This page intentionally left blank

Heritage Values i n Site Management

Four Case Studies

M a r t a de la T o r r e

Margaret G. H . MacLean

Randall Mason

David Myers

E d i t e d b y M a r t a de la T o r r e

T h e Getty Conservation Institute, Los Angeles

T h e G e t t y C o n s e r v a t i o n Institute

T i m o t h y P. W h a l e n , Director
Jeanne M a r i e T e u t o n i c o , Associate Director, Field Projects and Sciences

T h e G e t t y C o n s e r v a t i o n Institute w o r k s internationally to advance c o n s e r v a t i o n and

to e n h a n c e a n d e n c o u r a g e the p r e s e r v a t i o n and u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f the v i s u a l arts in all
o f their dimensions—objects, collections, architecture, and sites. T h e Institute serves
the c o n s e r v a t i o n c o m m u n i t y t h r o u g h scientific research; education and training; field
projects; a n d the dissemination o f the results o f b o t h its w o r k and the w o r k o f others
in the field. I n all its endeavors, the Institute is c o m m i t t e d to addressing u n a n s w e r e d
questions and p r o m o t i n g the highest possible standards o f c o n s e r v a t i o n practice.

© 2005 J. Paul G e t t y T r u s t
G e t t y Publications
1200 G e t t y C e n t e r D r i v e , Suite 500
L o s Angeles, C a l i f o r n i a 90049-1682
www.getty.edu

Christopher Hudson, Publisher

M a r k G r e e n b e r g , Editor in Chief

Patrick Pardo, Project Editor

A b b y Sider, Copy Editor
P a m e l a H e a t h , Production Coordinator
H e s p e n h e i d e D e s i g n , Designer and Compositor

T h e i n d i v i d u a l case studies w e r e originally designed by Joe M o l l o y a n d copyedited by

S y l v i a T i d w e l l and D i a n n e W o o . T h e b o o k cover is based on a design by Joe Molloy.

P h o t o g r a p h s in the G r o s s e lie case study are courtesy o f Margaret G . H . M a c L e a n .

P h o t o g r a p h s for all other case studies have b e e n provided as indicated.

T h e a c c o m p a n y i n g C D - R O M contains copyrighted materials that have b e e n used w i t h

p e r m i s s i o n . See last page for full credit i n f o r m a t i o n .

Printed in C a n a d a by Friesens

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

Heritage values in site m a n a g e m e n t : four case studies / M a r t a de la T o r r e
.. [et a l . ] ; edited by M a r t a de la T o r r e ,
p. c m .
Includes b i b l i o g r a p h i c a l references a n d index.
I S B N - 1 3 : 978-0-89236-797-0 (pbk.)
I S B N - 1 0 : 0-89236-797-0 (pbk.)
1. H i s t o r i c s i t e s - M a n a g e m e n t - C a s e studies. 2. C u l t u r a l
p r o p e r t y - P r o t e c t i o n - C a s e studies. I . D e la T o r r e , M a r t a , 1946- II. G e t t y
C o n s e r v a t i o n Institute.
CC135.H46525 2005
363.6 '9-dc22

2004017483
 Contents

Foreword
Timothy P. Whalen v

PART O N E Project Background

Marta de la Torre

Introduction 3 Steering C o m m i t t e e o f the

C a s e Study Project 13
A b o u t the C a s e Studies: P u r p o s e , D e s i g n ,
a n d Methods 10

PART T W O The Case Studies

Grosse l i e and the I r i s h M e m o r i a l Chaco Culture N a t i o n a l Historical Park

N a t i o n a l H i s t o r i c Site Marta de la Torre, Margaret G. H. MacLean, and
Margaret G. H. MacLean and David Myers David Myers
A b o u t T h i s Case Study 18 A b o u t T h i s Case Study 60
M a n a g e m e n t C o n t e x t and M a n a g e m e n t C o n t e x t and
H i s t o r y o f Grosse l i e 20 History o f C C N H P 61
U n d e r s t a n d i n g and P r o t e c t i n g the Values U n d e r s t a n d i n g and P r o t e c t i n g
o f Grosse l i e and the Irish M e m o r i a l the Values o f the Park 69
N a t i o n a l H i s t o r i c Site 28 Conclusions 97
Conclusions 50 Appendix A: T i m e Line during
Appendix A: Commemorative Integrity— H e r i t a g e Status 101
A Short H i s t o r y o f a C e n t r a l C o n c e p t
A p p e n d i x B: Resource Classification 105
i n H e r i t a g e M a n a g e m e n t i n Parks Canada 53
A p p e n d i x C: M a n a g e m e n t
References 55 Priorities o f C C N H P i n 2001 106
Persons C o n t a c t e d d u r i n g the Appendix D : Summary o f
D e v e l o p m e n t o f the Case 56 Legislation Pertinent t o C C N H P 107
References no
Persons C o n t a c t e d d u r i n g the
D e v e l o p m e n t o f the Case 113

iii
 P o r t A r t h u r H i s t o r i c Site Hadrian's W a l l W o r l d Heritage Site
Randall Mason, David Myers, and Marta de la Torre Randall Mason, Margaret G. H. Maclean, and
A b o u t T h i s Case Study 116 Marta de la Torre
Management Context and A b o u t T h i s Case Study 172
H i s t o r y o f P o r t A r t h u r H i s t o r i c Site 117 M a n a g e m e n t C o n t e x t and H i s t o r y
U n d e r s t a n d i n g and P r o t e c t i n g o f H a d r i a n s W a l l W o r l d H e r i t a g e Site 174
the Values o f the Site 129 U n d e r s t a n d i n g and P r o t e c t i n g the
Conclusions 160 Values o f the Site 190

A p p e n d i x A : T i m e L i n e after Conclusions 206

the C l o s i n g o f the Penal C o l o n y 164 A p p e n d i x A : T i m e L i n e for
References 167 H a d r i a n s W a l l d u r i n g H e r i t a g e Status 209

Persons C o n t a c t e d d u r i n g the References 211

D e v e l o p m e n t o f the Case 169 Persons C o n t a c t e d d u r i n g the
D e v e l o p m e n t o f the Case 213

PART THREE Issues Raised b y the Case Studies

Marta de la Torre 217

Index 228 A b o u t the Authors 233

Contents o f Supporting Documents o n CD-ROM

Grosse lie and the Irish M e m o r i a l National P o r t A r t h u r H i s t o r i c Site

Historic Site
(1) Grosse l i e N a t i o n a l H i s t o r i c Site—
D e v e l o p m e n t C o n c e p t (1992)
(2) Grosse l i e N a t i o n a l H i s t o r i c Site—Report o n
the Public C o n s u l t a t i o n P r o g r a m (1994)
(3) Part I I I ( C u l t u r a l Resource M a n a g e m e n t
Policy) o f Parks Canada G u i d i n g Principles
and O p e r a t i o n a l Policies (1994)
(4) C o m m e m o r a t i v e I n t e g r i t y Statement for
Grosse l i e and the Irish M e m o r i a l N a t i o n a l
H i s t o r i c Site (1998)
(5) Grosse l i e and the Irish M e m o r i a l N a t i o n a l
H i s t o r i c Site M a n a g e m e n t Plan (2001)
(6) G u i d e t o the Preparation o f C o m m e m o r a t i v e
I n t e g r i t y Statements (2002)
(1) B r o a d A r r o w Cafe C o n s e r v a t i o n Study (1998)
(2) P o r t A r t h u r H i s t o r i c Site C o n s e r v a t i o n Plan,
v o l u m e 1 (2000)
(3) P o r t A r t h u r H i s t o r i c Site C o n s e r v a t i o n Plan,
v o l u m e 2 (2000)
(4) P A H S M A A n n u a l R e p o r t 2001
Hadrian's W a l l W o r l d Heritage Site
(1) P l a n n i n g Policy Guidance 16: A r c h a e o l o g y a n d
P l a n n i n g (1990)
(2) P l a n n i n g P o lic y Guidance 15: P l a n n i n g a n d the
H i s t o r i c E n v i r o n m e n t (1994)
(3) H a d r i a n s W a l l W o r l d H e r i t a g e Site
M a n a g e m e n t Plan 1996
(4) H a d r i a n s W a l l W o r l d H e r i t a g e Site
M a n a g e m e n t Plan 2002-2007

Chaco Culture National Historical Park

(1) Chaco C u l t u r e General M a n a g e m e n t
P l a n / D e v e l o p m e n t C o n c e p t Plan (1985)
(2) Chaco C u l t u r e Statement for I n t e r p r e t a t i o n
and I n t e r i m Interpretive Prospectus (1991)
(3) N a t i o n a l Park Service M a n a g e m e n t Policies
2001
 Foreword

I a m pleased t o w r i t e this f o r e w o r d t o Heritage Values in b e t w e e n i n t e r n a t i o n a l guidance d o c u m e n t s and technical

Site Management: Four Case Studies, the result o f research i n t e r v e n t i o n guidelines. I t is o u r h o p e that the case stud­
carried o u t b y b o t h the staff o f the G e t t y C o n s e r v a t i o n ies p r o v i d e the reader w i t h a n e w and different v i e w p o i n t
Institute ( G C I ) a n d o u r colleagues i n heritage organiza­ over the landscape o f m a n a g i n g and preserving c o m p l e x
tions a r o u n d the w o r l d . T h e b o o k presents the results o f heritage sites.
the w o r k o f a g r o u p o f dedicated professionals, w h o came T h e case studies themselves are available o n the
together over a p e r i o d o f t w o years t o discuss values- G C I W e b site at w w w g e t t y . e d u / conservation. H o w e v e r ,
based m a n a g e m e n t o f c u l t u r a l heritage sites. this p u b l i c a t i o n o f the case studies also includes a compar­
T h e case studies presented i n this v o l u m e are i s o n o f the m a n a g e m e n t policies i m p l e m e n t e d at the dif­
the result o f a collaborative project o f the A u s t r a l i a n H e r ­ ferent sites and an explanation o f the m e t h o d o l o g i e s and
itage C o m m i s s i o n ( n o w the A u s t r a l i a n H e r i t a g e C o u n c i l ) , process f o l l o w e d i n the development o f the case studies. I t
English Heritage, the U n i t e d States N a t i o n a l Park Service, is o u r expectation that these methods, w h e n used b y o t h ­
Parks Canada, and the G C I . T h e individuals representing ers i n the conservation field, m i g h t p r o v i d e a critical mass
these organizations—-Jane L e n n o n , C h r i s t o p h e r Y o u n g , o f i n f o r m a t i o n t o create guidelines and evaluation stan­
Kate Clarke, Francis M c M a n a m o n , D w i g h t Pitcaithley, dards for best practice.
Christina C a m e r o n , G o r d o n Bennett, and Francois I hope that this v o l u m e w i l l p r o v i d e unconven­
LeBlanc—steered the development o f the case studies t i o n a l insights i n t o the challenges o f preserving the
and w o r k e d closely w i t h the quartet w h o c o o r d i n a t e d u n i q u e , ever-changing, and often-conflicting values o f
the w o r k and w r o t e the text: M a r t a de la T o r r e and D a v i d c u l t u r a l heritage sites t o b o t h students and practitioners
M y e r s o f the G C I and M a r g a r e t G. H . M a c L e a n and Ran­ i n the field.
dall M a s o n . I a m g r a t e f u l t o all o f t h e m for t h e i r t i m e and
expertise, and this v o l u m e owes a great deal t o t h e i r Timothy P. Whalen
insights and experience. I n particular, I w o u l d like t o rec­ Director
ognize and t h a n k M a r t a de la T o r r e , w h o s e v i s i o n and The Getty Conservation Institute
leadership g u i d e d b o t h the research project and the case
studies t e a m .
T h e case studies project b r o u g h t together t w o
areas i n w h i c h the G C I has done considerable w o r k : site
management, and research i n significance and values i n
the conservation o f c u l t u r a l heritage sites. These case
studies c o n t i n u e this w o r k , presenting an i n - d e p t h analysis
o f h o w four i m p o r t a n t organizations i n different h e m i ­
spheres identify, understand, and p r o t e c t the values attrib­
u t e d t o c u l t u r a l heritage sites w h e n considering the
preservation, care, and m a n a g e m e n t o f those sites.
T h e sites i n these case studies are diverse and
include a v a r i e t y o f elements, r a n g i n g from buildings,
archaeological remains, and v i e w s and landscapes, t o
t o w n s and a g r i c u l t u r a l lands. Focusing o n these f o u r sites
and their u n i q u e characteristics and challenges, the case
studies bridge a gap i n the conservation l i t e r a t u r e

v
This page intentionally left blank
PART ONE Project Background

M a r t a de la T o r r e
This page intentionally left blank
 Introduction

P r e s e n t a t i o n o f t h e Project m e n t guidelines w i t h on-site p l a n n i n g and o p e r a t i o n a l

decisions b y l o o k i n g at all the values a t t r i b u t e d t o the
T h i s p u b l i c a t i o n presents f o u r case studies developed i n a
sites, and examine h o w these values influence manage­
collaborative p r o j e c t o f the G e t t y C o n s e r v a t i o n I n s t i t u t e ,
m e n t . O n e o f the clearest insights e m e r g i n g from this
the A u s t r a l i a n H e r i t a g e C o m m i s s i o n (as o f January 2004,
study is the c o m p l e x i t y o f the relationships o f a site's val­
the A u s t r a l i a n H e r i t a g e C o u n c i l ) , E n g l i s h H e r i t a g e , the
ues and the m a n y i m p l i c a t i o n s t h a t m o s t r o u t i n e manage­
U.S. N a t i o n a l Park Service, a n d Parks Canada. Each case
m e n t decisions have for t h e m . L o o k i n g at the ramifications
focuses o n a specific c u l t u r a l site a n d analyzes its manage­
o f such decisions and their i m p a c t o n the various aspects
m e n t t h r o u g h the lens o f the site's values a n d significance.
o f the place, i t becomes evident that heritage m a n a g e m e n t
These materials have a didactic i n t e n t , a n d i t is anticipated
w i l l benefit from approaches that p r o m o t e holistic think­
t h a t t h e y w i l l be used b y i n s t i t u t i o n s and i n d i v i d u a l s
ing, that g o b e y o n d the prescriptions issued i n charters and
engaged i n the study o r practice o f site m a n a g e m e n t , con­
guidelines, and that can sustain activities t o m o n i t o r the
servation p l a n n i n g , a n d h i s t o r i c preservation. T h e case
i n t e g r i t y o f values and significance.
studies are preceded b y a discussion o f site m a n a g e m e n t
T h e cases d o n o t measure the success o f a g i v e n
concepts used i n the case analyses. T h e y are f o l l o w e d b y a
m a n a g e m e n t m o d e l against some set standard. Rather,
s u m m a r y o f some o f the m o r e i m p o r t a n t p o i n t s t h a t
t h e y are i n t e n d e d t o illustrate and explain h o w f o u r differ­
e m e r g e d i n the studies, c o m p a r i n g , i n some instances,
ent g r o u p s have dealt w i t h the p r o t e c t i o n o f values i n the
h o w a p a r t i c u l a r issue developed at the different sites.
m a n a g e m e n t o f f o u r specific sites, and h o w they are
T h e heritage l i t e r a t u r e contains a large n u m b e r
h e l p e d o r h i n d e r e d i n these efforts b y legislation, regula­
o f charters and guidance d o c u m e n t s i n t e n d e d t o assist the
tions, and o t h e r policies.
practitioners i n p l a n n i n g a n d m a n a g e m e n t . 1
More
I t m u s t be said from the start that the responses
recently, m a n y i n t e r n a t i o n a l d o c u m e n t s have started t o
t h a t an o r g a n i z a t i o n can give t o a specific s i t u a t i o n are n o t
advocate n e w comprehensive m a n a g e m e n t approaches
u n l i m i t e d . L i m i t a t i o n s are created b y the legal and a d m i n ­
focused o n the values o f a place. T h e organizations partic­
istrative context. T h e m a n a g i n g authorities i n v o l v e d i n the
i p a t i n g i n this p r o j e c t share a b e l i e f i n the usefulness o f
cases are g o v e r n m e n t a l agencies, i n three cases n a t i o n a l
values-based m a n a g e m e n t i n a b r o a d range o f local,
ones. I n practical t e r m s this means t h a t the approaches
regional, n a t i o n a l , a n d i n t e r n a t i o n a l contexts. T h e y also
used and the decisions m a d e i n these sites are governed as
recognized t h a t there is l i t t l e i n f o r m a t i o n a b o u t the appli­
m u c h b y the n a t i o n a l policies a n d regulations as b y the
c a t i o n o f theoretical guidelines t o specific cases a n d c r i t i ­
specific situations o f the sites. Balancing h i g h e r authorities
cal analyses o f actual m a n a g e m e n t practices. These cases
w i t h local needs is a challenge faced b y m o s t managers. I f
are i n t e n d e d t o fill some o f t h a t gap b y i l l u s t r a t i n g h o w
negative impacts o f policies o r actions have been p o i n t e d
values a n d significance are u n d e r s t o o d and used i n actual
o u t i n the case studies, i t has been done t o illustrate the
m a n a g e m e n t practices.
c o m p l e x i t y o f m a n a g i n g sites w i t h m u l t i p l e values. These
T h e case studies i n this p u b l i c a t i o n deal w i t h sites
c o m m e n t s s h o u l d n o t be t a k e n as an evaluation o f the
t h a t are u n i q u e , a n d thus each one emphasizes the issues
actions o f the site authorities.
t h a t w e r e considered t o be i m p o r t a n t i n t h a t place a n d its
circumstances. O p e r a t i o n a l activities generally target T H E SITES AND T H E I R GOVERNING AGENCIES
specific p r o b l e m s and rarely a l l o w the t i m e t o consider T h e f o u r sites studied as p a r t o f this project—Grosse l i e
b r o a d i m p l i c a t i o n s . T h e case studies step b a c k t o l o o k at a n d the I r i s h M e m o r i a l N a t i o n a l H i s t o r i c Site i n Canada,
the i m p a c t o f the o p e r a t i o n a l decisions o n the essential Chaco C u l t u r e N a t i o n a l H i s t o r i c a l P a r k i n the U.S., P o r t
qualities o f the site. T h e y p r o v i d e detailed analyses o f the A r t h u r H i s t o r i c Site i n Australia, and Hadrian's W a l l
processes t h a t connect p o l i c y statements a n d manage­ W o r l d H e r i t a g e Site i n the U n i t e d K i n g d o m — w e r e p u t

3
f o r t h b y t h e i r g o v e r n i n g agencies as examples o f h o w val­
ues issues have been addressed. T h e sites w e r e chosen t o
present a variety o f resources and circumstances that affect
m a n a g e m e n t . T h e administrative e n v i r o n m e n t o f each is
2
different, d e t e r m i n e d b y its legal status, applicable legisla­
t i o n , and policies o f g o v e r n i n g agencies. T h e sites also v a r y
i n t h e i r h i s t o r y as a heritage place, and those that have
enjoyed heritage status the longest have seen a m o r e thor­
o u g h t r a n s f o r m a t i o n o f t h e i r values and significance.
Site M a n a g e m e n t
T H E CHANGING MANAGEMENT ENVIRONMENT
T h e m a n a g e m e n t o f c u l t u r a l sites has b e c o m e a t o p i c o f
m u c h interest i n recent years. H e r i t a g e m a n a g e m e n t , h o w ­
ever, is n o t a n e w enterprise. Sites have b e e n m a n a g e d i n
one w a y o r another since the m o m e n t t h e y came t o be
considered "heritage." Some o f the recent a t t e n t i o n can be
a t t r i b u t e d t o i m p o r t a n t changes t h a t have o c c u r r e d i n the
e n v i r o n m e n t i n w h i c h sites are m a n a g e d and the need t o
f i n d ways o f d o i n g an o l d task u n d e r n e w conditions.
H e r i t a g e m a n a g e m e n t used t o be the c o n c e r n o f
small g r o u p s o f experts w h o defined and c o n t r o l l e d w h a t
c o n s t i t u t e d heritage a n d d e t e r m i n e d h o w i t was conserved
and i n t e r p r e t e d . C o n s e r v a t i o n o f physical resources was
the c e n t r a l concern, since value was defined i n t e r m s o f
m a t e r i a l " a u t h e n t i c i t y " and "integrity." A l l the o t h e r activ­
3
ities that o c c u r r e d at a site w e r e generally measured
against the i m p a c t t h e y h a d o n the fabric. (This does n o t
m e a n t h a t decisions t h a t h a d a negative i m p a c t w e r e never
taken; b u t t h e y w e r e seen i n i t i a l l y as "necessary c o m p r o ­
mises" and later as "bad decisions.")
As a result o f years o f w o r k , the care a n d conser­
v a t i o n o f materials have b e e n g r e a t l y advanced, a n d t o d a y
there are m a n y effective—albeit often expensive a n d
c o m p l e x — s o l u t i o n s . H o w e v e r , i n spite o f technical solu­
tions, the p r e s e r v a t i o n a n d m a n a g e m e n t o f heritage have
b e c o m e m o r e difficult a n d c o m p l e x . A m o n g the factors
c o n t r i b u t i n g t o this c o m p l e x i t y are the expansion o f the
concept a n d scope o f heritage, the t r e n d t o l o o k for solu­
tions i n m a r k e t approaches, a n d the g r o w i n g p a r t i c i p a t i o n
o f n e w g r o u p s i n heritage decisions.
T h e idea o f w h a t constitutes heritage has
extended from i n d i v i d u a l b u i l d i n g s a n d m o n u m e n t s t o
m u c h greater ensembles o f h u m a n creations, such as
cities a n d landscapes—many n o w p r o t e c t e d as W o r l d H e r ­
itage Sites. H e r i t a g e professionals have h a d t o m a k e the
t r a n s i t i o n f r o m m a n a g i n g a n d c o n s e r v i n g one b u i l d i n g ,
w h e r e the p r o t e c t i o n o f the m o n u m e n t was the p r i n c i p a l
4 PROJECT B A C K G R O U N D
objective, t o dealing w i t h places i n w h i c h the heritage is
o n l y one a m o n g m a n y elements o f a l i v i n g and e v o l v i n g
e n v i r o n m e n t . N o n e o f the cases presented here are con­
cerned exclusively w i t h a single structure. T h e sites v a r y i n
degree o f complexity, b u t all i n c l u d e buildings, archaeolog­
ical remains, and i m p o r t a n t v i e w s a n d landscapes, a n d i n
the case o f H a d r i a n s W a l l , t o w n s and a g r i c u l t u r a l lands.
M a r k e t (or business) approaches have b e e n
applied i n the heritage w o r l d i n recent decades. T h i s is a
l o g i c a l m o v e i f v i e w e d as t u r n i n g for solutions t o a disci­
p l i n e w i t h experience i n a l l o c a t i n g resources a n d r e s o l v i n g
conflicts i n c o m p l e x a n d d y n a m i c e n v i r o n m e n t s . A t the
same t i m e , the g l o b a l t r e n d t o w a r d p r i v a t i z a t i o n o f activi­
ties a n d f u n c t i o n s t r a d i t i o n a l l y i n the p u b l i c d o m a i n has
also e n c o u r a g e d this shift.
H o w e v e r , w h i l e the application o f m a r k e t con­
cepts and business approaches can be useful for heritage
m a n a g e m e n t , i t also has dangers. A g o o d example o f
efforts t o adapt business m e t h o d s t o the c u l t u r a l field is
cost-benefit analysis. As one o f the m o s t frequently used
tools i n business d e c i s i o n - m a k i n g processes, i t was applied
early o n t o the heritage field. I n an a t t e m p t t o b r i n g her­
itage i n t o the e c o n o m i c arena, the benefits o f heritage
decisions w e r e j u s t i f i e d b y e c o n o m i c outcomes, such as
g e n e r a t i o n o f e m p l o y m e n t o r increased revenues from vis­
itors. H o w e v e r , i t was s o o n evident t h a t m o n e t a r y mea­
surements never account for the t o t a l i t y o f either benefits
o r costs o f heritage decisions. T h e r e are i n t a n g i b l e benefits
o f p r e s e r v i n g heritage a n d costs i n its loss that cannot be
assigned a m o n e t a r y o r quantitative value. T h i s has l e d the
heritage field t o use these quantitative tools w i t h reserva­
tions, and m o r e i m p o r t a n t , t o seek m e a s u r e m e n t m e t h o d s
that are m o r e suitable t o c u l t u r a l resources. 4
Basically, the benefits o f heritage are defined b y
the values t h a t society attributes t o i t . T h e r e are m a n y
sources o f i n f o r m a t i o n t h a t can be t a p p e d t o establish the
values o f a heritage place. H i s t o r i c a l records a n d research
findings have b e e n used m o s t i n the past, and generally are
c o n s u l t e d first. T h e values t h a t generally emerge from
these sources are the t r a d i t i o n a l ones: historic, scientific,
a n d aesthetic.
M o r e recently, the v a r i o u s g r o u p s w h o have a
stake i n the place, be t h e y experts, politicians, ethnic o r
religious g r o u p s , o r n e i g h b o r h o o d c o m m u n i t i e s , have
been r e c o g n i z e d as an i m p o r t a n t source o f k n o w l e d g e
a b o u t values. Social benefits such as ethnic dignity, eco­
n o m i c d e v e l o p m e n t , spiritual life, a n d social stability have
started t o be recognized. N o d o u b t , m a n y g r o u p s a n d
individuals derive e c o n o m i c benefits from the heritage.
A n d , as n e w values emerge, there are questions as t o Values a n d Significance
w h e t h e r the n e w ones are as "valuable" as the m o r e tradi­
tional ones o r those that can be measured i n m o n e t a r y Values-based site management is the coordinated
terms. A greater interest i n heritage is a g o o d t h i n g
and structured operation of a heritage site with the
indeed, b u t i t also creates complex and sometimes difficult
management situations. primary purpose of protecting the significance of

VALUES-BASED MANAGEMENT the place as defined by designation criteria, govern­

Heritage resource management can be defined simply as
ment authorities or other owners, experts of various
"the w a y that those responsible choose t o use it, exploit it,
o r conserve i t . " However, as m o r e people feel responsibil­
5
stripes, and other citizens with legitimate interests
i t y for heritage, authorities can seldom make manage­
in the place.
m e n t choices solely o n their o w n . N e w interested groups
come w i t h opinions about the values o f their heritage and
"Value" and "significance" are terms used i n cul­
h o w i t is t o be conserved and managed—opinions that do
n o t always coincide w i t h the views o f experts. People have tural management w i t h increasing frequency
come t o anticipate benefits from these resources, and
b u t w i t h various definitions. T h e y are also cen­
authorities m u s t take i n t o consideration these expecta­
tions. Sometimes, the values o f different groups are tral concepts t o values-based management and
incompatible and can result i n serious conflicts. Heritage
to the case studies o f this publication. 1

professionals have been l o o k i n g for ways t o b r i n g f o r t h

the views o f all stakeholders and t o resolve the conflicts
I n this project, "value" has been used t o m e a n
that inevitably arise. I n this changed e n v i r o n m e n t , deci­
sions about heritage need t o be negotiated. T h e search is positive characteristics attributed t o heritage
o n for an approach that assures equity, avoiding those i n
objects and places b y legislation, governing
w h i c h the values that prevail b e l o n g t o the g r o u p w i t h the
m o s t political power. authorities, and other stakeholders. These 2

T h e approaches m o s t often favored are those

characteristics are w h a t make a heritage site
called "values-based," i n w h i c h the m a i n management
goal is the preservation o f the significance and values o f a significant and are the reason w h y stakeholders
place. Understanding all the values attributed t o c u l t u r a l
and authorities are interested i n it. T h e benefits
resources is fundamental t o these methods. O n l y after this
happens can one consider h o w these values are t o be effec­ o f heritage are inextricably l i n k e d t o these
tively protected. This systematic analysis o f values distin­
values.
guishes these approaches f r o m m o r e traditional ones,
w h i c h are m o r e likely t o focus o n resolving specific prob­
"Significance" has been used t o m e a n the
lems or issues w i t h o u t f o r m a l consideration o f the i m p a c t
o f solutions o n the totality o f the site or its values, o r t o overall i m p o r t a n c e o f a site, d e t e r m i n e d
focus o n the conservation o f the tangible resources. 6

t h r o u g h an analysis o f the t o t a l i t y o f the val­

These n e w management methods are seen t o
have a n u m b e r o f advantages. T h e y require awareness o f ues a t t r i b u t e d t o it. Significance also reflects
all the values o f a site; they rely o n consultation and there­
the i m p o r t a n c e a place has w i t h respect t o one
fore involve m o r e o f society i n the conservation process;
and they create a deeper understanding o f the resource. or several o f its values, and i n r e l a t i o n t o o t h e r
M o s t importantly, they are seen as means o f achieving
comparable sites.
sustainability for the heritage, b y p r o m o t i n g the participa­
t i o n and i n v o l v e m e n t o f all those w h o care.

INTRODUCTION 5

Notes
1 See, f o r e x a m p l e , R. M a s o n a n d E . A v r a m i , " H e r i t a g e V a l u e s
a n d C h a l l e n g e s o f C o n s e r v a t i o n P l a n n i n g , " i n J. M . T e u t o n i c o
a n d G . P a l u m b o , Management Planningfor Archaeological Sites,
L o s A n g e l e s : T h e G e t t y C o n s e r v a t i o n I n s t i t u t e , 2000,13.
2
A s w i l l b e c o m e e v i d e n t i n t h e cases, e a c h o f t h e o r g a n i z a ­
t i o n s i n v o l v e d i n t h e s t u d y defines v a l u e s i n s l i g h t l y , b u t n o t
significantly, different ways.
6 PROJECT B A C K G R O U N D
Nevertheless, values-based m a n a g e m e n t is a n e w
approach w i t h m a n y aspects r e m a i n i n g t o be explored.
T h e r e p o r t o f a recent m e e t i n g o f experts brings o u t
advantages a n d challenges o f m a n a g i n g m u l t i p l e values
i n a p a r t i c i p a t o r y process w h e n i t says " [ T ] r a d i t i o n a l
absolute values are replaced b y relative, pluralistic value
systems, w h i c h i n t u r n a l l o w the b r i d g i n g o f large c u l t u r a l
differences. T h e m e t h o d s o f d e c i s i o n - m a k i n g and the
d e t e r m i n a t i o n o f policies have m o v e d away b o t h f r o m
over-regulated, state-dominated process and the simplistic
use o f o p t i m i z a t i o n m o d e l s . . . t o partially chaotic, n o t
foreseeable social processes." T h i s p u b l i c a t i o n attempts
7
t o shed n e w l i g h t o n some o f the less k n o w n aspects o f
these n e w approaches.
Values
O n e o f the m o s t i m p o r t a n t steps i n values-based manage­
m e n t is the identification o f the values o f the place
t h r o u g h an elicitation process i n v o l v i n g stakeholders.
O n l y after this has been done, a n d i n c o n j u n c t i o n w i t h a
t h o r o u g h u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f the physical resources, is m a n ­
agement i n a p o s i t i o n t o establish the significance o f the
place a n d the appropriate policies and strategies.
I n reality, however, planners and managers almost
always deal w i t h sites w h o s e p r i m a r y significance has
been established earlier, usually at the t i m e o f designa­
t i o n . T h e significance o f the sites i n c l u d e d i n this study
was established b y legislation o r as p a r t o f the designation
process. T h i s significance can be called different things:
"purpose o f the p a r k " i n the N a t i o n a l Park System; crite­
ria for listing, i n the case o f H a d r i a n s Wall's W o r l d H e r ­
itage Site status; and " c o m m e m o r a t i v e i n t e n t " i n Parks
Canada. A l l heritage designation schemes are based o n
specific criteria that favor certain values. For example,
n a t i o n a l heritage systems consider o n l y those values—
generally historic ones—that are i m p o r t a n t t o the n a t i o n
as a w h o l e . W o r l d H e r i t a g e l i s t i n g is based o n criteria that
consider so-called universal values. Official designations
address the values that m a k e sites significant at the
n a t i o n a l o r i n t e r n a t i o n a l level, b u t i n almost all instances
exclude o t h e r i m p o r t a n t values h e l d b y l e g i t i m a t e stake­
holders. I n general, the h i g h e r the designation level, the
n a r r o w e r the values that are recognized as significant.
Since heritage places have a m u l t i p l i c i t y o f values, favor­
i n g certain ones at the t i m e o f designation can create
interesting challenges for m a n a g e m e n t , a n d these issues
are explored i n each o f the case studies. A l l the agencies
i n v o l v e d i n this study use m a n a g e m e n t approaches that
a t t e m p t t o recognize and p r o t e c t values t h a t g o b e y o n d
those identified b y designation o r l i s t i n g processes. T h e
ability o f each o r g a n i z a t i o n t o recognize a d d i t i o n a l values
varies, a n d depends o n t h e b r o a d e r legal a n d administra­
tive f r a m e w o r k i n w h i c h the g o v e r n i n g a u t h o r i t y exists.
I t is i m p o r t a n t t o recognize that i n all cases the
g o v e r n i n g agencies consider the p r o t e c t i o n o f the physical
resources t o be p a r a m o u n t . As expressed b y English H e r ­
itage: "significance involves a detailed u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f
the historic fabric o f the site and h o w i t has changed
t h r o u g h t i m e , and t h e n an assessment o f the v a l u e s — b o t h
historic a n d c o n t e m p o r a r y — a s c r i b e d t o that fabric."
E L I C I T I N G VALUES
G o v e r n i n g authorities deal differently w i t h the
i d e n t i f i c a t i o n o f stakeholders and the e l i c i t a t i o n o f values.
T h e i n v o l v e m e n t o f stakeholder g r o u p s can h a p p e n i n
several ways. I n m a n y instances, interested g r o u p s m a k e
t h e i r v i e w s k n o w n a n d d e m a n d i n v o l v e m e n t i n the deci­
s i o n - m a k i n g process. Less frequently, authorities m a y
request the p a r t i c i p a t i o n o f l e g i t i m a t e stakeholders.
Often, e l i c i t i n g i n f o r m a t i o n a b o u t values is n o t a simple
process, a n d the r e c o g n i t i o n o f this challenge b y the her­
itage field has l e d t o some i m p o r t a n t recent w o r k o n val-
ues-elicitation a n d assessment t o o l s . 9
T r a d i t i o n a l stakeholders o f c u l t u r a l sites have
b e e n professionals i n various disciplines, such as history,
archaeology, architecture, ecology, biology, a n d so f o r t h ,
w h o s i m u l t a n e o u s l y express a n d create value t h r o u g h
t h e i r research o r expert o p i n i o n s . E v e r y site has a g r o u p o f
people w h o are considered t o be the p r i n c i p a l stakehold­
ers. O f t e n , t h e y are the ones w h o w e r e i n v o l v e d w i t h t h e
place w h e n its significance was first recognized. T h e i r
l o n g - t e r m interest a n d s t r o n g association w i t h the o r i g i n a l
values have often earned t h e m a p r i v i l e g e d relationship
w i t h the m a n a g i n g agencies, a n d t h e y are the "experts"
w h o are c o n s u l t e d i n m a j o r decisions.
M o r e recently, g r o u p s w h o value heritage sites
for different reasons have c o m e f o r t h a n d d e m a n d e d t o be
i n v o l v e d . These n e w stakeholder g r o u p s can range
c o m m u n i t i e s l i v i n g close by, t o g r o u p s w i t h t r a d i t i o n a l
ties o r interests i n p a r t i c u l a r aspects o f the site. N e w val­
ues often surface as a result o f the i n v o l v e m e n t o f these
groups. B r o a d i n v o l v e m e n t o f p u b l i c g r o u p s provides
l e g i t i m a c y t o the results o f the p l a n n i n g process a n d can
assist m a n a g e m e n t i n the i m p l e m e n t a t i o n o f the plans.
H o w e v e r , the i n v o l v e m e n t o f n e w g r o u p s is n o t always an
easy process. M o s t o f the values a r t i c u l a t e d i n a values-
e l i c i t a t i o n o r c o n s u l t a t i o n process are l e g i t i m a t e a n d
m e r i t serious c o n s i d e r a t i o n and p r o t e c t i o n as the site is
managed. B u t , as stakeholders m u l t i p l y , heritage m a n ­
agers face w i d e - r a n g i n g a n d sometimes c o n f l i c t i n g inter­
ests. I n practice, i n v o l v i n g different g r o u p s i n the p l a n n i n g
a n d m a n a g e m e n t processes creates n e w challenges t o
identify l e g i t i m a t e spokespersons, choose appropriate
e l i c i t a t i o n m e t h o d s , and consider all the values o f a place.
I n m o r e t r a d i t i o n a l approaches, authorities still
take i t u p o n themselves t o articulate w h a t they believe t o
be the v i e w s o f the different groups, o r selected i n f o r m a n t -
stakeholders are consulted i n the early stages o f the plan­
n i n g process. T h e i n v o l v e m e n t o f stakeholders i n the plan­
8
n i n g process o r the r e c o g n i t i o n o f t h e i r values is n o t a
guarantee t h a t they w i l l be i n v o l v e d i n m a n a g e m e n t deci­
sions. I n m a n y instances, "experts" o r the authorities inter­
p r e t the values o f a w i d e s p e c t r u m o f stakeholders as
needed i n the m a n a g e m e n t process, o r consult o n l y those
groups w h o s e values they consider w o u l d be m o s t directly
affected b y a decision. T h i s is necessary since any manage­
m e n t approach r e q u i r i n g constant consultations w i t h
m a n y g r o u p s w o u l d be extremely inefficient. I n this situa­
t i o n , w h a t becomes i m p o r t a n t is that those w i t h the p o w e r
o f decision have sufficient i n t e r a c t i o n w i t h stakeholders so
t h a t they m a y t r u l y take t h e i r v i e w s i n t o consideration.
F i n d i n g the r i g h t spokespersons for a g r o u p is
critical. O n l y g r o u p s w i t h f o r m a l structures, such as tribes
or r e l i g i o u s sects, can easily designate representatives w h o
speak for the g r o u p as a w h o l e . I n all o t h e r instances,
authorities m u s t rely o n t h e i r k n o w l e d g e o f the g r o u p s o r
o n i n f o r m a n t s t o identify l e g i t i m a t e representatives. I f
those representing a g r o u p are n o t considered t o have the
a u t h o r i t y t o d o so, the i n f o r m a t i o n they p r o v i d e is l i k e l y
to be contested later o n .
H e r i t a g e places m i g h t be seen t o r e m a i n fairly
u n c h a n g e d over t i m e , b u t like stakeholder groups, values
also evolve a n d n e w ones emerge. T h e r e are m a n y ways i n
w h i c h a site changes, even after its designation as "her­
itage" guarantees its preservation. A r c h a e o l o g i c a l w o r k
can b r i n g t o l i g h t a d d i t i o n a l resources; research a n d n e w
i n f o r m a t i o n can generate value for objects; events can
from
give n e w significance t o a place; and, alas, d e t e r i o r a t i o n
can d i m i n i s h values.
ECONOMIC VALUE
H e r i t a g e m a n a g e m e n t tends t o assess t h e c u l t u r a l a n d
social values o f sites separately f r o m t h e i r e c o n o m i c
d i m e n s i o n . T h i s happens i n spite o f the fact t h a t i n m a n y
instances, e c o n o m i c value is significant a n d a large n u m ­
ber o f individuals benefit from i t . T h i s s i t u a t i o n seems t o
be created b y t w o separate factors: first, the field's t r a d i ­
t i o n a l aversion t o assigning "a p r i c e " t o heritage, insisting
INTRODUCTION 7
t h a t the value o f " h e r i t a g e " — s o m e t h i n g t h a t is u n i q u e
a n d irreplaceable—cannot be measured i n m o n e t a r y
t e r m s ; a n d second, the real difficulties t h a t exist i n c o m ­
p a r i n g e c o n o m i c a n d c u l t u r a l values.
Considerable effort has b e e n devoted i n recent
years t o researching the e c o n o m i c value o f heritage a n d
t o f i n d i n g the means o f i n t e g r a t i n g i t w i t h o t h e r values.
T h i s is an i m p o r t a n t p r o b l e m r e q u i r i n g s o l u t i o n . As her­
itage becomes u b i q u i t o u s , the a m o u n t o f resources
needed for its care becomes significant a n d has t o be con­
sidered i n the c o n t e x t o f o t h e r possible investment. I n
order for this t o be done responsibly, there need t o be
tools t h a t measure t h e f u l l value o f heritage, a n d n o t o n l y
monetary contributions.
Overemphasis o f any value can be d e t r i m e n t a l t o
heritage, a n d this is m o s t t r u e o f e c o n o m i c considera­
tions. P l a y i n g u p t o the e c o n o m i c value o f heritage has
generally m e a n t increasing t h e n u m b e r o f visitors, gener­
ally tourists. V i s i t o r access a n d p r e s e r v a t i o n have always
b e e n r e c o g n i z e d as a p o t e n t i a l source o f conflict. M o r e
recently, the e c o n o m i c benefits generated b y t o u r i s m have
c o m e t o be seen as t h e means o f assuring preservation.
W h i l e t o u r i s m can be either a positive o r a nega­
tive factor i n c u l t u r a l sites, there are o t h e r " e c o n o m i c val­
ues" t h a t are w i t h o u t a d o u b t d e t r i m e n t a l . Such a case is
w h e r e the c u l t u r a l resource sits o n l a n d t h a t has alternative
uses t h a t c o u l d generate significant e c o n o m i c benefits,
such as m i n i n g o r development. Unless the c u l t u r a l
resource enjoys a v e r y s t r o n g legal p r o t e c t i o n , this is a dan­
gerous s i t u a t i o n because the realization o f the p o t e n t i a l
e c o n o m i c benefits c o u l d b r i n g about its destruction.
C o n s i d e r a t i o n o f e c o n o m i c values w i l l c o n t i n u e
t o g a i n i m p o r t a n c e i n the f u t u r e as heritage encompasses
larger areas a n d m o r e " w o r k i n g " e n v i r o n m e n t s , w i t h the
p r i v a t i z a t i o n trends, a n d the emphasis o n public-private
partnerships. M a n y i n the w o r l d o f heritage have already
n o t e d t h a t the n a r r o w v i e w o f c o n s e r v a t i o n as the care o f
the m a t e r i a l c u l t u r a l p r o p e r t y m u s t y i e l d t o a w i d e r con­
cept o f c o n s e r v a t i o n as an e c o n o m i c a l l y sustainable prac­
tice t h a t involves society at large.
P R O T E C T I O N OF VALUES
T h e purpose o f k n o w i n g and understanding the ways a
place is v a l u e d is t o p r o t e c t the significance a t t r i b u t e d t o i t
b y different groups i n society and create a sustainable
preservation e n v i r o n m e n t . However, because c u l t u r a l her­
itage has a m u l t i t u d e o f values, i t is n o t always possible t o
p r o t e c t all o f t h e m equally. Values are sometimes i n
8 PROJECT B A C K G R O U N D
conflict, and managers m u s t m a k e decisions t h a t favor
some b u t n o t others. T h i s involves setting priorities a m o n g
the values. Some priorities are m a n d a t e d b y law, usually
favoring those values that u p h o l d the heritage designation.
Each o f the case studies i n this p u b l i c a t i o n dis­
cusses conflicts t h a t have b e e n faced b y site authorities.
T h e source o f conflict can be t h e uses t h a t different stake­
holders w a n t t o m a k e o f the site i n accordance w i t h t h e i r
values, a n d others can surface w h e n the p r o t e c t i o n o f a
certain value has a negative i m p a c t o n another.
T h e p r i o r i t y g i v e n t o c e r t a i n values o f t e n depends
o n the system t h a t labels c u l t u r a l heritage. I n W o r l d H e r ­
itage Sites, for example, n a t i o n a l authorities are c o m m i t ­
ted t o p r o t e c t i n g those values t h a t m a k e t h e sites
significant at a universal level. T h e choice o f j u s t i f i c a t i o n
for i n s c r i p t i o n i n the list is left t o the c o u n t r y n o m i n a t i n g
the site, b u t the site m u s t m e e t the c r i t e r i o n o r criteria
selected b e y o n d the local o r n a t i o n a l level. T h i s restric­
t i o n , b y d e f i n i t i o n , w i l l n o t a l l o w all values o f a site t o be
p a r t o f the W o r l d H e r i t a g e N o m i n a t i o n a n d affects all
o t h e r values n o t m e e t i n g the "universal" c r i t e r i o n .
T H E IMPORTANCE OF FABRIC
W h i l e the values and significance o f a place o u g h t t o be the
touchstone o f m a n a g e m e n t decisions, day-to-day opera­
tions are m o s t often concerned w i t h the use and care o f the
physical resources. T h u s , t o p r o t e c t values and significance,
i t is critical t o d e t e r m i n e the relationship o f values t o fabric.
I n its m o s t literal sense this can m e a n m a p p i n g the values
o n the features o f the site and answering questions such as,
w h i c h features capture the essence o f a g i v e n value? W h a t
about t h e m m u s t be guarded i n order t o retain that value? I f
a v i e w is seen t o be i m p o r t a n t t o the value o f the place,
w h a t are its essential elements? W h a t a m o u n t o f change is
possible w i t h o u t c o m p r o m i s i n g the value? Clear under­
standing o f w h e r e values reside allows site managers t o
p r o t e c t w h a t makes a site significant. T h i s is s o m e w h a t dif­
ferent from the rationale b e h i n d the p r o t e c t i o n o f the fabric
i n t r a d i t i o n a l conservation. I n that perspective, the o r i g i n a l
materials w e r e the o n l y essential elements o f significance
and sustained the concepts o f " i n t e g r i t y " and "authentic­
ity." Values-based m a n a g e m e n t does n o t d i m i n i s h the value
o f the physical materials, b u t the conservation o f o t h e r ele­
ments—some tangible, others not—is also i m p o r t a n t , such
as the conservation o f landscape v i e w s and t r a d i t i o n a l uses.
Heritage agencies use different means t o deter­
m i n e w h e r e values reside. Traditionally, w o r k was con­
ducted as i f values resided i n any m a t e r i a l that was "authen-
tic" and any structure that h a d ' ' i n t e g r i t y " T h e values-based
p l a n n i n g process calls for t w o steps—documentation o f the
site and assessment o f the conditions o f the resources—
that provide a clear understanding o f the place, w h i c h is
fundamental t o the c o n n e c t i o n b e t w e e n values and fabric.
Conclusions
VALUES-BASED MANAGEMENT: A FRAMEWORK
FOR CONSERVATION
T h e e v o l u t i o n f r o m a v i s i o n o f i d e n t i f y i n g and c a r i n g for
specific resources t o one that focuses o n the benefits t o be
o b t a i n e d from these activities has t r a n s f o r m e d the her­
itage field i n recent years. Nevertheless, one o f the m a j o r
challenges i n this n e w v i s i o n has b e e n m a k i n g a clear
statement o f the objectives t o be achieved a n d f i n d i n g
ways o f m e a s u r i n g success.
M o n i t o r i n g continues t o be one o f the weakest
areas o f professional heritage practice i n spite o f recent
efforts t o establish indicators o r n e w tools t o assist i n this
task. M e m b e r s o f the Steering C o m m i t t e e o f the Case
Study Project have suggested that values-based manage­
m e n t c o u l d p r o v i d e a n e w framework for heritage care.
T h i s w o u l d occur w h e n the p r o t e c t i o n a n d preservation
o f significance are accepted as the p r i n c i p a l objective o f
m a n a g e m e n t , w h i c h i n t u r n w o u l d require t h a t heritage
m a n a g e m e n t focus o n the i n t a n g i b l e values o f the place
w h i l e at the same t i m e p r o t e c t i n g the physical and t a n g i ­
ble e m b o d i m e n t o f those values. W i t h this n e w perspec­
tive, the effectiveness o f m a n a g e m e n t can be m o n i t o r e d
by i d e n t i f y i n g appropriate indicators.
T h e cases t h a t f o l l o w illustrate the reality o f
m a n y o f the issues discussed i n this i n t r o d u c t i o n . T h e
final chapter o f this p u b l i c a t i o n l o o k s across the f o u r cases
t o c o m p a r e h o w the local administrative and legal envi­
r o n m e n t s affected specific issues.
Notes
1. A l i s t o f c h a r t e r s a n d o t h e r i n t e r n a t i o n a l s t a n d a r d s is avail­
a b l e o n t h e W e b sites o f t h e I n t e r n a t i o n a l C o u n c i l o n M o n u ­
m e n t s a n d Sites ( h t t p : / / w w w . i c o m o s . o r g ) ; a m o r e c o m p r e ­
h e n s i v e l i s t o f c u l t u r a l h e r i t a g e d o c u m e n t s is a v a i l a b l e at
h t t p : / / w w w . g e t t y . e d u / c o n s e r v a t i o n / resources.
2. T h e rationale and m e t h o d o l o g y used i n the development o f
t h e cases are p r e s e n t e d i n t h e n e x t s e c t i o n o f t h i s p u b l i c a t i o n .
3. T h e concept o f a u t h e n t i c i t y was the focus o f considerable
i n t e r n a t i o n a l d e b a t e i n r e c e n t years. T h e s e d e b a t e s b r o u g h t
i n t o e v i d e n c e t h a t " a u t h e n t i c i t y " is d i f f i c u l t t o d e f i n e a n d
means different things i n different cultures. I f "authenticity"
is s e e n as a s u r r o g a t e f o r " v a l u e , " i t is easier t o u n d e r s t a n d
w h y i t c a n h a v e s u c h d i f f e r e n t m e a n i n g s across c u l t u r e s . F o r
m o r e d e t a i l s o n a u t h e n t i c i t y , see K . E . L a r s e n , e d . , Nara Con­
ference on Authenticity, Japan 1994, Paris: U N E S C O , I C O M O S
10
3c I C C R O M , 1995, a n d G . A r a o z a n d M . M a c L e a n , eds.,
Authenticity in the Conservation and Management of the Cultural
Heritage of the Americas, W a s h i n g t o n , D . C . : U S / I C O M O S &
T h e G e t t y C o n s e r v a t i o n I n s t i t u t e , 1999.
4. See, f o r e x a m p l e , D . T h r o s b y , Economics and Culture,
C a m b r i d g e : C a m b r i d g e U n i v e r s i t y Press, 2001.
5. M . P e a r s o n a n d S. S u l l i v a n , Looking After Heritage Places:
The Basics of Heritage Planningfor Managers, Landowners,
M e l b o u r n e : M e l b o u r n e U n i v e r s i t y Press, 1995,7.
6. Values-based h e r i t a g e m a n a g e m e n t has b e e n m o s t t h o r ­
oughly formalized i n Australia, w h e r e the B u r r a Charter
guides practitioners. Faced w i t h the technical a n d p h i l o s o p h i ­
cal challenges p o s e d b y a b o r i g i n a l places, n o n a r c h i t e c t u r a l
sites, a n d v e r n a c u l a r h e r i t a g e , A u s t r a l i a n h e r i t a g e p r o f e s s i o n ­
als f o u n d t h a t t h e e x i s t i n g g u i d a n c e i n t h e f i e l d f a i l e d t o p r o ­
v i d e a d e q u a t e l a n g u a g e a n d sensitivities. B u i l d i n g o n t h e basic
ethics a n d p r i n c i p l e s o f t h e V e n i c e C h a r t e r , t h e y d e v i s e d
g u i d e l i n e s f o r h e r i t a g e m a n a g e m e n t — a site-specific a p p r o a c h
t h a t calls f o r a n e x a m i n a t i o n o f t h e v a l u e s a s c r i b e d t o t h e
p l a c e b y all its s t a k e h o l d e r s , a n d t h e precise a r t i c u l a t i o n o f
w h a t c o n s t i t u t e s t h e site's p a r t i c u l a r significance. W h i l e i t is
o f f i c i a l l y e n d o r s e d o n l y i n A u s t r a l i a , t h e B u r r a C h a r t e r has
b e c o m e an adaptable m o d e l for c u l t u r a l l y tailored approaches
t o site m a n a g e m e n t i n o t h e r p a r t s o f t h e w o r l d .
7. R . N a n d a , " G r o u p R e p o r t : V a l u e s a n d Society," i n N . S. B a e r
a n d F. Snickars, Rational Decision-Making in the Preservation of
Cultural Property, B e r l i n : D a h l e m U n i v e r s i t y Press, 2001, 76.
8. English Heritage, "Policy Statement o n Restoration, Recon­
s t r u c t i o n , a n d S p e c u l a t i v e R e c r e a t i o n o f A r c h a e o l o g i c a l Sites
I n c l u d i n g R u i n s , " Feb. 2001: p a r a . 32.
9. F o r m o r e i n f o r m a t i o n , see M . de l a T o r r e , Assessing the Values
of Cultural Heritage Research Report 2002, L o s A n g e l e s : T h e
Getty Conservation Institute.
10. F o r a step-by-step e x p l a n a t i o n o f t h i s p r o c e s s , see M . D e m a s ,
"Planning for Conservation and M a n a g e m e n t o f Archaeo­
l o g i c a l Sites: A V a l u e s - B a s e d A p p r o a c h , " i n J. M . T e u t o n i c o
a n d G . P a l u m b o , Management Planningfor Archaeological Sites,
Los Angeles: T h e G e t t y C o n s e r v a t i o n Institute, 2000,27-54.
NOTES 9
 About the Case Studies: Purpose, Design, and Methods
T h e five partners i n v o l v e d i n this p r o j e c t h o p e t h a t these
case studies w i l l m o t i v a t e o t h e r g r o u p s o r agencies t o cre­
ate examples o f values-based site m a n a g e m e n t . As s o o n as
the first case was m a d e available o n the W e b , t h e G C I
received i n q u i r i e s as t o the m e t h o d o l o g y f o l l o w e d for its
d e v e l o p m e n t . T h i s section explains the process t h a t was
f o l l o w e d a n d the reasons for some o f the choices m a d e as
p a r t o f t h a t process.
Representatives o f all five organizations—the
A u s t r a l i a n H e r i t a g e C o m m i s s i o n , E n g l i s h H e r i t a g e , the
G C I , Parks Canada, and the U.S. N a t i o n a l Park Service—
m e t i n Los Angeles i n February 2001 at the i n v i t a t i o n o f
the G C I a n d agreed t o w o r k t o g e t h e r t o create f o u r case
studies. I n this first m e e t i n g i t was established t h a t this
n e w l y c o n s t i t u t e d g r o u p w o u l d d e t e r m i n e the final objec­
tives o f the project, identify the sites, a n d generally steer
the p r o j e c t as the cases w e r e developed.
W h i l e the idea o f the project was conceived at the
G C I , i t was o n l y w i t h the spirited guidance o f all the experi­
enced and t h o u g h t f u l m e m b e r s o f the project t e a m that
this b r o a d idea was challenged and refined, b e c o m i n g the
case studies here: the systematic analyses o f actual p l a n n i n g
and m a n a g e m e n t efforts, o f the i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f principles
and guidelines i n u n i q u e situations, and o f the i n t e n d e d and
u n i n t e n d e d outcomes o f operational decisions.
The P a r t n e r s h i p a n d P u r p o s e o f the Project
S E L E C T I O N OF PARTNERS
T h e choice o f partners for this p r o j e c t was i n large p a r t a
practical decision o f the G C I . For an effort w i t h n o real
precedent, the p o t e n t i a l for f i n d i n g a c o m m o n set o f goals
a n d objectives was l i k e l y t o be h i g h e r i n a c o l l a b o r a t i o n
a m o n g organizations w h o s e policies w e r e b r o a d l y k n o w n
a n d w e l l established. I t was also h e l p f u l t o start w i t h
organizations w i t h w h i c h the I n s t i t u t e h a d some p r i o r
association. A d d i t i o n a l l y , the use o f a c o m m o n language
w o u l d h e l p ease the process, g i v e n the n u m b e r o f d o c u ­
m e n t s t h a t w o u l d n e e d t o be f o u n d , read, w r i t t e n , a n d cir­
10 PROJECT B A C K G R O U N D
culated. T h e w i l l i n g n e s s o f t h e U.S. N a t i o n a l Park Service,
Parks Canada, the A u s t r a l i a n H e r i t a g e C o m m i s s i o n , a n d
E n g l i s h H e r i t a g e t o c o m m i t t o a t i m e - a n d labor-intensive
project like this was the final a n d essential factor, a l l o w i n g
the c r e a t i o n o f a g o o d w o r k i n g t e a m .
F r o m the start the p r o j e c t h a d a didactic i n t e n t .
T h e objective set early o n b y the m e m b e r s o f the Steering
C o m m i t t e e o f the Case Study Project was t o create cases
focused o n the m a n a g e m e n t o f values i n heritage sites
w i t h the i n t e n t i o n o f f i l l i n g a gap t h e y perceived i n the
c o n s e r v a t i o n a n d heritage m a n a g e m e n t l i t e r a t u r e
between publications dealing w i t h guiding principles—
w h e t h e r i n the f o r m o f charters o r p o l i c y d o c u m e n t s —
a n d those o f m a n a g e m e n t plans for specific sites. I t was
felt case studies focusing o n analyses o f the processes o f
p l a n n i n g a n d m a n a g e m e n t for specific sites, t h e applica­
t i o n o f principles a n d guidelines t o u n i q u e situations, a n d
the results o f o p e r a t i o n a l decisions w o u l d p r o v i d e m u c h -
needed i n f o r m a t i o n o n p l a n n i n g a n d m a n a g e m e n t .
AUDIENCES FOR, AND USES OF, T H E CASES
T h e organizations p a r t i c i p a t i n g i n this p r o j e c t share a
b e l i e f i n t h e p o t e n t i a l usefulness o f values-based manage­
m e n t i n a b r o a d range o f i n t e r n a t i o n a l contexts. T h e cases
w e r e w r i t t e n for use b y people engaged i n the study
a n d / o r practice o f site m a n a g e m e n t , c o n s e r v a t i o n p l a n ­
n i n g , and h i s t o r i c preservation. T h e y are teachers,
researchers, a n d / o r site managers, o r s t u d y i n g t o d o one
or m o r e o f these things. T h e reader is assumed t o be
familiar w i t h heritage m a n a g e m e n t concepts a n d t e r m i ­
nology, i n t e r n a t i o n a l charters a n d guidance, a n d general
c o n s e r v a t i o n principles.
H e r i t a g e professionals i n the target audience m a y
represent m a n y disciplines, all o f w h i c h have a r o l e i n the
m a n a g e m e n t o f c u l t u r a l sites. I n fact, one o f the objec­
tives o f the p r o j e c t is t o present values-based approaches
as a c o m m o n f r a m e w o r k t h a t can b r i n g t o g e t h e r a diverse
a n d b r o a d l y representative g r o u p o f people w h o m u s t
w o r k t o g e t h e r i n m a n a g i n g c u l t u r a l sites.
 S E L E C T I O N OF SITES
O n e i m p o r t a n t task o f the Steering C o m m i t t e e was t o
identify one site t o be studied from each o f t h e f o u r partic­
i p a t i n g countries. W h i l e the final decision fell t o the
respective officials from each o r g a n i z a t i o n , the g r o u p sug­
gested the f o l l o w i n g criteria:
• Significance at a n a t i o n a l level
• N o t overly difficult t o travel t o o r visit
• Accessibility a n d completeness o f d o c u m e n t a t i o n
o n the site a n d its h i s t o r y
• Access t o organizations a n d stakeholders
involved
• A published management plan and information
o n the process used t o develop i t
• D e m o n s t r a t e d c o n s u l t a t i o n w i t h stakeholders
• S t r o n g interest o f site staff i n p a r t i c i p a t i n g i n this
project
• Examples o f conflicts a n d t h e i r resolutions
• Evidence o f c o n s i d e r a t i o n o f the relationship o f
values t o fabric
• Presence o f p o l i t i c a l sensitivities
• S t r o n g didactic p o t e n t i a l
T h e sites selected w e r e Grosse l i e and the Irish
M e m o r i a l N a t i o n a l H i s t o r i c Site (Parks Canada), the
Chaco C u l t u r e N a t i o n a l H i s t o r i c a l Park (U.S. N a t i o n a l
Park Service), P o r t A r t h u r H i s t o r i c Site ( T h e A u s t r a l i a n
H e r i t a g e C o m m i s s i o n a n d P o r t A r t h u r Site M a n a g e m e n t
A u t h o r i t y ) , a n d H a d r i a n s W a l l W o r l d H e r i t a g e Site (Eng­
lish H e r i t a g e ) . Together, these sites represent a range o f
situations w i t h diverse stakeholders a n d values; interest­
i n g differences a m o n g the m a n a g e m e n t plans i n t e r m s o f
date, style, a n d i m p l e m e n t a t i o n ; a n d an assortment o f
p l a n n i n g processes t h a t presented specific challenges w i t h
obvious p o t e n t i a l for use i n t e a c h i n g / l e a r n i n g contexts.
The D e s i g n a n d M e t h o d s o f t h e Project
T H E I N T E L L E C T U A L CONSTRUCT
A t the first m e e t i n g i n 2001, the b r o a d outlines o f the p r o j ­
ect w e r e defined, a n d the Steering C o m m i t t e e m e m b e r s
began t o focus o n the issues a n d questions t h a t w o u l d
guide the research. W h i l e each successive m e e t i n g refined
the issues further, three central questions w e r e agreed t o
early o n :
• H o w are t h e values associated w i t h the site
u n d e r s t o o d a n d articulated?
• H o w are these values t a k e n i n t o account i n the
site's m a n a g e m e n t policies a n d strategies?
• H o w d o m a n a g e m e n t decisions and actions on-site
affect the values?
Once the central questions w e r e established, the
g r o u p focused o n the m o s t appropriate scope a n d t o n e for
the finished cases. T h e y agreed t h a t each site w o u l d be
e x a m i n e d t h r o u g h its o w n lens, a n d the analysis w o u l d
exclude any c o m p a r i s o n o f the relative success o f its m a n ­
agement against an external o r a r b i t r a r y standard. Also,
each case w o u l d present o n l y t h a t site and n o t assume t h a t
the steward agency handles all its sites i n the same way.
G i v e n the h i g h level o f interest a n d experience o f the i n d i ­
viduals i n v o l v e d , i t r e m a i n e d a challenge t h r o u g h o u t the
project t o steer clear o f j u d g m e n t , w h i l e at the same t i m e
m a i n t a i n i n g a c o n s t r u c t i v e l y critical a n d r i g o r o u s t o n e .
I n order t o p r o v i d e a context for the discussion o f
values, policies, a n d actions, each case first needed t o
include a h i s t o r y o f the place as a heritage site. Second, i t
was i m p o r t a n t t o examine the administrative and legal
e n v i r o n m e n t w i t h i n w h i c h m a n a g e m e n t p l a n n i n g was
done, w i t h a v i e w t o w a r d h o w site authorities w e r e helped
or h i n d e r e d i n t h e i r tasks b y legislation, regulations, and
o t h e r policies. T h i r d , i t was crucial t o study the actual
place, i n order t o see the i m p a c t o f particular m a n a g e m e n t
decisions.
T H E PROCESS OF CREATING T H E CASES
A five-step process was used t o create each case study:
1. Research and document collection
T h e case-writing t e a m first c o n d u c t e d a t h o r o u g h
r e v i e w o f the relevant heritage statutes and policies and
became familiar w i t h the h i s t o r y o f each site. T h e y con­
d u c t e d a L E X I S - N E X I S search for relevant news articles
and o b t a i n e d copies of, a n d became familiar w i t h , o t h e r
p e r t i n e n t site-management d o c u m e n t s . T h e y w r o t e s u m ­
maries o f the key d o c u m e n t s a n d generated a t i m e line o f
key dates i n the h i s t o r y o f the site. T h e g o v e r n i n g agency
a n d the staff o f the site p r o v i d e d p e r t i n e n t d o c u m e n t s ,
i n c l u d i n g the m a n a g e m e n t p l a n , w h i c h w e r e t h e n assem­
b l e d w i t h o t h e r i n f o r m a t i o n a n d sent t o each m e m b e r o f
the t e a m i n advance o f the site visit.
2. Site visit
T h e entire p r o j e c t t e a m traveled t o the site. D u r ­
i n g the four- o r five-day visit, the g r o u p t o u r e d the site,
h e a r d staff presentations, a n d m e t w i t h site staff a n d rep­
resentatives o f o t h e r agencies o r partners. These meetings
t o o k the f o r m o f g r o u p discussions as w e l l as one-on-one
i n t e r v i e w s . ( I n t w o cases, r e t u r n visits w e r e m a d e b y case
w r i t e r s for a d d i t i o n a l i n t e r v i e w s o r t o use the site
archives.)
A B O U T T H E CASE STUDIES I I
O n the last half-day o f the visit, the p r o j e c t t e a m m e t t o panies this p u b l i c a t i o n . A list o f these d o c u m e n t s is p r o ­
r e v i e w the m a i n issues that h a d surfaced d u r i n g the visit v i d e d o n page iv.
and t o discuss h o w they m i g h t be addressed i n the case. A l t h o u g h the f o u r cases f o l l o w the c o n t e n t out­
3. Drafting line established at the b e g i n n i n g o f the project, each one
F o u r people associated w i t h the G C I w e r e respon­ has u n i q u e features c o r r e s p o n d i n g t o the issues f o u n d at
sible for w r i t i n g the cases. T h e decision t o assign responsi­ each site. T h e studies are presented here as a set, b u t they
b i l i t y for the w r i t i n g t o these people instead o f employees are also i n t e n d e d t o be used as separate units for analysis
o f the respective agencies associated w i t h the sites was o r teaching.
based o n the need t o have consistency a m o n g the cases, t o
m a i n t a i n objectivity, and t o avoid b u r d e n i n g the partner
agencies w i t h additional w o r k .
Starting w i t h the o u t l i n e and the three questions
( n o t e d above) that h a d b e e n established, the case w r i t e r s
set t o w o r k . T h e y studied the official m a n a g e m e n t docu­
m e n t s for the site, the legislation t h a t established the site,
p l a n n i n g guidelines used b y the o p e r a t i n g agencies, news
stories, professional j o u r n a l s , personal observations, his­
t o r i c p h o t o g r a p h s , t h e i r o w n p h o t o g r a p h s , and t h e i r
extensive notes from the project t e a m meetings as w e l l as
field i n t e r v i e w s . As questions arose, the w r i t e r s consulted
w i t h one another, o t h e r p r o j e c t t e a m m e m b e r s , site staff,
and stakeholders for clarification.
4. Review of drafts
Each case was subjected t o at least three revisions
f o l l o w i n g reviews b y all m e m b e r s o f the project team, the
relevant site staff, and representatives o f the g o v e r n i n g
agency. T h e p u r p o s e for such extensive r e v i e w was t o
ensure t h a t the m a n y issues, interests, a n d sensitivities
w e r e presented i n an accurate a n d balanced way. Also,
w h i l e the final texts m i g h t reflect the perspectives o f the
project t e a m m o r e t h a n those o f the site staff, i t was v e r y
i m p o r t a n t t o e l i m i n a t e errors o f fact t h r o u g h this v e t t i n g .
I n each case, the g o v e r n i n g agency p r o v i d e d a sign-off o n
the study o f its site.
5. Production
Photographs w e r e chosen t o s u p p o r t the c o n t e n t
o f the case studies, and maps w e r e created t o o r i e n t the
reader. T h e texts w e r e g i v e n a final editorial r e v i e w and
made available i n P D F f o r m a t o n the GCFs W e b site.
I t is i m p o r t a n t t o r e m e m b e r t h a t all f o u r case
studies present situations t h a t w e r e already f o u n d d u r i n g
the t i m e o f the project, and some m a n a g e m e n t policies
and decisions have already started t o change i n the s h o r t
t i m e elapsed since its conclusion. T h e same holds t r u e o f
the guidance a n d m a n a g e m e n t d o c u m e n t s used at the
sites. Because o f the i m p o r t a n c e t h a t these d o c u m e n t s
played i n the d e v e l o p m e n t o f the cases, the m a i n ones for
each site are m a d e available i n the C D - R O M t h a t accom­

12 PROJECT B A C K G R O U N D
Steering Committee of the Case Study Project
M e m b e r s ' affiliations are g i v e n as o f the t i m e o f the project.

Gordon Bennett Margaret G. H. MacLean

Director Heritage Consultant
Policy and G o v e r n m e n t Relations Los Angeles
N a t i o n a l H i s t o r i c Sites D i r e c t o r a t e
Parks Canada Francis P. McManamon
D e p a r t m e n t a l C o n s u l t i n g Archaeologist
Christina Cameron A r c h a e o l o g y and E t h n o g r a p h y
D i r e c t o r General U.S. N a t i o n a l Park Service
N a t i o n a l H i s t o r i c Sites D i r e c t o r a t e
Parks Canada Randall Mason
Assistant Professor and D i r e c t o r
Kate Clarke Graduate P r o g r a m i n H i s t o r i c Preservation
Head o f Historic Environment Management University o f M a r y l a n d
English Heritage
David Myers
Marta de la Torre Research Associate
Principal Project Specialist T h e G e t t y C o n s e r v a t i o n Institute
T h e G e t t y C o n s e r v a t i o n Institute
Dwight Pitcaithley
Francois LeBlanc Chief Historian
Head U.S. N a t i o n a l Park Service
Field Projects
T h e G e t t y C o n s e r v a t i o n Institute Christopher Young
H e a d o f W o r l d H e r i t a g e and I n t e r n a t i o n a l Policy
Jane Lennon English H e r i t a g e
Commissioner
Australian Heritage Commission

S T E E R I N G C O M M I T T E E OF T H E CASE S T U D Y PROJECT 13
This page intentionally left blank
PART TWO The Case Studies
This page intentionally left blank
Grosse Tie and the Irish Memorial National Historic Site

Margaret G. H . MacLean and David Myers

 About This Case Study
T h i s case study examines Grosse lie and the Irish M e m o ­
rial N a t i o n a l H i s t o r i c Site, w h i c h is managed b y Parks
Canada. T h e small island o f Grosse lie is located i n the
St. Lawrence River, near the city o f Quebec. Largely
because o f its strategic l o c a t i o n , i t began t o play an i m p o r ­
tant role i n Canadian h i s t o r y i n 1832, f u n c t i o n i n g as a
quarantine station that received n e w l y a r r i v i n g i m m i ­
grants from E u r o p e and the British Isles before they
reached the m a i n l a n d . For 150 years i t was a place o f
intense activity; as o f 1984, i t was recognized as a place o f
m e m o r y b y Parks Canada. Its m a n a g e m e n t is still evolv­
i n g , and the eventful first phases o f p l a n n i n g are still fresh
i n the m i n d s o f staff.
T h i s section consists o f a b r i e f o r i e n t a t i o n t o the
site itself and a p r e v i e w o f issues that are discussed i n the
rest o f the case study.
T h e next section, " M a n a g e m e n t C o n t e x t and
H i s t o r y o f Grosse l i e / ' describes Parks Canada, i n c l u d i n g
its place i n the g o v e r n m e n t , its organization, a n d the
guidance i t provides for the resources u n d e r its steward­
ship. T h i s b a c k g r o u n d is m e a n t t o aid the reader i n under­
standing the e v o l u t i o n o f Parks Canada and the c u r r e n t
e n v i r o n m e n t i n w h i c h decisions are made. T h i s section
continues w i t h a description o f the strategic l o c a t i o n o f
Grosse l i e , the h i s t o r y o f its use, and its e v o l u t i o n as a
heritage site.
T h e f o l l o w i n g section, " U n d e r s t a n d i n g and Pro­
t e c t i n g the Values o f Grosse l i e and the Irish M e m o r i a l
N a t i o n a l H i s t o r i c Site," focuses o n the identification and
m a n a g e m e n t o f the values o f the site and takes as its
structure the three questions h i g h l i g h t e d o n page 11: t h e
identification o f the values associated w i t h the site, t h e i r
place i n m a n a g e m e n t policies and strategies, and the
i m p a c t that the actual m a n a g e m e n t o f the site is h a v i n g
o n the values.
T h e final section, "Conclusions," reviews t h e
p r i n c i p a l issues and questions that have emerged i n the
discussion o f this case. Some o f these m a y also be appli­
cable t o o t h e r cases i n this series, as w e l l as t o manage­
m e n t situations at o t h e r sites w i t h w h i c h the reader m a y
be familiar.
18 GROSSE I L E A N D T H E I R I S H M E M O R I A L N A T I O N A L H I S T O R I C SITE
T h i s study o f the m a n a g e m e n t o f Grosse fie a n d
the Irish M e m o r i a l N a t i o n a l H i s t o r i c Site draws o n exten­
sive c o n s u l t a t i o n a m o n g the m e m b e r s o f the project
steering c o m m i t t e e , staff o f the site, and Parks Canada
authorities. T h e authors have consulted m a n y reports,
plans, and s t a t u t o r y and guidance d o c u m e n t s r e l a t i n g t o
this site, t o o t h e r Level I heritage sites i n Canada, and t o
Parks Canada i n general. T h e y have relied o n the staff o f
the site and o f the r e g i o n a l Parks Canada office i n Quebec
for the i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f this d o c u m e n t a t i o n and the
rationale for m a n y decisions m a d e on-site.
T h e situation studied i n this case existed b e t w e e n
June 2001 and June 2002, w h e n the case was developed and
w r i t t e n . Parks Canada is a d y n a m i c organization, and cer­
tain changes have taken place i n the i n t e r i m , i n c l u d i n g p o l ­
icy reviews and adjustments; also, certain activities have
been c o m p l e t e d on-site that h a d been i n the p l a n n i n g stages
d u r i n g the research for this study. T h e analysis focuses o n
the situation as i t was, n o t o n the recent changes.
D i g i t a l reproductions o f the f o l l o w i n g supplemen­
tary documents are contained w i t h i n the accompanying
C D - R O M : Grosse lie N a t i o n a l H i s t o r i c Site—Development
Concept (1992); Grosse lie N a t i o n a l Historic Site—Report
o n the Public C o n s u l t a t i o n P r o g r a m (1994); Part I I I (Cul­
t u r a l Resource M a n a g e m e n t Policy) o f Parks Canada G u i d ­
i n g Principles and Operational Policies (1994); C o m m e m o ­
rative I n t e g r i t y Statement for Grosse lie and the Irish
M e m o r i a l N a t i o n a l Historic Site (1998); Grosse lie and the
Irish M e m o r i a l N a t i o n a l H i s t o r i c Site M a n a g e m e n t Plan
(2001); and Guide t o the Preparation o f C o m m e m o r a t i v e
Integrity Statements (2002).
Issues A d d r e s s e d i n This Case S t u d y
M a n y o f the challenges o f m a n a g i n g a heritage site desig­
nated as h a v i n g n a t i o n a l significance are v e r y similar from
one site t o another: d e f i n i n g w h a t is i m p o r t a n t and deter­
m i n i n g w h a t is fragile, w h a t requires v i g i l a n t p r o t e c t i o n ,
and w h a t m e r i t s i n t e r p r e t a t i o n for the p u b l i c o n w h o s e
b e h a l f i t is h e l d i n trust. T h e three questions t h a t anchor
the discussion testify t o these similarities. T h e difficulties
faced b y those w h o p l a n for and manage heritage sites
quite often arise w h e n policies conflict o r w h e n the
balance a m o n g social, administrative, o r o t h e r c o m p o ­
nents is upset. These p r o b l e m s and t h e i r resolutions are
o p p o r t u n i t i e s — o r " l e a r n i n g p o i n t s " — f r o m w h i c h others
i n v o l v e d i n heritage site maintenance can learn.
I n this case study, f o u r m a i n l e a r n i n g points
emerge:
1. As practiced b y the planners and stewards o f
Grosse l i e and the Irish M e m o r i a l N a t i o n a l H i s t o r i c Site,
values-based site m a n a g e m e n t places significant w e i g h t
o n the role and voice o f stakeholders. I n i t i a l assumptions
about categories o f stakeholders differed s o m e w h a t from
the actual stakeholders w h o stepped f o r w a r d . T h e process
was designed t o be flexible and inclusive, and i t expanded
and w o r k e d effectively, even i n ways that w e r e n o t always
anticipated.
2. W i t h regard t o a n a t i o n a l historic site like Grosse
lie, the m i s s i o n o f Parks Canada is t o foster appreciation
o f Canada's past b y p r o t e c t i n g and presenting the site for
the benefit, education, and e n j o y m e n t o f c u r r e n t and
future generations. T h e stewards are responsible for
focusing o n aspects o f the site that define its value t o the
n a t i o n . T h u s , local values and interest i n the site are sec­
o n d a r y t o values that are m e a n i n g f u l at the n a t i o n a l level.
3. Parks Canada has developed t w o p i v o t a l con­
c e p t s — c o m m e m o r a t i v e i n t e n t and c o m m e m o r a t i v e
i n t e g r i t y — t h a t define the p r i n c i p a l objectives for the p r o ­
t e c t i o n and presentation o f a national-level site and
describe i n detail w h a t constitutes the site i n its o p t i m a l
c o n d i t i o n . These t w o concepts serve t o anchor p o l i c y dis­
cussions about objectives and l i m i t s o f acceptable change.
4. A t Grosse l i e , one o f the m o s t interesting chal­
lenges i n the d e v e l o p m e n t o f the interpretive scheme is
h o w t o tell one o f the p r i n c i p a l stories o f the site w h e n
m u c h o f the historic fabric associated w i t h that story has
been destroyed and overlaid w i t h later additions. Interpre­
tive p r o g r a m m i n g that enables visitors t o see past the
visual confusion created b y the existing physical condi­
tions is difficult b u t necessary. Moreover, choices regard­
i n g t r e a t m e n t i n t e r v e n t i o n s ( w h i c h affect the appearance
o f the b u i l t resources) m u s t balance historical accuracy
w i t h physical d u r a b i l i t y w h i l e m a i n t a i n i n g the hierarchy
o f messages m a n d a t e d b y authorities.

ABOUT THIS CASE STUDY 19

Management Context and History of Grosse lie

T h i s section looks first at Parks Canada, t h e agency c o m m e m o r a t i o n , w h i c h recognizes n a t i o n a l l y significant

responsible for Grosse lie and the Irish M e m o r i a l , as places, persons and events." I t comprises n o t o n l y t h e
4

an administrative e n t i t y and as a keeper o f heritage sites
o n b e h a l f o f the Canadian people. T h e o r g a n i z a t i o n
has evolved over t i m e , and its p u r p o s e and mission are
reflected i n the w a y i n w h i c h its holdings have been and
are v a l u e d and managed. F o l l o w i n g this account o f t h e
m a n a g e m e n t context is a fuller description o f Grosse lie
itself, o f its l o c a t i o n i n the St. Lawrence River, and o f h o w
i t came t o occupy a p o s i t i o n o f significance.
Parks Canada
T h e Parks Canada A g e n c y was established o n i A p r i l 1999
b y an A c t o f the Parliament o f Canada. 1
historic sites b u t also t h e m o r e t h a n five h u n d r e d persons
and three h u n d r e d events d e e m e d t o be o f n a t i o n a l
significance. Parks Canada has direct responsibility for
145 o f the 849 designated n a t i o n a l historic sites across
the country. T h e agency contributes t o t h e conservation
a n d / o r presentation o f an additional seventy-one sites
t h r o u g h cost-sharing agreements.
Parks Canada has a b r o a d range o f responsibili­
ties i n the m a n a g e m e n t o f n a t i o n a l historic sites. These
include developing policies for conserving and presenting
each site's c u l t u r a l resources, for conserving n a t u r a l
resources, and for p r o v i d i n g infrastructure for p u b l i c visi­

t a t i o n . These activities often involve c o n s u l t a t i o n w i t h

T h e C h i e f Executive Office o f Parks Canada
interested m e m b e r s o f the Canadian public. T h e agency
reports directly t o t h e m i n i s t e r o f Canadian heritage. T h i s
also reviews existing heritage legislation i n order t o p r o ­
m i n i s t e r "is responsible for n a t i o n a l policies and p r o g r a m s
pose enhancements t o federal l a w for the p r o t e c t i o n o f
relating t o broadcasting, c u l t u r a l industries, arts, heritage,
n a t i o n a l historic sites.
official languages, Canadian identity, Canadian symbols,
T h e federally appointed H i s t o r i c Sites and M o n u ­
exchanges, m u l t i c u l t u r a l i s m , and sport." 2

m e n t s B o a r d o f Canada ( H S M B C , o r "the Board") advises

P r i o r t o the passage o f the Agency Act, Parks
the m i n i s t e r o f Canadian heritage o n various aspects
Canada h a d b e e n p a r t o f three different departments dur­
o f the w o r k o f the historic sites p r o g r a m . T h e B o a r d is
i n g the p e r i o d o f t i m e covered i n this case study. For each
m a d e u p o f individuals representing all o f the Canadian
o f these three departments, t h e official responsible for
provinces and territories and some o f the n a t i o n a l her­
Parks Canada was an assistant d e p u t y minister. F r o m 1974
itage agencies. T h e i r duties and functions are described
t o 1979, Parks Canada was p a r t o f the D e p a r t m e n t o f
i n the Historic Sites and Monuments Act, and the B o a r d
I n d i a n and N o r t h e r n Affairs; from 1979 t o 1993, i t was p a r t
develops its o w n policies and procedures, w h i c h are t h e n
o f the D e p a r t m e n t o f the E n v i r o n m e n t ; a n d from 1993 t o
approved b y the minister. W i t h the administrative s u p p o r t
1999, i t was p a r t o f the D e p a r t m e n t o f Canadian Heritage.
o f staff from the n a t i o n a l historic sites p r o g r a m , t h e
T h e m a n d a t e o f Parks Canada is "to p r o t e c t and
B o a r d examines n e w site o r m o n u m e n t n o m i n a t i o n s ,
present n a t i o n a l l y significant examples o f Canada's natu­
commissions research as needed, balances stakeholder
r a l and c u l t u r a l heritage, and foster p u b l i c understanding,
claims, and formulates r e c o m m e n d a t i o n s t o t h e m i n i s t e r
appreciation and e n j o y m e n t i n ways that ensure their eco­
regarding designation and the m o s t appropriate f o r m o f
logical and c o m m e m o r a t i v e i n t e g r i t y for present and
c o m m e m o r a t i o n o f a g i v e n subject.
future generations." 3

T h e criteria for n a t i o n a l significance (as stated b y

T h e agency administers three systems—national
the H S M B C ) are as follows:
parks, n a t i o n a l historic sites, and n a t i o n a l m a r i n e conser­
A place m a y be designated o f n a t i o n a l historic
v a t i o n areas—and other p r o g r a m s concerned w i t h
significance b y v i r t u e o f a direct association w i t h a n a t i o n ­
Canada's heritage.
ally significant aspect o f Canadian history. A n archaeolog­
T h e n a t i o n a l historic sites directorate o f Parks
ical site, structure, b u i l d i n g , g r o u p o f buildings, district, o r
Canada "is responsible for Canada's p r o g r a m o f historical

20 GROSSE I L E A N D T H E I R I S H M E M O R I A L N A T I O N A L H I S T O R I C SITE
 Peopling the Land Governing Canada
Canada's earliest inhabitants P o l i t i c s a n d p o l i t i c a l processes
Migration and i m m i g r a t i o n Government institutions
Settlement Security and law
People and the e n v i r o n m e n t M i l i t a r y a n d defense
Canada and the w o r l d

Expressing
Intellectual and
Cultural Life Developing Economies
L e a r n i n g a n d t h e arts H u n t i n g and gathering
Figure l.i. N a t i o n a l H i s t o r i c Extraction and production
Architecture and design
Sites o f C a n a d a t h e m a t i c
Science Trade and commerce
framework. Building
Sports a n d leisure Communications
Social and and transportation
Philosophy and
Community Life
spirituality Technology and
Community organizations
engineering
Religious institutions
Labor
E d u c a t i o n a n d social
well-being
Social m o v e m e n t s

c u l t u r a l landscape o f p o t e n t i a l n a t i o n a l historic G e o g r a p h y a n d H i s t o r y o f Grosse Tie

significance w i l l :
a. illustrate an exceptional creative achievement i n
concept and design, technology, a n d / o r p l a n n i n g ,
o r a significant stage i n the development o f
Canada; o r
b. illustrate o r symbolize i n w h o l e o r i n p a r t a cul­
BEFORE 1832
H u m a n h a b i t a t i o n o n Grosse lie p r i o r t o European con­
tact appears t o have been occasional and seasonal, proba­
b l y attracted b y the fish and game resources that still d r a w
h u n t e r s t o this area. W h e n the Europeans arrived i n the
7

t u r a l t r a d i t i o n , a w a y o f life, o r ideas i m p o r t a n t i n sixteenth century, they q u i c k l y recognized the value o f

the development o f Canada; o r
c. be m o s t explicitly and m e a n i n g f u l l y associated
o r identified w i t h persons w h o are d e e m e d o f
n a t i o n a l historic i m p o r t a n c e ; o r
d. be m o s t explicitly and m e a n i n g f u l l y associated
o r identified w i t h events that are d e e m e d o f
n a t i o n a l historic i m p o r t a n c e . 5
Since 1981 the w o r k o f the B o a r d i n the
identification o f subjects for c o m m e m o r a t i o n has also
been g u i d e d b y the N a t i o n a l H i s t o r i c Sites o f Canada Sys­
t e m Plan, w h i c h provides a f r a m e w o r k t o ensure that the
6
N a t i o n a l H i s t o r i c Sites System adequately represents each
o f the i m p o r t a n t historic themes i n Canadian history.
T h e system p l a n uses a thematic construct t o organize
history, classify sites, and p r o v i d e a comprehensive v i e w
o f Canadian history; the themes o f the c u r r e n t p l a n are
presented i n figure 1.1. Today, Grosse lie and the Irish
M e m o r i a l N a t i o n a l H i s t o r i c Site is associated w i t h the
"Peopling the L a n d " t h e m e , u n d e r the subtheme " M i g r a ­
t i o n and i m m i g r a t i o n / '
the St. Lawrence River, w h i c h gave their ships access w e l l
i n t o the N o r t h A m e r i c a n interior.
T h e first record o f a l a n d concession o n Grosse
lie dates t o 1662, o n l y fifty-four years after the city o f Que­
bec was f o u n d e d o n the site o f the indigenous settlement
o f Stadacona. For the next 150 years, Grosse lie was used
p r i m a r i l y for h u n t i n g and fishing b y nonresident colonial
landowners. B y 1816, records indicate the presence o f
homesteads and agriculture; f a r m i n g c o n t i n u e d o n Grosse
lie u n t i l 1832, w h e n the island was expropriated b y the
g o v e r n m e n t for use as an i m m i g r a n t quarantine station.
1832 TO 1937
After the end o f the N a p o l e o n i c wars i n 1815, e m i g r a t i o n
t o N o r t h A m e r i c a from Ireland, Scotland, and E n g l a n d
surged. B y 1830, Quebec h a d b e c o m e b y far Canada's
largest i m m i g r a n t p o r t , accepting some t h i r t y thousand
entrants annually, t w o - t h i r d s o f w h o m came from Ireland.
W i t h these n e w arrivals came the cholera epidemic that
was t h e n r a g i n g i n the British Isles; about t h i r t y - e i g h t
h u n d r e d people died o f cholera i n 1832 i n Quebec City,

M A N A G E M E N T C O N T E X T A N D HISTORY 21
Figure 1.2. M a p o f t h e r e g i o n . T h i s m a p s h o w s t h e C a n a d i a n\
M a r i t i m e P r o v i n c e s , j u s t n o r t h o f t h e N e w E n g l a n d states, a n d
t h e w a t e r w a y t h a t leads f r o m t h e N o r t h A t l a n t i c O c e a n i n t o t h e
G u l f o f St. L a w r e n c e a n d c o n t i n u e s as t h e St. L a w r e n c e R i v e r p a s t
Q u e b e c a n d i n t o t h e i n t e r i o r . G r o s s e l i e , s h o w n o n t h e m a p , sits at a
t r a n s i t i o n a l p o s i t i o n i n t h e river w h e r e f r e s h w a t e r m e e t s s e a w a t e r ; i t is
therefore h o m e t o a distinctive array o f flora and fauna. T h e t o w n s
s h o w n o n t h e s o u t h s h o r e are t h o s e from w h i c h f e r r y s e r v i c e c a r r i e s
visitors t o the island.
and h a l f t h a t n u m b e r d i e d i n M o n t r e a l . W i t h this, and
w i t h t h e i r experience w i t h outbreaks o f t y p h u s a m o n g
i m m i g r a n t s i n the 1820s, the B r i t i s h authorities recognized
the need for an i m m i g r a n t quarantine station for the p o r t
o f Quebec t o check the spread o f disease. T h e y chose
Grosse l i e for its size, its harbor, its p r o x i m i t y t o Quebec
City, a n d its isolated p o s i t i o n i n the river.
T h e Great Famine r a k e d over I r e l a n d from 1845 t o
1849; d u r i n g its peak years o f 1847-48, a b o u t 100,000 E u r o ­
pean e m i g r a n t s came t o Quebec City, m o s t o f t h e m Irish.
Already weakened by malnutrition, m a n y contracted
t y p h u s and dysentery d u r i n g the six-week sea voyage.
Waves o f gravely i l l passengers o v e r w h e l m e d the quaran­
tine station s staff and facilities—there w e r e o n l y 200 beds
for sick i m m i g r a n t s and a b o u t 800 for the healthy; yet, b y
the spring o f 1847, m o r e t h a n 12,000 individuals w e r e
detained at Grosse l i e .
C o l o n i a l authorities scrambled t o b u i l d hospitals
and shelters. W h e n the station s facilities w e r e finally ade­
quate, the e n d o f the sailing season stopped the seemingly
endless stream o f i m m i g r a n t ships. D u r i n g the course o f
1847, m o r e t h a n 5,000 i m m i g r a n t s h a d perished at sea, and
5,424 m o r e h a d d i e d and w e r e b u r i e d o n Grosse lie. T h o u ­
sands m o r e perished i n Quebec, M o n t r e a l , and o t h e r cities
i n eastern Canada. 8
After a less-devastating epidemic o f cholera h i t i n
1854, the f u n c t i o n o f Grosse l i e began t o change. F r o m
1861 t o 1900, w h i l e the average annual n u m b e r o f i m m i ­
22 GROSSE I L E A N D T H E I R I S H M E M O R I A L N A T I O N A L H I S T O R I C SITE
grants t o Quebec C i t y r e m a i n e d b e t w e e n 25,000 and
26,800, they w e r e c o m i n g from different places. D u r i n g
this p e r i o d the Irish became the m i n o r i t y ; E n g l i s h e m i ­
grants w e r e m o s t n u m e r o u s , and m o r e Scandinavians and
o t h e r w e s t e r n Europeans w e r e j o i n i n g t h e m . T h e y all
w e r e leaving considerably less-desperate c o n d i t i o n s i n
E u r o p e and Great B r i t a i n . T h e y arrived i n Canada i n
m u c h better health, h a v i n g been far better a c c o m m o d a t e d
and fed o n b o a r d t h a n earlier i m m i g r a n t s . T h e replace­
m e n t o f sailing vessels w i t h steamships cut the crossing
t i m e from Great B r i t a i n t o t w e l v e days—one-quarter o f
the previous passage. A n d , t o w a r d the e n d o f the nine­
t e e n t h century, St. J o h n and Halifax, better connected t o
the c o u n t r y ' s i n t e r i o r b y r a i l r o a d , began t o c o m p e t e w i t h
Quebec as i m m i g r a t i o n ports.
D u r i n g the e c o n o m i c b o o m from 1900 t o 1915,
annual arrivals t o Quebec surged t o 92,000. W h i l e e m i ­
grants from Great B r i t a i n still d o m i n a t e d and m a n y still
came from Scandinavia and w e s t e r n E u r o p e , j o i n i n g t h e m
n o w w e r e people from the M i d d l e East, Australia, N o r t h
and S o u t h Africa, Asia, and the Caribbean.
D u r i n g W o r l d W a r I a n d c o n t i n u i n g t h r o u g h the
Depression, i m m i g r a t i o n n u m b e r s d r o p p e d markedly.
B e t w e e n 1932 a n d 1941, Quebec received o n l y a q u a r t e r o f
those a r r i v i n g i n Canada, reflecting the o p e n i n g o f n e w
p o r t s o f entry, some o n the Pacific coast. I n February 1937,
the Canadian g o v e r n m e n t finally closed the Grosse l i e
quarantine station; i t was n o l o n g e r needed.

1937 TO 1988
D u r i n g W o r l d W a r I I , u n d e r the Canadian D e p a r t m e n t o f
N a t i o n a l Defense, Grosse lie became the W a r Disease
C o n t r o l Station. T a k i n g advantage o f the site's i s o l a t i o n ,
scientists e x p e r i m e n t e d w i t h viruses a n d vaccines t o pre­
v e n t the deliberate i n t r o d u c t i o n o f a n i m a l diseases t o
N o r t h A m e r i c a . A l t h o u g h this w o r k ended i n 1945, similar
scientific w o r k was p e r f o r m e d there from 1951 t o 1956 i n
response t o the K o r e a n W a r and the C o l d War.
I n 1957 a n i m a l disease research o n the island
shifted t o the Canadian D e p a r t m e n t o f A g r i c u l t u r e ,
w h o s e w o r k c o n t i n u e d there u n t i l 1988. I n 1965 A g r i c u l ­
t u r e Canada's contagious disease d i v i s i o n also started
u s i n g the island as a quarantine station for i m p o r t e d live­
stock. A l t h o u g h there have b e e n n o a n i m a l quarantine
activities o n Grosse l i e since 1986, lands a n d facilities used
b y A g r i c u l t u r e Canada are still subject t o sectoral agree­
m e n t s b e t w e e n Parks Canada a n d A g r i c u l t u r e Canada.
Grosse lie Becomes a H e r i t a g e Site
T h i s section traces the e v o l u t i o n o f the status o f Grosse
lie as a heritage site a n d discusses h o w ideas and c o n t r i b u ­
tions l e a d i n g t o an u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f the site's values a n d
significance e m e r g e d d u r i n g this process a n d coalesced.
Figure 1.3. M a p o f G r o s s e l i e . G r o s s e l i e
is o n e o f t h e t w e n t y - o n e islands i n t h e
I l e s - a u x - G r u e s a r c h i p e l a g o i n t h e St.
L a w r e n c e River, a b o u t 48 k i l o m e t e r s
(30 m i l e s ) n o r t h e a s t ( d o w n s t r e a m ) from
t h e c i t y o f Q u e b e c . T h e i s l a n d is 2.5 k i l o ­
m e t e r s {1V1 m i l e s ) l o n g a n d 800 m e t e r s
( r o u g h l y h a l f a m i l e ) w i d e at its b r o a d e s t
p o i n t , w i t h a l a n d surface o f a p p r o x i ­
m a t e l y 185 hectares (457 acres). T h e
s h o r e l i n e i n c l u d e s beaches (at C h o l e r a
B a y ) , cliffs ( o n t h e s o u t h e r n edge o f t h e
W e s t e r n a n d C e n t r a l Sectors), t i d a l w e t ­
lands ( H o s p i t a l Bay), a n d tide pools. Pine
trees a n d o t h e r w o o d l a n d p l a n t s c o v e r
m u c h o f the island n o r t h o f the gravel
r o a d . Access t o t h e i s l a n d is l a r g e l y b y
f e r r y from t h e s o u t h s h o r e o f t h e St.
L a w r e n c e R i v e r ; staff a n d v i s i t o r s are fer­
r i e d t o t h e w h a r f , w h i c h is l o c a t e d at t h e
n o r t h e a s t e n d o f t h e W e s t e r n Sector.
( N u m b e r e d a n d n a m e d features are dis­
cussed i n t h e t e x t a n d / o r s h o w n i n
photographs.)
1897: T H E FIRST PILGRIMAGE
Grosse l i e was first recognized as a place o f significance i n
1897, w h e n a g r o u p from the A n c i e n t O r d e r o f H i b e r n i ­
ans, an Irish C a t h o l i c fraternal o r g a n i z a t i o n w h o s e m e m ­
bers w e r e Canadians o f Irish descent, visited Grosse l i e t o
c o m m e m o r a t e the fiftieth anniversary o f the t e r r i b l e year
o f 1847. I t is i m p o r t a n t t o n o t e that the Great Famine o f
the mid-i840s i n I r e l a n d was n o t a simple n a t u r a l disaster;
rather, i t was a tragic coincidence o f failed a g r i c u l t u r a l
m e t h o d s , harsh social policies, u n r e l e n t i n g poverty, and
inadequate m e d i c a l practices, the legacies o f w h i c h still
h a u n t English-Irish relations. A t o n l y fifty years after the
fact, some w h o m a d e the H i b e r n i a n p i l g r i m a g e t o Grosse
lie i n 1897 w e r e themselves l i k e l y t o have b e e n survivors o f
t h a t t r a u m a t i c t i m e ; others m a y have b e e n relatives o r
friends o f those w h o perished. For t h e m a n d for m a n y
others, Grosse l i e h a d the p o w e r f u l a n d p o i g n a n t q u a l i t y
9
o f a c e m e t e r y o f innocents.
1909: DEDICATION OF T H E C E L T I C CROSS
I n 1909 the A n c i e n t O r d e r o f H i b e r n i a n s dedicated
a Celtic Cross o n a h i g h p r o m o n t o r y o n the s o u t h w e s t e r n
e n d o f the island as a m e m o r i a l t o the lost i m m i g r a n t s .
Inscriptions o n the base o f the m o n u m e n t testify p a r t i c u ­
larly t o residual bitterness a b o u t the c o n d i t i o n s that forced
M A N A G E M E N T C O N T E X T A N D HISTORY 23

Figure 1.4. T h e C e l t i c C r o s s . E r e c t e d i n 1909 b y t h e A n c i e n t O r d e r o f
H i b e r n i a n s t o c o m m e m o r a t e t h e I r i s h e m i g r a t i o n , i t stands o n a s o u t h -
f a c i n g c l i f f i n t h e W e s t e r n S e c t o r o f G r o s s e l i e ; c u t from I r i s h s t o n e , i t
is a b o u t 15 m e t e r s (49 feet) h i g h .
the f l i g h t o f so m a n y Irish t o the N e w W o r l d . T h e E n g l i s h
i n s c r i p t i o n reads, "Sacred t o the m e m o r y o f thousands o f
Irish e m i g r a n t s w h o , t o preserve the faith, suffered
h u n g e r a n d exile i n 1847-48, a n d stricken w i t h fever, ended
here t h e i r s o r r o w f u l p i l g r i m a g e . " T h e t r a n s l a t i o n o f the
Gaelic i n s c r i p t i o n reads rather differently: " C h i l d r e n o f
the Gael d i e d i n the thousands o n this island, h a v i n g fled
f r o m the laws o f f o r e i g n tyrants a n d artificial famine i n
the years 1847-48. God's blessing o n t h e m . L e t this m o n u ­
m e n t be a t o k e n t o t h e i r n a m e a n d h o n o r from the Gaels
o f A m e r i c a . G o d Save Ireland."
F r o m 1909 o n , the A n c i e n t O r d e r o f H i b e r n i a n s
o r g a n i z e d a nearly annual p i l g r i m a g e from Quebec C i t y
t o the great stone cross, a t r a d i t i o n t h a t continues t o the
p r e s e n t . T o g o there as a p i l g r i m was t o retrace the steps
10
o f one's forebears a n d t o acknowledge the courage a n d
pathos o f the i m m i g r a n t s ' j o u r n e y s . T h e isolated l o c a t i o n
o f the island a n d its m i n i m a l d e v e l o p m e n t easily evoked
earlier times a n d surely added t o the e m o t i o n a l p o w e r o f
the experience.
1974: HSMBC RECOMMENDS NATIONAL
HISTORIC SITE DESIGNATION
I n 1974, l o n g after Grosse l i e h a d finished its w o r k as an
i m m i g r a n t q u a r a n t i n e station a n d h a d seen service as
a b i o l o g i c a l testing station, an a g r i c u l t u r a l research
station, a n d a livestock q u a r a n t i n e station, the H S M B C
m a d e its r e c o m m e n d a t i o n t o place a c o m m e m o r a t i v e
plaque o n Grosse l i e . W i t h the acceptance o f this r e c o m ­
24 GROSSE I L E A N D T H E I R I S H M E M O R I A L N A T I O N A L H I S T O R I C SITE
m e n d a t i o n b y the minister, Grosse l i e became a n a t i o n a l
historic site. T h e plaque, u n v e i l e d i n 1980, b o r e the f o l l o w ­
ing inscription: 11
I n 1832, a q u a r a n t i n e s t a t i o n w a s e s t a b l i s h e d h e r e o n G r o s s e
lie i n an a t t e m p t t o prevent the i n t r o d u c t i o n o f cholera f r o m
E u r o p e . T h e s t a t i o n s m e d i c a l a n d q u a r a n t i n e facilities
p r o v e d i n a d e q u a t e i n t h e face o f t h e c h o l e r a a n d t y p h u s
w h i c h p e r i o d i c a l l y a c c o m p a n i e d i m m i g r a n t ships; conse­
quently, epidemics spread t h r o u g h the Canadas o n a n u m b e r
o f occasions i n the course o f the n i n e t e e n t h century. O r i g i ­
n a l l y d e s i g n e d as a t e m p o r a r y e s t a b l i s h m e n t u n d e r m i l i t a r y
c o m m a n d , t h e s t a t i o n w a s l a t e r o p e r a t e d as a r e g u l a r s e r v i c e
b y t h e C a n a d i a n g o v e r n m e n t u n t i l s u p e r s e d e d i n 1937 b y
n e w f a c i l i t i e s at Q u e b e c . 1 2
1981: NATIONAL HISTORIC SITES OF
CANADA SYSTEM PLAN
W i t h the i n t r o d u c t i o n o f the N a t i o n a l H i s t o r i c Sites o f
Canada System Plan, all o f the n a t i o n a l historic sites w e r e
concatenated i n t o a t h e m a t i c framework, described ear­
l i e r . B y categorizing sites according t o t h e m e s a n d sub-
13
themes, the system p l a n aids the H S M B C a n d Parks
Canada t o see the strengths a n d gaps i n the c o m m e m o r a ­
tive p r o g r a m s t h e y oversee a n d t o i d e n t i f y needs o r
o p p o r t u n i t i e s for e d u c a t i o n p r o g r a m s o r strategic
planning.
1984: T H E BOARD REAFFIRMS T H E SIGNIFICANCE
OF GROSSE I L E IN CANADIAN HISTORY
I n 1983 a n d 1984, the H S M B C discussed at l e n g t h the
t h e m e o f i m m i g r a t i o n . T h e m i n u t e s o f its meetings
r e c o r d t h a t "the B o a r d once m o r e stated its o p i n i o n t h a t
the t h e m e o f I m m i g r a t i o n is a m o n g the m o s t significant
i n Canadian history." I n the same m e e t i n g , the B o a r d
"reaffirmed its statement o f June 1974 t h a t the Q u a r a n t i n e
Stations at Grosse l i e a n d Partridge Island are o f n a t i o n a l
historic significance" a n d r e c o m m e n d e d t h a t " i n l i g h t o f
the n u m b e r a n d q u a l i t y o f the i n s i t u resources o n Grosse
lie related t o the t h e m e o f i m m i g r a t i o n , the M i n i s t e r
s h o u l d consider a c q u i r i n g the island, o r p o r t i o n s o f i t ,
a n d there d e v e l o p i n g a n a t i o n a l historic p a r k . " 14
1988: GROSSE I L E COMES UNDER
T H E JURISDICTION OF PARKS CANADA
F o l l o w i n g the r e c o m m e n d a t i o n s o f the Board, the envi­
r o n m e n t m i n i s t e r ( t h e n responsible for Parks Canada)
reached an u n d e r s t a n d i n g w i t h the a g r i c u l t u r e minister,
a n d i n A u g u s t 1988 a f o r m a l a g r e e m e n t was reached
b e t w e e n the t w o d e p a r t m e n t s t o transfer the b u i l d i n g s
a n d sites o f h i s t o r i c a l interest t o Parks C a n a d a . 15
Figure T w o o f t h e f e r r i e s t h a t o p e r a t e o u t o f t h e p r i v a t e m a r i n a at
B e r t h i e r - s u r - M e r . T h e o n e o n t h e l e f t c a n c a r r y 140 passengers; t h e o n e
o n t h e r i g h t , 50.
B e g i n n i n g i n the late 1980s and extending i n t o
the mid-1990s, the p e r i o d covered b y p l a n n i n g for the m a n ­
agement o f Grosse lie, there were significant p o l i c y
changes and related developments i n Parks Canada. These
i n c l u d e d the development and approval o f the c u l t u r a l
resource m a n a g e m e n t p o l i c y and o f c o m m e m o r a t i v e
integrity, b o t h o f w h i c h w e r e m u c h m o r e explicitly values-
based t h a n Parks Canada's previous p o l i c y documents.
W h i l e i t was a challenge for people involved i n p l a n n i n g
(and management) t o integrate the latest t h i n k i n g , there
was, overall, surprisingly little lag b e t w e e n n e w p o l i c y
direction and other activities.
Facilities a n d Services T o d a y
Grosse l i e and the Irish M e m o r i a l N a t i o n a l H i s t o r i c Site
is o p e n t o the p u b l i c M a y t h r o u g h October. H i g h season
for v i s i t a t i o n generally lasts from mid-June t h r o u g h the
b e g i n n i n g o f September. A l l visitors t o the island arrive
b y private ferry service from either the s o u t h shore o f the
St. Lawrence o r from the p o r t o f Quebec. Ferries from the
s o u t h shore depart from the p o r t s o f Berthier-sur-Mer and
M o n t m a g n y (fig. 1.2). M o s t visitors depart from Berthier-
sur-Mer for the t h i r t y - m i n u t e boat ride t o the island. T h i s
schedule allows visitors t o stay at the site f r o m t w o t o four
hours. I n 2001, adult tickets from Berthier-sur-Mer w e r e
about $34 each, and a child's ticket (ages 6-12) was about
$17. A d m i s s i o n t o the site is i n c l u d e d i n ticket prices (all
16
Figure 1.6. A v i e w t o w a r d t h e east, s h o w i n g t h e D i s i n f e c t i o n B u i l d i n g
and the Carpentry and P l u m b i n g Building ( n o w the Visitor Center and
g i f t s h o p ) at t h e l e f t . B u i l t i n 1892 o n t h e n o r t h e n d o f t h e w e s t e r n
wharf, the Disinfection Building housed three disinfection chambers
a n d , e v e n t u a l l y , s h o w e r s . T h e s o u t h w i n g w a s e r e c t e d i n 1915; t h e
n o r t h , i n 1927. T h e D i s i n f e c t i o n B u i l d i n g has b e e n r e s t o r e d t o its 1927
a p p e a r a n c e ; i t is t h e f i r s t p l a c e m o d e r n v i s i t o r s e n t e r .
q u o t e d i n U.S. dollars). T h e ferry service from M o n t ­
m a g n y m a i n l y transports site staff. T h e j o u r n e y takes
some forty-five minutes, depending o n the tides. T w o
r o u n d - t r i p ferries depart from this small dock—early each
m o r n i n g and i n the late afternoon.
Ferries from the p o r t o f Quebec are m a r k e t e d as
cruises offering sightseeing along the river rather t h a n as
t r a n s p o r t a t i o n exclusively t o Grosse lie. T h e y are available
b y reservation only. T h e boat t r i p takes approximately
three h o u r s each way, thus a l l o w i n g visitors t o stay at the
site for about three hours. Tickets for this service from
Quebec are about $48 for adults and about $24 for children.
U p o n arrival at the w h a r f o n the s o u t h shore o f
Grosse l i e , w h i c h is situated i n the island's W e s t e r n Sector,
visitors are m e t b y t r a i n e d guides. G u i d e d tours are
d i v i d e d i n t o three parts. T h e y b e g i n w i t h a visit t o the
Disinfection B u i l d i n g ( l o c a t i o n 8, fig. 1.3), w h e r e several
exhibits explain the h i s t o r y and w o r k i n g s o f the quaran­
tine station. T h i s b u i l d i n g was fitted w i t h b a t h i n g facilities
for n e w arrivals and w i t h a steam chamber for disinfecting
their c l o t h i n g and carried items.
Visitors can t h e n take a sixty-minute h i k e a r o u n d
the W e s t e r n Sector, t o see the hotels and o t h e r facilities
(locations 2-6, fig. 1.3), the Celtic Cross ( l o c a t i o n 1, f i g .
1.4), and the Irish M e m o r i a l at the Irish Cemetery. T h i s
l o o p takes the visitors back a r o u n d t o a p o i n t at the head
o f H o s p i t a l Bay, w h e r e a t r a m takes visitors o u t t o the
C e n t r a l and Eastern Sectors.
M A N A G E M E N T C O N T E X TA N D HISTORY 25
Figure 1.7. T h e C a t h o l i c P r e s b y t e r y a n d t h e c h a p e l n e x t d o o r , b u i l t i n
1848 a n d 1874, r e s p e c t i v e l y T h e p r e s b y t e r y w a s r e m o d e l e d i n 1913,
w h e n a w r a p a r o u n d p o r c h was removed and a second story was
expanded. I n the backyard o f this structure, archaeological w o r k ,
s h o w n i n f i g u r e 1.8, w a s d o n e i n s u m m e r 2001.
Figure 1.8. A s m a l l e x c a v a t i o n i n t h e b a c k o f t h e C a t h o l i c P r e s b y t e r y
O p e n e d i n a u t u m n 2001 as p a r t o f a w a t e r p i p i n g p r o j e c t , t h e d i g
revealed w o o d e n piers o n w h i c h a small o u t b u i l d i n g stood. W h i l e n o
traces o f the b u i l d i n g r e m a i n e d above g r o u n d , this f i n d substantiates
records and photographs o f the t i m e .

Figure 1.9. T h e P u b l i c W o r k s T h i s a p p r o x i m a t e l y s i x t y - m i n u t e t o u r includes

O f f i c e r s H o u s e ( l o c a t i o n 12, f i g .
a stop at the Catholic Chapel and Presbytery (locations 17
1.3). I t w a s a n i m p o r t a n t b u i l d ­
and 18, fig. 1.7) and the Lazaretto ( l o c a t i o n 19, fig. 1.3),
i n g , j u d g i n g from t h e q u a l i t y o f
w h e r e the interpretive scheme focuses o n the tragedy o f
its d e c o r a t i o n . T h e e x t e r i o r has
recently been restored, and the 1847. Fifteen o f the b u i l d i n g s s u r v i v i n g from the quaran­
i n t e r i o r has b e e n c o n s e r v e d . tine station w i l l eventually be accessible t o v i s i t o r s . Sev­ 17

eral are u n d e r g o i n g conservation w o r k and w i l l be o p e n

Figure 1.10. T h e A n g l i c a n C h a p e l
( l o c a t i o n 11, f i g . 1.3). B u i l t i n
1877-78, t h e A n g l i c a n C h a p e l w a s
m a d e o f w o o d a n d set o n
m a s o n r y pillars. I t was intended
f o r t h e use o f t h e s t a f f a n d resi­
t o the p u b l i c i n the near f u t u r e , such as the Public W o r k s
Officer's H o u s e , the A n g l i c a n Chapel, and the M a r c o n i
Station. T h e o t h e r historic buildings, as w e l l as those from
the Canadian A r m y a n d A g r i c u l t u r e Canada's o c c u p a t i o n
o f the island, are n o t o p e n t o the p u b l i c .
Some o f the historic structures are used b y visi­
tors and staff for o t h e r purposes. T h e o l d C a r p e n t r y a n d
P l u m b i n g B u i l d i n g ( l o c a t i o n 7, fig. 1.3) houses the V i s i t o r
Center and its gift shop. T h e second f l o o r holds the
administrative offices o f the site. T h e D i s i n f e c t i o n B u i l d ­
i n g ( l o c a t i o n 8) and the T h i r d Class H o t e l ( l o c a t i o n 4)
house p u b l i c w a s h r o o m s . T h e T h i r d Class H o t e l also
accommodates the cafeteria that serves visitors as w e l l as
site staff a n d others w o r k i n g o n the i s l a n d . R o o m s o n 18

dents o f the island, n o t for the the u p p e r floors o f this b u i l d i n g are used as s h o r t - t e r m
i m m i g r a n t s . I n order t o preserve
sleeping a c c o m m o d a t i o n s for staff and others w o r k i n g o n
the structure's largely o r i g i n a l
site. T h e M e d i c a l E x a m i n a t i o n Office ( l o c a t i o n 9) as w e l l
a p p e a r a n c e a n d t o s t o p leaks, t h e
p i l l a r s are b e i n g r e i n f o r c e d ; a
as some buildings i n the C e n t r a l Sector are also used as
m o i s t u r e b a r r i e r is b e i n g p l a c e d seasonal residences for staff. 19

between the interior walls and the
board-and-batten exterior skin;
a n d t h e t i n r o o f is b e i n g r e p a i r e d .
M o r e - m o d e r n facilities o n the island include an
aircraft l a n d i n g strip i n the Eastern Sector, used exclu­
sively b y Parks Canada; a w a s t e w a t e r t r e a t m e n t plant; an
u n d e r g r o u n d w a t e r storage tank; and h e a t i n g o i l tanks.

26 GROSSE I L E A N D T H E IRISH M E M O R I A L N A T I O N A L H I S T O R I C SITE

 Figure l.u. T h e gift shop interior. Figure 1.12. B u i l t i n 1912 o f c o n c r e t e w i t h s o m e w o o d e n c l a d d i n g a n d
o t h e r details, t h e F i r s t Class H o t e l a c c o m m o d a t e d a r r i v i n g p a s s e n g e r s
w h o were placed under medical observation. B y the second half o f the
n i n e t e e n t h century, t h e s h i p p i n g c o m p a n i e s h a d m a d e i t clear t o t h e
a u t h o r i t i e s t h a t f a c i l i t i e s f o r p a s s e n g e r s b e i n g d e t a i n e d f o r m e d i c a l rea­
sons n e e d e d t o c o r r e s p o n d t o t h e i r classes o f passage, t o a v o i d u n c o m ­
f o r t a b l e m i x i n g o f passengers.

Figure 1.13. N o w c a l l e d t h e S e c o n d Class H o t e l , t h i s b u i l d i n g s e r v e d as

t h e first-class h o t e l from i t s c o n s t r u c t i o n i n 1893 u n t i l 1912. T h i s t w o -
s t o r y w o o d e n b u i l d i n g is 46 m e t e r s (150 feet) l o n g a n d h a d r o o m f o r 152
c a b i n passengers; t h e r e w a s a d i n i n g r o o m , a s i t t i n g r o o m , a n d w a s h ­
rooms.

Figure 1.14. T h e T h i r d Class H o t e l , b u i l t i n 1914, is t h e l a r g e s t o f t h e h e a t i n g . T o d a y t h i s b u i l d i n g h o u s e s t h e caf eter ia t h a t caters t o v i s i t o r s

t h r e e h o t e l s , d e s i g n e d t o h o l d 140 b e d s i n i t s fifty-two rooms. Built o f t o G r o s s e He. A l s o s e e n h e r e is t h e s q u a r e - p l a n B a k e r y , b u i l t b e t w e e n
c o n c r e t e , i t i n c l u d e d k i t c h e n s a n d d i n i n g areas at e i t h e r e n d o f e a c h 1902 a n d 1910. I n s i d e t h e w o o d e n b u i l d i n g are m a n y o f t h e o r i g i n a l spe­
f l o o r o f the b u i l d i n g , w i t h l i v i n g quarters i n t h e center. W h i l e i t offered c i a l i z e d features u s e d f o r m a k i n g a n d b a k i n g b r e a d .
close q u a r t e r s a n d l i t t l e p r i v a c y , i t w a s fitted w i t h e l e c t r i c i t y a n d c e n t r a l

M A N A G E M E N T C O N T E X T A N D HISTORY 27
Understanding and Protecting the Values of Grosse lie
and the Irish Memorial National Historic Site

V a l u e s A s s o c i a t e d w i t h Grosse Tie o f the site, a n d the p r o p o s e d means and strategies

for achieving statement m a n a g e m e n t objectives. T h e
I n essence, the values associated w i t h Grosse lie emerge
m a n a g e m e n t p l a n provides a framework w i t h i n w h i c h
i n three categories: the r o l e played b y this island i n
subsequent decision m a k i n g and detailed p l a n n i n g c o u l d
Canada's h i s t o r y ; the g o o d c o n d i t i o n and representative
take place.
character o f the bu ildings and o t h e r features r e l a t i n g t o its
T h e Quebec r e g i o n a l staff o f Parks Canada
various roles over the p e r i o d o f a century; and the p o t e n ­
u n d e r t o o k a n d r e p o r t e d o n t h e i r w o r k o n items 1 t h r o u g h
tial for effective c o m m u n i c a t i o n o f its i m p o r t a n c e . Even
3 i n 1989 i n a p u b l i c i n f o r m a t i o n paper. T h e i n f o r m a t i o n
22

t h o u g h all o f the elements o f value that are c u r r e n t l y rec­

paper became the basis o f the development concept dis­
o g n i z e d and captured i n the m a n a g e m e n t policies a n d
cussed b e l o w , and i t represented the first official proposal
23

principles for the site w e r e present i n the earliest discus­

o f Parks Canada regarding the values o f Grosse l i e . I t con­
sions, t h e y w e r e articulated and p r i o r i t i z e d slightly differ­
sidered h o w the site m i g h t best be presented t o the p u b l i c
ently b y the stakeholders as the process detailed b e l o w
and elaborated o n the themes that w o u l d frame the inter­
unfolded.
pretive p r o g r a m . 2 4

PARKS CANADA BEGINS T O FORMULATE T h e general t h e m e was "Canada: L a n d o f W e l ­

ITS P E R S P E C T I V E c o m e and H o p e / ' t o be expressed t h r o u g h t w o themes.
For Grosse l i e , as w i t h m o s t historic sites o f n a t i o n a l o r T h e m a i n t h e m e , " I m m i g r a t i o n t o Canada v i a Quebec
i n t e r n a t i o n a l interest, perspectives o n the value o f the C i t y (1830-1939)," w o u l d be conveyed b y six concepts:
place e m e r g e d g r a d u a l l y from several directions. F o l l o w ­ • the n a t i o n a l a n d i n t e r n a t i o n a l context s u r r o u n d ­
i n g the 1988 a g r e e m e n t t o transfer historic resources o n i n g the a r r i v a l o f i m m i g r a n t s i n Canada
the island t o Parks Canada, the staff l a u n c h e d the process • government policy
o f p l a n n i n g for the preservation a n d presentation o f the • risks and perils o f the A t l a n t i c crossing
n e w n a t i o n a l historic site. T h e products r e q u i r e d o f this
20
• profiles o f i m m i g r a n t s
p l a n n i n g process are described i n detail i n Parks Canada • p u b l i c o p i n i o n a b o u t n e w arrivals
m a n a g e m e n t directives. T h e y were:
21
• c o n t r i b u t i o n s o f i m m i g r a n t s t o Canadian society
1. Themes and objectives—based o n the c o m m e m o r a ­ T h e second t h e m e , "Grosse l i e Q u a r a n t i n e Sta­
tive i n t e n t established b y the H S M B C w h e n the site was t i o n (1832-1937)," w o u l d be conveyed b y five concepts:
designated, w h i c h articulates the historical rationale and • selecting the site o f Grosse l i e
n a t i o n a l context for p l a n n i n g , m a n a g e m e n t , a n d develop­ • the station as i t dealt w i t h people a n d t h e i r
m e n t o f the site. illnesses
2. Terms of reference—provide d i r e c t i o n o n essential • o p e r a t i o n o f the station (authorities, legislation,
p r o t e c t i o n and site o p e r a t i o n measures, p e n d i n g the r e c e p t i o n o f i m m i g r a n t s , the tragic years o f 1832,
approval o f a m a n a g e m e n t p l a n . 1834, and 1847)
3. Interim management guidelines—provide direction • daily life
o n the priorities, roles, responsibilities, and i m p l e m e n t a ­ • geographical a n d e n v i r o n m e n t a l features
t i o n o f the p l a n n i n g p r o g r a m . T h i s last s u b t h e m e dealing w i t h the g e o g r a p h i c a l
4. Management plan concepts—identify a range o f setting seemingly recognizes the n a t u r a l value o f the site
possible options that w o u l d direct the f u t u r e m a n a g e m e n t and " w i l l t r y t o evoke the n a t u r a l e n v i r o n m e n t as i t m a y
o f the site. have b e e n at the t i m e . . . and w i l l consider the n a t u r a l
5. Management plan—articulates long-range direc­ e n v i r o n m e n t as i t appears today." 25

t i o n for the p r o t e c t i o n , presentation, and use o f resources

28 GROSSE I L E A N D T H E I R I S H M E M O R I A L N A T I O N A L H I S T O R I C SITE
 I n effect, Parks Canada was devising an approach
t o presenting the stories o f a small island and a t t e m p t i n g
t o connect t h e m t o the expansive concepts that f r a m e d the
n a t i o n a l experience. I t h a d w o r k e d t o present Grosse l i e i n
the proposal d o c u m e n t s as a n a t i o n a l historic site and
endeavored t o reveal the values recognized for the place b y
means o f research and expert testimony. T h e H S M B C h a d
stipulated that i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s h o u l d focus o n the n a t i o n a l
significance o f the i m m i g r a t i o n t h e m e and n o t exclusively
o n i m m i g r a t i o n from Ireland, a l t h o u g h p a r t i c u l a r empha­
sis w o u l d be placed o n Irish i m m i g r a t i o n . 2 6
I n w h a t can be
seen as an early version o f a statement o f significance, the
p u b l i c i n f o r m a t i o n paper states:
T h e Grosse l i e q u a r a n t i n e station played a m a j o r role i n
t h e process o f i m m i g r a t i o n t o c e n t r a l Canada f o r m o r e
t h a n a century. T h e c o n t r i b u t i o n o f i m m i g r a t i o n t o t h e for­
m a t i o n o f the Canadian p o p u l a t i o n was substantial. I m m i ­
g r a n t s a r r i v i n g from e v e r y c o r n e r o f E u r o p e , from e v e r y
class, h e l p e d t o b u i l d t h e c o u n t r y b y b r i n g i n g t h e i r c o u r a g e ,
toil, and culture. Some o f t h e m settled i n Quebec, w h i l e
others traveled o n w a r d t o various regions o f Canada and
t h e U n i t e d States. T h e least f o r t u n a t e , n o d o u b t s e v e r a l
t h o u s a n d strong, saw their adventures e n d before their
n e w lives b e g a n . 2 7
W h i l e this perspective shaped the research a n d
its o u t c o m e t o a considerable extent, o t h e r values w e r e
also r e c o g n i z e d a n d described i n this early d o c u m e n t .
T h e i n f o r m a t i o n paper also i n c o r p o r a t e s the results o f a
m a r k e t i n g study c o n d u c t e d o n b e h a l f o f Parks Canada.
Perhaps as a result o f this m a r k e t o r i e n t a t i o n , the infor­
m a t i o n paper recognizes the e c o n o m i c value placed o n
the site b y the authorities, interest groups, a n d c o m m u n i ­
ties o n the s o u t h shore o f the St. L a w r e n c e River, w h o
saw the d e v e l o p m e n t o f Grosse l i e as a p o t e n t i a l engine
for r e g i o n a l t o u r i s m a n d e c o n o m i c d e v e l o p m e n t . T h e
i n f o r m a t i o n paper also identified actual a n d p o t e n t i a l
stakeholders o f the n a t i o n a l h i s t o r i c site, such as some
ethnic a n d c u l t u r a l c o m m u n i t i e s ( m e n t i o n i n g the Irish
specifically), w h i c h i t recognized w o u l d a t t r i b u t e spiritual
and associative values t o the site. A n d , w h i l e i t is n o t dis­
cussed i n the paper, an i n t e r e s t i n g challenge t a k i n g shape
was t h a t o f presenting a n a t i o n a l s t o r y w i t h an Irish con­
n e c t i o n w i t h i n a long-established local society t h a t was
French speaking a n d n o t p a r t i c u l a r l y enthusiastic a b o u t all
aspects o f i m m i g r a t i o n .
M a n y o f the b u i l d i n g s and structures d a t i n g from
1847 o n w a r d still stood, and identifiable r u i n s a n d sub­
surface remains o f h i s t o r i c features w e r e located all over
the island. These h i s t o r i c features—housing, kitchens, dis­
i n f e c t i o n facilities, i s o l a t i o n wards, hospitals, residences,
piers, roads, churches, a n d so o n — w e r e f o u n d t o be
r e m a r k a b l y authentic, as f e w m a j o r changes w e r e ever
made. T h e y w e r e witness t o all chapters i n the h i s t o r y o f
Grosse l i e .
F u r n i t u r e , fittings, personal items, and even vehi­
cles from all phases o f the island's use w e r e also f o u n d i n
g o o d c o n d i t i o n , e v o k i n g the q u a l i t y o f life for the various
k i n d s o f residents, patients, a n d visitors w h o passed
t h r o u g h . M o r e o v e r , the u n i q u e character o f the island i n
its riverine l o c a t i o n gave rise t o a great v a r i e t y o f habitats,
flora, and fauna.
T h e paper concludes w i t h a s u m m a r y o f reasons
w h y Parks Canada p r e d i c t e d t h a t Grosse l i e w o u l d
b e c o m e a significant site i n the n a t i o n a l system: the con­
t i n u i n g i m p o r t a n c e o f i m m i g r a t i o n i n Canada's h i s t o r y ;
the n u m b e r , diversity, and representative q u a l i t y o f the
c u l t u r a l resources; the e m o t i o n a l p o w e r o f the place for
thousands o f descendants o f i m m i g r a n t s (particularly the
Irish); a n d its geographic l o c a t i o n and favorable p o s i t i o n
o n the t o u r i s m m a r k e t .
PARKS CANADA PRESENTS ITS IDEAS
AND PLANS TO T H E PUBLIC
T h e Parks Canada guidance available at the t i m e states
that
m a n a g e m e n t p l a n n i n g is b a s e d o n consensus, b o t h i n t e r n a l l y
t h r o u g h t e a m w o r k a n d f u n c t i o n a l review, a n d externally,
28
t h r o u g h public p a r t i c i p a t i o n . . . . A comprehensive public con­
sultation strategy s h o u l d be developed early i n the p l a n n i n g
p r o g r a m t o e n s u r e t h a t o p e r a t i o n a l l y r e l e v a n t i n f o r m a t i o n is
s o u g h t , o b t a i n e d a n d u s e d p r o a c t i v e l y , a n d t o facilitate c o n s e n ­
sus b u i l d i n g w i t h s t a k e h o l d e r s a n d w i t h t h e p u b l i c at l a r g e . 2 9
I n early 1982, the p u b l i c c o n s u l t a t i o n effort was
l a u n c h e d b y Parks Canada t o present its plans for the p r o ­
t e c t i o n and i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f the site. I n advance o f the
p u b l i c meetings, copies o f the d e v e l o p m e n t concept docu­
m e n t w e r e m a d e available t o interest g r o u p s a n d the press
i n areas w h e r e the meetings w o u l d be h e l d .
I n spite o f the extensive research a n d p r e p a r a t i o n
o f t h o r o u g h a n d comprehensive i n t e r n a l d o c u m e n t s relat­
i n g t o all aspects o f the h i s t o r y o f Grosse l i e , the develop­
m e n t concept was subject t o fairly b r o a d and, i n some
cases, q u i t e negative i n t e r p r e t a t i o n b y certain groups.
T h e d e v e l o p m e n t concept c a r r i e d f o r t h the themes o f
U N D E R S T A N D I N G A N D P R O T E C T I N G T H E VALUES 29
i m m i g r a t i o n and quarantine identified i n the i n f o r m a t i o n
paper, b u t i t d i d n o t reflect the sensitivity t o the Irish
tragedy t h a t was evident i n o t h e r p r e l i m i n a r y d o c u m e n t s .
T h r o u g h o u t , from descriptions o f the status and
c o n d i t i o n o f i n d i v i d u a l features and classes o f resources
o n the island t h r o u g h a detailed section a b o u t the govern­
m e n t ' s objectives for the site, there is n o m e n t i o n o f the
30
experience o f the Irish i n 1847. T h e m a i n p o i n t o f con­
t e n t i o n d u r i n g the p u b l i c debate was t h a t some g r o u p s felt
significance was b e i n g t a k e n away from the Irish tragedy
o f 1847. I n a discussion o f h o w the site s h o u l d be p r o ­
m o t e d , the t o p i c arises:
A s f o r t h e " i m a g e " o f t h e site t o b e p r o m o t e d , b o t h
c u r r e n t a n d p o t e n t i a l clienteles clearly stated t h a t the t h e m e
o f i m m i g r a t i o n has l i t t l e i m p a c t . I n t h a t respect, t h e i m a g e
m u s t b e m o d e l e d o n c l i e n t e l e e x p e c t a t i o n s , interests, a n d
m o t i v a t i o n s , u s i n g t h e t h e m a t i c c o n t e x t p r i m a r i l y as a b a c k ­
drop I t is also felt t h a t t h e r e s h o u l d n o t b e t o o m u c h
e m p h a s i s o n t h e t r a g i c aspects o f t h e h i s t o r y o f G r o s s e l i e .
On the contrary, the-painful events of 1832 to 1847, which have often
been overemphasized in the past, need to be put back into perspective,
without robbing them of their importance [emphasis a d d e d ] .
T h e u n f o r t u n a t e last sentence o f this statement w o u l d be
q u o t e d often i n the n e x t phase o f the process.
A f t e r a l e n g t h y e x p l o r a t i o n o f the local c o m m e r ­
cial d e v e l o p m e n t interests and logistical considerations
r e l a t i n g t o t r a n s p o r t a t i o n and infrastructure, the r e p o r t
r e t u r n e d t o the subject o f values and themes, stating t h a t
one o f the three d e v e l o p m e n t principles s h o u l d be respect
for the e m o t i o n s felt b y visitors w h o are connected t o
those w h o d i e d o n the island and the fact t h a t the island is
seen as a "place o f p i l g r i m a g e , r e m e m b r a n c e , and con­
t e m p l a t i o n . " T h e second principle was t h a t the i n t e r p r e ­
tive p r o g r a m s h o u l d cover the f u l l range o f historical
themes chosen for the site. T h e t h i r d p r i n c i p l e was t h a t
the d e v e l o p m e n t o f Grosse l i e w o u l d f o l l o w an i n t e g r a t e d
approach, " d r a w i n g o n b o t h the n a t u r a l and c u l t u r a l
facets o f the site." 32
T H E PUBLIC RESPONDS
17 March-8 April 1992
Several i n f o r m a t i o n sessions w e r e h e l d i n M o n t m a g n y
Quebec, L'lle-aux-Grues, St. Malachie, and M o n t r e a l ,
attended b y a p p r o x i m a t e l y t w o h u n d r e d people.
22 April-20 May 1992
A series o f three f o r m a l p u b l i c meetings w e r e h e l d i n
M o n t m a g n y , Quebec, and M o n t r e a l .
30 GROSSE I L E A N D T H E I R I S H M E M O R I A L N A T I O N A L H I S T O R I C SITE
T w o h u n d r e d Irish Canadians w h o attended the
final m e e t i n g i n this series insisted t h a t a d d i t i o n a l meet­
ings be h e l d outside Quebec i n order t o give m o r e people
from across Canada the chance t o be heard, a d d i n g t h a t
the d e v e l o p m e n t concept d i d n o t do justice t o , o r was o t h ­
erwise deficient w i t h , respect t o the "Irish d i m e n s i o n " o f
the site. T h i s p o i n t o f v i e w was echoed i n statements from
across the country. T h e m i n i s t e r directed Parks Canada t o
organize a second r o u n d o f p u b l i c meetings i n spring 1993.
16 February 1993
T h e Grosse tie National Historic Site—Development Concept
Supplement 33
was issued i n response t o the clearly unex­
pected reactions o f m a n y Irish Canadians t o the o r i g i n a l
d e v e l o p m e n t concept d o c u m e n t . T h i s s u p p l e m e n t was
i n t e n d e d t o "expand u p o n and clarify certain p o i n t s before
c o n t i n u i n g w i t h the p u b l i c exercise." T h e d o c u m e n t
34
acknowledges the inappropriateness o f the emphasis o f
the d e v e l o p m e n t concept:
B a s e d o n t h i s passage [quoted above], r e p r e s e n t a ­
tives o f t h e I r i s h c o m m u n i t y h a v e g e n e r a l l y a t t r i b u t e d t o t h e
Canadian Parks Service the i n t e n t i o n o f m i n i m i z i n g the
31
i m p o r t a n c e o f the tragedy that Irish i m m i g r a n t s experi­
e n c e d i n 1832 a n d 1847. S u c h is n o t t h e case. T h e passage i n
q u e s t i o n expresses t h e p e r s o n a l o p i n i o n o f i n d i v i d u a l s w h o
p a r t i c i p a t e d i n t h e m a r k e t s t u d y ; t h a t is, t h a t promotion of the
site f o r f u t u r e t o u r i s t s — w h i c h w a s t h e specific issue t h e y
w e r e addressing—should n o t be based solely o n the tragic
e v e n t s o f 1832 a n d 1 8 4 7 . 35
C o r r e c t i n g w h a t h a d b e c o m e — a n d w o u l d con­
t i n u e t o be—an e m o t i o n a l l y charged s i t u a t i o n p r o m i s e d
t o be a test for those w h o w o u l d manage the n e x t phase o f
the process. I n this d o c u m e n t , Parks Canada a c k n o w l ­
edges t h a t clarification is needed w h e n i t states, " i n l i g h t o f
the reactions and c o m m e n t s received, the Canadian Parks
Service has c o n c l u d e d t h a t the M a r c h 1992 d o c u m e n t d i d
n o t fulfill its m i s s i o n o f i n f o r m i n g the p u b l i c . I t is i n d e e d
s o m e w h a t vague o n certain points, p a r t i c u l a r l y those o f
specific c o n c e r n t o the Irish c o m m u n i t y . " T h e last page 36
o f this d o c u m e n t attempts t o correct the vagueness o f the
d e v e l o p m e n t concept b y stating clearly and forcefully the
i n t e n t i o n s o f the Canadian Parks Service w i t h regard t o
the site, w h i c h i n c l u d e u t m o s t respect for the Irish events
o n the island. I t f u r t h e r r e c o m m e n d s t h a t "the expression
o f the i m m i g r a t i o n t h e m e as 'Canada: L a n d o f W e l c o m e
and H o p e ' s h o u l d be d r o p p e d ; the t r a g i c dimensions o f
events o n the island m a k e i t i n a p p r o p r i a t e . T h e s t o r y t o l d ,
and the t h e m e , is immigration; s i m p l y t h a t . " 37
 22 March-if April 1993
I n this second r o u n d , seven public meetings w e r e convened
i n Vancouver; Fredericton, N . B . ; C h a r l o t t e t o w n , P.E.I.; and
T o r o n t o . Participants at these meetings made statements
and s u b m i t t e d briefs; people w h o d i d n o t attend w e r e
invited t o s u b m i t f o r m a l statements as w e l l . A toll-free tele­
p h o n e n u m b e r was set u p t o take statements from callers.
W r i t t e n statements w e r e received from 228 people, m o s t o f
Irish descent. Some 920 people sent letters t o P r i m e Minis­
ter Brian Mulroney, whose Irish heritage d i d n o t escape the
w r i t e r s ' notice. A b o u t two-thirds o f the w r i t e r s used boiler­
plate text that h a d been suggested for this purpose. T h e let­
ters and the w r i t t e n briefs demonstrate the deep e m o t i o n
stirred b y reaction t o the perceived shortcomings o f the
development plan, b u t m o s t convey concern w i t h o u t accu­
sations. Three petitions w e r e also received bearing signa­
tures o f 23,855 additional p e o p l e . 38
T h e c o n t e n t o f the responses r e l a t i n g t o the
significance o f the site stressed the i m p o r t a n c e o f Grosse
lie as a m e m o r i a l t o the dead and as a r e m i n d e r o f a b i t t e r
chapter i n Irish history. Present i n m a n y o f the statements
was the appreciation that m a n y i m m i g r a n t s recovered
from illnesses and w e n t o n t o thrive; even so, this was n o t
considered sufficient reason t o forget the tragedy. Some
n o t e that the i m m i g r a n t experience o f the 1840s was n o t
a simple, j o y f u l arrival o n the fertile shores o f Canada as
m u c h as i t was the e n d t o a treacherous crossing t h r o u g h
h e l l and h i g h water.
A p a r t f r o m the occasional i n f l a m m a t o r y mis­
sives, these w e r e genuine sentiments, p u t f o r t h i n g o o d
faith d u r i n g this u n c o m f o r t a b l e episode. Some difficulty
was p r o b a b l y inevitable at this p o i n t , as the site was, i n
effect, converted from a shrine o f significance t o a specific
g r o u p t o a n a t i o n a l historic site. A n d w h i l e the f o r m e r
m e m o r i a l i z e s a tragedy, the latter was i n t e n d e d t o cele­
brate the arrival and c o n t r i b u t i o n s o f thousands o f i m m i ­
grants t o Canada. T h e N a t i o n a l H i s t o r i c Sites o f Canada
System P l a n h a d n o t b e e n i n force for v e r y l o n g , a n d i t
39
seemed t o some t h a t these efforts t o convey the story o f
i m m i g r a t i o n — a t one o f the few sites w i t h the historic
fabric t o s u p p o r t the s t o r y — w e r e t a k i n g over the l o n g -
established significance o f the site. T h e task ahead for
Parks Canada w o u l d be t o recognize a n d shelter the spiri­
t u a l qualities o f the place as the d e v e l o p m e n t o f the
n a t i o n a l historic site w e n t f o r w a r d .
RESULTS OF T H E PUBLIC
CONSULTATION PROGRAM
A l t h o u g h the p u b l i c c o n s u l t a t i o n p r o g r a m h a d a s t r o n g
c o n f r o n t a t i o n a l edge, Parks Canada p u b l i s h e d its experi­
ence o f this p i v o t a l phase o f p l a n n i n g at Grosse lie. T h e
staff transcribed all the audiotaped verbal presentations
at the p u b l i c meetings as w e l l as the messages left at the
toll-free telephone n u m b e r . T h e y collected all the briefs
presented and all the letters received b y the g o v e r n m e n t .
Each one h a d its o w n c o m p u t e r file, and the topics cov­
ered w e r e classified and charted. T h i s d o c u m e n t a t i o n n o w
constitutes an i m p o r t a n t resource for those i n search o f
models for heritage preservation.
March 1994
Parks Canada p u b l i s h e d Grosse lie National Historic Site—
Report on the Public Consultation Program (Parks Canada
1994c), w h i c h presents passages q u o t e d from these files,
organized u n d e r five topic areas. I t also lists the names
40
o f people and organizations present at each o f the p u b l i c
meetings.
T h e r e p o r t contains o n l y m i n i m a l analysis o r
j u d g m e n t o f the commentaries, and n o a t t e m p t was made
t o react t o the issues. I t is r e m a r k a b l y free o f defensiveness
and, i n fact, encourages still m o r e feedback. T h e final page
i n the r e p o r t text i n f o r m s the reader that the H S M B C
w o u l d be responsible for the analysis o f the findings from
the c o n s u l t a t i o n phase and w o u l d s u b m i t its r e c o m m e n ­
dations t o the minister. T h e g o v e r n m e n t w o u l d t h e n for­
m u l a t e and announce its p o s i t i o n regarding the "orienta­
t i o n o f the project."
10 August 1994
M i n i s t e r o f Canadian H e r i t a g e M i c h e l D u p u y announced
that he h a d accepted the n e w advice o f the H S M B C
regarding the f u t u r e d e v e l o p m e n t o f Grosse lie, and thus
he w o u l d direct Parks Canada t o tell "the f u l l s t o r y o f the
Canadian i m m i g r a n t experience at Grosse lie. T h e Irish
experience o n the island, especially d u r i n g the tragic epi­
d e m i c years o f the first h a l f o f the n i n e t e e n t h century, is
t o be a p a r t i c u l a r focus o f the c o m m e m o r a t i o n . . . . [ H e ]
also a n n o u n c e d the establishment o f a panel o f p r o m i ­
n e n t Canadians r e p o r t i n g t o h i m t o assist Parks Canada
i n the i m p l e m e n t a t i o n o f his decision o n Grosse l i e . " 41
T h e m e m b e r s o f the panel, together w i t h eight
r a n k i n g Parks Canada staff, analyzed all the responses and
requests received d u r i n g the p u b l i c c o n s u l t a t i o n p r o g r a m ,
and they f o r m u l a t e d and j u s t i f i e d a set o f r e c o m m e n d a ­
tions for submission t o D u p u y .
August 199$
Parks Canada p u b l i s h e d the r e p o r t o f the advisory p a n e l , 42
w h i c h contains eleven r e c o m m e n d a t i o n s o n matters o f
i n t e r p r e t a t i o n , use o f specific historic buildings, r a n k i n g
U N D E R S T A N D I N G A N D P R O T E C T I N G T H E VALUES 31
o f the island's resources w i t h regard t o t h e i r care, themes
for development, t o n e o f presentations, ambience and
atmosphere, financing, and access. Each r e c o m m e n d a t i o n
is accompanied b y specific o p e r a t i o n a l suggestions as t o
h o w i t m i g h t best be realized.
O n e dependable fact i n the heritage field is t h a t
values evolve w i t h t i m e a n d w i t h the i n v o l v e m e n t o f n e w
stakeholders. I n t h e case o f Grosse l i e , however, i t was
b e c o m i n g clear t h a t the values o f the o r i g i n a l Irish stake­
holders h a d n o t changed t o p e r m i t a b r o a d acceptance
o f the proposals as stated i n the d e v e l o p m e n t concept. I t
appeared t h a t an o p t i m i s t i c , t h e m a t i c c o n s t r u c t t h a t k n i t ­
t e d together Canada's n a t i o n a l h i s t o r i c sites had, i n Grosse
fie, c o l l i d e d w i t h m e m o r i e s o f suffering and injustice t h a t
still r e m a i n p r o f o u n d l y i m p o r t a n t t o some people o f Irish
n a t i o n a l i t y o r descent. I t also became evident t h a t b o t h
positions represent l e g i t i m a t e values o f Grosse l i e a n d
t h a t t h e y needed t o be preserved a n d presented i n the
n e w n a t i o n a l site.
I n r e c o u n t i n g events w h o s e r e s o l u t i o n is n o w
k n o w n , one risks the t r a p o f ' p r e s e n t - i s m " — j u d g i n g a
past s i t u a t i o n t h r o u g h present sensibilities. C o n t e x t u a l -
i z i n g a n d e x p l a i n i n g the reasoning o f Parks Canada is
done n o t t o stanch discussion b u t , rather, t o i n f o r m i t .
T o w a r d this end, t h e n , the q u e s t i o n can be posed: W h o
w e r e the Irish? T h i s m a y seem t o be a curious question,
b u t i t is an i m p o r t a n t one g i v e n recent scholarship o n
the I r i s h i n Canada.
T r a d i t i o n a l l y i t has been p r e s u m e d that the Irish i n
Canada w e r e p r i m a r i l y R o m a n Catholic and largely u r b a n
dwellers (and p r o b a b l y anti-British and republican as w e l l ) ,
m u c h as was the case i n the U n i t e d States. B u t recent schol­
arship, particularly o n nineteenth-century Irish i m m i g r a ­
t i o n t o Canada, has challenged that view. I n fact, based o n
quantitative data, approximately t w o - t h i r d s o f Irish i m m i ­
g r a t i o n t o Canada was Protestant; the i m m i g r a n t s m o r e
typically settled initially i n r u r a l areas and i n smaller t o w n s ;
and they m a y w e l l have chosen Canada ( w h i c h before 1867
was c o m m o n l y referred t o as British N o r t h A m e r i c a ) rather
t h a n the U n i t e d States because i t was British.
I n the case o f Grosse l i e , references t o "the I r i s h "
( i n c l u d i n g t o the " I r i s h M e m o r i a l " ) generally indicate the
I r i s h C a t h o l i c c o m m u n i t y , b u t this n a r r o w e r use needs t o
be u n d e r s t o o d i n context, because Canadians o f I r i s h o r i ­
g i n constitute a m u c h b r o a d e r g r o u p , a n d the g r o u p as a
w h o l e does n o t necessarily have the same concerns o r
share the same v i e w s . 43
Therefore, the s t r e n g t h o f the p u b l i c r e a c t i o n
t o the perceived underemphasis o n the "Irish tragedy"
32 GROSSE I L E A N D T H E I R I S H M E M O R I A L N A T I O N A L H I S T O R I C SITE
was s o m e w h a t s u r p r i s i n g for the Parks Canada staff
w o r k i n g o n this project. I t seemed t o be o u t o f p r o p o r t i o n
a n d based o n a m i s r e a d i n g o f i m p e r f e c t materials—and
possibly related t o the p o l i t i c a l events o f the m o m e n t
i n Ireland.
A n i m p o r t a n t p o i n t one m a y glean from this case
is t h a t stakeholders' divergent v i e w s o n values are subject
t o a b r o a d range o f influences n o t c o n f i n e d t o official his­
tories o r even t o facts. A n t i c i p a t i n g p o t e n t i a l sources o f
influence i n a p l a n n i n g s i t u a t i o n can prepare participants
for effective p u b l i c consultations; retrospective analysis o f
consultations can shed n e w l i g h t o n h o w values have
e m e r g e d a n d h o w t h e y m a y have changed.
NEW STATEMENT OF COMMEMORATIVE INTENT
AND ITS IMPACTS
A statement o f c o m m e m o r a t i v e i n t e n t is the concise dec­
l a r a t i o n o f the reasons a n d p u r p o s e for w h i c h a n a t i o n a l
historic site has b e e n so designated. F o l l o w i n g extensive
research a n d deliberations, the H S M B C w r i t e s this state­
m e n t for the approval o f the m i n i s t e r o f Canadian her­
itage. O n c e approved, i t becomes t h e t o u c h s t o n e for
the m a n a g e m e n t p l a n n i n g at the site. T h e statement o f
c o m m e m o r a t i v e i n t e n t d e l i m i t s a n d p r i o r i t i z e s the m a i n
interests o f Parks Canada r e g a r d i n g the stewardship a n d
presentation o f a site u n d e r its j u r i s d i c t i o n . I n M a r c h 1996
the M i n i s t e r o f Canadian H e r i t a g e clarified the c o m m e m ­
orative i n t e n t o f Grosse l i e b y m o d i f y i n g the n a m e o f the
n a t i o n a l h i s t o r i c site, w h i c h became "Grosse l i e a n d the
Irish M e m o r i a l , " 4 4
thereby b r i n g i n g the fateful year o f
1847 i n t o sharper focus t h a n was p r o p o s e d b y the develop­
m e n t concept f o u r years earlier. T h e statement o f c o m ­
m e m o r a t i v e i n t e n t became:
T h e G r o s s e l i e a n d t h e I r i s h M e m o r i a l N a t i o n a l H i s t o r i c Site
c o m m e m o r a t e s the significance o f i m m i g r a t i o n t o Canada,
e s p e c i a l l y v i a t h e g a t e w a y o f Q u e b e c C i t y , from t h e b e g i n ­
n i n g o f the 19th c e n t u r y u p t o the First W o r l d W a r .
G r o s s e l i e also c o m m e m o r a t e s t h e t r a g i c e v e n t s s u f f e r e d b y
Irish i m m i g r a n t s o n the island m a i n l y d u r i n g the t y p h u s epi­
d e m i c o f 1847.
F i n a l l y , t h e site c o m m e m o r a t e s t h e r o l e p l a y e d b y t h e i s l a n d ,
from 1832 t o 1937, as t h e q u a r a n t i n e s t a t i o n f o r t h e p o r t o f
Quebec, for years t h e p r i n c i p a l p o i n t o f e n t r y f o r i m m i ­
grants to Canada. 4 5
W h e n c o m p a r e d t o the w o r d i n g i n t h e develop­
m e n t concept, this statement demonstrates t h a t w h i l e the
recognized facts are the same a n d n o n e w values have
b e e n added, an i m p o r t a n t shift i n emphasis has t a k e n
place. Instead o f s h y i n g away from p u t t i n g the " I r i s h
tragedy" i n a p o s i t i o n o f p r o m i n e n c e that (it h a d been
t h o u g h t ) m i g h t overshadow the o t h e r aspects a n d inter­
pretive o p p o r t u n i t i e s o f the site, this statement reflects
the voices o f the stakeholders b y p r o m o t i n g the tragedy
to p r o m i n e n c e a l o n g w i t h the r e c o g n i t i o n o f the role o f
i m m i g r a t i o n and o f this island i n the establishment o f
m o d e r n Canada.
I n 1998, a n e w H S M B C plaque replaced the one
dedicated i n 1980; the n e w text referred t o the r o l e o f
Grosse l i e as a quarantine station, stressed the p h e n o m e ­
n o n o f i m m i g r a t i o n , and gave special a t t e n t i o n t o the
Irish experience o f 1847.
T h e three elements m o s t closely associated w i t h
the tragic events are located i n the W e s t e r n Sector o f the
Figure 1.17. T h e I r i s h C e m e t e r y w a s l a i d o u t i n 1832 b e t w e e n t w o crags
island. T h e Celtic Cross, erected i n 1909, stands above the
l o c a t e d s o u t h w e s t o f C h o l e r a Bay. T h i s v i e w l o o k s east across t h e
southeastern cliff o f Grosse l i e (fig. 1.4) and is reached
c e m e t e r y , w i t h H o s p i t a l B a y i n t h e d i s t a n c e . U n t i l 1847 i n d i v i d u a l b u r i ­
o n l y b y a rustic w o o d l a n d t r a i l , seen i n figure 1.15. T h e als w e r e p e r f o r m e d h e r e . T h a t year, b e c a u s e o f t h e h i g h r a t e o f m o r t a l ­
o t h e r t w o elements are the D o c t o r s ' M e m o r i a l and the i t y from t y p h u s , l o n g t r e n c h e s w e r e u s e d as m a s s graves. T h e c e m e ­
Irish C e m e t e r y (figs. 1.16,1.17). t e r y ' s t o p o g r a p h y s h o w s e v i d e n c e o f t h e t r e n c h e s . T h i s c e m e t e r y is
b e l i e v e d t o h o l d o v e r 6,000 o f G r o s s e l i e ' s 7,553 d e a d .

Figure 1.1$. A w o o d l a n d t r a i l , A n e w e l e m e n t was p l a n n e d as an enhancement

w h i c h leads t o t h e c l i f f - t o p
l o c a t i o n o f the Celtic Cross.
Figure 1.16. T h e D o c t o r s ' M e m o ­
r i a l . T h e t r a i l s h o w n i n f i g u r e 1.15
continues over the t o p o f the crag;
o n t h e o t h e r side, a s m a l l m a r b l e
m o n u m e n t stands i n a b i r c h g r o v e
next to the Irish Cemetery. This
stele is a m e m o r i a l t o t h e p h y s i ­
cians w h o s a c r i f i c e d t h e i r lives i n
t h e 1830s a n d 1840s f o r t h e s i c k
i m m i g r a n t s . It was placed here i n
a b o u t 1853 b y D r . D o u g l a s , t h e
first superintendent o f the quar­
antine station.
to the spiritual aspect o f Grosse l i e — a n e w Irish M e m o ­
rial. A design c o m p e t i t i o n was held, and, f r o m the w i n ­
n i n g design, an expressive e a r t h w o r k and s u r r o u n d were
b u i l t t o c o m m e m o r a t e those w h o h a d died and been
b u r i e d i n u n m a r k e d graves o n Grosse lie. T h e n e w
m e m o r i a l , a few meters s o u t h o f the Irish Cemetery,
evokes an ancient b a r r o w t o m b . I t consists o f paths i n the
shape o f a Celtic cross c u t t h r o u g h an earthen m o u n d ,
w h i c h is t o p p e d b y native shale. I t is f r a m e d o n the n o r t h
by an arc o f glass panels that bear the engraved names o f
those w h o d i e d o n the island. I n A u g u s t 1998, Parks
Canada i n a u g u r a t e d this m e m o r i a l i n the presence o f Ire­
land's president, M a r y McAleese.
A t the e n d o f a difficult b u t successful process
that was best u n d e r s t o o d i n retrospect, the values cited
i n the c o m m e m o r a t i v e i n t e n t o f the historic site o f
Grosse l i e and the Irish M e m o r i a l are a p o i g n a n t b l e n d
o f o p t i m i s m and sadness that captures the f u l l character
o f the place.
C o n s i d e r a t i o n o f Values in M a n a g e m e n t
Policies a n d S t r a t e g i e s
Once discovered and stated, h o w w o u l d the values
expressed i n the statement o f c o m m e m o r a t i v e i n t e n t
be f r a m e d w i t h i n a m a n a g e m e n t plan? H o w are they
connected to, and i n c o r p o r a t e d i n t o , the guidance regard­
i n g actions r e c o m m e n d e d o n the site?

U N D E R S T A N D I N G A N D P R O T E C T I N G T H E VALUES 33
Figure 1.18. T h e n e w I r i s h M e m o r i a l is t u c k e d a g a i n s t t h e h i l l s i d e , j u s t
s o u t h w e s t o f the D o c t o r s ' M e m o r i a l a n d above the Irish Cemetery.
T h e s t o n e s t r u c t u r e i n t h e c e n t e r is framed b y glass p a n e l s e t c h e d w i t h
t h e n a m e s o f t h e d e a d from t h e e p i d e m i c y e a r s .
COMMEMORATIVE INTENT AND
COMMEMORATIVE INTEGRITY
As o f 1994, Parks Canada has e m p l o y e d a p o w e r f u l nor­
m a t i v e approach t o establishing t h e m a n a g e m e n t a n d
i n t e r p r e t i v e f r a m e w o r k for the sites u n d e r its stewardship.
T w o core concepts h e l p t o m a i n t a i n the focus o f manage­
m e n t decisions: c o m m e m o r a t i v e i n t e n t (described above)
a n d c o m m e m o r a t i v e i n t e g r i t y . Each o f these concepts is
46
o p e r a t i o n a l i z e d b y a d o c u m e n t t h a t defines i n detail the
concept as i t applies t o a specific site.
Commemorative integrity is a t e r m used t o describe
the h e a l t h o r wholeness o f a n a t i o n a l h i s t o r i c site. A state
o f c o m m e m o r a t i v e i n t e g r i t y can be said t o exist w h e n :
• the resources t h a t s y m b o l i z e o r represent a site's
i m p o r t a n c e are n o t i m p a i r e d o r u n d e r threat;
• the reasons for the site's n a t i o n a l h i s t o r i c
significance are effectively c o m m u n i c a t e d t o the p u b l i c ;
• the site's heritage values ( i n c l u d i n g those n o t
related t o n a t i o n a l significance) are respected b y all w h o s e
decisions a n d actions affect the s i t e . 47
T h e c o m m e m o r a t i v e i n t e g r i t y statement is a
detailed d o c u m e n t w r i t t e n as p a r t o f the m a n a g e m e n t
p l a n n i n g process for a site. I t ties t h e c o m m e m o r a t i v e
i n t e n t t o the physical features w h e r e value resides, a n d
expands o n the specific characteristics o f t h a t value. I t also
emphasizes t h e o b l i g a t i o n o f the site managers t o ensure
t h a t t h e site retains its c o m m e m o r a t i v e integrity. T h e
statement serves as a guide for the m a n a g e m e n t o f the
34 GROSSE I L E A N D T H E I R I S H M E M O R I A L N A T I O N A L H I S T O R I C SITE
Figure 1.19. Glass p a n e l s at t h e I r i s h M e m o r i a l o n w h i c h v i s i t o r s m a y
r e a d t h e n a m e s o f t h o s e w h o d i e d e i t h e r e n r o u t e t o o r at G r o s s e l i e .
site a n d as a means o f assessing its state and d e t e r m i n i n g
the necessary measures t o be taken.
T h e first p a r t o f the statement identifies a n d eval­
uates the c u l t u r a l resources w i t h reference t o t h e h i s t o r i c
values t h a t p r o m p t e d the n a t i o n a l designation o f the site.
I n c l u d e d are specific goals a n d objectives r e g a r d i n g the
desired state o f these resources as w e l l as w o r k t h a t m a y
be necessary t o achieve these goals. T h e second p a r t is t h e
a r t i c u l a t i o n o f the k e y messages, any secondary messages,
and any c o n t e x t o r t o n e t h a t is seen as i m p o r t a n t t o associ­
ate w i t h the messages t h a t are t o be c o m m u n i c a t e d t o the
p u b l i c a b o u t the site. I n c l u d e d i n this p a r t is the m e n t i o n
o f any challenges t h a t are already anticipated i n t h e area
o f c o m m u n i c a t i o n . T h e t h i r d p a r t o f the statement
describes resources a n d o t h e r values t h a t are n o t o f
n a t i o n a l significance b u t t h a t c a r r y h i s t o r i c significance
for the site, a n d i t identifies messages r e g a r d i n g these
resources t h a t are i m p o r t a n t t o c o m m u n i c a t e t h r o u g h
the i n t e r p r e t i v e p r o g r a m .
CULTURAL RESOURCE MANAGEMENT POLICY
AND VALUES PRESERVATION
For Parks Canada, historic v a l u e — r a t h e r t h a n social, cul­
t u r a l , scientific, e c o n o m i c , use, p r o g r a m , o r o t h e r val­
ues—determines w h e t h e r a resource is a c u l t u r a l resource
and, hence, w h e t h e r i t s h o u l d be m a n a g e d u n d e r the p o l ­
icy. T h e seminal guidance c o n t a i n e d i n the c u l t u r a l
resource m a n a g e m e n t policy, p a r t o f the Guiding Principles
and Operational Policies** ensures a values-based a p p r o a c h
t o heritage m a n a g e m e n t t h r o u g h its d e f i n i t i o n o f its p r i n ­ the i m p o r t a n t relationship b e t w e e n value a n d resource
ciples, practice, a n d activities. T h r o u g h o u t , all the p r i n c i ­ and c o n c e r n e d m o r e w i t h process t h a n w i t h o u t c o m e .
ples deal i n one w a y o r a n o t h e r w i t h values, even w h e n
SAFETY FROM IMPAIRMENT OR T H R E A T
the w o r d value is n o t specifically used. T h e f o l l o w i n g
T h e first task i n e n s u r i n g the p r o t e c t i o n o f physical
excerpts d e m o n s t r a t e this f u n d a m e n t a l c o m m i t m e n t :
resources from i m p a i r m e n t is t o i d e n t i f y a n d characterize
1.1 PRINCIPLES
all the resources i n the Level I category. B r i e f passages
4 9

1. 1.2 W h i l e a l l c u l t u r a l r e s o u r c e s are v a l u e d , s o m e c u l ­ extracted from the c u l t u r a l resource m a n a g e m e n t p o l i c y

t u r a l r e s o u r c e s are d e e m e d t o b e o f t h e h i g h e s t p o s s i b l e define Level I a n d Level I I resources:
value a n d w i l l be p r o t e c t e d a n d presented accordingly. Parks
2.2.1 Level I :
Canada w i l l value m o s t h i g h l y those c u l t u r a l resources o f
N a t i o n a l h i s t o r i c s i g n i f i c a n c e is t h e h i g h e s t l e v e l a s s i g n e d t o
n a t i o n a l historic significance.
a c u l t u r a l resource i n the c u s t o d y o f Parks Canada. N a t i o n a l
1. 1.4 C u l t u r a l resources w i l l be v a l u e d n o t o n l y for
historic significance w i l l be d e t e r m i n e d i n accordance w i t h
t h e i r p h y s i c a l o r m a t e r i a l p r o p e r t i e s , b u t also f o r t h e associa­
t h e N a t i o n a l H i s t o r i c Sites P o l i c y .
t i v e a n d s y m b o l i c a t t r i b u t e s w i t h w h i c h t h e y are i m b u e d ,
2.2.1.1 Evaluation to determine national historic
a n d w h i c h f r e q u e n t l y f o r m t h e basis o f t h e i r h i s t o r i c v a l u e .
s i g n i f i c a n c e is u n d e r t a k e n b y t h e H i s t o r i c Sites a n d M o n u ­
1.1.5 A c u l t u r a l r e s o u r c e w h o s e h i s t o r i c v a l u e derives
m e n t s B o a r d o f C a n a d a . Its r e c o m m e n d a t i o n t o t h e M i n i s ­
from its w i t n e s s t o m a n y p e r i o d s i n h i s t o r y w i l l b e r e s p e c t e d
ter, a n d a n y s u b s e q u e n t M i n i s t e r i a l d e s i g n a t i o n , m a y s p e c i f y
f o r t h a t e v o l u t i o n , n o t j u s t f o r its existence at a s i n g l e m o m e n t
w h i c h r e s o u r c e s w i t h i n a d e s i g n a t e d n a t i o n a l h i s t o r i c site are
i n time. P a r k s C a n a d a w i l l r e v e a l a n u n d e r l y i n g o r p r e v i o u s
themselves o f n a t i o n a l historic significance.
p h y s i c a l state o f a n o b j e c t , s t r u c t u r e , o r site at t h e expense o f
2.2.1.2 W h e r e a M i n i s t e r i a l d e s i g n a t i o n is n o t specific
l a t e r f o r m s a n d m a t e r i a l o n l y w i t h g r e a t c a u t i o n ; w h e n his­
w i t h respect t o the n a t i o n a l h i s t o r i c significance o f resources
t o r i c v a l u e is c l e a r l y r e l a t e d t o a n e a r l i e r f o r m , a n d w h e n
at a n a t i o n a l h i s t o r i c site, t h e p r o g r a m w i l l a p p l y t h e c o m ­
k n o w l e d g e a n d existing m a t e r i a l o f that earlier f o r m a l l o w
memorative intent o f the designation to determine w h i c h
1.2 PRACTICE
r e s o u r c e s are t o b e s p e c i f i c a l l y c o n s i d e r e d o f n a t i o n a l his­

1.2.2 T o u n d e r s t a n d a n d appreciate c u l t u r a l resources toric significance.

and the sometimes complex themes they illustrate, the pub­

2.2.2 Level I I :
lic w i l l b e p r o v i d e d w i t h i n f o r m a t i o n a n d services t h a t effec­
A r e s o u r c e t h a t is n o t o f n a t i o n a l h i s t o r i c s i g n i f i c a n c e m a y
tively c o m m u n i c a t e the i m p o r t a n c e a n d value o f those
have h i s t o r i c v a l u e a n d thus be considered a c u l t u r a l
resources a n d t h e i r themes.
resource.
1.2.3 A p p r o p r i a t e uses o f c u l t u r a l r e s o u r c e s w i l l b e
2.2.2.1 Parks C a n a d a w i l l establish a n d a p p l y c r i t e r i a t o
t h o s e uses a n d a c t i v i t i e s t h a t r e s p e c t t h e h i s t o r i c v a l u e a n d
d e t e r m i n e w h i c h resources u n d e r its j u r i s d i c t i o n are L e v e l I I . A
physical i n t e g r i t y o f the resource, a n d that p r o m o t e public
r e s o u r c e m a y b e i n c l u d e d i n t h i s c a t e g o r y b y v i r t u e o f its his­
understanding and appreciation.
t o r i c a l , aesthetic, o r e n v i r o n m e n t a l q u a l i t i e s . C r i t e r i a w i l l also
1.4 RESPECT
g i v e c o n s i d e r a t i o n t o s u c h factors as r e g i o n a l o r l o c a l associa­

1.4.1 C u l t u r a l resources w i l l be m a n a g e d w i t h c o n t i n u ­ t i o n ; o r p r o v i n c i a l , t e r r i t o r i a l o r m u n i c i p a l designations.

o u s care a n d w i t h r e s p e c t f o r t h e i r h i s t o r i c c h a r a c t e r ; t h a t is,
2.2.2.2 B u i l d i n g s t h a t are d e s i g n a t e d " c l a s s i f i e d " o r "rec­
f o r t h e q u a l i t i e s f o r w h i c h t h e y are v a l u e d .
ognized" i n accordance w i t h the Federal Heritage Buildings

T h e c u l t u r a l resource m a n a g e m e n t p o l i c y P o l i c y w i l l a u t o m a t i c a l l y b e c o n s i d e r e d as L e v e l I I c u l t u r a l

describes the "practice" o f c u l t u r a l resource m a n a g e m e n t resources, unless t h e y m e e t t h e r e q u i r e m e n t s t h a t have b e e n

as p r o v i d i n g a " f r a m e w o r k for d e c i s i o n - m a k i n g rather d e s c r i b e d f o r L e v e l I c u l t u r a l r e s o u r c e s . B u i l d i n g s m a y also

t h a n a set o f p r e d e t e r m i n e d answers. Its a i m is t o ensure be considered Level I I c u l t u r a l resources i n accordance w i t h

t h a t the historic character for w h i c h resources are v a l u e d criteria d e s c r i b e d . . . above. 5 0

is identified, recognized, considered, a n d c o m m u n i c a t e d . "

T h e c o m m e m o r a t i v e i n t e g r i t y statement catalogs
I n the same v e i n , i t provides the principles for decision
all the features and characteristics t h a t s y m b o l i z e the
m a k i n g i n c o n s e r v a t i o n a n d o t h e r i n t e r v e n t i o n s . T h i s is an
i m p o r t a n c e o f Grosse l i e and draws o n historical and
i m p o r t a n t d o c u m e n t , as i t is at the same t i m e clear a b o u t
archaeological research t o explain and i n t e r p r e t these

U N D E R S T A N D I N G A N D P R O T E C T I N G T H E VALUES 35
elements. 51
T h e Level I features are c u l t u r a l landscapes,
architectural and archaeological vestiges, and m o v a b l e
c u l t u r a l resources. T h e c u l t u r a l landscapes i n c l u d e the
geographic l o c a t i o n as w e l l as the n a t u r a l features and
characteristics o f the island that w e r e so w e l l suited t o its
uses—and that are i n ways still largely u n c h a n g e d since
1832. A l s o i n c l u d e d are the roads, wharfs, views, and ceme­
teries as w e l l as the strategic separation o f activity sectors
e m p l o y e d for h e a l t h purposes. 52
T a k e n together, all these
resources are v a l u e d for t h e i r authenticity, for the fact that
they represent the periods i n Canadian h i s t o r y b e i n g c o m ­
m e m o r a t e d , and for t h e i r ability t o help convey the
themes t o the p u b l i c .
T h e i n t e g r i t y statement also sets the stage for
defining the m a n a g e m e n t strategies. For each class o f fea­
ture, the text includes objectives for securing the linkages
b e t w e e n the feature and the c o m m u n i c a t i o n o f its
significance, i n the f o r m o f statements o f a desired out­
c o m e : "Presentation o f the landscape reinforces the
expression o f landscape c o m p o n e n t s i n such a w a y as t o
s u p p o r t the historic nature o f significant sites from the
h u m a n quarantine p e r i o d ; . . . a maintenance p r o g r a m t o
c o n t r o l vegetation, n o t a b l y i n the heritage areas, has been
elaborated a n d i m p l e m e n t e d ; . . . the various maintenance
and presentation facilities take i n t o account the fact that
the fences are a m o n g the d o m i n a n t and significant ele­
m e n t s o f the island's historic landscape/' 53
T h i s approach is also used i n describing the struc­
tures, p r o c e e d i n g b u i l d i n g b y b u i l d i n g ; reestablishing con­
nections o f historic fabric w i t h the historic uses o f the
buildings; and delineating t h e i r respective relevance t o the
larger site's c o m m e m o r a t i v e i n t e n t . K e y messages associ­
ated w i t h Level I features are also gathered and presented
i n a s u m m a r y s u p p o r t i n g the themes o f i m m i g r a t i o n ,
quarantine, and the Irish d i m e n s i o n .
T h e second c o m p o n e n t o f p r o t e c t i n g the signif­
icant resources from damage o r threat is the identification
o f risks, o f t h e i r sources, and o f t h e i r p o t e n t i a l impacts.
A t t e n t i o n t o this is ensured t h r o u g h the guidance available
i n the site m a n a g e m e n t plan. T h e physical c o n d i t i o n o f
each o f the three classes o f Level I resources is described,
w i t h examples o f some o f the p r i n c i p a l risks; these
i n c l u d e i n h e r e n t characteristics o f materials o r context,
w e a t h e r and the d e t e r i o r a t i o n o f previous protective
measures (such as p a i n t ) , impacts caused b y vehicles, o r
changes i n v e g e t a t i o n . 54
T h e t h i r d c o m p o n e n t i n p r o t e c t i n g these
resources is developing a n d / o r e m p l o y i n g m a n a g e m e n t
36 GROSSE I L E A N D T H E I R I S H M E M O R I A L N A T I O N A L H I S T O R I C SITE
strategies—including conservation i n t e r v e n t i o n s — t h a t
have as t h e i r objective the m i t i g a t i o n o r avoidance o f
threats t o the i n t e g r i t y o f the physical resources. T h e r e
are t w o m a i n sources o f guidance for decision m a k i n g ,
covering p r e v e n t i o n and i n t e r v e n t i o n . T h e first is the
c u l t u r a l resource m a n a g e m e n t p o l i c y section o f the
d o c u m e n t Parks Canada Guiding Principles and Operational
Policies. 55
T h e chapter o n conservation begins b y stating,
" C o n s e r v a t i o n encompasses the activities that are a i m e d
at the safeguarding o f a c u l t u r a l resource so as t o retain its
historic value and extend its physical l i f e / ' 5 6
T h e guide­
lines that f o l l o w cover the steps t o be t a k e n b y site m a n ­
agers as they f o r m u l a t e approaches for the general care o f
c u l t u r a l resources o r f o r m u l a t e the detailed plans l e a d i n g
t o a conservation i n t e r v e n t i o n . T h e y refer the user t o site
m a n a g e m e n t plans and t o the resources available from the
Federal H e r i t a g e Buildings Review Office ( F H B R O ) 5 7
for
m o r e specific guidance.
Section 4 o f the m a n a g e m e n t p l a n 5 8
supplies
d i r e c t i o n for actions b e i n g considered for landscapes,
buildings, and o t h e r Level I resources, as w e l l as for Level
I I resources. T h e guidance p r o v i d e d for these actions
59
indicates the i m p o r t a n c e a t t r i b u t e d t o the presentation o f
the resources. T h e p l a n offers the m o s t specific guidance
o n ensuring that decisions are m a d e according t o estab­
lished policies, t a k i n g account o f concerns for the physical
safety o f Level I resources w h e n presentation is also a
r e q u i r e m e n t . T h e q u a l i t y o f this guidance is d e m o n ­
strated b y summaries offered for t w o resource types:
Landscapes and Environment
Actions s h o u l d seek t o p r o t e c t significant v i e w s recognized
as Level I ; restore and m a i n t a i n the divisions and character
o f the three-sector o r g a n i z a t i o n o f the station; and accen­
tuate the landscapes that h i g h l i g h t the areas associated
w i t h the quarantine activities. T h e p l a n favors subtle i n d i ­
cators over explicit text panels at every t u r n , such as u s i n g
vegetation t o locate features o r l i m i t v i e w s o r access.
Buildings
A c t i o n o r i n a c t i o n is proscribed that w i l l d i r e c t l y o r i n d i ­
rectly damage the appearance, architectural detail, o r
s t r u c t u r a l i n t e g r i t y o f a historic b u i l d i n g . For each b u i l d ­
i n g , an architectural i n t e r v e n t i o n p l a n is t o be p r o d u c e d
that describes p r o b l e m s anticipated i n preserving, using,
and presenting the structure. T h e p l a n requires the use o f
best practices i n p l a n n i n g and i m p l e m e n t i n g i n t e r v e n t i o n s
and points the staff t o w a r d a d d i t i o n a l guidance, such as
the F H B R O Code o f Practice, w h i c h specifically governs
federally o w n e d structures. 60

F H B R O Code of Practice
Principles o f Conservation Actions
T h e first p r i n c i p l e is t h a t o f m i n i m u m i n t e r v e n t i o n ; it
r e q u i r e s t h a t a p r o b l e m a n d its p o s s i b l e s o l u t i o n s b e c o n ­
s i d e r e d s u c h t h a t n o m o r e is d o n e t o t h e features t h a n is
a c t u a l l y necessary. T h i s e n s u r e s t h a t r e p l a c e m e n t ( h i g h
i n t e r v e n t i o n ) is t h e last o p t i o n c o n s i d e r e d , n o t t h e first.
O t h e r p r i n c i p l e s i n t h i s set are as f o l l o w s :
• each case unique, w h i c h d e m a n d s t h a t m e a s u r e s a n d m a t e ­
rials are s e l e c t e d f o r t h e specific s i t u a t i o n at h a n d
• balancing, w h i c h r e q u i r e s t h a t i n t e r v e n t i o n s w e i g h c o n ­
s e r v a t i o n p r i n c i p l e s o f c a u t i o n , h o n e s t y , a n d fit i n rela­
t i o n t o the heritage values o f the b u i l d i n g
• caution, w h i c h is i m p o r t a n t p a r t i c u l a r l y w h e n t h e a u t h e n ­
t i c i t y o f t h e m a t e r i a l is e s p e c i a l l y v a l u e d
• honesty, w h i c h r e g u l a t e s c h o i c e s b a s e d o n e x i s t i n g e v i ­
d e n c e , so t h a t t h e d i f f e r e n c e b e t w e e n n e w a n d o l d f a b r i c
is l e g i b l e
• fit or compatibility, w h i c h aims to encourage h a r m o n y o f
p r o p o r t i o n , t e x t u r e , m a t e r i a l s , etc., w h e n d e a l i n g w i t h
contextual values
E F F E C T I V E COMMUNICATION OF T H E REASONS
FOR T H E SITE'S IMPORTANCE
As e l o q u e n t as a dilapidated b u t i n t a c t n i n e t e e n t h - c e n t u r y
l a u n d r y house m i g h t be t o an architectural h i s t o r i a n , i t
m a y stand m u t e before a nuclear physicist o n v a c a t i o n
w i t h her f a m i l y As is recognized f u l l y i n all the p e r t i n e n t
Parks Canada guidance, the m e a n i n g o f c u l t u r a l resources
such as those at Grosse l i e is revealed t h r o u g h effective
c o m m u n i c a t i o n o f the values h e l d t h e r e i n . F u r t h e r m o r e ,
the site is actually seen t o lose its c o m m e m o r a t i v e
i n t e g r i t y i f the messages a u t h o r e d for the site are n o t
effectively c o m m u n i c a t e d t o visitors.
T h e i n t e r p r e t i v e scheme for Grosse l i e is n o t yet
f u l l y i n place. I n k e e p i n g w i t h its responsibilities, Parks
Canada has d i v i d e d its a t t e n t i o n b e t w e e n the stabilization
o f the physical resources a n d the phased d e v e l o p m e n t o f
the i n t e r p r e t i v e plans. Therefore, w h i l e i t is n o t yet possi­
ble t o experience a c o m p l e t e d presentation, i t is possible
to r e v i e w the ideas a n d principles t h a t w i l l help shape the
i n t e r p r e t i v e scheme and t o see h o w they reflect the values
identified for the site. T h e Plan of the Visit Experience™
o f Grosse l i e defines the experience t h a t the v i s i t o r w i l l
have at the site, t h r o u g h the activities a n d services t o be
offered. T h i s d o c u m e n t identifies three dimensions o f the
v i s i t o r s encounter w i t h the site: associative, educational,
a n d spiritual. These dimensions are values related t o the
s o l e m n , serene atmosphere o f t h e place. T h e first d i m e n ­
sion o f the e n c o u n t e r relates t o the sense o f place, defined
as the e m o t i o n s evoked i n the v i s i t o r b y the site. A second
d i m e n s i o n is the k n o w l e d g e t h a t can be t r a n s m i t t e d t o vis­
i t o r s t h r o u g h the resources o f the island. T h e final d i m e n ­
sion o r value is a s p i r i t u a l one, consisting o f v i s i t o r s '
insights about themselves t h a t t h e y m i g h t o b t a i n t h r o u g h
t h e i r visit t o the site.
A n i m p o r t a n t c o n t r i b u t i o n o f this d o c u m e n t is
t h a t i t analyzes and ties the various elements o f the site—
buildings, layout, patterns o f l a n d use, landscapes, and
v i e w s — t o the three statements o f the c o m m e m o r a t i v e
i n t e n t and o t h e r heritage values. I t also elaborates o n the
topics t o be presented t o c o m m u n i c a t e the three elements
o f the c o m m e m o r a t i v e i n t e n t and indicates w h i c h
resources w i l l be used t o do so. For example, u n d e r the
t h e m e o f the Irish M e m o r i a l , the i n f o r m a t i o n a b o u t Irish
i m m i g r a t i o n d u r i n g the first h a l f o f the n i n e t e e n t h cen­
t u r y is t o be m e n t i o n e d first i n the D i s i n f e c t i o n B u i l d i n g ,
a l t h o u g h this structure d i d n o t exist d u r i n g the p e r i o d
b e i n g discussed. Later, guides w i l l present i n f o r m a t i o n
a b o u t the Irish Famine and the tragedy o f 1847 d u r i n g the
visit t o the Celtic Cross, the I r i s h Cemetery, the n e w Irish
M e m o r i a l , and the Lazaretto. Finally, the t o p i c o f the s y m ­
b o l i c value o f Grosse l i e t o the Irish is t o be " c o m m u n i ­
cated" t h r o u g h visits t o the c e m e t e r y and the Irish M e m o ­
rial. Similar analyses a n d plans are presented for each o f
the themes and t h e i r topics.
T h e Plan of the Visit Experience also examines the
p o t e n t i a l for, a n d constraints r e l a t i n g t o , expanding the
audiences for Grosse l i e , i n c l u d i n g the logistics o f g e t t i n g
t o and from the island. T h e p l a n proposes a range o f selec­
tive tours, each t a r g e t i n g a p a r t i c u l a r audience o r concept,
to be developed and tested over t i m e . T h e various t o u r s
recognize the constraints i m p o s e d b y the short d u r a t i o n
o f visits t o the site, a result o f the t r a n s p o r t a t i o n schedule.
B o t h the m a n a g e m e n t p l a n and the i n t e g r i t y
statement acknowledge o t h e r issues t h a t p r o m i s e t o c o m ­
plicate the presentation o f messages r e g a r d i n g the
significance o f Grosse l i e i n several areas: p e r i o d i z a t i o n ,
s u r v i v a l o f features f r o m all phases, a n d u n e v e n represen­
tativeness o f the c u l t u r a l resources, a m o n g others.
T h e one-hundred-year span o f t i m e b e i n g c o m ­
m e m o r a t e d saw d r a m a t i c changes i n the o p e r a t i o n o f
Grosse lie as a quarantine station. Public health, science,
m e d i c i n e , and t r a n s p o r t a t i o n all w e n t t h r o u g h i m p o r t a n t
developments t h a t left an i m p a c t o n the island; these
changes f o r m p a r t o f the significance o f the landscape and
U N D E R S T A N D I N G A N D P R O T E C T I N G T H E VALUES 37
b u i l t e n v i r o n m e n t . As the i n t e g r i t y statement reports,
" T h e i n i t i a l installations at the quarantine station w e r e
marked by improvisation (hurried planning) and igno­
rance (forms o f transmission o f epidemic diseases). T h i s
phase was f o l l o w e d b y a r a t i o n a l i s a t i o n o f r e c e p t i o n infra­
structures for i m m i g r a n t s t h a t w e n t b e y o n d Grosse l i e ,
i m p r o v i n g the c o m p l e m e n t a r y facilities at the p o r t o f
Quebec, Levis, and Pointe au Pere. I n this manner, the his­
t o r y o f quarantine is i n m a n y ways m a r k e d b y the evolu­
t i o n o f the p h e n o m e n o n o f i m m i g r a t i o n i n the w o r l d and
especially at Q u e b e c . " 62
T h e traces o f these events can be difficult t o
m a i n t a i n , b u t they are i m p o r t a n t t o the story. T o realize
the c o m m e m o r a t i v e i n t e n t o f the site, the s t o r y o f a par­
ticular p e r i o d m u s t be t o l d i n the physical context o f
buildings a n d o t h e r features t h a t w e r e n o t present d u r i n g
that t i m e . W i t h o u t some t h o u g h t f u l i n t e r p r e t i v e cues, the
v i s i t o r w o u l d have a difficult t i m e d i s t i n g u i s h i n g the fea­
tures o f one p e r i o d from those o f the next.
I n fact, m o s t o f the historic resources o n the
island date t o the final phase o f use o f the quarantine sta­
t i o n . V e r y l i t t l e standing architecture survives from the
t i m e w h e n the station s m o s t d r a m a t i c events transpired—
and for w h i c h the site is, i n part, c o m m e m o r a t e d . T h i s sit­
u a t i o n challenges the i n t e r p r e t i v e p r o g r a m t o address the
h i s t o r y i n o t h e r ways.
C o m m u n i c a t i n g the p r i n c i p a l themes and the
stories t h a t convey t h e m t h r o u g h the physical remains
requires a sophisticated p r o g r a m o f i n t e r p r e t a t i o n . W h i l e
i t m i g h t be possible t o dismantle some o f the v e r y recent
structures (such as storage buildings from the 1960s) i n
order t o simplify the landscape, i t m a y n o t be appropriate.
Requirements i n h e r e n t i n the statement o f c o m m e m o r a ­
tive i n t e n t require an innovative approach that does n o t
sacrifice any o f the resources. T h u s the statement affords
strong, holistic p r o t e c t i o n that calls for creative and con­
scientious m a n a g e m e n t .
T h e management p l a n echoes these protectionist
concepts and offers guidance o n methods for realizing these
objectives b y folding t h e m i n t o three w o r k a b l e principles:
respecting the spirit o f the place, e m p l o y i n g a comprehen­
sive and specific v i e w o f history, and using an approach that
emphasizes the i m p o r t a n t connections b e t w e e n the n a t u r a l
e n v i r o n m e n t and the c u l t u r a l resources.
I n l i g h t o f these principles, the i n t e n t i o n expres­
sed i n the m a n a g e m e n t p l a n is t o present the historic a n d
n a t u r a l features i n an i n f o r m a t i v e a n d e n g a g i n g w a y w h i l e
m a i n t a i n i n g a dignified and relatively somber image for
the site. A l o w - k e y t o n e is preferred on-site, and off-island
38 GROSSE f L E A N D T H E I R I S H M E M O R I A L N A T I O N A L H I S T O R I C SITE
interpretive panels and brochures about Grosse l i e a n d the
Irish M e m o r i a l w i l l be o n l y sparsely used.
Objectives for Messages of National Historic
Significance from the Commemorative
Integrity Statement
• T h e p r e s e n t a t i o n o f G r o s s e l i e is t i e d i n w i t h c o m m e m o ­
rative intent, l i n k i n g the resources that s y m b o l i z e the
site's n a t i o n a l s i g n i f i c a n c e w i t h messages o f n a t i o n a l his
t o n e significance.
• T h e messages e l a b o r a t e d i n p u r s u i n g t h e c o m m e m o r a ­
t i v e i n t e n t ease t h e i n t e r a c t i o n b e t w e e n t h e v i s i t o r a n d
t h e r e s o u r c e s o f t h e n a t i o n a l h i s t o r i c site, f o r w h i c h t h e
v a l u e s are c o m m u n i c a t e d .
• T h e r e s o u r c e s are p r e s e n t e d as a c o h e r e n t a n d s i g n i f i c a n t
whole.
• T h e messages are c o m m u n i c a t e d t o t h e p u b l i c i n a c l e a r
fashion, t a k i n g i n t o account the needs o f different clien­
teles a n d u s i n g a p p r o p r i a t e m e a n s .
• E v a l u a t i o n m e t h o d s a n d t o o l s are e s t a b l i s h e d t o d e t e r ­
m i n e the efficiency o f message t r a n s m i s s i o n 6 3
Quality of the Visitor's Experience
T h e q u a l i t y o f t h e v i s i t o r ' s e x p e r i e n c e is a c o n c e p t t h a t is
used i n the m a n a g e m e n t o f m a n y c u l t u r a l resources and
t h a t g e n e r a l l y s u m m a r i z e s w h a t t h e s t a f f h a s i d e n t i f i e d as
t h e k e y v a l u e s o r aspects o f t h e p l a c e . F o r G r o s s e l i e a n d
t h e I r i s h M e m o r i a l , t h i s is d o n e i n t h e Plan of the Visit
Experience, * 6
w h i c h identifies the factors t h a t c o n t r i b u t e
t o t h i s p o s i t i v e e x p e r i e n c e a n d ties i t t o specific r e s o u r c e s
o n t h e site. T h e e l e m e n t s i d e n t i f i e d as c o n t r i b u t i n g t o a
q u a l i t y e x p e r i e n c e are
• h i s t o r i c landscapes a n d v i e w s t h a t evoke the past
• visible archaeological remains
• i m p o r t a n t b u i l d i n g s w i t h p u b l i c access
• c o m p e t e n t guides
• i n t e r p r e t a t i o n routes and paths that allow the visitor t o
e x p e r i e n c e t h e site firsthand
• a cultural and natural experience
• the presence o f partners o f Parks Canada w h o can e n r i c h
the experience o f the visitor
P R O T E C T I O N OF T H E SECONDARY HERITAGE
VALUES OF T H E SITE
A l l m a n a g e m e n t d o c u m e n t s t o u c h o n the secondary
heritage values o f the site, w h i c h i n c l u d e historic,
archaeological, o r o t h e r evidence o f paleohistoric d i m e n ­
sion; the early land-grant settlements; the a r m y presence
d u r i n g periods o f w a r ; and use b y A g r i c u l t u r e Canada.
T h e exceptional n a t u r a l e n v i r o n m e n t o f the island also
falls i n this category. A s s i g n m e n t o f these diverse and
65
interesting k i n d s o f resources t o this second level does n o t
i m p l y that t h e y are n o t i m p o r t a n t o r delicate o r w o r t h y o f
attention. The principle o f commemorative integrity o f
Parks Canada requires that the heritage values o f the
site—represented b y Level I I resources—be respected i n
m a n a g e m e n t decisions. These resources, however, are n o t
the focus o f intensive interpretive o r protective activity.
I n some instances, buildings o f the p o s t w a r era
are i n conflict w i t h some o f the Level I landscapes, partic­
u l a r l y i n the C e n t r a l Sector o f the island. W h i l e the c o m ­
m e m o r a t i v e i n t e g r i t y principle requires that these struc­
tures be respected, site m a n a g e m e n t staff has considered
r e m o v i n g o r relocating some o f t h e m t o free some
significant vistas. N o n e o f the buildings have yet been
removed, and there is serious discussion as t o the i m p a c t
that actions o f this t y p e w o u l d have o n the c o m m e m o r a ­
tive i n t e g r i t y o f the site.
I n the management plan, strategic d i r e c t i o n w i t h
regard t o infrastructure notes that all n e w facilities w i l l be
designed and located t o have the least possible i m p a c t o n
c u l t u r a l and n a t u r a l resources. T h e e n v i r o n m e n t a l values
o f Grosse lie, w h i l e they are seen as Level I I , have their
o w n set o f protections under federal law. T h e Canadian
Environmental Assessment Act, passed i n 1992, provides p o w ­
erful support for e n v i r o n m e n t a l p r o t e c t i o n at nationally
managed sites, a m o n g other places. T h e act established a
federal e n v i r o n m e n t a l assessment process that requires
that any action that m a y have an effect o n resources o f nat­
u r a l o r c u l t u r a l significance m u s t be preceded b y an assess­
m e n t o f p o t e n t i a l risks o r d a m a g i n g impacts. A n effect is
considered t o be "any change that the project m a y cause i n
the e n v i r o n m e n t , i n c l u d i n g any effect o f any such change
o n health and socio-economic conditions, o n physical and
c u l t u r a l heritage, o n the c u r r e n t use o f lands and resources
for traditional purposes b y aboriginal persons, o r o n any
structure, site o r t h i n g that is o f historical, archaeological,
paleontological o r architectural significance." 66
T h e act calls for the redesign w i t h appropriate risk
m i t i g a t i o n , o r for the w i t h d r a w a l o f any project h a v i n g an
effect, i n order t o ensure a proactive protective approach.
A g a i n , all m a n a g e m e n t documents encourage avoiding
solutions that require dramatic decisions regarding the
e n v i r o n m e n t i n order t o save an i m p o r t a n t historic feature.
T h e m a n a g e m e n t p l a n contains a s u m m a r y o f
the e n v i r o n m e n t a l assessment that e x a m i n e d the p o t e n ­
tial impacts o f the activities o f v i s i t a t i o n and m a n a g e m e n t
at Grosse l i e . T h e r e p o r t f o u n d that the strategic guide­
lines i n the p l a n that relate t o p r o t e c t i n g and presenting
the n a t u r a l resources o f the site are enhancing the v i s i o n
o f the site a n d fostering s o u n d m a n a g e m e n t 6 7
Neverthe­
less, some areas o f p o t e n t i a l conflict are singled o u t for
m o n i t o r i n g , i n c l u d i n g the possible i m p a c t o n the shore­
line o f n e w o r expanded v i s i t o r facilities, difficult choices
relating t o the effect o f vegetation (rare o r typical) o n his­
toric structures, and i m p a c t o n bat colonies o f conserva­
t i o n interventions o n buildings. These areas w i l l be dis­
cussed f u r t h e r below.
A t Grosse lie, t w o specific management policies
are aimed directly at p r o t e c t i n g the e n v i r o n m e n t a l values,
and they have an interesting effect o n an i m p o r t a n t objec­
tive o f the site. T h e first is that visitors are n o t allowed t o go
i n t o the b a c k c o u n t r y away from the areas near the gravel
road, the buildings, and the public spaces. Second, they are
not allowed t o come ashore from private transport o r from
anywhere except the m a i n wharf. These policies b o t h pro­
tect the n a t u r a l e n v i r o n m e n t and l i m i t access t o the site t o
the c o m m e r c i a l carriers. W h i l e managers w o u l d w e l c o m e
m o r e visitors and w o u l d like t o have visitors stay for longer
periods, they are n o t w i l l i n g t o p u t even the Level I I
resources at risk t o accomplish these goals.
I m p a c t o f M a n a g e m e n t Policies o n the
Site's Values a n d Their P r e s e r v a t i o n
H o w d o m a n a g e m e n t decisions and actions on-site affect
the values? T h i s question m a y also be posed i n t e r m s o f
the i n t e g r i t y statement: H o w are m a n a g e m e n t decisions
affecting the p r o t e c t i o n o f the Level I resources o r the
effective c o m m u n i c a t i o n o f the site's significance o r the
m a n a g e m e n t o f the o t h e r heritage values?
This question can be addressed from at least t w o
directions. First, Parks Canada has several procedures t o
t r a c k its o w n effectiveness i n achieving the objectives
defined d u r i n g the p l a n n i n g process. Second, specific situ­
ations and their resolutions can shed l i g h t o n h o w w e l l
plans are b e i n g i m p l e m e n t e d and w h e t h e r they are
p r o d u c i n g the desired effects. T h i s discussion w i l l l o o k at
each o f the areas o f value at Grosse l i e and the means
used b y Parks Canada staff to assess effectiveness. Particu­
lar situations i n each o f the areas w i l l be used t o illustrate
decisions m a d e on-site.
PROTECTING L E V E L I RESOURCES
A n u m b e r o f operational controls help Parks Canada staff
ensure the p r o t e c t i o n o f the resources for w h i c h Grosse
lie is recognized at the n a t i o n a l level. Each year, the crew
U N D E R S T A N D I N G A N D P R O T E C T I N G T H E VALUES 39
o f skilled technicians and the site managers define a w o r k The L a z a r e t t o
p r o g r a m o f u r g e n t r e m e d i a l actions, n o r m a l mainte­
nance, infrastructure i m p r o v e m e n t s , and the occasional lazaretto [or lazaret or lazarette] — 1. A hospital
research activity. Various factors affect the design o f this
treating contagious diseases. 2. A b u i l d i n g o r
p r o g r a m , i n c l u d i n g o p p o r t u n i t y , i m p o r t a n c e , and avail­
able resources. I n the discussions regarding these deci­ ship used as a quarantine station. 3. A storage
sions, the staff depends o n a relational database i n w h i c h
space b e t w e e n the decks o f a ship. 1

specific resources have i n d i v i d u a l files, and t h e i r physical

histories are tracked. H a v i n g detailed records o f this k i n d
helps m a i n t a i n objective priorities w h e n there are literally Significance o f the B u i l d i n g
hundreds o f conservation challenges a w a i t i n g a t t e n t i o n .
A team-based approach used i n p l a n n i n g situations— T h e Lazaretto is a Level I structure located near
c o m b i n i n g architects, archaeologists, technicians, ethnog­
the eastern t i p o f Grosse lie (location 19, fig.
raphers, and interpreters—and i n the field also helps the
site staff m a i n t a i n a balanced approach t o ensuring the 1.3). I t is one o f o n l y four structures o n the
h e a l t h o f the resources. W h i l e each specialty has its o w n
island that dates f r o m the early years o f the
concerns, the t e a m is u n i t e d b y the i n s t i t u t i o n a l c o m m i t ­
m e n t t o Grosse lie's c o m m e m o r a t i v e integrity. T h e fact quarantine station, and i t is the single one
that the buildings are i m p o r t a n t because they have stories
r e m a i n i n g f r o m the tragic year o f 1847. I t is also
t o tell makes i t all the m o r e i m p o r t a n t that the architects,
the technicians, and the i n t e r p r e t i v e experts all participate the o n l y r e m a i n i n g intact b u i l d i n g that served
i n decisions a b o u t their care.
as a hospital d u r i n g the p e r i o d c o m m e m o r a t e d
O n e o f the reasons the H S M B C r e c o m m e n d e d
the designation o f Grosse l i e as a n a t i o n a l historic site was at Grosse lie. Because o f its u n i q u e significance,
the presence o f m a n y structures o n the site that repre­
i t was designated a Federal Heritage B u i l d i n g
sented its quarantine functions. Today those buildings
constitute one o f the m o s t e l o q u e n t elements o f the site; and singled o u t for c o m m e m o r a t i o n b y the
they also present a challenge i n t e r m s o f conservation.
H i s t o r i c Sites and M o n u m e n t s B o a r d . 2

T h e n u m b e r o f structures and their c o n d i t i o n call for a

l o n g p e r i o d o f conservation activities u n t i l all o f t h e m
T h e Lazaretto was b u i l t as one o f a set o f simi­
have been stabilized and made sound. Maintenance o f
any b u i l d i n g i n this climate is always a challenge, even lar buildings i n a c o m p l e x dedicated t o the care
w h e n there are n o requirements apart f r o m p u r e physical
o f the i l l and convalescing i m m i g r a n t s . T h e
preservation. H o w e v e r , w h e n the b u i l d i n g is considered
t o have value i n p a r t because o f its age, its bleak l o c a t i o n , c o m p l e x i n c l u d e d kitchens, residences for
and its fragile status, the j o b becomes rather m o r e
cooks and nurses, a police station, washhouses,
d e m a n d i n g . Parks Canada has developed approaches
t o the conservation and presentation o f the i n d i v i d u a l outbuildings, and latrines b u i l t i n response t o
buildings, s o m e t h i n g that has been discussed at various
the vast n u m b e r o f i m m i g r a n t s w h o reached
points i n this case. T h e Grosse lie National Historic Site—
Development Concept o f 1992 states i n this regard that: the island i n 1847.

the treatment o f visible archaeological remains, structures

a n d b u i l d i n g s w o u l d r e m a i n discreet a n d non-invasive . . .
M o s t o f the structures f r o m this c o m p l e x have

w o r k w o u l d be p e r f o r m e d o n the buildings w i t h the a i m ,

since disappeared, and any r e m a i n i n g vestiges
p r i m a r i l y , o f m a i n t a i n i n g the features t h e y have generally

r e t a i n e d since t h e i r relative a b a n d o n m e n t , w h i l e p r o t e c t i n g
are u n d e r g r o u n d o r o v e r g r o w n w i t h vegeta­
t h e m against f u r t h e r d e t e r i o r a t i o n . Care w o u l d be taken, i n
t i o n ; even the Protestant Cemetery, nearby,
p a r t i c u l a r , t o p r e s e r v e t h e m a r k s left b y t h e p a s s i n g y e a r s ,

[continued on page 46]

40 GROSSE I L E A N D T H E I R I S H M E M O R I A L N A T I O N A L H I S T O R I C SITE
T h e L a z a r e t t o s e e n from t h e s o u t h w e s t . T h e west e n d and rear o f the Lazaretto, s h o w i n g some o f
t h e w i n d o w s a n d d o o r s i n t h e b a c k w a l l o f t h e b u i l d i n g , as
w e l l as t h e b e a d - b o a r d s k i r t t h a t c o v e r s t h e r e p l a c e d p i e r s
that support the building.

was p a r t l y o b l i t e r a t e d i n the c o n s t r u c t i o n o f were inadequate A l l the buildings intended

the l a n d i n g strip. As a result, i t is h a r d t o visual­ for the general use o f emigrants were converted

ize the o r i g i n a l spatial o r g a n i z a t i o n o f this i n t o hospitals. B y 1848, the quarantine station,

special z o n e . T h u s , the survival o f the r e m a i n ­

3
w h i c h c o u l d accommodate at the opening o f

i n g Lazaretto takes o n great i m p o r t a n c e i n navigation i n 1847 only 200 hospital patients and

c o m m u n i c a t i n g the c o m m e m o r a t i v e i n t e n t 800 healthy i m m i g r a n t s , possessed facilities

o f the site. sufficient for 2,000 sick, 300 convalescent and

3,500 i m m i g r a n t s i n detention. There were t w o

History
convalescent hospitals i n the end o f the island,

A l t h o u g h Grosse l i e began o p e r a t i n g as a quar­ 'containing 150 beds each, together w i t h sheds

antine station i n 1832, its early r o l e was largely capable o f l o d g i n g 3,500 i m m i g r a n t s / " 5

l i m i t e d t o c u r s o r y examinations o f i m m i g r a n t s
T h e Lazaretto is one o f a d o z e n o f the q u i c k l y
o n t h e i r w a y t o t h e p o r t o f Quebec. I t was n o t 4

assembled sheds erected that year t o handle

u n t i l the great epidemics o f the 1840s that pas­
the large n u m b e r s o f a r r i v i n g i m m i g r a n t s .
sengers, b o t h healthy a n d sick, w e r e detained
B y the f o l l o w i n g year, all the a c c o m m o d a t i o n s
o n the island. A h i s t o r i a n describes the situa­
i n the Eastern Sector o f the island h a d b e e n
t i o n v i v i d l y : " C o n d i t i o n s w e r e chaotic at G I
designated as sickbay, k e e p i n g the sick and
t h r o u g h o u t 1847. B o t h the facilities and staff

U N D E R S T A N D I N G A N D P R O T E C T I N G T H E VALUES 41
 convalescing i m m i g r a n t s away from t h e i r

healthy travel companions, w h o w e r e h o u s e d

i n the W e s t e r n Sector i n the First, Second, a n d

T h i r d Class H o t e l s .

B y 1878, all the 1847 sheds h a d disappeared

except for this one. O v e r the years, this r e m a i n ­

i n g shed was r e p u r p o s e d several times and

T h e i n t e r i o r o f t h e east e n d o f t h e L a z a r e t t o , s h o w i n g o n e
o f t h e d i a g o n a l b r a c e s as w e l l as o n e o f t h e w i n d o w s altered m a n y m o r e . T h e first t r a n s f o r m a t i o n
m o d i f i e d f o r a l a t e use o f t h e b u i l d i n g .
was done q u i c k l y i n 1848, t o change the shed's

use from passenger a c c o m m o d a t i o n s t o hospi­

tal quarters. A t t h a t t i m e the i n t e r i o r was

d i v i d e d i n t o f o u r separate areas, evidence for

w h i c h survives t o some extent today. Floors,

ceilings, paneling, and exterior siding w e r e

changed several times over the years. D o c u ­

m e n t s indicate that d u r i n g its years as a hospi­

tal, the i n t e r i o r and exterior walls w e r e l i m e -

washed regularly as a means o f disinfection.

F r o m the 1850s u n t i l i t ceased b e i n g used as a

hospital i n the 1920s, i t h o u s e d m a i n l y smallpox

T h e M a r c o n i S t a t i o n i n S e p t e m b e r 2001. B u i l t i n 1919, t h e
patients, and i t became k n o w n as the Shed des
M a r c o n i S t a t i o n is a s m a l l b u i l d i n g w i t h a d o u b l e - s i d e d r o o f .
picotes. P l u m b i n g for toilets and baths was
I t is set b a c k from t h e r o a d , close t o t h e r i v e r , a n d n o t far
from the physicians' residence. T h e u t i l i t a r i a n role o f the installed a r o u n d the t u r n o f the t w e n t i e t h cen­
b u i l d i n g is r e f l e c t e d i n i t s i n t e r i o r a r r a n g e m e n t : t h e c o n s o l e
a n d its o p e r a t o r w e r e i n t h e w e s t e r n half, a n d t h e g e n e r a t o r tury. I n line w i t h the c o n t e m p o r a r y practice o f
a n d w a s h r o o m w e r e i n t h e e a s t e r n h a l f . T h e M a r c o n i Sta­
t i o n r e p l a c e d t h e o l d t e l e g r a p h o f f i c e b e t w e e n 1885 a n d 1892.
shielding smallpox patients f r o m daylight, a
T h e b u i l d i n g d e m o n s t r a t e d the technological advance i n
project was started i n 1904 t o cover the i n t e r i o r
c o m m u n i c a t i o n s as w e l l as t h e d a i l y o p e r a t i o n s o f a h u m a n
q u a r a n t i n e s t a t i o n s u c h as G r o s s l i e . walls o f the r o o m s w i t h r e d p a n e l i n g — a n d

possibly t o install r e d glass i n the w i n d o w s .

T h i s measure appears t o have been achieved

o n l y i n the w e s t e r n m o s t r o o m .

A r o u n d 1942 the island was used b y the

42 GROSSE I L E A N D T H E I R I S H M E M O R I A L N A T I O N A L H I S T O R I C SITE
 i n g and t h e n a flat ceiling w e r e added. Never­

theless, the structure has retained a n u m b e r o f

o r i g i n a l features i n a d d i t i o n t o its v o l u m e :

French casement w i n d o w s w i t h m a n y small

glass panes, v e n t i l a t i o n outlets, and traces o f

the o r i g i n a l interior, i n c l u d i n g graffiti from

patients housed i n the b u i l d i n g over the years.

T h e L a u n d r y . B u i l t i n 1855, at t h e s h o r e l i n e , t h e L a u n d r y
facilitated the w a s h i n g o f the i m m i g r a n t s ' c l o t h i n g . Inside I n the first c o n d i t i o n assessment o f the b u i l t
are s o m e o f t h e o r i g i n a l f e a t u r e s , i n c l u d i n g t h r e e o f t h e f o u r
resources done b y Parks Canada staff w h e n the
o r i g i n a l c h i m n e y s a n d fireplaces u s e d f o r h e a t i n g w a t e r a n d
d i s i n f e c t i n g c l o t h i n g . I t is t h e o n l y r e m a i n i n g s t r u c t u r e t h a t island became a n a t i o n a l historic site, this
attests t o o n e o f t h e i m p o r t a n t steps i n d i s i n f e c t i o n as p r a c ­
ticed i n the mid-nineteenth century. b u i l d i n g was f o u n d t o be i n precarious condi­

t i o n . Perhaps m o s t a l a r m i n g was the fact that i t

was sagging badly, because its f o u n d a t i o n foot­

ings h a d shifted and settled. W h i l e the struc­

Canadian A r m y for e x p e r i m e n t a l research
t u r e was s u p p o r t e d o n jacks a w a i t i n g the n e w
o n animals. A t that t i m e , the Lazaretto was
footings, a b r i e f salvage archaeology project
converted i n t o a chicken coop, w i t h significant
was u n d e r t a k e n , y i e l d i n g objects that came
modifications that closed several o f the doors
across o n the ships w i t h the Irish i n those early
o n the facade and c u t n e w w i n d o w s i n t o the
years. Today a small glass display case i n the
6

walls t o i m p r o v e air circulation. T h e eastern­

eastern r o o m contains objects f o u n d d u r i n g
m o s t o f the f o u r i n t e r i o r r o o m s was n o t
this w o r k .
altered m u c h , k e e p i n g its o l d paneling, ceiling,

and w i n d o w s . T h e challenge before the technical t e a m was t o

e m p l o y all the requisite guidelines, retain (or

Conservation Treatment
reinstate) the historic aspect and value o f this

T h e Lazaretto is one o f the few buildings o n u n i q u e structure, and m a k e i t safe for visitors

the island that saw c o n t i n u o u s use from the and guides t o use. T h i s team—as is standard for

1840s u n t i l i t was restored i n 1997 and 1998. As historic sites i n Q u e b e c — i n c l u d e d representa­

recorded i n the C u l t u r a l Resources Registry o f tives from the fields o f architecture, engineer­

Quebec, i t h a d been m o d i f i e d several times: i n g , history, archaeology, and historic preserva­

walls w e r e paneled, the i n t e r i o r was p a r t i ­ t i o n . T h e y e x a m i n e d and analyzed the struc­

t i o n e d i n t o four zones, and a three-section ceil­ t u r e and the site and c o n c l u d e d that the

U N D E R S T A N D I N G A N D P R O T E C T I N G T H E VALUES 43
 "as-found" f o r m o f the Lazaretto a l l o w e d for a n i z e d as an undesirable m a n a g e m e n t o p t i o n ,

c o m p l e t e presentation and "reading" o f its evo­ b u t i n previous generations, i t was often the

l u t i o n , described briefly above. T h e y p r o p o s e d o p t i o n chosen. Parks Canada planners antici­

t h a t the i n t e r i o r o f the b u i l d i n g be d i v i d e d i n t o pated the p o t e n t i a l for p e r i o d i z a t i o n d u r i n g the

three sections, each presenting one phase o f p l a n n i n g phases and w e r e able t o avoid over­

the b u i l d i n g . T h e eastern r o o m w o u l d repre­ s i m p l i f y i n g this u n i q u e b u i l d i n g . T h e technical

9

sent the b u i l d i n g d u r i n g the 1847 epidemic; the and p h i l o s o p h i c a l decisions f o l l o w e d the nor­

central section w o u l d c o r r e s p o n d t o its service m a t i v e guidance, w h i c h states t h a t c u l t u r a l

as a hospital; and the w e s t e r n section w o u l d resources s h o u l d be v a l u e d i n t h e i r context and

evoke the 1850-1927 p e r i o d o f the smallpox t h a t a c u l t u r a l resource "whose historic value

quarantine. 7
derives from its witness t o m a n y periods i n his­

t o r y w i l l be respected for t h a t e v o l u t i o n , n o t
As i t n o w stands, the b u i l d i n g sits o n n e w foun­
j u s t for its existence at a single m o m e n t
dations, so the sagging floors and slightly lean­
in time." 1 0

i n g walls are n o t v e r y exaggerated o r precari­

ous. Some early graffiti o n the i n t e r i o r w h i t e ­ B y c o m p a r i s o n , the c u r r e n t appearance o f

w a s h e d w o o d is p r o t e c t e d b e h i n d clear plastic the Lazaretto's exterior seems t o t e l l q u i t e a

sheets. T h e w e s t e r n m o s t r o o m has its red- different story. C e r t a i n l y i t is the result o f

p a i n t e d w a l l s a n d ceiling restored from the decisions that r e q u i r e d j u g g l i n g a n u m b e r o f

1920s. M u c h o f the i n t e r i o r space retains its

8
considerations, a n d the difference b e t w e e n the

o r i g i n a l fabric, and the w i n d o w s opened d u r i n g i n t e r i o r a n d the exterior demonstrates visibly

its p e r i o d as a c h i c k e n c o o p can be closed i n h o w m a n a g e m e n t decisions can affect h o w a

the easternmost r o o m t o s h o w h o w the r o o m place expresses its o w n history. B e l o w are listed

l o o k e d o r i g i n a l l y A n y n e w elements t h a t have some o f the considerations t h a t w e r e p a r t o f

been added i n the i n t e r i o r are i m m e d i a t e l y rec­ the discussions a b o u t h o w best t o p r o t e c t this

ognizable, distinguished b y t h e i r different p a i n t particular building.

treatment.
• T h e general objectives for p r o t e c t i n g i n situ

T h e i n t e r i o r o f the Lazaretto n o w reads like a c u l t u r a l resources, w h i c h i n c l u d e p r o t e c t i n g

historic narrative o f the life cycle o f the b u i l d ­ the structure and all external characteristics o f

i n g , from 1847 t o 1950. Restoring a b u i l d i n g t o a the b u i l d i n g s and e n s u r i n g t h a t all maintenance

single phase o f a m u l t i p h a s e h i s t o r y (a process respects the range o f i n t e r i o r finishes. 11

referred t o as " p e r i o d i z a t i o n " ) has b e e n recog­ • T h e objective o f p r e s e r v i n g the "spirit o f the

44 GROSSE I L E A N D T H E I R I S H M E M O R I A L N A T I O N A L H I S T O R I C SITE
 place" and o f m a i n t a i n i n g i n the structures weather at this latitude is unquestionably stress­

some o f the character they have acquired over f u l o n clapboard buildings, particularly one set

years o f neglect. 12
o n pilings instead o f o n f u l l foundations.

• W h e r e m a t e r i a l (or artifactual values) are

F r o m the outside, the Lazaretto today can be
p r e e m i n e n t , p r o l o n g i n g the life o f s u r v i v i n g
read as a handsome b u i l d i n g i n an antique style,
historic fabric becomes the p r i m a r y concern;
covered n o t w i t h w h i t e w a s h b u t , rather, w i t h
generally speaking, a preservation approach
robust b u t t e r - c o l o r e d latex paint, w i t h green
focused o n s t a b i l i z a t i o n / c o n s o l i d a t i o n and
t r i m . T h e same finishes are used for the M a r ­
s u p p o r t e d b y a c o n c e r n for c a u t i o n i n the
c o n i Station, w h i c h was b u i l t seventy-eight
conservation principles applied w i l l p r o v i d e
years later. For a v i s i t o r w h o expects an approx­
the best means t o respect these values. 13

i m a t i o n o f a u t h e n t i c i t y i n the appearance o f
• I n t e r v e n t i o n s respectful o f heritage character
the sole s u r v i v o r f r o m the crisis years, the
s h o u l d be g u i d e d b y the principles o f fit (or
Lazaretto's pristine appearance is a visual sur­
c o m p a t i b i l i t y ) — f o r example, h a r m o n i z i n g
prise. T h e u n i q u e i m p o r t a n c e o f the b u i l d i n g
p r o p o r t i o n s , color, texture, f o r m s , materials,
and o f the events i t represents are obscured b y
or s t r u c t u r a l characteristics o f added elements,
w h a t can be seen as a mask—protective,
w h e n c o n t e x t u a l values are dealt w i t h . W h e r e
perhaps, b u t inscrutable. T h e external appear­
c o n t e x t u a l values are concerned w i t h physical
ance c o u l d be said t o d i m i n i s h the associative
relationships, the p r i m a r y c o n c e r n m a y be pre­
value o f this b u i l d i n g b y m a k i n g i t m o r e
s e r v i n g o r reestablishing i m p o r t a n t relation­
difficult for the v i s i t o r t o m a k e associations
ships b e t w e e n and a m o n g b u i l d i n g elements
w i t h the times a n d events b e i n g c o m m e m o ­
and the w h o l e ; w h e r e these values are con­
rated. T h i s s t r o n g contrast w i t h the as-yet-
cerned w i t h f u n c t i o n a l context, reestablishing
u n r e s t o r e d historical b u i l d i n g s o n the island,
p r o p e r fit b e t w e e n a b u i l d i n g and its use w o u l d
such as the Laundry, m i g h t lessen as the o t h e r
become i m p o r t a n t . 14

structures are restored o r as the Lazaretto

• T h e cost-effectiveness o f l o n g - w e a r i n g surface
weathers over t i m e .
finishes for p r o t e c t i n g the w o o d e n shell, as w e l l

as the m o r e fragile and f u l l y authentic features

Notes
inside, requires n o l o n g explanation. O n e needs

o n l y t o witness one n o r easter t o see h o w v i o ­ 1. American Heritage College Dictionary, 3 r d e d . ( N e w Y o r k :

H o u g h t o n M i f f l i n , 1993).
l e n t the w e a t h e r can be, especially u p o n this 2. H S M B C 1993; F e d e r a l H e r i t a g e B u i l d i n g s R e v i e w O f f i c e

I995-
exposed p r o m o n t o r y . N o r m a l exposure t o

U N D E R S T A N D I N G A N D P R O T E C T I N G T H E VALUES 45
 3. P a r k s C a n a d a 1998a, 7. w h i c h h e i g h t e n t h e a u t h e n t i c i t y o f resources. N o b u i l d i n g w o u l d be

4. A considerable a m o u n t o f i n f o r m a t i o n r e g a r d i n g t h e his­ r e s t o r e d t o a f o r m e r state a n d n o n e w o u l d b e r e b u i l t 6 8

t o r y o f u s e a n d t r a n s f o r m a t i o n o f t h i s b u i l d i n g is f o u n d i n
T o be consistent w i t h this directive, decisions
t h e Registre des ressources culturelles du Quebec.
r e g a r d i n g h o w best t o p r o t e c t a n d present such b u i l d i n g s
5. Anicki984.
m u s t address a n d balance considerations o f p r o t e c t i o n
6. I n f o r m a l c o m p a r i s o n s d o n e t o d a t e w i t h o b j e c t assem­
from w e a t h e r a n d exposure, the a u t h e n t i c i t y o f the mate­
blies o f t h e t i m e i n I r e l a n d suggest t h e p o t e n t i a l f o r
rials, a n d the visual presentation. These are n o t s i m p l e
e x t r a o r d i n a r y r e s e a r c h i n t h i s p a r t i c u l a r area o f t h e i s l a n d ;
decisions. I n a few cases at Grosse l i e , recent t r e a t m e n t
t h e y also s u g g e s t a r i c h i n f o r m a t i o n r e s o u r c e f o r t h e i n t e r ­
pretive p r o g r a m ( M o n i q u e Elie, Parks Canada, personal projects reflect decisions t h a t appear t o be i n conflict w i t h
communication). these principles. T h r e e b u i l d i n g s — t h e M a r c o n i Station,

7. F r o m F o r t i e r 1997. the Public W o r k s Officer's H o u s e , a n d the L a z a r e t t o —

n o w have a pristine appearance, i n stark contrast t o o t h e r
8. T h e dark red e n v i r o n m e n t was t h o u g h t t o reduce damage
t o p a t i e n t s ' e y e s i g h t as t h e y r e c o v e r e d .
historic structures t h a t s u r r o u n d t h e m . T h e r e s t o r a t i o n
o f the Public W o r k s Officer's H o u s e has recently
9. P a r k s C a n a d a 1998a, 45.
b e e n c o m p l e t e d . T h e f u n d i n g for this w o r k was p r o v i d e d
10. P a r k s C a n a d a 1994a, 103.
b y the M i n i s t r y o f Public W o r k s , w h i c h s u p p l e m e n t e d
11. P a r k s C a n a d a 1998a, 10.
the b u d g e t available t o Parks Canada. T h e p a r t i c i p a t i o n
12. E n v i r o n m e n t C a n a d a , C a n a d i a n P a r k s S e r v i c e 1992a, 27. o f another g o v e r n m e n t d e p a r t m e n t m a d e possible the
13. F H B R O 1996, 23. c o n s e r v a t i o n o f this Level I b u i l d i n g , w h i c h u p t o t h a t
14. I b i d . , 24. p o i n t h a d n o t b e e n a m o n g the ones identified for p r i o r i t y
attention.
T h e case o f the Lazaretto is e x a m i n e d i n m o r e
detail i n the sidebar (see p. 40). Topics addressed i n c l u d e
the t r e a t m e n t process f o r t h a t b u i l d i n g a n d its i m p a c t o n
the values associated w i t h the b u i l d i n g as w e l l as a possi­
ble missed o p p o r t u n i t y t o develop an innovative a p p r o a c h
t o t r e a t m e n t for an i m p o r t a n t b u i l d i n g .
T h e conflict created b y the existence o f p o s t w a r
structures i n the c e n t r a l p a r t o f the island remains t o be
resolved. W h i l e there are plans t o rehabilitate some o f
the a n i m a l q u a r a n t i n e stations f o r n e w uses after m o v i n g
t h e m t o r e m o t e areas o f the island, n o a c t i o n has b e e n
taken. T h e r e is n o d o u b t t h a t these n e w e r structures stand
w h e r e significant structures (such as the M e d i c a l Superin­
tendent's H o u s e ) once s t o o d a n d t h a t t h e y b l o c k w h a t
w o u l d have b e e n the h i s t o r i c v i e w s o f the eastern a n d
w e s t e r n wharfs. W h i l e these are Level I I structures, the
p r i n c i p l e o f c o m m e m o r a t i v e i n t e g r i t y requires t h a t t h e y
be "respected" i n all decisions. I t remains t o be seen h o w
the site staff w i l l i n t e r p r e t this guidance.

E F F E C T I V E COMMUNICATION OF T H E SITE'S
NATIONAL SIGNIFICANCE
Effective c o m m u n i c a t i o n requires t h a t b o t h t h e speakers
a n d the listeners are able t o d o t h e i r respective j o b s . First,
Parks Canada a n d t h e site staff have the responsibility t o
express the messages crafted for the site. T h e r e are also
some i n t e r p r e t i v e panels i n locations a r o u n d the island
t h a t offer i n f o r m a t i o n o n p a r t i c u l a r features. H o w e v e r ,

46 GROSSE I L E A N D T H E I R I S H M E M O R I A L N A T I O N A L H I S T O R I C SITE
there is c u r r e n t l y a preference for the m o r e personal
approach t o i n t e r p r e t a t i o n t h a t depends o n guides.
T h e q u a l i t y o f the guides' presentation, the style
o f t h e i r delivery, t h e i r ability t o respond t o questions, a n d
t h e i r o w n k n o w l e d g e of, a n d interest i n , the subjects can
d e t e r m i n e t o a great extent the q u a l i t y o f the v i s i t o r s '
experience. Parks Canada pays a great deal o f a t t e n t i o n t o
this i n d i c a t o r o f the c o m m e m o r a t i v e i n t e g r i t y o f the site.
Grosse l i e a n d the Irish M e m o r i a l is o p e n M a y
t h r o u g h October. A f t e r the close o f the season, an assess­
m e n t o f the experience o f the guides is u n d e r t a k e n b y
means o f a survey T h i s gives the guides the o p p o r t u n i t y
to r e p o r t o n the relative success o f the c o n t e n t o f t h e i r
presentations; o n the levels o f interest d e m o n s t r a t e d b y
visitors; and o n the ways i n w h i c h c o n t e n t is calibrated t o
the p a r t i c u l a r interests, ages, nationalities, ethnicities, a n d
so o n o f people t o w h o m t h e y spoke. T h e y can r e p o r t o n
t h e i r difficulties i n c o n v e y i n g c e r t a i n issues o r o n t h e i r
v i e w s o f the need t o expand o n p a r t i c u l a r topics. A t some
p o i n t before the start o f a n e w season, site staff studies the
surveys, a n d adjustments m a y be m a d e t o the i n t e r p r e t i v e
presentations for the c o m i n g season.
Before the site opens again i n the spring, the
guides w h o w i l l w o r k o n Grosse l i e d u r i n g the season are
b r o u g h t together for seventy-five h o u r s o f classroom
t r a i n i n g . T r a i n i n g materials are prepared a n d g i v e n t o
each m e m b e r o f the g r o u p ; specialists from Parks
Canada, o t h e r agencies, a n d academic i n s t i t u t i o n s i n t h e
r e g i o n serve as lecturers o n Irish history, m e d i c a l history,
Canadian history, Parks Canada policy, a n d o t h e r topics.
T h e content o f the interpretive scheme is subject
to constant change and refinement, depending o n the
findings from surveys and o n n e w ideas that c o m e from
staff and partners. O t h e r sources for n e w content are the
H S M B C and additions t o the system p l a n that the B o a r d
and Canadian Heritage m i g h t r e c o m m e n d . T w o recent
additions w i l l have an i m p a c t o n the presentation o f Grosse
lie: the c o m m i t m e n t t o tell the stories o f w o m e n i n Cana­
dian history, and the c o m m i t m e n t t o tell the stories o f cul­
t u r a l and ethnic diversity T h i s n e w emphasis reiterates the
p o i n t , made earlier i n this discussion, that w h e n a place
becomes a n a t i o n a l historic site i n Canada (as i n m a n y o t h e r
countries), i t becomes p a r t o f a system that exists for all the
citizens. Its stories b e c o m e larger w h e n presented o n a
national, rather t h a n local, stage. T h e r e is the risk o f losing
some o f the specific m e a n i n g o f the place, and decisions
about this are i n the hands o f the n a t i o n a l authority. I t is
interesting t o see that i n the case o f Grosse lie, a preponder­
ance o f visitors t o the site is, i n fact, native t o t h e p r o v i n c e .
AUDIENCE AND ACCESS
T h e second e l e m e n t i n effective c o m m u n i c a t i o n is the
ability o f t h e audience t o receive a n d u n d e r s t a n d the mes­
sages b e i n g delivered. Part o f the reason w h y so m u c h his­
t o r i c fabric s u r v i v e d o n Grosse l i e relates t o the fact t h a t
this is a p r o t e c t e d island i n the m i d d l e o f a river t h a t has
b e e n o f f l i m i t s t o the p u b l i c for m a n y generations. W h i l e
the benefits o f this i s o l a t i o n are obvious, the difficulties i t
poses i n presenting the site t o the p u b l i c are considerable.
Briefly stated, t r a n s p o r t t o Grosse l i e is l i m i t e d a n d expen­
sive. A visit t o the island ranges b e t w e e n 1.5 a n d 4.5 h o u r s .
T a k e n together, these factors significantly c o n s t r a i n the
p o t e n t i a l for access t o the site a n d for a t h o r o u g h presen­
t a t i o n o f the c o m m e m o r a t i v e i n t e n t messages.
T h e earliest p l a n n i n g d o c u m e n t s for the site stip­
ulate t h a t Parks Canada " w i l l operate n o m a r i n e o r air
t r a n s p o r t a t i o n services t o Grosse lie. Responsibility for
the m a r i n e t r a n s p o r t a t i o n service m a y be assumed b y the
service p r o v i d e r o r b y i n d e p e n d e n t carrier." As described
69
earlier, v i s i t o r t r a n s p o r t a t i o n is p r o v i d e d m a i n l y b y one
b o a t c o m p a n y o p e r a t i n g from the s o u t h shore t o w n o f
Berthier-sur-Mer. T h e crossing lasts a p p r o x i m a t e l y t h i r t y
m i n u t e s , a n d there are o n l y three trips t o the island per
day d u r i n g the h i g h season (each t r i p can t r a n s p o r t
a p p r o x i m a t e l y 150 passengers). T h e captain gives a b r i e f
river t o u r a l o n g the w a y as the f e r r y passes o t h e r islands
o n the w a y t o the Grosse l i e dock.
T h e business partnership b e t w e e n this boat c o m ­
pany and Parks Canada can be construed as v i t a l t o Grosse
lie and the Irish M e m o r i a l , b u t n o t necessarily t o the c o m ­
pany. T h e i r other business comes from w h a l e - w a t c h i n g
trips i n the St. Lawrence, and from charter trips arranged
for hunters d u r i n g the O c t o b e r and N o v e m b e r h u n t i n g sea­
son. T h i s situation has made i t difficult for Parks Canada
staff to negotiate different arrangements o r longer stays o n
the island for visitors. T h e situation m a y soon change, as
other transport companies seem t o be interested i n provid­
i n g access t o Grosse lie from Quebec City. Discussions are
also u n d e r w a y about the possibility o f large cruise ships
sending passengers t o the island o n small launches. N o p r i ­
vate boats are presently a l l o w e d t o d o c k o r anchor t o b r i n g
visitors t o the island, and there are n o plans t o change this
policy. W h i l e t r a n s p o r t a t i o n t o the island was b e i n g p r o ­
v i d e d o n l y b y boat companies based o n the s o u t h shore, the
e c o n o m i c benefits that the site m i g h t b r i n g w e r e l i m i t e d t o
this area. T h e t r a n s p o r t a t i o n n o w b e i n g p r o v i d e d directly
from Quebec, a l t h o u g h potentially increasing the n u m b e r
o f visitors t o the site, m i g h t d i m i n i s h the n u m b e r o f those
w h o travel t h r o u g h the s o u t h shore t o w n s .
U N D E R S T A N D I N G A N D P R O T E C T I N G T H E VALUES 47
 A l l means o f access m u s t take i n t o consideration
t h e i r i m p a c t o n the resources o f the n a t i o n a l historic site.
I n 2001, a f i r m i n Quebec approached Parks Canada w i t h
interest i n delivering visitors t o Grosse l i e b y hovercraft,
b u t this scheme posed several p r o b l e m s . First, the craft
w o u l d need a floating d o c k t o be c o n s t r u c t e d at a cost
o f Canadian $100,000, as i t w o u l d be unable t o use the
existing fixed, m u l t i l e v e l dock. Second, the noise m a d e b y
the compressed air engines w o u l d interfere w i t h the q u i e t
ambience o f the island. I n a d d i t i o n , the i m p a c t o f this
t y p e o f vessel o n the flora and fauna o f the shore w o u l d
need t o be evaluated.
W i n d o r r a i n can m a k e the crossing from the
m a i n l a n d difficult and unpleasant for visitors unaccus­
t o m e d t o r o u g h seas. G e t t i n g a r o u n d o n the island is rela­
tively easy i f one is ambulatory. A n u p h i l l h i k e w i t h stairs
and r o u g h t e r r a i n p r o h i b i t w h e e l c h a i r access t o the Celtic
Cross, a l t h o u g h a level r o a d is available t o the c e m e t e r y
and the n e w Irish M e m o r i a l . Trolleys c a r r y visitors
t h r o u g h the village and o u t t o the island's Eastern Sector.
A l t h o u g h Grosse l i e and the Irish M e m o r i a l is a
n a t i o n a l historic site, i t has n o t b e e n actively p r o m o t e d for
l o n g , and i t is n o t yet w e l l k n o w n t o travelers from o t h e r
provinces o r from outside Canada. Its i n t e r p r e t i v e p r o ­
g r a m s are n o t f u l l y deployed, and the c a r r y i n g capacity
o f this site is still b e l o w the projections. Various aspects o f
the infrastructure are still b e i n g i m p r o v e d , w i t h the possi­
b i l i t y i n v i e w o f larger n u m b e r s o f visitors. T h e w a t e r sys­
t e m has recently b e e n u p g r a d e d ; expanded sewage facili­
ties are i n the w o r k s ; and o v e r n i g h t a c c o m m o d a t i o n s o n a
m o d e s t scale are b e i n g c o n t e m p l a t e d . I t is u p t o the local
and r e g i o n a l Parks Canada staff t o undertake m a r k e t i n g
efforts; they attend t o u r i s m fairs t o seek p u b l i c i t y for the
site and t o identify channels t h r o u g h w h i c h t h e y can
encourage interested visitors.
W h i l e the "success" o f Grosse l i e and the Irish
M e m o r i a l is n o t j u d g e d o n the basis o f the n u m b e r s o f
visitors attracted annually, the development o f the site
(and the enhancement o f the interpretive p r o g r a m s ) does
hinge p a r t l y o n its attendance and i n c o m e . T h e success
o f the site is, however, evaluated o n the basis o f h o w effec­
tively its heritage values are conveyed t o its visitors. T h e
c u r r e n t situation has visitors o n the island for three t o four
h o u r s at most. T h e r e are a d o z e n historic features spread
o u t over the 3.45-km (2.14-mile) l e n g t h o f the island that are
o p e n t o the public, n u m e r o u s others that can be visited
from the outside only, and m a n y o p p o r t u n i t i e s for t a k i n g
i n the scenery from various vantage points. L e a v i n g t i m e
for l u n c h — e i t h e r a picnic o r a m e a l i n the cafeteria—there
48 GROSSE I L E A N D T H E I R I S H M E M O R I A L N A T I O N A L H I S T O R I C SITE
is l i t t l e chance the v i s i t o r can see the w h o l e site. I f the
guides have o n l y 1.5 h o u r s i n w h i c h t o present a f o u r - h o u r
interpretive p r o g r a m , they cannot be as effective as t h e y
are t r a i n e d t o b e . 70
T h e c o n t e n t o f the i n t e r p r e t i v e p r o g r a m is still i n
development. Success i n this area is t r a c k e d b y p e r i o d i c
r e p o r t i n g . T h e 1999 r e p o r t o n the state o f p r o t e c t e d her­
itage areas includes a c o m m e m o r a t i v e i n t e g r i t y r e p o r t ­
71
i n g table, covering several n a t i o n a l historic sites, i n c l u d i n g
Grosse l i e and the Irish M e m o r i a l . T h e table assigns a
grade t o several items listed u n d e r the categories o f
"Resource C o n d i t i o n , " "Effectiveness o f C o m m u n i c a ­
tions," and "Selected M a n a g e m e n t Practices." A l l indica­
tors at Grosse l i e h a d i m p r o v e d since the previous evalua­
t i o n t w o years earlier, except i n the area o f " C o m m u n i c a ­
t i o n , " w h i c h includes overall c o m m u n i c a t i o n , c o m m u n i ­
cation o f n a t i o n a l significance and o f the n a t i o n a l h i s t o r i c
site general values, and c o m m u n i c a t i o n o f the range and
c o m p l e x i t y o f perspectives presented. Grosse l i e was
g i v e n p o o r m a r k s i n this category, i n d i c a t i n g s h o r t c o m ­
ings i n the presentation o f the site and an absence o f p r o ­
g r a m m i n g o n the general subject o f " I m m i g r a t i o n . "
A n o t h e r w a y t o visit Grosse l i e is t h r o u g h its
W e b s i t e . Interestingly, the W e b site reflects some o f the
72
p r o b l e m s i n c o m m u n i c a t i o n seen o n the island. I n the
m e d i u m t h a t allows the creative r e v i s u a l i z a t i o n o f the
site, its buildings, a n d its landscapes, the W e b site design­
ers chose t o present the site i n its three g e o g r a p h i c a l sec­
tors, exactly the w a y one sees i t o n the g r o u n d . I n the
"Grosse l i e at a glance" p a r t o f the W e b site, the W e s t e r n
Sector is explained b u i l d i n g b y b u i l d i n g , i l l u s t r a t e d b y
i n d i v i d u a l p h o t o g r a p h s . Elsewhere o n the W e b site, a
v e r y abbreviated h i s t o r y is g i v e n t h a t does n o t connect
the physical remains t o the stories o f the place.
T h e r e is an i n t e r t w i n e d set o f issues t h a t w i l l con­
t i n u e t o challenge the managers o f Grosse lie. Constraints
o n access t o the island a l l o w the c o n t i n u e d p r o t e c t i o n o f
the n a t u r a l e n v i r o n m e n t a n d ensure t h a t all visitors enter
the site at the m a i n w h a r f . T h e c o n s e r v a t i o n p r i o r i t i e s for
the n a t u r a l resources o f the island i n c l u d e the shoreline
as a P r i o r i t y I sector; P r i o r i t y I elements are considered
u n i q u e o r h i g h l y sensitive, and l i m i t e d access is r e c o m ­
m e n d e d , since "all h u m a n a c t i v i t y . . . runs the risk o f
u l t i m a t e l y e x t i n g u i s h i n g the e l e m e n t i n q u e s t i o n . " 73
T h e c u r r e n t a r r a n g e m e n t w i t h t r a n s p o r t companies
m a y be l i m i t i n g the n u m b e r o f visitors t o a level l o w e r
t h a n the actual d e m a n d ; the a r r a n g e m e n t also keeps t h e i r
visits short. T h e apparent exclusivity o f the t r a n s p o r t
a r r a n g e m e n t has e c o n o m i c benefits for the s o u t h shore
a n d for the business partnerships i n force, b u t these eaves and nested i n the rafters, above the d r o p ceiling.
benefits m i g h t be shared b e t w e e n several companies W h e n Parks Canada t o o k over the site and began its sys­
i n the near f u t u r e . t e m a t i c e x a m i n a t i o n a n d e v a l u a t i o n o f buildings, i t
became o b v i o u s t h a t the bats w e r e c o m p r o m i s i n g a n u m ­
R E S P E C T FOR, AND P R O T E C T I O N
ber o f significant structures. Parks Canada also recognized
OF, O T H E R HERITAGE VALUES
t h a t the bats needed s o m e w h e r e t o live, as t h e y require
T h i s category o f values includes m o s t n o t a b l y the c u l t u r a l
considerable heat a n d enclosed spaces t o survive the
remains a n d b u i l t e n v i r o n m e n t d a t i n g from before 1832
island's weather.
and after 1937, discussed earlier, as w e l l as the n a t u r a l envi­
Possible options for dealing w i t h the bats
r o n m e n t . C u l t u r a l remains p r e d a t i n g 1832 are scant, b u t
i n c l u d e d a l l o w i n g t h e m t o r e m a i n i n the buildings, e l i m i ­
t h e i r p r o t e c t i o n is addressed t h r o u g h strict controls over
n a t i n g the bats altogether, o r offering t h e m alternative
any activity i n v o l v i n g excavation o r disturbance o f subsur­
h o u s i n g . T h e o p t i o n chosen was the t h i r d . Several spe­
face remains. W h e n archaeology is u n d e r t a k e n , i t is usu­
cially designed structures w e r e b u i l t close t o the historic
ally i n the context o f some inevitable w o r k s project, o r
structures w h e r e bats h a d b e c o m e a serious p r o b l e m .
w h e n i t can be j u s t i f i e d as c r u c i a l for some o t h e r reason.
These n e w dwellings w e r e h i g h o f f the g r o u n d , w i t h
C u l t u r a l features p o s t d a t i n g 1937 i n c l u d e a n u m b e r o f
extended eaves and i n t e r n a l baffling t h a t retained the
structures b u i l t for storage, quarantine-related uses, o r
b o d y heat o f the c r o w d i n g bats. T h e y w e r e also b u i l t o n
scientific activity b y the m i l i t a r y o r a g r i c u l t u r a l sectors o f
skids, rather t h a n set i n t o the g r o u n d , so t h a t as the bats
the Canadian g o v e r n m e n t . W h i l e these structures seem
came t o prefer these structures t o the restored historic
less r o m a n t i c t o the v i s i t o r k e e n t o see vestiges o f the
buildings, the n e w structures c o u l d be g r a d u a l l y m o v e d
n i n e t e e n t h century, the b u i l d i n g s a n d t h e i r contents repre­
away from the h i s t o r i c b u i l d i n g s .
sent parts o f the m u l t i l a y e r e d h i s t o r y o f Grosse l i e , a n d
I t is i m p o r t a n t t o n o t e t h a t one o f the m o s t
t h e y are l i k e l y t o g r o w i n interest as they age, w i t h i n the
i m p o r t a n t mechanisms for e n s u r i n g the c o n t i n u e d protec­
context o f the larger story.
t i o n o f all o f a site's values a n d resources is the Canadian
T h e n a t u r a l e n v i r o n m e n t is central t o the c o n d i ­
federal l a w t h a t requires Parks Canada t o r e v i e w the m a n ­
t i o n o f c o m m e m o r a t i v e i n t e g r i t y o f Grosse l i e , as the
a g e m e n t plans o f its sites every five years. I n this way, the
e n v i r o n m e n t is so m u c h a p a r t o f the spirit o f the place. I n
values o f the site a n d the w a y i n w h i c h they are articu­
a d d i t i o n , there is a significant set o f ecozones a n d habitats
lated, presented, a n d p r o t e c t e d are c o n t i n u a l l y m o n i t o r e d .
i n this riverine context. As has b e e n n o t e d , the delicate
T h e r e v i e w begins w i t h staff assessing progress
nature o f the l i t t o r a l z o n e e n c i r c l i n g the island is p r o b a b l y
m a d e o n i m p l e m e n t i n g the p l a n i n force; this is done
one o f the k e y features o f the protective p l a n i n this area.
t h r o u g h the p r o d u c t i o n o f a State o f the Park R e p o r t
T h e p r o t e c t i o n o f this fragile shore system is p a r t o f the
( n o w called the State o f Protected H e r i t a g e A r e a Report).
reason w h y Parks Canada has p r o h i b i t e d the d o c k i n g o r
T h i s r e p o r t evaluates the state o f c o m m e m o r a t i v e
a n c h o r i n g o f private boats. B u t , as m e n t i o n e d above, this
i n t e g r i t y o f the site u n d e r review. I t can shed l i g h t o n the
r e s t r i c t i o n l i m i t s the m o d e s o f access and the n u m b e r o f
effectiveness o f the m a n a g e m e n t p l a n and can indicate t o
visitors w h o can experience the site o r b e c o m e familiar
the managers certain adjustments t h a t m a y be necessary.
w i t h the c o m m e m o r a t i v e message i n situ. A t this p o i n t ,
I n some cases, p u b l i c c o n s u l t a t i o n is u n d e r t a k e n as p a r t
the p r o t e c t i o n o f the " o t h e r c u l t u r a l v a l u e " o f the n a t u r a l
o f this r e v i e w i f i t is felt t h a t the p l a n (or the w o r k t h a t i t
e n v i r o n m e n t appears t o be t a k i n g p r i o r i t y over creating
r e c o m m e n d s ) does n o t f u l l y s u p p o r t the c o m m e m o r a t i v e
o p p o r t u n i t i e s for greater c o m m u n i c a t i o n o f the
integrity, i f p o l i c y o r legal shifts p r o v i d e n e w i n f o r m a t i o n
significance o f Grosse l i e a n d the Irish M e m o r i a l . M a n a g ­
o r considerations r e l a t i n g t o the p l a n s objectives, i f
i n g the conflict b e t w e e n d u a l responsibilities—protecting
significant n e w i n f o r m a t i o n becomes available a b o u t risk
a fragile area and m a k i n g an i m p o r t a n t site available—is
o r damage, i f substantial changes are n o t e d i n v i s i t a t i o n ,
a classic challenge for a site manager.
o r i f o t h e r changes affect the m a n a g e m e n t c o n t e x t . 74

O n e interesting s i t u a t i o n demonstrates the deli­

cate balance o f historic structures a n d the l o c a l w i l d l i f e
p o p u l a t i o n . For m a n y years, a n u m b e r o f historic b u i l d ­
ings o n the island w e r e h o m e t o large bat colonies—
i n c l u d i n g the Lazaretto. H e r e , bats entered u n d e r the

U N D E R S T A N D I N G A N D P R O T E C T I N G T H E VALUES 49
Conclusions
T h e Parks Canada guidelines p r o v i d e a s t r u c t u r e d and sys­
t e m a t i c approach t o the p l a n n i n g and m a n a g e m e n t o f his­
t o r i c sites. I n m o s t n a t i o n a l heritage systems, the designa­
t i o n o f a n a t i o n a l site attributes a p a r t i c u l a r value o r
significance t o a site, often p r i o r t o an analysis o f the f u l l
range o f values that the site m i g h t embody. T h e Canadian
system is n o exception. T h e official declaration o f a site's
values—the c o m m e m o r a t i v e i n t e n t i n the case o f Cana­
dian n a t i o n a l historic sites—acquires p r i m a c y i n all deci­
sions on-site, and i n some cases i t can overshadow o t h e r
values associated w i t h a place before i t was recognized at
the n a t i o n a l level. I n the case o f Grosse l i e as a n a t i o n a l
historic site, the values t h a t w e r e i n i t i a l l y d e e m e d t o be
i m p o r t a n t w e r e those t h a t t o l d a s t o r y a b o u t the develop­
m e n t o f the n a t i o n , and those t h a t w e r e already i m p o r t a n t
to a p a r t i c u l a r g r o u p o f stakeholders w e r e i n i t i a l l y d o w n ­
played. H o w e v e r , w h e n the prescribed process o f p u b l i c
c o n s u l t a t i o n and r e v i e w was u n d e r t a k e n , the conflicts
over values w e r e resolved.
O n e o f the interesting issues t h a t e m e r g e d i n the
p u b l i c c o n s u l t a t i o n phase was the possibility o f unex­
pected stakeholders stepping f o r w a r d and d e m a n d i n g
inclusion. W h i l e this process i n v o l v e d some stress a n d
expense, i t r e m i n d s us t h a t heritage touches h u m a n e m o ­
tions, and i t is advisable t o a l l o w t h e i r expression. Also, i t
offered f u r t h e r evidence that places can have stakeholders
w h o m a y never see the place itself. A year after an affect­
i n g visit t o Grosse l i e , M a r y R o b i n s o n , t h e n president o f
Ireland, gave a speech t o the Irish legislature e n t i t l e d
" C h e r i s h i n g the Irish Diaspora," i n w h i c h she t a l k e d a b o u t
the i m p o r t a n t connections b e t w e e n c o n t e m p o r a r y Ire­
l a n d and its people t o those w h o e m i g r a t e d d u r i n g the
d a r k famine years.
Parks Canada's concept o f c o m m e m o r a t i v e
integrity, w i t h its three indicators o f the h e a l t h and w h o l e ­
ness o f the resource, advocates an approach t h a t takes
i n t o c o n s i d e r a t i o n the t o t a l i t y o f the site and its values.
By r e q u i r i n g n o t o n l y t h a t the physical elements be con­
served b u t also t h a t the significance o f the site be effec­
tively c o m m u n i c a t e d , c o m m e m o r a t i v e i n t e g r i t y effec­
tively places equal value o n the p r o t e c t i o n o f the physical
50 GROSSE i L E A N D T H E I R I S H M E M O R I A L N A T I O N A L H I S T O R I C SITE
materials and o f t h e i r meanings, e n s u r i n g the preserva­
t i o n o f b o t h for present a n d f u t u r e generations. T h e prac­
tice o f devising a statement o f c o m m e m o r a t i v e i n t e n t
and t h e n b u i l d i n g a c o m m e m o r a t i v e i n t e g r i t y statement
seems t o be an e n o r m o u s l y useful process t h a t encour­
ages focus o n the principles and values t h a t are m o s t
i m p o r t a n t and allows the technical and s t a t u t o r y c o m p l i ­
ance t o f o l l o w b e h i n d .
T h e technical issues are n o t any simpler here t h a n
at o t h e r historic sites. Site managers need t o be v i g i l a n t as
they m a k e t r e a t m e n t and m a n a g e m e n t decisions t h a t have
impacts o n Level I b u i l d i n g s — b a l a n c i n g historical
i n t e g r i t y a n d physical survival. T h e p r o t e c t i o n o f a u n i q u e
b u i l d i n g such as the Lazaretto as an artifact a n d as a
m u s e u m is a c o m p l e x challenge, an interesting didactic
case i n itself.
T h e isolated l o c a t i o n o f Grosse l i e and the
a c c o m p a n y i n g logistical constraints o n use, access p o l i ­
cies, and e n v i r o n m e n t a l p r o t e c t i o n s have i n some respects
l i m i t e d the ability o f those w h o value the site t o experi­
ence it. Creative means w i l l be necessary i n order t o
i m p l e m e n t the c o m m e m o r a t i v e i n t e n t fully.
T h e t h i r d i n d i c a t o r o f the h e a l t h o f a historic
site is t h a t the heritage values o f the site are respected b y
all w h o s e decisions o r actions affect the site. T h e p u r p o s e
o f this r e q u i r e m e n t is t o avoid h a r m t o values a t t r i b u t e d
to a site t h a t are n o t i n c l u d e d i n the statement o f c o m ­
m e m o r a t i v e i n t e n t . T h e a m b i g u i t y o f the phrase
"respected b y all w h o s e decisions o r actions affect the site"
does n o t p r o v i d e m u c h guidance i n cases w h e r e the p r o ­
t e c t i o n o f the heritage values o f some o f the Level I I
resources is seen t o d i m i n i s h the c o m m e m o r a t i v e i n t e n t
o f the site. As the site a n d its i n t e r p r e t i v e p r o g r a m con­
t i n u e t o be developed a n d as the place becomes b e t t e r
k n o w n , the balance o f perspectives r e g a r d i n g messages,
preservation, access, and o t h e r c u r r e n t l y d y n a m i c issues
is l i k e l y t o b e c o m e steadier.
 17. P a r k s C a n a d a 2001,50.
Notes 18. T h e c a f e t e r i a a n d s p e c i a l events a r e c a t e r e d b y L e M a n o i r des
Erables, o n e o f Parks Canada's business partnerships.

1. R e f e r r e d t o as t h e Agency Act, i t s p u r p o s e w a s " t o e s t a b l i s h 19. Parks Canada 2001,40.

t h e P a r k s C a n a d a A g e n c y a n d t o a m e n d o t h e r A c t s as a
20.
c o n s e q u e n c e . " S t a t u t e s o f C a n a d a 1998, c h a p . 31 ( a s s e n t e d
t o 3 D e c . 1998). F i r s t Session, T h i r t y - s i x t h P a r l i a m e n t , 4 6 - 4 7
E l i z a b e t h I I , 1997-98.
2. F r o m t h e W e b site o f C a n a d i a n H e r i t a g e : A R e p o r t o n Plans
a n d P r i o r i t i e s 2001-2002: h t t p : / / w w w . p c h . g c . c a / p c -
c h / p u b s / r p p 2 o o i / v u e - e n s _ e n g . h t m (Jan. 2003).
T h e i r p o i n t o f d e p a r t u r e w a s t h e 1984 r e c o m m e n d a t i o n t h a t
P a r k s C a n a d a a c q u i r e t h e site, w h i c h f o l l o w e d o n t h e r e c o g n i ­
tion b y the H S M B C o f t w o i m p o r t a n t components: a com­
m i t m e n t t o t h e e l e m e n t o f i m m i g r a t i o n as p a r t o f t h e
n a t i o n a l story, a n d t h e s u r v i v i n g h i s t o r i c r e s o u r c e s t h a t w o u l d
s u p p o r t t h e t e l l i n g o f t h e s t o r y o f i m m i g r a t i o n a n d its p i v o t a l
role i n the building o f the nation. T h e other nineteenth- and

3. P a r k s C a n a d a , n . d , 1. twentieth-century ports o f entry for i m m i g r a n t s had l o n g

since, a n d repeatedly, b e e n r e d e v e l o p e d .
4. H o m e p a g e o f t h e N a t i o n a l H i s t o r i c Sites o f C a n a d a W e b
site: h t t p : / / w w w . p a r k s c a n a d a . g c . c a / l h n n h s / i n d e x l _ e . a s p 21. E n v i r o n m e n t C a n a d a 1986; e a r l i e r a n d l a t e r v e r s i o n s o f t h i s

(Jan. 2003). d i r e c t i v e a r e also a v a i l a b l e .

5. T h e H S M B C W e b site p r o v i d e s a t h o r o u g h d i s c u s s i o n 22. E n v i r o n m e n t C a n a d a 1989.

o f the Board's history, activities, a n d procedures, 23. E n v i r o n m e n t C a n a d a 1992a, 5.

i n c l u d i n g t h e c r i t e r i a as c i t e d i n t h e t e x t at:
24. I b i d . , 47.
http: / /www2.parkscanada.gc.ca/hsmbc/english/
c r i t e r i a _ e . h t m (Feb. 2003). 25. I b i d . , 54-55-

6. T h e f i r s t v e r s i o n w a s p u b l i s h e d i n 1981. T h e v e r s i o n 26. H S M B C 1984.

i n f o r c e t o d a y is P a r k s C a n a d a 2000a; 27. E n v i r o n m e n t C a n a d a 1989, 9.

http: / /www2.parkscanada.gc.ca/Nhs/sysplan/
28.
e n g l i s h / c o m p _ e . p d f . I n 1974, w h e n G r o s s e l i e b e c a m e a
N a t i o n a l H i s t o r i c Site, i t w a s a s s o c i a t e d w i t h t h e t h e m e o f
i m m i g r a t i o n under the heading " D e m o g r a p h y / P o p u l a t i o n . "
7. T h i s s e c t i o n s u m m a r i z e s i n f o r m a t i o n i n c l u d e d i n several
d o c u m e n t s , i n c l u d i n g t h e Grosse tie and the Irish Memorial
National Historic Site Management Plan ( P a r k s C a n a d a 2001).
A s h a s b e e n n o t e d , P a r k s C a n a d a is e n t r u s t e d w i t h t h e s t e w ­
a r d s h i p o f s i g n i f i c a n t sites w i t h t h e t r u s t o f t h e g o v e r n m e n t
and the faith o f the citizenry. W i t h this mandate, i t m u s t
p r e s e n t a v i e w d e r i v e d from i t s b e s t e f f o r t s t o g a t h e r a c c u r a t e
a n d c o m p r e h e n s i v e i n f o r m a t i o n a n d p e r s p e c t i v e s from a l l
a p p r o p r i a t e sources. I n t h e case o f G r o s s e l i e , t h i s w a s
effected t h r o u g h c o m m i s s i o n e d research, c o n s u l t a t i o n w i t h

8. P a r k s C a n a d a 2001. e x p e r t s , a n d a m a r k e t i n g study.

9. I b i d . , 63. 29. E n v i r o n m e n t C a n a d a 1991, app. A , p . 4.

10. T h e A u g u s t 2001 p i l g r i m a g e i n c l u d e d a b o u t t w o h u n d r e d 30. E n v i r o n m e n t C a n a d a 1992a, 46.

p e o p l e , from t h e A n c i e n t O r d e r o f H i b e r n i a n s , I r i s h H e r ­ 31. I b i d . , 62.

itage (Quebec), a n d A c t i o n Grosse-Ile ( T o r o n t o ) .
32. Ibid., 69.
11. O n e o f t h e g u i d i n g d o c u m e n t s i n c o n s i d e r i n g t h e site f o r
33. E n v i r o n m e n t C a n a d a 1993.
c o m m e m o r a t i o n a t t h i s l e v e l w o u l d h a v e b e e n t h e 1968 v e r ­
s i o n o f t h e National Historic Sites Policy, w h i c h states t h a t his­ 34. I b i d . , 3.

t o r i c sites c o u l d b e d e s i g n a t e d o n t h e basis o f f i v e c r i t e r i a , 35. I b i d . , 21.

w h i c h r e l a t e d t o a site's a s s o c i a t i o n w i t h events t h a t s h a p e d
36. I b i d . , 3.
C a n a d i a n h i s t o r y , o r w i t h t h e life o f a g r e a t C a n a d i a n , o r
w i t h an i m p o r t a n t m o v e m e n t i n Canadian history (Depart­ 37. I b i d . , 23.

m e n t o f I n d i a n Affairs a n d N o r t h e r n D e v e l o p m e n t 1968,5). 38. T w o t e x t s w e r e u s e d : (1) " W e , t h e u n d e r s i g n e d , a r e d i s m a y e d

12. F r o m P a r k s C a n a d a 1998a, a n n e x 1, D e l i b e r a t i o n s o f t h e t h a t t h e t r a g i c t r u t h o f t h e d e a t h o f 15,000 I r i s h m e n ,

H i s t o r i c Sites a n d M o n u m e n t s B o a r d o f C a n a d a . w o m e n , a n d c h i l d r e n w h o s e m o r t a l r e m a i n s are b u r i e d i n
m a s s g r a v e s o n G r o s s e l i e is i g n o r e d i n E n v i r o n m e n t
13. P a r k s C a n a d a 1981.
C a n a d a ' s p l a n t o d e v e l o p t h e i s l a n d as a t h e m e p a r k c e l e b r a t ­
14. M i n u t e s o f t h e H S M B C m e e t i n g , J u n e 1984 ( H S M B C 1984), i n g Canada: L a n d o f W e l c o m e & H o p e . W e therefore urge
p r e s e n t e d i n P a r k s C a n a d a 1998a, a n n e x 1,55-56. t h e G o v e r n m e n t o f Canada t o ensure t h a t t h e Irish graves o f

15. Parks Canada 2001,2. G r o s s e l i e a r e p e r p e t u a t e d as t h e m a i n t h e m e o f t h e

N a t i o n a l H i s t o r i c P a r k , a n d as a r e m i n d e r o f t h e I r i s h r o l e i n
16. A l l p r i c e s i n t h i s s e c t i o n a r e i n U.S. d o l l a r s , q u o t e d from t h e
t h e b u i l d i n g o f C a n a d a " ; a n d (2) " T h e F e d e r a l G o v e r n m e n t
W e b site o f G r o s s e l i e a n d t h e I r i s h M e m o r i a l N a t i o n a l H i s ­
o f C a n a d a h a s s t a t e d t h e r e m a i n s o f 20,000 I r i s h p e o p l e w h o
t o r i c Site: h t t p : / /www2.parkscanada.gc.ca/parks/quebec/
t r i e d t o escape t h e F a m i n e l i e b u r i e d i n G r o s s e l i e . Yet, t h e y
g r o s s e i l e / e n / s c h e d u l e _ e . h t m l (Feb. 2003).

NOTES 51
 p l a n t o t u r n t h i s N a t i o n a l H i s t o r i c Site i n t o a p l a y g r o u n d f o r 63. P a r k s C a n a d a 1998a.
t h e b o a t e r s o f t h e St. L a w r e n c e . T h e y w i s h t o f o r g e t t h e
64. P a r k s C a n a d a 1998b.
t r a g i c e v e n t s o f 1847 s t a t i n g t h e s t o r y o f t h o s e w h o l i e t h e r e
65. P a r k s C a n a d a 1998a g i v e s p a r t i c u l a r e m p h a s i s t o issues
has b e e n o v e r - e m p h a s i z e d . A c t i o n G r o s s e - i l e has b e e n
related t o t h e m a n a g e m e n t o f n a t u r a l resources i n a p p e n d i x
f o r m e d t o e n s u r e t h a t t h e m a s s g r a v e s o n t h e i s l a n d are p r o ­
2, " C o n s e r v a t i o n P r i o r i t i e s f o r G r o s s e l i e N a t u r a l
tected a n d t o ensure that the revisionists d o n o t distort o r
R e s o u r c e s . " T h i s s e c t i o n discusses m a n a g e m e n t d e c i s i o n s
b u r y t h e s t o r y o f those w h o rest at Grosse l i e a n d those w h o
t h r o u g h t h e a s s i g n m e n t o f f o u r levels o f c o n s e r v a t i o n p r i o r ­
m a n a g e d t o survive t h e island. A c t i o n Grosse-Ile plans t o
i t y t o particular n a t u r a l resources o n the island.
ensure t h a t Grosse lie m a i n t a i n s a p r o m i n e n t place i n b o t h
C a n a d i a n a n d Irish h i s t o r y a n d t h a t t h e graves a n d t h e s t o r y 66. T h i s passage is q u o t e d from Canadian Environmental Assess­
o f t h o s e b u r i e d t h e r e are p r o t e c t e d a n d p r e s e r v e d . S h o w ment Act 1992, c. 37, f o u n d at: h t t p : / / l a w s . j u s t i c e . g c . c a / e n /
y o u r s u p p o r t b y l e n d i n g y o u r signature t o this petition." C - 1 5 . 2 / 2 6 7 9 1 . h t m l # r i d - 2 6 8 3 0 (Feb. 2003).
( P a r k s C a n a d a 1994c, 7 0 - 7 2 ) .
67. S u m m a r y o f t h e e n v i r o n m e n t a l assessment i n Parks C a n a d a
39. P a r k s C a n a d a 1981. 2001, 6 8 .

40. T h e f i v e t o p i c areas are: h i s t o r i c a l s i g n i f i c a n c e , d e v e l o p m e n t 68. E n v i r o n m e n t C a n a d a 1992a, 72.

objectives a n d principles, c o m m e m o r a t i o n themes, c u l t u r a l
69. E n v i r o n m e n t Canada 1989,46.
r e s o u r c e s , a n d p u b l i c p a r t i c i p a t i o n . P a r k s C a n a d a 1994c.
70. F i r s t r a i s e d i n E n v i r o n m e n t C a n a d a 1989,19.
41. Canadian Heritage News Release Communique P-07'/'94-84.
71. Parks C a n a d a 2000b, 49,51.
42. P a r k s C a n a d a 1995.
72. T h e o f f i c i a l W e b site f o r G r o s s e l i e is f o u n d at:
43. G o r d o n B e n n e t t , Parks Canada, p e r s o n a l c o m m u n i c a t i o n , 2002.
h t t p : / / www2.parkscanada.gc.ca / parks / quebec / grosseile /
44. P a r k s C a n a d a , 1998a, 3. e n / i n d e x . h t m l (Feb. 2003).

45. Ibid. 73. P a r k s C a n a d a 2001, 83.

46. See a p p e n d i x A f o r f u r t h e r d i s c u s s i o n o f c o m m e m o r a t i v e 74. P a r k s C a n a d a 2000c, sees. 4 . 4 , 7 . 4 .

intent and c o m m e m o r a t i v e integrity.

47. P a r k s C a n a d a , 2002.

48. P a r k s C a n a d a 1994a.

49. I b i d . , sec. 1, P r i n c i p l e s o f C u l t u r a l R e s o u r c e M a n a g e m e n t ,
subsecs. 1.1.2-1.4.1: h t t p : / / w w w 2 . p a r k s c a n a d a . g c . c a /
L i b r a r y / PC_Guiding_Principles / Park146_e.htm.

50. I b i d . , sec. 2.2, also f o u n d a t t h e W e b site c i t e d i n n o t e 4 9 .

51. P a r k s C a n a d a 1998a. T h i s s t a t e m e n t is also s u m m a r i z e d i n

P a r k s C a n a d a 2001,13-18.

52. T h e m o r e - m o d e r n e l e m e n t s from l a t e r o c c u p a t i o n s are

classified as L e v e l I I r e s o u r c e s , d i s c u s s e d l a t e r i n t h i s s e c t i o n .

53. P a r k s C a n a d a 1998a, 8.

54. P a r k s C a n a d a 2001,27ff.

55. P a r k s C a n a d a 1994a, sec. 3, A c t i v i t i e s o f C u l t u r a l R e s o u r c e

M a n a g e m e n t , subsec. 3.4: h t t p : / / w w w 2 . p a r k s c a n a d a . g c . c a /
Library / PC_Guiding_Principles / Parki57_e.htm#3.4.

56. I b i d . , sec. 3.4.

57. Specifically, F H B R O 1 9 9 6 , f o u n d at: h t t p : / /

www2.parkscanada.gc.ca / Library / D o w n l o a d D o c u m e n t s /
D o c u m e n t s A r c h i v e / C o d e O f P r a c t i c e _ e . p d f (Feb. 2003).

58. P a r k s C a n a d a 2001,436°.

59. I n t h e case o f G r o s s e l i e , L e v e l I I r e s o u r c e s are t h o s e associ­

ated w i t h t h e " o t h e r heritage values" discussed below.

60. F H B R O 1996.

61. T h i s d o c u m e n t is available o n l y i n F r e n c h (Parks C a n a d a 1998b).

62. P a r k s C a n a d a 1998a, 52.

52 GROSSE I L E A N D T H E I R I S H M E M O R I A L N A T I O N A L H I S T O R I C SITE

Appendix A: Commemorative
I n t e g r i t y — A S h o r t H i s t o r y of a Central
Concept i n H e r i t a g e M a n a g e m e n t i n
Parks Canada
Gordon Bennett
Director, Policy and G o v e r n m e n t Relations
N a t i o n a l H i s t o r i c Sites D i r e c t o r a t e
Parks Canada
T h e concept o f c o m m e m o r a t i v e i n t e g r i t y was o r i g i n a l l y
developed b y Parks Canada i n 1989 for purposes o f report­
i n g o n the state o f n a t i o n a l historic sites i n the 1990 State
o f the Parks Report. I n the course o f p r e p a r i n g this
report, i t became apparent that Parks Canada h a d infor­
m a t i o n o n m a n y o f the i n d i v i d u a l features and p r o g r a m
activities that existed at i n d i v i d u a l n a t i o n a l historic sites
b u t that i t lacked a conceptual f r a m e w o r k t o r e p o r t o n the
overall state o f h e a l t h and wholeness o f its n a t i o n a l his­
t o r i c sites. I n other w o r d s , w e h a d i n f o r m a t i o n about the
parts b u t n o t about the w h o l e . A n d i t became apparent t o
us that w e c o u l d n o t s i m p l y aggregate the parts and
equate the resulting s u m w i t h the state o f the w h o l e (the
site). T h u s was b o r n the concept o f c o m m e m o r a t i v e
integrity.
S i m p l y stated, c o m m e m o r a t i v e i n t e g r i t y
describes the h e a l t h and wholeness o f a n a t i o n a l historic
site. A n a t i o n a l historic site possesses c o m m e m o r a t i v e
integrity when:
• the resources that symbolize o r represent the
site's i m p o r t a n c e are n o t i m p a i r e d o r u n d e r threat;
• the reasons for the site's n a t i o n a l historic
significance are effectively c o m m u n i c a t e d t o the public;
and
• the site's heritage values ( i n c l u d i n g those n o t
related t o n a t i o n a l significance) are respected b y all whose
decisions and actions affect the site.
W h a t began as a f r a m e w o r k t o m o n i t o r and
r e p o r t systematically o n the state o f the n a t i o n a l historic
sites q u i c k l y evolved i n t o s o m e t h i n g m u c h broader.
Indeed, b y 1994, w h e n Parks Canada Guiding Principles and
Operational Policies 1
was issued, and w h e n n e w approaches
t o m a n a g e m e n t and business p l a n n i n g h a d b e e n i n t r o ­
duced, c o m m e m o r a t i v e i n t e g r i t y h a d evolved i n t o :
• a f u n d a m e n t a l p r o g r a m objective (ensure the
c o m m e m o r a t i v e i n t e g r i t y o f n a t i o n a l historic sites);
• a statement o f results t o be achieved (health and
wholeness o f n a t i o n a l historic sites, i.e., c o m m e m o r a t i v e
i n t e g r i t y ) ; and
• a p r i m a r y organizational accountability.
O v e r the next few years, the concept was r a p i d l y
elaborated. O n e o f the m o s t i m p o r t a n t advances was the
i n t r o d u c t i o n o f C o m m e m o r a t i v e I n t e g r i t y Statements.
T h e p u r p o s e o f these statements is t o p r o v i d e a site-
specific description o f w h a t c o m m e m o r a t i v e i n t e g r i t y
means for a particular n a t i o n a l historic site ( h o w can w e
t r y t o ensure c o m m e m o r a t i v e i n t e g r i t y i f w e do n o t k n o w
w h a t i t means i n the context o f a specific site?). As is the
case w i t h c o m m e m o r a t i v e i n t e g r i t y itself, the C o m m e m ­
orative I n t e g r i t y Statement (referred t o as a CIS) is r o o t e d
i n Parks Canada's C u l t u r a l Resource M a n a g e m e n t Policy.
T h e CIS identifies the h i s t o r i c / h e r i t a g e values—associa­
tive as w e l l as physical—relating t o the site ( i n c l u d i n g
those n o t directly related t o the f o r m a l reasons for desig­
n a t i o n ) and provides guidance o r indicators for d e t e r m i n ­
i n g w h e n these values m i g h t be i m p a i r e d o r u n d e r threat,
n o t adequately c o m m u n i c a t e d o r respected. Stakeholder
and p u b l i c p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n the development o f the CIS is
encouraged. A l o n g w i t h the C u l t u r a l Resource Manage­
m e n t Policy, the CISs w e r e critical c o m p o n e n t s i n Parks
Canada's m o v e t o values-based m a n a g e m e n t . T h e y
responded t o the question posed b y f o r m e r I C O M O S
secretary-general H e r b Stovel: " W h e r e does value lie?"
As stated i n the 1995 draft Guidelines for the Preparation
o f C o m m e m o r a t i v e I n t e g r i t y Statements, k n o w i n g w h e r e
value lies (i.e., w h a t the values are) is essential t o steward­
ship, because k n o w i n g w h e r e value lies f u n d a m e n t a l l y
informs:
• w h a t w e need t o do (i.e., manage);
• h o w w e s h o u l d d o / m a n a g e i t (i.e., adopt m a n ­
agement strategies appropriate t o the specific case based
o n the values); and
• w h a t one s h o u l d be accountable for (i.e., the
nature o f m a n a g e m e n t accountability).
T h e draft guidelines w e r e superseded b y a consid­
erably m o r e detailed Guide to the Preparation of Commemo­
rative Integrity Statements i n 2002 t o p r o v i d e clarification
2
and d i r e c t i o n o n issues that h a d n o t been addressed o r
adequately addressed i n the 1995 version, t o codify best
practice that h a d developed after 1995, and t o p r o v i d e
guidance t o a w i d e range o f historic site managers and
stakeholders—not s i m p l y those i n Parks Canada—who
m i g h t w i s h t o prepare such statements. C o m m e m o r a t i v e
APPENDIX A 53
i n t e g r i t y and C o m m e m o r a t i v e I n t e g r i t y Statements
require the i n p u t o f experts, b u t t h e y are n o t the private
preserve o f experts. T h e n e w guide also m a d e some
m i n o r e d i t o r i a l changes t o the d e f i n i t i o n o f c o m m e m o r a ­
tive integrity, w h i c h n o w reads as follows:
gone from a conceptual construct t o a w a y o f describing
o u r business. H o w c o u l d this have happened, g i v e n all
the interests (managers, operations people, professional
disciplines, stakeholders, etc.) affected a n d / o r involved?
A n u m b e r o f reasons can be suggested t o explain this:

A n a t i o n a l h i s t o r i c site possesses c o m m e m o r a t i v e i n t e g r i t y
• the s i m p l i c i t y o f the concept

(health and wholeness) w h e n :

• the emphasis o n values and o n a systematic and
comprehensive a r t i c u l a t i o n o f values
• t h e r e s o u r c e s d i r e c t l y r e l a t e d t o t h e r e a s o n s f o r desig­
• the focus o n the site, rather t h a n o n an organiza­
n a t i o n as a n a t i o n a l h i s t o r i c site are n o t i m p a i r e d o r u n d e r
t i o n o r specific activities o r functions
threat;
• its usefulness as a m a n a g e m e n t , p l a n n i n g , and
• t h e r e a s o n s f o r d e s i g n a t i o n as a n a t i o n a l h i s t o r i c site
evaluation t o o l
are e f f e c t i v e l y c o m m u n i c a t e d t o t h e p u b l i c ; a n d
• its clear relationship t o w h a t w e (should) d o at
• t h e site's h e r i t a g e v a l u e s ( i n c l u d i n g t h o s e n o t r e l a t e d historic sites
t o t h e r e a s o n s f o r d e s i g n a t i o n as a n a t i o n a l h i s t o r i c site) are • the i n v o l v e m e n t and engagement o f a b r o a d
r e s p e c t e d i n a l l d e c i s i o n s a n d a c t i o n s a f f e c t i n g t h e site. range o f people
• it's n o t exclusionary

T h e n e w guide is available o n the Parks Canada • it's a u n i f y i n g concept

W e b site at h t t p : / / w w w . p c . g c . c a / d o c s / p c / g u i d e / g u i d e /
commemorative_l_o_e.asp.
O n the m o n i t o r i n g front, i t was n o t u n t i l 1997 Notes
t h a t Parks Canada began t o explicitly r e p o r t o n the state
o f c o m m e m o r a t i v e i n t e g r i t y o f n a t i o n a l historic sites. 1. P a r k s C a n a d a 1994b.

I n t h a t year, eight sites w e r e r e p o r t e d o n . O n e o f the 2. P a r k s C a n a d a 2002.

m o s t interesting findings was t h a t the greatest i m p a i r ­

m e n t t o these eight sites was i n the c o m m u n i c a t i o n o f
n a t i o n a l significance. B e g i n n i n g i n 2001-02, Parks Canada
c o m m i t t e d t o evaluating the state o f c o m m e m o r a t i v e
i n t e g r i t y for fifteen n a t i o n a l historic sites a year. T h e
C o m m e m o r a t i v e I n t e g r i t y Statements serve as the basis
for these evaluations.
W i t h i n a Parks Canada context, c o m m e m o r a t i v e
i n t e g r i t y has b e c o m e the key c o m p o n e n t i n p l a n n i n g ,
m a n a g i n g , operating, evaluating, and t a k i n g r e m e d i a l
action i n n a t i o n a l historic sites. T h e C o m m e m o r a t i v e
I n t e g r i t y Statement provides the core for n a t i o n a l historic
site m a n a g e m e n t plans and annual business plans. C o m ­
m e m o r a t i v e i n t e g r i t y evaluations p o i n t t o w h e r e r e m e d i a l
m a n a g e m e n t a c t i o n is required, and, for an increasing
n u m b e r o f managers, they are considered t o be a pre­
requisite t o any n e w m a n a g e m e n t p l a n n i n g activity ( h o w
can y o u p l a n i f there is n o t a s o u n d u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f the
state o f the place for w h i c h the p l a n is b e i n g done?).
C o m m e m o r a t i v e i n t e g r i t y w i l l also be the center­
piece o f n e w legislation p l a n n e d for Canada's n a t i o n a l
historic sites, i n c l u d i n g sites n o t o w n e d b y Parks Canada.
I n l i t t l e m o r e t h a n a decade, the values-based manage­
m e n t approach i n h e r e n t i n c o m m e m o r a t i v e i n t e g r i t y has

54 GROSSE I L E A N D T H E I R I S H M E M O R I A L N A T I O N A L H I S T O R I C SITE
References

A n i c k , N . 1984. Grosse tie and Partridge Island, Quarantine Stations. H i s ­
t o r i c Sites a n d M o n u m e n t s B o a r d o f C a n a d a A g e n d a P a p e r N o .
1983-19. O t t a w a : H S M B C .
C a n a d i a n H e r i t a g e . 1994. Canadian Heritage News Release Communique
P-oy/94-84. Q u e b e c : C a n a d i a n H e r i t a g e .
. 1998a. Commemorative Integrity Statement: Grosse tie and the Irish
Memorial National Historic Site. Q u e b e c : P a r k s C a n a d a .
. 1998b. Plan d'experience de visite [Plan of the Visit Experience]—Lieu
Historique National de la Grosse-tle-et-le-Memorial-des-Irlandais. Q u e b e c :
Parks Canada.

D e p a r t m e n t o f I n d i a n Affairs a n d N o r t h e r n D e v e l o p m e n t , N a t i o n a l . 2000a. National Historic Sites of Canada: System Plan. O t t a w a :

H i s t o r i c P a r k s B r a n c h . 1968. National Historic Sites Policy. O t t a w a : Parks Canada.
D e p a r t m e n t o f I n d i a n Affairs a n d N o r t h e r n D e v e l o p m e n t , N a t i o n a l
. 2000b. Parks Canada Agency State of Protected Heritage Areas—1999
H i s t o r i c Parks B r a n c h .
Report. O t t a w a : P a r k s C a n a d a .
E n v i r o n m e n t C a n a d a , C a n a d i a n P a r k s S e r v i c e . 1986. Management Direc­
. 2000C. Parks Canada Guide to Management Planning. O t t a w a :
tive 4.2.1: Management Planning Process for National Historic Sites. O t t a w a :
Parks Canada.
C a n a d i a n Parks Service.
. 2001. Grosse tie and the Irish Memorial National Historic Site Manage­
. 1989. Grosse tie National Historic Site Project Orientation—Public
ment Plan. Q u e b e c : P a r k s C a n a d a .
Information Paper. Q u e b e c : C a n a d i a n P a r k s S e r v i c e .
. 2002. Guide to the Preparation of Commemorative Integrity
. 1991. Management Directive 3.2.1: Management Planning Process for
Statements. Q u e b e c : P a r k s C a n a d a , h t t p : / / w w w . p c . g c . c a / d o c s / p c /
National Historic Sites. O t t a w a : C a n a d i a n P a r k s S e r v i c e .
guide / guide / commemorative_l_0_e.asp
. 1992a. Grosse tie National Historic Site—Development Concept.
. N . d . Parks Canada Agency 2001-2002 Estimates: A Report on Plans and
Quebec: C a n a d i a n Parks Service.
Priorities. O t t a w a : P a r k s C a n a d a .
. 1992b. Grosse tie National Historic Site—Development Concept
S t a t u t e s o f C a n a d a . 1998. Parks Canada Agency Act.
Supplement. Q u e b e c : C a n a d i a n P a r k s S e r v i c e .

. 1993. Grosse tie National Historic Site—Development Concept

Supplement. O t t a w a : C a n a d i a n P a r k s S e r v i c e .

F e d e r a l H e r i t a g e B u i l d i n g s R e v i e w O f f i c e ( F H B R O ) . 1995. Enonce de
la valeur patrimoniale: Le Lazaret (no. 100) Grosse-tle, Quebec. R a p p o r t
B E E F P N o . 90-31.

. 1996. Federal Heritage Buildings Review Office (FHBRO) Code of

Practice. O t t a w a : F H B R O .

F o r t i e r , Y. 1997. Le Lazaret de Grosse-tle: Synthese et conclusion prelimi-

naires. U n p u b l i s h e d r e p o r t .

H i s t o r i c Sites a n d M o n u m e n t s B o a r d o f C a n a d a ( H S M B C ) . 1984.
Minutes, June.

. 1993. M i n u t e s , N o v .

P a r k s C a n a d a . 1981. National Historic Sites of Canada System Plan.

O t t a w a : Parks Canada.

. 1994a. C u l t u r a l r e s o u r c e m a n a g e m e n t p o l i c y . I n Parks Canada

Guiding Principles and Operational Policies. O t t a w a : P a r k s C a n a d a .

. 1994b. Parks Canada Guiding Principles and Operational Policies.

O t t a w a : Parks Canada.

. 1994c Grosse tie National Historic Site—Report on the Public Consul­

tation Program. Q u e b e c : C a n a d i a n H e r i t a g e / P a r k s C a n a d a .

. 1995. Grosse tie and the Irish Quarantine Tragedy: Report of the
Advisory Panel on Grosse tie. Q u e b e c : P a r k s C a n a d a .

REFERENCES 55
 Persons Contacted during the Development of the Case

Jean Barry Jeanne Boulanger

Site M a n a g e m e n t Specialist C o r p o r a t i o n for H e r i t a g e
Quebec Service Center
Parks Canada Monique Elie
Archaeologist
Pierre Beaudet Quebec Service Center
Chief Parks Canada H e r i t a g e
Cultural Heritage
Quebec Service Center Jean-Francois Lachance
Parks Canada H e r i t a g e Parks Canada t r a n s p o r t a t i o n partners
Croisiers Lachance
Denis Belleau
C h i e f o f Technical Services Daniel Villeneuve
Quebec D i s t r i c t Site M a n a g e r
Parks Canada Grosse l i e a n d the Irish M e m o r i a l
N a t i o n a l H i s t o r i c Site
Marie Josee Bissonette
Parks Canada a d m i n i s t r a t i o n

56 GROSSE I L E A N D T H E I R I S H M E M O R I A L N A T I O N A L H I S T O R I C SITE
This page intentionally left blank
This page intentionally left blank
Chaco Culture National Historical Park

Marta de la Torre, Margaret G. H . MacLean,

and David Myers

 About This Case Study
T h i s case study l o o k s at the m a n a g e m e n t o f Chaco C u l ­
t u r e N a t i o n a l H i s t o r i c a l Park ( C C N H P ) b y the U.S.
N a t i o n a l Park Service (NPS). T h i s site was declared a
n a t i o n a l m o n u m e n t i n 1907 and became one o f the o r i g i ­
n a l units o f the NPS w h e n the agency was created i n 1916.
T h e l o n g h i s t o r y o f C C N H P as a heritage site provides an
excellent i l l u s t r a t i o n o f h o w values emerge and evolve
w i t h n e w k n o w l e d g e as w e l l as h o w they are i n f l u e n c e d
b y changes o f values i n society. T h i s case also explores
h o w the specific values and circumstances o f a site can be
respected w i t h i n the v e r y specific m a n a g e m e n t guidance
p r o v i d e d b y a c o m p l e x n a t i o n a l agency w i t h responsibility
for a large n u m b e r o f sites. B o t h the emergence and evo­
l u t i o n o f values and the m a n a g e m e n t o f a site as p a r t o f a
large system p r o v i d e o p p o r t u n i t i e s t o analyze the resolu­
t i o n o f conflicts and the i m p a c t o f m a n a g e m e n t decisions.
T h e case is presented i n t w o parts. First, " M a n ­
agement C o n t e x t a n d H i s t o r y o f C C N H P * ' provides gen­
eral b a c k g r o u n d i n f o r m a t i o n a b o u t the NPS and the site.
I t first describes the m a n a g e m e n t context o f the NPS,
i n c l u d i n g its place i n the g o v e r n m e n t , its o r g a n i z a t i o n ,
a n d the administrative guidance i t provides for managers
o f the resources u n d e r its stewardship. T h e discussion
t h e n n a r r o w s its focus t o C C N H P itself, addressing the
geographic l o c a t i o n o f the Park, its h i s t o r y o f h a b i t a t i o n ,
and its e v o l u t i o n as a heritage site. T h e final section o f this
p a r t describes the Park's features, partnerships, infrastruc­
ture, and facilities.
T h e archaeological remains o f the Chacoan
c i v i l i z a t i o n p r o t e c t e d b y the Park are recognized t o have
n a t i o n a l and i n t e r n a t i o n a l significance. T h e significance
assigned t o this site has always b e e n based o n these
archaeological resources, b u t the values a t t r i b u t e d t o
t h e m have changed and expanded over t i m e . T h e i n i t i a l
section o f the next part, "understanding and P r o t e c t i n g
the values," examines h o w the values o f C C N H P have
emerged and evolved over its history. T h e f o l l o w i n g sec­
t i o n analyzes h o w these values are reflected i n the policies
that guide the operations o f the site. T h e final section
explores the i m p a c t t h a t these policies—and o t h e r m a n ­
agement actions—have h a d o n the values o f the site and
60 C H A C O CULTURE N A T I O N A L HISTORICAL PARK
includes examples o f h o w some specific situations w e r e
h a n d l e d b y the site authorities.
This study o f the m a n a g e m e n t o f C C N H P draws
o n extensive consultation a m o n g the authors, the m e m ­
bers o f the project steering c o m m i t t e e , staff o f the site,
and NPS authorities, i n i n t e r v i e w s and frank discussions.
T h e authors have consulted an extensive range o f reports,
plans, and statutory and guidance documents r e l a t i n g t o
this Park, t o related p a r k units, and t o the NPS i n general.
T h e staff o f the Park and o f NPS headquarters i n Washing­
t o n , D . C . , have p r o v i d e d i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f this documenta­
t i o n and the rationale for m a n y decisions m a d e o n site.
T h e situation studied i n this case existed b e t w e e n
October 2001 and June 2002, w h e n the case was developed
and w r i t t e n . Since then, there have been changes i n m a n ­
agement personnel, and certain policies are b e i n g reviewed
and m o d i f i e d . T h e analysis focuses o n the situation as i t was
then, n o t o n the recent changes. M a n a g e m e n t is a c o n t i n u ­
ous process, and the case presents a snapshot taken at a par­
ticular m o m e n t i n t i m e . A similar study done i n a few years
w o u l d likely capture a different picture.
D i g i t a l reproductions o f the f o l l o w i n g supple­
m e n t a r y documents are contained w i t h i n the accompany­
i n g C D - R O M : Chaco C u l t u r e General M a n a g e m e n t P l a n /
Development Concept Plan (1985); Chaco Culture Statement
for Interpretation and I n t e r i m Interpretive Prospectus (1991);
and N a t i o n a l Park Service Management Policies 2001.
 Management Context and History of CCNHP
Management Context
DEPARTMENT OF T H E INTERIOR
T h e N a t i o n a l Park Service (NPS) is a federal agency
w i t h i n the U n i t e d States D e p a r t m e n t o f the Interior. T h i s
d e p a r t m e n t , t h r o u g h its various agencies, is responsible
for the m a n a g e m e n t o f m o s t federal p u b l i c lands i n the
U n i t e d States, w h i c h constitute o n e - t h i r d o f the t o t a l
acreage o f the country. T h e agencies that m a k e u p the
d e p a r t m e n t cover a great deal o f g r o u n d , l i t e r a l l y and
figuratively; i n a d d i t i o n t o the NPS, t h e y i n c l u d e , a m o n g
others, the B u r e a u o f L a n d M a n a g e m e n t , the Fish and
W i l d l i f e Service, the Office o f Surface M i n i n g Reclama­
t i o n a n d Enforcement, a n d the B u r e a u o f I n d i a n Affairs.
T h e secretary o f the i n t e r i o r and the agencies' directors
manage the inevitable conflicts r e s u l t i n g from the overlap­
p i n g mandates and resources for w h i c h they are account­
able. T h e secretary and the agency directors are a p p o i n t e d
b y the U.S. president a n d generally represent the p a r t i c u ­
lar v i e w s a n d p h i l o s o p h y o f a p o l i t i c a l party.
NATIONAL PARK SERVICE
T h e U.S. Congress created the NPS i n 1916 w i t h the m a n ­
date t o preserve n a t u r a l a n d c u l t u r a l resources o f n a t i o n a l
significance. T h e f o u n d i n g legislation states t h a t
the Service shall promote and regulate the use o f Federal
areas k n o w n as national parks, monuments and reservations
by such means and measures as conform to the fundamental
purpose o f the said parks, monuments and reservations,
w h i c h purpose is to conserve the scenery and the natural
and historic objects and the w i l d life therein, and to provide
for the enjoyment o f the same i n such manner and by such
means as w i l l leave t h e m unimpaired for the enjoyment o f
future generations. 1
A t its f o u n d i n g , the NPS assumed responsibility
for t w e l v e existing n a t i o n a l parks, n i n e t e e n m o n u m e n t s
( i n c l u d i n g Chaco C a n y o n N a t i o n a l M o n u m e n t ) , a n d t w o
reservations. Its m i s s i o n specified the d u a l o b l i g a t i o n o f
c o n s e r v i n g u n i m p a i r e d the scenery a n d the c u l t u r a l a n d
n a t u r a l resources, and p r o v i d i n g access for t h e i r enjoy­
m e n t . I n t e r p r e t a t i o n s o f w h a t constitutes conservation,
access, and u n i m p a i r e d resources have created tensions
b e t w e e n these obligations at various times d u r i n g the his­
t o r y o f the NPS. O v e r the years, however, the u n i m p a i r -
m e n t i m p e r a t i v e from the NPS m a n d a t e has b e e n inter­
p r e t e d b y NPS directors a n d s o m e t i m e s b y secretaries o f
the i n t e r i o r as g i v i n g c o n s e r v a t i o n p r i m a c y over access. 2
T h i s p o s i t i o n is s t r o n g l y s u p p o r t e d i n c u r r e n t NPS m a n ­
agement policies. 3
L o c a t e d i n the States, the D i s t r i c t o f C o l u m b i a ,
A m e r i c a n Samoa, G u a m , P u e r t o Rico, Saipan, a n d the
V i r g i n Islands, the NPS properties include 56 n a t i o n a l
parks, 39 n a t i o n a l historical parks, 75 n a t i o n a l m o n u m e n t s ,
19 n a t i o n a l reserves a n d preserves, 78 n a t i o n a l historic
sites, and 25 n a t i o n a l battlefields. M o r e t h a n h a l f o f the
units o f the system are considered t o be o f c u l t u r a l o r his­
t o r i c significance.
T h e NPS presently has responsibility for 385
units o r places o f n a t i o n a l significance—natural, h i s t o r i ­
cal, a n d recreational areas—the diversity o f w h i c h is
d e m o n s t r a t e d b y c i t i n g a few examples: Yellowstone
N a t i o n a l Park, Independence N a t i o n a l H i s t o r i c a l Park,
Mesa Verde N a t i o n a l Park, the V i e t n a m Veterans M e m o ­
rial, A b r a h a m L i n c o l n ' s Birthplace N a t i o n a l H i s t o r i c Site,
the Blue Ridge Parkway, Cape C o d N a t i o n a l Seashore,
a n d the W h i t e H o u s e .
I n a d d i t i o n t o these sites, the NPS oversees p r o ­
g r a m s that serve b r o a d c o n s e r v a t i o n and recreation
needs. Examples i n c l u d e the N a t i o n a l Register o f H i s t o r i c
Places; the N a t i o n a l H i s t o r i c L a n d m a r k s P r o g r a m ; the
L a n d a n d W a t e r C o n s e r v a t i o n F u n d Grants P r o g r a m ;
the H i s t o r i c A m e r i c a n B u i l d i n g Survey; the H i s t o r i c
A m e r i c a n E n g i n e e r i n g Record; the A m e r i c a n Battlefield
P r o t e c t i o n P r o g r a m ; the N a t i o n a l M a r i t i m e H e r i t a g e
Grants P r o g r a m ; the Rivers, Trails a n d C o n s e r v a t i o n
Assistance P r o g r a m ; and the T r i b a l H e r i t a g e Preservation
Grants P r o g r a m .
O v e r its eighty-six years, the NPS a d m i n i s t r a t i o n
has expanded a n d contracted, as the times have r e q u i r e d
a n d as resources have a l l o w e d . I n the mid-1990s, as p a r t o f
an effort t o streamline the federal g o v e r n m e n t , the NPS
M A N A G E M E N T CONTEXT A N DHISTORY 6l
u n d e r w e n t a d e c e n t r a l i z i n g r e o r g a n i z a t i o n t h a t reassigned
t w e l v e h u n d r e d j o b s from the headquarters i n W a s h i n g ­
t o n , D . C . , a n d r e g i o n a l offices t o i n d i v i d u a l parks a n d spe­
cialized service centers.
T h e m i s s i o n o f the NPS t o preserve u n i m p a i r e d
the n a t u r a l and c u l t u r a l resources a n d values o f the
n a t i o n a l p a r k system for the e n j o y m e n t , education, a n d
i n s p i r a t i o n o f this and f u t u r e generations represents a
great deal o f responsibility. B u t , as w i t h m a n y large U.S.
4

g o v e r n m e n t bureaucracies, the actual a u t h o r i t y for select­

i n g a n d i m p l e m e n t i n g m a n a g e m e n t strategies resides i n
legislation a n d related p r o c e d u r a l d o c u m e n t s w r i t t e n t o
ensure c o m p l i a n c e . As NPS p o l i c y clarifies, "the manage­
m e n t o f the n a t i o n a l p a r k system and NPS p r o g r a m s is
g u i d e d b y the C o n s t i t u t i o n [ o f the U n i t e d States], p u b l i c
laws, treaties, p r o c l a m a t i o n s , Executive Orders, regula­
tions, a n d directives o f the Secretary o f the I n t e r i o r a n d
the Assistant Secretary for Fish a n d W i l d l i f e a n d Parks."
I n the c u r r e n t o r g a n i z a t i o n , each p a r k o r site has
a m a n a g e m e n t t e a m headed b y a superintendent, w h o is
the p r i n c i p a l a u t h o r i t y i n m o s t decisions r e g a r d i n g t h a t
u n i t . Superintendents r e p o r t t o t h e i r respective r e g i o n a l
directors, b u t outside the issuing o f c e r t a i n p e r m i t s , m o s t
p a r k operations are h a n d l e d locally once the annual
b u d g e t a n d activity plans are approved. Superintendents
have b e e n c o m p a r e d t o ship captains: "others m i g h t o w n
the p r o p e r t y a n d d e t e r m i n e t h e cargo, b u t once away
from the d o c k (or i n t h e field), the captain (or superinten­
dent) makes the decisions." 6
D e s c r i p t i o n o f CCNHP a n d Its C o n t e x t
Figure 2.1. N o r t h Mesa. The limited vegetation, temperature extremes,
occasional flooding, and gusting winds contribute to active erosion
patterns i n the landscape. Horizontal sedimentary layers have been
carved into colorful plateaus, mesas, buttes, and canyons. Photo:
David Myers
5
deep a n d 2.5 k i l o m e t e r s (1.5 miles) w i d e , b o r d e r e d b y
sandstone cliffs t o the n o r t h a n d s o u t h . A b o v e these cliffs
lie mesas d o t t e d w i t h p i n o n a n d j u n i p e r trees. Grasses
a n d shrubs cover the a l l u v i a l c a n y o n b o t t o m , d r a i n e d
b y the e p h e m e r a l Chaco W a s h . A t the w e s t e n d o f the
Park, Chaco W a s h a n d Escavada W a s h j o i n t o f o r m the
Chaco River.
F r o m the tops o f the mesas, the n a t u r a l b o u n d ­
aries o f the San J u a n Basin m a y be v i e w e d i n all directions:
C o l o r a d o ' s San J u a n a n d L a Plata M o u n t a i n s t o t h e n o r t h ,
the C h u s k a M o u n t a i n s t o t h e west, the Jemez M o u n t a i n s
t o the east, a n d M o u n t T a y l o r t o the s o u t h . T h r o u g h o u t
the basin, vast deposits o f u r a n i u m , coal, n a t u r a l gas, a n d
o i l lie b e n e a t h the surface.

CULTURAL C O N T E X T
NATURAL C O N T E X T
C C N H P is l o c a t e d i n a relatively p o o r a n d l i g h t l y p o p u ­
C C N H P is situated i n the n o r t h w e s t e r n p a r t o f the state
lated area o f N e w M e x i c o . N a t i v e A m e r i c a n s , p r i m a r i l y
o f N e w M e x i c o , near the center o f the 6.47-million-
Navajo, constitute the m a j o r i t y o f t h e residents i m m e d i ­
hectare (25,000-square-mile) San J u a n Basin, w i t h i n the
ately s u r r o u n d i n g the Park. T h e Pueblo tribes live i n areas
m u c h larger C o l o r a d o Plateau. T h e basin is generally
f u r t h e r east, west, a n d s o u t h . T h e lands a r o u n d t h e Park
semiarid, typically r e c e i v i n g o n l y 21.6 centimeters (8.5
are used p r i m a r i l y for g r a z i n g sheep, cattle, a n d horses
inches) o f p r e c i p i t a t i o n annually, w h i c h accounts for the
a n d for i n d u s t r i a l e x t r a c t i o n a n d processing o f the r e g i o n s
r e g i o n s sparse vegetation. S u m m e r s b r i n g intense b u t
abundant deposits o f energy resources.
b r i e f t h u n d e r s t o r m s w i t h flash floods. A n n u a l tempera­
I n t e r t r i b a l , as w e l l as n o n - I n d i a n , relations i n the
tures v a r y widely, w i t h w i n t e r l o w s w e l l b e l o w freezing
Southwest are shaped significantly b y the extent o f federal
a n d s u m m e r peaks a r o u n d 38 ° C (100 °F). Year-round, daily
a n d t r i b a l g o v e r n m e n t s ' c o n t r o l o f l a n d i n this area—and
temperatures at Chaco C a n y o n also t e n d t o range widely,
b y the complexities o f l a n d interests i n general. Nuances
r i s i n g a n d falling w i t h the sun, due t o an elevation i n
i n legalities o f l a n d use are o f t e n c o m p l i c a t e d b y t h e o p p o ­
excess o f 1,829 m e t e r s (6,000 feet).
s i t i o n o f surface a n d subsurface interests, w h i c h are i n
T h e Park t o d a y covers a p p r o x i m a t e l y 13,760
m a n y cases d i v i d e d b e t w e e n different parties for one l a n d
hectares (34,000 acres). Chaco C a n y o n itself, w h i c h cuts
p a r c e l . M a n y residents o f the S o u t h w e s t q u e s t i o n the
7

east-west t h r o u g h the Park, is some 91 meters (300 feet)

62 C H A C O CULTURE N A T I O N A L HISTORICAL PARK

extent o f g o v e r n m e n t i n v o l v e m e n t i n l a n d m a n a g e m e n t
i n the r e g i o n . I n part, they feel that federal c o n t r o l reflects
the interests o f distant bureaucrats i n W a s h i n g t o n , D . C . ,
rather t h a n local interests, and that local revenues lost
due t o the e x e m p t i o n o f g o v e r n m e n t l a n d from p r o p e r t y
taxes are n o t m a d e u p b y federal payments and subsidies.
I n a d d i t i o n , setting aside lands as n a t i o n a l parks and u n d e r
the Wilderness Act of 1964 is seen as p r e v e n t i n g viable eco­
n o m i c activities i n those areas. Nevertheless, g r a z i n g and
the i n d u s t r i a l e x t r a c t i o n o f various types o f n a t u r a l
resources have l o n g been a l l o w e d i n o t h e r federal lands i n
the r e g i o n .
T h e presence i n the r e g i o n o f m a n y Native A m e r ­
ican reservations, w h i c h are a m o n g the n a t i o n s largest,
complicates local and federal l a n d issues. T h e lands i n and
a r o u n d several o f these reservations are the subject o f
long-standing controversies over sovereignty due t o some­
times-conflicting treaties b e t w e e n the U.S. g o v e r n m e n t
and the tribes. A case i n p o i n t is a c e n t u r y - o l d dispute
b e t w e e n the H o p i t r i b e and Navajo N a t i o n over approxi­
m a t e l y 248,000 hectares (1.8 m i l l i o n acres) o f l a n d i n the
Four Corners r e g i o n — t h e m e e t i n g p o i n t o f the states o f
A r i z o n a , C o l o r a d o , N e w M e x i c o , and U t a h . C o m p l i c a t i n g
and occasionally fueling the l a n d dispute is the unresolved
issue o f legal c o n t r o l over coal reserves, v a l u e d i n the b i l ­
lions o f dollars. N o t surprisingly, this conflict reverberates
i n m a n a g e m e n t issues at C C N H P .
History of Settlement a n d Use
C u r r e n t evidence indicates a b r o a d and relatively c o n t i n u ­
ous h a b i t a t i o n o f the San Juan Basin d u r i n g the Paleo-
Indian period, r o u g h l y b e t w e e n 8,000 and 10,000 years
ago. T h e earliest remains o f h u m a n h a b i t a t i o n i n Chaco
8
C a n y o n date t o 7,000 t o 2,000 years ago. These early inhab­
itants apparently w e r e seminomadic hunter-gatherers.
Between t w o and three thousand years ago, inhabitants
o f the canyon began t o establish m o r e - p e r m a n e n t settle­
ments, facilitated b y their increasingly sophisticated use
o f domesticated strains o f squash, beans, and c o r n .
D u r i n g the 1,300 years o f Anasazi, o r ancestral 9
Puebloan, culture, architecture, technology, social
o r g a n i z a t i o n and p o p u l a t i o n d i s t r i b u t i o n c o n t i n u e d t o
evolve. A p e r i o d o f increased p r e c i p i t a t i o n b e t w e e n A . D .
400 and 500 p r o v i d e d for greater ease i n g r o w i n g crops,
a l l o w i n g for the first p e r m a n e n t o c c u p a t i o n o f Chaco
C a n y o n and a significant p o p u l a t i o n g r o w t h i n the area.
Settlement patterns, i n c l u d i n g subterranean p i t houses
and a c c o m p a n y i n g storage structures, eventually coa­
lesced i n t o small villages. B y about A . D . 500, the canyon s
inhabitants w e r e b u i l d i n g one-story m a s o n r y dwellings
above g r o u n d , organized a r o u n d central p i t houses.
T h e p e r i o d f r o m A . D . 700 t o 1300, also called the
Pueblo p e r i o d , is associated w i t h w h a t is k n o w n as the
"Chaco P h e n o m e n o n . " T h e core area o f Chaco C a n y o n
appears t o have served as an administrative, economic,
and c e r e m o n i a l nexus o f a c u l t u r e that d o m i n a t e d w h a t
today is k n o w n as the Four Corners.
T h e phases o f o c c u p a t i o n i n Chaco C a n y o n left
b e h i n d c o m p l e x m a s o n r y structures k n o w n as "great
houses," c o n t a i n i n g h u n d r e d s o f r o o m s and dozens o f
kivas ( r o u n d structures o f v a r y i n g size) t h a t w e r e m u c h
larger i n scale t h a n a n y t h i n g p r e v i o u s l y b u i l t i n t h e
r e g i o n (fig. 2.2); t h e i r appearance is u n i q u e i n the A m e r i ­
cas. O t h e r features o f the Chaco P h e n o m e n o n i n c l u d e
r o a d a l i g n m e n t s (some segments are m o r e t h a n 64 k i l o ­
meters—40 m i l e s — l o n g ) w i t h c u t stairways a n d
m a s o n r y r a m p s t h a t lead t o m o r e t h a n 150 o u t l y i n g great
houses a n d settlements. T h e Chacoans also created a n d
depended o n t h e i r w a t e r c o n t r o l a n d d i s t r i b u t i o n struc­
tures t o manage the scant seasonal rains, and t h e y
depended o n t h e i r a s t r o n o m i c a l k n o w l e d g e t o anticipate
calendric cycles. T h e y left p e t r o g l y p h s t h a t m a r k e d solar
events, a n d t h e y appear t o have used r o a d a n d architec­
t u r a l a l i g n m e n t s t o reflect l u n a r a n d stellar events. Exca­
vations o f t h e great houses have revealed seashells, cop­
per bells, a n d remains o f macaws, suggesting trade w i t h
peoples o f the Pacific Coast a n d the G u l f o f C a l i f o r n i a as
Figure 2.2. Pueblo Bonito seen from the air. Great houses, such as
Pueblo Bonito, are unique to Chaco culture. They have large numbers
o f rectangular and irregular rooms as well as r o u n d structures o f dif­
ferent sizes, called kivas. The purpose o f the kivas is not k n o w n w i t h
certainty, although it is assumed that they were communal gathering
places, perhaps used for ceremonies. Photo: Courtesy National Park
Service, Chaco Culture N H P Collection Archives.
M A N A G E M E N T CONTEXT A N D HISTORY 63
w e l l as o f M e s o a m e r i c a . T h e Chacoans also t r a d e d
their intricately decorated coiled p o t t e r y and fine
turquoise j e w e l r y
By A . D . 1130, n e w construction at Chaco h a d ceased,
and b y A . D . 1300 m o s t o f the p o p u l a t i o n o f the canyon had
m o v e d away. Over t i m e , Chacoan people m i g r a t e d t o other
areas o f the region, including, t o the n o r t h , the Mesa Verde
area; t o the west and southwest, the H o p i Mesas, the Z u n i
M o u n t a i n area, and the Chuska Mountains; and t o the east
and southeast, along the Rio Grande.
Archaeologists generally believe that Chaco
C a n y o n was n o t resettled u n t i l the Navajo m i g r a t e d i n t o
the r e g i o n from the n o r t h i n the late 1500s o r 1600s,
a l t h o u g h N a t i v e A m e r i c a n groups assert that the canyon
has been i n c o n t i n u o u s use since Anasazi t i m e s . Archae­ 10
ological evidence shows that Chaco C a n y o n was used b y
b o t h R i o Grande Pueblo and Navajo groups, from j u s t
before the Pueblo Revolt o f 1680 against the Spanish
t h r o u g h the m i d - n i n e t e e n t h century. F r o m the e n d o f that
p e r i o d t h r o u g h the first p a r t o f the t w e n t i e t h century,
Navajo p o p u l a t e d the canyon, establishing seasonal
camps, p e r m a n e n t dwellings, p l a n t and m i n e r a l g a t h e r i n g
areas, a n d c e r e m o n i a l sites. After the establishment o f
Chaco C a n y o n N a t i o n a l M o n u m e n t i n 1907, Navajo fami­
lies c o n t i n u e d t o f a r m and graze there u n t i l the NPS i n i t i ­
ated a resettlement p r o g r a m i n the m i d 1930s.
E v o l u t i o n o f Chaco C a n y o n
as a H e r i t a g e Site
T h e first d o c u m e n t e d interest i n Chaco C a n y o n b y E u r o ­
pean A m e r i c a n s as a place o f archaeological significance
came i n 1849, w h e n the W a s h i n g t o n E x p e d i t i o n , a U.S.
A r m y T o p o g r a p h i c a l Engineers reconnaissance detach­
m e n t , encountered and w r o t e descriptions o f Chacoan
sites. L i k e the earlier Spanish m i l i t a r y expeditions o f the
11
1820s, the U.S. A r m y engineers w e r e m e t b y Navajo w h o
h a d i n h a b i t e d the area for almost f o u r h u n d r e d years.
W h e n first "discovered," the ruins o f Chaco C a n y o n w e r e
seen as the abandoned vestiges o f a vanished civilization.
I n spite o f this perception, affiliated clans and religious
societies o f the H o p i o f A r i z o n a and the Pueblos o f N e w
M e x i c o c l a i m t o have v i s i t e d the site t o h o n o r t h e i r ances­
t r a l homelands since the t i m e o f the e m i g r a t i o n o f its pre­
historic inhabitants i n the t h i r t e e n t h c e n t u r y 12
I n 1877, the U.S. g o v e r n m e n t ' s G e o l o g i c a l and
Geographical Survey o f the Territories p r o d u c e d exten­
sive descriptions and maps o f the Chacoan sites. T h e next
i m p o r t a n t d o c u m e n t a t i o n o f the site came i n 1888, w h e n
64 C H A C O CULTURE N A T I O N A L HISTORICAL PARK
the B u r e a u o f A m e r i c a n E t h n o l o g y surveyed and p h o ­
t o g r a p h e d the m a j o r Chacoan sites for a study o f Pueblo
architecture. These p h o t o g r a p h s p r o v i d e evidence that
l o o t i n g and v a n d a l i s m o f prehistoric remains w e r e already
o c c u r r i n g at this early date.
I n 1896, relic h u n t e r R i c h a r d W e t h e r i l l arrived at
Chaco after excavating several ancestral Puebloan sites,
i n c l u d i n g some at Mesa Verde, i n search o f "antiquities."
H i s successes attracted the interest o f the w e a l t h y H y d e
brothers o f N e w York, w h o over the next five years collab­
o r a t e d w i t h W e t h e r i l l t o c o n d u c t full-scale excavations at
Pueblo B o n i t o , one o f the m o s t p r o m i n e n t o f the site's
great houses. George H . Pepper o f the A m e r i c a n M u s e u m
o f N a t u r a l H i s t o r y supervised the excavation w o r k o f the
H y d e E x p l o r i n g E x p e d i t i o n , w h i l e W e t h e r i l l directed a
Navajo crew. T h e p r i m a r y purpose o f the e x p e d i t i o n was
t o gather artifacts for the Hydes, w h o later d o n a t e d t h e i r
collections t o the A m e r i c a n M u s e u m o f N a t u r a l H i s t o r y
i n N e w York, w h e r e t h e y are f o u n d today.
B y this t i m e , the p r o l i f e r a t i o n o f treasure-hunting
excavations t h r o u g h o u t the Southwest h a d created great
c o n c e r n a m o n g the scientific establishment o f the c o u n ­
try. Early attempts t o p r o t e c t archaeological sites m e t
s t r o n g resistance from w e s t e r n settlers w h o saw these
efforts as one m o r e initiative b y the federal g o v e r n m e n t
t o regulate the use o f the l a n d . H o w e v e r , a 1901 federal
investigation o f the H y d e E x p l o r i n g E x p e d i t i o n s excava­
tions and the l a n d claims o f R i c h a r d W e t h e r i l l at Chaco
C a n y o n strongly r e c o m m e n d e d that the U.S. g o v e r n m e n t
create a n a t i o n a l p a r k t o preserve the archaeological sites
i n the area. T h e General L a n d Office responded b y p u t ­
t i n g a stop t o the H y d e E x p e d i t i o n s excavations at Pueblo
B o n i t o and b y rejecting WetherilFs l a n d claim. Despite
these decisions, W e t h e r i l l c o n t i n u e d t o homestead at
Chaco Canyon, and he operated a t r a d i n g post at Pueblo
B o n i t o u n t i l his death i n 1910.
Eventually, after twenty-five years o f c o n c e r n
over damage t o the archaeological record, the Antiquities
Act was signed i n t o l a w i n 1906. T h e act was designed t o
p r o t e c t and regulate the use and care o f "historic land­
marks, historic and prehistoric structures, and o t h e r
objects o f historic o r scientific i n t e r e s t " 13
and "to preserve
[their] historic, scientific, c o m m e m o r a t i v e , a n d c u l t u r a l
values." T h e n e w l a w a u t h o r i z e d the creation o f
14
n a t i o n a l m o n u m e n t s o n lands o w n e d o r c o n t r o l l e d b y the
federal g o v e r n m e n t b y presidential p r o c l a m a t i o n , w i t h o u t
congressional approval, as was (and still is) r e q u i r e d for
the creation o f n a t i o n a l parks. T h e act stipulates that the
extension o f n a t i o n a l m o n u m e n t s is t o "be c o n f i n e d t o the
Figure 2.3. Region o f C C N H P and Chaco Archeological Protection
System. Chaco Canyon National M o n u m e n t originally encompassed
the canyon and surrounding mesas (7,998 hectares; 19,840 acres) and
the four small detached units o f Kin Bineola, Kin Ya'a, Casa Morena,
and Pueblo Pintado. Additional lands were added to the m o n u m e n t
in 1928 and 1980. The 1980 legislation recognized the extension o f the
Chaco culture by changing the name o f the unit to Chaco Culture
National Historical Park and by creating the Chaco Archeological
Protection Sites.
smallest area compatible w i t h the proper care and manage­
m e n t o f the objects t o be p r o t e c t e d . ' " I n M a r c h 1907,
5
President T h e o d o r e Roosevelt issued Presidential
P r o c l a m a t i o n N o . 740, establishing C h a c o C a n y o n
National Monument.
T h e n e w n a t i o n a l m o n u m e n t was administered
b y the General L a n d Office o f the D e p a r t m e n t o f the
I n t e r i o r u n t i l 1916, w h e n i t came u n d e r the a d m i n i s t r a t i o n
o f the n e w l y f o u n d e d NPS. I n 1920, 461 hectares (1,140
acres) w i t h i n the Park w e r e technically the p r o p e r t y o f
Navajo families. Over t i m e , some o f that l a n d has been
acquired b y the NPS; today, title t o some o f these parcels,
called in-holdings, m a y be d i v i d e d a m o n g m o r e t h a n 100
descendants o f the o r i g i n a l titleholder. I t is estimated t h a t
j u s t over 120 hectares (300 acres) o f these lands i n the west­
ern p a r t o f the Park are still g r a z e d and c o u l d be m i n e d o r
developed b y t h e i r tideholders. A b o u t 650 hectares (1,620
acres) o f l a n d inside the Park are still h e l d b y private i n d i ­
viduals. C o m p l i c a t e d titles and o w n e r s h i p transactions
over t i m e have made i t difficult for the NPS t o say w i t h
any degree o f c e r t a i n t y the extent o f g r a z e d o r privately
o w n e d l a n d . W h i l e the NPS has an obvious interest i n
16
a c q u i r i n g these lands, i t recognizes the challenge involved:
"Recent efforts t o acquire allotments h a v i n g o n l y one
o w n e r have failed, and a c q u i r i n g these small tracts w i l l
require decades o f negotiations for each estate." 17
D u r i n g the first eighty years o f the Park, b o t h
g o v e r n m e n t a l and n o n g o v e r n m e n t a l archaeologists exca­
v a t e d various locations at the site. F r o m 1933 t o 1937,
G o r d o n V i v i a n carried o u t extensive conservation w o r k at
Pueblo B o n i t o , C h e t r o K e t l , and Casa Rinconada. A C i v i l ­
ian C o n s e r v a t i o n C o r p s ( C C C ) c r e w o f local Navajo
1 8
stonemasons i n i t i a t e d repairs i n 1937 t o m a n y o f the large
Chacoan structures t h a t w e r e d e t e r i o r a t i n g after years o f
exposure t o r a i n , w i n d , and freeze-thaw cycles as w e l l as
years o f archaeological excavations. T h e C C C project
p l a n t e d a p p r o x i m a t e l y 100,000 trees t h r o u g h o u t the
canyon t o forestall soil erosion, constructed earthen
b e r m s for the purpose o f soil conservation, and i m p r o v e d
m a n y roads and trails. I t began c o n s t r u c t i o n o f a r o a d t o
the t o p o f the cliff o v e r l o o k i n g Pueblo B o n i t o , b u t W o r l d
W a r I I i n t e r r u p t e d the project, w h i c h was abandoned i n
1941 and never resumed. T h e conservation u n i t eventually
left the C C C b u t c o n t i n u e d w o r k o n the stabilization o f
ruins as p a r k personnel.
B e t w e e n 1971 and 1986, the comprehensive and
interdisciplinary Chaco Center Project u n d e r t o o k a b r o a d
survey o f the m o n u m e n t , the e x a m i n a t i o n o f previous
d o c u m e n t a t i o n , and the excavation o f a n u m b e r o f sites.
P u b l i c a t i o n o f the findings was a key c o m p o n e n t o f the
project. T h e i n f o r m a t i o n t h a t resulted has a l l o w e d schol­
ars t o examine the Chaco P h e n o m e n o n f r o m a m u c h
M A N A G E M E N T CONTEXT A N D HISTORY 65

Figure 2.4. Early view o f Pueblo Bonito, w i t h Threatening Rock still
standing. For almost half a century, Pueblo Bonito was excavated
under the shadow o f Threatening Rock. Finally, i n 1941, the enormous
boulder separated from the crumbling mesa and fell onto the great
house, destroying some thirty rooms excavated during the t w o previ­
ous decades. Photo: Courtesy Southwest Museum, Los Angeles,
Photo # P23826
b r o a d e r perspective, a n d t h e i r conclusions have greatly
i n f l u e n c e d the i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f the site. 19
M o t i v a t e d b y n e w k n o w l e d g e about the exten­
sion o f the remains o f Chaco c u l t u r e a n d b y threats
from increased e x p l o i t a t i o n o f n a t u r a l resources i n the
r e g i o n , Congress enacted legislation i n 1980 a d d i n g 5,060
hectares (12,500 acres) t o the m o n u m e n t a n d c h a n g i n g its
n a m e t o Chaco C u l t u r e N a t i o n a l H i s t o r i c a l P a r k . 20
The
l a w affirmed the Park's mandate o f preservation, inter­
p r e t a t i o n , a n d research. T h e legislation also designated
t h i r t y - t h r e e o t h e r sites i n the San Juan Basin as Chaco
C u l t u r e A r c h e o l o g i c a l P r o t e c t i o n Sites a n d p r o v i d e d for
the a d d i t i o n o f m o r e sites i n the f u t u r e . M o r e t h a n t w o -
thirds o f these n e w l y p r o t e c t e d sites, w h i c h are n o t p a r t
o f C C N H P , are i n Navajo t r i b a l lands, allotments, o r lands
used b y the t r i b e for g r a z i n g . Subsequently, the Chacoan
Outliers Protection Act of 1995 added n i n e n e w a n d r e m o v e d
four f o r m e r l y designated Chaco C u l t u r e A r c h e o l o g i c a l
P r o t e c t i o n Sites, r e s u l t i n g i n a t o t a l o f t h i r t y - n i n e outliers,
e x t e n d i n g the area o f p r o t e c t e d sites b e y o n d the San
Juan Basin.
I n 1987, the U N E S C O W o r l d H e r i t a g e C o m m i t ­
tee f o r m a l l y recognized the i n t e r n a t i o n a l i m p o r t a n c e o f
C C N H P w h e n i t inscribed i t i n the W o r l d H e r i t a g e List.
T h e n o m i n a t i n g d o c u m e n t s present the site as c o n t a i n i n g
"the physical remains o f the Chacoans; a u n i q u e p o p u l a ­
t i o n o f a c u l t u r e t h a t has b e e n extinct for hundreds o f
years." 21
Chaco was inscribed i n the list u n d e r c r i t e r i o n
66 C H A C O CULTURE N A T I O N A L HISTORICAL PARK
C(iii) o f the 1984 W o r l d H e r i t a g e C o n v e n t i o n , w h i c h cov­
ers properties t h a t "bear a u n i q u e o r at least exceptional
t e s t i m o n y t o a c i v i l i z a t i o n w h i c h has disappeared" a n d
t h a t m e e t r e q u i r e m e n t s o f a u t h e n t i c i t y . Five o t h e r Cha­
22
coan sites—Aztec Ruins N a t i o n a l M o n u m e n t , Casamero,
H a l f w a y H o u s e , T w i n Angels, a n d K i n N i z h o n i — w e r e
also i n c l u d e d i n the W o r l d H e r i t a g e i n s c r i p t i o n , h i g h l i g h t ­
i n g the extension o f the Chaco c u l t u r e .
PARK OPERATIONS AND FACILITIES
Today, C C N H P is m a n a g e d b y a superintendent w h o
reports t o the d i r e c t o r o f the NPS I n t e r m o u n t a i n
Regional Office i n D e n v e r . T h e NPS alone is responsible
23
a n d accountable for the m a n a g e m e n t o f the Park, a n d
u n d e r law, o t h e r stakeholders o r g r o u p s can o n l y b e c o m e
i n v o l v e d i n a c o n s u l t a t i o n capacity. Currently, the Park has
a staff o f 21 p e r m a n e n t employees and 16 seasonal hires,
organized i n six o p e r a t i o n a l divisions: the superinten­
dent's office (2 f u l l - t i m e employees [FTEs]), c u l t u r a l
resources (the largest g r o u p , w i t h 14 FTEs i n p r e s e r v a t i o n
a n d 3 i n m u s e u m curatorial), n a t u r a l resources ( 1 F T E ) ,
l a w enforcement and emergency services (2 FTEs); v i s i t o r
services a n d i n t e r p r e t a t i o n (4.5 FTEs), a n d maintenance
(5.5 FTEs). T h e Park's base b u d g e t i n 2002 was approxi­
m a t e l y US$1.6 m i l l i o n , o f w h i c h US$300,000 was trans­
ferred t o an agency o f the Navajo T r i b e for the Navajo site
protection project. 24
T h e m a i n access t o the Park is f r o m the northeast
t h r o u g h a r o a d that starts at N e w M e x i c o 44/U.S. 550, the
m a i n east-west h i g h w a y from the Four C o r n e r s r e g i o n t o
Santa Fe a n d A l b u q u e r q u e . T h e distance f r o m this h i g h ­
w a y t o the Park entrance is 33.6 k m (21 miles), o f w h i c h
25.5 k i l o m e t e r s (16 miles) is unpaved r o a d . A second r o a d
approaches the site from the s o u t h from U.S. 40 v i a
C r o w n p o i n t ; the last 30.4 k m (19 miles) o f this r o a d are
also unpaved. I n order t o encourage access t o the Park
from the northeast, for a l o n g t i m e maps a n d brochures o f
C C N H P issued b y the NPS d i d n o t indicate the existence
o f the s o u t h r o a d . A t h i r d unpaved r o a d t h a t p r o v i d e d
access t o the site from the n o r t h w e s t was closed several
years ago.
T h e Park is o p e n all year from sunrise t o sunset,
a l t h o u g h the unpaved roads can be impassable d u r i n g
i n c l e m e n t weather. T h e Park charges an entrance fee o f
US$8 per car o r US$4 per m o t o r c y c l e , w h i c h is collected
at the V i s i t o r Center.
O f the a p p r o x i m a t e l y four t h o u s a n d archaeologi­
cal sites t h a t have b e e n identified w i t h i n Park boundaries,
thirty-seven are o p e n t o visitors. These are located o n the
 Figure 2.5. Current boundaries o f the Park. The areas demarcated by
arrows are those added i n 1980, when legislation changed the status o f
the site from a national m o n u m e n t to a national historical park. The
paved road inside the Park passes by the Visitor Center and makes a
14.5-km (9-mile) loop on the floor o f the canyon. Visitors have easy
access to over a dozen important sites from this loop road. C C N H P has
some facilities for visitors, such as the Visitor Center, a small camp­
ground, and picnic areas.

Figure2.6. C C N H P visitation characteristics. (Source: National Park Service Public Use Statistics Office, 29 May 2002, http: / /www.aqd.nps.gov/stats.)

M A N A G E M E N T CONTEXT A N D HISTORY 67
l o o p r o a d and o n some o f the b a c k c o u n t r y trails. W a l k i n g
trails w i t h interpretive signage that lead visitors t h r o u g h
the m a j o r r u i n sites are surfaced w i t h c o m p a c t e d gravel.
T h e 30.4 k i l o m e t e r s (19 miles) o f trails i n the b a c k c o u n t r y
areas and the mesa tops are r o u g h e r and are n o t easily
discerned. Access t o the b a c k c o u n t r y sites is a l l o w e d
i n d i v i d u a l l y o r w i t h ranger-led tours. Visitors t o those
areas m u s t o b t a i n p e r m i t s so that rangers can keep t r a c k
o f off-trail hikers. T h e detached Park units are connected
t o the Park b y paved and unpaved roads passing t h r o u g h
private land. T h u s , the c o n s t r u c t i o n o f gates t o l i m i t
access is precluded.
Starting i n the 1970s, the n u m b e r o f visitors t o
the Park declined from an estimated 90,000 annually t o
a p p r o x i m a t e l y 74,000 i n 2001. Park staff attribute the
decline i n recent years i n p a r t t o the appearance o f
hantavirus i n the r e g i o n . A c c o r d i n g t o a 1994 study, the
25

great m a j o r i t y o f visitors t o C C N H P are o f E u r o p e a n

ancestry and have h a d several years o f h i g h e r e d u c a t i o n . 26

O n l y 20 percent o f visitors are accompanied b y c h i l d r e n

o r teenagers. A l m o s t h a l f o f t h e m spend b e t w e e n t w o
a n d six h o u r s on-site, and o n e - f o u r t h stay i n the Park
overnight.
T h e V i s i t o r Center, b u i l t i n 1957, is o p e n daily
except Christmas and N e w Year s Day. T h e center has a
small e x h i b i t i o n focused o n Chaco c u l t u r e and o n Navajo
and Pueblo h i s t o r y ; three films about Chaco, the Anasazi,
and Fajada B u t t e are s h o w n i n a small p r o j e c t i o n r o o m .
T h e Center also houses a b o o k s t o r e , administrative
offices, restrooms, and d r i n k i n g fountains.
T h e r e are f o u r picnic areas i n the Park w i t h a t o t a l
o f nine picnic tables; c a m p i n g sites have t h e i r o w n eating
areas. P a r k i n g areas a l o n g the i n t e r p r e t i v e l o o p r o a d can
a c c o m m o d a t e s i x t y - t w o vehicles. O f f the m a i n entrance
r o a d are a forty-five-site c a m p g r o u n d and a small-group
c a m p i n g area w i t h c o m f o r t stations. M i n i m a l o v e r f l o w
c a m p i n g space is available d u r i n g peak v i s i t a t i o n season.
T h e site is 96 k i l o m e t e r s (60 miles) from the nearest t o w n
that provides a c c o m m o d a t i o n s . T h e r e are n o lodgings,
a u t o m o b i l e services, o r f o o d facilities inside the Park.
Because o f its relative remoteness, all m a i n t e ­
nance facilities, w a t e r t r e a t m e n t systems, and employee
h o u s i n g are located w i t h i n the Park i n an area n o t far from
the V i s i t o r Center. These facilities consists o f six m a i n t e ­
nance and t e n h o u s i n g structures, a w a t e r w e l l a n d stor­
age tanks, w a t e r and sewage pipelines, and 0.8 hectares
(2 acres) o f sewage discharge l a g o o n s . 27

68 C H A C O CULTURE N A T I O N A L HISTORICAL PARK

 Understanding and Protecting the Values of the Park
T h i s p a r t o f the Chaco case study examines the values
o f C C N H P — h o w they w e r e and are identified and recog­
n i z e d and h o w they are considered i n the m a n a g e m e n t
o f the site. I t t h e n analyzes the i m p a c t o f operational
decisions and actions o n the values a t t r i b u t e d t o the site.
T h r e e questions focus the discussions o f the
sections that f o l l o w :
• H o w are the values associated w i t h the site
u n d e r s t o o d and articulated?
• H o w are these values t a k e n i n t o account i n the
site's m a n a g e m e n t policies and strategies?
• H o w do m a n a g e m e n t decisions and actions o n
site affect the values?
I n these discussions, i t is i m p o r t a n t t o keep i n
m i n d that C C N H P cannot operate independently; as a
u n i t o f the NPS i t m u s t f o l l o w the directives established
for the system as a w h o l e . T h e NPS is a federal agency
that bases the m a n a g e m e n t o f its holdings o n the U.S.
C o n s t i t u t i o n , federal laws, executive orders, federal regu­
lations that have the force o f law, and p o l i c y directives
f r o m the secretary o f the i n t e r i o r and the secretary's
deputies. W i t h i n the NPS, policies and guidance m a k e
operational these laws and directives. A t the p a r k level,
m e m o r a n d a o f agreement establish specific relationships
w i t h other institutions, and p l a n n i n g d o c u m e n t s o f vari­
ous kinds specify the w o r k t o be done and the means b y
w h i c h i t is t o be i m p l e m e n t e d .
A t times, conflicts arise b e t w e e n w h a t is expected
from all NPS units and w h a t m a y be best for, o r reason­
able t o expect from, a particular site. Each u n i t came i n t o
the system u n d e r different circumstances, and each brings
its o w n u n i q u e resources, history, and p o t e n t i a l i n t o one
vast administrative structure that is accountable t o C o n ­
gress and the A m e r i c a n people. T h e NPS m a n a g e m e n t
structure and guidelines focus o n the overarching needs
and issues o f the properties o f the system. Superinten­
dents m u s t address the u n i q u e values and needs o f their
parks t h r o u g h decisions m a d e w i t h the b r o a d powers and
discretion that they are g i v e n i n the system.
C u r r e n t NPS policies clearly state that the funda­
m e n t a l purpose o f the n a t i o n a l p a r k system is t o "con­
serve Park resources and values," and they f u r t h e r explain
that this f u n d a m e n t a l purpose "also includes p r o v i d i n g for
the e n j o y m e n t o f Park resources and values b y the people
o f the U n i t e d States." T h e NPS m a n a g e m e n t policies
28
and the various directors' orders p r o v i d e a framework o f
compliance w i t h laws, executive orders, and o t h e r regula­
tions. I n a d d i t i o n , C C N H P m a n a g e m e n t is g u i d e d b y the
m i s s i o n and purpose o f the Park.
M o s t o f the m a n a g e m e n t d o c u m e n t s available
for C C N H P predate the c u r r e n t NPS m a n a g e m e n t p o l i ­
cies, and i n general, they do n o t analyze values o r carry
29
clear statements o f the Park's values and significance. 30
T h i s does n o t m e a n that the values a t t r i b u t e d t o C C N H P
have n o t been recognized o r p r o t e c t e d over t i m e . Some
values (scientific) w e r e w e l l articulated and p r o t e c t e d
from the start; o t h e r values fall u n d e r c o n s t i t u t i o n a l p r o v i ­
sions that w e r e designed t o p r o t e c t a b r o a d range o f civil
liberties (e.g., freedom o f r e l i g i o n , Native A m e r i c a n
rights); and others have been p r o m o t e d m a i n l y t h r o u g h
n a t i o n a l (as opposed t o site-specific) legislation (e.g., envi­
r o n m e n t a l ) . Nevertheless, the absence, u n t i l recently, o f a
f o r m a l statement o f values means that i n order t o under­
stand w h a t values have been recognized at C C N H P and
h o w they have evolved, this study has h a d t o take an i n d i ­
rect approach, r e l y i n g o n reviews o f federal and site-
specific legislation, presidential proclamations, regula­
tions, the guidance p r o v i d e d b y NPS, and, at the p a r k
level, priorities, allocation o f resources, and actions.
Values A s s o c i a t e d w i t h CCNHP
W h e n Chaco C a n y o n N a t i o n a l M o n u m e n t was created
i n 1907, the presidential p r o c l a m a t i o n cited "the extraordi­
n a r y interest [ o f Pueblo ruins], because o f t h e i r n u m b e r
and t h e i r great size, and because o f the i n n u m e r a b l e and
valuable relics o f a prehistoric people w h i c h they con­
tain." 31
T h i s p r o c l a m a t i o n was m a d e possible b y the
Antiquities Act passed i n June 1906, w h i c h provides for the
creation o f n a t i o n a l m o n u m e n t s that include "historic
U N D E R S T A N D I N G A N D P R O T E C T I N G T H E VALUES 69
l a n d m a r k s , h i s t o r i c a n d prehistoric structures, a n d o t h e r t h o u s a n d years o f evidence o f h u m a n c u l t u r a l develop­
objects o f h i s t o r i c o r scientific interest." m e n t , as h a v i n g a significance t h a t consists of:
• Evidence o f a c i v i l i z a t i o n t h a t flourished b e t w e e n
VALUES OF CHACO
the n i n t h a n d the eleventh centuries and h a d h i g h achieve­
W h e n President T h e o d o r e Roosevelt created Chaco
m e n t s i n architecture, a g r i c u l t u r e , social complexity, e n g i ­
C a n y o n N a t i o n a l M o n u m e n t t o p r o t e c t the c o l l e c t i o n o f
neering, astronomy, a n d e c o n o m i c o r g a n i z a t i o n
r u i n s a n d materials t h a t s u r v i v e d from an ancient civiliza­
• Chaco "great houses"—the largest, best pre­
t i o n , t h e i r p o t e n t i a l for g e n e r a t i n g k n o w l e d g e a b o u t the
served, a n d m o s t c o m p l e x prehistoric a r c h i t e c t u r a l struc­
past was b e i n g recognized as a p r i n c i p a l value. A m o n g the
tures i n N o r t h A m e r i c a
m o s t p r o m i n e n t stakeholders o f the m o n u m e n t w e r e
• A r e g i o n a l system o f c o m m u n i t i e s centered i n
a n t h r o p o l o g i s t s a n d o t h e r scholars w h o feared the possi­
Chaco C a n y o n a n d l i n k e d b y roads a n d trade n e t w o r k s
b i l i t y o f loss o f i n f o r m a t i o n i f the archaeological remains
t h r o u g h o u t the San J u a n Basin
were n o t protected.
• 120 years o f archaeological a n d a n t h r o p o l o g i c a l
A t the same t i m e , the r u i n s i n s p i r e d awe a n d a
research i n the P a r k . . . a n d . . . m o r e t h a n 1.5 m i l l i o n arti­
n e w respect for earlier inhabitants o f the l a n d , considered
facts a n d archival d o c u m e n t s
t h e n as a vanished race. A n early d e s c r i p t i o n o f Chaco
• O t h e r links t o the past a n d t o the n a t u r a l land­
C a n y o n illustrates these sentiments w h e n i t says, "the
scape t h r o u g h c o n t e m p o r a r y A m e r i c a n I n d i a n descen­
m o s t r e m a r k a b l e r u i n s y e t discovered are those standing
dants o f Chaco C a n y o n , w h o value i t t o d a y for its s p i r i t u a l
i n N e w M e x i c o . T h e y p u t t o shame the p r i m i t i v e l o g - h u t
c o n n e c t i o n w i t h t h e i r past
o f o u r forefathers; the frame shanty o f the p r a i r i e t o w n ;
• A r e m o t e l o c a t i o n offering o p p o r t u n i t i e s t o enjoy
the d u g - o u t o f the m i n i n g regions; the adobe shelter o f
solitude, n a t u r a l quiet, clear air, starlit skies, a n d
the Pacific slope. I n size a n d g r a n d e u r o f c o n c e p t i o n , t h e y
p a n o r a m i c vistas
equal any o f the present b u i l d i n g s o f the U n i t e d States, i f
• T h e largest l o n g - t e r m p r o t e c t e d area i n n o r t h ­
w e except t h e C a p i t o l at W a s h i n g t o n , a n d m a y w i t h o u t
w e s t e r n N e w M e x i c o , w h i c h encompasses relatively
discredit be c o m p a r e d t o the P a n t h e o n a n d the Colos­
u n d i s t u r b e d examples o f floral a n d faunal c o m m u n i t i e s
s e u m o f the O l d W o r l d . " 3 2
F r o m this perspective, the early
w i t h i n the C o l o r a d o Plateau ecosystem, a n d offers o p p o r ­
stakeholder g r o u p s o f the n a t i o n a l m o n u m e n t extended
tunities t o conserve the r e g i o n s b i o d i v e r s i t y a n d m o n i t o r
b e y o n d t h e scientific c o m m u n i t y t o i n c l u d e all those w i t h
its e n v i r o n m e n t a l q u a l i t y . 35

an interest i n the past, w h o also saw i n these r u i n s the vali­

These statements present a m o r e detailed a n d
dation o f a new nation.
expanded set o f values t h a n those m e n t i o n e d i n the 1 9 0 7
Since t h e n , the archaeological resources have
p r o c l a m a t i o n . Values have deepened and expanded as a
r e m a i n e d the central focus a n d p u r p o s e o f the Park, and
result o f research, n e w perspectives, and the passage o f
o t h e r values have c o m e t o be ascribed t o t h e m a n d t h e i r
t i m e . T h e n u m b e r o f archaeological sites r e c o g n i z e d as
s u r r o u n d i n g s over t i m e . T h e present m i s s i o n statement
b e i n g o f interest a n d w o r t h y o f p r o t e c t i o n has increased
reflects the ways i n w h i c h the values as f o r m a l l y recog­
substantially. T h e Park is k n o w n t o i n c l u d e a p a r t i c u l a r
n i z e d have expanded: "Chaco C u l t u r e N a t i o n a l H i s t o r i c a l
k i n d o f feature—the great houses—that has b e e n revealed
Park provides for the preservation, p u b l i c e n j o y m e n t ,
t o be u n i q u e t o this c u l t u r e . T h e thousands o f k n o w n
study, a n d i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f the i n t e r n a t i o n a l l y significant
Chacoan sites constitute an i n t e r r e l a t e d system o f c o m ­
c u l t u r a l features a n d n a t u r a l ecosystem processes w i t h i n
m u n i c a t i o n a n d trade. K n o w n , b u t n o t officially recog­
the Park, a n d o f the associated c u l t u r a l features f o u n d
n i z e d at the t i m e o f designation, was the s u r v i v a l a n d con­
t h r o u g h o u t the s u r r o u n d i n g F o u r C o r n e r s R e g i o n . " 33
The
t i n u a t i o n l i n k i n g c o n t e m p o r a r y tribes w i t h the ancient
statement declares the o b l i g a t i o n o f the NPS t o preserve
builders a n d subsequent inhabitants o f w h a t is n o w Park
these features; t o p r o v i d e o p p o r t u n i t i e s for the p u b l i c t o
l a n d . T h e c o m m u n i t i e s o f flora a n d fauna possess a recog­
experience a n d appreciate t h e m ; t o study t h e m ; a n d t o
n i z e d interest, a n d t h e y have increased i n r a r i t y a n d
present a n d m a k e available i n f o r m a t i o n a b o u t t h e m .
i m p o r t a n c e because t h e y have b e e n p r o t e c t e d for
T h e c u r r e n t v e r s i o n o f the Resource Manage­
nearly sixty years w i t h i n the Park, w h i l e s u r r o u n d i n g
ment Plan 34
identifies the f o u r t h o u s a n d sites a n d 1.5 m i l ­
areas have b e e n g r a z e d a n d subject t o o t h e r uses over
l i o n artifacts a n d archival d o c u m e n t s , w h i c h h o l d t e n
the same p e r i o d .

70 C H A C O CULTURE N A T I O N A L HISTORICAL PARK

 T h i s section examines the values detected i n the
Park's m i s s i o n and the statements o f significance i n the
latest Resource M a n a g e m e n t P l a n . T h e emergence and
36
e v o l u t i o n o f these values are discussed u n d e r the head­
ings o f i n f o r m a t i o n value (scientific and educational),
aesthetic value, spiritual value, social value, historic value,
e n v i r o n m e n t a l value, associative/symbolic value, and
e c o n o m i c value.
Information Value—Scientific and Educational
T h e earliest descriptions o f w h a t is n o w C C N H P refer
almost exclusively t o the i m p o r t a n c e o f the Chacoan
architectural sites. T h e emphasis was o n the p o t e n t i a l o f
these remains t o p r o v i d e i n f o r m a t i o n about t h e i r creators
and early inhabitants. T h e passage o f the Antiquities Act i n
1906 was the result o f twenty-five years o f efforts o n the
p a r t o f a g r o u p o f dedicated citizens and m e m b e r s o f the
e m e r g i n g a n t h r o p o l o g i c a l profession t o save the relics o f
the past. Fascination w i t h N a t i v e A m e r i c a n antiquities
started w h e n E u r o p e a n travelers g o t t h e i r first glimpses o f
the magnificent r u i n s o f the Southwest. H o w e v e r , i t was
i n the late n i n e t e e n t h century, s h o r t l y after the c o n c l u s i o n
o f the C i v i l W a r a n d f o l l o w i n g the heyday o f the w e s t e r n
expansion, that these antiquities captured the interest o f
the scientific c o m m u n i t y o n the eastern seaboard. T h e
professionals' curiosity was c o n t i n u o u s l y fueled b y
reports and descriptions o f n e w sites; b y the creation o f
collections exhibited i n m u s e u m s i n W a s h i n g t o n , N e w
York, Philadelphia, and Boston; and b y t h e i r presentation
t o even w i d e r publics at the W o r l d ' s C o l u m b i a n Exposi­
t i o n i n Chicago i n 1893 and the Louisiana Purchase
E x p o s i t i o n i n Saint L o u i s i n 1904. 37
As research was c o n d u c t e d and the extent o f the
Chacoan culture started t o be u n d e r s t o o d , the i n f o r m a ­
t i o n value o f the archaeological resources o f Chaco
expanded t o encompass features o t h e r t h a n the architec­
t u r a l ruins. I t was obvious even i n the early years o f sci­
entific archaeology that these places w e r e evidence o f a
sophisticated culture, w i t h capacities for l a b o r organiza­
t i o n and large-scale f o o d p r o d u c t i o n . W i t h n e w tech­
niques and sensitivities t o certain k i n d s o f data b e i n g
increasingly available t o archaeologists, the field m o v e d
t o w a r d research i n t o systems i n the Southwest. Once the
general c u l t u r a l sequences i n architecture and p o t t e r y h a d
been m a p p e d o u t , the evidence from the Chacoan sites
began t o emerge, and i t d e m o n s t r a t e d that trade goods
from great distances w e r e m o v i n g a r o u n d the r e g i o n .
M o r e recently, the a s t r o n o m i c a l associations a m o n g
Chacoan sites and roads, t h e i r orientations t o the move­
m e n t o f the sun and m o o n and t o o t h e r heavenly events,
have d r a w n the a t t e n t i o n o f researchers.
T h e i n f o r m a t i o n value a t t r i b u t e d t o the Park
resides i n the remains o f the architecture, the associated
m a t e r i a l culture, the ways i n w h i c h materials w e r e
deposited i n antiquity, the evidence o f ancient lifeways,
the subtle i m p r i n t s o f activity still visible i n the landscape,
and the spatial relationships a m o n g all these elements.
I n f o r m a t i o n value provides the m o s t benefit w h e n profes­
sional research m e t h o d s are used t o study the resource.
Scientific value is the t e r m often g i v e n t o this i n f o r m a t i o n
value b y stakeholders i n v o l v e d i n academic research. T h i s
value is p a r t i c u l a r l y fragile, and, paradoxically, its preser­
v a t i o n depends t o a great extent o n n o n i n t e r v e n t i o n .
Excavation o r exposure o f physical remains inevitably
diminishes f u t u r e i n f o r m a t i o n value, so disturbance o f
any k i n d m u s t be carefully considered. As n e w technical
advances b e c o m e available t o archaeologists and techni­
cians, they are able t o extract far m o r e i n f o r m a t i o n from
physical evidence t h a n i n times past; thus, the value o f
pristine sites, authentic materials, soils, and m o r e
ephemeral subtleties increases w i t h t i m e . Logically, t h e n ,
the value o f reliable, early narrative and graphic docu­
m e n t a t i o n o f these sites and t h e i r e n v i r o n m e n t s increases
over t i m e as w e l l , as a r e c o r d o f change i n c o n d i t i o n o r
physical status.
T h e value o f archaeological materials has been
s u p p o r t e d over the years b y n a t i o n a l legislation. T h e
Antiquities Act of 1906—the first general legal p r o t e c t i o n
afforded t o the remains o f the past i n the U n i t e d States—
clearly states that archaeological and historic resources
w e r e v a l u e d at the federal level for t h e i r i m p o r t a n c e t o
science, education, and o t h e r n a t i o n a l interests and t h a t
the g o v e r n m e n t t o o k seriously its responsibility t o ensure
t h e i r p r o p e r investigation, i n t e r p r e t a t i o n , and preserva­
t i o n . Scientific and educational values are reaffirmed b y
the Historic Sites Act of 1935, the National Historic Preserva­
tion Act of 1966, and the Archaeological and Historic Preserva­
tion Act of 19J4, a m o r e sophisticated l a w that underscores
the i m p o r t a n c e o f the i n f o r m a t i o n p o t e n t i a l o f archaeo­
logical a n d historic resources. T h e Archaeological Resources
Protection Act of 1979 f u r t h e r strengthens the government's
p o s i t i o n s u p p o r t i n g the value o f archaeological resources
o n federal a n d I n d i a n lands t o scholars, the public, and
native peoples. B y r e a f f i r m i n g the value o f c u l t u r a l
remains, these acts s u p p o r t and validate the efforts o f the
NPS t o p r o t e c t the resources o f C C N H P .
U N D E R S T A N D I N G A N D P R O T E C T I N G T H E VALUES 71
 C C N H P is r i c h i n archaeological and c u l t u r a l
materials created and left b e h i n d over a p e r i o d o f m a n y
centuries. These materials bear witness n o t o n l y t o the
Anasazi people b u t also t o o t h e r inhabitants over t i m e .
T h e 1985 General M a n a g e m e n t Plan, i n an a t t e m p t t o
facilitate the p r i o r i t i z a t i o n o f p r o t e c t i o n initiatives and the
d e t e r m i n a t i o n o f appropriate uses o f the land, presented
a r a t i n g system t o establish the i m p o r t a n c e o f the differ­
ent types o f vestiges f o u n d i n the P a r k . A l t h o u g h Park
38

staff indicate that this r a n k i n g has never h a d any practical

application, i t still provides a g o o d i n d i c a t i o n o f the rela­
tive value assigned b y the NPS t o the various types o f cul­
t u r a l resources. Anasazi remains are g i v e n the highest
score, as befits those that constitute the p r i m a r y purpose
Figure z.y. Pueblo Bonito ruins. The n o t i o n o f "scenery" i n national
o f the Park. W i t h i n the Anasazi category, h a b i t a t i o n and
parks was associated early o n w i t h the aesthetic experience o f visitors.
k i v a sites are r a n k e d h i g h e r t h a n roads and trails, and
This is still the case today at CCNHP, where aesthetic considerations
h i g h e r t h a n shrines and c e r e m o n i a l sites. A r t i f a c t scatters hold a place o f prominence i n Park management. The qualities that
o r hearths and b a k i n g pits are at the l o w e r e n d o f the make the place so appealing to the visiting public do not lend them­
value scale. Remains o f earlier a n d later habitations selves easily to objective description, but they are recognized to include

received l o w e r rankings.
T h e educational value o f C C N H P is realized
w h e n the i n f o r m a t i o n o b t a i n e d t h r o u g h the research o f
experts and the k n o w l e d g e o f t r a d i t i o n a l users is c o m m u ­
nicated t o a broader audience. Visitors t o the site are
i n f o r m e d o r educated t h r o u g h o b s e r v a t i o n and t h r o u g h
the i n f o r m a t i o n and i n t e r p r e t a t i o n p r o v i d e d o n site.
O t h e r m e m b e r s o f the p u b l i c m a y g a i n access t o i n f o r m a ­
t i o n t h r o u g h reports and publications, the W o r l d W i d e
W e b , objects o n display at m u s e u m s i n the U n i t e d States
and abroad, academic courses, television p r o g r a m s , and
so o n . T h e educational value ascribed t o the Park today
goes b e y o n d the archaeological remains t o encompass all
aspects o f the site, such as N a t i v e A m e r i c a n ties and natu­
r a l resources and habitats.
the desert landscape, the panoramic vistas, and the architectural
remains. Photo: Marta de la Torre
changed l i t t l e since 1907, b u t t h e y have b e c o m e m o r e valu­
able because o f the increasing r a r i t y o f such places i n a
more crowded, more mobile w o r l d .
I n recent decades, the aesthetic value created b y
the conditions m e n t i o n e d above has been b u n d l e d w i t h
o t h e r elements and is referred t o b y Park managers as "the
q u a l i t y o f the v i s i t o r experience." T h i s q u a l i t y is seen t o
depend o n a n u m b e r o f elements that include:
• sweeping, u n i m p a i r e d v i e w s
• an u n c r o w d e d p a r k
• appreciation o f ancient sites w i t h m i n i m a l
distractions

Aesthetic Value • clear air

T h e aesthetic value o f Chaco C a n y o n was recognized • n o intrusions o f man-made noise o r l i g h t

early o n , and i t is codified i n the mandate o f the NPS (at n i g h t )

Organic Act 39
t o p r o t e c t "the scenery" u n i m p a i r e d . • clean w a t e r and adequate facilities

A l t h o u g h the o r i g i n a l designation o f Chaco as a n a t i o n a l • access t o a ranger for personal i n t e r p r e t a t i o n

T h i s " q u a l i t y o f experience" has b e c o m e a p r o m i ­
m o n u m e n t (rather t h a n a n a t i o n a l park) placed the
n e n t value articulated b y the managers o f C C N H P over
emphasis o n the p r o t e c t i o n o f the archaeological ruins
t i m e , and i t is specifically m e n t i o n e d as such i n the
and t h e i r scientific and educational values, w h e n the site
Resource M a n a g e m e n t Plan o f 1995 and the 2002 draft.
40 41

became p a r t o f the n a t i o n a l p a r k system i n 1916, i t

Its p r o t e c t i o n has b e c o m e one o f the t o p p r i o r i t i e s o f Park
assumed a n u m b e r o f values h e l d b y the n e w agency.
management, second o n l y t o the conservation o f the
T h e r e are a n u m b e r o f i n t a n g i b l e elements that
ruins. T h e i m p o r t a n c e attached t o i t is s u p p o r t e d b y
c o n t r i b u t e t o the aesthetic q u a l i t y o f the place, such as
the results o f a 1994 v i s i t o r study t h a t r a n k e d scenery,
clean air, silence, and solitude. T a k e n together, they are a
solitude, n a t u r a l setting, and c a l m atmosphere as the
p o w e r f u l value o f the Park and m o r e t h a n the simple s u m
o f the parts. T h e evocative qualities o f the landscape have

72 C H A C O CULTURE N A T I O N A L HISTORICAL PARK

m o s t appreciated values o f the Park, after its educa­
tional value. 42
Some o f the items i n the list above have i m p o r ­
tance b e y o n d the aesthetic experience. For example,
sweeping, u n i m p a i r e d vistas are inextricably t i e d t o
ancient Chacoan roads i n lands outside the Park and t o
the t r a d i t i o n a l N a t i v e A m e r i c a n v i e w s from the t o p o f the
mesas that encompass the four sacred m o u n t a i n s o f the
Navajos. T h e loss o f these vistas ( w h e t h e r from develop­
m e n t o r p o l l u t i o n ) w o u l d i m p i n g e n o t o n l y o n Chaco's
aesthetic value b u t also o n the spiritual value o f the site
for some stakeholders, as w e l l as o n the educational value
o f the C C N H P t o p r o v i d e visual evidence o f the Chaco
Phenomenon.
Spiritual Value
Native A m e r i c a n interest i n the sites o f C C N H P is
r e p o r t e d t o have been present for generations. Chaco
C a n y o n is c l a i m e d as a sacred place for m e m b e r s o f clans
and religious societies o f the H o p i o f A r i z o n a and the
Pueblos o f N e w M e x i c o . W h i l e they descend from a dif­
ferent language g r o u p and c u l t u r a l t r a d i t i o n f r o m the
Puebloans, Navajo m o v e d i n t o the area i n the late six­
t e e n t h o r seventeenth c e n t u r y and thus c l a i m a t t a c h m e n t
as w e l l . Studies c o m m i s s i o n e d b y the Park have recorded
t h a t Chaco is a place i m p o r t a n t t o N a t i v e A m e r i c a n
g r o u p s for a range o f c e r e m o n i a l activities, i n c l u d i n g the
offering o f prayers, the g a t h e r i n g o f plants and minerals,
a n d the c o l l e c t i o n o f Anasazi potsherds for use as temper­
i n g m a t e r i a l b y p o t t e r y makers. Paintings and carvings i n
the r o c k walls o f the Chaco C a n y o n s h o w m o d e r n Pueblo
religious symbols and Navajo h e a l i n g ceremonies. 43
Federal appreciation o f c o n t e m p o r a r y N a t i v e
A m e r i c a n g r o u p s ' interest i n these ancient sites is v e r y
recent. W h i l e the American Indian Religious Freedom Act of
19J8 d i d n o t create additional rights o r change existing
authorities, i t made i t a r e q u i r e m e n t t h a t federal agencies
develop means for managers t o b e c o m e i n f o r m e d a b o u t
Native A m e r i c a n religious c u l t u r e , consult w i t h t h e m
a b o u t the i m p a c t o f p r o p o s e d actions, and avoid unneces­
sary interference w i t h t r a d i t i o n a l practices. T h i s act p r o ­
v i d e d a legal framework w i t h i n w h i c h c o n s u l t a t i o n and
n e g o t i a t i o n c o u l d take place a m o n g the federal stewards
and N a t i v e A m e r i c a n stakeholders regarding activities
b e i n g considered b y either side t h a t m i g h t affect places,
animals, plants, and o t h e r federal resources o f religious
significance t o N a t i v e Americans. I t served t o signal the
f o r m a l a c k n o w l e d g m e n t o f an o n g o i n g t r a d i t i o n a l c u l t u r e
and the need for respectful c o n s u l t a t i o n t o ensure the p r o ­
t e c t i o n o f the interests o f all stakeholders involved.
Park staff have recognized the i m p o r t a n c e o f
considering N a t i v e A m e r i c a n perspectives i n the manage­
m e n t o f Chacoan sites for years. H o w e v e r , f o r m a l cooper­
a t i o n w i t h tribes came a b o u t w i t h the creation i n the early
1980s o f the Interagency M a n a g e m e n t G r o u p ( I M G ) t o
p r o v i d e d i r e c t i o n for the m a n a g e m e n t o f t h i r t y - t h r e e
Chaco A r c h e o l o g i c a l P r o t e c t i o n Sites (see map,fig 2.3).
I n 1990, the Joint M a n a g e m e n t Plan created b y the I M G
was a m e n d e d t o m a k e the NPS "responsible for adminis­
t r a t i o n o f archaeological p r o t e c t i o n sites o n Navajo
lands, and for requesting and d i s t r i b u t i n g funds t o the
Navajo Tribe for the m a n a g e m e n t o f Navajo-related
sites." These arrangements w e r e codified i n the Chacoan
44
Outliers Protection Act of 1995** T h e NPS was represented
i n the I M G i n i t i a l l y b y the NPS Regional Office i n Santa
Fe, b u t this responsibility was transferred t o C C N H P i n
the m i d 1990s. T h i s change expanded the relationship
b e t w e e n the Navajo and the Park a d m i n i s t r a t i o n , w h i c h
h a d existed for decades t h r o u g h the Navajo conservation
crews o f the Park.
I n 1990 the p o s i t i o n o f N a t i v e A m e r i c a n s was
strengthened b y the passing o f the Native American Graves
Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA), 46
mandating
c o n s u l t a t i o n w i t h tribes p r i o r t o any disturbance o f b u r i a l
sites, as w e l l as the r e t u r n o f b u r i a l objects o r h u m a n
remains t o the appropriate c u l t u r a l l y affiliated tribe.
C u l t u r a l affiliation t o h u m a n and m a t e r i a l remains exist­
i n g o r o r i g i n a t i n g from w i t h i n the boundaries o f the Park
was f o r m a l l y established i n 2000, w h e n C C N H P assigned
this status t o the Navajo N a t i o n ; the H o p i ; the Z u n i ; and
the Pueblos o f A c o m a , C o c h i t i , Isleta, Laguna, N a m b e ,
Picuris, Pojoaque, San Felipe, San Ildefonso, San Juan,
Sandia, Santa A n a , Santa Clara, Santo D o m i n g o , Taos,
Tesuque, and Z i a . 4 7
T h e issues r e l a t i n g t o c u l t u r a l affilia­
t i o n r e m a i n contentious, so w o r k continues o n assessing
specific aspects o f the claims b y some groups. These dis­
cussions have gained an i m p o r t a n c e t h a t goes b e y o n d the
concerns o f NAGPRA since they i n d i r e c t l y affect civil, land,
and w a t e r rights outside the P a r k . 48
S h o r t l y before the enactment o f NAGPRA, the
superintendent o f C C N H P f o r m e d the A m e r i c a n I n d i a n
C o n s u l t a t i o n C o m m i t t e e , the first one o f its k i n d i n the
country. T r i b a l p a r t i c i p a t i o n was k e p t i n f o r m a l , and all
N e w M e x i c o and A r i z o n a Pueblo governments, the
Navajo N a t i o n , and the A l l I n d i a n Pueblo C o u n c i l w e r e
U N D E R S T A N D I N G A N D PROTECTING T H E VALUES 73
i n v i t e d t o send representatives t o the meetings. W i t h o u t
a clear mandate, the early times o f the c o m m i t t e e are
r e p o r t e d t o have been difficult, w i t h the NPS advocating
an i n f o r m a l approach o f "let's get together and t a l k about
things o f m u t u a l i m p o r t a n c e . " F r o m the Native A m e r i ­
49
can perspective, the message is r e p o r t e d t o have been
i n t e r p r e t e d t o m e a n t h a t "the p u r p o s e o f this c o m m i t t e e
i n real Park p l a n n i n g efforts is unclear. T h e c o m m i t t e e
seems t o have devolved i n t o a k i n d o f n o m i n a l b o d y t h a t
makes the Parks' efforts l o o k g o o d w i t h o u t really d o i n g
a n y t h i n g o f substance." O v e r the years, some t r i b a l
50
g r o u p s have p a r t i c i p a t e d consistently i n the c o m m i t t e e ' s
deliberations, the consultations have b e c o m e regular, and
the advice from the tribes is g i v e n serious consideration
b y Park m a n a g e m e n t .
Laws p r o t e c t i n g religious freedom also cover the
interests o f g r o u p s and i n d i v i d u a l practitioners o f w h a t
have been called N e w A g e spiritual rites and activities. A
n u m b e r o f ancient sites a r o u n d the w o r l d have attracted
people w i s h i n g t o experience and interact w i t h these
places i n n e w and n o n t r a d i t i o n a l ways t h a t often b l e n d
aspects o f various religions and cultures. C C N H P , t o
w h i c h they ascribe spiritual value, has b e c o m e a favorite
place for these groups. T h e emergence o f n e w stakehold­
ers often complicates the m a n a g e m e n t tasks o f a u t h o r i ­
ties, since t h e y sometimes b r i n g values t h a t are different
from others o f l o n g e r standing. T h e r e c o g n i t i o n , respect,
and eventual i n t e g r a t i o n o f these n e w values i n the m a n ­
agement o f the site can give rise t o conflicts, as has been
the case i n C C N H P . These issues are explored i n m o r e
detail i n the last section o f this study.
Social Value
I n a d d i t i o n t o the spiritual c o n n e c t i o n m a n y Native A m e r ­
ican groups have t o the site, the lands o f C C N H P w e r e
h o m e t o the Navajo for several centuries, d u r i n g w h i c h
t i m e they forged c u l t u r a l a n d historical ties t o the place.
D u r i n g the first f o r t y years o f the m o n u m e n t , Navajo
"traversed the trails, r a n livestock, c o n d u c t e d sings, a n d
occupied scattered hogans a l o n g the w a s h . " 51
B y the early
1930s, NPS administrators h a d d e t e r m i n e d t h a t the graz­
i n g o f sheep was d a m a g i n g the ruins, and they started t o
evict the Navajo from the m o n u m e n t . I n 1947, the NPS
finished fencing the p e r i m e t e r o f the m o n u m e n t , and i n
1949 the last Navajo f a m i l y l i v i n g i n the site m o v e d away,
a l t h o u g h the use o f s m a l l p o r t i o n s o f the l a n d still c o n t i n ­
ues today. Scholars as w e l l as Navajo recognize that, i n
52
a d d i t i o n t o the religious values discussed above, "Navajos
retain an e m o t i o n a l tie t o m a n y places [ w i t h i n the Park],
74 C H A C O CULTURE N A T I O N A L HISTORICAL PARK
Figure2.8. Navajo cornfield. I n the late sixteenth or early seventeenth
century, Navajo groups arrived i n the area n o w occupied by the Park,
where they established camps and lived from farming and herding.
A few decades after the creation o f the national m o n u m e n t i n the
early twentieth century, NPS authorities considered that the protection
o f the ruins required the cessation o f these activities. A l t h o u g h no
longer living w i t h i n the boundaries o f the Park, many Navajo retain
family and cultural ties to the place. Photo: # 44-297. Chaco Canyon:
W i l l y George's C o r n Patch, M o c k i n g Bird Canyon. Archives, Labora­
t o r y o f Anthropology, M u s e u m o f Indian Arts & Culture, Santa Fe,
N e w Mexico.
such as f o r m e r homes, b u r i a l places o f relatives, and
places o f i m p o r t a n c e i n t h e i r religious t r a d i t i o n s . " 53
W h i l e m o s t o f the h i s t o r y used i n this case study
is t h a t constructed b y historians and archaeologists, i t is
i m p o r t a n t t o n o t e t h a t the Navajo and the Pueblo g r o u p s
see the h i s t o r y o f the r e g i o n i n a v e r y different way. Since
m a n y aspects a n d details o f these histories—as w e l l as reli­
gious and c u l t u r a l beliefs—are n o t shared w i t h outsiders,
this study can o n l y h i n t at the n u m e r o u s values a t t r i b u t e d
b y N a t i v e A m e r i c a n s t o the lands o c c u p i e d b y the Park.
Historic Value
As one o f the earliest n a t i o n a l m o n u m e n t s and later as a
f o u n d i n g u n i t o f the n a t i o n a l parks system, Chaco occu­
pies a place o f i m p o r t a n c e i n the h i s t o r y o f the NPS. B y
v i r t u e o f its status as a n a t i o n a l m o n u m e n t u n t i l 1980, the
site developed i n a p a t h t h a t was different from t h a t fol­
l o w e d b y n a t i o n a l parks. T h e significance o f the m o n u ­
m e n t was clearly u n d e r s t o o d t o reside i n its archaeologi­
cal ruins, a n d the m a i n m a n a g e m e n t objectives always
focused o n t h e m . T h e emphasis o n access and v i s i t a t i o n
o f some o t h e r NPS units o f comparable resources, such
as Mesa Verde N a t i o n a l Park nearby i n C o l o r a d o , was
absent from Chaco C a n y o n N a t i o n a l M o n u m e n t . Today
these t w o n a t i o n a l parks present a m a r k e d contrast i n the
q u a l i t y o f experience t h e y p r o v i d e for visitors, m u c h o f
w h i c h is the result o f decisions m a d e over the years.
 C C N H P also bears witness t o a c e n t u r y o f evolu­
t i o n o f the practices o f archaeology a n d preservation.
T h e research activities carried o u t o n site have reflected
the practices o f archaeologists and conservators at the
t i m e they w e r e conducted. These activities have left t h e i r
m a r k i n excavated sites and reconstructed structures. T h i s
h i s t o r y o f the Park as a heritage site is p a r t o f the i n f o r m a ­
t i o n p r o v i d e d t o visitors.
Environmental Value
T h e e n v i r o n m e n t a l qualities o f the Park can be seen t o
have t w o components. T h e first is composed o f the land-
f o r m s and w a t e r resources i n their relatively u n i m p a i r e d
c o n d i t i o n , and the plants and wildlife native t o this ecologi­
cal zone, a l o n g w i t h relict n a t u r a l c o m m u n i t i e s o f culti-
vars and other species that w e r e i n t r o d u c e d o r used i n
ancient o r historic times. As such, this constellation o f
features and elements creates an e n v i r o n m e n t that exists i n
o n l y a few places i n the w o r l d . T h e second i m p o r t a n t qual­
i t y resides i n r a r i t y These kinds o f m i c r o e n v i r o n m e n t s are
b e c o m i n g less c o m m o n over t i m e , and one exists at
C C N H P today because i t has been protected for decades
from the damage caused b y grazing, m i n i n g , air and w a t e r
p o l l u t i o n , and the i n t r o d u c t i o n o f exotic species.
Early i n the t w e n t i e t h century, e n v i r o n m e n t a l
degradation was n o t a significant w o r r y for the NPS at
Chaco C a n y o n . Livestock w e r e g r a z e d i n areas o f the
n a t i o n a l m o n u m e n t for years w i t h o u t t h e i r i m p a c t o n the
landscape ever b e c o m i n g a concern. T h e eventual banish­
m e n t o f herds and flocks from the site was m o t i v a t e d b y
the damage they w e r e causing t o the ruins. Ecological
concerns d i d , however, eventually reach the Park from the
outside w o r l d . Public awareness o f the fragile nature o f
the ecology o f the planet began t o f l o w e r i n the 1960s, as a
reaction t o the d a m a g i n g effects o f p o p u l a t i o n g r o w t h
and little r e g u l a t i o n o f large-scale industry, m i n i n g , o r
agriculture. T h e U.S. Congress began t o respond t o the
g r o u n d s w e l l o f p u b l i c c o n c e r n for the e n v i r o n m e n t w i t h
piecemeal legislation, and Congress eventually passed the
comprehensive National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) o f
1969. T h i s act, and later its a m e n d m e n t s , 54
converted i n t o
federal p o l i c y the g r o w i n g r e c o g n i t i o n o f the responsibil­
i t y o f the federal g o v e r n m e n t t o p r o t e c t the q u a l i t y o f the
environment. 55
Regulations for all NPS units t o c o m p l y
w i t h this legislation came i n the f o r m o f m a n a g e m e n t
guidelines p r o t e c t i n g the e n v i r o n m e n t . As was the case
56
for the i n f o r m a t i o n value o f the archaeological resources,
the n a t u r a l values o f the Park w e r e also enhanced as a
result o f n a t i o n a l legislation.
T h e regeneration o f the ecosystem o f C C N H P —
as a result o f the almost c o m p l e t e e l i m i n a t i o n o f g r a z i n g
and o t h e r d a m a g i n g uses—has t r a n s f o r m e d the Park i n t o
a reservoir for the Navajo o f m e d i c a l and c e r e m o n i a l
plants and i n t o an i m p o r t a n t source for scientific research.
Some o f the conflicts that have arisen as a result o f this sit­
u a t i o n are discussed i n the next section.
Associative (Symbolic) Value
M a n y individuals attribute great value t o the experiencing
o f a site physically and t h r o u g h the senses. T h i s value has
been w e l l explored i n r e l a t i o n w i t h n a t u r a l sites, w h e r e i t
has been called naturalistic value, defined as the direct
experience and e x p l o r a t i o n o f nature that satisfies curios­
ity, discovery, and r e c r e a t i o n . I n the c u l t u r a l w o r l d , this
57
value has been called associative o r s y m b o l i c . T h e quan­ 58
t i t y and i m p o r t a n c e o f the archaeological elements f o u n d
i n Chaco C a n y o n and the s u r r o u n d i n g area, as w e l l as the
undeveloped character o f the site, give the place a s t r o n g
associative value. I n the m o d e r n w o r l d , this value can be
experienced virtually, b u t w i t h o u t d o u b t , i t is strongest
w h e n visitors are able t o experience the reality o f the tan­
gible remains o f the past. T h i s value comes o u t v e r y
strongly i n the 1994 visitors study, w h i c h f o u n d that "visi­
tors at Chaco desire a physical e n v i r o n m e n t w h e r e inde­
pendence and access t o ruins are achievable, Park facilities
are few and p r i m i t i v e , and an interpretative approach is
self guided. T h i s is necessary for t h e m t o experience the
physical and interpretative aspect o f the h i s t o r y depicted
at Chaco o n a m o r e personal, introspective l e v e l . " 59
T h i s value closely depends o n the a u t h e n t i c i t y
o f the ruins and the vistas and terrains that have r e m a i n e d
relatively u n c h a n g e d over centuries. I t is also a key ele­
m e n t o f the " q u a l i t y o f the experience" m e n t i o n e d above.
A l t h o u g h the existence o f this value is n o t arti­
culated i n any C C N H P d o c u m e n t , the m e n t i o n made
often o f the Park as a "special place," as w e l l as the preoc­
c u p a t i o n w i t h the conservation o f the authentic remains
and w i t h m a i n t a i n i n g a certain "atmosphere" i n the Park,
can be i n t e r p r e t e d as a tacit r e c o g n i t i o n o f a s t r o n g asso­
ciative value.
Economic Value
O n e o f the first values associated w i t h the Chacoan ruins
was the artifacts f o u n d i n t h e m . W h i l e a b i g p a r t o f the
interest was m o t i v a t e d b y scientific curiosity, there was an
e c o n o m i c value i m p l i c i t i n the g a t h e r i n g o f artifacts t o be
sold t o m u s e u m s and collectors. T h i s e c o n o m i c value is
still u p h e l d b y those i n v o l v e d i n the trade o f N a t i v e A m e r ­
ican antiquities, w h o often derive significant financial
U N D E R S T A N D I N G A N D P R O T E C T I N G T H E VALUES 75
benefits f r o m t h e i r endeavors. T h i s e c o n o m i c value is seen
t o be negative and d e t r i m e n t a l i n m a n y heritage quarters,
since the p u r s u i t o f its benefits results i n the l o o t i n g
o f sites.
I n a d d i t i o n t o the m o n e t a r y value o f artifacts,
one o f the strongest sources o f e c o n o m i c value o f sites
depends o n the use o f the l a n d . I n general, this aspect o f
e c o n o m i c value is the area w h e r e the interests o f stake­
holders create the m o s t serious—and m o s t p u b l i c —
conflicts. A t C C N H P , as i n m a n y o t h e r heritage sites, the
m o s t significant e c o n o m i c value lies i n alternative o r addi­
t i o n a l uses t h a t can be m a d e o f the Park and the s u r r o u n d ­
i n g l a n d . T h e e c o n o m i c benefits t h a t b e c o m e unrealizable
f r o m lands p r o t e c t e d as n a t i o n a l parks o r w i l d l i f e sanctu­
aries have always been a c o n c e r n o f farmers and ranchers
o f the w e s t e r n U.S. These g r o u p s presented the strongest
o p p o s i t i o n t o the preservation m o v e m e n t , since "preserv­
i n g the u n i q u e b u t obscure heritage o f the r e g i o n r e q u i r e d
the w i t h d r a w a l o f lands t h a t c o n t a i n e d tangible ruins.
M o r e often t h a n n o t , these lands also i n c l u d e d resources
that had commercial value." 60
T h e San Juan Basin is k n o w n t o c o n t a i n signi­
ficant u n d e r g r o u n d resources o f coal, u r a n i u m , n a t u r a l
gas, and o i l , a n d there are active coal a n d u r a n i u m mines
i n the lands n e i g h b o r i n g the Park. T h e subsurface rights
i n certain areas o f the Park are n o t h e l d b y the NPS, and,
theoretically, m i n e r a l , o i l , and gas e x p l o r a t i o n and
e x p l o i t a t i o n c o u l d take place there. I n the 1970s and 1980s,
the threats posed b y the e x p l o i t a t i o n o f these resources
w e r e so i m m e d i a t e t h a t they p r o m p t e d legislation
expanding the surface o f the Park and creating a d d i t i o n a l
p r o t e c t e d zones t h a t c o n t a i n archaeological remains. T h e
1985 General M a n a g e m e n t Plan for C C N H P has a s t r o n g
focus o n the challenges that w o u l d emerge i f i n d u s t r i a l
concerns became interested i n e x p l o i t i n g the resources
w i t h i n the Park and i f there w e r e a r a p i d d e v e l o p m e n t
o f t h e s u r r o u n d i n g areas. S o m e o f these issues have
61
receded i n t o the b a c k g r o u n d , since the price o f these
resources i n recent times has m a d e t h e i r e x p l o i t a t i o n
u n e c o n o m i c . T h i s has b r o u g h t a b o u t a decrease i n this
t y p e o f activity, b u t circumstances c o u l d w e l l change
i n the f u t u r e .
O t h e r alternative uses o f the l a n d t h a t w o u l d
b r i n g e c o n o m i c benefits t o some stakeholder g r o u p s
include cattle and sheep g r a z i n g . T h e Navajo used Park
lands for t h e i r herds and flocks for centuries, and i t is o n l y
i n recent years that this practice has started t o be phased
o u t . Today, a p p r o x i m a t e l y 121 hectares (300 acres) i n the
76 C H A C O CULTURE N A T I O N A L HISTORICAL PARK
w e s t e r n sector o f the Park are p r i v a t e l y o w n e d allocations
o n w h i c h sheep and cattle are still grazed.
T h e Park also has an e c o n o m i c value for the sur­
r o u n d i n g c o m m u n i t i e s . A t present, some local families
derive t h e i r l i v e l i h o o d from e m p l o y m e n t i n the Park,
m a i n l y as p a r t o f the c o n s e r v a t i o n crews. T h e Park also
has a p o t e n t i a l e c o n o m i c value for the s u r r o u n d i n g c o m ­
m u n i t i e s i f they w e r e t o develop services for visitors, such
as a c c o m m o d a t i o n s a n d f o o d . W h i l e this has n o t yet hap­
pened, a project t o b u i l d a h o t e l o v e r l o o k i n g the Park—
w i t h serious p o t e n t i a l o f h a v i n g an i m p a c t o n m a n y o f the
values o f the site—was canceled, n o t because o f concerns
a b o u t the Park, b u t because o f a shift i n the priorities o f
the Navajo N a t i o n .
World Heritage Value
W h e n C C N H P was n o m i n a t e d t o the W o r l d H e r i t a g e
List i n 1984, the NPS h a d t o consider w h i c h o f the values
a t t r i b u t e d t o the Park h a d an o u t s t a n d i n g universal, r a t h e r
t h a n a n a t i o n a l o r local, d i m e n s i o n . I n the context o f the
W o r l d H e r i t a g e C o n v e n t i o n , outstanding universal value is
"taken t o m e a n c u l t u r a l a n d / o r n a t u r a l significance w h i c h
is so exceptional as t o transcend n a t i o n a l boundaries and
t o be o f c o m m o n i m p o r t a n c e for present and f u t u r e gen­
erations o f all h u m a n i t y . " T h e site was p r o p o s e d as
62
m e e t i n g a c r i t e r i o n t h a t recognizes sites t h a t bear a u n i q u e
t e s t i m o n y t o a civilization t h a t has disappeared. T h e 1984
d o c u m e n t s described the site as p r e s e r v i n g "the physical
remains o f the Chacoans; a u n i q u e p o p u l a t i o n o f a cul­
t u r e t h a t has been extinct for hundreds o f years." 63
The
n o m i n a t i o n u n d e r w e n t an i m p o r t a n t m o d i f i c a t i o n t h a t
l e d t o the i n c l u s i o n o f several o t h e r n e i g h b o r i n g Chacoan
sites as p a r t o f the W o r l d H e r i t a g e Site. T h i s expansion,
suggested b y the W o r l d H e r i t a g e C o m m i t t e e , recognized
that the Chacoan civilization and its remains are n o t
confined t o the area covered b y C C N H P . 6 4
I n considering the values o f i n d i v i d u a l sites, the
criteria o f the W o r l d H e r i t a g e C o n v e n t i o n have also
evolved over t i m e . I n 1992 the W o r l d H e r i t a g e Opera­
t i o n a l Guidelines w e r e m o d i f i e d t o a l l o w the i n s c r i p t i o n o f
C u l t u r a l Landscapes. T h e U n i t e d States c o u l d request t h a t
the i n s c r i p t i o n o f C C N H P i n the W o r l d H e r i t a g e List be
r e e x a m i n e d u n d e r the n e w category o f relict a n d associa­
tive c u l t u r a l landscapes. T h i s w o u l d recognize the u n i ­
65
versal value o f the m o r e - i n t a n g i b l e elements o f the site,
such as viewsheds and spatial relationships.
The management documents o f C C N H P do n o t
address specifically the values o f the site as specified i n the
W o r l d H e r i t a g e n o m i n a t i o n materials, a l t h o u g h they
m e n t i o n its i n t e r n a t i o n a l significance. T h i s does n o t i m p l y
that the universal values are n o t b e i n g protected; rather, i t
seems t o m e a n that the values associated w i t h Chaco,
according t o the c r i t e r i o n u n d e r w h i c h i t was inscribed i n
1987, are encompassed w i t h i n the values already recog­
n i z e d and protected.
STAKEHOLDERS
C C N H P authorities identify "professional archaeologists
and c u l t u r a l anthropologists; N a t i v e A m e r i c a n tribes;
state, county, city and t r i b a l governments; and ' N e w A g e '
religious followers" as the Park's p r i n c i p a l constituen­
cies. D e f i n i n g stakeholders as any g r o u p w i t h l e g i t i m a t e
66
interest i n the Park, and based o n the previous analysis o f
the values ascribed t o it, the list c o u l d be expanded t o
include o t h e r professionals and researchers, such as envi­
ronmentalists, zoologists, and botanists; Congress and
some g o v e r n m e n t agencies, such as the B u r e a u o f L a n d
M a n a g e m e n t , the B u r e a u o f I n d i a n Affairs, and the U.S.
Forest Service; o t h e r NPS units w i t h Puebloan and Cha-
coan sites; neighbors, local landowners, and t h e i r business
c o m m u n i t i e s ; t o u r i s m agencies; visitors, campers, and
o t h e r recreational travelers; the general U.S. public; and
the i n t e r n a t i o n a l c o m m u n i t y , as represented b y the W o r l d
H e r i t a g e C o m m i t t e e and U N E S C O .
C C N H P ' s stakeholders certainly never gather at
the same table, n o r do they speak w i t h equal force. Some
o f the stakeholders do n o t visit, o r have any contact w i t h ,
the Park. Some are o n l y interested i n the e c o n o m i c value
o f the l a n d for alternative uses and h o l d this value h i g h e r
t h a n any o f the others. I n some cases, the values o f stake­
holders are irreconcilable.
Some conflicts b e t w e e n stakeholders' values at
C C N H P have been resolved (or at least simplified) outside
the arena o f the Park b y the i n t r o d u c t i o n o f n e w legisla­
t i o n o r regulations, shifts i n authority, o r changes i n p r i o r i ­
ties. I n some instances, the values are s i m p l y i g n o r e d , so
as n o t t o raise interest (and therefore p o t e n t i a l conflict)
from any quarter. Conflicts over subsurface m i n e r a l
rights, for example, can p i t legal o w n e r s h i p and develop­
m e n t rights against the need t o safeguard air and w a t e r
q u a l i t y and against the r e q u i r e m e n t t o p r o t e c t ruins f r o m
damage. H o w e v e r , the conflict m a y be d o r m a n t u n t i l
another energy crisis emerges o r u n t i l some o t h e r issue
changes the c u r r e n t situation.
Consultations w i t h Native A m e r i c a n groups,
particularly those culturally affiliated w i t h the Park, are
supported, and t o some extent mandated, b y NAGPRA.
C C N H P created its A m e r i c a n I n d i a n C o n s u l t a t i o n C o m ­
m i t t e e i n a n t i c i p a t i o n o f NAGPRA, and i t continues t o con­
sult i t extensively o n matters related t o the use and conser­
v a t i o n o f the site.
A l t h o u g h the o n l y official consultative g r o u p
associated w i t h the Park is that o f N a t i v e Americans, the
superintendent and staff o f C C N H P m a i n t a i n a c o m p l e x
n e t w o r k o f stakeholder relationships. A great deal o f
effort is g i v e n t o c u l t i v a t i n g contacts w i t h local stakehold­
ers and decision makers i n n e i g h b o r i n g t o w n s .
T h e Park superintendent a n d staff also adhere
to a good-neighbor p o l i c y t o w a r d o t h e r Chacoan sites i n
the r e g i o n . T h i s p o l i c y leads t o close c o l l a b o r a t i o n w i t h
o t h e r NPS units, t r i b a l c u l t u r a l resource officers, and state
p a r k authorities.
EVOLUTION OF VALUES
F r o m a c o m p a r i s o n o f the values o f the Park w h e n i t was
first established w i t h those a t t r i b u t e d t o i t now, i t is clear
that t i m e has b r o u g h t a b o u t e v o l u t i o n and expansion
t h r o u g h n e w k n o w l e d g e and t h r o u g h enhanced apprecia­
t i o n o f c u l t u r a l traditions and the benefits o f p r o t e c t i n g
a fragile landscape. As this e v o l u t i o n has happened, the
o r i g i n a l i n f o r m a t i o n and associative values have b e c o m e
stronger. Some o f the o t h e r values, such as the spiritual
and social ones h e l d b y Native A m e r i c a n groups, w e r e
always present, b u t they h a d t o w a i t u n t i l quite recently
for f o r m a l r e c o g n i t i o n from federal authorities. T h e
spiritual value o f the site for some N e w A g e adherents
has emerged m o r e recently o n this ancient site, and i t is
rather m o r e difficult t o integrate i n t o a m a n a g e m e n t
strategy, g i v e n the conflict b e t w e e n t h e i r practices and
those o f the l o n g e r - t e r m Native A m e r i c a n stakeholders.
Others, such as the n a t u r a l o r ecological values, have
e m e r g e d as society as a w h o l e recognized the i m p o r t a n c e
o f these values, i n n a t i o n a l parks and elsewhere. I n all,
t h e n , the e n r i c h m e n t and deepening o f the values o f the
site have also increased the site's significance.
Consideration of Values in M a n a g e m e n t
Policies a n d S t r a t e g i e s
T h i s section examines h o w the values ascribed t o the Park
or established t h r o u g h n a t i o n a l laws and o t h e r federal
provisions h a v i n g the force o f l a w figure i n c u r r e n t m a n ­
agement policies, strategies, and objectives at C C N H P .
Answers t o the question o f h o w values are taken i n t o con­
sideration i n the m a n a g e m e n t policies, strategies, and
objectives have been gleaned from existing documenta­
t i o n , conversations w i t h NPS and Park staff, and observa­
tions on-site.
U N D E R S T A N D I N G A N D P R O T E C T I N G T H E VALUES 77
 CURRENT GUIDANCE
T h e NPS has an impressive b o d y o f policies, regulations,
a n d guidelines t h a t a t t e m p t t o standardize, i f n o t the deci­
sions i n t h e parks, certainly t h e criteria and the processes
used t o reach t h e m . T h e p u r p o s e o f this guidance is t o
ensure f u l f i l l m e n t o f the agency's m a n d a t e t o p r o t e c t a n d
manage the great v a r i e t y o f n a t i o n a l l y significant areas
u n d e r its care w i t h o u t " d e r o g a t i o n o f the values a n d p u r ­
poses for w h i c h these various areas have been
established" 67
and t o c o m p l y w i t h federal laws a n d regula­
tions relevant t o p a r k operations. T h i s w e i g h t y p o l i c y
f r a m e w o r k m u s t still a l l o w field p e r s o n n e l t h e flexibility
needed t o m a k e decisions appropriate t o t h e c o n d i t i o n s o f
the i n d i v i d u a l parks.
T h e n e w NPS M a n a g e m e n t Policies 2001 requires
f o u r p l a n n i n g processes at p a r k level: general manage­
m e n t p l a n n i n g , strategic p l a n n i n g , i m p l e m e n t a t i o n plan­
n i n g , a n d annual p e r f o r m a n c e p l a n n i n g . W i t h i n this
68
f r a m e w o r k , p l a n n i n g proceeds f r o m b r o a d m a n a g e m e n t
concerns t o specific i m p l e m e n t a t i o n p r o g r a m s . Each p a r t
o f the process is set t o result i n w r i t t e n plans. H o w e v e r ,
these n e w policies w i l l be i m p l e m e n t e d gradually, a n d n o t
all parks are i n c o m p l i a n c e w i t h the p l a n n i n g require­
m e n t s yet. I n the case o f C C N H P , the m a i n m a n a g e m e n t
d o c u m e n t s c u r r e n t l y i n force are the G e n e r a l Manage­
m e n t Plan o f 1985, the Strategic Plan for 2001-05, the
Resource M a n a g e m e n t Plan o f 1995, a n d the Chaco
A r c h e o l o g i c a l P r o t e c t i o n Site System J o i n t M a n a g e m e n t
Plan o f 1983 ( w i t h its 1990 a m e n d m e n t ) 6 9
T h e seventeen-year-old G e n e r a l M a n a g e m e n t
Plan is n o t regarded as obsolete b y staff, b u t i t is used p r i n ­
cipally as a list o f actions from w h i c h the superintendent
can select some for i m p l e m e n t a t i o n . 70
T h i s p l a n c a n n o t be
characterized as a strategic d o c u m e n t . Rather, i t focuses
o n c e r t a i n m a t t e r s t h a t w e r e considered p r o b l e m a t i c at
the t i m e a n d identifies specific actions t o be u n d e r t a k e n .
Some o f the issues t h a t w e r e critical i n 1985—such as the
e x p l o i t a t i o n o f n a t u r a l resources a r o u n d the Park a n d a
possible e x p o n e n t i a l g r o w t h i n p o p u l a t i o n i n t h e area a n d
i n t h e n u m b e r o f P a r k visitors—have failed t o m a t e r i a l i z e
or have faded i n t o the b a c k g r o u n d . For these reasons, the
usefulness o f the 1985 G e n e r a l M a n a g e m e n t Plan for the
purposes o f this study is l i m i t e d , since i t n o l o n g e r reflects
the m a i n preoccupations o f Park staff. I n t e r m s o f day-to­
day operations a n d the actions t h a t m o s t directly affect
a n d reflect values, the m o s t relevant d o c u m e n t s are the
Resource M a n a g e m e n t Plan o f 1995 a n d the m o r e recent
one i n draft f o r m . 7 1
78 C H A C O CULTURE N A T I O N A L HISTORICAL PARK
T h e research u n d e r t a k e n for this study i d e n t i f i e d
three m a n a g e m e n t p r i o r i t i e s at C C N H P :
• p r o t e c t i o n o f the archaeological resources
• p r o v i s i o n o f a h i g h - q u a l i t y experience for
visitors
• c o m p l i a n c e w i t h legal, statutory, a n d o p e r a t i o n a l
requirements 72
T h e r e s t o r a t i o n o f the n a t u r a l ecosystems is also
a c o n c e r n , b u t t o a lesser degree t h a n the o t h e r three, as
i n d i c a t e d i n the 2002 draft o f t h e Resource M a n a g e m e n t
Plan, w h i c h states, " w h i l e b o t h c u l t u r a l a n d n a t u r a l
p r e s e r v a t i o n efforts are c o m p a t i b l e , conflicts m a y arise.
I n these instances, g i v e n the legislative p u r p o s e o f the
Park, m a n a g e m e n t o f c u l t u r a l resources w i l l be favored
over m a n a g e m e n t o f n a t u r a l resources." 73
T h e m i s s i o n statement o f C C N H P also speaks o f
f o u r m a i n areas o f a c t i v i t y — p r e s e r v a t i o n , p u b l i c enjoy­
m e n t , research, a n d i n t e r p r e t a t i o n . These f o u r areas have
b e e n used i n this study t o organize the discussion i n this
a n d the n e x t sections. I t s h o u l d be n o t e d that, i n m o s t
instances, all policies have an i m p a c t o n many, i f n o t all,
values o f a place. Some impacts are i n t e n t i o n a l a n d antici­
pated; others are n o t . A p o l i c y can also have a positive
effect o n a g i v e n aspect o f a value, w h i l e at the same t i m e
negatively affecting some o f its o t h e r dimensions. O n e o f
the benefits o f values-based m a n a g e m e n t is t h a t i t
increases the awareness o f these impacts t h r o u g h the
m o n i t o r i n g o f values. T h e discussions t h a t f o l l o w a t t e m p t
t o identify b o t h positive a n d negative results o f policies, i n
o r d e r t o illustrate the r e a l i t y a n d c o m p l e x i t y o f manage­
m e n t decisions; these discussions s h o u l d n o t be c o n s t r u e d
as a c r i t i c i s m o f C C N H P m a n a g e m e n t .
PRESERVATION POLICIES
Conservation of Cultural Resources
I n accordance w i t h the f o u n d i n g p u r p o s e o f the Park a n d
w i t h subsequent legislation, the c o n s e r v a t i o n o f c u l t u r a l
resources is the first p r i o r i t y o f C C N H P . T h e m a i n p o l i c y
i n this area seeks t o avoid i m p a i r m e n t o f the archaeological
resources b y d i s t u r b i n g t h e m as l i t t l e as possible. T h r e e
strategies are b e i n g e m p l o y e d : m i n i m i z i n g physical inter­
v e n t i o n a n d f a v o r i n g noninvasive actions; a v o i d i n g expo­
sure t o the elements; a n d l i m i t i n g access.
A l t h o u g h reconstruction o f architectural ruins
was carried o u t d u r i n g the early years o f the Park, this
approach was abandoned decades ago. M o s t o f the cur­
r e n t c o n s e r v a t i o n w o r k on-site consists o f stabilization
o f t h e r u i n s , backfilling, drainage c o n t r o l , a n d e r o s i o n
m a n a g e m e n t . O t h e r passive c o n s e r v a t i o n measures are

Figure2.9. Reburial teams w o r k i n g i n the field. Over the last decade,
the Parks cultural resource management team has implemented a pro­
g r a m o f reburial and backfilling o f excavated structures. W h i l e these
methods have proved to be effective i n terms o f conservation, they
hide from view the totality or parts o f the archaeological resources.
The criteria used to select the sites for backfilling l o o k at the interpreta­
t i o n strategies o f the Park, the materials under consideration, the
fragility o f the structures, and the degree o f maintenance that the sites
w o u l d require i f left exposed. Reburied sites are regularly monitored.
Photo: Guillermo Aldana
also e m p l o y e d and consist o f barriers that prevent access,
o f d o c u m e n t a t i o n , and o f m o n i t o r i n g . T h i s m i n i m a l
i n t e r v e n t i o n approach, together w i t h the p o l i c y o f allow­
i n g archaeological excavations o n l y i n extreme cases,
protects b o t h the physical remains and the i n f o r m a t i o n
they c o n t a i n .
T h e r e are a p p r o x i m a t e l y 1,250 sites i n the Park
classified as Active Preservation Sites. These i n c l u d e sev­
eral h u n d r e d o f the largest and m o s t exposed structures,
all excavated sites, sites w h e r e research and analysis are
g o i n g o n , sites t h a t require r o u t i n e o r cyclical t r e a t m e n t ,
and sites actively threatened b y erosion. T h e c o n d i t i o n o f
150 o f these sites is assessed o n a regular basis, a n d a b o u t
f o r t y sites t h a t are considered v e r y sensitive are e x a m i n e d
every year. A l l o t h e r sites are considered Passive Preserva­
t i o n Sites, and characteristically t h e y are l o w - m a i n t e n a n c e
sites t h a t are partially exposed o r b u r i e d , relatively stable,
unexcavated o r pristine, and n o t actively i n t e r p r e t e d .
Restricting public access t o the r u i n s is a preserva­
t i o n strategy t h a t has been used i n C C N H P for decades.
T h i s strategy is also manifested i n attempts m a d e t o l i m i t
the n u m b e r o f visitors c o m i n g t o the Park (discussed
b e l o w u n d e r "Public E n j o y m e n t Policies") and the
resources t h a t are accessible t o those w h o d o arrive. W i t h
over four t h o u s a n d k n o w n archaeological sites i n the
Park, m o s t o f those t h a t have been excavated are n o w
reburied. A p p r o x i m a t e l y fifty sites are b e i n g i n t e r p r e t e d
and are o p e n t o visitors. T h e rest o f the exposed r u i n s are
i n w h a t is classified as b a c k c o u n t r y an area t h a t can be vis­
i t e d w i t h p e r m i s s i o n from Park m a n a g e m e n t .
L i m i t i n g excavations t o those t h a t are absolutely
essential is also a p a r t o f the preservation strategy at
Chaco, as i t is i n m o s t o t h e r n a t i o n a l parks. As p a r t o f the
p o l i c y o f m i n i m i z i n g i n t e r v e n t i o n s t o the site, C C N H P
has p o i n t e d scholarly research requests t o the materials
that are already excavated. T h i s p o l i c y is s u p p o r t e d b y
w o r k designed t o enhance access t o the 1.5 m i l l i o n objects
y i e l d e d over the years from excavations at Chaco and sur­
r o u n d i n g sites. A few objects are e x h i b i t e d at the V i s i t o r
Center, b u t m o s t o f the collections are h e l d at the Univer­
sity o f N e w M e x i c o i n A l b u q u e r q u e . NPS policies s u p p o r t
this strategy, and additional funds have b e e n allocated for
the c o n s t r u c t i o n o f i m p r o v e d storage and study facilities
at the university, as w e l l as t o i m p r o v e databases, w h i c h
w i l l facilitate access b y scholars.
Chacoan Resources outside the Park
T h e i n v o l v e m e n t o f C C N H P i n the p r o t e c t i o n o f
resources outside its boundaries has c o m e a b o u t as a
result o f legislation, rather t h a n Park policy. I n 1980, legis­
lation 75
established the Chaco C u l t u r e A r c h e o l o g i c a l Pro­
t e c t i o n Site p r o g r a m t o manage and p r o t e c t t h i r t y - t h r e e
Chacoan sites located o n t r i b a l o r federal lands, outside
the j u r i s d i c t i o n o f the NPS. T h e r e are, however, t h o u ­
sands o f o t h e r sites, m a n y o f t h e m i n privately h e l d lands
that r e m a i n w i t h o u t any p r o t e c t i o n , and over w h i c h NPS
has n o influence or j u r i s d i c t i o n .
A m e n d m e n t s t o the Chaco C u l t u r e A r c h e o l o g i ­
cal P r o t e c t i o n Site System J o i n t M a n a g e m e n t P l a n 76
have
made C C N H P responsible for the a d m i n i s t r a t i o n o f sites
located i n Navajo lands, and for requesting and distribut­
i n g funds t o the Navajo N a t i o n for the m a n a g e m e n t o f
these sites. These arrangements have b r o u g h t a b o u t a
close w o r k i n g relationship b e t w e e n the Park staff and
Navajo c u l t u r a l specialists. As w i t h the conservation o f
resources inside the Park, the objectives o f the manage­
m e n t o f these external resources are t o m a i n t a i n t h e i r
74
i n t e g r i t y as remains from the past a n d t o preserve the
i n f o r m a t i o n a l value they e m b o d y C o n s e r v a t i o n policies
and strategies o f m i n i m a l disturbance have b e e n adopted
for sites located i n Navajo lands. I n contrast t o Park
resources, these sites are s e l d o m o p e n t o visitors.
Conservation of Natural Resources
N a t u r a l resources have recently started t o receive m o r e
a t t e n t i o n from Park staff as a result o f legislation, direc­
tives from NPS a d m i n i s t r a t i o n a n d executive orders, and
U N D E R S T A N D I N G A N DP R O T E C T I N G T H E VALUES 79
the availability o f funds for t h e i r study a n d p r o t e c t i o n .
T h e stated l o n g - t e r m objective is t o a l l o w n a t u r a l
processes t o take over, w i t h f u l l k n o w l e d g e t h a t this w i l l
n o t restore the l a n d t o Chaco-era c o n d i t i o n s . As m e n ­
t i o n e d before, the p r o t e c t i o n o f these resources can never
be the t o p p r i o r i t y o f the Park, a n d i t is r e c o g n i z e d t h a t i f
conflicts w e r e t o arise b e t w e e n t h e i r p r e s e r v a t i o n and t h a t
o f c u l t u r a l resources, the latter w o u l d be f a v o r e d . 77
A t this t i m e , m u c h o f the activity i n n a t u r a l
resource m a n a g e m e n t is directed at c o m p l y i n g w i t h legal
or NPS p o l i c y r e q u i r e m e n t s . I t consists o f species i n v e n t o ­
ries a n d m a p p i n g , baseline data c o l l e c t i o n , a n d various
k i n d s o f i m p a c t studies. E r o s i o n c o n t r o l w o r k c o u l d be
considered as e n v i r o n m e n t a l p r o t e c t i o n efforts; neverthe­
less, the p r i n c i p a l purpose o f such w o r k is the preserva­
t i o n o f the r u i n s . O t h e r actions are directed at the protec­
t i o n o f w a t e r a n d air quality, as m a n d a t e d b y legislation
and NPS directives.
A t first glance, the i m p a c t o f p o l l u t i o n o n the
resources o f the Park does n o t appear t o be as serious as
o t h e r threats. H o w e v e r , any d e t e r i o r a t i o n o f air q u a l i t y
w o u l d affect the viewsheds o f the Park and, i f extreme,
c o u l d c o n t r i b u t e t o the physical d e g r a d a t i o n o f archaeo­
l o g i c a l materials. B y l i m i t i n g the n u m b e r o f vehicles a n d
visitors, Park managers are e n s u r i n g a l o w level o f a m b i ­
ent c o n t a m i n a t i o n i n the i m m e d i a t e e n v i r o n m e n t . For
areas outside NPS j u r i s d i c t i o n , there is p r o t e c t i v e legisla­
t i o n t h a t m a y be e m p l o y e d w h e n e v e r p r o b l e m s t h r e a t e n
to encroach o n the i n t e g r i t y o f the site. T h e Park has sev­
eral m o n i t o r i n g efforts u n d e r w a y t o collect data o n air
quality, w a t e r quality, a n d o t h e r indicators, so t h a t any
changes w i l l be i m m e d i a t e l y evident a n d managers m a y
take appropriate action. These k i n d s o f activities, i n c l u d ­
i n g fire m a n a g e m e n t p l a n n i n g , are largely preventive con­
servation o n a large scale a n d are a i m e d t o w a r d prepara­
t i o n for dealing w i t h p r o b l e m s before t h e y affect the
archaeological resources o r the q u a l i t y o f the v i s i t o r expe­
rience, as discussed below.
PUBLIC ENJOYMENT POLICIES
Policies i n the area o f p u b l i c e n j o y m e n t fall i n t o t w o m a i n
categories: those d i r e c t e d at t h e c o n d i t i o n s f o u n d b y visi­
tors i n the Park a n d those related t o access t o the site.
Some o f the elements t h a t guarantee the q u a l i t y o f the
v i s i t o r s ' experience are covered b y legislation a n d b y
b r o a d NPS directives, such as those c o n c e r n e d w i t h air
quality, extraneous sounds, a n d so o n . Others, such as the
choice o f h a v i n g i n t e r p r e t a t i o n delivered b y Park rangers
rather t h a n b y descriptive panels, o r l i m i t a t i o n s o n the
80 C H A C O CULTURE N A T I O N A L HISTORICAL PARK
d e v e l o p m e n t o f the Park, are the result o f C C N H P p o l i c y
decisions.
T h e q u a l i t y o f the v i s i t o r experience sought
b y C C N H P staff can o n l y be achieved i f the n u m b e r o f
visitors is k e p t relatively low, and this a i m has b e c o m e a
d r i v i n g p r e o c c u p a t i o n over the years. Perhaps the m o s t
o b v i o u s manifestations o f this c o n c e r n are the efforts
m a d e t o isolate the site b y l i m i t i n g access from several
existing c o u n t y roads a n d b y k e e p i n g the m a i n r o a d t o
the Park unpaved. T h i s unpaved entrance r o a d c o u l d be
said t o have b e c o m e a s y m b o l o f p r o t e c t i o n i n Park l o r e .
A l t h o u g h this r o u g h 25.5-kilometer (16-mile) ride can be
a p a r t i a l deterrent, p a r t i c u l a r l y i n w i n t e r and d u r i n g the
r a i n y season, o t h e r factors can be said t o be as i m p o r t a n t
i n k e e p i n g v i s i t o r n u m b e r s d o w n , such as the distance
f r o m o v e r n i g h t a c c o m m o d a t i o n s a n d the lack o f facilities
on-site. 78
T h e l o w level o f d e v e l o p m e n t on-site has been a
long-standing p o l i c y o f C C N H P . I n the o p i n i o n o f some
NPS staff, this p o l i c y came about, a n d has been m a i n ­
tained, as a result o f the n a t i o n a l m o n u m e n t status t h a t
the site h a d for m a n y decades. T h e "undeveloped" q u a l i t y
o f the Park is seen as a great asset, b y b o t h Park staff a n d
visitors. 79
T h e emphasis o n v i s i t o r access f o u n d i n the
n a t i o n a l parks seems t o have b e e n absent from the
n a t i o n a l m o n u m e n t s , w h e r e the p r i m a r y c o n c e r n has
been the p r o t e c t i o n o f the c u l t u r a l , historic, o r scientific
resources o f the units.
I n m o s t c u l t u r a l sites, values are affected and
often b r o u g h t i n t o conflict over issues o f conservation,
access, a n d the q u a l i t y o f the v i s i t o r experience. C C N H P
is n o exception, as is i l l u s t r a t e d b y decisions r e g a r d i n g the
Park's c a m p g r o u n d . T h e 1985 General M a n a g e m e n t Plan
calls for the c r e a t i o n o f a n e w and larger c a m p g r o u n d
closer t o the entrance o f the Park, i n the G a l l o W a s h . 80
T h e justifications for m o v i n g the c a m p g r o u n d from the
old location were conservation (campgrounds were too
close t o u n i q u e cliff dwellings) a n d t h e safety a n d enjoy­
m e n t o f visitors ( c a m p i n g facilities w e r e located w i t h i n
the one-hundred-year f l o o d p l a i n a n d t o o close t o the
access road). Seventeen years later, the c a m p g r o u n d
remains i n its o r i g i n a l place. Park m a n a g e m e n t explains
t h a t m o r e - d e t a i l e d studies i n v a l i d a t e d some o f the 1985
rationale, since the m o v e t o G a l l o W a s h i m p l i e d develop­
m e n t o f a pristine area, r i c h i n archaeological remains,
w h i l e the cliff dwellings close t o the o l d campsite are seen
to have already b e e n subjected t o m a n y decades o f con­
tact w i t h visitors. T h e campsite m o v e w o u l d also have
r e q u i r e d a considerable i n v e s t m e n t and g r o u n d distur-
bance t o b r i n g w a t e r a n d electricity t o the n e w site. I n this
p a r t i c u l a r case, the i n f o r m a t i o n a n d scientific values o f
the pristine G a l l o W a s h area, as w e l l as practical consider­
ations, prevailed over v i s i t o r convenience a n d c o m f o r t .
T h e m a j o r i t y o f Park visitors are tourists w h o
c o m e m a i n l y for educational o r recreational reasons. 81
T h e r e are o t h e r g r o u p s w h o s e interest is o f a different
nature, a n d t h e y w o u l d like t o use the site i n different
ways. Some N a t i v e A m e r i c a n g r o u p s fall i n t o this cate­
gory. H o w e v e r , the o v e r a r c h i n g g o a l o f p r o t e c t i o n o f the
c u l t u r a l a n d n a t u r a l resources has p r e c l u d e d certain activi­
ties t h a t N a t i v e A m e r i c a n s consider t o be t h e i r r i g h t a n d
o b l i g a t i o n , such as the g a t h e r i n g o f plants a n d the per­
f o r m a n c e o f certain rituals.
T h e social and spiritual values o f C C N H P t o
Native Americans, N e w Agers, and o t h e r interest g r o u p s
are vested t o a considerable extent i n the p r o t e c t e d setting
o f the Park. T h e General M a n a g e m e n t Plan states, "a key
element is the concept o f m a i n t a i n i n g the existing scene—
the canyon ambience—so t h a t the m a j o r r u i n s can be
experienced and i n t e r p r e t e d i n a setting m u c h like the
e n v i r o n m e n t that s u p p o r t e d the daily existence o f the
Chacoan i n h a b i t a n t s . " L e a v i n g aside discussion as t o
82
w h e t h e r the o r i g i n a l e n v i r o n m e n t o f the Chacoan age can,
i n fact, be recaptured, i n effect, the m a n a g e m e n t strategies
p r o t e c t the possibility o f spiritual experience at the site b y
k e e p i n g distractions t o a m i n i m u m . W h i l e f o r b i d d e n b y
l a w t o favor the practice o f one r e l i g i o n over another, the
stance o f the Park protects the interests o f those w i t h a
spiritual interest i n the Park b y e x c l u d i n g activities that
c o u l d c o m p r o m i s e the i n t e g r i t y o f the setting. Paradoxi­
cally, regulations designed t o p r o t e c t the ruins l i m i t access
t o certain places a n d can prevent stakeholders from u s i n g
the Park for t h e i r ceremonies o r rituals.
R E S E A R C H POLICIES
I n line w i t h its m a n d a t e t o "facilitate research activities o n
the u n i q u e archaeological resources," C C N H P has a
research p o l i c y based o n c o l l a b o r a t i o n w i t h o t h e r NPS
units, educational institutions, i n d e p e n d e n t scholars, a n d
t r i b a l and state g o v e r n m e n t s . T h e research p r i o r i t i e s o f
the Park are developed i n accordance w i t h the Chaco
Research P l a n n i n g Strategy. T h e projects c u r r e n t l y
identified are i n t e n d e d t o fill i n f o r m a t i o n gaps needed for
i n t e r p r e t a t i o n , m a n a g e m e n t , a n d preservation, o r t o c o m ­
p l y w i t h c u l t u r a l resources a n d e n v i r o n m e n t a l laws a n d
NPS p o l i c i e s . 83
T h e Park's long-standing collaborative research
strategy has p a r t n e r e d C C N H P w i t h o t h e r i n s t i t u t i o n s
a n d academic groups, such as t h e School o f A m e r i c a n
Research i n Santa Fe a n d the S m i t h s o n i a n I n s t i t u t i o n . O f
p a r t i c u l a r i m p o r t a n c e was the Chaco Center Project
(1969-81), a j o i n t endeavor o f the NPS a n d the U n i v e r s i t y
o f N e w M e x i c o , a n d one o f the largest archaeological
research projects ever u n d e r t a k e n i n the U.S. T h e Chaco
Center Project consisted m a i n l y o f fieldwork a n d the p u b ­
l i c a t i o n o f results o f this a n d o t h e r research activities.
Starting i n 1971, the p r o j e c t l o c a t e d a n d appraised the
archaeological remains i n the Park a n d adjacent lands.
O v e r one t h o u s a n d sites w e r e identified, and t w e n t y - f i v e
sites w e r e excavated as p a r t o f the w o r k . T h e project's p i o ­
n e e r i n g use o f r e m o t e sensing aided i n i d e n t i f y i n g the pre­
historic r o a d system t h a t radiated o u t w a r d from Chaco
C a n y o n t o connect n u m e r o u s o u t l y i n g Chacoan c o m m u ­
nities i n the r e g i o n . T h e Chaco Center Project h a d a
84
s t r o n g influence d u r i n g the 1980s o n the i n t e r p r e t a t i o n
presented at the Park. M o r e recently, a n e w effort o f the
U n i v e r s i t y o f C o l o r a d o - B o u l d e r a n d the NPS aims t o syn­
thesize the findings o f the earlier project and m a k e t h e m
m o r e available.
A t the c o n c l u s i o n o f the Chaco Center Project i n
1981, C C N H P a d o p t e d a p o l i c y o f l i m i t e d archaeological
excavations. A l l excavation proposals are r e v i e w e d b y Park
staff a n d presented t o the A m e r i c a n I n d i a n C o n s u l t a t i o n
C o m m i t t e e ; a l m o s t w i t h o u t exception, requests are
denied. Park personnel s u p p o r t this p o s i t i o n because i t
avoids exposing n e w structures and sites t h a t require
active conservation. N a t i v e A m e r i c a n s t e n d t o oppose
excavation because o f concerns a b o u t d i s t u r b i n g h u m a n
remains and sacred sites. T h i s p o l i c y gives p r i o r i t y t o the
values o f N a t i v e A m e r i c a n s a n d t o the p r o t e c t i o n o f
f u t u r e p o t e n t i a l i n f o r m a t i o n value over the value o f infor­
m a t i o n i n the present.
INTERPRETATION AND
DISSEMINATION POLICIES
I n t e r p r e t a t i o n at C C N H P is done according t o the m a i n
lines o f a p r o g r a m established b y the 1991 Statement for
I n t e r p r e t a t i o n and I n t e r i m Interpretive Prospectus. 85
This
d o c u m e n t identifies seven p r i m a r y concerns regarding
i n t e r p r e t a t i o n : " p r o m o t i n g safety, lessening i m p a c t t o
resources due t o increasing v i s i t a t i o n b y explaining t o the
p u b l i c i n t e r n a l and external threats t o the resources, t e l l i n g
a c o m p l e t e Park story, fostering sensitivity t o w a r d A m e r i ­
can I n d i a n v i e w s o f Chaco and archaeology, developing
better c o m m u n i t y relations t h r o u g h outreach services,
responding t o interpretive needs o f special populations,
U N D E R S T A N D I N G A N DP R O T E C T I N G T H E VALUES 8l
and i n t e r p r e t i n g Chaco C u l t u r e as a designated W o r l d
H e r i t a g e Site." 86
I n addition, c u r r e n t i n t e r p r e t a t i o n p r i o r i t i e s
emphasize c o n s u l t a t i o n w i t h N a t i v e A m e r i c a n stakehold­
ers and the i n c o r p o r a t i o n o f t h e i r v i e w s and beliefs i n the
stories t o l d . T h e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n available at the site
includes i n f o r m a t i o n about the c o n s e r v a t i o n o f the
archaeological resources. T h e topics and perspectives pre­
sented i n the i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f the site acknowledge the
m u l t i p l i c i t y o f values attached t o the Park.
A t the site, i n t e r p r e t a t i o n and i n f o r m a t i o n are
available at the V i s i t o r Center ( t h r o u g h a small e x h i b i t i o n ,
interpretive videos, l i t e r a t u r e for sale, o r h u m a n contact
at the i n f o r m a t i o n desk) o r f r o m regularly offered t o u r s
w i t h Park rangers. I n t e r p r e t i v e panels and o t h e r i n f o r m a ­
t i o n i n situ are l i m i t e d t o signs stating the sacredness o f
the place and t o s m a l l b o o k l e t s sold at some o f the m a j o r
sites. Some o f the i m p o r t a n t sites o f the Park t h a t are n o t
o p e n t o visitors, like Fajada B u t t e , are m a d e accessible b y
o t h e r means—publications and audiovisual presentations
i n the V i s i t o r Center.
T h e p o l i c y o f r e l y i n g o n h u m a n interpreters o n -
site is considered b y Park m a n a g e m e n t t o be w e l l suited t o
the t e l l i n g o f the v e r y c o m p l e x Chaco s t o r y T h e contact
o f visitors w i t h Park rangers a n d the absence o f signs o r
interpretative panels i n the r u i n s are believed t o con­
t r i b u t e t o the q u a l i t y o f the experience, i n p a r t i c u l a r b y
enhancing the associative value o f the place. I n a d d i t i o n ,
the presence o f rangers a r o u n d the site is believed t o dis­
courage v a n d a l i s m and i n a p p r o p r i a t e v i s i t o r behavior.
H o w e v e r , the m a j o r i t y o f Chaco visitors i n t e r v i e w e d for
the 1 9 9 4 v i s i t o r survey s t r o n g l y preferred the f r e e d o m t o
visit the site i n d e p e n d e n t l y and t o rely o n brochures and
site panels for i n t e r p r e t a t i o n . 88
Despite the emphasis o n q u a l i t y o f experience,
certain circumstances—some o f t h e m outside the Park's
c o n t r o l and others created b y policy—have an i m p a c t o n
i n t e r p r e t a t i o n . I n general, the biggest l i m i t i n g factors are
the v e r y short t i m e that visitors are usually able t o spend
i n the Park and the lack o f access t o some critical areas o f
the Park. W i t h the nearest o v e r n i g h t a c c o m m o d a t i o n s
(except for the Park's c a m p g r o u n d ) located an h o u r and a
h a l f away, travel t i m e t o a n d from the Park consumes at
least three h o u r s o f m o s t visitors' day—and often as m u c h
as five. A l m o s t h a l f the visitors spend b e t w e e n t w o a n d six
h o u r s v i s i t i n g the P a r k . T h e e x h i b i t i o n and the audiovi­
89
sual presentations at the V i s i t o r Center p r o v i d e a g o o d
82 C H A C O CULTURE N A T I O N A L HISTORICAL PARK
i n t r o d u c t i o n t o the site, b u t they can occupy another h o u r
o r m o r e , s h o r t e n i n g f u r t h e r the t i m e the v i s i t o r has for
87
direct contact w i t h Park resources.
T h e area encompassed b y the Park is extensive,
b u t the m a j o r i t y o f o p e n archaeological sites are located
a r o u n d the l o o p r o a d . Access t o the t o p o f the n o r t h mesa
a n d t o the v i e w s afforded b y t h a t vantage p o i n t can give
visitors a clearer u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f the Chaco Phenome­
n o n , i n c l u d i n g the system o f roads. T h e Chaco Center
Project i n c l u d e d extensive research and w o r k at Pueblo
A l t o , a great house o n t o p o f the n o r t h mesa. T h i s site was
selected, a m o n g o t h e r reasons, because m a n y o f the roads
l i n k i n g Chaco C a n y o n w i t h sites t o the n o r t h converged
there, and " i t was felt t h a t the excavated and restored site
c o u l d play an i m p o r t a n t p a r t i n the interpretative s t o r y
presented t o visitors b y the N a t i o n a l Park Service." 90
Today o n l y a small percentage o f visitors have t h a t experi­
ence, since the mesa tops can o n l y be reached t h r o u g h a
difficult c l i m b u p the r o c k face, c h a l l e n g i n g even for able-
b o d i e d visitors.
L i k e all o t h e r parks i n the NPS system, C C N H P
uses the I n t e r n e t t o p r o v i d e i n f o r m a t i o n t o the p u b l i c .
T h e Park's W e b site is less developed t h a n t h a t o f o t h e r
parks i n the system, b u t i t contains practical as w e l l as his­
t o r i c a l i n f o r m a t i o n . Currently, interpretative p r i o r i t i e s
include expanding educational o u t r e a c h o p p o r t u n i t i e s
a n d developing a Chaco-based c u r r i c u l u m . A l t h o u g h
i n f o r m a t i o n a b o u t the Park appears i n every NPS m a p o f
the system and is listed i n the N a t i o n a l Park Foundation's
Passport to the Parks, recent Park m a n a g e m e n t has fol­
l o w e d a strategy o f d i s c o u r a g i n g p u b l i c i t y locally and
nationally. T h i s has been v i e w e d as an i m p o r t a n t factor i n
c o n t r o l l i n g the n u m b e r o f visitors, and thus the conserva­
t i o n o f the resources and the q u a l i t y o f the visit. T h e
i m p a c t o f these policies and strategies is discussed i n the
next section, o n the q u a l i t y o f the visitors' experience.
T h e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n policies o f the Park emphasize
the educational value o f the site. I n t e r p r e t a t i o n is seen as
an o p p o r t u n i t y t o c o m m u n i c a t e the s t o r y o f Chaco t o the
public (actual visitors t o the site, p o t e n t i a l visitors and the
interested p u b l i c t h r o u g h w r i t t e n and o t h e r m e d i a , and
v i r t u a l visitors o n the W o r l d W i d e W e b ) . T h e topics for
i n t e r p r e t a t i o n , however, extend b e y o n d the factual infor­
m a t i o n o r c o m m u n i c a t i o n a b o u t the Chaco stories. A t
C C N H P , i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o p p o r t u n i t i e s are seized t o c o m ­
m u n i c a t e m o s t o f the values o f the Park: scientific, educa­
t i o n a l , aesthetic, historic, n a t u r a l , and spiritual.
 I m p a c t o f M a n a g e m e n t Policies o n the Fajada Butte
Site's V a l u e s a n d Their P r e s e r v a t i o n
Fajada Butte is a p r o m i n e n t geological f o r m a ­
T h i s final section o f the case l o o k s at the i m p a c t o n the
site o f the policies identified earlier. I t also examines three t i o n o n the eastern end o f the Park. Near its
specific issues—the closing o f Fajada B u t t e , access t o Casa
top, o n the eastern cliff, there are three large,
Rinconada, a n d the q u a l i t y o f visitors' experience—as
illustrations o f m a n a g e m e n t decisions. shaped stone slabs positioned vertically against
T h e NPS provides guidance t o field personnel
t w o spiral petroglyphs. T h i s "Sun Dagger"
t h r o u g h its strategic plans, m a n a g e m e n t policies, and
director s orders. Nevertheless, these directives leave con­ e n g r a v i n g was u n k n o w n t o the NPS u n t i l its
siderable discretion t o the superintendents, so that t h e i r
discovery by A n n a Sofaer and her colleagues
actions and responses can be appropriate t o t h e i r parks'
specific conditions. I n a d d i t i o n t o these regulations, super­ i n 1977. Sofaer i n t e r p r e t e d her t i m e d observa­
1

intendents m u s t take i n t o consideration the resources—

b o t h h u m a n and financial—available t o t h e m , and they
m u s t set priorities consistent w i t h the spirit o f the m i s s i o n
and mandate o f the park.
Management decisions have i m p a c t o n areas or
issues that are b e y o n d those o f i m m e d i a t e consideration.
A l t h o u g h values-based management seeks t o protect,
tions o f the p o s i t i o n o f the sun and m o o n rela­
tive t o the assemblage t o indicate that i t
m a r k e d solstices and equinoxes and o t h e r
astronomical events; some challenged her
claims. I n the late 1980s, Sofaer and her col­
2

t o the largest extent possible, all the values o f a site, the

t o t a l p r o t e c t i o n o f all values—or o f all aspects o f a given leagues reevaluated and reaffirmed their earlier
value—is seldom possible. These are inevitable conse­
i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f the Sun Dagger as a calendri-
quences o f decision m a k i n g , and they are the reason w h y i t
is extremely i m p o r t a n t t o understand h o w values are cal m a r k e r and also n o t e d the existence o f a
affected b y specific decisions.
t o t a l o f t h i r t e e n astronomical glyphs at three
This section is organized according t o the type o f
policy b e i n g discussed. However, the interrelation a m o n g different locations o n the b u t t e . 3

values and the m u l t i p l e effects o f decisions w i l l be clearly

evident, as the same issues are sometimes raised i n relation
t o several policies. T h e discussions raise positive and nega­
tive effects o f decisions i n order t o illustrate the realities and
complexity o f management.
Despite the controversy over the significance
o f the Fajada Butte petroglyphs and other
assemblages t o Chaco's prehistoric inhabitants,

IMPACT OF PRESERVATION AND Sofaer's findings i m m e d i a t e l y d r e w the interest

RESEARCH POLICIES
o f c o n t e m p o r a r y Native Americans as w e l l as
As has been established, the legislative purpose o f C C N H P
gives undisputed p r i o r i t y t o the preservation o f the c u l t u r a l n o n - N a t i v e Americans. This interest i n t u r n
features o f the Park—more specifically, t o the Anasazi
increased visitation t o the butte. W h e n Park
archaeological remains. B u t as also seen earlier, the values
attributed t o these resources are varied and evolving. Since managers became concerned about the site's
m o s t o f the preservation policies o f C C N H P are m e a n t t o
stability, the superintendent p r o h i b i t e d access
protect—physically—the archaeological materials and
structures, their i m p a c t o n other values can vary. to the butte i n 1982 except for visits a u t h o r i z e d
T h e conservation p o l i c y o f m i n i m a l i n t e r v e n t i o n
by p e r m i t .
o n the f a b r i c — m a i n l y reburial and stabilization—meets
w i t h the approval o f m o s t Native A m e r i c a n groups. F r o m
their perspective, this conservation approach l i m i t s the
[continued on page 8y]

U N D E R S T A N D I N G A N D P R O T E C T I N G T H E VALUES 83
 T h e 1985 C C N H P General M a n a g e m e n t Plan
specifies that "use o f Fajada B u t t e w i l l be b y
p e r m i t o n l y and w i l l be restricted t o N a t i v e
A m e r i c a n s u s i n g the site for r e l i g i o u s purposes
(requests for access t o be s u p p o r t e d b y t r i b a l
leaders, i n c l u d i n g religious leaders);
researchers w i t h antiquities p e r m i t s o r w i t h
research proposals approved b y the superin­
tendent, after c o n s u l t a t i o n w i t h the D i v i s i o n o f
A n t h r o p o l o g y , Southwest C u l t u r a l Resources
Center, a n d cleared o n l y w h e n the p r o p o s e d
research is nondestructive; and, N a t i o n a l Park
Service personnel o n well-justified official busi­
ness approved b y the
superintendent." T h e 4
d o c u m e n t also recog­
nizes p o t e n t i a l safety
hazards t o visitors i n its
reasons for l i m i t i n g
v i s i t o r access.
I n 1989 Park staff discov­
ered t h a t even these
l i m i t e d activities w e r e
causing damage. O n the
s u m m e r solstice o f t h a t
year, Park staff became
aware that t w o o f the three vertical slabs h a d
shifted. T h i s m o v e m e n t prevented the petro-
g l y p h spirals f r o m accurately m a r k i n g astro­
n o m i c a l events. A n NPS study t o evaluate the
causes and extent o f the damage c o n c l u d e d
that the site is e x t r e m e l y fragile a n d t h a t even
84 C H A C O CULTURE N A T I O N A L HISTORICAL PARK
l i m i t e d access accelerates n o r m a l e r o s i o n
processes. T h e study also r e c o m m e n d e d stabi­
l i z a t i o n o f the site a n d reevaluation o f the site's
use policy. I n 1 9 9 0 access t o the site was closed
to everyone, i n c l u d i n g researchers a n d tradi­
t i o n a l users, p e n d i n g c o m p l e t i o n o f a manage­
m e n t p l a n for the area a n d stabilization o f the
Sun Dagger solstice m a r k e r . Since t h e n , the
5
o n l y access a l l o w e d has been b y NPS e m p l o y ­
ees t o m o n i t o r conditions. A 1 9 9 4 e t h n o g r a p h i c
s t u d y questioned w h e t h e r the site s h o u l d be
6
closed t o all N a t i v e A m e r i c a n s o r w h e t h e r i t
s h o u l d be o p e n t o the c e r e m o n i a l activities o f
Sun Dagger. As a geological formation, Fajada Butte has always
been a striking feature o f Chaco Canyon. I t was not u n t i l 1977,
however, that the existence o f a Native American marker o n top o f
the butte became k n o w n . Today several Native American groups
claim the Sun Dagger, as w e l l as other areas o n and around the
butte, as culturally significant. A slight shift i n the position o f the
stones o f the Sun Dagger has skewed its alignment w i t h astronomi­
cal events. Currently, access to the butte is l i m i t e d to m o n i t o r i n g
visits by NPS personnel. Photo: Courtesy National Park Service,
Chaco Culture N H P Collection Archives.
some approved m e m b e r s o f tribes d e t e r m i n e d example o f historic ceremonial use o f the b u t t e

t o be t r a d i t i o n a l l y associated w i t h the site. p r i o r t o 1977. 8

I m p o r t a n t questions i n a l l o w i n g privileged use

O t h e r questions raised b y the 1994 study are
o f Fajada B u t t e b y N a t i v e A m e r i c a n s w o u l d be
w h e t h e r all o f Fajada B u t t e s h o u l d be o f f l i m i t s
w h e t h e r these g r o u p s t r a d i t i o n a l l y used the
t o visitors, o r w h e t h e r some parts s h o u l d be
b u t t e for c e r e m o n i a l and o t h e r purposes, o r
accessible t o some groups. Officially, the Park
w h e t h e r use began after the 1977 "discovery" o f
has o n l y closed access t o the u p p e r p a r t o f the
the Sun Dagger. Those questions are difficult
b u t t e , as indicated b y the Federal Register notice
t o answer, since Native A m e r i c a n s have tended
o f closure, w h i c h specifies t h a t the b u t t e w i l l
t o keep i n f o r m a t i o n about t h e i r sacred places
be closed " f r o m the t o p o f the talus slope, i.e.,
and ceremonies secret. 7

c o n t o u r i n t e r v a l 6400," and the crevice o n the

9

M a n y o f the representatives i n t e r v i e w e d for the s o u t h face, p r o v i d i n g access t o the t o p has been

1994 study offered interpretations, w h i c h some­ b l o c k e d w i t h a m e t a l grate. However, visitors

times varied, o f Anasazi use o f prehistoric cul­ are t u r n e d away w e l l before they reach this

t u r a l features, as w e l l as i n f o r m a t i o n about the p o i n t ; signs o n the access p a t h and at the base

vegetation and minerals o n and a r o u n d the o f the b u t t e indicate t h a t the site is o f f l i m i t s .

butte, based u p o n k n o w l e d g e o f their o w n cul­ T h i s s i t u a t i o n gave rise t o the request that as

t u r a l systems. However, an ethnohistorical liter­ p a r t o f the 1994 study, Native Americans be

ature review f o u n d n o evidence o f historical use asked t o define the boundaries o f Fajada B u t t e

o f any Chaco C a n y o n resource b y Rio Grande t o see h o w t h a t b o u n d a r y compares w i t h the

Pueblos p r i o r t o the mid-1980s, a l t h o u g h some Park administration's p e r c e p t i o n o f w h a t is or

o f these tribes have visited the Park for ceremo­ s h o u l d be closed. 10

nial purposes since then. N o r have contempo­

NPS's c o n c e r n started w i t h damage t o the Sun
r a r y Z u n i ceremonial o r other uses at Fajada
Dagger. T h e r e are o t h e r c u l t u r a l features that
Butte been identified. T h e research also indi­
are c u r r e n t l y w i t h i n the inaccessible areas. T h e
cated that the Navajo have i m p o r t a n t historical
1994 study, i n p a r t t h r o u g h i n t e r v i e w s w i t h
and traditional associations w i t h Fajada Butte
Native A m e r i c a n residents o f the area, identi­
(including h a v i n g a story i n their o r a l traditions
fied the f o l l o w i n g c u l t u r a l c o m p o n e n t s i m p o r ­
explaining the o r i g i n o f the butte), and revealed
t a n t t o Native A m e r i c a n s today, listed i n the
a 1974 account o f the b u t t e as a place w h e r e
order they appear w h e n the b u t t e is ascended: 11

Navajo gathered plants. I n general, t h o u g h , this

one instance from the Navajo is the o n l y precise

U N D E R S T A N D I N G A N D P R O T E C T I N G T H E VALUES 85
 • plants used b y N a t i v e A m e r i c a n s T h i s case raises the difficult q u e s t i o n o f dealing

• historical f a m i l y l i v i n g quarters, b o t h n o r t h w i t h social values a t t r i b u t e d t o heritage sites

a n d s o u t h o f Fajada B u t t e b y t r a d i t i o n a l c u l t u r e groups. Should—or,

• p e t r o g l y p h panel away from the base o f m o r e t o the p o i n t , could—NPS g r a n t special

Fajada B u t t e access t o N a t i v e A m e r i c a n s t o Fajada B u t t e

• historic h o g a n o n flank o f Fajada B u t t e w h i l e e x c l u d i n g o t h e r groups, such as N e w A g e

• minerals adherents? T h e issues raised i n r e l a t i o n t o the

• calendars and symbols near roofs o f astronomers' decisions o n Casa Rinconada indicated t h a t

rooms NPS considers t h a t any special-access arrange­

• r o o m s w h e r e astronomers are believed t o ments t h a t exclude o t h e r g r o u p s w o u l d be n o t

have lived o n l y against p o l i c y b u t also u n c o n s t i t u t i o n a l .

• Sun Dagger I f this is a p o s i t i o n that is accepted w i t h o u t fur­

• eagle's nest t h e r analysis, i t puts i n t o q u e s t i o n w h e t h e r the

• c o n t e m p o r a r y c e r e m o n i a l area NPS can respect and p r o t e c t the values o f all

• prayer shrine stakeholders o f a site.

I t s h o u l d be n o t e d t h a t the value o f all o f these

features t o N a t i v e A m e r i c a n s contrasts sharply

Notes
w i t h the perceptions h e l d b y n o n - N a t i v e

A m e r i c a n s c o n c e r n i n g Fajada B u t t e , w h i c h 1. For an in-depth discussion o f the significance o f Fajada

Butte, see Stoffle et al. 1994.
essentially define its significance i n t e r m s o f
2. Sofaer et al. 1982a.
the Sun Dagger. 12

3. Ibid.

4. NPS 1985,54-
I n the Park's e x a m i n a t i o n o f h o w t o proceed i n
5. NPS 1990b.
m a n a g i n g Fajada Butte, i t requested i n p u t from 6. Stoffle et al. 1994.

Native Americans t o g a i n t h e i r views o n the
subject. Stoffle and colleagues r e p o r t that "most
I n d i a n representatives w o u l d define all o f Fajada
7. I t is c o m m o n for only certain members o f clans or tribes to
possess knowledge concerning sacred sites and ceremonies.
Secrecy w i t h respect to non-Native Americans has also
arisen because o f a history o f non-Native Americans inten­
tionally desecrating sacred sites.

Butte o f f l i m i t s t o all n o n - I n d i a n activity." 13

8. Wozniak, Brugge, and Lange 1993,18-21; Stoffle et al. 1994,
26-32.
T h e y r e c o m m e n d e d boundaries t o p r o t e c t the
9. NPS 1999.
areas o f value t o t h e m , w h i c h coincide w i t h the 10. Stoffle et al. 1994,37.

measures taken b y Park management. T h e 11. Ibid., 38-39.

12. Ibid., 38.

i r o n y is that the area defined b y Native A m e r i ­
13. Ibid., 48.
cans has become o f f l i m i t s t o t h e m t o o .

86 C H A C O CULTURE N A T I O N A L HISTORICAL PARK

efforts t o preserve the ancestral heritage that some believe
s h o u l d be left t o f o l l o w a n a t u r a l course o f decay. Some
archaeologists also s u p p o r t the use o f these conservation
methods, w h i c h they see as p r o t e c t i n g the i n f o r m a t i o n
value o f the archaeological record. T h e c u r r e n t p o l i c y
t h a t allows excavation o n l y o n v e r y rare occasions also
reflects the approach o f m i n i m a l disturbance o f the
archaeological remains. N a t i v e A m e r i c a n g r o u p s s u p p o r t
l i m i t i n g excavations, since this stance concords w i t h cul­
t u r a l beliefs t h a t these sites s h o u l d r e m a i n u n d i s t u r b e d .
T h e Society for A m e r i c a n A r c h a e o l o g y also takes the posi­
t i o n that " m o d e r n archaeology, i n fact, frequently requires
n o excavation b u t depends u p o n the study o f existing col­
lections and i n f o r m a t i o n r e p o r t e d i n scientific publica­
tions. Instead o f d i g g i n g , archaeologists b r i n g n e w tech­
nologies and m e t h o d s t o bear u p o n materials excavated
earlier." I n d i v i d u a l archaeologists, however, are m o r e
91
reluctant t o accept this policy, as evidenced b y the o n ­
g o i n g requests for permissions t o excavate.
T h e excavation p o l i c y protects the p o t e n t i a l for
i n f o r m a t i o n v a l u e d b y academics and the i n t e g r i t y v a l u e d
by Native Americans. I t reserves the resources for f u t u r e
investigation, l i m i t i n g the i n f o r m a t i o n value t o t h a t w h i c h
can be realized from nondestructive research activities.
T h e emphasis o n the s u r v i v a l o f the physical remains
addresses the associative value o f the Park b y p r o t e c t i n g
the i n t e g r i t y and a u t h e n t i c i t y o f the remains.
T h e conservation policies o f C C N H P also p r o ­
tect m a n y o t h e r values a t t r i b u t e d t o the site. T h e protec­
t i o n that has b e e n g i v e n t o p l a n t a n d a n i m a l c o m m u n i t i e s
i n the Park has created a sanctuary w i t h u n u s u a l o r rare
conditions o f interest t o the scholarly c o m m u n i t y and t o
Native A m e r i c a n groups. T h e s t a t u t o r y and o p e r a t i o n a l
constraints o n unnecessary disturbance o f the e n v i r o n ­
m e n t — s u c h as the Park p o l i c y o f c o n t r o l over g r a z i n g and
m i n e r a l e x p l o r a t i o n — c a n increase the value g i v e n t o the
resources' i n f o r m a t i o n p o t e n t i a l , w h i l e at the same t i m e
i m p i n g i n g o n o t h e r values, such as the spiritual and cul­
t u r a l values o f Native Americans, as w e l l as the e c o n o m i c
value t o those w h o w o u l d prefer t o e x p l o i t Park lands for
alternative uses.
T h e r e are a n u m b e r o f laws and NPS directives
for the p r o t e c t i o n and m a n a g e m e n t o f n a t u r a l resources
that c o u l d be said t o w o r k against some o f the c u l t u r a l
values o f C C N H P . For example, the executive order t h a t
restricts the i n t r o d u c t i o n o f "exotic" (nonnative) species
i n t o n a t u r a l ecosystems i n federal lands, i f i n t e r p r e t e d lit­
erally o r enforced strictly, w i l l l i m i t the options o f plants
t h a t c o u l d be used i n erosion c o n t r o l strategies t o p r o t e c t
the archaeological r e m a i n s . 92
I n other instances, strict enforcement o f the regu­
lations against r e m o v i n g any resources—cultural o r
n a t u r a l — f r o m the parks impinges o n Native A m e r i c a n
practices o f gathering plants and other materials for medic­
inal and r i t u a l purposes and creates an interesting conflict
b e t w e e n values. T h e i m p o r t a n c e o f the Park's resources for
these purposes is heightened b y the depletion o f m a n y o f
these species from nearby lands b y g r a z i n g and other uses. 93
T h e 1985 General M a n a g e m e n t P l a n allows n o n ­
94
destructive uses o f the site and establishes that p e r m i s s i o n
is r e q u i r e d for anyone, i n c l u d i n g Native Americans, t o
gather materials. D u r i n g the p e r i o d o f consultation o f the
plan, the Navajo N a t i o n objected t o these provisions as "an
i n t r u s i o n o n the privacy and independence o f Navajo cere­
m o n i a l life," b u t the p e r m i s s i o n r e q u i r e m e n t stood 9 5
C C N H P strictly follows the NPS p o l i c y that collecting
materials on-site is n o t allowed; unofficially, staff recognize
that some collecting is likely t o be t a k i n g place. I n this par­
ticular situation, the conflict goes b e y o n d an issue o f differ­
ent values. T h e r e is a c o n t r a d i c t i o n b e t w e e n stipulations i n
the Native A m e r i c a n Relations Policy r e q u i r i n g respect o f
religious ceremonies and traditions; the General Manage­
m e n t Plan; and the American Indian Religious Freedom Act
o n one side; and, o n the other side, the p r o h i b i t i o n s o f
r e m o v i n g a n y t h i n g from n a t i o n a l parks f o u n d i n federal
r e g u l a t i o n s and the Archaeological Resources Protection Act
96
of 1979. T h e NPS M a n a g e m e n t Policies 2001 recognize the
conflict and indicate t h a t "these regulations are u n d e r
review, and NPS p o l i c y is e v o l v i n g i n this area." 97
CULTURAL LANDSCAPES
NPS has recently p r o p o s e d a study o f the c u l t u r a l land­
scape o f C C N H P . T h e NPS defines a c u l t u r a l landscape as
"a geographic area, i n c l u d i n g b o t h c u l t u r a l and n a t u r a l
resources and the w i l d l i f e o r domestic animals therein,
associated w i t h a historic event, activity, o r person o r
e x h i b i t i n g o t h e r c u l t u r a l o r aesthetic values." 98
Early studies o f the Park's resources tended t o
v i e w t h e m as a static g r o u p i n g o f ruins. H o w e v e r , i n the
1970s, the Chaco Center Project b r o u g h t a greater under­
standing o f o t h e r prehistoric landscape features, such as
roads and w a t e r - c o n t r o l devices. More-recent studies have
considered the a s t r o n o m i c a l alignments o f prehistoric
structures and n a t u r a l features. A n e w c u l t u r a l landscape
study c o u l d be an i m p o r t a n t effort, since there is evidence
o f a sophisticated u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f e n v i r o n m e n t a l
dynamics and a s t r o n o m i c a l events t h a t demonstrates a
U N D E R S T A N D I N G A N D P R O T E C T I N G T H E VALUES 87
s t r o n g c o n n e c t i o n b e t w e e n the ancient inhabitants and Casa IR i n c o n a d a
t h e i r n a t u r a l e n v i r o n m e n t . Chaco scholars have reached
these conclusions based u p o n a careful e x a m i n a t i o n o f the Casa Rinconada is the largest k n o w n great kiva
physical remains o f Anasazi h a b i t a t i o n o f the r e g i o n ,
i n the Park, and i t is a m o n g the largest i n the
w h i c h i n c l u d e evidence o f lifeways adapted t o p r o v i d e
f o o d and w a t e r i n a n arid e n v i r o n m e n t as w e l l as struc­ Chacoan sphere o f influence. Excavated i n the
tures, roads, and a s t r o n o m i c a l markers. T h e i r conclusions
1930s, i t n o w stands o p e n t o the elements, w i t h
have also been s u p p o r t e d b y the p r o m i n e n c e o f landscape
features i n the o r a l t r a d i t i o n s o f the descendants o f the its circular walls i n relatively g o o d c o n d i t i o n .
Puebloan c u l t u r e w h o live i n the r e g i o n today.
Because o f its e n o r m o u s size, its impressive
T h e archaeological and e n v i r o n m e n t a l elements
o f the Park are already the focus o f preservation, research, e n g i n e e r i n g and p o s i t i o n , its interesting inte­
and i n t e r p r e t a t i o n . Seeing a place from a m o r e - t r a d i t i o n a l ,
r i o r details, and its association w i t h ancient reli­
reifying perspective that singles o u t easily definable objects
(artifacts, structures, sites, etc.), as has o c c u r r e d t o date at gious ceremonies, it has always attracted the
Chaco, l i m i t s the a t t r i b u t i o n o f value—and, therefore,
a t t e n t i o n o f visitors. U n t i l recently i t was the
explicit p r o t e c t i o n and m o n i t o r i n g — t o those types o f
objects." A c u l t u r a l landscape perspective w i l l l o o k at o n l y kiva w h e r e entrance was p e r m i t t e d .
these elements together w i t h n a t u r a l features, d o c u m e n t ­
i n g and u n d e r s t a n d i n g the relationship b e t w e e n t h e m and In 1987, a N e w Age event—the " H a r m o n i c
i d e n t i f y i n g o t h e r significant geographical elements. T h e
Convergence"—was planned and was expected
results o f c u l t u r a l landscape studies w i l l be i m p o r t a n t for
m a n a g e m e n t purposes: they w i l l b r i n g a different percep­ to attract about five thousand people t o the
t i o n o f w h a t is valuable i n C C N H P and a l l o w the develop­
Park for t w o days for ceremonies, dancing,
m e n t o f a p r e s e r v a t i o n p o l i c y i n this area.
chanting, bonfires, and m e d i t a t i o n i n and
IMPACT OF R E S T R I C T I N G ACCESS
T h e policies o f C C N H P i n t e n d e d t o restrict access—by visi­ a r o u n d some o f the m a j o r ruins. Casa Rin­
tors, researchers, o r stakeholders—are v e r y successful i n
conada was t o be an i m p o r t a n t venue for
preserving the resources and the i n f o r m a t i o n they contain.
However, shielding the resources from physical damage the festivities.
does n o t m e a n that all the values a t t r i b u t e d t o those
resources are b e i n g protected. L i m i t a t i o n s o f access can T h e Park's c u l t u r a l resource specialists feared
have a negative i m p a c t o n some values; i n this case, b y
that irreparable damage w o u l d be done t o the
restricting the n u m b e r o f visitors t o the site, the benefits
o f the site's associative value are enjoyed b y fewer people. structure and t o the archaeological i n t e g r i t y
T h e limitations o f access t o m a n y areas o f the Park have
o f the floors and o t h e r features, g i v e n the
reduced the n u m b e r o f places and vistas that visitors can
see and the ways i n w h i c h they can experience the values n u m b e r s o f people and the kinds o f activities
o f the Park. However, the policies increase the q u a l i t y o f
planned. However, Park m a n a g e m e n t felt that
the visit b y fostering a quiet and reflective atmosphere.
These restrictions, c o m b i n e d w i t h l i m i t e d i n t e r p r e t a t i o n it needed t o allow some access b y this g r o u p t o
a r o u n d the site, do n o t facilitate the c o m m u n i c a t i o n o f the
the k i v a . Refusing access t o the petitioners
1

i m p o r t a n c e and extension o f Chaco C u l t u r e b e y o n d the

lands o f the Park. A visitor w h o stays o n the canyon floor m i g h t have resulted i n legal action alleging dis­
misses the views o f the Chaco roads, views o f the m o u n ­ c r i m i n a t i o n . T h e superintendent and his staff
tains sacred t o Native Americans, and a panoramic v i e w o f
the great and small houses seen from above. faced the c o n f l i c t i n g values o f the mandate—

[continued on page 91]

88 C H A C O CULTURE N A T I O N A L HISTORICAL PARK

o n the one h a n d t o p r o t e c t the i n t e g r i t y o f the
ruins, and o n the o t h e r h a n d t o u p h o l d the
r i g h t o f access t o the site, religious freedom,
and the m a n d a t e t o p r o v i d e for e n j o y m e n t b y
the public. I n k e e p i n g w i t h the available guide­
lines, the staff put together a m i t i g a t i o n p l a n
establishing b e h a v i o r a l and geographical
boundaries for all p r o p o s e d activities for this
event and r e c o m m e n d e d preventive measures
to p r o t e c t Casa Rinconada. These i n c l u d e d lay­
ing d o w n a protective floor over the exposed
archaeological levels. C o n t i n g e n c y plans for
p r o b l e m s w e r e prepared.
T h e event t o o k place, a t t r a c t i n g o n l y a b o u t h a l f
o f the anticipated c r o w d , and the i m p a c t o n the
physical resources was negligible. After the
event, however, staff started t o f i n d "offerings"
t h a t w e r e b e i n g left i n some areas o f the Park,
p r i n c i p a l l y i n Casa Rinconada. I n 1991 cre­
2
m a t e d h u m a n remains started t o be left i n the
kiva, and a l t h o u g h the scattering o f ashes f r o m
cremations m a y be p e r m i t t e d b y Park superin­
tendents, n o p e r m i t s h a d been g r a n t e d i n
3
these cases. Perhaps m o r e i m p o r t a n t , b o t h the
offerings and the deposit o f h u m a n remains
v i o l a t e d the sensitivities o f N a t i v e A m e r i c a n
g r o u p s affiliated w i t h the Park. M e m b e r s o f
the A m e r i c a n I n d i a n C o n s u l t a t i o n C o m m i t t e e
r e c o m m e n d e d t o Park staff t h a t access t o the
k i v a be f o r b i d d e n . A c c o r d i n g t o Park staff,
there was disagreement a m o n g the t r i b a l repre­
sentatives as t o w h i c h N a t i v e A m e r i c a n g r o u p s
Casa Rinconada viewed from above. For several years during
the time that Casa Rinconada—the largest kiva i n the Park—
was open to visitors, a shallow layer o f dirt protected the floor
features. Recently, the features were uncovered after access to
the interior was prohibited. Both Native American sensitivities
and conservation concerns influenced this decision. Photo:
Guillermo Aldana
h a d a l e g i t i m a t e r i g h t t o use the k i v a , and they
also h a d concerns about the i m p a c t that inap­
p r o p r i a t e access w o u l d have o n visitors.
I n 1996, h e e d i n g the advice o f the c o m m i t t e e
and c o n c e r n e d w i t h visitor-induced damage
and the n e w practices, C C N H P proposed the
closure o f Casa Rinconada and c o n d u c t e d the
r e q u i r e d e n v i r o n m e n t a l i m p a c t study, fol­
4
l o w e d b y a p e r i o d o f p u b l i c consultation. T h e
study expressed p a r t i c u l a r c o n c e r n over the
practice o f leaving ashes, since t h e i r r e m o v a l
r e q u i r e d the scraping o f the surface w h e r e
they w e r e deposited. A l t h o u g h the r e m o v a l o f
the ashes left o n the k i v a floor disturbed o n l y
the layer o f fill that h a d b e e n added i n 1991 as a
protective buffer, i t was felt that this fill s h o u l d
be r e m o v e d since i t obscured the o r i g i n a l floor
and its features. T h e d o c u m e n t s m a k e n o m e n ­
t i o n o f N a t i v e A m e r i c a n concerns.
U N D E R S T A N D I N G A N D PROTECTING T H E VALUES 89
 T h i s decision is consistent w i t h the p r i o r i t y

g i v e n b y Park m a n a g e m e n t t o the c o n s e r v a t i o n

o f the archaeological remains. C o n t i n u e d

access b y visitors and the leaving o f offerings

and the deposit o f h u m a n ashes w e r e seen t o

be d e t r i m e n t a l m a i n l y t o the physical conserva­

t i o n o f the site. A t the same t i m e , the o b s c u r i n g

o f flooring elements was seen t o have a nega­

Gate blocking the entrance to Casa Rinconada. Today access to
the interior o f the kiva is blocked by these barriers. From the r i m tive i m p a c t o n the educational value o f the
above, visitors can see the kiva, including the floor features, which
place, n o t o n its spiritual values. Since
were obscured i n the past. The uncovering o f all the architectural
features can contribute to the understanding o f the visitor. H o w ­
backfilling and r e b u r i a l are c o n s e r v a t i o n strate­
ever, the ban o n access required for the protection o f the ruins
prevents visitors from experiencing the space o f the kiva. Photo: gies w i d e l y used i n the Park, one can assume
Marta de la Torre
that the value o f m a i n t a i n i n g the v i s i b i l i t y o f

S h o r t l y after the p u b l i c consultations, i t was f l o o r elements—even i f from a distance—was

a n n o u n c e d that Casa Rinconada w o u l d be seen as critical i n this case.

closed t o a l l . A t present, visitors can v i e w the

5

T h e values favored b y the decision t o close

i n t e r i o r f r o m the d o o r w a y s o r the r i m above, Casa Rinconada w e r e the scientific i m p o r t a n c e

and access is possible o n l y w i t h special p e r m i s ­ o f the site—the u n i q u e , fragile, and unrestor-

sion o f the superintendent. Some Native A m e r ­ able qualities o f its o r i g i n a l features, a n d the

icans perceive the cause o f the closure t o be the p o t e n t i a l for y i e l d i n g f u r t h e r i n f o r m a t i o n i f

acts o f groups w h o h a d n o c u l t u r a l c l a i m t o the these qualities are n o t disturbed. Affected b y

place. I n t h e i r view, the actions w e r e v i o l a t i n g the decision w e r e the spiritual values h e l d b y

the sacredness o f "their" place, and o n l y these Native A m e r i c a n s and N e w Agers and the

n e w rituals s h o u l d have been banned. T h e benefits t o the general p u b l i c from e n t e r i n g the

official reason g i v e n for closing the k i v a was k i v a and experiencing the i n t e r i o r space.

the p r o t e c t i o n o f the physical resource. A n y 6

T h e conflict b r o u g h t a b o u t b y the i n t r o d u c t i o n
decision t o a l l o w use b y N a t i v e A m e r i c a n s b u t
o f N e w A g e practices i n a heritage place was
n o t b y o t h e r g r o u p s w o u l d have v i o l a t e d the
n o t an issue explored d u r i n g the decision m a k ­
establishment clause o f the U.S. C o n s t i t u t i o n ,
i n g process. H o w e v e r , the emergence o f stake­
w h i c h pertains t o the separation o f r e l i g i o n and
h o l d e r g r o u p s ascribing n e w values o r appro-
the state.

90 C H A C O C U L T U R E N A T I O N A L H I S T O R I C A L PARK
 p r i a t i n g existing ones a n d the need t o deter­
m i n e l e g i t i m a c y for t h e i r claims are difficult
issues t h a t m a n y heritage managers c o n f r o n t .
I n this p a r t i c u l a r case, d e n y i n g access t o a n e w
spiritual g r o u p w o u l d have b e e n seen as reli­
g i o u s d i s c r i m i n a t i o n a n d thus u n c o n s t i t u ­
t i o n a l . T h e r e s o l u t i o n o f the conflict d i d n o t
have t o be reached t h r o u g h negotiations,
since NPS m a n a g e m e n t was able t o f i n d a
" c o n s e r v a t i o n " j u s t i f i c a t i o n for the closure
a n d thus sidestep the difficult matters o f
d e t e r m i n i n g the l e g i t i m a c y o f n e w stake­
h o l d e r g r o u p s a n d p r i o r i t i z i n g values.
Notes
1. The Cultural Resource Management Guidelines (NPS 28)
(NPS 1994) was the primary reference for staff as they con­
sidered the request for this use o f the site. NPS 28, which
was supplanted in 1998 by Director s Order No. 28 and the
updated Cultural Resource Management Guidelines (NPS
1997a), contains a procedure to be followed whenever any
intervention is contemplated.
2. Although depositing materials on-site is prohibited by fed­
eral and NPS regulations, offerings found in the Park are
gathered by staff and curated according to the practices
established by the NPS for items left at the Vietnam Veter­
ans Memorial in Washington, D.C.
3. In accordance w i t h NPS general regulations and applicable
state laws.
4. NPS 1996.
5. NPS 1997b.
6. Loe 1996, B-04.
Preservation reasons have b e e n g i v e n for closing
some i m p o r t a n t sites i n the Park t o visitors. Fajada B u t t e
a n d Casa Rinconada, for example, h o l d p a r t i c u l a r
significance for certain t r i b a l m e m b e r s . W h i l e k e e p i n g
visitors away f r o m these sites can p r o t e c t N a t i v e A m e r i ­
can spiritual values, the no-access r u l e , w h i c h also applies
t o those w h o h o l d the place sacred, prevents t h e m from
e n j o y i n g the benefits o f this value.
IMPACT OF LIMITING T H E NUMBER
OF VISITORS
T h e p o l i c y o f r e s t r i c t i n g contact w i t h the resources is
based o n t h e Park's e s t i m a t i o n t h a t this is the best w a y t o
p r o t e c t the sites g i v e n the available resources. T h i s p o l i c y
requires a strategy t o m a i n t a i n a l o w n u m b e r o f visitors,
b u t the o p t i m a l n u m b e r is n o t k n o w n . Park staff recog­
nize t h a t t h e y w o u l d have difficulty establishing the m a x i ­
m u m n u m b e r o f visitors the Park c o u l d sustain at any
g i v e n t i m e f r o m the p o i n t o f v i e w o f c o n s e r v a t i o n a n d
safety; nevertheless, t h e y feel t h a t peak v i s i t a t i o n days i n
the s u m m e r m o n t h s c o m e close t o m a x i m u m c a r r y i n g
capacity o f the site. A s m a l l n u m b e r o f visitors is seen as
b e i n g preferable b o t h for the sake o f the physical c o n d i ­
t i o n o f the r u i n s and the landscape and for the sake o f the
q u a l i t y o f the experience.
G e o g r a p h i c a l i s o l a t i o n and few facilities and serv­
ices inside the Park s u p p o r t efforts t o l i m i t the n u m b e r o f
visitors. T h e " p r i m i t i v e " nature o f the site is seen as posi­
tive b y m a n y visitors, w h o consider t h e i r stay i n the Park
as an o p p o r t u n i t y t o get b a c k t o nature and away f r o m the
annoyances o f c i v i l i z a t i o n . 100
T h e lack o f services and
facilities, however, l i m i t s the a m o u n t o f t i m e t h a t those
w h o visit can spend. S h o r t visits o b v i o u s l y present a chal­
lenge t o the staff i n p r o v i d i n g a m e a n i n g f u l i n t e r p r e t a t i o n
o f such a c o m p l e x site.
IMPACT OF STAKEHOLDER RELATIONSHIPS
C C N H P has a considerable n u m b e r o f stakeholders at the
local, n a t i o n a l , a n d i n t e r n a t i o n a l levels. T h e values t h a t
t h e y ascribe t o the Park vary, a n d Park staff recognize the
balance o f p o w e r t h a t exists a m o n g stakeholders as w e l l
as the p o t e n t i a l for serious conflict. T h e fact t h a t C C N H P
is a d m i n i s t e r e d b y a federal agency gives the strongest
w e i g h t t o the voice o f the NPS a n d its cabinet-level par­
ent, the D e p a r t m e n t o f the Interior. W h i l e these a u t h o r i ­
ties are the voice o f the c i t i z e n r y o n one level, t h e i r
specific i n s t i t u t i o n a l r e q u i r e m e n t s a n d p r i o r i t i e s can
sometimes relegate the interests o f o t h e r stakeholders t o
lesser positions. C o m p l i a n c e w i t h h i g h e r authorities
obliges the NPS t o certain p r i o r i t i e s and actions t h a t favor
U N D E R S T A N D I N G A N D P R O T E C T I N G T H EVALUES 91
the values that u n d e r l i e these mandates over w h a t m i g h t
be i m p o r t a n t t o the local o r nonfederal interests.
O v e r the years, heritage professionals—archaeol­
ogists i n p a r t i c u l a r — h e l d a privileged p o s i t i o n a m o n g
stakeholder groups. Today, N a t i v e A m e r i c a n s m i g h t
have m o v e d t o that p o s i t i o n , and t h e i r stake i n the site is
b r o a d l y recognized i n the m a n a g e m e n t o f the Park.
A l t h o u g h concerned o n l y w i t h the r e p a t r i a t i o n o f objects
and h u m a n remains, NAGPRA has i n d i r e c t l y reinforced the
i m p o r t a n c e o f these stakeholders and t h e i r values. T h e
p a r t i c i p a t i o n o f Navajo, Z u n i , and H o p i tribes and Pueblo
groups i n the Park's A m e r i c a n I n d i a n C o n s u l t a t i o n C o m ­
m i t t e e has g i v e n t h e m an i m p o r t a n t advisory role i n the
m a n a g e m e n t o f the site. T h e superintendent brings t o this
g r o u p m o s t issues t h a t i m p a c t the conservation and use o f
the site—fostering a c o n s u l t a t i o n t h a t goes w e l l b e y o n d
that m a n d a t e d b y NAGPRA. W h i l e Park m a n a g e m e n t rec­
ognizes t h a t officially this g r o u p has o n l y a "consultative"
role, i t admits that o p i n i o n s expressed b y this g r o u p are
g i v e n v e r y serious consideration. T h e m o s t recent
Resource M a n a g e m e n t Plan d r a f t 101
acknowledges the
shift i n the stakeholders' p o w e r m a p : "over the past t e n
years, the Park's A m e r i c a n I n d i a n C o n s u l t a t i o n C o m m i t ­
tee has g r a d u a l l y t a k e n the lead r o l e i n shaping Park p o l ­
icy a n d practice. T h i s has created a certain tension
b e t w e e n the N a t i v e A m e r i c a n and archaeological con­
stituencies. Resolving this tension is the c u r r e n t challenge
for the [ C u l t u r a l Resource] d i v i s i o n / ' 102
u n d e r n o r m a l circumstances) c o u l d be stirred i n t o action i f
i t saw a threat t o the values that placed the site o n the
W o r l d Heritage List. A n o t h e r example o f a stakeholder
g r o u p , at a more-local level, is the neighbors o f the Park.
Park staff r e p o r t that this g r o u p , i n general, is n o t v e r y
involved o r interested i n Park-related issues. However, i f
the authorities decided t o pave the r o a d leading i n t o the
Park, some m e m b e r s w o u l d side w i t h the Park against the
p a v i n g project, b u t others w o u l d c o m e o u t i n favor o f it.
T h e difference i n t h e i r positions w o u l d p r o b a b l y be based
u p o n w h e t h e r they t h o u g h t a paved r o a d created a danger
to t h e i r herds from speeding vehicles, o r w h e t h e r they
w o u l d like t o facilitate access t o their homes.
Park m a n a g e m e n t recognizes that the p o s i t i o n
o f a stakeholder g r o u p w i l l depend u p o n the m a t t e r b e i n g
considered. T h e r e are n o t m a n y stakeholder g r o u p s w h o
w o u l d be o n the side o f the Park o n all issues. T h u s , the
Park has n o u n c o n d i t i o n a l allies, and the i m p o r t a n c e o f
m a i n t a i n i n g g o o d relations and o p e n lines o f c o m m u n i c a ­
t i o n w i t h all stakeholders is critical.

T h e o p i n i o n s o f the m e m b e r s o f this consultative

c o m m i t t e e are n o t always u n a n i m o u s , n o r are they always
i n agreement w i t h those o f Park m a n a g e m e n t . T h e clos­
i n g o f Casa Rinconada seems t o be one instance i n w h i c h
N a t i v e A m e r i c a n g r o u p s feel t h a t t h e i r c u l t u r a l r i g h t t o
enter the r u i n s has been c u r t a i l e d b y a NPS decision
r e q u i r i n g t h e i r asking for p e r m i s s i o n t o do so, even
t h o u g h t h e y w e r e the first t o suggest the closure. C o n ­
versely, however, the change i n attitudes o f some Native
A m e r i c a n s t o w a r d the preservation o f resources c o u l d be
a t t r i b u t e d t o contacts and discussions i n this c o m m i t t e e .
Some m e m b e r s o f the g r o u p n o w s u p p o r t "conservation"
o f the ruins, r e c o g n i z i n g t h a t some o f the n o n - N a t i v e
A m e r i c a n values o f the site can enhance and p r o t e c t t h e i r
o w n values.
T h e r e are stakeholders w h o have a passive rela­
tionship w i t h the site and w i l l continue t o have o n e — u n t i l
such t i m e as they w i s h t o h i g h l i g h t the values they ascribe
to the site o r u n t i l they consider those values threatened.
As a h y p o t h e t i c a l example, the stakeholder g r o u p repre­
sented b y the i n t e r n a t i o n a l c o m m u n i t y ( n o t v e r y active

92 C H A C O CULTURE N A T I O N A L HISTORICAL PARK

Q u a l i t y o f V i s i t o r s ' Experience C C N H P is able t o m a i n t a i n this isolation

t h r o u g h a c o m b i n a t i o n o f factors—some cir­
T h e superintendent and staff o f C C N H P are
cumstantial, others resulting f r o m p o l i c y deci­
c o m m i t t e d t o p r o v i d i n g a high-quality
sions. T h e geographic l o c a t i o n o f the Park and
experience for visitors. M a n a g e m e n t strategies
the relatively few accommodations for travelers
are established and decisions are made w i t h
i n the s u r r o u n d i n g t o w n s play an i m p o r t a n t
awareness o f their i m p a c t o n the p r o t e c t i o n o f
role i n m a i n t a i n i n g l o w visitor numbers. O t h e r
this quality. A l t h o u g h n o t explained o r analyzed
c o n t r i b u t i n g factors are a direct result o f the
in detail i n any official d o c u m e n t , the quality
strategy o f little development that the Park has
o f a visitor's experience is believed t o depend o n
f o l l o w e d for decades. These factors include n o t
direct contact w i t h the archaeological and natu­
paving the access roads, offering m i n i m a l serv­
ral resources, a peaceful atmosphere, and
ices for visitors on-site, l i m i t i n g the n u m b e r o f
a pristine e n v i r o n m e n t . Those responsible for
campgrounds, and discouraging publicity about
the Park carefully manage all three factors.
the Park.
C C N H P ' s mandate t o m a i n t a i n the archaeologi­
T h e efforts t o m a i n t a i n the l o w profile o f the
cal resources o f the Park i n " u n i m p a i r e d " condi­
Park are easily justified i n t e r m s o f legislation
t i o n requires that direct contact o f visitors w i t h
and managerial discretion, i n the sense that i t
the ruins be carefully c o n t r o l l e d . T h e strategy
is undeniable that sooner o r later any p o l i c y
e m p l o y e d b y Park management has been t o
encouraging visitation is likely t o have a negative
restrict access t o a sufficient b u t relatively small
i m p a c t o n the conservation o f the resources.
n u m b e r o f ruins and t o require special permis­
However, other national parks—Yosemite i n
sion for v e n t u r i n g i n t o the backcountry.'
California, for example—have encountered
T h e Park's peaceful e n v i r o n m e n t is m a i n t a i n e d
great resistance f r o m stakeholders t o c u r t a i l i n g
b y l i m i t i n g the n u m b e r o f visitors.This strategy
visitation for conservation reasons. T h e accept­
also favors the p r o t e c t i o n a n d regeneration o f
ance o f C C N H P ' s policies designed t o discour­
the n a t u r a l e n v i r o n m e n t . V i s i t o r n u m b e r s at
age public access c o u l d be a t t r i b u t e d t o a c o m b i ­
C C N H P i n 2001 are variously r e p o r t e d t o be
n a t i o n o f factors. A t the local level, the Park's
b e t w e e n 61,000 and 74,000, and b o t h figures
stakeholders are relatively small groups o f
represent a decline over totals o f recent years.
Native Americans o r others w h o do n o t benefit
O t h e r national parks i n the r e g i o n have visita­
m u c h f r o m the Park ( n e i g h b o r i n g c o m m u n i ­
t i o n n u m b e r s that are several times those
ties). A large stakeholder g r o u p — t h e scientific
of CCNHP. 2

c o m m u n i t y — c a n derive benefit w i t h o u t visiting

U N D E R S T A N D I N G A N D P R O T E C T I N G T H EVALUES 93
 the Park o n a regular basis. A n d finally, there t o u r i s m i n the Southwest decreased dramati­

seems t o be a general lack o f appreciation o f the cally. T h e anticipated p o p u l a t i o n g r o w t h from

values o f the Park a m o n g the public at large. regional development o f the energy and fuel

industries never materialized either. C u r r e n t visi­

T h e p a v i n g o f the m a i n r o a d leading i n t o the
t a t i o n is w e l l b e l o w 1989 levels. Park manage­
Park has been discussed for m a n y years. T h u s
m e n t is n o t m a k i n g any efforts t o increase it, and
far, Park m a n a g e m e n t has been able t o h o l d its
the quality o f the experience for Park visitors
position, one that is fueled b y fear o f increased
remains very h i g h .
n u m b e r s o f visitors. A m e m o r a n d u m dated July

1989 f r o m the superintendent at C C N H P t o the O n e o f the m a n a g e m e n t objectives stated i n

director o f the Southwest Regional Office NPS's 1995 Resource M a n a g e m e n t Plan is t o

presents a h y p o t h e t i c a l scenario i n w h i c h visita­ "prevent development i n the p r i m a r y visitor-

t i o n t o C C N H P w o u l d double w i t h i n three years use areas [ n o additional roads, n o expansion o r

i f the e n t r y r o a d w e r e paved. U s i n g the 1989 visi­ a d d i t i o n o f p a r k i n g areas, and n o f u r t h e r sup­

t o r n u m b e r o f 91,000 and estimating p o r t facilities] that w o u l d adversely i m p a c t the

an annual increase o f approximately 11 percent, historic landscape and setting." 3

the scenario envisaged a possible visitor l o a d o f

T h e almost pristine n a t u r a l e n v i r o n m e n t ,
over 200,000 b y the year 2000. Park authorities
another factor o f a q u a l i t y visitor experience,
considered that these n e w conditions w o u l d
has resulted from the absence o f d a m a g i n g
require a larger visitor center; m o r e p a r k i n g
activities such as h i g h visitation, g r a z i n g , and
areas; n e w c o m f o r t stations; a larger camp­
m i n i n g over a l o n g p e r i o d o f t i m e . T h i s q u a l i t y
g r o u n d ; and expansion o f waste t r e a t m e n t
appreciates as Park lands c o n t i n u e t o be p r o ­
facilities, f o o d services, and other amenities.
tected. However, i n the setting o f C C N H P , the
I t w o u l d also d e m a n d additional funds for
characteristics o f the lands outside its b o u n d ­
staffing, i n c l u d i n g guides, l a w enforcement
aries can influence the experience o f the visitor.
rangers, resource m a n a g e m e n t professionals,
W h i l e the r e g i o n has n o t experienced the devel­
and conservation technicians. T h e prospect was
o p m e n t that was anticipated a few years back,
o v e r w h e l m i n g , and i t was considered certain
any eventual n e w uses o f the s u r r o u n d i n g
that the q u a l i t y o f the visit w o u l d d i m i n i s h .
lands—whether habitation or m i n i n g — a r e likely
Chaco w o u l d b e c o m e a c r o w d e d n a t i o n a l p a r k
t o have a significant i m p a c t o n the q u a l i t y o f
like others i n the r e g i o n . T w o years after this
the air and views f r o m the Park. W h i l e this is an
m e m o r a n d u m was issued, the first cases o f
area that is technically outside the responsibility
hantavirus were reported i n the region, and
and c o n t r o l o f NPS management, the g o o d -

94 C H A C O CULTURE N A T I O N A L HISTORICAL PARK

n e i g h b o r relationship w i t h local stakeholders that far as t o r e c o m m e n d that "future proposals t o add

Park staff m a i n t a i n c o u l d influence decisions i n facilities or upgrade existing ones at Chaco seri­

the future. ously consider their p o t e n t i a l i m p a c t o n the pres­

ent experience e n v i r o n m e n t . Modifications that

Some o f the qualities identified w i t h a g o o d
w o u l d significantly increase the n u m b e r o f visi­
visitor experience are apparently s u p p o r t e d b y
tors o r severely restrict visitor independence and
the results o f a visitor study carried o u t i n three
m o b i l i t y w o u l d probably have the greatest influ­
national p a r k units i n 1994. As p a r t o f the study,
4

ence i n detracting from the present conditions." 8

visitors at C C N H P w e r e asked t h e i r reasons for

v i s i t i n g the Park and asked t o identify "aspects This last q u o t a t i o n f r o m the visitor study s u m m a ­

o f the Park settings, w h i c h are composed o f the rizes m o s t o f the conflicts and issues raised

managerial, physical, and social aspects o f a Park, b y the focus o n the q u a l i t y o f the experience.

that w e r e i m p o r t a n t t o the realization o f their Visitors t o C C N H P constitute a relatively small

desired experiences." T h e researchers f o u n d

5
g r o u p that recognizes the r u i n s ' educational and

that the m a i n reason visitors came t o Chaco was symbolic value and seeks contact w i t h nature i n

t o learn about history; the desire t o experience a t r a n q u i l e n v i r o n m e n t away from crowds. T h e

the n a t u r a l e n v i r o n m e n t came second. 6

study points o u t , however, that the conditions

that exist i n the Park are the result o f a series o f

A n o t h e r element c o n t r i b u t i n g t o the q u a l i t y
decisions and circumstances, as discussed above.
o f the visit is related t o the educational value
Changes i n some o f these conditions—such as
o f the Park and considered v e r y i m p o r t a n t b y
the p a v i n g o f the r o a d o r c o n s t r u c t i o n o f
C C N H P management. This element is the
overnight accommodations on-site—could
o p p o r t u n i t y t o offer ranger-led tours and pre­
attract a m u c h larger n u m b e r o f visitors and
sentations. However, the 1994 study f o u n d that
change the atmosphere o f the place.
visitors w e r e n o t as interested i n the personal

contact available i n ranger-led tours as they As always, choices are t o be made b e t w e e n access

w e r e i n the f r e e d o m t o w a l k independently and p r o t e c t i o n : i n this case, access b y m a n y or b y

t h r o u g h the ruins w i t h self-guided b o o k l e t s or few, and the physical p r o t e c t i o n o f the resources

be helped w i t h i n f o r m a t i o n a l signs i n the ruins as w e l l as p r o t e c t i o n o f a certain q u a l i t y o f visit

and elsewhere i n the Park. 7

that can exist o n l y i f i t is l i m i t e d t o a relatively

small n u m b e r o f people. A l l the values a t t r i b u t e d

T h e undeveloped nature o f the Park was
t o the Park are affected b y decisions i n this area—
considered a positive attribute b y the m a j o r i t y
i n b o t h positive and negative ways.
o f visitors interviewed, and the study goes so

U N D E R S T A N D I N G A N D P R O T E C T I N G T H E VALUES 95
 Notes

1. Most o f the regulations governing access to the resources

o f the Park are left to the discretion o f the superintendent,
as authorized by the Code of Federal Regulations (36 CFR 1.5).
These regulations can be found i n NPS 2001c. Site-specific
regulations include the closure o f certain areas (Fajada
Butte, Atlatl Cave, and the interior chamber o f Casa Rin-
conada), the restriction o f access to the ruins and front-
country and backcountry areas, and the requirement that
permissions be requested for special uses.

2. W h i l e each park is unique i n its facilities and carrying

capacity, the following figures are given as indicators
(from: http.7 / www.nps.gov):
Gross Park Surface Visitors
(FY2001) (FY2001)
CCNHP, N e w Mexico 13,750 hectares 61,602
(33,974 acres)
Mesa Verde National 21,093 hectares 511,764
Park, Colorado (52,122 acres)
W u p a t k i National Park, 17,013 hectares 537,851
Arizona (42,042 acres)
Bandelier National Park, 13,628 hectares 293,548
N e w Mexico (33,677 acres)

3. NPS 1995, objective page.

4. The t w o other parks included i n the study were Mesa

Verde National Park and W u p a t k i National Monument;
see Lee and Stephens 1994.

5. Lee and Stephens 1994,2-3.

6. Ibid., 33-36.

7. Ibid., 39-

8. Ibid., 46-47.

96 CHACO CULTURE NATIONAL HISTORICAL PARK

 Conclusions
T h e NPS mandate t o preserve " u n i m p a i r e d the n a t u r a l
and c u l t u r a l resources and values o f the n a t i o n a l p a r k sys­
t e m for the e n j o y m e n t , education, and i n s p i r a t i o n o f this
and f u t u r e g e n e r a t i o n s " 103
carries w i t h i t a great deal o f
responsibility. As w i t h m a n y large g o v e r n m e n t bureaucra­
cies, the actual a u t h o r i t y for selecting and i m p l e m e n t i n g
m a n a g e m e n t strategies resides i n legislation and related
p r o c e d u r a l d o c u m e n t s w r i t t e n t o ensure compliance.
One o f the overarching issues explored b y this
study is the possibility that the i n d i v i d u a l parks—supported
b y the NPS management e n v i r o n m e n t — c a n recognize,
take i n t o consideration, and protect all the values ascribed
t o a place. T h e i n f o r m a t i o n gathered indicates that, w h i l e
there are certain constraints, this is possible w i t h i n limits.
T h e case o f C C N H P indicates that regardless o f any n u m ­
ber o f values that are ascribed t o a national park, the pre­
ponderant and p r i m a r y ones w i l l always be those that w e r e
the reason for the creation o f the Park. I n the case o f
Figure 2.10. Meditating i n Casa Rinconada. C C N H P is considered a
place o f spiritual significance by several Native American groups. More
recently, N e w Agers have also come to view Chaco as a special place.
Some o f the practices o f this new group o f stakeholders offend the
sensitivities o f stakeholders o f longer standing. The NPS has found
itself having to decide whether all stakeholder claims are legitimate
and whether some groups have rights that take priority. So far, the NPS
has sidestepped a direct decision on these matters by resolving the
conflict i n the arena o f "conservation." Photo: Courtesy National Park
Service, Chaco Culture N H P Collection Archives.
C C N H P , the purpose o f the Park lies i n the archaeological
ruins, b u t the value seen i n those resources has g r o w n and
changed over t i m e . H o w e v e r , the focus o n the physical
conservation o f the archaeological materials is at times an
obstacle t o the r e c o g n i t i o n and p r o t e c t i o n o f some o f the
values ascribed t o those materials. I n a d d i t i o n , the force o f
law, n o t policy, appears t o be the m a i n factor i n the recog­
n i t i o n and p r o t e c t i o n o f values i n n a t i o n a l parks.
I n the l o n g h i s t o r y o f Chaco C a n y o n as a heritage
site, the e v o l u t i o n and emergence o f values over t i m e
have been fueled b y n e w k n o w l e d g e and b y c h a n g i n g soci­
etal mores and professional practices. T h e e v o l u t i o n i n
values b r o u g h t a b o u t b y professional practices is best
reflected i n the i n f o r m a t i o n and associative values, p r o ­
tected b y policies related t o excavation and conservation.
T h e fate o f N a t i v e A m e r i c a n spiritual values and the natu­
r a l values o f the site illustrates how, i n the case o f the
NPS, legislation plays a m a j o r role i n the creation o f n e w
values and i n the r e c o g n i t i o n o f stakeholders' interests.
O t h e r questions explored i n this case have been
the a m o u n t o f l a t i t u d e Park superintendents have, w i t h i n
this v e r y s t r u c t u r e d n a t i o n a l system, t o establish policies
and objectives that address the specific s i t u a t i o n o f the
Park, as w e l l as w h e t h e r compliance w i t h higher-level
authorities l i m i t e d t h e i r choices o f action. T h e answers
d o n o t clearly fall o n one side o r the other. T h e r e are cer­
tainly m a n y activities at the site, p a r t i c u l a r l y at the level
o f reports and justification, i n t e n d e d t o address issues
o f compliance. H o w e v e r , at a m o r e - p r a g m a t i c level, the
case has s h o w n that the superintendent has a s u r p r i s i n g
a m o u n t o f l a t i t u d e t o i n t e r p r e t the n a t i o n a l policies and
directives. I n a d d i t i o n , an e x a m i n a t i o n o f Chaco C a n y o n
as a heritage place illustrates h o w this site is the result o f
its h i s t o r y and the decisions that have been made i n the
past. I n theory, policies at the n a t i o n a l and local levels
c o u l d change d r a s t i c a l l y — w i t h emphasis shifting, for
example, b e t w e e n c o n s e r v a t i o n and access. I n fact, w h i l e
policies have changed over the Park's history, the p r i o r i t i e s
and conditions on-site have r e m a i n e d fairly constant.
A simple c o m p a r i s o n o f C C N H P w i t h another
nearby n a t i o n a l p a r k can illustrate this p o i n t . T h i s study
CONCLUSIONS 97
has repeatedly p o i n t e d o u t the p r i m a c y o f the conserva­
t i o n o f the c u l t u r a l resources i n all m a n a g e m e n t decisions
at C C N H P . T h i s emphasis is j u s t i f i e d at the NPS system
level b y its mandate t o m a i n t a i n resources u n i m p a i r e d ,
and j u s t i f i e d at the p a r k level b y its legislative purpose.
A t the same t i m e , o t h e r parks i n the system w e r e created
w i t h similar purposes and today are v e r y different from
C C N H P , w i t h its u n d e v e l o p e d a n d t r a n q u i l setting.
Mesa Verde N a t i o n a l Park, i n the n e i g h b o r i n g
state o f C o l o r a d o , provides an interesting contrast t o
C C N H P w i t h regard t o its m a n a g e m e n t policies and its
approach t o visitors and access. Mesa Verde became a
n a t i o n a l p a r k (rather t h a n a n a t i o n a l m o n u m e n t ) i n 1906,
and almost i m m e d i a t e l y i t became one o f the n a t i o n a l
sites featured i n efforts t o develop t o u r i s m and visitation.
Decisions w e r e m a d e t o h a r d e n the front-country areas o f
the site t o m a k e t h e m accessible t o as m a n y people w h o
w a n t e d t o see t h e m , and t o m a k e t h e m relatively i m p e r v i ­
ous t o damage t h r o u g h the p a v i n g o f pathways and the
p e r m a n e n t c o n s o l i d a t i o n o f ruins, w h i l e f o r b i d d i n g all vis­
i t o r access t o the b a c k c o u n t r y Today m o r e t h a n 500,000
people visit a s m a l l p a r t o f Mesa Verde N a t i o n a l Park
every year, w h e r e a paved r o a d delivers t h e m t o the edge
o f a few archaeological sites. T h e r e they are encouraged
to explore inside the ruins, eat i n the restaurant, and sleep
at the i n n . A t Mesa Verde, i t c o u l d be said t h a t a choice
was m a d e t o sacrifice some sites for the sake o f access and
i n exchange for the p r o t e c t i o n o f others i n the backcoun­
try. T h e archaeological remains w e r e the reason for the
creation o f b o t h parks, b u t Mesa Verde and Chaco p r o t e c t
these resources t h r o u g h v e r y different strategies.
T h e ever-present d i l e m m a i n heritage sites o f
access versus c o n s e r v a t i o n appears t o be h a n d l e d at
C C N H P w i t h less conflict t h a n i n o t h e r parks i n the sys­
t e m t h a t have t r i e d t o l i m i t the n u m b e r o f visitors. T h e
geographic l o c a t i o n o f C C N H P a n d its s u r r o u n d i n g s has
s u p p o r t e d the i s o l a t i o n policy. I n 1985 there was consider­
able c o n c e r n a b o u t the i m p a c t t h a t a change i n these con­
ditions w o u l d b r i n g t o the Park. A l t h o u g h the anticipated
threats never materialized, the d e v e l o p m e n t o f the r e g i o n
remains n o t a possibility b u t a c e r t a i n t y at some p o i n t i n
the f u t u r e . As the r e g i o n evolves, the l o n g - t e r m protec­
t i o n o f C C N H P depends substantially o n the ability o f its
superintendent and staff to u n d e r s t a n d and balance the
interests o f all the stakeholders, t o m e e t its compliance
obligations, and t o find acceptable solutions w h e n these
forces conflict. T h e specific threats t h a t m i g h t emerge i n
the f u t u r e are unpredictable. H o w e v e r , they are l i k e l y t o
o r i g i n a t e p r i n c i p a l l y from d e v e l o p m e n t and its corollaries
98 C H A C O CULTURE N A T I O N A L HISTORICAL PARK
o f alternative l a n d uses, p o l l u t i o n , increased p o p u l a t i o n
(and visitors). T h e battles t o be f o u g h t w i l l require s t r o n g
Park coalitions w i t h some o f the stakeholder groups. T h e
g r o u p s t h a t w i l l be the needed allies w i l l depend o n the
battle t o be f o u g h t . T h e good-relations approach w i t h all
the stakeholders (rather t h a n strong-and-fast alliances
w i t h some o f t h e m ) , w h i c h is f o l l o w e d at this t i m e , seems
wise. As i n the past, the critical e l e m e n t o f m a n a g e m e n t
i n the Park w i l l be the ability o f the superintendent t o
m a i n t a i n focus o n the core values o f the Park, o n b e h a l f
o f its constituents, present a n d f u t u r e .
Notes
1. U.S. Code 1916.
2. For a discussion o f these evolving definitions and conflict
among them, see Sellars 1997 and W i n k s 1997.
3. NPS 2000a, sec. 1.4.4.
4. See NPS 2000a, sec. 1.4, for the interpretation o f the National
Organic Act of 1916, the General Authorities Act of 19J0, as
amended (U.S. Code, vol. 16, sees. 1, i a - i ) .
5. NPS 2000a, 5.
6. L o w r y 1994,29.
7. Birdsall and Florin 1992,349-52.
8. The information here has been gathered from Lister and
Lister 1981; Lekson et al. 1988; and Strutin and H u e y 1994.
For a more comprehensive bibliography o f Chaco Canyon,
see "Bibliography o f Chaco Resources" maintained by D a n
Meyer, Department o f Anthropology, University o f Calgary:
http: / / vvWvV.ucalgary.ca/ -dameyer/chacbib.html
(12 Feb. 2003).
9. Anasazi, a Navajo w o r d usually translated as "ancient ene­
mies," was introduced i n 1936 to replace Basket M a k e r -
Pueblo as the archaeological label for the prehistoric ances­
tors o f the historical Pueblo people o f n o r t h e r n Arizona
and N e w Mexico. The Navajo are not descendants o f the
Anasazi, and some Pueblo people prefer to use a t e r m from
their o w n language, such as the H o p i Hisatsinom, to refer
to their prehistoric ancestors.
10. It should be noted that i n many cases, Native American his­
tories differ from what could be called "academic" history
Attempts are made throughout this study to state Native
American views i f they have been made k n o w n to the
authors o f the study and i f they differ from those presented
by the NPS or academic sources.
11. A more-complete time line o f Chaco Canyon and C C N H P
in historical times is presented i n appendix A. Unless other­
wise noted, the information provided i n this section has
come from Lee 1971; Lister and Lister 1981; and Strutin and
H u e y 1994.
12. Wozniak, Brugge, and Lange 1993; Stoffle et al. 1994. 43. Wozniak, Brugge, and Lange 1993; Stoffle et al. 1994.

13. U.S. Code 1906, sec. 2. 44. NPS 1990a.

14. M c M a n a m o n 2001, 257. 45. U.S. Code 1993.

15. U.S. Code 1906, sec. 2. 46. U.S. Code 1990.

16. C C N H P staff, private communication, A p r i l 2002. 47. Federal Register, 12 March 1999 (vol. 64, no. 48).

17. NPS 2002b, pt. 1,4-5. 48. See Hoover 2001,34-37.

18. The Civilian Conservation Corps was established i n 1933 by 49. Stoffle et al. 1994, 81.
the Act for the Relief of Unemployment through the Performance
50. Begay et al. 1993, quoted i n Stoffle et al. 1994, 81.
of Useful Public Work, and for Other Purposes during the Great
51. Keller and Turek 1998,190.
Depression years. Originally intended to deal w i t h the con­
servation o f natural resources, its w o r k later extended to the 52. Ibid., 191.
construction and repair o f paths, campsites, and so o n and,
53. Brugge 1993,12.
i n some cases, as i n Chaco, to the stabilization o f archaeolog­
ical structures. 54. U.S. Code 1969, as amended by Public Law 94-52,3 July 1975;
Public Law 94-83, 9 Aug. 1975; and Public Law 97-258,4(b),
19. NPS 1991,19.
13 Sept. 1982.
20. US. Code 1980.
55. Sec. 101 (US. Code, vol. 42, sec. 4331) (a): "The Congress, rec­
21. NPS 1984,27. ognizing the profound impact o f m a n s activity o n the inter­
relations o f all components o f the natural environment, par­
22. UNESCO W o r l d Heritage Committee 1 9 8 4 , 7 - 8 .
ticularly the profound influences o f population g r o w t h ,
23. The official Web site o f the park (www.nps.gov/ chcu) pro­ high-density urbanization, industrial expansion, resource
vides more information o n facilities and visits to the site. exploitation, and new and expanding technological advances
24. NPS 2002a. and recognizing further the critical importance o f restoring
and maintaining environmental quality to the overall welfare
25. Hantavirus, a disease carried by rodents, is potentially deadly
and development o f man, declares that i t is the continuing
to humans.
policy o f the Federal G o v e r n m e n t . . . to create and maintain
26. Lee and Stephens 1994,14-28. conditions under w h i c h m a n and nature can exist i n produc­
27. Park infrastructure information is taken from NPS 2002a. tive harmony, and fulfill the social, economic, and other
requirements o f present and future generations o f
28. NPS 2000a, 1.4.3.
Americans."
29. NPS 2000a.
56. NPS 1982 was superseded and replaced by NPS Director s
30. NPS 2002b contains a statement o f the Park's significance (to
Order N o . 12: Conservation Planning, Environmental
be discussed below). The 1995 Resource Management Plan
Impact Analysis, and Decision M a k i n g (NPS 2001b), effective
(NPS 1995) and the 1985 General Management Plan (NPS
8 Jan. 2001.
1985) m e n t i o n the importance o f only the archaeological
57. See Satterfield 2002.
remains, w h i c h constitute the purpose o f the Park.
58. For a discussion o f the associative / symbolic value o f her­
31. U.S. President 1907.
itage, see Lipe 1984,1-11.
32. Hardacre 1879,274.
59. Lee and Stephens 1994,135.
33. NPS 2002b, 1.
60. Rothman 1989,17.
34. NPS 2002b.
61. NPS 1985.
35. Ibid., 3-4.
62. UNESCO W o r l d Heritage Committee 2002,1.C.3.
36. NPS 2002b.
63. NPS 1984,28.
37. For an extensive description o f the interest i n Native A m e r i ­
64. UNESCO W o r l d Heritage Committee 1985.
can antiquities i n the late nineteenth and early twentieth
centuries, see Lee 1971. 65. UNESCO W o r l d Heritage Committee 1999.

38. NPS 1985,119-29. Appendix B summarizes the various cate­ 66. NPS 2002b, H i .
gories and their "scoring" value.
67. U.S. Code, vol. 16, sec. i a - i .
39. U.S. Code 1916.
68. NPS 2000a, sec. 2.3.
40. NPS 1995.
69. Respectively, NPS 1985; NPS 2000b; NPS 1995, currently
41. NPS 2002b. being revised and existing i n draft f o r m , NPS 2002b; and NPS
1983, w i t h its 1990 amendment, NPS 1990a. These and other
42. Lee and Stephens 1994,33-36.

NOTES 99
 documents consulted for the preparation o f this case are 93. Code of Federal Regulations, title 36, chapter 1, sec. 2.1 (Parks,
listed i n the references. Forests, and Public Property), 2002. A l t h o u g h current regula­

70. A new general management plan is required by the new NPS tions provide some latitude to park superintendents to desig­

management policies, but no time has yet been specified for nate that certain fruits, berries, or nuts may be gathered i f

its development. this has no adverse effect o n park resources, no other gather­
ing or consumptive use o f resources is allowed unless
71. NPS 2002b.
authorized by federal statute or treaty rights.
72. A list o f the more-specific management priorities or actions
94. NPS 1985.
identified i n the 2002 draft o f the Resource Management
Plan (NPS 2002b) is presented i n appendix C. 95. C C N H P N-5.

96. Code of Federal Regulations, title 36, chapter 1, sec. 2.1,2002.

73. NPS 2002b, 4.
97. NPS 2000a, sec. 8.5, 9 0 .
74. Ibid., 11-12.
98. Birnbaum 1994,1.
75. Public Law 96-550 (U.S. Code 1980).
99. For a discussion o f l i m i t i n g versus more-holistic perspectives
76. NPS 1990a.
toward cultural heritage, see Byrne et al. 2001,55-72.
77. NPS 2002b, pt. 2 , 1 .
100. Lee and Stephens 1994, 46.
78. The closest towns w i t h tourist accommodations are
101. NPS 2002b.
Bloomfield, Aztec, and Farmington. Santa Fe and Albu­
querque, the t w o major cities i n the area, are t w o and a half 102. Ibid., pt. 2 , 1 .
to three hours away by car. There has been talk i n the Navajo
103. Ibid., 10.
N a t i o n o f building a hotel i n Crownpoint, south o f the site,
but there has been no follow-up. Some local families allow
camping o n their lands during the high season.

79. Lee and Stephens 1994,37-40.

80. NPS 1985.

81. Lee and Stephens 1994,38.

82. NPS 1985, 46.

83. NPS 2002b, 7.

84. For details o f the w o r k done by the Chaco Center Project,

see Lister and Lister 1981.

85. NPS 1991.

86. Ibid., 6.

87. Information provided by C C N H P staff.

88. Lee and Stephens 1994,127.

89. Ibid.

90. Lister and Lister 1981,157.

91. Stuart and M c M a n a m o n , n.d., 8.

92. Public Law 90-583 (U.S. Code 1968) provides for the control o f
noxious plants o n federal lands, and Executive Order 11987
(U.S. President 1977), "Exotic Organisms," calls for restric­
tions o n the introduction o f exotic species into natural
ecosystems o n federal lands. NPS policy also states that con­
t r o l or eradication o f an exotic species w i l l be implemented
w h e n that species threatens resources (such as native species,
rare or endangered species, or natural ecological communi­
ties or processes) on park lands (NPS 1988). Priority is placed
on control programs for exotic species having a high impact
on park resources and for w h i c h there is a reasonable expec­
tation for successful control.

IOO C H A C O CULTURE N A T I O N A L HISTORICAL PARK


Appendix A:
Time Line d u r i n g H e r i t a g e Status
1250- M e m b e r s o f affiliated clans and religious societies
present o f the H o p i and the Pueblos o f N e w M e x i c o have
visited Chaco o n pilgrimages t o h o n o r their
ancestral homelands.
1&23 T h e Spanish m i l i t a r y e x p e d i t i o n l e d b y Jose
A n t o n i o V i z c a r r a passed t h r o u g h Chaco C a n y o n
and p r o d u c e d the first w r i t t e n account identify­
i n g the ruins there.
1849 W h i l e i n the area o f Chaco C a n y o n , the Wash­
i n g t o n E x p e d i t i o n , a U.S. A r m y T o p o g r a p h i c a l
Engineers reconnaissance detachment headed
b y L t . James H . Simpson, encountered and w r o t e
descriptions o f Chacoan sites. T h e r e s u l t i n g gov­
e r n m e n t r e p o r t i n c l u d e d detailed illustrations.
T h i s was the first substantial w r i t t e n and graphic
r e p o r t c o n c e r n i n g the c u l t u r a l heritage at Chaco
Canyon.
1877 W i l l i a m H e n r y Jackson, a p h o t o g r a p h e r w h o was
p a r t o f the U.S. g o v e r n m e n t ' s G e o l o g i c a l and
Geographical Survey o f the Territories, l e d b y
F. V H a y d n , p r o d u c e d more-extensive descrip­
tions and maps o f the Chacoan sites.
1888 V i c t o r and Cosmos M i n d e l e f f o f the Bureau o f
A m e r i c a n E t h n o l o g y surveyed and p h o t o g r a p h e d
the m a j o r Chacoan sites for a study o f Pueblo
architecture. T h e i r p h o t o g r a p h s i n c l u d e d the
d o c u m e n t a t i o n o f l o o t i n g and vandalism. As the
o l d e s t - k n o w n p h o t o g r a p h s , t h e y p r o v i d e a base­
line for m e a s u r i n g the subsequent effects o f l o o t ­
i n g , vandalism, visitation, and n a t u r a l collapse
at the sites.
1896- After excavating several ancestral Puebloan sites
1901 i n the Four C o r n e r s r e g i o n , i n c l u d i n g sites at
Mesa Verde i n 1888, amateur archaeologist and
relic h u n t e r R i c h a r d W e t h e r i l l came t o excavate
at Chaco C a n y o n . W e t h e r i l l d r e w the interest o f
the H y d e b r o t h e r s o f N e w Y o r k t o the site. O v e r
the next five years, the H y d e E x p l o r i n g Expedi­
t i o n c o n d u c t e d full-scale excavations at Pueblo
B o n i t o . George H . Pepper o f the A m e r i c a n
M u s e u m o f N a t u r a l H i s t o r y i n N e w Y o r k super­
vised the excavations, w h i l e W e t h e r i l l "led a b a n d
o f Navajo laborers w h o d i d m u c h o f the actual
d i g g i n g . " T h e i r p r i m a r y purpose was t o accumu­
1
late artifacts for the m u s e u m ' s collection. N u m e r ­
ous artifacts w e r e shipped t o the m u s e u m , w h e r e
they are located t o d a y
1901 F o l l o w i n g an investigation o f the H y d e Expedi­
t i o n s excavations at Chaco C a n y o n , as w e l l as
the l a n d c l a i m o f R i c h a r d W e t h e r i l l there, w h i c h
i n c l u d e d Pueblo B o n i t o , C h e t r o K e t l , and Pueblo
del A r r o y o , General L a n d Office special agent S.J.
H o l s i n g e r strongly r e c o m m e n d e d that the U.S.
g o v e r n m e n t create a n a t i o n a l p a r k t o preserve
Chacoan sites, and he c o m p i l e d a r e p o r t docu­
m e n t i n g m a n y ruins. T h e General L a n d Office
responded b y suspending the H y d e e x p e d i t i o n s
excavations at Pueblo B o n i t o . T h e H y d e expedi­
t i o n never r e s u m e d its archaeological w o r k at
Chaco.
1902-10 Despite the denial o f R i c h a r d WetherilTs l a n d
c l a i m i n 1902, he c o n t i n u e d t o homestead at
Chaco C a n y o n and operated a t r a d i n g post at
Pueblo B o n i t o u n t i l his controversial m u r d e r
i n 1910.
1906 As a direct result o f controversy over WetherilFs
excavations at Chaco C a n y o n and claims b y
professionally t r a i n e d archaeologists that they
d i d n o t p r o p e r l y account for the site's scientific
significance, Congress enacted the Antiquities Act.
T h e l a w — t h e n a t i o n s first t o p r o t e c t
antiquities—granted the president the p o w e r
t o establish n a t i o n a l m o n u m e n t s .
1907 President T h e o d o r e Roosevelt set aside approxi­
m a t e l y 20,630 acres at Chaco C a n y o n as Chaco
C a n y o n N a t i o n a l M o n u m e n t u n d e r the a u t h o r i t y
o f the Antiquities Act. U n t i l 1916, w h e n the
N a t i o n a l Park Service (NPS) was created, the
m o n u m e n t was administered b y the federal agen­
cies that h a d j u r i s d i c t i o n over the land.
1916 Congress passed the Organic Act, w h i c h p r o v i d e d
for the creation o f the NPS, w h i c h has adminis­
tered Chaco C a n y o n N a t i o n a l M o n u m e n t and
Chaco C u l t u r e N a t i o n a l H i s t o r i c a l Park since
that t i m e .
1921-2J N e i l J u d d o f the N a t i o n a l Geographic Society
led the excavation o f several h u n d r e d r o o m s at
Pueblo B o n i t o , as w e l l as parts o f Pueblo del
APPENDIX A IOI
 A r r o y o and several smaller sites, for the S m i t h ­
sonian I n s t i t u t i o n . A g o a l o f this e x p e d i t i o n was
t o preserve the excavated Pueblo B o n i t o ; exten­
sive conservation treatments w e r e c o n d u c t e d at
the site.
1928 After a resurvey o f the m o n u m e n t p r o p e r t y i n d i ­
cated t h a t the lands m e n t i o n e d i n the o r i g i n a l
p r o c l a m a t i o n d i d n o t c o n t a i n all o f the described
ruins, President C a l v i n C o o l i d g e issued a second
p r o c l a m a t i o n , Presidential P r o c l a m a t i o n 1826, t o
correct these errors.
1929-41 Edgar Lee H e w e t t o f the School o f A m e r i c a n
Research and D o n a l d D . B r a n d o f the U n i v e r s i t y
o f N e w M e x i c o l e d excavations at C h e t r o K e t l
and m a n y s m a l l Chacoan sites.
1931 Congress enacted legislation (U.S. Statutes at Large
46:1165) t h a t related t o several aspects o f interest
i n lands at Chaco. First, i t a u t h o r i z e d the
exchange o f private lands w i t h i n the m o n u m e n t
for federal lands elsewhere i n N e w M e x i c o . I n
a d d i t i o n , i t a u t h o r i z e d the d r i v i n g o f livestock
across m o n u m e n t lands for o w n e r s (and t h e i r
successors i n interest) o f certain lands i n and
a d j o i n i n g the m o n u m e n t . T h e act also specified
means b y w h i c h the U n i v e r s i t y o f N e w M e x i c o
and the M u s e u m o f N e w M e x i c o and / o r the
School o f A m e r i c a n Research (located i n Santa
Fe) c o u l d c o n t i n u e t o c o n d u c t research o n t h e i r
f o r m e r lands w i t h i n the m o n u m e n t or, at the dis­
c r e t i o n o f the secretary o f the interior, o n o t h e r
lands w i t h i n the m o n u m e n t .
1
933 37
_
G o r d o n V i v i a n carried o u t extensive conservation
w o r k at Pueblo B o n i t o , C h e t r o K e t l , and Casa
Rinconada.
1937 A C i v i l i a n C o n s e r v a t i o n C o r p s ( C C C ) c r e w o f all-
Navajo stonemasons i n i t i a t e d repairs t o m a n y
large excavated Chacoan structures t h a t w e r e
d e t e r i o r a t i n g due t o years o f exposure t o r a i n ,
w i n d , and freeze-thaw cycles. I n a d d i t i o n , the
C C C b u i l t a t w o - h u n d r e d - p e r s o n camp near
Fajada B u t t e t o house w o r k e r s t o p r o v i d e
i m p r o v e m e n t s t o the m o n u m e n t .
1941 After a year o f heavy rains, T h r e a t e n i n g R o c k fell
o n t o and destroyed a p p r o x i m a t e l y t h i r t y r o o m s
at Pueblo B o n i t o t h a t h a d been excavated i n the
1920s.
102 C H A C O CULTURE N A T I O N A L HISTORICAL PARK
194J After the last Navajo resident at the m o n u m e n t
m o v e d away, the NPS erected fences at its b o u n d ­
aries t o exclude livestock and thereby t o restore
rangeland vegetation.
1949 T h e U n i v e r s i t y o f N e w M e x i c o deeded lands i n
Chaco C a n y o n N a t i o n a l M o n u m e n t t o the NPS
i n r e t u r n for c o n t i n u e d rights t o c o n d u c t sci­
entific research at the m o n u m e n t .
1959 As p a r t o f the NPS's M i s s i o n 66 c o n s t r u c t i o n
campaign, w h i c h extended from 1956 t o the
agency's 50th anniversary i n 1966, the NPS cre­
ated the m o n u m e n t ' s V i s i t o r Center, staff hous­
i n g , and c a m p g r o u n d s .
1969-81 T h e NPS a n d the U n i v e r s i t y o f N e w M e x i c o r u n
the Chaco Center Project, a m u l t i d i s c i p l i n a r y
research u n i t established t o enhance the under­
standing o f prehistoric N a t i v e A m e r i c a n cultures
o f the San Juan Basin. T h e center carried o u t
f i e l d w o r k and p u b l i c a t i o n a n d e x p e r i m e n t e d w i t h
the application o f n e w technologies t o research.
T h e center's w o r k identified and appraised over
one t h o u s a n d sites i n the Park and adjacent lands
and used r e m o t e sensing t o identify the prehis­
t o r i c r o a d system t h a t radiates o u t w a r d from
Chaco C a n y o n t o connect n u m e r o u s o u t l y i n g
Chacoan c o m m u n i t i e s i n the r e g i o n .
1979 T h e NPS approved the d o c u m e n t Chaco C a n y o n
N a t i o n a l M o n u m e n t : General M a n a g e m e n t
P l a n / D e v e l o p m e n t C o n c e p t Plan (NPS 1979).
1980 Congress enacted Public L a w 96-550, w h i c h cre­
ated Chaco C u l t u r e N a t i o n a l H i s t o r i c a l Park, tak­
i n g the place o f Chaco C a n y o n N a t i o n a l M o n u ­
m e n t . T h i s l a w contained three general p r o v i ­
sions: (1) i t added a p p r o x i m a t e l y 12,500 acres t o
the Park; (2) i t designated t h i r t y - t h r e e o u t l y i n g
sites i n the San Juan Basin as Chaco C u l t u r e
A r c h e o l o g i c a l P r o t e c t i o n Sites and p r o v i d e d for
the a d d i t i o n o f o t h e r sites i n the future; i n addi­
t i o n , i t created the Chaco C u l t u r e A r c h e o l o g i c a l
P r o t e c t i o n Site p r o g r a m t o j o i n t l y manage and
p r o t e c t Chacoan sites located o n lands n o t u n d e r
the j u r i s d i c t i o n o f the NPS; and (3) i t a u t h o r i z e d
a c o n t i n u i n g p r o g r a m o f archaeological research
i n the San Juan Basin.
1981 T h e Chaco C u l t u r e Interagency M a n a g e m e n t
G r o u p — c o m p o s e d o f the NPS, the B u r e a u o f
L a n d M a n a g e m e n t , the B u r e a u o f I n d i a n Affairs,
the Navajo N a t i o n , the State o f N e w M e x i c o , and
the U.S. Forest Service—was created t o p r o v i d e
for d e v e l o p m e n t o f a j o i n t m a n a g e m e n t p l a n for
f o r m a l l y designated Chacoan o u t l y i n g sites, as
r e q u i r e d u n d e r Public L a w 96-550. T h e agencies
i n v o l v e d i n the d e v e l o p m e n t o f the p l a n h a d
either j u r i s d i c t i o n over, o r interest i n , lands con­
t a i n i n g o u t l y i n g sites.
1982 T h e Park superintendent closed access t o Fajada
Butte, a N a t i v e A m e r i c a n sacred site, t o all visi­
tors except those a u t h o r i z e d b y p e r m i t .
1983 T h e Chaco C u l t u r e Interagency M a n a g e m e n t
G r o u p issued the d o c u m e n t Chaco A r c h e o l o g i c a l
P r o t e c t i o n Site System: J o i n t M a n a g e m e n t Plan,
w h i c h c o n t a i n e d guidelines for the identification,
preservation, p r o t e c t i o n , and research o f desig­
nated Chacoan o u t l y i n g sites.
1984 Based o n p u b l i c c o m m e n t s and p l a n n i n g and
m a n a g e m e n t discussions t h a t f o l l o w e d , the NPS
prepared the d o c u m e n t D r a f t General Manage­
m e n t P l a n / D e v e l o p m e n t C o n c e p t Plan / E n v i r o n ­
m e n t a l Assessment, Chaco C u l t u r e N a t i o n a l His­
torical Park, N e w M e x i c o . T h e d o c u m e n t
i n c l u d e d a description o f p r o p o s e d actions (gen­
eral m a n a g e m e n t plan) as w e l l as alternatives for
m a j o r proposals contained i n the p l a n . I n O c t o ­
ber, this d o c u m e n t was released for p u b l i c and
agency consideration. O n N o v e m b e r 1, a p u b l i c
m e e t i n g t o receive c o m m e n t s was h e l d i n A l b u ­
querque. A c c o r d i n g t o the NPS, "the m a j o r i t y
response was i n favor o f the general m a n a g e m e n t
p l a n proposals as described i n the draft docu­
m e n t . " I n the fall o f the same year, the NPS also
2
h e l d meetings w i t h federal, state, and local agen­
cies; the Navajo N a t i o n ; energy companies; and
individuals t o r e v i e w the m o s t i m p o r t a n t l a n d
m a n a g e m e n t and p r o t e c t i o n proposals c o n t a i n e d
i n the D r a f t L a n d P r o t e c t i o n Plan, Chaco C u l t u r e
N a t i o n a l H i s t o r i c a l Park.
1985 I n September, the Southwest R e g i o n approved
the d o c u m e n t General M a n a g e m e n t Plan / D e v e l ­
opment Concept Plan/Chaco Culture National
H i s t o r i c a l Park, N e w M e x i c o .
1987 T h e W o r l d H e r i t a g e C o m m i t t e e o f the U n i t e d
N a t i o n s Educational, Scientific, and C u l t u r a l
O r g a n i z a t i o n ( U N E S C O ) designated Chaco C u l ­
t u r e N a t i o n a l H i s t o r i c a l Park as a W o r l d H e r i t a g e
Site.
1991 Chaco C u l t u r e N a t i o n a l H i s t o r i c a l Park i n s t i t u t e d
the Chaco A m e r i c a n I n d i a n C o n s u l t a t i o n
Committee.
1993 T h e NPS created the Vanishing Treasures Initia­
tive, w h i c h is a i m e d at p r o v i d i n g a d d i t i o n a l fund­
i n g for ruins conservation at agency sites i n the
Southwest, i n c l u d i n g C C N H P . Since that t i m e ,
the p r o g r a m has p r o v i d e d significant f u n d i n g t o
the Park for c a r r y i n g o u t conservation-related
w o r k and for h i r i n g conservation-related staff.
1995 Congress enacted the Chacoan Outliers Protection
Act of 199$ (Public L a w 104-11). T h e act added nine
n e w o u t l y i n g sites and r e m o v e d four f o r m e r l y
designated o u t l i e r sites as Chaco C u l t u r e A r c h e o ­
logical P r o t e c t i o n Sites. These changes increased
the t o t a l n u m b e r o f outliers t o t h i r t y - n i n e and
extended t h e i r geographic scope outside the San
Juan Basin.
1996 W o r l d M o n u m e n t s F u n d n a m e d C C N H P and
associated archaeological sites i n N e w M e x i c o t o
its list o f the 100 m o s t endangered m o n u m e n t s .
I n response t o the urgings o f affiliated Native
A m e r i c a n tribes, the NPS closed b o t h entrances
t o the great k i v a k n o w n as Casa Rinconada.
1997 T h e N a t u r a l Resources Defense C o u n c i l and the
N a t i o n a l T r u s t for H i s t o r i c Preservation issued
the r e p o r t Reclaiming Our Heritage: What We Need
to Do to Preserve America's National Parks, w h i c h
i n c l u d e d C C N H P as one o f several case studies o f
threatened parks.
T h e NPS and the U n i v e r s i t y o f C o l o r a d o -
B o u l d e r f o r m e d a c o l l a b o r a t i o n a i m e d at creating
a synthesis o f the w o r k done b y the Chaco Center
Project (1969-81) t h r o u g h a series o f conferences.
1999 T h e N a t i o n a l Parks C o n s e r v a t i o n Association
n a m e d C C N H P t o its annual list o f the t e n m o s t
endangered n a t i o n a l parks i n the U n i t e d States—
c i t i n g damage t o the resources caused b y e n v i r o n ­
m e n t a l conditions; insufficient preservation and
APPENDIX A 103
 maintenance; l o o t i n g ; and p o t e n t i a l d e v e l o p m e n t
o f s u r r o u n d i n g lands.

As p a r t o f its r e q u i r e d activities u n d e r the Native

American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act of
1990 (NAGPRA), C C N H P d e t e r m i n e d t h a t the
Navajo N a t i o n s h o u l d be i n c l u d e d i n its list o f
Native A m e r i c a n tribes d e e m e d t o be c u l t u r a l l y
affiliated w i t h the prehistoric inhabitants o f
Chacoan sites. T h i s d e t e r m i n a t i o n m e a n t t h a t
the Navajo, like the Pueblo and H o p i tribes o f
the r e g i o n w h o h a d already b e e n considered
descendants, can legally c l a i m possession o f
h u m a n remains and artifacts w i t h i n the Park.
T h i s f i n d i n g has p r o d u c e d a series o f protests
f r o m the H o p i and m o s t o f the Pueblo tribes, as
w e l l as c r i t i c i s m f r o m the Society for A m e r i c a n
Archaeology.

Notes

1. Rothman 1989, 23.

2. NPS 1985,4-

104 C H A C O CULTURE N A T I O N A L HISTORICAL PARK

 Period of Occupation
A p p e n d i x B:
Resource Classification Score 5: Anasazi

Score 4: Paleo-Indian, Archaic, and Navajo 1750-1900;

T h i s scoring system was developed t o d e t e r m i n e u n k n o w n — A n a s a z i o r Archaic
the relative i m p o r t a n c e o f resources after the
a d d i t i o n o f n e w lands t o the Park as a result o f Score 2: Navajo 1900-45 and u n k n o w n ; historic pre-1900;

the 1980 legislation. A l t h o u g h i t was n o t i n t e n d e d u n k n o w n — N a v a j o o r historic

t o be used as a r a n k i n g o f resources, i t does seem Score 1: U n k n o w n
t o indicate the relative value a t t r i b u t e d t o
resources o n the basis o f c u l t u r a l affiliations, site
type, and date. T h e i n f o r m a t i o n was taken from
NPS 1985,119-29.

Cultural Affiliation

Score 5: Anasazi

Score 4: Archaic, Paleo-Indian, and u n k n o w n (probably

Anasazi o r Archaic)

Score 3: Navajo and u n k n o w n (probably Anasazi o r

Navajo)

Score 2: H i s t o r i c and u n k n o w n (Navajo o r historic)

Score 1: U n k n o w n

Site Type

Score 5: H a b i t a t i o n , k i v a

Score 4: H o g a n , Anasazi r o a d o r trail, signaling site, shrine

o r other ceremonial feature, Anasazi ledge u n i t ,
field house, w a t e r c o n t r o l feature, Archaic o r
Paleo-Indian c a m p

Score 3: A r t i f a c t scatter; other—Archaic o r Paleo-Indian;

camp—Anasazi, Navajo, historic, o r u n k n o w n ;
r o c k art; storage site

Score 2: B a k i n g pit; Anasazi o r u n k n o w n hearth; Navajo

o r historic ledge u n i t ; b u r i a l ; r a n c h c o m p l e x

Score 1: Road o r trail—Navajo o r historic; a n i m a l hus­

b a n d r y feature; sweathouse; oven; q u a r r y ; cairn;
other—Navajo o r historic; o t h e r — u n k n o w n ;
unknown

APPENDIX B 105
 • M a k i n g m u s e u m collections m o r e accessible t o
A p p e n d i x C: researchers b y p r o v i d i n g i n f o r m a t i o n o n m u s e u m
M a n a g e m e n t P r i o r i t i e s off CCNHP holdings i n a v a r i e t y o f formats
in 2 0 0 1
• U p d a t i n g m u s e u m exhibits t o p r o v i d e m o r e accu­

Source: NPS 2002b, pt. 4,3-5.

rate i n f o r m a t i o n t o visitors about the c u r r e n t
u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f the Park's c u l t u r a l resources
S u m m a r y o f C u l t u r a l Resources P r i o r i t i e s

• U p d a t i n g all site records and maps t o p r o v i d e S u m m a r y o f N a t u r a l Resources P r i o r i t i e s

accurate i n f o r m a t i o n o n the resources m a n a g e d
b y the Park
• D e v e l o p i n g and m a n a g i n g NPS and GIS data­
bases t o m o n i t o r Park n a t u r a l and c u l t u r a l
resources
• C o n d u c t i n g NPS-required c u l t u r a l resources
studies t o i m p r o v e u n d e r s t a n d i n g a n d manage­
m e n t o f the resources
• C o m p l y i n g w i t h all laws r e g u l a t i n g activities o n
federal lands and c o n s u l t i n g w i t h c u l t u r a l l y
affiliated tribes o n Park m a n a g e m e n t issues
• P u b l i s h i n g final reports o n past archaeological
projects t o m a k e the data available t o the general
public
• C o n t i n u i n g the site preservation backfilling p r o ­
g r a m t o p r o t e c t archaeological sites for the f u t u r e
• D e v e l o p i n g preventative maintenance plans t o
c o n d u c t regular, cyclic preservation treatments t o
prevent catastrophic site loss
• I n i t i a t i n g studies a n d m o n i t o r i n g t o gather data
for use i n developing a m a n a g e m e n t p l a n for the
Park's p i o n e e r i n g e l k h e r d
• C o n t i n u i n g studies o f Park vegetation and
w i l d l i f e t o u n d e r s t a n d Park resources a n d t h e i r
l o n g - t e r m recovery from p o o r range manage­
ment prior to 1990
• C o n d u c t i n g studies t o u n d e r s t a n d the Park's
ecological significance a n d its r o l e i n c o n s e r v i n g
r e g i o n a l biodiversity
• I m p l e m e n t i n g and m o n i t o r i n g r e c o m m e n d a t i o n s
from research studies t o effectively manage n a t u ­
r a l resources
• C o n t i n u i n g d e v e l o p m e n t o f the n i g h t sky m o n i ­
toring program
• D e v e l o p i n g h y d r o l o g y data as needed t o manage
erosion threats t o c u l t u r a l sites and t o preserve
riparian habitats and biodiversity

• C o n d u c t i n g baseline site c o n d i t i o n assessments

and c o m p l e t i n g architectural d o c u m e n t a t i o n as
required

• C o m p i l i n g the b a c k l o g o f preservation records

and p r e p a r i n g annual reports d o c u m e n t i n g site
preservation treatments

• G a i n i n g m u s e u m c o l l e c t i o n accountability
t h r o u g h the d e v e l o p m e n t and i m p l e m e n t a t i o n o f
m u s e u m m a n a g e m e n t plans and t h r o u g h reduc­
i n g the b a c k l o g o f uncataloged objects a n d
archives

• Preserving m u s e u m collections b y p r o p e r l y con­

serving and s t o r i n g objects and archives and
h o u s i n g t h e m i n facilities that m e e t federal and
NPS standards

106 C H A C O CULTURE N A T I O N A L HISTORICAL PARK


Appendix D:
Summary of Legislation
P e r t i n e n t t o CCNHP
Antiquities Act of 1906 {U.S. Code,
v o l . 1 6 , sees. 4 3 1 - 3 3 ) — 1 9 0 6
T h i s act was passed t o p r o t e c t archaeological resources
f r o m damage o r d e s t r u c t i o n at the hands o f looters, ama­
t e u r archaeologists, and curious visitors. T h e act specified
that u n a u t h o r i z e d excavation o f any historic o r prehis­
t o r i c r u i n m a y be punishable b y fine a n d / o r j a i l . I t gave
the president the a u t h o r i t y t o p r o c l a i m as n a t i o n a l m o n u ­
ments l a n d m a r k s o f historic o r prehistoric interest. I t
n a m e d the federal departments that m i g h t issue p e r m i t s
for p r o p e r research o n federal lands and a l l o w e d that fur­
ther constraints o n such activity c o u l d be issued b y these
departments.
National Park Service Organic Act
(U.S. Code, v o l . 1 6 , sees. 1-4)—1916
T h i s act established the NPS and p r o v i d e d its mandate,
stating t h a t i t "shall p r o m o t e a n d regulate the use o f the
federal areas k n o w n as n a t i o n a l parks, m o n u m e n t s , and
reservations hereinafter specified b y such means and
measures as c o n f o r m t o the f u n d a m e n t a l purposes o f the
said parks, m o n u m e n t s , and reservations, w h i c h purpose
is t o conserve the scenery and the n a t u r a l and historic
objects and the w i l d l i f e therein, a n d t o p r o v i d e for the
e n j o y m e n t o f the same i n such m a n n e r and b y such
means as w i l l leave t h e m u n i m p a i r e d for the e n j o y m e n t o f
future generations."
T h e director o f the NPS is g i v e n considerable lati­
tude i n this legislation for g r a n t i n g privileges, leases, and
p e r m i t s t o use the l a n d o r its resources, p r o v i d e d that the
grantees are satisfactorily qualified.
Historic Sites Act of 1935
(U.S. Code, v o l . 1 6 , sees. 461-67)—1935
T h i s l a w declares the n a t i o n a l p o l i c y t o preserve for p u b l i c
use historic sites, buildings, and objects o f n a t i o n a l
significance for the i n s p i r a t i o n and benefit o f the people o f
the U n i t e d States. T h e NPS director, o n b e h a l f o f the sec­
retary o f the interior, shall ensure that the f o l l o w i n g func­
tions are u n d e r t a k e n :
• M a k e , organize, and preserve graphic, p h o t o ­
graphic, and narrative data o n historic and archaeological
sites, buildings, and objects;
• Survey these resources t o d e t e r m i n e w h i c h pos­
sess exceptional value as c o m m e m o r a t i n g o r i l l u s t r a t i n g
the h i s t o r y o f the U n i t e d States;
• C o n d u c t the research necessary t o get accurate
i n f o r m a t i o n o n these resources;
• Enter i n t o contracts, associations, partnerships,
etc., w i t h appropriate organizations o r individuals
(bonded) t o protect, preserve, m a i n t a i n , etc., any historic
o r ancient b u i l d i n g , site, etc., used i n c o n n e c t i o n w i t h
p u b l i c use.
Further, i t establishes the NPS A d v i s o r y B o a r d
and A d v i s o r y C o u n c i l t o assist the director i n i d e n t i f y i n g
sites for NPS n o m i n a t i o n , i n m a n a g i n g those sites, and i n
g a t h e r i n g i n f o r m a t i o n f r o m the m o s t qualified experts o n
the matters w i t h i n t h e i r p u r v i e w .
National Historic Preservation Act of 1966
(NHPA) f as Amended (U.S. Code, v o l . 1 6 ,
sees. 470ff.)—1966
T h i s act declares the r e c o g n i t i o n o f the federal govern­
m e n t o f the i m p o r t a n c e o f historic places t o the q u a l i t y o f
life i n the U n i t e d States and declares a c o m m i t m e n t t o the
preservation o f the historical and c u l t u r a l foundations o f
the n a t i o n as a l i v i n g p a r t o f its c o m m u n i t y life and devel­
o p m e n t , i n order t o give a sense o f o r i e n t a t i o n t o the
A m e r i c a n people. I t states that ' A l t h o u g h the m a j o r bur­
dens o f historic preservation have been b o r n e and m a j o r
efforts i n i t i a t e d b y private agencies and individuals, and
b o t h s h o u l d c o n t i n u e t o play a v i t a l role, i t is nevertheless
necessary and appropriate for the Federal G o v e r n m e n t t o
accelerate its historic preservation p r o g r a m s and activi­
ties, t o give m a x i m u m encouragement t o agencies and
individuals u n d e r t a k i n g preservation b y private means,
and t o assist State and local governments and the N a t i o n a l
T r u s t for H i s t o r i c Preservation i n the U n i t e d States t o
expand and accelerate t h e i r historic preservation p r o ­
g r a m s and activities." Further, i t makes clear that the fed­
eral g o v e r n m e n t has a s t r o n g interest t o p r o v i d e leader­
ship i n the preservation o f the prehistoric and historic
resources o f the U n i t e d States and o f the i n t e r n a t i o n a l
c o m m u n i t y o f nations and i n the a d m i n i s t r a t i o n o f the
n a t i o n a l preservation p r o g r a m i n partnership w i t h states,
I n d i a n tribes, Native Hawaiians, and local governments.
T w o sections are p a r t i c u l a r l y p e r t i n e n t t o archaeological
resources such as those at C C N H P :
SECTION 106 REGULATIONS
T h i s section requires federal agencies t o take i n t o account
the effects o f t h e i r undertakings o n historic properties and
APPENDIX D 107
afford the A d v i s o r y C o u n c i l a reasonable o p p o r t u n i t y t o
c o m m e n t o n such undertakings. T h e procedures define
h o w agencies m e e t these s t a t u t o r y responsibilities. T h e
"106 Process" seeks t o a c c o m m o d a t e historic preservation
concerns w i t h the needs o f federal undertakings, t h r o u g h
c o n s u l t a t i o n early i n the p l a n n i n g process w i t h the agency
official and o t h e r parties w i t h an interest i n the effects o f
the u n d e r t a k i n g o n historic properties. T h e goal o f con­
s u l t a t i o n is t o identify historic properties p o t e n t i a l l y
affected b y the u n d e r t a k i n g ; assess its effects; and seek
ways t o avoid, m i n i m i z e , o r m i t i g a t e any adverse effects
o n historic properties. T h e agency official m u s t c o m p l e t e
this process p r i o r t o a p p r o v i n g the expenditure o f federal
funds o n the w o r k o r before any p e r m i t s are issued.
T h e regulations that i m p l e m e n t section 1 0 6
define the appropriate participants and the professional
and practical standards t h e y m u s t meet; they also describe
the c o m p o n e n t s o f the process necessary t o c o m p l y w i t h
the National Historic Protection Act, i n c l u d i n g the
identification and r e c o r d i n g o f historic properties; an
assessment o f threats, p o t e n t i a l l y adverse effects, and
readiness for emergencies; consequences o f failure t o
resolve such threats; and the appropriate k i n d s o f consul­
t a t i o n required.
SECTION 110 REGULATIONS
Section n o sets o u t the historic preservation responsibili­
ties o f federal agencies; i t is i n t e n d e d t o ensure that his­
t o r i c preservation is fully i n t e g r a t e d i n t o the o n g o i n g p r o ­
g r a m s o f all federal agencies.
T h e guidelines that accompany this act s h o w h o w
federal agencies s h o u l d address the various o t h e r require­
m e n t s and guidelines i n c a r r y i n g o u t t h e i r responsibilities
u n d e r the act. T h e head o f each federal agency, acting
t h r o u g h its preservation officer, s h o u l d b e c o m e familiar
w i t h the statutes, regulations, a n d guidelines that bear
u p o n the agency's historic preservation p r o g r a m r e q u i r e d
b y section n o .
T h e section also requires that all federal agencies
establish a preservation p r o g r a m for the identification,
evaluation, n o m i n a t i o n t o the n a t i o n a l register, and p r o ­
t e c t i o n o f historic properties. Each federal agency m u s t
consult w i t h the secretary o f the i n t e r i o r ( t h r o u g h the
director o f the NPS) i n establishing its preservation p r o ­
grams. Each m u s t use historic properties available t o i t i n
c a r r y i n g o u t its responsibilities. Benchmarks i n this
respect include the f o l l o w i n g :
• A n agency's historic properties are t o be m a n a g e d
and m a i n t a i n e d i n a w a y that considers the preservation o f
108 C H A C O CULTURE N A T I O N A L HISTORICAL PARK
their historic, archaeological, architectural, and c u l t u r a l
values;
• Properties n o t u n d e r agency j u r i s d i c t i o n b u t
p o t e n t i a l l y affected b y agency actions are t o be f u l l y con­
sidered i n agency p l a n n i n g ;
• Preservation-related activities m u s t be carried o u t
i n c o n s u l t a t i o n w i t h o t h e r federal o r state agencies, Native
A m e r i c a n tribes, and the private sector;
• Procedures for compliance w i t h section 1 0 6 o f
the same act are t o be consistent w i t h regulations issued
b y the A d v i s o r y C o u n c i l .
Agencies m a y n o t g r a n t assistance o r a license
t o an applicant w h o damages o r destroys historic p r o p ­
e r t y w i t h the i n t e n t o f a v o i d i n g the requirements o f
section 1 0 6 .
Archaeological and Historic Preservation
Act of 1974 [U.S. Code, v o l . 1 6 , sees.
469ff.)—1974
S u p p o r t i n g earlier legislation, this act specified t h a t i t was
federal p o l i c y t o require the preservation, t o the extent
possible, o f historical and archaeological data threatened
b y d a m c o n s t r u c t i o n o r alterations o f t e r r a i n . I t includes
the preservation o f data, relics, and specimens t h a t m i g h t
be lost o r destroyed as the result o f f l o o d i n g , r o a d con­
s t r u c t i o n , o r construction-related activity, b y any U.S.
agency o r b y someone licensed b y such an agency, o r b y
any a l t e r a t i o n o f the t e r r a i n caused b y a federal construc­
t i o n project o r federally licensed activity.
It requires the n o t i f i c a t i o n o f the secretary o f the
i n t e r i o r i f any such damage is possible, i n advance o f the
start o f such a project, so that the appropriate m i t i g a t i n g
action c o u l d be i n i t i a t e d (research, salvage, recovery, doc­
u m e n t a t i o n , etc.). T o reduce the b u r d e n o n contractors,
landowners, and o t h e r citizens, this l a w requires the secre­
t a r y o f the i n t e r i o r t o initiate such w o r k w i t h i n sixty days
o f n o t i f i c a t i o n and t o compensate the o w n e r for the t e m ­
p o r a r y loss o f use o f the land, i f necessary. I t also specifies
the r e p o r t i n g procedures t o be used, disposition o f recov­
ered materials, a n d the c o o r d i n a t i o n o f such w o r k at the
n a t i o n a l level, a n d r e c o m m e n d s f o l l o w - u p procedures i n
order t o assess the need for a n d success o f this p r o g r a m .
American Indian Religious Freedom Act of
1978 (U.S. Code, v o l . 4 2 , sec. 1996)—
1978
This act states that " i t shall be the p o l i c y o f the U.S. t o pro­
tect and preserve for A m e r i c a n Indians their inherent r i g h t
o f freedom t o believe, express, and exercise the traditional Agencies are r e q u i r e d t o consult w i t h Congress and t o
religions o f the A m e r i c a n Indian, E s k i m o , A l e u t , and solicit and consider the v i e w s and suggestions o f o t h e r
Native Hawaiians, i n c l u d i n g b u t n o t l i m i t e d t o access t o stakeholders and customers w h o are p o t e n t i a l l y affected
sites, use, and possession o f sacred objects and the freedom by the p l a n .
to w o r s h i p t h r o u g h ceremonials and traditional rites." Performance plans are done o n a yearly basis,
covering the agency's fiscal year. L i n k e d w i t h the strategic
The Archaeological Resources Protection p l a n c u r r e n t l y i n effect, p e r f o r m a n c e plans m u s t include
Act of 1979 [U.S. Code, v o l . 1 6 , sec. the goals for the fiscal year; a description o f the processes
470aa-mm)— 1979 and skills and o f the technology, h u m a n , capital, and
i n f o r m a t i o n resources needed t o m e e t the goals; and
T h i s act secures the p r o t e c t i o n o f archaeological
a description o f h o w the results w i l l be verified and
resources and sites o n p u b l i c lands and I n d i a n lands, and
validated.
fosters increased c o o p e r a t i o n and exchange o f i n f o r m a ­
Performance reports, prepared at the e n d o f
t i o n b e t w e e n g o v e r n m e n t a l authorities, the professional
each year, detail the agency's achievements t o w a r d the
archaeological c o m m u n i t y , and private individuals h a v i n g
a c c o m p l i s h m e n t o f the annual goals set o u t i n the per­
collections o f archaeological resources and data o b t a i n e d
f o r m a n c e plan.
before 31 O c t o b e r 1 9 7 9 .
It requires that any investigation a n d / o r r e m o v a l
o f archaeological resources o n p u b l i c o r I n d i a n lands be
c o n t i n g e n t o n a qualified applicant o b t a i n i n g a p e r m i t .
T h e successful application m u s t demonstrate that the
w o r k is i n the p u b l i c interest, that recovered materials w i l l
r e m a i n U.S. p r o p e r t y (curated b y an appropriate institu­
t i o n ) , and that the w o r k p r o p o s e d is consistent w i t h the
larger m a n a g e m e n t goals o f the lands i n question. O t h e r
requirements include t r i b a l notification, r e p o r t i n g , over­
sight, deadlines, p r o h i b i t e d acts, and confidentiality,
a m o n g others.

Government Performance and Results

Act of 1993 {U.S. Statutes at Large 107
[ 1 9 9 3 ] : 2 8 5 ; Public L a w 1 0 3 - 6 2 )

T h i s act requires federally f u n d e d agencies t o develop and

i m p l e m e n t accountability systems based o n goal setting
and performance m e a s u r e m e n t and t o r e p o r t o n t h e i r
progress i n b o t h p l a n n i n g and results i n the b u d g e t a r y
process. T h e act was created t o address a b r o a d range o f
concerns about g o v e r n m e n t accountability and p e r f o r m ­
ance, w i t h the goal o f i m p r o v i n g citizens' confidence i n
the g o v e r n m e n t b y forcing accountability i n the manage­
rial and i n t e r n a l w o r k i n g s o f federal agencies. A l l partici­
p a t i n g agencies m u s t c o m p l e t e three documents: a strate­
gic plan, a p e r f o r m a n c e plan, and a performance r e p o r t .
Strategic plans, issued every three t o five years,
m u s t include a comprehensive m i s s i o n statement, a
description o f general goals and objectives and h o w these
w i l l be achieved, identification o f key factors that c o u l d
affect achievement o f the general goals and objectives,
and a description and schedule o f p r o g r a m evaluations.

APPENDIX D 109
References

Birdsall, S., and J. W Florin. 1992. Regional Landscapes of the United States National Park Service closed Casa Rinconada, a great kiva at Chaco,
and Canada. 4 t h ed. N e w York: John W i l e y and Sons. as a result.

Birnbaum, C. A . 1994. Protecting Cultural Landscapes: Planning, Treat­ L o w r y W 1994. The Capacity for Wonder: Preserving National Parks.
ment, and Management of Historical Landscapes. Preservation Briefs 36. Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution.
NPS. http: / / w w w 2 . c r . n p s . g o v / h p s / t p s / b r i e f s / b r i e f 3 6 . h t m (12 Feb.
M c M a n a m o n , F. P. 2001. "Cultural resources and protection under
2003).
United States l a w " ConnecticutJournal of International Law 16 (2):
Brugge, D . 1993. "Navajo Interests at Chaco Culture National Historical 247-82.
Park." I n Wozniak, Brugge, and Lange 1993.
Mason, R., ed. 1999. Economics and Heritage Conservation. Los Angeles:
Byrne, D., et al. 2001. Social Significance: A Discussion Paper. Hurstville, Getty Conservation Institute.http:/ / www.getty.edu/conservation/
N e w South Wales, Australia: N e w South Wales National Parks and publications /pdf_publications/ econrpt.pdf (12 Feb. 2003).
Wildlife Service.
National Park Service (NPS).
Chaco Culture Interagency Management Group. 1983. Chaco Culture See US. National Park Service.
Interagency Management Group. Chaco Archeological Protection Site
Pearson, M . , and S. Sullivan. 1995. Looking after Heritage Places. Carlton,
System: Joint Management Plan. Chaco Culture Interagency
Victoria: Melbourne University Press.
Management Group.
Public Broadcasting System. 1980. The Chaco Legacy [film]. Odyssey
Code of Federal Regulations. 2002. Title 36, chapter 1, sec 2.1.
Films.
Hardacre, E. C. 1879. "The cliff-dwellers." Scribners Monthly, an Illus­
Rothman, H . 1989. Preserving Different Pasts: The American National Mon­
trated Magazine for the People 17 (1879), pt. 2: 2.66-76.
uments. Urbana: University o f Illinois Press.
Hoover, J. 2001. A cultural affiliation controversy" American
f
Archaeology
Satterfield, T 2002. "Numbness and sensitivity i n the elicitation o f envi­
4 (4) (Winter 2000-01): 34-37.
ronmental values." I n Assessing the Values of Cultural Heritage: Research
Keller, R., and M . F. Turek. 1998. American Indians and National Parks. Report, ed. M . de la Torre. Los Angeles: Getty Conservation Institute.
Tucson: University o f Arizona Press.
Sellars, R. W. 1997. Preserving Nature in the National Park: A History. New
Lee, M . E., and D . Stephens. 1994. Anasazi Cultural Parks Study Assess­ Haven: Yale University Press.
ment o f Visitor Experiences at Three Cultural Parks. N o r t h e r n A r i ­
Sofaer, A., et al. 1982a. "Lunar m a r k i n g o n Fajada Butte." I n Archaeoas-
zona University, Flagstaff.
tronomyin the New World, ed. A . Aveni, 169-81. Cambridge: Cambridge
Lee, R. F. 1971. The Antiquities Act of 1906. Reprinted i n An Old Reliable University Press.
Authority: An Act for the Preservation of American Antiquities, ed. R. H .
. 1982b. The Sun Dagger [film]. Washington, D.C.: Solstice Project,
Thompson. A special issue o f Journal of the Southwest 4 (2) (Summer
Bullfrog Productions.
2000): 198-269.
StofHe, R. W , et al. 1994. American Indians and Fajada Butte: Ethno­
Lekson, S. H . , et al. 1988. "The Chaco Canyon c o m m u n i t y " Scientific
graphic Overview and Assessment for Fajada Butte and Traditional
American 259 (1): 100-109.
(Ethnobotanical) Use Study for Chaco Culture National Historical
Lipe, W D . 1984. "Value and meaning i n cultural resources." I n Park, N e w Mexico-Final Report. BARA, University o f Arizona, Tucson.
Approaches to the Archaeological Heritage: A Comparative Study of World
Strutin, M . , and G. H . Huey. 1994. Chaco: A Cultural Legacy. Tucson:
Archaeological Resource Management, ed. H . Cleere. Cambridge: Cam­
Southwest Parks and Monuments Association.
bridge University Press.
Stuart, G. E., and F. P. M c M a n a m o n . N . d . 'Archaeology and y o u . "
Lister, R. H . , and F. C. Lister. 1981. Chaco Canyon: Archaeology and Archae­
Society for American Archaeology, http: / / www.saa.org/
ologists. Albuquerque: University o f N e w Mexico Press.
publications/ArchAndYou (25 May 2004).
Loe, V 1996. "Entering Anasazi r u i n prohibited: Chaco Canyon kiva
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
doors closed to prevent further desecration." Dallas Morning News,
(UNESCO) W o r l d Heritage Committee. 1984. Operational Guidelines for
17 Nov., B-04. Note: This article discusses the practices o f N e w Age
the Implementation of the World Heritage Convention. Paris: UNESCO.
adherents at Chaco Culture National Historical Park, h o w these acts
. 1985. Report o f the rapporteur. N i n t h Session, SC-85/ Conf. 0 0 / 9 .
are deemed to be a desecration o f places held sacred there by Native
Americans w h o claim cultural affiliation to the site, and h o w the U S . . 1999. Operational Guidelines for the Implementation of the World

IIO C H A C O CULTURE N A T I O N A L HISTORICAL PARK

Heritage Convention. Paris: UNESCO, h t t p : / / whc.unesco.org/ . 1983. Chaco Archeological Protection Site System: Joint Manage­
opgutoc.htm (25 May 2004). ment Plan. NPS.

. 2002. Revision o f the "Operational Guidelines for the Implemen­ . 1984. W o r l d Heritage List N o m i n a t i o n Submitted by the United
tation o f the W o r l d Heritage Convention": T h i r d Draft Annotated States o f America, Chaco Culture National Historical Park. NPS.
Revised "Operational Guidelines" by the March 2002 Drafting Group. . 1985. General Management Plan/Development Concept Plan,
26 C O M W H C - 0 2 / C o n f . 202/14B, Twenty-sixth Session, 2 4 - 2 9 June,
Chaco Culture National Historical Park, N e w Mexico. NPS.
http: / / whc.unesco.org/archive/2002/whc-02-conf202-14be.pdf
. 1988. Resource Management Plan: Chaco Culture National
( 1 2 Feb. 2003).
Historical Park. NPS.
U.S. Code. 1906. An Actfor the Preservation of American Antiquities. Vol. 16,
. 1990a. Chaco Culture Archeological Protection Site System Joint
sees. 431-33. h t t p : / / w w w . c r . n p s . g o v / l o c a l - l a w / a n t i 1 9 0 6 . h t m
Management Plan: Plan Amendment. NPS.
(12 Feb. 2003).
. 1990b. Chaco Culture National Historical Park temporarily closes
. 1916. The National Park Service Organic Act. Vol. 16, sees. 1-4.
Fajada Butte. News release, 19 March. NPS. Note: A copy o f this news
http: / /www.nps.gov/legacy/organic-act.htm (12 Feb. 2003).
release is contained i n app. B o f Stoffle et al. 1994.
. 1931. An Act to Authorize Exchange of Lands with Owners of Private-
. 1991. Statement for Interpretation and I n t e r i m Interpretive
Land Holdings within the Chaco Canyon National Monument, New Mexico,
Prospectus: Chaco Culture National Historical Park, Chaco Canyon,
and for Other Purposes. U.S. Statutes at Large 46:1165. Note: This act passed
N e w Mexico. NPS.
by the U.S. Congress provided means to the U.S. secretary o f the inte­
rior t o eliminate private holdings o f land w i t h i n Chaco Canyon . 1994. NPS 28: Cultural Resource Management Guidelines.
National M o n u m e n t . The act also provided that i f certain lands w i t h i n Release N o . 4. NPS.
the m o n u m e n t owned by the University o f N e w Mexico, the M u s e u m
. 1995. Resource Management Plan: Chaco Culture National
o f N e w Mexico, and the School o f American Research were conveyed
Historical Park. NPS.
to the U.S. government, then those institutions w o u l d be permitted to
continue scientific research w i t h i n those specified parcels. This statute . 1996. Protection o f Casa Rinconada Interior: Environmental

is superseded by U.S. Statutes at Large 94 (1980): 3227. Assessment: Chaco Culture National Historical Park. NPS.

. 1997a. Director's Order N o . 28: Cultural Resource Management

. 1968. Carlson-Foley Act of 1968 (noxious plant control), sec. 1241;
Guidelines. Release N o . 5. NPS.
Public Law 90-583.
. 1997b. Finding o f N o Significant Impact: Protection o f Casa Rin­
. 1969. National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA). Vol. 42, sees.
conada Interior: Chaco Culture National Historical Park. NPS, 30 June.
4321-47. http: / /ceq.eh.doe.gov/nepa/regs/nepa/nepaeqia.htm (12
Feb. 2003). . 1999. Chaco Culture National Historical Park, San Juan County,
N e w Mexico; Fajada Butte closure. Federal Register 64 (48). Washington,
. 1979. Archaeological Resources Protection Act (ARPA). Vol. 16, sec.
D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 12 March.
47oaa-mm.
. 2000a. Management Policies 2001. NPS. Note: The report's intro­
. 1980. US. Statutes at Large 94:3228; Public Law 96-550, title v, sec.
duction states that "this volume is the basic service-wide policy docu­
503. Note: This act passed by the U.S. Congress provides for the estab­
ment o f the National Park Service." It includes sections concerning
lishment o f Chaco Culture National Historical Park as well as for t h i r t y
park system planning, land protection, natural resource management,
Chaco Culture Archeological Protection Sites and the abolishment o f
cultural resource management, wilderness preservation and manage­
Chaco Canyon National M o n u m e n t , http: / / w w w 4 . 1 a w .
ment, and interpretation and education. The document also includes a
cornell.edu/uscode/16/410ii-5.html (12 Feb. 2003).
glossary and appendices containing references to laws cited i n the text
. 1990. Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act and relevant executive orders, memoranda, and director's orders,
(NAGPRA). Vol. 25, sec. 32; Public Law 101-601. http: / / www.cr.nps.gov/ h t t p : / / w w w . n p s . g o v / p o l i c y / m p / p o l i c i e s . p d f (12 Feb. 2003).
nagpra/index.htm (as o f 12 Feb. 2003) and http: / / www.cast.uark.edu/
. 2000b. National Park Service Strategic Plan, FY2001-FY2005.
o t h e r / n p s / n a g p r a / n a g p r a . d a t / l g m o o 3 . h t m l (12 Feb. 2003).
NPS. http: / /planning.nps.gov/document/NPS%5Fstrategic%
. 1995. Chacoan Outliers Protection Act of 1995. US. Statutes at Large
5 F p l a n % 2 E p d f (12 Feb. 2003).
109 (1995): 158; Public Law 104-11. Note: The act added nine new o u t l y i n g
. 2001a. Chaco Culture National Historical Park Annual Perfor­
sites and removed four formerly designated outlier sites as Chaco
mance Plan: Fiscal Year 2002. NPS.
Culture Archeological Protection Sites. These changes increased the
total number o f outliers t o thirty-nine, totaling 14,372 acres, and . 2001b. Director's Order N o . 12: Conservation Planning,
extended their geographic scope outside the San Juan Basin, Environmental Impact Analysis, and Decision-Making. NPS.
http: / /www.nps.gov/legal/laws/ 1 0 4 t h / 104-ii.pdf (12 Feb. 2003). h t t p : / / w w w . n p s . g o v / p o l i c y / D O r d e r s / D O r d e r 1 2 . h t m l ( 1 2 Feb. 2003).

U.S. National Park Service (NPS). 1979. Chaco Canyon National M o n u ­ . 2001c. Chaco Culture National Historical Park. Superintendent's
ment: General Management Plan/Development Concept Plan. NPS. C o m p e n d i u m (Site Specific Rules and Regulations). NPS.

. 1982. NPS 12: National Environmental Policy Act . 2002a. Chaco Culture National Historical Park Annual Perfor­
Guidelines. NPS. mance Plan, Fiscal Year 2002. NPS.

REFERENCES I I I
 . 2002b. Chaco Culture National Historical Park Resource Manage­
ment Plan (Draft). NPS, 10 Jan.

U.S. President. 1907. Proclamation 740. U.S. Statutes at Large 35: 2119,11
March. Note: This proclamation by U.S. President Theodore Roosevelt
created Chaco Canyon National M o n u m e n t .

. 1928. Proclamation 1826. U.S. Statutes at Large 45: 2937,10 Jan.

Note: This presidential proclamation by U.S. President Calvin Coolidge
extended the boundaries o f Chaco Canyon National M o n u m e n t .

. 1977. Executive Order 11987, "Exotic Organisms." 24 May.

http.7 / envirotext.eh.doe.gov/data/eos/carter/ 19770524.html
(12 Feb. 2003).

Winks, R. W 1997. The National Park Service Act of 1916: "A contradictory
mandate"? Denver University Law Review 74 (3): 575-620.

Wozniak, F. E., D . Brugge, and C. Lange, eds. 1993. A n Ethnohistorical

Summary o f Ceremonial and Other Traditional Uses o f Fajada Butte
and Related Sites at Chaco Culture National Historical Park. N e w Mex­
ico Historic Preservation Division, Santa Fe. Note: This document was
prepared for the N e w Mexico Historic Preservation Division under an
intergovernmental agreement w i t h the Southwest Regional Office o f
the U.S. National Park Service, w h i c h funded the study.

112 C H A C O CULTURE N A T I O N A L HISTORICAL PARK

 Persons Contacted during the Development of the Case

Rachael Anderson Petuuche Gilbert

Vanishing Treasures A r c h a e o l o g i s t Tribal Councilman
Chaco C u l t u r e N a t i o n a l H i s t o r i c a l Park A c o m a Pueblo
N a t i o n a l Park Service
Joyce Raab
TaftBlackhorse Archivist
Navajo N a t i o n Chaco Sites P r o t e c t i o n P r o g r a m Chaco C u l t u r e N a t i o n a l H i s t o r i c a l Park
Navajo N a t i o n H i s t o r i c Preservation D e p a r t m e n t N a t i o n a l Park Service

Russell Bodnar James Ramakka

C h i e f o f Interpretations C h i e f o f N a t u r a l Resources M a n a g e m e n t
Chaco C u l t u r e N a t i o n a l H i s t o r i c a l Park Chaco C u l t u r e N a t i o n a l H i s t o r i c a l Park
N a t i o n a l Park Service N a t i o n a l Park Service

Wendy Bustard Virginia Salazar

Museum Curator Regional C u r a t o r
Chaco C u l t u r e N a t i o n a l H i s t o r i c a l Park I n t e r m o u n t a i n S u p p o r t Office-Santa Fe
N a t i o n a l Park Service N a t i o n a l Park Service

G. B. Cornucopia Richard Sellars

Park G u i d e Historian
Chaco C u l t u r e N a t i o n a l H i s t o r i c a l Park I n t e r m o u n t a i n S u p p o r t Office-Santa Fe
N a t i o n a l Park Service N a t i o n a l Park Service

Jill Cowley Brad Shattuck

H i s t o r i c a l Landscape A r c h i t e c t N a t u r a l Resources P r o g r a m M a n a g e r
I n t e r m o u n t a i n S u p p o r t Office-Santa Fe Chaco C u l t u r e N a t i o n a l H i s t o r i c a l Park
N a t i o n a l Park Service N a t i o n a l Park Service

Dabney Ford C. T. Wilson

C h i e f o f C u l t u r a l Resources M a n a g e m e n t Superintendent
Chaco C u l t u r e N a t i o n a l H i s t o r i c a l Park Chaco C u l t u r e N a t i o n a l H i s t o r i c a l Park
N a t i o n a l Park Service N a t i o n a l Park Service

Richard Friedman
M c K i n l e y C o u n t y GIS Center
N e w Mexico

PERSONS C O N T A C T E D D U R I N G T H E D E V E L O P M E N T OF T H E CASE 113

This page intentionally left blank
Port Arthur Historic Site

Randall Mason, David Myers,

and Marta de la Torre

 About This Case Study

T h i s case study l o o k s at the m a n a g e m e n t o f P o r t A r t h u r W e sincerely t h a n k all those w h o have p a t i e n t l y

H i s t o r i c Site i n Australia. Since 1987 the g o v e r n i n g b o d y and generously c o n t r i b u t e d t h e i r t i m e and ideas, those
has been the P o r t A r t h u r H i s t o r i c Site M a n a g e m e n t w h o have h e l p e d us focus o u r interpretations, a n d those
A u t h o r i t y ( P A H S M A ) , a g o v e r n m e n t business enterprise w h o o t h e r w i s e assisted us i n o u r f i e l d w o r k and research.
created b y the Tasmanian State g o v e r n m e n t . C o n s e r v a t i o n D i g i t a l r e p r o d u c t i o n s o f the f o l l o w i n g supple­
and stewardship o f P o r t A r t h u r as a heritage site are the m e n t a r y d o c u m e n t s are c o n t a i n e d w i t h i n the accompany­
p r i m a r y objective o f P A H S M A , w h i c h i n m a n a g i n g the site i n g C D - R O M : B r o a d A r r o w Cafe C o n s e r v a t i o n Study
also m u s t take i n t o consideration financial viability. (1998); P o r t A r t h u r H i s t o r i c Site C o n s e r v a t i o n Plan, v o l ­
T h e f o l l o w i n g section describes the site o f P o r t u m e s 1 and 2 (2000); and P A H S M A A n n u a l R e p o r t 2001.
A r t h u r itself—its geographic situation, history, and evolu­
t i o n as a heritage site—as w e l l as its c o n t e m p o r a r y fea­
tures, partnerships, infrastructure, and facilities. I t t h e n
discusses the m a n a g e m e n t context i n w h i c h P A H S M A
operates, i n c l u d i n g its relationship t o state and c o m m o n ­
w e a l t h g o v e r n m e n t s and heritage organizations.
T h e next section examines the identification and
m a n a g e m e n t o f the values o f the site and is s t r u c t u r e d
a r o u n d the three research questions established for the
case studies: (1) H o w are the values associated w i t h the
site identified?; (2) W h a t is t h e i r place i n m a n a g e m e n t
policies?; and (3) W h a t i m p a c t is the actual m a n a g e m e n t
o f the site h a v i n g i n the values?
I n the c o n c l u d i n g section, several didactic
themes are addressed, i n c l u d i n g the balancing o f c u l t u r a l
and e c o n o m i c values, the i m p l i c a t i o n s o f P A H S M A s par­
ticular i n s t i t u t i o n a l arrangements, and the i m p a c t o f its
B u r r a Charter-based conservation p l a n n i n g process o n
site values.
T h i s case study is the result o f m a n y h o u r s o f
research, i n t e r v i e w s , site visits, extensive consultation,
and frank discussion. T h e staff and b o a r d o f P A H S M A
have b e e n e x t r e m e l y h e l p f u l i n the research, p r o d u c t i o n ,
and r e f i n e m e n t o f this study. T h e y have b e e n f o r t h c o m i n g
and generous and have participated energetically i n
the discussions that t o o k place d u r i n g the Steering C o m ­
mittee's visit t o P o r t A r t h u r i n January 2002, and later
b y correspondence.
I n p r e p a r i n g this case study, the authors consulted
the extensive d o c u m e n t a t i o n p r o d u c e d b y P A H S M A and
previous m a n a g i n g authorities as w e l l as sources from
elsewhere i n Australia.

Il6 PORT A R T H U R HISTORIC SITE

 Management Context and History of Port Arthur
Historic Site

Geographic Description 1

I n the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, England

i m p l e m e n t e d a p o l i c y under w h i c h convicted criminals
were sent t o Australia t o serve o u t their sentences and be
r e f o r m e d t h r o u g h w o r k . Prisons, support c o m m u n i t i e s ,
and small industries were established i n Australia t o p u n ­
ish, employ, and equip the i n c o m i n g convict p o p u l a t i o n .
Port A r t h u r was t o be the center o f this n e w convict sys­
t e m , organized i n the r e m o t e area n o w k n o w n as the
Tasman Peninsula. There, repeat offenders and the recal­
citrant served o u t their t e r m s — o f t e n life sentences at
h a r d labor.
N o w i n a r u i n e d state, P o r t A r t h u r is o f great
significance t o c o n t e m p o r a r y Australians, particularly
Tasmanians. T h e site is one o f the best-known symbols
o f the era o f "convictism," w h i c h played such a formative
Figure 3.1. Map o f Australia. Port A r t h u r is located on the island o f
role i n Australia's h i s t o r y and identity.
Tasmania, south o f the Australian mainland.
Australia's o n l y island state, Tasmania is located
south o f Australia, separated from the m a i n l a n d b y Bass
Strait. I n designating a site for its penal colony, England
chose the Tasman Peninsula for its remoteness and isola­
t i o n . T h e peninsula is connected t o m a i n l a n d Tasmania

Figure 3.2. The Tasman Peninsula, located at the southeast end Figure 3.3. The location o f Port A r t h u r and seven other prominent
of Tasmania. convict heritage sites.

M A N A G E M E N T CONTEXT A N D HISTORY 117

b y a slender i s t h m u s k n o w n as E a g l e h a w k N e c k , w h i c h is east coast o f N e w H o l l a n d (Australia) a n d its adjacent
less t h a n 30 meters (33 yards) w i d e . Aside from this n a r r o w islands as t h e colonies t h a t w o u l d receive t r a n s p o r t e d
l a n d l i n k , the T a s m a n Peninsula is s u r r o u n d e d e n t i r e l y b y criminals. T h e first fleet t h a t sailed from E n g l a n d the fol­
water. D i r e c t l y t o the s o u t h is the s o u t h e r n Pacific Ocean, l o w i n g year t o settle the A u s t r a l i a n state o f N e w S o u t h
a n d t o the east is the T a s m a n Sea. T o the west a n d n o r t h is Wales carried a significant n u m b e r o f convicts. I n 1790,
a series o f bays, some sheltered from the o p e n ocean. O n e G o v e r n o r P h i l l i p o f N e w S o u t h Wales i n t r o d u c e d the
o f these p r o t e c t e d , deep harbors was d u b b e d P o r t A r t h u r . p o l i c y o f assigning convicts as i n d e n t u r e d laborers o r
Its l o c a t i o n o n the peninsula m a d e i t ideal for the con­
s t r u c t i o n o f a penal settlement i n large p a r t because i t
w o u l d p r o v i d e a p o r t for o c e a n g o i n g vessels t r a v e l i n g
across S t o r m Bay t o a n d from H o b a r t , the center o f colo­
n i a l g o v e r n m e n t i n Tasmania. Today, H o b a r t is Tasma­
nia's capital and remains an i m p o r t a n t p o r t i n its o w n
r i g h t . B y r o a d , P o r t A r t h u r is a p p r o x i m a t e l y 100 k i l o m e ­
ters (62 miles) from H o b a r t ; b y m o d e r n boat, the t r i p
takes b e t w e e n three a n d f o u r h o u r s .
P o r t A r t h u r has a t e m p e r a t e a n d w e t c l i m a t e .
T h e area's p l e n t i f u l r a i n once s u p p o r t e d l u s h v e g e t a t i o n ,
Figure 3.4. View o f the church and Mason Cove, 1873. Photo: Courtesy
i n c l u d i n g forests d o m i n a t e d b y v a r i o u s species o f native W. L. Crowther Library, State Library o f Tasmania.
eucalypt. Today, m u c h o f this native v e g e t a t i o n has
b e e n cleared a n d replaced b y grass a n d E u r o p e a n decid­
u o u s trees.

H i s t o r y of Settlement a n d Use 2

P o r t A r t h u r is a c o m p l e x a n d r i c h heritage site. D o z e n s
o f b u i l d i n g s o c c u p y the site, some i n r u i n s , some restored
as m u s e u m s , others adapted for reuse i n a v a r i e t y o f ways.
Some structures date f r o m the c o n v i c t p e r i o d (1830-77),
a n d others represent later eras. T h e site is also r i c h i n
archaeological resources.

PRE-CONVICT PERIOD
A b o r i g i n a l peoples are believed t o have i n h a b i t e d the Figure 3.5. View o f the church and Mason Cove, 2002. Photo: David Myers
island o f Tasmania for at least 36,000 years p r i o r t o the
arrival o f the first Europeans i n the mid-seventeenth cen­
tury. D u t c h n a v i g a t o r A b e l T a s m a n l e d t h e first E u r o p e a n
e x p e d i t i o n t o Tasmania i n 1642 a n d n a m e d the island V a n
D i e m e n s L a n d after his sponsor, the governor-general o f
the D u t c h East India C o m p a n y . 3

C O N V I C T PERIOD AND C O N V I C T I S M 4

U n d e r the B r i t i s h E m p i r e , the c o n v i c t system was for­

m a l l y i n i t i a t e d t h r o u g h the Transportation Act o f 1717,
w h i c h stated t h a t the "labor o f c r i m i n a l s i n the colonies
w o u l d benefit the n a t i o n . " C o n v i c t s w e r e once a u c t i o n e d
t o B r i t i s h colonists i n N o r t h A m e r i c a , b u t the A m e r i c a n
R e v o l u t i o n p u t an e n d t o this practice. I n D e c e m b e r 1786,
Orders i n C o u n c i l identified, a m o n g o t h e r territories, the
Figure 3.6. The penitentiary building, the largest and most p r o m i n e n t
structure from the convict period. Photo: Marta de la Torre

Il8 PORT A R T H U R HISTORIC SITE

s e r v a n t s t o free s e t t l e r s . P h i l l i p b e l i e v e d t h a t p r o v i d i n g
convict labor for ap e r i o d o f t w o years at the e x p e n s e o f
the C r o w n w o u l d e n c o u r a g e settlers to the area. T h e
practice soon spread throughout the colony and became
k n o w n as the a s s i g n m e n t system.
I n 1803, G o v e r n o r K i n g o f N e w S o u t h W a l e s s e n t
a fleet, w h i c h i n c l u d e d convicts, to establish the first
British settlement in V a n Diemen's L a n d (Tasmania) near
the present city o f H o b a r t . K i n g h a d c h o s e n the island to
w a r d off the threat o f F r e n c h settlement a n d to monitor
A m e r i c a n w h a l i n g ships. H o b a r t s o o n b e c a m e a n i m p o r ­
tant port a n d the seat of g o v e r n m e n t for the island. V a n
D i e m e n sLand, w h i c h originally w a s not a separate
c o l o n y b u t a n o u t p o s t o f N e w S o u t h W a l e s , a n d its iso­
lated location w e r e v i e w e d as suitable for the containment
o f h a r d - c o r e convicts. T h e island's first p e n a l s e t t l e m e n t
w a s established at M a c q u a r i e H a r b o u r , o n the island's
w e s t c o a s t , i n 1821. A s e c o n d s t a t i o n w a s c r e a t e d a t M a r i a
I s l a n d i n 1825. B o t h f a c i l i t i e s w e r e s e c o n d a r y p e n a l stations
that held prisoners w h o h a d committed n e w offenses
since their transport to Australia.
D e m a n d in H o b a r t for w o o d w a s high, particu­
l a r l y f o r s h i p b u i l d i n g , a n d i n S e p t e m b e r 1830 t h e f i r s t c o n ­
victs w e r e sent to P o r t A r t h u r to cut timber. S o o n there­
after, t h e island's t h i r d s e c o n d a r y p e n a l station w a s con­
structed at P o r t Arthur.
F o l l o w i n g the closure o f the p e n a l settlements at
M a r i a I s l a n d i n S e p t e m b e r 1832 a n d a t M a c q u a r i e H a r b o u r
a m o n t h later, P o r t A r t h u r ' s population, infrastructure,
a n d i m p o r t a n c e g r e w rapidly. T h e following year, a small
island within sight of Port A r t h u r w a s selected for burials.
T h e island, w h i c h w o u l d over time receive approximately
o n e t h o u s a n d interments, w a s t h e n k n o w n as D e a d
I s l a n d . I n 1834, p r i s o n e r s ' b a r r a c k s w e r e b u i l t a n d t h e f i r s t
juvenile p r i s o n in the British E m p i r e w a s c o n s t r u c t e d at
Point Puer, across the bay from P o r t A r t h u r . Its p u r p o s e
w a s to separate y o u n g m a l e convicts f r o m the "bad c o m ­
pany and example" of the adult convict population. Con­
s t r u c t i o n b e g a n o n the s e t t l e m e n t ' s first p e r m a n e n t b u i l d ­
i n g s , w h i c h i n c l u d e d a c h u r c h . B y 1836, t h e s e t t l e m e n t
contained almost one thousand convicts and Point Puer
nearly three hundred boys. Port Arthur h a d b e c o m e an
i m p o r t a n t industrial center, the site o f ship a n d s h o e m a n ­
ufacturing, lime making, saw milling, stone quarrying,
coal mining, brick and pottery manufacturing, leather tan­
ning, and agricultural production.
A n 1838 B r i t i s h H o u s e o f C o m m o n s S e l e c t C o m ­
mittee o n transportation severely criticized the arbitrari­
ness of the assignment system. Consequently, convictism
in Australia changed markedly. T h e committee proposed
replacing the assignment system with an e w approach
k n o w n as the p r o b a t i o n system. C o m m i t t e e members
believed n e w convicts should complete various stages of
incarceration and labor and eventually earn their freedom
through g o o d behavior. U n d e r the n e w system, newly
transported prisoners w o u l d initially s p e n d aportion o f
their sentences w o r k i n g at ap r o b a t i o n station. T h e y t h e n
w o u l d be o r g a n i z e d into g a n g s to w o r k o n roads, to clear
land, a n d to provide agricultural labor in r e m o t e areas. T o
incorporate the probation system, housing for the convict
gangs h a d to be constructed quickly.
Immediately following the adoption of the pro­
b a t i o n s y s t e m i n 1841, V a n D i e m e n ' s L a n d w a s c h o s e n a s
the location o f several p r o b a t i o n stations to be adminis­
tered from Port Arthur. T h e s e stations w e r e established
at Saltwater River, the C o a l M i n e s , C a s c a d e s , a n d I m p r e s ­
sion Bay. A d d i t i o n a l stations w e r e set u p o n the adjacent
Forestier Peninsula. W h e n criminal transport to N e w
S o u t h W a l e s c e a s e d a f t e r 1842, t h e n u m b e r o f convicts
sent to V a n D i e m e n ' s L a n d increased significantly.
B y this time, P o r t A r t h u r h a d entered a significant
period of development, m a r k e d by construction of a hos­
p i t a l (1842), flour m i l l a n d g r a n a r y (1842-44), a n d h o u s e s
for administrators. T h e start o f construction of the Model
P r i s o n ( l a t e r k n o w n a s t h e S e p a r a t e P r i s o n ) i n 1848 s i g ­
n a l e d a shift i n the settlement's a p p r o a c h to the a d m i n i s ­
tration of prisoners. T h e n e w approach was based on
ideas from Britain a n d the U n i t e d States at the e n d o f the
eighteenth century and the beginning of the nineteenth
century that prisoners should be reformed through a
r e g i m e o f t o t a l s i l e n c e a n d a n o n y m i t y . I n t h e 1820s, e x p e r ­
iments in separate a n d silent incarceration w e r e carried
o u t i n the U n i t e d States, m o s t n o t a b l y at E a s t e r n State
Penitentiary in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. T h e Philadel­
p h i a s y s t e m w a s refined in Britain a n d later at Pentonville
P r i s o n i n L o n d o n , w h i c h s e r v e d as the m o d e l for the
design o f the Separate P r i s o n at P o r t Arthur. A m o n g the
s y s t e m ' s m o r e p r o m i n e n t c o m p o n e n t s w e r e its s o l i t a r y
cells u s e d to isolate prisoners from the corrupting
i n f l u e n c e s o f o t h e r p r i s o n e r s , a n d its " d u m b cells,"
w h e r e i n p r o b l e m inmates w e r e deprived of light a n d
s o u n d . T h e s e prisoners w e r e a l l o w e d outside their cells
o n l y o n c e a day. T h e y w e r e f o r c e d to w e a r h o o d s to a v o i d
b e i n g r e c o g n i z e d b y o t h e r c o n v i c t s a n d felt slippers to
muffle the s o u n d of their footsteps. O t h e r changes at
the settlement d u r i n g this period included the closure
o f t h e P o i n t P u e r b o y s ' p r i s o n i n 1849 a n d t h e conversion
M A N A G E M E N T CONTEXT A N D HISTORY 119
of the flour m i l l a n d g r a n a r y into apenitentiary from
1854 t o 1857.
T h e n u m b e r o f transported convicts to V a n
Diemen's L a n d decreased over the years, and the practice
f i n a l l y c e a s e d i n 1853. T h r e e y e a r s l a t e r , V a n D i e m e n s
L a n d w a s r e n a m e d T a s m a n i a . A l t h o u g h p r o b a t i o n sta­
tions o n the island gradually w e r e shuttered as the last
c o n v i c t s p a s s e d t h r o u g h t h e m , P o r t A r t h u r a n d its o u t -
stations c o n t i n u e d to o p e r a t e for s o m e t i m e . T h e settle­
m e n t e v o l v e d into aw e l f a r e establishment, h o u s i n g p a u ­
pers, invalids, a n d t h e m e n t a l l y ill, as e v i d e n c e d b y t h e
c o n s t r u c t i o n o f a P a u p e r s ' M e s s i n 1864 a n d t h e a s y l u m i n
1868. I n 1871, c o n t r o l o v e r P o r t A r t h u r w a s t r a n s f e r r e d
from the British imperial to the T a s m a n i a n State govern­
ment. T h e cessation of imperial funds signaled the
impending decay of Port Arthur'sstructures. Six years
later, the P o r t A r t h u r p e n a l c o l o n y w a s finally c l o s e d
d o w n . T h i s e v e n t s i g n a l e d t h e e n d o f t h e free l a b o r s u p p l y
that T a s m a n i a h a d relied o n since the beginning of the
n i n e t e e n t h c e n t u r y . F r o m 1830 t o 1877, m o r e t h a n 12,000
sentences w e r e served out at the settlement.
THE COMMUNITY, OR "CARNARVON," P E R I O D
After the end of convictism in Tasmania, the physical
r e m a i n s o f the convict s y s t e m w e r e often referred to as
"blots o n the landscape." R e m i n d e r s o f the island's sordid
past, they w e r e routinely d e m o l i s h e d a n d their materials
r e u s e d . I n 1877, t h e n e w l y d u b b e d T a s m a n P e n i n s u l a w a s
o p e n e d to p r i v a t e settlement, t h e f o r m e r p r i s o n site w a s
r e n a m e d Carnarvon, and the government attempted
a u c t i o n t h e l a n d lots a n d b u i l d i n g s to t h e p u b l i c . A t first,
local residents resisted b u y i n g p r o p e r t y at C a r n a r v o n , b u t
b y t h e e a r l y 1880s a s m a l l c o m m u n i t y w i t h a s c h o o l a n d
p o s t office h a d b e e n established. S o m e o f the p e n a l build­
ings w e r e d e m o l i s h e d a n d sold as salvage, a n d others w e r e
converted to serve n e w purposes. C a r n a r v o n b e c a m e
center of the T a s m a n Peninsula community, functioning
as ag a t h e r i n g spot for sporting events a n d other func­
tions. T o u r i s m grew, benefiting the local economy.
Although the establishment of the Carnarvon
c o m m u n i t y w a s slow to take hold, b o t h local a n d outside
interest i n t h e f o r m e r p e n a l site h a d g r o w n , n u r t u r e d b y
c u r i o s i t y a b o u t its d a r k past. M a n y l o c a l s w i s h e d t h e
remains o f the penal settlement w o u l d c r u m b l e into obliv­
i o n ; at t h e s a m e t i m e , t h e y r e a l i z e d its p o t e n t i a l f o r i n c o m e .
T h u s b e g a n C a r n a r v o n ' sevolution into atourist t o w n .
T h e first c o n c e r t e d effort to benefit financially
from t h e site's t o u r i s t p o t e n t i a l c a m e i n 1881—only f o u r
years after the closing o f the p e n a l c o l o n y — w h e n the
120 PORT A R T H U R HISTORIC SITE
W h i t e h o u s e b r o t h e r s l a u n c h e d ab i w e e k l y steamer
service b e t w e e n H o b a r t a n d N o r f o l k B a y to transport visi­
tors to C a r n a r v o n . T w o y e a r s later, the b r o t h e r s opened
the first h o t e l at t h e site o f t h e f o r m e r C o m m i s s a r i a t
S t o r e . I n 1893, t h e v o l u n t e e r T a s m a n i a n T o u r i s t A s s o c i a ­
tion w a s f o r m e d to p r o m o t e a n d develop T a s m a n i a as a
tourist destination. T h e association p r e p a r e d a n d distrib­
u t e d leaflets a b o u t C a r n a r v o n , focusing o n the scenic
qualities o f t h e r e g i o n . T h e site's s o r d i d p a s t w a s r a r e l y
m e n t i o n e d , a n omission that b e c a m e ar e c u r r i n g pattern
in the p r o m o t i o n o f C a r n a r v o n a n d the rest of T a s m a n i a .
T h e 1890s a l s o w i t n e s s e d t h e o p e n i n g o f t h e P o r t A r t h u r
M u s e u m i n H o b a r t at t h e p h o t o g r a p h y s t u d i o o f J. W
Beattie, w h i c h exhibited n u m e r o u s period photographs
o f the site as w e l l as c o n v i c t - e r a relics.
A s e r i e s o f f i r e s i n 1884,1895, a n d 1897 d e s t r o y e d
and d a m a g e d several structures. M a n y of the remaining
convict-era buildings w e r e gutted, including the church,
asylum, hospital, prison, a n d penitentiary. Concurrently,
h o w e v e r , m a n y n e w buildings w e r e b e i n g constructed, as
the c o m m u n i t y around Carnarvon grew.
I n 1913, t h e T a s m a n i a n T o u r i s t A s s o c i a t i o n s u b ­
5
m i t t e d the first p r o p o s a l to the T a s m a n i a n State g o v e r n ­
m e n t for t h e m a n a g e m e n t o f t h e r u i n s at t h e site. L a t e r
that year, the g o v e r n m e n t d r a f t e d the first set o f r e c o m ­
m e n d a t i o n s for t h e site's m a n a g e m e n t , i n c l u d i n g p h y s i c a l
repairs to the c h u r c h , a n d b e g a n to i m p l e m e n t t h e m the
f o l l o w i n g year. T h i s m o v e m a r k e d the first effort o f t h e
T a s m a n i a n State g o v e r n m e n t to actively preserve a his­
to
toric site.
T h e government then established the Scenery
P r e s e r v a t i o n B o a r d ( S P B ) i n 1915 t o m a n a g e p a r k s a n d
r e s e r v e s a c r o s s t h e state, i n c l u d i n g t h e P o r t A r t h u r site.
T h e following year, the S P B laid the g r o u n d w o r k for the
first f o r m a l p r o t e c t i o n o f t h e r u i n s at P o r t A r t h u r t h r o u g h
the
the c r e a t i o n o f five reserves: the c h u r c h , the penitentiary,
the M o d e l Prison, Point Puer, a n d D e a d Island. T h e S P B
w a s directly responsible for Port Arthur's m a n a g e m e n t ,
b u t its s e c r e t a r y a n d field s t a f f — a l l state employees—
w e r e b a s e d i n H o b a r t . It is w o r t h n o t i n g t h a t t h e b o a r d ' s
m a i n f u n c t i o n w a s to p r o t e c t t h e site's n a t u r a l e n v i r o n ­
m e n t a n d s c e n e r y r a t h e r t h a n its c u l t u r a l h e r i t a g e .
T h e s e r e s e r v e s w e r e Australia's first g a z e t t e d
historic sites—a measure of Port Arthur's long-standing
importance in Australianculture. Gradually,the S P B
a c q u i r e d l a n d at t h e site, a p p o i n t e d guides, a n d c o n d u c t e d
a few small-scale preservation projects. O v e r the next two
d e c a d e s , C a r n a r v o n w a s w i d e l y p u b l i c i z e d , a n d its n o t o r i ­
e t y s p r e a d q u i c k l y . B y 1925, t h e S P B , i t s f i n a n c i a l r e s o u r c e s
r u n n i n g low, accepted the T a s m a n M u n i c i p a l Council's
offer to a s s u m e m a n a g e m e n t o f the reserves, subject to
certain conditions set b y the S P B .
I n 1926, a r e m a k e o f t h e 1908 f i l m For the Term
of His Natural Life w a s s h o t a t t h e s i t e , d e s p i t e protests
t h a t it w o u l d r e s u l t i n n e g a t i v e p u b l i c i t y f o r T a s m a n i a .
R e l e a s e d i n 1927, t h e f i l m w a s a b o x - o f f i c e s u c c e s s a n d
h a d a significant i m p a c t i n p r o m o t i n g t o u r i s m to t h e site.
T h a t s a m e year, C a r n a r v o nw a s r e n a m e d P o r t A r t h u r in
a n effort to h e l p o u t s i d e r s identify t h e site's c o n v i c t his­
tory. T h e P o r t A r t h u r T o u r i s t a n d Progress Association
w a s also f o r m e d for the p u r p o s e of further developing
the site into a tourist center.
The Tasman Municipal Councilmanaged the
s i t e u n t i l 1938, w h e n c o n t r o l w a s t u r n e d o v e r t o t h e P o r t
Arthur and E a g l e h a w k N e c k Board, an e w group within
the S P B , as aresult o f the T a s m a n i a n State government's
r e n e w e d financial support for the S P B . O v e r the next
years, the government acquired the P o w d e r Magazine, the
G o v e r n m e n t Cottage, the C o m m a n d a n t ' s House, and the
cottage in w h i c h Irish political prisoner W i l l i a m S m i t h
O ' B r i e n w a s h e l d i n 1850. A s b e f o r e , t h e j u s t i f i c a t i o n f o r
purchasing the properties w a s their economic earning
potential from tourism. However, during W o r l d W a r II,
v i s i t a t i o n to t h e site p l u n g e d . T h e S P B h a d its b u d g e t
s l a s h e d at t h e s a m e t i m e it w a s a s s i g n e d t h e t a s k o f m a n ­
aging sixteen n e w reserves. A s aresult, the buildings at
Port A r t h u r w e r e allowed to decay even further, a n d
losses d u e to theft a n d v a n d a l i s m o n l y a d d e d to the toll.
Following the recommendations of a document
k n o w n as the M c G o w a n Plan, the T a s m a n i a n State gov­
e r n m e n t t o o k a b o l d s t e p i n 1946, p u r c h a s i n g t h e town
o f P o r t A r t h u r f o r t h e s u m o f £21,000. I n a s t a r k c h a n g e
from the past, the plan called for valuing the history a n d
a r c h i t e c t u r e o f the site r a t h e r t h a n f o c u s i n g p r i m a r i l y
o n its e c o n o m i c v a l u e . T o u r i s t v i s i t a t i o n to t h e site g r e w
rapidly o n c e again after the e n d o f W o r l d W a r II. A c c e s s
to the site r e m a i n e d free, however, and the S P B h a d
difficulty d e v e l o p i n g a n d m a n a g i n g t h e site w i t h t h e s m a l l
a m o u n t s o f i n c o m e generated f r o m guide fees a n d build­
ing rentals. Nevertheless, s o m e conservation a n d g r o u n d
b e a u t i f i c a t i o n p r o j e c t s m o v e d f o r w a r d . I n t h e 1950s, t h e
S P B m a n a g e d to p u r c h a s e the t o w n h a l l / a s y l u m building
a n d l e a s e d it to t h e T a s m a n M u n i c i p a l C o u n c i l , w h i c h h a d
b e e n u s i n g t h e b u i l d i n g as its c h a m b e r s . E n c o u n t e r i n g
licensing p r o b l e m s at H o t e l Arthur, located i n the f o r m e r
Medical Officer's H o u s e , the S P B approved construction
o f an e w m o t e l o n the hill b e h i n d Civil Officers' R o w over­
l o o k i n g t h e r e a r o f t h e M o d e l P r i s o n a n d t h e w h o l e site.
A f t e r y e a r s o f d e l a y s , t h e m o t e l f i n a l l y o p e n e d i n i960.
T w o years later, the T a s m a n P e n i n s u l a B o a r d , a n e w
g r o u p w i t h i n t h e S P B , a s s u m e d responsibility for site
conservation after years o f ineffective management.
I n 1971, t h e T a s m a n i a n S t a t e g o v e r n m e n t d i s ­
s o l v e d t h e S P B a n d r e p l a c e d it w i t h t h e N a t i o n a l P a r k s
and Wildlife Service ( N P W S ) ,w h i c h then assumed
r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r t h e m a n a g e m e n t o f P o r t A r t h u r . I n 1973,
the T a s m a n Municipal Council vacated the t o w n hall/asy­
l u m building a n d m o v e d to N u b e e n a . A t that time, the
N P W S h a d apolicy that excluded residential use within
t h e h i s t o r i c site. T h e c o u n c i l ' s r e l o c a t i o n a n d c o n v e r s i o n
o f the t o w n hall to avisitor center w a s s y m b o l i c o f the
community's displacement from t h e h i s t o r i c site. A s dis­
c u s s e d i n t h e f o l l o w i n g s e c t i o n , t h e 1970s a n d s u c c e e d i n g
decades s a w increased state investment in conservation
and creation of more dedicated management regimes
two for P o r t A r t h u r as a h e r i t a g e site. A r e g u l a r f e r r y s e r v i c e
b e g a n t r a n s p o r t i n g tourists f r o m the site to D e a d Island.
A t the request o f the ferry operator, the island's n a m e
w a s officially c h a n g e d to the Isle o f the D e a d . 6
I n 1979, t h e T a s m a n i a n S t a t e government
a n n o u n c e d the first substantial c o m m i t m e n t o f monies
from t h e C o m m o n w e a l t h a n d t h e s t a t e (A$9 million
o v e r s e v e n y e a r s ) to c o n s e r v a t i o n at t h e site i n t h e f o r m
of the Port Arthur Conservation and Development Pro­
j e c t ( P A C D P ) . T h i s p r o j e c t , w h i c h c o n t i n u e d u n t i l 1986,
funded the extensive restoration of historic buildings,
the stabilization o f ruins, a n d the development o f visitor-
related facilities a n d infrastructure, a n d p r o v i d e d for the
conservation and development of historic resources
t h r o u g h o u t the T a s m a n P e n i n s u l a as well. B a s e d o n
input from AustraliaI C O M O S (International Council on
M o n u m e n t s a n d Sites), the N P W S revised a n d e x p a n d e d
t h e r e c o g n i z e d significance o f P o r t A r t h u r as a historic site
t o i n c l u d e t h e t o w n s h i p p e r i o d ( r o u g h l y 1880 t o 1930). 7
T h e P A C D P w a s at the t i m e the largest heritage conserva­
tion a n d d e v e l o p m e n t project u n d e r t a k e n in all o f A u s ­
tralia. It also s e r v e d as a significant training g r o u n d for
Australian heritage professionals. This training c o m p o ­
nent has p r o d u c e d anationwide interest in the ongoing
conservation w o r k and protection of the cultural
resources at P o r t Arthur.
A s the seven-year project c a m e to a close, the
Tasmanian Minister of Arts, Heritage and E n v i r o n m e n t
refused to provide further funding. T h e T a s m a n i a n Parlia­
m e n t r e s p o n d e d i n 1987 b y p a s s i n g t h e Port Arthur Historic
Site Management Authority Act. T h i s a c t c r e a t e d a n d t r a n s ­
f e r r e d a u t h o r i t y o v e r the site to the P o r t A r t h u r H i s t o r i c
M A N A G E M E N T CONTEXT A N D HISTORY 121
Site M a n a g e m e n t A u t h o r i t y ( P A H S M A ) , a g o v e r n m e n t
business enterprise (GBE).
I n l a t e A p r i l o f 1996, t r a g e d y s t r u c k w h e n a g u n ­
m a n killed thirty-five p e o p l e at P o r t Arthur, t w e n t y inside
the B r o a d A r r o w Cafe and fifteen in the immediate vicin­
ity M o s t o f the victims w e r e tourists, but m a n y w o r k e d
a n d lived at P o r t Arthur. T h e event p r o v e d to be t r a u m a t i c
to the site staff a n d the local c o m m u n i t y . I n D e c e m b e r
of that year, the B r o a d A r r o w Cafe w a s partially d e m o ­
lished. T h e t r a g e d y f o r g e d an e w c h a p t e r i n P o r t A r t h u r ' s ,
8
and Australia's,history by almost immediately catalyzing
the passage a n d e n a c t m e n t o f national g u n control legis­
lation in Australia.T h e Australianp r i m e minister also
t a p p e d f u n d s to b u i l d an e w V i s i t o r C e n t e r to r e p l a c e the
Broad A r r o w Cafe. 9
Shortly thereafter, the T a s m a n i a n authorities
commissioned the Doyle Inquiryinto the m a n a g e m e n t
P o r t Arthur. T h i s investigation l o o k e d at the w o r k i n g s o f
P A H S M A s i n c e its e s t a b l i s h m e n t , i n c l u d i n g t h e P A H S M A
Board's handling of the development of the n e w Visitor
C e n t e r a n d p a r k i n g a r e a , its r e l a t i o n s w i t h e m p l o y e e s i n
the a f t e r m a t h o f the tragedy at the cafe, a n d the c o n s e r v a ­
tion a n d m a i n t e n a n c e o f historic resources at the site. 1 0
T h e i n q u i r y r e s u l t e d i n a m e n d m e n t s t o t h e PAHSMA Act
as w e l l as the reconstitution o f the P A H S M A B o a r d . W i t h
t h e 1998 c h a n g e i n t h e T a s m a n i a n l e g i s l a t u r e from t h e
Liberal P a r t y to the L a b o r Party, the state government
adopted policies e n c o u r a g i n g t o u r i s m to i m p r o v e the
e c o n o m y . T h i s n e w stance also led to the a p p o i n t m e n t
high-profile individuals to the P A H S M A B o a r d , including
a former executive director of the Australian Heritage
Commission (AHC).
In 2000, the T a s m a n i a n premier announced that
P A H S M A w o u l d receive A$IO million in funding for con­
s e r v a t i o n o v e r t h e e n s u i n g five y e a r s . A c o n d i t i o n o f t h e
f u n d i n g w a s that P A H S M A w o u l d s u b m i t an e w c o n s e r v a ­
tion p l a n to the A H C . T h e p r e m i e r also a n n o u n c e d that
state a n d c o m m o n w e a l t h f u n d i n g w o u l d be p r o v i d e d
for the creation of " T h e C o n v i c t Trail," w h i c h w o u l d
r e c o n n e c t the historic site at P o r t A r t h u r w i t h the c o n v i c t
outstations throughout the rest of the T a s m a n Peninsula,
including those at E a g l e h a w k N e c k , Cascades, I m p r e s s i o n
Bay, Saltwater River, the C o a l Mines, a n d N o r f o l k Bay.
P A H S M A , the T a s m a n Municipal Council, and local
b u s i n e s s e s f o r m e d ap a r t n e r s h i p k n o w n as P o r t A r t h u r
R e g i o n M a r k e t i n g L t d . ( P A R M ) to m a r k e t the P o r t A r t h u r
r e g i o n as atourist destination. After m u c h debate, a
m e m o r i a l garden also w a s created in the spring of 2000
at t h e site o f t h e f o r m e r B r o a d A r r o w C a f e , w h i c h is n o w
in ruins. 1 1
122 PORT A R T H U R HISTORIC SITE
The M a n a g e m e n t C o n t e x t
COMMONWEALTH HERITAGE LEGISLATION,
POLICY, AND ADMINISTRATION
T h o u g h t h e P o r t A r t h u r H i s t o r i c Site is o w n e d b y the
T a s m a n i a n (state-level) g o v e r n m e n t , n o t the c o m m o n ­
w e a l t h (federal- o r national-level) g o v e r n m e n t , this discus­
sion of management and policy contexts begins with a
l o o k at relevant national-level factors.
Australia has separate c o m m o n w e a l t h , state, a n d
territory governments, w h i c h together c o m p o s e a fairly
decentralized system. Decisions a n d actions related to
m o s t heritage places and their land use are governed by
state a n d local laws. C o r r e s p o n d i n g l y , sites either are
f u n d e d b y state g o v e r n m e n t s or generate revenue o n their
o w n . T h i s i m p o r t a n t p o l i t i c a l c o n t e x t is ad i s t i n c t l y differ­
of ent one from sites f u n d e d b y n a t i o n a l g o v e r n m e n t s .
T h e Australian Heritage Commission Act (1975) i s
the commonwealth's p r i m a r y legislation dealing w i t h
the identification, protection, a n d presentation of cultural
heritage places at the national level. T h i s act established
the A H C and the Register of the National Estate. T h e
A H C is a n i n d e p e n d e n t a u t h o r i t y o p e r a t i n g u n d e r t h e
jurisdiction of the c o m m o n w e a l t h government's Environ­
m e n t a n d H e r i t a g e p o r t f o l i o , a n d is r e s p o n s i b l e to t h e
M i n i s t e r f o r E n v i r o n m e n t a n d H e r i t a g e . T h e m i n i s t e r is
a u t h o r i z e d to d i r e c t t h e A H C o r its c h a i r to p r o v i d e a d v i c e
a n d to enter places into the Register o f the National
of E s t a t e . T h e A H C is n o t d i r e c t l y i n v o l v e d i n h e r i t a g e m a n ­
a g e m e n t as a n o w n e r a n d m a n a g e r o f sites. 1 2
T h e p u r p o s e o f t h e a c t is to p l a c e r e s p o n s i b i l i t y
o n c o m m o n w e a l t h ministers a n d authorities to take into
c o n s i d e r a t i o n N a t i o n a l E s t a t e v a l u e s (as defined b y the
A H C ) and professional recommendations concerning the
potential effects o f p r o p o s e d actions. 1 3
It is g e n e r a l l y n o t
intended to give the A H C p a r a m o u n t protective authority
over National Estate places.
T h e act defines the N a t i o n a l Estate as follows:
" T h e National Estate consists of those places, being com­
ponents of the natural environment of Australiaor the
cultural e n v i r o n m e n t of Australia,that have aesthetic, his­
toric, scientific or social significance or other special value
for future generations as w e l l as for the present
community." 1 4
T h i s register acts as an a t i o n a l list o f p l a c e s t h a t
r e a c h adefined threshold o f significance at a national,
regional, o r local level, against w h i c h p r o p o s e d c o m m o n ­
wealth actions a n d decisions can be checked for poten­
tially h a r m f u l impacts.
 AUSTRALIA ICOMOS
T h e Australiannational committee of the International
C o u n c i l o n M o n u m e n t s a n d Sites (Australia I C O M O S ) ,
o r g a n i z e d i n 1976, p r o m o t e s g o o d p r a c t i c e i n t h e c o n s e r ­
vation of culturalheritage places throughout the nation.
It is a n o n g o v e r n m e n t a l o r g a n i z a t i o n a n d is affiliated w i t h
the U n i t e d Nations Educational, Scientific a n d Cultural
O r g a n i z a t i o n ( U N E S C O ) . Its m e m b e r s are professionals
f r o m avariety o f fields i n v o l v e d i n the practice o f heritage
conservation.
I n 1979, A u s t r a l i a I C O M O S a d o p t e d t h e Australia
ICOMOS Charter for the Conservation of Places of Cultural
Significance ( T h e B u r r a C h a r t e r ) . T h e B u r r a C h a r t e r ,
w h i c h w a s r e v i s e d i n 1988 a n d 1999, h a s p r o v i d e d g u i d i n g
principles for cultural heritage conservation practice in
Australia. 1 5
T h e Burra Charter consists of principles a n d
procedures that ensure the conservation of aplace's cul­
tural significance. It sets o u t alogical process for articulat­
ing the cultural significance of aplace a n d then deciding
o n conservation policies a n d m e a s u r e s to protect that
significance. T h e process emphasizes consultation w i t h a
r a n g e o f stakeholders, as w e l l as t r a n s p a r e n c y a n d clear
d o c u m e n t a t i o n w i t h r e g a r d to u n d e r s t a n d i n g a n d protect­
ing significance. T h e charter's principles have b e e n widely
and voluntarily accepted and followed by heritage agen­
cies a n d p r a c t i t i o n e r s t h r o u g h o u t t h e n a t i o n , a n d it h a s
b e e n perhaps the m o s t influential d o c u m e n t in m o v i n g
cultural heritage practice in Australiatoward a m o r e
explicitly v a l u e s - b a s e d a p p r o a c h . A s s u c h , it h a s b e c o m e
a de facto policy.
TASMANIAN HERITAGE LEGISLATION,
POLICY, AND ADMINISTRATION
State-level factors are perhaps the m o s t important policy
contexts shaping the m a n a g e m e n t of Port Arthur. T h e
first l a w i n T a s m a n i a to a d d r e s s t h e p r o t e c t i o n o f h e r i t a g e
w a s t h e Scenery Preservation Act o f 1915. T h i s l e g i s l a t i o n
established the S c e n e r y P r e s e r v a t i o n B o a r d , the first p u b ­
lic a u t h o r i t y established i n the w h o l e o f A u s t r a l i a for the
m a n a g e m e n t of parks and reserves. Port Arthur w a s
a m o n g t h e l a n d s t h e S P B h e l d a n d m a n a g e d . I n 1970, t h e
Scenery Preservation Act w a s r e p e a l e d t h r o u g h a d o p t i o n
t h e National Parks and Wildlife Act. T h i s a c t p r o v i d e d t h a t
l a n d m a y b e d e c l a r e d a c o n s e r v a t i o n a r e a to p r e s e r v e fea­
tures o f historical, archaeological, or scientific interest,
or to preserve or protect a n y A b o r i g i n a l relics o n that
land. T h e act also created the National P a r k s a n d Wildlife
Service (of T a s m a n i a ) to m a n a g e b o t h cultural a n d natu­
ral heritage within T a s m a n i a , although emphasis was
clearly o n the latter. N P W S w a s the m a n a g i n g a g e n c y for
P o r t A r t h u r H i s t o r i c S i t e f r o m 1970 t o 1987. 16
I n 1995, t h e T a s m a n i a n P a r l i a m e n t p a s s e d t h e
state's first c o m p r e h e n s i v e c u l t u r a l heritage legislation,
t h e Historic Cultural Heritage Act. }7
This law contains provi­
sions for identification, assessment, protection, a n d con­
servation o f places d e e m e d to have "historic cultural her­
itage" significance. T h e act also provides for the creation
o f t h e T a s m a n i a n H e r i t a g e C o u n c i l ( T H C ) , w h i c h is
responsible for advising the minister o n issues concerning
T a s m a n i a ' s historic cultural heritage a n d o n m e a s u r e s to
conserve that heritage for present a n d future generations.
T h e T H C also w o r k s w i t h i n the m u n i c i p a l land-use plan­
n i n g s y s t e m to provide for the p r o p e r protection o f Tas­
m a n i a ' s h i s t o r i c c u l t u r a l h e r i t a g e (it h a s s t a t u t o r y r e v i e w
over projects involving properties o n the T a s m a n i a n
H e r i t a g e Register), assists i n "the p r o m o t i o n o f t o u r i s m
in respect o f places o f historic cultural heritage signi­
ficance," a n d maintains proper r e c o r d s — a n d encourages
others to m a i n t a i n p r o p e r r e c o r d s — o f places of historic
cultural heritage significance.
T h e 1995 l a w a l s o p r o v i d e d f o r t h e c r e a t i o n o f t h e
T a s m a n i a n Heritage Register, kept b y the T H C .T h e crite­
ria for b e i n g listed o n the register are b a s e d o n those u s e d
for the Register of the National Estate. U n d e r the Historic
Cultural Heritage Act, t h e m i n i s t e r m a y d e c l a r e a s i t e t o b e
a h e r i t a g e a r e a i f it is d e e m e d to c o n t a i n a p l a c e o f h i s t o r i c
cultural significance. W o r k s impacting aregistered place
m u s t be a p p r o v e d b y the state Heritage C o u n c i l . T h e
c o u n c i l has the authority to set standards for a p p r o v e d
w o r k s a n d to require professional supervision of the
w o r k . T h e act also provides for Heritage Agreements,
w h i c h i n c l u d e provisions for m o n e t a r y a n d technical assis­
tance to the o w n e r of the registered place. T h e council
m a y a p p r o v e d a m a g i n g w o r k s o n l y i f it is satisfied t h a t
there are n o p r u d e n t or feasible alternatives. 1 8
LOCAL COUNCILS
In the state o f T a s m a n i a , l a n d use a n d d e v e l o p m e n t
are regulated b y planning schemes, w h i c h are legally bind­
ing statutory documents. Local councils are responsible
of for preparing a n d administering these planning meas­
ures, w h i c h include provisions governing land use a n d
development. 1 9
T h e Municipality of Tasman Planning Scheme
(1979), a d m i n i s t e r e d b y t h e T a s m a n M u n i c i p a l C o u n c i l ,
governs use and development of land o n the T a s m a n
Peninsula. A l l lands w i t h i n P o r t A r t h u r Historic Site are
classified as aN a t i o n a l P a r k / S t a t e R e s e r v e reservation.
M A N A G E M E N T CONTEXT A N D HISTORY 123
T h e a p p r o a c h to t h e site, as w e l l as its v i e w s h e d , is a l s o
regulated b y ac o m p l e x system o f zoning. 2 0
W h e n the T a s m a n Municipal C o u n c i l receives
p l a n n i n g a p p l i c a t i o n s r e g a r d i n g h i s t o r i c areas, it refers
t h e m to the D e v e l o p m e n t A d v i s o r y C o m m i t t e e for His­
t o r i c A r e a s . T h i s c o m m i t t e e is c o m p o s e d o f r e p r e s e n t a ­
tives from the council, from the local community, and
from the T a s m a n i a n Department of Tourism, Parks,
Heritage and the Arts. F o r projects and reviews o n the
Port Arthur reserve, the T a s m a n Municipal C o u n c i l
focuses o n straightforward infrastructuralmatters, s u c h
as s e w e r a n d w a t e r provision, deferring to P A H S M A
T H C reviews o f P A H S M A s activities) o n m o s t heritage-
specific matters. 2 1
PORT ARTHUR HISTORIC SITE
MANAGEMENT AUTHORITY
I n 1987, t h e T a s m a n i a n P a r l i a m e n t p a s s e d t h e Port Arthur
Historic Site Management Authority Act e s t a b l i s h i n g
P A H S M A , w h i c h a s s u m e d m a n a g e m e n t o f the site
the T a s m a n i a n D e p a r t m e n t of Lands, Parks and Wildlife.
S i n c e 1995, P A H S M A h a s b e e n a G B E o p e r a t i n g i n p a r t
u n d e r t h e p r o v i s i o n s o f t h e Government Business Enterprises
Act (1995). A s e m i - i n d e p e n d e n t g o v e r n m e n t authority
w i t h a n annual budget provided b y the T a s m a n i a n State
government, P A H S M A nevertheless operates under the
auspices o f a n a p p o i n t e d b o a r d r a t h e r t h a n the state. T h e
P o r t A r t h u r site f a c e d p e r p e t u a l f u n d i n g shortfalls, a n d
through P A H S M A the T a s m a n i a n government hoped
c r e a t e a n e n t i t y c a p a b l e o f i n d e p e n d e n t l y g e n e r a t i n g its
o w n r e v e n u e . O n e o f the first steps w a s to start c h a r g i n g
a d m i s s i o n fees to t h e site.
T h e P A H S M A B o a r d reports directly to the
T a s m a n i a n p r e m i e r , a n d t h e r e is state r e p r e s e n t a t i o n
the b o a r d as w e l l as state b u d g e t oversight a n d control.
T h e Port Arthur Historic Site Management Authority Act
defines the functions o f P A H S M A as follows:
• E n s u r i n gthe preservation and maintenance
the H i s t o r i c Site as a n e x a m p l e o f am a j o r c o n v i c t settle­
m e n t a n d penal institution of the nineteenth century;
• C o o r d i n a t i n g archaeological activities o n the
Historic Site;
• P r o m o t i n g an understanding of the historical
a n d a r c h a e o l o g i c a l i m p o r t a n c e o f the H i s t o r i c Site;
• Consistent with the m a n a g e m e n t plan, promot­
i n g the H i s t o r i c Site as atourist destination;
• P r o v i d i n g a d e q u a t e facilities for visitors' use;
124 PORT A R T H U R H I S T O R I C SITE
• U s i n g its b e s t e n d e a v o r s to s e c u r e f i n a n c i a l assis­
tance by w a y of grants, sponsorship, and other means,
for t h e c a r r y i n g o u t o f its f u n c t i o n s ; a n d
• C o n d u c t i n g its affairs w i t h av i e w to becom­
i n g aviable c o m m e r c i a l enterprise. ( A f u r t h e r act o f
p a r l i a m e n t i n 1989 a m e n d e d t h i s r e q u i r e m e n t t o r e a d :
" C o n d u c t i n g its affairs w i t h av i e w o f b e c o m i n g commer­
cially viable." ) 2 2
I n t h e w a k e o f t h e 1996 P o r t A r t h u r m a s s a c r e ,
the m a n a g e m e n t of P A H S M A c a m e u n d e r close scrutiny
a n d w a s f o u n d to b e in serious n e e d o f reorganization.
(and A c c o r d i n g to the T a s m a n i a n State government's report
of the Doyle Inquiry, 2 3
PAHSMA's economically self-
sufficient m a n d a t e w a s at o d d s w i t h the c o n s e r v a t i o n val­
u e s a n d g o a l s r e c o g n i z e d ( i n t h e 1985 p l a n a n d t h e r e a f t e r )
as t h e f o u n d a t i o n o f t h e site's m a n a g e m e n t . P A H S M A is
n o t l i k e l y to g e n e r a t e sufficient i n c o m e to f u l l y f u n d its
c o n s e r v a t i o n activities; h o w e v e r , its t o u r i s m o p e r a t i o n
endeavors to generate asustainable s t r e a m o f income
from
w i t h i n its b r o a d e r c o n s e r v a t i o n , e c o n o m i c , a n d c o m m u ­
nity objectives.
I n 1997, P A H S M A c o n v e n e d t h e P o r t A r t h u r H e r ­
itage Advisory Panel ( H A P ) , consisting of heritage
experts. Its c h a i r w a s as e n i o r C a n b e r r a - b a s e d heritage
consultant. T h e chair reported directly to the P A H S M A
Board. H A P ' s role w a s to advise the b o a r d o n matters
regarding heritage at P o r t Arthur. T h e p a n e l t o o k a hands-
o n a p p r o a c h at the outset, initiating a n d drafting the brief
to
for t h e site's c u r r e n t c o n s e r v a t i o n p l a n , w h i c h w a s com­
p l e t e d i n 2000. A s t h e P A H S M A B o a r d a c q u i r e d m e m b e r s
with greater heritage expertise a n d hired m o r e profession­
a l l y t r a i n e d h e r i t a g e c o n s e r v a t i o n i n d i v i d u a l s o n its staff,
the panel has stepped back and focused primarily on
on
r e v i e w i n g s e c o n d a r y p l a n s a n d p r o v i d i n g ab r o a d e r l e v e l
o f a d v i c e to t h e c o n s e r v a t i o n staff. 2 4
P o r t A r t h u r Historic Site Facilities
of
a n d Services
O n e o f the m o s t s t r i k i n g aspects o f t h e P o r t A r t h u r site
is t h e b e a u t y o f t h e s u r r o u n d i n g l a n d s c a p e a n d its c o n ­
trast to the h o r r o r o f the events a n d penal-industrial sys­
tem of nineteenth-century convictism. B y some accounts,
the beautiful landscape w o r k s against the conservation
a n d interpretation o f the m a i n messages a n d related his­
toric a n d s o c i a l v a l u e s o f t h e site. H o w e v e r , this q u a l i t y
o f the site w a s n o t e d e a r l y o n — i n d e e d b y the c o n v i c t s
themselves—and thus could be considered one of the
i m p o r t a n t historic e l e m e n t s i n the site's past. F o r s o m e
visitors, t h e serenity o f the l a n d s c a p e m a k e s itdifficult t o
imagine the brutality o fthe convict period. F o r others,
that s a m e s e r e n i t y a c t u a l l y h e l p s t h e m reflect o n t h e site's
past. Buildings s u c h a sthe penitentiary a n d the Separate
P r i s o n — w h e r e the convict experience is immediately
felt—have the m o s t potential for conveying the historic
experience.

MAJOR BUILDINGS AT PORT A R T H U R 25

The Asylum
T h e a s y l u m (1868) h o u s e d t h e m e n t a l l y i l l , o l d e r c o n v i c t s ,
and ex-convicts—some transported from locations other
t h a n P o r t A r t h u r . F r o m 1895 t o 1973 i t w a s h o m e t o t h e
C a r n a r v o n T o w n B o a r d (later k n o w n a sthe Tasman
M u n i c i p a l Council). T o d a y ith o u s e s as m a l l m u s e u m
a n d a cafeteria.

Key:
I. Asylum
2. Church

3- Civil Officers' Row

4- Commandant's House
5- Hospital
6. Military Compound

7- Paupers' Mess
8. Penitentiary
9- Point Puer
10. Separate Prison
n. Smith O'Brien's Cottage
12. Visitor Center

13. Broad Arrow Cafe

14. Administrative Offices

15. Jetty
16. Overlook

17- Motel

Figure 3.7. Map of the current property boundaries of the Port Arthur Figure 3.8. Map of the central visitors' area and its major structures
Historic Site and the central visitors' area. and features. It should be noted that the motel (17) sits on a small, pri­
vately owned parcel of land adjoining the site.

M A N A G E M E N T CONTEXT A N DHISTORY 125

 The Church
T h e c h u r c h , c o n s t r u c t e d i n 1836-37, w a s g u t t e d b y a f i r e
i n 1884 t h a t l e f t o n l y i t s w a l l s s t a n d i n g . T h e r u i n s o f t h e
church are perhaps the most recognizable symbol o f Port
Arthur today

Civil Officers 7
Row
T h e structures r e m a i n i n g along this r o w h o u s e d civilian
officials a tP o r t A r t h u r . T h e s e i n c l u d e the Accountant's
H o u s e (1842); t h e J u n i o r M e d i c a l O f f i c e r ' s H o u s e (1848);
t h e P a r s o n a g e (1842-43), w h i c h h o u s e d t h e A n g l i c a n p a r ­
s o n ; a n d t h e M a g i s t r a t e ' s a n d S u r g e o n ' s H o u s e s (1847).

The Commandant's House

T h e C o m m a n d a n t ' s H o u s e (1833) w a s h o m e t o t h e
Figure 3.9. The asylum. Photo: Marta de la Torre
h i g h e s t - r a n k i n g official a tP o r t A r t h u r . It w a s enlarged
s e v e r a l t i m e s , e x t e n d i n g u p t h e hill. I ts e r v e d a s t h e
Carnarvon Hotel from 1885 t o a r o u n d 1904, a n d t h e n a s a
g u e s t h o u s e u n t i l t h e 1930s.

The Hospital
T h e hospital, w h i c h h o u s e d u pt o eighty patients, was
o p e n e d i n 1842. I t s e r v e d c o n v i c t s a n d s o l d i e r s i n s e p a r a t e
wards. T h e structure w a s severely d a m a g e d b y bushfires
i n t h e 1890s, l e a v i n g o n l y t h e r u i n e d f a c a d e a n d northwest
wing standing today.

The Military Compound

Soldiers lived, ate, a n d e n g a g e d i nr e c r e a t i o n a tthe mili­
tary c o m p o u n d . It i n c l u d e d ap a r a d e g r o u n d for military
exercises. T h e c o m p o u n d also h o u s e d civilian officers and
military families. T h e soldiers' barracks w e r e demolished
after the settlement w a s closed, a n d other buildings i n the Figure 3.10. The ruins of the hospital lie behind those of the Paupers'
Mess. Photo: Marta de la Torre
p r e c i n c t w e r e l o s t i n b u s h f i r e s i n t h e 1890s. O n e o f t h e
d o m i n a n t s t r u c t u r e s t o d a y i s t h e g u a r d t o w e r (1835). O t h e r
e x t a n t s t r u c t u r e s a r e T o w e r C o t t a g e (1854), w h i c h housed
m a r r i e d officers a n d their families, a sw e l l a ss o m e w a l l
sections, t w o small turrets, a n d s o m e foundations.

Paupers' Mess
Ex-convicts w h o w e r e t o oold o ri n f i r m t o w o r k gathered
a t t h e P a u p e r s ' M e s s , b u i l t i n 1864. O n l y t h e w a l l s o f t h e
building remain today

The Penitentiary
This substantial four-story structure w a s built between
1842 a n d 1844 a n d o r i g i n a l l y s e r v e d a s a g r a n a r y a n d f l o u r
m i l l f o r a b o u t a d e c a d e . I n 1857, i t w a s c o n v e r t e d t o a p e n i ­
tentiary and held prisoners until the closure o fthe Port
A r t h u r c o n v i c t s e t t l e m e n t . I t h o u s e d 136 c o n v i c t s o n i t s
f i r s t t w o f l o o r s i n s e p a r a t e c e l l s a n d 348 i n d o r m i t o r y - s t y l e Figure 3.11. The exercise yards of the Separate Prison. The exercise
accommodations o n the f o u r t h floor. T h e third floor yards lie in ruin today. Conservation and interpretation plans call for
partial reconstruction of these yards. Photo: Marta de la Torre
h o u s e d alibrary, mess, a n d C a t h o l i c chapel. Sometime

126 PORT A R T H U R HISTORIC SITE

a f t e r 1877, t h e s t r u c t u r e w a s r a v a g e d b y fire a n d l o o t e d .
T o d a y s e v e r a l o f its m a i n w a l l s e c t i o n s h a v e b e e n stabi­
l i z e d to p r e v e n t c o l l a p s e , a n d it is v i s u a l l y t h e m o s t domi­
nant structure in the M a s o n C o v e area.
Point Puer
O n l y scattered ruins r e m a i n o f the f o r m e r boys' p r i s o n at
P o i n t P u e r (1834), l o c a t e d a c r o s s t h e h a r b o r from Mason
C o v e . Point P u e r w a s created to separate b o y s ages eigh­
teen and under from older prisoners. T h e boys' prison
c e a s e d o p e r a t i o n s i n 1849.
The Separate Prison
T h e Separate Prison, originally called the M o d e l Prison,
w a s m o d e l e d after L o n d o n ' s Pentonville P r i s o n a n d w a s
typical o f an u m b e r o f other prisons, s u c h as L i n c o l n
Castle, w h e r e sensory deprivation w a s u s e d to b r e a k
inmates' resistance to reform. T h e c o m p l e x comprised
t w o w i n g s o f parallel r o w s o f cells, w h e r e p r i s o n e r s w e r e
isolated for twenty-three hours per day a n d p e r f o r m e d
tasks s u c h as s h o e m a k i n g . It w a s first o c c u p i e d i n 1849.
Smith O'Brien's Cottage
T h i s c o t t a g e , b u i l t to a p p r o x i m a t e l y its p r e s e n t configura­
t i o n i n 1846, w a s n a m e d f o r t h e I r i s h p o l i t i c a l p r i s o n e r
h e l d t h e r e i n 1850. I t a l s o w a s o n c e a s t a b l e a n d t h e m i l i ­
tary hospital.
Today, m o s t visitors to the site arrive b y c a r o r b u s
via the A r t h u r H i g h w a y a n d p a r k at the m a i n p a r k i n g area
ated in averdant landscape occupying the basin surround­
ing the h a r b o r a n d defined b y small ridges. Visitors navi­
gate t h r o u g h this area o n p a v e d roads a n d surfaced w a l k ­
w a y s . U s e o f t h e r o a d s w i t h i n M a s o n C o v e is r e s t r i c t e d to
P A H S M A v e h i c l e s . O n e e x c e p t i o n is v e h i c l e a c c e s s to the
p u b l i c jetty, w h e r e locals are p e r m i t t e d to drive t h r o u g h
the site to fish. Recently, small electric vehicles have b e e n
i n t r o d u c e d to enable visitors w i t h m o b i l i t y difficulties to
a c c e s s m o s t a r e a s o f t h e site.
I n t h e n o r t h w e s t p a r t o f t h e site, s e c l u d e d from
t h e t o u r i s t a r e a s o n a f o r e s t e d hilltop, is t h e administrative
c o m p l e x . It includes m a n a g e m e n t offices, the Radcliffe
Collection a n d Archaeological Store, nursery a n d forestry
facilities, a n d t h e w o r k s y a r d . M o s t o f the site's s e r v i c e
infrastructure, s u c h as sewers, s t o r m drains, w a t e r supply,
electricity supply, a n d telecommunications, is c o n c e a l e d .
E n t r y fees are listed below. T o u r s to the Isle o f the
D e a d , as w e l l as the e v e n i n g g h o s t tours, are ticketed sepa­
rately. T i c k e t s m a y b e p u r c h a s e d at the Visitor C e n t e r ,
b y p h o n e o r fax, o r at the P o r t A r t h u r H i s t o r i c Site W e b
site. 2 6
G r o u p a n d school-group b o o k i n g s are also available.
S c h o o l - g r o u p tours last o n e to t w o hours. I n addition to
the standard tour, students get the c h a n c e to dress u p in
nineteenth-century-style clothing, learn h o w to use a s e m ­
a p h o r e , o b s e r v e the site's historic architecture, a n d l e a r n
about early building materials and methods.
Entry ticket fees (valid for 2 days): 27

in front of the Visitor Center, where they m a y purchase an A$ 22.00 Adult

entry ticket valid for t w o days. T h e ticket includes access 17.50 P e n s i o n e r , s e n i o r , f u l l - t i m e s t u d e n t
to the Interpretation G a l l e r y in the Visitor Center; entry 10.00 C h i l d (4 t o 17 y e a r s )
to the Port A r t h u r M u s e u m located in the f o r m e r a s y l u m 48.00 F a m i l y (2 a d u l t s a n d u p t o 6 c h i l d r e n )
building, w h i c h has a s m a l l collection o f convict artifacts;
Ghost tour fees:
a d m i t t a n c e t o t h e s i t e ' s m o r e t h a n 40 h e c t a r e s (100 a c r e s )
A$ 14.00 Adult
of landscaped grounds and gardens, including m o r e than
8.60 Child
thirty historic buildings, ruins, and restored period homes;
36.30 Family
and aguided introductory historical walking tour and har­
b o r cruise. T h e t w e n t y - m i n u t e c r u i s e sails past the dock­ Isle of the Dead tour fees:
yards, the site o f the P o i n t P u e r boys' prison, a n d the Isle a s 6.60 Adult
of the Dead. Visitors' options include athirty-minute tour 5.50 Child

to the Isle o f the D e a d a n d the n i n e t y - m i n u t e Historic 19.50 Family

G h o s t T o u r . T h e latter consists o f alantern-lit w a l k at

d u s k a r o u n d the site as t o u r g u i d e s tell o f sightings, T h e P o r t A r t h u r site is o p e n from 9 A . M . t o 5 P.M.
apparitions, a n d strange o c c u r r e n c e s r e p o r t e d at P o r t T h e grounds and ruins are o p e n from 8:30 A . M . u n t i l d u s k .
Arthur f r o m the convict period until the present. V i s i t o r C e n t e r h o u r s a r e 8:30 A . M . u n t i l t h e l a s t g h o s t t o u r
V i s i t o r a c t i v i t y is c o n c e n t r a t e d i n t h e M a s o n Cove at night. Services at the Visitor C e n t e r include a d e s k o f
area, w h i c h w a s the center of development of the penal the T a s m a n i a n Visitor Information Network, operated
settlement a n d later the t o w n of C a r n a r v o n . A n u m b e r of b y P o r t A r t h u r R e g i o n M a r k e t i n g L t d . Staff at the desk
historic buildings, ruins, gardens, a n d m e m o r i a l s are situ­ p r o v i d e i n f o r m a t i o n o n a c c o m m o d a t i o n s , activities, a n d

M A N A G E M E N T CONTEXT A N D HISTORY 127

other services available in the region, including informa­ Hobart to Port Arthur Cruise, including coach return:* 0

tion o n other convict-related heritage reserves in the area. A$ 120.00 Adult

T h e y also assist visitors w i t h b o o k i n g reservations b o t h 99.00 Pensioner
inside and outside the region. Food, refreshments, and 85.00 C h i l d ( a g e s 4 t o 17)
c a t e r i n g facilities at the site i n c l u d e F e l o n s R e s t a u r a n t a n d 350.00 F a m i l y (2 a d u l t s a n d u p t o 2 c h i l d r e n )
the Port Cafe in the Visitor Center, and the M u s e u m Cafe 68.00 ( a d d i t i o n a l c h i l d )
located in the former asylum building. T h e Visitor Center
Tasman Island Wilderness Cruise:
also h o u s e s agift s h o p that sells b o o k s , videos, s o u v e n i r s ,
A$ 49.00 Adult
a n d T a s m a n i a n arts a n d crafts. S o m e items m a y b e p u r ­
43.00 Pensioner
c h a s e d o n l i n e at P o r t A r t h u r ' s W e b site.
35.00 Child
I n t h e V i s i t o r C e n t e r , a m o d e l o f t h e site as it w a s
145.00 F a m i l y (2 a d u l t s a n d u p t o 2 c h i l d r e n )
i n t h e 1870s i s u s e d t o o r i e n t v i s i t o r s . T h e p l a c e m e n t o f t h e
30.00 ( a d d i t i o n a l c h i l d )
m o d e l allows visitors to g a z e t h r o u g h aglass w a l l over­
l o o k i n g M a s o n C o v e a n d t h e h e a r t o f t h e site. O n e o f t h e Seaplane flights:
m a i n activities i n t h e I n t e r p r e t a t i o n G a l l e r y is t h e " L o t ­ A$ 80 / n o /160 Adult
tery of Life," ag a m e in w h i c h visitors are given a playing 40/66/85 Child
card containing the identity o f af o r m e r prisoner at the 200 /280 /395 F a m i l y (2 a d u l t s a n d u p t o 2 c h i l d r e n )
penal settlement. A s they m o v e through the Interpreta­
t i o n G a l l e r y , t h e y t r a c e t h e p a t h o f t h a t c o n v i c t from t h e During the period covered by the 2001PAHSMA
U n i t e d K i n g d o m to T a s m a n i a . Annual Report (1 J u l y 2000-30 J u n e 2001), t h e n u m b e r o f
P o r t A r t h u r m a i n t a i n s m e e t i n g facilities that d a y t i m e e n t r i e s t o t h e P o r t A r t h u r s i t e w a s 203,600, a n d
a c c o m m o d a t e g r o u p s f r o m six to thirty-five. I n addition, t h e H i s t o r i c G h o s t T o u r t o o k i n m o r e t h a n 46,000 v i s i ­
the site c a n h o s t c o n f e r e n c e s b y special a r r a n g e m e n t that tors. 3 1
V i s i t a t i o n is c o n s i d e r a b l y h i g h e r i n t h e s u m m e r
can include specialized tours, sunset harbor cruises, con­ months. M o s t visitors c o m e from other states in Australia,
vict role-plays, a n d catering. Several structures in M a s o n rather than from within Tasmania. 3 2

C o v e are u s e d to h o u s e staff.
Facilities at the M a s o n C o v e h a r b o r area include
a b o a t r a m p a n d a p u b l i c j e t t y c o m p l e t e d i n M a r c h 2002.
T h e h a r b o r is q u i t e p o p u l a r f o r r e c r e a t i o n a l activities,
s u c h as s c u b a diving a n d boating. 2 8
Aprivate company,
w h i c h operates the Isle o f the D e a d tour, also offers
cruises to Port A r t h u r o n acatamaran. 2 9
O n e such excur­
sion, the H o b a r t to P o r t A r t h u r C r u i s e , follows the same
route that convicts traveled, and o n the w a y allows pas­
sengers to catch glimpses o f m a r i n e wildlife a n d observe
dramatic coastlines, including those of S t o r m Bay, C a p e
R a o u l , a n d T a s m a n I s l a n d . A s e c o n d e x c u r s i o n is t h e T a s -
m a n IslandWilderness Cruise,w h i c h departs from Port
A r t h u r to T a s m a n Island. A n o t h e r private o p e r a t o r offers
s e a p l a n e flights. T h e F l i g h t to F r e e d o m , offered i n three
different lengths, gives p a s s e n g e r s aerial v i e w s o f the site
a n d t h e r e g i o n ' s t o w e r i n g cliffs, b l o w h o l e s , c a v e s , a n d g e o ­
logic formations.

128 PORT A R T H U R H I S T O R I C SITE

 Understanding and Protecting the Values of the Site
Port Arthur has been recognized, in every w a y imagina­
ble, as h a v i n g ag r e a t d e a l o f v a l u e as ah e r i t a g e p l a c e . T h i s
section identifies the various assessments a n d statements
of value 3 3
m a d e for the P o r t A r t h u r site i n c o n s e r v a t i o n
p l a n n i n g a n d policy d o c u m e n t s . Secondarily, this section
identifies v a l u e s o f the site that are i m p l i e d i n policies, b u t
not explicitly assessed a n d described (for the m o s t part,
these implied values are the economic values generally
excluded by the Burr a Charter values framework).
Values Associated w i t h
P o r t A r t h u r Historic Site
F o r f o r t y - s e v e n y e a r s P o r t A r t h u r w a s ac o n v i c t site, b u t
it h a s b e e n a h i s t o r i c site f o r m o r e t h a n a h u n d r e d y e a r s .
T h u s , s o m e a r t i c u l a t i o n o f t h e site's v a l u e s is t r a c e a b l e
b a c k t o t h e 1870s. U n t i l t h e c o n t e m p o r a r y e r a o f h e r i t a g e
p r o f e s s i o n a l i z a t i o n ( s t a r t i n g i n t h e 1970s), m o s t a r t i c u l a ­
tion o f heritage values w a s implicit a n d indirect, m o r e dis­
cernible i n actions a n d policies t a k e n o n the site t h a n i n
deliberate pronouncements. S o m e of the major, earlier
instances of value identification are outlined in the earlier
s e c t i o n o n P o r t A r t h u r ' s h i s t o r y as a h e r i t a g e site. I n this
s e c t i o n , e m p h a s i s is p l a c e d o n t h e m o s t r e c e n t official
statements of the value of Port Arthur.
HISTORICAL ARTICULATION OF VALUES
I m m e d i a t e l y f o l l o w i n g t h e c o n v i c t p e r i o d , the site's v a l u e s
w e r e seen t obe b o t h utilitarian (the establishment o fa
n e w township a n d village, aproductive rural landscape
rising from the remnants of the convict landscape) and
social (symbolic). T h e s e social values w e r e contradictory:
negative, in feelings o fs h a m e about the convict period,
l e a d i n g to efforts t ot e a r d o w n , r e u s e , o r o t h e r w i s e erase
traces f r o m the convict era; a n d positive, in seeing the
economic potential of the convict resources, leading t o
the first efforts t o p r o m o t e t o u r i s m on-site.
Aesthetic values, too, w e r e clearly perceived,
m o t i v a t i n g visits f r o m outsiders e v e n before the p e n a l
c o l o n y w a s s h u t d o w n i n 1877. V i s i t o r s w e r e d r a w n t o
the romantic aspect of the building ruins, the gardened
English landscaping, and the remoteness of the T a s m a n
Peninsula. Aesthetic values have remained a m o n g the
most clearly articulated values throughout the manage­
m e n t h i s t o r y o f t h e p o s t - p e n a l c o l o n y site. Developing
simultaneously w a s the realization that the Port Arthur
s t o r y (as told a n d as s y m b o l i z e d a n d r e p r e s e n t e d i n s o m e
o f its r e m a i n i n g s t r u c t u r e s ) h a d v a l u e as a n economic
r e s o u r c e : t od r a w tourists. F r o m the last t h i r d o f the n i n e ­
t e e n t h c e n t u r y t ot h e p r e s e n t , m a n y p r o j e c t s h a v e been
u n d e r t a k e n t od e v e l o p the T a s m a n P e n i n s u l a ' s t o u r i s m
e c o n o m y , often centered o n P o r t A r t h u r as the m a i n
attraction. 3 4
A t t e m p t s t ocultivate the site's e c o n o m i c val­
ues in effect k e p t alive the historic, aesthetic, a n d social
v a l u e s o f the site ( a n d also c h a n g e d t h e m i n aw a y ) , w h i c h
i n t h e 1970s b e c a m e t h e o b j e c t o f c o n c e r t e d s i t e m a n a g e ­
m e n t a n d c o n s e r v a t i o n e f f o r t s . O n l y s i n c e t h e 1940s h a s
conservation of the historic, symbolic values of the site—
w h a t are these days grouped under the rubric of cultural
s i g n i f i c a n c e — b e e n t h e f o c u s o fsite development.
Historic values relating to convictism w e r e articu­
lated selectively, until m o r e - r i g o r o u s , professional efforts
w e r e m a d e t o d o c u m e n t t h e m i n t h e 1979-86 P o r t A r t h u r
Conservation and Development Project (PACDP). Cer­
tain historic values w e r e explicitly recognized in the early
twentieth century, in particular those that inspired popu­
lar narratives s u c h as the novel a n d s u b s e q u e n t film
For the Term of His Natural Life, a s w e l l a s s t o r i e s t o l d b y
local tour guides. However, these values lacked a contex­
tual understanding of the role o fconvictism in T a s m a n i a n
a n d A u s t r a l i a n history a n d identity, a n d they did n o t have
the base o fscholarly research underlying the historic
values recognized today. A t the time, historic values w e r e
selected o n the basis of w h a t resonated w i t h popular
c u l t u r e a n d c o n s u m e r i s m (i.e., f a s c i n a t i o n w i t h t h e h o r r o r
o f the penal system a n d stories o fcriminals) a n d w h a t w a s
m a r k e t a b l e . N e v e r t h e l e s s , P o r t A r t h u r t o o k its p l a c e i n t h e
popular national m e m o r y through the assertion o f such
consumer-oriented values.
U N D E R S T A N D I N G A N D P R O T E C T I N G T H E VALUES 129
 CONTEMPORARY ARTICULATION OF
VALUES IN HERITAGE PLANS AND
O T H E R OFFICIAL DOCUMENTS
A wide range of values has been associated with Port
Arthur, both historically a n d in contemporary practice.
In the hundred-plus years that Port Arthur has been a
h e r i t a g e site, n e g a t i v e v a l u e s as w e l l as positive v a l u e s
h a v e b e e n v e r y m u c h i n e v i d e n c e a n d h a v e s h a p e d site
m a n a g e m e n t quite clearly Conflicts between positive
a n d n e g a t i v e v a l u e s , o r a m o n g efforts t od e v e l o p dif­
f e r e n t p o s i t i v e v a l u e s , h a v e b e e n r e c o g n i z e d i n t h e 2000
C o n s e r v a t i o n P l a n a n d other policy, planning, a n d
legislative documents.
O v e r time, a n d especially in the past several
decades, the values articulated in Port Arthur's manage­
m e n t p l a n s h a v e f l u c t u a t e d i n r e s p o n s e t oe x t e r n a l c o n ­
ditions, particularlythe a m o u n t o f public funding pro­
vided b y different g o v e r n m e n t sources. W h e n funding
h a s b e e n i n a b u n d a n c e ( a s i t w a s f o r P A C D P f r o m 1979
t o 1986), p l a n s a n d m a n a g e m e n t f o c u s e d m o r e e x c l u ­
sively o n cultural significance values. W h e n public fund­
ing has b e e n cut b a c k substantially, emphasis shifted
t o w a r d e c o n o m i c values, as m a n a g e m e n t necessarily
t u r n e d its f o c u s o n g e n e r a t i n g r e v e n u e f r o m t h e site
t h r o u g h t o u r i s m a n d associated c o m m e r c i a l activity.
T h i s s i t u a t i o n o c c u r r e d i n t h e e a r l y 1990s, w h e n a s u r p l u s -
generating expectation was imposed on P A H S M A , which
r e s p o n d e d w i t h greater focus o n e a r n i n g r e v e n u e at the
expense o f conservation.
I n t h e l a s t f e w d e c a d e s , t h e a r t i c u l a t i o n o fsite v a l ­
ues has b e c o m e a n explicit goal o f heritage professionals,
managers, and policy makers. 3 5
An u m b e r of plans have
b e e n f o r m u l a t e d ( d e s c r i b e d b e l o w ) , a n d it is i m p o r t a n t
to realize the external forces shaping these plans. I n e a c h
case, plans for P o r t A r t h u r w e r e formulated not only
according to the best practices o f the conservation field
at t h e t i m e , b u t also t os e c u r e f u n d i n g for t h e site's c o n s e r ­
v a t i o n f r o m ap a r t i c u l a r g o v e r n m e n t s o u r c e . T h e a b i d i n g
p u r p o s e o fs e c u r i n g f u n d i n g t h r o u g h p o l i t i c a l c h a n n e l s
has s h a p e d the goals, methods, a n d o u t c o m e s o f the
various plans.
T h e 1975 D r a f t P o r t A r t h u r S i t e Management
Plan, formulated by the T a s m a n i a n N P W S , w a s the
first m o d e r n p r o f e s s i o n a l p l a n for t h e site. It c a l l e d for
fairly aggressive restoration a n d for the concentration
of development (including infrastructure and residences
for site staff i n historic b u i l d i n g s ) o n the historic c o r e
a r o u n d M a s o n C o v e . T h i s has b e e n referred to as the
Williamsburg approach, focusing o n the convict period
130 PORT A R T H U R HISTORIC SITE
a n d r e m o v i n g buildings associated w i t h the post-
convict C a r n a r v o n era. Little o fthis p l a n w a s imple­
m e n t e d , t h o u g h it m a r k e d o n e e n d o f t h e development-
conservation spectrum of management planning.
P A C D P r e p r e s e n t e d am a j o r shift i n attitude
t o w a r d site v a l u e s as w e l l as a shift i n the conservation
philosophy that drove the treatment o f values a n d fabric.
Strongly influenced by national heritage organizations,
the A H C , a n d Australia I C O M O S , this concentrated effort
of heritage professionals f r o m across Australia resulted in
t h e r e c o g n i t i o n a n d m a n a g e m e n t o fab r o a d e r r a n g e o f
h e r i t a g e v a l u e s t h a n s o l e l y t h o s e o fc o n v i c t i s m . T h e c o n ­
siderable on-site presence o f P A C D P p e r s o n n e l over sev­
eral years built astrong cadre of professionals w h o , today,
c o n t i n u e t oh o l d a s t a k e i n t h e c o n s e r v a t i o n o f P o r t
A r t h u r f r o m their far-flung positions. T h e project relied
o n substantial government funding, w h i c h allowed focus
on conservation, not development. N o sustained empha­
sis w a s t h e r e f o r e p a i d t ot h e f u t u r e r o l e a n d c u l t i v a t i o n
of commercial values. 3 6
W h e n the temporary infusion
of T a s m a n i a n State funds ended, there w e r e few
resources, strategies, or expertise available t o sustain
t h e site a n d its c o n s e r v a t i o n .
T h r o u g h t h e d e v e l o p m e n t o fa s t a t e m e n t of
significance, P A C D P focused m o r e explicitly o n values.
T h e p r o j e c t also b r o u g h t a b o u t ashift i n v i e w p o i n t ,
advocating strongly that both the convict and C a r n a r v o n
p e r i o d s w e r e i m p o r t a n t a s p e c t s o fP o r t A r t h u r ' s
heritage significance. I n f o r m a l changes e m b o d i e d in this
new, heritage-professional approach were codified in a
1982 d r a f t m a n a g e m e n t p l a n , w h i c h i n t u r n w a s the
b a s i s f o r t h e o f f i c i a l 1985 P o r t A r t h u r H i s t o r i c S i t e M a n ­
agement Plan.
T h e B u r r a Charter w a s the p r i m a r y guide for
t h e 1985 p l a n , b u t t h e r e w a s n o e x p l i c i t a r t i c u l a t i o n o f
"values" or a n explicit process o f investigating different
v a l u e s . " T h e c u l t u r a l s i g n i f i c a n c e o fP o r t A r t h u r is r e a d i l y
apparent." 3 7
T h e p l a n n e r s codified the site v a l u e s i n a four-
p o i n t s t a t e m e n t o fc u l t u r a l s i g n i f i c a n c e :
i. T h e site's v a l u e as p h y s i c a l r e m a i n s — o f p e n a l
settlement and o f Carnarvon
ii. T h e site's associations w i t h t h e A u s t r a l i a n c o n v i c t
system, and the role of the system in the develop­
m e n t of Tasmania and the nation
iii. T h e townscape /landscape values [referringt o
aesthetic values]
iv T h e "buildings a n d structures are important a n d
scarce examples of their type." 3 8
T h e " e c o n o m i c i m p o r t a n c e o f t o u r i s m " t ot h e state—
s p e a k i n g to t h e site's e c o n o m i c v a l u e — w a s n o t e d on
p a g e i o f the p l a n as acontext o f the study, b u t n o t as
o n e o f t h e v a l u e s o r v a r i a b l e s p e r se.
" T h e principal direction of m a n a g e m e n t for the
Port A r t h u r Historic Site will be towards conservation o f
the fabric o f the settlement to enable the historic realities
of the Site to b e accurately a n d continuously understood
at m a n y levels, w h i l e p r o v i d i n g visitor a n d management
requirements with minimal impact." 3 9
Based on these
value priorities, arresting physical decay o f the historic
fabric w a s the p a r a m o u n t goal. Reconstruction, advo­
c a t e d s t r o n g l y i n t h e 1975 s c h e m e , w a s t o b e u n d e r t a k e n
o n l y w h e n it w a s t h e s o l e m e a n s o f a r r e s t i n g d e c a y .
T h e 1985 p l a n r e p r e s e n t e d a n i m p o r t a n t s h i f t i n
philosophy to value the post-convict-era historical layers
a n d f a b r i c , c a p t u r i n g , a s B r i a n E g l o f f p u t s it, " t h e t r a n s f o r ­
mation of aconvict landscape into an Australian town­
ship." 4 0
T h i s a v o w e d l y p r o - c o n s e r v a t i o n s t a t e m e n t o f site
values (not to m e n t i o n the clear "value the layers" conser­
vation philosophy) s w u n g the p e n d u l u m toward conser­
vation o f heritage values a n d has since b e e n v i e w e d as
a b e n c h m a r k . It p r o v e d difficult to execute this level o f
c o n s e r v a t i o n activity, h o w e v e r , w i t h o u t the extended
c o m m i t m e n t of T a s m a n i a n State funds o n w h i c h the
plan was premised.
A f t e r 1987, s t a t e f u n d i n g f o r P A C D P c e a s e d , a n d
the creation of P A H S M A w a s naturally accompanied by a
swing of the p e n d u l u m back toward economic values and
generating revenue t h r o u g h tourism. Site management
t u r n e d its a t t e n t i o n o n c e a g a i n t o w a r d o b t a i n i n g r e v e n u e
and away from research and physical conservation of her­
itage resources. " G i v e n the significant economic, social,
a n d political i m p a c t s following the events at P o r t A r t h u r
i n A p r i l 1996, t h e A u t h o r i t y h a s r e c o g n i s e d t h e n e e d t o
b r i n g f o r w a r d plans c o n c e r n i n g visitor facilities a n d serv­
ices w i t h i n the Site," including asound-and-light show, a
n e w Visitor Center, a n access road, a n d p a r k i n g areas. 4 1
This change in m a n a g e m e n t strategy and prioritization
o f values w a s not a c c o m p a n i e d b y an e w articulation of
v a l u e s . T h e 1996 a m e n d m e n t s t o t h e 1985 m a n a g e m e n t
plan (done by P A H S M A ) codified these changes (many
o f w h i c h c a m e b e f o r e t h e w r i t i n g o f t h e 1996 a m e n d ­
ments) but contained n o statement (or restatement)
o f site values.
T h e shifts i n v a l u e s resulting from the changes
i n m a n a g e m e n t b e t w e e n 1970 a n d 2000 s e t a n i m p o r t a n t
context for understanding the new, explicit articulation
of values in the conservation planning process completed
i n 2000. T h e 2000 C o n s e r v a t i o n P l a n k e p t i n m o t i o n the
s w i n g i n g p e n d u l u m o f values, b r i n g i n g site management
back from the revenue-centered m o d e l toward w h a t the
p l a n n e r s v i e w as aclear prioritization o f heritage values.
In practice, o f course, conservation activities m u s t be bal­
a n c e d w i t h the revenue-generating t o u r i s m activities o n
t h e site, a n d this i m p o r t a n t c h a l l e n g e defines m a n y o f t h e
site m a n a g e m e n t issues d i s c u s s e d b e l o w . I n fact, several
plans for Port A r t h u r formally recognized the n e e d t o
w o r k o n b o t h conservation a n d tourism, b u t different
levels a n d sources o f f u n d i n g contributed to the swings
between management regimes focused on conservation
and those focused o n tourism. Currently, the manage­
m e n t o f P o r t A r t h u r s e e m s to have achieved afairly bal­
a n c e d position, o n e that gives conservation aclear, b u t
n o t exclusive, priority over c o m m e r c i a l activities.
T h e c u r r e n t r e g i m e o f v a l u e articulation a n d site
m a n a g e m e n t is t h e s u b j e c t o f t h e s e c t i o n s t h a t follow,
w h i c h f o c u s o n t h e 2000 C o n s e r v a t i o n P l a n .
OFFICIAL STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE
A t present, the v a l u e s o f the P o r t A r t h u r site are refer­
enced in the T a s m a n i a n Heritage Register's statement
of significance:
Port Arthur Historic Site is of great historic cultural heritage
value to Tasmania and Australia for its ability to demon­
strate the convict periodfrom1830 to 1877 and its ability to
demonstrate the subsequent developments of the site, par­
ticularly as a tourist attraction and the attempts to downplay
the site's convict history. Port Arthur Historic Site is one of
only three convict settlements in Tasmania. It is a rare and
endangered place. Port Arthur Historic Site has considerable
potential for scientific and social research to contribute to
the understanding of Tasmania's history. Port Arthur is a
prime example of the British colonial penal system, the evo­
lution of that system during the 19th century, and the effects
of that system in shaping Australian society. The site has the
ability to demonstrate a high degree of technical and cre­
ative achievement for the time, including industrial enter­
prises such as shipbuilding, saw milling and brick making.
Port Arthur Historic Site, as the most famous convict site in
Australia, has a strong and special meaning for the Tasma­
nian as well as the Australian community as a place of sec­
ondary punishment in the convict system. The place also has
a special meaning to Tasmanians for its association with the
1996 mass killing by Martin Bryant. The site has particular
associations with Governor Arthur and political prisoner
Smith O'Brien 4 2
U N D E R S T A N D I N G A N DP R O T E C T I N G T H E VALUES 131
A s a s t a t e m e n t o f t h e site's v a l u e s , the p r e c e d i n g q u o t e
t o u c h e s o n all four B u r r a C h a r t e r categories a n d speaks
strongly to the values attributed to the different historic
layers of the post-European-contact Port Arthur land­
scape: from the founding o f the convict period to the
1996 t r a g e d y , i n c l u d i n g t h e c o n t i n u a l r e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n
o f the site's h i s t o r y i n t h e d e c a d e s b e t w e e n t h e end
of the convict era and the beginning of the modern
c o n s e r v a t i o n e r a i n t h e 1970s. T h i s s t a t e m e n t p a v e s t h e
w a y for assessing the v a l u e s o f the site b y v a l u e - t y p e o r
b y historical layer.
THE 2000 CONSERVATION P L A N 43
T h e v a l u e s o f the P o r t A r t h u r site h a v e b e e n articulated
m o s t e x h a u s t i v e l y i n t h e 2000 C o n s e r v a t i o n P l a n , o n e
two main management documents formulated by
P A H S M A , the other being the annual Corporate Plan.
T h e Conservation Plan's detailed a n d rigorous b r e a k d o w n
o f the site's v a l u e s w a s g e n e r a t e d a c c o r d i n g to r e s e a r c h
a n d the m u l t i p l e significance criteria applicable to the site
(from T a s m a n i a n State legislation a n d from the AHC).
Broadly, the values are articulated a c c o r d i n g to the
C h a r t e r categories o f aesthetic, historic, scientific, a n d
social value, w i t h equivalent categories added for Aborigi­
nal and W o r l d Heritage values. T h e values are s u m m a ­
rized below. 4 5
Aesthetic Values:
• Abeautiful and picturesque landscape, combin­
ing buildings and landscape.
• H a r b o r location and water-boundedness of the
l a n d s c a p e is p a r t o f t h e v a l u e d a e s t h e t i c (also t r u e o f
other places o f s e c o n d a r y p u n i s h m e n t ) , so this aspect o f
aesthetic value relates closely to historic (convict) values.
• Visual " l a n d m a r k qualities" as represented b y the
church ruins, the penitentiary ruins, and the views t o
Point P u e r a n d Isle o f the D e a d .
• Individualbuildings and elements of the English/
b u s h landscaping each convey particularaesthetic values
(for example, G e o r g i a n colonial style o f the R o y a l E n g i ­
neers, use of local materials, or lack of craftsmanship in
a building's convict labor).
Historic Values:
• P o r t A r t h u r ( P A ) is ap r e m i e r c o n v i c t site r e l a t i n g
to the nation's convict history; this takes precedent
other historic values.
• D r a w i n g directly o n this, several subvalues are
identified, s u c h as the historic value o f the Separate P r i s o n
132 PORT A R T H U R HISTORIC SITE
(vis-a-vis p e n a l history a n d c h a n g e s in c o n f i n e m e n t philos­
ophy) a n d the different parts o f the penal s y s t e m spread
across the T a s m a n Peninsula (the probation stations).
• T h e combination of the picturesque landscape
and the paradoxical representation of convict history in
this s e t t i n g is specifically c a l l e d o u t as a v a l u e .
• P A is " a c o m p l e x l a y e r e d c u l t u r a l l a n d s c a p e . "
• O n a n i n t e r n a t i o n a l scale, P A is a n i m p o r t a n t p a r t
of the British penal/colonization/forced-labor system
(this relates to the W o r l d H e r i t a g e n o m i n a t i o n ; see
below).
• P A is a n e a r l y a n d l e a d i n g e x a m p l e o f a h e r i t a g e -
based tourist destination.
• P A illustrates c h a n g i n g approaches to heritage
of
conservation philosophy and practice (both in manage­
ment and in conservation/restoration work).
• PA's settlement w a s a n important event in the
history of Tasmania.
• A s part of the penal system, P A w a s also a n indus­
trial c o m p l e x .
4 4
• T h e A p r i l 1996 t r a g e d y a d d e d " a n a d d i t i o n a l l a y e r
Burra
o f t r a g i c s i g n i f i c a n c e " t ot h e site; it is n o w a s s o c i a t e d w i t h
national gun laws.
• P A is e v i d e n c e o f t h e p r o b a t i o n s y s t e m , a n d l a t e r
as awelfare institution (lunatics, the poor, etc.).
• A f t e r 1877 ( e s p e c i a l l y t h e p o s t - 1 8 9 4 r e n a m i n g ) ,
P o r t A r t h u r / C a r n a r v o n h a s historic v a l u e as a typical
Tasmanian local c o m m u n i t y or small township.
Scientific Values:
• Above- and below-ground historical and
maritime resources have "exceptional research potential"
to yield insight into the convict experience; this extends
to t h e c u l t u r a l l a n d s c a p e itself, i n d i v i d u a l s t r u c t u r e s , a n d
archival collections.
• A b o r i g i n a l sites are separately a c k n o w l e d g e d as
having research value.
• N a t u r a l r e s o u r c e s o f the site "are also a n i m p o r ­
tant scientific research resource."
• T h e s e scientific v a l u e s refer to P A site a n d the
outliers (e.g., P o i n t P u e r ) .
• T h e combination of "oral tradition [including
family links], d o c u m e n t a r y evidence, collections,
structures, e n g i n e e r i n g relics, archaeological features
a n d landscape at P o r t A r t h u r h a v e u n p a r a l l e l e d potential
over
for c o m m u n i t y education."
 Social Values: • Scientific, educational, a n d other values (mean­
• P A is a s y m b o l o f t h e c o n v i c t p a s t o f A u s t r a l i a . ings for the non-Aboriginal community)
• P A is a s y m b o l o f T a s m a n i a ' s r o l e i n A u s t r a l i a n - (Potential) scientific value
history. - A s historic value, Aboriginal values help demon­
• P A is a f o u n d a t i o n f o r T a s m a n i a n s ' self-identity. strate that the significance of P A goes b e y o n d the convict
• P A is a m a r k e r o f f a m i l y h i s t o r y f o r s o m e ( e s p e ­ era.
cially those cultivating links to convictism) a n d o f A n g l o -
Celtic heritage for alarger group. World Heritage Values: 4 6

• " P A is a significant l o c a l l a n d m a r k " a n d s t a n d s • P A is o n e o f e i g h t sites i n c l u d e d i n t h e thematic

as a n i m a g e o f the T a s m a n P e n i n s u l a a r e a as a w h o l e . n o m i n a t i o n that has b e e n drafted (but not forwarded) for
• " T h e A r c a d i a n qualities of the Port A r t h u r land­ Australian C o n v i c t Sites. 4 7

scape are o f significance to generations o f T a s m a n i a n s • T h e values identified to support the W o r l d H e r ­

a n d other visitors."
• P A "holds an important place in the history of
m o d e r n heritage conservation in Australia."
• T h e 1996 t r a g e d y h a s m a d e P A a p o i g n a n t p o l i t i ­
cal s y m b o l at a national level [ a n d ap o i g n a n t m a r k e r o f
grief for those locally a n d those directly associated w i t h
the tragedy].
• P A is o f c o n t e m p o r a r y s o c i a l s i g n i f i c a n c e to
Tasmanian Aboriginal people.
• P A represents the identity of the T a s m a n
P e n i n s u l a c o m m u n i t y ; this s t r o n g a s s o c i a t i o n is p o s i t i v e
(a r e a s o n to r e c o g n i z e a n d c e l e b r a t e c o m m u n i t y life)
and negative (signaling the estrangement that has b e e n
felt from the site itself).
• T h e s t r o n g c o m m u n i t y a t t a c h m e n t to P A is t o d a y
"underscored" b y the e c o n o m i c i m p o r t a n c e o f the his­
toric site for the p e n i n s u l a .
• P A is a p l a c e o f e n j o y m e n t , r e f l e c t i o n , a n d c a t h a r ­
sis w i t h r e g a r d to c o n v i c t i s m .
Aboriginal Values:
• Associational values
- General associational value with Aboriginals due
to their o c c u p a t i o n o f the T a s m a n Peninsula.
- T h e v a l u e o f s o m e A b o r i g i n a l sites o n the p e n i n ­
s u l a , t h o u g h it is n o w a h i g h l y m o d i f i e d landscape.
- N e g a t i v e value, to A b o r i g i n a l s , o w i n g to their dis­
location f r o m this place.
- W e a k associational values in the post-European
era.
• S o c i a l v a l u e s ( m e a n i n g s felt b y t h e contemporary
Aboriginal community)
- Existence of traditional Aboriginal resources
( t h o u g h t h e r e a p p a r e n t l y is little p h y s i c a l e v i d e n c e of
such).
itage C o n v e n t i o n criteria are in accord w i t h the other val­
ues identified above, though they focus mostly o n historic
values a n d ignore values a n d significance for the local
communities, areal source of complexity and challenge in
managing PA.
The Burra Charter methodology was employed
to articulate, research, a n d assess these values, a n d they
are the result of adeliberate process of investigation,
research, consultation, a n d synthesis. T h e value categories
necessarily overlap (e.g., s o m e historic v a l u e s also a p p e a r
u n d e r A b o r i g i n a l values a n d W o r l d H e r i t a g e values), as
it is i m p o s s i b l e to f u l l y s e p a r a t e o n e k i n d o f site v a l u e
f r o m all others. S e e i n g the C o n s e r v a t i o n P l a n as the p r o d ­
u c t o f B u r r a C h a r t e r m e t h o d o l o g y is i m p o r t a n t f o r
understanding the particular concept of "social values"
u s e d (to e n c o m p a s s all the different senses o f place attach­
ment, historical and contemporary) and the absence of
"economic values," w h i c h are largely excluded f r o m con­
siderations of cultural significance. 4 8
In keeping with
B u r r a m e t h o d o l o g y , t h e a r t i c u l a t i o n o f site v a l u e s is c e n ­
tered o n the four p r i m a r y types: historic, aesthetic, social,
a n d scientific.
V a l u e a r t i c u l a t i o n is a l s o o r g a n i z e d a c c o r d i n g
to stakeholder c o m m u n i t i e s : the m a i n l a n d Australian
community, the T a s m a n i a n community, the
Tasmanian Aboriginal community, the local T a s m a n
Peninsula community, the tragedy community, and
the heritage c o m m u n i t y . T h i s effort to l o o k at values
f r o m multiple perspectives maximizes the articulation
o f the site's values.
Based o n the values articulated in the
Conservation Plan, Port Arthur's current statement
of significance—PAHSMA'sbenchmark policy statement
o n cultural v a l u e s — r e a d s as follows: 4 9

- T h e Aboriginality of the area has been crushed

by the post-invasion convict era.

U N D E R S T A N D I N G A N D PROTECTING T H E VALUES 133

 STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE The B r o a d A r r o w Cafe

Port Arthur Historic Site is an outstanding convict place— a n d the 1996 Tragedy

an important foundation for Australia's sense of identity.

I n A p r i l 1996, a g u n m a n e n t e r e d t h e B r o a d
Port Arthur is significant in a World context because it
exemplifies a worldwide process of colonial settlement A r r o w Cafe in Port Arthur and opened fire,
using labour provided by forced migration. The place sym­
killing twenty people. After firing more shots
bolises an expansionist period of European history and
British strategic objectives. It displays key aspects of penal outdoors in the parking area, he got into his
philosophy and the social structure that produced it.
car a n d continued his killing spree. T h e tragic
In conjunction with other Australian Convict places, Port
Arthur demonstrates aspects of the British penal system, event a d d e d another layer to the dark history
in particular, concepts of religious instruction, secondary
o f P o r t A r t h u r a n d p r e s e n t e d an u m b e r o f
punishment and segregation as adopted in Australia. It is a
focal point for understanding the convict history and con­ c h a l l e n g e s for site m a n a g e r s .
vict-period operation of the Tasman Peninsula. The place
also represents changing community attitudes to the notion F r o m the perspective of several distinct stake­
of convict heritage.
holder groups, the heart-wrenching events
At Port Arthur, a sense of scenic beauty is heightened by the
paradox of a grim past. Topography and layers of history associated with the Port Arthur massacre have
reflected in indigenous and introduced plantings and an
h a d am a r k e d effect o n t h e v a l u e s o f t h e site.
array of structures combine in an evocative and picturesque
cultural landscape. The Arcadian qualities of this landscape In the words of one interviewee, the tragedy
contrast with its historical role as an industrial penal site.
h a s " d r a w n al i n e " i n t h e h i s t o r y o f t h e site,
The form and location of built elements display deliberate
design and arrangement, reflecting the initial order and between what c a m e before and what comes
hierarchy of Port Arthur's civil, military and penal settle­
afterward. 1
T h e incident has m a d e Port Arthur
ment and subsequent post-convict history. The place retains
a high degree of integrity and authenticity. both apoignant c o n t e m p o r a r y political s y m b o l

Port Arthur is an important element in Australian identity, a n d as y m b o l o f g r i e f for locals a n d o t h e r s

invoking intense and, at times, conflicting feelings.
directly associated w i t h the tragedy.
The place has traditionally been an important centre of
economic activity and work in the Tasman Peninsula and
T h e shooting i m p a c t e d not only the cafe a n d
Tasmania—initially as a convict workplace, later a town and
premier tourist destination. its staff ( s o m e o f w h o m w e r e a m o n g t h e v i c ­
For the Tasman Peninsula community, Port Arthur has
t i m s ) b u t also the entire site b y r e c a s t i n g t h e
strong and enduring associations and meanings as a land­
mark and as the symbolic centre of the community. image of Port Arthur in the public mind.

Port Arthur's physical evidence, both above and below O p i n i o n s differ as to h o w the values associated
ground, has exceptional scientific research potential arising
w i t h t h e 1996 t r a g e d y r e l a t e t o t h e c o r e c u l t u r a l
from the extensive resource itself, the integrity of archaeo­
logical deposits and the ability of material culture to provide values of Port A r t h u r (those related to convic­
valuable insight into the convict experience. In combination,
t i s m ) . A l t h o u g h t h e t r a g e d y is m e n t i o n e d i n
the oral tradition, documentary evidence, collections,
structures, archaeological features and landscape at Port the Conservation Plan s statement
Arthur have great potential for research and community
o f s i g n i f i c a n c e , t h e p l a n sm a i n f o c u s is o n
education. Port Arthur is a landmark place in the history and

[continued on page 137]

PORT A R T H U R HISTORIC SITE

convictism. T h e c r i m e at the B r o a d A r r o w study w a s p r a i s e d as a successful effort to d o c u ­

a d d e d a n ironic n o t e to the cultural values that m e n t and address stakeholders' values.

were already driving the convictism theme. For

T h e social-value study discerned national val­
s o m e visitors, the shooting o v e r s h a d o w e d con­
ues, s o m e of w h i c h , though, w e r e expressed
v i c t i s m a n d its i n d u s t r i a l , p e n a l , a n d l a n d s c a p e
u n i q u e l y b y local c o m m u n i t i e s (e.g., the
s t o r i e s . T h e 1996 t r a g e d y i s t h u s deliberately
m o u r n i n g of those directly affected b y the
not p r o m o t e d to visitors.
event). T h e s e local a n d national values, how­

Different groups held different opinions about ever, w e r e conflicted as m u c h as t h e y w e r e

h o w the cafe site s h o u l d b e h a n d l e d . Some related. T h e negative site values h e l d b y t h o s e

w a n t e d all evidence o f the event destroyed. in m o u r n i n g sensibly led to the partial destruc­

Indeed, the cafe w a s partially d e m o l i s h e d as a n tion o f site f a b r i c — a n a t t e m p t to r e m o v e traces

act o f m o u r n i n g . O t h e r s s o u g h t to m a r k the of the horrible events. T h o s e focused o n a

site: m e m o r i a l s a p p e a r e d s o o n a f t e r w a r d . T h e m o r e l o n g - t e r m a n d m o r e positive v i e w o f site

different social values o f the cafe, c o r r e s p o n d ­ v a l u e s (e.g., that the P o r t A r t h u r t r a g e d y repre­

ing to different c o m m u n i t i e s /stakeholder sented aturning point in g u n control laws, or

groups, w e r e a source o f real conflict. that the Port Arthur tragedy represented an

additional layer o f history) w i s h e d to preserve

Site m a n a g e r s tried to ensure that the range of
the r e m a i n s as aw a y o f preserving the positive
values w a s fully researched a n d that n o group's
social value.
values w e r e excluded. I n deciding w h a t ulti­

m a t e l y w o u l d h a p p e n to the physical r e m a i n s In the context o f this case study, a n u m b e r

o f t h e cafe site, a c a r e f u l s t u d y o f t h e s o c i a l o f conflicts over values a n d fabric c a n be

v a l u e s associated w i t h the t r a g e d y a n d the site identified:

was undertaken. T h e study followed a

2
• Different stakeholders, s o m e representing local

m e t h o d o l o g y developed specifically for under­ constituencies (relatives o f victims, local resi­

standing the different social values ascribed to dents, P o r t A r t h u r staff) a n d others represent­

h e r i t a g e sites, a n d w h i c h d e p e n d e d o n identify­ ing m o r e national (nonlocal) constituencies,

ing a n d interviewing the b r o a d range of stake­ c o n s t r u e d the values o f the cafe differently.

holder groups. T h e study's findings illuminated • F i n d i n g v a l u e i n ab u i l d i n g (or, a s c r i b i n g v a l u e s

w h a t course o f action to take. B y using a delib­ to fabric) does not always lead to apolicy o f

erate and detailed process of consultation to conservation. I n s o m e instances, negative

deal w i t h an emotionally charged situation, the values suggest destruction or neglect of the

U N D E R S T A N D I N G A N D PROTECTING T H E VALUES 135

 fabric as the preferred c o u r s e o f action. the building w a s p r e s e r v e d in astate of

• Divergent values held b y different groups and stripped-down ruins, cleared of any physical

individuals pointed to different w a y s to handle evidence of the shooting, yet clearly m a r k i n g

the fabric o f the cafe: negative social values led t h e a c t u a l site as aliteral m e m o r i a l .

to adesire to destroy the physical remains; posi­

B y putting Port Arthur o n the front page
tive social v a l u e s (e.g., t h e institution o f
nationally a n d internationally, the tragedy
national g u n control legislation) suggested con­
immediately heightened the contemporary
s e r v i n g t h e p h y s i c a l r e m a i n s o f t h e t r a g e d y site.
s o c i a l v a l u e s o f P o r t A r t h u r , a n d it l i k e l y

T h e resolution of these conflicting v a l u e s — b r o u g h t m o r e visitors too. I n a n economic

a painful process that involved an u m b e r of s e n s e , t h e r e is a n o t h e r c o n n e c t i o n b e t w e e n the

s t a k e h o l d e r g r o u p s a n d a site management t r a g e d y a n d site values: p o s t - t r a g e d y govern­

team in transition—was multifarious. Some m e n t funding led to the debate about the siting

p a r t s o f the site w e r e c o n s e r v e d i n a c c o r d w i t h and f o r m of the Visitor Center, w h i c h in turn

e a c h set o f values. A n e w m e m o r i a l w a s helped stimulate the design and commission­

installed (a cross m a d e o f h u o n pine, initially ing of the Conservation Plan and the n e w

i n t e n d e d as at e m p o r a r y m a r k e r ) ; the demoli­ articulation of values and values-based plan­

tion o f the cafe, b e g u n i m m e d i a t e l y after the n i n g for t h e w h o l e site ( t h o u g h ar e v i s e d c o n ­

tragedy, w a s halted; a n d the remaining shell of servation plan h a d already been in the works).

O v e r t i m e , it is l i k e l y — p e r h a p s i n e v i t a b l e —

that the values associated w i t h the cafe, a n d the

s t r e n g t h w i t h w h i c h t h e y a r e felt, w i l l c h a n g e . I n

the years since the stabilization o f the cafe ruins

a n d t h e c r e a t i o n o f m e m o r i a l s , site m a n a g e r s

h a v e p l a c e d a n interpretive m a r k e r at t h e site

a n d published am o d e s t b r o c h u r e in response to

visitor inquiries. S u c h interpretation w o u l d have

s e e m e d i n a p p r o p r i a t e i n the i m m e d i a t e after­

Port Arthur Memorial Garden. Demolition of the cafe was m a t h of the tragedy, w h e n n o one w i s h e d to
started shortly after the 1996 tragedy but was halted by court
d r a w a t t e n t i o n to t h e site. A s l o c a l m e m o r y
order. The structure remained in ruins until it was recon­
structed as a memorial. The memorial, however, is not given b e c o m e s less i m m e d i a t e a n d locals deal w i t h
prominence in the interpretation schemes of Port Arthur
and serves primarily as a quiet testimony to the senseless their grief, the n a t i o n a l m e m o r y w i l l likely
killing of staff and visitors. Photo: Marta de la Torre

136 PORT A R T H U R HISTORIC SITE

 b e c o m e predominant, and the Port Arthur
tragedy will likely take o n value
as a n o t h e r layer o f national significance—as
o p p o s e d to the extraordinary, conflicted, a n d
particularly local values of the place that were
felt i m m e d i a t e l y after.
Notes
1. Scott 1997 is a powerful and detailed account of the tragedy
and its effects on local citizens and those associated with
Port Arthur.
2. Jane Lennon and Associates 1998; Johnston 1992.
development of Australian heritage conservation philosophy
and practice.
Port Arthur and the Tasman Peninsula have contemporary
significance for Tasmanian Aboriginal people, arising from
the perceived intactness of the natural landscape and the
presence of pre-contact Aboriginal sites that connects the
present-day Aboriginal community to the pre-contact past.
The events of 28 April 1996 make Port Arthur a symbol of
continuing tragedy, suffering and gun law reform for all
Australians.
Port Arthur is a nationally-significant symbol of Australia's
convict past, a highly revered icon that symbolically repre­
sents Tasmania's place in Australian history
T h e s t a t e m e n t o f significance t o u c h e s o n all cate­
gories of value articulated in the planning process and
begins to prioritize t h e m simply b y ordering the brief nar­
rative. It also s u c c e e d s i n i n t e r p r e t i n g site v a l u e s i n a n u m ­
ber o f ways: b y capturing the different cultural values
(aspects of cultural significance) identified in the B u r r a
process and suggesting the character of the Port Arthur
landscape as thickly layered w i t h historic values; b y intro­
d u c i n g e c o n o m i c values into the mix; b y referring to vari­
ous stakeholder communities that hold these values; and
by suggesting the regional nature of Port Arthur's
s i g n i f i c a n c e — i t is t h e p e n i n s u l a r l a n d s c a p e , n o t j u s t t h e
M a s o n C o v e core, that holds significance.
A l o n g with the Conservation Plan, other docu­
m e n t s l o o k at the values o f P o r t A r t h u r from perspectives
other than those involved in the overall, conservation-
focused plans.
BROAD ARROW CAFE CONSERVATION STUDY
T h e Broad Arrow Cafe Conservation Study 5 0
was com­
missioned to research, articulate, a n d assess the heritage
v a l u e s a s s o c i a t e d w i t h t h e A p r i l 1996 t r a g e d y . T h i s s t u d y ,
w h i c h p r e c e d e d t h e 2000 C o n s e r v a t i o n P l a n c o n c e r n i n g
the entire P o r t A r t h u r H i s t o r i c Site, elicited the values o f
the cafe site a c c o r d i n g to established A u s t r a l i a n social-
value methodology. 5 1
T h e following excerpts from the statement
of significance resulting from the B r o a d A r r o w Cafe
study speak to the values identified specifically for this
p a r t o f the P o r t A r t h u r site i n the w a k e o f the tragedy.
Further detail a n d discussion can be found in the a c c o m ­
p a n y i n g s i d e b a r ( s e e p . 134). M o s t s i g n i f i c a n t l y , t h e study
found strong negative a n d positive social values associated
w i t h the cafe.
U N D E R S T A N D I N G A N DP R O T E C T I N G T H E VALUES 137
 The Cafe has nation-wide social value because of its
connection with the tragedy.
• For some communities this value is related to deceased
friends and relatives;
• for others it is related to the nature of the tragedy,
evoking both negative and positive responses;
• for others such as historians, writers and cultural
tourists, it is part of the ongoing history of the site.
T h e s t u d y also f o u n d m i n o r o r negligible aesthetic a n d sci­
entific values associated w i t h the Cafe. T h e historic values
w e r e s e e n t o b e s i g n i f i c a n t i n t w o s e n s e s . F i r s t , t h e 1996
t r a g e d y a d d e d a n o t h e r l a y e r to t h e h i s t o r y o f t h e site,
t h o u g h t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p b e t w e e n t h e 1996 t r a g e d y a n d t h e
t r a g i c a s p e c t s o f c o n v i c t i s m is t h e s u b j e c t o f s o m e u n c e r ­
tainty. S e c o n d , m a n y o b s e r v e r s believe the B r o a d A r r o w
C a f e as t r a g e d y site w i l l a c q u i r e g r e a t e r historic v a l u e i n
s u b s e q u e n t years i n association w i t h the shift i n n a t i o n a l
g u n laws a n d attitudes, a n d m a y even eclipse the locally
held negative social values that w e r e so strong in the
tragedy's immediate aftermath.
UNIVERSITY OF TASMANIA
ECONOMIC IMPACT STUDY
T h e economic impact study commissioned by P A H S M A
a n d c o m p l e t e d i n 1999 i s t h e m o s t d i r e c t a n d d e l i b e r a t e
analysis a n d s t a t e m e n t o f t h e site's e c o n o m i c values. 5 2
T h e study included dollar estimates of the contributions
o f P o r t A r t h u r H i s t o r i c Site operations to the state econ­
o m y and an exploration of h o w the heritage values of
t h e site ( c o n s t r u e d m o r e b r o a d l y b u t still i n e c o n o m i s t s '
terms) could be described and estimated. T h e first aspect
of the study s h o w e d that Port A r t h u r clearly has a positive
e c o n o m i c i m p a c t o n the state e c o n o m y , yielding positive
multiplier effects as g a u g e d t h r o u g h j o b creation,
P A H S M A expenditures, and tourism outlays in connec­
t i o n w i t h visits to t h e site.
A s p a r t o f the s e c o n d aspect o f the study, a dis­
tinction w a s d r a w n b e t w e e n direct-use v a l u e s o f the site
(the impacts o f w h i c h are fairly straightforward to m e a s ­
u r e e c o n o m i c a l l y , as w a s d o n e i n the first p a r t o f the
study) a n d indirect "preservation values," s u c h as b e q u e s t
v a l u e a n d existence value, w h i c h are m o r e difficult to
measure or estimate and are therefore only outlined in the
document. T h e s e kinds of economic value are briefly
described in the report but are not estimated or analyzed
in detail. 5 3
T h e report concludes that the "large increases in
c o n s e r v a t i o n e x p e n d i t u r e s o n t h e P o r t A r t h u r site c a n b e
138 PORT A R T H U R H I S T O R I C SITE
j u s t i f i e d o n e c o n o m i c g r o u n d s " — t h a t is, o n t h e b a s i s o f
e c o n o m i c impacts that could be m e a s u r e d within the limits
o f the study. It also r e c o m m e n d e d that "a full scale heritage
valuation" b e c o m p l e t e d in w h i c h the full r a n g e o f eco­
n o m i c values c a n b e analyzed. Ultimately, the goal o f this
study w a s to articulate a n d analyze the e c o n o m i c values o f
t h e h e r i t a g e site i n their o w n right, e m p l o y i n g t h e v a r i o u s
quantitative analytics "native" to the e c o n o m i c s field.
SUMMARY OF T H E VALUES ASSOCIATED
W I T H PORT ARTHUR
W h e t h e r o n e looks at the values that have b e e n articu­
l a t e d for t h e P o r t A r t h u r site, o r at r e c e n t p l a n n i n g a n d
p o l i c y d o c u m e n t s , it is c l e a r t h a t b o t h c u l t u r a l a n d e c o ­
n o m i c values have been recognized and that both have
f o r m e d the basis for decision m a k i n g over time.
In keeping w i t h the B u r r a Charter model, cul­
tural a n d e c o n o m i c values are treated differently a n d sepa­
rately. C u l t u r a l v a l u e s h a v e b e e n a n a l y z e d a n d articulated
m o s t explicitly, a n d to o n e extent o r a n o t h e r h a v e
r e m a i n e d at the center o f all discussions o f P o r t Arthur's
v a l u e as aplace. E c o n o m i c values h a v e b e e n influential i n
shaping decisions and determining the m a n a g e m e n t for
t h e site, b u t t h e y h a v e b e e n a r t i c u l a t e d a n d a n a l y z e d m o r e
implicitly, as they are c o n s i d e r e d to b e derived values a n d
not inherent conservation values.
Cultural values center o n the remains of the con­
vict period, but over the past several decades conservation
philosophy has shifted to e m p h a s i z e the value o f other
historic periods of the site—the C a r n a r v o n period, in
p a r t i c u l a r — a n d set u p m a n a g e m e n t s c h e m e s i n w h i c h
convict-period values are not p e r m i t t e d to obscure or
erase these other cultural values.
Economic values have long been part of Port
A r t h u r ' s identification a n d m a n a g e m e n t as ah i s t o r i c site.
T h i s is m a d e a b u n d a n t l y c l e a r i n D a v i d Y o u n g ' s Making
Crime Pay 54
and in the s u m m a r y history of Port Arthur
in the earlier part o f this case study, a n d r e m a i n s so today.
T h e t o u r i s m d e v e l o p m e n t activities initiated over the
past hundred-plus years were never based o n a deliberate
assessment of e c o n o m i c values a n d potentials. Never­
theless, these activities have b e e n formative factors in
t h e m a n a g e m e n t o f t h e site as w e l l as i n s u b s e q u e n t
appraisals o f t h e site's v a l u e s , w h i c h n o w i n c l u d e t h e
history o f these t o u r i s m activities. 5 5
T h e next section explores h o w the articulated
site v a l u e s h a v e b e e n i n c o r p o r a t e d into management
p o l i c i e s f o r P o r t A r t h u r . It is f o l l o w e d b y a d i s c u s s i o n o f
t h e i m p l i c a t i o n s o f m a n a g e m e n t decisions o n site v a l u e s
and vice versa.
H o w M a n a g e m e n t Policies a n d S t r a t e g i e s
Take V a l u e s i n t o C o n s i d e r a t i o n
F r o m t h e f o r e g o i n g , it is c l e a r t h a t P o r t A r t h u r h a s a g r e a t
depth and breadth of values a n d that the Conservation
Plan a n d other documents articulate values in support of
t h e w i d e l y a g r e e d - u p o n c u l t u r a l significance o f t h e site.
F u r t h e r , it is e v i d e n t , i m p l i c i t l y a n d explicitly, t h a t t h e
n o m i c v a l u e s o f P o r t A r t h u r a r e a n i m p o r t a n t f a c t o r i n its
m a n a g e m e n t . I n exploring h o w these values are reflected
i n t h e c u r r e n t m a n a g e m e n t strategies for t h e site, s o m e
patterns emerge:
• First, cultural significance values are clearly artic­
ulated and addressed in P A H S M A s Conservation Plan
a n d have b e c o m e the basis for c o n s e r v a t i o n policy at a
general level.
• Second, both culturaland economic values
strongly shape the m a n a g e m e n t strategies a n d decisions
r e g a r d i n g t h e site.
• T h i r d , i n a c c o r d a n c e w i t h t h e site's M i n i s t e r i a l
Charter and the Conservation Plan, conservation has
priority over other activities a n d issues in the manage­
m e n t o f t h e site.
• Fourth, economic values are assessed or analyzed
i n t h e c o u r s e o f d a y - t o - d a y m a n a g e m e n t o f t h e site,
w h e r e a s cultural values are assessed a n d a n a l y z e d as p a r t
of the deliberate forward-planning scheme represented
in the Conservation Plan.
• Fifth, the decisions o f P A H S M A s executive
b o a r d are the vehicle for integrating the various cultural
and economic values. T h e board oversees the preparation
o f t h e C o r p o r a t e P l a n e a c h y e a r . It is af o r m a l document
endorsed b y the g o v e r n m e n t a n d the vehicle for carrying
o u t o n ay e a r l y basis C o n s e r v a t i o n P l a n a n d b o a r d policies
a n d priorities r e l a t i n g to t h e site as w e l l as v a r i o u s g o v e r n ­
m e n t obligations. H o w e v e r , the b o a r d also m a k e s
significant conservation a n d m a n a g e m e n t decisions
informally, based o n the n e e d to integrate the various cul­
tural a n d e c o n o m i c v a l u e s o n aday-to-day basis. 5 6
T h i s s e c t i o n d e s c r i b e s h o w site v a l u e s are
reflected i n policies b y a n a l y z i n g t h e m a i n site manage­
m e n t documents. S u c h an analysis seems appropriate
g i v e n that the overall m a n a g e m e n t o f the site h a s been
organized by P A H S M A around the processes that have
generated these plans—primarilythe Conservation Plan
and Corporate Plan. These two instruments, along with
the factors s t e m m i n g from the institutional a n d regula­
tory settings of P A H S M A , overwhelmingly constitute the
formal management strategies. 5 7
O u r interviews revealed the opinion of m a n y on
site that t h e s e o l d e r p l a n s are n o t r e l e v a n t to t h e p r e s e n t
m a n a g e m e n t o f t h e site. T h e y w e r e o r i g i n a l l y r e q u i r e d for
statutory reasons a n d crafted to attract f u n d i n g as w e l l as
ensure conservation. Although they do not guide day-to­
d a y , s i t e - b y - s i t e d e c i s i o n s t o d a y , t h e 1985 p l a n i n p a r t i c u l a r
h a s s h a p e d t h e d e v e l o p m e n t o f site v a l u e s a n d the c u r r e n t
eco­
m a n a g e m e n t by adjusting the balance between cultivating
cultural a n d e c o n o m i c values. T h e plan also helped
s h a p e d the m a n a g e m e n t o f v a l u e s t o d a y by, for instance,
valorizing Carnarvon-eraresources, ensuring conserva­
tion of the remaining heritage resources, and preventing
d e v e l o p m e n t a n d overzealous r e c o n s t r u c t i o n at the center
o f t h e site.
THE 1985 AND 1996 MANAGEMENT PLANS
T o g e t h e r , t h e 1985,1996, a n d 2000 p l a n s r e f l e c t t h e p e n d u ­
l u m swings m a n a g e m e n t has t a k e n in order to balance
conservation a n d the a c c e s s / t o u r i s m activities r e q u i r e d to
o p e r a t e the site (in o t h e r w o r d s , b a l a n c i n g the d u a l g o a l s
of conserving cultural significance a n d funding opera­
tions). T h e m a i n factor in d e t e r m i n i n g w h i c h w a y the
p e n d u l u m swings has b e e n the availability of external
government funding.
T h e c o m p r e h e n s i v e 1985 M a n a g e m e n t P l a n w a s
written near the end of the seven-year P A C D P , w h i c h used
A$9 m i l l i o n o f s t a t e a n d n a t i o n a l f u n d s t o c a r r y o u t a v a r i ­
ety of conservation works. T h e plan w a s prepared in
and a c c o r d w i t h the B u r r a C h a r t e r a n d identified as m a n a g e ­
m e n t objectives conservation of fabric a n d cultural
significance, as w e l l as t o u r i s m a n d ancillary c o m m e r c i a l
development. Cultural significance centered o n the con­
vict s y s t e m as the basic vector o f E u r o p e a n settlement in
Tasmania. Different layers of history w e r e described and
a c k n o w l e d g e d — c o n v i c t , C a r n a r v o n , m o d e r n — b u t as the
p l a n stated, " [ T ] h e potential o f P o r t A r t h u r as a n a u t h e n ­
more tic historic site" lies w i t h c o n v i c t i s m . 5 8
T h e cultural significance of Port Arthur w a s
d e f i n e d i n t h e 1985 p l a n a s " r e a d i l y a p p a r e n t " : 5 9
(i) because the site is a major physical demonstration of the
lives, customs, processes and functions of an early Australian
penal settlement, and its transformation into the township of
Carnarvon, which is of particular interest and in danger of
being lost.
U N D E R S T A N D I N G A N D P R O T E C T I N G T H E VALUES 139
(ii) because of the inherent associations of the site with the Aus­
The S e p a r a t e P r i s o n
tralian convict system, and the role this system played in the
economic, social and cultural development of the state of
Tasmania in particular, and the nation in general. T h e S e p a r a t e P r i s o n is o n e o f t h e m o s t valued
(iii) because of the townscape and landscape values of the Site,
s t r u c t u r e s at P o r t A r t h u r . It is r e l a t i v e l y i n t a c t ,
and in particular the degree of unity of materials, form and
scale, and the contribution of the setting in the landscape. highly imageable, a n d directly related to some

(iv) because many of the buildings and structures within the site of the most dramatic chapters in the history of
are important and scarce examples of their type.
T a s m a n i a n convictism. T h e c o n s e r v a t i o n strat­
M a n a g e m e n t p o l i c i e s i n t h e 1985 p l a n r e c o g n i z e
e g y f o r t h e p r i s o n is o f g r e a t i n t e r e s t . A s o f this
the n e e d to achieve ab a l a n c e b e t w e e n "the d u a l require­
m e n t s o f the site w i t h r e s p e c t to c o n s e r v a t i o n a n d writing, the recommendations currently being
tourism." A l t h o u g h the national a n d T a s m a n i a n signi­
considered include acombination of preserva­
ficance o f the c o n v i c t / p e n a l site "as a n historical d o c u ­
m e n t " is g i v e n p r i o r i t y , "[a]t t h e s a m e t i m e , t h e H i s t o r i c tion, repair, a n d reconstruction o f s o m e ele­
Site is o n e o f t h e p r i n c i p a l t o u r i s t d e s t i n a t i o n s i n T a s m a ­
m e n t s , as w e l l as c o r r e c t i n g s o m e past r e c o n ­
n i a , a n d as s u c h is o f v i t a l i m p o r t a n c e to t h e State's e c o n ­
o m y . It is i m p e r a t i v e t h e r e f o r e t h a t t h e e n j o y m e n t and structions. T h e plan provides aglimpse into
interest o f visitors to the Site be aprincipal c o n c e r n o f
h o w the general conservation policies of the
m a n a g e m e n t to be b a l a n c e d w i t h the n e e d to curate the
Historic site." 6 0
T h e policies i m p l e m e n t i n g this strategy, Conservation Plan are being integrated and
however, continued in the direction of conservation and
applied to the details o f asingle b u i l d i n g —
did not result in strong revenue-generating measures. T h e
eleven policies almost entirely cover guidance of conser­ particularly, h o w significance a n d values are
v a t i o n , w i t h little a t t e n t i o n p a i d to t o u r i s m development
related to specific fabric interventions. 1

o r access. A l s o i n c l u d e d is a s t a t e m e n t a b o u t t h e e x c l u s i o n
o f c o m m u n i t y facilities f r o m t h e site, a p p a r e n t l y prioritiz­
ing the conservation of the core convict/penal landscape, T h e 1840s s h i f t i n i n c a r c e r a t i o n p h i l o s o p h y r e p ­

a n d t o u r i s t a c c e s s t o it, o v e r t h e s o c i a l v a l u e s e m b o d i e d i n resented by the Separate Prison—separation

c o m m u n i t y u s e o f t h e site, w h i c h h a d g r o w n o v e r t i m e .
a n d isolation—is historically significant a n d
Safely focused o n conservation of cultural
significance given the steady stream of government funds, resonates today. T h r o u g h the m a n y decades
2
of
t h e 1985 p l a n w a s e s s e n t i a l l y a c o n t i n u a n c e o f t h e P A C D P
P o r t A r t h u r ' s life as a t o u r i s t site, t h e S e p a r a t e
years. A s P A C D P funds ceased a n d P o r t A r t h u r strived to
b e c o m e m o r e e c o n o m i c a l l y self-sufficient, that practice Prison has b e e n the m o s t visited. T h e building
gave w a y to years of reorientation t o w a r d e c o n o m i c val­
has endured several substantial episodes of
ues a n d efforts to generate revenue. T h i s m a r k e d a turn­
ing point in h o w m a n a g e m e n t policies took values into construction, conservation, reconstruction,
consideration.
destruction, and reuse. M u c h of the fabric of
T h e 1996 M a n a g e m e n t P l a n r e f l e c t e d t h i s s h i f t i n
values. N o t afull plan, b u t r a t h e r a n eighteen-page set o f t h e p r i s o n is i n s e r i o u s n e e d o f r e p a i r ; o v e r a l l
a m e n d m e n t s t o t h e 1985 M a n a g e m e n t P l a n , t h e 1996 p l a n
t h e b u i l d i n g is i n p o o r c o n d i t i o n a n d d o e s n o t
did not rearticulate values but revised and changed some
o f t h e p o l i c i e s s e t i n 1985. " T h e A u t h o r i t y f i n a n c e p r o ­ present an authentic or contemplative experi­
g r a m is r e d u c i n g its d e p e n d e n c e o n g o v e r n m e n t a n d t h e
ence for visitors.
general limited availability o f funds f r o m that s o u r c e . . . .
the overall i m p a c t [ o f this shift] c a n b e m i t i g a t e d through
[continued on page 144]

140 PORT A R T H U R H I S T O R I C SITE

The original plan of the Separate Prison, showing individual
cells, exercise yards, and chapel. (Source: 2002 Conservation
Plan.) Reproduced with permission of the Archives Office of
Tasmania, PWD 266I822.

U N D E R S T A N D I N G A N D PROTECTING T H E VALUES 141

 T h e p l a n n i n g p r o c e s s b e h i n d t h e 2000 C o n s e r ­ • S o m e walls that historically separated exercise

vation P l a n provides guidance for the specific yards will be reconstructed.

treatment of particular areas of conservation • T h e m a i n entrance, w h e r e convicts historically

activity t h r o u g h secondary plans a n d specific entered the building, w a s incorrectly recon­

conservation projects formalized in "individual s t r u c t e d f r o m t h e 1930s t h r o u g h t h e 1950s ( t h e

element plans," master plans, a n d projects. T h e o p e n i n g f a c e d n o r t h w h e r e a s it o r i g i n a l l y f a c e d

S e p a r a t e P r i s o n P r o j e c t R e p o r t , w h i c h is i n t h e south) and will be reconstructed again.

d r a f t stage, is afull-scale c o n s e r v a t i o n p l a n f o r • S o m e cell interiors a n d doors will be recon­

the building. T h e plan w a s undertaken by out­ structed for the sake of interpretation

side consultants (Design 5Architects) a n d has (no original doors are extant).

been reviewed by the Heritage Advisory Panel

T h e aesthetic impact a n d historical narratives
a n d staff o f the C o n s e r v a t i o n D e p a r t m e n t .
of the Separate Prison—the power of being in a
Prior to i m p l e m e n t a t i o n o f the project, the
stark setting, representing anotorious t u r n in
plan and the proposed scope of w o r k must be
incarceration philosophy—are compelling.
approved by the T a s m a n i a n Heritage Council.
Creating an "immersion" experience through

T h e S e p a r a t e P r i s o n P r o j e c t R e p o r t is b e i n g w h i c h this c a n b e c o n v e y e d to v i s i t o r s is t h e

d e v e l o p e d as aderivative o f the C o n s e r v a t i o n driving force b e h i n d the decisions for selective

P l a n a n d fleshes o u t the overall site values a n d r e c o n s t r u c t i o n s — w h i c h , as the B u r r a C h a r t e r

significance statements articulated in the Con­ a n d C o n s e r v a t i o n P l a n p o l i c i e s c l e a r l y state, is

servation Plan. T h e Separate Prison Project acceptable only under the m o s t stringent condi­

Report includes documentation, historical tions. F o r instance, the principles guiding

research, and condition assessment of the specific decisions o n the p r i s o n sfabric state, "It

structure. Issues of interpretation a n d visitor is e s s e n t i a l t o at l e a s t p a r t l y r e i n s t a t e t h e h i s t o r i ­

access are carefully integrated w i t h decisions cal 'opacity' o f the building, w h e r e b y a n out­

o n the care o f fabric; the plan focuses o n m a k ­ sider could not see in, a n d a n i n m a t e could not

ing an interpretable building, not merely on see b e y o n d his controlled space." M e a n w h i l e ,

conserving the fabric. however, the overall policies of the C o n s e r v a ­

tion P l a n set ac o n t e x t for these decisions:

T h e planned treatment of s o m e major build­
" E v i d e n c e o f later (e.g., post-convict) u s e s o f
ing elements includes the following:
the building will be conserved and interpreted,

but will not be emphasized." 3

142 PORT A R T H U R H I S T O R I C SITE

T h e Separate Prison plan strikes a balance s t r u c t e d — t o o s p e c u l a t i v e l y — i n t h e 1950s.

between conservation of cultural values and N o w k n o w n to be inaccurate, r e m o v a l a n d

creating an interesting visitor attraction b y reconstruction of these elements has been con­

reconstructing s o m e lost building elements, t e m p l a t e d b u t is n o t c u r r e n t l y p l a n n e d . T h e

removing s o m e layers of previous restoration, benefit o f vivid interpretation s e e m s to be the

a n d stabilizing other fabric elements. T h e deci­ driving force behind these interventions. Deci­

sions s e e m motivated b y aclear understanding sions for r e c o n s t r u c t i n g e l e m e n t s fall w i t h i n

o f the central role this structure s h o u l d play in the boundaries of sound conservation practice

t h e r e a l i z a t i o n a n d m a n a g e m e n t o f t h e site's ( r e c o n s t r u c t i n g o n l y w h e n t h e r e is e v i d e n c e of

cultural significance values (particularly the the original, a n d / o r w h e r e the existing recon­

c o n v i c t i s m themes), as w e l l as the financial s t r u c t i o n is i n a c c u r a t e o r m i s l e a d i n g ) a n d d o

imperative realized b y attracting visitors. not sacrifice a n y fabric associated w i t h k e y

aspects of cultural significance.

T h e proposals follow the recommendations

for restoration a n d r e c o n s t r u c t i o n set o u t i n Clearly, the plan s specific decisions about

the Conservation Plan. T w o types of building building fabric are intended to directly shape

elements are slated for reconstruction: some the historic values represented by the building

elements of the building m a d e incomplete over a n d c o m m u n i c a t e d to visitors. T h e e l e m e n t s to

time are being restored (the exercise yards a n d b e reconstructed are j u d g e d to be critical in

cell interiors); e l e m e n t s incorrectly recon­ conveying the m a i n interpretive themes of

structed in the past will be demolished and convictism. A secondary concern involves

reconstructed. I n b o t h cases, this w o r k will retaining e n o u g h fabric to interpret the conser­

enhance the interpretive value of the building v a t i o n p r o c e s s itself, t h o u g h this is s e c o n d a r y

through "reinstatement of those functional to e n h a n c i n g the core cultural significance val­

a n d spatial relationships w h i c h have b e e n miss­ ues. T h e p l a n also pays close attention to visi­

ing since closure of the prison." All recon­ 4

tor access, paving the w a y for greater a n d equi­

struction w o u l d be based on thorough research table visitation to the building a n d thus greater

and documentation, 5
a n d a l l o r i g i n a l (pre-1877) r e a l i z a t i o n o f its e c o n o m i c v a l u e w i t h i n t h e

material w o u l d be kept. framework of conservation.

T h e interiors of the prison s chapel w i n g are

l a r g e l y a r e c o n s t r u c t i o n . T h e i n d i v i d u a l stalls,

pulpits, ceiling, a n d other elements w e r e recon­

U N D E R S T A N D I N G A N D PROTECTING T H E VALUES 143


Notes
1. As of this writing, the plan policies were not complete,
though research and documentation phases of the plan
are finished.
2. For a detailed description of the philosophy behind the
Separate Prison and convict life in this structure, see
page 119.
3. Port Arthur Historic Site Management Authority n.d.(c).
4. Design 5—Architects Pty. Ltd. 2001,116.
5. One of the difficulties encountered was the dearth of docu­
mentation available on the major reconstruction and repair
projects carried out over the decades.
144 PORT A R T H U R H I S T O R I C SITE
success i n h a v i n g P o r t A r t h u r perceived as the p r i m a r y
desirable destination i n the State a n d as a v a l u e - f o r - m o n e y
attraction. A higher level of visitor services, e n h a n c e d vis­
itor programs, expanded evening p r o g r a m s a n d a contin­
u e d c o m m i t m e n t t o w a r d s c o n s e r v a t i o n w o r k s will assist
the Authority in achieving improved market share." 6 1
T o
i m p l e m e n t t h e s e p o l i c i e s , t h e 1996 p l a n a m e n d s t h e 1985
plan to "instigate a n i m m e d i a t e capital d e v e l o p m e n t pro­
g r a m " for i m p r o v e d visitor facilities, i n c l u d i n g a V i s i t o r
Center, vehicle access, a n d "a n e w visitor Night Entertain­
ment Experience." 6 2
E v e n t h o u g h it w a s s p u r r e d b y t h e
A p r i l 1996 t r a g e d y , t h a t e v e n t o n l y h e i g h t e n e d t h e n e e d t o
attract m o r e visitors a n d thus generate revenue.
THE 2000 CONSERVATION PLAN
AND ITS SECONDARY PLANS
T h e m o s t direct, exhaustive, a n d deliberate translation of
v a l u e s i n t o p o l i c y i s f o u n d i n t h e 2000 C o n s e r v a t i o n P l a n .
T h e s e policies follow a n d build o n the articulation of val­
ues a n d statement of significance in the original Conser­
vation Plan. 6 3
T h e y have b e e n successfully institutional­
i z e d as the basis for site m a n a g e m e n t a n d as the focal
p o i n t for discussions o f all site values, the t r e a t m e n t o f all
site e l e m e n t s , a n d decisions r e g a r d i n g p r o g r a m s .
T h e written policies that f o r m the core of the
Conservation P l a n — t h e touchstone d o c u m e n t for m a n ­
aging the culturalvalues of the site—are presented
below. A s noted m a n y times in print and in interviews, the
Conservation Plan has been wholly adopted by
P A H S M A s b o a r d a n d executive as the p r i m a r y policy to
guide m a n a g e m e n t decisions. P A H S M A has m a d e a sub­
stantial i n v e s t m e n t i n t h e p l a n , a n d it i n t e n d s to p l a y a
l a r g e r o l e i n m a n a g e m e n t o f t h e site.
Philosophy and Principles
T h e plan outlines the philosophical approach a n d princi­
ples that underlie policies. I n keeping w i t h B u r r a philoso­
phy, retention a n d conservation o f cultural significance
are the overarching goal.
The outstanding heritage value of the place imposes an
overarching obligation for retention of cultural significance
of the place.
[TJhere is nothing more important or pressing about the
management of the Port Arthur Historic Site than the
obligation to conserve it. The existing site is the only one
that there will ever be. While it is important to recognise
that interpretation of the site and communication of infor­
mation about the place to the wider community is an inte­
gral element of conservation, primacy must be given to
 caring for the place, rather than to tourism and provision
of visitor services.
This is not to say that the importance and legitimacy of
visitation and supply of positive visitor experiences is not
important—it is. However, as a matter of overwhelming and
fundamental importance, the conservation requirements
must prevail.
T h e following principles are identified as the f u n d a m e n t a l
philosophical basis for the P o r t A r t h u r Historic Site C o n ­
servation Policy. 6 4
• T h e primacy of conservation over other
m e n t objectives m u s t be recognized;
• P o r t A r t h u r Historic Site m u s t be acenter o f
excellence in heritage management;
• Essential conservation activities a n d w o r k s
s h o u l d n o t b e accepted as d e t e r m i n e d b y the c u r r e n t
limits imposed b y funding generated through visitor
numbers, or other similar financial constraints. If
s i t e - g e n e r a t e d r e s o u r c e s a r e i n a d e q u a t e , it is i m p e r a t i v e
that, o n c e essential actions are k n o w n a n d resource
implications quantified, sources of external resources
are obtained;
• C o n s e r v a t i o n m u s t extend to the total resource,
tangible and intangible;
• Decision making must be based upon proper
understanding o f cultural significance;
• A c a u t i o u s a p p r o a c h is r e q u i r e d w h e r e
m a y have adverse heritage impacts; abide by principles
of reversibility a n d the precautionary principle;
• Conservation should be undertaken in accor­
d a n c e w i t h well-accepted guidelines, s u c h as the
Charter and other international declarations;
• T h e social a n d environmental condition of Port
A r t h u r H i s t o r i c S i t e s h o u l d b e m o n i t o r e d , t om e a s u r e
effectiveness of conservation actions a n d provide essential
d a t a f o r f u t u r e d e c i s i o n m a k i n g . T h i s r e l a t e s t ot h e v i s i t o r
experience a n d to impacts o n the local c o m m u n i t y ;
• Interested persons, organizations, and other
stakeholders should be involved in the conservation of
P A ; w i d e c o n s u l t a t i o n y i e l d s b e n e f i t s t ot h e
o f t h e site;
• Visitation a n d interpretation are integral ele­
m e n t s o f conservation. Provision o f apositive, i n f o r m a ­
t i v e a n d i n t e r a c t i v e e x p e r i e n c e f o r v i s i t o r s t ot h e h i s t o r i c
site, a n d t h o s e w h o w i s h t o l e a r n a b o u t it, r e m o t e
t h e p l a c e itself, m u s t c o n t i n u e to b e a f u n d a m e n t a l a i m .
Conservation Policy
Based o n the foregoing philosophy a n d principles, and
with guidance f r o m the Burra Charter, the General Con­
s e r v a t i o n P o l i c y for P o r t A r t h u r H i s t o r i c Site is o u t l i n e d i n
s e c t i o n 5.1, v o l u m e 1, o f t h e C o n s e r v a t i o n P l a n :
Port Arthur Historic Site is a place of outstanding heritage
significance, where excellence in heritage management is
the primary aim.
The Port Arthur Historic Site Statement of Significance
provides the basis for natural and cultural resource manage­
ment at the site.
manage­
Retention of identified significance and conservation of the
Port Arthur Historic Site has primacy over all other manage­
ment objectives.
Port Arthur Historic Site will be managed and conserved in
accordance with the following principles and guidelines:
• the Australia ICOMOS Charter for the Conservation of
Places of Cultural Significance (the Burra Charter and
associated guidelines);
• the ICOMOS-IFLA International Committee for Historic
Gardens Charter;
• the ICAHM Charter for the Protection and Management
of Archaeological Heritage;
• the Australian Natural Heritage Charter and associated
guidelines; and
• the Draft Guidelines for the Protection, Management
actions and Use of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Cultural
Heritage Places.
Conservation of the Port Arthur Historic Site
will adopt a total resource approach and will extend to
Burra all areas and elements such as landscape, built structures,
cultural deposits, artefacts, records, memories and associa­
tions along with uses and activities. Conservation will
the be directed at biodiversity as well as social values and
cultural heritage, consistent with a commitment to
ecological sensitivity.
Conservation of the Port Arthur Historic Site will make use
of the full array of available expertise and knowledge and
will adopt a scientific approach to materials conservation.
management
Caution will be applied in making decisions, which may
damage the natural or cultural environment over time. The
precautionary principle will be adopted, where appropriate,
in relation to management actions with potential to result in
a loss of significance. If there is any threat of serious or irre­
from
versible environmental damage, lack of full scientific cer­
tainty will not be used as the reason for postponing measures
to prevent environmental degradation.
U N D E R S T A N D I N G A N DP R O T E C T I N G T H E VALUES 145
 However, any actions which may result in a loss of cultural
significance must be reversible.
The Port Arthur Historic Site will be protectedfromphysical
damage by appropriate security and maintenance measures.
The effectiveness of conservation management of the Port
Arthur Historic Site will be monitored.
Interpretation of the history and significance of the place is
fundamental to its conservation.
Port Arthur Historic Site will set national and international
standards in best practice conservation.
Ultimate responsibility for decision making in relation to the
Port Arthur Historic Site is vested in the Port Arthur Historic
Site Management Authority
I n a d d i t i o n , a s e p a r a t e s t a t e m e n t o f p o l i c y is
given for each o f the following areas: Landscape; Aborigi­
nal Heritage; Archaeology; Built Elements; Collections
(curatorial and archaeological); Records; Research; Finan­
cial R e s o u r c e s for C o n s e r v a t i o n ; H u m a n R e s o u r c e s for
Conservation; Planning Processes; Use; Visitors; Interpre­
tation; Associated C o m m u n i t i e s ; O t h e r Interested People;
T h e Peninsula; Future Development; Monitoring; and
Land Holding.
T h e C o n s e r v a t i o n P l a n lays out a deliberate
a n d comprehensive a p p r o a c h to translating values a n d
significance into strategies. T h e policies are inclusive a n d
clear, a n d c o m p r e h e n s i v e i n r e g a r d to cultural values.
T h i s is a s s o c i a t e d w i t h t h e v a l u e t y p e s c o n t r i b u t i n g to
c u l t u r a l significance, t h e f u n c t i o n a l e l e m e n t s o f t h e site,
a n d t h e d i s c i p l i n e s a n d p r o f e s s i o n s e n g a g e d i n its m a n a g e ­
m e n t (landscape, archaeology).
A l l i n all, the p l a n establishes the p r i m a c y o f
c u l t u r a l v a l u e s i n m a n a g i n g t h e site. It is a m a j o r a c h i e v e ­
m e n t that P A H S M A has invested i n the entire plan, as
has the T a s m a n i a n State g o v e r n m e n t , w h i c h has allo­
cated A$IO m i l l i o n o v e r five y e a r s f o r i m p l e m e n t a t i o n
of the plan.
T h e policies of the C o n s e r v a t i o n P l a n f o r m a
s t r o n g b a s e for decision m a k i n g . Its o u t s t a n d i n g feature
is t h e s t r a t e g y o f g i v i n g s e e m i n g l y u n d i l u t e d p r i m a c y to
conservation (over tourism a n d economic concerns),
especially in light of the institutional a r r a n g e m e n t of
P A H S M A as aquasipublic c o r p o r a t i o n a n d the commer­
cial i m p e r a t i v e this r e q u i r e s ( e v e n i f t h e i m p e r a t i v e is n o
l o n g e r , a f t e r 1995, f o r P A H S M A t o b e a p r o f i t a b l e e n t e r ­
prise; the G B E imperative calls for P A H S M A to lead the
region in attracting tourism a n d setting ahigh standard
146 PORT A R T H U R H I S T O R I C SITE
for conservation a n d t o u r i s m experience). T h e policy
that articulates this p r i o r i t y — " R e t e n t i o n o f identified
significance a n d conservation of the Port Arthur Historic
Site has p r i m a c y over all other m a n a g e m e n t objectives"—
sets ah i g h bar. It decrees that retention o f cultural
s i g n i f i c a n c e a l w a y s t a k e s p r e c e d e n c e o v e r o t h e r (i.e.,
tourism, access, utilitarian)policies a n d actions. (This
high standard w a s f o r m e d in response to the Doyle
I n q u i r y a n d o t h e r r e a c t i o n a g a i n s t t h e pre-1996 m a n a g e ­
m e n t g o a l i m p o s e d o n P A H S M A to m a k e the site eco­
n o m i c a l l y s e l f - s u s t a i n i n g . F u r t h e r m o r e , it is i n a c c o r d
with the Burra Charter model.) This expectation would
be unrealistic if seen only as ashort-term, day-to-day
g u i d e to decision m a k i n g . I n reality, s o m e s h o r t - t e r m deci­
sions to invest resources in tourism/access infrastructure
(and therefore not in direct conservation w o r k ) are actu­
ally m a d e in conjunction w i t h al o n g - t e r m decision
r e g a r d i n g t h e site's c o n s e r v a t i o n — k e e p i n g i n m i n d that
P A H S M A s long-term view and mandate includes ongoing
tourist access a n d c o m m e r c i a l activity T h e inclusion of
b o t h a c c e s s a n d c o n s e r v a t i o n as g o a l s is w h a t m a k e s the
overall conservation strategy sustainable in the long term.
T h e policies clearly set the b r o a d strategic c o u r s e
for P A H S M A s conservation w o r k , providing guidance on
s u c h issues as consulting w i t h stakeholder communities,
relating the P o r t A r t h u r site to the w h o l e T a s m a n P e n i n ­
sula, preventing the building o f n e w structures in the core
areas, a n d placing avalue o n monitoring. A s policies, they
remain quite general and address the direction and m a n ­
a g e m e n t o f c o n s e r v a t i o n activities; specific c o n s e r v a t i o n
a c t i o n s o n t h e site a n d its b u i l d i n g s a n d o t h e r e l e m e n t s a r e
addressed in the secondary a n d tertiary plans. Creation of
s e c o n d a r y plans will take several years to complete. T h e
C o n s e r v a t i o n P l a n is c l e a r l y d e s i g n e d to w o r k w i t h t h e
s e c o n d a r y p l a n s a n d is n o t i n t e n d e d to s t a n d o n its o w n as
a guide to m a k i n g detailed decisions. T h e s e c o n d a r y plans
c o m p l e m e n t the C o n s e r v a t i o n P l a n a n d treat landscape,
particular buildings, and archaeological resources in the
detail required.
Except in broad terms, the Conservation Plan
d o e s n o t prioritize the identified site values. T h e full r a n g e
o f v a l u e s is w e l l a r t i c u l a t e d , b u t h o w a n d w h e n o n e takes
p r e c e d e n c e o v e r a n o t h e r is n o t a d d r e s s e d . A g a i n , t h e s e
decisions are left to the s e c o n d a r y plans. O p e r a t i o n a l l y ,
these problems are resolved by senior m a n a g e m e n t and
the b o a r d , w h o assess the priorities set out i n e a c h second­
ary plan a n d integrate t h e m into aw o r k a b l e yearly pro­
g r a m o f c o n s e r v a t i o n activities.
 Finally, the C o n s e r v a t i o n P l a n does not take eco­
n o m i c values into consideration in any detailed w a y
than stating the policy that e c o n o m i c values take a b a c k
seat w h e n choosing b e t w e e n conservation a n d c o m ­
merce. Further, the plan policies keep separate concerns
s u c h as archaeology, landscape, a n d built elements. T h e
m e c h a n i s m for m a k i n g a n d policing decisions according
to these p o l i c i e s — f o r m a n a g i n g the site h o l i s t i c a l l y — i s
the set o f relationships forged a m o n g the core manage­
m e n t t e a m m e m b e r s . T h e s e relationships are largely
informal a n d are an intentional result of the conservation
planning process. B y w o r k i n g with one another, various
departments c a n intelligently resolve complicated m a n ­
a g e m e n t issues u s i n g b r o a d p a r a m e t e r s to w h i c h all staff
subscribe. T h i s process w a s s e e n as equally i m p o r t a n t as
t h e p r o d u c t i o n o f aw r i t t e n p l a n , a n d to d a t e it a p p e a r s
to have largely succeeded.
THE SECONDARY 2001 INTERPRETATION PLAN
This secondary plan, called the Interpretation Plan, revis­
its t h e h i s t o r i c v a l u e s a n d b r o a d i n t e r p r e t i v e p o l i c i e s o f
the Conservation Plan and produces adetailed plan of
action that flows out of stated interpretation philosophy
a n d strategies. T h e Interpretation Plan does not identify
n e w v a l u e s s o m u c h as it r e v i s e s a n d r e n d e r s t h e h i s t o r i c
v a l u e s (as w e l l as audiences, delivery m e c h a n i s m s , etc.) t o
a level o f specificity called for in the C o n s e r v a t i o n Plan. It
takes acritical a p p r o a c h to m a k i n g plans for future inter­
p r e t a t i o n a n d p r o v i d e s a t h o r o u g h s u m m a r y o f its t h e o ­
retical underpinnings.
This plan carries out the general prescriptions in
t h e C o n s e r v a t i o n P l a n . H o w e v e r , it d e p a r t s f r o m t h e lat­
t e r 's g u i d a n c e i n o n e i m p o r t a n t w a y . W h e r e a s t h e C o n s e r ­
vation Plan establishes that "the p r i m a r y m e s s a g e o f on-
site i n t e r p r e t a t i o n w i l l c o n v e y the significance o f the p l a c e
a n d the p h y s i c a l evolution o f the site i n c l u d i n g c o n s e r v a ­
tion processes," 6 5
the Interpretation Plan provides a vari­
ety o f o p t i o n s — a i m e d at different a u d i e n c e s a n d at differ­
ent specialty visitor groups—instead of a"primary mes­
sage." T h e reasons for this c h a n g e are justified in the Inter­
pretation Plan ssuccinct review of theories guiding the
design of interpretive programs.
T h e themes and topics 6 6
a d v a n c e the values as
literally set o u t in the s t a t e m e n t o f significance. T h e y
integrate the values for the understanding of visitors (pre­
senting different aspects o f the site b u t also connecting
historical insights w i t h c o n t e m p o r a r y issues) as o p p o s e d
to using t h e m for purposes o f m a x i m i z i n g revenue or har­
vesting scientific values. F o r e x a m p l e , the p l a n calls for
interpretation of the "paradoxes" of the landscape (juxta­
other posing the ugliness of convictism with the beauty of the
landscape) a n d o f the different interpretations o f Port
Arthur's past over time, as o p p o s e d to focusing o n the
straight chapter-and-verse o f convictism history. T h e plan
also specifies interpretation o f "crime a n d p u n i s h m e n t "
at P o r t A r t h u r in t e r m s o f h o w society deals w i t h these
issues today.
The amended [interpretation] policy is as follows: 67
• Interpretation of the Port Arthur Historic Site will be under­
taken in accordance with this Plan.
• Interpretation programs and messages will have primary
regard to the significance of the site.
• The approach to interpretation will extend beyond the Port
Arthur Historic Site itself, providing an understanding of the
place in its historical, geographical and social context, [this
brings the interpretation in alignment with the Conserva­
tion Plan s regional strategy—regionalism is one way that
all the policies line up]
• Messages to be conveyed in interpretation will be developed
in consultation with all involved in developing, managing
and delivering that interpretation.
• Interpretation will be based only on sound, contemporary
and scholarly research.
• Interpretation programs and initiatives will be undertaken in
a manner that minimises impact on the fabric of significant
elements.
• Interpretation will extend to historic activities, structures,
places and landscapes and will, where possible, focus on real
historic elements. The introduction of new, purpose-built
interpretive elements will be minimised.
• Regular evaluation will continue to inform our interpretive
activities.
T h e interpretive policies f o r m arobust strategy
that does not suggest prioritizing s o m e heritage values
over others. Rather, the policies m a n d a t e development of
a n u m b e r of specialized messages, programs, and prod­
ucts b a s e d o n specific values a n d oriented to a correspond­
ingly w i d e range o f general a n d specialist audiences.
THE SECONDARY 2001 LANDSCAPE PLAN
A s o f this w r i t i n g , t h e L a n d s c a p e P l a n is t h e s e c o n d of
the Conservation Plan ssecondary plans 6 8
It follows the
basic conservation planning methodology (understanding
the landscape's natural a n d cultural features, codifying
significance, identifying issues a n d threats to significance,
a n d formulating policies) in addressing the interaction
U N D E R S T A N D I N G A N DPROTECTING T H E VALUES 147
o f landscape a n d cultural significance at P o r t Arthur.
B r o a d l y , it r e i n f o r c e s t h e c u l t u r a l v a l u e s a r t i c u l a t e d i n
the Conservation Plan and asserted in the statement
significance. It adds the n o t i o n o f n a t u r a l (environmental-
ecological) values to the m i x a n d e x a m i n e s t h e m in detail.
Ultimately, the Landscape Plan focuses o n the cultural
landscape aspects of Port Arthur, w i t h the intention of
conserving natural and culturalvalues and preserving
t h e i r v i s u a l i m p a c t o n t h e s i g n i f i c a n c e o f t h e site.
O n e g o a l o f t h e L a n d s c a p e P l a n is to d e s c r i b e t h e
cultural and natural values of the Port Arthur landscape,
a n d h o w the l a n d s c a p e (as a w h o l e entity, n o t o n l y as a col­
lection of elements) contributes particularlyto the values
articulated in the Conservation Plan. This d o c u m e n t
a m o r e detailed history and background of the cultural
features o f the landscape. It describes h o w the values
identified in the Conservation P l a n are expressed in the
various landscape elements (cultural and natural) that
have b e e n inventoried. T h e plan also includes a m o r e
detailed analysis of the "paradox" in values of comforting
pastoral landscape images juxtaposed with the u n c o m ­
fortable historic values of convictism. I n general, the
inventories a n d significance assessments reinforce the
q u a l i t y o f P o r t A r t h u r as a site w i t h a d e e p l y l a y e r e d ,
eclectic l a n d s c a p e — a place w i t h m a n y values, n o n e of
which predominates.
B u t t h e L a n d s c a p e P l a n is n o t m e r e l y a n a n a l y s i s
of already articulated values. B y articulating natural val­
ues, the p l a n i n effect adds a set o f ecological values t o
the Conservation Plan. T h e Landscape Plan encourages
the preservation and re-creation of m o r e native plant
e c o l o g y a n d identifies landscaping m e a s u r e s to prevent
the erosion o f the n a t u r a l e n v i r o n m e n t a l qualities. It also
asserts the historic a n d aesthetic values related to (or even
stemming from) topography a n d other aspects of the nat­
ural environment.
Another departure from the system of value
a c c o u n t i n g is r e f l e c t e d i n t h e L a n d s c a p e P l a n s f i v e - p a g e
"Statement o f significance for the landscape," w h i c h artic­
ulates site v a l u e s b y d e s c r i b i n g t h e v a l u e s a n d significance
o f i n d i v i d u a l , p h y s i c a l a r e a s (i.e., M a s o n C o v e , P o i n t P u e r ,
Isle o f the D e a d , G a r d e n Point, a n d C a r n a r v o n B a y ) . Spec­
i f y i n g v a l u e s i n this m a n n e r is o n e w a y i n w h i c h t h e sec­
ondary plans advance the articulation of value. A similar
l e v e l o f s p e c i f i c a t i o n is e v i d e n t i n t h e o t h e r s e c o n d a r y
plans that have b e e n u n d e r t a k e n for the Separate Prison,
the a s y l u m / t o w n hall, a n d the harborside area.
148 PORT ARTHUR HISTORIC SITE
THE 2001/2002 CORPORATE PLAN
P A H S M A s C o r p o r a t e Plans are the strategic p r o g r a m s for
of c o m p r e h e n s i v e site m a n a g e m e n t . D o n e annually, t h e y set
e a c h y e a r s p o l i c i e s a n d , t oa l e s s e r e x t e n t , s p e c i f i c p r o j e c t
priorities. I n devising the C o r p o r a t e Plan, the b o a r d uses
t h e C o n s e r v a t i o n P l a n a n d its s e c o n d a r y p l a n s as g u i d e s .
T h e b o a r d also takes into account g o v e r n m e n t require­
m e n t s a n d relevant d o c u m e n t s s u c h as h u m a n resources
plans; financial, visitor numbers, a n d c o m m e r c i a l opera­
tions targets; a n d c o m m u n i t y obligations, as l o n g as these
do not conflict w i t h policies in the C o n s e r v a t i o n Plan.
T h e Corporate Plans imply values without articulating
t h e m , a n d spell out h o w values are to be realized a n d cul­
gives tivated t h r o u g h m a n a g e m e n t decisions a n d priorities.
T h e plans record the results of P A H S M A decisions but
g i v e little insight i n t o t h e p r o c e s s b y w h i c h t h e decisions
were made.
For agiven year, the C o r p o r a t e Plan c o m m u ­
nicates to the T a s m a n i a n Minister o f State Development
h o w all the activities o f P A H S M A , c o m m e r c i a l a n d
conservation, will be carried out. " T h e C o n s e r v a t i o n P l a n
is a b r o a d o v e r r i d i n g d o c u m e n t o f g e n e r a l p o l i c y : t h e Cor­
p o r a t e P l a n is a y e a r l y s t a t e m e n t o f w h a t w i l l b e a c h i e v e d .
E v e r y y e a r as m o r e s e c o n d a r y plans are c o m p l e t e d , the
Corporate Plan g r o w s m o r e detailed." 6 9
In practice, the
Conservation a n d C o r p o r a t e Plans together define and
capture the strategic direction of P A H S M A . T h e y could
also b e interpreted as addressing t w o different audiences:
the C o n s e r v a t i o n P l a n relating to internally focused deci­
sions a b o u t m a t t e r s inside the site b o u n d a r i e s ( c o n s e r v a ­
t i o n a n d d e v e l o p m e n t decisions a b o u t site e l e m e n t s ) ; and
the C o r p o r a t e P l a n relating to externally focused matters,
s u c h as partnerships w i t h g o v e r n m e n t , the local c o m m u ­
nity, a n d P o r t A r t h u r R e g i o n M a r k e t i n g L t d . ( P A R M ) .
Although the Corporate Plan describes the goals
a n d priorities o f the s a m e organization as the C o n s e r v a ­
t i o n P l a n d o e s , it t a k e s a different a p p r o a c h , e n v i s i o n i n g
P A H S M A as a n organization to b e r u n as a business,
r a t h e r t h a n as a set o f c o n s e r v a t i o n p r o j e c t s . N o t h i n g is
i n c l u d e d a b o u t specific historic, aesthetic, social, o r sci­
entific values other t h a n clarifying that "conserving the
c u l t u r a l v a l u e o f t h e site" is t h e first p o i n t i n t h e statement
of purpose. 7 0
(These values are articulated in the Conser­
vation Plan.)
Striking abalance b e t w e e n these t w o sets o f val­
ues, these t w o institutional mandates, these t w o perspec­
tives, is left to t h e c o l l a b o r a t i v e w o r k o f t h e management
t e a m a n d the board. T h e C o r p o r a t e P l a n s strategies and
statements are expressions of h o w different aspects of
site m a n a g e m e n t , opportunities, a n d constraints are inte­ • improve opportunities for
g r a t e d . T h e s e a n n u a l d o c u m e n t s r e p o r t o n h o w the site education and training on site

is m a n a g e d t o e n s u r e t h a t t h e o v e r r i d i n g g o a l o f • increase / improve utilisation

P A H S M A — c o n s e r v a t i o n — i s met, a n d t oensure that of IT opportunities on site
P A H S M A holds itself accountable for the m a n y aspects • [improve] corporate
o f its m a n d a t e — f i n a n c i a l a c c o u n t a b i l i t y , c o m m e r c i a l governance
performance, community engagement, and transparency
(5) maintain government support • increasing awareness and
o f decision m a k i n g , all n e c e s s a r y m e a n s t o achieving support for PAHSMA
the goal. endeavors at Government level
In the Conservation Plan and in m a n y other
(6) strengthening community • increasing awareness and
discussions a n d d o c u m e n t s , P A H S M A clearly states that interaction support for PAHSMA
c o n s e r v a t i o n o fc u l t u r a l v a l u e s i st h e c e n t r a l g o a l o f its endeavors in the broader
site m a n a g e m e n t . T h e C o r p o r a t e P l a n d o e s n o t c o n t r a ­ community
d i c t this, b u t it v i e w s P A H S M A m o r e a s ab u s i n e s s , c r e a t ­
i n g t h e possibility that t h e p r i o r i t y o fc o n s e r v a t i o n a n d A s P A H S M A ' s organizational goals, the strategic
the focus o n cultural values could be hedged in favor of drivers are m e a n t t odefine, connect, orient, a n d integrate
generating revenue. P A H S M A w o r k s actively t o prevent conservation w o r k and the development o f tourism.
this. W h a t e v e r disconnects m i g h t potentially exist T h e s e t w o spheres are s e e n b y m a n a g e m e n t as inter­
between the Conservation Plan and the Corporate Plan r e l a t e d : a d d i t i o n a l t o u r i s m r e v e n u e is s o u g h t t of u n d c o n ­
are resolved through managers' deliberations. T h e means s e r v a t i o n w o r k ; c o n s e r v a t i o n w o r k is i n t e n d e d , among
of resolving s u c h hypothetical conflicts are not outlined o t h e r goals, t ocreate abetter visitor experience and
o n p a p e r . T h e site's l e a d e r s a n d m a n a g e r s h a v e g r e a t t h e r e b y i n c r e a s e t o u r i s m . T h e e x t e n t t ow h i c h this cycle
confidence in the m a n a g e m e n t culture instilled a n d culti­ c h a n g e s h o w site v a l u e s a r e a s s e s s e d a n d a c t e d u p o n is n o t
v a t e d i n recent years ("the P o r t A r t h u r w a y " 7 1
), and in a d d r e s s e d i n t h e C o r p o r a t e P l a n a n d is c o v e r e d i n t h e last
managers' c o m m i t m e n t t oconsultation a n d truly collabo­ s e c t i o n o fthis s t u d y (see, for i n s t a n c e , t h e s i d e b a r o n the
rative p r o b l e m solving. next page, o n the Historic G h o s t Tours). I n s o m e cases,

T h e 2001/ 2002 C o r p o r a t e P l a n i s o r g a n i z e d i n v e s t m e n t s are m a d e t oi m p r o v e visitor experience,

a r o u n d six "strategic drivers o f[ P A H S M A ' s ] business": w h i c h c o u l d b e seen as p r e - e m p t i n g investing in conserva­

tion. I n ashort-term time frame, s o m e might v i e w such
STRATEGIC DRIVER OBJECTIVE decisions as c o n t r a r y t othe C o n s e r v a t i o n Plan's conserva­

(1) management of heritage values • conserve cultural and natural
fabric and landscape
• enhance understanding of
cultural meaning and value
• establish PA as a centre for
research and expertise in
cultural management
tion-first policy. H o w e v e r , P A H S M A clearly sees t h e m a s
l o n g - t e r m i n v e s t m e n t s t og u a r a n t e e the c o n s e r v a t i o n o f
t h e site (a v i s i o n o fc o n s e r v a t i o n that integrates t o u r i s m
a n d access as o n e i n g r e d i e n t o fsuccessful, sustainable
conservation). T h e Corporate Plan recognizes the need t o
think carefully about these relationships b y pointing out,
for instance, the n e e d t o"ensure c o m m e r c i a l activities o n
site are consistent w i t h interpretive objectives." 7 2

(2) increased visitation • increase visitor numbers to

PA by 2 %
(3) developing quality visitor • improve visitor experience
experience and increase perception of
"value for money" and
customer satisfaction
(4) improve organisational • improve financial outcomes
capability of PAHSMA
• continue to develop human
resource function and staff
development
SUMMARY
Based o n the foregoing analysis, the findings regarding
h o w different site v a l u e s are r e p r e s e n t e d i n P o r t A r t h u r
policies are s u m m a r i z e d below.
Aboriginal values are acknowledged but not con­
sidered ak e y m a n a g e m e n t issue. T h i s g r o u p o f stakehold­
ers i sa b s e n t ( a t t e n t i o n t ot h e s e v a l u e s i s legislated), a n d
little m a t e r i a l is a v a i l a b l e t oc u r a t e . A b o r i g i n a l v a l u e s a r e
n o t d e t a i l e d , a n d t h e i r m a n a g e m e n t is n o t d i s c u s s e d i n site
d o c u m e n t s i n deference t othe T a s m a n i a n A b o r i g i n a l
community, w h i c h does not w i s h outside m a n a g e m e n t t o

U N D E R S T A N D I N G A N DP R O T E C T I N G T H E VALUES 149
b e u n d e r t a k e n a n d prefers to carry out this w o r k itself in
Historic Ghost Tours
the future.
Historic values are well represented and domi­
n a t e d b y c o n v i c t i s m . T h e r e is a c k n o w l e d g m e n t t h a t l a y e r s Port Arthur's nighttime Historic Ghost Tours
o f m e a n i n g a r e still a c c u m u l a t i n g , a n d t h a t p o s t - c o n v i c t -
a r e al o n g - s t a n d i n g p a r t o f t h e site's offerings.
era layers are significant alongside the values directly
related to convictism. A s an alternative f o r m of interpretation—dis­
Aesthetic values are considered in policies that
tinct from the m o r e scholarly, canonical forms
call for the perpetuation o f the existing aesthetic land­
scape, a n d thus the paradox of convictism in an Arcadian o f site i n t e r p r e t a t i o n — a n d ac o m m e r c i a l activ­
landscape.
ity, t h e g h o s t t o u r s d e p a r t from the Conserva­
Social values are described a n d listed in the Con­
s e r v a t i o n P l a n , a n d ar a n g e o f p o l i c i e s i n t h e p l a n r e l a t e to tion Plan and Interpretation Plan. T h e tours
their conservation, t h o u g h they d o n o t s e e m to attract as
h i g h l i g h t an u m b e r o f i s s u e s r e l a t e d t o site
m u c h attention as historic values do. Social values e m e r g e
as strong factors i n specific circumstances, the m o s t strik­ interpretation: h o w commercial and cultural
ing instance being the B r o a d A r r o w Cafe tragedy. I n the
v a l u e s are b a l a n c e d , h o w site v a l u e s are c o m ­
sense that the Conservation Plan defines the economic
c o n c e r n s o f the local c o m m u n i t y a n d the state as social m u n i c a t e d to visitors, the variety o f interpre­
values, they are omnipresent and enter into m a n y of the
tive f o r m s u s e d to r e a c h diverse audiences, and
d e c i s i o n s a b o u t t h e site. S o c i a l v a l u e s r e l a t e d to specific
s t a k e h o l d e r g r o u p s also factor into site m a n a g e m e n t of h o w the forms of communication shape the
specific site elements, s u c h as the desire o f veterans'
p e r c e i v e d v a l u e s o f t h e site. 1

g r o u p s t o p r e s e r v e aW o r l d W a r Im e m o r i a l avenue
o f trees.
O n ag h o s t t o u r , v i s i t o r s a r e l e d i n t h e d a r k b y
Scientific values are b e h i n d the well-articulated
policies dealing w i t h archaeological activities. flashlight o r t o r c h t h r o u g h the site a n d several
E c o n o m i c v a l u e s are r e c o g n i z e d implicitly i n site
o f its b u i l d i n g s , e n t e r t a i n e d w i t h s c a r y stories
decisions, policies, a n d planning documents—through
wide recognition of the tension between commercial and o f " g h o s t s " w h o h a v e b e e n s p o t t e d at t h e site.
c o n s e r v a t i o n u s e s o f t h e site's v a l u e s — a n d explicitly d o c ­
Guides convey s o m e historical information
u m e n t e d i n as u p p o r t i n g s t u d y (the U n i v e r s i t y o f T a s m a ­
nia's e c o n o m i c i m p a c t study). I n k e e p i n g w i t h the B u r r a about the place, a n d the "ghost" characters
Charter process, however, they remain o n a separate
take their cues from site history, b u t the c o n ­
plane from the cultural significance values that f o r m the
basis o f the C o n s e r v a t i o n Plan's policies. t e n t is d r i v e n m o r e b y e n t e r t a i n m e n t t h a n b y
T h e r e is n o o n e d o c u m e n t i n w h i c h all o f t h e site
Port Arthur's well-researched cultural
values are articulated. Values tend to be dealt w i t h sepa­
rately—usually according to the m a i n B u r r a C h a r t e r cate­ s i g n i f i c a n c e . G h o s t t o u r i n t e r p r e t a t i o n is n o t
g o r i e s — w i t h little f o r m a l analysis o f t h e trade-offs t h a t
focused o n the significance a n d values of the
m u s t o c c u r i n practice. Holistic t r e a t m e n t o f all site v a l u e s
is a d d r e s s e d i n t h e C o n s e r v a t i o n P l a n o n l y at a g e n e r a l site as c u r r e n t l y d e n n e d i n the C o n s e r v a t i o n
level; the s e c o n d a r y plans (Interpretation, L a n d s c a p e , Sepa­
Plan, but instead complements the standard
r a t e P r i s o n , etc.) d o a c h i e v e ag o o d d e a l o f i n t e g r a t i o n v i s ­
a-vis the specific activities o r resources to w h i c h they per­ daytime offerings o f P o r t Arthur.
tain. T h e i n t e g r a t i o n o f v a l u e s is a c h i e v e d a n a l y t i c a l l y i n
w o r k s u c h as the L a n d s c a p e Plan's statement o f significance
w r i t t e n for different g e o g r a p h i c a r e a s o f t h e site. T h e
[continued on page 152]

150 PORT A R T H U R H I S T O R I C SITE

F o r m a l l y o r g a n i z e d s i n c e 1988, t h e t o u r s a r e a
popular interpretive p r o g r a m for visitors. T h e y
h a r k e n b a c k to the i m m e d i a t e post-convict era,
w h e n local residents (some of t h e m former
inmates) guided visitors a r o u n d the ruins,
regaling t h e m w i t h stories o f the convict days.
T h e tours have b e c o m e central to the commer­
cial strategies o f P A H S M A a n d P A R M : because
they take place in the evening, they attract a n d
retain overnight visitors, w h i c h contributes t o
t h e l o c a l a n d s t a t e e c o n o m i e s . P r i c e d a t A$i4
per adult, the Historic G h o s t T o u r s attracted
46,000 v i s i t o r s i n 2001, p r o d u c i n g n e a r l y
A$6OO,OOO i n d i r e c t r e v e n u e .
T h e ghost tours also advance the cultural val­
u e s o f t h e site. T h e y r e p r e s e n t a different
a p p r o a c h to interpretation from that outlined
in the Interpretation Plan—less scholarly or
informed by theories of education, m o r e enter­
tainment- and commercially driven, cued t o
the emotional connections that are m o r e acces­
sible i n an i g h t t i m e visit. P A H S M A s r e s e a r c h
suggests that the tours are an important m e a n s
b y w h i c h v i s i t o r s l e a r n a b o u t t h e site a n d its
significance. One-third of the evening visitors
o v e r l a p w i t h t h e 200,000 a n n u a l v i s i t o r s t o t h e
site a n d t h u s h a v e a d d i t i o n a l e x p o s u r e . F o r
m o r e t h a n 30,500 e v e n i n g v i s i t o r s , t h e g h o s t
t o u r is t h e i r o n l y c o n t a c t w i t h t h e site.
E v e n t h o u g h they are ade facto f o r m of inter­
pretation, the tours are m a n a g e d n o t as part o f
the interpretive offerings o f P A H S M A but b y
Visitor Services, aseparate unit in the Conser­
v a t i o n D e p a r t m e n t . I n effect, the t o u r s are a
separate, independent interpretative operation.
T h e board has begun reviewing the Historic
G h o s t T o u r s program, consulting w i t h the var­
2
ious stakeholders (including the guides w h o
c r e a t e d a n d c o n t i n u e t od e l i v e r t h e t o u r s ) a n d
i n c o r p o r a t i n g t h e i r f e e d b a c k into t h e site's
o t h e r interpretation policies a n d activities.
T h e tours also represent social values. Some
P A H S M A staff (particularlythose w h o created
the tours and have m a n a g e d t h e m over the
years) identify w i t h the tours as atradition a n d
feel strongly a b o u t a l l o w i n g t h e m to continue.
Indeed, the tours represent the contributions
o f staff w h o h a v e w o r k e d o n t h e site for years,
w e l l b e f o r e t h e 1996 t r a g e d y a n d t h e changes
that followed, and whose interpretations of
Port Arthur'shistory are ade facto part of the
site's significance.
Despite the tours' popularity and financial suc­
cess, s o m e heritage professionals criticize their
lack of interpretive rigor and question their
relation to the cultural significance a n d values
o f the site as identified i n t h e C o n s e r v a t i o n
Plan. W h i l e the tours deliver s o m e information
a b o u t t h e site itself, c o n f o r m i n g to t h e m a i n
interpretive themes, the tours seem tooled t o
elicit e m o t i o n a l r e a c t i o n s t ot h e p l a c e . Some
see the g h o s t tours as potentially u n d e r m i n i n g
t h e c u l t u r a l v a l u e s o f t h e site b y r e p r e s e n t i n g
t h e m to the public as e n t e r t a i n m e n t r a t h e r
UNDERSTANDING A N D PROTECTING T H EVALUES 151
 t h a n as c o m p l e x historical issues. S u c h a cri­
tique undervalues the real benefits of the tours.
P A H S M A s b o a r d a n d staff express strong
s u p p o r t for the tours as a n alternative m e a n s
for e n g a g i n g visitors w i t h t h e site's c u l t u r a l
significance as w e l l as for their e c o n o m i c
contributions. T h e y believe that the Historic
G h o s t T o u r s fill av a l u a b l e a n d i d i o s y n c r a t i c
niche in the m a n a g e m e n t of Port Arthur's
m a n y values.
Notes
1. This assessment is admittedly anecdotal and based on
limited exposure to the ghost tours.
2. Young 1996.
152 PORT A R T H U R HISTORIC SITE
b o a r d ' s decisions rely o n s e c o n d a r y p l a n s to alarge extent.
R e g a r d i n g a r e a s o r i s s u e s f o r w h i c h n o s e c o n d a r y p l a n is
yet c o m p l e t e d , i n f o r m a l m e a n s o f i n t e g r a t i n g site v a l u e s
are m o r e important a n d flow from the input a n d expertise
o f site m a n a g e r s , at o p i c d i s c u s s e d f u r t h e r i n t h e l a s t s e c ­
tion o f the study.
I m p a c t o f M a n a g e m e n t Policies
a n d Decisions o n t h e Site's V a l u e s
a n d Their P r e s e r v a t i o n
This section addresses the following questions: H o w are
values considered in decision making? W h a t have been
the implications of decisions a n d policies o n the values of
t h e site? A r e t h e r e d i s c r e p a n c i e s b e t w e e n w h a t is s t a t e d i n
the documents and w h a t actions are actually taken? W h a t
effects d o institutional a r r a n g e m e n t s h a v e o n the manage­
m e n t o f site v a l u e s ?
GENERAL POLICIES AND DECISION MAKING
T h e m a n a g e m e n t o f P o r t A r t h u r , i n g e n e r a l a n d i n its
details, is c a r r i e d o u t a c c o r d i n g to P A H S M A s p l a n s a n d
policies. It s e e m s w e l l s e r v e d b y the plans themselves, and
m o r e so b y the planning processes (collaborative, inclu­
sive, a n d exhaustive).
O n e o f t h e o v e r r i d i n g t h e m e s i n this s e c t i o n is
P A H S M A s focus o n f o r m u l a t i n g general policies that set
strategic direction, while c a r r y i n g out (over time) a series
o f m o r e detailed secondary plans a n d leaving specific deci­
sions about fabric to i n f o r m a l processes m a n a g e d o n a n a d
h o c b a s i s b y t h e e x e c u t i v e t e a m . T h i s a p p r o a c h is i n k e e p ­
i n g w i t h the nature o f m a n a g e m e n t plans as guidance
d o c u m e n t s r a t h e r t h a n as specific w o r k plans.
Port Arthur's C o n s e r v a t i o n Plan, for instance,
establishes the r a n g e o f v a l u e s o f the site a n d states clearly
t h a t c o n s e r v a t i o n is m o r e i m p o r t a n t t h a n a t t r a c t i n g a n d
s e r v i n g visitors. B u t it d o e s n o t specify, f o r e x a m p l e , h o w
t h e f a b r i c o f t h e S e p a r a t e P r i s o n s h o u l d b e h a n d l e d ; this is
t h e s u b j e c t o f its o w n s e c o n d a r y p l a n . N o r d o e s t h e Con­
servation Plan specify exactly w h a t conservation projects
s h o u l d be u n d e r t a k e n a n d in w h a t order. S u c h specifics
a r e l e f t (1) t o t h e a c t i o n s c a l l e d f o r i n t h e s e c o n d a r y a n d
t e r t i a r y p l a n s , a n d (2) t o t h e d a y - t o - d a y , y e a r - t o - y e a r j u d g ­
m e n t of the managers themselves—abiding by the overall
p o l i c y o f c o n s e r v i n g t h e site's c u l t u r a l significance v a l u e
first—as to w h i c h actions to take a n d in w h a t order. 7 3
T h e s e arrangements, w i t h i n the limits agreed to
as overall policies, a l l o w the m a n a g e r s to react a c c o r d i n g
to circumstances a n d seize opportunities as they present
themselves. T h e decentralized, s o m e w h a t privatized insti-
t u t i o n a l s e t u p o fP A H S M A , a n d its C o n s e r v a t i o n P l a n (procurement, personnel, tourism promotion, forming
s c h e m e , e m b o d i e s this approach. C o n s t a n t consideration partnerships w i t h the private sector; in other words, the
is g i v e n t ow h a t a c t i o n s a r e m o s t u r g e n t , m o s t r e l e v a n t , s e p a r a t i o n o fsectoral responsibilities i n different agencies
a n d m o s t suitable for implementation, given the ever- w o r k s against holistic m a n a g e m e n t ) . Quasigovernment
shifting availability o ff u n d i n g a n d p a r t n e r s . corporations are m o r e flexible and can be opportunistic
a n d responsive t oexternal conditions.
T H E E F F E C T S OF GOVERNMENT POLICY
C h a n g e s i n m e m b e r s h i p o ft h e g o v e r n i n g body
P A H S M A s fairly i n d e p e n d e n t status has asignificant effect
a n d external conditions can also have astrong impact o n
o n h o w site v a l u e s are m a n a g e d . I n g e n e r a l , state a n d
such relatively small, relatively independent organiza­
c o m m o n w e a l t h bodies h a v e b e c o m e less influential a s
tions. T h e m a n a g e m e n t troubles at P o r t A r t h u r b y the
P A H S M A has become more independent, well funded,
t i m e o f t h e 1997 D o y l e I n q u i r y w e r e b r o u g h t o n i n p a r t b y
a n d professionally staffed. P A H S M A h a s clearly w o n the
attempts t or e s p o n d t oexternal factors. T h e y w e r e also
c o n f i d e n c e a n d s u p p o r t o ft h e T H C a n d t h e A H C f o r its
s y m p t o m a t i c , h o w e v e r , o fw h a t c a n h a p p e n i n a s m a l l ,
policies a n d p r o g r a m s , a n d h e n c e i ss e e n n o t t o w a r r a n t
freestanding m a n a g e m e n t group in w h i c h the impact o f
the detailed scrutiny previously necessary. T h e exception
i n d i v i d u a l s i ss t r o n g a n d susceptibility t o e x t e r n a l f u n d i n g
is t h e e n o r m o u s l y i n f l u e n t i a l r o l e o fP A H S M A s h o m e
and other factors is high.
m i n i s t r y , w h i c h is p r o v i d i n g t h e A$IO million of funding
A n o t h e r m a j o r effect o nP o r t Arthur's values in
( o v e r five y e a r s ) for t h e site's c o n s e r v a t i o n p r o g r a m . T h i s
the r e c e n t past h a s b e e n the state g o v e r n m e n t ' s shift i n
a n d other T a s m a n i a n State p o l i c i e s — s u c h as investing in
t h i n k i n g a b o u t t h e r e s o u r c e s it p r o v i d e s t o P o r t A r t h u r
the n e w Bass Strait ferry service b e t w e e n T a s m a n i a a n d
a n d t h e b e n e f i t s i te x p e c t s from t h e site. C o n t i n u i n g t h e
m a i n l a n d A u s t r a l i a — c o n t i n u e t ob ei m p o r t a n t i n f l u e n c e s
pendulum swings between conservation and commercial
o n the m a n a g e m e n t o fsite values.
o r i e n t a t i o n s at the site from t h e 1970s t h r o u g h t h e 1990s,
Policy c h a n g e s at the state a n d commonwealth
g o v e r n m e n t policies h a v e l e d t h e m o s t r e c e n t shift, w h i c h
g o v e r n m e n t levels c a n h a v e ag r e a t effect o n site v a l u e s
s t a r t e d i n 1998. T h e c h i e f e x e c u t i v e o f t h e D e p a r t m e n t o f
a n d their m a n a g e m e n t . I n the case o fP o r t A r t h u r , t h e s e
State D e v e l o p m e n t stated that the government's expecta­
effects c a n b e s u m m a r i z e d as (i) s h a p i n g the institutional
t i o n s o fg e t t i n g r e t u r n s o n t h e i r i n v e s t m e n t w e r e "not
s e t u p o ft h e m a n a g i n g e n t i t y ( P A H S M A s s t a t u s a sa G B E ,
simply economic." 7 5
T h e state g o v e r n m e n t a n d the
a quasigovernmental corporation); 7 4
(2) p r o v i d i n g / c o n ­
P A H S M A B o a r d w o r k o n t h e a s s u m p t i o n that the site h a s
trolling access t ofinancial resources (direct state funding,
a variety o fe c o n o m i c a n d cultural v a l u e s — o r , aspects o f
s u b s i d i a r y f u n d i n g o ft o u r i s m d e v e l o p m e n t as o n e o f t h e
s i g n i f i c a n c e — a n d that investment in these different val­
p r e f e r r e d m e a n s o fp o s t i n d u s t r i a l p u b l i c i n v e s t m e n t i n
u e s y i e l d s different k i n d s o fr e t u r n s . I n o t h e r w o r d s , t h e
e c o n o m i c d e v e l o p m e n t ) ; a n d (3) c r e a t i n g e x p e c t a t i o n s and
government supports the emphasis o nconservation a s
p e r f o r m a n c e targets for the benefits created b y these pub­
l o n g as the " r e t u r n s " c o n t i n u e t ob eb o t h cultural ( g o o d
lic i n v e s t m e n t s .
c o n s e r v a t i o n w o r k , e x c e l l e n c e o fv i s i t o r e x p e r i e n c e ,
T h e institutional setup directly affects v a l u e s b y
p l e n t y o fv i s i t o r s , m a i n t e n a n c e o fA u s t r a l i a n a n d T a s m a n ­
setting t h e g e n e r a l g o a l s o ft h e o r g a n i z a t i o n a n d e n a b l i n g
ian identity) a n d e c o n o m i c (reasonable e c o n o m i c per­
it t ou n d e r t a k e c e r t a i n activities. Q u a s i p u b l i c c o r p o r a ­
f o r m a n c e o fP A H S M A , a n d e c o n o m i c benefits o f P o r t
tions enjoy latitude in specifying h o w institutional goals
A r t h u r activities t othe p e n i n s u l a a n d the state).
are t ob ep u r s u e d , a n d P A H S M A s , for e x a m p l e , are quite
T h e i n v e s t m e n t o fT a s m a n i a n authorities i n P o r t
b r o a d a n d d i v e r s e . B y d e s i g n , i to p e r a t e s a sa b u s i n e s s
A r t h u r is p a r t o ft h e state's d e c i s i o n t o e l i m i n a t e r e l i a n c e
a n d as ag o v e r n m e n t s t e w a r d s h i p a g e n c y t op u r s u e b o t h
o n extractive a n d agriculturalindustry (the export o f tim­
e c o n o m i c a n d c o n s e r v a t i o n g o a l s i n m a n a g i n g t h e site,
b e r a n d apples) a n d b e c o m e m o r e o fagreen, tourist-
in contrast t othe institutional setup o fa s t r a i g h t f o r w a r d
o r i e n t e d state. P o r t A r t h u r ' s m a n a g e m e n t , al i n c h p i n o f
g o v e r n m e n t a g e n c y , w h i c h is o f t e n c o n s t r a i n e d b y b u r e a u ­
this strategy, isk e y t othe b r o a d e r m a r k e t i n g o f T a s m a n i a
cratic structures a n d interagency relationships. Tradi­
for tourism. This change in g o v e r n m e n t policy—raising
tional g o v e r n m e n t agencies have fairly n a r r o w (if exten­
the profile o fP o r t A r t h u r as a n e c o n o m i c development
sive) m a n d a t e s (e.g., c o n s e r v a t i o n o fc u l t u r a l h e r i t a g e )
r e s o u r c e — s h a p e s t h e d ef a c t o p r i o r i t i z a t i o n o fsite v a l u e s .
a n d often rely o nother g o v e r n m e n t entities a n d rules in
T h e e c o n o m i c values realized on-site t h r o u g h c o m m e r c i a l
o r d e r t op e r f o r m f u n c t i o n s outside that m a n d a t e
activities, as w e l l as the positive e c o n o m i c externalities t o

U N D E R S T A N D I N G A N DP R O T E C T I N G T H E VALUES 153
the region, are m o r e explicitly recognized. Government
p o l i c y is f u r t h e r r e f l e c t e d i n t h e h a n d l i n g o f v a l u e s
t h r o u g h site m a n a g e m e n t : t h e e c o n o m i c v a l u e s are
dependent o n the conservation, protection, and presenta­
t i o n o f t h e site's c u l t u r a l significance v a l u e s , w h i c h p u t s
everything in alignment for the managers. C o n s e r v i n g
c u l t u r a l v a l u e s e n a b l e s t h e r e a l i z a t i o n o fe c o n o m i c values.
T h e Corporate Plans and Conservation Plan pro­
vide a clear mandate: D o not sacrifice conservation t o
c o m m e r c e . N e v e r t h e l e s s , t h e b o a r d h a s s h o w n t h a t it is
also willing to r e s p o n d to opportunities a n d carry out
s u c h initiatives w i t h i n the guidelines o f the C o n s e r v a t i o n
P l a n . M e a s u r e s a r e i n p l a c e t og a u g e t h e i m p a c t o f i n d i v i d ­
ual projects s u c h as the n e w ferry service a n d h a r b o r s i d e
plan. However, there are no established processes t o m o n ­
i t o r t h e c u m u l a t i v e i m p a c t o fall p r o j e c t s , n o r h a v e l i m i t s
of acceptable change been articulated. Either one would
a l l o w the b o a r d a n d m a n a g e m e n t t oassess i m p a c t o n the
w h o l e site o v e r t i m e .
P A H S M A m u s t c o n t i n u e t op r o v e t h a t s t a t e funds
are n e e d e d a n d w e l l spent, a n d that this government
i n v e s t m e n t y i e l d s b e n e f i t s b e y o n d t h e site itself. P A H S M A
has d e m o n s t r a t e d the social a n d e c o n o m i c benefits o fa
w e l l - c o n s e r v e d a n d - i n t e r p r e t e d h e r i t a g e site t ot h e l o c a l
and wider community.
DEALING W I T H CONFLICTING VALUES
D e a l i n g w i t h c o n f l i c t i n g v a l u e s is a m a j o r i s s u e i n v a l u e s -
b a s e d m a n a g e m e n t a n d o f m a j o r i n t e r e s t t ot h e d i d a c t i c
p u r p o s e s o ft h i s c a s e s t u d y . T h e p o t e n t i a l f o r economic
v a l u e s t ot r u m p o r u n d e r m i n e c u l t u r a l v a l u e s , a n d t h e
p o t e n t i a l for different c u l t u r a l v a l u e s t oc o m p e t e , i s a n
issue f a c e d at m a n y sites.
A s is m a d e c l e a r i n t h e C o n s e r v a t i o n P l a n , t h e
Corporate Plans, and in conversations with P A H S M A
B o a r d a n d staff, t h e p r i m a r y g o a l s a n d v a l u e s f o r P o r t
A r t h u r ' s site m a n a g e m e n t are c o n s e r v a t i o n a n d c u l t u r a l
significance. Yet the financial requirements for m a n a g i n g
the site r e q u i r e a fairly aggressive c o u r t i n g o f economic
values t h r o u g h c o m m e r c i a l a n d t o u r i s m activities a n d
courting political-governmental sources of funding. T h e
policy d o c u m e n t s for Port A r t h u r do not detail specifically
h o w t oachieve a b a l a n c e w h e n the realization o f eco­
n o m i c a n d c u l t u r a l v a l u e s s e e m s t oconflict. B e c a u s e t h e s e
d o c u m e n t s a d d r e s s d i f f e r e n t s e t s o fsite v a l u e s , g a p s m a y
appear w h e n they are put together. T o the extent that
such gaps raise uncertainty about value priorities, conflict
and competition can crop up.
154 PORT A R T H U R HISTORIC SITE
Staff a n d b o a r d appear to share a clear w o r k i n g
u n d e r s t a n d i n g a b o u t h o w P A H S M A is s u p p o s e d t o p e r ­
f o r m as a c o m m e r c i a l o p e r a t i o n a n d g o v e r n m e n t eco­
n o m i c - d e v e l o p m e n t investment, a n d also as a p a r a g o n o f
conservation w o r k — s t a n d a r d s set out in the C o r p o r a t e
a n d Conservation Plans. T h e only specified decision
r e g a r d i n g the r e l a t i o n o f t h e s e t w o sectors a n d site v a l u e s
is t h e C o n s e r v a t i o n P l a n ' s p h i l o s o p h y / p o l i c y t h a t c o n s e r ­
vation takes priority w h e n c o m m e r c i a l activities are in
conflict.
A case in point w a s the decision not t o privatize
a n d o u t s o u r c e c o m m e r c i a l o p e r a t i o n s o n t h e site (e.g.,
restaurants, gift shop). T h i s decision s t e m m e d i n p a r t
from t h e state g o v e r n m e n t ' s c o m m i t m e n t ( r e l a t e d to its
political position not to privatize the T a s m a n i a n State
hydro c o m p a n y ) and has been part of the C E O ' s mandate
from the board. Privatization might have been more
l u c r a t i v e , b u t it w o u l d h a v e t a k e n q u a l i t y c o n t r o l o u t of
P A H S M A s hands and would not have been in accord with
the C o n s e r v a t i o n Plan's values a n d policies, w h i c h put
c o n s e r v a t i o n first. " W e o f t e n m a k e d e c i s i o n s a p r i v a t e
business w o u l d not," one executive said, citing examples
s u c h as n o t p u t t i n g a M c D o n a l d ' s r e s t a u r a n t i n the S e p a ­
rate Prison, o r n o t s t o c k i n g certain p r o d u c t s i n the gift
s h o p that the c o n s e r v a t i o n staff w o u l d consider inappro­
priate. Conflicts arise b e t w e e n c o m m e r c i a l a n d conserva­
tion mandates from t i m e t ot i m e — s u c h as t h o s e r e g a r d ­
ing special events and the ghost t o u r s — b u t the conflicts
were worse w h e n private operators and contractors were
on-site. F e w e r conflicts crop u p n o w that P A H S M A con­
trols all decision m a k i n g a n d i m p l e m e n t s these decisions
t h r o u g h its m a n a g e m e n t t e a m — a "whole-of-site"
approach.
In interviews, b o a r d m e m b e r s a n d staff c o m m u ­
n i c a t e d c l e a r l y t h a t c o n s e r v a t i o n is t h e f u n d a m e n t a l g o a l
o f m a n a g e m e n t , a n d that achieving this goal requires inte­
g r a t i n g m a n a g e m e n t o ft o u r i s m w i t h o t h e r economic
aspects a n d c o m m e r c i a l activities o f t h e site. T h i s i n t e g r a ­
tion, or trading-off, h a p p e n s not t h r o u g h structured plan­
n i n g or according to routinized decision m a k i n g b u t
"around the table" in b o a r d a n d executive deliberations.
I n t e g r a t i o n o fe c o n o m i c a n d c u l t u r a l v a l u e s is h a n d l e d
i n f o r m a l l y a n d g u i d e d b y g e n e r a l p o l i c i e s — i t is left n o t t o
c h a n c e b u t t ot h e m a n a g e r s . F o r i n s t a n c e , t h e staff h e a d ­
i n g different d e p a r t m e n t s ( c o m m e r c i a l as w e l l as conser­
vation operations) w o r k w e l l together as a t e a m . T h i s
executive g r o u p , representing all m a n a g e m e n t areas a n d
different values, m e e t s w e e k l y a n d ensures that there i s
collaboration b e t w e e n conservation a n d c o m m e r c i a l enti-
ties. T h e i m p o r t a n c e o fthis i n t e g r a t i o n p r o c e s s was
acknowledged and addressed m o r e formally through the
w o r k s h o p s p r e s e n t e d t o t h e staff, a n d s p e c i f i c a l l y t h e sce­
n a r i o s u s e d t o t r a i n staff. S t a f f w e r e a s k e d t o c o n s i d e r , f o r
e x a m p l e , w h a t w o u l d h a p p e n i fs o m e o n e p r o p o s e d s t a g ­
i n g a r o c k c o n c e r t o nt h e site, o r i f s o m e o n e donated
funds for reroofing the church. T h e s e exercises w e r e in
effect m a n a g e m e n t "practice" for the process-based solu­
tions (as o p p o s e d t op r e s c r i b e d p l a n - b a s e d solutions) o n
w h i c h P A H S M A relies t oresolve conflicts a n d set priori­
ties vis-a-vis site values.
T h e executive staff are quite clear a b o u t their
d u t y o fconfronting a n d h e a d i n g off potential conflicts
between conservation and commerce, dealing with them
" a r o u n d the table" guided b y the "general conservation
policy." T h i s m o d e l o fdecision m a k i n g d e p e n d s a great
deal o nthe personalities sitting at the table. A s the p e o p l e
c h a n g e , t h e " P o r t A r t h u r w a y " i si n t e n d e d t ob et h e s y s ­
t e m for educating a n d integrating n e w c o m e r s a n d sustain­
i n g the m a n a g e m e n t practices set i n place b y the C o n s e r ­
vation Plan and the board. T h e Port Arthur w a y is
described b y b o a r d vice chairperson S h a r o n Sullivan:
" T h e P o r t A r t h u r w a y is t h e w a y i n w h i c h t h e Conserva­
tion P l a n w a s developed w i t h full staff input, including the
workshops w h i c h continually reinforce the conservation
planning process a n d in w h i c h conservation plan policies
are w o r k e d t h r o u g h a s they apply t oparticularissues. Itis
not a n accident that the P o r t A r t h u r staff act the w a y they
d o . It is a n i n t e n d e d o u t c o m e o ft h e c o n s e r v a t i o n p l a n ­
n i n g p r o c e s s a n d it is i n t e n d e d t o e n s u r e t h a t p r i o r i t y i s
g i v e n t ol o n g - t e r m site c o n s e r v a t i o n i n e v e r y issue w h i c h
is c o n s i d e r e d b y t h e E x e c u t i v e a n d t h e staff." 7 6
In setting P A H S M A s course, the C o r p o r a t e Plan
leaves r o o m for political m a n e u v e r i n g a n d opportunistic
d e v e l o p m e n t d e c i s i o n s o nt h e p a r t o ft h e b o a r d . A n y g a p s
perceived between the strategic C o r p o r a t e Plan a n d the
more-specific Conservation Plan (including the secondary
p l a n s ) a p p e a r t ob eb y d e s i g n . T h i s g i v e s t h e b o a r d a n d
executive flexibility i n setting priorities, allocating
resources, a n d s oforth, a n d enables t h e m t o r e s p o n d
m o r e effectively t oopportunities, disasters o r other unex­
pected events, c h a n g i n g m a c r o e c o n o m i c conditions, and
changing political fortunes.
T h e l e a d e r s h i p o ft h e b o a r d c o n t i n u e s t o r e c o g ­
n i z e t h e i m p o r t a n c e n o t o n l y o fi n t e g r a t i n g t h e manage­
m e n t o fdifferent values b u t also o fcontinually revising
Port Arthur's statement o fsignificance a n d r e e x a m i n i n g
the relation b e t w e e n c o m m e r c i a l a n d conservation strate­
gies. O n e b o a r d m e m b e r stated, " I fw e w e r e doing the
C o n s e r v a t i o n P l a n s t a r t i n g n o w , w ew o u l d i n t e g r a t e com­
mercial a n d conservation activities/policies in the same
plan." O t h e r m e m b e r s explained that the Burra Charter
m e t h o d o l o g y a n d the d o m i n a n c e o fe c o n o m i c values
during the previous administrations are reasons w h y
economic values are not amore-explicit part o f the
Conservation Plan.
T H E CONSERVATION PLAN'S E F F E C T
ON SITE VALUES
"The Conservation Plan is the basis for all
our decision making." 77
T h e philosophy behind the Conservation Plan, mirrored in
P A H S M A policies overall, isthe p r i m a c y o f conservation
a n d , b y e x t e n s i o n , t h e c u l t u r a l v a l u e s c o m p r i s i n g t h e site's
cultural significance. A s reported b y several interviewees,
the single m o s t important m o m e n t in the C o n s e r v a t i o n
P l a n process w a s the a p p r o v a l o fthis p h i l o s o p h y b y the
P A H S M A B o a r d a n d T a s m a n i a n State government.
Economically, the plan helped secure the A$IO
million i n state f u n d i n g for P o r t A r t h u r (along w i t h the
T a s m a n i a n State government's confidence in P A H S M A s
board a n d m a n a g e m e n t ) . T h e political objectives o f the
process w e r e successfully addressed: atargeted effort w a s
m a d e t oshape state policy a n d gain financial a n d political
support. I n this m a t e r i a l sense, the C o n s e r v a t i o n P l a n
o b v i o u s l y a d v a n c e s all t h e v a l u e s o ft h e site.
T h e b a l a n c e o fthis section explores issues related
specifically t om a n a g e m e n t o fcultural values.
Articulating Values According to Type
B y e m p l o y i n g the heritage value t y p o l o g y o fthe B u r r a
Charter process, the Conservation Plan privileges those
value types. This a p p r o a c h yields benefits in exhaustively
dealing with the four canonical types o f cultural
significance v a l u e — h i s t o r i c , social, scientific, a n d aes­
thetic—backed by an established process o fresearch,
consultation, and synthesis into an overall statement o f
significance. A t the s a m e time, the process raises s o m e
potential difficulties by, for instance, e x c l u d i n g economic
values, a n d handles A b o r i g i n a l values a w k w a r d l y b y seg­
regating them.
T h e Conservation Plan's m e t h o d o f examining
values b y type a n d not b y chronology m a y w o r k against
t h e u n d e r s t a n d i n g o fP o r t A r t h u r as a d e e p l y l a y e r e d site.
C o n t r a s t this w i t h aw a y o fassessing v a l u e s (historic o r
"conservation" values at least) a c c o r d i n g t othe periods o r
layers o ft h e site ( A b o r i g i n a l , c o n v i c t - e r a , C a r n a r v o n , S P B ,
P a r k s / P A C D P , P A H S M A , post-1996). A v a l u e e l i c i t a t i o n
U N D E R S T A N D I N G A N D P R O T E C T I N G T H E VALUES 155
f r a m e w o r k b a s e d o n historic p e r i o d s c a n l e a d to a differ­
ent m a n a g e m e n t strategy, privileging the values related to
a p a r t i c u l a r e r a , w h i c h m a y h a v e ab e n e f i c i a l effect o n t h e
s c i e n t i f i c v a l u e r e l a t e d t o it.
T h e i d e a o f c h r o n o l o g i c a l l a y e r s is c e n t r a l to
visitors' u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f the site a n d h a s b e e n the tradi­
tional w a y o f l o o k i n g at the site's significance a n d c o n s e r ­
vation. 7 8
H o w are values of different periods prioritized
w h e n t h e y coexist i n ap a r t i c u l a r b u i l d i n g ? I n t h e p e n i t e n ­
tiary, for instance, f u t u r e c o n s e r v a t i o n to a l l o w r e a d i n g
o f t h e 1840s f a b r i c a n d c r e a t e p e r f o r m a n c e s p a c e may
s a c r i f i c e t h e i n t e g r i t y o f t h e 1970s c o n s e r v a t i o n w o r k .
Ideally, values w o u l d b e o r g a n i z e d b o t h b y type a n d
b y historical layer, so that o n e w a y o f valorization does
not dominate.
P o r t A r t h u r c o n s e r v a t i o n p l a n n i n g efforts
r e s p o n d to this issue b y trying to mitigate this k i n d o f
unavoidable, chronological valorization of value types.
Different value schemes are used in secondary p l a n s —
organized, for instance, a r o u n d g e o g r a p h i c areas, as in
the L a n d s c a p e Plan; a r o u n d interpretive themes, as i n
the Interpretation Plan; or around eras in built-element
plans. T h e s e "alternative" value schemes cut across the
m a i n typology and enrich the articulation of values with­
out undermining the values-based rigor of the Burra
Charter framework.
Assigning Priorities among Cultural Values
T h e Conservation Plan articulates the w i d e range of
cultural values, yet assigns n o priority or hierarchy to
them. W h e n decisions m u s t be m a d e between, hypotheti-
cally, ap r o j e c t c e n t e r e d o n c o n s e r v i n g r e s e a r c h v a l u e s
( d o c u m e n t i n g a r c h a e o l o g i c a l r e s o u r c e s ) a n d ap r o j e c t to
stabilize reconstructed built fabric, the value articulation
a n d significance s t a t e m e n t s p r o v i d e little g u i d a n c e . T h e
S e p a r a t e P r i s o n ( s e e s i d e b a r o n p a g e 140) p r e s e n t s t h e
option of r e m o v i n g earlier conservation w o r k (from
the twentieth century) to restore the nineteenth-century
convict experience.
S e c t i o n 6.3.10 o f t h e C o n s e r v a t i o n P l a n o f f e r s
g e n e r a l g u i d a n c e (first, w o r k o n t h i n g s t h a t a r e d a n g e r o u s
o r that threaten operations, t h e n prioritize a c c o r d i n g to
the significance o f the specific elements in question), a n d
i n d i v i d u a l site e l e m e n t s a r e r a t e d i n b r o a d categories for
their significance. 7 9
T h e d e c i s i o n s a r e left i n t h e h a n d s o f
P A H S M A managers and their annual w o r k s budget. Yet
P A H S M A policy for spending A$IO million in government
f u n d s o n c o n s e r v a t i o n w o r k s h a s n o t b e e n c o d i f i e d ; it is
decided o n arolling, year-to-year basis. A s c h e m e for
156 PORT ARTHUR HISTORIC SITE
phasing of conservation and development projects has
b e e n drafted as a n internal p l a n n i n g tool, identifying
planning projects and major and m i n o r works, and
scheduling these projects over afive-year period. T h i s
d o c u m e n t p r o v i d e s ag u i d e l i n e f o r d e c i s i o n s a n d is c o n t i n ­
ually rethought a n d refined.
Tying Values to Fabric
Values articulated in the Conservation Plan are not tied
to specific e l e m e n t s o f f a b r i c . It is left to t h e s e c o n d a r y
plans to establish the more-detailed policies about conser­
vation a n d operational priorities a n d treatment of fabric,
a n d to set out steps for i m p l e m e n t a t i o n . T h e tertiary plans
spell out actual w o r k s procedures. T h e s e c o n d a r y a n d ter­
tiary plans are not actually hierarchical, even though their
n a m e s suggest they are. T h e y are intended to cut across
o n e another, enabling project p l a n n i n g to focus either o n
s u b j e c t a r e a s (e.g., a r c h a e o l o g y ) o r o n specific site ele­
m e n t s (e.g., t h e S e p a r a t e P r i s o n ) .
Instances arise, however, w h e n the general poli­
c i e s — i n concert w i t h the specific value assessments—
s e e m to prefigure adecision regarding the conservation
o f asite r e s o u r c e . F o r e x a m p l e , t h e c h u r c h , like m a n y site
elements, has several kinds of value. Given the overall
value assessments a n d conservation policies, the scenic
(aesthetic) qualities o f the c h u r c h as aroofless r u i n seem
to take precedent over the historic values that w o u l d b e
r e a l i z e d b y r o o f i n g a n d r e c o n s t r u c t i n g it. ( S u c h r e c o n ­
struction w o u l d also raise the issue of adversely affecting
the authenticity of the structure.)
The Conservation Plan's Effect on the Process
T h e process of formulating and approving the Conserva­
tion P l a n h a s h a d av e r y s t r o n g a n d s a l u t a r y effect o n m a n ­
agement within P A H S M A . T h e process helped manage
t h e h u g e post-1996 t r a n s i t i o n o f staff; i t h e l p e d manage
a n d g u i d e t h e r e c o m p o s i t i o n o f t h e b o a r d ; a n d it h e l p e d
r e d u c e t e n s i o n b y i m p r o v i n g c o m m u n i c a t i o n a m o n g dif­
ferent stakeholders a n d within the P A H S M A organization.
In another sense, the C o n s e r v a t i o n Plan raises
questions about the role o f outside agencies vis-a-vis
P A H S M A i n m a n a g i n g t h e site, a n d w h a t k i n d s o f over­
sight are enabled. T h e flexibility o f the d e c i s i o n - m a k i n g
process gives P A H S M A asignificant a m o u n t o f autonomy
a n d oversight. T h e Conservation Plan has helped secure
c o n f i d e n c e a n d ap r i o r i b u y - i n b y staff, l o c a l l e a d e r s , a n d
state officials o n P A H S M A site d e v e l o p m e n t a n d c o n s e r v a ­
t i o n d e c i s i o n s . L o c a l c o u n c i l a p p r o v a l is still n e e d e d to
approve physical projects, b u t this c o n c e r n s m a i n l y infra-
structural issues (not heritage i s s u e s — o n this the local
 PORT ARTHUR HISTORIC SITE
Conservation Plan and derived plans

Figure 3.12. Port Arthur Historic Site Conservation Plan and derived
plans. (Source: Adapted from Richard Mackay, "Conservation Planning
Presentation," January 2001)

c o u n c i l defers to t h e T H C ) .T h e T H C h a s statutory T h e m a i n interpretation strategies r e m a i n those

review responsibilities a n d sometimes attaches
to projects. B u t P A H S M A a n d the T H C have aclose w o r k ­
ing relationship, 8 0
and there has been discussion
granting P A H S M A blanket exemption from T H C review
o n the basis that self-review w o u l d be sufficient to
the quality of conservation work.
THE INTERPRETATION PLAN
AND ITS E F F E C T S ON VALUES
T h e Interpretation Plan will shape cultural values directly
as it p a c k a g e s t h e m f o r p u b l i c u n d e r s t a n d i n g .
m o s t part, the m e a s u r e s called for in the plan will build o n
the values and significance outlined in the
Plan. T h e r e are s o m e departures, though. Instead of see­
i n g the values a c c o r d i n g to the categories u s e d in the
s e r v a t i o n P l a n , the I n t e r p r e t a t i o n P l a n v i e w s the site first
as "a c o m p l e x l a y e r e d c u l t u r a l landscape." I n this sense, i t
presents a different, m o r e holistic w a y o f l o o k i n g at cul­
tural values. 8 2
conditions identified in the Conservation Plan, although their con­
tent has b e e n significantly revised. T h e guided tour
over r e m a i n s the m o s t i m p o r t a n t interpretive activity, b u t
t h e n u m b e r a n d v a r i e t y o f o f f e r i n g s is to b e increased
ensure to address niche audiences.
T h e Interpretation Plan dispenses with the idea
o f o n e " p r i m a r y message" a n d in particular w i t h a pri­
m a r y m e s s a g e "too fabric-focused" a n d centering o n the
p h y s i c a l e v o l u t i o n o f t h e site. "[RJather, I n t e r p r e t a t i o n
will a i m to offer ar a n g e o f presentations that will cater t o
8 1
F o r the
audience types a n d interests," a n d the interpretation poli­
cies a n d activities will b e m o r e "visitor-focused." This
Conservation
significant departure of interpretation strategy will likely
affect h o w the v a l u e s are m a n a g e d . B y c a t e r i n g to the
Con­
interests of visitors, the interpretation policies are turning
away f r o m aconsensus v i e w of historic values (centered
o n convictism and national character) and toward the
r e c o g n i t i o n that all visitors see the v a l u e s o f the site differ­

ently a n d should not be expected to accept asingular mes­

sage. S u c h astrategy raises the potential for conflict with

U N D E R S T A N D I N G A N D P R O T E C T I N G T H E VALUES 157
t h e n o t i o n o fa s i n g l e s t a t e m e n t o fs i g n i f i c a n c e f o r t h e
site—and indeed, the Port Arthur Statement of
S i g n i f i c a n c e ( s e e p . 134) i s l e n g t h y a n d i n c o r p o r a t e s , i n
effect, an u m b e r o f different "significances."
T h e Interpretation Plan also builds in m e c h a ­
n i s m s o f f e e d b a c k a n d r e s p o n s i v e n e s s t ov i s i t o r e x p e r i ­
e n c e s that, i n time, m a y shift the k i n d s o f values b e i n g
p r e s e n t e d . H e n c e t h e r e is a n i n t e n t i o n a l r e s h a p i n g o f v a l ­
u e s — o r at least a n o p e n i n g to different v i e w s — b u i l t in t o
the m a n a g e m e n t strategy. P r e s u m a b l y , as visitors' percep­
tions o f v a l u e shift, i n t e r p r e t a t i o n policies w o u l d shift t o
address t h e m , perhaps c h a n g i n g the priorities o f the val­
u e s b e i n g t r a n s m i t t e d . V i s i t o r f e e d b a c k is ap o t e n t i a l fac­
t o r o fc h a n g e i n w h i c h v a l u e s a r e i n t e r p r e t e d ; a n o t h e r is
r e s e a r c h , w h i c h is i n t e n d e d t oc o n t i n u a l l y i m p r o v e a n d
u p d a t e the specific values a n d m e s s a g e s available t o visi­
tors a n d the public.
In m o r e specific t e r m s o f h a n d l i n g fabric, values,
a n d interpretation strategy, o n e o f the plan's m o s t inter­
e s t i n g p o i n t s is t h e n o t i o n t h a t t h e s t a r k c o n t r a s t between
two of the m a i n cultural values of the site—the aesthetic
values of the landscape juxtaposed with the historic and
s o c i a l v a l u e s o fc o n v i c t i s m a n d its d r e a d f u l n a r r a t i v e s — i s
singled out for interpretation. Also, reconstruction a n d
r e i n s t a t e m e n t o f m i s s i n g b u t h i s t o r i c f e a t u r e s is e n c o u r ­
aged, as allowed w i t h i n the b o u n d a r i e s o f C o n s e r v a t i o n
Plan policy Such interpretation improvements have
potential effects o n the aesthetic values if yards, fences,
fieldlines, p a t h w a y s , a n d footprints are reinstated, for
i n s t a n c e . T h i s is a c l e a r e x a m p l e o fa s e c o n d a r y p l a n g i v ­
i n g o n e t y p e o fc u l t u r a l v a l u e p r i o r i t y o v e r a n o t h e r i n
o r d e r to a c h i e v e t h e o v e r a l l g o a l s for t h e site.
THE TASMAN PENINSULA REGION AS RESOURCE
AND AS STAKEHOLDER
T h e articulation of values a n d statement of significance
in the C o n s e r v a t i o n P l a n pave the w a y for this multifac-
eted a p p r o a c h to seeing the cultural significance o f Port
A r t h u r o n aregional scale (including the peninsula, the
island, a n d the waters). This rightly encompasses the
p e n i n s u l a - w i d e s y s t e m o fc o n v i c t s t a t i o n s , p r o b a t i o n s t a ­
tions, p e n a l sites, a n d o t h e r sites o f p r o d u c t i o n t o s u p p o r t
the m a i n convictism values. Like m a n y others, the
"regional" issue stems f r o m the cultural significance of
t h e site as w e l l as f r o m its e c o n o m i c values.
T h e significant cultural landscape being con­
s e r v e d a n d i n t e r p r e t e d at P o r t A r t h u r is t h e Tasman
P e n i n s u l a , n o t j u s t t h e P o r t A r t h u r site itself. P l a n s a n d
s c h o l a r s g o i n g b a c k a t l e a s t t o t h e P A C D P y e a r s (1979-86)
158 PORT A R T H U R H I S T O R I C SITE
agree that the peninsula, stretching to places like Saltwa­
t e r R i v e r a n d t h e C o a l M i n e s , is t h e t r u e r e s o u r c e a n d is
n o t c o n f i n e d t ot h e b o u n d a r i e s o f P o r t A r t h u r . T h e v a l u e
o f the historical probation relics has b e e n recognized on
the peninsula—the buildings and routes are protected
under the T a s m a n Municipal Council planning scheme.
C o m m e r c i a l activities a n d e c o n o m i c benefits b e i n g m a n ­
a g e d b y P A H S M A a r e i n t e n d e d t oe n c o m p a s s a n d spill
over to the w h o l e peninsula. T o advance the c o m m e r c i a l
and conservation goals of P A H S M A , m a n a g e m e n t has
already b e g u n adopting regional strategies a n d actions,
including Port Arthur Region Marketing Ltd.(PARM) and
the C o n v i c t T r a i l i n t e r p r e t i v e s c h e m e . T h e site's r e g i o n a l
s i g n i f i c a n c e is b e i n g a d d r e s s e d p r o a c t i v e l y a n d s u c c e s s ­
fully, l a r g e l y t h r o u g h activities a n d o r g a n i z a t i o n s outside
the Conservation Plan, a n d b y strengthening informal
relationships with the c o m m u n i t y and with owners of the
o t h e r p e n i n s u l a r sites.
P A R M w a s f o r m e d i n 2000 t o c o o r d i n a t e a n d
a d v a n c e e f f o r t s t om a r k e t P o r t A r t h u r a l o n g w i t h o t h e r
t o u r i s m activities in the T a s m a n P e n i n s u l a region. It has
f o r t y - t h r e e m e m b e r s . P A H S M A is P A R M ' s p r i m a r y b e n e ­
factor a n d holds t w o o f the group's six seats o n the b o a r d .
T h e organization builds o n the widely held notion that
t h e P o r t A r t h u r site is t h e c o m p e t i t i v e a d v a n t a g e o f t h e
region in tourism marketing and should be marketed t o
benefit the entire region. Tourists experience the region as
a whole; their satisfaction does not begin or e n d w i t h the
site e x p e r i e n c e . I f the tourist e x p e r i e n c e i n P o r t A r t h u r
c a n b e l i n k e d t oo t h e r r e s o u r c e s b e y o n d t h e site, o v e r n i g h t
visits t ot h e r e g i o n c a n b e i n c r e a s e d — a p r i m a r y m e a n s of
increasing economic benefits.
T h e character of the whole peninsula—its mar­
keting, services, ownership, a n d land-use control—is out
of P A H S M A s control, yet the overall success of promot­
ing Port Arthur depends on these regional/peninsular
c o n n e c t i o n s . I n i t i a t i n g a n d s u p p o r t i n g P A R M is a s t e p
toward managing these relationships/partnerships. E v e n
the direct stewardship responsibilities of P A H S M A m a y
s o o n extend to the s e c o n d a r y p u n i s h m e n t station at C o a l
Mines. 8 3
W h a t are the implications for values a n d their
m a n a g e m e n t o f this m u l t i f a c e t e d effort t ot r e a t P o r t
A r t h u r as aregional entity as o p p o s e d to a strictly
b o u n d e d site?
Apart from P A R M , there are currently no formal
relationships between P A H S M A and other owners and
p a r t n e r s . A n y s t r o n g a s s e r t i o n o fP A H S M A c o n t r o l o v e r
the greater peninsula w o u l d be resented b y locals, though
they s e e m t oe n j o y ap r o d u c t i v e relationship at present.
B r o a d e r control w o u l d have to be achieved carefully, in a
partnership f r a m e w o r k and through adeliberate collabo­
rative process. P A H S M A s e e m s to be paving the way
toward this—the Conservation Plan and P A R M are two
examples o f effective collaborative processes. 8 4

U N D E R S T A N D I N G A N D PROTECTING T H E VALUES 159

 Conclusions
T h e m a n a g e m e n t o f P o r t A r t h u r brings to light a n u m b e r
o f i m p o r t a n t l e s s o n s a n d p r i n c i p l e s . A s u m m a r y is o f f e r e d
h e r e as didactic points a n d t h e m e s relevant to heritage site
management in general.
Port A r t h u r provides a n opportunity to observe a
deliberate and thoughtful conservation planning
w o r k — t h e pioneering B u r r a C h a r t e r p r o c e s s — a p p l i e d to
a site w i t h v a r i e d cultural heritage significance, a n exten­
sive a n d c o m p l e x set o f physical resources, a n d a progres­
sive set o f institutional a r r a n g e m e n t s m a d e for t h e site's
m a n a g e m e n t . P o r t A r t h u r is o f p a r t i c u l a r i n t e r e s t b e c a u s e
it h a s b e e n m a n a g e d as a h e r i t a g e site f o r m o r e t h a n
h u n d r e d y e a r s , m u c h l o n g e r t h a n t h e f o r t y - s e v e n y e a r s it
w a s o p e r a t e d as a prison.
T h e ownership, control, and funding sources
f o r P o r t A r t h u r h a v e c h a n g e d a g r e a t d e a l o v e r its history,
resulting in avariety and n u m b e r of plans—each one
c o m p l e t e d not only to outline conservation strategies
b u t to satisfy the goal o f s e c u r i n g resources either
the g o v e r n m e n t a l a g e n c y in control at the t i m e o r
the t o u r i s m market. T h e imperative to secure funding,
in ever-changing political a n d administrative climates,
explains i n large p a r t the shifts i n v a l u i n g strategies o v e r
t i m e — f r o m the conservation-centered, government-
f u n d e d priorities at o n e e n d o f the s p e c t r u m to the
c o m m e r c i a l - c e n t e r e d , m a r k e t - o r i e n t e d strategies at the
other. A t present, P A H S M A has stopped the pendulum
s o m e w h e r e in the middle of the spectrum, balancing
physical conservation and interpretive needs with tourism
access a n d other revenue-generating activities that also
c o n t r i b u t e to t h e l o n g - t e r m c o n s e r v a t i o n o f t h e site.
T h e 1996 t r a g e d y a t t h e B r o a d A r r o w C a f e added
a n o t h e r significant layer o f v a l u e s to the site w i t h o u t
obscuring the core cultural values related to convictism
a n d its a f t e r m a t h . D e a l i n g w i t h t h e i m p a c t o f t h e tragedy
w a s am a j o r challenge for site m a n a g e m e n t . It h e l p e d p a v e
t h e w a y f o r t h e 2000 C o n s e r v a t i o n P l a n a n d p l a n n i n g
process, w h i c h t u r n e d the site a r o u n d . T h e management
philosophy c h a n g e d to include true collaboration across
m a n a g e m e n t areas, incorporate lateral m a n a g e m e n t ,
focus on external partnerships, while simultaneously
160 PORT ARTHUR HISTORIC SITE
emphasizing the conservation and presentation of core
cultural significance values.
T h e recent history of Port Arthur disproves the
i d e a t h a t c o m m e r c e is t h e b a n e o f c o n s e r v a t i o n , a n d t h a t
t h e s e p a r a t i o n o f e c o n o m i c a n d c u l t u r a l v a l u e s is legiti­
frame­ m a t e i n d e a l i n g holistically w i t h site m a n a g e m e n t . T h e
m o d e l of sustainable conservation practiced by P A H S M A
a d v a n c e s b o t h sets o f the site's v a l u e s .
POLICY AND VALUES FRAMEWORK
Port A r t h u r has awell-developed policy f r a m e w o r k . T h e
overarching frameworks of the Conservation and Corpo­
one
rate Plans, plus the m o r e detailed decisions w o r k e d out
and recorded in the secondary and individual elements
plans, give m a n a g e r s ag o o d deal o f latitude as w e l l as
sufficient levels o f policy guidance a n d empirical informa­
tion to m a k e s o u n d decisions.
V a l u e s are articulated c o m p l e t e l y a n d explicitly.
E c o n o m i c a n d cultural values are assessed differently a n d
from
at d i f f e r e n t levels o f detail. M o r e i m p o r t a n t is h o w these
from
values are integrated, a n d the m a n a g e m e n t r e g i m e at P o r t
A r t h u r — t h e "Port A r t h u r w a y " — h a s d o n e this quite
well. T h e current m a n a g e m e n t clearly understands the
primacy of conservation of cultural significance values,
while fully recognizing the essential role of e c o n o m i c val­
ues a n d efforts to realize t h e m ( t h r o u g h direct t o u r i s m ,
business d e v e l o p m e n t related to t o u r i s m a n d site o p e r a ­
tions, a n d the positive e c o n o m i c externalities generated
for the T a s m a n i a n e c o n o m y b y visitation to P o r t Arthur).
MANAGEMENT ARRANGEMENTS AND
INSTITUTIONAL A R C H I T E C T U R E
T h e institutional a r r a n g e m e n t s o f the site represent a n
important, emerging model in heritage m a n a g e m e n t —
a quasipublic corporate model. 8 5
T h e salient feature of
this i n s t i t u t i o n a l a r r a n g e m e n t is t h a t t h e p r i m a r y manage­
m e n t e n t i t y — P A H S M A , in the case of Port A r t h u r —
enjoys the benefits of s o m e government funding without
the strictures (oversight, for instance) o f operating as a
governmental department nested within alarge hierarchi­
and cal b u r e a u c r a c y . I n a s m a l l , i n d e p e n d e n t entity, decisions
c a n b e m a d e m o r e q u i c k l y a n d w i t h m o r e flexibility, a n d
w i t h alarger r a n g e o fpublic, private, o r nongovernmen­
tal organization ( N G O ) partners. T h e s e entities also b e a r
responsibility for generating s o m e o ftheir revenue.
H o w e v e r , this i n d e p e n d e n c e isa double-edged
s w o r d . I n its initial f o r m , w h e n a n n u a l profit w a s r e q u i r e d ,
the G B E institutional f o r m a t w a s f o u n d t ob e deeply
flawed. It h a s b e e n u s e d t o excellent effect i n r e c e n t y e a r s ,
w h e n , i n r e s p o n s e t o post-1996 c h a l l e n g e s a n d o p p o r t u n i ­
ties, P A H S M A s m a n d a t e w a s m o d i f i e d t o r e p l a c e profit
m a k i n g w i t h the m o r e reasonable goal o fensuring the
c o n s e r v a t i o n a n d p r e s e n t a t i o n o fthe site w h i l e p u r s u i n g a
policy o fc o m m e r c i a l viability.
B y relying o nam i x o fdedicated government
f u n d i n g a n d self-generated revenue, this k i n d o f institu­
t i o n a l s e t u p e x p o s e s t h e site a n d its v a l u e s t o al e v e l o f
r i s k . I f v i s i t a t i o n d r o p s off, a n d / o r i fg o v e r n m e n t support
is t h r e a t e n e d , t h e site w o u l d b e c o m e v u l n e r a b l e . T h e r e
w o u l d likely b ep r e s s u r e t ob e c o m e m o r e c o m m e r c i a l a t
the expense o fconservation values. T h e P A H S M A institu­
tional f r a m e w o r k enables the p e n d u l u m t oswing either
w a y i n f a v o r o f c o m m e r c i a l o rc u l t u r a l v a l u e s . P o r t
A r t h u r h a s less o fasafety net t og u a r d against overdevel­
o p m e n t , t h o u g h i th a s t h e s a m e e x p o s u r e t o p u b l i c - s e c t o r
d i s i n v e s t m e n t i n c o n s e r v a t i o n . M o r e o v e r , i n its c o m m i t ­
m e n t t o t h e 2000 C o n s e r v a t i o n P l a n , P A H S M A has
a c c e p t e d t h e p r i m a c y o fits o b l i g a t i o n t op r o t e c t t h e cul­
tural significance o fP o r t A r t h u r over all other considera­
tions. T h e key, o fcourse, isb a l a n c i n g certainty a n d risk
taking t oact entrepreneurially within the b o u n d s o f
retaining cultural significance, acourse P A H S M A has
charted well.
T H E PORT ARTHUR WAY, MANAGEMENT STYLE,
AND PLANNING PROCESS
P o r t A r t h u r is ag o o d e x a m p l e o ft h e s a l u t a r y effect o f
thoughtful, deliberate planning processes. T h e Conserva­
tion Plan process enabled and stoked collaboration among
P A H S M A s departments a n d has positively shaped the
o n g o i n g , e v e r y d a y m a n a g e m e n t o ft h e site. E s t a b l i s h m e n t
o f the P o r t A r t h u r w a y isc o u n t e d a m o n g the m a j o r
accomplishments o fthe past few years. T h e collaboration
o f b u s i n e s s a n d c o n s e r v a t i o n staff a tP o r t A r t h u r i s
remarkable. Developed a spart o fthe Conservation Plan
process, the P o r t A r t h u r w a y relies o n flexible policies t o
g u i d e d a y - t o - d a y m a n a g e m e n t , a n d o na v i d c o n s u l t a t i o n
a n d staff involvement.
T h e managers o fP A H S M A have succeeded in
collaborating w i t h external p a r t n e r s as well. T h e y h a v e
been opportunistic, attracting the n e w ferry service from
H o b a r t and carrying out the successful Islands o f Vanish­
m e n t conference, a n d also have b e e n avid partnership
builders, forging relationships w i t h the T a s m a n i a n State
government, the heritage community, and P A R M . This
collaborative a p p r o a c h isapplied m o r e generally t h r o u g h ­
o u t t h e site, a n d i ti so n e o f t h e p r i m a r y w a y s i n w h i c h
decisions about e c o n o m i c a n d cultural values are inte­
grated. T h e m a n a g e m e n t style o fthe C E O h a s set a n
important tone: reaching consensus, building a manage­
m e n t t e a m , b u i l d i n g ties t og o v e r n m e n t , a n d b r e a k i n g
d o w n b a r r i e r s a m o n g t h e d i f f e r e n t l e v e l s o f staff. A l l o f
these tools a n d habits create am a n a g e m e n t strategy that
is n o t e a s i l y r e c o r d e d o rc a p t u r e d i n d o c u m e n t s , making
t h e m h a r d t ostudy outside o fcase studies. Nevertheless,
t h e y are i m p o r t a n t t o the effective, sustainable manage­
m e n t o ft h e site.
It i sdifficult t o get aw e l l - r o u n d e d v i e w o f t h e
effect o fthis m a n a g e m e n t a n d p l a n n i n g r e g i m e o n site
v a l u e s . T h i s i sp a r t i c u l a r l y s ow i t h P o r t A r t h u r , g i v e n t h e
relatively short time the current m a n a g e m e n t t e a m has
been in place. I n recent years, however, P A H S M A has
largely s u c c e e d e d i n creating avalues-centered manage­
m e n t r e g i m e in the sense that ithas deliberately identified
a r a n g e o f site v a l u e s , p l a c e d t h e m a tt h e c e n t e r o f p o l i c y ,
and managed flexibly a n d creatively t oachieve overall
goals within policy frameworks.
U l t i m a t e l y , t h e q u e s t i o n is, W h a t b e n e f i t s have
stemmed from the use o fvalues-based p l a n n i n g a n d m a n ­
a g e m e n t for P o r t A r t h u r ? O n the basis o fthis case study,
one can conclude that the values orientation o f Port
Arthur's m a n a g e m e n t has created aclear mandate o f
protection o faw i d e l y u n d e r s t o o d set o fcultural values
c e n t e r e d o nc o n v i c t i s m ; flexible internal management
habits a n d principles, allowing creativity a n d opportunism
within the overall conservation-focused management
policy; a n d g o o d partnership building, leading t o strong
relations in the region a n d the creation o fsolid resources
at the state g o v e r n m e n t level.
Notes
1. Further details about the site's geography and features are
available in the 2000 Conservation Plan, particularly Godden
Mackay 2000b.
2. See appendix A for a time line of Port Arthurfrom1877
to 2001.
3. Simpson and Miller 1997,15.
NOTES 161
 4. Brand 1998; Godden Mackay 2000b; Design 5 Architects Pty. 30. All prices are given in Australian dollars; current as of
Ltd. 2001; and Young 1996 were used as sources of informa­ January 2002.
tion for this section.
31. PAHSMA 2001a.
5. Much of the information in this and the following sections
32. Context 2001,100.
was takenfromYoung 1996.
33. Use of the term values herein follows the precedents set by
6. Egloff 1986,4.
the Burra Charter unless otherwise noted.
7. Ibid., 19.
34. The ebb and flow of these many decades are carefully docu­
8. Jane Lennon and Associates 1998. mented in Young 1996.
9. Briggs 1996. 35. Brian EglofFs work was a valuable source for this summary.
10. Michael 1997. 36. In the context of this study, commercial values refers to a
particular type of economic value, specifically the kind of
11. AAP Information Services Pty. Ltd. 2000.
economic use value realized by the commercial activities
12. For a full description of the role and responsibilities of directly related to the site—user fees, food and other prod­
the Australian Heritage Commission, please log on to ucts purchased on site, and so on. Secondarily, it also refers
http://ahc.gov.au/ (8 May 2003).
to the economic values generated as positive externalities to
13. Marshall and Pearson 1997,46. site activities, and again are realized through specific com­
mercial operations—for instance, nearby restaurants and
14. Government of Australia 1975, section 4(1).
lodging.
15. Australia ICOMOS1999.
37. Tasmania National Parks and Wildlife Service 1985,22.
16. In 1987 (the year PAHSMA was created), the NPWS (of Tas­
38. Ibid.
mania) merged with the Department of Lands to become
the Department of Lands, Parks and Wildlife. Five years 39. Ibid., 1.
later, this department was subsumed within the Department 40. Egloff 2002,15.
of Environment and Land Management (DELM). After the
41. Port Arthur Historic Site Management Authority 1996,1-2.
Labor government was re-elected in August 2002, the Tas­
manian premier created a new Department of Tourism, 42. Quotedfromthe Australian Heritage Places Inventory entry
Parks, Heritage and the Arts, which reported to him. Source: found at www.heritage.gov.au/cgi-bin/ ahpi/record.pl?TASRl
Tasmania National Parks and Wildlife Service 2000. (no date given). The statement of significance at the
commonwealth-level Register of the National Estate is not
17. The act became effective in early 1997. Tasmania was the last
considered current. It identifies, indirecdy, the 1830s to the
state in Australia to adopt such legislation.
1870s as the primary period of significance. It refers mainly to
18. Government of Tasmania 1995a. buildings of the main site, with only a passing reference to
19. Tasmanian Premier s Local Government Council 2001,5. open spaces. The register's Web site notes that pre-1991 listings
such as this are in need of updating.
20. Context 2001, 85-86.
43. The Conservation Plan was developed by Godden Mackay
21. Ibid., 87.
for the Port Arthur Historic Site Management Authority.
22. Government of Tasmania 1987,1995.
44. Godden Mackay 2000a, section 3.2.
23. Tasmanian Audit Office 1997.
45. The summaries are derived from Godden Mackay 2000b,
24. D. Young, "Re: Port Arthur," e-mail correspondence, section 3.0.
26 February 2002.
46. "World Heritage" values cannot be articulated for Port
25. Information for figure 3.8 was gathered from the Site Tour Arthur because it has not been designated a UNESCO World
section of the Port Arthur Historic Site Web site, Heritage Site. They are listed in the Conservation Plan
http: / / www.portarthur.org.au/ site-tour.htm (8 May 2003) because of an ongoing effort to nominate Port Arthur and
and from Temple 2000. other convict-related Australian sites for World Heritage sta­
26. The Bookings section of the Port Arthur Web site is found at tus. Nevertheless, these values are shaped by the nomination
http: / / www.portarthur.org.au/bookings.htm (8 May 2003). criteria set out in the World Heritage Convention and Opera­
tional Guidelines.
27. All prices are given in Australian dollars; current as of
January 2002. 47. Government of Australia 1999.

28. Context 2001,105. 48. Economic values are, however, mentioned in passing in
other parts of the Conservation Plan: for example, in section
29. Information regarding transportation to Port Arthur and
5.9, volume 1, on policies forfinancingof conservation:
other areas in the vicinity can be found at
"Recognising the economic value of the PAHS to the
http:/ /www.portarthurcruises.com.au/ (8 May 2003).
economies of Tasmania and Australia, State and Common-

162 PORT A R T H U R H I S T O R I C SITE

 wealth Governments will be asked to commit to ongoing
recurrentfinancialcontributions." As noted elsewhere in
this case, the site's economic values are recognized—often
implicitly—in documents other than the Conservation Plan.
49. Godden Mackay 2000a, Section 3.3.
50. Jane Lennon and Associates 1998.
51. This social-value methodology is an outgrowth of the Burra
Charter methodology See Johnston 1992. The use of this
methodology for the BAC study was advocated by the HAP.
52. Unitas Consulting Ltd. 1999. This work is an economic
impact study based on input-output modeling.
53. For a full description of economists' frameworks for under­
standing and measuring the value of cultural heritage, see
Frey 1997; Mason 1999; Throsby 2001.
54. Young 1996.
55. These tourism activities are classic examples of "valoriza­
tion" of a heritage site, even in the absence of deliberate
articulation and valuation of economic values.
56. The suggestion here is not that decisions or policies reached
"informally" lack the qualities of formal decision-making
processes. It would be useless to judge whether formal or
informal processes are a priori "better." The point we wish
to make here is that informal decision-making processes are
important in the management of the values of any site and
should not escape our attention or emphasis just because
they are not formally specified or documented. As noted in
the final section of this report, the informal aspects of
PAHSMAs management are critical to its success.
57. The operations of the site, by contrast, are organized more
by value-type. If this section were analyzing operations, not
strategies, value-type would be a more sensible way to
organize the discussion.
58. Tasmania National Parks and Wildlife Service 1985, 9-10.
59. Ibid., 22.
60. Ibid., 43.
61. Port Arthur Historic Site Management Authority 1 9 9 6 , 6.
62. Ibid., 8.
63. This sequence of progressively more detailed policies—con­
tained in the 2000 Conservation Plan and following into the
secondary plans—is summarized in the diagram in figure
3.12 (see p. 157).
64. These are excerpted and/ or paraphrased; for full text, see
Godden Mackay 2000a, section 4.8.
65. Ibid., section 5.14.
66. Port Arthur Historic Site Management Authority 2001b, 4-5.
67. Ibid.
68. The latest draft does not include recommendations, and the
policies have not yet been finalized. The Draft Landscape
Plan was prepared by Context Pty, part of the team that cre­
ated the Conservation Plan.
69. Sharon Sullivan, personal communication, February 2003.
70. Port Arthur Historic Site Management Authority n.d.(b), 24.
71. The collaborative process instilled during the management
planning process, and cultivated assiduously by the board
and executive since then.
72. Port Arthur Historic Site Management Authority n.d.(b), 24.
73. The Conservation Plan, for instance, does not contain a list
of conservation projects to be undertaken over the life of the
plan. Instead, the conservation manager keeps a list of proj­
ects phased over afive-yearspan but not ranked in order of
priority. This list is revisited annually as the year's work pro­
gram is devised—but not followed strictly—in deciding how
to spend each year s A$2 million of fundingfromthe state.
74. The Conservation Plan calls for exempting PAHSMA from
the GBE Act, leaving it an independent, quasigovernmental
agency but giving it a statutory focus on conservation.
PAHSMA was exempted in 1997fromproviding a financial
return to the government, although it remains a GBE. It was
also recommended that PAHSMA be given delegation under
the Tasmanian Heritage Act so that referral of conservation
decisions to the THC is not necessary.
75. Personal communication, January 2002.
76. Sharon Sullivan to Marta de la Torre, e-mail correspondence,
13 January 2003.
77. Peter Romey personal communication, January 2002.
78. Consider, for instance, the difference between the 1972 plan
to conserve the convict era versus the PACDP philosophy to
assess the Carnarvon-period values and site elements.
79. Godden MacKay 2000a, section 6.3.10.
80. Being that the Tasmanian heritage community is small,
there is a membership overlap between the THC and
PAHSMA.
81. The future tense is used in this section because few parts of
the Interpretation Plan have been implemented to date. Any
effects are projected, not actual.
82. The benefit of having different perspectives on cultural val­
ues is discussed in the section "How Management Policies
and Strategies Take Values into Consideration," noting rea­
sons to have alternatives to the type-driven articulation of
values in the Conservation Plan.
83. This transfer of stewardship to PAHSMAfromthe state
parks and wildlife agency was under discussion at the time of
the Getty team's visit; it has since been agreed to.
84. It should be noted that the research team did not talk exten­
sively with people in the community, related and/ or unre­
lated to the site, who could give a different perspective.
85. Technically a government business enterprise in the case
of Australia. Elsewhere they are known by such titles as
public-benefit corporations and community development
corporations.
NOTES 163
 1895 Abushfire spread into C a r n a r v o n and b u r n e d
A p p e n d i x A : Time Line a f t e r t h e the old a s y l u m , then the t o w n hall; the Model
Closing of t h e Penal Colony 1

Prison; the hospital; the G o v e r n m e n t Cottage;

and several houses. T h e hospital and t o w n hall
1877 P o r t A r t h u r p e n a l s e t t l e m e n t closed. T h e site w e r e rebuilt.
almost immediately b e c a m e adestination for
1898 A n o t h e r bushfire blew into the settlement,
interested tourists.
destroying the roof and floor of the penitentiary
1881 T h e Whitehouse brothers began a biweekly a n d b u r n i n g t h e r e b u i l t h o s p i t a l , l e a v i n g o n l y its
steamer service between H o b a r t and Norfolk Bay stone walls.
to transport tourists to C a r n a r v o n .
190J I n response to increased d e m a n d for tourist
1883 T h e W h i t e h o u s e b r o t h e r s o p e n e d the first h o t e l visits to P o r t A r t h u r , the W h i t e h o u s e brothers
at t h e site i n t h e f o r m e r C o m m i s s a r i a t S t o r e to increased the frequency of their steamer service
cater to visitors. b e t w e e n H o b a r t a n d N o r f o l k Bay, a n d later to
Taranna, from t w o to three trips per w e e k .
1884 A b u s h f i r e sets a b l a z e t h e c h u r c h , l e a v i n g little
s a v e f o r its w a l l s . T h e r u i n e d r e m a i n s , w h i c h 1907 T h e Tasmanian Tourist Association began
b e c a m e o v e r g r o w n w i t h ivy, a d d e d to t h e site's to organize overland a n d steamer trips to
picturesque appearance. Port Arthur.

1889 T h e T a s m a n i a n g o v e r n m e n t m a d e plans to auc­ 1908 T h e f i r s t f i l m v e r s i o n o f For the Term of His Nat­

tion for d e m o l i t i o n a n d salvage all P o r t A r t h u r ural Life, b a s e d o n t h e M a r c u s C l a r k e c o n v i c t
buildings previously reserved from sale. O p p o s i ­ tragedy novel o f the s a m e n a m e , w a s filmed at
tion from residents of C a r n a r v o n a n d H o b a r t t h e site. T h e o v e r l a n d r o u t e to t h e site w a s
provided that the buildings could remain if i m p r o v e d to m a k e it a c c e s s i b l e t o m o t o r vehicles.
converted into factories or showplaces. T h e
Carnarvon town board was formed. 1912 M o t o r b u s service to P o r t A r t h u r began.

1913 T h e T a s m a n i a n Tourist Association put forth the

18905 T h e Port Arthur Museum, which included
p h o t o g r a p h s o f t h e site, o p e n e d i n H o b a r t at t h e
p h o t o g r a p h y studio o f J. W Beattie.
1890 Four-horse carriage service between Taranna and
C a r n a r v o n w a s initiated. R o a d s t h r o u g h o u t
peninsula were generally upgraded, and w o r k
b e g a n o n an e w r o a d b e t w e e n C a r n a r v o n a n d
W e d g e Bay.
1891 T h e U n i o n Steamship line launched Easter
tours of Port Arthur and other Tasmanian penal
settlements.
1892 B e a t t i e p u b l i s h e d t h e f i r s t e d i t i o n o f Port
Van Diemen's Land, a c o l l e c t i o n o f photographs.
1893 T h e volunteer Tasmanian Tourist Association
w a s f o r m e d to p r o m o t e a n d develop T a s m a n i a
as adestination o f t o u r i s m . Its w o r k w a s instru­
mental in promoting tourism in Tasmania, and
included the preparation and distribution of
leaflets a b o u t P o r t A r t h u r .
many
first p r o p o s a l to the T a s m a n i a n g o v e r n m e n t for
m a n a g e m e n t o f t h e r u i n s at t h e site.
1914 After an inquiry concerning financial deficiencies,
the T a s m a n i a n Tourist Association w a s replaced
the
b y the state D e p a r t m e n t o f T o u r i s m .
1915 T h e Scenery Preservation B o a r d (SPB) w a s cre­
a t e d t h r o u g h p a s s a g e o f t h e Scenery Preservation
Act b y t h e T a s m a n i a n P a r l i a m e n t . T h i s body
r e p r e s e n t e d the first A u s t r a l i a n a u t h o r i t y c r e a t e d
for the m a n a g e m e n t of parks a n d reserves,
a l t h o u g h its p r i m a r y f o c u s w a s p r o t e c t i o n o f the
Arthur, natural environment.
1916 T h e S P B p r o v i d e d for t h e first f o r m a l protection
o f the ruins at P o r t A r t h u r t h r o u g h the creation
o f five reserves t h e r e — t h e sites o f the c h u r c h ,
the penitentiary, the M o d e l Prison, Point Puer,
and D e a d Island. These reserves were Australia's
first g a z e t t e d h i s t o r i c sites. T h e S P B g r a d u a l l y
b e g a n to a c q u i r e l a n d at t h e site.

164 PORT A R T H U R H I S T O R I C SITE

1925 A s t h e S P B ' s f i n a n c i a l r e s o u r c e s b e c a m e s c a r c e , it
responded by accepting the T a s m a n Municipal
Council's offer to take over m a n a g e m e n t o f the
r e s e r v e s at t h e site, s u b j e c t to c e r t a i n conditions
set b y t h e b o a r d . T h e c o u n c i l m a n a g e d t h e site
u n t i l 1937.
1926 T h e s e c o n d v e r s i o n o f For the Term of His Natural
Life w a s f i l m e d a t t h e s i t e . T h i s f i l m , w h i c h w a s
a box-office success, h a d asignificant i m p a c t in
a t t r a c t i n g t o u r i s m to t h e site.
1927 T h e c o m m u n i t y at t h e site c h a n g e d its n a m e
f r o m C a r n a r v o n to P o r t A r t h u r , in large part d u e
to the g r o w i n g tourist industry there. T h e P o r t
A r t h u r Tourist a n d Progress Association also w a s
f o r m e d w i t h the p u r p o s e o f d e v e l o p i n g the site as
a tourist center.
1930 T a s m a n i a n novelist R o y Bridges published in the
M e l b o u r n e Argus a s h o r t e s s a y a r g u i n g t h a t t h e
Port A r t h u r ruins w e r e significant m a i n l y for the
convict suffering that h a d occurred there, rather
than for aesthetic qualities.
1935 T h e P o r t A r t h u r R o o m w a s created at the Tas­
m a n i a n M u s e u m i n H o b a r t to h o u s e relics as w e l l
as d o c u m e n t s , photos, a n d o t h e r i t e m s related to
the site from a s e c o n d collection a m a s s e d b y J. W
B e a t t i e , w h o h a d d i e d i n 1930. T h e c o l l e c t i o n
p u r c h a s e d p r i m a r i l y f o r its e c o n o m i c v a l u e i n
t e r m s o f attracting tourists.
1938 C o n t r o l o v e r t h e s i t e w a s t a k e n a w a y from t h e
local T a s m a n Municipal Council and turned over
to the P o r t A r t h u r a n d E a g l e h a w k N e c k B o a r d , a
n e w sub-board of the SPB.
1939-40 T h e g o v e r n m e n t a c q u i r e d t h e P o w d e r Magazine,
the G o v e r n m e n t Cottage, the Commandant's
H o u s e , a n d the cottage in w h i c h Irish political
p r i s o n e r W i l l i a m S m i t h O ' B r i e n w a s h e l d i n 1850.
1946 Following the recommendations of a document
k n o w n as the M c G o w a n P l a n , the T a s m a n i a n
government purchased the t o w n of Port A r t h u r
to better p r e s e r v e t h e site a n d to h a v e c o n t r o l
o v e r its f u t u r e d e v e l o p m e n t . I n a s t a r k c h a n g e
from the past, the M c G o w a n P l a n called for valu­
i n g t h e h i s t o r y a n d a r c h i t e c t u r e o f the site r a t h e r
t h a n f o c u s i n g s o l e l y o n its e c o n o m i c value.
1959 T h e first c a r f e r r y s e r v i c e f r o m m a i n l a n d A u s ­
tralia to T a s m a n i a began, providing a significant
b o o s t to the n u m b e r o f tourists visiting the state.
1960 After years of construction delays, amotel was
o p e n e d o v e r l o o k i n g t h e site to t h e r e a r o f the
M o d e l P r i s o n a n d w i t h i n t h e v i e w s h e d o f t h e site.
1962 A n e w sub-board of the S P B , the T a s m a n
Peninsula B o a r d , a s s u m e d responsibility for
site conservation.
1971 T h e S P B w a s dissolved and replaced by the newly
created National Parks and Wildlife Service
( N P W S ) , w h i c h a s s u m e d responsibility for m a n ­
agement of Port Arthur.
1973 T h e T a s m a n M u n i c i p a l C o u n c i l offices moved
from the t o w n hall /a s y l u m building to Nubeena,
m a r k i n g the permanent removal of the local
community from t h e site.
1979-86 E x t e n s i v e c o n s e r v a t i o n w o r k w a s conducted
through the Port A r t h u r Conservation and Devel­
opment Project (PACDP) and was carried out
w i t h c o m m o n w e a l t h a n d state funding. P A C D P
w a s aregional development project that provided
for the conservation a n d development of historic
resources throughout the T a s m a n Peninsula.
P A C D P also s e r v e d as a significant training
was
g r o u n d for Australian heritage professionals. In
a d d i t i o n , it w a s i n v o l v e d i n t h e r e l o c a t i o n o f the
Port A r t h u r township and the construction of
r o a d s b y p a s s i n g t h e site.
1983 Based on comments from Australia I C O M O S , the
N P W S revised a n d e x p a n d e d the official
significance o f P o r t A r t h u r as ahistoric site to
i n c l u d e t h e t o w n s h i p p e r i o d ( r o u g h l y 1880 t o
1930).
1986 I n response to uncertainty concerning the future
o f P o r t A r t h u r as P A C D P c a m e to aclose, mem­
bers of the local c o m m u n i t y founded Friends of
P o r t A r t h u r H i s t o r i c Site. T h e o r g a n i z a t i o n was
f o r m e d to p r o m o t e t h e site a n d l o b b y t h e state a n d
c o m m o n w e a l t h governments w i t h the objective of
ensuring s o u n d m a n a g e m e n t practices at P o r t
Arthur.
1987 T h e T a s m a n i a n P a r l i a m e n t p a s s e d t h e Port Arthur
Historic Site Management Authority Act, w h i c h c r e ­
a t e d a n d t r a n s f e r r e d a u t h o r i t y o v e r t h e site
APPENDIX A 165
 to the P o r t A r t h u r Historic Site Management ing a n d sales p r o g r a m . " P A H S M A a n d the
A u t h o r i t y ( P A H S M A ) . T h e act also erected a toll T a s m a n Municipal Council are the m a i n financial
b o o t h at the site to collect visitor e n t r a n c e fees contributors to P A R M .
for the first time.
2001 W o r k w a s completed o n the reconstruction of
1996 I n April, alone g u n m a n killed twenty people the G o v e r n m e n t Cottage gardens.
inside the B r o a d A r r o w Cafe (and fifteen more in
the vicinity). M o s t o f the victims w e r e tourists,
although an u m b e r of the remaining victims both
Notes
w o r k e d a n d lived at P o r t Arthur.

In June, the Australianprime minister announced 1. This time line was derivedfromthe following sources:
t h e p r o v i s i o n o f A$2.5 m i l l i o n f o r t h e c o n s t r u c ­ Young 1996; Egloff 1986; Briggs 1996; Jane Lennon and Asso­
tion o f an e w Visitor C e n t e r to replace the B r o a d ciates 1998; Michael 1997; as well as other PAHSMA docu­
A r r o w Cafe. ments and personal communication with PAHSMA staff.

In December, the B r o a d A r r o w Cafe w a s partially

d e m o l i s h e d as areaction to the tragedy.

1997 T h e D o y l e Inquiry, astate audit, investigated the

m a n a g e m e n t of Port A r t h u r since the establish­
m e n t of P A H S M A a n d e x a m i n e d issues including
the board's handling of the development of plans
f o r t h e n e w V i s i t o r C e n t e r a n d p a r k i n g a r e a , its
relations w i t h P A H S M A e m p l o y e e s i n the after­
m a t h o f t h e 1996 t r a g e d y , a n d t h e g e n e r a l h a n d ­
ling of conservation and maintenance of historic
r e s o u r c e s at t h e site. T h e i n q u i r y l e d to t h e r e c o n -
stitution o f the P A H S M A B o a r d as w e l l as a m e n d ­
m e n t s t o t h e PAHSMA Act.

1998 T h e site's n e w V i s i t o r C e n t e r o p e n s after m u c h

controversy.

2000 T h e T a s m a n i a n premier opened the Convict

Trail, w h i c h c o n n e c t s the historic site at P o r t
A r t h u r w i t h the convict outstations at E a g l e h a w k
Neck, Cascades, Impression Bay, Saltwater River,
the C o a l Mines, a n d Norfolk Bay. T h e premier
simultaneously announced that P A H S M A would
receive A $ i o million in funding for conservation
over a five-year period.

Conservation Plan completed and adopted by

P A H S M A .

A m e m o r i a l g a r d e n w a s c r e a t e d at the site o f the

former Broad A r r o w Cafe.

Port Arthur Region Marketing Ltd. (PARM)

began operations w i t h the "overall objective to
increase the e c o n o m i c input of t o u r i s m to the
P o r t A r t h u r R e g i o n t h r o u g h a n effective m a r k e t ­

166 PORT A R T H U R HISTORIC SITE

 References

AAP Information Services Pty. Ltd. 2000. "Tasman Peninsula Receives
Double Boost," 25 May.
Armstrong, H. 1997. "Recognition of Landscape Values Workshop: A
Summary." Historic Environment 13(3-4): 63-64.
Australia ICOMOS. 1999. The Burra Charter: The Australia ICOMOS
Charterfor the Conservation of Places of Cultural Significance. Australia
ICOMOS. The full text of the charter is found at wvvw.icomos.org/
australia/burra.html (8 May 2003).
Australian Heritage Commission. 1981. The Heritage of Australia:
The Illustrated Register of the National Estate. Melbourne: Macmillan
Company of Australia.
. 1994a. More Than Meets the Eye: Identifying and Assessing Aesthetic
Value. Barton, ACT: Australian Heritage Commission.
. 1994b. People's Places: Identifying and Assessing Social Value for
Communities. Barton, ACT: Australian Heritage Commission.
. 2000. Australian Heritage Commission Annual Report 1999-2000.
Canberra: Australian Heritage Commission.
. 2001. Australian Historic Themes: A Framework for Use in
Heritage Assessment and Management. Canberra: Australian Heritage
Commission.
Australian Heritage Projects and K. Winkworth. 1998. Review of Exist­
ing Criteria for Assessing Significance Relevant to Movable Heritage
Collections and Objects.
Beck, H. 1995. "Social and Aesthetic Values: New Assessment Method­
ologies for Involving the Community" In Place: A Cultural Heritage Bul­
letin (Bulletin of the Australian Heritage Commission) 1:15-18.
Boyer, P. 1995.'An Interpretation of Port Arthur." In Cultural Conserva­
tion: Towards a National Approach. Canberra: Australian Heritage Com­
mission, Australian Government Publishing Service.
Brand, 1.1998. Penal Peninsula: Tasmania's Port Arthur and Its Outstations,
1827-1898. Launceston, Tasmania: Regal Publications.
Briggs, J. 1996. "$2.5m Welcomed for Port Arthur Reconstruction."
Hobart Mercury, 14 June.
Casella, E. C. 1997. "To Enshrine Their Spirits in the World: Heritage
and Grief at Port Arthur, Tasmania." Conservation and Management of
Archaeological Sites 2: 6 5 - 8 0 .
Context. 2001. Port Arthur Historic Site Landscape Plan (Draft 2).
Coombs, C. 1998. "Port Arthur Historic Site Management Authority
Response." Australian Journal of Emergency Management 13(1): 16-19.
Design 5 Architects Pty. Ltd. 2001. The Separate (Model) Prison Port Arthur
Conservation Project Report (Conservation Analysis—Final Draft).
Egloff, B. 1986. The Port Arthur Story: 1979 to 1986 (Being a True and Accu­
rate Account in Brief of the Port Arthur Conservation and Development Pro­
ject). Hobart: National Parks and Wildlife Service.
. 1995. "Conservation Project Units at Home and Abroad." In
Cultural Conservation: Towards a National Approach. Canberra: Australian
Heritage Commission, Australian Government Publishing Service.
. 2002. "Port Arthur Historic Site and Australia ICOMOS: The
Formative Years." Paper presented at Islands of Vanishment confer­
ence, Port Arthur, June.
Egloff, B., and R. Morrison. 2001. "'Here Ends, I Trust Forever, My
Acquaintance with Port Arthur': The Archaeology of William Smith
O'Brien s Cottage." Australian Historical Archaeology 19:1-11.
Frey, B. S. 1997. "The Evaluation of Cultural Heritage: Some Critical
Issues." In Economic Perspectives on Cultural Heritage, ed. M. Hutter and
I. E. Rizzo, 31-49. London: Mac Millan.
Gardiner, J., and S. Knox. 1997. "Identifying, Assessing, Conserving and
Managing Elements of a Cultural Landscape: A Case Study of the
Alstonville Plateau, North-Eastern New South Wales." Historic Environ­
ment 13(3-4): 45-53-
Godden Mackay. 2000a. Port Arthur Historic Site Conservation Plan,
Volume 1: Overview Report. Prepared for the Port Arthur Historic Site
Management Authority.
. 2000b. Port Arthur Historic Site Conservation Plan, Volume 2:
Supporting Information. Prepared for the Port Arthur Historic Site
Management Authority
Government of Australia. 1975. Australian Heritage Commission Act of
19J5 as Amended. The text of this legislation can be found at
http: / / scaletext.law.gov.au/html/pasteact/0/227/top.htm.
. 1999. Australian Convict Sites: Nomination by the Government of
Australia for Inscription on the World Heritage List (draft).
Government of Tasmania. 1987. Port Arthur Historic Site Management
Authority Act. The full text of this legislation can be obtained through
www.thelaw.tas.gov.au/scanact/acttitle/F/A ( 3 j u n e 2003).
. 1995a. Historic Cultural Heritage Act. The full text of this legis­
lation can be obtained through www.thelaw.tas.gov.au/scanact/
acttitle / F / A (3 June 2003).
. 1995b. Government Business Enterprises Act. The full text of this
legislation can be obtained through www.thelaw.tas.gov.au/
scanact/ acttitle/F/ A (3 June 2003).
Jane Lennon and Associates. 1998. Broad Arrow Cafe Conservation Study.
Johnston, C. 1992. What Is Social Value? A Discussion Paper. Canberra:
Australian Government Publishing Service.

REFERENCES 167
Kaufman, P. 1997. "Community Values in Cultural Landscape Decision . 2001b. Port Arthur Historic Site Management Authority Interpreta­
Making: Developing Recommendations for Ensuring Planning tion Plan 2001.
Processes Include Differing Expectations of Communities of Interest."
Purdie, R. W. 1997. The Register of the National Estate: Who, What,
Historic Environment 13(3-4): 5 7 - 6 2 .
Where? Canberra: Department of the Environment.
Marquis-Kyle, P., and M. Walker. 1994. The Illustrated. Burra Charter:
Russell, J. 1997. "The Upper Mersey River Valley, Tasmania: Assessing
Making Good Decisions about the Care of Important Places. Sydney: Aus­
Cultural Values in a Natural Area." Historic Environment 13(3-4): 4 2 - 4 4 .
tralian Heritage Commission.
Scott, M. 1997. Port Arthur: A Story of Strength and Courage. Sydney: Ran­
Marshall, D., and M. Pearson. 1997. Culture and Heritage: Historic Envi­
dom House.
ronment. Canberra: Department of the Environment [Australia: State
of the Environment Technical Paper Series (Natural and Cultural Simpson, L., and B. Miller. 1997. The Australian Geographic Book of Tas­

Heritage)], 46. mania. Terrey Hills, New South Wales: Australian Geographic Pty Ltd.

Strange, C. 2002. "From 'Place of Misery' to 'Lottery of Life': Inter­

Mason, R., ed. 1999. Economics and Heritage Conservation. Los Angeles:
preting Port Arthur's Past." Open Museum Journal 1 (August). Available
The Getty Conservation Institute. Available at www.getty.edu/ conser­
at http: / / amol.org.au/ omj / v o l u m e 2 / strange.pdf (8 May 2003).
vation/ resources/econrpt.pdf (8 May 2003).
Tasmania National Parks and Wildlife Service. 1975. Port Arthur Historic
Michael, L. 1997. "No Board Could Have Anticipated the Impact
Site Management Plan.
of April 2 8 / Doyle Opens Can of Worms." Hobart Mercury, 28 June.

Pearson, M., et al. 1998. Environmental Indicators for National State of the
Environment Reporting—Natural and Cultural Heritage. Canberra:
Department of the Environment.
Pearson, M., and D. Marshall. 1995. Study of World Heritage Values: Con­
vict Places. Canberra: Department of the Environment, Sport and
Territories.
Pearson, M., D. Marshall, and S. Sullivan. 1995. Looking After Heritage
Places. Carlton, Victoria: Melbourne University Press.
. 1985. Port Arthur Historic Site Management Plan. Sandy Bay,
Tasmania.
. 2000. "A Brief History of the Parks and Wildlife Service,"
25 January Available at www.dpiwe.tas.gov.au/inter.nsf/WebPages/
SJON-57K8UB?open (8 May 2003).
Tasmanian Audit Office. 1997. Special Investigation into Administrative
Processes Associated with Preservation and Maintenance of Port Arthur His­
toric Site. Auditor-General Special Report No. 21. Hobart, August.

Port Arthur Historic Site Management Authority. N.d.(a). Briefing Note:
Government Gardens Reconstruction.
. N.d.(b). Port Arthur Historic Site Management Authority Corporate
Plan 2001/2002. Port Arthur Historic Site Management Authority
. N.d.(c). Separate Prison Conservation Project Principles.
. 1996. Port Arthur Historic Site Management Plan 1996 (Amending
the Port Arthur Historic Site Management Plan 1985).
. 1998a. Port Arthur Historic Site Management Authority Corporate
Plan 1998/99 to 2000/2001.
Tasmanian Premier's Local Government Council. 2001. Simplifying
Planning Schemes: A Discussion Paper about Common Key Elements for Plan­
ning Schemes. Available at www.dpiwe.tas.gov.au/inter.nsf/Attach­
ments /JCOK-5E58TU?open (8 May 2003).
Taylor, K. 1997. "Is Aesthetic Value Part of Social Value?" In Place:
A Cultural Heritage Bulletin (Bulletin of the Australian Heritage Com­
mission) 3: 15.
. 1999. "Reconciling Aesthetic Value and Social Value: Dilemmas
of Interpretation and Application." Association for Preservation Technol­
ogy (APT) Bulletin 30(1): 51-55.

. 1998b. Port Arthur Historic Site Management Authority Draft Temple, J. 2000. Port Arthur: Tasmania, Australia. Launceston,
Business Plan. Tasmania: Archer Temple Pty. Ltd.

. 2000a. Port Arthur Historic Site Management Authority Annual
Report 2000. May be found at www.portarthur.org.au/paannrep-
2000.pdf (8 May 2003).
. 2000b. Port Arthur Historic Site Management Authority Corporate
Plan 2000/2001.
. 2000c. Port Arthur Historic Site Management Authority Government
Cottage Gardens Landscape Masterplan Rationale.
Throsby D. 2001. Economics and Culture. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Unitas Consulting Ltd. 1999. The Economic Contribution of the Port Arthur
Site to the Tasmanian Economy.
Young, D. 1996. Making Crime Pay: The Evolution of Convict Tourism in
Tasmania. Hobart: Tasmanian Historical Research Association.

. 20ood. Port Arthur Historic Site Management Authority Govern­

ment Cottage Gardens Masterplan: Accompanying Notes.

. 2000C Port Arthur Historic Site Management Authority Museum

Conservation Stage II: Proposal for the Reinstatement of the Entrance Portico
(For Consideration by the Tasmanian Heritage Council).

. 2001a. Port Arthur Historic Site Management Authority Annual

Report 2001. May be found at www.portarthur.org.au/ paannrep.pdf
(8 May 2003).

168 PORT A R T H U R HISTORIC SITE

 Persons Contacted during the Development of the Case

Ian Boersma Stephen Large

Conservation Project Manager Chief Executive
P o r t A r t h u r Historic Site M a n a g e m e n t Authority P o r t A r t h u r Historic Site M a n a g e m e n t A u t h o r i t y

Julia Clark Richard Mackay

Interpretation Manager Principal
P o r t A r t h u r Historic Site M a n a g e m e n t A u t h o r i t y Godden Mackay Pty

Brian Egloff Peter Romey

Associate Professor Conservation Manager
School of Resource, Environmental P o r t A r t h u r Historic Site M a n a g e m e n t A u t h o r i t y
and Heritage Sciences
Margaret Scott
University of Canberra
Director
Gregjackman B o a r d o f the P o r t A r t h u r Historic Site
Archaeology Manager Management Authority
P o r t A r t h u r Historic Site M a n a g e m e n t Authority
Maria Stacey
Barry Jones Visitor Services Manager
Chairman P o r t A r t h u r Historic Site M a n a g e m e n t A u t h o r i t y
B o a r d o f the P o r t A r t h u r Historic Site
Sharon Sullivan
Management Authority
Director
JeffKelly B o a r d o f the P o r t A r t h u r Historic Site
Director Management Authority
B o a r d of the P o r t A r t h u r Historic Site
David Young
M a n a g e m e n t Authority, and
Chair
Chief Executive
P o r t A r t h u r Historic Site A d v i s o r y Committee
T a s m a n i a n D e p a r t m e n t of State D e v e l o p m e n t

Wendy Kennedy
Director
B o a r d o f the P o r t A r t h u r Historic Site
Management Authority

PERSONS C O N T A C T E D D U R I N G T H E D E V E L O P M E N T O F T H E CASE 169

This page intentionally left blank
Hadrian's Wall World Heritage Site

Randall Mason, Margaret G. H. MacLean,

and Marta de la Torre

 About This Case Study
T h i s case study looks at the m a n a g e m e n t o f H a d r i a n s
W a l l W o r l d H e r i t a g e Site. H a d r i a n s W a l l is a r e m a r k a b l e ,
extensive R o m a n r u i n that has b e e n v a l u e d as a n archaeo­
logical r e m a i n for m o r e than t w o centuries. T o d a y the
d e s i g n a t e d W o r l d H e r i t a g e Site i n c l u d e s t h e W a l l ; its asso­
ciated archaeological features, s u c h as forts, milecastles,
a n d v a l l u m ditches; a n d the "setting," a "visual envelope"
a n d b u f f e r z o n e e x t e n d i n g f r o m i t o 6 k i l o m e t e r s (.6 t o 3.7
miles) from t h e W a l l itself. A n u m b e r o f a g e n c i e s , g o v e r n ­
m e n t bodies, and private landowners are involved in the
m a n a g e m e n t o f the site u n d e r the c o o r d i n a t i o n o f E n g ­
lish Heritage. T h i s study focuses o n the values-based m a n ­
a g e m e n t o f t h e s e r e s o u r c e s s i n c e t h e site's W o r l d H e r ­
i t a g e l i s t i n g i n 1987.
T h r o u g h o u t this case study, references to "the site"
i n d i c a t e t h e e n t i r e W o r l d H e r i t a g e S i t e — t h e W a l l , its asso­
c i a t e d r e m a i n s , a n d its i m m e d i a t e s u r r o u n d i n g s . A c c o r d i n g
to p l a n n i n g d o c u m e n t s , the site a n d the setting are u n d e r ­
stood as distinct g e o g r a p h i c entities in this report. 1
H o w e v e r , m o s t o f the general references to the
site refer also to the setting. I f s o m e u n c e r t a i n t y r e m a i n s
in these definitions, their use in this case study closely mir­
r o r s t h a t i n t h e 2002 H a d r i a n s W o r l d H e r i t a g e S i t e M a n ­
a g e m e n t P l a n . I n t h e p l a n , t h e s e t t i n g is c o n s i d e r e d p a r t o f
t h e site a n d is d e s c r i b e d a s d i s t i n c t f r o m it. W h e n r e f e r r i n g
to s o m e o v e r a r c h i n g aspect o f the s i t e — f o r e x a m p l e , "vis­
itors to...," "perception of...," or "government policies
t o w a r d . . . " — t h e s e t t i n g is i m p l i c i t l y i n c l u d e d . I n o t h e r
i n s t a n c e s , t h e s e t t i n g is r e f e r r e d t o s p e c i f i c a l l y as a t e r r a i n
separate from a n d e n v e l o p i n g the W a l l . T h e l a c k o f a rig­
orous and clear distinction in the plan seems intentional
i n t h a t it c o n v e y s t h e l o o s e , flexible n a t u r e o f t h e p a r t n e r ­
s h i p - d r i v e n m a n a g e m e n t s t r u c t u r e o f t h e site. I n t h e e n d ,
the values according to w h i c h the H a d r i a n sW a l l land­
s c a p e is m a n a g e d a r e u n d e r s t o o d as p e r t a i n i n g to t h e
w h o l e entity, site a n d setting. It is p o s s i b l e t h a t i f t h e p l a n
defined the setting as part o f the core m a n a g e d territory
o f t h e s i t e — i n s t e a d o f d e f i n i n g it as a " v i s u a l e n v e l o p e " —
it w o u l d e n g e n d e r p o l i t i c a l o p p o s i t i o n . S u c h w a s o n e of
the lessons learned during the boundary-setting debate
r a i s e d b y t h e 1996 p l a n .
172 H A D R I A N ' S W A L L W O R L D H E R I T A G E SITE
T h e l o n g history o f H a d r i a n sW a l l as a heritage
site p r o v i d e s a n excellent illustration o f h o w values
emerge and evolve with changing use and n e w knowledge
as w e l l as h o w they are influenced b y c h a n g i n g values i n
society M o r e specifically, this case explores h o w the values
o f a n e x t e n s i v e site, w i t h a c o m p l e x set o f l a n d o w n e r s a n d
s t a k e h o l d e r s ( a n d w h e r e t h e r e is n o u n i f i e d o w n e r s h i p o f
the l a n d or historical features o f the W o r l d H e r i t a g e Site),
are conserved a n d m a n a g e d in collaborative arrange­
ments. O f interest are issues arising f r o m the large-scale
partnership m o d e l o f m a n a g e m e n t as w e l l as issues
related to the conservation a n d d e v e l o p m e n t o f specific
sites w i t h i n the r e g i o n a l m a n a g e m e n t framework.
A n a n a l y s i s is p r e s e n t e d i n t h e n e x t t w o sections.
T h e first o f t h e s e , " M a n a g e m e n t C o n t e x t a n d H i s t o r y o f
H a d r i a n sW a l l W o r l d H e r i t a g e Site," provides general
b a c k g r o u n d i n f o r m a t i o n o n t h e site a n d its m a n a g e m e n t ,
gives a g e o g r a p h i c d e s c r i p t i o n o f t h e site, a n d s u m m a r i z e s
t h e h i s t o r y o f H a d r i a n ' s W a l l . A l s o d i s c u s s e d is t h e m a n ­
a g e m e n t e n v i r o n m e n t o f t h e site, i n c l u d i n g t h e n u m e r o u s
partners involved at national a n d local levels as w e l l as rel­
evant legislation a n d policy.
T h e last section, " U n d e r s t a n d i n g a n d Protecting
the V a l u e s o f the Site," looks at the connections between
values a n d m a n a g e m e n t in three w a y s . First, the values
ascribed to the site are s u m m a r i z e d , as t h e y h a v e b e e n
reflected in successive planning a n d m a n a g e m e n t docu­
ments. Second, the role of values in determining the m a n ­
a g e m e n t policy o f the current W o r l d Heritage Site r e g i m e
is e x a m i n e d . Finally, m a n a g e m e n t p o l i c i e s a n d d e c i s i o n s
are a n a l y z e d as to t h e i r i m p a c t o n t h e site's v a l u e s .
This case study of Hadrian'sWall W o r l d Heritage
Site is t h e r e s u l t o f r e s e a r c h , i n t e r v i e w s , site visits, e x t e n ­
sive consultation, a n d frank discussion. Colleagues at E n g ­
lish Heritage a n d the H a d r i a n sW a l l T o u r i s m Partnership
have b e e n particularlyhelpful in the research, production,
a n d refinement o f this study. T h e y have b e e n f o r t h c o m i n g
and generous, and have participated energetically in the
extensive tours and discussions that took place during the
Steering C o m m i t t e e ' s visit to the Hadrian's W a l l region
i n A p r i l 2002.
 In p r e p a r i n g this case study, the authors consulted
the extensive documentation produced by English Her­
itage, the H a d r i a n sW a l l T o u r i s m Partnership, a n d vari­
ous local governments and regional organizations with
stewardship responsibilities for s o m e aspect of the W o r l d
H e r i t a g e Site. Site visits a n d tours o f the r e g i o n were
indispensable in u n d e r s t a n d i n g the scope o f effort a n d
depth of understanding that go into m a n a g i n g the
Hadrian sW a l l landscape.
Digital reproductions of the following supple­
mentary documents are contained within the accompany­
i n g C D - R O M : P l a n n i n g P o l i c y G u i d a n c e 16: A r c h a e o l o g y
a n d P l a n n i n g (1990); P l a n n i n g P o l i c y G u i d a n c e 15: Planning
a n d t h e H i s t o r i c E n v i r o n m e n t (1994); H a d r i a n s W a l l
W o r l d H e r i t a g e S i t e M a n a g e m e n t P l a n 1996; a n d H a d r i a n s
W a l l W o r l d H e r i t a g e S i t e M a n a g e m e n t P l a n 2002-2007.

ABOUT THIS CASE STUDY 173

 Management Context and History of
Hadrian s Wall World Heritage Site

Physical a n d Geographic Description

H a d r i a n sW a l l W o r l d H e r i t a g e Site i sl o c a t e d i n n o r t h e r n
E n g l a n d . T h e s i t e e x t e n d s a p p r o x i m a t e l y 118 k i l o m e t e r s
(73 m i l e s ) e a s t t o w e s t , f o l l o w i n g t h e l i n e o f H a d r i a n s W a l l
across the Tyne-Solway isthmus and spreading d o w n the
C u m b r i a n coast t oinclude R o m a n coastal defenses. T h e
specific g e o g r a p h i c b o u n d a r i e s o fthe site are b a s e d o n
2

the extent o fthe W a l l a n d associated sites a n d r u i n s that

a r e p r o t e c t e d a ss c h e d u l e d m o n u m e n t s u n d e r t h e Ancient
Monuments and Archaeological Areas Act o f 1979. T h e s e t ­ 3

t i n g c o n s i s t s o ft h e v i e w s h e d a r o u n d t h e site itself.
T h e R o m a n s , i n s e a r c h o f al o c a t i o n o nw h i c h t o
b u i l d adefensive m i l i t a r y n e t w o r k against hostile i n h a b i ­
tants t othe north, chose the narrowest east-west path in
this r e g i o n o fBritain a n d u s e d m a n y o fthe area's topo­
graphic features t otheir advantage. Today, the archaeo­
l o g i c a l r e m a i n s o f t h e W a l l a n d its a s s o c i a t e d s t r u c t u r e s
t a k e m a n y f o r m s , a n d ag r e a t d e a l o f a r c h a e o l o g i c a l
r e s e a r c h h a s b e e n c o n d u c t e d o nt h e m . F e a t u r e s o f t h e
W a l l have b e e n adapted, altered, reused, dismantled, a n d
c o n s e r v e d o na n o n g o i n g b a s i s s i n c e its c o n s t r u c t i o n
b e g a n i n 122 C . E .
In m a n y places, the W a l l stands aboveground in
its o r i g i n a l p o s i t i o n , t h o u g h n o t i n its o r i g i n a l d i m e n s i o n s
Figure 4.1. Map of the United Kingdom, indicating the location of
( n o w h e r e d o e s t h e W a l l s u r v i v e at its full h e i g h t ) . O n t h e
Hadrian s Wall. The Wall was built by the Roman army in 122 C . E .
western and eastern ends there are few aboveground
across the narrowest part of its island territory.
remains. Wall features are best preserved a n d m o s t read­
able i n t h e c e n t r a l s e c t i o n o ft h e site, w h e r e a significant
portion, called the Clayton Wall, has been conserved and

Figure 4.2. Map of the Wall and its setting.

174 H A D R I A N ' S W A L L W O R L D H E R I T A G E SITE

Figure 4.3. A long view of the Wall. This portion of the Wall is typical
of the central section of the World Heritage Site. Photo: Margaret
G. H. MacLean
rebuilt. M a n y landscape f e a t u r e s — v a l l u m ditches a n d
4
o t h e r e a r t h w o r k s — s u r v i v e . D o z e n s o f milecastles, forts,
a n d fortlets a r e still e v i d e n t i ne x c a v a t e d a n d c o n s e r v e d
remains, a n d m a n y o f these are interpreted for the public.
S i n c e t h e 1880s m o s t o f t h e W a l l ' s v i s i b l e r e m a i n s h a v e
b e e n c o n s e r v e d a n d c o n s o l i d a t e d i ns o m e m e a s u r e . T h e
W a l l has b e e n totally destroyed i nonly afew places, w h e r e
h i g h w a y s , p i p e l i n e s , o rq u a r r i e s c r o s s o rc o v e r its l i n e .
T o p o g r a p h i c a l l y , t h e site c a n b e d i v i d e d r o u g h l y
into three regions. T h e first isthe e a s t e r n l o w l a n d r e g i o n
k n o w n a sthe T y n e a n d W e a r L o w l a n d s , w h i c h lie
between South Shields and Chollerford. F r o m Wallsend,
the Wall runs w e s t w a r d from the N o r t h Sea coast across
low-profile terrain a n d t h r o u g h the lower T y n e River val­
ley. A f t e r t h e i n d u s t r i a l r e v o l u t i o n , t h e u r b a n c e n t e r o f
Newcastle u p o n T y n e emerged asthe c o m m e r c i a l capital
o f E n g l a n d ' s n o r t h e a s t , ap o s i t i o n t h e city still m a i n t a i n s .
Figure 4.4. One of numerous sections of the Wall that cuts through
working farms. Photo: David Myers
Figure 4.$. The exposed foundations of a fort at South Shields. Photo:
Margaret G. H. MacLean
This sprawling u r b a n area (now called Tyneside) domi­
n a t e s t h e e a s t e r n r e g i o n o f t h e site. W i t h i n T y n e s i d e , t h e
W a l l exists m o s t l y a sb e l o w g r o u n d o r e x c a v a t e d / c o n ­
served ruin.
T h e continuous course o faboveground Wall
runs w e s t w a r d , beginning a tH e d d o n a n d extending
toward Birdoswald, and forms the second, central region
5
o f t h e site.
T h e t h i r d r e g i o n lies t o the w e s t a n d consists o f
lowlands b e t w e e n B r a m p t o n a n d the S o l w a y Firth, a tidal
estuary characterizedb ymarshes and mudflats. Today,
this area isd o m i n a t e d b ylivestock pastures a n d agricul­
tural cultivation. Farther inland isthe Carlisle Basin, a
broad valley drained b ythe rivers Irthing, Eden, Esk, a n d
Figure 4.6. The remains of a well-preserved regimental bathhouse
associated with the Roman fort at Chesters, situated astride the Wall
on the North Tyne River. Photo: Margaret G. H. MacLean
MANAGEMENT CONTEXT AND HISTORY 175

Figure 4.7. Detail of a conserved section of the Wall near Birdoswald.
The stone contains an original Roman inscription. Photo: David Myers
C a l d e w , all o f w h i c h flow into the S o l w a y Firth. R u r a l
l a n d i nthe b a s i n isu s e d m a i n l y for livestock g r a z i n g . Situ­
ated a tthe h e a d o f the S o l w a y Firth isthe historic city o f
Carlisle, the region su r b a n hub. B e t w e e n the basin a n d
the central region o fexposed uplands isa transitional
z o n e o f rolling hills divided b y valleys.
Although the Wall ends at Bowness-on-Solway
along the Solway Firth, remnants o fthe R o m a n s '
sive n e t w o r k , i nthe f o r m o f freestanding fortlets a n d
ers, are f o u n d t o the s o u t h w e s t a l o n g the C u m b r i a n
as far a sM a r y p o r t a tthe p e r i p h e r y o f the L a k e District.
H e r e the landscape b e c o m e s m o r e rolling, w i t h the
m a r k e d b y s e a cliffs. O c c a s i o n a l f o r t sites c o n t i n u e a s f a r
s o u t h a s R a v e n g l a s s , t h es o u t h e r n m o s t p o i n t o f t h e W o r l d
H e r i t a g e Site.
Figure 4.8. The Romans took advantage of the landscape's natural
barriers, situating the Wall atop the high ridges of Whin Sill, east of
Housesteads. Photo: Marta de la Torre.
176 H A D R I A N ' S W A L L W O R L D H E R I T A G E SITE
A maritime influence creates atemperate climate
y e a r - r o u n d i n G r e a t B r i t a i n , i nspite o f its r e l a t i v e l y h i g h
latitude. T h e r e g i o n o f the site is c h a r a c t e r i z e d b y r e g u l a r
6
high humidity, cloudiness, and ahigh percentage o f days
with precipitation. 7
History of Hadrian's W a l l 8
T h e history o f the Wall's creation b yR o m a n legions, and
of the R o m a n period o f British history, has b e e n exten­
sively d o c u m e n t e d . 9
This section focuses o nthe post-
R o m a n period and emphasizes the history o fthe Wall asa
heritage site a n d t h e g r a d u a l a c k n o w l e d g m e n t o f the
l a n d s c a p e i nw h i c h t h e W a l l i s s i t u a t e d a sp a r t o f t h e site.
In the centuries following the R o m a n s ' abandon­
m e n t o fthe Military Z o n e , the stones o fthe masonry
s t r u c t u r e s o f t h e W a l l a n d its a s s o c i a t e d fortifications
w e r e r e m o v e d a n d r e u s e d i nt h e c o n s t r u c t i o n o f castles,
churches, dwellings, field walls, a n d other structures.
T h u s the W a l l provided great utilitarian value asa source
of building material. L a n d records dating back tothe Nor­
m a n period also s h o w that the W a l l w a s a n important
b o u n d a r y b e t w e e n p r o p e r t y holdings, a g r i c u l t u r a l fields,
a n d parishes. I n addition, itinspired place-names through­
defen­
out the region, giving rise t o W a l t o n , W a l w i c k , Thirlwall,
tow­
and Walby.
coast
Although the Wall has been described i n written
and cartographic w o r k s dating back t o the eighth century,
coast
t h e f i r s t r e l a t i v e l y l a r g e - s c a l e a c c o u n t a p p e a r e d i n 1599,
w h e n the antiquarian W i l l i a m C a m d e n published a survey
a n d e x p l a n a t i o n o f t h e W a l l a n d its s t r u c t u r e s i nt h e fifth
edition o fhis Britannia.
T h r o u g h o u t the eighteenth and nineteenth cen­
turies, the W a l l continued t o b e u s e d a sasource o f build­
i n g m a t e r i a l . T h e 1750s s a w t h e c o n s t r u c t i o n o f t h e M i l i ­
t a r y R o a d , w h i c h i s a p p r o x i m a t e l y 48 k i l o m e t e r s (30 m i l e s )
long, between Newcastle and Carlisle. 1 0
T h e road was
b u i l t o n t h e t o po f t h e W a l l t o m i n i m i z e d a m a g e t ot h e
fields o f local l a n d o w n e r s a n d t o save costs b yu s i n g the
Wall's remnants asaroad foundation and asa source
for stone. 1 1
T h e steady erosion o fthe Wall led to concerted
efforts t o study ita sw e l l a sag r o w i n g interest i n conserv­
i n g it. I n t h e e i g h t e e n t h c e n t u r y , s e v e r a l a n t i q u a r i a n s t u d ­
i e s w e r e m a d e , i n c l u d i n g W i l l i a m H u t t o n ' s The First Man
to Walk Hadrian's Wall i n 1801. T e n y e a r s l a t e r , H u t t o n
saved asection o f the W a l l a tPlanetrees from b e i n g pil­
l a g e d t o m a k e field walls, a nevent c o n s i d e r e d the first suc­
cessful effort o f conservation. 1 2
 J o h n C l a y t o n w a s a ni m p o r t a n t figure
u n d e r s t a n d i n g a n d c o n s e r v a t i o n o f t h e W a l l . I n 1832, h e
inherited land containing Chesters R o m a n Fort. T h e nine­
t e e n t h c e n t u r y w a s ap e r i o d " w h e n [Wall] sites w e r e
o w n e d b yprivileged individuals... w h o could use
for their o w n r e s e a r c h — a n d the pleasure o f themselves
a n d o f their friends." 1 3
F o r ne ar ly six decades,
funded the excavation, protection, and reconstruction o f
remains o f the Wall. I n the process, h e a m a s s e d a collec­
tion o f R o m a n objects from various locations along
W a l l . C l a y t o n a c q u i r e d a n d w o r k e d o n five R o m a n s i t e s i n
the area o f C h e s t e r s a n d led excavations a tthe fort sites o f
H o u s e s t e a d s ( 1 8 4 9 - p r e s e n t ) , C a r r a w b u r g h (1873-76), a n d
C a r v o r a n (1886).
T h e nineteenth century w a s also m a r k e d b y the
establishment o f "learned societies" for the study o f antiq­
uities. T h i s d e v e l o p m e n t c a m e a tat i m e w h e n there w a s a
strong interest i nall things R o m a n a n d the v i e w that the
R o m a n E m p i r e w a s am o d e l for England's o w n vast impe­
rial holdings. T h e s e societies increased interest in, a n d
access t o ,the W a l l , i n t r o d u c i n g itt o b r o a d e r audiences,
a l t h o u g h m e m b e r s h i p w a s l i m i t e d t o t h es o c i a l a n d e c o ­
n o m i c elite. T h e proliferation o f t h e s e g r o u p s
with the emergence o f the R o m a n t i c m o v e m e n t , w h i c h
fostered a nappreciation for the aesthetic qualities o f the
ruins a n d the n a t u r a l o rnaturalistic landscapes i n w h i c h
they w e r e situated. 1 4
I n 1849, t h e first p i l g r i m a g e
the full length o f H a d r i a n sW a l l w a s led b y J o h n Colling-
w o o d B r u c e . T w o years later, B r u c e p u b l i s h e d the
e d i t i o n o f The Roman Wall, w h i c h s u m m a r i z e d t h e r e s u l t s
of Clayton's excavations atChesters R o m a n Fort and pub­
licized J o h n Hodgson's theory o f the Wall's construction
under the emperor Hadrian. 1 5
I n 1863, B r u c e a l s o p u b ­
l i s h e d h i s Handbook of the Roman Wall, a n i m p o r t a n t
historical guide t o this day. 1 6
T h e latter part o f the century s a w the
acquisition o fpart o fthe Wall and the creation o fthe
m u s e u m t o d i s p l a y i t s R o m a n r e l i c s . I n 1875, t h e S o u t h
Shields U r b a n District C o u n c i l established the
R e m a i n s P a r k atS o u t h Shields, m a r k i n g the first
acquisition and display o fpart o fthe Wall b ya public
authority 1 7
L a t e r , i n 1896, t h e m u s e u m a t C h e s t e r s R o m a n
Fort was constructed tohouse John Clayton's
of R o m a n objects.
G o v e r n m e n t efforts t o protect the W a l l increased
t h r o u g h further public a n d trust o w n e r s h i p i nthe
eth century. T h e s e decades also witnessed a n extraordi­
n a r y g r o w t h o f tourist visitation. A n e w generation o f
academically trained, professional archaeologists rose to
i n the p r o m i n e n c e i nW a l l s t u d i e s a n d r e p l a c e d t h e a m a t e u r anti­
quarians. W i t h the passage o fnational legislation provid­
i n g f o r t h e p r o t e c t i o n o f a r c h a e o l o g y , a first p o r t i o n o f t h e
W a l l w a s s c h e d u l e d a s a n a n c i e n t m o n u m e n t i n 1927.
them I n 1932, c o n t i n u e d q u a r r y i n g t h r e a t e n e d the
archaeological fabric o f the Wall, motivating the national
Clayton government tointroduce new, more powerful national
ancient m o n u m e n t s legislation. T h i s led t o the adoption
of the Hadrian's Wall and V a l l u m Preservation Scheme, a
the first step toward comprehensive public protection o f the
central part o fthe Wall and s o m e buffer areas surround­
i n g it. 1 8
T h e National Trust also received asadonation the
c o r e o f its H a d r i a n ' s W a l l h o l d i n g s a t H o u s e s t e a d s i n t h e
central region, aW a l l site that h a s p r o v e n t o b e t h e m o s t
p o p u l a r a m o n g t o u r i s t s . I n 1935, t h e N a t i o n a l T r u s t
o p e n e d the Housesteads M u s e u m to the public. 1 9
M a s s t o u r i s m b e g a n i nthe years following W o r l d
W a r II,w h e n the g r o w t h i na u t o m o b i l e o w n e r s h i p and
i n c r e a s e s i nleisure t i m e b r o u g h t m o r e a n d m o r e visitors
t o t h e W a l l . V i s i t a t i o n p e a k e d i n 1973, t h e n q u i c k l y
d r o p p e d a s a r e s u l t o f a s p i k e i n f u e l p r i c e s ( s e e fig. 4.9).
F r o m t h e s t a r t , t h ee x p e r i e n c e s a v a i l a b l e t o t o u r i s t s h a v e
coincided b e e n quite varied a n d r e m a i n s o today, ranging from well-
staffed a n d t h o r o u g h l y m a n a g e d sites w i t h interpretive
s c h e m e s , gift shops, a n d amenities, t o large stretches
accessible informally b ysimply w a l k i n g through the
traveling countryside.
I n 1970, t h e V i n d o l a n d a T r u s t , a n i n d e p e n d e n t
first archaeological charitable organization, was founded at
the fort site o f V i n d o l a n d a ( f o r m e r l y C h e s t e r h o l m ) . Its
m i s s i o n w a s t h ee x c a v a t i o n , p r e s e r v a t i o n , a n d p r e s e n t a ­
t i o n o f t h e R o m a n r e m a i n s . L a t e r , i n t h e mid-1980s,
a n o t h e r fort site w e n t into p u b l i c o w n e r s h i p w h e n t h e
C u m b r i a C o u n t y C o u n c i l acquired the B i r d o s w a l d estate.
Likewise, Rudchester was acquired b y Northumberland
first public County, North Tyneside acquired Wallsend, and South
first T y n e s i d e e x p a n d e d its h o l d i n g s a t S o u t h S h i e l d s . E n g l i s h
H e r i t a g e ( E H ) , c r e a t e d b y P a r l i a m e n t i n 1984, h a s s e r v e d
R o m a n as a nactive force i nthe conservation, m a n a g e m e n t , and
public presentation o fthe Wall. T h e agency opened the C o r -
b r i d g e M u s e u m i n 1984 a n d l a u n c h e d i t s W a l l R e c o r d i n g
Project the following year. T h e project provides detailed
collection d o c u m e n t a t i o n o f t h e visible r e m a i n s o f t h e W a l l a n d its
associated features. 2 0
E H continues t o care for m a n y parts
of the Wall.
twenti­ A s a c u l m i n a t i o n o f its l o n g h i s t o r y o f h e r i t a g e
and stewardship, Hadrian's Wall w a s inscribed b y the
U n i t e d Nations Educational, Scientific a n d Cultural
O r g a n i z a t i o n ( U N E S C O ) a s a W o r l d H e r i t a g e S i t e i n 1987.
M A N A G E M E N T CONTEXT A N D HISTORY 177
T h e i n s c r i p t i o n c i t e s c r i t e r i a C (ii), (iii), a n d (iv) ( s e e b o x a t
right). Since this designation, an u m b e r o f m e a s u r e s have
b e e n i m p l e m e n t e d to c o o r d i n a t e m a n a g e m e n t o f t h e site.
T h e H a d r i a n sWall T o u r i s m Partnership ( H W T P ) was
c r e a t e d i n 1993 t o c o o r d i n a t e t h e d e v e l o p m e n t o f s u s t a i n ­
able t o u r i s m for the H a d r i a n sW a l l W o r l d Heritage Site
area. Early w o r k focused o n coordinating m a r k e t i n g a n d
visitor information. Shortly thereafter, the secretary o f
state a p p r o v e d aproposal for the H a d r i a n sW a l l Path,
a n e w National Trail enabling visitors to w a l k the length
o f t h e W a l l . T h e p a t h o p e n e d i n 2003. I n 1996, a H a d r i a n s
W a l l W o r l d Heritage Site m a n a g e m e n t plan for the period
1996-2001 w a s p u b l i s h e d a f t e r e x t e n s i v e c o n s u l t a t i o n . T h e
first p l a n to c o o r d i n a t e m a n a g e m e n t o f t h e entire site, it
established the W o r l d Heritage Site M a n a g e m e n t P l a n
C o m m i t t e e ( W H S M P C , o r M P C ) "to act as the p r i m a r y
f o r u m for issues concerning the m a n a g e m e n t of the
W o r l d Heritage Site." 2 1
E H established the H a d r i a ns Wall
Co-ordination Unit, b a s e d in H e x h a m , to oversee imple­
m e n t a t i o n o f t h e p l a n . T h e p l a n w a s u p d a t e d i n 2002.
In recent decades, local entities have imple­
m e n t e d avariety o f strategies to attract m o r e visitors to
t h e site. T h e s e efforts h a v e b e e n m o t i v a t e d i n p a r t b y t h e
w e a k e n i n g o f other industries i n the region, s u c h as ship­
building, coal mining, iron making, and steelmaking. In
1986, t h e T y n e a n d W e a r M u s e u m s c o m p l e t e d r e c o n s t r u c ­
tion o f the W e s t G a t e at A r b e i a R o m a n Fort at S o u t h
Shields, w h i c h E w i n n o t e s w a s "the first r e c o n s t r u c t i o n
of astanding remain associated with Hadrian's Wall and
was consequently controversial." 2 2
W o r k is n o w under
w a y to reconstruct the C o m m a n d i n g Officer s quarters
a n d asoldiers' barracksblock. A t the eastern e n d o f the
Wall in Maryport, the Senhouse M u s e u m Trust opened
t h e S e n h o u s e R o m a n M u s e u m i n 1990, w h i c h h o u s e s t h e
N e t h e r h a l l c o l l e c t i o n o f R o m a n a r t i f a c t s . I n 2000, t h e
S e g e d u n u m R o m a n Fort, Bath H o u s e and M u s e u m in
W a l l s e n d o p e n e d to the public. T h e development, w h i c h
r e u s e s p a r t o f a s h i p y a r d o n t h e T y n e R i v e r , is o p e r a t e d
by the T y n e and W e a r M u s e u m s and includes a w o r k i n g
r e c o n s t r u c t i o n o f aR o m a n b a t h h o u s e as w e l l as a v i e w i n g
t o w e r a p p r o x i m a t e l y 34 m e t e r s (112 f e e t ) i n h e i g h t .
F a c e d w i t h rising n u m b e r s o f visitors to the Wall,
t h e 1996 M a n a g e m e n t P l a n e x p r e s s e d c o n c e r n s about
the negative impact o n historic resources by increased
t o u r i s m (especially b y w a l k e r s a n d other i n f o r m a l visi­
t o r s ) . T h a t u p w a r d t r e n d w a s r e v e r s e d , h o w e v e r , i n 2001
2 3
with the outbreak of foot a n d m o u t h disease ( F M D ) .
T h e epidemic caused the closure of the countryside in
m a n y rural areas o f the region to avoid the spread o f the
178 H A D R I A N ' S W A L L W O R L D H E R I T A G E SITE
World Heritage List Criteria for
Cultural Properties 74
A monument, group of buildings or site—as defined
above—which is nominated for inclusion in the World
Heritage List, will be considered to be of outstanding
universal value for the purpose of the Convention when
the Committee finds that it meets one or more of the fol­
lowing criteria and the test of authenticity. These criteria
are defined by the Committee in its Operational Guide­
lines. Each property nominated should:
i. represent a masterpiece of human creative genius; or
ii. exhibit an important interchange of human values,
over a span of time or within a cultural area of the world,
on developments in architecture or technology, monu­
mental arts, town-planning or landscape design; or
iii. bear a unique or at least exceptional testimony to a
cultural tradition or to a civilization which is living or
which has disappeared; or
iv be an outstanding example of a type of building or
architectural or technological ensemble or landscape
which illustrates (a) significant stage(s) in human history;
v. be an outstanding example of a traditional human set­
tlement or land-use which is representative of a culture
(or cultures), especially when it has become vulnerable
under the impact of irreversible change; or
vi. be directly or tangibly associated with events or living
traditions, with ideas, or with beliefs, with artistic and liter
ary works of outstanding universal significance (the Com­
mittee considers that this criterion should justify inclusion
in the List only in exceptional circumstances and in con­
junction with other criteria cultural or natural).
disease. Access to sections o f the W a l l o n f a r m l a n d w a s
impeded, and the most popular m a n a g e d site—House-
s t e a d s — w a s closed to the public all b u t ten days d u r i n g
that year. U r b a n sites suffered indirectly v i a g e n e r a l d o w n ­
turns in the n u m b e r s of overseas and education/group
visits to the region.
F M D severely d a m a g e d the region's agricultural
e c o n o m y , necessitating the slaughter o f all infected or
potentially infected livestock, a n d h a d asecondary nega­
tive i m p a c t b y r e d u c i n g t o u r i s m to the site to afraction o f
its p r e - e x i s t i n g levels. L a t e s t f i g u r e s i n d i c a t e t h a t t o u r i s m
p r o m o t i o n a n d other efforts to recover from F M D have
b e e n effective vis-a-vis t o u r i s m traffic. T o t a l visitation to
 DESIGNATED CLASSIFICATIONS
A p r i m a r y m e a n s o f h e r i t a g e p r o t e c t i o n i n E n g l a n d is
statutory designation. T h e categories of heritage places
covered b y separate legislation are: scheduled ancient
m o n u m e n t s , listed buildings, a n d conservation areas.
W o r l d H e r i t a g e Sites, registered p a r k s a n d gardens, a n d
battlefields are protected t h r o u g h the integrated p l a n n i n g
processes a d m i n i s t e r e d at the local to district levels. 2 6

Figure4.9. "The graph shows some longer term trends. Whilst the Scheduled Ancient Monuments
numbers of visitors to the forts and museums shown have declined A s p r e s c r i b e d b y t h e Ancient Monuments and Archaeological
since the 1970s, the numbers of people out walking around the Wall
Areas Act, a s c h e d u l e d a n c i e n t m o n u m e n t i s o n e that
area, particularly in the central sector have increased Approximately
m e e t s specific criteria o f age, rarity, documentation,
23% of visitors in the central sector of Hadrian s Wall are from over­
seas. Approximately 69% of visitors in this area are on holiday" group value, survival, fragility o r vulnerability, diversity,
Source: "Tourism Facts & Figures," http:/ /www.hadrians-wall.org/ a n d potential. T h e secretary o f state approves those
m o n u m e n t s m e e t i n g these criteria as w e l l as the criterion
s t a f f e d s i t e s i n t h e r e g i o n r e a c h e d 562,571 i n 2 0 0 2 — a 23.7 of national importance, in consultation with E H .
p e r c e n t i n c r e a s e o n 2001 f i g u r e s a n d a 5.1 p e r c e n t i n c r e a s e O f the three types of designated heritage, sched­
o n 2000 figures.25
uled ancient m o n u m e n t s are the m o s t rigorously pro­
tected b y legislation. B y law, the treatment o f scheduled
The M a n a g e m e n t C o n t e x t a n c i e n t m o n u m e n t s is h a n d l e d at t h e n a t i o n a l l e v e l a n d is
not integrated into t o w n a n d c o u n t r y planning policies.
Heritage preservation in the United K i n g d o m began
S c h e d u l e d m o n u m e n t c o n s e n t m u s t b e o b t a i n e d from t h e
w i t h m o d e s t efforts to protect individual archaeological
secretary o f state for all w o r k s to s c h e d u l e d monuments,
sites o f interest. T h e p r e s e r v a t i o n m o v e m e n t became
including maintenance. 2 7
P l a n n i n g guidance for w o r k o n
m o r e f o r m a l i z e d i n 1882 w i t h t h e p a s s a g e o f t h e Ancient
such m o n u m e n t s — i n c l u d i n g that proposed in these
Monuments Protection Act. O v e r t i m e , h i s t o r i c b u i l d i n g s ,
m a n a g e m e n t a g r e e m e n t s — i s p r o v i d e d i n Planning Policy
landscapes, parks, battlefields, a n d other places attracted
Guidance 16: Archaeology and Planning (PPG 16). 28

the interest a n d c o n c e r n of preservationists a n d

T o d a y , t h e r e a r e m o r e t h a n 13,000 s u c h m o n u ­
g o v e r n m e n t , a n d efforts proliferated to record, restore,
ments under protection around the world. After being
a n d preserve s u c h places for posterity. T h e m a i n
s c h e d u l e d as a n a n c i e n t m o n u m e n t , H a d r i a n sW a l l later
legislation c o n c e r n i n g archaeological resources at this
a c q u i r e d s t a t u s a s al i s t e d b u i l d i n g a n d a s aW o r l d H e r ­
t i m e i s t h e Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Areas Act
itage Site.
o f 1979. O t h e r p r o t e c t i o n s n o w i n p l a c e a r e n u m e r o u s ,
Listed buildings
flexible, a n d a l m o s t entirely integrated into the p l a n n i n g
T h e primary means of acquiring national protection of
processes f r o m the national level d o w n to the county
b u i l d i n g s is t h r o u g h listing. T h e s e c r e t a r y o f state, a g a i n
council level, a n d are s u p p o r t e d b y the various govern­
r e l y i n g o n t h e c o u n s e l o f E H , is r e s p o n s i b l e f o r m a i n t a i n ­
mental a n d nongovernmental organizations that
i n g as t a t u t o r y list o f b u i l d i n g s d e t e r m i n e d to h a v e special
administer heritage places.
architectural interest, historic interest, close historical asso­
H a d r i a n sW a l l is ac o n s t e l l a t i o n o f scheduled
c i a t i o n , a n d g r o u p v a l u e . Planning Policy Guidance 15: Plan­
m o n u m e n t s a n d listed buildings w i t h u n i q u e status at the
ning and the Historic Environment (PPG 1$) c o n t a i n s t h e
n a t i o n a l level; it is a l s o i n s c r i b e d as aW o r l d H e r i t a g e Site,
definitions, selection criteria, procedures, a n d considera­
m o r e a s a c o n c e p t u a l e n t i t y t h a n a s ap a r t i c u l a r p l a c e . I t
tions relevant to this designation, a n d provides guidance
is s u b j e c t t o ab r o a d r a n g e o f p r o t e c t i o n s a f f o r d e d b y g o v ­
c o n c e r n i n g the treatment o f listed buildings. 2 9

e r n m e n t authorities t h r o u g h statutes, regulations, a n d

L i s t e d b u i l d i n g s a r e r a n k e d a c c o r d i n g t o g r a d e s 1,
policy directives, a n d b y the international c o m m u n i t y
11* ( " t w o s t a r r e d " ) , a n d 11. A n y w o r k s ( r e p a i r s , u p g r a d e s ,
t h r o u g h t h e W o r l d H e r i t a g e C o n v e n t i o n a n d its o p e r a ­
restorations, etc.) b e i n g c o n s i d e r e d for listed buildings
t i o n a l g u i d e l i n e s . B e l o w is ab r i e f d e s c r i p t i o n o f t h e h e r ­
m u s t obtain consent. T h e secretary o f state has delegated
itage classifications, agencies, a n d statutory authorities,
to local authorities m o s t decisions c o n c e r n i n g these con-
w h i c h inform the m a n a g e m e n t discussions that follow

M A N A G E M E N T CONTEXT A N D HISTORY 179

s e n t a p p l i c a t i o n s . A p p l i c a t i o n s f o r w o r k s t og r a d e i, g r a d e
ii*, a n d d e m o l i t i o n s o f g r a d e n b u i l d i n g s m u s t b e
reviewed by E H or other relevant national bodies.
Conservation areas
A c o n s e r v a t i o n a r e a is a t e r r i t o r y t h a t h a s b e e n d e t e r ­
m i n e d t oh a v e s p e c i a l a r c h i t e c t u r a l o r h i s t o r i c interest.
Conservation areas m a y be designated b y local planning
authorities, a n d local development plans contain descrip­
t i o n s o ft h e m a n d p o l i c i e s f o r t h e i r p r o t e c t i o n . Local
authorities determine whether proposed n e w develop­
m e n t will negatively i m p a c t aconservation area's charac­
ter a n d appearance. N o conservation areas have b e e n
c r e a t e d t op r o t e c t a n y p a r t o ft h e H a d r i a n s W a l l W o r l d
H e r i t a g e Site o r its setting.
World Heritage listing
Since b e c o m i n g asignatory to the W o r l d Heritage C o n v e n ­
t i o n i n 1984, t h e U n i t e d K i n g d o m h a s a d d e d t w e n t y - f o u r
W o r l d H e r i t a g e Sites t ot h e list i n t h e n a t u r a l a n d / o r cul­
tural categories. T h e operational guidelines o f the W o r l d
Heritage Convention include a recommendation
to d e v e l o p site m a n a g e m e n t p l a n s for e a c h site b e i n g n o m i ­
n a t e d t o t h e list: " S t a t e s P a r t i e s a r e e n c o u r a g e d t o p r e p a r e
p l a n s for the m a n a g e m e n t o f e a c h n a t u r a l site n o m i n a t e d
a n d for the safeguarding of each culturalproperty n o m i ­
nated. Allinformation concerning these plans should be
m a d e a v a i l a b l e w h e n t e c h n i c a l c o - o p e r a t i o n is r e q u e s t e d / '
W h i l e t h e r e is n o B r i t i s h l e g i s l a t i o n o r r e g u l a t i o n
pertaining solely to W o r l d Heritage Sites or nominations,
s o m e official g u i d a n c e m a k e s s p e c i f i c r e f e r e n c e t ot h e o p e r ­
ational guidelines that implement the Convention. F o r
e x a m p l e , PPG i j , i s s u e d b y t h e O f f i c e o f t h e D e p u t y P r i m e
M i n i s t e r , r e q u i r e s l o c a l a u t h o r i t i e s t od e v i s e policies t o p r o ­
v i d e for t h e l o n g - t e r m p r o t e c t i o n o f t h e s e sites, a n d t h a t
any development proposals be evaluated with regardt o
t h e i r p o t e n t i a l i m p a c t o n t h e p r o s p e c t i v e site a n d its setting,
from a n aesthetic as w e l l as a n e n v i r o n m e n t a l perspective.
Thus, national policy w o r k s with the guidelines
so that W o r l d H e r i t a g e designation serves t ostimulate the
development of integrated conservation planning across
the United K i n g d o m . Hadrian's Wall has the distinction of
h a v i n g the first W o r l d H e r i t a g e Site m a n a g e m e n t p l a n t o
b e c o m p l e t e d i n t h e c o u n t r y (1996) a n d t h e f i r s t t o b e
u p d a t e d (2002).
NATIONAL H E R I T A G E - R E L A T E D AGENCIES
A t t h e n a t i o n a l level, h e r i t a g e is m a n a g e d b y s e v e r a l
departments a n d agencies. T h e D e p a r t m e n t for Culture,
M e d i a a n d Sport ( D C M S ) holds p r i m a r y responsibility for
t h e b u i l t h e r i t a g e t h r o u g h its A r c h i t e c t u r e a n d H i s t o r i c
180 HADRIAN'S W A L L W O R L D HERITAGE SITE
Environment Division. 3 1
Advised by E H ,the secretary of
state f o r c u l t u r e , m e d i a a n d s p o r t is r e s p o n s i b l e f o r t h e
s c h e d u l i n g o fa n c i e n t m o n u m e n t s , r u l i n g o n a p p l i c a t i o n s
for scheduled m o n u m e n t consent a n d listing buildings o f
special architectural or historic interest. T h e secretary also
w o r k s specifically w i t h U N E S C O o n issues related t o
W o r l d Heritage Sites in the U n i t e d K i n g d o m .
L a n d - u s e p l a n n i n g falls u n d e r t h e aegis o f t h e
Office of the D e p u t y P r i m e Minister, including national
legislation a n d guidance d o c u m e n t s , s u c h as the PPGs,
(see statutes, regulations, policy directives, a n d guidelines
b e l o w ) . T h e D e p a r t m e n t o fE n v i r o n m e n t , F o o d , a n d
R u r a l Affairs ( D E F R A ) , w h i c h handles countryside issues,
also plays asignificant role in the m a n a g e m e n t a n d con­
servation of heritage. T h e Countryside Agency, w h i c h
o p e r a t e s u n d e r D E F R A , i st h e n a t i o n a l a g e n c y r e s p o n s i b l e
for rural matters. It plays aless direct b u t n o t e w o r t h y role
in heritage affairs.
English H e r i t a g e serves as the g o v e r n m e n t ' s
s t a t u t o r y a d v i s e r c o n c e r n i n g all issues r e l a t e d t ot h e c o n ­
s e r v a t i o n o fE n g l a n d ' s h i s t o r i c b u i l t e n v i r o n m e n t . E H i s
classified as " a n E x e c u t i v e N o n - D e p a r t m e n t a l P u b l i c B o d y
sponsored by the D C M S . " 3 2
It is r e s p o n s i b l e f o r t h e m a n ­
a g e m e n t (i.e., r e p a i r , m a i n t e n a n c e , a n d p r e s e n t a t i o n ) o f
m o r e than four hundred properties in public ownership
and, m o r e commonly, guardianship. E H interfaces w i t h
3 0
m a n y aspects o f the p l a n n i n g a n d c o n s e n t s y s t e m , as dis­
cussed further below. F u n d e d in part by the government
a n d i n p a r t b y s e l f - g e n e r a t e d r e v e n u e s , it a l s o r e - g r a n t s
f u n d i n g f o r t h e c o n s e r v a t i o n o ft h e b u i l t h e r i t a g e . ( O t h e r
key nongovernmental financial supporters of heritage in
the United K i n g d o m include the Heritage Lottery F u n d
and the E u r o p e a n Union.)
T h e N a t i o n a l T r u s t w a s established as a private
c h a r i t y i n 1895 t o s a f e g u a r d t h r e a t e n e d n a t u r a l a n d c u l ­
tural heritage sites. 3 3
T o d a y , it h o l d s i n p e r p e t u i t y more
t h a n 248,000 h e c t a r e s (613,000 a c r e s ) o f c o u n t r y s i d e i n
E n g l a n d , W a l e s , a n d N o r t h e r n Ireland, a l m o s t six h u n ­
d r e d m i l e s o fc o a s t l i n e , a n d m o r e t h a n t w o hundred
b u i l d i n g s a n d g a r d e n s . It is a p a r t i c u l a r l y i m p o r t a n t f o r c e
i n t h e r e g i o n o fH a d r i a n ' s W a l l .
L O C A L HERITAGE AUTHORITIES
A t the local level, responsibility for c o n s e r v a t i o n o f the
h i s t o r i c b u i l t e n v i r o n m e n t r e s i d e s w i t h 34 c o u n t y c o u n c i l s ,
238 d i s t r i c t c o u n c i l s , a n d 46 u n i t a r y c o u n c i l s . T h e s e
authorities handle m o s t decisions regarding buildings and
conservation areas, including consideration o f applica­
tions for listed building consent a n d conservation area
consent. L o c a l authorities also issue m o n e t a r y grants t o
outside groups a n d vendors for the repair a n d improve­
ment of both designated and nondesignated elements o f
the historic built e n v i r o n m e n t . I n s o m e cases, the local
authorities o w n a n d m a n a g e their o w n h e r i t a g e sites. T e n
national parks in E n g l a n d a n d W a l e s also are independent
local authorities w i t h statutory responsibility for heritage.
T h e s e include N o r t h u m b e r l a n d National Park, a large
portion of w h i c h coincides w i t h the H a d r i a n sW a l l W o r l d
H e r i t a g e Site.
I n addition t otheir role i n d e t e r m i n i n g the out­
c o m e o fc o n s e n t a p p l i c a t i o n s , t h e c o u n c i l s p r o v i d e active
p r o t e c t i o n o ft h e h i s t o r i c b u i l t e n v i r o n m e n t b y p l a c i n g
specific policies into local t o w n a n d c o u n t r y plans. A n u m ­
b e r o flocal authorities have incorporated specific provi­
sions into these policies as aw a y o fi m p l e m e n t i n g the oth­
erwise advisory and partnership-based Management
A s o f s u m m e r 2002, t h i r t e e n l o c a l a u t h o r i t i e s a t v a r i o u s
levels h a d i n c o r p o r a t e d m e a s u r e s specific t oH a d r i a n s
Wall, based o n the M a n a g e m e n t Plan, into local policies.
NATIONAL HERITAGE STATUTES AND POLICIES
Provisions for the national government's conservation of
h e r i t a g e a r e f o u n d i n acts o fP a r l i a m e n t , r e g u l a t i o n s , a n d
policy documents. Statutory protection o fheritage in
G r e a t B r i t a i n b e g a n w i t h t h e e n a c t m e n t o ft h e Ancient
Monuments Protection Act o f 1882. S i n c e t h a t t i m e , t h e
adoption of n e w national statutes a n d policies has greatly
e x p a n d e d t h e e x t e n t o fg o v e r n m e n t c o n t r o l o v e r c u l t u r a l
heritage, including towns and landscapes. Starting in the
l a t e 1960s, n a t i o n a l c o n s e r v a t i o n a c t i v i t i e s h a v e b e e n
folded into the planning process. Rather than enforcing
fixed rules, this discretionary p l a n n i n g s y s t e m allows for
flexible a n d responsive decision m a k i n g . A listing o f the
principal statutes follows; those w i t h annotations bear a
specific relation t odesignation, e n h a n c e m e n t s o f protec­
t i o n , a n d n e w a p p r o a c h e s t op l a n n i n g a n d management.
Historic Buildings and Monuments Act (1953)
Civic Amenities Act (196f). T h i s a c t l a u n c h e d t h e t r e n d o f
embedding heritage preservation in the planning
processes at the c o u n t y a n d district levels. It also legalized
the group value of buildings and acknowledged the
i m p o r t a n c e o fc o n s e r v i n g a r e a s as o p p o s e d t o i n d i v i d u a l
buildings. Local planning authorities were given the
r e s p o n s i b i l i t y o fd e s i g n a t i n g as c o n s e r v a t i o n a r e a s t h o s e
p l a c e s w i t h i n t h e i r j u r i s d i c t i o n t h a t w e r e o fs p e c i a l a r c h i ­
tectural or historic interest, the character or appearance o f
w h i c h it w a s d e s i r a b l e t op r e s e r v e o r e n h a n c e .
Town and Country Amenities Act (1974). T h i s a c t m a k e s i t t h e
responsibility o f l o c a l p l a n n i n g authorities t or e v i e w des­
ignated c o n s e r v a t i o n areas a n d d e t e r m i n e if other ele­
ments should be designated.
Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Areas Act (1979).
T h i s act refined the definition o f protected status designa­
t i o n s — a d d i n g t h e c a t e g o r y o fa r c h a e o l o g i c a l a r e a —
w h i c h c o u l d b e m a d e e i t h e r b y t h e s e c r e t a r y o fstate o r
b y local p l a n n i n g authorities, subject t oc o n f i r m a t i o n b y
the secretary. T h e criterion o fnational-level significance
r e m a i n e d in force. T h e act also strengthened protections
b y m a k i n g certain offenses against scheduled m o n u m e n t s
Plan. subject t ocriminal prosecution.
National Heritage Act (1983). T h i s a c t e s t a b l i s h e d E n g l i s h
3 4
H e r i t a g e as apublic b o d y w i t h responsibility for all aspects
of protecting a n d promoting the historic environment.
Town and Country Planning Act (1990). T h e l a t e s t i n a s e r i e s
t h a t b e g a n i n 1947 w i t h t h e e s t a b l i s h m e n t o f t h e E n g l i s h
p l a n n i n g system, this act recognizes a n d assigns p l a n n i n g
jurisdiction in various contexts. A n y development o f land
or change in land use w a r r a n t s a n application for permis­
sion from the planning authority in force, thus reducing
the individual l a n d o w n e r ' s ability t oc h a n g e the character
of atownscape or countryside in unacceptable ways.
Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act
(1990). 35
This act recognizes that the p r i m a r y responsibility
to list significant b u i l d i n g s lies w i t h t h e s e c r e t a r y o f state
a n d his or her advisers. H o w e v e r , itemphasizes the roles
a n d responsibilities of local planning councils t o m o n i t o r
the historic fabric in their jurisdictions, r e c o m m e n d build­
ings for listing, a n d limit c h a n g e s that c a n b e m a d e t o
listed buildings.
Heritage Lottery Fund (HLF) (1993). T h e National Lottery Act
o f 1993 a l l o w e d f o r t h e c r e a t i o n o f a r e v e n u e s t r e a m t o
support conservation projects for the physical u p k e e p
o f buildings a n d sites o fn a t i o n a l i m p o r t a n c e . W h i l e the
l e g i s l a t i o n r e l a t i n g t o t h e National Lottery Act i s n o t p r e ­
s c r i p t i v e i n r e g a r d t o t h e h e r i t a g e i t s e l f , 1998 s a w t h e i n t r o ­
d u c t i o n o ft h e r e q u i r e m e n t f o r a c o n s e r v a t i o n p l a n f o r a
site r e q u e s t i n g H L F f u n d s for w o r k s o n h i s t o r i c sites.
M A N A G E M E N T CONTEXT A N D HISTORY 181
Planning Policy Guidance (PPG). " P l a n n i n g p o l i c y g u i d a n c e
n o t e s set o u t G o v e r n m e n t policy o n p l a n n i n g issues
a n d provide guidance to local authorities a n d others on
the operation of the planning system. T h e y also explain
the relationship between planning policies a n d other
policies w h i c h have a n important bearing o n issues
of development a n d land use. Local planning authorities
m u s t take their content into account in preparing their
development plans." 3 6
PPG ty. Planning and the Historic Environment (September
1994; updated frequently) f o c u s e s o n t h e p l a n n i n g p r o c e s s e s
involving listed buildings a n d other aspects o f the historic
e n v i r o n m e n t , i n c l u d i n g W o r l d H e r i t a g e Sites, p a r k s a n d
gardens, battlefields, conservation areas, associated road­
w a y s a n d traffic, a n d the b r o a d e r historic landscape. N o
special statutes pertain specifically to W o r l d Heritage
S i t e s . R a t h e r , t h i s P P G ( s e c t i o n 2.22) a r t i c u l a t e s t h a t l o c a l
authorities m u s t devise m a n a g e m e n t plans that include
policies to p r o v i d e for t h e l o n g - t e r m p r o t e c t i o n o f sites.
D e v e l o p m e n t proposals m u s t b e assessed w i t h regard to
t h e i r p o t e n t i a l i m p a c t o n a site a n d its setting, i n c l u d i n g
the assessment of environmental impacts for develop­
m e n t of significant magnitude.
PPG 16: Archaeology and Planning (1990) i s a p a r a l l e l m a n u a l
f o r p l a n n i n g p r o c e s s e s i n v o l v i n g a r c h a e o l o g y . It is d i r e c t e d
at p l a n n i n g authorities, p r o p e r t y o w n e r s , developers,
archaeologists, a m e n i t y societies, 3 7
and the general public.
"It sets o u t the S e c r e t a r y o f State's p o l i c y o n archaeologi­
cal remains o n land, a n d h o w they should be preserved or
recorded both in a n u r b a n setting a n d in the countryside.
It g i v e s a d v i c e o n t h e h a n d l i n g o f a r c h a e o l o g i c a l r e m a i n s
and discoveries under the development plan a n d control
systems, including the weight to be given to t h e m in plan­
ning decisions and the use of planning conditions/' 3 8
OWNERSHIP AND MANAGEMENT DISTRIBUTION
O w n e r s h i p a n d m a n a g e m e n t w i t h i n t h e site is v a r i e d a n d
complex. T h e r e are approximately seven hundred private
o w n e r s , a c c o u n t i n g f o r 90 p e r c e n t o f t h e s i t e . L a n d u s e i s
similarly diverse and includes u r b a n neighborhoods,
f a r m s a n d pasturage, t o w n s a n d villages. M a n y o f the
p r i m e a r c h a e o l o g i c a l sites, h o w e v e r , a r e p u b l i c l y o w n e d
or otherwise m a n a g e d for conservation a n d public access.
A p p r o x i m a t e l y 10 p e r c e n t o f t h e s i t e i s m a n a g e d
specifically for heritage conservation, access, presentation,
research, and recreation. These owners and managers
include seven local authorities, English Heritage, the
182 H A D R I A N ' S W A L L W O R L D H E R I T A G E SITE
National Trust, and the Vindolanda Trust. T h e local
authorities with the most substantial holdings and
m a n a g e m e n t roles for particular R o m a n heritage sites
are the C u m b r i a C o u n t y C o u n c i l (owns and manages
Birdoswald), Northumberland County Council (owns
and manages Rudchester), North Tyneside Council (owns
Wallsend), and South Tyneside Metropolitan Borough
Council (owns South Shields). B o t h Wallsend a n d South
Shields are m a n a g e d for their o w n e r s b y the T y n e a n d
Wear Museums. Northumberland National Park Author­
ity also leases T h i r w a l l Castle a n d m a n a g e s avisitor center
and car parks. T h e Allerdale District C o u n c i l and Carlisle
a n d Newcastle City C o u n c i l s also o w n areas of R o m a n
ruins related to H a d r i a n s Wall.
English Heritage manages approximately 8 kilo­
m e t e r s (5 m i l e s ) o f t h e W a l l , t h r e e f o r t s a n d p a r t s o f t h e i r
civil settlements (including R o m a n C o r b r i d g e ) , t w o
bridges, a n d m o s t of the visible milecastles a n d turrets.
It s h o u l d b e n o t e d t h a t m a n y E H g u a r d i a n s h i p p r o p e r t i e s
are o w n e d b y the C u m b r i a C o u n t y Council, the National
Trust, and the Vindolanda Trust, resulting in considerable
overlap in management activities.
T h e estate o f t h e N a t i o n a l T r u s t i n t h e site's c e n ­
t r a l s e c t o r c o v e r s a p p r o x i m a t e l y 1,100 h e c t a r e s (2,718
acres). Its m a i n h o l d i n g s i n c l u d e the fort at H o u s e s t e a d s ,
a p p r o x i m a t e l y 8 k i l o m e t e r s (5 m i l e s ) o f t h e W a l l , lengths
o f the v a l l u m , t w o visible milecastles, a n d the fortlet a n d
m a r c h i n g c a m p s at H a l t w h i s t l e C o m m o n .
T h e V i n d o l a n d a T r u s t o w n s the forts a n d civil
settlements at V i n d o l a n d a a n d C a r v o r a n , a n d operates
m u s e u m s at b o t h sites. T h e S e n h o u s e T r u s t also operates
a m u s e u m o f R o m a n relics located next to the R o m a n
fort at M a r y p o r t . B o t h the N e w c a s t l e M u s e u m o f A n t i q u i ­
ties a n d T u l l i e H o u s e h o l d m a j o r collections related to
H a d r i a n sW a l l . A n u m b e r o f related R o m a n sites lie
w i t h i n the W o r l d Heritage Site b u t are u n d e r varied
ownership.
MANAGEMENT COORDINATION
Coordination a m o n g the m a n y owners, managers, stew­
a r d s , a n d u s e r s o f H a d r i a n s W a l l a n d its s e t t i n g is o n e of
the leading challenges in conserving and m a n a g i n g the
s i t e . T h e 1987 d e s i g n a t i o n o f t h e W a l l a s a W o r l d H e r i t a g e
Site c l e a r l y r e c o g n i z e d t h e v a l u e o f t h e W a l l a n d its s e t t i n g
as aw h o l e , n o t s i m p l y as a collection o f i n d i v i d u a l sites
a n d f e a t u r e s . I n a d d i t i o n , it h i g h l i g h t e d t h e i m p o r t a n c e o f
coordinated m a n a g e m e n t to preserve the Wall's values.
G r o u n d w o r k w a s laid for the present efforts o f the
Hadrian's W a l l W o r l d Heritage Site M a n a g e m e n t P l a n
C o m m i t t e e ( M P C ) a s f a r b a c k a s t h e 1976 D a r l i n g t o n
A m e n i t y R e s e a r c h T r u s t ( D A R T ) r e p o r t a n d t h e 1984
Hadrian sWall Consultative C o m m i t t e e document Strat­
egyfor Hadrian's Wall. B o t h d o c u m e n t s w e r e b a s e d o n t h e
intellectual-historical tradition o funderstanding the W a l l
a n d its a s s o c i a t e d f e a t u r e s h o l i s t i c a l l y a n d a s s e r t e d t h a t t h e
Wall should b emanaged asa whole.
T h e notion o fWall-wide management gained
f u r t h e r m o m e n t u m i n 1990-91 a s a r e s u l t o f m a j o r d e v e l ­
o p m e n t proposals for open-cast coal m i n i n g a n d oil
d r i l l i n g i nw h a t w o u l d l a t e r b e d e s i g n a t e d a s t h e setting.
Opponents o fthe development (including English Her­
itage a n d the C o u n c i l for British Archaeology) prevailed, Figure 4.11. View of a structural wall of Housesteads Fort in the fore­
a n d t h e e x p e r i e n c e p r o v i d e d a ni m p o r t a n t v a l i d a t i o n o f ground with Hadrian s Wall extending eastward into the distance.
Photo: David Myers
t h e W a l l ' s a c k n o w l e d g e d v a l u e s a sw e l l a s t h e v a l u e s o f its
l a n d s c a p e / s e t t i n g . F u r t h e r m o r e , i t e m e r g e d t h a t manage­
side A g e n c y ; a n d the start o f the M a n a g e m e n t Plan
ment o f t h e W a l l a n d i t s s u r r o u n d i n g s — n o t j u s t i t s d e s i g ­
process, led b yEnglish Heritage. Historically, ownership
n a t i o n a n d p r o t e c t i o n — w o u l d b e k e y t o its s u r v i v a l a n d
a n d c o n t r o l o f the territory m a k i n g u pthe site a n d setting
development.
h a d b e e n fragmented. I n response, these initiatives created
Prior tothese pro-conservation outcomes, World
institutions a n d partnerships t o m a n a g e Wall a n d setting
Heritage designation h a d not b e e n explicitly addressed i n
r e s o u r c e s i nw a y s t h a t w e r e c o h e r e n t g e o g r a p h i c a l l y a n d
the legislation regarding the m a n a g e m e n t o f the historic
built environment. T h e s e public controversies occurred
b e f o r e PPG 15 w a s p u b l i s h e d i n 1994; i n d e e d , t h e i n q u i r i e s
that w e r e held helped lead t o the inclusion o f specific
W o r l d H e r i t a g e s e c t i o n s i n PPG 15.
A r o u n d 1993, t h r e e d i s t i n c t b u t r e l a t e d i n i t i a t i v e s
w e r e developed, each bringing together avariety o f part­
ners a n d focusing efforts o n the W a l l a n d setting a sa n
integrated w h o l e . T h e s e three initiatives w e r e t h e
Hadrian sWall T o u r i s m Partnership ( H W T P ) ; t h e
H a d r i a n sW a l l Path National Trail, led b ythe Country-

Figure 4.12. View of the excavated area at Housesteads Roman Fort

Figure 4.10. The English Heritage museum building just below the fort looking south into the valley. Visitors cross this area as they walk from
at Housesteads. Photo: Margaret G. H. MacLean the car park up to the fort. Photo: Randall Mason

M A N A G E M E N T CONTEXT A N DHISTORY 183

across sectors. T h e y have led quite directly to the current T h e m e m b e r s o f the M P C are:
m a n a g e m e n t a n d p l a n n i n g regime. B e h i n d the initiatives Allerdale Borough Council
is a c o r e set o f i n d i v i d u a l s , c o n n e c t e d i n f o r m a l l y a n d for­
Association of Northeast Councils
mally, w h o r e m a i n i n v o l v e d i n the m a n a g e m e n t o f the site
to this day. Carlisle City Council

I n 1996, t h e f i r s t c o m p r e h e n s i v e management Carlisle County Council

plan w a s adopted to provide af r a m e w o r k reconciling a n d Castle Morpeth Borough Council
b a l a n c i n g t h e v a r i e t y o f interests i n t h e site, to a r t i c u l a t e
Community Council of Northumberland
agreed-upon objectives, a n d to generate p r o g r a m s o f
w o r k . A m o n g the central provisions o f this p l a n w a s the Copeland Borough Council

creation of the M a n a g e m e n t Plan Committee, w h i c h rep­ Council for British Archaeology

r e s e n t s t h e s t a k e h o l d e r s i n t h e site a n d its setting. T h e Country Land & Business Association
1996 p l a n s p e l l s o u t t h e M P C s responsibilities:
Countryside Agency

Cumbria County Council

1. to oversee the implementation of general and
specific recommendations made within the Management Cumbria Tourist Board

Plan, and to monitor the success in meeting the targets it Department of Culture, Media and Sport
sets; Department of Environment, Food, and Rural Affairs
2. to establish a forum for management issues, and Durham University
to continue to co-ordinate efforts towards concerted man­
English Heritage, Hadrian s Wall Co-ordination Unit
agement within the Hadrian s Wall World Heritage Site;
English Heritage, London
3. to receive reports from responsible bodies and
agencies on projects which affect the Hadrian's Wall area; English Nature

4. to agree action programmes and priorities for European Liaison Unit

developing specific aspects of the management plan; Forest Enterprise

5. to monitor the condition of the World Heritage Government Office North East
Site, and develop and agree on appropriate action to deal Hadrian's Wall Tourism Partnership
with threats to its well-being;
ICOMOS UK
6. to develop and agree further policies and codes
Lake District National Park
of practice for protection, recording and research, access,
interpretation, and preservation of the World Heritage Site, National Farmers Union

as well as safeguarding the livelihoods and interests of those The National Trust
living and working within the zone, and to encourage the
Newcastle City Council
adoption of such policies by responsible bodies and agencies;
North Tyneside Metropolitan Borough Council
7. within the overriding need to conserve the
Northeast Museums, Libraries and Archives Council
World Heritage Site, to promote the economy of the region;
Northumberland County Council
8. to agree the work programme of, and provide
general direction for the proposed Hadrians Wall Co-ordina­ Northumberland National Park

tion Unit; Northumbria Tourist Board

9. to review the conclusions and recommenda­ Tyne dC Wear Museums

tions within the management plan, to determine the fre­ Tynedale District Council
quency of the necessary updating of the plan, and to oversee
University of Newcastle
this process when it occurs. 39

The Vindolanda Trust

Voluntary Action Cumbria

184 H A D R I A N ' S W A L L W O R L D H E R I T A G E SITE

 T h e M P C c o n v e n e s b i a n n u a l l y t or e v i e w p r o g r e s s t h e f o r m o f its s t a t u t o r y r e v i e w a u t h o r i t y . I f i n c e r t a i n sit­
o n t h e p l a n . T h e 1996 p l a n a l s o c r e a t e d t h e H a d r i a n s W a l l uations the negotiation, consultation, and collaboration of
Co-ordination Unit ( H W C U ) , w h i c h oversees implemen­ t h e p a r t n e r s h i p fails t ob r i n g a r e s u l t a c c e p t a b l e t o E H , t h e
tation o fthe m a n a g e m e n t plan o n aday-to-day basis. organization has the authority t oc h a n g e the o u t c o m e .
A n o t h e r i m p o r t a n t e n t i t y is t h e H W T P , w h i c h , like t h e E v i d e n t l y , this a c t i o n is a v o i d e d t ot h e l a r g e s t e x t e n t p o s s i ­
H W C U , handles day-to-day responsibilities for m a n a g i n g b l e . E H fills t h e c o m p l i c a t e d r o l e s o f m a n a g e r , r e g u l a t o r ,
activities at t h e site. T h e H W T P w o r k s t oc o o r d i n a t e sus­ archaeologist, business partner, a n d referee. F u r t h e r m o r e ,
t a i n a b l e t o u r i s m m a r k e t i n g a n d d e v e l o p m e n t ; it is dis­ as a n o p e r a t o r o f historic sites, the o r g a n i z a t i o n n e e d s t o
cussed in m o r e detail below. c u l t i v a t e t h e site's e c o n o m i c a n d u s e v a l u e s , a n d it is
s o m e t i m e s s e e n t ob e i n c o m p e t i t i o n w i t h o t h e r sites.
T H E R O L E OF ENGLISH HERITAGE
T h i s p u t s E H i n t h e p o s i t i o n o fa d v o c a t i n g — a n d n e e d i n g
E n g l i s h H e r i t a g e is a k e y o r g a n i z a t i o n i n this management
to balance—different kinds o f values. R e c o g n i z i n g the
s c h e m e . It plays several roles simultaneously. A t o n e level,
c o m p l e x i t y , E H a n d its p a r t n e r s h a v e e s t a b l i s h e d o t h e r
it s e r v e s as p a r t n e r a n d c o o r d i n a t o r ; at a n o t h e r level, it is
organizations, s u c h as the H W T P a n d the N a t i o n a l Trail,
the national authority that advises a n d approves or pre­
to bolster the sitewide presence a n d perspective a n d h e d g e
v e n t s c e r t a i n i n t e r v e n t i o n s o r a c t i v i t i e s o fo t h e r p a r t n e r s .
reliance o n o n e sole, c o o r d i n a t i n g entity.
E H ' s c o r e m a n d a t e — a n d its h i s t o r i c a l m i s s i o n a n d r a i s o n
d ' e t r e — a s w e l l as its s t a t u t o r y responsibilities i d e n t i f y it
closely w i t h the historic, archaeological, a n d research val­
u e s o f t h e W a l l . T h e m a n a g e m e n t f u n c t i o n s it h a s t a k e n
o n for the H a d r i a n sW a l l W o r l d Heritage Site (and others
i n E n g l a n d ) h a v e , h o w e v e r , m o r e f u l l y c l a r i f i e d its r o l e i n
c o n t e m p o r a r y values. C o n g r u e n t w i t h this b r o a d e n i n g o f
m a n d a t e a n d o f t h e t y p e s o f v a l u e s it r e c o g n i z e s i n its site-
specific w o r k , E H sees itself as steward, advocate, a n d pro­
tector of historic landscapes a n d environments, rather
t h a n o fsites a n d monuments. 4 0

O f c e n t r a l i m p o r t a n c e t ot h e s u c c e s s o f manage­
m e n t i s t h e H W C U , s e t u p i n 1996 b y E H t o l e a d t h e i m p l e ­
m e n t a t i o n o fthe first M a n a g e m e n t Plan. 4 1
Currently, the
H W C U c o n s i s t s o f t w o s t a f f m e m b e r s o n l o a n from E H
who, in collaboration with other individuals from other
institutions, lead the i m p l e m e n t a t i o n o fthis s c h e m e
a c r o s s t h e totality o f t h e site, a i d e d b y d o z e n s o f p a r t n e r
organizations and m o r e than seven hundred landowners.
E H is t h e g o v e r n m e n t ' s " l e a d b o d y f o r t h e h i s ­
t o r i c e n v i r o n m e n t " a n d is t h e o n l y n a t i o n a l b o d y w i t h t h e
r e m i t t op r o t e c t a n d c o n s e r v e t h e W o r l d H e r i t a g e Site.
B a s e d o n t h e 1979 Ancient Monuments and Archaeological
Areas Act a n d t h e 1983 National Heritage Act, E H h a s s t a t u ­
tory review authority for planning consent regarding
s c h e d u l e d m o n u m e n t s . E H also offers advice t oo w n e r s o f
s c h e d u l e d m o n u m e n t s a n d listed b u i l d i n g s a n d is t h e m a n ­
a g e r o fs e v e r a l m u s e u m s / h i s t o r i c sites a n d m u s e u m s at
the site ( C o r b r i d g e , H o u s e s t e a d s , a n d C h e s t e r s ) .
B e c a u s e o f its k e y r o l e i n t h e H W C U a n d its l e g a l
m a n d a t e at a n a t i o n a l level, E H is s o m e w h a t m o r e t h a n a n
equal p a r t n e r in the s c h e m e , a n d this creates a n i m b a l a n c e
of power a m o n g the partners. E H holds at r u m p card in

M A N A G E M E N T CONTEXT A N D HISTORY 185

 R e c o n s t r u c t i o n a t A r c h a e o l o g i c a l Sites:
A Lens o n C u l t u r a l Resource Policy
R e c o n s t r u c t i o n o f a b o v e g r o u n d features at
a r c h a e o l o g i c a l s i t e s is a s o u r c e o f g r e a t
v e r s y i n p r o f e s s i o n a l c i r c l e s , a n d y e t it is a f a i r l y
c o m m o n practice. In situ reconstruction pro­
posals often highlight conflicts of value: while
reconstruction usually destroys archaeological
a n d r e s e a r c h value to s o m e extent a n d
d a m a g e p e r c e p t i o n s o f asite's "authenticity,"
the "realism" suggested by the n e w structure
can increase the n u m b e r of visitors a n d there­
fore the e c o n o m i c a n d social v a l u e o f t h e site.
E x situ reconstructions are less controversial
because, in principle, they are not placed
archaeological deposits. T h e strategies a n d
intentions behind reconstruction vary consid-
The bathhouse of Segedunum at Wallsend. In addition to a
broad, excavated area and a new, award-winning museum, the
site includes a Roman bathhouse reconstructed ex situ. The
project has captured considerable interpretive and research
values through the process of researching, constructing, and
presenting the working Roman-style bathhouse. Since it was
not built above archaeological resources and is presented as a
modern structure, it does not undermine the research value
of the site. Photo: Marta de la Torre
186 H A D R I A N ' S W A L L W O R L D H E R I T A G E SITE
e r a b l y f r o m site to site a l o n g H a d r i a n ' s W a l l ,
m a k i n g reconstruction a n excellent lens
t h r o u g h w h i c h to v i e w the varying, s o m e t i m e s
contro­ opposing, approaches to cultural resource pol­
icy that exist w i t h i n the M a n a g e m e n t Plan
framework.
Several examples of reconstructed buildings
a n d features are present at individual sites
may
across the W o r l d H e r i t a g e Site, a n d m o r e are
p l a n n e d f o r t h e f u t u r e . E v e n t h e W a l l itself is
an in situ reconstruction in s o m e places. Part­
ners have different standards for reconstruc­
tion, r a n g i n g f r o m astrict avoidance o f recon­
s t r u c t i o n as ac o n s e r v a t i o n strategy, to its free
over
use to generate interpretation a n d visitor
attraction.
R e c o n s t r u c t i o n has b e e n justified either as
research in the use of construction materials
a n d t e c h n i q u e s o r a s am e a n s o f h e l p i n g the
visitor imagine the original appearance of a
site. T h e r e c o n s t r u c t i o n s i l l u s t r a t e d h e r e were
conceived a n d e x e c u t e d to create stronger
i m a g e s a n d interpretive tools for conveying the
c e n t r a l h i s t o r i c v a l u e s o f t h e W a l l a n d its fea­
tures as representing the R o m a n military fron­
tier that so strongly s h a p e d this part o f the
United Kingdom.
In general, the conservation field does not
embrace reconstruction. T h e Venice Charter'
states, 'All reconstruction w o r k s h o u l d . . .be
Panoramic view of the actual remains of the fort at Sege-
dunum, as seenfroman observation tower, showing the
reconstructed bathhouse at the far left. Photo: public understanding, bolstering the mar­
Margaret G. H. MacLean
ketability o f sites, c r e a t i n g j o b s , a n d b o o s t i n g

r u l e d o u t a p r i o r i / " PPG I J t e r m s r e c o n s t r u c ­
f
tourism expenditures and associated economic

t i o n " n o t a p p r o p r i a t e . " T h e 1998 B r i t i s h S t a n ­ externalities.

dard on the Principles of the Conservation of

Recently revised E H policy on reconstruction
Historic Buildings instructs,'A presumption
2

maintains basic conservation principles while

a g a i n s t r e s t o r a t i o n is a h a l l m a r k o f t h e B r i t i s h
carefully circumscribing certain conditions
a p p r o a c h to building conservation." However,
u n d e r w h i c h it c a n b e a c c e p t e d as conservation
s o m e experts believe reconstructions increase
policy, a n d therefore in the interest o f sustain­

ing heritage values. Emphasis, however,

remains o n discouraging speculative recon­

struction a n d precluding in situ reconstructions

that d a m a g e original fabric.

T h e 2002 M a n a g e m e n t P l a n a d o p t s a

policy generally supportive of reconstruction,

citing several successful e x a m p l e s at the site

a n d listing several advantages o f selective

The West Gate at Arbeia at South Shields. Located near
reconstructions (in situ a n d otherwise). This
Newcastle, the site of Arbeia has several reconstructions.
The West Gate, reconstructed in 1988, was initially chal­ marks achange from the traditional approach
lenged by English Heritage and resulted in a public inquiry.
Reconstruction was eventually approved, along with tacit to archaeological values.
approval of the idea of using reconstructions as a bold visi­
tor attraction strategy. It is interesting to note that the same
A l l i n all, al a c k o f c o n s e n s u s still r e m a i n s on
individual developed the plans for South Shields and Sege-
dunum using reconstruction, excavation, and museum dis­ reconstruction a m o n g the H a d r i a n sWall part­
play methods but different overall approaches to each.
Photo: Margaret G. H. MacLean ners. T h e issue has b e e n divisive. A l r e a d y in

M A N A G E M E N T CONTEXT A N DHISTORY 187

 The reconstructed barracks at Arbeia at South Shields. At
present, additional in situ reconstructions of barracks and
houses are being undertaken within the excavated fort walls
at Arbeia. Photo: Marta de la Torre
The private Vindolanda Trust pursues an active program of
excavation, research, conservation, and reconstruction with
a strong entrepreneurial visitor orientation. Some of the
Trust's initiatives have proven controversial. These include a
number of ex situ reconstructions, for example this temple
and segments of stone-and-turf wall. The Trust plans to
reconstruct a large Roman fort on its properties, in a loca­
tion that would have a strong visual impact on the setting.
Photo: Marta de la Torre
1984, p r i o r t o W o r l d H e r i t a g e designation,
approval of the proposal for the reconstruction
o f the W e s t G a t e at S o u t h Shields d i d n o t come
until after apublic inquiry, the last step in
resolving areconstruction disagreement.
T h e i n t e r e s t s i n f a v o r o f r e c o n s t r u c t i o n a n d its
economic-development benefits w o n out over
188 H A D R I A N ' S W A L L W O R L D H E R I T A G E SITE
Clayton's Wall, near Steel Rigg. Many segments of Hadrian's
Wall could be considered reconstructions. For example, in
some places much of the wall was mined for building stone
in the post-Roman era. The extensive sections of Clayton's
Wall reconstructed in the nineteenth century (followed by
similar conservation in the twentieth century) consist of a
core of excavated and reassembled Roman-era dry-laid wall
with nineteenth-century course layered on the top. Few, if
fr truly authentic segments of exposed wall survive.
Dto: Marta de la Torre
heritage c o n s e r v a t i o n interests, led at that time
b y E H . Proposals for reconstruction are
e x p e c t e d to c o n t i n u e as c o n s e r v a t i o n and
d e v e l o p m e n t activities p r o c e e d in the W o r l d
H e r i t a g e Site. T h e a b s e n c e o f c o n s e n s u s is s e e n
as a n indicator o f the health o f the overall
partnership: partners can disagree on specific
approaches even though they agree on the gen­
eral f r a m e w o r k of values and their protection.
"Generally, there can be no objections to
r e c o n s t r u c t i o n w h i c h is n o t i n s i t u p r o v i d e d the
s e t t i n g o f t h e W o r l d H e r i t a g e S i t e is p r o ­
tected," and, further, that principles of histori­
cal accuracy a n d reversibility are respected. 3
H a d r i a n sW a l l policy therefore reflects a
branching away from rigid ideological pro­
n o u n c e m e n t s against reconstruction toward
a m o r e situational decision m a k i n g based on
 recognition o fthe multiplicity o f values

involved. Future proposals for reconstruction

present potentially divisive decisions for the

partnership.

In the end, the key question about reconstruc­

t i o n i sw h e t h e r i tt h r e a t e n s t h e overall integrity

a n d authenticity o fthe W a l l a n d setting, and

t h e r e f o r e t h e h e r i t a g e v a l u e s o f t h e e n t i r e site.

Decisions ultimately will b em a d e within the

planning controls s y s t e m — t h e scheduled mon­

u m e n t s r e v i e w c o n d u c t e d b yE H t oadvise the

consent decisions o fthe D C M S .

Notes

1. ICOMOS, The Venice Charter, 1967.

2. British Standard on the Principles of the Conservation
of Historic Buildings (BS7913,1998), cited in English
Heritage Policy Statement on Restoration, Reconstruction,
and Speculative Recreation of Archaeological Sites Including
Ruins, February 2001.
3. English Heritage 2002, 65-66.

M A N A G E M E N T CONTEXT A N D HISTORY 189

 Understanding and Protecting the Values of the Site
Values Associated w i t h Hadrian's W a l l
HOW VALUING OF T H E WALL HAS EVOLVED
Since thedeparture o f theR o m a n legions centuries ago,
local people a n dcommunities have valued and m a d e u s e
o f t h e W a l l i n av a r i e t y o f utilitarian w a y s : a s as o u r c e o f
q u a r r i e d stone, as field boundaries, a n ds o o n . A n t i q u a r i a n
interest i n H a d r i a n sW a l l , a n d t h e c o n s c i o u s u n d e r s t a n d ­
i n g o fa r c h a e o l o g i c a l a n d h i s t o r i c v a l u e , b e g a n a r o u n d
1600 a n d i n c r e a s e d t h r o u g h o u t t h e n i n e t e e n t h century.
T h u s , u s e v a l u e s and h e r i t a g e v a l u e s o f t h e W a l l s t r e t c h
back over centuries.
L e g i s l a t i o n p r o t e c t i n g t h e W a l l h a sb e e n enacted
over time, reflecting t h e c h a n g i n g values attributed t ot h e
site. T h e o r i g i n a l legislation s c h e d u l i n g m o s t o f t h e W a l l
as an a t i o n a l m o n u m e n t d a t e s from 1927 a n d f o c u s e d
exclusively o n t h eWall's R o m a n archaeological a n d his­
t o r i c v a l u e s . T h i s s c h e d u l i n g w a s u p d a t e d b y t h e 1932
H a d r i a n sW a l l a n d V a l l u m P r e s e r v a t i o n S c h e m e , w h i c h
extended t h eprotected area.
T h e 1976 D a r l i n g t o n A m e n i t y R e s e a r c h T r u s t
report o n conservation a n d visitors services, organized b y
the Countryside C o m m i s s i o n , formulated
a s t r a t e g y t od e a l w i t h t h e W a l l i n ag e o g r a p h i c a l l y com­
prehensive way. Italso addressed b o t h t h ethreats a n d
o p p o r t u n i t i e s p r e s e n t e d b y tourists d r a w n t ot h e W a l l ,
and recognized real a n d potential constraints presented
b y reconciling agricultural, tourist, a n dconservation uses
o f t h eW a l l a n d itslandscape. T h e D A R T report w a st h e
b a s i s f o r t h e 1984 d o c u m e n t Strategy for Hadrian's Wall,
p r o d u c e d b y t h e H a d r i a n sW a l l C o n s u l t a t i v e C o m m i t t e e ,
w h i c h c o n s i s t e d o faf e w d o z e n n a t i o n a l , r e g i o n a l ,
and local government agencies, aswell as nonprofit
groups representing aw i d e variety o f stakeholders. 4 2
T h e balanced view o fresources a n d / o r conservation a n d
development opportunities presented i ntheD A R T report
w e r e e x t e n d e d b y t h e Strategy. T h e l a t t e r f o c u s e d o n s i t e s
d i r e c t l y o n , o r r e l a t e d t o , t h e W a l l itself, a n d p r o p o s e d a
s t r a t e g y o fs t r e n g t h e n i n g t o u r i s m u s e o f l a r g e r , c e n t r a l
sites a l o n g t h eW a l l ( C a r v o r a n , B i r d o s w a l d , C h e s t e r s ,
and Corbridge). W h i l e concentrating o n safeguarding the
190 HADRIAN'S W A L L W O R L D HERITAGE SITE
W a l l , t h e d o c u m e n t s u g g e s t e d efforts t op r o t e c t a n d
e n h a n c e i t s l a n d s c a p e s e t t i n g . T h e f o u r p o i n t s o ft h e
strategy are:
a. t os a f e g u a r d t h e s p l e n d i d h e r i t a g e o f R o m a n
m o n u m e n t s a n d all a s s o c i a t e d r e m a i n s s ot h a t t h e y a r e
n o t lost o r spoilt f o rfuture generations;
b. t op r o t e c t , a n d w h e r e p o s s i b l e e n h a n c e , t h e
q u a l i t y o f l a n d s c a p e setting o f t h e W a l l sites;
c. t oe n c o u r a g e a p p r o p r i a t e p u b l i c v i s i t i n g o f
the Wall area, w i t h convenient access and high-quality
e x p e r i e n c e a n d( f o r t h o s e w h o s e e k it) u n d e r s t a n d i n g
o f t h e R o m a n m o n u m e n t a n d w a yo f life;
d. t o e n s u r e that local p e o p l e derive t h eb e s t possi­
ble benefits from t o u r i s m b y w a yo f i n c o m e a n d e m p l o y ­
m e n t , whilst e n s u r i n g that all appropriate steps a r e t a k e n
to m i n i m i s e t h e adverse effects o ftourism, particularly
on agriculture. 4 3
T h o u g h b o t h t h e D A R T r e p o r t a n d t h e Strategy
h a d little i m m e d i a t e , p r a c t i c a l effect, t h e y d i ds e t a p r e c e ­
d e n t f o rp a r t n e r s h i p b u i l d i n g a n dab r o a d e n e d v i e w o f t h e
Wall's values. B o t h acknowledged contemporary a n d her­
itage values, a n d v a l u e d t h eW a l l itself as w e l l as t h e sur­
r o u n d i n g landscape. E q u a l l y important, these early initia­
tives l a u n c h e d a n e v o l u t i o n a r y p r o c e s s o fc o n c e i v i n g t h e
W a l l a n d i t s v a l u e s a s a whole entity c o m p r i s i n g t h e c o r e
archaeological resources aswell asthelandscape setting.
M o n u m e n t s c h e d u l i n g u n d e r t h e 1979 Ancient Monuments
and Archaeological Areas Act r e v i s e d t h e o r i g i n a l d e s i g n a ­
tions. T h e W a l l is n o walmost entirely scheduled.
U N E S C O W o r l d Heritage inscription o f
H a d r i a n s W a l l M i l i t a r y Z o n e i n 1987 w a s b a s e d o n
R o m a n - e r a heritage values. "Built under t h eorders o f
E m p e r o r H a d r i a n i n a b o u t 122 A . D . o n t h e b o r d e r b e t w e e n
E n g l a n d a n d S c o t l a n d , t h e 118-kilometer l o n g w a l l is a
s t r i k i n g e x a m p l e o f t h e o r g a n i s a t i o n o fam i l i t a r y z o n e ,
w h i c h illustrates t h etechniques a n dstrategic a n d geo­
political views o ft h eR o m a n s . " 4 4
T h e inscription w a sa
c a t a l y s t f o r u n d e r s t a n d i n g and managing t h e W a l l a s a
zone, n o tsimply a narchaeological resource.
M a n a g i n g t h e site i n ac o m p r e h e n s i v e a n d
holistic w a yb e c a m e t h e m a j o r challenge. T h e p r i m a r y
v e h i c l e h a s b e e n t h e M a n a g e m e n t P l a n s o f 1996 a n d 2002. extended, and eventually m o r e than two hundred
T h e plans dealt w i t h contemporary-use values a n d the responses were received. M o s t of the concerns were
long-recognized, iconic archaeological and historic values expressed by the archaeological c o m m u n i t y and by
of the Wall. T h e y have stimulated the development of the landowners and farmers, often channeled through local
partnership-based management model employed today, authorities. T h e overall n u m b e r of responses w a s not
and in their formulation even embodied such an large, a n d few w e r e hostile, but specific concerns w e r e
approach. strongly articulated:
• F e a r o fa d d i t i o n a l c o n t r o l s o n f a r m i n g t h r o u g h ­
CURRENT UNDERSTANDING OF VALUES
out aw i d e zone
T h e c u r r e n t u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f t h e site's v a l u e s is explicitly
• Fear of widespread enforced change t o farming
represented in the two M a n a g e m e n t Plans. T h e values are
practices
n o t l i s t e d p e r s e i n t h e 1996 p l a n , b u t t h e s i t e ' s h i s t o r i c a l
• Fear of increased bureaucracy and additional
a n d c o n t e m p o r a r y s i g n i f i c a n c e is w e l l s u m m a r i z e d as fol­
English Heritage controls
l o w s : " T h e H a d r i a n s W a l l c o r r i d o r is i m p o r t a n t . . . b o t h
• C o n c e r n s o v e r t r a f f i c m a n a g e m e n t o n r o a d B6318
for the c o n c e n t r a t i o n o f R o m a n sites a n d for their s u r v i v a l
(the Military R o a d )
a n d effect o n today's landscape." 4 5
A n articulation of val­
• Fear of impact of tourism and of the National
u e s is p r e s e n t e d i n t h e s i g n i f i c a n c e o f t h e H a d r i a n s W a l l
Trail o n f a r m i n g activities a n d archaeological remains.
Military Zone:
E n g l i s h Heritage's response, as c a p t u r e d i n the
• archaeological values of the R o m a n Wall
revised plan, was described by lead planner Christopher
r e m a i n s , as w e l l as its a s s o c i a t e d f e a t u r e s ( v a l l u m , etc.),
Y o u n g : " W e r e w r o t e the p l a n [after the public comment
a n d outlier sites (e.g., fortlets a n d S t a n e g a t e features);
c y c l e ] a n d m a d e it m o r e a c c e s s i b l e . W e a l s o s p e n t a lot o f
• the historical values associated with the R o m a n
time talking to people a n d groups w i t h concerns. I n the
n o r t h e r n f r o n t i e r a n d its s u b s e q u e n t influence;
end, apart from the boundaries, there w a s comparatively
• t h e v a r i e d s u r r o u n d i n g l a n d s c a p e a l o n g t h e 80-
little difference i n s u b s t a n c e b e t w e e n t h e policies set o u t
mile length of the Wall;
i n 1995 a n d 1996, b u t w e h a d a c h i e v e d b e t t e r u n d e r s t a n d ­
• aesthetic a n d natural values of the surrounding
i n g o f w h a t w a s i n t e n d e d as aresult o f the consultation
landscape are also n o t e d briefly; a n d
process." 4 7

• t h e a d d i t i o n a l l a y e r o f W o r l d H e r i t a g e v a l u e is
T h e final 1996 p l a n a d d r e s s e d t h e p r i m a r y
described.
c o n c e r n s as follows:
Economic and other contemporary values were
• It a d o p t e d atiered a p p r o a c h to land-use a n d m o n ­
n o t explicitly a r t i c u l a t e d as a c o n t r i b u t o r to t h e site's
u m e n t controls, using n o r m a l ancient m o n u m e n t powers
s i g n i f i c a n c e i n 1996, t h o u g h t h e y a r e t a c i t l y a d d r e s s e d
for archaeological cores a n d appropriate planning policies
in plan policies a n d through the partnerships formed.
to protect the setting.
I n s e c t i o n 3.1, " N e e d f o r a M a n a g e m e n t P l a n , " t h e c e n t r a l
• It recognized the n e e d for change in the agricul­
m a n a g e m e n t c h a l l e n g e is c l e a r l y d e f i n e d as i n v o l v i n g
tural landscape (not the fossilization of particular f a r m i n g
" f o u r m a j o r f a c t o r s w h i c h n e e d t o b e b a l a n c e d " : (1) c o n ­
methods), a n d the development of positive landscape
serving archaeological resources (and associated land­
m a n a g e m e n t o n av o l u n t a r y basis w i t h appropriate grant
s c a p e ) ; (2) p r o t e c t i n g t h e w o r k i n g a g r i c u l t u r a l l a n d s c a p e
support.
s u r r o u n d i n g t h e W a l l ; (3) e n s u r i n g p u b l i c a c c e s s f o r v i s i ­
• It clarified that E H s o u g h t n o additional p o w e r s
tors a n d local users, a n d m a k i n g this access sustainable;
in establishing the Co-ordination Unit; the role of the unit
a n d (4) r e c o g n i z i n g the i m p o r t a n t c o n t r i b u t i o n s o f the
w a s to p r o v i d e afocus o n the W a l l as aw h o l e , as w e l l as
W a l l to the local a n d regional economies.
coordination o f efforts a n d c a r r y i n g out o f tasks that did
A f i r s t - d r a f t p l a n w a s i s s u e d i n J u l y 1995 a n d
n o t fall to o t h e r agencies.
generated strong reactions during the public consultation
• It f o r m a l i z e d the b o u n d a r i e s o f the W o r l d
period, resulting in revisions a n d ap l a n m o r e responsive
H e r i t a g e Site a n d d e f i n e d its setting.
t o t h e c o n c e r n s o fa w i d e r r a n g e o f s t a k e h o l d e r s . 4 6

• It p u r s u e d "sustainability" o f t o u r i s m t h r o u g h
H u n d r e d s o f c o p i e s o f t h e d r a f t a n d 35,000 s u m m a r y
w o r k i n g with the H W T P and through maintenance and
leaflets w e r e distributed to aw i d e r a n g e o f partners a n d
m a n a g e m e n t o f traffic t h r o u g h o u t the region.
individuals. T h e three-month consultation period w a s

U N D E R S T A N D I N G A N DP R O T E C T I N G T H E VALUES 191
 T h e r e v i s e d 2002 M a n a g e m e n t P l a n i s n o t a
significant departure from t h e 1996 p l a n ; r a t h e r , i t i s a
r e f i n e m e n t a n d c o n t i n u a t i o n o f i t . T h e 2002 p l a n i n c l u d e s
a p o i n t - b y - p o i n t a n a l y s i s o ft h e p r o g r e s s a c c o m p l i s h e d on
t h e n i n e t e e n o b j e c t i v e s o f t h e 1996 p l a n . A d j u s t m e n t s t o
"regulatory a n d administrative measures" for putting the
p l a n i n t o effect w e r e c o n s i d e r e d t oh a v e b e e n l a r g e l y
achieved. F o r the m o s t part, objectives in the area o f con­
s e r v a t i o n a n d r e s e a r c h w e r e e s t i m a t e d n o t t oh a v e b e e n
a c h i e v e d . Finally, i n t h e a r e a s o fs u s t a i n a b l e t o u r i s m a n d
v i s i t o r access, it w a s d e t e r m i n e d t h a t significant p r o g r e s s
h a d b e e n m a d e b o t h at specific sites a n d at the W a l l - w i d e
scale. 4 8
I n t h e 2002 p l a n , t h e a p p r o a c h t o v a l u e a r t i c u l a t i o n
w a s r e v i s e d t os u g g e s t an e w b a l a n c e b e t w e e n h e r i t a g e
v a l u e s (the b a s i s o fc o n s e r v a t i o n p o l i c i e s ) a n d c o n t e m ­
porary-use values (the basis for access a n d d e v e l o p m e n t
policies).
T h e c o r e s t a t e m e n t o fs i g n i f i c a n c e m a k e s the
connection b e t w e e n archaeological values a n d their uses,
b o t h cultural a n d e c o n o m i c : " [ H a d r i a n sW a l l M i l i t a r y
Z o n e ] i so fs i g n i f i c a n t v a l u e i n t e r m s o fits s c a l e a n d i d e n ­
tity, t h e t e c h n i c a l e x p e r t i s e o fits b u i l d e r s a n d p l a n n e r s ,
its d o c u m e n t a t i o n , s u r v i v a l a n d rarity, a n d also i n t e r m s
o f its economic, educational and cultural contribution to
today's world." 49
F o l l o w i n g a r e e l e m e n t s o f t h e 2002 S t a t e m e n t of
Significance: 5 0
• Archaeological and historical values: tightly tied to Roman
period, with some acknowledgment of the nineteenth-
and twentieth-century values created by conservation . . .
although the values are clearly centered on the Roman, the
aboveground remains have (almost exclusively) been con­
served, consolidated, and restored in situ over the last 150
years.
• Natural values: seven key types of habitat are represented
in the World Heritage Site, many of them recognized as
significant ecological resources at the national and inter­
national levels.
• Contemporary values: economic, recreational and educa­
tional, social and political.
• World Heritage values. The rationales for meeting WHC
criteria (ii), (iii), and (iv) stem exclusively from Roman fabric
and associations. [Though stated last, these in fact are at the
center of articulated values for the Wall and its setting.]
192 H A D R I A N ' S W A L L W O R L D H E R I T A G E SITE
Current m a n a g e m e n t and policy are clearly
focused on the archaeological values and associated
h i s t o r i c v a l u e s o ft h e W a l l . S e c o n d a r y t othis, b u t i n t e ­
g r a t e d as bases for policy, are the aesthetic values o f the
s e t t i n g a n d t h e e c o n o m i c v a l u e s . T h e l a t t e r is p e r h a p s t h e
m o s t i m p o r t a n t c o n t e m p o r a r y v a l u e o fH a d r i a n s W a l l
a n d represents ad e p a r t u r e from t h e 1996 p l a n .
T h e l a t e s t M a n a g e m e n t P l a n d o e s n o t r e f l e c t all
t h e v a l u e s h e l d b y all t h e p a r t n e r s . W h a t a r e r e p r e s e n t e d
a r e t h e v a l u e s a n d p o l i c i e s o n w h i c h t h e r e is c o n s e n s u s ,
and which have emerged from the process o f consultation
and negotiation that created the multipartner plan. E a c h
o f t h e p a r t n e r o r g a n i z a t i o n s a n d / o r l a n d o w n e r s is l i k e l y
to have projects a n d h o l d values that are n o t a c c o u n t e d for
in the plan.
E a c h p a r t n e r s e e s m a n a g e m e n t o ft h e site from
t h e p e r s p e c t i v e o fits p a r t i c u l a r s t a k e i n t h e W a l l a n d its
value priorities. T h e core significance, range o f values,
a n d general policies for the W o r l d Heritage Site are shared
b y all. A s e x p e c t e d , the v a l u e s are a r r a n g e d a n d p r i o r i t i z e d
differently b y different p a r t n e r s as e a c h p u r s u e s its g o a l s
within the M a n a g e m e n t Plan framework. For example,
t h e 2002 b i d f o r S i n g l e R e g e n e r a t i o n B u d g e t ( S R B )
regional economic development funding highlights eco­
n o m i c values. These documents were submitted by the
H W T P a n d reflect acollective d e c i s i o n b y the members
of H W T P (which include EH). 5 1
H o w M a n a g e m e n t Policies a n d S t r a t e g i e s
Take V a l u e s i n t o C o n s i d e r a t i o n
T h i s s e c t i o n d e s c r i b e s h o w t h e e v o l v i n g v a l u e s o ft h e W a l l
have b e e n reflected a n d taken into consideration in the
p o l i c i e s a n d s t r a t e g i e s o ft h e W o r l d H e r i t a g e S i t e M a n a g e ­
m e n t P l a n s . T h e d i s c u s s i o n is o r g a n i z e d a r o u n d s e v e r a l
types of policies or m a n a g e m e n t issues that provide a per­
spective o n the particularchallenges faced b y manage­
ment. T h e s e challenges include the setting of boundaries;
t h e v a l u e s h i f t s b e t w e e n t h e 1996 p l a n a n d t h e 2002 p l a n ;
t o u r i s m s t r a t e g i e s a n d t h e c r e a t i o n o ft h e H W T P ; agricul­
tural policy; a n d the central role of partnerships in m a n ­
a g e m e n t o ft h e site.
SETTING BOUNDARIES
B o u n d a r i e s for the site w e r e n o t i n c l u d e d i n the o r i g i n a l
n o m i n a t i o n o fH a d r i a n sW a l l t ot h e W o r l d H e r i t a g e L i s t
i n t h e mid-1980s. T h e b o u n d a r i e s w e r e s e t l a t e r , d u r i n g
f o r m u l a t i o n o f t h e 1996 M a n a g e m e n t P l a n . T h i s l a g g a v e
the multipartner collaboration the opportunity t o g r o w
and develop before thecontentious subject o f boundary
setting w a s addressed.
Primarily boundaries were determined in accord
with theparts o f theWall that h a d been scheduled as
ancient m o n u m e n t s . Secondarily, t h e setting w a s estab­
lished as av i e w s h e d o f t h eW a l l resources ( f r o m i t o 6
k i l o m e t e r s d i s t a n t ) a n da s t h e a r e a s t h a t p o t e n t i a l l y c o n ­
tained significant archaeological resources. T h e resulting
discussions a n d negotiations revealed t h e different values
Site w o u l d lead to further controls. T h i s issue w a s taken
u p at senior levels o f g o v e r n m e n t , a n d t h e eventual deci­
sion o n b o u n d a r i e s w a sm a d e at t h eministerial level.
In t h e end, t h epractical m a n a g e m e n t effect o f
setting t h eb o u n d a r i e s w a sv e r y s m a l l — t h e planners' orig­
i n a l c o n c e p t i o n a n d t h e e v e n t u a l r e s u l t a r eq u i t e similar.
P s y c h o l o g i c a l l y , t h o u g h , m a n y p e o p l e felt m o r e comfort­
able w i t h a closely d e f i n e d Site a l o n g w i t h ab r o a d Setting,
w h i c h m i g h t b e easier to alter i nt h e future. 5 2

h e l d b y v a r i o u s g r o u p s a n ds t a k e h o l d e r s . Disagreements
FROM T H E 1996 PLAN TO T H E 2002 PLAN
arose w i t h local authorities o rl a n d o w n e r s about specific
T h e r e a r es o m e s u b t l e b u tsignificant differences between
properties t o b e i n c l u d e d i nt h e setting, a n dstrategic deci­
t h e 1996 a n d 2002 M a n a g e m e n t P l a n s , w h i c h r e f l e c t o n t h e
sions h a dto b e m a d e to exclude particularagricultural,
c o n t i n u i n g e v o l u t i o n o f site values.
t o w n , o r other lands lest l a n d o w n e r s perceive e v e n m o r e
Conceptually, over t h e course o f this period,
regulatory controls and reviews were being imposed.
focus shifted f r o m t h eMilitary Z o n e to "theW a l l a n d its
T h e 1995 d r a f t p l a n p r o p o s e d b o u n d a r i e s t h a t
Setting." A l t h o u g h t h en o t i o n o f H a d r i a n sW a l l as a land­
approximated roughly thearea n o wdefined asthe Setting
scape and n o tsimply as a narchaeological resource w a s
o f t h eW o r l d H e r i t a g e Site. A l s o p r o p o s e d , m o r e tenta­
i n d i c a t e d i n t h e 1995 d r a f t a n d t h e 1996 p l a n , t h i s c e n t r a l
tively, w a st h e i n c l u s i o n o f aw i d e z o n e d o w n t h e C u m ­
i d e a i s m u c h m o r e e v i d e n t i n t h e 2002 p l a n . T h i s s h i f t
brian coast, d o w n t h en o r t h coast o f t h e S o l w a y estuary,
reflects ab r o a d e n i n g o f t h e t y p e s o f v a l u e s t o w a r d a
a n d t h r o u g h alarge area o f t h e T y n e River valley a r o u n d
g r e a t e r i n c l u s i o n o f a e s t h e t i c a n dc o n t e m p o r a r y v a l u e s
Corbridge and north o f H e x h a m . This reflected a n
o f t h ew i d e r setting landscape. Italso w a saresponse t o
a p p r o a c h that v i e w e d t h eW o r l d Heritage Site v e r y m u c h
the F M D disaster a n d itsi m p a c t o n t h evalues o f t h e
as acultural landscape.
W o r l d H e r i t a g e Site. I naddition, it s y m b o l i z e d a m o v e
I n p r a c t i c a l t e r m s , t h e 1995 d r a f t p l a n p r e s e n t e d
t o w a r d ab r o a d e r - s c a l e a n d m o r e holistic a p p r o a c h t o
a tiered a p p r o a c h to t h e m a n a g e m e n t o f this b r o a d l y
p l a n n i n g . O n ec o u l d s a yt h a t t h e o l d e r m o d e l o f p l a n n i n g
d e f i n e d site. T h e i n n e r m o s t tier, t h e a r c h a e o l o g i c a l c o r e ,
for a n archaeological resource h a d b e e n replaced b y a
would b e protected b ypowers under ancient monuments
m o d e l o f p l a n n i n g f o raliving landscape that counts t h e
legislation since it consisted o f s c h e d u l e d sites only, w h i l e
1 1 8 - k i l o m e t e r (73-mile) a r c h a e o l o g i c a l r e s o u r c e among
d e v e l o p m e n t s i n t h e o u t e r p a r t o f t h e site w o u l d b e c o n ­
its d e a r e s t e l e m e n t s .
trolled through planning policies i nlocal authority plans.
Access, tourism revenue, tourism impact, agricul­
T h i s w a seffectively t h eposition reached, after exhaustive
t u r a l v i a b i l i t y , a n de c o n o m i c d e v e l o p m e n t — i s s u e s t h a t
p u b l i c c o n s u l t a t i o n , i n t h e 1996 p l a n — a t i g h t l y defined
f o r m t h esocial context o f conserving t h e W a l l — h a v e
S i t e c o m p o s e d o f t h e a r c h a e o l o g i c a l c o r e a n da S e t t i n g
b e e n d i s c u s s e d a n d d e b a t e d s i n c e t h e 1970s. T h e M a n a g e ­
u n d e r l o c a l c o n t r o l . T h ee n dr e s u l t w a s v i r t u a l l y t h e s a m e .
m e n t Plans have g r o w n progressively m o r e detailed a n d
S o m e a r g u e d i n t h e 1995-96 p u b l i c d i s c u s s i o n s
proactive i ndealing w i t h these diverse issues that consti­
that t h eW o r l d Heritage Site s h o u l d n o tb e c o n c e r n e d
tute t h esocial context o f t h eW a i f s conservation, a n d
w i t h t h e l a n d s c a p e as aw h o l e since that l a n d s c a p e is n o t
integrating t h e m with them o r e heritage-centered values
R o m a n and therefore n o to f outstanding universal value.
a n d i s s u e s . T h e v a l u e s a r t i c u l a t e d i n t h e 2002 p l a n m o r e
T h i s a r g u m e n t d i d n o t w i no u t ,o w i n g t o t h e l o g i c t h a t
explicitly recognize t h ei m p o r t a n c e o f contemporary-use
the W a l l is w h e r e it isb e c a u s e o f t h e landscape a n d h a s
v a l u e s . C o r r e s p o n d i n g l y , t h e p o l i c i e s a r em o r e strongly
greatly influenced thedevelopment o f thelandscape since
s h a p e d b y c o n t e m p o r a r y v a l u e s i n t h e 2002 p l a n , t h o u g h
its c o n s t r u c t i o n .
not at t h e sacrifice o f heritage values ( w h i c h already w e r e
T h e m o s t powerful arguments offered regarding
w e l l a r t i c u l a t e d i n t h e 1996 p l a n ) .
boundaries were n o tabout thecultural value o f the land­
scape, b u trather about t h epotential i m p a c t o n m o d e r n T H E C E N T R A L R O L E OF PARTNERSHIPS
land m a n a g e m e n t a n d t h einterests a n d freedoms o f cur­ R e c o g n i t i o n a n de n g a g e m e n t o f m a n y d i v e r s e s t a k e ­
rent l a n d o w n e r s . T h e r e w a sw i d e s p r e a d c o n c e r n that for­ h o l d e r s a r ek e yt o v a l u e s - b a s e d m a n a g e m e n t . T h e
m a l l y designating s u c h alarge area as aW o r l d H e r i t a g e H a d r i a n s W a l l p l a n s a r ei n c l u s i v e i n t h i s r e g a r d , t a k i n g

U N D E R S T A N D I N G A N D P R O T E C T I N G T H E VALUES 193
into consideration the interests of future generations, o f
the w o r l d at large (universal value), o farchaeologists and
researchers, o f tourists a n d visitors, a n d o f government,
landowners, farmers, and local communities. Develop­
m e n t a n d implementation of m a n a g e m e n t policies have
relied strongly o n the formation of institutional partner­
ships, w i t h the H W C U , H W T P , or the C o u n t r y s i d e
A g e n c y playing the coordinating roles. A t o n e level, this
r e g i m e o f p a r t n e r s h i p s is a s t r a i g h t f o r w a r d r e s p o n s e t o
the decentralized patterns o fownership and stewardship
in the territory o f the Site a n d S e t t i n g — n a m e l y the seven
h u n d r e d or so o w n e r s a n d dozens of g o v e r n m e n t and
n o n p r o f i t a g e n c i e s w i t h a s t a k e i n t h e site.
Fragmented landownership remains a prevalent
pattern. U n d e r the current partnership regime, there is
n o s i n g l e m a n a g e r f o r t h e w h o l e s i t e , b u t r a t h e r a fluid b u t
fairly stable g r o u p o forganizations led b y a s m a l l core o f
coordinating partners. 5 3
T h i s h a s b e e n called a partnership
park m a n a g e m e n t m o d e l , i n c o n t r a s t t o t h e t r a d i t i o n a l
m o d e l o f u n i f i e d site o w n e r s h i p . 5 4
T h e core group of
partners per force spends agreat deal o fenergy managing
the partnerships. T h e s e partnerships provide benefits
beyond those that w o u l d accrue from individual partners
acting alone and without coordination. That these
benefits are seen as o u t w e i g h i n g the costs holds true e v e n
for s o m e individual partners—foremost, the V i n d o l a n d a
T r u s t — w h o disagree w i t h s o m e of the m a i n policies
guiding the M a n a g e m e n t Plan.
B y m a k i n g it a p r i o r i t y t oc o o r d i n a t e a n d inte­
grate the actions o f p a r t n e r s at all g e o g r a p h i c levels, the
M a n a g e m e n t P l a n s e r v e s t h e range o f t h e l a n d s c a p e ' s v a l ­
u e s w e l l . O n e r i s k o f s u c h a l a r g e p a r t n e r s h i p p a r k is t h a t
of uncoordinated action, w h i c h not only can damage
resources a n d threaten values directly but also c a n send a
m e s s a g e t h a t t h e e n t i r e p a r t n e r s h i p is n o t f u l l y s u p p o r t e d
b y all partners. M a i n t a i n i n g a spirit o fcooperation and
p a r t n e r s ' u l t i m a t e d e f e r e n c e t ot h e v a l u e s o f t h e whole
site, as d i s c u s s e d a n d r e c o r d e d i n t h e M a n a g e m e n t Plan,
is c e n t r a l t ot h e s u c c e s s o f t h e p a r t n e r s h i p .
T h e overriding goal of the Hadrian sWall part­
n e r s h i p s h a s b e e n t oc r e a t e a b a l a n c e d p r o g r a m o f c o n s e r ­
vation a n d development, as evidenced in the collaboration
o f three different o r g a n i z a t i o n s l e a d i n g the effort: E H , a
conservation-driven agency; the H W T P , primarily an
economic development agency; and the Countryside
Agency, astatutory agency involved in m a n y countryside
issues a n d in developing the H a d r i a n sW a l l P a t h National
T r a i l . T h i s is a d e p a r t u r e from traditional conservation
p r a c t i c e — w h i c h generally resisted or ignored develop­
194 H A D R I A N ' S W A L L W O R L D H E R I T A G E SITE
m e n t a n d its benefits, a n d t o o o f t e n f o c u s e d o n monu­
m e n t s r a t h e r t h a n w h o l e l a n d s c a p e s — a n d is a l i g n e d w i t h
similar efforts in other countries s e e k i n g to m a n a g e large
heritage resources, complexes, or landscapes (for e x a m ­
ple, F r e n c h regional p a r k s a n d A m e r i c a n heritage areas).
T h r o u g h partnering and overlapping of responsi­
bilities, the site's v a l u e s h a v e b e e n w e l l a c k n o w l e d g e d i n
both depth and breadth. This acknowledgment probably
c o m e s m o r e easily w h e n the partners have diverse inter­
ests a n d values t h a n in a case o fcentralized o w n e r s h i p
and management. F o r instance, s o m e partnerships focus
o n archaeological values, others o n natural values or
recreational use. W i t h these collaborations spread out
a c r o s s t h e r e g i o n , a critical t a s k f o r m a n a g e m e n t is o n e of
coordination. T h e Wall's status as aW o r l d H e r i t a g e Site
plays a n anchoring role, keeping archaeological values,
a n d historic value related to the R o m a n archaeology, a s
the focus o fall efforts. S u c h b u y - i n o n " R o m a n " v a l u e s
brings together all the s t a k e h o l d e r s — n o t just the partners
for w h i c h W a l l - w i d e value understanding a n d m a n a g e ­
m e n t is t h e p r i m a r y g o a l , b u t also l o c a l a u t h o r i t i e s , i n d i ­
v i d u a l h e r i t a g e sites, g o v e r n m e n t a g e n c i e s w i t h d i v e r g e n t
mandates, national government, and World Heritage
stakeholders.
TOURISM STRATEGY
T o u r i s m d e v e l o p m e n t activities a n d the e c o n o m i c values
realized by tourism play astrong but not primary role in
site m a n a g e m e n t . T h e l e a d i n g t o u r i s m s t r a t e g y p u r s u e d
has been spearheaded by the tourism development agency
H W T P . T h e H W T P is itself a p a r t n e r s h i p , w i t h a n e x e c u ­
tive a n d m o r e t h a n a d o z e n f u n d e r s a n d p a r t n e r s (govern­
m e n t agencies, local councils, a n d others). T h e agency
s e e k s t oi n c r e a s e t h e e c o n o m i c b e n e f i t s a n d s u s t a i n a b l e
uses o f the heritage resources a n d other amenities avail­
able t o visitors.
S i n c e i t s f o r m a t i o n i n 1993, t h e H W T P ' s efforts
have been closely coordinated w i t h those of the H W C U
a n d other W a l l - r e l a t e d entities, as reflected i n the M a n a g e ­
ment Plan. 5 5
This integration of tourism and management
activities is e v i d e n t i n t h e list o f H W T P objectives:
• T o develop ahigh quality tourism product w h i c h
meets the needs of identified target markets, within the
overall objectives of the W o r l d Heritage M a n a g e m e n t Plan;
• T o generate a n d spread benefits for businesses in
the area, b y i m p r o v i n g c o m m u n i c a t i o n a n d access t o
markets, attracting m o r e high spending domestic and
overseas visitors, a n d developing the 'shoulder' seasons;
 • T o e n c o u r a g e m o r e p e o p l e t ol e a v e t h e i r c a r s at
h o m e a n d t ot r a v e l i n t o a n d a r o u n d t h e a r e a b y p u b l i c
transport a n d other m e a n s s u c h as cycling a n d w a l k i n g ;
• T o stimulate visitor interest in, a n d support
for, t h e m a n a g e m e n t a n d c o n s e r v a t i o n o ft h e W o r l d
H e r i t a g e Site;
• T o influence visitor b e h a v i o u r , t os p r e a d the l o a d
i n s u p p o r t o fa g r e e d site m a n a g e m e n t o b j e c t i v e s , t o m a x ­
imise benefits a n d minimise any adverse impacts o n the
host community 5 6
T h e agency engages in traditional marketing
activities a n d plays a n i m p o r t a n t part in regional b r a n d i n g
a n d identity for both the Northeast a n d the Northwest
(two governmental regions across w h i c h H W T P ' s w o r k
s p a n s ) . It w o r k s w i t h l o c a l b u s i n e s s e s t oi m p r o v e t h e i r
u n d e r s t a n d i n g a n d c o n n e c t i o n s w i t h the site a n d also
organizes the Wall-wide bus service. 5 7
T h e H W T P ' s i n v o l v e m e n t reflects the attitude
that tourism values m u s t be integrated w i t h heritage val­
ues. T h e agency takes the lead in tourism p r o m o t i o n and
Wall-based economic regeneration—within the frame­
w o r k o f the Site's c o n s e r v a t i o n m a n d a t e . It h a s l a u n c h e d
a w i d e v a r i e t y o fs u c c e s s f u l s e r v i c e s a n d i n i t i a t i v e s ( f r o m
the a f o r e m e n t i o n e d b u s service t oaW e b site t o w i n n i n g
a n d administering alarge g o v e r n m e n t grant for tourism-
l e d r e g i o n a l e c o n o m i c r e g e n e r a t i o n ) t ow o r k t o w a r d t h e s e
g o a l s , o p e r a t i n g o n t h e i d e a t h a t " h e r i t a g e is a d r i v e r o f
e c o n o m i c regeneration." W h a t sets the H W T P apart
from o t h e r t o u r i s m a g e n c i e s is its c l o s e p a r t n e r s h i p w i t h
E H a n d its full b u y - i n t ot h e M a n a g e m e n t P l a n , i n c l u d i n g
the primacy of heritage conservation.
T h r o u g h its o b j e c t i v e s a n d activities, t h e H W T P
defines a n d p u r s u e s w h a t the M a n a g e m e n t P l a n calls sus-
t a i n a b i l i t y Sustainable, as d e f i n e d b y t h e H W T P a n d its
W o r l d H e r i t a g e Site partners, m e a n s (i) staying w i t h i n the
overall (conservation) objectives of the W o r l d Heritage
S i t e a n d (2) b a l a n c i n g t h e p u r s u i t o f t h e v a r i o u s v a l u e s
recognized in the plan, both c o n t e m p o r a r y a n d historic.
A s t h e M a n a g e m e n t P l a n states o n its v e r y first p a g e , it is
"to p r o v i d e a m e a n s for e s t a b l i s h i n g a n a p p r o p r i a t e bal­
a n c e b e t w e e n t h e n e e d s o fc o n s e r v a t i o n , a c c e s s , s u s t a i n ­
a b l e e c o n o m i c d e v e l o p m e n t , a n d t h e i n t e r e s t s o ft h e l o c a l
community." 5 8
I n d e e d , s u s t a i n a b i l i t y is a n c h o r e d i n v a l u e s :
'A n u n d e r l y i n g p r i n c i p l e [ o f t h e p l a n ] i s t h a t o f ' s u s t a i n ­
ability' w h i c h strikes ab a l a n c e b e t w e e n m a x i m i s i n g
e n j o y m e n t a n d u s e o ft h e W H S w h i l e still p r e s e r v i n g t h e
v a l u e s a n d f a b r i c o ft h e S i t e a n d its S e t t i n g a n d e n s u r i n g
t h a t t h e i r u n i v e r s a l s i g n i f i c a n c e is n o t i m p a i r e d f o r f u t u r e
generations." 5 9
AGRICULTURAL POLICY, VALUES, AND USES
T h e p r a c t i c e o fa g r i c u l t u r e a n d a g r i c u l t u r a l p o l i c y h a s
a significant effect o n the H a d r i a n sW a l l landscape a n d
its m a n a g e m e n t , e s p e c i a l l y i n t h e c e n t r a l s e c t i o n s o f t h e
site. A g r i c u l t u r e h a s s h a p e d t h e l a n d s c a p e for c e n t u r i e s
and plays an exceedingly important role in the regional
economy, rivalingtourism and tourism-related develop­
m e n t as the m o s t i m p o r t a n t c o n t e m p o r a r y - u s e values
in the Setting.
T h e 2002 p l a n r e c o g n i z e s t h e interdependency
between agriculture and heritage conservation. A s part of
t h e a r t i c u l a t i o n o fc o n t e m p o r a r y v a l u e s , t h e p l a n s state­
m e n t o fs i g n i f i c a n c e n o t e s t h e c o n t r i b u t i o n o f a g r i c u l t u r e
to the W o r l d H e r i t a g e Site's e c o n o m i c values. 6 0
Sustaining agriculture, difficult in itself given eco­
n o m i c p r e s s u r e s a n d g l o b a l i z a t i o n , is y e t m o r e c o m p l e x i n
t h e c o n t e x t o ft h e W o r l d H e r i t a g e S i t e . T h e m a i n t e n a n c e
o f t r a d i t i o n a l a g r i c u l t u r e ( e s p e c i a l l y p a s t u r a g e ) is a p o w e r ­
ful lever for m a n a g i n g the landscape, w h i c h has b e c o m e
a n i n c r e a s i n g l y v a l u e d p a r t o ft h e site, a s w e l l a s f o r c o n ­
s e r v i n g t h e a r c h a e o l o g i c a l r e s o u r c e s o ft h e W a l l itself.
G r e a t aesthetic a n d historic v a l u e lies i n the l a n d s c a p e o f
pasturage, stone walls, and sheep. Likewise, agricultureis
essentially a n e c o n o m i c activity, a n d e c o n o m i c pressures
o n agriculture are addressed by an u m b e r of government
p r o g r a m s , s u c h as the C o u n t r y s i d e S t e w a r d s h i p S c h e m e ,
w h i c h provides grants a n d advice o n diversification.
F a r m e r s t e n d t osee c o n s e r v a t i o n a n d t o u r i s m
a s c o s t s t ob e a r , a n d e v e n a s a t h r e a t t o e c o n o m i c s u s t a i n ­
ability. N e v e r t h e l e s s , t h e y a r e p a r t n e r s i n m a n a g i n g t h e
site as aheritage place. D E F R A ' s C o u n t r y s i d e S t e w a r d s h i p
S c h e m e is o n e p r o g r a m u s e d t om a n a g e t h e t h r e a t s a n d
o p p o r t u n i t i e s o fc h a n g i n g a g r i c u l t u r a l p r a c t i c e s a n d t h e i r
effect o n heritage places. T h e s c h e m e gives grants t o
f a r m e r s t oe n c o u r a g e the c o n s e r v a t i o n o f l a n d s c a p e a n d
ecological values. F o r example, b y helping start farm-stays
i n s t e a d o fc o n v e r t i n g p a s t u r a g e t ot i l l e d l a n d o r f o r e s t r y ,
stewardship grants help farmers m a n a g e their land t o con­
serve valued environments a n d cultural features while
diversifying operations t oachieve greater financial stabil­
ity. T h e site is a t a r g e t a r e a f o r t h i s n a t i o n a l p r o g r a m , a n d
applicants from w i t h i n the area receive preferential treat­
m e n t . A n o t h e r b e n e f i t is t h e b a r n s c h e m e , t h r o u g h w h i c h
f a r m e r s s e c u r e g r a n t s t oc o n s t r u c t b a r n s that are a p p r o ­
p r i a t e t ot h e a e s t h e t i c v a l u e s o ft h e l a n d s c a p e a n d t h a t
a l l o w t h e m t oshelter s t o c k d u r i n g w i n t e r a n d therefore
manage am o r e lucrative operation. This p r o g r a m was
strongly promoted by Northumberland National Park
a n d is a g o o d e x a m p l e o f w h a t c a n b e a c h i e v e d t h r o u g h
UNDERSTANDING A N D PROTECTING T H E VALUES 195
p a r t n e r s h i p ; i n d e e d , s u c h ap r o g r a m w o u l d n o t h a v e
created by any one organization working independently
H e r i t a g e p r o t e c t i o n is a n i m p o r t a n t p u b l i c g o o d ,
a n d restricting s o m e of the rights of private property
h o l d e r s is ar e a s o n a b l e t r a d e - o f f f o r g u a r a n t e e i n g p u b l i c
access to heritage. Heritage conservation o f a n y k i n d thus
has s o m e perceived disadvantages, for instance, the con­
straints that m o n u m e n t scheduling m i g h t impose o n
use of one's land. Although W o r l d Heritage designation
b r i n g s a d v a n t a g e s to s o m e f a r m e r s , o t h e r s see it as f u r t h e r
constraint.
T h e F M D c r i s i s o f 2001 r e d u c e d f a r m i n g i n c o m e s
s o m e 60 p e r c e n t i n t h e r e g i o n a n d p u s h e d a g r i c u l t u r a l v a l ­
ues to the forefront. 6 1
T h e i m p a c t o n tourism, access, a n d
the regional e c o n o m y — a l o n g w i t h the direct threat to
a g r i c u l t u r e — s h a p e d t h e c r e a t i o n o f t h e 2002 p l a n . T h e
2002 p l a n t a k e s a g r i c u l t u r a l v a l u e s i n t o c o n s i d e r a t i o n
seriously, g i v e n t h a t it w a s w r i t t e n w h e n this r e g i o n w a s
recovering a n d r e s p o n d i n g to the F M D disaster. E v e n
though the decimation of animal stocks threatened the
v e r y p r a c t i c e o f p a s t u r a g e i n t h e s e p l a c e s , t h e crisis is
thought to have accelerated the pressures o n agriculture
b u t not to have c h a n g e d t h e m fundamentally. E c o n o m i c
pressures o n f a r m i n g will continue to spur diversification,
changes in ownership (both fragmentation and amalgama­
tion o f farms), a n d conversion o f f a r m l a n d to other uses
altogether.
A t the regional scale a n d in the long-view
frame, the interrelationship between agricultural policy
a n d m a n a g e m e n t o f t h e W o r l d H e r i t a g e Site is e v i d e n t i n
s e v e r a l w a y s . C o n s i d e r as c e n a r i o i n w h i c h a g r i c u l t u r e
c e a s e d to b e v i a b l e i n its t r a d i t i o n a l m o d e s : o p e n l a n d
w o u l d likely revert to s c r u b o r forest, vastly c h a n g i n g the
a e s t h e t i c o f t h e l a n d s c a p e a n d t h e p e r c e p t i o n o f its v a l u e s .
Or, consider the wholesale transfer o f pasture l a n d to cul­
t i v a t i o n ( a l t h o u g h it is u n l i k e l y f o r r e a s o n s o f c l i m a t e a n d
soil). T h i s w o u l d result i n potentially d a m a g i n g effects o f
p l o w i n g o n several k i n d s o f site values, physically disturb­
ing archaeological remains, accelerating erosion, and,
again, changing the look of the landscape.
In the end, economic decisions of individual
f a r m e r s m u s t b e reconciled w i t h local effects as w e l l as
r e g i o n a l effects, n o t o n l y o n the W a l l a n d Setting b u t also
o n e n v i r o n m e n t a l / e c o l o g i c a l values. A t the local level,
coordinated conservation of archaeological resources,
ecological resources, and economically robust agricul­
t u r a l p r a c t i c e s is difficult f o r s o f e w staff to manage.
[continued on page 199]
196 H A D R I A N ' S W A L L W O R L D H E R I T A G E SITE
been Foot a n d M o u t h Disease:
The Effects o f E x t e r n a l Forces
T h e agriculturale c o n o m y and pastoral land­
scape that predominate m u c h of the central
section of the Wall are important contributors
free
to c o n t e m p o r a r y values o f the W o r l d Heritage
Site a n d its setting. T h e s e c a m e u n d e r d i r e c t
t h r e a t i n 2001 w i t h t h e o u t b r e a k o f f o o t a n d
m o u t h disease ( F M D ) a m o n g livestock popula­
t i o n s i n t h e U n i t e d K i n g d o m . F M D is a v i r a l
d i s e a s e t h a t is d e a d l y to s o m e l i v e s t o c k a n d
more
other m a m m a l s , i n c l u d i n g cattle, sheep, pigs,
goats, a n d deer. T h e outbreak h a d disastrous
1
e c o n o m i c effects in the area o f H a d r i a n s W a l l ,
a l o n g w i t h an u m b e r o f s e c o n d a r y effects o n
the values and m a n a g e m e n t of other aspects
o f t h e site.
T h e F M D crisis effectively closed large areas
time
a r o u n d the W a l l for m o n t h s . It dealt a m a j o r
b l o w to the agricultural a n d t o u r i s m
economies of the region and has h a d lasting
effects o n the s u r r o u n d i n g c o m m u n i t i e s and
landscape. C u m b r i a w a s the county hardest
h i t : ' A p p r o x i m a t e l y 80% o f f a r m s w i t h i n t h e
W o r l d H e r i t a g e Site a n d its s e t t i n g h a d t h e i r
stock destroyed." 2
Visitor traffic to m u c h o f
t h e site c a m e to av i r t u a l h a l t as p a r t s o f t h e
c o u n t r y w e r e q u a r a n t i n e d , a l t h o u g h s o m e sites
along the Wall remained open. Fear and nega­
tive p e r c e p t i o n k e p t p e o p l e a w a y p e r h a p s as
m u c h as the actual closures did.
Assisting farmers and rescuing the agricultural
economy and landscape—a fundamental part
of the W o r l d Heritage Setting and perhaps
k e y c o n t r i b u t o r to its w i d e l y p e r c e i v e d aes­
thetic v a l u e — w e r e the necessary, immediate
responses to the crisis. I n the l o n g e r term,
F M D heightened partners' perceptions of
importance of agriculture in managing the
landscape. Farmers, w h o are important stew­
ards of historic a n d aesthetic values, are eco­
n o m i c operators and key participants in the
p r o d u c t i o n a n d e n j o y m e n t o f t h e site's c o n ­
t e m p o r a r y values. T h u s , threats to their liveli­
h o o d translated into threats to their steward­
ship roles: if they c o u l d n o longer f a r m , h o w
w o u l d that i m p a c t the m a n a g e m e n t o f the site?
A n e w agricultural farming economy based
tillage o r forestry instead o f pasturage, o r
kinds of commercial or industrial development
s e e n as alternatives to pasturage, c o u l d drasti­
cally affect the c h a r a c t e r o f the setting. T h e
Countryside Stewardship Scheme, developed
by the D e p a r t m e n t of Environment, Food, and
Rural Affairs ( D E F R A ) , has been addressing
these types of transitions for adecade, but
F M D dramatically emphasized h o w serious
effects c o u l d be.
T h e F M D crisis also highlighted the i m p o r ­
tance of t o u r i s m to the regional e c o n o m y —
particularly in rural areas along the W a l l — a n d
the relationship between agricultural practices
a n d m a n a g e m e n t o f t h e site. F o r d e c a d e s the
W a l l h a d p r o v i d e d e c o n o m i c v a l u e as a tourist
the attraction; balancing this w i t h conservation of
heritage values w a s the central challenge for
planning a n d m a n a g e m e n t . T h e external force
o f F M D threatened this balance b y focusing
the attention o n economic values. T o u r i s m (which
s u f f e r e d i t s o w n 40 p e r c e n t d r o p i n a c t i v i t y i n
the aftermath of the outbreak) became
identified m o r e fully as the " r e p l a c e m e n t " eco­
n o m i c development strategy for agriculture,
m u c h as it h a d b e e n f o r i n d u s t r y a g e n e r a t i o n
earlier. C o n s e r v a t i o n o f cultural values was
n o t directly u n d e r m i n e d b y the F M D crisis,
t h o u g h d a m a g e s to the t o u r i s m e c o n o m y high­
lighted the vulnerability of the cultural sector
on to fluctuations in t o u r i s m - m a r k e t revenue.
n e w
T h e most relevant lesson was learned through
the difficulty e n c o u n t e r e d in r e s p o n d i n g to this
k i n d o f " s l o w - b u r n " disaster, given the m u c h
decentralized p o w e r structure of the partner­
ship. A q u i c k a n d sure response w a s hindered
the
Visitation to major sites near Hadrian's Wall. There was a significant
decrease in the number of visitors as a result of foot and mouth
disease affecting the area during 2 0 0 0 - 2 0 0 1 . However, the number
of visitors increased quickly once the crisis had passed.
U N D E R S T A N D I N G A N D P R O T E C T I N G T H E VALUES 197
 b y the need for consultation a n d coordination agriculture as w e l l as for heritage t o u r i s m , the

a m o n g the partners. This factor w o u l d also heritage v a l u e s o f the site a n d setting w e r e

c o m e into play in the w a k e of similar natural p r o t e c t e d . T h e b a s i c s t r u c t u r e o f t h e site's

disasters, e n v i r o n m e n t a l accidents, or eco­ m a n a g e m e n t regime—flexible policies a n d a

n o m i c dislocations. T h o u g h the F M D disaster w i d e latitude for the actions of individual part­

is still q u i t e r e c e n t a n d a d j u s t m e n t s a r e still ners, held together b y am u t u a l commitment

being m a d e by landowners, organizations, to a c o m m o n core o f v a l u e s — a l l o w e d partici­

communities, a n d other groups, afew insights pants to r e s p o n d the w a y they did. A t the same

can be drawn from the experience. time, the decentralized partnership structure

prevented aswifter response. T h e n e e d for

T h e 2002 M a n a g e m e n t P l a n w a s g r e a t l y
partners to act in concert a n d i n f o r m one
i n f l u e n c e d b y t h e fact t h a t it w a s w r i t t e n d u r ­
another takes time a n d resources. C o m i n g to
ing the F M D recovery period—illustrating that
an agreement o n novel, contentious, unex­
t h e c o n d i t i o n s u n d e r w h i c h a p l a n is f o r m u ­
pected issues also causes delays. T h e r e w a s
l a t e d h a v e a s t r o n g i m p a c t o n it. T h e e m p h a s i s
m u c h debate, for instance, o n the pros a n d
o n economic recovery and, consequently, on
cons of w h i c h W a l l venues w o u l d stay o p e n
contemporary-use values has been the most
d u r i n g the crisis. A n d a g r e a t d e a l o f effort w a s
o b v i o u s i m p a c t o f t h e F M D crisis. P l a n n e r s a n d
put into informational campaigns a n d discus­
partners have participated a n d continue to par­
sions a m o n g agencies a n d institutions, w h i c h
ticipate in determining the adjustments n e e d e d
helped foster am u t u a l understanding b e t w e e n
to find an e w balance o f diversified, sustainable
institutions w i t h v e r y different m a n d a t e s a n d
agriculture that d o e s n o t h a v e adverse effects
m i s s i o n s (e.g., D E F R A , H W T P , i n d i v i d u a l
o n t h e h e r i t a g e r e s o u r c e s o f t h e site.
f a r m e r s , a n d heritage site operators).

This balance of values has changed in response

Brought on by F M D , the heightened awareness
to the F M D tragedy a n d the resulting stresses
of the connection between agricultural
o n the Hadrian sWall landscape and
use/policy a n d m a n a g e m e n t of the Wall and
stakeholders. T h e M a n a g e m e n t Plan goals
setting has b e e n alearning experience for the
remain focused o n sustainable management—
m a n a g e m e n t group of the Hadrian s Wall
w h i c h is to say, d e v e l o p m e n t w i t h i n a c o n s e r v a ­
W o r l d H e r i t a g e Site. M a n a g e m e n t has a c c o m ­
tion framework—but this sustainability has
m o d a t e d a shift t o w a r d e m p h a s i z i n g the eco­
been redefined by F M D . B y bolstering the
n o m i c values of the Wall in the context of
e c o n o m i c use of the landscape for diversified

198 H A D R I A N ' S W A L L W O R L D H E R I T A G E SITE

 conserving the core heritage values. In the
c l i m a t e , t h e f o c u s is n o w o n t o u r i s m r a t h e r
t h a n o n the crippled agricultural sector.
Notes
1. Accessed at http: / / www.defra.gov.uk/footandmouth/
about/index.htm (5 April 2003).
2. Accessed at http: / / www.24hourmuseum.org.uk/nwh/
ART13762.html (10 July 2003).
n e w I m p a c t o f M a n a g e m e n t Policies
a n d Decisions o n t h e Site's V a l u e s
a n d Their P r e s e r v a t i o n
This section outlines s o m e of the impacts that the Man­
a g e m e n t Plans, policies, a n d decisions have h a d o n the
site's v a l u e s . T h e d i s c u s s i o n h i g h l i g h t s m a j o r i n n o v a t i o n s
of, a n d l e s s o n s l e a r n e d from, t h e H a d r i a n sW a l l experi­
ence a n d identifies issues relevant to m a n a g e r s o f similar
sites a n d projects. I n reality, o f c o u r s e , the effects o f the
site's m a n a g e m e n t e x t e n d b e y o n d w h a t is c o v e r e d h e r e .
T h e topics selected for discussion in this section are the
impact of W o r l d Heritage designation o n values; the bal­
ance between the values of the Wall and the values of the
w i d e r landscape; the effects o f the partnership-driven
m o d e l of management; and the nature of Management
Plan policies.
IMPACT OF WORLD HERITAGE DESIGNATION
ON VALUES
W o r l d Heritage designation has reinforced, and even
h e l p e d e x p a n d , t h e v a l u e s o f H a d r i a n sW a l l . It h a s g e n e r ­
a t e d p l a n n i n g p r o c e s s e s that h a v e e n g a g e d afull r a n g e o f
values and integrated these into the m a n a g e m e n t of the
s u r r o u n d i n g l a n d s c a p e . A s ap o l i c y d e c i s i o n t a k e n b y t h e
government, the W o r l d Heritage nomination has directly
affected the perception a n d assessment of the values of
this l a n d s c a p e a n d its r e s o u r c e s . I n p r i m a r y w a y s , it h a s
clearly a r t i c u l a t e d t h e site's " u n i v e r s a l v a l u e , " a n d i n m y r ­
i a d s e c o n d a r y w a y s it h a s p r o m p t e d v a l u e assessment,
planning, and management action.
W o r l d H e r i t a g e status functions as b o t h a con­
s e r v a t i o n s t r a t e g y a n d am a r k e t i n g s t r a t e g y a n d f u r t h e r s
the efforts o f existing local, regional, a n d national bodies.
It d o e s so b y c r e a t i n g t h e m e c h a n i s m s for W a l l - w i d e
management through partnerships, w h i c h have resulted
in aseries o f affirmative relationships a n d development
opportunities, while reinforcing existing statutory con­
trols a n d refraining f r o m i m p o s i n g additional ones.
B y adding a n explicit layer of universal value,
W o r l d Heritage status continues the decades-long
evolution of the understanding and m a n a g e m e n t of
t h e W a l l a n d its l a n d s c a p e . It facilitates m o v i n g from a
n a r r o w focus o n the R o m a n archaeological remains t o
a m o r e holistic, e n c o m p a s s i n g v i e w o f the heritage
v a l u e s . B e c a u s e it h a s e n a b l e d a n d f o s t e r e d r e g i o n a l
cooperation, World Heritage designation has indeed
added value in each of the categories articulated in the
Management Plan.
U N D E R S T A N D I N G A N D P R O T E C T I N G T H E VALUES 199
 T h e m a n a g e m e n t p l a n n i n g activities have
Limits of Acceptable Change
resulted in ab r o a d articulation of the values of Site a n d
Conference
S e t t i n g (i.e., i n c l u d i n g n a t u r a l , c o n t e m p o r a r y , a n d n o n -
R o m a n cultural values along with the core R o m a n / u n i ­
versal values). B y institutionalizing the connection A n u m b e r of resource-, project-, a n d place-
b e t w e e n t h e m a n a g e m e n t o f t h e s i t e and t h e setting,
specific plans have b e e n initiated u n d e r the
W o r l d H e r i t a g e status h a s r e i n f o r c e d the v a l u e s o f the liv­
ing landscape, s u c h as e c o l o g y a n d nature, visual qualities, rubric of the M a n a g e m e n t Plan, including a
and contemporary use.
local interpretive p l a n at Gilsland a n d conser­
T h e designation has also b r o u g h t prestige to the
W a l l and probably helped attract the substantial amounts v a t i o n plans for the R o m a n fort sites o f
o f g o v e r n m e n t f u n d i n g d e v o t e d to projects at the site
Chesters and Housesteads. T h e plans have
(£10 m i l l i o n t o £12 m i l l i o n f r o m t h e H e r i t a g e L o t t e r y
F u n d , f o r i n s t a n c e ; m o r e r e c e n t l y , £3.6 m i l l i o n i n r e g i o n a l been spearheaded by the particular partners
S R B g r a n t s ) . T h e result h a s b e e n am o r e p r o a c t i v e , i n c e n ­
involved, but, dictated by the Management
tive-based attitude t o w a r d site d e v e l o p m e n t , as o p p o s e d
to the traditional regulatory, restrictive approach. Plan, efforts h a v e b e e n m a d e to i n c o r p o r a t e
W o r l d Heritage designation has been a unifying
t h e m into the larger regional f r a m e w o r k of
force, creating incentives (and in s o m e w a y s require­
m e n t s ) for collaboration. Projects s u c h as the H W T P pro­ significance, values, a n d general policies.
g r a m s o r the N a t i o n a l Trail benefit all a n d p r o v i d e addi­
t i o n a l o p p o r t u n i t i e s to enjoy, u s e , a n d u n d e r s t a n d t h e site. T w o overarching implementation issues must
I n s c r i p t i o n o f t h e site is s e e n as t h e f o r c e b e h i n d t h e c o n ­
tinuing exchange b e t w e e n different stakeholders—from b e a d d r e s s e d . T h e first is h o w to s p e c i f y a n d

different parts o f the Wall, a n d f r o m different perspectives i m p l e m e n t the b r o a d insights a n d decisions

o n the value of the Wall. G i v e n the fragmented ownership
pattern, the n u m b e r of government and other agencies of the regional planning and management

involved with land management, and the competition for s c h e m e a t al o c a l l e v e l , o r f o r s p e c i f i c r e s o u r c e s .

tourism and grant revenue in times of economic stress,
it is r e a s o n a b l e to t h i n k t h a t t h e r e w o u l d n o t h a v e b e e n a T h e s e c o n d is h o w to m o n i t o r v a l u e s at s u c h

W a l l - w i d e p l a n or m a n a g e m e n t s c h e m e w i t h o u t the des­ local, empirical scales that their i m p r o v e m e n t

i g n a t i o n . O p i n i o n s o n this i n t e r p r e t a t i o n differ, h o w e v e r .
S o m e o f t h o s e i n v o l v e d feel that s o m e regional s c h e m e (or erosion) "on the ground" can be gauged
w o u l d still h a v e e m e r g e d w i t h o u t the designation's cat­ and management can respond.
a l y z i n g effect.
All these benefits s h o u l d not lead o n e to t h i n k that
T o address both these challenges, the C o u n t r y ­
W o r l d Heritage status has b e e n apanacea. T h e designation
has not eliminated divisiveness a n d competition among side A g e n c y a n d E n g l i s h Heritage are leading
stakeholders in the Site a n d Setting. Conflicts b e t w e e n
a n e f f o r t t o c o m p l e t e al i m i t s o f acceptable
o w n e r s a n d regulatory agencies r e m a i n , as d o conflicts
b e t w e e n conservation-driven interests a n d development- c h a n g e ( L A C )s t u d y f o r t h e m o s t h i g h l y v i s i t e d
driven interests. T h e essential n a t u r e o f this place's heritage
and traveled stretch of the Wall—Housesteads
and contemporary values—extraordinarily rich and very
d i v e r s e — m a k e s such disagreements inevitable, a n d a plan­ to S t e e l R i g g . T h i s a r e a is u n d e r t h e
1 most
n i n g s y s t e m i n w h i c h t h i s is r e c o g n i z e d a n d d e a l t w i t h c o l ­
i n t e n s e u s e a n d p r e s s u r e , a n d it a l s o h a s a c o m ­
l e c t i v e l y is a p r o d u c t i v e a r r a n g e m e n t . V a r i o u s a g e n c i e s w i l l
continue to c o m p e t e for resources. Indeed, various plicated, overlapping stewardship a n d owner-
groups—the Roman archaeology community, or the
[continued on page 202]

200 H A D R I A N ' S W A L L W O R L D H E R I T A G E SITE

ship pattern involving an u m b e r of institutions,
including E H ,the National Trust, and
Northumberland National Park. A n adaptation
of carrying-capacity planning and impact
assessment, L A Cmethods acknowledge the
reality of landscape change a n d focus o n identi­
fying acceptable ranges of change. T h e y are
b a s e d o n m a n a g i n g o u t c o m e s so that the differ­
ent values and functions of alandscape remain
b a l a n c e d , as o p p o s e d to setting particular
values as apriori targets for protection. These
tolerances are not b a s e d o n scientific studies,
but rather are established through extensive
consultation a m o n g the stakeholders.
T h e H o u s e s t e a d s L A C conference l o o k e d at
five factors, e a c h relating l o o s e l y to the h e r ­
itage a n d c o n t e m p o r a r y values articulated
for the W o r l d H e r i t a g e Site: a r c h a e o l o g i c a l
r e s o u r c e quality; n a t u r a l r e s o u r c e quality; dis­
turbance to farming; recreational p a t h quality;
a n d quality o f visitor experience. F o r e a c h fac­
tor, clear b e n c h m a r k s are o u t l i n e d as l i m i t s —
for example, "no deterioration in the archaeo­
l o g i c a l r e s o u r c e " o r " a m a x i m u m o f 40 c o m ­
plaints from farmers per annum." Monitoring
is b u i l t i n : " T h e L A C p r o c e s s relies u p o n a sys­
tem of continual environmental monitoring
that demonstrates w h e n aquality threshold has
b e e n b r e a c h e d o r is a b o u t to b e b r e a c h e d . "
T h e five e l e m e n t s c h o s e n for m o n i t o r i n g corre­
late w e l l w i t h W o r l d Heritage Site values and
goals. W i t h the points for unacceptable change
h a v i n g b e e n defined, a series o f "management
p r e s c r i p t i o n s " is d r a w n u p to g u i d e responses
to specific c h a n g e s (e.g., w h o m to consult
before constructing afence around a scheduled
m o n u m e n t , o r w h e n it is a c c e p t a b l e to c l o s e
certain parts of the walking path).
A s w i t h o t h e r plans i n the W o r l d H e r i t a g e Site,
the linchpin o f the L A C a p p r o a c h to microlevel
h e r i t a g e l a n d s c a p e m a n a g e m e n t is n o t the
specific limits or actions described in the plan
but the system of collaboration. T h e House-
steads L A C "brings together organisations and
individuals w i t h diverse interests (subsequently
referred to as the C o n f e r e n c e ) to agree o n lim­
its o f a c c e p t a b l e c h a n g e for specific p a r a m e ­
ters, h o w t h e y s h o u l d b e m o n i t o r e d a n d the
m e a s u r e s to be t a k e n to prevent t h e m being
reached or if they are reached." W i t h the con­
ference d o n e a n d the plan in place, the actual
w o r k o f m o n i t o r i n g a n d r e p o r t i n g is s h a r e d b y
the m a i n stakeholder agencies.
T h e L A C stresses collaboration a m o n g part­
ners as the k e y to b a l a n c i n g the values o f the
landscape, while also demonstrating detailed
understanding of the resources a n d their use.
T h i s effort has n o n e t h e l e s s e n g e n d e r e d criti­
c i s m for being too exhaustive, intensive, and
2
expensive to b e p r a g m a t i c a n d useful as a
widely adopted management method.
U N D E R S T A N D I N G A N D PROTECTING T H E VALUES 201
 o w n e r s o fo n e o r a n o t h e r s i t e / a t t r a c t i o n , f o r example—
Notes h a v e s e l e c t i v e l y u s e d t h e s t a t e m e n t o fs i g n i f i c a n c e t o
a d v a n c e their o w n interests. T h i s study, however, suggests
1. The source for much of the information on the LAC efforts that W o r l d Heritage designation and the management
is Rimmington and McGlade 2001. efforts that have resulted substantially o u t w e i g h these real
2. Ibid., 4. a n d potential conflicts. T h e W o r l d Heritage efforts have
l e d t o e f f e c t i v e m a n a g e m e n t o f t h e f u l l r a n g e o ft h e W a l l ' s
values.

BALANCING WALL VALUES AND

LANDSCAPE VALUES
T h e W a l l a n d its l a n d s c a p e a r e c l o s e l y r e l a t e d b u t a l s o dis­
tinct. T h e W a l l is p r i m a r i l y a n a r c h a e o l o g i c a l r e s o u r c e , 6 2

w h e r e a s t h e S e t t i n g is aw o r k i n g l a n d s c a p e d e f i n e d b y e c o ­
n o m i c production, ecological values, aesthetic judgments,
a n d so on. Site a n d Setting are v a l u e d differently yet m a n ­
aged in concert.
F r o m the onset of m o d e r n historical interest in
the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, the values of the
Wall were overwhelmingly construed in terms o fR o m a n -
era archaeological a n d historic remains. M o r e recently, the
perceived values have evolved and broadened quite dra­
matically to e n c o m p a s s arichly layered historic landscape
representing m a n y periods and narratives and carrying
important contemporary values. W i t h o u t diminishing the
value of the Wall, the clear trend over the past thirty years
o r s o h a s b e e n t o v a l u e t h e W a l l and i t s s u r r o u n d i n g l a n d ­
scape for both their heritage values a n d their c o n t e m p o ­
rary-use values. This broader conception represents the
c o n s e n s u s t o d a y — t h a t t h e R o m a n W a l l is t h e c o r e b u t n o t
t h e totality o f w h a t is s i g n i f i c a n t a b o u t this p l a c e — a n d t h e
diversity of values presents achallenge for management.
A two-tiered geographic scheme was devised
from the beginning of W o r l d Heritage inscription, identi­
fying the core archaeological resources (including s o m e
associated resources n o t o n the line o f the W a l l itself) as
w e l l as asubstantial buffer z o n e (the Setting). S u c h a terri­
torially b r o a d c o n c e p t i o n n e c e s s i t a t e s ab r o a d c o n s i d e r a ­
t i o n o f v a l u e s , g i v e n t h a t m u c h o f t h e l a n d is i n active,
nonconservation use a n d under the control of m a n y sepa­
r a t e o w n e r s . T o d a y , t h e site is u n d e r s t o o d a n d d e s c r i b e d
p r i m a r i l y as al a n d s c a p e , t h o u g h it is c l e a r t h a t t h e r o o t s o f
t h e site's v a l u e lie i n t h e a r c h a e o l o g y a n d o v e r t i m e h a v e
evolved to include the landscape.
T h e k e y e l e m e n t o f H a d r i a n ' s W a l l — a n d the set
o f values leading to the various legal protections and
official r e c o g n i t i o n — i s clearly the h i s t o r y o f the W a l l a n d
its a s s o c i a t e d f e a t u r e s as a R o m a n i m p e r i a l frontier. I n t h e
y e a r s f o l l o w i n g t h e 1987 i n s c r i p t i o n a n d t h e n e w manage-

202 H A D R I A N ' S W A L L W O R L D H E R I T A G E SITE

m e r i t s t r u c t u r e s a n d i n i t i a t i v e s f o r m e d i n t h e 1990s, t h e
strict focus o n R o m a n archaeological a n d historic values
h a s e v o l v e d to i n c o r p o r a t e ab r o a d e r r a n g e o f values. T h i s
e x p a n d e d range includes other heritage values (post-
R o m a n uses o f the Wall, or the nineteenth-century agri­
cultural landscape) as w e l l as c o n t e m p o r a r y - u s e values
(associated with the practice of agriculture or tourism
development). Today's management scheme endeavors t o
m a i n t a i n ab a l a n c e a m o n g the different k i n d s o f values.
F o r instance, historic values related to the agricul­
tural landscape created in the nineteenth century s e e m to
b e o f little c o n s e q u e n c e i n t h e p l a n n i n g a n d management
of the landscape, though these values are reflected in
m u c h of the territory. Features related to these values
f o r m alarge p o r t i o n o f the l a n d s c a p e — p a s t u r a g e , stone
field w a l l s , f a r m h o u s e s , a n d b a r n s — a n d t h e r e is a m p l e
evidence of ongoing medieval habitation along and on
Wall. 6 3
T h e R o m a n focus on conservation and manage­
m e n t can w o r k against understanding and m a n a g i n g
t h e s e p o s t - R o m a n values. D e f i n i n g the l a n d s c a p e as a "set­
t i n g " f o r t h e R o m a n / W a l l r e s o u r c e s p u t s it i n a s e c o n d a r y
p o s i t i o n . W h i l e this is r i g h t l y s e e n as n e c e s s a r y i n t e r m s
of prioritizingvalues (identifying the ones of universal
v a l u e a n d putting t h e m at the center o f management),
the implications as to h o w the other, n o n - R o m a n historic
values are recognized are not clear.
C o n t r a r y examples are evident in the several lay­
ers of p o s t - R o m a n historic values that are well preserved
a n d represented. T h e B i r d o s w a l d site h a s m a i n t a i n e d
buildings dating f r o m the sixteenth to nineteenth cen­
turies, carrying out conservation a n d interpretation
w i t h i n this context. T h e efforts to develop access a n d
i n t e r p r e t a t i o n at this site are h e l d u p as am o d e l i n the
f r a m e w o r k of the M a n a g e m e n t Plan. T h e n e e d for sensi­
tivity a n d s u b t l e t y i n b a l a n c i n g v a l u e s is w e l l - r e c o g n i z e d ,
a n d w r e s t l e d w i t h , a c r o s s t h e site.
These values coexist almost everywhere in the
landscape. F o r example, the R o m a n historic values relate
directly to c o n t e m p o r a r y values t h r o u g h tourism: the
W a l l is t h e s o u r c e o f m a n y k i n d s o f v a l u e a n d is p e r h a p s
the m o s t important resource for regional e c o n o m i c devel­
o p m e n t and regeneration. T h e values are protected
explicitly as am a t t e r o f policy, a n d m a n y o f the c u r r e n t
a n d p l a n n e d efforts to i m p r o v e m a n a g e m e n t are focused
o n the visual a n d other experiential qualities of the W a l l
setting. T h e s e have b e e n the subject o f the "limits o f
acceptable change" analyses d o n e b y the National Trail,
the National Trust, a n d N o r t h u m b e r l a n d National P a r k to
m a n a g e the H o u s e s t e a d s area at am o r e local scale. U s i n g
the conserved archaeological and historic values of the
W a l l as avisitor attraction h a s b e e n ad r i v i n g force n o t
only in the Wall-wide m a n a g e m e n t scheme committed to
paper but also in the creation of partnerships (especially
with the H W T P and with national and local govern­
m e n t s ) a n d the attraction o f f u n d i n g to sustain all activi­
ties associated w i t h the W a l l ( f r o m strict c o n s e r v a t i o n t o
more development-oriented schemes).
W h a t h a s b e e n the i m p a c t o f the shift t o w a r d
v a l u i n g the setting as w e l l as the site? H i g h l i g h t i n g W o r l d
H e r i t a g e values—explicitly " u n i v e r s a l " — s e e m s largely to
have bolstered the a d v a n c e m e n t of local a n d regional val­
ues associated with the landscape. T h e current manage­
m e n t r e g i m e a c k n o w l e d g e s that the W a l l has s h a p e d this
landscape for the last n i n e t e e n h u n d r e d years, a n d that a
b r o a d e r s t o r y o f l a n d s c a p e e v o l u t i o n a n d ab r o a d e r r a n g e
the o f v a l u e s a r e t h e b a s i s f o r its c u r r e n t v a l u e to society.
W h i l e the expansion of geographic scope and universal
significance of the values to be conserved m a y have intro­
d u c e d m o r e complexity a n d conflict, the m o r e i m p o r t a n t
r e s u l t is p o s i t i v e : ag r e a t e r r a n g e o f v a l u e s is a s s e s s e d a n d
conserved, a n d am o r e holistic f r a m e w o r k for recognizing
the significance of different kinds of values has b e c o m e
broadly accepted. T h e M a n a g e m e n t Plans reflect a bal­
a n c e d a p p r o a c h to m a n a g i n g the core heritage values
(those associated w i t h the Wall) a n d the other, often
e q u a l l y i m p o r t a n t , v a l u e s o f t h e c o n t e x t (i.e., t h e S e t t i n g ) .
THE E F F E C T S OF A PARTNERSHIP MODEL
ON VALUES
T h e partnership m a n a g e m e n t structure used for
H a d r i a n sW a l l has a n important impact o n values. 6 4
In
a general sense, involving m o r e partners of varied kinds
broadens the values that are being championed. F o r
instance, including private landowners along with conser­
vation groups and archaeologists places economic and
other contemporary-use values o n par with historic and
r e s e a r c h values. S o m e p a r t i c u l a r e x a m p l e s arise i n the fol­
lowing discussion.
T h e M P C e m e r g e d i n t h e 1996 p l a n , b u t s u c h
cooperation a n d collaboration c a n be traced b a c k to
r e p o r t s a n d p l a n s f o r m u l a t e d i n t h e 1970s a n d 1980s. S i m i ­
lar arrangements have b e e n e m p l o y e d elsewhere in the
world over the past twenty years, but they reach a high
level of articulation a n d refinement in the management
of Hadrians Wall. 6 5
T h e institutionalized partnership of these agen­
cies constitutes ac o m p r e h e n s i v e effort to m a n a g e a r a n g e
of values larger than that held by any one partner. This
U N D E R S T A N D I N G A N D P R O T E C T I N G T H E VALUES 203
r a n g e is c l e a r l y r e f l e c t e d i n t h e M a n a g e m e n t P l a n s as w e l l :
archaeological, historic, aesthetic, economic, a n d other
c o n t e m p o r a r y - u s e values are all a c c o u n t e d for at the
regional scale. S u c h a t h o r o u g h l y horizontal process o f
m a n a g e m e n t , i tc o u l d b e s a i d , l e a d s t o a c o n t i n u o u s r e b a l ­
a n c i n g o f v a l u e s a n d t h u s t op l a n s w e l l a d j u s t e d t o a c h i e v ­
i n g l o n g e r - t e r m stewardship goals as w e l l as s h o r t e r - t e r m
d e v e l o p m e n t g o a l s . A t o n e level, this a p p r o a c h is a
r e s p o n s e t ot h e m o s a i c o fc o m p l i c a t e d o w n e r s h i p a n d
s t e w a r d s h i p responsibilities. A g e n e r a t i o n ago, t h e list o f
potential partners was smaller ( E H and landowners), but
under the current regime the n u m b e r has increased dra­
m a t i c a l l y . T h e t e r r i t o r y is c o n t r o l l e d b y m o r e t h a n six
h u n d r e d o w n e r s a n d d o z e n s o fdifferent o r g a n i z a t i o n s
a n d agencies. T h e only sensible m a n a g e m e n t model
depends o n partnership a m o n g the existing owners and
stakeholders.
H o w does the partnership-dependent manage­
m e n t structure affect values? R e g i o n a l c o o r d i n a t i o n w o r k s
in at least t w o w a y s . First, raising awareness o f the
i n t e g r i t y o ft h e w h o l e W a l l a s a R o m a n a r c h a e o l o g i c a l
resource—not the individual, excavated sites—abets the
c o n s e r v a t i o n o ft h i s o v e r a r c h i n g , r e g i o n a l - s c a l e c u l t u r a l
value, w h i c h o t h e r w i s e w o u l d b e difficult t o achieve
u n d e r a p i e c e m e a l a r r a n g e m e n t o fd i s p a r a t e sites. S e c o n d ,
m a r k e t i n g t h e W a l l as a w h o l e t ov i s i t o r s i n c r e a s e s e c o ­
n o m i c values. A collaborative m a r k e t i n g effort c a n create
a n i m a g e f o r t h e r e g i o n as a w h o l e , r e n d e r i n g it m o r e dis­
t i n c t i v e t ov i s i t o r s i n d i s t a n t m a r k e t s . R e g i o n a l c o o r d i n a ­
t i o n also is s p r e a d i n g v i s i t o r s e l s e w h e r e a l o n g t h e W a l l ,
g u i d i n g t h e m t ol e s s e r - k n o w n places. I n s o m e sites this i s
perceived as "reducing t o u r i s m pressure" a n d in others a s
"siphoning off visitors."
U n d e r l y i n g t h e p l a n s is a n e t h i c o f c o o p e r a t i o n ,
a n d t h e r e is m u c h e v i d e n c e o fc o o p e r a t i v e w o r k o n the
g r o u n d as w e l l . N e a r l y e v e r y o r g a n i z a t i o n a n d site c o n ­
tacted for this study reported s o m e k i n d o f partnership a s
e s s e n t i a l t oits c u r r e n t activities a n d goals. T h e p a r t n e r ­
ship m o d e l has also b e e n successful in securing funds for
n e w initiatives a n d cooperative projects. B u t the partner­
ship structure also leaves r o o m for competition a m o n g
p a r t n e r s for f u n d i n g , visitors, credit a n d visibility, c o n t r o l
over l a n d use, a n d other issues. A cooperative ticketing
s c h e m e w i t h several participating sites w a s i n t r o d u c e d b u t
failed, as s o m e o p e r a t o r s felt t h e c r o s s - p r o m o t i o n w a s not
w o r k i n g a n d opted out. T h e r e are indications that the
older, p r e v a i l i n g attitude o fc o m p e t i t i o n a m o n g sites h a s
n o t faded, a l t h o u g h n e w m a n a g e r s t e n d t ofall i n line w i t h
t h e c o o p e r a t i v e p h i l o s o p h y o ft h e M a n a g e m e n t Plan.
204 H A D R I A N ' S W A L L W O R L D H E R I T A G E SITE
Partnership models in general, and the Hadrian s
W a l l efforts i n particular, are n o t w i t h o u t their inherent
difficulties. T h e r e is n o s i n g l e a c c o u n t a b i l i t y f o r t h e site's
overall well-being. T h e organizations with sitewide m a n ­
date are c o o r d i n a t i n g o r d e v e l o p m e n t entities, n o t m a n ­
a g e m e n t units. S o m e p a r t n e r s a r e i n v o l v e d i n s e v e r a l dif­
ferent aspects at o n c e — a s o w n e r , regulatory agency,
financially interested party, n e i g h b o r — l e a v i n g ample
r o o m for conflicts o f interest t odevelop, or the perception
of them. O n e organization, or core of partners, has t o
t a k e t h e l e a d y e t m u s t n e v e r a p p e a r t o o f a r o u t i n front o f
the consensus o n various issues. R e c o g n i z i n g individual
partners w h o are taking uncoordinated actions or follow­
ing divergent policies requires constant vigilance. S u c h
difficulties a n d c o m p l i c a t i o n s are best resolved n o t b y
e x e r c i s e s o fr a w p o w e r — t h o u g h s o m e t i m e s t h e need
a r i s e s — b u t rather b y a continuing series o f discussions,
exchanges, negotiations, compromises, a n d dispute reso­
lution, all o f w h i c h d e m a n d a great deal o f resources
(staff time, energy, m a t e r i a l costs, etc.). I n d e e d , o n l y
landowners a n d E H have a n d exercise r a w power. T h e
partnership model operates under the hypothesis that
the t i m e a n d effort n e e d e d t om a n a g e c o m p l e x p a r t n e r ­
ships are worthwhile.
T h e b e n e f i t s o ft h e p a r t n e r s h i p m o d e l speak
directly t oother issues that have arisen vis-a-vis values a n d
m a n a g e m e n t o ft h e s i t e — f o r i n s t a n c e , s t r i k i n g a b a l a n c e
b e t w e e n W a l l values a n d setting values. D E F R A a n d the
Countryside A g e n c y wield the influence and have the
incentive t om a n a g e the b r o a d e r l a n d s c a p e , w h e r e a s the
p o w e r o fE H is fairly w e l l f o c u s e d o n t h e W a l l a n d its
i m m e d i a t e s u r r o u n d i n g s . T o m a n a g e the site a n d setting
together requires acollaborative partnership.
MANAGEMENT PLANS AND T H E I R POLICIES
It h a s a l r e a d y b e e n p o i n t e d o u t w h i c h v a l u e s a r e articu­
lated in the M a n a g e m e n t Plans for Hadrian'sWall. T h e
i n t e n t h e r e is t od e s c r i b e h o w t h e a p p r o a c h t o m a n a g e ­
m e n t a n d p l a n n i n g (i) is r e f l e c t i v e o ft h e b r o a d e r , m o r e
inclusive attitude t o w a r d values that has evolved, and
(2) i s a r e s p o n s e t o t h e l a r g e s c a l e o f t h e r e s o u r c e s a n d
the n e e d t ofoster local a n d resource-specific c o n t r o l
over resources and their values.
M a n a g e m e n t P l a n policies set the vision a n d p r o ­
vide direction, but they do not prescribe or proscribe
actions. T h e p l a n differs from w h a t is t r a d i t i o n a l l y s e e n as
a m a s t e r p l a n i n t h a t it e s t a b l i s h e s p r i n c i p l e s o f o p e r a t i o n
a n d general guidelines but does not chart out the specific
w o r k to be done. Instead, the plan creates a framework f o r
a n d anticipates the creation of the regional- a n d local-level
plans a n d contributions to d e t e r m i n i n g local land-use pol­
icy. Specific r e g u l a t o r y c o n t r o l s r e m a i n i n t h e h a n d s of
local authorities and, for national scheduled monuments
t h e m s e l v e s , w i t h E H . F o r i n s t a n c e , t h e p l a n is d e s i g n e d to
be i m p l e m e n t e d through adoption in existing local plans
a n d r e g u l a t i o n s — a n d to a large extent, local a n d regional
authorities have endorsed the M a n a g e m e n t Plan and
i n c o r p o r a t e d its p r o v i s i o n s i n t o t h e i r o w n p l a n n i n g poli­
cies a n d schemes. 6 6

T h e M a n a g e m e n t P l a n s for the site c a r r y n o

s t a t u t o r y a u t h o r i t y a n d a r e n o t t a b l e d i n P a r l i a m e n t (i.e.,
p a s s e d o r e n d o r s e d officially b y the g o v e r n m e n t ) . T h e
2002 p l a n i s " e n d o r s e d " b y t h e M P C a n d " a d o p t e d " b y t h e
individual partners. In other words, the plan gains author­
ity o n l y to t h e e x t e n t to w h i c h it is a d o p t e d o r i m p l e ­
m e n t e d b y local authorities. T h e s e local controls, the
a d o p t i o n o f w h i c h is n e g o t i a t e d a n d n o t r e q u i r e d , a r e
c o m p l e m e n t e d b y existing national statutory controls
( c f . PPG 15 a n d 16; s c h e d u l e d m o n u m e n t s r e v i e w s ) a n d
are s e e n as sufficient legal protection. B y e n d o r s i n g the
W o r l d H e r i t a g e listing o f t h e site, h o w e v e r , t h e n a t i o n a l
g o v e r n m e n t tacitly endorses the provisions o f the plan.
A s a result, the intentions o f the plan are b a c k e d b y vari­
ous statutory authorities, but these are neither centralized
in a n y particular institution or agency n o r tied directly to
the M P C .
T h e p r i m a r y f o c u s is o n t h e m e a n s ( t h e p r o c e s s )
o f continuing to w o r k together, p u r s u e c o m m o n goals,
and/or pursue individual goals within the bounds of the
a g r e e d - u p o n f r a m e w o r k . S o m e typical results o f this flexi­
ble policy a p p r o a c h include the use of L A C m e t h o d s to
m a n a g e access to the Housesteads-Steel R i g g s e g m e n t of
the Wall, a n d the different approaches taken to creating
local/small-area interpretive plans, carried out under the
rubric of the regional scheme but performed by the local
partners themselves. I n all these types o f local planning,
t h e k e y v a l u e a d d e d b y t h e M P C is t h e c o o r d i n a t i o n of
actions so that consistency a n d cooperation lead directly
to leveraging all investments for positive, W a l l - w i d e
impact.

U N D E R S T A N D I N G A N D P R O T E C T I N G T H E V A L U E S 205
 Conclusions
T h e H a d r i a n sW a l l m a n a g e m e n t a n d planning s c h e m e
represents ahighly developed, t h o r o u g h l y consultative,
a n d thoughtful s y s t e m o f values-based conservation. It
h a s t w o h a l l m a r k s o f sustainability: it e n c o m p a s s e s the
m a n y types of values associated with the core resources
a n d t h e i r c o n t e x t s , a n d its i m p l e m e n t a t i o n is b a s e d o n
p a r t n e r s h i p s . T h e s c h e m e is e x p l i c i t l y d r i v e n b y t h e
identification of heritage a n d other values, a n d b y actions
u n d e r t a k e n to ensure their existence a n d sustained use.
T h e current scheme has evolved over the past thirty years
t h r o u g h the efforts o f m a n y organizations a n d has b e e n
strengthened b y W o r l d Heritage designation a n d the
U n i t e d K i n g d o m ' s efforts to generate at h o r o u g h manage­
m e n t response to this recognition o f universal value.
O v e r the generation or so of planning a n d m a n ­
a g e m e n t e x a m i n e d in this case study, there has b e e n a
clear a n d progressive recognition of the breadth of values
to be m a n a g e d for this heritage place. W h a t w a s o n c e con­
sidered a n archaeological resource tracing aline across the
country has been transformed in afew decades into a
complex, layered cultural landscape rich in both heritage
and contemporary values. M a n a g e m e n t practices and
plans h a v e evolved as w e l l a n d h a v e h e l p e d shift attitudes
t o w a r d v a l u e s at e v e r y step. Overall, the r e c o g n i t i o n o f
partners' collective interests outweighs the i m p o r t a n c e of
individual goals. T h e partnership has c o m e to a n agree­
m e n t t h a t H a d r i a n ' s W a l l is al a n d s c a p e a n d n o t a d i s c r e t e
m o n u m e n t . T h e t w o - t i e r e d s t r u c t u r e o f b o u n d a r i e s fol­
lows the partnership m o d e l for m a n a g i n g the landscape:
t h e c o r e is a g r e e d u p o n a n d p r o t e c t e d tightly a n d u n i ­
f o r m l y , a n d t h e s e t t i n g is m a n a g e d a c c o r d i n g to t h e w i s h e s
of the local jurisdictions or owners, w h o have differing
views of what should be protected and how. In seeking
i n c l u s i o n a n d r e c o g n i t i o n o f t h e site's policies i n l o c a l
land-use policies a n d plans, the w h o l e s c h e m e recognizes
the limits o f ap a r t n e r s h i p m o d e l . Ultimately, c o n t r o l over
the resources resides w i t h the individual partners.
T h e collaborative, "horizontal" m a n a g e m e n t
s c h e m e s e e m s w e l l suited to the resources a n d the pat­
terns of landownership and control, and has resulted in
b e n e f i t s e q u a l to (if n o t e x c e e d i n g ) its costs (real a n d
206 H A D R I A N ' S W A L L W O R L D H E R I T A G E SITE
m e t a p h o r i c ) . Its significant a c h i e v e m e n t s h a v e i n c l u d e d
t h e f o u n d i n g o f t h e H W T P a n d its W a l l - w i d e p r o g r a m s
of marketing, transportation, a n d education; the estab­
lishment o f the National Trail; the attraction o f substan­
tial g r a n t funds; a n d the s u c c e s s f u l c o n s e r v a t i o n a n d inter­
pretation o f alarge a n d c o m p l e x set o f cultural resources.
T h e M a n a g e m e n t Plan provides af r a m e w o r k a n d guid­
a n c e for all partners a n d actors to carry o u t their w o r k .
T h e partnership m o d e l has several features abun­
dantly in evidence for Hadrian's W a l l a n d contributing to
its s u c c e s s :
• T h e positive results of the partnership since the
mid-1990s a r e c l e a r . W i t h t h e p a r t n e r s w o r k i n g i n c o n c e r t ,
a n u m b e r of objectives have b e e n achieved which, in the
opinion of those o n the ground, w o u l d not have been
reached by organizations w o r k i n g independently.
• M a n a g i n g b y c o n s e n s u s is a n e x c e e d i n g l y i m p o r ­
t a n t p r i n c i p l e a n d a m a j o r l e a r n i n g p o i n t . It is a r e p l a c e ­
m e n t , o n e c a n say, f o r m a n a g e m e n t b y r e g u l a t i o n a n d
d i r e c t s t a t u t o r y c o n t r o l . T h e r e is a r e m a r k a b l y w i d e b u y -
in a m o n g partners o n the protection o f the setting as well
as the Wall.
• T h e r e are alot of "calculated ambiguities" in
planning and management. T h e planning has remained
at astrategic level, avoiding the prescription o f particular
a c t i o n s f o r p a r t i c u l a r sites. T h i s is a p p r o p r i a t e g i v e n t h e
extensive scale o f the w h o l e venture a n d the n e e d to rec­
ognize (and perhaps decentralize) the distribution of
power a m o n g the various partners and individuals w h o
w i e l d u l t i m a t e c o n t r o l o v e r l a n d a n d r e s o u r c e s . It is also
flexible a n d allows the partnership to r e s p o n d to c h a n g i n g
external forces, w h e t h e r those forces are w e l c o m e oppor­
tunities (regional regeneration funds) or unwelcome
threats (the ravages of F M D ) .
A n integrated planning and management regime
has b e e n i m p l e m e n t e d at Hadrian's W a l l that addresses a
variety o f situations a n d sets af r a m e w o r k for integrating
policies a n d actions at different g e o g r a p h i c scales. T h e
a p p r o a c h u s e d is also a " l e a r n i n g " s y s t e m , as s e e n i n t h e
evolution from t h e 1996 p l a n t o t h e 2002 p l a n . T h e l a t t e r i s
b y n o m e a n s af i n i s h e d p l a n ; it explicitly calls f o r t h e
i m p l e m e n t a t i o n o fpolicies ( w h i c h necessarily relate t o 5. Details on the archaeological remains and extant remains in
t h e r e g i o n a n d t h e w h o l e r e s o u r c e ) a tal o c a l , a c t i o n a b l e the site can be found in the Management Plans, in particular
section 1.2.6 of the 2002 plan [and guidebooks].
scale. Further, the partnership recognizes that o n e goal
over the next several years should b ethe creation o f 6. Hadrian s Wall World Heritage Site is situated at a latitude
of 4°N.
monitoring m e c h a n i s m s — w a y s t ounderstand and track
5

7. McKnight 2 0 0 1 , 2 2 4 - 2 6 .
h o w values are b e i n g shaped, a n d t ouse this i n f o r m a t i o n
in the m a n a g e m e n t o fthe W a l l a n d Setting. 8. A detailed time line appears in the appendix.
T h e institutional arrangements s e e m well suited 9. For a detailed history and description of the Wall, see Birley
t o m a n a g i n g v a l u e s a sw e l l a sc o n s e r v a t i o n a n d d e v e l o p ­ 1961; de la Bedoyere 1999; Breeze and Dobson 2000; and
Ewin2ooo.
m e n t activities. T h e H a d r i a n sW a l l s c h e m e s e e m s n e i t h e r
centralized n o r decentralized. A n effective center exists i n 10. Watson 1997, 23. Today, the Military Road is known as B6318.
the combination o fthe H W C U and the H W T P . This c o m ­ 11. Ewin 2000, 41.
bination also includes partners from the private sector but 12. English Heritage 2002,13.
is n o t s o p r i v a t i z e d a st o b e o v e r l y s u s c e p t i b l e t o m a r k e t
13. Ewin 2000, vii.
fluctuations. E H h a s au n i q u e a n d c o m p l i c a t e d set o f
14. Ibid., 2.
roles: f o r t h e r e g i o n , i ti sac o o r d i n a t o r , c o n v e n e r , a n d c o n ­
15. Hadrian's Wall Tourism Partnership, "Hadrian's Wall
s u l t a n t ; f o r t h e W a l l a s a n a r c h a e o l o g i c a l r e s o u r c e , i ti sa
World Heritage Site: Research and Archaeology: Rev.
r e g u l a t o r y a g e n c y ; for c e r t a i n sites, i ti sad a y - t o - d a y m a n ­
Dr. John Collingwood Bruce, 1998-99." http:/ /
ager; a n d for o t h e r sites, i ti salso t h e o w n e r . A s s u c h , E H www.hadrians-wall.org/randa/jcb.htm (16 May 2002).
is p o t e n t i a l l y a to d d s w i t h s o m e o f its o w n p a r t n e r s , b u t
16. Ibid.
t h i s h a s n o t p r o v e n t o b e aliability. I t i sn o t c l e a r , h o w e v e r ,
17. English Heritage 2002,13.
w h e t h e r this m a k e s E H m o r e o r less effective i n p l a y i n g
18. Ewin 2000,44. The archaeological protection acts passed
the lead coordinating role.
during this period were the Ancient Monuments Protection Act
T h e p a r t n e r s h i p m o d e l i sn o t w i t h o u t its d o w n ­
of 1882, the Ancient Monuments Act of 1910, the Ancient Monu­
side. C o m p e t i t i o n a m o n g partners r e m a i n s . T h e r e is ments Consolidation and Amendment Act of 1913, and the
little c e n t r a l i z e d o rs t a t u t o r y a u t h o r i t y t o f o r c e r e s o l u t i o n Ancient Monuments Act of 1932.
of issues w h e n necessary. T h e partnership's successes 19. English Heritage, "Hadrian s Wall Museums." http: / /
h a v e r e l i e d o nl a r g e i n f u s i o n s o f f u n d s ; i ft h e i n c e n t i v e s www.eng.-h.gov.uk/ ArchRev/rev95_6/hwmuseum.htm
for f u n d i n g a n d m a r k e t i n g d r y u p , t h e r e w o u l d b e little (23 May 2002).

m o r e than the p o w e r o fg o o d ideas t ohold together the 20. Hadrian s Wall Tourism Partnership, "Research and
whole partnership. Persuasion and perseverance are Archaeology: Wall Recording Project." http: / /
a m o n g the most important managers' tools i nsuch a www.hadrians-wall.org/ (23 May 2002).

scheme, and these require enormous investments o f 21. English Heritage 1996, paragraph 9.4.2.
time a n d h u m a n capital. 22. Ewin 2000,31.

23. This concern was based on the perception that more walkers
would come and have a negative impact. Once formal counts
Notes of footpath traffic were conducted, fears of overuse by walk­
ers proved unfounded, illustrating the notion that accurate
information and monitoring are essential for site manage­
1. English Heritage 2002, 2 and part 5, "Maps."
ment. Christopher Young, English Heritage, e-mail corre­
2. Reiterating what is noted in the introduction, site refers spondence, 19 June 2003.
throughout to the World Heritage Site in totality—the Wall,
24. Quotedfromhttp: / / whc.unesco.org/nwhc/pages/doc/
associated remains, and the setting.
mainf3.htm. World Heritage List criteria for natural heritage
3. These include forts, fortlets, and other monuments to the properties are also available at this URL.
south of Bowness (the western end of the Wall) along the
25. Jane Brantom, Hadrian s Wall Tourism Partnership, e-mail
Cumbrian coast, and other Roman sites near, but not adja­
correspondence, 19 June 2003.
cent to, the line of the Wall.
26. Kate Clark, personal communication, 2001, citing Mynors
4. The Clayton Wall was rebuilt not to its original height but to
1999.
that sufficient to serve as a barrier to keep out livestock and
create a property boundary.

NOTES 207
 27. If such consent is denied, the applicant has therightto public 47. Christopher Young, English Heritage, e-mail correspon­
inquiry or informal hearing prior to afinalruling concerning dence, 11 April 2003.
the application.
48. English Heritage 2002, section 2.1.1,33-42.
28. PPG 16: Archaeology and Planning, Department of the Envi­
49. Ibid., 28, emphasis added.
ronment, 1990. Her Majesty's Stationery Office, London.
May be found at http: / / www.planning.odpm.gov.uk/ppg/ 50. See English Heritage 2 0 0 2 , 2 8 - 3 2 , for the full text of the

ppgi6/index.htm (May 2003).

statement of significance.

29. PPG 15: Planning and the Historic Environment, section 6.10.
51. This document is available at http: / / www.

Department of the Environment and Department of hadrians-wall.org/. Click on Hadrian s Wall Tourism

National Heritage, 1994. Her Majesty's Stationery Office, Partnership.

London. Found at http: / / www.planning.odpm.gov.uk/ 52. The source for much of the information in this section is
ppg/ppgi5 /pdf/ppg15.pdf. Recent amendment may be drawnfromcorrespondence with Christopher Young,
found at http: / / wwwplanning.odpm.gov.uk/circulars/ English Heritage.
0101/09.htm (May 2003).
53. The core of the partners group is represented by the MPC.
30. UNESCO Convention Concerning the Protection of the World Cul­
54. This term is used increasingly, for instance, in the U.S.
tural and Natural Heritage: Operational Guidelines, part I.21.B.
National Park Service to refer to the increasing decentraliza­
31. This department is also responsible for matters related to the tion of authority and funding through the inclusion of pri­
arts, sport, and recreation; the National Lottery; libraries, vate, public, and nonprofit partners in the management of
museums, and galleries; licensing for the export of cultural parks and historic sites. As an example, see the press release
goods,film,broadcasting, and the royal estate; and regula­ at http: / / data2.itc.nps.g0v/release/Detail.cfm?ID=355.
tion of the press.
55. Available at http: / / www.hadrians-wall.org/.
32. Accessed at www.english-heritage.org.uk.
56. Available at http: / / www.hadrians-wall.org/. Click on
33. See http: / / www.nationaltrust.org.uk/main /. Hadrian s Wall Tourism Partnership.

34. These measures are summarized in appendix 4 of the 2002 57. The operation of the bus is funded by a number of bodies—
Management Plan. not solely HWTP—including Northumberland National
Park, which underwrites any losses.
35. This document is found at http: / / www.hmso.gov.uk/acts/
a c t s i 9 9 0 / Ukpga_i9900009_en_2.htm#mdivi. 58. English Heritage 2 0 0 2 , 1 .

36. PPG 15, explanatory note, http: / / www.planning.odpm. 59. Ibid.

gov.uk/ppg/ppg15/pdf/ ppg15.pdf.
60. Ibid., 57.
37. Amenity societies in the United Kingdom include the
61. Ibid., 26.
Ancient Monuments Society, the Council for British Archae­
ology, the Georgian Group, the Society for the Protection of 62. It should be noted that "the Wall," as used here and through­
Ancient Buildings, the Victorian Society, and the Twentieth out, also encompasses related archaeological resources and
Century Society. sites not technically part of the Wall itself.

63. English Heritage 2002, section 1.2.4.

38. PPG 16, introduction.

39. English Heritage 1996, section 9.4.2. 64. Similar kinds of partnership-driven models have been used
in other countries, and the increasing reliance on partner­
40. It should also be noted that this change is congruent with
ships in all types of planning has been an area of innovation
philosophical shifts in the heritage field and related disci­ for at least the last thirty years.
plines that more seriously recognize the geographic and
65. In the United Kingdom, such partnership arrangements
value contexts of what are traditionally seen as historic
resources. involving different national agencies as well as local and
regional partners are quite common now, but those involv­
41. English Heritage 2002, 2 0 - 2 1 .
ing Hadrian's Wall have been a trendsetter.
42. Strategy 1984.
66. Appendix 4 of the 2002 Management Plan lists the specific
43. Ibid., 9. local plans and policies through which the plan is already
being implemented.
44. Accessed at http: / / whc.unesco.org/sites/430.htm (5 April
2003).

45. English Heritage 1996, paragraph 1.1.9.

46. Accessed at http: / / www.eng-h.gov.uk/ ArchRev/rev95_6 /

hadrian.htm.

208 H A D R I A N ' S W A L L W O R L D H E R I T A G E SITE

 of the Wall. A second pilgrimage took place in
A p p e n d i x A : Time Line for H a d r i a n ' s 1886, a n d s i n c e t h a t t i m e t h e g r o u p s h a v e l e d s u c h
W a l l d u r i n g H e r i t a g e Status pilgrimages every ten years. 6

1599 AntiquarianW i l l i a m C a m d e n visited the length 1851 J o h n Collingwood Bruce published the first

of H a d r i a n sWall except the central sector due e d i t i o n o f The Roman Wall, w h i c h s u m m a r i z e d

to its d a n g e r o u s c o n d i t i o n . T h e f o l l o w i n g y e a r the results o f J o h n Clayton's excavations at

he published his survey a n d explanation of the Chesters R o m a n Fort and publicizedJohn Hodg­

W a l l a n d its s t r u c t u r e s i n t h e fifth edition of son's theory of the Wall's construction u n d e r the

his Britannia* emperor Hadrian. 7

1J32 T h e R e v . J o h n H o r s l e y ' s w o r k Britannia Romana, 1863 J o h n C o l l i n g w o o d B r u c e published his Handbook

t h e first s y s t e m a t i c s t u d y o f H a d r i a n s W a l l , of the Roman Wall, w h i c h h a s s i n c e s e r v e d a s a n

was published. i m p o r t a n t g u i d e to the W a l l . Its t h i r t e e n t h edition

w a s p u b l i s h e d i n 1978. 8

ca. ljjo T h e MilitaryRoad was constructed between

N e w c a s t l e a n d C a r l i s l e . A p p r o x i m a t e l y 48 k i l o ­ 1875 T h e S o u t h Shields U r b a n District C o u n c i l estab­

m e t e r s (30 m i l e s ) o f t h e r o a d w a s b u i l t o n top lished the R o m a n R e m a i n s P a r k at S o u t h Shields,

of Hadrian sWall between Newcastle and m a r k i n g t h e first p u b l i c a c q u i s i t i o n a n d d i s p l a y o f

Sewingshields. 2 a part of the Wall. 9

1801 W i l l i a m H u t t o n w a l k e d the length of the Wall 1896 T h e m u s e u m at C h e s t e r s R o m a n Fort, w h i c h

and wrote an account, n o w published under the h o u s e d J o h n Clayton's collection of objects, w a s

t i t l e The First Man to Walk Hadrian's Wall o p e n e d to the public.

1811 W i l l i a m H u t t o n saved asection of the Wall 1927 A first s e c t i o n o f t h e W a l l w a s s c h e d u l e d a s a

at Planetrees from being pillaged to m a k e monument.

field walls. 3

1932 T h e Ancient Monuments Act w a s e n a c t e d i n p a r t a s

1832-90 I n 1832, J o h n C l a y t o n i n h e r i t e d o w n e r s h i p o f a result o f threats to the Wall. 1 0

T h e Hadrian's

Chesters R o m a n Fort. F r o m that time until his Wall and Vallum Preservation Scheme was
d e a t h i n 1890, C l a y t o n e x c a v a t e d a n d p r o t e c t e d a d o p t e d . T h e B r i t i s h g o v e r n m e n t a c q u i r e d its first
remains of the Wall and amassed acollection of parts of the Wall."
R o m a n objects from various locations along the
1935 T h e Housesteads M u s e u m w a s o p e n e d to the
Wall. O n e conservation technique C l a y t o n devel­
public. 1 2

oped w a s encasing the surviving Wall remains in

d r y s t o n e f a c e w o r k t o p p e d w i t h turf. Sections o f 1970 T h e Vindolanda Trust, an independent archaeo­
the W a l l built over in this fashion are today logical charitable trust, w a s f o u n d e d to excavate,
k n o w n as the C l a y t o n Wall. 4 preserve, and present the R o m a n remnants
associated w i t h l a n d o w n e d b y the trust at
1840 J o h n H o d g s o n p u b l i s h e d h i s History of Northum­ Vindolanda.
berland, t h e first w o r k t o a r g u e c o n v i n c i n g l y t h a t
the Wall h a d been constructed under the R o m a n 1972 T h e V i n d o l a n d a T r u s t a c q u i r e d the R o m a n site

e m p e r o r H a d r i a n . H o d g s o n a l s o w a s t h e first t o k n o w n as C a r v o r a n , located 8 m i l e s to the w e s t of

record thoroughly a n d in detail the structure Vindolanda.

o f t h e W a l l a n d its a s s o c i a t e d forts i n t h e c e n t r a l 1973 Tourist visitation to the W a l l peaked.

sector. 5

1976 Darlington Amenity Research Trust report was

1849 T h e Newcastle Society of Antiquaries and the published, articulating the n e e d for a Wall-wide
Cumberland and Westmoreland Antiquarian and conservation strategy, t o u r i s m s c h e m e , a n d m a n ­
Archaeological Society, led b y J o h n C o l l i n g w o o d agement attention.
B r u c e , h e l d t h e i r first p i l g r i m a g e a l o n g t h e length

APPENDIX A 209
1984 T h e d o c u m e n t Strategy for Hadrian's Wall w a s M u s e u m s , included aw o r k i n g reconstruction o f
published, proposing aregionwide framework a R o m a n b a t h h o u s e a n d av i e w i n g t o w e r approxi­
for conservation a n d tourism. m a t e l y 34 m e t e r s (112 f e e t ) i n h e i g h t .

English Heritage opened the Corbridge M u s e u m 2001 T h e H a d r i a n sW a l l region w a s severely damaged

at C o r b r i d g e R o m a n site. b y the foot a n d m o u t h disease epidemic.

T h e C u m b r i a C o u n t y Council acquired the 2002 M a n a g e m e n t P l a n 2002-2007 w a s released.

Birdoswald estate for the purpose o f developing
the remains o fthe R o m a n fort a n d other archae­
ological features t h e r e a saheritage site that
Notes
w o u l d b eopen t othe public.

198J E n g l i s h H e r i t a g e b e g a n its W a l l R e c o r d i n g P r o j ­ 1. English Heritage 2002, 23.

ect, w h i c h p r o v i d e d the first detailed r e c o r d o f
2. Watson 1 9 9 7 , 3 -
2

t h e visible r e m a i n s o f t h e W a l l a n d its associated

3. English Heritage 2002,13.
features. T h e finished drawings are u s e d in the
4. English Heritage 1999, 4 2 - 4 3 .
m a n a g e m e n t a n d conservation o fthe Wall. 1 3

5. Hadrian s Wall Tourism Partnership, "Hadrian s Wall

1986 T h e Tyne and W e a r Museums completed recon­ World Heritage Site: Research and Archaeology: Rev. John
struction o fthe W e s t G a t e at A r b e i a R o m a n F o r t Hodgson." http: / /wvvrw.hadrians-wall.org/ (23 May 2002).
at S o u t h Shields. 6. English Heritage 2002, 24.

1987 H a d r i a n sW a l l Military Z o n e inscribed b y 7. Hadrian's Wall Tourism Partnership, "Hadrian's Wall World
Heritage Site: Research and Archaeology: Rev. Dr. John
U N E S C O a saW o r l d H e r i t a g e Site u n d e r criteria
Collingwood Bruce, 1 9 9 8 - 9 9 . " http:/ /www.hadrians-wall.
C (ii), (iii), a n d (iv).
org/randa/jcb.htm (16 May 2002).

T h e first visitor c e n t e r o p e n e d a t B i r d o s w a l d 8. Ibid.

R o m a n Fort. 9. English Heritage 2002,13.

10. English Heritage 1996,13.

1990 T h e Senhouse M u s e u m Trust opened the
Senhouse R o m a n M u s e u m , which houses the 11. English Heritage 2002,13.

N e t h e r h a l l collection o fR o m a n artifacts, i n 12. English Heritage, "Hadrian s Wall Museums." http: / /

Maryport. www.eng-h.gov.uk/ ArchRev/rev95_6/ hwmuseum.htm
(23 May 2002).
1993 T h e H a d r i a n sW a l l T o u r i s m Partnership w a s
13. Hadrian's Wall Tourism Partnership, "Research and Archaeol­
created. ogy: Wall Recording Project." http: / / www.hadrians-wall.org/
(23 May 2002).
1994 T h e secretary o fstate a p p r o v e d proposals for the
H a d r i a n sW a l l Path, an e w National Trail. 14. English Heritage 1996, paragraph 9.4.2.

1996 T h e Hadrian's W a l l W o r l d Heritage Site Manage­

m e n t P l a n f o r t h e p e r i o d 1996-2001 w a s published
after extensive consultation. T h e p l a n established
the W o r l d Heritage Site M a n a g e m e n t P l a n C o m ­
m i t t e e "to a c t a st h e p r i m a r y f o r u m f o r i s s u e s
concerning the m a n a g e m e n t o fthe W o r l d H e r ­
itage Site." 1 4
English Heritage established the
H a d r i a n sW a l l Co-ordination Unit, based in
H e x h a m , t ooversee implementation o fthe plan.

2000 T h e Segedunum R o m a n Fort, Bath House and

M u s e u m in Wallsend opened t othe public. T h e
development, operated by the T y n e and W e a r

210 H A D R I A N ' S W A L L W O R L D H E R I T A G E SITE

 References
Bidwell, P., ed. 1999. Hadrian's Wall 1989-1999: A Summary of Recent
Excavations and Research Prepared for The Twelfth Pilgrimage of Hadrian's
Wall, 14-21 August 1999. Carlisle: The Cumberland and Westmoreland
Antiquarian and Archaeological Society and the Society of Antiquaries
of Newcastle upon Tyne.
Birley, E. 1961. Research on Hadrian's Wall. Kendal, England: T Wilson.
Breeze, D. J., and B. Dobson. 2000. Hadrian's Wall. 4 t h ed. New York:
Penguin.
British Standard on the Principles of the Conservation of Historic
Buildings (BS7913,1998). In English Heritage Policy Statement on Restora­
tion, Reconstruction, and Speculative Recreation of Archaeological Sites
Including Ruins, February 2001.
Darlington Amenity Research Trust. 1976. Hadrian's Wall: A Strategy for
Conservation and Visitor Services. DART Publication no. 25, August.
de la Bedoyere, G. 1999. Hadrian's Wall: History and Guide. London:
Tempus Publishing Ltd.
Dore, J. N. 2001. Corbridge Roman Site. 1989. Reprint. London: English
Heritage.
English Heritage. "Hadrian s Wall Museums." http: / / wwweng-h.gov.
uk/ ArchRev/ rev95_6/hwmuseum.htm (23 May 2002).
English Heritage. 1996. Hadrian's Wall World Heritage Site Management
Plan. London: English Heritage.
. 1999. Chesters Roman Fort. London: English Heritage.
. 2002. Hadrian's Wall World Heritage Site Management Plan,
2002-200J. Available as a pdf file at http: / / www.hadrians-wall.org/
HWTPMgmtPlan2002.pdf.
Ewin, A. 2000. Hadrian's Wall: A Social and Cultural History. Lancaster:
Centre for North-West Regional Studies/University of Lancaster.
Fairclough, G., G. Lambrick, and A. McNab. 1995. Yesterday's World,
Tomorrow's Landscape: The English Heritage Historic Landscape Project,
1992-94. London: English Heritage.
Hadrian's Wall Tourism Partnership. 2002. Beyond the Final Frontier:
Projects in Progress and Proposed, Hadrian's Wall World Heritage Site.
January.
. "Hadrian s Wall World Heritage Site: Research and
Archaeology: Rev. Dr. John Collingwood Bruce, 1998-99."
http: / / www.hadrians-wall.org/randa/jcb.htm (16 May 2002).
. "Research and Archaeology: Wall Recording Project."
http: / /www.hadrians-wall.org/ (23 May 2002).
. "Research and Archaeology: Rev. John Hodgson."
http: / /www.hadrians-wall.org/ (23 May 2002).
Hadrian s Wall Tourism Partnership/SRB Steering Group. 2000. Enrich­
ment and Enterprise. Round 6: Single Regeneration Budget Bid. 23 May.
Historic Buildings and Monuments Commission for England. N.d.
World Heritage Convention, Cultural Properties: UK Nomination Hadrian's
Wall Military Zone.
Johnson, J. S. 1999. Chesters Roman Fort. 1990. Reprint. London: English
Heritage.
Land Use Consultants (in association with Heritage Site and Landscape
Surveys Ltd). 1995. Hadrian's Wall Landscape and Planning Study: Final
Report. June.
Mason, R., ed. 1999. Economics and Heritage Conservation. Los Angeles:
The Getty Conservation Institute, http: / / www.getty.edu/
conservation/ publications/pdf_publications/ econrpt.pdf.
McKnight, T 2001. Physical Geography: A Landscape Appreciation. 4 t h ed.
Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice Hall.
Mynors, C. 1999. Listed Buildings, Conservation Areas and Monuments. 3 r d
ed. London: Sweet and Maxwell.
Ordnance Survey 1975. Map of Hadrian's Wall. 2 d ed. Southampton:
Ordnance Survey Publication.
Pearson, M., and S. Sullivan. 1995. Looking After Heritage Places: The
Basics of Heritage Planningfor Managers, Landowners. Melbourne:
Melbourne University Press.
Rimmington, N., and D McGlade. 2001. "Limits of Acceptable Change
Conference: Defining and Managing Quality—Housesteads Roman Fort
to Steel Rigg Section of Hadrian s Wall." Consultation draft, 5 November.
The Strategy for Hadrian's Wall. 1984. Hadrian s Wall Consultative
Committee.
UK. Department of the Environment. 1990. Planning Policy Guidance 16:
Archaeology and Planning. Her Majesty's Stationery Office, London.
Found at http: / / www.planning.odpm.gov.uk/ppg/ppgi6/
index.htm (May 2003).
UK. Department of the Environment and Department of National
Heritage. 1994. Planning Policy Guidance ly. Planning and the Historic Envi­
ronment. Her Majesty's Stationery Office, London. Found at
http: / / www.planning.odpm.gov.uk/ppg/ppg15/pdf/ppg15.pdf.
Recent amendment may be found at http: / / www.planning.odpm.
gov.uk/circulars/ 0101/ 09.htm (May 2003).
REFERENCES 211
UNESCO Convention Concerning the Protection of the World Cultural and
Natural Heritage. Accessed at http: / / whc.unesco.org/nwhc/pages/
doc/ mainf3.htm.

UNESCO Convention Concerning the Protection of the World Cultural and

Natural Heritage: Operational Guidelines for the Implementation of the
World Heritage Convention. Accessed at http: / / whc.unesco.org/
opgulist.htm.

Watson, 1.1997. Hadrian's Wall: A Teacher's Handbook. London: English

Heritage.

212 H A D R I A N ' S W A L L W O R L D H E R I T A G E SITE

Persons Contacted during the Development of the Case

Julian Acton David Murray

National Farmers Union National Farmers Union
Northumberland Cumbria

Lindsay Allason-Jones Karen Parker

Director of Archaeological Museums Administration and Newsletter Editor
M u s e u m of Antiquities English Heritage Co-ordination Unit
University of Newcastle
Georgina Plowright
Paul Austen Curator
H a d r i a n sW a l l W o r l d Heritage Site Co-ordinator English Heritage
English Heritage Co-ordination Unit Corbridge R o m a n Site

Patricia and Robin Birley Andy Poad

Directors Property Manager
The Vindolanda Trust T h e National Trust

Jane Brantom Neil Rimmington

Manager Earthworks Officer
H a d r i a n sW a l l T o u r i s m Partnership English Heritage

Bill Griffiths Brian Selman

Curator Parish Council
Tyne and Wear Museums/Segedunum Heddon-on-the-Wall

Nick Hodgson Peter Stone

Principal Keeper of Archaeology Senior Lecturer
Tyne and Wear Museums/South Shields Newcastle University

Paget Lazari Lynn Turner

Project Manager Chief Leisure and T o u r i s m Officer
Northumberland National Park Tynedale Council

David McGlade Elaine Watson

Hadrian's W a l l Path National Trail Officer General Manager
Countryside Agency Birdoswald

Emma Moody
Sustainable Transport Officer
H a d r i a n sW a l l T o u r i s m P a r t n e r s h i p

PERSONS C O N T A C T E D D U R I N G T H E D E V E L O P M E N T O F T H E CASE
This page intentionally left blank
PART THREE Issues Raised by the Case Studies

M a r t a de la T o r r e
This page intentionally left blank
T h e four case studies included in this publication illustrate
h o w different organizations have dealt w i t h the challenges
o f m a n a g i n g sites w i t h m u l t i p l e values. T h e cases s h e d
light o n the approaches dictated b y the administrative a n d
political environments of each organization, a n d the solu­
tions they f o u n d to a c c o m m o d a t e the specific resources
a n d c i r c u m s t a n c e s o f t h e sites.
This section compares h o w s o m e of the issues
a n d c h a l l e n g e s w e r e h a n d l e d at t h e different sites. E v e r y
aspect of m a n a g e m e n t illustrated in the cases could be the
subject o f these comparisons. H o w e v e r , this section
focuses o n those issues that s e e m to illustrate the chal­
lenges o f m a n a g e m e n t particularlywell. T h o s e selected
for consideration are: the m a n a g e m e n t planning require­
m e n t s a n d t h e g u i d a n c e a v a i l a b l e f o r it a n d f o r its i m p l e ­
mentation; the application o f these guiding principles to
i n d i v i d u a l sites; t h e t r e a t m e n t o f v a l u e s , i n c l u d i n g h o w
they are recognized and the role played by stakeholders;
the h a n d l i n g o f the often difficult subject o f economic
value; the resolution of conflicting values and the tensions
b e t w e e n local, national, a n d international values; the
recognition o f the l a n d s c a p e as acultural value; the
importance o f the fabric; the concept of "quality of the
visitors' experience"; a n d the m o n i t o r i n g o f values.
Management Planning
T h e organizations involved in this study operate in c o m ­
plex environments and engage in elaborate planning
processes to assure that they m o v e a h e a d in a concerted
m a n n e r to fulfill their m a n d a t e s . I n all s y s t e m s the p l a n ­
n i n g processes are intended to result in written docu­
m e n t s u s e d to guide a n d explain decisions a n d actions.
T h e n u m b e r of documents available a n d their currency
v a r i e d a m o n g t h e sites, b u t i n all i n s t a n c e s t h e manage­
m e n t guidelines called for p r i m a r y a n d s e c o n d a r y plans, as
w e l l as i m p l e m e n t a t i o n a n d r e p o r t i n g d o c u m e n t s .
PLANNING GUIDELINES
T h e C a n a d i a n a n d U.S. sites are p a r t o f n a t i o n a l s y s t e m s
parks a n d historic places. Their governing agencies have
developed policies a n d guidelines to be applied in the m a n ­
a g e m e n t o f all the units in the systems to assure consistent
practices of conservation and management. 1
Justification a n d rationale for planning are clearly
explained in the two N o r t h A m e r i c a n systems. T h e U.S.
National P a r k Service ( N P S ) d o c u m e n t s state that the
agency "plans for one p u r p o s e — t o ensure that the deci­
s i o n s it m a k e s a r e as effective a n d efficient as p o s s i b l e i n
c a r r y i n g o u t t h e N P S m i s s i o n . T h a t m i s s i o n is to p r e s e r v e
unimpaired the natural and culturalresources and values
of the national park system for the enjoyment, education,
a n d inspiration o f this a n d future generations a n d to
cooperate w i t h partners to extend the benefits o f resource
conservation a n d o u t d o o r recreation t h r o u g h o u t this
country and the world." Current N P S guidelines 2
specify
the d e v e l o p m e n t o f aseries o f s e q u e n t i a l plans, starting
w i t h aG e n e r a l M a n a g e m e n t P l a n that will "ensure that
the p a r k h a s aclearly d e f i n e d direction for r e s o u r c e s
preservation a n d visitor use." Guidelines indicate that
" g e n e r a l m a n a g e m e n t p l a n n i n g w i l l constitute the first
p h a s e o f tiered p l a n n i n g a n d decision-making. It will
focus o n w h y the park w a s established, a n d w h a t manage­
m e n t p r e s c r i p t i o n (i.e., r e s o u r c e c o n d i t i o n s , v i s i t o r e x p e r i ­
ences, a n d appropriate types of m a n a g e m e n t actions)
should be achieved and maintained over time." 3
In the C a n a d i a nsystem the preparation of m a n ­
a g e m e n t p l a n s is m a n d a t e d b y t h e a c t t h a t e s t a b l i s h e d
Parks Canada. 4
T h i s o b l i g a t i o n is r e f l e c t e d i n t h e agency's
G u i d i n g Principles a n d O p e r a t i o n a l Policies, w h i c h states
that "[E]ffective p l a n n i n g sets out the w a y s a n d m e a n s by
w h i c h cultural resources will be cared for a n d presented.
P l a n n i n g activities flow from policy objectives a n d adhere
to policy principles. T h r o u g h these activities Parks
C a n a d a ensures that the elements of g o o d cultural
r e s o u r c e m a n a g e m e n t practice are i n place i n all s y s t e m s
and processes." 5
It further specifies that "the goal o f m a n ­
a g e m e n t p l a n n i n g f o r n a t i o n a l h i s t o r i c sites is t o e n s u r e
the c o m m e m o r a t i v e integrity o f n a t i o n a l historic sites
and the application of culturalresource management
of principles and practice." 6
Port A r t h u r Historic Site M a n a g e m e n t A u t h o r i t y
( P A H S M A ) is ag o v e r n m e n t b u s i n e s s e n t e r p r i s e ( G B E )
217
established b y aministerial charter of the State of T a s m a ­
n i a . A s s u c h , it is a b l e to set its m a n a g e m e n t
7
policies
within the parameters specified in the charter but without
the guidance o f ahigher authority P A H S M A adheres to
t h e Australia ICOMOS Charter for the Conservation of Places
of Cultural Significance (the B u r r a Charter), w h i c h
endorses v e r y specific planning processes. 8
In England, responsibility for the protection of
r e c o g n i z e d h e r i t a g e sites is a s s i g n e d to v a r i o u s levels o f
g o v e r n m e n t , to b o t h public a n d private agencies, a n d to
private citizens. W o r l d H e r i t a g e Sites, registered p a r k s
a n d gardens, a n d battlefields are protected t h r o u g h inte­
g r a t e d p l a n n i n g processes a d m i n i s t e r e d at the local to dis­
trict levels b y national legislation to protect designated
sites a n d b y policies i n land-use d e v e l o p m e n t plans. T h e
Office of the D e p u t y P r i m e Minister issues Planning Pol­
icy Guidance notes (or PPGs, currently being replaced by
P l a n n i n g Policy S t a t e m e n t s — P P S s ) , w h i c h set o u t govern­
m e n t policy o n the relevant legislation a n d give detailed
guidance for decision makers. T h e s e planning guidelines
define t e r m s a n d direct all p l a n n i n g activities a n d are
m e a n t to consider ascope of concerns m u c h broader than
t h e v a l u e s a n d c i r c u m s t a n c e s o f a specific c u l t u r a l site.
PPG 1: General Policy and Principles 9
clarifies that "the plan­
ning system regulates the development and use of land in
the public interest. T h e s y s t e m as aw h o l e a n d the prepa­
r a t i o n o f d e v e l o p m e n t p l a n s i n p a r t i c u l a r , is t h e most
effective w a y o f reconciling the d e m a n d for development
a n d t h e p r o t e c t i o n o f t h e e n v i r o n m e n t . T h u s it h a s a k e y
role to play in contributing to the G o v e r n m e n t ' s strategy
for sustainable d e v e l o p m e n t b y helping to provide for nec­
essary development in locations w h i c h do not compro­
m i s e the ability o f future generations to m e e t their
needs." 1 0
T h e r e are currently twenty-five PPGs, 1 1
all o f
w h i c h m u s t be taken into consideration w h e n planning in
historic sites; h o w e v e r , o n l y t w o relate specifically to h e r ­
i t a g e s i t e s : PPG ly. Planning and the Historic Environment
PPG 16: Archaeology and Planning. 12
SPECIFIC PLANS
I n the sites studied, the m a i n m a n a g e m e n t d o c u m e n t s
called m a n a g e m e n t plans, general m a n a g e m e n t plans, or
conservation plans. W h i l e their content and organization
vary from site to site, t h e s e d o c u m e n t s u s u a l l y i n c l u d e
s t a t e m e n t s a b o u t t h e l e g a l s t a t u s o f t h e site, its signifi­
cance, a n d m a i n m a n a g e m e n t objectives. Today, these pri­
m a r y p l a n s are strategic d o c u m e n t s , a n d site authorities
see t h e m as a tool for c h a n g e c o n t a i n i n g avision o f the
future and outlining the rules and principles that will be
218 ISSUES R A I S E D B Y T H E C A S E S T U D I E S
f o l l o w e d t o a c h i e v e it. I n t h i s t h e y d i f f e r from the master
p l a n s p o p u l a r a f e w d e c a d e s ago, w i t h t h e i r l o n g lists o f
specific actions a n d activities.
Chaco Culture National HistoricalPark ( C C N H P )
has the m a n a g e m e n t p l a n o f longest standing a m o n g all
t h e s i t e s s t u d i e d . I t s 1985 G e n e r a l M a n a g e m e n t P l a n i s n o t
c o n s i d e r e d b y site staff to reflect c u r r e n t policies o f t h e
N P S even t h o u g h the plan proposed "a course of action for
m a n a g e m e n t a n d u s e o f C C N H P f o r t h e n e x t 10-15 y e a r s . "
Since the plan w a s constructed a r o u n d v e r y specific issues
c o n s i d e r e d c r i t i c a l i n 1985, s u c h a s m i n i n g a n d d e v e l o p ­
m e n t o f s u r r o u n d i n g l a n d s , it b e c a m e o b s o l e t e s o o n after
w h e n the anticipated threats did not materialize. T h e use­
fulness of the plan has been limited since then. Currently
t h e p l a n is u s e d m a i n l y as a c h e c k l i s t o f " a c t i o n i t e m s "
from w h i c h the authorities select for i m p l e m e n t a t i o n
those that are considered relevant and ignore those that are
not, awaiting the development of an e w General M a n a g e ­
m e n t Plan in accordance w i t h current N P S policies. C u r ­
rently, the directives a n d regulations established for the
N P S s y s t e m as aw h o l e s e e m to b e m o r e i m p o r t a n t for the
management of C C N H P , and Park management spends
considerable resources o n " c o m p l i a n c e " activities.
T h e first m a n a g e m e n t p l a n for the N a t i o n a l H i s ­
t o r i c Site o f G r o s s e lie w a s s t a r t e d s h o r t l y after its desig­
n a t i o n as a n a t i o n a l h i s t o r i c site. T h e p r e s e n t a t i o n o f a
d e v e l o p m e n t c o n c e p t t o t h e p u b l i c i n 1992 l a u n c h e d a n
important phase of public consultation detailed in the
case study 1 3
I n accordance w i t h Parks C a n a d a policy,
w h e n t h e p l a n w a s p u b l i s h e d i n 2001, i t f o c u s e d o n e n s u r ­
i n g t h e c o m m e m o r a t i v e i n t e g r i t y o f t h e site. F r o m the
m a n a g e m e n t plan flow aseries o f d o c u m e n t s , which
study the values a n d the resources in detail a n d formulate
specific strategies a n d identify actions to preserve t h e m . 1 4
T h e 2000 C o n s e r v a t i o n P l a n i s t h e l a t e s t i n a
series o f m a n a g e m e n t d o c u m e n t s that have b e e n pre­
and p a r e d over the years for P o r t A r t h u r H i s t o r i c Site. T h e
preparation o f the latest p l a n w a s led b y external consult­
ants a n d followed closely the guidelines provided in the
B u r r a Charter. T h e staff w a s v e r y involved w i t h the devel­
are
o p m e n t o f t h e p l a n , s i n c e t h e p r o c e s s is s e e n as t h e means
o f transmitting a n d institutionalizing the policies set o u t
i n t h e p l a n . M o r e so t h a n at a n y o f t h e o t h e r sites,
P A H S M A staff constantly referred to the C o n s e r v a t i o n
P l a n as justification for m a n a g e m e n t decisions.
T h e 2001 M a n a g e m e n t P l a n o f H a d r i a n s W a l l i s
the s e c o n d o n e p r e p a r e d for this W o r l d H e r i t a g e Site. It
reflects the b r o a d social considerations m a n d a t e d b y the
United Kingdom's planning guidelines, a n d considers the
protection of heritage resources in the context of societal
n e e d s . T h i s is d i f f e r e n t from t h e t h r e e o t h e r sites, w h e r e
the p u r p o s e o f p l a n n i n g w a s the p r o t e c t i o n o f the sites
t h e m s e l v e s a n d t h e i r v a l u e s . A g r e a t e r p u r p o s e is r e c o g ­
n i z e d i n t h e p l a n f o r H a d r i a n s W a l l , w h e r e it is s t a t e d t h a t
" [ M a n a g e m e n t Plans provide the m e a n s for establishing
an appropriate balance between the needs of conserva­
tion, access, sustainable e c o n o m i c d e v e l o p m e n t a n d the
interests of the local community." 1 5
I n c o n t r a s t to t h e o t h e r t h r e e sites, this m a n a g e ­
m e n t p l a n does not have "statutory status," since H a d r i a n s
W a l l a n d its S e t t i n g exist as a u n i t o n l y i n t h e c o n t e x t o f t h e
W o r l d H e r i t a g e C o n v e n t i o n . N e v e r t h e l e s s , i n s p i t e of, o r
p e r h a p s b e c a u s e of, its e x c l u s i v e s t r a t e g i c n a t u r e , t h e p l a n
has e n o r m o u s i m p o r t a n c e for the d e v e l o p m e n t o f activi­
ties i n the area o f the W o r l d H e r i t a g e Site, a l t h o u g h not
l e g a l l y b i n d i n g . "Its p u r p o s e is t od r a w t o g e t h e r i n t o one
d o c u m e n t the description a n d significance o f the Site, t o
identify the organisations a n d individuals w i t h a n interest
in the Site, i n c l u d i n g the existing relevant frameworks that
c a n b e u s e d t o p r o t e c t it, t oi d e n t i f y t h e p r e s s u r e s o n t h e
values o f the Site a n d to set o u t a n a g r e e d overall g u i d i n g
s t r a t e g y for t h e p a r t n e r o r g a n i s a t i o n s , t oa d d r e s s t h e i s s u e s
w h i c h are of concern through their individual remits and
by w o r k i n g cohesively together." 1 6
T h e m a n a g e m e n t s y s t e m s u s e d i n all f o u r sites
rely o n aprimary planning d o c u m e n t that records the mis­
sion of the place and the mandate of the governing author­
ity a n d establishes general principles o f operation. T h e s e
conservation plans or m a n a g e m e n t plans are supported by
secondary or tertiary plans that focus o n implementation
m e t h o d s a n d w o r k plans. I n the N P S system, strategic,
implementation, and annual performance plans constitute
the next tiers o f d o c u m e n t s . P a r k s C a n a d a staff has pre­
pared plans dealing w i t h visitor experience a n d care of the
resources; business plans; a n d periodic reports for G r o s s e
l i e a n d t h e I r i s h M e m o r i a l N a t i o n a l H i s t o r i c S i t e . T h e 2000
C o n s e r v a t i o n P l a n for P o r t A r t h u r Historic Site specifies a
c o m p l e x set o f s e c o n d a r y a n d tertiary plans that deal w i t h
specific buildings as w e l l as areas o f operations. Finally, the
M a n a g e m e n t P l a n for H a d r i a n sW a l l W o r l d Heritage Site
acts as a n u m b r e l l a for m o r e specialized management
p l a n s for the v a r i o u s places that exist w i t h i n the site as w e l l
as business a n d t o u r i s m plans for the region.
O n e of the questions raised in the study w a s h o w
m u c h latitude did system-wide directives allow local
a u t h o r i t i e s t ot a i l o r d e c i s i o n s t ot h e i r o w n c i r c u m s t a n c e s .
T h e a n s w e r s e e m s to be that the C a n a d i a n a n d the U.S.
national parks systems give sufficient discretion to local
m a n a g e r s t oa d d r e s s t h e n e e d s o f t h e i r sites. M o s t inter­
ventions on archaeological remains within Hadrian s Wall
W o r l d Heritage Site are g o v e r n e d b y principles established
for English Heritage, including reconstructions. Neverthe­
less, as i n d i c a t e d i n t h e c a s e study, t h e r e is a g r e a t v a r i e t y
in the a p p r o a c h to reconstruction a n d the extent to w h i c h
it is u s e d b y d i f f e r e n t o w n e r s . I n s h o r t , t h e s t u d y f o u n d
instances w h e n the guidelines, policies, a n d directives
a p p e a r e d to h a v e left so m u c h l e e w a y to local authorities
that s o m e o f their decisions s e e m e d to be outside the
p a r a m e t e r s set b y the prescribing d o c u m e n t s .
In acouple of instances, policies a n d regulations
w e r e seen to b e asource o f conflict. S o m e o f the directives
of the N P S — h a v i n g b e e n formulated independently to deal
w i t h specific issues—provided contradictory guidance. F o r
example, the directives guaranteeing respect of traditional
uses o f the p a r k s b y Native A m e r i c a n s , particularlyin rela­
tion to religious ceremonies, a n d the system-wide prohibi­
tion to r e m o v e a n y materials from the national parks cre­
ated ad i l e m m a for authorities. T h e N P S ' s recently updated
m a n a g e m e n t policy d o c u m e n t s attempt to address these
inconsistencies through m o r e comprehensive approaches
and considerations of management issues.
Values
T h e case studies s h o w that the m a n a g e m e n t approaches
u s e d i n all four sites are b a s e d o n the c o n s e r v a t i o n o f val­
ues a n d the significance of the places, a n d demonstrate
that values-based m a n a g e m e n t c a n take different forms.
T h e m a i n differences lie i n the w a y s i n w h i c h v a l u e s are
prioritized, h o w values are considered during the plan­
ning and m a n a g e m e n t processes, and the m e a n s t o
resolve conflicts b e t w e e n t h e m .
SIGNIFICANCE
T h e official significance o f the sites i n c l u d e d i n this study
stems from the values of their archaeological or historic
resources. Until recent times, few documents elaborated
o n t h e v a l u e s o f a site, s i n c e it w a s a s s u m e d t h a t t h e i r
antiquity or history, their beauty, their scientific potential,
and in m a n y instances, their uniqueness w e r e self-evident.
However, the arrival of n e w stakeholders w i t h demands
t h a t o t h e r v a l u e s also b e r e c o g n i z e d b r o u g h t w i t h it t h e
realization that values c a n b e in conflict a n d that, at times,
protecting all o f t h e m s i m u l t a n e o u s l y c a n b e impossible.
All four cases illustrate h o w the values o f the sites
have evolved over time and h o w n e w values have emerged.
T h e significance o f w h a t is t o d a y C h a c o C u l t u r e N a t i o n a l
Historical Park w a s recognized in apresidential proclama-
ISSUES R A I S E D B Y T H E C A S E S T U D I E S 219
t i o n i n 1907 t h a t m e n t i o n e d t h e i m p o r t a n c e o f t h e a r c h a e o ­
l o g i c a l r e m a i n s d u e , s e e m i n g l y , t ot h e i r scientific, a e s t h e t i c ,
a n d age values. A t that time, the site a l r e a d y h a d v a l u e for
other groups, b u t these values w e r e n o t r e c o g n i z e d as
being sufficiently i m p o r t a n t to m a k e the place significant
for the e m e r g i n g nation. T o this day, the official " p u r p o s e o f
t h e p a r k " r e m a i n s a n c h o r e d t o its a r c h a e o l o g i c a l a n d aes­
thetic significance. H o w e v e r , i n m a n a g i n g t h e site, t h e
National P a r k Service m u s t take into consideration also the
ecological value a n d the spiritual a n d cultural values t o
Native A m e r i c a n and other groups. W i t h i n the N P S , n e w
values are recognized mainly through legislation that often
is n o t d i r e c t l y r e l a t e d to t h e site o r e v e n to t h e n a t i o n a l
parks. F o r instance, the natural value of C h a c o b e c a m e
m o r e p r o m i n e n t a s t h e r e g u l a t i o n s e s t a b l i s h e d b y t h e Envi­
ronmental Protection Act w e r e e n f o r c e d , a n d N a t i v e A m e r i ­
can values (and the involvement of these groups with the
s i t e ) w e r e s t r e n g t h e n e d b y t h e p a s s a g e o f t h e Native Ameri­
can Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA) i n 1990.
T h e v a l u e s o fG r o s s e lie a n d t h e I r i s h M e m o r i a l —
w i t h a shorter history as aheritage p l a c e — h a v e yet to fully
e v o l v e . Its s i g n i f i c a n c e is b a s e d o n t h e island's i m p o r t a n c e
to the h i s t o r y o f i m m i g r a t i o n to C a n a d a ; as a site o f the
great tragedies of Irish immigrants, especially due t o the
1847 t y p h u s e p i d e m i c ; a n d f i n a l l y a s a q u a r a n t i n e s t a t i o n
for the port o f Q u e b e c . T h e statement o f commemorative
i n t e n t o f t h e site m e n t i o n s t h e s e t h r e e a s p e c t s o f its his­
t o r y H o w e v e r , e v e n i n its s h o r t h i s t o r y as a n a t i o n a l his­
t o r i c site, t h e island's a s s o c i a t i o n w i t h D r . F r e d e r i c k M o n t i -
z a m b e r t — w h o r a n the quarantine station a n d did impor­
tant w o r k i n the field o f preventative m e d i c i n e a n d public
h e a l t h i n C a n a d a — h a s b e e n r e c o g n i z e d as a n additional
element o fsignificance. F u r t h e r m o r e , Parks Canada's con­
cept o f c o m m e m o r a t i v e integrity requires that all heritage
values o faplace be identified so that they c a n be pro­
t e c t e d . T h u s , G r o s s e lie is r e c o g n i z e d as h a v i n g o t h e r his­
toric values a n d natural values as aspecial habitat.
P o r t A r t h u r h a s h a d ah i s t o r y as aheritage site
t h a t s p a n s m o r e t h a n a c e n t u r y , a n d its s i g n i f i c a n c e h a s
fluctuated during that time in accordance with the
value—positive or negative—attributed by Australianst o
their convict past. Similar changes c a n be seen in the
a t t e n t i o n p a i d to t h e e c o n o m i c v a l u e o f t h e site, deter­
m i n e d in this instance b y the availability o fexternal sup­
p o r t o r the n e e d to rely o n e a r n e d i n c o m e . Today, as a gov­
e r n m e n t b u s i n e s s e n t e r p r i s e t h a t is n o t d e p e n d e n t o n a
government agency, P o r t A r t h u r Historic Site M a n a g e ­
m e n t A u t h o r i t y s e e m s t oh a v e the m o s t flexibility to recog­
nize a n d take into consideration the largest n u m b e r of val­
220 ISSUES R A I S E D B Y T H E C A S E S T U D I E S
u e s . T h e p r o c e s s o f c r e a t i n g t h e 2000 C o n s e r v a t i o n P l a n
started w i t h aseries o f values identified in the B u r r a C h a r ­
ter a n d established their existence in Port Arthur, resulting
i n t h e l o n g e s t list o f v a l u e s o f a n y o f t h e sites s t u d i e d .
T h e n o m i n a t i o n o f Hadrian's W a l l for W o r l d
Heritage listing focused o n the universal value o f the
R o m a n r e m a i n s as t e s t i m o n y o f the technical a n d archi­
t e c t u r a l a c c o m p l i s h m e n t s o fa n a n c i e n t c i v i l i z a t i o n . T h e
site's m o s t r e c e n t m a n a g e m e n t p l a n specifically m e n t i o n s
the archaeological and historical values of the Wall and
associated features, a n d the i m p o r t a n c e of the landscape
a n d setting i n w h i c h t h e y exist. T h i s strict definition o f the
v a l u e s is d i c t a t e d b y its W o r l d H e r i t a g e s t a t u s a n d is p r o b ­
ably salutary, since the other, nonheritage values o f the
p l a c e — s u c h as its e c o n o m i c v a l u e t h r o u g h t o u r i s m — a r e
s i g n i f i c a n t , a n d a t t e m p t s c o u l d b e m a d e t og i v e t h e m p r i ­
ority w h e n m a k i n g certain decisions. H o w e v e r , as a place
c o m p o s e d o f m a n y individual sites a n d encompassing
l a r g e u r b a n a n d r u r a l areas, it h a s a c o m p l e x set o f v a l u e s .
A s the case s t u d y o fthe E n g l i s h site explains, the t e n s i o n
b e t w e e n the values a n d interests o f m a n y varied stake­
h o l d e r s is o n e o f t h e c h a l l e n g e s o f management.
STAKEHOLDERS
It is e v i d e n t t h a t t h e b r o a d i n v o l v e m e n t o f p u b l i c g r o u p s
provides legitimacy to the results o f the p l a n n i n g process
a n d c a n assist authorities i n the i m p l e m e n t a t i o n o f the
p l a n s . H o w e v e r , t h e i n v o l v e m e n t o f n e w g r o u p s is n o t
a l w a y s a n e a s y process. I n the sites studied, as authorities
s o u g h t t oi d e n t i f y t h e v a l u e s o f a site, t h e i d e n t i f i c a t i o n o f
stakeholders presented an u m b e r o fchallenges, including
determining the legitimate spokesperson for ag r o u p and
maintaining abalance a m o n g stakeholders.
T h e c a s e o fG r o s s e lie a n d t h e I r i s h M e m o r i a l
N a t i o n a l H i s t o r i c Site illustrates the difficulties o f the
former. Early in the planning process, Parks C a n a d a rec­
o g n i z e d that Irish C a n a d i a n s have a special affinity t o the
i s l a n d t h r o u g h w h i c h m a n y o ft h e i r a n c e s t o r s entered
t h e c o u n t r y . I n d e t e r m i n i n g t h e v i e w s o ft h e p l a c e d u r ­
ing the initial planning phases, the authorities consulted
individuals w h o h a d along-term involvement with the
place a n d w h o m they t h o u g h t c o u l d speak to the values
o f this g r o u p . Nevertheless, w h e n the plans w e r e set out
to the public for consultation, other Irish g r o u p s across
C a n a d a felt that the p r o p o s e d i n t e r p r e t a t i o n d i d n o t
reflect their values. T h e strong reaction that ensued
caught Parks Canada by surprise and threatened t o derail
t h e c o n s u l t a t i o n p r o c e s s b y t u r n i n g it i n t o a c o n f r o n t a ­
tion. T h e p o s i t i o n t a k e n b y s o m e Irish C a n a d i a n s — a n d it
is n o t c l e a r e v e n t o d a y w h e t h e r it w a s a g r o u p r e p r e s e n t a ­
tive o f the w h o l e c o m m u n i t y o r o n l y a f a c t i o n — r e s u l t e d
i n a n a m e c h a n g e for the historic site a n d a d e l a y i n the
planning process. This episode illustrates h o w important
it is t oi d e n t i f y t h e s p o k e s p e r s o n f o r a s t a k e h o l d e r g r o u p .
H o w e v e r , u n l e s s a g r o u p is s t r u c t u r e d f o r m a l l y a n d c a n
d e s i g n a t e a s p o k e s p e r s o n (as c o u l d b e t h e c a s e o fa t r i b e
o r a r e l i g i o u s g r o u p ) , it w i l l c o n t i n u e t ob e d i f f i c u l t t o
i d e n t i f y a l e g i t i m a t e r e p r e s e n t a t i v e w h o is c a p a b l e o f
speaking o n behalf of the whole group.
EVOLUTION OF VALUES
T h e r e are heritage places w h o s e values appear to r e m a i n
unchanged. However, the evolution of values over time is
a n i m p o r t a n t c h a r a c t e r i s t i c o fs i t e s s t u d i e d . T h e c a s e s o f
P o r t Arthur, C h a c o , a n d H a d r i a n sW a l l illustrate this well.
W h e n H a d r i a n s W a l l lost its u t i l i t a r i a n v a l u e as a
m i l i t a r y d e f e n s e i n R o m a n t i m e s , it r e t a i n e d utility as its
material components were reused in other constructions.
Starting in the eighteenth century, antiquarians a n d histo­
rians b r o u g h t forth a different set o f values, a n d today,
e c o n o m i c ( a n d t h u s u t i l i t a r i a n ) v a l u e o f t h e W a l l is a g a i n
r e c o g n i z e d b y all stakeholders. P o r t A r t h u r s significance
shifted from akey element in the T a s m a n i a n e c o n o m y t o
a n i m p o r t a n t c u l t u r a l site for all A u s t r a l i a n s o v e r a p e r i o d
of a century
S o m e t i m e s , a p a r t i c u l a r v a l u e o fa site c o m e s t o
be appreciated by n e w groups. In the mid-twentieth cen­
t u r y , N e w A g e r s s t a r t e d t of i n d s p i r i t u a l v a l u e i n C h a c o
Culture National HistoricalPark, aplace that h a d been
spiritually significant t oN a t i v e A m e r i c a n g r o u p s for c e n ­
turies. Today, the aesthetic a n d scientific values coexist
w i t h spiritualvalues for Native A m e r i c a n a n d N e w Age
groups, and with expanding ecological values.
Important events or situations c a n also modify
the values attributed to aplace. This w a s the case for Port
Arthur, w h e r e ag u n m a n r a n d o m l y killed thirty-five peo­
p l e a t a n d a r o u n d t h e s i t e i n 1996, c r e a t i n g a n e w s i g n i f i ­
c a n c e for P o r t A r t h u r as aplace o f m o u r n i n g . I m m e d i ­
ately after the tragic killings, m a n y questions w e r e a s k e d
a b o u t t h e f u t u r e o f t h e site, from possible closure t o h o w
to i n t e r p r e t the tragedy, if at all. T h e individuals w h o
m o s t touched b y the tragedy in m a n y cases lived nearby
o r w o r k e d at t h e site, a n d h a d g r e a t i n f l u e n c e o v e r t h e re-
evaluation process that followed the tragedy T h e initial
reaction o f w a n t i n g to obliterate evidence of the event,
tearing d o w n the B r o a d A r r o w Cafe where most of the
killings took place, later evolved into adesire t o r e m e m ­
b e r t h e lost lives. T o d a y , t h e m a s s a c r e is m e m o r i a l i z e d i n
an abstract garden surrounding the ruins of the Cafe, and
i n t e r p r e t a t i o n t ot h e v i s i t o r is l o w - k e y . I n a d d i t i o n , P o r t
A r t h u r is n o w c l o s e l y a s s o c i a t e d at t h e n a t i o n a l l e v e l w i t h
strict g u n c o n t r o l l a w s that w e r e p a s s e d after the m a s ­
sacre. T h e s e v a l u e s a r e v e r y r e c e n t , a n d it c a n b e antici­
p a t e d that t h e y w i l l evolve as t i m e g o e s by. T h i s n e w e r
tragic value o fPort A r t h u r a n d the national significance
of the g u n control legislation are likely t obe interpreted
differently b y generations t o c o m e .
T h e foot a n d m o u t h disease ( F M D ) that infected
h e r d s i n t h e U n i t e d K i n g d o m i n 2001 o r i g i n a t e d i n f a r m s
around HadriansWall. T h e measures taken by govern­
m e n t a n d f a r m e r s t oa v o i d t h e s p r e a d o f t h e infection
included the destruction of m a n y herds and the closure of
t h e r e g i o n t ov i s i t o r s . T h e s e m e a s u r e s h a d a t e r r i b l e
i m p a c t o n t h e e c o n o m y o ft h e a r e a . T h e s e e v e n t s , w h i c h
coincided with the development of the second Manage­
m e n t P l a n for the W o r l d H e r i t a g e Site, resulted i n a n
a l t e r e d p e r c e p t i o n o f t h e v a l u e s o f t h e site. F o r o n e , the
risks i n h e r e n t i n h e r d i n g l e d t h e f a r m e r s t od i s c u s s alter­
the
native uses for the lands a r o u n d the archaeological
resources. T h o s e discussions m a d e evident the important
c o n t r i b u t i o n a n d v a l u e o f t h e l a n d s c a p e — i n its p r e s e n t
c o n d i t i o n — t o the integrity o f the W o r l d H e r i t a g e Site.
S e c o n d , t h e i m p o r t a n c e o f H a d r i a n s W a l l t ot h e econ­
o m y and welfare of the region h a d been recognized in the
past, b u t i n t h e crisis c r e a t e d b y F M D it w a s c r u e l l y h i g h ­
l i g h t e d . (It is c o n c e i v a b l e t h a t t h e r o l e t h a t G r o s s e lie
p l a y e d after W o r l d W a r II as a research center for bacterio­
logical w a r f a r e , a n d later as a q u a r a n t i n e station, m i g h t
acquire special significance through societal changes or
special circumstances.)
ECONOMIC VALUE
T h e r e is g r e a t c o n c e r n i n t h e c u l t u r a l w o r l d t h a t c o n s i d e r ­
ation o f the e c o n o m i c v a l u e o f heritage sites c o u l d lead t o
o v e r e m p h a s i z i n g this aspect o f the place at the e x p e n s e o f
the culturalvalues. However, although none of the plan­
n i n g processes c a r r i e d o u t at the sites i n this project c o n ­
siders e c o n o m i c values o n par w i t h cultural ones, most
planning and management documents contain some
were f o r m o fa c k n o w l e d g m e n t o f t h e e c o n o m i c v a l u e o f t h e
site t os t a k e h o l d e r s . It w o u l d b e i m p o s s i b l e n o t t od o so i n
a w o r l d w h e r e c u l t u r a l a n d n a t u r a l sites, like m a n y other
public goods, are increasingly being asked to cover their
by o w n costs.
Tourism and visitor-generated income are gener­
ally b e h i n d t h e e c o n o m i c v a l u e o f m o s t c u l t u r a l sites. T h e
e c o n o m i c c o n t r i b u t i o n o f t h e site o f P o r t A r t h u r to t h e
ISSUES R A I S E D B Y T H E C A S E S T U D I E S 221
local e c o n o m y w a s q u i c k l y r e c o g n i z e d w h e n shortly after carefully m o n i t o r e d a n d c o o r d i n a t e d so as n o t to damage
t h e c l o s u r e o ft h e p e n a l c o l o n y p e o p l e s t a r t e d t ov i s i t t h e t h e c u l t u r a l significance o f t h e sites, a n d t h e site a u t h o r i t i e s
place. T h e T a s m a n i a n T o u r i s t A s s o c i a t i o n w a s the first are intimately involved w i t h their operations. T h e roles of
g r o u p t o e x p r e s s i n t e r e s t i n p r o t e c t i n g t h e r u i n s i n 1913. these agencies are discussed in the case studies.
T h e 2000 C o n s e r v a t i o n P l a n f o r t h e s i t e d o e s n o t consider
C O N F L I C T RESOLUTION
e c o n o m i c value w h e n establishing the significance of the
T h e p u r p o s e o f v a l u e s - b a s e d m a n a g e m e n t is t o r e s p e c t
place. Nevertheless, the current statement o f significance
t h e m a n y v a l u e s a t t r i b u t e d t oa n y g i v e n c u l t u r a l site. A s
a c k n o w l e d g e s that t h e site "has traditionally b e e n an
the case studies demonstrate, there are instances w h e n
i m p o r t a n t c e n t r e o fe c o n o m i c a c t i v i t y a n d w o r k i n t h e
values held b y different stakeholder groups c o m e into
T a s m a n P e n i n s u l a a n d T a s m a n i a — i n i t i a l l yas a convict
conflict. S o m e t i m e s , these conflicts c a n find resolution
workplace, later at o w n a n d p r e m i e r tourist destination." 1 7

through compromises and adaptations. O t h e r times, how­

E c o n o m i c considerations are important in Port Arthur,
ever, the conflicts are irreconcilable, a n d o n e o r a n o t h e r o f
n o t o n l y b e c a u s e o f its c o n t r i b u t i o n t ot h e r e g i o n b u t also
t h e v a l u e s h a s t ob e g i v e n p r i o r i t y . T h e s e a r e s o m e o f t h e
because the act that created the P A H S M A specifically
m o s t difficult decisions that cultural m a n a g e r s must
m e n t i o n s t h a t it s h o u l d o p e r a t e " w i t h a v i e w o f becoming
m a k e , a n d for this r e a s o n the g o v e r n i n g agencies often
commercially viable." 1 8
Similarly, the M a n a g e m e n t Plan
provide guidance.
o f G r o s s e lie a n d the Irish M e m o r i a l N a t i o n a l H i s t o r i c
C C N H P d o c u m e n t s state that "while b o t h
S i t e a c k n o w l e d g e s t h e e c o n o m i c v a l u e o ft h e site t o t h e
cultural a n d natural p r e s e r v a t i o n efforts are generally
region, particularly as a result o f increased t o u r i s m .
compatible, they m a y be in conflict in s o m e situations. I n
H a d r i a n sW a l l partners, as h a s b e e n m e n t i o n e d before,
t h e s e i n s t a n c e s , g i v e n t h e l e g i s l a t e d p u r p o s e o ft h e p a r k ,
c o n s i d e r t h e e c o n o m i c d i m e n s i o n o f t h e site t ob e o f
m a n a g e m e n t o fc u l t u r a l r e s o u r c e s w i l l b e f a v o r e d o v e r
great importance.
management of natural resources." 1 9
In Parks Canada,
I n t h e m a n a g e m e n t o fall t h e sites i n c l u d e d i n t h i s
m a i n t a i n i n g t h e i n t e g r i t y o ft h e c o m m e m o r a t i v e intent
study, the e c o n o m i c a n d cultural values are kept separate
o f a site (i.e., t h e v a l u e s t h a t m a k e t h e p l a c e s i g n i f i c a n t
c o n c e p t u a l l y a n d t oa large extent also i n p l a n n i n g a n d
i n C a n a d i a n h i s t o r y ) is t h e p r i m a r y m a n a g e m e n t objec­
m a n a g e m e n t . T h e r e s u l t o ft h i s s e p a r a t i o n i n t h e c a s e o f
tive. C o m m e m o r a t i v e integrity m e a n s h e a l t h y r e s o u r c e s
P o r t A r t h u r is t h a t i n a m a n a g e m e n t s e t t i n g w h e r e the
s u p p o r t i n g national significance a n d effective communi­
Conservation Plan provides detailed guidelines for the
c a t i o n o ft h e c o m m e m o r a t i v e i n t e n t , a n d it a l s o r e q u i r e s
" c u l t u r a l " d e c i s i o n s o n t h e site, it d o e s n o t a d d r e s s t h e
that "the site's h e r i t a g e v a l u e s ( i n c l u d i n g t h o s e not
" e c o n o m i c " a c t i v i t i e s o ft h e p l a c e , a p a r t from the overrid­
related t othe reasons for designation as a n a t i o n a l
ing policy that commercial decisions m u s t not impact
historic site) are r e s p e c t e d i n all decisions a n d actions
a d v e r s e l y t h e c o n s e r v a t i o n o ft h e site.
affecting the site." 2 0
(It s h o u l d b e n o t e d that a m o n g the
T h e e c o n o m i c v a l u e o fC C N H P is c o m p l e t e l y
sites studied, o n l y P a r k s C a n a d a considers c o m m u n i c a ­
different. It is n o t b a s e d o n t o u r i s m o r o n e c o n o m i c activ­
t i o n o fs i g n i f i c a n c e a n i n t e g r a l p a r t o ft h e protection
ity g e n e r a t e d b y t h e site, b u t r a t h e r o n alternative u s e s of
o f t h e v a l u e s o fa site.)
the land. T h e case study discusses in detail the economic
In C C N H P s o m e of the practices introduced by
p o t e n t i a l o ft h e e n e r g y r e s o u r c e s t h a t l i e u n d e r t h e p a r k
the N e w A g e stakeholders were seen by s o m e Native
a n d s u r r o u n d i n g lands. I n c o n t r a s t w i t h t h e o t h e r sites,
A m e r i c a n g r o u p s to violate their religious beliefs. F a c e d
w h e r e t h e s t a k e h o l d e r s c a n r e a l i z e t h e b e n e f i t s o ft h e c u l ­
w i t h this conflict a m o n g stakeholders' values, the N P S pro­
tural and economic values simultaneously, in Chaco, the
hibited all religious c e r e m o n i e s i n places considered sacred.
e x p l o i t a t i o n o fe n e r g y r e s o u r c e s w o u l d c e r t a i n l y h a v e a
This decision eliminated the conflict from park grounds but
v e r y n e g a t i v e i m p a c t o n t h e c u l t u r a l v a l u e s o ft h e site.
affected the spiritualvalue the place h a d for b o t h groups.
In Port Arthur a n d Hadrian sWall, w h e r e the
It c a n b e a r g u e d that N P S h a d o n l y t w o alternatives: t o
i m p o r t a n c e o f t h e e c o n o m i c v a l u e f o r t h e r e g i o n a n d its
a l l o w e v e r y g r o u p t oc a r r y o n their p r a c t i c e s a n d rituals o r
inhabitants has b e e n explicitly recognized, stakeholders a n d
to b a n t h e acts c o m p l e t e l y . A c c o r d i n g t ot h e C o n s t i t u t i o n
site authorities h a v e c r e a t e d s e p a r a t e entities to p u r s u e t h e
o f the U n i t e d States, favoring o n e g r o u p over another
benefits o f tourism. Port A r t h u r Regional M a r k e t i n g L t d .
w o u l d have constituted discrimination o n the basis
and Hadrian sWall Tourism Partnership are independent
of religion.
from t h e sites. H o w e v e r , t h e i r objectives a n d a c t i o n s a r e

222 ISSUES R A I S E D B Y T H E C A S E S T U D I E S
 S o m e conflicts have simpler solutions. A t G r o s s e
lie, t h e p r o t e c t i o n o f t h e v e r y i m p o r t a n t L a z a r e t t o r e q u i r e d
eliminating bat colonies in the eaves. Bats, however, are a
protected species in C a n a d a , a n d closing access to their
habitat w o u l d have inflicted damage. T h e solution found
b y t h e a u t h o r i t i e s w a s t oc l o s e t h e e a v e s b u t t o c o n s t r u c t
small structures n e a r b y to w h i c h the colonies could
m i g r a t e . T h e s e s t r u c t u r e s a r e m o v e d f u r t h e r from t h e
Lazaretto each year, leading the bats a w a y from the his­
toric building.
Sometimes aparticularvalue can be given more
o r less i m p o r t a n c e i n different decisions. T h e r u i n s o f
the church of Port Arthur have acquired iconic m e a n i n g
for t h e site, a n d t h e c h u r c h h a s r e m a i n e d u n r o o f e d for
decades. M e a n w h i l e , plans are proceeding to reconstruct
p a r t s o f t h e M o d e l P r i s o n to m a k e it m o r e easily c o m p r e ­
hensible to the visitors. Clearly, the aesthetic a n d historic
values are considered v e r y i m p o r t a n t in relation to the
church, w h i l e at the M o d e l Prison, the educational value
a n d probably the architecturalf o r m s s e e m to be given pri­
ority over the others.
L O C A L VERSUS NATIONAL AND
INTERNATIONAL VALUES
T w o o f the sites studied i n this p r o j e c t — C h a c o C u l t u r e
National HistoricalPark and Hadrians W a l l — w e r e
i n s c r i b e d i n t h e W o r l d H e r i t a g e L i s t i n 1987, a n d t h e n o m i ­
nation of athird—PortA r t h u r — i sin preparation. T h e
c h o i c e o f j u s t i f i c a t i o n f o r t h e l i s t i n g is left t o t h e c o u n t r y
n o m i n a t i n g t h e site, b u t t h e site m u s t m e e t t h e c r i t e r i o n
or criteria selected at auniversal level. T h i s restriction, b y
definition, w i l l n o t a l l o w all v a l u e s o f a site to b e p a r t o f
the W o r l d H e r i t a g e N o m i n a t i o n , as m e n t i o n e d earlier,
a n d c o u l d b e s e e n as g i v i n g less i m p o r t a n c e to s o m e of
the values that do not have "universal importance."
C h a c o w a s listed as aplace that "bear[s] a u n i q u e
o r at least exceptional t e s t i m o n y to a cultural tradition o r to
a c i v i l i z a t i o n w h i c h is l i v i n g o r w h i c h h a s d i s a p p e a r e d . " 2 1
H a d r i a n sW a l l w a s inscribed u n d e r b r o a d e r criteria, w h i c h ,
in addition to the criterion u s e d for C h a c o , included
"exhibit(ing) a n important interchange o f h u m a n values,
over aspan of time or within acultural area of the world,
o n developments in architecture or technology, monumen­
t a l a r t s , t o w n - p l a n n i n g o r l a n d s c a p e d e s i g n " a n d "beQng) a n
outstanding example of atype of building or architectural
or technological ensemble or landscape w h i c h illustrates
(a) significant stage(s) i n h u m a n history." 2 2
Evidently,
t h e s e criteria leave o u t i m p o r t a n t v a l u e s o f t h e sites.
T h e r e have b e e n attempts to enlarge the W o r l d
H e r i t a g e guidelines to include all the values o f a n o m i ­
n a t e d site, n o t o n l y t h o s e t h a t a r e c o n s i d e r e d o f i n t e r n a ­
t i o n a l significance. I f this w e r e to h a p p e n , all o f t h e site's
values w o u l d b e protected b y the W o r l d H e r i t a g e listing.
H o w e v e r , this c h a n g e has b e e n o p p o s e d b y s o m e state par­
ties w h o d o n o t w a n t to b e subject to international over­
sight w i t h respect to local or national issues a n d values.
A l t h o u g h t h e d e s i g n a t i o n as W o r l d H e r i t a g e is
c o n s i d e r e d i m p o r t a n t b y U . S . a n d E n g l i s h a u t h o r i t i e s , it
has b e e n u s e d v e r y differently i n e a c h case. P a r k staff at
C C N H P i n d i c a t e d t h a t t h e site's W o r l d H e r i t a g e status is
i n v o k e d usually to obtain resources or special considera­
tion. 2 3
In Hadrian'sWall, o n the other hand, the U N E S C O
l i s t i n g is t h e f o r c e b e h i n d , a n d o f t e n t h e j u s t i f i c a t i o n for,
planning and coordination.
The V a l u e o f the Landscape
T h e values recognized b y the criteriaof the W o r l d Her­
itage C o n v e n t i o n a n d national heritage schemes are tradi­
tional ones, generally historic, archaeological o r scientific,
artistic a n d aesthetic. Social values have started to be rec­
ognized in the heritage field only lately a n d have b e e n the
subject of important recent research. 2 4
T h e expansion of the concept of w h a t can consti­
tute "heritage" h a s l e d to the r e c o g n i t i o n o f the signifi­
cance of landscapes. T h e natural values of the environ­
m e n t have been part of the natural conservation field
s i n c e its i n c e p t i o n . H o w e v e r , t h e c o n c e p t t h a t l a n d s c a p e s
are also cultural heritage e m e r g e d in recent decades. Start­
ing from a n increased awareness o f the n e e d to protect
t h e s e t t i n g o f t h e t r a d i t i o n a l " m o n u m e n t s , " it h a s
e x p a n d e d to include vast areas that e n c o m p a s s b o t h natu­
ral resources a n d h u m a n creations. This extension of the
s c o p e o f h e r i t a g e is l e a d i n g to r e c o g n i t i o n o f s o c i a l a n d
e c o n o m i c values as " n o n m o n u m e n t a l , " a n d utilitarian
areas are included in heritage resources. This w a s the case
in P o r t A r t h u r Historic Site a n d Hadrian's W a l l W o r l d
H e r i t a g e Site, w h e r e , o n c e the "site" w a s r e c o g n i z e d as
r e a c h i n g b e y o n d the strict confines o f the m o n u m e n t s t o
i n c l u d e l a n d , villages, a n d cities, n e w social a n d economic
considerations c a m e into play.
At the same time, landscapes are acquiring
i m p o r t a n c e in a n d of themselves, a n d different strategies
for their protection c a n b e seen in the cases o f this study.
A s this has h a p p e n e d , the "setting" o f the cultural
resources often extends b e y o n d the official b o u n d a r i e s
ISSUES R A I S E D B Y T H E C A S E S T U D I E S 223
o f t h e site, a n d c h a n g e s i n t h e u s e o f t h o s e l a n d s c o u l d
affect t h e o t h e r v a l u e s o f t h e h e r i t a g e site. I n C C N H P ,
t h e s i g n i f i c a n c e o f t h e s e t t i n g a n d t h e n e e d t o p r o t e c t it
c r y s t a l l i z e d i n t h e 1970s a s a r e s u l t o f a n t i c i p a t e d e x p a n ­
sion o f m i n i n g activities a r o u n d the park. It w a s feared
that coal and u r a n i u m mining and the exploitation of
natural gas w o u l d create atmospheric pollution that
w o u l d o b s c u r e t h e v i e w s f r o m t h e site, a n d at t h e same
time bring an increase in the population and develop­
m e n t a r o u n d t h e site. I n m a n y p l a c e s o f H a d r i a n s W a l l
W o r l d H e r i t a g e Site, t h e h o r i z o n is v i s i b l e f o r m a n y k i l o ­
meters b e y o n d the protected areas. T h e importance of
these landscapes and views had been recognized well
b e f o r e t h e F M D c r i s i s f o c u s e d n a t i o n a l a t t e n t i o n o n it.
I n b o t h p l a c e s it is a c k n o w l e d g e d t h a t l e g a l p r o t e c ­
tion of such vast extents of land w o u l d be unreasonable
a n d impossible. E n g l i s h Heritage, as the national a g e n c y
m a n d a t e d to p r o t e c t t h e h e r i t a g e o f H a d r i a n sW a l l , h a s
reserved the right to c o m m e n t o n d e v e l o p m e n t in places
w i t h ah i g h i m p a c t o n t h e s e t t i n g . I n r e c e n t y e a r s , f o r
e x a m p l e , it o p p o s e d ap r o p o s a l t o e s t a b l i s h w i n d f a r m s i n
the hills visible from parts o f the site a n d f o u n d a n u n e x ­
p e c t e d ally: m i l i t a r y a u t h o r i t i e s i n an e a r b y a i r b a s e w h o
s a w t h e w i n d m i l l s a s ah a z a r d t o m i l i t a r y flights.
C h a c o a u t h o r i t i e s h a v e a d o p t e d am o r e passive
a p p r o a c h to the protection of the views from t h e site.
O n c e t h e e n e r g y c r i s i s o f t h e 1970s p a s s e d a n d w i t h i t t h e
threat of mining, N P S has carefully avoided raising ques­
tions a b o u t t h e u s e o f l a n d s a r o u n d t h e site. T h e r a t i o n a l e ,
as e x p l a i n e d b y t h e f o r m e r s u p e r i n t e n d e n t , is t h a t restric­
t i o n s o n l a n d u s e i n t h a t r e g i o n o f t h e U . S . a r e av e r y sensi­
tive issue, a n d e v e n d i s c u s s i n g it w o u l d p o l a r i z e factions.
A s l o n g as the potential threats d o n o t b e c o m e real, the
N P S is f o l l o w i n g ap o l i c y o f " l e t t i n g s l e e p i n g d o g s lie."
The I m p o r t a n c e o f Fabric
Another big challenge presented by values-based manage­
m e n t has been establishing the connection b e t w e e n the
values identified a n d their protection in the operations
t h e site. T h e f o u r cases illustrate different m e a n s o f inte­
grating values into practice, and various degrees of suc­
cess. T h e old c o n u n d r u m o f access versus c o n s e r v a t i o n
e m e r g e d as p e r h a p s the m o s t c o m m o n conflict o f values,
leading several o f the site authorities to u s e ac o n c e p t
"quality o f the visit" as a n a r e n a for tradeoffs.
T h e tangible/intangible duality of the concept
s i g n i f i c a n c e is r e c o g n i z e d i n g u i d a n c e d o c u m e n t s . T h e N P S
states that "to b e significant, ac u l t u r a l r e s o u r c e m u s t h a v e
224 ISSUES R A I S E D B Y T H E C A S E S T U D I E S
i m p o r t a n t historical, cultural, scientific, o r technological
a s s o c i a t i o n s a n d it m u s t m a n i f e s t t h o s e a s s o c i a t i o n s i n its
physical substances. P u t another way, the significance of
c u l t u r a l r e s o u r c e s is b a s e d o n t w o i n t e r r e l a t e d qualities. A
c u l t u r a l r e s o u r c e c o n s i s t s o f an u m b e r o f p h y s i c a l , c h e m i ­
cal, o r b i o l o g i c a l features; at t h e s a m e t i m e , it c o n s i s t s o f
ideas, events, a n d relationships. T h e physical a n d social
d i m e n s i o n s o f ac u l t u r a l r e s o u r c e a r e i n s e p a r a b l y inter­
w o v e n . F o r ar e s o u r c e t o b e s i g n i f i c a n t , its m e a n i n g m u s t b e
indelibly fixed in f o r m and fabric." 2 5
T h e B u r r a C h a r t e r also clearly states that
" [ C J u l t u r a l s i g n i f i c a n c e is e m b o d i e d i n t h e p l a c e itself, its
fabric, setting, use, associations, meanings, records,
related places a n d related objects." It m a k e s a distinction
b e t w e e n "conservation," defined as "all the processes of
l o o k i n g a f t e r a p l a c e s o a s t o r e t a i n i t s cultural significance"
a n d "preservation," said to m e a n "maintaining the fabric o f
a p l a c e i n its e x i s t i n g state a n d r e t a r d i n g d e t e r i o r a t i o n . " 2 6
V o l u m e 2 o f t h e 2000 C o n s e r v a t i o n P l a n o f P o r t A r t h u r
H i s t o r i c Site l o o k s at the r e s o u r c e s o f the site i n relation to
the values identified a n d the significance established for
the place.
T h e C a n a d i a n system highlights the importance of
m a k i n g the connection b e t w e e n fabric a n d values b y speci­
fying that "[I]n order to guide design decision-making in
practical fashion, heritage character m u s t be clearly defined
b y linking the p r i m a r y areas o f heritage value to related
character-defining elements, patterns a n d relationships." 2 7
I n a c c e p t i n g the intangible d i m e n s i o n o f signifi­
cance, s o m e organizations have developed n e w methods
to establish the c o n n e c t i o n s b e t w e e n values a n d the site
itself a n d are m a k i n g these connections b e t w e e n values
a n d f a b r i c v e r y explicit. A n e x c e l l e n t e x a m p l e o f this is t h e
analysis c a r r i e d o u t for the r e s o u r c e s o f G r o s s e lie, w h i c h
e x a m i n e d the various aspects of the commemorative
intent (significance) in relation to w h a t w a s on-site a n d
w h a t the visitor w o u l d see. 2 8
A t C C N H P the p r o t e c t i o n o f the v a l u e s a n d sig­
nificance o f the site h a s b e e n e q u a t e d for a l m o s t a c e n t u r y
of
with the physical protection of the resources. According
to N P S mission, the resources s h o u l d be m a i n t a i n e d
u n i m p a i r e d . I n fact, s i n c e b e c o m i n g an a t i o n a l monument
a n d l a t e r ap a r k , t h e r e s o u r c e s h a v e b e e n c h a n g e d b y
excavations a n d e n h a n c e m e n t s for interpretation a n d the
of
e n j o y m e n t o f visitors. S o m e values, s u c h as those attrib­
uted to the ruins b y Native A m e r i c a n s , c a n be denied or
of
receive less recognition if they are s e e n to have a n i m p a c t
on the physical materials of the ruins.
 Heritage agencies use different m e a n s to deter­
m i n e w h e r e "values" reside. Traditionally, w o r k w a s con­
d u c t e d as if values resided i n a n y m a t e r i a l that w a s
"authentic" a n d a n y structure that h a d "integrity." T h e
values-based p l a n n i n g process calls for t w o steps that
focus o n the physical aspects o f the site. 2 9
These two
steps—documentation o f the site a n d a s s e s s m e n t o f the
conditions o f the r e s o u r c e s — p r o v i d e aclear u n d e r s t a n d ­
i n g o f t h e p l a c e , w h i c h is f u n d a m e n t a l to t h e connection
b e t w e e n "values" a n d fabric.
Quality of the Visitors 7
Experience
T h e m a n a g e m e n t d o c u m e n t s i n all four sites address the
i m p e r a t i v e o f p r o v i d i n g ah i g h - q u a l i t y e x p e r i e n c e t o visi­
tors. S o m e o f the factors seen to influence that quality are
c o m m o n to all f o u r sites, s u c h as i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f t h e sig­
nificance of the place. Nevertheless, there are differences
in emphasis, w h i c h reflect the m a n a g e m e n t philosophies
o f t h e i n d i v i d u a l sites.
T h e Conservation Plan of Port Arthur Historic
Site determines that m a n a g e m e n t will "endeavor to pro­
vide high quality visitor experience, consistent w i t h the
conservation requirements a n d enabling visitors a n
understanding of the meanings a n d significance of PA." 3 0
It t h e n g o e s o n to m e n t i o n that n o n e s s e n t i a l facilities that
c o u l d have adverse effect o n cultural significance will be
avoided, but that those that are provided will be "consis­
tent w i t h industry best practice." T h e s e directives clearly
echo the priority of protection and conservation. A t the
s a m e t i m e , " i n d u s t r y b e s t p r a c t i c e " s e e m s t o r e f e r to its
m a n d a t e t o " c o n d u c t its affairs w i t h av i e w o f becoming
commercially viable." 3 1
H a d r i a n sW a l l ' s p l a n calls for " p r o v i d i n g visitors
w i t h a n o v e r a l l e x p e r i e n c e o f t h e W H S w o r t h y o f its spe­
cial values a n d significance." 3 2
T h e plan, however, never
fully defines w h a t aquality experience w o u l d be,
a l t h o u g h it m e n t i o n s e x c a v a t i o n s a n d d i s p l a y o f a r c h a e o ­
logical r e m a i n s ; g o o d interpretation, b o t h i n sites a n d i n
m u s e u m s ; access, s u c h as that p r o v i d e d b y the new
National Trail; conservation of the archaeological
resources; a n d better facilities. A m o n g the facilities m e n ­
t i o n e d are w e t - w e a t h e r facilities, shops, visitor centers,
refreshments, a n d toilets sited adjacent to car parks. T h e r e
is s p e c i a l i m p o r t a n c e a t t a c h e d to t h e q u a l i t y o f t h e s e facil­
ities, e x p r e s s e d i n t h e p l a n as: " I t is i m p o r t a n t t h a t v i s i t o r s
to the W H S are w e l c o m e d b y facilities that i m m e d i a t e l y
c o m m u n i c a t e to t h e m the significance o f the Site t h r o u g h
their quality." 3 3
I n G r o s s e lie, ab a l a n c e d e m p h a s i s o n v a r i o u s fac­
tors s u c h as access, facilities on-site, interpretation, a n d
c o n s e r v a t i o n is t h e h a l l m a r k o f t h e d e f i n i t i o n o f a q u a l i t y
visitor experience. A s dictated b y the elements of c o m ­
m e m o r a t i v e integrity, successful c o m m u n i c a t i o n o f the
s i g n i f i c a n c e o f t h e site is g i v e n al o t o f i m p o r t a n c e . O f all
the sites studied, G r o s s e lie h a d the m o s t c o m p l e t e analysis
o f the visitors' experience, w h i c h considered issues s u c h as
transportation, t i m e n e e d e d on-site, a n d o p t i m a l itinerary.
O n t h e o t h e r h a n d , C C N H P is t h e site t h a t s e e m s
to m o s t frequently use the "quality o f the visitors' experi­
e n c e " as am a n a g e m e n t a n d m o n i t o r i n g tool. T h e a u t h o r i ­
ties at C h a c o h a v e identified the visitors' ability to b e i n
d i r e c t c o n t a c t w i t h t h e r e s o u r c e s , areflective atmosphere,
a n d ap r i s t i n e e n v i r o n m e n t as t h e e l e m e n t s t h a t p r o v i d e
quality to the visitors. 3 4
I n this instance, g o o d facilities o n -
site are n o t afactor c o n t r i b u t i n g quality. A s am a t t e r o f fact,
d e v e l o p m e n t o f facilities is s e e n as p o t e n t i a l l y h a v i n g a n e g ­
ative i m p a c t o n the e n v i r o n m e n t a n d the atmosphere.
M o n i t o r i n g Values
T h e effort to identify a n d protect values w o u l d be i n c o m ­
plete if the condition of these values could not be moni­
tored. M o n i t o r i n g , the final stage in m a n y management
p l a n n i n g p r o c e s s e s , s e e m s a l w a y s to b e left last w h e n it
c o m e s to devoting time a n d resources to management.
M a n y m a n a g e r s a d m i t the n e e d to put m o r e thought and
r e s o u r c e s into m o n i t o r i n g values. A t the e n d o f the day,
g o o d m a n a g e m e n t is e v i d e n t i n h e a l t h y a n d s u s t a i n a b l e
v a l u e s . M o n i t o r i n g t h e p h y s i c a l r e s o u r c e s is t h e most
c o m m o n m e t h o d o f m o n i t o r i n g sites, b u t this is u s e f u l
o n l y i f t h e r e l a t i o n b e t w e e n v a l u e s a n d f a b r i c is estab­
lished and well understood. Although there are today very
sophisticated tools that can detect minute changes in the
material, this does not guarantee that the u n d e r l y i n g val­
ues of the place are not being eroded. F o r example, while
a site m i g h t r e t a i n t o t a l i n t e g r i t y o f its fabric, it m i g h t l o s e
s o m e values t h r o u g h intense (but w e l l - m a n a g e d ) visita­
tion, noise pollution, or i m p r o p e r use of the place. M o n i ­
t o r i n g i n t a n g i b l e v a l u e s is difficult a n d c a n o n l y b e d o n e
indirectly. T h e organizations involved in this study are
employing m e t h o d s that hold promise.
Parks Canada's concept of commemorative
i n t e g r i t y w a s d e v e l o p e d i n t h e 1990 S t a t e o f t h e P a r k s
R e p o r t "as af r a m e w o r k to e v a l u a t e a n d r e p o r t o n t h e
h e a l t h a n d w h o l e n e s s o f n a t i o n a l historic sites." 3 5
Part of
the process of preparing the c o m m e m o r a t i v e integrity
statement includes an in-depth analysis of the relationship
ISSUES R A I S E D B Y T H E C A S E S T U D I E S 225
o f t h e c o m m e m o r a t i v e i n t e n t (i.e., t h e v a l u e s a n d signifi­ toring for the entire W o r l d H e r i t a g e Site, t h o s e involved i n
c a n c e o f the site) a n d the p h y s i c a l place. I n addition, the p l a n n i n g a n d m a n a g i n g the overall site m a i n t a i n that
p r o c e s s i n c l u d e s t h e p r e p a r a t i o n o fo b j e c t i v e s r e l a t e d t o m o n i t o r i n g is o n e o f t h e i r f o r e m o s t p r i o r i t i e s i n develop­
e a c h o ft h e t h r e e e l e m e n t s o f t h e s t a t e m e n t . T h e s e o b j e c ­ ing the m a n a g e m e n t s c h e m e after recently revising the
tives s h o u l d u p h o l d "the d e s i r e d state o f t h e site, its Management Plan.
resources a n d their historic values," "describe the ideal Other systems are based o n the use of indicators,
field conditions sought through management," and "pro­ w h i c h provide quantitative data. All these approaches
v i d e af r a m e w o r k for m a n a g e m e n t activities a n d p e r f o r m ­ attempt to m e a s u r e change or success. Often, however,
a n c e i n d i c a t o r s for m e a s u r i n g t h e state o fasite's c o m ­ the baselines against w h i c h measures are taken are frag­
m e m o r a t i v e integrity." 3 6
Periodically, the agency issues a m e n t e d — t h e y d e a l o n l y w i t h o n e a s p e c t o f t h e site, o r
report o n the conditions of the heritage areas, w h e r e vari­ have n o correlation to the values o f the place. T h e r e is
ous indicators associated w i t h the objectives of the state­ considerable interest in identifying indicators o f sustain-
m e n t are examined and evaluated. 3 7
ability. T h i s s t u d y s u g g e s t s that t h e significance o f t h e site
T h e N P S regularly monitors a n d carries out peri­ a n d t h e p r o t e c t i o n o f its v a l u e s c o u l d b e t h e b a s e l i n e that
o d i c r e v i e w s o f its u n i t s b u t h a s n o t d o n e a c o m p r e h e n ­ could start the process.
s i v e , s y s t e m - w i d e e v a l u a t i o n o f t h e m . I n 1999, t h e
National Parks Conservation Association launched a four-
y e a r p r o g r a m t h a t " a s s e s s e s t h e h e a l t h o fo u r n a t i o n a l Notes
parks by objectively examining the resource conditions
and threats in selected park units." 3 8
A s part o fthe work, it 1. U.S. National Park Service, Management Policies 2001, Wash­
has d e v e l o p e d m e t h o d o l o g i e s t oassess the n a t u r a l a n d ington, D.C.: National Park Service Policy; Parks Canada,
cultural resources, as w e l l as the s t e w a r d s h i p capacity o f Parks Canada Guiding Principles and Operational Policies,
its sites. 3 9
T h i s w o r k is o f r e c e n t d a t e a n d h a d n o t been Ottawa: Parks Canada, 1994.

applied to C C N H P at the time o fthe study 2. In http: / /planning.nps.gov/ (10 Feb. 2004).
T h e role o f m o n i t o r i n g at P o r t A r t h u r takes at 3. NPS, Management Policies 2001, Section 2.3.1.
least t w o f o r m s . O n e o f t h e m is t h e t y p i c a l m o n i t o r i n g of 4. Statutes of Canada 1998, Chapter 31, "Parks Canada Agency
site-wide physical conditions, w h i c h proceeds o n a regular Act," Article 32. Text available at http: / /laws.justice.gc.ca/
a n n u a l s c h e d u l e a n d is c a r r i e d o u t b y c o n s e r v a t i o n staff. en/P-0.4/ 89014.html (10 Feb. 2004).

M o n i t o r i n g o f intangible v a l u e s — a s n o t e d above, a far
trickier task—is addressed b y s o m e of the habits inculcated
as part o f w h a t o n e c o u l d call the " m a n a g e m e n t culture"
o f P A H S M A : the staff are in constant, o p e n communica­
t i o n a b o u t t h e s t a t e o f t h e site a n d t h r e a t s t ov a l u e s ; a d d i ­
tionally, constant s u r v e y i n g o f visitors a n d other stakehold­
ers offers a n indirect, t h o u g h m e a n i n g f u l , s t r e a m o f infor­
m a t i o n o n h o w the v a l u e s o f the site are b e i n g t r a n s m i t t e d
(and by extension, h o w they are being conserved).
In England, the Countryside A g e n c y and English
H e r i t a g e are l e a d i n g ac o n f e r e n c e t oestablish the limits o f
a c c e p t a b l e c h a n g e ( L A C )f o r t h e H o u s e s t e a d s a r e a o f
H a d r i a n sW a l l W o r l d H e r i t a g e S i t e — t h e m o s t intensely
visited part o fthe Wall's archaeological remains. Monitor­
i n g c h a n g e is critical i n this v a s t site w i t h al a r g e n u m b e r
of owners, managers, and environments. T h e method
e m p l o y e d , explained in detail in the case study, w o r k s
t h r o u g h d e t a i l e d d i s c u s s i o n s a m o n g aw i d e r a n g e of
s t a k e h o l d e r g r o u p s t oestablish m i n i m u m c o n d i t i o n s
5. Parks Canada Agency, "3.2. Planning," in Parks Canada Guid­
ing Principles and Operational Policies, 1994. http: //www.pc.
gc.ca/docs/pc/poli/princip/index_E.asp (10 Feb. 2004).
6. See the case study of Grosse lie and the Irish Memorial
National Historic Site in this publication for a detailed discus­
sion of the concept of commemorative integrity.
7. Government Business Enterprises Act 1995, Ministerial Charter
Enterprise: Port Arthur Historic Site.
8. In the context of a relatively decentralized government, the
Burra Charter, although not a legal document, is by consen­
sus the central guidance used by heritage professionals
throughout Australia.
9. PPG 1, as well as a number of the other PPGs, will be
superceded by corresponding Planning Policy Statements in
the course of 2004.
10. Office of the Deputy Prime Minister, Planning Policy Guid­
ance 1: General Policy and Principles: Part 39. Found at
http: / / www.odpm.gov.uk/stellent/ groups/odpm_
planning/ documents/page/odpm_plan_6o6895.hcsp
of (August 2003).

q u a l i t y n e c e s s a r y t os u s t a i n t h e v a l u e s o f t h e site a n d t h e 11. For a complete list of PPGs, see http: / / www.odpm.gov.uk/

quality of visitor experiences. A s for the question of moni­ stellent / groups / odpm_control / documents /

226 ISSUES R A I S E D B Y T H E C A S E S T U D I E S
 contentservertemplate / odpm_index.hcst?n=2263&l=2 logical Sites: A Values-Based Approach," in J. M.Teutonico
(10 Feb. 2004). and G. Palumbo, Management Planningfor Archaeological Sites,
Los Angeles: The Getty Conservation Institute, 2000, 27-54.
12. PPG 15 and PPG 16 are due to be replaced by a single PPS.
Godden Mackay, Port Arthur Historic Site Conservation Plan,
13. The Act of Parliament creating Parks Canada Agency in 1998
Volume 1: Overview Report, prepared for the Port Arthur His­
stipulates that management plans must be revised every five
years. toric Site Management Authority, 2000, Section 5.13.

The Port Arthur Historic Site Management Authority Act of 1987,

14. This holds true for all the sites studied in this project. Each
as amended in 1989.
case explains the network of planning and guidance docu­
ments used in the site. 32. Hadrian's Wall World Heritage Site Management Plan 2001-2007,
2000,76.
15. English Heritage, Hadrian's Wall World Heritage Site Manage­
ment Plan 2002-200J, 2002, Section 1.1. 33. Ibid., 62.

16. Ibid. 34. The CCNHP case study contains a discussion of the quality
of the visit.
17. Godden Mackay, Port Arthur Historic Site Conservation Plan,
Volume 1: Overview Report, prepared for the Port Arthur His- 35. Parks Canada, Guide to the Preparation of Commemorative
toric Site Management Authority, 2000, Section 3.3. Integrity Statements, 2002, Section 1.1.1.

18. The Port Arthur Historic Site Management Authority Act of 1987,
as amended in 1989.
19. National Park Service, Chaco Culture National Historical
Park Resource Management Plan, 10 January 2002 (Draft), 4.
36. Ibid., Section 2.3.3.
See Parks Canada Agency, State of Protected Heritage Areas
37-
1999 Report at http:/ /wwwpc.gc.ca/docs/pc/rpts/
heritage/sphareport_e.pdf (10 Feb. 2004).

20. Parks Canada, Guide to the Preparation of Commemorative 38. In http: / / www.npca.org/across_the_nation/park_pulse/
Integrity Statements, 2002, Section 1.1.2. http: / / www.pc.gc. default, asp (10 Feb. 2004).
ca/docs/pc / guide / guide / index_e. asp.
Ibid.
21. World Heritage Committee, World Heritage Convention
Operational Guidelines, Part C, Paragraph 24, a, ii (commonly
called Criterion C [iii]). http: / / whc.unesco.org/
nwhc/ pages/ doc/ main.htm.

22. Ibid, C (ii) and C (iv).

23. This can be interpreted as the reflection of the distrust in

certain quarters in the U.S. of all United Nations activities,
even if filtered through UNESCO. Those who opposed the
UN have raised the specter of loss of sovereignty over the
land encompassed in World Heritage sites. For whatever rea­
son, the number of WHSs in the U.S. is low compared to
other countries. (Of 730 sites in the World Heritage List, only
20 are in the United States. In comparison, Italy has 36 sites,
Spain 35, France 28, India 23, and Mexico 22). Even those U.S.
places that have been listed do not use their World Heritage
status very publicly.

24. See, for example, D. Byrne et al., Social Significance: A Discus­

sion Paper, Hurtsville, Australia: NSW National Parks &
Wildlife Service, 2001.

25. NPS, Cultural Resources Management Guidelines, 1997, 9.

26. Australia ICOMOS, The Burra Charter, 1999, Article 1.

27. Federal Heritage Buildings Review Office, Federal Heritage

Buildings Review Office (FHBRO) Code of Practice. Ottawa:
Federal Heritage Buildings Review Office, 1996,13.

28. Parks Canada, "Lieu Historique National de la Grosse-Ile-et-

le-Memorial-des-Irlandais Plan d'Experience de Visite,"
December 1998 (unpublished document).

29. For a step-by-step explanation of this process, see M. Demas'

"Planning for Conservation and Management of Archaeo­

NOTES 227
 Index
Note: Page numbers i n italic type refer to illustrations
and captions; page numbers followed by an " n " refer
to endnotes.
aboriginal values, at Port A r t h u r Historic Site, 133
access to sites: at Fajada Butte i n Chaco, 83-86; at
Grosse lie site, 47-49; restrictions i n Chaco on, 88,
9i, 97-98; visitors experience at Chaco and, 93-95,
5
96n.i
Act for the Relief of Unemployment through the
Performance of Useful Public Work, and for Other
Purposes, 99n.i8
Action Grosse lie (Toronto), 5in.io
aesthetic values: at Chaco Culture National Historical
Park, 72-73, 220; at Port A r t h u r Historic Site, 129,
132,150
Agency Act (Canada), 20,5in.i
agricultural policy, Hadrian s Wall site management
and, 195-96,199
Allerdale District Council, 182
amenity societies, Hadrian's Wall preservation and, 182
American Indian Religious Freedom Act of 1978, 73, 87,
108-9
American Museum o f Natural History, 64,101
Anasazi culture: i n Chaco Culture National Historical
Park, 63-64, 87-88, 98n.9, ioon.99; Fajada Butte site
and, 85-86
Ancient Monuments Act o f 1910, 207n.i8
Ancient Monuments Act o f 1932, 207n.i8, 209
Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Areas Act o f 1979,
174,179,181,185,190, 207n.3
Ancient Monuments Consolidation and Amendment Act o f
1913, 207n.i8
Ancient Monuments Protection Act o f 1882,179,207n.i8
Ancient Monuments Society, 2o8n.37
Ancient Order o f Hibernians, Grosse lie Celtic Cross
dedication and annual pilgrimage by, 23-24,24,
5in.io
A n i m a l disease research, at Grosse lie and Irish
Memorial National Historic Site, 23
Antiquities Act o f 1906, 64-65, 69-71,101,107
Archaeological and Historic Preservation Act of 1974, 71,108
Archaeological Resources Protection Act of 1979, 71, 87,109
archaeological excavations: associative (symbolic)
values of, at Chaco, 75; as central focus at Chaco,
70-77; at Chaco Culture National Historical Park,
60, 63, 63-66,78-79,79, 82-87, 98n.9; cultural land­
scapes i n Chaco, 88, ioon.99; at Grosse lie historic
site, 26,26; at Hadrian's Wall W o r l d Heritage Site,
175-79,186-89,207n.5; 207n.i8; information value
of, i n Chaco, 71-72,220; interpretation of, at
Chaco, 81-82; management context for, at
Hadrian's Wall site, 179-85; protection of, at
Grosse lie historic site, 36-37; stakeholder relation­
ships and, 91-92
architectural sites, i n Chaco Culture National
Historical Park, 71-72
associative (symbolic) values, at Chaco Culture
National Historical Park, 75
audience identification: at Chaco Culture National
Historic Park, 80-81; for Grosse lie site, 47-49
Australia, values-based heritage management and, 9n.6
Australia ICOMOS Charter for the Conservation of Places
of Cultural Significance (Burra Charter), 9n.6,
i63n.5i, 215, 224, 226n.8; articulation o f values by,
228 INDEX
130-31,133; Broad A r r o w Cafe Study and, 160-61;
Conservation Plan and, 137-39; local authorities
and, 123; Separate Prison preservation and, 142-43
Australia International Council o n Monuments and
Sites (ICOMOS), 121,123,130-31
Australian Convict Sites, 133
Australian Heritage Commission. See Australian
Heritage Council
Australian Heritage Commission Act (1975), 122
Australian Heritage Council, 3; heritage planning of,
130-31; history of, 122, i62n.i2; partnership w i t h
GCI, 10
Australian Heritage Places Inventory, i62n.42
Authenticity: cultural differences i n definition of,
9n.3; fabric and, 8-9; i n site management, 4, 9n.3
Aztec Ruins National Monument, 66
B Sites in, 79; aesthetic values of, 72, 72-73; associative
BeattieJ. W , 120,164
Bennett, Gordon, 53-54
Birdoswald, Roman Wall at, 175-76,176, 203, 210
Brand, Donald D., 102
Bridges, Roy, 165
Britannia, 176,209
Britannia Romana, 209
British House o f Commons, Select Committee,
establishment o f Port A r t h u r by, 118-19
British Standard on the Principles o f the
Conservation o f Historic Buildings, 187
Broad A r r o w Cafe Conservation Study, 137-38,150,
160-61, 221
Bruce, John Collingwood, 177,209
building maintenance, at Grosse lie historic site, 36
Bureau o f American Ethnology, 101; Chaco Culture
National Historical Park and, 64
Burra Charter. See Australia ICOMOS Charter for the
Conservation of Places of Cultural Significance
business partnerships. See also public-private partner­
ships: audience identification and access strategies
for Grosse lie and, 47-49
C at, 80-81; quality o f visitors' experience at, 93-95,
Camden, W i l l i a m , 176,209
Canadian Environmental Assessment Act, 39
Canadian Heritage: interpretive content at Grosse lie
site from, 47; Web site for, 20,5in.2
Carlisle Basin, Hadrian's Wall sites in, 175-76
Carlisle City Council, 182
"Carnarvon" era, at Port Arthur site, 120-22,130,164-65
Carnarvon T o w n Board, 125
Carrawburgh fort excavation, 177
Carvoran fort excavation, 177
Casamero site, 66
Casa Rinconada, 65; access restrictions to, 86, 88-91,
89-90, 9j, 97-98,103; conservation at, 102; stake­
holder relationships and, 92
Cascades probation station, 119,122,166
case studies: audiences for and applications of, 10;
conflict resolution in, 222-23; creation of, n-12;
design and methodology, n-12; economic value i n ,
221-22; efficacy of, 3; evolution of, 10; evolution o f
values in, 221; importance o f fabric in, 224-25;
landscape value in, 223-24; local vs. national and
international values in, 223; management planning
in, 217-19; monitoring o f values in, 225-26; part­
nership selection and purpose o f project, 10;
"quality o f experience" criteria in, 225; site selec­
tion criteria, n ; stakeholders in, 220-21; values
discussed in, 219-23
Celtic Cross (Grosse lie), 23-24,25
Chaco American Indian Consultation Committee, 77,
81, 92,103
Chacoan Outliers Protection Act of 199% 66,73,103
Chaco Archeological Protection Sites, 73,78
Chaco Canyon National Monument, 65,70,101-2
Chaco Center Project, 65-66, 81, 87,103
Chaco Culture Archeological Protection Sites, 65, 66,
102-3; Joint Management Plan for, 79
Chaco Culture Interagency Management Group
(IMG): Chaco Archeological Protection Sites and,
73; history of, 103
Chaco Culture National Historical Park (CCNHP):
access restrictions on, 88, 91; Active Preservation
(symbolic) values, 75; case study characteristics, 60;
conflict resolution in, 222-23; Congressional legis­
lation on, 102; creation of, 102-3; cultural context
of, 62-63; cultural landscapes in, 76-77, 87-88,
ioon.99; cultural resources conservation at, 78-79,
79; description and context of, 62, 62-63; Draft
Land Protection Plan, 103; economic value of,
75-76, 222; environmental values of, 75; evolution
as heritage site, 64-68, 98n.11, 221; evolution o f
values at, 77; Fajada Butte in, 83-86, 84; General
Management Plan for, 72,76,78-82, 84-87, ioon.70,
102, 218; historical values at, 74-75; history o f settle­
ment and use at, 63, 63-64, 98n.8; information and
dissemination policies, 81-82; landscape values at,
224; local vs. national and international values i n ,
223; management-based policies and preservation
of, 83-92; management context and history of,
61-62; management planning in, 218-19; manage­
ment priorities of, 106; maps of, 65, 67; natural
context of, 62, 62; natural resources conservation
at, 79-80; Navajo land title disputes in, 65-66; oper­
ations and facilities at, 66-68, 67, 99n.23; preserva­
t i o n policies at, 78-80; public enjoyment policies
96n.i-2,225; research policies, 81; resource
classification scoring system for, 105; scientific-
educational information values at, 71-72; selection
criteria for, 11; significance criteria at, 224-25; social
values at, 74; spiritual values in, 73-74; stakeholders
in, 77, 91-92; subsurface rights in, 76; summary o f
legislation concerning, 107-9; time line during
heritage status, 101-4; values associated w i t h ,
69-77,219-20; values-based management, 69-70,
77-82; visitation characteristics, 66, 67, 68; W o r l d
Heritage value of, 76-77
"Chaco Phenomenon," 63,65-66; aesthetic values at
Chaco and, 72-73; interpretation of, 82
"Cherishing the Irish Diaspora," 50
Chesters Roman Fort, 175,177, 200, 209
Chetro Ketl, 65,101-2
cholera epidemics, at Grosse lie and Irish Memorial
National Historic Site, 22-23
Civic Amenities Act (1967), 181
Civilian Conservation Corps (CCC), Chaco Culture
National Historical Park and, 65, 99n.i8,102
Clarke, Marcus, 164
Clayton, W i l l i a m , 177, 209
Coal Mines probation station, 119,122,166
commemorative integrity statements: for Grosse lie
and Irish Memorial National Historic Site, 34,
53-54, 220, 226n.6; history of, at Grosse lie, 53-54;
Objectives for Messages o f National Historic
Significance from, 38; protection from impairment
or threat contained in, 35-37; roots i n Parks Canada
of, 53-54; secondary heritage values at Grosse lie,
protection of, 39
commemorative intent, at Grosse lie and Irish
Memorial National Historic Site, 19,32-33, 220
commercial values. See also economic values: i n Port
A r t h u r Site management, 130-31,1601.36
communication strategies: audience identification for
Grosse lie site, 47-49; o n importance o f Grosse lie,
37-38, 46-47
conservation: at Hadrian's Wall W o r l d Heritage Site,
180; heritage management at Port A r t h u r and, 131,
139-40,144; management coordination at
Hadrian's Wall concerning, 183-85; i n Port A r t h u r
Conservation Plan and secondary plans, 144-47;
o f Separate Prison at Port Arthur, 140-44; i n site
management, 4; values-based framework for, 9
Conservation Plan o f 2000 for Port A r t h u r site, 131-37,
139, i62n.43, i63n.73-74; adoption of, 166; con­
flicting values in, 155; economic values in, 222;
effect o n site values of, 155-57,157; government
policies and, 154; impact o n preservation and site
values of, 152-53,163^73; importance o f fabric i n ,
224; management style and planning, 161, 218-19;
secondary plans, 144-47,163x1.63; Separate Prison
structure, 140-44; social values in, 150
"Convictism" era, 118-20; Port A r t h u r Historic Site
and, 117,129
Convict Trail established, 122,166
Coolidge, Calvin (President), 102
Corbridge Museum, 177, 210
Corporate Plan for Port Arthur, 132,139,148-49,
163x1.71; conflicting values in, 155; government
policies and, 154
cost-benefit analysis, pitfalls of, i n heritage site
management, 4
Council for British Archaeology, 183, 2o8n.37
Countryside Agency: Hadrian's Wall site manage­
ment and, 180,183,194; monitoring o f values at
Hadrian's Wall, 226
Countryside Commission, 190
cultural conflicts: access restrictions at Chaco and,
88-91; at Hadrian's Wall site, 200-202; over Grosse
lie historic site designation, 29,32-33; resolution of,
in case studies, 222-23
cultural landscape, Chaco defined as, 76-77, 87-88
Cultural Resource Management Guidelines (NPS),
88, 9 i n . i - 2
cultural resources: i n Chaco Culture National
Historical Park, 62-63,70-77; conservation of, at
Chaco, 78-79,79; effective communication o n
importance of, 37-38; heritage values protection at
Grosse lie and, 49; management at Grosse lie of,
34-35; outside Chaco Park, 79; significance criteria
for, 224-25; stakeholders' role in, 7; values-based
management and, 5-6
Cultural Resources Registry o f Quebec, Lazaretto at
Grosse lie and, 43
cultural values: Conservation Plan for Port A r t h u r
and, 144-47,155-57, i63n.78; o f Hadrian's Wall site,
192; at Port Arthur, 138-40, 222; o f Romans, at
Hadrian's Wall, 200-202; Separate Prison at Port
A r t h u r and, 142-43
Cumberland and Westmoreland Antiquarian and
Archaeological Society, 209
Cumbria County Council, 177,182, 210
D management goal, 131,156-57; Separate Prison at
Darlington Amenity Research Trust (DART) report,
183,190, 209
Dead Island (Port A r t h u r site), 119,121,164
decision-making process: management o f Port
A r t h u r and, 139,163x1.56; preservation and site
values at Port A r t h u r and, 152-53
Department for Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS),
Hadrian's Wall and, 180, 2o8n.3i
Department o f Environment, Food, and Rural Affairs
(DEFRA): Countryside Stewardship Scheme,
195-96,199; foot-and-mouth crisis and, 197-99;
Hadrian's Wall site management and, 180
Department o f Environment and Land Management
( D E L M ) (Australia), i62n.i6
Development Advisory Committee for Historic Areas
(Tasmania), 124
dissemination policies, at Chaco Culture National
Historic Park, 81-82
Doyle Inquiry into Port Arthur, 122,124,146,153
Draft Port A r t h u r Site Management Plan, 130
draft process and review, case study creation and, 12
Dupuy, Michel, 31
D u t c h East India Company, 118
E Georgian Group, 2o8n.37
Eaglehawk Neck outstation, 121-22,166
Eastern State Penitentiary (Philadelphia), 119
economic development: Grosse lie historic site desig­
nation and, 29; Hadrian's Wall site management
coordination and, 183-85; lack of, at Chaco site,
80-81, ioon.78
economic values: i n case studies, 221-22; i n Chaco
Culture National Historical Park, 75-76; govern­
ment policies at Port A r t h u r and, 153-54; at
Hadrian's Wall site, 191-92; i n heritage manage­
ment, 7-8; o f Port A r t h u r Historic Site, 129-30,133,
138-40,144,150 162x1.36; i62n.48; Separate Prison at
Port A r t h u r and, 142-43; University o f Tasmania
economic impact study for Port Arthur, 138,
i63n.52
educational value: o f Chaco Culture National
Historical Park, 71-72; o f Hadrian's Wall site, 192
Egloff, Brian, 131
English Heritage (EH): archaeological excavations
coordination, 187-89; collaborative projects, 3;
coordination o f Hadrian's Wall management w i t h ,
183-85,2o8n.40, 219; G C I collaboration w i t h , 10;
Hadrian's Wall Co-ordination Unit, 178,185;
Hadrian's Wall site and, 177-78, 210; limits o f
acceptable change, 200-202; management plans at
Hadrian's Wall site and, 205, 2o8n.66; m o n i t o r i n g
o f values at Hadrian's Wall, 226; museum building
of, 183,185; national heritage-related agencies and,
180, 2o8n.3i; ownership and management o f
Hadrian's Wall site and, 182; partnership model at
Hadrian's Wall and, 204, 207; protection as priority
of, 8; values o f Hadrian's Wall site and, 191-92;
Wall Recording Project of, 177, 210
Environmental Protection Act, 220
environmental values. See also conservation; land­
scape management: Casa Rinconada access issue
and, 88-91; at Chaco Culture National Historical
Park, 75; at Grosse lie historic site, 36; heritage
values protection at Grosse lie and, 49; landscape
management and, 223-24; natural resources
conservation at Chaco, 79-80, 82, 87, ioon.92;
secondary heritage sites at Grosse lie and, 39
Environment Canada directives, 28,5in.2i
Executive Order 11987, ioon.92
exotic species, i n Chaco park, 87, ioon.92-93
F tors' experience at, 225; Quarantine Station at, 24,
fabric preservation and destruction: at Grosse lie and
Irish Memorial National Historic Site, 19; impor­
tance of, i n case studies, 224-25; as Port A r t h u r
Port A r t h u r and, 142-43; values and importance
of, 8-9
Fajada Butte, 83-86, 84; historical time line
concerning, 102-3
Federal Government (Canada), Parks Canada Agency
review by, 49
Federal Heritage Building, Lazaretto at Grosse lie
designated as, 40-45
Federal Heritage Buildings Review Office (FHBRO),
36-37, 52n.57
Federal Register, Fajada Butte notice in, 85
First Man to Walk Hadrian's Wall, The, 176,209
Flight to Freedom tours (Tasmania), 128
foot and m o u t h disease (FMD), Hadrian's Wall site
management and, 178-79,193,196-99,197, 206-7,
210, 221, 224
Forestier Peninsula probation station, 119
For the Term of His Natural Life, 121,129,164-65
G
General Land Office, history o f Chaco and, 101
Geological and Geographical Survey, o f Chaco
Culture National Historical Park, 64,101
Getty Conservation Institute (GCI): case study
drafting at, 12; collaborative projects, 3; evolution
o f case studies at, 10; partnership selection, 10
governing authorities. See also local authorities: elici-
tation o f values by, 7; impact o n Port A r t h u r of,
153-54,16311.74
government business enterprise (GBE): PAHSMA as,
124,153-54, i63n.74, 217-18; Port A r t h u r site and,
122,160, i63n.85
Government Business Enterprises Act, 124
Government Performance and Results Act o f 1993,109
"Great houses," at Chaco Culture National Historical
Park, 70-77
Grosse lie and the Irish Memorial National Historic
Site: addition o f Irish Memorial proposed, 33;
Anglican Chapel on, 26,26; archaeological excava­
tions at, 26,26; audience and access issues at,
47-49; bat colonies at, 49; building maintenance at,
36; Carpentry and Plumbing Building, 26; case
study characteristics, 18; Catholic Presbytery at,
26,26; Celtic Cross at, 23-24,24, 33,33; commemo­
rative intent and integrity at, 19,31-34,53-54, 220,
226n.6; conflict resolution at, 223; digital informa­
tion sources on, 18; Disinfection Building at, 25,
25-26; Doctors' Memorial at, 33,33; effective
communication strategies on significance of,
37-38,46-47; evaluation o f "success" of, 48-49;
ferry service to, 25,2% 47-49,5in.i6; First Class
H o t e l on, 27; geography of, 21-23; guides' role at,
47; health of, 50; heritage site designation, 23-24;
heritage values protection at, 49; historical back­
ground on, 18, 20-23, 41-45, 46x1.4; impact o f
management policies at, 39-40,46-49; Irish
Memorial and Cemetery at, 25-26,33,33, 37; land­
scapes and environment at, 36; Laundry building
at, 43,43; Lazaretto at, 26,40-46,41-43; learning
points concerning, 19; Level I resources protection
at, 39-40, 46; management context at, 20-27;
management planning for, 218-19; maps of, 22-23;
Marconi Station at, 26,42,42, 45-46; Medical
Examination Office, 26; Medical Superintendent's
House location, 46; m o d e r n facilities on, 26,27,
5in.i9; petitions concerning Irish history of, 31-33,
5in.38; protection from impairment or threat at,
35-37; public input concerning, 29-33; Public
Works Officer's House, 26,26, 46; quality o f visi­
33,37-38; secondary heritage values, protection of,
38-39; Second Class H o t e l on, 27; selection criteria
for, 11; stakeholders in, 220-21; statement o f
commemorative intent concerning, 33-34; T h i r d
Class H o t e l at, 26,27; values-based management
at, 33-39; values protection at, 28-33,220; Web site
for, 49
INDEX 229
Grosse tie National Historic Site—Development Concept of
1992, 40,46
Grosse tie National Historic Site—Development Concept
Supplement, 30
Grosse tie National Historic Site—Report on the Public
Consultation Program, 31,5211.40
guides: as interpreters at Chaco, 82, 94-95; role of, at
Grosse lie site, 47
Guide to the Preparation of Commemorative Integrity
Statements, 53-54
Guiding Principles and Operational Polices (Parks
Canada Agency), 34-35, 217-18
H Historic Buildings and Monuments Act o f 1953,181
Hadrian's Wall and Vallum Preservation Scheme,
177,190
Hadrian's Wall Co-ordination Unit ( H W C U ) , 178,185,
194-95, 207
Hadrian's Wall Path National Trail, 178,183,185,
200, 225
Hadrian's Wall Tourism Partnership ( H W T P ) ,
2o8n.57,210; cultural values and, 200; economic
values and, 191; local authorities and, 178, 203;
management coordination and, 183-85,194-95,
206-7
Hadrian's Wall W o r l d Heritage Site: agricultural
policy, values, and uses, 195-96,199; Arbeia Roman
Fort, West Gate, 178,187-88, 210; archaeological
excavations at, 175-79,186-89, 207^5; 207n.i8;
balance o f wall and landscape values at, 202-3,
2o8n.62; Birdoswald ruins, 175-76,176, 203, 210;
boundary setting policies at, 192-93; bus service at,
195, 2o8n.57; case study characteristics for, 172-73;
Chesters Roman Fort, 175,177, 200, 209; Clayton
Wall restoration, 174-75,177,188, 207n.4, 209;
Commanding Officer's quarters, 178; conservation
areas at, 180; cultural values of, 192; designated
classifications at, 179-80; digital resources on, 173;
economic value of, 191-92, 222; educational values
at, 192; effect o f W o r l d Heritage designation,
199-202; English Heritage role in, 183; evolution o f
values at, 221; foot-and-mouth crisis and, 178-79,
193,196-99,197, 221; historical values at, 191; history
of, 176-79, 209-10; Housesteads Roman museum,
177,183, 200; impact o f management policies on,
199-205; landscape values at, 223-24; limits o f
acceptable change at, 200-202; listed buildings at,
179-80; listing process for, 180; local authorities,
management partnerships w i t h , 180-81,193-94,
203-4, 2o8n.65; local vs. national and international
values at, 223; management context for, 179-85;
management coordination for, 182-85;
Management Plan Committee, 182-85, 203-4, 2.10;
management planning at, 218-19; Management
Plan o f 1996,178-79,179,191-93, 204-5, 207n.23;
Management Plan o f 2002,187-89,191-93,204-5,
2o8n.66, 210, 218-19; maps of, 174; Military Zone,
176,190-91, 209-10; national heritage-related agen­
cies, 180; national heritage statutes and policies
and, 181-82; ownership and distribution issues, 182;
partnership park management model at, 194,
203-4, 2o8n.54; 2o8n.64-66; physical and geogra­
phic description, 174-76,174-76, 207^2-3; pilgrim­
ages to, 177-79; quality o f visitors' experience at,
225; scheduled ancient monuments at, 179,
2o8n.27; selection criteria for, 6, n ; Single
Regeneration Budget for, 192; South Shields
Roman remains, 175,177-78, 209; Statement o f
Significance concerning, 192; summary o f
management at, 206-7; tiered geographic scheme
for, 202-3; time line for, 209-10; tourism at, 177-79,
194-95, 207n.23; values associated w i t h , 190-92, 220;
values-based management of, 192-99; visitation
trends at, 197,197
Halfway House site, 66
Handbook of the Roman Wall, 177
230 INDEX
"Harmonic Convergence," Chaco park access and,
88-90
Haydn, F. V , 101
Heritage Lottery Fund (HLF) (1993), 181
heritage management: information sources on, 3,
9n.i; limits o f acceptable change policies and,
201-2; management context i n Britain for, 179-85;
at Port A r t h u r site, 130-31
heritage values: at Chaco park, 69-77, 93-95;
definitions of, 4; economics, 7-8; at Port Arthur,
155-57; respect for, at Grosse lie, 49
Hewett, Edgar Lee, 102
historical significance. See significance criteria
Historic Cultural Heritage Act, 123, i62n.i7
Historic Ghost Tour (Port Arthur), 128,150-52
Historic Sites Act of 193% 71,107
Historic Sites and Monuments Act, 20
Historic Sites and Monuments Board o f Canada
(HSMBC), 20-21; i m m i g r a t i o n theme at Grosse lie
and, 29; interpretive content at Grosse lie site
from, 47; Lazaretto at Grosse lie and, 40-45;
national historic site designation for Grosse lie, 24,
30-31,40,51n.11; National Historic Sites o f Canada
System Plan and, 24; statement o f commemora­
tive intent for Grosse lie, 33-34; Web site of, 5in.5
historic values: at Chaco Culture National Historical
Park, 74-75; at Hadrian's Wall site, 191, 203; o f Port
A r t h u r Historic Site, 129,132,150
History of Northumberland, 209
Hobart to Port A r t h u r cruise, 128
Hodgson, John, 209
Holsinger, S. J., 101
H o p i tribe: Chaco Culture National Historical Park
and, 64,101; spiritual values at Chaco and, 73-74
Horsley, John (Rev), 209
Housesteads Roman museum, 177,183, 200-202,
209, 226
H u t t o n , W i l l i a m , 176, 209
Hyde Exploring Expedition, 64,101
I National Estate values, at Port A r t h u r site, 122
"immersion" experience, Separate Prison at Port
Arthur, 142-43
i m m i g r a t i o n history, at Grosse lie and Irish Memorial
National Historic Site, 21-23, 28-29,37-38,5in.20
impairment, protection from, at Grosse lie, 35-37
Impression Bay probation station, 119,122,166
informational values, at Chaco Culture National
Historical Park, 71-72
Interior, U. S. Department of, Chaco Culture National
Historical Park history and, 61-62
Interpretation Plan o f 2001 for Port Arthur, 147,
157-58, i63n.8i-82
interpretive programming: at Chaco Culture
National Historic Park, 81-82; at Grosse lie and
Irish Memorial National Historic Site, 19, 47-49
Irish Heritage (Quebec), 5in.io
Irish immigrants: petitions concerning Grosse lie
from, 31-33,5in.38; as stakeholders at Grosse lie
and Irish Memorial National Historic Site, 21-24,
28-33,37; statement o f commemorative intent
concerning Grosse lie and, 33-34
Isle o f the Dead (Port Arthur), 121,127-28
J Historical Park and, 61-66,102-4; Intermountain
Jackson, W i l l i a m Henry, 101
Judd, Neil, 101-2
K monitoring o f values by, 226; Organic Act and
King (Gov), 119
Kin Nizhoni site, 66
kiva structures: access restrictions for, 88-91; at Chaco
Culture National Historical Park, 63-64
L
landscape management: at Grosse lie historic site, 36;
at Hadrian's Wall, 202-3; at Port A r t h u r site,
147-48, i63n.68; value of, i n case studies, 223-24
Landscape Plan for Port A r t h u r site, 147-48, i63n.68
land-use planning, Hadrian's Wall site management
and, 180,194
Lazaretto, at Grosse lie, 40-45,41-43
limits o f acceptable change (LAC): at Hadrian's Wall
site, 200-202; m o n i t o r i n g of, 226
local authorities: Hadrian's Wall and role of, 178,
180-81,193-94; management coordination for
Hadrian's Wall site w i t h , 182-85; partnership
model at Hadrian's Wall and, 204, 2o8n.65; role of,
on Port A r t h u r site, 123-24; system-wide directives
and, 219; values of, vs. national and international
values, 223
Louisiana Purchase Exposition, 71
M
Making Crime Pay, 138
management planning: i n case studies, 217-19; specific
case study plans, 218-19
Maria Island, penal colony on, 119
market approach: to Grosse lie historic site, 29,
5in.28; heritage site management, 4
McGowan Plan, 121,165
Mesa Verde National Park, 74, 9611.4, 98
Mindeleff, Victor and Cosmo, 101
Minister o f Environment and Heritage (Australia), 122
Ministry o f Public Works (Canada), funding for
Grosse lie by, 46
monitoring: o f Grosse lie site, 54; o f values, i n case
studies, 225-26; values-based framework for, 9
Mulroney, Brian, public consultation o n Grosse lie
site and, 31
Municipality of Tasman Planning Scheme, 123-24
N
National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), 75, 9911.33
National Heritage Act (1983), 181,185
national heritage-related agencies (U.K.), Hadrian's
Wall and, 180
national heritage statutes and policies (U.K.), 181-82
National Historical Sites Policy, 51n.11
National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, 71,107-8
National Historic Sites o f Canada, 20,5in.4; System
Plan of, 21, 24,31,5in.6
National Parks and Wildlife Act, 123
National Parks and Wildlife Service (NPWS)
(Australia), 121,123, i62n.i6; authority over Port
Arthur, 158-59,163^83,165; Draft Port A r t h u r Site
Management Plan of, 130
National Parks Conservation Association, 103-4
National Park Service (NPS) (U.S.): Chaco Culture
National Historical Park case study and, 60; collab­
orative heritage projects, 3; conflicts over mandate
of, 61, 98n.2; creation and duties of, 61-62,101;
Cultural Resource Management Guidelines, 88,
9in.i-2; environmental values orders of, 75,
99n.55-56; exotic organisms management, 87,
ioon.92-93; Fajada Butte management policies of,
83-86; history o f Chaco Culture National
Regional Office operations, 66; Joint Management
Plan for Chaco, 73,78-82,103; management plan­
ning guidelines from, 217-19; mission of, 62, 217-18;
creation of, 72-73,101,107; partnership park
management model and, 2o8n.54; partnership
w i t h GCI, 10; preservation policies, 83-92; public
enjoyment policies at Chaco and, 80-81, ioon.78;
"purpose o f the park" criteria, 6, 219-20; Resource
Management Plan o f 1995,78, 92, 94, ioon.72;
 significance criteria of, 224; stakeholder relation­
ships w i t h , 77, 91-92; values-based management
o f Chaco by, 69-96,77-82, 99n.30, 220; Vanishing
Treasures Initiative, 103
National Park/State Reserve classification, for Port
A r t h u r site, 123-24
National Resources Defense Council, 103
National Trail (England), Hadrian's Wall Path as, 178
National Trust for Historic Preservation, 103;
Hadrian's Wall and, 177; limits o f acceptable
change policies and, 201-2; ownership and
management o f Hadrian's Wall site and, 182
Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act
(NAGPRA), 73-74,77, 92,104, 220
Native Americans. See also specific tribes: archaeolog­
ical research on, 64, 98n.9-io; Casa Rinconada
access issue and, 88-91; i n Chaco Culture National
Historical Park, 62-63; Chaco resources outside
Chaco park, 79; economic development i n Chaco
and, 80-81, ioon.78; economic value o f Chaco and,
75-76; interest i n Fajada Butte by, 83-86, 86n.7;
involvement i n management planning at Chaco,
219; nineteenth-century fascination w i t h , 71-72,
99n.37; spiritual values at Chaco and, 73-74; as
stakeholders i n Chaco, 73,77, 82, 91-92
natural resources conservation: at Chaco Park, 79-80;
priorities summary at Chaco, 106
Navajo culture: at Chaco Culture National Historical
Park, 63-65, 98n.9; economic value o f Chaco to,
76; Fajada Butte site and, 85-86; history of, at
Chaco, 101-2; social values of, 74; spiritual values
at Chaco and, 73-74
N e w Age movement, Chaco culture site and, 73-74,
88-91, 221
Newcastle City Council, 182
Newcastle Museum o f Antiquities, 182
Newcastle Society o f Antiquaries, 209
N e w South Wales, prisoner transport to, 118-19
Norfolk Bay convict station, 122,164,166
N o r t h Tyneside Council, 182
Northumberland County Council, 182
Northumberland National Park, 181-82,195, 2o8n.57;
limits o f acceptable change policies and, 201-2
O facilities and services on, 124-28; ferry service to,
Organic Act (National Park Service), 72-73,101,107
P 121,164-66; government policy effects on, 153-54,
PAHSMA Annual Report, 128
Parks Canada Agency: access protection strategies for
Grosse lie, 47-49; advisory panel report on Grosse
lie, 31-32; collaborative heritage projects, 3;
commemorative intent and integrity at Grosse lie
and, 34; " c o m m e m o r a t i v e intent" c r i t e r i a , 6;
conflict resolution and, 222; "Conservation
Priorities for Grosse lie Natural Resources"
appendix, 52x1.66; creation of, 18, 227^13; Cultural
Resource Management Policy of, 53-54, 224;
federal review of, 49; Grosse lie and Irish
Memorial National Historic Site mission of, 19;
Grosse lie management directives of, 28-29,
5in.2o; Guiding Principles and Operational
Policies, 217-18; heritage values protection at
Grosse lie by, 49; historical background on, 20-23,
5111.1; historic value preservation objectives of,
34-35; history o f commemorative integrity at,
53-54; interpretive scheme for Grosse lie, 37; juris­
diction over Grosse lie, 24-25; management plan­
ning guidelines in, 217-18; mandate of, 20;
marketing study on, at Grosse lie, 29,5in.28;
National Historic Sites o f Canada System Plan
and, 24; partnership w i t h GCI, 10; public consulta­
tion on Grosse lie site, 30-33; publicity over Grosse
lie historic site designation, 29-30; stewardship o f
significant sites and, 5in.28
Parks Canada Guiding Principles and Operational
Policies, 36,53-54
partnership park management model: Hadrian's Wall
site and, 194, 206-7, 2o8n.54; impact on values of,
203-4, 2o8n.64
Pentonville Prison, 119
"Peopling the Land" theme, at Grosse lie and Irish
Memorial National Historic Site, 21
Pepper, George H . , 64,101
petroglyphs, at Chaco Culture National Historical
Park, 63-64, 83-86, 84
Phillip (Gov), 118-19
physical resources: protection of, at Grosse lie, 35-37;
protection o f as priority 7
Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act
(1990), 181
Planning Policy Guidance (PPG) directives, 179-80,
182-83,187; planning guidelines in, 218, 226n.9
Planning Policy Statements (proposed for 2004),
226n.9
Plan of the Visit Experience, 37,52n.6i
Point Puer juvenile prison, 119-20,127,164
Port Arthur, Van Diemen's Land, 164
Port A r t h u r and Eaglehawk Neck Board, 121,165
Port A r t h u r Conservation and Development Project
(PACDP), 121-22,129-31,139-40,144,158 i63n.78,165
Port A r t h u r Heritage Advisory Panel (HAP), 124,
142-43
Port A r t h u r Historic Site: aboriginal values at, 133;
aesthetic values of, 129,132,150; Asylum building,
125-26,125-26; Broad A r r o w Cafe tragedy, 122,
134-38,150,160,166, 221; "Carnarvon" era on,
120-22,130,164-65; case study background, 116;
church ruins on, 118,126, 222; Civil Officers' row,
126; Commandant's House, 121,126; Commissariat
Store, 120; Commonwealth heritage legislation,
policy, and administration, 122; conflicting values
at, 154-55; Conservation Plan o f 2000 for, 131-37,
139,140-47,155-57, W> i62n.43, i63n.63; 163^73-74,
218, 220; contemporary articulation o f values,
130-31; convict era and convictism and, 118-20;
Corporate Plan for, 132,139,148-49,163^71;
economic value of, 129-30,133,138-40,144,150
16211.36; i62n.48, 221-22; evolution o f values at, 221;
121,128,165; fires at, 120,164; geographic descrip­
tion of, 117-18,117-18, i 6 i n . i ; Government Cottage,
163x1.74; historic ghost tours at, 128,150-52; historic
values at, 129,132,150; history o f settlement and
use, 118-12; hospital structure at, 126,126,164;
H o t e l A r t h u r on, 121; Interpretation Plan o f 2001,
147; Landscape Plan for, 147-48, i63n.68, 223-24;
local councils' role in, 123-24; local vs. national and
international values at, 223; Macquarie Harbour,
119; management arrangements and institutional
architecture, 160-61; management context at,
122-24,161; management plans o f 1985 and 1996,
139-40,144; management's impact on site values
and preservation, 152-59; maps of, 117,125; Mason
Cove area, 118,127-28,130; mass shooting at, 122,
134-37,166, 221; Medical Officer's House, 121;
meeting facilities at, 128; military compound on,
126; Model Prison on, 119,121,164-65, 223; moni­
toring o f values at, 226; Paupers' Mess, 120,126,
126; penitentiary building, 118,126-27; policy and
values framework at, 160; Powder Magazine struc­
ture, 121,165; pre-convict period at, 118; probation
stations and, 119; Raddiffe Collection and
Archaeological Store, 127; scientific values at, 132,
150; selection criteria for, 11; Separate Prison struc­
ture, 119,126,126-27,140-44,141', social values at,
129,133,150; summary o f values for, 138-39,149-50,
152; Tasmanian heritage legislation and, 123; tick­
eting structure and pricing, 127; time line for,
164-66; Tower Cottage structure, 126; University o f
Tasmania economic impact study for, 138, \63n.51;
values-based management at, 139-52,163^56;
values of, 129-39,2.20; Visitor Center, 127-28,166;
visitors' experience at, 158,225; W o r l d Heritage
values at, 133,162x1.46
Port A r t h u r Historic Site Conservation Policy, 145
Port Arthur Historic Site Management Authority Act,
121-22,124,165-66, 222
Port A r t h u r Historic Site Management Authority
(PAHSMA): benchmark policy statement, 133-34,
137; Conservation Plan and secondary plans
adopted by, 144-47,163^63; Corporate Plan and,
148-49, i63n.7i; creation of, 116,121-22,166; govern­
ment policies and, 153-54,^63x1.74; historic ghost
tours policy, 151-52; impact on preservation and
site values of, 152-59; management culture at, 226;
management planning guidelines of, 217-18; Port
A r t h u r site management by, 124,130-31,161; priori­
tization o f cultural values by, 156-57; as resource
and stakeholder, 158-59; Tasmanian Heritage
Council and, i63n.8o; values-based management
strategies, 139-52,163^56-57
Port A r t h u r Historic Site Management Plan, 130
Port A r t h u r Memorial Garden, 136,136,166, 221
Port A r t h u r Museum, 120,127,164
Port A r t h u r Region Marketing Ltd. (PARM), 122,
127-28,148-49,161; establishment of, 166; historic
ghost tours policy, 151-52; as resource and stake­
holder, 158-59
Port A r t h u r Statement o f Significance, 137-38,158
Port A r t h u r Tourist and Progress Association, 121,165
"Present-ism," i n Grosse lie site designation debate,
32-33
preservation policies: at Chaco, 78-80; at Grosse lie,
34-35; at Hadrian's Wall site, 199-205; at Port
Arthur, 152-59; research and, 83, 87; values-based
management at Chaco and, 83-92
Presidential Proclamation No. 740, 65
Presidential Proclamation N o . 1826,102
prisoner transportation, history of, 117-20,164-66
privatization. See also government business enterprise
(GBE); public-private partnerships: economic
value o f heritage sites and, 8; i n heritage site
management, 4
production process, case study creation, 12
public consultation and input: o n Grosse lie historic
site designation, 30-33; w i t h Native Americans at
Chaco, 77,103; on values, 7
public-private partnerships: conflicting values at Port
A r t h u r over, 154-55; economic value o f heritage
sites and, 8; government business enterprise for
Port A r t h u r site, 122,153-54,160,163^85; PAHSMA
as, 124,160-61
P u e b l o B o n i t o ( C h a c o P a r k ) , 63, 64-66, 66, 72, 101-2
Pueblo del Arroyo, 101-2
Pueblo Revolt o f 1680, 64
Pueblo tribes: archaeological research on, 64, 98n.9;
in Chaco Culture National Historical Park, 62,
62-64,101; Fajada Butte site and, 85-86; social
values of, 74; spiritual values at Chaco and, 73-74
Q
"quality o f experience" criteria: aesthetic values at
Chaco and, 72-73; associative (symbolic) values o f
Chaco and, 75; i n case studies, 225; at Chaco, 80-81,
93-95, 96n.i-2, ioon.78; importance o f fabric and,
224-25; quality of, strategies at Grosse lie for, 38
R
Reclaiming Our Heritage: What We Need to Do to Preserve
America's National Parks, 103
Register o f the National Estate (Australia), 122,
i62n.42
Registre des ressources culturelles du Quebec, 46x1.4
religious freedom laws, spiritual values at Chaco
and, 74
INDEX 231
research policies: case study creation and, n ; at Chaco
Culture NationarHistoric Park, 8ir impact o n
preservation, 83, 87
Resource classification scoring system, at Chaco
Culture National Historical Park, 105
Resource Management Plan, at Chaco Culture
National Historical Park, 70
revenue-centered management model, for Port
A r t h u r site, 130-31
Robinson, Mary, 50
Roman Empire, British reverence for, 177
Roman Wall, The, 177,209
Roosevelt, Theodore, 65, 70,101
s Tasmanian Heritage Council ( T H C ) , 123-24,143,
Saltwater River probation station, 119,122,166
San Juan Basin: economic values of, 76; history o f
Chaco park and, 102-3
Scenery Preservation Act o f 1915,123
Scenery Preservation Board (SPB) (Port Arthur),
120-21,123,164-65
School o f American Research, 81
scientific values: at Chaco Culture National Historical
Park, 71-72; at Port A r t h u r site, 132,150
secondary heritage values, protection of, at Grosse
lie, 38-39
Segedunum Roman Fort, Bath House and Museum,
178,186-87, 210
Senhouse Museum Trust, 178, 210
Senhouse Roman Museum, 177, 210
Separate Prison Project Report, 142-43
Separate Prison structure (Port Arthur), 119,126,
126-27,140-44,141
significance criteria: i n case studies, 219-20; at Chaco
Culture National Historical Park, 70-77; establish­
ment of, 5-6; for Grosse lie, HSMBC reaffirmation
of, 24; for Hadrian's Wall site, 192; o f Historic Sites
and Monuments Board o f Canada, 20-21,5111.5;
importance o f fabric and, 224-25; for Port A r t h u r
site, 131-34,137-38, i62n.42; values-based manage­
ment and concept of, 5
Simpson, James H . (Lt.), 101
Single Regeneration Budget, for Hadrian's Wall
site, 192
site management, current research on, 4-5
site selection criteria, for case studies, 11
site visits, case study creation, 11-12
Smith O'Brien, W i l l i a m , 121,127,165
Smithsonian Institution, 81
social values: Broad A r r o w tragedy at Port A r t h u r
and, 135-37, i63n.5i; at Chaco Culture National
Historic Park, 74; heritage site management and, 4;
at Port A r t h u r Historic Site, 129,133,150
Society for American Archaeology, 87
Society for the Protection o f Ancient Buildings,
2o8n.37
Sofaer, Anna, 83
Solway Firth, Roman Wall at, 176
South Shields, Roman remains at, 175,177-78,209
South Shields Urban District Council, 177, 209
South Tyneside Metropolitan Borough Council, 182
spiritual values: Casa Rinconada access issue and role
of, 88-91; at Chaco Culture National Historical
Park, 73-74,221
spokespersons, articulation o f values by, 7
stakeholders: Broad A r r o w tragedy at Port A r t h u r
and, 135-37; i n case studies, 220-21; at Chaco
Culture National Historical Park, 77, 82, 91-92; at
Grosse lie and Irish Memorial National Historic
Site, 19; i n Grosse lie site designation, 32-33;
Tasman Peninsula region as, for Port A r t h u r site,
158-59; values consultation w i t h , 7
Steering Committee o f the Case Study Project:
project design and methodology, n-12; project
objectives set by, 10; site selection by, 11
Strategyfor Hadrian's Wall, 190,210
232 INDEX
subsurface rights, i n Chaco, 76
Sullivan, Sharon, 155
"Sun Dagger" petroglyph, 83-86, 84
sustainability management, at Hadrian's Wall site, 195
T 203-4, 2o8n.64; o f Port A r t h u r Historic Site,
Tasman, Abel, 118
Tasmania: i n convict era, 118-20; geography of, 117,
117-18
Tasmanian Department o f Lands, Parks, and
Wildlife, 124, i 6 i n . i 6
Tasmanian Department o f Tourism, Parks, Heritage
and the Arts, 124, i62n.i6
Tasmanian Heritage Act, 16311.74
i63n.8o
Tasmanian Heritage legislation, 123
Tasmanian Heritage Register, 123,131-32, i62n.42
Tasmanian Minister o f Arts, Heritage and
Environment, 121
Tasmanian Minister o f State Development, 148-49
Tasmanian Museum, 165
Tasmanian Tourist Association, 120,164, 222
Tasmanian Visitor Information Network, 127
Tasman Island Wilderness Cruise, 128
Tasman Municipal Council, 121-25,165
Tasman Peninsula: Port A r t h u r Historic Site on, 117,
120,122; as resource and stakeholder, 158-59
Tasman Peninsula Board, 121,165
Threatening Rock, 102
tourism: at Chaco Culture National Historic Park,
80-81, ioon.78; economic value o f heritage sites
and, 8, 221-22; Grosse lie historic site designation
and, 29; at Hadrian's Wall W o r l d Heritage Site,
177-78,194-95; at Port A r t h u r Historic Site, 120-22,
138-39, i63n.55
Town and Country Amenities Act (1974), 181
Town and Country Planning Act (1990), 181
Transportation Act o f 1717,118
treatment interventions, at Grosse lie and Irish
Memorial National Historic Site, 19
Tullie House, 182
Twentieth Century Society, 2o8n.37
T w i n Angels site, 66
Tyne Museum, 178,182, 210
Tyneside urban area, Hadrian's Wall sites in, 175
U W h i n Sill, Roman Wall at, 176,176
U n i o n Steamship line, 164
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural
Organization (UNESCO): Australia ICOMOS
affiliation w i t h , 123; British heritage-related agen­
cies and, 180; Hadrian's Wall Heritage Site designa­
t i o n by, 177-78; U.S. distrust of, 227^23; W o r l d
Heritage Committee, Chaco site designation by,
66,103
United States, prison reforms in, 119-20
universal values, o f Hadrian's Wall site, 190-92, 220
University o f Tasmania economic impact study, for
Port Arthur, 138,16311.52
V Wall management, 199-202; limits o f acceptable
"valorization" o f heritage sites, at Port Arthur, 138,
16311.55
values: aesthetic values, at Chaco, 72-73; balance of, at
Hadrian's Wall site, 202-3; Broad A r r o w tragedy at
Port A r t h u r and, 134-37; Casa Rinconada access
issue and role of, 88-91; i n case studies, 219-23; o f
Chaco Culture National Historical Park, 69-77;
conflicts over, at Port Arthur, 154-55; economic
values, 7-8,75-76; effect o f Conservation Plan o f
2000 for Port Arthur, 155-57; elicitation of, 7; evolu­
tion of, at Chaco, 77; evolution of, i n case studies,
221; at Grosse lie and Irish Memorial National
Historic Site, 28-33; Hadrian's Wall site, under­
standing and protection of, 190-92; heritage
management and protection of, 8; historic values,
at Chaco, 74-75; identification of, 5-9; importance
o f fabric to, 8-9; local vs. national and interna­
tional values, i n case studies, 223; m o n i t o r i n g of,
i n case studies, 225-26; partnership models and,
12.9-39, i62n.33-35; preservation of, at Grosse lie,
34-35; protection of, 8; public debate over, i n
Grosse lie site designation, 31-33; role of, i n Chaco
management, 77-82; social values at Chaco, 74;
spiritual values, at Chaco, 73-74; W o r l d Heritage
value, o f Chaco, 76-77
values-based management: applications of, 3; authen­
ticity and, 9n.3; at Chaco Culture National
Historical Park, 69-96,77-82; commemorative
integrity at Grosse lie and strategies for, 36-37;
conflict resolution and, 222-23; defined, 5-6; foot-
and-mouth crisis at Hadrian's Wall and, 196-99; at
Grosse lie and Irish Memorial National Historic
Site, 19,33-39; at Hadrian's Wall site, 192-99;
impact at Grosse lie of, 39-40, 46-49; impact at
Hadrian's Wall site of, 199-205; impact at Port
A r t h u r of, 152-59; intellectual construct of, n ;
organizational differences i n definition, 5, 6n.2; at
Port A r t h u r Historic Site, 139-52,16311.56; Port
A r t h u r Interpretation Plan and, 157-58; preserva­
t i o n o f Chaco and, 83-92; visitors' experience at
Chaco and, 93-95
"value the layers" conservation philosophy, 131
Van Diemen's Land, 117-20. See also Port A r t h u r
Historic Site
Vanishing Treasures Initiative (NPS), 103
Venice Charter, 9n.6,186
Victorian Society, 2o8n.37
Vindolanda Trust, 177, 209; ownership and manage­
ment o f Hadrian's Wall site and, 182,188
Vivian, Gordon, 65,102
W
Wall Recording Project, 177, 210
War Disease Control Station, at Grosse lie and Irish
Memorial National Historic Site, 23
Washington Expedition, at Chaco Culture National
Historical Park, 64,101
Wear Museum, 178,182, 210
Web sites: for Chaco, 82; for Grosse lie, 49
Wetherill, Richard, 64,101
Whitehouse steamer service, 120,164
Wilderness Act of 1964, 63
Williamsburg Approach, at Port A r t h u r site, 130
W o r l d Heritage Convention, 66,76,179-80
W o r l d Heritage Operational Guidelines, 76
W o r l d Heritage Site Management Plan Committee
(WHSMPC), 178
W o r l d Heritage Sites. See also Hadrian's Wall W o r l d
Heritage Site: agricultural policies at, 195-96,199;
boundary setting policies, 192-93; Chaco Culture
National Historical Park as, 76-77, 92,103; cultural
properties criteria for, 178; Hadrian's Wall case
study, 172-213; impact o f designation o n Hadrian's
change policies and, 200-202; local vs. national and
international values at, 223, 227^23; Port A r t h u r
nomination at, 132-33,16211.46; protection o f
values at, 8; universal values criteria for, 6
W o r l d Monuments Fund, 103
World's Columbian Exposition, 71
W u p a t k i National Monument, 96n.4
Y
Young, David, 138
z
Z u n i culture, Fajada Butte site and, 85-86
 About the Authors

M a r t a de l a T o r r e i s t h e d i r e c t o r o f t h e M u s e u m Studies anthropology and holds adoctorate in anthropology, with

G r a d u a t e Certificate P r o g r a m at Florida International a specialization in archaeology, from the University of
U n i v e r s i t y i n M i a m i . F r o m 1985 t o 2002 s h e w o r k e d a t t h e California at Berkeley.
Getty Conservation Institute (GCI), w h e r e she w a s direc­
Randall Mason i s a s s o c i a t e p r o f e s s o r o f a r c h i t e c t u r e ,
tor o f training a n d , later, h e a d o f i n f o r m a t i o n a n d c o m ­
G r a d u a t e P r o g r a m i n H i s t o r i c Preservation, at the U n i v e r ­
m u n i c a t i o n s . W h i l e at the G C I ,she led a six-year r e s e a r c h
sity o f P e n n s y l v a n i a . T r a i n e d i n g e o g r a p h y , history, a n d
project on the values of heritage, w h i c h produced several
u r b a n planning, h e w o r k e d previously at the G e t t y C o n s e r ­
research reports a n d the four case studies presented in this
vation Institute a n d w a s director o f the Historic Preserva­
publication. Prior to joining the G C I ,she w a s director o f
tion P r o g r a m at the University o f M a r y l a n d . I n addition, h e
special projects a n d administration at the International
is a p a r t n e r i n t h e n o n p r o f i t r e s e a r c h g r o u p M i n e r v a P a r t ­
C o u n c i l o f M u s e u m s in Paris, France. S h e holds a n M . A .
ners, w h i c h develops projects to strengthen the connections
in arts m a n a g e m e n t from A m e r i c a n University, aB.A. in
b e t w e e n heritage conservation a n d social development.
art history a n d d e s i g n from George Washington Univer­
H i s r e c e n t l y p u b l i s h e d w o r k i n c l u d e s Giving Preservation a
sity, a n d a C e r t i f i c a t e o f M u s e u m S t u d i e s from the Ecole
History: Histories of Historic Preservation in the United States
d u L o u v r e in Paris.
( e d i t e d w i t h M a x P a g e ; R o u t l e d g e , 2003).
Margaret G . H . M a c L e a n i s a c u l t u r a l h e r i t a g e analyst
D a v i d Myers i s r e s e a r c h a s s o c i a t e a t t h e G e t t y C o n s e r v a ­
w i t h t h e U n i t e d S t a t e s D e p a r t m e n t o f State, w h e r e s h e is
tion Institute in L o s Angeles. H e w a s aKress Research Fel­
engaged in heritage conservation and management policy,
l o w at the University o f Pennsylvania's A r c h i t e c t u r a l C o n ­
and in the protection of movable heritage from interna­
servation Research Center from 2000 t o 2001. F r o m 1991 t o
tional theft a n d illegal trafficking. A s senior training pro­
1995 h e s e r v e d a s a l e g i s l a t i v e a s s i s t a n t t o a U . S . r e p r e s e n t a ­
g r a m coordinator at the G e t t y C o n s e r v a t i o n Institute
tive. H e s t u d i e d historic p r e s e r v a t i o n , g e o g r a p h y , a n d
( G C I ) f r o m 1989 t o 1993, s h e d e v e l o p e d a n d implemented
political science a n d holds amaster's degree a n d a n
training p r o g r a m s relating to conservation a n d manage­
a d v a n c e d certificate i n architectural c o n s e r v a t i o n a n d site
m e n t o f a r c h a e o l o g i c a l heritage m a t e r i a l s a n d sites. F r o m
management from the University o f P e n n s y l v a n i a as w e l l
1993 t o 1999, a s d o c u m e n t a t i o n p r o g r a m d i r e c t o r a t t h e
as amaster's d e g r e e f r o m the University o f K a n s a s .
G C I , she established afield r e c o r d i n g a n d information
m a n a g e m e n t section in support of the GCI's conservation
projects. She studied art history, cultural geography, a n d

ABOUT THE AUTHORS 233

 T h e following supporting d o c u m e n t s o n the enclosed C D - R O M are gratefully used by permission of
the organizations listed below:

Grosse l i e a n d t h e Irish M e m o r i a l P o r t A r t h u r Historic Site

N a t i o n a l Historic Site
T h e P o r t A r t h u r Historic Site C o n s e r v a t i o n Plan, v o l u m e s
G r o s s e lie N a t i o n a l H i s t o r i c S i t e — D e v e l o p m e n t C o n c e p t ; 1 a n d 2; B r o a d A r r o w C a f e C o n s e r v a t i o n S t u d y ; a n d t h e
G r o s s e lie N a t i o n a l Historic S i t e — R e p o r t o n the Public P A H S M A A n n u a l R e p o r t 2001 were reproduced with the
Consultation P r o g r a m ; C o m m e m o r a t i v e Integrity State­ permission o f the P o r t A r t h u r Historic Site Management
m e n t for G r o s s e lie a n d the Irish M e m o r i a l N a t i o n a l H i s ­ Authority
toric Site; G r o s s e lie a n d the Irish M e m o r i a l N a t i o n a l H i s ­
toric Site M a n a g e m e n t Plan; P a r t III( C u l t u r a l R e s o u r c e H a d r i a n ' s W a l l W o r l d H e r i t a g e Site
M a n a g e m e n t Policy) of Parks C a n a d a Guiding Principles
H a d r i a n sW a l l W o r l d H e r i t a g e Site M a n a g e m e n t Plan
a n d O p e r a t i o n a l Policies; a n d G u i d e to the Preparation o f
1996 a n d H a d r i a n sW a l l W o r l d H e r i t a g e Site Management
C o m m e m o r a t i v e Integrity S t a t e m e n t s have all b e e n gen­
P l a n 2002-2007 w e r e r e p r o d u c e d w i t h t h e k i n d p e r m i s s i o n
erously provided by the Parks C a n a d a A g e n c y
o f E n g l i s h H e r i t a g e . P l a n n i n g P o l i c y G u i d a n c e 15: P l a n ­
ning and the Historic E n v i r o n m e n t and Planning Policy
Chaco C u l t u r e N a t i o n a l H i s t o r i c a l P a r k
G u i d a n c e 16: A r c h a e o l o g y a n d P l a n n i n g a r e C r o w n c o p y ­
The Chaco Culture General Management Plan/Develop­ right materials reproduced w i t h the permission of the
m e n t C o n c e p t Plan; C h a c o C u l t u r e Statement for Inter­ C o n t r o l l e r o f H M S O a n d the Q u e e n sPrinter for Scotland.
pretation and Interim Interpretive Prospectus; and
N a t i o n a l P a r k S e r v i c e M a n a g e m e n t P o l i c i e s 2001 were
kindly provided by the U.S. National P a r k Service.