Laserfiche WebLink
<br />• III. METHODOLOGY <br />3.1 REVIEW OF LITERATURE AND SITE SURVEY FILES <br />As mentioned in Section 1.3, the literature and site <br />survey file reviews were to have been conducted prior to the <br />field investigation. Due to lack of lead time, however, the <br />review was conducted during and after the field investigation, <br />resulting in duplicate reporting of several sites already on <br />file. The results of the review are fully described in Sec- <br />tions 4.1 and 4.3 of this report. <br />3.2 FIELD TECHNIQUES <br />The Colowyo Mine site and the railroad corridors re- <br />• quired somewhat different field survey techniques. The mine <br />site exhibits relatively little relief or distinctive topographic <br />features and it was consequently more difficult than usual to <br />plan traverses of the area so that they did not overlap. The <br />usual technique was to space crew members from 50 to 100 feet <br />apart along a straight line and traverse an area at right angles <br />to that line. The length of any one traverse was determined by <br />natural or cultural boundaries such as fence lines, roads, or <br />gullies. This technique was used to cover the entire mine site. <br />Some archeologists have suggested that the spacing between mem- <br />bers of a crew should be reduced to 25 feet in open country and <br />less in areas of heavy vegetation. while this may minimize the <br />possibility of missing a site, it is felt that the coverage <br />• given by the field techniques employed during the present <br /> <br />