SUPPORTING R E P O R T F Heritage ABORIGINAL CULTURAL HERITAGE A REPORT ON THE HEATHGATE RESOURCES PTY LTD MINERAL LEASE EXTENSION AREA APPLICATION (ML6036). Bob Ellis PO Box 996 Mount Barker SA 5415 May 2006 Introduction This report identifies and addresses the Aboriginal Cultural Heritage matters which arise from an application by Heathgate Resources Pty Ltd for an extension of the area of its current Mining Lease (ML6036). The lease was granted to the company in 1999 and is currently operated by Heathgate Resources Pty Ltd for in-situ leaching of uranium. The lease contains the Beverley Mine and Camp and an associated airstrip. The lease is located on Wooltana Station, on the broad plains between Lake Frome and the eastern extension of the Northern Flinders Ranges, South Australia. The pastoral lease was acquired by Heathgate Resources Pty Ltd in 2002. It is anticipated that the application for the extension of the Mining Lease will be made in 2006. The area of the proposed extension is shown in Appendix 1 of this report. This report is not based on specially commissioned anthropological and archaeological surveys such as those previously undertaken by professional anthropologists and archaeologists to produce the reports informing the 1998 Environmental Impact Study for the original Lease application (Kinhill Pty Ltd (1997); Co-ordata Research (1997)). Rather, it relies upon information collated as a result of ten (10) separate Cultural Heritage inspections and reports which have been produced since 1999 and upon application of a methodology for continuing assessment of activities proposed by Heathgate Resources Pty Ltd (and its sister company Quasar Resources Pty Ltd) in the area of their leases and licences. Those inspections (Ellis B, 1999-2006, Fitzpatrick P, 2002) have arisen from the application of a Work Area Clearance methodology, adopted by the company in association with the Native Title applicants, to minimise potential deleterious impact upon Aboriginal cultural values at all stages of exploration and development within the leases and licences held by the companies. This methodology and the inspections it has generated have resulted in detailed and in most cases, on-foot investigation, of areas embraced by the Mining Lease and proposed extension area. The Work Area Clearance methodology, implemented at the request of the Adnyamathanha Traditional Land Association (Aboriginal Corporation), (ATLA) is in the process of formal acceptance as result of the negotiation of a Work Area Clearance Agreement between the ATLA Native Title Management Committee, as the body representing the claimants associated with the Adnyamathanha No. 1 Native Title Application (SAD 6001/98) and Heathgate and Quasar Resources Pty Ltd. That agreement will ensure that the companies’ future exploration and mining activities will be conducted only following specially commissioned surveys and inspections of the proposed areas of activity, leading to the grant of appropriate approvals by Adnyamathanha researchers, nominated by named Native Title applicants. A separate agreement under Section 9B of the Mining Act (SA) 1971 is expected to be finalised with respect to any mining to be carried out within the extension area. Work Area Clearance Methodology The Work Area Clearance methodology was developed in the Northern Territory to permit Aboriginal traditional owners, in company with cultural heritage professionals or advisors, (but not those professionals or advisors alone), to assess activities proposed on Aboriginal land, without the necessity for them to divulge information on the cultural amenity of the area within which work is proposed (see Toyne and 2 Vachon, 1984, p. 111). In its more general application to non-Aboriginal land, the methodology relies upon the proponent of the proposed activities providing details of that work within the context of a specific, geographically defined area. Subsequently, expert Aboriginal custodians conduct a physical inspection of the area and assess the program of work in accordance with their knowledge of the cultural values of that area. Where that assessment is that the proposed work will not adversely impact upon the cultural values of the area, approval is given, subject to such conditions as may be necessary. Where the work is judged to threaten sites or cultural features, approval is withheld, without the necessity for details of those sites or values to be disclosed. Under this arrangement, what is “cleared”, or approved, is the specific program of works as outlined by the proponent of those activities. The approval for those works does not necessarily imply that the area of impact lacks cultural values or that the area is free (or “clear”) of specific places of cultural significance. Rather, it is approved, or “clear” for the proponent to pursue the activity which has been proposed for assessment. Consequently, it is a requirement of the methodology that any variation on the approved program of work, or any future program of works proposed in that area, must be the subject of a further field inspection by knowledgeable Aboriginal custodians. This requirement has the added benefit of providing opportunity for research teams to monitor previously approved exploration activities and the rehabilitation works which follow. The term “cultural heritage clearance” is occasionally encountered in discussion of cultural heritage field inspections carried out in accordance with this methodology. Use of that term is strictly avoided in this discussion since it implies that once inspected, future activity of any kind in a specific area has been approved, as a result of an agreement that the area is free (or “cleared”) of cultural heritage values or places. That is not the case with the assessments carried out in the extension area and is not an assumption which is justified by any Work Area Clearance assessment. For the Adnyamathanha at least, all areas of land within their traditional territories are imbued with cultural heritage values. This methodology has been extensively applied in the context of assessing exploration work, particularly exploratory drilling, proposed by Heathgate Resources Pty Ltd (and its sister company Quasar Resources Pty Ltd) on their leases and licences. Nonetheless, some information on the cultural values of the area has been approved for general information. It is that information that is provided in this report, together with the conditions and agreed protective measures which have been developed to accompany approval for specific works in the area of the lease extension application. The Draft Work Area Clearance Agreement currently under negotiation by the two parties provides for the periodical inspections of “work areas”, on tenements located on Wooltana Station, to be carried out by a team of eight Adnyamathanha researchers assisted by a cultural heritage specialist (or specialists) who is responsible for recording the details of any permissions granted by the research team and any conditions which may be attached to those approvals. The eight researchers are nominated on each occasion by four named Native Title applicants, Ms Geraldine Anderson, Mr Gordon Coulthard, Mr Vincent Coulthard and Mr Mark McKenzie who each nominate two delegates as researchers. Normally, this arrangement results in 3 male and female and older and younger researchers, of both moieties, being nominated to constitute the research group. These four named applicants are recognised by ATLA as having a specific interest in the area of the mine and extension area. At the time of the grant of the original lease to Heathgate Resources Pty Ltd the four named applicants had separate Native Title Claims lodged over the lease area (SC 94/1 lodged by Mr Gordon Coulthard, SC 95/4 lodged by Mr Mark McKenzie, SC 97/1 lodged by Ms Geraldine Anderson and SC 97/2 lodged by Mr Vincent Coulthard and others). These claims have subsequently been amalgamated into the Adnyamathanha No. 1 (SAD 6001/98) and No. 2 (SAD 6002/98) claims. All of the previous named applicants are applicants under the amalgamated claim SAD 6001/98. The ability of those named applicants to nominate two delegates to undertake Work Area Surveys is consistent with the spirit of those earlier agreements. At the time of the original grant of the Mining Lease ML6036 to Heathgate Resources Pty Ltd separate agreements were negotiated with the then Native Title applicants. As a result of one agreement (with the claimants associated with SC 97/2) an independent review of the EIS prepared by Heathgate Pty Ltd was undertaken and a further cultural heritage inspection was carried out by a team of Adnyamathanha researchers to complement the specifically commissioned expert reports prepared for the EIS (Ellis B, 1999). The Archaeological Record According to Dr Marjorie Sullivan (1980), occupation of the Flinders Ranges was most intense over the last 5,000 years during the time of the first apparent permanent and comprehensive occupation of the sand deserts of the Lake Eyre Basin, north of the area under discussion. As Sullivan notes however, evidence also suggests that the better watered areas of the Ranges sustained Aboriginal populations as early as 15,000 years BP as the climatic improvement that followed the last glacial maximum (17 – 15,000 years ago) prompted a more complete occupation of some parts of the Australian arid zone. The earliest dated evidence of occupation of the Frome Plains comes from a site on Balcoracana Creek where it enters Lake Frome.