GEOPHYSICAL INVESTIGATIONS AND ARCHEOLOGICAL 

MONITORING OF THE UNDERGROUND ELECTRIC LINE 

INSTALLATION PROJECT AREA AT THE FORT LARNED 

NATIONAL HISTORIC SITE, 14PA305, PAWNEE COUNTY, KANSAS

BY

STEVEN L. DE VORE

AND

MELISSA A. BAIER

Technical Report 136

NATIONAL PARK SERVICE

MIDWEST ARCHEOLOGICAL CENTER

1

MWAC

Midwest Archeological Center

National Park Service

U.S. Department of the Interior

Midwest Archeological Center

Lincoln NE

GEOPHYSICAL INVESTIGATIONS AND 

ARCHEOLOGICAL MONITORING OF THE 

UNDERGROUND ELECTRIC LINE INSTALLATION 

PROJECT AREA AT THE FORT LARNED NATIONAL 

HISTORIC SITE, 14PA305, PAWNEE COUNTY, KANSAS

by

Steven L. De Vore

and

Melissa A. Baier

Midwest Archeological Center

Technical Report 136

NATIONAL PARK SERVICE

Midwest Archeological Center

United States Department of the Interior

National Park Service

Midwest Archeological Center

Lincoln, Nebraska

2014
This report has been reviewed against the criteria contained in 43CFR Part 7, Subpart 

A, Section 7.18 (a) (1) and, upon recommendation of the Midwest Regional Office

and the Midwest Archeological Center, has been classified as

AVAILABLE

Making the report available meets the criteria of 43CFR Part 7, Subpart A, Section 7.18 

(a) (1).
i

ABSTRACT

The National Park Service’s Midwest Archeological Center staff with VolunteerIn-Parks participants conducted geophysical investigations of the underground electric 

line installation construction project at Fort Larned National Historic Site (14PA305) in 

Pawnee County, Kansas. The geophysical investigations were conducted between July 

13 and July 18, 2009. The investigations were requested by the resource manager at Fort 

Larned National Historic Site. The project was located along the western side of the fort 

next to the row of Officers’ Quarters. The geophysical survey included a magnetic survey 

with dual fluxgate gradiometer and a resistance survey with a resistance meter and twinprobe array. The geophysical survey was conducted in an attempt to identify any buried 

archeological remains associated with the fort in the vicinity of the construction project 

for the installation of the park’s underground electric line. The archeological monitoring 

of the underground electric line installation occurred between November 17 and 19, 

2009. The monitoring activities included the documentation of the installation line and 

new transformer locations with a global positioning system unit and the monitoring 

of excavations for the directional boring access pits. The geophysical survey identified 

numerous buried archeological remains associated with the remnants of the military 

activities at the site, as well as more recent 19th- and 20th-century farming and park 

activities at the site. The total area investigated by the geophysical survey in the FOLS 

geophysical project area was 16,161 m2 or 3.99 acres. 
ii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

This project was completed with the support and assistance from the Fort 

Larned National Historic Site staff. Sincere appreciation is extended to the FOLS 

Superintendent Kevin McMurry, the FOLS Chief of Resource Management George 

Elmore, and the FOLS Facility Manager Bill Chapman who participated in the planning 

and implementation of the geophysical survey and archeological monitoring project. All 

of the FOLS park staff went out of their way to make the MWAC crew and volunteers 

feel welcome and provided assistance in getting the work done efficiently, safely, and as 

comfortably as possible during the archeological investigations. 

The authors would also like to thank the Volunteers-In-Parks participants 

Laura McClatchey and David Wolf for their time and effort spent on the project. Their 

enthusiasm made the project much more enjoyable than it would have been without 

their participation. A total of 88 VIP hours were donated to the project.

At the Midwest Archeological Center, we would like to thank Dr. Mark Lynott 

(MWAC Manager) and Dr. Ralph Hartley (MWAC Archeological Assistance and 

Partnership Program Manager), both now retired, for their direction, leadership, and 

support during the project. We also appreciate the geophysical survey efforts of Drew 

LaBounty. We are also grateful for the support provided by Administrative Officer Jill 

Lewis, and the rest of the MWAC staff for all of their help without which this project 

would not have been completed as smoothly or efficiently as it was. Darin Schlake and 

Bryttie Duren provided logistical, computer, transportation, and personnel support 

during the project while Allan Weber and Jeff Larson provided editing and report 

preparation in the publishing of this document. We are grateful for their review 

comments of the draft manuscript.
iii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Abstract........................................................................................................................... i

Acknowledgements......................................................................................................... ii

Table of Contents.............................................................................................................iii

List of Tables.................................................................................................................... v

List of Figures................................................................................................................... v

Introduction.....................................................................................................................1

Environmental Setting......................................................................................................3

Cultural History of the Fort Larned National Historic Site ..................................................5

Prehistoric Periods....................................................................................................5

Historic Periods ........................................................................................................7

Previous Cultural Resource Investigations ........................................................................11

Present Geophysical and Archeological Investigations......................................................13

Geophysical Survey Methods...................................................................................13

Site Mapping Methods............................................................................................14

Geophysical Prospection Techniques........................................................................15

Magnetic Survey .............................................................................................15

Resistance Survey ............................................................................................18

Geophysical Data Processing ...................................................................................19

Processing Dual Fluxgate Gradiometer Magnetic Data .....................................20

Processing Resistance Data..............................................................................20
iv

Geophysical Data Interpretations.............................................................................21

Interpreting the Magnetic Data .......................................................................21

Interpreting the Resistance Data......................................................................23

Combined Geophysical Data Set Interpretations..............................................24

Archeological Monitoring Methods.........................................................................24

Conclusions and Recommendations................................................................................27

References Cited.............................................................................................................29
v

TABLES

Table 1. Global positioning system corrected grid coordinates for the FOLS 

geophysical project area..................................................................................................43

Table 2. Acquisition and instrumentation information for the dual fluxgate 

gradiometer survey used in the grid input template at the FOLS geophysical 

project area ....................................................................................................................53

Table 3. Acquisition and instrumentation information for the resistance 

survey used in the grid input template at the FOLS geophysical project area ...................53

FIGURES

Figure 1. Location of the geophysical project area at the Fort Larned 

National Historic Site, Pawnee County, Kansas. ...............................................................55

Figure 2. General view of the southern portion of the geophysical project.......................56

Figure 3. General view of the western portion of the geophysical project 

behind Officers Row .......................................................................................................56

Figure 4. General view of the northern portion of the geophysical project ......................57

Figure 5. Laying out the geophysical survey grid corner stakes with the 

surveying compass and 100-meter tape ..........................................................................57

Figure 6. Placing the surveying ropes on the geophysical grid..........................................58

Figure 7. Sketch map of the geophysical investigations at the Fort Larned 

National Historic Site.......................................................................................................59

Figure 8. UTM grid of the geophysical project area at the Fort Larned 

National Historic Site.......................................................................................................60

Figure 9. Conducting the magnetic survey with the dual fluxgate 

gradiometer....................................................................................................................61

Figure 10. Conducting the resistance survey with the resistance meter 

and twin probe array ......................................................................................................61

Figure 11. Image and contour plots of the dual fluxgate gradiometer 

magnetic data from FOLS................................................................................................62

Figure 12. Image and contour plots of the resistance data from FOLS..............................63
vi

Figure 13. Interpretation of the magnetic data from the dual fluxgate 

gradiometer in the FOLS geophysical project area............................................................64

Figure 14. Interpretation of the resistance data from the FOLS geophysical 

project area. ...................................................................................................................65

Figure 15. Combined geophysical anomalies from the FOLS geophysical 

project area. ..................................................................................................................66

Figure 16. Archeological monitoring of the buried electric line installation 

at FOLS...........................................................................................................................67

Figure 17. Excavation of access pit 1 with a backhoe.......................................................68

Figure 18. View of the open electric vault .......................................................................68

Figure 19. Wall profiles of Pit 1. ......................................................................................69

Figure 20. Wall profiles of Pit 2. ......................................................................................70

Figure 21. Wall profiles of Pit 3. ......................................................................................71
1

INTRODUCTION

The geophysical survey and archeological monitoring activities at Fort Larned 

National Historic Site (Site 14PA305), in Pawnee County, Kansas, were conducted as 

part of the National Park Service’s (NPS) Midwest Archeological Center (MWAC) 

archeological assistance to the park’s construction and compliance activities related 

to the installation of an underground electric line from overhead power lines on the 

west side of the park along 180th Avenue, a gravel county road. The investigations were 

requested by the park’s resource specialist, George Elmore, to evaluate the archeological 

resources in the underground utility construction zone in compliance with Section 

106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended through 2006 (NPS 

2006a:35-99). 

Fort Larned National Historic Site (FOLS) was authorized by legislation enacted 

by the Congress of the United States in 1964 under Public Law 88-541 (FOLS 1995:6). The 

national historic site was established to commemorate the significant role of the fort in 

the opening of the West. The law provided for the acquisition of 750 ac of land including 

the fort site and nearby remains of the Santa Fe Trail along with scenic easements. Fort 

Larned served as a base of military operations against the hostile Plains Indians and for 

protection of commerce along the eastern part of the Santa Fe Trail during the 1860s and 

1870s. The military post also served as the Indian Bureau Agency for the administration 

of the terms of the Fort Wise Treaty of 1861 with the Central Plains Indian tribes. 

The geophysical investigations were conducted from July 13 to July 18, 2009, 

along the western side of the fort next to the row of Officers’ Quarters (Figure 1). The 

geophysical survey included a magnetic survey with dual fluxgate gradiometer and 

a resistance survey with a resistance meter and twin-probe array. These techniques 

offered inexpensive, rapid, and relatively non-destructive and non-invasive methods of 

identifying buried archeological resources and site patterns that were detectable; they 

also provided a means for sampling relatively large areas in an efficient manner (Roosevelt 

2007:444-445; and Von Der Osten-Woldenburg 2005:621-626). The geophysical survey 

was conducted in an attempt to identify buried archeological remains associated with 

the fort in the vicinity of the construction project corridor for the installation of the 

park’s underground electric line. The geophysical survey was conducted by MWAC 

archeologist Steven L. De Vore and archeological technician Andrew “Drew” LaBounty. 

Volunteers-In-Parks (VIP) program participants during the geophysical investigations 

included Laura McClatchey and David Wolf.

The archeological monitoring of the underground electric line installation 

occurred between November 17 and 19, 2009. The monitoring activities were conducted 

by MWAC archeologist Melissa A. Baier. The monitoring activities included the 

documentation of the installation line and new transformer locations with a global 

positioning system (GPS) unit and the monitoring of the excavations of directional 

boring access pits.
2

FORT LARNED NATIONAL HISTORIC SITE
3

ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING

Fort Larned National Historic Site is located within the Plains Border section 

of the Great Plains province of the Interior Plains division of the North American 

continent (Fenneman 1931:25-30). The site also lies within the Rolling Plains and Breaks 

land resource region of the Central Great Plains Winter Wheat and Range Region major 

land resource area (USDA 2006:195-196,200-202). The region consists of submature to 

mature dissected plains. The dissected plains are broad with undulating and rolling 

uplands that generally contain narrow valleys with steep hilly side slopes. Local relief 

in the region is measured in meters to tens of meters. However, broad flood plains and 

terraces occur along the larger rivers. Fort Larned is located on the right or south bank 

of the Pawnee Fork, a tributary of the Arkansas River. The area surrounding Fort Larned 

is relatively flat with featureless terraces and bottom lands of the Great Bend lowland 

region of the Arkansas River lowlands (Schoewe 1949:291-296). The area is transected by 

numerous abandoned channels of the Pawnee Fork. Sedimentary rock outcrops in the 

county range from the Cretaceous to Quaternary periods (McLaughlin 1949; Schoewe 

1949:261-273). Terrace deposits along the Pawnee Fork consist of Pleistocene and 

Holocene Epoch alluvium from the Quaternary Period; however, some of the alluvial 

deposits may date to the Tertiary Period. 

The area also lies on the western edge of the Illinoian biotic province (Dice 

1943:21-23). The native vegetation is dominated by mixed grass prairie vegetation, 

which consists of tall and mid-height grasses. Little bluestem, big bluestem, switchgrass, 

sideoats grama, and western wheatgrass represent the major grass species (Brown 

1985:46-53; Dodge and Roth 1978:65; Küchler 1974; Shelford 1963:334-344; USDA 

2006:202). Stands of cottonwoods occur on the flood plains along the major rivers. 

Numerous species of forbs are also present including sunflowers, goldenrods, and 

ragweed. Wildlife in the region includes white-tailed deer, coyote, raccoon, black-tailed 

jackrabbit, pheasant, bobwhite quail, meadowlark, and mourning dove along with a 

variety of songbirds, rodents and smaller mammals, reptiles, amphibians, insects, and 

aquatic fauna, including bass, catfish, bluegill, and bullhead (Brown 1985:46-53; Shelford 

1963:334-344; USDA 2006:202). Bison, pronghorn antelope, elk, and wolves were present 

in the region during the prehistoric and early historic periods. 

Mollisols dominate the soil groups in the region (Foth and Schafer 1980:111-

142; USDA 2006:202). Entisols are also present but to a lesser extent (Foth and Schafer 

1980:37-62; USDA 2006:202). The loamy to clayey soils range from shallow to very deep 

and moderately well drained to somewhat excessively drained. The soil temperature is a 

mesic regime. The soils also have an ustic soil moisture regime (USDA 2006:202). Within 

the immediate project area, the soils belong to the New Cambria-Bridgeport-Hord soil 

association identified by “deep, nearly level, well drained and moderately well drained 

soils that have a silt loam to silty clay subsoil (Dodge and Roth 1978:4). The soil within 

the project area is identified as a Bridgeport silt loam” (soil mapping unit Br) with 0 to 

2 percent slopes (Dodge and Roth 1978:8,37). The nearly level Bridgeport soil is a deep, 

well-drained soil found on low terraces, which are occasionally flooded. The silt loam 

soil is formed in silty alluvial sediments on long, convex areas adjacent to major streams. 

It is moderately permeable with a high available water capacity. Fertility is high while 
4

FORT LARNED NATIONAL HISTORIC SITE

the runoff rate is slow. The soil has a low shrink-swell potential. The surface layer is very 

friable. It has a moderately alkaline pH reaction (Dodge and Roth 1978:8,37). 

The climate is a temperate continental climate with warm summers and cold 

winters (Bark 1978:2-3; Trewartha and Horn 1980:299-302; USDA 2006:201). Annual 

precipitation averages 60 cm. Most of the precipitation occurs in the form of rain 

between April and September. Snowfalls can be heavy with an annual average of 55 cm. 

The average annual temperature is 13.4° C with a January daily average of -0.39° C and a 

July daily average of 26.7° C (Bark 1978:60-61). The region averages a freeze-free period 

of approximately 180 days ranging from 145 to 210 days (USDA 2006:201). The prevailing 

winds are from the south. Severe windstorms can occur along with occasional tornadoes 

in well-developed thunderstorms (Bark 1978:2-3).
5

CULTURAL HISTORY OF THE FORT LARNED NATIONAL 

HISTORIC SITE

Little physical evidence is available from archeological investigations of the Fort 

Larned National Historic Site for the prehistoric occupation of the area (Boszhardt 

and Bednarchuk 2008). The numerous archeological investigations at the park have 

focused on the historic military occupation of Fort Larned (MWAC 1998). Information 

concerning the prehistoric use of the region is summarized in the publications of Robert 

J Hoard and William E. Banks (2006), Patricia J. O’Brien (1984), John D. Reynolds and 

William B. Lees (2004), and Waldo R. Wedel (1959). The project area lies within the 

Arkansas River Lowlands archeological study unit (Brown 1987:XVI-1—XVI-16).

The prehistoric period has been divided into several traditions denoting changes 

in technology, subsistence, and settlement patterns. The project area lies within the 

Central Plains Subarea of the Plains archeological cultural area of North America 

(Willey 1966:311-329). The prehistoric period is generally divided into the Paleoindian 

(11,000-7,000 B.C), Archaic 7,000 B.C. to A.D. 1), Ceramic (A.D. 1-1500), and Protohistoric 

(A.D. 1500-1800) periods, although the durations and manifestations of any individual 

tradition are specific to the local region. The historic period begins in 1541 with the 

arrival of Coronado’s band of Spanish explorers. The historic period (Holt 1990; HPD 

1984,1987; Lees 1989; Reynolds and Lees 2004:44-55) has been divided into five separate 

study contexts including the European and American exploration and contact with 

Native Americans (1541-1820), American exploration and settlement (1820-1865), rural 

and agricultural dominance (1865-1900), time of contrasts (1900-1939), and the recent 

past (1939-present). 

Prehistoric Periods

The prehistoric periods have been described in several publications. The 

prehistoric contexts have been summarized by Patricia J. O’Brien (1984) and in the 

State’s prehistoric archeological preservation plan by Kenneth L. Brown (1987:XVI-1—

XVI-16) and Kenneth L. Brown and Marie E. Brown (1987:IX-1—IX-26). These include 

the Paleoindian Period (11,000 to 7,000 B.C.), the Archaic Period (7,000 B.C.to A. D. 1), 

the Ceramic Period (A.D. 1-1500), and the Protohistoric Period (A.D. 1500-1541). 

The Paleoindian Period in the Arkansas River lowlands is poorly represented in 

the archeological record (Blackmar and Hofman 2006:46-75; Brown and Brown 1987:IX16—IX-24; O’Brien 1984:27-37; Reynolds and Lees 2004:11-14; Wedel 1959:536-538). The 

Paleoindians are represented by small bands of nomadic hunter-gatherers who subsisted 

off large game animals such as mammoths and bison, as well as other Pleistocene fauna 

and supplemented their diets with seeds, roots, berries, nuts, and small animals. The 

Paleoindian Period is divided into three stages based on projectile point forms: 1) Llano 

or Clovis Complex (11,000-9,000 B.C.), 2) Folsom Complex (9,000-8,000 B.C.), and 3) 

Plano Complexes (8,000-7,000 B.C.). In the Arkansas River lowlands, the Paleoindian 

period is represented by isolated finds of Clovis and later Paleoindian projectile points 

(Brown and Brown 1987:IX-1—IX-26). 
6

FORT LARNED NATIONAL HISTORIC SITE

The Archaic Period represents a shift in the reliance on large game to an 

increasing diversity of technologies associated with hunting, fishing, trapping, foraging, 

plant processing, and woodworking. The Archaic is further divided into the Early (6,000-

5,000 B.C.), Middle (5,000-2,000 B.C.), and Late Archaic (2,000 B.C-A. D. 1) stages with 

increases in highly regionalized adaptation to local environmental niches and increasing 

populations (Blackmar and Hofman 2006:46-75; O’Brien 1984:39-44; Reynolds and Lees 

2004:14-22; Wedel 1959:538-542). Stemmed and notched projectile points dominate the 

tool kit. Ground-stone tools are being incorporated into the Archaic tool kit for grinding 

seeds into meal. Subsistence consists of a seasonal round of exploitation of a diversity 

of faunal and floral resources. Habitation sites are becoming more permanent with 

increasing populations. The Archaic period within the Arkansas River lowlands is not 

very well represented. 

The Ceramic Period spans the Early Ceramic or Plains Woodland period 

(A.D. 1-1000), the Middle Ceramic period (A.D. 900-1500), and the Late Ceramic 

or Protohistoric period (A.D. 1500-1825). The Early Ceramic period is marked by 

the introduction of pottery, as well as changes in social organization, subsistence 

strategies, and technology (Bozell 2006:93-104; Logan 2006:76-92; O’Brien 1984:45-55; 

Reynolds and Lees 2004:22-32; Wedel 1959:542-557). Bow-and-arrow technology is 

introduced during the Early Ceramic period. Subsistence is largely based on hunting 

and intensive plant gathering; however, by the end of the Early Ceramic period, 

incipient plant domestication is occurring along with the introduction of tropical 

cultigens such as maize. Mound construction associated with mortuary activities 

occur across the eastern United States including the eastern and northern parts of 

Kansas. Hopewellian influences from Ohio are documented in the eastern part of the 

state. The Early Ceramic period within the Arkansas River lowlands is not very well 

represented. The Middle Ceramic period in the eastern United States is associated with 

the Mississippian cultures with their development of urban centers and temple mounds. 

The Middle Ceramic cultures have adapted a dual economy with maize, squash, and 

bean agriculture supplemented by hunting and wild food gathering. The bow and arrow 

becomes widespread during the period. Introduction of the rectangular earthlodge 

occurs in the northern part of the state associated with the Central Plains Tradition 

village farmers of the Upper Republican, Nebraska, and Smoky Hill complexes (O’Brien 

1984:59-62; Reynolds and Lees 2004:32-41; Roper 2006:105-132; Wedel 1959:557). The 

Middle Ceramic period in central Kansas, including Pawnee County, is defined by the 

poorly documented Pratt Culture (Brown 1987:XVI-2—XVI-5; Wedel 1959:503-512). 

The Pratt complex exhibits aspects of the Central Plains tradition and the Southern 

Plains cultures. The economy consists of hunting, gathering, and agriculture. Structures 

consist of flattened sides with rounded and braced corners with four center support 

posts and a central hearth and interior cache pits. Artifacts consist of small, notched 

and unnotched triangular projectile points, alternately beveled diamond-shaped knives, 

bone tools, and sand tempered and shell tempered ceramics. The Late Ceramic period, 

including the protohistoric and early historic tribal periods, consist of the Great Bend 

aspect, the historic Wichita, and the Dismal River aspect/Plains Apache (Blakeslee and 

Hawley 2006:165-179; Brown 1987:XVI-6—XVI-16; Lees 1989:69-71,83-84; Marshall 

2006:219-232; O’Brien 1984:67-78; Reynolds and Lees 2004:41-44; Scheiber 2006:133-150; 

Vehik 2006:206-218; Wedel 1959:47-82,571-615). The Late Ceramic period represents a 

period of change in the Great Plains region of Kansas with the arrival of the European 
7

explorers in Kansas, including the Spanish under Coronado in 1541 and the French 

under de Bourgmont in 1724. During this period, specific historic tribes, such as the 

Kansas, Pawnee, Wichita, and Plains Apache are identifiable in the archeological record. 

The period ends with the removal of Native American tribes from the Eastern United 

States into Kansas in the early 1800s. The period presents the development of historic 

Native American tribes and the initial contact of the tribes with European explorers. The 

Great Bend aspect in central and southern Kansas is associated with the development of 

the historic Wichita while the Dismal River aspect is associated with the historic Apache 

and the Oneota aspect may be associated with the Kansa. The Wichita, Pawnee, and 

Kansa represent agricultural villagers while the Plains Apache remain nomadic.

Historic Periods

Compared to the prehistoric period in the region, the historic periods are 

extremely well documented. The initial exploration of the region by Europeans and 

contact with Native American tribes in Kansas had a profound effect on the native 

populations during the historic period between 1541 and 1825. The 16th-century 

explorations by the Spanish with Coronado in 1541, Onate in 1601, and Ulibarri in 1706, 

and the 17th-century explorations by the French explorers de Bourgmont in 1724 and 

Trudeau in 1794 provide written accounts of their observations of the landscape and 

interactions with Native American tribes (Lees 1989:71; Reynolds and Lees 2004:44-48). 

The American Lewis and Clark 1804-1086 expedition traveled along the northeastern 

part of Kansas while Pike in 1806 traveled across Kansas to Colorado and New Mexico. 

Thomas Say of the Stephen Long expedition provided additional insight into the Kansas 

territory in 1819 (Lees 1989:69-71). 

Between 1820 and 1865, Kansas saw the resettlement of many eastern Native 

American tribes, as well the establishment of American settlement within the state (HPD 

1987; Lees 1989:71-73; Reynolds and Lees 2004:48-51). While the Pawnee, Wichita, and 

Plains Apache were no longer permanent residents in the state, the Kansa and the Osage 

remained important state residents. During the late 1820s and the 1830s, several eastern 

woodland tribes including the Sac and Fox, the Ioway, the Illinois, the Otoe, Delaware, 

Cherokee, Chippewa, and others were resettled in eastern Kansas (O’Brien 1984:79-82). 

In addition to the Native American tribes, American missionaries and traders moved 

into the state to work with the tribes. The Santa Fe Trail and the Oregon and California 

trails carried American emigrants and commerce across Kansas during this period. 

Kansas Territory was established in 1854 under the Kansas-Nebraska Act. In 1861, 

Kansas was admitted to the Union. American settlement occurred rapidly along the 

eastern third of the state. Settlement during this portion of the period was characterized 

by the establishment of forts, farms, roads, schools, towns, and the completion of the 

government land office surveys of the state (O’Brien 1984:83-86). In the years leading 

up to the Civil War and during the Civil War, eastern Kansas was the focus of much 

violence over the issue of slavery. Fort Larned was established along the Santa Fe Trail in 

1860. The Indian War of 1864 resulted in hostilities between the Plains Indians and the 

American settlers in the state.

Following the Civil War, Kansas developed from a frontier to a state with a 

diversified economy during the period of rural and agricultural dominance between 
8

FORT LARNED NATIONAL HISTORIC SITE

1865 and 1900 (HPD 1984; Lees 1989:73-74; Reynolds and Lees 2004:51-53). Most of 

these tribes were moved elsewhere by the 1870s, although the Iowa Tribe of Kansas 

and Nebraska, the Kickapoo Tribe of Indians in Kansas, the Prairie Band Potawatomi 

Nation, and the Sac and Fox Nation retained reservations within the state to the present 

day. This opened more land in the state to American settlement. Railroad construction 

in Kansas began in the late 1860s. The railroads played a significant role in the further 

development of the state’s agricultural dominance throughout the period. The location 

of the railroads played an important role in the deciding factor in the location of new 

towns across the state. During this period, the state’s agricultural economy focused on 

wheat cultivation and on livestock production and processing. During the early part 

of the period, Kansas railheads provided shipping points for the Texas cattle drives 

to the eastern market places. Additional hostilities with the Plains Indians resulted in 

conflicts during 1867 and 1868. By 1870, American settlement in the eastern half of the 

state was complete. In 1877, a large group of Cheyenne left their Oklahoma reservation 

and crossed Kansas. By 1890, the entire state was settled; however, this was not without 

severe hardships for the American emigrants. The economic collapse in the 1890s 

resulted in the decrease in the farming population in the western part of the state; 

however, this economic downturn was to provide development of the state’s mineral 

extraction industries, including drilling for oil and natural gas and mining for coal and 

salt. The Fort Larned military reservation was transferred from the Department of War 

to the Department of the Interior’s General Land Office in 1883. In 1884, the buildings 

and lands of the military reservation were sold at public auction and adapted for use as a 

private ranch (Quinn Evans/Architects 1996:1-1—1-3). 

During the time of contrast from 1900 to 1939, the agricultural industry in the 

state rebounded with increasing mechanization and diversity (Holt 1990; Lees 1989:74-

75; Reynolds and Lees 2004:53-54). The mineral extraction industries continued to 

expand throughout the period. The automobile was becoming an important means 

of transportation for people and goods during this period. World War I and the Great 

Depression also had significant impacts on the state’s economy and population. The 

1930s drought had a major impact on the state, especially in the agricultural region in 

western Kansas.

The recent past from1939 to the present resulted in many major changes in 

the nation, which were also represented in the state (Lees 1989:75; Reynolds and Lees 

2004:54-55). World War II had a major impact on the state’s population with increases 

in military training at the army and army air corps bases and the deployment of the 

fighting men overseas. Women filled the industrial and manufacturing roles that the 

men had occupied prior to the start of the war. Prisoner-of-War camps were established 

throughout the state. Following the war, the period continued to see a decline in the 

rural population with smaller farms and communities suffering from the movement 

away from the rural areas to larger urban areas. Following the war large-scale land 

leveling and agricultural terracing made it possible for fewer farmers to grow the crops 

and livestock needed to produce the grain, dairy, and meat for public consumption. 

Federal highway and reservoir construction also altered the landscape. In 1957, the Fort 

Larned Historical Society was founded and opened the old fort to the public. The Fort 

Larned site was designated a National Historic Landmark in 1960. In 1964, Congress 

authorized the establishment of the Fort Larned National Historic Site as a national park 
9

unit. The fort property was acquired by the National Park Service in 1966. The National 

Park Service continued to restore the fort’s buildings to represent the 1868 military use 

since becoming a National Historic Site (Quinn Evans/Architects 1996:2-28—2-30).
10

FORT LARNED NATIONAL HISTORIC SITE
11

PREVIOUS CULTURAL RESOURCE INVESTIGATIONS

The cultural resource investigations at the Fort Larned National Historic Site 

have produced numerous archeological reports, which are summarized in the cultural 

sites inventory for the park (MWAC 1998, 2007). The first archeological investigations at 

the site in the late 1960s, the 1970s, the 1980s, and the 1990s occurred as preliminary steps 

in the reconstruction of the military post (Albright and Scott 1974; Dial 1991; Hunt 1983; 

Griffin 1991; Monger 1981; Perttula and Shaw 1980; Richner 1979; Scott 1974, 1975, 1998a, 

1998b; Spears 1978; Sudderth 1981, 1983a, 1983b; Thiessen 1983; Zalucha and Olinger 

1976a, 1976b). Other archeological projects in the 1970s included the archeological 

survey of a detached landholding containing trail ruts associated with the Santa Fe Trail 

southwest of the park (Nickel 1975), the archeological survey of a proposed sandstone 

quarry exhibit (Nickel 1987), salvage archeology associated with the construction of 

the museum and visitors center (Monger 1976), construction of the maintenance facility 

(Lees 1984), archeological monitoring of utility line installations and reconstruction 

activities (Elmore 1983a, 1983b, 1984, 1986, 1988a, 1988b, 1989; Griffin 1987; Hunt 1990; 

Monger 1980; Thiessen 1987), and other archeological compliance-related projects 

(Scott 2005). In addition to the archeological investigations, geophysical investigations at 

the fort included the magnetic survey of HS-3 and suspected privy location (Weymouth 

1978), the metal-detector survey of the proposed new visitors center location (Scott 

1995), and the geophysical investigations of the potential location for the Cavalry Stables 

(Kern and De Vore 1999). 

A number of histories have been written about Fort Larned and its association 

with the Santa Fe Trail (Brown 1964; Oliva 1985, 1990, 1997; Reaves 1995; Unrau 1956; 

Utley and Watkins 1993). In addition to the histories, several historic furnishing studies 

and structure reports, management documents, and other cultural resource studies 

related to Fort Larned National Historic Site were compiled for the park since its 

establishment in 1966 (Albright and Scott 1974; Clemensen 1978, 1980; Cockrell et al. 

1991; FOLS 1988, 1995; MWRO 1978; Quinn Evans/ Architects 1996, 1999; Rickey and 

Crellin 1967; Sheire 1968, 1969; Stinson 1966).
12

FORT LARNED NATIONAL HISTORIC SITE
13

PRESENT GEOPHYSICAL AND ARCHEOLOGICAL 

INVESTIGATIONS

The archeological/geophysical project area is located around the northwest, 

west, and southwest perimeter of the buildings surrounding the quadrangular parade 

ground (Figures 2, 3, and 4). The investigations are concentrated along the back side of 

the Officers’ Row buildings on the west side of the parade ground along the route of the 

proposed utility line that had been flagged by the Midwest Energy, Inc., personnel. The 

proposed route is slightly different from the originally proposed route and the existing 

buried electrical utility line. The majority of the route will be bored underground with 

access points for connections placed in vaults. 

The 2009 archeological investigations of the underground electric line 

installation project corridor consists of two phases with the geophysical survey 

representing the first phase and archeological monitoring of the utility line installation 

representing the second phase of the field project. The geophysical phase includes the 

survey of the project area with a dual fluxgate gradiometer system and a resistance meter 

and twin-probe array. The monitoring phase includes the visual inspection of the 

excavation of the access pits for the directional boring of the underground utility 

lines and the connection of the new line with the existing utility lines connecting 

the fort buildings.

Geophysical Survey Methods

The geophysical survey project at the Fort Larned National Historic Site (Site 

14PA305) included the area behind the row of Officers’ housing on the southwest, 

west, and northwest sides of the fort’s parade ground. The geophysical project area was 

located to the west of the park’s two-track access road extending south of the gravel 

access road on the south side of Officers’ Row and north of the farm era irrigation ditch, 

in the backyards of HS-7 and HS-8 and west of the backyard fences of the Officers’ 

Quarters between the wood fences and the bank of Pawnee Fork, and on the north side 

of Officers’ Row to the park entrance road and the bank of Pawnee Fork. The project 

area was planted in domestic grasses. Thirty-four complete and 16 partial 20-m-by-20-m 

grid units, which were used to control the placement of the instruments during data 

acquisition, were established in the FOLS geophysical project area (De Vore 2009). The 

total area investigated by the geophysical survey in the FOLS geophysical project area 

was 16,161 m2

 or 3.99 ac.

Initially, the mapping station for the surveying compass (Ushikata 2005) and 

first geophysical grid point with the arbitrary mapping coordinates of N60/E100 was 

established 1 m west of the southwest corner of the Company Officers’ Quarters (HS-7) 

backyard fence and approximately 5 cm south of the southern fence wall (Figure 5). A 

reference point was placed to the north of the mapping station at one meter from the 

west wooden fence line to serve as a backsight to establish the geophysical grid’s northsouth baseline. The baseline orientation was 27.5° west of magnetic north. The southern 

portion of the north-south base line established with the surveying compass and a 100-m 

tape. The grid baseline was established with wooden hub stakes placed at 20-m intervals 
14

FORT LARNED NATIONAL HISTORIC SITE

out to 100 m south of the initial mapping station. The east-west baseline extended 40 m 

to the east and 60 m to the west. The rest of the north-south baseline to the north of the 

initial mapping station extended an additional 189 m at 20-m intervals until the final 

grid stake was placed near the edge of the levee above the Pawnee Fork. Additional grid 

unit stakes were placed on the east and west sides of the north-south baseline stakes 

with the grid extending 40 m to the east and 60 m to the west of the baseline. 

Twenty-meter ropes were placed along the east-west grid lines connecting the 

grid unit corners. These ropes formed the north and south boundaries of each grid 

unit during the data collection phase of the survey. Additional ropes were placed at 1-m 

intervals across the grid unit in a north-south orientation (Figure 6). The survey ropes 

served as guides during the data acquisition. The ropes were marked with different color 

tape at half-meter and meter increments designed to help guide the survey effort. Once 

the geophysical survey of each grid unit was completed the survey ropes were flipped to 

the next adjacent grid unit. As the survey activities progressed across the geophysical 

project area, a sketch map was completed indentifying both cultural and natural surface 

features in the project area (Figure 7). The geophysical data were acquired across the 

grid units beginning in the lower left hand corner of each grid unit (Geoscan Research 

1987:43-54,2003:5/2-5/11). 

Site Mapping Methods

The geophysical survey grid corner stakes at the project area within the FOLS 

geophysical project area were mapped with a Trimble GeoXH global positioning system 

(GPS) handheld receiver and external antenna (Trimble 2007a) along with surface 

features including access roads, the irrigation ditch, trees, the Pawnee Fork bank and 

levee, etc. The GPS readings at stationary points (i.e., grid unit corners and individual 

surface features) were collected with 30 readings from five or more satellites while line 

segment data were collected at one second intervals along the path of the line. The field 

GPS data were collected in the universal transverse mercator (UTM) projection for the 

Zone 14 North coordinates of the North American Datum of 1983 (NAD83) horizontal 

datum. The data were transferred to a laptop computer via the Trimble TerraSync 

software (Trimble 2007b,2007c). The data were then differentially corrected using the 

Trimble Pathfinder Office software (Trimble 2007d) using the continuously operating 

reference station (CORS) HAVILAND (HVLK) site located 60 km away at Haviland, 

Kansas (Table 1). Four files were processed with 2,777 (93.8%) of 2,959 selected positions 

were code corrected by post-processed. One thousand four hundred sixty-six (49.5%) of 

2,959 selected positions were carrier corrected by post-processing with one (0.1%) of the 

code positions chosen over carrier since it was higher quality. The estimated range for 

the 2,959 corrected positions yielded 2.8% within an accuracy range of 0-15 cm, 14.2% 

within and accuracy range of 15-30 cm, 219.8% within an accuracy range of 30-50 cm, 

9.7% within an accuracy range of 0.5-1.0 m, 1.0% within an accuracy range of 1.0-2.0 m, 

43.9% within an accuracy range of 2.0-5.0 m, and 8.6% at an accuracy range greater than 

5.0 m. The high DOP values resulted from a variety of sources including multi-pathing 

of the satellite signal through the overhead tree canopy, poor satellite geometry, and the 

number of satellites present during the collection phase. After the raw survey data in 

the standard storage format (SSF) was post processed, the corrected data were 
15

exported to Excel data files and imported into Surfer 9 (Golden Software 2009) for 

final display (Figure 8).

Geophysical Prospection Techniques

Geophysical prospection techniques available for archeological investigations 

consist of a number of techniques that record the various physical properties of earth, 

typically in the upper couple of meters; however, deeper prospection can be utilized if 

necessary. Geophysical techniques are divided between passive techniques and active 

techniques. Passive techniques are primarily ones that measure inherently or naturally 

occurring local or planetary fields created by earth-related processes under study 

(Heimmer and DeVore 1995:7,2000:55; Kvamme 2001:356,2005:424). The primary passive 

method utilized in archeology is magnetic surveying. Other passive methods with limited 

archeological applications include self-potential methods, gravity survey techniques, and 

differential thermal analysis. Active techniques transmit an electrical, electromagnetic, 

or acoustic signal into the ground (Heimmer and DeVore 1995:9,2000:58-59; Kvamme 

2001:355-356). The interaction of these signals and buried materials produces altered 

return signals that are measured by the appropriate geophysical instruments. Changes 

in the transmitted signal of amplitude, frequency, wavelength, and time-delay properties 

may be observable. Active methods applicable to archeological investigations include 

electrical resistance/resistivity, electromagnetic conductivity (including groundconductivity and metal detectors), magnetic susceptibility, and ground-penetrating 

radar. Acoustic active techniques, including seismic, sonar, and acoustic sounding, have 

very limited or specific archeological applications. Additional information on the basic 

geophysical techniques used during the present survey may be found in publications by 

Arnold Aspinall, Chris Gaffney, and Armin Schmidt (2008), Bruce Bevan (1991,1998), 

Anthony Clark (2000), Lawrence B. Conyers (2004), Lawrence B. Conyers and Dean 

Goodman (1997), Andrew David (1995, 2001), Rinita Dalan (2008), Andrew David, Neil 

Linford, and Paul Linford (2008), Chris Gaffney and John Gater (2003), Chris Gaffney, 

John Gater, and Sue Ovenden (1991, 2002), Don H. Heimmer and Steven L. De Vore 

(1995, 2000), Kenneth Kvamme (2001, 2003, 2005), I. Scollar, A. Tabbagh, A. Hesse, and I. 

Herzog (1990), and John Weymouth (1986).

Magnetic Survey

A magnetic survey is a passive geophysical survey (see Aspinall et al. 2008; Bevan 

1991, 1998:29-43; Breiner 1973;1992:313-381; Burger 1992:389-452; Clark 2000:92-98, 

174-175; Davenport 2001: 50-71; David 1995:17-20; David et al. 2008:20-24; Dobrin and 

Savit 1988:633-749; Gaffney and Gater 2003:36-42, 61-72; Gaffney et al. 1991:6, 2002:7-

9; Hanson et al. 2005:151-175; Heimmer and DeVore 1995:13, 2000:55-56; Kvamme 

2001:357-358, 2003:441, 2005:434-436, 2006a:205-233, 2006b:235-250; Lowrie 1997:229-

306; Milsom 2003:51-70; Mussett and Khan 2000:139-180; Nishimura 2001:546-547; 

Oswin 2009:43-54, 126-135; Robinson and Çoruh 1988:333-444; Scollar et al. 1990:375-

519; Telford et al. 1990:62-135; Weymouth 1986:343; and Witten 2006:73-116 for more 

details on magnetic surveying). A dual system fluxgate gradiometer was used during the 

geophysical investigations at the FOLS geophysical project area. 
16

A magnetic survey is a passive geophysical prospection technique used to 

measure the earth’s total magnetic field at a point location. Its application to archeology 

results from the local effects of magnetic materials on the earth’s magnetic field. These 

anomalous conditions result from magnetic materials and minerals buried in the soil 

matrix. Iron artifacts have very strong effects on the local earth’s magnetic field. Other 

cultural features that affect the local earth’s magnetic field include fire hearths and soil 

disturbances (e.g., pits, mounds, wells, pithouses, and dugouts), as well as geological 

strata. Magnetic field strength is measured in nanoteslas (nT; Sheriff 1973:148). In North 

America, the earth’s magnetic field strength ranges from 40,000 to 60,000 nT with an 

inclination of approximately 60° to 70° (Milsom 2003:43; Weymouth 1986:341). The 

project area has a magnetic field strength of approximately 59,280 nT (Peddie 1992; 

Sharma 1997:72-73) with an inclination of approximately 71° 36’ (Peddie and Zunde 

1988; Sharma 1997:72-73). Magnetic anomalies of archeological interest are often in the 

±5 nT range, especially on prehistoric sites. Target depth in magnetic surveys depends 

on the magnetic susceptibility of the soil and the buried features and objects. For most 

archeological surveys, target depth is generally confined to the upper 1-2 m below the 

ground surface with 3 m representing the maximum limit (Clark 2000:78-80; Kvamme 

2001:358). Magnetic surveying applications to archeological investigations have included 

the detection of architectural features, soil disturbances, and magnetic objects/artifacts 

(Bevan 1991; Clark 2000;92-98; Gaffney et al 1991:6; Heimmer and DeVore 1995,2000; 

Weymouth 1986:343). 

Two modes of operation for magnetic surveys exist: the total field survey and 

the gradient survey. The instrument used to measure the magnetic field strength is the 

magnetometer (Bevan 1998:20). The total field survey uses a single magnetic sensor. 

Three different types of magnetic sensors have been used in the magnetometer: 1) 

proton-free precession sensors, 2) alkali vapor (cesium or rubidium) sensors, and 3) 

fluxgate sensors (for a detailed description of the types of magnetometers constructed 

from these sensors see Clark 2000:66-71; Milsom 2003:45-47; Scollar et al. 1990:450-469; 

Weymouth 1986:343-344). 

The total field magnetometer is designed to measure the absolute intensity 

of the local magnetic field. This type of magnetometer utilizes a single sensor. Due to 

diurnal variation of the earth’s magnetic field, the data collected with a single sensor 

magnetometer must be corrected to reflect these diurnal changes. One method is 

to return to a known point and take a reading that can be used to correct the diurnal 

variation. A second method is to use two magnetometers with one operated at a 

fixed base station collecting the diurnal variation in the magnetic field. The second 

magnetometer is used to collect the field data in the area of archeological interest. 

Common magnetometers of this types used in archaeological investigations include the 

proton-precession magnetometer, the Overhauser effect magnetometer (a variation of 

the proton-precession magnetometer), and the cesium magnetometer. 

The magnetic gradient survey is conducted with a gradiometer or a magnetometer 

with two magnetic sensors at a fixed vertical distance apart. The instrument measures 

the magnetic field at two separate heights. The top sensor reading is subtracted from the 

bottom sensor reading. The resulting difference is recorded. This provides the vertical 

gradient or change in the magnetic field. Diurnal variations are automatically canceled. 
17

This setup also minimizes long-range trends. The gradiometer provides greater feature 

resolution and potentially provides better classification of the magnetic anomalies. Two 

commonly used gradiometers in archeological investigations are the cesium gradiometer 

and the fluxgate gradiometer. They are capable of yielding 5 to 10 measurements per 

second at a resolution of 0.1 nT (Kvamme 2001:358). Cesium gradiometers record the 

absolute total field values like the single-sensor total field magnetometers. It also records 

the gradient change between the bottom and top sensors. The fluxgate sensors are 

highly directional, measuring only the component of the field parallel to the sensor’s 

axis (Clark 2000:69). They also require calibration (Milsom 2003:46-47). Both cesium 

and fluxgate gradiometers are capable of high-density sampling over substantial areas at 

a relatively rapid rate of acquisition (Clark 2000:69-71; Milsom 2003:46-47).

The dual fluxgate gradiometer system, the Bartington Grad 601-2 single axis 

magnetic gradiometer (Figure 9), is a vector magnetometer, which measures the strength 

of the magnetic field in a particular direction (Bartington Instruments 2007). The 

dual fluxgate gradiometer sensor configuration of the instrument uses two fluxgate 

gradiometer sensor tubes separated by a distance of 1 m. The dual gradiometer records 

two lines of data during each traverse reducing the distance walked and the survey time 

by half compared to the time and distance covered with a single gradiometer system. 

The sensors must be accurately balanced and aligned along the direction of the field 

component to be measured. The first reference point for balancing and aligning the dual 

gradiometer is located at N0/E60; however, it was moved to N0/E40 during the course 

of the magnetic survey. The instrument is aligned on magnetic north. The fluxgate 

gradiometer sensor tubes in the dual gradiometer are spaced 1 m apart with the two 

tubes also spaced at 1 m apart. The instrument is carried so the two sensors in each 

tube are vertical to one another with the bottom sensors approximately 30 cm above the 

ground. Each sensor reads the magnetic field strength at its height above the ground. 

The gradient or change of the magnetic field strength between the two vertical sensors 

is recorded in the instrument’s memory for both sensor tubes. These gradients 

are not in absolute field values but rather voltage changes, which are calibrated in 

terms of the magnetic field strength. The dual fluxgate gradiometer also provides a 

continuous record of the magnetic field strength across each line for each traverse 

across the grid unit. 

The magnetic survey for the dual fluxgate gradiometer was designed to collect 

eight samples per meter along 1.0-m traverses or eight data values per square meter at 

the FOLS geophysical project area (Table 2). The data were collected in a zigzag fashion 

with the surveyor alternating the direction of travel along each traverse across the grid. 

Thirty-two hundred data values were collected for each complete 20-m-by-20-m grid 

unit surveyed during the project. The magnetic data were recorded in the memory of 

the dual fluxgate gradiometer and downloaded to a field laptop computer when the 

instrument’s memory became full, at the end of the day, and at the completion of the 

survey in the FOLS geophysical project area. The magnetic data from the dual fluxgate 

gradiometer were downloaded into the Bartington GRAD 601 software (Bartington 

2007). The data were then imported into ARCHAEOSURVEYOR for processing (DW 

Consulting 2008). Shade-relief and trace-line plots were generated in the field before the 

instrument’s memory was cleared. 
18

FORT LARNED NATIONAL HISTORIC SITE

Resistance Survey

The resistance survey is an active geophysical technique, which injects a current 

into the ground (see Bevan 1991, 1998:7-18; Burger 1992:241-318; Carr 1982; Clark 

2000:27-63, 171-174; Davenport 2001:29-30; David 1995:27-28; David et al. 2008:24-

28; Dobrin and Savit 1988:750-773; Gaffney and Gater 2003:26-36, 56-61; Gaffney et 

al. 1991:2; 2002:7; Hallof 1992: 39-176; Heimmer and DeVore 1995:29-35, 2000:59-60; 

Kvamme 2001:358-362, 2003:441-442, 2005:434-436; Lowrie 1997:206-219; Milsom 

2003:83-116; Mussett and Khan 2000:181-201; Nishimura 2001:544-546; Oswin 2009: 

32-43, 118-126; Robinson and Çoruh 1988:445-478; Scollar et al. 1990:307-374; Sharma 

1997:207-264; Somers 2006:109-129; Telford et al. 1990:522-577; Van Nostrand and Cook 

1966; Weymouth 1986:318-341; Witten 2006:299-317; and Zonge et al. 2005:265-300 for 

more details on resistivity surveys). The voltage is measured and by Ohm’s Law, one 

may compute the resistance at any given point (R=V/I where R is resistance, V is voltage, 

and I is current). Due to the problem of contact resistance between two electrodes in 

the ground, a typical resistance survey makes use of four electrodes or probes. The 

current passes through two electrodes and the voltage is measured between the other 

two probes. The configuration of the electrodes also varies (see Milsom 2003:99 and 

Weymouth 1986:324 for common configurations). 

Resistance or resistivity changes result from electrical properties of the soil 

matrix. Changes are caused by materials buried in the soil, differences in soil formation 

processes, or disturbances from natural or cultural modifications to the soil. In 

archeology, the instrument is used to identify areas of compaction and excavation, as 

well as buried objects such as brick or stone foundations. It has the potential to identify 

cultural features that are affected by the water saturation in the soil, which is directly 

related to soil porosity, permeability, and chemical nature of entrapped moisture (Clark 

2000; Heimmer and De Vore 1995:30). Its application to archeology results from the 

ability of the instrument to detect lateral changes on a rapid data acquisition, highresolution basis, where observable contrasts exist. Lateral changes in anthropogenic 

features result from compaction, structural material changes, buried objects, excavation, 

habitation sites, and other features affecting water saturation (Heimmer and De Vore 

1995:37). The resistivity survey may sometimes detect the disturbed soil matrix within a 

grave shaft. 

The Geoscan Research RM15-D resistance meter uses the PA20 multiple-probe 

array (Geoscan Research 2007). Arranged as a twin-probe array, a current and voltage 

probes are located on a mobile frame, which is moved around the site (Figure 10). Two 

additional probes are located away from the survey area, which also consists of a current 

probe and voltage probe. The mobile probes are set 0.5 m apart on the multiprobe array 

frame. The remote probes are set a distance 30 times the mobile probe separation. The 

probes on the frame are located at a fixed distance apart. A general rule of thumb for the 

depth investigation of resistance survey is that the depth is equal to the distance of probe 

separation. This value is not a unique number but an average for the volume of soil 0.5 m 

depth and a surface diameter of 0.5 m under the center point of the instrument frame. 

The probes are connected to the resistance meter, which is also on the frame. Wings 

may be added to the frame to expand the separation distance of the probes; however, 

this requires the resurvey of the grid for each change in the probe separation distance. 
19

The measurement is taken when the mobile probes make contact with the ground 

and completes the electrical circuit. The resulting resistance value is the average of 16 

readings. The average value is stored in the resistance meter’s memory until downloaded 

to a field laptop computer. 

The resistance survey was designed to collect two samples per meter along 1.0-

m traverses or two data values per square meter at the FOLS geophysical project area 

(Table 3). The data were collected in a zigzag fashion with the surveyor maintaining the 

alternating the direction of travel for each traverse across the grid. Eight hundred data 

values were collected for a complete 20-m-by-20-m grid unit. The resistance data were 

recorded in the memory of the resistance meter and downloaded to a laptop computer 

at the completion of each day’s survey effort. The resistance data were imported into 

Geoscan Research’s GEOPLOT software (Geoscan Research 2003) for processing. 

Both shade-relief and trace-line plots were generated before the instrument’s memory 

was cleared. 

Geophysical Data Processing

Processing of geophysical data requires care and understanding of the various 

strategies and alternatives (Kvamme 2001:365; Music 1995; Neubauer et al. 1996). Roger 

Walker and Lewis Somers (Geoscan Research 2003) provide strategies, alternatives, 

and case studies on the use of several processing routines commonly used to process 

magnetic, resistance, and conductivity data in the GEOPLOT software. David et al. 

(2008:42-45) presents a basic description of steps involved in the processing of magnetic, 

resistance, and ground-penetrating radar data. Kenneth Kvamme (2001:365) also 

provides a series of common steps used in computer processing of geophysical data:

Concatenation of the data from individual survey grids into a single composite 

matrix;

Clipping and despiking of extreme values (that may result, for example, from 

introduced pieces of iron in magnetic data);

Edge matching of data values in adjacent grids through balancing of brightness 

and contrast (i.e., means and standard deviations);

Filtering to emphasize high-frequency changes and smooth statistical noise in 

the data;

Contrast enhancement through saturation of high and low values or histogram 

modification; and

Interpolation to improve image continuity and interpretation.

It is also important to understand the reasons for data processing and display (David 

et al. 2008:45-49; Gaffney et al. 1991:11). They enhance the analyst’s ability to interpret 

the relatively huge data sets collected during the geophysical survey. The type of display 
20

FORT LARNED NATIONAL HISTORIC SITE

can help the geophysical investigator present his interpretation of the data to the 

archeologist who will ultimately use the information to plan excavations or determine 

the archeological significance of the site from the geophysical data. 

Processing Dual Fluxgate Gradiometer Magnetic Data

The magnetic data were recorded in the memory of the gradiometer and 

downloaded to a field laptop computer when the instrument’s memory was full or at 

the completion of day’s survey effort. Upon completion of the magnetic survey with the 

dual fluxgate gradiometer system at the FOLS geophysical project area, the data were 

processed in the ARCHAEOSURVEYOR computer program. The grid data file was 

assembled into a composite file (DW Consulting 2008:31-32). The data were destriped 

to remove any traverse discontinuities that may have occurred from operator handling 

or heading errors (DW Consulting 2008:9,60). The magnetic data from the geophysical 

survey area ranged from -127.2 nT to 134.3 nT with a median of -0.03 nT, a mean of 

-1.37 nT, and a standard deviation of 26.893 nT after the application of the destriping 

operation. Upon completion of the destriping function, the data were interpolated by 

expanding the number of data points in the traverse direction and by reducing the 

number of data points in the sampling direction to provide a smoother appearance in the 

data set and to enhance the operation of the low-pass filter (DW Consulting 2008:9,61). 

This changed the original 8-x-1 data point matrix into a 4-x-4 data point matrix. The 

low-pass filter was then applied over the entire data set to remove any high-frequency, 

small-scale spatial detail (DW Consulting 2008:9,71). This transformation may result 

in the improved visibility of larger, weak archeological features. The data were then 

exported as an ASCII dat file (DW Consulting 2008:39) and placed in the SURFER 9 

contouring and 3D surface mapping program (Golden Software 2009). Image and 

contour maps of the dual fluxgate gradiometer data were generated for the survey grid 

area at the FOLS geophysical project area (Figure 11). 

Processing Resistance Data

At the end of the day, or upon completion of the resistance survey, the data were 

downloaded into a field laptop computer for further processing in GEOPLOT (Oswin 

2009:79-80). The grid files were combined to form a composite file and further processed 

in GEOPLOT (Oswin 2009:80-86). The edge-match routine was applied to remove 

discontinuities between grid edges (Geoscan Research 2001:6/45-6/47). Discontinuities 

may result from the improper placement of the remote probes as they are moved across 

the survey area, as well as changes in soil moisture content resulting from loss of 

moisture due to evaporation or increase in moisture from rain showers. The resistance 

data composite file from the FOLS survey grid area was despiked to remove any random, 

spurious measurements caused by contact with buried cobbles during the averaging 

of the multiple readings taken at each survey point (Geoscan Research 2001:6/35-

6/39). Despiking may be accomplished with the processing routine in GEOPLOT or 

manually by editing each individual grid file. The resistance data from the resistance 

survey at the FOLS survey grid area, after the application of the edge-matching and 

despiking routines, ranged from 0.0 ohms to 146.5 ohms with a mean of 105.09 ohms and 

a standard deviation of 3.153 ohms. The interpolation routine was then applied to the 

data set to arrange the data from a 2-x-1 square matrix to an equally spaced 4-x-4 square 
21

matrix (Geoscan Research 2001:6/53-6/56). A high-pass filter was then applied over the 

composite data set. The high-pass filter was used to remove low-frequency, large-scale 

spatial detail such as a slow changing geological “background” trend (Geoscan Research 

2001:6/49-6/52). The data were then exported as an ASCII dat file and placed in 

the SURFER 9 mapping program (Golden Software 2009; Oswin 2009:86-95). Image 

and contour maps of the resistance data were generated for the FOLS survey grid 

area (Figure 12). 

Geophysical Data Interpretations

Andrew David (1995:30) defines interpretation as a “holistic process and its 

outcome should represent the combined influence of several factors, being arrived at 

through consultation with others where necessary.” Interpretation may be divided 

into two different types consisting of the geophysical interpretation of the data and the 

archaeological interpretation of the data. At a simplistic level, geophysical interpretation 

involves the identification of the factors causing changes in the geophysical data. 

Archeological interpretation takes the geophysical results and tries to apply cultural 

attributes or causes. In both cases, interpretation requires both experience with the 

operation of geophysical equipment, data processing, and archeological methods; 

and knowledge of the geophysical techniques and properties, as well as known and 

expected archeology. Although there is variation between sites, several factors should 

be considered in the interpretation of the geophysical data. These may be divided 

between natural factors, such as geology, soil type, geomorphology, climate, surface 

conditions, topography, soil magnetic susceptibility, seasonality, and cultural factors 

including known and inferred archeology, landscape history, survey methods, data 

treatment, modern interference, etc. (David 1995:30; David et al. 49). It should also be 

pointed out that refinements in the geophysical interpretations are dependent on the 

feedback from subsequent archeological investigations. The use of multiple instrument 

surveys provides the archeologist with very different sources of data that may provide 

complementary information for comparison of the nature and cause (i.e., natural or 

cultural) of a geophysical anomaly (Clay 2001). Each instrument responds primarily to a 

single physical property: magnetometry to soil magnetism, electromagnetic induction to 

soil conductivity, resistivity to soil resistance, and ground-penetrating radar to dielectric 

properties of the soil to (Weymouth 1986:371).

Interpreting the Magnetic Data

Interpretation of the magnetic data (Bevan 1998:24) from the project requires 

a description of the buried archeological feature or object (e.g., its material, shape, 

depth, size, and orientation). The magnetic anomaly represents a local disturbance in 

the earth’s magnetic field caused by a local change in the magnetic contract between 

buried archeological features, objects, and the surrounding soil matrix. Local increases 

or decreases over a very broad uniform magnetic surface would exhibit locally positive 

or negative anomalies (Breiner 1973:17). Magnetic anomalies tend to be highly variable 

in shape and amplitude. They are generally asymmetrical in nature due to the combined 

effects from several sources. To complicate matters further, a given anomaly may be 

produced from an infinite number of possible sources. Depth between the magnetometer 

and the magnetic source material also affect the shape of the apparent anomaly (Breiner 
22

FORT LARNED NATIONAL HISTORIC SITE

1973:18). As the distance between the magnetic sensor on the magnetometer and the 

source material increases, the expression of the anomaly becomes broader. Anomaly 

shape and amplitude are also affected by the relative amounts of permanent and 

induced magnetization, the direction of the magnetic field, and the amount of magnetic 

minerals (e.g., magnetite) present in the source compared to the adjacent soil matrix. 

The shape (e.g., narrow or broad) and orientation of the source material also affects the 

anomaly signature. Anomalies are often identified in terms of various arrays of dipoles 

or monopoles (Breiner 1973:18-19). A magnetic object is made of magnetic poles (North 

or positive and South or negative). A simple dipole anomaly contains the pair of opposite 

poles that are relatively close together. A monopole anomaly is simply one end of a dipole 

anomaly and may be either positive or negative depending on the orientation of the 

object. The other end is too far away to have an effect on the magnetic field. 

Magnetic anomalies of archeological objects tend to be approximately circular 

in contour outline. The circular contours are caused by small size of the objects. 

The shape of the object is seldom revealed in the contoured data. The depth of the 

archaeological object can be estimated by half-width rule procedure (Bevan 1998:23-

24; Breiner 1973:31; Milsom 2003:67-70). The approximations are based on a model of 

a steel sphere with a mass of 1 kg buried at a depth of 1.0 m below the surface with the 

magnetic measurements made at an elevation of 0.3 m above the ground. The depth of 

a magnetic object is determined by the location of the contour value at half the distance 

between the peak positive value of the anomaly and the background value. With the 

fluxgate gradiometer, the contour value is half the peak value since the background 

value is approximately zero. The diameter of this contour (Bevan 1998:Fig. B26) is 

measured and used in the depth formula where depth = diameter – 0.3 m (Note: The 

constant of 0.3 m is the height of the bottom fluxgate sensor above the ground in the 

Geoscan Research FM36 where I carry the instrument during data acquisition. This 

value needs to be adjusted for each individual that carries the instrument.). The mass in 

kilograms of the object (Bevan 1998:24, Fig. B26) is estimated by the following formula: 

mass = (peak value - background value) * (diameter)3

/60. It is likely that the depth and 

mass estimates are too large, rather than too small, since they are based on a compact 

spherical object made of iron. Archeological features are seldom compact but spread out 

in a line or lens. Both mass and depth estimates will be too large. The archaeological 

material may be composed of something other than iron such as fired earth or volcanic 

rock. Such materials are not usually distinguishable from the magnetic data collected 

during the survey (Bevan 1998:24). The depth and mass of features composed of fired 

earth, like that found in kilns, fireplaces, or furnaces could be off by 100 times the mass 

of iron. If the archeological feature were composed of bricks (e.g., brick wall, foundation, 

or chimney), estimates could be off by more than a 1,000 times that of iron. The location 

of the center of the object can also be determined by drawing a line connecting the peak 

positive and peak negative values. The rule of thumb is that the center of the object is 

located approximately one-third to one-half of the way along the line from the peak 

positive value for the anomaly. One should also be cautious of geophysical anomalies 

that extend in the direction of the traverses since these may represent operator-induced 

errors. The magnetic gradient anomalies may be classified as three different types: 

linear, dipole, and monopole.
23

The first step in interpreting the magnetic anomalies from the project area 

is to identify areas of high magnetic contrast and, especially, the positive magnetic 

anomalies or the North pole of the dipole. The dual fluxgate gradiometer tends to 

emphasize weaker changes, enhancing the contrasts between the high and low values 

of the magnetic anomalies. The dual fluxgate gradiometer data from the FOLS project 

area contains numerous magnetic anomalies (Figure 13). These anomalies appear to 

be associated with metal artifacts and buried archeological features, as well as modern 

intrusions. The gravel access roads on the west and south sides of the row of Officers’ 

Quarters appear as slight linear magnetic disturbances. Buried utility (electric, storm 

water, sewage, water, etc.) lines are also indicated by stronger linear magnetic anomalies 

consisting of the typical high/low value beaded pattern. There is also a series of weak 

linear anomalies in the northern part of the project area that may relate to the leach field 

or may represent historic features associated with the military or farming activities at 

the post. In the backyards of the Officers’ Quarters, there are dense concentrations of 

magnetic anomalies. Although some magnetic anomalies in the northern portion of the 

survey area of the backyards are associated with modern intrusions including a sheetmetal shed and park vehicles along with the modern wooden fence lines, reconstructed 

outhouses, and park restoration activities, other magnetic anomalies are associated with 

the historic military activities and later farming activities on the property. There is an 

area outside of the backyard fences that contains slightly fewer magnetic anomalies 

than found on the inside of the backyard fences. These magnetic anomalies also appear 

to be associated with military and farming activities. Ground-truthing would help 

identify the nature of these anomalies and their association to historic activities or 

more recent ground-disturbing activities. The areas containing the manhole covers and 

buried utility vaults are clearly identified by extremely strong magnetic anomalies. In 

addition to these large clusters of magnetic anomalies, there are smaller clusters located 

outside of these large ones. The smaller clusters may be locations of discarded material, 

as well as building locations associated with the military occupation or more recent 

farming activities. These anomalies all bear further ground-truthing examination with 

traditional archeological excavation techniques. 

Interpreting the Resistance Data

Interpretation of the resistivity data results in the identification of lateral 

changes in the soil. Since the array parameters are kept constant throughout 

the survey, the resulting resistance values varies with changes in the subsurface 

sediments/soil matrix and buried archeological resources. For each probe 

separation, the depth penetration is approximately the same as the distance 

between the current and potential probe on the mobile array frame, which was 0.5 

m. The resistance measurement for each point represents the average value for the 

hemispheric volume of soil with the same radius. If the soil below the survey area 

were uniform, the resistivity would be constant throughout the area. Changes 

in soil characteristics (e.g., texture, structure, moisture, compactness, etc.) and 

the composition of archeological features result in differences in the resistances 

across the surveyed grid. Large general trends reflect changes in the site’s geology 

whereas small changes may reflect archeological features. An advantage to the 
24

resistance survey and its interpretation is its usefulness in areas that have high 

concentrations of metal objects such as the three project areas in this study.

The resistance data from the FOLS geophysical survey area illustrates a number 

of resistance anomalies previously identified in the dual fluxgate gradiometer magnetic 

data set from the project area (Figure 14). The resistance anomalies include the gravel 

access road and the location of the wooden backyard fences. In addition to these 

linear resistance anomalies, there are several linear anomalies across the project area. 

Some may represent locations of old trails, fence lines, and other cultural features. 

Concentrations of resistance anomalies in the backyards appear to represent the 

locations of privies or small sheds, as well as possible garden plots. As with the magnetic 

anomalies, ground-truthing with traditional archeological excavation techniques are 

warranted to determine the nature of these anomalies and their relationship to the 

military occupation at Fort Larned. 

Combined Geophysical Data Set Interpretations

A different way of looking at the geophysical data collected during the 

investigations of the survey area at parking lot area is to combine the complementary 

data sets into one display. Several different geophysical anomalies overlap suggesting a 

strong correlation between the geophysical data and the buried archeological features 

(Ambrose 2005). These areas of overlap would be considered areas of high probability 

for ground-truthing and the investigations of buried archeological resources. While 

these correlations are important, individual isolated occurrences also need groundtruthing in order to determine their unique nature as well. Complementary data from 

the geophysical survey efforts at the FOLS geophysical project area indicate the locations 

of historic military artifact or sheet midden concentrations and more recent 19th- and 

20th-century farming building locations and related activity areas, as well as modern 

National Park Service modifications to the military landscape (Figure 15).

Archeological Monitoring Methods

The archeological monitoring activities at FOLS included the documentation of 

the proposed installation line and new transformer locations with a global positioning 

system (Figure 16) unit and the monitoring of the directional boring access pits (Baier 

2009). Using the geophysical data as a guide for the selection of relatively clear areas 

devoid of artifact or feature concentrations, locations for the directional boring access 

pits were identified in relatively cultural sterile areas. The access pits were excavated 

by the JK Electric personnel with a backhoe prior to the directional boring of the 

underground electric lines (Figure 17). The main electrical vault was also uncovered 

(Figure 18). The vault had been installed several years ago and re-excavated numerous 

times for additional maintenance. The top of the vault was located approximately 47 

cm below the ground surface. The sediments above and surrounding the vault were 

homogeneous brown silty clay. No artifacts were observed during the excavation. 

During the excavation of the pit for the west transformer, an old telephone line 

was uncovered at a depth of approximately 65 cm below the surface. The transformer pit 

(Pit 1) was moved further south of the initial location (Figure 19a). The pit measured 3.5 
25

m north-south, including the 1.5 m portion of the pit where a phone line was uncovered, 

by 1.1 m east-west. The pit was excavated to a depth of approximately 1.4 m. The upper 86 

cm of sediment was very loose and fine textured, but below 86 cm the sediments became 

more compact. The soil stratigraphy was very clearly defined in all four walls of the pit 

(Figure 19b). The upper stratigraphic layer was brown silty clay that extended to 52-58 

cm below the ground surface. A thin lens of dark gray silt measuring approximately 2 cm 

was located below the upper silty clay layer. The third stratigraphic layer was very pale 

brown clayey silt that extended to 110-120 cm below the surface. The bottom layer of 

sediment was dark brown silty clay. No artifacts were observed during the excavation of 

the transformer pit or in the pit walls.

Pit 2 was placed along the projected route of the buried electric line next to 

the existing electric line where the line turned north (Figure 20a). Excavation of Pit 2 

with the backhoe revealed very clear stratigraphic layers in the pit wall profiles (Figure 

20b). The uppermost layer was damp, dark brown silty clay that extended 30-40 cm 

below surface. These sediments overlaid pale brown clayey silt similar to that seen in 

Pit 1. This second layer extended to a depth of 60 cm throughout most of the pit but 

gradually dipped to 80 cm to the west. The next layer was dark brown silty clay found 

100 cm below surface on the east and 115 cm in the west. The bottommost layer was also 

dark brown silty clay, but it was lighter in color (10YR4/3 as opposed to 10YR3/3). The 

pit originally measured 2.35 m east-west by 1.5 m north-south, with additional steps for 

easier access during the profiling. The steps measured 1.5 m east-west and 0.75 m northsouth making the maximum length of the pit 3.85 m east-west. The maximum depth of 

the pit was approximately 1.45 m. No artifacts were observed during the excavation, and 

no features were observed in any of the profile walls.

The final pit (Pit 3) was located in the yard northwest of HS-9 (Figure 21a). The 

soil stratigraphy in this area was also very well defined (Figure 21b). The uppermost 

sediment was loose, brown silty clay. From about 55-65 cm to 75 cm was compact, dark 

brown silty clay. Below this layer was very pale brown clayey silty from 75-105 cm. At 

the bottom of the pit beginning around 105 cm below surface was brown silty clay. The 

pit measured 2.02 m north-south by 1.52 m east-west and was excavated to a maximum 

depth of approximately 1.6 m. No artifacts or features were observed during the 

excavation or in the walls of the pit. 

Two hand-dug holes were also excavated in order to identify the presence of 

electrical conduit along the eastern route of the electric line. Midwest Energy identified 

where the conduit was supposed to be located, but the JK Electric contractors wanted 

to confirm the location. The first hole was excavated near the levee north of HS-12. The 

conduit was found approximately 50 cm below surface. Sediments were brown silty 

clay. The second hole was excavated approximately 3 m south of the southeast corner 

of HS-6. The conduit was found 90 cm below surface. Sediments were brown silty clay. 

Additional trenching occurred from the county road by the maintenance facility to 

the irrigation ditch. The trench was confined to the existing electric line trench, 

which was previously disturbed by its initial construction. The access pits were 

profiled and photographed.
26

FORT LARNED NATIONAL HISTORIC SITE
27

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

During the period from July 13 to July 18, 2009, geophysical investigations were 

conducted at Fort Larned National Historic Site (14PA305) along the western side of the 

fort next to the row of Officers’ Quarters. The geophysical survey included a magnetic 

survey with dual fluxgate gradiometer and a resistance survey with a resistance meter 

and twin-probe array. The geophysical survey was conducted in an attempt to identify 

buried archeological remains associated with the fort in the vicinity of the construction 

project for the installation of the park’s underground electric line. The archeological 

monitoring of the underground electric line installation occurred between November 

17 and 19, 2009. The monitoring activities included the documentation of the proposed 

installation line and new transformer locations with a global positioning system unit 

and the monitoring of excavations for the directional boring access pits. The geophysical 

survey identified numerous buried archeological remains associated with the remnants 

of the military activities at the site, as well as more recent 19th- and 20th-century farming 

and park activities at the site. The total area investigated by the geophysical survey in the 

FOLS geophysical project area was 16,161 m2 or 3.99 ac.

The surveys resulted in the identification of numerous subsurface anomalies. 

The magnetic and resistance data collected at the site provided information on the 

physical properties (magnetic and soil resistance properties) of the subsurface materials. 

Standard methods for conducting geophysical investigations were used with standard 

20-m-by-20-m grid sizes where feasible. The results of the geophysical survey indicated 

the presence of buried features and artifact concentrations related to the military period, 

historic farming era, and modern park activities associated with the occupation of the 

Fort Larned National Historic Site in the late 19th and 20th centuries. 

Finally, refinement of the archeological and geophysical interpretation of the 

survey data is dependent on the feedback of the archeological investigations following 

geophysical survey (David 1995:30). Should additional archeological investigations 

occur at the site investigated during this project, the project archeologist is encouraged 

to share additional survey and excavation data with the geophysical investigator for 

incorporation into the investigator’s accumulated experiences with archeological 

problems. Throughout the entire geophysical and archeological investigations, 

communication between the geophysicist and the archeologist is essential for successful 

completion of the archeological investigations. It is also important for the investigators to 

disseminate the results of the geophysical survey and archeological investigations to the 

general public. It is through their support in funds and labor that we continue to make 

contributions to the application of geophysical techniques to the field of archeology. 

This report has provided a review and analysis of the geophysical and 

archeological monitoring data collected during the investigations of the proposed 

underground electric line installation at Fort Larned National Historic Site. The 

geophysical techniques applied to the investigations at Site 14PA305 have proven 

successful in the identification of buried archeological resources in the present 

archeological/geophysical project area. The geophysical techniques combined with 

traditional archeological monitoring methods have the potential to identify the 

subsurface features associated with the historic and possibly the prehistoric use across 
28

FORT LARNED NATIONAL HISTORIC SITE

the park. This information will be used by the Midwest Archeological Center and the 

Fort Larned National Historic Site staffs to guide further archeological inquiry into the 

nature of the archeological resources at the military post (Site 14PA305) and help direct 

future National Park Service geophysical surveys and archeological excavations at other 

locations within the boundary of the Fort Larned National Historic Site. 
29

REFERENCES CITED

Albright, John, and Douglas D. Scott

1974 Historic Furnishing Study: Historical and Archeological Data, Fort Larned 

National Historic Site, Kansas. Denver Service Center, National Park Service, 

Denver, Colorado.

Ambrose, Heather M.

2005 Quantitative Integration and Three-dimensional Visualization of Multiarchaeological geophysics Survey. ProQuest Information and Learning Company, 

Ann Arbor, Michigan.

Aspinall, Arnold, Chris Gaffney, and Armin Schmidt

2008 Magnetometry for Archaeologists. AltaMira Press, Lanham, Maryland.

Baier, Melissa

2009 Archeological Monitoring of Underground Electric Line Installation, Fort 

Larned National Historic Site, November 17-19, 2009. Trip report on file, Midwest 

Archeological Center, National Park Service, Lincoln, Nebraska.

Bark, L. Dean

1978 Climate. In Soil Survey of Pawnee County, Kansas, by Darold A. and William E. 

Roth, pp. 2-3,60-61. U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington D.C.

Bartington Instruments

2007 Operation Manual for Grad 601 Single Axis Magnetic Gradiometer. OM1800. 

Bartington Instruments, Oxford, England.

Bevan, Bruce W.

1991 The Search for Graves. Geophysics 56(9):1310-1319.

1998 Geophysical Exploration for Archaeology: An Introduction to Geophysical 

Exploration. Special Report No. 1. Midwest Archeological Center, Lincoln, 

Nebraska.

Blackmar, Jeanette M., and Jack L. Hofman

2006 The Paleoarchaic of Kansas. In Kansas Archaeology, edited by Robert J. Hoard 

and William E. Banks, pp. 46-75. University of Kansas Press, Lawrence. 

Blakeslee, Donald J., and Marlin F. Hawley

2006 The Great Bend Aspect. In Kansas Archaeology, edited by Robert J. Hoard and 

William E. Banks, pp. 165-179. University of Kansas Press, Lawrence.

Bozell, John R.

2006 Plains Woodland Complexes of Western Kansas and Adjacent Portions of 

Nebraska and Colorado. In Kansas Archaeology, edited by Robert J. Hoard and 

William E. Banks, pp. 93-104. University of Kansas Press, Lawrence.
30

FORT LARNED NATIONAL HISTORIC SITE

Breiner, Sheldon

1973 Applications Manual for Portable Magnetometers. GeoMetrics, Sunnyvale, 

California.

1992 Magnetics: Applications for Portable Magnetometers. In Practical Geophysics 

II for the Exploration Geologist, compiled by Richard Van Blaricom, pp. 313-381, 

Northwest Mining Association, Spokane, Washington.

Brown, Everett M.

1964 Fort Larned: Camp on Pawnee Fork. Ms. on file, Fort Larned National Historic 

Site, Larned, Kansas.

Brown, Kenneth L.

1987 Arkansas River Lowlands. In Kansas Prehistoric Archaeological Preservation 

Plan, edited by Kenneth L. Brown and Alan H. Simmons, pp. XVI-1—XV1-16. 

Office of Archaeological Research, University of Kansas, Lawrence.

Brown, Kenneth L., and Marie E. Brown

1987 The Paleo-Indian Period. In Kansas Prehistoric Archaeological Preservation Plan, 

edited by Kenneth L. Brown and Alan H. Simmons, pp. IX-1—IX-26. Office of 

Archaeological Research, University of Kansas, Lawrence.

Brown, Lauren

1985 The Audubon Society Nature Guides: Grasslands. Alfred A. Knopf, New York.

Buck, Madeleine

n.d. A History of Fort Larned. Ms. on file, Santa Fe Trail Center and Museum, Larned, 

Kansas.

Burger, H. Robert

1992 Exploration Geophysics of the Shallow Subsurface. Prentice Hall PTR, Englewood 

Cliffs, New Jersey.

Carr, Christopher

1982 Handbook on Soil Resistivity Surveying: Interpretation of Data from Earthen 

Archeological Sites. Research Series, Volume 2. Center for American Archeology 

Press, Evanston, Illinois.

Clark, Anthony

2000 Seeing Beneath the Soil: Prospecting Methods in Archaeology. Reprint. Routledge, 

London. Originally published in 1990 by B. T. Batsford, Ltd., London.

Clay, R. Berle 

2001 Complementary Geophysical Survey Techniques: Why Two Ways are always 

Better than One. Southeastern Archaeology 20(1):31-43.
31

Clemensen, A. Berle

1978 Historic Structure Report: Historic Furnishing Study, Commanding Officer’s 

Quarters HS-8, Fort Larned National Historic Site, Kansas. Denver Service Center, 

National Park Service, Denver, Colorado.

1980 Historic Structure Report: Historic Furnishing Study, Fort Larned Commanding 

Officer’s Quarters HS-8 National Historic Site, Kansas. Denver Service Center, 

National Park Service, Denver, Colorado.

Cockrell, Ron, Alan W. O’Bright, and Jan L. Dial

1991 Historic Structure Report: Blockhouse (HS-10), Fort Larned National Historic Site, 

Pawnee County, Kansas. Midwest Regional Office, National Park Service, Omaha, 

Nebraska.

Cutler, William G.

1883 History of the State of Kansas. A. T. Andreas, Chicago, Illinois.

Davenport, G. Clark

2001 Where is it? Searching for Buried Bodies & Hidden Evidence. SportWork, Church 

Hill, Maryland.

David, Andrew

1995 Geophysical Survey in Archaeological Field Evaluation. Research & Professional 

Services Guidelines No. 1. Ancient Monuments Laboratory, English Heritage, 

London.

2001 Overview—The Role and Practice of Archaeological Prospection. In Handbook 

of Archaeological Sciences, edited by D. R. Brothwell and A. M. Pollard, pp. 521-

527. John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., Chichester, England.

David, Andrew, Neil Linford, and Paul Linford

2008 Geophysical Survey in Archaeological Field Evaluation. Second Edition. Research 

& Professional Services Guidelines No. 1. Ancient Monuments Laboratory, 

English Heritage, London.

De Vore, Steven L.

2009 Geophysical Survey of the Proposed Utility Line Installation along the Perimeter 

of the Row of Officers’ Quarters on the West Side of the Quadrangular Parade 

Ground at Fort Larned National Historic Site, Pawnee County, Kansas (July 

13-18, 2009). Trip Report on file, National Park Service, Midwest Archeological 

Center, Lincoln, Nebraska.

Dial, Janis L.

1991 Historic Structure Report Archeological Data: Blockhouse (HS-10), Fort Larned 

National Historic Site, Pawnee County, Kansas. In Historic Structure Report: 

Blockhouse (HS-10), Fort Larned National Historic Site, Pawnee County, Kansas, 

by Ron Cockrell, Alan W. O’Bright, and Jan L. Dial, pp.47-126. Midwest Regional 

Office, National Park Service, Omaha, Nebraska.
32

FORT LARNED NATIONAL HISTORIC SITE

Dice, Lee R.

1943 The Biotic Provinces of North America. University of Michigan Press, Ann Arbor.

Dobrin, Milton B., and Carl H. Savit

1988 Introduction to Geophysical Prospecting. Fourth Edition. McGraw-Hill Book 

Company, New York.

Dodge, Darold A., and William E. Roth

1978 Soil Survey of Pawnee County, Kansas. U.S. Government Printing Office, 

Washington D.C.

DW Consulting

2008 ArchaeoSurveyor User Manual. Program Version 2.3.0X, Issue 2. DW 

Consulting, Barneveld, The Netherlands.

Elmore, George

1983a Archeological Monitoring of Trenching for Power Line. Paraprofessional report 

on file, Fort Larned National Historic Site, Larned, Kansas.

1983bArcheological Information on HS-2, Barracks/Hospital. Paraprofessional report 

on file, Fort Larned National Historic Site, Larned, Kansas.

1984 Ground Disturbance, South Side HS-8, Commanding Officer’s Quarters. 

Paraprofessional report on file, Fort Larned National Historic Site, Larned, 

Kansas.

1986 HS-8 Cellar Window. Paraprofessional report on file, Fort Larned National 

Historic Site, Larned, Kansas.

1988a Blockhouse Monitoring. Paraprofessional report on file, Fort Larned National 

Historic Site, Larned, Kansas.

1988b Monitoring of Electrical Line Installation to Fee Collection Station. 

Paraprofessional report on file, Fort Larned National Historic Site, Larned, 

Kansas.

1989 Monitoring of Fence Installation around Officers Row. Paraprofessional report 

on file, Fort Larned National Historic Site, Larned, Kansas.

Fenneman, Nevin M.

1931 Physiography of Western United States. McGraw-Hill Book Company, New York.

FOLS

1988 Resources Management Plan and Environmental Assessment. Fort Larned 

National Historic Site, Larned, Kansas.

1995 Fort Larned National Historic Site Statement for Management. Fort Larned 

National Historic Site, Larned, Kansas.

Foth, Henry D., and John W. Schafer

1980 Soil Geography and Land Use. John Wiley & Sons, New York.

Gaffney, Chris, and John Gater

2003 Revealing the Buried Past: Geophysics for Archaeologists. Tempus Publishing, 

Stroud, Great Britain.
33

Gaffney, Chris, John Gater, and Sue Ovenden

1991 The Use of Geophysical Techniques in Archaeological Evaluations. Technical 

Paper Number 9. Institute of Field Archaeologists, University of Birmingham, 

Birmingham, England.

2002 The Use of Geophysical Techniques in Archaeological Evaluations. Paper No. 6. 

Institute of Field Archaeologists, University of Reading, Reading, England.

Geoscan Research

2001 Geoplot Version 3.00 for Windows Instruction Manual, Version 1.6. Geoscan 

Research, Bradford, England.

2003 Geoplot Version 3.00 for Windows Instruction Manual, Version 1.6. Geoscan 

Research, Bradford, England.

2007 Resistance Meter RM15-D Instruction Manual, Version 2.95. Geoscan Research, 

Bradford, England.

Golden Software

2009 Surfer 9 User’s Guide: Contouring and 3D Surface Mapping for Scientists and 

Engineers. Golden Software, Golden, Colorado.

Griffin, Kristin L.

1987 Monitoring of Floor Removal at HS-4, Fort Larned National Historic Site. Trip 

report of file, Midwest Archeological Center, National Park Service, Lincoln, 

Nebraska.

1991 Excavations inside Historic Structure 4, The New Commissary, at Fort Larned 

National Historic Site, Kansas. Midwest Archeological Center Technical Report 6. 

Midwest Archeological Center, National Park Service, Lincoln, Nebraska.

Hallof, Philip G.

1992 Electrical: IP and Resistivity: Grounded Electrical Methods in Geophysical 

Exploration. In Practical Geophysics II for the Exploration Geologist, compiled by 

Richard Van Blaricom, pp. 313-381, Northwest Mining Association, Spokane, 

Washington.

Hansen, R. O., Louis Racic, and V. J. S. Grauch

2005 Magnetic Methods in Near-Surface Geophysics. In Near-Surface Geophysics, 

edited by Dwain K. Butler, pp. 151-175. Society of Exploration Geophysicists, 

Tulsa, Oklahoma.

Heimmer, Don H. and Steven L. De Vore

1995 Near-Surface, High Resolution Geophysical Methods for Cultural Resource 

Management and Archeological Investigations. Revised edition. National Park 

Service, Denver, Colorado.

2000 Near-Surface, High Resolution Geophysical Methods for Cultural Resource 

Management and Archaeological Investigations. In Science and Technology in 

Historic Preservation, edited by Ray A. Williamson and Paul R. Nickens, pp. 53-73. 

Advances in Archaeological and Museum Science, Volume 4. Kluwer Academic/

Plenum Publishers, New York.
34

FORT LARNED NATIONAL HISTORIC SITE

Hoard, Richard J., and William E. Banks (editors)

2006 Kansas Archaeology. University of Kansas Press, Lawrence.

Holt, Daniel D.

1990 Kansas Preservation Plan: Study Unit on A Time of Contrasts: progress, Prosperity, 

and the Great Depression, 1900-1940. Historic Preservation Department, Kansas 

State Historic Society, Topeka.

HPD

1984 Kansas Preservation Plan: Study Unit on The Period of Rural/Agricultural 

Dominance (1865-1900). Historic Preservation Department, Kansas State 

Historical Society, Topeka.

1987 Kansas Preservation Plan: Study Unit on the Period of Exploration and Settlement 

(1820s-1880s). Historic Preservation Department, Kansas State Historical Society, 

Topeka.

Hunt, William J., Jr.

1983 Archeological Investigations at FOLS, May 15-19, 1983. Trip report on file, 

Midwest Archeological Center, National Park Service, Lincoln, Nebraska.

1990 Trip Report. Trip report on file, Midwest Archeological Center, National Park 

Service, Lincoln, Nebraska.

Kern, Anne, and Steven L. De Vore

1999 Geophysical Investigations of Potential 10th Cavalry Stables (HS-35) Location, 

Fort Larned National Historic Site, Pawnee County, Kansas. Ms. on file, Midwest 

Archeological Center, National Park Service, Lincoln, Nebraska.

Küchler, A. W.

1974 A New Vegetation Map of Kansas. Ecology 55:586-604.

Kvamme, Kenneth L.

2001 Current Practices in Archaeogeophysics: Magnetics, Resistivity, Conductivity, 

and Ground-Penetrating Radar. In Earth Sciences and Archaeology, edited by Paul 

Goldberg, Vance T. Holliday, and C. Reid Ferring, pp. 353-384. Kluwer Academic/

Plenum Publishers, New York.

2003 Geophysical Surveys as Landscape Archaeology. American Antiquity 68(3):435-

457.

2005 Terrestrial Remote Sensing in Archaeology. In Handbook of Archaeological 

Methods, edited by Herbert D. G. Maschner and Christopher Chippindale, pp. 

423-477. AltaMira Press, Lanham, Maryland.

2006a Magnetometry: Nature’s Gift to Archaeology. In Remote Sensing in Archaeology: 

An Explicitly North American Perspective, edited by Jay K. Johnson, pp. 205-233. 

University of Alabama Press, Tuscaloosa.

2006bData Processing and Presentation. In Remote Sensing in Archaeology: An 

Explicitly North American Perspective, edited by Jay K. Johnson, pp. 235-250. 

University of Alabama Press, Tuscaloosa.

2007 Integrating Multiple Geophysical Datasets. In Remote Sensing in Archaeology, 

edited by James Wiseman and Farouk El-Baz, pp. 345-374. Springer, New York.
35

Kvamme, Kenneth L., Jay K. Johnson, and Bryan S. Haley

2006 Multiple Methods Surveys: Case Studies. In Remote Sensing in Archaeology: 

An Explicitly North American Perspective, edited by Jay K. Johnson, pp. 251-267. 

University of Alabama Press, Tuscaloosa.

Lees, William B.

1984 Results of an Archeological Evaluation of a Proposed Maintenance Building 

Location, Fort Larned National Historic Site, Pawnee County, Kansas. Ms. on file, 

Midwest Archeological Center, National Park Service, Lincoln, Nebraska.

1989 Kansas Preservation Plan Section on Historical Archeology. Kansas State 

Historical Society, Topeka.

Logan, Brad

2006 Woodland Adaptations in Eastern Kansas. In Kansas Archaeology, edited by 

Robert J. Hoard and William E. Banks, pp. 76-92. University of Kansas Press, 

Lawrence.

Lowrie, William

1997 Fundamentals of Geophysics. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United 

Kingdom.

Marshall, James O.

2006 The Kansa. In Kansas Archaeology, edited by Robert J. Hoard and William E. 

Banks, pp. 219-232. University of Kansas Press, Lawrence.

McLaughlin, Thad G.

1949 Geology and Ground-water Resources of Pawnee and Edwards Counties, Kansas. 

Kansas Geological Survey Bulletin 80. Kansas Geological Survey, Lawrence.

Milsom, John

2003 Field Geophysics. Third Edition. John Wiley & Sons, Chichester, United 

Kingdom.

Monger, Earl W.

1976 A Report on the Archaeological Salvage of the Various Projects at Fort Larned 

National Historic Site. Ms. on file, Midwest Archeological Center, National Park 

Service, Lincoln, Nebraska.

1980 Monitoring during Trenching for the Intrusion of Fire Alarm Cables, when 

Pit Silos are Filled, and when KPL Lays approximately 1,000 Ft. of Power Line 

Underground, Provide Archaeological Monitoring for Historic Artifacts and/

or Features. Ms. on file, Midwest Archeological Center, National Park Service, 

Lincoln, Nebraska.

1981 Conduct Archaeological Investigations of Windowwells and Entrances of Cellars 

of HS-7 and HS-9 for Reconstruction Program now in Progress. Ms. on file, 

Midwest Archeological Center, National Park Service, Lincoln, Nebraska.
36

FORT LARNED NATIONAL HISTORIC SITE

Music, B.

1995 On-Site Prospection in Slovenia: The Case of Rodik. Archaeological Computing 

Newsletter 43:6-15.

Mussett, Alan E., and M. Aftab Khan

2000 Looking into the Earth: An Introduction to Geological Geophysics. Cambridge 

University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom.

MWAC

1998 Fort Larned National Historic Site Cultural Sites Inventory. Midwest 

Archeological Center, Lincoln, Nebraska.

2007 Chronological Listing of Archeological Work in Fort Larned National Historic 

Site. In Fort Larned National Historic Site Cultural Sites Inventory, by Midwest 

Archeological Center, pp. CRONO.LISTING.1-7. Midwest Archeological Center, 

Lincoln, Nebraska.

MWRO

1978 Master Plan, Fort Larned National Historic Site. Midwest Regional Office, 

National Park Service, Omaha, Nebraska.

Neubauer, W., P. Melichar, and A. Eder-Hinterleitner

1996 Collection, Visualization, and Simulation of Magnetic Prospection Data. 

In Interfacing the Past: Computer Applications and Quantitative Methods in 

Archaeology, CAA95, Volume 1, edited by H. Kamermans and K. Fennema, pp. 

121-129. Analecta Praehistorica Leidensia No. 28. University of Leiden, Leiden, 

The Netherlands.

Nickel, Robert K.

1975 EO11593 Surveys of Wagon Ruts Unit, Fort Larned National Historic Site. Trip 

report on file, Midwest Archeological Center, National Park Service, Lincoln, 

Nebraska.

1987 Archeological Survey of Quarry Site for Blockhouse, Fort Larned National 

Historic Site. Trip report Ms. on file, Midwest Archeological Center, National Park 

Service, Lincoln, Nebraska.

Nishimura, Y.

2001 Geophysical Prospection in Archaeology. In Handbook of Archaeological 

Sciences, edited by D. R. Brothwell and A. M. Pollard, pp. 543-553. John Wiley & 

Sons, Ltd., Chichester, England.

NPS

2006 Federal Historic Preservation Laws: The Official Compilation of U.S. Cultural 

Heritage Statues. National Park Service, Washington, D.C.

O’Brien, Patricia J.

1984 Archeology in Kansas. Public Education Series No.9. University of Kansas, 

Lawrence.
37

Oliva, Leo E.

1985 Fort Larned. Kansas State Historical Society, Topeka.

1990 Fort Larned on the Santa Fe. Kansas State Historical Society, Topeka.

1997 Fort Larned: Guardian of the Santa Fe Trail. Kansas State Historical Society, 

Topeka.

Oswin, John 

2009 A Field Guide to Geophysics in Archaeology. Springer-Praxis Books, Chichester, 

United Kingdom. 

Peddie, Norman W.

1992 The Magnetic Field in the United States, 1990, Total Intensity Chart. U.S. 

Geological Survey Geophysical Investigations Map GP-1002-F. U.S. Geological 

Survey, Reston, Virginia.

Peddie, Norman W., and Audronis K. Zundie

1988 The Magnetic Field in the United States, 1985, Inclination Chart. U.S. Geological 

Survey Geophysical Investigations Map GP-986-I. U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, 

Virginia

Perttula, Timothy K., and Chet Shaw

1980 Archeological Investigations at Historic Structure 3, Fort Larned National 

Historic Site. Ms. on file, Midwest Archeological Center, National Park Service, 

Lincoln, Nebraska.

Quinn Evans/Architects

1996 Fort Larned National Historic Site Cultural Landscape Report. Quinn Evans 

Architects and Land and Community Associates, Ann Arbor, Michigan.

1999 Historic Structures Report Officer’s Row; South Officer’s Quarters (HS-7), 

Commanding Officer’s Quarters (HS-8), and North Officer’s Quarters (HS-9), Fort 

Larned National Historic Site, Larned, Kansas. Quinn Evans Architects and Land 

and Community Associates, Ann Arbor, Michigan.

Reaves, Stacy Webb

1995 A Necessary Evil, the Post Sutler at Fort Larned and Fort Dodge Kansas. Ms. on 

file, Midwest Archeological Center, National Park Service, Lincoln, Nebraska.

Reynolds, John D., and William B. Lees

2004 The Archeological Heritage of Kansas: A Synopsis of the Kansas Preservation Plan. 

Kansas State Historical Society, Topeka.

Richner, Jeffrey

1979 Trip to Fort Larned National Historic Site, 3/12-3/14/79. Trip report on file, 

Midwest Archeological Center, National Park Service, Lincoln, Nebraska.

Rickey, Don, Jr., and Thomas N. Crellin

1967 Fort Larned National Historic Site, Kansas Historic Structures Report. Division 

of History, Office of Archeology & Historic Preservation, National Park Service, 

Washington, D.C.
38

FORT LARNED NATIONAL HISTORIC SITE

Roosevelt, A. C.

2007 Geophysical Archaeology in the Lower Amazon: A Research Strategy. In Remote 

Sensing in Archaeology, edited by James Wiseman and Farouk El-Baz, pp. 443-

4475. Springer, New York.

Roper, Donna C.

2006 The Central Plains Tradition. In Kansas Archaeology, edited by Robert J. Hoard 

and William E. Banks, pp. 105-132. University of Kansas Press, Lawrence.

Scheiber, Laura L.

2006 The Late Prehistoric on the High Plains of Western Kansas: High Plains Upper 

Republican and Dismal River. In Kansas Archaeology, edited by Robert J. Hoard 

and William E. Banks, pp. 133-150. University of Kansas Press, Lawrence.

Schoewe, Walter H.

1949 The Geography of Kansas. Transactions Kansas Academy of Science 52(3):261-

333.

Scott, Douglas D.

1973 The Archeology of Fort Larned National Historic Site, Kansas. Master’s Thesis, 

University of Colorado, Boulder.

1974 Archeological Salvage during the Enlisted Barracks Restoration at Fort Larned 

National Historic Site. Ms. on file, Midwest Archeological Center, National Park 

Service, Lincoln, Nebraska.

1975a 1974 Excavations at Fort Larned National Historic Site. Ms. on file, Midwest 

Archeological Center, National Park Service, Lincoln, Nebraska.

1975b A Report on the Archeology Salvage on the North Side of HS 1, Fort Larned 

National Historic Site. Ms. on file, Midwest Archeological Center, National Park 

Service, Lincoln, Nebraska.

1977 Historic Fact vs. Archaeological Reality: A Test in Environmental 

Reconstruction. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, University of Colorado, Boulder.

1995 Archeological Inventory of the Proposed New Visitor Center Site, Fort Larned 

NHS, Kansas. Rocky Mountain Project Report on file, Midwest Archeological 

Center, National Park Service, Lincoln, Nebraska.

1998a Investigations of Fort Larned (FOLS) Cellars and Refrigerant Line Excavations, 

August 24-28, 1998. Trip report on file, Midwest Archeological Center, National 

Park Service, Lincoln, Nebraska.

1998b Archeological Investigations Related to Fort Larned NHS Refrigerant 

Line Replacement and Officer’s Cellars Stabilization. Ms. on file, Midwest 

Archeological Center, National Park Service, Lincoln, Nebraska.

2005 Archeological Mitigation at the Old Commissary HS5, Stabilization at Fort 

Larned National Historic Site, Kansas. Ms. on file, Midwest Archeological Center, 

National Park Service, Lincoln, Nebraska.

Scollar, I., A. Tabbagh, A. Hesse, and I Herzog

1990 Archaeological Prospection and Remote Sensing. Topics In Remote Sensing 2. 

Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, England.
39

Sharma, Prem V.

1997 Environmental and Engineering Geophysics. Cambridge University Press, 

Cambridge, United Kingdom.

Shelford, Victor E.

1963 The Ecology of North America. University of Illinois Press, Urbana.

Sheriff, Robert E.

1973 Encyclopedic Dictionary of Exploration Geophysics. Society of Exploration 

Geophysicists, Tulsa, Oklahoma.

Sheire, James W.

1968 Ft. Larned National Historic Site: The Company Quarters Historic Structures 

Report, Part II Historical Data Section. Division of History, Office of Archeology 

and Historic Preservation, National Park Service, Washington, D.C.

1969 Fort Larned National Historic Site, Historic Structures Report Part II, Historical 

Data Section. Historic Preservation Division, Denver Service Center, National 

Park Service, Denver, Colorado.

Somers, Lewis

2006 Resistivity Survey. In Remote Sensing in Archaeology: An Explicitly North 

American Perspective, edited by Jay K. Johnson, pp. 109-129. University of 

Alabama Press, Tuscaloosa.

Stinson, Dwight E., Jr.

1966 Fort Larned National Historic Site Historic Structures Report: Historical Data 

Section. Historic Preservation Division, Denver Service Center, National Park 

Service, Denver, Colorado.

Sudderth, W. E.

1981 Trip Report to Fort Larned National Historic Site. Trip report on file, Midwest 

Archeological Center, National Park Service, Lincoln, Nebraska.

1983a XXX Archeology at the Fort Larned National Historic Site, Larned, Kansas. 

Ms. on file, Midwest Archeological Center, National Park Service, Lincoln, 

Nebraska.

1983b “You are what you eat” 1983 Archeological Work at Fort Larned. Ms. on file, 

Midwest Archeological Center, National Park Service, Lincoln, Nebraska.

Telford, W. M., L. P. Geldart, and R. E. Sheriff

1990 Applied Geophysics. Second Edition. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 

United Kingdom.

Thiessen, Thomas

1983 Archeological Excavation of Flagstaff Remnant at Fort Larned National Historic 

Site. Trip report on file, Midwest Archeological Center, National Park Service, 

Lincoln, Nebraska.

1987 Archeological Monitoring of Floor Removal in HS-4, at Fort Larned National 

Historic Site. Trip report on file, Midwest Archeological Center, National Park 

Service, Lincoln, Nebraska.
40

FORT LARNED NATIONAL HISTORIC SITE

Trewartha, Glenn T., and Lyle H. Horn

1980 An Introduction to Climate. Fifth Edition. McGraw-Hill Book Company, New 

York.

Trimble

2007a Getting Started Guide GeoExplorer 2005 Series, Version 1.10. Trimble Navigation 

Limited, Westminster, Colorado. 

2007bGetting Started Guide TerraSync Software, Version 3.00. Trimble Navigation 

Limited, Westminster, Colorado. 

2007c Reference Manual TerraSync Software, Version 3.00. Trimble Navigation 

Limited, Westminster, Colorado. 

2007dGetting Started Guide GPS Pathfinder Office Software, Version 4.00. Trimble 

Navigation Limited, Westminster, Colorado. 

Unrau, William E.

1956 The History of Fort Larned, Kansas: Its Relation of the Santa Fe Trail and the 

Plains Indian. Master’s thesis, University of Wyoming, Laramie.

USDA

2006 Land Resource Regions and Major Land Resource Areas of the United States, 

the Caribbean, and the Pacific Basin. United States Department of Agriculture 

Handbook 296. U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C.

Ushikata 

2005 Tracon & Surveying Compasses. Ushikata Manufacturing Company, Tokyo.

Utley, Robert, and Christina Watkins

1993 Fort Larned National Historic Site. Southwest Parks and Monument Association, 

Tucson, Arizona.

Van Nostrand, Robert G. and Kenneth L. Cook

1966 Interpretation of Resistivity Data. Geological Survey Professional Paper 499. 

United States Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C.

Vehik, Susan C.

2006 Wichita Ethnohistory. In Kansas Archaeology, edited by Robert J. Hoard and 

William E. Banks, pp. 206-218. University of Kansas Press, Lawrence.

Von Der Osten-Woldenburg, Harald

2005 Applications of Ground-Penetrating Radar, Magnetic and Electrical Mapping, 

and Electromagnetic Induction Methods in Archaeological Investigations. In 

Near-Surface Geophysics, edited by Dwain K. Butler, pp. 621-626. Society of 

Exploration Geophysicists, Tulsa, Oklahoma.

Wagner, William J.

1976 Architectural Data Section, Historic Structures Report for Buildings No. 3, 4, 5, 7, 

8, 9, and 10, Fort Larned National Historic Site, Larned, Pawnee County, Kansas. 

Midwest Regional Office, National Park Service, Omaha, Nebraska.
41

Wedel, Waldo R.

1959 An Introduction to Kansas Archeology. Smithsonian Institution Bureau of 

American Ethnology Bulletin 174. U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, 

D.C.

Weymouth, John W.

1978 A Magnetic Survey at Fort Larned National Historic Site. Ms. on file, Midwest 

Archeological Center, National Park Service, Lincoln, Nebraska.

1986 Geophysical Methods of Archaeological Site Surveying. In Advances in 

Archaeological Method and Theory, Volume 9, edited by Michael B. Schiffer, pp. 

311-395. Academic Press, Orlando, Florida.

Willey, Gordon R.

1966 An Introduction to American Archaeology: Volume One, North and Middle 

America. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey.

Witten, Alan J.

2006 Handbook of Geophysics and Archaeology. Equinox Publishing Ltd., London.

Woods, B. Z.

1934 A History of Fort Larned. The Aerend: A Kansas Quarterly 5(1):

Zalucha, L. Anthony, and Danny E. Olinger

1976a Archeological Investigations, Fort Larned National Historic Site. Trip report on 

file, Midwest Archeological Center, National Park Service, Lincoln, Nebraska.

1976b Archeological Investigations, Fort Larned National Historic Site, Kansas, 

1976. Ms. on file, Midwest Archeological Center, National Park Service, Lincoln, 

Nebraska.

Zonge, Ken, Jeff Wynn, and Scott Urquhart

2005 Resistivity, Induced Polarization, and Complex Resistivity. In Near-Surface 

Geophysics, edited by Dwain K. Butler, pp. 265-300. Society of Exploration 

Geophysicists, Tulsa, Oklahoma.

Zwink, Timothy Ashley

1980 Fort Larned: Garrison on the Central Great Plains. Unpublished Ph.D. 

dissertation, Oklahoma State University, Stillwater.
42

FORT LARNED NATIONAL HISTORIC SITE
43

TABLES

Table 1. Global positioning system corrected grid coordinates for the FOLS geophysical 

project area (Site 14PA305).

ID Longitude Latitude HAE Easting Northing MSL

1 -99.218 38.182 592.945 480877 4226027 619.629

1 -99.218 38.182 593.106 480878 4226026 619.79

1 -99.218 38.1819 593.109 480879 4226022 619.793

1 -99.218 38.1819 593.187 480881 4226018 619.871

1 -99.218 38.1818 593.194 480882 4226014 619.879

1 -99.218 38.1818 593.014 480884 4226009 619.698

1 -99.218 38.1818 593.06 480886 4226004 619.745

1 -99.218 38.1817 593.134 480887 4225999 619.818

1 -99.218 38.1817 593.284 480889 4225994 619.968

1 -99.218 38.1816 593.277 480891 4225990 619.962

1 -99.218 38.1816 593.276 480893 4225985 619.96

1 -99.218 38.1815 593.143 480895 4225980 619.828

1 -99.218 38.1815 593.176 480897 4225975 619.861

1 -99.218 38.1815 593.154 480899 4225970 619.839

1 -99.218 38.1814 593.311 480901 4225965 619.995

1 -99.218 38.1814 593.33 480903 4225960 620.015

1 -99.218 38.1813 593.274 480906 4225955 619.958

1 -99.218 38.1813 593.455 480908 4225950 620.139

1 -99.218 38.1812 593.59 480910 4225945 620.275

1 -99.218 38.1812 593.776 480912 4225940 620.461

1 -99.218 38.1811 593.717 480914 4225935 620.402

1 -99.218 38.1811 593.553 480916 4225930 620.238

1 -99.218 38.181 593.037 480918 4225925 619.722

1 -99.218 38.181 592.999 480920 4225920 619.684

1 -99.218 38.181 593.097 480922 4225915 619.782

1 -99.218 38.1809 592.984 480925 4225910 619.669

1 -99.218 38.1809 592.755 480927 4225904 619.44

1 -99.218 38.1808 592.856 480929 4225899 619.541

1 -99.218 38.1808 592.968 480931 4225894 619.653

1 -99.218 38.1807 592.862 480932 4225889 619.547

1 -99.218 38.1807 592.819 480935 4225884 619.504

1 -99.218 38.1806 592.716 480937 4225878 619.401

1 -99.218 38.1806 592.916 480939 4225873 619.601

1 -99.218 38.1805 592.817 480942 4225868 619.502

1 -99.218 38.1805 592.778 480944 4225863 619.463

1 -99.218 38.1804 592.737 480946 4225858 619.422

2 -99.218 38.1809 592.71 480925 4225911 619.396

2 -99.218 38.1809 592.853 480925 4225913 619.538

2 -99.218 38.181 592.882 480923 4225917 619.567
44

FORT LARNED NATIONAL HISTORIC SITE

Table 1. Continued.

ID Longitude Latitude HAE Easting Northing MSL

2 -99.218 38.181 592.804 480921 4225921 619.489

2 -99.218 38.181 592.953 480919 4225925 619.638

2 -99.218 38.1811 593.058 480918 4225930 619.743

2 -99.218 38.1811 593.229 480916 4225934 619.914

2 -99.218 38.1812 593.446 480914 4225939 620.131

2 -99.218 38.1812 593.35 480912 4225942 620.035

2 -99.218 38.1812 593.425 480911 4225941 620.109

2 -99.218 38.1812 593.418 480912 4225939 620.102

2 -99.218 38.1811 593.22 480913 4225934 619.905

2 -99.218 38.1811 592.986 480915 4225929 619.671

2 -99.218 38.181 592.966 480917 4225924 619.651

2 -99.218 38.181 592.811 480919 4225919 619.496

2 -99.218 38.1809 592.807 480921 4225914 619.492

2 -99.218 38.1809 592.669 480923 4225910 619.354

2 -99.218 38.1809 592.725 480924 4225911 619.41

2 -99.218 38.1809 592.723 480925 4225911 619.408

2 -99.218 38.1809 592.71 480925 4225911 619.396

3 -99.218 38.1811 593.194 480915 4225933 619.879

4 -99.22 38.1816 593.531 480746 4225982 620.214

4 -99.22 38.1816 593.549 480747 4225982 620.233

4 -99.22 38.1816 593.543 480750 4225983 620.227

4 -99.22 38.1816 593.535 480754 4225984 620.219

4 -99.22 38.1816 593.532 480758 4225986 620.216

4 -99.22 38.1816 593.606 480763 4225988 620.29

4 -99.22 38.1816 593.522 480768 4225990 620.206

4 -99.22 38.1816 593.32 480773 4225992 620.004

4 -99.219 38.1817 593.4 480778 4225994 620.083

4 -99.219 38.1817 593.472 480783 4225996 620.156

4 -99.219 38.1817 593.315 480788 4225998 619.999

4 -99.219 38.1817 593.274 480794 4226000 619.958

4 -99.219 38.1817 593.293 480799 4226002 619.977

4 -99.219 38.1818 593.276 480805 4226004 619.96

4 -99.219 38.1818 593.395 480810 4226006 620.079

4 -99.219 38.1818 593.272 480815 4226008 619.956

4 -99.219 38.1818 593.292 480820 4226010 619.976

4 -99.219 38.1818 593.141 480825 4226012 619.825

4 -99.219 38.1819 593.193 480830 4226015 619.877

4 -99.219 38.1819 593.262 480836 4226017 619.946

4 -99.219 38.1819 593.224 480841 4226019 619.908

4 -99.219 38.1819 593.163 480847 4226021 619.847

4 -99.219 38.1819 593.143 480852 4226023 619.828

4 -99.219 38.1819 593.115 480858 4226025 619.799

4 -99.219 38.182 593.245 480863 4226026 619.929
45

Table 1. Continued.

ID Longitude Latitude HAE Easting Northing MSL

4 -99.218 38.182 593.226 480869 4226027 619.91

4 -99.218 38.182 593.143 480875 4226029 619.828

4 -99.218 38.182 593.091 480881 4226030 619.776

4 -99.218 38.182 593.145 480887 4226030 619.829

4 -99.218 38.182 593.098 480892 4226031 619.782

4 -99.218 38.182 593.041 480898 4226032 619.726

5 -99.219 38.1819 593.024 480844 4226020 619.708

5 -99.219 38.1819 593.085 480843 4226020 619.769

5 -99.219 38.1819 593.206 480838 4226020 619.89

5 -99.219 38.1819 593.205 480832 4226020 619.889

5 -99.219 38.1819 593.144 480827 4226021 619.828

5 -99.219 38.1819 593.336 480822 4226024 620.02

5 -99.219 38.182 593.349 480818 4226027 620.032

5 -99.219 38.182 593.485 480814 4226031 620.169

5 -99.219 38.182 593.506 480810 4226036 620.189

5 -99.219 38.1821 593.451 480807 4226042 620.135

5 -99.219 38.1821 593.531 480805 4226047 620.215

5 -99.219 38.1822 593.569 480803 4226053 620.253

5 -99.219 38.1822 593.684 480800 4226059 620.367

5 -99.219 38.1823 593.65 480798 4226064 620.334

5 -99.219 38.1823 593.6 480796 4226070 620.283

5 -99.219 38.1824 593.916 480794 4226075 620.599

5 -99.219 38.1824 593.677 480792 4226081 620.361

5 -99.219 38.1825 594.521 480792 4226082 621.204

5 -99.219 38.1825 593.916 480792 4226083 620.6

5 -99.219 38.1825 593.951 480790 4226085 620.634

5 -99.219 38.1825 593.903 480790 4226087 620.587

5 -99.219 38.1825 593.973 480790 4226087 620.656

6 -99.22 38.1815 593.924 480722 4225972 620.608

6 -99.22 38.1815 594.014 480723 4225973 620.697

6 -99.22 38.1815 593.856 480728 4225974 620.54

6 -99.22 38.1815 593.843 480733 4225976 620.526

6 -99.22 38.1815 593.935 480737 4225978 620.619

6 -99.22 38.1815 593.823 480742 4225980 620.507

6 -99.22 38.1816 593.902 480747 4225982 620.586

6 -99.22 38.1816 593.828 480751 4225985 620.511

6 -99.22 38.1816 593.925 480756 4225988 620.609

6 -99.22 38.1816 593.919 480760 4225992 620.603

6 -99.22 38.1817 593.867 480764 4225997 620.551

6 -99.22 38.1817 593.682 480768 4226001 620.366

6 -99.22 38.1818 593.781 480772 4226006 620.464

6 -99.22 38.1818 593.77 480775 4226011 620.453

6 -99.219 38.1819 593.754 480778 4226016 620.438
46

FORT LARNED NATIONAL HISTORIC SITE

Table 1. Continued.

ID Longitude Latitude HAE Easting Northing MSL

6 -99.219 38.1819 594.04 480780 4226022 620.723

6 -99.219 38.182 594.088 480782 4226027 620.771

6 -99.219 38.182 594.063 480784 4226033 620.747

6 -99.219 38.1821 593.998 480785 4226039 620.682

6 -99.219 38.1821 594.106 480786 4226045 620.79

6 -99.219 38.1822 594.016 480787 4226051 620.7

6 -99.219 38.1822 594.114 480788 4226057 620.797

6 -99.219 38.1823 594.272 480789 4226063 620.955

6 -99.219 38.1824 593.964 480789 4226072 620.648

6 -99.219 38.1824 593.942 480789 4226072 620.626

6 -99.219 38.1824 594.043 480789 4226074 620.727

6 -99.219 38.1824 594.094 480790 4226075 620.777

6 -99.219 38.1824 594.148 480790 4226078 620.831

6 -99.219 38.1824 594.136 480790 4226081 620.819

6 -99.219 38.1825 594.175 480789 4226085 620.858

6 -99.219 38.1825 594.096 480789 4226086 620.78

6 -99.219 38.1825 594.086 480789 4226090 620.769

6 -99.219 38.1826 594.129 480788 4226094 620.813

6 -99.219 38.1826 594.071 480786 4226098 620.754

6 -99.219 38.1826 593.752 480784 4226103 620.435

6 -99.219 38.1827 594.05 480784 4226104 620.733

6 -99.219 38.1827 594.076 480784 4226104 620.76

6 -99.219 38.1827 593.86 480784 4226104 620.543

6 -99.219 38.1827 594.425 480783 4226106 621.108

6 -99.219 38.1827 592.168 480780 4226111 618.851

6 -99.219 38.1827 594.295 480781 4226110 620.978

6 -99.219 38.1827 594.353 480781 4226110 621.037

6 -99.219 38.1827 594.505 480780 4226112 621.188

6 -99.219 38.1828 594.226 480778 4226116 620.909

6 -99.22 38.1828 593.739 480775 4226121 620.422

6 -99.22 38.1829 595.149 480771 4226132 621.832

6 -99.22 38.183 594.127 480769 4226137 620.81

6 -99.22 38.183 594.157 480767 4226142 620.84

6 -99.22 38.183 594.196 480765 4226146 620.879

6 -99.22 38.1831 594.233 480763 4226150 620.916

6 -99.22 38.1831 594.392 480762 4226155 621.075

6 -99.22 38.1832 594.177 480760 4226159 620.859

6 -99.22 38.1832 594.229 480759 4226164 620.911

6 -99.22 38.1832 594.057 480759 4226168 620.74

6 -99.22 38.1833 594.014 480761 4226173 620.697

6 -99.22 38.1833 593.867 480763 4226177 620.55

6 -99.22 38.1834 593.954 480767 4226181 620.636

6 -99.22 38.1834 593.871 480770 4226185 620.553
47

Table 1. Continued.

ID Longitude Latitude HAE Easting Northing MSL

6 -99.22 38.1834 593.927 480775 4226188 620.61

6 -99.219 38.1834 593.894 480779 4226191 620.577

6 -99.219 38.1835 593.727 480783 4226195 620.409

6 -99.219 38.1835 593.69 480787 4226198 620.373

6 -99.219 38.1835 593.672 480790 4226203 620.354

6 -99.219 38.1836 593.659 480792 4226208 620.341

6 -99.219 38.1836 593.71 480794 4226214 620.392

6 -99.219 38.1837 593.856 480794 4226219 620.539

6 -99.219 38.1837 593.979 480793 4226225 620.662

6 -99.219 38.1838 594.172 480792 4226231 620.855

6 -99.219 38.1838 594.208 480792 4226233 620.89

7 -99.219 38.1838 594.222 480792 4226233 620.905

7 -99.219 38.1838 594.23 480792 4226233 620.913

7 -99.219 38.1838 594.294 480791 4226237 620.976

7 -99.219 38.1839 591.5 480790 4226237 618.182

7 -99.219 38.184 593.413 480789 4226249 620.096

7 -99.219 38.184 596.372 480790 4226252 623.054

7 -99.219 38.184 591.541 480788 4226256 618.224

7 -99.219 38.1841 601.001 480795 4226261 627.683

7 -99.219 38.1841 597.833 480791 4226262 624.515

7 -99.219 38.1841 594.933 480789 4226266 621.615

7 -99.219 38.1841 593.399 480790 4226267 620.081

8 -99.219 38.1841 592.448 480790 4226268 619.13

9 -99.22 38.184 594.351 480768 4226254 621.033

10 -99.22 38.1839 594.394 480750 4226246 621.076

11 -99.22 38.1838 593.95 480744 4226235 620.632

12 -99.22 38.1837 593.518 480738 4226221 620.201

13 -99.22 38.1836 593.981 480736 4226210 620.663

14 -99.22 38.1836 593.271 480742 4226212 619.954

15 -99.22 38.1837 593.795 480761 4226220 620.477

16 -99.22 38.1839 593.573 480753 4226239 620.256

17 -99.22 38.1839 594.528 480772 4226245 621.21

18 -99.219 38.1838 590.491 480779 4226228 617.174

19 -99.219 38.1836 592.661 480787 4226210 619.344

20 -99.219 38.1834 592.451 480794 4226191 619.134

21 -99.22 38.1834 589.025 480775 4226184 615.708

22 -99.22 38.1836 587.395 480767 4226204 614.078

23 -99.22 38.1835 589.574 480748 4226196 616.257

24 -99.22 38.1834 594.63 480742 4226190 621.312

25 -99.22 38.1833 595.541 480751 4226171 622.224

26 -99.22 38.1833 591.565 480748 4226178 618.247

27 -99.22 38.1833 593.752 480757 4226176 620.435

28 -99.22 38.1831 593.401 480765 4226158 620.084
48

FORT LARNED NATIONAL HISTORIC SITE

Table 1. Continued.

ID Longitude Latitude HAE Easting Northing MSL

29 -99.22 38.1831 595.226 480759 4226153 621.909

30 -99.22 38.1829 592.946 480765 4226136 619.629

31 -99.22 38.183 594.725 480772 4226139 621.408

32 -99.219 38.1828 596.978 480781 4226120 623.662

33 -99.22 38.1828 598.583 480768 4226115 625.266

34 -99.22 38.1826 594.198 480769 4226096 620.881

35 -99.22 38.1826 594.597 480770 4226094 621.28

36 -99.22 38.1825 594.929 480769 4226090 621.612

37 -99.219 38.1826 595.629 480788 4226101 622.312

38 -99.219 38.1829 596.448 480799 4226129 623.131

39 -99.219 38.1827 594.028 480806 4226109 620.711

40 -99.219 38.1825 589.989 480815 4226090 616.673

41 -99.219 38.1825 595.499 480795 4226084 622.182

42 -99.219 38.1824 596.497 480777 4226078 623.18

43 -99.22 38.1824 593.617 480775 4226075 620.3

44 -99.22 38.1822 591.96 480773 4226052 618.644

45 -99.219 38.1822 592.533 480785 4226056 619.216

46 -99.219 38.1823 594.374 480804 4226063 621.058

47 -99.219 38.1824 593.883 480822 4226073 620.566

48 -99.219 38.1823 593.268 480848 4226061 619.952

49 -99.219 38.1822 593.547 480829 4226054 620.231

50 -99.219 38.1821 592.803 480811 4226047 619.486

51 -99.219 38.1821 593.136 480793 4226039 619.819

52 -99.22 38.182 593.189 480774 4226032 619.872

53 -99.22 38.182 593.68 480764 4226027 620.364

54 -99.22 38.1819 592.716 480758 4226017 619.4

55 -99.22 38.1818 593.037 480752 4226006 619.721

56 -99.22 38.1818 593.986 480763 4226005 620.67

57 -99.219 38.1818 595.342 480782 4226012 622.026

58 -99.219 38.1819 593.425 480800 4226020 620.109

59 -99.219 38.182 594.249 480819 4226027 620.933

60 -99.219 38.182 592.631 480837 4226035 619.315

61 -99.219 38.1821 594.266 480856 4226043 620.95

62 -99.219 38.1819 594.478 480863 4226023 621.162

63 -99.218 38.1819 593.79 480866 4226022 620.474

64 -99.219 38.1819 593.445 480844 4226016 620.13

65 -99.219 38.1818 592.635 480826 4226009 619.319

66 -99.219 38.1817 592.913 480807 4226001 619.597

67 -99.219 38.1817 592.307 480789 4225993 618.991

68 -99.22 38.1816 592.13 480770 4225985 618.814

69 -99.219 38.1814 592.087 480778 4225968 618.771

70 -99.219 38.1815 593.062 480797 4225975 619.746

71 -99.219 38.1816 592.815 480815 4225984 619.5
49

Table 1. Continued.

ID Longitude Latitude HAE Easting Northing MSL

72 -99.219 38.1816 591.135 480833 4225991 617.819

73 -99.219 38.1817 593.048 480852 4225999 619.733

74 -99.218 38.1818 593.19 480871 4226006 619.874

75 -99.218 38.1816 594.166 480877 4225985 620.85

76 -99.219 38.1815 591.77 480861 4225977 618.454

77 -99.219 38.1815 592.865 480842 4225974 619.549

78 -99.219 38.1814 592.492 480823 4225966 619.176

79 -99.219 38.1813 592.904 480804 4225957 619.588

80 -99.219 38.1812 594.099 480810 4225944 620.783

81 -99.219 38.1812 593.677 480825 4225942 620.361

82 -99.219 38.1812 595.847 480830 4225945 622.532

83 -99.219 38.1813 593.578 480849 4225952 620.262

84 -99.218 38.1814 592.618 480868 4225960 619.303

85 -99.218 38.1814 592.646 480886 4225968 619.331

86 -99.218 38.1813 592.008 480935 4225950 618.692

86 -99.218 38.1813 591.78 480934 4225949 618.465

86 -99.218 38.1812 594.094 480931 4225946 620.779

86 -99.218 38.1812 595.742 480928 4225945 622.427

86 -99.218 38.1812 596.241 480926 4225943 622.926

86 -99.218 38.1812 595.695 480923 4225942 622.38

86 -99.218 38.1812 592.462 480921 4225940 619.147

86 -99.218 38.1812 591.787 480918 4225939 618.472

86 -99.218 38.1812 594.101 480914 4225939 620.786

86 -99.218 38.1812 595.603 480909 4225940 622.288

86 -99.218 38.1812 595.768 480905 4225941 622.453

86 -99.218 38.1812 594.936 480901 4225941 621.621

86 -99.218 38.1812 591.892 480897 4225941 618.577

86 -99.218 38.1812 592.12 480893 4225941 618.805

86 -99.218 38.1812 592.745 480888 4225940 619.429

86 -99.218 38.1812 595.477 480884 4225940 622.162

86 -99.218 38.1812 593.851 480875 4225940 620.535

86 -99.218 38.1812 591.768 480871 4225940 618.453

86 -99.218 38.1812 592.311 480867 4225941 618.996

86 -99.219 38.1812 593.096 480862 4225941 619.78

86 -99.219 38.1812 595.448 480857 4225941 622.132

86 -99.219 38.1812 595.8 480853 4225940 622.484

86 -99.219 38.1812 594.662 480848 4225941 621.346

86 -99.219 38.1812 591.166 480843 4225940 617.851

86 -99.219 38.1812 590.912 480838 4225940 617.596

86 -99.219 38.1812 591.8 480834 4225940 618.484

86 -99.219 38.1812 595.54 480828 4225940 622.225

86 -99.219 38.1812 596.269 480823 4225940 622.953

86 -99.219 38.1812 593.847 480818 4225940 620.532
50

FORT LARNED NATIONAL HISTORIC SITE

Table 1. Continued.

ID Longitude Latitude HAE Easting Northing MSL

86 -99.219 38.1812 591.668 480814 4225940 618.352

86 -99.219 38.1812 591.964 480809 4225940 618.648

86 -99.219 38.1812 592.539 480805 4225940 619.223

86 -99.219 38.1812 595.383 480799 4225940 622.068

86 -99.219 38.1812 596.143 480794 4225940 622.827

86 -99.219 38.1812 593.416 480790 4225940 620.1

86 -99.219 38.1812 591.004 480785 4225940 617.689

86 -99.219 38.1812 591.236 480780 4225940 617.92

86 -99.22 38.1812 593.397 480775 4225940 620.081

86 -99.22 38.1812 595.622 480770 4225940 622.306

86 -99.22 38.1812 595.928 480766 4225940 622.612

87 -99.22 38.1812 594.729 480726 4225940 621.413

88 -99.22 38.1812 595.264 480733 4225940 621.948

88 -99.22 38.1812 593.881 480732 4225939 620.565

88 -99.22 38.1812 593.546 480735 4225941 620.23

88 -99.22 38.1812 591.453 480740 4225943 618.137

88 -99.22 38.1812 593.362 480744 4225945 620.046

88 -99.22 38.1812 594.085 480748 4225948 620.769

88 -99.22 38.1813 594.928 480753 4225950 621.612

88 -99.22 38.1813 593.107 480758 4225953 619.791

88 -99.22 38.1813 589.12 480764 4225954 615.804

88 -99.22 38.1813 584.809 480770 4225957 611.493

88 -99.22 38.1814 581.046 480775 4225959 607.73

88 -99.219 38.1814 601.514 480778 4225962 628.198

88 -99.219 38.1814 597.389 480783 4225965 624.074

88 -99.219 38.1814 593.239 480789 4225967 619.923

88 -99.219 38.1814 614.347 480791 4225969 641.031

88 -99.219 38.1815 610.298 480797 4225972 636.982

88 -99.219 38.1815 607.153 480802 4225974 633.837

88 -99.219 38.1815 597.906 480814 4225979 624.591

88 -99.219 38.1816 593.781 480820 4225982 620.465

88 -99.219 38.1816 591.587 480826 4225984 618.271

88 -99.219 38.1816 592.083 480831 4225986 618.767

88 -99.219 38.1816 592.827 480836 4225989 619.511

88 -99.219 38.1816 595.678 480841 4225991 622.363

88 -99.219 38.1817 596.51 480846 4225993 623.194

88 -99.219 38.1817 593.702 480851 4225996 620.386

88 -99.219 38.1817 590.214 480853 4225998 616.899

88 -99.219 38.1817 591.217 480852 4226003 617.902

88 -99.219 38.1818 591.708 480851 4226008 618.392

88 -99.219 38.1818 594.704 480848 4226012 621.388

88 -99.219 38.1819 595.388 480846 4226017 622.072

88 -99.219 38.1819 593.331 480845 4226022 620.015
51

Table 1. Continued.

ID Longitude Latitude HAE Easting Northing MSL

88 -99.219 38.1819 592.493 480844 4226025 619.177

89 -99.219 38.1819 592.512 480844 4226025 619.196

89 -99.219 38.182 592.533 480845 4226026 619.217

89 -99.219 38.182 592.624 480845 4226027 619.308

89 -99.219 38.182 592.636 480844 4226028 619.32

89 -99.219 38.182 592.638 480844 4226028 619.322

89 -99.219 38.182 592.595 480843 4226027 619.279

89 -99.219 38.1819 592.548 480844 4226026 619.232

89 -99.219 38.1819 592.512 480844 4226025 619.196

90 -99.219 38.182 592.491 480843 4226027 619.175

90 -99.219 38.182 592.631 480842 4226027 619.315

90 -99.219 38.182 592.653 480840 4226029 619.337

90 -99.219 38.182 592.606 480838 4226032 619.29

90 -99.219 38.182 592.665 480835 4226035 619.349

90 -99.219 38.1821 592.576 480833 4226039 619.26

90 -99.219 38.1821 592.784 480830 4226042 619.468

90 -99.219 38.1821 592.766 480827 4226046 619.449

90 -99.219 38.1822 592.914 480824 4226049 619.597

90 -99.219 38.1822 592.727 480823 4226051 619.411

90 -99.219 38.1822 592.821 480823 4226052 619.505

90 -99.219 38.1822 592.959 480823 4226052 619.643

90 -99.219 38.1822 593.08 480822 4226053 619.764

90 -99.219 38.1822 593.002 480819 4226057 619.686

90 -99.219 38.1823 593.003 480816 4226061 619.687

90 -99.219 38.1823 593.1 480813 4226065 619.784

90 -99.219 38.1823 593.271 480811 4226068 619.955

90 -99.219 38.1824 591.26 480810 4226070 617.944

91 -99.219 38.1824 592.106 480808 4226073 618.789

91 -99.219 38.1824 592.421 480809 4226073 619.105

91 -99.219 38.1824 592.31 480810 4226074 618.993

91 -99.219 38.1824 592.588 480814 4226074 619.271

91 -99.219 38.1824 592.671 480815 4226078 619.355

91 -99.219 38.1824 592.355 480819 4226079 619.039

91 -99.219 38.1824 593.02 480821 4226079 619.703

91 -99.219 38.1824 592.816 480823 4226081 619.499

92 -99.219 38.1821 592.681 480836 4226041 619.365

93 -99.219 38.182 592.672 480844 4226028 619.356

93 -99.219 38.182 592.675 480844 4226028 619.359

93 -99.219 38.182 592.846 480846 4226030 619.53

93 -99.219 38.182 592.734 480849 4226032 619.418

93 -99.219 38.182 592.779 480853 4226034 619.463

93 -99.219 38.182 592.78 480857 4226036 619.464

93 -99.219 38.1821 592.761 480861 4226039 619.445
52

FORT LARNED NATIONAL HISTORIC SITE

Table 1. Concluded.

ID Longitude Latitude HAE Easting Northing MSL

93 -99.218 38.1821 592.774 480866 4226041 619.458

93 -99.218 38.1821 592.749 480870 4226044 619.433

93 -99.218 38.1821 592.703 480875 4226046 619.387

93 -99.218 38.1822 592.578 480879 4226048 619.262

94 -99.219 38.182 592.633 480844 4226027 619.317

94 -99.219 38.182 592.662 480844 4226027 619.346

94 -99.219 38.182 592.691 480847 4226028 619.375

94 -99.219 38.182 592.641 480851 4226029 619.325

94 -99.219 38.182 592.593 480855 4226030 619.277

94 -99.219 38.182 592.687 480860 4226031 619.371

94 -99.218 38.182 592.651 480865 4226032 619.336

94 -99.218 38.182 592.751 480870 4226033 619.436

94 -99.218 38.182 592.698 480875 4226035 619.382

94 -99.218 38.182 592.57 480876 4226035 619.254

94 -99.218 38.182 592.713 480877 4226034 619.397

94 -99.218 38.182 592.411 480877 4226033 619.095

94 -99.218 38.182 592.654 480878 4226030 619.339

94 -99.218 38.182 592.815 480880 4226026 619.499

94 -99.218 38.1819 592.804 480882 4226021 619.488

94 -99.218 38.1819 592.576 480883 4226019 619.26

95 -99.219 38.1822 593.366 480841 4226059 620.05

96 -99.219 38.1821 593.006 480811 4226046 619.689

97 -99.22 38.1832 593.79 480763 4226165 620.473

98 -99.219 38.1833 593.873 480792 4226178 620.556

99 -99.219 38.1834 593.314 480790 4226186 619.997
53

Table 2. Acquisition and instrumentation information for the dual fluxgate gradiometer 

survey used in the grid input template at the FOLS geophysical project area (Site 14PA305).

GENERAL

Acquisition Value Instrumentation Value

Sitename FOLS2009 Survey Type Dual Gradiometer

Map Reference Fort Larned, KS 7.5 

minute quadrangle

Instrument Bartington 

Grad601-2

Dir. 1st Traverse Grid N Units nT

Grid Length (x) 20 m Range AUTO

Sample Interval (x) 0.125 m Log Zero Drift Off

Grid Width (y) 20 m Baud Rate 19200

Traverse Interval (y) 1.0 m Number of Sensors (tubes) 2

Traverse Mode ZigZag Download Software Bartington 

GRAD601

FILE

NOMINCLATURE

Raw Data Processed Data Corrected Data

Processing Software Archeosurveyor

Grid g01-g50

Composite gc gcz, gczi, gczil, gczilr

Table 3. Acquisition and instrumentation information for the resistance survey used in the 

grid input template at the FOLS geophysical project area (Site 14PA305). 

GENERAL

Acquisition Value Instrumentation value

Sitename FOLS2009 Survey Type Resistance

Map Reference Fort Larned, KS 7.5 

minute quadrangle

Instrument RM15

Dir. 1st Traverse Grid N Units Ohm

Grid Length (x) 20 m Current Range AUTO

Sample Interval (x) 0.5 m Gain Range AUTO

Grid Width (y) 20 m Baud Rate 9600

Traverse Interval (y) 1.0 m Frequency 137 Hz

Traverse Mode Zigzag High Pass Filter 13 Hz

ACCESSORIES

Accessories Value

Array Hardware PA5

Interface AD1

Log Mode Single

Configuration Twin

Probe Spacing 0.5

FILE

NOMINCLATURE

Raw Data Processed Data Corrected Data

Processing Software GEOPLOT

Grid r21-r50 r33a

Mesh rm, rma, rmt

Composite rc, rca, rce rcae, raced, rcaedi, rcaedih,

rcaedihr, rcta
54

FORT LARNED NATIONAL HISTORIC SITE
55

FIGURES

Figure 1. Location of the geophysical project area at the Fort Larned National Historic 

Site (14PA305), Pawnee County, Kansas.
56

FORT LARNED NATIONAL HISTORIC SITE

Figure 2. General view of the southern portion of the geophysical project (view to the east northeast).

Figure 3. General view of the western portion of the geophysical project behind Officers Row (view 

to the north northwest).
57

Figure 4. General view of the northern portion of the geophysical project (view to the southwest).

Figure 5. Laying out the geophysical survey grid corner stakes with the surveying compass and 

100-meter tape (view to the west southwest).
58

FORT LARNED NATIONAL HISTORIC SITE

Figure 6. Placing the surveying ropes on the geophysical grid (view to the south southeast).
59

Figure 7. Sketch map of the geophysical investigations at the Fort Larned National 

Historic Site.
60

FORT LARNED NATIONAL HISTORIC SITE

Figure 8. UTM grid of the geophysical project area at the Fort Larned National Historic Site.
61

Figure 9. Conducting the magnetic survey with the dual fluxgate gradiometer (view to the southeast).

Figure 10. Conducting the resistance survey with the resistance meter and twin probe array (view to 

the south southeast).
62

FORT LARNED NATIONAL HISTORIC SITE

Figure 11. Image and contour plots of the dual fluxgate gradiometer magnetic data from FOLS.
63

Figure 12. Image and contour plots of the resistance data from FOLS.
64

FORT LARNED NATIONAL HISTORIC SITE

Figure 13. Interpretation of the magnetic data from the dual fluxgate gradiometer in 

the FOLS geophysical project area.
65

Figure 14. Interpretation of the resistance data from the FOLS geophysical project area.
66

FORT LARNED NATIONAL HISTORIC SITE

Figure 15. Combined geophysical anomalies from the FOLS geophysical project area. 
67

Figure 16. Archeological monitoring of the buried electric line installation at FOLS.
68

FORT LARNED NATIONAL HISTORIC SITE

Figure 17. Excavation of access pit 1 with a backhoe (view to the southwest).

Figure 18. View of the open electric vault (view to the north northwest).
69

a) View of south wall profile of Pit 1 (view to the south)

Figure 19. Wall profiles of Pit 1.

b) east wall profile of Pit 1
70

FORT LARNED NATIONAL HISTORIC SITE

a) view of west wall profile of Pit 2 (view to the west)

b) south wall profile of Pit 2

Figure 20. Wall profiles of Pit 2.
71

a) south wall profile of Pit 3 (view to the south)

b) west wall profile of Pit 3

Figure 21. Wall profiles of Pit 3.
72

FORT LARNED NATIONAL HISTORIC SITE