stage 1 archaeological assessment sumac ridge wind farm...

Stage 1 Archaeological Assessment

Sumac Ridge Wind Farm

Geographic Township of Manvers

City of Kawartha Lakes, Ontario

Submitted to

Ortech Power

804 Southdown Road, Mississauga, On, L5J 2Y4

and

The Ontario Ministry of Tourism and Culture

Prepared by

584 Oxford Street East, London, ON N5Y 3J1 Phone: (519) 641-7222 Fax: (519) 641-7220

Archaeological License Number: P083 Our File: 2010-085

PIF Number: P083-061-2010

October 2010

Timmins Martelle Heritage Consultants Inc., Stage 1 Archaeological Assessment,

Sumac Ridge Wind Farm, Manvers Township, City of Kawartha Lakes, ON ii ____________________________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________________________

Table of Contents

List of Figures ii TMHC Personnel iii Acknowledgements iii Project Summary iv 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1

2.0 PURPOSE 1

3.0 METHODS AND SOURCES OF INFORMATION 3

4.0 STAGE 1 ASSESSMENT 3

4.1 Project Description and Study Area 3 4.2 Physiography, Drainage and Soils 5 4.3 Evaluation of Archaeological Potential: First Peoples Sites 5 4.4 Evaluation of Archaeological Potential: Historic Era Sites 10 4.5 Property Review 15

5.0 SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS 20 References 21 Table 1: Cultural Chronology for Native Settlement

in the City of Kawartha Lakes 6 Appendix A Sumac Ridge Wind Farm, Turbine Layout and Natural Features 23

List of Figures 1: Location of the Subject Property 2 2: Aerial Photo of the Subject Property 4 3: Physiography in the Vicinity of the Subject Property 7 4: Soils on the Subject Property 8 5: Drainage of the Subject Property 9 6: Location of the Subject Property on the 1861 Tremaine Map 13 7: Location of the Subject Property on the 1878 Map of Manvers Township 14 8: Archaeological Potential of the Study Area 16 9: Disturbed area of house and drive, southwest corner, south half of Lot 15, Con. 6 17 10: Overgrown area, northwest corner, south half of Lot 15, Con. 6, looking east 17 11: Disturbed area of farm buildings in southwest corner, Lot 14, Con. 6, looking northwest 17 12: Rocky pasture, south half of Lot 14, Con. 6, looking west 18 13: Disturbed area of house, north half of Lot 14, Con. 6, looking southwest 18 14: Alfalfa field on south half of Lot 14, Con. 6, looking northwest 18 15: Pasture, west part of Lot 14, Con. 7, farmstead in background, looking northeast 19 16: Bean field on Lot 13, Con. 7, looking west 19 17: Bush area on Lot 13, Con. 7 looking west 19


Sumac Ridge Wind Farm, Manvers Township, City of Kawartha Lakes, ON iii ____________________________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________________________

TMHC Personnel

TMHC would like to thank the following staff members who contributed to this project:

Project Coordinators: Peter Timmins, Ph.D (P118)

Arthur Figura (P083)

Field Reconnaissance: Arthur Figura (P083) Steven Van Damme (R274)

Report Contributors: Peter Timmins, Ph.D. John MacDonald, B.A. Sarah Daniels, B.A.

GIS Technician: Noel Grasso Steven Van Damme, B.A.

Acknowledgements

TMHC would like to acknowledge the assistance of the following individuals: Leah Deveaux EA Specialist Ortech Power, Mississauga, Ontario Nadiya Bogush Ortech Power, Mississauga, Ontario Robert von Bitter Archaeological Database Coordinator Ministry of Culture, Toronto, Ontario


Sumac Ridge Wind Farm, Manvers Township, City of Kawartha Lakes, ON iv ____________________________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________________________

Project Summary A Stage 1 archaeological assessment was conducted for a proposed new wind farm located in Manvers Township, southwest of the hamlet of Bethany, Ontario. The Stage 1 assessment forms part of an environmental review for the project under the Environmental Protection Act, Renewable Energy Approvals process (Ontario Reg. 359.09). The purpose of our work is to evaluate possible construction impacts to known or potential archaeological resources within the proposed wind farm lands. A review of the topography, hydrology, soils and both current and past land uses for the property indicated that most of the proposed wind farm lands have potential for either First Peoples and/or historic era archaeological sites according to Ministry of Tourism and Culture criteria.

Any proposed construction on the subject property must be preceded by a Stage 2 archaeological assessment. The lands consist of agricultural, fallow lands, bush lots and residential or farm complexes. Agricultural lands that can be feasibly ploughed will require pedestrian survey conducted at a five metre interval once the fields are ploughed to permit acceptable survey conditions according to Ministry of Tourism and Culture standards and guidelines. Any rocky pasture, scrub lands, wood lots or residential grassed areas that are to be affected by construction must be assessed by shovel testing. All areas to be impacted during construction must be assessed including areas designated for wind turbines and utility installation, machine travel and material storage.

The Ministry of Tourism and Culture is asked to review the information presented in this report and issue a letter concurring with its recommendations. This correspondence should be directed to Leah Deveaux of Ortech Power and copied to Timmins Martelle Heritage Consultants Inc.

Stage 1 Archaeological Assessment


Geographic Township of Manvers

City of Kawartha Lakes, Ontario

1.0 INTRODUCTION A Stage 1 archaeological assessment was conducted for a proposed new wind farm located in Manvers Township, southwest of the hamlet of Bethany, Ontario (Figure 1). Most of the subject lands are currently used for agricultural purposes and will see the installation of wind turbines. The Stage 1 assessment forms part of an environmental review for the project under the Environmental Protection Act, Renewable Energy Approvals process (Ontario Reg. 359.09). The purpose of our work is to evaluate possible construction impacts to known or potential archaeological resources within the proposed wind farm lands.

A field reconnaissance of the property was carried out by on September 9th, 2010, under warm, partly sunny conditions. All archaeological consulting activities were performed under the Professional Archaeological License of Arthur Figura (P083) and in accordance with the “Archaeological Assessment Technical Guidelines” of the Ministry of Tourism and Culture (MCTR 1993). Permission to enter the property to carry out our study was given by Leah Deveaux of Ortech Power on behalf of the landowners.

2.0 PURPOSE

The Ontario Heritage Act makes provisions for the protection and 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 which states:

“development and site alteration shall only be permitted on lands containing archaeological resources or areas of archaeological potential if the significant archaeological resources have been conserved by removal and documentation, or by preservation on site. Where significant archaeological resources must be preserved on site, only development and site alteration which maintain the heritage integrity of the site may be permitted.” (emphasis in the original)

The Environmental Protection Act provides for the protection and conservation of the natural environment. Ontario Reg. 359.09 requires proponents of renewable energy projects to consider whether the project will have an impact to an archaeological resource at the project location through completing an archaeological assessment of the affected lands. The purpose of a Stage 1 archaeological assessment is to determine if there are


Sumac Ridge Wind Farm, Manvers Township, City of Kawartha Lakes, ON 2 ______________________________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________________________

Figure 1: Location of the Subject Property



______________________________________________________________________________________

known cultural resources within the proposed areas of impact or potential for such resources to exist. Subsequently, it can act as a planning tool by identifying areas of concern that, where possible, could be avoided to minimize environmental impact. It is also used to determine the need for a Stage 2 field assessment involving the search for archaeological sites. If significant sites are found, a strategy (usually avoidance, preservation or excavation) must be put forth for their mitigation.

3.0 METHODS AND SOURCES OF INFORMATION

A Stage 1 overview and background study was conducted to gather information about known and potential cultural heritage resources within the study area. Landscape and environmental conditions were reviewed using physiographic, topographic and soils mapping for the area. Early historic maps and historical summaries were consulted and a review of the Provincial registered archaeological sites database was carried out. A review of background documents was supplemented by a preliminary field reconnaissance of the subject property to photo-document existing conditions and highlight significant features within and around the study area that indicate archaeological potential.

When compiled, this information was used to create a summary of the characteristics of the study area to evaluate its archaeological potential. For the Province of Ontario, the Ministry of Tourism and Culture has identified a number of criteria that can be used to determine if an area has archaeological potential. These criteria primarily relate to geographic and cultural-historic features which would have influenced past land and resource use, as well as encouraged settlement (MCCR 1997:11). The presence or absence of such features allows an archaeologist to estimate the likelihood of ancient land use and thus the presence of archaeological sites.

Typically, a Stage 1 assessment will determine potential for precontact First

Peoples and historic Euro-Canadian sites independently. This is due to the fact that lifeways varied considerably between the precontact and historic eras so that the criteria used to evaluate potential for each type of site differs.

4.0 STAGE 1 ASSESSMENT

4.1 Project Description and Study Area

The proponent wishes to construct a wind farm southwest of the hamlet of Bethany on part of Lots 13, 14 and 15, Concessions 6 and 7, Manvers Township in the City of Kawartha Lakes, Durham County (Figure 1). The study area consists of lands located north of Ballyduff Road, south of Highway 7A, and east of Highway 35 (Figures 1 and 2). Most of the study area is currently used for agricultural purposes, however, a number of woodlots and scrub bush areas are present as well.



______________________________________________________________________________________

Figure 2: Aerial Photo of the Subject Property



______________________________________________________________________________________

The following sections provide an overview of the study area and its archaeological potential. A detailed review of the property is also included in Section 4.5.

4.2 Physiography, Drainage and Soils

The study area falls within the Peterborough drumlin field physiographic region (Chapman and Putnam 1984:169), an area lying north of the Oak Ridges moraine, containing over 3000 drumlins. The properties are characterized by rolling terrain. The northwest part of the subject property is a drumlinized till moraine, while the southeast part is classified as a kame moraine (Figure 3).

The dominant soil type in the study area is Bondhead fine sandy loam (Webber et

al. 1946) (Figure 4). Bondhead soils are formed from limestone till and are characteristically well drained and found in areas of rolling topography, such as that exhibited by the subject property.

The study area is drained by Fleetwood Creek and Pigeon River (Figure 5). Fleetwood Creek lies approximately 0.4 kilometres to the east of the property and flows north into Pigeon River. Pigeon River lies approximately 3.25 kilometres to the west of the property and flows north into the Trent-Severn Waterway system. Several small tributaries from both Fleetwood Creek and Pigeon River originate or flow through the subject property. Their presence contributes to the archaeological potential of the area.

4.3 Evaluation of Archaeological Potential: First Peoples Sites

According to the Provincial database there are five registered archaeological sites within two kilometres of the subject lands. The precise locations of these sites are considered confidential information by the Ministry of Tourism and Culture and are not disclosed in this report.

Site BaGp-22 is reported to be located on the former Harold Russell farm, on Lot

14, Concession 7, Manvers Twp. (MTC n.d.). The easterly part of that lot lies within the study area, however, the Ministry database does not provide the precise location of the site on the lot, beyond the statement that artifacts were found “around Bunker Hill, Ballyduff” (MTC n.d.). Yet Bunker Hill is located about three km west of the study area. Thus, it is possible that BaGp-22 was registered based on the artifact collection rather than observation of the site, and it may not be located on Lot 14, Concession 7. TMHC is conducting further research in an effort to identify the location of this site.

The Strong site (BaGp-1), is located west of Ballyduff in Concession 5 and is

classified as an Iroquoian campsite (MTC n.d.). However, this site has also been described as covering an area of 2 to 3 acres, which suggests that it may be a hamlet or a village. The Strong site was apparently partially excavated by local residents and may have subsequently been destroyed by aggregate extraction (MTC n.d.).



______________________________________________________________________________________

The Fleetwood 2 site (BaGp-36) was discovered during an archaeological survey conducted in 1987 by Mayer, Pihl, Poulton & Associates (MTC n.d.). This site is located just east of the study area and consists of an early to mid 16th C Huron village and a mid-nineteenth century Euro-Canadian component. The Fleetwood Creek 1 site (BaGp-35), located southeast of the study area, consists of a single Late Woodland ceramic sherd found during the 1987 archaeological survey conducted by Mayer, Pihl, Poulton & Associates.

The Allan Cochrane site (BbGp-11), located northeast of the study area, consists

of two stone axes found by the landowner near his buildings.

One highly significant sites is located just beyond a two kilometre radius from the project property. This is the Spearing Ossuary (BbGp-1), is a large burial pit that has been extensively looted over the years. A second ossuary is reputed to be located in the area.

Based on region-specific and province-wide archaeological data, a generalized

chronology of native settlement in the City of Kawartha Lakes has been developed (Table 1). Table 1: Cultural Chronology for Native Settlement in the City of Kawartha Lakes

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

Middle 6000 - 2500 B.C. stemmed, side & corner notched points Brewerton, Otter Creek, Stanly/Neville

Late 2000 - 1800 B.C. narrow points Lamoka

1800 - 1500 B.C. broad points Genesee, Adder Orchard, 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 Point Peninsula

Transitional A.D. 500 - 900 first corn, cord-wrapped stick pottery Princess Point/Sandbanks Tradition

Late Early Iroquoian A.D. 900 - 1300 first villages, corn horticulture, longhouses Pickering

Middle Iroquoian A.D. 1300 - 1400 large villages and houses Uren, Middleport

Late Iroquoian A.D. 1400 - 1650 tribal emergence, territoriality Precontact Huron

Contact Aboriginal A.D. 1700 - 1875 treaties, mixture of Native & European items Ojibwa/Mississauga

Euro-Canadian A.D. 1796 - present English goods, homesteads European settlment, pioneer life

Period



______________________________________________________________________________________

Figure 3: Physiography in the Vicinity of the Subject Property



______________________________________________________________________________________

Figure 4: Soils on the Subject Property



______________________________________________________________________________________

Figure 5: Drainage of the Subject Property



______________________________________________________________________________________

Several factors can be used to assess an area’s potential for having First Peoples

sites. These include the presence of well-drained sandy soils, rolling topography, elevated landscape features and proximity (within 300 metres) to either potable water and known archaeological sites. When these are taken into consideration, virtually all of the land within the subject property has high potential for the recovery of precontact aboriginal sites. This is due primarily to the presence and proximity of Fleetwood Creek and Pigeon River tributaries along the eastern and northern edges of the study area. Proximity to watercourses is the primary determinant for native archaeological site locations in southwestern Ontario. The presence of known archaeological sites on or near the subject properties also contributes to the high archaeological potential of the lands.

4.4 Evaluation of Archaeological Potential: Historic Era Sites

The potential of an area to contain historic era or EuroCanadian sites can be considered through an overview of the historical development of a region, a review of early maps and a consideration of landscape features and early roadways that might have been attractive for settlement during the period. The subject property falls within the Township of Manvers in the City of Kawartha Lakes. A brief discussion of early pioneer settlement in the area is provided below.

Manvers Township, Durham County, Victoria County and the City of Kawartha Lakes Manvers Township was originally part of Durham County, which is now Regional Municipality of Durham. Durham County was established in 1792 and became a part of the Home District (previously Nassau District) in 1798 (Armstrong 2004:94,172). In 1800 Durham was removed from the Home District; in 1802 it formed part of the newly established Newcastle District and by 1849 it was officially recognized as part of the United Counties of Northumberland and Durham (Armstrong 2004:172,184). At this time there were six townships contained within Durham County: Cartwright, Manvers, Cavan, Darlington, Clarke, and Hope (Belden & Co. 1878). In 1974 Durham Region was established as an amalgamation of the respective townships contained within. At this point the township of Manvers was transferred to Victoria County and remained as such until 2001 when Victoria County was dissolved. The municipalities and townships that were formerly part of Victoria County were amalgamated and the area was renamed the City of Kawartha Lakes (MTO). Manvers Township was initially surveyed in 1816 with the first recorded legal settler arriving in 1830 (Armstrong 2004:145). Compared to other townships in Durham County, Manvers Township experienced late initial settlement and slow population growth. As of 1842 Manvers was bounded to the east by Cavan Township, the north by Ops Township, the west by Cartwright Township, and the south by Clarke Township (Smith 1846:109). The northwest corner of the township was cut off by Lake Scugog. At this time there were 400 acres of Crown lands for sale within the Township at a cost of eight shillings per acre, no doubt encouraging settlement in a township whose meagre



______________________________________________________________________________________

population of 697 was considerably behind other townships in the county (Smith 1846:110). In 1878, the principal villages of Manvers Township were Bethany, Franklin, Lifford, Ballyduff, Burton, Lotus, Yelverton, Genetsville, and Drum (MTP). Ballyduff The village of Ballyduff, founded primarily by Irish immigrants, was named as such after the town of Ballyjamesduff in Ireland and was one of the first areas within Manvers Township to be settled (Leetooze 1998:94). The first known settler in the village of Ballyduff (as well as in Manvers Township) was Joseph Porter, who was said to have arrived there between 1816 and 1820 (Leetooze 1998:94). Porter purchased the north part of Lot 12 Concession 5 and all of Lot 11 Concession 6 from Bishop Jacob Mountain, a land grantee from Montreal.

The original location of the village proper was Lots 10 and 11 of the 5th and 6th Concessions (Figure 7). A census from 1842 lists the village’s total population as 111. Of all residents enumerated, only one, Matthew Porter, a weaver, had an occupation other than a farmer or labourer (Leetooze 1998:94). The somewhat slow beginnings of the village seemed to be overcome by 1851 with the establishment of a post office, though at the time the postal name was Manvers. As of 1851 the village boasted a potash factory, a boot maker, a general store, a tavern, a boot and shoe maker, a carpenter, and a school (Leetooze 1998:95). The school in Ballyduff was built prior to 1851 on the property of David Porter, Lot 11 Concession 6, and appears on the 1861 map for Manvers Township by John Shier (Shier 1861). A census taken by William H. Smith in 1852 included two blacksmiths, an assessor and collector, a waggonmaker, a sawyer, a cabinet maker, and a physician as additions to the occupation base within the village (Leetooze 1998:97). An Episcopal Methodist Church and Presbyterian also established by this time, though the Methodist church was moved to the town of Lotus by 1912 (P: 1974).

A listing in the Canada Directory for 1857 enumerated Ballyduff with a population of roughly 100 and noted the establishment of a hotel in the village (Lovell 1858). It is also noted within that the Port Hope and Lindsay Railway was ‘distant from Ballyduff six miles,’ possibly foreshadowing the village’s demise. The village was able to maintain its place within Manvers Township for a few years following the establishment of the railway, which has been credited to its location along the Manvers Road and situation between Newcastle and its port on Lake Ontario. Unfortunately for Ballyduff, the population of the village in 1875 was the same as it had been in 1852 (Leetooze 1998:100). Ballyduff lost its place as the principal village in the township to the town of Bethany to the east and a general decline in population ensued. In fact, the 1878 map of Manvers Township depicts Ballyduff as a small hamlet in comparison to the growing town of Bethany (Belden 1878).



______________________________________________________________________________________

Investigation of Historic Maps for Study Area

The study area for the proposed Sumac Ridge Wind Farm encompasses Lot 14 Concession 6, the southern half of Lot 15 Concession 6, the west third of Lot 14 Concession 7, and the southern half of Lot 13 Concession 7. The 1861 Tremaine map shows the following occupants for the affected lots: William Byers (southern half of Lot 15 Concession 6), Joshua Porter (southern half Lot 14 Concession 6), John Porter (northern half Lot 14 Concession 6), and Robert Gillies (west third of Lot 14 Concession 7, and the southern half of Lot 13 Concession 7) (Tremaine 1861). This map does not show any structures present on the affected lands (Figure 6).

The 1878 County Atlas map for Manvers Township shows the following occupants for the affected lots: William Sommerville (southern half of Lot 15 Concession 6), Ed Kellell (southern half Lot 14 Concession 6), John Porter (northern half Lot 14 Concession 6), and the estate of R. (Robert) Gillis (Gillies) (west third of Lot 14 Concession 7, and the southern half of Lot 13 Concession 7) (Belden 1878). There are structures shown on the southwest corner of Kellell’s lot, the northeast corner of Porter’s lot below the road cut-out, and the northeast corner of Gillies’ landholdings on the southern half of Lot 13 Concession 7 (Belden 1878). The proposed locations of the turbines provided by Ortech Power do not appear to fall within the locations of the aforementioned historic structures, though the historic maps cannot always be assumed to represent the actual land use conditions at the time (Ortech 2010).

Several factors can be used to assess a property’s potential for containing

EuroCanadian pioneer sites. These include the proximity to water and transportation routes, the presence of well drained soils and known historic structures and proximity to areas of early European settlement. When these are taken into consideration, the subject property has high potential for the discovery of historic sites. This is due primarily to the proximity of potable water to each property, the presence of known 19th century structures and the proximity of the subject lands to mid-19th century roads (Ballyduff Road and Highway 7A).



______________________________________________________________________________________

Figure 6: Location of the Subject Property on the 1861 Tremaine Map



______________________________________________________________________________________

Figure 7: Location of the Subject Property on the 1878 Map of Manvers Township



______________________________________________________________________________________

4.5 Property Review

TMHC staff visited the subject property on September 9th, 2010, and completed a Stage 1 reconnaissance to confirm the archaeological potential of the study area. The lands consist of existing houses, drives, and associated outbuildings, agricultural fields, fallow fields and scrubland, and small woodlots. The study area includes parts of Lots 13 and 14, Concession 7, all of Lot 14, Concession 6, and the south half of Lot 15, Concession. The field reconnaissance confirmed that the property has archaeological potential, with the exception of those areas that have been extensively disturbed by the construction of farm buildings and homes. Figure 8 shows areas of archaeological potential within the study area. The south half of Lot 15, Concession 6 contains rolling hills with some pasture, wooded and overgrown areas. Four watercourses run through this area, all tributaries of Fleetwood Creek. There is a home creating a disturbed area in the southwest corner of the lot (Figure 9). A turbine is planned for the northwest corner of this parcel in an area that is currently overgrown in bush (Figure 10). The area has very high archaeological potential due to the proximity of tributaries of Fleetwood Creek. The turbine and access road in this area would have to be assessed by test pitting.

Lot 14, Concession 6 contains a disturbed area with a farmhouse and associated buildings in the southeast corner of the lot (Figure 11). The remainder of the southern half of the lot consists of pasture that is notably rocky, and two small woodlots. A turbine is planned for the central portion of the south half of Lot 14. This is an area of rocky pasture that would require test pitting (Figure 12).

The fields of the northern half of Lot 14, Concession 6, are mainly in alfalfa but

also contain some pasture, a disturbed area with a house (Figure 13), a small woodlot and an area of overgrown brush and trees. A turbine is planned for one of the fields that is presently in alfalfa (Figure 14). This turbine location and associated access road should be ploughed in preparation for the assessment.

The western portion of Lot 14, Concession 7 contains a bean field with sandy

soils and rolling topography, an overgrown fallow field, pasture and a farm complex (Figure 15). There are currently no turbine locations planned for this area.

Moving west, the southeast quarter of Lot 13, Concession 7 contains a bean field

with sandy soils and rolling topography, a large area of woodlot and scrub bush, and a small pasture. Two turbines are planned for this area; one in the field presently planted in beans (Figure 16) and the second to the north in and area of scrub bush (Figure 17). The turbine location and access road in the bean field requires ploughing in preparation for assessment, while the location in the bush area would have to be test pitted.



______________________________________________________________________________________

Figure 8: Archaeological Potential of the Study Area



______________________________________________________________________________________

Figure 9: Disturbed area of house and drive, southwest corner, south half of Lot 15, Con. 6

Figure 10: Overgrown area, northwest corner, south half of Lot 15, Con. 6, looking east

Figure 11: Disturbed area of farm buildings in southwest corner, Lot 14, Con. 6, looking northwest



______________________________________________________________________________________

Figure 12: Rocky pasture, south half of Lot 14, Con. 6, looking west

Figure 13: Disturbed area of house, north half of Lot 14, Con. 6, looking southwest

Figure 14: Alfalfa field on south half of Lot 14, Con. 6, looking northwest



______________________________________________________________________________________

Figure 15: Pasture, west part of Lot 14, Con. 7, farmstead in background, looking northeast

Figure 16: Bean field on Lot 13, Con. 7, looking west

Figure 17: Bush area on Lot 13, Con. 7 looking west



______________________________________________________________________________________

5.0 SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS

A Stage 1 archaeological assessment was conducted for a proposed new wind farm located on parts of Lots 13, 14 and 15, Concessions 6 and 7, Manvers Township in the City of Kawartha Lakes. According to Ministry of Tourism and Culture criteria, with the exception of highly disturbed areas occupied by a residences and outbuildings, most of the study area has archaeological potential. The potential arises from the proximity to watercourses and known archaeological sites, and the presence of elevated topography and well drained sandy soils.

Any proposed surface or subsurface impacts that will result from construction,

utility installation, material storage and machine travel may affect previously unrecorded archaeological resources within the subject property. As such, impact areas such as access roads, turbine locations and underground cable corridors will require Stage 2 archaeological assessment prior to construction to determine if archaeological sites are present.

Since typical archaeological assessment methods cannot always detect deeply

buried archaeological deposits, if these are found at any point during construction, the Ministry of Tourism and Culture should be notified immediately at (416) 314-7132. Upon the discovery of human remains during construction, the proponent should immediately contact a representative of Timmins Martelle Heritage Consultants, the Ministry of Culture as well as the Registrar of Cemeteries, Michael D’Mello, in the Cemeteries Regulation Unit of the Ministry of Consumer and Commercial Relations (416) 326-8392.

The Ministry of Tourism and Culture is asked to review the information presented

in this report and issue a letter concurring with its recommendations.



______________________________________________________________________________________

References

Armstrong, Frederick H. 2004 Handbook of Upper Canadian Chronology. Hamilton: Dundurn Press, Ltd. Belden, H. & Co. 1878 Illustrated Historical Atlas of Northumberland and Durham Counties. (1972 reprint) Belleville, ON: Mika Silk Screening Ltd. Chapman L.J. and D.F. Putnam 1984 Physiography of Southern Ontario. Second Edition. Toronto: University of Toronto Press. geographynetwork.ca 2006 OBM Maps for the Province of Ontario. Leetooze, Sherrell Branton 1999 The Durham County Companion: corrections, addendums and indexes to the brief history series of the townships of the former Durham County. Bowmanville, ON: Lynn Michael-John Associates. Leetooze, Sherrell Branton 1998 A Trail Through the Bush: a brief history of Manvers Township. Bowmanville, ON: Lynn Michael-John Associates. Lovell, John 1858 "Ballyduff," The Canada Directory. Montreal, QC: John Lovell. Vertical File: Manvers Township-Villages, Lindsay Branch: Kawartha Lakes Public Library. Manvers Township Pioneers [MTP] "The Early History and Pioneers of Manvers Township" http://www. ontariogenealogy.com/Durham/manversh.html (accessed Sept. 2010) Manvers Township, Ontario (MTO) http://www.worldlingo.com/ma/enwiki/en/Manvers_Township,_Ontario (accessed Oct. 2010) Ministry of Citizenship, Culture and Recreation (MCCR) 1997 Conserving a Future for Our Past: Archaeology, Land Use Planning and

Development in Ontario – An Educational Primer and Comprehensive Guide for Non-specialists. Toronto.

http://www.worldlingo.com/ma/enwiki/en/Manvers_Township,_Ontario



______________________________________________________________________________________

Ministry of Culture, Tourism and Recreation (MCTR - now the Ministry of Tourism and Culture), Cultural Programs Branch, Archaeology and Heritage Planning 1993 Archaeological Assessment Technical Guidelines (Stages 1 – 3 Reporting

Format). Toronto. Ministry of Tourism and Culture n.d. Archaeological Database. On file at the Ministry of Tourism and Culture,

Toronto, Ontario. Ortech Power 2010 Sumac Ridge Wind Farm: Turbine Layout and Natural Feature. Prepared by

David Warner, August 22. Shier, John Esq. 1861 Map of Durham Upper Canada. Toronto. Smith, Wm. H. 1846 Smith's Canadian Gazetteer, Canada West. Toronto: H.&W. Rowsell. The Post [P] 1974 "Fourteenth Township in Victoria County," Lindsay, ON. February 1 in Vertical File: Manvers Township-Villages, Lindsay Branch: Kawartha Lakes Public Library. Tremaine, George C. 1861 Manvers Township, Durham County: 1861 Census Map. Toronto: Archives of Ontario. Webber, L.R., F.F. Morwick and N.R. Richards 1946 Soil Survey of Durham County. Report No. 9 of the Ontario Soil Survey. Ministry

of Agriculture and Food, Guelph. Wilson, Pearl and Laura Morton 1981 Rural Gatherings. Lindsay, ON: Floyd W. Hall.



______________________________________________________________________________________

Appendix A


Turbine Layout and Natural Features

Sumac Ridge Wind Farm688000 690000

4892

000

LegendTurbine LocationTurbine Buffer - 550mProject AreaBuildng PointCommunication TowerAccess RoadInter-Connection LineSwitching StationFeeder LineRiverUtility LineRailwayRailway Buffer - 55.2mWater Area - PermanentWetland Area - PermanentWater Area Buffer - 30mWater Area Buffer - 120mOntario Heritage FoundationFleetwood Creek Natural AreaFleetwood Creek NatureReserve Buffer - 30mFleetwood Creek NatureReserve Buffer - 120mWooded AreaWooded Area Buffer - 30mWooded Area Buffer - 120mPit/QuaryUtility Line Buffer - 142.5m

RoadsPrincipal HighwaySecondary HighwayMajor RoadLocal roadTrailRoadway Buffer - 55.2mConcession Road Buffer - 100m

0 620310 Meters

Prepared By:David Warner

Date:August 22, 2010

Projection:UTM, NAD 83Zone 17

Toronto

Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada,Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources

WPDTurbine Layout and Natural Features

Inset Area

stage 1 archaeological assessment sumac ridge wind farm...

Documents