Episode 8 | Protecting New Zealand’s archaeology

[Music] Welcome back to the eighth episode of Otairoa Unurthed, Namihi Nui Kea Kue for making it this far. Today we're going to talk about how we protect and care for archaeology in New Zealand under the Heritage New Zealand Polhiri Tonga Act. I have to admit that before I joined this organisation about six years ago I had no idea that there was legislation protecting archaeology in Otairoa, that it was illegal to destroy or take items from an archaeological site. To explain why it's so important that we protect our archaeology, I'm looking to Vanessa Tana today. Vanessa is Heritage New Zealand's manager of archaeology or Kaifaka Hairae Podtairanga here. [Music] Vanessa, to begin with, can you explain what your job entails? I do a lot of talking. I'm continually talking to people about applications for archaeological authorities and also about our process and what's required under the legislation. So all that talking is that because people just don't really know much about it. Talking is a wide range, so there's some people who are very knowledgeable about it. People are coming from a lot of different perspectives, and they have applicants, who have tongue to fenoa, who have internal staff. And a lot of the talking that I do is with our regional archaeologists who are based in our offices across the country, and they are doing most of the interaction with applicants, archaeologists and reviewing archaeological assessments and authority applications. And then they provide that to me for reviewing sign-offs. So I talked to them quite a lot. So I think we'll go back to basics and just start with what counts as archaeology in New Zealand. So the date was established in 1975, when the law to protect archaeological sites was first introduced. Some people hope that that might be reviewed and we may get a rolling date. It's fairly arbitrary date, 1900, but that's how it is at the moment. So under the legislation in archaeological site, that post date's 1900 may be declared in archaeological site by Heritage New Zealand. So there is some provision to protect post 1900 archaeological sites. Most recently Heritage New Zealand declared the Ashburton in King Chinese market garden site, and that one dates from the 1920s. But I guess that's a bit more effort as it to declare something an archaeological site rather than it just automatically being one. You're exactly right. So generally it's only the most significant sites that will get a declaration to protect them and Heritage New Zealand staff undertake the research and assess the significance of any places that communities or Heritage New Zealand or local authorities consider or nominate to be an archaeological site. And then once it is the same statutory protection as pre-1900 archaeological sites apply. So how do you know if a site is an archaeological site? Like if you just see a piece of land, how would you know that they had human habitation before 1900? So part of an archaeologist's job is to survey land and identify sites. And they do this based on their knowledge and understanding of how people settle places in New Zealand. There are the sources of information which add to their knowledge and understanding and they'll also use maps and oral and historical accounts. As a result of archaeological survey, there are more than 66,000 archaeological sites recorded in the New Zealand Archaeological Association's database, which is called ArcSight. So that database helps us to determine whether there may be an archaeological site on any property. So that ArcSight website, can anyone look at it? On the surface, everyone can look at it and determine whether the not-nero has archaeological sites in it. But there is more detailed information that's behind that, that in today's members may have access to. We should put a link up to that with this podcast because it would be quite interesting to just look near where you live and see if there's archaeological sites nearby. That's a great idea. So how are these archaeological sites protected? So they're protected under Heritage New Zealand Polhari Tonga Act. In Heritage New Zealand, regulates the recovery of information from archaeological sites under that act. So if you think that a site has evidence of pre-19 activity on it, and you want to do any work on that site, any earthquakes that is so taking foundations for a house or a drain or building a road. You'll need to get an archaeologist to complete an assessment to determine whether or not the earthquakes that you're proposing will impact a site. You will also need to consult with Ewi Hapo to determine if there's a site of interest to Maori. If impact to the site, the archaeological site is unavoidable, then you'll need to apply to Heritage New Zealand for an archaeological authority. The archaeological authority controls how that information will be recovered from the site. And may involve archaeologists monitoring earthquakes, undertaken by machinery, and/or archaeological investigation by archaeologists using hand tools. So basically the process is just for me who's not an archaeologist. First of all, you see if you can avoid damaging the archaeology, and then if you do really have to damage it because the drain's going through the area, then you make sure it's monitored. Yes, so if you can't avoid it because you can't redesign the drain to avoid the archaeology, that's basically what the archaeological authority process is for. You get an archaeological authority, and then information is recovered from that site because you're modifying it and once the information is gone, it's gone forever. There is another archaeological authority type which is called a scientific authority, and so that's where archaeologists are applying to undertake a scientific investigation of an archaeological site. So that's four research purposes only. Yeah, no, that's probably what we think of more as traditional archaeology going on a dig and discovering it, but actually you're saying most of the archaeology is happening because there's groundworks going on. Yeah, and the damage to that site is unavoidable, so then we're just recovering information from it. That type of archaeology is generally for it to sort of rescue archaeology. Why do this archaeological process of recovering the information because I can imagine for developers they'd get quite annoyed at having to maybe pay an archaeologist and what's the argument that this is worth doing. The archaeological sites and information in our country are really important. It's not like anywhere else in the world. The settlement is the end of the settlement of the Pacific by Polynesians. We've got 800 years or so worth of archaeological evidence and sites that can contribute to that story of voyaging and adapting to a completely new environment. So in a way, it's important that the resources are protected. Archaeological sites are finite resource. They can't be recreated. Yeah, archaeological sites provide information about things that are not often recorded. So actually, so all aspects of domestic life, food, the use of space. What I really like about it is, you know, people often say, oh New Zealand's got no histories, two new compared to the Romans and the Greeks and the Middle Ages. But actually what you're saying is yes, it's more recent, but that's what makes it so spectacular. That's what's so important about it because we don't have this type of evidence of a settlement by people in a new country and they have to adapt. They bought their food crops with them. They had to learn about their new environment and adapt methods of gardening. They found new sources of stone to make tools and all sorts of resources. The climate was completely different, but they were extremely successful and they adapted really fast and the population grew as a result. So Vanessa, you talked about how archaeology is a scarce resource and if we dig it up, we use it up. So I'm just wondering, how do archaeologists make sure that there is still archaeology for future archaeologists to discover? I think I said archaeology is a finite resource. It needs to be managed and I guess that's what the archaeological authority process that we manage at Heritage New Zealand contributes. We advocate for the preservation in situ of the resource. You don't need to destroy and modify all of an archaeological site to learn a great deal. You learn quite a lot without actually destroying the place. It's important to preserve some of the resource for future generations because they will have different questions that they want answered and also different technologies with which to answer questions. Another thing that we do is to preserve samples and parts of those sites. So museums also store samples and materials that are not necessarily the ones that end up on display. And what about with climate change? Is that affecting things? Archaeological sites in this country are faced by a great threat in climate change. The majority of archaeological sites are around the coastline. People have always lived in close proximity to the coast for transport resources, etc. So coastal erosion in anundation by the sea is going to take the archaeological sites. Well, it's a great threat to our future knowledge. And so foreshort and tell Vanissa, I know that you want to talk about holes in the ground. So can you just explain what do you mean by that? What I particularly wanted to illustrate here today is the types of features and things that archaeologists can see under the surface. This picture here, what has occurred here is that the top soil has been removed over the area and archaeologists have carefully worked their way into the archaeological deposit. What they're looking for is patterns and the subsurface. So post holes, for example, outlining a building or structure, they'll be identifiable because there'll be a different colour, I feel, usually quite often dark or maybe charcoal staining in them and you can see these features underneath the top soil, cut into the natural soil or into other archaeological deposits below them. Yeah, I just love it that we think of archaeologists looking for artifacts and even Sean Tell makes it sound like you've got something tangible to show and yet what you're looking for is kind of the gap of where something used to be, but that still tells you a whole lot. If we look at our digging deep section, which is where we try and look at something in a little bit more detail, the question I have for you is why is it so important for me as a member of the public to not remove anything from an archaeological site? Once you've removed things from an archaeological site, you lose the context, so if you moved an artifact from an archaeological site, how do you know what that artifact relates to? So that's part of the reason why it's important. When recovering that information that an archaeologist is doing that because obviously the context is the thing that contributes to the story, an archaeological site may have multiple layers of habitation and you can only work that out if you've got the whole picture and you excavate those layers carefully. This is way if you find something that looks like archaeological evidence, leave it in place and contact your local Heritage New Zealand Paul Harryton office, we'll be able to provide advice on what the most appropriate thing to do would be. That's a good point because I wonder if everyone knows that it is actually illegal to say if you find an amazing odd bottom to just take it home with you. That's a good point and maybe one that not many people are aware of but it is unlawful to damage an archaeological site and people can be prosecuted. It's a criminal offence, not just individuals who may have dug up the site, but also companies have employed and directed them to do that work might be liable for a prosecution. Yeah and that Heritage New Zealand has a strategic approach to this so we frequently try to work with people who may have inadvertently damaged an archaeological site to negotiate solutions such as staff training and that sort of thing so damage doesn't happen again. However, we have a load tolerance for people who are a repeat offenders or should know better and as it's a criminal prosecution the person gets a criminal record and the court will ensure a fine. Yeah I was amazed when I started work at Heritage New Zealand and I just didn't realise that people could get taken to court for repeatedly ignoring this type of thing. Yep so it does happen but like I said we do have a strategic approach to it but people who are deliberately digging archaeological sites that sort of activity is not tolerated. And I do have a question from a kid here which I wonder if archaeologists hear from kids quite a bit. What about finding dinosaur bones? Love to hear their kids' questions? No, archaeologists don't dig dinosaurs and the reason for this is that they're not related to human irritation because they lived a long time prior. So that's not the job of an archaeologist but the job of a paleontologist. archaeologists however do use similar techniques to recover evidence and information such as excavation and dating of a material. archaeologists do work with animal bones but only those that are the result of their interaction with people such as animals that are caught and consumed by people and we also do encounter species that are in our extinct such as mower but not dinosaurs. That's a great answer thank you. Thanks so much Vanessa for that great explanation of why Altairoa's archaeology is so precious and important to protect and thanks to you any listeners out there who've made the effort to listen to this podcast through to episode eight. This has been such a fun project for me born unexpectedly out of the 2020 lockdown last year. I want to say a huge thank you to so many people who've supported me firstly all the amazing archaeologists who gave up their time and put up with my interviewing experiments online to all the heritage news Ellen Polheri Tonga colleagues and NZAA members who helped me along the way. Thank you. In particular my degratitude to Pam, Catherine and Arden E for your input. Thank you to Sarah Hogan for our lovely Altairoa unearthed image. I have recorded and edited this podcast myself often at home so all the mistakes and dodgy sound moments are my own fault. If you listen closely you might have heard some two-year-old screams outside my bedroom door and some of the episodes. I have got one more bonus episode to edit on the Waikato Whitland Power project but it's a six-person mega interview so I need a bit more time to edit it. Look out for it in a month or so. Kair Kite.