Laserfiche WebLink
1 <br />6 <br />1880 artifacts, are present within the draw at the northwest portion of the site, an area that probably <br />served as a small dump. The chipped stone, ceramic and ground stone artifacts of the lithic <br />' component aze confined to the northem and northeastern parts of the site, generally north and east <br />of Structure 1 and including the area of Concentration 1. Several of the glass artifacts found on the <br />' site have evidence of knapping modification and use. <br />' Methods <br />Test Excavations <br />' Test excavations at SLA7186 included probing and formal excavation of 1 sq m test pits. <br />The probes were excavated in one of three ways. Probes (six) excavated in 1996 were done using <br />' a Giddings Soil Exploration Device with alert-inch auger. Extension attachments allowed this <br />angering to continue to the base of fine sediments, up to 254 cm below surface in one instance. The <br />Giddings probes were too deep, ranging from 132 to 254 cm, to remove all fill for screening. The <br />' volume of matrix screened from each hole is only a sample of the fill within each Giddings auger <br />probe. Recovered matrix was screened through quarter-inch mesh hazdware cloth. <br />' Probing continued during the 1997 investigations, using a hand held power post hole digger <br />with aneight-inch auger, or using shovel probes. The shovel probes were generally 25 to 35 cm in <br />N diameter. All fill from these probes .vas screened dvough quarter-inch mesh hazdware cloth. Gross <br />depth control was possible with the shovel probes and artifacts were provenienced to approximate <br />level. <br />' Probes were laid out in transects, spaced at 5 m within each transect (except for the Giddings <br />probes which were at ] 0 m intervals). Transect placement was designed to cover those parts of the <br />' site where aboriginal materials were the most common and where they were most likely to be found <br />subsurface based on geomorphology and surface expression. Other transects were placed to test for <br />historic deposits and features not expressed a[ the surface. Testing focused on the northem and <br />' eastern parts of the site. <br />Nine 1 sq m test pits were placed in various locations within the probed part of the site, based <br />on the results of probing and on the occurrence of surface features. These test pits were excavated <br />generally through two sterile levels, or to one meter, whichever came first. Test pits neaz positive <br />' probes were extended at least through the maximum depth of materials recovered from adjacent <br />probes. Test pits were excavated in ] 0 cm levels, measured below ground surface. All matrix was <br />screened through quarter-inch mesh hardware cloth. Artifacts were separated to class and bagged <br />' by provenience. At least one wall of each test pi[ was profiled, multiple walls were profiled in <br />certain test pits where stratigraphy warranted. Plan maps were kept by level where there were soil <br />changes, artifacts, building materials, or other discoveries that warranted a plan record. Photographs <br />' were taken as appropriate. <br />• The probe array and test pits were instrument mapped. The test pits were excavated within <br />' a grid system established at the site, under the assumption that mitigative data recovery excavation <br /> <br />