In short
A west Victorian farmer has disputed charges that he destroyed an ancient Aboriginal rock formation depicting an eel.
The case is being argued on whether the Lake Bolac landowner made an “honest and reasonable” mistake excavating the rocks four years ago.
What’s next?
The magistrate will hand down his decision on May 1.
A western Victorian farmer has disputed a charge that he destroyed a large Aboriginal cultural heritage site, telling a court he believed it presented a “safety issue”.
Adrian McMaster allegedly used an excavator to remove rocks from an ancient stone arrangement resembling an eel on his Lake Bolac property, between Ballarat and Dunkeld, in 2021.
“I was moving the stones so I could get the [weed sprayer] in there,” the 65-year-old told Ballarat Magistrates Court.
“It was a fire hazard.”
Mr McMaster’s lawyer, James Portelli, told the court his client made an “honest and reasonable” mistake as he believed the rocks he moved were not the 1,500-year-old eel formation.
Mr Portelli said Mr McMaster was not disputing the legitimacy of the registered Aboriginal heritage site, the fact the eel formation was on his property, or that he engaged in mechanical rock removal.
But Mr McMaster conceded he had limited knowledge of the ancient formation, including its shape.
“All it is is rocks in a paddock,” Mr McMaster said. “Being a miner, a rock’s a rock.”
Growing up on the property about 220 kilometres west of Melbourne, Mr McMaster said there were “Chinese whispers” in his family about the Aboriginal heritage site but never any formal discussions or documentation.
He told the court he appreciated the importance of Aboriginal heritage after 40 years as a fly-in fly-out miner in locations including the Pilbara, and while he did not accept the site was culturally significant, he would never “go out intentionally to do damage”.
“Being a farmer you’re thinking about doing preventative stuff, you’re not thinking about seeing Tom, Dick or Harry to get permission,” Mr McMaster told the court, when pressed by prosecution Emily Allan over inconsistencies in his approach to Aboriginal heritage on Western Australian mine sites compared to his own property.
“I don’t know anyone in Lake Bolac of Aboriginal background … never seen them in my lifetime.”
Cultural heritage advisor intervenes
The court heard Mr McMaster was twice warned by senior heritage advisor John Tunn that he was interfering with a known Aboriginal heritage site as he removed the rocks.
Mr Tunn, from the Department of Transport and Planning, told the court he drove past the property on the day of the incident and saw Mr McMaster operating an excavator between basalt brown boulders.
Mr Tunn said he pulled over and told Mr McMaster he needed to be “very careful” and urged him to “get some advice”.
Mr Tunn said he left but, after five minutes, turned back to have a second conversation with Mr McMaster because there didn’t seem to be any “alarm or urgency” on his part.
“I said, ‘I don’t know whether I’ve been clear enough. If you continue to do what you’re doing, it may not end well for you’,” Mr Tunn told the court.
Mr McMaster said he was not prepared to take Mr Tunn’s word as “gospel” and therefore had no reason to stop his work.
“I wanted to finish doing that job and get it out of the way. Safety first,” Mr McMaster said.
Significance of the site
John Clarke, from the Eastern Maar Aboriginal Corporation, told the court he could not articulate in English how important the place was to Aboriginal people.
The giant 300 metre eel arrangement, known to Djap Wurrung traditional owners as the kuyang ceremonial ground, has been a recognised and registered site of Aboriginal significance since 1975.
Mr Clarke said that the entire existence of the Maar people revolved around the kuyang (eel) and he was “shocked” to find it had been destroyed.
“It is a given that we lose heritage every day,” Mr Clarke told the court after a long pause.
“This was a significant site. Given the township’s knowledge of the place, it was a shock.”
Alleged breach of heritage act
Following an investigation by Aboriginal Victoria — which has since been amalgamated into First Peoples-State Relations under the Department of Premier and Cabinet — Mr McMaster was last year charged with one offence under the Aboriginal Heritage Act, relating to harm or likely harm of Aboriginal cultural heritage.
The two-day hearing in Ballarat this week focused on whether Mr McMaster understood he was excavating land overlaid with the registered heritage site.
The case is being argued on the question of whether Mr McMaster’s actions constituted a “mistake of fact or law” and whether that mistake was “reasonable and honest”.
The magistrate will hand down his decision on May 1.