Idaho National Laboratory Cultural Resource Management Plan

INL Research Design
Each of the problem domains presented thus far can potentially be addressed by the archaeological
data recovered during the surveys. Interpretations concerning the potential contribution of the recovered
data and recommendations about how that potential can be realized are presented later in this appendix.
The research design, as presented in this appendix, is also suitable for evaluating the potential research
contributions and, therefore, the legal status of previously recorded INL sites. However, it must be
reemphasized that the design is far from complete and is meant primarily to address the range of data
recorded during the surveys conducted by the Swanson/Crabtree Anthropological Research Laboratory
(Reed et al. 1997).
Problem Domain: Chronology
Determining the chronological meaning of different styles of stone tools, ceramics, and other artifacts
is a critical step toward the interpretation of the prehistory of an area. Only through a detailed
understanding of the artifact chronology can the antiquity of most archaeological sites be estimated.
Without knowing the age of occupation of sites, little else can be learned about the other problem
domains. For this reason, chronology is the most basic of the domains and has the most immediate
priority.
There have been several excavations in the upper Snake River Basin that have contributed to our
understanding of artifact chronology; however, most were completed before modern approaches to the
analysis of style were developed. Reanalysis of those collections along with the collection of new
specimens in a controlled manner is essential. Several INL sites could make significant contributions and
are therefore protected by law.
Research Topic: Projectile Point Chronology. A generalized projectile point sequence has been
proposed for the upper Snake River Basin based on previously excavated sites (Butler 1978); however, a
more recent interpretation of the existing data proposes a much tighter sequence of styles based on
comparisons with sequences developed for surrounding regions (Holmer 1986). Whereas the “tighter”
sequence seems more desirable because it allows more precise age determinations of sites to be made, it is
difficult to determine its validity because of the sparse nature of the existing data. It is only through
meticulous data collection from the kinds of sites that exist at INL that our knowledge of projectile point
sequence can be refined to the point that it is useful for answering basic questions in other domains.
Research Question—What is the age of the stemmed-indented base point in the study area?
The age of stemmed-indented base points has been an enigma for several decades of archaeology in
the Desert West. Arguments in the literature debate an early occurrence (8300–6200 B.P.) vs. a late
occurrence (5000–3300 B.P.) in various regions. Recently, Holmer (1986) concluded that
stemmed-indented base points occur during both time periods (some regions contain points from only one
period, and some both) and that the points of each period are not related to each other but were
independently developed styles. He suggests that points of both periods are present in the upper Snake
River Basin and that they should be distinguishable from each other by making a few key measurements
based on a computerized comparison of the early and late series in other areas of the Desert West. Such a
project has not yet been conducted in southern Idaho because of the paucity of well-dated specimens.
Since numerous stemmed-indented base points occur at INL, sites containing them are especially
important to determine if both early and late varieties occur there and how to tell the difference between
the two.
Data Requirements: Any site containing stemmed-indented base points that also has the potential for
buried deposits and datable materials.
179