Laserfiche WebLink
<br />8 <br />As a criterion for determining the relative intensity for survey <br />efforts in the project, the degree of slope was not rigidly applied. <br />Many areas were surveyed despite the presence of grades exceeding 15°6. <br />However, no sites and very few isolated artifacts were observed on any <br />but the most gentle slopes. The same procedure has been utilized else- <br />where with substantially similar results (Jennings and Daniels 1976). <br />Since much of the region in which the tracts are located is highly <br />dissected, there are many instances where grades exceed the 15N value. <br />Many of these more steeply inclined areas were surveyed in transit to <br />other areas, or because of desireable terrain. No slope was eliminated <br />from the survey without field checking, unless examination of topographic <br /> map coverage showed that a particular locality was too steep. <br /> <br /> The second physiographic consideration used in determining areas <br /> suitable for survey is aspect. Anorth-facing slope is 4onsidered <br /> the least desirable aspect, as it offers the least protection from <br /> the prevailing northwesterly winds and allows for limited inso- <br /> lation, especially during the early mornings. Amore suitable exposure <br /> would be to the south and east. This orientation would provide more <br /> protection in inclement weather and would receive more and earlier <br /> warmth from the morning sun, making such a locality more comfortable <br /> and habitable. <br /> Considering the relative merits of a southerly exposure, we would <br /> <br /> expect archaeological sites to occur more frequently on the south-facing <br /> slopes. Using the foregoing assumptions as a guide, the survey effort <br /> was organized along these lines. One factor that interfered with this <br />• procedure was the structure of the Williams Fork Mountains. These mountains <br />rt <br />