Parapara Hydroelectric Scheme Homepage       Archaeology Assessment Report.. page 11             contents


There are a number of steps that should be taken to mitigate for the effects of the development on the archaeological values of the area. These consist of work that would need to be done before, during and after the proposal.

Before any work is carried out, a conservation plan for the dam (and possibly the tunnel and penstocks) should be drawn up by a suitably qualified person. The conservation plan for the dam should include the steel pipes associated with the lifting gear for the overflow pipes. This should be drawn up in accordance with the principals of the ICOMOS New Zealand Charter discussed above and should address issues such as the fabric to be used in repairing the dam and the suitable treatment of the steel pipes (for example, should they be left as they are or reinstated, along with replacement lifting gear, etcetera). An authority to destroy, damage or modify an archaeological site will be required from the Historic Places Trust in order that the legislative requirements of the Historic Places Act 1993 are met (see Appendix 3 for details of this).

Before work is carried out in the Richmond Flat area, detailed recording of the tailings and associated race systems would need to take place. Although the road is unlikely to cross this area, previous DoC experience has shown that, despite the best of intentions, unexpected events often occur in the course of such developments, such as careless machine operators and last minute changes of plan. This detailed recording would take the form of mapping and photography. Similar recording should also take place if the power station infrastructure is to effect the tailings at the confluence of the Glen Gyle Creek and Parapara River. It may also be necessary for some surveying, recording and/or excavation work to be carried out before the access and/or maintenance roads are constructed, depending on the final routes selected.

During the course of the excavation of the tunnel, a suitably qualified archaeologist should visit the site and record details about the structure of the tunnel. A suitably qualified archaeologist should also visit the site when the dam is temporarily drained.

The final aspect of mitigation that could be undertaken to offset some of the costs to the archaeological resource would be allowing increased public access to the area via the access road(s) and providing interpretation signage. A new road into Richmond Flat would allow improved public access, which would give people an important opportunity to visit a relatively intact mining system with significant archaeological, historical and technological values, as outlined within this report.

Katharine Watson Archaeology July 2003     Page 11

return to top  /   previous page   /   next page