Course:CONS370/Projects/Indigenous Djap Wurrung resistance and community responses to threats against sacred birthing trees in Australia

From UBC Wiki
More than 260 Djap Wurrung trees in western Victoria are due to be bulldozed to make way for a 12km duplication of the Western Highway. Protesters, some who have been camping at the site for more than a year, fear a standoff with police will come to a head.[1]

Summary

The Djap Wurrung (also spelt Djabwurrung, Tjapwurrung,or Djapwarrung) people are Aboriginal Australians whose Country (territory) is the volcanic plains of central Victoria[2]. Djap Wurrung Country ranges from the Mount William Range of Gariwerd in the west to the Pyrenees range in the east, encompassing the Wimmera River flowing north and the headwaters of the Hopkins River flowing south[2]. On Djap Wurrung Country, there are over 3,000 sacred birthing trees that are over 800 years old [2]. Over 50 generations have been born on these cultural sites[2].

"Those trees are a part of us. The history of those trees is what makes us Djab Wurrung women. The stories of birthing, the stories of cooking, the story of those trees being culturally modified over hundreds of years is incredible." - Djab Wurrung woman Lidia Thorpe[3]

A poster created by the Djap Wurrung Heritage Protection Embassy and land defenders, calling for increased support and allies to attend the camp.

The Victoria branch of the Australian Labor Party planned a four-lane highway extension alongside Major Road Projects of Victoria (MRVP), a division of Vic Roads (Roads Corporation of Victoria), that is set to destroy the landscape[4]. The 12.5 kilometer construction project is called the Western Highway - Buangor to Ararat Project [5].

In response, Djapp Wurrung community members -- Elder Aunty Sandra Onus and Zellanach Djab Mara -- set up the Djab Wurrung Heritage Protection Embassy to prevent the destruction, with allies and activists[3]. The Embassy set up a camp on Country in June 2018 with the support of others opposing the project[3]. The community has taken “bold action thereby preventing work from starting and demanding the project is cancelled”.[2] Though campaign is led by Djap Wurrung Traditional Owners, participants at the Camp include diverse groups of people.

Djab Wurrung people have suggested an alternative route “that would protect the sacred trees, and recommend that safety on the road can be maximised by lowering the speed limit”[4]. However, the government has refused to consider this alternative route.

On August 8th, 2019, 14 months after the peaceful camp blockade was set up on Country, police issued the Traditional Owners at the Djab Wurrung Heritage Protection Embassy an eviction notice, “giving the Djab Wurrung people 14 days to vacate their sacred landscape to make way for the Western Highway duplication”[4]. The eviction notice was directed to police by Daniel Andrews, 48th Premier of Victoria since 2014 and state leader of the Australian Labor Party since 2010[4].

Throughout 2019, Major Road Projects Victoria (MRVP) and their workers continued to have a presence on the land without the consent of the Djap Wurrung people and Embassy. Contractors conducting surveying works “continued to flout mandatory stop work periods” while Djab Wurrung Traditional Owners awaited mediation with MRPV[4]. Sovereign Djab Wurrung land protectors and their supporters had to continually escort workers off the land.

Djap Wurrung Embassy Camp

“Violation is the only appropriate word for these actions, as Djab Wurrung women and their supporters were forced to place themselves in the way of the contractors to protect the sacred birthing tree and a camp that has been a haven for women, gender diverse people and young children....The Djab Wurrung women continued to hold the space in the face of rising aggression and tension as the workers seemed determined to further intrude on the sacred landscape, approaching within metres of the sacred birthing tree and a culturally significant canoe tree.” [2]

Legal action helped stall the project for months[5]. Mediation between the Djap Wurrung people and MRVP commenced September 18th, 2019[2]. In late 2019, a 3.8km stretch of land was signed over to MRVP[2]. However, the camp continues to remain in place as of April 2020, and welcomes anyone to stay in an effort to protect old growth trees from being cut down during construction[2]. The Djap Wurrung Heritage Protection Embassy has posted and circulated a COVID-19 Health & Safety Protocol for all people planning on attending the camp.

COVID-19 Camp Protocol: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1R7xeGf0zDipHKS2MtOUlXCDP1hW5Q3tqG3iEX1Is3r0/mobilebasic [2].

How to Support the Djap Wurrung Embassy: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1-GTkdfwZDfvW26yvRuOMmx4p4hM73Im5dxk-GMElSJI/edit?fbclid=IwAR3ReWqpal5cBZ0DlSFQv63D1smoa3-_cHKPjUX_bq3yqu1YA0leP9tQ9FU [2].

Description

Colonialism in Australia

Australia's first recorded European contact was with the British navigator, Captain James Cook when he encountered the eastern coastline of Australia in 1770. [6] Later on, Cook claimed his discovery as a possession of the British Crown, which enabled the establishment of a new British colony in the Southern hemisphere. The aim of colonization was to alleviate overpopulation in prison and expand the British Empire and its power through the acquirement of land. [7] Eight years after its initial discovery, the first fleet with convicts, marines and civilians arrived at Sydney Cove in 1788 for a penal settlement. After, European settlement spread as new colonies were established across the nation. Here are a few of the many regions that were significantly influenced by colonization.[7]

The development of the country's internal and external borders over time.

✓ Van Diemen’s Land, today’s Tasmania

✓ Port Phillip District, in what is now Victoria

✓ Moreton Bay, near Brisbane

✓ Adelaide, in South Australia


Cook’s discovery is recent in comparison to 60,000 years of development of more than 500 Aboriginal Nations, and their cultures, who existed at the time. [8]The Australian Indigenous community consisted of both the Aboriginal Nations and the Torres Strait Islanders. The Torres Strait Islanders have also coexisted in the land for more than 5,000 years. Unfortunately, these traditional custodians of the land suffered from immense social crisis due to European settlement. [8] According to estimates, the “full-blood” Aboriginal population decreased by 96% from one million in 1788 to the remaining 58,000 in 1920s [9]. Although some disagree with the accuracy of this calculation by arguing it is an exaggeration, there is more than enough evidence to support the drastic decline in Aboriginal population between the 19th and early 20th century. [9]

New South Wales Mounted Police engaging Indigenous Australians during the Waterloo Creek Massacre of 1838. [10]
The Devastating Genocide

Lack of immunity against epidemics such as smallpox, influenza or measles that were introduced by the Europeans' arrival was one source of  the large number of deaths amongst the Indigenous communities. According to Arthur Phillip, Captain of the first fleet, smallpox was responsible for killing half of the Indigenous population in Sydney within the first fourteen months of their arrival. [7][11]

In addition to the threats to physiological health, intentional damages were a source of death and destruction. These damages included culture assimilation, acquisition of Indigenous land, sexual exploitation, physical abuse, and massacres of Indigenous communities; leading to the unfortunate reduction in Indigenous populations and tragic cultural genocide. Friction between the Europeans and the Natives was inevitable because of the long-term competition for resources and difference in lifestyles.[12] Some consider colonization as a process of “introducing the superior western civilization” and believe that Aboriginal people were “doomed to extinction”;they omit the gruesome truth . The convenient assumption that “Aboriginal race extinction was irreversible” has made many felt exonerated from the unjust violence.[9]

A multimedia project led by the the Indigenous Australian artist is among the initiatives seeking to map the numerous sites where colonists massacred Aboriginal people

           One of the most unsuccessful British settlements was undeniably in Van Diemen’s Land, also known as Tasmania today. [8] In 1803, British created an outpost on the Van Diemen’s Land. In the following year, evidence recorded 60 murders of Aborigines, possible when they were approaching the town. [13] In addition to disease, dispossession and intermarriage, the collapse of Aboriginal communities was also a result of the Black War. From 1824 to 1831 In 1830, an armed group known as the “Black Line” was ordered to remove tribes in Big River and Oyster Bay by Sir George Arthur. [14]The Black Line failed to remove all tribes from their settled district, indicating the Aboriginal resistance. In spite of the effort to resist, Aboriginal population of Tasmania sharply dropped from thousands to a few hundreds. [15][16] The frontier war continued at the Wimmera, Victoria and caused more deaths in the late 1840s. [17]The Myall Creek massacre in New South Wales exemplified similar conflict in other parts of Australia as well. If one really pays attention to the timeline for the devastating century, they would notice that massacres took place frequently until 1928 and many were killed just for resisting. [8]

Historical Interpretations
The Cover Page of Henry Reynolds work

In his ground-breaking work on Aboriginal studies, “The Other Side of the Frontier'', Henry Reynolds provides historical context through nuanced delineation of interactions between Indigenous communities and the Europeans. The presentation of Indigenous values is  strongly focused on their respect for the land and natural resources. His work also sheds light upon the Aboriginal resistance against British conquest, enabling many to realize the inseparable community-led resistance intertwined with settler-colonial history. [18] By introducing the Indigenous lifestyles, cultures and conflicts with British, many topics avoided by previous literatures are mentioned and reinvestigated. Diction such as “invasion” is in juxtaposition with prior sources’ use of “settlement” .[19] The discussion of Frontal War on VanDiemen’s Land put an emphasis on the “black” sides .[18] Reynolds claims that the intention is not to make the audience simply regard Aboriginal people as victims, but his work did provide reasons for people to commemorate the sacrifices of the Frontier War. [19]Aside from Henry Reynolds, other historians such as Lyndall Ryan and Charles Rowley also recorded notorious atrocities against the Aboriginal communities during colonization. [20]

Though many historians recognize the suffering of Aboriginal communities, there are  opposing voices that doubt the validity of these works. Keith Windschuttle, a primary antagonizing historian, questions the evidence used in Reynolds and Ryan’s work and attacks almost all their opinions [18]. In The fabrication of Aboriginal history, Windschuttle explicitly claimed that the Aboriginal death numbers are “an amplification of the actual situation”. Ironically, when he accused Renolds and Ryan’s work of not using enough evidence, his own arguments are mostly based on anecdotal evidence and other unreliable sources.[20]Some of his opinions such as claiming that the skeletons near burial sites were kangaroos lacked support and could be extremely misleading. Unlike mainstream historians, Windschuttle believes the violence and extermination of the Aborigines can be justified if the British settlement was resisted. [20] Even Windschuttle himself recognizes the inhumane attacks on the Van Diemen’s Land is responsible for the Aborigines’ extinction.[20] Many other historians criticize Windschuttle for his failure to grasp the point. Many investigations regarding Aboriginal communities are not about the actual deaths or magnitude but about how European colonization has continually been destructive towards Aboriginal communities. Overall, the Aboriginal deaths from early settlement and resistance efforts may even be greater than the current records, we may not recognize the exact casualties given that many tribes did not use the same systems to record history . Like John Harris argues, “history tends to be written from the perspective of the powerful” .[9] In this case, the European government who had more control over words recreated history from their own side rather than the Indigenous societies. Therefore, those who have more power in literature should be more considerate of both parties if they aim to publish unbiased work.

The Djap Wurrung
Map of Victorian Aboriginal Territories categorized by tribes and language groups

The Djap Wurrung’s, also known as the Djapwurrung or Tjapwurrung, presence on their land can be traced back to 40,000 years.[21] Today, the Djap Wurrung land spreads over 7,000 km2, from Mount Rouse to Hamilton. [22] The Djap Wurrung societies are  composed of at least eleven bands, following two different matrilineal systems.[22] Their lifestyle is partially hunting and gathering, but there is also evidence of agriculture practices. Some aboriginal activists’ theories suggest that the traditional ball-kicking Aboriginal game initiated within the Wimmera tribe has inspired contemporary Australian football and the formation of its rules. [23]Trees have intrinsic spiritual meanings in the Djap Wurrung culture.[24] Births are witnessed  by these trees and those who have passed on are buried near the trees. [24]

European settlement has made a great impact on the Djap Wurrung Nation. The first contact was marked in 1836, when the invasion began. [25] The resistance against European invasion included stealing sheep and driving off, while the settlers broke this resistance with massacre. By 1842, there were at least 35 reports of massacres. however very little of these developed into court investigations against the settlers. [25] By 1841, some of the tribes were put into reserves and resistance to European invasion increased. According to estimates, the Djap Wurrung population shrunk from 2,050 to 615.[26] About three quarters of the population pre-contact vanished due to disease, massacres, poison and starvation. [26] Later on, Djap Wurrung land also attracted large numbers of Europeans and Chinese that wanted to search for gold. [25]

Aboriginal People Today

Today, there are 250 unique language groups within the continent of Australia and only about three percent of Australian population claims  Aboriginal heritage. [27] In comparison to the existence of more than 500 nations before British colonization, this is a drastic decline. Though separated from their traditional land, confronting massacres and being exposed to diseases, the Indigenous communities are still resistant and adaptive to changes .[8][27]

Aboriginal tribes from the Galiwnku Island gathering to watch the proceeding of Prime Minister Kevin Rudd to apologize for the former Aboriginal mistreatments under the Australian governments. This apology only took place in 2008.

Contemporary Indigenous people live across urban, rural and remote areas of Australia. Many Federal laws explicitly discriminate against the Aboriginals, for example the Mental Deficiency Bill passed in 1939 which identified “inefficient groups”, including the “slum dwellers, homosexuals, prostitutes, alcoholics, and of course aboriginal people” .[28] Though this Bill was soon abolished for serious racial discrimination, the earliest Federal law that applied to Aboriginal Australian’s rights was not passed until 1967. [27]. Even as recent as 1972, the Prime Minister still denied all Aboriginal land rights publicly in his national speech, as he considered Aboriginal land-use to be inefficient economically and socially. [28]

Major struggles for Aboriginal communities still involve the retention of cultural heritage, loss of identity, as well as government recognition. The State of Victoria proposed a treaty with the Aboriginal population that recognizes Aboriginal sovereignty and provides compensation. Unfortunately, this is only a proposal and there have not been nation-wide treaty in Australia either, therefore making Australia yet another country that has not signed an authorized treaty with Indigenous peoples in the British Commonwealth. [27]

Prime Minister Kevin Rudd delivered a formal apology for the profound impact of colonization on Indigenous communities and recognized former mistreatments in the 2008 Federal Government Parliament. [29] In the 1990’s, the agenda of “reconciliation” became clear, however, there have been limited actions taken or changes made regarding issues that Indigenous communities face. According to statistics, many Indigenous peoples are still disadvantaged in health, education and employment. however there are successful examples of those who overcome these barriers.[29] The effective means include increased schooling and literacy as well as medical services training. [8] The work of Aboriginal activists has also achieved to some extent public approval and engagement with the non-Aboriginal communities, accompanied with increasing non-Aboriginal empathy after learning of the heartbreaking mistreatment in both colonial and independent Australia towards Aboriginal Australians, and a fascination to explore more about their diverse cultures. [29]

Tenure arrangements

The tenure of the Djap Wurrung community is customary. There is no legal document which declares their sovereignty to the land on the Western Highway and surrounding areas. However, the Djap Wurrung people describe themselves as the Traditional Owners.[30] After the land belonging to the Djap Wurrung community was colonized by early settlers, their control of the land was increasingly lost. This also applies to many other Indigenous communities in Australia and around the world. Since the Djap Wurrung community is not recognized by the government as the owners of the land through legislation, there is no freehold or leasehold ownership. Presently, the official owner of the land is the Australian government .[30] However, Indigenous communities throughout Australia, like the Djap Wurrung people, are fighting for their sovereignty, land rights and the retention of culturally significant areas.

Administrative arrangements

The Djap Wurrung Embassy have declared their sovereignty and “as survivors...will not concede [their] land rights” [31]. The Aboriginal Heritage Act in 2006 promises to appropriately protect and manage the areas around the Western Highway. [32] Therefore, it is government’s duty to provide protection. This Act also provide the rules for management, as it must respect Aboriginal self-determination, and recognize Aboriginal communities as the Traditional Owners and primary guardians. [32]This Act establishes the Victorian Aboriginal Heritage Council (VAHC), which is responsible for appointing Registered Aboriginal Parties and provides suggestions for the Minister for Aboriginal Affairs that applies rules to the entire state. [32]By working together with local Aboriginal groups, the VAHC can have an exhaustive assessment of the Act . If the Elders of Djap Wurrung are not satisfied with the cultural heritage protection, they can choose to report back to the Victorian Aboriginal Council that is responsible for monitoring protection. [32].Reconciliation and full consent is necessary prior to any outsiders’ acts. In addition, this act also addresses that the Djap Wurrung have their own right to decide who can represent their cultural heritage. [32]

Affected Stakeholders

The Djap Wurrung people are the primary affected stakeholders in the community. They have been oppressed by the government for over 230 years. [33] Their main objectives are to protect the birthing trees which will be cut down to build an extension of the Western Highway. This project is known as project 2b. Some of these birthing trees had already been removed to build section 2a of the highway[5]. The birthing trees removed by the Australian government are culturally significant to the community as these trees have been directly connected to their ancestral territory. As they fight to keep these birthing trees alive, it is a symbol of the declaration of their sovereignty to the land.

Women have given birth in the hollows of these trees for generations.

These birthing trees are where Aboriginal women give birth traditionally. Women would give birth by squatting against the trees during the final stages of birth. The baby would come out onto the paperbark. After birth, the baby comes in contact with the spirit of the land and establishes a relationship with the land[34]. Birthing trees are also a cultural gathering place, where Indingenous peoples can feel accepted after their rights and territory had been taken away from them through colonization[35]. As we learn how these trees are used by the Djap Wurrung and their cultural importance, we understand why they are affected stakeholders.

The Djab Wurrung Heritage Protection Embassy is also an affected stakeholder as they are an organization which was established to protect the sacred trees on the Western Highway. Although the leaders of this organization are Djap Wurrung traditional owners of the land, many non-Indigenous people have voiced their support for the Embassy. They recognize the connections between Indigenous communities and nature for generations in the region. They also realize the sovereignty to the land of the Aboriginal group and how they have been mistreated by the Australian government over generations.

Interested Outside Stakeholders

The Australian government and the Major Roads Project Authority are the primary interested stakeholders outside of the community. They would like to remove the Djap Wurrung birthing trees on the Western Highway. This project is known as the Western Highway Project. The section 2a of the highway had already been built, with strong public backlash. The estimate of trees to be removed was 221 trees to construct the highway. However, this number was significantly underestimated as the actual number of trees removed to construct 2a was 1350. A project to build the extension of the highway, 12.5 kilometers long, is known as section 2b. 260 culturally significant trees are under threat of being removed to make way for the highway. The state of Victoria’s government plans to work with Aboriginal locals through providing only monetary compensation but do not have any intentions to save the birthing trees, a fundamental aspect of the Djap Wurrung community.[36]

A new proposed route which served the same purpose would have been more cost effective and safer than the removal of these culturally significant trees. This new route would require drivers to drive for two extra minutes to reach their destination. [37]The state of Victoria did not put in much effort to consider this new route or look at other alternatives to keep these birthing trees alive. They describe the Western Highway as “one of Victoria’s key trade routes, providing a link between the region’s primary producers with Melbourne’s domestic and export markets” .[36] Through this, we see that the government does not have any of these Indigenous communities’ interests in mind. The convenience of drivers is more important than the cultural importance of these birthing trees to the Djap Wurrung community. The attempt for the Australian government to wipe out the trees is a symbol of their attempt to remove any claim of territory by the Djap Wurrung community.

Discussion

The intention of our case study is to spread knowledge about Djap Wurrung land management, community forestry and resistance in relation to threats against sacred birthing trees. We want to bring awareness to a current, ongoing dispute about a sacred grove of trees within a settler-state where no substantive treaty has been entered into between the government of Australia and the Indigenous people of Australia. We aim to demonstrate the strength and determination of the Djap Wurrung community, as land defenders and activists who put their own lives at risk in order to protect the sacred birthing trees. We also aim to highlight the important connections between birthing practices and the land.

Despite ongoing colonization, which presents itself through land theft, pollution, development and unsustainable farming and forestry practices, sacred places still exist. Cultural sites where the Djap Wurrung birthing trees live are alive are a part of an interconnected web of relationships that span across generations[38]. The Major Roads Project Authority and the Australian government have continually “undermined land defenders and positioned Djap Wurrung people as against the interests of the rest of the population”[38]. Another example of colonial violence, these trees are Djap Wurrung people's “inheritance”, directly tied to their ancestral territories[38]. Their survival and the Djap Wurrung fight to keep them alive and safe are a “cultural obligation" and an assertion of their sovereignty[38].

Critical issues in this case study include land, Indigenous sovereignty and consent.

Land
A close up of gum tree bark.

Australia is among “the most deforested countries in the world” and is a large emitter of greenhouse gasses[5]. With the removal of forests, Australia’s carbon sinks would decline[5]. According to Victorian State of the Environment Report 2018, there is a downward trend of remnant vegetation, of biodiversity, of forest health[39]. The state of Victoria’s environmental health is “poor and, despite much good work, the tools used to manage it are ineffective”[5].

It remains common practice to offset vegetation lost by planting new vegetation. however, “you cannot meaningfully offset any habitat tree”[5]. As old-growth river red gum trees, up to 800 years old with girths of more than 7 metres and standing over 30 metres tall, the birthing trees “provide habitat and nutrients for dozens of mammals and birds, and thousands of insect species”[5][39]. Nearly 3,000 trees would need to be destroyed to enlarge the highway [5]. As a result, the state of Victoria’s biodiversity and vegetation cover would significantly decrease.

The Djap Wurrung community has a myriad of supporters across Australia, and beyond. This is one of the signs from the camp.

Additionally, the trees have been “culturally modified, with fire, creating small room[s] in the base of the trunk[s]...[where] thousands of Djab Wurrung babies have been born...within it. The placentas of those babies have been buried under the Directions Trees”[5]. Overall, with the highway widening, historical trees which are important to Indigenous groups would need to be cut down. This will cause cultural and environmental damage to the region’s Indigenous communities. The tradeoffs for expanding this highway are short term benefit for citizens to arrive at their destination quicker, but significant long term loss of cultural identity for the Djap Wurrung people[5].

Indigenous Sovereignty
Before Indigenous Australian art was ever put onto canvas, people would smooth over the soil to draw sacred designs which belonged to that particular ceremony. This is still practiced today. Aboriginal art demonstrates an interconnectedness between people and the land, and is practiced today as an act of sovereignty and self-determination.

The Djap Wurrung people are the rightful Traditional Owners of the Country that MRVP has been attempting to construct upon[2]. The Commissioner for Environmental Sustainability claims to “proudly [acknowledge] Victoria’s Aboriginal community...as Australia’s first peoples and as the Traditional Owners and custodians of the land and water on which we rely”[39]. They also claim to recognise and value “the ongoing contribution of Aboriginal people and communities...[and] embrace the spirit of reconciliation, working towards the equality of outcomes and ensuring an equal voice”[39]. Victoria’s government claims it wants to work on a treaty with Aboriginal Victorians to create Australia’s first treaty [5]. However, most of the treaty revolves around compensation, not actual solutions for environmental and spiritual concerns to conserve the trees[5].

Despite these political claims, the government and police continue to allow contractors and workers to violate protocols surrounding birthing trees, neglecting Djap Wurrung culture, sovereignty and land rights. As Indigenous people who have lived on Country for thousands and thousands of generations, Djap Wurrung people are sovereign, and their Lore (cultural teachings, traditional knowledge, governance practices) surrounding the sacred birthing trees must be upheld and prioritized above the State governance of Victoria[2].  

Consent
"Hands off Country".

The Australian government's actions indicate that it is “committed to working with Aboriginal Victorians who don’t get in the way”[5]. The MRVP has proven that there is greater enthusiasm for governance solutions that are “material (involving compensation, for example) rather than solutions that require meaningful engagement with spiritual or environmental concerns”[5].

The area where the trees reside is "a place of sanctuary in which Djab Wurrung sovereignty has never been ceded”[4]. The Djap Wurrung have a right to Free, Prior and Informed Consent (FPIC), which is recognized in the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP). It allows them to “give or withhold consent to a project that may affect them or their territories….Once they have given their consent, they can withdraw it at any stage”[40]. FPIC also enables Djap Wurrung people to “negotiate the conditions under which the project will be designed, implemented, monitored and evaluated”[40].

Assessment

Djap Wurrung protesters sit out the front of the VicRoads office in Ararat.[41]

The asymmetrical power between the Australian Government and the Djap Wurrung is obvious. While there are plentiful historical records of European invasion and alterations of land use without asking for permission, this issue is ongoing. In this case, the culturally significant mother trees were removed by the government in order to build road. There were only a few families consulted before some of the sacred trees were removed. [37]

Similar to many historical scenarios, the Australian government has dominating power over the Djap Wurrung community. The inconsiderate and reckless government actions can be easily justified by legislation, since legislation is formulated by the government authorities themselves. In the government’s perspective, construction actions on Djap Wurrung land is reasonable as long as it contributes to “progressive development”. Government power is employed in an imprudent manner without a proper evaluation of the consequences. What’s worse about this act is that the road building project had an alternative route that was arguably cheaper, safer, and more importantly without the destruction of the sacred trees . This implies that the government chooses to neglect the forests’ sacredness and any negative implications to Aboriginal groups, just because it is not their own culture at risk. This is not the only thing the government fails to grasp. They ignore the fact that Djap Wurrung territories were never ceded to federal control [31] and the government did not ask for permission to be on their lands, which leads to the violation of Djap Wurrung’s rights and sovereignty. There should be more governance and negotiation on the Australian government's planning as well.

As Djap Wurrung’s responsibility of nurturing the trees has been more and more stripped away by VicRoads, they have resisted and fought against road construction. Given its profound effects, there are actually very few official studies that focus on this unfair issue. They have gained global attention by self-broadcasting on social media platforms, and have only given a few interviews for news articles, as news can easily be manipulated by journalists or the government. The Djap Wurrung’s power is strengthened as more non-Aboriginal allies join to help resist encroachment. Their sovereignty could be respected if the Victorian government recognizes these damages to the land cannot be undone. The government should compensate the community and work towards including the Djap Wurrung in decision-making processes. Sadly, in reality, the Djap Wurrung camps set up by the community, activists and allies are still facing eviction. According to the Djap Wurrung, “no trees no treaty”; it is highly unlikely for them to sign any treaties with the government after the sacred trees’ removal. [31]

Recommendations

  1. It is well known that gathering places “encourage healing and wellbeing”, creating inclusive and empowering spaces[35]. Cultural gathering places in particular provide a sense of place, especially for people who have been marginalized and affected by colonization[35]. In this case, the sacred trees are gathering places for women giving birth. The land defender camp and Djap Wurrung community gatherings are also gathering places for both healing and resistance. We recommend that these spaces be respected, and that the camp be allowed to remain as long as needed, as Djap Wurrung people continue to maintain their distinct connection to the land. No notices of eviction should be given to the members of the camp. No police, contractors or road workers should be allowed to access Djap Wurrung territory without free, prior, informed and ongoing consent. Negotiation processes should be respected and conducted on Djap Wurrung terms, led by Djap Wurrung community members rather than Australian government officials or companies. The right of the Djap Wurrung people to withdraw from any negotiated project must be respected.
    Community members, land defenders and allies at camp.
  2. The attempt to wipe out Djap Wurrung sacred places “must be seen as an attempt to wipe out their claim to them”, which serves to further dispossess Aboriginal peoples in Australia and “allow the state to continue its operations unhindered” by Aboriginal sovereignty[38]. We recommend that Djap Wurrung knowledge be prioritized and adhered to in terms of the future of the trees that are on their territory, since Indigenous knowledge systems strengthen cultural identity, self-determination and ultimately health and wellbeing[35].
  3. Aboriginal women in Australia “collectively express a strong desire to maintain cultural practices associated with childbirth”, including birthing close to home and on their homelands, on Country[42]. Aboriginal birthing and elder women have “consistently reported ongoing cultural practices associated with childbirth”, including knowledge sharing across generations, family support, land-based rituals and practices, and “observance of extended family present at the time of or shortly after birth”; these practices are alive and well[42]. However, certain land-based birthing practices for Aboriginal women, including Djap Wurrung women, are at risk, as land continues to be developed and taken by the government for other purposes. The “inflexibility” of Australian health systems to meet the needs of Aboriginal women is unacceptable; Australian obstetricians, doctors, nurses and midwives “lack cultural awareness and understanding” of the importance of Aboriginal kinship and relationships with their territories[42]. Australia’s lack of progress towards providing a culturally secure environment for Indigenous populations is particularly evident in the area of childbirth[34]. We recommend that the Australian government pass specific laws, and hospitals create culturally-specific policies,  that will address the rights of Aboriginal women to participate in cultural birthing practices, on their own terms, whether they are giving birth in a hospital, at home or on Country.
    "No Trees, No Treaty"
  4. Additionally, since Aboriginal women “regain culturally secure birthing practices when birth is brought back to the remote communities”[42] where Aboriginal women are in charge of themselves and their own births, we recommend that any areas identified as birthing spots on Country across Australia be rightfully returned to the communities to which they belong. We also recommend increased funding and educational opportunities for Aboriginal people who wish to work in health care, including obstetrics and maternity, in order to ensure that Aboriginal women who are giving birth in hospitals or urban settings are provided with access to Aboriginal care providers.

Created by:

Zoe Li (Conservation Science)

Hannah Stanley (Political Science, First Nations & Indigenous Studies)

Gabriel Wan (Urban Forestry)


References

  1. ↑ "Protesters defend sacred 800-year-old Djap Wurrung trees as police deadline looms". The Guardian.
  2. ↑ 2.00 2.01 2.02 2.03 2.04 2.05 2.06 2.07 2.08 2.09 2.10 2.11 2.12 "Djap Wurrung Heritage Protection Embassy".
  3. ↑ 3.0 3.1 3.2 Johnson, S. (August 20, 2019). "Victorian Premier issues Western Hwy protesters ultimatum over sacred tree stalemate". ABC Ballarat News.
  4. ↑ 4.0 4.1 4.2 4.3 4.4 4.5 Mahomet, Amanda (August 8, 2019). "Media Release: Barking Up The Wrong Tree". DW Embassy.
  5. ↑ 5.00 5.01 5.02 5.03 5.04 5.05 5.06 5.07 5.08 5.09 5.10 5.11 5.12 5.13 5.14 Cunningham, Sophie (July 19, 2019). "The Djab Wurrung Birthing Tree". The Monthly.
  6. ↑ (Cook, J. (1770) wiki "Cook's Journal: Daily Entries, 22 April 1770". Retrieved from http://southseas.nla.gov.au/journals/cook/17700422.html)
  7. ↑ 7.0 7.1 7.2 Australians together. (n.d) Colonisation.(Website) Retrived from https://australianstogether.org.au/discover/australian-history/colonisation/#colonisationreference2
  8. ↑ 8.0 8.1 8.2 8.3 8.4 8.5 Behrendt, 2013
  9. ↑ 9.0 9.1 9.2 9.3 Harris, John.(2003). Aboriginal History, Vol. 27“Hiding the Bodies, the myth of humane colonization of Australia” https://press-files.anu.edu.au/downloads/press/p73641/pdf/book.pdf
  10. ↑ W.Walton after Louisa and Godfrey Charles Mundy. "Mounted police and blacks".
  11. ↑ Bladen, F. M. (1892). Historical Records of New South Wales (Vol. 1). C. Potter.
  12. ↑ "Colonial period, 1788–1901". Australian War Memorial.
  13. ↑ Elder, B. (2003). Blood on the wattle: Massacres and maltreatment of Aboriginal Australians since 1788. Sydney: New Holland.
  14. ↑ Kenyon, S.(1928) .The Victorian Historical Magazine,; J. Fenton, A History of Tasmania; Historical Records of Australia, ser. I, vols. XIX to XXII and XXVI; Kenyon Records at Public Library, Melbourne.
  15. ↑ Boyce, J. (2006). The Companion to Tasmanian History. Retrieved from https://www.utas.edu.au/library/companion_to_tasmanian_history/F/Fabrication.html
  16. ↑ "History of Australia, Colonisation". Wikipedia.
  17. ↑ Broome, Richard (1988). "The Struggle for Australia : Aboriginal-European Warfare, 1770–1930". In McKernan, Michael; Browne, Margaret; Australian War Memorial (eds.). Australia Two Centuries of War & Peace. Canberra, A.C.T.: Australian War Memorial in association with Allen and Unwin, Australia. pp. 92–120. ISBN 0-642-99502-8.
  18. ↑ 18.0 18.1 18.2 Reynolds, H. (2006). The other side of the frontier: Aboriginal resistance to the European invasion of Australia. UNSW Press.
  19. ↑ 19.0 19.1 "The Other Side of the Frontier: Aboriginal Resistance to the European Invasion of Australia by Henry Reynolds". Goodreads.com.
  20. ↑ 20.0 20.1 20.2 20.3 Windschuttle, K. (2003). The fabrication of Aboriginal history. Sydney Papers, The, 15(1), 20.
  21. ↑ "Djap Wurrung". Wikipedia.
  22. ↑ 22.0 22.1 Tindale, Norman Barnett (1974). "Tjapwurong (VIC)". Aboriginal Tribes of Australia: Their Terrain, Environmental Controls, Distribution, Limits, and Proper Names. Australian National University Press. ISBN 978-0-708-10741-6.
  23. ↑ Dawson, James (1881). Australian Aborigines: The Languages and Customs of Several Tribes of Aborigines in the Western District of Victoria, Australia (PDF). Melbourne: George Robertson.
  24. ↑ 24.0 24.1 Richards, Thomas; Bennett, Catherine M; Webber, Harry (2013). "A post-contact Aboriginal mortuary tree from southwestern Victoria, Australia". Journal of Field Archaeology. 37 (1): 62–72. doi:10.1179/0093469011z.0000000005.
  25. ↑ 25.0 25.1 25.2 Clark, Ian D. (1995). Scars in the Landscape: a register of massacre sites in western Victoria, 1803–1859 (PDF). AIATSIS. pp. 57–84. ISBN 0 85575 281 5.
  26. ↑ 26.0 26.1 Mallett, Ashley (2002). The Black Lords of Summer: The Story of the 1868 Aboriginal Tour of England and Beyond. University of Queensland Press. pp. 169–175. ISBN 978-0-702-23262-6.
  27. ↑ 27.0 27.1 27.2 27.3 Blakemore, Erin. "Aboriginal Australians". National Geographic.
  28. ↑ 28.0 28.1 Tarpey-Brown, F. (2019). Glimpsing Cracks in the Present: Acts of Utopian Desire and Resistance at Gezi Park and the Aboriginal Tent Embassy. Studies in Arts and Humanities, 5(1), 67-76
  29. ↑ 29.0 29.1 29.2 Tonkinson, R., & Berndt, R. M. (2018, April 19).Aboriginal Peoples In Australian Society. Encyclopeedia Britannica.  Retrieved from https://www.britannica.com/topic/Australian-Aboriginal/Aboriginal-peoples-in-Australian-society
  30. ↑ 30.0 30.1 "Why we are here". DW Embassy.
  31. ↑ 31.0 31.1 31.2 "Protect Sacred Trees. Save 80,000 years of culture". DW Embassy.
  32. ↑ 32.0 32.1 32.2 32.3 32.4 Kanoa, Tim. "Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Management Plan Western Highway Duplication". aboriginalvictoria.
  33. ↑ Lay, B. (2019, August 23). Tragic absurdity on the Western Highway. Retrieved April 21, 2020, from https://www.eurekastreet.com.au/article/tragic-absurdity-on-the-western-highway
  34. ↑ 34.0 34.1 Kildea, Sue & M. Wardaguga (August 3, 2009.). ezproxy.library.ubc.ca/chapter/10.1007/978-90-481-2599-9_26 "Childbirth in Australia: Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Women" Check |url= value (help). Childbirth Across Cultures: pp 275-286. Check date values in: |date= (help)CS1 maint: extra text (link)
  35. ↑ 35.0 35.1 35.2 35.3 Kingsley, Jonathan & Emily Munro-Harrison, Anne Jenkins, Alister Thorpe. (November 2018). ""Here we are part of a living culture": Understanding the cultural determinants of health in Aboriginal gathering places in Victoria, Australia". Health & Place. 54: 210–220. line feed character in |title= at position 9 (help)
  36. ↑ 36.0 36.1 Cunningham, S. "The Djab Wurrung Birthing Tree".
  37. ↑ 37.0 37.1 Hayman-Reber, M. (2018, June 18). Removal of sacred Djap Wurrung trees an 'act of cultural terrorism'. NITV News. Retrieved from https://www.sbs.com.au/nitv/nitv-news/article/2018/06/18/removal-sacred-djap-wurrung-trees-act-cultural-terrorism
  38. ↑ 38.0 38.1 38.2 38.3 38.4 Gorrie, Nayuka (April 12, 2019.). ""The government wants to bulldoze my inheritance: 800 year-old-sacred trees; To sit in a tree that saw your people birthed, massacred, and now resist is a feeling that the English language will never be able to capture"". The Guardian (London). line feed character in |title= at position 77 (help); Check date values in: |date= (help)
  39. ↑ 39.0 39.1 39.2 39.3 "Victorian State of the Environment Report 2018". Commissioner for Environmental Sustainability Victoria. 2018.
  40. ↑ 40.0 40.1 Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO). "Free, Prior and Informed Consent". Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations.
  41. ↑ "Protesters defend sacred 800-year-old Djap Wurrung trees as police deadline looms". The Guardian.
  42. ↑ 42.0 42.1 42.2 42.3 Marriott, Rhonda & Tracy Reibel, Juli Coffin, Janinne Gliddon, Denese Griffin, Melanie Robinson, Anne-Marie Eades, Jade Maddox. (October, 2019). 2019.06.017 ""Our culture, how it is to be us" — Listening to Aboriginal women about on Country urban birthing" Check |url= value (help). Women and Birth. 32: 391–403. Check date values in: |date= (help)


Seekiefer (Pinus halepensis) 9months-fromtop.jpg
 This conservation resource was created by Course:CONS370. It has been viewed over {{#googleanalyticsmetrics: metric=pageviews|page=Course:CONS370/Projects/Indigenous Djap Wurrung resistance and community responses to threats against sacred birthing trees in Australia|startDate=2006-01-01|endDate=2020-08-21}} times.
Retrieved from "https://wiki.ubc.ca/index.php?title=Course:CONS370/Projects/Indigenous_Djap_Wurrung_resistance_and_community_responses_to_threats_against_sacred_birthing_trees_in_Australia&oldid=597438"