Submission from the Australian Archaeological Association to the Minister for Arts, Heritage and Environment Concerning The Draft Environmental Impact Statement on Tasmanian Woodchip Exports Beyond 1988

Abstract

The Australian Archaeological Association is very concerned about the meagre attention given to the effects of Tasmanian forestry operations on the archaeological record (both Aboriginal and European) in the Draft EIS. It has been well demonstrated that a valuable portion of our rich cultural heritage exists on forested lands in other states of Australia (Vinnicombe 1980; Attenbrow 1981; Egloff 1981; Bowdler 1983; Byrne 1983; Anderson 1984; Byrne 1984) and that without proper investigation, management and protection, many important archaeological sites are lost each year. Our Association wishes to draw the Minister's attention to a number of misconceptions, inadequacies and errors concerning archaeological matters which, because they occur within the Draft EIS, are presumed to be notions held by the Tasmanian Forest Industries and the Tasmanian Forestry Commission. In general, we consider that the EIS should have, (a) more thoroughly discussed both the European and Aboriginal archaeological values in forests, (b) identified the actual effects of logging on these, and (c) made detailed proposals for the mitigation of such effects.