|
4. CONSERVATION
CHARTERS
4.1 INTRODUCTION
All cemeteries
are significant to the community. Most cemeteries have both natural
and cultural significance. The conservation of cemeteries is about the
retention of this significance. All management, maintenance and repair
in cemeteries should be guided by sound conservation principles so that
significance is retained.
There
are two documents recognised throughout Australia as authoritative guides
to conservation principles: the Burra Charter for conservation
of cultural significance and the Australian Natural Heritage Charter
for conservation of natural significance. These conservation charters
define heritage values that are used to identify and assess significance
of places. They also provide guidelines to good management to retain
and conserve cultural and natural significance. The two documents are
essentially consistent, but both should be consulted if there are difficult
issues, eg. if roots of a rare native tree are damaging a headstone.
4.2 THE
BURRA CHARTER
The International
Council on Monuments and Sites (ICOMOS) was founded at a meeting in
Warsaw in 1965. This international organisation comprises professional
people around the world who are involved in the conservation of historic
sites and places. In 1966 ICOMOS adopted a Charter (the Venice Charter)
for the Conservation and Restoration of Monuments and Sites.
In 1979
Australia ICOMOS set out to adapt the Venice Charter to Australian conditions.
The resulting document, the Burra Charter, was adopted in 1981 and extensively
revised in 1999. The Charter encompasses a number of ideas:
1. an
acceptance of the general philosophy of the Venice Charter;
2. the
need for a common conservation language throughout Australia;
3.
an emphasis on the need for a thorough understanding of the significance
of a place before policy decisions can be made;
4. an
approach more flexible and practical than is suggested by the Venice
Charter, and one which could cope with the realities of Australia's
heritage, and in particular permitting the stringency of conservation
processes to be varied according to the nature of significance;
5.
that technical words or jargon be avoided and that where this was
not possible, as in the types of conservation processes, definitions
be inserted;
6.
that a neutral or multidisciplinary approach be adopted which would
avoid defining the fields of architects, engineers, archaeologists,
historians etc. and use instead terms like "place" and "work".
(From:
J. S. Kerr, 1983. The Burra Charter of Australia ICOMOS in M. Bourke,
M. Lewis and B. Saini (eds) Protecting the Past for the Future. Proceedings
of the UNESCO Conference on Historic Places. Sydney 22?28 May 1983.
Australian Government Publishing Service, Canberra.).
A major
revision of the Burra Charter in 1999 reinforced certain key concepts
for conservation.
1. Significance
is not just about the physical aspects of a place, but also about its
associations, meanings, and related records.
2. Accordingly,
people for whom a place has meaning should be involved in the planning
process.
3. Conserving
cultural significance involves three steps. Understanding "cultural
significance" comes first, then development of policy, and finally management
of the place in accordance with the policy.
The Burra
Charter may be found at www.icomos.org/docs/burra_charter.html
It also
forms Appendix 1 to these Guidelines.
4.3 THE
AUSTRALIAN NATURAL HERITAGE CHARTER
In many
cases the value of a cemetery lies partly in the presence of native
plants, birds and animals. In such cases, the Australian Natural Heritage
Charter (ANHC) of 1995 (revised 2001/02) should also be consulted.
This Charter
has similar concepts and principles to the Burra Charter and defines
similar values and approaches. For instance it recognises aesthetic,
social and scientific value, as does the Burra Charter. However, the
ANHC also recognises an additional aspect to significance, namely "existence
value". This concept implies both the "life-support value" of natural
systems, and the enrichment of human experience derived from the natural
world.
Existence
value and life-support value will rarely be central aspects of heritage
significance of cemeteries, but the concepts imply a general caution
against any change to a cemetery which will remove or degrade the richness
of its natural life forms. Thus poisoning or excessive mowing of native
grasses not only discourages birds and encourages eventual weed growth,
but also makes the cemetery a less "human" place and so degrades its
cultural value also.
The Australian
Natural Heritage Charter is currently being revised, but the first
edition is widely available in hard copy, and remains valid in its principles.
|
