24000 aboriginal artefacts at Randwick

110 views
Skip to first unread message

Gary Vines

unread,
Jul 28, 2017, 10:18:04 PM7/28/17
to OzArch
from Radio 2ser Breakfast :6:00am 20th Mar 2017 http://2ser.com/one-year-whats-happened-randwick-aboriginal-artifact-find/

"Is Aboriginal Heritage being recognised correctly? April last year, on the corner of Alison Road and Doncaster Avenue Randwick, roughly 24,000 indigenous artefacts were discovered on the construction Sydney’s Light Rail. Nic was joined with Greens MP David Shoebridge and CEO of Tocomwall Scott Franks from the Wonnarua Nation to discuss what has happened to the discovery and and how decisions on Aboriginal Heritage sites are made."

A few interesting comments:
  • The artefacts are under a care and control permit held by GML and locked away in their offices.
  • Axiona declined access to the Aboriginal community group Tocomwall.
  • No other artefacts sites have been found along the Light Rail works.
  • The minister is not satisfied it is a significant archaeological area.
  • The right to say what happens to Aboriginal Heritage is disputed by competing Aboriginal organisations: "most of these people wouldn't know a stone axe if they were hit in the side of the head with it"
Does anyone on this list have a mole in GML who knows the status of th ematerial - ie. have they worked out if it is all artefactual?

john...@ozemail.com.au

unread,
Jul 28, 2017, 10:27:50 PM7/28/17
to oza...@googlegroups.com

 

 

Thanks Gary,

 

This is all MOST interesting.

But re the bit "The minister is not satisfied it is a significant archaeological area" where on earth does that come from?   Because my own finding/conclusion on the matter has to date been that the Minister knew absolutely nothing (or else was just not looking at what he is sent about it all?).

And re moles, unfortunately I would not know a mole from a wombat.

However, you will like this .. I was yesterday contacted (at last) by RandyKitty.

 

Cheers,

 

John Byrnes

(Sydney geologist)


----- Original Message -----

To:
"OzArch" <oza...@googlegroups.com>
Cc:

Sent:
Fri, 28 Jul 2017 19:18:04 -0700 (PDT)
Subject:
{OzArch} 24000 aboriginal artefacts at Randwick
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "OzArch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to ozarch+un...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to oza...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/ozarch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Richard Wright

unread,
Jul 28, 2017, 10:56:19 PM7/28/17
to oza...@googlegroups.com
Has anybody with expertise in lithics been asked to give an opinion?

I was not asked to give an opinion on the basic question - are the stones Aboriginal artefacts? Or can they be explained as fractured ballast, or whatever.

I think the critical question here is whether there are quantities of flakes with striking platforms, and with scars on their dorsal surfaces where other flakes were struck off previously.

If the answer is 'no' then analysis is no more advanced than the time of the controversy that was generated by Dr. Gallus at Koonalda Cave in the mid 1960s.

I believe that GML should hold an occasion when experts are invited to have a look at representative samples of the stones.

If GML does not do that, or are legally unable to do that, then the matter is farcical and suitable for a future episode of the ABC's Utopia.

Richard Wright

At 12:18 29/07/2017, you wrote:
from Radio 2ser Breakfast :6:00am 20th Mar 2017 http://2ser.com/one-year-whats-happened-randwick-aboriginal-artifact-find/

"Is Aboriginal Heritage being recognised correctly? April last year, on the corner of Alison Road and Doncaster Avenue Randwick, roughly 24,000 indigenous artefacts were discovered on the construction Sydney’s Light Rail. Nic was joined with Greens MP David Shoebridge and CEO of Tocomwall Scott Franks from the Wonnarua Nation to discuss what has happened to the discovery and and how decisions on Aboriginal Heritage sites are made."


A few interesting comments:
  • The artefacts are under a care and control permit held by GML and locked away in their offices.
  • Axiona declined access to the Aboriginal community group Tocomwall.
  • No other artefacts sites have been found along the Light Rail works.
  • The minister is not satisfied it is a significant archaeological area.
  • The right to say what happens to Aboriginal Heritage is disputed by competing Aboriginal organisations: "most of these people wouldn't know a stone axe if they were hit in the side of the head with it"
Does anyone on this list have a mole in GML who knows the status of th ematerial - ie. have they worked out if it is all artefactual?

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "OzArch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to ozarch+un...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to oza...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/ozarch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

******************************************************
Richard Wright
42A Llewellyn Street
Oatley
NSW 2223
Australia

Phone: 0417292582
*******************************************************


Virus-free. www.avast.com

john...@ozemail.com.au

unread,
Jul 28, 2017, 11:48:17 PM7/28/17
to oza...@googlegroups.com

 

Hello Richard,

 

Some opinions were offered .. but there appeared to be zero interest apparent in having such opinions .. as best I could judge.

An interesting thing to spring up as an aside from all the discussion this generated (e.g. like about other places with thousands of artefacts around Sydney) was for me that Aboriginal (Darug) elder .. 'uncle'  Colin ... told me that many years ago just a little bit (from his verbal description) southwest of Camellia railway station he had seen what must have been "hundreds if not thousands" of artefacts/flakes over a very small area, in which there were at least two patches where the "artefacts were so dense as to be almost touching".

Knowing that interesting bit of info, at least four of us have (separately) on different occasions now poked all around there ... and found absolutely zilch of interest (a few fragments of porcelain maybe ... and one of us did find a bit of possible "artefact" but ... oops, it had concrete adhering to the back or it, so was discounted).

That said, the spot is nonetheless still somewhat unusual/curious.    There is a small gentle amphitheatre depression on the east side of James Ruse Drive between Grand Avenue and Grand Avenue North which I think might be remnant of a small cliff-eroded-bend along former course of Clay Cliff Creek (which has since been shortened and put in canal or pipes).    If so, one might perhaps "imagine" a camping area there being favourable?    Over my years of driving along James Ruse Drive I think I have seen all that area excavated slightly next to the road and re-filled to make a flat parking area.  

So this just remained/remains another little mystery.   But it may be noted that Grand Avenue N was the route of the old tramway that ran between Parramatta and a wharf near Duck River Mouth (because steamers had to put passengers off there - they could not get all the way up to Parramatta - without dredging).    A new Light Rail from Parramatta to Strathfield is planned to re-occupy the same route.

So could the dense concentration of maybe thousands of small angular whitish fragments seen there have been the base of former tramway ballast pile I have wondered.   If so it has to be 'white metal' (metamorphosed sandstone) and I have no knowledge of what that Parramatta tramway actually did use.

The area has been subject of considerable change .. with much more coming (highrise).

The ABC's Utopia sounds like good watching, but I have never seen it.    According to a nice glossy pamphlet put out by Parramatta Council, the whole of the Camellia/Rose Hill or Parra/Duck Rivers peninsula (once a beloved spot for oil refining and manufacturing) will become a new Billions dollar utopia too .. with thousand of new residents able to go in there, and at silverwater etc. along the Parramatta to Strathfield Light Rail route --- a significant part of the Government's overall mega plan of where to put expanding population I believe.   

 

Cheers,  John

 

 

 

 


 


----- Original Message -----

To:
<oza...@googlegroups.com>
Cc:

Sent:
Sat, 29 Jul 2017 12:47:06 +1000
Subject:
Re: {OzArch} 24000 aboriginal artefacts at Randwick

Virus-free. www.avast.com

Iain Stuart

unread,
Jul 28, 2017, 11:48:46 PM7/28/17
to Oz Arch

I think you will find that GML are constrained by their contract. Knowing some of those who work at GML I am sure that they are more than capable of determining what is an Aboriginal object. However to ask their staff to breach contracts is in my view a little irresponsible.

 

Cheers

 

Dr Iain Stuart

 

JCIS Consultants

P.O. Box 2397

Burwood North

NSW 2134

Australia

 

(02) 97010191

Ia...@jcis.net.au

 

Richard Wright

unread,
Jul 29, 2017, 12:07:55 AM7/29/17
to oza...@googlegroups.com
Iain

I'm not asking anybody to breach contracts. I'm commenting on what seems to be the paradigm of a crazy process - from the point of view of the public advancement of knowledge of a taxpayers' funded project.

I realise that for some time heritage legislation, and those administering it, are not always committed to the advancement of knowledge.

Richard
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "OzArch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to ozarch+un...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to oza...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/ozarch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

******************************************************
Richard Wright
42A Llewellyn Street
Oatley
NSW 2223
Australia

Phone: 0417292582
*******************************************************


Virus-free. www.avast.com

Gary Vines

unread,
Jul 29, 2017, 12:20:15 AM7/29/17
to OzArch
If the contract includes staying silent, even if the stones turn out to be railway ballast, then this too would be a little irresponsible.

Shaun Canning

unread,
Jul 29, 2017, 1:20:42 AM7/29/17
to oza...@googlegroups.com
Contracts are contracts - end of story - and to suggest anything but adherence to a legally binding agreement entered into in good faith is asking GML to commit commercial and legal suicide.

GML are (presumably) doing exactly as they are required under the terms of their contracts and/or permits, as any reputable heritage management firm would do.

Regards,

 

Dr Shaun Canning

Managing Director & Principal Heritage Advisor

0400 204 536             shaun....@achm.com.au

 

Australian Cultural Heritage Management

Brisbane | Melbourne | Sydney

1300 724 913                             www.achm.com.au

 

Find me at LinkedIn


On 29 Jul 2017, at 2:21 pm, Gary Vines <garyvi...@gmail.com> wrote:

If the contract includes staying silent, even if the stones turn out to be railway ballast, then this too would be a little irresponsible.

Gary Vines

unread,
Jul 29, 2017, 2:19:40 AM7/29/17
to OzArch

Jeannette Hope

unread,
Jul 29, 2017, 2:39:11 AM7/29/17
to oza...@googlegroups.com

I’ve never had a contract that prevented  consultation with other experts on technical matters, even where there were political confidentially issues. 

 

In fact I’ve regularly  contacted people, mostly other consultants,  and said something like:  You’ve worked in this region or on this material before,  can you have a look at these pictures / items and tell me what you think?   Or, did you come across any similar sites, artefacts in your survey?   In one case it turned out that the localised site I’d recorded was at one end of a linear (ca 1km) site complex  where someone else had recorded the other end.   I’ve had a similar experience with historic sites/ heritage buildings, where feedback from consultants who’ve done previous work in that area has resolved questions.  I’ve also seen a few consulting reports where silly errors were made that could have been avoided by a simple email to check (in some cases, I had been asked to review the report).

 

How common is it for contracts to prevent normal professional communication?   Surely there’s difference  between professional checking and breaking confidentiality?  

 

Jeannette

 


AVG logo

This email has been checked for viruses by AVG antivirus software.
www.avg.com



john...@ozemail.com.au

unread,
Jul 29, 2017, 2:47:56 AM7/29/17
to oza...@googlegroups.com

 

Hello,

 

Re "the specific naming criteria that the GNB requires for the naming of light rail stops" I wasn't aware that the GNB did have any such specific criteria.  

Maybe this is something new with them?

I pretty thoroughly tried to look into GNB specific criteria back when Kiama Council seemed to be strongly trying to get permission to apply a name "Thunda" (cf. thunder) across Bombo Quarry (some think Bombo might be Aboriginal for thunder?).   It seemed that this was happening because one of the Councillors with marketing experience thought Thunda (the name for a cartoon logo which he had invented to go on walking track posts), and which looked remarkably like the American cartoon character Sponge Bob Short Pants, could have the tourists flocking there in even greater numbers than now.

Thankfully, the Sponge Bob Short Pants lookalike idea faded into obscurity down there.  But the full story on just exactly what did the GNB say was never revealed.

Cheers, John

 

 

 

 

 


----- Original Message -----


To:
"OzArch" <oza...@googlegroups.com>
Cc:

Sent:
Fri, 28 Jul 2017 23:19:39 -0700 (PDT)
Subject:
{OzArch} Re: 24000 aboriginal artefacts at Randwick


Gary Vines

unread,
Jul 29, 2017, 3:31:45 AM7/29/17
to OzArch

http://www.sydneylightrail.transport.nsw.gov.au/news/aboriginal-artefacts-randwick-stabling-yard-%E2%80%93-your-questions-answered


June 2017 – update

Around 32,000 stone items were discovered in 2016 at the Randwick Stabling Yard. A Plan of Management has been developed, in conjunction with the four Registered Aboriginal Parties to identify the composition and origin, suitably store and protect the items, and establish the best way to recognise and commemorate this important find.

This Plan of Management also outlines the additional research required, and suggests measures to be implemented to mitigate impacts. It considers cultural mapping to learn more about the materials and their origin, interpretation displays to increase community understanding of Randwick’s rich local Aboriginal history and examines the potential to acknowledge its importance through educational material for local schools and universities.

Under the guidelines established, the stone items are currently being stored with the Heritage Consultants where chemical analysis is being used to accurately determine their composition and origin.

We will continue to work with the Aboriginal groups and the Office of Environment and Heritage to ensure the best outcome for this find and for any others as construction continues along the 12-kilometre light rail route.

Jeannette Hope

unread,
Jul 29, 2017, 4:18:56 AM7/29/17
to oza...@googlegroups.com

Is chemical analysis the first thing you’d do to identify the type of rock? 

 

You could  ask a geologist (or get a couple of opinions) who would recognise  the general rock type (igneous, metamorphic, sedimentary) and, if familiar with Sydney geology, might immediately recognise any likely sources.    

 

You could check the records to find out where road gravel was quarried in the past, and compare samples.  You could compare it to Aboriginal artefacts in the AM, to see if there were any of the same rock type.    You could make some thin sections and look at structure. None of those things immediately  sound like ‘chemical analysis’.

 

Or you could send a picture to your friendly rock advisors in Ohio:   http://geosurvey.ohiodnr.gov/major-topics/rock-identification.

 

My guess is that the reason for the secrecy is that they  know very well that these are not artefacts, but because of  the embarrassment over the initial media reports, they want unarguable proof of the source of the rocks from a road gravel quarry before they say anything else publicly.

 

Jeannette   

 

 

From: oza...@googlegroups.com [mailto:oza...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Gary Vines
Sent: Saturday, 29 July 2017 5:32 PM
To: OzArch
Subject: {OzArch} Re: 24000 aboriginal artefacts at Randwick

 

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "OzArch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to ozarch+un...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to oza...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/ozarch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

john...@ozemail.com.au

unread,
Jul 29, 2017, 5:10:35 AM7/29/17
to oza...@googlegroups.com

 

Hello,

 

Well this is certainly some advance .. from 20 to 22 to 24 and now 32 thousand of them.

But re "where chemical analysis is being used to accurately determine their composition and origin" how will that work exactly?

it will be interesting if it did.   But rocks as light coloured as these looked on TV are often highly siliceous and without a staggering array of major elements, or highly diagnostic trace elements.

Perhaps by chemical analysis they mean XRF and that certainly won't do any harm.

 

Cheers,

 

John

 

~~~

 


 


----- Original Message -----

To:
"OzArch" <oza...@googlegroups.com>
Cc:

Sent:
Sat, 29 Jul 2017 00:31:45 -0700 (PDT)

Subject:
{OzArch} Re: 24000 aboriginal artefacts at Randwick


Gary Vines

unread,
Aug 3, 2017, 7:20:20 AM8/3/17
to oza...@googlegroups.com
Response to my query regarding the Randwick artefacts



Begin forwarded message:

From: CBD Coordination <CBDCoor...@transport.nsw.gov.au>
Date: 3 August 2017 10:40:49 AM AEST
Subject: Your enquiry about the Aboriginal artefacts

Dear Mr Vines
 
Thank you for your interest in the Aboriginal artefacts found at the Randwick stabling yard site.
 
We understand and appreciate your interest in artefacts found along the light rail alignment. All identified artefacts from the site were salvaged and have been temporarily stored in a secure location.
 
Long-term management of the materials will be in consultation with the relevant aboriginal groups. Transport for NSW is committed to appropriate consultation with all relevant parties, when the analysis is complete.
 
Transport for NSW values our Aboriginal heritage and we continue to investigate, in accordance with the relevant management plans, a strategy to manage the artefacts. We will continue working with the Aboriginal representatives to ensure the best outcome, not only for this find, but for any other heritage that may be encountered as construction continues.
 
I am advised that the plan of management is not publicly available, and public access to the artefacts is not permitted at this time.
 
We appreciate your patience with this matter and understand any concern about the time needed to report on the items that were found. You may be assured that publication of the report will be well publicised.
 
Kind regards
Brian Connolly
Transport for NSW
CBD Coordination Office
 


This email (including any attachments) may contain confidential and/or legally privileged information and is intended only to be read or used by the addressee(s). If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender by return email, delete this email and destroy any copy. Any use, distribution, disclosure or copying of this email by a person who is not the intended recipient is not authorised.

Views expressed in this email are those of the individual sender, and are not necessarily the views of Transport for NSW, Department of Transport or any other NSW government agency. Transport for NSW and the Department of Transport assume no liability for any loss, damage or other consequence which may arise from opening or using an email or attachment.
Please visit us at http://www.transport.nsw.gov.au or http://www.transportnsw.info

Dear sir/madam

There has been some discussion among provisional archaeologists regarding the Aboriginal artefacts found at Randwick stabling yard. In particular photos and video of the material have been viewed on the project website and various media, and some archaeologists have noted that the material shown does not necessarily have the appearance of Aboriginal flaked stone artefacts, but could be some other form of broken stone such as crushed rock from gravel fill. I understand the material is held by the archaeological consultants GML, and according to your own web site a plan of management has been developed.

It is understood that commercial and confidentiality issues may be present, but I believe for the sake of good public communication, it is reasonable for the archaeological profession to be able to discuss these matters from an informed position. Therefore I am wondering if it would be possible to either obtain a copy of the plan of management or preferably gain access to examine the material. Or if this is not possible, whether there is someone familiar with the excavated stone material (preferably a GML archaeologist) who would be willing to provide further information.

Regards

Gary Vines

Richard Wright

unread,
Aug 3, 2017, 5:52:36 PM8/3/17
to oza...@googlegroups.com
A fine example of question begging in that letter. It first has to be demonstrated that the stones are Aboriginal artefacts. This has evidently not entered the head of Transport for NSW.

Maybe they are Aboriginal artefacts, but the ring of secrecy surrounding this project makes me wonder.

On another matter - relating to Tocomwall. They released photos to the Fairfax Media.

http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/call-to-halt-sydney-light-rail-after-massive-indigenous-artefact-find-20160329-gnsxr4.html

So how come Tocomwall was not working under a confidentiality agreement?

Richard
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "OzArch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to ozarch+un...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to oza...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/ozarch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

******************************************************

Tony Lowe

unread,
Aug 3, 2017, 8:26:33 PM8/3/17
to oza...@googlegroups.com

 

I agree with Richard.  All because there is rumour that 20,000 pieces of stone have been found, doesn’t mean they are all flaked stone.  Diagnostic analysis in the lab is a necessary stage.

 

The story that this project has some level of confidentiality that other projects don’t is not accurate.  The consultancy firm isn’t out there paying for the work to be done.  They have a client who is paying, who in the Randwick Stabling Yard case happens to be Transport NSW, an official government body.  The client has a right to ask for the analysis of the material to completed, as well as consultation with the relevant Aboriginal groups, before the material is made public.  This seems reasonable.  It also seems to me that Transport NSW is doing the right thing.  They have applied for the necessary permits (presumably for European heritage as well as Aboriginal archaeology), contracting a firm to make the applications as well as to monitor the works, and is now answering questions about the process.  The approvals from the Dept of Environment and Heritage certainly would require a report on the project to be written and certainly would not countenance the project to be carried out in secrecy or not adequately reported on.

 

The desire of persons to know what has been found is natural but sometimes processing of material and consultation takes longer than they would desire.  In the end no consultancy firm would enter into an agreement that forbade them from disclosing an important find from the local Aboriginal groups or from writing a final report.  It would be impossible to obtain a permit to undertake this sort of project with such conditions, especially forbidding consultation with the local Aboriginal Land Council.  Anyway, as could be expected, word of some finds, if possibly quite inaccurate, seems to have gotten out.   

 

Tony Lowe

Casey & Lowe Pty Ltd

T: (02) 9568 5375

M: 0409 988 846

E: tony...@bigpond.com

W: www.caseyandlowe.com.au

 

 

 

 

From: oza...@googlegroups.com [mailto:oza...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Richard Wright


Sent: Friday, 4 August 2017 7:52 AM
To: oza...@googlegroups.com

 

Image removed by sender.

Virus-free. www.avast.com

image001.jpg

Gary Vines

unread,
Aug 4, 2017, 3:16:04 AM8/4/17
to OzArch
I think part of the concern among archaeologists - or at least my own private concern if others don't share it, is that a very substantial claim was made more than 16 months ago about the significance of an Aboriginal site which did not appear to be born out by photographs and video of the material at the time. For example look here. While it might be politically sensitive to question the claim, as Aboriginal community members and opponents to the light rail have used it as an argument that the works should stop or some form of compensation for the destruction should occur, and it might be embarrassing for the parties involved if the initial media turns out to be in error, I think it is reasonable after 16 months to ask for some further evidence of validity of the original claim. 
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages