Sustainable mindsets: Combining traditional indigenous knowledge with non-aboriginal understanding to address environmental risks

Abstract

Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples are the traditional owners of Australia. It has been predicted that they have been the custodians of these lands for at least 60,000 years. Their traditional lands are inextricably linked to their languages, cultural practices and spiritual being. As the custodians they have used their traditional Indigenous knowledge to care for the land – its plants, animals and waterways, protecting unique ecosystems and maintaining sustainability. In fact, their traditional understanding reflects what has been described in the literature as a sustainable mindset. We come together as non-Aboriginal and Aboriginal educators to explore how environmental threats within the epoc of Anthropocene may be addressed using such a sustainable mindset – one reflecting both indigeneity and posthumanism perspectives. We describe three case studies showing how the use of traditional knowledge held by local Indigenous communities (IPLCs) can be used with non-Indigenous knowledge to address human induced planetary changes to protect important animal species and the land on which they live. We draw on written and oral reports from our Indigenous co-authors and data obtained informally from them by way of ‘yarning’. We describe how in the north-west of Western Australia areas of significant ecological and cultural value are being negatively affected by human-induced change threatening different animal species and ecosystems. We outline the effects of light pollution in Port Hedland and how this is disrupting the life cycle of the flatback sea turtle - culturally significant sea animals. As a point of comparison, we next describe how green back turtle and Dugong populations are being protected and sustained on the Dampier Peninsula using traditional knowledge more recently supplemented through the work of the Bardi Jawi Rangers. Finally, we examine how the Fitzroy River catchment area is increasingly under threat from water extraction and mining, but how a sustainable mindset can be used to obviate these environmental risks.

Introduction

The traditional owners of Australia are the diverse groups of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples who make up about 3% of Australia’s population. It has been predicted that they have been the custodians of this nation’s lands for at least 60,000 years. As claimed by Uncle Simon Forrest, a Noongar Elder living in the capital city of Western Australia - Perth: “[Australian Aboriginal peoples] are the first of the first nations’ people” (p.c.). Not only have they been caring for the land, but as with many First Nations people around the world, their traditional lands are inextricably linked to their languages, cultural practices and spiritual being. That is, in posthumanism terms, as a people they have been living interconnectedly with their environment (Ulmer, 2017).

We begin this paper, as is culturally appropriate, by introducing ourselves – who we are and where we come from and then, more generally, describing IPLCs of Australia and how they have exercised this custodianship on their lands using their traditional knowledge. This serves as a point of contrast to what has occurred in this country since colonialism where the sustainable mindset of Australian Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people has been ignored, even denigrated, and only in more recent times has it begun to be understood and acknowledged (though not universally embraced). As part of our discussion, we outline what is meant by the term sustainable mindset. We then provide a description of how we collected the data for the three case studies and then present each of these – all of which serve to illustrate how such a mindset can manifest in IPLCs and serve to redress Anthropocene - the environmental damage that has occurred in these settings since colonisation.

Who we are

Oliver is non-Aboriginal, but her family (from her father’s side) have been in Australia since at least colonisation. She was a primary school and ESL teacher. She is now a research professor and has worked in universities for more than 30 years. With funding made available from the Western Australian Department of Education, she initiated the development of the “On Country Teacher Education (OCTE)” program when Head of the School of Education, at Curtin University. Sheffield is non-Aboriginal and a migrant. She arrived in Australia in 1983 with her family and finished secondary school in Perth. She has a degree in science and was a secondary school science teacher. She has worked in the tertiary education since 2013 and was the coordinator and lecturer of the Science Education unit within the OCTE program that Authors 3–6 (Bradshaw, Hunter, Nowers and Taylor-Ellison) were enrolled in when they wrote the reports that are the key data for this paper. Bradshaw and Hunter are both proud Bardi women who live in the community of Ardyaloon (One Arm Point) in far north of Western Australia (WA). Together they have worked at their local school for a number of years and look forward to becoming fully qualified teachers so they can continue working with their community and the next generations. Nowers is a Yawuru woman (with traditional lands near Broome), but was born and raised in Port Hedland, WA. She has worked in various roles in schools – including as an Aboriginal Education officer and more recently with the “Follow the Dream” program (see https://pff.com.au/programs/programs/follow-the-dream/). As a fully qualified teacher she will be able to continue her education career. Taylor-Ellison is Bardi woman with strong family links back to the Northern Territory and she lives in her home community of Derby, WA. In a similar way to the others, she has worked hard to continue providing support to Aboriginal students in her school whilst studying to become a fully qualified teacher.

Australian local Indigenous communities and custodianship

At the time of colonisation – 235 years ago – it has been predicted that there were over 250 traditional Australian languages spoken by the Indigenous inhabitants of the land. These language groups or what are often referred to as language nations can be mapped geographically to cover the entire landmass of the Australian continent. The people living in these nations are the custodians their land. Prior to colonisation and continuing today, especially in areas where colonial society has had less impact, they have cared for their land – its plants, animals and waterways - using their traditional Indigenous knowledge protecting Australia’s unique ecosystems and maintaining its sustainability.

The importance of this custodianship cannot be under-estimated: Different Aboriginal nations care for some of the world's highest areas of environmental biodiversity. Like many First Nations peoples across the world, over their long history and through their connection to land, their knowledge has developed in complex ways, as a ‘collective’ that has been passed down through the generations (Little Bear, 2000). This enables them to manage and protect it, ensuring the balance of their land’s ecosystem. And the relationship they have with the land is reciprocal – with their care it sustains them physically, and also emotionally and spiritually.

Their traditional understanding of caring for and managing their land personifies what Kassel et al. (2016: 35.) describe as a Sustainable Mindset. Such a mindset is:

“a way of thinking and being that results from a broad understanding of the ecosystem's manifestations, from social sensitivity, as well as an introspective focus on one's values and higher self and finds its expression in actions for the greater good of the whole.” (Kassel et al., 2016).

The Sustainability Mindset moves away from traditional management disciplinary silos by integrating management ethics, entrepreneurship, environmental studies, systems thinking, self-awareness and spirituality. Kassel, et al., identify four key components: Emotional intelligence, system thinking, spiritual perspective and ecological worldview. In turn, these are reflected in Australian First nation peoples’ social, linguistic, and cultural ways of ‘knowing, being, and doing’ (Martin and Mirraboopa, 2003).

Whilst a sustainable mindset is reflected in the ongoing custodianship by IPLCs of their land, it stands in stark contrast to the disruptive legacy of colonialism in the environment. Even the language used by the different Aboriginal and Torres Strait language nations when describing the environment differs markedly from the way non-Aboriginal English speakers in Australia talk about it. For instance, traditional Australian Indigenous languages reflect how the speakers’ conceptualise their ‘land’, reflecting their deep and holistic knowledge, and their strong relationship and spiritual connection to it (Little Bear, 2000). For example, in the vocabulary used in many traditional Aboriginal languages, the words used for ‘land’ go beyond just referring to part of the earth with the meanings extended to also include ‘belonging’, ‘heart’, ‘spirit’ and even ‘mother’. For instance, in Noongar culture the word for traditional lands is ‘Boodja’ which also has implied in its meaning both belonging and custodianship, with specific reference to caring for their land.

English words on the other hand demonstrate how non-Aboriginal environmental understanding is compartmentalized, where for instance the physical features of the land are labelled using terms that are arbitrary, sometimes reflecting their appearance and/or transactional use. An example of this is the different way English speakers refer to water sources compared to the way traditional language users do this. In the English language words for water sources are the same words regardless to whether they are permanent or temporary and require adjectives to demark these characteristics (e.g., dry river, permanent spring, winter stream). In contrast, for instance, the Yindjibarndi people who are the custodians of land in the northwest of Western Australia approximately 1,200 kms north of Perth use different words to do this: The word ‘yinda’ is used only for a permanent pool whereas ‘mawa’ (meaning water) is used for temporary sources. Further, the language they use and their response to these natural resources are closely tied to their spiritual beliefs and cultural customs: The Yindjibarndi people believe river channels were formed by the river spirit ‘warlu’ when the world was ‘soft’ and so this spirit protects the ‘yinda’ or permanent water sources. Therefore, when accessing these resources cultural custom dictates that they show due respect for the permanent water and, in fact, demonstrate this in behavioural ways explicitly thanking the ‘warlu’ for providing this source to them (Mark and Turk, 2003). In this way, Indigenous knowledge and spiritual beliefs, and respect and care for nature serves to sustain the environment.

Colonialism, in contrast, has seen the degradation of many permanent water sources. As an example, the Murray-Darling basin of south-eastern Australia is made up of rivers, wetlands and floodplains. These environmental features help to support plants, animals and people, but they have been significantly and negatively impacted by the overuse of the Murray and the Darling Rivers. There have been fish deaths, algal blooms, flooding and rising salinity in the surrounding lands. Unlike the respect shown by the Yindjibarndi people towards their ‘yindi’, water in this basin has been treated as if it is an endless commodity. Furthermore, even terms used in English in relation to this water source reflect the economic (rather than spiritual) connection to this part of the environment. The water from the rivers is ‘bought and sold’ and ‘water markets’ are associated with its use. Hence, the primary focus has not been on sustainability, but rather on the transactional needs of those using the water (https://www.mdba.gov.au/issues-murray-darling-basin).

The exploitation of the environment and its natural resources from agriculture, mining and other related industries, such as has occurred in the Murray-Darling basin, has been repeated across Australia with significant and negative impacts. Collectively it has led to human induced climate and planetary change – Anthropocene. Yet the language describing the (over) use of the environment maintains Eurocentric perspectives with “favouring of Western knowledge over non-Western” (Henriksen et al., 2022: 466) and the ongoing compartmentalisation and even celebration of human activity within the environment. Terms such as ‘wealth’, ‘richness’, ‘increasing exports’, and ‘markets’ are used to describe such activities and even environmental impact is objectified and dehumanised with expressions such as ‘land management’ and ‘environmental regulations’.

Posthumanism critiques this human-centric worldview that has dominated Western thought for centuries. It argues that humans are not isolated from their environment and other forms of life, and it also questions the hierarchical distinctions made between humans and animals, as well as between humans and machines. Instead, it blurs the boundaries between humans, animals, machines, and nature. It envisions a future where these categories become more fluid, allowing for new forms of existence and interaction.

From an Australian Indigenous perspective, the concept of posthumanism intersects with a deep-rooted understanding of interconnectedness and respect for all life forms (Ulmer, 2017). Indigenous cultures have long held a holistic view of existence, recognizing the interdependence between humans, land, animals, and spirits. Posthumanism, which calls into question human exceptionalism, resonates with these traditions as it encourages acknowledgement of the agency and consciousness of all beings. However, Indigenous perspectives also caution against the potential risks of unchecked technological intervention, emphasizing the importance of maintaining harmony with the natural world. For Indigenous communities, the posthumanist discourse invites reflection on how advancements can coexist with traditional wisdom, promoting a balanced and sustainable future that respects the intrinsic value of all life and where “environmental justice” (Henriksen et al., 2022: 467) can be achieved.

From the intersection of the environment, recognition of Australian Indigenous perspectives, and uptake of posthumanism, a profound harmony emerges. The potential of this coming together is demonstrated in the way that IPLCs, despite the environmental crisis of Anthropocene, have successfully cared for the land in sustainable ways for millennia, perceiving it as a living entity imbued with spiritual significance and it also aligns with posthumanism's call to transcend anthropocentrism and recognize the agency of all entities, including nature. Further, posthumanism's exploration of technological possibilities can benefit from Indigenous ecological knowledge, fostering innovation that respects the delicate balance of ecosystems.

However, caution is advised, as Indigenous voices emphasize the need to avoid disrupting the symbiotic relationship between humanity and the environment. Furthermore, a “western bias” (Henriksen et al., 2022) has continued almost unabated and until very recently IPLCs have been left out of the decision-making process, nor even consulted about the management and protection of their traditional lands. In fact, with colonialisation many ICPLs were forced from their land, separating them from their spiritual and cultural ties. Their voices have not been heard nor their perspectives and insights sought, despite their considerable knowledge and understanding about the environment. In a small way in this paper, we seek to provide such an opportunity to demonstrate how listening to the original custodians of this land, building upon their traditional knowledge and practices, but also how they are combining this with non-Aboriginal understandings, might provide some way forward.

Method

The data for this paper comes from Authors 3 – 6 inclusive. By listening to their ‘voices’, based on their lived experiences and perspectives, but also their purposeful reflections of the relevant literature, we are able to provide insight beyond the usual Eurocentric view. These authors wrote their stories as part of their studies: All are currently enrolled in a Bachelor of Education to become fully qualified teachers allowing them to work with the young people in their own communities. As part of their studies, they completed a first year unit of study entitled “Educators Inquiring about the World (2023)” (https://inquiringabouttheworld.weebly.com/ways-of-knowing.html). Within this unit, Sheffield, covered content related to two-way science. This enabled all the students in the unit (including Authors 3 – 6) to combine their traditional science knowledge with a pedagogical approach that culturally aligns with ways they may work in the future as teachers.

Specifically, a two-way approach recognises that Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples have long-standing scientific knowledge traditions. These traditions have developed through observation, using all the senses; through prediction and hypothesis; through testing (trial and error); and through making generalisations within specific contexts. These scientific methods have been practised and transmitted from one generation to the next and contribute to particular ways of knowing the world that are unique, but at the same time complementary to Western scientific knowledge. As such science can be taught to school students using both western and traditional indigenous knowledge to create understanding of science topics.

As the Authors 3-6 completed the science unit their assessment required them to identify a topic that was significant to them and then to research it using local, traditional knowledge, but also informed by the research literature. Each student produced a report, and these are the basis for the case studies we report here. To supplement this data, further information was sought by way of ‘yarning’ (Ober, 2017; Oliver and Exell 2020). Yarning can be described as informal interview or a way of sharing knowledge through storytelling (Bessarab and Ng’andu 2010). They did this as they presented their ideas orally to each other and/or to Author 2 (Sheffield). Where necessary, further details with clarified or confirmed by way of email and text messages (because they continue to live “On Country” some distance from each other and from Oliver and Sheffield) during the writing of this paper. Together the yarns, written reports and other forms of communication were used as the basis for the narratives that underpin the case studies, which are presented next. The first case study illustrates the impact that humans are having on the environment and, in particular, a culturally significant marine animal (flatback sea turtles). The second provides a description of how traditional knowledge is being used to address impact on marine animals (Greenback turtles and Dugong) and how this knowledge is being extended to provide important education opportunities to students in schools. The third case study again examine the negative impact of colonial activities on important cultural land, but how perceptions are beginning to change.

The case studies

The flatback sea turtles of ‘Marapikurrinya’

The Australian flatback sea turtle (Natator depressus) is endemic to northern Australia and the populations are found from Cains in Northern Queensland across the top of the country and down to Exmouth in Western Australia, including in the Pilbara region of Western Australia, and specifically Port Hedland (Marapikurrinya). The traditional name of this town refers to the shape of the natural tidal creeks that move in from the coast and that from a bird’s eye perspective look like a hand (Mara) pointing straight (Pikurri) - with ‘Nya’ being a location marker. For the Aboriginal and Torres Strait people of Australia, turtles have a special significance: Not only are they an important food source, but they also frequently represented in ‘Dreamtime stories’ (traditional explanation of creation) and are the totems of many. Totems – something akin to a spirit animal – connect individuals to Dreamtime and the natural world, and signify the relationship (or kinship), as well as the rights and responsibilities they have to each other. Once more there is close alignment between such cultural practices and a sustainable mindset. For example, in many Aboriginal language nations custom prevents individuals from eating their totem animals serving to maintain sustainable numbers in the environment. It is also customary to show respect and care for those animals represented by an individual’s totem, helping to ensure the species longevity.

Although with roots in Broome, Author 5 (Nowers) was born and lives in Marapikurrinya and has a deep appreciation and cultural connection to the flatback sea turtles. Like many she is concerned about their vulnerability and the risk of losing them to extinction. At present the population is estimated to have only 20,000 to 21,000 nesting females. Nowers has worked as a turtle-monitoring volunteer (see below), visiting the turtles nesting and hatching sites on Cemetery and Pretty Pool beaches. Like many she is concerned about the effects of light pollution particularly how it disrupts the turtles’ journey back to the ocean. As part of her teacher education studies, she examined existing environmental reports and published research to examine what is known about the effects of light pollution (and other factors) on Australian flatback sea turtles and what has been done to date. She also provides directions for the future.

The reason for the light pollution in Marapikurrinya is that it is home to the largest port in Australia and, in fact, in the whole Oceania region. It handles around 425 million tons of cargo per year. According to research carried out by Waayers and Stubbs (2016) the flatback sea turtles nesting sites are exposed to light spill from the large industrial port and the associated residential areas. To help address their vulnerability there was a 10-year research project – a Turtle Monitoring Program carried out between 2004 and 2014. It identified the seasonality, number of turtles, nesting success, adult sizing, hatching orientation and the effects of light pollution effects on the hatching. It identified various factors related to light pollution that impact turtles including the wavelength, intensity, glow, perception of light also the direction and elevation of light sources. For instance, turtles that become disorientated from light pollution can die due to predation, dehydration, or exhaustion. The assessment also concluded that Cemetery and Pretty Pool beaches had significant amounts of lighting near nesting areas that may have a deleterious effect. In fact, mapping conducted in 2010 (see Waayers and Stubbs, 2016) of the hatchlings emerging from their nests at Pretty Pool beach revealed that a majority of hatchlings were attracted by the lights on Goode Street and Cooke Point, however, most tracks showed the turtles eventually made it to the ocean.

As a result of the various research studies, an Environmental Assessment guideline was developed for protecting marine turtles. Suggestions included changes to the intensity and wavelength of lighting along the beaches, changing the metal halide lights and high-pressure sodium lights to low pressure sodium lights in order to reduce the impact of light pollution on the turtle’s rookeries. Other strategies also have been implemented to minimise the light directed towards the beach including the installation of lowered streetlights, dual lighting fitted with both metal halides for off season lighting and low-pressure sodium lighting for nesting seasons. In addition to these moves, information packs were distributed to residents about how they could reduce the impact of artificial lighting on the beach front. Lights that exist at nearby Matterson Oval and the Water tower have now both been turned off during nesting seasons and the intensity of the flood lights have been changed at the council building. The relocation of the hospital from Port Hedland to South Hedland means there is no long lighting from this facility affecting the turtles at night-time.

Despite these positive outcomes, further research is still required as the turtles appear to face challenges beyond light pollution including their use as a food source (e.g., harvesting of eggs), destruction of nests due to dune erosion and 4WD activities, ocean pollution, global warming (e.g., heat of beach sand), net entanglement, and predatory animals (e.g., sharks, crocodiles, goannas and feral animals), with 88% of nest predation being done by foxes. Off road vehicles on the Pretty pool beach can destroy nests and disrupt the lay of the land creating dips that trap hatchlings preventing them from reaching the ocean. Dredging of the harbour can also impact the turtles either by way of direct injury or because habitat modification can impact their nesting sites (e.g., burying nests). It can also cause the turtles to be disorientated, disrupting their navigation to and from their nesting beaches. Cyclones, which have always been prevalent in the Pilbara, can also cause the beach dunes to erode and increase hatchlings mortality rates through loss of nests to erosion and by impacting female turtles from being able to nest during these times.

Although light pollution can be harmful, especially during hatching seasons, the town of Port Hedland has implemented various measures to combat the problem to ensure that the survival of the turtle rookeries with significant work having been done to reduce the impacts of light pollution. As a result the numbers of female nesting flatback sea turtles has remained steady over recent years. Unfortunately, other challenges are impacting the turtles and further research is needed. This is especially important given the ecological and cultural significance of these marine animals to Australian Aboriginal people.

The Greenback turtles and dugong of the dampier peninsula

The Dampier peninsula is located in the Kimberley region of Western Australia. It is home to a number of small Aboriginal communities including those in Beagle Bay, Lombardina, Djarindji, Ardyaloon (One Arm Point) and Ngardalargin. Given these communities and their relative isolation (though this changed when the road was bitumised at the beginning of this decade), it is a place that remains strong in terms of its rich Aboriginal culture. The elders continue to share traditional knowledge which is passed from one generation to the next. This is supplemented by the work of local rangers – such as the Bardi Jawi rangers working out of Ardyaloon.

Ardyaloon is located 2446 km north of Perth with the closest populated town being Derby. In 2016 Ardyaloon had a population of 365 and is the home community of Authors 3 and 4 (Bradshaw and Hunter). Both are proud Bardi women with strong connections to culture and community. In fact, their desire to become fully qualified teachers is driven by their desire to stay in their community to teach the current children and future generations.

Hunter’s report of the greenback turtles (Chelonia Mydas) provides a unique comparison to that of Case Study 1. Greenback turtles are some the oldest reptiles in the world dating back to the time of the dinosaurs over 200 million years ago. They are slow growing - the longest of any sea turtle and they can live up to 70 years. They are located throughout the temperate water in the regions around the equator. They nest along the Western Australian coast, migrating from feeding grounds in Indonesia, Queensland and Northern Territory. Although there are large numbers of turtles around the waters of Ardyaloon, they are currently listed as vulnerable according to the list of endangered species and they are now protected through multi-country Memoranda of Understandings and treaties since the 1980s (Seminoff, 2004). Green turtles are being managed internationally because of the decreasing numbers around the world. Their biggest threat is humans hunting them or taking their eggs for food, income or illegal trade. There is no current protection plan on the Dampier Peninsula, but with the new road development the Bardi Jawi rangers are currently examining ways to control hunting methods to ensure the longevity of the species. At present they are tagging them to keep records and data of the whereabouts.

Despite being protected, Aboriginal people do have a license to hunt them. Greenback turtles (called ‘goorlil’ in local Bardi language) are a very important to the local indigenous communities as they are one of the main food sources, having been sustainably hunted by the Bardi people for many thousands of years. One turtle can feed a whole family group and every piece of the meat is eaten. Having turtle cooked at a family house brings all family members together to enjoy the meal and to have quality time with each other.

A community elder described how a dream time story “from way back” about Goorlil has been carried through the generations as a means to keep Bardi culture very strong and especially as a mechanism to protect these animals. As a result, these turtles have been cared for as part of traditional custom. For example, eggs that have already been laid are not to be touched because there is a need to respect them so they may hatch and survive for future harvest. However, when a turtle is caught and has eggs inside its cooked in a traditional way with rocks mixed with the blood in a pot and this is a special treat for families to enjoy together.

Bradshaw’s report describes how Dugongs are also culturally significant to the Bardi people. Like the greenback turtles, they are also an important source of food that have been sustainably sourced from the sea over many generations. For example, mother dugongs are never speared to ensure the future of the species. Each Female dugong gives birth to one calf at a time, and it stays with its mother until it stops breast feeding. Within the Bardi tribe, only men can hunt for dugong and when one is caught it shared out to different family groups. This is a special event in the community as everyone comes together to eat the very tasty and rich meat.

Dugongs are a medium seized marine mammal, in adulthood weighing up to 300 kg and growing up to 2.6 m in length. As with the greenback turtles, they may live up to 70 years. Dugongs are a close relative of elephants, although they are often referred to as the sea cow. Their scientific name is Dugong dugong. As another endangered species it, too, is protected, although again Bardi people have traditional rights to hunt this species.

Dugong are located in northern half of Australia, from Queensland down to the New South Wales border on the east coast and down from Norther Territory to Shark Bay on the west coast. They are also found in neighbouring countries in the Indian and Pacific Oceans. They live in warm shallow areas where they can protect themselves from big waves and wild storms and where there is sea grass – which is their food source.

It is this traditional care for the animals, sustainable hunting methods and the respect that is given, combined with the more recent activities of the Bardi Jawa rangers that will serve to protect animals such as the greenback turtles and dugongs. To this end the rangers also come to the school and work with the students teaching them about looking after the Bardi sea country and protecting the sea animals within this zone. For instance, using traditional knowledge they teach the boys which animals to hunt and which to leave alone. They also teach the students that killing too many will mean that these animals will not survive into the future. In this way, a two-way learning approach to science works to foster an ongoing sustainable mindset in the next generation.

The fitzroy river catchment area

Given its cultural value and ecological importance and being an integral part of life to the Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal people of the West Kimberley region where her community is located, Author 6’s (Taylor-Ellison) report focuses on the Fitzroy River catchment area. The river system and its catchment play an important role to the Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal people in the towns and surrounding communities by providing food, water and recreational activities. In an area where the cost of living is high, especially in terms of food, and incomes are low, fishing and hunting are an integral part of life providing food security and good nutrition, as well as traditional medicinal resources.

Taylor-Ellison describes how there are a total of 10 different language groups (nations) within the Fitzroy River catchment area. Permanent and semi-permanent pools are fundamental water sources for traditional and modern Aboriginal people, and while much of the knowledge about their cultural significance is not extensively recorded in western scientific literature, it can still be found in some language groups oral histories, rock art, and dreamtime stories. From a cultural perspective, ancestral powers are still present in the landscape and intimately connect people, country and culture (Petheram et al., 2018: 124). There are many places along the river and in the catchment area that are used for getting food, family gatherings and recreational activities such as fishing and hunting. In addition, many billabongs, waterholes and rivers are used for traditional spiritual and ceremonial practices, with some having rock paintings located nearby and for this reason they are considered sacred sites. Rivers, and water in general, are central to many cultural beliefs and stories with spirit beings believed to occupy the area, often in the form of snakes or rainbow serpents. Morgan et al., (2004: 158) states that the waters and places such as gorges must be treated with ritual and respect to maintain water flows, renew aquatic life and ensure human welfare.

Taylor-Ellison also notes its environmental importance, describing the many rivers, billabongs and wetlands and how they are home to numerous rare, threatened and endangered species of plants and animals, some of which cannot be found anywhere else in the world. For this reason, several legislative acts and formal listings such as the West Kimberley Heritage listing (2011), are in place to protect these species and the land on which they inhabit. Her report (written the previous year) turned out to be quite prophetic, at the beginning of this year floods devastated the region having catastrophic impact on the land, its plants, animals and people.

The Fitzroy River catchment area spans a total of approximately 94,000 km² of land in the Kimberley region. It extends as far north to the Wunaamin Milinundi Ranges (formally the King Leopold Ranges) and to the end of the Hann River. To the east, the boundary is close to the town of Halls Creek and to Stuart Creek in the southeast. Extending southwest it includes Geegully creek, the Willare Roadhouse and the township of Derby to the west. This is where the mouth of the Fitzroy River can be found. The catchment area also encompasses the Fitzroy River, the Margaret River, the Camballin Flood Plains, Geikie Gorge and Gladstone Lake. In addition, it includes two main towns, Derby and Fitzroy Crossing, as well as up to 60 small Aboriginal communities and nearly 45 pastoral stations - meaning a combined population of 7500 people in the area (Petheram et al., 2018), all of whom rely on the mighty Fitzroy River.

The Fitzroy River itself lies between Derby and Broome and flows out into the King Sound within the Indian Ocean. It stretches over 700 km with approximately 20 other rivers and creeks flowing into it. Traditionally known as Martuwarra, it is one of the largest free-flowing rivers in the world with outstanding biodiversity. The river and the catchment area house a diverse range of plants and animals that have adapted to the seasonal climate. There are also numerous billabongs (small permanent water sources) and larger wetlands that hold ecological and environmental value (Environment Australia, 2001 as cited in Petheram et al., 2018) supporting waterbird populations of international significance, 10 rare or threatened plant species and 13 threatened animal species. The popular tourist destinations of Geikie and Windjana gorges, Mimbi caves and Tunnel creek hold stranded remnants of a Devonian barrier reef system and supports colonies of the Yellow-lipped cave bat (endemic to the Fitzroy River), the Ghost bat and the Orange Horseshoe bat (endemic to Australia) (McKenzie et al., 2009). The mouth of the Fitzroy River in the King Sound is also a notable habitat that contains 13 species of ecologically significant mangroves and complex food-webs and is one of the most species-rich tidal flat systems in the world (Centre of Excellence in Natural Resource Management, 2010, as cited in Petheram et al., 2018). A total of 42 fish species have been recorded in the Fitzroy catchment, 28 of which complete their life cycle in freshwater and the remaining 14 are marine, estuarine or rely on both salt and fresh waters during their lifecycle (Petheram et al., 2018). The Fitzroy River acts as a nursery to many of these species and in some cases is the only place they are located (e.g., Freshwater Sawfish and the Freshwater Whipray – both of which are listed as international threatened species list). Other notable threatened animal species in the Fitzroy River and its catchment include the Red Goshawk, Purplecrowned Fairy-wren, Gouldian Finch, Peregrine Falcon, Northern Quoll and the Freshwater crocodile (Vogwill, 2015).

Despite its ecological significance and it being a centre of cultural life, there is a longstanding history of threats to the river and the catchment area with companies attempting to extract water or dam the Fitzroy River. At present, there are proposals for water extraction for several irrigation projects and for mining. There are continually new proposals for damming, mining, land-clearing and water extraction in the Fitzroy River catchment area with the majority being rejected. At present, there are proposals for water extraction for several irrigation projects and for mining. Hancock Agriculture, a subsidiary of Gina Rinehart’s privately owned Hancock Prospecting, has plans to pump 325 gigalitres (325 billion litres) from the Fitzroy River. This equates to approximately two-thirds of the Sydney Harbour and would irrigate a cropping area of over 21,000 hectares (“Cattle queen Gina Rinehart’s $285 million battle – Hancock Agriculture”, 2019). They also own one of the few stations in the catchment area that currently have crop and irrigation set up. Gogo station, also known as Margaret Downs, located 11 km south of Fitzroy Crossing also has plans to extract water for an irrigation project. According to the Environmental Protection Authority (2021), their request is to develop up to 8353 hectares of land for irrigated cropland and associated infrastructure and the abstraction of 50 gigalitres of surface water and 2500 megalitres of ground water. The proposed location of the project is on station property near Margaret River, approximately 10 km east of Fitzroy Crossing.

In 2018, the WA government lifted the fracking ban and with that brought companies scoping places in the Kimberley for fracking projects. According to an article released in early 2021, there was news that Buru Energy (who have former projects in the region) and Origin Energy have partnered for drilling exploration and possible fracking with the proposed locations of the Roebuck Bay Ramsar Wetland catchment, the Fitzroy River, the Karajarri and Yawuru Indigenous Protected Areas and Edgar Ranges National Park (Stringfellow, 2021). Simultaneously, another news article was released detailing the efforts of the Texan owned company, Bennet Resources, to build a gas mine in the Kimberley with plans to ultimately export it. Their first application of 6-wells near Nookanbah station was declined, but has since been re-lodged with an expansion of 20-wells across Nookanbah and Blina stations. This area, located approximately 20 km from the Fitzroy River, is used by the native title holders – Warlangurru and Yungnora (Nookanbah) peoples (Young, 2021).

There are measures to keep the Fitzroy River in its natural state and to protect the endangered species that cannot be found anywhere else on earth. For generations Aboriginal people, especially the traditional owners have fought to protect the Fitzroy River in its natural state. Many local and traditional owners are continuing the fight to protect the Fitzroy River because of its history and cultural significance for the Aboriginal people. In more recent times this has become easier to achieve with government departments recognising the significance of the ecology within the catchment area and the wider Kimberley region. The Fitzroy River is recognised in Australia through various formal listings: the West Kimberley National Heritage listing (2011), and the Aboriginal Heritage Act 1972 (WA) (Poelina et al., 2019: 8). There are also several conservation and national parks and sanctuaries which are managed by government departments and local rangers’ groups and, therefore, are protected under government policy and legislation. In 2016, a document called the Fitzroy River declaration was created by traditional owners and includes eight key steps which they agreed are necessary to protect the values of the river (Álvarez-Romero et al., 2021: 77). While this is not yet a legal recognised document, the Martuwarra Fitzroy River Council has called on the WA Government for its implementation along with a Martuwarra Fitzroy River catchment management plan. It is groups like the Martuwarra Fitzroy River Council (established in 2018 by traditional owners) and Environs Kimberley (established in 1996 by local volunteers) that advocate for the implementation of protection mechanisms such as the commitments made by the 2018 WA Government – no damming policy, develop a management plan and create the Fitzroy River National Park.

Sadly, however, much of the upper Fitzroy River catchment shows considerable signs of degradation because heavy grazing, with many large uncovered and eroding areas (Williams and Pen, 1998). Cattle have caused increased soil erosion and a decline in the ground cover vegetation in the riparian zone along the river channel and around billabongs and wetlands. Deliberate and accidental plant and animal introductions have also added to the altered state of the catchment landscape (CSIRO, 2018: 10).

In terms of the water flow of the river system, this depends on the rainfall during the wet season and climate change, it seems, is affecting this. According to data from the Bureau of Meteorology, the annual stream flow has increased over the years. Specifically, the average streamflow for the 2019–2020 season, 92% of the region (9 sites) had falls within the higher ranges (1000–2500, 2500–10,000, 10,000–50,000 ML/day). This contrasts to the total rainfall for 2016–2017 season where only 15% of the region (2 sites) had higher than 50,000 ML/day and 46% (6 sites) had 10,000–50,000 ML/day. Clearly the floods earlier this year demonstrate the impact of changes that have occurred both in rainfall, but also in terms of the catchment’s ability to cope with annual ‘wet’ season.

Based on the evidence provided above, there is clearly a need to protect the Fitzroy River Catchment area – the various species and the land which they inhabit. Further water extraction, land clearing and fracking will continue to alter its natural state, impacting key ecosystems, endangered species and areas of considerable cultural significance. The WA Government needs to fulfil their commitments made in 2018 to the traditional owners and the local people of the West Kimberley to ensure the sustainability of this important area.

Conclusion

The First Nations people of Australia have maintained a Sustainable Mindset for millennia reflected in their ways of ‘knowing, being and doing’ and shown explicitly through their languages and cultural practices. Their Indigenous knowledge and insights intersect with posthumanist ideals in ways that hold promise for shaping a future where advancements honour the interconnectedness of life and the sanctity of the natural world. In this way their knowledge represents an invaluable resource to address environmental injustice during this period of Anthropocene. Following their lead, rather than simply considering natural resources as commodities to be used to satisfy human requirements (as has occurred through colonial practices), their practices can serve to protect the land including the ecosystems, plants and animals. This involves a change of mindset – a move away from “Judeo Christian epistemologies that have historically valued humans over other beings” (Henriksen et al., 2022) to becoming custodians of the land - providing it with physical, emotional, and spiritual sustenance and protection. This may be achieved through a two-way approach to sustainability – utilising both traditional knowledge and supplementing it with non-Aboriginal approaches. The case studies reported in this paper show the various ways and extent to which this has been done in different locations in the north of Western Australia. They serve as models for the future.