THE region’s Traditional Owners group has blasted Yumbah Aquaculture over its handling of the proposed Dutton Way abalone farm, saying it has been left out of consultation about the project.

Gunditj Mirring Traditional Owners Aboriginal Corporation was the first submitter this week to the Planning Panels Victoria Standing Advisory Committee, which is holding a hearing in the Drill Hall in Portland on the proposal for a 500-tonne farm.

The Traditional Owners group was not the only Indigenous critic of the proposal, with Gunditjmara man Shea Rotumah firing a few missiles of his own when making his personal submission on Wednesday.

But Gunditj Mirring chairwoman Donna Wright set the wheels in motion on Monday, pointing to a lack of consultation, appropriation of language, the effect the proposal could have on country and the disregard for Gunditjmara aspirations as some of the reasons the organisation was opposed to the project.

“If this ever happens it would be a total certain destruction of our country,” she said.

An earlier Cultural Heritage Management Plan – a requirement before the project can proceed – had been done when Gunditj Mirring was under administration and without its direct input, then was approved by the secretary of the Department of Premier and Cabinet as happens in such cases.

There had been no consultation from Yumbah after the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal decision in December 2020 to reject the original 1000-tonne proposal.

“This is wrong the way Yumbah has gone about establishing (the project),” she said.

“Their proposed Yumbah abalone farm is one of the most disrespectful processes I’ve ever heard of.

“The fact that our elders weren’t consulted…”

Ms Wright said the Planning Minister (who will make the final decision) needed to know there had been no consultation or contact from Yumbah  – “we’re just so angry that that happens in 2023”.

Gunditj Mirring only became aware of the revised project when member and Dutton Way resident Amy Saunders brought it to the organisation’s attention.   

“We weren’t advised that this development was going to happen on our country,” Ms Wright said.

“We’re very disappointed that no-one had contacted or consulted with native title holders… our rights as native title holders have been affected.”

Ms Wright said there was no formal or legal obligation for the panel to notify native title holders “but even the common courtesy to come and have a yarn with us as Gunditjmara people, we expect these organisations to talk to us in good faith,”

Gunditj Mirring was opposed to the project on sea country “that has sustained not only local residents but also biodiversity and sea life”.

“The fact that we have not been part of this consultation is huge,” Ms Wright said.

“This proposed development of an abalone farm will desecrate our sea country.

“We’re horrified at the amount of materials and destruction of our sea country that this development is going to be.

“The harm that this is going to cause is from another mob from NSW (how she referred to Yumbah, which is an Indigenous word from the northern part of that state) that wants to come down to our country and exploit our sea country for profit and market a delicacy to international buyers… that makes no economic sense for us.

“We have every right to say no, but not to be part of the decision making is really hurtful especially for our old people.

“We have every right to protect our country… and make sure our children’s existence is protected.

“That’s all we’ve ever done as Gunditjmara people is to protect our country.

“We’ve been taught by our elders to do so and we’re teaching our children to do so.”

Gunditj Mirring could not act in its members interests as native title holders if it wasn’t part of the consultation process.

Ms Wright said that in asserting its rights to protect its country Gunditj Mirring often had to attend hearings such as this one to point out that fact.

“We haven’t been able to do that (in this case) because we haven’t been told what’s going on,” she said.

“I find it offensive that another mob from another country would come down here to exploit it.”

Yumbah had appropriated language – it has called the farm Nyamat, which means sea country – as well “to suggest this is a good thing”.

“There’s even suggestions the company will help us to rehabilitate the land,” she said.

“You can’t… how are you going to rehabilitate the country when you’re dealing with tonnes of concrete.

“What we lose and the damage caused, no amount of money, (it) doesn’t matter how the company tries to justify (it), they’ve actually chosen an avenue which is really sneaky.”

Ms Wright also pointed to the past.

“Our people were massacred near where this proposed development is going to be,” she said.

“The Convincing Ground is a very sacred place to us.

“Since colonisation we have been able to not only survive but we want to thrive too with our own aspirations.

“But if the big corporates and money is going to decide what our aspirations are going to look like, we have to intervene.

“The horror I’ve been told about in this development has just shocked us.”

Gunditj Mirring was “totally at the mercy of corporates” when it came to developments, with proposals in a “high-level language” that was difficult for people to understand.

Ms Wright said Gunditj Mirring did not want a development that was not in the interests of its children.

“Yumbah can go to another country and be disrespectful,” she said.

“The underhanded tactics that this company has taken on to build the abalone farm is disgraceful.

“Should I just go and build an aquaculture facility on their country without their permission.

“It doesn’t work that way down here, we don’t do that to our people.

“We’ve got to stand up for what’s right.

“It’s not in our best interests, it’s in the interests of profit and you have to put culture before profit.

“When people come to our country they want to experience our land.

“You can’t do that if there’s going to be a huge concrete monstrosity the size of six MCGs – that sets my alarm bells ringing.”

Gunditj Mirring chief executive Masita Maher said the Cultural Heritage Management Plan was “not sufficient for the proposed operations”.

“I don’t believe its captured the scale of the operations,” she said.

“It might be noted that significant harm to cultural heritage will occur (should development proceed).

Committee member Ian Hamm, himself a Yorta Yorta man, said it could consider native title rights in its deliberations but “Victorian law is what the panel focuses on”.

Counsel for Yumbah Alexandra Guild said the Cultural Heritage Management Plan was needed for the project to proceed and had been approved in January 2019.

While Gunditj Mirring was under administration when the plan process began, thus it was approved by the government secretary, when administration ended Gunditj Mirring representatives attended field sessions “and they were consulted”.

“Although they weren’t eventually responsible for approving the Cultural Heritage Management Plan, they were involved,” she said.

While the plan was prepared for the previous proposal, Yumbah believed it was still adequate as it covered the entire site at a higher “activity level”.

“There’s no possibility here a more rigorous assessment would have been required because the highest level of assessment was undertaken anyway,” she said.

Should there now be any changes required Gunditj Mirring would need to approve them.

Gunditjmara continue the fight

Following the Gunditj Mirring submission, Ms Saunders spoke, separate to a submission she will deliver today.

“Caring for country is not just a hash tag, it’s deep in our bones,” she said.

“I may not have my language on my tongue and I may not have the dances on my hips but I know when I wake up in the morning and my feet hit the floor I’m instantly connected to my country.”

Mr Rotumah also spoke then, but his main submission came on Wednesday and he also noted the appropriation of language.

“The proponent exploits our special species, calling it a protein,” he said.

“Its name’s tullik.”

He said Yumbah grew 12 million abalone at its Narrawong farm but just three million survived and they were fed “unnatural products”.

“No care for this country, no care for its owners, no care for anyone but themselves,” he said.

“Talk about economic development and resources, whose resources?

“Yumbah has not even submitted on the impacts on my native title. I’ve put up with enough s..t.

“I ask the panel to take the next logical step… that acknowledges my deep connection to this country, my sovereignty… to throw this proposal out.

“So on that basis alone, we should all go home.”

Committee chairman Lester Townsend then told Mr Rotumah that “we accept that there are broader processes… that need to be resolved”.

“Certainly native title issues will need to be resolved,” Mr Townsend said.

“(But) we’ve been asked to provide specific advice to the Minister for Planning and we will do that.

“We certainly hear what you’re saying in terms of your submission.

“We are mindful that there are potentially bigger issues than we’ve been asked to provide advice (on).”

Mr Townsend said the process did not exempt other legislation but was focused on the Glenelg Planning Scheme while the Cultural Heritage Management Plan, works approval and Marine and Coastal Act were other factors.

Mr Rotumah responded again.

“You can’t be serious,” he said.

“Under all relevant acts and legislation, it doesn’t meet the criteria.

“It’s got nothing to do with the Cultural Heritage Management Plan.

“Do they seek to extinguish my native title… or do they seek to enter into a native land disagreement.”

Mr Townsend said “that’s a legitimate question but you need to ask that in a different forum to the proponent”.

“But that’s not an issue we’ve been asked to provide advice on, we’ve been asked to provide advice on the planning scheme (Yumbah is seeking a change to the scheme to allow the project in a Rural Living Zone).”

Mr Rotumah then asked what the planning scheme said about native title.

“I’m not sure it says anything on native title,” Mr Townsend replied.

Mr Rotumah then said “can I book a recess so I can make a call to some people, and you might want to do the same”.

Committee member Mandy Elliott then told Mr Rotumah that while this was a process focused on the planning scheme it did not stop him from following through under the Native Title Act.

Mr Rotumah then reiterated his belief that the Native Title Act was a relevant act “because we are sick of being told we’re not relevant”.

Mr Townsend said the committee was obliged under law to “offer people natural justice, to listen to everything, because that’s what we do”.

“But we are mindful that this is a proposal that requires a range of approvals,” he said.

“I can understand peoples’ frustration but.. we’ve been asked to do something, we’ll do that to the best of our ability.

“We’ll do that fairly, we’ll communicate in our advice what we’ve heard in submissions.”

After some more to and fro, Mr Rotumah expressed his frustration.

“I’m getting frustrated now, I’m exhausted,” he said.

“I’m tired and I think we should get some advice.

“I’m not saying you’re not a clever bloke.”

Mr Townsend said that if Mr Rotumah believed the criteria hadn’t been met, that was a matter “beyond our ability to determine”.

Mr Rotumah wasn’t appeased.

“So you’re not going to ask anybody about it, you’re not going to bother,” he said.

Mr Townsend replied “it’s not we’re not going to bother”.

“We’ve been asked for advice, we provide advice,” he said.

“If people think there’s a defect in the way we’ve been asked for advice, you need to explore to find other avenues for you to challenge it.”    

● About 35 community submitters have spoken at the hearing so far, with more due on the final day of the hearing today, followed by Yumbah’s closing submission. Due to space restrictions in this edition, all those submissions will be covered in Tuesday’s Observer.