Laserfiche WebLink
' pit. The shovel testiny was therefore far from informal yet was not a <br />fiill controllEd test. This m:thod was selected because it was suspected <br />that excavation returns from the site would be minirral due to the <br />linuted soil develo~nent evident. There was, however, at least sane <br />architecture present and the site was being treated as kegister eligible <br />wrtil proven different. Additionally, few such sites had been excavated <br />so there were few objective precidents to draw from. <br />l~:ach excavation unit was established by use of a striny line. <br />! ccavations were crnpleted with a crnibination of shovel, picks, trowel <br />acid wick brown. >~ccavations were conducted in natural levels of not <br />more than 10 centimeters, tare quarter inch mesh screens were used as <br />appropriate to screen dirt fran the topsoil of each test unit. Profiles <br />were drawn weed photographed. The site was mapped anti the test pits <br />backfilled. Colorado, Westmoreland accepted responsibility for reseeding <br />the grrnuui surface. <br />laboratory work involved washing and cataloging of artifacts. A <br />sirrple lithics analysis was oarQleted by exam; n;ny the edges of all the <br />stone tools and debitage for signs of use wear. Scree earparative <br />literature review was ccny~leted to see if the wear patterns observed <br />were consistent with those generally found on butchering tools. The <br />results of this study are discussed in Section VI and illustrated in <br />Figure 13. The artifacts will be permanently curated at Mesa College in <br />Grand Junction. <br /> <br />~~ <br /> <br />~~ <br />