@Conference Paper {10723,
	title = {Managing Minimum: The Development and Use of Technical Guidelines for Archaeological Consulting Activities in Ontario},
	year = {1993},
	address = {Montreal},
	abstract = {The developrnent of the archaeological consultant industry in Ontario began in earnest by the late 1970{\textquoteright}s. Revisions to the provincial Environmental Assessment and Planning Acts further fuelled the growth of this industry through the early 1980{\textquoteright}s, and much of the last decade has seen a consistent growth in the range and types of development activities now requiring statutory review for possible impacts to cultural heritage resources. The Regulatory \& Operations Group of the Cultural Operations and Field Services Branch, Ministry of Culture and Communications, is responsible for providing this review, as well as for the review of archaeological consultant reports generated as a result of MCC heritage conditions being attached to developrnent proposals. By the mid 1980{\textquoteright}s, when the consultant industry and MCC review staff had begun to participate in a large scale in the developrnent review sector, it was increasingly apparent that minimal requirements for field and reporting activities were needed. Thus MCC and the consultant industry, as well as representatives from archaeological organizations, the development sector and municipal approval authorities, began discussing the means to develop technical guidelines for development review generated assessment and mitigation activities. In 1988 a draft guideline was developed to define minimal standards for field assessments, and for the reports written as a result of those activities. This guideline has provided archaeological consultants with minimal standards to follow and MCC staff with an objective base from which to evaluate reports. The development sector has also been provided with a description of what they generally could expect of the archaeologist hired to fulfil cultural heritage conditions on a development proposal. During the past 5 years use of this document, limitations have become apparent, and subsequent revisions have attempted to address these matters. Efforts have also been made to develop a mitigation guideline to provide minimal standards for excavation and avoidance methodologies in this development review context. This paper will review the development of the archaeological assessment technical guideline for the consultant industry in the Province of Ontario, and review its relative usefulness over the last 5 years. Current efforts to expand the range of activities covered by technical guidelines will also be examined.},
	author = {Neal Ferris}
}
