Mt Warning - NPWS leave some questions unanswered
I have been having some difficulty obtaining answers to simple questions about Mt Warning from the seat warmers at NPWS. If anyone can cut and paste the following and mail them to NSW Minister for Environment James Griffin it would be greatly appreciated (email: office@griffin.minister.nsw.gov.au ).
Dear Kane,
Thanks for your email. I have outlined some comments and associated follow-up questions below. In your reply can you please address and quote the numbered questions?
1. The nomination of Mount Warning as an Aboriginal Place in 2014 included the statement that there were "at least eight separate stories about the mountain and its cultural meaning. Each story is equally valid; with no one story taking precedence."
Given that some of the indigenous stories allow for public access to the summit how will the NPWS provide for continued public access to the summit, or will NPWS ignore the directions imposed on the listing?
You indicate that all NPWS consultations with Indigenous representatives have been through the WCG, and that this group was formed by Bundjalung Tribal Elders.
2. How has NPWS confirmed Bundjalung are the correct Indigenous group to discuss and negotiate Aboriginal interests at Mt Warning? Presumably, NPWS would be aware of the views of Githabal elder Harry Boyd and Wijabul elder Fletcher Roberts who have contested Bundjalung claims at Mt Warning.
In her book White Beech Germaine Greer provides the following quote from Harry Boyd:
"On August 31 2009 Ngarakwal/Githabul activists made a submission to the Tweed Shire Council protesting against the perpetuation of the Bundjalung myth, the misuse of information from Indigenous elders and the lie of the dual identity of Mount Warning. According to Githabul elder Harry Boyd, Mount Warning is not Wollumbin the cloud-catcher and has nothing to do with any warrior king. The whole caldera is Wulambiny Momoli or 'scrub turkey nest', a `djurebil' or increase site where hunting is forbidden so that Brush-turkeys may replenish their numbers. He and his supporters denounced the ‘Bundjalung nation' as a white fiction. 'There is no Bundjalung nation, tribe, people, language, culture, clan, nor horde, No Bundjalung anything.'
It was my turn to visit Ann in Melbourne, where I gave her a progress report.
‘The Ngarakwal, Tindale's Arakwal, now say that the real Bundjalung are the Clarence River people; they also say that the Tweed Bundjalung are well aware that they are descendants of Islanders, and not Aboriginal at all.’"
In 2000 Wijabul Fletcher Roberts issued a press release that read as follows in full:
"Cultural boundaries, responsibilities have been ignored in Mt Warning issue, Elder says.
Wijabul elder Fletcher Roberts has criticised moves by a section of the Aboriginal community to claim that Mt Warning is a sacred site and to prevent people from climbing the mountain.
"They have had walking tracks up the mountain for decades, but no one has tried to stop people from climbing it before," Mr Roberts said.
"This claim is a modern day invention.
"This claim is being perpetuated by someone who is overstepping his cultural responsibilities and he will have to face the consequences of Aboriginal lore for what he is doing.
"Claims are being made that this knowledge came from the very elder who raised me and gave me my own knowledge but he never told me not to go to Mt Warning.
"The people who are stepping into this from outside these boundaries will have to face the cultural consequences.
"They should remember the boundaries of their own clan area and the cultural lore.
"These people should be mindful of the destruction they are causing to true Aboriginal culture.
"The white community needs to wise up to the Aboriginal sectors that try to use their lack of understanding of Aboriginal culture for their own purposes.
"The white community needs to make sure it identifies the true elders of an area.
"They should realise that elders' responsibilities apply to their own tribal areas and they have no jurisdiction over another area.
"It is not unusual for clans to have disputes over boundaries and this still happens today as it did in the past... but for people from Mullabugilmah (near Grafton) to claim that they have some jurisdiction over Mt Warning id too far a stretch of the imagination.
"If they still believe in the culture they should stick to their own areas.
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE signed F Roberts January 4, 2000."
3. In light of the statements by Mr Boyd and Roberts can you please describe why NPWS believe Bundjalung have a claim on the mountain?
3a.Why have NPWS ignored and not spoken to other claimants?
3b. Have NPWS spoken to Aboriginal groups outside the WCG and if not why not?
The Aboriginal mythology represented by Millie Boyd about Mount Warning and recorded by NPWS anthropologist Harry Creamer is not referenced in any NPWS management plans, including it seems your Aboriginal Place Management Plans.
4. Can you confirm NPWS are party to what effectively amounts to cultural genocide in not referencing Millie Boyd's well documented mythology about Mount Warning? 3a. Why has this mythology been ignored despite it being recorded by NPWS own Anthropologist?
You suggest Aboriginal Groups have long called for the closure of Mount Warning to the public. The view appears to have originated relatively recently in the late 1990s with the emergence of the Bundjalung as the dominant Aboriginal group in the area. In his many interviews with Aboriginal elders in the 1970s and 80s your own Anthropologist Harry Creamer has stated the walk up Mt Warning was never mentioned as an issue. As recently as 2007 Mt Warning custodian Marlene Boyd stated: "I do not oppose the public climbing of Mt Warning - how can the public experience the spiritual significance of this land if they do not climb the summit and witness creation!"
Any management should reference all Indigenous views not just those of one particular group, this follows on the NPWS management Act.
5. Why hasn't NPWS given equal prominence to the views of Marlene Boyd, and included the mythology as expoused by her Mother Millie in evaluating Aboriginal interests on the mountain.and developing management plans for the park?
6. In relying on the claims of one Indigenous group with contested claims on the mountain and ignoring the claims of the true custodians can you explain how NPWS have acted in accordance with its management Act?
7. Given the park is closed how does NPWS or the Wollumbin Consultative Group propose to compensate local businesses that will be severely impacted by the closure. These businesses have been completely ignored by NPWS in formulating it's management plans for the park?
8. Given the park is closed to the public does NPWS propose to maintain access to the summit for Aboriginal cultural purposes?
8a. Which organisation would cover the costs of maintenance?
9. Given the future of the park remains undecided and the walk may be reopened has NPWS obtained an Aboriginal Heritage Impact Permit (AHIP) for work required to restore the track and maintain the lookouts?
Comments
Post a Comment