CONCLUSIONS
Of particular interest, but difficult to quantify, is the relative importance of hunting in comparison to maize horticulture. Cleland (1976) has proposed a focal-diffuse model, which has varied in popularity over time. In general, he states that the Late Prehistoric period is characterized by a pattern of resource utilization. This primarily relates to agricultural economies, where Middle Mississippian is the most focal, followed by Upper Mississippian and Late Woodland adaptations. In the latter "agricultural resources are simply an element of a diffuse economy (Cleland 1976:73)".
Overall, these three sites indicate a fair degree of variability in faunal resource utilization in the Late Prehistoric period. It does not seem nearly as clear cut as the case that Essenpreis (1982) presents in Ohio. This variability may be accounted for by a number of factors, including local ecology, seasonality of site occupation, patterns of landscape use, and duration of settlement. In this particular case, seasonality and site location are probably the two most important factors in whether the faunal assemblage would be classified as focal or diffuse; therefore the use of these terms may be misleading.
The large number of factors involved in classifying sites based on the representation and frequency of various species requires a large database open for testing. It is quite probable that the work of many researchers within the state will be required. As a result of possible future needs for the data recovered during this project, all of the data produced by the faunal analysis of these three sites has been presented in publications (Garniewicz 1996b: Tables 5, 6, and 7).