James Chism and Francoise Duguay

Introduction

Geotechnical investigation and exploration drilling is ongoing within the Voisey’s Bay Claim Block as essential components of the proposed mining project. There is potential for these activities to result in unintended disturbance or destruction of historic resources. Therefore, a Stage 1 Historic Resources Overview Assessment was required. The most recent phase of this research, (herein referred to as the 1996 Fall Archaeology Project) was a continuation of the historic resources impact assessment work carried out within and adjacent to the main claim block in 1995 and during the winter and summer of 1996 (JWEL 1996a; JWEL, Mushuau Innu Band Council and Torngàsok Cultural Centre 1997).

Table 1. Cultural Traditions in Labrador

Culture	Dates (BP)	Sites in Voisey’sBay Area
Maritime Archaic	7,500-3,500	Cape Little and Iglosiatik Island. Many sites known north and south of the Voisey’s Bay area.
Pre-Dorset Palaeo-Eskimo	3,800-3,000	Cape Little, Kamarsuk and Kikkertavik Island. Many sites known on islands north and East of Nain.
Intermediate Indians	3,500-2,800	Iglosiatik, Paul and Kikkertavak Islands.
Groswater Palaeo-Eskimo	3,000-2,200	House Harbour, Cape Little and Kamarsuk.
Dorset Palaeo-Eskimo	2,500-500	House Harbour and Kikkertavik Island. Many other sites are known on the island east of the Project Area.
Late Prehistoric Indians	1,750-350	Daniel Rattle, Kamarsuk, Takpanyok Bay, Satosoak Island and Kikkertavak Island.
Thule Eskimo	700 – 200	Iglosiatik Island.
Labrador Innu	350-present	Commonly found throughout Voisey’s Bay area.
Labrador Inuit	200-present	Commonly found throughout Voisey’s Bay area.
Settlers	200-present	Commonly found throughout Voisey’s Bay area.
(Source: Fitzhugh 1978, Marshall 1995)

Relation to Previous Work

Archaeological investigation in the Voisey’s Bay area has revealed a long and complex cultural history, dating from roughly 6,500 years ago until the present. Several cultural traditions of Indian and Inuit ancestry lived in the Voisey’s Bay area harvesting the plant and animal resources of the land and sea in a seasonal fashion. Nearly all cultures known from the archaeological record of Newfoundland and Labrador are represented in the Voisey’s Bay area. The origins of these cultural traditions lie in areas either south or west of Labrador or north, in the eastern Arctic. Table 1 summarizes the cultural traditions known to occur in Labrador and identifies approximate dates for each tradition and important sites in the Voisey’s Bay area. Approximate locations of the latter are shown in Figure 1.

The archaeological research and assessment carried out in the Voisey’s Bay area during the fall of 1995 (JWEL 1996a), March and April of 1996, and the summer of 1996 (JWEL, Mushuau Innu Band Council and Torngàsok Cultural Centre 1997) represents the most comprehensive archaeological investigation of an inner bay/near coastal zone in north-central Labrador conducted to date. Professional archaeologists surveyed over 200 km2 conducting visual inspections and test-pitting. As a result, 132 archaeological sites have been identified within the project boundaries. In 1995 fifteen sites were located on or near the shores of Anaktalak Bay and Edward’s Cove, six on the shore of Voisey’s Bay and eleven in interior areas situated between the two bays, including two sites at Camp Pond and Discovery Hill. The majority of sites located in 1996 were found along the shores of Anaktalak and Voisey’s Bays, Kangeklualuk Bay, in the Reid Brook Valley and along the banks of rivers and shores of ponds, including Trout and Reid Ponds.

Of the 132 sites, 19 date certainly to the prehistoric period, thirteen to the later prehistoric/early historic period, and 100 are attributable to the historic and more recent occupation of the region. A summary by cultural affiliation of the archaeological sites identified as a result of historic resources assessment work at Voisey’s Bay is summarized in Table 2:

Table 2. Summary of Known Sites by Cultural Affiliation

Cultural Affiliation	Number of Sites	% of Total # of Sites
Maritime Archaic	6	4.55
Pre-Dorset Palaeo-Eskimo	1	0.76
Intermediate Indian	3	2.27
Indeterminate Palaeo-Eskimo	1	0.76
Late Prehistoric Indian	2	1.51
Indeterminate/prehistoric	6	4.55
Inuit, historic or prehistoric	2	1.51
Inuit	33	25.00
Innu	45	34.09
Innu and/or Inuit	14	10.61
Settlers	8	6.06
Unknown	11	18.33
TOTAL	132	100.00

Recent and Historic Occupation

Ninety-two, or roughly two-thirds of the known sites in the project area are attributable to recent and historic Innu and Inuit occupation and/or use of the area, some of which is very recent. Archaeological remains associated with these occupations include marker stones, fox-trap anchors, tent rings, cabin foundations, hearths and goose-hunting blinds. Recent Innu sites are found in a variety of coastal-inner bay settings, particularly including the Gooseland area at the head of Voisey’s Bay. This latter area has been identified as important for goose hunting in the spring. Sites are also found along streams flowing into the heads of Voisey’s Bay: Ikadlivik Brook, Reid Pond/Reid Brook and Trout Pond/Kogluktokoluk Brook. Settlement in the Reid Brook Valley appears light compared to that in other valleys. Historic (greater than 100 years old) Innu camps are significantly fewer in number than those of the recent period. The general pattern and seasonality of settlements was probably similar to that during recent times, although different patterns associated with long-distance seasonal movement would have existed.

Historic Inuit settlement appears to have been more concentrated in coastal areas along the shores of bays, particularly Kangeklualuk, Voisey’s and Anaktalak Bays, than in interior areas. Sites located on the coast were likely oriented toward seating in the spring and/or fall. One inukshuk was found overlooking Reid Brook, a possible Inuit dwelling was located on Trout Pond and an Inuit site was found on Makhavinekh Lake. Inuit sites at times, were found along the shores of Voisey’s and Anaktalak Bays. Two of these sites served as trading posts which were frequented by the Innu during the winter in historic times. The remains of several cabins and the Rawson MacMillan Expedition base camp (1927-28) were also located.

Figure 1: Approximate Locations of Archaeological Sites in the Voisey’s Bay Area.

Pre-Contact Occupation

Sites related to prehistoric occupation in the area were found both along the coast and in nearby interior areas. There appears to have been a moderate level of settlement throughout the prehistoric period in both inner bay and interior lowland valleys.

One large site complex has been located relating to Maritime Archaic occupation of the region. This is actually made up of several sites on high terraces in the Reid Brook valley. Another Maritime Archaic site was found along Kogaluk Brook.

Three Intermediate Indian components were found, one on the south shore of Voisey’s Bay, one overlooking Gooseland and one in the Kogluktokoluk Valley. Occupation of these sites was likely in the spring and/or fall, when geese, char and seals would have been present.

Three definite Late Prehistoric Indian period sites have been located within the project boundaries. Season of occupation for these sites was likely the same as that of the Intermediate Indian period occupation. Several sites classified as indeterminate prehistoric may relate to the Late Prehistoric Indian period.

Very few Palaeo-Eskimo (Pre-Dorset, Groswater or Dorset) sites were identified within the project boundaries. No Thule Eskimo sites were located. This may suggest these cultures had different habitat preferences, reflective of their preferred maritime adaptations. The inner-bay/near coastal environment in which the claim block is situated may not have been attractive to prehistoric Inuit cultures whose settlement and subsistence strategies were more focused on true coastal locations such as offshore islands or land-fast ice. Seasonal forays into the interior for important resources such as caribou may have become more important during the early contact period and after the introduction of firearms around 1785. If this pattern of land use existed during prehistoric times, the inner-bay/near coastal zone (where most of the archaeological investigation was carried out) would likely have been used as a transitional zone where people stopped only briefly while moving to or from the coast to more interior areas. Archaeological remains associated with this type of occupation are typically difficult to find and identify. Thus this gap in the cultural sequence may be attributable to failure to identify the evidence.

Objectives

The primary objective of the 1996 Fall Archaeology Project at Voisey’s Bay was to conduct archaeological assessment of general areas, mineral exploration drill sites (bore holes), and geotechnical test pits and drill areas to support the permitting of mineral exploration and geotechnical investigation during the fall and winter of 1996-1997.

Three general areas (Western Extension, Reid Brook Valley and Headwater Pond/Gooselands) were identified for archaeological assessment.

Methodology

Background Research

Prior to the field study, the archaeologists reviewed all available information on historic resources in the Voisey’s Bay area. This included a review of the 1995 Stage 1 Overview Assessment of Voisey’s Bay Mineral Exploration Area (JWEL 1996b).

Field Survey

An area within a 100 m radius of the marked drill site was assessed for potential surface and subsurface cultural resources. Following intensive visual investigation for surface features, subsurface testing was carried out at an intensity which corresponded with the probability of locating significant traces of human occupation. High potential land forms, such as relatively level and well drained locations, were shovel tested at approximate 5 m intervals, with 50 cm2 test pits until a culturally sterile level was reached. Areas with diminished potential received decreased attention, which translated into an increase in the distance between test pits (10 m, 15 m, etc.). Given that archaeological resources can be present in what appear to be unlikely places, some random test-pitting was also conducted on sloping or irregular ground.

General recording was completed for each surveyed zone, including descriptive data (elevation above sea level, geomorphology and vegetation). Photographs were also taken at each location.

Unforeseen circumstances, primarily adverse weather conditions, permitted archaeological investigation of a portion of one general survey area only, a scree terrace in the Western Extension. The specific field method used to assess this area consisted of walking transects to identify surface features and locations suitable for past occupation. When found, suitable areas were tested with an intensity corresponding to their judged degree of potential.

Survey Results

General Areas

The results of the assessment of the general areas identified for investigation are summarized in Table 3.

Table 3. Identification, Location, Results and Status of General Areas: 1996 Fall Archaeology Project.

Area	Location	Archaeological Assessment	Results	Status
Western Extension	Scree terrace south of Ikadlivik Brook	Surface/test pits	Negative	Clear
Reid Brook Valley	Western Extension: wedge of land between Ikadlivik & Reid Brooks	Not surveyed	N/A	Possible previous survey (summer 1996)
Headwater Pond/Gooselands	Bore holes ST-1, ST-6, ST-8 & ST-9 are located in that survey area	No general survey	Negative	Clear

Western Extension

The scree terrace surveyed is located at the base of a hill, south of Ikadlivik Brook. The vast majority was a sloped and irregular terrace of fallen rock, covered in two locations with more level and boulder-strewn clay and sand deposits. A lower sand terrace was located, closer to the river, at the southern margin of the area. Archaeological investigation included surface inspection and systematic and random test-pitting. No archaeological resources were found.

Reid Brook Valley

This area includes a wedge of land between Ikadlivik and Reid Brooks. This area was surveyed during the summer of 1996. Therefore archaeological assessment was not carried out in this area.

Headwater Pond/Gooselands

This area was not surveyed due to time and weather constraints.

Mineral Exploration Drill Areas (Bore Holes)

Six proposed mineral exploration bore holes were surveyed. All drill holes yielded negative results. Therefore, their status was determined to be “clear.”

Geotechnical Test Pits and Drill Area

Nineteen proposed geotechnical test sites were surveyed. All findings were negative. Status is “clear” for all geotechnical test pit sites surveyed.

One proposed geotechnical bore hole was investigated: BH-1E is located in Edward’s Cove, in the area of the proposed dock site. This area had been previously surveyed in 1995 and 1996. Therefore, archaeological assessment of this area involved thorough surface inspection only. One previously recorded archaeological site, a fox-trap anchor (HcCm-14), was located close to drill BH-1E. This site is not threatened by the proposed drilling activity. Therefore, status for this bore hole was determined to be “clear.”

Summary of Research Results

A total of five exploration bore holes, 19 geotechnical test pit sites, one geotechnical bore hole (BH-1E) and one general area (Western Extension) were surveyed for the presence of historic resources. No archaeological remains were found during the survey.

Conclusions and Recommendations

All archaeological investigations yielded negative results. It is therefore recommended exploration drilling and geotechnical investigation be permitted to proceed in the areas assessed during the 1996 Fall Archaeology Project. One archaeological site (HcCm-14) is located close to bore hole BH-1E but is not directly threatened by the proposed drilling.

References

Fitzhugh, W. W.

1978 – “Maritime Archaic Cultures of the Central and Northern Labrador Coast.” Arctic Anthropology 15(2):61-95.

JWEL

1996a – “Voisey’s Bay 1995 Environmental Baseline Technical Data Report: Historic Resources Program.” Voisey’s Bay Nickel Company Limited, St. John’s, NL.

1996b – “1995 Stage 1 Overview Assessment of Voisey’s Bay Mineral Exploration Area.” Voisey’s Bay Nickel Company Limited, St. John’s, NL.

JWEL, Mushuau Innu Band Council and Torngàsok Cultural Centre

1997 – “Voisey’s Bay 1996 Environmental Baseline Technical Data Report: Historic Resources Program.” Voisey’s Bay Nickel Company Limited, St. John’s, NL.

Marshall, Ingeborg

1995 – “Voisey’s Bay 1995 Historic Resources Archival and Literature Review.” JWEL, St. John’s, NL.

Voisey’s Bay Nickel Company Limited

1996 – “The Voisey’s Bay Mine/Mill Project: Project Description Report.” Voisey’s Bay Nickel Company Limited, St. John’s, NL.