Indigenous Peoples’ Custodianship of Outdoor Environments

Overview

In the past decade, Australia has increasingly — though incompletely — recognised Indigenous peoples’ ongoing custodial rights and responsibilities for Country. Formal mechanisms including Land and Water Councils and Registered Aboriginal Parties (RAPs) represent the institutionalisation of Indigenous custodianship within Australian law and land management frameworks.

The Concept of Custodianship

Custodianship is fundamentally different from Western property ownership:

• Responsibility over rights: Custodians are responsible for Country, not simply entitled to use it.
• Relational and spiritual: Country includes not just physical land but the ancestors, spirits, laws, and stories embedded in it.
• Intergenerational: Custodians must maintain Country for future generations, not just their own benefit.
• Active management: Custodianship requires ongoing care — burning, water management, ceremony, harvesting according to seasonal protocols.

In contemporary law, custodianship is recognised through Native Title (since Mabo 1992), land rights legislation, and heritage protection frameworks.

Land and Water Councils

Northern Territory Land Councils

The Aboriginal Land Rights (Northern Territory) Act 1976 established statutory Land Councils to administer Aboriginal land and represent Traditional Owners:

Functions of Land Councils:
- Consult with Traditional Owners about proposed land-use activities (mining, tourism, research)
- Negotiate land-use agreements and royalties
- Administer sacred site protection
- Manage entry permits onto Aboriginal land
- Advocate for Traditional Owners in policy and legal contexts

Key power: Land Councils can refuse consent to mining or development on Aboriginal land — a significant protection of custodial authority.

Water Councils and Water Rights

Water is central to custodianship in arid and semi-arid Australia:

• Murray-Darling Basin water allocations are contested between irrigators, environment flows, and emerging Indigenous water rights.
• The National Water Initiative (2004) and subsequent reforms have slowly recognised Indigenous cultural water needs.
• In Victoria, the First Peoples’ Assembly has advocated for formal allocation of cultural water entitlements to Traditional Owners.
• The Ngarrindjeri Nation (SA) has been a leading voice for cultural flows in the lower Murray, asserting that the river is a living ancestor requiring sufficient flow to maintain cultural and ecological health.

KEY TAKEAWAY: Land and Water Councils translate the abstract concept of custodianship into formal legal powers — Traditional Owners can consent to, negotiate, or refuse activities on their Country through these structures.

Registered Aboriginal Parties (RAPs) — Victoria

Legal Framework

In Victoria, the Aboriginal Heritage Act 2006 created the Registered Aboriginal Party (RAP) system as the primary mechanism for protecting Aboriginal cultural heritage:

Who can be a RAP?
- An Aboriginal organisation demonstrating connection to a specific geographic area
- Must be formally registered by the Victorian Aboriginal Heritage Council (VAHC)
- One RAP per area (though areas can be contested)

Powers and responsibilities of RAPs:

Map of Victorian RAPs (examples):
- Dja Dja Wurrung (central Victoria) — DJAARA
- Wurundjeri Woi Wurrung (Melbourne and surrounds)
- Bunurong Land Council (south-east Melbourne, Mornington Peninsula)
- Gunaikurnai Land and Waters Council (East Gippsland)
- Eastern Maar Aboriginal Corporation (Great Ocean Road region)
- Barengi Gadjin Land Council (Wimmera, Little Desert region)

RAPs and Outdoor Environments

RAPs are directly relevant to outdoor environments because:
- Many high-value natural areas (national parks, State forests, coastal reserves) contain significant cultural heritage — middens, stone arrangements, scar trees, ceremony sites.
- Outdoor activities (bushwalking track construction, campsite development, rock climbing, mountain biking) can damage cultural heritage without appropriate consultation.
- RAPs participate in joint management of parks and reserves in their area.

Case study — Gunaikurnai and Croajingolong National Park:
The Gunaikurnai people have a Joint Management Plan with Parks Victoria for parks and reserves across East Gippsland, integrating traditional ecological knowledge into park management and visitor interpretation.

Contemporary Custodianship in Practice

Cultural Burning

The Victorian Traditional Owner Cultural Fire Network (VTOCFN), established 2016, coordinates cultural burning across multiple RAP areas. Partners include Parks Victoria, DELWP (now DEECA), and CFA.

Key principles of cultural burning (contrasted with hazard reduction):

Sea Country

Custodianship extends to marine environments. The Yolngu (NT), Arabana (Lake Eyre Basin), and coastal Victorian groups assert custodial responsibility for rivers, estuaries, and near-shore marine environments — increasingly recognised in emerging ‘blue economy’ and marine park frameworks.

EXAM TIP: For exam questions on RAPs, be specific: name at least one Victorian RAP and link it to a geographic area and a specific custodial activity (e.g., DJAARA and cultural burning in Castlemaine Diggings NP). Generic answers about ‘Aboriginal people’ without specific groups or mechanisms score poorly.

VCAA FOCUS: The key contrast is between custodianship (responsibility-based, relational) and Western land management (rights-based, extractive). Show you understand this philosophical difference, not just the legal mechanisms.