BHP has promised to not disturb ancient Aboriginal sites in Western Australia for a mine expansion without consulting extensively with traditional owners, despite securing ministerial consent.
The mining giant applied in October to work in an area covering 40 significant Indigenous sites to enlarge the $4.5 billion South Flank iron ore project, which Aboriginal Affairs Minister Ben Wyatt approved last month.
The approval came five days after Rio Tinto blew up two 46,000-year-old rock shelters in the Juukan Gorge area, distressing the Puutu Kunti Kurrama and Pinikura people, who said they had mentioned the significance of the sites "for years", and sparking an international outcry.
One of the sites in the Pilbara which BHP applied to develop is in the Djadjiling Range, which contains rock shelters and is an area that has been occupied for a similar amount of time.
Mr Wyatt said the Banjima native title holders did not file any objections to various Section 18 notices lodged by BHP which, under the state's Aboriginal Heritage Act, seek the minister's consent to develop a site where land users conclude that impact from development is unavoidable.
Banjima Native Title Aboriginal Corporation chair Maitland Parker said the Banjima people "do not support the destruction of sites of cultural significance".
"We stand with all Aboriginal traditional owners and particularly our Pilbara brothers and sisters, the Puutu Kunti Kurrama and Pinikura at this time, in our abhorrence at the destruction of the Juukan rock shelters, and those suffering the threat of or having recently experienced similar site destruction."
The BHP South Flank project is expected to start next year and destroy up to 86 significant Aboriginal sites dating back 15,000 years.
The assessed the 86 sites identified, concluding that 40 should be classified as in protected heritage area, despite the Banjima people saying all should be protected.
The Guardian reports that the company said it had "taken into account the views and recommendations provided by the Banjima representatives during the consultation and inspection”, but it was “not reasonably practical” to avoid all "Aboriginal cultural heritage sites".
“Any cultural material salvaged as part of these programs shall be stored in the cultural repository at the BHP Mulla Mulla Heritage Office until a different location is nominated by the Banjima people,” BHP’s assessment report said.
Protesters are seen outside of the BHP offices in Melbourne's CBD, Wednesday, July 11, 2018. Source: AAP
A BHP spokesperson told SBS News on Thursday they plan to take a “sustainable approach”.
“We will not disturb the sites identified without further extensive consultation with the Banjima people,” they said.
“That consultation will be based on our commitment to understanding the cultural significance of the region and on the deep respect we have for the Banjima people and their heritage.”
In 2015 the Banjima people – who are the native title holders of the area -.
“BHP agreed financial and other benefits for the Banjima People, while the Banjima made commitments to support the South Flank Project,” Mr Wyatt said in a statement.
“The agreement also covered heritage matters, and identified 72 exclusion zones which were sites regarded as significant by the Banjima People.
Mr Wyatt defended his decision to approve BHP's plans on Thursday, encouraging BHP to work with the native title holders.
"As Minister for Aboriginal Affairs, I want to see impacts to Aboriginal sites limited to the practical extent possible,” Mr Wyatt said in a statement.
“I am also a great believer in self-determination for Aboriginal people and support native title groups using their hard-won rights to make commercial agreements with land users. I am cautious about governments interfering in private negotiations by registered native title holders.
"The ability to negotiate such agreements is one of the real tangible benefits which come from the often long and torturous process to have native title rights recognised.”
Under state law, the Banjima people are powerless to intervene in the project’s development, with Western Australia's Aboriginal Heritage Act section 18 noting that traditional owners are unable to stop their sacred sites from being destroyed.
Section 18 also allows an owner of the land – – to apply to the Aboriginal Cultural Material Committee for consent to proceed with a development action.
The Banjima people are aware they are not able to formally object, but their archaeological advisor told The Guardian that “in no way” do they “support the continued destruction of this significant cultural landscape".
The WA Government is reviewing .
Western Australia’s Aboriginal Affairs minister Ben Wyatt agreed to the expansion in May. Source: AAP Image/Rebecca Le May
Rio Tinto has backed legislative change following the company’s destruction of Aboriginal sites, blaming a misunderstanding for the hurt they caused the Puutu Kunti Kurrama and Pinikura people.
BHP echoed Rio Tinto’s sentiment.
“We support the West Australian Government’s review and reform of the Aboriginal Heritage Act and we will continue to actively engage in that process,” a spokesperson said.
Additional reporting by AAP.
