riley, tullah historic heritage assessment minerals... · riley, tullah historic heritage...

RILEY, TULLAHHistoric Heritage Assessment

Final Report prepared forVenture Minerals

6 August 2012

Riley, TullahHistoric Heritage Assessment

6 August 2012i

TABLE OF CONTENTSTABLE OF CONTENTS...................................................................................................... I

1.0 INTRODUCTION......................................................................................................... 1

1.1 CLIENT AND PROJECT DETAILS.................................................................................................................11.2 AUTHORSHIP ......................................................................................................................................... 31.3 APPROACH ............................................................................................................................................. 31.4 LIMITATIONS AND CONSTRAINTS............................................................................................................ 41.5 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ........................................................................................................................... 4

2.0 HISTORIC HERITAGE ASSESSMENT ........................................................................6

2.1 DESKTOP REVIEW OF REGISTERED AND LISTED HERITAGE PLACES .......................................................... 62.1.1 World/National/Commonwealth Heritage Lists ...................................................................... 62.1.2 Tasmanian Heritage Register .....................................................................................................72.1.3 West Coast Planning Scheme.......................................................................................................72.1.4 Register of the National Estate................................................................................................... 82.1.5 Tasmanian Historic Places Inventory ....................................................................................... 82.1.6 Forestry Tasmania Database ..................................................................................................... 92.1.7 Previous Studies of the Region.................................................................................................... 9

2.2 SUMMARY OF HERITAGE PLACES ........................................................................................................... 9

3.0 HISTORICAL OVERVIEW ........................................................................................ 10

3.1 INTRODUCTION.....................................................................................................................................103.2 THE EUROPEAN EXPLORATION OF THE REGION ...................................................................................103.3 THE DEVELOPMENT OF MINING IN THE REGION .................................................................................. 113.4 THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE WILSON RIVER OSMIRIDIUM FIELD..........................................................163.5 WORKING AND LIVING ON THE OSMIRIDIUM FIELDS ............................................................................183.6 THE REGULATION OF OSMIRIDIUM MINING ........................................................................................ 243.7 OSMIRIDIUM WORKINGS WITHIN THE STUDY AREA............................................................................. 26

3.7.1 Mining Lease Areas ....................................................................................................................273.7.2 Areas Developed under Miner’s Rights ................................................................................... 29

3.8 THE DECLINE OF OSMIRIDIUM WORKINGS ON THE WILSON RIVER..................................................... 343.9 LATER PROSPECTING IN THE AREA ...................................................................................................... 34

4.0 HISTORIC HERITAGE FIELDWORK RESULTS & ASSESSMENT............................. 47

4.1 OVERVIEW ........................................................................................................................................... 474.2 PREAMBLE TO THE INVENTORY............................................................................................................ 47

4.2.1 Field Methods..............................................................................................................................474.2.2 Background to the Inventory ................................................................................................... 534.2.3 Summary of Results .................................................................................................................. 54

4.3 ASSESSING THE SIGNIFICANCE OF THE RILEY SITES..............................................................................554.4 LATE TWENTIETH CENTURY DEVELOPMENT WITHIN THE STUDY AREA ............................................... 564.5 COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS ......................................................................................................................61

4.5.1 Introduction ................................................................................................................................614.5.2 Osmiridium Mining at Adamsfield .......................................................................................... 644.5.3 The Earliness of the Wilson River Field................................................................................... 664.5.4 Concluding Remarks................................................................................................................. 67

4.6 STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE............................................................................................................. 674.7 INVENTORY DATA SHEETS – REFERENCE MAPS ................................................................................... 69

4.7.1 All Riley Sites.............................................................................................................................. 704.7.2 Sweeney Creek ............................................................................................................................ 714.7.3 Three Mile Creek.........................................................................................................................724.7.3 Riley Creek: Map 1 .....................................................................................................................734.7.4 Riley Creek: Map 2.....................................................................................................................744.7.5 Riley Creek: Map 3 .....................................................................................................................75


6 August 2012ii

4.7.6 Trinder Creek............................................................................................................................. 764.8 INVENTORY DATASHEETS .....................................................................................................................77

5.0 HISTORIC HERITAGE MANAGEMENT...................................................................115

5.1 CONCLUSION....................................................................................................................................... 1155.2 MANAGEMENT GUIDELINES ............................................................................................................... 115

6.0 REFERENCES.......................................................................................................... 117

6.1 SECONDARY REFERENCES................................................................................................................... 1176.1.1 Reports and Publications ......................................................................................................... 1176.1.2 Newspapers.............................................................................................................................. 1206.1.3 Websites..................................................................................................................................... 121

6.2 PRIMARY REFERENCES....................................................................................................................... 1216.2.1 Archival Material ..................................................................................................................... 1216.2.2 Historic Plans, Surveys & Photographs .................................................................................1226.2.3 Personal Communications.......................................................................................................123

APPENDIX 1: AUSTRALIAN HERITAGE COUNCIL TARKINE AREA ........................... 124

APPENDIX 2: HISTORIC PLANS.................................................................................. 125

APPENDIX 3: PROTOCOL FOR MANAGING NEWLY DISCOVERED SITES................. 134


6 August 20121

1.0 INTRODUCTION1.1 Client and project detailsVenture Minerals has applied for a mining lease area over Mount Lindsay, on Tasmania’s west coast,some 35 kilometres by road, to the west of Tullah. It is proposed to develop this lease area for atin/tungsten/magnetite and copper mine.1

A 59 square kilometre Exploration License is also held over an adjacent area to the south-east ofMount Lindsay. This license area EL45/2010 is centred on Riley Creek and exploratory works havebeen undertaken. It is proposed to develop this site for the direct shipping of hematite ore.2 Associatedwith this proposed mining development, locations have been identified for other infrastructure. Thisincludes the mine offices, workshop and lay down area, crushed ore stockpile, and the dry crushingand screening sites. A network of tracks already exists within the license area.

As part of the development of a mining operation, a range of planning studies are required.Commencing work in February 2012, Austral Tasmania undertook a desktop investigation of thislicence area EL45/2010, located to the east and north of Lake Pieman, west of the Huskisson River,and to the south of the Pieman Road (Figure 1).

This area is located in the core of the former Wilson River osmiridium district. Worked intermittentlyfrom c.1902-1903 to the 1930s, historic mining activity reached its peak in the years c.1918 to 1922.The research indicated that all the creeks within the study area would appear to have been worked foralluvial deposits. Hard rock mining is also recorded, but poorly documented by comparison.

Although the history indicates quite extensive development, no clear understanding exists on thelocation or extent of sites of former workings. This absence of detailed information of where pastmining activity took place is not unusual, as much of the area was worked by individuals or smallgroups operating on small claims taken up as miner’s rights.

Because of these uncertainties, a cautious approach was adopted to define the study areas for fieldinvestigations. The areas investigated as part of this Historic Heritage Assessment corresponds withthe four laterite ore bodies termed Areas A, B, C and D and enclosed by a single boundary line. Inaddition, the proposed infrastructure sites have also been assessed (Figure 1).

The purpose of this report is to establish the statutory historic heritage requirements currentlyapplicable to the study area; provide an overview history of development; identify, record and assesssites of potential historic heritage significance; and, make recommendations for management ormitigation strategies where appropriate.

1 EPBC Act Public Notices: Referral of Proposed Action, Venture Minerals: Mount Lindsay tin-tungsten-magnetite-copper mine,2 November 20112 ASX Announcement, Venture Discovers Second DSO Hematite Prospect at Mt Lindsay, Tasmania’, Tuesday 22nd November2011, Ref: /VMS/606/VMS00269


6 August 20122

Figure 1: Field & Desktop Investigation Study Areas. Basemap TasMap, © State of Tasmania


6 August 20123

1.2 AuthorshipThis report was prepared by David Parham, James Puustinen and Malcolm Hutchinson (all AustralTasmania).

1.3 ApproachAustral Tasmania’s approach to this project has been to provide a systematic and logical historicheritage assessment. This has included:

Review of Heritage Registers and Lists

A desktop investigation was conducted of all readily available statutory and non-statutoryheritage registers, lists and schedules to clearly identify any statutory historic heritagerequirements relevant to the study area.

Historical Research

A detailed historical investigation of the Wilson River area, involving extensive research andthe preparation of an illustrated history. Three key phases of use or development within thestudy area were identified:

1. 1891-1893: Issuing of speculative mineral leases across the study area for silver-lead.Little, if any development can be expected from this period as all leases were void by1893;

2. c.1902-1903 to 1930s: Osmiridium Mining. Osmiridium was not mined consistentlythroughout this period, but rather for shorter phases, namely:

a. c.1902-1903 to 1905: initial discovery and exploitation;

b. 1910-1914: second phase of workings to the outbreak of the First World War;and

c. c.1918-c.1930s. The key period of development on the field, primarily fromc.1918-1922, and declining thereafter.

3. c.1945-present: Prospecting and exploration of the region. Prospecting works duringthe 1980s in search of chromite appear to have particular relevance to developmentwithin the study area.

From the review of reports, articles and plans, an attempt was made to locate where thisosmiridium mining historically took place. As much of the field was developed under miner’srights, which were not mapped, there is no clear understanding where past developmentoccurred. Rather, the general impression is that alluvial mining took place on all the creekswithin the study area, at Riley Knob and on the Riley Prospect. Development surroundingRiley Creek appeared to have been particularly intense.

Field Investigations

Because of this lack of certainty, a cautious approach was taken in identifying areas for fieldinvestigations, namely the laterite ore bodies as enclosed by a single boundary line and thesites of the proposed infrastructure (Figure 1).

The field survey was undertaken over 11 days in March, April and July 2012 by twoexperienced heritage practitioners, including an archaeologist. The survey provided ascomplete a coverage of the study areas as could be practically and safely achieved. In responseto the historical profile of development on the field, the fieldwork was primarily focused oninspecting the creeks within the ore bodies and inspection of the infrastructure sites, as thesewere the areas known to have been historically worked for osmiridium. General pedestriantraverses were also made of the broader study area using the network of existing tracks.

In response to the changing topography and vegetation, ground surface visibility - a key factorin site recognition - varied considerably. The nature of this environment is discussed in moredetail in Section 4.0 of this report. However, in summary the dominant vegetation cover is tall


6 August 20124

wet eucalypt forests over younger regrowth and tea tree.3 On the higher ridges, the vegetationcover is more open, allowing for greater access and ground visibility. Descending to the creeksand creek valleys, the vegetation rapidly changes, often choked with Bauera, Tea Tree, cuttinggrass and log falls. This growth along the creeks substantially inhibited ground surfacevisibility and movement.

Written descriptions were made of identified sites; photographs were taken and spatiallocations recorded with a hand held GPS unit referencing the GDA 94 datum. Dependentupon the overhead canopy cover, accuracy in location details varied between +/- 3 metres, to+/- 11 metres.

Assessment and Management

The identified sites were assessed for their significance against the criteria of the HistoricCultural Heritage Act 1995. To assist in management of values, the level of significance hasbeen assessed against State and local thresholds using recently developed guidelines.4 Inundertaking this process, a comparative analysis with other similar types of places has beenprepared.

The preparation of advice for managing and mitigating historic cultural heritage values,including for sites, items or features that will potentially be impacted by the proposed miningoperations.

1.4 Limitations and constraintsThis assessment is limited to consideration of historic heritage values only. The assessment ofAboriginal cultural values, social and landscape values are beyond the scope of this study. Anyrequirements for Aboriginal heritage value assessments should be separately addressed throughconsultation with Aboriginal Heritage Tasmania, DPIPWE.

The results and judgements contained in this report are constrained by the limitations inherent inoverview type assessments (including accessibility of historical information, ground surface visibilityconditions, safety considerations and related access restrictions). As noted above, the creeks and creekvalleys are the areas known to have been historically worked for osmiridium. The dense vegetationgrowth along the creeks severely restricted ground visibility, and in one instance, prevented completesurvey.

Whilst every effort has been made to gain insight to the historic heritage profile of the subject studyarea, Austral Tasmania Pty Ltd cannot be held accountable for errors or omissions arising from suchconstraining factors.

Grid references quoted in this report were determined through use of a hand held GPS unit. Theyshould be regarded as approximate and be confirmed by more detailed survey prior to use for designpurposes. All maps are oriented with north at the top of the page unless otherwise assigned.

1.5 AcknowledgementsThe assistance of the following people and organisations is gratefully acknowledged:

Mr Andrew Radonjic, Venture Minerals;

Mr Joseph Horak, Venture Minerals;

Ms Jenny Stein, Venture Minerals;

Ms Carol Bacon, Mineral Resources Tasmania;

Mr Rowan Blake, Mineral Resources Tasmania;

Mr John Stephenson, Heritage Tasmania;

3 North Barker Ecosystem Services, Riley Iron Laterite Prospect Proposal. Botanical Survey and Fauna Habitat Assessment,unpublished report prepared for Venture Minerals, 3 April 2012, p.54 Department of Primary Industries, Parks, Water and Environment, October 2011, Assessing historic heritage significance forApplication with the Historic Cultural Heritage Act 1995


6 August 20125

Ms Ruiping Gao, Forestry Tasmania;

Mr Ian Brumby, Forestry Tasmania;

Ms Mikayla Keating, West Coast Heritage Ltd;

Mr Mike Nash, Parks & Wildlife Service;

Mr Peter Rigozzi, Parks & Wildlife Service;

Dr Nic Haygarth;

Staff of Tasmanian Archives and Heritage Office.


6 August 20126

2.0 HISTORIC HERITAGE ASSESSMENT

2.1 Desktop review of registered and listed heritage placesBoth Federal and State Acts of Parliament may have a bearing on the management of cultural heritagewithin or adjacent to the study area. Key legislation is summarised below. The summary is intended asa guide only and should be confirmed with the administering agency and, where necessary, specialistlegal opinion.

2.1.1 World/National/Commonwealth Heritage Lists

A new national heritage system commenced on 1 January 2004. This established a framework for theidentification, protection and care of places of significance to the nation and/or Commonwealth underthe Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act).

On 11 December 2009, the Minister entered the Tarkine in the National Heritage List under theemergency listing provisions of the EPBC Act prompted by the then proposal for the Tarkine Road.This emergency listing was valid for one year,5 and on 16 December 2010, the emergency listinglapsed to allow for further consultation. The Minister has referred the nomination to the AustralianHeritage Council for further assessment and consultation. The deadline for the Council to report tothe Minister is December 2013.6

In July 2011, the Australian Heritage Council released further, preliminary information regardingtheir assessment. This included a map showing an area considered by the Council that ‘might have[National heritage] values’ (see Appendix 1). The boundaries of this area are subject to changefollowing further consultation, but currently include the study area.7

The information provided by the Council also included an assessment against the National HeritageCriteria, and statements as to why the Tarkine may have values. This assessment has been madeagainst three criteria. Two of these criteria relate to natural, geoheritage and indigenous values. Thethird of these against criterion (e.), aesthetic values states that:

The Tarkine contains areas of a wild, undisturbed character that are remote and highly natural and arehighly valued by the Tasmanian community.

Wilderness is important to the community as a place of reflection and a source of inspiration.

The Tarkine has inspired artworks since the late nineteenth century and is a place of great beauty.8

The information provided by the Council does not make specific mention of the study area. Someinformation regarding the broader locality was provided in the original National Heritage Listnomination of the Tarkine. Although no specific reference is made to values of the study area, thenomination does identify areas in the broader locality (most notably the Meredith Range) as havingaesthetic value. The nomination stated:

Large areas of high quality wilderness centred on the Meredith Range and the Sumac region and threeseparate areas (Norfolk Range, Mt Bertha/Donaldson River and Savage/Keith River) which actuallyabut each other, creating a continuous stretch of wilderness covering much of the proposed NationalHeritage Area;

Areas of high quality scenic value such as; Australia’s largest tract of rainforest, the Meredith Range, theNorfolk Range and the coastline.

5 What would National Heritage listing mean for The Tarkine? At http://www.environment.gov.au/heritage/ahc/national-assessments/tarkine/pubs/tarkine-to-date.doc6 Media Release - Australian Heritage Council, 9 March 2011: ‘National Heritage Assessment of the Tarkine’; ‘The TarkineNational Heritage assessment. National Heritage Assessment’, Australian Heritage Council:http://www.environment.gov.au/heritage/ahc/national-assessments/tarkine/information.html accessed 17 February 20127 ‘The Tarkine maps and values information’, National Heritage Assessment, Australian Heritage Council, 18 July 2011,http://www.environment.gov.au/heritage/ahc/national-assessments/tarkine/values.html, accessed 17 February 20128 ‘Tarkine Values summary’, 18 July 2011, http://www.environment.gov.au/heritage/ahc/national-assessments/tarkine/pubs/tarkine-values-summary-2011.pdf, accessed 17 February 2012


6 August 20127

The significantly undisturbed waterways of the Tarkine, including the Arthur, Pieman, Savage andDonaldson Rivers, create important visual features amongst the mountain, lowland and rainforestlandscapes and are some of the most frequently depicted attributes of the place.9

At present, approvals under the EPBC Act National Heritage Listing provisions are not required.However, other matters of ‘National Environmental Significance’ remain subject to the EPBC Act.

It should also be noted that a further Emergency Listing of the Tarkine could be made where theMinster has been satisfied that the place has one or more National Heritage values and that any one ormore of those values is under significant adverse threat that is likely and imminent. In response toVenture Minerals Mount Lindsay referral, a new application for Emergency Listing of the Tarkine wasmade in November 2011, and rejected by the Minister in early December.10

Should the Tarkine be entered in the National Heritage List, the approval of the CommonwealthMinister would be required for ‘actions’ that will have, or are likely to have, a significant impact on amatter of national environmental significance. Significant impacts can be anticipated where one ormore of the National Heritage values will be lost, degraded, notably altered, modified, obscured ordiminished. Due to constitutional limitations, the need to seek approval is restricted to aconstitutional corporation, the Commonwealth or a Commonwealth agency.11

2.1.2 Tasmanian Heritage Register12

Entry in the Tasmanian Heritage Register (THR) triggers statutory processes under the terms andprovisions of the Historic Cultural Heritage Act 1995. Places are eligible for entry to the Registerprovided they satisfy at least one of seven criteria. Anyone (including the Tasmanian HeritageCouncil) may nominate a place for entry to the Register at any time. Under Section 32 (1) of the Act, aperson must not carry out any works in relation to a Registered place or a place within a Heritage Areawhich may affect the historical cultural significance of the place unless the works are approved by theTasmanian Heritage Council. The Heritage Council may only approve works that are likely to destroyor reduce the significance of a Registered place if satisfied there is no prudent and feasible alternativeto carrying out the works. The Act also provides the Heritage Council or Minister with scope to protectthe heritage values of (both registered and unregistered places) through provisional listing and issuingStop Work Orders.

In 2009 Heritage Tasmania released its pre-development assessment guidelines.13 Although non-statutory, these guidelines are designed to provide guidance to both public and private developers inthe identification and management of historic heritage values. This report has been preparedcognisant of the principles outlined in this guide.

As at April 2012, there are no places on the Tasmanian Heritage Register within the study area or thebroader locale.

2.1.3 West Coast Planning Scheme

The West Coast Planning Scheme establishes a Heritage Code with the intent of protecting items andplaces of heritage significance in the planning scheme area.14 The provisions of the Code apply todevelopment of places included in Table 19.1 (Items and Places of Heritage Significance), ordevelopment immediately adjacent to places included in Table 19.1. There are no places within thestudy area, or immediately adjacent, included in Table 19.1.

Some of the broader provisions of the Planning Scheme may have relevance for considering culturalheritage within the context of a mining operation within the study area. The study area is locatedwithin two zoning areas under the Scheme. The area defined by Land Parcel Identifier GFZ63 is

9 National Heritage List, The Tarkine, Waratah Rd, Savage River, TAS, Australia, 10575110 Tasmanian Times, ‘Mine plan prompts new Emergency National Heritage bid for Tarkine’, 18 November 2011:http://tasmaniantimes.com/index.php?/weblog/article/mine-plan-prompts-new-emergency-national-heritage-bid-for-tarkine/ accessed 21 November 2011; Tasmanian Times, ‘Burke’s broken promise misleads the public’, 2 December 2011:http://tasmaniantimes.com/index.php?/weblog/article/burkes-broken-promise-misleads-the-public/ accessed 5 December201111 EPBC Act, s.15B(1)12 Query submitted: 2 April 201213 Heritage Tasmania, November 2009, Pre-development assessment guidelines14 WCPS, cl.19.1.1


6 August 20128

within the ‘Environmental Protection Zone’ of the Scheme and the area defined by Property ID2531984 is within the ‘Natural Resources Zone’. As discussed under s.2.1.1, the Tarkine has beennominated to the National Heritage List, in part, for its aesthetic values, and the EnvironmentalProtection Zone gives some weight to management of cultural values. Thus, one of the objectives ofthe Environmental Protection Zone is the protection or maintenance of areas of high environmentalquality or scenic amenity.15 The specific standard for mining in this zone is for all quarrying activitiesto be carried out in accordance with the Quarry Code of Practice 1999, which in turn includesprovisions for the protection of sites of heritage significance.16

The visual impact criteria of the Zone relate to the siting of buildings, which may have relevance to aproposed mining development where buildings will be constructed. The objective is to preventdetrimental impacts on views and vistas from building in visually prominent areas.17

Similarly, the objectives of the Natural Resources Zone include maintenance of the scenic, historic andcultural values of the Zone. Mining activity within this Zone must meet the acceptable solutions orperformance criteria of the Wetlands and Waterways Code, while quarrying activities also refer to theQuarry Code of Practice. The standards for the protection of views and vistas from major touristroutes also require consideration of potential impacts from quarrying or mining activity.18

2.1.4 Register of the National Estate

The Register of the National Estate (RNE) was established in 1976 as a list of natural, Indigenous andhistoric heritage places throughout Australia, with limited statutory mechanisms relating to actionstaken by the Commonwealth. As of February 2007, the RNE ceased to be an active register, withplaces no longer able to added or removed and the expectation that the States and Territories wouldconsider places included on the RNE for management under relevant State legislation. The RNEceased to exist as a statutory register on 19 February 2012 and references to the RNE were removedfrom the EPBC Act. The RNE continues to exist as a non-statutory information source. Coincidencewith other heritage lists and registers (including the THR and planning scheme heritage schedules) isnot uncommon.

A number of places in the broader region are included in the RNE, some in part for their culturalvalues. The study area is located within the listed or nominated boundaries of the following places:

Table 1: Summary of RNE places

2.1.5 Tasmanian Historic Places Inventory

The Tasmanian Historic Places Inventory (THPI) is currently managed by the Historic HeritageSection of Parks and Wildlife Service, Tasmania. It is a non-statutory database, however, coincidencewith other heritage lists and registers (including the RNE, THR and planning scheme heritageschedules) is not uncommon. Where an activity will potentially impact upon identified cultural values,specialist advice should be sought to allow these impacts to be evaluated as part of the historicheritage assessment process.

No THPI sites are located within the study, or its immediate vicinity, although several are located inthe broader locality.19

15 WCPS, cl.10.416 WCPS, Table 10.1, 2.3; Quarry Code of Practice June 1999, DPIPWE17 WCPS, Table 10.1: 5.018 WCPS, cl.9.4(e), Table 9.1, 1.0, 8.019 See for example: Lucy Spur Goldfield South (7914.032); Heemskirk Falls (7914.063); and Renison Bell Tinfield (7914.046)

ID Place Status

17652 Meredith Range Area, Savage River,TAS , Australia

Registered Place

103054 Tarkine, Waratah Rd, Savage River,TAS, Australia

Indicative Place

17747 Tarkine Wilderness Area, SavageRiver, TAS, Australia

Registered Place


6 August 20129

2.1.6 Forestry Tasmania Database

A map-based review was made of the Forestry Tasmania database of historic heritage sites. Nohistoric heritage sites for the study area, or the broader vicinity are recorded on this database.

2.1.7 Previous Studies of the Region

The most relevant and recent previous investigation of the region is the 2008 publication A PeopledFrontier: The European Heritage of the Tarkine Area. The study adopts a thematic approach tounderstanding the European heritage of the Tarkine, against a number of topics such as exploration,mining, droving, hunting and recreational pursuits. The Wilson River area is briefly discussed in thehistorical overview, but not specifically included in the list of identified significant sites at either aState or regional level, although the broader regional context and significance of osmiridium mining isidentified.20

2.2 Summary of Heritage PlacesThe following table summarises the identified heritage places and their relationship with the studyarea. The summary is intended as a guide only and should be confirmed with the administeringagency and, where necessary, specialist legal opinion.

Place Name Register Relevant to study area (Y/N)

The Tarkine National Heritage List21

Register of the National EstateYes

Meredith Range Area, SavageRiver, TAS , Australia

Register of the National Estate Yes

Lucy Spur Goldfield South THPI NoHeemskirk Falls THPI NoRenison Bell Tinfield THPI No

Table 2: Summary of registered and listed heritage places

20 Haygarth, N, Cubit, S (ed.), A Peopled Frontier: The European Heritage of the Tarkine Area, Circular Head Council:Smithton, 2008, pp.23, 29, 133-13421 NOTE: the Emergency Listing of the Tarkine lapsed on 16 December 2010, and the Minister has referred the nomination tothe Australian Heritage Council for further consultation.


6 August 201210

3.0 HISTORICAL OVERVIEW22

3.1 IntroductionThe study area is located some 25 kilometres by road to the west of Tullah in the remote north west ofTasmania. It is bounded by Lake Pieman on the west and south, the Huskisson River on the east andthe Pieman Road to the north. From the late nineteenth century, considerable interest existed in themineral prospects of the broader region, primarily its tin resources. What followed was a rapid, butquite short-lived boom in speculative claims, prospecting and mining activity. By 1914, the broadermineral field covered a vast area of about 130 square kilometres. Starting at the southern base of theMeredith Range, the field extended from the Wilson River in the east, Mount Livingstone on the west,and from the Upper Stanley River in the north, south to the Pieman River.

Whilst it was tin that first brought prospectors to the region, it was the precious metal osmiridiumthat is central to the history of the study area. Osmiridium was discovered in the study area in c.1902-1903, and over the coming decades, the area gained some importance as a source of the valuablemineral.

The following sections aim to provide an overview of the historical use and development of the studyarea. Of some benefit to this project are a series of reports and investigations of the area dating fromthe late nineteenth century. In combination with historical plans and newspaper reports, a certainlevel of understanding of the study area can be constructed.

3.2 The European Exploration of the RegionFor much of the nineteenth century, the rugged and impenetrable forests of the west coast constrainedEuropean exploration to the coastal fringe. Initially called the Retreat River, the watercourse nowknown as the Pieman River was first discovered by Europeans in 1816, when James Kelly sought ananchor at its mouth but was prevented from entering by dangerous surf. In 1824, Lieutenant JamesHobbs rowed from Macquarie Harbour to the Pieman River during exploration of the west coast.Hobbs and his crew made it more than 30 kilometres up the river to the rapids.

With the exception of loggers in search of huon pine, the area appears to have been largely ignored forthe next fifty years. It was not until 1871 and the discovery of tin at Mount Bischoff that any realincentive existed to enter the region when the hope of finding tin and other minerals, in particulargold, pushed prospectors into the area along the Pieman and its tributaries.23

The first track into the area was cut in 1873 by prospector Joseph Harman. Harman cut a line south ofWaratah towards Mount Ramsay. He later continued this track south towards Parsons Hood. Veteranprospector TB Moore was the next European to visit the area. From Mount Ramsay, Moore followedthe Wilson River as it headed south, noting the presence of gold and tin in the River.

Early in 1876, CP Sprent and his party made an expedition into the area to examine the MeredithRange in the hope of finding granite and mineral bearing deposits. Travelling south-west viaHarman’s track, their course took them through thick myrtle and horizontal forests and across gulliesand ranges along the tributaries of the Ramsay and Wilson Rivers. Sprent noted the presence of‘palladium’ in the valley of the Wilson River. Although the mineral was in fact osmiridium, this wasthe first time the metal was identified in Tasmania, and its presence was to later play an importantrole in the development of the area. With the region explored, mining interests wasted little time. Asearly as 1877, prospectors began to arrive in the Pieman - North Heemskirk area.24

22 This historical overview was first reported in: Austral Tasmania, Riley Creek, Tullah. Historic Heritage Desktop Assessment,unpublished final report prepared for Venture Minerals, 30 April 201223 Pink, K, The West Coast Story. A History of Western Tasmania and its Mining Fields, Zeehan: West Coast Pioneers’Memorial Museum, 1982, pp.126-12724 Binks, CJ, Explorers of Western Tasmania, Mary Fisher Bookshop: Launceston, 1980, pp.203, 204-207; Bacon, C, Notes onthe History of Mining and Exploration at Adamsfield. Mineral Resources Tasmania Report 1992/20, 1992, MRT Report:UR1992_20, p.1


6 August 201211

3.3 The Development of Mining in the RegionTin was first discovered in Tasmania in 1871 at Mount Bischoff, to the north of the study area. Thisdiscovery was of fundamental importance to the future of Tasmania, with Haygarth describing it asthe ‘cradle of the Tasmanian mining industry’, resulting in widespread prospecting of the west coastand economic growth and prosperity for the colony.25

It was silver-lead however that first brought the prospectors into the locality of the Wilson River. Asilver-lead ore body had been discovered in 1882 at Zeehan to the south of the study area. By 1891,233 companies and syndicates operated in the Zeehan and Dundas region.26

In describing Tasmania’s silver deposits in 1891, Montgomery noted that exploration north of thePieman River and along the slopes of the Meredith Range had discovered silver-bearing country. Heexpected that these deposits would link up with the established Zeehan and Heazlewood fields.27

It was this expectation of silver that appears to have brought mining interests to the study area in thefirst place. In 1891, a series of leases were taken up north of the Pieman River and between the Wilsonand Huskisson Rivers. Thirteen of these leases are depicted in Figure 2, nine of which correspond, orpartially correspond with the study area. The hope for silver ore, or silver-lead appears to have beenspeculative as all leases had become void by 1893 and were not reissued at a later date.28 Nodocumentation has been found of these claims being worked for silver-lead deposits, and actualmining would seem unlikely.

25 Haygarth, N, Cubit, S (ed.), op. cit., p.1726 Dickens, G, ‘Zeehan’s Silver-Lead Ore Body’, in Alexander, A, (ed.), The Companion to Tasmanian History, Centre forTasmanian Historical Studies, University of Tasmania, Hobart, 200527 Montgomery, A, Silver deposits of Tasmania, 1890, MRT Report, UR1891-1969_001-4, p.228 TAHO, MIN83/1/7, Register of Applications for Mineral Leases: 104/91M, 105/91M, 118/91M, 409/91M, 119/91M, 563/91M,3760/87M, 3761/87M, 3762/87M, 3763/87M; MRT, Minerals Applications Register, Book No. 7, 3863/87M, 3864/87M,3866/87M


6 August 201212

Figure 2: Detail from undated West Coast Mineral Fields Plan with indicative study area overlay. Highlightedblue are the silver-lead leases, issued in 1891, and void by 1893 (MRT, West Coast Mineral Fields Plan 215, u.d, Plan

obtained from Mineral Resources Tasmania).

Whilst the development of silver mining in the locality may have failed, more success was had withestablishing tin mining in the broader region. Following the establishment of mines at MountBischoff, prospectors pushed to the south, discovering the Mount Heemskirk tin field in 1876. Othermajor west coast fields were later developed, including Mount Balfour (1884), Renison Bell (1890)and Mount Cleveland (1891).29

With such intensive interest, prospectors soon began to examine the Pieman River and its tributaries.The first discovery of tin was made in around 1893 by Albury, Mitchell and Upchurch, finding alluvialtin on small river flats to the south-east of Mount Livingstone. Further prospecting identified sectionsof quartz tourmaline along the riverbanks, and two reward claims of 80 acres each were applied for onthe Stanley River. Within weeks of the discovery, prospecting parties had set out from Zeehan andmining leases for over 1,300 acres had been applied for. The tin resource of the field was concentrated

29 Dickens, G, ‘Tin Mining’, in Alexander, A, (ed.), The Companion to Tasmanian History, Centre for Tasmanian HistoricalStudies, University of Tasmania, Hobart, 2005


6 August 201213

on the river flats of the Stanley River, deposited from the surrounding granite hills, and also fromquartz tourmaline veins. High levels of tin ore were also found in the river beds of the various creekswhich fed the Stanley River.

The first official examination of the field was made in January and February 1895 by GeologicalSurveyor A Montgomery. Montgomery’s brief analysis was of the broader West Coast mining fieldsbut it also included the Stanley River tin field. At this early stage, claims were centred on the StanleyRiver and its tributaries, and did not extend as far east as the Wilson River and the study area.

Montgomery’s first observation was mention of the difficulty in accessing the region. By 1895, trackswere being cut to connect the Stanley field with Meredith’s track from North Dundas to Waratah onthe east side and with the goldfields near the Lucy River on the west. From the south, access fromZeehan was via pack horses to the Pieman River. It was the eastern track from North Dundas toWaratah which would later provide access to the Wilson River and the vicinity of the study area.30

Work in the broader Stanley River tin field was carried out sporadically during the late nineteenthcentury, but ultimately the high transport costs made mining prohibitively expensive and the area wasneglected for several years. It was not until tin prices rose during the early twentieth century thatattention once again turned to the field.31

It was also during the early twentieth century that new discoveries were made in the region. In 1903payable quantities of osmiridium were discovered in Trinder Creek, a small watercourse flowing intothe Pieman River near its junction with the Wilson River. The metal had been known to goldprospectors since the nineteenth century. However, at the time no value was attached to the mineralwhich was difficult to separate from the gold. It was not until a market for the metal was establishedthat osmiridium gained any value locally.32

The Government undertook a more detailed investigation of the Stanley River tin field in 1904.Transport problems were a key concern to the development of the region. At the time, the preferredroute was via the pack track from Zeehan. For most of its route, the hard ground surface provided anexcellent travelling surface but on reaching the Pieman River Valley, great difficulties emergedcourtesy of the heavily forested hills and the impediments of having to cross the river by cage. Wallerconsidered that a bridge across the Pieman River would be impracticable and unduly expensive,preferring instead to suggest that a ferry or punt should be brought to the river. As a priority however,emphasis was given to improving the existing track, allowing machinery to be brought to the field.33

Despite Waller’s preference for a ferry or punt, local lobbying did result in a permanent means ofcrossing the Pieman, when in 1908 the Government funded the construction of a suspension bridge.The bridge was designed to also be capable of carrying pack horses.

The bridge resulted in a new track being developed from Renison Bell. Although this track had thedisadvantage of steep grades in several places, it proved a great encouragement to the prospecting ofthe region and provided the most direct route to the study area.

The further exploration and prospecting of the study area resulted from this improved access. In 1911,AD Merton discovered tin to the east of the Wilson River, and mining soon followed. A bridge wasconstructed across the Wilson River in 1912, and from here, a well corded track was formed to connectup with the Stanley River track. Finally, the Wilson River area was accessible to prospectors in searchof tin, osmiridium and gold.34

Relatively little tin mining occurred in the broader vicinity of the study area. The most productiveleases were held by the Rosebery Prospecting Company to the north of the study area. Here, the

30 Montgomery, A, Report on the Progress of the Mineral Fields in the Vicinity of the Neighbourhood of Zeehan; Viz.:Mackintosh River, Mount Black, Mount Read, Mount Dundas, Mount Zeehan, Stanley River, and Mount Heemskirk,Geological Surveyor’s Office: Launceston, 15 May 1895, MRT Report: OS_118, pp.24-2531 Waterhouse, LL, The Stanley River Tin Field. Geological Survey Bulletin No. 15, Department of Mines: Hobart, 1914, MRTReport: GSB15, pp.12, 125; Launceston Examiner, Tuesday 18 July 1893, p.6; Waller, G.A, Report on the Prospects of theStanley River Tinfield, Government Geologist: Zeehan, 1904, MRT Report: OS_222, passim32 Brown, C, A Review of the Osmiridium Mining Industry of Tasmania, John Vail, Government Printer: Hobart, 1919, MRTReport: OS-258, p.4; Reid, A.M, Osmiridium in Tasmania. Geological Survey Bulletin No. 32, Department of Mines: Hobart,1921, MRT Report: GSB32, p.6833 Waller, op. cit., pp.17-1934 Waterhouse, op. cit., pp. 125-128


6 August 201214

company held 318 acres between the Wilson and Huskisson Rivers. Actual development was fairlyminor. Centred on Mount Merton, the Company had cut seven or eight surface trenches and threeadits. Works were hampered by both the isolated location which made it very difficult and expensiveto bring machinery to the site, coupled with an insufficient water supply. In late 1915, the Companywas wound up.35

Four mining leases also existed further to the north. The nature of these claims appears to have beenspeculative, as in 1912, only one of the four had been worked. All of these leases had been cancelled bymid-1913.36

A very detailed investigation of the Stanley River tin field was reported by Assistant GovernmentGeologist Waterhouse in 1914. By this time, the Stanley River tin field had expanded to cover a vastarea of about 130 square kilometres. Starting at the southern base of the Meredith Range, the fieldextended from the Wilson River to the east, Mount Livingstone on the west, and from the UpperStanley River in the north, south to the Pieman River. Whilst some tin claims had been around theWilson River, by far the most intensive development had occurred further to the west at MountLindsay and on the Stanley River (Figure 3).

35 Ibid, pp.168-172, 174-175; The Mercury, Friday 8 October 1915, p.336 These four claims were sections: 5574M, 5575M, 5576M and 5577M; MRT, Mineral Applications Register, Book No. 19,5574M, 5575M, 5576M, 5577M; Waterhouse, op. cit., p. 176; Examiner, Friday 11 August 1911, p.2; Examiner, Wednesday 18December 1912, p.2


6 August 201215

Figure 3: 1914 sketch plan of the Stanley River tin field annotated with key workings (Plate II: Geological Sketch Map of the Stanley River District, from Waterhouse, LL, TheStanley River Tin Field. Geological Survey Bulletin No. 15, Department of Mines: Hobart, 1914, MRT Report: GSB15. Plan obtained from Mineral Resources Tasmania)

Stanley River Mine

Mount LindsayMine

Other WilsonRiver Tin Leases

Wilson River

Main RoseberyProspect Co.

workings


6 August 201216

At the time of Waterhouse’s inspection in 1913, the Stanley River tin field had already passed its peakin production. Only 16 people were employed across the entire vast field: eight in lode tin mining, sixin alluvial tin mining, and two were employed in alluvial osmiridium mining. No clear figures areavailable on the output of the Stanley River tin field, although Waterhouse suggested that totalproduction probably amounted to 45 tonnes of tin oxide. As with previous reports, Waterhouseacknowledged that the great impediment to development was the difficulty in accessing the field.

The pack track from Renison Bell was poorly graded, and as a result, transport costs to the regionwere high, to the detriment of those trying to work the field. All machinery needed to be brought ineither by horses, or hauled in by sledges, at a cost of £13 to £14 a ton. Large portions of the track werenot corded, and during winter were almost impassable.37

3.4 The Development of the Wilson River Osmiridium FieldWhilst the development of tin mining may have characterised the broader Stanley River field, it wasthe emergence of osmiridium mining which is central to the history of the study area. Osmiridium asit is commonly known, was first discovered by a British scientist in 1804, who isolated two metallicsubstances known as Iridium and Osmium. The two metals were usually found combined together in arare metal associated with platinum, although with its own unique attributes.

The Wilson River area was the first place in Tasmania where the rare metal was discovered, whenSprent mistakenly identified the material as palladium in 1876. Later, north west prospectors foundosmiridium whilst panning for gold. The then unknown metal was tin-white in colour; was heavierthan gold; and at the time, was considered an annoying substance to separate from the gold. It was notuntil a market for the metal was established that osmiridium gained any value locally. The key use forthe extremely hard and non-corrosive metal was in the manufacture of pen nibs for fountain pens.Other uses included electrical work, photography and jewellery.38

Tasmania’s osmiridium deposits were found at various locations on the west coast. All such areasshared the common characteristics of holding large deposits or serpentine, a mottled stone formedfrom hydrated magnesium silicate, and located within creek beds, on hillsides and even plateaus.Within the local district, osmiridium existed in the area between the Wilson and Huskisson Rivers,and was found in shallow alluvial deposits in the creeks and rivers.

Osmiridium mining in the Wilson River district commenced in c.1902-1903. Reid wrote that the firstdiscovery was made in 1903 by Charles Riley and W Kinsella who found payable quantities of themineral in Trinder Creek, a small watercourse running in the southern section study area. Howeverreports emerged in May 1903, that over a twelve month period, brothers Charles and John TempleRiley had extracted the massive amount of 1.5 kilograms of the metal working over a large area in thevalley between the Wilson and Huskisson Rivers. Shortly afterwards, an 80 acre reward lease wasissued to John Temple Riley to the north of Riley Knob, but owing to market instabilities, operationsceased in 1905.

It was not until the price of osmiridium rose sharply in about 1910 that attention again turned to theWilson River. The Wilson River osmiridium district was bounded by the Wilson River in the west, theHuskisson River in the east, and the Pieman to the south. No clear northern boundary had beenestablished at this date due to the lack of exploration. The key areas of discovery and exploitation werelocated within the study area, along the small creeks which flowed into the Wilson, Huskisson andPieman Rivers. The district was accessible via three routes. Tracks were established from the south atboth Renison Bell and Rosebery, while a third pack track was extended through from the StanleyRiver in the west.39

It was also in 1910 that the Tasmanian Government first recognised osmiridium as a mineral resource,enabling the State to enter the world trading market. Some 60 men were working on the Wilson Riverat this time. A total of 3.4 kilograms were produced in 1910, more than doubling the following year, ofwhich, only a small proportion was derived from the Wilson River field. More valuable than gold, in

37 Waterhouse, op. cit., pp.1-2, 125-128, 20238 Brown, op. cit., pp.1, 3-4, 21; Bacon, op. cit., p.1; Reid, op. cit., p.10939 Ibid, p.6; Bottrill, RS, Matthews, WL, Occurrences of Gemstone Minerals in Tasmania, 8th edition, Mineral ResourcesTasmania: Rosny Park, 2006, p.18; Examiner, Thursday 7 May 1903, p.2; Reid, op. cit., pp.68, 71-75


6 August 201217

late 1912 it was reported that prospectors in the Savage and Wilson River areas were making as muchas 25 to 30 shillings a day from osmiridium. Tasmanian production reached a new peak of 35.7kilograms in 1913.40

As well as being where osmiridium was first discovered in Tasmania, the Wilson River district hasanother claim to fame: as the location where the then largest single piece of osmiridium wasdiscovered in the world. The nugget was found by James Sweeney on 20 April 1913, and weighed 56grams. It was sold as a display item to the Queen Victoria Museum and Art Gallery the following yearfor £30 (Figure 4). This nugget was found near the source of Sweeney Creek, which commences itscourse in the northern part of the study area. However, this record was soon broken numerous times,with larger nuggets found at Nineteen Mile Creek in the Heazlewood district.41

Figure 4: The Sweeney Nugget (‘The Sweeney Nugget, Wilson River Field’, in Reid, A.M, Osmiridium in Tasmania.Geological Survey Bulletin No. 32, Department of Mines: Hobart, 1921, p.79. Photograph obtained from Mineral Resources

Tasmania).

It was not long before these shallow deposits of osmiridium were worked out. By February 1914 it wasreported that:

There are still a good number of fossickers working on osmiridium in the vicinity of the Wilson andHuskisson Rivers, but the precious metal has become scarcer and is of less valuable character thanformerly. Most of that won now is in thin flat grains, which has not nearly so good a market value as the“shotty” variety.42

Nonetheless, 133 people were still working the Wilson and Savage River fields by early 1914. Suchlevels of production were not to last. The outbreak of the First World War in 1914 resulted in a rapidfall in production and loss of markets. Whilst tin, gold and osmiridium continued to be found at theWilson River, it was reported in 1915 that they were no longer in payable quantities. The Tasmanianindustry did not recover until 1918. At the beginning of 1918, osmiridium buyer JG Arnett noted that

40 The Mercury, Monday 2 December 1912, p.4; Twelvetrees, WH, The Bald Hill Osmiridium Field. Geological Survey BulletinNo. 17, Department of Mines: Hobart, 1914, MRT Report: GSB17, p.35; Brown, op. cit., p.5; Haygarth, N, Cubit, S (ed.), op. cit.,p.2941 TAHO, AB948/1/98, WH Twelvetrees to Secretary for Mines, 4 July 1914; Reid, op. cit., p.78; Nye, PB, Mines Department:Osmiridium in Tasmania, Hobart, 19 April 1928, MRT Report: UR 1928B/106-110, p.10742 The Mercury, Friday 20 February 1914, p.3


6 August 201218

there were about 12 men employed on the Wilson River field. Over the previous year he had purchasedabout 80 ounces (i.e., c.2.2 kilograms) of the precious metal, at an average price of £13 an ounce.43

3.5 Working and Living on the Osmiridium FieldsA new report into the osmiridium industry was published in 1919. The theory existed that the WilsonRiver osmiridium deposits formed part of the larger Mount Stewart belt of serpentine. However, theimpenetrable bush made it impossible to test this theory.

On the Wilson River field, mining was mostly taking place on the small creeks and shallow ground,working the loam or mud. Nearby, some parties were obtaining the metal from the cemented bottoms.As the deposits were located in an elevated position and reliant on water for sluicing, active miningoccurred during the wetter months of the year, and was largely abandoned by summer. Because ofthese seasonal works, Tasmania’s output was notable for its erratic and somewhat uncertainproduction.

Although the Wilson River district was an important producer of osmiridium, it was not the largestfield in Tasmania at the time. Larger workings existed at Bald Hill, near Waratah. This was also thefirst place in Tasmania that osmiridium was found occurring in solid rock. A mine and crushing plantwas established at the site to work the serpentine stone.44

Working solid rock deposits was by far the exception, rather than the rule at this date. For the mostpart, mining took place on the creek and riverbeds, or along former courses of creeks, where theosmiridium had been deposited from eroded serpentine.45

The methods used to mine and wash alluvial gravels for osmiridium were simple. Some areas wereworked by individuals, while other deposits were worked by small groups of three or more people. Thefirst areas to be exploited were most often the shallow gravels located in steeply inclined creeks, whichwere more easily and cheaply worked. At its most basic, the miner equipped with pick, shovel, axe anddish would pan these shallow deposits, leading to what Reid called a ‘nomadic’ existence for theminer, continually moving from place to place.

Miners with greater capital were able to work the larger terrace deposits and deeper river gravels, bydriving tunnels into the material, and then washing out the pay dirt into cradles or sluice boxes, beforepanning the material to obtain the gold and osmiridium. Another more intensive method available tothe miner was to construct a wing dam within the riverbed to divert the water to one side, allowing thedeposit to be excavated. Such work though required more money. With single prospector claimslimited to 50 square yards (i.e., some 41 square metres), the costs and time associated with these moreextensive sluicing works were often not warranted for unproven deposits.

Separating the gold and osmiridium from waste material was usually undertaken by washing. Onsmall-scale operations, the deposit was simply panned to reveal the valuable minerals, where on anaverage day a miner could work through 30 pans. Cradles were also sometimes used, allowing fargreater amounts of alluvial material to be worked. If an adequate supply of water existed, sluice boxeswere employed, whereby a team of two miners could process several tons of alluvial deposits a day.Ground sluicing was used in areas where it was difficult to construct a timber sluice box. Reid alsoreferred to the use of hydraulic sluicing, using water pumped under high pressure to wash away thealluvials before being worked through sluicing boxes.46

Figures 5-8 shows these simple forms of mining using pick, shovel, pans, cradles and sluicing. Figure8 also shows the only found photo showing historic workings on the Wilson River field. Although noindividuals or specific location is given, the photograph shows the mud being transported to the sluiceby barrows before being washed in a channelled stream of water.

43 The Mercury, Saturday 28 March 1914, p.6; Brown, op. cit., p.5; Examiner, Wednesday 14 April 1915, p.2; Examiner,Saturday 17 April 1915, p.4; TAHO, AB948/1/98, WH Twelvetrees to Secretary for Mines, 4 July 1914; TAHO, AD948/1/97, JGArnett to Inspector of Mines, 2 February 191844 Haygarth, N, ‘Pen-Pushers with Pans: 20th-century Tasmanian Osmiridium Mining’, in Mining History: The Bulletin of thePeak District Mines Historical Society, Vol. 17, No. 4, 2009, p.8445 Brown, op. cit., pp.6-1046 Reid, op. cit., pp.88-89, 92-93


6 August 201219

Figure 5: 1918 photograph of miners workingselection at Mount Stewart. Note the pans and

cradle.47

Figure 6: 1918 photograph of miners working a creekat Mount Stewart. Note the pans and cradle.48

Figure 7: c.1919 photograph showing panning forosmiridium at Nineteen Mile Creek. Note also the

stacked boulders.49

Figure 8: c.1919 photograph showing sluicing mudfor osmiridium. This is also the only historic photo

located showing workings on the Wilson River field.50

Few metals attracted such excitement and interest as osmiridium. Reid summarised this interest well:‘The extraordinary fascination attaching to this study has arisen in large measure from its almostfabulous value from the capriciousness of its occurrence, and its comparative rarity’.51

New discoveries were widely reported, as was the life and work of the ‘Ossie Diggers’. This atmospherewas well described by the media:

There is probably nothing in Australia so reminiscent of the early days of gold mining as the osmiridiumfields of the West Coast. The individuality of the Digger’s quest, the remoteness from settled areas, thechanging moods of fortune generating a constant air of expectancy.52

47 Tasmanian Archives and Heritage Office, The Weekly Courier, Thursday 26 December 1918, p.22, ‘Diggers on their Claim,Mount Stewart Field, North-Western Tasmania’. Reproduced with Permission.48 Ibid, ‘Loughnan and Stantons Reward Claim’. Reproduced with Permission.49 Brown, op. cit., p.9, ‘Panning Off’ at Nineteen Mile Creek’. Photograph obtained from Mineral Resources Tasmania.50 Brown, op. cit., p.12 ‘Sluicing Mud for Metal at Wilson River’. Photograph obtained from Mineral Resources Tasmania.51 Reid, op. cit., p.2952 Advocate, Wednesday 15 June 1921, p.6


6 August 201220

This idealised view of osmiridium mining was also captured in popular culture, in the book JewelledNights written by Tasmanian author Marie Bjelke Petersen and in its film adaptation produced in1925, and partly shot on the Savage River osmiridium fields.53

Even more formal narratives put forward a romanticised vision of life for the diggers. In 1919, DrCampbell Brown, an employee of LE Waterman, a New York fountain pen manufacturer, visitedTasmania in an attempt to push down the price of osmiridium. Poorly received by the miners, Brownwent on to write an account of the osmiridium industry in Tasmania.54

Published by the Tasmanian Government, the report is as much a romantic description of the minersas it is a technical report.

An average days work would bring the miner between ‘half to one pennyweight’ (i.e., 0.75 - 1 gram) ofosmiridium, which according to Brown, was kept safely in a chamois pouch. From here, a buyer wouldvisit the field, each offering their own price. Field buyers themselves were often osmiridium miners,who would on sell the product to brokers before reaching the key markets of London and New York.55

High praise was given to the osmiridium miners of Tasmania, who were:

... without doubt, one of the highest type of alluvial miners in the world. He is clean, hospitable,industrious, and skilful at his work, though perhaps a little conservative, and lives a secluded life in themost forsaken spots that ever a human being got to. He realises that he is not undergoing his hardshipsfor nothing, and wants his “pound of flesh” all the time, but is fair and straight in a business deal. He isfree from the common vices so prevalent amongst precious metal miners, and when he has “made a bit”he keeps it. His home in the bush is never one of architectural beauty, but serviceable though temporary.He gets his letters and food brought to him from a long distance by carrier or pack horse, and his contactwith the outside world is slight. It may be a fascinating life to the man with “bushy” habits who is fond ofthe wild; but he pays the price for it. His attention is concentrated on one thing only, viz., the desire toget the metal, get it quickly, and get it in plenty. Unlike some miners he makes no revenue from fur-bearing animals, though wild cats, ringtails, black and grey opossums are around him; while the black,tiger and whip snakes are his sworn enemies.56

Many miner’s camps and huts were recorded by the illustrated press at this time. Figures 9-15 showthe variety in both size and materials used in providing habitation for the miners, ranging from smallcanvas tents to large huts constructed from milled timber. Figure 15 also shows a photograph of asubstantial hut, most likely from the Little Wilson River workings, to the north of the study area, anddating from c.1921.

53 Rimon, W, ‘Films’, in Alexander, A, (ed.), The Companion to Tasmanian History, Centre for Tasmanian Historical Studies,University of Tasmania, Hobart, 200554 Examiner, Thursday 21 August 1919, p.2; Examiner, Saturday 13 September 1919, p.4; Examiner, Thursday 21 August 1919,p.2; Examiner, Saturday 13 September 1919, p.4, Haygarth, N, pers. comm., 24 February 201255 Brown, op. cit., pp.12, 16, 21, 2356 Ibid, pp.15-16


6 August 201221

Figure 9: 1918 photograph showing a large tent atMount Stewart, combining both canvas and a centralsection made from bush materials. Note also use of a

corrugated iron roof.57

Figure 10: 1918 photograph of miner’s tent atNineteen Mile Creek. Note the bush pole chimney and

clothes drying.58

Figure 11: 1918 photograph of a large camp, probablyat Mount Stewart. The structure is built on a log

foundation with canvas superstructure. Note whatappears to be a bottle dump on the right hand side of

the entrance.59

Figure 12: 1918 photograph of a hut at Nineteen MileCreek. This is both a large and well constructed hut,

built from milled timber.60

57 Tasmanian Archives and Heritage Office, The Weekly Courier, Thursday 3 October 1918, p.23, ‘Diggers’ Camp Mount StewartOsmiridium Field, North-Western Tasmania. This party has one of the best claims’. Reproduced with Permission.58 Tasmanian Archives and Heritage Office, The Weekly Courier, Thursday 16 May 1918, p.21, ‘Osmiridium Miners’ Camp onthe Nineteen Mile Creek’. Reproduced with Permission.59 Tasmanian Archives and Heritage Office, The Weekly Courier, Thursday 26 December 1918, p.22, ‘Camps of OsmiridiumDiggers’. Reproduced with Permission.60 Tasmanian Archives and Heritage Office, The Weekly Courier, Thursday 26 December 1918, p.22, ‘Osmiridium Diggers’Camp on the Nineteen-Mile Creek, North-Western Tasmania. Reproduced with Permission.


6 August 201222

Figure 13: c.1919 photograph from an unknownlocation. Simple A Frame bush pole hut clad in split

timber. The photograph shows a field buyerpurchasing osmiridium.61

Figure 14: c.1919 photograph of a canvas tent at BaldHill supported by bush poles. Brown called this

structure a typical camp.62

Figure 15: A well constructed hut built from milled timber. The photograph dates from c.1921 and was mostlikely taken on a tin and osmiridium lease at the Little Wilson River. Pictured are: Paddy Hartnett (left),

possibly Len Aylett (3rd from left) and William Aylett (4th from left)63

Production on the Wilson River field appears to have peaked in the early 1920s. Over 100 men wereworking on the field in 1920, creating such demand that the following year, the Government funded

61 Brown, op. cit., p.22, ‘A Field Buyer on His Rounds’. Photograph obtained from Mineral Resources Tasmania.62 Brown, op. cit., p.15, ‘A Typical ‘Camp’ At Bald Hill’. Photograph obtained from Mineral Resources Tasmania.63 Private Collection, c.1921 Photograph of Hut on Little Wilson River, provided by Dr Nic Haygarth. Reproduced withPermission.


6 August 201223

the construction of a new bridge over the Wilson plus two miles of track. By May, the population hadgrown to over 150 people, the majority working on the Little Wilson River, some eight kilometres tothe north of the study area. Meanwhile, back on the Lower Wilson, there was ‘nothing big doing’,where the lack of water hampered work.64

In 1921, the Department of Mines published their most thorough investigation into the Tasmanianosmiridium industry to date. This work seems to have been prompted by the substantial increase ininternational demand for the metal, which in turn resulted in the growth of the industry. This growthwas strengthened by Tasmania’s enviable position of being the sole producer on a large scale of freepoint metal.

As part of his work, Reid visited the Wilson River area over 1919-20. For the most part, osmiridiumhad been obtained from detrital and alluvial deposits. Such deposits could be easily explored andworked by prospectors without the need for a large initial outlay. Once worked out, production fell.65

Reid provides the best understanding of the development of the Wilson River field to 1921.Importantly, his work also included a geological sketch plan of the field (Figure 16). When combinedwith the written descriptions, and other sources, a certain level of understanding of development onthe Wilson River field can be obtained.

64 The Mercury, Monday 29 March 1920, p.8; Examiner, Thursday 1 April 1920, p.3; The Mercury, Monday 11 October 1920,p.4; The Mercury, Friday 29 April 1921, p.4; Examiner, Friday 27 May 1921, p.2; Nye, op. cit., p.10865 Reid, op. cit., pp.2, 68, 71-75


6 August 201224

Figure 16: Detail from 1921 geological sketch plan of the Wilson River osmiridium field with indicative studyarea overlay (Tasmanian Archives and Heritage Office, Reid, A.M, Osmiridium in Tasmania. Geological Survey Bulletin No.

32, Department of Mines: Hobart, 1921, Plate IX: ‘Geological Sketch Map of Wilson River District’, reproduced withpermission).

3.6 The Regulation of Osmiridium MiningTo understand the way in which osmiridium was mined in Tasmania, it is important to consider howproduction and sales were regulated. The rugged individualism which represented the idealised ‘OssieDigger’ in popular culture was also one supported by Government policy, the Secretary of Mineswriting in 1913 that:

... the Minister is desirous of doing all that is possible to protect the interests of the individual miner inprospecting and mining and to prevent as far as possible a monopoly by a single person or company.66

This protection of the individual miner was achieved through regulating who, where and how a personcould claim and develop land. Single miners or small groups were entitled to make claims for miner’srights. A single miner was eligible to a half-acre claim, to be marked off in the form of a square - 50yards by 50 yards. Larger, consolidated claims could also be made by groups of miners. This ranged

66 TAHO, AD948/1/97, Secretary of Mines to State Mining Engineer, 3 June 1913


6 August 201225

from 1 acre claims for parties of two miners working together, up to a maximum of 5 acres for a partyof 10 miners.

Possession of the claim took place once it was marked out by pegs, a notice put up, and an applicationmade to the Registrar of Mines. Once the claim was made, the miner was required to commenceworking the section within 48 hours. With the exception of holidays and other specified events, aminer risked their claim being forfeited should they stop working for a period of 48 hours. Groundthat had not been worked for three months was considered abandoned and new claims could be madeon the plot.67

It is through this system that the Tasmanian osmiridium industry emerged, allowing for individuals orsmall groups to develop the fields without the need for large amounts of capital.

Far more controversial however, was the issuing of osmiridium leases. The ordinary miningregulations were also used for osmiridium leases. However, the granting of such leases was at thediscretion of the authorities and certain restrictions were put in place to prevent monopolies beingformed by wealthy individuals or companies. For example, leases could only be taken out over areaswhere osmiridium was found in situ, that is, as lodes occurring in the serpentine rock and not overalluvial deposits. Restrictions were also put in place to prevent leases being made on rivers, creeks oralluvial claims.68

Despite these restrictions, conflicts would emerge when attempts were made to take up leases on theosmiridium fields. The issuing of a lease on the Mount Stewart field appears to have been particularlybitter. In 1918, John Stanton and Edward Loughnan discovered a rich source of the precious metal. Anapplication was made for a 10 acre reward claim in recognition of their discovery. The diggers met thisaction with concern. Public meetings were held, petitions circulated, and the Minister for Mines waslobbied.69

John Stanton, applicant for the claim complained bitterly how:

Prompted by a spirit of envy, greed, and jealousy which is characteristic of the I.W.W’s [InternationalWorker’s of the World] a certain class of so called diggers have conspired to rob us of the Reward claimdue to us.70

In response, the Government decided that whilst they would issue a Reward Lease to Stanton, theywould prohibit any other leases being taken up, and reserve the rest of the field for the alluvialdiggers.71

Such tensions also emerged on the Wilson River field. In late March 1920, reports began to emergethat more than 12 sections had been pegged out on the higher ridges of the field in the vicinity of RileyKnob. These claims varied from 10 acres up to 40 acres and had reportedly been made by ThomasMcDonald on behalf of Launceston mining interests. Pressure was placed on the Minister to refusethese applications, which would displace the alluvial miners from land they had traditionally worked.McDonald came out publicly to deny the claims, stating that whilst visiting the field he pegged outtwo, 40 acre claims on the Ramsay Track, on land that he said had already been worked out by alluvialminers.72

The issuing of leases was not the only problem on the osmiridium fields. Relationships betweenalluvial miners and field buyers had also been a ongoing source of friction. Buyers would visit thefields and purchase the osmiridium from the miners. Quite commonly, it would later emerge that thebuyers would pay different amounts for the metal, even on the same day. The accuracy of the scaleswas also questioned. All led to ill feeling.73

The matter came to a head during the early 1920s when the price of osmiridium fell. The longstandingtensions between miners and buyers were publicly aired, and miners from Mount Stewart, Savage

67 Reid, op. cit., pp.112-114, 11868 Ibid, p.12169 The North Western Advocate and the Emu Bay Times, Wednesday 8 May 1918, p.2; TAHO, AD948/1/97, J Stanton toMinister for Mines, 10 June 191870 TAHO, AD948/1/97, J Stanton to Minister for Mines, 10 June 191871 The Mercury, Wednesday 26 June 1918, p.672 The Mercury, Monday 29 March 1920, p.8; Examiner, Thursday 1 April 1920, p.373 Brown, op. cit., p.21


6 August 201226

River and Wilson River began to meet demanding higher prices. Collectively, the miners lobbied theTasmanian Government for a better deal. The Government was responsive, with the Premier, SirWalter Lee taking the unprecedented step of visiting the osmiridium fields in the vicinity of Waratahin June 1921, and addressing the miners (Figure 17).

Figure 17: Sir Walter Lee addressing a group of miners on one of the osmiridium fields near Waratah, June1921 (TAHO, NS/2218/1/2, Photograph - Post card to Billy Kerrison from W E Kerrison - group at Osmiridium Fields, some

men identified. Reproduced with permission).

The Government agreed with the concerns of the diggers and passed a new Act to regulate the market.All osmiridium mined in the State was pooled and sold to a single buyer at Melbourne, with certainguarantees on market price. At first the new system appeared to work, with a rise in the price ofosmiridium. However, concerns soon emerged on the percentage of the advance made to the minersand delays in final payments. Some miners also worked outside of the system, selling their metal tounlicensed buyers. These factors ultimately resulted in the failure of the osmiridium pool.74

3.7 Osmiridium Workings within the Study AreaAlthough the historical records provide a general understanding of the development of osmiridiummining on the Wilson River field, they are less useful in identifying with any great accuracy whereprevious workings may have taken place.

The study area was developed under both lease holdings and small miner’s rights claims. Whilst it ispossible to identify the location of former leases with some degree of accuracy, no such accuracy existsfor identifying the locations worked under miner’s rights claims.

The following sections provide an outline of development as identified through the historical records.

74 Nye, P, Tasmanian Osmiridium & its Marketing, Mines Department: 27 November 1930, MRT Report: UR1930_008-12,p.10; The Mercury, Saturday 21 July 1923, p.6


6 August 201227

3.7.1 Mining Lease Areas

By far, the Wilson River osmiridium field was developed by alluvial diggers operating under miner’srights. There were however, several lease areas granted, some of which correspond with the studyarea.

The first lease issued on the field was made soon after the discovery of osmiridium in 1903. Shortlyafterwards, JT Riley located the precious metal and applied for a Reward Claim of 80 acres, locatedapproximately 25 chains (i.e., some 503 metres) north-westward of Riley Knob. Works had ceased by1905.75 A survey of this Reward Claim has not been located.

The post-1910 upturn in the market saw renewed interest in the field. In 1913, two leases were issuedfor land within the study area (Figure 18). The first was made in May 1913 to Frederick Kershaw, whoreceived an 80 acre lease to the south of Kershaw Creek, and registered as section 6460M. Theapplication only noted the general description of ‘minerals’ as the desired commodity. How Kershawworked the lease area is not known as it was void by April 1915.76

It was also in 1913 that another lease was issued nearby, this time for 40 acres and registered as6461M. The lease was issued to Thomas Dixon, August Dettmer and Arthur Spotswood. Again, theapplication does not list a specific commodity, and it too was void by April 1915.77 Whilst Kershaw,Dixon and Dettmer may not have held the lease areas for long, all remained connected to the field, asthey appear as holders of miner’s rights over the coming years, whilst Spotswood is also recorded asbeing an osmiridium buyer, based in Zeehan.78

The last lease to be issued in the study area for osmiridium occurred some ten years later, with a 10acre section granted to JT Riley in 1925. This lease area 9578M straddled the eastern boundary of theold section 6460M and was taken up for osmiridium. The lease was described as being located at thehead of Riley Creek. Also described as the ‘Riley Prospect’, it is this section on which the most detailedinformation is available.79

The section had been worked well before the issuing of the lease, with Reid noting that following theremoval of the topsoil, a considerable amount of the osmiridium had been recovered. Within a blockof 60 x 30 x 2 feet (i.e., 18.2 x 9.1 x 0.60 metres deep), over 20 ounces (i.e., 566 grams) of the preciousmetal had been extracted.80

Reid did not depict the Riley Prospect in the geological sketch plan, although it is shown in othermining charts.

The prospect was investigated in more detail in 1926. The report noted that narrow gutters had beenworked through the southern section of the lease. The lease held very good prospects for osmiridiumto be obtained from washing the alluvial deposits that covered the area. However, to successfully workthe site, it would be necessary to obtain an adequate water supply and institute hydraulic sluicing, acostly task given the elevated location of the lease. Before investing in such substantial infrastructure,Scott recommended boring and sinking to accurately define the area and potential value of thedeposit. It is currently unknown whether such testing and hydraulic works took place on the lease,although the lease was void by 1927.81

75 Reid, op. cit., p.6876 TAHO, MIN83/1/20, Register of Applications for Mineral Leases: 6460M77 TAHO, MIN83/1/20, Register of Applications for Mineral Leases: 6461M78 The North Western Advocate and the Emu Bay Times, Saturday 8 February 1913, p.779 MRT, Minerals Applications Register, Book No. 22, 9578M80 Ibid, pp.72-7381 Scott, JB, Report on Section No 9578-M in the Name of J T Riley, Area - 10 Acres, 1926, MRT Report UR1926_052-54, p.54;MRT, Minerals Applications Register, Book No. 22, 9578M


6 August 201228

Figure 18: Detail from undated West Coast Mineral Fields Plan with indicative study area overlay showing thelocation of the three early twentieth century mining leases (MRT, West Coast Mineral Fields Plan 215, u.d, Plan

obtained from Mineral Resources Tasmania).

The 1925 survey prepared of section 9578M is also the only plan or map located on which any builtdevelopment on the field is depicted. The diagram shows a hut located in the far south east corner ofthe 10 acre section (Figure 19).


6 August 201229

Figure 19: Detail from 1925 survey diagram of Section 9578M. The hut site is circled (MRT, Mineral. Diagramfrom Actual Survey 49/39, 1925, Plan obtained from Mineral Resources Tasmania).

3.7.2 Areas Developed under Miner’s Rights

The majority of workings that took place within the study area appear to have occurred under miner’srights. It is also more than likely that the areas formerly held as leases were also previously or laterworked by alluvial diggers.

The best understanding of development on the Wilson River field comes from Reid’s 1921 publication,demonstrating that the study area is located within the key area of osmiridium workings. At the timeReid reported his findings in 1921, 60 miners were working on the Wilson River field.82

As discussed above, many of these miner’s right claims were for areas as small as half an acre, whichonce exhausted were abandoned and new areas taken up. Old miner’s right claims would also bereworked. Although charts of miner’s rights claims were made at the later Adamsfield workings,83 nosuch chart or similar survey has been found showing areas worked by the diggers on the Wilson River.The best that is available are the written descriptions given by Reid that cross-reference to thegeological sketch plan of the area.

The following table summarises this development within the study area. The alignments of the creekshave been highlighted on the sketch plans, but would not represent the true extent of works.

82 Reid, op. cit., pp.2, 68, 71-7583 See Bacon, op. cit., p.12


6 August 201230

Location Details Geological Sketch Plan Reference84

Riley Creek This area was first worked by JT and C Riley,where the osmiridium deposits proved to be‘wonderfully rich’, having underlyingserpentised bronzitite and peridotite rocks.

The Riley Creek Valley was between 100-160metres wide and approximately 1.6 kilometreslong. The valley was found to be osmiridiumbearing throughout its extent, but to 1921, onlya narrow strip of some 20 metres had beenworked. Presumably this narrow area ofworkings was on Riley Creek itself and theground immediately flanking the watercourse.

Beneath the detrital material, large structuralplanes of serpentine rock existed. Potholes andcrevices within these rocks had proved avaluable source of osmiridium, which wasgenerally coarse, and even nugget-like in form.Reid found it ‘incomprehensible’ that noproper attempt had been made to quarry thisrock.85

The extent of works on Riley Creek wasdescribed a few years later. Scott wrote that thewhole area of flat ground in the valley had beenworked out for a considerable distance. By1926 most of the alluvial material had alreadybeen exploited and only two or three men wereengaged on the small areas that had yet to beworked.86

Streams 1-5 A series of five small streams flowed in anortherly direction and entered Riley Creek,with streams 2, 3, 4 and 5 corresponding withthe historic overlay. Although all of thesestreams held rich concentrations of gold,tinstone and osmiridium, the scale of thedeposits were not extensive. Reid does not notethat the streams had been worked, althoughpresumably they had, given their high contentof precious metals and proximity to other areasof workings.87

84 Sketch Plan images taken from: Tasmanian Archives and Heritage Office, Reid, A, Osmiridium in Tasmania. GeologicalSurvey Bulletin No. 32, Department of Mines: Hobart, 1921, Plate IX: ‘Geological Sketch Map of Wilson River District’,reproduced with permission.85 Reid, op. cit., p.7186 Scott, op. cit., p.5387 Ibid, p.72


6 August 201231


Trinder andFowlerCreeks

Trinder and Fowler Creeks also containedosmiridium and gold. Indeed, it was in TrinderCreek that the precious mineral was first foundon the field, with the discovery being made in1903 by C Riley and W Kinsella. Beyond thisfirst discovery, Reid does not identify who hadworked these creeks.88

The geological sketch plan also shows a shaftclose to the southern edge of Trinder Creek.This is also the only such feature depicted onthe study area. Reid does not discuss thedevelopment of hard rock mining.

Three MileCreek

Three Mile Creek flows in a south westerlydirection before entering Riley Creek. Reidwrote that Three Mile Creek had produced afair quantity of good-grade osmiridium. Healso noted that quite extraordinarily, below thejunction of Three Mile with Riley Creeks, theosmiridium deposits within Riley Creek werevery poor.89

OsmiridiumCreek

Osmiridium Creek is a small tributarycommencing in the northern part of the studyarea, before it joins Merton Creek further tothe north.

Osmiridium Creek contained irregularlydistributed metal. Near its source, coarsegrained metal had been discovered, one nuggeteven weighing over an ounce (i.e., over 28.3grams). A fair amount of unworked groundcontinued to exist to 1921, but production washampered by the lack of water to allow forwashing.90

SweeneyCreek

Sweeney Creek is also a tributary of MertonCreek. Payable quantities of osmiridium hadbeen recovered from Sweeney Creek, with therichest deposits found in the upper reaches ofthe creek. In 1913, the then largest singlenugget, weighing 56 grams was found at thehead of the creek by James Sweeney.

Other diggers had also enjoyed success on theCreek. Near where the Rosebery Track crossedthe Creek, J O’Meara and W Knight hadrecovered large nuggets, over 28.3 grams inweight.91

88 Ibid, pp.68, 7289 Ibid, p.7290 Ibid, p.7791 Ibid, pp.77-78

Shaft


6 August 201232


Gold Creek Gold Creek flows in a northerly directionbefore joining Sweeney Creek. Althoughcarrying a high proportion of gold in theconcentrate, the osmiridium deposits weredescribed by Reid as being small andunimportant.92

Table 3: Summary of Osmiridium Workings within the Study Area worked through Miner’s Rights

Further historical records also give some level of understanding of the miners working the field.Following the pegging out of their claim, each miner was required to submit a notice to the ZeehanOffice for Mining Claims. Records of these claims in the Wilson River area date from 1911 to 1924,although predominantly from the 1920s. Whilst the records are far from complete, these noticesprovide the only details of where a particular miner was working at a certain time, although the levelof detailed information is scant.

Only 18 such notices have been located as summarised in the following table.

Date Claimant Where Other Details

16 February1911

HD Flight At top of Merton’s Creek joiningJ William’s on the west side.

50 square yards

13 March 1920 James Fahey On Riley’s Creek. ½ an acre

13 March 1920 J Sweeney & J Dooly In Riley’s Creek above Fahey’sworkings.

One acre

13 March 1920 J Dixon, T Gillis & HSmith

At Riley’s Creek. ½ an acre

27 March 1920 A Salmon Wilson River. ½ an acre

28 May 1920 JP Dixon West slope of Riley’s Hill. 50 square yards

29 May 1920 JP Dixon At Three Mile Creek. 50 square yards, miner’s rightNo. 1200

5 November1920

A Kinsella, R Ruggersi[?]

Near the Huskisson River, in acreek known as Merton Creek.

1 acre

27 November1920

JP Dixon On the spur at the lower end ofRiley Creek.

½ an acre

29 December1920

William Doak & RegPike

West bank head of Riley’s Creekat Wilson River.

1 acre

7 January 1921 C Dettmer 2 and ¾ miles from the WilsonRiver on the Ramsay Track.

50 square yards

12 May 1921 William Doak North and adjoining claimpreviously pegged in the name

½ an acre

92 Ibid, p.78


6 August 201233

Date Claimant Where Other Details

of William Doak and ReginaldPike, December 1920. Situatenorth western slope head ofRiley’s Valley, Wilson River.

12 May 1921 William Doak North end of Riley’s Valley,Wilson River.

½ an acre

14 May 1921 JJ Walsha [?] Wilson River. ½ an acre

11 June 1921 JP & J Dixon Mosquito Creek, nearHuskisson River.

1 acre

13 June 1921 A McGuiness & HHodgson

Mosquito Creek, HuskissonRiver.

1 acre

3 November1922

J Dixon Wilson River, Riley’s Creek,south east angle.

½ an acre

23 May 1924 F Kershaw No. 2 Soak at Riley’s Creek. An application for a WaterRight under a Miner’s Right toconstruct a water race from theNo. 2 soak at Riley’s Creek, 8chains long, heading south west.

Table 4: Summary of Wilson River Miner’s Claims93

Another source of information on the alluvial miners working the field comes from returns from theosmiridium buyers. These registers commence in September 1922, by which time the Wilson Riverfield had begun to decline in production. Nonetheless, these registers are an important record of theminers and the levels of their production. From September to November 1922, some 38 diggers wereworking the field. By far, the majority were getting less than an ounce a month of the precious metal.

During September-November 1922, the following miners are recorded as working on the WilsonRiver:

AW Fenton J Burge

Thomas Stanton S Reardon

J Watkins JS Fenton

A McGuiness D Keenan

Frederick Kershaw Reginald Flight

W Beale D Donovan

V Ellins W Lincoln

W Flight - Dhu

J Gould W Eady

H Boyd Carl Zarrin

M Smith S Dwyer

J Carpenter J Sullivan

J Dixon Thomas Power

M Burkery W Knight

93 TAHO, MIN 197/1/1-2, Applications from the Zeehan Office for Mining Leases, Water Rights, Notices of the Marking Off ofProspecting Claims, and Associated Papers


6 August 201234

F McGuiness J Ven

FC Faws [?] W White

James Fahey J Wilson

Thomas Dixon J Power94

William Grant

3.8 The Decline of Osmiridium Workings on the Wilson RiverProduction on the Wilson River peaked in May 1921, when over 150 people were working on the field,primarily to the north of the study area along the Little Wilson River.95 Such heights were to be shortlived. The combination of a drop in the osmiridium market price and the emergence of new fields sawa gradual decline on the Wilson River.

By early 1922, many of the older prospectors were leaving the Wilson River field, where only poorresults were being obtained. In July, it was being reported that ‘the osmiridium fields are now quiet.The Wilson River field has been practically worked out’.96 Numbers fell from about 40 men workingthe field at the beginning of 1922, down to 29 by December. The decline continued over the comingyears: 18 miners by May 1923; only 10 by September 1924.97

The 1925 discovery of alluvial osmiridium at Adamsfield in south west Tasmania resulted in a newrush. The Adamsfield area developed into Tasmania’s largest osmiridium producer, accounting forhalf of the State’s total production, and attracting miners from the Wilson River, the Advocate goingso far as to say that ‘nearly all the old hands from the Wilson River district’ had left for Adamsfield.98

Although working the Wilson River field may have fallen, interest in the mineral prospects of theregion remained strong. A new investigation was made into the Upper Wilson River area in 1929,where encouraging results were obtained for tin, gold and osmiridium. Huon, King Billy and CeleryTop Pine were also found to exist in the region. Access issues were a major impediment todevelopment and recommendations were made for improving the tracks to allow packhorses to enterthe region, and eventually light motor vehicles.99

Despite this downturn, some did continue to try and work the field. A 10 acre osmiridium lease wasissued as late as 1925 to John Temple Riley. Located within the study area, his success was limited. In1926, only two or three men were mining the small areas that had yet to be worked, activity that wasrestricted to the winter months when enough rain fell to allow the miners to wash the deposit. Thelease was void by 1927. Small scale works persisted. In 1930, Riley wrote that ‘there are still a few goodmen sticking to this field and prospecting’, prompting the Government to replace the cage across thePieman River to provide access for the miners. In 1931, some 40 to 45 osmiridium miners were stillworking on the Wilson River and adjacent districts.100

3.9 Later Prospecting in the AreaWhile osmiridium mining at the Wilson River declined during the 1920s, interest in the mineralprospects of the area remained strong. Tin, gold and osmiridium were all sought after commodities.As early as 1930, prospecting parties were scouring the region, reportedly finding encouraging driftsof tin in the creeks of the Wilson River.101

94 TAHO, MIN150/1/1 Register of Osmiridium Buyer’s Returns of Purchases, September, October, November 192295 Examiner, Friday 27 May 1921, p.296 Advocate, Tuesday 11 July 1922, p.597 The Mercury, Monday 6 February 1922, p.2; Advocate, Monday 19 June 1922, p.4; TAHO, MIN150/1/1 Register ofOsmiridium Buyer’s Returns of Purchases, September - December 1922 ,January, March, May, July September 1923,September 192498 Bacon, op. cit., pp.1-3; Advocate, Wednesday 12 August 1925. p.4; Advocate, Tuesday 8 September 1925, p.6; The Mercury,Wednesday 28 April 1926, p.899 The Mercury, Monday 25 November 1929, p.9; Examiner, Monday 25 November 1929, p.9100 MRT, Minerals Applications Register, Book No. 22, 9578M; Scott, op. cit., p.53; TAHO, AD266/1/1713, JT Riley to P KellyMHA, 27 March 1930; The Mercury, Friday 6 February 1931, p.8101 Examiner, Thursday 13 February 1930, p.9


6 August 201235

From the mid-twentieth century the Wilson River area came under increasing scrutiny andexploration. The history of the area can be characterised by a progressive series of exploration leasesand invasive and non-invasive investigations.

In 1945, the Wilson River district was identified as one of five important mineral zones in the PiemanRiver area. Alluvial deposits containing tin, gold and osmiridium were identified, with possibilities forlarge scale sluicing and mining. Henderson found it ‘incomprehensible’ that no sustained attempt hadbeen made to work the serpentine rock deposits.102

Works began on a major investigation of the North Pieman mineral field in 1949, covering an area ofsome 1,165.5 square kilometres, including the Wilson River environs. Since the decline in activemining, maintenance of the tracks had ceased and they had become overgrown. At the Wilson River, itwas noted that the condition of the bridge was poor, though the old Mount Ramsay track continued tobe navigable for four miles. Beyond this, forestry works had practically destroyed the track. Tin,osmiridium and gold were identified as existing along the Wilson and Harman Rivers. It was alsonoted that a temporary camp is likely to have existed in the study area. It is not known whether thiscamp related to the former osmiridium workings or the later prospecting works. The camp waslocated about half a mile upstream from the point where the Renison Bell track crossed TrinderCreek.103

In tandem with the above, work was being undertaken to examine in more detail the gold andosmiridium resources of the Pieman River area. The key area of investigations were the formerworkings on the Lower Wilson River. Coldham noted that the primary alluvial deposits in the creekshad been ‘completely worked out’, although secondary deposits continued to be present within thebasins and flats around these water courses. Selective test pitting and cuts were made in an attempt toestablish the potential value of these secondary deposits. The results were mixed. Promising sampleswere found at Sweeny’s Creek, while Trinder Creek yielded disappointing results. Overall, the testingwas not a success, and Coldham recommended the abandonment of the project.104

The Wilson River area was also investigated for its asbestos potential in 1955. Access to the districtwas available via the old ‘digger’s track’, following the Argent River from Renison Bell in the south.This track had recently been cleared out and met the Pieman River at its junction with the HuskissonRiver. Cages were erected over both the Pieman and Huskisson, and from here the track continuedover the button grass plains to reach the Wilson River area. With regard to the vicinity of the studyarea, Taylor found ‘a fair development’ of asbestos fibre at Riley Knob, which although in smallquantities, justified further prospecting should access issues be improved.105

In 1956 a partnership was formed between Rio Tinto and EZ to carry out a regional survey of the westcoast, in the process producing photo-geological maps of the region. Geophysical surveys wereundertaken, including airborne magnetometer, airborne electro-magnetometer and spontaneouspotential surveys over large areas of north west Tasmania, including the study area. Multiple mineralanomalies worthy of further investigation were identified in the area between the Wilson andHuskisson Rivers. A very large lease area was subsequently granted to Rio Tinto which included thestudy area, with Rio’s work focussed on surveying for tin mineralisation.106

The following year, locals began lobbying the Government to replace the cages across the Pieman andWilson Rivers, to allow prospecting and mining to take place. The matter was investigated, andalthough five small parties interested in mining were identified, it was found that most werecontractors, firewood collectors and were only engaged in mining in a small scale during theweekends. The matter was dropped for the time being.107

Mining companies with greater capital had more success in reaching the remote area. In 1962, theAberfoyle Tin Development Partnership took up exploration leases over the Mount Lindsay-Stanley

102 Henderson, QJ, The Mineral Prospects of the Pieman River Area, Department of Mines, 23 April 1945, MRT Report:UR1954_073-76, pp.15-16103 Taylor, BL, Progress Report on the North Pieman Mineral Field, 5 November 1954, MRT Report: 55-0121, pp.2-4, 9104 Coldham, JC, Pieman Gold-Osmiridium Field, 1949, MRT Report 49-0100, pp.1-3105 Taylor, BL, Asbestos in Tasmania, Geological Survey Mineral Resources No.9, Department of Mines: Hobart, 1955, MRTReport: GSMR09, pp.93-95106 McCarthy, E, R.T.A.E. and E.Z. Exploration Programme Geophysical Surveys in N.W. Tasmania to 31st May 1957 - ProjectPRP/7/100, Rio Tinto Australian Exploration Pty. Limited, 1957, MRT Report: 57-0167, pp.1-5, Plan No. T100107 TAHO, AD266/1/1713, Resident Engineer, Queenstown to Road Engineer, Department of Public Works, 9 September 1957


6 August 201236

River area and initiated an extensive series of surveys, sampling, trenching and drilling. As late as1963, mention was made of the need to use pack horses to access the site.108

Aberfoyle also investigated the prospects of other nearby locations, expanding their lease area in 1963to cover some 225 square kilometres, including the study area (Figure 20).

Figure 20: Detail from 1963 sketch plan showing the expanded lease area which included the study area(Aberfoyle Tin Development Partnership, Tin Projects in Western Tasmania, in Morton, JL, Progress Report No. 8 of Mt.Lindsay Tin Prospect, Zeehan, Tasmania, 11 October 1963, TCR _0361, plan obtained from Mineral Resources Tasmania)

Within this expanded area, the Company investigated the serpentine sediments in search of sulphidemineralisation. This included geochemical and drill sampling of areas near Ahearne, Riley andTrinder creeks over 1967-1969. Further geological investigations were carried out in the lower WilsonRiver area, extending on to the junctions of Salmon and Tulloch Creeks, where minor pyritemineralisation was found. More detailed investigations of the Wilson River area followed in 1968,including investigations of the serpentine belt within the study area.109

This work involved examining the geology of the Three Mile Creek area, Riley Knob, Sweeny Creekand Trinder Creek. Although focussed on a geological analysis for nickel-copper prospects, the authors

108 McCarthy, op. cit.; Owen, S, Adamus Resources Limited. Exploration Licence 18/2002 Serpentine Ridge NW Tasmania.2003 Annual Report on Exploration Activities within EL18/2002 to Mineral Resources Tasmania, 2003, MRT Report:EL1820002_200310_01, p.6; Owen, S, Mount Lindsay – Webbs Creek Exploration Licence 21/2005. Annual Technical Reportfor the period 22/08/2008 to 22/08/2009, Venture Minerals Ltd, July 2009, p.5; Morton, JL, Geological Report on MtLindsay Tin Deposit, Zeehan, Tasmania, 1962, MRT Report: 62_0341, p.3; Morton, J.L, Study & Estimated Cost & Schedule ofProposed Diamond Drill Programme of Mt Lindsay Tin Deposit, 30 November 1962, MRT Report: 62_0348, pp.9-10; Morton,JL, Progress Report No. 8 of Mt. Lindsay Tin Prospect, Zeehan, Tasmania, 11 October 1963, MRT Report: 63-361, p.4109 Jordan, M, Reports on the Camp 30, Ahearne’s Creek and Wilson River Areas, EL 2/63, February 1969, MRT Report: 69-0598, p.1; Roetz, M, Cameron, P, Allen, B, Geology of the Wilson River Area, MRT Report: 69-0598, p.1; Eshuys, E, Etheridge,M, Aberfoyle Tin Development Partnership. Report on the Mt. Lindsay Area, Tasmania (Summer Programme 1967/68.),February 1968, MRT Report: 68-0499, pp.18-19


6 August 201237

noted that with the exception of the old Mount Merton tin mine, all historic mining work had beenalluvial. This conclusion was challenged by later investigations. Further geochemical and geophysicalwork was recommended.110

Follow up work took place the following year to test the nickel anomalies. The seven anomaliespreviously located were tested with drilling using hand augering equipment. To access the area aheliport site was established near Riley Creek, and a camp set up nearby. Lines were cut along each ofthe anomalies and samples taken from old test pits as well as new drill sites. The results were notencouraging and further work was not recommended.111

By 1972, Aberfoyle’s lease area had been reduced in size to cover some 124 square kilometres, but stillincluded the study area within its boundaries. That year, the Company undertook a detailedreconnaissance exploration program to identify the presence of tin deposits. This work included linecutting, gridding, soil sampling at 100 points, magnetic traverses and geological mapping. The workconcluded that tin deposits were generally of a low order of magnitude, noting the constraintsinherent in surface exploration. It was recommended that further exploration work should take place.It was also in 1972, that Aberfoyle recommended a joint venture with Renison Bell, and althoughsurvey work was undertaken, Aberfoyle released the area before the partnership was formalised.112

Aberfoyle maintained their exploration licence of the study area into the early 1980s. Majorimprovements to access also took place during this period. In 1980, the then Hydro ElectricCommission completed the Lower Pieman dam access road from Tullah, providing, for the first time,road access to the study area and the broader region.113

Presumably, with this new transport route, areas of State Forest were available for logging. Figure 21shows a 1984 aerial photograph of the northern section of the study area, where selective logging hadtaken place both north and south of the Pieman Road.

110 Jessup, A, Chenhall, B, Aberfoyle Tin Development Partnership. Interim Report on the Camp 30 Merton Area, Tasmania,1968, MRT Report 68-0500, pp.2-6, 9, 20111 Glasson, KR, Aberfoyle Tin Development Partnership, Report on Trinder-Camp 30 Area, Exploration Licence 2-63, 1969,MRT Report 69-0560, pp.1-6112 Krummei, G, E.L. 2/63, Tasmania. End of Project Report, Wilson River-Pieman Area, 15 October 1972, MRT Report: 72-0901, p.1; Newnham, LA, Schellekens, RR, Aberfoyle Ltd, E.L. 2-63 Mt. Lindsay - Western Tasmania, Annual Report, 1972-73,1973, MRT Report 73-0962113 Ellis, PD, Exploration Progress Report E.L. 53/70, Stanley River, Tasmania. Period ending 10th November, 1982, EMR160/82, October 1982, MRT Report: 82-1874, pp.1, 3; Martin, LA, Roberts, PA, E.L. 2/63, Mt Lindsay Area, WesternTasmania. Merton Hill Progress Report, 1982, MRT Report 82-1751, p.1


6 August 201238

Figure 21: Detail from 1984 aerial photograph showing the recently completed Pieman Road. Selective logginghad taken place both to the north and south of the road by this time (North West Forests, Run 36, 9/12/84, 1017-060

M486, image reproduced courtesy of TASMAP, © State of Tasmania)

In 1985, a new exploration lease was issued to MG Creasy. Exploration licence 24/85 covered 22square kilometres, including the study area. As part of the approvals process for the exploration work,an Environmental Impact Assessment was prepared. The Assessment noted that tracks alreadyexisted along the power line easement and leading south towards Riley Knob. The testing worksincluded a series of sample pits to be dug and the construction of 12 kilometres of main tracks (2.4metres wide), and 9 kilometres of minor tracks. The proposed location of these tracks and test pits isdepicted in Figure 22.


6 August 201239

Figure 22: 1985 sketch plan showing proposed tracks and test sites (Tasmanian Archives and Heritage Office,AC249/1/439, 4/813, Creasey [sic], M.G, Serpentine Ridge: Plan from Environmental Impact Assessment, 1985. Reproduced

with Permission)


6 August 201240

Creasy’s investigations were approved with requirements that the sample pits be rehabilitated at theend of works and standard conditions for the avoidance of potential sites of Aboriginal and historicheritage value.114

Working with Callina N.L, works on testing the area soon followed, in search of platinum groupelements. The testing works took place near Riley Creek and a creek referred to as ‘Lippy Jane’, whichappears to have been the north eastern source of Three Mile Creek. Testing works included theexcavation of 9 costeans located on the creek beds and slope materials, finding chromite, osmiridiumand gold.115

More systematic exploration soon followed. Centred on the Riley Creek area and the smallwatercourses to the south, it was noted that the area had been extensively prospected during the early1900s and numerous prospecting pits relating to this work continued to exist, primarily around thecreeks.

The reporting from this period provides the best understanding of development in the study area sinceReid first investigated the field in 1921. The following table summarises these areas of historic mining,as described in 1987.

Location Description

Three Mile Creek/‘Lippy Jane Creek’

Davis noted that the south-eastern bank of the creek had been cut by trenches and races,up to 7 metres above the level of the creek. The trenches were recorded as being up to 3metres deep, and up to 5 metres wide. Extensive workings existed on the first 400 metresof the creek, on its eastern side.

Further extensive workings existed along the top of the ridge to the north-west of ThreeMile Creek. Here, Davis located a large trench, 15 metres long, 4 metres wide and up to 3metres deep. Several smaller trenches also existed in this area.116

Riley Creek Riley Creek was described as having been extensively worked, most notably at thejunction of Riley and Trinder Creeks. In places, Riley Creek still flowed through log-linedwater races. Discard piles of pebbles and stones (up to 1.5 metres high) were also noted.

Upstream, Davis located large trenches upslope, which were generally less than 1 metredeep and fanned out across the slope.117

Fowler Creek Numerous small trenches existed at the head of Fowler Creek, while no trenches werelocated downstream.118

Trinder Creek A number of small pits existed at the head of Trinder Creek as well as scattered pits alongits bank to its junction with Fowler Creek. Heavy vegetation at this location preventedfurther investigations to determine if the workings continued on towards Riley Creek.119

Table 5: Descriptions of Areas Recorded by Callina N.L in 1987

Importantly, the report includes a map showing the location of these historic workings, described as‘old prospecting pits’. A total of 18 separate areas of historic workings are shown and a description wasmade of each feature. They suggest that rather than ‘old prospecting pits’, these features were actuallyevidence of the former osmiridium workings. Interestingly, the descriptions note several lodeworkings such as shafts and adits. This seems somewhat unusual given that the historic reports notethe field as being primarily developed through alluvial mining.

114 TAHO, AC249/1/439, Creasy, M.G., Serpentine Ridge, Environmental Impact Assessment, 1985115 Callina N.L, Annual Report on Tasmanian Prospect E.L. 24-85, 1985, MRT Report 86-2613, pp.1-4116 Davis, N, Annual Report 1/12/86-1/12/87 Wilson River Exploration Licence 24/85, 1987, MRT Report 87-2744, p.5117 Ibid, p.5118 Ibid119 Ibid, p.6


6 August 201241

Given the importance of this report in documenting historic workings, the map and description offeatures is reproduced at Figure 23 and Table 6.

Figure 22Reference

Description

1 Trench 30 metres x 1 metre x 1 metre generally orientated North-South but trench is not straight.Through alluvial cobbles.

2 1.5 metres x 1 metre x 2 metres deep trench orientated North-South.

3 1.5 metres x 1 metre x 2 metres deep in the unconsolidated red lateritic gravels. OrientationNorth-South.

4 Caved in trench. Previous dimensions believed to be similar to hole 5-11.

5 2 metres x 1 metre x 2 metres trench orientated as 60°.






11 2 metres x 1 metre x 2 metres trench. Orientation not determined.

12 Caved in shaft.

13 2 metres x 1 metre x 2 metres test pit orientated as 0°.

14 2 metres x 1 metre x 2 metres test pit orientated as 35°.

15 Adit under hard cap. Orientated at 240°. Opening 2 metres x 1 metre x 3 metres deep.Undetermined depth to back of adit. Several smaller (1 metre x 0.5 metre deep) diggings downslope (east) into red clay.

16 3 metres long x 1 metre wide by 2 metres deep. The adit cuts under the hard cap approximately1.5 metres through an orange clay containing irregular sub-rounded laterite nodules, 2.20millimetres in size.

17 Bi-level trench 10 metres x 1 metre with 1 metre step in middle of trench.

18 1.5 metre x 1.5 metre x 3.5 metre deep through reworked glacial deposit consisting of roundedcobbles of quartzite and conglomerate. Orientation approximately 300°. Through orange claywith minor irregular rock.

Table 6: Descriptions of Features shown in Figure 23 by Callina N.L, 1987120

120 Ibid, p.20


6 August 201242

Figure 23: 1987 plan showing old alluvial workings, or ‘pits’ identified by Callina N.L. The features are cross-references in Table 6 (Davis, N, Annual Report 1/12/86-1/12/87 Wilson River EL 24/85, Figure 3 Location of Previous Workings, MRT Report 87-2744, plan obtained from Mineral Resources Tasmania)


6 August 201243

Over 1986-87, Callina established an exploration grid over the part of their lease focussed onconcentrated areas covered in detrital material. These works presumably required some selectivelogging where proposed tracks or testing sites coincided with forested areas. However, records of suchactivities have not been located, most likely because the first Forest Practices Code (and the recordkeeping associated with it) did not become operational until November 1987. Drilling was undertakenby Callina at 50 metre intervals along this grid, and bulk samples were taken from 35 sites. Theseworks took place in a location designated ‘Area A’, covering some 35 hectares. The results werepromising, indicating a potentially economic alluvial chromite resource, with small amounts of goldand osmiridium. Similar work was carried out in 1988, again providing reasonable results forchromite content.121

In 1989, testing works continued in Area A, and extended into a new location to the east, termed ‘AreaC’ and covering some 55 hectares. The results were poor, with levels of chromite too low to allow thedevelopment to proceed. Some testing also took place further to the south on the button grass plain,providing low values for precious minerals. Testing of the detrital material in Area D wasrecommended for the following seasons.122 Importantly, the report also includes an annotated aerialphotograph of these testing areas (Figure 24). When compared with current aerial imagery, theroadworks associated with the testing locations within Areas A and C remain highly visible as linearground disturbances (Figure 25).

121 Davis, 1987, op. cit., pp.9, 15; Davis, N, Interim Report EL 24-85 Wilson River Area, North-Western Tasmania, October1988, 1988, MRT Report 88-2879, pp.1-8; Forest Practices Board, Forest Practices Code, Forest Practices Board: Hobart, 2000,p.3122 Blanks, RF, Annual Report 1988-89, EL 24-85, Wilson River - Riley Knob, Western Tasmania, 1989, MRT Report 89-3044,pp.1-3


6 August 201244

Figure 24: Aerial photograph contained in 1989 Callina Report showing testing areas A, C and D. Comparethese locations with Figure 25 (Blanks, RF, Annual Report 1988-89, EL 24-85, Wilson River - Riley Knob, Western

Tasmania, 1989, MRT Report 89-3044, p.13, Photograph obtained from Mineral Resources Tasmania)


6 August 201245

Figure 25: c.2012 aerial photograph indicating locations tested by Callina with road works visible as linearfeatures in the landscape (Areas A and C) (© Google earth, © 2012 Cnes/Spot Image, © 2012 Whereis® Sensis Pty Ltd)

The extensive testing undertaken by Callina showed that the costs associated with mining andprocessing chromite from the site would be marginally better than break even. However, the 1989economic downturn made the project unviable and works ceased.123

Exploration has continued into more recent times. In 2002, Adamus Resources were granted anexploration licence over some 137 square kilometres, principally in search for primary nickel,

123 Callina NL, Annual Report 1989-90 Exploration Licence 24/85, Wilson River, 1990, MRT Report 90-3170, pp.1-2


6 August 201246

platinoid and gold mineralisation. This licence area 18/2002 included the study area. Some parts ofthis site were found to be non-prospective and 40 acres were released from the licence. Whilst someareas in the western part of the study area were released back to the Crown, the majority of the studyarea remained in Adamus’ license area.124

Within this reduced area of 97 square kilometres, Adamus undertook preliminary testing workinvolving magnetic surveying, stream, soil and rock sampling, and bulk sampling of glacial gravel andlateritic clay at 11 sites. Further testing followed in the coming years.125

Currently, the study area is held by Venture Minerals as part of as part of a 59 square kilometreExploration Licence (EL45/2010). Preliminary works have been undertaken by Venture and a directshipping ore hematite prospect has been discovered.126

124 Owen, S, 2003 Annual Report, MRT Report EL182002_200310_01 report, pp.1-17; Owen, S, Adamus Resources Ltd, EL18/2002, Serpentine Ridge NW Tasmania, 2004 Partial Release, 2004, MRT Report, EL182002_2004 partial_release, pp.5,Figure 1125 Owen, S, Adamus Resources Ltd, 2005 Annual Exploration Report EL 18/2002 Serpentine Ridge, 2005, MRT Report,EL182002_2005, pp.5, 27-28126 ASX Announcement, Venture Discovers Second DSO Hematite Prospect at Mt Lindsay, Tasmania’, Tuesday 22nd November2011, Ref: /VMS/606/VMS00269


6 August 201247

4.0 HISTORIC HERITAGE FIELDWORK RESULTS &ASSESSMENT

4.1 OverviewAs part of the fieldwork completed for this historic heritage assessment, 87 sites/features wereidentified. These consisted of:

54 sites or features relating to historic alluvial osmiridium mining (for example mullockheaps, areas of ground works, test pits, races or drains); and

33 sites which are most likely to result from investigation and workings carried out in the1980s (costeans, test pits, small scale workings). Further information regarding these sites iscontained in section 4.4.

Following rationalisation of the sites, four separate datasheets have been prepared for the historicfeatures located on or near Sweeney Creek, Three Mile Creek, Riley Creek and Trinder Creek. No sitesof historic occupation (e.g., hut or camp sites, refuse deposits) were found. This should not beinterpreted as evidence that such sites no longer exist within the study area.

4.2 Preamble to the Inventory4.2.1 Field Methods

This report presents the results of fieldwork within the study area as defined in Figure 1. This wasinformed by the results of the desktop assessment and took the form of both targeted and generalpedestrian field survey. In response to variations in the definition of the study area, surveys have beenundertaken for a total of 11 days in three separate blocks of field investigations over the periods 19-23and 26-27 March; 24-26 April; and 4 July 2012. The attributes of sites or features identified duringthe field component were recorded and the information transferred to a series of illustrated inventorydatasheets (see Figure 44). To provide a complete context, this report documents the results of allidentified features, including those outside of the laterite deposits.

The field survey took the form of pedestrian inspection of the study area. The desktop investigationsindicated that all of the creeks within the study area had been historically worked for alluvialosmiridium. For this reason, the survey initially focussed on surveying these creeks and surrounds,with particular reference to Riley Creek, the area historically recorded as being subject to the mostextensive development. Invariably the location of the creeks also corresponded with the densestvegetation: Bauera, Tea Tree, cutting grass and log falls which substantially inhibited ground surfacevisibility and access. Compounding this problem, the flow of water in the creeks was at timesnegligible, and in some cases no discernible creek body could be identified, particularly in the upperpart of small creek catchments.

An extensive network of currently operational and overgrown vehicle tracks also exists within thestudy area, most notably within Areas A and C. A high proportion of these tracks were walked to gainan appreciation of the broader study areas and the impact of late-twentieth century exploration. Asmany of these traverse higher ridges, overview of the surrounding landscape was possible and a seriesof more recent mineral exploration sites were identified as a result.

Figure 26 shows a simplified version of the field survey transects.


6 August 201248

Figure 26: Field Survey Transects (highlighted in ‘green’). Basemap TasMap, © State of Tasmania

The following sections summarise the results for each area investigated.


6 August 201249

Area A

Area A is located on a ridge that runs in a roughly east-west alignment, at an elevation between 200-230m a.s.l. The area is crossed by the main vehicular track off the Pieman Road, and a track whichtrends in a south westerly direction en route to Fowler Creek. The spur of the ridge slopes both to thenorth on descent to Three Mile Creek, and on the south side to Riley Creek. On the spur and higherridges, the vegetation is largely open Stringy Bark eucalypt forest, changing to Western Peppermintand Tea Tree on the western lower slopes.127 Ground visibility was variable within Area A, however,generally the higher slopes were more open, with lighter understorey growth. As the ridge descends tothe creek valleys, the vegetation becomes progressively thicker and visibility decreases.

Area A is largely outside of areas known to have been historically worked. The exceptions are on thesouthern side where the laterite deposit encroaches upon Riley Creek as well as two small unnamedtributaries of the creek. Features of historic alluvial mining were found within Riley Creek and theeasternmost tributary.

Three Mile Creek would appear to be outside of Area A, and again, the dense vegetation andundergrowth obscures visibility, although two features including a large trench were recorded (Figure27).

A network of vehicle tracks exists within Area A, primarily to the west of the main track to FowlerCreek. Some of these tracks were inspected, and several features identified, most likely relating to latetwentieth century mineral exploration.

Figure 27: The Large Trench above Three Mile Creek.

Area B

Area B is located to the east of Area A. The area follows Riley Creek in a southerly direction from itssource for approximately 280 metres. Riley Creek is historically recorded as the most intenselydeveloped area on the Wilson River osmiridium field and consequently was subject to the mostintensive survey. To the west of the head of the Creek, a large area of alluvial works was identifiedwithin a broader area dominated by Western Peppermint and Tea Tree,128 with a dense layer of humicmaterial covering the forest floor (Figure 28). The head of the creek is choked with thick cutting grass,interspersed with Tea Tree and Banksia. This vegetation growth obscured the ground surface to theextent that it became practically impossible to discern both the flow and course of the creek.

Beyond the Area B laterite deposit, Riley Creek flows through a largely flat, elliptical valley. The valleygently ascends for approximately 300 metres towards the north-west before reaching the spur of thehill. Again, vegetation cover on these higher sections was sufficiently open to allow for features such as

127 North Barker Ecosystem Services, p.14128 Ibid


6 August 201250

alluvial works and water races or channels to be identified. However, on descending the valley towardsthe creek, the vegetation changes to dense cutting grass and Tea Tree which considerably obscured thebanks of the creek and surrounds, although a large number of mullock heaps were recorded in thevicinity (Figure 29).

Riley Creek was followed to the western extent of the study area. As the Creek continues its westerlyflow, the valley narrows considerably and the vegetation changes to rainforest growth of Myrtle,Sassafras, Leatherwood, ferns and mosses,129 with an open understorey characterised by a denseaccumulation of humus. Both mullock heaps and an area of alluvial workings was identified withinthis incised valley, although of a smaller scale than existed further to the east. Interestingly, parts ofthe creek in this location have been lined with timber logs to channel the flow of water.

Figure 28: Area of alluvial works found near the headof Riley Creek.

Figure 29: Riley Creek near its intersection with themain track. Low mullock heaps were found on the

banks of the creek.

Area C

Area C is the largest of the ore bodies subject to field survey. The area is centred on a ridge of some240m a.s.l, that runs in a roughly north-east to south-west alignment. The area is traversed by themain vehicular tracks that lead in a south-easterly direction towards Fowler Creek and a track thatruns north-east to south-west above Riley Creek. The north-west facing slope of Area C falls quitesharply towards the Riley Creek valley, whilst to the south-east, the land falls towards Trinder Creek.

Again, the vegetation varies within the locality. More open, predominantly Western Peppermint andTea Tree130 provides cover on the higher slopes and ridges, with dense vegetation colonising the creekvalleys. The area is largely outside of locations of historic workings and is criss-crossed by aconsiderable network of exploratory tracks, the majority appearing to date from the 1980s period ofoperations, with several contemporaneous prospecting sites evident (Figure 30).

129 Ibid, p.8130 Ibid, p.14


6 August 201251

Figure 30: One of the prospecting sites found near the track network in Area C.

Fowler and Trinder Creeks are located to the south of Area C. At the time of inspection, there was littleflow present in Fowler Creek, and no historic sites or features were located in the small section ofcreek that was surveyed (Figure 31).

Trinder Creek was the most difficult water course to work through, with very dense cutting grass,Bauera and log falls, obscuring the ground surface and features, and making navigation and progress aslow, difficult and eventually impossible task. Approximately 230 metres of the creek course wasfollowed in a north-easterly direction from the vehicle track. Beyond this point, the dense vegetationbecame impassable, and risky given the inability to determine the nature of the underlying groundand the hazard of holes and log falls. The north-west facing ridge was climbed in an attempt to findanother access point to the creek below but without success.

Despite the constraints on field survey, a number of mullock heaps flanking the creek were recorded,although of a far lesser intensity than appears on Riley Creek (Figure 32).

Figure 31: Fowler Creek. Figure 32: Concentration of mullock found onTrinder Creek.

Area D

Area D is the northern most ore body, located to the east of the main access road and centred on GoldCreek. A low ridge of some 260m a.s.l. is the dominant landform in the western part of Area D.Covered in relatively open dry Stringy Bark forest,131 the density of the vegetation increases as the spurof the ridge runs out to Gold Creek. The Bauera covered spur falls easterly towards the Creek, wherecutting grass (c.2m high), Tea Tree and log falls cover the valley floor with very poor ground visibility(Figure 33). Although swampy, the precise course of Gold Creek could not be discerned within Area D.At the southern end of Area D, several historic sites or features were located, forming part of the largerRiley Creek valley workings, but losing definition amidst dense cutting grass and Tea Tree.

131 Ibid


6 August 201252

Figure 33: General View of Gold Creek Valley.

Proposed Infrastructure Site

Associated with the proposed mining development, locations have been identified for theestablishment of other infrastructure, including a dry crushing and screening plant, crushed orestockpile and mine office. These sites are located to the east of the main access road leading southfrom the Pieman Road. Sweeney Creek flows in a north-easterly direction through this location.

Sweeney Creek is flanked by dense Melaleuca squarosa scrub with cutting grass, bauera and tea treeprominent along the margins (Figure 34) becoming progressively more dense and encroaching uponthe course of the creek as it flows in a north-westerly direction (Figure 35). Beyond the creek, thevegetation becomes more open wet eucalypt forest, dominated by Eucalyptus obliqua.132

Approximately 180 metres of Sweeney Creek was surveyed where it corresponds with the proposedinfrastructure site. Several sites or features were located near the creek, from both the historic andmore recent periods.

132 TheLIST, TasVeg 2.0


6 August 201253

Figure 34: General View of Sweeney Creek. Figure 35: General view of a heavily vegetated sectionof Sweeney Creek.

4.2.2 Background to the Inventory

The inventory Datasheets and associated mapping form the principal output of the project. Thedatasheets and associated features have been numbered sequentially. The Datasheets refer to morethan one site or feature, and a number of individual elements have been grouped where their type isrelated geographically or by type. In these instances the individual elements have been given anumeric suffix (i.e. 1.01, 1.02, 1.03 etc).

Although the historical overview is useful for providing the general context for development within thestudy area, it largely lacks sufficient detail to attribute particular sites or features to specificindividuals or events. For this reason, the datasheets have been prepared on a geographic basis,reflecting the water courses where historic sites were located, that is, Sweeney, Three Mile, Riley andTrinder Creeks. Likewise, for clarity, individual sites have been grouped into larger geographicalareas. For example, areas where mullock heaps or prospecting pits predominate are depicted andbroadly characterised in descriptions, rather than as individual sites or features.

Section 4.2.3 contains the full list of items logged during the field survey. This table lists the SiteNumber and Name. Section 4.7 contains maps showing the location of the Inventory Items. Mappedsite locations were determined by grid references retrieved from a hand held GPS unit referencing theGDA 94 datum.133 Dependent upon the ground cover, accuracy in location details varied between +/-3 metres, to +/- 11 metres. The identified sites are graphically presented in a standardised formatwhereby features are identified by number and otherwise according to the following conventionswhich provide an indication of type at a glance:

133 Hand held GPS grid references should be regarded as approximate.


6 August 201254

Table 7: Mapping conventions used throughout this report

Section 4.8 comprises the four Datasheets. For a key to the layout of the sheets, see Figure 44, below.The Datasheets contain extracts from the overall mapping.

Each datasheet contains a history field where summary contextual information is included. This isnot intended to replace the need for full and direct reference to information contained in theHistorical Overview contained in Section 3.0.

The attributes of each site or feature are included in the description field. This information issupplemented by captioned photographs cross-referenced to descriptions in the text. A morecomprehensive explanation of significance or process not possible in the history and description fieldsis contained in the discussion field.

Significance is ascribed according to State or Local levels of significance and assessed against thecriteria of the Historic Cultural Heritage Act 1995.134

4.2.3 Summary of Results

Site Number Name

Sweeney Creek1 01-02 Extent of workings (mullock heaps etc).

03 Stacked Stones04 Stacked Stones05 Mullock Heap

Three Mile Creek2 01 Alluvial Workings Area

02 Test PitRiley Creek

3 01 Alluvial Workings Area02 Water Channel03 Water Channel04 Water Channel05 Alluvial Workings Area06 Water Channel07 Alluvial Workings Area08 Water Channel

09-16 Alluvial Workings Area17 Water Channel18 Water Channel19 Water Channel20 Mullock heaps (group)21 Testing Site (group)22 Other: shoed tree stump23 Alluvial Workings Area

134 The assessment of social significance was beyond the scope of the study.


6 August 201255

Site Number Name

24 Water Channel25 Water Channel26 Water Channel27 Water Channel28 Water Channel29 Water Channel30 Mullock heaps (group)31 Testing Site (group)32 Alluvial Workings Area33 Water Channel34 Water Channel35 Water Channel36 Testing Site (group)

37-38 Mullock: west to east end39 Water Channel40 Alluvial Workings Area

41-42 Mullock: east to west end43 Other: timber lined creek44 Other: timber lined creek45 Other: possible cut and benched creek bank46 Alluvial Workings Area

47-48 Mullock: southern to northern end - unnamed tributary No. 149 Mullock: unnamed tributary No. 250 Testing Site (group)

Trinder Creek4 01-02 Mullock: south-western to north-eastern end

Table 8: Inventory List

4.3 Assessing the Significance of the Riley SitesThe assessment of cultural significance is a pivotal part of any heritage assessment. In this reportsignificance is expressed in terms of the Australia ICOMOS Burra Charter (the Burra Charter)definition of cultural significance and the seven criteria of the Historic Cultural Heritage Act 1995.Article 1.2 of the Burra Charter defines:

Cultural significance means aesthetic, historic, scientific, social, or spiritual value for past,present or future generations.

Cultural significance is embodied in the place itself, its fabric, setting, use, associations,meanings, records, related places and related objects.135

The Historic Cultural Heritage Act 1995 (the Act) definition defines this as:

‘historic cultural heritage significance’, in relation to a place, means significance to any groupor community in relation to the archaeological, architectural, cultural, historical, scientific,social or technical value of the place.136

This definition is similar to the one given by the Burra Charter, with the notable absence of aestheticvalue. The Act provides that a place may be entered in the Tasmanian Heritage Register where it is of‘historic cultural heritage significance’ and where it meets one or more of the seven required criteria.Although not necessarily explicit, these criteria reflect the values identified in the definition of ‘historiccultural heritage significance’, that is, historical, archaeological, architectural and so on.

The Act is silent on how important a place should be to meet a criterion for entry in the TasmanianHeritage Register. However, the use of words and phrases such as ‘important’, ‘important in

135 Australia ICOMOS Burra Charter, Art. 1.2136 Historic Cultural Heritage Act 1995, s.3


6 August 201256

Tasmania’s history/heritage’, and ‘high degree’, help indicate that although a place may have heritagevalue, it may not necessarily be of sufficient value to meet a criterion of the Act.137

Guidelines have been developed to assist in applying these criteria and determining the level ofsignificance of a place at either State or local levels of heritage significance.138 The Guidelines definethis distinction between State and local significance as:

A place is of historic heritage significance at a STATE level as being important to the whole of Tasmania,and therefore eligible for entry in the Tasmanian Heritage Register; or

A place is of historic heritage significance at a LOCAL level as being important to a region or localcommunity and eligible for listing in a heritage schedule of a local planning scheme.139

In applying this distinction, thresholds have been developed to define the minimum required value/sthat a place must possess to be considered as having heritage significance at either State or locallevels. This report has been prepared cognisant of the principles contained in these Guidelines.

The evaluation of significance has a practical application as it provides the basis for determining howplaces, sites, items and/or features identified during the field survey should be managed. In generalterms, active management is recommended for those places assessed by the author as having heritagesignificance at either State or local levels. Within these two categories, the prescriptions vary, althoughin framing recommendations with regard to places of State significance a proactive approach ofteninvolving design reviews and third party consultation with Heritage Tasmania is advocated to avoid,as far as possible, the need for late notice costly recycling through process. In contrast, places assessedas having local significance may be more appropriately managed through internal decision-makingprocedures and/or consultation with local planning authorities assuming mitigation measures arefully implemented. No further action is recommended for the majority of sites assessed as not meetingthe threshold for the local level of significance.

It is also possible that a single place will have both assessed State and local level values. In such cases,it is recommended in the first instance that consultation take place with Heritage Tasmania andfurther advice is sought on the management of local level values.

In all cases, site-specific recommendations for management of historic heritage values should be readin conjunction with the overarching guidelines presented in Section 5.0 of this report.

Mineral Resources Tasmania has also developed a set of internal Guidelines for new miningoperations on previously worked deposits.140 These Guidelines are useful for providing advice whenconsidering re-working an historic mining landscape, and provide some indication of the broaderrarity or representativeness of certain mining features such as shafts, adits, machinery, building sitesand so on.

The Guidelines also provide summary information regarding management or mitigation measures forimpacting historic mining sites. The Guidelines note the importance of recording physical evidenceprior to change, including accurately locating sites; detailed descriptions; and a statement of conditionor integrity.

This report has been prepared cognisant of the principles contained in these Guidelines.

4.4 Late Twentieth Century Development within the Study AreaIn assessing the potential heritage values of the study area, it is important to consider the survivingintegrity of the historic landscape; largely a question of trying to quantify the extent of impacts fromlate twentieth century development.

From the mid-twentieth century, the broader Wilson River area came under increasing scrutiny andexploration, with the study area forming part of a series of mining leases where both invasive andnon-invasive investigations were carried out. Some forestry works also took place. However, records

137 Ibid, s.16138 Department of Primary Industries, Parks, Water and Environment, October 2011, Assessing historic heritage significancefor Application with the Historic Cultural Heritage Act 1995139 Ibid, p.2140 Bacon, C.A, Tasmanian Geological Survey Record 1996/02. Mining Heritage Guidelines for use by MRT Staff: Re-opening,re-working or exploring a previously worked deposit, 26 February 1996


6 August 201257

of logging works are scant, given that they seem to have occurred prior to the introduction of theForest Practices Code in November 1987.

With regard to development specific to the study areas, exploration during the 1980s is of mostrelevance. In 1985, an exploration lease was issued to MG Creasy. Testing was first carried out nearRiley and ‘Lippy Jane’ Creeks, and later from 1986-89, expanding exploration to locations whichlargely correspond with Areas A and C considered in this current report. Within these areas, anexploration grid was established and drilling undertaken at 50 metre intervals with bulk samplingfrom 35 sites.

The establishment of this testing grid resulted in the construction of a network of roads or tracks.Approximately 14 kilometres of such tracks exist within the study area. Most notably, a grid of trackswas established in Areas A and C, and to a lesser extent within areas B and D. The impact from thesetracks is clearly present within the landscape, being visible on aerial imagery as linear formationsrunning in a south-westerly to north-easterly direction.

The tracks remain evident the field, with many being navigable by 4WD vehicle, while others havebecome overgrown and are suitable for foot traffic only. The main tracks follow the south-west tonorth-east alignment of the hills. Some areas are criss-crossed by south-east to north-west alignedtracks, giving rise to the grid-like formation described above.

The tracks are typically 5 metres wide (not accounting for shoulders), and most follow the topographyof the slopes, although some have been formed by cutting and benching. The full extent of the tracksystem is truncated in parts, most often because of current exploration activities. Associated withthese roadworks, limited and selective forestry activity is also evident, with some chainsaw cut treestumps remaining in place.

Surrounding this network of tracks, a number of exploratory or testing sites were located. Such sitesincluded small, shallow circular test pits of less than 2 metres in diameter; shallow rectilinear pits;and deep rectangular costeans approximately 1.5 - 2.5 metres deep. In some cases, these testing sitesare unmistakably recent in origin: deep narrow costeans with clean edges and little regrowth. In othercases it is less certain whether the feature relates to recent or historic exploration. This is especiallythe case with testing sites X12-X17, located largely adjacent to a track running along the northern sideof the Riley Creek valley. Their location along this track is certainly persuasive of more recent activity,however their regular, rectangular form is also very similar to prospecting sites found nearby andsurrounding some of the historic alluvial works areas.

Based on the coincidence of road works and associated testing sites with areas known to have beenhistorically worked, the desktop study identified potential for considerable impacts on historic miningsites. However, the field survey came to a contrary conclusion, namely that the impact of 1980sexploratory work on historic sites has been minimal. These more recent works have not destroyedhistoric mining sites to an extent that would prevent interpretation of the osmiridium mininglandscape. Certainly, some disturbances have occurred where tracks cross watercourses: cuttingthrough channels, trenches or mullock heaps, but the location of these tracks has largely stayed clearof the creek valleys where the largest number of historic sites were located. Indeed, it appears that thetracks have purposely been situated to avoid the more challenging terrain (whether they be naturalobstacles, or the results of earlier mining activity) in favour of the higher and drier hill slopes.

A different pattern emerges in the north of the study area at the proposed infrastructure sites, whereten features were located. The historical record of more recent development in this area is scant. Someactivity may have taken place in the late-1960s when held by Aberfoyle, however the features locatedin Sweeney Creek are makeshift and could also represent individual (i.e., weekend type rather thancorporate mining) efforts. Test holes along the margins of the creek may be similarly related orcompany sampling sites.

Figure 36 below depicts the existing track network and the series of exploratory and workings sites,thought to date from the 1980s. Details of these sites are included in Table 9.


6 August 201258

Figure 36: Existing Track Network and Probable 1980s Investigation and Workings Sites. Basemap TasMap,© State of Tasmania


6 August 201259

SiteNo.

Description Location

X1 Undifferentiated excavated material of recent origin and probably associatedwith modern prospecting/testing (see also X2, X4, X6).

E368296 / 5378036N


E368297 / 5378045N

X3 Discarded flat metal item in course of creek. Probably associated withmodern prospecting/testing.

E368302 / N5378053


E368315 / N5378069

X5 A possible makeshift sluice ‘box’ and sediment trap using plastic sacking andgalvanised tin set within the course of the creek. Unclear whether thisrepresents mineral exploration or individual efforts. Potentially associatedwith features X8 & X9.

E368319 / N5378072

X6 Undifferentiated excavated material probably of more recent origin (as in X2)and likely associated with modern prospecting/testing.

E368319 / N5378074

X7 Modern shovel test hole. E368309 / N5378079

X8 Timber frame associated with modern prospecting/testing. Potentiallyassociated with features X5 & X9.

E368320 / N5378080

X9 A sheet of corrugated galvanised iron and mild steel reinforcing barassociated with modern prospecting/testing. Potentially associated withfeatures X5 & X8.

E368333 / N5378093

X10 Modern shovel test hole. E368316 /N 5378123

X11 A shallow rectangular costean (approximately 0.5m deep), 3m long and 1mwide located near historic alluvial works sites.

E368503 / N5377220

X12 X12, X13, X14, X15, X16 and X17 form part of a series of testing sites locatedwithin Area C. They include both shallow circular pits of less than 2mdiameter, to narrow rectangular costeans approximately 0.5m wide x 1.5mlong x 1m deep. These sites were largely found adjacent to, or within closeproximity to the track leading from Area A through Area B. Their locationnear this track would suggest they are of more recent origin (i.e., 1980stesting work), however their form and size is also similar to testing siteslocated near alluvial works sites on Riley Creek.

E368457 /N5377180

X13 As above. E368412 / N5377160

X14 As above. E368375 / N5377140

X15 As above. E368283 / N5377110

X16 As above. E368479 / N5377090

X17 As above. E368157 / N5377050

X18 A large recent rectangular costean (5m x 3m x 2m deep) located adjacent to amain vehicle track in Area B. The lack of vegetation regrowth suggests arecent origin for this feature.

E367628 / N5377080


6 August 201260

SiteNo.


X19 A small and shallow (i.e., approximately 1.5m diameter) test pit locatedadjacent to road in area B.

E367534 / N5377090

X20 A roughly circular pit (i.e., approximately 2m diameter), located adjacent to amain vehicle track in Area B. It was unclear whether the feature was culturalor perhaps natural (i.e., tree pull), although other similar pits were located onthe opposite side of the track.

E367539 / N5377020

X21 A small (i.e., approximately 2m diameter) test pit located at end of Pad Site(A0301).

E367266 / N5376940

X22 A shallow rectangular costean (approximately 0.5m deep), 2m long and 1mwide.

E367570 / N5376930

X23 A series of small pits (i.e., approximately 1m diameter) within a 10m radiuslocated within a forest clearing. Evidence of machine cut timber was alsofound at this location.

E367573 / N5376890

X24 A group of five testing sites, most likely related to late twentieth centurydevelopment, located adjacent to a track. The sites varied from small circularpits (i.e., approximately 1m in diameter) to narrow, bucket excavatedcosteans.

E367720 / N5376830

X25 A group of three testing sites roughly aligned in a south-westerly direction,including two small test pits (i.e., less than 1m diameter) and a rectangularcostean approximately 1.5m long x 0.75m wide x 0.75 deep. These featureswere located off the main track leading to Fowler Creek. Their origin isunclear, although their form is similar to testing sites found near historicalluvial works areas.

E368029 / N5376830

X26 A narrow rectangular costean (1.5m long x 0.75m wide x 0.75 deep) locatedimmediately adjacent to the main track leading down to Fowler Creek. Itslocation suggests a more recent origin, although its form is similar to testingsites found near historic alluvial works areas.

E368009 / N5376790

X27 A large but shallow circular pit (approximately 5 metres in diameter), cut intothe slope of the hill and adjacent to the main track, which runs parallel toRiley Creek.

E368241 / N5376780

X28 A shallow circular pit (approximately 2m in diameter), located adjacent to atrack towards the north eastern end of Area D.

E368671 / N5376960

X29 A shallow and roughly circular pit (approximately 1m in diameter), locatedadjacent to a track towards the south-western end of Area D. The pit is of asomewhat indistinct form and may not be a cultural feature.

E367830 / N5376540

X30 A shallow circular pit (approximately 2 metres in diameter), cut into theslope of the hill and adjacent to the main track, which runs parallel to RileyCreek.

E368011 / N5376650

X31 A narrow rectangular costean located immediately above a track, on a lowridge. The machine cut costean is approximately 2.5 long x 1m wide x 2mdeep.

E368206 / N5376620

X32 A shallow, but roughly rectangular costean located adjacent to track runningroughly parallel with Trinder Creek, approximately 2 long x 1m wide.

E368749 / N5376860


6 August 201261

SiteNo.


X33 A shallow circular pit (approximately 2 metres in diameter) located adjacentto the main track running roughly parallel with Trinder Creek.

E368461 / N5376430

X34 A small and roughly circular pit (approximately 1m in diameter), locatedtowards the end of a track. A possible (but not confirmed) narrow andshallow channel was observed in the vicinity.

E368621 / N5376550

X35 A narrow rectangular costean located immediately adjacent a track, runningparallel with the main track leading to Fowler Creek. The machine cutcostean is approximately 2.5 long x 1m wide x 2m deep.

E368250 / N5376420

Table 9: Details of Probable 1980s Investigation and Workings Sites

4.5 Comparative Analysis4.5.1 Introduction

A comparative analysis is useful in understanding why the located sites may have heritagesignificance, and how important they are, when compared with other similar places. In makingcomparisons, it is important to attempt to refer to a data set that will support ‘like with like’evaluations.

In many respects, the identified sites are unremarkable examples of alluvial mining. However, theirreal value comes from their association with osmiridium mining. With the exception of Adamsfield,osmiridium fields have not been considered for their heritage values in any great detail. Noosmiridium sites currently exist on key heritage registers such as the Tasmanian Heritage Register orRegister of the National Estate. The Tasmanian Historic Places Inventory lists five sites associatedwith osmiridium, but again, Adamsfield is the only one that has been assessed in detail.141

Haygarth has broadly identified the significance of the Tarkine region for its historical associationswith osmiridium mining writing:

First osmiridium mining, and one of only two major osmiridium fields in Tasmania, producing one-thirdof the State’s osmiridium. The Mount Stewart field was the only Tasmanian producer of ‘Syssertskite’osmiridium.142

Largely considering historical associations and values, Haygarth identified State level significance forthis association with osmiridium mining.

With such little information it is difficult to understand the relative significance of the Wilson Riverosmiridium field as compared with other similar places. However, detailed contemporary reportsprovide some level of understanding of historical factors such as earliness, scale and type of works,production and how others viewed the Wilson River field. This historical analysis can also providesome perspective on how important osmiridium was as part of the entire Tasmanian mining industry.

Although a rare metal, osmiridium was found and worked to varying degrees at a number of locations,mostly in western and north-western Tasmania. This includes:

Adamsfield;

Savage River (Bald Hill, Heazlewood, Nineteen Mile Creek);

Mount Stewart;

Long Plain;

Wilson River;

141 See THPI 7915.019 Bald Hill Osmiridium Field; 8112.001 Adamsfield; 8210.091 Osmiridium Beach; 8210.094 Rocky Plains;8211.141 Fletcher Plains Osmiridium Mining.142 Haygarth, op. cit., p.134


6 August 201262

Renison Bell;

Dundas;

Styx, Florentine and Spero Rivers, Birchs Inlet;

Hamilton Range;

Gordon River; and

Salisbury Goldfield.

The Tasmanian Government did not recognise osmiridium as a mineral resource until 1910, andtherefore records related to early production are scant. Furthermore, with the exception ofAdamsfield, published accounts of the production levels for individual fields have not been located.143

Work at Adamsfield began in 1925, quickly developing into Tasmania’s most important osmiridiummining field. Before the emergence of Adamsfield, other osmiridium fields were recognised for theirsignificant production levels, and it is these areas that are most comparable to the Wilson River, bothin periods of operation and scale.

The conclusion that can be drawn from geological and newspaper reports is that the Wilson River areawas not the most important osmiridium field during its key period of operations, which peaked in theearly 1920s. Rather, it was mining in the broader Savage River area (Bald Hill, Heazlewood, NineteenMile Creek) that had the highest levels of production and development of new mining techniques.

As an example, in 1911, 272.75 ounces (i.e., 7.73 kilograms) of osmiridium was produced in Tasmania.This had grown to 778.75 ounces (i.e., 22.07 kilograms) in 1912. Of this total production, Twelvetreeswrote in 1914 that only a ‘small proportion’ came from the valleys of the Wilson and Huskisson Rivers,the majority being sourced from the Savage River fields.144

Similarly, in 1919 Brown wrote that the best-known locality for osmiridium was at Nineteen MileCreek and Bald Hill, and that Nineteen Mile Creek was the ‘best and most abundant locality for themetal in Tasmania’.145 Bald Hill was also particularly noteworthy as it had the then unique distinctionof being possibly the first place in the world where solid rock mining took place, with the quarryingand crushing of the serpentine rock, which yielded very high-grade results. A few years later, Reidcame to a similar conclusion, arguing that at that time, Bald Hill was ‘perhaps the most importantsource of osmiridium in Tasmania’.146 The recorded production rate of the combined Mount Stewart,Nineteen Mile, Bald Hill and Wilson River fields was 15,526 ounces (i.e., 440.15 kilograms), valued at£350,845.147 Presumably, the Wilson River portion of this total was comparatively less than theseother fields.

From such accounts, it can be concluded that the Wilson River workings were secondary to what wasoccurring at Savage River. In terms of the quality of osmiridium, differences also existed between thefields. Thus, the most desirable ‘shotty’ granules of osmiridium were found at Nineteen Mile Creekand Bald Hill. On the Wilson River though, Brown wrote that the osmiridium was of a scaly or flakynature, a less valuable commodity, although Riley Creek itself was known for its nugget-likedeposits.148

Quantifying the importance of the Tasmanian osmiridium industry is also very useful in theassessment of heritage significance. For such a newly developed mineral resource, osmiridium miningquickly rose in importance in the Tasmanian mining industry. In 1910 when official records began,only 120 ounces (i.e., 3.40 kilograms) were produced. This had grown to 1,018.8 ounces (i.e., 28.88

143 Various general reports such as those by Brown (1919), Reid (1921), Nye (1928, 1930) provide details as to total production,but not production levels for individual fields. Bacon (1996) includes yearly production levels from 1910-1968, withAdamsfield’s production separately listed: Bacon, op. cit., p.3144 Twelvetrees, op. cit., p.35145 Brown, op. cit., pp.6-7146 Reid, op. cit., p.49147 Henderson, QJ, Thomas, DE, Osmiridium Mining at Mount Stewart, Nineteen Mile and Bald Hill, 1943, MRT ReportUR1943_165-168, p.1148 Brown, op. cit., p.13


6 August 201263

kilograms) by the outbreak of the First World War, during which period production significantly fell.The industry did not recover until 1918 when 1,606.7 ounces (i.e., 45.55 kilograms) were extracted.149

New heights were reached in 1920, when the value of osmiridium production reached £77,144. Thisfigure accounted for some 5.42% of the total value of Tasmania’s mining commodities for that year. By1922 osmiridium production, was ranked 10th out of the 20 top commodities for its earned value,beaten by gold, silver, copper, tin, iron ore and so on, but more important than other commoditiessuch as bismuth, asbestos, shale and zinc.150 As these rankings were based on annual productioncalculated from 1880-1922 (and records of osmiridium production only begin in 1910), the relativeposition of osmiridium against other mining commodities is all the more remarkable.

Another aspect which differentiates osmiridium from other mining commodities is how it wasregulated, and how these regulations translated into employment. Although some company workingsand mining leases did exist, what characterised the Tasmanian industry were small-scale workings byindividuals or small parties, working under miner’s rights claims. Indeed, it was Government policy tosupport the interests of the individual miner and prevent the development of monopolies bycompanies or a few wealthy individuals. As such, claims were limited in size, starting at a half-acre fora single miner, and growing to a maximum of 5 acres for a party of 10 diggers working cooperatively.151

This system allowed individuals to try their luck on the osmiridium fields, without the need forexpensive equipment or large amounts of start up capital. More valuable than gold, few metalsattracted such excitement or interest, and hundreds of people made their way to the fields. Newdiscoveries were widely reported, and popular culture presented an idealised image of the ruggedindividualism of the ‘Ossie Digger’.

Tracing the number of people working on the Wilson River and other similar fields is less thanprecise, changing with fluctuating market prices; falling during the First World War; and impacted bythe development of new fields as the shallow deposits were worked out. However, the following figuresare available:

1911: About 100 men were employed in prospecting for osmiridium at Savage River and thecreeks heading from the Serpentine country.152

1912: a total of 150 miners were working on the Savage River and Nineteen Mile fields duringsummer.153

1913: Over 80 miners were working the Wilson River field gaining with satisfactory results.During the same period, some 90 to 100 men were working on the Savage River and itstributaries.154

1914: Different figures exist for employment during this year. The Secretary for Minesreported that during the first half of 1914, an average of 65 men were working the Wilson andSavage River osmiridium deposits. The Mercury however reported a higher figure of 133 inearly 1913.155

1918: About 12 men employed on the Wilson River field at the beginning of the year.Numbers were expected to increase once the bridge over the Wilson River was re-erected.156

1919: Some 60 men were working on the Wilson River field during 1919, with about 200employed on the Savage River.157

149 Bacon, op. cit., p.3150 Nye, op. cit., p.4151 TAHO, AD948/1/97, Secretary of Mines to State Mining Engineer, 3 June 1913; Reid, op. cit., pp.112-114, 118152 Report of the Secretary for Mines for the Year Ending 31 December 1911, John Vail Government Printer: Hobart, 1912, p.43153 Twelvetrees, op. cit., p.11154 Report of the Secretary for Mines for the Year Ending 31 December 1913, John Vail Government Printer: Hobart, 1914,pp.48-118155 Report of the Secretary for Mines for the Year Ending 31 December 1914, John Vail Government Printer: Hobart, 1915, p.54;The Mercury, Saturday 28 March 1914, p.6156 TAHO, AD948/1/97, JG Arnett to Inspector of Mines, 2 February 1918; Report of the Secretary for Mines for the YearEnding 31 December 1917, John Vail Government Printer: Hobart, 1918, p.92157 Report of the Secretary for Mines for the Year Ending 31 December 1919, John Vail Government Printer: Hobart, 1920, p.34


6 August 201264

1920: Over 250 people were working the Tasmanian osmiridium fields in 1920. Of this total,60 (i.e., 24%) were working on the Wilson River.158

1921: In May 1921, the population on the Wilson River field had grown to over 150 people,the majority working on the Little Wilson River, some eight kilometres to the north of thestudy area.159

1922: From September to November 1922, some 38 diggers were working the Wilson Riverfield. The total industry was employing an average of 271 miners during 1922.160

1923: Employment on the Wilson River field was down to 18 miners by May, falling to only10 by September 1924. The total industry was employing an average of 271 miners during thisyear.161

4.5.2 Osmiridium Mining at Adamsfield

No review of Tasmania’s osmiridium industry would be complete without some brief discussion of therole of Adamsfield, the State’s premier field.

In late 1924, a prospecting party found alluvial osmiridium at two locations in the Adams River Valley.Three leases were issued as rewards for the discovery, and what followed was something of a rush withhundreds of hopeful miners making their way to the new field. Designated a miner’s right field, morethan 1,000 claims were quickly issued and over 800 diggers were working the field during Septemberand October 1925. This was to be the high point for the number of miners at Adamsfield. By the end of1925, numbers had dropped to between 400-600 people. By the end of 1927, only 100 people wereworking the field, though more than doubling for a short period when the price of osmiridium rose in1928.

Both alluvial and hard rock mining took place at Adamsfield. In 1925, Nye described some 146 sets ofalluvial workings in the main osmiridium bearing area. Metal was extracted by sluicing the wash,either shovelling it through sluice boxes, or occasionally hosing the wash through trenches into theseboxes. Solid rock working techniques were introduced somewhat later, when in 1929 osmiridium wasfound in serpentine. By the following year, six sets of workings had been cut into the serpentine,consisting of trenches to expose the mineralised veins; ground sluicing of the surface of the lode; anddrives or tunnels cut off shallow shafts. The excavated material was then sluiced to separate the metalfrom the rock, with stamper batteries not emerging on the field until considerably later.

By this time, Adamsfield had well and truly passed its peak of production. Following the SecondWorld War, some small-scale attempts were made to extract osmiridium by sluicing and dredging thecreeks, rivers and abandoned spoil heaps. The last key phase of workings took place over 1964-1966when open cut mining was undertaken to supply the electronics industry. Small scale reworking ofabandoned alluvial diggings has subsequently taken place.

In addition to the mine workings, a thriving town grew up to supply the diggers. Most of the minerslived in tents, although some built log and daub or paling huts. Serving the miners were severalgrocery stores, a butchers shop, bakery, community hall, bush hospital, post office, police station,school, mines office and sly grog ship. At its peak, the town had a population of some 2,000inhabitants in 1925, but falling to around 200 by 1928.

Adamsfield quickly emerged as Tasmania’s most important osmiridium field. Bacon’s analysis showsthat Tasmania’s total production was some 31,100 ounces (i.e., some 881 kilograms), of which halfcame from Adamsfield. Of the remainder, most had come from the Heazlewood-Bald Hill areas.Production reached its peak in 1925, with 3,365.5 ounces (i.e., 95.4 kilograms) being extracted, andgenerating a total of £103,570. It was also in 1925 that the sale price reached a new high of £30.77 anounce.162

158 Reid, op. cit., pp.3, 68159 Examiner, Friday 27 May 1921, p.2160 TAHO, MIN150/1/1 Register of Osmiridium Buyer’s Returns of Purchases, September - November 1922; Report of theSecretary for Mines for the Year Ending 31 December 1922, John Vail Government Printer: Hobart, 1923, p.33161 Ibid, May-September 1923; Report of the Secretary for Mines for the Year Ending 31 December 1923, John Vail GovernmentPrinter: Hobart, 1924, p.33162 Bacon, op. cit., pp.3-16; THPI No. 8112.001, Adamsfield, recorded by D Parham, 5 January 1999, pp.1-5


6 August 201265

The heritage values of Adamsfield have been formally considered in three previous archaeologicalinvestigations.163

Prince (1987) noted that the majority of historic sites and features located at Adamsfield related toalluvial mining with their resulting landscape modifications. This included trenches, ditches, pondsand water races. Artefacts such as mining equipment and occupational refuse were also found.

The significance assessment found that while the site types were not of themselves ‘spectacular’, theydid have value as evidence of the nature and location of mining activities at Adamsfield. Further, theplace and its history was likely to have ‘considerable’ social significance, as demonstrated by thewidespread media coverage of the field during operations, and that the site continued to attractvisitors interested in the history of mining.164

The 1988 assessment identified more than fifty features, the majority being minor landscapemodifications such as small trenches or ditches, but also extensive water races. Other features foundincluded occupation artefacts, underground workings, and mining equipment or infrastructure,including a 5-shaft stamper battery.

Some further elaboration of significance was provided in the 1988 assessment, noting thatindividually, the minor landscape modification characteristics were not of ‘major’ archaeologicalsignificance. The recommended management response was to record the sites so that informationregarding the nature and distribution of the historic mining landscape was retained.165

Although looking at different areas and for different purposes, a contrary view on the significance ofAdamsfield was reached in the 1999 archaeological survey. Following consolidation of individual sitesor elements, Parham recorded a total of 19 features. These features can be grouped according to:

Occupation related sites: including the Adamsfield township site and five separate hut orhouse sites (both extant, ruined and subsurface potential); 2 stable sites; and fencing;

Mining Features: including modified landforms and infrastructure features of alluvialworkings; hard rock workings; water races; flumes; dams; and, a stamper battery; and

Transport Related Sites: the remains of a bridge.166

The informal statement of significance noted a range of historical, technical and social values, namely:

1. The field was one of only two in the State.167 The other was at Bald Hill (NW Tasmania) whichoperated during the 1920s to 1940s. Of the two fields Adamsfield was the larger and moreimportant and the only one to have an associated town.

2. The importance of osmiridium to the State as a source of income was significant. The fieldproduced £331,228 sterling worth of osmiridium.

3. Adamsfield was the largest mining community in south west Tasmania at the time.

4. At the time of operation, Tasmania, South Africa and the USSR were the major world suppliers ofosmiridium.

5. The field was one of the few major fields in western Tasmania to be dominated by individualsrather than companies.

6. The town was always isolated and represents one of the few true mining ‘ghost’ towns inTasmania.

7. The town also has an important social significance to Tasmanians. It represents part of themythology of the ‘early’ occupation of south west Tasmania by Europeans (there is an average ofone article every two years or so in the media). To those with family associations, the place is

163 Prince, GB, A Preliminary Archaeological Survey of Proposed Mining Exploration Activities in the Vicinity of Adamsfield,South West Tasmania, unpublished report to Metals Exploration Ltd, March 1987; Prince, GB, An Archaeological Survey ofProposed Mineral Exploration Works in the Vicinity of Adamsfield, Southwest Tasmania, unpublished report prepared forMetals Exploration Ltd, February 1988; THPI No. 8112.001, Adamsfield, recorded by D Parham, 5 January 1999164 Prince, March 1987, pp.10-12165 Prince, February 1988, pp.4-6166 THPI No. 8112.001, Adamsfield, recorded by D Parham, 5 January 1999, pp.2-3167 An assertion subsequently found to be incorrect. Refer to s4.5.1 of this report for the range of known osmiridium miningfields in Tasmania.


6 August 201266

special; the concept of community forged under extreme and isolated conditions have given rise tolegends such as those surrounding the stamina of the packers. The strength of these associations isevident in the numbers who returned or organised ‘Back to Adamsfield’ days.

8. Mining methods were adapted to suit the specific problems of the area.

The town and mine workings are therefore highly significant both to the State and nationally.168

As the 1999 assessment considered both the broader historical context and a larger area (inclusive ofthe township site), its general conclusions as to the significance of Adamsfield are supported overthose of the 1987 and 1988 reports.

In historical, economic and social contexts, Adamsfield far surpasses the osmiridium workings on theWilson River and other earlier fields. In terms of historic features, a greater range of site types is alsodemonstrated at Adamsfield, with evidence of both alluvial and hard rock mining and the associatedbuilt and archaeological evidence associated with a sizeable population.

However, some similarities do exist at a basic feature type level between the alluvial workings found inthe study area, and the alluvial workings at Adamsfield. Both areas demonstrate landscapemodification and disturbance consistent with the techniques of alluvial mining: concentrations ofmullock, irregular trenches, and complex networks of small races or drains for the delivery andremoval of water. The scale and type of works is also consistent in demonstrating what could beachieved by individuals or small groups working on small claims.

4.5.3 The Earliness of the Wilson River Field

Whilst not the most important of the various osmiridium fields, one area that does require closerexamination is the earliness of workings on the Wilson River. Indeed, the Wilson River was the firstplace in Tasmania where osmiridium was discovered, when Sprent mistakenly identified the metal as‘palladium’ in 1876. Somewhat speculative reports soon followed of osmiridium existing in the MountBischoff district. The metal was also known to north-west gold prospectors, but was considered anuisance to their work, being penalised when they failed to separate the osmiridium from the gold.169

It was not until a value was attached to the metal that it gained any attention locally. One of theearliest references to this emerging value comes from an 1899 report from the Whyte River DredgingCompany, which was working the river for alluvial gold. They claimed that the wash contained a ‘fairpercentage of osmiridium, and a very satisfactory offer has been made to the company for all of thismineral it can save.’170

Whilst the west coast gold mining industry may have found osmiridium as a by-product of their work,it was not until the early twentieth-century that prospectors began to intentionally seek out this metal.And it is in this regard that development on the Wilson River field appears to be particularly earlywith production commencing c.1902-1903. There are different accounts as to when, where and bywhom this work was first begun. Reid wrote in 1921 that payable quantities of osmiridium were firstfound by Charles Riley and W Kinsella in 1903 in Trinder Creek. However, other accounts note aslightly earlier date. In May 1903, reports emerged that over the previous twelve months, brothersCharles and John Temple Riley had extracted the massive amount of 53 ounces (i.e., 1.5 kilograms) ofosmiridium. The metal had been found over a large area between the Wilson and Huskisson Rivers. Sosuccessful was their work that an 80 acre reward claim was soon issued to JT Riley. A survey or theexact location of this lease area has not been established with certainty, but it was described as beingsome 503 metres north-west of the Riley Knob. Operations on the lease area were brief, ending by1905 due to market instabilities.171

The issuing of this 80 acre reward lease to JT Riley again seems particularly early within the context ofthe Tasmanian osmiridium industry. References to earlier leases have not been located as part of thisresearch.

Reid is the only official account which acknowledges the earliness of the Riley brothers work inosmiridium. In 1910, a series of events took place, which may have overshadowed their achievements.

168 Ibid, p.6169 Bacon, op. cit., p.1; Launceston Examiner, Thursday 8 June 1876, p.3; Launceston Examiner, Thursday 17 August 1876, p.3170 Launceston Examiner, Thursday 23 March 1899, p.2171 Reid, op. cit., p.68; Examiner, Thursday 7 May 1903, p.2


6 August 201267

In 1910, the price of osmiridium rose sharply and the Tasmanian Government first recognised themetal as a mineral resource, enabling Tasmania to enter the world trading market. Coupled with this,new fields were discovered on the Savage River, areas which were to surpass the Wilson River in theirimportance as osmiridium producers. Later Government reports also confused the matter,emphasising work on the Caudry Prospect at Bald Hill, where the first primary (i.e., in situ) deposit ofosmiridium was found in 1913.172

4.5.4 Concluding Remarks

Previous work at Adamsfield and this current report appear to be the only attempts at assessing indetail the historic heritage values of an osmiridium mining landscape in Tasmania. Despite theselimitations, some credible conclusions can be made about the relative significance of the study area,which comprises the key section of the Wilson River osmiridium field. This includes:

Over a relatively short period, osmiridium production developed in importance in the broaderTasmanian mining industry.

Few metals attracted such excitement or popular interest as osmiridium, and its regulationallowed for hundreds of individuals with little capital or experience to try their luck on theirfields. From this system emerged the idealised image of the ‘Ossie Digger’, widely representedin the press, as well as other media.

Adamsfield would appear to be the most significant of Tasmania’s osmiridium fields inhistoric, economic and social contexts. It had the highest levels of production; a substantialpopulation; and is the best documented and understood of all the fields from both technicalgeological reports and newspaper accounts.

Adamsfield also has the ability to demonstrate all types of osmiridium mining: alluvial andsolid rock, individual workings and company operations. The Wilson River sites onlydemonstrate alluvial workings, and not all of the different alluvial site types as found atAdamsfield.

Other, earlier and important osmiridium fields did exist before Adamsfield, most notably inthe Heazlewood-Bald Hill areas around the Savage River. The Wilson River field appearssecondary to these earlier workings.

The Wilson River area has some broader historical values. It was the first place where themetal was identified in Tasmania with Sprent’s mistaken discovery of ‘palladium’ in 1876. TheWilson River field also appears to have been early in the development of the Tasmanianindustry with short-lived attempts at mining beginning in c.1902-1903.

4.6 Statement of SignificanceThe study area centred on Riley Creek forms the core of the former Wilson River osmiridium district.The study area is an historic mining landscape and place of heritage significance at the local level.Although subject to extensive late twentieth-century mineral exploration, the historic landscape has ahigh level of integrity in its ability to demonstrate aspects of alluvial osmiridium production from theearly twentieth century. In scale and variety of features, the Riley Creek area is more significant thansites found on or near Sweeney, Three Mile and Trinder Creeks.

The study area has historical significance for its association with osmiridium mining. For a relativelybrief period during the early twentieth century, osmiridium mining developed as an importantcomponent of the Tasmanian mining industry, an industry that Tasmania became a world leader in.More valuable than gold, few metals attracted such interest. Particularly notable in the developmentof this industry was the role of the individual miner or ‘Ossie Digger’ with Government policyfavouring the interests of the individual over those of companies. The life and work of the miners waswidely publicised, creating an idealised image of the rugged individualism of the ‘Ossie Digger’.

There are two aspects of the history of the Wilson River field that are particularly noteworthy. Firstly,the Wilson River was the first place in Tasmania where osmiridium was discovered in 1876. Secondly,

172 Reid, Ibid; Brown, op. cit., p.5; The Mercury, Thursday 8 December 1910, p.3; Blake, F, Nye, P.B, The Geology and MineralDeposits of Tasmania, 1938, MRT Report GSB44, p.93; Examiner, Thursday 3 July 1913, p.3


6 August 201268

The Wilson River field appears to have been early in the development of the Tasmanian osmiridiumindustry with short-lived attempts at mining beginning in c.1902-1903.

Whilst forming part of this broader industry, the Wilson River field was not the most importantosmiridium field of its time. Other fields such as Bald Hill, Heazlewood, Nineteen Mile Creek, MountStewart and most importantly Adamsfield were far more significant in their levels of production andquality of metal.

The study area demonstrates some uncommon aspects of Tasmania’s heritage. As a rarely occurringmineral, osmiridium was found in few places in Tasmania. Its production was therefore comparativelyuncommon. However, the Wilson River field was certainly not unique, nor a leader in its production.There are other more notable examples of osmiridium fields within the west and north-west region ofTasmania.

As one of the less important osmiridium fields, the study area has some limited research potential.Compared with other fields, there is little historical documentation on workings on the Wilson River.The scale, location, type and relationship between individual sites therefore have some ability toprovide new information on the evolution of a small, and poorly understood alluvial osmiridium field.However, the ability of these sites to contribute new, important information beyond that alreadydocumented in this report is limited.

The study area has some representative value for its ability to demonstrate small-scale alluvialosmiridium production from the early twentieth century. Riley Creek in particular demonstrateslandscape modification and disturbance consistent with the techniques of alluvial mining undertakenby individuals or small groups. Phasing, or the evolution of workings may also be demonstrated. Themullock heaps and modified course of the Creek may demonstrate the earliest phase of workings, ascreek lines were often first exploited. The series of trenches, channels or drains and prospecting pitsmay demonstrate a second phase in mining. Far more labour intensive, these areas demonstrate themethods of production with complex and chaotic trenches, and numerous small channels or drains toprovide water for sluicing the deposits. The scale of these alluvial ground works demonstrates whatcould be achieved by a few individuals using simple technology and techniques. The chaotic andcomplex nature of these trenches also well demonstrates the irregularities in the distribution ofosmiridium.

Different geological conditions on Sweeney Creek have also resulted in different site types, with theuse of stacked dry stone walls to retain the sides of the creek, representative of a widely usedtechnique used on other fields (for example, at Adamsfield).

However, when compared to other fields, the study area is not the most significant example ofosmiridium mining. Other fields demonstrate a greater variety in mining techniques (alluvial andsolid rock) and production (individuals and companies). Places such as Adamsfield and Bald Hillmore fully demonstrate the processes of osmiridium mining and were also more significant than theWilson River in their production of the metal.

The study area has some associative values with individuals that made an important contribution tothe history of the local area, namely the various prospectors and miners responsible for discoveringand developing the Wilson River osmiridium field. Their contribution is most notably demonstratedin the naming of the creeks and other features. The work of brothers Charles and John Temple Riley isparticularly noteworthy. Both were prominent local prospectors and played a pivotal role in thedevelopment of the field. JT Riley went on to have a distinguished military career during the FirstWorld War. Well respected by the local community, he returned to the west coast after the War, andcontinued to work the Wilson River osmiridium field. An association also exists between prominentminer James Sweeney and Sweeney Creek.

Some discrete sections of historic workings have some low level aesthetic values, namely part of thealluvial workings in the northern section of Riley Creek, and the alluvial workings at the far westernend of the Creek. At these locations, the modified landscape forms of trenches, hummocky mullockheaps and channels contrast with their broader forested setting which has some aesthetic appeal.


6 August 201269

4.7 Inventory Data sheets – Reference MapsThe maps contained below depict the locations of sites and features identified during field survey. Thedata sheets contained in Section 4.8 of this report refer to these sites.


6 August 201270

4.7.1 All Riley Sites

Figure 37: Map showing all Historic Sites or Features identified during Fieldwork. Basemap TasMap, © State of Tasmania.


6 August 201271

4.7.2 Sweeney Creek

Figure 38: Map showing location of Sweeney Creek Sites. The location of Sweeney Creek is indicative asshown by the dashed line.


6 August 201272

4.7.3 Three Mile Creek

Figure 39: Map showing location of Three Mile Creek Sites.


6 August 201273

4.7.3 Riley Creek: Map 1

Figure 40: Map showing location of Riley Creek Sites: Northern Section.


6 August 201274


Figure 41: Map showing location of Riley Creek Sites: Central Section.


6 August 201275


Figure 42: Map showing location of Riley Creek Sites: Western Section.


6 August 201276

4.7.6 Trinder Creek

Figure 43: Map showing location of Three Mile Creek Sites.


6 August 201277

4.8 Inventory Datasheets

Figure 44: Key to the Datasheets

DatasheetNumber

GPS position(AGD 94)

HistoryDrawn from the historical

research completed for thisparticular study. Where

necessary, sources are cited

DescriptionField observations

Significance(see explanation above)

Discussion (optional)Some items require further discussion

or explanation not possible in theHistory or Description sections

RecommendationsManagement recommendations, a

summary of which are available in thefinal section of the report

Datasheettitle

LocationmapPhotographs


6 August 201278

1. SWEENEY CREEK SITES

Grid co-ordinates(AGD 94):

1.01-02 E 368340 N 5378105 1.04 E 368362 N 5378113- E 368393 N 5378152 1.05 E 368370 N 53781341.03 E 368357 N 5378045

Figure 3: Excavated material -mullock(1.05)– discernible in thick vegetation

on banks of the creek.

Figure 4: Stacked stone retaining thecreek bank (1.03)– a result of historic

alluvial mining activity.

Figure 5: Stacked stone retaining thecreek bank (1.04) – a result of historic

alluvial mining activity.

Figure 1: Sweeney Creek Features. The location of Sweeney Creek isindicative.

Figure 2: Detail from 1921 geological sketch plan of Wilson RiverOsmiridium Field with Sweeney Creek highlighted (Tasmanian

Archives and Heritage Office, Reid, A, Osmiridium in Tasmania. GeologicalSurvey Bulletin No. 32, Department of Mines: Hobart, 1921, Plate IX:

‘Geological Sketch Map of Wilson River District’, reproduced with permission.)

History:

The Development of the Tasmanian Osmiridium Industryand the Wilson River Field

The development of the Wilson River osmiridium field is central to thehistory of the study area. The Wilson River area was the first place inTasmania where the rare metal was discovered, when Sprentmistakenly identified the material as palladium in 1876. Later,


6 August 201279

osmiridium was found by gold prospectors working the rivers andcreeks of the north west, but as no value was placed on the metal,miners were penalised for their failure to remove osmiridium from thegold. It was not until a market for the metal was established during theearly twentieth century that osmiridium gained any value locally. Thekey use for the extremely hard and non-corrosive metal was in themanufacture of pen nibs for fountain pens. Other uses includedelectrical work, photography and jewellery.

Within the local area, osmiridium existed in the area between theWilson and Huskisson Rivers, and was found in shallow alluvialdeposits in the creeks and rivers. Osmiridium mining in the WilsonRiver district commenced in c.1902-1903 and different accounts existon who, where and when this first began. Reid wrote that the firstdiscovery was made in 1903 by Charles Riley and W Kinsella whofound payable quantities of the mineral in Trinder Creek, a smallwatercourse running in the southern section study area. Howeverreports emerged in May 1903, that over a twelve month period,brothers Charles and John Temple Riley had extracted the massiveamount of 1.5 kilograms of the metal working over a large area in thevalley between the Wilson and Huskisson Rivers. Shortly afterwards,an 80 acre reward lease was issued to John Temple Riley to the northof Riley Knob, but owing to market instabilities, operations ceased in1905.

It was not until the price of osmiridium rose sharply in about 1910 thatattention again turned to the Wilson River. In that year, some 60 menwere working on the field, growing by 1914 to 133 people on thecombined Savage River and Wilson River fields.

It was not long though before these shallow deposits of osmiridiumwere worked out, which, coupled with the outbreak of the First WorldWar, saw a loss of markets and rapid fall in production. TheTasmanian industry did not recover until 1918, and this post-warperiod saw the most intense development on the Wilson River.

At the beginning of 1918, about 12 men were working on the WilsonRiver, growing to over 100 people by early 1920. By May of that year,over 150 people were working on the field, the majority on the LittleWilson River, to the north of the study area.

It is a difficult task to establish with accuracy the location of formerosmiridium workings on the Wilson River from historicaldocumentation. Whilst a few, short-lived mining leases did existwithin the study area, the majority of the area appears to have beenworked under miner’s rights, whereby individual miners, or smallgroups could lay claim to areas varying between 50 square yards for asingle miner, up to five acres for a group of 10 miners workingtogether.

It is through this system that the Tasmanian osmiridium industryemerged, allowing for individuals or small groups to develop the fieldswithout the need for large amounts of capital. Indeed, it was officialGovernment policy to favour the interests of the individual miner andprevent the development of monopolies or companies. This wasachieved through restricting the issuing of mining leases to locationswhere osmiridium was found in situ, that is, in solid rock, as opposedto alluvial deposits which were reserved for the individual miner or‘Ossie Diggers’.

More valuable than gold, few metals attracted such excitement andinterest as osmiridium. New discoveries were widely reported, and thepress and popular culture went to some length to present an idealisedpicture of the rugged individualism of the Diggers.

For the most part, mining took place on the creek and riverbeds, oralong former courses of creeks, where the osmiridium had been


6 August 201280

deposited from eroded serpentine. The first areas to be exploited weremost often the shallow gravels located in steeply inclined creeks, whichwere more easily and cheaply worked. Various methods were availableto the miners to work these alluvial deposits. At its simplest, the minerequipped with pick, shovel, axe and dish would pan the creeks, whereon an average day a miner could work through 30 pans. Cradles werealso sometimes used, allowing far greater amounts of alluvial materialto be worked. If an adequate supply of water existed, sluice boxes wereemployed, whereby a team of two miners could process several tons ofalluvial deposits a day. Occasionally, hydraulic sluicing was usedwhere the material was hosed into trenches and directed into thesluice boxes. These boxes collected the small grains of osmiridium,while the waste material was washed away. This waste material neededto be eventually removed from the trenches where it was dumped nearthe drainage channels. Extracting osmiridium held in clay was a moreintensive process, with the clay needing to be mixed with water toform a slurry, before being processed through the boxes.

Production on the Wilson River peaked in May 1921, when over 150people were working on the field, primarily to the north of the studyarea along the Little Wilson River. Such heights were to be short lived.The combination of a drop in the osmiridium market price and theemergence of new fields, most notably Adamsfield, saw a gradualdecline on the Wilson River. Numbers fell from about 40 men workingthe field at the beginning of 1922, down to 29 by December. Thedecline continued over the coming years: 18 miners by May 1923; only10 by September 1924. A few continued to prospect the region into the1930s.

Whilst osmiridium mining may have declined, interest in the mineralprospects of the area remained strong. From the mid-twentiethcentury, the Wilson River area came under increasing scrutiny andexploration, characterised by a progressive series of mining leases andinvasive and non-invasive investigations.

Of most relevance to the study area are the exploratory works carriedout during the mid-late 1980s. In 1985 an exploration lease was issuedto MG Creasy, including the study area. Initially focussed on platinumgroup elements, work soon shifted to chromite exploration.

Over 1986-87, an exploration grid was established over the part of thelease, and a network of roads and test sites established. These roadsand testing locations strongly correspond with the laterite deposits inAreas A and C currently being investigated by Venture Minerals.Whilst these 1980s works established that production of chromitewould be marginally better than break even, the 1989 economicdownturn made the project unviable and works ceased.

Sweeney Creek

Sweeney Creek was one of the earlier parts of the Wilson Riverosmiridium field to be developed. The creek is named after prospectorJames Sweeney, who on 20 April 1913, discovered the then largestsingle piece of osmiridium in the world. The nugget was found nearthe source of the creek that now bears his name. The nugget weighed56 grams and was sold to the Queen Victoria Museum and Art Gallerythe following year for £30. Sweeney continued to work on the fieldinto the early 1920s.

His record was, however, soon broken numerous times, with largernuggets found at Nineteen Mile Creek in the Heazlewood district.Other diggers had also enjoyed success on the creek. Near where theRosebery Track crossed the creek, J O’Meara and W Knight hadrecovered large nuggets, over 28.3 grams in weight.

Little information exists about later development on the creek. Fromthe mid-twentieth century, Sweeney Creek formed part of multiple


6 August 201281

exploration leases, however it is unclear whether investigative workstook place. In the 1960s the area was held by the Aberfoyle TinDevelopment Partnership as part of their larger Mount Lindsayholdings. Aberfoyle’s exploration activity was centred on findingsulphide mineralisation. Reports from 1968 note that the creek it wascovered in thick vegetation, with massive serpentine rock outcropscovered in think brown-red soil and glacial material located in someplaces.

Relevant sources:

Advocate, Monday 19 June 1922, p.4; Tuesday 11 July 1922, p.5

Bacon, C, Notes on the History of Mining and Exploration at Adamsfield.Mineral Resources Tasmania Report 1992/20, 1992, MRT Report: UR1992

Brown, C, A Review of the Osmiridium Mining Industry of Tasmania, JohnVail, Government Printer: Hobart, 1919, MRT Report: OS-258

Callina NL, Annual Report 1989-90 Exploration Licence 24/85, Wilson River,1990, MRT Report 90-3170

Davis, N, Annual Report 1/12/86-1/12/87 Wilson River Exploration Licence24/85, 1987, MRT Report 87-2744

Eshuys, E, Etheridge, M, Aberfoyle Tin Development Partnership. Report onthe Mt. Lindsay Area, Tasmania (Summer Programme 1967/68.),February 1968, MRT Report: 68-0499

Examiner, Thursday 7 May 1903, p.2; Wednesday 14 April 1915, p.2; Saturday17 April 1915, p.4; Thursday 1 April 1920, p.3; Friday 27 May 1921, p.2;Monday 25 November 1929, p.9

Jessup, A, Chenhall, B, Aberfoyle Tin Development Partnership. InterimReport on the Camp 30 Merton Area, Tasmania, 1968, MRT Report 68-0500

Jordan, M, Reports on the Camp 30, Ahearne’s Creek and Wilson River Areas,EL 2/63, February 1969, MRT Report: 69-0598

Haygarth, N, Cubit, S (ed.), A Peopled Frontier: The European Heritage of theTarkine Area, Circular Head Council: Smithton, 2008

The Mercury, Friday 20 February 1914, p.3; Saturday 28 March 1914, p.6;Monday 29 March 1920, p.8; Monday 11 October 1920, p.4; Friday 29 April1921, p.4; Monday 6 February 1922, p.2; Monday 25 November 1929, p.9;Friday 6 February 1931, p.8

MRT, Minerals Applications Register, Book No. 22, 9578M

Nye, PB, Mines Department: Osmiridium in Tasmania, Hobart, 19 April 1928,MRT Report: UR 1928B/106-110

Reid, A.M, Osmiridium in Tasmania. Geological Survey Bulletin No. 32,Department of Mines: Hobart, 1921, MRT Report: GSB32

Roetz, M, Cameron, P, Allen, B, Geology of the Wilson River Area, MRTReport: 69-0598

Scott, JB, Report on Section No 9578-M in the Name of J T Riley, Area - 10Acres, 1926, MRT Report UR1926_052-54

TAHO, AB948/1/98, WH Twelvetrees to Secretary for Mines, 4 July 1914

TAHO, AC249/1/439, Creasy, M.G., Serpentine Ridge, Environmental ImpactAssessment, 1985

TAHO, AD266/1/1713, JT Riley to P Kelly MHA, 27 March 1930

TAHO, AD948/1/97, Secretary of Mines to State Mining Engineer, 3 June 1913;JG Arnett to Inspector of Mines, 2 February 1918

TAHO, MIN150/1/1 Register of Osmiridium Buyer’s Returns of Purchases,September - December 1922 ,January, March, May, July September 1923,September 1924

TAHO, MIN 197/1/1-2, Applications from the Zeehan Office for Mining Leases,Water Rights, Notices of the Marking Off of Prospecting Claims, and


6 August 201282

Associated Papers

Twelvetrees, WH, The Bald Hill Osmiridium Field. Geological Survey BulletinNo. 17, Department of Mines: Hobart, 1914, MRT Report: GSB17

Description:

A 180m long (approx) section of Sweeney Creek corresponds with theproposed infrastructure site location. This represents approximately13% of the entire length of the creek as depicted in topographicalmaps.

A range of features were identified during field survey of the creek andenvirons. These fall into two categories. Firstly, there appears to beevidence of modern activity (refer to s.4.4, Figure 36 and Table 9 forinformation). Secondly, evidence of historic alluvial mining is clearlyrepresented by mullock heaps lining the banks, for approximately 70m(1.01-1.02 & 1.05 – see Figure 3 for typical view) and short sectionsof stacked stone retaining the creek sides (1.03 & 1.04 – see Figures 4& 5), the majority of visible features being within 5 - 10m of the courseof the creek.

Discussion:

Evidence of modern activity predominates towards the south-westernend of the section of creek inspected which is comparatively open andclear (refer to s.4.2.1 Figure 34). Here makeshift modern materialshave been used to either sample or work the creek and the excavatedmaterial is exposed and undifferentiated by comparison with theevidence of historic mining located further downstream. Whether thisis a result of corporate mineral exploration/testing (such as thatundertaken by Aberfoyle) or prospecting by individuals is unclear. It isunlikely that all phases of modern workings have been documented. Incontrast, evidence of historic mining is clearly represented by stonemullock heaps discernible on the high sides of the heavily vegetatednorth-western half of the creek (see Figures 4-5), short sections ofwhich are retained by hand stacked dry stone walls.

Sweeney Creek is known to have been a focus of activity during theearly phase of mining and this is confirmed by the results of the fieldsurvey. A later phase of testing/prospecting is also represented andhas resulted in the re-working of parts of the creek that had beenpreviously exploited.

Approximately 13% of Sweeney Creek lies within the footprint of theproposed infrastructure site. Of this, approximately 40% contains, orhas the potential to contain, evidence of historic mining activity.Although the section of creek containing evidence of historic miningactivity is heavily vegetated, field observations suggest the majority offeatures are located within the creek or will be within 10m of itsmargins. This includes evidence of creek side retaining walls andlinear accumulations of mullock. Judging by contemporary reports,historic period workings will extend along the creek beyond theboundaries of the proposed infrastructure site footprint.

Significance Assessment:

Value Key Local Threshold Indicators173 Justification

Historic Value Demonstrates an important historicalperiod or phase in the history of the localarea.

Demonstrates a prominent period of

The study area has historical significancefor its association with osmiridium mining.For a relatively brief period during theearly twentieth century, osmiridiummining developed as an important

173 Adapted from Department of Primary Industries, Parks, Water and Environment, October 2011, Assessing historic heritagesignificance for Application with the Historic Cultural Heritage Act 1995


6 August 201283

economic prosperity ordecline/depression in the local area.

Notable example of the harvesting andtrade of natural resources associatedwith the key local historic themes of thelocal area.

component of the Tasmanian miningindustry, an industry that Tasmaniabecame a world leader in. More valuablethan gold, few metals attracted suchinterest. Particularly notable in thedevelopment of this industry was the roleof the individual miner or ‘Ossie Digger’with Government policy favouring theinterests of the individual over those ofcompanies. The life and work of the minerswas widely publicised, creating an idealisedimage of the rugged individualism of the‘Ossie Digger’.

There are two aspects of the history of theWilson River field, which are particularlynoteworthy. Firstly, the Wilson River wasthe first place in Tasmania whereosmiridium was discovered in 1876.Secondly, The Wilson River field appearsto have been early in the development ofthe Tasmanian osmiridium industry withshort-lived attempts at mining beginningin c.1902-1903. Sweeney Creek itself alsohas some interest, as the location wherethe then largest single osmiridium nuggetin the world was discovered, a record laterbroken on other fields.

Whilst forming part of this broaderindustry, the Wilson River field was not themost important osmiridium field of itstime. Other fields such as Bald Hill,Heazlewood, Nineteen Mile Creek, MountStewart and most importantly Adamsfieldwere far more significant in their levels ofproduction and quality of metal.

Although demonstrating small-scalealluvial mining, the historic featureslocated on Sweeney Creek have a lowerlevel of significance. Within the study area,the features located on Riley Creek aremore important in their ability todemonstrate the type and scale of worksundertaken on the Wilson Riverosmiridium field.

Rarity One of few comparable places across thelocal area that is associatedwith/demonstrates an activity that wasdistinctive for what it achieved or sounusual in its nature it is now ofparticular interest to a communitygroup.

The study area demonstrates someuncommon aspects of Tasmania’s heritage.As a rarely occurring mineral, osmiridiumwas found in few places in Tasmania. Itsproduction was therefore comparativelyuncommon.

However, the Wilson River field wascertainly not unique, nor a leader in itsproduction. There are other more notableexamples of osmiridium fields within thewest and north-west region of Tasmania.Within the study area itself, other areas, inparticular Riley Creek better demonstratethe processes of historic osmiridiummining.

Research Potential A comparative analysis suggests that As one of the less important osmiridium


6 August 201284

further research at the place has thepotential improve our understanding oflocal history or archaeology of:

a little-recorded aspect of Tasmania’spast.

or to provide information aboutsingle or multiple periods ofoccupation or use.

fields, the study area has limited researchpotential. Compared with other fields,there is little historical documentation onworkings on the Wilson River.

Representativeness A particularly fine, intact or pivotalexample of the class in a local context,representative of a class of places thatdemonstrate an historical land use,function or process, of historicalimportance.

The study area has some representativevalue for its ability to demonstrate small-scale alluvial osmiridium production fromthe early twentieth century. The use ofstacked dry stone walls to retain creeksides is representative of a widely usedtechnique used in other areas (e.g.,Adamsfield).

The evidence on Sweeney Creek does notdemonstrate the scale or complexity ofother alluvial ground works found in theRiley Creek Valley.

The ability of the record features todemonstrate the processes of alluvialosmiridium mining is limited.

TechnicalAchievement

Not applicable at Local Levels.

Social Value Not Assessed.

Associative Value A key phase(s) in the establishment orsubsequent development of the placewere undertaken by, or directlyinfluenced by, the important person(s) ororganisation and that person(s) ororganisation made an importantcontribution to the history of the localarea.

One or more achievements for which theperson(s) or organisation are consideredimportant are directly linked to the placeand that person(s) or organisation madean important contribution to the historyof the local area.

The study area has some associative valueswith individuals that made an importantcontribution to the history of the local area,namely the various prospectors and minersresponsible for discovering and developingthe Wilson River osmiridium field. Theircontribution is most notably demonstratedin the naming of the creeks and otherfeatures.

Sweeney Creek has an association withJames Sweeney a miner known to haveworked from an early date on the WilsonRiver field.

Aesthetic Values Exhibits sensual qualities that can bejudged against various ideals includingbeauty, picturesqueness, evocativeness,expressiveness, landmark presence,symbolism or some other quality ofnature or human endeavour.

The Sweeney Creek features have limitedaesthetic value, the stacked stone walls arefunctional features, not extensive andtherefore do not have compositionalqualities that could be said to be visuallyappealing.

1/1: Desirable but not essential to retain the evidence of historic mining in situ. Most of the features (includingthe evidence of stacked stone walls) could be contained by preserving the course of the creek when planningthe final layout of the infrastructure site.

1/2: Discussions should be held with relevant organisations (for example a local group in Tullah or the WestCoast Pioneers Memorial Museum) to determine if opportunities exist to present and interpret the historyand heritage of mining on the Wilson River osmiridium field and achieve a public benefit.

Reasons for Recommendations:


6 August 201285

The identified sites relate to small-scale alluvial osmiridium workings on Sweeney Creek. Stacking material tofacilitate access to mineral deposits is not uncommon in alluvial mining areas (e.g., Adamsfield has a moreextensive area exhibiting use of this technique), nonetheless, this type of feature has not been previouslyidentified during field inspections in the Riley study area. It is desirable to preserve the course of the creek whereit corresponds to the historic workings, however, in the event this is not practicable the record compiled hereshould be considered a sufficient level of documentation with no further action recommended.

As the history of osmiridium mining on the Wilson River field has a certain level of value and interest, a publicbenefit could be achieved where this history was interpreted and presented to the public. The Sweeney nuggetfound somewhere along the creek, for a time represented a world record find for osmiridium.

Any such interpretation however, should be subject to negotiation with interested groups of organisations,preferably locally, or within the broader west coast region.


6 August 201286

2. THREE MILE CREEK SITES


2.01 E367747 N5377211 2.02 E367833 N5377235

Figure 3: The approximately 30malluvial workings trench 2.01.

Figure 4: The trench 2.01.

Figure 5: Testing Site 2.02.

Figure 1: Trench and Testing Site, south of Three Mile Creek.

Figure 2: Detail from 1921 geological sketch plan of Wilson RiverOsmiridium Field with Three Mile Creek highlighted (Tasmanian

Archives and Heritage Office, Reid, A, Osmiridium in Tasmania. GeologicalSurvey Bulletin No. 32, Department of Mines: Hobart, 1921, Plate IX:


6 August 201287

‘Geological Sketch Map of Wilson River District’, reproduced with permission.)

History:


The development of the Wilson River osmiridium field is central to thehistory of the study area. The Wilson River area was the first place inTasmania where the rare metal was discovered, when Sprentmistakenly identified the material as palladium in 1876. Later,osmiridium was found by gold prospectors working the rivers andcreeks of the north west, but as no value was placed on the metal,miners were penalised for their failure to remove osmiridium from thegold. It was not until a market for the metal was established during theearly twentieth century that osmiridium gained any value locally. Thekey use for the extremely hard and non-corrosive metal was in themanufacture of pen nibs for fountain pens. Other uses includedelectrical work, photography and jewellery.






It is through this system that the Tasmanian osmiridium industryemerged, allowing for individuals or small groups to develop the fieldswithout the need for large amounts of capital. Indeed, it was officialGovernment policy to favour the interests of the individual miner andprevent the development of monopolies or companies. This wasachieved through restricting the issuing of mining leases to locations


6 August 201288

where osmiridium was found in situ, that is, in solid rock, as opposedto alluvial deposits which were reserved for the individual miner or‘Ossie Diggers’.


For the most part, mining took place on the creek and riverbeds, oralong former courses of creeks, where the osmiridium had beendeposited from eroded serpentine. The first areas to be exploited weremost often the shallow gravels located in steeply inclined creeks, whichwere more easily and cheaply worked. Various methods were availableto the miners to work these alluvial deposits. At its simplest, the minerequipped with pick, shovel, axe and dish would pan the creeks, whereon an average day a miner could work through 30 pans. Cradles werealso sometimes used, allowing far greater amounts of alluvial materialto be worked. If an adequate supply of water existed, sluice boxes wereemployed, whereby a team of two miners could process several tons ofalluvial deposits a day. Occasionally, hydraulic sluicing was usedwhere the material was hosed into trenches and directed into thesluice boxes. These boxes collected the small grains of osmiridium,while the waste material was washed away. This waste material neededto be eventually removed from the trenches where it was dumped nearthe drainage channels. Extracting osmiridium held in clay was a moreintensive process, with the clay needing to be mixed with water toform a slurry, before being processed through the boxes.





Three Mile Creek

Relatively little is known of the specific history of development onThree Mile Creek. The earliest record found dates from May 1920,when JP Dixon lodged a miner’s right claim for 50 square yards ofland at Three Mile Creek. Certainly however, the records of suchclaims are far from complete. Reid did not identify any specificindividuals or workings the following year when he reported on the


6 August 201289

field, only writing that the Creek had produced a fair amount of goodgrade osmiridium.

As part of the 1980s exploratory works, Davis noted previousdevelopment on Three Mile Creek, where the south-eastern bank ofthe creek had been cut by trenches and races, up to 7m above the levelof the creek. The trenches were recorded as being up to 3m deep, andup to 5m wide. Extensive workings existed on the first 400m of thecreek, on its eastern side. Further extensive workings existed along thetop of the ridge to the north-west of Three Mile Creek. Here, Davislocated a large trench, 15m long, 4m wide and up to 3m deep. Severalsmaller trenches also existed in this area.

Relevant sources:


















TAHO, MIN 197/1/1-2, Applications from the Zeehan Office for Mining Leases,Water Rights, Notices of the Marking Off of Prospecting Claims, andAssociated Papers


Description:

Three Mile Creek is outside of, and flows to the north of Area A. Twofeatures were recorded in its vicinity, adjacent to an abandoned track,


6 August 201290

below the main vehicle road. They are likely to form part of broaderworkings on Three Mile Creek.

The main feature (2.01) is a large trench, running parallel to theabandoned track. The trench measured approximately 30m long x 5mwide x 3m deep. Heavy vegetation is present obscuring much of theform of the feature, and its southern side showed evidence of collapse.

Some 90m to the east, a small, shallow test pit was located (2.02). Ofapproximately 3m diameter, the pit was poorly defined and overgrownwith cutting grass.

Discussion:

The Three Mile Creek sites demonstrate alluvial osmiridiumproduction. In particular, the large trench (2.01) demonstrates thescale of works that could be achieved by small parties using simplemethods of hand excavation. Whilst the scale of the trench and itslocation adjacent to the abandoned track could suggest that this trenchis of more recent origin, Davis described features of a similar scale aspart of his 1987 investigations.

When compared to the numbers of historic features and sites on RileyCreek, these two features demonstrate a considerably lower level ofinterest and production.




Demonstrates a prominent period ofeconomic prosperity ordecline/depression in the local area.


The study area has historical significancefor its association with osmiridium mining.For a relatively brief period during theearly twentieth century, osmiridiummining developed as an importantcomponent of the Tasmanian miningindustry, an industry that Tasmaniabecame a world leader in. More valuablethan gold, few metals attracted suchinterest. Particularly notable in thedevelopment of this industry was the roleof the individual miner or ‘Ossie Digger’with Government policy favouring theinterests of the individual over those ofcompanies. The life and work of the minerswas widely publicised, creating an idealisedimage of the rugged individualism of the‘Ossie Digger’.

There are two aspects of the history of theWilson River field, which are particularlynoteworthy. Firstly, the Wilson River wasthe first place in Tasmania whereosmiridium was discovered in 1876.Secondly, The Wilson River field appearsto have been early in the development ofthe Tasmanian osmiridium industry withshort-lived attempts at mining beginningin c.1902-1903.

Whilst forming part of this broaderindustry, the Wilson River field was not themost important osmiridium field of itstime. Other fields such as Bald Hill,



6 August 201291

Heazlewood, Nineteen Mile Creek, MountStewart and most importantly Adamsfieldwere far more significant in their levels ofproduction and quality of metal.

Although demonstrating small-scalealluvial mining, these two features have alower level of significance. Within thestudy area, the features located on RileyCreek are more important in their ability todemonstrate the type and scale of worksundertaken on the Wilson Riverosmiridium field.




Research Potential A comparative analysis suggests thatfurther research at the place has thepotential improve our understanding oflocal history or archaeology of:



As one of the less important osmiridiumfields, the study area has some limitedresearch potential. Compared with otherfields, there is little historicaldocumentation on workings on the WilsonRiver.

In comparison with other sections of thefield, most notably Riley Creek, these twofeatures have low research potential intheir ability to provide new information onthe evolution of a small alluvial osmiridiumfield.


The study area has some representativevalue for its ability to demonstrate small-scale alluvial osmiridium production fromthe early twentieth century.

Although the trench is comparable in sizeto other similar features found in the studyarea, the site does not demonstrate thescale or complexity of other alluvial groundworks found in the Riley Creek Valley.

The ability of these two features todemonstrate the processes of alluvialosmiridium mining are limited.




Associative Value A key phase(s) in the establishment orsubsequent development of the placewere undertaken by, or directly

The study area has some associative valueswith individuals that made an importantcontribution to the history of the local area,


6 August 201292

influenced by, the important person(s) ororganisation and that person(s) ororganisation made an importantcontribution to the history of the localarea.


namely the various prospectors and minersresponsible for discovering and developingthe Wilson River osmiridium field. Theircontribution is most notably demonstratedin the naming of the creeks and otherfeatures.

Three Mile Creek has a known associationwith JP Dixon a miner known to haveworked quite extensively over the broaderWilson River field during the early 1920s.


The two features have negligible aestheticvalue, with little visual appeal orcompositional qualities.

2/1: No further action beyond the record compiled here is recommended.



The identified sites relate to small-scale alluvial osmiridium workings above Three Mile Creek. Further, similarsites are likely to exist in the vicinity of Three Mile Creek. However, this creek was not surveyed as it is outside ofthe study area.

When compared to the numbers of historic features and sites on Riley Creek, these two features demonstrate aconsiderably lower level of historic production. Comparatively, these sites are of lower significance.

In response to this level of significance, the record compiled in this report is considered as a sufficient level ofdocumentation and no further action is recommended.

As the history of osmiridium mining on the Wilson River field has a certain level of value and interest, a publicbenefit could be achieved where this history was interpreted and presented to the public.



6 August 201293

3. RILEY CREEK SITES


3.01 E 368503 N 5377441 3.22 E 368603 N 5377654 3.36 E 368165 N 53768683.02 E 368548 N 5377534 3.23 E 368438 N 5377019 3.36 E 368205 N 53770543.03 E 368547 N 5377493 3.23 E 368458 N 5377069 3.37-38 E 368087 N 5376761-3.04 E 368556 N 5377467 3.24 E 368404 N 5377129 E 368353 N 53768363.05 E 368403 N 5377394 3.24 E 368409 N 5377188 3.40-41 E 368015 N 5376707-3.06 E 368446 N 5377280 3.24 E 368441 N 5377255 E 367937 N 53766903.07 E 368469 N 5377368 3.25 E 368459 N 5377086 3.42 E 367507 N 53766403.08 E 368489 N 5377273 3.26 E 368402 N 5377015 3.43 E 368001 N 53767273.09-16 E 368538 N 5377207 3.27 E 368354 N 5376988 3.44 E 367838 N 53766963.17 E 368543 N 5377329 3.28 E 368448 N 5376950 3.45 E 367698 N 53766633.18 E 368526 N 5377260 3.29 E 368346 N 5376962 3.46 E 367607 N 53766453.19 E 368445 N 5377167 3.30 E 368394 N 5376994 3.47-48 E 367730 N 5376730-3.19 E 368465 N 5377211 3.30 E 368477 N 5377050 E 367742 N 53769283.20 E 368433 N 5377336 3.31 E 368396 N 5377060 3.49 E 367527 N 53767073.20 E 368473 N 5377408 3.31 E 368439 N 5377052 3.50 E 367551 N 53770083.20 E 368494 N 5377151 3.31 E368517 N 5376940 3.50 E 367559 N 53770033.21 E 368493 N 5377251 3.32 E 368145 N 5376972 3.50 E 367780 N 53769673.21 E 368510 N 5377488 3.33 E 368252 N 5377040 3.50 E 367787 N 53769693.21 E 368536 N 5377164 3.34 E 368189 N 53769823.21 E 368563 N 5377266 3.35 E 368178 N 5376971

Figure 5: A small extension or test cutoff the alluvial workings trench 3.01.

Figure 6: A channel or drain (3.03)leading into trench 3.01.

Figure 7: The alluvial workings area3.05 is smaller and less well defined

than other similar sites.

Figure 1: Map showing location of Riley Creek Sites: NorthernSection


6 August 201294

Figure 8: Channel 3.15 leading into themain alluvial workings area 3.16

Figure 9: The hummocky groundsurface at 3.16.

Figure 10: The narrow channel (3.12)connects trench 3.09 with the main

area of workings 3.14.

Figure 11: One of the rectangulartesting pits (3.21) found near thealluvial workings area 3.09-3.16.

Figure 2: Map showing location of Riley Creek Sites: CentralSection.

Figure 3: Map showing location of Riley Creek Sites: WesternSection.


6 August 201295

Figure 12: Shallow area of alluvialworkings 3.23

Figure 13: Channel 3.24 leading to thealluvial workings area 3.23

Figure 14: Northern end of alluvialworkings 3.35

Figure 15: An open area containingmullock heaps found near Riley Creek

3.39

Figure 4: Detail from 1921 geological sketch plan of Wilson RiverOsmiridium Field with Riley Creek highlighted (Tasmanian Archivesand Heritage Office, Reid, A, Osmiridium in Tasmania. Geological SurveyBulletin No. 32, Department of Mines: Hobart, 1921, Plate IX: ‘Geological

Sketch Map of Wilson River District’, reproduced with permission.)

History:


The development of the Wilson River osmiridium field is central to thehistory of the study area. The Wilson River area was the first place inTasmania where the rare metal was discovered, when Sprentmistakenly identified the material as palladium in 1876. Later,osmiridium was found by gold prospectors working the rivers andcreeks of the north west, but as no value was placed on the metal,miners were penalised for their failure to remove osmiridium from thegold. It was not until a market for the metal was established during theearly twentieth century that osmiridium gained any value locally. Thekey use for the extremely hard and non-corrosive metal was in themanufacture of pen nibs for fountain pens. Other uses includedelectrical work, photography and jewellery.



It was not long though before these shallow deposits of osmiridiumwere worked out, which, coupled with the outbreak of the First World


6 August 201296

Figure 16: The channel leading intothe small alluvial workings 3.40

Figure 17: One of the short sections ofRiley Creek lined with logs 3.44

Figure 18: The far western area ofalluvial workings 3.46

War, saw a loss of markets and rapid fall in production. TheTasmanian industry did not recover until 1918, and this post-warperiod saw the most intense development on the Wilson River.



It is through this system that the Tasmanian osmiridium industryemerged, allowing for individuals or small groups to develop the fieldswithout the need for large amounts of capital. Indeed, it was officialGovernment policy to favour the interests of the individual miner andprevent the development of monopolies or companies. This wasachieved through restricting the issuing of mining leases to locationswhere osmiridium was found in situ, that is, in solid rock, as opposedto alluvial deposits, which were reserved for the individual miner or‘Ossie Diggers’.


For the most part, mining took place on the creek and riverbeds, oralong former courses of creeks, where the osmiridium had beendeposited from eroded serpentine. The first areas to be exploited weremost often the shallow gravels located in steeply inclined creeks, whichwere more easily and cheaply worked. Various methods were availableto the miners to work these alluvial deposits. At its simplest, the minerequipped with pick, shovel, axe and dish would pan the creeks, whereon an average day a miner could work through 30 pans. Cradles werealso sometimes used, allowing far greater amounts of alluvial materialto be worked. If an adequate supply of water existed, sluice boxes wereemployed, whereby a team of two miners could process several tons ofalluvial deposits a day. Occasionally, hydraulic sluicing was usedwhere the material was hosed into trenches and directed into thesluice boxes. These boxes collected the small grains of osmiridium,while the waste material was washed away. This waste material neededto be eventually removed from the trenches where it was dumped nearthe drainage channels. Extracting osmiridium held in clay was a moreintensive process, with the clay needing to be mixed with water toform a slurry, before being processed through the boxes.


Whilst osmiridium mining may have declined, interest in the mineralprospects of the area remained strong. From the mid-twentiethcentury, the Wilson River area came under increasing scrutiny and


6 August 201297

Figure 19: Linear mullock heaps alongthe western end of Riley Creek 3.41-

3.42

exploration, characterised by a progressive series of mining leases andinvasive and non-invasive investigations.



Riley Creek

Of all areas within the Wilson River field, Riley Creek appears to havebeen the most developed. Brothers, John Temple and Charles EdwardRiley had a long association with the Wilson River field, commencingin c.1902. The pair were the first to work the creek that now bears theirname (as with the Riley Knob). Along the creek, the osmiridium wasfound to be ‘wonderfully rich’. JT Riley went on to have adistinguished military career during the First World War with the 3rd

Light Horse. Enlisting at the age of 41, Riley was wounded severaltimes during the conflict and was rewarded for his conduct, finishingthe War as a Lieutenant. Well respected by the local community, hereturned to the west coast after the War, and continued to work theWilson River osmiridium field.

In 1921, The Riley Creek Valley was described as being between 100-160m wide and approximately 1.6km long. The valley was found to beosmiridium bearing throughout its extent, but to 1921, only a narrowstrip of some 20m had been worked. Presumably this narrow area ofworkings was on Riley Creek itself and the ground immediatelyflanking the watercourse.

Beneath the detrital material, large structural planes of serpentinerock existed. Potholes and crevices within these rocks had proved avaluable source of osmiridium, which was generally coarse, and evennugget-like in form. Reid found it ‘incomprehensible’ that no properattempt had been made to quarry this rock.

Although the records are far from complete, a total of nineapplications for miner’s rights have been found for the Riley Creekarea, and lodged during 1920-1924. Working small areas of half to oneacre, these miners included James Fahey, J Sweeney, J Dooly, J Dixon,T Gillis, H Smith, William Doak, Reg Pike and F Kershaw.

Some development under leases also took place with the issuing of a10 acre lease to JT Riley in 1925. This lease area 9578M was located atthe head of Riley Creek. Also described as the ‘Riley Prospect’, thissection had been worked well before the issuing of the lease, with Reidnoting that following the removal of the topsoil, a considerableamount of the osmiridium had been recovered. Within a block of 60 x30 x 2 feet (i.e., 18.2 x 9.1 x 0.60m deep), over 20 ounces (i.e., 566grams) of the precious metal had been extracted.

The extent of works on Riley Creek were described a few years later.Scott wrote that the whole area of flat ground in the valley had beenworked out for a considerable distance. By 1926 most of the alluvialmaterial had already been exploited and only two or three men wereengaged on the small areas that had yet to be worked.

Scott’s 1926 report into the Riley Prospect described that narrowgutters had been worked through the southern section of the lease.


6 August 201298

The lease held very good prospects for osmiridium to be obtained fromwashing the alluvial deposits that covered the area. However, tosuccessfully work the site, it would be necessary to obtain an adequatewater supply and institute hydraulic sluicing, a costly task given theelevated location of the lease. Before investing in such substantialinfrastructure, Scott recommended boring and sinking to accuratelydefine the area and potential value of the deposit. It is currentlyunknown whether such testing and hydraulic works took place on thelease, although the lease was void by 1927.

As part of the 1980s exploratory works, Davis wrote how Riley Creekhad been extensively worked, most notably at the junction of Riley andTrinder Creeks. In places, Riley Creek still flowed through log-linedwater races. Discarded piles of pebbles and stones (up to 1.5m high)were also noted. Upstream, Davis located large trenches, which weregenerally less than 1m deep and fanned out across the slope.

Relevant sources:

Advocate, Monday 19 June 1922, p.4; Tuesday 11 July 1922, p.5; 8 June 1923,p.4









NAA, Riley, John Temple, B2455, 80331720








TAHO, Colonial Tasmanian Family Links Details, John Temple Riley




6 August 201299

Description:

Riley Creek is documented by the historical records as the mostintensively mined watercourse within the study area. This level ofdevelopment was confirmed by the field survey with 47 historicfeatures recorded. Riley Creek commences its course within Area Band flows in a generally south and westerly direction forapproximately 1 km within the study area. Vegetation growth andground visibility varied considerably along its course. At its head, thecreek is choked and otherwise obscured by dense cutting grass. As itcontinues, the creek enters a largely flat elliptical valley. Vegetationcover on the valley floor was sufficiently open to allow for theidentification of a number of features within the valley, however, thecourse of the creek was densely vegetated. As the creek continues itswesterly flow, the valley narrows considerably and the vegetationchanges to rainforest species near the far western end of the surveyedarea.

Northern Section

The head of the creek valley appears to have been the area mostintensely developed. An area of alluvial workings, mullock heaps, testpits and water channels covers approximately 2.1 hectares at thisnorthern end. The northern most workings (3.01) consisted of adeeply incised trench, up to 3m deep, 5m wide, and approximately110m long. Feeding into this section of workings, three short waterchannels or drains were identified (3.02, 3.03, and 3.04). Varyingbetween 45-65m in length, the true extent of channels 3.03 and 3.04is unclear, with their source being undetectable amidst dense cuttinggrass. Evidence of sluicing was discernible, with several mullock heapsobserved in the base of the trench. Some small test extensions, or cutshave been made off this trench, presumably miner’s attempts to chasedeposits of osmiridium.

To the west, a smaller area of alluvial workings was identified (3.05).Approximately 100m long, this narrow trench (approximately 5m atits widest), becomes a water channel at its southern end (3.06). Inturn, this channel would have fed the largest trench identified (3.07),but has been truncated by a track. Trench 3.07 extends for some165m, and has been excavated to a depth of up to 3m. It is locatedimmediately adjacent to a track which skirts its western edge. On theeastern side, a water channel, some 75m long runs roughly parallel tothe trench, before terminating (3.08). This channel is approximately0.75m wide and 0.5m deep, and is a type of feature commonlyencountered during the survey.

Nearby to the south, an area of alluvial workings was discovered,demonstrating a variety of feature types. This area of workings (3.09-3.16) exhibited the most complex configuration of all of the areaslocated during field survey. It was also where the vegetation cover wassufficiently open to allow for more detailed recording. The chaoticnature of this area also demonstrates what Reid called the‘capriciousness’ of osmiridium, with irregular channels, trenches, testcuts and pits. This area has been recorded in the indicative sketch planat Figure 20, annotated with particular feature references, and also inthe panoramic photograph at Figure 21.

In working the loam or clay, a series of water channels or drains werecut to supply water for the sluicing. Channel 3.17 is the longest ofthese features, extending for some 160m. Approximately 0.75m wideand 0.5m deep, the excavated spoil has been deposited on either sideof the formation. It enters the area of alluvial workings at its northernend. Other similar, but smaller channels have also been cut, includingfeatures 3.18 and 3.19. Channel 3.19 forms part of a more complexseries of such features. It flows in a southerly direction (presumably asan extension of channel 3.06). The line of this channel is cut by a


6 August 2012100

track running roughly east-west, but on the other side of the track, thechannel can again be traced, where it is joined by a second channel,coming off channel 3.24. The combined flow of these two channelsthen enters the southern area of alluvial workings, but again has beentruncated by a track.

At the northern end of the alluvial workings, three irregular trencheshave been cut. Features 3.09 and 3.10 later rejoin the main workings,whilst the shallow (less than 1m deep) 3.11 does not. Both 3.09 and3.10 are approximately 1.5m deep and are irregularly shaped withstraight-cut walls. Feature 3.09 in particular demonstrates thisirregularity with small spurs or cuts being made on its western side insearch of osmiridium. Both trenches are linked by a short and shallowchannel or drain, some 0.5m deep. Narrow (0.75m wide) channelshave been cut off these trenches (3.12, 3.13). To allow for the transferof water, these channels have been excavated to a depth ofapproximately 1.5m.

The above named channels enter the centre of the alluvial workings(3.14), an area approximately 30m wide and up to 1.5m deep.Extensive workings are evidenced by the hummocky ground surfaceformed by numerous small mullock heaps. Larger concentrations ofmullock also exist in this area, which show the effect of water erosionon their northern ends, being ‘tear dropped’ shaped. The western edgeof the workings has a very irregular outline with numerous small testcuts or trenches being excavated into the loam or clay. At its southernend a third, narrow and deep channel (3.15) drains into a further areaof workings, which again exhibits extensive landscape modificationwith a hummocky ground surface formed from mullock heaps (3.16).In addition to these workings, the broader area also demonstrates theprocesses of alluvial osmiridium mining, with numerous linearmullock heaps from 0.75 - 1m in height surrounding the workings(3.20) as well as many rectangular test pits (3.21). Similar featuresare also located in proximity to other trenches to the north.

It is also at this northern end of the creek valley that the only non-mining related site was found. Approximately 185m to the north-eastof trench 3.01, a shoed-tree stump was found (3.22). Some 2.5mhigh, two shoe holes were visible in the remnant stump. The felledsection of tree had not been removed.

Central Section

The scale and intensity of workings decreases as Riley Creek continuesits westerly course. Within this central section, two key areas ofalluvial workings were discovered (3.23, 3.32). The smaller of these(3.23) covers an area of approximately 1,400m2, with a shallowexcavation depth of approximately 0.75m. A small area of excavationalso exists to its north. Again, evidence of water delivery and drainagewas found. Six channels or drains were located, both feeding anddraining these alluvial workings (3.24, 3.25, 3.26, 3.27, 3.28, and3.29). All share the common characteristics of being poorly defined,generally being 0.75m wide x 0.5m deep. The longest of such features,and the longest channel found during survey is channel 3.24, whichcommences its course near channel 3.06 in the north, and makes abroken southerly progression to the alluvial workings 3.23. Numeroussmall mullock heaps (3.30) and rectangular test pits (3.31) arelocated on the periphery of these alluvial workings.

To the west, a large trench was located (3.32), avoided by, andrunning parallel with one of the tracks. Some 185m long, the trench isdeepest (approximately 1.75m) at its northern end, becomingshallower at its southern extent (approximately 0.75m). Three waterchannels (3.33, 3.34, and 3.35) were identified, flowing to the westbefore entering the main trench. The longest of these channels (3.33),measured some 145m. At the northern end, the base of the trenchdemonstrates the process of alluvial mining, with numerous mullock


6 August 2012101

heaps, and an excavated channel running in a southerly direction.Whilst the northern half of the trench is well defined, its southern endis shallower and poorly defined, with dense cutting grass obscuring theedge of the workings, and the base of the trench itself. It is possiblethat a channel directed a flow of water from the southern end of thistrench, however the dense vegetation prevented any precise siterecognition. As with the other areas of alluvial workings, a series ofrectangular test pits (3.36) exist on the periphery of the trench, butare largely obscured by vegetation, especially at its southern end.

Extensive evidence was also found of Riley Creek itself being worked.The most common feature were linear mullock heaps. To the east ofthe junction of Riley Creek and the main vehicle track, an almostunbroken line of mullock heaps extended over a length ofapproximately 280m (3.37-3.38). Typically less than 1m in height,these piles of mullock were linear in shape, and formed from thecoarse gravel or pebbles of the creek. Mullock was generally restrictedto the immediate vicinity of the creek, but selected parts of theworkings was noted up to 30m distant. It was also in this locality that ashort channel or drain of some 65m long was found running parallelwith the creek (3.39). The vegetation growth becomes more densefurther upstream, obscuring evidence of previous workings.

Western Section

As Riley Creek continues its westerly flow, the creek valley becomesnarrower and more deeply incised. Access and visibility along thecreek banks improves however, and a number of sites were identified.To the west of the junction of the track and creek, a similar pattern ofdevelopment exists. Small linear mullock heaps again line the creekbanks (3.41-3.42), extending in a broken line for some 460m. As thecreek valley becomes more deeply incised in this area, the mullock arelargely restricted to the margins of the creek.

Two small areas of alluvial workings were located on the southernbank of the creek in this section (3.40, 3.46). The smallest of thesefeatures (3.40), commences with a short 15m long channel whichfeeds into a small, roughly elliptical trench, less than 20m in extent.Small mullock heaps surround these workings. A somewhat larger(approximately 1,100m2) area of workings exists near the westernextent of the study area, cut into the side of the hill (3.46). Again, thisarea of workings is irregular in its form, with numerous small trenchesintersecting. Several drains or channels have been cut to drain theseworkings.

Other types of features were located in this section of Riley Creek. Attwo points (3.43, 3.44), the course of Riley Creek itself has been linedwith timber logs (two courses of logs were visible). Both approximately10m in length, the lining was presumably made to direct the flow,prevent scouring and potentially increase the head of water availablefor sluicing. Davis also noted lined sections of creek in 1987. A thirdfeature (3.45) is less distinct in its form. Over a distance of some 60m,the steep southern bank of the creek appears to have been cut andbenched, to form a track approximately 1.5m wide. This may havebeen created to improve access, however its form is somewhatindistinct and it may be a natural feature.

Near this western end of the study area, two unnamed tributaries flowin a southerly direction into Riley Creek. Very little evidence ofworkings was observed on the westernmost tributary, save a smallnumber of mullock heaps near its junction with Riley Creek (3.49).However, the eastern tributary demonstrated fairly consistentworkings along its entire length of some 300m with small linearmullock heaps lining the banks of the creek (3.47-3.48). Test pitswere located in the broader locality of this tributary (3.50), howevertheir distance from the creek may be more suggestive of 1980s


6 August 2012102

exploratory work and not the historic period of osmiridium mining.

Discussion:

Consistent with the historical documentation, Riley Creek and theassociated creek valley were found to be the most developed sectionsof the study area, with comparatively extensive evidence of alluvialworkings: mullock heaps, trenches, test pits and water channels. Thefeatures indicate considerable development of the creek proper, butalso extensions into the broader valley with trenching works.

The historical documentation is somewhat curious in its description ofdevelopment. Reid wrote in 1921 that only a narrow strip of some 20mhad been worked. Presumably this narrow area of workings was onRiley Creek itself and the ground immediately flanking thewatercourse.

However, a few years later in 1926, Scott wrote that the whole area offlat ground in the valley had been worked out for a considerabledistance and that most of the alluvial material had already beenexploited.

These are quite contrasting in the descriptions of the extent of works.It is possible that when Reid inspected Riley Creek, development waslimited to the creek itself, working the most easily obtainable alluvialdeposits. However, by the time Scott inspected the site five years laterin 1926, these creek deposits had been exhausted and mining hadexpanded chasing deposits in the broader valley. This increase inactivity coincides with our understanding of the early 1920s being thepeak period of development of the field.

It is therefore possible that two distinct phases of workings may beevident in the Riley Creek sites:

Firstly, workings on Riley Creek itself. These works modified theflow and course of the creek, with mullock heaps extensively liningits banks, as well as some small sections of log lining along thecreek bank; and

Secondly, alluvial ground works beyond the creek. These workswere more labour intensive and resulted in a complex network oftrenches, channels, mullock deposits and test pits.

Although not possible to correlate particular workings with specificindividuals, the extensive trenching works near the head of Riley Creek(3.01-3.21) would appear to be the result (or at least in part) of workundertaken under both miner’s rights and lease holdings, with JTRiley holding a lease in this general area from 1925-1927.






The study area has historical significancefor its association with osmiridium mining.For a relatively brief period during theearly twentieth century, osmiridiummining developed as an importantcomponent of the Tasmanian miningindustry, an industry that Tasmaniabecame a world leader in. More valuablethan gold, few metals attracted suchinterest. Particularly notable in thedevelopment of this industry was the roleof the individual miner or ‘Ossie Digger’



6 August 2012103

with Government policy favouring theinterests of the individual over those ofcompanies. The life and work of the minerswas widely publicised, creating an idealisedimage of the rugged individualism of the‘Ossie Digger’.

There are two aspects of the history of theWilson River field, which are particularlynoteworthy. Firstly, the Wilson River wasthe first place in Tasmania whereosmiridium was discovered in 1876.Secondly, The Wilson River field appearsto have been early in the development ofthe Tasmanian osmiridium industry withshort-lived attempts at mining beginningin c.1902-1903.


Riley Creek was the most developed sectionof the study area demonstrating historicosmiridium mining.



However, the Wilson River field wascertainly not unique, nor a leader in itsproduction. There are other more notableexamples of osmiridium fields within thewest and north-west region of Tasmania.





The scale, location, type and relationshipbetween individual sites on Riley Creekhave some ability to provide newinformation on the evolution of a smallalluvial osmiridium field.

However, the ability of these sites tocontribute new, important informationbeyond that already documented in thisreport is limited.

Representativeness A particularly fine, intact or pivotalexample of the class in a local context,representative of a class of places thatdemonstrate an historical land use,function or process, of historical


Riley Creek in particular demonstrates


6 August 2012104

importance. landscape modification and disturbanceconsistent with the techniques of alluvialmining undertaken by individuals or smallgroups.

Phasing, or the evolution of workings mayalso be demonstrated. The mullock heapsand modified course of the Creek arepotentially attributable to the earliestphase of workings, as it was the creekswhich were often first exploited.

The broader series of trenches, channels ordrains and prospecting pits maydemonstrate a second phase in mining. Farmore labour intensive, these areasdemonstrate the methods of productionwith complex and chaotic trenches, andnumerous small channels or drains tocontrol and direct the flow of water forsluicing the deposits. The scale of thesealluvial ground works demonstrates whatcould be achieved by a few people usingsimple technology and techniques. Thechaotic and complex nature of thesetrenches also well demonstrates theirregularities in the distribution ofosmiridium.

However, when compared to other fields,the study area is not the most significantexample of osmiridium mining. Otherfields demonstrate a greater variety inmining techniques (alluvial and solid rock)and production (individuals andcompanies). Places such as Adamsfield andBald Hill more fully demonstrateosmiridium mining and were also moresignificant than the Wilson River in theirproduction of the metal.







The work of brothers Charles and JohnTemple Riley is particularly noteworthy.Both were prominent local prospectors andplayed a pivotal role in the development ofthe field. JT Riley went on to have adistinguished military career during theFirst World War. Well respected by thelocal community, he returned to the westcoast after the War, and continued to workthe Wilson River osmiridium field.


6 August 2012105


Some discrete sections of historic workingshave some low level aesthetic values,namely part of the alluvial workings in thenorthern section of Riley Creek, and thealluvial workings at the far western end ofthe Creek.

At these locations, the modified landscapeforms of trenches, hummocky mullockheaps and channels contrast with theirbroader forested setting which has someaesthetic appeal.

Recommendations:

3/1: Desirable, although not essential to avoid or minimise impacts to the Riley Creek sites. Preservation of thecourse of the creek would assist in avoiding or minimising impacts to a large number of sites.



Of the entire study area, Riley Creek and the surrounding valley best demonstrates the processes of historicalosmiridium mining, and the scale of works achieved on the Wilson River field. These sites are assessed as havingheritage significance at the local level. However, other historic osmiridium fields have, or are likely to have higherlevels of significance.

In response to this level of significance, it would be desirable, but not essential to avoid or minimise impacts. Itwould certainly be desirable if representative examples of these features (e.g., mullock heaps along the creekand/or alluvial ground workings) could be conserved as part of the proposed mining development.

Where impacts will occur, no further action is considered necessary. Whilst there is comparatively little historicaldocumentation on the Wilson River osmiridium field, the combination of the historic overview, field surveyresults, written descriptions, photographs, mapping and sketch plan in this report provide an adequate record ofthe scale, nature and function of the area. In this respect, information related to the historic mining operationsappears to have been secured in the documentation collated for this project and is commensurate with the overallsignificance of the place.




6 August 2012106

Figure 20: Indicative sketch plan of the main area of alluvial workings on Riley Creek (3.09-3.16)


6 August 2012107

Figure 21: Panoramic view taken from atop a mullock heap within 3.14, looking south to south-west. The panorama highlights the complex and chaotic nature of the workingsin this area and the hummocky nature of mining landforms.


6 August 2012108

4. TRINDER CREEK SITES


4.01 -02 E367747 N5377211 - E368615 N5376413

Figure 3: Photograph of Trinder Creektaken at 4.02. This was the only

location found where ground visibilitywas sufficiently open to photograph

the concentrations of mullock.

Figure 4: One of the low, circularmullock heaps found at 4.02.

Figure 1: Mullock heaps found along Trinder Creek

Figure 2: Detail from 1921 geological sketch plan of Wilson RiverOsmiridium Field with Trinder Creek highlighted (Tasmanian Archives

and Heritage Office, Reid, A, Osmiridium in Tasmania. Geological SurveyBulletin No. 32, Department of Mines: Hobart, 1921, Plate IX: ‘Geological

Sketch Map of Wilson River District’, reproduced with permission.)

History:


The development of the Wilson River osmiridium field is central to thehistory of the study area. The Wilson River area was the first place inTasmania where the rare metal was discovered, when Sprentmistakenly identified the material as palladium in 1876. Later,osmiridium was found by gold prospectors working the rivers andcreeks of the north west, but as no value was placed on the metal,


6 August 2012109

miners were penalised for their failure to remove osmiridium from thegold. It was not until a market for the metal was established during theearly twentieth century that osmiridium gained any value locally. Thekey use for the extremely hard and non-corrosive metal was in themanufacture of pen nibs for fountain pens. Other uses includedelectrical work, photography and jewellery.






It is through this system that the Tasmanian osmiridium industryemerged, allowing for individuals or small groups to develop the fieldswithout the need for large amounts of capital. Indeed, it was officialGovernment policy to favour the interests of the individual miner andprevent the development of monopolies or companies. This wasachieved through restricting the issuing of mining leases to locationswhere osmiridium was found in situ, that is, in solid rock, as opposedto alluvial deposits, which were reserved for the individual miner or‘Ossie Diggers’.


For the most part, mining took place on the creek and riverbeds, oralong former courses of creeks, where the osmiridium had beendeposited from eroded serpentine. The first areas to be exploited weremost often the shallow gravels located in steeply inclined creeks, which


6 August 2012110

were more easily and cheaply worked. Various methods were availableto the miners to work these alluvial deposits. At its simplest, the minerequipped with pick, shovel, axe and dish would pan the creeks, whereon an average day a miner could work through 30 pans. Cradles werealso sometimes used, allowing far greater amounts of alluvial materialto be worked. If an adequate supply of water existed, sluice boxes wereemployed, whereby a team of two miners could process several tons ofalluvial deposits a day. Occasionally, hydraulic sluicing was usedwhere the material was hosed into trenches and directed into thesluice boxes. These boxes collected the small grains of osmiridium,while the waste material was washed away. This waste material neededto be eventually removed from the trenches where it was dumped nearthe drainage channels. Extracting osmiridium held in clay was a moreintensive process, with the clay needing to be mixed with water toform a slurry, before being processed through the boxes.





Trinder Creek

Very little is known of the specific history of development on TrinderCreek, although it was reported this was the first place on the WilsonRiver where the precious metal was found in 1903. Whilst noting thepresence of osmiridium in the creek, Reid provided no further detailsof workings in his 1921 report, although curiously he depicted a shaftclose to the southern edge of Trinder Creek. This is also the only suchfeature historically documented in the study area.

As part of the 1980s exploratory works, Davis identified a number ofsmall pits at the head of Trinder Creek as well as scattered pits alongits bank to its junction with Fowler Creek. Heavy vegetation at thislocation prevented further investigations to determine if the workingscontinued on towards Riley Creek.

Relevant sources:


Bacon, C, Notes on the History of Mining and Exploration at Adamsfield.


6 August 2012111

Mineral Resources Tasmania Report 1992/20, 1992, MRT Report: UR1992

















Description:

Trinder Creek is a small water course flowing in a south westerlydirection south of Area C. Access to the creek is greatly impeded byvery dense cutting grass, Bauera and log falls, which obscured theground surface and features, and made navigation a slow, difficult andeventually impossible task. Approximately 230m of watercourse wasfollowed, trending north-east from the vehicle track. Beyond thispoint, dense vegetation precluded access both physically and given theinability to see the ground surface and hidden hazards. The north-westfacing ridge was climbed in an attempt to find another access point tothe creek below without success.

Despite the limitations present in the field survey, a number offeatures were found. A series of mullock heaps were found along thebanks of the creek, indicating that the creek bed itself had beenworked for alluvial deposits. Ground visibility within this area wasvery poor, and site recognition was likewise reduced. However, some15 mullock heaps were found on both sides of the creek (4.01-4.02).These were generally less than a metre in height and took either alinear formation running parallel with the creek, or were low circularfeatures, generally less than 5m in diameter. Notwithstanding thedense vegetation, mullock was found to be sporadically locatedthroughout the surveyed area, and in lower numbers and scale than


6 August 2012112

observed at Riley Creek.

It was only at the northern end of the surveyed area that the mullockheaps could be inspected in any detail (4.02). Here, a relatively openarea of historic workings was located, consisting of circular heaps,approximately o.5m high with a diameter less than a 5m, and formedfrom coarse gravel (Figure 3).

The ‘scattered pits’ noted by Davis in 1987 were not located during thesurvey.

Discussion:

Despite the dense vegetation, which inhibited both navigation and siteidentification, a number of features were identified along TrinderCreek. It would seem likely that further mullock heaps would existbeyond the surveyed area, obscured amidst dense vegetation.

Very little site specific history is known about the Trinder Creek sites.Nonetheless the location and scale of the mullock demonstratesevidence of working the creek itself for osmiridium. Historically, it wasthese creeks which were first exploited, working the shallow gravels bypan, pick and shovel, and sluice box. Once the osmiridium wasexhausted, more intensive methods were employed. In this regard,such mullock heaps may be considered evidence of an earlier, or initialphase of workings.

Even though the extent of the field survey was restricted, the resultsare also somewhat consistent with previous reports on the area. BothReid (1921) and Davis (1987) recorded osmiridium workings along thecreek, but of a frequency and scale and secondary to the extractionoccurring on Riley Creek.






The study area has historical significancefor its association with osmiridium mining.For a relatively brief period during theearly twentieth century, osmiridiummining developed as an importantcomponent of the Tasmanian miningindustry, an industry that Tasmaniabecame a world leader in. More valuablethan gold, few metals attracted suchinterest. Particularly notable in thedevelopment of this industry was the roleof the individual miner or ‘Ossie Digger’with Government policy favouring theinterests of the individual over those ofcompanies. The life and work of the minerswas widely publicised, creating an idealisedimage of the rugged individualism of the‘Ossie Digger’.

There are two aspects of the history of theWilson River field which are particularlynoteworthy. Firstly, the Wilson River wasthe first place in Tasmania whereosmiridium was discovered in 1876.Secondly, The Wilson River field appearsto have been early in the development ofthe Tasmanian osmiridium industry with



6 August 2012113

short-lived attempts at mining beginningin c.1902-1903. Trinder Creek in particularis identified as one of these early areas ofworkings, however it remains unknownwhether the sites located during the fieldsurvey relate to this period of operations.


Although the Trinder Creek sites are ableto demonstrate small-scale alluvial mining,these mullock heaps have a lower level ofsignificance. Within the study area thefeatures located on Riley Creek are moreimportant in their ability to demonstratethe type, scale and phasing of worksundertaken on the Wilson Riverosmiridium field.








In comparison with other sections of thefield, most notably Riley Creek, themullock heaps on Trinder Creek have lowresearch potential in their ability toprovide new information on the evolutionof a small alluvial osmiridium field.



Both in their scale and type, the ability ofthe Trinder Creek sites to demonstrate theprocesses of alluvial osmiridium miningare limited. Namely, they demonstrate pastworking of the creek, possibly an early


6 August 2012114

phase of development on the field.

However, when compared to other fields,and other parts of the study area, moresignificant representative examples ofosmiridium mining do exist.







Trinder Creek has an association withCharles Riley and W Kinsella, responsiblefor some of the first workings on theWilson River osmiridium field, although itremains unknown whether the sites locatedduring the field survey relate to their work.


The mullock heaps have negligibleaesthetic value, with little visual appeal orcompositional qualities.

4/1: No further action beyond the record compiled here is recommended.



Whilst noting that only a limited section of Trinder Creek was able to be inspected, the identified sites relate tosmall scale alluvial osmiridium workings of the creek itself. Further, similar sites are likely to exist beyond thesurveyed area, but given the very dense vegetation, the ability to effectively identify such sites must be consideredlow.

When compared to the scale of sites on Riley Creek, Trinder Creek shows a considerably lower level of historicworkings. The site types are also limited to mullock heaps and do not demonstrate a broader range of workingssuch as the alluvial ground workings found in the Riley Creek valley. Comparatively, the Trinder Creek sites are oflower significance.

In response to this level of significance, the record compiled in this report is considered as a sufficient level ofdocumentation and no further action is recommended.




6 August 2012115

5.0 HISTORIC HERITAGE MANAGEMENT5.1 ConclusionThe study area is located in the core of the former Wilson River osmiridium district. Workedintermittently from c.1902-1903 to the 1930s, historic mining activity reached its peak in the yearsc.1918 to 1922. The research indicated that all the creeks within the study area would appear to havebeen worked for alluvial deposits. Hard rock mining is also recorded, but poorly documented bycomparison.

Over a relatively brief period, osmiridium became an important part of the Tasmanian industry,providing employment for many hundreds of people. Notable in this development was the work ofindividual miners, over larger company operations.

The resulting landscape is complex. Consisting of alluvial workings, 54 historic sites or features werelocated during field survey. This included mullock heaps, areas of ground works, test pits, stackedstones retaining creek banks, and water channels or drains. Development on Riley Creek andsurrounds was particularly intense. In addition, a further 33 sites were identified, most likely relatingto more recent exploration activity.

An assessment has been made of the potential historic heritage values of the study area and acomparison made with other similar places. This report concludes that the study area containsfeatures of historic heritage significance, and that this significance is manifest at the local level.

5.2 Management Guidelines1. Statutory Heritage Approvals:

No statutory historic heritage approvals are currently required for development within thestudy area at either local or State levels. At present, approvals under the EnvironmentProtection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 National Heritage Listing provisions arenot required. However, other matters of ‘National Environmental Significance’ remain subjectto that Act. A decision on the inclusion of the Tarkine in the National Heritage List is yet to bemade.

2. Site Specific Recommendations:

Proceed to implement the heritage management recommendations as per individual datasheets. Different recommendations have been made for each area, based on the assessed levelof significance.

Based on the scale and diversity of features, Riley Creek and surrounds has been assessed asthe most significant part of the study area. The stacked stone walls on Sweeney Creek alsohave particular value. It would be desirable, but not essential, to avoid or minimise impacts tothese areas.

Evidence of historic workings found on or near Three Mile and Trinder Creeks were assessedas being of less importance than those found on Riley and Sweeney Creeks. No furthermanagement of these sites is considered warranted.

The information related to the historic mining operations within the study area appears tohave been secured in the documentation collated for this project and is commensurate withthe overall significance of the place.

3. Interpretation:

Although not Tasmania’s most significant osmiridium field, the history and heritage of thestudy level have a certain level of value and interest. A community benefit could be achieved


6 August 2012116

where these values could be presented to the public. Further discussions with interested andrelevant groups should be considered to determine if interpretation options exist.

As a proposed mining site with restricted public access, such interpretation would most likelytake place off-site, preferably in Tullah, or nearby locations such as at the West Coast PioneersMemorial Museum in Zeehan.

On-site interpretation (and recognition of the history and heritage of the study area) could beconsidered in the nomenclature of new mining areas or associated infrastructure. Mostprominent are the names of key personalities in the development of the field. For example:

Charles and John Temple Riley.

W Kinsella.

JP Dixon.

James Sweeney.

Frederick Kershaw.

To make available to the public information related to the history and heritage of the studyarea, it would also be desirable for copies of this report to be lodged with the State Library ofTasmania. As the study area forms part of a broader Stanley River mineral field and otherlease areas held by Venture Minerals, lodgement of the other historic heritage assessmentreports prepared for Venture Minerals should also be considered.177

4. Dealing With Unexpected Discoveries:

Although every attempt has been made to locate sites of potential historic heritagesignificance within the study area, it is likely that further currently unknown sites will existwithin the area, especially given the dense vegetation and leaf litter that characterises certainareas. Whilst no sites of historic occupation (e.g., hut or camp sites, refuse deposits) werefound during the field survey, this should not be interpreted as evidence that such sites nolonger exist within the study area and caution should be applied when managing suchpotential sites.

It is also highly likely that historic heritage sites or features will exist outside of the fieldsurvey study area boundaries. The historical overview strongly suggests that all creeks withinthe proposed lease area were historically worked for osmiridium. Where activity is proposedbeyond the existing study area (Figure 1), further assessments may be warranted.

In response to such challenges, a protocol has been developed to provide guidance to VentureMinerals on the identification and management of sites of potential heritage significancediscovered during development (see Appendix 3).

Further specialist advice should be sought where complex sites are identified or whereexplanation of the protocol is required.

177 See: Austral Tasmania, Mount Lindsay, Tullah. Historic Heritage Assessment, unpublished report prepared for VentureMinerals, 23 June 2011; Austral Tasmania, Stanley River, Tullah. Historic Heritage Assessment, 11 November 2011


6 August 2012117

6.0 REFERENCES

6.1 Secondary References6.1.1 Reports and Publications

ASX Announcement, Venture Discovers Second DSO Hematite Prospect at Mt Lindsay, Tasmania’,Tuesday 22nd November 2011, Ref: /VMS/606/VMS00269

Austral Tasmania, Proposed Addition to Mount Lindsay Mining Lease Area, (Wilson River). HistoricHeritage Desktop Assessment, Draft unpublished report prepared for Venture Minerals, 16December 2011

Bacon, C, Notes on the History of Mining and Exploration at Adamsfield. Mineral ResourcesTasmania Report 1992/20, 1992, MRT Report: UR1992

Bacon, C.A, Tasmanian Geological Survey Record 1996/02. Mining Heritage Guidelines for use byMRT Staff: Re-opening, re-working or exploring a previously worked deposit, 26 February1996

Binks, CJ, Explorers of Western Tasmania, Mary Fisher Bookshop: Launceston, 1980

Blake, F, Nye, P.B, The Geology and Mineral Deposits of Tasmania, 1938, MRT Report GSB44

Blanks, RF, Annual Report 1988-89, EL 24-85, Wilson River - Riley Knob, Western Tasmania, 1989,MRT Report 89-3044

Bottrill, RS, Matthews, WL, Occurrences of Gemstone Minerals in Tasmania, 8th edition, MineralResources Tasmania: Rosny Park, 2006

Brown, C, A Review of the Osmiridium Mining Industry of Tasmania, John Vail, GovernmentPrinter: Hobart, 1919, MRT Report: OS-258

The Burra Charter: The Australia ICOMOS Charter for Places of Cultural Significance, 1999

Callina NL, Annual Report on Tasmanian Prospect E.L. 24-85, 1985, MRT Report 86-2613

Callina NL, Annual Report 1989-90 Exploration Licence 24/85, Wilson River, 1990, MRT Report 90-3170

Coldham, JC, Pieman Gold-Osmiridium Field, 1949, MRT Report 49-0100

Davis, N, Annual Report 1/12/86-1/12/87 Wilson River Exploration Licence 24/85, 1987, MRTReport 87-2744

Davis, N, Interim Report EL 24-85 Wilson River Area, North-Western Tasmania, October 1988,1988, MRT Report 88-2879

Department of Primary Industries, Parks, Water and Environment, October 2011, Assessing historicheritage significance for Application with the Historic Cultural Heritage Act 1995

Dickens, G, ‘Tin Mining’, in Alexander, A, (ed.), The Companion to Tasmanian History, Centre forTasmanian Historical Studies, University of Tasmania, Hobart, 2005

Dickens, G, ‘Zeehan’s Silver-Lead Ore Body’, in Alexander, A, (ed.), The Companion to TasmanianHistory, Centre for Tasmanian Historical Studies, University of Tasmania, Hobart, 2005

Ellis, PD, Exploration Progress Report E.L. 53/70, Stanley River, Tasmania. Period ending 10thNovember, 1982, EMR 160/82, October 1982, MRT Report: 82-1874

Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999

EPBC Act Public Notices: Referral of Proposed Action, Venture Minerals: Mount Lindsay tin-tungsten-magnetite-copper mine, 2 November 2011

Eshuys, E, Etheridge, M, Aberfoyle Tin Development Partnership. Report on the Mt. Lindsay Area,Tasmania (Summer Programme 1967/68.), February 1968, MRT Report: 68-0499


6 August 2012118

Forest Practices Board, Forest Practices Code, Forest Practices Board: Hobart, 2000

Glasson, KR, Aberfoyle Tin Development Partnership, Report on Trinder-Camp 30 Area,Exploration Licence 2-63, 1969, MRT Report 69-0560

Haygarth, N, Cubit, S (ed.), A Peopled Frontier: The European Heritage of the Tarkine Area, CircularHead Council: Smithton, 2008

Haygarth, N, ‘Pen-Pushers with Pans: 20th-century Tasmanian Osmiridium Mining’, in MiningHistory: The Bulletin of the Peak District Mines Historical Society, Vol. 17, No. 4, 2009

Henderson, QJ, The Mineral Prospects of the Pieman River Area, Department of Mines, 23 April1945, MRT Report: UR1954_073-76

Henderson, QJ, Thomas, DE, Osmiridium Mining at Mount Stewart, Nineteen Mile and Bald Hill,1943, MRT Report UR1943_165-168

Heritage Tasmania, Pre-development assessment guidelines, November 2009

Historic Cultural Heritage Act 1995

Jessup, A, Chenhall, B, Aberfoyle Tin Development Partnership. Interim Report on the Camp 30Merton Area, Tasmania, 1968, MRT Report 68-0500

Jordan, M, Reports on the Camp 30, Ahearne’s Creek and Wilson River Areas, EL 2/63, February1969, MRT Report: 69-0598

Krummei, G, E.L. 2/63, Tasmania. End of Project Report, Wilson River-Pieman Area, 15 October1972, MRT Report: 72-0901

Martin, LA, Roberts, PA, E.L. 2/63, Mt Lindsay Area, Western Tasmania. Merton Hill ProgressReport, 1982, MRT Report 82-1751

McCarthy, E, R.T.A.E. and E.Z. Exploration Programme Geophysical Surveys in N.W. Tasmania to31st May 1957 - Project PRP/7/100, Rio Tinto Australian Exploration Pty. Limited, 1957, MRTReport: 57-0167

Montgomery, A, Report on the Progress of the Mineral Fields in the Vicinity of the Neighbourhood ofZeehan; Viz.: Mackintosh River, Mount Black, Mount Read, Mount Dundas, Mount Zeehan,Stanley River, and Mount Heemskirk, Geological Surveyor’s Office: Launceston, 15 May 1895,MRT Report: OS_118

Montgomery, A, Silver deposits of Tasmania, 1890, MRT Report, UR1891-1969_001-4

Morton, JL, Geological Report on Mt Lindsay Tin Deposit, Zeehan, Tasmania, 1962, MRT Report:62_0341

Morton, JL, Study & Estimated Cost & Schedule of Proposed Diamond Drill Programme of MtLindsay Tin Deposit, 30 November 1962, MRT Report: 62_0348

Morton, JL, Progress Report No. 8 of Mt. Lindsay Tin Prospect, Zeehan, Tasmania, 11 October 1963,MRT Report: 63-361

National Heritage List, The Tarkine, Waratah Rd, Savage River, TAS, Australia, 105751

Newnham, LA, Schellekens, RR, Aberfoyle Ltd, E.L. 2-63 Mt. Lindsay - Western Tasmania, AnnualReport, 1972-73, 1973, MRT Report 73-0962

North Barker Ecosystem Services, Riley Iron Laterite Prospect Proposal. Botanical Survey andFauna Habitat Assessment, unpublished report prepared for Venture Minerals, 3 April 2012

Nye, PB, Osmiridium in Tasmania, Hobart: Mines Department 19 April 1928, MRT Report: UR1928B/106-110

Nye, P, Tasmanian Osmiridium & its Marketing, Mines Department: 27 November 1930, MRTReport: UR1930_008-12


6 August 2012119

Owen, S, Adamus Resources Limited. Exploration Licence 18/2002 Serpentine Ridge NW Tasmania.2003 Annual Report on Exploration Activities within EL18/2002 to Mineral ResourcesTasmania, 2003, MRT Report: EL1820002_200310_01

Owen, S, Adamus Resources Ltd, EL 18/2002, Serpentine Ridge NW Tasmania, 2004 PartialRelease, 2004, MRT Report, EL182002_2004 partial_release

Owen, S, Adamus Resources Ltd, 2005 Annual Exploration Report EL 18/2002 Serpentine Ridge,2005, MRT Report, EL182002_2005

Owen, S, Mount Lindsay – Webbs Creek Exploration Licence 21/2005. Annual Technical Report forthe period 22/08/2008 to 22/08/2009, Venture Minerals Ltd, July 2009

Pink, K, The West Coast Story. A History of Western Tasmania and its Mining Fields, Zeehan: WestCoast Pioneers’ Memorial Museum, 1982

Prince, GB, A Preliminary Archaeological Survey of Proposed Mining Exploration Activities in theVicinity of Adamsfield, South West Tasmania, unpublished report to Metals Exploration Ltd,March 1987

Prince, GB, An Archaeological Survey of Proposed Mineral Exploration Works in the Vicinity ofAdamsfield, Southwest Tasmania, unpublished report prepared for Metals Exploration Ltd,February 1988

Reid, A.M, Osmiridium in Tasmania. Geological Survey Bulletin No. 32, Department of Mines:Hobart, 1921, MRT Report: GSB32

Report of the Secretary for Mines for the Year Ending 31 December 1911, John Vail GovernmentPrinter: Hobart, 1912







Rimon, W, ‘Films’, in Alexander, A, (ed.), The Companion to Tasmanian History, Centre forTasmanian Historical Studies, University of Tasmania, Hobart, 2005

Roetz, M, Cameron, P, Allen, B, Geology of the Wilson River Area, MRT Report: 69-0598

Scott, JB, Report on Section No 9578-M in the Name of J T Riley, Area - 10 Acres, 1926, MRT ReportUR1926_052-54

Taylor, BL, Progress Report on the North Pieman Mineral Field, 5 November 1954, MRT Report: 55-0121

Taylor, BL, Asbestos in Tasmania, Geological Survey Mineral Resources No.9, Department of Mines:Hobart, 1955, MRT Report: GSMR09

THPI 7915.019 Bald Hill Osmiridium Field

THPI 8112.001 Adamsfield

THPI 8210.091 Osmiridium Beach

THPI 8210.094 Rocky Plains


6 August 2012120

THPI 8211.141 Fletcher Plains Osmiridium Mining

Twelvetrees, WH, The Bald Hill Osmiridium Field. Geological Survey Bulletin No. 17, Department ofMines: Hobart, 1914, MRT Report: GSB17, p.35

Waller, G.A, Report on the Prospects of the Stanley River Tinfield, Government Geologist: Zeehan,1904, MRT Report: OS_222

Waterhouse, LL, The Stanley River Tin Field. Geological Survey Bulletin No. 15, Department ofMines: Hobart, 1914, MRT Report: GSB15

West Coast Planning Scheme

6.1.2 Newspapers

Advocate, Wednesday 15 June 1921, p.6

Advocate, Monday 19 June 1922, p.4

Advocate, Tuesday 11 July 1922, p.5

Advocate, Monday 19 June 1922, p.4

Advocate, Friday 8 June 1923, p.4

Advocate, Wednesday 12 August 1925. p.4

Advocate, Tuesday 8 September 1925, p.6

Advocate, Thursday 11 October 1928, p.4

Launceston Examiner, Thursday 8 June 1876, p.3

Launceston Examiner, Thursday 17 August 1876, p.3

Launceston Examiner, Tuesday 18 July 1893, p.6

Launceston Examiner, Thursday 23 March 1899, p.2

Examiner, Thursday 7 May 1903, p.2

Examiner, Friday 11 August 1911, p.2

Examiner, Wednesday 18 December 1912, p.2

Examiner, Thursday 3 July 1913, p.3

Examiner, Wednesday 14 April 1915, p.2

Examiner, Saturday 17 April 1915, p.4

Examiner, Thursday 21 August 1919, p.2

Examiner, Thursday 21 August 1919, p.2

Examiner, Saturday 13 September 1919, p.4

Examiner, Thursday 1 April 1920, p.3

Examiner, Friday 27 May 1921, p.2

Examiner, Monday 25 November 1929, p.9

Examiner, Thursday 13 February 1930, p.9

Examiner, Friday 1 December 1933, p.4

The Mercury, Thursday 8 December 1910, p.3

The Mercury, Monday 2 December 1912, p.4

The Mercury, Friday 20 February 1914, p.3


6 August 2012121

The Mercury, Saturday 28 March 1914, p.6

The Mercury, Friday 8 October 1915, p.3

The Mercury, Wednesday 26 June 1918, p.6

The Mercury, Monday 29 March 1920, p.8

The Mercury, Monday 11 October 1920, p.4

The Mercury, Friday 29 April 1921, p.4

The Mercury, Friday 29 April 1921, p.4

The Mercury, Monday 6 February 1922, p.2

The Mercury, Saturday 21 July 1923, p.6

The Mercury, Wednesday 28 April 1926, p.8

The Mercury, Monday 25 November 1929, p.9

The Mercury, Saturday 17 January 1931, p.4

The Mercury, Friday 6 February 1931, p.8

The Mercury, Tuesday 15 November 1932, p.11

The North Western Advocate and the Emu Bay Times, Saturday 8 February 1913, p.7

The North Western Advocate and the Emu Bay Times, Wednesday 8 May 1918, p.2

6.1.3 Websites

‘Media Release - Australian Heritage Council, 9 March 2011: ‘National Heritage Assessment of theTarkine’; ‘The Tarkine National Heritage assessment. National Heritage Assessment’,Australian Heritage Council: http://www.environment.gov.au/heritage/ahc/national-assessments/tarkine/information.html accessed 17 February 2012

‘Mine plan prompts new Emergency National Heritage bid for Tarkine’, in Tasmanian Times, 18November 2011: http://tasmaniantimes.com/index.php?/weblog/article/mine-plan-prompts-new-emergency-national-heritage-bid-for-tarkine/ accessed 21 November 2011; TasmanianTimes, ‘Burke’s broken promise misleads the public’, 2 December 2011:http://tasmaniantimes.com/index.php?/weblog/article/burkes-broken-promise-misleads-the-public/ accessed 5 December 2011

‘Tarkine Values summary’, 18 July 2011, http://www.environment.gov.au/heritage/ahc/national-assessments/tarkine/pubs/tarkine-values-summary-2011.pdf, accessed 17 February 2012

‘The Tarkine maps and values information’, National Heritage Assessment, Australian HeritageCouncil, 18 July 2011, http://www.environment.gov.au/heritage/ahc/national-assessments/tarkine/values.html, accessed 17 February 2012

‘What would National Heritage listing mean for The Tarkine?’ Athttp://www.environment.gov.au/heritage/ahc/national-assessments/tarkine/pubs/tarkine-to-date.doc

6.2 Primary References6.2.1 Archival Material

MRT, Minerals Applications Register, Book No. 7, 3863/87M, 3864/87M, 3866/87M

MRT, Mineral Applications Register, Book No. 19, 5574M, 5575M, 5576M, 5577M



6 August 2012122

NAA, Riley, John Temple, B2455, 80331720

TAHO, AD266/1/1713, JT Riley to C Kelly MHA, 27 March 1930

TAHO, AC249/1/439, 4/813, Creasey [sic], M.G., Serpentine Ridge: Environmental ImpactAssessment, 1985

TAHO, AD266/1/1713, Resident Engineer, Queenstown to Road Engineer, Department of PublicWorks, 9 September 1957

TAHO, AD948/1/97, Secretary of Mines to State Mining Engineer, 3 June 1913

TAHO, AD948/1/97, JG Arnett to Inspector of Mines, 2 February 1918

TAHO, AD948/1/97, J Stanton to Minister for Mines, 10 June 1918


TAHO, Colonial Tasmanian Family Links Details, John Temple Riley

TAHO, MIN83/1/7, Register of Applications for Mineral Leases: 104/91M, 105/91M, 118/91M,409/91M, 119/91M, 563/91M, 3760/87M, 3761/87M, 3762/87M, 3763/87M

TAHO, MIN83/1/20, Register of Applications for Mineral Leases: 6460M, 6461M

TAHO, MIN150/1/1 Register of Osmiridium Buyer’s Returns of Purchases, September, October,November 1922, January, March, May, July September 1923, September 1924

TAHO, MIN 197/1/1-2, Applications from the Zeehan Office for Mining Leases, Water Rights, Noticesof the Marking Off of Prospecting Claims, and Associated Papers

6.2.2 Historic Plans, Surveys & Photographs

1914, MRT, from Waterhouse, LL, The Stanley River Tin Field. Geological Survey Bulletin No. 15,Department of Mines: Hobart, 1914, MRT Report: GSB15: ‘Plate II: Geological Sketch Map ofthe Stanley River District’

1918, TAHO, The Weekly Courier, Thursday 16 May 1918, p.21, ‘Osmiridium Miners’ Camp on theNineteen Mile Creek’

1918, TAHO, The Weekly Courier, Thursday 3 October 1918, p.23, ‘Diggers’ Camp Mount StewartOsmiridium Field, North-Western Tasmania. This party has one of the best claims’.

1918, TAHO, The Weekly Courier, Thursday 26 December 1918, p.22, ‘Camps of Osmiridium Diggers’

1918, TAHO, The Weekly Courier, Thursday 26 December 1918, p.22, ‘Osmiridium Diggers’ Camp onthe Nineteen-Mile Creek, North-Western Tasmania’

1918, TAHO, The Weekly Courier, Thursday 26 December 1918, p.22, ‘Diggers on their Claim, MountStewart Field, North-Western Tasmania’

1918, TAHO, The Weekly Courier, Thursday 26 December 1918, p.22, ‘Loughnan and Stanton’sReward Claim’

1919, MRT, ‘Panning Off’ at Nineteen Mile Creek’, in Brown, C, A Review of the Osmiridium MiningIndustry of Tasmania, John Vail, Government Printer: Hobart, 1919, MRT Report: OS-258, p.9

1919, MRT, ‘Sluicing Mud for Metal at Wilson River’, in Brown, C, A Review of the OsmiridiumMining Industry of Tasmania, John Vail, Government Printer: Hobart, 1919, MRT Report: OS-258, p.12

1919, MRT, ‘‘A Typical ‘Camp’ At Bald Hill’, in Brown, C, A Review of the Osmiridium MiningIndustry of Tasmania, John Vail, Government Printer: Hobart, 1919, MRT Report: OS-258,p.15

1919, MRT, ‘A Field Buyer on His Rounds’. in Brown, C, A Review of the Osmiridium Mining Industryof Tasmania, John Vail, Government Printer: Hobart, 1919, MRT Report: OS-258, p.22


6 August 2012123

1921, Private Collection, c.1921 Photograph of Hut on Little Wilson River, provided by Dr NicHaygarth

1921, TAHO, NS/2218/1/2, Photograph - Post card to Billy Kerrison from W E Kerrison - group atOsmiridium Fields, some men identified

1921, TAHO, McIntosh Reid, A, Osmiridium in Tasmania. Geological Survey Bulletin No. 32,Department of Mines: Hobart, 1921, Plate IX: ‘Geological Sketch Map of Wilson River District’

1921, MRT, ‘The Sweeney Nugget, Wilson River Field’, in McIntosh Reid, A, Osmiridium in Tasmania.Geological Survey Bulletin No. 32, Department of Mines: Hobart, 1921, p.79

1925, MRT, Diagram from Actual Survey 49/39, 1925

1963, MRT, Morton, JL, Progress Report No. 8 of Mt. Lindsay Tin Prospect, Zeehan, Tasmania, 11October 1963, TCR _0361: Aberfoyle Tin Development Partnership, Tin Projects in WesternTasmania

1985, TAHO, AC249/1/439, Creasy, M.G., Serpentine Ridge, Plan from Environmental ImpactAssessment, 1985

1989, MRT, Blanks, RF, Annual Report 1988-89, EL 24-85, Wilson River - Riley Knob, WesternTasmania, 1989, MRT Report 89-3044, p.13

1989, MRT, Davis, N, Annual Report 1/12/86-1/12/87 Wilson River EL 24/85, Figure 3 Location ofPrevious Workings, MRT Report 87-2744

2010-12, Google Earth Image, ©2010 Google, © 2012 Cnes/Spot Image, © 2012 Whereis® Sensis PtyLtd

u.d., MRT, West Coast Mineral Fields Plan 215

6.2.3 Personal Communications

Haygarth, N, pers. comm., 24 February 2012

Radonjic, A, pers. comm., 1 March 2012


6 August 2012124

APPENDIX 1: AUSTRALIAN HERITAGE COUNCIL TARKINE AREA


6 August 2012125

APPENDIX 2: HISTORIC PLANS

Undated, West Coast Mineral Fields Plan 215, Plan obtained from Mineral Resources Tasmania.


6 August 2012126

1914, Plate II: Geological Sketch Map of the Stanley River District, from Waterhouse, LL, The Stanley River Tin Field. Geological Survey Bulletin No. 15,Department of Mines: Hobart, 1914, MRT Report: GSB15. Plan obtained from Mineral Resources Tasmania.


6 August 2012127

1921, TAHO, Reid, A.M, Osmiridium in Tasmania. Geological Survey Bulletin No. 32, Department of Mines: Hobart, 1921, Plate IX: ‘Geological Sketch Map ofWilson River District’, reproduced with permission.


6 August 2012128

1963, Aberfoyle Tin Development Partnership, ‘Tin Projects in Western Tasmania’, in Morton, JL, ProgressReport No. 8 of Mt. Lindsay Tin Prospect, Zeehan, Tasmania, 11 October 1963, MRT Report: TCR_0361. Plan

obtained from Mineral Resources Tasmania.


6 August 2012129

1984, North West Forests, Run 36, 9/12/84, 1017-060 M486, image reproduced courtesy of TASMAP, © Stateof Tasmania.


6 August 2012130

1985, TAHO, AC249/1/439, 4/813, Creasey [sic] M.G., Serpentine Ridge: Plan from Environmental ImpactAssessment, 1985. Reproduced with Permission.


6 August 2012131

1987 plan showing old alluvial workings, or ‘pits’ identified by Callina N.L. (Davis, N, Annual Report 1/12/86-1/12/87 Wilson River EL 24/85, Figure 3 Location ofPrevious Workings, MRT Report 87-2744, plan obtained from Mineral Resources Tasmania.


6 August 2012132

c.1989, Aerial photograph contained in 1989 Callina Report showing testing areas A and C. Compare theselocations with Figure 23 (Blanks, RF, Annual Report 1988-89, EL 24-85, Wilson River - Riley Knob, Western Tasmania,

1989, MRT Report 89-3044, p.13, Photograph obtained from Mineral Resources Tasmania)


6 August 2012133

APPENDIX 3: PROTOCOL FOR MANAGING NEWLYDISCOVERED SITES

Introduction & PurposeGiven the level of historic mining activity, it is highly likely that new historic sites will be found thathave not been documented in this report. This is particularly the case with areas that are currentlyheavily vegetated or covered in dense humus which may obscure evidence of historic mining orassociated activity.

The purpose of this protocol is to provide guidance to Venture Minerals on the identification andmanagement of sites of potential heritage significance discovered during development. It is likely thatthe types of sites that may be discovered will be consistent with features already documented in thisreport, for example, alluvial ground works consisting of trenches, mullock heaps, testing sites, waterchannels and drains, or evidence of worked creeks, such as small mullock lining the creek banks.Given the consistency in historic land use and period of occupation, it is also likely that newlydiscovered sites will have similar characteristics and values to those features that have already beendocumented.

Whilst no sites of historic occupation (e.g., hut or camp sites, refuse deposits) were found during thefield survey, this should not be interpreted as evidence that such sites no longer exist within the studyarea and caution should be applied when managing such potential sites.

It is also highly likely that historic heritage sites or features will exist outside of the study areaboundaries. The historical overview strongly suggests that all creeks within the lease area werehistorically worked for osmiridium. Where activity is proposed beyond the existing study area, furtherassessments may be warranted.

The basic management measure is for the site or feature to be recorded, prior to being impacted.Documentation of such discoveries should be lodged with Mineral Resources Tasmania, to ensure thata permanent and evolving site record is maintained.

Most sites can be adequately recorded by Venture Minerals, without the need for engaging heritageadvice. The exception to this is dealing with particularly important or complex sites, such as sites offormer occupation or abandoned mining equipment. In such cases, heritage advice may be warranted.Where doubt exists, further advice should be sought.

External StandardsThere are two key standards that should be considered when new historic sites are identified. The firstare Heritage Tasmania’s Pre-Development Assessment Guidelines, Proactively managing historicheritage. These Guidelines provide general advice applicable to all developments. With regard to newdiscoveries, the Guidelines state that:

During the development phase previously unknown or unlisted heritage sites may be discovered orunearthed. It is recommended that proactive planning ensures a clear protocol for handling suchcircumstances is developed and communicated to those individuals and groups responsible for itsmanagement.

Any [sic] such a protocol should include:

• ceasing all construction activities within 100 metres of the place immediately;

• arranging for a qualified specialist to assess the place’s significance and determine appropriateactions;

• notifying Heritage Tasmania of the find and the proposed course of action; and

• seeking guidance on the measures or steps that should be taken.178

Mineral Resources Tasmania has also issued a set of internal Guidelines.179 These Guidelines are ofparticular relevance to the Riley area as they address matters related to re-opening of a previously

178 Heritage Tasmania, November 2009, Pre-development assessment guidelines, p.2


6 August 2012134

worked mining area. The Guidelines also provide a broader understanding of the relative value ofparticular types of mining sites, and also specific recording requirements. The general recordingrequirements established by the Guidelines are:

The physical evidence should be recorded by measurement, sketch and photography, and shouldinclude:-

(1) accurate location of sites and features;

(2) a detailed description of components of a site, and how it was worked. (what was mined orprocessed? How i.e. underground, open cut, underhand stopping etc.? Who did the work? When?Where on site was the mining, the processing, the tailings disposal etc?);

(3) a statement on the condition of site (i.e. whether the operation of the site can be understood fromthe remaining features).

Ideally the recording should be done by persons with training or expertise in this type of work, and therecords should be lodged with Mineral Resources Tasmania.180

These Guidelines will be useful in determining what type of recording is warranted for particular typesof sites, and whether further management is required. The Guidelines are attached at the end of thisprotocol.

Identifying and Recording the SiteIndividuals who work on the mining lease are likely to be best placed to identify and interpret sites ofhistoric mining activity. As noted above, ideally a site should be recorded by someone trained or withexpertise in this type of work. These skills can be gained through training and experience.

To assist with this recording process, a pro forma data sheet has been prepared, which requiresstandard information to be inserted. The most crucial aspect of the data sheet is the description of theplace - its location and characteristics. It is the description that will be form the enduring record, priorto the site being disturbed.

The following provides a data sheet pro forma to be used for site recording. The pro forma includesbasic guidance for completing each field.

179 Bacon, C.A, Tasmanian Geological Survey Record 1996/02. Mining Heritage Guidelines for use by MRT Staff: Re-opening,re-working or exploring a previously worked deposit, 26 February 1996180 Ibid, p.1


6 August 2012135

1.SequentialSiteNumber

NAME OF SITEname of identified site, e.g., trench, water race, mullock heap

Date: Date/s of RecordingGrid Coordinates (GDA94 ): The eastings and northings of the site. Coordinates should be

recorded in GDA94 datum. Single coordinate points can be taken forsmall, or discrete features. Multiple coordinates should be taken forlinear or complex features.

Site Photographs

Site photographs. Include annotatedphotographs of site and its key

components.

Location Map

A map should be prepared which accurately locates the site andfeatures from its grid coordinates. With complex sites consisting of

multiple components, the map should be annotated, or a sketch planprepared.

Description:

The MRT Guidelines provide that this should be a detailed descriptionof components of a site, and how it was worked. (what was mined orprocessed? How i.e. underground, open cut, underhand stopping etc.?Who did the work? When? Where on site was the mining, theprocessing, the tailings disposal etc?).

This should include a written description stating:

• What is the site: e.g., a mullock heap, an extraction pond, a shaft,an adit, a trench, a water race, a piece of mining equipment, oran unknown site.

• What are its characteristics: How large is the feature? What areits dimensions? What is it made/consist of (refer to MRTGuidelines for site specific requirements)?

What is its setting: cleared/open area? vegetated area? Swampy lowarea? Hill/mountain slope?

Site Condition:

• Can the type of site be determined or easily interpreted? Forexample, is it a well preserved section of piping or water race? Isit an intact shaft or adit?

• Has the site been previously impacted? For example, has theshaft/adit collapsed? Is the piping seriously degraded? Haveroad/mining works impacted the site?

Site History (where available):

• A site history often provides the important context to the feature -who and when developed the site? What for?

• A brief site history will usually suffice, which attempts to answerbasic questions of who, what, when and why.

• Reference should first be made to the historical material collatedin the ‘Riley Creek, Tullah Historic Heritage Assessment Report’(Austral Tasmania)’, which contains information about thedevelopment of the various parts of the study area, and a series ofhistoric maps.

• With more complex, significant sites, the services of aprofessional historian may be required.

Site Management:


6 August 2012136

• Can impacts to the site be avoided? Does the site need to beprotected during works (e.g. fencing).

• Where sites can be avoided, their details should be included inapplicable Environmental Management Plans.

• Where sites cannot be avoided, is any further managementrequired?


6 August 2012137

Managing Particularly Important of Complex SitesWhilst most sites can be effectively identified and recorded by the leaseholder, heritage advice will berequired when dealing with abandoned machinery or equipment and sites of former occupation.These types of sites can be particularly important as they tell us how the site was mined, or how theminers may have lived. As osmiridium mining was largely undertaken by individuals on small claims,evidence of past occupation may be particularly significant. As abandoned equipment belongs to theCrown, prior approval from Mineral Resources Tasmania will be required before such sites areimpacted.

Where such features are identified during development, further works should cease and the siteshould be avoided and clearly identified as a works exclusion zone until it has been assessed andmanagement strategies put in place.

Although there was some built development on the Wilson River field, it is more than likely that mostminers lived in tents or rough huts, moving on once the osmiridium was exhausted on their claim. It ismore than likely that evidence of former hut or camp sites and the people who lived in them continueto exist. Again, impacts to such sites should be avoided until properly assessed.

Sometimes evidence of these places will be clear and unmistakeable. Other times, the evidence will bemore subtle and difficult to interpret. Features to be aware of include:

Building platforms: often a square/rectangular cleared area, sometimes with footings still inplace;

Chimney structures or hearths. Chimneys and hearths were often well built and sometimeswill be quite easy to identify. In the study area, these are likely to have been made from locallycollected stones, timber or from corrugated iron;

Refuse deposits. Rubbish is likely to have been deposited close by a former occupation siteand is often the most obvious sign that people previously lived in the area. Things to look outfor include broken or intact bottles; ceramics, tins or canisters; or personal items such asboots. Refuse deposits can be particularly important for showing how people used to live on amining site - what they ate and drank, how they looked after themselves, and theirentertainment. Bottles and other items should not be removed until they have been properlyassessed.


6 August 2012138

Tasmanian Geological Survey Record 1996/02. Mining HeritageGuidelines


6 August 2012139


6 August 2012140


6 August 2012141


6 August 2012142


6 August 2012143


6 August 2012144


6 August 2012145

riley, tullah historic heritage assessment minerals... · riley, tullah historic heritage...

Documents