HomeMy WebLinkAboutSuWa200sec13-5Alaska Resources Library & Information Services
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Document
ARLIS Uniform Cover Page
Title:
Cultural resources study, Study plan Section 13.5 : Final study plan
SuWa 200
Author(s) – Personal:
Author(s) – Corporate:
Alaska Energy Authority
AEA-identified category, if specified:
Final study plan
AEA-identified series, if specified:
Series (ARLIS-assigned report number):
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project document number 200
Existing numbers on document:
Published by:
[Anchorage : Alaska Energy Authority, 2013]
Date published:
July 2013
Published for:
Date or date range of report:
Volume and/or Part numbers:
Study plan Section 13.5
Final or Draft status, as indicated:
Document type:
Pagination:
34 p.
Related work(s):
Pages added/changed by ARLIS:
Notes:
All reports in the Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Document series include an ARLIS-
produced cover page and an ARLIS-assigned number for uniformity and citability. All reports
are posted online at http://www.arlis.org/resources/susitna-watana/
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project
(FERC No. 14241)
Cultural Resources Study
Study Plan Section 13.5
Final Study Plan
Alaska Energy Authority
July 2013
FINAL STUDY PLAN CULTURAL RESOURCES STUDY 13.5
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Page 13-1 July 2013
13. CULTURAL AND PALEONTOLOGICAL RESOURCES
13.5. Cultural Resources Study
On December 14, 2012, Alaska Energy Authority (AEA) filed with the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission (FERC or Commission) its Revised Study Plan (RSP), which included
58 individual study plans (AEA 2012). Included within the RSP was the Cultural Resources
Study, Section 13.5. RSP Section 13.5 focuses on systematically inventorying cultural resources
within the Area of Potential Effects (APE), evaluate the National Register eligibility of
inventoried cultural resources within the APE that may be affected by the Project, and assess
Project-related effects on National Register-eligible historic properties within the APE. RSP
13.05 provided goals, objectives, and proposed methods for cultural resources data collection
and analysis.
On February 1, 2013, FERC staff issued its study determination (February 1 SPD) for 44 of the
58 studies, approving 31 studies as filed and 13 with modifications. RSP Section 13.5 was one of
the 13 approved with modifications. In its February 1 SPD, FERC recommended the following:
We recommend that the study plan be modified to require AEA to consult with CIRI and
interview knowledgeable Dena’ina elders, as recommended by CIRI, in order to adequately
identify place names, ethnography, history, and culture associated with this culture group. We
also recommend that AEA designate specific locations where they would interview
knowledgeable Dena’ina elders that are convenient for both AEA and the elders.
We also recommend that AEA evaluate cultural resource sites in the indirect APE for eligibility
for the National Register. However, when and how this may be accomplished is best left until the
initial study results are available and in consultation with BLM, SHPO, and affected tribal
representatives.
In accordance with the February 1 SPD, AEA addressed the recommended modifications in the
Final Study Plan for Section 13.5.
13.5.1. General Description of the Proposed Study
The study area proposed herein consists of both a direct and indirect APE. The direct APE
includes areas of anticipated direct effects, particularly areas subject to ground disturbance from
Project construction. The direct APE encompasses the reservoir impoundment area, construction
camp, and three potential access/transmission corridors (Figure 13.5-1). The impoundment area
as defined here consists of the proposed normal 23,546-acre maximum reservoir surface area
plus an additional 25 vertical feet above that elevation equating to the 2,075 foot elevation
upstream from the proposed Watana Dam. The three proposed access/transmission corridors
differ in length. The Chulitna Corridor is approximately 42.7 miles long; the Denali Corridor is
approximately 41.4 miles long; and the Gold Creek Corridor is approximately 49.2 miles long.
The indirect APE consists of those areas outside of the direct APE that may experience Project-
induced human activity, particularly dispersed recreation. These include: the Upper Susitna
River corridor from the upper extent of the inundation zone to the Denali Highway Bridge, Fog
Lakes, areas around the inundation zone within local drainages that flow into the reservoir,
existing trails and camps, and Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) ANSCA 14(h)(1) sites (in addition
FINAL STUDY PLAN CULTURAL RESOURCES STUDY 13.5
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Page 13-2 July 2013
to those within the direct APE). In consultation with interested parties during summer and fall
2012, the direct and indirect APEs were refined based on: a recalculation of the impoundment
area using the 2,075-foot elevation (25 feet above proposed normal maximum pool level to
account for potential shoreline changes caused by the reservoir filling and operation),
reconsideration of watersheds and topographic features as natural boundaries to new human
travel beyond the direct APE, preliminary results of the 2012 archeological field reconnaissance
and consequent modeling of likely areas for cultural resources, and identification of known trails
where uses may increase as an indirect result of the Project. The APE as updated for this revised
study plan combines the current definitions of the direct and indirect APE to design the sampling
strategies and priorities for the 2013-2014 field studies. As explained in Section 13.5.3 below,
the APE may be further adapted based on results from AEA’s ongoing environmental and
engineering studies.
A total of 104 known cultural resource sites (90 prehistoric, eight Euroamerican historic, and six
Alaska Native historic) are currently identified within the direct APE (Figure 13.5-2 (Hays et al.
2012). The proposed corridors and camp facilities have a combined total of 40 previously-
documented sites (all precontact/prehistoric except for two historic). The 2,075-foot
impoundment area has a total of 64 known cultural resource sites (62 prehistoric and two
historic). Additional sites likely exist within unsurveyed portions of the APE. Known sites will
be relocated in 2013 and 2014 and coordinates will be recorded with a survey-grade, hand-held
GPS unit. Other standard site data will be recorded and previously described site conditions will
be verified.
Phase I (Inventory) surveys will be conducted in areas of the direct and indirect APEs not
previously surveyed or in areas within the APE that the 2012 locational model identifies as high
potential for containing cultural resources. A combination of low and slow aerial reconnaissance
from a helicopter and systematic pedestrian transect survey will be employed during Phase I
surveys. Phase II (Evaluation) studies will be conducted for sites within the direct APE only,
based on the conclusions of the Phase I surveys, to assess eligibility and analyze effects to
eligible historic properties that may be adversely affected by the Project. Both Identification and
Evaluation Phase surveys will follow established professional guidelines, including the Alaska
Office of History and Archaeology Historic Preservation Series No. 11 (OHA 2003).
As noted above, the direct APE may include TCPs. As described in National Register Bulletin
#38, a TCP is a property, i.e., a place, that is eligible for inclusion in the National Register
because of its association with cultural practices or beliefs of a living community that (a) are
rooted in that community’s history, and (b) are important in maintaining the continuing cultural
identity of the community. Determining whether a property qualifies as a TCP requires
systematic review and evaluation similar to that devoted to archaeological properties, with
additional considerations.
The ethnogeographic portion of the study includes consultation with Ahtna and Dena’ina elders
to integrate Alaska Native perspectives on historical land use and cultural values into the cultural
resource investigation. Through a partnership with Ahtna, Inc., the regional corporation for the
Ahtna people, the ethnogeographic component of the Cultural Resources Study will document
Ahtna perspectives and ethnographic context for significance of the cultural resources sites
potentially affected by the Project. Included will be traditional Ahtna land use and settlement
patterns, seasonal migrations, religious and sacred sites, and traditional foot trail systems. Ahtna
language place name records on file (Kari 2008; Kari 2012) will be consulted, and linguistic
FINAL STUDY PLAN CULTURAL RESOURCES STUDY 13.5
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Page 13-3 July 2013
analysis of Ahtna place names, including archival taped sources and confirmation interviews
with Ahtna Elders, will provide insight into the geographic information (notably hydrology)
encoded in the Ahtna terms and narratives for important places.
With regard to the Dena’ina people, the ethnogrographic component of the Cultural Resources
Study will build on existing Upper Cook Inlet Dena’ina places names work (Kari and Fall 2003),
supplemented by additional interviews with knowledgeable Dena’ina elders, likely from the
communities of Chickaloon and Knik. AEA will consult with CIRI and interview knowledgeable
Dena’ina elders, as recommended by CIRI, to adequately identify place names, ethnography,
history, and culture associated with the Dena’ina people. The location of these interviews will
be decided during consultation with CIRI, in an effort to conduct the interviews at locations
convenient for both AEA and the elders.
In consultation with Doyon, Limited and other tribal officials, similar interviews may be used to
record historic use in the Project area by Doyon region residents, particularly those from Nenana.
Study Goals and Objectives
The goals of the 2013-2014 Cultural Resources Study plan are to systematically inventory
cultural resources within the APE (36CFR 800.4(b)), evaluate the National Register eligibility of
inventoried cultural resources within the APE that may be affected by the Project (36 CFR §
800.4(c)), and assess Project-related effects on National Register-eligible historic properties
within the APE (36 CFR § 800.5).
Specific objectives are to:
• Consult with the SHPO, BLM, and Alaska Native entities during implementation of
the 2013-2014 cultural resources survey
• Inventory cultural resources within the APE
• Evaluate National Register eligibility of cultural resources within the APE that may
be affected by the Project
• Determine the potential Project-related effects on National Register-eligible historic
properties within the APE
• Develop information needed to prepare a HPMP for the Project
The TCP study will be informed through the ethnogeographic study, which has as its goals the
identification, inventory, and evaluation of landscape features and resources within the APE that
have been and continue to be important to the Ahtna people. The objective is to use ethnographic
landscape and place name data to help identify TCPs according to procedures set forth under 36
CFR Part 800, and determine their significance according to National Register criteria (36 CFR §
60.4). Traditional land use patterns of the study area by the Ahtna were based on a migratory
cycle that followed fish, game, and plant harvesting opportunities. A complex system of travel
and trapping cabins, trails, fish camps, trade routes, portage areas, trap lines, hunting ranges,
seasonal camps, and winter villages has been in use for many generations. Some of these use
patterns continue today, incorporating modern subsistence harvest technologies and
transportation while maintaining traditional use areas by family and clan. Subsistence activity
and land use have also been affected in recent times by subsistence regulation, aboriginal land
title changes (ANCSA and the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act [ANILCA]),
schooling, child protection, and medical care laws and regulations. The ethnogeographic study
FINAL STUDY PLAN CULTURAL RESOURCES STUDY 13.5
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Page 13-4 July 2013
addresses the following topics, with emphasis on Ahtna tribal practices, supplemented by
information on Dena’ina and Lower Tanana tribal practices as appropriate:
• Land use patterns in the study area, including the seasonal migration patterns of the
late 19th and early 20th centuries, and how they relate to the system of trails, trap lines,
hunting and fishing sites, winter villages, and religious sites
• Types of wild resources exploited and traditional ecological knowledge about historic
animal and fish populations in the area
• Traditional stewardship (i.e., traditional management practices)
• Contemporary values associated with the landscape
• Transcription and translation of language texts that pertain to the Project APE
• Hydrological concepts embedded in place names, directional system, and landscape
narratives
13.5.2. Existing Information and Need for Additional Information
Cultural resource investigations conducted within the study area between 1978 and 1985 for
prior project designs (referred to as “early 1980s-era”) documented almost 300 cultural
properties believed to span the last 11, 000 years. Site types in the inventory include historic and
precontact archaeological sites, historic buildings and ruins, and other cultural features. About
one-third of the sites are in or near the location of the proposed Watana Dam and impoundment.
Approximately 90 percent have stone tools and other prehistoric artifacts, about 10 percent are
historic sites consisting of building ruins and/or scatters of commercially manufactured items
(metal cans, bottles, etc.), and less than 1 percent are fossils of animals or plants. The more
recent Native sites are from the Athabascan Indians who inhabited the area historically and hold
the majority of the area’s Alaska Native place names in their linguistic dialect (Ahtna); the older
sites fade into a more generalized adaptation shared by Alaska’s ancient interior peoples.
Historic sites in the Project area reflect mining, prospecting, hunting, trapping, fishing, and
recreational pursuits, as well as simply remote Alaska living.
13.5.2.1. Archaeological Resources
Between 1978 and 1985, archaeologists conducted cultural resources surveys, testing, and site
excavations for the then-proposed Alaska Power Authority Susitna Hydroelectric Project and
ancillary facilities (construction camps, transmission lines, and access roads). Although the
project proposed in the 1980s had a different footprint than the currently proposed Project, there
is considerable overlap. For the 1980s project, annual and summary reports from the early 1980s-
era described over 270 sites that required some form of analysis and curation of associated
artifacts (e.g., Dixon 1985; Dixon et al. 1985; Greiser et al. 1985, 1986). Another 22 previously
known sites were revisited and documented. Of the sites found, 111 were discovered through
subsurface testing (amounting to approximately 28,000 shovel tests). Of those known sites, 87
percent have prehistoric/ precontact remains, two percent have postcontact/protohistoric remains,
10 percent have historic and modern remains, and one site has paleontological remains.
Advances in geoarchaeological techniques and modeling of the region’s stratigraphy in the last
30 years, especially those focusing on volcanic ash or tephra deposits, prompts re-examination of
the conclusions reached in the 1980s. Revisions are anticipated in the understanding of site
locations and distributions through time and space and how they relate to historic Native land
FINAL STUDY PLAN CULTURAL RESOURCES STUDY 13.5
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Page 13-5 July 2013
use, the Project area’s cultural chronology from a regional perspective, and its place in the
greater scheme of North American prehistory.
More than a quarter-century of modern archaeological research has been carried out in Alaska
since the original Susitna project work, aided by new methods and technology including GPS
and GIS, geoarchaeology, geochronology, stratigraphic analysis, lithic and faunal analysis, and
ice-patch research. Research in south-central and Interior Alaska river drainages has
demonstrated that the prehistoric cultural chronology and dynamics are far more complex than
was previously believed (i.e., Dixon 1985). Modern advances in radiometric dating techniques in
particular require re-examination of the radiocarbon dates from the Project area. Accurate dating
is essential to determine site significance, which can depend on cultural affiliation,
archaeological tradition, and microstratigraphic layers that may represent multiple occupations
and/or components spanning hundreds or thousands of years. Sites evaluated for National
Register eligibility that have well-preserved organics or multiple components will be
radiometrically dated to assist in the eligibility evaluation. Conditions that allow preservation of
organic archaeological materials are relatively rare in the study area.
The cultural resources data gap report (Bowers et al. 2012) reviewed and summarized the
cultural resource literature for the Project area prepared during the 1978 to 1985 environmental
studies. Data gaps identified include inadequacies in the locational information for sites due
largely to limitations in field and mapping methods. The cultural chronology within the APE
warrants re-examination due to more modern dating techniques (e.g., accelerated mass
spectrometry [AMS] radiocarbon [14C], optically stimulated luminescence [OSL]) and newer
geoarchaeology (in this case tephra) studies. Investigations of prehistoric land use patterns in
Interior Alaska have progressed to the testing of more sophisticated locational models applicable
to the Project’s cultural resources field studies (VanderHoek 2011). Partial inventories of Alaska
Native place names exist that were not available during the early 1980s-era studies, and they,
too, can now be incorporated into locational models and field survey strategies.
13.5.2.2. Ethnogeographic Resources
The Project area includes lands important to CIRI and the Dena’ina tribal communities, Ahtna,
Inc., and the Ahtna tribal communities, and potentially the Lower Tanana-speaking tribal
community in Nenana. Based on linguistic data (Krauss et al. 2011) the Ahtna traditional use
area included the Susitna-Watana Project impoundment and lands to the west (Figure 13.5-3) —
further west than the Ahtna regional corporation boundary (Figure 13.1-1). Alaska Native
regional corporation boundaries drawn by ANCSA in 1971 shifted the CIRI boundary east into
the area historically used by the Ahtna. Recognizing the interconnections of corporations and
tribes, the ethnogeographic study will concentrate on the Ahtna traditional use area,
supplemented by interviews with knowledgeable Dena’ina elders (particularly from Chickaloon
and Knik), and as appropriate with Lower Tanana elders from Nenana. Overall, the cultural
resource study is intended to broadly address the significance of past land use regardless of
ethnicity or antiquity, and will document historic properties and TCPs that may be affected by
the project whether resulting from prehistoric or contemporary practices of Ahtna or Dena’ina.
As a practical matter, Ahtna tribal practices are less represented in the published scientific
literature yet there remain Ahtna language speakers familiar with the study area, and thus the
RSP addresses this imbalance while including both Dena’ina and Lower Tanana data sources.
FINAL STUDY PLAN CULTURAL RESOURCES STUDY 13.5
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Page 13-6 July 2013
The early 1980s-era studies in the Project area did not recognize TCPs because they did not exist
as a formal concept within historic preservation law or regulation. Now, investigation addressing
TCPs is required for compliance with Section 106 of the NHPA. There were little data collected
about Alaska Native place names in the prior studies (e.g., Dixon et al.1985; Greiser et al. 1985,
1986), and the information that was collected does not meet current professional standards and is
not in modern geospatial format (see Bowers et al. 2012; Simeone et al. 2011). However, in the
years since the early 1980s-era studies, Ahtna place names data have been collected by James
Kari, William Simeone, and others (e.g., Kari 1983, 1999, 2008, 2010, 2011, 2012).
Ethnographic data – in the form of interviews, archival documents, and linguistic data (place
names) – can help define the value or cultural significance of a site to the Ahtna, Dena’ina, and
Lower Tanana peoples, which in turn will help determine whether TCPs exist in the Project area.
The data will also contribute to the locational model for identifying potential archaeological
sites. For example, ethnographic data documenting annual or seasonal activity (including the
type of resource used, where harvested, method of harvest, and season of harvest) may help in
detecting archaeological sites. Ethnographic data also better enable development of historical and
cultural context for a site, which is necessary to determine its significance and possible eligibility
to the National Register. Ethnographic data aides in the interpretation of sites and artifacts on a
variety of levels, addressing such topics as: (1) how a site or artifact was used; (2) how a site fits
into Alaska Native and non-Native history; (3) whether a site’s content can be applied to the
explanation of the area’s cultural history; and (4) if a site has religious or other significance not
apparent from its physical attributes.
The ethnogeographic study builds on previous research by principal investigators Dr. William
Simeone and Dr. James Kari, and will be modeled after the approaches of Simeone and Kari
(2002, 2004) and Simeone and Valentine (2007). As with both those studies, the
ethnogeographic study for the Project will combine ethnographic, historical, and linguistic
research to document traditional Ahtna land use patterns, stewardship practices, and Ahtna
traditional knowledge for use by state and federal agencies in making management decisions.
The approach to be taken in applying the Susitna data to TCPs parallels aspects of a similar
effort addressing Ahtna TCPs sponsored by the BLM as part of the East Alaska Resource
Management Plan (Kari and Tuttle 2005).
13.5.3. Study Area
The study area or APE for the Project is composed of an area of direct effect and an area of
indirect effect—the geographic region in which the character or use of historic properties may be
affected directly or indirectly by construction and operation of the Project. The APE for both
direct and indirect effects is identified using several types of information, including Project
engineering (transportation corridors and potential visitor infrastructure), known or likely human
use patterns, and topographic features that may act as boundaries to visitor travel beyond the
project footprint. If licensing studies conducted in 2013 indicate that there may be Project-related
effects to cultural resources in areas currently outside the APE, the APE may be further adapted
to encompass these areas. Any recommended changes to the APE will be included in AEA’s
ISR, which will be prepared and distributed in February 2014. Currently, the total area within the
study area is approximately 248,707 acres.
FINAL STUDY PLAN CULTURAL RESOURCES STUDY 13.5
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Page 13-7 July 2013
13.5.3.1. Area of Potential Direct Effect
Direct effects to cultural resources are those consequences directly attributable to construction
and operation of the Project, including inundation. The APE for direct effects encompasses the
Watana Reservoir, a buffer around the reservoir footprint up to the 2,075-foot contour, Watana
Dam and Camp Facilities area, three potential access and transmission alignments (Chulitna,
Denali, and Gold Creek corridors), and facilities associated with construction and operation of
the Project. The proposed direct APE, developed in consultation with the SHPO, federal and
municipal agencies, Alaska Native entities, and other interested parties, is depicted in Figure
13.5-1.
13.5.3.2. Area of Potential Indirect Effect
Indirect effects to cultural resources are those that occur beyond the direct effects from
implementing the Project, such as looting of archaeological sites and damage from off-road
vehicle use after the Project has been completed. The proposed indirect APE, developed in
consultation with the SHPO, federal and municipal agencies, Alaska Native entities, and other
interested parties, is depicted in Figure 13.5-1. As proposed, the Project would inundate the
middle Susitna with water upriver of the dam site to the 2,050-foot contour. This would create an
approximately 39-mile long lake which will be accessible to the general public. In addition, it is
expected that overland use via existing trails by hunters, fisherman, trappers, and recreationists
will likely increase as an indirect effect of the proposed Project since access and other developed
facilities available for public use will likely be constructed in the immediate Project area. AEA
plans to study possible indirect effects that may result from the construction and operation of the
proposed Project. The indirect APE is comprised of:
1) Areas likely to be affected by induced dispersed recreational activity extending from existing
trails, including all-terrain vehicle (ATV) trails and recent campsites observed during the
2012 field investigations
2) Areas near or related to known sites in the statewide Alaska Heritage Resources Survey
(AHRS) inventory, BIA’s ANCSA 14(h)(1) site inventory, and recent use-areas like
airstrips, bridges, mines, and cabins that are adjacent to APE mapped trails and recreation
use areas, based on the premise that these areas may also be locations where future increased
human travel may occur
3) Areas adjacent to APE-mapped trails and recreation areas with known high cultural resource
potential as determined by the site locational modeling and 2012 aerial and pedestrian
reconnaissance, based on the premise that these areas may also be locations where future
increased human travel may occur
13.5.4. Study Methods
13.5.4.1. Previous Survey Strategies, Methods, and Definitions
Cultural resource investigations conducted within the study area between 1978 and 1985
documented almost 300 cultural properties spanning the last 11,000 years. Site types in the
inventory include historic and protohistoric archaeological sites, historic buildings and ruins, and
other cultural features. Many of these sites are within, and would be inundated by, the proposed
Watana Reservoir. Subsequent archaeological investigations following the initial surveys have
FINAL STUDY PLAN CULTURAL RESOURCES STUDY 13.5
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Page 13-8 July 2013
located and recorded additional cultural resources and expanded knowledge of known sites (cf.
Betts 1987; Blong 2011; Dilley 1988; Wygal 2009; VanderHoek et al. 2007).
The information collected in the late 1970s and early to mid-1980s—the “early 1980s-era”
data—forms the bulk of the spatial data within the study area and resulted from two separate
projects: the first by Dixon et al. (1980, 1985); and the second by Greiser et al. (1985, 1986).
Methods used in the 1979 to 1984 fieldwork by Dixon et al. (Figure 13.5-4) included the
delineation of “survey locales” by close examination of U.S. Geological Survey (USGS)
topographic maps in combination with a survey strategy using additional environmental and
artifact variables as analytical units. These variables were defined within a framework of
research questions addressing the cultural historical sequence of this region. The survey locales
were visited and the terrain within them that was judged higher in site potential was examined by
pedestrian survey. In some places, shovel tests were placed in areas deemed of higher site
potential. If sites were located either by observation of surface artifacts or by subsurface
discovery, concentrated testing then took place. Areas considered of lesser site potential
(determined by examination of maps and by on-the-ground judgments) were not surveyed or
tested. Concentrated testing meant that the archaeologists set up a grid at a point of site
discovery, and then dug shovel tests along transects at specified intervals outward from the
discovery point (Figures 13.5-4, 13.5-5). Thus systematic grids of shovel tests (round holes
approximately 12 inches [in] in diameter) and at least one square 16-in or 36-in test unit was
excavated for each artifact discovery. Locations at which concentrated testing occurred were:
variable within a survey locale, mainly within the impoundment, and occurred only at sites;
major portions of survey locales were not subjected to concentrated testing and in some cases
were not walked because terrain was deemed unsuitable.
Methods used in 1985 in the second of the two projects (Figure 13.5-4) included delineation of
survey “units” by a random sampling method that was more explicitly predictive (Greiser et al.
1985). Two major variables, terrain and vegetation—each of which had numerous subgroups—
were statistically assessed for associations with known sites across the project area; results were
used to stratify areas into lesser or greater degrees of site potential. Then 160-acre survey units
were randomly chosen from within a sample of the population of units defined by a grid of the
project area. Pedestrian survey across the 160-acre units consisted of linear transects spaced at
predetermined intervals that were walked regardless of topography. Though the method was
systematic, few sites were located using this approach. Topographic features of higher site
potential within the project area but outside a randomly selected survey unit were not surveyed.
Both of the methods described above have merit, and current survey strategies typically use
aspects of both. Advanced GIS tools and the cumulative archaeological experience in field
survey methods over the last 30 years contribute to today’s methods. GIS-based models provide
a more effective means of spatially stratifying the Project area, enabling archaeologists to
determine which areas appear to have lower or higher site potential; in 2013 and 2014 both types
of areas will be tested to verify the assumptions on which models are based. The 1980s-era work
used similar approaches but did not have the benefit of modern GIS or GPS technology.
The early 1980s-era datasets represent a significant amount of field effort and thought, and they
are especially useful for refining expectations about site discovery, artifact preservation, and
stratigraphic contexts. Site discovery is one of the more straightforward processes in cultural
FINAL STUDY PLAN CULTURAL RESOURCES STUDY 13.5
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Page 13-9 July 2013
resource management. In contrast, evaluating a site and determining whether it is eligible for
listing in the National Register is often not straightforward, and may require revisiting and
reassessing other sites within the APE that may be affected by the Project. Because of major
differences in how site locations were recorded and the resulting variations in accuracy (GPS
versus a pencil point on a paper map), as well as changes during the nearly 30 years since site
discovery, matching site data collected during early 1980s-era work and current field
observations can be difficult. The cultural resource investigations for the Project will be
accomplished using best practices for modern archaeology. The usefulness of the early 1980s-era
data will depend in large part on how accurately the old sites can be matched to current field
observations.
13.5.4.2. Locational Model and Survey Strategy
Archaeological survey strategy development typically begins with two things: 1) a review of
relevant literature and previous archaeological work in the study area, often performed in an
office, museum or archive setting; and 2) a close examination of the topography and other
environmental variables, done using observations collected in the field and GIS techniques in the
office. These information sources in concert help define expectations about cultural resources
within the study area, which in turn helps determine survey strategies (Figure 13.5-5).
This is a holistic pursuit and requires consideration at a regional scale of factors such as climate
or ecoregional variability, as well as scrutiny of specific details at the site and artifact level.
Details such as elevations at which sites typically occur, or resources closely associated with
sites, as evidenced by organic remains (bones, for example), may indicate why people chose to
dwell at a particular location. The general goal of a survey strategy is to locate archaeological
sites; thus, an understanding of why an area is more desirable than another is important.
However, determining those factors that make a location more desirable are complex. Models
help to explore this complexity.
Survey strategies today often employ models to assist in defining locations that may have a
greater potential for site discovery. The treatment of these cultural resources is governed by
federal and state law. Section 106 of the NHPA is the most commonly cited statute, but other
directives are also in place to help guide management of cultural resources. The larger goal is to
locate cultural resources and determine if they are eligible for inclusion on the National Register.
Survey types consist of either aerial or pedestrian transects. Given the remoteness of the study
area, aerial surveys are conducted by helicopter at low airspeed and altitude across large
expanses of land. Areas of high potential within these expanses are recorded by GPS and camera
and are returned to later for ground survey and testing. Aerial surveys are also necessary in areas
where geographic boundaries prohibit access by survey crews. Examples in the study area
include steep valleys and river crossings, high elevations, and barrier waterfalls. Ground surveys
are conducted in areas having a high potential for cultural resources. Methods used to optimally
cover large areas of land (e.g., 40 acres) typically involve a crew of 6 people in a row each
spaced 10 to 15 meters (m) apart. The crew walks parallel transects over the land inspecting the
ground surface, trees, understory vegetation, and microtopography. Testing can either occur
during ground surveys or later during a testing phase. Any resources encountered are recorded in
field books, on forms, in GPS units, and photographically.
FINAL STUDY PLAN CULTURAL RESOURCES STUDY 13.5
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Page 13-10 July 2013
Survey strategy development is part of most field archaeology, and spatial modeling using GIS
techniques provides a flexible means for combining many spatially defined variables onto one
surface. The surface illustrates the combined variables with quantitative measures, which can
then be used to stratify or characterize a study area in a number of ways. Models are not
snapshots of reality, but rather a process which explores one of a number of possible scenarios.
Models are one of several techniques from a larger toolbox used to develop survey strategies.
Specifically, that toolbox also includes examination of available satellite imagery, USGS maps,
and information on known cultural resources, as well as professional archaeological fieldwork.
The 2012 model used to develop a survey strategy for the Project was based upon several digital
datasets of varying spatial and chronological scales that are listed in Table 13.5-1. Datasets in
many cases provide multiple variables for creating the model surface. For example, Digital
Elevation Model data (elevation) are used to derive slope and aspect within the model area, and
precipitation and temperature datasets provide monthly averages useful for creating variables of
summer and winter extremes. The Source column in Table 13.5-1 lists agencies mainly
responsible for collecting data and producing rasters or shapefiles. There is an increasing number
of excellent websites specifically tailored for the distribution of downloadable data, such as the
Statewide Digital Mapping Initiative (SDMI) based at University of Alaska Fairbanks, the
USGS’s Alaska Geospatial Data Clearinghouse, and the State of Alaska Department of Natural
Resources’ own Alaska State Geo-Spatial Data Clearinghouse. Table 13.5-2 lists the variables
examined in the modeling process.
In general, the modeling process for a locational model (designed to assist archaeologists in site
discovery) can be broken into 10 steps. These steps are described using vocabulary developed for
GIS analysis:
STEP 1. Gather data (downloadable, in most cases) for creating layers of geospatial and
other information; these will be independent variables (i.e., vegetation, elevation, wildlife
presence, etc.), and dependent variables (i.e., known archaeological site types and
locations).
STEP 2. Determine the spatial extent of the model area based on an APE (ideally
encompassing as many representative ecosystems as possible) and create a model
polygon. Clip all layers to this area, and buffer lines, points or polygons to desired sizes.
STEP 3. Polygons with variables having dichotomous information (presence/absence)
should be reclassified as 1 for presence, 0 for absence; values will be numerical. Rasters
with continuous variables need to be grouped using Layer Properties>Symbology with
Manual grouping. Merge the vector datasets with the model area poly to get total
coverage of the model area.
STEP 4. Rasterize all layers. Create two rasters of the model polygon (usually 30 m size
grids), one with values of 0, and one with values of 1 across the whole grid (these are
used later in the process). The idea is to standardize the grid structure for future
calculations.
STEP 5. Extract all raster values of the dependent data points (sample of known sites,
usually AHRS data) by using Spatial Analyst>Generalize>Extract Values to Points in
ArcMap Toolbox. Generate a sample random point dataset of suitable size for statistical
purposes and extract all raster values for that dataset as was done for the known dataset.
FINAL STUDY PLAN CULTURAL RESOURCES STUDY 13.5
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Page 13-11 July 2013
STEP 6. Copy the extracted values into Excel spreadsheets and code the data; categorize
values to reduce numbers (i.e., group elevation values by 100 m intervals and identify
with a code number). Place coded data into statistical software such as Statistical Package
for the Social Sciences (SPSS) as data tables.
STEP 7. Run frequencies and cross tabulations. It is easiest to split types of sites (historic,
prehistoric) into separate tables accompanied by a comparable number of random sites
(i.e., prehistoric sites and similar number of random sites in a table, historic sites and
random sites in another table, etc.) prior to calculating frequencies and cross tabulations.
Examine results of variable association with the dependent data, and compare variable
associations with results for random points (this is best done using Pearson chi-square
tests).
STEP 8. Weight (reclassify) the rasters using the results of the statistical runs. Make sure
“no data” is equal to zero and the area of the model is covered completely when
reclassifying rasters (use 16 bit or higher signed raster types). For rasters which do not
cover the whole model use mosaic to new raster, combining the variable raster with the
model raster in Map Algebra>Raster Calculator (either multiply using the model raster
with values of 1 or add using the model raster with values of 0). Generally, a
reclassification requires recalculation.
STEP 9. Combine the rasters in Raster Calculator to produce a final model surface.
STEP 10. Examine the surface; use the results to assist in survey design or other analysis,
in understanding the area in general, and to address research questions.
The purpose of a locational model of this type produced is to use a sample of known site
distributions to inform archaeologists about site potential in nearby areas that have not been
previously examined for cultural resources. The method is probability-based in that statistically
significant relationships between variables form the basis for placing importance on those
variables. The experience and judgment of archaeologists involved in the modeling process is an
important component since decisions regarding how to spatially define the model area, which
variables to include, and how to categorize and apply model results are the responsibility of the
modeler. The Project model has been applied to the APE to stratify the modeled surface into
higher and lower potential areas for sites. Survey will be focused on areas judged of higher
potential for sites, though areas judged of lower potential also will be sampled.
This type of model is most effectively used for locating buried (subsurface) protohistoric or
prehistoric cultural resources, because land use shifted after Euro-American contact in many
areas of Alaska, and because historic era resources such as collapsed cabins, mining tailings, etc.,
are often more readily identifiable through aerial survey or historic records.
Problems with locational models are related to the resolution of datasets; fine-grained data are
not always available for meaningfully characterizing an area. The Project model has a visualized
resolution of 30 m, but some datasets such as temperature and precipitation are based on coarser
grids (rasters). In addition, variables based on modern datasets may imperfectly characterize
prehistoric environments, especially those with considerable time depth. However, the
environmental parameters associated with the known archaeological sites (regardless of the
actual chronological age of the site) are defined in modern terms, making locations across a
region comparable. Difficulties most likely occur at sites associated with extinct resources
FINAL STUDY PLAN CULTURAL RESOURCES STUDY 13.5
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Page 13-12 July 2013
(bison, for example), or at locations desirable for socio-cultural reasons such as spiritual ties or
other reasons not associated with quantifiable variables. Ethnogeographic datasets can, however,
be incorporated into models when they are available in coded form.
Complementing the model development are the results of the brief 2012 field season, which are
also incorporated into the comprehensive 2013-2014 study plan. During three weeks of 2012 a
crew of three evaluated how difficult it would be to relocate, map, and record existing cultural
resource sites within the direct APE. Inconsistent site location coordinates in the AHRS database
limited relocation of known sites to two or three per day. The 2012 effort indicates that
coordinates for all AHRS sites in the direct APE must be updated, for which it is estimated six
crews of six people will be necessary. To ensure the most consistent and reasoned application of
the model, field crews will be briefed on the criteria for defining high and low potential areas as
part of their initial project orientation.
13.5.4.3. Culturally Modified Trees
Culturally modified trees (CMTs) are quantifiable data that can only be detected from ground
surveys, though ethnogeographic studies can help identify where CMTs might be found and
interpret their meaning. In Alaska’s interior, traditional Native tree modification typically takes
the form of blazing, bark removal, and occasionally weaving or braiding of branches. Sometimes
CMTs mark a trail, route direction, or fork, but more often tree bark was harvested for uses such
as canoe manufacture, basketry, house construction, and cache pit lining. Typically the location,
number of CMTs, modification type (e.g., scar, plank removal, bark removal, burn), dimensions,
aspect, sketch, and a description of the CMT are recorded on a field form. Since 2001, in
consultation with the SHPO, groves with 25 or more CMTs are recorded in the AHRS inventory.
13.5.4.4. Lake Coring
Lakes and ponds can contain a paleoenvironmental record spanning hundreds and thousands of
years. Under stable conditions, their surfaces collect airborne sediments that then sink and
ultimately settle on the basin floor. By sampling lacustrine (lake) bottom sediments it is possible
to characterize past environmental conditions during the Holocene and very late Pleistocene.
Lake sediments typically contain pollen spores, volcanic ash (tephra), wind-blown silt (known as
aeolian silt, or loess), and sand. Insect exoskeletons, aquatic microorganisms, vegetation, and
other botanical and faunal remains in various states of preservation contribute to basin sediments.
Through time, the resulting lacustrine beds preserve a record of the area’s sedimentation history
and vegetation succession. Accurate information on the study area’s paleoenvironment helps
place the archaeological record in its proper context, and can contribute temporal depth to
analyses of contemporary flora and fauna.
Two important factors bearing on lacustrine coring methods are time of year and water body
depth. The best season to core lake beds is spring, when thick ice provides a stable work
platform and allows the coring equipment to remain relatively parallel to the water column. Also,
by mid-spring, the longer days provide safe and suitable working light. Without adequate ice, a
floating platform must be constructed and anchored into place after break-up, creating numerous
logistical problems. Water depth is the second most important factor when lake coring, with a
water depth of 15’-20’ being optimal. Deeper lakes require extensions on the coring device that
increase the fieldwork effort, which is why shallow water bodies are preferred sample locations.
FINAL STUDY PLAN CULTURAL RESOURCES STUDY 13.5
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Page 13-13 July 2013
Livingstone piston corers are the most common and least expensive devices used to core lakes
and ponds.
Three to five lakes at varying elevations in the study area will be cored, preferably shallow water
bodies near cultural resources. If bathymetric data is available it will be used to screen-out lakes
and ponds unsuitable for coring; if not, then additional reconnaissance effort will be required to
map lake bottoms.
Lake coring will be conducted in the spring of 2014, involving a crew of between three and five
specialists flown to each of the lakes to be sampled in the study area. A fixed-wing aircraft on
skis will be used to transport the crew and cores (due to weight restrictions and core sample
lengths -- multiple cores measuring 1 m each -- a helicopter is not advisable). The fieldwork is
estimated to take from three to five days. An ice auger will be used to cut a hole for inserting the
piston core extensions. Samples of the lacustrine sediments will be taken in one meter
increments depending on the sediment depth, with the ideal being an complete column from the
uppermost lake sediments down to bedrock. Glacially-derived kettle lakes common in the study
area provide favorable coring conditions. Analyses will be conducted by outside laboratories
other than AEA. Analyses to be conducted include: 1) radiocarbon dating consisting of 25-30
samples; 2) Carbon-Nitrogen isotope ratio; 3) oxygen isotope ration; 4) pollen identification; and
5) tephra geochemical characterization. The duration of laboratory preparation, analysis,
synthesis, and results is expected to extend into 2015. An interim report of radiocarbon results
and preliminary tephrochronology will be completed by 2014 and included in the Updated Study
Report.
13.5.4.5. Survey Strategy and Phasing of Field Investigations in the Direct APE
The study methods to be implemented in 2013 and 2014 focus on cultural resource identification
(inventory) and evaluation (OHA 2003). Described here are the accepted professional practices
commonly applied in contemporary archaeological and broader cultural resource investigations.
The known properties within the APE to be evaluated include precontact/prehistoric
archaeological sites, including isolated finds, TCPs, historic sites, and any other buildings,
structures, objects or districts of an architectural nature that may be eligible for listing on the
National Register. Discrimination of TCPs requires historic and ethnohistoric interviews,
translation, and field investigation. Surveys may also be needed in areas where access was
denied to archaeological crews in 1978-1985; and subsurface testing may be required at high-
potential areas that were identified but not tested during previous fieldwork.
An aerial survey will be conducted prior to full field crew deployment in 2013 and in 2014.
Aerial survey in this case will be used to verify proposed survey segments (Figure 13.5-5),
examine helicopter landing zones, examine the direct APE as defined in this document, and
provide planning data for the 2013-2014 field seasons.
The field investigations will be executed in two phases. Phase I (identification) surveys in 2013
and 2014 will address the direct APE including the camp, corridors, and impoundment area
(Figure 13.5-1). The Alaska OHA and SHPO have defined standards and guidelines for these
surveys. The Identification Phase is defined as, “reconnaissance level surveys . . . in the planning
stages of a project. They are used to determine if an intensive survey or testing is warranted, but
alone cannot normally be used to satisfy complete compliance. These studies entail development
of research designs, archival and background research, field survey, analysis, and reporting. All
FINAL STUDY PLAN CULTURAL RESOURCES STUDY 13.5
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Page 13-14 July 2013
surveys should include pedestrian (walkover) examinations of the ground surface and might
include subsurface testing” (OHA 2003).
Phase I survey in the direct APE will differ in coverage, intensity, and access in comparison to
Phase I surveys in the indirect APE (see subsection 13.5.4.5 for indirect APE survey strategy).
Survey in the direct APE will consist of pedestrian transects (described below), which record
high potential areas; these areas are tested as conditions and logistics allow (e.g., helicopter
access, daylight/weather, size of landform, etc.). The majority of effort in 2013 and 2014 will be
devoted to the direct APE.
Two types of survey will be conducted on the direct APE: aerial (Type A) and pedestrian (Type
B). Aerial surveys are conducted by helicopter at low airspeed and altitude across large expanses
of land. Areas of high potential within these vast expanses are recorded by GPS and camera and
returned to later for pedestrian survey and testing. Aerial surveys are also necessary in areas
where geographic boundaries prohibit access by survey crews. Examples in the study area
include steep valleys and river crossings, high elevations, and barrier waterfalls. Pedestrian
surveys will be conducted in areas that have high potential for cultural resources, and particularly
where there is high potential for deep aeolian sediments (especially during the 2013 field
season). Methods used to optimally cover large areas of land (e.g., 40 acres) are to space a crew
of six people 10 to 15 m apart in a line. The crew travels in a parallel line across the land
inspecting the ground surface, trees, understory vegetation, and micro-topography for cultural
resources.
Testing within a designated test area (regardless of whether or not it was identified by helicopter-
based survey or pedestrian-based survey) consists of at least six, 50 x 50 centimeter (cm) test pits
dug to a maximum of 1 m depth below ground surface. Tests are hand-excavated using a shovel
and trowel and screened through 1/4 in or 1/8 in mesh. Tests are spaced five to 10 m apart based
on the size of the landform. Tests are aligned in a systematically oriented, recorded, and
replicable grid pattern. Grid size, number of tests, grid spacing, and grid orientation are all
dictated by the size and shape of the landform being investigated. If cultural resources are
encountered during Phase I they will be recorded as AHRS sites; restricted site information will
be reported in the summary field report.
Phase II Evaluation surveys will be initiated on sites recommended in the Phase I assessment for
further work in 2013 and 2014. If it is determined that a site will not be affected by the Project
then no further survey will be recommended. Evaluations will require that one or more crews
return to selected sites to collect data for evaluating National Register eligibility of sites
potentially affected by the Project. Evaluation of known sites can require, but is not limited to:
intensive survey; delineation; establishment and mapping of site boundary; scaled drawings;
structural measurements; architectural assessment; dendrochronology; tephrochronology;
radiocarbon dating; artifact analysis; and recommendations.
Sites within the impoundment up to the 2,075-foot elevation may be affected, especially the
upper 100 feet (ft) where sites may be affected by shoreline erosion, scouring, sedimentation,
and seasonal flow variations. OHA (2003) defines the Evaluation Phase as requiring; “evaluation
of historic buildings and structures and/or investigation of adequate portions of archaeological
sites to evaluate the significance of the property. These studies entail development of research
designs, archival and background research, field studies, analysis, and reporting. When there are
three or more buildings or structures, it should be determined if the resources constitute an
FINAL STUDY PLAN CULTURAL RESOURCES STUDY 13.5
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Page 13-15 July 2013
historic district. Archaeological evaluation projects must include excavation as a major
component of field sampling.” Sampling theory is composed of a number of contrasting or
complimentary methods yielding results from a subset of a greater whole. The goal is to achieve
an accurate result from the subset or sample that can be used to extrapolate the same result to the
larger whole. “Adaptive sampling” allows modification of the sample design or strategy during
the Evaluation Phase based on positive or negative results (Orton 2000:34).
The sample will be selected from all the sites recorded during the Identification Phase. This
sample will be fully evaluated to determine eligibility during the Evaluation Phase. Until all sites
have been identified, the sample size is unknown. The eligibility of a site to the NRHP may be
based on four criteria: A) sites that are associated with events that have made a significant
contribution to the broad patterns of our history; or B) sites that are associated with the lives of
significant persons in our past; or C) sites that embody the distinctive characteristics of a type,
period, or method of construction, or that represent the work of a master, or that possess high
artistic values, or that represent a significant and distinguishable entity whose components may
lack individual distinction; or D) sites that have yielded or may be likely to yield, information
important in history or prehistory (NPS 2012). The sample will also be based on site-specific
criteria (e.g., within the direct APE, multicomponent, contain human remains, has organic
preservation, intact tephra deposits, etc.). Because the cultural resource investigation is being
done within an anthropological framework, and because Anthropology relies on the comparative
method, adequate sample sizes of sites and specimens are critical for making the comparisons
that will lead to defensible interpretations of the archaeological record with the APEs.
Many sites in areas that may be affected by the Project, such as the proposed inundation zone,
will need Phase II surveys. Some affected sites will meet more than one of the criteria listed
above, thus reducing the sample size. The greatest amount of effort will be focused on the
impoundment area. Phase II survey will be conducted, in the direct APE only, in 2013 and 2014.
Results of the inventory survey will be presented in a Phase I report with recommendations for
Evaluation Phase II testing and analysis of affected sites. The Project team will immediately
begin processing site evaluation data as they are gathered. Lab analysis and report writing will be
conducted concurrently with execution of the field survey. The required Phase II evaluation
report will be prepared in 2014 for submittal by AEA to SHPO, BLM, and FERC. The results of
this survey will help inform preparation of the HPMP. As is common after the application has
been obtained, the HPMP may reserve subsequent seasons for completing evaluations, as
necessary, and for developing management measures for historic properties within the APE (see
FERC 2002).
13.5.4.6. Survey Strategy and Phasing of Field Investigations in the Indirect APE
The study methods applied to the indirect APE will differ from those described above for the
direct APE. The methods will follow accepted professional practices for cultural resource
investigations, but will differ in the amount of testing, aerial and ground survey intensity, and
site recordation. The indirect APE defined above and shown on Figure 13.5-1 is the portion of
the study area that may see increased human access and activity due to Project development.
Phase I survey in the indirect APE will be mainly conducted by aerial survey. Pedestrian survey
will also be necessary in the indirect APE where the Project has been determined to have a
potential effect on cultural resources. But the amount of ground survey in the indirect APE will
FINAL STUDY PLAN CULTURAL RESOURCES STUDY 13.5
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Page 13-16 July 2013
be less than in the direct APE. This discrimination will require supplemental engineering and
geotechnical Project data such as proposed locations of ancillary facilities. It is understood that
once these types of ancillary facilities are clearly defined then they will be incorporated into the
direct APE. Until such facilities are defined then they will be surveyed as part of the indirect
APE. Other indirect areas include trails and navigable waters providing access to the direct APE.
The indirect APE addresses the impacts of activity in proximity to the impoundment but outside
the direct APE.
The two types of survey to be conducted in the indirect APE are termed aerial (Type A) and
pedestrian (Type B) (described in more detail above in subsection 13.5.4.4). The majority of the
indirect APE will need to be aerially surveyed by helicopter with one crew at low air speed and
altitude. Pedestrian survey will be conducted in areas of the indirect APE that have a high
potential for containing cultural resources. Pedestrian survey consists of one crew of six or more
spread along a line 10 to 15 m apart. Type B surveys will likely constitute a small proportion of
survey area compared with Type A survey areas.
Subsurface testing will be conducted in areas that have at least been pedestrian surveyed. Testing
consists of digging 50 x 50 cm test pits to a depth of 1 m when possible. Testing will be
systematic. Testing intensity will be defined by the high potential landform shape, size, and safe
accessibility. Normally, at least six tests will be excavated in any given test area. A grid will be
laid out and tests will be performed every five to 10 m. If cultural resources are encountered
during testing they will be recorded as AHRS sites and restricted site information will be
reported in the summary field report.
Phase II Evaluations will be conducted in the indirect APE in locations where Project-induced
recreational activities along existing trails and camp sites leading to the reservoir could adversely
affect cultural resources. The level of effort required to conduct a Phase II National Register
eligibility evaluation in these areas will be developed in consultation with the SHPO, federal and
municipal agencies, Alaska Native entities, and other interested parties, following AEA’s
completion of the initial work in the indirect APE described in this section.
With regard to other potential Project-related effects to cultural resources in the indirect APE
identified at a later time, (e.g., due to changes in Project design, scope, and/or location of Project
works and facilities), then those sites will be recommended for evaluation in field studies beyond
the 2013-2014 seasons.
13.5.4.7. Mapping-Related Activities
• Map recently identified prehistoric resource locations. Sites will be relocated and mapped
with a survey-grade Trimble GeoXT 6000 Series in North American Datum of 1983
(NAD83) with real-time accuracy of 50 cm (scheduled for completion in 2013-2014).
• Add to or adjust locational data on prehistoric settlement patterns and land use (scheduled
for completion in 2013-2014).
• Add to or adjust locational data on historic settlement patterns and transportation routes
(scheduled for completion in 2013-2014).
• Compile additional relevant environmental datasets from the 2012 field season for use in
future locational model (scheduled throughout 2013-2014).
FINAL STUDY PLAN CULTURAL RESOURCES STUDY 13.5
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Page 13-17 July 2013
• Map TCPs within the APE, creating a geodatabase with TCP locations and place names.
Locations will be depicted based on historical and cultural information. Depending on the
nature of some resources, special restrictions may need to be placed on access to
information (scheduled throughout 2013-2014).
• Prepare maps using the latest GIS files with Ahtna place names (Kari 2012) and
expanding and annotating the current Ahtna/Dena’ina place name inventory into the
geodatabase being developed for cultural resource sites (scheduled throughout 2013-
2014).
13.5.4.8. Ethnogeography-Related Activities
• Hold a regional elders conference as a venue to inform communities of the upcoming
research work, including information on other AEA sponsored research, such as fisheries
and wildlife studies, subsistence studies, etc. The conference is planned to be held in the
Ahtna region (since most Native contributors are from that region) with invitations to
others, and scheduled so as not to interfere with the Alaska Federation of Natives (AFN)
annual meeting. A conference in early March of 2013 will avoid traditional Ahtna and
Dena’ina subsistence activity windows and the date will be scheduled concurrent with
other community meetings or gatherings for maximum efficiency and courtesy.
• Identify, inventory, and compile archival data sources of the Ahtna language, with
particular focus on the Jake Tansy recordings on land use and travel, some of which
appear in Kari (2010). Recorded stories pertinent to the upper Susitna River from other
Ahtna narrators, including Jim Tyone, Jack Tyone, John Shaginoff, Henry Peters, and
Fred John will be evaluated, along with the few known Shem Pete recordings and
narrative segments that pertain to the Talkeetna Mountains and the upper Susitna River
(scheduled throughout 2013-2014).
• Identify and inventory additional data from collections of tapes and transcripts recorded
in the English language by the BIA, the Institute for Social and Economic research
(ISER), Ahtna, Inc., and other researchers, including Frederica de Laguna and Constance
West (scheduled throughout 2013-2014).
• Identify knowledgeable Ahtna individuals to interview for current ethnographic
information on potential TCPs in the study area (scheduled throughout 2013-2014).
• Collect Ahtna interview data on contemporary land use and the cultural landscape
(scheduled throughout 2013-2014).
• Develop interview protocol with the assistance of knowledgeable Ahtna individuals to
guide effective interviewing (scheduled throughout 2013-2014).
• Interview 30 to 50 Ahtna persons of different ages (estimate two hours per interview)
(scheduled throughout 2013-2014).
• Document the results of Ahtna interviews, and transcribe tapes (scheduled throughout
2013-2014).
• In consultation with CIRI, identify knowledgeable Dena’ina elders to interview for
current ethnographic information on potential TCPs in the study area, to build on existing
FINAL STUDY PLAN CULTURAL RESOURCES STUDY 13.5
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Page 13-18 July 2013
Upper Cook Inlet Dena’ina places names work (Kari and Fall 2003) (scheduled for
2014).
• Collect Dena’ina interview data on contemporary land use and the cultural landscape
(scheduled for 2014).
• Develop interview protocol with the assistance with Dena’ina elders, and in consultation
with CIRI, to guide effective interviewing (scheduled for 2014).
• Interview Dena’ina elders (estimate two hours per interview) (scheduled for 2014).
• Document the results of Dena’ina interviews, and transcribe tapes (scheduled for
throughout 2014).
• Develop data on three types of trails: BLM layer, field observation layer, and historic foot
trail layer.
13.5.4.9. Synthesis and Analysis Activities
• Develop historic contexts. This task will be largely dependent on the outcome of 2012
planning studies, fieldwork, analysis, and agency consultation. This task will be
implemented in 2013.
• Update cultural chronology. This task will be largely dependent on the outcome of 2012
planning studies and 2013-2014 fieldwork and analysis. For this reason, the work will be
deferred until after field studies are complete. This will require collecting and analyzing
samples at a number of sites for archaeometric analysis, radiocarbon dating, optically
stimulated luminescence OSL dating, and tephrochronology (see Bowers et al. 2012).
• Develop archaeological locational model prior to fieldwork. Digital data will be
examined statistically to assess strength of associations between known dependent
variables (site locations) and independent variables, such as elevation and other
environmental variables (15 to 20 or more variables can be assessed). The model output
is a map of the study area with negative to positive values depicted in 30 m (98 ft) by 30
m (98 ft) units that grade from dark to light; areas with negative or lower values are least
likely to hold sites, and areas with higher, positive values are most likely to hold sites.
The information generated is useful for developing survey strategies across the APE and
particularly unsurveyed areas, but it is also applicable to surveyed areas that appear to
need further exploration.
• Transcribe and translate place name terms and narratives, with initial translation
performed by Dr. Kari (scheduled throughout 2013-2014).
• Proofread and correct initial and secondary translations by language specialists or Ahtna
elders (scheduled throughout 2013-2014).
• Synthesize data sets to prepare an Interim Study Report by early February 2014 and a
final comprehensive report to be submitted as the Updated Study Report by early
February 2015. Combine the archaeological results; locational model; historic and
contemporary land use patterns; Ahtna and Dena’ina perspectives on the land and
FINAL STUDY PLAN CULTURAL RESOURCES STUDY 13.5
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Page 13-19 July 2013
resources; Ahtna- and Dena’ina-language place names; and narratives about important
locations. Identify additional studies and reports if needed (scheduled for 2014).
13.5.4.10. Inadvertent Discoveries
Protocols for the inadvertent discovery of human remains, graves, and/or burial items are
described in the Plan for Unanticipated Discoveries of Cultural Resources and Human Remains.
This document outlines the methods for confirming field discoveries, requirements for
communicating discovery information, and contacts for state officials, federal agents, and
affected Alaska Native entities.
13.5.4.11. Archaeological Internship and Additional Workforce
AEA’s cultural resources study will include an internship program to provide an opportunity for
Alaska Native entities to participate in the fieldwork and work alongside registered professional
archaeologists for the 2013 and 2014 seasons. Duties, desired experience, and preferred
educational background are outlined below.
Primary Responsibilities:
• Assisting in conducting Phase I reconnaissance survey
• Assisting in conducting Phase II site evaluations
• Using standard archaeological field techniques, these include:
o Walking transects (up to 5 miles per day, possibly more) and working 6-12 hours
per day in the boreal forest
o Taking notes and photographs
o Digging shovel and trowel test pits
o Screening sediments
o Carrying a pack and equipment (weighing up to 35 pounds)
Knowledge and Skill Requirements:
• Course work in history, social sciences, and earth sciences
• Experience/training in specialized areas is preferred (e.g., anthropology, geology,
ecology)
AEA also plans to invite Matanuska-Susitna Borough archaeologists, when available, to work
with the archaeological crews in the field.
13.5.5. Consistency with Generally Accepted Scientific Practice
The research methods discussed in this proposed Cultural Resources Study (Section 13.5) are
consistent with professional practices and FERC’s study requirements under the Integrated
Licensing Process (ILP). Inventory, evaluation, and determination of effect are well-established
steps under NHPA Section 106 and the ACHP’s implementing regulations at 36 CFR Part 800.
Additionally, the quality of work and qualifications of workers will adhere to the Secretary of the
Interior’s Standards and Guidelines for Archaeology and Historic Preservation (48 FR 44716).
This Cultural Resources Study will be undertaken in accordance with the implementing
regulations of NHPA Section 106, FERC’s ILP regulations, the Secretary of the Interior’s
FINAL STUDY PLAN CULTURAL RESOURCES STUDY 13.5
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Page 13-20 July 2013
(Secretary) Standards and Guidelines for Archeology and Historic Preservation (48 FR 44716),
the Secretary’s Professional Qualification Standards (48 FR 22716), and the ACHP’s general
guidelines for identification and testing procedures as set forth in Treatment of Archeological
Properties, A Handbook. Unless otherwise specified, field notes, samples, artifacts, and other
collected data will be curated with the University of Alaska Museum in Fairbanks in accordance
with the requirements set forth in 36 CFR Part 79. Site information, other than the site’s AHRS
number and National Register eligibility, will be maintained as confidential as provided for
under NHPA Section 304, as amended (16 U.S.C. § 470w-3).
In addition, all field crew members will receive approximately two hours of
classroom/laboratory instruction on tephra identification and its importance, as well as
approximately two hours of classroom/laboratory instruction on soil stratigraphy, as part of the
routine pre-field training for archaeological survey crews.
Because FERC’s standard practice in hydropower licensing processes is to enter into a (PA) with
the SHPO, AEA expects FERC to circulate a draft PA following the completion of the cultural
resources study, and likely shortly after its issuance of the draft environmental impact statement.
13.5.6. Schedule
In 2012, a crew of three archaeologists worked within the direct APE to derive estimates for the
time and effort needed to relocate, map, and record known cultural resource sites. Two to three
known sites were relocated per day, so it is estimated that six six-person crews will be necessary
to adequately inventory all known sites in the direct APE. The 2012 field survey determined that
the known site coordinates are inaccurate and will need to be updated in the AHRS database as a
result of the cultural resource inventory. Results of the 2012 field season have been incorporated
into the 2013-14 Revised Study Plan.
Fieldwork performed in 2013-2014 (Table 13.5-3) will include the following components:
• Site Surveys (Inventory Phase). Applying the GIS-based locational model developed
early in the study, the 2013-2014 field efforts will begin within the impoundment area.
Survey will take place in the proposed Gold Creek, Chulitna, and Denali Corridors. To
the extent possible, the study will make use of the 1978-1985 Phase I survey data (e.g.,
Bowers et al. 2012; Dixon et al. 1985; Greiser et al. 1985, 1986).
• Site Testing (Evaluation Phase). The 2013-2014 field efforts will initiate systematic site
testing, with the goal of developing recommendations of eligibility to the National
Register for a sample of sites within the direct APE. This will primarily include the
Watana impoundment zone, and to a lesser extent the proposed Gold Creek, Chulitna,
and Denali Corridors.
Study products to be delivered in 2013-2015 will include:
• Interim Reporting. The progress of the cultural resource investigations will be presented
to the Technical Workgroup on a quarterly basis during 2013 and 2014.
• ArcGIS Spatial Products. Shapefiles of the 1980s and current cultural resources data
will be compiled into a geodatabase for the study area. All map and spatial data products
will be delivered in the two-dimensional Alaska Albers Conical Equal Area projection,
and NAD 83 horizontal datum consistent with ADNR standards. Naming conventions of
FINAL STUDY PLAN CULTURAL RESOURCES STUDY 13.5
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Page 13-21 July 2013
files and data fields; spatial resolution; and metadata descriptions must meet the ADNR
standards established for the Project.
• Final Reports. Reports completed at the beginning of 2014 and 2015 will summarize the
results of each field season and will be submitted to resource agency personnel and other
licensing participants along with spatial data products. This will include
recommendations for additional study in subsequent field seasons and will cover
Identification and Evaluation Phases of the Project studies. Reports will follow FERC
and SHPO protocols (36 CFR Part 800); will follow professionally-accepted standards;
and will include site descriptions, site evaluations (Recommendations of Eligibility), and
Determinations of Effect. The reports will be filed with FERC to fulfill the study report
requirements of 18 CFR section 5.15(c) and (f) of the ILP regulations.
During the licensing process AEA, in consultation with the SHPO and BLM, will develop an
HPMP specifying procedures for the continued identification, evaluation, and protection of
historic properties.
13.5.7. Relationship with Other Studies
The cultural resource study’s interdependency with other studies is depicted in Figure 13.5-6.
Both the Ethnogeography/TCP effort and the archaeological inventory expect to be informed by
information resulting from other studies – to be in hand by Q4 2013. A set of three questions has
been included in the Traditional Knowledge surveys as part of the Subsistence Study (Section
14), specifically to illicit comments about potential TCPs. The questions are general, derived
from the legal definition of a TCP, and designed to draw-out details from the narrator. In turn,
the ethnogeography investigation is expected to have developed oral history accounts about
caribou migrations and possibly other natural resource patterns by Q2 2014, which is information
of value to the Subsistence study group (Figure 13.5-6).
Three study groups will yield information of use to the archaeological inventory, within the
cultural resource study. The Recreational Resources study will contribute information on trails
and predicted recreation localities within the study area, the Geology and Soils study will
contribute information bearing on erosion and mass-wasting processes, and the Geomorphology
study will provide information on the age of landforms. The cultural resource investigations will
produce data sets on site nature and location, so reports are expected to be of limited distribution
and largely not shared with other study groups (Figure 13.5-6).
13.5.8. Level of Effort and Cost
The work described above will take place during the 2013 and 2014 field seasons, with initiation
of evaluations of National Register eligibility in 2013-2014. Costs proposed here are in addition
to the 2012 reconnaissance effort. For the combined 2013 and 2014 effort, the costs of cultural
resource investigations (including field studies, data collection and mapping, analysis, and
reporting) have been estimated to cost $7.2-$8.2 million.
13.5.9. Literature Cited
Ahtna, Inc. 2012. Land and Resource Group: Mission Statement. Web. Accessed 2012
<http://www.ahtna-inc.com/land_department.html>
FINAL STUDY PLAN CULTURAL RESOURCES STUDY 13.5
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Page 13-22 July 2013
Alaska Energy Authority (AEA). 2011. Pre-Application Document: Susitna-Watana
Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No. 14241. December 2011. Prepared for the Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission by the Alaska Energy Authority, Anchorage, Alaska.
Alaska Office of History and Archaeology. 2011. Alaska Historic Resources Survey database.
Web. Accessed September 2011 <http://dnr.alaska.gov/parks/oha/ahrs/ahrs.htm>
Alaska Office of History and Archaeology (OHA) 2003. Standards and Guidelines for
Investigating and Reporting Archaeological Historic Properties in Alaska. History
Preservation Series No. 11. Alaska Department of Natural Resources, Anchorage.
Betts, R. C., 1987 Archaeological Investigations at Butte Lake, Alaska: An Inquiry into Alaskan
Notched Point-Microblade Assemblages. University of Alaska, Department of
Anthropology, Geist Fund Report 91. Fairbanks.
Bowers, Peter (editor), Joshua D. Reuther, Richard O. Stern, Carol Gelvin-Reymiller, Dale C.
Slaughter, Jill Baxter-McIntosh, Haley Brown, and Sarah McGowan. 2012. Susitna-
Watana Hydroelectric Project Cultural Resources Data Gap Analysis. Report prepared
for the Alaska Energy Authority, Anchorage. Report prepared by Northern Land Use
Research, Inc., Fairbanks.
Blong, John. 2011. Preliminary Summary on 2010-2011 Field Research in the Upper Susitna
Basin. Unpublished manuscript. Northern Land Use Research, Inc., Fairbanks.
de Laguna, Frederica and Catharine McClellan 1981. Ahtna. In Subarctic, edited by J. Helm, pp.
641-663. Handbook of North American Indians, Volume 6, W. C. Sturdevant, general
editor. 20 vols. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, DC.
Dilley, Thomas E. 1988. Holocene Tephra Stratigraphy and Pedogenesis in the Middle Susitna
River Valley, Alaska. Unpublished Master of Science thesis, Department of Geology,
University of Alaska, Fairbanks.
Dixon, E. James Jr. 1985. Cultural Chronology of Central Interior Alaska. Arctic Anthropology
22(1):47-66.
Dixon, E. James, Jr., George S. Smith, and David C. Plaskett. 1980. Environmental Studies
Procedures Manual/Research Design: Subtask 7.06 Cultural Resources Investigation for
the Susitna Hydropower Project. Alaska Power Authority, Susitna Hydroelectric Project,
submitted to Acres American, Inc. by Terrestrial Environmental Specialists, Inc., and
University of Alaska Museum, Fairbanks.
Dixon, E. James Jr., George S. Smith, William Andrefsky, Becky M. Saleeby, and Charles J.
Utermohle. 1985. Susitna Hydroelectric Project, Cultural Resources Investigations,
1979-1985. Alaska Power Authority, Susitna Hydroelectric Project, Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission Project No. 7114 Volume VI, Appendices E and F. University of
Alaska Museum, Fairbanks, Alaska (APA document no. 2718).
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) 2002. Guidelines for the Development of
Historic Properties Management Plans for FERC Hydroelectric Projects. Washington
D.C.
Greiser, T. Weber, Sally T. Greiser, Glenn H. Bacon, Thomas A. Foor, Priscilla Russell Kari,
James Kari, David F. Gallacher, and Janene M. Caywood. 1985. Phase I Report:
FINAL STUDY PLAN CULTURAL RESOURCES STUDY 13.5
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Page 13-23 July 2013
Background Research and Predictive Model for Cultural Resources Located Along the
Susitna Hydroelectric Project’s Linear Features Volume I. Report by Historical Research
Associates, Missoula, Montana, with contributions from Alaska Heritage Research
Group, Inc. through Harza-Ebasco Susitna Joint Venture for Alaska Power Authority,
Anchorage, Alaska (APA document no. 2865).
Greiser, T. Weber, Sally T. Greiser, Glenn H. Bacon, David F. Gallacher, Thomas A. Foor, and
James A. Fall. 1986. Susitna Hydroelectric Project Phase II Final Report. Sample Survey
and Predictive Model Refinement for Cultural Resources Located along the Susitna
Hydroelectric Project Linear Features Volumes 1 and 2. Report to Harza-Ebasco Susitna
Joint Venture and Alaska Power Authority by Historical Research Associates, Missoula.
Hays, Justin M., Peter M. Bowers, Charles M. Mobley, and Taylor Brelsford. 2012. Cultural
Resources Study. Report prepared for the Alaska Energy Authority by Northern Land Use
Research, Inc., Charles M. Mobley and Associates, and URS Corporation, Fairbanks.
Kari, James (editor). 1983. Ahtna Place Names Lists, Preliminary Edition. A Joint Publication of
the Copper River Native Association and the Alaska Native Language Center, Copper
Center and Fairbanks, Alaska.
Kari, James. 1999 Draft Final Report: Native Place Names Mapping in Denali National Park
and Preserve. National Park Service.
Kari, James. 2008. Ahtna Place Names Lists. 2nd ed. revised. Fairbanks: Alaska Native
Language Center.
Kari, James. 2010. Ahtna Travel Narratives - A Demonstration of Shared Geographic
Knowledge Among Alaskan Athabascans. Fairbanks: Alaska Native Language Center.
Kari, James. 2011. A Case Study in Ahtna Athabascan Geographic Knowledge. IN Landscape in
Language, Transdisciplinary Perspectives, ed. by D.M. Mark, A.G. Turk, N. Burenhult
& D. Stea. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, pp. 239-260.
Kari, James. 2012. Place Names Maps for Ahtna Inc. Fairbanks: Alaska Native Language
Center. CD with 17 pdf files.
Kari, James and James A. Fall. 2003. Shem Pete's Alaska. The Territory of the Upper Cook Inlet
Dena'ina. 2nd ed. University of Alaska, Fairbanks, Fairbanks Alaska.
Kari, James and Siri Tuttle. 2005. Copper River Native Places: A Report on Culturally Important
Places to Alaska Native Tribes in Southcentral Alaska. BLM Alaska Technical Report
No. 56. USDOI, Bureau of Land Management, Anchorage, Alaska.
Krauss, Michael, Gary Holton, Jim Kerr, and Colin T. West. 2011. Indigenous Peoples and
Languages of Alaska. Map. Fairbanks and Anchorage: Alaska Native Language Center
and UAA Institute of Social and Economic Research (Updated Version of map originally
by Krauss 1974).
National Park Service 2012. National Register Bulletin. How to Apply the National Register
Criteria for Evaluation. www.nps.gov/nr/publications/bulletins/nrb15/nrb15_2.htm
Accessed on October 19, 2012.
Orton, Clive. 2000. Sampling in Archaeology. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
FINAL STUDY PLAN CULTURAL RESOURCES STUDY 13.5
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Page 13-24 July 2013
Simeone, William E. and James Kari . 2002. Traditional Knowledge and Fishing Practices of the
Ahtna of Copper River, Alaska. Alaska Department of Fish and Game, Division of
Subsistence, Technical Paper No. 270.
Simeone, William E. and James Kari. 2004. The Harvest and Use of Non-salmon Fish Species in
the Copper River Basin. Office of Subsistence Management Fisheries Resource
Monitoring Program. Alaska Department of Fish and Game, Division of Subsistence.
Technical Paper No. 292.
Simeone, William E., and Erica McCall Valentine. 2007. Ahtna Knowledge of Long-term
Changes in Salmon Runs in the Upper Copper River Drainage, Alaska. Alaska
Department of Fish and Game, Division of Subsistence. Technical Paper No. 324.
Simeone, William E., Adam Russell and Richard O. Stern. 2011. Watana Hydroelectric Project
Subsistence Data Gap Analysis. Report prepared for ABR, Inc., and the Alaska Energy
Authority by Northern Land Use Research, Inc., Anchorage, Alaska.
VanderHoek, Richard. 2011. Cultural Resource Management Plan for the Denali Highway
Lands, Central Alaska. Draft manuscript. Alaska Office of History and Archaeology
Report Number 112. Alaska Office of History and Archaeology, Division of Parks and
Outdoor Recreation, Anchorage.
VanderHoek, Richard, Randolph M. Tedor and J. David McMahan. 2007. Cultural Materials Re-
covered from Ice Patches in the Denali Highway Region, Central Alaska, 2003-2005.
Alaska Journal of Anthropology 5(2): 185-199.
Wygal, Bryan. 2009. Prehistoric Colonization of Southcentral Alaska: Human Adaptations in a
Post Glacial World. Dissertation. Department of Anthropology, University of Nevada,
Reno.
FINAL STUDY PLAN CULTURAL RESOURCES STUDY 13.5
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Page 13-25 July 2013
13.5.10. Tables
Table 13.5-1. Datasets used in Project Model 1
Dataset Source Access
Archaeological site type and location Alaska Heritage Resources Survey (AHRS)- Alaska Office
of History and Archaeology
Permit
Revised Statute 2477 Historic Trails Alaska Dept. of Natural Resources Public
Digital elevation models (DEM) United States Geological Survey Public
Surface geology, lode deposits, sediment
basins
United States Geological Survey, Alaska Dept. of Natural
Resources
Public
Ecoregion United States Geological Survey Public
Hydrography United States Geological Survey, Alaska Dept. of Natural
Resources
Public
Vegetation U of California, Berkeley, Ducks Unlimited Public
Wetlands United States Fish and Wildlife Service Public
Wildlife (fowl, fish, mammals) Alaska Department of Fish and Game & Alaska Department
of Natural Resources
Public
Permafrost National Snow and Ice Data Center Public
Temperature and Precipitation National Snow and Ice Data Center Public
FINAL STUDY PLAN CULTURAL RESOURCES STUDY 13.5
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Page 13-26 July 2013
Table 13.5-2. Classified variables examined in Project locational modeling.
Variables Classes
Site type classes 1 through 4 (Random, Prehistoric, Native Historic, Euro-American
Historic)
DEM classes 1 through 23 (100-meter increments)
Slope classes 1 through 9 (5-degree increments)
Aspect classes 1 through 9 (45-degree increments)
Surficial geology 16 classes (dataset codes)
Possible tool-stone location presence/absence (1, 0)
Coal deposits presence/absence (1, 0)
Metalliferous-lode deposits presence/absence (1, 0)
Vegetation classes 0 through 23 (dataset codes)
Distance to lake classes 1 through 4 (within 100, 500, 1000 meters, & > 1000 meters)
Distance to stream classes 1 through 4 (within 100, 500, 1000 meters, & > 1000 meters)
Distance to anadromous waters classes 1 through 4 (within 100, 500, 1000 meters, & > 1000 meters)
Caribou ranges presence/absence (1, 0 - summer, winter, calving, migration routes)
Moose ranges presence/absence (1, 0 - summer, winter, calving, rutting)
Dall’s sheep ranges presence/absence (1, 0 - summer, winter)
Dall’s sheep licks presence/absence (1, 0)
Duck & geese ranges presence/absence (1, 0 - nesting, molting, summer, winter, migration routes)
Swan ranges presence/absence (1, 0 - nesting, molting, summer, winter, migration routes)
Seabird colonies presence/absence (1, 0)
Eagle/raptor concentrations presence/absence (1, 0)
Precipitation classes 1 through 6, January (20 millimeter increments) & July (30 millimeter
increments)
Temperature classes 1 through 5, January (3-degree C increments) & July (1 degree C
increments)
Permafrost classes 1 through 8 (dataset codes)
FINAL STUDY PLAN CULTURAL RESOURCES STUDY 13.5
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Page 13-27 July 2013
Table 13.5-3. Schedule for implementation of the cultural resource study.
Activity 2012 2013 2014 2015
1 Q 2 Q 3 Q 4 Q 1 Q 2 Q 3 Q 4 Q 1 Q 2 Q 3 Q 4 Q 1 Q
Reconnaissance level field study
Modeling and sample design
development from 2012 field
reconnaissance
Pre-field preparation (logistics,
equipment, maps, safety, training
and aerial reconnaissance of
direct and indirect APEs)
Archeological Field studies –
Inventory (priority on the
impoundment, followed by
corridors)
Archeological Field studies –
Initiation of Evaluation (priority on
the impoundment, followed by
corridors)
Ethnogeographic Study,
planning, coordination with tribes,
Elders conference
Ethnogeographic Fieldwork
Draft Ethnogeographic study
report, circulated for community
review, Elders conference
Initial Study Report
Δ
Additional modeling from 2013
field study results, integrate
results from ethnogeographic
study, develop sample design for
2014
Lake coring ____
Pre-field preparation (logistics,
equipment, maps, safety training)
Field studies –Inventory
(corridors and trails)
Field studies – Evaluation (all
project components)
Updated Study Report ▲
Legend:
Planned Activity
Δ Initial Study Report (February 2014)
▲ Updated Study Report (February 2015)
FINAL STUDY PLAN CULTURAL RESOURCES STUDY 13.5
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Page 13-28 July 2013
13.5.11. Figures
Figure 13.1-1. Property ownership in the vicinity of the study area.
FINAL STUDY PLAN CULTURAL RESOURCES STUDY 13.5
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Page 13-29 July 2013
Figure 13.5-1. Direct and indirect APEs for the cultural resource study.
FINAL STUDY PLAN CULTURAL RESOURCES STUDY 13.5
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Page 13-30 July 2013
Figure 13.5-2. Survey coverage accomplished in the late 1970s and early 1980s.
FINAL STUDY PLAN CULTURAL RESOURCES STUDY 13.5
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Page 13-31 July 2013
Figure 13.5-3. Traditional Native language areas in the vicinity of the study area.
FINAL STUDY PLAN CULTURAL RESOURCES STUDY 13.5
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Page 13-32 July 2013
Figure 13.5-4. Detail of testing accomplished in the late 1970s and early 1980s.
FINAL STUDY PLAN CULTURAL RESOURCES STUDY 13.5
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Page 13-33 July 2013
Figure 13.5-5. Proposed survey methods in the direct and indirect APEs.
FINAL STUDY PLAN CULTURAL RESOURCES STUDY 13.5
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Page 13-34 July 2013
Figure 13.5-6. Study interdependencies for the cultural resources study.