HERITAGE IMPACT ASSESSMENT

Transcription

1 HERITAGE IMPACT ASSESSMENT PROPOSED CULTIVATION OF VIRGIN SOIL AND CONSTRUCTION OF A DAM ON PORTION 9 OF THE FARM MIDDELBURG (VINKRIVIER) NO. 10, WITH A WATER PUMPING SCHEME FROM THE BREEDE RIVER, ROBERTSON Prepared for: BOLAND ENVIRO Att: Ms Johlene Krige PO Box 250 Worcester johlene@bolandenviro.co.za Client: VAN LOVEREN (PTY) LTD By Jonathan Kaplan Agency for Cultural Resource Management P.O. Box 159 Riebeek West 7306 Ph/Fax: Cellular: acrm@wcacces.co.za JUNE 2012

2 Executive summary The Agency for Cultural Resource Management (ACRM) was appointed by the Four Cousins Trust (Van Loveren) to conduct a Heritage Impact Assessment (HIA) for the proposed development of up to 370 ha of (virgin) agricultural land for the cultivation of new vineyards on Portion 9 of the Farm Middleburg (Vinkrivier) No. 10, situated alongside the R60 between and Worcester in the Western Cape. The proposed development includes the construction of a large water storage dam on Farm No. 10 that will entail the clearing of a further 35 ha of natural vegetation. Additional infrastructure includes a water pumping scheme, where water from the Breede River will be piped to a small (< 1 ha) balancing dam at a point on the Jakkalsnek (on Farm 52/Re) where a gravity pipeline will then transport the water under the R60 to the proposed Middleburg dam. The HIA forms part of the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) process that is being conducted by Boland Enviro. As required, a Notification of Intent to Develop (NID) was completed by Boland Enviro and submitted to Heritage Western Cape (HWC) informing them of the proposed development. In a letter dated 8 June 2011 (Case No. 1438), HWC requested that a HIA must be done, consisting of a specialist archaeological and palaeontological study. J. Kaplan of ACRM has been appointed to conduct the archaeological study (as part of the HIA), and Dr John Almond, the specialist palaeontological study. A five-day baseline survey of the proposed development was undertaken by J. Kaplan, in which the following observations were made: Three hundred and sixty-four archaeological occurrences (numbering more than 750 stone artefacts) were documented and mapped with a hand held GPS unit. Most of the tools comprise single isolated occurrences that are spread unevenly over the surrounding landscape, but several dispersed scatters of tools, ranging from very low density scatters (between five and 25 lithics) to much higher densities (of more than 80 tools), were also encountered. One such scatter (Site 150), located alongside a small pan on Farm No. 10, probably represents a Middle Stone Age (MSA) stone knapping site where large numbers of flakes, flaked chunks, cores and debitage were counted. Site 150 has been rated as having medium (Grade 3B) significance, while the remaining archaeological occurrences have all been rated as having low (Grade 3C) significance. By far the majority of tools located during the study are assigned to the MSA, with much smaller numbers of Early and Later Stone Age (ESA & LSA) elements occurring. Most of the tools tend to cluster around areas which have already been disturbed or modified, such as sheet washed hill slopes, erosion dongas, pans, diggings, and gravel roads. The majority of tools comprise triangular shaped flakes, thicker more rounded chunky flakes, large flake blades, pointed flakes, chunks, and flaked chunks or minimal cores. Relatively large numbers of round, irregular and flat disc cores were also counted. Modified (i. e. partially retouched and utilized) flakes, and miscellaneous retouched pieces were also noted, but the overall frequencies of such tools are quite low. The frequency of formal retouched tools is very low (< 0.5%), and only three scrapers, three adzes, (probably LSA) and one crude bifacial MSA point were found. Of the 25 or so ESA implements encountered, several bifaces (including two handaxes) were found. 1

3 More than 92% of the implements are made on locally available quartzite, with smaller numbers (± 8%) in indurated shale and silcrete. Only two chalcedony flakes were found. No organic remains such as pottery, bone or ostrich eggshell was found. The remains of a grave was found within the footprint area of Farm No. 10, and it is recommended that the grave (probably that of a farm worker) be fenced off, prior to implementation of the project. The applicant (Van Loveren Pty Ltd) has indicated that no farming will take place in this area, as the soils are not suitable (they are too wet) for cultivation of vineyards. The results of the archaeological study of Middelburg Farm No. 10 has added to an increasingly large body of information that has been generated in the Breede River Valley (between Worcester and ) that demonstrates fairly high archaeological visibility across the landscape, where the majority of the remains are assigned to the MSA. While most of the `sites encountered in the region comprise single, isolated finds, or small dispersed scatters of tools, several activity areas such as stone knapping, as well as settlement sites have been identified on several farms in the region, which open up possibilities for future applied research. It is maintained that overall, the specialist archaeological study of the Farm Middleburg No. 10/9 has captured good information on the archaeological heritage, and that the proposed agricultural development (with recommended mitigation measures in place) will not have a significant impact on the archaeological landscape. With regard to the specialist palaeontological impact assessment (PIA), the footprint area of the proposed project, including dams, agricultural lands and pipeline, is underlain by fossiliferous marine to lacustrine sediments of the Ecca Group (Karoo Supergroup) of Early to Middle Permian age. Most of these Palaeozoic bedrocks contain only sparse, low diversity fossil assemblages, however, and their outcrop is largely buried beneath thick superficial deposits (alluvium, colluvium, soils) that are of low palaeontological sensitivity. The fossil content of the Ecca Group here has often been compromised by weathering, tectonic deformation (e.g. folding) and calcrete formation. Therefore only deeper excavations (>2 to 3m) are likely to intersect fresh, potentially fossil-rich Ecca bedrock. According to the PIA undertaken by Dr J. Almond, the impact significance of the new agricultural lands and pipeline is therefore considered to be LOW. The balancing dam on the Jakkalsnek (on Farm 52/Rem) is likely to be excavated into mudrocks of the Whitehill Formation. This formation has yielded important fossils of mesosaurid reptiles, trace fossils, crustaceans and insects at Scherpenheuwel, situated within the Breede River Valley some 12 km west of the study area. Test pits within the footprint of the proposed main irrigation dam in the north-western part of the Farm Middelburg No. 10 have also yielded locally abundant fossil plant remains. This is one of very few fossil plant localities recorded within the outlier of Karoo Supergroup rocks in the Worcester Valley. The stratigraphic position of these rocks whether uppermost Ecca Group or lowermost Beaufort Group - remains uncertain. If Lower Beaufort Group rocks are indeed represented here, they might contain rare remains of terrestrial vertebrates (e.g. mammal-like reptiles or Therapsids) that would be of very considerable palaeontological interest. 2

4 According to the PIA report it is concluded `that the impact significance of the two proposed dam sites the balancing dam on Farm 52/RE Lange Vallei, and the main irrigation dam on Farm 10 Middelburg (Vinkrivier) - is potentially HIGH. With regard to the proposed Middelburg/Vinkrivier agricultural development near, the following recommendations are made: Archaeology 1. The grave on Farm No. 10 must be fenced off prior to any development proceeding. 2. Site # 150 must be excluded from the proposed agricultural development. A buffer of about 35 m should be established around the pan, and the area fenced off. Fencing must be done in consultation with the archaeologist. 3. If any unmarked human remains are uncovered or exposed during preparation of the site for development, these must immediately be reported to the archaeologist (Jonathan Kaplan ), or Heritage Western Cape (Jenna Lavin ) Palaeontology 1. It is recommended that a site visit by a professional palaeontologist be made to both dam sites once they have been excavated but before they are filled with water. The purpose of the visit would be to record and judiciously sample fossil assemblages exposed by the dam excavations together with appropriate stratigraphical, sedimentological and palaeontological data. The specialist involved would require a collection permit from Heritage Western Cape (HWC), fossil material must be curated in an approved repository, and all work carried out should meet the minimum standards for palaeontological impact studies developed by SAHRA (South African Heritage Resources Authority). 2. The Environmental Control Officer (ECO) responsible for this development should be alerted to the possibility of fossil remains being found on the surface or exposed by fresh excavations at any time during construction. Should substantial fossils (e.g. plant stems and leaves, vertebrate bones and teeth, shells) be discovered or exposed during development, the responsible ECO should alert HWC so that appropriate mitigation measures may be considered. The above recommendations should be incorporated into the Environmental Management Plan for the proposed development. 3

5 Table of contents Page Executive summary 1 1. INTRODUCTION 5 2. HERITAGE LEGISLATION 5 3. DESCRIPTION OF THE RECEIVING ENVIRONMENT 7 4. STUDY APPROACH Method of survey Constraints and limitations Identification of potential risks Results of the desk top study RESULTS OF THE ARCHAEOLOGICAL STUDY Portion Portion Portion Portion Portion Portion Water storage dam Water pumping scheme Significance of the archaeological heritage RESULTS OF THE PALAEONTOLOGICAL STUDY IMPACT STATEMENT ARCHAEOLOGICAL HERITAGE RECOMMENDATIONS REFERENCES 32 Appendix I: Spreadsheet of waypoints and description of archaeological finds Appendix II: Track paths and waypoints of archaeological finds Appendix III: Palaeontological Impact Assessment report 4

6 1. INTRODUCTION The Agency for Cultural Resource Management (ACRM) was appointed by the Four Cousins Trust (Van Loveren) to conduct a Heritage Impact Assessment (HIA) for the proposed development of up to 370 ha of (virgin) agricultural land for the cultivation of vineyards on Portion 9 of the Farm Middleburg (Vinkrivier) No. 10 situated alongside the R60 between and Worcester in the Western Cape (Figure 1). The proposed development includes the construction of a large water storage dam on Farm No. 10 that will entail the clearing of a further 34.5 ha of natural vegetation. Additional infrastructure includes a water pumping scheme (on the Farm Eilandia 466/3), where water from the Breede River will be piped to a small (< 1 ha) balancing dam at a point on the Jakkalsnek (on Farm 52/Re) where a gravity pipeline will then transport the water under the R60 to the Middleburg irrigation dam (Figure 2). The proposed pipeline from the Breede River will cross three properties 1 and is about 7 kms long. The pipeline will be located alongside fence lines and gravel farm roads and will be buried underground. A pump station will also be constructed at the river on the Farm Eilandia. The largest section of the pipeline will be located on this property. Farm No. 10 is already zoned for Agriculture, but has not been utilised for agriculture in the past. No rezoning of the land is therefore required. The HIA forms part of the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) process that is being conducted by Boland Enviro. As required, a Notification of Intent to Develop (NID) was completed by Boland Enviro and submitted to Heritage Western Cape (HWC) informing them of the proposed development. In a letter dated 8 June 2011 (Case No. 1438), HWC requested that a HIA must be done, consisting of a specialist archaeological and palaeontological study. J. Kaplan of ACRM has been appointed to conduct the archaeological study (as part of the HIA), and Dr John Almond, the specialist palaeontological study. 2. HERITAGE LEGISLATION The National Heritage Resources Act (Act No. 25 of 1999) makes provision for a compulsory Heritage Impact Assessment (HIA) when an area exceeding 5000 m² is being developed. This is to determine if the area contains heritage sites and to take the necessary steps to ensure that they are not damaged or destroyed during development. The NHRA provides protection for the following categories of heritage resources: Landscapes, cultural or natural (Section 3 (3)) Buildings or structures older than 60 years (Section 34); Archaeological sites, palaeontological material and meteorites (Section 35); Burial grounds and graves (Section 36); Public monuments and memorials (Section 37); Living heritage (defined in the Act as including cultural tradition, oral history, performance, ritual, popular memory, skills and techniques, indigenous knowledge systems and the holistic approach to nature, society and social relationships) (Section 2 (d) (xxi)). 1 The water pumping scheme/pipeline will cross three properties, namely Eilandia Farm 466/3 Worcester, (abstraction point), Farm 52/Re (balancing dam) and Farm 10/5 5

7 Figure 1. Location of Middelburg (Vinkrivier) Farm 10/9,. Extract from the 1: map 3319 Worcester. Figure 2. Layout plan for the proposed water-pumping scheme from the Breede River to the irrigation dam on the Farm Middleburg No. 10/9 (Vinkrivier). 6

8 3. DESCRIPTION OF THE RECEIVING ENVIRONMENT Middleburg (or Vinkrivier) is located alongside the R60 between and Worcester, approximately 15 kms northwest of (Figure 3). The property is entirely undeveloped and is covered in natural Karoo veld. Associated infrastructure includes gravel farm roads that traverse the land. There are no (old) buildings, structures or any features of cultural or historical significance on the property. The Vinkrivier runs alongside the southern portion of the farm and there are several non-perennial streams that feed into the river. Five portions of land on Farm No. 10/9 have been identified for agricultural development (refer to Figure 4). These include the following: Portion 1 (113 ha): is an undulating open valley located on a flat topped ridge above Portion 2. The landholdings are covered in thick Karoo veld (Figures 5-7). There is extensive sheet wash on the north eastern hill slopes, a small farm dam is located in the north east (against the mountains), and a few sporadic pans occur over the remainder of the proposed site. The lands rise to a hillock in the south, where the Vinkrivier runs alongside the southern boundary of the property. Portion 2 (94 ha): is a long, wide, flat strip of land located adjacent (i.e. north of) a small non-perennial stream. The land is covered in natural Karoo veld, especially in the south, and alongside the Vinkrivier, where the riparian vegetation is extremely dense. There are a few small sandy blowouts in the south, and some vegetated heuweltjies in the north (Figures 8-10). Portion 3 (60 ha) is located between the Vinkrivier and a smaller non-perennial stream that feeds into the river at a point in the south west (Figures 11 & 12). The proposed site is fairly level and is covered in extremely dense vegetation, especially alongside the river/stream edge. Apart from a single gravel farm road and a number of test pits, the landholdings are undisturbed and entirely undeveloped. Portion 4 (48 ha) is located south of and alongside Portion 3. Several small streams intersect the site which is also fairly level and covered in extremely dense Karoo veld (Figures 13-15). Apart from a few test pits, the proposed site is undisturbed and undeveloped. Portion 5 (23 ha) is located adjacent the R60 and the railway line. The site is fairly level, but does slope gently toward the stream, where it is very densely vegetated. Of all the affected landholdings, Portion 5 is the most degraded. The northern portion has been quite heavily scraped and the remains of an old gravel quarry occur alongside the railway line/r60 (Figures 16-18). Portion 6 (33 ha) is a long wide, flat strip of land located adjacent the R60 in the south western portion of the farm. The Vinkrivier meanders along the eastern boundary. The southern portion is covered in very dense Karoo veld (Figures 19 & 20) The proposed water storage dam (35 ha) is located in the far north eastern corner of Farm No. 10. The land dips quite steeply from the northern slopes into a small nonperennial stream and the receiving environment is covered in very thick natural veld. (Figures 21 & 22). Several drainage channels run into the stream from the south western slopes. There is a gravel farm road that cuts through the middle of the proposed site. 7

9 N Dam Agricultural development Lime quarry Lime factory Figure 3. Aerial photograph of the study site local context N Figure 4. Layout of the proposed agricultural lands (Portions 1-6) and the proposed irrigation dam 8

10 Figure 5. View of Portion 1 facing south Figure 6. View of Portion 1 facing south east Figure 7. View of Portion 1 facing north 9

11 Figure 8. View of Portion 2 facing north west Figure 9. View of Portion 2 facing south west. The R60 can be seen in the distance Figure 10. View of Portion 2 facing north 10

12 Figure 11. View of Portion 3 facing south west Figure 12. View of Portion 3 facing north Figure 13. View of Portion 4 facing north east 11

13 Figure 14. View of Portion 4 facing south west Figure 15. View of Portion 4 facing west Figure 16. View of Portion 5 facing south. The R60 is to the right of the plate 12

14 Figure 17. View of Portion 5 facing north Figure 18. View of Portion 5 facing south east Figure 19. View of Portion 6 facing south 13

15 Figure 20. View of Portion 6 facing north Figure 21. View of the dam site facing north east Figure 22. View of the dam site facing south east 14

16 4. STUDY APPROACH 4.1 Method The approach followed in the archaeological study entailed a fairly detailed and systematic foot survey of the proposed development site. Each of the affected landholdings (i. e. Portions 1-6), as well as the proposed water storage dam (on Farm 10), and the bulk water scheme (including the pipeline route and Jakkalsnek balancing dam) were surveyed. Most of the test pits were also inspected for archaeological remains. A track path of the survey indicating waypoints of archaeological finds was created (refer to Figures in Appendix II). All archaeological occurrences documented during the survey were plotted in situ, using a hand held Garmin Oregon 300 GPS device, set on the map datum wgs 84. The survey took place on the 29 th and 30 th November, and 1 st and 2 nd December, A final site visit was undertaken on 13 th June, A desk top study was also done. 4.2 Constraints and limitations The survey of the water pipeline and balancing dam, from the Breede River to the R60 was done on foot and by vehicle. Most of the route follows existing gravel roads and fence lines and there were no limitations experienced with regard to the study. With regard to Portions 1-6 and the large water storage dam on Farm No. 10, these landholdings are covered in natural Karoo vegetation, ranging from dense, to extremely dense, especially alongside the Vinkrivier and non-perennial streams, where the riparian vegetation was virtually impenetrable. As a result archaeological visibility ranges from high (gravel patches, farm roads, pans, sheet washed hill slopes), to very low. However, the archaeologist is confident that a good record of the archaeological heritage has been captured during the 5-day survey. 4.3 Identification of potential risks Stone tools may be exposed during vegetation clearing operations and preparation of the lands for development. However, indications are that the potential risk of locating significant finds is low. 4.4 Results of the desk top study Early Stone Age tools (ESA) were first recorded during a study for the proposed Silverstrand Golf Course and residential development alongside the Breede River near (Kaplan 2003a). ESA and Middle Stone Age (MSA) tools were later documented inside the urban edge of the town (Kaplan 2006, Kaplan 2007). In recent years, larger numbers of MSA tools, and a few ESA implements (including handaxes and other bifaces) were documented on the farm Klipbos a few kilometres south of (Kaplan 2011a) and on the Farm De Goree about 5 kms north of the town (Kaplan 2010). Large numbers of MSA tools were also documented west of, on the road to McGregor (Kaplan 2011b) and south of Worcester, alongside the R60, more than 700 MSA tools, including a rare MSA settlement site were recorded during an AIA for a proposed solar energy farm (Kaplan 2011c). Relatively large numbers of MSA 15

17 tools were recently documented during a study for a proposed free range chicken facility (Kaplan 2012a), and a handful of MSA tools were found during a study on the Farm Willow Creek east of the R60 (Kaplan 2012b) in the Nuy Valley near Worcester. So far, Later Stone Age (LSA) sites appear to be less visible in the Breede River Valley, restricted to only a few isolated and dispersed finds (Kaplan 2011a, 2010a), but some pottery and a few flake tools were also found during the study for the proposed solar energy farm (SEF) alongside the R60 (Kaplan 2011c), possibly confirming the historical presence of Hassequa Khoekhoe Herders who were known to have seasonally occupied the Breede River Valley during the late 17 th Century (Martin 2006). A rare LSA stone knapping site, that includes several hammerstones, flake debris, anvils and a pecked metal disc were also recorded during the study for the proposed free range chicken farm, alongside the SEF (Kaplan 2012a), and a possible Khoekhoe herder camp was recorded during an AIA for a proposed wind energy farm south of the Brandvlei Dam near Worcester (Kaplan 2010b). A scatter of LSA tools was also recorded on a farm near Rawsonville (Kaplan 2010c) and LSA rock art has been documented near Goudini and the Brandvlei Dam (Kaplan 2003a; Yates 2003). 5. RESULTS OF THE ARCHAEOLOGICAL STUDY A spreadsheet of waypoints and description of archaeological finds documented during the study is illustrated in Table 1 in Appendix I. 5.1 Portion 1 One hundred and fifty-one archaeological occurrences, numbering more than 350 stone implements were documented in Portion 1 on the Farm Middelburg No. 10. Waypoints of the archaeological finds are illustrated in Figure 73 in Appendix II. More than 95% of the tools recorded during the study are assigned to the MSA, and more than 98% of the tools encountered are in locally available quartzite. No organic remains such as pottery, bone or ostrich eggshell was found in Portion 1. While most of the implements are spread thinly and unevenly over the surrounding landscape (which is covered in very dense veld), they are more visible, and tend to cluster around areas which have been disturbed or modified, such as sheet washed hill slopes, erosion dongas, pans, diggings, and gravel farm roads. Very few LSA implements were found during the survey, but notable finds include one indurated shale adze (229) and one silcrete end scraper (153). ESA lithics are more common, and up to 16 implements were found, including several large flakes, one bifacial handaxe (204), one small biface (216), and a low density scatter of tools (205/6) located on rough stony ground alongside the gravel road on the flat escarpment overlooking Portion 2. Most of the archaeological occurrences comprise single, isolated finds, but a few small scatters of implements and several larger dispersed scatters of tools, were also located. About 50 tools were encountered on a wide gravel patch (129) in the northern end of Portion 1 where extensive sheet wash occurs on the heavily scarred and eroded hill slopes. The finds include mainly triangular shaped flakes with convergent dorsal scars, fatter, chunky flakes, unmodified and occasionally utilised and partially retouched flake blades, chunks, and flaked chunks/minimal cores. Several round cores were also counted. One utilized and partially retouched indurated shale pointed flake, a possible 16

18 indurated shale adze with step flaking, and several utilized and retouched silcrete MSA flakes were also found across this area (refer to in Table I in Appendix I). By far the most extensive, spatially coherent scatter of tools (across all the affected landholdings) occurs on a, hard gravel surface behind a small vegetated hummock in an old farm track alongside a small pan, where more than 80 implements were counted (Figure 23). The site (150) which at its densest, measures about 15 m x 5 m in extent, appears to be mostly in-situ and probably represents a MSA stone knapping area, where most of the implements comprise flake debitage including unmodified flakes, chunks, flaked chunks, anvils (n = 2), and several manuports. At least 12 round irregular and flatter (worked out) disc cores were also counted. Only one hammerstone was found, however. More than 98% of the lithics are in quartzite but a few tools in indurated shale, silcrete and even chalcedony were also found. Of the formal tools, only one crude bifacial point and one possible re-used indurated shale adze with step flaking was counted, suggesting that the site is indeed a stone knapping locality. A collection of tools documented in Portion 1 is illustrated in Figures N Vinkrivier Figure 23. Location of Site 150 in Portion 1. 17

19 Figure 24: View facing south Figure 27. Tools from Portion 1. Scale is in cm Figure View facing south Figure 28. Tools from Portion 1. Scale is in cm Figure 26. Tools from Portion 1. Scale is in cm Figure 29. Tools from Portion 1. Scale is in cm

20 Figure 30. Tools from Portion 1. Scale is in cm Figure 33. Tools from Portion 1. Scale is in cm Pan Figure 31. Tools from Portion 1. Scale is in cm Figure 34. Site 150 facing north Pan Figure 32. Tools from Portion 1. Scale is in cm Figure 35. Site 150 facing east, alongside the gravel road

21 Figure 36. Collection of tools from 150. Scale is in cm Figure 39. Tools from Portion 1. Scale is in cm Figure 37. Cores from 150. Scale is in cm Figure 40. ESA tools from Portion 1. Scale is in cm Figure 38. Tools from Portion 1. Scale is in cm Figure 41. Tools from Portion 1. Scale is in cm

22 Figure 42. Tools from Portion 1. Scale is in cm Figure 43. Tools from Portion 1. Scale is in cm 5.2 Portion 2 Forty-three archaeological occurrences, numbering about 80 stone implements were documented in Portion 2. Waypoints of the finds are illustrated in Figure 73 in Appendix II. The majority of occurrences comprise, single, isolated finds, encountered mostly on exposed patches of gravel, or spread randomly over the surrounding landscape, which is covered in dense Karoo veld. A low density) scatter of tools ( ) was located on a patch of gravel nestling around a series of vegetated hummocks parallel to the raised stream bank in the north western portion of the proposed site. These include about MSA quartzite flakes and chunks, a single silcrete core/chunk and nicked silcrete flake, a partially retouched pointed flake, and several large weathered indurated shale flakes, including one with fresh (possibly LSA retouch). Overall more than 98% of the tools found in Portion 2 are assigned to the MSA, while only a single ESA core (011) was encountered on a small hill wash slope alongside the gravel road, where a handful of MSA lithics were also encountered (010 & 011). Most of the remains documented during the study, however, include fat chunky, and triangular shaped flakes, chunks, several flake blades, flaked chunks, pointed flakes and a few round cores. No obvious LSA tools were found. No formal tools (such as scrapers, adzes, or spear points) or any organic remains such as ostrich eggshell, pottery or bone were encountered during the survey. More than 98% of the finds are in locally available quartzite. Probably the most significant `find in Portion 2 is not of an archaeological nature. This includes a grave (021), later confirmed by the farmer, that occurs about 20 m from the gravel road in the far northern portion of the proposed agricultural site. The grave comprises a large pile of (collapsed) lichen-covered sandstone, about 1.5 x 1.5 m in diameter (Figure 47). No headstone or footstone was noted, but some rusted metal, a broken clay brick, and a small pile of charcoal, were found lying alongside the rocks. The owner of the farm (Mr Hennie Retief) has indicated that this area in Portion 1 will be excluded from the proposed agricultural development as it is too wet for cultivation of vineyards. A collection of tools documented in Portion 1 is illustrated in Figures

23 Figure 44. Tools from Portion 2. Scale is in cm Figure 47. Tools from Portion 2. Scale is in cm Figure 45. Tools from Portion 2. Scale is in cm Figure 48. Tools from Portion 2. Scale is in cm Figure 46. Tools from Portion 2. Scale is in cm Figure 49. Grave (021) in Portion 2. View facing south west

24 5.3 Portion 3 Fourteen archaeological occurrences were encountered in Portion 3 of the Farm Middelburg No. 10. Waypoints of the archaeological finds are illustrated in Figure 74 in Appendix II. The landholdings in Portion 3 are almost completely undisturbed (apart from a gravel road and test pits) and are covered in very dense natural veld. Most of the tools comprise MSA elements, such as flakes, and chunks, but two manuports were found on the high river bank in the western portion of the property where the two rivers meet. One broken, partially retouched LSA silcrete flake (705) and a snapped indurated shale flake (714) with step retouch were also found. The most notable site was a small scatter of about 10 flakes, chunks, an anvil and an indurated shale flake located on a hard patch of gravel/white sand against a vegetated hummock (710). No ESA tools, or any organic remains such as pottery or bone were found. A collection of tools documented in Portion 3 is illustrated in Figures Portion 4 Thirteen stone implements were documented in Portion 4 on Farm No. 10. Waypoints of the finds are illustrated in Figure 74 in Appendix II. The affected lands apart from a few test pits, is covered in extremely dense natural veld, and grasses, resulting in very low archaeological visibility. Most of the finds comprise single isolated occurrences, including five implements which were found in the gravel road along the southern boundary of the proposed site. Apart from an ESA biface (718) located on a gravel bank alongside a small stream, and an ESA flake embedded in the gravel road (723), all the tools are assigned to the MSA. No formal tools or any organic remains such as pottery were found. A collection of tools documented in the Portion 4 is illustrated in Figure 53. Anvil Figure 50. Tools from Site 710. Scale is in cm Figure 51. Site 710 view facing east

25 Silcrete flake Ind. shale flake with retouch Figure 52. Tools from Portion 3. Scale is in cm Figure 53. Tools from Portion 4. Scale is in cm 5.5 Portion 5 Thirty seven archaeological occurrences, numbering about 90 stone implements were documented in Portion 5 of Farm No. 10/9, alongside the R60. Waypoints of archaeological finds are illustrated in Figure 73. The majority (more than 90%) of the tools are assigned to the MSA, but a relatively larger number of LSA lithics were encountered on the proposed site, when compared to Portions 1-4. Only one ESA flake (290) was found, however. While most of the tools comprise single isolated finds that occur in a disturbed and degraded context, several low density scatters of tools were also encountered across the property. A larger number of MSA flake blades and pointed flakes were also found on the site. A thin scatter of mixed LSA and MSA tools ( & 280) occurs on an elevated ridge of colluvian, alongside a series of eroded vegetated `dunes about 75 m west of and parallel to the heavily vegetated floodplain. Apart from a number of larger MSA quartzite flakes, and chunks, several thin, pressure flaked utilized and retouched LSA silcrete and indurated shale flakes, a small round silcrete core, and an indurated shale miscellaneous retouched piece/convex scraper, were also encountered. A few more single, isolated LSA tools were found over the remainder of Portion 5, including a low density scatter (291) of three indurated shale chunks, several quartzite MSA flakes, one indurated shale miscellaneous retouched flake blade, a broken case bottle fragment, and some 19 th century Annular ware, that occurs on an eroded dune hummock alongside the vegetated stream in the far southern portion of the proposed site. Not too far from 291, about 10 quartzite flakes and chunks, several indurated shale flakes, an indurated shale core and a silcrete miscellaneous retouched flake (295) was also documented on an eroded bank and gravel patch almost directly alongside the R60. One very dispersed scatter (290) of about 30 quartzite flakes and chunks, a quartzite core, a large indurated shale core, and ESA flake were encountered on an extensive patch of gravel (possibly an old quarry) alongside the gravel road (290) that cuts across the southern portion of the proposed site. A collection of tools documented during the study is illustrated in Figures

26 Figure 54. Tools from Portion 5. Scale is in cm Figure 57. Tools from Portion 5. Scale is in cm Figure 55. Tools from Portion 5. Scale is in cm Figure 58. Tools from Portion 5. Scale is in cm Figure 56. Tools from Portion 5. Scale is in cm Figure 59. Tools from Portion 5. Scale is in cm

27 5.6 Portion 6 Thirty-six archaeological occurrences numbering about 60 stone artefacts were documented in Portion 6 of Farm No. 10. Waypoints of archaeological finds are illustrated in Figure 73. The majority of the tools are assigned to the MSA, while a few LSA tools, including a backed silcrete flake (325) were also found. No ESA tools were encountered in Portion 6. The majority of the MSA lithics comprise chunky, and triangular shaped flakes, chunks, flaked chunks and several round cores. More than 95% of the tools are in quartzite, but a few utilized and partially retouched implements in indurated shale and silcrete were also noted. Most of the finds comprise single, isolated occurrences that occur on the hard flat stony ground alongside the stream, but a few dispersed scatters of tools were also recorded, including a larger scatter (336) of quartzite and indurated shale flakes, a retouched flake, several chunks, a minimal core, and a large chunk of flaked indurated shale that occurs alongside a path adjacent an eroded slope. No organic remains such as bone, pottery or ostrich eggshell was found. A collection of tools documented in Portion 6 is illustrated in Figures 60 & 61. Figure 60. Tools from Portion 6. Scale is in cm Figure 61. Tools from Portion 6. Scale is in cm 5.7 Water storage dam Sixty archaeological occurrences numbering about 115 stone artefacts were documented in the 35 ha footprint area of the proposed Middelburg water storage dam. Waypoints of the archaeological finds are illustrated in Figure 75. Most of the lithics comprise single, isolated MSA occurrences, including smaller triangular shaped, and fatter chunky flakes, edge retouched and utilized flakes, and small round, and flatter disc cores. A LSA indurated shale scraper (057) and a single ESA flake (067) was also found. A number of tools were located in the gravel farm road that intersects the site. Several low density scatters of tools were also recorded, including a scatter (069) numbering about 18 flakes and chunks and two flat disc cores, which occur in an erosion gully south of the stream that cuts through the site, and a dispersed scatter of tools, including flakes, chunks, and a possible indurated shale LSA side scraper (076) that was found in a patch alongside the farm road. Another small scatter (092) of tools including several flakes, and three cores (including one quartz core) was found alongside the road. A collection of tools and the context in which they were found is illustrated in Figures

28 Figure 62. Tools from proposed dam site. Scale is in cm Figure 65. Tools from proposed dam site. Scale is in cm Figure 63. Tools from proposed dam site. Scale is in cm Figure 66. Tools from proposed dam site. Scale is in cm Figure 64. Tools from proposed dam site. Scale is in cm Figure 67. Site 076. View facing north east

29 5.8 Water pumping scheme Eleven archaeological occurrences numbering between 30 and 40 stone implements were encountered during the walk through and drive by survey of the proposed pipeline route, and balancing dam on the Jakkalsnek (Refer to Figure 72). Most of the tools include MSA flakes and chunks, but at least three ESA flakes were also found. These were mostly encountered on sheet washed and steep eroded north facing slopes alongside the winding gravel road on the Farm Eilandia. A split quartzite cobble and a small quartzite flake were found within the footprint area of the balancing dam on the Jakkalsnek, while a small scatter of tools (306), including an indurated shale bifacial flake (possibly a broken handaxe), and a large weathered indurated shale retouched flake, were found in an eroded culvert alongside the gravel road, about 300 m before the R60. A collection of tools and the context in which they were found are illustrated in Figures Figure 68. Tools alongside gravel road. Scale is in cm Figure 70. Tools alongside gravel road. Scale is in cm Biface/broken hand axe Figure 69. Context in which the tools were found. Figure 71. Tools from culvert (306). Scale is in cm 28

30 5.9 Significance of the archaeological heritage Three hundred and sixty-four archaeological occurrences numbering more than 750 stone artefacts were documented on the Farm Middleburg (Vinkrivier) No. 10. The remains are comparable to many of the finds that have been encountered elsewhere (by the archaeologist) on farms situated between Worcester and, which are dominated by tools assigned to the MSA. Most of the Middelburg lithics comprise single isolated finds, but several dispersed scatters of tools, ranging from low density scatters to much higher frequencies (of more than 80 tools), were also encountered. Not surprisingly, most of the artefacts tend to cluster around areas which have been disturbed or altered, such as sheet washed slopes, dongas, pans, diggings, and gravel roads. One such scatter (known as Site 150), located near a small pan in Portion 1, most likely represents a MSA stone knapping site where large numbers of flake debitage and more than a dozen cores, but only two formal tools, were recorded. The site appears to be spatially coherent, and has been rated as having medium (Grade 3B) significance. As archaeological sites are concerned, however, the majority of the remains are lacking in context, as no organic remains such as bone, pottery or ostrich eggshell were found. Many of the implements are also found on eroded surfaces. Despite the relatively large numbers of tools that were encountered during the study, the context in which they were found means that the majority of archaeological remains on Farm 10/9 have been rated as having low (Grade 3C) significance. 6. RESULTS OF THE PALAEONTOLOGICAL STUDY According to John Almond (2012), the footprint area of the proposed project, including dams, agricultural lands and pipeline, is underlain by fossiliferous marine to lacustrine sediments of the Ecca Group (Karoo Supergroup) of Early to Middle Permian age. Most of these Palaeozoic bedrocks contain only sparse, low diversity fossil assemblages, however, and their outcrop is largely buried beneath thick superficial deposits (alluvium, colluvium, soils) that are of low palaeontological sensitivity. The fossil content of the Ecca Group here has often been compromised by weathering, tectonic deformation (e.g. folding) and calcrete formation. Therefore only deeper excavations (>2 to 3m) are likely to intersect fresh, potentially fossil-rich Ecca bedrock. The impact significance of the new agricultural lands and pipeline is considered to be LOW (Almond 2012:). The balancing dam on the Jakkalsnek is likely to be excavated into mudrocks of the Whitehill Formation. This formation has yielded important fossils of mesosaurid reptiles, trace fossils, crustaceans and insects at Scherpenheuwel, situated within the Breede River Valley some 12 km west of the study area. Test pits within the footprint of the proposed main irrigation dam in the north-western part of the Farm Middelburg have yielded locally abundant fossil plant remains. This is one of very few fossil plant localities recorded within the outlier of Karoo Supergroup rocks in the Worcester Valley. The stratigraphic position of these rocks whether uppermost Ecca Group or lowermost Beaufort Group - remains uncertain. If Lower Beaufort Group rocks are indeed represented here, they might contain rare remains of 30

31 terrestrial vertebrates (e.g. mammal-like reptiles or Therapsids) that would be of very considerable palaeontological interest. It is concluded `that the impact significance of the two proposed dam sites the balancing dam on Farm 52/RE Lange Vallei and the main irrigation dam on Farm 10 Middelburg (Vinkrivier) - is potentially HIGH (Almond 2012:.24). 7. IMPACT STATEMENT (ARCHAEOLOGICAL HERITAGE) The archaeological study of Middelburg Farm No. 10 has added significantly to a growing body of information that has been generated in the Breede River Valley that demonstrates fairly high archaeological visibility across the landscape, where the majority of the remains are assigned to the MSA. While many of the occurrences encountered during these studies comprise single, isolated finds, or small dispersed scatters of tools lacking in context, several activity areas such as stone knapping, and settlement sites, have also been identified (refer to Kaplan 2011c, 20012a), which presents opportunities for future applied research. It is maintained that the specialist archaeological study of Farm No. 10/9 has captured good information on the archaeological heritage present, and that the proposed agricultural development (with recommended mitigation measures in place) will not have a significant impact on the archaeological landscape. Apart from the Site 150 which has been rated as having medium (Grade 3B) significance, the overall impact of the proposed development on important archaeological heritage remains is likely to be low. 8. RECOMMENDATIONS With regard to the proposed Middelburg/Vinkrivier agricultural development on Farm No. 10/9 near, the following recommendations are made: Archaeology 1. The grave (021) on Farm No. 10 must be fenced off prior to any development proceeding. 2. Site # 150 must be excluded from the proposed agricultural development. A buffer of about 35 m must be established around the pan and the area fenced off. Fencing must be done in consultation with the archaeologist 3. If any unmarked human remains are uncovered or exposed during preparation of the site for development, these must immediately be reported to the archaeologist (Jonathan Kaplan ), or Heritage Western Cape (Jenna Lavin ) Palaeontology 1. It is recommended that a site visit by a professional palaeontologist be made to both dam sites once they have been excavated but before they are filled with water. The 31

32 purpose of the visit would be to record and judiciously sample fossil assemblages exposed by the dam excavations together with appropriate stratigraphical, sedimentological and palaeontological data. The specialist involved would require a collection permit from Heritage Western Cape (HWC), fossil material must be curated in an approved repository, and all work carried out should meet the minimum standards for palaeontological impact studies developed by SAHRA (South African Heritage Resources Authority). 2. The Environmental Control Officer (ECO) responsible for this development should be alerted to the possibility of fossil remains being found on the surface or exposed by fresh excavations at any time during construction. Should substantial fossils (e.g. plant stems and leaves, vertebrate bones and teeth, shells) be discovered or exposed during development, the responsible ECO should alert HWC so that appropriate mitigation measures may be considered. The above recommendations should be incorporated into the Environmental Management Plan for the proposed development. 32

33 9. REFERENCES Almond, J Palaeontological specialist study: combined desktop and field assessment. Proposed development of new vineyards, irrigation dam and water pumping scheme for Farm No. 10 Middelburg near, Western Cape. Report prepared for Boland Enviro. Natura Viva cc. Cape Town. Kaplan, J. 2012a. Heritage Impact Assessment, proposed expansion of a free range chicken facility on Farm 440, Remainder Farm 441, & Farm 478 near. Report prepared for Boland Enviro. ACRM Cape Town Kaplan, J. 2012b. Heritage Impact Assessment the proposed Willow Creek Chicken Farm on Portion 2 of Farm 336, Worcester. Report prepared for Warren Patterson Planning. ACRM Cape Town Kaplan, J. 2011a. Archaeological Impact Assessment proposed development of agricultural land Klipbos. Report prepared for Boland Enviro. ACRM Cape Town Kaplan, J. 2011b. Archaeological Impact Assessment proposed development of agricultural land and construction of an off-channel storage dam on Portion 18 of the Farm Uitnoord 129. Report prepared for EnviroAfrica. ACRM Cape Town Kaplan, J. 2011c. Archaeological Impact Assessment proposed SANVAL Solar Farm. Report prepared for Boland Enviro. ACRM Cape Town. Kaplan, J. 2010a. Archaeological Impact Assessment proposed development of agricultural land on Portion 16 of Farm 100 (De Goree). Report prepared for Boland Enviro. ACRM Cape Town. Kaplan, J. 2010b. Archaeological Impact Assessment proposed development of agricultural land on Portion 3 and Portion 80 of Farm 125 Wolvendrift,. Report prepared for Envirodinamik. ACRM Cape Town Kaplan, J. 2010c. Archaeological assessment of Portion 22 of Farm 386 Wysersdrift near Rawsonville. Section 24G application. Report prepared for Boland Enviro. ACRM Cape Town. Kaplan, J Archaeological Impact Assessment proposed development on Portion 100 (Portion of Portion 58) of the Farm Bosjemansdrift Bonnievale. Report prepared for Envirodinamik. ACRM Cape Town Kaplan. J Archaeological Impact Assessment proposed housing development Erf Report prepared for EnviroAfrica. ACRM Cape Town Kaplan, J Phase 1 Archaeological Impact Assessment proposed development Erf 3. Report prepared for Boland Enviro. Agency for Cultural Resource Management. Kaplan, J. 2003a. Archaeological study proposed development Silverstrand Golf and Country Estate,. Report prepared for Ecosense. Agency for Cultural Resource Management. 33

34 Kaplan, J. 2003b. Archaeological scan proposed expansion of existing Goudini Spa Resort. Report prepared for Boland Conservation Services. Agency for Cultural Resource Management Yates, R A heritage management plan for Quaggaskloof Site 1 on Portion 1 of Farm 495, Worcester. Iziko: South African Museum 34

35 Appendix I Spreadsheet of waypoints and description of archaeological finds 35

36 Site Name of Farm Lat/Long Description of finds Portion 9 of the Farm Middelburg (Vinkrivier) No. 10 Pipeline from Breede River 001 S E Very small scatter of a few MSA flake tools on sheet wash slopes & erosion dongas alongside road (pipeline from Breede River) 002 S E Very small scatter of flake tools on extensive sheet wash alongside road includes several quartzite MSA flakes, chunks and misc chunks, and 1-2 larger ESA flakes. (pipeline from Breede River) 003 S E A few MSA quartzite flakes and chunks occur on sheet washed slopes alongside the road. 1 large ESA flake. (pipeline from Breede River) 004 S E Deep donga alongside the road, sheet wash slopes, a few MSA quartzite flakes and chunks, including 1 flat core. (pipeline from Breede River) 005 S E MSA flake and chunk in small donga alongside the road. (pipeline from Breede River) 006 S E A few MSA quartzite flakes and chunks on sheet washed slopes alongside the road. (pipeline from Breede River) 007 S E Small quartzite flake alongside road Balancing dam 008 S E Split quartzite cobble/msa retouched flake balancing dam 009 S E Broken quartzite flake in road. (pipeline from Breede River) 305 S E Quartzite flake 306 S E Ind. shale bifacial flake/broken handaxe, a large ind. shale flake, x 2 retouch/utilized flakes near culvert alongside road Portion S E A few MSA quartzite flakes on eroded bank/sheet wash alongside the road. large?esa core 011 S E MSA quartzite flakes, chunks, utilized `blank on gravel patch 012 S E MSA quartzite flake 013 S E Snapped MSA flake 014 S E MSA quartzite flake 015 S E MSA quartzite flake 016 S E Small, broken retouched silcrete flake 36

37 017 S E X 2 quartzite chunks 018 S E Small chunk 019 S E MSA quartzite flake/blade 020 S E Chunky MSA flake 021 S E Grave small pile of lichen-covered rocks (sandstone), about 1 x 1 m in diameter, some rusted metal, clay brick, pile of charcoal. 022 S E Small, low density scatter of MSA flakes on large, exposed patch of gravel alongside raised stream bank. Includes silcrete core/chunk, partially retouched pointed flake, a few quartzite MSA flakes, large weathered ind. shale flake (with fresh retouch), nicked silcrete flake 023 S E Part of above 024 S E Same as above, alongside, including a few MSA quartzite flakes & chunks; 1 weathered ind. shale flake 025 S E Snapped ind. shale flake, and a few quartzite flakes and chunks 026 S E MSA quartzite flake 027 S E MSA quartzite flake 028 S E Flat MSA quartzite flake 029 S E Broken/snapped flake 030 S E Several MSA flakes in patch alongside hummock, inc. quartzite flakes, large round flaked chunk/min core/cortex, chunky retouched blade 031 S E Quartzite chunk 032 S E Broken quartzite flake 033 S E Chunky quartz flake 034 S E Small chunky flake 035 S E Broken quartzite flake 036 S E Chunky quartzite flake with broken tip 037 S E Indurated shale flake 038 S E X 2 large flakes; 1 retouched/utilized 040 S E Chunk/minimal core 041 S E MSA quartzite flake 042 S E Large quartzite flake/blade 043 S E Snapped quartzite flake, ind. shale chunk/broken flake 044 S E Quartzite chunk 045 S E Large pointed quartzite flake 046 S E X 2 quartzite flakes, 1 chunk 047 S E Broken quartzite flake 048 S E X 2 quartzite flakes 049 S E Broken flake and chunk 050 S E X 2 quartzite chunks 051 S E Large chunky quartzite flake 37

38 052 S E X 3 chunky flakes 053 S E Quartzite chunk Irrigation Dam 054 S E MSA quartzite flake 055 S E MA quartzite flake 056 S E Thin, indurated shale flake 057 S E Small triangular shaped flake, quartzite chunk, broken flake, ind. shale side scraper in erosion gulley 058 S E X 2 chunky quartzite flakes 059 S E Large flake 060 S E Large chunky flake 061 S E Small chunk 062 S E Small flake 063 S E Triangular shaped edge retouched flake 064 S E Broken flake 065 S E X 2 small flakes 066 S E Small flake 067 S E ESA flake 068 S E Small flake 069 S E MSA flakes,, 2-3 chunks, 2 flat cores, in small erosion gulley south of the stream channel 070 S E Snapped flake 071 S E Chunk 072 S E MSA quartzite flake 073 S E X 4 flakes and 1 chunk 074 S E Flake 075 S E X 2 chunks 076 S E Low density scatter of a few MSA quartzite flakes, flaked chunk, 1-2 chunks in quartzite, 1?ind shale scraper, on patch of gravel alongside gravel path/track 077 S E Chunk 078 S E Flake and chunk 079 S E Flake 080 S E Flake/blade 081 S E Chunky flake 082 S E Chunk and flake in track 083 S E Flake in track 084 S E Flake and chunk in track 085 S E Flake in track 086 S E Flake in track 087 S E Chunk in track 088 S E Flake in track 089 S E Flake in track 090 S E Flake in track 38

39 091 S E Flake in track 092 S E quartzite flakes, 3 chunks, 2 round cores, on gravel patch alongside track, 1 round quartz core 093 S E Round core 094 S E Chunk 095 S E Chunk and flake 096 S E Flake 097 S E Chunky flake and chunk 098 S E Chunky flake 099 S E Ind shale flake, 2 quartzite flakes, small flakes, 2-3 chunks on patch of red gravel 100 S E Chunk, x 2 flakes 101 S E Small chunky core 102 S E Flat round core, flake and chunk 103 S E X 2 flakes, 1 chunky pointed flake 104 S E Flat round core 105 S E Flake in road/boundary fence 106 S E Quartzite flake 107 S E Flake 108 S E Flake 109 S E Flake 110 S E Chunk 111 S E Chunk 112 S E Chunk 113 S E Flake 114 S E Flake Portion S E Broken unifacial flake 116 S E Flake 117 S E On sheet washed hill slope; several MSA quartzite flakes, 1 edge retouched flake, large ESA flake, fat chunky flake, large pointed utilized and partially retouched flake 118 S E Chunk, 2-3 quartzite flakes, round manuport, 119 S E Small, partially retouched pointed flake 120 S E Sheet washed hill slope, x 2 quartzite MSA flakes, 2 chunks, large pointed flake/blade 121 S E Small, thin flake, small silcrete snapped and retouched flake 122 S E Large utilized quartzite flake 123 S E Extensive sheet washed slope/donga mostly clays, large thick partially retouched flake, large chunk (quartz), Ind shale chunk 124 S E MSA quartzite flake on sheet washed slopes 39

40 125 S E Flake 126 S E Broken side struck quartzite flake 127 S E Core-reduced flake, chunk 128 S E Small quartz chunk 129 S E Scatter up to 50 tools on extensive gravel patch on hill slope; flakes, and chunky flakes, cobble cortex core, ind shale chunk, quartzite flakes,, large core, indurated shale flake, silcrete flake disturbed, 130 S E Extension of above sheet wash hill slope, low density scatter, including indurated shale?adze step flake, and weathered silcrete flake 131 S E Patch of sheet wash gravel on hill slope, small round core 132 S E Patch of gravel in drainage channel about 300 m from dam; x 3 flakes, large indurated shale cobble/cortex/core 133 S E X 2 small flakes 134 S E Flake in footpath 135 S E Chunk 136 S E Quartzite flake 137 S E Quartzite flake 138 S E Quartzite flake and chunk 139 S E Flake 140 S E X 5 large and medium-sized flakes, 2 chunks, on small patch of clay/shale 141 S E Flake in road 142 S E Flake in road 143 S E Flake in road 144 S E Flake in road 145 S E Large, snapped, utilized flake/blade 146 S E On knoll, high point in southern portion of the site, overlooking dam, large quartz chunk, large quartzite flake, 2-3 quartzite flakes, quartz chunk, round quartz flaked chunk/min core, indurated shale utilized MSA flake, large quartz and quartzite flake, a few smaller pieces scattered about 147 S E Flake 148 S E Chunk 149 S E Small chunky side struck retouched flake 150 S E More than 80 MSA flakes, utilized and retouched pieces, chunks and round cores (n = 12), x 2 anvils and a hammerstone, on a hard gravely surface, alongside a small wet pan, including many flaked chunks, mainly in quartzite but also in silcrete and 40

41 even 1-2 in chalcedony and ind. shale.? Possible activity/stone knapping area. One crude bifacial point, re-used adze (step flaking). 151 S E Flake 152 S E Chunk 153 S E ?silcrete end scraper on gravel patch 154 S E X 3 MSA flakes,1 ESA flake 155 S E X 4-5 quartzite flakes, I utilized flake in ind. shale, flaked chunk 156 S E quartzite flakes, 157 S E Ind. shale pointed flake with some retouch on tip 158 S E X 2 small MSA quartzite flakes 159 S E Quartzite flake 160 S E Flake 161 S E Flake 162 S E Chunk 163 S E Chunk 164 S E X 2 flakes, 1 chunk 165 S E X 2 quartzite flakes, on gravel patch 166 S E Weathered ind shale flake, x 2 quartzite flakes, 1 chunk, bit and pieces of quartz, near small gravel and clay depression 167 S E Quartzite flake 168 S E Flat round core 169 S E Quartzite chunk, and ind shale chunk 170 S E Quartz flake 171 S E Large quartzite flake, chunk, 172 S E Quartzite flake 173 S E Quartzite flake 174 S E Quartzite flake 175 S E Quartzite flake 176 S E Chunk 177 S E Weathered Ind shale chunk and flake, quartzite flake on gravel bank 178 S E Large flake, small chunky flake and chunk 179 S E Misc. retouched flake blade 180 S E Flake in footpath 181 S E Flake in footpath 182 S E Chunk in footpath 183 S E Flake 184 S E Small flake 185 S E Retouched and utilized silcrete flake 186 S E Flake 187 S E Flake 188 S E Flake 41

42 189 S E Flake 190 S E Round irregular core 191 S E Flake 192 S E Quartz chunk 193 S E Flake in road alongside `dam` 194 S E Flake 195 S E Flake 196 S E X 2 flakes and blade on `kopje 197 S E Large flake on `kopje 198 S E Low density scatter x quartzite flakes, inc utilized and misc retouched pieces, 2 cores, large flake, on flat stony escarpment alongside road 199 S E Large, flat/wide utilized flake/blade 200 S E Large flat flake 201 S E Small broken flake 202 S E Chunky flake 203 S E Flake 204 S E ESA biface?handaxe 205 S E Low density scatter alongside the road, 5-6 large ESA flakes, large core, ESA biface, 2-3 chunks 206 S E A little further on, another low density scatter, inc several large ESA flakes, smaller MSA flakes, alongside road 207 S E Large, chunky flake 208 S E X 2 flakes 209 S E Several large flakes, flat disc core, chunks, on patch of stony ground alongside road 210 S E Flake in footpath 211 S E Flake in footpath 212 S E Flake in footpath 213 S E X 2 flakes, 1 large chunk in pan alongside road 214 S E Flake 215 S E Round pebble/cortex core, flake alongside road 216 S E Small biface 217 S E Small flake 218 S E Flake 219 S E Flake 220 S E Chunk 221 S E X 2 fat chunky flakes 222 S E Flake and chunk all including above on flat stony escarpment 223 S E Flake 224 S E ESA flake and MSA flake 225 S E Flake 42

43 226 S E Large MSA flake 227 S E Small, thin scatter of few tools, inc. x 5 flakes on patch of gravel, round core 228 S E Several flake tools in road, inc. flake/blade, 1 ind. shale flake 229 S E Indurated shale LSA adze 230 S E X 2 flakes 231 S E Flat disc core 232 S E Chunky flake 233 S E Flake 234 S E Flake 235 S E Flake 236 S E Blade, x 2 flakes, x 2 chunks in patch alongside road 237 S E Large flat MSA flake 238 S E MSA flake on edge of pan, and broken round core 239 S E Flat core 240 S E Flake and chunk 241 S E Large, flat flake and smaller flake 242 S E Chunk/min core on broken cobble/cortex 243 S E Broken round core, and large chunky flake 244 S E Flat flake 245 S E Flake 246 S E Flake and chunk 247 S E Flake 248 S E ESA flake 249 S E Flake 250 S E X 2 flakes 251 S E Fat chunky flake 252 S E Chunky flake 253 S E Broken flake 254 S E Chunky flake with partial retouch 255 S E Min core/flaked chunk 256 S E Chunky flake 257 S E Small, broken flake 258 S E Small flat flake 259 S E Chunk 260 S E Chunk and chunky flake 261 S E Chunky flat flake 262 S E Chunk 263 S E Flat core 264 S E Fat chunky flake 265 S E Fat chunky flake 266 S E Small flake 43

44 Portion S E Quartz flake 268 S E Weathered ind. shale flake and quartzite chunk 269 S E Thin, ind. shale flake (?LSA), ind. shale chunk/flake scars, quartzite flake, 270 S E Ind shale MRP 271 S E Large ind. shale chunk 272 S E Eroded bank sheet wash/colluvian, several thin silcrete flakes, quartzite flakes and chunks, ind. shale flake, - LSA and MSA. against dune hummock/small knolls 273 S E Same as above, inc. a few MSA quartzite flakes, small LSA silcrete core, ind. shale flake 274 S E Chunk 275 S E A few MSA quartzite chunks and flakes, large ind shale flake with scraper retouch, 1-2 ind. shale flakes, ind. shale MRP/utilized (LSA) flake sheet washed ridge parallel to non-perennial stream 276 S E Broken silcrete MSA flake 277 S E X 2 small quartzite flakes 278 S E Quartzite blade 279 S E Quartzite flake 280 S E quartzite flakes, ind. shale retouched chunk, on sheet wash/colluvian ridge parallel to stream 281 S E Large quartzite chunk 282 S E Large quartzite chunk with utilized edge 283 S E A few quartzite MSA flakes, ind shale chunk on ridge alongside stream 284 S E Knoll/hummock/eroded bank, ind. shale chunk and split quartzite cobble 285 S E X 2 ind. shale chunks, 2 quartzite chunks, and quartzite flake 286 S E Quartzite chunk, thick quartzite utilised bladelet 287 S E Large, round quartzite core and chunky quartzite flake (with cortex) 288 S E Quartzite flake 289 S E X 2 flakes in large eroded gulley, inc. ind shale chunk and flake 290 S E Scatter of about 20 quartzite flakes, 8 chunks, 1 core, large ind. shale core (large cobble), 1 ESA on extensive sheet wash, near gravel road 291 S E X 3 Ind shale chunks,, flake, ind. shale MRP flake/blade, on eroded 44

45 hummock/knoll, broken case bottle fragment, Annular ware, x 2 quartzite flakes, 292 S E Small flake 293 S E Chunky quartzite flake 294 S E Ind. shale flake 295 S E In s-western corner, on eroded bank, and gravelly patch x 5 quartzite flakes, a few chunk a few ind. shale flakes, large flat ind. shale flake, ind. shale core, silcrete MRP 296 S E Several quartzite flakes, and chunks, large quartzite utilized flake 297 S E Quartzite core, quartzite flake, ind. shale flake 298 S E Quartzite chunk 299 S E X 3 ind. shale flakes, alongside fence line, on eroded bank 300 S E Quartzite flake 301 S E Quartzite flake/blade 302 S E Triangular shaped flake 303 S E Triangular shaped flake 304 S E Large flake, several smaller quartzite flakes, and chunks, large core (cortex cobble) Portion S E Low density scatter of a few quartzite MSA flakes and chunks, a few weathered ind. shale flakes and chunks, on patches of gravel 308 S E Same as above, closer to the river, on flat gravel ridge, a few dispersed MSA quartzite flakes, one core 309 S E Unmodified quartzite flakes, and chunks, flaked chunks/min core and round irregular core 310 S E Notched, side struck quartzite flake 311 S E Flat, chunky ind shale pointed flake 312 S E Quartzite flake 313 S E A few quartzite MSA flakes, flaked cobble, large flake and chunk, on an eroded, stony gravelly/shale ledge. Also ind. shale chunk and flake 314 S E A few quartzite flakes, ind. shale chunk, on stone gravel ledge - ext of S E Ind shale chunk and x 2 quartzite flakes on eroded slope/bank overlooking non-perennial stream/floodplain 316 S E Ind shale chunk on eroded bank 317 S E Quartzite flake, and chunk 318 S E Large quartzite flaked chunk/min core 45

46 319 S E Round, flat core 320 S E quartzite MSA flakes, ind. shale flake and chunk on rocky ledge overlooking non-perennial stream 321 S E Quartzite flake 322 S E X 2 quartzite flakes in road 323 S E Chunk 324 S E X 4 quartzite flakes and 1 chunk on stony ledge 325 S E Small?backed/retouched silcrete flake LSA 326 S E Large ind. shale flake/chunk, 2 quartzite flakes, ind shale chunk, on ledge near deep cutting 327 S E X 2 flakes and round core/flaked chunk on wide flat stony plain 328 S E Flat, thin silcrete flake 329 S E Broken/snapped blade 330 S E Weathered chunky ind shale miscellaneous retouched flake, and quartzite chunk 331 S E X 2 quartzite flakes, 1 chunk, 1 ind. shale utilized flake, alongside donga about 50 m from railway line 332 S E X 2 quartzite chunks on gravel patch 333 S E quartzite flake on gravel patch 334 S E Chunk 335 S E Large, flattish flake 336 S E Snapped, retouched ind. shale flake, 2 quartzite chunks, large quartzite flake, 1 minimal core, x 2 ind shale flakes & chunk, block/chunk of flaked ind. shale, 1 large quartzite chunk, on loose, stony path, slightly eroded slope 337 S E Quartzite chunk and flake 338 S E Chunky flake 339 S E Flake 340 S E Thick, chunky retouched flake blade 341 S E Flake 342 S E Small flake 343 S E Small chunk Portion S E Broken chunk 703 S E Quartzite flake in road 704 S E Weathered/water rolled flake 705 S E Broken partially retouched silcrete LSA flake 706 S E Broken/flaked chunk 707 S E Thin indurated shale flake 708 S E Broken quartzite flake 709 S E Chunk 46

47 710 S E ± 10 MSA quartzite flakes, chunks, and small anvil, including ind shale flake on small patch of white sand/gravel/hummock surrounded by thick veld 711 S E Chunk 712 S E Quartzite flake 713 S E Quartzite manuport near river bank 713a No GPS reading Manuport 714 S E Snapped ind. shale flake, with step flaking Portion S E Flake/chunk 716 S E Chunk 717 S E Water worn flake 718 S E Large flake 719 S E Large flake ESA?biface 720 S E Large weathered flake 721 S E Chunk in road 722 S E X 2 flakes in road 723 S E ESA flake in road 724 S E Large MSA flake in road 725 S E MSA flake in road 726 S E Flake in small gravel patch Table 1. Spreadsheet of waypoints and description of archaeological finds 47

48 Appendix II Track paths and waypoints of archaeological finds 48

49 Figure 72. Middelburg archaeological study: track paths and waypoints of archaeological finds, Portions 1-6, irrigation dam and water pumping scheme from the Breede River

50 Figure 73. Middelburg archaeological study. Track paths and waypoints and archaeological occurrences, Portion

51 Figure 74. Middelburg archaeological study: Track paths and waypoints of archaeological finds in Portion 3 and 4. 24

52 Figure 75. Archaeological study: Waypoints of archaeological in the proposed irrigation dam. 25