In general, an assessment will consist of several procedural steps such as scoping, analysis, determination of significance, development of mitigation measures, and development and implementation of a follow-up program. These steps are iterative rather than linear; circumstances commonly arise during the course of an assessment that require these steps to be revisited. The assessment procedure, including the different steps one has to consider, is captured in a case study provided at the end of this section.

Public participation is a critical element throughout the assessment process and input from the public should be sought from the initial stages of proposed projects. This can be beneficial by integrating local knowledge at the planning phase of projects.

Further, it is important to note that trained professionals in cultural heritage resources should be involved throughout the assessment of the project, as appropriate.

Step 1. Scoping

Effective scoping focuses the EA analysis on relevant environmental issues and concerns arising from a proposed project.

Scoping for cultural heritage resources should consider the following:

A. ldentify cultural heritage resources and other relevant information

The first step in a scoping exercise is to identify cultural heritage resources located on- and off-site which potentially could be affected by the project. To do this, it is necessary to assess the potential for the presence of cultural heritage resources first through a site survey or inspection, then identify and evaluate them. This would also provide information on the significance of the cultural heritage resources that may be affected by a project. Once the geographical area and the significance of the resources have been identified, then identification of site boundaries should follow. During this early phase of the project, project site boundaries should remain flexible at least until all cultural resources have been identified and consensus among project team members has been satisfied.

Background information may include historical events and key characteristics of the area, particularly with respect to the culture and important heritage values of those living in the area.

The scientific significance of heritage sites is also an important aspect to be considered when assessing a heritage site. Any sites recognized for their heritage value should be identified in an environmental assessment.

Possible sources of information to assist in identifying potential for or the presence of important cultural heritage resources include:

• lists of national parks, national historic sites, and historic canals (Parks Canada);
• federal and provincial registers of archaeological sites (see Appendices 2 and 3);
• Canadian Register of Heritage Properties (Parks Canada);
• Federal Heritage Buildings Register Office (FHBRO);
• federal and provincial government departments responsible for heritage issues (see Appendix 1);
• aboriginal communities;
• academic and research institutions;
• professional societies and organizations;
• federal, provincial and municipal archives and libraries;
• museums;
• land use plans;
• local citizens or associations involved in the area of heritage conservation and protection; and
• ICOMOS Canada (International Council on Monuments and Sites).

Pertinent questions to ask when identifying cultural heritage resources include, for example:

• What are the main heritage characteristics and resources of the area which may potentially be affected? Is this area, or any part of it recognized to have any heritage or cultural value in terms of archaeology, history, science, architecture, engineering and natural history?
• Was there any exploratory work previously undertaken, in order to identify archaeological sites or artifacts in the proposed project area? Was there any similar type of work done to identify the cultural values of the proposed project area?
• What was the scope and thoroughness of previous work, and is it adequate for current purpose?

B. Identify spatial and temporal boundaries of the project

Boundaries for Cultural Heritage Resources

Setting boundaries for cultural heritage resources must be planned within the project area. Although in some instances, the cultural heritage resources might be a distance from the core area of the project and might be affected by the project, inclusion of these cultural heritage resources could be considered within the boundaries of the project.

It is important to remember that the Act requires to assess any change on cultural heritage resources resulting from changes in the environment caused by the project. This must be kept in mind when establishing boundaries for a project.

Boundaries Associated with Cumulative Environmental Effects

Cumulative environmental effects is defined as,

“the effect on the environment which results from effects of a project when combined with those of other past, existing and imminent projects and activities. These may occur over a certain period of time and distance.”
(RA Guide 1994).

When identifying spatial and temporal boundaries the cumulative environmental effects which could result from the project must be considered. Defining the spatial and temporal boundaries establishes a frame of reference for assessing cumulative environmental effects and facilitates their identification. Such boundaries can also influence the assessment in a variety of ways. If large boundaries are defined, only a superficial assessment may be possible and uncertainty will increase. If the boundaries are small, a more detailed examination may be feasible but an understanding of the broad context may be sacrificed. Proponents may perceive assessments with large boundaries as onerous or unfeasible, whereas the public may think small boundaries do not adequately encompass all of the project's environmental effects.

Also:

• Different boundaries may be appropriate for different cumulative environmental effects. For example, the boundaries selected for cumulative environmental effects on air quality might be quite different than those chosen for effects on cultural heritage resources;
• Spatial boundaries should extend beyond a project's immediate site to include the area likely to be affected;
• Temporal boundaries may extend beyond the timing of construction and operation to include the period of occurrence of the effects.

Most importantly, the boundaries of an assessment should be reasonable. In many cases, it will be appropriate to consult with the affected public in making this determination. Whatever boundaries are set, they may influence the determination of significance, because the effects including cumulative effects of the project on cultural heritage resources may be very significant locally, but of little significance regionally.

C. Identify potential environmental effects on cultural heritage resources

The term “environmental effect”, defined in Section 2(1) of the Act, includes the effects on physical and cultural heritage which may result from changing environmental conditions caused by a project. For further clarification on environmental effects, refer to section 1.4 of the RA Guide.

The following questions should be considered:

• Will environmental effects resulting from a project, either beneficial or deletarious to the environment, could adversely affect the cultural heritage resources?
• Are there other past, existing or imminent projects or activities which are currently or may in the future, affect the identified cultural heritage resources? Will these cumulative effects adversely impact the cultural heritage resources?
• Do members of the community demonstrate any concern about the proposed project? How do they value their cultural heritage resources? How will they view their cultural heritage resources being adversely affected by an undertaking?

The responsibility over heritage matters is shared by several jurisdictions and consultation with other government agencies is an essential aspect of the assessment. The public must also be consulted, preferably in the early planning stages of the project, to ensure that community values and concerns have been considered in an environmental assessment.

Step 2. Analysis of the Potential Effects on Cultural Heritage Resources

The objective of the analysis is to describe how the potential environmental effects of a project may affect cultural heritage resources. This phase of the assessment should include:

• A description of the nature and current status of the resources, including important characteristics and current assessment of stressors, such as adverse effects of acid rain caused by past and current projects and activities on historic buildings; the natural erosion of an archaeological site; changes to the cultural landscape around a historic church, etc.;
• Assessment of the potential effects the project may likely cause to the cultural heritage resources;
• Consideration of cumulative effects of past, existing and future projects and activities in the proposed project area, all of which may have the potential of affecting the same cultural heritage resources and the overall heritage value of the area; and
• An analysis of the results of the consultations held with the public and stakeholders.

Step 3. Determination of Significance of Adverse Effects

The Act requires the RA to determine whether the project is likely to cause significant adverse environmental effects. While consideration of the significance of various forms of physical impacts on heritage resources is important, they must be balanced with a firm understanding of the historic, archaeological and cultural significance of the resources in question. These issues must be explored if mitigation is to be effective which is also a reason to consult with professionals at the onset of a project with a potential of having cultural heritage resources.

In the case where impacts on cultural heritage resources are the only significant impacts identified in the overall context of the project, it is at the discretion of the RA to make a decision on whether the project would be determined to cause significant environmental effects. In making a determination on significance, the following questions should be considered:

• Will the project cause any adverse effects on cultural heritage resources?
  • An adverse effect on cultural heritage resources is one which destroys elements essential to the heritage character or introduces elements that are damaging or detrimental to the heritage character. Table 1 presents examples of adverse effects on cultural heritage resources as a result of a project causing a change in the environment.
• Will these effects be significant in terms of causing any alterations to the state of the cultural heritage resources?
  • The following aspects of the various environmental effects (as they affect cultural heritage resources) should be considered:
    • magnitude;
    • geographic extent;
    • duration and frequency;
    • reversibility;
    • context.
• Will the project affect the cultural heritage resources in a way that contributes, either additively or synergistically, to existing effects from other past or pesent projects, or effects that will likely stem from future projects? If so, the significance of these total effects must be considered, regarding the potential to:
  • illustrate historic themes, provide a view on the past, or portray a historical event which occurred in the area;
  • evaluate whether a cultural resource can physically survive the impacts of cumulative effects;
  • educate the public about the value of our cultural heritage;
  • provide for the spiritual and cultural purposes of the site; and
  • promote further research.
• How likely are these effects to occur?

For more detailed information on determination of significance refer to the RA Guide.

Step 4. Design of Mitigation Measures

Consultation with heritage experts is strongly advised to ensure that appropriate mitigation measures for cultural heritage resources are implemented. Although a range of measures could be deployed to mitigate impacts on cultural heritage resources, those chosen must fit the type and scope of a project. Mitigation measures must be technically and economically feasible and could include:

• Re-siting of the project to avoid sensitive areas such as significant sites or areas known to contain cultural artifacts, significant cultural landscape, etc.;
• Changing the project design or construction techniques and technologies to reduce effects of the project on cultural heritage resources;
• Implementing site protection such as stabilization practices, fences, monitoring, etc.;
• Conducting professional rescue archaeology to salvage archaeological resources and their contextual information prior to their damage or destruction;
• Changing site maintenance practices causing damage to historic fabric, e.g. road salt on stone walls.

Step 5. Follow-up Program

The objectives of a follow-up program are to verify the accuracy of the EA and determine the effectiveness of any mitigation measures that have been implemented. Section 16(2) of the Act requires that all comprehensive studies, all mediation and assessments by a review panel consider the need for, and requirements of a follow-up program. If it is determined that the project is likely to cause effects on cultural heritage resources and that a follow-up program is needed, then monitoring the effects on the cultural heritage resources may be included in the follow-up program.

While consideration of the need for follow-up is required for all but the screening phase of a federal EA, the determination of appropriateness and actual implementation of such a program is left to the discretion of the RA.