Introduction
A Cultural Heritage Management Plan was introduced by the Aboriginal Heritage Act 2006 in a bid to conserve the environment and cultural heritage areas amid increased development. According to the Act, a management plan is required if the proposed development is listed as a high-impact activity resulting in significant ground disturbance and if the activity is happening in a sensitive area of cultural heritage which has not been significantly disturbed earlier.
Aboriginal parties comprising of guardians, keepers, knowledge holders of the aboriginal cultural heritage were given the responsibility of vetting developments and advising on issues concerning their cultural heritage. A plan taking into consideration the expected environmental impact of the development as well as the measures taken to minimize the impact of the project has to be prepared and vetted by these parties for permits to be issued (Aboriginal Heritage Act 2006, p.36).
A high-impact activity generally comprises buildings and other works that result in significant ground disturbance. These include the construction of three or more houses, subdivisions of three or more lots, developing alpine resorts as well as production of timber. Others include the harvesting of sand or sandstone, searching for stones, and building dams (Department of Planning, par. 4).
Areas of cultural heritage sensitivity on the other hand include declared Ramsar wetlands, ancient lakes, registered cultural heritage places, waterways, coastal land, coastal Crown land, parks, the high plains, Koo Wee Rup Plain, greenstone outcrops, stony rises. It also covers surrounding areas to the sites and whose disturbance development could interfere with the site. (Aboriginal Heritage Act 2006, p23).
About the development proposed by Bruce on his five-hectare farm, several issues come up. First, the developments proposed by Bruce fall in the category of high-impact activities. His wish to build a Bed and Breakfast (B&B) on the eastern side of his house amounts to the development of alpine resorts which is listed as a high-impact activity in the Act. Also, Bruce’s decision has further weaknesses, his intents to subdivide his land into five I acre plots. He is oblivious to the fact that the subdivision of the land into three or more lots surpasses the threshold of being declared a high-impact activity.
Perhaps, more importantly, is the fact that the land is located near Bakers Creek. Bakers Creek is the site known to have triggered off the largest peacetime migration in the world in the 19th century due to the discovery of gold. This brought great focus on Victoria by the whole world hence passing as a great cultural heritage site (Castlemaine & Maldon, par. 4)
Considering that Bruce’s land runs along both sides of the Creek and that the developments proposed amount to high-impact activities, Bruce is expected to sponsor a Cultural Heritage Management Plan to perform either of the activities as required by the Act.
Mount Alexander Shire Council’s planning scheme
Various studies have been done on various heritage sites and several recommendations and proposals are offered. Under the Castlemaine Residential strategy 2005, the land within the Low-Density Residential Zone (LDRZ) was to be expanded to protect the low density, semi-urban, as well as bushland nature of these areas. Areas within the LDRZ have limitations as to the minimum size of sub-divisions allowed (4000m2) and the developments allowed (Mount Alexander, par. 6). In addition, making a developmental decision in Mount Alexander Shire Council calls for an analysis of the overall council objectives. Development does not only take into account the individual’s interests. It must consider the cultural, strategic, and natural contexts of the area in question.
Before making his decision, Bruce must ensure that he abides by the specifications in the planning scheme. Bruce’s property is within these areas and hence the building of B&B accommodation is not permitted Under the Mount Alexander Shire Council’s planning scheme to protect the natural vegetation. By building the B&B, he will have failed to consider the natural environment which consists of the spiky lace orchids that are considered among the threatened species by the Environment Protection & Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999. Still, the subdivision of the land into 5 lots of 1 hectare is way below the minimum size of 4000m2 for every unit hence he is not permitted to subdivide. If he goes ahead with his proposed plan, he is likely to face appropriate punishment by the law.
About the building of a 1*1 meter signpost, more information is needed to ascertain whether this will harm the existing vegetation or not.
The Environment Protection & Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999
The Environment Protection & Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act) is the Australian government’s central piece of legislation in matters concerning the environment. It offers legal protection to important plant and animal species as well as matters of national environmental significance (Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act). This shows one drawback in Bruce’s proposed plans. His plans fail to conserve and protect important plants that are considered threatened.
The Environment Protection & Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act) relates to the protection of the environment and biodiversity as well as other related issues. Its main objectives are to protect the environment, especially the aspects that relate to matters of national environmental importance, promote ecologically sustainable development via sustainable utilization of natural resources and promoting conservation of heritage, biodiversity as well as a cooperative approach to the protection and management of the environment involving the government and other stakeholders among others (Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act,1999 ).
In chapter 2 of the EPBC Act emphasis is on environmental conservation in terms of requirements for environmental approvals. The minister is given powers to decide whether an action likely to harm the environment should be permitted or not. No one can take an action without the minister approving or even decide whether approval is needed except in a few cases such as those involving a bilateral agreement between the commonwealth and the state or territory in which the action is happening as well as those actions taken following Regional Forest Agreements (Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act, 1999).
Bruce’s proposal will negatively impact the environment. If he goes ahead with his plan then he will have to destroy the spiky laced orchids which are classified as threatened. His actions will therefore be in controversy with the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act.
Chapter 3 focuses on the control of activities that significantly impact declared world Heritage Property. No one is allowed to take action that can cause a significant impact on the world heritage values of a declared World Heritage Property or that will affect the values of the declared World Heritage Property. Failure to adhere attracts penalties ranging from 5000 for individuals to 5000 for corporate. Barker’s Creek is considered among the world heritage property. Bruce’s propositions will therefore be unacceptable. Should he go ahead with his proposed plans, he will have to face the stipulated penalty of at least 5000.
There however exists some listed threatened species and communities. The act stipulates that any action with a significant impact on listed threatened species or communities without approval is prohibited. Due to the presence of the remnant vegetation called the spiky lace orchid listed as a threatened species under the act, Bruce’s proposed development has to be submitted to the minister for approval. Failure to adhere also attracts penalties same as those stipulated above (Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act, 1999).
As can be observed the legislations are very similar in terms of intent and scope. Both the Aboriginal Heritage Act 2006 as well as the EPBC Act 2009 converges at a common ground in the protection of heritage sites. The Mount Alexander Shire Council’s planning scheme and the two acts also converge at a common ground in controlling the exploitation and degradation of the environment. Unfortunately, Bruce’s proposed development plans are contravening almost all of them.
He is engaging in high impact activities that are prohibited in the region, he is planning to subdivide the land into more than three plots which is also a contravention of the laws covering his region, he is about to alter the natural environment and finally destroy the spiky laced orchids which are among the threatened species. This points out that the minister will not give Bruce the ok to go ahead with his plans.
Works Cited
Aboriginal Heritage Act 2006. “Victorian Consolidated Legislation.” 2006. Web.
Castlemaine & Maldon. “Bakers Creek.” 2009. Web.
Department of Planning and Community Development. “When will a Cultural Heritage Management Plan be Required?” 2006. Web.
Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999. “Commonwealth Consolidated Acts.” Web.
Mount Alexander. “Residential strategy.” 2004. Web.