President's Message
September/October 2009
(as published in Arch Notes New Series 14(6))
I have always believed that people should participate in volunteer societies from which they draw significant benefit. In my particular case, being curator of Ontario archaeology at the Canadian Museum of Civilization, I always felt a duty to one day roll up my sleeves and do my bit. I spent several years on the Board of Directors of the Ottawa Chapter of the OAS and in doing so, I learned more about the inner workings of the society and some of its needs.
Four years ago when Dena Doroszenko called me up, I felt it was time for me to step up and play a positive part. My institution provided me with the funding that was essential to allow me to attend the four quarterly meetings of the board in Toronto as well as the annual symposium. Without such financial support, I could not have been able to participate and the OAS could not have afforded to defray the costs. This fact alone is a serious impediment to the active participation on the OAS Board of Directors of members from well outside of the GTA. While couches and buses could replace hotels and trains, significant resources are nonetheless required and the current OAS budget does not easily allow for this.
After three years, this is my 18th and final message as the President of the Board of Directors of the Ontario Archaeological Society. I would like to take a few lines to review some of the accomplishments that have taken place during that time as well as some of the unfinished, and in some cases, yet to be started work that I thought should have been part of what I had been able to accomplish. Think of this as listening in to my ‘OAS confession’.
A very significant amount of change has occurred over the past three years in the area of the OAS website. It was revamped, redesigned and refocused as a vehicle for extending the reach of the Board and the OAS. For the first time, the OAS is speaking to the general public in French as well as in English. For once, the very significant francophone population of Ontario is being met halfway as far as sharing Ontario’s ancient history is concerned. There is still more to do, but the direction is set.
The use of PayPal has greatly facilitated membership sign-up and renewal. A Facebook group aimed specifically at students has consistently increased the number of future archaeologists interested in news from the OAS and should provided the critical new members of tomorrow.
Our prized journal, OA, is now an online resource spreading accessible and timely information about Ontario’s past to whomever is mildly interested around the globe. A brand new Ontario Archaeology Theses Database (thanks for Jennifer Birch and Jim Keron) promises to increase awareness among the academic community of pertinent, in-depth studies that have been carried out under the cloak of academia. Never has the reach of the OAS been as great and as immediate.
Over the last three years the Board has also gone over some pretty rough and difficult patches; we changed both our Treasurer and Executive Director, more or less at the same time. These are the two most critical positions on the Board, with all due respect to my colleagues there. We now have in place two excellent individuals (our ED Lorie Harris and Treasurer Jim Keron) who are just finishing their first year in their respective positions. As such, they can now foresee events and circumstances which will require their specific attention rather than be surprised by them. They can also modify procedures to better suit their work styles and preferences. These are long-term positions (the Treasurer is a volunteer while the Executive Director is a paid part-time position) and as such the outlook forthe next several years, as far as Board functioning goes, looks excellent.
Three years ago, I had identified advocacy as a critical area for the OAS – as a way for us to be collectively relevant. I believe this year’s consultation process on the Draft Standards and Guidelines (thanks to Neal Ferris and Ron Bernard) provided us with some serious momentum in this direction.
My real satisfaction with these and many other significant board achievements is to have been part of the group that saw them through. They place the OAS on a solid and sound footing.
And what of the future? Are we ready to coast along now? Everyone would disagree with such complacency, including myself. At the same time, the new Board of Directors which will constitute itself next January must have free rein to set its own directions. Still, with a perspective acquired over the past three years as the OAS President, I would like to offer some thoughts to contemplate when setting those new goals.
First off, there is a detailed Strategic Plan which already sets out some significant and measurable milestones for the next three years. It will need updating. Among the many, many projects and activities which it envisages, I would encourage the new Board to keep its sights on a couple of possibilities. The first revolves around the early history of Ontario, in particular, the first recorded travels in what is today Ontario. In 1613, Samuel de Champlain travelled up the Ottawa River as far as the Pembroke area. While he did not achieve his goal of reaching the land of the Huron until two years later, he did at that time provide us with our first descriptions, brief as they may have been, of parts of Ontario and some of its people. Of course, two years later, in 1615, he reached Huronia and overwintered there, providing us with a rich and textured description of people, lifestyles and places. Archaeology is very well placed to provide touchstones that would allow reflection and contemplation about the significance of these 400th anniversaries for all Ontarians, including First Nations.
While the stage upon which these events unfolded are far removed from the shores of Lakes Ontario and Erie, they are no less important for the history of Ontario. Any commemoration of the 400th anniversaries of Champlain in Ontario would be competing with well-planned commemorations of the war of 1812. Still, I feel that the OAS should seriously investigate partnerships and funding opportunities, and take a lead role in planning a full range of activities surrounding the 1613-1615 travels of Champlain in Ontario. In this way, the OAS could reach out to First Nations communities, francophone communities, the archaeological community and broader historical and heritage communities, and foster a much needed exchange and appreciation of each other and our contributions to understanding the past. Such commemorations could be a very unifying opportunity.
It seems a platitude to affirm this, but heritage tourism is an important and growing component of summertime activities in Ontario. There are museums, restored buildings, reconstructed villages and streetscapes, murals, historic plaques, re-enactments, etc. Many of these have archaeological dimensions or components. In the province of Québec, for 10 years now, there has been a non-profit organization known as Archéo-Québec (http://www.archeoquebec.com/e-0101.html) which has been promoting, for mutual benefit, tourism opportunities relating to archaeology, whether it be the possibility of taking part in an archaeological excavation, or visiting an archaeological site or a museum/interpretive center. What has been critical is the ‘network’ that is created where one venue actively promotes all of the others.
Promotion is more than a pamphlet placed with so many others at a tourist stand. It involves an annual publicity blitz with well-known personalities and advertising campaigns. Thus, there is a strongly reinforced message being sent out. Visitors are shown to the next place of interest rather than being left on their own to stumble across it. The measured benefits over the past 10 years have been exponential. I believe Ontario has the heritage resources that could easily benefit from the creation of such a network. Partnerships with government ministries would be critical to establishing directions and possibilities, as would the building of relations with Archéo-Québec. By any estimate, the advantages to Ontario archaeology are obvious and the potential impact on regional tourism within Ontario can only be guessed at. But if the example from Québec is any indication, it is at the very least worth investigating in a serious fashion.
I have enjoyed the opportunity of contributing to the OAS. In doing so I have come to know many of the ardent hearts of Ontario archaeology and this will remain with me as the most valuable of memories. There have been a great many memorable discussions around the Board table, unforgettable Stimmell meals and Red Rocket breaks. I wish to thank all of my Board colleagues as well as the legion of others who, in one way or another, make the OAS the vibrant and dynamic organization that it is.
Jean-Luc Pilon