Sector profile: cultural heritage

Overview

Heritage resources include artifacts or museum collections, buildings or structures (e.g., historic buildings, bridges, infrastructure, or monuments), cultural heritage landscapes (e.g., historic streetscapes, parks, trails, industrial complexes), and archaeological sites.

Ontario recognizes that cultural heritage resources may have attributes that are tangible (such as the features and details that help make a building or landscape significant) and intangible (such as stories and customs connected with the cultural heritage value of a property).

There is a growing recognition internationally that intangible practices or traditions, such as oral traditions, expressions, language, social practices, rituals, ceremonies, traditional knowledge, and skills, can in themselves be of cultural heritage value.^{footnote 321[321]} Language retention and cultural transmission are particularly important to Ontario’s Indigenous people, and the Francophone community.

In British Columbia, in addition to tangible cultural assets, the First Peoples’ Cultural Council supports communities and individuals in safeguarding intangible cultural heritage through the language and arts programs and the FirstVoices project.^{footnote 322[322]} As another example, in 2014 the Government of Quebec designated Inuit Throat Singing as part of its cultural heritage, the first such designation under new legislation.^{footnote 323[323]}

Many partners work to conserve, protect, and promote Ontario’s shared heritage, including community heritage organizations, museums, heritage and archaeological consultants, developers, private property owners, volunteers, the academic sector, the Government of Ontario, and the federal and municipal governments. Their efforts enhance community development, promote environmental sustainability, and bring economic benefits.

The Ontario Heritage Trust conserves and protects significant built, cultural, and natural heritage sites in Ontario. In addition to its educational and commemorative programs, the Trust holds 188 heritage properties, including 27 built properties, in trust for the people of Ontario, and has conservation easement agreements on 270 heritage properties.^{footnote 324[324]} The Trust has erected over 1,200 commemorative plaques across the province to mark significant people, events, and places.^{footnote 325[325]}

Legislative framework

The Ontario Heritage Act provides the legislative framework for the identification, designation, protection, and conservation of Ontario’s heritage.^{footnote 326[326]} It also defines the roles of municipalities and the provincial government in cultural heritage conservation. The Act gives municipal councils the power to designate individual heritage properties and heritage conservation districts. The Act prohibits alteration, removal or demolition of building or structure on a designated property without municipal approval.

The Act ensures the conservation of cultural heritage property owned or controlled by the provincial Crown or prescribed public bodies. This is achieved through the Standards and Guidelines for Conservation of Provincial Heritage Properties.^{footnote 327[327]}

Under the Act, anyone who carries out archaeological fieldwork in Ontario must hold a valid archaeological license issued by the Minister of Tourism, Culture and Sport.^{footnote 328[328]} The publication Standards and Guidelines for Consultant Archaeologists sets out rules for fieldwork and reporting, including requirements for engaging Indigenous communities.

Heritage protection is integrated into many other pieces of legislation. For example it is an important aspect of land use planning and development decision-making processes through the Environmental Assessment Act, the Planning Act, and the Provincial Policy Statement (2014).^{footnote 329[329]} Land use planning processes provide for the identification, protection and conservation of significant built and cultural heritage resources and the protection of archaeological resources.

Social and economic benefits of cultural heritage

Conserving cultural heritage is closely linked to quality of life, sense of place and identification with the past, and contact and cooperation across cultures and age groups.^{footnote 330[330]} Engagement in cultural heritage can foster a sense of belonging to a wider community, increasing social cohesion and a sense of inclusion.^{footnote 331[331]} Access to cultural heritage also broadens opportunities for education and lifelong learning.

Heritage conservation can be part of the solution to the challenges of climate change. Repurposing historic buildings conserves the energy embedded in them. Conserving cultural heritage landscapes also promotes sustainable land development, balancing protection of cultural heritage resources, management, and planning for new development.

Investment in heritage streetscapes has been shown to have a positive impact on communities. For example, the conservation of historic neighbourhoods in the Rope Walks in Liverpool and the Merchant City in Glasgow resulted in a significant improvement in residents’ perception of their neighbourhoods compared with other places.^{footnote 332[332]} Conserving heritage buildings can also help create jobs and other economic benefits. In the US, a $1 million investment in the rehabilitation of a heritage building in Delaware created 14.6 jobs, compared with 11.2 jobs from a similar investment in a new building and 9.2 jobs from a manufacturing investment.^{footnote 333[333]}

Ontario’s museums, archives and historic sites employ 5,275 people and generated over $432M in revenues in 2011.^{footnote 334[334]} Ontario represents just over 30% of the total GDP attributed to cultural heritage in Canada.^{footnote 335[335]}

Museums and heritage organizations

Ontario has hundreds of museums, historic sites, heritage organizations, historical societies, archives, cultural centres, and related institutions.^{footnote 336[336]}

Museums and heritage organizations contribute to community identity and pride, attract tourists, foster creativity and innovation, assist in youth development, and provide educational programs for both children and adults.^{footnote 337[337]} Museums support the development of skills important for success in the knowledge economy, such as critical thinking, creativity, and collaboration. Heritage organizations promote community heritage through walking tours, lectures, Doors Open events, and research. Many of these organizations are almost exclusively volunteer-run.

Ontario’s museums and historic sites had 12 million visits in 2011,^{footnote 338[338]} including over 14,000 school groups.^{footnote 339[339]} Virtual visitors are also accessing museum collections and heritage experiences. Digital services allow people to explore collections, customizing their experiences through opportunities to research, sort, and access material of interest to them.^{footnote 340[340]} In 2011, there were over 15 million online visits to Ontario’s museums, historic sites, and archives.^{footnote 341[341]}

Key trends

Digital transformation

Museums and heritage sites are digitizing their collections to help long-term conservation as well as to increase public engagement and access. The Red Lake Regional Heritage Centre, in partnership with the local First Nation, created an online exhibit of an Elder telling the legend of Red Lake as he heard it from his ancestors, recorded in both Ojibwe and English.^{footnote 342[342]}

Digitization of collections supports the development of an increasing array of museum apps and social media conversations where users can share, tag, or comment on heritage collections. The Ontario Museum Association offers a location-based app called ON museums that promotes special offers, current exhibits, and nearby museums. The Museum of Health Care in Kingston created an app that tells the history of Nursing in Kingston through photos, audio-visual recreation, and games.

To engage youth, museums are recognizing that they need to provide opportunities for authentic exchanges and two-way discussions. Youth councils, such as the one at Bytown Museum in Ottawa, allow young people to participate in creating digital experiences for their peers and organizing events and exhibitions.^{footnote 343[343]}

Digital engagement strategies will continue to grow in importance. They allow museums to link to the community and deliver what people value. They can target underserved populations, culturally diverse communities, and seniors, and in particular, engage younger generations. Digital engagement also contributes to sustainability by introducing new ways of reaching out to supporters to generate revenue.

Continued investment in digitization is vital, as there will be uses for digitized holdings that have not yet been designed or imagined.^{footnote 344[344]} Digital holdings could form the basis of new ventures to reach new markets and generate revenues. Many larger institutions are already taking advantage of opportunities to license images held in their collections and create digital products, for example to support education, that could be licensed or syndicated. Entering into co-branding relationships may be possible for museums with recognizable brands or trademarks as a means of monetizing their reputation. The challenge for smaller museums is to build capacity to exploit these opportunities in a way that is both financially feasible and rewarding. Many such opportunities require large up-front investment, crowdfunding, or social enterprise.

Museums will need to find a balance between their public mission and commercial opportunities, and they will need staff with keen business acumen and understanding of market principles. Within this context, demonstrating the public value of museums and heritage organizations and their relevance to communities will continue to be a high priority.^{footnote 345[345]}

Sustainable organizations

As non-profit and volunteer organizations, museums and heritage organizations regularly face financial challenges and are struggling to “do more with less.”^{footnote 346[346]} Pressing financial needs include funds for capital improvements, digital conservation and curation, and dissemination and engagement. 

In addition to fiscal challenges, workforce renewal, and the ability to provide attractive job openings for new entrants into the profession, is a key concern in the museum sector.^{footnote 347[347]} Current museum and heritage organization leadership is aging, along with all of Ontario’s population, and organizations need strategies to attract a new generation of dedicated leaders and volunteers.^{footnote 348[348]} The need for updated skills and training (e.g., digital technology skills), job stability, and equitable pay and benefits are key concerns of library, archive, and museum professionals internationally.^{footnote 349[349]}

Small and rural communities experience all of these challenges more acutely. Regional networks and partnerships with local libraries, archives, and art galleries can help address organizational capacity needs. For example, the Ottawa Museum Network, representing 11 community museums, partnered with the City of Ottawa to obtain a license and training for new collections management software.^{footnote 350[350]}

Relationship with First Nations, Métis and Inuit Peoples

Questions of voice and representation, who speaks for whom, have characterized critiques of the museum system in recent decades. For example, the Report of the Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples recognized the authority of Indigenous Canadians to speak for themselves in the way they are represented in museums, particularly in recognizing their role in the development of Canadian history and contemporary life. The commission recommended that museums and First Nations work together to correct inequities.^{footnote 351[351]} These recommendations were reiterated in the Truth and Reconciliation Commission Report in 2015.^{footnote 352[352]}

Museums and heritage organizations are developing new relationships with Indigenous communities. Some have jointly agreed to new protocols for describing, researching, handling, and sharing culturally sensitive material.^{footnote 353[353]} A good example is the Musée des Abénakis in Quebec, which consulted and involved the Indigenous community in establishing the museum and has included members of the Abenaki community ever since. The museum serves as a platform for discussing the issues and struggles of this Indigenous community.^{footnote 354[354]}

In Ontario, Sustainable Archaeology has established an advisory committee composed of equal numbers of archaeologists and First Nations individuals to explore all issues of archaeological practice and heritage. The principal aim of the committee is to advise and direct Sustainable Archaeology's operational goals, accommodating both archaeological and First Nation cultural values in a co-management fashion. For example, if a researcher wants to see sensitive artifacts, both archaeologists and First Nations have to give consent.

These are significant accomplishments, but the recent report of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission underscored the need to do more to deepen the relationship between museums and First Nation, Métis, and Inuit peoples.^{footnote 355[355]} The report recommends a national review of museum policies and best practices to determine the level of compliance with the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples and to make recommendations.^{footnote 356[356]}

Collections management pressures

Heritage organizations with collections, such as museums and archives, increasingly must find ways to make their collections more accessible to the general public and Indigenous communities while ensuring their continued preservation. Many are finding it difficult to afford adequate storage for their collections, conduct research on them, and share them with the public.

Many museums are dealing with the legacy of years of unplanned collecting and need realistic strategies for documenting and managing collections within available resources. Some are considering other options, including de-accessioning.^{footnote 357[357]} Some are partnering with other cultural institutions, such as libraries, to provide greater access to their collections through joint digital conservation projects.

Digital technology has opened the door to increasing access to collections and potentially increasing revenues, but resources are needed to implement it. Many Ontario museums participate in the Canadian Heritage Information Network (CHIN) started by the Department of Canadian Heritage in the 1970s. It includes cross-Canada artifact databases and the Virtual Museum of Canada, which supports and brings on line exhibits developed by local museums.^{footnote 358[358]}

The RE-ORG Canada workshop offered by the Canadian Conservation Institute offers one solution to collections management challenges faced by community museums.^{footnote 359[359]} The training initiative aims to help museums address their storage issues using the RE-ORG methodology, which is internationally recognized.^{footnote 360[360]} Participants identify key issues affecting access to and conservation of their collections, develop options for reorganization, and implement solutions.

Built heritage

Built heritage connects us to previous modes of daily life, culture and work. It includes properties with residential, commercial, institutional or industrial buildings, monuments, places of worship, and structures such as bridges or dams.

Many municipal governments recognize the role heritage buildings, districts, and other heritage resources can play in revitalizing their communities. As of 2015, there were 7,836 heritage properties individually designated by municipalities under the Ontario Heritage Trust Act. Additionally, Ontario municipalities have designated 121 Heritage Conservation Districts, representing 20,800 properties.^{footnote 361[361]} Municipalities also use other conservation tools to protect heritage properties, including conservation plans, cultural heritage impact assessments, tax rebates, and heritage loan and grant programs.

The conservation of built heritage plays a role in attracting investment, businesses, and skilled professionals to the area. Significant economic activity and job creation are associated with the conservation and repurposing of heritage buildings.^{footnote 362[362]} In some cases, heritage development (the renovation that supports continued use or adaptive reuse of historic buildings) has been shown to be economically competitive with new construction. Even when the cost is greater, developers of heritage properties are generally rewarded with a high rate of return on investment.^{footnote 363[363]}

Key trends

Adaptive reuse of heritage sites

In both urban and rural communities, the adaptive reuse of historic buildings creates unique living and working spaces. Historic buildings, streetscapes, and entire downtowns are being redeveloped as exciting places to live and work. A wide range of heritage development projects have been completed in Ontario, most of which are private sector projects.^{footnote 364[364]} Examples include the Alton Mill, a former knitting mill and rubber company which was restored and revitalized as an arts-based marketplace and gallery; the #1 Fire Station in Kenora, revitalized and restored to house a craft brewer; and the Merritton Cotton Mill in St. Catharines, restored by a local entrepreneur and rented to a popular and profitable restaurant. An important factor in the success of heritage development is dynamic, risk-taking, creative developers.^{footnote 365[365]}

Social enterprises for heritage redevelopment have multiple impacts, both economic and social. In Toronto, Artscape has redeveloped a number of heritage buildings into creative centres, housing, galleries, theatres, and spaces for not-for-profit groups, as well as live/work spaces for artists. Artscape Queen Street West, formerly a warehouse, was the first legal live/work space in Toronto geared to artists’ incomes. Today it is located in the heart of a thriving gallery district.^{footnote 366[366]}

Local governments are using a range of approaches to finance brownfield redevelopment, including tax abatements (rate freezes or deductions for a set period of time), revolving loan funds, or general obligation bonds.^{footnote 367[367]} For example, in 2002 the City of Toronto designated the industrial buildings of the Don Valley Brick Works. The following year the City issued a proposal looking for a developer to raise the capital needed to restore and reuse all 16 heritage structures on the site, and to create a centre for environmental learning and urban ecology.^{footnote 368[368]} The project, led by social enterprise Evergreen, was funded through loans from the provincial, federal and municipal government, as well as private funding. The heritage redevelopment and establishment of Canada’s first large-scale community environment centre was completed in 2010.^{footnote 369[369]}

Environmental sustainability

There is evidence that the environmental footprint of historic buildings is smaller than that of new construction, even compared with modern buildings designed to be energy efficient. Buildings from the early 20^th century have been shown to perform as well as if not better than newer buildings.^{footnote 370[370]} This is because historical construction methods and materials often maximized natural sources of heat, light, and ventilation. By leveraging original design intelligence in existing buildings, modernization of older buildings can achieve levels of energy consumption comparable to new builds at a LEED Silver level.^{footnote 371[371]}

Additionally, it takes decades before a new building recovers, through energy savings, the embodied energy of an old building, taking into account the energy used in demolition and new construction. Studies have estimated that it can take between 10 and 80 years for a new building to overcome the negative environmental impacts from construction.^{footnote 372[372]}

A study of building reuse in Portland, Oregon reported that reusing the existing building stock would meaningfully reduce the negative environmental impacts associated with building development. The study found that 15% of the county’s total CO₂ reduction targets would be met simply by reusing 1% of Portland’s total building stock over 10 years instead of replacing them with new, efficient buildings.^{footnote 373[373]}

Building reuse almost always yields fewer environmental impacts compared with new construction. It also offers immediate climate change impact reductions.^{footnote 374[374]} Waste from demolition and construction is estimated to account for almost 30% of all waste going to landfills in Canada.^{footnote 375[375]} Reusing an old building cuts down on landfill waste, protects greenfield land, and can reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

Conservation of built heritage resources presents economic opportunities associated with green industries, for example through the development and use of sustainable conservation technologies. These new opportunities will have implications for the construction sector, creating a need for new skills.^{footnote 376[376]} Construction professionals will need to acquire skills in the conservation, repair, and maintenance of heritage properties, including skills related to sustainability, regeneration, energy efficiency, and climate change. This effort will require widespread dissemination of information, advice and guidance, and best practices related to methods and materials.^{footnote 377[377]}

Development and heritage resources

Despite evidence that property values in heritage conservation districts tend to be higher than market value, there is still a stigma around the financial viability of heritage buildings and heritage development projects.^{footnote 378[378]} Difficulties with respect to accessing financing from banks have been noted.^{footnote 379[379]} Developers will increasingly need to ensure that they have viable business models to attract adequate financing for conservation and ongoing resource protection.

Low returns on investment are said to act as a deterrent to conservation efforts, whereas fiscal incentives and grants are key to encouraging it.^{footnote 380[380]} The US has had a federal tax credits for rehabilitation of historic buildings since 1977. Since the program began, over 38,000 projects have generated 2.4 million jobs and leveraged $66 billion in private investment. The tax credit has been shown to be a tool to revitalize vacant and underutilized buildings and older urban neighbourhoods and downtowns, create affordable housing, stimulate the community, and enhance property values.^{footnote 381[381]}

Under the Ontario Heritage Act, municipalities can create heritage grant or loan programs to assist owners of heritage properties to cover the costs of repair and restoration or to adaptively reuse heritage buildings in community improvement areas. Some municipalities provide grants, loans, and tax rebates, including Ottawa, Toronto, Peterborough, Stratford, Cobourg, and many others.^{footnote 382[382]} Ontario Heritage Property Tax Relief is a provincial program that provides a tax rebate to heritage property owners in participating municipalities. The province and the municipality share the cost of the program. Currently, 41 municipalities participate in the program.^{footnote 383[383]}

Cultural heritage landscapes

A cultural heritage landscape is “a defined geographical area that may have been modified by human activity and is identified as having cultural heritage value or interest by a community, including an Aboriginal community. The area may involve features such as structures, spaces, archaeological sites, or natural elements that are valued together for their interrelationship, meaning or association.”^{footnote 384[384]}

Examples of cultural heritage landscapes range from heritage conservation districts designated under the Ontario Heritage Act, villages, parks, gardens, battlefields, main streets and neighbourhoods, cemeteries, trails, views, natural areas, and industrial complexes. They may also include areas recognized by federal or international designation authorities.

Cultural heritage landscapes may be associated with a traditional practice, such as harvesting fish or animals, establishing seasonal camps, or gathering for ritual and ceremonial events. These practices represent an ongoing relationship with a place, but do not necessarily modify the landscape. For example, the long distance routes used by Inuit to travel across the High Arctic disappear with each new snowfall.^{footnote 385[385]}

In Ontario, heritage conservation districts are identified as a type of cultural heritage landscape that can include residential, commercial, or industrial areas, rural landscapes, or hamlets, with features or land patterns that contribute to a cohesive sense of time or place. For example, the Oil Springs Heritage Conservation District in Lambton County defines the practice of small-scale oil extraction as part of local community identity and protects the area’s industrial heritage and rural landscapes.^{footnote 386[386]} Heritage conservation districts, in addition to significant physical elements, may also include important views or vistas, for example toward spaces within the district.^{footnote 387[387]}

A cultural heritage landscape may also be a single property. For example, the McMichael Gallery in Ontario includes a sculpture garden, a wilderness garden intended to reflect the northern landscapes of the Group of Seven, and a small cemetery where six Group of Seven members and gallery founders Robert and Signe McMichael have been buried. The McMichael is currently engaged in the creation of a master plan to guide its development and long term care. Enhancing and maintaining the grounds as a cultural heritage landscape is a key component of the plan.^{footnote 388[388]}

Key trends

Strategic use of cultural heritage landscapes in community and economic development

Increasingly, the potential community and economic value of conserving cultural heritage landscapes is being recognized, and jurisdictions are implementing cultural heritage landscape conservation strategies.^{footnote 389[389]} Cultural heritage landscape conservation plans, inventories, or guidelines exist in a number of Ontario municipalities, including Hamilton, Mississauga, Caledon, Waterloo, Oakville, Kitchener, and Vaughan. Communities may pursue conservation of cultural heritage landscapes for practical or economic reasons.^{footnote 390[390]} For example, the heritage designation of Markham Village and Unionville, both within the town of Markham, contributed to the evolution of these neighbourhoods and has been shown to have had a positive impact on business.^{footnote 391[391]}

Cultural heritage has been the catalyst for sustainable heritage-led regeneration in several European cities, such as the award-winning regeneration of the Grainger Town in Newcastle upon Tyne in England and initiatives in Krakow, Lille, and Liverpool. In Manchester, an integrated policy approach to cultural heritage landscapes led to the regeneration of the wider area.^{footnote 392[392]} The conservation of cultural heritage played a key role in regenerating the Cathedral Quarter in Belfast, where the investment in heritage conservation was the driver for regeneration.^{footnote 393[393]}

Evolving approaches to conservation

The goals of ecological sustainability and conserving cultural heritage landscapes are converging. Increasingly, the conservation of cultural heritage landscapes is defined by sustainability, leading to “rethinking how we use technology, live life in urban milieus, and how we understand nature.”^{footnote 394[394]} As a result, some cultural heritage landscape conservation projects are contributing to conserving biodiversity.^{footnote 395[395]}

The protection of cultural heritage landscapes will continue to play a role in sustainable land development, but socioeconomic change will put pressure on cultural heritage landscapes. Some cultural heritage landscapes near urban areas will be threatened by urbanization and encroachment. There will be a growing challenge to develop appropriate conservation strategies, recognizing the needs of an evolving society while protecting the cultural heritage value of the landscape.^{footnote 396[396]}

The European Landscape Convention commits signatory countries to develop strategies and plans to conserve culturally significant landscapes and promote awareness of them, to strengthen public participation in landscape conservation and to integrate cultural landscape considerations into larger cultural and economic plans.^{footnote 397[397]} Ireland’s National Landscape Strategy, for example, aims to integrate landscape into its approach to sustainable development, recognizing the interconnections between heritage landscapes, biodiversity and climate change.^{footnote 398[398]}

An innovative use of technology to both conserve and promote awareness of a cultural landscape is the Memorial Landscape Berlin Wall, a web-based Geographic Information System (GIS) developed by the Department of Architectural Conservation of the Brandenburg University of Technology. In addition to conserving the authentic physical remains and traces, the memory of the Wall has been conserved digitally, allowing users to explore the remains virtually.^{footnote 399[399]}

Archaeology

An archaeological site is any site that contains an artifact or other physical evidence of past human use or activity. Sites may include the remains of camps, villages, battlefields, pioneer homes, burial grounds, and shipwrecks. These sites tell the story of the history and the development of the local area. Archaeological sites can be found anywhere that may have attracted humans in the past, including urban centres as was the case with the remains of Ontario’s 1797 First Parliament.

Archaeology in Ontario is predominantly practised as a commercial enterprise driven by the needs of the land use and development sector.^{footnote 400[400]} The archaeology industry is estimated to be worth more than $20 million annually and is growing.^{footnote 401[401]} The industry currently employs about 475 licensed archaeologists and hundreds of other specialized workers such as field crews, research staff, and collections managers. However, changing professional practices have led some in the profession to express concern that graduating archaeologists may not be adequately prepared for the responsibilities of private sector careers as consultants.^{footnote 402[402]}

Ontario’s archaeological fieldwork activity is increasing, uncovering an unprecedented volume of artifacts and data. This has created a challenge for archaeologists, museums, universities, and other institutions that do not have the space to house growing collections. There are currently more than 20,000 archaeological sites registered with the Ministry of Tourism, Culture and Sport.^{footnote 403[403]}

In 2011 the Ministry implemented new Standards and Guidelines for Consultant Archaeologists. This document sets out, for the first time, best practices and requirements for engaging with Indigenous communities in archaeological fieldwork and decision-making. The draft technical bulletin, Engaging Aboriginal Communities in Archaeology, provides further guidance for archaeologists.^{footnote 404[404]} Best practices include protection in situ, having community liaisons on site during fieldwork, and the proper disposition of Aboriginal artifacts and ancestral remains.^{footnote 405[405]}

Similarly, under the 2014 Provincial Policy Statement (PPS 2014), planning authorities are required to conserve significant archaeological resources before development can occur, and to consider the interests of Indigenous communities when doing so. The PPS 2014 also suggests that planning authorities take a proactive approach to conserving archaeological resources by considering and promoting archaeological management plans.^{footnote 406[406]}

Key trends

Increased involvement of Indigenous communities in archaeology

In Ontario, 80% of all archaeological sites are Indigenous in origin. This includes First Nations and Métis villages, hunting camps and portage areas. Artifacts include pottery sherds, arrow and spear points, and other everyday materials. Some sites and their contents, such as burial sites and ossuaries containing ancestors’ remains and funerary artifacts, are sensitive and must be treated with respect and dignity.^{footnote 407[407]}

Indigenous peoples are increasingly voicing their deep interest in the conservation of the sites and artifacts left by their ancestors. There is a continued need for increased dialogue between archaeologists and Indigenous individuals, organizations, and communities. The Ministry of Tourism, Culture and Sport has supported the Association of Professional Archaeologists to provide training to members of Indigenous communities and archaeological site liaison staff with the goal of promoting good communications between Indigenous communities and archaeologists.

In 2013, the Ontario Heritage Trust and the University of Toronto partnered with the Huron-Wendat Nation to rebury the remains of 1760 Huron-Wendat ancestors. The reburial occurred at the location of the largest original burial sites, within a conservation area owned by the Ontario Heritage Trust. This is the largest reburial of Aboriginal ancestral remains ever undertaken in North America.^{footnote 408[408]}

Lack of public access to the archaeological record

The rapid growth in archaeological fieldwork driven by development, particularly in southern Ontario, has yielded tens of millions of artifacts and large amounts of associated records and data (collectively “archaeological collections”).

Some archaeological collections have been transferred to public institutions, but the majority are in the private care of consultant archaeologists and consulting firms, museums, and government, held in trust for Ontarians. Archaeologists are required to file fieldwork reports in the Ministry’s Register of Reports, which is publicly accessible. However, access to artifacts and detailed data for research, educational, and public information purposes remains limited under the present circumstances.

Most Canadian provinces have a provincial repository, sometimes part of the provincial museum. Many American states have government-sanctioned repositories for archaeological collections, most of which are co-managed with the relevant Native American tribes.^{footnote 409[409]}

The Internet plays a key role in facilitating the sharing of information about Ontario archaeology, with an increasing focus on public interpretation on line (for example, on archaeologists’ websites). Some major projects are under way to consolidate and digitize archaeological collections to make them more accessible, but the sheer number of objects will make this a challenge for the foreseeable future.^{footnote 410[410]}

One innovative solution being developed in Ontario is the consolidation, storage, and digitization of artifact collections through Sustainable Archaeology, a joint project between McMaster University and the University of Western Ontario. Sustainable Archaeology accepts artifact collections from archaeological researchers and consultants for a fee. It will facilitate future use by researchers and ultimately allow the public to connect with Ontario’s archaeological heritage.^{footnote 411[411]}