Volume 2: Draft Gorst Planned Action Environmental Impact Statement

GORST PLANNED ACTION EIS | AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT, SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS, AND MITIGATION MEASURESTable 3.10-4 Archaeologically Sensitive Landforms Likely Present in the Study Area depicts the archaeologicalsensitivity areas within the Study Area and is based on the Suquamish Tribes GIS Archaeological Sensitivity Modelfor Kitsap County (Suquamish Tribe and PetersonGIS 2010). Figure 3.10-1 Gorst Creek Watershed: CulturalResources Probability depicts high and moderate probability locations within the Study Area. The High ProbabilityAreas include the locations where known archaeological sites and historic built environment resources have beenrecorded as well as those areas where archaeological sites are anticipated based on geology, soils, slope, Lidar, andethnographic data. The Moderate Probability Areas include locations where there is the potential forarchaeological sites and historic built environment resources to be located based on the available data; howevernone have been identified to date and historic and modern land use and alteration (e.g. freeway construction,mining activities, etc.) may have disturbed.Historical and Modern Landscape AlterationThe landscape of the Study Area has undergone extensive modification since the first Euroamerican settlementswere established in the area. Two of the most widespread landscape modification methods included the removalof sediment and filling of topographical depressions. Each of these methods has a unique effect on archaeologicalsite preservation and visibility. By understanding these effects, expectations about archaeological potential can begenerated for developed areas and then used to inform archaeological investigation strategies to identify wherearchaeological deposits are most likely to be present.Sediment removal is used to decrease the elevation of and/or level the ground surface. Removal, also referred toas “cutting” is achieved through a variety of processes including mechanical excavation, hydraulic sluicing, and theuse of explosives. Since cutting results in the removal of sediment, it provides no direct sedimentary indicators.However, locations where sediments have been removed can be recognized by truncation or absence of soilhorizons. Cutting does not affect archaeological potential equally across landforms. For example, on landformsformed as a result of glacial advance and retreat, such as till plains, precontact human activity would have onlyoccurred on the exposed ground surface. Removal of this surface would result in the removal of all sediments thathave the potential to contain intact archaeological deposits. For example, the ground disturbance associated withthe quarry within the Study Area would have substantially disturbed, and likely removed, all evidence ofprecontact habitation and use.Filling is used to raise the elevation of the ground surface. The composition of fill deposits is defined by thedeposit’s source or origin. Fill deposits may contain accumulations of precontact, historical, and/or modern objectsthat have been displaced from the location of their primary deposition. Since widespread filling began during thehistorical period, precontact archaeological deposits within these fill deposits are not expected to be in primarydepositional context and, therefore, do not represent an intact archaeological site.Anticipated Archaeological Property TypesPrecontact human habitation, however, was dependent on the availability of water and the ease with whichresources could be transported. Consequently, habitation areas were likely located along coastal, river, and lakemargins. The Study Area encompasses a coastal environment with several rivers, creeks, and lacustrine areas andis considered highly sensitive for archaeological sites. The Study Area extends across two broad environments—coastal and upland. Eight landform types likely to be found in these environments that have the potential tocontain archaeological sites are discussed in detail below. A summary table of these landforms is provided in Table3.10-4 Archaeologically Sensitive Landforms Likely Present in the Study Area.Draft | June 2013 3-135