Tracks 501, 601, 503
Review of Aboriginal Heritage
Executive summary
The Tasmanian Government is investigating options for re-instigating access by offroad vehicles (ORVs) to three currently closed tracks (501, 503 and 601) between Sandy Cape and Pieman Heads within the Arthur-Pieman Conservation Area (APCA). The southern portion of Track 601 extends into the adjoining Pieman River
State Reserve. Tracks 501, 601 and the western 2km of 503 are situated within the boundary of the Western Tasmania Aboriginal Cultural Landscape (WTACL), which was entered on the Commonwealth Government’s National Heritage List (NHL) in 2013 on account of its high Aboriginal heritage values.
A referral under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBCA) regarding the proposed action to re-open the affected tracks and undertake allied mitigation works was submitted in 2017. A response was received that the proposed activity was a controlled action requiring assessment and approval through the preparation of a Public Environment Report (PER), the content of which was set out in guidelines issued by the (then) Commonwealth Department of Environment and Energy (DOEE).
The Department of Primary Industries, Parks, Water and Environment (DPIPWE) commissioned an Aboriginal Heritage Assessment of the proposal to re-open and undertake selected mitigation works on Tracks 501, 503 and 601. Aboriginal community consultation was not part of the study brief, but is proposed to be undertaken separately if the proposal proceeds.
DPIPWE Statement of Intent
Due to the significance and complexity of the cultural values, their spatial extent and the dynamic landforms of the area, determining how to allow for ORV access while ensuring protection of the values of the WTACL is challenging and complex.
To assist in understanding how best to address the PER guidelines, the Parks and Wildlife Service (PWS) commissioned an independent cultural heritage assessment of the immediate area traversed by Tracks 501, 503 and 601. That work was described in a background report provided to the PWS that contains the results of a desktop analysis and on-ground field survey of the Aboriginal cultural heritage values of Tracks 501, 503 and 601, an assessment of the potential impacts to those values of the proposed activity, and findings with respect to the proposed mitigation measures and the PER guidelines.
This report is derived from the background report. The findings contained in the background report have not been altered in this report. The key difference is that sensitive cultural heritage information from the background report has been removed in line with standard practice.
This report is intended to support a better public and stakeholder understanding of the Aboriginal cultural values of the WTACL and the wider area, and specifically the area of the tracks, and the key issues that must be addressed and detailed in the PER to demonstrate that ORV access can be provided for without resulting in an unacceptable impact on those values.
Desktop review
A search of the Aboriginal Heritage Register (AHR) in January 2020, based on a 1km wide corridor centred on the Tracks 501, 503 and 601, returned 102 records for the study area between Johnsons Head and Pieman Heads. These records reflect the results of studies by numerous researchers since the early 1980s using a range of methodologies, with many sites evidently having been re-recorded and re-registered over the years, either singly or as part of larger complexes without updating or retiring the original site registrations.
The previously registered sites predominantly comprise shell middens (with or without visible stone artefacts and animal bone – food remains), stone artefact scatters or isolated stone artefacts. A single rock marking site has been recorded within close proximity to one of the tracks.
The previously registered sites group into two main clusters; a northern cluster of 50 site entries between Johnsons Head and Lagoon River (Track 501), and a southern cluster of 51 site entries between the Interview River and the Pieman River mouth (Track 501). Only one site is recorded along the 9.5km long sandy beach extending between Lagoon River and Interview River (Track 501).
Survey results
A total of sixty-one (61) sites or precincts were able to be re-located or otherwise defined during survey from the 102 desktop survey records.
Track 501
Of the fifty-one (51) previously recorded sites in the vicinity of Track 501, twenty-four (24) sites were able to be re-located in some fashion, although there can be no guarantee that the same artefacts or features were still present or visible. Six sites were searched for but not able to be found, while a further twenty-one (21) sites were not searched for, being considered insufficiently close to the proposed track to warrant re-assessment. Nineteen (19) previously recorded sites were ultimately grouped into six combined sites or precincts, four relocated single sites retained their legacy AHR number, while one site previously recorded as a rock engraving was upgraded to a precinct to encompass local midden deposits, but retained its original AHR number. Fifteen (15) previously unrecorded sites or precincts were delineated, arriving at a total of twenty-six (26) separate site or precinct entities being designated along Track 501.
Track 503
This track had been subject to previous survey. Two new sites were recorded along this track.
Track 601
Of the fifty-one (51) previously recorded sites in the vicinity of Track 601, traces were observed corresponding to forty-two (42) legacy record locations. Eight sites were searched for but not able to be found, while one was not searched for. Twenty-one (21) legacy sites were grouped into eight combined sites or precincts, twenty-two (22) re-located single sites retained their legacy AHR number, and three previously unrecorded sites were delineated. This equates to thirty-three (33) separate site or precinct entities being designated along Track 601.
The bulk of previously recorded sites along Track 501 and Track 601 that were targets for reassessment were able to be found in some form, confirming the patterning of previous Tracks 501, 601 and 503 Aboriginal cultural heritage report, APCA Page 6 results, although in many cases, particularly along Track 601, the surface expressions of the re-located sites was smaller than the originally recorded extents. This is considered to reflect the extent of site erosion and vegetation growth since the original records were made; 30 years in some cases.
The most significant empirical finding of the present study in relation to understanding site patterning is the identification of ten previously unrecorded midden sites in the large dune field complex between Lagoon River and Interview River. While the sites were typically low density and/or heavily eroded, they demonstrate firstly that the apparent absence of sites within this landscape unit suggested by previous work is not correct and that Aboriginal people were content to carry food for over a kilometre rather than being tethered to shore resources. Secondly, the findings demonstrate that sites are constantly being exposed and concealed in the dynamic dunefield environment and highlight the risk of making management decisions based on fugitive site presentations.
The other key knowledge gain is that many of the sites are in poor condition and rapidly deteriorating. While many midden sites displayed intact deposits, these are actively eroding, and the geomorphological indications are that these are small vestiges of their original extents.
All observed site presentations are primarily a function of erosion, which is particularly noticeable along Track 501. The sites formed in a dynamic sand-budget environment where winnowing, dispersal and redistribution of material is part of a seasonal cycle of sand sequestration and release. Evidence suggests that for most of the period of site formation, thought to correspond to the last 2 000-3 000 years, the net sand budget was cumulative, trapping small camp sites soon after they were formed and protecting them.
Post contact land use, including cattle agistment, indiscriminate burning and ORV use has reversed the sediment equation, leading to erosion of previously stable landforms and exposing cultural material to dispersal by wind and water.
Cultural significance
Contemporary heritage management principles hold that Aboriginal communities are the primary sources of information about Aboriginal heritage, and that aesthetic, social and spiritual (i.e. Aboriginal cultural) significance of Aboriginal heritage objects and places can only be determined by those communities. Aboriginal community consultation is required to understand these forms of cultural significance.
Scientific significance is commonly considered to refer to the potential of a place to yield information, generally through a process of archaeological investigation in response to timely and specific research questions. It is not possible to meaningfully assess the scientific value of a place in the absence of these questions, so as a workaround, archaeologists commonly refer to such things as uniqueness or representativeness in terms of location, form and content that may be mined for data suitable for answering a range of potential future questions.
The current study area contains a variety of Aboriginal living places and cultural deposits that are able to support a wide range of potential scientific research interests. Small sites may provide a snapshot of a moment in time, for example a family gathering for a single meal – potentially revealing aspects of group size and gender. Large compound sites have the potential to demonstrate changing patterns in food production, land use and social behaviour. Small sites and large sites within the WTACL each tell different parts of the story of Tasmania’s first peoples and together comprise one of the richest and most intact Aboriginal cultural landscapes remaining in Tasmania.
National Heritage List values
The NHL values statement focuses on the idea that during the late Holocene in northwest Tasmania, people practiced a semi-sedentary way of living, supported by rich marine resources including shellfish, birds and seals. Two site types, depressions relating to former huts that were sometimes grouped in villages, and cobble beach depressions thought to be used for hunting seal, reflect aspects of this semi-sedentary lifestyle and are very important to protect. Other site types, such as shell middens and stone artefact scatters located between the hut villages, are also evidence of this mixed sessile and mobile way of life; they are all part of the one economic strategy. No hut depressions or potential ‘seal hides’ were identified during the present survey; however, this does not diminish the capacity for the area to demonstrate the National Heritage values relating to semi-sedentism.
Proposed activity and potential impacts
The proposed works along Tracks 501 and 601, and to a lesser degree Track 503, involve a combination of track surface protection, drainage works, fencing, track markers, signage and, in some cases, track realignment aimed to reduce the direct vehicular impacts on Aboriginal heritage.
Aboriginal heritage sites within the WTACL are continually being exposed as a result of natural and anthropogenic factors. The patterning of visible cultural material will change as the disturbance and erosion progresses, exposing and destroying sites and with it evidence of Aboriginal life on the coast over the last 2 000-3 000 years. There is clear evidence that ORV use has directly impacted sites within the study area, and also contributed to general entropy by suppressing vegetation, disrupting palaeosols, and otherwise nucleating de-stabilising erosion.
Tracks 501, 503 and 601 directly intersect thirty-five (35) confirmed sites/precincts over a cumulative linear distance of c2.3km on a range of substrates and terrain. A further twenty-six (26) confirmed sites are potentially at risk from activity away from the proposed tracks, while eight (8) previously recorded sites that could not be re-located have legacy coordinates that plot within 30m of the proposed track alignment and may be potentially impacted. Due to their currently buried status, an unknown number of heritage sites that do not present at surface may be potentially impacted over time.
In addition to potential impacts associated with implementing the proposed mitigation works and proposed compliant use, over the long-term the most significant risk to Aboriginal heritage is associated with unauthorised vehicular access to sensitive environments, as many of the more fragile midden sites are located in dune sands where user activity is difficult to regulate.
Impact assessment
Tracks 501, 503 and 601 directly intersect thirty-five (35) confirmed Aboriginal heritage sites/precincts over a cumulative linear distance of c2.3km on a range of substrates and terrain. A further twenty-six (26) confirmed heritage sites are potentially at risk from activity away from the proposed tracks, while eight (8) previously recorded sites that could not be relocated have legacy coordinates that plot within 30m of the proposed track alignment and may be potentially impacted. Due to their currently buried status, an unknown number of heritage sites that do not present at surface may be potentially impacted over time.
It was observed in many instances that heritage sites extend beyond the extent of the proposed mitigation works, rendering large areas vulnerable to damage.
A high level risk analysis suggests that implementing the proposed controls along Track 501 may result in a theoretical reduction from a very high level uncontrolled risk to high risk (or Tracks 501, 601 and 503 Aboriginal cultural heritage report, APCA Page 8 lower) at one location, a high level uncontrolled risk will be reduced to medium risk (or lower) at one location, and a medium level risk will be reduced to low risk at one location. This equates to a material reduction in risk of direct and indirect impacts by at least one risk level at three out of a total of 32 sites.
The proposed works will not result in any reduction in risk to the two sites identified along Track 503.
For Track 601, implementing the proposed controls may result in a theoretical reduction from a very high level uncontrolled risk to high risk (or lower) at eight locations, a high level uncontrolled risk will be reduced to medium risk (or lower) at four locations, and a medium level risk will be reduced to low risk at seven locations. This equates to a material reduction in risk of direct and indirect impacts by at least one risk level at nineteen out of a total of 40 sites.
These results may be improved if the proposed mitigation actions are extended to the remapped heritage site/track intersection extents, but are unlikely to reduce the potential impacts to acceptable levels, particularly along Track 501 where large expanses of highly fragile heritage will remain accessible to users not complying with proposed controls.
Knowledge gaps
The proposed mitigation works, which include track surface protection, track markers, fencing, drainage works, signage and local re-routing, aim to address selected track condition problems and known environmental risks, however significant gaps remain in understanding the full range of heritage values and proving that the track engineering concept, the current scale of proposed deployment, and the likely level of user compliance will not result in cumulative impacts to Aboriginal heritage values. These knowledge gaps must be adequately addressed in the PER.
Expanding deployment to cover the additional physical heritage intersections identified by survey may appear a simple exercise, however the complex geomorphology and potential for currently concealed sites to be exposed or impacted in future means that a high level of residual risk will remain. Even if the spatial coverage of mitigation works proved adequate, the lack of data attesting to the effectiveness of the proposed track surfacing, fencing and signage etc on preserving Aboriginal heritage is unlikely to meet statutory duty of care obligations. Trials of the proposed hardening/matting medium have not yet been undertaken elsewhere within the APCA in relation to managing heritage impacts, and no data is available regarding the degree to which users might comply with the proposed mitigations. To the contrary, evidence was observed during field work of unauthorised vehicle access along the currently closed tracks.
Further evidence demonstrating the efficacy of the proposed mitigations is required before they can be considered to support the proposed action. In addition to proving the track hardening concept, demonstrating user compliance and expanding the deployment to cover known heritage risks, a range of additional mitigation actions would likely be necessary to reduce potential heritage risks below statutory thresholds and comply with the principles of Ecologically Sustainable Development.
These additional actions may include subsurface archaeological investigation, archaeological salvage, limiting vehicle types and numbers, real-time vehicle tracking and policing, regular impact monitoring, ongoing asset maintenance and environmental rehabilitation.
Determining which of the currently proposed and potential additional mitigation measures should be used in which location will require expertise in a range of heritage and technical fields, and input from the
Aboriginal community; consequently, no site-specific commentary on proposed or potential mitigations is able to be presented in this report.
Due largely to the absence of demonstrated evidence for the efficacy of the proposed mitigation measures, the current assessment concludes that a PER assessment is unlikely to be successful based on current technical information alone.
The costs associated with implementing and maintaining the necessary engineering and administrative controls for re-opening Tracks 501, Track 601, and to a lesser degree Track 503, have not been estimated but are likely to be considerable, and given the competing imperatives of capping vehicle numbers to limit impacts and reliance on vehicle permit fees for cost recovery, effective and ongoing impact mitigation may not be economically viable.
Significant knowledge gaps exist with regard to understanding:
• the risk of buried cultural deposits in areas where there is no current surface presentation;
• the performance characteristics of the proposed track surfacing material;
• site-specific geotechnical settings and installation requirements; • maintenance requirements, including ongoing heritage site condition monitoring;
• the likely degree of vehicle use and user compliance;
• how to limit, track and police vehicle numbers/sizes/weights;
• the effectiveness of the proposed mitigations in reducing user impacts to heritage inanalogous settings; and
• how the proposed actions are supported by the Tasmanian Aboriginal community.
Management Planning
Filling the knowledge gaps, and potentially undertaking other actions, will be required to adequately acquit the broader aims of the reserve classification, vision and process that are articulated in the 2002 APCA
Management Plan (APCA MP) to ensure that “the natural and cultural values of the area are well conserved, managed and presented”.
At a fundamental level, it is evident that the APCA MP requires urgent review to take into account the
WTACL NHL listing and the additional statutory obligations and imperatives for Aboriginal community consultation, and to provide the most equitable forum for broader community input into the future management and uses of the place.
Aboriginal community engagement
The APCA MP stresses the importance of involving the Aboriginal community in activities that have the potential to impact cultural heritage within the reserve. This requirement is made even more potent by the 2013 listing of the WTACL on the NHL. It is essential that any actions undertaken regarding Tracks 501, 503 and 601 are consistent with the requirements of the APCA MP, including the requirement for Aboriginal community consultation, and that works are based upon appropriate evidence, knowledge and disciplines.
Engaging with the Tasmanian Aboriginal community is essential for understanding the Aboriginal heritage values of the WTACL and broader APCA, for developing effective, equitable and sustainable values management, and demonstrating compliance with reserve and statutory guidelines and policies.
While Aboriginal community consultation on the proposed mitigation works and tracks re-opening is envisaged if the PER proceeds, delaying consultation until the concept is at an advanced stage is not in the spirit of State and Commonwealth guidelines on indigenous engagement and may be considered a weakness in any PER assessment.
Read the full report here.
Media release – Jacquie Petrusma, Minister for Parks, 15 July 2021
Arthur-Pieman Conservation Area Values Assessment
The Tasmanian Government has received a final cultural values assessment into allowing off-road vehicle access to tracks within the Arthur-Pieman Conservation Area (APCA) – tracks 501, 503 and 601.
This assessment is a requirement of the Australian Government under the Commonwealth Environmental Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act) to re-open identified tracks for this type of recreational use.
The Tasmanian Government has today presented the report to the APCA Management Committee.
The report identifies that cultural heritage remains a significant impediment to reopening the tracks.
The government’s priority has always been the need to protect the significant cultural and natural values within the APCA, while allowing Tasmanians to fish, camp and explore the landscape.
The government recognises the importance of recreational off-road vehicle access to many in the Tasmanian community and is committed to working with them to develop further opportunities on the west coast.
That is why the Tasmanian Government will invest significantly into facilities and other improvements for those who enjoy exploring the rugged and magnificent west coast.
We will consult with the key stakeholders in relation to where the investment should be targeted in coming weeks. The types of works that will be considered include:
*Improving the existing roads and open tracks in the region;
*Providing much needed campgrounds and amenities; and
*Developing new facilities or developing tracks outside of the Western Tasmania Aboriginal Cultural Landscape (WTACL).
More information about the APCA and the Cultural Heritage Report can be found on the DPIPWE website: https://dpipwe.tas.gov.au/about-the-department/arthur-pieman-tracks
Media release – Bob Brown Foundation, 15 July 2021
PREMIER GUTWEIN CAN PROTECT TAKAYNA
Bob Brown Foundation is calling on the Tasmanian Government to clarify its decision on controversial plans to re-open the takayna/Tarkine Aboriginal cultural landscape to off-road vehicles. After today the Minister for Parks, Jacquie Petrusma made a vague statement ‘that cultural heritage remains a significant impediment to reopening the tracks’. The government has received a long awaited cultural values assessment into allowing off-road vehicle access to tracks 501, 503 and 601 on the takayna/Tarkine coast in the National Heritage listed Western Tasmania Aboriginal Cultural Landscape.
“The Liberals’ embarrassing 2014 election commitment to re-open tracks in one of Australia’s richest Aboriginal heritage coasts caused a showdown with Tasmanian Aboriginal Centre in the Federal Court that has no place in this era,“ Bob Brown Foundation’s Campaign Manager Jenny Weber said.
“It is unacceptable for a government two hundred and thirty years after the invasion of Australia to be pushing an archaic attempt to foster off-road vehicle enthusiasts recreation over the preservation of 40 000 years of Aboriginal living landscape.”
“Premier Gutwein can protect takayna in a World Heritage listed national park, returned to Aboriginal ownership. This proposal has been on the table for six years and can be achieved without shallow complaints by people and companies with vested interests who want to continue to destroy the cultural and natural values of takayna/Tarkine,” Jenny Weber said.
“The Federal Court found that the region has irreplaceable Aboriginal heritage with the highest cultural values. Premier Gutwein can be a leader and commit to funding permanent Aboriginal rangers to monitor and protect takayna/ Tarkine and to both promote its World Heritage status and return the land, which includes no private land, to Aboriginal ownership,” Jenny Weber said.
Media release – Aboriginal Land Council of Tasmania, 16 July 2021
ABORIGINAL LAND COUNCIL WELCOMES GOVERNMENT REPORT RECOMMENDING AGAINST 4WD ACCESS ON ARTHUR-PIEMAN ABORIGINAL LANDSCAPE
Land Council Chairman Michael Mansell has welcomed the Tasmanian report warning against re-opening tracks 501, 503 and 601 in the culturally sensitive Arthur-Pieman conservation area. Mr Mansell said “The report should finally put a stop to this crazy scheme that was made to get a few hundred votes in Smithton at the expense of ancient irreplaceable Aboriginal heritage. The report warned that the 2017 Hodgman generated plan, rejected twice as contrary to law by the federal court, would breach the Tasmanian government’s legal and ethical obligations to protect and preserve Aboriginal heritage.
The report stated that the proposed action ie. allowing offroad vehicles (ORVs) to three currently closed tracks (501, 503 and 601) between Sandy Cape and Pieman Heads within the Arthur-Pieman Conservation Area (APCA), “will require revision in the light of the current survey findings and Aboriginal community consultation.” The report rightly pointed out that no plans to harm Aboriginal heritage should occur without Aboriginal approval, consent which the report acknowledged had not been obtained.”
Mr Mansell said the report would now be considered by the APCA Management Committee. Mr Mansell said it is time for the government to ‘get over’ the Hodgman legacy and move on. Blindly following an outdated and offensive policy is inconsistent with reconciliation. Quoting from the report, Mr Mansell pointed to the report’s conclusion that:
‘In the view of the consultants undertaking the present study, the current proposal is not currently supported by sufficient evidence that it will be materially effective in mitigating damage to Aboriginal heritage values, including listed national heritage values, associated with intended compliant use. It does not adequately address the unacceptably high risk of impacts associated with non-compliant activities which have created significant damage in the past, and in several instances, were observed to still be occurring. Most significantly, to date the proposed activity has not involved engagement with the Tasmanian Aboriginal community so currently cannot demonstrate compliance with the APCA MP and Tasmanian and Commonwealth heritage legislation, polices and guidelines. Engagement with the Tasmanian Aboriginal community will be a critical and central requirement for the preparation of the PER should the proposal proceed.’
Media release – Tasmanian Wilderness Society, 16 July 2021
Gutwein Government Must Scrap Barbaric Offroad Folly That Would Destroy takayna/Tarkine Aboriginal artefacts
“The Arthur-Pieman Conservation Area is not a ‘park’ to Tasmanian Aboriginal people. It is our country, one of the last places we can take our families and surround ourselves absolutely with the places and culture of our old people, who lived there for so many thousands of years. We connect there; it’s a place of our memory and of our continuance. We feel our old people around us there.”
Brendan ‘Buck’ Brown, AHO 2020, quoted on p12, “Tracks 501, 601, 503 Review of Aboriginal Heritage”
An independent cultural heritage assessment into the Tasmanian Government’s proposed three offroad tracks along the takayna/Tarkine coast (also known by the non-Aboriginal name of Arthur Pieman Conservation Area) makes clear this offensive and ill-advised scheme represents an ‘unacceptably high risk’ to lutruwita’s (Tasmania’s) pakana (Tasmanian Aborginial) living cultural heritage and would cause ‘damage to Aboriginal heritage values, including listed national heritage values’.
“The findings of the cultural heritage assessment report are crystal clear and should make the Gutwein Government come to its senses. The Gutwein Government must end this threat to Aboriginal living cultural and heritage values, the ongoing distress to the pakana community and ecological harms to this incredibly special place and scrap this stupid and offensive scheme immediately,” said Tom Allen for the Wilderness Society Tasmania.
“The takayna/Tarkine coast, like the rest of the takayna/Tarkine region, has such rich ecological and pakana living cultural and heritage values and significance that it would qualify for World Heritage status and protection. The fact that the Tasmanian Government has pushed for Aboriginal cultural heritage sites and artefacts to be literally crushed by off-road vehicles is barbaric, offensive and shameful.
“Adding insult to injury, as well as the offensiveness of the scheme itself, the consultants’ findings make clear that lutruwita/Tasmania’s pakana community has been repeatedly ignored and not consulted about this ridiculous scheme. This exclusion and failure to consult is as unethical as it is unlawful,” said Mr Allen.
Failure to consult with the pakana community means that the proposal ‘cannot demonstrate compliance with the APCA MP [Arthur Pieman Conservation Area Management Plan] and Tasmanian and Commonwealth heritage legislation, policies and guidelines’. (p82)
Other key findings from the report
‘Leaving the tracks closed to vehicle access is a viable option for conserving Aboriginal heritage sites and values including listed National Heritage values… Taking no action (i.e. keeping the tracks closed) is likely to be the simplest and most cost-effective means of affording physical protection to Aboriginal heritage sites, conserving NHL values and aligning with current APCA management policies.’ (p71).
The coast of takayna/Tarkine ‘is considered extremely significant, and it is evident there is considerable knowledge of heritage values in the area that have not been officially documented. It is vital to understand that making management decisions, including designing park infrastructure, based only on official records without Aboriginal community input, carries very high risks of impacting heritage that is both legally protected and belongs to Aboriginal people.’ (p12)
‘Shell middens, many containing stone artefacts, are very common, and often extensive. Many are intersected by the existing tracks, with several being intersected by proposed re-routes. While it may be possible to avoid some of the smaller identified sites by additional re-routes, larger sites will be difficult, if not impossible, to avoid.’ (p72)
‘Past vehicular access via Tracks 501 and 601 has resulted in significant damage to Aboriginal heritage.’ (p74)
‘All damage to Aboriginal heritage is irreversible, as sites are finite and non-renewable. The high degree of unpredictability of some impacts, and irreversibility of all impacts, constitutes.’ (p77)
‘The significance of any impacts can only be determined by the Tasmanian Aboriginal community through a process of meaningful and empowered engagement.’ (p77)
There are ‘significant risks that heritage breaches may result from cumulative and facilitated use.’ (p77)
Plastic matting not viable
‘Further evidence is required to support the use of the proposed plastic matting as an effective means of mitigating impacts on Aboriginal heritage values… It is the responsibility of the Department to provide the required evidence to the satisfaction of the Tasmanian Aboriginal community and Commonwealth regulator.’ (p78)
Offsets not viable
‘Offset management is not a methodology that is used or acceptable to the Tasmanian Aboriginal community for compensation of residual impacts at this time. It is not possible to address the question of offset management without comprehensive Aboriginal community consultation.’ (p82)
Scheme will damage cultural heritage
‘The current proposal is not currently supported by sufficient evidence that it will be materially effective in mitigating damage to Aboriginal heritage values, including listed national heritage values.’ (p82)
The proposal does ‘not adequately address the unacceptably high risk of impacts associated with non-compliant activities which have created significant damage in the past, and in several instances, were observed to still be occurring.’ (p82)
Failure to consult with the pakana community
‘To date the proposed activity has not involved engagement with the Tasmanian Aboriginal community so currently cannot demonstrate compliance with the APCA MP and Tasmanian and Commonwealth heritage legislation, polices and guidelines.’ (p82)
Legal requirements for input by and from Aboriginal community
‘Management of cultural heritage is not simply an environmental matter, and the acceptability of any proposal that may impact Aboriginal heritage values can only be determined by the Aboriginal community. This position is consistent with the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, the Australia (ICOMOS) Statement on Indigenous Cultural Heritage, and the Commonwealth Government’s National Heritage Management Principles.
This concept is also reflected in the following Objects and Principles of the EBPC Act:
3 Objects of the Act 3
(d) to promote a co-operative approach to the protection and management of the environment involving governments, the community, land-holders and indigenous peoples;
3A Principles of Ecologically Sustainable Development
(b) If there are threats of serious or irreversible environmental damage, lack of full scientific certainty should not be used as a reason for postponing measures to prevent environmental degradation.’ (p82)
Michelle O’Byrne MP, Shadow Minister for Aboriginal Affairs & Bastian Seidel MLC, Shadow Minister for Parks & Environment, 16 July 2021
Labor respects Arthur-Pieman assessment outcome
Tasmanian Labor respects the outcome of the Federal Arthur-Pieman Conservation Area Values Assessment.
Shadow Minister for Aboriginal Affairs Michelle O’Byrne said Tasmania has some extraordinary Aboriginal heritage and it needs to be protected.
“Our island is home to thousands of years of aboriginal history and it is important that we protect and respect this,” Ms O’Byrne said.
“Given the Tasmanian Government have embarked on a pathway to treaty with Tasmanian Aboriginal people, a commitment that has Labor’s full support, the government should now as a demonstration of good faith, confirm they will cease trying to reopen these tracks that have been closed since 2012.
“The Liberals have shamefully politicised this issue after misleading Tasmanians for three elections and now they cannot hide any longer.”
Shadow Minister for Parks & Environment Bastian Seidel said Labor welcomes the government’s announcement that they would upgrade roads outside of the conservation area.
“Labor acknowledges the interests of recreational off-road vehicle users to maintain access to areas on the west coast,” Dr Seidel said.
“The government’s announcement that they would look to make improvements to existing roads is a positive outcome, with a plan to develop new facilities outside the Western Tasmanian Aboriginal Cultural Landscape benefitting all Tasmanians.
“However, despite the spin, it is clear this project is yet another broken promise from a government that continues to announce populist, pie in the sky policy ideas with little planning or grounding in reality.
“The people of Braddon deserve an apology after seven years of lies and deception.
“It is time the Liberal Government start being honest to Tasmanians and respectful to our state’s aboriginal heritage.
“Labor respects the outcome of this assessment and looks forward to the Liberal Government investing in facilities outside this area in the future.”
Rosalie Woodruff MP | Acting Greens Leader, 16 July 2021
Liberals Must Publicly Commit to Close takayna Tracks
The Aboriginal Heritage report released late yesterday afternoon makes it crystal clear, the 4WD tracks on the takayna coast should not be re-opened. The Gutwein Government must clearly rule out re-opening them, and end seven years of effectively turning a blind eye to destruction of an ancient cultural landscape.
Being non-committal about the need to protect tens of thousands of years of Aboriginal heritage is not good enough.
The Liberals’ 2014 election commitment to open the tracks was an affront to Aboriginal Tasmanians, and sent a signal to 4WD users they should be able to access the heritage-rich coastline. For the last seven years many 4WD enthusiasts have taken that encouragement, illegally accessing closed tracks and irreparably destroying middens.
Enough disrespect has been shown, and harm caused, by the Liberals. If the Gutwein Government is serious about a treaty process, the first step is to make a strong statement that the takayna tracks are closed for good.
The Liberals must also make a commitment that any proposal for alternative 4WD tracks does not compromise cultural or environmental values elsewhere.
The takayna coastline is a landscape like nowhere else on the planet, and it must be protected in perpetuity. In the upcoming state budget, we urge the Liberals to fund additional Aboriginal rangers to protect the National Heritage-listed Western Tasmania Aboriginal Cultural Landscape.
