Ground Penetrating Radar Survey at the Bullhead Bluff Cemetery

Sample GPR survey of portions of the Bullhead Bluff Cemetery (9CM326) and an area immediately north of the legally-established cemetery on property was completed by the LAMAR Institute research team. Two samples were systematically examined and these were designated GPR Blocks A and B. GPR Block A examined a 33.5 meter (east-west) by 20.8 meter (north-south) area that surrounded three sides (East, West and South) of the unfinished Herrin house. The survey of Block A revealed many radar anomalies but none were conclusively identified as human graves. Discovery was inhibited on the south-central part of Block A by the presence of a massive tree stump with extensive root disturbances. The areas north of the house and directly beneath the house were not included in the study because those areas were inaccessible. Human burials may exist in the vicinity of the Herrin house, although the GPR survey results do not support this assertion. Additional survey or testing may be necessary to fully resolve the question of the existence, or absence, of graves in this area. GPR Block B examined a 19 meter (east-west) by 15.5 meter (north-south) portion of the Herrin property that was previously platted as part of the Bullhead Bluff Cemetery. Only that portion of this tract, which was cleared of the vegetation, was available for GPR survey. Several grave-sized anomalies were identified within this study block and these are likely to be human burials. These data suggest that many potential graves are present in the cemetery, which have no visible surface indications. Future land users of this area should recognize the potential for buried human remains on this part of the property. A more complete and systematic GPR survey of the entire cemetery would undoubtedly provide a better understanding of the full extent of unmarked graves that are present in the Bullhead Bluff Cemetery. This study demonstrated that GPR technology can be applied to this environment for purposes of detecting graves. Other factors, such as extensive tree root systems, flooding effects, and modern land use have affected the clarity and integrity of the GPR data and present challenges in its interpretation. Many of the graves in this cemetery may be quite shallow, which further limits the usefulness of GPR technology. Oral accounts of graves "bobbing to the surface" during past freshets may be validated from the GPR survey record. The shallow water table may also have limited the depth to which grave shafts were originally excavated. Determining the actual depths of these grave shafts would require additional probing or test excavation, which was beyond the scope of the present study. As the Herrin's situation demonstrates, there is a need to clearly delineate the outer extent of the graveyard. Doing so will help to prevent future land-use conflicts in this part of Camden County. GPR survey can be one useful component in the search for graves, but it should be combined with other survey methods to insure a more complete cemetery delineation.