SBCT Final EIS - Govsupport.us

Chapter 3 ⎯ Affected EnvironmentSeveral areas on FRA were excluded from the list of areas identified for archaeological inventories inthe Integrated Cultural Resources Management Plan (ICRMP) because of mission considerations (includinghazards), low site potential, or low potential for mission impact. These areas include:• The ERF impact area, which contains UXO and is off-limits to cultural resource management;• The Alpine Tundra zone, which is an ecologically sensitive zone protected by restrictions ontraining;• Wetlands, including freshwater and saltwater marshes, bogs, and lakes that are often covered bystanding water and have a low potential for undisturbed archaeological sites. This does not includeriparian areas along drainages; and• Cantonment developed areas that have been extensively disturbed for development and areunlikely to retain undisturbed archaeological sites. Some isolated portions of the cantonment nearShip Creek and Camp Carroll are comparatively undisturbed.Historic Built EnvironmentTwo historic building surveys have been completed on FRA for the Nike Site Summit and Cold Warera buildings. The Nike Summit Inventory documented 27 contributing buildings and structures(USARAK 2004). Nike Site Summit has been listed on the NRHP as a historic district. CEMML developeda Cold War historic context for FRA so far only the buildings associated with Nike SiteSummit have been identified as contributing to the context. Additional studies of Cold War era historicbuildings on FRA are currently underway. Fifty-four buildings and structures currently exist inthe Fort Richardson Historic Area.Properties of Traditional, Religious, or Cultural SignificanceSeveral groups of Dena’ina Athabascans traditionally used lands on FRA including the Knik Tribe,Eklutna Village, the Chickaloon, and the Tyonek. Dena’ina Athabascans have been investigatingPTRCSs on FRA. These include traditional use locations, coastal bluff locations, and shoreline locations,many of which may have associated archaeological remains. Some of these sites may be eligibleto the NRHP as TCPs, but to date, none of them have been identified as TCPs.3.2.4.2 Donnelly Training AreaPrehistoric ContextThe prehistory of interior Alaska is characterized by a varied, often nomadic settlement pattern with afocus on hunting of terrestrial animals. The Paleoarctic and Northern Archaic tool traditions includedstone, bone, antler, and ivory tools. The lithic technologies included the use of microblades. With theAthabascan Tradition, materials culture begins to reflect distinct cultural groups.In the late Pleistocene, the interior of Alaska was a relatively ice-free bowl surrounded by the extensivecontinental ice sheet to the east and the Cordilleran glacier to the west. The Alaska Range forcedstorm systems from the south upwards creating a rain shadow and a broad, ice-free, steppe-tundra environmentto the north. This environment supported large herbivores such as bison, mammoth, mastodon,horse, camel, moose, caribou, antelope, elk, and yak. Most of the earliest evidence of humanoccupation in Alaska is found in the interior. The first humans could have crossed from Asia intoAlaska as early as 30,000 BP, but the earliest known sites in the interior date from 11,000 to12,000 BP.February 2008 3–109 2/25th SBCT Final EIS