Lot 149 Dp 750008 – 2153 Collector Road Currawang Nsw

Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Due Diligence Assessment LOT 149 DP 750008 – 2153 COLLECTOR ROAD CURRAWANG NSW

Report Prepared for Mr Paul Burns

20th September 2018

www.pasttraces.com.au email: [email protected]

Document Verification Lot 149 DP 750008 – 2153 Collector Road Currawang NSW

Project Number: Project File Name: Lot 149 DP750008 – Due Diligence Revision Date Prepared by (name) Reviewed by (name) F.1 31/7/2018 Lyn O’Brien Lee Bath F.2 20/9/2018 Lyn O’Brien  Past Traces Pty Ltd This document is and shall remain the property of Past Traces Pty Ltd. The document may only be used for the purposes for which it was commissioned. Unauthorised use of this document in any form whatsoever is prohibited.

Disclaimer: Past Traces Pty Ltd has completed this assessment in accordance with the relevant federal, state and local Legislation. Past Traces accepts no liability for any damages or loss incurred as a result of reliance placed upon the report content or for any purpose other than that for which it was intended.

Important Information Concerning the Distribution of this Document

This report contains information restricted under NPW Act 1974 and cannot be publicly available. Restricted information includes (but is not limited to):

 Tabled GPS co-ordinates for Aboriginal places or objects, including lithic artefacts, stone arrangements, middens, burials, scarred trees, rock art and Potential Archaeological Deposits.  Maps or images depicting the location of Aboriginal places or objects, including lithic artefacts, stone arrangements, middens, burials, scarred trees, rock art and Potential Archaeological Deposits.  Location or overly descriptive information pertaining to places of Aboriginal cultural significance, as expressed or directed by Representative Aboriginal Organisations, Aboriginal elders, or members of the wider Aboriginal community.  Heritage places or objects vulnerable to vandalism, theft, or damage.

These items must be removed from the report before being made available to the general public and should only be made available to those persons with a just and reasonable need for access to the knowledge.

www.pasttraces.com.au email: [email protected]

CONTENTS

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...... i 1 INTRODUCTION ...... 1 1.1 PROJECT OBJECTIVES ...... 1 1.2 ABORIGINAL CONSULTATION ...... 2 2 ASSESSMENT RESULTS ...... 5 2.1 AHIMS SEARCH ...... 5 2.2 PREVIOUS HERITAGE STUDIES ...... 7 2.3 LANDFORM ASSESSMENT ...... 8 2.4 SITE VISIT ...... 9 2.4.1 Ground Surface Visibility ...... 9 2.4.2 Disturbance ...... 11 2.4.3 Aboriginal heritage Sites ...... 11 2.4.4 Areas of Potential Archaeological Deposit (PAD) ...... 11 2.5 IMPACT ASSESSMENT ...... 11 3 RECOMMENDATIONS ...... 14 4 REFERENCES ...... 15

.FIGURES

Figure 1. Location of project area 3

Figure 2. Detail of proposed works 4

Figure 3. Figure 1 from BHM 2000 showing site location of 57-2-0288 5

Figure 4. Location of AHIMS Sites 6

Figure 5. Flowchart of Due Diligence process 13

www.pasttraces.com.au email: [email protected]

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Field survey was undertaken over this area of Lot 149 DP750013 proposed for construction impacts on the 20th July 2018 which identified no heritage constraints. An alternative area on Lot 114 DP 750008 was assessed by field survey and reporting on 21st November 2017 and found to contain no heritage constraints (Past Traces 2017). The Due Diligence Assessment has shown that no Aboriginal heritage sites or areas of Potential Archaeological Deposit (PAD) were identified within the project area based on a review of previous reports and field survey of the project area. As a result of the field survey and background research completed for the project, the following recommendations have been developed: Recommendation 1: Works to proceed without further heritage assessment in areas without heritage constraints. The proposed works can proceed without further assessment within the areas where no Aboriginal objects or places have been identified as occurring. The potential of impacting unrecorded sites within these areas during the proposed works is assessed as extremely low, based on landform analysis and prior levels of disturbance. Recommendation 2: Discovery of Unanticipated Aboriginal cultural material. All Aboriginal places and objects are protected under the NPW Act. This protection extends to Aboriginal material that has not been previously identified, but might be unearthed during construction activities. In the event that Aboriginal material is discovered during construction the following steps should be undertaken:

 Cease Work: Works must cease in the vicinity of the find and a fenced buffer zone of 10m around the find be erected.  Notification: OEH must be notified of the find.  Management: A qualified heritage consultant should be engaged to assess and record the find in accordance with the legislative requirements and OEH guidelines. If the find is Aboriginal in nature, consult with OEH in regards to appropriate steps and management. This would usually involve consultation with the Aboriginal community and may require application for an Aboriginal Heritage Impact Permit.

i www.pasttraces.com.au email: [email protected] Recommendation 3: Discovery of Human Remains In the unlikely event that human remains are discovered during the construction, all work must cease. OEH, the local police and the appropriate LALC should be notified. Further assessment would be required to determine if the remains are Aboriginal or non-Aboriginal. Recommendation 4: Alteration of impact footprint Further archaeological assessment would be required if the proposal activity extends beyond the area of the current investigation.

ii www.pasttraces.com.au email: [email protected]

1 INTRODUCTION

This Due Diligence report provides Aboriginal heritage due diligence advice for the proposed Recreational Facility (Outdoor) – Rifle Range to be established on Lots 114 and 200 DP 750008, and Lot 149 DP 750013, 2155 Collector Road, Currawang (the ‘site’). The proposed development comprises the establishment of a Recreational Facility (outdoor) - Rifle Range for the purposes of individual and group training and practice shooting. The proposed development includes construction of construction of a shed and the establishment of sites where shooting at 25m, 50m 100m can be conducted. The project area is shown in Figure 1. The location of proposed facilities (the impact area) is confined to a small section within the southern portion of Lot 149 DP750013 and is shown in Figure 2. All construction impacts are confined to this small area within the larger Lot location. In November 2017 field survey and assessment was undertaken on an area of Lot 114 DP750008 for the proposed construction site. This assessment found no heritage constraints to be within the project boundaries (Past Traces 2017). These construction works within Lot 149 DP750013 are high impact and would have a negative impact on any Aboriginal heritage located within the impact area. Aboriginal heritage sites may be located on the surface or subsurface in areas of high potential for the preservation of archaeological remains of past usage by Aboriginal groups. To assess the potential impacts of the proposed works on Aboriginal heritage this Due Diligence Heritage Assessment has been undertaken. This report, field survey and associated research has been conducted in accordance to the requirements of the Due Diligence Code of Practice for the Protection of Aboriginal Objects in New South Wales (OEH 2010.

1.1 PROJECT OBJECTIVES

The following is a summary of the major objectives of the due diligence assessment:

 Identify Aboriginal objects and places known to exist within the Project Area through a search of the Aboriginal Heritage Information Management System (AHIMS) maintained by the Office of Environment and Heritage (OEH).

 Assessment of Landscape for landforms that may contain potential for unrecorded sites and to determine level of disturbance of landscape features.

 Undertake site visit to visually inspect areas identified for impact, or areas holding potential and to verify levels of disturbance. If registered sites (AHIMS) occur within the project area, record and assess condition.

 Complete due diligence report containing recommendations to minimise potential impacts to heritage values within the project area.

1 www.pasttraces.com.au email: [email protected] 1.2 ABORIGINAL CONSULTATION

Consultation with the Aboriginal community is not a requirement of the Due Diligence Code and this Due Diligence assessment has been undertaken without further consultation with the LALC. If impacts to Aboriginal heritage are found to occur as a result of the development then consultation will be undertaken with the LALC and the wider Aboriginal community as required by NSW Office of Environment and Heritage (2010).

2 www.pasttraces.com.au email: [email protected]

Figure 1: Study Area

Legend Study Area

± 24/11/2017 1:40,000 0 250500 1,000 1,500

Metres GDA 1994 MGA Zone 55

Imagery © Department of Finance, Services & Innovation 2017 Figure 2: Areas of Impact and AHIMS Sites

Legend AHIMS Sites Area of Impact Study Area

57-2-0288 ± 30/07/2018 1:7,000 037.575 150 225

Metres GDA 1994 MGA Zone 55

Imagery © Department of Finance, Services & Innovation 2017 2 ASSESSMENT RESULTS

2.1 AHIMS SEARCH

A search of the OEH AHIMS database was undertaken on the 27/7/2018 which revealed no previously recorded heritage sites within the project area. A further extensive search was then undertaken over a wider 1km surrounding area centred on the project area (AHIMS Search No 360380). One site was returned within this enlarged area within Lot 62 DP750008 located to the west of the project area. This site was identified by BHM in 2000 and consists of two quartz flakes which were then collected under an Aboriginal heritage impact permit (AHIP). This site (57-2-0288) recorded by BHM (2000) is listed on AHIMS at an incorrect location. According to the figure within the original 2000 report this site is located within Lot 62 DP750008 but on AHIMS it is listed as within Lot 200 DP750008. The location of the site as shown in the original report is shown in Figure 3.

Figure 3. Figure 1 from BHM 2000 showing site location of 57-2-0288

The location of the AHIMS sites as registered are shown in Figure 4. For the wider area of Collector and Lake George, sites mainly consist of artefact scatters, in association with water bodies or sand deposits

5 www.pasttraces.com.au email: [email protected] Figure 2: AHIMS Sites

Legend AHIMS Sites Study Area

51-5-0001

± 24/11/2017 1:40,000 0 250500 1,000 1,500

Metres GDA 1994 MGA Zone 55

57-2-0288 Imagery © Department of Finance, Services & Innovation 2017 2.2 PREVIOUS HERITAGE STUDIES

In order to evaluate the potential for Aboriginal sites to exist within the study area, consideration has been given to local and regional site patterning. This section provides a review of past research (mostly archaeological consulting reports) and an examination of locally identified Aboriginal cultural heritage sites to identify landforms that contain high potential for the preservation of Aboriginal heritage sites. A number of heritage assessments have been undertaken for the Collector and Bungendore region. These studies have been mainly commissioned due to residential developments and sand quarry operations. The most relevant of these heritage studies are summarised below in Table 1 to provide an overview of survey results, types of site identified and landforms. Table 1. Summary of previous heritage studies within the study region

Author and Date Project Aims Findings Koettig, M. (1981) Survey completed for proposed 33 aboriginal sites consisting of artefact Highway extension and duplication scatters were recorded mainly on drainage from Collector to ACT Border lines. Three areas of high potential were identified on high water embankments near Lake George. Koettig, M. (1984) Collection, subsurface testing and Sites consisted of mainly quartz artefact investigation of identified sites along scatters located on ridge lines or drainage the proposed highway from lines. Recommendation for destruction. Collector to ACT Border Packard (1986) Review of predictive model and Concluded that sand deposits held high investigation of significance of sand potential for archaeological deposits and bodies in the Lake George Region should be subject to high levels of investigation.

Packard, P. (1987) Investigation of a proposed sand Model of potential in sand bodies with extraction area at Rose Lagoon. associated water locations.

Bowen Heritage Management Survey and assessment of a Located one small site consisting of two (2000) proposed sand quarry on Lot 62 quartz flakes within the area of Aeolian DP750008 to the west of the sand deposit on lower slopes in area of current study area on the northern bracken growth. shore of Lake George. Biosis (2004) Undertook a preliminary A number of sites identified consistent assessment for the Proposed with the model of higher potential along Collector Wind Farm creek lines and high ridge lines.

Martinez and Archaeologically investigating a No new sites were identified, four previously recorded sites were located in Lance (2010) commercial sand quarrying area proximity to Turallo Creek. . Martinez and Lance surveyed approximately 20 acres of land that boarded Turallo Creek NSW Archaeology (2012) Survey undertaken for proposed Sites consisted of isolated finds and surface Collector Wind Farm scatters located on ridge lines and on lower slopes in proximity to drainage lines.

7 www.pasttraces.com.au email: [email protected] The closest assessment undertaken in the area was conducted by Bowen Heritage Management (BHM) in 2000 within Lot 62 to the west of the study area at a distance of 1.2km. This assessment identified two quartz flakes on the surface of a sand deposit amongst lower slopes. This site was considered to hold low importance but to hold sub surface potential for further deposits. As discussed in the last section, this site is incorrectly recorded on AHIMS and is not in close association with the project area. This site is located within a sand deposit, a very different landform then those present within the project area. These previous assessments for the region have confirmed the importance of level areas or low rises adjacent to water ways and the sensitivity of aeolian sand deposits for the preservation of archaeological material. As a result of the previous assessments, any areas of level terrace or low knolls in the vicinity of creek lines are considered to hold moderate potential (dependant of degree of disturbance) in addition to any areas containing sandy deposits. None of the previous assessments have incorporated the current study area and no previous archaeological surveys have been undertaken over the study area.

2.3 LANDFORM ASSESSMENT

The study area is located within a larger area of steep ridgelines, heavily forested with steeply incised small ephemeral drainage lines. The project area is located on an area of lower slopes to one of these ephemeral drainage lines. The drainage line passes through the project area with impact areas located on the east and west lower slopes. The drainage line continues south to join a 1st order creek line. The proposed impact areas of the facilities is shown in Figure 2. From aerial review, within the proposed development areas the landscape appears to have suffered a high degree of impact through previous activities. These impacts are due to vegetation and tree removals, construction of roads, levelling of areas for buildings/machine storage and impacts from past quarrying activities. Review of previous sites located in the vicinity indicates a site location model based on proximity to water resources such as creek lines. Scarred trees can occur anywhere in the landscape where mature trees remain. Level terraces above creek lines would appear to be the preferred location of camp sites, a factor repeated through most assessed areas of southern NSW. These areas are considered to hold high potential for both surface sites and areas of subsurface potential deposits. None of these landforms appear to be present within the project area. Based on landscape modelling it would appear most probable that the wider area would have been traversed in the course of group movements and hunting and gathering activities. No specific resources appear evident in the vicinity of the project area that would have focused activity at these locations. Camping or resting locations were focused on dependable water sources. The only dependable water within the project area would be the tributary creek present to the south. Archaeological traces of these activities would consist of isolated artefacts or small artefact scatters which can occur anywhere throughout the landscape. From review of aerial photos of the project area it would appear that landforms with areas of moderate potential may be located within the project area, in proximity to the drainage line which runs through the centre of the area. However, these areas appear to be heavily disturbed due to the past quarrying activities, soil removals and levelling for building/machinery parking.

8 www.pasttraces.com.au email: [email protected] 2.4 SITE VISIT

A site visit and field survey of the study area was undertaken on the 20th July 2018 to verify the findings of the desktop review of landforms and disturbance. The aim of the investigation was to identify heritage objects or places of Potential Archaeological Deposit (PAD). Based upon the background research, known Aboriginal site patterning, current aerial photography, existing ground disturbances and consultation with the land owner, a pedestrian survey methodology was developed focused on the areas of building envelopes, rifle range and proposed access roads. All of these proposed impact areas were visually inspected and degree of disturbance noted. Special attention was given to areas along drainage lines and on the surrounding landforms considered to hold potential based on landform modelling. All surveyed areas and items of interest were recorded on a topographic map of the study area (using a GPS and GDA 94 coordinates), along with levels of visibility, erosion, soil conditions, and evidence of land disturbance.

2.4.1 Ground Surface Visibility Ground surface visibility (GSV) is the percentage of ground surface that is visible during the field inspection. GSV increases in areas of exposures such as stock impact trails, roads, gates and along areas of erosion such as creek banks and dam walls. As a result surveys undertaken in areas with high exposure rates result in a more effective survey coverage. GSV over most of the study area was very high due to sparsity of grass coverage across the large area of the rifle range and large areas of exposed ground under trees. Bare earth was visible in most areas with an average GSV of 45%. Exposures were present at high frequency across the project areas consisting of levelled areas, vehicle impact trails, past quarrying activities and cleared temporary building and stockpiling areas associated with these past activities. Exposures were present along the drainage line and along the southern creek line, which was examined for any signs of cultural deposits, despite being located outside of the project area and not anticipated to be impacted by the proposal. The conditions at the time of the field survey are shown in plates 1 to 8.

Plate 1: view north along western portion of Plate 2: view north along eastern portion of project area – area has been levelled for quarry project area - area has also been levelled with operations earth disturbance

9 www.pasttraces.com.au email: [email protected]

Plate 3: view south along eastern portion of Plate 4: GSV in forested areas (western portion) project area

Plate 5 - Quarry area in western portion Plate 6 - Southern section – area has been scalped previously

Plate 7 - Rifle range looking north along gully Plate 8 - Rifle range gully looking south

10 www.pasttraces.com.au email: [email protected]

2.4.2 Disturbance The degree of disturbance across the study area was high. Disturbances were present in the form of prior vegetation and tree removal, construction of access roads, temporary building and machinery storage locations (now removed) and the old quarry. These areas had all been stripped to the subsoils with a base shale bedrock and gravels exposed. These soils all appeared to be thin overlaying base. The high level of disturbance across the proposed development areas within the project area, have reduced the potential for these areas to retain cultural deposits. These disturbed areas revealed shallow soils, with high levels of gravels and an almost total GSV level of 80%. The observed depth of soil also precludes the presence of deep deposits. This high level of disturbance within the project impact areas has reduced the potential for unrecorded deposits or sites to remain in these locations to low. Examples of areas of disturbance can be seen in Plates 1 to 8.

2.4.3 Aboriginal heritage Sites No areas of Aboriginal heritage were identified during the field survey. No known heritage sites will be affected by the proposed development.

2.4.4 Areas of Potential Archaeological Deposit (PAD) Areas of PAD are defined as landforms that hold higher potential than their surrounds to contain subsurface deposits of past Aboriginal occupation. Based on a review of previous studies completed for the region, areas of PAD would be located in association with waterways (1st or 2nd order streams) on level ground or within areas of aeolian sand deposits. Areas with higher potential for unrecorded sites are located to the south of the project area overlooking the 1st order creek line. These areas will not be impacted by the proposed development, being located outside of the project area. The area along the drainage line has been subject to high levels of disturbance with the previous impacts to the quarrying and pastoral operations consisting of cut and fill and the creation of level areas for past buildings/machinery stockpiling operations. These earthworks have removed all potential for any Aboriginal heritage sites to remain in these highly impacted locations. As a result of the high level of impacts, no areas of PAD were identified within the project area. The area of the rifle range is located within a gully with high surrounding slopes. This area consisted of alluvial sediments and is low-lying. This area would not have been conducive to Aboriginal usage and does not contain a water source. Water may drain along the eastern edge following heavy rains along the drainage line but would not have been a permanent or dependable source of water.

2.5 IMPACT ASSESSMENT

As a result of the site visit, field survey of proposed impact areas and background research, it is considered that the project has low potential to impact on unrecorded Aboriginal heritage sites or areas of PAD. No known heritage sites will be impacted and no heritage constraints are present within the project area. Proposed building envelopes and shooting range facilities are all sited within areas of high previous disturbance or low landform potential within Lot 149 DP750013. The past disturbance to the area will have removed the original topsoils and any associated heritage sites and deposits.

11 www.pasttraces.com.au email: [email protected] Previous assessment has been undertaken for an additional area on Lot 114 DP750008 which also resulted in a finding of nil heritage impacts from any of the proposed works (Past Traces 2017). Based on the assessment the impacts from the project area are as follows:

 No known Aboriginal objects or places will be impacted by the proposed works.  No known Aboriginal objects or places are present in the project area.  No areas of high potential to contain unrecorded Aboriginal objects of places are present in the project area. The Code provides a flowchart of six questions to identify the presence of and potential harm to Aboriginal heritage. These questions and their applicability to the project are shown in Figure 5. The responses to these questions determine if further heritage investigations are required.

12 www.pasttraces.com.au email: [email protected] 8 The generic due diligence process

1. Will the activity disturb No the ground surface or any culturally modified trees?

Yes

2. Are there any: a) relevant confirmed site records or other associated landscape feature information on AHIMS? and/or No, b) any other sources of information of which none a person is already aware? and/or c) landscape features that are likely to indicate presence of Aboriginal objects?

Yes, any or all

3. Can harm to Aboriginal objects listed on AHIMS or identified by other sources of information and/or can the carrying out of Yes the activity at the relevant landscape features be avoided?

4. Does a desktop assessment and visual inspection confirm that there are Aboriginal objects No or that they are likely?

AHIP application not necessary. Yes Proceed with caution. If any Aboriginal objects are found, stop work and notify DECCW. If human remains are found, stop work, secure the site and 5. Further investigation notify the NSW Police and DECCW. and impact assessment

10 Due Diligence Code of Practice 3 RECOMMENDATIONS

Based on this due diligence assessment the following actions are recommended for the project. Recommendation 1: Works to proceed without further heritage assessment with caution. The proposed works can proceed without further assessment as no Aboriginal heritage sites (objects or places) are present within the project area. The potential of impacting unrecorded sites within these areas during the proposed works is assessed as extremely low, based on landform analysis and prior levels of disturbance. Recommendation 2: Discovery of Unanticipated Aboriginal cultural material. All Aboriginal places and objects are protected under the NPW Act 1977. This protection extends to Aboriginal material that has not been previously identified, but might be unearthed during construction activities. In the event that Aboriginal material is discovered during construction the following steps should be undertaken:

Adherence to these recommendations will result in the low potential for the proposal to negatively impact on Aboriginal heritage values. Recommendation 3: Discovery of Human Remains In the unlikely event that human remains are discovered during the construction, all work must cease. OEH, the local police and the appropriate LALC should be notified. Further assessment would be required to determine if the remains are Aboriginal or non-Aboriginal. Recommendation 4: Alteration of impact footprint Further archaeological assessment would be required if the proposal activity extends beyond the area of the current investigation.

14 www.pasttraces.com.au email: [email protected] 4 REFERENCES

Biosis. (2004). Collector Wind Farm: preliminary Cultural heritage Assessment. Report for Epuron . Bowen,A. (2000). An Archaeological Investigation of a Proposed Sand Quarry site, North of Ondyong Point Lake George NSW. Report to Troy Magyar. Koettig, M. (1981). Collector to ACT Border Archaeological Survey for Aboriginal Sites. Reporto Department of Main Roads NSW. Koettig,M. (1984). Archaeological Investigations of Sites CAB 14,16,23 and 29 Between Bungendore Road and Sutton Southern Highlands NSW. Report to Department of Main Roads NSW. NSW Archaeology. (2012). Proposed Collector Wind Farm Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Assessment Report . report to RATCH Australia Corporation. Packard, P. (1986). Archaeological Sites in Sand Deposits on the Southern Tablelands. Report to NPWS. Packard,P. (1987). Archaeological Investigation of Proposed sand Extraction Area at Rose Lagoon near Collector NSW. Report to G.Dutaillis and Associates. Past Traces. (2017). Due Diligence Advice Letter Lot 114 DP750008 Proposed rifle range facility Collector NSW. Report to Mr Paul Burns.

15 www.pasttraces.com.au email: [email protected]