DOCSLIB.ORG

Shifting State Constructions of Anangu Pitjantjatjara Yankunytjatjara’ Referred to in the Title

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Shifting State Constructions of Anangu Pitjantjatjara Yankunytjatjara’ Referred to in the Title Shifting State Constructions of Anangu Pitjantjatjara Yankunytjatjara: Changes to the South Australian Pitjantjatjara Land Rights Act 1981-2006 DEIRDRE TEDMANSON A thesis submitted for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy of the AUSTRALIAN NATIONAL UNIVERSITY February 2016 Declaration of Originality I certify that this thesis does not incorporate without acknowledgement any material previously submitted for a degree or diploma in any university; and that to the best of my knowledge and belief it does not contain any material previously published or written by another person except where due reference is made in the text. Signed: On: 20/10/2016 ii Acknowledgements There are many people I would like to acknowledge for their support on this journey. First and foremost, I would like to thank Principal Supervisor and Chair of my Supervisory Panel, Dr Will Sanders, Senior Fellow at the Centre for Aboriginal Economic Policy Research (CAEPR) at ANU for his constancy throughout my candidature. From our first discussions to final submission, you have challenged, advised, guided and provided unfailing support and it is very much appreciated – thankyou. Thanks also to supervisory panel members, Professor Jon Altman for generosity of spirit and inspiring ideas; Professor Tim Rowse for important early theoretical insights; Professor Richard Mulgan also for helpful early discussions. Thanks also to Professor Mick Dodson for timely clarifications and Professor Larissa Behrendt for insights into legal issues. I would also like to extend my gratitude to Director Jerry Schwab and everyone at CAEPR, staff, academics, colleagues, students all - for making me welcome throughout my time with the Centre. Thanks also to all my wonderful friends and colleagues for your encouragement. To Lia Bryant, your support, timely debriefing, and ongoing belief in me and this project has been a tonic which helped keep me focused; I am very grateful. Thank-you Sue King, for your generosity and solidarity throughout this journey, from beginning onwards you have helped in so many ways, and it is much appreciated. I could not wish for better colleagues or friends. Thanks also to Christine and Peter, Frances Bedford, Bebe Ramzam (and Bibi Leslie and Dolly), Roxanne Colson, Dennis Colson, Gary Lewis, Sandra Lewis (and family), Makinti, Peter Furze, Peter McDonald, Lowitja O’Donoghue, Peter Buckskin, Maryann Bin-Sallik, Donna, Tammy, Ann Killen, Pauline, Collette, Denise Wood, Adrian Vicary, Kurt Lushington, Bill Edwards, Bruce Underwood, Sam Osborne, Jonathan Nicholls - and my colleagues in the corridor at Magill. To people on the Lands I offer my respect and gratitude for all that you have so generously shared, Kunmanara Nyaningu, Kunmanara Thompson, Yami Lester, Uncle Murray, Makinti Minutjukur, Lewis family, Burton family, Ramzan family, Singer family, Stepahn Rainow, Donald Fraser, Ronnie Brumby, Rex Tjami; and many many others. Palya. I want to especially acknowledge the love and support of my beautiful family: to Louise, Sophie, Claire, Grace, Lucy, Jeff and Charlie – thank-you for being the joy of my life; and to the love of my life Hans, my partner, husband, colleague and friend – thank-you for your intellectual, material and emotional support, I could not have done this without you. iii Abstract The Pitjantjatjara Land Rights Act (PLRA), passed by the Parliament of South Australia in 1981, was a milestone for Indigenous self-determination in Australia and a pinnacle of Anangu/ state relations. Although passed under Liberal Premier David Tonkin, the PLRA had its roots in the leadership of Labor’s Don Dunstan, Premier for over a decade until 1979 and before that Aboriginal Affairs Minister. Dunstan’s vision for Indigenous land rights and self-determination for the Anangu Pitjantjatjara Yankunytjatjara (APY) Lands was embraced by both major parties. This historic achievement of communal land title and community self-determination was also the result of a five-year campaign by the Pitjantjatjara Council (PC) formed by Anangu in 1976. The PLRA created Anangu Pitjantjatjara (AP) as the ‘body corporate’ of Traditional Owners (TOs) and, through an elected Executive, empowered Anangu decision-making over development, access and other matters. By 2004 the Rann Labor Government was arguing that self-determination on the APY Lands had failed and seeking to appoint an Administrator to oversee the Lands. Over the next two years, amidst much contestation, Rann gained Opposition support to substantially amend the PLRA. Amendments re-asserted SA Government oversight and control of the Lands through ministerial powers to direct the Executive, or to suspend it and appoint an Administrator, amongst other changes. This thesis is a narrative account and critical analysis of what happened, how and why in the 25 years between the passing of the PLRA 1981 and its amendment into the APYLRA by 2006. It draws on two bodies of social science literature, critical policy analysis and political theory on Indigenous rights. Conceptually it argues that framing is an important part of the policy process. Using interpretative and critical policy thinkers like Colebatch, Bacchi and Fischer, the thesis considers how problems were identified and issues problematized in the politics of policy- making. It locates this discussion within broader questions of recognition, sovereignty, decolonisation and power. The thesis argues that the original policy context for the PLRA sought greater self- determination as justice for Anangu, enhancing the social well-being of their communities and reversing some of the debilitating effects of colonisation. In a very different framing 25 years later, Anangu leadership and governance were blamed for social ills in their communities, such as petrol sniffing. Despite two Coronial Inquests identifying inadequate government service delivery as contributing to the persistence of petrol sniffing on the Lands, the State Government targeted self-determination as the problem. Anangu community-control was pathologised, whereas in 1981 it had been eulogized. Drawing on the work of political theorists Kymlicka, Tully, Taylor and Fraser on minority rights and the politics of recognition, the thesis explores possibilities and limitations of self- determination within the context of the APY Lands. While the 1981 PLRA optimistically promoted Anangu self-determination as a form of internal decolonisation, this thesis argues that policy shifts through to 2006 mark a substantial retreat from the politics of recognition and minority rights. iv Contents Declaration of Originality............................................................................................... ii Acknowledgements ......................................................................................................... iii Abstract ........................................................................................................................... iv Contents ........................................................................................................................... v List of Figures ............................................................................................................... viii List of Abbreviations .................................................................................................... iix Chapter 1: Introduction ............................................................................................... 12 1.1 Thesis Aims ........................................................................................................... 13 1.2 Methodology ......................................................................................................... 15 1.2.1 Personal location in thesis .............................................................................. 19 1.3 Thesis Structure ..................................................................................................... 23 1.4 APY Lands Context .............................................................................................. 26 1.4.1 Demographics ................................................................................................ 28 1.4.2 Communities, councils and homelands .......................................................... 29 1.4.3 Regional Anangu organisations ..................................................................... 31 Chapter 2: Recognising Anangu Land Rights ............................................................ 35 2.1 Introduction ........................................................................................................... 35 2.2 Dunstan’s Agenda ................................................................................................. 36 2.2.1 Aboriginal Lands Trust Act 1966 ................................................................... 36 2.2.2 Incorporating Aboriginal ‘collective’ identity ............................................... 37 2.3 Pitjantjatjara Land Rights Campaign: ‘Growing up the Country’ ........................ 38 2.3.1 Ernabella Mission .......................................................................................... 39 2.3.2 Anangu leadership .......................................................................................... 42 2.3.3 ‘We want the Land here’ ................................................................................ 44 2.3.4 Underlying tensions within an emerging unity .............................................. 45 2.4 Pitjantjatjara
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Lake Victoria Annual Report 2008-09 Murray–Darling Basin Authority Lake Victoria Annual Report 2008-09
    MURRAY-DARLING BASIN AUTHORITY Lake Victoria Annual Report 2008-09 Murray–Darling Basin Authority Lake Victoria Annual Report 2008-09 Published by Murray-Darling Basin Authority Postal Address GPO Box 1801, Canberra ACT 2601 Office location Level 4, 51 Allara Street, Canberra City Australian Capital Territory Telephone (02) 6279 0100 international + 61 2 6279 0100 Facsimile (02) 6248 8053 international + 61 2 6248 8053 E-Mail [email protected] Internet http://www.mdba.gov.au For further information contact the Murray-Darling Basin Authority office on (02) 6279 0100 This report may be cited as: Lake Victoria Annual Report 2008-09. MDBA Publication No. 50/09 ISBN: 978-1-921557-56-9 (on-line) ISBN: 978-1-921557-57-6 (print) © Copyright Murray-Darling Basin Authority (MDBA), on behalf of the Commonwealth of Australia 2009. This work is copyright. With the exception of photographs, any logo or emblem, and any trademarks, the work may be stored, retrieved and reproduced in whole or in part, provided that it is not sold or used in any way for commercial benefit, and that the source and author of any material used is acknowledged. Apart from any use permitted under the Copyright Act 1968 or above, no part of this work may be reproduced by any process without prior written permission from the Commonwealth. Requests and inquiries concerning reproduction and rights should be addressed to the Commonwealth Copyright Administration, Attorney General’s Department, National Circuit, Barton ACT 2600 or posted at http://www.ag.gov.au/cca. The views, opinions and conclusions expressed by the authors in this publication are not necessarily those of MDBA or the Commonwealth.
    [Show full text]
  • BUDGET OVERVIEW Delivering Results for South Australia
    2006 07 BUDGET OVERVIEW Delivering results for South Australia BUDGET PAPER 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS 2006‑07 Budget at a glance _________________________________________________________ 1 Focussing on services and building communities _________________________________________ 3 Delivering infrastructure for our future __________________________________________________ 4 Public Private Partnership projects ____________________________________________________ 5 Funding our infrastructure needs ______________________________________________________ 7 Savings measures _________________________________________________________________ 8 Expenses by function and revenue by source ___________________________________________ 10 Delivering against South Australia’s Strategic Plan Improving wellbeing ____________________________________________________________ 11 Expanding opportunity __________________________________________________________ 13 Building communities ___________________________________________________________ 14 Growing prosperity ____________________________________________________________ 15 Attaining sustainability __________________________________________________________ 16 Fostering creativity ____________________________________________________________ 17 Regions ________________________________________________________________________ 18 Revenue measures _______________________________________________________________ 19 Economic highlights _______________________________________________________________ 20 Risks to fiscal outlook
    [Show full text]
  • Policy Life Cycle Analysis of Three Australian State-Level Public
    Article Journal of Development Policy Life Cycle Policy and Practice 6(1) 9–35, 2021 Analysis of Three © 2021 Aequitas Consulting Pvt. Ltd. and SAGE Australian State-level Reprints and permissions: in.sagepub.com/journals-permissions-india Public Policies: DOI: 10.1177/2455133321998805 Exploring the journals.sagepub.com/home/jdp Political Dimension of Sustainable Development Kuntal Goswami1,2 and Rolf Gerritsen1 Abstract This article analyses the life cycle of three Australian public policies (Tasmania Together [TT], South Australia’s Strategic Plan [SASP,] and Western Australia’s State Sustainability Strategy [WA’s SSS]). These policies were formulated at the state level and were structured around sustainable development concepts (the environmental, economic, and social dimensions). This study highlights contexts that led to the making of these public policies, as well as factors that led to their discontinuation. The case studies are based on analysis of parliamentary debates, state governments’ budget reports, public agencies’ annual reports, government media releases, and stakeholders’ feedback. The empirical findings highlight the importance of understanding the political dimension of sustainable development. This fact highlights the need to look beyond the traditional three-dimensional view of sustainability when assessing the success (or lack thereof) of sustainable development policies. Equally important, the analysis indicates that despite these policies’ limited success (and even one of these policies not being implemented at all), sustainability policies can have a legacy beyond their life cycle. Hence, the evaluation of these policies is likely to provide insight into the process of policymaking. 1 Charles Darwin University (CDU), Alice Springs, Northern Territory, Australia. 2 Australian Centre for Sustainable Development Research & Innovation (ACSDRI), Adelaide, South Australia, Australia.
    [Show full text]
  • Abortion, Homosexuality and the Slippery Slope: Legislating ‘Moral’ Behaviour in South Australia
    Abortion, Homosexuality and the Slippery Slope: Legislating ‘Moral’ Behaviour in South Australia Clare Parker BMusSt, BA(Hons) A thesis submitted in fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy, Discipline of History, Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences, University of Adelaide. August 2013 ii Contents Contents ii Abstract iv Declaration vi Acknowledgements vii List of Abbreviations ix List of Figures x A Note on Terms xi Introduction 1 Chapter 1: ‘The Practice of Sound Morality’ 21 Policing Abortion and Homosexuality 24 Public Conversation 36 The Wowser State 44 Chapter 2: A Path to Abortion Law Reform 56 The 1930s: Doctors, Court Cases and Activism 57 World War II 65 The Effects of Thalidomide 70 Reform in Britain: A Seven Month Catalyst for South Australia 79 Chapter 3: The Abortion Debates 87 The Medical Profession 90 The Churches 94 Activism 102 Public Opinion and the Media 112 The Parliamentary Debates 118 Voting Patterns 129 iii Chapter 4: A Path to Homosexual Law Reform 139 Professional Publications and Prohibited Literature 140 Homosexual Visibility in Australia 150 The Death of Dr Duncan 160 Chapter 5: The Homosexuality Debates 166 Activism 167 The Churches and the Medical Profession 179 The Media and Public Opinion 185 The Parliamentary Debates 190 1973 to 1975 206 Conclusion 211 Moral Law Reform and the Public Interest 211 Progressive Reform in South Australia 220 The Slippery Slope 230 Bibliography 232 iv Abstract This thesis examines the circumstances that permitted South Australia’s pioneering legalisation of abortion and male homosexual acts in 1969 and 1972. It asks how and why, at that time in South Australian history, the state’s parliament was willing and able to relax controls over behaviours that were traditionally considered immoral.
    [Show full text]
  • South Australia
    14. South Australia Dean Jaensch South Australia was not expected to loom large in the federal election, with only 11 of the 150 seats. Of the 11, only four were marginal—requiring a swing of less than 5 per cent to be lost. Three were Liberal: Sturt (held by Christopher Pyne since 1993, 1 per cent margin), Boothby (Andrew Southcott since 1996, 3 per cent) and Grey (4.5 per cent). Of the Labor seats, only Kingston (4.5 per cent) was marginal. Table 14.1 Pre-Election Pendulum (per cent) ALP Liberal Party Electorate FP TPP Electorate FP TPP Kingston 46 .7 54 .4 Sturt 47 .2 50 .9 Hindmarsh 47 .2 55 .1 Boothby 46 .3 52 .9 Wakefield 48 .7 56 .6 Grey 47 .3 54 .4 Makin 51 .4 57 .7 Mayo 51 .1 57 .1 Adelaide 48 .2 58 .5 Barker 46 .8 59 .5 Port Adelaide 58 .2 69 .8 FP = first preference TPP = two-party preferred Labor won Kingston, Wakefield and Makin from the Liberal Party in 2007. The Liberal Party could win all three back. But, in early 2010, it was expected that if there was any change in South Australia, it would involve Liberal losses. The State election in March 2010, however, produced some shock results. The Rann Labor Government was returned to office, despite massive swings in its safe seats. In the last two weeks of the campaign, the polls showed Labor in trouble. The Rann Government—after four years of hubris, arrogance and spin—was in danger of defeat.
    [Show full text]
  • Presentation Tile
    Authentic and engaging artist-led Education Programs with Thomas Readett Ngarrindjeri, Arrernte peoples 1 Acknowledgement 2 Warm up: Round Robin 3 4 See image caption from slide 2. installation view: TARNANTHI featuring Mumu by Pepai Jangala Carroll, 2015, Art Gallery of South Australia, Adelaide; photo: Saul Steed. 5 What is TARNANTHI? TARNANTHI is a platform for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander artists from across the country to share important stories through contemporary art. TARNANTHI is a national event held annually by the Art Gallery of South Australia. Although TARNANTHI at AGSA is annual, biannually TARNANTHI turns into a city-wide festival and hosts hundreds of artists across multiple venues across Adelaide. On the year that the festival isn’t on, TARNANTHI focuses on only one feature artist or artist collective at AGSA. Jimmy Donegan, born 1940, Roma Young, born 1952, Ngaanyatjarra people, Western Australia/Pitjantjatjara people, South Australia; Kunmanara (Ray) Ken, 1940–2018, Brenton Ken, born 1944, Witjiti George, born 1938, Sammy Dodd, born 1946, Pitjantjatjara/Yankunytjatjara people, South Australia; Freddy Ken, born 1951, Naomi Kantjuriny, born 1944, Nyurpaya Kaika Burton, born 1940, Willy Kaika Burton, born 1941, Rupert Jack, born 1951, Adrian Intjalki, born 1943, Kunmanara (Gordon) Ingkatji, c.1930–2016, Arnie Frank, born 1960, Stanley Douglas, born 1944, Maureen Douglas, born 1966, Willy Muntjantji Martin, born 1950, Taylor Wanyima Cooper, born 1940, Noel Burton, born 1994, Kunmanara (Hector) Burton, 1937–2017,
    [Show full text]
  • FPA Legislation Committee Tabled Docu~Ent No. \
    FPA Legislation Committee Tabled Docu~ent No. \, By: Mr~ C'-tn~:S AOlSC, Date: b IV\a,c<J..-. J,od.D , e,. t\-40.M I ---------- - ~ -- Australian Government National IndigeJrums Australlfans Agency OFFICIAL Chief Executive Officer Ray Griggs AO, CSC Reference: EC20~000257 Senator Tim Ayres Labor Senator for New South Wales Deputy Chair, Senate Finance and Public Administration Committee 6 March 2020 Re: Additional Estimates 2019-2020 Dear Senatafyres ~l Thank you for your letter dated 25 February 2020 requesting information about Indigenous Advancement Strategy (IAS) and Aboriginals Benefit Account (ABA) grants and unsuccessful applications for the periods 1 January- 30 June 2019 and 1 July 2019 (Agency establishment) - 25 February 2020. The National Indigenous Australians Agency has prepared the attached information; due to reporting cycles, we have provided the requested information for the period 1 January 2019 - 31 January 2020. However we can provide the information for the additional period if required. As requested, assessment scores are provided for the merit-based grant rounds: NAIDOC and ABA. Assessment scores for NAIDOC and ABA are not comparable, as NAIDOC is scored out of 20 and ABA is scored out of 15. Please note as there were no NAIDOC or ABA grants/ unsuccessful applications between 1 July 2019 and 31 January 2020, Attachments Band D do not include assessment scores. Please also note the physical location of unsuccessful applicants has been included, while the service delivery locations is provided for funded grants. In relation to ABA grants, we have included the then Department's recommendations to the Minister, as requested.
    [Show full text]
  • NAIDOC Week SA 2019 7 JULY - 14 JULY Voice
    NAIDOC Week SA 2019 7 JULY - 14 JULY Voice . Treaty . Truth Let’s work together for a shared future WHEN EVENT RSVP DETAILS WHERE ONGOING Until Mon 15 Aboriginal Building Public event Aboriginal graphic design is covering the Ground floor July 2019 Wrap glass windows of 77 Grenfell Street. For more 77 Grenfell Street Free information, contact Khatija at 8343 2449 or email Adelaide SA 5000 Sponsored by Department [email protected] of Planning, Transport and Infrastructure Until Sat 20 The Kardi Munaintya Public transport This specially designed tram is operational Tram Route July 2019 Tram throughout the year and is showcased during Adelaide SA 5000 Reconciliation and NAIDOC weeks. For more Sponsored by Department information, contact Khatija at 8343 2449 or email of Planning, Transport and [email protected] Infrastructure Until Sun 21 Ngarrindjeri Exhibitions Public event Two exhibitions - Ngarrindjeri Ruwe by 27 Sixth Street July 2019 Cedric Varcoe maps Ngarrindjeri lands and Murray Bridge Presented by Murray Free waters, sharing ancestor stories fundamental SA 5253 Gallery open Bridge Regional Gallery to Ngarrindjeri culture. Connected features Tue - Sat contemporary weaving practices by Ngarrindjeri 10:00am – artists from Murray Bridge to Meningie, Victor 4:00pm Harbour to Raukkan including Ellen Trevorrow, Sun 11:00am Phyllis Williams, Robert Wuldi, Cedric Varcoe, Deb – 4:00pm Rankine, Elly Wilson, Alice Abdulla, Joe Trevorrow, Hank Trevorrow, and Ngarrindjeri Weavers Collaborators. For more information, contact the Gallery at 8539 1420 or email [email protected] Until Thu 25 Vietnam – One In, All In Public event Country Arts SA presents a new exhibition The Walter Nichols July 2019 honouring the untold stories of South Australian Memorial Gallery Hosted by Country Arts SA Free Aboriginal veterans of the Vietnam War, before, Nautilus Art Centre For Port Lincoln during and after.
    [Show full text]
  • Grievability and Nuclear Memory | 379
    Grievability and Nuclear Memory | 379 Grievability and Nuclear Memory Jessie Boylan Nuclear Wounds Without grievability, there is no life, or, rather, there is something living that is other than life. Instead, “there is a life that will never have been lived,” sustained by no regard, no testimony, and ungrieved when lost. The apprehension of grievability precedes and makes possible the apprehension of precarious life. —Judith Butler, Frames of War: When Is Life Grievable? (2009) ince 1945, nuclear weapons have been tested on all continents except for South America and Antarctica. Although “it is the nature of bombing to Sbe indiscriminate,”1 Aboriginal, Indigenous, and First Nations people have been the disproportionate victims of these weapons. They also continue to face nuclear waste dumps, uranium mines, and other nuclear projects on their land. This radioactive colonialism ensures that violence persists and is etched into the knowledge of people, place, and country, and that the single “event” of a nuclear detonation is far from over. Official records provide ample evidence to document how state policies, practices, and attitudes marked Aboriginal people as not fully human. For example, the Maralinga nuclear test site in Australia was “chosen on the false assumption that the area was not used by its traditional Aboriginal owners.”2 People living downwind (“downwinders”) of the Nevada Test Site in Utah during the US atomic weapons testing program,3 including First Nations communities, were considered “a low-use segment of the population.”4 These racist assumptions and statements, one tiny example from the archive of the nuclear landscape, constructed the people (and the lands they inhabited) as disposable.
    [Show full text]
  • Community Water Supplies in the APY Lands.Pdf
    Kapi Nganampa Community water supplies in the Anangu Pitjantjatjara Lands, South Australia: sustainability of groundwater resources A.R. Dodds, S. Hostetler, and G. Jacobson ©Commonwealth of Australia 2001 ISSN 1039-0073 ISBN 0 642 47573 3 This work is copyright. The Copyright Act 1968 permits fair dealing for study, research, news reporting, criticism or review. Selected passages , tables or diagrams may be reproduced for such purposes provided acknowledgment of the source is included. Major extracts or the entire document may not be reproduced by any process without the written permission of the Executive Director, Bureau of Rural Sciences, P.O. Box Ell, Kingston, ACT 2604. Department of AGRICULTURE FISHERIES and FORESTRY • AUSTRALIA The Bureau of Rural Sciences (BRS) is the science agency within the Commonwealth Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry - Australia. Published by: Bureau of Rural Sciences PO BoxEll Kingston, ACT 2604 Telephone: (02) 6272 4282 Facsimile: (02) 6272 4747 Internet: http://www.affa.gov.au Copies available from: AFFA Shopfront GPO Box 858 Canberra ACT 2601 Telephone: (02) 6272 5550 Fax: (02) 6272 5771 Email: [email protected] Preferred way to cite this publication: Dodds, A.R., Hostetler, S.D., and Jacobson, G. (2001) Community water supplies in the Anangu Pitjantjatjara Lands, South Australia: sustainability of groundwater resources. Bureau of Rural Sciences, Canberra. This report does not represent professional advice given by the Commonwealth or any other person acting for the Commonwealth for any particular purpose. It should not be relied on as the basis for any decision to take action on any matter which it covers.
    [Show full text]
  • Groundwater Recharge in the Eastern Anangu Pitjantjatjara Yankunytjatjara Lands
    Groundwater recharge in the eastern Anangu Pitjantjatjara Yankunytjatjara Lands DEWNR Technical report 2014/06 Groundwater recharge in the eastern Anangu Pitjantjatjara Yankunytjatjara Lands Peter Kretschmer and Daniel Wohling Department of Environment, Water and Natural Resources May, 2014 DEWNR Technical Report 2014/06 Department of Environment, Water and Natural Resources GPO Box 1047, Adelaide SA 5001 Telephone National (08) 8463 6946 International +61 8 8463 6946 Fax National (08) 8463 6999 International +61 8 8463 6999 Website http://www.environment.sa.gov.au Disclaimer The Department of Environment, Water and Natural Resources and its employees do not warrant or make any representation regarding the use, or results of the use, of the information contained herein as regards to its correctness, accuracy, reliability, currency or otherwise. The Department of Environment, Water and Natural Resources and its employees expressly disclaims all liability or responsibility to any person using the information or advice. Information contained in this document is correct at the time of writing. This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. © Crown in right of the State of South Australia, through the Department of Environment, Water and Natural Resources 2014 ISBN 978-1-922174-78-9 Preferred way to cite this publication Kretschmer, P., Wohling, D., 2014, Groundwater recharge in the Anangu Pitjantjatjara Yankunytjatjara Lands, South Australia, DEWNR Technical Report 2014/06, Government of South Australia, through the Department of Environment, Water and Natural Resources, Adelaide Download this document at: http://www.waterconnect.sa.gov.au DEWNR Technical Report 2014/06 i Foreword The Department of Environment, Water and Natural Resources (DEWNR) is responsible for the management of the State’s natural resources, ranging from policy leadership to on-ground delivery in consultation with government, industry and communities.
    [Show full text]
  • South Australia by Local Government Area (LGA) Alphabetically
    Dementia prevalence estimates 2021-2058 South Australia by local government area (LGA) alphabetically LGA 2021 2058 Adelaide City Council 366 923 Adelaide Hills Council 801 1,363 Adelaide Plains Council 144 373 Alexandrina Council 937 1,406 Anangu Pitjantjatjara Yankunytjatjara 15 79 The Barossa Council 596 972 Barunga West 102 77 Berri Barmera Council 292 351 Burnside 1,206 2,055 Campbelltown City Council 1,372 2,383 Ceduna 70 117 Charles Sturt 2,794 5,740 Clare and Gilbert Valleys Council 250 293 Cleve 42 56 Coober Pedy 49 61 Coorong District Council 140 120 Copper Coast Council 489 528 Elliston 22 35 The Flinders Ranges Council 46 49 Franklin Harbour 36 41 Gawler 611 1,227 Goyder 116 132 Grant 156 275 Holdfast Bay 1,091 1,911 Kangaroo Island Council 129 192 Dementia Australia (2018) dementia prevalence data 2018-2058, commissioned research undertaken by NATSEM, University of Canberra. © Dementia Australia 2021 South Australia by local government area (LGA) alphabetically (continued) LGA 2021 2058 Karoonda East Murray 38 34 Kimba 25 34 Kingston District Council 83 69 Light Regional Council 221 353 Lower Eyre Peninsula 109 219 Loxton Waikerie 324 390 Marion 2,043 3,944 Mid Murray Council 263 393 Mitcham 1,589 2,684 Mount Barker District Council 657 1,650 Mount Gambier 627 909 Mount Remarkable 91 86 Murray Bridge 531 911 Naracoorte Lucindale Council 198 295 Northern Areas Council 131 141 Norwood Payneham & St Peters 926 1,754 Onkaparinga 3,578 7,017 Orroroo Carrieton 30 25 Peterborough 59 44 Playford 1,406 3,487 Port Adelaide Enfield 2,506 6,133 Port Augusta City Council 294 484 Port Lincoln 348 451 Port Pirie Regional Council 474 582 Prospect 369 851 These data exclude Gerard Community Council, Maralinga Tjarutja Community Inc, Nepabunna Community Council, Outback Communities Authority and Yalata Community because of very small numbers.
    [Show full text]