Port Arthur Historic Site Port Arthur Historic Site Management Authority A Case Study The Getty Conservation Institute, Los Angeles Port Arthur Historic Site Port Arthur Historic Site Management Authority A Case Study Written by Randall Mason, David Myers, and Marta de la Torre The Getty Conservation Institute, Los Angeles Project coordinator: Marta de la Torre Report editor: Marta de la Torre Design/Production coordinator: Joe Molloy Copy editor: Dianne Woo Copyright © J. Paul Getty Trust The Getty Conservation Institute Getty Center Drive, Suite Los Angeles, CA - Telephone - Fax - Email [email protected] www.getty.edu/conservation The Getty Conservation Institute works internationally to advance conservation and to enhance and encourage the preservation and understanding of the visual arts in all of their dimensions—objects, collections, architecture, and sites. The Institute serves the conservation community through scientific research; education and training; field projects; and the dissemination of the results of both its work and the work of others in the field. In all its endeavors, the Institute is committed to addressing unanswered questions and to promoting the highest possible standards of conservation practice. The Institute is a program of the J. Paul Getty Trust, an international cultural and philanthropic institution devoted to the visual arts and the humanities that includes an art museum as well as programs for education, scholarship, and conservation. Contents Introduction Site Management—Traditional and Values-Based The Case Study Project About This Case Study Management Context and History of Port Arthur Historic Site Geographic Description History of Settlement and Use The Management Context Port Arthur Historic Site Facilities and Services Understanding and Protecting the Values of the Site Values Associated with Port Arthur Historic Site How Management Policies and Strategies Take Values into Consideration Impact of Management Policies and Decisions on the Site’s Values and Their Preservation Conclusions Appendix A: Time Line after the Closing of the Penal Colony Appendix B: Port Arthur Historic Site Conservation Plan References Acknowledgments Steering Committee of the Case Study Project Persons Contacted during the Development of the Case Introduction Over the past five years, the GCI has undertaken research for decisions. The approaches most often favored are on the values of heritage. Following work on the nature those called values-based. of values, on the relationship between economic and cul- Values-based site management is the coordinated and struc- 1 tural values, and on methods of assessing values, the cur- tured operation of a heritage site with the primary purpose rent effort aims to illustrate how values are identified and of protecting the significance of the place as defined by des- assessed, how they play into management policies and ignation criteria, government authorities or other owners, objectives, and what impact management decisions have experts of various stripes, and other citizens with legitimate on the values. This analysis of Port Arthur Historic Site is interests in the place. one of four analyses of heritage sites undertaken by this project. Each discussion is published as a case study. Values-based approaches start by analyzing the values and significance attributed to cultural resources. Site Management—Traditional They then consider how those values can be protected and Values-Based most effectively. This systematic analysis of values distin- guishes these management approaches from more tradi- Heritage site management can be defined simply as “the tional ones, which are more likely to focus on resolving way that those responsible [for the site] choose to use it, specific problems or issues without formal consideration 2 exploit it, or conserve it.” Authorities, however, seldom of the impact of solutions on the totality of the site or its make these choices solely on their own. As the interest in values. While there are variations in the terminology and heritage and heritage sites has grown, people have come specifics of the processes followed, values-based manage- to anticipate benefits from these resources, and authori- ment is characterized by its ability to accommodate many ties must take into consideration these expectations. heritage types, to address the range of threats to which Many cultural sites are appreciated for their cultural and heritage may be exposed, to serve the diversity of interest educational benefits; some are seen primarily as places of groups with a stake in its protection, and to suggest a recreation; and others are expected to act as economic longer-term view of management. engines for communities, regions, or nations. Sometimes There are many sources of information that the expectations of different groups can be incompatible can be tapped to establish the values of a site. Historical and can result in serious conflicts. records and previous research findings have been the most Although heritage practitioners generally agree used in the past, and they are generally consulted first. that the principal goals of cultural management are the Values-based management places great importance on the conservation of cultural resources and/or their presen- consultation of stakeholders—individuals or groups who tation to the public, in reality, cultural sites almost always have an interest in a site and who can provide valuable have multiple management objectives. The result is that information about the contemporary values attributed to often the various activities that take place at these sites— the place. Traditional stakeholders of cultural sites have such as conservation interventions, visitor management, been professionals in various disciplines—such as history, infrastructure development, and interpretation—are han- archaeology, architecture, ecology, biology, and so on— dled separately, without a unifying process that focuses all whose input is expressed through their research or expert decisions on the common goals. opinions. More recently other groups who value heritage In recent years, the field of heritage preservation sites for different reasons have been recognized as stake- has started to develop more integrated approaches to site holders too. These new stakeholders can be communities management and planning that provide clearer guidance living close to a site, groups with traditional ties or with interests in particular aspects of the site. Stakeholders with wide-ranging and sometimes conflicting interests in VALUE AND SIGNIFICANCE a place may perceive its values quite differently. However, Value and significance are terms frequently used in site most of the values articulated in a values-elicitation or management with various definitions. This holds true for consultation process are legitimate, and thus merit serious the organizations involved in this case study project; each consideration and protection as the site is used. of them uses these terms slightly differently, and they are In its strictest definition, values-based manage- often guided by wording included in legal or regulatory ment does not assume a priori the primacy of traditional documents.4 values—historic, aesthetic, or scientific—over others that In this study, value is used to mean the characteris- have gained recognition more recently, such as social ones. tics attributed to heritage objects and places by legislation, However, in the case of sites of national or regional governing authorities, and/or other stakeholders. These significance, the principal values recognized are almost characteristics are what make a site significant, and they always defined by the authorities at the time of designa- are often the reason why stakeholders and authorities are tion. In those instances, the values behind that significance interested in a specific cultural site or object. In general, ordinarily have primacy over all others that exist or might these groups (or stakeholders) expect benefits from the eventually be identified. In all sites (national and others) value they attribute to the resource. some of the ascribed values will be deemed more impor- Significance is used to mean the overall impor- tant than others as the significance of a place is clarified. tance of a site, determined through an analysis of the Once the values of a site have been identified and totality of the values attributed to it. Significance also its significance established, a critical step to assure their reflects the degree of importance a place has with respect conservation—and one of the most challenging aspects to one or several of its values or attributes, and in relation of this approach—is determining where the values reside. to other comparable sites. In its most literal sense, this step can mean mapping the values on the features of the site and answering questions The Case Study Project about which features capture the essence of a given value. Since the Getty Conservation Institute has been What about them must be guarded in order to retain that involved with values-based site management planning value? If a view is seen to be important to the value of the through research efforts, professional training courses, place, what are its essential elements? What amount of symposia, and field projects. As an extension of this change is possible before the value is compromised? A commitment, and associated with a related research and clear understanding of where the values reside allows site publication effort