Cultural Heritage Resources Analysis
Image: Triad Film Productions Ltd.
Project Impacts:
Under the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act, it was required that historic, archaeological, paleontological and architectural resources be included in environmental assessments (Nalcor 2009, Vol. 3). However, due to the lack of paleontological and architectural resources in the study area, only historic and archaeological resources were investigated extensively. The Lower Churchill project Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) identifies one main indicator for effects upon cultural heritage resources: the loss or disturbance of cultural heritage sites (Nalcor 2009, Vol. 3).
Loss of a resource occurs when "structural remains, artifacts or any other materials associated with a site, cultural feature or landscape, are dispersed, displaced, altered or destroyed to the degree that little or no meaningful information regarding the object, the site's purpose and age, or its occupants or builders, is retrievable" (Nalcor 2009, Vol. 3).
Disturbance of a resource happens when "structural remains, artifacts or any other materials associated with a site, cultural feature or landscape, are dispersed, displaced or altered. Some degree of meaningful information regarding the object, the site's purpose and age, and its occupants or builders, is retrievable" (Nalcor 2009, Vol. 3).
In the case of this project, loss or disturbance is likely to be caused by reservoir preparation, reservoir flooding, changes in the flow patterns and water levels of the river, as well as other associated construction activities and increased access to the area of the project (Nalcor 2009, Vol. 3). Several studies were used to identify historic and archaeological sites within the project area, with the majority of them occurring between 1998 and 2006 (Nalcor 2009, Vol. 3). Members of the Innu Nation were key members of many of the research teams finding these sites. Ultimately, 48 historic and archaeological sites were identified in the area. These are visualized in Figure 1 below, and include 26 sites with pre-European contact components, 6 historic tilts, 14 historic campsites/occupations, and 2 historic Hudson's Bay Company trading posts (Nalcor 2009, Vol. 3). The other two sites are important and known cultural and spiritual sites for the Innu included in the area: the hill on the north side of Muskrat Falls (Manitu-utshu) and the site of the final shaking tent ceremony in Labrador at Upper Brook (Ushkan-shipiss) (Nalcor 2009, Vol. 3).
Under the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act, it was required that historic, archaeological, paleontological and architectural resources be included in environmental assessments (Nalcor 2009, Vol. 3). However, due to the lack of paleontological and architectural resources in the study area, only historic and archaeological resources were investigated extensively. The Lower Churchill project Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) identifies one main indicator for effects upon cultural heritage resources: the loss or disturbance of cultural heritage sites (Nalcor 2009, Vol. 3).
Loss of a resource occurs when "structural remains, artifacts or any other materials associated with a site, cultural feature or landscape, are dispersed, displaced, altered or destroyed to the degree that little or no meaningful information regarding the object, the site's purpose and age, or its occupants or builders, is retrievable" (Nalcor 2009, Vol. 3).
Disturbance of a resource happens when "structural remains, artifacts or any other materials associated with a site, cultural feature or landscape, are dispersed, displaced or altered. Some degree of meaningful information regarding the object, the site's purpose and age, and its occupants or builders, is retrievable" (Nalcor 2009, Vol. 3).
In the case of this project, loss or disturbance is likely to be caused by reservoir preparation, reservoir flooding, changes in the flow patterns and water levels of the river, as well as other associated construction activities and increased access to the area of the project (Nalcor 2009, Vol. 3). Several studies were used to identify historic and archaeological sites within the project area, with the majority of them occurring between 1998 and 2006 (Nalcor 2009, Vol. 3). Members of the Innu Nation were key members of many of the research teams finding these sites. Ultimately, 48 historic and archaeological sites were identified in the area. These are visualized in Figure 1 below, and include 26 sites with pre-European contact components, 6 historic tilts, 14 historic campsites/occupations, and 2 historic Hudson's Bay Company trading posts (Nalcor 2009, Vol. 3). The other two sites are important and known cultural and spiritual sites for the Innu included in the area: the hill on the north side of Muskrat Falls (Manitu-utshu) and the site of the final shaking tent ceremony in Labrador at Upper Brook (Ushkan-shipiss) (Nalcor 2009, Vol. 3).
Figure 1: Locations of Historic and Archaeological Resources within the Assessment Area (Nalcor 2009, Vol. 3)
Mitigation: Effects on cultural heritage resources such as those seen in this project are often considered to be irreversible and unmitigable, largely due to the knowledge and meaning associated with these resources are lost along with the physical space. Nonetheless, Nalcor has proposed several mitigation measures to address these potential effects. Some of these mitigation efforts are addressed below.
- Systematic data recovery of sites (SDR): This involves the recovery, analysis, interpretation and reporting of site data, when losses to cultural heritage sites will occur. SDR includes provisions for this recovered data to be conserved and curated with the provincial museum of Newfoundland and Labrador. All SDR data must be made available for future researchers (Nalcor 2009, Vol. 3).
- Additional field recording of sites (AFR): This involves the use of photography, video, illustration, collection, documentation and conservation of site artifacts. One example of AFR that has already occurred involves the documentation and recording of an Innu elders visit to the site of the last shaking tent ceremony, as this location will be destroyed by the project (Nalcor 2009, Vol. 3).
- Systematic field recording and subsurface sampling (SFR & SS): These methods are used to identify components and aspects of the cultural heritage sites. Many of the identified sites will undergo this form of mitigation (Nalcor 2009, Vol. 3).
- Employee education regarding important sites: Though not mentioned as one of the above three main mitigation methods in the EIS report, educating employees about the importance of cultural heritage sites can be a powerful mitigation force. The EIS mentions employee education as a key aspect of mitigating effects upon the Innu spiritual site on the north hill of Muskrat Falls (Manitu-utshu) (Nalcor 2009, Vol. 3).
- Continued communication with Indigenous and community groups: This was also not outlined as one of the three main mitigation measures for cultural heritage resources. However, it is mentioned in the EIS that Indigenous groups will be communicated with (if warranted) when unknown cultural heritage sites are discovered through construction of the project (Nalcor 2009, Vol. 3).
Critique
Positive Aspects:
|
Negative Aspects:
heritage site. For example, the EIS lays out how the spillway construction will affect certain sites, how reservoir flooding will impact sites, etc (BC Hydro 2013, Vol. 4). The Lower Churchill project EIS is much more general, and does not have the level of specificity that can be seen in the Site C EIS (Nalcor 2009, Vol. 3). - The Site C EIS has multiple indicators of impacts upon cultural heritage resources. For example, the level of access to sites and changes in context of the sites are included as indicators of impacts, along with the loss or disturbance of sites (BC Hydro 2013, Vol. 4). The Lower Churchill assessment, on the other hand, only identifies the loss or disturbance of cultural heritage sites as an indicator of impact (Nalcor 2009, Vol. 3). |