No abstract

The feasibility of real-time lung tumor motion tracking in SI direction with continuous ultrasound and periodic CBPI was demonstrated. The real-time estimation of the target position from the two streams for lung cancer patients would enable respiration gating or tracking during SBRT.

No abstract

Current strategies for protecting archaeological sites during implementation of brush management practices such as chaining are frequently inadequate. Potentially significant prehistoric remains are sometimes dealt with in a fashion conducive to their destruction. This conflict can be alleviated by developing a chahring program in which there is planned avoidance of cultural resources. This is accomplished through an intensive archaeological, soil, range, and visual assessment of project areas prior to chaining. The development of a chaining design by an interdisciplinary planning team and the "buffering" of sites during implementation of the range improvement can enhance all resources. Through careful planning, secondary impacts such as vandalism to prehistoric sites can be reduced as well. The use of heavy equipment in brush management is an effective and frequently used method of increasing rangeland forage capacity. In particular, conversion of large stands of pinyon-juniper woodland to grassland habitat by bulldozing or chaining has been a common undertaking for the past 30 years. Specifications for brush management differ quite markedly among the various federal and state agencies concerned with range management, but it is rare that adequate consideration has been given to the preservation of archaeological sites or cultural resources within project areas. Cultural resources are non-renewable and individual sites represent unique measures of past human behavior. Once disturbed, neither the site nor the information contained therein can be replaced. With increasing efficacy of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 and the resultant mandates to federal land management and assistance agencies, archaeology has become a valid multiple-use resource. Recognition of this has led to the hiring of 241 archaeologists by the Forest Service and the Bureau of Land Management (Rogge 1980), a proposal by the Soil Conservation Service to train its staff in cultural resourcedetection, and a review of archaeological site protection in range improvement areas at the 198 1 National Association of Conservation Districts' pasture and range meeting at Cedar City, Utah. Presently lacking, however, is a common body of "how to" material designed to protect these resources prior to, during and after implementation of range improvements such as chaining. This paper examines the state-of-the-art with particular reference to: (1) the types of archaeological sites most susceptible to adverse impacts of chaining; (2) the methods capable of reducing or eliminating disruptiveeffects of chaining; and (3) determining the significance of archaeological values in areas undergoing range improvement. Impacts of Chaining on Archaeology Archaeological sites of all types are likely to be impacted if located in areas to be chained, but greatest disturbance will occur to small and shallow sites containing fragile artifact patterns. Hayden (1965) describes fragile artifact patterns as sites with mate-The author is with the

No abstract