Commentaire
I have the following questions and comments:
• Will the 50 m protective buffer after Stage 2 be applied retroactively to current sites?
• Will the 20 m protective buffer after Stage 3 for partial clearance be applied retroactive to current sites?
• Limits of Archaeological site Standard 2 is a blanket statement and does not take into consideration permanent physical constraints of a natural form. A guideline should be added.
• The glossary defines lithic scatter as "A distribution of stone flakes and tools found on the surface of a ploughed field". By this definition it does not apply to lithics found in test units or test pits. Is this the intent? Lithic scatter is the term used throughout the document in reference to test pit survey and test unit excavation as well plough-disturbed contexts. The defined term in the glossary is a contradiction and can cause confusion.
• Stage 2 Recommendations Does Standard 1 "no other recommendations shall be made regarding archaeological assessment", include no site recommendations as stated in Standard 2?
• Stage 2 Recommendations Standard 3 d. Is a letter from the proponent acknowledging awareness of protected archaeological sites required whenever sites requiring further work are found or only when partial clearance is considered?
Soumis le 27 mars 2026 11:36 AM
Commentaire sur
Renouvellement du cadre relatif au patrimoine : Propositions liées au Programme d’archéologie de l’Ontario, notamment des changements ciblés aux Normes et directives à l’intention des archéologues-conseils
Numéro du REO
026-0216
Identifiant (ID) du commentaire
183780
Commentaire fait au nom
Statut du commentaire