The Saanich Inlet study area encompasses all linear and island shoreline configurations between Hatch Point at the western entrance to the inlet, south to the Goldstream estuary, and north to Moses Point at the eastern entrance. Eighty-one archaeological sites have been recorded in the study area and entered in the British Columbia Archaeological Site Inventory. All 81 sites occur either directly on the Saanich Inlet shoreline or in the near upland zone adjacent to Saanich Inlet waters. This site distribution may be a reflection of the importance of marine resources and the predominance of water transportation among coastal First Nations groups. However, it may simply be a reflection of the past focus on shoreline site inventory projects by archaeologists working in this region and not a true representation of past aboriginal land-use or occupation practices.
During the past 25 years, Saanich Inlet shorelines and adjacent near upland zones have been surveyed at a reconnaissance level by Acheson, et al (1975) and Powell (1978 and 1979). Several archaeological test excavations have been conducted at various sites in the area by Oliver (1974) and as a part of recent impact assessment studies conducted by Wilson (1987, 1988, and 1989), Eldridge (1989), and Mason and Ham (1994). Wilson (1991) also prepared a brief heritage resource overview for the Bamberton area. Except for small geographical locales associated with recent impact assessments, no intensive level archaeological surveys have been conducted in the study area. Site-specific archaeological data available for the area are highly variable due to the site recording standards employed two decades ago when most of the known sites for the area were documented. Site survey techniques and recording standards have evolved considerably during the intervening period.
The types of archaeological sites present can be summarized only at a general level due to the variable nature of the information recorded on B. C. Archaeological Site Inventory forms. In summary, 79 (97.5 %) of the 81 recorded sites in the study area are shell midden sites(1). Eight of the 79 shell midden sites are known to contain human remains. Of the two remaining sites, one is a human burial site with associated trade goods while the second site is recorded simply as a site with a depression and surface lithics present.
Shell midden sites can range in size from small shellfish processing sites to large village sites that were occupied on a year round basis. These types of sites can be assessed both in terms of surface area (length x width) as well as volume of cultural deposit present (length x width x depth). For the 79 shell middens sites recorded in the study area, only surface area assessments can be made as depth measurements were infrequently recorded. The size distribution of the 79 shell midden sites by surface area is presented below.
________________________________________________________
< 499 sq. m 25 sites
500 - 1,999 sq. m. 28 sites
2,000 - 4,999 sq. m. 11 sites
5,000 - 9,999 sq. m. 4 sites
10,000 - 19,999 sq. m. 1 site
> 20,000 sq. m. 3 sites
Unknown 7 sites
________________________________________________________
In terms of surface area, 53 (74 %) of the 72 shell midden sites have a surface area of less than 2,000 square meters. These sites are likely camp sites that were used on a seasonal basis to exploit the wide range of resources present in the study area prior to European contact. The eight sites (11 %) with surface areas exceeding 5,000 square meters are likely village sites that were occupied on a year round basis by at least a portion of the resident social unit. The 11 sites (15 %) in the 2,000 to 4,999 square meter range are more difficult to assign to either category without subsurface testing or excavation. Village/camp assignments are based solely on surface dimensions and are speculative. Further detailed surface and subsurface data is required before definitive determinations can be made in this regard.
No stone wall or other fish trap sites or rock art sites (pictograph and petroglyph sites), have been recorded in the study area. Evidence of fish trap structures associated with salmon streams in the area may have been destroyed by subsequent commercial or residential activity. However, it is unlikely that sites of this type were present in the area in the past, at least in the areas directly associated with the Bamberton Project lands, since salmon-bearing streams are not present here.
The geographic location of the 81 sites in the study area have been characterized according to their distribution in both the upland and intertidal zones, or in the intertidal zone only. Fifty-seven (70 %) of the 81 sites recorded occur in the upland zone while 24 sites (30 %) occur in both the upland and adjacent intertidal zones. No sites are known to occur exclusively in the intertidal zone. The determination of an intertidal location for at least a portion of the 24 sites recorded as having both an upland and intertidal distribution was based primarily on comments on the site form that indicated wave action was impacting the site or that artifacts were observed in the intertidal zone in front of the site. It is possible, even likely, that a number of the 57 sites currently in the upland zone category also have an intertidal distribution. At present, there are no comments on the site forms that indicate any of these sites are eroding into the intertidal zone.
It is of interest to note, that no archaeological sites were documented within the Bamberton lands prior to the present study.
Two shell midden sites, both located on the eastern shoreline of Saanich Inlet, have been radio-carbon dated. A single C14 date (820 + 90 years BP) estimate was obtained from test excavations at DdRu 53 at the head of Brentwood Bay (Wilson 1988) and three from test excavations at DdRu 61 (2580 + 90 BP; 2370 + 90 BP; and 1540 + 90 BP), located northeast of Henderson Point (Wilson 1989). The three dates obtained from DdRu 61 are attributed by the author to the Marpole Culture Type. The earliest date (2580 + 90 BP) appears to bridge the Marpole/Locarno Beach time period while the latest date (1540 + 90 BP) appears to bridge the Marpole/Gulf of Georgia time period. The single date from DdRu 53 (820 + 90 BP) is from the Gulf of Georgia time period (see Mitchell, 1971; Matson and Coupland, 1995).
It is difficult to summarize the general condition of sites in the study area solely on the basis of presently recorded information. Many of the sites, particularly those located on shorelines adjacent to commercial or residential development, have been directly impacted by development. In some cases, entire sites have been destroyed. Comments in some site records indicate that 10 to 90% of intact deposits have been destroyed. Very few sites in the study area appear not to have sustained some degree of damage over time, either by human or natural agencies. The present condition of all sites in the study area should be evaluated and their records updated in order to determine the actual extent of physical damage sustained since the sites were initially recorded. For the Bamberton study area, all sites previously documented exhibit varying degress of disturbance from simple erosion to complete destruction.
Data on the relationship between specific archaeological sites and subsistence resource areas, past as well as present use, needs to be documented in order to determine ongoing patterns of aboriginal settlement and subsistence in the study area. A key element in the process is the use of so-called traditional-use data, including place names, where possible. A serious effort should be made to integrate data obtained from other sources of information.
Eighty-one archaeological sites are formally recorded in the Saanich Inlet study area. The archaeological record for the study area is highly variable, both in terms of the quantity and quality of archaeological information contained on B. C. Archaeological Site Inventory forms. Certain limitations, therefore, are inherent in any subsequent use made of the archaeological record in this region. The study area is rich in archaeological information and every effort must be made to ensure that all archaeological sites are protected and preserved for future generations.
Archaeological investigations outlined in The Bastion Group proposal titled "Aboriginal Land Use and Cultural Heritage Study for the Bamberton Town Development Project" were to be conducted in two stages: 1) an archaeological overview study that will examine information on previously recorded archaeological sites located in the direct, ancillary, and regional impact zones, focussing particularly on the direct impact zone; and 2) a detailed field examination of all shoreline and inland areas in the Direct Impact zone. It is noted that archaeological field investigations were carried out under the terms and conditions of a Heritage Inspection Permit issued by the Archaeology Branch of the Ministry of Small Business Tourism and Culture (Permit 1997-078).
The first step in this process was to identify and evaluate all previous archaeological studies conducted in the Saanich Inlet study area. Background materials that were examined included archaeological site inventory records on file with the Archaeology Branch, Victoria, B. C. These files contain information on all known archaeological sites in the study area, including data on site location, type, and density. All previous archaeological investigations, including overviews, inventories, impact assessments, excavations, etc., were reviewed prior to initiating the field component of the study. Reports that were consulted as part of the background research to this study include Acheson, et al (1975); Powell (1978, 1979); Oliver (1974); Wilson (1987, 1988, 1989, 1991); Eldridge (1989); Eldridge, et.al, (1996); Mason and Ham (1994); and Simonsen, et al (1995).
An equally important source of information for conducting intensive level survey is traditional ecological knowledge (TEK), also referred to as traditional use site (TUS) data or aboriginal use site (AUS) data. This category of data was an important part of the present study and is presented and summarized elsewhere in the report.
Until the early 1980's, site survey on the Northwest Coast was conducted typically as a reconnaissance level investigation. Since then, archaeological surveys have become more intensive, both in terms of survey methodology and site mapping and recording methods and techniques (Mackie 1983, 1986; Haggarty and Inglis 1984, 1985), primarily due to increased time and budgets allotted for such studies. As these standards became more widely practiced, the quantity and quality of site records improved and, as a result, these records became an integral part of archaeological research and resource management mandates.
The inventory procedures employed on this project varied due to the diverse nature of the ecozones present in the study area and the assumption that different types of archaeological sites and features would occur in different environmental settings. As a result, the study area was stratified into two main zones - the shoreline and upland areas.
The shoreline zone comprises all of the intertidal zone (ITZ) and the forest fringe up to approximately 100 meters inland. The key to understanding past use of the shoreline zone is to characterize and understand the ITZ. This zone should be viewed only at a half tide or lower and, therefore, surveyed in accordance with daily tidal fluctuations. Although tidal fluctuations were small during the field days on this project, this procedure was employed as much as possible. Use of this procedure on the west coast of Vancouver Island was largely responsible for the dramatic increase in the number and range of sites located and recorded, even in areas previously surveyed (Haggarty and Inglis 1985; Mackie 1983).
All of the shoreline zone was walked, as well as observed from a small boat at lowest tide levels for each day of survey. All wave cut bank exposures, tree throws, and rock outcrops were checked and all level, well-drained areas were probed using Oakfield soil samplers. Within the coastal fringe, various tree species were checked for any evidence of cultural modification.
Shoreline site mapping and recording procedures used on this project also were developed on earlier projects on the west coast of Vancouver Island (Haggarty and Inglis 1985) and used recently on the Archaeological Inventory of Clayoquot Sound Project (Mason, et al. 1997). Site inventory forms were completed for each new site found and updated for previously recorded sites in the study area. Temporary numbers (e.g., T-003) were assigned to each new site found.
The upland inventory aspect of the Bamberton project examined areas which were situated behind the 100 meter strip of land that was the focus of the shoreline inventory. The field methodology and scope of examinations in the inland sector varied somewhat from the shoreline inventory component. Like the shoreline inventory, inland areas deemed to have a potential for containing archaeological resources were examined in detail by means of a series of non-aligned foot traverses spaced from 5 to 120 meters apart, utilizing a survey team of two, to four individuals. Traverses were carried out within all inland terrace features, along ridge-tops and along gully edges and associated terrace and knoll features. All such areas were deemed to have a high, to medium potential for containing surface or buried archaeological remains in the form of shell midden deposits, fire altered rocks, artifacts, lithic detritus or cultural features (such as hearths and storage pits). Map 3 of this report shows the general distribution of field traverses in areas of high to medium potential, prior to the start of field examination..
In areas deemed to have a low potential for buried or surface archaeological remains (i.e. lands of greater than 10% slope; areas not associated with streams, creek bottoms and low-lying, swampy ground) only spot checks of existing sub-surface exposures were made. However, since all areas within the Bamberton lands were considered to have a high to medium potential for containing Culturally Modified Trees (CMTs), all trees along foot traverses were checked for cultural modification. As well, stands of red cedars were given additional attention throughout the subject property since cedar is the most common CMT type in coastal environments. It should be noted in this context, that evidence of past logging activity is present throughout the Bamberton Lands and it is quite likely that the incidence of CMTs has been greatly skewed as a result of this activity.
In inland areas deemed to have a potential for containing evidence of buried archaeological remains, visual inspections of existing sub-surface exposures (e.g. stream banks, tree throws, road cuts, barrow pits, etc.) were augmented by numerous soil probe and shovel test excavations. In addition, since our examinations were not limited to only archaeological resources - but also included areas that may contain evidence of cultural practices such as ceremonial activities (e.g. ceremonial bathing, plant gathering, seclusion sites, etc.) - field investigators were also instructed to look for and document non-archaeological physical evidence of such practices. It is important to note that these practices are ongoing and are associated with contemporary First nations spiritual and ceremonial activity and, as such, are considered very private. The First Nations Management Committee for the Bamberton Project has determined that these areas - if they were identified in the course of the site inventory program - must be treated with respect and their locations kept confidential.
In addition to an examination of high and medium potential areas associated with specific land form types, the inland inventory examined numerous areas in a purely judgmental fashion, in the course of moving from one area to another and or in conjunction with providing field support to the ethnobotanical component of the overall project. The combined effort of the systematic examination of specific land form features, coupled with spot checks of numerous other areas and assisting other components of the project, resulted in a very thorough and wide coverage of most areas within inland portions of the Direct Impact Zone.
A total of four sites were documented in the course of field investigations at Bamberton that were deemed to have archaeological significance. All are shell midden archaeological deposits. No culturally modified trees were found in any portion of the property. Although several recent historic period sites and features associated with quarrying limestone and the production of cement products by the Bamberton Plant were observed, these were not documented in any detail since such areas do not fall within the terms of reference for this study.
Three of the four shell midden deposits are situated along the Saanich Inlet shoreline of the Bamberton property DdRv-T1, T2 and T3) while the fourth (DdRv-T4) is a unique shell midden site situated at some distance from the shoreline and on a high terrace landform bordering a deep gully (see detailed site description below). The incidence of inland shell midden deposits in the south Vancouver Island area has increased rapidly during the past few years, primarily as a result of archaeological inventory and impact assessment projects associated with the proposed land development. Of particular note is the great number of midden deposits found during the archaeological impact assessment for the newly completed Island Highway - Victoria approaches, highway project (see Eldridge et al, 1996). A total of 13 inland midden sites were documented by this project. Such sites are somewhat unique since they do not follow the established pattern of shell midden sites being directly associated with shoreline areas which contain shellfish resources. The inhabitants of site DdRv-T4 at Bamberton would have had to expend a considerable amount of energy to transport their shellfish resources from the Saanich Inlet shoreline, up a very steep gully and incline, to the terrace where the shellfish was processed. An archaeological excavation project at this site might determine why the site is where it is and could also shed light on other cultural activities that took place there.
The lack of CMTs within the Bamberton lands is not entirely surprising in view of the extensive logging activity which has taken place here during the past 80 - 100 years. We have also noted the paucity of cedar stands within the subject lands - a result of a combination of the effects of past logging and lack of suitable habitat for this species. Cedar is the most commonly found CMT type found in coastal areas. The presence of only four shell midden sites along the 3 kilometer shoreline of the Bamberton project lands is also not surprising, given the steep, rocky nature of shorelines and the general lack of extensive shellfish resource areas.
Finally, we must note that there is some potential for additional archaeological sites to be found in the course of project development. A process for dealing with such an eventuality, is presented in the Conclusion section of the report.
As a prelude to providing a description of the nature and location of archaeological sites within the Bamberton project area, we must qualify the way in which this information is presented. In particular, site locations are described only in general terms and are given non-specific locations on Map 3 of this report. This is done to protect sites from disturbance and vandalism since the archaeological value of a site can be compromised by any form of disturbance to the site's surface or sub-surface matrix. Archaeological sites, such as those documented at Bamberton, are protected by law (The B.C. Heritage Conservation Act) and any unauthorized disturbance is illegal.
This site area must have been considerably larger than it now appears. The remains of a shell midden deposit is situated in the vicinity of Shell Beach - a well known clam resource for the people of Malahat and other Saanich Inlet First Nations groups (Roy Daniels, personal communications, 1997).
The original site area has been extensively damaged as a result of the construction - and later demolition - of a house and associated services, paths, a garden area, boat house and various other land development related activities (see Figure 7). A seawall has been constructed along a portion of the original site frontage but a considerable amount of erosion was observed in areas not protected by this structure. From our observations, it appears that all of the original archaeological deposits have either been totally disturbed by the construction/demolition of the house and related facilities, or have been eroded away.
This small shell midden deposit is situated on a rocky section of shoreline in the vicinity of Sheppard Point. The site measures 15 meters (North-South) by 6 meters (East-West) and is made up of scattered shell midden matrix on the surface and 5-10 cm of buried shell midden deposits (based on 12 soil probe tests).
The site area is associated with several small pocket beaches which contain molluscan resources (primarily clams). A deer trail traverses the site area, parallel to the shoreline. The area lying immediately upland of the site is steep and rocky. Site vegetation is composed of arbutus, Douglas fir, Oregon grape, ocean spray, grasses and moss. The archaeological remains appear little disturbed and are too high to be affected by shoreline erosion (see Figures 4 and 5).
Site DdRv-T3 is another small and shallow archaeological deposit composed of a mixture of crushed clam shell and dark brown, organic soil. A few fire altered rocks were observed around the exposed edges of the site area.
The site areas is situated between two large oil storage tanks and Sandy Beach and is located on top of a small rocky outcrop. Site dimensions are 15 meters (North-South) by 5 meters (East-West) and maximum depth of cultural deposits is 15 centimeters. The remains of a recent camp site is associated with the site area. This is in the form of a rectangular enclosure (bordered on the south and west side by large logs), a circular stone fire pit, a piece of corrugated iron roofing material and a slender, 2.5 meter long cut pole (possibly used as a ridge pole for a tarp enclosure). The origin of this feature is not known but it may have been associated with a Tsartlip family who used to come here to dig clams (Tom Sampson, personal communication, 1997). Site vegetation is composed of arbutus, Douglas fir, willow, yew, ocean spray, wild rose, cow parsnip, grasses and mosses.
This site is found along the edge of a deep gully, at the north end of a broad inland terrace land form feature, at an elevation of circa 80 meters above sea level. The site is situated 200 meters inland from the Saanich Inlet shoreline and, as such, is considered quite unique. The archaeological matrix is composed of whole and crushed clams and cockles, mixed with medium brown soil, to a maximum depth of 35 centimeters. Horizontal dimensions are 35 meters (North-South) by 25 meters, (East-West).
The site area has been disturbed by selective logging activity which took place in the past 15 years. This is evidenced by the presence of skid roads (two of which go through the site area) and surface disturbance caused by machinery movement and skidding activity. A total of 32, 30 x 30 centimeter shovel test holes were excavated in and around the site area, in order to determine its extent. Site vegetation is composed of arbutus, juvenile Douglas fir, alder, Oregon grape and wild rose (see Figures 8 and 9).
(1)Shell middens are usually areas that are associated with camp, village and/or shell fish exploitation and preparation areas. Shell middens are so-named because of the predominance of whole and crushed shell within the site deposits.
[ EAO Homepage | Project Registry | EA Guide | Back to Table of Contents]
Questions or Comments? eaoinfo@gems5.gov.bc.ca
Last Updated: 8/31/98