Culture and Ecology of Chaco Canyon and the San Juan Basin

14 Chaco Project SynthesisComparison of Sample Transect and InventorySurveys. Judge (1981b) compared data from the1971 transect survey with those from the 1972-1975inventory survey to determine how accurately thetransect survey estimated sample populationparameters. Within an area selected for this analysis,a predicted total of 632 sites was far less than the1,689 recorded. The reason for this discrepancy wasdetermined to be an error of measurement, particularlywith regard to site size, probably because theinventory crews spent more time evaluating andrecording sites than the transect survey crew did.Although the results of this comparative study pointedto problems with the technique as employed, Judgeconcluded that future carefully prepared researchdesigns would prove useful to both researchers andcultural resource managers once sufficient expertisewas gained.Judge continued to be involved in the evaluationof predictive models using site survey data. Duringthe mid-1980s, the Bureau of Land Managementfunded a project to evaluate its use by culturalresource managers (Judge and Sebastian 1988). Intheir final appraisal of this technique, Judge andMartin (1988) concluded that, although useful,predictive models based on a sample of survey sitesand an evaluation of their location against a number ofenvironmental variables could not replace fieldsurveys. Although there were numerous ways todefine and analyze the components of the modelbuildingprocess, no clear-cut approach was recommended;few standards for archaeological andenvironmental data-collection were proposed. Complexhuman behavior within an ecosystem requiredintegration of theories from anthropology and othersocial sciences into any model that could be proposed,based on both correlation and deductive reasoning.The focus on social aspects of human behavior inmodels began its return under the title of "PostProcessual Archaeology. "Additional Lands Survey. With the additionof 5050.7 ha (12,480 acres) and a change in statusfrom Chaco Canyon National Monument to ChacoCulture National Historical Park in 1980, surveys ofsites in four previously undocumented areas wereconducted in 1983 and 1984 under the direction ofR.Powers (Van Dyke 2006a). During the interim, siteexcavations (Appendix A:Table A.5) were underway,and it became apparent that "grab" sherd samplescollected during the inventory survey were notrepresentative of the occupational spans at both largeand small house sites (Windes 1982b). To correct thissampling deficiency, Windes initiated the practice ofcounting both sherds and lithics in transects laid acrossvarious features of the site. Transect surveys ofceramic and lithic materials were incorporated into theadditional lands survey. Recent government regulationsalso required more extensive documentation;e.g., the recording of information on site conditionand preservation that was desired by park managers.As a result, a more detailed analysis of survey datawas possible (see chapters in Van Dyke 2006a). Alldata were coded and entered into a computerizeddatabase, which has been upgraded and is available atthe NPS facility at UNM.In summary, three si te surveys recordedsomewhat different information. Both the 1971transect survey and the 1972-1975 inventory surveyrecorded 300 sites in two different formats. Theadditional lands survey of Chacra Mesa also coveredsome of the same area that was included in theinventory survey, but the amount of information isgreater. As a result of these differences in surveytechnique and recording, comparisons of data andresults among surveys in this synthesis are limited.The differences in purposes and methods reflectchanges in governmental regulations, methodologicalimprovements, and theoretical perspectives.Rock-art Survey. The recording of petroglyphs,pictographs, and other images on rock asanother tool for, or window into, deciphering culturaldevelopment came of age during the Chaco Project.Guided by the presence of pictographs or petro glyphsat sites recorded during the inventory survey, theArchaeological Society of New Mexico Rock ArtField School, under the direction of James G. Bain,spent seven years (1975 to 1981) recording data thatrepresented Archaic, Basketmaker, Pueblo, Navajo,Spanish, and Anglo-American use of the canyon. Themethods for recording were still being developed(Bain 1974; Crotty 2000; Kolber 2003). None of thedata were computerized. Although no formal analysisof the project was undertaken, one graphic recordappeared (Steed 1980), and several panels have beenincorporated into broader regional discussions(Schaafsma 1980,1984,2000). Brugge(l976, 1977,