VI. Defining Features and KOCOA Analysis
6.1 KOCOA Determination
The main unit of study for this research project is the defining feature. A defining
feature, as either a natural or a cultural feature, is the basic unit in the KOCOA
system of military terrain analysis. Developed by military experts and historians,
the KOCOA system is a specialized technique for landscape analysis in which natural
and cultural terrain features or landmarks are studied for their relation to a battle.
KOCOA is an acronym that stands for:
• Key terrain
• Obstacles
• Cover and concealment
• Observation points
• Avenues of approach and retreat.
How a defining feature was used during the battle defines its categorization in the KOCOA system. Although a feature may have been used for multiple functions during the battle by the different sides in the conflict, at least one of these uses must be met for the feature to be termed a defining feature. The importance of a defining feature is based upon its role in determining the success or failure of a military unit in the battle.
Table 6 lists the defining features related to the Battle of Chemung on August 13, 1779. These defining features are limited to those features or landmarks discussed in the historical records reviewed for this study. The list includes the major and influential features related to the battle. The table is divided into five sections: terrain or topographic features; road and transportation networks; structures or villages; fortifications; and miscellaneous. Records for each feature also include descriptions of its location; relevance to the battle; comment; its KOCOA description; and an integrity assessment. A full record of all accounts recorded for the KOCOA analysis can be found in Appendix III. Figure 16 shows the location of the major defining features [text deleted]
Table 6. Defining Features of the Chemung Battlefield, August 13, 1779.
This page/map was intentionally deleted per the requirements of the Archaeological
Resource Protection Act (16 U.S.C. 470hh) and its implementing regulations (49 FR
1027, Jan. 6, 1984).
Figure 16. This page/map was intentionally deleted per the requirements of the Archaeological Resource Protection Act (16 U.S.C. 470hh) and its implementing regulations (49 FR 1027, Jan. 6, 1984).
Figure 17. This page/map was intentionally deleted per the requirements of the Archaeological Resource Protection Act (16 U.S.C. 470hh) and its implementing regulations (49 FR 1027, Jan. 6, 1984).
Figure 18. This page/map was intentionally deleted per the requirements of the Archaeological Resource Protection Act (16 U.S.C. 470hh) and its implementing regulations (49 FR 1027, Jan. 6, 1984).
6.2 Geographic Analysis of Defining Features
Various analytical techniques were applied to the spatial data related to the Chemung Battlefield as an attempt to better define the functionality of the different defining features during the Battle of Chemung. The analyses presented here include viewshed analysis, interpolation of slope, and firing ranges for the core areas. Each of these analyses helps to refine the locations of the defining features and provides a foundation for future research and preservation initiatives.
Viewshed analysis helps to better define how observation areas were utilized and what their limits were [text deleted]
[text deleted] The viewsheds are also based on digital elevation models (DEMs) that are measurements of the present day landscape without knowing exactly how the topography changed since the battle. As such the viewshed analyses can provide an insight on how positions of observation were used and provide predictions and expectations for use in future research and preservation.
Slope analysis was important to help refine the location of the Continental's Avenue of Approach. The historic descriptions of the trail were unclear. This was most likely due to the fast pace of the march, its occurrence at night, and the scouts repeatedly getting lost. The trail most likely followed the Native American trail connecting the various villages in the region, specifically Tioga to New Chemung. Given the fast movement of the troops, the use of mostly light infantry, and the small contingent of troops as compared to the whole Sullivan-Clinton campaign, new trails were probably not a major concern and more of an obstacle to movement. Some deviations were probably necessary given the topography and the subtly of the mission. Much of the topography related to the Avenue of Approach [text deleted] has been reshaped by cutting and filling so that no accurate interpretation of the historic topography can be made. [text deleted]
[text deleted]
These analyses provide an initial framework for future research helping to guide research questions and research designs. Ground truthing of these analyses through field survey and a reexamination of other data sets will help to better identify the locations and boundaries of the defining features and the movements of troops and the flow of the battle.
Figure 19. This page/map was intentionally deleted per the requirements of the Archaeological Resource Protection Act (16 U.S.C. 470hh) and its implementing regulations (49 FR 1027, Jan. 6, 1984).
Figure 20. This page/map was intentionally deleted per the requirements of the Archaeological Resource Protection Act (16 U.S.C. 470hh) and its implementing regulations (49 FR 1027, Jan. 6, 1984).
Figure 21. This page/map was intentionally deleted per the requirements of the Archaeological Resource Protection Act (16 U.S.C. 470hh) and its implementing regulations (49 FR 1027, Jan. 6, 1984).
Figure 22. This page/map was intentionally deleted per the requirements of the Archaeological Resource Protection Act (16 U.S.C. 470hh) and its implementing regulations (49 FR 1027, Jan. 6, 1984).
Figure 23. This page/map was intentionally deleted per the requirements of the Archaeological Resource Protection Act (16 U.S.C. 470hh) and its implementing regulations (49 FR 1027, Jan. 6, 1984).
Figure 24. This page/map was intentionally deleted per the requirements of the Archaeological Resource Protection Act (16 U.S.C. 470hh) and its implementing regulations (49 FR 1027, Jan. 6, 1984).
Figure 25. This page/map was intentionally deleted per the requirements of the Archaeological Resource Protection Act (16 U.S.C. 470hh) and its implementing regulations (49 FR 1027, Jan. 6, 1984).
Figure 26. This page/map was intentionally deleted per the requirements of the Archaeological Resource Protection Act (16 U.S.C. 470hh) and its implementing regulations (49 FR 1027, Jan. 6, 1984).
