Canadian Cultural Landscapes:

Illustrations of Holistic Conservation?

Canadian Artist: Emily Carr YAN QCI 1912 Oil on canvas 98.8 x 152.5 Art Gallery of Hamilton
Gift of Roy G. Cole, 1992

Debborah Donnelly
University College Dublin
World Heritage Conservation
March 10, 2017
 D. Donnelly 1

Introduction
This paper will examine the concept of cultural landscapes as an interface between cultural and
natural heritage conservation as it specifically relates to Canadian sites. Like art, landscapes
are most wholly appreciated when there is an understanding of the full context in which they
were created. This includes not only aesthetic and historical values, but a range of the scientific,
social and spiritual importance placed upon them.

An overview of terminology and explanation of the nomination process as defined in the

Convention,1 will be followed by the clear requirement for the overlapping of natural and cultural
needs in risk assessments in order to ensure effective heritage management.

While Canada has 1,130 cultural landscapes listed on the Canadian Register of Historical
Places (CRHP),2 it currently only has one inscribed under the UNESCO World Heritage List,
the Landscape of Grand Pr, which will be examined as a primary example. However, there
are attributes under the mixed (cultural/natural)3 World Heritage nomination files of the Gwaii
Haanas and Quttinirpaaq files which will be considered herein. The Old Town Lunenburg
cultural World Heritage site will be utilised as an example under the Risk Management section.

Convention and Operational Guidelines

It is the responsibility of State Parties to, identify and delineate the different properties situated
on its territory (Convention, 1972: Article 3), and the selection of the nomination category of a
property between cultural, natural, mixed, or as a cultural landscape is up to their own
interpretation of the site in question, and the definitions.

Cultural landscapes - are cultural properties and represent the combined works of
nature and of man designated in Article 1 of the Convention. They are illustrative of the
evolution of human society and settlement over time,4 under the influence of the physical
constraints and/or opportunities presented by their natural environment and of
successive social, economic and cultural forces, both external and internal. (UNESCO:
2015, Article 2, Item 47)5
Mixed Cultural and Natural Heritage Properties are considered mixed cultural and
natural heritage if they satisfy a part or the whole of the definition of both cultural and

1
Convention refers to the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation (UNESCO)
Convention Concerning the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage (1972).
2
As accessed and defined under cultural landscape through a search on the CRHP, March 1st, 2017.
3
Canada does not currently have any inscribed properties that are mixed, all are either cultural or natural, which
is why the tentative mixed sites were chosen to analyse.
4
Underlining was done by this author for emphasis.
5
Note that there is a more comprehensive definition under Annex 3 of the Guidelines (UNESCO: 2015), and Item
10 defines the three main categories: (i) a landscape designed and created intentionally by man; (ii) an
organically evolved landscape (relict or continuing); (iii) an associative cultural landscape.
 D. Donnelly 2

natural heritage laid out in Articles 1 and 2 of the Convention. (UNESCO: 2015, Article
2, Item 46).

Determination is often made based on evaluation of both cultural and natural significance.

Cultural Significance

Australia has been a leader in applying the idea of cultural landscapes to lands associated with
Aboriginal people in its territory (Buggey, 1999: 19). The Burra Charter (Australia: 2013) was
developed6 (and amended) to describe the theory and practice of cultural heritage
management, and is often used by other nations as a guideline. It defines Cultural Significance
as an:
aesthetic, historic, scientific, social or spiritual value for past, present or future
generations. Cultural significance is embodied in the place itself, its fabric,
setting, use, associations, meanings, records, related places and related objects.
Places may have a range of values for different individuals or groups. (Burra
Charter, Article 1.2)

The Burra Charter however, has a more prescriptive view of cultural significance than that of
Orbali (2008) who took a values-based approach and listed the following diverse range of
topics as consideration for determining cultural significance:
Aesthetic
Age and rarity
Architectural
Artistic
Associative value
Cultural value
Economic value
Educational value
Emotional value
Environmental
Historic
Identity and community
Landscape value
Local distinctiveness
Political value
Public value
Religious/spiritual value
Scientific, research & knowledge value
Social value
Technical value
Townscape value

6
The Burra Charter was originally brought into force in 1979, and has had several iterations. The most recent
version, which supersedes previous versions, is dated from 2013.
 D. Donnelly 3

The definition of cultural significance is not internationally accepted, and can take a variety of
forms. As this paper is focusing on Canada, following are the historical and contemporary
definitions of cultural landscape that is utilised there.

Canada

The definition of Aboriginal Cultural Landscape was defined relatively early, and came about
as the result of a consultative process to ensure the perspective of Canadian Aboriginal groups
were included in Canadian designations. It was described in a paper commissioned by the
Historic Sites and Monuments Board of Canada, written by Susan Buggey (1999: 30) as follows:

An Aboriginal cultural landscape is a place valued by an Aboriginal group (or

groups) because of their long and complex relationship with that land. It
expresses their unity with the natural and spiritual environment. It embodies their
traditional knowledge of spirits, places, land uses, and ecology. Material remains
of the association may be prominent, but will often be minimal or absent.

In 2004, the National Capital Commission (NCC) defined cultural landscape as a set of ideas
and practices embedded in a place. The ideas and practices are what make it cultural; the
place is what makes it a landscape (Government of Canada: 2004: 10).

A subsequent Canadian approach includes a definition of cultural landscape under Canadas

Historic Places Standards (2010: Section 4.1 Guidelines for Cultural Landscapes, including
Heritage Districts), which is any geographical area that has been modified, influenced or given
special cultural meaning by people, and that has been formally recognized for its heritage value.
Cultural landscapes are often dynamic, living entities that continually change because of natural
and human-influenced social, economic and cultural processes. The Standards document
does not specifically define cultural significance, but references the Burra Charter in its
bibliography.

The comparisons above are drawn only to ensure that the definition and characterization of
cultural significance and cultural landscape are seen from a broad perspective, and how it
may differ in Canadian context.

Natural Significance
While the Burra Charter defined cultural significance, the Australian Natural Heritage Charter
(Australia: 2002, Article 1.3) defined natural significance. Natural significance is defined as
the importance of ecosystems, biodiversity and geodiversity for their existence value or for
present or future generations, in terms of their scientific, social, aesthetic and life-support value.

The same charter (2002, Article 1.8) defines natural integrity as, the degree to which a place
or ecosystem retains its natural biodiversity and geodiversity and other natural processes and
characteristics.
 D. Donnelly 4

Canada

While the Principles and Guidelines for Ecological Restoration in Canadas Protected Natural
Areas (Parks Canada and the Canadian Parks Council: 2008, Item 4.1.1) utilizes the term
natural significance they do not define it. The document does point to the National Parks Act
(2000) definition of ecological integrity defined below.

National Parks Act of Canada (2000, Section 2) describes ecological integrity as a condition
that is determined to be characteristic of its natural region and likely to persist, including abiotic
components and the composition and abundance of native species and biological communities,
rates of change and supporting processes.

Risk Management

Environmental impacts on cultural heritage like sea-level rise, flooding, erosion, etc., can no
longer be ignored. In the past, cultural heritage conservation was generally reactionary to
damage without consideration of how those impacts came to pass. Cultural assets are not
generally isolated from their environment. So, planning for environmental risks to cultural
heritage means that the traditional idea of conservation as restoration (often theoretical and
not based on fact) no longer applies, but the concept actually includes preservation.7 To
preserve an object, building, site or landscape, one should have a reasonable knowledge of
potential impacts. This is where risk analysis and risk management become relevant. In order
to maintain something, one must mitigate the risks that could damage it.

Cultural Landscapes are a combination of cultural and natural elements that are to be
considered as a unique entity. This brings ecological management together with cultural
heritage management. How a cultural site develops or changes over time can impact the natural
environment, just as climate and geological processes (for example) can impact both the
ecology, and the cultural artefacts (buildings, objects, etc.).

The potential for adverse environmental impacts (e.g., introduction or re-introduction of

invasive species) must also be considered, regardless of whether it is required by environmental
assessment or related legislation (Canadas Historic Places: 2010, p. 75, Item 4.1.7).

There is a well-defined approach to ecological restoration described in the Principles and

Guidelines for Ecological Restoration in Canadas Protected Natural Areas (Parks Canada and
the Canadian Parks Council: 2008) which includes under Section 3.2 Guidelines for Ecological
Restoration in Canadas Protected Natural Areas, that specifically details recommendations for
Improvements in Landscapes and Seascapes (Section 3.2.4) (Table 1 below) that also respect
the significance of cultural heritage.

7
Preservation means maintaining a place in its existing state and retarding deterioration. (Burra Charter: 2013:
Article 1.6)
 D. Donnelly 5

Table 1: Improvements in Landscapes and Seascapes (Parks Canada and the Canadian Parks
Council: 2008, Section 3.2.4)

The framework under these Principles and Guidelines integrates many principles and
procedures of ecological risk assessment(and) like ecological risk assessment, it is
fundamentally a values and goal-driven process that identifies, organizes and analyzes diverse
scientific and socio-cultural information to make informed decisions about appropriate
management actions (Ibid, p. 43).

Climate Change

Not least of the potential direct physical effects of climate change on cultural heritage are sea-
level rise (SLR), increases in the intensity of extreme weather events and changes in humidity
(Hall, et al: 2015, p.1 - quoting the 2014 IPCC8).

8
IPCC Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
 D. Donnelly 6

Old Town Lunenburg, Nova Scotia (listed cultural World Heritage Site), is an excellent
example of risk management planning undertaken as a requirement to fulfil municipal and
provincial agreements to submit a Municipal Climate Change Action Plan (MCCAP). During this
analysis of built heritage likely to be impacted by climate change, which was carried out on
behalf of the Bluenose Coastal Action Foundation, they discovered that some of the UNESCO
sites are at risk to sea level rise and storm surge flooding (Forbes & Wightman, 2013: 26).

Fig. 1 Old Town Lunenburg. Photo Vincent Ko Hon Chiu (2014) (UNESCO: 2015a, Gallery)

Landscape of Grand Pr, Nova Scotia

Grand Pr is the only listed Canadian Cultural Landscape on the World Heritage List, inscribed
in 2012 under the following criteria:

Criterion (v): The cultural landscape of Grand Pr bears exceptional testimony to

a traditional farming settlement created in the 17th century by the Acadians in a
coastal zone with tides that are among the highest in the world. The polderisation
used traditional techniques of dykes, aboiteaux and a drainage network, as well as
a community-based management system still in use today. The resultant rich alluvial
soil enabled continuous and sustainable agricultural development.
Criterion (vi): Grand Pr is the iconic place of remembrance of the Acadian
diaspora, dispersed by the Grand Drangement, in the second half of the 18th
century. Its polder landscape and archaeological remains are testimony to the
values of a culture of pioneers able to create their own territory, whilst living in
harmony with the native Mikmaq people. Its memorial constructions form the centre
of the symbolic re-appropriation of the land of their origins by the Acadians, in the
20th century, in a spirit of peace and cultural sharing with the English-speaking
community. (UNESCO World Heritage List: Landscape of Grand Pr)
It consists of 1323 hectares of dykelands, on an eastern arm of the Bay of Fundy in western
Nova Scotia. The boundary was assigned to include the area that has been dyked from the
1680s up to the present day, that is under the stewardship of the Grand Pr Marsh Body, and
that continues to support exclusive agricultural use (Parks Canada: 2011, p. 280/2759).
The Management Plan for the nominated property (Ibid, Section 4.3) includes Factors Affecting
the Property (including development, environmental, and visitor and tourism pressures), as well
as Section 8: Natural Disaster and Risk Preparedness.
 D. Donnelly 7

In the former (Section 4.3.1.3 Alternate energy sources), the State Party has considered the
potential impacts of either wind or tidal power. Section 4.3.2.1 Coastal change and rising sea
level is an identified significant risk for the site. Mitigation by maintaining the dykes, as well as
continuing research is planned.

Under the latter (Natural Disasters), strong storms, flooding and fire have been identified as the
main risks.

Notably, while the criteria that the landscape was inscribed under was (v) and (vi) both cultural
criteria (UNESCO, 2012) there is limited information on the fact that this site is composed of a
vast area of marshland and agricultural land, and there is an absence of an inventory of species.
While a copy of the Species at Risk Act is attached to the nomination file, no reference to a list
of species is provided, or what plans are in place to deal with ecological issues. In this case, it
is seen that Grand Pr as a cultural landscape has conducted a basic risk analysis for impacts
to the cultural aspects of the property, but not for any natural heritage.

The nomination file does include an Overview of Coastal Change Influences on the Landscape
of Grand Pr, which includes a section on Anticipated Climate Change Impacts on Dykelands
(Section 4.6). However, there is again no reference to impacts to local wildlife. It seems highly
unusual that a marsh site on the coast of the highest tides in the world has not considered
impacts on the natural ecology.

Grand Pr does not illustrate an example of a cultural landscape as an interface to cultural and
natural heritage conservation.

Fig. 2 View of the agricultural landscape of Grand Pr (Winery Assoc. of NS: 2012)

Gwaii Haanas, British Columbia

The Gwaii Haanas site was nominated in 2004 under the following proposed criteria:

Criterion (iii): The homeland of the Haida is represented by the whole Gwaii
Haanas area not just the island of SGang Gwaay with its house vestiges and
 D. Donnelly 8

carved mortuary and memorial poles. This homeland is documented in oral tradition
and archaeological resources and it is rich in associated cultural values;
Criterion (v): It is an outstanding example of land and sea use which is
representative of a culture and of human interaction with the environment;
Criterion (vi): It is evocative of the Haida cosmological relationship with this place;
Criterion (vii): It possesses exceptional natural scenic beauty and superlative
natural phenomena focused on the mountains-to-the-sea landscape, with old-
growth forested islands, coastal zone and undersea life;
Criterion (ix): A superb display of ecological processes occurring in the old-growth
temperate rainforests and the role of the islands in wildlife evolution can be
observed;
Criterion (x): The diversity of species and the presence of endemics are
exceptional. (Parks Canada: 2016c)
Gwaii Haanas is currently on the tentative list, but the nomination file is still being developed by
the Archipelago Management Board (AMB), which is composed of equal membership of Parks
Canada staff and the Council of Haida Nation.

While it is listed as a mixed site, there are aspects of this nomination that could be considered
as a cultural landscape, and therefore worthy of review for the determination of whether both
cultural and natural heritage conservation have been considered (this far into the process).
While there is no longer full-time occupation on the park site, Haida people have a continuing
presence at SG ang Gwaay,9 and the other four village sites inside the park from May to October
as part of the Haida Gwaii Watchmen Program (Parks Canada: 2016d). They are Haida men
and women, employed by Parks Canada to act as guardians and guides to the important cultural
sites within the park.

Fig. 3 Gwaii Haanas National Park Reserve of Canada (Trail Canada: 2011)

9
SGang Gwaay is a World Heritage listed cultural site (inscribed in 1981), that falls within the Gwaii Haanas
National Park Reserve.
 D. Donnelly 9

Even though Haida people no longer continuously occupy the sites within the park, their ongoing
presence and involvement in the education and protection of the site would meet the
requirement of evolution of human society and settlement over time in the definition by the
Convention for a cultural landscape.

Regarding their combined process of cultural and natural conservation the various plans of the
Gwaii Haanas include a thorough understanding and balance between the two.

The newly finalised Haida Gwaii Marine Plan (Haida Nation, et al: 2015, p. vii, Table 1.1, and
Section 6.1 Governance and Integrated Management) acknowledges the individual plan of the
Gwaii Haanas with respect to marine plan management and zoning, the Gwaii Haanas National
Marine Conservation Area Reserve and Haida Heritage Site: Interim Management Plan and
Zoning (Parks Canada: 2010) hereafter GHNMCAR.

The GHNMCAR was created to establish preliminary management priorities and stakeholder
cooperation, as well as guiding principles, objectives and implementation strategies
(CHNMCAR: Section 1.2 Purpose and Scope of the Interim Management Plan).

The Biological and Cultural Context of the site has been well established, siting more than 3,500
identified marine species in the area, and a human occupation of over 12,000 years represented
by over 600 identified coastal archaeological sites (CHNMCAR: 2010, 3). Recognition of
Sustainable Resource Use (Section 2.4) includes access for traditional Haida subsistence,
tourism and licensed recreational and commercial fishing. The Plan also spells out their
responsibilities and objectives for Conservation of Biodiversity and Ecosystems (Section 4.2)
and Sustaining Haida Culture (Section 4.3). Research and Monitoring (Section 4.5) have also
been considered, but there is no reference within this file on risk analysis.

The 2016 (proposed) Multi-species Action Plan for Gwaii Haanas National Park Reserve,
National Marine Conservation Area Reserve, and Haida Heritage Site hereafter MSAP,
meets the requirements for an action plan set out in the Species at Risk Act (SARA (s.47)) for
species requiring an action plan that occur inside the boundary of the site (MSAP: 2016, v). It
also refers to an integrated plan that is in process of development, that includes Land, Sea,
People Management Plan for Gwaii Haanas.10

The MSAP thoroughly describes the terrestrial (Table 1) and marine species (Table 2) that are
at risk. They have also considered risks from invasive species and wildlife diseases (terrestrial),
and the need for cooperation on marine species as most of the marine species at risk in Gwaii
Haanas waters are highly mobile and make extensive use of habitats outside Gwaii Haanas,
sometimes migrating thousands of kilometers each year (MSAP: 2016, Section 3
Conservation and Recovery Measures).

10
A fully integrated plan would be preferable for the nomination file to UNESCO.
 D. Donnelly 10

Fig. 4 Gwaii Haanas: Wet Wilderness. Photo Sabine Jessen (CPAWS: 2015)

The MSAP is a comprehensive action plan that defines dynamic Invasive Species Management,
but falls a bit short on examining how those species may impact the cultural aspects of the site,
and focuses primarily on the ecological. The information they gather though, could be utilised
by other partners on the site for ensuring that potential damage is mitigated for the
archaeological sites.

The Gwaii Haanas National Park Reserve and Haida Heritage Site Management Plan for the
Terrestrial Area (Archipelago Management Board: 2004) hereafter GHMP, defines their top
three management goals as: 1) Protecting Natural Heritage, 2) Respecting Cultural Heritage,
and 3) Sustaining the Continuity of Haida Culture. It does have strategies outlined to identify
and assess the risks to Gwaii Haanas from external extractive industries (GHNP: 2004, 13),
and to evaluate historic trails from a risk management perspective (Ibid. 24). With a new
integrated plan in progress and the subsequent 12 years from the development of this plan, it
is hoped that a more robust risk analysis and risk management plan will be incorporated into
their overall plans.

Quttinirpaaq, Nunavut

Fig. 5 Quttinirpaaq National Park (Parks Canada: 2016a)

 D. Donnelly 11

Like Gwaii Haanas, Quttinirpaaq was nominated and placed on the World Heritage tentative list
in 2004. The proposed criteria for the mixed site is as follows:

Criterion (iii): Quttinirpaaq is an exceptional testimony to the earliest and

successive human occupations of the Canadian Eastern High Arctic by the early
Palaeo-Eskimo and subsequent cultural traditions;

Criterion (vii): exceptional natural scenic beauty and superlative natural

phenomena with mountains, polar desert and a thermal oasis;

Criterion (viii): Geological processes connected with high latitude glaciation and
ice shelves represent outstanding examples of major stages of the earths history;

Criterion (x): It contains a diversity of species, with a wide range of arctic species,
including endangered Peary caribou. (Parks Canada: 2016e)

The Park Vision in the Quttinirpaaq National Park of Canada Management Plan (Parks
Canada: 2009, Section 5) states that monitoring programs will measure and report on important
indicators of ecological integrity and environmental change and will create understanding of the
condition of key cultural resources. Indicators and targets will be developed for management of
the park.

The Section entitled Managing for Ecological Integrity (Ibid, Section 6) gives a general
description of terrestrial, marine and freshwater ecosystems and the identification of ecological
stressors (climate change, long-range transport of pollutants, and localized impacts). Section
6.4.4 Species at Risk lists potentially at risk and other rare species including: Porsilds bryum
(a moss), ivory gull, gyrfalcon, narwhal, polar bear, and Peary caribou.11

Fig. 6 Peary caribou. Photo: Micheline Manseau (Parks Canada, 2016a)

11
SARA registry lists the High Arctic Peary Caribou (Northwest Territories, Nunavut) as Endangered based on
the last Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada (COSEWIC) assessment in May, 2004, as is
the Ivory Gull (April 2006). The Porsilds bryum is listed as Threatened; the Polar Bear and Narwhal are both
listed as Special Concern; and the Gyrfalcon as Not at Risk, although the last COSEWIC assessment was April
1987 (review of registry March 2, 2017).
 D. Donnelly 12

In 2014 Parks Canada produced a Visitor Information Package for tourists which includes a
short section on Environmental Conservation Practices but does not address the equivalent
regarding the protection of archaeological objects or sites.

The Independence I culture (2000-4000 BC) are considered to be the first humans to arrive and
settle in the area of Quttinirpaaq (Parks Canada: 2009). The area has a long history of
occupation and thus the landscape has been directly, if perhaps subtly, impacted by this
contact. However, not all cultural landscapes are characterized by substantive visible
expressions of the relationship between culture and place. This is important when it comes to
acknowledging the cultural landscape heritage of non-material cultures or cultural landscapes
where the relationship with place does not result in distinct material or morphological imprints
on the land (Prosper, 2007: 121-122).

Fig. 7 Pre-Contact stone tool from Quttinirpaaq National Park. Photo: Christian Kimber
(Parks Canada: 2009)

Fort Conger lies within Quttinirpaaq National Park (on Ellesmere Island), and is listed under the
Canadian Register of Historic Places (CRHP) as a Historic Site that includes, three huts built
in 1900 by American engineer and explorer Robert E. Peary for use as the principal land base
for his 1901-1902 attempt to reach the North Pole. In addition to these huts there are also
archaeological remains.

Fig. 8 House at Fort Conger, Ellesmere Island, November 1881. Credit: NOAA (Robinson: 2013)
 D. Donnelly 13

The Management Plan addresses Cultural Heritage: Protecting Cultural Resources (Parks
Canada: 2009, Section 7). This section identifies archaeological sites within the park and
expresses that many artefacts remain in situ. While known sites have been evaluated by
archaeologists for, condition, threats, research potential and educational opportunities the
current plan is still preliminary and reactionary. Any archaeological resources identified through
monitoring as vulnerable to immediate loss or damage will be evaluated as soon as possible
for heritage values and assessed for designation as threatened sites. Impacts will be monitored
and managed (Ibid, 7.1.1). Many of the strategic goals are for creating an inventory, conducting
a full evaluation of all known cultural resources in the park, and ongoing monitoring. They have
outlined goals, objectives and action plans to ensure protection of the site.

The Joint Park Management Committee has placed a strong emphasis on both Inuit knowledge
and science within the plan, in ensuring that the park is well preserved. They have done some
risk analysis, with a plan for monitoring all aspects of change in the environment for both
ecological and cultural impacts. The continued occupation in the area and involvement of the
local inhabitants could fulfil the requirements of a cultural landscape but as long as the site is
listed and protected for both natural and cultural elements then it doesnt really matter whether
it is listed as a mixed site or a cultural landscape.

Conclusion
Both Gwaii Haanas and Quttinirpaaq are still in the process of developing their nomination files.
Gwaii Haanas has several plans that fulfil the majority of the needs from both a natural and a
cultural heritage perspective. A joint risk analysis (cultural and natural) and integrated
management plan (the latter in progress) would absolutely meet these goals.

Quttinirpaaq has an integrated plan that outlines goals, objectives and actions for the park. They
have successfully covered both natural and cultural aspects in this single plan. Because it is
now more than seven years old, it would be opportune to update the file and provide more of
the monitoring results and risk management principles into their plan, and an addition to their
nomination file.

While a case has been made that the Canadian nominated World Heritage (mixed
cultural/natural) sites of Gwaii Haanas and Quttinirpaaq could be seen as cultural landscapes
that also illustrate a balance of both cultural and natural heritage conservation, the lone
Canadian file that has been World Heritage listed to date as a cultural landscape, Grand Pr,
does not effectively demonstrate this concept.

Mixed sites must clearly establish their requirements, however in the case of cultural landscapes
that are defined only under cultural criteria this has not been the case. Even though Grand
 D. Donnelly 14

Pr was only recently inscribed (2012) they have not compiled a list of species, or identified the
impacts that changes to their environment (both built and natural) will have on them, or the fact
that climate change may introduce new invasive species (flora and fauna) and any risks
associated with that.

While the term landscape may suggest a mix of nature and culture, because a World Heritage
cultural landscape can be nominated and inscribed while under criteria for only culture, or only
nature,12 the processes have not been put in place to facilitate an interface between cultural
and natural conservation.

12
As of March 10, 2017 the World Heritage List [online] for cultural landscapes included 127 inscribed under
cultural criteria, 3 natural, and 16 mixed.
 D. Donnelly 15

References
Archipelago Management Board (2004) Gwaii Haanas National Park and Reserve and Haida
Heritage Site Management Plan for the Terrestrial Area. http://www.pc.gc.ca/eng/pn-
np/bc/gwaiihaanas/plan/plan1.aspx
Australia Heritage Commission (2002) Australia Natural Heritage Charter: For the Conservation
of Places of Natural Heritage Significance. Second Edition.
https://www.environment.gov.au/system/files/resources/56de3d0a-7301-47e2-8c7c-
9e064627a1ae/files/australian-natural-heritage-charter.pdf
Australia ICOMOS (2013) Charter for the Conservation of Places of Cultural Significance,
2013 [online] http://australia.icomos.org/wp-content/uploads/BURRA_CHARTER.pdf
Australia ICOMOS (2013a) Understanding and Assessing Cultural Significance, Practice
Note, Version 1, November 2013 [online] http://australia.icomos.org/wp-
content/uploads/Practice-Note_Understanding-and-assessing-cultural-significance.pdf
Buggey, Susan (1999) An Approach to Aboriginal Cultural Landscapes. Historic Sites and
Monuments Board of Canada. http://www.pc.gc.ca/docs/r/pca-
acl/images/Aboriginal_Cultural_Landscapes_e.pdf
Canadian Parks and Wilderness Society (CPAWS) (2015) Gwaii Haanas [website]
http://cpawsbc.org/campaigns/gwaii-haanas
Canadas Historic Places (2016) Canadian Register of Historic Places. [website / database]
http://www.historicplaces.ca/en/results-resultats.aspx?m=2&Keyword=cultural%20landscape
Canadas Historic Places (2010) Standards and Guidelines for the Conservation of Historic
Places in Canada: A Federal, Provincial and Territorial Collaboration. Second Edition.
http://www.historicplaces.ca/media/18072/81468-parks-s+g-eng-web2.pdf
CyArk (2013) Fort Conger. [website / photo] http://archive.cyark.org/supplies-from-lady-franklin-
bay-expedition-greely-expedition-photograph-media
Forbes, J., Wightman, J. (2013) Planning for Climate Change in the Town of Lunenburg, NS:
Inventory of the Built Environment at Risk to Sea Level Rise and Storm Surge. Bluenose
Coastal Action Foundation.
Government of Canada (2004) Definition and Assessment of Cultural Landscapes of Heritage
Value on NCC Lands.13 http://www.ncc-ccn.gc.ca/sites/default/files/pubs/Definition-
Assessment-Cultural-Landscapes-Heritage-Value-NCC-Lands-2004_0.pdf
Government of Canada (2002) Species at Risk Act (S.C. 2002, c. 29). Current to February 16,
2017. http://laws.justice.gc.ca/PDF/S-15.3.pdf
Government of Canada (2000) Canada National Parks Act S.C. 2000, c 32. Last amended on
September 1, 2015. [accessed 26 February 2017] http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/PDF/N-14.01.pdf
Government of Canada (1994) Federal Heritage Buildings Review Office (FHBRO) Heritage
Character Statement on Ellesmere Island, Northwest Territories:14 Fort Conger Buildings.
http://www.historicplaces.ca/media/14861/1988-177(e)fortcongerbuildings.pdf

13
NCC National Capital Commission
14
Ellesmere Island used to belong to the Northwest Territories, until the formation of the new territory of
Nunavut in 1999.
 D. Donnelly 16

Haida Nation and Province of British Columbia (2015) Haida Gwaii Marine Plan.
https://www.for.gov.bc.ca/tasb/SLRP/marine/MaPP/HaidaGwaii_MaPP.pdf
Hall, C.M., Baird, T., James, M. & Ram, Y. (2015): Climate change and cultural heritage:
conservation and heritage tourism in the Anthropocene. Journal of Heritage Tourism.
IPCC (2014) Climate change 2014 synthesis report summary for policymakers. Geneva:
Author.
Ontario Heritage Trust (2012) Cultural Heritage Landscapes An Introduction.
http://www.heritagetrust.on.ca/CorporateSite/media/oht/PDFs/HIS-020-Cultural-heritage-
landscapes---An-introduction-ENG.pdf
Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry (MNRF) (2015) Moving Biodiversity
Conservation to a Landscape Approach. [website] https://www.ontario.ca/page/moving-
biodiversity-conservation-landscape-approach
Orbali, A. (2008) Architectural Conservation, Blackwell Science: Oxford.
Parks Canada (2016) State of Canadas Natural and Cultural Heritage Places 2016.
http://www.pc.gc.ca/eng/docs/pc/rpts/elnhc-scnhp/2016/tdm-toc.aspx
Parks Canada (2016a) Quttinirpaaq National Park [website] http://www.pc.gc.ca/eng/pn-
np/nu/quttinirpaaq/index.aspx
Parks Canada (2016b) Multi-species Action Plan for Gwaii Haanas National Park Reserve,
National Marine Conservation Area Reserve, and Haida Heritage Site [Proposed].
http://www.registrelep-
sararegistry.gc.ca/virtual_sara/files/plans/Ap%2DGwaiiHannasHaida%2Dv00%2D2016mar30%
2DEng%2Epdf
Parks Canada (2016c) World Heritage in Canada - Canada's Tentative List: Gwaii Haanas,
British Columbia - Proposed Justification of "Outstanding Universal Value" [last updated 2016-
08-08] http://www.pc.gc.ca/eng/progs/spm-whs/sec06/sec03c.aspx
Parks Canada (2016d) Gwaii Haanas National Park Reserve, National Marine Conservation
Area Reserve, and Haida Heritage Site [website last updated 2016-07-18]
http://www.pc.gc.ca/eng/pn-np/bc/gwaiihaanas/index.aspx
Parks Canada (2016e) World Heritage in Canada - Canada's Tentative List: Quttinirpaaq,
Nunavut - Proposed Justification of "Outstanding Universal Value" [last updated 2016-08-08]
http://www.pc.gc.ca/eng/progs/spm-whs/sec06/sec03g.aspx
Parks Canada (2014) Quttinirpaaq National Park Visitor Information Package.
http://www.pc.gc.ca/eng/pn-np/nu/quttinirpaaq/visit.aspx
Parks Canada (2011) World Heritage Nomination Proposal for the Landscape of Grand Pr,
Nova Scotia, Canada. UNESCO website http://whc.unesco.org/uploads/nominations/1404.pdf
Parks Canada (2010) Gwaii Haanas National Marine Conservation Area Reserve and Haida
Heritage Site: Interim Management Plan and Zoning Plan. http://www.pc.gc.ca/eng/pn-
np/bc/gwaiihaanas/plan/plan1.aspx
Parks Canada (2009) Quttinirpaaq National Park of Canada: Management Plan.
http://www.pc.gc.ca/eng/pn-np/nu/quttinirpaaq/plan.aspx
 D. Donnelly 17

Parks Canada and the Canadian Parks Council (2008) Principles and Guidelines for Ecological
Restoration in Canadas Protected Natural Areas.
http://www.pc.gc.ca/docs/pc/guide/resteco/guide_e.pdf
Prosper, L. (2007) "Wherein Lies the Heritage Value? Rethinking the Heritage Value of Cultural
Landscapes from an Aboriginal Perspective", The George Wright Forum Vol. 24, Number 2,
pp.117-124. http://www.georgewright.org./242prosper.pdf
Robinson, M. (2013) Greelys Pendulum, Part 2 of 2. Time to Eat the Dogs Blog 19 March
2013. https://timetoeatthedogs.com/page/2/
Rossler, M. (2006) World Heritage cultural landscapes: A UNESCO flagship programme 1992
2006. Landscape Research, Vol. 31(4), pp. 333353.
Sherren, K., Loik. L., Debner, J.A. (2016) Climate adaptation in new world cultural
landscapes: The case of Bay of Fundy agricultural dykelands (Nova Scotia, Canada). Land Use
Policy. Vol 51, pp.267-280.
Taylor, K., Lennon, J.L. (2011) Cultural Landscapes: A Bridge Between Culture and Nature?.
International Journal of Heritage Studies. Vol 17(6), pp. 537-554.
Trail Canada (2011) Gwaii Haanas National Park Reserve of Canada [website]
http://www.trailcanada.com/national_parks/gwaii_haanas/
UNESCO (2015) Operational Guidelines for the Implementation of the World Heritage
Convention - WHC.15/01 8 July 2015. UNESCO Website http://whc.unesco.org/en/guidelines/
UNESCO (2015a) World Heritage List Old Town Lunenburg [website]
http://whc.unesco.org/en/list/741
UNESCO (2012) World Heritage List Landscape of Grand Pr. [website]
http://whc.unesco.org/en/list/1404
UNESCO (1972) Convention concerning the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural
Heritage. Paris: UNESCO World Heritage Centre. [online]
http://whc.unesco.org/archive/convention-en.pdf . [accessed 29 September 2015].
Winery Association of Nova Scotia (2012) Grand Pr. [website/photo]
https://winesofnovascotia.ca/tag/grand-pre/