Texas Historical Commission
Enercon Services, Inc. (ENERCON), in support of Salt Creek Midstream, LLC, conducted an intensive archeological survey for the proposed Quito Draw Pipeline Project. The proposed pipeline is approximately 19.3 miles (31.1 km) in length, located near Barstow and Pyote, Texas in Ward County. This report encompasses only the University Lands, UT System property segment of the proposed Quito Draw Pipeline Project which is approximately 11.8 miles (19.0km) in length. The University Lands, UT System property segment of the project area is depicted on the United States Geological Survey (USGS) Wink South, Tex. (1968), Soda Lake NE, Tex. (1968), and Soda Lake SE, Tex. (1968) 7.5 Minute Quadrangle maps. The construction corridor consists of a 50 foot (15m) wide permanent pipeline right-of-way (ROW) and a 50 foot (15m) wide temporary workspace corridor. The entire 50 foot (15m) wide ROW will be cleared of vegetation and the eight-inch gas pipeline will be installed in an open cut trench. The cultural resources survey corridor and area of potential effect (APE) was 100 foot (30m) wide for the entire 11.8 mile (19.0km) length of the pipeline segment through the University Lands, UT System property segment of the project, for a total of 143.03 acres (57.88 hectares).
The survey of the University Lands, UT System, a political subdivision of the State of Texas, property, was completed under Texas Antiquities Permit No. 9011. The initial cultural resources field investigation on University Lands, UT System property was conducted October 7, 2018 to October 9, 2018 by Christopher Flowers and Gary D. Edington and consisted of an intensive pedestrian survey utilizing transects spaced no greater than 15m apart with shovel tests in areas which had the potential for buried cultural resources. The field investigation was conducted in accordance with the Texas Historical Commission (THC) Archeological Survey Standards for Texas. The entire project was supervised by Gary D. Edington, an ENERCON archeologist who meets the U.S. Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualification Standards for archeology as set forth in 36 CFR 61.
The initial cultural resources investigation of the proposed Quito Draw Pipeline Project on University Lands, UT System property resulted in the observation of one isolated find (IF). IF#1 consists of a mottled pink and white tertiary chert flake. Ground Surface Visibility (GSV) at the location of IF#1 averaged around 65 percent. Five shovel tests were excavated in the vicinity of IF#1, all of which were negative for cultural resources. A pedestrian survey grid at 3-5m intervals at the location of IF#1 failed to identify any additional cultural materials and the location was noted as an isolated find. IF#1 lacks important information potential and is not recommended as eligible for the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) or designation as a State Antiquities Landmark (SAL), and no further work is recommended at the location of IF#1.
Prior to the initial survey, a site file check was conducted which resulted in the determination that no previously recorded sites are within the APE, or within 1-mile of the APE on University Lands, UT System property. Unfortunately, the Atlas was updated after the site file check was completed. A post facto site file check was conducted which resulted in the determination that seven previously recorded sites are recorded within 1-mile of the APE. Two of which, 41WR106 and 41WR107, are recorded within the APE and were partially impacted by the construction of the Quito Draw Pipeline on University Lands, UT System property. The field crew did not know 41WR106 and 41WR107 were recorded adjacent to the APE prior to fieldwork and these site locations were not observed during the initial survey. Prior to this Cultural Resources Report being presented to THC construction began on both the Quito Draw and Olifant 12-Inch pipelines. Thus, a post facto revisit of 41WR106 and 41WR107 was conducted on February 22, 2020 by J. Matthew Oliver and Gary D. Edington to assess the impact damage to both sites. Both sites, 41WR106 and 41WR107 were negatively impacted by the construction of the Quito Draw and Olifant 12-inch Pipelines on University Lands, UT System property. At site 41WR106 it appears that less than two percent of the previously recorded site area has been destroyed while at site 41WR107 it appears that approximately four percent of the site has been destroyed by the clearing of the Quito Draw and Olifant 12-inch pipelines.
The cultural resources investigations did not result in finding any additional historic or prehistoric artifacts, features, cultural lenses, or sites over 50 years of age on University Lands, UT System property. Therefore, it is recommended that the project will have no effect on any additional historic property that may qualify for inclusion in the NRHP or determination as a SAL on University Lands, UT System property. No further cultural resources investigations are recommended for the Quito Draw Pipeline Project on University Lands, UT System property. If cultural material, including sites, features, or artifacts that are 50 years old or older are encountered within the ROW during maintenance activities of the Quito Draw and Olifant Pipelines on University Lands, UT System property, work in the area must cease and the THC (512-463- 5853) must be immediately be notified.
Cite this Record
Oliver, J. Matthew; Edington, Gary D.; Riggs, Jerry L.; and Wesbury, Brandon R.
"Cultural Resources Report for the Salt Creek Midstream, LLC Proposed Quito Draw Pipeline Project on University Lands, UT System Property in Ward County, Texas,"
Index of Texas Archaeology: Open Access Gray Literature from the Lone Star State: Vol. 2020,
Available at: https://scholarworks.sfasu.edu/ita/vol2020/iss1/70
Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
American Material Culture Commons, Archaeological Anthropology Commons, Environmental Studies Commons, Other American Studies Commons, Other Arts and Humanities Commons, Other History of Art, Architecture, and Archaeology Commons, United States History Commons
Tell us how this article helped you.