Abstract

In CRM, a distinction is usually made between activities which can cause damage to heritage resources, and the actual damage that is caused. With regard to forestry, this distinction is more often than not lost to most archaeologists. The assumption is made that the forest industry in general will inevitably inflict significant damage to any heritage resources in the forest. However, five years of intensive examination of a wide variety of forestry activities indicates that this is an erroneous assumption. For example, the most visible effect of forestry is the cutting down of trees. Yet, analysis has shown that most ground impact from tree cutting is similar to that experienced by a natural forest fire. This begs the question: if tree cutting doesn't cause that much damage, what kinds of activities DO cause impacts, and how can they be effectively managed? In fact, under almost all situations, forestry impacts can be predicted and managed if three requirements can be satisfied: 1) the nature, significance and distribution of local archaeological resources are known 2) industrial forestry practices are identified 3) the relationships between forestry practices and archaeological resources are understood The first requirement is usually dealt with through regional archaeological overviews, often involving predictive modelling. Often as not, however, heritage management stops at that point, and forest industry planners are left dangling, wondering what to do with a heritage overview or potential model. This paper moves past the modelling stage, by addressing the second requirement from the perspective of the commercial forest industry in general, establishing parameters so that the last point can be explored. The result is a management strategy that fits into the integrated resource management operations of current forestry management programs, and can be sustained for centuries of forest practices.