4.
0 DEEP TEST METHODS AND TECHNIQUES
4.1 INTRODUCTION
Three subsurface testing methods were independently applied to the six test locales to assess
their utility for buried site discovery. These methods include, in order of increasing subsurface
impact, geophysical survey (remote sensing), coring and augering, and backhoe trenching.
Because ground disturbances affect the results of these surveys, the order in which the methods
were applied to each test locale followed their relative amount of subsurface disturbance (i.e.,
remote sensing, followed by coring and augering, and then trenching).
Each of the methods used during this study was applied to a predetermined area whose
generalized boundaries were established through consultation between the principal
geoarchaeologists and archaeologists in the field prior to initiation of the field investigations.
The generalized outline of the test locale was initially selected to meet the archaeological and
geomorphological testing criteria established for that locale and then marked using a hand-held
Global Positioning System (GPS) instrument (WAAS corrected to achieve <3 m [<9.8 ft]
accuracy).
The test areas chosen were at least 0.4 ha (1 ac) in size, and the rationale for test locale sizes,
shapes, and layouts was discussed previously (Chapter 3.0). Test areas were identical for each of
the methods under investigation (geophysical survey, coring, and trenching) at each locale. A
40 m × 100 m (131 ft × 328 ft) grid was surveyed at the Clement, Hoff Deep, Fritsche Creek II,
and Root River test locales; a 60 m × 80 m (197 ft × 263 ft) grid was surveyed at the City
Property test locale; and a 30 m × 140 m (98 ft × 459 ft) grid was surveyed at the Anderson test
locale. Prior to geophysical survey the test locales were cleared of agricultural crops as needed,
and the surface was prepared (i.e., plowed, disked). Next, a datum was established and the test
locale was gridded into 20 m × 20 m (66 ft × 66 ft) sampling units. The baselines and interior
nodes of the grid were marked using PVC stakes. These staked points allowed the geophysical
surveys, cores, augers, backhoe trenches, and archaeological test units to be more easily
measured, interrelated, and plotted. Relative elevations were measured using a transit at each
staked grid node and baseline to create a generalized topographic map of each test locale.
4.2 GEOPHYSICAL SURVEY METHOD AND TECHNIQUES
4.2.1 Introduction
The geophysical remote sensing surveys were conducted by sampling at regular intervals along
consistently spaced parallel transects. These transects were located using the survey grid
established at each test locale prior to initiation of all fieldwork. The sampling intensity
employed determines the resolution of the survey, as well as the speed at which the survey can
be completed. Usually, a small transect interval will result in more readings and data collected
than a larger transect interval and, consequently, the subsurface may be reconstructed more
accurately. Accuracy, however, comes at a price, as smaller intervals require more transects,
increasing the amount of time and cost to complete the survey. As a result, effective and
efficient geophysical survey designs aim to balance the intensity of the survey coverage with
Mn/DOT/WR-0200 4-1
completion time. In practice, appropriate sampling intervals differ from instrument to
instrument. Additionally, sampling intervals must also be appropriate to the scale and
geophysical contrast in subsurface features (Somers and Hargrave 2004:6). Thus, the
relationship between soil composition, soil moisture, and feature geometry must be considered
(Weymouth 1986:386-7). The intervals employed in this study were selected based on the
operators’ professional opinion as to the most cost effective means of maximizing information.
The surveys were conducted using a Geoscan FM36 magnetic gradiometer (Figure 4.2.1-1:A, B),
a Geoscan RM15 and MPX15 multiplexed earth resistance meter (Figure 4.2.1-1:C), and a
Sensors and Software Noggin SmartCart 250mHz GPR unit (Figure 4.2.1-1:D).
4.2.2 Magnetics
The Geoscan FM-36 magnetic gradiometer (Figure 4.2.1-1:A, B) was used to map changes in the
magnetic gradient of the test locales. The survey was conducted by dividing the test area into a
set of grid areas and then collecting grid-wise magnetic reading from transects within the survey
area. Eight magnetic gradient readings were taken per meter along each of the survey transects.
The transects were spaced 0.5 m (1.6 ft) apart, which yielded a data density of 6400 readings for
each 20 m × 20 m (66 ft × 66 ft) area of the survey grid, at a spatial resolution of 0.0625 m2
(0.67 m2). The instrument sensors on the FM-36 are 0.5 m (1.6 ft) apart vertically, and their
sensitivity was set at 0.1 nanotesla. Survey data collection times and personnel hours were
recorded for each survey test locale.
The data were analyzed using Geoplot 3.0 image processing software (Geoscan Research 1987)
and ArcGIS 8.3. The processed magnetic gradient data are shown for each survey area in
Appendix A, while selective, representative data plots and interpretations are presented in the
discussions of results for each test locale in Chapters 5.0 through 10.0. In the data plots, areas of
low magnetism are shown as white and high magnetism are black.
4.2.3 Resistivity
In this study, a series of electrical potential difference maps was acquired by passing induced
current through progressively deeper layers using five successively greater electrode spacings
(Figure 4.2.2-1C), while maintaining a fixed central reference point. The maps show the
electrical paths taken and depths penetrated for each resistivity reading so that a three-
dimensional, multiplexed resistivity model of the subsurface can be created. The potential
difference measurements are directly proportional to the changes in the deeper subsurface.
Apparent resistivity values calculated from measured potential differences can be interpreted in
terms of overburden thickness, water table depth, and the depths and thicknesses of subsurface
strata. In practice, the depth of penetration for any individual probe pair is variable across space,
as currents induced by the instrument refract at layer boundaries causing distortion. However,
post-processing can reduce some of these effects. Thus, the multi-probe array returns a series of
resistivity images of increasing depth penetration, permitting three-dimensional approximations
of the subsurface. Because the relationship between electrode separation and depth sensitivity is
complex, the vertical scale quoted for the pseudo-sections displayed are approximate.
Furthermore, as the depth of investigation increases, the size of the smallest anomaly that can be
Mn/DOT/WR-0200 4-2
Mn/DOT/WR-0200 4-3
resolved also increases. The precision of resistivity profiles diminishes as the inverse square of
the electrode spacing (DOE 2000:25). Consequently, only larger features can be resolved within
deeper profiles, while near-surface, small-scale features can be resolved using three-dimensional,
multiplexed resistivity instrumentation.
The resistivity surveys conducted for this project consisted of one resistivity reading taken at 1 m
(3.3 ft) intervals along transects that were spaced 1 m (3.3 ft) apart. This resulted in a data
density of 400 readings for each 20 m × 20 m (66 ft × 66 ft) area of the survey grid and yielded a
spatial resolution of 1 m2 (11 ft2). The zigzag traverse method was used, with traverses spaced
1 m (3.3 ft) apart. Instrument settings were typically 40v; 1ma; 10× gain; 137Hz, but
occasionally were altered to fit site-specific conditions in the field. To address change in earth
resistivity with depth, resistivity surveys at all test locales were conducted in vertical profiling
mode. The physics of this process are well documented (Aspinall and Crummett 1997; Bozzo et
al. 1994; Clark:1990:61-63). The mobile probes were configured for five simultaneous twin
array surveys, with interprobe spacings of 1 m (3.3 ft), 2 m (6.6 ft), 3 m (9.8 ft), 4 m (13.1 ft) and
5 m (16.4 ft). The multiple twin array survey was designed to record resistivity at depths
roughly corresponding to the interprobe spacings used in the survey and is well suited to
archaeological targets. With this array setup, the earth resistivity was measured for a
hemispheric volume of ground directly below the mobile survey probes (Figure 4.2.1-1:C) (Clark
1990:29; Kvamme 2001:361). The resulting depth slices can be computed along any axis to
investigate change in three dimensions in a process known as resistivity tomography. Images
created in this manner are known as resistivity pseudosections.
Because, as discussed in Chapter 3.0, the subsurface resistivity distribution is controlled by
hydrology, soil and/or bedrock geology, some understanding of the composition and resistive
properties of the subsurface materials is needed understand the meaning of the survey. At the
areas surveyed during this study, the local bedrock geology is considerably deeper than the
detection limits of the instrument and setup used (i.e. <3 m to 5 m [<9.8 ft to 16.4 ft] deep),
which makes the geological and pedological properties of the unconsolidated deposits the main
concern for this study. The test locales consist mainly of relatively fine-grained, alluvial soils.
The main exceptions to this are the Fritsche Creek II and Anderson test locales, which are
generally coarse-grained colluvial and alluvial fan (Fritsche Creek II) and eolian sand
(Anderson) deposits. During this study all surveys occurred during a period of normal
precipitation.
Survey data collection times and personnel hours were recorded for each survey test locale. The
raw resistivity data collected in the field generally ranged from about 1 ohm to 220 ohms. Like
the magnetic survey, data processing was performed through Geoplot and ArcGIS software and
included data filtering and interpolation algorithms. These included de-spiking to remove the
effects of ferric debris and to reduce noise; low and high pass filtering to remove or enhance
regional gradients; and interpolation of grid cells. The processed resistivity data are shown for
each survey in Appendix A (five resistivity plots, one for each depth slice), while important
interpretations are shown as figures accompanying discussions of the results for each test locale.
Mn/DOT/WR-0200 4-4
4.2.4 Ground Penetrating Radar
The GPR surveys undertaken during this project used a Sensors and Software Noggin 250
SmartCart (Figure 4.2.1-1:D). Survey times and personnel hours were recorded for each survey
test locale. The survey proceeded in a similar manner to the other geophysical techniques and
used the same grid. Typically, 20 GPR readings were taken per meter along each transect.
These transects were spaced 0.5 m (1.6 ft) apart, and the survey was performed using a zigzag
recording method. Data were collected in the field and analyzed using Sensors and Software
(2000) EKKO_Mapper and EKKO_3D software. Data were edited using Win_EKKO_Pro.
Signal saturation corrections and root mean square amplitude averaging were applied to improve
raw data, which are presented as vertical profiles and time/depth slices in two dimensions at
0.5 m (1.6 ft) intervals. ArcGIS 8.3 was used to overlay the data with other geophysical
information. In general, the GPR data were processed and plotted to provide pseudo cross-
sections (40 per grid or about 240 per test locale) and two-dimensional maps at ca. 0.5 m (1.6 ft)
depth slices (about 30 maps). Examples of representative maps and sections are depicted for the
discussions of individual testing locations (Chapter 5.0-10.0), while complete maps and sections
are shown in Appendix A.
4.3 CORING/AUGERING METHODS AND TECHNIQUES
The coring/augering field investigations for this project focused on defining the distribution of
anthropogenic features at known archaeological sites and identifying and assessing the potential
for buried archaeological sites at the test locales where archaeological materials previously have
not been identified. We also evaluated the usefulness of coring for reconstructing the
depositional framework and subsurface stratigraphy and/or detecting the presence of buried
landscape components and paleo-surfaces. The coring and augering process used actually is a
two-step procedure. It was selected for this study because it has relatively low impact on buried
archaeological resources, but can still be used to construct maps and cross sections and provide
three dimensional survey coverages. It also has a generally unlimited depth range for most
geomorphic settings. For the coring step of the process, 18 to 20 continuous, solid-earth cores
were collected per acre from each of the test locales (Figure 4.3-1:A). A truck-mounted
Geoprobe® was used to extract 4.5-cm (1.75-in) diameter cores. Core samples were described in
the field using standard systems for describing soils (Soil Survey Staff 1975; Schoeneberger et
al. 1998) and geological features (Collinson and Thompson 1982; Folk 1974) and then were
discarded. The times for the start and finish of each core were recorded in a log.
The subsurface information gleaned from the cores (Figure 4.3-1:B) was then used to identify
“target” horizons that were believed to have a high-potential for buried archaeological material
(i.e., soil horizons or other zones suggesting buried, stable ground surfaces). Because the
probability of actually finding archaeological material in a 4.5-cm (1.75-in) core is small, these
target horizons were then sampled using 10-cm to 13-cm (4-in to 5-in) diameter flight-augers.
Augering was accomplished by advancing 10-cm or 13-cm (4-in or 5-in) diameter continuous
flight augers with the truck-mounted Geoprobe. The use of different auger sizes was necessary
to accommodate equipment malfunction. When the 10-cm (4-in) diameter auger was used, six
auger holes were excavated at each locus; when the 13-cm (5-in) diameter auger was used, four
Mn/DOT/WR-0200 4-5
Mn/DOT/WR-0200 4-6
auger holes were excavated at each locus. Multiple holes were necessary at each locus to
simulate consistent volume shovel probes. For each auger location (1) the auger is advanced to
the top of the target stratum; (2) the hole is cleaned out; (3) the auger is advanced into the target
deposit; and (4) the target deposit is brought to the surface and screened through one-quarter inch
mesh hardware cloth. The start and finish times at each locus were then recorded in a log.
Sediment was collected from the target horizon and screened through one-quarter inch mesh for
archaeological material (Figure 4.3-1C).
The cores were placed every 20 m (66 ft) in a grid-wise pattern and included placement of cores
along the test locale boundaries. Sedimentological and stratigraphical cross sections were
prepared for each of the test locales to show the subsurface relationships of stratigraphic horizons
revealed in the cores. These served as a basis for constructing the depositional history of the
deep test area. Detailed descriptions of the cores are included in Appendix B. Specific results
and conclusions, as well as how they fit within the Holocene geological and geoarchaeological
context for the six test locales in Minnesota, are discussed in Chapters 5.0-10.0.
4.4 TRENCHING METHODS AND TECHNIQUES
Backhoe trenching for this project focused on defining the distribution of anthropogenic deposits
at known archaeological sites and identifying and assessing the potential for buried
archaeological sites at test locales where archaeological materials previously have not been
identified. This work focused on developing a three dimensional picture of buried landscapes
and associated depositional horizons and paleosols using a multidisplinary approach that
involved collaboration of earth scientists and archaeologists in field decisions and interpretations
(Figure 4.4-1). The geoarchaeological analyses and conclusions were based on the examination
of backhoe trench profiles that were described, sampled, and analyzed to identify characteristics
pertinent to the depositional environments and histories at each test locale. The content and
context of each archaeological occupation discovered were placed into the stratigraphic
framework of the landform (Figure 4.4-1). The backhoe trenches were supplemented by
archaeological test excavations placed adjacent to the trenches. Consequently information
pertaining to landform development prior to human occupation (stratigraphy and geological
history), use of the landform during occupation (anthropogenic effects), and history of
archaeological site formation and abandonment (site taphonomy) was obtained.
Five to seven trenches per acre were placed within the test locales to study specific sedimentary
or geomorphological aspects of the landform. The trenches were typically 4 m to 6 m (13 ft to
20 ft) long by about 1 m to 1.5 m (3 ft to 5 ft) wide and usually 3 m to 4 m (9 ft to 12 ft) deep
(Figure 4.4-1). Trenches were generally placed within the test locales under study to test general
spacing parameters for site discovery, to reveal the most complete stratigraphy, and to
investigate specific testing criteria established for the various test locales. The specific rationale
and factors that were used to locate trenches during this study are discussed in Chapters 5.0-10.0.
Because two of the test locales were part of previously recorded National Register-eligible
archaeological sites, some discretion was used in trench placement to minimize the impact to the
archaeological resources (i.e., a minimum number of trenches were used, and we avoided placing
additional excavations near trenches that clearly indicated significant cultural resources).
Mn/DOT/WR-0200 4-7
Mn/DOT/WR-0200 4-8
Archaeological material was discovered through two means. First, the trench walls and profiles
were visually inspected and then troweled to identify artifacts and possible cultural features.
Second, sediments from promising or high-potential horizons were screened to recover artifacts
from 50 cm × 50 cm (20 in × 20 in) test units placed off the sides of the backhoe trenches (Figure
4.4-2). Details of the methods employed for these archaeological test units are discussed below.
Sediment and soil characteristics within the test locales were recorded for the backhoe trenches
(Figure 4.4-1), as well as for profiles of any auxiliary 50-cm × 50-cm (20-in × 20-in)
archaeological test excavation units placed alongside the trenches (Figure 4.4-2). Standard field
recording procedures were used to document details of the geological and pedological formation
environments of sediments observed in the trenches. These characteristics included observations
of the lithology (texture) of each distinct stratum, as well as bedding, sorting, and the contacts
(boundaries) between strata. Elevation differences were measured as depths below the ground
surface at each individual exposure. Each exposure was also measured in relation to a site
datum. Post-depositional weathering and soil formation characteristics were recorded following
standard soil descriptive terminology developed by the United States Department of Agriculture,
Soil Conservation Service (USDA-SCS 1974). These characteristics include descriptions of
texture, color, mottling, structure, consistency, inclusions, intrusions, and transferals. Soil
horizon nomenclature follows Birkeland (1984:7), and the USDA-SCS Soil Survey Manual
(USDA-SCS 1993). Soil-horizon designations represent modern conditions. In addition,
trenches were photographed and mapped in relation to other features and trenches at the site.
Finally, trench locations were recorded using GPS equipment. Field hours and equipment hours
were recorded for testing at each of the test locales and were used in the cost benefit analysis.
Detailed descriptions of these trenches are presented in Appendix C.
The subsurface of the testing locale was mapped based on soils and sedimentary horizons
observed in trench profiles. To aid in understanding their subsurface relationships, as well as in
reconstructing the depositional history (sedimentological and stratigraphical), the trenches were
linked to create cross section(s) that were drawn across various axes of each test locale. The
locations of the cross sections were selected to show either atypical or more complete aspects of
the stratigraphic and depositional relationships of the subsurface deposits. Detailed descriptions
of each trench excavated during this research are included in Appendix C. Specific results and
conclusions for the deep test trenching, as well as how they fit within the Holocene geological
and geoarchaeological context for the six test locales, are presented in Chapters 5.0-10.0.
4.5 ARCHAEOLOGICAL FIELD METHODS
Traditional archaeological field methods were a key component of both the coring/augering and
backhoe trenching deep testing procedures to demonstrate the presence or absence of
archaeological deposits. Archaeological methods were not part of the remote sensing surveys
because no subsurface soils are exposed.
The goal of the archaeological contribution to the coring/augering survey was to identify and
sample target horizons that had a high potential for containing buried archaeological material.
These horizons were sampled for artifacts using 10-cm or 13-cm (4-in or 5-in) diameter
continuous flight augers. Four 13-cm or six 10-cm diameter closely-spaced auger holes were
Mn/DOT/WR-0200 4-9
Mn/DOT/WR-0200 4-10
placed at each location determined to include one or more target horizons. These numbers of
auger holes were the maximum that could be drilled without moving the coring rig and, hence,
were the most cost efficient method of sampling. The resulting area sampled is approximately
75 in2 (484 cm2), which approximates a 25-cm (10-in) diameter shovel test. The exact grid
coordinates of the sets of auger test-holes were measured and recorded. Archaeologists then
screened the soils from the target surface. This process is consistent with the methods used in
standard shovel test survey in Minnesota (Anfinson 2001:34). Consequently, the archaeological
testing during the coring/augering process can be considered shovel tests and are, therefore,
subject to the same constraints and statistical treatments as shovel testing (see Kintigh 1988;
Nance 1983; Nance and Ball 1986; Shott 1985, 1989; Krakker et al. 1983).
Artifacts and evidence of archaeological deposits were sought in two ways within the backhoe
trenches (Figure 4.4-2). First, trench profile walls were scraped clean with trowels and shovels
to expose any possible features and prepare the trench walls for photography. The walls were
examined in detailed for the presence of cultural features or artifacts during this process. Special
attention was paid to buried land surfaces (i.e., paleosol sequences) to ensure that artifacts were
exposed if discovered as a result of wall preparation. These artifacts or features were mapped
and their location recorded on the profile. In addition to visual inspection of the walls by earth
scientists and archaeologists, identified land surfaces stable enough to have allowed human
occupation, typically marked by variably developed paleosol sequences, were sampled for the
presence of buried cultural material using at least one 50 cm × 50 cm (20 in × 20 in) excavation
unit. These units were placed off the side of each trench and used the trench profile to guide
their placement and excavation. Once the location was decided and fixed, the exact grid
coordinates of the test unit were measured and recorded, and a 1 m (3.3 ft) profile segment was
mapped and photographed by the archaeologists. When no artifacts or other evidence of an
archaeological site were observed along the trench profile, these test units provided supporting
evidence whether archaeological material was present in the subsurface.
Intervening horizons not of archaeological interest were removed either by hand using shovels
and trowels or, more typically, with the assistance of the backhoe to expose an area
approximately 1 m × 1 m (3.3 ft × 3.3 ft) in size. A buffer was maintained above the beginning
of each horizon to be sampled so that the target horizon was not compromised or disturbed in
any way. Once the 1 m × 1 m (3.3 ft × 3.3 ft) area was cleaned to the desired depth, a 50 cm ×
50 cm (20 in × 20 in) unit was laid out. Excavation and recordation proceeded in 10 cm (4 in)
levels to a depth of at least 10 cm (4 in) below the base of the target horizon. Sediments from
each level were screened, and artifacts were provenienced by level.
Stable surfaces of an age compatible with human occupation, identified in the cores and trenches
based on their stratigraphic, pedological, and sedimentological characteristics, were tested for
archaeological content mainly by passing samples of soil and sediment from the horizon through
one-quarter inch screen. While the recovery of microdebitage using various recovery methods
has been suggested to be a potentially useful technique for site discovery (Dunnell and Stein
1990; Fladmark 1982) that is potentially both cost effective and minimally destructive to
archaeological deposits (also see Hull 1987; Vance 1987), little actual application or rigorous
testing of its usefulness, cost-effectiveness, and reliability has taken place. Difficulties in using
microdebitage include the accurate recognition and classification of microdebitage as opposed to
Mn/DOT/WR-0200 4-11
other sediment particles, the possibility of transport of microdebitage from its original location
and movement through sediments that actually do not contain archaeological sites, and the
demonstrated failure to identify sites based on the presence/absence of microdebitage (Michlovic
1994).
Several studies consider these issues in detail. First, because of its small size, microdebitage is
prone to the same movement processes as naturally occurring sedimentary particles or
pedological clasts. Given the ease that sand-sized and smaller particles can be moved up or
down the soil profile (Johnson 1990, 1992; Johnson and Watson-Stegner 1990), microdebitage
may be more prone to biomantle displacements than any other artifacts. Moreover, because
microdebitage has the same size range as sand particles, such artifacts can be transported just as
readily as sand grains in most depositional settings (alluvial, colluvial, and eolian). Yet, such
settings are precisely the primary contexts within which buried archaeological sites are usually
found and preserved. Shackley (1978), for example, points out the possibility and ease with
which small scale debris can be transported in an alluvial setting. Colluvial settings can also
easily duplicate many of the same depositional processes present in alluvial environments;
microdebitage as well as other sand-size particles can and probably do become entrained and
remobilized in mass-flow deposits. Additionally, Fladmark (1982) notes the potential for eolian
transport of sub-sand sized particles (i.e., less than 2 mm), an aspect that is particularly relevant
in dune settings. In such settings, medium- to fine-grained sand particles are preferentially
eroded and transported, leaving coarse- to very coarse-grained sand and larger particles behind as
lags. In such settings, while the larger microdebitage may not be actually transported, it can
become redeposited as an erosional lag, often losing the original cultural context of the artifacts.
Clearly, the presence of microdebitage does not necessarily indicate the occurrence of in situ
archaeological deposits. In fact, their presence alone (i.e., without other cultural artifacts and/or
features) should probably raise a red flag concerning the possible undisturbed nature of the
deposits. As is true with any cultural artifact, the significance of microdebitage can only be
assessed through its larger depositional, pedological, and archaeological contexts.
In another study, Michlovic et al. (1988) obtained positive results with regard to the co-
occurrence of micro- and macrodebitage (>0.25 in) in plow zone and stratified contexts at
previously known sites; however, they did not identify any microdebitage at any locations they
tested where a prehistoric site was not already known to exist. Fladmark (1982:214), who failed
to recover any microdebitage from a number of his column samples that contained
macroartifacts, also observed the unpredictable nature of the occurrence of microdebitage . An
even more dramatic example of this unpredictability occurred at the Mooney site (12NR0029) in
Norman County, Minnesota (Michlovic 1994). In this instance microdebitage occurred in only
two of 305 core samples that were taken from the site. Finally, Nicholson (1983) in his
comparative study of sampling techniques that evaluated the reliability of microdebitage as an
indicator of sites in regional surveys, concluded that microdebitage was not a very useful
indicator of occupation.
Finally, although no systematic time studies have been conducted, evidence presented by
Metcalfe and Heath (1990:793) from the Heartbreak Hotel excavations in Utah indicates that the
processing and analysis of microdebitage is extremely time-consuming. Further, the numerous
logistical issues associated with screening sediments through small mesh screen or undertaking
Mn/DOT/WR-0200 4-12
flotation recovery suggest that the use of microdebitage for site discovery is not cost effective for
Phase I site identification.
Soils at the Hoff Deep test locale were particularly difficult to screen, and it was not always
possible to screen the entirety of the auger sample. In this one instance, flotation samples were
collected from auger target horizons. Following preliminary analysis of the artifacts from the
augering, ten flotation samples (ca. 10 liters each) from auger holes that produced archaeological
materials in comparable target horizons were floted as a blind test for the presence of
archaeological materials that may have been missed. None produced archaeological materials.
4.6 ARCHAEOLOGICAL LABORATORY METHODS
4.6.1 Prehistoric Period Artifacts
Standard analytic procedures were employed in the analysis of the prehistoric artifacts recovered
from the sites investigated. This analysis was designed to classify and describe the recovered
materials in terms of the types of artifacts represented, their typological affiliation where
appropriate, and their functional, temporal, and cultural affiliation where possible. The major
artifact classes associated with the prehistoric components at these sites include ceramics, lithic
tools and debitage, and fire-cracked rock. The artifacts are described and discussed for each test
locale (i.e., Chapters 5.0-10.0) and are listed in Appendix E. Artifacts were prepared for curation
in accordance with 36 CFR § 79, Curation of Federally-Owned and Administered
Archaeological Collections. The recovered faunal remains from each site were analyzed
separately and the results are presented in discussion of each test locale. These are listed in
Appendix F.
Ceramic Assemblage
The prehistoric ceramic sherds were initially sorted by vessel segment (i.e., rim, neck, body,
base) and then by paste and temper characteristics, surface treatments, and decoration. Exterior
surface treatments include cordmarked, smoothed over cordmarked, net impressed, brushed,
striated or wiped, and smoothed surfaces, while interior treatments, which were mainly
uniformly smoothed, range from incomplete smoothing that left temper protruding to well
smoothed. Exfoliated/eroded sherds represent a residual class of ceramics. Paste characteristics
include texture (i.e., silty or sandy), structure (massive, blocky, and laminar in sherd cross
section), and hardness (i.e., friable [crumbly and easily disintegrated] or compact [well-
consolidated and tightly knit]). Temper characteristics include size (i.e., fine [<1 mm], medium
[1-2 mm], coarse [2-3 mm], very coarse [>3 mm), and poorly sorted [mix of particle sizes]),
relative amount (i.e., low, moderate, or high), and types. Temper types are mainly shell or grit,
which include felsic grit (light-colored, such as quartzite and granites), mafic grit (dark-colored,
such as darker-colored granites, hornblendes, diabase), and mixed felsic and mafic grit. The
number, weight and sizes of sherds were recorded for each of these categories. Sherd sizes are
based on their estimated surface area (Size Grade [SG] 1=1 cm5 or less; SG 2=1-4 cm5; SG 3=4-
9 cm5; SG 4=9-16 cm5).
Mn/DOT/WR-0200 4-13
Lithic Assemblage
The lithic artifacts recovered from the prehistoric sites are subdivided into chipped and ground
stone tools, debitage or debris from the manufacture and maintenance of chipped stone tools, and
fire-cracked rock. The chipped stone tools are classified according to standard morpho-
functional types (e.g., projectile points, bifaces, end scrapers, and retouched and edge damaged
flakes). Pertinent descriptive attributes such as shape, cross-section shape, and raw material type
were recorded for each tool along with metric dimensions (e.g., length, width, and thickness).
The debitage is classified by flake type, flake size, flake treatment (i.e., heat-treated) and raw
material. Flake types include shatter, decortication flakes, blocky secondary flakes, and three
subtypes of flat secondary flakes subdivided by the type of striking platform. These include
1) no striking platform, 2) simple (unfaceted) platforms, and 3) complex (faceted) platforms.
Simple striking platforms are typically flat, lack faceting, are seldom ground, and are often
oriented at right or slightly acute angles to the axis of the flake. Complex striking platforms are
usually diminutive, multifaceted, frequently ground, and often exhibit lipping of the bulb of
percussion. They are also usually oriented at sharply acute angles to the axis of the flake. Flakes
are measured and grouped into 10-mm size intervals. The lithic raw materials include chert,
quartz (milky or colorless), quartzites, orthoquartzites, and silicified sandstone and are identified
based on both published and unpublished references (e.g., Bakken 1985, 1997; Bozhardt 1998;
Morrow and Behm 1986) and a comparative collection at CCRG’s laboratory facility. For
example, chert types include Prairie du Chein, Grand Meadow, Burlington, and Knife River,
which can be distinguished based on color and fossil inclusions (i.e., oolitic, etc.). Quartzite,
Orthoquartzites and silicified sandstone can be identified based on color, luster, cementation, and
grain type, texture, size and shape. Most of these can be distinguished from one another to
varying degrees, although Bozhardt (1998) has noted that considerable overlap can occur both
within and between sources in texture and/or color.
4.6.2 Historic Period Artifacts
Historic period artifacts were collected from surface and subsurface contexts and used mainly to
monitor the nature and extent of historic disturbances. These artifacts are categorized according
to material of manufacture (i.e., ceramic, glass, metal, bone, rubber, plastic, and mineral-
composite-miscellaneous) and their observable physical properties (e.g.,. Cleland 1983). These
properties include function, form, color or type of decoration, and method of manufacture.
Besides providing the basis on which to identify specific types of artifacts or objects (e.g.,
tablewares, utilitarian kitchenwares, bricks, bottles/jars, various types of metal artifacts, etc.) and
their context of use, these attributes also provide important information pertaining to age. The
classification scheme focuses on aspects of late nineteenth and early twentieth century material
and associated aspects of technological change. Specific details of the composition and age of
the recovered historic period artifacts is detailed under the individual site assemblage
descriptions.
Mn/DOT/WR-0200 4-14
4.6.3 Faunal Remains
Zooarchaeological remains from each site were examined individually, with the following
information recorded for each specimen: element, section or portion of the element, side of the
body (when applicable), taxonomic classification, and relative age (adult or juvenile/sub-adult).
Determination of age was based on the degree of epiphyseal fusion, tooth eruption, and occlusal
wear. Refitting of bone fragments was restricted to specimens recovered from the same
provenience. An osteological comparative collection and various reference manuals were used
in the identification of certain specimens.
Evidence of butchering and carcass processing, in the form of cut, saw, and chop marks was
recorded when observed. Each specimen was examined for evidence of exposure to heat, in the
form of burned (partially smoked or burned black) and calcined (gray to bluish white in color,
chalky texture) bone, as well as other cultural modification(s). Due to specimen fragmentation,
otherwise unidentifiable pieces of mammal bone are categorized as being from large, medium, or
small mammals, based on the relative size and thickness of each specimen. The approximate
live weight of large mammals is considered to be greater than 23 kg (50 lbs), 5 kg to 23 kg
(11 lbs to 50 lbs) for medium mammals, and less than 5 kg (11 lbs) for small mammals. When it
was not possible to reliably categorize a specimen based on size, it is simply classified as
mammal or mammal of indeterminate size. A detailed inventory of the faunal assemblage is
included at the end of this analysis as Appendix F.
Mn/DOT/WR-0200 4-15
