LAND RETURN

Submitted: Wednesday, Jun 08, 2011 at 20:45
ThreadID: 86844 Views:2405 Replies:4 FollowUps:9
This Thread has been Archived
Just reading local paper that Fink Gorge and stage 4 of the simpson desert was handed back to the traditional owners
A 99yr lease for Fink Gorge
Which part of the Simpson is stage 4 does any body know I would have no idea where to start looking
Cheers Reggy2
Back Expand Un-Read 0 Moderator

Reply By: Doomadgee Roadhouse - Wednesday, Jun 08, 2011 at 20:57

Wednesday, Jun 08, 2011 at 20:57
you asked for it hahha :-)
One of the largest parcels of Aboriginal land in the history of the Aboriginal Land Rights Act (Northern Territory) has been returned to traditional owners.

Prime Minister Julia Gillard today handed back the deeds to four parcels of land to traditional owners at a ceremony in Alice Springs.

Two of the four parcels - Finke Gorge National Park and Simpson Desert stage 4 - were some of the earliest claims lodged under the Aboriginal Land Rights (Northern Territory) Act 1976.

Simpson Desert stage 4 is a parcel of two pieces of land, which together measure an area of approximately 1,827,600 hectares, making it one of the largest grants of Aboriginal land in land rights history.

This is a historic day for the Arrernte peoples of Central Australia and a milestone in the history of land rights in Australia.

Finke Gorge National Park, located approximately 138 kilometres west of Alice Springs, has been recognised internationally for its rich diversity of Central Australian flora

The Park includes a unique collection of rare and ancient plants. It also contains many sites of cultural significance to groups of the Arrernte people.

The park is the latest of 13 Northern Territory parks to be returned to traditional owners under joint management arrangements following a landmark agreement in 2004.

Under this agreement, the land is leased back to the Northern Territory for 99 years for use as a National Park, ensuring it operates as a protected conservation area for the enjoyment of all.

The traditional owners will have a strong voice in the future management and operation of the park under a joint management partnership with the Territory’s Parks and Wildlife Service.

The Central Land Council and traditional owners are working to design community development projects that can be supported with the income received under park leasing arrangements.

Simpson Desert stage 4, located east of Alice Springs, forms the estates of various traditional owners of the Arrernte group of peoples and is rich in cultural history and biodiversity.

The remaining two parcels in this package of four include two smaller grants of land in the vicinity of Hermannsburg.

The Australian Government acknowledges and respects the continuing cultural attachment Aboriginal people have to their land and will continue to work with them to deliver better outcomes for Indigenous Australians and their communities.
AnswerID: 456824

Follow Up By: Member - reggy 2 (VIC) - Wednesday, Jun 08, 2011 at 21:04

Wednesday, Jun 08, 2011 at 21:04
Thanks for the quick reply I was not sure which part of the Desert they were talking about
Cheers
0
FollowupID: 729947

Reply By: Member - Stephen L (Clare SA) - Wednesday, Jun 08, 2011 at 20:59

Wednesday, Jun 08, 2011 at 20:59
Hi Reggy

From what we were told years ago, there were Native Title Claims put in for All of the Crown Land of the Simpson Desert in the Northern Territory. If this is the case it could be this land. If this is the case, it will be very interesting to follow the outcome, as it could put a complete ban on remote Simpson Desert travel, including the Madigan Line and others places like Geosurvey Hill. The only place where travel should not be effected would be the Hay River Run, as Lindsay is or was on the Board of the CLC and the last thing that he would want to see happen is to stop access to his Land.

Others may have the exact area that it relates to.



Cheers


Stephen
Smile like a Crocodile

Lifetime Member
My Profile  My Blog  My Position  Send Message

AnswerID: 456825

Follow Up By: Olsen's 4WD Tours and Training - Wednesday, Jun 08, 2011 at 21:53

Wednesday, Jun 08, 2011 at 21:53
Lindsay's mob had a claim in place for the land north of Maddigan Camp 16 (Maddigans Tree) up to his existing boundary and east. I suspect that is one of the two parcels of land. The other would be west of there I suspect. I could be wrong.
0
FollowupID: 729953

Follow Up By: Olsen's 4WD Tours and Training - Wednesday, Jun 08, 2011 at 21:54

Wednesday, Jun 08, 2011 at 21:54
correction... up to his existing boundary and west.... towards the Plenty lakes etc.
0
FollowupID: 729954

Reply By: Gronk - Thursday, Jun 09, 2011 at 12:38

Thursday, Jun 09, 2011 at 12:38
And as an Australian citizen, will I have access to this parcel of AUSTRALIA ????

I hope so.....but ???



A little bit off topic, but in the eastern states, if the traditional owners either no longer exist or don't want to claim, then another tribe from any other area can put in a claim for a parcel of land....now thats NOT handing the land back to the traditional owners.....and its why some people get a bit cynical about the whole process !!
AnswerID: 456870

Follow Up By: The Landy - Thursday, Jun 09, 2011 at 13:56

Thursday, Jun 09, 2011 at 13:56
I don’t think the assertion that ‘anyone’ can claim ‘any’ area, on the basis they are indigenous is correct.

The Land Rights Act defines ‘traditional landowners’ as a group of Aboriginals who have primary spiritual responsibility for sacred sites on a piece of land, and who are entitled by Aboriginal tradition to hunt and gather on that land (or words to that effect).

The interpretation of that definition has been subjected to a great deal of discussion and debate when determining native title claims. And this in part is due to a view held by many that native title claims need to be developed in terms of their particular customs and laws as aboriginal notions of continuous occupation may differ greatly from that by non-aboriginal people.

Plenty written on the topic, and worth a read for those with an interest, and a read highlights just how complex the simple term ‘traditional landowner’ actually is...

0
FollowupID: 729992

Follow Up By: Member - Mfewster(SA) - Thursday, Jun 09, 2011 at 19:07

Thursday, Jun 09, 2011 at 19:07
Where on earth did you find this? Can you give an example where it has happened? As far as I am aware, the laws that deal with these matters are all Federal anyway.

Your chances as an Australian citizen of getting access to "native title" land are much better than that of most Indigenous Australians getting access to non indigenous owned land )in fact not even owned, all that is required is a lease when in reality the ownership still belongs to the people of Australia.
0
FollowupID: 730034

Follow Up By: Gronk - Friday, Jun 10, 2011 at 00:54

Friday, Jun 10, 2011 at 00:54
Has happened a couple of times on the Central Coast of NSW.....the groups that claimed native title weren't the original habitants of that area, but because for whatever reason the original habitants ( maybe no descendants ?? ) weren't able to claim, anyone nearby that area were allowed to claim ......but of course, at stake was some serious dollars ( like 10's of millions ) being offered by developers ..
0
FollowupID: 730059

Follow Up By: The Landy - Friday, Jun 10, 2011 at 06:04

Friday, Jun 10, 2011 at 06:04
Hi Gronk

And I think you have now made the important distinction that rather than ‘anyone from anywhere’ in your original post , to other groups within the area, or region.

This aspect is well covered in texts on the definition of ‘Traditional Landowners’ and was the reason I highlighted that it is more complex than simply saying they always lived there. Have a read of some of the information available if you have an interest as it discusses this quite a lot and clears up a lot of misunderstanding on the topic.
0
FollowupID: 730060

Reply By: Member - Trouper (NSW) - Thursday, Jun 09, 2011 at 17:24

Thursday, Jun 09, 2011 at 17:24
I wonder how many traditionals will actually go into these remote areas particularly the Nth Simpson area?? I would suggest more white Australians go there more than any other!! I wonder if we will be denied access?

regards.......jeff
AnswerID: 456896

Follow Up By: Allfour4x4 - Thursday, Jun 09, 2011 at 18:24

Thursday, Jun 09, 2011 at 18:24
Of course you'll be able to go there......












For a price!
0
FollowupID: 730027

Follow Up By: The Landy - Thursday, Jun 09, 2011 at 18:28

Thursday, Jun 09, 2011 at 18:28
Jeff

I would think that most unlikely. Lindsay Booker, an Eastern Arrernte Elder, has done a lot to open up that part of the Australia to tourism, a read of many of the threads here attest to that, and he is Chairman of the Central Land Council... In fact, his drive for tourism is one of the reasons why more ‘white’ Australians have visited this region over the past few years.

Besides, I don’t think you will find a lot of examples where a fence has been erected around land after Native title has been granted.

I think it will be mostly ‘business as usual’ – no reason to suspect anything else.

0
FollowupID: 730029

Sponsored Links