Laserfiche WebLink
3 <br />• <br /> <br />strategy, are outlined first. Following that is a discussion of the <br />actual area surveyed, with a brief description of the environmental <br />setting of each tract, and how it differs from the overall environment <br />of the Williams Fork Mountain region. Additionally, the number, type, <br />and distribution of any archaeological and historical sites are outlined <br />by tract. The analysis section consists of two major parts:. the first <br />is a descriptive typological breakdown of artifactual materials recovered, <br />and the second is an historical interpretation of the archaeology of the <br />Williams Fork Mountains based on the artifacts recovered and the distri- <br />bution of the sites. The appendix consists of site descriptions, <br />including each site's particular environmental and physical setting, <br />dimensions, contents, and an evaluation of its scientific or historic <br />potential for yielding important information. This evaluation also <br />provides a recommendation as to what each site may require in terms of <br />protection or future study. <br />Literature Search <br />A detailed literature search for information regarding archaeological <br />`J <br /> <br />reconnaissance or excavation was not undertaken prior to initiating the <br />fieldwork phase of the project <br />LOPA's previous experience in the <br />general area surrounding the project indicated that no literature was <br />available prior to beginning fieldwork. Upon returning to CSU, it was <br />learned that crews from the University of Colorado had been working in <br />the Yampa River-Milk Creek area, directly adjacent to Tracts 8, 13, and <br />14. However, no data except the information obtained from the Archaeolo- <br />gical Survey of Colorado Inventory Sheets has been made available to us <br />from that proiect. <br />