2013 Green Steps Project Report
“Develop some materials suitable for a case study into an
element of sustainable practice in agriculture.”
Project Dates:
3rd – 21st February 2014
Organisation:
Charles Sturt University (Wagga Wagga Campus)
Department:
School of Agricultural & Wine Sciences
Supervisor:
Caroline Love
Lecturer
(02) 6933 2202
clove@csu.edu.au
Student:
Chloe Roberts
0427 688 812
chloeroberts_5@hotmail.com
Submitted:
1st March 2014
Executive Summary
My Green Steps project resulted in extensive research, and the writing of a draft
module, for the subject AGR202 Food, Environment and Culture run by the School of
Agricultural and Wine Sciences at Charles Sturt University. The module seeks to
explore the history of Indigenous Land Management practices and how they could
potentially be implemented in broad acre farming in Australia into the future, to
achieve greater sustainability.
After completing this module, students should be able to communicate, in a
professionally appropriate style, about Indigenous Land Management practices and
their integration into contemporary agriculture, by considering multiple perspectives
to arrive at a justified viewpoint.
Introduction
Charles Sturt University (CSU) was formally established in 1989, after a number of
regional institutions in south-western and western New South Wales merged.
However, the university’s history dates back to 1895 with the establishment of the
Bathurst Experimental Farm and Wagga Wagga campus soon after, taking on its first
students in October 1896. For over 100 years, the university has been offering
vocational agricultural education and today, the university is still known for its quality
agricultural courses that focus on the practical issues facing agriculture, producers,
agribusiness and the environment.
Charles Sturt University established CSU Green under the CSU Strategy 2011-2015,
as part of the university’s commitment to sustainability. At present, the university is
continually working on their Sustainability Enabling Plan 2011-2015 and has
affirmed its commitment to the cause by signing the Talloires Declaration alongside
over 350 universities around the world. In an attempt to make CSU more sustainable
and encourage staff and students to be engaged in this process, CSU Green has set a
number of targets, focusing in particular on a reduction in energy and water usage, the
movement towards carbon neutrality and embedding education for sustainability into
curriculum across the University to meet the Graduate Learning Outcomes (GLOs).
To assist in reaching these targets, sustainability projects are developed by various
departments within the university, in conjunction with CSU Green. These are then
offered to Green Steps students whose role is to research and develop strategies that
can be implemented by these departments, to contribute to the achievement of the
CSU’s sustainability goals.
The School of Agricultural and Wine Sciences at Charles Sturt University is the
largest and most successful provider of agricultural, horticultural and wine science
education in Australia. As part of their newly developed Bachelor of Agricultural
Science course, the subject AGR202 Food, Environment & Culture will be offered to
students. This subject will aim to give students a greater knowledge and
understanding of sustainability, culture and ethics associated with modern agricultural
production complimenting the requirement of the Sustainability GLO. By the
completion of the subject, students will be able to communicate, in a professionally
appropriate style, about contemporary agricultural challenges by considering multiple
perspectives to arrive at a justified viewpoint. My Green Steps project is based around
developing some of the course material for this subject.
On-campus Project Aims
The aim of my on-campus project is to develop some course materials suitable for a
case study into the history of agricultural development in Australia from the
perspective of Indigenous Australian peoples.
The project will seek to explore:
a. The historical impact of the values and beliefs of Indigenous Australians on
the Australian landscape, and
b. The potential for cultural inclusivity for the future of sustainable agricultural
practice.
ii
The project will address both Australia as a whole and the Riverina region of New
South Wales more specifically, as it is local to where AGR202 will primarily be
delivered.
iii
AGR202
Principles of Indigenous Land Management
FACULTY OF AGRICULTURAL & WINE SCIENCES
Module 1
201160
Principles of Indigenous Land Management
AGR202 Module 1
Indigenous land management: history,
contemporary issues, definitions, themes and
comparisons
Faculty of Agricultural & Wine Sciences
Written and compiled by
Chloe Roberts
ii
Table of Contents
INTRODUCTION AND GENERAL FOCUS
1
TOPIC 1 A HISTORY OF INDIGENOUS AUSTRALIANS AND THEIR
‘MANAGEMENT’ OF THE LAND
3
TOPIC 2 TRADITIONAL VS CONTEMPORARY LAND MANAGEMENT
AND THE POTENTIAL FOR THEIR INTEGRATION
8
iii
AGR202 Module 1
Introduction and general focus
What is Indigenous Land Management? Does it refer to Indigenous people managing
land or the management of Indigenous Land? Are we talking about ‘traditional’
Indigenous land management techniques, modern techniques or a combination of
both? Did Indigenous people ‘manage’ the land purposefully; similar to the way we
manage our land today?
By the end of Module 1 you should have a sound understanding of the history of
Indigenous Land Management, what it involves, and most importantly, how it might
be able to assist in the sustainability of modern agriculture.
…
Indigenous peoples have occupied the Australia/Torres Strait Island region for what is
estimated to have been the past 40,000 years and perhaps even longer. The past two
hundred years of colonial Australia is inconsequential in comparison, which surely
indicates that Indigenous Australians have a lot to offer in the way of their knowledge
of the land. However, despite the extensive research that has been carried out to
determine what Indigenous Land Management involved and to what extent it was
carried out, the fact still remains unclear.
There are many resources that exist nowadays which discuss various aspects of
Indigenous Land Management; journals, government policy papers, books and
multimedia productions. Not surprisingly, considerable controversy exists. Unlike
standard disciplines such as anthropology, botany, ecology and sociology, the science
of Indigenous Land Management is open to interpretation. As a result, it is not a
neatly defined area of study, varying on all cultural, political, social, economic and
environmental levels.
By this stage, you may be tempted to question why Indigenous Land Management is
so important to contemporary agriculture and the reasons behind its inclusion in the
subject AGR202 Food, Environment and Culture. The following excerpt may assist in
clarification:
Indigenous land and sea management, also referred to as ‘caring for country’,
includes a wide range of environmental, natural resource and cultural heritage
management activities undertaken by individuals, groups and organisations across
Australia for customary, community, conservation and commercial reasons. These
activities have their origins in the holistic relationships between traditional
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander societies and their customary land and sea
estates – or ‘country’ – that have evolved over at least 50 000 years. Increasing
formal involvement of Indigenous peoples was highlighted in the 2011 Australia –
state of the environment report as one of four standout trends in environmental
management over the past decade. These formal roles mean Indigenous land
management (ILM) requires cross-cultural engagement with non-Indigenous land
management and managers.
(Hill et al., 2013)
1
AGR202 Module 1
Although an extensive amount of Indigenous Land Management activities have being
carried out in recent years, there still appears to be a division between the traditional
ecological perspective of native people and the western scientific perspective. As a
result, Indigenous culture is slowly becoming extinct, as discussed by Knudston &
Suzuki (1992):
Their very survival has depended upon their ecological awareness and adaptation 
These communities are the repositories of vast accumulations of traditional
knowledge and experience that links humanity with its ancient origins. Their
disappearance is a loss for the larger society, which could learn a great deal from
their traditional skills in sustainably managing very complex ecological systems. It
is a terrible irony that as formal development reaches more deeply into rain forest,
deserts and other isolated environments, it tends to destroy the only cultures that
have proved able to thrive in these environments.
(Knudtson & Suzuki, 1992, p. 18)
Furthermore, despite the value of traditional environmental knowledge and
management practices, it is still difficult for some professionals to accept that they
have anything to learn from rural people, or to recognise that there is a parallel system
of knowledge to their own which is complimentary (Johannes, 1989). Hopefully, with
further education, there is a growing acceptance and reflection on the past repository
for traditional knowledge.
Before we delve further into Indigenous Land Management and broadly consider the
points of view of stakeholders, you might pause to record your understanding of the
topic and what you currently associate with Indigenous Land Management practices.
___________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________
References
Hill, R., Pert, P.L., Davies, J., Robinson, C.J., Walsh, F., & Falco-Mammone, F.
(2013). Indigenous Land Management in Australia: Extent, scope, diversity,
barriers and success factors. Cairns: CSIRO Ecosystem Sciences.
Johannes, R.E. (1989). Traditional ecological knowledge: a collection of essays.
IUCN.
Knudtson, P., & Suzuki, D. (1992). A personal foreword: The value of native
ecologies. In Wisdom of the elders (pp. xxi-xxxv). Sydney: Allen & Unwin.
2
AGR202 Module 1
Topic 1 A history of Indigenous Australians and their
‘management’ of the land
In the past, there has been the view that, prior to 1788, Aboriginals were ‘backwards’
and uncivilised, and that they were a people who ‘trod lightly on the ground’ as a
minor component of the ecosystem. However, in recent years this notion has been
challenged, suggesting that our pre-conceived idea about the Indigenous people of
this land could not be further from the truth.
Prior to European settlement, the Australian landscape appeared to be much like a
mosaic of plant communities which all served a purpose in the Indigenous
community. Indigenous Australians valued the association between food, water and
shelter and managed the land accordingly. Land care was a major purpose in life for
Aboriginal people and although their approach was entirely sustainable, they were
actively intervening in the landscape. As a result, the most intensive and extensive
land management in the world occurred here in Australia, prior to 1788.
There was an abundance of grasslands, favoured by Indigenous Australians for the
food it provided to their population. This included plant components such as bulbs,
tubers and yams, along with the animals that grazed in these areas. They also
favoured these areas for their ease of travel and establishment of campsites. The
grasslands were broken up with scattered open forest and dense bushland, serving as a
habitat for the native animal population. These ‘belts’ of forest and grassland were
arranged in what can be though of as a giant trap.
The belts often stretched from a steep incline down into valleys to the waters edge.
Indigenous peoples were then able to burn the grasslands to encourage new plant
growth, which in turn encouraged animals, such as kangaroos, to flock to the area.
The Aboriginals could easily camouflage themselves in the adjacent bushlands and
ambush any animals that were grazing nearby. If the animals were to flee, they would
either run into the incline, slowing them down significantly, or to waters edge. Early
European settlers made the observation that the Indigenous people of Australia
appeared to have a lot of recreational time. We now know this was because they knew
where their resources were (plant populations and therefore animals) making their
food and shelter both predictable and convenient.
Upon European settlement, explorers believed Australia to be a vast wilderness and
which lead to the infamous ‘Terra Nullius’. They believed that what they saw were
naturally occurring parks, much like what they cultivated in their homeland, which
were greatly suited to grazing, leading to the sharp increase in domestic and feral
livestock numbers in the years post-European settlement. Early accounts from Captain
Cook onwards all use the same expression, upon seeing the landscape – “it looks like
an English gentleman’s park”. Even the arid inland (desert) was described by early
travellers, including Sturt and Stewart, in much the same way. What these explorers
didn’t realise was that native flora and fauna was carefully managed by the people
who had frequented the land for at least tens of thousands of years before.
Furthermore, as a result of these land management practices, Indigenous Australians,
over a period of time, successfully domesticated the whole continent.
3
AGR202 Module 1
How Aboriginals ‘managed’ the land
Aboriginal Australians carried out a number of activities, including damming creeks
to create natural watering holes for their own use as well as to attract animals to the
area, which incidentally resulted in a change in Australian landscape. However, more
intentional was their use of fire. Fire was considered to be both a totem and ally for
Aboriginal Australians, and was an important part of their culture. They had an
intense knowledge of how to use fire and this was to their advantage. They could
predict where it would go, how long it would burn for, when and where it would burn
out and how hot it would be. They could then adjust their timing and placement of the
fire accordingly to achieve the desired result.
Fire was used as a tool to reshape vegetation, much like bulldozers today. Over 100s
of years Aboriginal Australians were able to remove forest in some areas and build
forest in others through their use of fire. Fire was used to promote the growth of
valued plants, with plant species unable to survive fire declining in numbers, and
more resistant species, such as grass trees, eucalypts and acacias, dominating.
Aboriginal peoples could also use fire to drive animals out into open grasslands from
dense scrub making it easier to salvage food. This Indigenous Land Management is
now broadly referred to as ‘fire-stick farming’.
Biodiversity and an abundance of land were assets of the Indigenous population and
both have been significantly reduced in the past 200 years. Aboriginals had the ability
to inhabit other areas from that where they burned and hunted due to their limited
population. Essentially, what existed in 1788 was a designed and managed landscape
optimised to support an abundant and organised hunter-gatherer lifestyle or mobile
farming scenario.
Examples of land management with fire in the Riverina
The first Europeans to arrive in the Riverina region described rich grassland but now
these areas are known to be areas of dense forest. If we use the Eucalypt as an
example, we know that the Eucalypt will re-sprout after a bushfire event. However,
this native tree species had clearly not existed in this area when Europeans arrived so
bushfire could not have been the reason for its absence. The only logical answer is the
repeated, careful and very precise use of fire, which burnt off seedlings, saplings and
left grassland.
Other evidence of this intense land management by fire can be found in literature,
anthropology and ecology and the native plants themselves. Around 70% of
Australian plants tolerate or need fire for their survival. An understanding of how
plants respond to fire can tell you how plant populations came about, where fire
events has occurred and who had been responsible for these events, reaffirming the
involvement of Indigenous Australians.
Severe bushfire
Today, severe bushfires are a regular occurrence, that often result in disaster for
affected communities. It is reasonable to assume that if Indigenous Australians had
experienced fires of the same intensity they wouldn’t have survived. Yet, we know
4
AGR202 Module 1
the opposite to be true and as a result it is reasonable to assume that these bushfire
events did not occur. But why?
Fuel control was an integral part of bushfire management for Indigenous peoples.
Aboriginals burnt fuel and created clearings in dense forest and bushland areas during
winter and into spring before environmental conditions became too hot and dry to
ensure its safety. This technique is referred to as ‘cold burning’. Cold burning meant
that the amount of fuel available to carry fires was broken up into patches, and in
occupied areas fires could be contained. Fuel was not able to accumulate to a point
that it became devastating.
After 1788, it didn’t take long for the Australian landscape to change and become
overgrown, with paintings in the early 1800s depicting an abundance of densely
populated forest areas as opposed to very few trees shown in paintings of the late
1700s. This ultimately led to the occurrence of the extensive wildfires of the past 200
years, particularly from the 1920s onwards. It is only in recent years that fire has been
used as a preventative measure, diminishing the occurrence of such widespread fires
and restricting the amount of damage in the event that they do occur.
Critics
The information presented thus far is sourced from research conducted by Bill
Gammage, author of The Biggest Estate on Earth (Gammage, 2011). The book has
won numerous awards, including the Prize for Australian History in the 2012 Prime
Minister’s Literary Awards, but it is not without its critics.
One such critic is Timothy Neale, PHD student from the University of Melbourne. He
claims that the text is eccentric, with little scientific substance. In his literature
review, Neale says that Gammage‘s text does not rely at any point on Aboriginal
academics or oral traditions, with his three main sources being (white) depictions in
writing and art of ‘land before the Europeans changed it’, anthropological accounts of
Aboriginal societies 'today’, and readings of 'what plants tell' about their history and
place (Neale, 2012). Neale (2012) makes the point that The Biggest Estate on Earth
(2011) does not examine any case studies about how indigenous language groups
integrated into a management regime over a specific area. Instead, it creates a uniform
theo-juridical system out of resemblances between historically and geographically
unrelated anthropological observations (Neale, 2012). Neale (2012) concludes by
saying that the author's intent is to present 'a tsunami of evidence' that, overwhelming
the reader, attempts to thereby patch the gaps of each respective source.
Furthering Neale’s arguments, bushfire specialist, Roger Underwood, suggests in his
review of The Biggest Estate on Earth (2011) that Gammage under-rates the
importance of soil type and fertility on vegetation type and structure and that it is
unreasonable to suggest that Australia’s landscape in 1788 was shaped solely by fire.
For example, Gammage (2011) attributes patterns in Jarrah forest to Aboriginal
burning, but Underwood (2012) argues that they are the result of a combination of
drought and shallow soils over massive granite.
Another publication that draws from an extensive collection of early European
records, although fragmentary and sometimes of questionable reliability, is Ron
5
AGR202 Module 1
Hateley’s The Victorian Bush: Its ‘Original and Natural’ Condition (2010). It is
particularly focused on the ecological effects of fire with the concept of ‘fire-stick
farming’ discussed in some detail. However, like Underwood (2012), this publication
contrasts Gammage’s The Biggest Estate on Earth (2011) finding no evidence for preEuropean Aboriginal burning of Victoria’s mountain forests. Instead, Hateley (2010)
argues that these forests appear to have been mainly shaped by drought, fires caused
by lightening, winds, hailstorms, snowstorms – in other words extreme weather
events – and by medium-term climatic cycles (Maroske, 2011).
Currently, practices of burning and thinning forests, eliminating dodder laurel and
mistletoe from forest trees and planting trees to reduce salinity on previously treeless
plains are all based on widely held claims including that:




Devastating wildfires occurred because we had not maintained Aboriginal
burning practices in forests,
Forests had thickened since European settlement, that
Dryland salinity had increased dramatically since settlement as a result of tree
clearing, and
Poor management had resulted in massive infestations of mistletoe and
parasites that killed trees (Maroske, 2011).
Hateley (2010) challenges these widely adopted ideas that underpin our current land
management practices prompting discussions about current land management
practices, particularly those local to Victoria. Today, there are still many academics
that who deny that Aboriginal people ever lit anything much other than a campfire;
who are supported by environmentalists who believe that fuel reduction burning
destroys biodiversity and does not help fire control. However, the idea that
Indigenous Australians used fire to manage and optimise land use has been presented
countless times over the past 50 years by many a pre-historian, anthropologist,
ecologist, silviculturist and forester (Underwood, 2012).
After assessing the above information, it seems reasonable to assume that Aborigines
observed the impact of naturally occurring fires over a period of time which, given the
evidence, eventually resulted in their use of fire as a tool to achieve short-term
outcomes. This included the creation of favourable habitats for herbivores and
increasing local abundance of food plants. Whether Aborigines actually possessed a
predictive ecological knowledge of the long-term consequences of their fire use is
likely to remain unclear (Bowman, 1998).
You might take time now to consolidate your thoughts by making some short notes
about the various perspectives presented thus far, detailing whether or not all of the
writers and researchers arrived at similar conclusions and noting controversies and
reservations about some of the claims made about Indigenous Land Management
practices. You might also like to include your own interpretation of the information
and details of any other further reading you have undertaken as a result.
___________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________
6
AGR202 Module 1
___________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________
Note:
‘Firestickfarming’ in Gostin and Chong (1994) Living Wisdom:
Aborigines and the Environment, also provides a good one page
summary of Indigenous ‘management’ practices.
Definitions
Fire-stick farming: the indispensible use of fire as a tool in traditional Aboriginal
economies; the use of fire by aborigines to arrange the biological furniture to suit their
needs; the systematic and predictive ecological knowledge of the consequences of
fire-use (Bowman, 1998). Systematic and deliberate seasonal burning practiced by
Aboriginal people as a form of land management (Gostin & Chong, 1994).
References
Bowman, D.M.J.S. (1998). The impact of Aboriginal landscape burning on the
Australian biota. New Phytologist, 140(3), 385-410. doi: 10.1111/j.14698137.1998.00289.x
Gammage, Bill. (2011). The biggest estate on earth. Melbourne: Allen and Unwin.
Gostin, O., Chong, A. (1994). Living wisdom: Aborigines and the environment.
Aboriginal Australia University of Queensland Press, 123-139.
Hateley, Ron. (2013). The Victorian Bush: its ‘Original and Natural’ Condition
Ecological Management & Restoration, 14(2), 10-11. doi: 10.1111/emr.12042
Maroske, S. (2011). Reviews. Historical Records of Australian Science, 22(2), 304316. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1071/HR11013
Neale, Timothy. (2012). The biggest estate on earth [Book Review]. Arena Magazine,
116, 51-52. VIC: Fitzroy.
Underwood, Roger. (2012). The Biggest Estate on Earth and Burning Issues [Book
Review]. Retrieved from:
http://aefweb.info/data/Book%20Review%20Gammage%20and%20Adams%
20and%20Attiwill.pdf
7
AGR202 Module 1
Topic 2
Traditional vs contemporary land
management and the potential for their
integration
Since 1788, careless farming practices, deforestation, over-fertilising, the practice of
monoculture and over-stocking has resulted in land degradation and soil erosion
across Australia, indicating major environmental mismanagement. It is only in recent
years that landholders and managers have turned to traditional land management
practices as a means of combining indigenous knowledge and land care practices with
the management skills and technical know-how of non-Indigenous Australians
(Gostin & Chong, 1994). Although Indigenous knowledge alone is inadequate to
address this degradation and to restore degraded resources, it is still a valuable tool in
achieving sustainable land management (Baker, Davies, & Young, 2001).
Before we go any further, it is valuable to understand the motivation behind
indigenous land management techniques so as to establish the integrity of such
practices. It is also important to realise that despite the development and misuse of
land in recent years, Indigenous ancestral rights and complex spiritual links remain.
Religion and Indigenous rituals for the land
Throughout Australia, the group claiming ownership of the land is known as the
patrilineal clan. The patrilineal clan is those descendants in the male line from a
common ancestor who had direct links with the creative ancestors. The creative
ancestors are thought to still abide in the land, take interest in the affairs of people and
maintain the fertility and productivity of the land. In the past, men and women within
each clan had particular links with different totemic sites through their conception
totems and totemic affiliations that they acquired through their clan, sex and social
status. These sites were shared with other people who had the same totem, including
those outside their own clan, and with natural species that are traced to the totemic
spirit. These totemic links imposed both spiritual and natural rights and
responsibilities, including caring for and carrying out rituals for their totems and
totemic sites as well as caring for and fostering the land and the natural species
associated with their totem site. This network of interest in the land ensured that it
was cared for properly at all times. Even if a patrilineal clan should be left with no
male or female members to care of clans lands, those with a spiritual link to the land
and those with managerial rights over the land would see that ownership was passed
to a group with the best claim to the land ensuring no land was left unserved or
uncared for.
The primary obligation for owners and managers of the land was to see that religious
ceremonies or rituals were carried out when they were required to be and that they
were performed in such as way as to produce the desired effect. One such ritual
sought to maintain and increase the supply of a species of plant or animal associated
with the spirit at a particular site. The importance of this ritual, in addition to specific
methods of associated land and resource management, are detailed in the following
account of Yolngu practices given by Williams (1986):
8
AGR202 Module 1
For the Yolngu, conservation of resources is a conscious concern. Moreover, certain
harvesting practices include conservation techniques. For example, women dig some
varieties of yams in such a way that a portion which will regenerate is left in the ground.
Certain techniques of trapping fish involve provision for live storage and release of fish
not needed for immediate consumption. Moreover, men insist that the toxic substances
used to stun fish in one technique of fishing do not affect the immature stock. Land
owners and their waku and gutharra may impose restrictions on the extraction of certain
mineral deposits used for ritual decoration. I was told for example that leaders in control
of one unusually rich yellow ochre quarry became concerned because mining the ochre
was increasing the effect of natural erosion. The religious significance of the site gave
additional cause for concern and the leaders decided to prohibit further mining lest the
deposit be completely exhausted. Finally, Yolngu men have told me that their techniques
for cooling the meat of a large animal where it was killed, for carrying and storing it, and
for reheating before it is eaten, are intended to prevent waste.
Rotation in use of base camps, two to four years of more or less continuous occupation
followed by a comparable period of non-occupation as discussed in Chapter 5 is, I was
told, a means of allowing the natural species in the surrounding area to regenerate and
the winds and rains to clean the site.
Fire technology in northeastern Arnhem Land is governed by a range of practices that
maintain the environment at levels of maximum productivity, similar to those reported in
other areas of Aboriginal Australia. Only recently, however, have systematic and detailed
studies of burning been undertaken. Yolngu anticipate that one result of the burning that
is a part of the ritual purification of land after a death is economic benefit. At present,
Yolngu infrequently use burning as a technique to aid hunting, but when they describe
their use of fire in the past they emphasise precision in planning and direction as well as
the effects of fire in conserving the environment. As reasons for burning off certain
areas, Yolngu also consistently cite making foot travel easier.
The examples I have sketched here do not begin to exhaust the range of resource
conservation measures that Yolngu in northeastern Arnhem Land use. They do
demonstrate the consciousness of Yolngu concern and the principles through which they
implement their concern.
(Williams, 1986, pp. 93-94)
As you can see, an understanding of Indigenous land management techniques rests on
the strength of the religious link between people and land.
An integrated approach
In the past, Indigenous people recognised the great number of ecological variables
that influence population carrying capacity, including rainfall, temperature, sunlight,
soil fertility, plant and animal distribution and growing conditions, and populated
accordingly. Some environments have a natural capacity to support large populations
while others, such as the dry inland deserts, do not, therefore limiting the size of the
local tribe. This ensured maximum efficiency of resource use and although this
intensified over time, they developed techniques for maintaining and regenerating
resources despite the increase in population.
Dissimilarly, the modern mainstream approach to land management is fragmented,
separating land from sea, water from soil and rangeland from coast rather than
integrating all of these elements to create a holistic approach to management of the
Australian landscape. Furthermore, management of the physical aspects of the
environment should be considered along with social and economic activities,
including the needs of the Australian people (Baker et al., 2001). As a result, and as
9
AGR202 Module 1
previously mentioned, Indigenous land management practices are being adapted in
modern times to achieve cultural inclusivity for the future of sustainable agricultural
practice.
Modern use of Indigenous land management practices
To achieve a sustainable farming practices in Australia today, landholders and
managers need to achieve a holistic, integrated approach to land management, similar
to that of Indigenous Australians prior to European settlement. Indigenous land
management, particularly the use of fire is, as previously discussed, one of the most
controversial issues regarding indigenous land management. However, as nonindigenous knowledge of the process of burning and other Indigenous methods is
improving, conflicts are becoming less profound. More effective communication
remains the key to contemporary indigenous efforts to address the effects of
environmental degradation. (Baker et al., 2001).
In recent times, no-till farming has gained popularity for its preservation of topsoil
and maintenance of soil structure, not to mention the financial advantages it boasts
with lower pass rates and fewer pieces of equipment. It is estimated that up to 90% of
all Australian farmers use no-till farming today (Llewellyn et al, 2012). However, notill farming if not necessarily conducive to a holistic, integrated land management
approach or to the implementation of Indigenous land management practices. This is
because no-till relies heavily on the use of chemicals to control weeds, pests and
disease. It also disputes the use of regular, low-intensity burning for weed control,
which is, as we know, an integral part of Indigenous land management techniques. As
a result, a major shift in current farming practices and attitudes will have to occur to
achieve our sustainability goals.
Given that climate change and sustainability are dominating world media, the concept
of Permaculture has been attracting attention and gaining mainstream recognition as a
potential solution (Sullivan, 2008). Permaculture is a system of crop production based
on a variety of perennial plants, which are compatible and self-sustaining. In recent
years, this method of farming is finding acceptance and respectability as a more
sustainable form of land use. Permaculture mirrors the Indigenous practice of
harvesting a variety of crops in a sustainable way in the natural environment and has
also stimulated new interest in Aboriginal pharmaceutical and medicinal practices,
helping to retrieve and safeguard Indigenous culture, wisdom and way of life (Gostin
& Chong, 1994).
Read
Reading 1
The living culture whose time has come
Read the sections ‘What is permaculture?’ and ‘Broadacre permaculture?’ and make
brief notes. The remainder of the article should be read for interest only. For more
information on permaculture, see the links contained within the article.
10
AGR202 Module 1
Despite permaculture showing great potential for significant contribution to
sustainability of the Australian agricultural industry into the future, fire still remains
the most attainable and scientifically supported method of all Indigenous land
management practices. Although the use of fire is controversial, there are multiple
reasons why low intensity, moderately frequent fire is an asset. Due to Australia’s
long history and the extensive evidence to suggest frequent Aboriginal burning, it is
important to recognise that fire affects a substantial proportion of factors that
influence ecological sustainability. This mainly includes the maintenance of cycles of
carbon, water and nutrients and the maintenance of the processes of soil formation
(Adams & Attiwill, 2011).
Read
Reading 2
The ecological sustainability of slash-and-burn agriculture
Make notes on the role of fire in ecological processes and it’s viability as an
sustainable form of crop production.
To conclude this module, carefully review the main points made about indigenous
land management practices and the potential for their inclusion to achieve enhanced
sustainability.
References
Adams, M., Attiwill, P. (2011). Burning Issues : Sustainability and Management of
Australia's Southern Forests. Retrieved from http://www.eblib.com
Baker, R., Davies, J., & Young, E. (2001). Managing country: an overview of the
prime issues. Working on country: contemporary indigenous management of
Australia’s lands and coastal regions, 3-23. VIC: Oxford University Press.
Gostin, O., Chong, A. (1994). Living wisdom: Aborigines and the environment.
Aboriginal Australia University of Queensland Press, 123-139.
Kleinman, P.J.A., Pimentel, D., & Bryant, R.B. (1995). The ecological sustainability
of slash-and-burn agriculture. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, 52(2),
235-249.
Llewellyn, R.S., D’Emden, F.H., Kuehne, G. (2012). Extensive use of no-tillage in
grain growing regions of Australia. ACT: Grains Research and Development
Corporation.
Sullivan, R. (2008). The living culture whose time has come. ECOS, 144, 8-10.
Retrieved from:
http://www.ecosmagazine.com/?act=view_file&file_id=EC144p8.pdf
Williams, N. (1986). The Yolgnu and their land: A system of land tenure and the fight
for its recognition. ACT: Australian Institute of Aboriginal Studies.
11
AGR202 Module 1
Conclusion
On completion of my Green Steps Internship I have developed sufficient course
materials in Topics 1 and 2 for a case study into the history of agricultural
development in Australia from the perspective of Indigenous Australian peoples. I
recommend that these modules be used for the subject AGR202 or similar. Upon
completion of these modules, students should have a sound understanding of the
historical impact of the values and beliefs of Indigenous Australians on the Australian
landscape and be able to discuss the potential for cultural inclusivity for the future of
sustainable agricultural practice. This information should be used in conjunction with
other course materials to form the AGR202 curriculum, equipping students with the
knowledge to address contemporary agricultural challenges by considering multiple
perspectives to arrive at a justified viewpoint.
iv