Natural and cultural heritage has differential value; what is priceless and irreplaceable to some is disposable to others. This differentiation is cause for many conflicts and manifests anywhere from highly localised disputes to the very core of sovereign sensitivity.
In an ABC News article Vandal attack on treasured cave, heavy cutting equipment was allegedly used to break into the Kubla Khan cave, regarded as one of Australia’s most pristine underground formations. Within the cave is a huge chamber called Xanadu, containing an 18m high stalagmite known as the Khan. The cave is not open to the general public and permits are restricted to only 12 tour groups each year.
Exclusivity of access to public reserves is contentious. The relationship between the permit-issuing authority and the permit holder is exclusionary to fair trade. Inhabitants local to the area may well perceive their exclusion from their cultural heritage as usurpatory, especially if permit-holders derive income privilege from restricted entry.
When I read the article I was reminded of the seemingly senseless destruction of the Dig Tree, made famous through the ill-fated 1860 Burke & Wills expedition. I must confess that when I heard of this incident of alleged vandalism, Innaminka sprang to mind and the beauty of the approach through the Strezlecki Desert. Nevertheless, there are those amongst us, thankfully small in number, who deliberately damage or destroy heritage as an expression of will.
I have previously written about the Disposal of Our Heritage, but much of my concern reflects the likelihood of collateral damage inflicted against the state and its Parks and Wildlife Service in particular.
It is very frustrating that the environmental mandates and functions of government land management agencies are not considered business activites, as they are relieved of the need to conform with competitive neutrality and fair trade. A national overhaul of environmental compliance is urgently required to protect our heritage from these aggravating practices. Our greatest defense, in the meantime, is the residential vigilance of local people and the importance of protecting that which sustains them, now and hopefully into the future.
Jennifer Marohasy BSc PhD is a critical thinker with expertise in the scientific method.
Tough, senstive problem, Neil. A lot of country people have been alienated by Conservation agency and Parks Management conduct/strategies. Backlash is a problem, and a few can do a lot of damage.
If items of cultural or scientific significance are on private land, they are actally under stronger protection. This is why I have been concerned for a long time with the grab for national parks and reserves – often under the justification that said areas contain items of conservation significance.
I am in in 2 minds on the subject, behind us we had all these abo(riginal) rock carvings of whales etc. Then some kids, young and old, came in and chucked wheelies on MX bikes on the carvings, breaking them up.
You could call them vandals.
But what is the issue here?
Should works of antiquity be given precededence over contemporary life?
Truth is, these carvings were in sandstone, which has a limited life anyway. And their previous relevaance has long gone.
Roll on to contemporaray times, whole societies have been physically obliterated yet they rebuilt and are stronger today.
Heritage should be more a belief not an artifact
The extensive damage done to areas now classed as national parks is insurmountable.
Conservation and Parks management is a joke – there is no conservation or management in national parks in Victoria.
800 year old trees were wiped out in last Summer’s bushfires which were fuelled by dead wood, blackberries and other noxious weeds flourishing,former grassy plains are choked with scrubby undergrowth forcing native fauna further afield for grazing food.
Now that Parks Vic have taken over areas formally managed by DSE,including state forests,things will only become worse,as they are a law unto themselves.