Mount Emerald Wind Farm, Herberton Range North Queensland Environmental Impact Statement Volume 3

Appendix 10A Non-Indigenous CH Assessment

PR100246 / R72894; Volume 3 – Final November 2014

Non-Indigenous Cultural Heritage Assessment

Mt Emerald Wind Farm Development Springmount - Far North Queensland for Mt Emerald Wind Farm Pty Ltd 10029C/2010

Converge Heritage + Community Pty. Ltd. undertook this assessment.

Contact details are: Benjamin Gall Converge Heritage + Community Pty. Ltd. ABN: 71 366 535 889 Level 1, 230 Draper St, Cairns PO Box 2666, Cairns, Qld 4870 Tel: (07) 4031 2355 Fax: (07) 4031 2377 Email: [email protected]

© 2014 Copyright This report and the information contained herein, is subject to copyright and may not be copied in whole or in part without the written consent of the copyright holders

DOCUMENT VERIFICATION

Converge Project: SPRINGMOUNT – Mt Emerald Wind Farm Project Number: 10029C Document Title: File location: Non-Indigenous Cultural Heritage Assessment M;Cairns Projects/10029C Springmount – Mt Emerald Wind Farm, Springmount, Far North Queensland Mt Emerald Wind Farm/Reporting

Verification:

Revision Date Nature of revision Prepared by Authorised by 0 30 June 2010 Draft Report for comment Karen Townrow Benjamin Gall 1 15/10/2014 Final KT 2 3 4

Table of Contents

1.0 Executive Summary ...... 3

1.1 Non-Indigenous Cultural Heritage Sites...... 3 1.2 Significance Assessment for the Study Area ...... 3 1.3 Impact to Non-Indigenous Cultural Heritage Sites ...... 3 1.4 Conclusions and Recommendations ...... 4 1.4.1 Recommendation 1 - Cultural Heritage Management of Unknown Sites ...... 4 1.4.2 Recommendation 2 – Unexploded Ordnance ...... 4 2.0 Introduction ...... 5

2.1 Purpose of the Study ...... 5 2.2 Study Area ...... 6 2.3 Dates and Duration of the Work ...... 7 2.4 Personnel ...... 7 2.5 Nature of the Impact (The Project) ...... 7 2.6 Non-Indigenous Cultural Heritage Legislation and Searches ...... 9 2.6.1 World Heritage List ...... 9 2.6.2 National Legislation ...... 9 2.6.3 State Legislation ...... 10 2.6.4 Local Legislation ...... 11 2.6.5 Non-Statutory Framework ...... 12 2.7 Secondary Sources and Previous Reports ...... 13

3.0 Background Information ...... 14

3.1 Biogeographical Information ...... 14 3.2 Historical Background ...... 15 3.2.1 Exploration and Early Colonisation ...... 15 3.2.2 Mining ...... 17 3.2.3 Settlement and Mixed Farming ...... 17 3.2.4 Tobacco ...... 20 3.2.5 World War II ...... 20

10029C P 1

3.2.6 The Mareeba-Dimbulah Irrigation Scheme ...... 22 3.2.7 Recent Developments ...... 23 3.2.8 Conclusions ...... 23 4.0 Cultural Heritage Investigation ...... 24

4.1 Survey Methodology ...... 24 4.1.1 Sampling Strategy ...... 24 4.2 Constraints to the Survey...... 25 4.2.1 Site Integrity ...... 25 4.2.2 Ground Surface Visibility ...... 25 4.3 Consultation ...... 26 4.4 Survey Outcomes ...... 26

6.0 Significance Assessment ...... 27

7.0 Proposed Development ...... 28

8.0 Recommendations ...... 29

8.2 Recommendation 1 - Cultural Heritage Management of Unknown Sites ...... 29 8.3 Recommendation 2 – Unexploded Ordnance ...... 29

9.0 References ...... 30 Appendix 1: Discovery Of Items Of Potential Non-Indigenous Cultural

Heritage ...... 32

10029C P 2

1.0 Executive Summary

This assessment has been undertaken to evaluate the non-Indigenous cultural heritage within the proposed Mt Emerald Wind Farm Project. The assessment evaluates the potential impacts and required mitigation should the project proceed. The proposed wind farm development is located within lot 7 on Crown Plan SP235244, approximately 18.5km south-west of Mareeba on the Atherton Tablelands, Far North Queensland.

This assessment includes:

An historical background for the Mt Emerald Wind Farm Area.

The results of the cultural heritage field assessment.

The nature of non-Indigenous cultural heritage significance within the Mt Emerald Wind Farm Area and the potential impacts of the Project in relation to this significance.

General management recommendations for the site in respect to non-Indigenous cultural heritage matters.

1.1 Non-Indigenous Cultural Heritage Sites

No non-Indigenous cultural heritage sites were located during this assessment.

1.2 Significance Assessment for the Study Area

No sites of non-Indigenous cultural heritage significance were identified during the assessment of the Study Area. Thus the Study Area contains no known non-Indigenous cultural heritage significance as defined under section 35 (1) of the QHA.

1.3 Impact to Non-Indigenous Cultural Heritage Sites

It is possible but unlikely that non-Indigenous sites of cultural heritage significance may be located during the construction phase of the development. Should this occur it is recommended that the process outlined in Appendix 1 be followed.

It is possible that unexploded World War II ordnance may be located during the construction phase of the development. Should this occur it is recommended that the process outlined in Volume 3,

10029C P 3

Appendix 31, of the EIS for the Project; Desk Study for Potential Historic Unexploded Ordnance Contamination, be followed.

1.4 Conclusions and Recommendations

From a heritage perspective, this report has concluded that the Mt Emerald Wind Farm Area contains no known levels of non-Indigenous cultural heritage significance. Assuming the recommendations below are suitably implemented, this report finds the nature and level of impact by the Mt Emerald Wind Farm is manageable.

1.4.1 Recommendation 1 - Cultural Heritage Management of Unknown Sites

It is possible that currently unknown sites of non-Indigenous cultural heritage significance may exist within the Mt Emerald Wind Farm area. In these circumstances it is recommended that the process outlined in Appendix 1 is adopted.

1.4.2 Recommendation 2 – Unexploded Ordnance

It is possible that currently unknown unexploded ordnance from World War II may exist within the Mt Emerald Wind Farm area. In these circumstances it is recommended that the process outlined in Volume 3, Appendix 31 of the EIS for the Mt Emerald Wind Farm Project; Desk Study for Potential Historic Unexploded Ordnance Contamination, be followed.

10029C P 4

2.0 Introduction

Mt Emerald Wind Farm Pty Ltd commissioned Converge Heritage and Community (Converge) to conduct an assessment of the non-Indigenous cultural heritage potential of the area identified as the Mt Emerald Wind Farm within lot 7 on Crown Plan SP235244 in the vicinity of Springmount, on the Great Dividing Range including Walsh Bluff on the east side of the Bourke Development Road. The Mt Emerald Wind Farm Area is located approximately 18.5km southwest of Mareeba (see figure 1 for location). This report presents the results of a cultural heritage assessment carried out in May 2010 and updated in October 2014. The Study is necessary to determine the level of non- Indigenous cultural heritage significance relevant to the Mt Emerald Wind Farm and make appropriate recommendations about the management of cultural heritage values.

2.1 Purpose of the Study

The purpose of this Study is to qualify the level of non-Indigenous cultural heritage significance relevant to the area directly affected by the Mt Emerald Wind Farm Project and recommend the suitable management of these heritage values. Contextual research was undertaken to determine the existence, extent and probable levels of significance of the area prior to the field survey taking place.

This report presents the results of the non-Indigenous cultural heritage survey, and includes:

A summary of the history and environment of the Mt Emerald Wind Farm Project. The results of the cultural heritage field assessment. The nature of cultural heritage significance within the Mt Emerald Wind Farm Project and the potential impacts of the project in relation to the Mt Emerald Wind Farm Project. Specific management recommendations for the protection of potential areas of cultural heritage significance.

The scope of this study acknowledges that the archaeological record is both fragile and non- renewable. Any major disturbance of the environment poses a potential threat to this valuable cultural resource.

10029C P 5

2.2 Study Area

The proposed wind farm development is located within lot 7 on Crown Plan SP235244, approximately 18.5km south-west of Mareeba on the Atherton Tablelands, Far North Queensland. It covers an area of approximately 2, 422 hectares.

Figure 1: Location of Project Area (courtesy RPS)

10029C P 6

2.3 Dates and Duration of the Work

Mt Emerald Wind Farm Pty Ltd commissioned Converge to complete the study during May - June 2010. Field assessment was carried out on 31 May 2010. The report was finalised and updated in October 2014.

2.4 Personnel

Karen Townrow undertook the background historic research and field assessment of the Mt Emerald Wind Farm Project and prepared this report. Geoff Doherty and Stef Blackmore undertook archival research in the Queensland State Archives. Karen was assisted in the field by Jim Noli, owner of Lot 7 on Crown Plan SP235244.

2.5 Nature of the Impact (The Project)

The current proposed project is to establish a wind farm across the top of the escarpment which forms the Great Dividing Range in the Springmount area which lies generally to the south side of Springmount road on the west side of the Kennedy Highway in the vicinity of Walkamin.

The proposed wind farm development comprises up to approximately 75 turbines. These turbines will consist of a tapering 78m to 80m steel tower (ground to hub) supporting a three bladed rotor with blade lengths of up to 50m to 54m (100m to 108m diameter). Tower diameter at the base will be approximately 4.2m tapering to 2m at the central hub. Access tracks will generally follow the ridge lines. Each individual turbine will have a capacity of up to 3.0MW, with a total height to blade tip between 130m to 134m. It is proposed that clearing for access track and underground power cabling may be up to 10m wide in vegetated areas. Turbine sites may require up to an 80m2 clearing to facilitate construction and maintenance. A network of underground cables will connect the turbines with an onsite substation which will connect to the Powerlink 132 kV concrete tower line.

Mt Emerald Wind Farm Pty Ltd requires a non-Indigenous cultural heritage assessment to be carried out within the boundary Lot 7 on Crown Plan SP235244.

The conceptual wind turbine layout of the Mt Emerald Wind Farm Project is outlined in Figure 2.

10029C P 7

Figure 2: Conceptual Project Layout (courtesy RPS)

10029C P 8

2.6 Non-Indigenous Cultural Heritage Legislation and Searches

A number of national, state and local acts and regulations have relevance to this assessment. Knowledge of this legislation is essential when assessing sites, places or items of cultural heritage significance.

Searches of relevant statutory registers associated with national, state and local legislation were undertaken as part of this study. Places included on these registers possess an established level of significance. It is important to note, however, that the absence of a place on these registers does not mean it has no heritage significance. Not all places of heritage significance in Australia have been identified and/or listed as yet, particularly places of archaeological significance. Moreover, values can change and evolve, and places may take on new or different heritage significance according to these values, or the passage of time.

2.6.1 World Heritage List

The World Heritage List is compiled by the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation (UNESCO) and is an inventory of places considered to have outstanding universal value.

An on-line search of the World Heritage List was conducted to identify places and sites of cultural heritage significance located within the study area.

2.6.2 National Legislation The Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act, 1999 (EPBC) is the key national heritage legislation and is administered by the Commonwealth Department of the Environment (DOTE; formerly the Commonwealth Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities). This Act provides a number of statutory and legislative controls for heritage places. Places of national heritage value and those owned or managed by the Commonwealth are located on the National Heritage List and Commonwealth Heritage List respectively. In addition, the following legislation is relevant to heritage:

The Australian Heritage Council Act, 2003 (AHC) provides for the establishment of the Australian Heritage Council, which is the principal advisory group to the Australian Government on heritage

10029C P 9

matters. This Act also provides for registration of places considered of national significance on the former Register of the National Estate or the Australian Heritage Places Inventory (AHPI).

The Protection of Moveable Cultural Heritage Act, 1986 regulates the export of Australia’s significant cultural heritage objects. The Act does not restrict normal and legitimate trade in cultural property and does not affect an individual’s right to own or sell within Australia.

The AHC provides for the establishment of the Australian Heritage Council, which is the principal advisory group to the Australian Government on heritage issues. The AHC Act also provides for registration of places considered of national significance on the National Heritage List, the Commonwealth Heritage List or the AHPI.

No sites were identified on the National and Commonwealth Heritage List within the study area.

2.6.3 State Legislation

The Queensland Heritage Act 1992 Places of state heritage significance in Queensland are managed under the QHA. The Act provides for the establishment of the Queensland Heritage Council and the Queensland Heritage Register (QHR), which lists places of cultural heritage significance to Queensland, and regulates development of registered places. Under the provisions of the Act, any development of a place listed on the QHR must be carried out in accordance with the Act. A place may also be entered in the register if it satisfies one or more of the assessment criteria under Section 35 (1) of this Act.

The Act also applies to potential archaeological places:

Under section 60, a place may be considered to be an ‘archaeological place’ if not registered as a State heritage place and demonstrates ‘potential to contain an archaeological artefact that is an important source of information about Queensland’s history’ (section 60(b)). Archaeological places can be entered onto the QHR if they meet those criteria.

Section 89 requires a person to advise the Chief Executive Officer of the EHP of an archaeological artefact that is an important source of information about an aspect of Queensland’s history. This advice must be given as soon as practicable after the person discovers the item.

10029C P 10

Section 90 stipulates that it is an offence to interfere with an archaeological artefact once notice has been given of the artefact to the Chief Executive Officer.

No sites were identified on the QHR within the study area. The Bones Knob WWII RAAF 220 Radar Station (QHR 602741) and the Rocky Creek World War Two Hospital Complex (former) (QHR 601815), lie approximately 12km to the east south east of the study area.

Other State Acts A number of other Acts and Regulations make passing mention of cultural heritage and/or have relevance in some instances in a NICH assessment. These include:

The Land Protection (Pest and Stock Route Management) Regulation 2003, which identifies cultural heritage as a consideration in the use of a stock route.

The Coroners Act 2003 which has relevance in the circumstance of the discovery of human remains.

The Nature Conservation Act 1992 which is primarily concerned with the conservation of nature in Queensland. However the management principles of declared places under this Act include the management of cultural heritage values including non-Indigenous cultural heritage.

The Survey and Mapping Infrastructure Act 2003 is primarily concerned with surveying. Part 4 deals with the preservation of survey marks.

2.6.4 Local Legislation Local heritage places are managed under Part 11 of the QHA, local planning schemes and the Sustainable Planning Act 2009 (SPA). It is now mandatory for local government to have a local heritage register.

The study area falls within Mareeba Shire local government area.

The QHA provides a process for establishing a Local Heritage Register (LHR) and nominating places to the register. Specific information about the place must be included on the LHR comprising:

Enough information to identify the location and boundaries of the place.

A statement about the cultural heritage significance of the place.

10029C P 11

Following nomination to the LHR the State Integrated Development Assessment System (IDAS) Code contained in the regulation to the QHA will also apply.

No sites were identified on the LHR within the study area.

2.6.5 Non-Statutory Framework There are other sources of heritage places or historic sites that are not listed on statutory registers. These places are not afforded legislative protection. Nonetheless, places identified during these searches contribute to a better understanding of the study area and often identify places that have been overlooked for entry on statutory heritage registers. This is particularly important when considering the regulations of the QHA with regard to archaeological places.

Register of the National Estate (former) The Register of the National Estate (former) (RNE) is a list of natural, Indigenous and non- Indigenous heritage places throughout Australia. Following amendments to the Australian Heritage Commission Act 1975, the former RNE was frozen on 19 February 2007. This meant that no new places could be added to or removed from the RNE. From February 2012, all references to the former RNE were removed from the EPBC Act and the AHC Act. The RNE is now maintained as a non-statutory register and publicly available archive.

No sites were identified on the RNE within the study area.

National Trust of Australia (QLD) Register The Register of the National Trust of Australia (QLD) was also searched. The National Trust is a community based, non-government organisation which maintains a non-statutory register of heritage places. The listing of a place on the National Trust register, known as ‘classification’, has no legal force; however it is widely recognised as an authoritative statement of the cultural significance of a place.

No sites were identified on the National Trust of Australia Register within the study area.

Interactive Resource Tenure Map (IRTM) The Queensland Department of Energy and Mines (DME) maintain the Interactive Resource Tenure Map (IRTM). The IRTM enables the user to search and display mining tenure and exploration

10029C P 12

information. In particular, it is possible to search and display historic mining leases. The information is generally limited to the last 100 years and therefore excludes mining activity in the nineteenth century. However, it provides some ability to determine the location of historic mining leases and potential mines that are located in the study area.

No historic mines are identified on the IRTM.

EPA Places A list of reported places was compiled in 2006 by the then Department of Environment Protection Agency (EPA). Locations were provided but these were not verified and no descriptive information was included with the list. Some of these places were later revisited and listed on the QHR.

No sites within the current Study Area were identified on the list of EPA Places.

2.7 Secondary Sources and Previous Reports

One consultancy report and a number of secondary sources discuss the general history of the area. In particular the report by Converge “Nullinga Water Storage Infrastructure Project Cultural Heritage Reports” (2008) and a report by the Queensland Environmental Protection Agency WWII NQ: A cultural heritage overview of significant places in the defence of north Queensland during World War II 2009 have been relied upon to provide sufficient non-Indigenous context to this assessment. This material is referenced both in the text and in section 9 of this report.

10029C P 13

3.0 Background Information

The following background information is not intended to be a comprehensive report on the area surrounding the Mt Emerald Wind Farm Project; rather it provides a suitable platform for discussions regarding cultural heritage significance and management recommendations in compliance with the EPA (EHP) Guidelines for Historical Archaeological Studies.

Although the project only affects a small area within the Atherton Tablelands, it is important to provide background information to guide discussions later in the report.

3.1 Biogeographical Information

Geologically the project area lies on the western side of the Atherton Tablelands within the Hodgkinson Formation. Around 420 to 360 million years ago, these rocks were very thick sediments located in deep water off the edge of an ancient continent. These sediments hardened into rocks, were crumpled and folded by movement in the earth and raised above sea level to form an addition to the continent (Willmott & Stephenson 1989: 1).

Between 310 and 230 million years ago a second extensive group of rocks, mainly granites, formed. These rocks originated as molten material deep below the earth’s surface, cooled deep beneath the earth’s surface where they solidified in huge bodies known as batholiths. Due to their resistance to erosion, they form most of the high mountains in the region today (Willmott & Stephenson 1989: 1 & 6). The prolific mineralisation of the Hodgkinson Formation is thought to have occurred as a consequence of the one of these intrusions; the Elizabeth Granite intrusions (Blake 1972: 16-22).

A long period of geological stability ensued where extensive plains were developed through the process of erosion. Then, around 100 million years ago, major geological shifts occurred in the north-eastern parts of the continent; the Coral Sea subsided and the adjacent landmass uplifted. Up until this time the continent extended much further east than it does today. The fracturing and eventual dispersal of much of the landmass gave rise to New Zealand, Papua New Guinea and New Caledonia (Willmott & Stephenson 1989: 1 & 9).

The project area lies totally within Lot 7 on Crown Plan SP235244. The country within this lot rises steeply to form a high plateau area which extends to the south-west from Walsh Bluff. The plateau generally forms a number of north-south ridges which are intersected by two main creek lines which

10029C P 14

drain to the eastern side of the plateau. Other ephemeral creeks are also located within the area. To the immediate north-east of the western ridge lies a shallow gully which falls to a steeper gully leading north, into the Springmount dump area (ex CEC Springmount property).

The vegetation comprises open forest with grass tree and native grasses understorey and eucalypt upper storey. It appears that this vegetation grows on a relatively thin soil layer with numerous granite outcrops exposed on the ridge lines.

Ground disturbance within the area appears to be confined to a track and power line crossing east - west across the southern end of the site and a track pushed to the north along the western ridge.

This geological formation has played an integral role in the historical, social, economic, and land use development of the region.

3.2 Historical Background

The following discussion is not intended to be an exhaustive historical treatment of the Mt Emerald Wind Farm project area. It is based on library research of secondary sources, and is intended to provide an historical overview of the broad areas under consideration. Further research and analysis of specific areas and sites may be required to assist with assessment of particular cultural heritage issues arising in relation to the Mt Emerald Wind Farm Project.

3.2.1 Exploration and Early Colonisation

European settlement in Far North Queensland was intermittent. Captain Cook sailed past the coast and stopped on the banks of the Endeavour River for repairs on his way north in 1770. This was followed in coastal regions with sporadic British surveying/mapping trips and then more intensive occupation by beche-de mer fishermen from the late 1850s (Hatte 1999:8). Explorers such as Gregory in 1865, and Jardine in 1864, passed through the country to the western side of the Project Area (Dimbulah Historical Society 1989:12). Pastoralists took up properties to the south of the region around the Burdekin River and approximately 115km south-west of the Project Area (Mt Surprise and Fossilbrook) in the mid 1860s initially grazing sheep before changing to cattle (Bolton 1963 39-41). However, it was the discovery of gold, first with the Palmer gold rush starting from 1872 and then with the Hodgkinson in 1876, which really started to bring colonists to the north.

10029C P 15

Whilst Cooktown opened as a port in 1873 to service the Palmerston goldfield it was subsequently realised that this was too far north to service the more southern Hodgkinson goldfield and its principal town of Thornborough. Therefore Cairns was founded in 1876 to service the goldfield and surrounding regions. Timber getters and settlers quickly followed the exploration parties. After a rocky start with competition from the towns of Smithfield and Port Douglas, Cairns eventually secured its future, largely as a result of it being selected as the railhead for the railway link between the tablelands and the coast. Construction of the line took five years from 1886 to 1891. The rail line bought many benefits to the Atherton region including an assured link to the hinterland mining fields and the opening up of agricultural and pastoral lands on the Atherton Tableland (Hudson 2003:17 – 19).

The first pastoral station in the Atherton Tablelands area, established in 1877, was Emerald End located in the Mareeba area and owned by John Atherton. The establishment of this station appears to have started a ’minor rush’ for country north and south of the Atherton Tableland. It was reported that by 1877, 1400 miners were working on the Hodgkinson gold field and 4 800 people lived in the general area (Dimbulah Historical Society 1989:14) The agricultural industry serviced this population with crops of maize, vegetables, cereals and fruit trees as well beef (Loos1982:97).

In addition to establishing the station John Atherton also discovered tin at Tinaroo Creek, helped develop the Wild River (Herberton) tin field and supplied cattle to the Palmer and Hodgkinson goldfields. Miners associated with these new mining fields fanned out from Herberton into the surrounding area during the early 1880s (Bolton 1963:92, 116-8).

The mineral rushes brought other improvements such as the establishment of a regular coach route from Mareeba to Normanton by Cobb and Co in 1882 as well as the establishment of numerous carriers using a network of coach roads and or pack tracks, in many cases adapted from Aboriginal walking tracks (Burke & Grimwade 2002:32).

Whilst the Study Area is not specifically mentioned it appears clear that there was a general pattern of resistance through raids on people and property (particularly the slaughter of animals and the stealing of corn and potato crops and raids on small mining parties) by Aboriginal groups and retaliation by miner’s, pastoralists and the Native Police within the region during the late 1870s and 1880s (Loos 1982:99).

10029C P 16

By 1888 in an effort to come to a peaceful accommodation with the Aborigines a government initiative was implemented by Constable Hanes in the Atherton area. He established contact with Aboriginal groups to let them know they could obtain government rations at Atherton. This initiative proved very successful in stopping raids. Loos summarised Police Magistrate Zillman’s reports regarding this initiative noting:

…he now believed that the chief inducement for raiding the settles ‘was to procure the means of subsistence for the old men and women;…A good number of the young and able were already working for the selectors, who paid them in rations, tobacco and so on. (Loos 1982:110).

Whilst activity as outlined above was occurring in the region generally, the occurrence of any specific activity during the early stages of settlement in the project area is unclear.

3.2.2 Mining

Mining in the region saw the establishment of a number of fields from the earliest years of colonisation in the area. This included goldmining at the Hodgkinson Goldfields from 1876, tin mining at the Herberton Tinfields from 1878; tin mining at the Wild River, Tate River and Tinaroo Creek from 1878, tin mining at Stannary Hills and Glen Linedale from c.1886, copper mining at Chillagoe from 1892, copper mining at Mt Molloy from 1885, wolfram mining at Wolfram Camp from 1894, and copper mining at Mount Garnet from 1896 (Hooper, 1993). Prospectors may have searched in the Project Area however no mines appear to have been established in the early years of colonisation. The nearest exploration and small mining activities appear to have occurred to the west of the project area in the vicinity of the Walsh River with the largest site being Rocky Bluff to the south, south-west (Converge, 2008)

3.2.3 Settlement and Mixed Farming

Whilst, as stated in 3.2.1, the first pastoral station established in the region was

Figure 3: Springmount Pastoral Holding c. 1940

10029C P 17

Emerald Run land was initially taken up in the most potentially productive areas. The Project Area was probably not seen as prime country and even as late as the 1980s land at the foot of the range was reported as the sort of country where “…the wallabies need a cut lunch and the goannas need a waterbag…” (QCL c.1985). The standard stocking rate in the 1990s was one head per eight hectares (J. Gargan pers. comm.). The land regularly changed hands during the course of its early history and the lease holders detailed below are those who held the land for more substantial periods of time.

The first gazettal of a station in the area was not until 1913 when Chas McMahon took up 60 square miles for cattle breeding. He called the station Springmount Pastoral Holding. The Project Area is in the northern section of this holding on the eastern side. By the end of 1927 Chas McMahon had gone into debt and the lease had been forfeited (QSA Item ID306592, Run file 2250 part 1).

The Springmount Holding lease of 60 square miles was taken up again in 1930 by Maurice Marnane for pastoral purposes. The conditions of the lease were that the area was to be used to breed and fatten cattle and to breed horses. A special condition was that bona fide miners were to be allowed to come and go through the property with their stock and to be permitted to use the water resources on the property (QSA Item ID306592, Run file 2250 part 1).

Further mentions of the station are few. In June 1939 a permit was granted to ring bark an area of 3000 acres on Springmount Station. In 1940 the owners of the freehold portion adjoining Springmount Station to the north-east (Portion 242) attempted to acquire a part of Springmount for tobacco farming. The proposal was refused; primarily on account of the poor class tobacco soil (QSA Item ID306592, Run file 2250 part 1). A plan of the holding c. 1940 shows its extent (see Figure 3).

In 1951 a letter from the Minnage Brothers of Nullinga (this station adjoins Springmount to the west) and Springmount holdings to the Land Commissioner requested the granting of lease OL350 as: “…Owing to the work now being carried out by the Irrigation Department on the proposed site for the Nullinga Dam [which was to lie over the Walsh River and Catherine Creek on the western border of the station], we find ourselves faced with a problem of moving cattle between Nullinga and Springmount (blocks) where the yards and homestead are.” A note at the base of this letter by the Land Commissioner recommends that OL350 be made available at a rental of £1 per square mile (ltr 7/8/51 QSA Item ID306592, Run file 2250 part 1).

10029C P 18

The Minnage Brothers had in fact also acquired the two small neighbouring properties to Nullinga and Springmount; Barron Pastoral Holding (6 square miles) and, Mount Uncle Pastoral Holding (2 5/16 square miles). These properties were all bought in 1951 by Pompeo Pezzelato who continued to use the land to breed and fatten cattle.

Pezzelato finalised his sale of all four holdings to Francis Bourke on 21 February 1959. Bourke used the properties for cattle grazing. He was also the lessee of Special Lease No. 25516 (1005 acres) 60 acres which he had sown with sorghum. He was permitted to renew the leases for Mount Uncle, Springmount, Nullinga and Barron pastoral holdings on the understanding that resumption might be made at any time for the purposes of the Mareeba – Dimbulah Irrigation Project (QSA Item ID306592, Run file 2250 part 1).

In 1963 he made application for the retention of Portion 407 (283 acres) from Springmount Holding for a tobacco farm. This area appears to lie outside the Project Area on the north-east side of the holding close to Granite Creek. The letter from Bourke in support of this application points out the poor agricultural quality of the whole station to which were added the continuing difficulties associated with land resumptions for irrigation purposes:

Our cattle station “Springmount” of 98 sq. mls. having a carrying capacity of 500 head – approx, has very limited number of bullocks to turn off annually…Our Land and Station has been chopped and changed about so much in the last few years, that it no longer constitutes a cattle station within the meaning of a living area… We have tried but failed to sell the station… (QSA Item ID306592, Run file 2250 part 1)

Whether or not this application was successful is not clear.

Further land was resumed as Crown land for irrigation purposes in 1963 and the area continued to change hands at relatively regular intervals (QSA Item ID306592, Run file 2250 part 1).

During the 1990s Springmount and Nullinga stations were divided between the Gargan brothers. Much of the Springmount station was subdivided (J. Gargan pers. comm). The higher part of Springmount station in the region of Walsh’s Bluff had, however, been considered the least useable part of the station and no infrastructure, including tracks, was ever constructed in the area. As far as the Gargans can recall this area has never been used beyond occasionally running cattle on it (G. Gargan pers. comm.).

10029C P 19

3.2.4 Tobacco

Early attempts of growing tobacco prior to 1900 in Queensland were not generally successful. The rate at which the industry grew was so slow that it was still languishing at the turn of the century. Several farmers in the Koah/Kuranda area planted tobacco crops in the late 1890s but the August/September planting was not successful due to low night temperatures, fungus, mildew and insect investigations (Thorp J. 2001:127-130).

A resurgence of the industry was initiated through the production of successful government sponsored tobacco crops at Mareeba. This combined with the Soldier Settler Scheme (Queensland Irrigation and Water Supply Commission, 1952:1), the effects of the Depression, and the State government’s plans for closer settlement in the Mareeba-Dimbulah area through a land ballot system, led to a significant increase in the number of people in the region. Most of those who came to the area at this time came to grow tobacco (Powell, 1990:215).

In 1930 there were about 400 tobacco farmers in the area. This had swelled to about 800 in 1932 (Gibson. S. 2002). The establishment of the industry in the region appears to have been carried out without any significant research regarding best cultivation practises and/or best soil type. This, added to the other hardships associated with the industry in the region, resulted in a sharp decline in tobacco growing during the early 1930s (Gibson, S. 2002).

An upsurge in tobacco prices and the industry following the introduction of the Australian Contents Scheme in 1936 (which required tobacco products to contain a percentage of Australian tobacco) was followed by another slump in the industry during World War Two (Gibson, S. 2002).

In 1947 the North Queensland Tobacco Growers Co-operate was formed. This was instrumental, in addition to further government regulation through a stabilisation program with quotas, in reviving the industry and led to the halcyon days of the industry in the 1960s and 1970s (Gibson, S. 2002).

It seems unlikely that the Project Area was used for the cultivation of tobacco.

3.2.5 World War II

After the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbour and Malay and the fall of Singapore during World War II, the construction of defence works throughout Queensland was escalated. By late November 1942 General Blamey had ordered a survey of the Atherton Tableland. This was known as the ‘Atherton Project’ and had three main purposes:

10029C P 20

recuperate troops in a cooler climate while engaged in jungle warfare training.

provide suitable hospitalisation for malaria and tropical disease cases.

locate personnel and maintenance installations close to the New Guinea frontline with access to railway and port facilities (EPA 2009:54).

This was followed, in January 1943, with the transfer of the NEA headquarters of the Australian Army from Townsville to the Atherton Tableland and the establishment of the main administration base at Atherton.

As construction of the army’s recreation and training facilities proceeded, one of the largest concentrations of troops, equipment and buildings on the Tableland was centred around Atherton, Tolga and Rocky Creek. Major construction projects included: Rocky Creek Australian General Hospital (AGH) containing a tent hospital of 2400 beds and a large sewage plant; Bones Knob radar station with its two massive timber towers; and Tolga Advanced Ordnance Depot. The depot contained stores, workshops, and stockpiles of plant and equipment, motor transport vehicles, and weapons, stored over a large area. Among the 170 buildings were 18 large igloo stores (each 61 metres by 33 metres), Armco ammunition stores and Sidney Williams huts. Extensive camp facilities were laid out on the surrounding fields, including accommodation for officers and other ranks with separate recreation, kitchen, messing and ablutions, as well as administrative huts and quartermasters’ stores (EPA 2009:68).

Mareeba became far north Queensland’s main operational aerodrome when the Beaufort bombers of RAAF No.100 Squadron were landed in May 1943.

The eastern side of the Study Area was used by Allied forces as a live firing range. The RPS study into unexploded ordnance in and near the Study Area states:

ADF findings highlighting the existence of a mortar/grenade range within the project boundaries... Nine confirmed UXO contamination sites have been identified in vicinity of Tinaroo/Tolga with the Walkamin Mortar/Grenade range situated in the north-eastern quadrant of the project site as the closest source of ‘substantial’ contamination (RPS 2013:9 and Appendix 4).

This report also notes that chemical ordnance has been discovered in close proximity to active ordnance depots, such as the depot located in Tolga, 6km east of the project (RPS 2013:11).

10029C P 21

3.2.6 The Mareeba-Dimbulah Irrigation Scheme

One of the major problems associated with the early years of the tobacco industry in the Mareeba- Dimbulah area was the lack of a reliable source of water. Land was initially very cheap, and it was discovered to be of dubious quality for tobacco farming. In addition water was in short supply and not available year round. This meant that crops had to be hand watered from supplies carted from nearby creeks and rivers, or from storage tanks.

A major initiative of the North Queensland Tobacco Growers Co-operative was the implementation in Dimbulah of a campaign to lobby for an irrigation system for the area. This campaign brought together the tobacco growers in the region, provided detailed information to the Irrigation and Water Supply Commission and suggested the type of scheme that would be most appropriate. The two year campaign was initiated in 1944 (Short, E. H. nd:75) and had the advantage of tapping into a post World War II desire to populate North Queensland (Bureau of Investigation 1946:6).

An early result of the campaign was a report prepared by the Bureau of Investigation of Land and Water Resources into the Mareeba and Dimbulah tobacco growing areas. This report noted that tobacco was well suited to tropical climates but that 15 to 20 years of cultivation of the crop on well drained ‘light soil types’ had resulted in a reduction in the amount of humus in the soil and therefore a reduction in its productivity. It was also apparent to the Bureau’s investigation team that other factors which had contributed to a decline in the industry were the:

…wartime shortage of labour, the failure of tobacco prices to move upwards at the same rate as many other primary products, and the general lack of amenities. It was also apparent, however, that the greatest single contributory factor has been the decline in productivity under natural rainfall conditions.….close questioning of responsible growers and other residents of the district lead to the firm conclusion that a thriving tobacco industry can be retained only by the provision of irrigation facilities to the growers at a price which they can afford to pay (Bureau of Investigation, 1946:3).

It was recognised that the irrigation facilities were likely to be costly but effective and the investigation recommended that the costs and capacities of a complete irrigation scheme including a dam on the Walsh River with downstream and tributary creek weirs be carried out (Bureau of Investigation 1946:6). The weirs and channels associated with this scheme were largely complete by the end of the 1950s. The Walsh Main Channel flows to the north of the Study Area at the base of

10029C P 22

the range and the South Walsh Channel along the western side of the Walsh River from Collins Weir.

Since the demise of the tobacco industry, the Mareeba-Dimbulah Irrigation Scheme has been used to irrigate a variety of crops including rice and mangoes. However, no intensive use of the Study Area appears to have been undertaken.

3.2.7 Recent Developments

Little appears to have occurred within the Study Area within recent years although parts of the outer edges of Lot 7 on SP181453 have been excised or subdivided off the larger lot at various times.

The Chalumbin to Woree 275kV powerline and firebreak were constructed across the southern side of the lot during the late1990s (Sinclair Knight Merz 1996). Apart from this there appears to have been no development of the area.

3.2.8 Conclusions

The review of secondary source material in relation to this area identifies that the Study Area has been part of Springmount station for many years. Springmount station appears to have been marginal country from which a living could be gained only if it was part of holdings comprising a number of stations. Although various agricultural developments were undertaken in the vicinity and on the perimeter of the project area, it appears that the higher country which defines the Study Area remained largely undeveloped with little to no infrastructure being constructed within its confines.

Activities during WWII in the area appear to have been confined to the use of the eastern side of the Study area as a live firing range. Consequently unexploded ordnance may still exist on the eastern side of the Study Area. Whilst unexploded ordnance may have some cultural heritage significance in some instances, public safety and other legislative requirements take precedence for management purposes.

10029C P 23

4 .0 Cultural Heritage Investigation

This chapter provides an overview of the methodology, constraints and overall results of the field survey. Fieldwork undertaken by Converge staff is based on universally understood and accepted forms of assessment that occur in a series of clearly defined steps including sampling, surveying, site evaluation, recording, impact assessment, and management recommendations.

4.1 Survey Methodology

The survey methodology adopted for this comprised a helicopter survey across the project area in order to locate any non-Indigenous cultural heritage sites. The entire project area was surveyed in this manner. The Queensland Heritage Act 1992 (QHA) was applied in the assessment of all sites.

All assessment data was recorded in field notebooks and locations of any items or places of non- Indigenous cultural heritage were captured via a hand help global positioning system (GPS) receiver, accurate to ±5 meters using datum WGS 84. This information was then used to create maps outlining the location of sites and features noted during the assessment. Areas of interest were photographed using a digital camera (Canon PowerShot A650 IS) with 12.1 effective mega-pixels. Upon completion of the report, these photographs are stored on disk (CD) in the Converge Cairns office. Each site was considered in light of the QHA.

4.1.1 Sampling Strategy

Sampling strategies (where to look) can be either purposive, where specific areas are targeted (for whatever reason), as is done with predictive modelling; or probabilistic, where decisions are made to survey without any prior knowledge or predictive model of what heritage resources might exist in the landscape to be surveyed. So it is that archaeological survey strategies usually involve transects across the project area chosen at random (probabilistic) to avoid possible bias in the results; or transects within areas (purposive) known to be historically significant, or those designated areas specifically earmarked for development.

For this particular assessment a probabilistic sampling strategy was employed. Transects across the Project area were flown which enabled 100% of the area to be covered.

10029C P 24

4.2 Constraints to the Survey

4.2.1 Site Integrity

An assessment of site integrity provides an indicator of the intactness and integrity of the site. Levels of site integrity were determined using a percentage range between 0-100% where 0% indicates all site integrity is gone, and 100% represents excellent preservation of the original context. Therefore: Zero - 0%; Poor - 1-25%; Moderate - 26-50 %; Fair - 51-75 %; Good - 76-85%; Excellent - 86-100%.

The Study Area appeared undeveloped. No sites, apart from a recent track created to install a wind monitor tower, and the 1990s powerline and firebreak were observed. Therefore an assessment of site integrity was not required.

4.2.2 Ground Surface Visibility

Assessments of ground surface visibility provide an indication of how much of the ground surface can actually be seen. Ground surface visibility is most commonly inhibited by vegetation but other inhibitors may include concrete, gravel and bitumen. Levels of ground surface visibility were determined using a percentage scale in that 0% represents zero visibility and 100% represents maximum visibility (bare ground). Therefore: Zero - 0%; Poor - 1-25%; Moderate - 26-50 %; Fair - 51-75 %; Good - 76-85%; Excellent - 86-100%. The better the visibility, the more potential there is for locating historical/archaeological material.

The Mt Emerald Wind Farm area comprises open forest with a variety of eucalypts, native grasses and grass trees. Granite outcrops feature within this Figure 4: Study area. View to NNE landscape. No sites were located from the air.

10029C P 25

As no non-Indigenous cultural heritage sites were located, it was not considered necessary to make any assessment of ground surface visibility.

4.3 Consultation

Consultation with the following people was conducted as part of the research for this assessment:

Cairns Historical Society;

John and Grace Gargan, Springmount Station, Mutchilba;

Dimbulah Historical Society.

4.4 Survey Outcomes

One hundred percent of the project area was traversed by helicopter. No non-Indigenous cultural heritage sites were located. No further field assessment was undertaken by foot or vehicle.

10029C P 26

6 .0 Significance Assessment

No sites of non-Indigenous cultural heritage significance were identified during the assessment of the Study Area. Thus the Study Area contains no known level of non-Indigenous cultural heritage significance as defined under section 35 (1) of the QHA.

10029C P 27

7 .0 Proposed Development

The field assessment has not identified any sites of non-Indigenous cultural heritage significance as defined under the QHA within the Mt Emerald Wind Farm area. Therefore the proposed development will not impact on any known non-Indigenous cultural heritage significance of the area.

It is possible that unexploded ordnance from World War II may still exist on the eastern side of the Study Area. Whilst unexploded ordnance may have some cultural heritage significance in some instances, public safety and other legislative requirements take precedence for management purposes.

10029C P 28

8 .0 Recommendations

The field survey has identified no non-Indigenous cultural heritage sites within the Study area. However it is possible, if unlikely, that unknown and unexpected non-Indigenous cultural heritage sites which may potentially be impacted by the project are located within the Mt Emerald Wind Farm area.

Unknown non-Indigenous cultural sites or places may include or be related to:

Remains from early settlement mixed agriculture activities.

World War II items, particularly unexploded ordnance.

Assuming the recommendations below are suitably implemented, this report finds the nature and level of impact by the project is acceptable.

8.2 Recommendation 1 - Cultural Heritage Management of Unknown Sites

It is possible that currently unknown sites of non-Indigenous cultural heritage significance exist within the Mt Emerald Wind Farm area. In these circumstances it is recommended that the process outlined in Appendix 1 is adopted.

8.3 Recommendation 2 – Unexploded Ordnance

It is possible that currently unknown unexploded ordnance from World War II may exist within the Mt Emerald Wind Farm area. In these circumstances it is recommended that the process outlined in Volume 3, Appendix 31 of the EIS for the Mt Emerald Wind Farm project; Desk Study for Potential Historic Unexploded Ordnance Contamination, be followed.

10029C P 29

9 .0 References

Converge 2008 Nullinga Dam non-Indigenous Cultural Heritage Assessment, Far North Queensland. Unpublished Report to GHD, Converge, Cairns

Dimbulah History Committee 1989 Golden Reef to Golden Leaf; A history of Dimbulah, Dimbulah History Committee, Dimbulah.

Hooper, C. A. 1993 Angor to Zillmanton; stories of North Queensland’s deserted towns. Self published, Townsville.

Loos, N. 1982 Invasion and Resistance; Aboriginal-European Relations on the North Queensland Frontier 1861 - 1897. Australian National University Press, Canberra

Marquis-Kyle, P. and M. Walker 1999 The Illustrated Burra Charter. Sydney, Australian ICOMOS Incorporated.

Powell, J. M. (1990) Plains of Promise – Rivers of Destiny; Water Management and the Development of Queensland 1824 – 1990. Brisbane

Pullar, I. & M. Cook. (2001) Watery Sauces: A People’s History of the Water Resources Commission (Queensland) and its Predecessors 1881-1995. Brisbane 40165 WRC 1087615.

Queensland Environmental Protection Agency (2009) WWII NQ: A cultural heritage overview of significant places in the defence of north Queensland during World War II. Queensland Government Printer, Brisbane.

Queensland Heritage Register Place ID 601861 Rocky Bluff Battery and Township

Queensland Irrigation and Water Supply Commission (1951) Annual Report of the Commissioner of Irrigation and Water Supply 1950 -1951. Report to Queensland State Parliament, Brisbane.

Queensland Irrigation and Water Supply Commission (1952a) Annual Report

Short, E. H. (n.d) My Affair with Tobacco E. H. Short, Dimbulah

Sinclair Knight Merz (1996) Chalumbin to Woree 275kV Transmission Line. Impact Assessment Report. Unpublished report to Powerlink Queensland, Sinclair Knight Merz, Brisbane.

RATCH Australia Corporation Limited (2013) Mt Emerald Wind Farm, Arriga, Queensland Desk Study for Potential Historic Unexploded Ordnance Contamination. Mt Emerald Wind Farm EIS, Vol 3, Appendix 31.

Thorp J. (2001) The evolution of a little landscape: The Koah district of North Queensland. Unpublished BA Hons Thesis, James Cook University

10029C P 30

Wilmot, W. F. and P. J. Stephenson. (1989) Rocks and Landscapes of the Cairns District. Queensland Department of Mines, Brisbane.

Interviews

Gargan, John and Grace. Springmount Station, Springmount Rd, Mutchilba, 3 April 2008 and 3 February 2010 Wason, J. on site 7-8 April 2008

Website http://www.webgis.nrm.qld.gov.au – Interactive resource and tenure maps

Radio Articles

ABC Radio (Hindsight), Gibson, S. 2002 “It was a Good Industry” – The story of the Mareeba/Dimbulah Tobacco Industry. CD recording, ABC Radio.

10029C P 31

Appendix 1: Discovery Of Items Of Potential Non-Indigenous Cultural Heritage

PROCEDURE FOR DISCOVERY OF A NON-INDIGENOUS ITEM OF POTENTIAL CULTURAL HERITAGE SIGNIFICANCE STOP WORK If potential items of non-Indigenous cultural heritage are located during works: stop work, mark and protect the site. Work can continue elsewhere if it will not affect the item. INITIAL CONTACT Contact the Mt Emerald Wind Farm Environment Officer immediately on XXXX XXXX and notify them of the item. NOTIFICATION TO PROJECT ARCHAEOLOGIST The Mt Emerald Wind Farm Environment Officer to contact the Project Archaeologist, including details of the nature of the item. The Project Archaeologist should be commissioned in an ‘on-call’ capacity during construction. ASSESS SIGNIFICANCE The Archaeologist will attend the site (if necessary) as soon as possible to assess significance of item and recommend a course of action. These may include: i) protect and avoid; ii) excavate, record and remove; iii) investigate and preserve or iv) no action if the item is deemed to have no significance. Recommendation i), ii) and iii) will require preparation of a work method statement in consultation with EHP Cultural Heritage Branch prior to any action commencing.

IS ITEM DISCOVERED SIGNIFICANT? Yes No REPORT FIND TO EHP CULTURAL RECORDING HERITAGE BRANCH Items deemed to have no significance will require recording as evidence. A photograph of the item and a description of Reporting of archaeological find to EHP Cultural why it is not of significance should be recorded by the Heritage Branch is required by law. Depending on the Project Archaeologist and forwarded to the Mt Emerald nature of the find, the Project Archaeologist and EHP Wind Farm Environment Officer. will negotiate requirements of find. COMPLETE RECORDING/FIELD ADVICE WORK Advise Mt Emerald Wind FarmEnvironment Officer when Complete the archaeological or remedial works in assessment complete. Confirm advice with EHP Cultural accordance with the consent permit or agreed course Heritage Branch if required. of action. Advise Mt Emerald Wind Farm Environment Officer when assessment complete. WORK RECOMMENCES Mt Emerald Wind Farm Environment Officer to advise when works can re-commence in the original or changed form. SUBMIT FINAL REPORT Archaeologist completes reporting in accordance with the appropriate guidelines and conditions. A copy of the report to go to relevant Government Authorities and Mt Emerald Wind Farm Environment Officer. (Converge 2010)

10029C P 32

10029C P 33