|Tongariro National Park, NZ|
Thursday afternoon I attended the “Whose Public? Who speaks for Cultural Landscapes” session at NCPH featuring Susan Gray, Elizabeth Pishief and Aurelie Gfeller. This session was a more traditional format with the presenters each reading a formal paper. The common theme in the session was the preservation of cultural landscapes and the connections that indigenous people have to traditional landscapes.
Pishief spoke about her experience in the development of land use and cultural landscape policies in New Zealand. Pishief’s presentation provided insight into the cultural practices of the Maori people and the impact of their beliefs have had on the development heritage discourses. Perhaps most signficantly, Pishief described the Maori understanding of land as being both material and spiritual and uniquely connected to a sense of place and belonging. This presentation provided food for thought regarding Canadian indigenous conceptions of land and stewardship.
Gfeller’s presentation was focused on the UNESCO world heritage designation process. Though this presentation was not focused directly on indigenous conceptions of heritage, Gfeller did explain the roots of UNESCO designation and the difficulties many indigenous communities have getting their cultural landscapes recognized. Gfeller indicated that indigenous communities are often hampered by the UNESCO application process, the need to apply through formal government channels, and the need to explain non-tangible conceptions of cultural landscapes.
This panel concluded with Gray’s description of her experience working as an expert witness during litigation surrounding the 1836 Treaty of Washington with an emphasis on the historical and contemporary definitions of settlement. I found Gray’s discussion of settlement as a European term which is closely linked to the transformation of forest into farms intriguing and appropriate considering the many land disputes that are still occurring in North America. Understanding language used in original treaty documents is crucial to land dispute resolution.
Overall, I found this panel to contain a lot of interesting ideas about indigenous and settler conceptions of cultural landscapes across international boarders. The only drawback of the panel was that the format left limited time for audience questions and interaction.