GREATER WELLINGTON COASTAL PLAN REVIEW

Transcription

1 GREATER WELLINGTON COASTAL PLAN REVIEW ARCHAEOLOGICAL SCOPING STUDY MARCH 2012 A N D Y D O D D S U B S U R F A C E L T D P O B O X 3 1 P A E K A K A R I K I

2 G R E AT E R W E L L I N G T O N C OA S TA L P L A N R E V I E W ARCHAEOLOGICAL SCOPING STUDY CONTENTS Contents... 1 Introduction... 2 Project brief and layout of this report... 2 Method of research... 2 Results... 3 Canoe landings and portages... 3 Fish traps... 3 Sources for stone tool manufacture... 4 Midden / oven sites... 4 Burials and urupa... 4 Shipwrecks... 4 Hulks and abandoned vessels... 5 Scuttled vessels... 6 Submerged aircraft... 6 Wharves and jetties... 6 Anchorages... 7 Coastal defence... 7 Isolated finds... 9 Ballast Reclamations and seawalls Shipbuilding Slipways and landings Shore stations and bay whaling Shortlisted archaeological sites for further assessment Maps Conclusion Select annotated bibliography Additional references cited Appendix Cover image: Wreck of the S S Devon at Pencarrow Head, Wellington, 1913., 25 August Alexander Turnbull Library APG /2-G 1

3 INTROD UCTION Greater Wellington Regional Council is presently undertaking a review of its Coastal Plan. The operative Regional Coastal Plan for the Wellington Region 2000 contains a brief schedule of built heritage, but does not include specific mention of archaeological values. However, since that time, the proposed Regional Policy Statement for the Wellington Region 2010 has included a policy that requires that places, sites and areas with significant historic heritage values be identified (Policy 20). These values include archaeological significance. Places, sites and areas with significant historic heritage values include built heritage, archaeological sites, and sites of significance to tangata whenua. Several published histories pertaining to Wellington Harbour provide sufficient background detail for this scoping project (Anderson 1984, McGill 1984, Johnson 1996), and an inventory of historic heritage structures is currently being prepared by Chris Cochran, Russell Murray, and Michael Kelly. This archaeological scoping report was commissioned by Laura Paynter (Senior Policy Advisor, Greater Wellington Regional Council) to consider archaeological remains associated with the region's coastal marine area and prepare a preliminary list of archaeological sites. While this report discusses both Maori and non-maori site types it does not include waahi tapu or consider the significance of sites to Maori. It is anticipated that work to inform this aspect of the plan will occur separately, and will be provided by tangata whenua. PROJECT BRIEF AND L AYOUT OF THIS REPORT The project brief requires a preliminary list to be provided which identifies potentially significant archaeological sites for further investigation, and an annotated bibliography of principal sources consulted during the project. The layout of this report is as follows: The methodology used in compiling the list of potentially significant archaeological site is briefly described. Broad categories of site types are outlined with reference to prominent examples. For ease of reference, precontact Maori and historic period sites have been considered separately when discussing archaeological site types. It is acknowledged that Maori did not discontinue their traditional activities with the arrival of Europeans, but it is nevertheless useful for the purpose of this report to separate categories into traditional Maori types and sites associated with European industry to facilitate assessment of a representative range of categories in any shortlist or schedule. A discussion of the types of site, their potential for survival, and recommendations for further investigation is included in this report. Lastly, the report includes a schedule of archaeological sites for further consideration, and these are indicated on aerial plans of the Wellington region. Each site listing includes information on site type, date, NZTM grid reference, principal bibliographic references, and where applicable cross references site numbers in the New Zealand Archaeological Association (NZAA) Site Recording Scheme or the New Zealand Historic Places Trust (NZHPT) Register. METHOD OF RESEARCH The operative Coastal Plan for the Wellington Region includes schedules comprising five areas of significant conservation values, 20 areas of important conservation values (including areas identified as significant to tangata whenua), and 22 features and buildings of historic merit (GWRC 2000). A number of the features and buildings of historic merit are also potentially significant in terms of archaeological values but this has not been specifically identified. Of the listed historic sites three sites have been recorded in the NZAA Site Recording Scheme, and two sites are included in the New Zealand Historic Places Trust Register of historic places, historic areas, waahi tapu and waahi tapu areas. 2

4 The NZAA site recording scheme (Archsite) and New Zealand Historic Places Trust Register were reviewed for recorded sites associated with the coastal marine area in the Wellington region. The records of 94 archaeological sites in close proximity to the coastal marine area in the Wellington region were assessed, resulting in an additional 14 sites identified as potentially suitable for listing. Three sites with elements in the coastal marine area have been included in the NZHPT register of Historic Places (Evans Bay Patent Slip No.2895, Te Kahu-o-terangi whaling settlement No. 7662, and the Eastbourne Ferry Terminal and Wharf No.7807). The remaining sites were identified from secondary histories and regional and thematic overviews. The most valuable sources of information have been included in the annotated bibliography. RESULTS Of the 22 historic features and buildings identified in the Coastal Plan, two are recorded archaeological sites: Evans Bay Patent Slip R27/140, and wharves between Tug wharf and Overseas Passenger Terminal (R27/253 and R27/420). Both these sites also incorporate elements which pre-date 1900, and on this basis are afforded protection under the archaeological provisions of the Historic Places Act Regardless of age some of the other listed sites also have associated archaeological values. Archaeological significance of the sites on this list have been considered separately and additional details provided in the table below. Some of the following site types are found in the coastal marine area in other parts of New Zealand but examples have not yet been identified in the Wellington region coastal marine area. The reason for including mention of these sites here is to flag potential for such sites to exist undocumented within the Wellington region. Very few instances of site types associated with Maori activities have been identified, but it is important that representative examples of such sites be assessed for inclusion in subsequent revisions of the Coastal Plan if they are discovered in future. Other sites such as ballast piles that occur commonly around New Zealand in shallow coastal waters can be reasonably anticipated to be present, but have not yet been recorded in Wellington. Sources of recorded archaeological sites and regional heritage inventories are not exhaustive, and these site types are still discussed here in general terms to identify the types of sites that might be identified in future. CANOE LANDINGS AND PORTAGES Tauranga waka or canoe landing places have been reported in literary sources, located in navigable waterways adjacent to settlement sites such as pa and kainga. Some of these will not be possible to detect archaeologically, but may be a component landscape feature in a larger site. In naturally rocky areas, tauranga waka that were frequently used are sometimes visible as an area artificially cleared of boulders. Tauranga waka may include some physical remains, but many will be locations where historic landings have been reported to have taken place. The operative Coastal Plan lists tauranga waka at Onehunga Bay, Whitireia and Tarakena Bay. Other examples of tauranga waka in the Wellington region for which tangible evidence has not been identified include those at Titahi Bay and Porirua on the west coast, and Tokomaru and Te Unuunu in the Wairarapa (Kerehi 2003:77, 80). Portages, where canoes were hauled or carried over land from one water body to another, are also likely to be limited in terms of physical remains, and are for this reason are seldom recorded as archaeological sites. Like tauranga waka they are likely to be significant in cultural heritage landscapes as areas. Tauranga waka and portages which do not include tangible remains cannot be investigated using archaeological methods so have not been included in the list of archaeological sites for further research, but are likely to be significant cultural heritage sites in their own right. FISH TRAPS Fish traps are typically recorded in tidal estuaries or sheltered sandy bays with sufficient tidal range to allow for the construction of rock enclosures in the intertidal area, which are submerged at high tide and dry or shallow at low tide. A large enough enclosure within the intertidal area with a removable gate on the seaward side will allow for fish to swim into the trap at high tide, and then as the tide recedes they will be unable to escape, facilitating their harvest at low tide. Archaeological examples of these traps have been recorded in the Canterbury and Auckland regions, and while none have been recorded in the Wellington region to date it is possible that similar traps could exist, buried in silted up area of the Porirua and Pauatahanui estuaries. 3

5 SOURCES FOR STONE TOOL MANUFACTURE Only one site record for a stone source for the manufacture of stone tools has been recorded in the coastal marine area. T28/44 was recorded in 1970 as a possible stone tool quarry source near Pahaoa. No evidence of flaking was found on site, but stone suitable for the manufacture of stone tools including a chert-like material was noted there. It is likely that other sites of this nature exist around the coastline, potentially with evidence of stone flaking, but have not been recorded. MIDDEN / OVEN SITES Numerous midden and oven sites are located along the coastal margins, and some of these have been exposed in the coastal escarpment or eroding dunes. A review of NZAA records identified 34 recorded midden or oven sites reported as actively eroding from the coastal margins within the GWRC region. Of these, 22 sites were described as being in the dunes at the back of the beach adjacent to Queen ElizabethPark north of Paekakariki (NZAA ref all R26 252, , , 317, 321, 344). A further three are located at Te Oroi (S28/161, 163, 165), with the remainder dispersed around the region in a variety of locations. Once eroded, archaeological deposits lose much of their context and on that basis their archaeological value, but the exposed section of the site can still be recorded and sampled. Whether or not a site is recorded as eroding in the NZAA site record depends on the field recorder, and many similar unrecorded sites are likely to be present in areas not yet subject to archaeological field survey. For this reason it is possible that many more archaeological sites are exposed along the Wellington region coastal marine area than a review of the files is able to provide sufficient detail on. BURIALS AND URUPA A number of burials have been recorded in the NZAA site recording scheme as exposed in areas of active erosion. When they are discovered they are typically either exhumed for reburial nearby in a more stable area or taken to an urupa. None are likely to be intact within the coastal marine area below Mean High Water (MHW), but locations have been mentioned here to signal presence and the possibility of further remains eroding in future. Erosion protection works, if carried out, might involve works within the coastal marine area such as beach replenishment or rigid structures. Burials in actively eroding areas have been reported at Ohau Bay (Q27/121), Plimmerton (R26/158), Pukerua Bay (R26/209), Whareroa (R26/ 308, 313), Karori Stream mouth (R27/189), Pararaki River mouth (S28/ 28, 70), and Castle Point (U26/ 3, 13, 18). Many more burials, including a number of urupa, are located in dunes near the high water mark and may be susceptible to erosion in future. One example of this is the urupa at Oteranga Bay (Q27/117), which also includes the grave of at least one shipwreck victim (Forbes 1997). SHIPWRECKS Shipwrecks are what most people think of when they consider underwater cultural heritage. The Historic Places Act 1993, and the Protected Objects Act 1975 both make specific mention of shipwrecks. Of the 3000 shipwrecks documented in New Zealand, approximately 1500 pre-date 1900, and on this basis fall under the protection of the Historic Places Act. The scheduling of shipwreck sites has however been biased by inadequate site inventories, and the fact that only a few regional authorities to date have opted to exercise their mandate to protect underwater as well as terrestrial sites. Excluding deliberately scuttled vessels and wrecks which were successfully salvaged, there are at least 151 documented shipwrecks in the Wellington Region, of which 114 wrecked prior to Twenty-six have reliably documented positions, although the positions of many more can be estimated on a more general level on the basis of written accounts. The NZAA site recording scheme includes records of 10 wreck sites. These include Phyllis (R26/457), Willie McLaren 1889 (R27/205), South Seas 1942 (R27/207), Opua 1926 (S28/168), Paiaka 1906 (R28/42) and Devon 1913 (R27/206). Also included are four wrecks which occurred in the same location at Owhiro Bay and have been submitted under the same number (R27/219). These are the Yung Pen (1982), Progress (1931), Cyrus (1874) and Wellington (1869). Shipwrecks for which a position has been reliably confirmed by divers but not recorded in the NZAA site recording scheme include Defender (1918), Halcione (1913), Magic (1913), Subraon (1848), Tui (1848), Wahine (1968), Deinda (1992), Grasmere (1895), Nambucca (1905) and Woollahra (1907), Emma Sims (1907), Gil Blas (1857), and Tuvalu (1967). The earliest documented wrecks in the Wellington region include Hunter (1828), Waterloo ( ), John Dunscombe (1840) and Louisa ( ). The earliest wrecks to have been reliably re-located and documented in 4

6 recent times include Tyne ( ), Subraon (1848), St Vincent ( ), Cyrus ( ),Wellington ( ), Grasmere ( ), Tui ( ), Willie McLaren ( ) and Delmira ( ). Of the remaining 50 vessels at least 16 were constructed prior to 1900, and on this basis have the potential to inform about nineteenth century ship construction. Perhaps the most significant of these on the basis of its early construction date is the Omega ( ). Other notable examples include Penguin ( ), Lily ( ), La Vedette ( ), Ben Avon ( ), Felicity ( ), Omaka ( ), Siren ( ), Addende ( ) and Vindex ( ). Recently rediscovered and reliably documented sites include Woollahra ( ), Progress ( ), Emma Sims ( ), Devon ( ) and Nambucca ( ). Of particular interest are New Zealand built vessels, as these have the potential to contribute to knowledge about the methods and materials used historically in the New Zealand shipbuilding industry. Thematic research into wrecks of Australian built vessels has provided information on unique aspects of those vessels and some of the rationale behind certain elements of construction (eg. Coroneos 1991, Jeffery 1989). Forty-nine New Zealand built vessels are known to have wrecked in the Wellington region. These include Erin ( ), Industry ( ), Black Warrior (1845), Eliza ( ), Three Brothers ), Emily ( ), Carbon ( ), Maria Josephine ( ), Henrietta ( ), Cordelia ( ), Cleopatra ( ), Isabella Jackson ( ), Supply ( ), Nile ( ), Kate Brain ( ), Waihopai ( ), Rambler ( ), Day Dawn ( ), Dido ( ), Maggie Paterson ( ), Emerald ( ), Tui ( ), Colonist ( ), Vinnie ( ), Sovereign ( ), Waitapu ( ), Felicity ( ), Magic ( ), La Vedette ( ), Progress ( ), Vindex ( ), and Mary Ellen ( ). Vessels built and wrecked in the Wellington region include Louisa ( ), Sand Fly ( ), Mary Ann Wade ( ), Maori Davis ( ), Sarah Jane ( ), Matilda ( ), Petrel ( ), Joanna (1864), Aurora Queen (1866), Liberty ( ), Days Bay (1882), Rona ( ), Windward ( ), and Siren ( ). One Wellington built vessel, Paiaka ( ) has been salvaged and relocated on shore so no longer remains in the coastal marine area. Some shipwrecks are historically significant because of the loss of life; notable examples in the Wellington region were the wrecks of the Penguin (1909) in which 71 people were killed (Collins 2000) and Wahine (1968) in which 51 people drowned (Lambert and Hartley 1969). Other wrecks such as the White Swan (1862) gained historical significance because of those on board at the time, in this case nearly a third of New Zealand s politicians including the Premier (Warman 2000). Figure 1: Opua wreck site, Tora 1926 (S28/168). Wellington Museum of City and Sea HULKS AND ABANDONED VESSELS Hulked vessels were those that had been dis-masted or had the engines removed for subsequent use as a floating storage container or warehouse. Hulks were also convenient locations for storing dangerous goods such as explosives, or shipping consumables such as coal and water for easy transfer to visiting vessels. Usually when a hulk stopped being of use at a particular location it was towed elsewhere to continue its service, or simply abandoned. 5

7 The location of Wellington s rotten row, where the dilapidated hulks were located, has largely succumbed to reclamation, and as a result archaeological remains associated with many hulks are no longer within the coastal marine area. Perhaps the best known hulk, the Inconstant, or Plimmer s Ark, was discovered beneath the old Bank of New Zealand building in Lambton Quay (O Keeffe 1999), another example is Peggotty s hulk buried beneath the reclamation at Pipitea Point (Ward 1928:309). Many vessels were hulked at Kaiwharawhara, so any remains left behind will now be beneath the reclamation for the container wharf. At the end of their useful life most hulks were either cut up for scrap or many were taken out into Cook Strait, south of Turakirae Head, where they were deliberately scuttled. This practice continues today. SCUTTLED VESSELS When ships were beyond repair or obsolete, and there was no demand for recycled timbers or metal, they were simply stripped and discarded. This might be done in a variety of ways; sometimes they were towed out to sea and holed, or burnt to the waterline. Some of these were used as target practice for the armed forces prior to sinking. The Lutterworth and Arahura were used as target practice by airforce mosquito bombers, and the Ladybird, Oreti and Occident provided shelling practice for the navy. There are 42 recorded instances where vessels have been deliberately scuttled or blown up in the Wellington region. The majority of these have been towed out into Cook Strait and scuttled in the deep hole three to four miles south of Turakirae Head (Newton 2010: ). The earliest vessels to be deliberately scuttled in Cook Strait were the Ladybird ( ) and Ottolina ( ). Typically hulks and scuttled or abandoned vessels were stripped of all removable fittings, and salvageable cargo and effects, but can still yield considerable information about the construction and life of the vessel. As with shipwrecks, deliberately scuttled vessels must be deposited prior to 1900 for protection under the Historic Places Act to apply. Twenty-six of these vessels were constructed prior to 1900, the earliest being the Woodlark ( ) and the Gazelle ( ). The majority of these vessels were constructed overseas, but New Zealand built vessels included the Oreti (built in Dunedin in 1877), and the Putiki (built in Auckland in 1904). Other deliberately scuttled vessels continued to serve a purpose as a breakwater, and example of this practice in Wellington harbour is the barge sunk alongside the WWII wharf on Matiu/Somes Island (R27/218). In other parts of New Zealand, restrictions were eventually placed on scuttling vessels because of the shipping hazard posed, and vessels were run ashore at out of the way 'graveyard' locations such as Rangitoto and Browns Island in the Hauraki Gulf, and Quail Island in Lyttelton Harbour. However in Wellington the presence of deep water and currents have allowed the practice of scuttling ships to continue to the present day. SUBMERGED AIRCRAFT Only one recorded instance of an aircraft wreck occurring in the coastal marine area was identified. This was the Catalina Flying Boat which sank in Evans Bay in 1950 (McGill 1984: 104). Aircraft are not included within the jurisdiction of the Historic Places Act as none were in existence before However, archaeological work on sunken aircraft remains is a growing field of research and has been carried out with some success on Catalina aircraft in Darwin Harbour, Australia (Jung 1996). In New Zealand in-situ aircraft wreck sites can be described as nationally rare, as only those in remote areas or underwater are left un-salvaged. WHARVES AND JETTIES Archaeological remains associated with jetties and piers can include artefact deposits on the seabed as well as structural elements of construction and repair over the duration of its use. Distribution of artefactual material is likely to be concentrated towards the seaward end of the jetty where there is deeper water for berthing, with material concentrated in decreasing density further away from the sides of the jetty. Discrete concentrations are likely to occur between the jetty and the ship, as well as further away from the jetty depending on the width and number of vessels which berthed alongside. Like slipways and landings the jetties form the interface between the land and the sea, so structural remains will be located underwater, in the intertidal zone and on land. Wharves are likely to have similar types of archaeological remains to jetties. Wharves are platforms where ships are able to unload and are typically they are provided for commercial use. Like jetties, which project out into the sea, wharves are the structural interface between the land and the sea, so remains will be located underwater, in 6

8 the intertidal zone and on land. The degree to which archaeological deposits associated with jetties and wharves are able to be investigated depends on subsequent disturbance of the seabed in recent times. Dredging and scouring of the seabed in the vicinity of jetties and wharves will impact on the preservation of these deposits, but even operational jetties and wharves have been the subject of excavations in Australia (eg McCarthy 2002; Richards and Lewczak 2002). A number of underwater surveys of jetties have been undertaken in Wellington harbour, including Mahanga Bay wharf (R27/269) and Somes Island WWII jetty (R27/330) (MAANZ 2005), but none have been subject to archaeological excavation. Archaeological assessments of the structural elements of nineteenth century wharves on the Wellington waterfront have been recently carried out for Queens wharf (R27/420), Railway and Glasgow wharves(recorded under a single site record R27/429), and the tug wharf (R27/253) (O Keeffe 2007). ANCHORAGES Anchorages are frequently marked on historic charts, and these may refer to locations where specific ships anchored on a given date, or locations where deep and calm water was available and would be used by numerous ships over a period of time. As a result they have the potential to accumulate refuse thrown or dropped overboard from the ships that visited, in much the same way as jetties and wharves. Archaeological evidence of moorings is likely to be similar to that of anchorages, but with the possible presence of mooring anchors and lines. Figure 2: Detail of British Admiralty chart dated 1856 showing location of anchorage at Kapiti Island Old plans give locations of at least 12 historic anchorages in the Wellington region. The earliest reported anchorage was that of Captain James Cook who anchored off the entrance to Wellington harbour on 2 November 1773 (Anderson 1984:30). Cook stayed in that position only a few hours so there is unlikely to be any archaeological evidence of this visit. Barnett s chart of Port Nicholson in 1826 shows the locations of seven anchorages around Wellington harbour (ATL MapColl aj/ /Acc.384). The British Admiralty charts compiled by Stokes in the 1850s also denote the locations of anchorages at Lambton Harbour, and Entry (Kapiti) Island (Figure 2). COASTAL DEFENCE Wellington s network of coastal defence sites dates from the first years of European settlement with the positioning of a gun at the Thorndon barracks. Surviving remnants including gun emplacements, observation posts, magazines and searchlight emplacements variously date from the Russian scare in the 1880s, WWI, and WWII. Most of these sites are located on land, but a number of naval defence installations are located in the coastal marine area or span the land-sea interface. From 1891 Wellington harbour was protected by a controlled minefield located between Point Gordon and Ward Island, and the 1901 observation post for this minefield survives at Fort Ballance (Cooke 2000:114). Torpedo boats were purchased for the protection of Auckland, Wellington, Lyttelton and Otago harbours and torpedo boat and submarine mining depots were established in each location. The depots in Wellington were located at Shelly Bay and Mahanga Bay (Cooke 2000: ). 7

9 In WWII a new controlled mine field was established at Worser Bay, and an anti-submarine boom was constructed between Ward Island and Robinson Bay near Eastbourne, comprising approximately four miles of pipes six feet apart, connected with rails (Cooke 2000:401, Beaglehole and Carew 2001:178). Similar WWII pile defence sites have been the subject of recent archaeological research in Western Australia and their remains have been proposed for protection (Anderson 2011). Shelly Bay was redeveloped as a naval station in 1942 and additions at this time included wharves, slipways, and moorings for flying boats (Cooke 2000:114). Another WWII military installation in the coastal marine area was the degaussing station at Matiu/Somes Island (R27/213). The 1942 degaussing station comprised a shore station connected to 12 magnetic coils mounted on the sea bed about 125 metres off shore. These were used to measure the magnetic signature of steel hulled ships which could then be reset to protect against magnetic mines. German raiders also laid minefields at harbour entrances, and Wellington was no exception, the captured Adjutant laying ten TMB ground mines 1 (Cooke 2000: ). The defensive minefield at Worser Bay was detonated in 1944, and WWII munitions were dumped in Cook Strait in the vicinity of the ships graveyard south of Turakirae Head. It is likely that this was outside the 12 nautical mile limit, so may not be relevant to the Coastal Plan. In addition to the degaussing range on Matiu/Somes Island (R27/213), WWII era remains in the Wellington region recorded in the NZAA site recording scheme include the machine gun emplacements on the beaches at Plimmerton (R26/271) and Pukerua Bay (R26/259; R26/283), concrete tank traps at Worser Bay (R27/256), and a concrete lined trench dug into the beach at Makara (R27/258). Figure 3: Anti-submarine pile obstruction between Ward Island and Robinson Bay. ATL F ½ 1 TMB (Torpedomine) mines were launched from the torpedo tube and deposited on the seabed. They were then detonated by the magnetic signature of ships passing over, as opposed to TBA mines which were attached to mooring lines. 8

10 Figure 4: Plan showing location of WWII era coastal defences in Wellington Harbour and German mines at harbour entrance. Reproduced with permission from Peter Cooke's Defending NZ Ramparts on the Sea s ISOLATED FINDS Typically these would be treated in a manner similar to terrestrial find spots. While they may lack immediately apparent archaeological context, they should be incorporated in the site recording scheme as an indicator that additional archaeological sites might be found in the vicinity, or have subsequently been destroyed. Cannons, anchors and other large metal objects are easy to re-locate with magnetometers, and are often good indicators that other wreckage is in the vicinity. The gun itself contains a large amount of information that can be recovered. Guns are often targeted as trophy items, and inscriptions and heraldic devices, locations of fixing bolts etc. can be lost through inadequate conservation (Dean et.al 1996:314-25). Anchors were frequently cast 9

11 off to stay vessels that were in danger of striking the coast, and these would become lost when cables parted under strain. Often if stranding or wreck seemed imminent, other heavy items would be cast overboard in an attempt to reduce the draught and make the vessel more buoyant. Usually the first things to go would be heavy items handy to the sides, such as anchors and cannons. Typically this only occurred with wooden vessels, but there have been recorded instances when cargo has been cast off iron hulled vessels by misguided crew. In both cases contextual information can still be recovered. For example, the direction of an anchor chain or shaft can shed light as to the wind direction when it was cut loose or lost, and spatial distribution of discarded cannons and other heavy objects can similarly provide additional information about the sequence of events in wrecks or near misses. The considerable array of types and design make both cannons and anchors items for study in their own right, and if adequately supported with other archaeological indicators, they might provide evidence for less well reported voyages. Sometimes when a ship was grounded at low water it was possible to unload cargo and re-float on the next tide. Others were able to be salvaged, in varying states of condition. If the ship is not damaged and it has not been necessary to jettison cargo, stranding events may not leave an archaeological record. However, in cases where there has been damage to the vessel or items have washed or been thrown overboard these may be re-located. A number of anchors from Wellington harbour recovered during dredging operations are presently stored underwater at the stern of the Hikitia berthed at Taranaki wharf, waiting for an opportunity to undergo conservation treatment. This collection does not constitute an archaeological site in itself, but efforts should be made to ascertain the locations from which these anchors were recovered as this may assist in identifying the vessel from which individual anchors originated, or in the discovery of new archaeological shipwreck sites. Sometimes pieces of wreck become detached from their primary deposit, and are washed up on beaches as with a substantial piece of wreckage typical of a 19th c. vessel washed up near Hokitika. Finds such as this have resulted in questioning of the law relating to shipwreck sites and the legality of its recovery (Ingram 2007: ). In order to be protected wreckage must be deposited prior to Underwater sites tend to stabilise in a largely uniform manner, but their equilibrium can be disturbed by storms, scouring, erosion, salvage, and other activities which disturb the seabed (Ward et al 1998; Ward et al 1999). Once a piece of wreck has been removed from its original context it is no longer part of an archaeological site, and can be treated as a find. For reasons stated above, finds should still be reported, but the archaeological provisions of the Historic Places Act may no longer apply. BALLAST Ballast was carried in lieu of cargo to make a vessel more stable, by centering the load in the lower hold of the ship. In the absence of cast weight, rock was often used and simply jettisoned when new cargo was brought on board. Typically ballast mounds are discrete dumps of foreign rock, and may be associated with anchorages and moorings. Petrographic analysis of the rock may provide information as to where the ballast was taken onboard, and the quantity of rock might give an indication of vessel size. Also ballast mounds often contain additional refuse from the vessel. These are potentially common sites but none have been identified in the Wellington region, with the possible exception of the site at Worser Bay reported to be the Willie McLaren wreck site. RECLAMATIONS AND SEAWALLS Most of Wellington s early reclamations have been buried beneath later additions, so no longer have a direct association with the coastal marine area (Baillie 1924). Those which remain at the waterfront are typically later, with a few notable exceptions. Part of the 1889 seawall was recently exposed and reconstructed in Frank Kitts lagoon (R27/333). A number of early seawalls exist around Wellington harbour and have been identified for their heritage values in the operative Coastal Plan including those at Evans Bay ( s), Island Bay, and Point Jerningham (1927). Seawalls and retaining walls are of interest archaeologically because of details in their construction, but also the contents of the fill behind the seawall, the construction of which often results in the burial of old foreshore structures and artefactual material. 10

12 Figure 5: SO23656 (1956) showing date and location of Wellington waterfront reclamations. 11

13 SHIPBUILDING Most of Wellington s early shipbuilding sites will have been buried beneath reclamations, or in the case of those at the northern end of Wellington harbour were located on rivers and streams. Remains of shipbuilding sites within the coastal marine area are likely to be slipways or moorings. Areas that have not been subject to reclamations are more likely to retain elements of shipbuilding sites in the coastal marine area. Numerous shipbuilders were based in Wellington since the early 1840s. Early examples include Wright who built the schooner Royal George in 1840, Meech and Oxenham at the Hutt River mouth in 1841, Hay and McHattie who built the schooner Louisa in 1841 and John Wade who built the schooner Mary Ann Wade in 1842, both in Wellington. Shipbuilding sites that are more likely to yield physical remains in the coastal marine area are Cross and Wilcox at Ngauranga who built the Port Nick (McGill 1984:116). Remains of various operations at Clyde Quay during the 1890s, including those by Brigins & Hogg, David Christie and Paul Roberts, are likely to have been removed or buried but Ted Bailey continued to work there post-reclamation from 1909 (McGill 1984:118). In Balaena Bay, boat builders included J Gringins in the 1910s and J Jukes in the 1920s (Johnson 1996:75-77) SLIPWAYS AND LANDINGS Slipways and landings facilitate the launching and removal of vessels from the water and are often associated with shipbuilding and repair facilities. Like jetties and wharves, slipways are the structural interface between the land and the sea, so remains will be located underwater, in the intertidal zone and on land. One of the earliest slipways documented in the Wellington region was that of Captain Matheson who constructed a slipway in 1842 at Ngauranga to repair his vessel Clydeside (Johnson 1996:51). As with many wharves and jetties the earliest slipways at Wellington are likely to have been buried beneath reclamation, but historically prominent slipways include the 1873 Evans Bay Patent Slip (R27/140, NZHPT Register No.2895). Slipways associated with early twentieth century boat building may survive at Balaena Bay or Clyde Quay. Other structures associated with landing vessels and goods include the Matiu/Somes Lighthouse slipway (R27/301). SHORE STATIONS AND BAY WHALING A number of shore whaling stations in the Wellington region have been recorded on the basis of land based archaeological remains (Prickett 2002:83-99). These were typically isolated settlements where whalers set up on shore and fished for whales from small boats and processed their catch back on land. Whaling in the Kapiti area dates from the late 1830s to the late 1840s. Shore whaling continued in other parts of the country into the midtwentieth century, but the Kapiti stations were largely abandoned due to the decline in right whale numbers. Whaling was also undertaken from ships either in the open sea, or while at anchor, a practice known as Bay whaling. Kapiti Island was a well known location for Bay whaling and archaeological remains associated with this activity are likely to be accumulated deposits on or under the seabed, similar to those of other early anchorages. Within the Wellington region, Kapiti is the most significant area for shore whaling. Recorded shore whaling stations might include slipways and landings and other metal debris in the coastal marine area. When describing the Waiorua whaling station on Kapiti Island (R26/4) Prickett notes Along the foreshore are old iron, stone revetting, boat slipways and other remains, some of which may date from the whaling era, but 150 years of subsequent activity has rendered it difficult to interpret (Prickett 2002:96). Other significant shore whaling stations in this area which may have remains in the coastal marine area include Korohiwa (R27/147), Te Kahuoterangi (R26/6, NZHPT Register No. 7662), Long Point, Tokomapua (R26/236), Motungarara (R26/27), Tohoramamea (R26/28-29, 185), and Mana Island. There are also a small number of shipwrecks in the Wellington region associated with whaling, and like the shore based sites these date from the 1830s and 1840s, but none have been successfully re-located in recent times. Shipwrecks associated with whaling have been the subject of thematic research and have potential to considerably enhance knowledge about a poorly documented historic activity (eg. Anderson 1998, Smith 1999). Vessels associated with whaling wrecked in the Wellington region include Waterloo ( ), David ( ) and Elbe (1841). Also potentially of interest was the Sarah Jane ( ) which was en route to supply a shore based station in the South Island when wrecked. 12

14 SHORTLIST ED ARCHAEOL OGICAL SIT ES FOR FURTHER ASSESSMENT Consideration of archaeological sites to be incorporated in the heritage schedule appended to the Coastal Plan will be largely determined by significance. The criteria used for assessing archaeological significance is based on established guidelines (Walton 1999, NZHPT 2006). These include condition, representativeness, period and archaeological significance, and have been expanded upon below. Archaeological remains in the coastal marine area may include intertidal structures partially visible above water, but for many the only surviving remains will be located on or below the seabed. While the removal or destruction of many structures has been documented there may still be elements that survive where structures were attached to the seabed, or where piles have been cut off above the seabed. In some instances it will not be possible to fully determine the extent to which archaeological remains survive beneath the seabed without intrusive investigation. Archaeological excavation underwater is likely to be beyond the scope of this plan review, but if undertaken in future may still result in the recovery of significant historical information and associated artefactual material. Wharf and shipwreck sites are often good repositories of artefacts. Because of their association with a specific event, artefacts from shipwrecks are from a known date which can be important for determining date ranges for similar artefacts elsewhere. If well preserved they also act as a time-capsule of items from shipboard life or cargo. In contrast, artefacts recovered from jetties and wharves are similar in context to other historic middens on land which may include accumulated items dropped overboard from the duration of the jetty. Survival of archaeological deposits will also need to account for the overall integrity of the immediate area and to what extent it has been modified. Where further assessment has identified that archaeological remains are likely to be present, site records should also be filed with the NZAA site recording scheme. Archaeological sites located immediately adjacent to the coastal marine area have not been included in this study unless the remains are likely to extend intact into the sea, or where elements of the site were located in the coastal marine area. Some of these sites may be subject to erosion and as a result archaeological material may be deposited on the beach or into the sea, but once eroded this material loses most of its archaeological context. Sites that can be clearly defined in terms of location, extent and condition can be afforded protection through inclusion in a heritage schedule with corresponding rules in the plan. Where structures are still in use and actively maintained it may be useful to consider separate schedules for protection (limited intervention) and preservation (active intervention). It is desirable that any heritage list includes the most significant sites in the project area, but also that it encompasses a representative range of site types and themes. The shortlist of 51 sites proposed for further assessment have been selected on the following criteria: Survival/Condition: Sites have been selected on the basis of those which are most likely to have survived in-situ within the coastal marine area, and preference has been given to sites where physical remains have been reported in recent times. The coastline within the Greater Wellington Region is dynamic and where changes have occurred as a result of accretion or reclamation archaeological deposits might still exist, but fall outside of the scope of the boundaries defined by the Coastal Plan, so cannot be included. Representativeness: Where possible representative examples of different site types have been selected with examples from around the region. However the majority of archaeological remains that are likely to survive in the Wellington region coastal marine area are in the vicinity of Wellington harbour where most of the maritime activity has been concentrated. Because Maori archaeological remains in the coastal marine area are comparatively rarer, and often tend to be ephemeral in nature, these should be given precedence where physical remains have been confirmed or are likely to exist. Few examples were identified during the course of this research, but there are a number of geological formations or intangible sites identified as significant to tangata whenua in the operative plan. Protection of these sites through listing as important conservation areas will assist in addressing the imbalance of identified archaeological sites associated with Maori activity in the coastal marine area. Period: Preference has been given to earlier sites. Where multiple structures were constructed at the same location later structures can also be included. Areas such as Barretts Reef off Owhiro Bay that were the location 13

15 of multiple wrecks can be considered under a single listing, particularly if they are recorded as a single archaeological site, or if it is difficult to distinguish between remains of the various vessels. Archaeological significance: Sites which are likely to have high information potential, or historic significance to a particular area, have been given priority. Archaeological sites with high information potential are likely to be sites which have potential for recovery of artefactual material from a well preserved context, or structural remains where limited historical documentation exists. Where historical data is available, information from archaeological remains can be complementary particularly if it shows inconsistencies or provides additional context. The shortlisted sites are set out in the table and accompanying maps below: No Grid ref (NZTM) Type Location NZAA Date References Te Kahu-o-te-Rangi whaling Station Kapiti Island R26/ Prickett 1983; Prickett 2002:91-93; Carkeek 1967:218; Cowan 1907: Anchorage Kapiti Island Johnson 1990: Anchorage Kau Bay Johnson 1999:6, Anderson 1984: Beacon Falcon Shoal 1915 Anderson 1984: Beacon Karori Rock 1915 Beaglehole 2006: Beacon Hope Shoal 1915 Anderson 1984: Telegraph Cable Lyall Bay Colonist : Degaussing Range Matiu/Somes 1942 Cooke 2000: Island Pile Defences Ward Island 1942 Anderson 1984:142,147; Hitchens and Beale 2002:13; Beaglehole and Carew 2001: Homeguard Trench Makara R27/ Cooke 2000: Pillbox Pukerua Bay R26/ Cooke 2000: Patent Slip Evans Bay R27/ Johnson 1990:8; Johnson 1996:103-5; Anderson 1984:182-3; Berthold 1999:5-10; Greig 2004; McGill 1984: Rees George 1873: Scuttling ground Turakirae Newton 2010:139 Head Shipbuilding Balaena Bay Johnson 1990:75-7; Anderson 1984: Shipbuilding Clyde Quay McGill 1984: Shipwreck Tyne Sinclair Head Shipwreck Subraon Wellington Harbour Ingram 2007:40; Johnson 1996:60; Locker-Lampson and Francis 1994:110; Rippon 1985:68-69; McGill 1984: Ingram 2007:47-8; Locker-Lampson and Francis 1994:98; Johnson 1996:63; Anderson 1984:18; Ward 1928:145-46; 14

16 Shipwreck St Vincent Mokomoko Rocks Shipwrecks Cyrus; Wellington; Progress; Yung Pen Shipwreck Hannah Broomfield Shipwreck Tui Wellington Harbour Owhiro Bay R27/ ; ; Bluff Point Hitchens and Beale 2002:21; MAANZ nd Ingram 2007:160; Rippon 1985:70-71; Locker-Lampson and Francis 1994:97-98; Diggle 2009:108 Ingram 2007:185-86; Locker-Lampson and Francis 1994:29-30; Rippon 1985:69; Diggle 2009:59; Taylor 2007:38; MAANZ nd; McLaren-Smith 1991 Ingram 2007:223; Locker-Lampson and Francis 1994:47; Bell 1899:22; Taylor 2007:70 Ingram 2007:257-8; De Jardine 1984:89-91; Rippon 1985:69-70; Locker-Lampson and Francis 1994:109; Diggle 2009:120; Taylor 2007:166; Hitchens and Beale 2002:21; MAANZ nd; Bell 1899: Shipwreck Waitaki Black Rocks Ingram 2007:259-60; Rippon 1985:70-71; Locker-Lampson and Francis 1994:115; Farquhar 2001:14-15; Diggle 2009:121; Bell 1899:30; Taylor 2007: Shipwreck Willie McLaren Seatoun R27/205 Ingram 2007:270; Locker-Lampson and Francis 1994: ; Diggle 2009:122; Taylor 2007:179; MAANZ nd, Bell 1899: Shipwreck Grasmere Terawhiti Shipwreck Delmira Cape Palliser Ingram 2007:291; Locker-Lampson and Francis 1994:46; Rippon 1985:68; Diggle 2009:72; Bell 1899:34; Ryburn 1999:231; Forrest 1984:29; Taylor 2007:68; MAANZ nd Ingram 2007:293-94; Rippon 1985:70-71; Diggle 2009:59;

17 Shipwreck Ben Avon Palliser Bay Shipwreck Nambucca Terawhiti Shipwreck Woollahra Terawhiti Shipwreck Devon Pencarrow R27/ Shipwreck Magic Wellington Harbour Shipwreck South Sea Point Halswell R27/ Shipwreck Opua Tora Bell 1899:34; Taylor 2007:42 Ingram 2007:317-18; Locker-Lampson and Francis 1994:22-23; Rippon 1985:70-71; Leahy 1970:152 Ingram 2007:320-23; Locker-Lampson and Francis 1994:70-71; Rippon 1985:68-69; Taylor 2007:120; MAANZ nd Ingram 2007:337; Locker-Lampson and Francis 1994:120-21; Rippon 1985:68; Taylor 2007:180; MAANZ nd Ingram 2007:356-57; Johnson 1990:60; Laxon 1988:46-47; Rippon 1985:69-70; Locker-Lampson and Francis 1994:31-32; Hitchens and Beale 2002:21-23; MAANZ nd Ingram 2007:379; Rippon 1985:69-70; Locker-Lampson and Francis 1994:63; Hawkins 1960:180; Hitchens and Beale 2002:16; MAANZ nd Ingram 2007:423; Locker-Lampson and Francis 1994:93-94; McDougall 1983:67-76; Taylor 2007:153; Marine News 34(2):47-9; MAANZ nd Ingram 2007:391; Allan 1954:113; Kirk 1967:175; Win 2009: ; Locker-Lampson and Francis 1994:75-76; Taylor 2007:127; NZ Marine News 15(3):15; McLean 2007: Naval facilities Shelly Bay Cooke 2000: ; MAANZ 1997: Tank trap Worser Bay R27/256 Cooke 2000: Waiorua whaling station Tahoramaurea whaling station R26/4 Prickett 2002:95-6 R26/28, R26/29, R26/185 Prickett 2002: Tokomapuna R26/236 Johnson 1996:40;

18 whaling station Prickett 2002: Korohiwa whaling station R26/147 Prickett 2002: Mahanga Bay Wharf Mahanga Bay R27/ Johnson 1990:88-9; MAANZ 2005; McGill 1984: Days Bay Wharf Days Bay 1895 Johnson 1990:62-4; Anderson 1984:109; Hitchens and Beale 2002:10-11; McGill 1984: Rona Bay Wharf Rona Bay 1905 Johnson 1990:61; Anderson 1984:109; Hitchens and Beale 2002: Gravel loading jetty Hinds Point Hitchens and Beale 2002:15; Beaglehole and Carew 2001: Karaka Bay Wharf Karaka Bay 1901 Johnson 1990:90-1; Anderson 1984: Miramar Wharf Evans Bay 1901 Johnson 1990:86; Anderson 1984: Castlepoint Wharf Castlepoint 1883 Ross 1977: Queens Wharf Wellington waterfront Waterloo Wharf Wellington waterfront Petone Wharf Petone 1883, 1907 R27/ Johnson 1990:8,16-17,24,29-31; Johnson 1996:81-4,115-6; Ward 1928:293-94,422; Anderson 1984:86,108,124; McGill 1984:59-63, Johnson 1990:26,44; Anderson 1984:109,125; Pryce 2002:40; Johnson 1990:67-8; 1996:166-67,221-22,227; Anderson 1984:109; Hitchens and Beale 2002:4; Butterworth 1988:108,135-6, Seatoun Wharf Seatoun 1901 Anderson 1984: Lowry Bay Wharf Lowry Bay Beaglehole and Carew 2001: Landing/whaling Mana Island 1849 Prickett 2002:86-87; Maysmor 2009:44,50,56 17

19 MAPS 18

20 19

21 20

22 21

23 22

24 CONCLUSION This study has identified 221 vessels known to have been wrecked or scuttled in the Wellington coastal marine area and 189 sites with potential for structural remains. 51 potential archaeological sites within the coastal marine area in Wellington region have been recommended for further detailed assessment.

25 SEL ECT ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY Anderson, G Fresh about Cook Strait: An appreciation of Wellington Harbour. Methuen Publications, Auckland This book is a less detailed secondary history than that of Johnson (1996) but like McGill (1984) has been ordered thematically which is useful when considering sites in their wider geographical and temporal context, but also for identifying the range of sites pertaining to specific types. Both McGill (1984) and Anderson (1984) are well illustrated with maps and plans which assists in identifying locations for individual sites. Beaglehole, A. and A Carew Eastbourne: a history of the eastern bays of Wellington Harbour. Historical Society of Eastbourne Inc. Wellington This book contains detailed information about the history of the Eastern bays of Wellington from the Hutt River mouth to Pencarrow. It provides details on the structures and foreshore activities in these bays which is often only mentioned briefly or omitted from other histories of Wellington Harbour. The book is comprehensive with detailed endnotes and index, and well illustrated with historic photographs and plans. Beaglehole, H Lighting the Coast: A History of New Zealand's Coastal Lighthouse System. Canterbury University Press, Christchurch This is the primary reference on New Zealand lighthouses. The publication contains details on the various lighthouse settlements including those at Baring Head, Pencarrow, Castlepoint and Mana, so is useful in assessing if foreshore remains are likely to have been present. The scope of this book is limited to lighthouses rather than other navigation aids such as beacons and buoys, which are better obtained from general harbour histories such as Johnson Cooke, P Defending New Zealand. Ramparts on the Sea s. Defence of New Zealand Study Group, Wellington This is the primary reference for coastal defence sites in New Zealand. It is published in three volumes and provides detailed information on New Zealand s coastal defences from the 1840s, 1880s, WWI and WWII. The third volume comprises an extensive image collection associated with the sites described in the first two. A number of defence sites in Wellington for which physical evidence is still visible detailed in this publication have been documented in the NZAA site recording scheme, but for the majority no features are visible so have not been recorded. The book includes detailed information on the WWII anti-submarine defences of Wellington, and degaussing range, the remains of which largely survive underwater, as well as coastal machine gun emplacements and home guard trenches and anti-tank defenses located on the region s beaches. Hitchens, F. and P. Beale. Petone to Pencarrow: A shoreline with a history. Aviator Books, Wellington This is good as a quick reference for sites located along the eastern side of Wellington harbour. Limited in detail and primary references, it serves best as a basic overview which can provide a starting point for further research. 24

26 ICOMOS International Charter on the Protection and Management of Underwater Cultural Heritage. ICOMOS, Sofia This charter was adopted by the International Council on Monuments and Sites (ICOMOS) and details an international best practice approach for the protection of underwater cultural heritage. The charter was ratified by the 11th ICOMOS General Assembly in Sofia, Bulgaria, in October 1996, and succinctly covers the key aspects of underwater heritage protection including in-situ preservation, appropriate research and investigation, conservation, reporting, community involvement and interpretation. The charter was subsequently adopted by the 2001 UNESCO Convention on the Protection of Underwater Cultural Heritage, and has been included as an appendix to this report. Ingram, C.W.N New Zealand Shipwrecks: Over 200 years of disaster at sea (7 th Edition revised and updated by Diggle, L., Diggle, E. and K. Gordon). Hachette Livre, Auckland This is the primary reference for shipwrecks in New Zealand. First published in 1936, the book is now in its eighth revision. Arranged chronologically from 1795 until present day, each entry includes the details of the circumstances around the wreck and usually information about the ship itself such as rig, tonnage, dimensions, official number, date of construction, etc. The book does not cite sources for its information which is often frustrating as it does contain numerous errors. The text was first adapted verbatim from a newspaper special publication in 1899 called Toll of the Sea which chronicled wrecks of the nineteenth century. Wrecks from 1899 to 1936 were added to create the first edition. Since the publication of the eighth edition a companion has been published which corrects a number of errors, and adds a number of previously unreported wrecks (Diggle 2009). Johnson, D Wellington Harbour. Wellington Maritime Museum Trust, Wellington This is the principal secondary history reference for Wellington Harbour. It provides comprehensive details on history in a more or less chronological order from the first visits by Europeans to the present day. The history of the harbour is closely linked with the development of the port and its politics, and by necessity its scope does not always extend to include specific details of individual structures or vessels. Johnson, D Wellington by the sea. David Bateman Ltd, Auckland This publication includes a large number of plans and historical photographs pertaining to the Wellington waterfront. The text is considerably briefer than Johnson 1996, so many of the specific details have been omitted to allow for more illustrations. Locker-Lampson, S. and I. Francis, The Wreck Book: Rediscovered New Zealand Shipwrecks. Halycon Press, Auckland This is the principal reference for New Zealand shipwrecks that have been re-located in recent times. This book is the second revised edition of an earlier publication. Locker-Lampson and Francis detail 23 shipwrecks in the Wellington region, and include notes on their condition at the date of publication. The book is arranged alphabetically by the name of the ship, and includes a brief outline of events surrounding the wreck and summaries of the vessels attributes. Generally this is a fairly reliable source of information, and where the author is uncertain as to the claims of divers to have relocated a vessel it has been omitted. This book typically contains written descriptions of location rather than grid co-ordinates or detailed maps, so it is useful to use this in conjunction with another source such as Rippon or MAANZ n.d. 25

27 McGill, D The Pioneers of Port Nicholson. A.H. & A.W. Reed, Wellington This book is a less detailed secondary history than that of Johnson (1996) but like Anderson (1984) has been ordered thematically which is useful when considering sites in their wider geographical and temporal context, but also for identifying the range of sites pertaining to specific types. Both McGill (1984) and Anderson (1984) are well illustrated with maps and plans which assists in identifying locations for individual sites. MAANZ. n.d. Wrecks in the Wellington Area This is a brief list of diveable shipwrecks in the Wellington region compiled from a variety of sources including divers notes. The document is intended as a handout for divers interested in shipwrecks so is relatively brief and contains only a few sentences on each site. Newton, D They were scuttled in Cook Strait. Marine News 57(3): This is a brief but well researched and useful account of the various vessels purposefully sunk in the scuttling ground south of Turakirae Head in Cook Strait from 1909 to recent day. These wrecks are omitted from the scope of Ingram s New Zealand Shipwrecks which deals only with wrecked vessels, so this paper is complementary in that regard. Prickett, N The Archaeology of New Zealand Shore Whaling. Department of Conservation, Wellington This is one of a number of thematic publications on New Zealand heritage published by the Department of Conservation s former Science and Research Unit. It comprises a thematic study of New Zealand s shore whaling sites including a number from Kapiti Island and the coastal mainland in that vicinity. Prickett has visited most of the sites described in his research, includes map references, and details the current state of each site as pertaining to the features visible on land as at The book is not intended to cover underwater remains, and is also purposely limited in scope to exclude the activities of ship based whaling crews Rippon, P The New Zealand Divers Handbook. Reed Methuen, Auckland This is, as the title suggests, a handbook for New Zealand divers and covers a range of topics including marine ecology and health & safety. It contains locations of a number of wreck sites around New Zealand, marked on marine maps for ease of reference, and typically contains a sentence or two about each. It contains details on 14 wrecks around the Wellington region and is complementary to Locker-Lampson and Francis which does not provide specific coordinates or map references. Ward, L Early Wellington. Whitcombe and Tombs Ltd, Wellington This book contains details of the early waterfront industry of Wellington including lists of vessels to enter the port, and information on shipbuilders. Much of the activity described in this volume occurred in areas now reclaimed so any extant archaeological remains will have lost their direct association with the coastal marine area. 26

28 Watt, M Index to the New Zealand Section of all British Register of Ships New Zealand Ship and Marine Society, Wellington This is available on microfiche at the Alexander Turnbull Library, and is an account of all New Zealand ships over 100 tons in the Lloyds register of shipping from The Watts Index was published by the NZ Ship & Marine Society and contains records of 2884 vessels registered in New Zealand between 1840 and It also includes lists of shipbuilders, ship owners and masters. Like other compilations of shipping information the index contains errors so it is useful to verify the information with other sources. It contains useful background into many of the vessels wrecked in Wellington that may have been omitted from Ingram and is at times a useful tool for verification. UNESCO, Convention on the Protection of Underwater Cultural Heritage. The 2001 UNESCO convention builds on the principles of the 1996 ICOMOS Sofia charter, and establishes international best practice for legal frameworks around the protection of underwater cultural heritage. It was adopted by the 2001 General Conference of UNESCO, and came into force following its adoption by 20 countries in January 2009, and at present 42 countries have ratified the convention. New Zealand is as yet not a signatory to the convention as to do so would require changes to the Historic Places Act 1993, including the adoption of a 75 year rolling date for the protection of underwater cultural heritage rather than a static pre-1900 date. While the New Zealand government has signaled that this is not a priority at this stage, the Australian government is presently considering adopting legislation which could facilitate the adoption of the convention, and adoption of an approach consistent with the convention is recommended. A copy of the charter has been appended to this assessment. 27

29 ADDITIONAL REFE RENCES CITED Anderson, R. 1998, Whaling and sealing shipwreck sites in Victoria. In Lawrence, S. and M. Staniforth (eds) The archaeology of whaling in Southern Australia and New Zealand. The Australasian Society for Historical Archaeology and the Australian Institute for Maritime Archaeology. Special Publication 10:32-35 Anderson, R Fear of the deep: Cockburn Sound s World War II anti-submarine boom defence. Bulletin of the Australasian Institute for Maritime Archaeology 35:39-49 Baillie, H The Early Reclamations and Harbour Works of Wellington. Transactions of the Royal Society of New Zealand Beaglehole, A. and A. Carew Eastbourne: a history of the eastern bays of Wellington harbour. The Historical Society of Eastbourne Inc. Eastbourne. Berthold, M The Wellington Patent Slip. Marine News 48(1):5-10 Butterworth, S Petone. A History. Petone Borough Council, Petone Collins, B.E The Wreck of the Penguin. Steele Roberts Ltd, Wellington Coroneos, C One interpretation for the short working lives of early Australian wooden sailing vessels in Victorian Waters. Bulletin of the Australasian Institute for Maritime Archaeology 15(2):7-14 Cowan,J Kapiti Island. Appendices to the Journal of the House of Representatives 1907 C-08a:1-4 Forbes, S Oteranga Bay Wellington. Archaeological Assessment. Unpublished client report Greig, K Archaeological Report: Patent Slip, Evans Bay, Wellington. Unpublished client report GWRC Regional Coastal Plan for the Wellington Region. Greater Wellington Regional Council, May 2000 Jeffery, W.F Research into Australian built coastal vessels wrecked in South Australia Bulletin of the Australasian Institute for Maritime Archaeology 13(2):51-56 Jung, S Archaeological investigations of the Catalina wreck sites in East Arm, Darwin Harbour. The Bulletin of the Australian Institute for Maritime Archaeology 20(2):23-38 Kerehi, J Wairarapa Coastal Strategy Technical Report Heritage. Greater Wellington Regional Council, Wellington Lambert, M. and J. Hartley The Wahine Disaster. A.H. & A.W. Reed, Wellington Maysmor, B Mana Island: Te Mana o Kupe ki Aotearoa. Pataka Museum, Porirua MAANZ Mahunga Bay wharf: Archaeological survey. Maritime Archaeological Association, Wellington 28

30 McCarthy, M 'The archaeology of the jetty: an examination of jetty excavations and 'port related structures' in Western Australia since 1984.' Bulletin of the Australasian Institute for Maritime Archaeology 26:7-18 McDougall, B Shipbreaking and Pacific Scrap Ltd. Marine News 30(3):91-99 McDougall, R The Unfinished Voyage of HMNZS South Sea. Marine News 33(3):67-76 McLean, G Full Astern! An Illustrated history of New Zealand shipwrecks. Grantham House, Wellington NZHPT, Archaeological Guidelines Series No.2: Guidelines for Writing Archaeological Assessments. New Zealand Historic Places Trust, Wellington. O Keeffe, M The shipwreck under the city: The Inconstant, Wellington, New Zealand. Bulletin of the Australasian Institute for Maritime Archaeology 23: O Keeffe, M Maritime Archaeological Survey: South end of Matiu Somes Island. Unpublished report to Department of Conservation O Keeffe, M Ferry Wharf, Wellington. Archaeological monitoring of repair work. Unpublished report to NZ Historic Places Trust Prickett, N.,1983. An archaeological reconnaissance of the shore whaling industry on Kapiti Island, New Zealand. Records of the Auckland Institute and Museum 20:41-63 Rees George, J Description of the patent slip at Evans Bay, Wellington, and the mode of erecting or constructing the same. Transactions and Proceedings of the Royal Society of New Zealand 6:14-25 Richards, N.; Lewczak, C 'Back to the Bay: An overview of the Holdfast Bay Project and the reinvigoration of avocational maritime archaeology in South Australia.' Bulletin of the Australasian Institute for Maritime Archaeology 26:19-26 Smith, T. and C. Weir Where are the whalers?: Whaling wreck site potential of New South Wales. Bulletin of the Australasian Institute for Maritime Archaeology 23:40-45 Warman, M The White Swan Incident: the shipwreck that could have sunk a government. Wairarapa Archive, Masterton Ward, I., Larcombe, P.and P. Veth Towards new process orientated models for describing wreck disintegration an example using the Pandora wreck. Bulletin of the Australasian Institute for Maritime Archaeology 22: Ward, I., Larcombe, P.and P. Veth A New Process-based Model for Wreck site Formation. Journal of Archaeological Science 26:

31 APP ENDIX 30

32 31

33 32

34 33

35 34

36 35

37 36

38 37

39 38

40 39

41 40

42 41

43 42

44 43