CRM Policy and the Commemorative Integrity Statement

The concept of commemorative integrity and the commemorative integrity statement (CIS) are rooted in Parks Canada's Cultural Resource Management Policy . Commemorative integrity is an expression of the CRM Policy as applied to a specific national historic site.

The following questions have been derived from the CRM Policy and can be used in several ways.

• Answers to the questions in 2.1 and 2.3 can be used to describe the property and its resources, values and messages when preparing a CIS.
• Answers to the questions in 2.2 and 2.4 provide advice to managers to ensure that a state of commemorative integrity exists at the national historic site. These questions refer to actions or conditions implicit in the CIS objectives.
• Answers to the questions in 2.2 and 2.4 also contain guidance on monitoring, essential to ensuring commemorative integrity.

2.1 Describing Commemorative Integrity: The Site and its Resources

• Were all resources given initial consideration as potential cultural resources?
• Have resources been inventoried and evaluated?
• Are the cultural resources related to the reasons for designation accorded the highest value?
• Are the cultural resources valued in their context?
• Are the cultural resources whose historic value derives from their connection to different periods in history valued for that evolution and not just for their existence at a single moment in time?
• Are the cultural resources which derive their historic value from the interaction of nature and human activities valued for both their cultural and natural qualities?
• Are the associative or symbolic qualities of the cultural resources dealt with as well as the physical qualities?
• Have the natural resources of the site been treated in accordance with the CRM Policy principles?
• Does the CIS adequately address the whole (the site) as well as its parts?

2.2 Ensuring Commemorative Integrity: The Site and its Resources

• Is the historic value of the cultural resources respected in accordance with the CRM Policy principles and practice? Are cultural resources managed in accordance with the CRM Policy principles and practice?
• Do management decisions and practices adequately address the whole (the site) as well as the parts?
• Have the CRM Policy principles and practice been applied to contracts, leases, licenses, concessions or agreements that affect cultural resources?
• Are steps in place to ensure the continued survival of the cultural resources with minimum deterioration?
• Is there a program of conservation maintenance in place to mitigate wear and deterioration?
• Are records and inventories relating to cultural resources (including basic data, records of decisions and actions taken, heritage recording, & c.) up to date?
• Have modifications to the cultural resources been based on sound knowledge and respect for the historic value(s) of the resources?
• Does adequate research, recording, and investigation precede actions that affect cultural resources and their presentation?
• Have the potential consequences and cumulative impacts of proposed actions on the historic value of the cultural resources been considered?
• Has direct evidence been used instead of indirect evidence in conservation measures?
• Has the use of indirect evidence taken place in accordance with the CRM Policy principles and has the use of such evidence been clearly acknowledged?
• Have the least destructive and most reversible means been used to accomplish objectives?
• Have variances from the path of least intrusive action been justified and recorded?
• Are there uses or threats that reduce the potential for long-term conservation and future understanding and appreciation of the cultural resources? Have such uses or threats been discontinued or addressed?
• Is new work sensitive in form and scale (i.e., does not overwhelm) the site and its associated resources?
• Have research and the results of research been the basis for activities that have an impact on cultural resources and their presentation?
• Are monitoring and review systems in place to determine if conservation and presentation objectives are met effectively?
• Is the historic value/meaning of the site's cultural resources communicated?
• Is information about the cultural resources made available?
• Are the professional, technical and administrative activities, and the contributions of relevant disciplines effectively integrated into the site's management and operations? Does management place an emphasis on interdisciplinary teamwork?
• Is the site managed as a place of national historic significance to the whole nation, or it is managed primarily as an attraction?
• Do reconstructions or reproductions compromise the commemorative integrity of the site by overwhelming the reasons/resources integral to its designation of national significance?
• Have management planning activities been based on the commemorative objectives that led to the site's designation and acquisition?
• Has the historic value of the cultural resources been fully considered and integrated into the planning, conservation, presentation and operational programs?
• Have the planning activities flowed from policy objectives and adhered to policy principles?
• Do the CRM Policy principles form the basis for all public consultation?
• Do impact assessments consider and address the negative consequences of proposed actions on the historic value of cultural resources?

2.3 Describing Commemorative Integrity: Messages

• Are the messages consistent with the site's designation?
• Is the historic value of the historic site communicated?
• Is the historic value of cultural resources, which derive their importance from being part of a place or a site, communicated?
• Are statements about the past made without a basis in knowledge?
• Is respect for the historical evolution of cultural resources sacrificed for a moment-in-time interpretation?
• Is the continuum of meaning, ranging from national to local significance, communicated?
• Is the richness and diversity of the national historic sites system - including national historic sites administered by others - communicated?
• Are differing contemporary views, perspectives informed by traditional knowledge, and later interpretations presented?
• Is the past presented in a manner that accurately reflects the range and complexity of the human history commemorated or represented at the site?
• Does Parks Canada play the role of the arbiter of Canada's human history?
• Is a sense of shared responsibility for safeguarding these places of national historic significance passed on to the public?
• Does the site encourage research and study in Canadian history?

2.4 Ensuring Commemorative Integrity: Messages

• Is primary importance given to the reasons for designation?
• Are these messages overwhelmed by the communication of the site's other heritage messages?
• Does the public understand the reasons for the site's designation?
• Has direct evidence been used instead of indirect evidence in interpretation activities?
• Has the use of indirect evidence taken place in accordance with the CRM Policy principles? Has the use of such evidence been clearly acknowledged?
• Are the discrepancies in accuracy adequately acknowledged?
• Do depictions of the past without a basis in knowledge take place?
• Does presentation at the site focus on the whole as well as the parts that make up the whole?
• Do the means of presentation take into account the nature and interests of the public?
• Do the means of communication support or impede effective communication of the reasons for designation?
• Do the reconstructions or reproductions compromise the commemorative integrity of the site by overwhelming the reasons/resources integral to its designation of national significance?
• Are reproductions and reconstructions marked in such a way as not to be confused with the originals they are intended to represent?
• Is the past presented in a manner that accurately reflects the range and complexity of the human history commemorated at or represented at the site?
• Are differing contemporary views, perspectives informed by traditional knowledge, and later interpretations presented?