Maritime Cultural Heritage & Seabed Development

JNAPC Code of Practicefor Seabed DevelopmentJoint Nautical Archaeology Policy Committee

Maritime Cultural Heritage & Seabed DevelopmentJNAPC Code of Practice for Seabed Development

“At The Crown Estate we are enthusiastic aboutour maritime heritage and sustainable new usesof our seas. So we are delighted to support thepublication of this new version of the JNAPCCode through our Marine StewardshipProgramme. It will be an essential guide for allthose who, like us, are committed to reconcilingthe past, the present and the future of themarine environment.”

Roger Bright, Chief Executive, The Crown Estate

“The generic guidance provided in this updatedversion of the JNAPC Code represents anexcellent starting point for all potentialdevelopers looking to undertake activities onthe seabed. The marine aggregate sector isaware of the potential impacts its activities mayhave on our maritime heritage and theimportance of increasing our understanding ofthis important cultural resource. BMAPA hasalready developed a specific Guidance Note formarine aggregate extraction and the marinehistoric environment in association with EnglishHeritage. We have also recently introduced aprotocol for the reporting of archaeological findson ships and wharves. We would stronglyencourage other sectors to adhere to the Codeand follow the example set by the marineaggregates industry.”

Mark Russell, British Marine Aggregate Producers Association

Purpose of the CodeThe objective of the Code is to present anoverview of procedures for consultation and co-operation between seabed developers andmarine archaeologists. It is designed to helpfacilitate a smooth and cost effective process. It describes the top-level relationships that willensure a best practice model for developmentboth within and beyond the remit of the formalEnvironmental Impact Assessment (EIA)process. Where more detailed sources ofinformation on standards and guidance forspecific operations are sought, signposts areprovided. While the general principles can beapplied throughout the UK, specificarrangements for consultation may varybetween England, Northern Ireland, Scotland,Wales, the Isle of Man and the Channel Islands.

Significance of the Maritime Cultural Heritage The sea, seabed and foreshore of northernEurope and the British Isles has been exploitedby humans for over half a million years. Landsextending across the continental shelf were

Maritime Cultural HeritageInternational

"It is important to acknowledge the importance of underwater cultural heritage as an integral part of the

cultural heritage of humanity and a particularly important element in the history of peoples, nations, and their

relations with each other concerning their common heritage" (UNESCO Convention on the Protection of the

Underwater Cultural Heritage 2001)

Europe

Cultural heritage comprises "all remains and objects and any other traces of mankind from past epochs… The

archaeological heritage shall include structures, constructions, groups of buildings, developed sites, moveable

objects, monuments of other kinds as well as their context, whether situated on land or under water"

(European Convention on the Protection of the Archaeological Heritage (Valletta Convention) 1992

National

The National Heritage Act 2002 enabled English Heritage to assume responsibility for maritime archaeology in

English coastal waters, modifying its functions to include securing the preservation of ancient monuments in,

on, or under the seabed, and promoting the public’s enjoyment of, and advancing their knowledge of ancient

monuments, in, on, or under the seabed.

The objective of the Code is to present anoverview of procedures for consultation andco-operation between seabed developersand marine archaeologists.

Maritime Cultural Heritage & Seabed Development JNAPC Code of Practice 3

witness to recurring occupation by ancientpeoples before rising waters repeatedlyinundated the landscape. Watercraft fromprehistory to the present day enabled travelacross these evolving waterways but manythousands of vessels never completed theirjourneys.

Investigation of submerged and buried landsurfaces, settlements, boats, aircraft, ships,harbours and quays can open windows to apast that would be lost if their archaeologicalremains go unrecorded. Increasedunderstanding of cultural material from boththe intertidal zone and deep water can feeddirectly into heritage and education initiativesand plays an important role within theplanning system. Once destroyed, theseimportant archaeological remains are lostforever and the nation has a responsibility topreserve these intact, or by record, forcurrent and future generations.

The Government is committed to sustainabledevelopment in which archaeology is givenappropriate assessment and consideration.Within this context there is a responsibilityupon the developer to protect the UK’scoastal and marine historic assets which mayremain as archaeological material. This Code,jointly developed by marine archaeologistsand industry, provides a framework withinwhich the protection of these assets as partof our cultural heritage, and the legitimateinterests of maritime development can bereconciled.

The Code

1 Cultural and Financial Risk Management

Due consideration for archaeological remainsmust be given at the outset of any proposedmarine development. This can be both cost-effective and good for public relations. It hasthe potential to bring cultural rewards bothnationally and internationally because of thespecial, trans-national nature of maritimeheritage. It can also have a cost benefit to thedeveloper by identifying the potential forencountering archaeological remains andassociated responsibilities at an early stage.This can reduce the risk of duplication of effort,delays and unforeseen costs.

2 LegislativeConsiderations

A responsible approach to management of thecultural heritage is required under the EuropeanConvention on the Protection of theArchaeological Heritage (Valletta Convention)1992. The Convention, which applies toEuropean States, stipulates that the protectionof the cultural heritage must form an integratedcomponent of the planning process from its

outset. On a national or regional level, theStrategic Environmental Assessment frameworkshould set the context for the plan orprogramme and identify archaeologicalmitigation requirements to be addressed by anEnvironmental Impact Assessment. Suchinformation will then provide the basis fordetermining a planning consent by a localauthority or other statutory consent by agovernment department. Other legislation mayapply if cultural heritage is to be affected by adevelopment. This will need to be reviewed ona case-by-case basis.

3 Consultation and Seeking Advice

Advice should be sought by the developer atthe earliest opportunity to assess the potentialof proposed developments to disturb thecultural heritage. This will include consultationwith local archaeological curators who workwith the Historic Environment Records (HER),have access to appropriate expertise and whoadvise the local regulatory body. In the intertidal

InternationalUNESCO Convention on the Protection of theUnderwater Cultural Heritage 2001 (not ratified byUnited Kingdom at time of publication, but theAnnex is accepted by the Government as 'bestpractice').

EuropeEuropean Convention on the Protection of theArchaeological Heritage (Valletta Convention) 1992European Environmental Impact AssessmentDirective 97/11/ECEuropean Strategic Environmental AssessmentDirective 2000/42/EC

United KingdomProtection of Wrecks Act 1973Ancient Monuments & Archaeological Areas Act 1979Merchant Shipping Act 1995Protection of Military Remains Act1986Food and Environment Protection Act 1985Dealing in Cultural Objects (Offences) Act 2003

EnglandNational Heritage Act 2002Planning Policy Guidance 16 - Archaeology andPlanningPlanning Policy Guidance 20 - Coastal PlanningTaking to the Water: English Heritage’s InitialPolicy for the Management of MaritimeArchaeology in England, English Heritage 2002

Relevant Legislation,Directives and GuidingDocuments

4 Maritime Cultural Heritage & Seabed Development JNAPC Code of Practice

The Government is committed tosustainable development in whicharchaeology is given appropriateassessment and consideration.

zone, below mean low water and beyond thejurisdiction of local planning authorities, advicewill need to be obtained from a national heritagebody, such as English Heritage, HistoricScotland, CADW or DOE Northern Ireland. Thisis a vital part of planning a cost effective andintegrated approach to assessing the effects ofthe development, while identifying ways ofavoiding and mitigating damage.

4 Scoping Studies

Scoping studies should be carried out by thedeveloper as an essential step to identify allnecessary requirements for efficient appraisal ofboth the maritime and terrestrial cultural heritagethat may be affected by seabed developmentand their associated works. Professionalarchaeological advice should be sought toensure that all legal requirements and those ofregulators are met. This will mitigate againstand/or forewarn of possible financial implicationsat a later stage. It is important that all aspects ofthe development that could affect the culturalheritage are understood by archaeologicalcurators and consultants offering advice. A list of archaeological bodies that are able to offeradvice is provided on www.jnapc.org.uk

ScotlandNational Planning Policy Guideline 5 - Archaeology and PlanningNational Planning Policy Guideline 13 - Coastal Planning

WalesPlanning Guidance (Wales): Planning PolicySection 5 - Conserving and Improving NaturalHeritage and the CoastPlanning Guidance (Wales): Planning PolicySection 6 - Conserving the Historic EnvironmentWelsh Office Guidance 60/96 'Planning and theHistoric Environment: Archaeology’

Northern IrelandPlanning Policy Statement 6 - Planning,Archaeology and the Built Heritage

Isle of ManWreck and Salvage (Ships and Aircraft) Act 1979

Guidance documentsMarine Aggregate Dredging and the HistoricEnvironment: Guidance Note, BMAPA & EnglishHeritage 2003Coastal Defence and the Historic Environment:English Heritage Guidance 2003Military Aircraft Crash Sites: ArchaeologicalGuidance, English Heritage 2002Benchmarks for Field Archaeology Projects,Association of Local Government ArchaeologicalOfficers 2005

Due consideration for archaeological remainsmust be given at the outset of any proposedmarine development. This can be both cost-effective and good for public relations.

Maritime Cultural Heritage & Seabed Development JNAPC Code of Practice 5

5 Archaeological Consultancy and Contracting Services

Organisations providing maritime archaeologicalconsultancy and contracting services must becompetent, thereby ensuring thatarchaeological work is carried out in line withestablished standards. Where archaeologicalinvestigations are conducted, thearchaeologists will be aware of the potentialpublic relations benefits to developers ofpublishing their work. Financial or other supportfrom the developer will be recognised in anypublicity.

6 Assessment of Cultural Heritage

Following a scoping study, a desk-basedassessment is the next stage a developer willneed to commission to assess archaeologicalpotential. This involves the study of availablerecords and information sources on the knownor potential cultural heritage in the area ofdevelopment. This includes early consultationwith the appropriate HER and the NationalMonuments Record (NMR), and all partieswhose activities during the development mayinform understanding of the potential forarchaeological assets. Information gatheredduring field investigations should be fed intothe desk based assessment. This will result inan evaluation of all information to assess thepotential of the cultural heritage in the area ofdevelopment. This process will inform potentialmitigation strategies and any need for furtherinvestigations.

7 Field Investigations

It is in the interests of all parties that thefinancial and other risks of unexpecteddiscoveries of archaeologicalremains/deposits/material are minimised.

Where developers are undertaking marinesurveys as part of their development, using forexample geo-physical, geo-technical or visualtechniques, it is advantageous for themethodologies and techniques employed to beapproved by a curator (or consultant) as beingappropriate for an archaeological investigation.The potential for additional survey cost that thismight entail is likely to be offset by reduction inthe risk of having to re-survey areas wherearchaeological potential, as revealed byinappropriate techniques, cannot bedetermined. It is advantageous for fieldworkand desk based assessments to be conductedand reviewed concurrently.

Important Roles in the Development ProcessDeveloper - an organisation proposing or engaged in activities directed to the construction, alterationor renewal of any works in, on or under the seabed and associated activities on dry land, and in theexcavation, removal, movement or deposit of materials, substances or articles in, on or under the seabed.

Archaeological Consultant / Contractor - provider of independent archaeological advice orprofessional archaeological services to guide the developer through, and satisfy the archaeologicalrequirements of, the development process. Curators may be able to provide a list of archaeologicalconsultants and contractors. Developers can obtain details of consultants and contractors from theInstitute of Field Archaeologists, English Heritage and local authorities.

Curator - An archaeologist or heritage professional advising a statutory or other formal consultee, whoprovides advice to regulators on archaeological matters relating to development. They provide generalguidance to developers and regulators. The UK heritage bodies provide the function of Curator.

Regulator - an organisation, usually National or Local Government Department or agency, acting toensure compliance with legislation, directives and established guidance when issuing consents inrelation to development.

It is in the interests of all parties that thefinancial and other risks of unexpecteddiscoveries of archaeologicalremains/deposits/material are minimised.

6 Maritime Cultural Heritage & Seabed Development JNAPC Code of Practice

8 Archaeological Mitigation

Where important remains are identified,physical preservation in situ, is requiredwherever possible, in line with Governmentpolicies and international conventions.Mitigation, as detailed in an agreed protocolbetween developer and curator, may involvethe introduction of avoidance zones and/oradapting the area or method of development,which may have few or no financialimplications for the developer. Appropriatemitigation may be dictated by conditionsimposed within the consents procedure,which the developer would then have to fund.Underwater fieldwork, post-excavationanalysis, reporting and conservation ofrecovered remains need to be properlyresourced and can be expensive. However,physical intervention is only required if otheroptions to avoid damage are not possible.

9 Monitoring Disturbance

The responsibility for archaeological materialthat has been impacted by development doesnot stop once construction has beenpermitted and is under way. If a development

Unexpected DiscoveriesDiscoveries of archaeological material, which can be encountered at any stage in the developmentprocess, must be reported promptly to the Receiver of Wreck (of the Maritime and Coastguard Agency)and the national curatorial body responsible to enable appropriate action to be taken. To avoiduncertainty during operations the developer will need to agree contingency plans with the Curator fordealing with unexpected discoveries of objects that have archaeological significance.

Prompt reporting is the constructive course of action and can be of widespread value and interest.However, it is not an end in itself and does not negate the requirement for other processes.

The potential costs and delays of dealing properly with important unexpected discoveries makes ithighly desirable for all concerned that any significant remains should as far as possible be identified inadvance and left securely in situ.

The British and Marine Aggregate Producers Association and English Heritage have produced aprotocol for the reporting of unexpected finds. This is aimed at the marine aggregate industry but offersvaluable guidance to all those looking to undertake seabed development; details can be found at:www.wessexarch.co.uk/projects/marine/bmapa/index.html

causes cumulative effects on archaeologicaldeposits the national curator may advise thatthe consent includes conditions that require acommitment to monitor the site or area. Ifchanges (e.g. erosion) caused by thedevelopment prove to be detrimental toarchaeological material, remedial measuresneed to be undertaken to minimise any loss.

10 Retrieved Archaeological Material

Issues of ownership and reporting can becomplex so developers may need to seekadvice prior to disturbing any artefacts on theseabed. Where archaeological material isdisturbed and recovered as a result ofdevelopment activities, agreements must beput in place for its long-term conservation andmanagement. Developers and anyarchaeological consultants have a legalresponsibility to report discoveries to theReceiver of Wreck, and must seek to depositany artefacts and records in an appropriatemuseum as a complete permanent archive forfuture study. Specialist advice on theconservation of objects is essential anddiscussions with a suitable museum serviceshould be part of the early planning of anyinvestigation. Copies of all reports andpublications must be sent to the relevant localHistoric Environment Record and NationalMonuments Record. Deposition of recordsallows public use of information relating totheir heritage and can help develop educationand public understanding, and providepractical demonstration of co-operationbetween private and public sectors.

Where important remains are identified,physical preservation in situ, is requiredwherever possible, in line with Governmentpolicies and international conventions.

Maritime Cultural Heritage & Seabed Development JNAPC Code of Practice 7

www.jnapc.org.uk

www.thecrownestate.co.uk

We are grateful to the following organisations, bodies and government departments fortheir contributions in developing the Code and the principles it sets out.

Members of the JNAPCAssociation of Local Government Archaeological Officers (ALGAO), British Sub Aqua Club (BSAC),Council for British Archaeology (CBA), Hampshire and Wight Trust for Maritime Archaeology(HWTMA), Institute of Field Archaeologists (IFA), ICOMOS (UK), Marine Conservation Society (MCS),National Maritime Museum, National Museum and Galleries of Wales, The National Trust, NauticalArchaeology Society (NAS), Professional Association of Diving Instructors (PADI), Shipwreck HeritageCentre, Society for Nautical Research (SNR), Sub-Aqua Association (SAA), Institute of Conservation,Wessex Archaeology, Sarah Dromgoole, Steve Waring, Michael Williams, Robert Yorke.

Observers at the JNAPCAdvisory Committee on Historic Wreck Sites (ACHWS), Welsh Historic Monuments (CADW), The Crown Estate, English Heritage, Environment & Heritage Service (Northern Ireland), Historic Scotland, Maritime & Coastguard Agency (Receiver of Wreck), Ministry of Defence, Royal Commission on the Ancient and Historical Monuments of Scotland (RCAHMS).

Supporting OrganisationsAssociation of British Ports (ABP), British Marine Aggregate Producers Association (BMAPA), British Ports Association (BPA), British Wind Energy Association (BWEA), Countryside Council forWales (CCW), DCMS, DEFRA, English Nature, Joint Nature Conservation Committee (JNCC),National Federation of Fishermen’s Organisations (NFFO), Royal Commission on the Ancient andHistorical Monuments of Wales (RCAHMW), Renewable Power Association, Salvage Association,Scottish Trust for Underwater Archaeology, United Kingdom Cable Protection Committee (UKCPC).

This Code is a revision of the JNAPC Code of Practice for Seabed Developers first produced in 1995and updated in 1998.

This publication has been made possible by The Crown Estate’s Marine Stewardship Programme.The fund was established in1999 to provide support to initiatives and programmes which contributeto the development of best practice, and make a significant contribution to the good managementand stewardship of the marine environment.

A copy of this code along with an up to date list of contacts for advice can be found on The Crown Estate website www.thecrownestate.co.uk and the JNAPC website www.jnapc.org.uk.

The sites also contain additional information which may prove useful to potential developers and linksto websites of key organisations.

Further copies of this code are available from the JNAPCJoint Nautical Archaeology Policy Committee, c/o Council for British Archaeology,St Mary’s House, 66 Bootham, York YO30 7BZ

Tel: 01904 671417 Fax: 01904 671384

CreditsMain cover image: Dr Colin Martin.

Other images courtesy of:

Amec

British Marine AggregateProducers Association

Elsam

Npower Renewables

The Crown Estate

The Hampshire and Wight Trustfor Maritime Archaeology

The Mary Rose Trust

Wessex Archaeology

D. Still

Trustees of The British Museum

Kester Keighley

Tamara Thomsen