The New Zealand Sealing Industry - Department of Conservation
The New Zealand Sealing Industry - Department of Conservation
The New Zealand Sealing Industry - Department of Conservation
You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles
YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.
7. Discussion<br />
Four factors need to be considered in developing a management strategy for<br />
historic places <strong>of</strong> the European sealing industry:<br />
• Accurate definition <strong>of</strong> place<br />
• Appropriate representation <strong>of</strong> variation within the industry<br />
• Potential threats to their heritage values<br />
• Opportunities for their interpretation<br />
<strong>The</strong>se are discussed below, and specific management recommendations are<br />
outlined in Appendix 4.<br />
7.1 DEFINITION OF PLACE<br />
Some <strong>of</strong> the localities considered above should be discounted as historic places<br />
<strong>of</strong> the European sealing industry. Although the North Island, Marlborough<br />
Sounds, Canterbury, and Otago Harbour were sometimes visited by sealing<br />
vessels, there is no convincing evidence that the industry was ever pursued<br />
there. At a more specific level, several sites previously attributed to the<br />
activities <strong>of</strong> sealers in Dusky Sound appear to have alternative, more recent<br />
explanations. <strong>The</strong> same is probably the case for most <strong>of</strong> the beaches along the<br />
north coast <strong>of</strong> Stewart Island (section 6.4.10).<br />
<strong>The</strong>re are 30 localities for which land-based sealing activity can be suggested.<br />
<strong>The</strong>se vary considerably in terms <strong>of</strong> the precision with which the location <strong>of</strong> the<br />
activities can be defined (see Table 5 and Fig. 21, next pages). <strong>The</strong>re are 12<br />
places for which the historical evidence provides reasonably precise locational<br />
information. At least half <strong>of</strong> these (group 1) have already been confirmed by<br />
archaeological observations. In each case one (or more) specific archaeological<br />
sites have already been identified, and others with untested potential located,<br />
indicating that they are best considered as historic areas. <strong>The</strong>se must be<br />
considered the premier historic places <strong>of</strong> the industry, and managed<br />
accordingly. <strong>The</strong> localities in group 2 have equally precise historical data on<br />
location, but await proper archaeological assessment at the conjectured sites.<br />
Further investigation by survey and/or test excavation is clearly a priority.<br />
For most <strong>of</strong> the remaining places the historical data provides only a general<br />
indication <strong>of</strong> the location <strong>of</strong> sealing activities. For nine <strong>of</strong> these (group 3) one<br />
or more archaeological sites have been proposed as a possible specific location.<br />
Further investigation <strong>of</strong> these may provide confirmation <strong>of</strong> this possibility. A<br />
similar situation obtains for one archaeological site (group 4) which has<br />
conjectured sealing associations but no direct historical data. Further<br />
investigation <strong>of</strong> this unusual site should be considered a priority.<br />
<strong>The</strong>re are also six known or probable sealing localities (group 5) which have<br />
not yet been surveyed to determine the presence <strong>of</strong> specific sealing-related<br />
archaeological sites. Of these, the Kahurangi–Wekakura, Easy Harbour, and<br />
South Cape areas would appear to be particularly promising. Another four<br />
53