CALLALA BAY SHARED PATH, SHOALHAVEN LGA.

Sue Feary

Aboriginal cultural heritage assessment report

Report to Shoalhaven City Council Nowra, NSW

September2013

25

Table of Contents

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...... 4 1. INTRODUCTION ...... 6 2. DESCRIPTION OF THE AREA ...... 7 2.1. Location ...... 7 2.2. Landscape ...... 9 2.3. History of peoples living on the land...... 14 2.4. Material evidence ...... 17 2.4.1 AHIMS search ...... 17 2.4.1. Regional archaeological context...... 17 2.4.2. Local archaeological context ...... 20 3. ABORIGINAL CONSULTATION ...... 27 3.1. Notification ...... 27 3.2. Outcome of notification process ...... 29 3.3. Stage 2: Presentation of information about project ...... 29 3.4. Stage 3: Gathering information about cultural significance ...... 29 3.5. Stage 4: Review of draft ACHAR ...... 29 4. ARCHAEOLOGICAL INVESTIGATIONS ...... 30 4.1. Predictions ...... 30 4.2. Sampling strategy ...... 30 4.3. Survey coverage variables ...... 31 4.4. Field methods ...... 35 4.5. Recording methodology ...... 36 4.6. Results and analysis ...... 37 5. SIGNIFICANCE ASSESSMENT ...... 49 5.1. Criteria ...... 49 5.2. Statement of cultural heritage significance ...... 51 6. THE PROPOSED ACTIVITY ...... 51 6.1. Landuse history ...... 51 6.2. Description of development ...... 54 6.3. Assessing harm ...... 55 7. AVOIDING AND/OR MINIMISING HARM ...... 58 7.1 Strategies for minimising harm ...... 58 7.2. Area /sites to be harmed ...... 61 8. POTENTIAL CONSERVATION OUTCOMES...... 62 9. RECOMMENDATIONS AND CONCLUSIONS ...... 62 BIBLIOGRAPHY ...... 64 Appendix 1: AHIMS site search ...... 67 Appendix 2: Site cards 58-2-0144 and 58-2-0145 ...... 70

Feary, S. 2013 shared path. Aboriginal cultural heritage assessment. FINAL REPORT. Page 2

Appendix 3: OEH report ...... 76 Appendix 4: Newspaper advertisement ...... 78 Appendix 5: Letter to registered Aboriginal groups ...... 79 Appendix 6: Letter regarding project meeting ...... 81 Appendix 7: Detailed plans for proposed path, showing area of harm (Stage 1)...... 82 Appendix 8: Details of midden exposures...... 83 Appendix 9: Designs for path construction, above and at ground ...... 84 Figures

Figure 1: Locality map, showing location of ...... 7 Figure 2: Map showing location of Callala Bay village/Callala Point...... 8 Figure 3: Map showing study area for proposed path (red line) at Callala Bay village...... 8 Figure 4: Jervis Bay regional landscape ...... 10 Figure 5: Aboriginal protest poster...... 11 Figure 6: Plan showing route of proposed path ...... 12 Figure 7: Remnant vegetation at Callala Point...... 13 Figure 8: Named Aboriginal groups from blanket records ...... 14 Figure 9: Named Aboriginal groups ...... 15 Figure 10: Red Point and Hare Bay...... 21 Figure 11: Possible extent of 58-2-0145...... 22 Figure 12: Survey units (SU) used in field investigation ...... 31 Figure 13: natural shell beds, Callala Bay ...... 32 Figure 14: SU1 looking south towards steps. Car park on left, houses on right. Photo: S. Feary ...... 32 Figure 15: Main section of SU2 looking south ...... 33 Figure 16: eastern section of SU3...... 34 Figure 17: western section of SU3 ...... 34 Figure 18: SU4 showing gravel path and park land. Callala Creek is left of picture...... 35 Figure 19: Section of path plan showing position of Callala Path 1...... 39 Figure 21: Unformed track (left side of image) and exposed ground, northern section of SU2...... 41 Figure 22: Midden material, 58-2-0145 ...... 42 Figure 23: Marine Parade looking west, thick vegetation left of photo...... 42 Figure 24: Visible extent of midden 58-2-0145 relative to houses ...... 43 Figure 25: Densely packed mud oyster shell exposed by tree roots...... 44 Figure 26: Hummocky surface containing mud oyster shells, exposed by tree roots of Casuarinas...... 45 Figure 27: Aerial map showing possible extent of Callala Path 2 ...... 45 Figure 28: recorded midden exposures (black squares)...... 47 Figure 29: Anadara trapezia, 58-2-0144 ...... 48 Figure 30 Ostrea angasi, 58-2-0144 ...... 48 Figure 31: 1972 proposals for Callala Bay (Sant, 2004: 25) ...... 53 Figure 32: Aerial photo showing location of stages of path construction...... 55 Figure 33: Area in which harrn may occur to Aboriginal objects (covers Stage 1 and 2) ...... 57 Figure 34: Area to be monitored in SU1 ...... 60 Figure 35: Monitoring to occur in hatched area ...... 60

Tables Table 1: Summary of recorded sites from AHIMS search ...... 17 Table 2: Selected relevant archaeological reports ...... 23 Table 3: List of registered Aboriginal groups provided by OEH...... 28 Table 4: Sites recorded during field survey ...... 38 Table 5: Survey coverage variables ...... 49 Table 6: Cultural heritage significance assessment...... 51 Table 7: Assessment of harm ...... 56

Feary, S. 2013 Callala Bay shared path. Aboriginal cultural heritage assessment. FINAL REPORT. Page 3

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Shoalhaven City Council is intending to construct a shared path at Callala Bay village, between Sheaffe St near the boat ramp, across the rocky headland, to join the footbridge at Callala Creek, which connects to village. The subject area is a large prominent rocky headland, bounded by a long sandy beach to the north (Callala Bay/Hare Bay) and Callala Creek estuary to the south. The wider area is known to contain many archaeological sites and is part of an Aboriginal traditional cultural landscape.

The path will be located within public reserve land which is mostly cleared and grassed across the headland, with occasional stands of native vegetation, both remnant and planted. The Callala Bay boat launching facilities are at the northern end and a Council managed recreational reserve is adjacent to Callala Creek at the southern end with residential properties and roads forming the western and northern boundaries. The path is 1600 metres long and 2 metres wide, within an 8 metre wide ‘development corridor’ (3 metres each side of the path) to allow for minor essential path realignment during path construction. The ‘study area’ for the assessment includes all the Council managed land across the headland.

Two previously recorded sites occur within the development corridor– 58-2-0145 is a midden located at Callala Point, and 58-2-0144 is a midden located on the northern bank of Callala Creek.

Three Aboriginal groups responded during the formal consultation process; the Jerrinja Local Aboriginal Land Council (JLALC); the Shoalhaven Elders and Friends Corporation and Jerrinja Consultants PL (Graham Connolly). 1 The area falls within the Jerrinja LALC and Willie Connelly, the JLALC heritage officer participated in the fieldwork. Rod Wellington, Aboriginal Cultural Heritage officer from the NSW Office of Environment and Heritage also conducted an inspection of the proposed path. The draft report was sent to all registered Aboriginal groups for their comment and feedback. No written or verbal responses were received from any of the registered parties.

The fieldwork involved non-invasive surface investigation of the entire cleared area of Council managed land of some 45,000 square metres. Visibility was variable and generally poor, hampered by thick grass cover and introduced gravels in some locations. The development corridor has been disturbed previously during installation of underground services, erosion from vehicle use, and formation of gravel roads and paths. Cliff tops between the footbridge and the northern promontory of the headland were examined from the rocky shore platform below for the presence of midden exposures.

Field investigation re-located the two previously recorded sites and found two new sites. One new site comprised a single stone artefact and a small amount of dispersed shell fragments in a disturbed context. The other site appears to be a large, relatively intact mounded midden of mud oyster, extending into private property, on the southern side of the headland, above Callala Creek. Several discrete midden exposures recorded along the top of the cliff may represent a continuation of this midden.

1 Also known as Jerrinja Aboriginal Enterprise PL and possibly representing Jerrinja Traditional Owners Aboriginal Corporation

Feary, S. 2013 Callala Bay shared path. Aboriginal cultural heritage assessment. FINAL REPORT. Page 4

The assessment concluded that the sites ranged from high to low cultural significance, while recognising that Aboriginal people consider that all evidence of the ancestors is significant at one level.

In line with the cultural heritage significance assessments, the draft report recommended mechanisms for reducing impacts on the most significant Aboriginal objects, including constructing the path on the present ground surface, rather than excavating into it. This recommendation was supported by Office of Environment and Heritage (OEH) staff at a subsequent on-site meeting with Council staff, who undertook to further investigate this option. Council subsequently advised that it was not feasible to build the path on top of the ground. In response, OEH advised that subsurface testing would be required prior to consideration of any AHIP application from Council to harm these sites. Council responded by staging the development, with subsurface testing to occur during a later, second stage. Thus, although this report is a heritage assessment of the entire development proposal, the associated AHIP application refers only to Stage 1 of the development.

This report recommends monitoring of sections of the route by members of registered Aboriginal parties as a condition of an Aboriginal Heritage Impact Permit issued to Shoalhaven City Council for Stage 1 of the path. It is further recommended that the AHIP covers the entire development corridor for Stage 1 of the path, with partial or total harm allowed for recorded sites, and any other as yet unrecorded Aboriginal objects within the development corridor (excluding Aboriginal skeletal remains).

Feary, S. 2013 Callala Bay shared path. Aboriginal cultural heritage assessment. FINAL REPORT. Page 5

1. INTRODUCTION

This report describes the Aboriginal cultural heritage assessment undertaken in respect of a proposal by Shoalhaven City Council to construct a shared path between Sheaffe St and Callala Creek (also known as Bid Bid Creek), in the coastal village of Callala Bay on the western shores of Jervis Bay in southern . Several other minor developments are associated with the path, including, for example, signage, installation of bollards and fences to control vehicle use, minor road works, minor drainage, and plantings to protect the natural ground surface from further erosion.

The shared path at Callala Bay is one of many paths that have been constructed or are in the process of being constructed, within and between coastal villages of the Shoalhaven LGA. The aim of the paths is to encourage both locals and visitors to adopt a healthier lifestyle by providing public facilities for walking and bike riding while enjoying the natural beauty of the area.

The Shoalhaven City Council is responsible for undertaking both the works and the assessments for the new path and associated activities. Council has used DECCW’s Due Diligence process to assess the impact of the proposed development on Aboriginal objects (DECCW 2010a). This process identified two sites on or close to the proposed alignment of the path; two shell middens with AHIMS site IDs 58-2-0144 at Callala Creek and 58-2-0145 on Callala Point/Flora Point. Both are old recordings using grid coordinates based on the superseded British Imperial System, so their locations are not precisely recorded.

A Review of Environmental Factors (REF) has been prepared by Council for the Callala Bay path to meet the requirements of Part 5 of the Environmental Protection and Assessment Act 1979. This heritage assessment is in respect of a preferred route, which may be a little different from the final route. The final endorsed route will be identified through the REF process.

The objective of this archaeological assessment is to establish whether or not the proposal would result in impacts to Aboriginal objects and to determine the need, or otherwise, for an Aboriginal Heritage Impact Permit.

Potential impacts to sites 58-2-0144 and 58-2-0145, and any other Aboriginal objects recorded during this assessment would arise from a shallow excavation (maximum depth 150 mm) of 2.0 metre width and laying of gravel /concrete for the path. Impacts may also arise from associated activities such as installation of bollards, minor road works, installation of small public facilities (drinking fountains, lights) and erosion control and rehabilitation where required along the route.

This heritage assessment has been undertaken in accordance with relevant OEH guides and codes - Code of practice for archaeological investigations (DECCW, 2010), Guide to assessing Aboriginal heritage (OEH, 2011) and Aboriginal consultation requirements (DECCW, 2010).

Investigator and contributors

This assessment has been undertaken by Dr Sue Feary, Director, Heritage and Conservation Planning and Management, with contributions and advice from Council staff James Harris, Senior Strategic Planner,

Feary, S. 2013 Callala Bay shared path. Aboriginal cultural heritage assessment. FINAL REPORT. Page 6

Kaylene Barrie, Architectural Design Officer and Geoff Young, Environmental Operations Officer. Willie Connelly, the Jerrinja Local Aboriginal Land Council’s (JLALC) cultural heritage officer participated in field investigation and recording. Advice on management options was provided by OEH staff Jackie Taylor and Genevieve Palm.

2. DESCRIPTION OF THE AREA

2.1. Location

The subject area is located in the Parish of Wollumboola, County of St Vincent, within the Shoalhaven City Local Government Area. The proposed path is on the Huskisson and Nowra 1:25,000 topographic map sheets (GDA), in Zone 56.

The proposed path is to be built within the small coastal village of Callala Bay, located at Callala Point2 on the northern section of the western curve of the Jervis Bay embayment. Callala Bay village is approximately 25kms southeast of Nowra on the NSW south coast. is 200 kms to the west and 180 kms to the north (Figures 1 and 2). The path is situated between the Callala Creek estuary where it links up with an existing footbridge and traverses east and northward along the cliff top until it descends to the beach in the western section of Hare Bay, finishing at Sheaffe Street, just north of the boat ramp (Figure 3).

Figure 1: Locality map, showing location of Jervis Bay

2 Callala Point refers strictly to the southern promontory of the headland

Feary, S. 2013 Callala Bay shared path. Aboriginal cultural heritage assessment. FINAL REPORT. Page 7

Figure 2: Map showing location of Callala Bay village/Callala Point. Source: (Dalmazzo, 2012).

Figure 3: Map showing study area for proposed path (red line) at Callala Bay village. Source: Dalmazzo (2012).

Feary, S. 2013 Callala Bay shared path. Aboriginal cultural heritage assessment. FINAL REPORT. Page 8

2.2. Landscape

Regional The regional landscape comprises a large embayment, Jervis Bay, enclosed by the peninsulas of Beecroft and Bherwerre to the north and south respectively. St Georges Basin lies to the southwest and reaches the ocean through Sussex Inlet. The Jervis Bay region lies in the coastal plain of ’s eastern seaboard, backed to the west by steep sandstone escarpments and coastal ranges.

The geology of the Jervis Bay region can be described as undulating sandstone mass overlain by varying depths of windblown and water deposited sands. The base rock is made up of geological units belonging mainly to the Permian Shoalhaven group of sedimentary rocks which form the southern edge of the extensive Sydney Basin system. These ancient sandstones (c. 280 - 225 million years) are overlain by Tertiary aged alluvial sediments in low lying areas (Cho, et al, 1995). Water and wind deposited sediments of Quaternary age capped the older landscape with fine alluvium and formed the sandy beaches.

Formation of the bay in its present appearance occurred around 6000 years ago when the sea level reached its current height. Before this time, during the last ice age (20 - 15,000 years ago), the sea level was about 120 metres lower than today and the land extended 15 kilometres further eastward. The headlands would have been low mountain ranges and Bowen Island a hill. ‘Jervis Bay’ was an open vegetated valley, with a creek flowing outwards between what are now Bowen Island and (Director of National Parks, 2002). Rising sea levels carried sand landward, forming two major sand barriers, cutting off St Georges Basin and Beecroft Peninsula and depositing sand in the extensive dune sheets along Bherwerre Peninsula.

The geology of the region is very relevant to Aboriginal occupation as weathering of the sandstone cliffs has created the rock shelters where people lived and left their artwork on the walls. The eroded marine rock platforms are the habitat for many shellfish species and, under the sea, ‘bombies’ and other submarine features support a diverse range of fish and crustacean species. Knowledge of these species – their ecology and lifecycles – and how to hunt and gather them is a significant component of the traditional and local knowledge of Jervis Bay’s Aboriginal communities (Moorcroft & Feary, 2008).

One major creek, Currambene Creek, flows into Jervis Bay at Huskisson, associated with extensive and scientifically significant wetlands and salt marshes. Several other smaller creeks also reach the bay, the largest being Carama Inlet and Moona Moona Creek, both also associated with significant wetlands. The Woylie Gully wetland system reaches the ocean immediately east of Callala Bay village (see Figure 4). The western shores of Jervis Bay are characterised by long sweeping beaches and small bays, protected by rocky headlands. The area is largely naturally vegetated with tall open forest, patches of temperate rainforest and coastal heath, as development has been constrained by the presence of a suite of protected areas in both NSW, adjacent commonwealth lands on the Bherwerre peninsula and, ironically, the presence of a bombing range on Beecroft Peninsula. As a result the Jervis Bay region is nationally and internationally recognised for its biological diversity, being situated at the northern and southern limits of several species of fauna and flora. Numerous endangered species, both marine and terrestrial, exist in region.

Feary, S. 2013 Callala Bay shared path. Aboriginal cultural heritage assessment. FINAL REPORT. Page 9

The Regional Environmental Plan for Jervis Bay attempts to protect the natural and cultural values of the region by constraining residential development to infill of existing villages in the region (Department of Planning, 1996).

Figure 4: Jervis Bay regional landscape

The cultural heritage of Jervis Bay’s Aboriginal people is deeply embedded in the surrounding natural landscape and seascape. The spiritual and social significance of the Jervis Bay landscape and seascape is described in numerous publications, by Aboriginal people from Wreck bay and Jerrinja communities, anthropologists and archaeologists (e.g. Lowe 2001, Egloff 1995, Cane 1988). Many Aboriginal people also have strong historical associations with Jervis Bay, from living at official Aboriginal reserves at Orient Point and Wreck Bay or unofficial reserves on both sides of Currambene Creek (Navin 1991, Egloff 1981).

The sentient value of the landscape is kept alive today through storytelling and transfer of knowledge across generations and also in local schools through an Aboriginal language revitalisation programme. The coordinated campaign of Aboriginal people and conservation groups and the concomitant marriage of natural and cultural values was a major factor in stopping the re-location of the Australian fleet base and armaments depot to Jervis Bay in the 1990s and demonstrated the strength of attachment to place (Feary, 2001; Moorcroft & Feary, 2008; Lowe & Davies, 2001) The place continues to be of great cultural significance to Aboriginal people (Longbottom, 2001).

Feary, S. 2013 Callala Bay shared path. Aboriginal cultural heritage assessment. FINAL REPORT. Page 10

Figure 5: Poster relating to protests over the Commonwealth Government’s proposal to put the fleet base and armaments depot at Jervis Bay.

Bundarwa (Beecroft Peninsula) is the most significant spiritual and mythological landscape for Jervis Bay’s Aboriginal people, but there are many other more localised places of great spiritual, cultural and historical significance around the shores of Jervis Bay, see(Cane (1988) and Navin Officer (2012).

Local landscape The proposed shared path is located at Callala Point, on the eastern boundary of Callala Bay village, between Sheaffe St to the north and the footbridge over Callala Creek to the south, a distance of 1.6 kms (Figure 6). It will be built wholly within public reserve, comprising land owned either by Council or the NSW Government and managed by Council. Large Council reserves are located at Hare bay/Callala Bay and Callala Creek, linked by a strip of mostly cleared public land running across the headland between the rear boundaries of residences and the cliff line.

The natural landscape is dominated by a very prominent rocky headland which has two distinct promontories. The northern, unnamed promontory rises just south of Callala Bay sailing club, while the southern promontory (named Callala Point/Flora Point) delineates the northern boundary of Callala Creek, and is associated with extensive areas of rocky shore platforms. This headland, together with the western side of Beecroft Peninsula encloses a small protected embayment within Jervis Bay, known as Hare Bay (see Figure 4). Hare Bay contains some of the most important seagrass beds in NSW and is a nursery for a diverse array of fish species.

North of the headland, the proposed path is located on highly modified Holocene aged sand dunes of the western end of Hare Bay. At its southern end, the path descends from the headland down to the incised flood plain of Callala Creek.

Feary, S. 2013 Callala Bay shared path. Aboriginal cultural heritage assessment. FINAL REPORT. Page 11

Figure 6: Plan showing route of proposed path (green line)

Feary, S. 2013 Callala Bay shared path. Aboriginal cultural heritage assessment. FINAL REPORT. Page 12

An indication of the original vegetation of Callala Point can be gleaned from the few stands of remnant vegetation still remaining after clearing for the Callala Bay village. A flora survey for the proposed path identified the dominant vegetation as Bangalay sand forest (Eucalyptus botryoides) on sandy substrates with Angophora floribunda (rough-barked apple), Eucalyptus schlerophylla (scribbly gum) and Casuarina glauca on clay soils. Some rainforest elements were also identified as well as a diverse range of understorey species (Dalmazzo, 2012). Recent plantings of native species also occur on the two promontories. Most of the development corridor (path alignment and 3 metres each side) is cleared of native vegetation and grassed, with a vegetated strip along the top of the cliff, a few isolated large trees and a few small copses of remnant vegetation. The largest of these is on Callala Point itself and contains many weeds (Figure 7).

Figure 7: Remnant vegetation at Callala Point.

The built environment in the vicinity of the study area consists of boat launching facilities at Hare Bay, including a launching ramp, jetty, marina, large car park, sailing club building and barbeque facilities. Callala Point has a lookout with a short walking track leading to it. Steps go down from the cliff top to the rocky shore platform at several locations. The Callala Creek reserve contains picnic shelters, barbeque and shelters and toilets and a foot bridge. At the southern end of Marine Parade an unformed track occurs within the council reserve and there is a constructed gravel track along the southern edge of the headland.

A number of underground services, including water and sewerage lines exist within the development corridor. Their installation would have impacted any Aboriginal objects present.

Feary, S. 2013 Callala Bay shared path. Aboriginal cultural heritage assessment. FINAL REPORT. Page 13

2.3. History of peoples living on the land

Apart from the infrequent, but occasionally detailed observations of the earliest white explorers, such as those of Governor Macquarie and Charles Throsby, census reports of blanket distributions for the years 1833 to 1842 are the main source of written information on traditional Aboriginal life. Blankets were distributed annually at predetermined collection points and the distributor kept records of name, age, sex, number of wives, place of residence, and name of tribe. Blanket distribution centres in the Shoalhaven district recorded Aboriginal people from the following ‘tribal affiliations’ or named groups in the Jervis Bay region – Jervis Bay, Erowal, Bherewarrie with the Jeniwangle further inland (Egloff, et al, 1995) (Figure 8).

Figure 8: Named Aboriginal groups (in capitals) from blanket records (after Egloff et al 1995).

Wesson’s interpretations of the blanket records give a slightly different picture of the distribution of named groups. Figure 9 shows that although Bherewarrie is the same as in Egloff, Wesson places Jerriwangalie much closer to the coast and includes three additional named groups; Corramy on the northern shores of Sussex Inlet, Wagamy on the northern side of the bay and Wandawandahan inland from Jervis Bay (Wesson, 2000). Aboriginal people who identified themselves as coming from the Jervis Bay region were also counted in censuses in many other collection points in the wider region, reflecting the mobility of the Aboriginal population and/or responses to impacts of white settlement and an increasing dependence on government hand-outs.

Feary, S. 2013 Callala Bay shared path. Aboriginal cultural heritage assessment. FINAL REPORT. Page 14

Figure 9: Named Aboriginal groups (after Wesson 2000). 25 = Wagamy; 28 = Wandawandahan; 12 = Jerriwangalie; 8 = Corramy; 3 = Bherewarrie/Perrywerry/Berruar

Tindale identified the Wodi Wodi (also spelt/or known as Wodiwodi, Woddi Woddi, Illawarra, Tharawal) people as occupying the area from (approximately) Stanwell Park in the north to the northern bank of the , with the river forming a boundary between the Wodi Wodi and the Wandandian (also referred to as Tharumba, Kurialyuin, Murraygaro, Jervis Bay) people on the south side of the river (Tindale, 1974). The term Wodi Wodi was first recorded in 1875 from the testimony of Lizzy Malone, daughter of a woman of the Shoalhaven tribe, who said it was the language spoken by the Aboriginal people of the Illawarra (Navin Officer, 2007).

The Wandandian people appear to be a subgroup of large tribes whom Howitt in his late 19th century work on Aboriginal life in south-eastern Australia, describes as occupying the land between the Shoalhaven River and Cape Howe (NSW/Victorian border) and inland to the coastal range (Howitt, 1996). Conversely he also states that Yuin was the general name for all tribes between and , which is similar to RH Mathews, who placed the Yuin from south of Sydney to the Victorian border (Thomas, 2007).

Howitt identified two sub-tribes within the Yuin, called the Kurial (north) and Guyangal (south), as well as a division into coastal (Katung) and inland (Paiendra) people (Howitt, 1996, p. 82) The Kurial- Yuin northern sub-tribe comprised three smaller groups, one called the Gurungatta-manji, described as being in the lower Shoalhaven river districts.

Untangling the connections between language boundaries and boundaries based on other social groupings is difficult. Using the records of Mathews and Tindale, Eades has drawn a linguistic boundary between the northern Dharawal and southern Dhurga speakers, from about the middle of Jervis Bay (Eades, 1976). There is good linguistic evidence that people of Jervis Bay spoke Dharawal, According to some researchers, a language called Mudthung (Thurumba) was spoken between the Shoalhaven River and Ulladulla, reaching

Feary, S. 2013 Callala Bay shared path. Aboriginal cultural heritage assessment. FINAL REPORT. Page 15 inland to the Great Dividing Range. The language is described as being a dialect of Thoorga (Dhurga) (Wesson 2000: 157). The majority of local Aboriginal people today identify themselves as Dhurga speakers from the Wandandian/Wandrawandian cultural group.

Because of its high biodiversity, the Jervis Bay region would have been particularly rich in marine, estuarine and terrestrial resources and both the archaeological and ethnographic evidence suggests substantial numbers of Aboriginal people living in the area at white contact. Excellent descriptions of traditional Aboriginal life in the Jervis Bay region can be found in a number of publications, e.g. Egloff (1981, 1995); Cane (1988). Briefly, the ethnographic and archaeological records indicate that prior to white contact, up until about the 1820s, local Aboriginal people lived a traditional hunter-gatherer lifestyle, with an emphasis on harvesting of marine resources, particularly fish and shellfish (Bennett, 2007). The range of fish and shellfish species represented in middens indicates extensive use of both marine and estuarine resource zones probably on a seasonal basis. Bark canoes would have been used on sheltered water bodies, with men using spears and women using a hook and line to catch fish. Shearwaters were probably collected as they landed on the beaches, exhausted after breeding, and stranded marine mammals including whales would have been a rare but important component of the diet.

Terrestrial resources would have also been important, especially plants, for food, medicine and as a source of raw materials for making baskets, fish nets, string and many other items of material culture. Forest and woodland fauna such as wallabies, kangaroos, and arboreal marsupials would have been hunted by men. Sustainable harvesting of these resources demanded an intimate knowledge of their location, ecology, seasonal availability, as well as techniques for harvesting and processing. Stone would have been traded in from further south, to make stone artefacts for spear points and scrapers for working animal skins. The complex association between Aboriginal people and the natural environment was and still is, developed and maintained through ceremony and ritual when younger generations are taught cultural traditions through story telling.

The spiritual significance of the Jervis Bay region has been well documented, particularly creation stories associated with Bundoola and Spundula. Although these powerful figures are linked to places and activities on Beecroft Peninsula (Bundarwa) and are of particular significance to the Jerrinja Aboriginal Community at Orient Point, older men and women at Wreck Bay agree that Spundula is the most important and strongest spiritual being in the Jervis Bay area (Cane, 1988). Today Jervis Bay Aboriginal people describe Bundoola in terms of a lightning man and frequently as the source of bad or rough weather. He is a great fisherman who lives in Devil’s Hole and is associated with the wellbeing of the fish and shellfish resources. Bundoola controls the sea, the rain and the weather. He is also known as the ancestral figure who created the thirteen tribes of the New South Wales south coast (George Brown, Illawarra Mercury 7/7/1990 in Egloff (1995)).

Traditional Aboriginal life at Jervis Bay was probably not changed to any great extent until after the 1830s when the first land grants were made and timber getting and boat building began in the region. Access to traditional hunting and fishing grounds was restricted and local Aboriginal people were impacted by colonisation in more dramatic ways. An excellent detailed account of colonial history can be found in Dallas (2006).

Feary, S. 2013 Callala Bay shared path. Aboriginal cultural heritage assessment. FINAL REPORT. Page 16

An Aboriginal heritage study of the Shoalhaven LGA identified historical sources that describe an Aboriginal wallaby drive in the vicinity of Callala Point (Goulding & Waters, 2005).

“…Probably the last all aborigine ‘wallaby drive’ in the Shoalhaven district was conducted opposite Huskisson on Callala Point. There were no records kept of the ‘bag’ but it was a very good tally and justified the name Callala as a ‘place of plenty’. The wallaby drive took place before sunrise. Four canoes left Huskisson camp and proceeded upstream for about 2 miles to where Currambene flows quite close to the bay and forms a narrow peninsula with river on one side and the bay on the other. One boat contained the waddy men, i.e. men who would do the actual killing while the others contained the ‘drivers’ who would drive the scared wallabies down to them. The remaining canoes glided almost without sound to the appointed place where the drive would begin…“ (Shoalhaven City Council 1996: 15).

2.4. Material evidence

2.4.1 AHIMS search Shoalhaven City Council requested an extensive AHIMS search on 27 February 2013, for a 5 km radius around Callala Bay village. A total of 26 sites have been recorded within this area (Table 1 and Appendix 1).

Table 1: Summary of recorded sites from AHIMS search Site type Frequency of occurrence Open camp site (artefact scatter) 6 Isolated find 2 Middens (most also containing artefacts) 17 Burials (associated with middens) 1 (historic)

Several recorded sites identified during the AHIMS site search are the result of systematic archaeological surveys in the region. Scott Cane’s anthropological and archaeological survey for the proposed Navy fleet base and armaments depot recorded several sites, including previously recorded sites, on the western side of Beecroft peninsula (Cane, 1988). A survey for a proposed upgrade of unsealed roads at Red Point in saw the recording of several artefact scatters and large shell middens (Dibden & Kuskie, 1999). However, the majority of recorded sites within the extensive search area have not been recorded as a result of systematic survey, but are the product of opportunistic recordings by local people and/or researchers. Furthermore, some of the recordings date back to the 1970s, with imprecise locational information. There are also several known but unrecorded sites within the extensive search area, including two traditional burials on the northern banks of Currambene Creek and a large shell midden on top of the headland at Red Point.

No AHIPs have been issued previously for the subject area or the recorded sites within it.

2.4.1. Regional archaeological context

The Jervis Bay region is rich in archaeological sites and has been the subject of a considerable amount of archaeological research since the 1970s, including a number of important systematic excavations. The most significant natural event to impact on Aboriginal culture and history was the actual formation of Jervis Bay around 6000 years ago when the sea level rose and stabilised at its current level. This would have drowned

Feary, S. 2013 Callala Bay shared path. Aboriginal cultural heritage assessment. FINAL REPORT. Page 17 the river valleys and created Jervis Bay and St Georges Basin and commenced the process of dune barrier formations. Aboriginal people may have been living around Jervis Bay before the sea level rose, but if so, the archaeological evidence is now submerged beneath the ocean. There is evidence for Aboriginal occupation 20,000 years ago further south in a rock shelter at and further north in a shell midden at Shellharbour (Mulvaney & Kamminga, 1999) but it is more likely that the Jervis Bay area was not occupied until the bay itself and the surrounding wetlands, lakes and lagoons were formed. Creation of these new resource zones would have attracted subsistence hunter/gatherer and fisher people, because of the presence of a diverse range of resources that were easily accessible without needing to travel long distances. The huge numbers of sites recorded by archaeologists since the 1970s, especially on Beecroft and Bherwerrre Peninsulas support the idea that the Jervis Bay region was able to support a large Aboriginal population.

Several archaeological sites have been excavated in the Jervis Bay region, with radiocarbon dating showing evidence for Aboriginal occupation from at least 2000 years ago. These excavations provided scientific evidence of the diets and subsistence economy of the original inhabitants. A large midden at Cemetery Point, near the Wreck Bay Community cemetery, was excavated in 1973 before being quarried for shell grit by the then Jervis Bay Nature Reserve (Collier, 1975). The animal bones in the midden showed that mutton birds and a wide variety of fish species were hunted, including snapper. Some of the animal bones found in the midden were of species now extinct or very rare in the local area, such as the masked booby and a species of python. The site also contained evidence of a traditional tool kit including stone artefacts, bone points and shell fishhooks. Most of the midden was composed of shell and the sheer volume of shell in the Cemetery Point midden suggests that people were relying heavily on the shellfish locally available from the nearby rock platform. A wide range of species was collected, with blue mussel being the highest percentage by number, followed by tritons, abalone, mussel, whelks and turbans. Many other smaller shellfish species were also present, but they may have been collected incidentally, attached to the bigger specimens (Collier, 1975). Charcoal samples from ancient fires were radiocarbon dated, which showed that the site was occupied continuously from nearly 1800 years ago until around 300 years ago. This is a similar basal date to one obtained from midden deposits in a rock shelter on Abrahams Bosom Reserve on Beecroft Peninsula, which was excavated in the late 1980s (Paton & MacFarlane, 1989). These dates also fit in with a theory that archaeologists have, of an intensification of use of the coastline from around 2000 years ago (Hughes & Lampert, 1982). Previous excavations of rockshelters at Currarong, adjacent to Abrahams Bosom reserve gave an estimated basal date of 7,000 years BP (Before Present). The rich archaeological deposits showed a broad based economy that includes marine, estuarine and terrestrial resources. Several burials were also found in the rockshelters, the majority being children and infants (Lampert, 1971).

When several middens on the western side of Bowen Island were excavated and analysed in 1980, they gave a completely different picture of the traditional diet. Although shell, again with mussel shell dominant, was present in the middens, the assemblage of faunal bones demonstrated a diet based on a wide range of fish and bird species, with a preference for snapper and mutton birds. Carbon dates showed it to be occupied from 1200 years ago until about 400 years ago during which time mutton birds seemed to have been the dominant food (Blackwell, 1980). This is an interesting find as penguins are the dominant animal on the island today but few appear in the archaeological deposits. There are a number of possible explanations for the absence of penguin bones, the most likely being that it reflects a preference for the fattier and tastier mutton birds.

Feary, S. 2013 Callala Bay shared path. Aboriginal cultural heritage assessment. FINAL REPORT. Page 18

Excavation of a large shell midden on St Georges Basin demonstrated exploitation of a different suite of shellfish species from those found in the previous excavations. Bimbulas and pipi shells showed that the estuaries and open beaches were important for resource collection. Shell fishhooks and bone points were abundant in the midden, demonstrating the importance of fishing to the local economy (Barz, 1977).

A number of archaeological surveys have been conducted on Bherwerrre Peninsula, the earliest and most well-known being Marjorie Sullivan’s investigation in 1977 (Sullivan, 1977). This survey was undertaken during a major dune stabilisation program which unfortunately covered up some sites with many metres of introduced sand and destroyed other sites through use of heavy machinery. Sullivan considered that all of the sites she recorded post-dated the final rise of sea level, although some of the deeper sites may date back to 6000 years ago. A total of 56 sites were recorded with the majority being shell middens, with some of the deposits so extensive that it was impossible to distinguish between individual sites, especially in the Bherwerrre sand dunes. In 1996, Sullivan’s recorded sites on Bherwerrre peninsula were re-recorded by Katie Sachs as part of university research (Sachs, 1996). This study showed that the condition of most sites had deteriorated during the previous 19 years.

In 1976, Peter White and a group of archaeology students from Sydney University conduct a training exercise on Beecroft peninsula which resulted in the detailed recording of hundreds of sites, including a suite of highly significant art sites (White, 1977). Several of the sites were re-analysed and recorded by Kelvin Officer as part of a NPWS rock art recording project and also PhD research (Officer, 1991). They are now part of an ongoing monitoring program by the Department of Defence.

In 1987, Scott Cane undertook an Aboriginal heritage investigation of the Jervis Bay area as part of the environmental impact assessment of the Defence Department’s controversial proposal to re-locate the Australian Navy’s fleet base and the armaments depot from Sydney to Jervis Bay. He recorded 50 archaeological sites (Cane, 1988). Cane’s report contains useful syntheses of both the archaeological and historical evidence for Aboriginal use of the Jervis Bay region, and provides a detailed analysis of the distribution patterns, contents and condition of archaeological sites, as well as giving recommendations for future management. In particular, he noted that the density of sites/kilometre along the coastline was considerably higher than average site densities elsewhere along the east coast (Cane 1988), suggesting that the density of pre-contact Aboriginal populations at Jervis Bay was considerably higher than elsewhere on the south coast, possibly due to the existence of so many rich and varied resource zones, especially those of the marine environment.

These early, academically oriented investigations established the Aboriginal occupation models for Jervis Bay and provided critical information on traditional diet and resource collection strategies. There have been numerous investigations since, but most have been of a smaller scale, and primarily associated with environmental impact assessment for specific developments, rather than driven by research questions. As a result they have not contributed greatly to the archaeological knowledge base. Table 2 gives a summary of the most relevant reports for the region.

Feary, S. 2013 Callala Bay shared path. Aboriginal cultural heritage assessment. FINAL REPORT. Page 19

2.4.2. Local archaeological context

As Table 2 shows, most archaeological assessment in the region has occurred in the more developed southern section of Jervis Bay, south of Currambene Creek, which effectively divides the bay in half. The highlighted reports in Table 2 relate to the northern half of Jervis Bay and, together with data from AHIMS provides a picture of traditional Aboriginal occupation and use of the landscape and resources in the Callala Bay region. An archaeological survey for a proposed school at Callala Bay revealed no Aboriginal objects, due to the small size of the area and its distance from swamps and waterways (Dallas, 1998). In 1995, Sue Feary recorded an extensive, disturbed midden along what is now called the Silkwood Track between Callala Beach village and Callala Creek. The midden contained the usual suite of rocky platform molluscan species, together with some bone and stone artefacts.3 This site was re-investigated in 2000 in the context of an archaeological investigation for a proposed subdivision at Griffin St, a greenfields site immediately adjacent to Callala Beach village. Despite the high potential for the area to contain sites - being close to a major creek, proximity of other recorded sites and presence of undisturbed, naturally vegetated land - no new sites were found during the investigation (Jo McDonald Cultural Heritage Management PL, 2000). The absence of sites was attributed to very low ground visibility during the survey and additional archaeological investigation by way of test pitting was recommended (Jo McDonald Cultural Heritage Management PL, 2000).

A total of 54 test pits of 1 metre x 1 metre size were excavated within the development area, mostly with a backhoe. The test pits demonstrated that previously recorded site 58-2-0312 did not extend into the development area. One new site, CB2, was found in two test pits in the Callala Beach fore dunes. Analysis of the midden material showed that both marine and estuarine shellfish species resources had been harvested, together with flathead and wrasse and land mammals. Edible mussel was the dominant shellfish species, easily obtainable from the supra-littoral zone of the nearby rocky shore marine platforms. The small size of the site suggests sporadic occupation, with a suggestion that the focus of traditional Aboriginal life was further south, at Currambene Creek (Jo McDonald CHM PL, 2000).

In 1999 NPWS Nowra commissioned an archaeological survey of the new section of Jervis Bay National Park between Hare Bay and the Currarong Road, prior to the construction of a public access road into Red Point. Several middens and artefact scatters were known to occur but had not been recorded. The survey along 16 kms of tracks and trails and over broader areas recorded six sites, including an extensive midden immediately east of the Red Point headland (Dibden & Kuskie, 1999).

Northeast of Callala Bay, at Currarong and along Currarong Road, subsurface testing was conducted for upgrading of the sewerage scheme at Currarong and installation of new wastewater pipelines. 69 test pits were dug with a mechanical auger, which recovered 88 stone artefacts from 19 auger holes. Midden material of rocky shore platform molluscs was recovered from 26 of the auger holes, with a concentration of archaeological material in dunes associated with Carama Inlet (Navin Officer, 2004). The sporadic nature of the archaeological evidence seems in stark contrast to the large number of sites on Beecroft Peninsula and Abrahams Bosom Reserve.

3 Site 58-2-0312

Feary, S. 2013 Callala Bay shared path. Aboriginal cultural heritage assessment. FINAL REPORT. Page 20

In 2007, NPWS commissioned an audit of all recorded sites within Abrahams Bosom Reserve which forms a northern extension of Beecroft peninsula into NSW. At the time, it was believed that the reserve would be added to Jervis Bay National Park. More than 30 sites had been recorded over many decades; some being rockshelters with art and the audit provided valuable information on their condition and location. The report provided detailed recommendations for the ongoing protection and management of each site (Dibden, 2007).

Hare Bay was an important traditional and historical fishing place of Jerrinja fishermen, who have a deep knowledge of the area (Figure 10). The top of Red Point was used by Jerrinja people for fish spotting and contains a large midden (Feary pers. obs.).

Figure 10: Red Point and Hare Bay, with Carama inlet at top of image.

A characteristic feature of the archaeological sites in the Callala Bay area is that many were recorded more than 30 years ago, and have no associated reports. The two sites within the development corridor were possibly recorded as part of an Australian Museum investigation in the 1960s. Site 58-2-0144, a stratified midden on the northern bank of Callala Creek, east of the present footbridge has been recorded several times over a number of years which is useful for constructing its disturbance history. When first recorded it was described as having an upper layer of Port Lincoln (Mud) oysters and a lower layer of Anadara trapezia (bimbula/Sydney cockle), separated by a layer of black sand. Its dimension was given as 150 ft long and 1 ft deep, making it an extensive site. A ground edge axe and stone flakes are also mentioned, as well as ‘native wells in bush nearby’. Later recordings note the impact of erosion on the midden and the removal of shells by local people for their gardens. Concern was raised that the proposed bridge would destroy the site (which it may well have done, in part). An interesting point in regard to this midden is apparent change from bimbula to mud oyster which may reflect environmental changes but it may also represent a change

Feary, S. 2013 Callala Bay shared path. Aboriginal cultural heritage assessment. FINAL REPORT. Page 21 in Aboriginal diet due to localised over-exploitation of the highly sought after bimbula, as has been suggested for species changes in middens at Merimbula on the far south coast (ANUTech PL, 1986).

The second site in the development corridor for the proposed path is 58-2-0145, also recorded in the 1970s although in much less detail. This is recorded as an east facing stratified open midden on top of a cliff fronting a rock platform.4 Its dimensions are given as 30ft by 10ft and a few inches deep. The mollusc species present were reef gastropods and mussel, reflecting the proximity to the rock platform below. The area is described as being ‘50 yards south of Marine Parade on the beach side of road, cleared and grassed and used by campers’. In the absence of a precise grid reference, the site is estimated to be located on the public open space at Callala Point, possibly extending into what is now private property (Figure 11).

Figure 11: Possible extent of 58-2-0145.

In October 2012, Rod Wellington, Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Officer for OEH undertook an inspection of the proposed path at the request of Council. His report provides recommendations for monitoring and management and notes the presence of the two previously recorded sites and a possible new site, behind the cliff top on the southern side of the headland opposite Callala St (see Appendix 2 for his report on the inspection).

4 The reference to stratification suggests it was exposed in profile on the cliff edge.

Feary, S. 2013 Callala Bay shared path. Aboriginal cultural heritage assessment. FINAL REPORT. Page 22

Table 2: Selected relevant archaeological reports Report name Author (Date) Location/landform Type Results Comments Archaeological investigation of Avery R Leisure centre site, areal 1 small artefact scatter Generally low lying area a proposed leisure centre (1997) swamp/heath/coastal woodland, complex, the Wool Road, NSW 3kms west of PP An archaeological survey of a Colley S (1988) West of Collingwood beach, areal 2 artefact scatters Large area, only a very small portion proposed urban development swamp/heath surveyed, results very inconclusive but some at Vincentia, south coast of areas with high potential. new South Wales Vincentia Master Plan. Dallas M 2003 Bayswood subdivision areal No sites found Poor visibility, recommended a test pitting Archaeological Assessment of program Lot 801 & 802 in DP 102286 and Lots 72-75 in DP 87404 Cnr naval College Road and the Wool Road, Vincentia, NSW Vincentia Master Plan. Dallas M and Wright Bayswood subdivision Test excavation A few artefacts in one Low lying, low potential Archaeological test excavation RVS 2005 of the PADs of site 58-2-0392 (PAD1) and site 58-2-0393 (PAD2) in the project area comprising Lot 801 & 802 in DP 102286 and Lots 72-75 in DP 87404 Cnr naval College Road and the Wool Road, Vincentia, NSW Aboriginal and European Dallas M 2006 Heritage estates areal Re-location of 2 Area extensively damaged Cultural heritage Assessment. previously recorded The heritage estates, artefact scatters , NSW An archaeological assessment Dibden J and Kuskie P Red Point, northern side of Jervis Linear and areal 3 artefact scatters, 2 Extensive midden previously recorded was of proposed works by NPWS at 1999 Bay shell middens, 1 re-located. Red Point and Hammerhead isolated artefact Point, Jervis Bay. Investigation of a possible Feary S Huskisson Single site Identification of a Highly disturbed and may not be in-situ Aboriginal site at the 2012 assessment midden noted by Huskisson Hotel, Jervis Bay, McDonald in 2002 New South Wales Assessment of a possible Feary S RTBU Single site Possible midden Aboriginal site, RTBU camp, 2011 assessment remnants

Feary, S. 2013 Callala Bay shared path. Aboriginal cultural heritage assessment. FINAL REPORT. Page 23

Jervis Bay Territory The burial at Mary Bay Feary S Wreck Bay salvage Secondary burial of Buried at top of a steep dune face behind 2009 juvenile human beach Report on the survey for Koettig M 1989 lineal 1 artefact scatter, 4 Aboriginal sites along the PADs proposed Tomerong Bypass Sub-surface archaeological Kuskie P 1995 Worrowing Test excavation 1 additional artefact investigations of site 58-2- 0298, Worrowing estate, Old , NSW south coast Archaeological survey of ocean Lance A and Fuller N ( Jervis Bay hinterland linear 1 large artefact scatter outfall pipeline routes, Jervis 1988) Bay, New South Wales. Archaeological survey for McDonald J Huskisson areal No sites recorded, Aboriginal sites, Jervis Bay 2002 presence of shell hotel, Huskisson, NSW observed in a trench An archaeological assessment Navin K 1990 Tomerong areal 4 small artefact of alternative by-pass routes scatters, 2 axe groove for the princes Highway at site, 2 middens, and 1 Tomerong, NSW isolated find An archaeological investigation Navin K 1991 Currambene creek linear Important contact site Bilong may contain pre-contact burials as of proposed Currambene creek at Bilong. well as the post-contact grave. Culturally crossing and associated road 4 scarred trees, 2 significant site. routes from to artefact scatters, Callala beach, Jervis Bay , NSW isolated finds, 1 midden A preliminary archaeological Navin K 1993 Huskisson Pine forest areal No sites assessment for the St Georges Basin/Jervis Bay regional effluent management scheme. Archaeological assessment of a Navin K and Officer K Collingwood beach linear 1 artefact scatter, 1 AHIPs issued proposed path, Collingwood (1998) scarred tree, 1 isolated beach, Vincentia, NSW and find supplementary report Archaeological Investigation: Navin Officer 1993 Wreck Bay lands Survey and test 2 artefact scatters Proposed Water, Sewerage excavation (70 during survey. Very and Transmission Line test pits) little recovered during

Page 24 Feary, S. 2013 Callala Bay shared path. Aboriginal cultural heritage assessment. FINAL REPORT.

Easements, Bherwerre test pitting Peninsula, Jervis Bay. Nowra.

Proposed extension to Navin Officer Heritage Vincentia STP extension, Moona Desktop and Re-location of site Identified areas requiring further Vincentia STP. Archaeological Consultants Moona creek areal investigated by Silcox investigation in elevated edges of wetland Assessment (1999b) in 1992. No new sites basin Proposed extension to Navin Officer Heritage Vincentia STP extensions, Test 173 artefacts from 20 No outstanding features of assemblage Vincentia Sewerage Treatment Consultants excavations of 35 test pits Plant. Archaeological (1999c) subsurface testing program Proposed Bay and basin leisure Navin Officer 1999a Vincentia monitoring Nothing found after Clearing also removed topsoil, bit area is low centre, Vincentia, NSW. vegetation clearing lying with low potential Archaeological inspection and monitoring Program Indigenous heritage Oakley B Plantation Point areal Surveyed a small area Re-located previously recorded site 58-2- assessment proposed of freehold land on 0001 in part. development Lot 180 DP headland. No new 536100 Plantation Point sites. Vincentia NSW An archaeological survey of Paton R 1993 to Jervis Bay Road linear No sites the proposed 11kV overhead powerline route from Sanctuary Point across the Worrowing waterway, Jervis Bay, NSW Archaeological survey of a Silcox R Worrowing estates; rolling Area 1 artefact scatter, 3 Recommended test excavation proposed rural residential (1992) hinterland, c. 4 kms SW of PP PADs subdivision at , south coast, New South Wales Test excavations at Proposed Silcox R Worrowing Test excavation 92 artefacts found sub-division, Old Erowal bay, (1993) South Coast, NSW. Archaeological investigation of Silcox R Vincentia STP, 2kms northwest of Test 1000s artefacts Midden initially disturbed by fence midden and open campsite at (1992c) PP excavations recovered along ridge construction and inspected by NPWS. Vincentia, New South Wales. top and sides. Extensive and important site Estimated to be 20 m x 13 m and 80 cm deep.

Page 25 Feary, S. 2013 Callala Bay shared path. Aboriginal cultural heritage assessment. FINAL REPORT.

Test excavations on the Silcox R 1989 Tomerong Test 3 test pits had Concluded that ridge tops were preferred Tomerong bypass , near excavations of artefacts over alluvial flats for camping Nowra, NSW PADs Archaeological survey of Silcox R 1992 Areal survey 2 artefact scatters, one had >100 artefacts Wrights beach sewerage silcrete, system, St Georges Basin, NSW Proposed School sites at Dallas, M 1998 Callala Bay Areal survey of No sites Low potential Callala Bay 200metres x 100 metres Survey for Aboriginal sites and Jo McDonald Cultural East of Callala Beach village Area survey Re-recorded sites Large midden along what is now called relics at proposed residential Heritage management found previously by Silkwood track subdivision at Griffin St, Callala PL Feary Bay, NSW Proposed replacement of Dibden, J. 2004 Callala Creek, adjacent to southern Areal survey, No sites, Middens recorded very close by, on both walking bridge, Callala Bay, end of proposed path very small sides of creek NSW. Aboriginal archaeological assessment. Archaeological test excavation, Jo McDonald East of Callala Beach village Test pitting 1 new small site Previously recorded midden would not be proposed residential 2000 impacted subdivision, Griffin St precinct, Callala Beach, NSW

Page 26 Feary, S. 2013 Callala Bay shared path. Aboriginal cultural heritage assessment. FINAL REPORT.

3. ABORIGINAL CONSULTATION

The consultation process for this project has been in accordance with Aboriginal cultural heritage consultation requirements for proponents 2010 (DECCW 2010a). The steps taken in the consultation process were as follows:-

3.1. Notification

1. An advertisement seeking expressions of interest for being consulted in regard to the proposed path and a possible Aboriginal Heritage Impact Permit (AHIP) application was placed in the South Coast Register on 20 and 27 February 2013 (see Appendix 1 for newspaper advertisement).

2. A list of registered Aboriginal groups with a potential interest in being consulted regarding the proposed works was sought from and provided by Office of Environment and Heritage (OEH) in Queanbeyan on 30 October 2012. Table 1 below is the list provided by OEH. Advice was also sought from Margaret Simões, Council’s Aboriginal Community Development Officer in regard to other groups who may wish to be consulted. The Wreck Bay Aboriginal Community Council was added to the list and the contact details were updated for Jerrinja LALC and the Shoalhaven Elders. The area falls within the boundaries of the Jerrinja Local Aboriginal Land Council (LALC), who are registered for the area. A letter was sent to all registered groups on 15 February 2013, asking if they wanted to be consulted in regard to the development proposal (see Appendix 2).

3. All the organisations listed on page 10, Section 4.1.2 of the consultation requirements report (DECCW, 2010) were contacted by Council in October 2012 in relation to a similar development at Plantation Point, 7 kms south of this current development proposal and within the Jervis Bay catchment. Due to the proximity in time and space of the two developments these earlier notifications were considered to be applicable and relevant to the Callala Bay path proposal. The exception was the Southern Rivers CMA who previously advised the author that they do not pass information provided to them by Aboriginal people on to other parties.

Page 27 Feary, S. 2013 Callala Bay shared path. Aboriginal cultural heritage assessment. FINAL REPORT.

Table 3: List of registered Aboriginal groups provided by OEH.

Page 28 Feary, S. 2013 Callala Bay shared path. Aboriginal cultural heritage assessment. FINAL REPORT.

3.2. Outcome of notification process

 There were three respondents to the newspaper advertisement/letter to registered groups – o Graham Connolly from Jerrinja Consultants Pty Ltd (possibly also representing Jerrinja Traditional Owners Aboriginal Corporation). o Gordon Wellington, representing South Coast/ Shoalhaven Elders and Friends. o Andrew Harvey, representing the Jerrinja LALC . The National Native Title Tribunal advised that no native title claims were pending for the Jervis bay region, in a letter to Shoalhaven City Council, dated 12 November 2012. . NTSCorp advised Shoalhaven City Council in a letter dated 13 November 2012 that privacy laws prevented them from providing contact details of traditional owners. NTSCorp undertook to inform traditional owners about the project and make a response to Council by 21 November 2012. No responses were received. . The Office of the Registrar of the NSW Land Rights Act advised they had a listing for the Booderee National Park as registered traditional owners in the Jervis Bay region, and advised Council to contact the Wreck Bay Community Council. The Wreck Bay Community Council was contacted by letter as part of referral to registered Aboriginal groups. No response was received.

3.3. Stage 2: Presentation of information about project

The three registered groups were invited by a letter dated 5 March, to attend a project meeting and site inspection on 13 March 2013 (see Appendix 6). Jerrinja LALC sent their apologies and neither the Shoalhaven Elders nor the Jerrinja Consultants attended the meeting.

3.4. Stage 3: Gathering information about cultural significance

Although not a requirement of the consultation process, an experienced heritage officer of Jerrinja LALC was employed to assist in field survey and recording (Willie Connelly). During the field recording, there were discussions regarding the cultural significance of the area to the local Aboriginal community. The cultural heritage officer was not aware on any particular significance associated with Callala Point, but undertook to speak with Jerrinja community members thought to have cultural knowledge of the area.

In his inspection report dated 25/10/2013 Rod Wellington OEH Cultural Heritage Office refers to the cultural significance of the midden material visible along sections of the path (58-2-0145), in respect of it demonstrating traditional Aboriginal resource collection.

3.5. Stage 4: Review of draft ACHAR

This draft assessment report was posted to the three Aboriginal groups registered for this project on Monday 27 May 2013, for their comment and feedback within a 28 day period.

Page 29 Feary, S. 2013 Callala Bay shared path. Aboriginal cultural heritage assessment. FINAL REPORT.

No written or verbal responses were received from any of the registered groups within the 28 day period. An email reminder was sent to the CEO of Jerrinja LALC on 24 June 2013 and an email was sent to ACHO Rod Wellington on 27 June 2013 asking him to raise the issue with the Jerrinja LALC. No responses had been received by 4 July 2013.

4. ARCHAEOLOGICAL INVESTIGATIONS

4.1. Predictions

Models for Aboriginal occupation of Jervis Bay, have been put forward by several archaeologists e.g. Cane (1988); Navin Officer (1991) and Dallas (2003; 2006). The large numbers of recorded Aboriginal sites associated with the immediate coastline indicate that sites are likely to be present almost everywhere around the embayment, with a focus around wetlands and water courses, where there is elevated well drained land. Predictions for the presence of Aboriginal objects within the development corridor are as follows:

Middens: highly likely to be present - on the headland, associated with Callala Creek estuary and rock platforms and with the sand dunes of Hare Bay in the Sheaffe Street reserve. Burials: No burials have been recorded previously from this part of Jervis Bay. However, there is a medium-low likelihood for burials to be present in middens associated with water and aeolian sand deposits of Callala Creek and Hare Bay. Scarred trees: Most of the original vegetation has gone from the development corridor. Where mature forest/trees are extant, pre-contact scarred trees may still be present. Stone artefact scatters: these are likely to occur throughout the development corridor, either in a midden context or as separate assemblages, behind sand dunes, on the cliff top or adjacent to Callala Creek. Rockshelters: Not applicable to this assessment as there are no sandstone overhangs. Axe grooves: occur where flat sandstone surfaces outcrop in or adjacent to a water source (including rock pools). While small areas of flat sandstone are extant in the development corridor, the quality is not conducive to grinding axes.

4.2. Sampling strategy

The sampling strategy was informed by the following factors:- . The relatively small size of the subject area . The presence of two recorded sites . Preliminary inspection by ACHO Rod Wellington and the likelihood of a new third site within the development corridor . Lack of certainty of the precise final location of the shared path . The likelihood of an area larger than the shared path being subject to low but ongoing, long term impacts.

Page 30 Feary, S. 2013 Callala Bay shared path. Aboriginal cultural heritage assessment. FINAL REPORT.

As a result it was decided to undertake a total survey of the entire grassed area between the cliff /vegetation edge and the rear of the houses between Sheaffe Crescent and Callala Creek bridge, an area approximately 1500 metres long and between 20 and 50 metres wide (the ‘study area’, see Figure 3).

4.3. Survey coverage variables

For the purposes of the field recording, the following environmental parameters are relevant – topography, geology, soil and geomorphological processes. The area was divided into four landform units on the basis that they would have offered different conditions of living and resource collection for pre-contact Aboriginal populations (Figure 12).

Figure 12: Survey units (SU) used in field investigation

SU1: between Sheaffe Crescent and the steps leading up to the headland: This unit comprises fore dunes and hind dunes which terminate at the base of a slope on which residences are located. The dunes have a history of modification, due to leveling of the dune swales and ridges to allow for construction of roads and car parking associated with the boat ramp. The area is just above current sea level and is flat and covered with introduced grass and occasional trees. Wave sorted natural shell beds are exposed in section along the seaward edge and scattered across the ground surface north of the boat ramp (Figure 13). Ground visibility was virtually non-existent (Figure 14).

Page 31 Feary, S. 2013 Callala Bay shared path. Aboriginal cultural heritage assessment. FINAL REPORT.

Figure 13: natural shell beds, Callala Bay

Figure 14: SU1 looking south towards steps. Car park on left, houses on right. Photo: S. Feary

SU2: east facing section of the rocky headland bounded by its two promontories.

The headland is large and drops vertically to the marine rock platforms below. It contains clay soils, with sandy soils in places, where it supports Bangalay Sand Forest communities. The unit is largely cleared of vegetation, with the exception of remnant patches of native bush at each end and a thin, discontinuous strip along the cliff top edge. An unformed partially graveled track occurs within the unit. Marine Parade

Page 32 Feary, S. 2013 Callala Bay shared path. Aboriginal cultural heritage assessment. FINAL REPORT.

and a line of bollards form the western edge of SU2 except for a short section between the top of the steps and the intersection of Murray St and Marine parade, which is bounded by residences. Visibility is generally low, confined to a few patches of bare ground (Figure 15).

Figure 15: Main section of SU2 looking south

SU3: south-facing edge of the rocky headland, from Callala Point to the break of slope above Callala Creek. The eastern end of this section contains patches of remnant bush land separated by small cleared and grassed areas. There is a gravel road running between the fronts of the houses and the vegetation edge (Figure 16). The western section contains extensive grassed areas with scattered stands of Casuarina glauca (Figure 17). Archaeological visibility was generally very low, confined to exposed areas of ground within grassed areas and the edges of the gravel road.

Page 33 Feary, S. 2013 Callala Bay shared path. Aboriginal cultural heritage assessment. FINAL REPORT.

Figure 16: eastern section of SU3

Figure 17: western section of SU3

Page 34 Feary, S. 2013 Callala Bay shared path. Aboriginal cultural heritage assessment. FINAL REPORT.

SU4: Gentle slope and flat land on northern side of Callala Creek. This unit comprises aeolian and water deposited sandy sediments bordering Callala Creek between the footbridge and the ocean. A well-formed gravel path already exists in this unit, within a large reserve containing recreational facilities, remnant native vegetation and a weedy understorey along the creek banks which have been stabilized and fenced off in the past. The eastern section of the unit comprises a gently sloping south facing slope leading down to the sand flat (Figure 18).

Figure 18: SU4 showing gravel path and park land. Callala Creek is left of picture. Photo: S. Feary

4.4. Field methods

The primary aims of the field survey were to:- . Conduct a comprehensive investigation of the nominal route of the path and all areas either side, within Council reserve land. . Re-locate the previously recorded middens and determine their boundaries as far as possible. . Conduct more detailed recording of these sites, sufficient for cultural significant assessment. . Record any other Aboriginal objects within the development corridor . Ascertain whether, and to what extent, existing and newly recorded sites will be impacted by the proposed development to determine the need or otherwise for an AHIP.

Page 35 Feary, S. 2013 Callala Bay shared path. Aboriginal cultural heritage assessment. FINAL REPORT.

. Ascertain other existing or future activities that may impact on Aboriginal objects in the immediate area.

The field survey was conducted by archaeologist Sue Feary over one day on 15 March 2013, accompanied by experienced Jerrinja LALC heritage officer, Willie Connelly. The survey involved direct visual inspection of the entire subject area; however, some sections had very poor ground visibility due to the presence of thick grass cover and in some cases, patches of planted or remnant native vegetation. In some locations, introduced and local gravels hampered detection of Aboriginal objects. All exposed areas of ground were carefully inspected by the JLALC heritage officer and archaeologist. The position of artefacts and midden material was initially recorded with a hand held GPS but as its accuracy was only to 5 metres, it was more accurate to plot their location on the very accurate large scale plans prepared by Council. All large trees were inspected for scars of potential Aboriginal origin.

Following production of the draft report, an on-site meeting was held with OEH staff on 7 June 2013 to discuss management options for the middens to be impacted by the development. During the on-site meeting an inspection of cliff top edges for midden exposures was conducted from the rocky shore platform below the cliff. This identified several midden exposures which indicated that the middens may be more extensive than originally stated in the draft report.

Additional recording of cliff top edge midden exposures was carried out on 26 June 2013. This was done from both the rocky shore platform at dead low tide and by walking along the top of the cliff edge where vegetation permitted. This confirmed the exposures recorded on 6 June and recorded several new exposures.

Although none of the cliff top midden exposures will be impacted by the path, their recording is important for determining midden boundaries and therefore the proportion of the middens to be impacted by the development.

4.5. Recording methodology

The approach to detailed recording of artefacts and midden material has been guided by relevant sections of the OEH Code of Archaeological Practice (DECCW 2010b). The following questions were considered to be relevant in recording the middens: . Position of midden relative to resource zones . Seasonality of midden . Intensity of harvesting . Relative importance of foods . Techniques of harvesting and processing . Preservation bias . Size and depth of midden deposits . Antiquity . Changes over time in species harvested . Habitat of species in midden

Page 36 Feary, S. 2013 Callala Bay shared path. Aboriginal cultural heritage assessment. FINAL REPORT.

. Taphonomy . Comparison with other middens

In order to address these questions, the following variables were recorded:

. Dimensions of exposed material . Shellfish species present . Relative abundance of species . Density of shell . Degree of fragmentation . Degree of disturbance/re-deposition . Stratigraphy and temporal changes in species (for exposed sections) . Presence of non-shell material, e.g. artefacts, bones, charcoal, etc.

In regard to stone artefacts the following questions guided the recording methodology

. Density of artefacts . Spatial variation of artefacts . Range of raw materials . Range and relative proportions of artefact types . Whether artefact manufacture was occurring at the site . Comparison of lithic evidence at local and regional scales . Nature and extent of taphonomic processes . Significance of artefact assemblage . Potential for subsurface cultural material

To address these questions the following measurements/observations were made:- . Type of artefact: flake, flaked piece, core, manuport, fragment, tool, proximal fragment, amount of retouch/use. . Raw materials and quality: silcrete, chert, quartz . Dimensions: Length, width, thickness . Cortex: present/absent and percentage of cover . Qualitative data: platform preparation, flake scars . Nature and extent of retouch

4.6. Results and analysis

The field investigation resulted in the re-location of the two previously recorded sites (58-2-0144 and 58-2- 0145), a new recording of an isolated stone artefact and associated scattered shell fragments (Callala Path 1), and the recording of a new extensive mounded midden of predominantly mud oyster (Callala Path 2) (Table 4). It is possible that 58-2-0145 and Callala Path 2 are part of the same site.

Page 37 Feary, S. 2013 Callala Bay shared path. Aboriginal cultural heritage assessment. FINAL REPORT.

Table 4: Sites recorded during field survey Site #/name Feature Grid coordinates Survey unit Landform Callala Path 1 Midden/artefact 0292431/6124348 SU2 headland

Callala Path 2 midden 0292255/6123833 SU3 headland (eastern end) 58-2-0145 midden 0291921/6123757 SU3 headland (mid-point) 58-2-0144 midden 0291750/6123622 SU4 creek bank

1. Callala Path 1 The single artefact was recorded in the northern section of Survey Unit 2 at Grid Coordinates 0292431/6124348, on the northern promontory of the rocky headland, opposite Number 111 Murray St, now a vacant block (Figure 19).

Page 38 Feary, S. 2013 Callala Bay shared path. Aboriginal cultural heritage assessment. FINAL REPORT.

Figure 19: Section of path plan showing position of artefact (black square) and midden fragments (grey hatching) .

Page 39 Feary, S. 2013 Callala Bay shared path. Aboriginal cultural heritage assessment. FINAL REPORT.

A crystalline quartz primary flake was exposed in a 1 metre x 1 metre patch of bare ground, within a grassed area, close to a group of trees, approximately 3 metres back from cliff edge (Figure 20). Dimensions of the artefact are length = 19 mm; width = 14 mm; thickness = 4 mm. Despite careful searching, no other artefacts were found in the vicinity.

Figure 20: Quartz artefact recorded in SU2 .

This section of SU2 also contained a very small amount of dispersed and highly fragmented shell, probably Anadara trapezia exposed on the surface of an unformed track and other small exposures between house numbers 105 and 115 Murray St (Figure 21). The artefact and shell are interpreted as the remnants of a highly disturbed midden. The midden remnants and isolated find are designated Callala Path 1.

Page 40 Feary, S. 2013 Callala Bay shared path. Aboriginal cultural heritage assessment. FINAL REPORT.

Figure 20: Unformed track (left side of image) and exposed ground, northern section of SU2.

2. Identification of 58-2-0145

A large midden, thought to be 58-2-0145, occurs on and beside a gravel road forming a western extension of Marine Parade, within SU3. The midden was most evident opposite # 49 Marine Parade, becoming less dense going west to finally peter out at # 61 Marine Parade. Small exposures of shell were also observed on bare ground in amongst the vegetation. The survey from the rock platform below observed two major midden exposures on the cliff top edge, indicating the eastern and western boundaries of the midden. Appendix 8 provides details of the individual midden exposures.

The midden is highly disturbed and highly compacted and fragmented where it occurs on the vehicle track. It is densely packed in places, within a black sand matrix. Species observed were from both rocky shore platform and estuarine habitats, with Ostrea angasi (mud oyster) the dominant species. Other species present included Mytilus edulis (edible mussel) and Pyrazus ebeninus (mud whelk) (Figure 22).

Page 41 Feary, S. 2013 Callala Bay shared path. Aboriginal cultural heritage assessment. FINAL REPORT.

Figure 21: Midden material, 58-2-0145

The thick understory prevented a proper examination of the area adjacent to the road for ascertaining the extent of the midden (Figure 23). However, identification of several midden exposures at the top of the cliff has assisted in determining the extent of this midden.

Figure 22: Marine Parade looking west, thick vegetation left of photo. Midden is exposed on track. Source: Dalmazzo (2012).

Page 42 Feary, S. 2013 Callala Bay shared path. Aboriginal cultural heritage assessment. FINAL REPORT.

The original site card description suggests that it extends to the cliff edge and this was confirmed by field inspection, and is therefore of considerable size. Figure 24 shows the visible extent of the midden as indicated from exposures at the top of the cliff face, on the gravel road and in the bushland between the road and the cliff edge.

Figure 23: Visible extent of midden 58-2-0145 relative to houses

3. Callala Bay Path 2 An extensive, intact mounded midden was recorded in SU3, opposite #8 Callala St. The area is grassed with very limited ground visibility. A seat and steps down to the rocky shore platform occur at this location. The hummocky nature of ground surface at this location was noted by ACHO Rod Wellington during a previous inspection (see Appendix 4).

Although visibility was virtually non-existent, Willie Connelly noticed shell on bare ground around tree roots. A careful examination of all small patches of bare ground revealed the presence of abundant, large, densely packed mud oyster shells, with a depth of at least 10 cm below the present ground surface.

Page 43 Feary, S. 2013 Callala Bay shared path. Aboriginal cultural heritage assessment. FINAL REPORT.

Figure 24: Densely packed mud oyster shell exposed by tree roots.

Based on the hummocky surface, it was estimated that the midden covers at least 20 metres x 25 metres, and extends into the back yard of # 8 Callala St (Figures 25 and 26). The midden appears to be relatively intact, with whole, layered shells. No other molluscan species, artefacts or any other Aboriginal objects were observed, although a small amount of shell was noted in the soil profile at the top of the steps. Subsequent field inspection from the rock platform below identified three major midden exposures at the top of the cliff which confirmed the seaward extension of the midden and also indicated that it extended further east than originally recorded. Figure 27 shows the estimated extent of the midden.

Page 44 Feary, S. 2013 Callala Bay shared path. Aboriginal cultural heritage assessment. FINAL REPORT.

Figure 25: Hummocky surface containing mud oyster shells, exposed by tree roots of Casuarinas. Photo looking west.

Figure 26: Aerial map showing possible extent of Callala Path 2

Page 45 Feary, S. 2013 Callala Bay shared path. Aboriginal cultural heritage assessment. FINAL REPORT.

The archaeological evidence strongly suggests that Callala Path 2 and 58-2-0145 could overlap and form what is essentially a single site. However, they are referred to as separate sites in this report because the Callala St midden (Callala Path 2) appears to be predominantly composed of mud oyster, suggesting that Aboriginal people were targeting a single species for gathering. By contrast, the midden on the headland (58-2-0145) appears to be composed of a more diverse range of species, suggesting a much broader based shellfish gathering strategy, focused more on the rocky shore platforms. It is also possible that middens are different ages and the changes in species composition reflect a temporal change in species availability and/or preference.

Figure 28 shows the location of recorded midden exposures.5 Details of recorded midden exposures are at Appendix 8.

5 Recordings taken at the rock platform need to be extrapolated to the top of the cliff edge. Page 46 Feary, S. 2013 Callala Bay shared path. Aboriginal cultural heritage assessment. FINAL REPORT.

Figure 27: recorded midden exposures (black squares).

Page 47 Feary, S. 2013 Callala Bay shared path. Aboriginal cultural heritage assessment. FINAL REPORT.

4. Site 58-2-0144

Site 58-2-0144 was easy to find, exposed in section along the northern bank of Callala Creek, east of the present footbridge. The most obvious feature is a distinct band of Anadara trapezia in a black sand matrix approximately 20 cm thick among tree roots, sitting above a layer of red clays (Figure 29). In some locations, apparently above the Anadara layer, is a discontinuous band of mud oyster, as was described in the initial 1960s recording (Figure 30). The midden no longer 150 feet long; it is now less than 10 metres long.

Figure 28: Anadara trapezia, 58-2-0144

Figure 29 Ostrea angasi, 58-2-0144

Page 48 Feary, S. 2013 Callala Bay shared path. Aboriginal cultural heritage assessment. FINAL REPORT.

The banks have been severely eroded, suggesting that the midden once extended back a considerable distance from the banks, with much of it having been eroded away by tidal movement. The midden potentially extends into the development corridor of the proposed path, although if present, it would have been disturbed during construction of the existing gravel path.

In addition to the midden exposures in the creek bank, a small amount of highly dispersed shell was visible in Callala Creek reserve, on patches of bare ground associated with fixtures such as BBQs and tables/chairs. This suggested that the midden did extend some distance back from the current creek bank.

5. Survey Coverage

Survey coverage was worst in SU1 due to heavy grass cover. SU2 and SU3 had variable visibility, depending on the presence or absence of unformed tracks where bare ground was exposed. SU4 had visibility reduced by gravel and thick grass, except where creek banks were exposed in section. However, with the possible exception of SU1, the field survey gave sufficient coverage of and access to the archaeological footprint to enable a heritage assessment to be adequately carried out.

Table 5: survey coverage variables Survey Landform Survey Unit Visibility% Exposure% Effective Effective Unit (sq.m.) coverage coverage % (SU) area SU1 Beach dunes 3700 0 0 0 0 SU2 Rocky headland 11040 20 60 1324 36 SU3 Rocky headland 8860 10 50 443 5 (south facing) SU4 Creek banks and 920 10 10 9.2 1 slopes

5. SIGNIFICANCE ASSESSMENT

5.1. Criteria

For the purposes of the Aboriginal Heritage Impact Permit (AHIP) application the following sites are the subject of this significance assessment:-

 Callala Path 1 [midden fragments and isolated find]  Callala Path 2 [mud oyster midden]  58-2-0144 [midden, Callala Creek]  58-2-0145 [midden, Callala Point]

Page 49 Feary, S. 2013 Callala Bay shared path. Aboriginal cultural heritage assessment. FINAL REPORT.

The ICOMOS Burra Charter provides the framework for cultural significance assessment using the key criteria of social, aesthetic, scientific and historic values (ICOMOS 1987). The OEH Guide provides some direction on how to apply these criteria in the context of an ACHAR report (OEH, 2011).

Social value [all sites]: The high social value of the Jervis Bay region to Aboriginal people, particularly communities living at Wreck Bay and Orient Point (Jerrinja LALC) is well known and well documented, e.g. Cane (1988), Egloff et al (1995) and Moorcroft and Feary (2008). The rich archaeological and ethnohistoric record demonstrate that the Jervis Bay embayment and the enclosing peninsulas were and are of considerable social value, being associated with Dreaming stories, at least 2000 years of settlement and use, and a long history of black-white contact. Knowledge-holders from the three registered groups have not assigned any particular social value to the recorded sites on the Callala Bay headland, although people have strong memories of living, fishing and camping in the area in historic times.

The proposed path has high social value to the non-Aboriginal community at Callala Bay.

Historic value [all sites]: The marine and estuarine environments of Jervis Bay were important resource zones for hunter-gatherer peoples for whom fishing and shellfish gathering provided dietary staples. In this sense the middens at Callala Bay have historical value as tangible evidence for the pre-contact presence of Aboriginal people in the region. This historical value is enhanced by the gradual loss of other middens in the region.

Scientific (archaeological) value:

Callala Path 1: this site comprises a single artefact and a small amount of highly dispersed and fragmented shell and is probably the remnants of what was once a large midden. The site is not rare, and is a very poor example of a coastal shell midden and its educational value is minimal. There is some potential for midden to occur beneath presently grassed areas. The potential for subsurface deposits is minimal due to the presence of shallow clay soils and a long disturbance history. It has low scientific significance.

Callala Path 2: this site appears to be relatively intact and undisturbed. It also appears to be mounded, which is rare for this part of the south coast. It is also possible there is some depth to the midden material and the site is large. It is a good and locally rare example of a mounded midden comprising almost entirely mud oyster. For these reasons it is assessed as being of high scientific significance with potential to address questions related to traditional Aboriginal exploitation of estuarine resources.

58-2-0145: the visible section of this midden is highly disturbed and impacted by the current vehicle track, although intact sections of midden may exist beneath the remnant and planted vegetation on Callala Point. Because of the highly disturbed nature of the midden within the development corridor it has limited capacity to answer relevant research questions and is assessed as being of low-medium scientific significance.

58-2-0144: this is a fine example of a stratified midden potentially showing changes in Aboriginal diet over time. Although it has been subject to erosion and reworking by waves, it remains fairly intact and is well

Page 50 Feary, S. 2013 Callala Bay shared path. Aboriginal cultural heritage assessment. FINAL REPORT.

known to locals. It offers an excellent opportunity for public education on traditional Aboriginal culture. It is probable that it will not be impacted by the proposed path, and if so, impacts it will be confined to its northern edge. The site has medium potential for addressing relevant research questions and a high educational potential; overall it has medium scientific significance.

Aesthetic value: the Callala Bay headland, Hare Bay and Callala Creek have high aesthetic value, being the subject of numerous images used all over the world to promote the beauty of Jervis bay. To Aboriginal people and archaeologists, middens can evoke emotive responses which could be interpreted as belonging to the category of ‘aesthetic’. The midden deposits of Callala Path 2 and 58-2-0144 are assessed as being of medium aesthetic value.

5.2. Statement of cultural heritage significance

Table 6 presents a summary of the cultural heritage assessment process. Based on written and historical sources, the cultural heritage significance assessment process has concluded that the natural environment of the Callala Bay headland, the western end of Hare Bay and Callala Creek have social value to local Aboriginal people.

Table 6: cultural heritage significance assessment site aesthetic social scientific historic Callala Path 1 low med low low Callala Path 2 low high high med 58-2-0144 med high med med 58-2-0145 low med med med

Of the recorded sites, Callala Path 2 has high scientific significance; 58-2-0144 has medium scientific significance due to its high educational value; 58-2-0145 has medium scientific significance for its undisturbed sections, and Callala Path 1 has low scientific significance.

It is important to note that Aboriginal people do not ever consider Aboriginal sites to be insignificant, rather they appreciate the need for certain developments to proceed, particularly when there is also capacity to minimise harm to Aboriginal objects.

6. THE PROPOSED ACTIVITY

6.1. Landuse history

Archaeological evidence shows Aboriginal people occupied and used the subject area prior to European contact but the extent to which their presence altered the natural landscape is unknown. No doubt there would have been some use of fire to manage the vegetation for a variety of purposes, but there are no data Page 51 Feary, S. 2013 Callala Bay shared path. Aboriginal cultural heritage assessment. FINAL REPORT.

available to test these hypotheses. Fish traps and fish nets may have also been used in Callala Creek. Hare Bay was a traditional place for fishing.

Early land grants around Callala were made to Michael Hindman, of 208 acres on 19 July 1841 and William Creak, of 220 acres on 19 June 1841. A town called Central Jervis Town was identified to be built at Callala Point, one of several townships proposed once the Wool Road from Braidwood was completed and landowners saw opportunities to sell land (Taylor, 1995). During the 19th and early 20th century settlers took up land around Jervis Bay for dairying and farming, clearing the forests to do so and marginalizing local Aboriginal populations, most who ended up in the Roseby Park Aboriginal reserve at Orient Point or in the Wreck Bay Aboriginal reserve.

Once Canberra was declared as the nation’s capital and Jervis Bay was identified as its maritime outlet, surveyor and real estate agent Henry Halloran put forward some grand visions for Jervis Bay’s development as an industrial and urban centre, to rival Sydney. Halloran had visions of major cities, including Jervis Town at Callala Point, the southern extension of the proposed grandiose city of St Vincent City surrounding .

From 1875, the Commonwealth and NSW governments were considering Jervis Bay as a suitable location for iron smelting works, in the vicinity of Callala Bay. To provide electricity to the smelting works, a large power station would be built near Red Point. Then it was decided that the bulky waste from the smelting works could be dumped into Hare Bay with the long term goal of land reclamation for further industrial expansion. By 1972 plans for Callala included a petro-chemical plant, a copper smelter, a woodchip mill and a coal loader (Sant, 2004), (Figure 31).

Page 52 Feary, S. 2013 Callala Bay shared path. Aboriginal cultural heritage assessment. FINAL REPORT.

Figure 30: 1972 proposals for Callala Bay (Sant, 2004: 25)

Fortunately, due to strong opposition from locals and conservation groups, none of this came to fruition. The existing village of Callala Bay is now surrounded by Jervis Bay National Park, declared in 1994, and fronts on to , declared in 1998. The Jerrinja LALC own land between Callala Bay and Red Point, enabling them to continue a long tradition of camping in this area.

Callala Bay village currently covers an area of 8 sq kilometres with a population of around 2000, which increases during holiday periods. Apart from village infill, a couple of new subdivisions and upgrades of recreational facilities, Callala Bay village has seen minimal development in the last two decades and the permanent population does not appear to be increasing.

The area proposed for the shared path is within public open space on the edges of the village, managed by Shoalhaven City Council. The reserve has evidence of underground cables associated with various services, which would have impacted Aboriginal objects at the time of their installation.

The reserve/s are currently used by locals and visitors mainly for walking around the headland or across to Callala Beach village. Some informal vehicle parking occurs and the rubbish trucks use a gravel track to access the southern part of the headland. The boat launching facilities at Hare Bay are used extensively, as is the smaller reserve at Callala Creek.

Page 53 Feary, S. 2013 Callala Bay shared path. Aboriginal cultural heritage assessment. FINAL REPORT.

The main impacts of existing land use on Aboriginal objects are natural erosion of 58-2-0144 at Callala Creek and vehicle damage to site 58-2-0145. There appears to be minimal impact to either of the newly recorded sites, although the owner of 8 Callala St was doing some digging into the midden on his property at the time of the field survey.

6.2. Description of development

The proposal relates to construction of a new shared path to run between Sheaffe St, just east of the boat launching ramp and jetty, to the footbridge over Callala Creek (see Figure 3, p.8 and Figure 6 p.12). Detailed plans for the proposed development are at Appendix 7.

The shared path involves construction of a 1.6 km long and 2 metre wide concrete and/or gravel path between grid coordinates E 291778.885/N 6123894.249 and E 292312.819/N 6124563.338, within a Council reserve which runs along the back of houses across the rocky headland (see Figures 3 and 6 ). The development corridor extends 3 metres either side of the final path alignment. Proposed works include initial excavation to locate existing underground services, followed by excavation to form and construct the path. Excavation depth for the path would be variable depending on the surface material to be used, but could extend to 150 mm below existing ground level. Revegetation of a number of bare areas may also occur. The excavation for the path will be done using a bobcat or similar machine and holes would be dug using an earthen auger (hand-held or as a PTO attachment) and hand-tools such as spades and crowbars. Concrete would be delivered direct to the formed pour location. Material stockpiles would be located within highly disturbed areas of the reserve.

Discussions between the consultant, OEH staff and Council explored the feasibility of building the path above the ground in the vicinity of significant Aboriginal objects and the path design was modified to accommodate above ground construction to minimise impact on the most significant Aboriginal objects. Appendix 9 shows plans and cross sections for the ‘above’ and ‘at ground’ path options. Council advised subsequently that above ground construction of the path was not feasible due to a range of site constraints. As ground construction triggered the need for archaeological test excavations, Council decided to split path construction into two stages, as shown in Figure 32. The areas where above ground construction was desirable for minimising impacts on Aboriginal objects are within Stage 2, which is to be delayed pending the results of additional archaeological investigation. Discussions between the consultant, OEH and Council staff are continuing in this regard. Stage 1 of the development is between grid coordinates E 292285.456/N 6123849.052 and E292312.819/N 6124563.338 (Figure 32).

After path construction, the following small public features may be installed; lighting, water supply (bubblers / drinking fountain); viewing areas, picnic table areas, BBQ areas and seating. Some of these activities will involve additional localised disturbance to the ground.

Stage 1 of the project would commence as soon as the AHIP is issued and is expected to take several years to complete, as it is to be built by the Callala Bay community, with support from Council as required.

Page 54 Feary, S. 2013 Callala Bay shared path. Aboriginal cultural heritage assessment. FINAL REPORT.

Construction of Stage 2 is dependent on further funding, the outcomes of further archaeological investigations and additional planning and design work.

Figure 31: Aerial photo showing location of stages of path construction.

6.3. Assessing harm

The Aboriginal cultural heritage values of the development corridor relate to the middens and stone artefact as no other cultural values are recorded or known for the area. Two of the four sites have been identified as having high/med cultural heritage significance. Both 58-2-0145 and Callala Path 2 could potentially have their cultural heritage values diminished by the shared path.

The proposed shared path and associated activities have the potential to harm the four known sites – Callala Path 1, Callala Path 2, 58-2-0144 and 58-2-0145. It will also impact any other Aboriginal objects within the development corridor that were not observed during the field inspection due to lack of visibility

Page 55 Feary, S. 2013 Callala Bay shared path. Aboriginal cultural heritage assessment. FINAL REPORT.

or because they are in a sub-surface context. This includes the entirety of Survey Unit 1, for which there was no archaeological visibility, and the area immediately surrounding Callala Path 1.

The impact will result from the activities described in Section 6.2 above. These impacts are minor when compared to a history of road construction, subdivision and installation of underground cables and pipes. Shallow excavation of maximum depth 150 mm to install formwork for laying concrete or gravel and installation of bollards and fences, etc., will impact on sediments and the midden material and artefacts in and on them, by moving and/or breaking them. However, construction of the path also has the capacity to protect at least parts of the sites in the long term. Land rehabilitation and creation of a hard surface will help prevent erosion and further disturbance to the sites.

Sections of midden not in the direct final route of the path will not be directly impacted; however, they may still be subject to impacts from associated activities and the ongoing uses of the area as public open space. There are also potential impacts on Callala Path 2 where it extends into private land at # 8 Callala St.

Table 7: Assessment of harm Site name/number Type of harm Degree of harm Consequence of harm 58-2-0144 Direct (if harmed at all) Partial No loss of value 58-2-0145 Direct Partial Partial loss of value Callala Path 1 Direct(possibly indirect) Partial No loss of value Callala Path 2 Direct Partial Partial loss of value

Council will make every effort to minimise harm to Aboriginal objects, but harm may occur throughout the width and length of the development corridor as shown in Figure 33 i.e. the path and 3 metres either side of the path, a total width of 8 metres. The location of the path may change slightly if excavation reveals large tree roots or other impediments, but it is not likely to be very different from that shown in Figure 33. 6 Appendix 7 contains detailed maps for areas of harm associated with Stage 1 of the development.

The main objective of the proposed activity is to construct a shared path at Callala Bay village, being a public use facility to promote NSW government programmes for people to adopt a healthier lifestyle. It will channel users along a formed path rather than them wandering around everywhere. It will also formalise use of the public space more generally, which has the potential to help in protection of Aboriginal objects. The environmental impact of the path is generally of a minor nature, further justifying its construction.

6 The final size of the development corridor will be identified in the AHI P application and REF. Page 56 Feary, S. 2013 Callala Bay shared path. Aboriginal cultural heritage assessment. FINAL REPORT.

Figure 32: Map showing where harrn may occur to Aboriginal objects (Stage 1 and 2)

Page 57 Feary, S. 2013 Callala Bay shared path. Aboriginal cultural heritage assessment. FINAL REPORT.

7. AVOIDING AND/OR MINIMISING HARM

The activities described in Section 6 above will harm Aboriginal objects by disturbing the ground on and in which they occur. Although the proposed path and associated features will not impact on every part of every recorded site, the development overall and the ongoing use of the area by the public will continue to impact on the integrity of the sites as a whole. Even the proposed stabilisation and revegetation may cause harm in the legal sense of the word.

Thus it would be fair to say that harm cannot be avoided but once the final alignment of the path is known, some areas can be excluded from harm and in other areas harm can be minimised. This will be particularly important in regard to the significant midden deposits of Callala Path 2 and site 58-2-0145 within the Stage 2 path alignment.

Alternative approaches to totally avoid harm include:-

. No building of shared path; however, this does not stop the harm already caused by existing activities. . Move path to totally avoid all visible Aboriginal objects, and locations where objects may be present. This would be difficult to achieve as there is uncertainty as to the location of unrecorded objects. The middens are also very extensive and difficult to avoid.

7.1 Strategies for minimising harm

Assuming that the shared path is to be constructed, some level of harm to Aboriginal objects cannot be avoided. Because of the scientific (and social) significance of Callala Path 2, 58-2-0144 and 58-2-0145, an on-site meeting was held on 7 June 2013, to facilitate discussion between OEH staff, the consultant archaeologist and Council regarding strategies for minimising harm to these sites.7

OEH informed Council that the excavation necessary for a formed gravel or concrete path could impact on parts of Callala Path 2, 58-2-0145 and 58-2-0144 which have been assessed as having high and medium scientific value respectively. Under such circumstances it is often the case that archaeological test pitting is done to find out more information to assist OEH in making a decision about issuing an AHIP. It was agreed that the development was not of sufficient scale to warrant test pitting, leading to discussion about ways to reduce the impacts of the path and avoid the need for test pitting. It was agreed that Council would explore the feasibility of building the path on the surface to reduce impacts on 58-2-0144, 58-2-0145 and Callala Path 2. The path would be concrete, requiring no sides and would be laid on top of the ground with no excavation at all, with built up batters on each side. Appendix 9 is a diagrammatic representation of above ground construction of the path.

7 These sites are now within the Stage 2 development and are not part of the current AHIP application which is for Stage 1 only. Page 58 Feary, S. 2013 Callala Bay shared path. Aboriginal cultural heritage assessment. FINAL REPORT.

Disturbance to middens would be confined to temporary hardwood or steel stakes to hold the formwork in place while cement was poured. Harm will still occur from laying cement and use of pegs/pins to hold edges in place but it is very minor when compared to the alternative of a 15 cm deep excavation. Similarly, harm arising from associated activities is also minor.

As discussed earlier, above ground construction of the path is not feasible and it is likely that of Callala Path 2, 58-2-0145 and 58-2-0144 will require additional archaeological investigation prior to consideration of any AHIP application for their harm. They will be considered in the context of Stage 2 of the path and do not form part of the current AHIP application.

The following approaches are recommended to minimise harm to objects during and after Stage 1 path construction:-

1. During excavation for the path, undertake a monitoring programme by representatives of registered Aboriginal groups in the following areas:-

o Within Survey Unit 1 (SU1) between the boat ramp and the steps. Although the sand dunes have been modified, there is a low-medium possibility that midden and/or artefacts may be present underneath the grass. Figure 34 shows the area to be monitored.

o In the vicinity of Callala Bay Path 1 – to identify any further midden remnants and record any additional artefacts. This monitoring should during excavation for the path between # 105 and # 115 Marine Parade. Figure 35 shows the area to be monitored.

The overall aim of the monitoring is to determine if midden material and/or artefacts are present, how extensive the deposits are, their depth, and molluscan species present. The monitoring programme would have the added benefit of ensuring that Council workers/contractors are aware of the care they need to have when undertaking activities at these locations. The monitoring should occur once the upper layer of grass/ vegetation is removed by the bobcat or similar machine. One or two Aboriginal community representatives should be present to identify and collect artefacts and shell material.

Page 59 Feary, S. 2013 Callala Bay shared path. Aboriginal cultural heritage assessment. FINAL REPORT.

Figure 33: Area to be monitored in SU1

Figure 34: Monitoring to occur in area marked in red

Page 60 Feary, S. 2013 Callala Bay shared path. Aboriginal cultural heritage assessment. FINAL REPORT.

All midden material found during monitoring will be left on site to be used for environmental protection and land rehabilitation works. After recording and analysis, all artefacts will be repatriated at a nearby location agreed to by the registered Aboriginal parties and Council.

2. Mitigation measures

Mitigation measures include stabilising and revegetating some areas beside the path, which will, in the long term, provide protection to any objects. The exact location of revegetated areas cannot be finalised until the route is finalised.

In considering the principles of ecologically sustainable development and matters of cumulative harm, it should be noted that all sites have already suffered harm over many decades. Path construction will cause additional harm to some of the objects but overall, the sites will remain extant for future generations.

There are many hundreds of sites in the Jervis Bay region and over time many of them have been and will continue be destroyed by development, ignorance or neglect. However, there are also many sites within the protected areas of Jervis Bay which will hopefully fare somewhat better.

7.2. Area /sites to be harmed

Stage 1 of the path [included in current AHIP application]

 Aboriginal objects associated with Callala Path 1(see site card) attached to AHIP application.

 An eight metre wide parcel of land being Stage 1 of path construction between grid coordinates E 292285.456/N 6123849.052 and E292312.819/N 6124563.338 (see Figure 33 and Appendix 7).

Stage 2 of the path [not included in AHIP application]

 Aboriginal objects associated with the following sites

 Callala Path 2 (see site card attached to AHIP application)  58-2-0144  58-2-0145

 An eight metre wide parcel of land, being Stage 2 of path construction, between E 292285.456/N 6123849.052 (Callala Point) E 291778.885/N 6123894.249 (Lackersteen St end).

Page 61 Feary, S. 2013 Callala Bay shared path. Aboriginal cultural heritage assessment. FINAL REPORT.

8. POTENTIAL CONSERVATION OUTCOMES

A sound conservation outcome would be formal recognition by OEH and Council of the cultural/scientific significance of sites 58-2-0144, 58-2-0145 and Callala Path 2. The former requires active measures to halt the present rate of erosion. Callala Path 2 is potentially of high scientific value and Council and OEH should consider developing a strategy for active management of the site on private and public land. The intact sections of 58-2-0145 are effectively protected by the presence of remnant bush. These outcomes may be amended pending the results of further archaeological investigation for Stage 2 of the path.

9. RECOMMENDATIONS AND CONCLUSIONS

This Aboriginal assessment report is in respect of a proposed shared path at Callala Bay village, Jervis Bay. The fieldwork component re-located two existing sites and recorded two new sites. Two of the sites to be directly impacted by the Stage 2 path- Callala Path 2 and 58-2-0145 - are extensive and may form part of the same site in the vicinity of the southern promontory (Callala/Flora Point). They have been assessed as being of high/medium cultural significance due to their scientific and social values.

If the path could be built above the ground, harm to all recorded sites on its alignment would be minimal. If excavation is necessary for constructing the path, impacts on Aboriginal objects would be greater and further archaeological investigation of sites 58-2-0144, 58-2-0145 and Callala Path 2 is likely to be required before an AHIP will be issued – this will be addressed if/when Stage 2 of the path proceeds.

Both stages of the path will affect only small portions of each site. Strategies for minimising harm include monitoring, and redesigning and re-positioning the path at culturally sensitive locations, where this is feasible.

RECOMMENDATIONS FOR STAGE 1 CONSTRUCTION:-

1. The presence of Aboriginal objects should not be a constraint to construction of Stage 1 of the shared path (see Figure 32), which will impact Callala Path 1, a site assessed as having low cultural significance.

2. Mitigation should involve a monitoring programme during excavation of the path within Survey Unit 1 (SU1) and in the vicinity of Callala Path 1, to be conducted by representatives of registered Aboriginal parties. The monitoring would be a condition of the AHIP issued by OEH.

3. Shoalhaven City Council to apply for a s.90 Aboriginal Heritage Impact Permit (AHIP) from OEH to allow harm to recorded site Callala Path 1 and all as yet unrecorded objects within the development corridor of the Stage 1 development between Sheaffe St and 47 Marine Parade (see Figure 32). The final development corridor has been identified in the REF. The AHIP application, this report and the REF should be sent to OEH for processing.

Page 62 Feary, S. 2013 Callala Bay shared path. Aboriginal cultural heritage assessment. FINAL REPORT.

PRELIMINARY RECOMMENDATIONS FOR STAGE 2 CONSTRUCTION:-

1. Make every effort to construct the path above the ground in the relevant areas shown in Figure 36. An AHIP will still be required to harm objects but test pitting will not be required due to the minor nature of the harm.

2. Regardless of whether or not above ground construction is feasible, position the path to avoid the most intact sections of the sites, e.g. avoid the most mounded sections of Callala Path 2, stay on the existing gravel path for 58-2-0144 and stay close to the existing alignment of the formed road between 47 and xx marine Parade.

3. If above ground construction is not feasible, engage a qualified archaeologist to design a test pitting methodology, utilising the current Aboriginal consultation process and conduct a test pitting programme.

4. Once test pitting is completed and the results assessed by OEH, Council to apply for an AHIP to allow construction of Stage 2 of the path, utilising the Aboriginal consultation process already in place for Stage 1 of the project and for the test pitting.

Page 63 Feary, S. 2013 Callala Bay shared path. Aboriginal cultural heritage assessment. FINAL REPORT.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

ANUTech PL. (1986). An excavationa and analysis of 2 Aboriginal shell middens near Merimbula, New South Wales. Sydney: Sinclair, knight and Partners PL. Barz, K. (1977). Some theoretical and practical aspects of midden sampling as applied to a site at St Georges Basin, Jervis Bay, ACT. Canberra: Dept Prehistory and Anthroplogy, BA (Hons). Bennett, M. (2007). The economics of fishing: sustainable living in colonial NSW. Aboriginal History, 13, 85-102. Blackwell, A. (1980). Oh, I do like to be beside the seaside. Canberra: Dept Prehistory and Anthropology, Australian National UNiversity. Booderee National Park Board of Management; Director of National Parks. (2002). Booderee National Park Management PLan. Canberra: Commonwealth of Australia. Cane, S. (1988). An Assessment of the Impact of Defence Proposals on Aboriginal Sites in Jervis Bay, NSW. . Sydney: Sinclair Knight and Partners. Cho, G., Georges, A., & Stoutjesdik, R. (1995). Jervis Bay. A Place of Cultural, Scientific and Educational Value. Canberra: Australian Nature Conservation Agency. Collier, M. (1975). Cemetery Point. the analysis and economic interpretation of a midden. Canberra: Dept Prehistory and Anthropology, Australian National University, BA (Hons). Dallas, M. (1998). Proposed school sites at Callala Bay. Sydney: NSW Department of Public Works and Services. Dallas, M. (2006). Aboriginal and European cultural heritage assessment, The Heritage Estates, Worrowing Heights, NSW. Nowra: Shoalhaven City Council. Dalmazzo, P. (2012). Flora and Habitat Assessment for proposed shared path, Callala Point . Nowra: Shoalhaven City Council. DECCW. (2010a). Aboriginal cultural heritage consultation requirements for proponents 2010. Sydney: DECCW. DECCW. (2010). Code of Practice for archaeological investigation of Aboriginal objects in New South Wales. Sydney: DECCW. Department of Planning. (1996). Jervis Bay Regional Environmental PLan. Sydney: NSW Government. Dibden, J. (2007). Aboriginal landscapes of Jervis Bay, Stage 1. Abrahams Bosom Reserve, Currarong, via Nowra, NSW. Npwra: NPWS. Dibden, J., & Kuskie, P. (1999). An archaeological assessment of proposed works by NPWS (Nowra District) at Red Point and Hammerhead Point, Jervis Bay National Park, south coast of new South Wales . Nowra: NPWS, Nowra Area. Eades, D. (1976). The Dharawal and Dhurga languages of the New South Wales south coast. Canberra: Australian Institiute of Aboriginal Studies. Egloff, B. (1981). Wreck Bay. an Aboriginal fishing community. Canberra: Australian Institute of Aboriginal Studies. Egloff, B., Navin, K., & Officer, K. (1995). Jervis Bay National Park and Botanic Gardens as Aboriginal land. Final report to the MInister,. Sydney: Commonwealth Government. Feary, S. (2001). Moving towards joint management in New South Wales; a Jervis Bay case study. In R. Baker, J. Davies, & E. Young, Working on Country (pp. 276-293). : Oxford University Press.

Page 64 Feary, S. 2013 Callala Bay shared path. Aboriginal cultural heritage assessment. FINAL REPORT.

Goulding, M., & Waters, K. (2005). Shoalhaven Local Government Area. Aboriginal heritage study. Aboriginal Historical research, Stage 1. Queanbeyan: NSW Deaprtment of Environment and Conservation. Howitt, A. (1996). The native Tribes of south-east Australia (Facsimilie ed.). Canberra: Aboriginal Studies Press. Hughes, P., & Lampert, R. (1982). Prehistoric population change in southern coastal New South Wales. Valla Conference on Australian Prehistory, Bowdler, S (ed) (pp. 16-28). Canberra: ANU. Jo McDonald CHM PL. (2000). Archaeological test excavation, proposed residential subdivision, Griffin St Precinct, callala beach, NSW. Sydney: Realty Realisations. Jo McDonald Cultural Heritage Management PL. (2000). Survey for Aboriginal sites and relics at proposed residential subdivision at Griffen St, Callala Bay, NSW. Sydney: Realty Realizations PL . Lampert, R. (1971). Burrill Lake and Currarong. Canberra: ANU. Longbottom, D. (2001). Care and protection of flora and fauna at Jervis Bay. Conservation through cooperation - integrated management for the Jervis Bay region (pp. 167-168). HMAS Creswell, JBT: NPWS Nowra. Lowe, D., & Davies, J. (2001). Bundarwa, Berri-werri and the bay. In R. Baker, J. Davies, & E. Young, Working on country. Contemporary Indigenous management of Australia's lands and coastal regions lan (pp. 257-275). Melbourne: Oxford University Press. Moorcroft, H., & Feary, S. (2008). Looking after people, looking after country. A cultural heritage management strategy for the Wreck Bay Aboriginal community 2009-2014 . : Booderee National Park. Mulvaney, J., & Kamminga, J. (1999). Prehistory of Australia. Allen and Unwin: St Leonards. Navin Officer. (2004). Currarong Sewerage Scheme. Archaeological subsurface testing program. Sydney: NSW Department of Commerce. Navin Officer. (2007). Gerringong to Bomaderry Princes Highway upgrade. Preliminary Indigenous and non-Indigenous assessment. Sydney: Roads and Traffic Authority. Navin Officer. (2012). Shaolin Temple and academy, Comberton grange, Jervis Bay, NSW. Conybear Morrison International PL. OEH. (2011). Guide to investigating, assessing and reporting on Aboriginal cultural heritage in NSW. Sydney: Office of Environment and Heritage. Officer, K. (1991). NPWS South east region rock art project. Vols 1 and 2. Queanbeyan: NPWS. Paton, R., & MacFarlane, I. (1989). An excavation of Abrahams Bosom rockshelter 1, near Currarong, Jervis Bay. Queanbeyan: NPWS. Sachs, K. (1996). A resurvey of the Aboriginal archaeological sites on the Bherwerre Peninsula. Wollongong: BA/BSC Hons, University of Wollongong. Sant, B. (2004). Grand Visions for Jervis Bay. Paradise preserved? Shoalhaven Historical Society 1996 Living Echoes. Nowra: Shoalhaven City Council Sullivan, M. (1977). Aboriginal sites of Bherwerre Peninsula. Canberra: Dept Capital Territory. Taylor, K. (1995). European exploration and settlement. In G. Cho, A. Georges, & R. Stoutjesdijk (Eds.), Jervis Bay. A place of cultural, scientific and educational value (pp. 17-23). Canberra: Commonwealth of Australia. Thomas, M. (2007). Culture in Transition. The anthropological legacy of RH Mathews. Canberra: ANU E Press. Tindale, N. (1974). Aboriginal Tribes of Australia. Berkeley: University of California Press. Page 65 Feary, S. 2013 Callala Bay shared path. Aboriginal cultural heritage assessment. FINAL REPORT.

Wesson, S. (2000). An Historical atlas of the Aborigines of eastern and far south-eastern New South Wales. Melbourne: Monash University. White, J. (1977). An archaeological survey of the Beecroft Peninsula. Sydney: NPWS.

Page 66 Feary, S. 2013 Callala Bay shared path. Aboriginal cultural heritage assessment. FINAL REPORT.

Appendix 1: AHIMS site search

Page 67 Feary, S. 2013 Callala Bay shared path. Aboriginal cultural heritage assessment. FINAL REPORT.

Page 68 Feary, S. 2013 Callala Bay shared path. Aboriginal cultural heritage assessment. FINAL REPORT.

Page 69 Feary, S. 2013 Callala Bay shared path. Aboriginal cultural heritage assessment. FINAL REPORT.

Appendix 2: Site cards 58-2-0144 and 58-2-0145

Page 70 Feary, S. 2013 Callala Bay shared path. Aboriginal cultural heritage assessment. FINAL REPORT.

Page 71 Feary, S. 2013 Callala Bay shared path. Aboriginal cultural heritage assessment. FINAL REPORT.

Page 72 Feary, S. 2013 Callala Bay shared path. Aboriginal cultural heritage assessment. FINAL REPORT.

Page 73

Feary, S. 2013 Callala Bay shared path. Aboriginal cultural heritage assessment. FINAL REPORT.

Page 74 Feary, S. 2013 Callala Bay shared path. Aboriginal cultural heritage assessment. FINAL REPORT.

Page 75 Feary, S. 2013 Callala Bay shared path. Aboriginal cultural heritage assessment. FINAL REPORT.

Appendix 3: OEH report

Page 76 Feary, S. 2013 Callala Bay shared path. Aboriginal cultural heritage assessment. FINAL REPORT.

Page 77 Feary, S. 2013 Callala Bay shared path. Aboriginal cultural heritage assessment. FINAL REPORT.

Appendix 4: Newspaper advertisement

Page 78 Feary, S. 2013 Callala Bay shared path. Aboriginal cultural heritage assessment. FINAL REPORT.

Appendix 5: Letter to registered Aboriginal groups

COUNCIL REFERENCE: 46711E (D13/34788) CONTACT PERSON: James Harris

14 February 2013

«Name» «Address» «Suburb»

Dear Sir / Madam

Invitation to Aboriginal Persons to be Consulted Regarding a Shared Path in the Callala Bay Foreshore Reserve

Shoalhaven City Council is proposing to construct a shared concrete path through the Callala Bay foreshore reserve from Sheaffe Street to the existing footbridge at Callala Creek (southern end of Lackersteen Street). The shared path while providing a walking route will also provide opportunities for off road cycling (as per the section of shared path from the existing footbridge at Callala Creek which leads to Callala Beach).

The alignment of the path route (as shown in the attached Plan) builds, where possible, on existing infrastructure and follows wear lines of existing foot / bike traffic in the foreshore reserve. Where possible, the path alignment maintains a minimum buffer of 5 meters to adjacent private properties, but in some areas this buffer may be less due to the need to keep separation to the adjacent cliff line or significant flora.

Construction of the path is proposed to involve provision of a 2 meter wide concrete path with excavation to locate services, install signs and bollards, and to form and construct the path. Excavation depth for the path would be variable but could extend to 150 mm below existing ground level. Revegetation of a number of bare areas may also occur.

The path route is likely to be in close proximity to two recorded Aboriginal sites and possibly additional unrecorded sites. In such circumstances an Aboriginal Heritage Impact Permit may be required from the Office of Environment and Heritage (OEH).

Shoalhaven City Council is undertaking an Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Assessment of the Callala Bay path route and is inviting Aboriginal people with cultural associations to this area to express an interest in being consulted regarding the proposed works. You have been contacted because OEH has you listed as a registered group for the Shoalhaven Local Government Area or Council staff have noted your previous interest in this area. The purpose of this consultation is to assist Council in the preparation of an application for an Aboriginal Heritage Impact Permit for any site/s which may be impacted during path construction and to also assist the Director-General of OEH in making a determination on the application.

Page 79 Feary, S. 2013 Callala Bay shared path. Aboriginal cultural heritage assessment. FINAL REPORT.

Any groups or individuals who wish to be consulted on the Callala Bay shared path route should respond in writing with 14 days of date on this letter to

General Manager Shoalhaven City Council

By post: PO Box 42 Nowra NSW 2541

By email: [email protected]

For further information, contact James Harris, Senior Strategic Planner on (02) 4429 3570. Please quote Council’s reference 46711E (D13/34788).

Yours faithfully

Peter Adams Director Strategic Planning & Infrastructure Group

Page 80 Feary, S. 2013 Callala Bay shared path. Aboriginal cultural heritage assessment. FINAL REPORT.

Appendix 6: Letter regarding project meeting

Page 81 Feary, S. 2013 Callala Bay shared path. Aboriginal cultural heritage assessment. FINAL REPORT.

Appendix 7: Detailed plans for proposed path, showing area of harm (Stage 1).

[see separate PDF file]

Page 82 Feary, S. 2013 Callala Bay shared path. Aboriginal cultural heritage assessment. FINAL REPORT.

Appendix 8: Details of midden exposures8

Identifier (on map) easting northing Position of recording Description

Callala Path1 292431 6124348 Council reserve Single flake, associated scattered, dispersed shell 0145 292255 6123833 Council reserve Fragmented , densely packed shell on gravel vehicle track 0145 292211 6123843 Council reserve Fragmented , densely packed shell on gravel vehicle track Callala Path 2 291921 6123757 Council reserve (seat) Mounded area, densely packed mud oyster around tree roots

0144 291786 6123864 Creek bank Eastern exposure, mud oyster, no bimbula, higher up than bimbula Exp2 292007 6123757 Rock platform c. 20 cm thick layer of densely packed shell, top of cliff edge. Mud oyster. Close to 027. Assigned to Callala Path 2 Exp1 291884 6123744 Rock platform Large exposure, mixture of species, top of cliff edge. Assigned to Callala Path 2, but could be western extension of 58-2-0145 019 291962; 6123741 Rock platform Poor visibility, small amount shell on top of cliff edge. Assigned to Callala Path 2

020 292064; 6123759 Rock platform Large exposure on top of cliff edge, mixture of species. Assigned to 58-2-0145. 022 292285; 6123797 Rock platform Small amount of scattered shell on top of cliff edge. Assigned to 58-2-0145. 024 292190; 6123818 Edge of cliff On top of cliff edge eroded, among roots of a fallen tree, small amount scattered shell, 1 sq. m. – blue mussel, Turbo, mud oyster. Assigned to 58-2-0145.

025 292170; 6123819 Near edge of cliff Large exposure amongst vegetation, numerous small nerites, mud oyster, turbo, etc. Assigned to 58-2-0145 026 0292027 6123785 Edge of cliff Large exposure of shell on top of cliff edge, mostly mud oyster, but other species present. Assigned to 58-2-0145 027 291897 6123751 Edge of cliff Small amount of scattered shell, mud oyster, Turbo, etc. Callala Path 2 or 58-2-0145??

8 See Figure 28 for locations of exposures Page 83 Feary, S. 2013 Callala Bay shared path. Aboriginal cultural heritage assessment. FINAL REPORT.

Appendix 9: Designs for path construction, above and at ground

Page 84 Feary, S. 2013 Callala Bay shared path. Aboriginal cultural heritage assessment. FINAL REPORT.

Page 85 Feary, S. 2013 Callala Bay shared path. Aboriginal cultural heritage assessment. FINAL REPORT.