Published in Spetember 2006 Mining Monthly
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities have regained ownership of 1 million square kilometres of land, or 20% of Australia, over the past 40 years. Land with inherent valuable mineral resources has been leased to mining companies but even mining royalties have failed, by and large, to provide the flow-on conditions to improve the lifestyles of indigenous population while conserving their heritage.
The Hunter Valley, being the historic centre of coal mining in New South Wales, is proving to be a focus of dispute in the contentious area of Aboriginal heritage conservation. Some Aboriginal traditional owners claim that the NSW Department of Environment and Conservation interim community consultation guidelines are dividing the Aboriginal community by allowing groups other than the traditional owners to register for consultation over “sites of significance”.
In the Hunter Valley, Aboriginal politics is complex, with some 16-20 groups arguing for participation and consultation in the assessment process.
Mining companies attempting to harness the support of the local Aboriginal community behind their developments are being subjected to unnecessary expense and confusion because of the way the guidelines have been set out in NSW, according to some members of the local Aboriginal nation who see mining development as being beneficial.
Typically, most forms of development in the Hunter Valley require an assessment of potential Aboriginal heritage impacts, which result in the 2005 DEC interim community consultation requirements for applicants (NPWS Act 1974 part 6 Approvals). A key part of any Aboriginal heritage assessment is the intense Aboriginal consultation process that is needed prior, during, and after the completion of a project under NSW Government guidelines.
Members of the Aboriginal community are the primary determinants of the significance of their heritage. They may participate in the process through comment on the assessment methodology, contributing cultural knowledge and commenting on cultural significance of potential impacts and/or mitigation measures. These comments are provided through the assessment process conducted by the proponent.
Under the guidelines, the DEC is the decision-maker; reviews information from the proponents, including information about the views and knowledge provided by the Aboriginal community; and makes a decision to grant or not grant approval (with or without conditions).
Various parties with specialist skills or knowledge can be engaged by proponents to help them fulfil their responsibilities. Services provided can include Aboriginal assessment, advisory services and archaeological services.
However, some, such as Yarrawalk chief executive Scott Franks, believe the policies of DEC undermine the cultural and human rights of the descendants of traditional custodians on matters related to their country within any given language area throughout NSW.
“The DEC policies are developed in isolation of the key stakeholders, they being the Aboriginal people, industry – small, medium and large, and the mining, residential, industrial, and commercial sectors,” he said.
The DEC policy and those of various archaeologists making recommendations to various proponents have led to unnecessary cost being imposed on the developers of mining projects in the Hunter Valley by leading to larger numbers than necessary of people, thereby requiring more archaeologists.
By contrast, under the heritage consultation guidelines in Queensland, mining companies are used to dealing with the traditional owners of the land, who have the first say about the identification of sites of significance.
The DEC is currently internally reviewing the guidelines and will soon be consulting with Aboriginal groups, proponents, and heritage professionals to address the issues raised by Franks and others in the Hunter Valley, a spokesman for the department told Australia’s Mining Monthly.
“We’re fully aware of this problem and our staff deal with it everyday,” he said.
“We’re aware of people crossing perceived cultural boundaries. In NSW, it is hard to delineate traditional boundaries because the impact of white settlement dispersed the aboriginal population more than other states such as Queensland.
“DEC is a not in a position to decide who will ‘speak for country’.”
The DEC will seek to clarify the guidelines once feedback from Aboriginal groups and proponents has been received.
The NSW mining industry is attempting to overcome some of these uncertainties by developing partnerships with local Aboriginal groups in the Hunter Valley.
One partnership example is the Upper Hunter Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Trust that was established in 2001 from funds provided by mining companies. The trust is managed by delegates from the NSW departments of Aboriginal Affairs, Planning and the Public Trustee, and is supported by an Advisory Group of the Upper Hunter Wonnarua Council, Wanaruah Local Aboriginal Land Council, coal mines in the region, the NSW Minerals Council and NSW government departments.
The trust aims to develop a comprehensive Regional Aboriginal Heritage Study in the Upper Hunter Valley region that provides a framework for Aboriginal cultural heritage management.
It also aims to provide benefits, including development and enhancement of skills, to the communities of the Upper Hunter Valley region.
