SUBMISSION MADE TO THE WHITE PAPER JUNE 2014

INTRODUCTION

1

DISCLAIMER

1

FORWARD

1

HILL END & TAMBAROORA COMMON

4

GEOGRAPHIC/ ENVIRONMENTAL/ DEMOGRAPHIC AND HISTORIC OVERVIEW OF HILL END, TAMBAROORA AND THE HILL END & TAMBAROORA COMMON. 4 Geographic Background 4 Environmental Background 7 Historic Background 7 Demographic Background 7

RESPONSES TO ASSERTIONS MADE BY THE WHITE PAPER IN RELATION TO COMMONS. 9 WHAT WILL HAPPEN TO THE MINOR LEGISLATION? “Commons are held for the sole benefit of a group of commoners”. “The concept of commons could be considered to be outdated because the traditional rationale for commons no longer exists.” Do you support the repeal of the minor legislation listed? Do you see any disadvantages that would need to be addressed?

9 9 10 11 11

ON STREAMLINING AND THE DESIRE TO PRESERVE AN OVERARCHING INTENT TO ACHIEVE COMMUNITY BENEFITS. 12 “THE NEW ACT WILL PRESERVE THE OVERARCHING INTENT TO ACHIEVE COMMUNITY BENEFITS…” How would developing one piece of legislation to manage the Crown land estate benefit the community?

ANSWERS TO SELECTED QUESTIONS POSED BY THE WHITE PAPER.

12 12

14

Do you have any comments on the proposal to allow local councils to manage crown land under local government legislation rather than under the crown lands act? 14 The presence of PWS (NPWS) in Hill End & Tambaroora. 16 Summary on this point. 17 In addition to the suggestions provided, are there any other ways to ensure that the public is notified of the proposed use or disposal of crown land-and their views taken into account-that would be appropriate to include in the new legislation. 18

SUMMARY

19

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

20

Submission to the White Paper June 2014

i

Submission to The White Paper June 2014

INTRODUCTION The author of this submission, although a Common Trustee, does not submit this document on behalf of the Hill End and Tambaroora Common Trust. That was the original intention. However, for a variety of reasons, including the feeling there was insufficient time for the Trust to consider this submission due to its late delivery, the Trust decided to stick with the submission authored by Mr Don Rookledge. Two members of the Trust have asked me not to submit this as they feel it is damaging to the Common. I disagree and submit it, unendorsed, on my own behalf. It should be added however this submission has been prepared after much discussion with people from the Hill End and Tambaroora community. It has also been sent out to the community and made available via social media. Due to my situation this was at late notice (1.30pm 30th June). DISCLAIMER It should be noted that the author’s objectivity and, perhaps, integrity has been questioned, in writing, as a result of statements made in this document. Specifically she has been asked whether she is the employ of both/either NPWS and Hill End Gold Limited. The author has worked for NPWS. She was employed as a full-time field officer. She relinquished this position late in 2006. She has not worked for NPWS in the 8 intervening years. She has never worked for Hill End Gold Limited. She does work for 6 hours a week (a little more in school holidays. A little less in the depths of winter) in a camping shop, which is operated by Jim and Gaye Shanahan. Jim Shanahan does work for Hill End Gold Limited. Gaye does occasional work with the company but is primarily employed as the Administration Officer at the Hill End Public School. It should be noted that both Jim and Gaye hold long-standing executive positions with The Progress Association and the Bush Fire Brigade. The author has been a Trustee for a little under a year. She is the Trust’s representative on the recently formed “The Turon and Macquarie Weeds’ Working Group”.

FORWARD I am pleased to make this submission to The Crown Lands Legislation White Paper. Submission to the White Paper June 2014 1

Submission to The White Paper June 2014

The undertaking of a major review of the NSW Crown land estate, with the view to improving management reforms, for the benefit of the people of NSW, is timely and admirable in intention. It is also ambitious in scope. The author, after consultation with members of the community, offers an, in principle, support, to a number of the “overarching” aims of the review That is, to

• Create simpler legislation to support Crown land management in the 21st • • • •

century. Help grow the NSW economy through the more effective management of Crown land. Continue the key objective of managing Crown land for the benefit of the people of NSW Reduce red tape for the community and stakeholders Streamline and speed up administration

There is concern, however, that streamlining, done without proper identification of local community culture, will result in a dilution and homogenization of local communities counter to the 6th aim of the review. • To cement the role of local communities in the management of Crown land. The White Paper itself reflects a worrying tendency to speak of, and about communities, without due community consultation and identification. It could be argued that The White Paper speaks too generally about the concept of “community” and, particularly “local community” to be useful in any real way. Further to this it could be argued that the subsequent management of the submission process, has not allowed enough time for informed community debate. And that this seriously undermines the important recommendation listed above. Indeed two key assertions made by The White Paper

 “The only real difference between commons and Crown reserves is that commons are held for the sole benefit of a group of commoners whereas Crown reserves are held for the benefit of the broader public.” And

 “The concept of commons could be considered to be outdated because

the traditional rationale for commons no longer exists. Also, public land should provide benefits to the broader community rather than primarily to small groups of commoners.”

Indicate a level of broad-based assumptions suggesting that proper identification of local communities has been overlooked, at least in some instances. Submission to the White Paper June 2014 2

Submission to The White Paper June 2014

This is certainly the case in our community. The unique character, significance and potential of the Hill End Common (which this submission addresses in the next section for those unfamiliar with the area) earmark it as an asset for, not just the local population, but for the broader community of NSW. There is an argument that The Hill End and Tambaroora Common’s significance makes it worthy of its own piece of legislation to protect it from being identified and diluted by broad based plans of management. So, in summary, rather than revoking The Common Management Act 1989 there is a good case to be made that, the significance of the Hill End & Tambaroora Common, warrants its identification and protection, by the creation of its own individual legislative act.

Submission to the White Paper June 2014 3

Submission to The White Paper June 2014

HILL END & TAMBAROORA COMMON GEOGRAPHIC/ ENVIRONMENTAL/ DEMOGRAPHIC AND HISTORIC OVERVIEW OF HILL END, TAMBAROORA AND THE HILL END & TAMBAROORA COMMON. Geographic Background THE HILL END & TAMBAROORA COMMON comprises an area of over 6000 acres of rugged bushland. It surrounds the Village and environs of Hill End and Tambaroora. The Common’s general air of emptiness and abandonment create an evocative approach to Hill End. It is an historically rich area, set high up in the Central Tablelands, of Central West New South Wales. The Villages of Hill End and Tambaroora, the once thriving, sister-city to Hill End, have their genesis in the gold rush of the 1850’s. Hill End overtook Tambaroora as the dominant centre by the 1870’s

Pigeon-cote main street of Tambaroora Thanks to the National Library

Both villages declined as the gold-rush slowed. Hill End has enough key buildings still standing for the village to be a social centre for the locals as well as drawcard for visitors. Tambaroora, however, fell into a more dramatic decline. It exists today, through a myriad number of open spaces, remnant European plantings, and skeletal stone and Submission to the White Paper June 2014 4

Submission to The White Paper June 2014 brick remnants. It provides a potent illustration of the ephemeral nature of human habitation. It also, clearly, represents the “bust” side of the gold mining cycle. It thus provides a poetic and educational counterpoint to Hill End, a Village, which has retained strong reminders of the “boom” side of the cycle. Tambaroora is still home to a small but, proud, and semi-autonomous community which is spread though-out the common via a series of dirt roads. The Hill End and Tambaroora Common, as an area, comprises a variety of geographical landscapes. It includes some spectacular drop aways down into the Macquarie and Turon Rivers. It covers land severely degraded by the effects of the Gold rush. Extensive erosion has created, and continues to create, some spectacular gullies, and fairy-like formations. It is, in many areas, a fragile and friable landscape.

One of the many erosion gullies found throughout parts of the Common.

The Common is home to areas of significant natural and archaeological significance. The area comprising the Common contains many areas of historic and archaeological import. The Golden Quarter Mile, the chain of reef mines that hug the precipitous ridge of Hawkins Hill, is on the Common. It was, in this area that the Beyer-Holtermann Specimen was mined.

Submission to the White Paper June 2014 5

Submission to The White Paper June 2014

Photo of the Beyer-Holtermann Specimen taken by Beaufoy-Merlin With kind permission of the State gallery of NSW

The Common is also host to 3 spectacular lookouts. Kissing Point, Bald Hill and The Beaufoy-Merlin lookout are not only notable for their dramatic visual impact they also inform, each in their own way, the modern visitor. Kissing Point, for example, is the site of, what was the Hill End entry point, of the original Bridle Track. There are very few visitors, nearly all of whom have travelled in comfort, and speed, in a car, who are not immediately impacted by the remoteness of the Village and then awed at the precipitous country these early people were required to travel through. Both Beaufoy-Merlin Lookouts and Bald Hill Lookouts are enhanced by being the sites from which significant photographs from the Beaufoy-Merlin Collection were taken.

¯¯View of Hawkin’s Hill taken from the present Beaufoy-Merlin Lookout.¯¯¯¯ Photo by Beaufoy Merlin reproduced with permission from the NSW State Library. Submission to the White Paper June 2014 6

Submission to The White Paper June 2014

NPWS estimate visitor numbers to the Hill End/ Tambaroora region at around 270 a day. This is a contentious number within a Village struggling to find commercial and cultural viability. Whatever the visitor numbers are, there would be very few who do not visit one, if not all, of these significant Common assets. Environmental Background The Common is host to of wide variety of native flora and fauna There are koalas, kangaroos, various species of wallaby, possums, wombats as well as many small marsupials. The area is rich in native reptile species, insects and birds. The Barking Owl is, at times, found on the Common. The large number of tree hollows that still manage to exist on the Common are nesting sites for many birds and marsupials. The area, existing as it does, in the midst of large tracts of pastoral country provides the possibility to become a home to many species displaced by land management issues in other areas. Also by habitat destruction caused by the current suburban boom being experienced in “near-by” towns. It is an area that warrants further study. Historic Background The Hill End and Tambaroora Common has been managed by the community, via a Trust, since the mid1800’s. The estimated population for the Hill End/Tambaroora region, falls between 80 and 120 residents. The Hill End and Tambaroora Common Roll is comprised of 73 members. The Common is host to innumerable recreational and cultural activities. It not is a closed and exclusive estate. Demographic Background Today Hill End is a living Village. Its sister Village, Tambaroora, has declined to the state of near ghost-township. There exists, however, still, in Tambaroora a small but proud population, scattered throughout the Tambarooran end of the Common. The Hill End population is made up of “locals”, deemed to be residents who trace their ancestry back to the gold-rush days. And “ring-ins”, which is everybody else. There are a number of tourist operators. Most of the Commercial activity in the Village is dependent on visitors. Submission to the White Paper June 2014 7

Submission to The White Paper June 2014 There is a large and active population of Artists, drawn to the area for its authenticity, its historic aesthetic as well as for its landscape and social history inspiration. There are a number of farming families, carrying on inter-generational farming heritage. There are also a number of smaller “hobby” farms. The two villages situated, approximately, 4 kilometres apart were then, as now, inextricably linked. Hill End and Tambaroora form a remote community. Our nearest municipal centres, Bathurst and Mudgee, are approximately 80 kilometres distance. The Common falls within both Council boundaries. Most however, as well as the village of Hill End, fall within the boundaries of Bathurst Regional Council. The civic responsibility for Hill End is complicated by the fact that much of Village falls within the estate of the Department of Environment and Heritage (Parks and Wildlife Service). It is, as most people will know, deemed an “Historic Site”. It should be noted, however, that a sizeable number of freehold properties exist within the NPWS estate. The Village has a long, and contentious, history in its dealing with NPWS. The issue of “Community Consultation” is one, some in the community, feel they have heard much of, yet seen little in terms of practical and successful implementation. The resultant conflict, within occurs between sections of the Community, has led to, a culture of resentment and division. And, for a number of the population, feelings of disempowerment. The Common Trust, along with the Progress Association, The Bush Fire Brigade, the Family History Association, The Gathering Group and the Hill End Arts’ Council is one of six community based organisations. It should be noted that, the Hill End Public School, which secures its students, not just from the village and the Common, but from the surrounding rich pasture country, is a positive hub of learning and individual and social care.

Submission to the White Paper June 2014 8

Submission to The White Paper June 2014

RESPONSES TO ASSERTIONS MADE BY THE WHITE PAPER IN RELATION TO COMMONS. WHAT WILL HAPPEN TO THE MINOR LEGISLATION? The White Paper asserts that “There are a number of minor Acts that are no longer required and should be repealed.”. In building its argument for the revocation of one of the pieces of minor legislation, “The Commons Management Act 1989”, The White Paper uses two assertions.

1. “The only real difference between commons and Crown reserves is that commons are held for the sole benefit of a group of commoners whereas Crown reserves are held for the benefit of the broader public.” 2. “The concept of commons could be considered to be outdated because the traditional rationale for commons no longer exists. Also, public land should provide benefits to the broader community rather than primarily to small groups of commoners.” These two assertions are very far from the truth. At least in relation in relation to the HE&TC. Indeed any legislative revocation done, on the basis of these two arguments, could be judged as being laid on shaky foundations. At least where this Common is concerned.

“Commons are held for the sole benefit of a group of commoners”. Nothing could be further from the truth in respect of the Hill End & Tambaroora Common. Here is a list of some of the activities The Common is host to.       

Mining Fossicking/gold panning Trail bike riding 4 wheel driving Mountain bike riding Caving/mine hole exploration Camping Submission to the White Paper June 2014 9

Submission to The White Paper June 2014

       

Fishing Shooting Plein-air painting Photography Bush-walking Family History related searches Bird watching Nature study

The HE&TC seems certain to host the 2017 National Orienteering Championships. This will attract 600 Orienteers to the area. The HILL END ARTS COUNCIL is also looking at the Common as a user-friendly space in which to host their next year’s Sculpture Prize. As the Community has no easy access to recreational facilities such as pools, gyms and sporting clubs the Common also serve as a sporting/ recreational area for the villagers. The only activity that Commoners do have, in theory, an exclusive right to, is timber gathering.

“The concept of commons could be considered to be outdated because the traditional rationale for commons no longer exists.” The Hill End and Tambaroora Common Trust, from its genesis to the present day, provides an unbroken link of management, via a Trust, dating back to the 1870’s. The 140 or so intervening years, rather than resulting in historical redundancy, have served only to provide an important, and powerfully illustrative link to the past. The Common’s enclosure of, and cheek-by jowl proximity, with the Historic Estate of NPWS, also exempts it from this charge. The author, after consulting with community members, argues that the continued existence of the Common can only enhance Hill End’s importance as an “Historic Village” as well as help preserve, and promote, an authentic local population. The Common is littered with innumerable sites that link back to people’s family history. The local residents, and the descendants of the original habitants, provide an unbroken link, via oral history, photographs, written records, heirlooms etc back to the early days of the area. The Common is therefore imbued with a strong sense of historic, cultural and archaeological (both domestic and mining) significance for these people. This knowledge Submission to the White Paper June 2014 10

Submission to The White Paper June 2014 provides the opportunity for areas, and sites, of archaeological and environmental sensitivity to be identified and protected. And their stories too. Do you support the repeal of the minor legislation listed? No. Do you see any disadvantages that would need to be addressed? Yes. This document, in its entirety, does it’s best to present a coherent and comprehensive list.

Submission to the White Paper June 2014 11

Submission to The White Paper June 2014

ON STREAMLINING AND THE DESIRE TO PRESERVE AN OVERARCHING INTENT TO ACHIEVE COMMUNITY BENEFITS. “THE NEW ACT WILL PRESERVE THE OVERARCHING INTENT TO ACHIEVE COMMUNITY BENEFITS…” How would developing one piece of legislation to manage the Crown land estate benefit the community? It is clearly possible for Legislation to be “Overarching”. The concept of “Community”, however, while able to be simply defined for linguistic purposes, presents such a complicated and robust reality, it defies the definition and strictures applied to it under the Legislative aims. Within our own community, for example, there is a great diversity. This is not limited to the way that individuals hold wildly different needs and opinions. It extends through family, friends and Community groups. It also extends through time. History plays a significant part in the complicated series of interconnected matrices that constitute “community” in Hill End. Our small community represents a network of a diversity, the complexity of which, The Trust assert, would surprise someone unfamiliar with life in a small remote community. The challenge will be to understand and accommodate the needs, impacts and repercussions these legislative changes are likely to engender across a broad range of varied communities complicated, as it is, by co-existenting, so closely, with NPWS. One possible outcome of “Overarching legislation” and “Streamlining” of bureaucracy, if done without proper identification of local community culture, will result in a dilution and homogenization of local communities. There is an argument for the implementation of a programme, wherein time is spent, in dialogue with local Communities and key organisations, in order to ensure that the vigour and diversity is at least identified. In this way proper consideration can be given to what is at stake as a result of “streamlining”. Measures can then be taken to ensure that outcomes are as specific and determined as they need to be. This would also ensure that local Communities are made aware of the repercussions of this legislative proposal and would increase the quality of dialogue.

Submission to the White Paper June 2014 12

Submission to The White Paper June 2014 In our own community we have had no time to organise outside expert help and input even in the preparation of this submission. This community deserves an opportunity to fully understand the ramifications of the proposed legislative outcomes. It is only in this way that informed decisions can be made. Speaking specifically, what is at stake here, in Hill End, is not just a small area of reserve within a much broader and bigger community area. The Hill End and Tambaroora Common is an important part of the social, environmental, aesthetic, historical and cultural definition of this area. The Common is an important part of the local people’s social history as well as the extensive Diaspora of people who trace their Ancestry back here. Perhaps The Hill End & Tambaroora Common is worthy of inclusion, and documentation, as a case-study to ensure that the significance of this area and the authenticity of its population is identified and then enhanced. Rather than being diluted and lost.

Submission to the White Paper June 2014 13

Submission to The White Paper June 2014

ANSWERS TO SELECTED QUESTIONS POSED BY THE WHITE PAPER. Do you have any comments on the proposal to allow local councils to manage crown land under local government legislation rather than under the crown lands act? This is one question, the answer to which, would particularly benefit from a programme of community consultation. Informed understanding of local governance and planning legislation is really required in order to gain an understanding of what the likely outcomes to this proposal might be. The different community sectors too, need time to match likely outcomes, not just to individual needs, but, also, the broader community. It would seem logical to suggest that, as each local council has its own variations on local government legislation, that there are as many different outcomes to this question as there are councils. For this reason this document will speak of its own local council, Bathurst Regional Council. The Hill End & Tambaroora Common falls within both Bathurst Regional Council and Mid-Western Council. Bathurst Regional Council is our area’s major local government body. We are very well served by Bathurst Regional Council in many important areas. The support this community receives in the areas of health, art etc is a source of pride to the community. There are, also, outstanding contributions by individual councillors in the area of heritage management and preservation. However there are areas, many relevant to the management of The Hill End and Tambaroora Common, where there has been a long standing perception of neglect from council by certain sections of the community. For example weed management and litter collection on council reserves that fall adjacent to, or within, Common boundaries. Hill End Gold Limited, a locally based mining company, with extensive leasing and licensing arrangements on the Common, have initiated an area action group (The Turon Macquarie Weeds Working Group). This group is represented by a number of landholders (including THE&TC) concerned about Bathurst Regional Council’s slow response to the serious threat of the spread of Serrated-Tussock. Submission to the White Paper June 2014 14

Submission to The White Paper June 2014

The aim is to lobby council to take its weeds responsibility more seriously. This area produces some of the finest Merino in the country. This land is vulnerable to the spread of serrated-tussock. Bathurst Regional Council’s record of assisting in the management of this threat is one the Weed’s Working Group hopes to dramatically improve. THE&TC has a long standing, annual weed spraying programme funded from its own income. One concern, in management of the Common being transferred to BRC ,is the possibility, so real it could be deemed probable, that weed management in the area takes a significant step backwards. Our racetrack and showground, a site of historic significance, to the Village, is full of Sefton bush. It is a BRC reserve. Not only is unusable as a public space, the weed growth within creates a sizeable fire hazard to its own continuing existence.

The Hill End Racetrack and Showground 2014

Our tip, as one serving the refuse needs of the Office of Environment and Heritage (PWS), carries the interesting distinction of having no recycling facilities at all! There is not even the provision to isolate chemicals and hazardous waste. Nor it there the provision to leave bottles to one side, so that some independent collector can, feasibly and safely, execute this service. This is largely to do with the distance that separates Bathurst from Hill End. We sit at the nether end of the municipal boundary. A distance of approximately 80 kilometres. The 80 or so kilometres that divides Hill End from Bathurst also makes it very difficult for local people to attend council meetings. Lobbying local councillors, or visiting council offices has to be fitted in around a myriad of other jobs. The reverse is also true. Councillors wishing to visit Hill End to attend important community meetings need to add at least 2 hours travel time with the return trip being made, in the dark, in the weather, on a country road that plays host to a variety of native, feral and pastoral animals. Submission to the White Paper June 2014 15

Submission to The White Paper June 2014 Also a Bathurst, a large once historically significant country town, is growing and the demands upon BRC are changing accordingly. The outskirts of Bathurst now look more now like a suburb of outer Western Sydney than the once grand and historical rural centre that it was. The explosion of suburban growth mean BRC’s primary focus is, by necessity, as a supplier of services, and planning approvals, to a large, newly-growing suburban/urban area. It is very easy, with this demand on Council resources for outer regional concerns, and heritage provisions, to slip into the background. Especially when, as in the case of Hill End, there is another Government Agency, the Office of Environment and Heritage, already undertaking significant civic management responsibility. For example rubbish collection from its camping areas, and public bins. The water and sewerage network is also managed by NPWS. Many local people feel this presence of another government agency has led to the creation of an almost “sisterly” trust, with, what is seen, by many, as a resultant overreliance by BRC, on NPWS, on civic management issues in the Village. The follow on effect, possible from either the Common being given over to BRC or, indeed being given over (even in parts) to NPWS is one with, potentially serious repercussions for the Common and the Community. There are, it should be noted, large sections of a community already feeling, rightly or wrongly, disenfranchised.

The presence of PWS (NPWS) in Hill End & Tambaroora. NPWS is responsible for many important civic introductions to Hill End and its environs. The provision of a water and sewerage system has ensured residents within, and visitors to, the Historic Site are assured of monitored and high water quality. NPWS, due to their guardianship of key community buildings, exert enormous Governance control and influence in the Village. They are non-elected body. NPWS has, at times, been a great supporter, promoter of, and listener to the local community. However local people have experienced authoritarian, and short-sighted regimes. Indeed, the local community, has a long history of conflict in its co-existence with Parks. Unlike a Municipal Council, the management of the “Historic Site” occurs via a network of near tenured bureaucrats. The villagers have no or little control over, or input into, the selection of the key Personnel chosen to run their village, nor the management plans they are employed to enact. As such the Village is subject to unexpected changes in key staff. Each regime comes with its own style and agenda. Submission to the White Paper June 2014 16

Submission to The White Paper June 2014

The community, via a volunteer effort, is required, at times, to spend enormous amounts of time grappling with the challenges of co-existing with a salaried group of bureaucrats instructed to implement an ever-changing succession of paradigms and management plans. Some members of the local community feel neutered, and disempowered in this corelationship. There are complaints, often vociferous, from people feeling underconsulted on issues that have enormous ramifications for local people. There are complaints too, of people feeling they are being subjected to long-standing personal vendettas by people now is a position to hold some power. There are a number of issues currently before the Ombudsman. All of this creates a divided community. This is not helped by the perception that BRC, via a near instinctive government government body trust, seem to view NPWS, in certain areas, as an autonomous and therefore non-consultative arm of its own body. Summary on this point. There is a grave risk that the transfer of the Common management to BRC would result in the application of a general approach to Crown Reserve management which would overlook and seriously endanger the areas’ significance. There is also the likelihood that transfer of management to BRC would occasion a retrograde step in weed and feral animal management. BRC have already expressed their disinterest is assisting THE&TCT in roads’ maintenance even though, we have elderly and infirm people living at the end of fragile dirt roads. Vulnerable locals, dependant on these roads, are thus forced to share with 4WD enthusiasts, many of whom have no interest in driving with a view to maintaining road quality. The possibility of NPWS being used as enforcement agency against people, within, and from its own community is one that can only increase the division in a Community struggling to find accord. (Although it must be noted that the proposed changes to the enforcement provisions is one to be supported) Likewise the transfer of the Common to NPWS management is one that would, likely cause bitter conflict and protest. Division of the Common into areas of greater and lessor significance with a divvying up of Historically significant areas going to NPWS and “less historic” areas being over to BRC would also be likely to result in significant community division and protest. Submission to the White Paper June 2014 17

Submission to The White Paper June 2014

Not to mention the loss of a significant state asset. Hill End has large, deeply involved Diaspora, and these people too need to be considered. The Common Trust, as a community elected body is one area where local people can have a significant say in the management of a key local area. The author would like to express her concern that the imposition of a well-intentioned, but under-informed concept of Community consultation and its subsequent management will undermine the Community’s power to have a say in the management and development of the Common. In addition to the suggestions provided, are there any other ways to ensure that the public is notified of the proposed use or disposal of crown land-and their views taken into account-that would be appropriate to include in the new legislation. The intention to introduce online planning services via NSW Planning Portal is one that will see many people, particularly in regional and remote areas, seriously left out of the “virtual” loop. Bathurst Regional Council were, recently, forced to renege on their desire to bypass hard-copy notification to the Villagers of Hill End due to local peoples’ unfamiliarity with modern technologies as well as serious technical deficits due to our remote area location. Also, as there isn’t always reliable newspaper delivery to the Village, it is impossible to guarantee the availability of the local newspaper. A hard copy notification delivered to all residents seems to be worthy of consideration.

Submission to the White Paper June 2014 18

Submission to The White Paper June 2014 SUMMARY The White Paper reflects a worrying tendency to speak of, and about communities, without due community consultation and identification. In doing so it is missing, at least in some areas, an opportunity to create legislation that provides for the vigor and diversity of the people of NSW. The White Paper, perhaps, speaks too generally about the concept of “community” and, particularly “local community” to be useful in any real way to “local communities” and urges that the reality of what it is be a “local community” be examined, in depth, at the local level. The management of the submission process, has not allowed enough time for informed community debate. This seriously undermines The White Paper’s own important aim • “That is comprehensive Community consultation with the view to maximising delivery outcomes for communities and the broader NSW community” Two key assertions made by The White Paper

• “The only real difference between commons and Crown reserves is that commons And

are held for the sole benefit of a group of commoners whereas Crown reserves are held for the benefit of the broader public.”

• “The concept of commons could be considered to be outdated because the

traditional rationale for commons no longer exists. Also, public land should provide benefits to the broader community rather than primarily to small groups of commoners.”

Indicate a level of broad-based assumptions suggesting that proper identification of local communities has been overlooked, at least in some instances. The unique character, significance and potential of the Hill End Common, with its uniquely and extensively archived history, earmark it as an asset, not just for the local population, but for the broader community of NSW. The Common’s significance makes it worthy of its own piece of legislation to protect it from being identified and diluted by broad based plans of management. Not just from without. But within. So, in summary, rather than revoking The Common Management Act 1989 the author argues that the significance of the Hill End & Tambaroora Common warrants its identification and protection, by the creation of its own individual legislative act. Many Thanks. Submission to the White Paper June 2014 19

Submission to The White Paper June 2014

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This document has been written by Karin Mainwaring, a trustee of The Hill End & Tambaroora Common. As stated in the introduction this submission is not sanctioned by the Hill End and Tambaroora Common Trust. However it should be noted that Community input has been sought by me in the preparation of this document. I have done this via “Official” public notices (both virtual and hard copy) prepared by me. https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B3m-Bm8YaWVNY0VLMWl0NE5kVU0/edit?usp=sharing I have also disseminated information and invited comment, at a personal level, via a local newsletter I write The Tambaroora Times. http://tambarooratimes.blogspot.com.au/2014/06/uncommon-acts-extra-extra-readall.html And via a Facebook page I administer https://www.facebook.com/TheTambarooraTimes I did request to The Common Trust, on two occasions, that a Public Meeting be held to discuss this issue and to canvas opinions form he Community. This was deemed to be unnecessary. It should be noted that no public meeting has been held in the preparation of this submission nor of The Trust’s sanctioned one. I have also used local on-line services for overviews as well as visual references. Many thanks to Warwick Taylor’s site. http://www.warwicktaylor.com/tambaroora/album.php And Daphne Shead’s site http://hillendfamilyhistory.com/ Thanks to the State Library of NSW and The National Library for permission to include images from the their collections. All other photographs are the copyright of the author.

Submission to the White Paper June 2014 20

Submission to The White Paper June 2014

Looking out from Chinatown Tambaroora With kind permission of the State Library of NSW.

Submission to the White Paper June 2014 21