DRAFT
ACT Eastern Broadacre Planning Study
Cultural Heritage Component
Desktop Study
October 2007
Navin Officer heritage consultants Pty Ltd acn: 092 901 605
Number 4 Kingston Warehouse 71 Leichhardt St. Kingston ACT 2604
ph 02 6282 9415 A Report to MacroPlan Australia fx 02 6282 9416 DRAFT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
In accordance with the Canberra Spatial Plan (2004), the purpose of the broad study is to evaluate the suitability of the Eastern Broadacre area for employment generating development and to determine a future role and function for the area, taking into account the regional context. The Eastern Broadacre area is located on the eastern edge of the ACT, between Civic and the Kowen Plateau.
A Land Capability Assessment of the study area is to be undertaken concurrently with an economic assessment. As part of that assessment, this report provides a ‘desk-top’ assessment of Indigenous and Non-Indigenous heritage significance within the Eastern Broadacre area. It also includes similar assessments for a number of natural, geological/geomorphological and palaeontological sites in the study area.
Findings
This desktop study identified a total of 333 registered, recorded and known indigenous, historic and other heritage sites within the study area. These consist of 194 indigenous sites, 127 historic sites, seven natural areas, four geological/geomorphological sites and one palaeontological site.
Locations
Indigenous sites occur in a linear manner at the immediate east and west sides of the northern section of Majura Road, and a number of small clusters occur adjacent to Fairbairn Pine Forest, between the Molonglo River and Canberra Avenue in the east, along Jerrabomberra Creek towards the south, and to the west of the Monaro Highway in the south of the study area.
Historic sites appear to be scattered across the study area with concentrations occurring along Woolshed Creek in the north; at the junction of Fairbairn Avenue, Majura Road and Pialligo Avenue to the west; to the northwest of Fairbairn Pine Forest; and to the west of the Monaro Highway in the south of the study area.
Natural areas encompass large tracts of land in the Majura Valley, Jerrabomberra, Pialligo, and Symonston. Geological and geomorphological sites occur on Woolshed Creek, Northcott Drive and Fyshwick, and a single palaeontological site is in the south of the study area.
Heritage Significance
Indigenous sites comprise 11 highly (or moderate to high) significant places, 146 with lesser significance and 37 where the significance is unassessed or unknown.
Historic sites comprise 19 listed on various heritage registers, 21 with high (or moderate to high) significance, 55 with lesser significance, 18 with no significance and 14 where the significance is unassessed or unknown.
All of the seven natural areas are either listed on or nominated to a heritage register. Of the four geological/geomorphological sites one is listed on a heritage register, two have high or moderate to high heritage significance and the fourth has local significance. The heritage significance of the single palaeontological site in the south of the study area is considered to be high.
Recommendations
It is recommended that development planning within the Eastern Broadacre study area for:
Indigenous sites
• Should highlight those sites that have been identified as having either high or moderate to high heritage significance as being areas that are to be protected and where development should be avoided; DRAFT
• Should emphasise the need to develop management strategies (including mitigation measures as necessary), in consultation with the ACT Registered Aboriginal Organisations, for those sites that have been identified as having moderate, low to moderate, low, and very low heritage significance;
• Should note the requirement for an assessment, in consultation with the ACT Registered Aboriginal Organisations, of those sites for which the heritage significance is either unassessed or unknown; and
• Should identify the need for a comprehensive field survey program to be undertaken, in consultation with the ACT Registered Aboriginal Organisations, within those sections of the Eastern Broadacre Planning area that have not previously been surveyed.
Historic sites
• Should highlight those sites that have been heritage listed as being areas that are to be protected and where development should be avoided;
• Should emphasise the need to develop management strategies (if not already available) for those sites that have been identified as having high, moderate to high, moderate, low to moderate and low heritage significance;
• Should note the requirement for an assessment of those sites that are potentially significant or for which the heritage significance is either unassessed or unknown; and
• Should identify the need for a comprehensive field survey program to be undertaken within those sections of the Eastern Broadacre Planning area that have not previously been surveyed.
Natural areas
• Should highlight those sites that have been heritage listed as being areas that are to be protected and where development should be avoided; and
• Should identify the need for a comprehensive field survey program to be undertaken within those sections of the Eastern Broadacre Planning area that have not previously been surveyed.
Geological and geomorphological sites
• Should highlight the site that has been heritage listed as being an area that is to be protected and where development should be avoided;
• Should emphasise the need to develop management strategies (if not already available) for those sites that have been identified as having high, moderate to high, and local heritage significance; and
• Should identify the need for a comprehensive field survey program to be undertaken within those sections of the Eastern Broadacre Planning area that have not previously been surveyed.
Palaeontological site
• Should highlight the site as an area that is to be protected and where development should be avoided.
~ o0o ~ DRAFT TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. INTRODUCTION...... 1
1.1 REPORT OUTLINE...... 1 1.2 STUDY METHODOLOGY...... 1 1.3 PROJECT PERSONNEL ...... 1 2. ENVIRONMENTAL CONTEXT...... 3
2.1 THE MAJURA VALLEY ...... 3 2.2 THE JERRABOMBERRA VALLEY ...... 3 2.3 SOIL-LANDSCAPE UNITS WITHIN THE STUDY AREA ...... 3 2.4 EXISTING LAND USE DISTURBANCE ...... 4 3. ABORIGINAL CONTEXT ...... 6
3.1 ETHNOHISTORY...... 6 3.2 REGIONAL ARCHAEOLOGY OVERVIEW ...... 6 3.3 ACT DISTRICT OF MAJURA ...... 7 3.4 ACT DISTRICT OF JERRABOMBERRA ...... 11 3.5 RECORDED ABORIGINAL SITES ...... 13 3.6 PREDICTIVE ABORIGINAL ARCHAEOLOGY STATEMENT...... 13 4. HISTORICAL CONTEXT ...... 14
4.1 OUTLINE OF EUROPEAN NINETEENTH-CENTURY LAND SETTLEMENT...... 14 4.2 ACT DISTRICT OF MAJURA ...... 14 4.3 ACT DISTRICT OF JERRABOMBERRA ...... 15 4.4 PREVIOUS CULTURAL HERITAGE STUDIES ...... 16 4.5 LISTED HERITAGE ITEMS...... 18 4.6 PREDICTIVE HISTORICAL ARCHAEOLOGY STATEMENT ...... 19 5. STATUTORY OBLIGATIONS ...... 20
5.1 ACT HERITAGE ACT 2004...... 20 5.2 ENVIRONMENT AND HERITAGE LEGISLATION AMENDMENT ACT (NO 1) 2003 ...... 22 5.3 ENVIRONMENT PROTECTION & BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION ACT 1999...... 23 5.4 THE NATIONAL TRUST (ACT)...... 24 6. MANAGEMENT CONSIDERATIONS ...... 25
6.1 OVERVIEW ...... 25 6.2 LOCATIONS OF SITE TYPES...... 25 6.3 HERITAGE SIGNIFICANCE RANKINGS OF SITE TYPES ...... 26 7. RECOMMENDATIONS...... 28
8. REFERENCES...... 30
APPENDIX 1 SITE INVENTORY – LOCATION LISTING...... 34
APPENDIX 2 SITE INVENTORY - HERITAGE SIGNIFICANCE RANKING ...... 111
DRAFT 1. INTRODUCTION
The Eastern Broadacre area is located on the eastern edge of the ACT, between Civic and the Kowen Plateau (Figure 1.1). The area is in close proximity to the NSW border, together with key infrastructure including the Majura and Monaro Highways, the Canberra International Airport and industrial areas at Symonston, Hume and Fyshwick.
The area comprises the Majura-Symonston corridor that is identified in the Canberra Spatial Plan (ACT Government 2004) as a future ‘employment corridor’. The corridor is a substantial area of land that will be of considerable importance to the future economic development of the city. Under the National Capital Plan (1990) and the Territory Plan (2002) the majority of the study area is under Broadacre Area Land Use Policy, providing a land bank for future urban areas. A Broadacre policy provides for uses which require large land areas or a non-urban setting.
In accordance with the Canberra Spatial Plan (2004), the purpose of the broad study is to evaluate the suitability of the eastern Broadacre area for employment generating development and to determine a future role and function for the area, taking into account the regional context.
A Land Capability Assessment of the study area is to be undertaken concurrently with an economic assessment, ensuring a close relationship between the two. The Land Capability Assessment involves an assessment of existing environmental conditions to identify opportunities and constraints pertinent to the development of the study area. The assessment is to be a predominantly ‘desk top’ exercise.
As part of that Land Capability Assessment, this report provides an assessment of Indigenous and Non-Indigenous heritage significance within the study area. It also includes similar assessments for a number of natural, geological/geomorphological and palaeontological sites in the study area.
1.1 Report Outline
This report provides: a methodology for the desktop study; an environmental, Aboriginal and historical context for the study area; a summary of relevant statutory obligations; management considerations; recommendations; and a complete site inventory of registered, recorded and known heritage sites within the study area. The latter is presented both by location and indicative heritage significance ranking. The report does not provide mapping of any of the sites.
1.2 Study Methodology
This desktop study derived information from a range of sources, including from information held by the Heritage Unit of the ACT Department of Territories and Municipal Services, the Australian Heritage Database, the National Trust of Australia (ACT), published books and monographs, unpublished reports and other material relevant to the study area.
1.3 Project Personnel
Nicola Hayes undertook background research for the project and compiled this report.
ACT Eastern Broadacre Planning Study - Cultural Heritage Desktop Review 1 Navin Officer Heritage Consultants October 2007 DRAFT
Figure 1.1 The Eastern Broadacre Study Area (courtesy ACT Planning and Land Authority).
ACT Eastern Broadacre Planning Study - Cultural Heritage Desktop Review 2 Navin Officer Heritage Consultants October 2007 DRAFT 2. ENVIRONMENTAL CONTEXT
2.1 The Majura Valley
This section of the study area comprises a large proportion of the Majura Valley, a still predominantly rural valley situated along the eastern margin of North Canberra. It consists predominantly of the valley slopes and open valley floor topographies of the Woolshed Creek Valley. This catchment is often described locally as the Majura Valley, after the dispersed settlement which developed here towards the end of the nineteenth century. The valley is north-south aligned, extending from the Molonglo River in the south, to the upper catchment of McLaughlins Creek in the north, a linear distance of approximately 11 km. The valley floor provides a locally important access route with low gradients and a mostly permanently watered open environment. The far southeastern corner of the study area falls outside of the Woolshed Creek catchment and includes the upper catchments of two unnamed tributaries on the Dundee property which drain directly into the Molonglo River.
The Majura valley is defined by hills and ranges to the east and west. The western watershed follows the Mt Ainslie - Mt Majura and Gooroo Hill range. The eastern watershed occurs within the hills and ranges associated with the Sullivans Fault Line and are predominantly located in the Majura Military Training Area. The study area extends along the majority of the length of the catchment of Woolshed Creek, which drains consistently southward into the Molonglo River.
The general topography of the valley floor is characterised by low-lying alluvial flats and low gradient slopes and low relief spurlines interspersed by minor drainage lines, gullies and soaks. Discussions with local landholders indicated that the incidence of surface water soaks and springs, particularly from basal and toe slope contexts were more numerous in the past, particularly within the top half of the valley. Some of these areas would have formed low-lying boggy and wetland areas (now drained), and others small springs and soaks. Locally important water bores and pumps are now situated in the locations of former soaks. The basal valley slopes form a relatively narrow margin between the valley floor and the mid and upper valley slopes. Low to moderately graded spurline crests and slopes characterise the basal slopes, with an increasing incidence of bedrock exposures with altitude. Middle and upper valley slope contexts occur within the study area where the boundary extends to the water catchment. These areas occur in the northwestern and southeastern corners of the study area. Gradients tend to be steep with prominent spurlines and secondary ridges occurring only rarely.
2.2 The Jerrabomberra Valley
This section of the study area comprises a large proportion of the Jerrabomberra Valley situated along the eastern margin of South Canberra. Although this area contains large tracts of open rural valley it contains the industrial and commercial suburbs of Fyshwick, Hume and Symonston along with small agricultural holdings in Pialligo. The Jerrabomberra Wetlands also forms part of this section of the study area.
The Jerrabomberra Valley contains significant grassland areas recognised under Action Plan No 1 ‘Natural Temperate Grasslands: An Endangered Ecological Community’ and significant woodland areas recognised under Action Plan No 10 ‘Yellow Box/Red Gum Grassy Woodland: An Endangered Ecological Community’. The area also contains a number of other woodland communities that are recognised as having a high significance.
Jerrabomberra also provides significant habitats (in terms of both area and abundance) for the endangered and vulnerable species of the Golden Sun Moth, Grassland Earless Dragon, Button Wrinklewort, Small Purple Pea, Striped Legless Lizard, and the Perunga Grasshopper. There are also a number of bird species associated with the Yellow Box/Red Gum Grassy Woodland community.
2.3 Soil-Landscape units within the study area
Five soil-landscape categories occur within the survey corridor, the Florey, Umburra, Turner, Russell and Wanniassa typologies (Sleeman and Walker 1979).
ACT Eastern Broadacre Planning Study - Cultural Heritage Desktop Review 3 Navin Officer Heritage Consultants October 2007 DRAFT
The Wanniassa landform is the dominant category within the ACT (52.8%) and consists of rolling terrain, generally on basal and mid valley slope contexts. Dominant soil types are red earths, and red and yellow podsolics, with minor instances of lithosols, shallow earths and soloths. Approximately 33% of the study area falls within the Wanniassa landform unit. These areas occur at: the northern end and northeastern margin of the study area, northeast of Avonley and north of the Willows; and at the southeastern end along the basal valley slopes of the Malcolm Vale and Dundee properties. The geology of these areas is dominated by volcanic rocks on the slopes, and small areas of sedimentary rocks and alluvium on the valley floor. On the eastern valley slopes volcanic rocks occur that belong to the Gladefield Volcanics including acid lavas, tuff, ashstone and interbedded shale. Low spurlines and rises on the valley floor include rocks from the Fairbairn Group and Mt Ainslie porphyry including shale, limestone, sandstone, tuff, porphyry and altered acid lavas. The western slopes are dominated by the Ainslie Volcanics including rhyolite, dacite, tuff, quartz and porphyry.
The Turner landform comprises only 2.0% of the ACT and occurs in valley bottom contexts in a limited number of ACT valleys. Dominant soil types are red podsolic, yellow earths, and yellow podsolic, with minor instances of solodics and humic gley. Approximately 20% of the study area falls within the Turner landform unit. This land unit occupies the alluvial flats and low gradient slopes of the valley floor, south of the AFP training course and west of the airport. The geology of this area consists of Quaternary sediments within alluvial and basal slope contexts, and small areas of bedrock forming locally elevated but low gradient spurlines. Bedrock consists of the Ainslie Volcanics.
The Russell landform comprises only 2.1% of the ACT and consists of terrain formed on fan slopes, generally in basal and mid valley slope contexts. Dominant soil types are massive earths, and red and yellow podsolics, with minor instances of solodics. Approximately 18% of the study area falls within the Russell landform unit. This area occupies most of the valley floor and basal slope margin situated to the west of Woolshed Creek and extending south of The Willows. The geology of these areas consists of Quaternary sediments laid down as alluvial and colluvial deposits. Bedrock, consisting of the Ainslie Volcanics, outcrops on the higher slopes and is the origin of much of the cobbles and gravels deposited on the lower slopes.
The Florey landform comprises 19.1% of the ACT and consists of terrain formed on gently sloping terrain, generally in valley floor and lower basal slope contexts. Dominant soil types are red earths, red and yellow podsolics, and soloths, with minor incidences of solodics and shallow earths. Approximately 16% of the study area falls within the Florey landform unit. This area is situated in the southeastern portion of the study area, including and east of the airport, and up to the basal valley slopes east of Malcolm Vale and Dundee. The geology of this area consists of Quaternary sediments on the valley floor and small areas of bedrock, comprising the Ainslie Volcanics, which form locally elevated but low gradient and broad spurlines.
The Umburra landform comprises 19.9% of the ACT and consists of terrain formed on ridgelines and steep sided slopes, in upper valley slope contexts. Dominant soil types are lithosols and shallow earths with minor incidences of shallow podsolics. Approximately 13% of the study area falls within the Umburra landform unit. This area occurs as a narrow and discontinuous margin along the northern and northwestern study area boundary, and at the southeastern end of the study area. The geology of these areas consists of the Gladefield Volcanics on the eastern slopes and the Fairbairn Group and Mt Ainslie porphyry on the western slopes.
2.4 Existing Land Use Disturbance
European land use has resulted in the widespread disturbance of the upper soil layers within the study area and probably also changes in the rate and character of erosion and sedimentation. The types of landscape disturbance which are evident within the study area include:
• Original clearance of much of the native tree cover and understorey;
• Superficial ripping and ploughing of topsoil for establishment and maintenance of pasture grasses or agricultural crops;
ACT Eastern Broadacre Planning Study - Cultural Heritage Desktop Review 4 Navin Officer Heritage Consultants October 2007 DRAFT
• Construction of farm dams, fences, and major and minor vehicular access tracks and roadways;
• Grazing of cattle and sheep, with associated animal tracks and surface disturbance;
• Rabbit activity and rabbit control measures such as warren ripping;
• Major earthworks associated with soil erosion control features, such as contour mounding, creekline realignments and gully filling, and major fluvial channel structures such as sediment traps, dams and weirs;
• The creation and maintenance of pine plantations, including such activities as native vegetation clearance, deep ripping of the soil profile and track and road construction;
• Major disturbance in the vicinity of the existing Majura Road corridor resulting from road construction - excavation and road cuttings, road culverts and associated altered drainage regime, gravel and soil dumps;
• Construction of major vehicular roads and public utility easements (for example, gas pipelines, communication cables, and power lines); and
• Major earthworks, including levelling, mounding, filling, cutting, pit and trench digging.
Changes in vegetation cover and grazing and agricultural practices will have had considerable impact on the upper soil profile throughout the study area. The removal of native vegetation in favour of grasslands and their subsequent use for grazing and agriculture would have promoted erosion and surface instability on the valley slopes and the sedimentation of the valley floor. Increased and higher rates of water runoff after rain would have changed the hydrology and sediment regime of the creeklines, promoting downcutting and incision.
This land use history will have significantly impacted the survival and integrity of the prehistoric archaeological record. It is probable that most surface scatters of artefacts which occur within the uppermost soil layers will have undergone varying degrees of horizontal and vertical disturbance, particularly from ploughing. However, unless impact has been wholesale, (such as in excavation, filling or recontouring) it is frequently possible to identify a remnant scatter of disturbed artefacts which mark such sites.
Site types which would be unlikely to survive these levels of disturbance include carved and scarred trees, stone arrangements and earth rings or bora grounds.
European occupation and agricultural sites are equally susceptible to disturbance or destruction as a result of such activities. House sites and associated deposits can be churned and scattered by ploughing and more ephemeral sites such as selectors and shepherds huts may be completely obliterated. Many sites, such as houses and other farm structures are partially of wholly destroyed as a result of past deliberate attempts at demolition through fire or bulldozing.
ACT Eastern Broadacre Planning Study - Cultural Heritage Desktop Review 5 Navin Officer Heritage Consultants October 2007 DRAFT 3. ABORIGINAL CONTEXT
3.1 Ethnohistory
Tribal boundaries within Australia are based largely on linguistic evidence and it is probable that boundaries, clan estates and band ranges were fluid and varied over time. Consequently 'tribal boundaries' as delineated today must be regarded as approximations only, and relative to the period of, or immediately before, European contact. Social interaction across these language boundaries appears to have been a common occurrence. A reconstruction of clan boundaries based on Tindale (1940) indicates that the south Canberra area was close to the tribal boundaries of the Ngunnawal and Walgalu people. Horton's (1999) map shows a Ngarigo tribe in the southern Canberra area.
There is some uncertainty as to which language was spoken by the Aborigines of Canberra. The Canberra area appears to have been close to the linguistic boundary between the Gundungurra and Ngunnawal languages. Eades (1976) notes that published grammars for these two languages (Mathews 1900, 1901, 1904) are virtually identical. However, according to Eades’ boundaries the Ngunnawal of Canberra probably spoke the Gundungurra language.
References to the traditional Aboriginal inhabitants of the Canberra region are rare and often difficult to interpret (Flood 1980, Huys 1993). The consistent impression however is one of rapid depopulation and a desperate disintegration of a traditional way of life over little more than fifty years from initial white contact (Officer 1989). The disappearance of the Aborigines from the tablelands was probably accelerated by the impact of European diseases which may have included the smallpox epidemic in 1830, influenza, and a severe measles epidemic by the 1860's (Flood 1980, Butlin 1983).
By the 1850's the traditional Aboriginal economy had largely been replaced by an economy based on European commodities and supply points. Reduced population, isolation from the most productive grasslands, and the destruction of traditional social networks meant that the final decades of the region's indigenous culture and economy was centred on white settlements and properties (Officer 1989).
By 1856 the local 'Canberra Tribe', presumably members of the Ngunnawal or Ngarigo, were reported to number around seventy (Schumack 1967) and by 1872 recorded as only five or six 'survivors' (Goulburn Herald 9 Nov 1872). In 1873 one 'pure blood' member remained, known to the white community as Nelly Hamilton or 'Queen Nellie'.
The assertion of local tribal ‘extinctions’ was made possible by the fact that, frequently, only 'pure blooded' individuals were considered 'Aboriginal' or 'tribal' by European observers. In reality, 'Koori' and tribal identity remained integral to the descendants of the nineteenth-century Koori people, some of whom continue to live in the Canberra-Queanbeyan-Yass region.
Based on the above overview, it is probable that Aboriginal scarred trees in the Canberra region would date to no later than the 1850s and 1860s. Tree scars with an Aboriginal origin would therefore have to be at least in the order of 140-150 years old.
Early accounts of Aboriginal lifestyles in and comparable with the study locality describe aspects of a successful hunting and gathering economy and eventful social life and inter-group contacts. The material culture, which is partly reflected in the surviving archaeological record, included stone and wooden artefacts, skin clothing and bark and bough temporary dwellings (Flood 1980, Huys 1993).
3.2 Regional Archaeology Overview
Stone artefact scatters are the most frequently occurring residue of prehistoric activity in the region. They may range considerably in size and density, factors that are often interpreted as an indication of intensity of the Aboriginal landuse. As well, they provide insight into stylistic and technological behaviours. Such scatters are representative of one or more stages in what is termed a 'reduction sequence'. That is, the entire process from obtaining the stone raw material, to manufacture of stone
ACT Eastern Broadacre Planning Study - Cultural Heritage Desktop Review 6 Navin Officer Heritage Consultants October 2007 DRAFT artefacts and to eventual discard or loss and incorporation into the archaeological record. Isolated finds are artefacts that occur without any apparently associated archaeological materials or deposit. Open scatters are defined as spatially concentrated occurrences of two or more flaked stone artefacts.
Broad distinctions may be made between sites formed as a result of general living and habitation activities and sites located in response to the fixed locations of specific resources. Occupation sites relating to the former activities are most commonly recognised by the discard of flaked stone materials in sedimentary deposits. Subsequent processes of erosion or landuse may deflate or section these sediments to reveal surficial or embedded (sometimes stratified) materials. Sites formed as a result of resource location may be recognised by a range of features including the proximity of discarded stone materials to source stone materials and characteristic extraction and use marks upon stone or wood materials, ie. quarries, hatchet grinding grooves and scarred trees.
The wider regional pattern of Aboriginal occupation site occurrence within the ACT is one of higher site size and frequency in areas proximate to major permanent creeklines with a reduction in site size and frequency around less permanent water sources. Whilst sites have been found to occur throughout topographic and vegetational zones, there is a tendency for more of the larger sites to be located in proximity to creeks, wetlands and proximate parts of valley floors. A trend for larger sites to be near major water sources, but avoiding frost drainage hollows, was noted at a regional level by Flood (1980). Elsewhere in the Canberra region high site and artefact frequencies have also been correlated with the geographic occurrence of specific resources particularly, stone procurement outcrop locations (Access Archaeology 1990; Heffernan and Klaver 1995; Kuskie 1992a & b; Walshe 1994a).
Scarred trees may be the result of Aboriginal uses of bark and/or wood materials. Various other activities, including the retrieval of honey and other foodstuffs may also result in distinctive 'toe hold' and extractive scars. Scarred trees are sparsely documented in the wider Canberra region where suitable mature woodland has been retained (Officer 1992). The identification of scars as Aboriginal in origin is problematic for a number of reasons. A variety of natural processes such as fire damage, lightning strike and branch tears may mimic the scars formed by Aboriginal bark removal. In addition, bark was also a building material favoured by early European settlers, and there are instances where Aboriginal people were employed to strip bark for European buildings. The distinction between Aboriginal and historic scarred trees is therefore often difficult.
3.3 ACT District of Majura
A number of archaeological studies have been carried out within Majura. The majority of these have assessed the potential impact of developments such as the Australian Federal Police Driver Training Facility (Winston-Gregson 1985) and the ACT International Dragway (Navin Officer Heritage Consultants 2001b) or public utilities such as optic fibre cables (Barz 1985, 1986) and gas pipelines (Saunders 1995). A larger study was conducted in 1999 to identify places and areas of possible cultural heritage significance in those parts of the valley not already examined for cultural heritage values (Navin Officer Heritage Consultants 1999b) and for upgrading of Majura Road (Navin Officer Heritage Consultants 2002).
In addition to these professional studies, site recordings have also been conducted by both the Canberra and District Historical Society (C&DHS) and the Canberra Archaeological Society (CAS). As a consequence of this research a large number of both European and Aboriginal cultural heritage sites have been recorded in Majura Valley, the latter including isolated finds, open campsites and scarred trees.
Winston Gregson (1985) carried out an assessment of the then proposed AFP Driver Training Facility in Block 42. Two Aboriginal open campsites consisting of discrete scatters of quartz, silcrete and chert stone artefacts were identified in the course of the survey. The artefact types included blades, flakes, utilised cobbles and scrapers. At the time of recording, Winston-Gregson (1985:5) saw them being located within a possible passage, or “transport corridor” between the Lake George and Upper Yass River catchments. Winston-Gregson (1987) also carried out a similar survey in the area of the Gun Club lease on Block 13.
ACT Eastern Broadacre Planning Study - Cultural Heritage Desktop Review 7 Navin Officer Heritage Consultants October 2007 DRAFT
Barz (1985) carried out a study for Telecom Australia for a planned optic fibre cable (OFC) along the edge of the (then) proposed Majura Parkway. Sites recorded by Barz in the vicinity of Majura Road comprised OC5 (MV57), OC6 (MV69) and OC7 (MV59).
Site MV57 is located northeast of the new-constructed Majura Road/Federal Highway approach alignment. The site has been destroyed by roadworks in this location – the area has been excavated and filled as a result of the construction of a new road turn-off which provides access to the Gun Club and the northern remnant of Majura Road.
In 1986 Barz conducted a salvage project aimed at recovering Aboriginal artefacts along the proposed route of the OFC. Visible artefacts were collected from sites MV59 and MV69.
At the time of the original recording, site MV59 was identified as a small open artefact scatter covering an area 30 x 17 metres. Some disturbance was noted in 1985, as was the absence of ‘subsurface deposit’. MV59 was re-recorded in September 1998 in the context of the Woolshed Creek survey (see below).
Site MV69 (recorded as an isolated find in 1986) was re-recorded as an artefact scatter in September 1998 in the course of the Woolshed Creek survey (see below).
The Eastern Broadacre study area encompasses Pialligo, an area of considerable archaeological significance in the ACT. Thousands of stone artefacts have been recovered from sand bodies adjacent to the Molonglo River at Pialligo over the last three decades as the result of work carried out by the Canberra Archaeological Society and the Australian National University. During the course of thesis fieldwork at the Australian National University, Saunders (1989) collected four thousand artefacts from a market garden area within part of the source bordering dune complex. The artefacts at this location had been exposed largely as the result of repeated cultivation of the sandy deposits. Locations known to exhibit substantial quantities of artefacts include the old Pialligo sand quarry, the ACT Parks and Conservation Service nursery and adjoining cultivated areas to the west. Present records indicate that the known sites in the Pialligo area occur in two general clusters between the Molonglo River and Pialligo Avenue.
A archaeological survey was undertaken by the Canberra Archaeological Society of Honeysuckle Homestead in 1991 (Barber 1991). During the survey an artefact scatter and two isolated finds were located.
In 1992 Hogan carried out a study of the Avonley property located on Block 50. She considered the Avonley Woolshed as being a significant part of the Majura cultural and social landscape (Hogan 1992:28). The property was seen as retaining elements that are associated with the type of sheep and cattle properties that once dominated the Canberra Region.
No Aboriginal sites were recorded by Saunders (1995) when she carried out an investigation of a proposed gas pipeline between the Federal Highway and the proposed Majura Parkway.
AASC (1995) carried out a cultural resource survey of areas within the Kowen and Majura Valley districts to ascertain their suitability for a motor sports complex. A total of 31 artefacts in six sites were recorded during the study. The dominant raw material used to manufacture the artefacts was chert, with silcrete the second most common raw material.
Navin et al (1996) carried out a study for the proposed Federal Highway duplication from Stirling Avenue to Sutton Interchange that included a section of Majura Road easement. This section of road commenced at the Federal Highway and continued in a south-easterly direction for 1.3 km to the intersection of the existing Majura Road with an unnamed road that provided access to the top of Mount Majura. This part of Majura Road has been constructed as a component of the Federal Highway duplication.
As part of investigations for the proposed John Dedman Drive consideration was given to a number of ‘non John Dedman’ options (Officer 1997). Option ‘5’ involved the upgrading of Majura Road and Northcott Drive, including a new section of road crossing Woolshed Creek, linking Northcott Drive and Majura Road. The assessment of this option was primarily a desktop review and included only
ACT Eastern Broadacre Planning Study - Cultural Heritage Desktop Review 8 Navin Officer Heritage Consultants October 2007 DRAFT limited field assessment of the route. No ‘new’ sites were identified in the vicinity of Majura Road in the course of this review.
In 1998 AASC conducted a cultural heritage survey of the Army’s Field Firing Range at Majura, an area of approximately 39.5 km2. An estimated 15% of the study area was sampled by the survey, with survey transects biased toward existing ground exposures and riparian zones. Forty two Aboriginal sites, the majority of which were small scatters of stone artefacts, were recorded during the study. The largest scatter contained 30 artefacts. Five scarred trees were also recorded. It was noted that potential Aboriginal archaeological deposits, now obscured by alluvium, may exist along the flat floodplain of Reedy Creek and the main creek banks on the eastern plains.
In 1998 the ACT Heritage Unit commissioned Navin Officer Heritage Consultants (1999b) to undertake a project to identify places and areas of possible cultural heritage significance in those parts of the Majura Valley not already examined for cultural heritage values. The study was instigated as a result of the increasing pressure for infrastructure development in the Majura Valley and included an area of approximately 26 km2. The study area included most of Majura Road.
Archaeological survey conducted for the investigation resulted in 19 artefact scatters, 26 isolated finds, three scarred trees and one potential archaeological deposit being recorded. A total of 158 lithic artefacts including flakes, cores, lithic fragments, anvils, hammerstones and backed implements were identified in the surveys. The total inventory of Aboriginal site recordings in the Majura Valley at the conclusion of the study was eighty one, giving an overall site density of 1 site per 64 hectares, or 1 site or isolated find per 33 hectares.
An analysis of site location information found that there was a broad trend toward Aboriginal site location in valley floor and basal slope contexts. Within the small-scale landform categories, the most frequently recorded site contexts were: spurlines (41%), minor streamline margins (30%), major streamline margins (24%), terrace and alluvial flats (19%), basal slopes (17%), crests (14%), and mid slopes (12%). These frequencies indicated a preference for contexts that are locally elevated, have level ground, and are in close proximity (up to 100 m) to a water source. Riparian zones and mid valley to valley floor context spurline crests were considered to be the most archaeologically sensitive landforms within the valley.
Although the incidence of surface Aboriginal archaeological sites was found to be low within the Turner soil-landscape, it was considered probable that a significant and undetected archaeological resource may survive subsurface, particularly adjacent to and within 100 m of streamlines.
In the late 1990s the ACT Department of Urban Services commenced investigations into an appropriate alignment for the future construction of the Majura Parkway between the Federal Highway and Fairbairn Avenue, ACT. In 1998 several planning issues, including a Sydney to Canberra Very High Speed Train line, upgrading of the Canberra Airport, and road maintenance forecasts promoted the necessity to refine notional alignments into a preferred and defined road corridor.
Consequently in 1998 a route selection study was undertaken which aimed at defining a preferred Majura Valley Transport Corridor easement. As part of this project, an inventory of known cultural heritage sites in the area under consideration for the transport corridor was compiled (Navin Officer Heritage Consultants 1999a). The inventory comprised Stage One of the cultural heritage assessment component of a planning study for the Majura Valley Transport Corridor.
A detailed cultural heritage survey and assessment of a preferred Majura Valley Transport Corridor easement (Stage Two of the heritage assessment) was subsequently conducted in 1999 (Navin Officer Heritage Consultants 1999a). In the section of Majura Road which is south of the Woolshed Creek bridge the preferred transport corridor was located to the west of the Majura Road. North of the creek crossing the corridor essentially comprised the existing Majura Road easement.
A number of Aboriginal and historic sites were identified in, and in the near vicinity of, the transport corridor alignment. One previously unrecorded site, a small scatter of stone artefacts – MV157 – was located near Majura Road in the course of the surveys.
ACT Eastern Broadacre Planning Study - Cultural Heritage Desktop Review 9 Navin Officer Heritage Consultants October 2007 DRAFT
A desktop review and compilation of site data was conducted in 2001 which resulted in a site inventory for the Majura Valley Infrastructure Study (Navin Officer Heritage Consultants 2001c).
The existing Majura road was subject to heritage assessment for proposed upgrading as an interim measure before the Majura Parkway is constructed. The study did not find any new Aboriginal or historic sites but eight previously recorded sites were inspected (Navin Officer Heritage Consultants 2002).
Navin Officer Heritage Consultants (2006) conducted the cultural heritage assessment of the proposed Majura Parkway. Nineteen new Aboriginal sites, eleven of which were associated with Potential Archaeological Deposit (PAD), nine areas of Potential Archaeological Deposits with no surface artefacts and eighteen new historic sites were located during the survey.
Saunders (1999a) undertook a survey of the primary gas mains extension between Fyshwick and the ACT Border. No European or Aboriginal sites were located during this study however two areas of archaeological potential were identified in Fyshwick. Construction of the primary gas mains extension was monitored by members of the local Aboriginal community. During monitoring ten stone occurrences were identified. Saunders (2000) inspected the occurrences and identified three of them as being artefactual. Test pits were excavated at the first site, CPME-AS1, 105 artefacts were recovered from the surface of the site and seven artefacts were recovered form the two test pits excavated at the site. Eleven artefacts were recovered form the second site and ten artefacts were recovered from the third site.
Navin Officer Heritage Consultants (2001d) conducted the cultural heritage assessment for the Fairbairn Avenue upgrade. One Aboriginal site and four historic sites were located in the course of the field survey; this site is located outside of the current study area. The four historic sites consist of an early to mid twentieth century hard rock quarry (H1), a surveyor’s scar on an old-growth Yellow Box tree (H2), an avenue of pine trees of possible nineteenth century origin (H3), and the Duntroon RMC northern entrance ‘Gun Gates’ (H4). Site H3 is within the current study area.
No Aboriginal sites were located in the course of an archaeological survey of the Fairbairn RAAF Base, situated on the eastern margin of the Canberra Airport (Navin Officer Heritage Consultants 2001a). The absence of sites was found to be consistent with low site detection rates for other archaeological surveys conducted on the southern and downstream portion of the Majura Valley floor. It was noted that Navin Officer (1999b) had previously considered that this could be the result of higher alluvial sedimentation rates and the consequent burial of sites in these contexts. However, an alternative explanation was proposed, based on the evidence for a treeless grassland community occurring in this lower valley area prior to European settlement. This proposal presents the hypothesis that the treeless valley floor was not a preferred camping location due to the lack of shelter, and overnight cold temperatures. It was suggested that as a consequence, the lower valley floor represents a zone of low archaeological potential in which the evidence for Aboriginal campsites is rare.
This model has not yet been tested, and could only be assessed through a series of appropriately located subsurface testing programs.
A heritage assessment of the proposal to construct an International Dragway Facility on Block 52 on the eastern side of Majura Road was conducted in 2001 (Navin Officer Heritage Consultants 2001b). The study resulted in the identification of a number of heritage items including two possible zones of archaeological potential for subsurface Aboriginal sites associated with the fluvial corridor of Doughboy Creek, the former Majura Post Office and curtilage, and the site of W. Butt’s residence.
The Australian Federal Police proposed to redevelop and extend the existing driver training facility on Block 622. The subject area was approximately 199 ha in size and comprised alluvial flats and fringing basal slopes situated in the western fall and middle portion of the Woolshed Creek Valley. A cultural heritage survey of the area was conducted by Navin Officer Heritage Consultants (2003a). The survey located or re-located ten Aboriginal sites and a PAD. There were also six European sites within the study area.
ACT Eastern Broadacre Planning Study - Cultural Heritage Desktop Review 10 Navin Officer Heritage Consultants October 2007 DRAFT
The AFP proposed to impact site MV63, as a consequence of the redevelopment of their training facilities on Block 622. The site was to be directly impacted by road construction and adjacent development areas. A proposal to conduct of a salvage excavation at the site MV63 prior to the commencement of construction work was found to be consistent with the heritage guidelines recommended in the ACT Heritage Register. A proposed salvage methodology was approved by the NCA on the 28 July 2005.
The salvage excavation was conducted over the course of four days by Navin Officer Heritage Consultants (2005b). Thirteen backhoe pits were excavated and a total of 70 lithic items were salvaged, while an additional 14 items were collected from the surface of the site. All of the stone materials were common within sites in the northern part of the ACT. The nature of the cultural materials found during the testing indicated that there may have been several different activities undertaken at the site. It was concluded that site MV63 was likely to be less than 2,000 years old.
A services upgrade to the Majura Field Firing Range was undertaken in 2005. Upgrades involved the excavation of a 1.7 metre-wide trench to enable the installation of a 50 mm pipeline near the main access road to the Majura Field Firing Range. One section of this excavation impacted the northern corner of the Aboriginal heritage site MV121. A program of archaeological monitoring of the pipeline excavations within the site boundary was conducted in August 2005 (Navin Officer Heritage Consultants 2005c). The area within, and close to, the excavation footprint was inspected, and an isolated artefact was collected within the site boundary, close to the excavation site.
3.4 ACT District of Jerrabomberra
A number of archaeological investigations have been carried out in the in the Jerrabomberra District. Surveys have been conducted in the Jerrabomberra Creek Valley, Hume and Symonston.
In 1992 Winston Gregson surveyed creek flats and adjacent areas along a four kilometre section of Jerrabomberra Creek, locating three isolated finds in the course of the study (Access Archaeology 1992).
Navin (1993) undertook an archaeological investigation of nine parcels of land located around the perimeter of the light industrial area of Fyshwick. One Aboriginal site and four historic features were located during this study. A limited program of subsurface testing was also conducted. Testing involved excavating spade probes to a maximum area of 25cm. A total of 21 spade probes were excavated. No Aboriginal artefacts were located in the course of the subsurface testing program.
In 1994 Saunders undertook a preliminary cultural resource survey of Block 2099, Jerrabomberra. During the survey one Aboriginal site and an isolated find were located. These sites are now incorporated in the Canberra Abattoir sites (Navin and Officer 1994).
Navin and Officer (1994) conducted an archaeological survey for Aboriginal sites within the Canberra Abattoir site. Nine Aboriginal sites including seven artefact scatters and two isolated finds were located within the study area. Sites ranged from four artefacts to 100+. A limited program of subsurface testing was recommended.
Kuskie surveyed an area of about 10 ha of gentle slopes (section 22, block 6) in Hume in 1994. No Aboriginal sites were identified in the subject area.
In 1994 Walshe conducted a preliminary survey of the Hume Industrial Estate, which comprised a number of blocks totalling 30 ha on the Jerrabomberra Creek floodplain. No sites were located in the course of the survey (Walshe 1994b).
During the survey for the proposed extension of the Mugga Mugga Quarry, Sullivan (1996) located three isolated artefacts.
Avery (1997) located one possible Aboriginal scarred tree during a survey of 27.5 ha of gentle slopes with a west and northwest aspect in Hume.
ACT Eastern Broadacre Planning Study - Cultural Heritage Desktop Review 11 Navin Officer Heritage Consultants October 2007 DRAFT
In 1997 Klaver prepared a Preliminary Statement for the (then) proposed Jerrabomberra Aquatic Facility located at Hume. The subject area was approximately 200 ha and covered land east and west of Jerrabomberra Creek. Ten aboriginal sites were located during the field survey. The sites comprised six isolated finds, three artefact scatters and a possible extraction (quarry) site (Navin Officer 1997).
Saunders (1999b) conducted a survey of the proposed site for a correctional facility on Block 4, Section 102 in Symonston. Two areas of Aboriginal archaeological potential were identified within the subject area. It was recommended that the two areas be further investigated by removal of the grass cover and detailed surface inspection, followed by targeted test pitting (Saunders 1999:25).
Subsequently excavation in the areas of potential archaeological deposit (PADs) was conducted at Symonston in May 2001 (Navin Officer Heritage Consultants 2001e). No Aboriginal cultural material was retrieved from the backhoe pits.
The results of the latter study indicated that the general model for Aboriginal site location within the southern tablelands needed to be modified. Otherwise suitable locations in mid-valley contexts adjacent to low order tributary drainage lines may not have a high, or even moderate potential, for Aboriginal sites. It is probable that lower elevation contexts, in proximity to the natural treeline, present a greater potential for sites.
Hughes (2000) undertook a heritage assessment of the proposed SouthCare Aero Medical Service Facility, Hume, during which no sites were identified and the area was assessed to be of low archaeological potential.
Barber (2000) undertook a study of some 800 ha in Symonston. An extensive field survey program across that area located nineteen Aboriginal sites, all of which were surface scatters, and identified seventeen areas of archaeological sensitivity, consisting of locally elevated ground (mostly spurline crests) adjacent to watercourses.
Survey for a proposed Resource Recovery Estate at Hume (Navin Officer Heritage Consultants 2001f) was conducted within the area previously surveyed by Barber (2000). The 2001 survey relocated and re-recorded the three sites within that area that had previously been identified, and refined the areas of archaeological potential to seven discrete areas, three of which were associated with the recorded sites.
AASC undertook surface salvage of Site HA11 and test pitting of Hume PAD 1 and Hume PAD 2 in 2003. Twelve shovel pits were excavated at PAD1 and 16 at PAD2. One artefact was located during the testing of PAD1 and 13 artefacts were located at PAD2. 35 artefacts were collected at site HA11.
Hughes et al undertook monitoring of ground disturbance of HID 1391 (HA11) and HID 1395 (Hume PAD2) in 2007. Grader scrapes were excavated at each site. A total of 300 artefacts were recovered from HID 1391 and 450 from HID 1395. It was recommended that these sites should be conserved if future development was to occur.
Navin Officer Heritage Consultants (2003a) conducted a surface survey of a 10 hectare area at the location of the former zoo on Mugga Lane. The survey found one Aboriginal site containing eight artefacts located on the gentle gradient of a small spur crest.
Survey of a three hectare area of land proposed for construction of new buildings at the Quamby Youth Detention Centre on Mugga Lane, was undertaken by Navin Officer Heritage Consultants (2003c). No Aboriginal sites or areas of potential archaeological deposit were identified during that survey.
An archaeological survey of the Emergency Services Bureau Headquarters and Joint Emergency Services Training Academy, Hume, was undertaken by Navin Officer Heritage Consultants in late April 2004a. No Aboriginal sites were located within the study area. The two previously recorded historical sites (Site A1 and Site A2) were re-recorded and assessed to have moderate to high heritage significance.
ACT Eastern Broadacre Planning Study - Cultural Heritage Desktop Review 12 Navin Officer Heritage Consultants October 2007 DRAFT
Navin Officer Heritage Consultants undertook an archaeological survey of the ACT Prison site in late April 2004b. One area of potential archaeological deposit (JPAD 1) and two previously recorded historical sites (Site B, Site F) were identified within the study area. Previously recorded sites G, D2, C3, I1, I2 and I3 were not rerecorded as they were considered to be elements of the modern landscape that did not warrant significance assessment.
Subsequently excavation in the area of potential archaeological deposit (PAD) was conducted at Hume over a period of three days in May/June 2005 by Navin Officer Heritage Consultants (2005c). A 650 m grader scrape and eight pits were excavated. No Aboriginal cultural material was retrieved from the backhoe pits or grader scrape. No cultural stratigraphy was evident in the pits.
3.5 Recorded Aboriginal Sites
Appendix 1 provides a site inventory which lists the recorded Aboriginal sites in the study area by their location and Appendix 2 gives a heritage significance ranking for those sites.
3.6 Predictive Aboriginal Archaeology Statement
As a result of the numerous archaeological surveys undertaken to date in the Eastern Broadacre study area, qualitative observations regarding Aboriginal site location parameters may be summarised as follows:
• Artefact densities in open artefact scatters may vary considerably;
• Open artefact scatters are most likely to occur on relatively level ground in locally well drained contexts, either spurline crests, terraces or elevated creek banks in valley floor contexts, low gradient crests and streamline banks in mid valley slope contexts, and level crests, shoulders and saddles on major ridgelines and spurs;
• The majority of open artefact scatters, (particularly larger sites), are situated adjacent to, or in close proximity to, creek flats or valley bottom contexts, frequently on low gradient basal slopes adjacent to streams or wetlands;
• Open artefact scatters which contain relatively large artefact assemblages and densities occur most frequently and consistently within 100-150 m of major and relatively permanent drainage lines;
• Open artefact scatters which occur away from the valley basal slopes and major tributaries tend to be small and sparser. A preference for major confluences and valley constrictions may be indicated;
• Most sites located away from major water sources will consist of low density scatters of artefacts, and mostly contain less than 10 visible surface artefacts;
• Artefacts may occur wherever surface exposures of exploited rock occur, rock sources which are known to have been exploited in the ACT include chalcedony, chert, quartz, and fine grained igneous rocks such as fine grained porphyry and fine grained intrusives within granodiorite; and
• The occurrence of high grade cherts does not necessarily indicate Aboriginal exploitation.
Aboriginal scarred trees may occur anywhere old-growth trees survive. It is estimated that Aboriginal scars in the Canberra region would need to be in the order of 150 years old.
ACT Eastern Broadacre Planning Study - Cultural Heritage Desktop Review 13 Navin Officer Heritage Consultants October 2007 DRAFT 4. HISTORICAL CONTEXT
4.1 Outline of European nineteenth-century land settlement
The first documentation of Europeans in the Canberra area is in 1820 and 1821 when exploratory expeditions in search of the Murrumbidgee River passed through the area (Gillespie 1985). By the mid-1820s the first settlers, squatters and graziers had moved into the Canberra district, some individuals obtaining crown and compensatory land grants.
A series of land grants were made along the northern and southern banks of the Molonglo River in the region of the present Canberra City during the 1820s and early 1830s. These included grants to the north and south of the River, of over 17000 acres to Robert Campbell that formed the Duntroon Estate, and a 2560 acre portion, south of the River to a John Stephen(s).
Following the establishment of the large land grantees whose land covered the best grasslands on the river flats and basal valley slopes, the pattern of land selection was characterised by the purchase or selection of small parcels of forested land, following the Robertson Land Act of 1861. The land selectors who applied for land under the Robertson Land Acts were often people of limited financial resources or no government contacts, and often locals whose occupations and families were connected to the labour force of the larger estates. Their landholdings were often small and conditionally purchased, with freehold title only gained after completion of all payments. During the payment period, various conditions were often specified, including the conduct of improvements such as fencing and clearing, and a period of residency on the block.
Compared to the original government grants, the land subject to selection was mostly more marginal and forested, and often poorly watered in upper creek catchments. In many cases the smallholdings proved uneconomic and selectors could not support their payments and consequently lost or sold their holdings. The buyers were frequently the neighbouring large estate holders who retained the best land, the best water sources and could raise sufficient capital.
4.2 ACT District of Majura
The early history of the Majura Valley is integrated closely with the early settlement of Canberra. In 1825 Robert Campbell was allocated two land grants totalling about 5,000 acres (AASC 1995:11). The bulk of these grants were at the southern portion of the valley fronting the Molonglo River. Campbell was later to acquire further tracts of land in both the Majura Valley and in the Ginninderra area. The Campbell family was to be the largest landholder in the Majura Valley, if not in the Canberra region. It has been suggested (National Trust 1996:2) that at one time the bulk of the Majura Valley was, either officially or unofficially, in the hands of the Campbell family. The 1912 Pialligo Parish Map (Dept of Lands 1912) shows the extensive Campbell holdings as generally stretching from the Molonglo River to the vicinity of the present “Avonley”.
Initially the work force employed to work, not only Campbell’s property, but that of others in the Canberra Region, was drawn from the pool of convicts sent to Australia from Britain (Gillespie 1991:25). Convict labour was to later be replaced by free settlers and immigrant workers drawn from Britain by various assistance schemes and recruitment efforts by the Government (Gillespie 1991:25). The most successful of such schemes was one that saw a bounty paid to immigrants to entice them to migrate to the colony. The funds for the scheme were raised by the sale of land within the colony. Some private citizens, of which Robert Campbell was one, also assisted migrants to come to the colony. Campbell preferred to assist Scots with some knowledge of farming. It would appear that based on the origins of his work force Campbell also recruited from other parts of Great Britain.
In the years preceding the Robertson Land Acts the Campbells pursued a policy of settling their workers on small holdings of about two acres on which they were encouraged to raise cattle or to cultivate crops (Gillespie 1991:25). Such a holding appears to be “Majura House” which is reputed to have been built for Alfred Mayo and his family between 1846 and 1860 (Barrow 1998:32). Mayo was a farm labourer convict assigned to Robert Campbell who later obtained his ticket of leave and ultimately his freedom (McLennan and McLennan 1996). As a result of the Campbell’s practices
ACT Eastern Broadacre Planning Study - Cultural Heritage Desktop Review 14 Navin Officer Heritage Consultants October 2007 DRAFT many families were attracted to their property at Duntroon. These families included the Camerons, McDonalds, McInneses, McIntoshes and McPhersons (Gillespie 1991:26). By the mid-1850s there were approximately 50 people residing in the Majura Valley (National Trust 1996).
Following the Robertson Land Acts of 1861, which facilitated the free selection of Crown Land and which in themselves were attempts to break the absolute control of land by a few established owners, some of the Campbell workers selected land in their own names within the Majura Valley. Most of the land purchases in the Majura area were conditional purchases under The Crown Lands Alienation Acts of 1861. As a result of the closer settlement of the Majura Valley, a community, independent of Duntroon, grew in the valley. The focus of Valley communal and social life appeared to have been the “incipient village” that sprang up on the Majura Road in the vicinity of the property now known as “Avonley”. This village included a school, community hall and Post Office. Many of the new landowners travelled to Queanbeyan to purchase goods rather than rely on the Campbells at Duntroon. After 1861 the families taking up land in the Majura Valley included the Darmodys, McIntoshes, Harmans, Isabella Cameron and the O’Rourkes.
Based on the initial freehold data contained on the 1912 Parish of Pialligo Map (Dept of Lands 1912) the following were the acreages of the leading land holders: • the Campbell family – 9019 acres; • the Darmody family – in excess of 2000 acres; • the Harman Family – 667 acres; • the McIntoshes – 1482 acres; and • Isabella Cameron – 760 acres. By 1891 there were 83 dwellings, housing 393 people within the Majura Valley (C&DHS1967:2). Farming was not the only occupation of the inhabitants, with many following various trades. For example, one of the Darmodys ran a successful butchery from the family’s property “The Pines”, and Walter McIntosh acted as a blacksmith (National Trust 1996:3).
Freehold title in the valley mostly ended when the Federal Capital Territory (FCT) was declared and control of the area passed into Commonwealth hands. The establishment of the FCT also saw the Duntroon Estate resumed as the location of the new Royal Military College, with the rezoning taking place in 1912. Many of the families who had selected property in the Majura Valley continued to live in the valley, having taken up leases over their property from the Commonwealth authorities (National Trust 1996:3). For example, the Mayo family continued to reside at Majura House which remained in their hands for about 140 years. The family sold the lease in 1981.
4.3 ACT District of Jerrabomberra
The study area falls within the former NSW portions of 12, 161 and 200, Parish of Queanbeyan, County of Murray.
Portion 12 consists of 2,560 acres which originally formed part of a larger Jerrabomberra Estate which was a land grant in 1828 to John Palmer. The estate was managed by Duncan Cameron. Portion 12 was subsequently granted to Francis Mowatt in 1831. During his ownership Mowatt had no fewer than 36 convicts working on the property (Pam 1982). Mowatt sold to Dr James Fitzgerald Murray in 1837 for £2,000 (Gillespie 1991). Murray gave the station its current name of ‘Woden’ after the Nordic god. After Murray’s death the property was passed onto his brother Terrence Aubrey Murray who sold it in 1857 to Thomas Rutledge. Following several subsequent owners, the property was sold to George Campbell in 1871 and Woden became an outstation of the larger Duntroon Estate (Barrow 1998:45).
Portions 161 (50 acres) and 200 (69 acres) form part of an estate comprising seven portions totalling 313 acres originally selected by Thomas Tong. Tong was born in England around 1833 and arrived in Melbourne in 1854. Fletcher (1993) records Tong as being resident at Naas, Queanbeyan, Cuppacumbalong and Tharwa. He married Mary Harkin in 1868.
ACT Eastern Broadacre Planning Study - Cultural Heritage Desktop Review 15 Navin Officer Heritage Consultants October 2007 DRAFT
Tong’s initial selections comprised two portions (84 and 87) totalling 77 acres, gained under conditional purchase in 1872 and situated immediately south of the study area. Portion 84 appears to have served as a residential focus for the rest of the holding given that the 1872 Crown survey plan for the selection notes the presence of a ‘well’ and a ‘hut’ to the value of £20. This evaluation suggests a not insubstantial structure, and it is probable that it was more than a token structure. Tong’s holding increased up until 1878 with the subsequent conditional purchase of five adjacent portions to the north and west, totalling a further 236 acres. This included the selection of two portions which occur in the southern end of the present study area – Portion 161 in 1874 and Portion 200 in 1877. The Crown Survey plans for each portion, conducted in 1878, show no residential structures. A log fence to the value of £7 is noted along the eastern road boundaries of portion 161. Portion 200 is described as ‘good open country’ and portion 161 as ‘good open forest’ (Crown surveys for portion 161 & 200 parish of Tuggeranong, County of Murray, both of 1878).
Freehold title to all of Tong’s conditional purchases was gained in the name of George Campbell by 1905.
Fletcher (1993) notes that Thomas and Mary’s second child; John Thomas Tong was born in 1872 at ‘Woden’. John Thomas is also noted to have been born in a stone built dwelling (now a ruin and called ‘Stoneyhurst Cottage’) off Narrabundah Road (now Mugga Lane) on old portion 92 (Boot 1990, Barrow 1998). This 40 acre portion of land is 2.2 km northwest of the study area. The building was present when the portion was surveyed in 1878 and originally selected under conditional purchase by Joseph Harris. It has been proposed that the cottage was built in the 1850s (Boot 1990). The surveyor noted the value of the building to be £100. Freehold title to the portion was gained in the name of George Campbell by 1905.
Boot (1990) theorises that the ‘Stoneyhurst Cottage’ was constructed by the Campbells as an outstation or overseers house for the Duntroon Estate. If true, this would suggest that Harris was acting on behalf of Campbell when he selected this valuable asset. Boot quotes oral information from Mr Laurie Tong that Tong family members resided in the home prior to its sale to Harris in the late 1870s (Boot 1990). This suggests that Tong may have been an employee of the Campbells in the 1870s. This may also have been true for Harris.
The fact that there was already a not insignificant residential dwelling owned by Thomas Tong on portion 84, further to the south, in 1872, presents a problem. Either the Tong family had two residences in the 1870s, or the oral tradition may have become confused. It is conceivable that both Harris and Tong were employed by the Campbells and each operated on behalf of their employers to select neighbouring lands to the Duntroon Estate, prior to their eventual purchase by the Campbells. The Tong’s may have resided in ‘Stoneyhurst Cottage’ until its selection by Harris in, or before 1878, and subsequently changed residence to portion 84 in the Tong selections, perhaps as early as the early 1870s, following his marriage to Mary Harkin in 1868.
4.4 Previous Cultural Heritage Studies
A section of the study area was previously surveyed for historical sites in 1992 as part of a survey of 260 ha for the Jerrabomberra trunk sewer (Access Archaeology 1992). During the course of that survey 31 sites were located. Those sites comprised stockyards, horse jumps, fence posts, agricultural dam and fieldstone piles from ploughing, as well as the remains of a hut. With the exception of the hut remains, none of these sites met the threshold for listing on the heritage register.
Access Archaeology referenced oral history handed down to Charles A. Campbell of ‘Woden’ from his father, which identifies these traces as the remains of a shepherd’s hut. Another hut, known as ‘Bleak Hut’, is remembered to have been situated on the eastern side of Jerrabomberra Creek. Access Archaeology argues that hut site is located near the portion boundary of the Woden and Duntroon (Mugga Mugga) stations and therefore may relate to either station. It was noted that Campbell of Duntroon ran Mugga Mugga as an outstation with a barrack for shepherds in the 1830s, but that the lack of fencing also necessitated an additional camp for each flock and its master. The hut site was interpreted as such a camp (Access Archaeology 1991:18).
There have been two previous studies on European heritage sites within the study area. A broad- area archaeological field survey of 800 ha for the possible expansion of the Hume industrial estate
ACT Eastern Broadacre Planning Study - Cultural Heritage Desktop Review 16 Navin Officer Heritage Consultants October 2007 DRAFT
(Barber 2000), and an archaeological assessment of standing structures within the same area, for the same project (Heritage Archaeology 2000). The broad area study did not include a review Crown survey plans for the area and as a consequence did not systematically investigate nineteenth-century residential sites which lacked existing standing structures.
A heritage assessment of the Stoneyhurst homestead was conducted by Heritage Archaeology as part of this previous investigation (Heritage Archaeology 2000:5-9). The study concluded that the complex was constructed in two phases. The first related to the style of the late 1940s and includes the original home building which is a doubled gabled, fibro and timber structure with bay windows. A detached building to the rear also relates to this period and appears to have had an original function as a meat house and subsequently used as shearer’s quarters. A disused tennis court is also grouped in this phase.
Despite this stylistic assessment, the original home may date to the previous decade. The 1942 1:63,300 topographic map (surveyed in 1941) shows an unnamed building in the present location of Stoneyhurst.
The second phase includes stucco additions thought to date around the 1950s. They include flat roofed rectangular additions on the northern and eastern side of the original home, and an adjacent cement block garage. A modern shearing shed and silo are located to the north of the residence in an adjoining paddock.
The study also noted the remains of a c.1930s Buick motor vehicle in the eastern corner of the northern paddock adjacent to the homestead. The remains were in poor condition. The lessee informed the study that ‘this vehicle was not associated with the property’ (Heritage Archaeology 2000:9).
Heritage Archaeology states that no archaeological remains relating to activities or structures on the original Stoney Hurst Paddock Block were located. However it was also noted that limited ground surface visibility restricted the effectiveness of survey (Heritage Archaeology 2000:9).
The archaeological field survey conducted by Barber recorded one historic feature within the study area, a disused and abandoned Massey-Harris tractor in poor condition, situated on the bank of Woden (Dog Trap) Creek. The tractor is thought to date to the 1940s or early 1950s and was not considered to be rare or unusual.
Several other heritage studies, which are referenced in Appendix 1, have been undertaken within the study area.
ACT Eastern Broadacre Planning Study - Cultural Heritage Desktop Review 17 Navin Officer Heritage Consultants October 2007 DRAFT
4.5 Listed Heritage Items
The following table lists those historical sites in the study area that have been entered on heritage registers. Appendix 1 provides a site inventory, which lists the recorded historical sites in the study area by their location and Appendix 2 gives a heritage significance ranking for those sites.
Item Location Heritage Listing Historic Sites RAAF Base Fairbairn Group Glenora Drive CHL (I); RNE (I) Redwood Plantation Pialligo Avenue, Pialligo CHL (L); HR (I); RNE (I) Wartime Bomb Dump Buildings Pialligo Avenue, Pialligo CHL (L); HR (N); RNE (I) Duntroon Woolshed and Barn Fairbairn Avenue, Pialligo CHL (Ie); HR (R); RNE (I); NT Rose Cottage Gilmore HR (R); RNE (R); NT Mugga Mugga Homestead and Surrounds Narrabundah Lane, HR (R); RNE Symonston (R & I); NT Goldenholm Dairy Monaro Highway, Fyshwick HR (R); RNE (I); NT Majura House and Outbuildings Majura Road, Pialligo HR (N); RNE (I); NT Woden Homestead and Grasslands Hume HR (N); RNE (R); NT Hill Station Hume HR (N); NT Avenue of Pine trees Fairbairn Avenue HR (N); NT Callum Brae Symonston HR (N) Malcolm Vale Majura HR (N) Radio Hill Fyshwick HR (N) Travelling Stock Route Hume HR (N) Limekilns Majura HR (N) Stone House Ruin Site Majura Road, Majura HR (N); RNE (Rj) No 1 Oval Morshead Drive, Pialligo RNE (Rj); NT Cookanalla Symonston HR (R1) Geological/Geomorphological Site Woolshed Creek Geological Site Fairbairn Avenue, Pialligo HR (R); RNE (R & I); NT Natural Sites Majura Valley Native Grasslands Site Majura Road, Majura RNE (I); Natural areas around and within Majura, Pialligo Majura Road, Pialligo CHL (N) and Jerrabomberra Button Wrinklewort Habitat Majura field Firing Range HR (N) Grassland Earless Dragon Habitat Majura and Jerrabomberra HR (N) Majura Valley District of Majura HR (N); NT Natural Temperate Grassland Ecological Majura Valley HR (N) Community Savannah Woodland District of Jerrabomberra HR (N)
ACT Eastern Broadacre Planning Study - Cultural Heritage Desktop Review 18 Navin Officer Heritage Consultants October 2007 DRAFT
Key:
CHL: Commonwealth Heritage List RNE: Register of the National Estate L: listed R: registered N: nominated I: indicative Place I: indicative Re: removed form the register Ie: ineligible place Rj: rejected
HR: ACT Heritage Register NT: National Trust (ACT) Heritage Inventory R: registered N: nominated P: provisionally registered R1: rejected R2: removed, on ‘National Land’ R3: removed by administrative appeals tribunal
4.6 Predictive Historical Archaeology Statement
The following predictive statements are based on a review of primary and secondary historical sources, local oral history sources, the regional database of known sites of historical significance, and broadly defined locational criteria derived from southeast Australian archaeological models.
The following site types and locational trends are likely to occur within the study area:
• Nineteenth century farm and homestead complexes and other residential structures. This category includes residential and agricultural structures including homesteads, cottages, woolsheds and other outbuilding types
o These sites are most likely to occur on low spurs or locally elevated ground adjacent to alluvial flats on major streams or natural water holes; and
o Sites will tend to be situated within cadastral portions of relatively low number.
• Nineteenth century agricultural sites and features
o Relict field systems, including ploughland features such as ridge and furrow ground relief, relict post and rail fencelines, and drainage ditches. These are most likely to occur in valley floor contexts on alluvial flats;
o Stock yard and fencing sites consisting of remnant post and rail fencing located generally in valley floor and mustering locations; and
o Abandoned machinery can occur anywhere but frequently occur adjacent to homestead sites of field systems.
• Nineteenth century tracks and roadway structures, such as road platforms, culverts retaining walls and bridges.
o These features may occur anywhere within the landscape but will tend to follow locally elevated valley floor and basal slope topography and be aligned according to historic access and trade routes. Some early roads are indicated by early cadastral boundaries.
ACT Eastern Broadacre Planning Study - Cultural Heritage Desktop Review 19 Navin Officer Heritage Consultants October 2007 DRAFT 5. STATUTORY OBLIGATIONS1
5.1 ACT Heritage Act 2004
The Heritage Act 2004 provides for the protection, management and conservation of heritage places and objects in the ACT. The Act establishes a Heritage Register of heritage places and objects and establishes procedures for both provisional and full listing to the Register. The Act establishes the ACT Heritage Council to function as the main advisory body to the Minister on heritage issues. The Council receives administrative support from the ACT Heritage Unit, Environment ACT, Chief Ministers Department. The Council has the power to provisionally and fully register Heritage places and objects. Under the Act, the ACT Heritage Council is to be responsible for the Heritage Register and the heritage registration process.
An ‘Aboriginal Place’ and ‘Aboriginal Object’ are defined as ‘a place/object of particular significance to Aboriginal people because of either or both:
(a) Aboriginal Tradition; and/or
(b) The history, including contemporary history, of Aboriginal people (Section 9).
Under sections 74 and 75 of the Act a person commits an offence if they engage in conduct that diminishes the heritage significance of a place or object, or engage in conduct that causes damage to an Aboriginal place or object. These offences are graduated according to whether an offender was reckless or negligent ‘about whether the conduct would diminish the heritage significance’ or ‘cause damage’ to an Aboriginal Object of Place. To ‘cause damage’ is inclusive of disturbing or destroying.
A person also commits an offence under the Act if they do not report an Aboriginal place to the Heritage Council, and has 5 working days to do so (Section 51).
The reporting and offence provisions of the Act apply irrespective of land status or whether registration to the Heritage Register occurs.
The Act provides for the development and application of Heritage Guidelines. These are to be formulated by the Heritage Council and will set the policy for how places and objects are to be conserved, including registered places and objects. The guidelines may control how development is to take place in an area which is a heritage place or contains a heritage object. They will be performance-based but may include mandatory provisions (Part 5). During the transitional phase of the Act a heritage or conservation requirement for a place is taken to be a heritage guideline under the Heritage Act (section 129).
The only provisions for legally sanctioned disturbance to an Aboriginal place or object, or the diminution of the heritage value of a Heritage Place or Object is to conform to one of the exceptions listed in section 76 of the Act. According to this section, the offence provisions of the Act (sections 74 and 75) do not apply if conduct is engaged in accordance with a heritage guideline, heritage direction, heritage agreement, a conservation management plan, or an approval for a development under the Land Act part 6 (section 76(2)).
Disturbance to an Aboriginal site or place can only take place if the following conditions have been met: • The place (or site) has been registered; and the proposed disturbance is compatible with the heritage guidelines for the conservation of that place or object (Part 5); or • The proposed development follows a DA approval under part 6 of the Land Act (Part 10); or
1 The following information is provided as a guide only and is accurate to the best knowledge of Navin Officer Heritage Consultants. Readers are advised that this information is subject to confirmation from qualified legal opinion.
ACT Eastern Broadacre Planning Study - Cultural Heritage Desktop Review 20 Navin Officer Heritage Consultants October 2007 DRAFT
• The minister has issued a heritage direction for that place or object (Part 11); or • The minister has entered into an heritage agreement with a person to conserve the heritage significance of a registered place or object (Part 15); or • The proposed development follows a conservation management plan that has been approved by the Heritage Council (section 110).
Heritage recordings which occur on National Land under the National Land Ordinance 1989 (or subsequent amendments), or which occur in Designated Areas under the National Capital Plan are subject to development approval processes which may be in addition to, or instead of requirements identified as management requirements under s.54(1) of the Land (Planning and Environment) Act 1991.
Development approval processes within the ACT can be summarised as follows: • Work carried out on National Land in Designated Areas is subject to the approval of the National Capital Authority; • Work carried out on Territory Land in Designated Areas is generally subject to approval by the National Capital Authority but Territory requirements may also apply to development where the Territory is the approving Authority; • Work carried out on National Land outside of Designated Areas must be in accordance with a Development Control Plan agreed by the National Capital Authority that reflects the requirements of the Territory Plan; and • Work carried out on Territory Land outside Designated Areas is subject to the Territory Plan and Territory Approval processes.
Where a Heritage Place occurs in a Designated Area or National Land, it is conceivable that proposed development actions may not ordinarily be referred to the ACT Government for approval or be subject to any of the exceptions listed in section 76 of the Act. In these cases, there is potential for any action effecting a heritage place or object to constitute an offence under the Act. In these cases, an appropriate procedure would be the preparation of a conservation management plan for the Heritage Place (as defined in section 15) and its submission for approval by the Heritage Council. If approved, any actions effecting that heritage place which are consistent with the plan, will not constitute an offence under the Act (section 76(2)a(iv)).
Tree Protection Act 2005
The Tree Protection Act 2005 came into force on 29 March 2006, replacing the Tree Protection (Interim Scheme) Act 2001. The aim of this Act is to establish an ACT Tree Register across leased and unleased urban land and to protect trees of exceptional value. The new legislation has two types of Protected Tree; these are Regulated Trees and Registered Trees.
A Registered Tree is a tree that has been identified as being exceptional for its: • Natural or cultural heritage value; • Landscape and aesthetic value; and • Scientific value.
A Regulated Tree is a tree that is located on leased Territory land in an area declared as a Tree Management Precinct and is either: • A height of 12 m or more; or • A circumference of 1.5 m (approx. 0.5 m in diameter), or more at 1 m above ground level; or • Two or more trunks and the total circumference of all the trunks, 1 m above ground level, is 1.5 m or more; or • A minimum crown width of 12 m or more.
ACT Eastern Broadacre Planning Study - Cultural Heritage Desktop Review 21 Navin Officer Heritage Consultants October 2007 DRAFT
The transition to permanent tree protection will see each suburb declared as a Tree Management Precinct where all trees will continue to be protected until the Tree Register is established. As such, in the short term there will be minimal change for a majority of leaseholders during the transition period.
The transitional arrangements are to be lifted from an area once the survey for the Tree Register has been completed for that area. Tree Management Precinct status may be retained in areas with high levels of development and construction activity or listed as heritage precincts.
In the long-term, the legislation will only affect those leaseholders with Protected Trees on their lease.
Any activity that is likely to cause damage to a Protected Tree is prohibited under the new legislation. These include killing or removing a tree, or activities that are likely to cause the death or decline of the tree. Undertaking groundwork within the Tree Protection Zone of a protected tree also requires approval. The Tree Protection Zone is defined as the area under the canopy of the tree, the 2 m wide area surrounding the vertical projection of the canopy and the 4 m wide area surrounding the trunk as measured at 1 m above the natural ground level.
A Tree Management Plan may be proposed for Protected Trees as a mechanism for undertaking a range of activities that may affect the tree.
Trees that are currently registered on the ACT Heritage Register will be removed from the Heritage Register and entered on the ACT Tree Register. This will have implications for the management of trees within the study area.
5.2 Environment and Heritage Legislation Amendment Act (No 1) 2003
Australian Heritage Council Act 2003 and Australian Heritage Council (Consequential and Transitional Provisions) Act 2003
These three Acts replace the previous Commonwealth heritage regime instigated by the Australian Heritage Commission Act 1975. The Acts establish the following provisions:
The National Heritage List
The National Heritage List is a schedule of places which the Minister for the Environment and Heritage considers to have ‘National Heritage Value’ based on prescribed ‘National Heritage Criteria’. The List many include places outside of Australia if agreed to by the Country concerned. There is a public nomination process and provision for public consultation on nominations. Expert advice regarding nominations is provided to the Minister by the Australian Heritage Council.
A nominated place considered to be at risk can be placed on an emergency list while its heritage value is assessed.
The listing of a place is defined as a ‘matter of national environmental significance’ under the Environment Protection & Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999. As a consequence, the Minister must grant approval prior to the conduct of any proposed actions which will, or are likely to have, a significant impact on the National Heritage values of a listed place.
The Minister is to ensure that there are approved management plans for most listed places owned or controlled by the Commonwealth or a Commonwealth agency, and that Commonwealths actions are in accord with such plans.
The Commonwealth or its agencies cannot sell or lease a listed place unless the protection of its National Heritage values is specified in a covenant, or such an action is found to be unnecessary, unreasonable or impractical. All Commonwealth agencies which own or control places which have or may have National Heritage values, must take all reasonable steps to assist the Minister and Australian Heritage Council to identify and assess those values.
ACT Eastern Broadacre Planning Study - Cultural Heritage Desktop Review 22 Navin Officer Heritage Consultants October 2007 DRAFT
The Commonwealth Heritage List
The Commonwealth Heritage List is a schedule of places owned or controlled by the Commonwealth, which the Minister for the Environment and Heritage considers to have ‘Commonwealth Heritage Value’. The list may include places outside of Australia. The processes of nomination and assessment are similar to those for the National Heritage List. Like the National Heritage List, there is a provision for emergency listing.
The Act places a range of obligations on the Commonwealth Agencies with regard to places included on the Commonwealth Heritage List. These include: • Development of a heritage strategy applicable to all listed places controlled by the agency; • Preparation of a management plan for each listed place; • Conduct of a program to identify Commonwealth Heritage values on lands controlled by the agency and maintaining a register of such values; • Ensuring that no action is taken which has, will have, or is likely to have an adverse impact on the National Heritage values of a National Heritage Place, or the Commonwealth Heritage values of a Commonwealth Heritage Place, unless there is no feasible or prudent alternative and all reasonable measures to mitigate impact have been taken; and • Including a covenant in any sale or lease contract for land which includes a Commonwealth Heritage place which stipulates the protection of the Commonwealth Heritage values of that place, unless such an action is found by the agency to be unnecessary, unreasonable or impractical.
The Australian Heritage Council
The Australian Heritage Council provides expert advice to the Minister on heritage issues and nominations for the listing of places on the National Heritage List and the Commonwealth Heritage List. The Council replaces the former Australian Heritage Commission.
The Register of the National Estate
The register of the National Estate was established under the now repealed Australian Heritage Commission Act 1975. The National Estate was defined under this Act as ‘those places, being components of the natural environment of Australia or the cultural environment of Australia, that have aesthetic, historical, scientific or social significance or other special value for future generations as well as for the present community’. Under the new Commonwealth Acts, the Register will be retained and maintained by Australian Heritage Council as a publicly accessible database for public education and the promotion of heritage conservation. Nominations will assessed by the Australian Heritage Council. The Minister must consider the information in the Register when making decisions under the Environment Protection & Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999. A transitional provision allows for the Minister to determine which of the places on the Register and within Commonwealth areas should be transferred to the Commonwealth Heritage List.
5.3 Environment Protection & Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999
This Act repeals the following pieces of Commonwealth legislation: the Environment Protection (Impact of Proposals) Act 1974, the Endangered Species Protection Act 1992, the National Parks and Wildlife Conservation Act 1975, the World Heritage Properties Conservation Act 1983, and the Whale Protection Act 1980. The scope and coverage of the Act is wide and far-reaching. The objectives of the Act includes: the protection of the environment, especially those aspects of national significance; to promote the conservation of biodiversity and ecologically sustainable development, and to recognise the role of indigenous people and their knowledge in realising these aims.
The Act makes it a criminal offence to undertake actions having a significant impact on any matter of national environmental significance (NES) without the approval of the Environment Minister. Actions which have, may have or are likely to have a relevant impact on a matter of NES may be taken only:
ACT Eastern Broadacre Planning Study - Cultural Heritage Desktop Review 23 Navin Officer Heritage Consultants October 2007 DRAFT
• In accordance with an assessment bilateral agreement (which may accredit a State approval process) or a declaration (which may accredit another Commonwealth approval process); and • With the approval of the Environment Minister under Part 9 of the Act. An action that requires this Commonwealth approval is called a ‘controlled action’
Matters of national environmental significance (NES) are defined as:
• A place listed on the National Heritage List • World heritage values within declared World Heritage Properties (section 12(1)); • Ramsar wetlands of international importance (section 16(1)); • Nationally threatened species and communities (section 18); • Migratory species protected under international agreements (section 20); • Nuclear actions; • The Commonwealth marine environment (generally outside 3 nautical miles from the coast) (section 23(1&2)); and • Any additional matters specified by regulation (following consultation with the States) (section 25).
In addition, the Act makes it a criminal offence to take on Commonwealth land an action that has, will have, or is likely to have a significant impact on the environment (section 26(1)). A similar prohibition (without approval) operates in respect of actions taken outside of Commonwealth land, if it has, or is likely to have a significant impact on the environment on Commonwealth land (section 26(2)). Section 28, in general, requires that the Commonwealth (or its agencies) must gain approval (unless otherwise excluded from this provision), prior to conducting actions which has, will, or is likely to have a significant impact on the environment inside or outside the Australian jurisdiction.
The Act adopts a broad definition of the environment that is inclusive of cultural heritage values. In particular, the ‘environment’ is defined to include the social, economic and cultural aspects of ecosystems, natural and physical resources, and the qualities and characteristics of locations, places and areas (section 528).
The Act allows for several means by which a controlled action can be assessed, including an accredited assessment process, a public environment report, an environmental impact statement, and a public inquiry (Part 8).
Section 68 imposes an obligation on a proponent proposing to take an action that it considers to be a controlled action, to refer it to the Environment Minister for approval.
World heritage values are defined to be inclusive of natural and cultural heritage (section 12(3)), and a declared World Heritage Property is one included on the World Heritage List, or is declared to be such by the Minister (sections 13 and 14). The Act defines various procedures, objectives and Commonwealth obligations relating to the nomination and management of World Heritage Properties (Part 15, division 1).
5.4 The National Trust (ACT)
While the National Trust Register does not provide any statutory obligations for protection of a site as such, the acknowledgment of a place being listed on the Register as a significant site lends weight to its heritage value. Also, the fact that the actual data for sites may be minimal does not diminish the significance of a place. In fact, many sites were listed with only basic data added, especially in the early developmental stages of the Register.
The Trust, over the last few years have been upgrading the information for places listed, with criteria for assessment for listing based on the Australian Heritage Commission Criteria of assessment for entry to the Register of the National Estate.
ACT Eastern Broadacre Planning Study - Cultural Heritage Desktop Review 24 Navin Officer Heritage Consultants October 2007 DRAFT 6. MANAGEMENT CONSIDERATIONS
6.1 Overview
This desktop study identified a total of three hundred and thirty three (333) registered, recorded and known indigenous, historic and other heritage sites within the study area, as follows:
• one hundred and ninety four (194) indigenous sites, consisting of artefact scatters, isolated finds, possible Aboriginal scarred trees and Aboriginal scarred trees, quarried rock outcrops, potential archaeological deposits, procurement sites and stone sources; and
• one hundred and twenty seven (127) historic sites, consisting of archaeological sites, standing structures, ruins, remnant rail and road alignments, gardens and plantings, former bridges, wells, quarries, fence lines, farm machinery, military infrastructure remains, border markers, telephone lines, graves, dumps, sheep-dips, ammunition storage sites, memorial groves, travelling stock reserves, and ploughlands;
• Seven natural areas;
• Four geological/geomorphological sites; and
• One palaeontological site.
6.2 Locations of Site Types
Indigenous sites
Probably due to the bias of field surveys undertaken to date, there appears to be a:
• Linear cluster of sites occurring to the immediate east and west sides of the northern section of Majura Road; and
• Number of smaller clusters of sites adjacent to Fairbairn Pine Forest, between the Molonglo River and Canberra Avenue in the east, along Jerrabomberra Creek towards the south, and to the west of the Monaro Highway in the south of the study area.
Historic sites
Historic sites appear to be scattered across the study area with concentrations occurring along Woolshed Creek in the north; at the junction of Fairbairn Avenue, Majura Road and Pialligo Avenue to the west; to the northwest of Fairbairn Pine Forest; and to the west of the Monaro Highway in the south of the study area.
Natural areas
These areas encompass large tracts of land in the Majura Valley, Jerrabomberra, Pialligo, and Symonston.
Geological and geomorphological sites
These sites occur on Woolshed Creek, Northcott Drive and Fyshwick.
Palaeontological site
The single palaeontological site in the study area occurs in the south of the study area.
ACT Eastern Broadacre Planning Study - Cultural Heritage Desktop Review 25 Navin Officer Heritage Consultants October 2007 DRAFT
6.3 Heritage Significance Rankings of Site Types
Indigenous sites
The heritage significance of the 194 indigenous sites has been identified as follows:
• 11 are either high or moderate to high – eight scarred trees and four artefact scatters (one site has both);
• 15 are moderate – largely artefact scatters;
• Seven are low to moderate – also largely artefact scatters;
• 82 are low – artefact scatters and isolated finds;
• One is possibly low – an artefact scatter;
• 40 are very low – also artefact scatters and isolated finds;
• One is possibly very low – an artefact scatter; and
• 37 are unassessed or unknown – potential archaeological deposits, a possible scarred tree, artefact scatters, isolated finds, and stone sources.
Historic sites
The heritage significance of the 127 historic sites has been identified as follows:
• 19 are listed on various heritage registers;
• Nine are high;
• 12 are moderate to high;
• 18 are moderate;
• 12 are low to moderate;
• 22 are low;
• One is possibly low local significance;
• Two are potentially significant;
• 10 are below the threshold of having any heritage significance (and therefore do not have any heritage significance);
• Eight have no significance; and
• 14 are largely unassessed or unassessed, or their heritage significance is unknown.
Natural areas
Of the seven natural sites identified in the study area:
• One is an indicative site on the Register of the National Estate;
• One is nominated to the Commonwealth Heritage List;
ACT Eastern Broadacre Planning Study - Cultural Heritage Desktop Review 26 Navin Officer Heritage Consultants October 2007 DRAFT
• One is nominated to the ACT Heritage Register and listed on the National Trust of Australia (ACT) heritage inventory; and
• Four are nominated to the ACT Heritage Register.
Geological and geomorphological sites
Of the four geological/geomorphological sites identified in the study area:
• One is listed on the Register of the National Estate, the ACT Heritage Register and the National Trust of Australia (ACT) Heritage Register;
• One is of high heritage significance;
• One is of moderate to high heritage significance; and
• One has been identified as having local heritage significance.
Palaeontological site
The heritage significance of the single palaeontological site in the south of the study area is considered to be high. (The site is currently under investigation and this tentative assessment may be increased to very high (possibly regional or state) heritage significance
ACT Eastern Broadacre Planning Study - Cultural Heritage Desktop Review 27 Navin Officer Heritage Consultants October 2007 DRAFT 7. RECOMMENDATIONS
It is recommended that development planning within the Eastern Broadacre study area for:
Indigenous sites
• Should highlight those sites that have been identified as having either high or moderate to high heritage significance as being areas that are to be protected and where development should be avoided;
• Should emphasise the need to develop management strategies (including mitigation measures as necessary), in consultation with the ACT Registered Aboriginal Organisations, for those sites that have been identified as having moderate, low to moderate, low, and very low heritage significance;
• Should note the requirement for an assessment, in consultation with the ACT Registered Aboriginal Organisations, of those sites for which the heritage significance is either unassessed or unknown; and
• Should identify the need for a comprehensive archaeological field survey program to be undertaken, in consultation with the ACT Registered Aboriginal Organisations, within those sections of the Eastern Broadacre Planning area that have not previously been surveyed.
Historic sites
• Should highlight those sites that have been heritage listed as being areas that are to be protected and where development should be avoided;
• Should emphasise the need to develop management strategies (if not already available) for those sites that have been identified as having high, moderate to high, moderate, low to moderate and low heritage significance;
• Should note the requirement for an assessment of those sites that are potentially significant or for which the heritage significance is either unassessed or unknown; and
• Should identify the need for a comprehensive field survey program to be undertaken within those sections of the Eastern Broadacre Planning area that have not previously been surveyed.
Natural areas
• Should highlight those sites that have been heritage listed as being areas that are to be protected and where development should be avoided; and
• Should identify the need for a comprehensive field survey program to be undertaken within those sections of the Eastern Broadacre Planning area that have not previously been surveyed.
Geological and geomorphological sites
• Should highlight the site that has been heritage listed as being an area that is to be protected and where development should be avoided;
• Should emphasise the need to develop management strategies (if not already available) for those sites that have been identified as having high, moderate to high, and local heritage significance; and
ACT Eastern Broadacre Planning Study - Cultural Heritage Desktop Review 28 Navin Officer Heritage Consultants October 2007 DRAFT
• Should identify the need for a comprehensive field survey program to be undertaken within those sections of the Eastern Broadacre Planning area that have not previously been surveyed.
Palaeontological site
• Should highlight the site as an area that is to be protected and where development should be avoided.
ACT Eastern Broadacre Planning Study - Cultural Heritage Desktop Review 29 Navin Officer Heritage Consultants October 2007 DRAFT 8. REFERENCES
(AASC) Australian Archaeological Survey Consultants Pty Ltd 1995 Brief No 94/13 - Preliminary Cultural Resource Surveys of Potential Motor Sports Sites at Kowen and Majura. A Report to ACT Planning Authority, Dept of Environment, Land & Planning, ACT Government.
(AASC) Australian Archaeological Survey Consultants Pty Ltd 1998 Cultural Heritage Survey of Majura Field Firing Range, Majura ACT. Report to the Department of Defence.
(AASC) Australian Archaeological Survey Consultants Pty Ltd 2003 Mugga Resource Recovery Estate, Cultural Heritage Assessment, Salvage of Site HA11 and Test Pitting Results for Pad1 and 2. Report to Act Urban Services.
Access Archaeology 1992 Jerrabomberra Creek Trunk Sewer Cultural Resource Survey. Report to ACT Public Works, Canberra.
Access Archaeology Pty Ltd 1990 Ginninderra Water Quality Control Pond 1: Archaeological Survey. Report to ACT Public Works, Department of Urban Services.
Australia ICOMOS 1987 The Australia Icomos Charter for the Conservation of Places of Cultural Significance (The Burra Charter), Guidelines to the Burra Charter: Cultural Significance and Conservation Policy. Pamphlet, Australia Icomos (Inc).
Avery, S. 1997 Cultural Resource Survey of Block 55, Section 22 and 97, Hume, ACT. Report to Department of Urban Services.
Barber, M. 1991 Report on fieldwork at Honeysuckle Homestead April 27 to 11 May 1991. Report for Canberra Archaeological Society Inc.
Barber, M. 2000 Cultural Resource Survey of Hume and Adjacent Areas. Report to Department of Urban Services.
Barrow, G. 1998 Canberra’s Historic Houses: Dwellings and Ruins of the 19th Century. Dagraja Press, Canberra
Barz, R.K. 1985 An Archaeological Survey of the Line of the Proposed Sydney-Melbourne Optical Fibre Cable within the ACT. Report to Telecom Australia.
Barz, R.K. 1986 Salvage Report on Archaeological Sites along the Route of the Sydney-Melbourne Optical Fibre Cable within the ACT. Report to Telecom Australia, Optical Fibre Project.
Beesley, J. 1989 The Scarred Tree. Unpublished report to the Victoria Archaeological Survey, Melbourne.
Butlin, N. 1983 Our Original Aggression: Aboriginal populations of southeastern Australia 1788-1850. Allen & Unwin, Sydney.
Eades, D. K. 1976 The Dharawal and Dhurga Languages of the New South Wales South Coast. Australian Aboriginal Studies Research and Regional Studies No 8. AIAS, Canberra.
Flood, J. 1980 The Moth Hunters. Australian Institute of Aboriginal Studies, Canberra.
Heffernan, and J. Klaver 1995 A Conservation and Management Plan for Aboriginal Surficial Chert Quarries, Gungahlin, ACT. Report to ACT Heritage Section.
Hogan, K. 1992 Historical Cultural Landscapes: Avonley Woolshed, Pastoral Landscape Study. Student project on ‘Avonley’ Shearing Shed, University of Canberra.
ACT Eastern Broadacre Planning Study - Cultural Heritage Desktop Review 30 Navin Officer Heritage Consultants October 2007 DRAFT
Horton 1999 Map of Aboriginal Australia - part of The Encyclopaedia of Aboriginal Australia. AIATSIS
Hughes, P. J. 2000 A Cultural Heritage Assessment of the Proposed SouthCare Aero Medical Service Facility, ACT. Report to Environmental Management Services Pty Ltd.
Hughes, P., N. Richardson and W. Shawcross 2007 Hume Resource Recovery Estate, ACT: Monitoring of Ground Disturbance at Sites HID 1391 and HID 1395. Report to Heritage Unit, Environment ACT through Simeonov Civil Engineering (ACT) Pty Ltd.
Huys, S.F. 1993 Prehistoric Gungahlin. A Model of Human Occupation. Unpublished BA Hons thesis, Department of Archaeology and Anthropology, Australian National University, Canberra.
Klaver, J. 1997 Lake Jerrabomberra Aquatic Facility Archaeological Survey – Preliminary Statement. Report by Navin Officer Heritage Consultants to R.A Young Consulting Engineers.
Kuskie, P. 1994 A Preliminary Cultural Resource Survey of a Proposed Industrial Storage Area at Section 22, Block 6, Hume ACT.
Kuskie, P.J 1992a A Preliminary Cultural Resource Survey of the Proposed Residential Development Areas C1, C2, C3 and C4, at Gungahlin, ACT. Report to ACT DELP
Kuskie, P.J 1992b An Archaeological Investigation of Two Quarries and an Open Scatter at Gungahlin, ACT. Report to ACT Public Works.
Long, A. 2005 Aboriginal Scarred Trees in New South Wales: A Field Manual. Department of Environment and Conservation (NSW).
Mathews, R. H. 1900 The Gundungurra grammar. In The organisation, language, and initiation ceremonies of the Aborigines of the south-east coast of NSW in Royal Society of NSW Journal and Proceedings, vol. 34:262-281.
Mathews, R. H. 1901 The Gundungurra language, American Philosophical Society Proceedings, vol. 40 no 167:140-148.
Mathews, R. H. 1904 The Ngunawal language, in The Wiradyuri and other languages of NSW. In Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland Journal, vol 33: 294-299.
Navin K, K. Officer and K. Legge 1996 Proposed Duplication of the Federal Highway, Stirling Avenue to Sutton Interchange EIS - Cultural Heritage Component. (unpublished) report to Ove Arup & Partners.
Navin K. and K. Officer 1994 Preliminary Archaeological Assessment – Canberra Abattoir Site, ACT. Report to CMPS&F.
Navin K., 1993 Archaeological Survey Fyshwick Expansion Area, ACT. Report to Maunsell Pty Ltd.
Navin Officer Heritage Consultants 1999a Majura Valley Transport Corridor Cultural Heritage Assessment. Report to Gutteridge Haskins & Davey Pty Ltd.
Navin Officer Heritage Consultants 1999b Survey and Assessment of the Cultural Heritage Resource of part of the Majura Valley, Woolshed Creek, ACT. Volume 1. Report to Heritage Unit, ACT Urban Services.
Navin Officer Heritage Consultants 2001a RAAF Fairbairn Heritage Strategy Aboriginal Heritage Component. Report to Godden MacKay Logan Pty Ltd.
Navin Officer Heritage Consultants 2001b Proposed International Dragway Facility Block 52, Majura, ACT Cultural Heritage Assessment Report to Smith Kostryko Cohen Middleton Pty Ltd
ACT Eastern Broadacre Planning Study - Cultural Heritage Desktop Review 31 Navin Officer Heritage Consultants October 2007 DRAFT
Navin Officer Heritage Consultants 2001c Majura Valley Transport Infrastructure Study. Report to Maunsell McIntyre Pty Ltd.
Navin Officer Heritage Consultants 2001d Fairbairn Avenue Duplication; Cultural Heritage Assessment. Report to David Hogg Pty Ltd
Navin Officer Heritage Consultants 2001e ACT Correctional Facility Block 10, Section 102 Symonston, ACT. Archaeological Subsurface Testing Program. Report to Purdon Associates Pty Ltd.
Navin Officer Heritage Consultants 2001f Mugga Resource Recovery Estate Cultural Heritage Assessment. Report to Maunsell McIntyre Pty Ltd.
Navin Officer Heritage Consultants 2002 Proposed Upgrade of Majura Road ACT. Cultural Heritage Assessment. Report to SMEC.
Navin Officer Heritage Consultants 2003a Cultural Heritage Assessment of Part of Block 622, Majura, ACT. Report to Smith Kostryko Cohen Middleton Pty Ltd.
Navin Officer Heritage Consultants 2003b 1/3Symonston Assisted Living Development: Cultural Heritage Assessment. Report to Purdon Associates Pty Ltd.
Navin Officer Heritage Consultants 2003c Quamby Youth Detention Centre Upgrade: Cultural Heritage Assessment. Report to David Hogg Pty Ltd.
Navin Officer Heritage Consultants 2004a ESB Headquarters and Joint Emergency Services Training Academy, Hume: Cultural Heritage Survey. Report to WP Brown and Partners.
Navin Officer Heritage Consultants 2004b ACT Prison Site Investigation Blocks 6(part) & 12, Section 18, Hume. Cultural Heritage Assessment. A Report to Brown Consulting (ACT).
Navin Officer Heritage Consultants 2005a Majura Field Firing Range Services Upgrade, Majura Valley, ACT. Archaeological Monitoring and Salvage within Site MV121. Report to GHD Pty Ltd
Navin Officer Heritage Consultants 2005b Block 622, Majura ACT, Subsurface Archaeological Salvage and Investigation of Site MV63. Report to Daryl Jackson Alastair Swayn Pty Ltd.
Navin Officer Heritage Consultants 2005c ACT Prison Site Investigation, subsurface Investigation of JPAD1: Towards a Model of Aboriginal Occupation of the Canberra Valley Floor Grasslands. Report to Brown Consulting (ACT) Pty Ltd.
Navin Officer Heritage Consultants 2006 Majura Parkway, Majura Valley, ACT. Cultural Heritage Assessment. Report to SMEC Australia.
Officer, K. 1992 An Archaeological Investigation of an Aboriginal Scarred Tree 'Gundaroo Drive 4', Gungahlin, ACT. Report to R.A. Young and Associates Pty Ltd.
Officer, K. 1997 Cultural Heritage Assessment Proposed John Dedman Parkway and Alternative Options, Navin Officer Heritage Consultants, A Report to Maunsell Pty Ltd, published as Working Paper 5 in Maunsell Pty Ltd 1997 John Dedman Parkway Preliminary Assessment Working Papers – Environmental. Prepared for the ACT Department of Urban Services, ACT Government.
Officer, K.L.C. 1989 Namadgi Pictures: The Aboriginal rock art sites within the Namadgi National Park, ACT. Report to ACT Administration, Heritage Unit, and the ACT Parks and Conservation Service.
Saunders, P. 1989 Confounded by Carrots. Unpublished Litt.B thesis. Department of Prehistory & Anthropology, ANU.
ACT Eastern Broadacre Planning Study - Cultural Heritage Desktop Review 32 Navin Officer Heritage Consultants October 2007 DRAFT
Saunders, P. 1994 Block 2099, Jerrabomberra, ACT: Preliminary Cultural Resource Survey and Artefact Collection. Report to the Land Division, Department of the Environment, Land and Planning.
Saunders, P. 1995 Cultural Heritage Survey of Gas Pipeline from Federal Highway to Majura Parkway, ACT. Report by Navin Officer Heritage Consultants to AGL.
Saunders, P. 1999a Canberra Primary Gas Mains Extension Archaeological Survey for Aboriginal and European Heritage Sites, Fyshwick to ACT Border. Report to AGL Construction.
Saunders, P. 1999b Cultural Resource Survey of Symonston Block 4 Section 102, ACT. Report by Archaeological Heritage Surveys to Totalcare Projects.
Saunders, P. 2000 Canberra Primary Mains Extension ACT Section Archaeological Investigation of Aboriginal Sites Located During Construction Monitoring. Report to AGL Construction.
Schumack, J.E. and S. 1967 An Autobiography, or Tales and Legends of Canberra Pioneers. (Edited by L.F. Fitzhardinge), ANU press, Canberra.
Simmons 1977 Hume Freeway – Seymour to Avenel Section; Archaeological Survey Report. Victoria Archaeological Survey, Ministry of Conservation, Melbourne.
Sleeman, J.R. and P.H. Walker 1979 The Soils of the Canberra District. Soil and Landuse Series No. 58. Division of Soils CSIRO, Australia.
Sullivan, M. 1996 Mugga 1 Quarry Proposed Extension Archaeological Assessment. Report to Boral Resources.
Tindale, N.B. 1940 Distribution of Australian Tribes: A Field Survey. Transactions Royal Society of SA no 64:140-231.
Walshe, K. 1994a Documentation of and Management Options for three Chert Procurement Sources (Sites C1/1, C1/2 and C1/3) in the Proposed Gungahlin Town Centre. Report to ACT Planning Authority, DELP.
Walshe, K. 1994b Preliminary Cultural Resource Survey of the Hume Industrial Estate. Report to ACT Planning Authority.
Winston-Gregson, J.H. 1985 Australian Federal Police Site at Majura Block 42, Archaeological Report. Access Archaeology Pty Ltd. Report to National Capital Development Commission (Brief no. EL 55/84).
Winston-Gregson, J.H. 1987 Archaeological Survey - Proposed Gun Club Lease, Block 13. Report to ACT Heritage Unit Department of Parks & Conservation. ACT Administration.
~ o0o ~
ACT Eastern Broadacre Planning Study - Cultural Heritage Desktop Review 33 Navin Officer Heritage Consultants October 2007