Deakin Research Online This is the published version: Jones, David 2011, The water harvesting landscape of Budj Bim and Lake Condah : whither world heritage recognition, in Proceedings of the 2011 International Conference of the Association of Architecture Schools of Australasia, Deakin University, School of Architecture & Building, Geelong, Vic., pp. 131-142. Available from Deakin Research Online: http://hdl.handle.net/10536/DRO/DU:30042357 Reproduced with the kind permission of the copyright owner. Copyright : 2011, David Jones THE WATER HARVESTING LANDSCAPE OF BUDJ BIM AND LAKE CONDAH: WHITHER WORLD HERITAGE RECOGNITION David Jones 1) Deakin University, Australia, [email protected] ABSTRACT In July 2004 the Budj Bim National Heritage Landscape was inscribed onto the National Heritage List. The place accorded with the criterion of A. Events, Processes (in demonstrating a place of Indigenous-European colonization conflict), B. Rarity (in demonstrating the context, historical and philosophy of benevolence of Governments to Indigenous people), F. Creative or technical achievement (in demonstrating technical accomplishment in construction the system), and, I. Indigenous tradition (in demonstrating longevity and continuity of cultural practices). Such affords Budj Bim, that hosts a unique Indigenous water harvesting and aquaculture infrastructure system dating some 7,000-10,000 years within a country that the Gunditjmara have managed for some 20,000-50,000 years, national standing. Within the lands gazetted is a complex and multi-faceted system that would today be categorised as a major integrated landscape planning and catchment management scheme that includes demonstrable major site engineering, hydraulic engineering, and aquaculture and water management scientific evidence and process knowledge and application. Now listed, continuing objectives of the Gunditjmara, the custodians of the Budj Bim country, and a majority land owner of most of the Lake Condah complex, is to restore and heal this landscape, bring back its pre-colonial destroyed water systems and cultural landscape, but also progressively move towards a world heritage nomination for the landscape. This paper considers the position of the Budj Bim National Heritage Landscape within National Heritage List and World Heritage List criterion, proposing a debate about merit and continuity of Indigenous science, technologies, and process. In doing so, it also reviews World Heritage places that are Indigenous-rich in their essence and values to better appreciate the position of both Budj Bim and recognised Indigenous water technologies and knowledge systems within these listings to better appreciate and inform this debate. KEYWORDS Lake Condah, environmental planning, world heritage, Indigenous systems, Gunditjmara, Budj Bim INTRODUCTION In 2004, under the new Australian heritage regime that replaced the former Australian Heritage Commission and its registrar, Minister Kemp inscribed the Budj Bim National Heritage Landscape (BBNHL) into the new National Heritage Register. The BBNHL became the first Indigenous Association of Architecture Schools of Australasia (AASA) Proceedings, Deakin University 2011 131 landscape included in this Register and it remains today the foremost Australian Indigenous landscape because of its unique assemblage of tangible and intangible evidence and values. The only additional Indigenous landscapes inscribed have been the Brewarrina Aboriginal Fish Traps (Baiames Ngunnhu) inscribed in June 2005, Kakadu National Park inscribed in May 2007 [noting that Kakadu National Park has been previously inscribed on the World Heritage List in three stages - 1981 (Stage 1), 1987 (Stages 1 and 2) and 1992 (Stages 1, 2 and 3)], the Uluru-Kata Tjuta National Park that was inscribed in May 2007 [noting that the Park was inscribed on the World Heritage List in two stages, initially for its outstanding universal natural values in 1987 and then for its outstanding universal cultural values in 1994], and Ngarrabullgan [Mount Mulligan] in Queensland inscribed in May 2011. To the Gunditjmara, the traditional people and custodians of a ‘country’ that stretched across most of the lower south-west of the Western District of Victoria, embracing the localities of Portland, Hamilton, and Lake Condah today, this progressional discourse is about healing their ancestral responsibilities within the constructs of contemporary scenic and significance value systems. To appreciate this context it is important to comprehend the new Commonwealth heritage regime and the listing, then to comprehend the tangible and intangible values extant at the place, before understanding why, how and under what basis this progressional discourse is occurring. This paper charts the National Heritage listing and deliberations in train as to a possible World Heritage nomination. NATIONAL HERITAGE AND THE BUDJ BIM HERITAGE NATIONAL HERITAGE LANDSCAPE The Australian National Heritage regime was introduced in 1993 with an intention to rationalise the huge inventory of registered heritage places that had been accumulated under the previous Australian Heritage Commission. To both the Commission, and the present Australian Heritage Council, established under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act), heritage comprises all the components that constitute Australia's identity - our spirit and ingenuity, our buildings, and our unique, living landscapes. Such is derived from our past, our living systems and aspirations, our patterns of lifestyle, and the narratives and artefacts that we are divesting to our future generations. To assist in the identification and quantification of these components, heritage criteria, thresholds, and statutory listings were assembled to inform the identification and protection of places we, as an Australian community, wish to keep and pass to future generations. Such criteria, thresholds and listings are now the primary vehicles through which the heritage values of listed places are articulated, and guided in the formulation of their management policies. The criteria is set out in Table 1. Table 1 Association of Architecture Schools of Australasia (AASA) Proceedings, Deakin University 2011 132 Australian National Heritage Criteria a. the place has outstanding heritage value to the nation because of the place's importance in the course, or pattern, of Australia's natural or cultural history b. the place has outstanding heritage value to the nation because of the place's possession of uncommon, rare or endangered aspects of Australia's natural or cultural history c. the place has outstanding heritage value to the nation because of the place's potential to yield information that will contribute to an understanding of Australia's natural or cultural history d. the place has outstanding heritage value to the nation because of the place's importance in demonstrating the principal characteristics of: i. a class of Australia's natural or cultural places; or ii. a class of Australia's natural or cultural environments; e. the place has outstanding heritage value to the nation because of the place's importance in exhibiting particular aesthetic characteristics valued by a community or cultural group f. the place has outstanding heritage value to the nation because of the place's importance in demonstrating a high degree of creative or technical achievement at a particular period g. the place has outstanding heritage value to the nation because of the place's strong or special association with a particular community or cultural group for social, cultural or spiritual reasons h. the place has outstanding heritage value to the nation because of the place's special association with the life or works of a person, or group of persons, of importance in Australia's natural or cultural history i. the place has outstanding heritage value to the nation because of the place's importance as part of Indigenous tradition. The cultural aspect of a criterion means the Indigenous cultural aspect, the non-Indigenous cultural aspect, or both. Source: http://www.environment.gov.au/heritage/about/national/criteria.html, accessed 1st August 2011 The National Heritage List comprises a list of places with outstanding natural, Indigenous or historic heritage value to Australia. The Council assesses if a nominated place possesses one or more of the nine National Heritage List criteria heritage values and advises the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and the Arts if it satisfies their assessment. In terms of Budj Bim, the landscape and its nomination are geographically broken into two portions – the Mount Eccles portion and the Tyrendarra portion – but both are integral within the Gunditjmara perspective as being their Budj Bim landscape albeit possessing different successful criteria applicability. These two portions are depicted in the map associated with the National Heritage list gazettal documents. The Mount Eccles portion was deemed as satisfying criteria a, b, f and i and the Tyrendarra portion satisfied criteria a and f. The Minister for the Environment and Heritage, David Alistair Kemp, on 20 July 2004, concluded that he was satisfied that Budj Bim possessed National Heritage value or values and pursuant to section 324J of the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 instructed the places to be listed in the Schedule in the National Heritage List. Such occurred on the same day as the inclusion of the Royal Exhibition Building National