With the “cultural turn” in geography, scholars have become more focused on the politics of representation, politics of fieldwork, and politics of the research setting. In human geography, this epistemological shift has been accompanied by a methodological move toward intensive methods at the expense of extensive methods. In this article, I suggest that mixed methods that utilize the strengths of both intensive and extensive methods can offset the weaknesses of each method. Moreover, results from the field suggest that the combination of intensive and extensive methods could produce unique insights only possible from a mixed method approach.