Perspectives Heritage Solutions Pty Ltd Joanna Freslov, Phillip Hughes, Russell Mullett December 2004 AAV Project No. 2833 Post Wildfire Indigenous Heritage Survey Volume 1: Background, Survey, Results and Recommended Management Options A Report to Parks Victoria, the Department of Sustainability and Environment, and Aboriginal Affairs Victoria POST WILDFIRE INDIGENOUS SURVEY Perspectives Heritage Solutions Pty Ltd PO Box 713 • Hurstbridge VIC 3099 Phone (03) 9718 1554 • Fax (03) 9718 1829 Cover plate: View from Mount Sarah Track (view northeast) ii EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Executive Summary During 2003 a large bushfire burnt over 1.2 million hectares of private and public land in the high country of northeast Victoria and Gippsland. The fire and suppression activities affected a range of values in the highlands including Aboriginal heritage values. The Public Land Ecological and Cultural Bushfire Recovery Program determined that the best way to address and enhance effective cultural heritage management was an increased understanding of the nature and extent of the impact of bushfires on Indigenous heritage values. The Public Land Ecological and Cultural Bushfire Recovery Program aimed to collect this information through a project which would investigate and assess the impact of the bushfire and fire suppression activities on Indigenous cultural heritage values on public land. This project would also include an assessment of the impact of the bushfire on non-material heritage values including spiritual places and historic attachments. The project would be managed jointly by Parks Victoria (PV) and the Department of Sustainability and Environment (DSE). Parks Victoria and the Department of Sustainability and Environment therefore commissioned Perspectives Heritage Solutions Pty Ltd to conduct an archaeological survey for Aboriginal cultural heritage values within 12 study areas (later expanded to 14 areas) in the highlands and alpine regions of northeast Victoria and Gippsland (see Figure 1). The project required close consultation with, and participation of local Indigenous communities and traditional owners. The assessment has therefore comprised a background study of known archaeological values, modelling to produce a set of sensitivity zoning statements about site patterning in the selected study areas, interviews with traditional owners, a review of archival documentary archival sources to produce an ethnohistory, an archaeological survey for cultural sites, an assessment of the impact of the fires and fire suppression activities on Aboriginal cultural values in the study areas, training and mentoring of Aboriginal field teams and a report detailing the results of the study and survey, the risks posed to the Aboriginal heritage values and management issues and recommended management options for the future protection of Aboriginal heritage values in the project area. The report has been divided into four volumes: Volume 1—a study presenting a review of the known archaeology of the project area, sensitivity zoning statements, results of the survey and specific management recommendations for cultural heritage sites; Volume 2—a review of the impact of the fire and fire suppression activities on Aboriginal cultural heritage values and general principles for addressing the impact issues; Volume 3—an account of the consultation process, the ethnohistory, oral history, interviews with traditional owners, a plain language summary of the results of the survey and training; and Volume 4—all survey data, specific site location information and maps showing site locations and archaeologically sensitive areas. This volume, Volume 1, presents the background review and results of the survey. The study area consisted of 14 study units of varying size ranging between 70 km2 (Mount Mittamatite) to 3160 km2 (the expanded Dargo area) within a complex range of alpine/sub-alpine and footslope environments. A survey for Aboriginal archaeological values was conducted in the study areas between late January and April 2004 with several survey teams made up of two archaeologists, and up to six Indigenous staff. The survey targeted areas of interest within the fire affected areas and a total of 434 hectares was surveyed representing about 0.1% of the project area. The survey teams recorded 325 Aboriginal and non- Aboriginal archaeological sites. All sites were fully recorded and placed on the Aboriginal Affairs Victoria Site Register and the Heritage Victoria Inventory. An analysis of the site location, density and contents iii POST WILDFIRE INDIGENOUS SURVEY suggest that the region was heavily exploited and this is consistent with oral sources suggesting that the area was a rich resource zone. An assessment of the impact of the fires and fire suppression activities was carried out during the survey. The sensitivity zoning statements were also tested and refined during the survey and, based on the background research and the results of the fieldwork, the assessment of impacts to cultural heritage values and the sensitivity zoning statements, the study has identified areas of sensitivity for potential Aboriginal archaeological remains and has made a series of recommended management options to mitigate impact on the known sites and any potential but as yet unknown sites. These are summarised in the table below. A series of principles for the management of impact to heritage values during wildfire preparedness, suppression and recovery are presented in Volume 2. Consultation was undertaken with all the relevant Aboriginal representatives and representative groups by the project managers and in the field by the archaeologist. Consultation was conducted with the Gippsland Regional Cultural Heritage Program, the North East regional Cultural Heritage Program, the Gippsland East Gippsland Aboriginal Cooperative, Bangerang Cultural Centre, Mungabareena Aboriginal Corporation, Moogji Aboriginal Council, the Gunai Kurnai, Yeerung Kurnai, Monaro People, the Bidawal People, the Dhuduroa People, Waveroo People, and the Taunaurong Clans. Their views, where appropriate, are incorporated in the recommended management options (see Volume 3).1 1 Archaeological reports may be independently reviewed by Aboriginal Affairs Victoria, and the relevant Aboriginal community. Although the findings of a consultant’s report will be taken into consideration, recommendations in relation to managing heritage places should not be taken to imply automatic approval of those actions by Aboriginal Affairs Victoria, or the Aboriginal community. iv EXECUTIVE SUMMARY MANAGEMENT IMPACT SENSITIVITY PREDICTED REC. RECOMMENDATION/MANAGEMENT OPTION ZONE SITES NO. All areas All surface Various Artefact R. 1 General recommendation for all ground disturbing works across all land management tenures works in the scatters, Aboriginal Sites management isolated Follow PV and DSE cultural heritage guidelines during planning for ground disturbing works (Cultural areas artefacts, Heritage Planning Phase). scarred trees, The management recommendations in this report should be consulted during this planning phase to assist this quarries, process. hearths, grind Where works are likely to impact upon cultural heritage values, consultation with both traditional owners and stones, the relevant Aboriginal community will be required and a Consent to Disturb permit sought from the relevant grinding Aboriginal community under the terms of the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Island Heritage Protection Act grooves, stone 1984 before any works can proceed (see Appendix 3). arrangements, Follow PV and DSE cultural heritage guidelines during the works (Project Implementation and Delivery). rock shelters Some larger and more important sites may require individual heritage management plans (see below). See Volume All areas and areas of potential archaeological deposits (PADs) 4, sensitive Where works are carried out in areas where there are no known sites or in areas of potential archaeological archaeological deposits (PADs), PV and DSE heritage guidelines should be followed. The following should be noted: zones Consult with the relevant Aboriginal representatives and the agency Indigenous coordinator prior to conducting works in these areas. An archaeological survey or sub-surface testing may be required in PADS prior to works commencing. Monitoring of works by relevant Aboriginal representatives may be required of PADs during works. In all areas, including PADs, works staff should be alert and observe for Aboriginal materials during all ground disturbing activities. If located, stop all works in the vicinity immediately that it is safe to do so. Note the location of any finds. Report any finds or disturbance to the Works Supervisor who should then inform the appropriate people, including the relevant Indigenous agency representative, relevant Aboriginal representative and AAV. Works in this location cannot proceed without a Consent to Disturb permit. A qualified archaeologist and the relevant Aboriginal representatives should then attend the site promptly to fully record the site, place the site on the AAV Sites Register and determine appropriate management through consultation. The archaeologist can assist the agency to obtain a ‘Consent to Disturb’ permit following the above procedures. Human remains If human remains are located follow the procedure outlined in Appendix 5. It is important that this protocol be adhered to completely. v POST WILDFIRE INDIGENOUS SURVEY MANAGEMENT IMPACT SENSITIVITY PREDICTED REC.