Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Control of Indigenous Archaeological Heritage in Ontario, Canada

  • Research
  • Published:
Archaeologies Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Few Indigenous peoples have control over their heritage, despite international recognition of this right in the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, adopted by the UN General Assembly in 2007. In Ontario, Canada, the Ontario Heritage Act, R.S.O. 1990 regulates archaeology and grants licences to archaeologists to investigate archaeological heritage. Indigenous people want more control of their archaeological heritage in Ontario. To uphold Indigenous rights to archaeological heritage in Ontario, heritage legislation and policy needs to be revised and site protection increased. This paper recommends that Indigenous archaeological heritage in Ontario would be best protected by strengthening Ontario government land development policy and legislation to require the free, prior, and informed consent from affected Indigenous communities before removal of significant archaeological sites and remains from their ancestral territories.

Résumé

Peu de peuples autochtones contrôlent leur patrimoine malgré la reconnaissance mondiale de ce droit dans la Déclaration des Nations Unies sur les droits des peuples autochtones adoptée par l’Assemblée générale des Nations Unies en 2007. En Ontario au Canada, la Loi sur le patrimoine de l’Ontario de 1990 gouverne l’archéologie et octroie aux archéologues des licences leur permettant d’étudier le patrimoine archéologique. En Ontario, les peuples autochtones souhaitent avoir plus de contrôle sur leur patrimoine archéologique. Pour respecter les droits au patrimoine archéologique de l’Ontario, les lois et politiques relatives au patrimoine doivent être revues, et la protection des sites accrue. Le présent article avance que le patrimoine archéologique autochtone de l’Ontario serait mieux protégé si l’on renforçait la politique et les lois du gouvernement de l’Ontario en matière d’aménagement du territoire, de façon à exiger le consentement libre, préalable et éclairé des communautés autochtones avant la suppression des sites et vestiges d’importance des terres ancestrales.

Resumen

Pocos pueblos indígenas tienen control sobre su patrimonio, a pesar del reconocimiento internacional de este derecho en la Declaración de las Naciones Unidas sobre los Derechos de los Pueblos Indígenas (UNDRIP), adoptado por la Asamblea General de las NU en 2007. En Ontario (Canadá), la Ley sobre Patrimonio Cultural de Ontario, R.S.O. 1990 regula la arqueología y concede licencias a arqueólogos para investigar el patrimonio arqueológico. Los pueblos indígenas quieren más control de su patrimonio arqueológico en Ontario. Para defender los derechos de los indígenas al patrimonio arqueológico en Ontario, es necesario que se revisen la legislación y la política sobre el patrimonio y que se aumente la protección de los lugares. El presente documento recomienda que el patrimonio arqueológico indígena en Ontario estaría mejor protegido fortaleciendo la política gubernamental y la legislación sobre desarrollo de la tierra para que se requiera el consentimiento libre, previo e informado de las comunidades indígenas afectadas antes de la eliminación de lugares y restos arqueológicos significativos de sus territorios ancestrales.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Algonquins of Ontario 2015. Proposed Agreement-in-Principle among: The Algonquins of Ontario and Ontario and Canada. http://www.tanakiwin.com/wp-system/uploads/2015/06/Proposed-Agreement-in-Principle.pdf.

  • Alooloo, S., Asch, M., Craft, A., Hancock, R., Pinkoski, M., Vallance, N., West, A., and Wrightson, K. 2014. Treaty relations as a method of resolving IP and cultural heritage issues—Final report. Intellectual Property Issues in Cultural Heritage (IPinCH), Simon Fraser University, Burnaby. http://www.sfu.ca/ipinch/sites/default/files/resources/reports/treatyrelations_finalreport_2014.pdf.

  • Archaeological Conservancy 2015. The Archaeological Conservancy Annual Report 2015. http://www.archaeologicalconservancy.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/Annual-Report-2015.pdf.

  • Asch, M. (2009) Concluding thoughts and fundamental questions. In Protection of First Nations Cultural Heritage: Laws, Policy, and Reformpp. 394–411, edited by C Belland RK Paterson, UBC Press, Vancouver, BC.,

    Google Scholar 

  • Asch, M. (2014) On Being Here to Stay: Treaties and Aboriginal Rights in Canada, University of Toronto Press, Toronto.,

    Google Scholar 

  • Bell, C. 1992. Aboriginal claims to cultural property in Canada: A comparative legal analysis of the repatriation debate. American Indian Law Review 17:457–521.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Benjamin, C. (2014) Free, prior and informed consent: Defending Indigenous rights in the global rush for resources. In Indivisible Indigenous Human Rightspp. 168–193, edited by J Green, Fernwood Publishing, Halifax.,

    Google Scholar 

  • Buggey, S. (1999) An Approach to Aboriginal Cultural Landscapes, Historic Sites and Monuments Board of Canada, Ottawa.,

    Google Scholar 

  • Coleman, D., Williamson, R. (1994) Landscapes past to Landscapes future: Planning for archaeological resources. In Great Lakes Archaeology and Paleoecology: Exploring Interdisciplinary Initiatives for the Ninetiespp. 61–80, edited by R MacDonald, Quaternary Sciences Institute, University of Waterloo, Waterloo.,

    Google Scholar 

  • Colwell, C., Ferguson, T. J. 2014. The snow-capped mountain and the uranium mine: Zuni heritage and the landscape scale in cultural resource management. Advances in Archaeological Practice 2:234–251.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Council of the Haida Nation 2013. Cultural Feature Identification Standards Manual. http://www.haidanation.ca/Pages/documents/pdfs/land/CFIC_Standards_Manual_V3.pdf.

  • Craft, A. 2014. Living treaties, breathing research. Canadian Journal of Women and the Law 26:1–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dent, J. 2012. Past tents: Temporal themes and patterns of provincial archaeological governance in British Columbia and Ontario. M.A. thesis, University of Western Ontario, London.

  • Dent, J. 2016. Accounts of engagement: Conditions and capitals of Indigenous participation in Canadian commercial archaeology. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Western Ontario, London.

  • DeVries, M. 2014. Cultural resource management and Aboriginal engagement: Policy and practice in Ontario archaeology. M.A. thesis, University of Western Ontario, London.

  • Doelle, W. H., Barker, P., Cushman, D., Heilen, M., Herhahn, C., Rieth, C. 2016. Incorporating archaeological resources in landscape-level planning and management. Advances in Archaeological Practice 4:118–131.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Doroszenko, D. (2007) Adventures in archaeology at the Ontario Heritage Trust. In Past Meets Present: Archaeologists Partnering with Museum Curators, Teachers, and Community Groupspp. 265–279, edited by JH Jamesonand S Baugher, Springer, New York.,

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Ferris, N. 2003. Between colonial and Indigenous archaeologies: Legal and extra-legal ownership of the archaeological past in North America. Canadian Journal of Archaeology 27:154–190.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ferris, N. (2009) The Archaeology of Native-Lived Colonialism: Challenging History in the Great Lakes, University of Arizona Press, Tucson.,

    Google Scholar 

  • Ferris, N. 2012. Skandatut archaeological site preserved as a result of an historic land transfer agreement. Arch Notes 17(3):11.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ferris, N. (2014) Being Iroquoian, being Iroquois: A thousand-year heritage of becoming. In Rethinking Colonial Pasts through Archaeologypp. 371–396, edited by N Ferris, R Harrisonand MV Wilcox, Oxford University Press, New York.,

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Ferris, N. and Welch, J. 2014. Beyond archaeological agendas: In the service of a sustainable archaeology. In Transforming Archaeology: Activist Practices and Prospects, edited by S. Atalay, L.R. Clauss, R.H. McGuire, and J.R. Welch, pp. 215–238. Left Coast Press, Walnut Creek, CA.

  • Ferris, N., Welch, J. (2015) New worlds: Ethics in contemporary North American archaeological practice. In Ethics and Archaeological Praxispp. 69–94, edited by C Gneccoand D Lippert, Springer, New York.,

    Google Scholar 

  • Government of Nunavut 2013. Guidelines for Applicants and Holders of Nunavut Territory Archaeology and Palaeontology Permits. Government of Nunavut, Iqaluit. http://iprism.nunavut.local/auth-bin/nph-xauth?UIP=99.247.209.210&URL=aHR0cDovL3d3dy5jaC5nb3YubnUuY2EvcGRmL0d1aWRlX0VuZ2xpc2gucGRm.

  • Government of Ontario 1990. Ontario Heritage Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. O.18. https://www.ontario.ca/laws/statute/90o18.

  • Government of Ontario 2005. Ontario Heritage Amendment Act, 2005, S.O. 2005, C. 6 - Bill 60. https://www.ontario.ca/laws/statute/s05006.

  • Groarke, L., Warrick, G. (2006) Stewardship gone astray? Ethics and the SAA. In The Ethics of Archaeology: Philosophical Perspectives on Archaeological Practicepp. 163–180, edited by C Scarreand G Scarre, Cambridge University Press, New York.,

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Hamilton, M. A. (2010) Collections and Objections: Aboriginal Material Culture in Southern Ontario, McGill-Queen’s University Press, Montreal.,

    Google Scholar 

  • Haudenosaunee Development Institute 2010. “Policies: as adopted in Council June 5, 2010.” http://www.haudenosauneeconfederacy.com/HDI/HDI%20POLICY%20Final%20HEH%20Oct%204,%202011.pdf.

  • Hamilakis, Y. (2007) From ethics to politics. In Archaeology and Capitalism: From Ethics to Politicspp. 15–40, edited by Y Hamilakisand P Duke, Left Coast Press, Walnut Creek, CA.,

    Google Scholar 

  • Hawkins, A. L., Raynor, J. (2012) Local custodians: The role of avocational archaeologists in protection of Wendat heritage in Ontario. In Wendat and Wyandot Then and Now: Eonywa’ndiyonhratehkwih chia’ekwäa’tatehkwih — Proceedings of the First Wendat and Wyandot Studies Conference, Wendake, Québec, June 13th to 16th, 2012pp. 99–124, edited by L-J Doraisand J Lainey, Les éditions HannenorakWendake, Québec.,

    Google Scholar 

  • Hutchings, R., La Salle, M. 2015. Archaeology as disaster capitalism. International Journal of Historical Archaeology 19:699–720.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Indigenous and Northern Affairs Canada (INAC) 2016. Copy of the treaty made November 15, 1923 between his Majesty the King and the Mississauga Indians of Rice Lake, Mud Lake, Scugog Lake and Alderville — Treaty Text — Williams Treaty. https://www.aadnc-aandc.gc.ca/eng/1100100029019/1100100029035.

  • King, C. 2016. “The ‘Moccasin Trail’ Initiative.” Public lecture delivered at Brant County Museum, Brantford, Ontario, January 27, 2016.

  • La Salle, M. 2010. Community collaboration and other good intentions. Archaeologies 6:401–422.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McGuire, R. H. (2008) Archaeology as Political Action, University of California Press, Berkeley.,

    Google Scholar 

  • McManamon, F. P., Doershuk, J., Lipe, W. D., McCulloch, T., Polglase, C., Schlanger, S., Sebastian, L., Sullivan, L. 2016. Values-based management of archaeological resources at a landscape scale. Advances in Archaeological Practice 4:132–148.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nature Conservancy of Canada [NCC] 2015. The Nature Conservancy of Canada 20142015 Financial Statements. http://www.natureconservancy.ca/assets/documents/nat/annual-reports/financials2015EN-FINAL.pdf.

  • Nature Conservancy of Canada [NCC] 2016. http://www.natureconservancy.ca/en/.

  • Nisga’a Nation 1999. Nisga’a Final Agreement. http://www.nnkn.ca/files/u28/nis-eng.pdf.

  • Nunatsiavut Government 2016. “Archaeology.” http://www.nunatsiavut.com/department/archaeology/.

  • Ontario Heritage Trust 2015. http://www.heritagetrust.on.ca/CorporateSite/media/oht/PDFs/HM-Oct-2015-ENG.pdf.

  • Ontario Heritage Trust 2016. “Ontario Heritage Register.” http://www.heritagetrust.on.ca/Resources-and-Learning/Ontario-Heritage-Act-Register.aspx.

  • Ontario Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing 2014. Provincial Policy Statement. http://www.mah.gov.on.ca/AssetFactory.aspx?did=10463.

  • Ontario Ministry of Indigenous Relations and Reconciliation 2016a. “Current Land Claims.” https://www.ontario.ca/page/current-land-claims.

  • Ontario Ministry of Indigenous Relations and Reconciliation 2016b. The Journey Together: Ontario’s Commitment to Reconciliation with Indigenous Peoples. https://files.ontario.ca/trc_report_english-accessible-singles.pdf.

  • Ontario Ministry of Tourism and Culture 2011a. Standards and Guidelines for Consultant Archaeologists. http://www.mtc.gov.on.ca/en/publications/SG_2010.pdf.

  • Ontario Ministry of Tourism and Culture 2011b. Engaging Aboriginal Communities in Archaeology: A Draft Technical Bulletin for Consultant Archaeologists in Ontario. http://www.mtc.gov.on.ca/en/publications/AbEngageBulletin.pdf.

  • Ontario Minstry of Tourism, Culture and Sport 2016. “Archaeology.” http://www.mtc.gov.on.ca/en/archaeology/archaeology.shtml.

  • Parks Canada 2010. Standards and Guidelines for the Conservation of Historic Places in Canada. http://www.historicplaces.ca/media/18072/81468-parks-s+g-eng-web2.pdf.

  • Pfeiffer, S., Lesage, L. 2014. The repatriation of Wendat ancestors, 2013. Canadian Journal of Archaeology 38:5–12.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pokotylo, D., Mason, A. R. (2010) Archaeological heritage resource protection in Canada. In Cultural Heritage Management: A Global Perspectivepp. 48–69, edited by PM Messengerand GP Smith, University Press of Florida, Gainesville.,

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Saugeen Ojibway Nation 2011. Conducting Archaeology within the Traditional Territory of the Saugeen Ojibway Nation: Process and Standards for Approval Authorities, Development Proponents and Consultant Archaeologists. http://saugeenojibwaynation.ca/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/SON-Archaeology-Standards-and-Guidelines.pdf.

  • Supernant, K., Warrick, G. 2014. Challenges to critical community-based archaeological practice in Canada. Canadian Journal of Archaeology 38:563–591.

    Google Scholar 

  • Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada [TRC] 2015. Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada: Calls to Action. http://www.trc.ca/websites/trcinstitution/File/2015/Findings/Calls_to_Action_English2.pdf.

  • United Nations 2008. United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, General Assembly Resolution 61/295(Annex). http://www.un.org/esa/socdev/unpfii/documents/DRIPS_en.pdf.

  • Warrick, G. (2008) A Population History of the Huron-Petun, A.D. 500-1650, Cambridge University Press, New York.,

    Google Scholar 

  • Warrick, G. 2012. Buried stories: Archaeology and Aboriginal peoples of the Grand River, Ontario. Journal of Canadian Studies 46:153–177.

    Google Scholar 

  • Warrick, G., Hawkins, A., Martelle, H., and Ferris, N. 2010. Independent expert panel review of September 15th inspection report under the Ontario Heritage Act related to licensed activities carried out at the Skandatut ancestral Huron-Wendat archaeological site. Report on file with the Ontario Archaeological Society Inc. and the Ontario Ministry of Tourism, Culture and Sport, Toronto.

  • Williamson, R. F. 2010. Planning for Ontario’s archaeological past: Accomplishments and continuing challenges. Revista de Arquelogía Americana 28:7–45.

    Google Scholar 

  • Williamson, R. F., MacDonald, R. I. (2015) Echoes of the Iroquois Wars: Contested heritage and identity in the ancestral homeland of the Huron-Wendat. In Identity and Heritage: Contemporary Challenges in a Globalized Worldpp. 97–106, edited by PF Biehl, DC Comer, C Prescottand HA Soderland, Springer, New York.,

    Google Scholar 

  • Zimmerman, L. (2013) On archaeological ethics and letting go. In Appropriating the Past: Philosophical Perspectives on the Practice of Archaeologypp. 98–118, edited by G Scarreand R Coningham, Cambridge University Press, New York.,

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This paper is a revised version of one delivered in the “Heritage and the Late Modern State” session, 3rd Biennial Conference, Association of Critical Heritage Studies, Montreal, PQ, June 4, 2016. I would like to thank both Rich Hutchings and Josh Dent, the session organizers, for inviting me to participate. Thank you to all participants in the session who provided comments, some of which were incorporated into this paper. An anonymous reviewer recommended much needed organizational and substantive changes that strengthened the paper considerably. I extend my gratitude to all who assisted with this paper.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Gary Warrick.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Warrick, G. Control of Indigenous Archaeological Heritage in Ontario, Canada. Arch 13, 88–109 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11759-017-9310-1

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11759-017-9310-1

Key Words

Navigation