Tag Archives: Tweed Byron aboriginal Lands Council

Easy-Money – Claiming Ab-Originality

Billy Terribah/Didiba Andrews (father of Elizabeth “Lizzie” Boyd)

It’s become ‘trendy’ [and profitable] to claim descent from aboriginal blood…and many greedy souls are scurrying to feed at the trough – draining the limited funding allotted to struggling and disadvantaged Aboriginal peoples ……But how would you tell if someone really is an Aboriginal , or a fraud?

One of the by-products of human consciousness is self-consciousness, that is, knowing deeply that you are alive….And part of self-consciousness is also wondering where we came from; it’s clearly human nature to seek one’s roots.

For some people, that task is relatively easy because there are oral legends or written words that go back at least several generations (assuming family history is passed down accurately). But for most people, the path backwards is rocky, cluttered with confusing detour signs, or simply blank…..

Brunswick Heads Aboriginal Reserve
Closeup of the Brunswick Aboriginal Reserve

The recording of Origine’ culture was not a priority for colonial settlers in Australia……after initial invasion and occupation surviving peoples were incarcerated into Labour Camps and Reserves;  all distinct individual tribal countries were obliterated and all individual clans homogenised under the blanket classification of ‘Aborigines’, from one side of the continent to the other….in the subsequent decades the white Australia policies set about claiming the native bloodlines were on the decline –  dying out.

Several generations later many ‘white’ Australians are often excited to discover they may have aboriginal connections, and some even perceive there will be lucrative perks….native title claims and ILUA’s with the lure of potential ‘trust funds’ fuels the [all too] human ‘greed gene’…….and Reconciliation process trained the population to not ask to many questions [ its supposedly racist?]…..

But with billion dollar lands, mineral and development deals often at stake, why cant the public ask questions? ….Don’t the people have a right to question what actually constitutes an Aboriginal person and how much ‘ab-originality’ should someone possess in order to be given access to assets ?

Legal historian, John McCorquodale, has reported that since the time of white settlement, governments have used no less than 67 classifications, descriptions or definitions to determine who is an Aboriginal person… Royal Commission into Aboriginal Deaths in Custody, National Report (1991), Commonwealth of Australia, Canberra [11.12.5].

The Australian Law Reform Commission [ALRC] discussed the definition of an ‘Aborigine’ in its 1986 report, The Recognition of Aboriginal Customary Laws…….. The ALRC noted that early attempts at a definition tended to concentrate on descent, without referring to other elements of Aboriginality……. Problems arose in deciding whether descendants of unions between Aborigines and settlers were to be regarded as Aboriginal for the purposes of various restrictive or discriminatory laws [for example, disentitling Aborigines from voting or enrolling to vote]. In applying these restrictive laws, tests based on ‘quantum of blood’ were commonly applied….. ¼, ¾, or half caste, etc.

The Commonwealth Parliament obtained the power to legislate with respect to people of ‘the aboriginal race in any State’ in the 1967 referendum…… Aboriginal people were finally granted the legal status of being Human…. The Commonwealth subsequently enacted a number of statutes for the purpose of providing certain rights and privileges for the exclusive benefit of Indigenous Australians……. These statutes have generally defined an Aboriginal or Indigenous person as ‘a person who is a descendant of an indigenous inhabitant of Australia’, or a member or a person ‘of the Aboriginal race of Australia’.

These individual Aboriginal statues marks the inception of what will develop into a hidden apartheid system – an alternative legislative pathway which uses aboriginal legislation as a means of sidestepping ‘interference’ by the greater Australian community……..only for aboriginals  and operated by bureaucrats.

In the early 1980s, the Commonwealth Department of Aboriginal Affairs proposed a new three-part definition of an Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander person.

An Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander is a person of Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander descent who identifies as an Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander and is accepted as such by the community in which he [or she] lives.

But what if the community he [or she] lives in is dominated by a culture of whole families fraudulently claiming aboriginality?

Then the Federal government departments adopted the definition as their ‘working definition’ for determining eligibility to certain services and benefits. The definition continues to be applied administratively in relation to programs such as Abstudy funding for tertiary students, or aboriginal housing and health services, etc.

These ‘freebies’ led a lot of multi-cultural Australians, living comfortable regional existences far removed from the struggles of the remnant tribes existences on reserves, to suddenly become interested in claiming aboriginal descent [no matter how removed]   

The ‘bucket’ of cash which was allocated for ATSI programs became swamped with applications from all over…..but the bucket has a fixed amount and the more mouths ‘sucking’ on the tit, the less funds go to the truly disadvantaged…..this eventually ended with remote aboriginal communities loosing funding and having to be relocated yet again, their culture dispersed…..a sick cycle of dispossession continues….

The greedy fever of ‘easy-money’ has seen aboriginal identification proliferating…with the catch-cries of “compensation” infecting the memberships of Aboriginal Lands Councils and welfare departments…. and most recently, the native title process….. with circumspect individuals claiming to descended from apical ancestors  Origine’ families…….and even filing native title claims without the Origine’ families knowledge , let alone consent.

Origine’ Ngarakbal and Githabul descendants of the Yoocum-Yoocum moiety – 1910 – these people were incarcerated in the Nerang Aboriginal Reserve on the Gold Coast

In his story on the business of bloodlines Tony Koch, a Chief Reporter in Queensland for the Australia Newspaper, explains…..

http://www.tony-koch.com/index.php?page=home

“There is pride in discovering an Aboriginal family background, but some people lie about it to gain undeserved benefits”

“In the days when the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander commission existed and squandered much of  its billion-dollar budget like a drunken sailor, Aboriginality to a scheming, dishonest person meant possible access to high-paying positions of authority in legal, housing, employment or native title organisations where accountability was often little more than a joke”….. ,Kosh writes.

Aboriginal academic and co-chairwoman of Reconciliation Australia Jackie Huggins told Kosh how people would contact ATSIC or Centrelink claiming they had discovered that a fictitious grandparent was Aboriginal.

“The calls would get to me and these people would ask what special benefits they were therefore entitled to claim,” Huggins said.

“I would say: ‘This is what you will get — life expectancy of 20 years less than non-indigenous Australians, and if you are a woman, add three years; you will get sick and tired of going to funerals; probably get diabetes before age 40, and if not, kidney, heart or lung failure will kill you before you are 60’.

“Spiritually and culturally, there is a treasure trove of benefits. …..

“I am sick of people wrongly claiming that economic or special welfare benefits flow to Aboriginal people. It is just not true. I would recommend an ATSIC publication titled Matter of Fact which spells out the truth for all to see.”

On April 20, 1998, Federal Court Justice Merkel handed down a 120-page decision in Shaw and Another v Wolf and Others. A key element in that judgement establishing the status of Aboriginality was the declaration that to be Aboriginal one must, among other things, be descended from the inhabitants of Australia at the time immediately BEFORE European settlement.

Several key Native Title Indigenous Lands Use Agreements [ILUA] have been signed in New South Wales by ‘Aboriginals’ who could not show their connection to country from BEFORE the mid 1800’s ……………….This resulted in Native Title NOT being achieved, and having to be surrendered…..either Extinguished ….or in exchange for DEVELOPMENT….click on the below links to view the ILUAs of the Byron Bay Bundjalung which extinguished Ngarakbal Native Title without consent of the moiety.

http://www.nntt.gov.au/searchRegApps/NativeTitleRegisters/Pages/ILUA_details.aspx?NNTT_Fileno=NIA2001/001

http://www.nntt.gov.au/searchRegApps/NativeTitleRegisters/Pages/ILUA_details.aspx?NNTT_Fileno=NI2006/004

The most celebrated case of disputed Aboriginality occurred in the Queensland sugar coast town of Bundaberg in 2000 when claims were made by one branch of the Appo family that more than 100 members of their family were of Sri Lankan descent not Aboriginal, and were wrongly receiving concessional loans and benefits said to total millions of dollars over three decades.

Tony Kosh’s research revealed that, “There were allegations of wrongly claimed business and legal assistance, and even other claims that some family members were selected in state and national indigenous sporting teams despite not having Aboriginal heritage”.

“The issue came to a head on July 21, 2000 when Allan Keith Appo, then 66, was charged in the Bundaberg magistrate’s court with possessing undersized and female mudcrabs”.

“In his defence Appo claimed that the Fisheries Act did not apply to him because he was Aboriginal and therefore he could fish without restriction”.

“However, Department of Primary Industries legal officers researched Appo’s genealogy and presented generations of birth, death and marriage certificates showing his heritage was purely Sri Lankan”, Kosh states

“Magistrate John Brennan found Appo was not aboriginal and fined him $2300. ………Ironically, Appo was represented by Townsville Aboriginal Legal Aid which also funded his appeal to the District Court — where he lost again……..Appo, who has since died, said in an interview with me at the time that he had documented evidence from locals who swore he had Aboriginal blood”, Kosh recorded

Kosh was told by Appo that his reasoning for perpetuating the fraud: “If this decision holds, my children and their children will be affected because they will not be eligible for Aboriginal programs,” he lamented.

Spokesperson for the branch of the Appo family opposing him, Julie Appo, said at the time that it was destructive to real Aboriginal people to see jobs and program concessions going to people not entitled to such claims.

She told Kosh that “This deprives a genuine Aboriginal person of getting a job, position, a wage — and thereby providing something for his children to aspire to,” she said.

Kosh had found that earlier, in January 1995, another Appo family member from Bundaberg was also caught by fisheries inspectors with undersized and female crabs. He was charged and used the defence of Aboriginality, but was found guilty because birth certificates showed he did not have Aboriginal heritage.

He was fined $2700. Despite that conviction he continued to vote at ATSIC elections, claim Abstudy grants for his children and sell Aboriginal art.

He revealed his two brothers and a sister, his wife and his five children “all went through school on Abstudy”.

At that time Aboriginal corporation administrator, Garry Hamilton, of the Brisbane legal firm Minter Ellison, stated that the incidence of non-eligible people claiming Aboriginality for financial benefits was “rampant”.

He told how he had been appointed as administrator at Dalaipi Aboriginal Corporation at Caboolture, north of Brisbane in the mid-1990s. “The former administrator of this organisation just let anybody in,” he said. “There was an incredible number of white Australians with no Aboriginal connections at all getting benefits. It was so bad I just had to close the place down.” He told Kosh

http://www.tony-koch.com/index.php?page=detail&id=556

There are many who have suggested that MtDNA testing could be introduced to determine Aboriginality.  

The Australian Law Reform Commission tabled a report in May 2003 titled  – ‘Essentially Yours: The Protection of Human Genetic Information in Australia (ALRC Report 96)’ – it was the product of a two-year inquiry by the ALRC and the Australian Health Ethics Committee (AHEC), involving extensive research and widespread public consultation. The inquiry was the most comprehensive ever undertaken into these issues in Australia or overseas.

The report covers an extensive range of activities in which genetic information plays—or soon will play—an important role. The two-volume, 1200 page report makes 144 recommendations about how Australia should deal with the ethical, legal and social implications of the New Genetics.

Dr Loretta de Plevitz and Larry Croft summarised the four major barriers to proving Aboriginality by means of genetics as follows:

“Firstly.… there is no such thing as a genetically differentiated ‘race’: we are all one species.

Secondly … if race is defined by cultural and genetic context, then there are difficulties in proving membership of the ‘Aboriginal race’ as on this definition there were hundreds of Aboriginal races pre-1788.

Thirdly,….looking at the polymorphisms in an individual’s DNA shows us who they are related to. But this just defers the problem of whether those people related to the claimant are Aboriginal or not.

Fourthly…….who could the claimant’s genetic inheritance be tested against? It would be necessary to construct DNA reference groups based on ‘pure blood’ Aboriginal people covering all geographic groups in Australia. If by chance one of the reference DNA groups was very similar to the claimant’s then we can show descent … as the Australian Aboriginal population is so genetically diverse, there would need to be a large reference set of people for all genetically distinct groups …

Where there has been the wholesale extermination of entire groups of people, claimants attempting to prove their Aboriginality may not be related to any of the reference groups because there is no longer a reference group for them “…….L de Plevitz and L Croft,  13 March 2002.

Dr de Plevitz is a lecturer in the Faculty of Law, Queensland University of Technology; Mr Croft is employed by the Institute for Molecular Biosciences, University of Queensland.

“Though possibly an improvement on ‘blood’ quantum definitions, the utility of this summary can still be questioned, not least of all on the grounds that there is no such thing as an Aboriginal race. Most scientists long ago stopped using the word ‘race’…”..….Department of Aboriginal Affairs, Report on a Review of the Administration of the Working Definition of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders (1981), Commonwealth of Australia, Canberra, cited in J Gardiner-Garden, The Definition of Aboriginality: Research Note 18, 2000–01 (2000)

However, genetic kinship and ancestry testing has important limitations in practice. First, it relies on the availability of reference samples for comparison. If a living person wishes to establish that he or she is a member of a particular family group, the person must find someone within that group who can provide a genetic sample for the purpose of comparison. This becomes more difficult where a person seeks to establish a biological relationship with a person or family group that has been dead for years, decades or centuries.

The Human Genetics Society of Australia agreed that, in the absence of archival genetic material, genetic testing that identifies particular polymorphisms among a group might support the contention of common ancestry, but would not prove it definitively:

The relative isolation and small population base of indigenous peoples of Australia prior to European settlement makes it very likely that the frequency of many genetic polymorphisms in pre-European contact indigenous peoples differed from that of Europeans. Such differences may be expected to vary across the continent. A polymorphism absent or rare in Europeans but common in an ancestral indigenous population is likely to persist at a higher frequency in the descendants of that population than in peoples of European descent. Its presence at an appreciable frequency in a group claiming common ancestry would support the contention of common ancestry but not prove it. Its presence or absence in any given individual would not establish or refute membership of the group. None of the above, in the absence of archival genetic material, could establish association with a geographical location. Cultural and genealogical information is more likely to provide evidence of association between a group of indigenous individuals and a geographical location than genetic information.

John Presser, a forensic scientist, commented in a submission:  “In conjunction with other information, especially lineage or family trees, mtDNA is informative as to aboriginality where an unbroken female lineage exists. But it is imperative to remember that if no ‘aboriginal’ sequence is found, this result is silent as to aboriginality, all you can say is that there is no direct female line of descent and the result is inconclusive. It does not prove non aboriginal descent”…J Presser

The overall outcome – The Inquiry considers that under no circumstances should any person be required to undergo genetic testing to establish their Aboriginal descent. Claiming this would have significant ethical implications, and would arguably constitute racial discrimination against Aboriginal persons.

https://www.alrc.gov.au/publications/36-kinship-and-identity/genetic-testing-and-aboriginality

In reality true ancestral Indigenous familial structures differ in cultural organisation and historic context…… with the notion that Aboriginal identity can be determined through a Eurocentric model of descent that privileges western familial structures, totally inappropriate.

Origine’ Skinlore Kinship systems are matristic ….derived from arranged marriages which cycle across blocks of 12 generations, radiating  in cyclic triangulation’s…all of which is tracked using celestial pentagram cycles – connecting people to country for millennia – through their GRANDMOTHERs lineage …..tracking MtDNA sequencing to ensure genetic health of the people.

Cooowarragum – the most eastern celestial Skinlore site of the Australian Continent

The Coowarragum stone complex at the Pinnacle is the first Skinlore site on the most eastern landmass of the Australian Continent to be ‘lit’ by those stars….it is located on the boundary of the ancestral estates of the Ngarakbal Githabul tribes of the Yoocum-Yoocum moiety…..it was recorded on the National Parks and Wildlife  Aboriginal Sites Registration in 1980 by Archaeologist Adrian Piper.

These same Ngarakbal descendants have been excluded and discriminated against.  Removed from recognition in the Byron Bay area apparently due to being able to prove their ancestral descent from BEFORE occupation….but then that wouldn’t have assisted the NSW government with achieving extinguishment of native title or a Development ILUA.

If true moiety groups were supported to be identified instead of the governments administrative  ‘Aboriginal Nations’ system –  which is currently being enforced through political propaganda to facilitate administration of the people and operate as an alternative legislative ‘development’ pathway which dispossesses all Australians ….perhaps if this happened then things would get better in aboriginal communities.

Perhaps, if traditional Skinlore kinship descent systems were used to identify true Aboriginal bloodlines and totemic lore custodians then instances of genetic fraud could be eradicated and the limited purse of Indigenous funding would actually make it to the destination it has been designed for…….

If you would like to learn more, please subscribe to my blog

And please share this story – more people need to know about it.

Hoo Roo

 

Advertisements

Native Title – The Death Song of Mount Warning

Mount Warning – photograph by Vibrant Imaging http://www.vibrantimaging.com.au/

The ‘song of Mount Warning’, the central plug of the Wollumbin Caldera in the Northern New South Wales – South East Queensland cross-border region of eastern Australia, marks the beginning of an important Songline for the Matristic Lore Traditions of the Rainbow Serpent Seven Sister Skinlore Culture  – The marriage lore of the Australian continent from the Dreamtime.

Much ancestral Lore has become convoluted since colonisation, and even more so with the advent of State Native Title claims challenging the government’s authority and tenure to vast and lucrative tracts of land and water across the continent…..land and water laden with mineral wealth….so it is little wonder that some unscrupulous individuals claim to be able to claim native title and do so with the help of government funded services who seek to retain control of these vast assets.

Looking behind bureaucratic doors reveals how Aussie tax payers are paying for created Corporations to appropriate the ancestral ‘Songs and Songlines’ from out of the databases to be use as their own and even in court cases that empower corporate aboriginal lands councils to claim and develop public lands, and Indigenous Lands Use Agreements [ILUAs] to EXTINGUISH the inalienable rights of Origine’ Natives.

This has been allowed to occur due to a stylised form of ‘reverse racism’, skilfully marketed as Reconciliation, which has fostered a culture of “mustn’t ask too many questions and hurt anyone’s feelings”….creating a perfect environment for corruption to flourish.

This ‘culture’ has  developed over the last decade, empowering a free for all approach to native title claims, and ignores the cultural and intellectual copyright [moral rights] of the ‘real’ Origine’ custodians…..

Native Title services appears to basically aid and abet the confusion and division to escalate within the communities just as government had hoped by seeking genocidal ILUA outcomes.

What we are seeing happen again and again is the State Native Title Services [funded by the Government] repeatedly refusing to endorse any genealogical reports [of genuine Skinlore descendants who could claim native title] other than the ones their own Service has sanctioned –reports which often have garnered ancestral lore and attributed it to some unconnected corporation who [surprise surprise] isn’t too shy to sign off on State Development Projects.

It’s deplorable how shallow the ethics of academics have been forced. Creating new reports which no longer cite the Elders and Informants of the pre-development days…..every newly commissioned report edits just a little more out – with every new report crafted to facilitate the desire of developers….there’s obviously big bucks in the genocide of culture.

http://westbyronproject.com.au/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/Final-report-West-Byron.pdf

Page 50 of the West Byron Project – Cultural Assessment –  PDF available on the above link

It’s become more and more apparent that Native Title and associated Government departments are only hiring or endorsing reports written by Archaeologists and Anthropologists who omit the original Skinlore descendant informants whom they had included in [their] previous reports…… For to not do so renders those Archaeologist and Anthropologists unemployable in this culture of administrative corruption.

Regrettably you don’t actually have to go back too far in the records to see how much history has been selectively ‘edited’ …anyone who can read can easily ‘measure’ past reports against what recent publications are utilised by government to discern which apical informants have been deliberately omitted…..and which developments profited.

In 1985 Margaret Gummow,  a linguist, recorded Mrs Millie Boyd [nee Williams] singing cultural song [Lore] about the Wollumbin Caldera…. Milli Boyd described the context in which her Aunt Lella Williams had created it….

The song  was recorded in full in the publication “ The Essence of Singing and the Substance of Song – Linda Barwick, Allan Marret and Guy Tunstall”  – It is call ‘The Mount Warning Song’ – it is a song about death and the immorality of greed…..it was used by Tweed Byron Aboriginal Lands Councils to claim land – but you won’t find any admission of that, or of the Elders identity in any of their publications anymore…..

https://trove.nla.gov.au/work/9821955?selectedversion=NBD26734077

“According to Boyd, Lella Williams was travelling with members of her family from Fingal Head back to Kyogle.  At that time there was no bridge on the Tweed River but a [“Old South Sea Islander”] man rowed a canoe along the river.  The man in the canoe took Lela Williams and her family to Uki, from which they intended to walk to Kyogle.

As the [Islander] man rowed the canoe he took some of Williams’s hair and threw it in a pool near Mount Warning.  This was a very dangerous thing to do.  It is believed that if someone takes some of your hair they may be able to perform acts of sorcery that can physically harm you.

When the canoe arrived at Uki, Williams began her walk to Kyogle, but she only survived three days longer.  At the bottom of the pool her hair had joined onto two bones, which began creaking as they rubbed together.

Margaret Gummow states that “In 1985 when I recorded Millie Boyd she described how Williams had sung this song at Mt Warning and the bones in the Tweed River and describes her feelings of despair as she felt she was unable to control her life. According to Boyd, four days after Lella Williams died her spirit sang this song to Jack Barron, a famous song man at Woodenbong”.

Margaret Gummow…”Yes, and so when did she sing the song”?

Millie Boyd…”after she died.  You know the aborigines’ spirit never die.  They come back, they give you the news of themselves, of their lives.  They sing songs of their own lives, of what’s happening to them, and the elder people listen and they understand who did this and did that and who didn’t do this. Yes, that’s in those times, but today the young people wouldn’t believe it.

You see young people these days, in my time, my people – They don’t believe it. 

I believe it was given by God…All this business is given by god for them to use their spell and use it in the holy way”.

Gummow …”and so she sang the song after she died”?

Boyd…”yes, after she died in four days brought that song back to my grandfather, Jack Barron”.

Boyd herself learnt this song from her mother, Charlotte Williams [nee Brown], who learnt it from Jack Barron.

Gummow states that “To my knowledge there are four recordings of this song in existence, all performed by Boyd.  The first was recorded in 1977 by anthropologist Howard Creamer of the National Parks and Wildlife Service as part of a project concerning site protection. 

I recorded the second performance in 1985 in relation to my PhD research on Bundjalung and Gidabal songs [Gummow 1992].  

The linguist Margaret Sharpe recorded the third performance in 1989 in connection with a project funded by Aboriginal Legal Aide concerning the impact of land and land rights at Fingal Head.

[Minister Administering the Crown Lands (Consolidation) Act v Tweed Byron Local Aboriginal Land Council (1992) 75 LGRA 133 at 140 per Clarke JA]  

 The fourth performance was recorded on video in the early 1980s by Lorraine Mafi-Williams.  In an attempt to preserve traditional material, Mafi-Williams produced the film Eelarmarni in 1998, which featured Boyd explaining some of the mythology and singing several songs from the Mount Warning area”.

https://aso.gov.au/titles/documentaries/eelemarni/clip1/

The selective editing of information no longer reflects the truth that the Fingal Lands Case used Ngarakbal Githabul Lore to claim the Fingal peninsular lands for the Tweed Byron Aboriginal Lands Council….a lands council which exclusively identifies itself as being a part of the governments Bundjalung Nation…a created system that refuses to acknowledge that the Ngarakbal Githabul are NOT Bundjalung and have never identified as such……and now, for the governments “ease of Administration”,  Fingal, and all lands within the Tweed Byron Aboriginal Lands Councils Boundaries are being wrongfully purported as belonging to Bundjalung Culture.

Some of the Northern Rivers NSW Aboriginal Lands Council Boundaries – map exert from NSWALC

Government departments are altering ancient Rainbow Serpent Culture and ‘gifting’ it to Three Bundjalung Brother migrants – from a relatively contemporary cultural epoch. 

It should also be noted that Williams is a common name, and a lot of confusion over which Williams is which has also lined some unscrupulous pockets…

It is important to remember within the cultural lore contexts that all tribal family are related not in the immediate way that western society utilises, but in the tribal way…and Jack Barron was a tribal grandfather – through strict Skinlore kinship descent systems

One of the most important kinship tribal skin-lore relationships is “Mothers Brother”…Millie Boyd’s senior [surviving] ‘Brother’ was Stan Williams……In kinship lore a woman may not speak to her senior “brother’ and all rights of authority over the ancestral djurebil [sacred sites] for the family, including her children’s are held by her senior ‘Brother’…. at the same time a senior brother is also grandfather [as senior lore holder]…and the eldest born son of a woman is, in the tribal skin-lore, also grandfather, even to his own mother…..in this way, custodial rights, Bootheram Lore stories  and obligations are transferred…and,  in a similar manner they are passed down through the women.

Stan Williams was given, by his Elders, all initiation, lore, rituals, songs, dances and ceremonies of djurebil custodianship responsibilities for his Ngarakbal Githabal ancestral estate….and this in turn passed down to his senior son…and so on…

The legal interpretation of transference of ancestral Lore in Law is termed as Core and Contingent rights –   a senior lore holder has Core Rights of cultural knowledge, while all other siblings have Contingent Rights…..and in turn,  ‘determined’ native title groups have Core Rights , whilst Lands Councils only have contingent rights to ancestral lore and sites, etc….

Stan and Millie were two of nineteen children their parents Euston Williams and Charlotte Brown brought into the world – Post invasion and during the peak of colonisation of the much converted areas of the Byron, Tweed and Gold Coast regions of Australia.

Despite being born and held in Aboriginal Reserves administrated by the Aboriginal Protections Board, forced to stop speaking their ancestral language and cease their traditional culture, Euston and Charlottes marriage was still a traditional Skinlore marriage – A marriage between two tribal skin group moieties – Ngarakbal and Githabul – of the greater Yoocum-Yoocum society, which anthropologists refer to as a Cultural Block.

All Yoocum-Yoocum Skinlore kinships and descent is tracked through the star cycles by initiated Elders.  A significant stone complex located near the Pinnacle [Coowarragum] below Warazumbil [Border Ranges] between the Ngarakbal and Githabul estates was utilised for millennia to track these cycles and ensure healthy marriages between the Yoocum-Yoocum skin groups…tribal marriages [literally] made in heaven – with each individuals ancestral descent being able to traced back across [clusters of] 12 generation…… back to dreamtime…..

https://www.nationalparks.nsw.gov.au/things-to-do/walking-tracks/pinnacle-walk-and-lookout

Coowarragum – ‘Pumpinbil’ Pinnacle

It is a requirement of the Native Title Act for claimants to legally prove they have unbroken culture and descent – as one would expect…..

On April 20, 1998, Federal Court Justice Merkel handed down a 120-page decision in Shaw and Another v Wolf and Others. A key element in that judgment establishing the status of Aboriginality was the declaration that to be Aboriginal one must, among other things, be descended from the inhabitants of Australia at the time immediately BEFORE European settlement.

But imprudent claimants are attempting to prove their ancestry using the European concept of a family tree descent system which is totally unrelated to Origine’ Cultural Skinlore/Kinships and can only be traced within the timeframe of British occupation of Australia….. While Skinlore IS true culture which defines connection, obligation, authorisation, initiations and inter-relations both Pre and Post-Settlement….

The Government and its Courts utilising and recognising their own ‘imported’ European descent system in the native title process is, of course, completely contrary to the Acts requirement to prove unbroken culture…….the outcome?- Claimants traditional lore and custom is determined as unproven and so it’s a State ILUA and cultural Extinguishment.

Politicians and Developers are laughing all the way to the Bank

The Yoocum Yoocum Skinlore complex was located and recorded in 1980 by Adrian Piper- a senior archaeologist, who registered it on the National Parks and Wildlife Aboriginal Sites Registrar.

The land was purchased and protected by Rosalind Dunwell and her [then] husband Bill Mollinson, the co-creator of Permaculture, https://permacultureaustralia.org.au/2007/07/26/bill-mollison/

And the Skinlore knowledge of how the ‘site’ works was taught to me…….by Millie Boyd’s daughter…..

So while Europeans can conquer continents, import their man-made laws, create their courts, sanitise history, alter names on maps for court purposes, sanction suspect aboriginality claimants to sign off on corporate developments, and endorse claimants who ‘capture’ culture using unscrupulous methods……… the simple truth is that no matter how hard they try to eradicate the matristic Rainbow Serpent Culture, they will never EVER be able to rub out the stars from which it all descends.

 

If you would like to learn more, please subscribe to my blog

And please share this story – more people need to know about it.

Hoo Roo