My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
GENERAL35038
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
General Documents
>
GENERAL35038
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 7:56:13 PM
Creation date
11/23/2007 8:09:20 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1982057
IBM Index Class Name
General Documents
Doc Date
11/16/1989
Doc Name
ARCHAEOLOGICAL TESTING FOR 5RT132 SENECA II-W
From
PEABODY COAL CO
To
MLRD COLO HISTORICAL SOCIETY OSM
Permit Index Doc Type
VEGETATION
Media Type
D
Archive
No
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
18
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
4 <br />The pre-field testing plan was relatively simple. The initial stage was <br />to be an intensive surface survey including all of the defined site area as well <br />as the cut banks of the arroyos through the site. Testing was to include <br />systematic shovel or auger probing, 1 mz test units, and facing of arroyo walls. <br />The number and placement of the various test units was to be guided by any <br />evident patterns in artifact distributions relative to the depositional sequence <br />of soils on the site. Any areas where soils were preserved and there were <br />indications of cultural material in eroded or disturbed areas were to be tested. <br />Research goals, beyond determination of presence/absence of buried <br />cultural material, were to generally follow Guthrie et al. (1984) as modified <br />by the results of various studies in the region since that document was prepared <br />(e.g., Black 1986; LePoint 1987; Metcalf and Black 1988; Tones 1986). <br />Specific research domains identified by LaPoint (1987:215-216) are: <br />1. Improvement of the local chronological framework <br />2. Paleodemography <br />3. Prehistoric land use as it relates to settlement and <br />subsistence settings <br />4. Paleoenvironment <br />5. External cultural relationships. <br />Methods <br />The approach to testing, discussed prior to the project with Little Snake <br />Resource Area archaeologist Brian Naze and OSM archaeologist Foster Kirby, was <br />followed quite closely during fieldwork. Initially, the site was inspected <br />using WCRM's survey map and site form as a guide. Pin flags were used to mark <br />the locations of all artifacts; no features were visible on the surface. As <br />WCRM had not collected artifacts, en attempt was made to relocate all <br />diagnostics found during the survey. <br />Test units included 30 shovel probes and two lm x lm test pits, all <br />excavated to the depth of a massive yellow-brown clay which underlies the <br />surface soils and which is believed to predate human use of the area. These <br />units were placed in Localities A end C to supplement the generally excellent <br />exposures provided by erosional cuts. Locality B has obviously been stripped <br />of recent-age soils by sheet wash and was not tested. <br />Shovel probes measured about 32 to 35 cm in diameter and varied zn depth <br />from 15 to 60 cm, with most holes in the 30 to 40 cm depth range. Each hole was <br />excavated roughly by levels approximately 10 cm in depth with fill from each <br />increment screened separately. Probes were mapped via Brunton readings and <br />pacing from local data. <br />The lm x lm test units were used to supplement the results of the shovel <br />probes by placing them over, or in the vicinity of, positive probes. These were <br />also excavated in 10 cm levels and passed through 1/4-in mesh screen. Both test <br />units were placed in Locality A. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.