Theoretical and methodological advances in recent years havecontributed significantly to improving our understanding of the zooarchaeological record (for example, Behrensmeyer & Hill 1980; Binford 1988; Blumenschine 1986, 1989; Haynes 1985, 1987; O’Connor 1996, 2000; Mengoni Goñalons 1999, Miotti 1998; Miracle & Milner 2002; Reitz & Wing 1999). The ethnoarchaeology of hunter-gatherers has played a major role in these developments, providing models for the interpretation of the spatial arrangement of bone remains and their correlation with past human activities, especially in relation to economy and subsistence (Bartram 1993; Binford 1978a, 1981, 1984; Gould 1969; Lupo 1994, 1995; O’Connell, Hawkes, & Blurton Jones 1988a, 1988b, 1990; Yellen 1977). In contemporary research, special attention is given to bone assemblages to assess two principle factors that contribute to the formation of the archaeological record of past foragers. One is the cultural information that the spatial arrangement and context of bone features contain with regard to faunal exploitation, including patterns of hunting, transportation, butchering, processing, consumption, and discard (Binford 1981; Brooks & Yellen 1987; Kent 1987; O’Connell, Hawkes, and Blurton Jones 1988a, 1990, 1992). The second factor is the taphonomy of bone assemblages and the ways in which nonhuman factors contribute to site formation (see Behrensmeyer & Hill 1980; Borrero 1990a, 2001; Guiterrez 2004; Haynes 1987, 1988a, b, 1991; Kerbis Peterhans et al. 1993; Lyman 1994).