Laserfiche WebLink
15 <br />• <br />materials used to make ground stone tools are abundant in the survey area, <br />and, since these tools are usually fairly heavy and potentially difficult <br />to carry long distances, it is assumed that these tools were used at <br />the sites in which they were found. If this is true, any site with ground <br />stone tools is likely to have been the locus of general domestic food pre- <br />paration activities, no matter how minimal the lithic debris or surface <br />features. <br />Petrograph sites comprise a third type of site encountered in the <br /> <br />survey. These consist of rock panels with visible evidence of aboriginal <br />artwork. The artwork may include one or more of several methods of execu- <br />tion such as pecking, incising, abrading, or painting with pigments of <br />various colors. Design elements utilized may vary from abstract to anthro- <br />pomorphic or zoomorphic figures. Occasionally, rock art sites are associ- <br />ated with lithic or campsites, although it is generally difficult to ac- <br />curately assess the relationship between them on the basis of surface col- <br />lections alone. <br />Additional site types, such as kill, butchering, and quarry sites, <br /> <br />were not encountered during the survey. Kill or butchering sites might <br />well be located in the future, but the nature of the geology may eliminate <br />any possibility of discovering quarry sites in the area. There were no <br />obvious localities in which an exploitable quantity of tool materials <br />was available, although cobbles of quartzite were visible in the Williams <br />Fork and Yampa Rivers and could have provided a usable resource for tool <br />manufacture. <br />