Appendix C - Cultural Heritage Impact Assessment - Peabody Energy
Appendix C - Cultural Heritage Impact Assessment - Peabody Energy Appendix C - Cultural Heritage Impact Assessment - Peabody Energy
Cultural Heritage Impact Assessment North Wambo Underground Mine Modification 4.5 Site Predictions The following site predictions for the project area have been made on the basis of the environmental context, available historic observations of Aboriginal people in the region, archaeological studies and analysis of the AHIMS data. 4.5.1 Site Type The project area is located inland in an area which has been extensively mined. On the basis of the AHIMS data and the information available from previous archaeological investigations, it is considered that artefact sites (scatters and isolated finds) would be the most likely site type to be present in the project area. 4.5.2 Site Locations The majority of artefact scatters and isolated finds in the vicinity of the project area have previously been identified within 50 m of a watercourse. This indicates that the locations in the project area with the highest potential to contain artefact sites would be those near watercourses or drainage lines, generally above the floodplain. 4.5.3 Site Contents A review of previous archaeological investigations in the local area indicated that artefact scatters and isolated finds generally comprise flaked stone artefacts manufactured predominantly from mudstone and silcrete, with minor representations of tuff, quartz and quartzite and occasionally basalt, chert, chalcedony, petrified wood and felsic volcanics. It was therefore predicted that sites with artefacts within the project area would be characterised by flaked stone tools, cores and flakes largely manufactured from mudstone and silcrete. 4.5.4 Site Condition Due to the effects of previous land use, such as extensive clearing, sheet wash erosion, grazing livestock and previous farming practices and the highly disturbed nature of the project area, it was predicted that the area would be unlikely to contain any deep sub-surface archaeological deposits and that any deposits that may be present were unlikely to retain spatial or stratigraphic integrity. 108453-2; October 2012 Page 27
Cultural Heritage Impact Assessment North Wambo Underground Mine Modification 5.0 Historic Heritage Context 5.1 Historical overview Initial contact between Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal people in the Upper Hunter Valley was in 1797. Permanent settlement of the Hunter Valley was established in 1804 with a penal colony for the convicts who had been deemed unsuitable to remain in Sydney (generally, re-offenders). While the lower Hunter was developed on a foundation of industrial production the Upper Hunter maintained a predominantly agrarian purpose. An important figure in the early exploration of the Upper Hunter was John Howe, who first commented on the suitability of the land for agricultural use. The narrow floodplain between Aberdeen and Patrick’s Plains was declared to be “...The finest sheep land I have seen since I left England...The grass on the low ground is equal to a meadow in England (Wood 1972)”. The town of Singleton was named after Benjamin Singleton, who had taken part in the navigation of an overland route between the Hawkesbury and Hunter Rivers. He was granted land on the site of what is presently the town of Singleton by Governor Brisbane in 1823 (Wood 1972). Singleton settled on this land and established a residence. In 1827 Singleton set up the first inn in the area, called The Barley Mow, which was followed by the establishment of a flour mill in 1829 and a post office. The railway arrived in Singleton in 1863 and assisted in the further development and economic prosperity of the town (Appleton 1963). 5.2 Local history 5.2.1 Warkworth The Cockfighter Creek was the first name given to the Warkworth area in 1820. By 1840 there were three hotels and it was the stopping place for the coaches from Sydney. In general, land in the Warkworth area was leased by crown grants and used as grazing land. There was little significant construction undertaken on this land (Weir and Phillips 2007:4). In January 1863, the Real Property Act 1862 was introduced and many larger leases were divided into smaller lots. This was the beginning of the dairy industry of the Hunter Valley, which was subsequently strengthened by the completion of the Hawkesbury River Railway Bridge in 1888 (Weir and Phillips 2007:4). Until World War II, dairy farming, timber felling and grazing remained the most dominant industries in the Upper Hunter. 5.2.2 Jerrys Plains In November 1819, John Howe reached Jerrys Plains via Windsor (Brayshaw 1987:9) along a route which later became known as the “Bulga Tack” and is the present day Putty Road. The name Jerrys Plains was taken from the name of one of Howe’s men, a convict named Jerry Butler, who died in the area during the course of their exploration. The first printed use of the name Jerrys Plains appears in the newspaper The Australian on the 4th February 1827 and subsequently in the 1828 census. Throughout the 1820s, Jerrys Plains was populated sparsely, with approximately 500 people living in the Paterson Plain and Patrick Plain districts. This small population may have been a result of a drought, which was observed by Reverend J. D. Lang upon his arrival in the Hunter in 1828. Once the Putty Track and the Great North Road were established during the late 1820s to early 1830s, growth in rural commerce and local industries saw an associated increase in the population of the area. Constable J. Needham became the first Police Officer in Jerrys Plains in 1827. By 1831 government officials had decided to establish a mounted police station in the town due to the increased number of burglaries in 108453-2; October 2012 Page 28
- Page 1 and 2: WAMBO COAL PTY LTD NORTH WAMBO UNDE
- Page 3 and 4: Cultural Heritage Impact Assessment
- Page 5 and 6: Cultural Heritage Impact Assessment
- Page 7 and 8: Cultural Heritage Impact Assessment
- Page 9 and 10: Cultural Heritage Impact Assessment
- Page 11 and 12: Cultural Heritage Impact Assessment
- Page 13 and 14: Cultural Heritage Impact Assessment
- Page 15 and 16: WARNING No part of this plan should
- Page 17 and 18: Cultural Heritage Impact Assessment
- Page 19 and 20: Cultural Heritage Impact Assessment
- Page 21 and 22: Cultural Heritage Impact Assessment
- Page 23 and 24: Cultural Heritage Impact Assessment
- Page 25 and 26: Cultural Heritage Impact Assessment
- Page 27 and 28: Cultural Heritage Impact Assessment
- Page 29 and 30: Cultural Heritage Impact Assessment
- Page 31 and 32: Cultural Heritage Impact Assessment
- Page 33 and 34: Cultural Heritage Impact Assessment
- Page 35 and 36: Cultural Heritage Impact Assessment
- Page 37: Cultural Heritage Impact Assessment
- Page 42 and 43: Cultural Heritage Impact Assessment
- Page 44 and 45: Cultural Heritage Impact Assessment
- Page 46: Cultural Heritage Impact Assessment
- Page 49 and 50: Cultural Heritage Impact Assessment
- Page 51 and 52: Cultural Heritage Impact Assessment
- Page 53 and 54: Cultural Heritage Impact Assessment
- Page 55 and 56: Cultural Heritage Impact Assessment
- Page 57 and 58: Cultural Heritage Impact Assessment
- Page 59 and 60: Cultural Heritage Impact Assessment
- Page 61 and 62: Cultural Heritage Impact Assessment
- Page 63 and 64: Cultural Heritage Impact Assessment
- Page 65 and 66: Cultural Heritage Impact Assessment
- Page 67 and 68: Cultural Heritage Impact Assessment
- Page 69 and 70: Cultural Heritage Impact Assessment
- Page 71 and 72: Cultural Heritage Impact Assessment
- Page 73 and 74: Cultural Heritage Impact Assessment
- Page 75 and 76: Cultural Heritage Impact Assessment
- Page 77 and 78: Cultural Heritage Impact Assessment
- Page 79 and 80: Cultural Heritage Impact Assessment
- Page 81 and 82: Cultural Heritage Impact Assessment
- Page 83 and 84: Cultural Heritage Impact Assessment
- Page 85 and 86: Email: sales.singletonargus@ruralpr
<strong>Cultural</strong> <strong>Heritage</strong> <strong>Impact</strong> <strong>Assessment</strong><br />
North Wambo Underground Mine Modification<br />
4.5 Site Predictions<br />
The following site predictions for the project area have been made on the basis of the environmental context,<br />
available historic observations of Aboriginal people in the region, archaeological studies and analysis of the<br />
AHIMS data.<br />
4.5.1 Site Type<br />
The project area is located inland in an area which has been extensively mined. On the basis of the AHIMS<br />
data and the information available from previous archaeological investigations, it is considered that artefact<br />
sites (scatters and isolated finds) would be the most likely site type to be present in the project area.<br />
4.5.2 Site Locations<br />
The majority of artefact scatters and isolated finds in the vicinity of the project area have previously been<br />
identified within 50 m of a watercourse. This indicates that the locations in the project area with the highest<br />
potential to contain artefact sites would be those near watercourses or drainage lines, generally above the<br />
floodplain.<br />
4.5.3 Site Contents<br />
A review of previous archaeological investigations in the local area indicated that artefact scatters and<br />
isolated finds generally comprise flaked stone artefacts manufactured predominantly from mudstone and<br />
silcrete, with minor representations of tuff, quartz and quartzite and occasionally basalt, chert, chalcedony,<br />
petrified wood and felsic volcanics. It was therefore predicted that sites with artefacts within the project area<br />
would be characterised by flaked stone tools, cores and flakes largely manufactured from mudstone and<br />
silcrete.<br />
4.5.4 Site Condition<br />
Due to the effects of previous land use, such as extensive clearing, sheet wash erosion, grazing livestock<br />
and previous farming practices and the highly disturbed nature of the project area, it was predicted that the<br />
area would be unlikely to contain any deep sub-surface archaeological deposits and that any deposits that<br />
may be present were unlikely to retain spatial or stratigraphic integrity.<br />
108453-2; October 2012 Page 27
Change language