Archaeological testing at Deep River site finds artifact clusters; consultants recommend Stage 3 study

Court council convened Wednesday heard details of an archaeological assessment that identified concentrated artifact clusters at a 3‑hectare parcel in Deep River and recommended further investigation to determine whether the site should be protected.

Courtney Cameron of Cameron Heritage Consulting described a Stage 1 desktop survey and Stage 2 shovel‑testing field campaign conducted under Ontario Ministry standards. Cameron said crews placed shovel tests at 5‑ and 10‑metre intervals, recorded GPS points for all positive pits and adjusted testing in obviously disturbed areas such as roads and septic trenches.

"We found 28 positive test pits, seven surface finds and three depressions," Cameron said, adding that the positives formed two clusters that matched the locations of two homes identified by local researcher Stephanie Adams. "The northern cluster coincides with the Dole home and the southern cluster coincides with the Brindle home." She said the Dole location appeared bulldozed and highly disturbed, while the southern cluster produced more pre‑1944 material and domestic artifacts.

The field inventory included bottles, yellowware pottery, assorted glass and metal fragments and a French Catholic rosary cross whose manufacture was dated in the transcript to roughly 1920–1960s. Cameron said researchers recovered a single possible pre‑contact flake; it was waterworn and isolated, and she judged it insufficient on its own to trigger a Stage 4 mitigation excavation.

"We did find one possible flake," Cameron said, "but it does not by itself indicate cultural heritage value that would require Stage 4."

Cameron recommended the project proceed to a Stage 3 assessment for the southern/Brindle cluster to better determine the archaeological site's extent, collect a representative artifact sample and assess cultural heritage value under provincial criteria. She noted that Stage 3 work is intended to show whether a site warrants protection or, alternatively, mitigation through excavation.

Mr. Kaiser, who described the assessment as prompted by local research and an official‑plan requirement for a future secondary plan, told council there is no immediate plan to develop the property. "This was more of what we want to do in the future — how do we build a policy around it without understanding its cultural and contextual history?" he said.

Councillors asked procedural and technical questions about testing intervals, the distinction between disturbed and undisturbed areas, and which cluster merited further study. Cameron told the council she was not recommending Stage 3 for the Dole location because "there just isn't sufficient remains"; she recommended Stage 3 for the Brindle cluster, where concentrations of pre‑1944 artifacts and domestic items were present.

The presentation closed with council voting to receive the report. Council members did not move any immediate development approvals; staff said findings will inform future policy and any required approvals.

Clarifying details from the assessment provided to council included the study area size (about 3 hectares), the 300‑metre buffer used for environmental context, 28 positive test pits and the distinction that disturbed road and foundation areas were excluded from systematic testing. The presenters also noted that most recoveries were post‑1944 domestic debris but that the southern cluster produced more historically relevant material.

The council presentation will be used to determine whether to commission Stage 3 work and to inform the town's secondary‑planning process for the area. The presenters said Stage 3 would determine whether the site has sufficient cultural heritage value to warrant protection rather than excavation and destruction.