#25 Ethics of Paranormal Investigation

The first event this morning at The Amaz!ng Meeting 9 is a panel with James Randi, Karen Stollznow, Ben Radford, Joe Nickell, and Banachek, and is being moderated by Julia Galef.

The panelists are discussing going undercover and using deception during their investigations. They all feel that some deception is necessary occasionally. Randi, with his Darwinesque beard, does not go undercover and uses agents, such as Banachek for Project Alpha, instead.

The crowd is much smaller than yesterday. Many people are likely still in bed after partying all night. Other academic conferences that I've been to had ethics panels in the morning of the second or third day. Is it because the subject has a tendency to be a little dry and no one will be there? Might have to investigate that. Back to ethics.

Banachek feels that you need to set rules ahead of time for the investigation you are doing otherwise you could be seen as just doing a con. That seems logical. A serious investigation or an under cover operation should be treated as a science experiment that utilizes the scientific method. Would a college IRB approve an undercover experiment into the paranormal?

When dealing with issues of confidentiality it depends on the person. Nickell feels that it's a judgement call. If the person you are investigating is public and has a public persona then he feels it is OK to publish about them. Banachek feels that psychics prefer their privacy and he tries to preserve that if he can. Ben Radford once kept pictures of the front of a family's house out of an article to give them privacy. In another case a family thought they had a ghost. He let them down by saying if you had a ghost, it's gone now. He didn't run in, guns blazing, saying that they are full of crap and that ghosts don't exist.

Joe Nickell related an interesting story about a local skeptics group. The group wanted him to go with them to a haunted house. He agreed but when they wanted to bring a reporter he objected. He said that it creates an adversarial environment where the group is now trying to debunk something and could be playing to the needs of the reporter. As in academic research, you still need to preserve the integrity of your research subjects and make sure that you don't intentionally humiliate them.

Radford discussed the "children never lie" phenomenon. Parents are reluctant to believe that their children could be responsible for alleged paranormal activity. Randi agrees and says that children constantly test their environment to see what they can get away with.

The main point of the ethics discussion centered around truth and honesty. The panelists all agreed that you need a set of rules before you set out so you know how to respond to any situation that comes up. They also agree that humiliating your subjects and demeaning them for their beliefs is something they try to avoid,

I wonder whether it is ethical to NOT tell people that ghosts don't exist or that they can't tell the future. Don't tell them in a way that is disrespectful but do tell them. I feel that people need to know and part of the point of the investigation is to challenge paranormal activity. Of course, I'm not a paranormal investigator so these are just my opinions.

Live blogged during TAM9 in Las Vegas, NV.

#24 Heros: Experiences at TAM9

The end of the first official conference day at this year’s The Amaz!ng Meeting 9 is here.  My fiance and I went down to the pool after dinner and are now relaxing and reflecting on the day in our hotel room before going to Penn Jillette’s Rock & Roll Doughnut and Bacon Party.  I know.  I have no idea what to expect.  But that’s not what I wanted to talk about.

Heros.  I’ve never really been one to idolize anyone.  When I see a celebrity or sports figure in the airport or out on the town I never rush over for an autograph or get all gushy about it.  They are people.  I might say something to someone because of the novelty of the event but that’s about where it ends.  Bragging about a celebrity siting doesn’t really do anything for me.  

The only time I get excited about seeing certain people is at conferences.  When I go to academic conferences I’m always trying to spot faces and names from papers and books I’ve read.  They are our celebrities.  Here at TAM I’m constantly seeing podcasters, bloggers, and authors that I follow and read.  I’ve heard some people say that they are in the midst of their heros but is that the right way to phrase it?  The more I think about it, the more I’m just not sure.

What is a hero?  Are people that are doing jobs that they signed up for (firefighters, police, military) heros?  Possibly.  It does take a different sort of person to choose that lifestyle.  What about the guy walking down the street that dies or injures himself saving someone from a burning car?  He didn’t ask to be a hero but to a lot of people, he is.  Don’t even get me started on sports figures.  If I had a physical talent and could get paid $1,000,000 a game for using it I’m sure I would.  Actually, I wouldn’t, but a lot of people would.

So, what about podcasters?  Bloggers? Authors?  Some people see them as heros too.  Personally, I see them as examples, as leaders, as positive influences, and as trailblazers in the skeptical and critical thinking movement (at least the ones I listen to and read).  I guess that is my definition of “hero”.  However, I still don’t like using that term.

“Hero” implies some sort of worship in this country.  People seem to idolize “heros” and follow their every move.  I want to watch and listen to my “heros” but I want to forge my own path, blaze my own trail, and make my mark in my own way.  I’m learning from their examples and taking notes.  I listen to the Skeptic’s Guide to the Universe every week but I don’t want a poster of them in my house and I don’t want their autographs.  Well, I would get them to sign a book but that is different.  I collect non-fiction science related books and having author signatures makes them more personal.

Click pic for a larger version.Today we all watched a panel on the future of space exploration.  It was moderated by Dr. Phil Plait (Author of Death from the Skies).  On the panel were Bill Nye (The Science Guy), Dr. Neil deGrasse Tyson (director of the Hayden Planetarium and host of Nova’s Science Now), Dr. Pamela Gay (astronomer and co-host of Astronomy Cast), and Lawrence Krauss (theoretical astrophysicist and author).  It’s not even important what they were talking about.  To me, the take away lesson from watching and listening to the discussion was the passion they showed for the topic.  The panelists eloquently argued their points, were sometimes very animated, and kept the audience in a state of excitement the entire time.  I don’t think I’ve ever seen so many people enthralled by a talk on space exploration.  The Twitter feed was going crazy.  There were 25 to 50 tweets per minute throughout the discussion.  Why?  Why was everyone so enthralled and engaged?  Passion.

You can present the best, most thought out, arguments to someone but if you don’t show that you believe what you are saying with conviction then you’re going to be a hard sell.  People respond to passionate displays.  People don’t respond to apathy and monotone speeches.  I might be getting off topic.  My point is that “heros” within the science community are those that get their point across to a wide audience and sometimes actually influence people and change minds.  That is what this is all about.  Present your case, let people evaluate it, make their own decisions, and come up with their own conclusions.  That is all you can do.  If you did it right then people will remember you and what you said when they are confronted with a decision that pertains to your discussion.  

The people I’ve seen today lead very different lives from each other but have the same passion for what they do.  Some of them are superstars here at TAM but are going back to a computer and a cubicle on Monday.  Many of the speakers and presenters have written books and have been on TV.  But, as I’ve said, they all have passion and they are all, likely, somebody’s hero, or whatever you want to call them, if only for the short time we are at TAM.

Written at South Point Hotel in Las Vegas, Nevada

#23 Conflict of Interest

I'm working with a company that is contracting on a large, well established, open pit mine site right now.  The mine has been in operation for several decades and have excavated themselves a fairly large hole.  All waste rock is stacked up in piles hundreds of feet high all around the pit.  That's where we come in.

The mine, like all other mineral mines in the area, is looking to expand their operations into areas with less mineral volume per ton.  The price of gold is high enough to allow a profitable extraction in these less dense areas.  As a result, archaeology in the area is booming.  We are surveying and inventorying everything around the current mining operations and in some cases survey in new areas is taking place. 

At the mine we are currently working for, the new areas are being used partially for expansion of the mountainous waste rock piles and for some exploratory drilling.  This drilling is done on small pads that are cleared and leveled by bulldozers.  That brings me to what happened at the end of our session on Tuesday of this week.

We were having somewhat of a lazy day driving and mapping roads within the project area.  If you have ever been to a western desert state then you understand the network of two-track roads that exists out here.  If you haven't, imagine a circuit board from the 80s with all of the exposed circuit pathways and you'll start to get the idea.  For those who don't know, modern circuit boards, as opposed to boards from the 80s, are micro-miniature marvels of engineering.  The boards are multi-layer and you often can't even see most of what's going on.  They are quite fascinating.  I think I went astray somewhere.  Oh right...desert roads.

Anyway, we were driving all of the roads within the project area so we could get them in the GPS.  Some would need to be recorded as historic sites in their own right while others are just access roads for sites and areas.  Near the end of the day (about 1130 since we still had the 4.5 hour drive back to Reno) we had traveled over to an area that we surveyed in the previous session.  Actually, we were right next to a site we designated number 1, so, the first site we recorded on this project.  There was a bladed pad centered at the intersection of two historic two-track roads and at the edge of site number 1.  The boundary for site 1 was extended to encompass a possibly historic mound of dirt near one of the roads.  This is the portion that was destroyed by the blading of the pad.  The rest of the site, an historic debris scatter with prospect pits and a collapsed adit, was left intact.  However, we usually leave at least a 30 meter buffer around sites when work is being conducted near them.

So, where do we stand?  Portions of two un-recorded historic roads were destroyed.  The site boundary of an historic site was compromised but no artifacts were disturbed and no verified historic features were destroyed.  Also, the site in question is likely not eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places although it is, as of the time of this writing, still un-evaluated.  Unless the site was used by an important historical figure in the area, it will likely be ineligible and the mine would be allowed to plow through it anyway (with a monitor present).

Another factor in this saga is the fact that sporadic surveys have been done in the area before.  Several times in the past 20 years the mine has had small pad-shaped areas and access roads surveyed.  One of our jobs is to re-evaluate the previously recorded sites in the area.  It is possible that the mine thinks they are working on one of the previously "cleared" areas.  This may be true but they hired us to block survey the entire area and to report back with our findings and recommendations.  They should check with us prior to any ground disturbing activities.

Here is where the conflict of interest comes in.  The area we are surveying is BLM land.  It is owned by the taxpayers of this country.  The mine is leasing the land for it's use (and will likely be destroying it and "reclaiming" it later, but that is a topic for another discussion).  If they damage un-evaluated cultural resources they could be subject to fines under the Archaeological Resources Protection Act of ???? (ARPA).  The only people that are going to report them to the proper authorities would likely be us.  They are our client.  We are costing them time and money.  You can see the problem.

We have an ethical responsibility to ensure that the cultural resources on the property are treated with care and are diligently recorded for future generations to learn from.  We also enjoy working and putting food on the table.  It would be nothing for the mine to pay their fines and then award the next contract to another firm.  They have literally mountains of money.

What should our PI's do?  I think they'll start by talking to the environmental person at the mine.  If that person acts favorably and responsibly then the problem is solved.  We can still record most of the road that was destroyed and nothing on the site was really affected, this time.  If they deny wrong doing then they should be reported.  That is my feeling but I'm not responsible for making this decision.  

It should be known that I would not hesitate in reporting them in the case of a denial of wrong-doing.  It is our responsibility as stewards of the cultural heritage of this country to protect and defend those resources.  I usually speak my mind and sometimes it gets me in trouble.  In the end I believe that I'm doing good and that the end result, not my well being, is what matters.

What do you think?  How would you react?

Written at the end of a winding road in the Coastal Range of Southern Oregon at the Skull Creek Recreation Area campground.

#22 Shovelbums Guide Part 7: The UTM Grid

I’ve surveyed a lot of land in the last few days and every day someone seems to have trouble with the UTM grid.  Admittedly, math is not usually a strong point with most archaeologists but knowing where you are and the ability to read and understand a map are important.  The UTM grid is a tool that, when used properly, can greatly simplify your surveying efforts.  What is the UTM grid and why do we use it?

For the five people that read this blog I’m going to cut to the chase and lay out exactly what the grid is in one paragraph without getting into the details.

The Universal Transverse Mercator (UTM) grid divides the Earth into 60 vertical zones that are each 6° of longitude wide and are centered over a longitude line.  The zones are numbered 1 to 60 with zone one starting at 180° W longitude and zone numbering increasing to the east.  North America is covered by zones 10-19.  The zones are separated into 20 latitude bands lettered from C to X (south to north) with “I” and “O” omitted (I’ll say why in the detailed discussion).  Each zone is 1,000,000 meters wide with 500,000 in the center.  If you are walking in a UTM zone the northing will increase as you walk north and the easting will increase as you walk east.  The northing is your distance, in meters, from the equator an the easting is unique to the zone.  That’s the quick and dirty description of the UTM grid.  Now for the details.

Can you guess who designed the UTM grid?  That’s right, the military.  It was designed by the Army Corps of Engineers in the 40s to better calculate distance between two points.  Calculating distance between points on a latitude-longitude grid required complicated trigonometric formulas (remember, no calculators in the 40s).  The UTM grid required only the Pythagorean theorem (a2+b2=c2) to calculate distance, which can be done on a piece of scratch paper.  I’ve done it many times to calculate distance when I didn’t have a GPS in front of me.

“Mercator” in Universal Transverse Mercator refers to the Mercator projection of the Earth developed in the 16th century.  It was designed to represent the Earth on a two-dimensional piece of paper while preserving angles and approximate shapes but distorts distance and area.  The transverse Mercator is similar but uses non-linear scaling to preserve distance and area.

As I stated above, the grid is divided into 60 zones which are each divided into 20 sections or “Latitude Bands”.  The bands run from 80°S to 84°N with the first band starting with “C” in the south and ending with “X” in the north.  The letters “I” and “O” are omitted because the military always eliminates them due to their similarity to numbers.  Most of the bands are 8° high with band “X” extended to 12° to cover all of the land on the earth.  The remaining letters, “A”, “B”, “Y”, and “Z” are also used.  They cover the western and eastern sides of the Antarctic and the Arctic regions respectively.

A typical coordinate in the UTM system needs to have four parts.  They are the zone, band, easting, and northing.  A coordinate in Nevada could be 11T 587563 4375648.  That translates to zone 11, band T, with an easting of 587563 and a northing of 4375648.  The easting indicates that the coordinate is just east of the center of grid zone 11T.  The northing translates to 4,375,648 meters north of the equator.  If you are in the southern hemisphere the northing still refers to a distance to the equator.  The grid was designed so that you never have a negative number.

We typically walk on a particular northing or easting when we are doing survey.  Whenever I’m walking an easting line (maintaining a constant northing) I like to think about the fact that I am walking parallel to the equator.  It’s a little amazing that this system is set up that way and that I can parallel a line that is over four million meters away.  Geometry is fun!

Hopefully this clears up a little confusion for some people.  There is a lot more information on map projections, datums, and the UTM grid online.  Take a minute to learn more about the tools that we use every day.  It will make us all better scientists.

See you in the field!

Written in Eureka, Nevada on Independence Day Eve.

(Independence Day festivities begin with cannon fire at 5:22 am, sunrise! Wish we didn't have to work during the parade and games)

#21 The Holy Grail

This is day two of my second 8-day session with the new company.  We are working in Eureka, NV, a small little mining town on U.S. 50.  We couldn’t stay here last session because all of the hotels (three, I think) were full.  So, we stayed in Ely, NV, which is about 75 miles east of here.  

Staying in Ely had it’s ups and downs.  First, the hotel was a bit old and run down but nearly all of the hotels in Nevada are.  The room we were given was “recently converted” to a non-smoking room.  The conversion took place on paper only and the room smelled like an AA meeting.  It took three days of air fresheners to make it livable.

The upside to Ely was it’s proximity to activities and civilization.  We were right in downtown and near several restaurants.  We only tried this little Chinese place but it was nice to have options.  The hotel had so-so internet, small refrigerators, and no breakfast options.  Also, we had an hour and a half drive to the site in Eureka in the morning and afternoon.

We found out at the end of the last session that we’d be staying at the Best Western in Eureka for this session.  We also found out that they don’t have refrigerators or microwaves and that the internet is bad.  It turns out that some of the rooms have refrigerators, all of them have microwaves, and the internet isn’t that bad.  There are also HDTVs with HDMI connections so we can get our Netflix on the Apple TV or from the computer.  Nice.

The room we have is large, with a King bed and a nice desk and chair.  It’s not often that we get to stay in rooms this nice with these amenities while we are working.  Usually there aren’t these types of rooms available in small town Nevada.  Most towns have non-chain small hotels with few options.  Other amenities include a large spa-style hot tub and a small workout room with weights and a treadmill.  After walking 7.5 miles today I’m not sure I need the treadmill.  The app I use to track distance and calories on my iPhone said I burned 1700 calories.  If it’s off by even a few hundred I think I’m fine for exercise today.

Since we started the session with a drive out and a half day of work yesterday I hadn’t tried the breakfast options yet.  Most hotels have muffins, coffee, and maybe a sweet treat of some sort.  You get used to Nevada towns having pretty much whatever Costco sells for breakfast.  Sometimes, if you’re lucky, there will be juice.  Very occasionally there will be something hot and a full on breakfast is right out.

I left the room at 6:30 this morning to go check out the options.  As I rounded the corner to the breakfast area I saw the cereal choices come into view.  They were the standard boxed cereal that you could turn into a bowl and pour milk into as a kid.  I used to look forward to camping just so I could cut my box open and make it into a bowl.  There were about eight options including the standards: Cheerios, Raisin Bran, and Frosted Flakes.  There were a couple non-standard options like a granola cereal too.  Then the milk boxes came into view as well as some hard boiled eggs.  That’s when I saw it.  The holy grail of hotel breakfast amenities: The Waffle Iron.

Staying in small towns all the time you learn to appreciate the little things in life.  We don’t usually eat much for breakfast because we have to bring it.  We usually focus on lunch and dinner options instead.  It’s easy to skip breakfast and just have a snack.  The Waffle Iron changes everything.

When I see a waffle iron it immediately takes me to a lazy Sunday morning where I get to have a tasty hot breakfast with peanut butter and syrup.  Maybe some eggs and sausage too.  It makes living on the road just a little bit more tolerable and, even, enjoyable.  

There was a kid on our crew last session that took two small backpacks with him on session.  One was a field bad and one had some clothes in it.  He bought all of his food in the town we were in and ate out at restaurants a lot.  He’s young and likely hasn’t been doing this long so he still sees the work sessions as a short excursion to “the field” that he’ll soon return from.  This attitude is fine for some people but I think it’s depression inducing in others.  I need to feel like I’m living a normal life when I’m on session.  I bring a coffee maker or a french press and we eat mostly food that we made before we left.  I like to bring things that help me personalize the room and make me feel at home.  

That’s why I love seeing the waffle iron.  It doesn’t matter that the waffle didn’t really taste all that good and that the sugar free syrup is really an acquired taste that I haven’t acquired yet.  That’s not the point.  It’s that good “home” feeling that I get when I’m making it and when it is sitting in front of me.  The little things are what make this life possible and fun.

Maybe tomorrow I’ll put banana pieces on it.

So, this weekend, when you are sitting by the window with your coffee and enjoying a hot breakfast, think of me and all of the other hard working archaeologists that are going down to the lobby just hoping to see a waffle iron or some semblance of home.  We do it because we love it.

Written at Uncommon Grounds, a coffee shop, in Eureka, NV (Established  in 1864).

#20 Digital Archaeology

I'm officially an Apple Application Developer.  It's not as glamorous as it sounds but it did cost $106.  They don't want people screwing around just to get the Software Development Kit (SDK) and the ability to receive advance copies of iOS software (such as the new iOS5 that should be out in the Fall).  All this means is that I can take my application development to the next level: creation and testing.  You can't test your apps on an actual iOS device without being a part of the Developer Program and you can't distribute your apps on the Apple App Store either.

I have several apps in mind.  The first is a site recording application based on the Inter-Mountain Antiquities Computer System forms currently in use in the Great Basin and the Rocky Mountain region (for the most part).  The IMACS forms consist of several parts.  Part A is filled out for every site and includes two pages of site location, site description, topographic, vegetation, and soil information.  There is company information and eligibility (NRHP) information as well.

The next two parts depend on the type of site you are recording.  Part B is a two page (minimum) form for prehistoric sites and Part C is a two page (minimum) form for historic sites.  There are additional forms for petroglyphs and for encoding the main IMACS form.

So, at a minimum, you need four pages to record a site.  However, you have to include a site map, artifact tallies, continuation forms with feature descriptions and field specimen descriptions, photographs, and whatever else should be included.  I recorded an historic mining complex near Tonopah that ended up being about 60 pages (in the field, less when typed up)!  Let me say that again: 60 pages!  That page count means that I had to have those forms with me, in my backpack, and/or in my clipboard.  The typical Crew Chief also carries a binder full of information for dating and identification as well.  I've eliminated the binder by PDFing (in 2011 that is certainly a word) all of the historic and prehistoric reference material and uploading all of it to my iPad.  I can't get away from the forms, though.

My vision for site recording in the Great Basin would include at least two to three iPads (or other tablet device if someone wants to write the code) per crew.  The Crew Chief would have the "master" iPad and the crew members would have the "slave" iPads (electronics term; not a slight on the current position of field techs in this country, although not far off).  The CC could "distribute" via Bluetooth certain sections of the IMACS form to be filled out by the crew members.  Once they filled out their specific parts they could upload back to the "master" device.  The "master" device would have the ability to upload to the cloud or to a company server at any time for backup purposes.  It could also print the IMACS form in any format the company desires.  

There would be a few more time saving features as well.  IMACS sections are typically filled out in a fairly robotic way with canned sentences and variables.  A typical site description starts out, "This site is a 20 x 40 m lithic scatter with five features".  There is no reason the device can't create that sentence based on the inputed information.  Other sections could be filled out in a similar way.  The IMACS form could be customized as the user records the site based on a series of questions.  For example, you could select to start a new site.  The app asks what the site number is, what type of site it is, and what the coordinates of the datum are.  The rest of the sections are populated and changed as you fill out more information.

This is all fairly complicated and I'm not sure how I'm going to do it on my own.  It might take a while.

I have ideas for projectile point identification and historic reference information as well.  Once I get some programming experience under my belt I'd love to design apps for companies that have specific site recording needs.  

I feel that we can drastically reduce the overhead costs of archaeology by streamlining the site recording process.  Many Great Basin companies typically have a couple of people in the office whose sole responsibility is to type up IMACS forms.  It is a long and tedious process that potentially includes written errors from the crew, input errors from the typist, and translation errors (reading lefty scrawl like mine!).  These people are typically earning $30-40k per year or more.  That money and those people could be put to better use.

I'll give updates on my progress throughout the development process.  I also welcome any suggestions.

See you in the field!

Written at Starbuck's on Kietzke in Reno, NV.

#19 Shovelbums Guide Part 6: Types of Projects

Throughout the country there are quite a few variations on the four basic types of projects that you are likely to encounter. There are slightly different terms for the various phases of archaeology depending on the state and region you are working in. Generally, the four types of CRM archaeology are: survey, testing, mitigation, and monitoring. I'll discuss them in order since the development of a property will often involve all of these phases in that order.

Survey in some shape or form is usually the first phase of a project. It can be as simple as one person checking likely locations for archaeological sites (reconnaissance survey) and as complicated as a 300 mile 200-m wide corridor stretching across several mountain ranges (linear survey). There is also large block survey where you do long transects from one side to the other, turn around, and come back. In many areas there are very small surveys for cell tower locations or other types of antennas that can be as small as 30-m in diameter or less. There are surveys in many areas of the west that have very specific project area geometry for access roads and pads for geothermal wells and other types of wells (i.e. oil and natural gas). In small areas where a high amount of historical artifacts are expected a metal detecting survey is often performed.

In areas with high amounts of soil deposition survey usually includes shovel testing or some other type of subsurface testing (i.e. post hole or auger testing). A typical shovel testing survey will include transects that are 30-m wide with shovel tests placed 30-m apart. Some states have low, medium, and high probability areas that will change the shovel testing interval depending on the priority. The size of the shovel test also varies by state. In some states the shovel tests are approximately 30-cm in diameter while other states prefer 50-cm square shovel tests. There is a lot of variation.

In places like the Great Basin where there is little to no soil deposition a pedestrian survey is performed. This generally entails a walkover of the area utilizing the 30-m transect interval. Some companies prefer to walkover the entire area prior to recording any sites so they can tell the client what to expect when site recording does begin. Other companies will record sites as they come to them. Like shovel testing, there is a lot of variation.

Occasionally sites will go straight into the excavation or mitigation phase, however, some will go into what's called Phase II in some parts of the southeastern U.S. and simply site testing in other parts. Site testing can include any number of excavation strategies. The chosen strategy depends upon the type of site that is being tested, the depositional context, and the goals of the research design.

There are several possible excavation types that are involved with site testing. The first step is usually some sort of intense sub-surface testing. That could include close interval shovel testing (5-m grid or less sometimes) or auger testing. The results of the close interval investigation can yield information that leads to test pit excavations. These are usually 1 x 1 m test units (they could be larger and trench-like as well). Site testing can also include backhoe trenches and block scrapes (backhoe or shovel) to look at the stratigraphy and to locate features.

If after the previous phases a site is still eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) then it will go to the mitigation phase. Mitigation does not always involve excavation. Sometimes the words are used interchangeably. Mitigation refers to the plan that will be used to address the preservation of the site. Preservation could include a reroute of the project area or a fence that would result in completely avoiding the site. It could also include simply paving over a deeply buried site. Data are not lost in that case. The site is simply preserved for a very long time. Often, though, mitigation does involve some sort of large-scale excavation.

Block excavation takes many forms but often has one goal: locate features. Sometimes an excavation will "chase" features by opening units in specific directions based on artifact quantities or some other notable criteria resulting in a crossword puzzle-like shape. Other times a block could be simply a large square or rectangle with 1 x 1 m units systematically excavated. The type of excavation and the depth of the excavation is determined by the type of site that is expected to be there, the types of features expected, and usually by the land form and soil stratigraphy.

The final phase of a project is usually monitoring. Monitoring is often performed by one person that works with the construction crews as they are disturbing the ground. Monitoring is done when sites are expected in an area but weren't found during the other phases. It can also take place when a large site is very near the area being disturbed to ensure that the construction doesn't uncover any additional material or destroy existing parts of the site. When you are monitoring you are on the schedule of the construction company so a lot of waiting is often involved. It's a good time to catch up on your reading.

I could certainly be taken to task for not mentioning terms like "class III" and "inventory" but like I said above, there is a lot of variation in terminology and methodology. It would be beyond the scope of this post to detail the specific terms used in every state and region. It would also be virtually impossible as a lot of states do not have that type of information online and would have to be contacted directly. My hope is that this post gives the novice field tech a brief introduction as to the types of projects they can expect as they travel around our diverse country this summer.

See you in the field!

Written on a winding section of U.S. 50 between Eureka and Ely, Nevada.