The friends and relatives of archaeologists often ask, “Where do you work?” It’s an honest question, but the “where” varies. Archaeologists who work in cultural resources management (CRM) spend most of their time surveying land for archaeological sites, and as a result, they seldom need to visit the same parcel of land more than a few times. Once the parcel has been surveyed, they move on to another location, and generally have no reason to come back. Some project areas can extend for hundreds of miles, across multiple states. I’ve done professional fieldwork in 21 states myself. People who work in office environments seem to have trouble understanding this, because they go to the same building every day, without much in the way of variation.
If you manage to explain this, another question you might be asked is, “Whose land do you work on?” There is no easy answer to that question either, because it varies. We work on a combination of public land, private land, and Indian reservations. The people who actually own the land where we work are seldom the people who hired us, and this can lead to a lot of unnecessary confusion and hostility. Archaeologists and their clients do not have a good history of maintaining positive relations with the owners of the land parcels we’re supposed to survey. This is partially because field archaeologists do not always understand or appreciate the tension between our clients and the landowners, and also because we do not always understand the damage we might cause to the landowners’ crops or pasturage.
This post has little to do with the science of archaeology, unlike the previous two posts, which discuss the applications of geology and cartography within archaeology. Instead, this post is meant to be purely practical. It’s a guide to the different kinds of land usage in the United States, and how archaeological surveys might affect different plots of land in different ways.
Where Archaeologists Work
First, we need to go back to Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA), which requires archaeological surveys before any kind of ground-disturbing construction activity that might meet one of these criteria:
1. Uses federal funding
2. Requires a federal permit
3. Occurs on federal land
Due to the third criterion, archaeologists often have to survey federal land. This includes all land administered by the U.S. Forest Service, the National Park Service, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the Bureau of Land Management, the Bureau of Indian Affairs, and all United States military installations, including those located in foreign countries. When it comes to federal land, the “landowners” are the members of the public, whose interests are supposed to be supported by the government officials who administer the land. That is, except for Indian reservations, which are sovereign nations administered by the Bureau of Indian Affairs.
When archaeologists work on federal land, there are no angry landowners to worry about, because as members of the public, we are all the “landowners.” We may have to deal with angry locals who do not believe the land should be public in the first place, and this hostility can lead to violence, but I will deal with that later.
Now, let’s go back to the first two criteria of Section 106 that I mentioned: federal funding and federal permits. Any construction project that uses federal funding or requires a federal permit should be preceded by an archaeological survey, even if that project occurs on private land. Thus, archaeologists often work on private parcels as well. The clients who hire us often do not own the land itself; they have merely negotiated an easement to use a portion of the land.
Pipeline projects are a good example, because they have been a prominent source of employment for archaeologists over the past decade. Pipeline projects often require a permit from the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC), and because they need a federal permit, they fall under Section 106, and will require an archaeological survey. Large private companies build underground pipelines that transport fossil fuels or carbon dioxide over long distances. These pipeline companies are usually distinct from the oil companies that actually extract petroleum from the earth. Their pipelines can extend for hundreds of miles, crossing both public and private land. When a pipeline company wants to lay pipe through private land, it does not need to buy the land, but it does need to negotiate an easement with the landowner, in order to use a thin corridor of land within the landowner’s property.
Some landowners are not willing to allow pipelines through their property. In these cases, a government agency may enact “eminent domain,” effectively seizing whatever land is necessary for the pipeline’s construction, and sending law enforcement to ensure that the angry landowners do not disrupt the construction process.
This is important for field archaeologists to know—sometimes, we are surveying land that has been allocated to a private company’s use through eminent domain. This means that the landowner does not want us there, and may resort to violence.
Of course, pipelines are not the only construction projects that fall under Section 106. Transmission lines, cell towers, highway re-routes, bridge replacements, wind farms, and solar plants may all require an archaeological survey prior to construction, either because they use federal money or require a permit from a federal agency. These surveys may cross both public and private land. In many cases, the client responsible for building these infrastructure projects does not actually own the land where the construction takes place, and must try to work with private landowners. Sometimes the client only plans to negotiate a lease or easement to use the land. Sometimes they plan to buy the land outright, but the survey may be underway before the sale is finalized.
The archaeological survey is usually a very small part of the pre-construction process. Often, the landowners will see a small army of civil surveyors, biologists, archaeologists, and architectural historians marching across their property. Usually, the landowners do not understand exactly who these people are or what they are doing. Even worse, the civil surveyors, biologists, archaeologists, and architectural historians may not fully understand how they are damaging the landowners’ crops or pasture, especially if they are unfamiliar with farm life. This can lead to unnecessary confrontations and bad blood.
Many companies hire land agents or “landmen” to communicate with the landowners, in order to prevent these confrontations. There’s no tactful way to say this, but land agents are usually not very bright. Often, they don’t understand what the archaeologists and biologists actually do, so they misinform the landowners, whether intentionally or otherwise. A competent land agent may be the only thing preventing a confused farmer from putting a shotgun in your face, but unfortunately, many land agents fail to bring their “A game” to work, so you may want to brush up on de-escalation tactics yourself.
Furthermore, many landowners do not even farm or graze their own land, and this can complicate issues. Many landowners lease out their farmland to tenant farmers, and the tenant farmer is responsible for planting, harvesting, and (in some cases) selling the crops. In these cases, crop damage threatens the tenant farmer’s livelihood, and if the tenant farmer has not been consulted about the construction project and the various surveys that must occur beforehand, this too may lead to a confrontation.
The Pre-Construction Surveys
In the interest of avoiding such conflicts, I’m going to provide a very brief outline of the different kinds of surveyors who may have to visit a parcel of land before a major construction project. I’m going to focus on what these people actually do in the field, and how these activities might adversely affect either farmland or rangeland. This might be useful information for future or current field archaeologists. It might be useful for farmers or ranchers as well, so feel free to show this to any rural landowners you know.
The Civil Surveyors: These are licensed land surveyors who lay out the project area in the field. In other words, they determine the boundaries of the property/easement/lease area in question, and they usually mark the boundaries and/or centerline in the field with stakes. These stakes have to be in exactly the right spot, and licensed surveyors use precise equipment and years of training to ensure their boundaries are correct. For example, if they are surveying for a future pipeline, they usually plant stakes along the centerline of the pipeline corridor. If they are surveying for a future cell tower, they might plant stakes at the corners of the cell pad lease area.
Land surveyors use a type of modern theodolite known as a “total station” to lay out the project area and collect topographic information. A total station has a small computer situated on a tripod, and the computer shoots a laser at a stadia rod in the distance. The laser reflects off the stadia rod, back to the computer. This tells the computer the distance to, direction of, and elevation of the stadia rod. There is usually at least one person operating the total station, and one person holding the stadia rod.
This process requires a clear line of sight between the total station and stadia rod, across the entire survey area. This means that all the high vegetation between the tripod and stadia rod must be cleared, whether that vegetation be brush, woodland, or crops.
I’ve known land surveyors to clear paths through a farmer’s crops while laying stakes for a pipeline corridor. I assume they needed a clear line of sight for their survey equipment, but regardless of the rationale behind their actions, the farmer was very upset. I don’t hear about this happening very often, so I assume that most land surveyors manage to avoid doing this.
The Wetland Surveyors: These are biologists or environmental scientists who define the boundaries of wetland habitats within the project area.
Many members of the public (especially archaeologists) have trouble understanding what a “wetland” is, and do not understand why they are so important to delineate. A wetland is a specific type of habitat in which the soil is waterlogged part of the year, but not necessarily all year round. Biologists identify wetlands by noticing certain types of plants (such as cattails) that can grow in waterlogged soil. The roots of a plant—unlike its leaves—undergo respiration rather than photosynthesis, and they require oxygen, which can be difficult to find in saturated soil. Wetland plants have special adaptations that allow oxygen to be sent into the roots, even when the ground is waterlogged.
Biologists also identify wetlands by digging small holes to see whether the soil is hydric. “Hydric” soil is soil that is waterlogged during part of the growing season, and it often shows signs of redoxification. Basically, this means that the soil has turned gray, with some pockets of ferric oxide staining. Ferric oxide staining is often evident along root channels. Though wetland surveyors often need to dig some holes on a landowner’s property, they don’t need to dig very many. They typically don't need to dig as many as the archaeologists do.
The purpose of the wetland delineation is to protect wetland habitats. Despite the fact that I’m an archaeologist, I will argue until I’m blue in the face that this is much more important than any archaeological survey. Wetlands are among the most important natural resources we have. They remove toxins from the water supply and serve as a buffer against flooding.
The Cultural Resource Surveyors: These professionals fall into two groups—the archaeologists and the architectural historians.
Architectural historians locate standing structures (houses) within the project area and evaluate them to determine whether they are eligible to be placed on the National Register of Historic Places. This usually entails little more than taking photographs of old houses. It’s probably the least destructive part of the pre-construction surveys.
Archaeologists locate archaeological sites within the survey area. An archaeological site is any place with evidence of human activity more than 50 years old. This includes 10,000-year-old Native American lithic scatters, as well as historical farmsteads from the mid twentieth century.
Archaeologists use two main survey methods, and the application of these methods depends entirely on the ground cover:
The first method is pedestrian survey. During a pedestrian survey, the archaeologists walk across the survey area and look for artifacts on the surface of the ground. This is only effective in areas where artifacts might be visible on the ground surface, such as in tilled agricultural fields, or dry mountains or rangeland where the vegetation is sparse.
The other method is known as shovel testing. This entails that the archaeologists dig a series of small holes at regular intervals across the survey area, and sift the excavated soil through hardware cloth. The interval between each shovel test varies by state. They may be 8 meters apart, 15 meters apart, 30 meters apart, or even 100 meters apart. Shovel testing is most effective in places where vegetation covers the ground surface, such as woodland, pasture, or even agricultural fields where the crops have fully grown and covered up the earth.
Thus, you cannot tell a landowner exactly what you will be doing to his or her land, unless you know exactly what the ground cover is. Ground cover varies by season, and by how the land is used. A pasture, hay field, or forest will require shovel testing at all times of year. Pedestrian survey is usually effective in agricultural fields from late fall to early spring, when the ground may be mostly bare, but as the crops grow over the summer, they reduce visibility, and this may make shovel testing necessary.
Generally, shovel testing is more destructive than pedestrian survey, especially if you have to shovel test in somebody’s crops, such as a cotton field or alfalfa field. Not only will you be trampling the crops as you walk through them, but you will also be digging them up, and you will be knocking them down to make space for the sifting screen that you need to use for locating artifacts in the soil. I can guarantee you that no farmer wants to see a team of people digging holes and sifting dirt in the middle of his alfalfa field. If he has not been warned beforehand, he will probably become very angry. Unfortunately, many land agents fail to explain this process beforehand, and as a result, many an angry and bewildered farmer has looked out in shock to see an unexpected gaggle of 20-something kids digging holes in his crops.
To give an idea of how much shovel testing an archaeological survey generally requires, I’ve made a map that shows where all the shovel tests would be located in a 10-acre survey area, if the shovel tests were spaced apart at 15-meter intervals. As you can see, there are 144 shovel tests packed into that 10-acre area. Each shovel test will vary between about 30-50 cm. in diameter. Many states (including Ohio, Pennsylvania, West Virginia, New Hampshire, and Massachusetts) require that a shovel test be at least 50 cm. wide. Of course, this is a negligible sample of the total soil volume—less than a tenth of 1%—but it seems like a lot more after you've been digging all day, and it probably seems like a lot more to an angry farmer as well.
 |
| Figure 1. Map of hypothetical 10-acre survey area, with locations of 144 shovel tests at 15-meter intervals |
This was only a brief overview of the many proceedings that must occur before some major construction projects. Many farmers may react with hostility to these proceedings, if they were not warned beforehand, or if they never agreed to allow the construction project to occur on their land in the first place.
You need to understand what today’s farmers have been through. Many farmers are fairly old, and lived through the Farm Crisis of the 1980s, during which many landowners lost their farms to bank foreclosures. They watched the rise of Monsanto and its growing monopoly on seeds. Today, cattle farmers and ranchers are currently watching as monopolistic feedlots force small family operations out of the beef market. And of course, farmers and ranchers are watching pipeline companies use eminent domain to force their neighbors to surrender portions of their land. Among some elderly farmers I’ve known, there is a fear—not wholly unfounded—that shady banks and pipeline companies are trying to take their land. When they see teams of civil surveyors, biologists, and archaeologists crossing their land, they associate us with those entities. Whether we like it or not, we represent our clients, and some of our clients are less than ethical in their behavior.
Crops and Ground Cover by Region
This next section doesn’t have much to do with archaeology itself, but the conscientious archaeologist should still try to understand what sort of crops he or she might encounter during a Section 106 survey, and how those crops might affect survey methods. More importantly, you may want to understand how your survey methods may affect the crops or pasture.
Ground cover varies by region, as the percentage of land that is used for agriculture diminishes with arid climates, and the types of crops vary with climate as well. The Midwest—where I grew up—is virtually synonymous with farmland, as the majority of available ground is used for corn and soybean production. You may encounter the occasional cow pasture or hay field as well. Meanwhile, farmers in the Deep South often grow cotton and peanuts (or sugarcane and rice in southern Louisiana). As you go west onto the Great Plains, wheat becomes more important, though much of the available land is used for grazing livestock, rather than agriculture. And even farther west, in the Rocky Mountains and the Great Basin, the climate is too dry—and the soil too hard and rocky—for any sort of agriculture. All the available land is used for grazing, timber, or mining.
The Midwest
Farmers in the Midwest mainly grow corn (maize) and soybeans, which they alternate every year. Corn has a higher yield per acre, and thus is more lucrative, even though soybeans provide more money per bushel. Farmers often plant soybeans every other year in order to fix the soil with nitrogen, which is depleted by corn.
Both corn and soybeans are planted in the spring, grow during the summer, and are harvested in the fall. As they grow, they obscure the artifacts on the ground, and thus make pedestrian survey difficult. Fully grown soybeans may cover the ground so extensively that you cannot see any artifacts on the surface. Many archaeologists will try to conduct pedestrian survey through fully grown soybeans anyway, but this is usually ineffective, and arguably unethical. Fully grown corn does not necessarily obscure the artifacts on the ground, because you can often walk between the rows and see artifacts on the surface. But you may inadvertently damage the stalks as you’re walking.
The best time to conduct an archaeological survey across a corn field or soybean field is the period extending from late autumn to early spring—from harvest to planting, when the ground is bare. Not only does the bare earth allow for pedestrian survey (which is faster and easier than shovel testing), but there is no risk of damaging crops during this period.
However, there may be other factors that obscure the artifacts on the ground, even outside the growing season. If the ground has not been tilled, the fallen corn stalks or bean stalks may cover the ground so thoroughly that no artifacts are visible. Many farmers are switching to no-till farming to reduce soil erosion. While this is good for the environment, it makes life more difficult for field archaeologists. In addition, Midwestern weather is unpredictable, especially during the winter. A winter snowstorm may dump a layer of snow that does not melt for weeks. Pedestrian survey is ineffective in the snow. Shovel testing may be used in the snow, until the ground freezes.
 |
| Figure 2. Tilled corn field in late March, before the spring planting, in central Illinois. This field is ideal for pedestrian survey; the locations of surface artifacts have been marked with orange pin flags. |
The Deep South
Farmers in the Deep South often alternate between cotton and peanuts in the same way that Midwestern farmers alternate between corn and soybeans. Peanuts replace the soil nutrients that have been depleted by cotton.
In some places, fully grown cotton can be so thick that it makes it impossible to see artifacts on the ground, so shovel testing is necessary. At least, that is my experience in southern Alabama, where the cotton grows tall and thick. In other places, such as west Texas, the cotton does not grow nearly as densely, so pedestrian survey could probably be effective. Wherever you are, the ground will be more visible after the harvest, especially if it is tilled—but many farmers in the Deep South, as in the Midwest, now use no-till farming.
The Great Plains
The western part of the Great Plains has a drier climate than either the Midwest or the South. Thus, wheat is the dominant crop in the western Plains, because it requires less water than corn does.
Much of the wheat grown on the Plains is winter wheat. Winter wheat is planted in the fall, after the summer harvest. The seeds sprout in the fall, then lie dormant over the winter, lying under the snow. During this time, the young sprouts resemble regular grass—after all, wheat is a domesticated grass. When I was much younger, I sometimes mistook young winter wheat for ordinary grass, not realizing it was a crop (in my defense, nobody grows wheat where I grew up). In the spring, the wheat resumes growing, and by late summer or fall, it is tall and ready for the harvest.
Because of the life cycle of winter wheat, there is a very narrow window of opportunity during which you can conduct an archaeological survey in a wheat field without damaging the crops. This is the period after the harvest (summer to early autumn), but before the planting (early to late autumn). Any other time, you will be walking through or digging through the growing wheat. Like most crops, wheat obscures more of the ground as it grows, making pedestrian survey more and more unfeasible.
After the harvest, there may be enough ground visibility to allow for pedestrian survey, but often, the fallen stalks cover the ground so much that you won’t be able to see any artifacts. As always, tillage makes artifacts more visible, but many farmers now use no-till farming.
Much of the available land in the Great Plains is not used for agriculture at all, but has been set aside for grazing. The farther west you go, the less land is used for farming. In areas that are used for grazing, you will probably not see artifacts through the sod, so shovel testing may become necessary.
The Mountain West and Southwest
I’m using the term “Mountain West” to refer to everything from the Rocky Mountains to the Sierra Nevada and the Cascades, including the Great Basin in Nevada and western Utah. Not much of the land in the Mountain West or the Southwest is used for agriculture. Most of it is open rangeland used for grazing livestock. The climate is generally too dry, and the terrain too steep and rocky.
Shovel testing is not a widely used method of archaeological survey in the West. Archaeologists usually conduct pedestrian surveys instead. This is effective wherever the grass is sparse or nonexistent. Due to the lack of shovel testing, and the absence of crops through which archaeologists would have to walk, archaeological surveys in the West are generally not destructive or intrusive at all. You likely won’t cause any harm other than spooking a few horses or cattle.
But archaeologists may cause other problems for private landowners—especially if, ironically enough, we are trying to survey public land. To understand why this happens, you need to understand that archaeologists often need to drive through private land to reach the public parcels they are supposed to survey, and this might bother private landowners, especially if you don’t bother to ask for permission first.
In the West, there is a lot of public land administered by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM). Private parcels and BLM parcels are often arranged in checkerboard patterns, so that you cannot access the BLM parcels without driving through the private parcels. Some archaeologists drive down private ranch roads on the way to BLM parcels, without even realizing they are trespassing. This irritates the ranchers, who maintain the private roads at their own expense, and are generally not fond of trespassers.
You also need to understand that most Western ranchers hate the BLM (and other federal land management agencies such as the Forest Service). They believe the federal government controls too much land, and they resent having to apply for permits to graze on BLM parcels. These ranchers will not be happy to see archaeologists trespass on their land, simply in order to reach BLM parcels that these same ranchers do not believe should exist in the first place.
I mentioned earlier that this sentiment can lead to violence. This was the mindset of the armed men who occupied Malheur National Forest in 2016. If you trespass on private ranch land near any BLM parcel in the Western states, you will encounter men and women who believe that occupation to have been noble and justified.
 |
| Figure 3. Federal land in Coconino National Forest, Arizona. The sparse vegetation allows for pedestrian survey. |
Livestock
Landowners throughout the United States often raise some form of livestock, and it might benefit archaeologists to know more about the livestock they will encounter in the field. I’ve known archaeologists to make glaring mistakes when working on land with livestock. For example, I knew an older archaeologist who once left open the gate to a horse pasture while working on the property, allowing all the horses to escape. This is the sort of mistake that can ruin your month, and possibly ruin your reputation. In fact, if you take nothing else away from this entire blog post, remember this--do not let livestock escape. If you open a gate to a pasture, close it after you’ve gone through.
Horses
I’m sure you already know what a horse is. What you might not understand is how devastating a leg injury might be for a horse. Horses are very heavy animals that stand on light, thin legs with no muscle support. When a horse breaks a leg, the bone often shatters. Furthermore, horses are active animals that are usually unwilling to sit still during the long recovery process, which makes convalescence nearly impossible. For these reasons, a horse with a broken leg usually will not recover. This is why ranchers and farmers have historically euthanized horses with broken legs. Even with advancements in modern veterinary medicine, most horses with broken legs can’t be saved. If your negligence causes a horse to break a leg, the animal will probably be put down.
If there is a second thing you should take away from this blog post, it is this--make sure you completely backfill your holes while shovel testing in a horse pasture! If your shovel test is not filled in correctly, a horse could trip in the hole and break its leg. If the horse breaks its leg, it will probably be euthanized, and you’ve just cost the farmer at least $3000. The horse farmers I’ve encountered have warned us field archaeologists to be extremely cautious about this, and I’ve tried (without success) to explain this to past supervisors, but most archaeologists seem ignorant of the threat they pose while shovel testing in horse pastures.
The best way to backfill a shovel test is to keep your excavated soil on a tarp, and use the tarp to slide the soil back into the hole. But even if you use this method and manage to completely backfill your hole, the backfilled soil will continue to be fairly soft and loose until it settles. I’ve returned to survey areas where I had recently backfilled several shovel tests, and found that deer had been stepping into the backfill during the night. I could see that their narrow legs had been sinking deep into the still-loose backfill. The same could easily happen with a horse or cow. My point is that you can do your best to minimize risk, but sometimes shit happens. Fortunately, the only ungulates on that particular plot of land are whitetail deer; there were no horses or cattle to worry about.
There’s no guarantee that a horse will be clumsy enough to trip and break a leg. It depends on the horse. The feral horses of the Great Basin are perfectly adept at traversing steep, rocky ground without injuring themselves. But a Midwestern farm horse that has spent its entire life in a perfectly flat, stone-less pasture can easily trip and break a leg, especially if being ridden by someone who isn’t paying attention.
 |
| Figure 4. Curious horses disrupting a small archaeological excavation in southern Oklahoma |
Cattle
Cattle are not as likely to break a limb, and when they do, they usually recover quickly, unlike horses. If a cow breaks a leg, the best advice is to let it lie around all day, which is something most cows are happy to do anyway. That being said, you should still backfill your holes properly in a cow pasture.
On a ranch or cattle farm, the cows are more likely to hurt you than you are to hurt the cows. During calving season, the female cows may charge you to protect their babies. The bulls may charge and kill you any time of year.
Other Livestock
Farmers and ranchers will raise a variety of other animals, including sheep, goats, ostriches, llamas, alpacas, and bison. I am not familiar enough with most of these animals to know their specific needs, so you may want to communicate with the farmers or ranchers themselves if you find yourself surveying their pastures.
Other Land Uses
So far, I’ve mainly discussed crops and livestock, but landowners use their properties for a variety of other purposes, such as hunting, logging, and syrup production.
Many farmers use their land for hunting, and even let other other people hunt there, for a price. Because hunting has become so commercialized in recent years, these farmers may be upset if you disrupt their whitetail habitat, or if you happen to be surveying while they are hunting.
Also, many landowners raise trees for lumber. As an archaeologist, you may find yourself shovel testing in what appears to be a forest, severing roots with your shovel as you dig, without realizing you are actually surveying a tree farm.
One of my old friends lives on a farm that taps maple trees for syrup, which provides a source of income for her family. A pipeline company used eminent domain to cross her family’s land, and the pipeline company’s property assessors failed to realize that these maple trees were used for syrup production, so they underestimated the trees’ value. My friend’s family was never compensated the correct amount for the maple trees that the pipeline company destroyed.
Keep in mind that, when you are working in CRM, you are more than just an archaeologist. You are a point of contact between your client and whomever owns the land that your client wants to use. Your client may not behave with integrity, and as your client’s representative in the field, you may have to bear the brunt of the negative consequences.
It is not lost on me that, with all this talk of land ownership and property easements and eminent domain, and all the disputes inherent in such a topic, we archaeologists are studying the original inhabitants of the land, who were forcibly removed from their homes through a long process of violent genocide. Nor is it lost on me that the descendants of the original inhabitants are still here, and many of them do not want the material possessions of their ancestors disturbed or collected by anyone, archaeologists or otherwise. That is something to think about, wherever you happen to be working on an archaeological survey. While the current landowners may claim not only the land, but all the artifacts on it, the descendants of the people who made those artifacts are still alive, and arguably should have a greater voice in what happens to those artifacts, and how they are interpreted. I did not add this paragraph as a mere afterthought, but I wanted to give younger field techs or anthropology students something to ruminate over before they go on to their next project. We need to have more respect not only for the current landowners, but also the original landowners. Young college students are always the first to claim that they respect Indigenous rights, and yet are often the furthest removed from Indigenous people, with little understanding of the issues that contemporary Native American communities face.
Updated on April 11, 2024
