Shane Carriage and Lyn Mills from the Ulladulla Local Aboriginal Land Council.
As for the dunnart, surveyors used large PVC pipes distributed around the area with food in them. Rather than trap any dunnarts, the pipes are supposed to simply capture hair samples of animals that enter them. That hair is then sent off to a lab for analysis, to determine from which animal it came.
“After all the testing, we found nothing, not a thing. Not a skerrick.
“But the dunnart became the sticking point, even though the second survey found none.
“National Parks’ attitude was ‘They were there once’, so that was it.”
“I thought at the time, “We probably once used to eat this thing, now it’s costing us a feed.
“Talk about Karma.”
In a bid to unstall the project, Shane, along with representatives from Malbec, met with officials from National Parks and the Department of Planning.
“We were trying to nut out the problem with the dunnart, and how we can go about doing what we want to do, which was a substantial development.
“We spoke about how it would economically free up our community, how it would enable us to run programs to benefit our people, to create employment.
“The guy from National Parks words were, more or less, ‘I know our decision not to allow you to develop this land will create a socio-economic impact on your community, but that’s not my problem.
“So, basically, the dunnart is his problem, not Aboriginal people.”
It took another few years of battling the NSW Government for National Parks to finally concede, and for the Department of Planning to finally give approval.
But it came at a price.
The original proposal to develop the 16 hectares had to be substantially reduced, with ULALC agreeing to give up 40 percent of the land, which would be locked up as a conservation zone. Which brings us back to the development of the adjoining dairy.
That project is well underway, and houses have already been constructed.
When the original developers started on the project, they were required to set aside the equivalent of about 10 percent of the site, not for environmental reasons, says Shane, but to acknowledge what was previously there.
But prior to construction, the site yielded a major archeological find. Thousands upon thousands of Aboriginal artefacts were found.
“We originally did about five months of work collecting artefacts from the site,” says Shane.
“We found stone tools, chips, flakes – we’ve got 7,000 of them here in the office, which we collected. And you can still find them today.”
But with the original developers going broke before the project was completed, and new developers buying the site, everything changed.
“Four or five years later, after the initial decision was made, the new developer applied to national parks to have (the 10 percent requirement) revoked. And they did. They got all those blocks back.
“They’re up for sale, and some of them have even been built on.
“It actually butts onto our land – we have a common boundary. So National Parks are agreeing there’s no cultural significance on their land, because National Parks gets to make the decision about what is culturally significant and what’s not.
“At the same time, one dunnart which cannot be found again, has cost us 40 percent of our land.
“As far as I’m concerned, there’s been little or no equity in the decision-making from National Parks.
SEE OVER PAGE.
3 Comments
Land Grabbers thats all National Parks are. It just goes to show what they value, a Dunnart I know my people are endangered in this country and to think once we come under the National Parks and wildlife Act the mind boggles. It would be different if we had hundreds and thousands of acres in land in this state to play with. The governments of NSW since the inception of the Land Rights Act in NSW are shameful our claims are usually crap land the Gubbahs do not want ( only to a Murri wants it) and then we wait for decades to their departments make a decision on it Land Claims are a joke. Why is being a Murri so hard yes of course we are uniquely different but we are not stupid we all play the game hoping that the light at the end of the tunnel gets brighter, our kids getting educated, our health to get better, our Elders living longer, our people and especially our youth stop being goaled. It is simple NO LAND NO PEOPLE all our losses stem from the disrespect of culture and foremost the dispossession of our Land. Our land was our whole being and it is not ownership how a Gubba sees it we feel it big difference
This is highly emotive subject, and the author should have been careful to potray the facts accurately and in a way that doesnt cause misunderstanding. Attributing blame to certain parties shouldnt be done in this way either. I personally know that some of this information is misrepresented.
Environmental laws apply to EVERYONE and are in place to protect our natural heritage for ALL future generations. Environmental assessments are not a mindless bureacratic box, which you try to get it ticked off before starting a development, but a process where you fully assess what is on the site and its true environmental value, to assess what restrictions should apply, or if development should occur at all. The results are important and not inconsequential.
I have heard the catch cry of ‘creating local jobs’ for decades in the Shoalhaven as a justification for development yet it has never really materialised, and is usually used to pressure government agencies into approving something without due process. The develpment process can also be delayed or have to be restarted totally if the proponents, owners, developers or concept plans change.
I was surprised at the tone of the article in which, the local Land Council appears to be mocking the findings of the Environmental Report. These reports are thorough and are conducted in a scientific manner. Given the Land Council’s claim to be connected with their land, I would naively assume the results would have pleased the Land Council. More or less, endorsing their claim to its importance. Maybe I am misunderstanding their connection with land.
I understand their are many complexities in this issue, and am disappointed that it has been portayed in this manner
I do understand that enviromental law is for everyone, it is a slow, expensive process. The understanding to what LAND means to Aboriginal people is a even slower process for Governments and the
non-aboriginal population. Lets just say Biame (God) gave us this land for us to care for it Sorry all land in this country was significant and sacred to one of the many Tribes that used to exist in this land.
Aboriginal connection to the land means our whole being our law and lore is based on its many features geographically and the many spiritual beliefs are associated to those features. Science will not tell you these things but the people will. All the red tape associated with development makes someone rich and it is not us Murris. As for Land Claims take a trip up my way and look at all the crown land that has been fenced off and leased to the neighbouring cocky or the would be Kidman as long as it dosn’t go to the Murris “shame” walk on country and feel it and know it then talk about connection.