People have been in Ontario for about 11,000 years. They have left traces of their activities in numerous parts of the province - as spreads of pottery sherds across the surface of a field, as fragments of stone tools mixed up in the soils within a woodlot, or as artifacts scattered along the lakeshore. These archaeological sites contain the story of the Aboriginal people who lived in Ontario during those thousands of years, and of the non-aboriginal people who settled here during the past 400 years. In most cases, they are the only source of information about the people who created them.

Archaeological sites exist in all municipalities in Ontario - and all development projects have the potential to destroy them. Only a fraction of the archaeological sites in Ontario have been discovered and recorded. In recognition that archaeological sites contain a unique record of Ontario's history, the government has afforded them some protection under the Planning Act¹ the Environmental Assessment Act ² the Ontario Heritage Act³ and elsewhere. This protection applies not only to those sites that have been found and reported, but also to those that have yet to be discovered.

In many communities, it has become quite normal for archaeological assessments to be required and carried out to prior to development. Other jurisdictions have either been unaware of their responsibilities, or have chosen not to exercise their responsibility towards the conservation of archaeological heritage. Until recently, the various regulations, laws and protocols governing archaeological conservation have been applied inconsistently. As a result, numerous important archaeological sites have been destroyed.

The knowledge that an archaeological assessment may he necessary prior to development can strike terror into the hearts of developers. They may imagine hoards of students excavating a field with toothbrushes and tea-spoons or angry, heritage-minded, placard-waving citizens confronting their bulldozers. In reality, with good planning, complying with an archaeological assessment requirement can be painless. It is important to remember that archaeological conservation in the land-use planning process does not mean putting a stop to development. The goal is to identify, examine and remove or preserve the non-renewable vestiges of the past, not put road blocks in the way of development. But, because the developer is ultimately the user of any archaeological sites within the development area, he or she is on the hook for any costs associated with archaeological assessment and mitigation. The days when universities, archaeology clubs or the government could be expected to jump in to 'rescue' a site from development are long gone.

Under clause 2 (d) of the Planning Act⁴ the place of archaeology has been clearly stated:

The Minister, the council of a municipality, a local board, a planning board and the Municipal Board, in carrying out their responsibilities under this Act, shall have regard to, among other matters, matters of provincial interest such as (d) the conservation of features of significant architectural, cultural, historical, archaeological or scientific interest. [Emphasis added.]

Further clarification is provided in Provincial Interest Policy 2.5.2, authorized by subsection 3 ( 1 ) of the Planning Act⁵

So even if archaeological sites are found in advance of development once they have been documented (usually through scientific excavation) or protected (usually by avoidance), development can proceed unimpeded.

Not every proposed development will disturb or destroy archaeological sites. Indeed, many developments occur in areas that did not attract past settlement or use, or have been so disturbed that they retain little or no archaeological site potential.

In the past, Ministry of Citizenship, Culture and Recreation (MCzCR) archaeological staff reviewed and consented on development plans. Under the Planning Act. the onus for determining which properties require archaeological assessment is being placed with the local planning approval authority (either the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing or a delegated municipal planning authority). Since it is probably fair to say that most municipal planners and officials do not possess the archaeological training and expertise necessary to make an informed determination in this specialized area, MCzCR has devised guidelines allowing municipal officials to arrive at a simple "yes/no" answer as to whether a particular project needs an archaeological assessment. These guidelines will soon he available from MCzCR in print and electronic form.

Where archaeological potential has been determined, a standard archaeological condition is applied to the development application.

The proponent shall carry out an archaeological assessment of the subject property and mitigate, through preservation or resource removal and documentation, adverse impacts to any significant archaeological resources found. No grading or other soil disturbances shall take place on the subject property prior to the approval authority and the Ministry of Citizenship, Culture and Recreation confirming that all archaeological resource concerns have met licens-ing and resource conservation requirements.

This is not to suggest that MCzCR is out of the archaeological conservation game entirely. Once potential has been determined and specialist studies have been conducted, the ministry's role as a review agency comes into play. The ministry reviews all archaeological licence reports, evaluates the strategies proposed for their protection and/or removal, and apprises the approval authorities of their findings. MCzCR staff also serve as mediators when disputes arise and provide assistance and technical expertise to developers, municipalities and others involved in addressing archaeological planning concerns.

An archaeological assessment is the process of determining whether any archaeological sites exist on a property. Since an archaeological licence, issued under the Ontario Heritage Act, is necessary before any archaeological work can be conducted in Ontario, this work is usually done by a licenced archaeologist or archaeological consulting company.

Background research (Stage I) is done to determine whether any archaeological sites have ever been discovered on the property in the past, and to examine historical records for evidence of early Euro-Canadian or historic Native settlement. Once this information has been gathered, the archaeologist is in an informed position to undertake field work.

Field work (Stage 2) involves the detailed examination of the whole property in order to locate archaeological sites. This may be achieved by carefully and systematically examining the surface of cultivated fields, or if the development area is covered in brush or forest. by systematically testing the property in a grid pattern with small shovel test pits. In either case the archaeologist is looking for any evidence of past human activity - usually small pieces of pottery (prehistoric or historic), the by-products from stone tool making (flint or chert chips), or fragments of historic materials. By carefully mapping these artifacts, the archaeologist is able to determine the general nature and extent of the archaeological site. While the archaeologist relies on his or her professional judgment as to which strategy to use on a particular property it is also necessary that the strategy chosen complies with MCZCR's Archaeological Assessment Technical Guidelines.

If a site is found, the archaeologist must attempt to determine its size, nature and degree of preservation (Stage 3). This is usually achieved through intensified testing and analysis of the resulting finds. Depending on the nature and location of the site, some attempt to determine whether undisturbed sub-surface deposits remain intact may be made. The information from the Stage 3 testing should indicate the significance of the site and whether removal through archaeological excavation or avoidance is warranted. These determinations are based on many factors including the rarity of the site type, its age, the degree of preservation and its capacity to provide valuable scientific data.

Where significant archaeological sites are discovered and there is no way to avoid disturbing them during construction, removal through scientific excavation (Stage 4) is a possibility. This can be an expensive undertaking since (although teaspoons are rarely used) archaeological excavation tends to be labour intensive and requires many hours of post-excavation analysis and report preparation to complete a project. Just doing the physical work of digging the site is not enough "removal and documentation" implies completing the whole process and is a requirement of the archaeologist's licence.

Once the ministry is satisfied that any archaeological sites have been dealt with properly, they will advise the approval authority that their concerns have been met. The approval authority can then clear the archaeological condition from the development plan. Development proceeds.

The process of reconstructing the past from archaeological studies is evolutionary and incremental. Each archaeological site is like a small piece in an immensely complex jigsaw puzzle. Each piece that is lost makes completing the puzzle that much more difficult. Over the last few years, the pace of development in Ontario has meant that many, many pieces have been lost.

Obviously, we will never complete the puzzle and gain a total understanding of the lifestyles, cultures and activities of Ontario's past inhabitants. Through careful planning, however, we can ensure that the remaining parts of the puzzle are properly examined and recorded so that our children can inherit an accurate and realistic picture of the lives of those who preceded them through countless generations.

MCzCR has developed a comprehensive guideline addressing day-to-day issues relating to archaeology. Print copies are available by contacting the MCzCR⁶. A point-and-click computer version will be available soon from: Adams Heritage, Box 150, Newboro, Ontario K0G I P0, 61 3-272-3676