appendix f - balranald shire · southwestern nsw (figures 1-4). 2.2 proposed activities the...

Appendix F: Hatfield Aboriginal Heritage Report

Cristal Mining Australia Ltd Atlas Campaspe Mineral Sands Project HMC Transport Route Gravel Pits

AAbboorriiggiinnaall CCuullttuurraall HHeerriittaaggee DDuuee DDiilliiggeennccee AAsssseessssmmeenntt

Na tu ra l an d C ul tu ra l Her i ta ge Man ag em ent

a division of M.L. Cupper Pty Ltd

ABN: 48 107 932 918

Author: Matt Cupper

Report to Cristal Mining Australia Limited 3 January 2017

Landskape a division of ML Cupper Pty Ltd

ABN 48 107 932 918

PO Box 1068 Carlton 3053

e-mail: [email protected]

tel: 0408 006 690

PO Box 1068 Carlton 3053 e-mail: [email protected] tel: 0408 006 690

Atlas Campaspe Mineral Sands Project HMC Transport Route Gravel Pits

AAbboorriiggiinnaall CCuullttuurraall HHeerriittaaggee DDuuee DDiilliiggeennccee AAsssseessssmmeenntt Report to Cristal Mining Australia Limited 3 January 2017

N a t u r a l a n d C u l t u r a l H e r i t a g e M a n a g e m e n t

a division of M.L. Cupper Pty Ltd

ABN: 48 107 932 918

Author: Dr Matt Cupper Date: 3 January 2017

Cristal Mining Australia Limited CULTURAL HERITAGE DUE DILIGENCE ASSESSMENT OF GRAVEL PITS

ii

Executive Summary

Cristal Mining Australia Limited (Cristal Mining) intends to extract gravel from nearby

calcrete outcrops to upgrade existing access roads (the Heavy Mineral Concentrate

[HMC] transport route) to the Atlas Campaspe Mineral Sands Project area,

approximately 100 km north of Balranald in southwestern NSW.

In order to investigate the potential impact on Aboriginal cultural heritage resulting from

the proposed gravel extraction, Landskape was engaged by Cristal Mining to conduct a

cultural heritage due diligence assessment of three proposed gravel extraction pits.

The specific objectives of the cultural heritage due diligence assessment were to:

Locate and record any Aboriginal cultural heritage sites within the vicinities of the

proposed gravel extraction pits in consultation with representatives of the registered

Aboriginal parties (RAP) for the Atlas Campaspe Mineral Sands Project;

Identify the nature and extent of potential impacts of the proposed activities on

Aboriginal cultural heritage; and,

Devise options in consultation with the RAPs to avoid or mitigate potential impacts

of the proposed gravel extraction on Aboriginal cultural heritage places and objects.

No Aboriginal cultural heritage places or objects have previously been identified in or

near any of the proposed work areas. The present study encountered one Aboriginal

object in one of the proposed gravel extraction areas (Pit C). This is an isolated find of a

stone artefact (AHIMS site number 40-5-0180; Iona Artefact 1).

Based on the results of this cultural heritage due diligence assessment and consultation

with representatives of the RAPs it is concluded that:

The proposed gravel extraction be allowed to proceed because the activity can be

modified so harm to cultural heritage is avoided;

Harm to Aboriginal object AHIMS site number 40-5-0180 in proposed gravel Pit C

must be avoided by establishing a 20 m exclusion zone (i.e. a 20 m radius buffer

around the perimeter of the Aboriginal object). The exclusion zone must be

appropriately fenced with a permanent barrier. Employees, contractors and visitors

must be instructed not to enter the area except for approved land management

activities such as weed spraying, fence maintenance, etc.;

If any previously unidentified Aboriginal cultural heritage places or objects are

encountered during the course of the proposed gravel extraction all activities likely


iii

to affect the material shall cease immediately and the Office of Environment and

Heritage’s Environmental Line (tel: 131 555) consulted about an appropriate course

of action prior to recommencement of work. It can be an offence under the relevant

legislation to disturb or destroy Aboriginal cultural heritage objects without a valid

Aboriginal Heritage Impact Permit;

If human skeletal remains are encountered during the course of the proposed works

all activities in that area must cease. Remains must not be handled or otherwise

disturbed except to prevent further disturbance. If the remains are thought to be less

than 100 years old the Police or the State Coroners Office (tel: 02 9552 4066) must

be notified. If there is reason to suspect that the skeletal remains are more than 100

years old and Aboriginal, the proponent should contact the Office of Environment

and Heritage’s Environmental Line (tel: 131 555) for advice; and,

Cristal Mining should continue to involve representatives of the RAPs in the project.


iv

Contents EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ................................................................................................ ii CONTENTS ................................................................................................................... iv

1 INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................................... 1

2 PROPOSED GRAVEL PITS .................................................................................... 6

2.1 Project Objectives .............................................................................................. 6

2.2 Proposed Activities ............................................................................................ 6

2.3 Potential Disturbance ........................................................................................ 6

2.4 Flexibility of Design ............................................................................................ 6

3 ABORIGINAL COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT ......................................................... 7

3.1 Methodology for the Aboriginal Community Involvement: ................................. 7

3.1.1 Aboriginal Community Involvement Prior to the Field Assessment: . 7

3.1.2 Aboriginal Community Involvement During the Field Assessment: .. 7

3.1.3 Aboriginal Community Involvement Following the Field Assessment: ......................................................................................................... 7

3.2 Aboriginal Community Concerns ....................................................................... 8

4 LEGISLATIVE CONTEXT ........................................................................................ 9

4.1 National Parks and Wildlife Act 1974 ................................................................ 9

4.2 Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 ........................................ 10

4.3 Australia ICOMOS Charter for the Conservation of Places of Cultural Significance (Burra Charter) ........................................................................... 10

5 ENVIRONMENTAL CONTEXT .............................................................................. 12

6 ABORIGINAL CULTURAL HERITAGE CONTEXT ............................................... 15

6.1 Archaeological Record .................................................................................... 15

6.2 Ethnohistory ..................................................................................................... 15

6.3 Types of Cultural Heritage Sites ...................................................................... 16

6.3.1 Stone Artefact Scatters .................................................................. 16

6.3.2 Hearths ........................................................................................... 16

6.3.3 Freshwater Shell Middens .............................................................. 17

6.3.4 Earth Mounds ................................................................................. 17

6.3.5 Quarry Sites ................................................................................... 17

6.3.6 Modified Trees ............................................................................... 17

6.3.7 Stone Arrangements, Ceremonial Rings and Ceremony and Dreaming Sites ............................................................................... 18

6.3.8 Burials ............................................................................................ 18

6.4 Aboriginal Sites in the Project Area ................................................................. 18

7 PROJECT DESIGN AND SURVEY METHODOLOGY .......................................... 19

7.1 Site Predictive Model ....................................................................................... 19


v

7.2 Field Methodology ........................................................................................... 21

7.2.1 Logistics ......................................................................................... 21

7.2.2 Survey Methods ............................................................................. 21

7.3 Survey Coverage Data .................................................................................... 21

7.3.1 Conditions of Visibility .................................................................... 21

7.3.2 Coverage Analysis ......................................................................... 24

8 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION ............................................................................... 25

9 RECOMMENDATIONS .......................................................................................... 28

10 REFERENCES ....................................................................................................... 29

APPENDIX 1 ................................................................................................................ 33

List of Figures

Figure 1. Regional setting of the proposed gravel pits. ................................................. 2

Figure 2. Location of the proposed gravel Pit A. ............................................................ 3

Figure 3. Location of the proposed gravel Pit B. ............................................................ 4

Figure 4. Location of the proposed gravel Pit C. ........................................................... 5

Figure 5. Proposed location of gravel Pit B. ................................................................ 13

Figure 6. Proposed location of gravel Pit A. ................................................................ 13

Figure 7. Proposed location of gravel Pit A. ................................................................ 14

Figure 8. Proposed location of gravel Pit C. ................................................................ 14

Figure 9. Survey team members inspecting proposed gravel Pit B. ............................ 22

Figure 10. Team members inspecting proposed gravel Pit A. ..................................... 22

Figure 11. Proposed gravel Pit B showing the excellent surface visibility conditions. . 23

Figure 12. Proposed gravel Pit A showing the excellent surface visibility conditions. . 23

Figure 13. Aboriginal object AHIMS site number 40-5-0180. ...................................... 26

Figure 14. Aboriginal object AHIMS site number 40-5-0180. ...................................... 26

Figure 15. Location of AHIMS site number 40-5-0180 in proposed gravel Pit C. ........ 27

List of Tables

Table 1. Probability of encountering Aboriginal cultural heritage within the gravel pits. ............................................................................................................................... 20

Table 2. Visibility conditions of the proposed work areas. ........................................... 24

Table 3. Effective coverage of the proposed work areas. ............................................ 24

Table 4. Summary data of Aboriginal cultural heritage place in proposed gravel Pit C. ............................................................................................................................... 25


1

1 Introduction

Cristal Mining Australia Limited (Cristal Mining) intends to extract gravel from nearby

calcrete outcrops to upgrade existing access roads (the Heavy Mineral Concentrate

[HMC] transport route) to the Atlas Campaspe Mineral Sands Project area,

approximately 100 km north of Balranald in southwestern NSW (Figures 1-4).

In order to investigate the potential impact on Aboriginal cultural heritage resulting from

the proposed gravel extraction, Landskape was engaged by Cristal Mining to conduct a

cultural heritage due diligence assessment of three proposed gravel extraction pits.

The specific objectives of the cultural heritage due diligence assessment were to:

Locate and record any Aboriginal cultural heritage sites within the vicinities of the

proposed gravel extraction pits in consultation with representatives of the registered

Aboriginal parties (RAP) for the Atlas Campaspe Mineral Sands Project;

Identify the nature and extent of potential impacts of the proposed activities on

Aboriginal cultural heritage; and,

Devise options in consultation with the RAPs to avoid or mitigate potential impacts

of the proposed gravel extraction on Aboriginal cultural heritage places and objects.

Preparation of this report involved collation of relevant archaeological and

environmental information and the use of aerial photographs and topographic and

geomorphic maps to identify areas likely to contain archaeological sites. Fieldwork was

undertaken on 12 November 2016 by project archaeologist Dr Matt Cupper with the

assistance of Muthi Muthi Nation Aboriginal Corporation representatives Tara Bruton

and Ryan Kelly.


2

Figure 1. Regional setting of the proposed gravel pits.

Pit B

Pit C

Pit A


3

Figure 2. Location of the proposed gravel Pit A.


4

Figure 3. Location of the proposed gravel Pit B.


5

Figure 4. Location of the proposed gravel Pit C.


6

2 Proposed Gravel Pits

The proposed activities associated with the extraction of gravel are summarized below.

2.1 Project Objectives

Cristal Mining intends to extract gravel from nearby calcrete outcrops to upgrade

existing access roads (the Heavy Mineral Concentrate transport route) to the Atlas

Campaspe Mineral Sands Project area, approximately 100 km north of Balranald in

southwestern NSW (Figures 1-4).

2.2 Proposed Activities

The proposed activities include clearing remnant vegetation, soil stripping and

stockpiling, gravel extraction and site rehabilitation.

Heavy earthmoving equipment (excavators, front-end-loaders, etc) would be used to

excavate up to three gravel pits. Earthmoving equipment, dump trucks to remove the

gravel and support vehicles would utilize existing access roads and tracks for Pits A and

B, with a short section (800 m) of access road required for Pit C.

2.3 Potential Disturbance

Activities would occupy areas of 37 ha (Pit A), 4 ha (Pit B) and 67.5 ha (Pit C). Parts of

Pits A and B have previously been used for gravel extraction. The topsoil and calcrete

would be removed to depths of up to 2-3 metres. Topsoil would be reinstated at the

completion of gravel extraction and the areas rehabilitated.

2.4 Flexibility of Design

The areas for the proposed gravel pits are preferred locations, constrained by the

presence of suitable calcrete gravel but are relatively flexible. Their final locations would

be modified to avoid any potential harm to Aboriginal cultural heritage.


7

3 Aboriginal Community Involvement

This cultural heritage study has involved representatives of the local Aboriginal

community and considered their cultural values and concerns.

3.1 Methodology for the Aboriginal Community Involvement:

Aboriginal community participation in the Aboriginal cultural heritage due diligence

assessment comprised involvement: before the field assessment to assess preliminary

community views and organize a field survey team; during the field survey with the

Aboriginal team members; and after the field survey to discuss the findings and

recommendations for Aboriginal cultural heritage management.

3.1.1 Aboriginal Community Involvement Prior to the Field Assessment:

Cristal Mining’s Resource Development Manager Dr Ray Roberts, Human Resources

Business Partner David Arthur, Envirocom’s Principal Andrew Minns and project

archaeologist Dr Matt Cupper met with representatives of the registered Aboriginal

parties for the Atlas Campaspe Mineral Sands Project in Balranald on 24 June 2015 to

update them on the project.

The representatives of the registered Aboriginal parties present were Danny Kelly, Tara

Bruton, Cameron Murray (Muthi Muthi Nations Aboriginal Corporation), Gary Pappin

(Wakool Indigenous Corporation) and Faye Johnson (Ivanhoe Community Working

Party).

The proposed developments associated with the Atlas Campaspe Mineral Sands

Project were discussed with the representatives of the registered Aboriginal parties.

Opinions of the representatives of the registered Aboriginal parties about the

development and its potential impacts on cultural heritage were sought and any

concerns or queries were addressed.

3.1.2 Aboriginal Community Involvement During the Field Assessment:

On the recommendation of the registered Aboriginal parties Ryan Kelly and Tara

Bruton, both representative of the local Aboriginal community, were involved in the field

survey undertaken on 12 November 2016.

3.1.3 Aboriginal Community Involvement Following the Field Assessment:

At the completion of the field assessment, the project archaeologist Dr Matt Cupper

updated Danny Kelly (Muthi Muthi Nations Aboriginal Corporation) on the results of the

assessment and recommendations for managing Aboriginal cultural heritage. Dr


8

Cupper also met with Mr Kelly in Balranald on 21 December 2016 to address any

queries.

A draft copy of this cultural heritage due diligence assessment was provided to the

Muthi Muthi Nations Aboriginal Corporation on 9 December 2016. Any further

comments will be passed on to Cristal Mining and the Office of Environment and

Heritage.

3.2 Aboriginal Community Concerns

Aboriginal people of southwestern NSW are concerned about any development that

might impact upon Aboriginal sites on land that is traditionally theirs. All land has high

cultural significance for individual Aboriginal people and for the Aboriginal community

collectively. It should also be noted that any development upon, or disturbance of land is

contrary to principal Aboriginal beliefs regarding land, its values and its inherent cultural

significance.

The local Balranald Aboriginal community is particularly concerned about the

preservation of Aboriginal archaeological sites. However, the Aboriginal community

representatives consulted by project archaeologist Dr Matt Cupper expressed no

objections to the proposed gravel extraction proceeding, because the works are not

envisaged to impact upon cultural heritage places or items if the management

recommendations outlined in Sections 7 and 8 are adopted.


9

4 Legislative Context

All registered and unregistered Aboriginal archaeological sites in NSW are protected by

the State National Parks and Wildlife Act 1974 and Environmental Planning and

Assessment Act 1979. These Acts prohibit the destruction or disturbance of any cultural

heritage place or object, whether on private or public land. These places are considered

to have significance according to the guidelines of the Australia ICOMOS Charter for

the Conservation of Places of Cultural Significance (the Burra Charter).

The Office of Environment and Heritage is the NSW State Government agency that

administers these Acts as they pertain to Aboriginal heritage.

4.1 National Parks and Wildlife Act 1974

In NSW, the National Parks and Wildlife Act 1974 provides legislative protection for all

Aboriginal cultural heritage places and objects.

Section 86 of the National Parks and Wildlife Act 1974 sets out a number of offences

about ‘harm’ or desecration to an Aboriginal place or object. Harm means any act or

omission that:

Destroys, defaces or damages a place or object;

Moves an object from the land on which it had been situated; or,

Causes or permits a place or object to be harmed.

There are two types of offences for harming an Aboriginal place or object:

An offence of harming or desecrating an object which a person knows is an

Aboriginal object (a ‘knowing offence’)

An offence of harming a place or object whether or not a person knows it is an

Aboriginal place or object (a ‘strict liability offence’).

The maximum penalty for the knowing offence is $550,000 or $275,000 (depending on

whether there are aggravating circumstances) and 1 or 2 years’ gaol for an individual.

For a corporation the maximum penalty for the knowing offence is $1.1 million. The

maximum penalty for the strict liability offence in the case of an Aboriginal object is

$110,000 or $55,000 (depending whether there are aggravating circumstances) for an

individual or $220,000 for a corporation. The maximum penalty for harming an

Aboriginal place is $550,000 and 2 years’ goal for an individual and $1.1 million for a

corporation.

Section 87 National Parks and Wildlife Act 1974 provide several defences and

exemptions for both types of offence. For example, a person who exercises due


10

diligence in determining that their actions will not harm Aboriginal objects has a defence

against prosecution for the strict liability offence if they later unknowingly harm an object.

Accordingly, the Office of Environment and Heritage has prepared a code of practice to

assist individuals and organisations who choose to exercise due diligence. This Due

Diligence Code of Practice for the Protection of Aboriginal Objects in New South Wales

(DECCW 2010a) has been adopted as the NSW Minerals Industry Due Diligence Code

of Practice for the Protection of Aboriginal Objects (NSW Minerals Council 2010). The

present study conforms to this code of practice.

It is also a defence if a person holds a current Aboriginal Heritage Impact Permit (AHIP)

under section 90 National Parks and Wildlife Act 1974 and complies with the conditions

of the AHIP.

In addition to the defences in the National Parks and Wildlife Act 1974, the general

defence of ‘honest and reasonable mistake’ also applies to the strict liability offence.

4.2 Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979

The Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 also recognizes the need to

protect the cultural and natural heritage of NSW. It complements the National Parks and

Wildlife Act 1974 in that it provides for planning before development and it obliges the

developer to consult persons with relevant expertise or experience (Bowdler 1983:14).

The heritage scope of this legislation is wider than that of the National Parks and

Wildlife Act 1974 and sites of significance to contemporary communities are included.

4.3 Australia ICOMOS Charter for the Conservation of Places of Cultural Significance (Burra Charter)

The Australia ICOMOS Charter for the Conservation of Places of Cultural Significance

(Burra Charter) was adopted at a conference at the historic mining town of Burra, South

Australia, in 1979 (latest update 2013). This charter defines the procedures and basic

principles to be followed in the preservation of all types of sites, for example, Aboriginal

shell middens, ancient campsites represented by stone artefact scatters, or historic

mining shafts. These places are considered to have cultural significance either to

Aboriginal people or to Australians in general. Cultural significance is a term used to

encompass all the meanings and values that a particular place may have to people,

beyond its utilitarian value. It refers to ‘aesthetic, historical, scientific or social value for

past or present generations, or for its likely value to future generations’ (Marquis-Kyle

and Walker 1992: 73).

Under the guidelines of the Burra Charter, any Aboriginal sites found in the activity


11

areas for the proposed gravel pits would have social value. According to the charter,

social value is defined as:

…the qualities for which a place has become a focus of spiritual, political, national,

or other cultural sentiment to a majority or minority group (Marquis-Kyle and

Walker 1992: 73).

Some sites found in these areas could also have scientific value. This is assessed

according to each particular site’s research or scientific potential to provide information

about past Aboriginal or wider Australian culture, the environment, or human behaviour

generally. According to the Burra Charter:

The scientific or research value of a place will depend upon the importance of the

data involved or its rarity, quality or representativeness and on the degree to

which the place may contribute further substantial information (Marquis-Kyle and

Walker 1992: 73).

While the scientific or research value of a place may vary, the Aboriginal community of

the Balranald region consider all Aboriginal archaeological sites to be significant. The

Aboriginal people of southwestern NSW have an ancient and unique traditional culture,

which is still very much alive today. These sites are important to the local Aboriginal

people, and others, because they are a link to their ancestral lands and help keep their

traditional culture alive.


12

5 Environmental Context

The proposed gravel pits are located in dunefields and plains north of the Murrumbidgee

River approximately 100 km north of Balranald in southwestern New South Wales. The

Murrumbidgee River is a regulated permanent stream course with associated lakes and

wetland areas. This fluvio-lacustrine system lies within the Riverine Plain of the Murray

Basin. Climate is semi-arid, receiving approximately 300 mm of rainfall per annum

(Bureau of Meteorology 2016). The surface geology of the region is mostly aeolian

(wind-lain) sediments, while underlying sequences within the basin were deposited by

shallow seas and lakes over the past 60 million years (Brown and Stephenson 1991).

The proposed gravel pits occupy sandplain forms, which are low, undulating regions of

irregular sandy hummocks. The sandplains are vegetated by mosaics of Mallee

(Eucalyptus spp.) tall shrublands, Belah (Casuarina pauper) — Rosewood (Alectryon

oleifolius) — Wilga (Geijera parvifolia) low-open woodlands and Bluebush (Maireana

spp) low-open shrublands (Figures 5-8). The sandplains are part of the Hatfield and

Murululu land systems (Soil Conservation Service 1980, 1991). These land systems

comprise:

Hatfield land system (Pit B): extensive, slightly undulating sandplains with

isolated small depressions. Sandplains of calcareous, loamy to loamy sand red

earths and duplex soils with scattered clumps of Rosewood and Belah;

moderately dense stands of Black or Pearl Bluebush, abundant short grasses

and forbs. Areas of deeper sandy soils with scattered White Pine (Callitris

glaucophylla). and abundant short grasses and forbs. Depressions of grey clay

soils with Canegrass (Eragrostis australasica); rimmed by scalded duplex soils.

Murululu land system (Pits A and C): Slightly undulating, partially scalded

sandplains with areas of aligned dunes and isolated small depressions

Sandplains of calcareous, loamy to loamy sand red earths and duplex soils with

scattered clumps of Rosewood and Belah, scattered stands of Bluebush,

abundant short grasses and forbs. Dunes and rises of deeper loamy red earths

with Mallee and scattered Rosewood and Belah, abundant short grasses and

forbs dunes of deep brownish sands with clumped White Cypress Pine (Callitris

glaucophylla). Isolated depressions of grey clays with Canegrass (Eragrostis

australasica) or Nitre Goosefoot (Chenopodium nitrariaceum).

The environment of the project areas has been modified by past European land use

practices. This has mainly included low intensity cattle and sheep grazing and

installation of roads and other access tracks and fences. Gravel has previously been

removed for most of Pit B and part of Pit A.


13

Figure 5. Proposed location of gravel Pit B.

Figure 6. Proposed location of gravel Pit A.


14

Figure 7. Proposed location of gravel Pit A.

Figure 8. Proposed location of gravel Pit C.


15

6 Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Context

6.1 Archaeological Record

Some of the earliest evidence of human occupation of Australia comes from

southwestern NSW (Bowler et al. 1970, 2003, Thorne 1975, Bowler 1998, Thorne et al.

1999, Cupper and Duncan 2006, Olley et al. 2006). Stone artefacts found at Lake

Mungo in the Willandra Lakes region, about 30 km to the northwest of the Nepean

project area, have been dated to between 46,000 to 50,000 years ago (Bowler et al.

2003). The burials of a male and female at Lake Mungo are 42,000 years old (Olley et al.

2006, cf. Thorne et al. 1999). These are the oldest Australian human remains, with

‘Mungo Man’ (Willandra Lakes Hominid 3) also providing the earliest human

mitochondrial DNA in the world (Adcock et al. 2001; cf. Cooper et al. 2001). Fossil

footprints of a group of people dating to 19,000-20,000 years ago at Lake Garnpung,

approximately 60 km northwest of the Atlas Campaspe Mineral Sands Project area, are

the largest set of Pleistocene (Ice Age) human footprints in the world (Webb et al.

2006).

All that remains at many of these archaeological sites are flakes of stone debris from the

making and resharpening of stone tools (Allen 1974, 1980, 1990, 1998, Johnston and

Clark 1998). These were made both at Aboriginal open habitation areas (campsites) or

special activity areas such as stone knapping sites. As well as being the sites of

manufacture and maintenance of stone implements, open habitation areas usually

contain evidence of domestic and other activities such as cooking and food preparation.

Campfires or oven hearths are common, marked by heat retaining stones or

hearthstones and charcoal. Organic remains consist of burnt animal bones, emu and

aquatic bird eggshell and freshwater mussel shell. Human burials are relatively

abundant in the lunettes (Thorne 1975, Webb 1989).

6.2 Ethnohistory

Aboriginal people of the Muthi Muthi language group occupied the study area at the time

of first contact with Europeans (Sturt 1833, 1984 [1844-6], Mitchell 1839, Eyre 1845,

1985 [1842], Becker 1979 [1860-61], Beckler 1993 [1860], Krefft 1865, Allen 1974,

Tindale 1974, Hardy 1976, Clark 1990, Martin 2001). This language is closely related to

neighbouring groups including the Barkindji and Ngiyampaa, and their speakers shared

many cultural similarities, particular kinship and totemic systems (Blows 1995, Howitt

1996).

The Muthi Muthi, Barkindji and Ngiyampaa were hunter-fisher-gatherers and appear to


16

have had a semi-sedentary lifestyle. Early accounts by European observers suggest

that they lived near more permanent water sources such as along the stream courses

and lakes of the Darling, Murray, Murrumbidgee and Lachlan Rivers during the warmest

months of the year, with people moving into the dunefields to collect food after winter

rains (Allen 1974).

6.3 Types of Cultural Heritage Sites

Based on the results and analytical conclusions of previous archaeological surveys in

similar landscape contexts in the Balranald region and wider southwestern NSW it is

possible to predict the types and topographic contexts of Aboriginal cultural heritage

sites in the Atlas Campaspe Mineral Sands Project area. The occurrence and survival

of archaeological sites is, however, dependent on many factors including

micro-topography and the degree of land surface disturbance.

The types of Aboriginal cultural heritage site previously recorded in the Balranald region

and wider southwestern NSW are described below.

6.3.1 Stone Artefact Scatters

Scatters of stone artefacts exposed at the ground surface are one of the most commonly

occurring types of archaeological site in the region (Hope 1982). The remains of fire

hearths may also be associated with the artefacts. In rare instances, sites that were

used over a long period of time may accumulate sediments and become stratified. That

is, there may be several layers of occupation buried one on top of another.

Stone artefact scatters are almost invariably located near permanent or semi-permanent

water sources. Local topography is also important in that open campsites tend to occur

on level, well-drained ground elevated above the local water source. In southwestern

NSW they are commonly located around the margins of lakes and swamps, on river

terraces, along creek-lines and also on claypans.

6.3.2 Hearths

Hearths consist of lumps of burnt clay or stone cobble hearthstones. Sometimes ash

and charcoal are preserved. Other materials found in hearths include animal bone,

freshwater mussel shell, emu eggshell and stone artefacts. Hearths probably represent

the remains of cooking ovens, similar to those described in ethnographic accounts by

Surveyor-General of NSW Major Thomas Livingstone Mitchell (1839) and early settler

Peter Beveridge (1869, 1886) (see also Coutts et al. 1979). These were lined with baked

clay nodules and stone cobbles, possibly to retain heat. Hearths may be isolated or

occur in clusters and may be associated with open campsites or middens. They are


17

often located in dune swales, particularly on claypans, near soaks and on floodplain

terraces.

6.3.3 Freshwater Shell Middens

Shell middens are deposits of shell and other food remains accumulated by Aboriginal

people as food refuse. In inland NSW these middens typically comprise shells of the

freshwater lacustrine mussel Velesunio ambiguus or the freshwater riverine mussel

Alathyria jacksoni. Freshwater middens are most frequently found as thin layers or small

patches of shell and often contain stone or bone artefacts and evidence of cooking.

Such sites are relatively abundant along the Murrumbidgee River and the other river

systems and associated wetlands of southwestern NSW.

6.3.4 Earth Mounds

Earth mounds may have been used by Aboriginal people as cooking ovens or as

campsites. They are common in southwestern NSW. Originally they appear to have

ranged from 3 to 35 metres in diameter and from 0.5 to 2 metres in height. Today,

however, they may be difficult to recognize because of the effects of ploughing, grazing

and burrowing rabbits. Earth oven material, stone artefacts, food refuse and the remains

of hut foundations have been exposed in excavated earth mounds.

6.3.5 Quarry Sites

Quarries are locations where Aboriginal people obtained raw material for their stone

tools or ochre for their art and decoration. Materials commonly used for making flaked

stone tools include chert, silcrete, quartz and quartzite. Stone sources within the

Willandra Lakes region include silcrete outcrops on the floors and western shorelines of

Lakes Mungo, Chibnalwood and Leaghur (Bowler et al. 1970, Allen 1990, 1998,

Johnston and Clark 1998). Palaeozoic bedrock of the Manfred, Manara and Darnick

Ranges to the north of the West Balranald and Nepean Project areas has also been

quarried.

6.3.6 Modified Trees

Slabs of bark were cut from trees by Aboriginal people and used for a variety of

purposes including roofing shelters and constructing canoes, shields and containers

(Edwards 1972). Scars also resulted from the cutting of toeholds for climbing trees to

obtain honey or to capture animals such as possums. In southwestern NSW region

River Red Gums and Black Box are the most commonly scarred species. The

classification of scarred trees as natural, European or Aboriginal is often problematic.

However, if the scar is Aboriginal the tree must now be more than ~150 years old.


18

6.3.7 Stone Arrangements, Ceremonial Rings and Ceremony and Dreaming

Sites

Stone arrangements range from cairns or piles of rock to more elaborate arrangements

such as stone circles or standing slabs of rock held upright by stones around the base.

Some stone arrangements were used in ceremonial activities whilst others may

represent sacred or totemic sites. Other features associated with the spiritual aspects of

Aboriginal life are those now called ‘ceremony and dreaming’ sites. These can be either

stone arrangements or natural features such as rock outcrops, which may be associated

with initiation ceremonies or the activities of ancestral creators.

6.3.8 Burials

Aboriginal burial grounds may consist of a single interment or a suite of burials. Burials

tend to be in areas of sandy soil that were easy to dig and above floodwaters. Burials

are frequently located in source-bordering sand dunes, sand ridges, lunettes and

levees along watercourses (Webb 1989, Bonhomme 1990, Hope 1993, Littleton 1999).

Knowledge of Aboriginal burial grounds is best sought from local Aboriginal

communities.

6.4 Aboriginal Sites in the Project Area

According to the Office of Environment and Heritage’s Aboriginal Heritage Information

Management System (AHIMS), accessed on 3 November 2016 (AHIMS search

numbers 252504; Appendix 1), no Aboriginal cultural heritage places or objects have

been located previously at any of the proposed gravel pits or their surrounds (within at

least 5-10 km). This is probably largely due to patchy past archaeological survey

coverage but may also partly reflect an absence of reliable water sources in the

sandplains of the study area.


19

7 Project Design and Survey Methodology

In accordance with standard archaeological practice and the Code of Practice for

Archaeological Investigation of Aboriginal Objects in New South Wales (DECCW

2010b) a project design and survey methodology was prepared as a key component of

the cultural heritage due diligence assessment.

7.1 Site Predictive Model

Previous archaeological studies indicate that the most frequently recorded Aboriginal

cultural heritage places in the Balranald region and wider southwestern NSW are stone

artefact scatters, hearths, shell middens and burials (Bowler et al. 1970, Allen 1974,

1980, 1990, 1998, Johnston and Clark 1998). Other site types include stone sources,

culturally modified trees and stone arrangements. Based on these observations of

archaeological site types and their distribution and landscape setting, the following

predictive model of Aboriginal cultural heritage site locations for the proposed gravel

pits can be proposed. A summary of the predictive model is presented in Table 1.

Past Aboriginal occupation of the Balranald region and wider southwestern NSW would

have focussed on the area’s lakes and other wetlands because these areas offered a

rich resource zone in an otherwise arid landscape. Consequently, most archaeological

sites can be expected adjacent to freshwater sources. Although Aboriginal people

would have regularly journeyed into the poorly watered hinterland to collect plants, hunt

animals and exploit mineral resources, these areas including the West Balranald and

Nepean project areas have a much lower probability of containing Aboriginal cultural

heritage places and objects than the riverine and lacustrine environs of the

Murrumbidgee River.

Based on observations of archaeological sites and their distribution and landscape

setting, the following predictive model of site types and locations within the proposed

gravel pits can be proposed:

Stone artefact scatters, hearth sites and isolated finds of stone artefacts or

hearthstones have the potential to occur within the proposed gravel pits. The

density of these types of sites is predicted to be low, given the absence of nearby

permanent sources of water. Open occupation sites are typically found within 500 m

of water sources, so such sites are most likely to be encountered on level ground

adjacent to relict lake basins and claypans that may intermittently retain surface

water following rain. These landforms occur to south of the proposed gravel pits.


20

Stone quarry sites have the potential to occur at the proposed gravel pits, as

silcrete stone sources have already been recorded at the nearby Willandra Lakes.

Silcrete outcrops noted elsewhere in southwestern NSW often occur at topographic

low points in the landscape such as dry lakebeds (e.g. Bowler et al. 1970, Allen

1990, 1998, Johnston and Clark 1998, Cupper 2007).

Scars made by Aboriginal people have the potential to occur on any mature

Black Box trees, which sometimes grow around claypans within the sandplains of

southwestern NSW. River red gum trees, the other taxa typically scarred by

Aboriginal people in the region, definitely will not occur at the proposed gravel pits.

The chance of encountering shell middens is predicted to be low, as they are

usually found near permanent water sources, as are burial sites. Source-bordering

dunes and lunettes adjacent to rivers and lakes are the landforms most likely to

contain human skeletal remains.

Although stone arrangements have been recorded in southwestern NSW, they are

not common and are considered unlikely to be encountered at the proposed gravel

pits. Stone arrangements tend to occur on level ground, often on elevated

landforms such as floodplain terraces.

It should be noted that while predictive studies such as this can be expected to identify

areas in which sites associated with economic or subsistence activities may be present,

notably open habitation areas, other sites may fall outside such a predictive framework.

For example, places associated with spiritual aspects of traditional Aboriginal society

such as ceremony and dreaming sites are often located at topographically distinct or

unique features, which cannot be identified from an examination of maps or other

records. For this reason it is essential that local Aboriginal communities be consulted so

that sites of significance to them can be identified.

Table 1. Probability of encountering Aboriginal cultural heritage within the gravel pits.

Site type Scarred trees

Stone artefacts

Shell Middens

Stone quarries

Hearths Burials

Probability Low Moderate Negligible Low Moderate Negligible


21

7.2 Field Methodology

7.2.1 Logistics

Fieldwork was undertaken on 12 November 2016 by archaeologist Dr Matt Cupper with

the assistance of the Muthi Muthi Nation Aboriginal Corporation representatives Ryan

Kelly and Tara Bruton.

7.2.2 Survey Methods

The area surveyed was based on maps provided by Cristal Mining prior to the survey.

The methods employed were consistent with standard archaeological practice and

OEH’s Guide to Investigating, Assessing and Reporting on Aboriginal Cultural Heritage

in New South Wales (OEH 2011) and Code of Practice for Archaeological Investigation

of Aboriginal Objects in New South Wales (DECCW 2010).

The archaeologist and Aboriginal representatives examined the ground surface of the

proposed work areas for archaeological traces such as stone artefacts, hearths, heat

retainers, shells and mounds, and also mature trees for evidence of Aboriginal scarring

(Figures 9 and 10). The proposed activity areas were inspected with a pedestrian

survey whereby the team members walked across the areas in a series of transects.

Transects were distributed evenly over the proposed work areas and approximately

10 m apart. Due to the openness of the landscape it was possible to identify likely site

locations from at least 10 m and deviate from the transects to make closer inspections.

Particular attention was paid to areas with high ground surface visibility such as in

scalds and deflation hollows and along graded fencelines and vehicle tracks. Surface

visibility was particularly high across the study area due to wind, water, vehicular and

stock erosion.

7.3 Survey Coverage Data

7.3.1 Conditions of Visibility

Conditions of ground surface visibility will affect how many sites are located. Visibility

may also skew the results of a survey. If, for example, conditions of ground surface

visibility vary dramatically between different environments, then this in turn will be

reflected in the numbers of sites reported for each area. The area with the best visibility

may be reported as having the most sites (because they are visible on the ground) while

another area with less visibility but perhaps more sites will be reported as having very

little occupation. It is important therefore to consider the nature of ground surface

visibility as part of any archaeological investigation.


22

Figure 9. Survey team members inspecting proposed gravel Pit B.

Figure 10. Team members inspecting proposed gravel Pit A.


23

Figure 11. Proposed gravel Pit B showing the excellent surface visibility conditions.

Figure 12. Proposed gravel Pit A showing the excellent surface visibility conditions.


24

Conditions of ground surface visibility were typically around 80 % (Table 2, Figures 11

and 12). These excellent conditions of visibility were mainly due to the fact that the

ground surface was widely exposed by erosion by scalding and stock and vehicular

traffic and grass and herbaceous plant growth was sparse.

Table 2. Visibility conditions of the proposed work areas.

Land System Work Areas

Landforms Vegetation Visibility (%)

Exposures

1 Hatfield Pit B Sandplain Mallee, Belah, Rosewood, Wilga, White Cypress Pine

80 Vehicle tracks, graded fencelines, scalds, animal tracks, gullies, deflation hollows

2 Mulurulu Pit A Pit B

Sandplain Mallee, Belah, Rosewood

80 Vehicle tracks, graded fencelines, scalds, animal tracks, gullies, deflation hollows

7.3.2 Coverage Analysis

Coverage analysis is a useful measurement to allow cultural resource managers to

assess surveys from adjacent areas and it also allows some meaningful calculation of

the actual sample size surveyed. The actual or effective area surveyed by a study

depends on the conditions of ground surface visibility. Conditions of surface visibility are

affected by vegetation cover, geomorphic processes such as sedimentation and erosion

rates and the abundance of natural rock that may obscure the remains of cultural

activities.

Approximately 14 % of the surface areas of the proposed work areas were inspected on

foot, with an effective coverage of 11 % (Table 3). This is a high coverage and was due

to the excellent conditions of surface visibility.

Table 3. Effective coverage of the proposed work areas.

Land System

Work Areas

Area Visibility Coverage Effective coverage

(ha) (%) (ha) (% area)

(ha) (%)

1 Hatfield Pit B 4.0 80 1.0 25 0.8 20 2 Mulurulu Pit A

Pit C 104.5 80 14.4 14 11.5 11

Total 108.5 15.4 14 12.3 11


25

8 Results and Discussion

One Aboriginal cultural object, an isolated find of a stone artefact (AHIMS site number

40-5-0180) was identified in Pit C (Table 4; Figures 13 and 14). This is a broken

fragment of a sandstone grindstone measuring 72 x 50 x 15 mm. A summary

description of this feature is contained in Table 4 and mapped in Figure 15.

Table 4. Summary data of Aboriginal cultural heritage place in proposed gravel Pit C.

AHIMS Site Number

Site Name

GDA94 Zone 54 (mE)

GDA94 Zone 54 (mN)

Site size (m)

Landform Contents

40-5-0180 Iona Artefact 1

723522 6241165 na Sandplain Broken fragment of a sandstone grindstone

This cultural heritage site is very small with a low diversity of Aboriginal objects (n=1),

non-stratified, and well represented in the region, so has a low significance. It however

has higher cultural importance to the Muthi Muthi Aboriginal community as it is tangible

evidence of past use of the study area by their ancestors.

The general dearth of Aboriginal cultural heritage sites in the proposed gravel pits is

attributable to the fact that they are not near any natural drainage lines or depressions,

which tended to be the focus of past Aboriginal occupation. Moreover, archaeological

surveys for small developments only rarely encounter Aboriginal cultural heritage sites.

Scarred trees were not identified because of the absence of suitable trees. Quarry sites

are also definitely not represented in the study area as rock outcrop is lacking.

Landforms such as lunettes or source-bordering sand dunes that might contain sensitive

sub-surface cultural material such as burials do not occur in the proposed gravel pits.

The proposed gravel pits are sited in areas where there is low risk to any identified

cultural heritage if the management requirements detailed in Section 8 are implemented

and the potential for uncovering any previously unidentified cultural heritage is also very

low to negligible.

Cristal Mining must avoid harm to AHIMS site number 40-5-0180. It is recommended

that a 20 m exclusion buffer be established around the Aboriginal object (i.e. a 20 m

radius buffer around the perimeter of the Aboriginal object; Figure 15). The exclusion

zone must be appropriately fenced with a permanent barrier. Employees, contractors

and visitors must be instructed not to enter the area except for approved land

management activities such as weed spraying, fence maintenance, etc.


26

Figure 13. Aboriginal object AHIMS site number 40-5-0180.

Figure 14. Aboriginal object AHIMS site number 40-5-0180.


27

Figure 15. Location of AHIMS site number 40-5-0180 in proposed gravel Pit C.

N S

EW

025

0

Met

res

AH

IMS

site

num

ber

40-5

-018

0

Pit C

Excl

usio

n Zo

ne


28

9 Recommendations

Based on the results of this cultural heritage due diligence assessment and consultation

with representatives of the RAPs it is concluded that:

The proposed gravel extraction be allowed to proceed because the activity can be

modified so harm to cultural heritage is avoided;

Harm to Aboriginal object AHIMS site number 40-5-0180 in proposed gravel Pit C

must be avoided by establishing a 20 m exclusion zone (i.e. a 20 m radius buffer

around the perimeter of Aboriginal object). The exclusion zone must be

appropriately fenced with a permanent barrier. Employees, contractors and visitors

must be instructed not to enter the area except for approved land management

activities such as weed spraying, fence maintenance, etc.;

If any previously unidentified Aboriginal cultural heritage places or objects are

encountered during the course of the proposed gravel extraction all activities likely

to affect the material shall cease immediately and the Office of Environment and

Heritage’s Environmental Line (tel: 131 555) consulted about an appropriate course

of action prior to recommencement of work. It can be an offence under the relevant

legislation to disturb or destroy Aboriginal cultural heritage objects without a valid

Aboriginal Heritage Impact Permit;

If human skeletal remains are encountered during the course of the proposed works

all activities in that area must cease. Remains must not be handled or otherwise

disturbed except to prevent further disturbance. If the remains are thought to be less

than 100 years old the Police or the State Coroners Office (tel: 02 9552 4066) must

be notified. If there is reason to suspect that the skeletal remains are more than 100

years old and Aboriginal, the proponent should contact the Office of Environment

and Heritage’s Environmental Line (tel: 131 555) for advice; and,

Cristal Mining should continue to involve representatives of the RAPs in the project.


29

10 References

Adcock, G. J., Dennis, E. S., Easteal, S., Huttley, G. A., Jermiin, L. S., Peacock, W. J.,

Thorne, A., 2001. Mitochondrial DNA sequences in ancient Australians: implications for

modern human origins. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science U.S.A. 98,

537-542.

Allen, H. (1974). The Bagundji of the Darling Basin: cereal gatherers in an uncertain

environment. World Archaeology 5, 309-322.

Allen, H. (1980). Aborigines of the western plains of New South Wales. In The

Aborigines of New South Wales. (ed. C. Haigh and W. Goldstein). pp. 33-43. NSW

National Parks and Wildlife Service, Sydney.

Allen, H. (1990). Environmental prehistory in southwestern New South Wales during the

Late Pleistocene. In The World at 18 000 BP. vol. 2. Low Latitudes. (ed. C. Gamble and

O. Soffer). pp. 296-321. Unwin Hyman, London.

Allen, H. (1998). Reinterpreting the 1969-1972 Willandra Lakes archaeological surveys.

Archaeology in Oceania 33, 207-220.

Becker, L. (1979 [1860-1861]). Ludwig Becker: artist & naturalist with the Burke & Wills

expedition. (Edited: M. Tipping). Melbourne University Press for the Library Council of

Victoria, Carlton, Victoria.

Beckler, H. (1993 [1860]). A Journey to Cooper’s Creek. Melbourne University Press,

Carlton, Victoria.

Beveridge, P. (1869). On Aboriginals ovens. Journal of the Anthropological Society of

London 7, 187-189.

Beveridge, P. (1883). On the Aborigines inhabiting the great lacustrine and riverine

depressions of the Lower Murray, Lower Murrumbidgee, Lower Lachlan, and Lower

Darling. Journal and Proceedings of the Royal Society of New South Wales 17, 19-74.

Blows, J.M. (1995). Eagle and Crow: An Exploration of an Australian Aboriginal Myth.

Garland Publishing, NY.

Bonhomme, T. (1990). Aboriginal burials and sand mining on the Riverine Plain, NSW.

Report to the NSW National Parks and Wildlife Service.

Bowdler, S. (1983). Aboriginal sites on the Crown-timber lands of New South Wales.

Report to the Forestry Commission of New South Wales.

Bowler, J.M. (1998). Willandra Lakes revisited: environmental framework for human


30

occupation. Archaeology in Oceania 33, 120-155.

Bowler, J.M., Jones, R., Allen, H. and Thorne, A.G. (1970). Pleistocene human remains

from Australia: a living site and human cremation from Lake Mungo, western New South

Wales. World Archaeology 2, 39-60.

Bowler, J.M., Johnston, H., Olley, J.M., Prescott, J.R., Roberts, R.G., Shawcross, W.

and Spooner, N.A. (2003). New ages for human occupation and climatic change at Lake

Mungo, Australia. Nature 421, 837-840.

Brown, C.M. and Stephenson, A.E. (1991). Geology of the Murray Basin, southeastern

Australia. Bureau of Mineral Resources Bulletin 235.

Bureau of Meteorology (2016). Climate statistics for Australian locations – Balranald.

(online: http://www.bom.gov.au/climate/averages/tables/cw_049002.shtml)

Clark, I.D. (1990). Aboriginal languages and clans: an historical atlas of western and

central Victoria 1800-1900. Monash University, Clayton, Victoria.

Cooper, A., Rambaut, A., Macaulay, V., Willerslev, E., Hansen, A.J., Stringer, C. (2001).

Human origins and ancient human DNA. Science 292, 1655-1656.

Coutts, P.J.F., Henderson, P. and Fullagar, R.L.K. (1979). A Preliminary Investigation of

Aboriginal Mounds in North-Western Victoria. Ministry for Conservation, Melbourne.

Cupper, M.L. and Duncan, J. (2006). Last glacial megafaunal death assemblage and

early human occupation at Lake Menindee, southeastern Australia. Quaternary

Research 66, 332-341.

Department of Environment, Climate Change and Water (DECCW) (2010a). Due

Diligence Code of Practice for the Protection of Aboriginal Objects in New South Wales.

NSW Department of Environment, Climate Change and Water, Sydney.

Department of Environment, Climate Change and Water (DECCW) (2010b). Code of

Practice for Archaeological Investigation of Aboriginal Objects in New South Wales.

NSW Department of Environment, Climate Change and Water, Sydney.

Edwards, R., (1972). Aboriginal Bark Canoes of the Murray Valley, Rigby Limited,

Adelaide.

Eyre, E.J. (1845). Manners and customs of the Aborigines and the state of their

relations with Europeans. T. and W. Boone, London.

Eyre, E.J. (1985 [1842]). Reports and letters to Governor Grey from E.J. Eyre at

Moorunde. Sullivan’s Cove, Adelaide.

Hardy, M.E. (1976). Lament for the Barkindji: The vanished tribes of the Darling River


31

region. Rigby, Adelaide.

Hope, J. (1982). Archaeology and Environment of the Lower Darling Region of the

Murray Basin, southwestern New South Wales: the potential impact of seismic survey.

Report to ESSO Australia Ltd.

Hope, J. (1993). Aboriginal Burial Sites in the Murray-Darling Basin. Report to the

Murray-Darling Basin Commission.

Howitt, A.W. (1996). The Native Tribes of South-East Australia. Aboriginal Studies

Press.

Johnston, H. and Clark, P. (1998). Willandra Lakes Archaeological Investigations

1968-98. Archaeology in Oceania 33, 105-119.

Krefft, G. (1865). On the manners and customs of the Aborigines of the Lower Murray

and Darling. Transactions of the Philosophical Society of New South Wales 1862-1865,

357-374.

Littleton, J. (1999). East and west: burial practices along the Murray River. Archaeology

in Oceania 34, 1-14.

Marquis-Kyle, P. and Walker, M. (1992). The Illustrated Burra Charter. Australian

ICOMOS, Sydney.

Martin, S. (2001). Aboriginal Cultural Heritage of the Menindee Lakes Area. Part 1.

Aboriginal Ties to the Land. Report to the Menindee Lakes Ecologically Sustainable

Development Project Steering Committee.

Mitchell, T.L. (1839). Three expeditions into the interior of Eastern Australia. T. and W.

Boone, London.

NSW Minerals Council (2010). NSW Minerals Industry Due Diligence Code of Practice

for the Protection of Aboriginal Objects. NSW Minerals Council, Sydney

Olley, J.M., Roberts, R.G., Yoshida, H. and Bowler, J.M. (2006). Single-grain optical

dating of grave-infill associated with human burials at Lake Mungo, Australia.

Quaternary Science Reviews 25, 2469–2474.

Soil Conservation Service (1980). Land Systems Series Pooncarie Sheet 54-8. NSW

Soil Conservation Service, Sydney.

Soil Conservation Service (1991). Land Systems of Western New South Wales. NSW

Soil Conservation Service, Sydney.

Sturt, C.N. (1833). Two Expeditions into the interior of Southern Australia during the

years 1828, 1829, 1830 and 1831. Smith Elder, London.


32

Sturt, C.N. (1984 [1844-6]). Journal of the Central Australian Expedition. (Edited J.

Waterhouse). Caliban Books, Dover, NH.

Thorne, A.G. (1971). Mungo and Kow Swamp: morphological variation in Pleistocene

Australians. Mankind 8, 85-89.

Thorne, A.G. (1975). Kow Swamp and Lake Mungo. Ph.D. Dissertation, University of

Sydney.

Thorne, A., Grün, R., Mortimer, G., Simpson, J.J., McCulloch, M., Taylor, L. and Curnoe,

D. (1999). Australia’s oldest human remains: age of the Lake Mungo Skeleton. Journal

of Human Evolution 36, 591-692.

Tindale, N.B. (1974). Aboriginal Tribes of Australia: their terrain, environmental controls,

distribution, limits and proper names. University of California, Berkeley, CA.

Webb, S.G. (1989). The Willandra Lakes Hominids. Department of Prehistory,

Research School of Pacific Studies, Australian National University, Canberra.

Webb, S., Cupper, M.L. and Robins, R. (2006). Pleistocene human footprints from the

Willandra Lakes, southeastern Australia. Journal of Human Evolution 50, 405-413.


33

Appendix 1 NSW OEH Aboriginal Heritage Information Management System Search Results

AHIMS Web Services (AWS)Search Result Purchase Order/Reference : Balranald

Client Service ID : 252504

Date: 03 November 2016LandSkape - Natural & Cultural Heritage Management

P O Box 246

Merbein Victoria 3505

Dear Sir or Madam:

AHIMS Web Service search for the following area at Lat, Long From : -33.9769, 143.3474 - Lat, Long To :

-33.8101, 143.6118 with a Buffer of 50 meters, conducted by Matt Cupper on 03 November 2016.

Email: [email protected]

Attention: Matt Cupper

The context area of your search is shown in the map below. Please note that the map does not accurately

display the exact boundaries of the search as defined in the paragraph above. The map is to be used for

general reference purposes only.

A search of the Office of the Environment and Heritage AHIMS Web Services (Aboriginal Heritage Information

Management System) has shown that:

0

0

Aboriginal sites are recorded in or near the above location.

Aboriginal places have been declared in or near the above location. *

appendix f - balranald shire · southwestern nsw (figures 1-4). 2.2 proposed activities the...

Documents