Isolated and low-density stone artefact distributions, and dispersed shell midden material in coastal environments, should be recorded, but in most cases should not require further subsurface investigation and may be managed via contingencies.
Complex assessment in such cases can still be desirable and reasonable, however, depending on the specific factors of each CHMP. Decisions to either proceed to complex assessment or not should be reasoned and documented in the CHMP.
Background
A low density of stone artefacts covers much of Victoria. Similarly, the dispersed remains of midden material can be found across much of Victoria’s coastal environs. They are not generally indicative of any unique or specific heritage significance.
This is not a statement about the cultural significance of widespread artefactual or residual stone and coastal shell material, which is determined by Traditional Owners. It is a statement about its overall heritage significance relative to Aboriginal places which are intact or are examples of Aboriginal places where discrete events occurred. This goes to their practical treatment in the CHMP process relative to other Aboriginal heritage types, not to their absolute cultural value.
This requires thinking about treating low density material (such as LDADs) differently from other Aboriginal places at several points in the CHMP process – research and assessment design; collection and salvage strategies; and CHMP conditions.
The low density of these materials means the cost to obtain meaningful information from detailed complex studies is often prohibitive for little informational gain. Pursuing a complete record and collection of every artefact present on a project basis is usually impractical and does not necessarily add to our knowledge or appreciation of Aboriginal use of the landscape. However, it is important to continue recording locations and samples of this material by surface survey, as doing so can increase this understanding cumulatively over large areas, notwithstanding geomorphological and other taphonomic impacts on artefact displacement.
Guidelines in this section are intended mainly to achieve the objective in section 3(g) of the Act, but also contribute to the objective in section 3(a). By focusing intensive CHMP work on places of higher relative significance, DPC expects CHMP processes will be more timely and efficient, and also concentrate effort and resources on these places over work on heritage of lower relative significance.
Low density artefact distributions and scatters and CHMP method
If after either a desktop or standard assessment only low-density artefact scatters are discovered, a complex assessment is likely not required in accordance with the Act. Low densities of artefacts or dispersed shell midden material in a coastal context alone do not generally justify complex assessment or archaeological salvage by excavation. These can usually be appropriately managed via CHMP conditions and contingencies dealing with finds during an activity.
This is consistent with regulation 64. Regulation 64 requires a complex assessment when Aboriginal cultural heritage is or is likely to be present and it is not possible to identify the extent, nature and significance of the heritage without excavating. The presence of low-density material indicates Aboriginal heritage is present. However, if surface survey only finds such material, it may be possible to determine its nature and significance if the survey determines it is not likely that additional or different material is present subsurface. Its extent may be determined by reference to surface features and geomorphological research.
However, if the RAP or HA demonstrates particular features which warrant more intensive management, such as a particular cultural significance associated with intangible values, cumulative impact or regional rarity, low-density material may require further investigation to properly understand these features. Similarly, if landforms known to have significant subsurface deposits without surface indicators are present in the activity area, complex assessment may be justified.
Reasons for either proceeding to complex assessment or not in this circumstance must be documented in the CHMP.
The extent, nature and significance of low-density artefact scatters do not normally require investigation by complex assessment
Following a standard assessment, it may be possible that low densities of artefacts will be found in a subsurface context. Appropriate conditions and contingencies should normally be sufficient to manage this material if satisfactory to the RAP.
Complex investigation should only be undertaken where needed to define the extent, nature and significance of dense stratified deposits of cultural material.
Dense stratified deposits of cultural material can often only be investigated using sub-surface investigation, such as is required in a complex assessment, meeting the requirements of regulation 64(1)(b). In contrast, low densities of artefacts are not generally indicative of particular cultural heritage significance. Complex assessment is not normally required to investigate the extent, nature or significance of low-density artefact scatters, as their extent and nature at minimum can usually be determined by surface survey.
Example case study 1:
A CHMP for a proposed residential development for Melton discovered two LDADs during a standard CHMP assessment. No other Aboriginal cultural heritage was located, and the HA determined that it was likely the extent, nature and significance of this heritage within the activity area was reasonably established by the evidence uncovered. Therefore, Regulation 64(1) was not invoked, and a complex assessment was not required.
No other Aboriginal cultural heritage exists within the activity area. No complex assessment was needed.
The LDADs were recorded and details submitted to the VAHR. Two artefacts were collected as these were to be impacted by the activity, and the RAP were keen to add these artefacts to their keeping place. Three were left in situ as they were not to be impacted but were flagged to indicate areas to avoid during the activity.
The remainder of the LDADs will be destroyed by the development activity and/or managed by contingencies. Associated documentation will be stored by the RAP in its keeping place, along with the artefacts retained. Relevant provenance information will be submitted to the VAHR as a record edit. The Sponsor, with the RAP, will ensure accessible information about the activity area and the material collected is available. Artefact location point data will contribute to future predictive modelling in the region.
Example case study 2:
A CHMP for a proposed residential development in Cranbourne discovered no surface cultural material during a standard CHMP assessment. However, the location of the activity area, being above known Pleistocene landforms, and the low surface visibility of the activity area during the survey, presented sound cultural heritage management reasons for proceeding to subsurface testing. Therefore, Regulation 64(1) was invoked [heritage likely to be present under subsection (a), but not able to be assessed by survey only per subsection (b)], and a complex assessment was required.
The reasons for proceeding to complex assessment in this case were documented clearly in the CHMP.
Specific suggested universal CHMP conditions for low-density scatters
- Whenever an isolated artefact or low-density, dispersed scatter is revealed during CHMP preparation, the following universal CHMP conditions may be used, linked to the nature and extent of the scatter (if any):
- Artefact locations will be mapped
- A representative sample of artefacts (to a maximum of 100 per square kilometre) will be collected and appropriately stored. Ongoing custody and/or recorded reburial shall follow.
- Contingencies may be developed to manage discoveries during the activity.
- If the above universal conditions are employed, the reasons why subsurface investigation was not recommended should be agreed by the HA and RAP and documented in the CHMP.
- Where demonstrable reasons exist because of archaeological and/or cultural knowledge to progress to a complex assessment, the HA and RAP will determine appropriate cultural heritage management and CHMP conditions as for artefact scatters. Demonstrable reasons may include rare material or type of exceptional cultural significance (e.g. sacred object) or known regular occurrences of subsurface material in similar local landforms, which may require specific conditions.
- In cases where standard assessment only discovers LDADs or low density, dispersed cultural material, and subsequent complex assessment is recommended, reasons for this should be agreed by the HA and RAP and documented in the CHMP.
Updated