 321 0172) or Heritage Western Cape (Troy Smuts 021 483 9692)


ACRM 2013 27

10. REFERENCES Kaplan, J. 2012a. Heritage Impact Assessment proposed expansion of a free-range chicken facility on Farm 440, Remainder Farm 441 & Farm 478 near Worcester. Report prepared for Boland Enviro. ACRM. Kaplan, J. 2012b. Heritage Impact Assessment proposed development of a chicken broiler facility on Portion 3 of the Farm Moordkuil No. 488, near Worcester. Report prepared for Lieuwe Boonstra Environmental Consultant. ACRM. Kaplan, J. 2011. Archaeological Impact Assessment proposed SANVAL Solar Farm. Report prepared for Boland Enviro. ACRM. Kaplan, J. 2010a. Archaeological assessment of Portion 22 of Farm 386 Wysersdrift Rawsonville Western Cape. Section 24G application. Report prepared for Boland Enviro. ACRM. Kaplan, 2010b. Archaeological scoping study proposed prospecting for gravel on various farms in the Worcester area. Report prepared for Site Plan Consulting. ACRM Kaplan, J. 2010c. Archaeological Impact Assessment proposed development of two parcels of agricultural land on Portion of Farm 417 in Rawsonville. Report prepared for Boland Enviro. ACRM Kaplan, J. 2010d. Archaeological Impact Assessment of a proposed wind energy facility on Portions of Farm Modderrivier 49, Draaivlei 492 and Quaggaskloof 493 and Doornrivier 491 Worcester. Report prepared for DJ Environmental Consultants. ACRM Kaplan, J. 2009. Archaeological Impact Assessment proposed Aan de Doorns Sports Field and Community Hall. Report prepared for Boland Enviro. ACRM. Kaplan, J, 2008a. Archaeological Impact Assessment proposed sand mine on the Farm Modderrivier 499 (Remainder of Portion 8) Worcester. Report prepared for Settlement Planning Services. ACRM. Kaplan, J. 2008b. Archaeological scoping proposed development Quaggaskloof: preparation of a conceptual development framework plan. Report prepared for Urban Dynamics Western Cape. ACRM. Kaplan, J. 2006a. Phase 1 AIA, Erf 217 Rawsonville. Report prepared for Boland Enviro. ACRM Kaplan, J. 2006b. Phase 1 AIA, Erf 218 Rawsonville. Report prepared for Anel Blignaut Environmental Consultants. ACRM Kaplan, J. 2006c. Phase 1 Archaeological Impact Assessment proposed development Worcester Island (Portion of Remainder of Erf 18798) Worcester. Report prepared for SRK Consulting Engineers and Scientists. ACRM Kaplan, J. 2004. Archaeological scoping proposed Worcester Waterfront development. Report prepared for Chand Environmental Consultants. ACRM.


ACRM 2013 28

Kaplan, J. 2003. Archaeological scan proposed expansion of existing Goudini Spa Resort. Report prepared for Boland Conservation Services. ACRM. Kaplan, J. 200a. Phase 1 Archaeological Impact Assessment proposed N1/N2 Winelands Toll Highway Project. Report prepared for Crowther Campbell & Associates. Agency for Cultural Resource Management. Martin, R. 2006. Heritage Sensitivity Assessment and Notice of Intent to Develop: Altona (Portion 22 and Remainder of Portion 18 of the Farm Hartebeesrivier No. 506, as well as Erven 12963 and 12964, Worcester). Report prepared for SRK Consulting Engineers and Scientists. Ron Martin Heritage Consulting Yates, R. 2004. A Heritage Management Plan for Quaggaskloof Site 1 on Portion 1 of Farm 495 Worcester. Iziko: South African Museum.


ACRM 2013 29

Appendix I

Spreadsheet of waypoints and description of archaeological finds


ACRM 2013 30

Site Name of Farm Lat/long Description of archaeological finds Kweekraal 500 Block 10 066 S33 50.271 E19 22.596 ESA quartzite flake alongside dam 067 S33 50.296 E19 22.581 ESA core in test pit 068 S33 50.220 E19 22.635 ESA quartzite broken core near bakkie Block 9 071 S33 49.689 E19 22.865 Snapped MSA weathered blade/flake Block 8 072 S33 49.472 E19 22.840 Large ESA retouched, weathered quartzite chunk Block 7 073 S33 49.243 E19 22.854 Small fragment of Annular ware Block 6 074 S33 48.966 E19 22.999 MSA quartzite flake in bush cut track 075 S33 49.026 E19 23.023 Grave 078 S33 48.921 E19 22.937 ESA flake 079 S33 48.971 E19 22.982 Grave 080 S33 48.984 E19 22.989 Grave 081 S33 48.988 E19 22.989 Grave 082 S33 49.004 E19 23.000 Grave 083 S33 49.007 E19 22.986 Grave 084 S33 48.991 E19 22.982 Grave 085 S33 48.983 E19 22.977 Grave 086 S33 48.981 E19 22.975 Grave 087 S33 48.969 E19 22.965 Grave Block 4 077 S33 48.542 E19 23.234 ESA core on pile of cleared stone

Table 1 Spreadsheet of waypoints and description of finds


ACRM 2013 31

Appendix II

Track paths and waypoints


ACRM 2013 32

Figure 50. Block 1.

Figure 51. Block 2

N

N


ACRM 2013 33

Figure 52. Blocks 3-5

Figure 53. Block 6

Block 3

Block 5

Block 4

N

N


ACRM 2013 34

Figure 54. Block 7

Figure 55. Block 8

N

N


ACRM 2013 35

Figure 56. Block 9

Figure 57. Block 10

N

N

heritage impact assessment bar/brandvlei_dbar_appg3_hia.… · cellular: 082 321 0172 email: ......

Documents