Orange County NC Website
24 <br /> Cultural/Archaeological Resources <br /> Three cultural/archaeological resource surveys were \ •x .� , <br /> conducted on the Little River Park property by Legacy <br /> Research Associates, Inc. The first,a cultural resource <br /> survey for a selected area of the 391 acres was conduct- <br /> ed in 2001 prior to the development of the park. The <br /> second,in 2003,was an archaeological test of a poten- <br /> tial cultural site(identified in the 2001 survey)that was <br /> located within the area for the proposed entrance road +for the park. The final survey(2009)was a follow up to <br /> the 2001 survey,conducted to determine the signifi- <br /> cance of several sites identified in 2001. <br /> The 2001 survey was commissioned by Orange County - <br /> V <br /> with the purpose of identifying areas of cultural sig- - - •, <br /> nificance that should be preserved prior to the cre- <br /> ation of a site plan for the park. Twelve new sites were <br /> identified during the survey,two previously recorded <br /> sites were revisited,and two isolated finds of cultural <br /> material were recorded.Of these,there were three large of the work was to assess the historic significance of <br /> prehistoric scatters that are relatively rare in this region the sites,to determine the relationship between them, <br /> and recommended for further study.The other small and to provide recommendations for site protection <br /> prehistoric sites and multi-component scatters were and interpretation. Individually,according to the report, <br /> not judged worthy of nomination the National Regis- these sites do not meet the criteria for NRHP eligibility. <br /> ter of Historic Places (NRNP). In addition to the further Together, however,they could be eligible for the NRHP <br /> work at the three sites mentioned,this report recom- as an Archaeological District as examples of agricultur- <br /> mended that two of the prehistoric sites were judged to al,domestic,industry(milling),and transportation ac- <br /> be deserving of protection through avoidance. tivities in the late 19th/early 20th centuries.The report <br /> recommends several possible methods of public inter- <br /> The 2003 archaeological testing done in the area of pretation of these four sites.These include providing a <br /> the proposed entrance road was based on findings of historic context of the area,adding historic information <br /> the 2001 survey.The 2003 test was of only one identi- to the park's website, posting interpretative signs at the <br /> fied site of potential significance and was conducted sites,creating a historic archaeological tour of the sites, <br /> to ensure the construction of the entrance road was or creating a brochure for park patrons describing these <br /> appropriately placed in the site plan.The survey found sites,their significance,and how the area surrounding <br /> this site contained an unknown prehistoric lithic com- these prior settlements has been relatively unchanged <br /> ponent and a late 19th-to-20th century historic artifact since they were in use. <br /> scatter comprised of glass and ceramics,very likely <br /> associated with the abandoned Laws farmstead nearby. Additional historic elements in the park that have not <br /> The survey concluded that the portion of historic com- been assessed include a former public roadbed dating <br /> ponent that fell within the proposed road development back to the early 1900s that parallels the hiking trail in <br /> area was extensively disturbed, not unique, had limited the southern portion of the property.The public road <br /> information potential,and did not meet the criteria for shows up on the earliest NC Department ofTransporta- <br /> eligibility for the NRHP. tion map for Durham County dated 1920.There are also <br /> remains of an additional former home site adjacent to <br /> The 2009 cultural resources survey was commissioned the road,which is presently unassessed.Further assess- <br /> by Durham County to follow up on four sites identified ment may provide interesting and valuable information <br /> in the 2001 survey.These included two house sites,a for park interpretation. <br /> mill site,a seasonal spring with minor fieldstone en- <br /> hancements,and an historic river crossing.The purpose <br /> 12 Little River Regional Park&Natural Area Master Plan <br />