INVENTORY OF TOURISM ASSETS ON …...INVENTORY OF TOURISM ASSETS ON DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT AND CONSERVATION RANGELAND PROPERTIES Gascoyne and Murchison regions, Western Australia

INVENTORY OF TOURISM ASSETS ON DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT AND CONSERVATION RANGELAND PROPERTIESGascoyne and Murchison regions, Western Australia Amanda J Smith, Michael Hughes, David Wood and John Glasson

Gasgoyne and Murchison Regions, Western Australia

ii

Technical Reports The technical reports present data and its analysis, meta-studies and conceptual studies, and are considered to be of value to industry, government or other researchers. Unlike the STCRCs Monograph series, these reports have not been subjected to an external peer review process. As such, the scientific accuracy and merit of the research reported here is the responsibility of the authors, who should be contacted for clarification of any content. Author contact details are at the back of this report. We’d love to know what you think of our new research titles. If you have five minutes to spare, please click visit our website to complete our online survey. Sustainable Tourism CRC Tech Report Feedback National Library of Australia Cataloguing-in-Publication Entry Inventory of tourism assets on Department of Conservation and Land Management rangeland properties: Gascoyne and Murchison regions, Western Australia. Smith, Amanda. ISBN 9781920965501 (pbk.). 1. Western Australia. Dept. of Environment and Conservation. 2. Government property – Western Australia – Gascoyne River Region – Evaluation. 3. Government property – Western Australia – Murchison River Region – Evaluation. 4. Tourism – Western Australia – Gascoyne River Region – Evaluation. 5. Tourism – Western Australian – Murchison River Region – Evaluation. I. Cooperative Research Centre for Sustainable Tourism. II. Title. Other Authors/Contributors: Hughes, Michael. Wood, David. Glasson, John. 338.47919413

Copyright © CRC for Sustainable Tourism Pty Ltd 2008 All rights reserved. Apart from fair dealing for the purposes of study, research, criticism or review as permitted under the Copyright Act, no part of this book may be reproduced by any process without written permission from the publisher. All rights reserved. Apart from fair dealing for the purposes of study, research, criticism or review as permitted under the Copyright Act, no part of this book may be reproduced by any process without written permission from the publisher. Any enquiries should be directed to: General Manager, Communications and Industry Extension or Publishing Manager, [email protected]

Acknowledgements The Sustainable Tourism Cooperative Research Centre, established and supported under the Australian Government’s Cooperative Research Centres Program, funded this research.

The authors would like to thank the following organisations for providing support for this project: DEC with

special thanks to Colin Ingram for his continual support throughout the project and thanks also to Brett Fitzgerald, Sue Hancock and David Blood; Midwest Development Commission with thanks to Brendin Flannigan and Caroline Williams; and the Gascoyne Development Commission with thanks to Peter Taylor. Thanks also to the community members who attended workshops in Carnarvon and Geraldton to provide input into the project and members of the steering committee for guidance and support that included Colin Ingram (DEC), Charlie Nicholson (DEC), Colleen Henry (TWA) and Damian Shepherd (Department of Agriculture).

http://sustainabletourismcrc.cmail3.com/l/424209/s4i6d21/www.surveymonkey.com/s.aspx?sm=cCMy_2fyZbjAjkr2Vy5LopCg_3d_3d�

mailto:[email protected]�

INVENTORY OF TOURISM ASSETS ON DEC RANGELAND PROPERTIES

iii

CONTENTS

Acknowledgements ____________________________________________________________________ ii Acronyms & Abbreviations ______________________________________________________________ vi

SUMMARY _________________________________________________________________________ VIII Objectives of Study ___________________________________________________________________ viii Methodology ________________________________________________________________________ viii Key Findings ________________________________________________________________________ viii

Tourism development ________________________________________________________________________ viii Management_________________________________________________________________________________ ix

Future Action/Recommendations _________________________________________________________ ix Management_________________________________________________________________________________ ix Tourism development _________________________________________________________________________ ix Indigenous ___________________________________________________________________________________ x

CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION ____________________________________________________________ 1 Background __________________________________________________________________________ 3 Aims and Objectives ___________________________________________________________________ 3

CHAPTER 2 METHODOLOGY ___________________________________________________________ 4 Desktop Research _____________________________________________________________________ 4 Stakeholder Workshops_________________________________________________________________ 4 Site Visits____________________________________________________________________________ 5 Tour Operator Survey __________________________________________________________________ 5

CHAPTER 3 INVENTORY AND DESCRIPTION OF DEC RANGELANDS STATIONS____________ 6

Carnarvon Region Properties ____________________________________________________________ 6 Kennedy Range property—Mooka ________________________________________________________________ 6

Aboriginal occupation ________________________________________________________________________ 6 European exploration and settlement ____________________________________________________________ 6 Climate____________________________________________________________________________________ 7 Landscape _________________________________________________________________________________ 7 Flora______________________________________________________________________________________ 8 Fauna _____________________________________________________________________________________ 8 Existing tourism product ______________________________________________________________________ 9

Mt Augustus National Park properties—Cobra, Waldburg, Dalgety Downs and Mt Phillip ___________________ 11 Aboriginal occupation _______________________________________________________________________ 11 European exploration and settlement ___________________________________________________________ 13 Climate___________________________________________________________________________________ 15 Landscape ________________________________________________________________________________ 15 Flora_____________________________________________________________________________________ 16 Fauna ____________________________________________________________________________________ 16 Existing tourism product _____________________________________________________________________ 16

Pimbee _____________________________________________________________________________________ 21 Aboriginal occupation _______________________________________________________________________ 21 European exploration and settlement ___________________________________________________________ 21 Climate___________________________________________________________________________________ 21 Landscape ________________________________________________________________________________ 22 Flora_____________________________________________________________________________________ 22 Fauna ____________________________________________________________________________________ 22 Existing tourism product _____________________________________________________________________ 22

Geraldton Region Properties ___________________________________________________________ 22 Meekatharra and Wiluna properties—Mooloogool and Doolgunna ______________________________________ 22

Aboriginal occupation _______________________________________________________________________ 22 European exploration and settlement ___________________________________________________________ 23 Climate___________________________________________________________________________________ 24 Landscape ________________________________________________________________________________ 24 Flora_____________________________________________________________________________________ 25 Fauna ____________________________________________________________________________________ 25 Existing tourism product _____________________________________________________________________ 26

Perenjori properties—Karara, Lochada, Warriedar, Kadji Kadji ________________________________________ 26 Aboriginal occupation _______________________________________________________________________ 26 European exploration and settlement ___________________________________________________________ 27 Climate___________________________________________________________________________________ 33 Landscape ________________________________________________________________________________ 33 Flora_____________________________________________________________________________________ 36


iv

Fauna ____________________________________________________________________________________ 37 Existing tourism product _____________________________________________________________________ 37

Mullewa properties—Yuin, Narloo and Twin Peaks__________________________________________________ 38 Aboriginal occupation _______________________________________________________________________ 38 European exploration and settlement ___________________________________________________________ 39 Climate___________________________________________________________________________________ 39 Landscape ________________________________________________________________________________ 40 Flora_____________________________________________________________________________________ 41 Fauna ____________________________________________________________________________________ 41 Existing tourism product _____________________________________________________________________ 41

Property adjacent to Toolonga Nature Reserve—Muggon _____________________________________________ 42 Aboriginal occupation _______________________________________________________________________ 42 European exploration and settlement ___________________________________________________________ 42 Climate___________________________________________________________________________________ 42 Landscape ________________________________________________________________________________ 42 Flora_____________________________________________________________________________________ 44 Fauna ____________________________________________________________________________________ 44 Existing tourism product _____________________________________________________________________ 44

CHAPTER 4 POTENTIAL VISITOR PROFILE FOR DEC RANGELANDS STATIONS___________ 45

Visitor Characteristics ________________________________________________________________ 45 Gascoyne region visitor characteristics ____________________________________________________________ 45 Murchison region visitor characteristics ___________________________________________________________ 48

CHAPTER 5 TOURISM POTENTIAL OF DEC RANGELANDS STATIONS ____________________ 52 Wildflower Tourism___________________________________________________________________ 52 Drive Trail Tourism __________________________________________________________________ 55 Australian Indigenous Cultural Heritage Tourism ___________________________________________ 57 Non-Indigenous Cultural Heritage Tourism ________________________________________________ 58 Volunteer Tourism____________________________________________________________________ 59 Geotourism _________________________________________________________________________ 59 Wildlife Tourism _____________________________________________________________________ 60

CHAPTER 6 APPRAISAL OF THE POTENTIAL VALUE OF DEC RANGELANDS PROPERTIES 61 Economic Valuation __________________________________________________________________ 62

Direct visitor spend ___________________________________________________________________________ 62 Direct valuation—preventive/defensive and comparative preventive _____________________________________ 62 Shadow pricing and opportunity costs_____________________________________________________________ 63 Contingent valuation __________________________________________________________________________ 63

Associated Valuation Issues ____________________________________________________________ 64 Appropriate discount rates ___________________________________________________________________ 64 Risks and uncertainty________________________________________________________________________ 64 Distribution of costs and benefits ______________________________________________________________ 64 Scope of the economic network ________________________________________________________________ 64

Sustainability and Management of the Rangelands __________________________________________ 64 Pressure, state, response of rangeland industries/activities __________________________________________ 65

Benefits of shared rangeland management _________________________________________________________ 65 CHAPTER 7 SWOT ANALYSIS OF THE DEC RANGELANDS PROPERTIES __________________ 67 CHAPTER 8 CONCLUSION _____________________________________________________________ 69

Tourism Development _________________________________________________________________ 69 Management Issues ___________________________________________________________________ 70 Future Action/Recommendations ________________________________________________________ 70

Management_________________________________________________________________________________ 70 Tourism development _________________________________________________________________________ 71 Indigenous __________________________________________________________________________________ 71

APPENDIX A: STAKEHOLDER WORKSHOP AGENDA & ATTENDEES ____________________ 72 APPENDIX B: DETAILED SWOT ANALYSIS OF TOURISM DEVELOPMENT ON THE DEC RANGELAND PROPERTIES___________________________________________________________ 74

Mooka and Kennedy Range ____________________________________________________________ 74 Mt Augustus ________________________________________________________________________ 78 Pimbee_____________________________________________________________________________ 81 Mooloogool and Doolgunna ____________________________________________________________ 83 Karara, Lochada, Warriedar and Kadji Kadji ______________________________________________ 85 Yuin, Narloo and Twin Peaks ___________________________________________________________ 87


v

Muggon ____________________________________________________________________________ 89 APPENDIX C: SUMMARY OF TOUR OPERATOR SURVEY FINDINGS _____________________ 91

Gascoyne Murchison Region Tour Operator Survey 2005 _____________________________________ 91 Overview ___________________________________________________________________________________ 91 Method _____________________________________________________________________________________ 91 Findings ____________________________________________________________________________________ 91

Trip Characteristics _________________________________________________________________________ 91 Activities _________________________________________________________________________________ 92 Suggestions for regional development to improve tourism___________________________________________ 92 Perceptions of tourism potential _______________________________________________________________ 93

Conclusion __________________________________________________________________________________ 93 REFERENCES _______________________________________________________________________ 94 AUTHORS___________________________________________________________________________ 98

List of Maps Map 1: DEC pastoral properties analysed for tourism potential ______________________________________ 2

List of Figures Figure 1 Explorer Francis Gregory ____________________________________________________________ 6 Figure 2 Binthalya Homestead _______________________________________________________________ 7 Figure 3 Landscape of the western escarpment of the Kennedy Ranges _______________________________ 8 Figure 4 Mooka Creek _____________________________________________________________________ 8 Figure 5 Bidgemia Station Stay ______________________________________________________________ 9 Figure 6 Temple Gorge____________________________________________________________________ 10 Figure 7 Drapers Gorge____________________________________________________________________ 10 Figure 8 Honeycomb Gorge ________________________________________________________________ 11 Figure 9 Mt Augustus _____________________________________________________________________ 12 Figure 10 Goolinee—Cattle Pool (day-use site) _________________________________________________ 12 Figure 11 The Bangemall Inn c.1897 _________________________________________________________ 14 Figure 12 The original Cobra Homestead c.1906 ________________________________________________ 15 Figure 13 Dalgety Downs Homestead ________________________________________________________ 15 Figure 14 Goolinee _______________________________________________________________________ 17 Figure 15 Warrarla (Gum Grove) ____________________________________________________________ 17 Figure 16 Ooramboo—Edney’s Lookout, Mt Augustus a) Aboriginal engravings, b) Edney Spring, c) walk trail to Edney’s Lookout_______________________________________________________________________ 18 Figure 17 Mundee, Mt Augustus ____________________________________________________________ 19 Figure 18 Beedoboondu, Mt Augustus and (a) view from Beedoboondu (b) Flintstone Rock Aboriginal engravings______________________________________________________________________________ 19 Figure 19 Saddle Trail_____________________________________________________________________ 20 Figure 20 Mt Augustus Outback Tourist Resort _________________________________________________ 20 Figure 21 Cobra Station Accommodation______________________________________________________ 21 Figure 22 Peak Hill Settlement, Doolgunna ____________________________________________________ 23 Figure 23 Doolgunna Homestead ____________________________________________________________ 24 Figure 24 Landscape of Mooloogool _________________________________________________________ 24 Figure 25 Landscape of Doolgunna __________________________________________________________ 25 Figure 26 Shearers Quarters at Doolgunna _____________________________________________________ 26 Figure 27 Gnamma hole on Karara___________________________________________________________ 27 Figure 28 John Forrest Lookout, Karara _______________________________________________________ 28 Figure 29 Boundary riders team, at the 100mile No.1 fence (1926)__________________________________ 28 Figure 30 Rabbit Proof Fence on Karara ______________________________________________________ 29 Figure 31 Karara Shearing Shed c.1900s ______________________________________________________ 29 Figure 32 (a) Stone well at Karara (b) Monks well_______________________________________________ 30 Figure 33 (a) Damperwah State Farm ruins (b) Camel Soak _______________________________________ 30 Figure 34 (a) Karara homestead (b) Karara staff cottage __________________________________________ 30 Figure 35 Old Shearers Quarters, open shed and ablutions at Boiada Hill, Lochada _____________________ 31 Figure 36 Homestead at Warriedar ___________________________________________________________ 31 Figure 37 Badja Pit, Warriedar ______________________________________________________________ 32 Figure 38 Kadji Kadji Homestead____________________________________________________________ 32 Figure 39 (a) Kadji Kadji cottage (b, c, d) Shearing Shed _________________________________________ 33 Figure 40 Mongers Lake, Karara ____________________________________________________________ 34 Figure 41 Karara Breakaway _______________________________________________________________ 34


vi

Figure 42 Boiada Hill, Lochada _____________________________________________________________ 35 Figure 43 Warriedar amphitheatre ___________________________________________________________ 35 Figure 44 Landscape of Kadji Kadji __________________________________________________________ 36 Figure 45 Everlastings on Karara Station ______________________________________________________ 38 Figure 46 Rock cairn erected on Poondarrie Hill on Narloo by Mr John Forrest on one of his expeditions ___ 39 Figure 47 Greenough River_________________________________________________________________ 40 Figure 48 Poondarrie Hill, Narloo ___________________________________________________________ 41 Figure 49 Landscape of Muggon ____________________________________________________________ 44 Figure 50 Gascoyne Murchison Region Map ___________________________________________________ 45 Figure 51 Gascoyne region map _____________________________________________________________ 46 Figure 52 Gascoyne visitors’ place of residence_________________________________________________ 46 Figure 53 (a) Gascoyne domestic quarter returned from trip, (b) Gascoyne international quarter arrived in Australia _______________________________________________________________________________ 47 Figure 54 Transport used while in the Gascoyne region (2003/04) __________________________________ 47 Figure 55 Accommodation stayed in while visiting the Gascoyne region _____________________________ 48 Figure 56 Age of visitors 2002/03 to Gascoyne Region ___________________________________________ 48 Figure 57 Murchison Region Map ___________________________________________________________ 49 Figure 58 Mid West visitors’ place of residence_________________________________________________ 49 Figure 59 (a) Mid West domestic quarter returned from trip, (b) Mid West international quarter arrived in Australia _______________________________________________________________________________ 50 Figure 60 Transport used while in the Mid West region (2003/04) __________________________________ 50 Figure 61 Accommodation stayed in while visiting the Mid West region _____________________________ 51 Figure 62 Age of visitors 2002/03 to Murchison region ___________________________________________ 51 Figure 63 The Everlastings Wildflower Trail with approximate locations of DEC rangeland properties _____ 53 Figure 64 The North West Wildflower Drive Trail with approximate locations of DEC rangeland _________ 54 properties_______________________________________________________________________________ 54 Figure 65 Outback Pathways _______________________________________________________________ 56 Figure 66 Features of successful themed tourist drives/corridors ____________________________________ 57

List of Tables Table 1 List of rangeland properties included in assessment of tourism potential ________________________ 1 Table 2 Some held values associated with protected landscapes ____________________________________ 61 Table 3 Estimated direct spend impact per visitor night at a rangeland homestead in the Gascoyne _________ 62 Table 4 Rangeland examples of uses, pressures and resultant states _________________________________ 65 Table 5 Collective SWOT analysis of the DEC rangeland properties_________________________________ 67 Table 6 Mooka and Kennedy Range National Park SWOT Analysis_________________________________ 74 Table 7 Cobra, Waldburg, Dalgety Downs, Mt Phillip and Mt Augustus SWOT Analysis ________________ 78 Table 8 Pimbee SWOT Analysis ____________________________________________________________ 81 Table 9 Mooloogool and Doolgunna SWOT Analysis ____________________________________________ 83 Table 10 Karara, Lochada, Warriedar & Kadji Kadji SWOT Analysis _______________________________ 85 Table 11 Yuin, Narloo and Twin Peaks SWOT Analysis __________________________________________ 87 Table 12 Muggon SWOT Analysis___________________________________________________________ 89


vii

Acronyms & Abbreviations 2WD Two wheel drive vehicle

4WD Four wheel drive vehicle

CIE Community Impact Evaluation

CALM Department of Conservation and Land Management

DEC Department of Environment and Conservation (Western Australia)

DIA Department of Indigenous Affairs

DLGRD Department of Local Government and Regional Development

ESAs Environmentally Sensitive Areas

EU European Union

GDC Gascoyne Development Commission

GMS Gascoyne Murchison Strategy

HA Highly Accessible

IVS International Visitor Survey

MWDC Midwest Development Commission

NVS National Visitor Survey

MWGACC Mid West Gascoyne Area Consultative Committee

PBC Planning Balance Sheet

R Remote

SWOT Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities and Threats

TWA Tourism Western Australia (formerly WATC)

VR Very Remote

WATC Western Australia Tourism Commission (now Tourism WA)

WTA Willingness to Accept

WTP Willingness to Pay

YLSC Yamatji Land & Sea Council


viii

SUMMARY

The project assessed the tourism potential of inland pastoral properties recently acquired by the Department of Conservation and Land Management (now DEC, Department of Environment and Conservation) in the Murchison and Gascoyne regions of Western Australia. An inventory of natural and cultural tourism assets was compiled through desktop research and discussions with interest groups in the region. The report also includes perspectives on how the properties may afford a range of values both to DEC and the public good. The results of this project will help in the formulation of management approaches to tourism development on the DEC properties. The project will also facilitate development and strengthening of collaborative relationships between various tourism interest groups in the region.

Objectives of Study The project aimed to provide:

• an inventory of natural and cultural assets on DEC rangelands stations • an assessment of the tourism potential of these assets • an appraisal of the potential economic benefits of tourism on DEC rangelands stations • a documented methodology for the development of tourism inventories.

Methodology The research assessed the suitability of pastoral properties, purchased in the Gascoyne Murchison strategy, for potential tourism development. The first stage of the project involved desktop research to construct an inventory of natural and cultural assets on and adjacent to the DEC Gascoyne Murchison rangeland stations. Documented assets were identified that may be used to contribute to the development of a tourism product aimed at providing a revenue stream to contribute to future management costs. The second stage of this project was to seek further information from key stakeholders (including local indigenous groups, pastoralists, the local tourism industry, tour operators and local naturalists) about how these values can be developed into tourism opportunities and linked/integrated with existing tourism products. The final stage involved an appraisal of the viability of tourism to pastoral stations in the region and potential economic benefits to land managers.

Key Findings The key findings may be divided into two categories: tourism development related findings and management related findings.

Tourism development • There is potential for tourism on some stations in terms of spectacular and unique landscapes, cultural

heritage artefacts and wilderness style experiences. These include: - properties adjacent to Mt Augustus - properties adjacent to the Kennedy Ranges - Muggon - Doolgunna and Mooloogool - Karara, Lochada, Warriedar and Kadji Kadji.

• Other stations may not be suitable for on-site tourism activity owing to sensitivity of landscapes, poor accessibility, and/or lack of adequate potential tourism amenities. These include:

- Twin Peaks/Yuin/Narloo - Pimbee.

• Existing drive trails may function as a conduit for encouraging visitation to the appropriate DEC purchased properties.

• Development of tourism on key properties will potentially require a management presence specifically established for this purpose.

• Managers contracted by DEC to maintain properties may not be willing or able to manage tourism activity in addition to these duties.


ix

• DEC ultimately does not have the resources to function as a tourism operator on the pastoral stations

beyond provision of basic camping facilities and access, and limited management presence. • The uncertainty of tenure acts as a discouragement to commercial investment in tourism development on

the purchased properties. • There is interest from indigenous stakeholders in developing tourism products and experiences. These

may be in the form of on-site guided experiences or as resources taken from the stations and exported to off-site locations as craft and art products.

Management • Tourism will not provide the scale of revenue required to balance management costs but the stations may

be valued in terms of ecological, security and safety factors that may indirectly bring economic benefits to the state.

• The large area of isolated land fragmented over two regions poses significant management challenges in relation to maintenance of assets, control of introduced species, control of human access and rehabilitation of ecosystems owing to limited budgets and staffing.

• Lack of management presence has resulted in asset loss, damage or degradation and exposes currently valuable assets to future theft or degradation.

• There is a need to improve communication between DEC as managers and other stakeholders (Indigenous, neighbouring property holders) especially in relation to major decisions such as mass bore closures.

• Indigenous stakeholders are primarily interested in access to the properties and involvement in management decision making.

Future Action/Recommendations

Management • Biophysical and human use monitoring of the properties is essential for effective management. DEC’s

limited capacity may be augmented by sourcing voluntary labour from clubs and organised groups with interests in natural environments and conservation as a form of volunteer tourism.

• To this end DEC may wish to establish a formal relationship with key groups such as 4WD clubs, environmental volunteer organisations and other agencies (Police Force, Army) with a view to providing access to use of remote areas in exchange for conservation or maintenance work.

• Preservation, translocation or removal of existing buildings and associated equipment is an urgent need. Buildings on the properties are deteriorating rapidly and, in some instances, are being removed without authorisation. Establishing a management presence or relocating equipment and buildings to sites with an existing management presence will prevent the loss of valuable assets.

• An assessment of heritage value of properties and assets is required and may assist in prioritising the need for the actions recommended above.

Tourism development • Cultural heritage in the region has not been rigorously documented, a project to record oral histories in

the region is recommended as a basis for enriching any tourism products that may be developed in the future. A professor of Folklore (Graham Seal) at Curtin University has expressed interest in conducting such a project but would require significant funds.

• On properties with little or no existing built amenities suitable for tourist use, development of tourism based on arrangements with club and other organised groups activities (e.g. 4WD clubs, amateur science research clubs, university researchers, army, police, cadets, scouts) may benefit DEC by reducing management costs through mutual agreements based on maintenance and/or other required work (e.g. biological surveys, fence repair, road maintenance) in return for use of the land.

• On properties with existing or proposed tourism amenities (such as accommodation, formal campsites, ablutions) DEC should ideally engage at least two managers, one for managing the property as a whole and a second for specific management of tourists and tourism amenities.


x

Indigenous • Indigenous groups associated with respective properties should be included in management decisions and

tourism development initiatives. • The various stakeholders (Development Commissions, DEC, YLSC, DIA, MWGACC) should meet to

establish a memorandum of understanding in relation to tourism development in the region, including the DEC purchased properties and indigenous involvement in management and development.

• Workshops between government agencies and indigenous representatives for respective properties or groups of properties should be held in each region to establish a mutual understanding of management practice and direction and development of better relationships between government agencies and indigenous groups.

• Development of informal lines of communication between Indigenous representatives and government agencies will facilitate Indigenous enterprise initiatives and input into management of properties.


1

Chapter 1

INTRODUCTION

This report provides a collation of available information relating to natural and cultural assets present on the properties and part properties purchased by the Department of Conservation and Land Management (DEC) in the Gascoyne and Murchison regions of Western Australia. The inventory style information is overlaid with an assessment of the potential for tourism development on these ex-properties under DEC management. Assessment of the tourism potential of the DEC properties required consideration of these areas within the context of the Gascoyne and Murchison regions as a whole. It should be noted that DEC purchased the pastoral properties as part of a program of increasing representation of certain bioregions within Western Australia that were deemed underrepresented in the conservation estate. In other words, the properties were purchased primarily for their conservation value. Consideration of the potential for tourism development in these areas has therefore been conducted with the primary conservation value in mind. Table 1 details the properties and part properties purchased by DEC that have been included in this report. Map 1 illustrates the geographical location of the properties. The properties were purchased as part of a cross regional strategy as described in the following section.

Table 1 List of rangeland properties included in assessment of tourism potential

CARNARVON REGION

Mooka Cobra Waldburg

Part Dalgety Downs Part Mt Phillip Pimbee

GERALDTON REGION

Doolgunna Mooloogool Muggon Part Wooleen Part Twin Peaks Part Yuin

Narloo Lochada Warriedar Kadji Kadji Karara


2

Map 1: DEC pastoral properties analysed for tourism potential


3

Background The Gascoyne and Murchison regions of Western Australia have historically been dominated by pastoralism as the mainstay of the regional economy. An assessment of the social, economic and environmental status of these regions between 1998 and 2005 culminated in the Gascoyne Murchison Strategy (GMS). This strategy, concerned with sustainability in these regions identified issues negatively impacting on the pastoral industry such as declining vegetation, soil loss, increasing terms of trade and declining economic returns. The strategy recognised the need for improving the natural resource on which the industry is based, as well as addressing biodiversity conservation and expansion of the economic base in the regions.

Four core programs—business and industry development; industry research and development; voluntary

property adjustment; and improved regional environmental management—were established within the GMS. The Pastoral Rangelands Acquisition Program was a component of the regional environmental management program that provided funding for DEC to purchase selected land contained within pastoral properties to add to the conservation reserve system. The GMS funding was strengthened by significant contributions from the Commonwealth government’s National Reserve System Program of the Natural Heritage.

DEC purchased selected land systems (18 whole properties and 19 part properties totalling 3 916 244

hectares) from 1999 to 2004. The department purchased these properties with the primary purpose of establishing a more comprehensive, adequate and representative reserve system. While the primary focus of purchasing the pastoral lands is the rehabilitation and management for biodiversity and conservation purposes, it is also realised that the distinctive landscapes and cultural heritage values, both Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal, that exist across the rangelands are destined to attract increasing numbers of outback travellers.

The project has the potential to broaden the tourism product in Western Australia's North West offering a

tourism product for which there is an established demand and linking with existing products such as sections of the Gascoyne Murchison Outback Pathways. Tourism development in the station areas of the Murchison and Gascoyne offer possibilities to spread the influence of tourism inland, away from the coast, providing opportunities for more communities to share the benefits of a booming tourism industry and potentially lessen the impacts of growth on the coast. Broadening regional tourism product also provides opportunities to extend the duration of tourist visits to a region enhancing the returns of tourism to the regional economy. It also provides possibilities for the local indigenous populations to share their intellectual capital with tourism operators and tourists and may help address excessive and structural unemployment in Western Australia's North West.

Aims and Objectives The project aimed to provide, through tourism, sustainable, alternative, modes of development on pastoral stations in regional Western Australia. Specific aims include:

• an inventory of natural and cultural assets on DEC rangelands stations • an assessment of the tourism potential of these assets • an appraisal of the potential economic benefits of tourism on DEC rangelands stations • a documented methodology for the development of inventories through participatory processes.


4

Chapter 2

METHODOLOGY

The research assessed the suitability of properties, purchased in the Gascoyne Murchison strategy, for sustainable tourism. The first stage of the project involved desktop research to construct an inventory of natural and cultural assets on and adjacent to the DEC Gascoyne Murchison rangeland stations. Assets were identified in the documentation that may be used to contribute to the development of a tourism product aimed at providing a revenue stream to contribute to future management costs. The second stage of this project was to seek further information from key stakeholders (including local indigenous groups, pastoralists, the local tourism industry, tour operators and local naturalists) about how these values can be developed into tourism opportunities and linked/integrated with existing tourism products. The final stage involved an appraisal of the viability of tourism to pastoral stations in the region and potential economic benefits to land managers.

Desktop Research Initial data for the project was gathered from files in the DEC archives relating to the purchase of the properties. Any information indicating infrastructure, biophysical characteristics and social or cultural values was photocopied and filed. The archived information provided the basic framework for the inventory of the stations. Further information was sourced from a review of documents relating to the stations, including DEC reports, WA Museum records and Tourism WA visitor data. Information was also gathered through discussion with DEC staff and a review of the tourism literature. Subsequently, a draft inventory table was constructed detailing likely tourism assets on each property. A review of the literature was also written detailing the likely market demand for tourism on the rangelands and the types of experiences such tourists may seek. This formed the basis for stakeholder workshop discussions.

Stakeholder Workshops Stakeholder meetings were held in Carnarvon and Geraldton between May and August 2005. Meetings in each town focused on discussion of the corresponding pastoral properties for the respective regions. Stakeholder meetings were attended by government agency representatives, non-government organisation representatives, tourism operators and property owners and managers. Details of attendees and meeting agenda are provided in Appendix I.

Two stakeholder meetings were conducted in each region, one involving primarily non-indigenous

representatives and a second held exclusively for indigenous representatives. An exclusively indigenous stakeholders meeting was conducted for cultural reasons and to ensure indigenous representatives felt able to express their opinions freely. Government agency representatives from DEC, Development Commissions and Department of Indigenous Affairs also attended the indigenous workshops. The primary purpose of the meetings was to:

• directly involve industry partners and community members in the research process • gauge the level of interest in tourism development on the properties • gather additional information about tourism assets not accessed during the desktop inventory • gather ideas and perceptions regarding types of likely experiences • identify locations that may attract tourists and places not suitable for tourism visitation • elicit ideas regarding how to best communicate between various stakeholder groups • ascertain who to approach for more detailed information. The meetings were not intended as a forum for discussion of specific details regarding tourism development

opportunities. Rather, they were a forum for the various interested parties to gather and share general ideas in relation to tourism on the rangelands.

Attendees were invited to attend based on recommendations from regional government agency staff,

primarily through the respective development commissions and DEC offices. Government officers in each region devised a list of people they considered important and relevant to the project and sent invitations to attend. Attendees for the indigenous workshops were contacted on behalf of the project team by the respective


5

Development Commissions and Land and Sea Councils in each region. Attendees were provided with a workshop agenda and the desktop inventory of the properties to enable informed discussion.

Workshops were facilitated by the researchers based on the agenda in Appendix I. Depending on the group

dynamic, discussion primarily revolved around proceeding through the list of DEC purchased properties and discussing the tourism potential of each in terms of infrastructure and likely types of experience. The workshops also provided opportunities for the establishment of informal relationships between respective government agency staff and other stakeholders to facilitate collaboration and coordination of future tourism planning and development in the regions. Workshop discussion notes were recorded by the researchers for future assimilation into knowledge gathered for the project.

Site Visits The researchers visited the properties in the Gascoyne and Murchison regions to gain a first hand view of their condition and layout. Stations in the Gascoyne region were visited in conjunction with stakeholder workshops in Carnarvon. Information was collected at the DEC office in Carnarvon primarily relating to the location and layout of the stations. This also included maps of geology, topography and vegetation as well as sites identified either by DEC officers or station managers that had particular scenic or other tourism related values. A three day driving tour out of Carnarvon was undertaken during which properties adjacent to the Kennedy Ranges and Mt Augustus were visited. Managers of DEC properties and current pastoral properties were interviewed on a conversational basis regarding their opinions of the potential for tourism in the region. The driving tour of the Gascoyne properties was completed as a loop returning to Carnarvon then to Perth.

The Murchison Properties were visited on a drive trip over five days including the Lochada, Warriedar,

Karara group and the Yuin, Pimbee, Narloo group. Researchers stayed for two nights at each group of properties. Tours of the station were conducted independently on Narloo with the managers providing some information and ‘mud maps’ as a guide to points of interest. The Karara, Lochada managers offered a guided tour of the properties including points of interest and significant cultural sites. Doolgunna and Mooloogool, near Meekatharra, were visited separately with a guided tour of the points of interest provided by the DEC officer responsible for management of these properties.

Extensive notes from discussions with managers and observations of locations were made together with a

comprehensive digital image record. Site visits provided data that was not available in archival or current records or literature. The drive trip concluded with a stakeholders' workshop in Geraldton.

Tour Operator Survey A survey of tour operators licensed with DEC to operate in Mt Augustus National Park and Kennedy Range National Park was conducted via mail-back questionnaire (App. II). The survey sought operator feedback regarding:

• trip characteristics • activities during tours • suggestions for further development in the region • issues and barriers preventing tourism development • tourism potential of the DEC rangeland stations. The survey afforded a commercial perspective on the tourism potential of the properties within proximity of

the afore mentioned national parks. Licensed operators (N=112) were initially contacted on 26th May 2005 by DEC staff via email that included

a request to participate, background information relating to the study and the questionnaire for completion. A further email was broadcast on 10th June 2005 requesting the return of the completed survey forms by 24th June 2005. For those respondents who had not replied, a further reminder to complete the survey was made on 7th July 2005 via mail and included a copy of the questionnaire and reply paid envelope. Simple statistical analysis was carried out using primarily frequencies and means in combination with categorisation of written responses to expose the most frequent types of response.


6

Chapter 3

INVENTORY AND DESCRIPTION OF DEC RANGELANDS STATIONS

The pastoral properties were located across two DEC regions, the Carnarvon region and the Geraldton region. For the purposes of this project, the 19 whole and 18 part properties purchased by DEC were divided according to these regions. Within each respective region, the properties were grouped according to geographical clusters (Figure 2). For example, the stations clustered around Mt Augustus are discussed collectively.

Carnarvon Region Properties

Kennedy Range property—Mooka

Aboriginal occupation The Aboriginal history of the Kennedy Range and Mooka station is largely unrecorded. No apparent archaeological evidence is available for Mooka, however Cape Range, north of Mooka, was occupied by Aboriginal people over 30 000 years ago and the range has a continuous history of occupation since that time (Burbidge, McKenzie & Harvey 2000; Gough & Shepherd 1995). It is presumed that the remainder of the Carnarvon Basin has a similar history (Burbidge et al. 2000; DEC 2005 draft). The Kennedy Range has almost 100 recorded occupation sites on and around the ranges, most of which are archaeological sites, but a number are of ceremonial or mythological importance (DEC 2005 draft). It is believed that the Kennedy Range formed the boundary between the Maia people to the west and Malgaru tribe to the east (DEC 2002 draft; Gough & Shepherd 1995). Mooka means running water (Boston 2004). Artefact scatters around the freshwater springs on the western flank of the range, rock shelters and man-made structures suggest that camps, if not settlements, were common in that portion of the Kennedy Range Park (DEC 2005 draft; Dept of Indigenous Affairs 2005). There is also an artefact/scatter site at Venny Peak (Dept of Indigenous Affairs 2005). The freshwater springs on the western side of the range would have been a source of food (game and fish) and water for the Maia people (DEC 2005 draft). Clark (1992) also provides oral histories of pastoral and station life up until the 1960s. It was recalled that Aboriginal people lived on top of the Kennedy Ranges in caves and spears were used in the area (Clark 1992). There are also sites of significance at Binthalya (man-made structure) and engravings, artefacts/scatter, and a site of mythological significance at Kennedy Range (Dept of Indigenous Affairs 2005).

European exploration and settlement Francis Thomas Gregory (Figure 2) explored areas of the Gascoyne and Murchison in 1858 and named the Kennedy Range on 12th May in honour of the then Governor of Western Australia (Arthur Edward Kennedy) (Gough & Shepherd 1995; Gregory & Gregory 1884). The Lyons River, which runs along much of the eastern side of the range, was also named, presumably in honour of the British admiral and diplomat Lord Edmond Lyons (Gough & Shepherd 1995).

Figure 1 Explorer Francis Gregory

Source: Dept of Heritage and Environment 2005


7

Pastoral leases were taken up near the Kennedy Ranges in the 1880s when George Hammersley and Thomas Simms took up the Lyons River Station (Gough & Shepherd 1995). Originally called Binthabooka, Mooka has some of the largest springs in the Gascoyne (Boston 2004). The land was first taken up in 1906. Binthalya Homestead was named after a nearby Aboriginal well (Thalya means [water] ‘hole there’). The homestead was built by Norman Dempster (Figure 2). The Hutton’s bought Mooka in 1923/24 (Boston 2004). Part of the old Binthalya Homestead, windmills and associated structure, and fencing provide evidence of the former pastoral activities. The homestead is approximately 60 years old and is in a dilapidated condition. The old rabbit proof fence also runs partly along the western boundary. Mooka homestead is approximately 40 years old and is in reasonable condition and includes infrastructure such as shearing sheds and quarter and sheds.

Figure 2 Binthalya Homestead

Source: DEC 2005 draft

Climate Stations located on the Carnarvon Basin experience an arid to semi-arid climate with a mean annual rainfall as low as 200 millimetres in places (Burbidge et al. 2000; Payne, Curry & Spencer 1987). The average annual rainfall recorded at the nearby Lyons River Station is 210 millimetres with the highest monthly average of 34 millimetres in February and the lowest in September (Gough & Shepherd 1995). The temperature range from nearby Gascoyne Junction is from 9°C minimum and 22.4°C maximum in July to 23°C minimum and 40.5°C maximum in January (Payne et al. 1987). Gascoyne Junction has on average 19 days per month when the temperature exceeds 40°C in January (Halse, Shiel, Storey, Edward, Lansbury, Cale & Harvey 2000).

Landscape The Kennedy Ranges landform is characterised by extensive areas of broad gently undulating sand plains with localised areas of escarpments, gorges, floodplains and hills. The plateau is dissected by several major watercourses with intertwining floodplains and salt pans (DEC 2002 draft). Mooka is located on the western side of the Kennedy Ranges in the Carnarvon Basin, which is one of the major sedimentary basins of Western Australia (Figure 3). Isolated dunes descend the western scarp and form sediment sources for material transported by streams onto the Binthalya Plain (Halse et al. 2000). Mooka has eleven land systems and is dominated by the Yalbalgo land system in the western, central and southern parts of the station. It consists of large linear and reticular sand dunes up to 12 metres high with sandy swales (Payne et al. 1987). The swales support tall acacia shrub lands with occasional patches of eucalypts and an understorey of shrubs or hard spinifex (DEC 2005 draft; Payne et al. 1987). The northern part of Mooka comprises mainly three land systems namely Billy (14%), Windalia (8%) and Cahill (10%). The Billy system consists of low plateau, mesas and buttes with stony foot slopes and narrow drainage floors while the Windalia system consists of stony plains and narrow, dissected upper interfluves on radiolarite (Payne et al. 1987). The Cahill system also occurs along the eastern boundary of the station at the foot of the Kennedy Ranges and consists of sandy outwash plains and sandy channels (Payne et al. 1987).


8

Figure 3 Landscape of the western escarpment of the Kennedy Ranges

Source: DEC 2005 draft Mooka Spring and its associated creek (Figure 5) represent both a regionally significant aquatic system and

an unusual ecological community. It represents the best example of this wetland type in the Carnarvon Basin, based on plant and its species rich aquatic invertebrate species (DEC 2005 draft). Thirteen species of waterbird have been recorded on Mooka, mostly on Lake Julia and 126 aquatic invertebrates have been recorded (Halse et al. 2000).

Figure 4 Mooka Creek

Source: DEC 2005 draft

Flora The area around Mooka Spring, on the western side of the Range, include tall river gums (Eucalyptus camuldulensis) and cadjeputs (Melaleuca leucadendron) and a range of tropical emergent aquatic and dampland plants including droseras, sedges and bulrushes and shrubs such as coolibah (Eucalyptus victrix) and Acacia citrinoviridus (DEC 2005 draft). Mooka has six vegetation types. The property is dominated by low woodland of bowgada (Acacia ramulosa) and A. subtessarogona and includes other low woodland of A. victoriae, snakewood (A. xiphophylla) and mulga (A. aneura). Hummock grassland, shrub steppe, mixed scrub, hard spinifex (Triodia basedowii) and a mosaic of shrub lands of A. sclerosperma and sparse scrub/succulent steppe of saltbush (Atriplex spp.) and bluebush (Maireana spp.) are also apparent.

Fauna No official monitoring of the fauna on Mooka has been conducted. The online WA Museum database relating to animal distributions (FaunaBase) provides access to terrestrial vertebrate specimen records in the collections of the Western Australian Museum, the Queensland Museum and Museum and Art Gallery of the Northern Territory. FaunaBase identified a potential 43 species of birds, 12 species of mammals, 55 species of reptiles and 1 amphibian species for Mooka, based on its geographical coordinates. Kennedy Range National Park, adjoining Mooka, has a total of 33 reptile, 103 bird and 20 native mammal species (including 9 bats) known in the area (DEC 2005 draft).


9

Existing tourism product The Kennedy Range, located near the town of Gascoyne Junction, is an established nature based tourism destination. Gascoyne Junction offers hotel/motel style accommodation and a caravan park. In addition, Bidgemia Station, located 11 kilometres east of Gascoyne Junction via gravel road offers high quality station stay accommodation in ‘The Lodge’, a five-bedroom self-contained dwelling, and also offers modern backpacker style accommodation with twin share rooms, share bathroom and kitchen in the ‘Shearing Quarters’ (Figure 5). Camping is also available on the riverbank with ablutions and 24 hour power available. The Outback Pathways ‘Wool Wagon Pathway’ self drive trail passes near Mooka and Kennedy Ranges, as does the North West Wildflower Trail.

Figure 5 Bidgemia Station Stay

Photos: A. Smith & DEC 2005 draft

Recreation settings existing within Kennedy Range National Park are founded on the premise that the remote,

rugged, natural characteristics of the range are its greatest assets (DEC 2005 draft). Recreation opportunities available within the park include:

• wilderness area on top of the range • the base of the south-western side of the range • accessible areas at the base of the eastern escarpment. The eastern side of the Kennedy Range is currently the focal point for visitors to the area. Access to the

eastern side of the Kennedy Range is via a gravel road (Ullawarra Road). This road is suitable for 2WD vehicles in dry conditions. Access to the park may be restricted if the Gascoyne River crossing is closed or road conditions are unsuitable due to wet weather. The eastern escarpment currently has four recreation areas:

• Temple Gorge day-use and campground • Drapers Gorge day-use • Honeycomb Gorge day-use • Sunrise View day-use.


10

Temple Gorge has an information shelter available and a short walk (2 kilometres) with the trail head immediately adjacent to the campground. A terminus car park suitable for a small number of vehicles is available. The walk trail is not clearly defined and a rugged rocky path has developed into the gorge that requires rock scrambling and a significant level of fitness (DEC 2002 draft; 2005 draft) (Figure 6). The campground is small and basic, catering for ten small families or groups. A sealed-vault toilet is also available.

Figure 6 Temple Gorge

Photo: A. Smith

Drapers Gorge is a day-use site only with an undefined terminus car park and toilet provided. A short walk

trail (2 kilometres) is provided, although the track is not well defined and requires a high degree of fitness (DEC 2002 draft) (Figure 7). The trail features a series of highly seasonal waterfalls and small rock pools along its length. The access road is often inaccessible following rain as it crosses a major creek (DEC 2002 draft).

Figure 7 Drapers Gorge

Photo: A. Smith


11

Honeycomb Gorge is a day-use only site with a 600 metre walk trail that features a large amphitheatre containing a seasonal waterfall and pool (Figure 8). The gorge is named for its extraordinary honeycomb relief rock forms. An undefined terminus car park and toilet is provided at the site. The walk trail requires a moderate level of fitness due to its rocky nature (DEC 2002 draft).

Figure 8: Honeycomb Gorge

Photos: A. Smith

Sunrise view is a raised viewing area, only a short walk from a terminus road loop that provides a good view

of the front of the range. As its name suggests, the site is notable for feature sunrises (DEC 2002 draft). Of the 112 operators licensed to operate in Kennedy Range National Park and Mt Augustus National Park, 16

currently travel to Kennedy Ranges (App II). Tour operators currently visiting Kennedy Range are generally involved in some type of four-wheel-drive (4WD) tour (43%) followed by coach tours (37%) (Appendix B). Operators commonly visit the Kennedy Ranges for up to a day and have visited the hinterland region at least 4 times in the last five years. Operators visit the hinterland region at least annually (Appendix B). The aspects of the Hinterland valued most are the remoteness followed by the ecotourism experience, while the most important activities were sightseeing, camping and relaxing (Appendix B).

Mt Augustus National Park properties—Cobra, Waldburg, Dalgety Downs and Mt Phillip

Aboriginal occupation It was suggested by Tindale, in his book, Aboriginal Tribes of Australia, that Mt Augustus (Figure 9) was a natural boundary between two tribal areas—the smaller area of the Ninanu tribe to the north and the much larger area of the Wadjari tribe to the south (Gough & Bloomer 1995). The Wadjari Aboriginal people refer to Mt Augustus as Burringurrah. They used the area in times of drought because of the natural springs along the base of Mt Augustus. There are three known stories in the Dreaming that relate to the formation of Mt Augustus (Gough & Bloomer 1995). In Aboriginal mythology, mobs of people travelling across the country were often transmuted into the form of a range, while individuals became hills, peaks or other distinctive features of the landscape. The three stories about Mt Augustus (Burringurrah) generally relate to a male travelling across the country that was pursued by tribesman (either for breaking Aboriginal law or causing fear) and speared, then beaten by the womenfolk. His dead body lay on the plain, forming the shape of Mt Augustus (Gough & Bloomer 1995).


12

Figure 9 Mt Augustus

Photo: A. Smith Cattle Pool or Goolinee was also an important site for the Wadjari people. Cattle Pool is a permanent pool of

water near Mt Augustus on the Lyons River, a tributary of the Gascoyne (Figure 10). Gough and Bloomer (1995) recounted stories from the Burringurrah Aboriginal Community where people recalled their grandfathers telling them of the times when their people camped at Goolinee. Francis T. Gregory also recounted finding evidence of an Aboriginal encampment at Goolinee during his expedition in 1858 (Gregory & Gregory 1884).

Figure 10 Goolinee—Cattle Pool (day-use site)

Photo: A. Smith Francis T. Gregory wrote of the presence of Aboriginal people camping near the Mount Samuel, Mount

James and Mount Phillip area on the Gascoyne River in 1858 (Gregory & Gregory 1884). The explorers observed ‘upwards of thirty women and children, who ran into the bed of the river to hide, some of the women immersing their children completely under water occasionally to prevent their cry of alarm attracting our attention’ (Gregory & Gregory 1884). Gregory and Gregory (1884) observed wooden scoops containing a variety of seeds and roots and some small mammals near the fires. There was evidence of heavy spears with between three and eighteen barbs cut out of solid wood and with a shaft from three to four metres in length. There were also large shields made from sycamore and a few skins of the red kangaroo. Up to sixty men were later observed and were accompanied by large white dogs.

Aboriginal presence was also noted on Dalgety Downs in 1904 where James and Merton Fitzpatrick

encountered people camping near Dalgety creek (Fitzpatrick 2004). The local name for the area was Coondie, it was a popular spot to replenish stocks of waddies and boomerangs, as a very hard wood grew in abundance in this area (Boston 2004). The Fitzpatrick’s spoke some of the local dialect and befriended the local indigenous people, signing many of the families as station hands (Fitzpatrick 2004). Clark (1992) and Fitzpatrick (2004) report stories of Aboriginal people living and working on Dalgety Downs for a considerable period of time. Unions between European men and Aboriginal women are described in verbal and written historical accounts. Children from these unions were sent to New Norcia to be baptised and educated by the Benedictines.


13

In 1927, as part of the Aborigines Act Amendment Act 19111 and State Children Act Amendment Act 1919, the women (aged in their early 20s) and children were forcibly taken by police and placed aboard the steamer ‘Gascoyne’ and shipped steerage to Fremantle, from where they were transferred to the Moore River Mission (Fitzpatrick 2004). Other children also considered at the time as ‘half-caste’2 would also have been forcibly removed from the station. Historical verbal accounts were recorded of Aboriginal people being shot by police at a place called Dead Man Hill on Dalgety Downs Station (Clark 1992).

There are three Aboriginal sites registered at Mt Augustus. A site at Goolinee (Cattle Pool) includes

artefacts/scatter and is described as a site used as a birthplace, camp and water source (Dept of Indigenous Affairs 2005). The other two are at Mt Augustus and include ceremonial, mythological, painting, engravings and poundings (Dept of Indigenous Affairs 2005).

On the surrounding stations, there is an engraving site registered with Dept of Indigenous Affairs on Cobra.

There are four sites listed on Waldburg which incorporate the Waldburg Range. These have ceremonial significance, engravings, artefacts and scatter; Mt Phillip has five registered sites on the Thomas River, which include: a modified tree, artefact/scatter, man-made structures (former camp), a ceremonial site and a repository/cache. Medalia Pool on the Thomas River has sites of artefacts/scatter, a camp and is listed as a significant water source (Dept of Indigenous Affairs 2005).

European exploration and settlement Mt Augustus Explorer Francis Thomas Gregory was the first non-indigenous person to climb Mt Augustus on 3rd June 1858 during his exploration of the Gascoyne and Lyons Rivers. Mt Augustus was named after his brother Augustus C. Gregory, a surveyor and explorer (GDC 2005a; Gough & Bloomer 1995; Gregory & Gregory 1884). During this expedition, Mount Gascoyne, Mount Samuel, Mount James, Mount Phillips and Mount Dalgety were also named. Mount James was named after Mr James Roe who was on the expedition (Gregory & Gregory 1884).

Mt Augustus station was taken up in 1887 by Samuel James Phillips and John Hughes Phillips (Gough &

Bloomer 1995). After the First World War, Ernest Potts managed the station and ran 17 000 head of cattle with the help of indigenous and non-indigenous stockman. Potts managed the station for 35 years until 1955. The station then passed through a number of owners and managers (Gough & Bloomer 1995). In 1989, Mount Augustus and the land immediately surrounding it (9168 hectares) was voluntarily released from a portion of Cobra and Mt Augustus stations and declared a national park (Gough & Bloomer 1995).

The first non-indigenous person to discover Cattle Pool, near Mt Augustus and part of the Mt Augustus

National Park, was E.T. Hooley in 1866 when he drove 1945 sheep from Northampton to the Ashburton River (GDC 2005b; Sharp 1985). E.T. Hooley also named the Thomas River in 1866 (Sharp 1985). Cattle Pool was an important watering point along the De Grey Stock Route until the 1950s. It was also a ‘base’ at which cattle were gathered prior to be driven south-east to the rail-head in Meekatharra (GDC 2005b). Cobra Station Although currently the Cobra Station homestead, the Bangemall Inn has not always been so. The Bangemall Inn was established in 1896 by South Australian Percy Aycliffe to cater for the miners of El Dorado Gold Mine in the Bangemall goldfields (GDC 2005d; Gough & Bloomer 1995) (Figure 11). The inn was originally known as the Euranna and was renamed the Bangemall Inn in 1910 (GDC 2005d). It was an important centre in this isolated area and the local races were held there. It was used by pioneer pastoralists, gold miners, drovers and camel teamsters (Dept of the Environment and Heritage 2005).

1 The Chief Protector was made the legal guardian of all ‘half-caste’ children ‘to the exclusion of the rights of a mother of an illegitimate half-caste child.’ Aboriginal institutions were to exercise the same powers as State institutions in respect of State children (Aborigines Act Amendment Act 1911). 2 ‘half-caste’: includes any person born of an ‘Aboriginal’ parent on either side and the child of any such person.


14

Figure 11 The Bangemall Inn c.1897

Photo: A .Smith

The Bangemall Inn was also the terminus of Sir Charles Kingsford Smith’s mail run before he became

famous for completing the first flight across the Pacific Ocean in 1928 (GDC 2005c). The mail run was established in 1924. Charles Kingsford Smith and Keith Anderson bought a truck (a Dodge Graham one ton truck) and set up business as the Gascoyne Transport Company with the intention of out competing the camel teams that dominated transport in the Gascoyne area (GDC 2005c). One of the contracts they picked up was the mail run from Carnarvon to the Bangemall goldfields near Mt Augustus. This service also delivered all manner of supplies including fuel, newspapers, foodstuffs and various long-awaited luxuries (GDC 2005c). Kingsford Smith was known as a social character and entertainer, with a fondness for music, dance and drink. The inn would have been a welcome stop on a long and arduous trip covering hundreds of kilometres on roads that were little more than rudimentary bush tracks. His presence bought locals from far and wide to join him for a drink, a sing-a-long and to pick up the fortnightly mail (GDC 2005c).

In 1919, Charlie Cornish from the north-west bought the inn and held it until 1940 when the Fitzgerald

family, who owned nearby Cobra Station, bought it for use as a homestead (Gough & Bloomer 1995). The station ‘snaked’ right across Mt Augustus and the Thomas River, to a total length of 120 kilometres—hence the name Cobra Station (Boston 2004; GDC 2005d). In 1979, Cobra Station was purchased for a tourist development by a business syndicate from Perth and the inn was classified by the National Trust (Gough & Bloomer 1995). In 1983 a ‘historic wayside inn licence’ was granted and the old inn was reopened (GDC 2005d; Gough & Bloomer 1995). In 1989, Dennis and Alexa Lang purchased the station, restocked it and used the old hotel as a homestead (Gough & Bloomer 1995).

The Bangemall Inn is registered with the Australian Heritage Database as an indicative place (Place id.

10814) and is also registered with the Heritage Council of Western Australia (Place no. 04129). The building is historically important as one of the few surviving examples of the wayside hotels which used to be scattered through the north-west and for its association with Bangemall goldfields (Dept of the Environment and Heritage 2005; Heritage Council of Western Australia 2005). The homestead has adobe walls, corrugated iron roof and verandas supported by rough bush posts (Figure 12). The basic structure is little altered although additional rooms were put on in 1916 (Dept of the Environment and Heritage 2005). The grave of Mr John Ashley Cooper, the Mining Registrar, who died in February 1898, is located to the north of the former hotel (Heritage Council of Western Australia 2005).

The original Cobra Homestead is also registered with the Heritage Council of Western Australia (Place no.

15419). The homestead is situated 9 kilometres west of the Bangemall Inn. It is a simple stone building with a hipped corrugated iron roof (Figure 12). The homestead is in a deteriorated condition. There is a lonely grave surrounded by a decorative iron railing located to the west of the homestead approximately 18 metres off the main road (Heritage Council of Western Australia 2005). The grave is marked with a marble headstone, with a cross which has broken off the three-tiered base, the headstone reads: ‘In loving memory of Mary Katherine, beloved wife of James Comtesse who died 1st Feb 1925 aged 43 years’ (Heritage Council of Western Australia 2005). Another grave is located north-east of the old homestead and adjacent to a creek. Similarly this grave is marked by a three-tier marble base and intact cross and surrounded by a simple bush timber and wire fence with


15

a metal handrail. The headstone reads: ‘To the memory of Mary Jane Cream, loving mother of Ada, Edie, Ethel and Ray who died on March 15th 1933, aged 70 years’ (Heritage Council of Western Australia 2005).

Figure 12 The original Cobra Homestead c.1906

Source: DEC 2005; DEH 2005 Dalgety Downs Station Dalgety Downs was named after Mt Dalgety or Dalgety creek by the first lessees, James and Merton Fitzpatrick (Fitzpatrick 2004). Dalgety Downs was sectioned off from Dairy Creek Station in 1904 and the homestead was built by Billy Jackson (Figure 13). Dairy Creek was settled by the John Bernard Fitzpatrick in 1883 (Boston 2004; Fitzpatrick 2004). Dalgety Downs was run as a sheep station but also bread draught horses in 1909 and in 1911, the Fitzpatrick’s overlanded 170 camels to Dalgety Downs with the help of their six best indigenous stockmen and the two station house girls (Fitzpatrick 2004). Forty of the camels were sold en route and the remaining 130 were bred to replace draught horses as a means to transport wool in the area (Fitzpatrick 2004). James Fitzpatrick died in 1923 and Merton Fitzpatrick retired from the station in 1927. In the 1930s Mr Allen was the overseer of Dalgety Downs (Fitzpatrick 2004).

Figure 13 Dalgety Downs Homestead

Source: Fitzpatrick 2004 Mt Phillip and Waldburg Stations Little is documented of European exploration and settlement of Mt Phillip and Waldburg Stations.

Climate The region that incorporates Mt Augustus, Cobra, Dalgety Downs, Mt Phillip and Waldburg Stations experience an arid climate with an average rainfall of approximately 230 millimetres with the majority of rain falling between November and April in accordance with cyclonic activity. Summer is characterised by hot dry days with temperatures ranging from 21–45°C. Winter is mild with temperatures ranging from 5–33°C.

Landscape The Mt Augustus stations (Cobra, Dalgety Downs, Mt Phillip and Waldburg) are located in the Edmund and Collier Basins of the Gascoyne Complex (Sheppard 2004). A feature of the landscape on Cobra Station is the Gascoyne Ranges and the Centipede Range. The Gascoyne Ranges are rugged country with steep ranges and low stony hills. There are narrow valley plains between sharp dissections surrounded by gently sloping plains (DEC


16

1994). The Frederick River and the Lyons River cross the property, which includes a permanent pool (Edithanna Pool).

Waldburg has a number of ranges including the Gascoyne Ranges and Waldburg Range. There are also a series of upland areas, sheet wash plains and drainage lines. Waldburg Range is located in the north-east sector of the property. There are east/west ridges extending to Mt Egerton on the eastern boundary and Mt Candolle is on the northern boundary.

The Gascoyne Ranges is also a feature of Dalgety Downs landscape. The property is of a mountainous and

rocky nature. Other landscape features include Dalgety Brook and Waterfall Pools. Mt Phillip is divided by three creek systems comprising the Thomas River, Howlett Creek system and the

Thirty Three River system. Significant landforms include the Gascoyne Ranges and Mt Phillips and Mt Samuel in the north of the property.

Flora No formal flora survey has occurred in the Mt Augustus area to date. Cobra has eight vegetation associations. The property is dominated by low woodland and shrub lands of mulga (Acacia aneura) but also has areas of shrub lands and low woodlands that include Acacia victoriae and snakewood (A. xiphophylla) and some bowgada (A. ramulosa).

Waldburg has four vegetation types recognised on the property. These are dominated by mulga scrub and

include low woodlands of mulga, Acacia victoriae and snakewood. The diversity of topography and geology is conducive to supporting geographically restricted plant species with the greatest diversity of plant communities in stony, upland situations.

Dalgety Downs has eight vegetation types on the property. The property is dominated by shrub lands of

snakewood and Acacia victoriae and includes shrub lands and low woodland of mulga, mulga and snakewood and shrub lands of eremophila and cassia dwarf scrub.

Mt Phillip has four vegetation types on the property dominated by shrub lands of snakewood and Acacia

victoriae and includes shrub lands and low woodland of mulga and low woodlands of mulga, snakewood and Acacia victoriae.

Fauna The only formal fauna survey in the Mt Augustus area to date has been conducted by Birds Australia. The WA Museum FaunaBase online resource identified a potential 13 species of mammals, 53 species of reptiles/amphibians based on the geographical coordinates of Cobra Station and 62 species of birds as recorded by Birds Australia.

The coordinates for Waldburg identified a potential of 77 mammal species including the rare rock wallaby

(Petrogale lateralis); and priority listed long-tailed dunnart (Smithopsis longicaudata), pebble-mound mouse (Pseudomys chapmani) and the Lakeland Downs short-tailed mouse (Leggadina lakedownensis). There is also potential for 53 species of reptiles/amphibians including the rare yinnietharra rock-dragon (Ctenophorous yinnietharra). Blackhead pythons (Aspidites melanocephalus) and Stimson’s pythons (Morelia stimsoni) have been observed and Birds Australia has recorded 90 species of birds. The property supports wide areas of former habitat of the burrowing bettong (Bettongia lesueur) with extinct mounds common across wide areas of the property. There are also extinct mounds of the mallee fowl (Leipoa ocellata) and remains of the locally extinct greater stick-nest rat (Leporillus conditor).

The coordinates for Dalgety Downs and Mt Phillips identified a potential for 53 species of

reptiles/amphibians and 13 species of mammals. Two species of threatened fauna have been recorded on the properties including: mulgara (Dasycercus crysticauda) and the pebble-mound mouse. Additionally, Birds Australia has identified 35 species of birds.

Existing tourism product Mt Augustus (Burringurrah) is an important nature based tourism destination. The park is accessible via graded gravel roads and is suitable for two-wheel drive vehicles for most of the year. A seasonal road from Mt Augustus via Dooley Downs and Pingandy stations leads to the Ashburton Downs-Mt Vernon Road and provides a shorter route to continue to Karijini National Park and the Pilbara (Gough & Bloomer 1995). A ranger is stationed at the park during the main visitor season (April to October) and is available to provide guidance and information


17

about the park’s plants, wildlife and Aboriginal heritage (Gough & Bloomer 1995). Mt Augustus currently attracts approximately 4000 visitors per year and the site has a number of day-use sites and walk trails (Gough & Bloomer 1995).

Burringurrah Drive Trail forms a ring road around Mt Augustus and provides views of the changing faces of the rock and access to its recreation sites and walk trails (Gough & Bloomer 1995). Before reaching the drive trail, Mt Augustus can be viewed from Emu Hill lookout. The lookout provides a good location to take photographs of Mt Augustus. Once on the drive trail there is six day-use sites around the base of the rock. These include: Goolinee, Goordgeela Lookout, Wararla and Kotka Gorge, Ooramboo and Edney’s Lookout, Mundee, Beedoboondu and The Pound.

Goolinee (Cattle Pool) is a day-use picnic area located near a permanent pool on the Lyons River (Figure 14).

There is also a 2 kilometre return walk trail (Corella Trail) along the Lyons River. Goordgeela Lookout and trail follows a rocky creek to a lookout where views of the Lyons River and the Godfrey Ranges can be seen.

Figure 14 Goolinee

Photo: DEC 2005

Warrarla (Gum Grove) is a picnicking site among a grove of river gums adjacent to the Mt Augustus Outback Tourism Resort. The picnic site is at the head of a 2 kilometre return walk along the usually dry creek bed can be taken into Kotke Gorge (Gough & Bloomer 1995) (Figure 15).

Figure 15 Warrarla (Gum Grove)

Photo: DEC 2005

Ooramboo is a 150 metre easy walk trail to view Aboriginal engravings of animal tracks along an escarpment

(Gough & Bloomer 1995) (Figure 16a). A further walk of 100 metres takes the visitor to a permanent soak


18

‘Edney Spring’ (Figure 16b). There is a longer 6 kilometre return trail to Edney’s Lookout to enable elevated views (Gough & Bloomer 1995) (Figure 16c).

Figure 16 Ooramboo—Edney’s Lookout, Mt Augustus a) Aboriginal engravings, b) Edney Spring, c) walk trail to Edney’s Lookout

(a)

(b)

(c)

Photos: A. Smith Mundee is a 300 metre return walk trail to a rock wall with Aboriginal engravings on the walls (Figure 17).

The engravings are of kangaroo, emu and bustard tracks in three cave-like overhangs. Aboriginal mythology has it that a Dreaming spirit created the engravings with his fingers when the rocks were still soft (Gough & Bloomer 1995).


19

Figure 17 Mundee, Mt Augustus

Photos: A. Smith

Beedoboondu is a 250 metre short walk along a creek bed which brings the visitor to Flintstone Rock, lying

across the stream bed. Aboriginal engravings are located under the rock depicting animal tracks and hunters (Gough & Bloomer 1995) (Figure 18). This is also the access to the Summit Trail, a 12 kilometre return trail over rugged terrain which is only for the experienced and fit bushwalker (Gough & Bloomer 1995).

Figure 18 Beedoboondu, Mt Augustus and (a) view from Beedoboondu (b) Flintstone Rock Aboriginal engravings

(a)

(b) Photos: A. Smith

The Pound is a natural basin that was used in the early twentieth century for holding cattle prior to moving

them on the hoof to Meekatharra. Droving to Meekatharra would take 10 to 12 days (Gough & Bloomer 1995). A short walk (2 kilmotres return) up Saddle Trail leads to the saddle and provides views south into The Pound and north over the Lyons River valley (Gough & Bloomer 1995) (Figure 19).


20

Figure 19 Saddle Trail

Photo: DEC 2005

Camping is not permitted in the park and most people base themselves at either the Mt Augustus Outback

Tourist Resort (Figure 20), located on the north-east side of Mt Augustus. The Resort provides basic motel style rooms, unpowered camping and caravan sites, fuel, a public telephone and a shop supplying food and visitor information such as park maps and brochures. Alternatively, visitors can stay at Cobra Station, 37 kilometres west of Mt Augustus, which provides motel style rooms and unpowered camping and caravan sites and a public telephone. Fuel, food and park maps and brochures can also be obtained here (Figure 21).

Figure 20 Mt Augustus Outback Tourist Resort

Photos: A. Smith


21

Figure 21 Cobra Station Accommodation

Photos: A. Smith & DEC 2005

Of the 112 operators licensed to operate in Kennedy Range National Park and Mt Augustus National Park, 19

of those currently travel to Mt Augustus (App. C). Tour operators currently visiting Mt Augustus generally are involved in some type of four-wheel-drive (4WD) tour (43%) followed by coach tours (37%) (App C). Operators generally visit Mt Augustus for up to two days and generally have from 8 to 120 passengers per annum on their tours. While visiting Mt Augustus, operators generally stay at the Mt Augustus Outback Tourist Resort (62%) followed by Cobra Station (15%) (App. II).

Pimbee

Aboriginal occupation There are currently two native title claims over Pimbee (Gnulli and Mulgana native title claim group). Prior to pastoral activities, Aboriginal people lived in parts of the Pimbee area. There are a number of sites containing evidence of past occupation including gnamma holes, stone arrangements and implement scatters. Boston (2004) identified Pimbee as meaning ‘soft country’ with plenty of grasses. In the Jiwarli language Pimbee means ‘flat’ but in the Wajarri language it means the ‘palm of the hand’. However the name of the station is said to mean ‘lots of stones’. Boston (2004) suggests ‘men and women walked across this flat land, their palms outstretched to gather grass seeds as they walked from one water hole to the next’. The stones could have been grinding stones, conveniently left at various locations for use as the need arose.

European exploration and settlement There is little recorded information on the European exploration and settlement of Pimbee Station. Pimbee was developed for sheep in the early 1900s. The rabbit proof fence extends along the south boundary of the property and also runs north/south through the property on the old eastern boundary.

Climate The region incorporating Pimbee experiences a semi-desert Mediterranean climate with an average rainfall of 210 millimetres which falls mainly between May and early June in the winter months. Winters are characterised by mild days and cool nights while summers are hot and usually fairly dry.


22

Landscape Pimbee is part of the Carnarvon Basin and contains undulating sand plain country with sandy swales, areas of stony ridges and red dunes. These are broken by clay pan and clay flat country, with small creek systems and the Wooramel River, including extensive river pools, passing through the south-east corner of the property. There are longitudinal and convergent or occasionally reticulate sand ridges in the north-west/south-east section and flat to undulating interdunal plains of Aeolian sand. Dunes are high in the west and become flat in the east of the property.

The Yalbalgo land system dominates 90% of the station. Yalbalgo is characterised by sand plains with linear

and reticulate dunes (Payne et al. 1987). Other land systems include: Yagina characterised by low stony plains soil covered plains, stony claypans and minor sandy banks and dunes, while Target is characterised by plains with sandy banks, clayey interbank areas and numerous small drainage foci (Payne et al. 1987).

Flora Pimbee contains eight vegetation types including low woodland, shrub lands and succulent steppe. The property is mostly dominated by a mosaic of low woodland; waterwood (Acacia coriacea ssp. pendens) and shrub lands; A. sclerosperma & bowgada (A. ramulosa) scrub. Other vegetation includes: shrub lands of Acacia victoriae scrub, grevillea scrub and mulga (Acacia aneura). There is also succulent steppe containing samphire (Halosarcia spp.) and 97 hectares of clay pan area containing no vegetation. A graded gravel road (Pimbee Road) dissects the property and wildflowers can be viewed from this road.

Fauna No official monitoring of fauna has been conducted on Pimbee. The WA Museum FaunaBase for the coordinates of Pimbee identified a potential 15 species of birds, 4 species of mammals, 29 species of reptiles and 6 species of amphibians.

Existing tourism product Pimbee is dissected by Pimbee Road. This road links the North West Coastal Highway to Gascoyne Junction. Pimbee is located 180 kilometres south-east from Carnarvon, 102 kilometres south of Gascoyne Junction and 25 kilometres north of the Wooramel Roadhouse on the North West Coastal Highway. The station has no major dwelling although it does have two small timber and fibro staff cottages with a single bedroom, dining, kitchen and one of the cottages has a bathroom and toilet. There is also a shearing shed and quarters with six rooms, a bathroom and a shearers kitchen that is in average condition. The nearest accommodation is the Wooramel Roadhouse Caravan Park at Wooramel.

Geraldton Region Properties

Meekatharra and Wiluna properties—Mooloogool and Doolgunna

Aboriginal occupation Aboriginal people have lived throughout the area using the land for hunting, gathering and cultural purposes. Mooloogool contains a number of sites where Aboriginal people have gathered and other areas of significance may also exist. There is currently a native title claim over the property (Yugungua-Nya native title claim). There are ten sites registered with the Department of Indigenous Affairs. These include skeletal material/burial at Thaduna Hill; mythological significance at Jiminya Pool; artefacts/scatter at Noonyereena Pool; and artefacts/scatter and a quarry at Thadungunna Pool (Dept of Indigenous Affairs 2005).

On Doolgunna there are gnamma holes in granite outcrops and there is also a boulder mound next to a

gnamma hole water source and evidence of rock engravings and cave paintings, handprints and engravings. There are two native title claims over the property (Yugunga-Nya native title claim). There is one registered site with the Dept of Indigenous Affairs at Doolgunna Breakaway that includes a ceremonial site, a man-made structure, painting, engraving, quarry and artefacts/scatter (archaeological deposit, camp) (Dept of Indigenous Affairs 2005).

Karalundi Aboriginal Education Centre (KAEC) is keen to establish a post compulsory training centre at the

old Mooloogool homestead that provides opportunities for Aboriginal youth that enhance their development while at the same time promoting Aboriginal customs, culture and teachings.


23

European exploration and settlement At Mooloogool, the property was granted in 1918 and has remained an active pastoral property since then. A disused stock route runs through the property (Crown reserve no. 9699). There are a number of government wells along this stock route that may have some historical value. Mooloogool has a historic well (Diamond Well; Place No: 05519) registered with the Heritage Council of Western Australia. Additionally, the marked grave of the 18 month old daughter of previous owner, Noel Pomery, is located at Mooloogool homestead (Heritage Council of Western Australia 2005). Active mining by individual and groups of prospectors in search of gold have created significant environmental impacts at two locations on Mooloogool.

On Doolgunna there is the historical area of Peak Hill, which was an early mining settlement (Figure 22).

There are a few old out camps and miner’s huts such as Boyers hut (Figure 22a) which offers an insight into the hardships endured by the gold mining pioneers, and the pioneer cemetery which was once part of the Peak Hill townsite. Morks Well contains a gravesite of a two-year-old boy, Jack Morcks (dating back to the turn of the twentieth century). Additionally, two disused stock routes dissect Doolgunna; Crown Reserve number 9700—the De Grey/Peak Hill stock route which was gazetted in 1905; and CR20092, which was gazetted in 1929. There has been considerable gold exploration and prospecting activity on Doolgunna. The majority of the station is under exploration leases, either determined or pending, and there are a number of abandoned mine shafts.

Figure 22 Peak Hill Settlement, Doolgunna

(a) Boyers Hut – Doolgunna (b) Peak Hill Cemetery – Doolgunna

(c) Peak Hill Homestead Ruins (d) Peak Hill Homestead Ruins

Photos: DEC 2005

The Doolgunna homestead was built in early 1991 (Figure 23). The homestead and stock shearer’s quarters

were built in 1991 from cement and local stone, constructed on the site of the original house which was built in 1925. Full time caretakers are currently employed to maintain the homestead and surrounds.


24

Figure 23 Doolgunna Homestead

Photo: DEC 2005

Climate Mooloogool and Doolgunna are characterised by a semi-arid to arid climate. The area experiences long hot summers (23–37°C) with cool and mild winters (8–19°C). The annual average rainfall is 220 millimetres. The area experiences partially reliable winter rainfall to moderately unreliable summer falls.

Landscape Mooloogool is of fairly uniform topography, mostly a broad plateau of about 600 metres in elevation. The major surfaces are quaternary sands, alluvium and colluvium with outcrops of Precambrian sedimentary rocks and some dolerite sills. It is considered a place of considerable landscape antiquity that preserves portions of the palaeosurface and its superficial deposits.

Mooloogool is situated on the Meekatharra Plateau which is an ancient, eroded landscape typified by gently

undulating plains, with rough, rounded rock outcrops and low, rugged ranges and hills appearing conspicuously on its surface. Small erosion scarps or breakaways and flat-topped mesas are remaining evidence of a former plateau which once overlay this area (DEC 1994) (Figure 24). A small part of the Glengarry Range encroaches the south-western corner of Mooloogool.

Figure 24 Landscape of Mooloogool

Photos: DEC 2005


25

Doolgunna is situated on the Meekatharra Plateau so therefore has similar landscape to Moolooogool. The eastern half of the property is gently undulating while the western half is more rugged, stony and contains the eastern end of the two parallel curving fold ridges of the Robinson Range (Figure 25). Mt Leake is also located on the property. There are extensive breakaway scarps, caves and natural rock gardens in the south-east, north-west and north centre of the property. There are also permanent river pools in a headwater tributary of the Gascoyne River. The permanent rock holes and pools on the Yandthangunna Creek contain shoals of fish and provide habitat for tortoises. Fish Holes Creek is a permanent river pool rising from the divide north of the Robinson Range and maintains a water supply for much of the year in long pools gouged out of laterite. Other significant features include the flood plains and Eucalyptus ferriticola communities of South Branch of the Gascoyne River. These striking natural features may hold considerable scenic value for tourists visiting the area.

Figure 25 Landscape of Doolgunna

Photos: DEC 2005 & D. Wood

Flora Mooloogool has seven vegetation types. All associations comprise mulga (Acacia aneura) woodland, mulga shrubland or mulga shrub/steppe. The property is dominated by mulga low woodland and includes: hummock grasslands, shrub steppe; mulga and Eucalyptus kingsmillii over hard spinifex (Triodia basedoiwii).

Doolgunna has six vegetation types mostly dominated by low woodland of mulga (Acacia aneura). Also

included are hummock grasslands, shrub steppe; mulga and Eucalyptus kingsmillii over hard spinifex (Triodia basedoiwii). Other species include: Acacia quadrimarginea, Acacia victoriae, cotton bush (Ptilotus obovatus), corkwood (Hakea suberea), beefwood (Grevillea striata), and gidgee (Acacia pruinocarpa).

Fauna Mooloogool and Doolgunna potentially supports 82 ground dwelling vertebrate taxa including two scheduled rare species (Dasycercus cristticauda and Petrogale lateralis) and one priority species (Sminthopsis longicaudata). Extinct mounds of Bettongia leseur are common across wide areas of the property and extinct nests of mallee fowl (Leporilus sp.) are common in breakaways.

On Doolgunna, abandoned nests of the pebble mound mouse (Pseudomys patrius) were located to the south

of Fish Holes Creek. Dingoes are also present on the property.


26

Only limited official monitoring of fauna has been conducted on these properties. The WA Museum online database, FaunaBase, identified a potential 11 species of birds, 9 species of mammals and 28 species of reptiles based on geographical coordinates entered for Mooloogool and Doolgunna.

Existing tourism product The towns closest to the properties are Meekatharra (100–130 kilometres) and Wiluna (120 kilometres). Meekatharra is the largest centre in the Murchison and offers a variety of accommodation including hotel/motel style and a caravan park. Meekatharra has various other attractions including the Meekatharra Museum, Old Mount Gould Police Station c.1897 which was the first police station in the Murchison, and Peace Gorge, originally the Granites, an interesting rock formation.

In June 1919, when Meekatharra's servicemen came home from World War One, the Road Board organised a

gala picnic and sports day at the Granites and since then the area has been known as Peace Gorge. Meekatharra also has the Meeka Rangelands Discovery Trail that winds around Meekatharra Creek and includes a lookout where a ‘super-pit’ mine and the town of Meekatharra can be viewed. Interpretive signage along the trail features information relating to Meekatharra’s Indigenous and settlement history. Local events that attract tourists to the region include the ‘Return to Meekatharra Festival’ in September which includes live entertainment, fireworks, rodeo, market stalls, children’s rides and games and the outback ball. In November there is the annual basketball carnival with up to 300 people coming to the town from as far as Karratha in the north, to Quairading in the south for the weekend long carnival (Shire of Meekatharra 2005).

Wiluna also offers a variety of accommodation including hotel/motel, caravan park, and a station stay at

Gunbarrel Laager Travelle (Gunbarrel Grapes property) which is open mid-March to the end of October. Wiluna is located near Canning Stock Route, one of the most remote and isolated four wheel drive tracks in the world and popular with outback travellers. The track starts at Wiluna and runs 1820 kilometres to Halls Creek in the north of the State. The Outback Pathways self drive trail known as the ‘Miners Pathway’ also passes near the properties (Figure 65), as does the Northwest Wildflower Trail (Figure 64).

Maintenance was carried out at Doolgunna on the homestead and the shearer’s quarters (Figure 26) in 2005.

The facility can cater for groups of up to twelve people and basic ablution facilities (toilet, shower and laundry block) are provided.

Figure 26 Shearers Quarters at Doolgunna

Photo: (i) DEC 2005 (ii) D. Wood

Perenjori properties—Karara, Lochada, Warriedar, Kadji Kadji

Aboriginal occupation Aboriginal history in Australia dates back at least 40 000 years and possibly as much as 100 000 years (Payne et al. 1987). Aboriginal people in the arid zone lived a nomadic hunter-gatherer lifestyle entirely dependent on seasonal availability of native fauna and flora, although they used fire as a tool to manipulate the environment and increase abundance of desirable resources (Payne et al. 1987). The arrival of Europeans had a dramatic effect on the Aboriginal peoples with the introduction of new diseases, conflict, displacement and lifestyle change (Payne et al. 1987). The Aboriginal people were not recognised as land owners (or citizens) and the early colonial government gave the Governor the right to grant and dispose of land (Payne et al. 1987). The Aboriginal peoples right of access for the purpose of hunting, fishing and gathering had to be respected by the pastoral lessees, however, the lessees considered the resources of the arid environment as exclusively available for


27

exploitation. While most of the pastoral occupation was in general, peaceable and unopposed, some clashes did occur (Payne et al. 1987).

Aboriginal people were often used as guides by early exploration parties. With the establishment of pastoral properties, indigenous people were employed as station workers or stockmen, often in exchange for food, accommodation or relatively small wages (Payne et al. 1987). For example, the Buddima people worked as long-term shearers and musters on Karara Station and have visited and camped upon the station. Large Aboriginal station labour forces were common to the late 1960s when families of the labourers also lived on the station. Now very few families or labourers are employed due to the introduction of the basic minimum wage in 1966 and the generally poor economic circumstance of the pastoral industry (Payne et al. 1987). Today, most Aboriginal families live in towns in the area with very few, if any, still living traditional lifestyles (Payne et al. 1987).

Karara has four registered native title claims over all or part of the property. Sites registered with the Dept of

Indigenous Affairs include the Karara ochre quarry, Mongers Lake and Damperwah Spring (Dept of Indigenous Affairs 2005). There are also other sites of interest on Karara that include various gnamma holes (Figure 27). On Lochada there are eight Aboriginal sites listed on the DEC database; six are mainly related to water points such as soaks, springs and a rock hole and are scattered over the property. There are two artefact sites located near the southern boundary of Lochada. Location 4185 on the eastern boundary of Lochada was used by Aboriginal families in the past as a camping area and will probably be used again in the future. Sites registered with the Dept of Indigenous Affairs include Windinie Rock hole, Goonaburna Spring and Boiada Soak. These sites contain artefacts/scatter (Dept of Indigenous Affairs 2005). Less is known of Warriedar and Kadji Kadji however there is a native title claim over Warriedar. A man-made structure is registered at Warriedar with the Dept of Indigenous Affairs along with paintings at Warriedar Hill and Mougooderra Hill. At Kadji Kadji there are artefacts/scatter registered with the Dept of Indigenous Affairs on the station and at Kadji Kadji Creek and Nullewa Lake (Dept of Indigenous Affairs 2005).

Figure 27 Gnamma hole on Karara

Photo: A. Smith

European exploration and settlement In 1868 J.H. and G. Monger travelled through Damperwah (Karara station) followed by an expedition led by John Forrest in 1869 (Payne et al. 1987). A cairn, now known as Forrest’s Lookout, on top of an unnamed hill south of the Damperwah Hills provides physical evidence of the expedition’s passage through the area (Figure 28). It is most likely that sandalwood cutters were the earliest residents in the central region (c.1845) with the first pastoral leases being granted in the mid to late 1860s. Land around waterholes or natural springs were taken up first. Warriedar was settled in 1900 by F. Wittenoom and T&S Oliver (Payne et al. 1987).


28

Figure 28 John Forrest Lookout, Karara

‘This lookout forms part of the Damperwah Hills, which John

Forrest (later the state’s first Premier) discovered and named during his 1869 search for the missing German explorer Ludwig Leichhardt. In 1897 Forrest used the top of this hill as a survey point during his expedition to Cue and Daydawn’

Photos: A. Smith On Lochada three reserves were gazetted in 1906, 1909 and 1912 for the purpose of water supply whilst the

rabbit proof fence was being built (AGWA 2005). The rabbit proof fence (now the vermin proof fence) passes through Lochada and Karara (Figure 29 & 30). Rabbits were introduced in Victoria in 1859 and quickly spread to other states in Australia, becoming a pest and serious threat to agriculture. Rabbits arrived in Western Australia, spreading from the east, in 1894 causing damage to crops and pastures. The rabbit proof fence construction commenced in Western Australia in 1901 in response to an increasing rabbit population. (AGWA 2005). Two adjoining fences were constructed in 1904 and 1906. The Rabbit Proof Fence, including No.1, 2 and 3 fence lines, was completed in 1907 and stretched 3256 kilometres (AGWA 2005).

Figure 29 Boundary riders team, at the 100mile No.1 fence (1926)

Source: (AGWA 2005)


29

Figure 30 Rabbit Proof Fence on Karara

Photo: A. Smith

Karara was once known as Damperwah. The Samson’s were the first to settle on Karara in the 1900s. The

Karara Shearing shed was erected at this time (Figure 31). There are a number of stone wells and a well believed to have been hand dug by the monk’s from New Norcia who were known to shepherd their sheep through the Karara area (Figure 32). Damperwah was originally cleared as a state farm for experimental crop plots. About 5260 hectares (13 000 acres) were allocated to the experimental station. Remains from Damperwah State Farm c.1928–1939 consists of three houses of concrete construction c.1930, without roofs, with one house suffering fire damage, that is registered with the Heritage Council of Western Australia (Dept of the Environment and Heritage 2005; Heritage Council of Western Australia 2005) (Figure 33a). Unfortunately, the buildings are now in a severely dilapidated condition and could pose a significant visitor risk.

Camel soak is also located at Karara (Figure 33b). Camel soak was an important watering hole in a rocky

outcrop for Aboriginal people and was also used as a water spot for camels and the workers when building the rabbit proof fence c.1905 (Dept of the Environment and Heritage 2005; Heritage Council of Western Australia 2005). Today it is a popular picnic spot.

Figure 31 Karara Shearing Shed c.1900s

Photos: A. Smith


30

Figure 32 (a) Stone well at Karara (b) Monks well

(a) (b)

Photos: A. Smith

Figure 33 (a) Damperwah State Farm ruins (b) Camel Soak

(a) (b)

Photos: A. Smith The current homestead on Karara was built in the 1960s (Figure 34a). It is a two bedroom cottage that is

currently occupied by caretakers. There is also a two bedroom self-contained cottage located adjacent to the homestead that was built in 1996 (Figure 34b). The full time caretakers manage Karara, Lochada, Warriedar and Kadji Kadji. A tenant on Warriedar (discussed below) also provides a presence affording additional security for the isolated property and its assets.

Figure 34 (a) Karara homestead (b) Karara staff cottage

(a) (b)

Photos: A. Smith On Lochada there are remains of the old corrugated iron and weatherboard cookhouse, garage and storeroom

that are registered with the Heritage Council of Western Australia (Dept of the Environment and Heritage 2005; Heritage Council of Western Australia 2005) (Figure 35). This site, located at Boiada Hill, still provides ablution


31

facilities (including flush toilets and a functional kitchen). It is currently used by specialty groups (e.g. 4WD clubs) for camping.

Figure 35 Old Shearers Quarters, open shed and ablutions at Boiada Hill, Lochada

Photo: A. Smith

Warriedar takes its name from Mt Warriedar and has several sites of historical interest including a grave site,

mining relics and town site ruins. The grave site dates back to 1928 and is registered with the Heritage Council of Western Australia. The headstone of this grave reads ‘Donald Gollagher born April 1st 1858—died Feb 4th 1928, Peace Perfect Peace’. The ruins of a mining battery c.1920 are evident with remains of old boilers, equipment and the loading ramp. The battery was timber framed corrugated iron clad structure which housed a five head stamper. Additionally there are stone ruins from the Warriedar townsite c.1898 and ruins of the original Warriedar Homestead (Dept of the Environment and Heritage 2005; Heritage Council of Western Australia 2005). Today the homestead that remains on the property is old but in liveable condition. It is a rendered mud brick home with corrugated galvanised roof surrounded by verandahs with six bedrooms and two bathrooms. Maintenance is required as the building is rapidly deteriorating (Figure 36).

Figure 36 Homestead at Warriedar

Photo: DEC 2005


32

In relation to mining heritage, Gold was discovered at Warriedar in 1911 by S. Oliver. There are sites that contain mining equipment that may be of historical interest. There is also more substantial evidence of mining such as the Badja Pitt (Figure 37).

Figure 37 Badja Pit, Warriedar

Photo: DEC 2005

Kadji Kadji has little documented evidence of European settlement. There is currently a four bedroom

cement and brick home that is in good condition that was built in the 1950s (Figure 38). At the time of the field survey the dwelling was unoccupied. Adjacent to the homestead is a dilapidated two bedroom cottage that is made of asbestos so therefore should be condemned (Figure 39a). There is also a shearing shed and yards (Figs 39 b, c, d).

Figure 38 Kadji Kadji Homestead

Photos: A. Smith


33

Figure 39 (a) Kadji Kadji cottage (b, c, d) Shearing Shed

(a) (b)

(c) (d)

Photos: A. Smith

Climate The Sandstone-Yalgoo-Paynes Find area, that includes Karara, Lochada, Warriedar and Kadji Kadji, experiences a semi-arid (Semi-desert Mediterranean) climate with a mean average rainfall of 250 millimetres. Summers are characterised by hot, dry days with little relief at night (Payne, Van Vreeswyk, Pringle, Leighton & Hennig 1998). Winter is characterised by cool days and cold nights with rainfall occurring primarily from June to August. Based on data from Yalgoo, average maximum daily temperatures range from 36°C in summer to 19°C in winter (Payne et al. 1998). It is common for the maxima to exceed 40°C on several occasions (e.g. Yalgoo has an average of 24 days per annum that exceed 40°C). The average daily minimum temperature ranges from 20°C in summer to 7°C in winter (Payne et al. 1998).

Landscape The stations lie within the Murchison Province of the Archaean Yilgarn Craton in the Sandstone-Yalgoo-Paynes Find area (Payne et al. 1998). Karara lies within the Salinaland Plateau. The Salinaland Plateau is described as sand plains and lateritic breakaways; granitic and alluvial plains; ridges of metamorphic rocks and granite hills and rises; calcretes, large salt lakes and dunes along valleys (Payne et al. 1998). Karara has some granite rises and low domes in the western portion of the property. The eastern side of Karara is characterised by an extensive and highly mineralised greenstone belt, most of which has been intensively explored for gold and more recently, iron ore (Payne et al. 1998). Iron ore was extracted from Karara in the 1970s and exploration continues for a variety of minerals. Mongers Lake paleodrainage system is situated in the south-west corner of Karara and is a notable feature. The natural water system is Mongers Lake which is part of the Carnegie land type are extensive lake beds with fringing kopi dunes, fringing saline alluvial plains and sandy banks (Payne et al. 1998) (Figs 40 & 41). Other notable topographical features include Mt Karara and Damperwah Hills.


34

Figure 40 Mongers Lake, Karara

Photo: A. Smith

Figure 41 Karara Breakaway

Photo: A. Smith Lochada has 24 land systems that lie across the boundaries of the Murchison Plateau and the Salinaland

Plateau. The Murchison Plateau is described as mainly granitic plains with outgoing drainage, broken by ridges of metamorphic rocks (Payne et al. 1998). Lochada has frequent granite rises and low domes. The natural water system is the chain of salt lakes on the south and west side of the property which includes Weelhamby Lake. This paleodrainage line has running water only after significant rainfall in the general area. There are significant areas of flat salt lake with no vegetation that hold shallow water for several months of the year (Payne et al. 1998). Other topographical features include: Boiada Hill (Figure 42), Kutmia Hill; Windinie Hill; Red Hill; Jasper Hill; and Windaning Hill.


35

Figure 42 Boiada Hill, Lochada

Photo: A. Smith

Warriedar has 28 land systems dominated by (45%) a complex array of greenstone ridges and breakaways

that feature an often dense cover of bowgada, jam, mulga and various eucalypts (Payne et al. 1998) (Figure 43). Granite based systems occur in the south and centre of the property and occupy about 15% of Warriedar. Mulga washplains occupy approximately 25% of the property and occurs throughout (Payne et al. 1998). Warriedar has 25 kilometres of frontage on Mongers Lake in the south-east boundary. Notable landscape features include: Warriedar Hill; Boonerong Hill; and Jasper Hill.

Figure 43 Warriedar amphitheatre

Photo: DEC 2005

Kadji Kadji contains some extensive breakaway country supporting a range of vegetation including york

gums with a halophytic understorey on the lower foot slopes and stony plains. The property is dominated by salt lakes (Burrillgabby Lake, Nullewa Lake, Wollothea Pool) that are characterised by fringing alluvial plains with halophytic shrubs, kopi dunes and sandy banks (Payne et al. 1998). Other landscape features include: sand plains with acacia shrublands, mallees and heath; plains with minor calcrete inclusions with casuarina-acacia shrub lands or eucalypt woodlands; plains with deep sand soils supporting acacia shrub lands and occasionally wanderrie grasses; irregular plains and low rises supporting mulga, bowgada and some halophytic shrublands; low breakaways with short saline footslopes (Payne et al. 1998) (Figure 44).


36

Figure 44 Landscape of Kadji Kadji

Photos: A. Smith

Flora In 2003, 48 flora species were recorded on Karara. There is one declared rare plant occurring on the property (Eucalyptus synandra) and several priority species including Eucalyptus jutsonii, Gnephosis setifera, Grevillea scabrida, Grevillea granulosa, Melaleuca barlowii, Persoonia kararae, Persoonia pentastich and Wurmbea murchisoniana. There are 12 vegetation types including shrub lands, succulent steppe and medium woodlands. Additionally there is 2150 hectares of salt lakes. The property is dominated by shrublands of bowgada (Acacia ramulosa) and jam (A. acuminata) with Melaleuca uncinata thicket; scattered york gum (Eucalyptus loxophleba) and red mallee (Eucalyptus oleosa); Acacia quadrimarginea on stony ridges. Other vegetation includes: cypress pine (Callitris columellaris), samphire (Halosarcia spp.) and succulent steppe, Acacia neurophylla, A. beauverdiana and A. resinomarginea, tea tree scrub (Leptospermum spp.), yate (Eucalyptus occidentalis) and paperbark (Melaleuca spp.).

Lochada has 14 vegetation types including shrublands, succulent steppe and woodland thicket, and medium

woodlands. Fifty percent of the property is shrublands of bowgada (Acacia ramulosa), jam (A. affacuminata) and Melaleuca uncinata thicket. There are three dominant species of eucalypts that occur over 25% of the property: york gum (Eucalyptus loxophleba subsp. supralaves), red malee (E. kockii subsp. plenissima) and E. hypochlamydea. There is no known declared rare flora, one priority 2 species and one priority 4 species on the WA Herbarium list. There is also 2100 hectares of salt lakes that does not carry any vegetation. Other vegetation includes: cypress pine (Callitris columellaris), Melaleuca thyoides, samphire (Halosarcia spp.) and A. quadrimarginea on stony ridges.

Warriedar has 11 vegetation types including low woodland, medium woodlands, shrub lands, hummock

grasslands and succulent steppe. The property is dominated by low woodland over scrub; mulga (Acacia aneura) over bowgada (A. ramulosa, A. linophylla) and miniritchie (A. grasbyi) scrub. Other vegetation includes: hummock grasslands with spinifex, red mallee (Eucalyptus oleosa), jam (A. acuminata), york gum (E. loxophleba), Allocasuarina huegelina, saltbush and bluebush (Maireana spp.) and medium woodlands. There is also 1423 hectares of salt lakes, lagoons and claypans and two poorly known taxa (Priority 1 Flora)—Micromyrtus sp. Warriedar and Hydrocotyle sp. Warriedar.

Kadji Kadji has 13 vegetation types including shrub lands, succulent steppe, medium woodland and

hummock grasslands. The most extensive vegetation type is shrub lands of bowgada (Acacia ramulosa—A. linophylla), jam (A. acuminata) and Melaleuca uncinate thicket. Other vegetation includes: scattered eucalypts, cypress pine (Callitris columellaris), york gum (Eucalyptus loxophleba), Melaleuca thyoides, samphire, red


37

mallee (E. oleosa group), spinifex, and Allocasuarina campestris with some occurrence of salmon gum (Eucalyptus salmonophloia) in the south of the property.

Fauna Only limited official monitoring of fauna has been conducted on the stations. In 2003, 49 bird species and 9 reptile species were recorded on Karara. In 2004, a further survey conducted by Birds Australia identified 82 bird species. There are also active nests of the mallee fowl (Leipoa ocellata). Three mammal species; red kangaroo (Macropus rufus), euro (M. robustus) and Finlayson’s cave bat (Vespedalus finlaysoni) have also been recorded in the area.

In 2002, 54 bird species were recorded by Birds Australia on Lochada. This property has large areas of

potential nesting sites for parrots and cockatoos and habitat for the mallee fowl. Kangaroos and emus are also common.

A total of 71 birds species were recorded on Warriedar in 2005 by Birds Australia. Kadji Kadji also was

monitored by Birds Australia in the winter of 2005 and a total of 66 bird species were recorded. On Kadji Kadji nests of the now extinct lesser stick nest rat (Leporillus apicalis) have been located.

The WA Museum online database (FaunaBase) identified a potential 95 bird species based on the

geographical coordinates of Karara, Lochada, Warriedar and Kadji Kadji. This includes one declared rare species Calyptorhynchus latirostris (Carnaby’s black cockatoo), 22 mammal species, 71 reptile species including one declared rare species, Cyclodomorphus branchialis (Gilled Slender Bluetongue), and 12 species of amphibians.

Existing tourism product Perenjori and Morawa are the closest towns, located to the west of the properties. Perenjori is located approximately 50 kilometres south-west of the Karara homestead. It is at the southern gateway to the recently developed Monsignor Hawes Heritage Trail3. The town offers a variety of accommodation including hotel/motel style and a caravan park. Morawa is approximately 40 kilometres north of Perenjori and about 70 kilometres west of the Karara homestead, although less than 30 kilometres from the western boundary of this group of properties (Kadji Kadji boundary). Morawa also offers a variety of accommodation including hotel/motel, bed and breakfast, caravan park, station stay at Thundelarra Station and farm stay style accommodation at Bunyanna Homestead and Warrakatta Farmstay.

Parts of Karara are already listed as tourist destinations with the Shire of Perenjori. Camel Soak, a granite

catchment, also known as ‘The Rock Hole’, is probably the most popular site. Camel Soak was sunk as a watering point for men and their camel teams working on the No.2 Rabbit Proof Fence in 1903 to 1905 and is currently used as a picnic spot (Shire of Perenjori 2005). Other sites of tourism interest in the area include: Forrest’s lookout and Pindarri Soak. These are managed by the Shire who maintains the roads and facilities such as barbecues and benches. Tourism self drive trails including the Outback Pathways ‘Miners Pathway’ pass near the properties, as does the Everlastings Wildflower Trail, Monsignor J.C. Hawes Heritage Trail and Perenjori/Rothsay Heritage Trail. As the nearest town to the properties, Perenjori’s other points of interest include: Perenjori Museum, Perenjori Church (Church of St Joseph), Beryl Mine 67 kilometres north-east of Perenjori, Mongers Lake Lookout which overlooks a large salt lake and Rothsay Ghost Town.

Gold was discovered in Rothsay in 1894 and within a year all the leases had been pegged. In its heyday,

Rothsay had a population of 500, the town experienced a second lease of life during the 1930s when a company financed by the flamboyant mining entrepreneur, Claude de Bernales, reopened the mine. Today, old buildings such as the original mine manager's house and the 'strong room', and the derelict shaft are reminders of the 1890s gold rush (Shire of Perenjori 2005). Many of these attractions can be accessed on the Perenjori/Rothsay Heritage Trail. The trail is a 180 kilometre round trip which includes the Perenjori Museum (originally the Bank NSW building) and the John Forrest Lookout (survey point used by John Forrest), the Rothsay townsite, the rabbit proof fence road to the Camel soak and the Mongers Lake lookout (Shire of Perenjori 2005).

Morawa is known as the ‘Heart of the Wildflowers’ and the area is known for the unique and distinctive

wreath flower (Leschenaultia macrantha) (Shire of Morawa 2005) (Figure 45). As a result, a number of tour operators pass through the region during the wildflower season (July to October). These operators include: Australian Excursions, Feature Tours and Villa Carlotta Tours. Other attractions in Morawa include the Morawa

3 The Monsignor J.C. Hawes Heritage Trail highlights 15 buildings designed by the architect-priest John Hawes and other sites significant to his life. The self drive trail covers approximately 270 kilometres and includes towns such as Yalgoo, Tardun, Morawa, Perenjori, Northampton, Nanson and Geraldton.


38

Museum and Old Police Station, Holy Cross Catholic Church c.1932, St David's Anglican Church c.1933, Koolanooka Spring and Mine c.1961 which today is a picnic spot, Lake Nullewa which is an excellent spot for birdwatchers, War Rock and Gnamma Hole, Bilya Rock which is large granite rock suitable for bushwalking and picnicking, and Canna Store which is an old style general store c.1929.

Figure 45 Everlastings on Karara Station

Photo: A. Smith

Events in the region include:

• Russell Ormesher Memorial Meet, Morawa (5–6 March 2005)—speedway racing featuring super sixes, solos and side cars

• One Palm Farm Short Circuit Racing, Morawa (1–3 September 2005)—speedway racing and Royal Flying Doctor fundraiser

• Wattle Week Festival, Dalwallinu (10–17 September 2005)—eco walks and drives, food tasting, wildflower show and art show

• Biannual Art & Craft Show, Dalwallinu (16–17 September 2005)—art exhibition and sale, wine and cheese.

There are two other stations (Mt Gibson Station and White Wells Station) in the region that have been

purchased for conservation purposes with a potential for tourism. Mt Gibson Station is 137 000 hectares of bushland owned by Australian Wildlife Conservancy with the potential for reintroduction of many mammal species. Basic camping facilities are available at the station and there is scope for a wide range of scientific and visitor programmes. Charles Darwin Reserve (White Wells Station) is 68 600 hectares of bushland owned by Australian Bush Heritage Fund managed for conservation.

Mullewa properties—Yuin, Narloo and Twin Peaks

Aboriginal occupation The Aboriginal occupation of these stations has not been well documented so little is known. As discussed earlier, Aboriginal people in the arid zone lived a nomadic hunter-gatherer lifestyle. Large groups of Aboriginal people were often sighted by explorers and it was not uncommon for up to 150 indigenous people to be camped at a water source (Nixon & Lefroy n.d.). Frank Wittenoom explored much of the Murchison in the 1870s, his journals recount instances of the local indigenous people leading early settlers or explorers to rock holes and sharing precious supplies of water with the newcomers (Nixon & Lefroy n.d.). Wittenoom observed local indigenous people hunting kangaroo. He described the young men following the roo along its tracks, giving little short cooees all the way to keep the roo moving. The men would continue following the roo until it tired where eventually they would get close enough to knock it down with the waunah (a stick about 1.5 metres long). The men would then lie down close by and have a sleep and rest. The men would then return to the camp by the shortest route and send their women to retrieve the animal (Nixon & Lefroy n.d.). Wittenoom recounted other examples of indigenous people hunting and gathering using a variety of tools such as throwing sticks (coondie), scoops (dthugga), sticks (wannas) and wandoos. A wandoo is a kangaroo skin folded and carried on the back with the leg parts of the skin tied under the chin (Nixon & Lefroy n.d.). Spears (cooradoo), shields (wonda) and throwing sticks (meerou) were also used (Nixon & Lefroy n.d.). Wittenoom also commented on the introduction of new diseases, conflict, displacement and lifestyle change as a result of European occupation (Nixon & Lefroy n.d.).


39

Aboriginal people were employed as station workers or stockmen on Yuin and Twin Peaks and would have done so until 1966 when award wages were introduced and the general pastoral economy slowed down (Nixon & Lefroy n.d.). Sites registered with the Dept of Indigenous Affairs include paintings at White Well and Poondarrie Cave at Narloo and artefacts/scatter at Poondarrie Cave (Dept of Indigenous Affairs 2005).

European exploration and settlement John Forrest explored the Murchison region in 1874 (Nixon & Lefroy n.d.). Rock cairns erected by John Forrest are located on Twin Peaks and Narloo (Poondarrie Hill) (Figure 46). John and Alexander Forest entered the Murchison district at Yuin station on 9 April 1874 where they spent five days reorganising their supplies. They spent two days at Poondarrie and ended their journey at Beringarra on 2 May 1874 (Nixon & Lefroy n.d.).

Figure 46 Rock cairn erected on Poondarrie Hill on Narloo by Mr John Forrest on one of his expeditions

Photo: A. Smith Yuin By the mid to late 1800s Thomas Burges and John Perks were bringing flocks of sheep along the Greenough River as far as Yuin, and were granted the first pastoral leases made available in the region in 1864 (Curry, Payne, Leighton, Hennig & Blood 1994; Nixon & Lefroy n.d.). Burges and the Wittenoom brothers led the first wave of pastoral settlement and development which proceeded up the main arms of the Murchison river during the late 1860s and 1870s (Curry et al. 1994). Yuin was the first Murchison district station and was formally established in 1872 by Thomas Burges and overseen by John Perks. Frank Wittennoom arrived at Yuin in 1874 and set up camp. The Wittenoom’s leased Yuin Station from Burges in 1874 to further develop the station (Nixon & Lefroy n.d.). The first stone hut was built in 1874 and in 1875 the stone homestead, stone store and shearing shed were also built. In 1884, the Wittenoom’s lease expired and they handed the management of Yuin over to Francis Burges (Nixon & Lefroy n.d.). Pastoral settlement was enhanced in the 1890s when gold was discovered in the Murchison and new towns and a railway link to the coast were built (Curry et al. 1994). Francis Burges left Yuin in 1915 and the station was managed by several different managers up until 1929 when William Burges sold to Mr and Mrs Charles Foulkes-Taylor and B.L. Anderson (Nixon & Lefroy n.d.). Anderson managed the property from 1929 to 1957 with a four year absence during World War II when caretakers were appointed. From 1957 to 1959 Ted Elliott managed Yuin and in 1960 Michael Foulkes-Taylor took over management. In 1981 Michael and Jano Foulkes-Taylor became sole owners of Yuin Station (Nixon & Lefroy n.d.). Twin Peaks Alfred Charles Boddington was the founder of Twin Peaks in 1900 (Nixon & Lefroy n.d.). A homestead (a two room mud-brick and stone structure), shearing shed, windmills and fencing were constructed at this time. In 1919, the homestead was rebuilt by John Crothers of Geraldton (later the Geraldton Building Co.), incorporating the original homestead and using rock quarried from the property (Nixon & Lefroy n.d.). The Boddington’s (Boddington Bros.) ran the station until 1956 when they sold to Kenneth George Maslen (trading as Twin Peaks Station). Maslen improved the station by adding 240V power, building a cool room and a hangar for an aircraft and an airstrip. Maslen sold the property in 1975 to A & E Reading who then sold the station in 1981 to R.A. Ilich (Nixon & Lefroy n.d.). The part properties of Twin Peaks and Yuin purchased by DEC as part of the Gascoyne Murchison Strategy do not contain any of the dwellings on Twin Peaks or Yuin.

Climate The Murchison River catchment experiences an arid (desert) climate with a mean average rainfall of 210 millimetres. Summers are characterised by hot, dry days and mild to warm dewless nights. Winter is characterised by mild days and cool to cold nights with May and June being the most reliable months for rainfall


40

(Curry et al. 1994). Average maximum daily temperatures range from 38°C in January to 18°C in July. Maxima exceed 42°C at least once a year. The average daily minimum temperature ranges from 22°C to about 14°C (Curry et al. 1994).

Landscape Yuin, Narloo and Twin Peaks are part of the Murchison River Catchment, situated in the Yilgarn Craton of Western Australia (Curry et al. 1994). Yuin covers an area of 59 977 hectares and is mostly dominated by wash plains and sandy banks on hardpan with wanderrie and mulga shrub lands and wash plains on hardpan with mulga shrub lands. Also included are breakaways, stony plains and sandy surfaced plains on granite with mulga and holophytic shrub lands; river plains with saltbush, bluebush and other shrub lands; rough hills with acacia shrub lands (Curry et al. 1994). A feature of the landscape is the Greenough River and associated river frontage (Figure 47). There are some semi permanent pools along the riverbed and other spring fed tributaries which contain water year round supporting a variety of aquatic species and support for numerous avian fauna. Some of these pools, creeks, springs and brooks include: Cumbarunggnoo Pool, Poothea Pool, Thanda Creek, Mingah Spring, Nedunoolgarra Spring, Poondarrie Spring, Woolbarka Brook and Woojalong Brook. Beedeinna Hill is also a feature of the landscape (Curry et al. 1994).

Figure 47 Greenough River

Photo: A. Smith

Narloo covers and area of 14 998 hectares and is mostly dominated by breakaways, stony plains and sandy

surfaced plains on granite with mulga and holophytic shrub lands. Also included are sand plains with grassy shrub lands; wash plains on hardpan with mulga shrub lands; and rough hills with acacia shrub lands (Curry et al. 1994). Poondarrie Hill (Figure 48) and Beedeinna Hill are easily identifiable topographical features of the landscape.


41

Figure 48 Poondarrie Hill, Narloo

Photos: A. Smith

Twin Peaks covers an area of 27 300 hectares and is mostly dominated by wash plains on hardpan with

mulga shrub lands. Also included are river plains with saltbush, bluebush and other shrub lands; rough hills with acacia shrub lands; irregular plains on laterite and parent rock with mulga, bowgada and halophytic shrub lands; and sand plains with grassy shrub lands (Curry et al. 1994). A feature of the landscape is the Sanford River and associated creeks (McNab Creek), brooks (Coolarburloo Brook) and pools (Woorgowing Pool, Pilgah Pool, Bingawah Pool, Millgaroo Pool). Poona Hill is also a feature of the landscape.

Flora The properties (Narloo, Yuin and Twin peaks) contain extensive areas of Acacia grasbyi habitat. The area is mostly covered by low woodland over scrub; mulga (Acacia aneura) over bowgada (Acacia ramulosa) and minnieritchie (Acacia grasbyi) scrub. Also included are jam (Acacia acuminata subsp. acuminata) scrub, succulent steppe with open scrub, Acacia murranyana, Acacia sclereosperma, saltbush and bluebush (Maireana spp.). Additionally, a priority one taxa (Dithyrostegia gracilis) has been found on Yuin.

Fauna No official monitoring of fauna has been conducted on the properties. The WA Museum online database identified a potential 8 species of birds, 4 species of mammals, 21 species of reptiles and 3 species of fish based on the geographical coordinates of Yuin, Narloo and Twin Peaks.

Existing tourism product The stations are located 60–140 kilometres north-east of the town of Mullewa, a typical northern wheatbelt town with some notable buildings designed by Monsignor Hawes. Mullewa offers a variety of accommodation including hotel/motel style station stays at Tallering Station and Tardie Station, located on the border of Yuin Station and camping caravan/camping facilities in the town and at Erong Springs station. The Outback Pathways ‘Wool Wagon Pathway’ self drive trail passes near the properties, as does the Northwest Wildflower Trail.

The Mullewa district is known as wildflower country, in particular for carpets of everlastings and the wreath

flower (Leschenaultia macrantha). As a result, a number of tour operators pass through the region during the wildflower season (July to October). These operators include: Australian Excursions, Feature Tours, Swagman Tours and Villa Carlotta Tours.


42

Property adjacent to Toolonga Nature Reserve—Muggon

Aboriginal occupation Little is documented of Aboriginal occupation on Muggon Station. An old well near the present homestead called ‘Mookin’ was believed to have originally been a natural well used by Aboriginals occupying the area (Nixon & Lefroy n.d.). In the 1930s Aboriginals worked on the station. There are oral histories of floggings and whippings being common at the time (Clark 1992). The station is currently under native title claim. Sites registered with the Dept of Indigenous Affairs include a man-made structure at Bidgelang and Errabiddy hills. Errabiddy Hills is also of mythological significance and there are artefacts/scatter at Yarrawolya Pool and Ballythanna (Dept of Indigenous Affairs 2005).

European exploration and settlement Little is documented of European exploration of the Muggon area. Isolated sections of Muggon were selected as individual leases in the late 1870s and 1880s. The lack of water on Muggon (except in good years) discouraged early settlers from taking up much of the existing lease (Nixon & Lefroy n.d.). In 1907, John Mitchell acquired the Muggon country for his mother’s family firm, L.D. Mitchell & Sons of Yallalong. For the next quarter of a century the area was run as an out camp of Yallalong and cattle were grazed over the area (Nixon & Lefroy n.d.). A stone building and shearing shed were erected near a natural well called ‘Mookin’. Unfortunately, the shearing shed burnt down in 1927. In 1928, John Mitchell built a homestead, outbuilding and a second shearing shed then began an extensive fencing program and endeavoured to obtain better water supplies. Arthur Leeds lived in the homestead and ran the station for the Mitchell family although the property was still considered part of Yallalong (Nixon & Lefroy n.d.). The current shearing shed is unique in its construction in that it is an all-steel shed, prefabricated, that was fully imported from England. The only timber in the shed is that on the floor of the wool room, the shearing board and the pens. The shearer’s quarters and mess were also constructed of steel and have flat slate slabs which are unique to the property. The slate came from a hill called Badgeradda, about 160 kilometres from the homestead (Nixon & Lefroy n.d.).

In 1937, John Mitchell died and Arthur Leeds and his family moved to Yalallong leaving the Muggon

homestead and area unoccupied and resulted in it being again run from Yallalong on an outstation basis. In 1955/56, L.D. Mitchell & Sons sold the Muggon lease to the newly formed Muggon Pastoral Company Pty Ltd which was controlled by Major Harold de Vahl Rubin (Nixon & Lefroy n.d.). In 1961/62 the lease was sold to E.M. & N.V. Fitzgerald who then sold it in 1964 to Berinmill Pty Ltd (A.C. & A.G. Robinson and G.A. & B Saw). Berinmill Pty Ltd bought the station bare of stock and immediately stocked it with approximately 7000 head of sheep (Nixon & Lefroy n.d.). The company also undertook considerable maintenance, principally on water supplies and sunk a number of additional bores. In 1966, Muggon was again sold to Two Wells Pastoral Company (owned by Hector Brooks of South Australia), who appointed Bill McGillivray as manager (Nixon & Lefroy n.d.). Further extensions of the water supplies were made, however, the return of the property could not initially cover the outlay and Elders, who had financed the improvement, took over the lease and ran it for three years before they were able to sell and recoup their investment. The original homestead was almost completely destroyed by fire in 1970 and some of the original stone walls were replaced with timber and fibro. In 1973, A.M. & J.R. Mitchell took over Muggon with 9448 head of sheep. The Mitchell’s were still running the property up until the purchase of the property by DEC.

The homestead is in good condition with five bedrooms and two bathrooms, dining, kitchen, lounge, games

and family rooms. The homestead is air-conditioned with a below ground pool and established gardens. There is also a two bedroom governess cottage that includes ablutions and a three bedroom staff quarters with ablutions. The shearing shed although old is in fair condition and there are shearers quarters that comprise nine bedrooms, ablution block and kitchen.

Climate The climate of Muggon is similar to Yuin, Narloo and Twin Peaks stations being arid with annual rainfall approximately 230 millimetres which falls mostly in winter (May/June to October). Winters are generally cool and sunny. Summers are hot and dry with unreliable cyclonic storms and there are frequently long periods where the temperature exceeds 37.5°C.

Landscape Muggon is within the Murchison River catchment area of Western Australia (Curry et al. 1994). The property adjoins Toolonga Nature Reserve and covers an area of 182 743 hectares. Muggon is characterised by gently undulating to almost flat sandplains with its major feature being the salt pans, ephemeral swamps and numerous claypans (including Weenjung Claypan and Bedracoine Claypan) and drainage channels dissecting the station


43

from north to south (Curry et al. 1994). There is a very diverse range of country varying from red sand plain country, some creek systems feeding to the lakes on the western side, stony spinifex ridge lands and extensive lake lands and lake system (including Bedracoine Lake and Lake Tilly). The Yarra Yarrak lake system comprises 50–60% of the property. The land includes acacia shrub lands, acacia sandplains, mulga and snakewood shrub lands, grassy shrub lands, salt pans, saline flats, dunes and ephemeral wetlands (Curry et al. 1994). A number of land systems are found including the Weenyung land system, which is unique to the property (Curry et al. 1994) (Figure 49). Other features of the landscape include the Badgeradda Range and Errabiddy Bluff (Figure 49).


44

Figure 49 Landscape of Muggon

Errabiddy Bluff—Muggon Wolarry Swamp—Muggon

Yarrawolya Breakaway Yarrawolya Breakaway

Photos: DEC 2005

Flora There are 15 vegetation types on Muggon dominated by shrub lands of bowgada (Acacia ramulosa) scrub and succulent steppe with open scrub, scattered Acacia sclersosperma and bowgada over saltbush and bluebush (Maireana spp.). Also included are: mulga (Acacia aneura), samphire (Haoosarcia spp.), A. quadrimarginea scrub, snakewood (Acacia eremaea), minnieritchie (Acacia grasbyi) scrub and a priority two flora species (Acacia sp. Muggon Station).

Fauna No official monitoring of fauna has been conducted on Muggon. The WA Museum online database identified a potential 32 bird species, 5 mammal species and 31 reptile species based on the geographical coordinates of Muggon.

Existing tourism product Muggon is located approximately 76 kilometres north-west of the Murchison Settlement and 230 kilometres north of Mullewa. A significant feature of Muggon is Errabiddy Bluff, promoted by the Murchison Settlement, which has a picnic spot provided by the local Shire. Muggon is dissected by Butchers Track (the main travel route for campers and caravans and popular with 4WD’s) that links the North West Coastal Highway to the Murchison Settlement. The Murchison Settlement features a unique rammed earth museum and a Landcare award winning botanical walk. Nearby accommodation includes: Wooleen Station offering homestead and self-contained accommodation; Meeberrie Homestead (opened 1 June to 30 September); and the Murchison Roadhouse offers motel style accommodation and camping/caravan park accommodation. Wooleen Station also offers colonial and Aboriginal heritage tourism, nature based tours and an experience on a full working sheep and cattle station. Half day or sunset tours are available on request. Muggon is located near the Outback Pathways ‘Wool Wagon Pathway’ self drive trail and the Northwest Wildflower Trail.


45

Chapter 4

POTENTIAL VISITOR PROFILE FOR DEC RANGELANDS STATIONS

Visitor Characteristics The population of Gascoyne-Murchison in 2001 was 26 298 with 14% of the population identifying themselves as indigenous. The major population centre is Carnarvon with a population of 7273 in 2001 (NLWRA 2004). The Gascoyne Murchison includes the major centres of Exmouth, Coral Bay, Carnarvon, Upper Gascoyne, Meekatharra, Wiluna, Cue, Mt Magnet, Denham and Kalbarri (Figure 50). There is no visitor data specific to the region. Visitor information is available for the Gascoyne and Murchison region and is reported below.

Figure 50 Gascoyne Murchison Region Map

Source: (NLWRA 2004)

Gascoyne region visitor characteristics The Gascoyne region includes the Shire of Carnarvon, Exmouth, Shark Bay and Upper Gascoyne and extends from Shark Bay to Exmouth and inland to Mount Augustus (Figure 51). It covers an area of 136 110 square kilometres with the majority of the land tenure consisting of pastoral properties (WATC 2003a). The region is sparsely populated, with its 9755 residents living mainly in the towns of Carnarvon, Exmouth, Coral Bay, Denham and Gascoyne Junction. Carnarvon is the main commercial centre (WATC 2003a). The Gascoyne is primarily a nature-based and wilderness experience destination offering a combination of raw outback adventures with unique water-based experiences (WATC 2003a). The Shire of Upper Gascoyne has a population of 370, with the main centre, Gascoyne Junction, having a population of 35 (GDC 2004). DEC Rangeland properties included in this region are: Mooka, Mt Phillip, Cobra, Waldburg, Dalgety Downs and Pimbee.


46

Figure 51 Gascoyne region map

Source: (TWA 2004a; WATC 2003a)

Most tourism in the Gascoyne region is focused on the coast. DEC estimates that the number of annual

visitors to Kennedy Range National Park is about 4000 per annum and to Mount Augustus 6000 per annum. International Visitor Survey and National Visitor Survey data indicated there was 275 900 visitors to the

Gascoyne region in 2003/04 (WATC 2003a). This represents a 13% increase from 2000/01 (239 200). In 2003/04, visitors consisted mostly of intrastate visitors (64%) followed by international (21%) and interstate visitors (15%) (Figure 52). Based on a five year rolling average (2000 to 2004), UK visitors account for 30%, Germany accounts for 14%, Switzerland accounts for 10% and Netherlands account for 9% of all international visitors (WATC 2003a).

Figure 52 Gascoyne visitors’ place of residence

Adapted from: (WATC 2003a) On average domestic visitors stayed 6.8 nights in the region, while international visitors stayed 5.5 nights

(WATC 2003a). Based on a four year rolling average (2000 to 2003), domestic visitors were most likely to visit the region in July to September followed by October to December, while international visitors were most likely to visit in October to December followed by July to December (Figure 53) (WATC 2003a).


47

Figure 53 (a) Gascoyne domestic quarter returned from trip, (b) Gascoyne international quarter arrived in Australia

(a) Domestic Visitors (b) International Visitors Source: (TWA 2004a)

The majority of visitors (68%) visited the Gascoyne region for holiday/leisure purposes with outdoor or

nature being the most common activities undertaken for international visitors (89%) (WATC 2003a). Outdoor and nature included going to the beach, visiting national/state parks, bush walking, visiting botanic/public gardens, going whale/dolphin watching and visiting farms. Domestic visitors also rated outdoor or nature activities as an activity undertaken in the Gascoyne (50%) but were more likely to participate in social and sightseeing activities (69%) e.g. visiting friends and relatives, eating at restaurants, going to movies, pubs, clubs, discos or casinos, attending organised sporting events, going shopping (for pleasure), general sightseeing, picnics/bbq’s, ferry rides, tall ships, other tourism cruises, and day trips (WATC 2003a). In 2003/04, both domestic visitors and international visitors rated going to the beach (including swimming, surfing and diving) as the number one activity undertaken (WATC 2003a). The second most frequent activity undertaken by domestic visitors was general sight seeing, while international visitors were more likely to visit national/state parks as the second most frequent activity in the region (WATC 2003a).

Transport in the region for domestic visitors was mostly private/company car while international visitors

mostly used bus/coach transportation (Figure 54). However, when rented/hire vehicle and private/company car were combined, 43% of international visitors travelled via car (Figure 54).

Figure 54 Transport used while in the Gascoyne region (2003/04)

Adapted from: (WATC 2003a)

While in the Gascoyne region, both domestic and international visitors were most likely to stay in caravan

park/camping accommodation followed by hotel/resort/motel style accommodation (Figure 55). International visitors also stayed in backpacker/hostel accommodation (Figure 57).


48

Figure 55 Accommodation stayed in while visiting the Gascoyne region


Visitors to the Gascoyne region were mostly in the age bracket 25–44 years followed by 45–64 years (Figure

56) with a 54:46 male to female ratio (WATC 2003a).

Figure 56 Age of visitors 2002/03 to Gascoyne Region


In summary, self-drive domestic visitors account for the greatest percentage of visitors to the Gascoyne

region. Visitors generally stay in the region from 5.5 to 6.8 nights in caravan/camping accommodation, travelling via car or bus/coach (for international visitors).

Murchison region visitor characteristics The Mid West region comprises a total of nineteen local governments and ranges along the coast from Greenhead in the south to beyond Kalbarri in the north and past Lake Disappointment and Lake Carnegie in the east—an area of more than 470 000 square kilometres (Figure 57). The region has an estimated 50 490 residents living along the coast where the main regional centre, Geraldton, is located (WATC 2003b). The Mid West region offers a broad range of activities to visitors including exploring the outback and the Kalbarri gorges, maritime and cultural history, bushwalking, fishing, diving, surfing and wind surfing, whale watching and station stay experiences. The region also boasts a prolific number of seasonal wildflowers and is very popular for wildflower touring (WATC 2003b). DEC Rangeland properties included in this region are: Muggon, Kadji Kadji, Lochada, Warriedar, Karara, Twin Peaks, Narloo, Yuin, Doolgunna and Mooloogool.


49

Figure 57 Murchison Region Map

Source: (TWA 2004b; WATC 2003b)

As with the Gascoyne, the majority of tourism in the Mid West region is focused in the coastal areas, with

Kalbarri and Geraldton generating the highest economic return to the region (WATC 2003b). In 2003/04 there were 580 800 visitors to the Mid West region. Visitors consisted mostly of intrastate (82%), followed by international (10%) and interstate (8%) (Figure 58). Based on a five year rolling average (2000 to 2004), UK visitors account for 29%, Germany accounts for 14%, Switzerland accounts for 9% and Netherlands account for 9% of all international visitors (TWA 2004b).

Figure 58 Mid West visitors’ place of residence

Adapted from: (TWA 2004b) On average domestic visitors stayed 4.1 nights in the region, while international visitors stayed 4.8 nights

(TWA 2004b). Based on a four year rolling average (2001 to 2004), domestic visitors were most likely to visit the region in July to September followed by October to December (Figure 59a), while international visitors were most likely to visit in October to December followed by July to September (Figure 59b) (TWA 2004b).


50

Figure 59 (a) Mid West domestic quarter returned from trip, (b) Mid West international quarter arrived in Australia

(a) Domestic Visitors (b) International Visitors Source: (TWA 2004b)

In 2003/04, the majority of visitors (49%) visited the Mid West region for holiday/leisure purposes with

social/sightseeing being the most common activities undertaken by domestic visitors (74%) and outdoor and nature being the most common activities undertaken by international visitors (89%) (TWA 2004b). Domestic visitors rated eating out at restaurants as the number one activity undertaken in the Mid West region followed by visiting friends and relatives. In contrast, international visitors rated visiting national/state parks as the number one activity followed by going to the beach (including swimming, surfing, diving). Visiting national/state parks was rated ninth by domestic visitors (TWA 2004b).

Transport in the region for domestic visitors was mostly private/company car while international visitors

mostly used bus/coach transportation (31%) (Figure 60). However, when rented/hire vehicle and private/company car were combined, 50% of international visitors travelled via car (Figure 60).

Figure 60 Transport used while in the Mid West region (2003/04)

Adapted from: (TWA 2004b)

While in the Mid West region, domestic visitors were most likely to stay in a home of friend/relative

followed by hotel/resort/motel (Figure 61). Alternatively, international visitors were most likely to stay in caravan park/camping accommodation followed by hotel/resort/motel accommodation (Figure 61).


51

Figure 61 Accommodation stayed in while visiting the Mid West region


Visitors to the Gascoyne region were mostly in the 24–25 year age bracket followed by 45–64 years (Figure

62) with a total 57:43 male to female ratio (TWA 2004b). For domestic visitors there was a higher proportion of males 58:42 male to female ratio, while international visitors had a higher proportion of females, 47:52 male to female ratio (TWA 2004b).

Figure 62 Age of visitors 2002/03 to Murchison region


In summary, self-drive domestic visitors account for the greatest percentage of visitors to the Mid West

region. Domestic travellers generally stay in the region from 4.1 to 4.8 nights and stay with friends or relatives. International visitors primarily use caravan/camping accommodation.


52

Chapter 5

TOURISM POTENTIAL OF DEC RANGELANDS STATIONS

The rangeland stations of the Gascoyne and Murchison are located in an inland region with a traditionally low tourism profile. The majority of visitation in the Gascoyne and Murchison regions occurs along the coast, particularly the Kalbarri, Shark Bay and Ningaloo regions. Visitor statistics for the coastal areas indicate visitation rates of approximately 110 000 people per year while the inland regions, are estimated to host about 4000 to 6000 people per year. This indicates that the inland region of the Gascoyne and Murchison have potential for increased tourism activity given the currently low visitor numbers. The popularity of the coastal regions may potentially act as a source for increased visitation if tourists are encouraged to disperse inland during their visit. This may be framed in terms of broadening the Gascoyne Murchison experience and/or escaping crowded coastal areas for remote wilderness experiences.

The following section discusses various tourism potential markets that the rangeland properties may cater to.

In many cases, the potential basis for a tourism product already exists in the form of drive trails; tourism oriented infrastructure such as accommodation; as well as natural and cultural assets and experiences appropriate for product development. In some cases, development of tourism may occur through expansion of existing tourism experiences, such as wildflower tours, on to the newly acquired DEC properties.

Wildflower Tourism In Western Australia, most wildflowers bloom from July until September with some species in the south blooming in late spring (October and November) (WATC 2003c). The extent of flowering and the timing of the season is heavily dependant on winter rains. The northern region is best known for expansive fields of everlastings in yellow, pink and white, while the southern regions are home to a wide range of rare and unique flora (WATC 2003c). As part of a strategy to define and market wildflower tourism, TWA have divided the state into wildflower regions and allocated a trail to each. The wildflower trails relevant to this study are the Everlasting Trail (Figure 63) and the North West Trail (Figure 64). The approximate orientation of the DEC rangelands properties in relation to the TWA trails are indicated in lighter green on the maps. This illustrates the close proximity of the existing trails to the DEC properties, in some instances passing across properties of interest to this study.


53

Figure 63 The Everlastings Wildflower Trail with approximate locations of DEC rangeland properties

Adapted from: (WATC 2003c)


54

Figure 64 The North West Wildflower Drive Trail with approximate locations of DEC rangeland

properties

Adapted from: (WATC 2003c)

Despite the establishment and promotion of self drive wildflower trails, there has been limited research

conducted on wildflower tourism both in Australia and internationally. In 2003, TWA conducted a survey of 1201 Australian residents aged 25 and over to estimate the potential size and demographic characteristics of the intrastate and interstate wildflower tourism markets (WATC 2003c). For Perth respondents (n=400), 20% of respondents had specifically visited wildflower areas or wildflower trails while on holiday in the last two years. Furthermore, 78% of Perth respondents indicated that they intended to visit wildflower areas again in the next two years (WATC 2003c). Previous Perth wildflower visitors within this study were predominantly aged 55 and over (49%) and older singles/couples (59%). These finding were similar nationally (WATC 2003c). There was considerable scope for increasing market size with 61% of those who intended to visit wildflower trails in the next two years, having not actually been wildflower viewing in the previous two years (WATC 2003c).


55

Priskin (2003) conducted a survey of general visitors (N=702) to the Central Coast Region of Western

Australia in summer (December/January) and spring (September/October) 1999. Spring survey respondents rated viewing wildflowers as the most important attraction of the region followed by the ocean. Additionally, a majority of spring respondents rated wildflower appreciation (67%) as the most participated in activity followed by camping (61%) and bushwalking (56%). Spring respondents generally visited the region as a couple (62%), staying for 1 to 3 days (54%) and travelling via two-wheel drive (53%). The Pinnacles/Nambung National Park was the most visited natural attraction (35%). Additionally, a high proportion of spring respondents commenting that they were ‘only driving through the region’ (34%). There was a fairly even spread of age groups for spring respondents and proportion of male to females (51:49). A majority of respondents came from Perth (43%) or interstate (29%) with 19% coming from overseas. Personal income was from low (<$25K) (38%) to medium ($26–50K) (40%) and respondents generally had either secondary (42%) or university (42%) education.

Turpie and Joubert (2004) examined wildflower tourism in the Bokkeveld Plateau, South Africa. The area

attracts tourists in spring to view the wildflowers in bloom. During spring, both the conserved and farming areas produce impressive displays of wildflowers in bloom, which attracts tourists to the area. Tourists are accommodated in the small towns, as well as on several farms that provide bed-and-breakfast facilities during the season. A questionnaire (N=164) was distributed in September 2001 to estimate the value of flower tourism and to explore visitors’ preferences for different attributes of their experience. Similar to the Western Australian studies, the majority of visitors surveyed (94%) were locals (South Africans from the same and neighbouring provinces). Further, 57% of respondents had visited the area before with 91% of respondents on a self-drive visit, staying in the region for an average of 1.8 ± 1.1 days. The majority of respondents (71%) felt that seeing expanses or ‘carpets’ of flowers contributed most to their enjoyment. Seeing the variety of species (26%) and the general scenery and getting away from it all (18%) were second and third most important. This study found that tourists were more interested in widespread floral displays than in their actual composition.

The results of these studies indicate that wildflowers may provide a significant motivating factor in visitation

to regions while they are in bloom. The location of the DEC rangelands properties across prime areas of seasonal wildflower viewing suggests a significant number of people may choose to visit the properties to take advantage of wildflower viewing opportunities.

Drive Trail Tourism Drive trail tourism refers to experiences in which tourists use a prescribed drive route that connects points of interest across a region or regions. Creation of tourism drive trails is a popular method of tying a region together as a tourism product. The intent is to link a series of attractions into a coherent product whereby the whole is greater than the collection of individual attractions (Lane 1999; Prideaux 2002). Tourism Drive trails are purported not only to create a coordinated tourism product but also encourage movement of tourists through the whole region rather than concentrating at specific locations or bypassing the region altogether. This is achieved by creating trails that encourage the movement of tourists through sparse areas when travelling from one destination to the next. However, information relating to the contribution of drive trails to regional tourism and communities is close to non-existent. Most information relates to best practice in trail design and the processes of linking attractions by themes (Carson pers. comm. 1/7/2003; Hardy pers. comm. 4/7/2003). Despite the difficulties in evaluation and absence of detailed data relating to impacts on tourism, drive trails seem to be a popular focus for development of tourism in regional areas (Hardy 2003). The Outback Pathways self drive trails represent an example of a specifically marked and signposted drive trail network across the Gascoyne and Murchison regions (Figure 65). The approximate orientation and location of the DEC rangelands properties in relation to the drive trails is indicated.


56

Figure 65 Outback Pathways

Adapted from: MWDC 2005

While it is difficult to assess the success of a formal (or informal) drive trail, certain characteristics have been

identified that may encourage use. Figure 66 outlines the essential components of a successful drive trail product. The underlying principle revolves around a cohesive and consistent product that is clearly defined and easily followed by the visitor. This requires developing corresponding maps, directional signs and information nodes reflecting the location of the tourists on a drive trail route. Importantly, a drive trail route needs to have an effective road network that is easily navigable. Other components such as a range of quality accommodation amenities and other services are important components of a drive trail route.


57

Figure 66 Features of successful themed tourist drives/corridors

Source: Hardy 2003 The difficulty of gathering data means the impacts of drive trails on tourism productivity and development

may be difficult to demonstrate. However, as well as a means of increasing tourist visitation, the process of creating a drive trail may work to enhance social networks and cohesion within a region. This is on the premise that a drive trail functions on a foundation of networks and cooperative arrangements within the community. Prior research suggests that a successful touring route requires several key factors to come to fruition. These include community enthusiasm and involvement, consistent presentation of the route as a whole product, and protection of natural and cultural heritage (Hardy 2003). While it was proposed that these elements must be in place in order for a tour route to come into being successfully, the creation of a tour route may start with development or facilitation of these underlying factors. This of course would prove very difficult where social capital is weak while areas with strong social capital may find the creation of a drive route relatively straightforward. However, if there is an interest in creating a drive route and the elements stated above are required to achieve this, the route must start with the building of networks and ties before mapping can be considered. This may involve actions such as facilitation of communication between isolated attractions and associated tourism operations that otherwise would not have the time allocated to such activities. This approach has been adopted by the Great Southern Development Commission in the Central Great Southern region of WA in order to build the community base before development and marketing are undertaken (Hughes & Macbeth 2005). Thus, aside from the hypothetical direct benefits of the functioning tour route itself, the act of creating a tour route may have benefits for the communities involved.

Australian Indigenous Cultural Heritage Tourism The idea of tourism development as a means of economic revival for depressed regions has also been viewed as a pathway to economic autonomy for Australian indigenous communities. Tourism development involving indigenous communities has demonstrated advantages such as employment, cultural revival, cross-cultural understanding, strengthened community ties and increased material wealth. However, negative impacts such as co-modification and associated degradation of culture, exploitation of indigenous communities by external interests, high levels of economic leakage from communities and limited tourist/indigenous interaction were also

Unique Drive experiences and attractions distinctive to the rout

eorA corridor providing a mix of product that is suited to the

cons umer’s needs and creates a competitive advantage for the region. This may in clud

e land

Safe and efficient road

Clear directional and tourist signage

Adequate service infrastructure including rest areas, scenic lookouts, accommodation etc.

Efficient, user friendly information network underpinned by visitor centres

and

and packaged for the

A well managed network

with stakeholder cooperation and

consensus

Unique drive experiences and attractions distinctive to the route or

A corridor providing a mix of product that is suited to the consumer’s needs and creates a competitive advantage for the region. This may

include landscapes, cultural heritage etc …

Safe and efficient road network

Clear directional and tourist signage

Adequate service infrastructure including rest areas, scenic lookouts, and accommodation etc …

Efficient, user friendly information network underpinned by visitor centres and

community services

Tours and visitor services linked and packaged for the convenience

of the drive market.

A well managed network with

stakeholder cooperation and consensus


58

noted (Dyer, Aberdeen & Schuler 2003; Fuller, Buultjens & Cummings 2005). These researchers noted that many complications arise from the lack of parity between the capitalist corporate culture and traditional indigenous culture. However, indigenous majority ownership of experiences or businesses is seen as a means toward maximising positive returns and minimising negative impacts (Altman & Finlayson 2003). There appears to be a significant international tourism demand for experience of Australian indigenous culture that suggests rich pickings for those seeking to develop indigenous cultural heritage experiences (Fuller et al. 2005).

In a study of indigenous tourism in the Northern Territory, Ryan and Huyton (2000) conducted a survey of

471 visitors to Katherine, Northern Territory, Australia to rate existing and potential tourism products, among which were those based on Aboriginal culture. The study noted that most visitors to the Northern Territory were primarily interested in nature based experiences, with experiences of indigenous culture coming second. A similar study was conducted by Ryan and Huyton (2002) in Central Australia (Desert Park in Alice Springs and Uluru-Kata-Tjuta National Park) to determine how important exposure to Aboriginal culture was to the respondents. For both studies, the most important attribute was the desire to ‘visit places that are different from anywhere else’. The authors concluded that while Aboriginal tourism products based on Aboriginal culture had an interest for approximately a third of the visitors to the Northern Territory, it was not a central attraction. Rather, it provided a backdrop to the greater emphasis on nature based experiences.

Anecdotal evidence from tour operators working in Uluru-Kata Tjuta National Park indicated that much

tourist questioning about Aboriginal lifestyles is related not to their historic culture, but their current lifestyle, such as community dynamics, education system, leisure pastimes and so on (Ryan & Huyton 2002). From this, it may be that tourist promotion leaflets and tours should emphasise contemporary scenes of Aboriginal life and not simply traditional cultural activities. The inclusion of contemporary culture may then avoid the necessity to capitalise upon that involving what is still for many, sacred knowledge.

Non-Indigenous Cultural Heritage Tourism Ryan and McKenzie (2003) noted that experience of cultural heritage has traditionally been the most marketable tourism commodity and represents one of the oldest motives for travel. The Murchison and Gascoyne rangelands of Western Australia, have a rich cultural heritage that could contribute to development of tourism activity. Non-indigenous cultural heritage includes mining heritage, agricultural heritage and historic characters such as Kingsford Smith and explorers such as John Forrest (Zell & Bedford 2005). Most of this heritage is interlinked with indigenous cultural heritage, particularly in relation to pastoralism (Clark 1992). However, while such aspects may be an incentive for tourism, other factors including variable (at times unpredictable) and often difficult accessibility, geographical isolation, harsh climate and the ‘tenuous hold of civilisation’ can act to discourage tourist visitation. This is especially the case in relation to tourists of urban origin with little connection to ‘the outback’—such as migrants and ‘urban sophisticates’ (Sorensen & Epps 2003, p86). This suggests that cultural heritage tourism in the rangelands would function either as a small niche market or as a minor aspect of a broader experience.

In terms of market characteristics, the demographic profile of the cultural heritage tourist is as diverse as the

product itself (McKercher & duCros 2002). There are perhaps two classes of cultural heritage tourism, that which is focused specifically on cultural heritage as a core part of the experience, and that in which cultural heritage forms an incidental component of a broader experience. Tourists specifically focused on cultural heritage in their travels would be identified as a small niche market. Silberberg (1995) commented that these cultural heritage tourists tend to be wealthier, well educated and prefer comfortable hotel/motel style accommodation. McKercher and duCros (2002) noted that cultural heritage tourists tended to be knowledgeable about the heritage they are seeking to experience and likely to be middle aged or older. For the more common form where cultural heritage forms a backdrop or incidental part of a wider experience, Foo and Rossetto (1998) found that tourists under the age of 30 years were less likely to participate in a cultural tourism experience if a nature based experience was concurrently available. Those over the age of 30 years were more likely to participate in a cultural tourism experience given the same circumstances.

In terms of other characteristics of cultural heritage tourism, Sorensen and Epps (2003) stated that cultural

heritage sites tended to attract short stay visitors. In addition they noted that cultural heritage tourism sites have a low level of repeat visitation. This may create challenges in terms of maintaining a viable visitor flow. Nuryanti (1996) was of the opinion that heritage sites were more likely to attract domestic tourists because of the closer ties with the history of culture represented. This concept was reiterated by Poria et al (2004) who pointed to personal relevance and historical commonality as an important factor in successful cultural heritage tourism operations. The familiarity with the culture being represented, or personal cultural context, was also viewed as an important component of successful cultural tourism products by Prideaux & Kininmont (1999) and McIntosh & Prentice (1999). Tourism involving such a market would appear to be catering to a need to explore (at some


59

level) national identity and origins or understand cultural roots. It is difficult to generalise about a group defined by something as diverse as cultural heritage tourism. It would seem that as a market in itself, it is fairly limited with a low rate of repeat visitation.

According to Bureau of Statisitics data, most tourists visiting regional areas of Australia were doing so

primarily to visit friends and relatives and/or for nature based experiences (Australian Bureau of Statistics 2005). Cultural heritage did not feature in the responses of domestic or international visitors to rural Australia (O'Halloran, Cook, Sbragi & Buchanan 2000). This indicates that any experience of cultural heritage occurs in the context of socialisation with family and friends or as a augmentation of a nature experience. Foo and Rosetta (1998) noted that only a small proportion of tourists seek cultural heritage as the primary focus of their travel (about 9%). Most tourists at cultural heritage sites are there incidentally or as part of a more general tourism experience of a region. This is not to say that cultural heritage in rural areas is not an important part of the tourism experience. Rather, it adds ‘character’ to the experience of other aspects of rural areas. The idea of cultural heritage as an underlying component of other experiences probably relates to its strongly intangible character that often provides ambience or atmosphere and may not be overtly recognised but noticed if absent. It seems logical that any cultural heritage tourism development in the rangelands be undertaken with this in mind rather than attempting to create a free standing product.

Volunteer Tourism Volunteer tourism refers to people who choose to take part in a work program in combination with the opportunity to travel and experience nature and culture over the course of days or weeks in a location away from their usual place of residence. This type of experience is usually coordinated through an organisation with a particular agenda. Conservation Volunteers Australia is a prime example of such an organisation interested in encouraging volunteers to become involved in conservation related work while undertaking ‘… a unique touring experience …’ (Davies 2002 p173). DEC runs a similar program in the form of Landscope Expeditions. So called volunteer tourism is perhaps the most accurate representation of ecotourism where tourists contribute to the conservation of natural ecosystems or development of amenities in disadvantaged communities (Davies 2002, Galley & Clifton 2004, Stoddart & Rogerson 2004). Subsequently, volunteer tourism may function to benefit the locations in which it occurs, not only through the direct conservation or development effort carried out, but also through the associated reduced management costs or lack of resources within management to undertake tasks (Stoddart & Rogerson 2004).

According to Galley and Clifton (2004) volunteer tourists tend to be young, female and well educated. Most

tend to have been involved in past volunteer programs and are interested in the personal challenge of the experience in an outdoor setting. Obviously, volunteer tourists tend to show a high level of concern for the focus of their tourism experience, for example natural area conservation, contribution to increased living standards of disadvantaged communities and so on. It seems that volunteer tourism represents a mutually beneficial experience for both tourists as participants and stakeholders associated with the locations they visit. Volunteer tourists have positively reported having a new understanding of nature, feeling part of a team with a common purpose, feeling that they have made a useful contribution to ‘the planet’ and an increased awareness of their environmental impacts in their daily lives (Loudon 2004). In addition, the work volunteers carry out may benefit local environments and communities, reduce costs associated with management of locations which they visit and provide resources that managers and stakeholders may lack for achieving essential goals.

Volunteer tourism may suit the primarily conservation motive for the purchase of the pastoral properties in

the Gascoyne and Murchison. This is particularly pertinent when considering the limited management budgets and manpower able to be allocated to maintenance (let alone improvement) of the properties. Encouraging organised volunteer groups to use the pastoral stations for conservation and development expeditions could provide a vital service to DEC in terms of gathering biophysical data, contributing to rehabilitation of properties and providing a management presence that may discourage potential undesirable behaviour on the part of independent visitors in the more remote or sensitive areas.

Geotourism Geotourism may be defined as tourism focusing on ‘… sites of scientific importance, not only for geological reasons but also by virtue of its archaeological … or cultural value’ (Manca & Pireddu 2003). This may therefore encompass not only natural geological formations, such as rock strata and fossil remains, but also artefacts of past human presence and current use (such as mining). In the context of this report, geotourism is viewed as having a focus on the natural geological attributes of the landscape while archaeological and human use attributes are considered to be cultural heritage. Geology has provided the rationale behind establishing some of


60

the earliest national parks such as Yellowstone and Grand Canyon in the US (Kiernan 2004). Those advocating geotourism are of the view that biological aspects of a place are intimately linked to the geological attributes that are seemingly undervalued as evidenced by the overwhelming focus on biological conservation. The seemingly dominant focus on biodiversity appears to override the integral and equally important geo-conservation values.

Geotourism has been identified as a small niche market for travellers interested in the geology of landscapes

(Buckley 2003; Robinson 1998). This view relates primarily to those tourists who are specifically interested in the fine geological details of landscapes whether or not they are majestic. This market may be tapped with a view to encouraging enthusiasts who may be able to collect data on the physical aspects of the rangeland properties. On a broader scale, geotourists may include people attracted by impressive geological formations. In the context of this study region, visitors to the Kennedy Ranges and Mt Augustus may fall into this category. Breakaways and granite outcrops occurring across the Murchison properties may also afford a focus for more general geotourism. Past mining activities on the rangeland properties may also provide opportunities for geologically based tourism through the exposed rock strata and lure of discovering precious or semi precious stones.

Wildlife Tourism Wildlife tourism is a significant part of Australia’s tourism identity owing to the diversity of charismatic animals unique to the continent (Fredline & Faulkner 2001; Green, Higginbottom & Jones 1999; Higginbottom, Green, Leiper, Moscardo, Tribe & Buckley 2003; Newsome, Dowling & Moore 2005). For example, a survey of international visitors by Fredline and Faulkner (2001) indicated that approximately 67% of international visitors specifically stated they wanted to see wildlife during their visit while 71% reported having seen wildlife during their visit to Australia. Wildlife tourism involves a broad sweep of experiences that includes all of the aspects of the tourism genre with the distinguishing feature of animals as the primary attraction. Such experiences may involve aquatic or terrestrial animals, indigenous, endemic or feral animals as well as captive or non-captive animals (Burns & Howard 2003). The uniqueness of Australian wildlife in combination with factors such as remoteness and rarity appear to have provided the ideal context for successful wildlife tourism operations.

Green et al. (1999) stated that the important components required for the popularity of a wildlife tourism

experience include the perceived charisma of certain species; vulnerability; uniqueness and the ease of viewing the species of interest. Ease of viewing relates to the daily activity cycle (waking hours, peak foraging times, seasonality) and the geographic location, range and habitat of species. For example, it may be assumed that nocturnal wildlife are more difficult to view than diurnal wildlife as would wildlife in geographically isolated and restricted habitats as compared with widely distributed habitats. Commonly, rare and difficult to find wildlife can present a lucrative tourism market (e.g. whaleshark and gorilla tourism) that is generally accessible only by those with the time and the money to spend (Shackley 1996). Wildlife that presents difficulties in viewing may also appeal to a narrow audience of enthusiasts and professional interests more than ‘the mass market’ given the patience and dedication often required for a successful viewing experience (Tribe 2001).


61

Chapter 6

APPRAISAL OF THE POTENTIAL VALUE OF DEC RANGELANDS PROPERTIES

The DEC rangeland properties are likely to be associated with a range of held values. At the general level, these include use values (values humans may extract from natural areas), non-use values (as bequest to future generations, comfort in knowledge of existence) and intrinsic value (value apart from utility to humans). Use values represent the most direct and readily measured aspects of a natural area while intrinsic value is intangible and thus difficult to measure or express. Non-use values are less tangible than use values but may be measured or expressed using defacto scales such as contingency valuation. Establishing the range of values associated with the rangeland properties may assist in management decision making processes while also functioning as a justification for the original purchase and ongoing management costs of the properties

It is important to note that the rangeland properties were purchased by DEC primarily for their biodiversity

characteristics to improve representation of certain bioregions in the conservation estate in Western Australia. Biodiversity may be associated with held values that fall under all of the previously mentioned categories. Table 2 provides examples of the numerous values in relation to the rangelands properties.

Table 2 Some held values associated with protected landscapes

Use Values Non-use values Intrinsic values • land use practices • tourism/recreation use • aesthetic pleasure • research/education • ecosystem services

• cultural heritage • reassurance in knowledge of

conserved existence • conservation for use by

future generations

• Viable ecosystems

Adapted from: (Lucas 1992)

The rangeland stations acquired by DEC may be associated respectively with several or all of the value

meanings listed above. These represent conceptualisations of how people may relate to the rangelands properties. In order to quantify worth to humans, the use and non-use values may then be expressed or measured in terms of:

• benefits to the community, groups or individual people associated with the properties (social values) • extent of generation of material wealth (economic values) • intrinsic worth and ecosystem services benefits to humans (environmental values)

Each of the social, economic and environmental values may directly or indirectly benefit communities

associated with the rangeland properties. Direct benefits are those immediate effects of the presence of the economic, environmental or social values derived from conservation of the properties. Indirect benefits are the subsequent effects of the direct benefits. For example, in terms of economic values and tourism, direct benefits are those associated with visitor spending in the region. Indirect benefits are associated with the subsequent impact of tourism spending on employment, manufacturing and other economic activities in the region. In terms of social values, the direct benefits of tourism may be: improved services, social interaction and cultural exchange within the region. Indirect benefits may be enhanced knowledge and awareness, increased tolerance and social diversity. Finally, direct benefits associated with environmental values may include: watershed protection, breeding habitat maintenance, climatic stabilisation and carbon sequestration. The indirect benefits may include the attraction of tourists to view the unique environmental phenomena that have been conserved.

While the environmental values are central to the reasoning behind the purchase of the properties, the

primary values of interest within this discussion are the quantifiable economic benefits that may be derived from use and non-use values. These values can most directly contribute to the justification for the economic costs of purchasing and managing the stations. It is recognised that the values and benefits of the rangeland properties extend well beyond those which are economically quantifiable. However, for the specific purposes of this exercise, considerations of the wider values and benefits fall outside the scope of this report. Aspects of valuing the properties from an economic perspective are discussed in the following.


62

Economic Valuation The economic valuation of the environment and its uses is a somewhat controversial area but its theoretical rationale has now been well developed (e.g. see Winpenny 1996; OECD 1995); and there is some guidance on practical applications (e.g. see Dixon et al. 1994; Glasson 1998, 2005). This section of the document briefly runs through a number of approaches, from a minimum, but quantifiable, direct spend approach, to more nebulous but more inclusive approaches.

Direct visitor spend In the context of natural area tourism, the direct spend approach primarily concentrates on the initial direct spend of tourists visiting to experience a region’s natural assets. It includes estimates of their accommodation, travel, food and drink and other expenditures. It does not include the indirect and induced impacts of this spend, such as the jobs and wages generated and the subsequent further expenditure in the locality. In Western Australia, usually there is little direct spend within the protected areas themselves owing to the absence of opportunities beyond park fees. In such cases it is acceptable, however, to include spend in nearby towns given that this spend is directly associated with visitation to the protected area(s) of interest. In relation to the rangeland properties where onsite accommodation or other services are provided, it is possible to estimate a direct spend value associated with a specific property. To demonstrate calculation of direct spend from tourism, Table 3 provides an estimate of per person spending associated with an overnight stay on a rangeland property in the Gascoyne. Spending in nearby towns may then also be added to this estimate to demonstrate direct spending attracted to the region by the properties.

Table 3 Estimated direct spend impact per visitor night at a rangeland homestead in the Gascoyne

Expenditure Item Spend per person per night

• Accommodation(includes food ) (1) • Fuel (pp)—for av. 1000 km visit (2) • Miscellaneous expenditure, including supplies,

accommodation in adjacent towns (3)

$120 $40 $70

Total $230 (1) Based on limited experience from case study visit. Such rates may not be sustainable in the long run (2) Based on two persons sharing a LandCruiser equivalent; buying fuel at $1.25 per litre; fuel consumption of

eight kilometres per litre; for a two night visit. (3) Based on two persons sharing medium range hotel/motel; buying breakfast/dinner; and supplies. Based on

one night stay only in adjacent town.

If the property averaged, for example, five visitors per night, during the cooler months, the gross income could be approximately $90 000 p.a. (this may be a high estimate). Against such income must of course be set a range of costs—especially energy (a generator at $80 per day, would in itself, give annual costs of $30 000). What is particularly apparent is that almost half the daily expenditure may accrue to economic activities outside the rangelands area (although some of the fuel is likely to be purchased in the rangelands). If the indirect expenditure was built into the calculation (e.g. by using a simple multiplier of 1.4 for instance), per person per night expenditure impact would increase to $330, but almost all of the extra $100 would be attributable to activities outside the rangelands, much of it in the adjacent towns of Carnarvon, Exmouth and Meekatharra, because the rangelands have little or no service/manufacturing base.

Direct valuation—preventive/defensive and comparative preventive Individuals, firms and governments may undertake a variety of preventive or defensive expenditures in order to avoid or reduce unwanted environmental effects. Environmental damages are often difficult to assess, but defensive expenditures or replacement costs may provide a proxy measure. The acquisition of a number of properties in the rangelands indicates DEC values the associated environmental assets (ecological and cultural/heritage). The capital costs involved in acquiring the properties could be used as one form of valuation. In addition to capital costs, valuation may also include the costs of labour and resources to maintain a presence at the homestead, and to undertake basic ‘environmental maintenance’ such as control of exotic weeds and animal pests. Annual management costs per property range from approximately $10 000 up to more than $60 000 with an average of $20 000. Costs can exceed $100 000 for upgrading or installing accommodation and other associated infrastructure related to tourism. Furthermore, addition of tourism facilities will result in increased cost of maintenance of the new buildings and basic services required for tourism activities (such as continuous power). Such expenditures provide a wider valuation of the environmental assets of the properties from the perspective of government.


63

A comparative example of such preventive expenditure is provided by the European Union (EU) policy of taking land out of current use, to maintain environmental assets, in environmentally sensitive areas (ESAs). The policy arose in Europe in the 1980s as a result of concerns about the detrimental impact of more intensive agricultural practices in the countryside. The EU compensates farmers with per ha. subsidies to take land out of production, for a period of time, to maintain biodiversity and landscape features. The nature and size of such subsidies needs to be checked, although it is more the principle rather than the detailed expenditure which is relevant to this project.

Shadow pricing and opportunity costs The DEC properties that maintain a management presence provide a human presence in very remote country. The DLGRD Regional Indicators Report (2003) assessed the Gascoyne as 92% VR (very remote) and 8% R (remote), compared for example with Peel at 100% HA (highly accessible). Only the Kimberley and the Pilbara scored more highly on the VR index, at 99% and 97% respectively. A network of habitation in the region, provided by a management presence on the DEC properties, may be assigned a value based on estimating the cost of providing emergency and other services.

Properties with caretakers provide telecom and emergency fuel facilities; as well as informal security and

health support facilities. These facilities may be valued using shadow pricing. This approach estimates the value of substitutes—such as a life saved, an accident minimised (e.g. vehicle pulled out of sand/river), an emergency contact made to bring in medical facilities. However, it is important to note that estimating costs of such substitute events is speculative.

Another approach involves estimating the opportunity costs involved. For example, the cost of a police call

out from Carnarvon; a breakdown truck from Gascoyne Junction; medical emergency support from the flying doctor. That is, estimating the cost of providing services to a location in the absence of a caretaker able to undertake such services. For example, absence of a caretaker in a region may require the provision of an extra police officer and vehicle based in the region at considerable cost.

Contingent valuation Certain benefits associated with the properties may not have direct market prices. For example, clean air and noise pollution cannot easily be assigned a direct economic value. In this case, experimental market techniques or willingness to pay (WTP) (sometimes called contingent valuation techniques) may be appropriate. These are survey approaches where a direct attempt is made to elicit preferences from people by questionnaires (‘structured conversations’). Two kinds of questioning may take place:

• eliciting values—obtaining estimations of what people are willing to pay (WTP) for the presence or absence of a given attribute and what people are willing to accept (WTA) to forego or tolerate a given situation

• eliciting rankings—obtaining a ranking of stated preferences. Values for goods which are not marketed, such as environmental goods, may then be derived by ‘anchoring’ the preference to the real price of something observed in the market.

For instance, the technique can be used to evaluate how much people value the status quo, such as an unspoilt

national park or sacred site, by assessing how much they would be willing to pay to keep it unspoilt, or how much would need to be paid to them in order to allow the development to take place.

The contingent valuation method, while not very precise, can produce useful valuations. Data based on the

method may be sufficient to rule out certain project alternatives or favour others, and can thus be a valuable tool. However, the method has problems such as designing, implementing and interpreting questionnaires. Concepts such as willingness to pay (WTP) could be constrained by income level or may be unrealistically high if no limits are set. Similarly, willingness to accept (WTA) payment for a loss is not constrained. Willingness to pay may also suffer from the ‘free rider’ problem; a low WTP is expressed, on the assumption that others will pay more.

While the contingent valuation method’s applicability may be limited, there is now considerable experience

in applying this survey-based approach. In certain circumstances, the contingent valuation method may be the only available technique for benefit estimation, and can be applied to common property resources (such as common grazing land), to amenity resources with scenic, ecological or other characteristics, or to other situations where market information is not available.

The application of the contingent valuation approach for the Gascoyne rangelands study would be

complicated by the mix of actual and potential users: local communities (including indigenous populations) and the potentially broad range of travellers. It would also involve a direct survey/questionnaire approach which


64

would be time consuming and expensive. A Delphi Panel may be used as a surrogate method to reduce cost and time required to gather data. Such a method would involve assembling a representative panel, possibly on a postal survey basis, to gauge relative and composite valuations of the area.

Associated Valuation Issues

Appropriate discount rates Benefits and costs of uses of the environment are normally long term. Economic analysis sums future streams of benefits and costs by applying discount rates to those streams to create a net discounted present value. A high discount rate (e.g. 10%) can quickly erode future streams, and skew an analysis in favour of short term economic benefits rather than long term environmental benefits. Yet it can be argued that natural areas become more valuable over time (with scarcity value, pressure from competing uses). As such, the application of very low discount rates may be appropriate, and a way of reflecting some of the non-use values, and the interests of future generations. This could provide the basis of an interesting composite figure on return per hectare per square kilometre etcetera of tourism use, to be compared with other land uses/activities.

Risks and uncertainty The environmental risks and uncertainty involved in the policy/management options relating to activities such as tourism in a challenging environment will normally be covered in the economic analysis. But if the nature of risk is seen as particularly unpredictable, a detailed risk assessment may be required to identify the full costs and benefits and the likelihood that each will occur.

Distribution of costs and benefits Traditional economic appraisal, such as cost benefit analysis, tends to ignore the distributional effects, preferring to aggregate costs and benefits to estimate the change in the welfare of society as a whole. Ideally, appraisal should also include specific costs and benefits associated with specific subgroups or locations within the area of interest. For example, appraisal may include different locations (e.g. Carnarvon or Gascoyne Junction, or Mt Augustus); community groups; particular industries/services, or age groups and so on. An approach developed by Lichfield (1975, 1996), as the Planning Balance Sheet (PBS), and developed further as Community Impact Evaluation (CIE), provides one approach which divides those affected into producers and consumers engaged in various transactions. The findings are presented in tabular form, leaving the decision maker to consider the trade-offs involved, but with guidance from the appraisal.

Scope of the economic network Although isolated, the DEC rangeland properties cannot be considered in economic isolation. They are part of a spatial system, connected to other properties, towns and tourist facilities in the region. They are also elements in sector networks with, for example, outback tour operators including them as a point on a long distance route, which might stretch from Darwin to Albany. In this way, the properties rely on and contribute to, other elements in the network. As noted earlier, their presence may actually bring more direct spend benefit to linked towns than to themselves.

Such networks are also dynamic, responding to policy and business initiatives, and to changes in associated

infrastructure. For example, the Gascoyne Murchison Outback Pathways are a recent tourism initiative promoting sign posted routes through the region. Each tells a unique set of stories—the Wool Wagon Pathway, the Kingsford Smith Mail Run, and the Miners Pathway—using a network of interpretive sites. As they become better known, the Pathways may influence tourism flows in the region. Similarly, the sealing of the road from Carnarvon to Gascoyne Junction, and then through to Meekatharra, is expected to increase tourism activity by improving accessibility of some locations. However, improved accessibility can be a ‘two-edged sword’, increasing tourism visitation but also increasing the ability to source services and products from outside the location. That is, rather than buying supplies at Gascoyne junction, visitors and residents may choose to drive to Carnarvon if a sealed road were to improve access to the coast.

Sustainability and Management of the Rangelands The primary documents relating to rangelands management emphasise the importance of ‘ecosystem services’ that collectively maintain the rangelands ‘natural assets’, which underpin the array of ‘social, economic and cultural values and functions’. The key ecosystem services which maintain the natural assets include, for example: soil fertility, habitat provision, water recycling, pollination, and carbon sequestration. Key natural assets include, for example, the soil, biota, water, atmosphere, which in turn support other values (e.g. view


65

sheds, landscape, amenity, sense of place), which are important to uses such as tourism. The services and assets together support the heritage and all the communities and industries/activities of the rangelands. Goods produced by the rangelands include mineral, pastoral and horticultural products and water supply; other goods/services include life support, life fulfilment (the basis of the tourism industry) and future options.

Pressure, state, response of rangeland industries/activities The ‘pressure-state-response’ framework is an approach to environmental management uses favoured by environmental science and the State of the Environment Advisory Committee (Glasson, J 2005, pers. comm. May 2005). Various industries/activities exert pressure on the rangelands. These may include/have included: grazing, mining, horticulture, tourism and unallocated Crown Land and Native Title. Grazing in particular has had a serious effect on the state of the rangelands, leading to land degradation and soil erosion. Feral animals and weeds and altered fire regimes, have also had a significant and extensive impact on the state of the environment, especially in unallocated Crown Land/Native Title areas. Mining impacts have also been significant but tend to be more localised. Tourism tends to focus on high value areas, such as water features, indigenous sites, hills and ranges, susceptible to even low levels of activity and needs to be carefully managed. Table 4 provides a summary of uses that generate pressures, and the resultant states.

Table 4 Rangeland examples of uses, pressures and resultant states

Use Extensive grazing, native products harvesting

Intensive mining, water abstraction, horticulture

Tourism, recreation, aesthetics, cultural, conservation

Unallocated Crown Land, Native Title

Pressures • over grazing • Altered fire

regimes • Excessive

harvesting of fauna

• Weed and pest incursion

• Seasonal variation

• Land clearing • Excessive water

abstraction • Tailings disposition • Downstream

impacts of discharges



• Altered fire regimes

• Inappropriate waste management

• Localised disturbance



• Altered fire regimes



Changes to states • Loss of ecosystem function and productivity

• Loss of regional and local biodiversity

• Loss of topsoil through wind and water erosion

• Loss of site-based and localised biodiversity

• Altered local landscape and geomorphology

• Site disturbance, particularly fragile areas (e.g. coastline, water courses). However can be locally significant

• Loss of regional and local biodiversity

Significance of changes (more* indicates greater changes)

*** Serious and extensive over a considerable area

** Generally very localised, but intensive

* Generally very localised, but low impacts overall

** Moderate and extensive

Source: (EPA 2004)

Underpinning all rangelands activities and impacts is the climate and its natural variability. Rainfall, although

relatively low (200 millimetres per year), is a major driver of processes and functions and substantially varies seasonally and in terms of geographical dispersal. The Western Australian Greenhouse Strategy (Western Australian Greenhouse Unit 2004) is predicting increases in temperature and possibly even more variability in rainfall. This may significantly amplify the impacts of human pressures in the region in the long term.

Benefits of shared rangeland management The EPA (2004) sets out some key management principles for environmental sustainability, including:

• environmental protection and ecological sustainability to be achieved irrespective of economic conditions of the enterprise and industry scale

• environmental and ecological sustainability objectives to be set, and standards and criteria established • all enterprises to be managed in an environmentally sound manner


66

• biodiversity to be conserved through both reservation and off-reserve conservation • cultural heritage to be protected • landowners and managers to assume responsibility for environmental performance • stewardship of the rangelands to be shared between users • accurate and interpretable information on environmental conditions and trends to be used at all levels of

management In the context of the rangelands and their generally marginal economic viability, this is a significant list of

management principles. The list raises some important issues, as well as support, for the DEC rangeland properties strategy and the aims of this project. In particular:

• There is a clear call for good information on environmental conditions and trends—which ‘requires landholders and decision-makers to invest in ensuring access to accurate and interpretable information.

• There is recognition of stewardship shared between users, including coexisting industries, community groups, land users and the wider Western Australian community. ‘The basis for this stewardship should be an equitable distribution of the costs of environmental protection between the different beneficiaries, including landholders, other users of that land, community interest groups and the general public. Additional work is required to establish protocols for these shared commitments to environmental benefits.’

• In addition, there is also a recognition that ‘The rangeland community carries out a range of activities in addition to pastoral activities, from which the community as a whole benefits. The presence of people experienced in bushcraft who are living in remote areas provides a resource which can be of assistance to government agencies as they carry out their functions (e.g. general environmental management) and in providing a network of habitation to support travellers and emergency services. The benefit to the community of these services is difficult to estimate but is significant.’

To summarise this chapter, the rangeland stations have an array of use and non-use values that can be

quantified and expressed in terms of economic values. The direct tourist spend valuation is arguably the simplest approach. It provides quantification for some of the use values but may demonstrate that much of the spend is likely to go to towns outside the rangelands. Other valuation approaches, especially preventive expenditure and shadow pricing/opportunity cost, are more nebulous. However, these may be used to highlight other important use and non-use values such as: maintaining biodiversity; protecting heritage properties; providing a network of habitation to support emergency and security services in a hostile environment. It may be possible to derive approximate aggregate figures of such values. As rangelands management is based on increasingly rare expanses of natural area, benefits (and costs) should be considered over a long time period, as natural areas become more valuable over time. Finally, the distribution of costs and benefits, and the network implications (spatial and sectoral) are important elements in valuation of the rangelands properties.

In terms of implications for rangelands property policy and management, good information relating to natural

and cultural assets and various uses (e.g. tourism numbers) is an essential baseline. In addition, as the use and non-use benefits are shared by many stakeholders, recognition that the costs of stewardship should be shared between the users is important. More specifically, the valuation of individual stations in terms of use and non-use values, and in the context of wider spatial and sectoral networks, implies that they should not be assessed and supported solely on the basis of direct tourist spend. They should also be supported on the basis of their ‘environmental caretaker’ and ‘emergency/security services’ roles.


67

Chapter 7

SWOT ANALYSIS OF THE DEC RANGELANDS PROPERTIES

This chapter provides an analysis of the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats (SWOT) associated with tourism development on the DEC rangeland properties included in this report. The SWOT is expressed in summary table form and draws on the data and discussion presented in previous chapters. The aim is to present the information in a form that demonstrates the advantages and disadvantages of tourism development on the rangeland properties. As the properties possess some similarities in relation to tourism development, Table 5 provides an overall SWOT analysis for the rangeland properties collectively. Subsequent tables in this section then present analysis of each of the clusters of properties respectively.

Table 5: Collective SWOT analysis of the DEC rangeland properties

Strengths Weaknesses • Remoteness • Outback experience • Diverse unique natural and cultural assets • Aerial access available to most properties • Culturally rich

• Lack of management presence at potential tourism sites

• Lack of quality accommodation and services • Highly seasonal product • High tourism product cost • High turnover of caretakers • Caretakers with limited tourism management

experience • High capital costs of upgrading or

constructing tourism facilities

Opportunities Threats • Potential for aerial highway • Imminent improved road access in some

areas draw visitors from coast • Current development of signposted drive

trails through region (Outback Pathways) • Close to popular established tourism nodes

and routes along the coast • High potential for educational institutions

and other organised groups to use properties for education and research

• Local indigenous employment • Joint management of properties with

indigenous stakeholders

• Vandalism and theft of cultural assets • Systemic removal of station infrastructure • High risk environment for visitors • Mining leases across many properties

The remote wilderness style experiences that may be associated with the rangeland properties offer what

could be termed ‘a true outback experience’. This is the primary strength of the rangelands. The combination of expansive landscapes, distinctive geological formations and the rich indigenous and colonial heritage could combine to form a unique product. Uniqueness and distinctive experiences are two factors that can function to create an attractive tourism experience for adventure travellers.

The strengths are tempered somewhat by some key weaknesses in relation to tourism development and

management. Perhaps of most significance is the lack of quality accommodation and services across most of the rangeland properties coupled with isolation and the high expense of development. Accommodation is primarily of a low grade. While this may be adequate in terms of providing a rustic outback experience, provision of a range of accommodation options, including higher end facilities is more likely to attract more tourists. High end accommodation is particularly important for servicing tourists arriving by chartered flight. Unfortunately, the remoteness of the region means that there is a high capital cost for improvement of any of the properties while the extreme environmental conditions result in high maintenance costs. Similarly, isolation means that provision of services will also come at a higher cost to the tourist relative to the quality of the service received. Coupled


68

with this, while DEC may engage managers to maintain properties, the property managers may be unable or unwilling to provide tourism services and management in addition to their other duties. There is also a high turnover of caretakers meaning that establishment and development of tourism services is made more difficult owing to a lack of consistency. A lack of management presence has resulted in damage and theft of property and artefacts in the region in addition to a lack of regular maintenance in some areas being associated with rapid dilapidation of assets (such as homesteads). Such activity could degrade the quality of a site as a tourism experience in addition to other associated management issues. Finally, many of the properties have mining exploration licenses over them. These licenses take precedence over other tenures such that some properties (such as Kadji Kadji) are exposed to the possibility of mining activity. This in itself may function as a tourism attraction but at the same time can degrade the quality of the natural and cultural features of the landscape.

Opportunities are primarily evident in the current improvement of road access in the Gascoyne region

between Carnarvon and Gascoyne Junction has the potential to draw more visitors from the popular coastal tourism destinations. If the road is eventually sealed from Carnarvon to Meekatharra (as planned) this could form a significant route between inland attractions and the coast or visa versa. The Murchison region already has an established network of sealed roads enabling relatively easy access to the properties from nearby towns. Accessibility is a key factor in encouraging visitation in a region primarily visited by self drive tourists. An established network of drive trail itineraries based on wildflower tourism across the Murchison and Gascoyne may encourage self drive tourists to venture away from the popular coastal areas. Similarly, the Outback Pathways trail network represents a formal drive trail with directional and interpretive signposting that traverse many of the DEC rangeland properties. This may afford opportunities for provision of accommodation and services on rangeland properties adjacent to or traverse by these trails. Most of the properties also have air strips creating opportunities for an aerial highway or chartered flights from coastal centres to inland attractions. The success of such a product would require significant enhancement of existing infrastructure (on-ground transport, accommodation and so on) to support such activities. There is also significant interest from indigenous traditional owners and native title claimants in terms of access and joint management of the properties. This could form the basis for indigenous tourism products both on site and in the form of art works resourced from properties.

It is likely that the development of tourism on the rangelands properties will be of a low key character and

will probably not offset the costs of management. However, a low key tourism development approach would be consistent with the primarily conservation driven focus behind the purchasing and management of the properties. The following tables outline the strengths weaknesses, opportunities and threats associated with tourism development on each respective rangeland property cluster. The analysis of each property cluster is categorised into relevant sections such as: tourism services, attractions and management.


69

Chapter 8

CONCLUSION

Tourism Development The pastoral properties purchased by DEC have important values that may be conducive to tourism development. Tourism is viewed as one way of obtaining a return from the properties and providing benefits to local communities. However, it is likely that tourism will not provide the scale of revenue required to balance management costs. To this end, consideration of ecological, security and safety factors that may indirectly bring economic benefits to the state may provide further balance in terms of costs and benefits of managing the properties. While tourism may bring benefits to the region and to DEC, the properties and adjacent national parks have been purchased and established primarily for their biodiversity values. Thus any development of tourism activity will be governed partly by the precedence of conservation over tourism use. Issues associated with culturally sensitive sites on the properties should also be considered before decisions relating to development of tourism access are made. It is important that management decisions are inclusive of stakeholder groups with direct interests or links to respective properties.

There is potential for tourism on some stations in terms of spectacular and unique landscapes, cultural

heritage artefacts and wilderness style experiences. In particular, the properties adjacent to the Kennedy Ranges and Mt Augustus present significant foci for tourism activity. These unique and distinctive landforms together with their rich natural and cultural assets afford a good basis for further development of tourism. The properties adjacent to these national parks would require significant improvement to the quality of accommodation in order to encourage a higher level visitation. There are also good opportunities for further tourism development at Muggon and Doolgunna based on already existing facilities and visitation. Muggon is relatively close to the coastal tourism routes and nodes such as Shark Bay. It has an established and popular four wheel drive track (Butcher’s Track) that crosses the property and provides a route to Murchison Settlement from the coastal highway. Doolgunna has had improvements made to facilities such as accommodation and is already used by visiting staff, volunteers and Landscope groups. There appears to be ample opportunities to promote Doolgunna as a special interest organised tour group facility. Karara, Lochada, Warriedar and Kadji Kadji also have some unique and distinctive landscapes and vistas. These properties are located close to towns and have good access roads to the homestead. There are opportunities for well appointed campsites as well as some day use facilities for picnicking. Other stations may not be suitable for on-site tourism activity owing to sensitivity of landscapes, poor accessibility, and/or lack of adequate potential tourism amenities. These include the Twin Peaks, Narloo and Yuin group and Pimbee.

There is an existing network of drive trails that are already promoted by state and regional tourism bodies.

The existing drive trails may function as a conduit for encouraging visitation to the appropriate DEC purchased properties. The wildflower trails travel close to and through the DEC rangeland properties. They are promoted by Tourism WA and local regional tourism groups as self drive itineraries. In addition, the Outback Pathways initiative is focused on the development of formal drive trails with sign posting and interpretive signs installed along the designated route. Based on the diversity of cultural heritage in the rangelands region, the drive trails present an opportunity to ‘tap into’ a ready made tourism product that intends to encourage tourists to explore the region. Opportunities in accommodation provision is one obvious service that the DEC properties could provide.

Development of tourism on key properties will potentially require a management presence specifically

established for this purpose. Managers contracted by DEC to maintain properties may not be willing or able to manage tourism activity in addition to these duties. It would be strongly advisable to employ a manager solely devoted to tourism services on properties where significant numbers visit and use established facilities. Examples include Muggon, Doolgunna and potentially Cobra. DEC ultimately does not have the resources to function as a tourism operator on the rangeland properties beyond provision of camping facilities, access and a limited management presence. Employment of managers with tourism experience would help to ensure a quality experience for visitors.

There is interest from indigenous stakeholders in developing tourism products and experiences. These may

be in the form of on-site guided experiences or as resources taken from the stations and exported to off site locations as craft and art products. Traditional owners and native title claimants are interested in being involved in development of experiences, either as guides associated with existing tour operators, or in terms of developing new enterprises. There is some reluctance to use culturally significant stories, sites and practices as tourism


70

products. However, experiences based on the indigenous involvement in the pastoral industry were seen as a potentially desirable topic for discussion with tourists. Perhaps of greater interest was the potential to use traditional natural resources available on the properties to create art and other products that could then be sold in nearby towns or outlets in Perth and other centres. This was viewed as the least threatening to cultural sensitivities primarily because it avoided the issue of visitors accessing culturally sensitive sites on the properties.

While the properties may be frequented by independent travellers, the absence of a strong management

presence, the multiple points of access, isolation and large area make it unlikely that such visitors will contribute in the form of tourism revenue (access fees, accommodation fees) or other benefits. DEC is more likely to benefit from organised groups in using the properties for education, research or recreation based on previously established arrangements for use. While the groups are given the opportunity to use the properties as training grounds, research case studies or educational resources, they may agree to undertake certain tasks in return for this use. Mutually beneficial arrangements could include maintenance and repairs, biophysical survey work, trapping of pest species or other activities that could contribute to the management of the properties. Advanced payments for use of the properties by groups for specific purposes may also be an option.

Management Issues The large area of isolated land fragmented over two regions poses significant management challenges. Important issues including: maintenance of assets, control of introduced species, control of human access and rehabilitation of ecosystems are challenged by limited budgets and staffing relative to the area requiring management. Observations during visits to properties revealed that a lack of management presence has resulted in asset loss, damage or degradation and exposes currently valuable assets to future theft or degradation. The harsh environmental conditions also take their toll. Some facilities have rapidly deteriorated simply through lack of tenants to conduct daily maintenance. Facilities and equipment abandoned on some properties is usually stolen if not relocated to homesteads with a DEC management presence, or sold.

There is a need to improve communication between DEC as managers and other stakeholders (indigenous,

neighbouring property holders) especially in relation to major decisions such as mass bore closures. It was noted in one stakeholders meeting that some were unaware of DEC’s bore closure policy until they discovered the bore’s had been closed when visiting to access water. On the other hand, the myriad of interest groups connected with the rangeland properties means communication of management issues or decisions could be complex and time consuming. All stakeholders should endeavour to communicate concerns in relation to the rangeland properties. To this end, a stakeholder’s workshop in Geraldton established a need for clear lines of communication between various government departments and representative organisation at the informal and formal level. This perhaps is of particular importance to indigenous stakeholders who are primarily interested in access to the properties and involvement in management decision making.

Future Action/Recommendations Based on the range of information gathered by this research, the following recommendations are made in relation to management of the rangelands properties generally and then tourism development specifically and finally, indigenous issues.

Management • Biophysical and human use monitoring of the properties is essential for effective management.

DEC’s limited capacity may be augmented by sourcing voluntary labour from clubs and organised groups with interests in natural environments and conservation as a form of volunteer tourism.

• To this end DEC may wish to establish formal relationship with key groups such as 4WD clubs, environmental volunteers organisations and other agencies (Police Force, Army) with a view to providing access to use of wilderness areas in exchange for conservation or maintenance work.

• On properties where tourism activities are developed, a manager specifically engaged for provision of tourism management and related services could be required in addition to a property caretaker/manager. Consultation with current caretakers indicated some had either a lack of interest in tourism management or a lack of time given more urgent duties required for the maintenance of the properties. A dedicated tourism manager would ensure a quality experience for tourists and a good level of quality in services and amenities.

• Preservation, translocation or removal of existing buildings and associated equipment is a urgent need. Buildings on the properties are deteriorating rapidly and, in some instances, are being removed


71

without authorisation. Establishing a management presence or re-locating equipment and buildings to sites with an existing management presence will prevent the loss of valuable assets.

• An assessment of heritage value of properties and assets is required and may assist in prioritising the need for management actions. Identification of high value heritage assets would serve to identify where management action is needed to ensure these assets are not lost through neglect, vandalism or theft.

• Establish informal lines of communication between DEC and other groups with direct interests the rangelands (indigenous groups, development commissions, Dept Indigenous Affairs, local governments) will serve to help to foster understanding and improve cooperation and coordination between various stakeholders.

Tourism development • More data relating to tourism use of the rangelands is essential to facilitate any further tourism

planning and ensure subsequent development is appropriate. This may include further operator surveys and visitor surveys. Knowing who uses the rangelands and why, will assist in appropriate management decision making and provision of services.

• On properties with little or no existing built amenities suitable for tourist use, development of tourism based on arrangements with club and other organised groups activities (e.g. 4WD clubs, amateur science research clubs, university researchers, army, police, cadets, scouts) may benefit DEC by reducing management costs through mutual agreements based on maintenance and/or other required work (e.g. biological surveys, fence repair, road maintenance) in return for use of the land.

• On properties with existing or proposed tourism amenities (such as accommodation, formal campsites, ablutions) DEC should ideally engage at least two managers, one for managing the property as a whole and a second for specific management of tourists and tourism amenities. This will ensure that management of the properties does not suffer owing to time required for hosting tourists and visa versa.

• Cultural heritage in the region has not been rigorously documented, a project to record oral histories in the region is recommended as a basis for enriching any tourism products that may be developed in the future. A professor of Folklore (Graham Seal) at Curtin University has expressed interest in conducting such a project but would require significant funds.

• Brochures, web pages and or other forms of public communication should be used to promote properties where tourism visitation is desirable. This may serve to focus tourist activity in areas where it is wanted and divert visitation from areas that are culturally or environmentally sensitive.

Indigenous • Indigenous groups associated with respective properties should be included in management

decisions and tourism development initiatives. • The various stakeholders (Development Commissions, DEC, YLSC, DIA, MWGACC) should meet

to establish a memorandum of understanding in relation to tourism development in the region, including the DEC purchased properties and indigenous involvement in management and development.

• Workshops between government agencies and indigenous representatives for respective properties or groups of properties should be held in each region to establish a mutual understanding of management practice and direction and development of better relationships between government agencies and indigenous groups.

• Development of informal lines of communication between indigenous representatives and government agencies will facilitate indigenous enterprise initiatives and input into management of properties. This could improve relationships between DEC and indigenous groups and provide knowledge about the rangelands that may assist in tourism management.


72

APPENDIX A: STAKEHOLDER WORKSHOP AGENDA & ATTENDEES

Agenda

Rangelands Stakeholders Workshop

1. Light Lunch

2. Project introduction

3. DEC’s interest in the stations

4. Area under discussion

5. Tourism and economic values in the Gascoyne

6. Open discussion

Attendees

Carnarvon Rangelands Stakeholders Workshop (12/5/05) Attendees:

Name Organisation Dave Bower Arid Landscapes; Gascoyne Naturalists Brett Fitzgerald DEC Terry Cornwall (Koodah) DEC Sue Hancock DEC David Wood Curtin University Amanda Smith Curtin University Mike Hughes Curtin University John Glasson Curtin University Alex Harper Dept of Agriculture, NRM Centre Peter Taylor GDC Ben Maslen Stockman Safaris Rob Easter Tropicair Alex Maslen TWA Fred Taylor Yamatji Land & Sea Council Bronte Grant Yamatji Land & Sea Council


73

Apologies:

Name Organisation Jane McTaggart Bidgemia Station Ben Drew Carnarvon Naturalists Club Jim Miller Cobra Station Luke Morgan Dept of Agriculture, NRM Centre Denver Blake Giralia Station Renata Zmak Golden Outback Brett Pollock Golden Outback

Geraldton Rangelands Stakeholders Workshop (29/7/05) Attendees:

Name Organisation Des Bunter 4WD Association—tag along tours Dion DEC David Blood DEC Rowan Dawson DEC Sue Hancock DEC Greg Kitson DEC Michael Hughes Curtin University Amanda Smith Curtin University David Wood Curtin University Ron Shea Indig Rep—Doolgunna area Caroline Williams Indig Tourism MWDC Julie Woodhead Karara Station Peter Woodhead Karara Station Bill Mitchell Muggon Station Brendin Flanigan MWDC Mike Flood Tourism WA—better business blitz program Indigenous Community Workshop Geraldton (16/9/05) Name Organisation Robin Boddington Clarry Cameron Barry Dodd Malcolm Gamble Noel Green Doyen Radcliffe Yvonne Radcliffe Ron Shay Ross ?lastname? Wayne Warner Sue Hancock DEC Michael Hughes Curtin Uni David Wood Curtin Uni Rory Whitelaw DIA David Harman Morawa Brendin Flannigan MWDC Caroline Williams MWDC Julie Weir MWGACC Patrick Mullaley NACC Paul and Jo Squires Twin Peaks Lindsay Councillor Yamatji Cultural Trails Bronte Grant YLSC


74

APPENDIX B: DETAILED SWOT ANALYSIS OF TOURISM DEVELOPMENT ON THE DEC RANGELAND PROPERTIES

Mooka and Kennedy Range Table 6 Mooka and Kennedy Range National Park SWOT Analysis

Strengths Weaknesses • Well graded gravel roads suitable for 2WD • Access to Western side of the range

available all year through Mardathuna • Some areas 4WD access only—limits tourist

numbers at sensitive/isolated sites • 4WD’s able to cross the range/plateau from

east to west.

• Access unpredictable for tourism—rain events can close roads for long or short periods, rivers and creeks may rise and fall unpredictably

• Potential for strandings in wet weather due to road closure and flooded crossings

• Year round access only available through Mardathuna Station to Western side of range. Access through Mooka is restricted due to potential watercourse crossings.

• Access to the Mardathuna and Binthalya is largely unformed sand and is maintained on an infrequent basis by the Shire of Carnarvon.

• Poor internal access on Mooka—suitable for 4WD only—limit market appeal

• Track is rugged, seldom used with many potential risks and hazards.

• Air strips—operational airstrip at Gascoyne

Junction, Mardathuna, Minnie Creek, Jimba Jimba, Bidgemia and Binthalya

• Airstrips are isolated; need to link with other operators to take tourists to sites; clients need to book entire charter plane ($3000)

• Bus charter from Carnarvon runs to eastern

side of Kennedy Range

• Accommodation located at Bidgemia and Gascoyne Junction (approximately 10–15 kilometres), Mt Sandiman Homestead and Mardathuna Station

• Camping area provided at Kennedy Ranges National Park (Temple Gorge)

• Lack of accommodation variety in region • Lack of campsites/accommodation and

facilities available on Mooka • Accommodation not well promoted in region

• Range of local events—Landor Races, Gascoyne Junction Races and Gascoyne River Dash

• 19 tour operators currently travelling to region

• Local tour operator runs business from Mardathuna (neighbouring station to Kennedy Range) providing safari tent style accommodation and tours to Kennedy Range. Pick up available from Carnarvon. Day trip also available.

• Lack of indigenous tour operators • Tour season limited to six months of the

year (April to November)

• Kennedy Ranges located 144 kilometres east of Carnarvon therefore achievable as a day trip (particularly when sealing of road is complete)

Tourism Services

• Lack of coordination between various stakeholders with interests in tourism


75

Table 6 cont….

Strengths Weaknesses

• Remoteness and isolation • Solitude and silence • Wide open spaces

• Safety issues with remoteness, isolation • Remoteness (lack of emergency services

& staff presence) • Closest permanent DEC staff are based in

Carnarvon (160 kilometres away) • Extreme temperatures in summer e.g.

50°C • Limited sources of water • Unpredictable rain events, flash flooding

• High scenic values • Night sky (stars, moon) • Geotourism values including ranges, fossils

and gemstones (Mookaite) • Mookaite mining on the western side of the

range resulted in site disturbance and a negative intrusion on the landscape. There are also evident visitor hazards in association with the mining equipment and activities.

• Rich cultural and natural heritage; both indigenous and non-indigenous

• Friendly and diverse local characters epitomising the outback experience

• Aboriginal significance of some sites unknown

Tourism Attractions

• Offers outback experience and example of station life

• Day-use (Temple Gorge, Drapers Gorge, Falls day-use & Sunrise View day-use) and camping facilities (Temple Gorge) provided at eastern side of Kennedy Range National Park

• Kennedy Range walking tracks require moderate to high degree of fitness (no universal tracks)

• Currently no walking tracks outside of national park

• Entry station and toilets available on

eastern side of the park. • Natural setting of park maintained

• Low levels of infrastructure • Campground and day-use sites on eastern

side of park provide only basic facilities.

Tourism Facilities

• Several sites on western side of range used on an informal basis by visitors (e.g. Bullwalya, Cassie, Chaffcutters Spring, Venny Spring, Venny Peak, Mooka Creek) for either day-use or camping.

• Dilapidated infrastructure on Mooka & Binthalya may pose a visitor risk

• Vandalism of site evident e.g. a survey marker commemorating a visit by John Forrest was once located on the summit, but has been removed.

• Kennedy Ranges iconic site • Entry station with four information panels

and brochures available on eastern side of park.

• Lack of sign posting and visitor information • Lack of public awareness of area • Lack of brochures, pamphlets and static

info at key hub sites e.g. Gascoyne Junction

Marketing

• Located on Outback Pathway and Northwest Wildflower Drive Trail

High social values (with focus on benefits to the community, groups or person)

• Provides a network of habitation to support emergency and security services in a hostile environment

• Much of the direct tourist spend contributes to linked towns such as Carnarvon and Meekatharra

• Maintains biodiversity

Values (economic /social)

• Protects heritage properties


76

Table 6 cont….

Opportunities Threats

• Proposed sealing of road from Carnarvon to Gascoyne Junction and at a later stage through to Meekatharra

• Remoteness—large distances between points of interest, remote from population centres, may discourage tourist visitation

• Close locality to Gascoyne Junction which is ideally suited to provide critical visitor services

• Mooka has a caretaker and is well situated to provide for a number of visitor services and activities including accommodation, information, a base for tours, access control and management presence

• Caretakers may not be able to run tourism

accommodation business either through lack of interest/skills

• Provide accommodation other than camping, suitable for various groups and interests

• Provide reasonably priced accommodation • Provide more campsite areas catering for

both individuals, groups and tour operators • The property has two homesteads that

could be developed for accommodation • Binthalya Station is ideally located to

provide a focus for visitor services, entry control, visitor information and accommodation (camping) at the west side of the park

• Mooka Homestead is ideally located within the south-west sector to provide entry information, management presence, various services and possibly safari tent, camping/caravan and homestead stay accommodation.

• Lyons River Station has considered development of up market tourism facilities

• Region loses outback appeal through inappropriate or over development

• Some operators want area left as it is—reluctant to support development of tourism

• Binthalya homestead is in dilapidated

condition and would require considerable capital to upgrade.

• Access to Mooka homestead is difficult in

wet weather due to watercourse crossings • No immediate plans to proceed.

• Indigenous interest in developing tourism in region

• Indigenous peoples (traditional owners) to offer indigenous experience not non-indigenous peoples

• Potential for partnerships for indigenous tourism enterprises

• Lack of clarity in native title claims may stymie indigenous tourism opportunities

• Not all indigenous sites are listed; need to work with indigenous people before any development

• Some indigenous sites on stations may not suitable for tourism and should not be developed due to fragility, sacredness

• Indigenous community don’t always want sites registered as public may then gain access to them and the site may become degraded or it may not be suitable due to spiritual reasons

• Links with existing drive trail products and regional events

• Potential for tourism for 4WD clubs, school groups, Landscope, astronomy clubs, bird watching groups and university groups

Tourism Services

• Potential for a range of activities to be promoted—organised groups through to independent travellers

Tourism Facilities

• Upgrade facilities e.g. tables with shade and/or shelters in accordance with visitor use needs and in character with natural setting

• Proposal to establish a new campground at Temple Gorge—bush camp with parking, special camping loops and bays, walking tracks, toilets, shade shelter and information/interpretation. Also proposed to include special tour operator camps as part of development

• Proposal to convert existing Temple Gorge campground into picnic area and walking hub including some tables under shelter, toilets, walking tracks and information

• Some infrastructure becoming dilapidated due to lack of maintenance and therefore posing a risk to visitors


77

Table 6 cont….


• Scenic drive trail along the base of the eastern escarpment proposed

• Proposal to include three new day use sites (one to feature a deep canyon system, one historical site and one the dune ridge landscape) along eastern escarpment if road extension north to Draper’s tank is approved

• Proposal to include additional walking tracks along eastern escarpment

Tourism Facilities

• Proposal to develop Mooka Creek outcamp areas as a focus for day-use site activities including provision of parking, picnic facilities, toilet, walking tracks

• Proposal to include camping on the western sand plain

• Sites on western side of park suited to

relatively small numbers of visitors therefore providing opportunity for solitude

• Currently utilised sites have limited capacity and are generally exposed to main access road

• Sites on western side of park best suited to relatively small numbers of visitors therefore restricting access

Marketing • Provide signage at places of interest • Provide more interpretive information for tour

operators and general public

• Draft management plan and recreation and tourism master plan released

• Recreation setting is to tend toward being little modified, have a low level of facilitation and require the greatest degree of self reliance. This is to ensure the park retains it remoteness and wilderness character

• Joint management with indigenous owners

• Problems with communication between stakeholders

• Insecure tenure arrangements discourage investment

Management

• Lack of funding for redevelopment


78

Mt Augustus Table 7 Cobra, Waldburg, Dalgety Downs, Mt Phillip and Mt Augustus SWOT Analysis

Strengths Weaknesses • Well graded gravel roads suitable for 2WD • Some areas 4WD access only—limits tourist

numbers at sensitive/isolated sites

• Access unpredictable for tourism—rain events can close roads for long or short periods, rivers and creeks may rise and fall unpredictably

• Potential for strandings in wet weather due to road closure and flooded crossings

• Poor internal access on some stations—suitable for 4WD only—limit market appeal

• Long distances between point of interest • Air strips—number of operational airstrips • Airstrips are isolated; need to link with other

operators to take tourists to sites; clients need to book entire charter plane ($3000)

• Accommodation located at Cobra & Mt Augustus

• Lack of accommodation variety in region • Lack of high quality accommodation • Lack of campsites/accommodation and

facilities available on stations • Price of accommodation high for basic

facilities (Cobra)—lack of reasonably priced tourist accommodation

• Range of local events—Landor Races, Gascoyne Junction Races and Gascoyne River Dash

• 19 tour operators currently travelling to region • Lack of indigenous tour operators

Tourism Services



• Safety issues with remoteness, isolation • Remoteness (lack of emergency services &

staff presence) • Closest permanent DEC staff are based in

Carnarvon (rangers or volunteer hosts are seasonally located at Mt Augustus Resort)

• Extreme temperatures in summer e.g. 50°C • Limited sources of water • Unpredictable rain events, flash flooding

• High scenic values • Night sky (stars, moon) • Geotourism values including ranges and

fossils

• Rich cultural and natural heritage; both indigenous and non-indigenous

• Aboriginal significance of some sites unknown and probably not suitable for tourism due to fragility, spiritual sensitivity


Tourism Attractions

• Mt Augustus en route from Perth to Karijini—an established tourism destination

• 49 kilometre circuit route around Mt Augustus suitable for 2WD that includes 6 day use sites and walk trails

• Mt Augustus walking tracks require moderate to high degree of fitness (no universal tracks)

• Currently no walking tracks outside of national park

• Low levels of infrastructure

Tourism Facilities

• Dilapidated infrastructure may pose a visitor risk


79

Table 7 cont…


• Mt Augustus iconic site

• Lack of sign posting and visitor information

• Lack of public awareness of area • Lack of brochures, pamphlets and static

info at key hub sites e.g. Burringurrah community, Cobra station

Marketing

• Located on Outback Pathway and Northwest Wildflower Drive Trail

Opportunities Threats Tourism Services

• Proposed sealing of road from Carnarvon to Gascoyne Junction and at a later stage through to Meekatharra

• Remoteness—large distances between points of interest, remote from population centres, may discourage tourist visitation

• Close locality to Burringurrah Community which is ideally suited to provide critical visitor services and management support

• Not all stations have caretakers residing on property—lack of management presence may result in degradation of quality of experience

• Provide a range of accommodation suitable for

various groups and interests • Upgrading of accommodation at Cobra to motel

standard • Safari tent style accommodation at Mt Augustus • Provide reasonably priced accommodation • Station Stays • Sites suitable on the stations for day-use

camping and 4WD access


• Caretakers may not be able to run station stays either through lack of interest/skills or through unsuitable accommodation

• Some operators want area left as it is—reluctant to support development of tourism






• Some indigenous sites on stations are not suitable for tourism and should not be developed due to fragility, sacredness




• Potential for a range of activities to be promoted —organised groups through to independent travellers


80

Table 7 cont…


Tourism Facilities

• Provide access to toilets for public use • Upgrade facilities e.g. tables with shade at

places of interest in accordance with visitor use needs and in character with natural setting

• Some infrastructure becoming dilapidated due to lack of maintenance and therefore posing risk to visitors





• Well closures have caused mass death of

native animals and plants—bad public relations


Management



81

Pimbee Table 8 Pimbee SWOT Analysis



• Poor internal access on Pimbee—suitable for 4WD only—limit market appeal

• Accommodation at Wooramel Roadhouse

(caravan/camping) (25kilometres), Bidgemia and Gascoyne Junction (102 kilometres)

• Lack of accommodation variety in region • Lack of campsites/accommodation and

facilities available on station • Range of local events in nearby town attracting

potential visitors to region—Landor Races, Gascoyne Junction Races and Gascoyne River Dash

Tourism Services




staff presence) • Closest permanent DEC staff are based in

Carnarvon • Limited sources of water

• Night sky (stars, moon) • Rich cultural and natural heritage • Aboriginal significance of some sites unknown

Tourism Attractions


Table 8 cont….


• Currently no facilities suitable for tourism Tourism Facilities • Low levels of infrastructure

• Existing infrastructure could only support small numbers of visitors

• Staff cottages are small and in average condition

Marketing • Lack of sign posting and visitor information • Lack of public awareness of area • Lack of brochures, pamphlets and static info at

key hub sites e.g. Gascoyne Junction High social values (with focus on benefits to

the community, groups or person)



Values (economic/ social)


Opportunities Threats • Remoteness—large distances between points

of interest, remote from population centres, may discourage tourist visitation

• Close locality to Wooramel Roadhouse and Gascoyne Junction which is ideally suited to provide critical visitor services

• Pimbee does not have caretaker residing on property—lack of management presence may result in degradation of quality of experience

Tourism Services

• Provide campsite areas catering for both individuals, groups and tour operators

• Shearer’s Quarter’s could be developed for tourism accommodation



82

Table 8 cont….




• Some indigenous sites on stations may not be suitable for tourism and should not be developed due to fragility, sacredness



Tourism Services


• Lack of management presence may hinder coordination of activities.

Tourism Facilities

• Provide facilities e.g. toilets, tables with shade and/or shelters at places of interest in accordance with visitor use needs and in character with natural setting

• Due to isolated nature and lack of supporting infrastructure investment in facilities may be unviable.






Management



83

Mooloogool and Doolgunna Table 9 Mooloogool and Doolgunna SWOT Analysis

Strengths Weaknesses • Well graded gravel roads suitable for 2WD • On major highway (Great Northern Highway) • Close proximity to Meekatharra & Wiluna

(100-130 kilometres) therefore achievable as a day trip

• Located close to Canning Stock Route • Some areas 4WD access only—limits tourist


• Poor internal access on—suitable for 4WD only—limit market appeal

• A variety of accommodation at Meekatharra and Wiluna

• Shearers Quarters at Doolgunna have been

upgraded and suitable for tourism

• Lack of high quality accommodation in region e.g. chalet and self-catering accommodation

• No cooking facilities currently provided at Doolgunna and only basic ablutions

• Lack of campsites/accommodation and facilities available on Mooloogool

• Range of local events in nearby town attracting potential visitors to region—return to Meekatharra Festival and a basketball carnival

• Air strips—operational airstrips at Mooloogool and Doolgunna

• Airstrips are isolated; need to link with other operators to take tourists to sites

Tourism Services




staff presence) • Limited sources of water • Extreme temperatures in summer

• Night sky (stars, moon) • High scenic values • Glengarry and Robinson Ranges provide good

Geotourism opportunities

• Rich cultural and natural heritage both indigenous and non-indigenous



Tourism Attractions


Tourism Facilities

• Low levels of infrastructure • No walking tracks

Marketing • Located on Outback Pathway, Northwest Wildflower Trail and travel route to Karijini National Park)

• Lack of sign posting and visitor information • Lack of public awareness of area • Lack of brochures, pamphlets and static info at

key hub sites e.g. Meekatharra & Wiluna High social values (with focus on benefits to

the community, groups or person)


• Much of the direct tourist spend contributes to linked towns such as Meekatharra and Wiluna





84

Table 9 cont…


• Close locality to Meekatharra and Wiluna which is ideally suited to provide critical visitor services

• Remoteness of attractions on stations—large distances between points of interest

• Doolgunna has a caretaker and is well situated to provide for a number of visitor services and activities including information, a base for tours, access control and management presence

• Caretakers have already been involved in providing services for visitors












Tourism Services


Tourism Facilities


• Provide walk trails at points of interest catering for various fitness levels


operators and general public • Promote presence of Doolgunna

accommodation and station attractions to tour operators travelling to Karijini National Park via Great Northern Highway

• Need to conduct survey of tour operators

currently travelling to Karijini National Park to gauge level of interest in station. Interest may be initially low as operators may be reluctant to alter travel itineraries




Management



85

Karara, Lochada, Warriedar and Kadji Kadji Table 10 Karara, Lochada, Warriedar & Kadji Kadji SWOT Analysis


numbers at sensitive/isolated sites • Stations are a 4 hour drive from the Perth

metropolitan area therefore achievable as an overnight stay

• Poor internal access on stations—suitable for 4WD only—limit market appeal

• Accommodation at Perenjori and Morawa • Variety of accommodation in region • Informal camping area provided at Lochada

with basic facilities

• Lack of high quality accommodation in region e.g. chalet style accommodation

• Lack of campsites/accommodation and facilities available on stations

• Number of tour operators pass through Perenjori during the wildflower season

• Operators do not currently visit stations

• Range of local events in nearby town attracting potential visitors to region

• Events occurring mostly in September during the wildflower season

• Air strips—operational airstrips at Warriedar and Kadji Kadji

• Airstrips are isolated; need to link with other operators to take tourists to sites

Tourism Services



• Safety issues with remoteness, isolation • Limited sources of potable water

• Night sky (stars, moon) • High scenic values • Rich cultural and natural heritage; both

indigenous and non-indigenous e.g. Damperwah Agricultural Experimental Field Station, Ochre Quarry, large diversity of birds

• Expansive salt lake systems



Tourism Attractions


Tourism Facilities

• Camping facilities at Boiada Hill, Lochada that include ablution facilities and accessed via a good gravel road currently used by specialist groups e.g. 4WD clubs

• A number of historic buildings i.e. Karara

Shearing Shed and Damperwah Experimental Farm

• Visitor risk issues associated with the current Shearer’s Quarters at Lochada

• No homestead on Lochada—caretakers located at Karara

• At time of survey Kadji Kadji homestead was unoccupied

• Low levels of infrastructure • Dilapidated infrastructure may pose a visitor

risk

Marketing • Located on Outback Pathway (Wool Wagon Pathway) and the Everlastings Wildflower Trail

• Region promoted for wildflower tourism • Wildflower festival in Region (Dalwallinu)

• Lack of sign posting and visitor information • Lack of public awareness of station area • Lack of brochures, pamphlets and static info at

key hub sites e.g. Perenjori & Morawa




• Much of the direct tourist spend contributes to linked towns such as Perenjori and Morawa

• Maintains biodiversity • Protects heritage properties


86

Table 10 cont…


• Close locality to Perenjori and Morawa which is ideally suited to provide critical visitor services

• Karara has a caretaker and is well situated to proved for a number of visitor services and activities including accommodation at Karara cottage, information, a base for tours, access control and management presence.

• Caretakers may not be able to run tourism

accommodation/activities either through lack of interest/skills

• Potential for camping to be provided at Karara shearing shed

• Karara shearing shed facilities would need upgrading and there are currently no ablution facilities



• Warriedar homestead suitable for tourism (old but in liveable condition)

• Warriedar homestead would require considerable maintenance to bring up to tourism standard due to it’s dilapidated condition


• Stations could be developed for native art and craft to be created and sold in region





• Some indigenous sites on stations may not suitable for tourism and should not be developed due to fragility, sacredness


• Link with existing drive trail products and regional events

• Link with existing points of interest already promoted in adjacent towns e.g. pastoral history on stations to link with existing Perenjori/Rothsay Heritage Trail

• Potential for tourism for 4WD clubs, school groups, landscope, astronomy clubs, bird watching groups and university groups

Tourism Services



• Suitable for loop trail to be developed at Mungada Road

• Access to Mungada Road could be limited if the Mt Karara mine were to go ahead

Tourism Facilities

• Site suitable at Kadji Kadji that would be suitable as a day use site. Located near good 2WD access road.


operators and general public • Promote stations to tour operators currently

conducting wildflower tours in region



Management

• Possibility of commencement of mining due to high level of exploration occurring on stations


87

Table 10 cont…



• Poachers and shooters come on land without permission of management

• People entering the station without advising caretakers can be problematic and interfere with works

• Multiple access tracks create a situation where access is difficult to control

Management

• Lack of funding for re-development

Yuin, Narloo and Twin Peaks Table 11 Yuin, Narloo and Twin Peaks SWOT Analysis



• Poor internal access on—suitable for 4WD only —limit market appeal

• Access to Narloo from Tardie Station can be closed due to flooding of Greenough River Access suitable via 4WD due to necessity to cross river

• Accommodation at Tardie Station, Wooleen Station, Meeberrrie Homestead and in Mullewa

• Lack of accommodation variety in region • Station stays are not always available as some

operate on request basis only • Station stays may only be available to small

groups • Lack of campsites/accommodation and facilities

available on station • Range of local events in nearby town attracting

potential visitors to region

• Air strip—operational airstrip at Yuin • Airstrip is isolated; need to link with other operators to take tourists to sites

• Lack of co-ordination between various stakeholders with interests in tourism

Tourism Services

• Number of tour operators pass through Mullewa during the wildflower season

• Operators do not currently visit stations



staff presence) • Limited sources of water

• Night sky (stars, moon) • High scenic and historical values at Poondarrie

Hill • 4WD access only. Track is also utilised by

Telstra to maintain the receiving station located in the area

• Rich cultural and natural heritage • Wildflowers

• Aboriginal significance of some sites unknown • Seasonally dependent

Tourism Attractions


Tourism Facilities

• Currently no facilities suitable for tourism • Low levels of infrastructure

Marketing • Located on Outback Pathway and the Northwest Wildflower Trail


key hub sites High social values (with focus on benefits to the

community, groups or person)






88

Table 11 cont…


Close locality to Mullewa which is ideally suited to provide critical visitor services

• Remoteness—large distances between points of interest

• Lack of management presence may result in degradation of quality of experience




• Some indigenous sites on stations may not be suitable for tourism due to fragility, sacredness



• Lack of management presence may hinder coordination of activities

Tourism Services

• Links with existing drive trail products

Tourism Facilities


• Due to isolated nature and lack of supporting infrastructure investment in facilities may be unviable





• Insecure tenure arrangements discourage

investment

Management



89

Muggon Table 12 Muggon SWOT Analysis

Strengths Weaknesses • Well graded gravel roads suitable for 2WD and

caravans • Butchers Track dissects Muggon and is the link

between North West Coastal Highway and Murchison Settlement

• Located 100 kilometres from Overlander Roadhouse which is on one of the main travel routes for the northwest coastal area

• Some areas 4WD access only—limits tourist numbers at sensitive/isolated sites

• Poor internal access on station—suitable for 4WD only—limit market appeal

• Accommodation at Murchison Settlement, Wooleen Station, Meebeerrie Homestead

• Lack of accommodation variety in region • Lack of campsites/accommodation and facilities

available on station • Air strip—operational airstrip at Muggon • Airstrip is isolated; need to link with other

operators to take tourists to sites

Tourism Services


• Remoteness and isolation • Solitude and silence • Wide open spaces • High scenic values • Night sky (stars, moon)

• Safety issues with remoteness, isolation • Remoteness (lack of emergency services & staff

presence) • Limited sources of water • Extreme temperatures in summer • Unpredictable rain events, flash flooding

• Rich cultural and natural heritage • Adjoins Tooloonga Nature Reserve • Extensive salt lakes and claypans • Errabiddy Bluff is a tourism feature promoted by

the Shire of Murchison • Geotourism values include the Badgeradda

Range




Picnic facilities provided at Erfabiddy Bluff • Currently no facilities suitable for tourism elsewhere on the station

Tourism Attractions

• Low levels of infrastructure • Errabiddy Bluff already a developed tourist site • Located on the Outback Pathway and Northwest

Wildflower Trail


key hub sites e.g.

Tourism Facilities


Marketing • Provides a network of habitation to support emergency and security services in a hostile environment

• Much of the direct tourist spend contributes to linked towns such as Murchison Settlement

• Maintains biodiversity • Protects heritage properties • Remoteness—large distances between points of

interest, remote from population centres, may discourage tourist visitation


• Shearers quarters in good condition and could be developed for tourism

• Governess cottage (2 bedroom) and staff quarters (3 bedroom) could be developed for tourism

• Accommodation would cater for small groups only

• Caretakers may not be able to run tourism accommodation business either through lack of interest/skills


90

Table 12 cont…








• Links with existing drive trail products


Tourism Services

• Windmills on Muggon (now decommissioned) could be used as a one way loop of camping sites (one at each bore)

• Re-opening mills may hinder feral control effort

• Provide signage at places of interest • Business may be redirected from Wooleen

Station if they are at capacity • Provide more interpretive information for tour

operators and general public • If one way bore loop trail developed visitors

could be provided with a detailed interpretive maps

• Infrastructure needs to be suitable for tourism • Roads would need to be maintained and a

management presence would be necessary for safety reasons

Tourism Facilities



Marketing • Insecure tenure arrangements discourage investment

Management • Lack of funding for redevelopment


91

APPENDIX C: SUMMARY OF TOUR OPERATOR SURVEY FINDINGS

Gascoyne Murchison Region Tour Operator Survey 2005

Overview As part of the larger Rangelands tourism inventory project, a mail back survey was applied to gather data on the tour operators licensed with DEC operating in the Gascoyne and Murchison regions of Western Australia. The survey addressed:

• trip characteristics • activities • suggestions for further development in the region • issues and barriers preventing tourism development • perceived tourism potential of the DEC rangeland stations.

The data gathered was used to inform the project and writing of the main report.

Method Licensed operators (N=112) were initially contacted in May 2005 by DEC staff via email. Initial contact included a request to participate in the survey, background information relating to the study and the questionnaire for completion. A further email was broadcast in early June 2005 requesting the return of the completed survey forms by late June 2005. For those respondents who had not replied, a further reminder to complete the survey was made in early July 2005 via land mail. The hardcopy reminder included a letter of request, the questionnaire and a reply paid envelope.

A total of 112 surveys were distributed to the relevant tour operators. Of those, 77 were returned,

representing a 69% response rate. Of the 77 returned questionnaires, the majority (66%) of licensed tour operators were not offering tours to relevant DEC managed land at the time. These were discounted. The following results are based on the 34% (n=26) of respondents who were offering tours to the Gascoyne and/or Murchison interior.

Findings

Trip Characteristics • Most tour operators surveyed (88%) conducted 1–2 day tours through the region, visiting one, or a

combination, of Collier Range, Mt Augustus and Kennedy Range national parks. • Tours were most likely to be either coach tours (37%) or guided 4WD tours (43%). • The frequency of tours offered by operators varied from one every few years to several per year. • Most operators used accommodation facilities provided at Mt Augustus Resort, Cobra Station or

Bidgemia station (89%). • A smaller proportion used national parks campsites or other campsites (27%). • Most tour operators (79%) carried 12–20 passengers per year through the region. • Clients were mostly seeking a remote natural area experience.


92

Activities Operators were asked to indicate primary activities they undertook while touring in the Gascoyne and Murchison regions. Responses were as follows:

Activity % of respondents

Camping 12

4WD 8

Sightseeing 15

Flora appreciation (wildflower viewing) 8

Bushwalking 4

Relaxing (isolation, solitude, peace & quite) 12

WA History 4

Team building activities 4

Non response 36

Suggestions for regional development to improve tourism Operators were asked an open ended question regarding suggestions for further development of tourism products in the region. Responses were as follows:

Response % of respondents

Leave as is 43 Improved Access / roads 40 More / better quality accommodation 40 Better tourism marketing / more information 20 Better tourism facilities 16 Provide more interpretive info for tour operators 8


93

Perceptions of tourism potential Respondents were asked an open-ended question in regards what aspects of the properties purchased by DEC as part of the Gascoyne Murchison strategy may afford tourism potential and suggestions for further development of tourism on these stations. Responses were as follows:

Aspects % of respondents

Aspects % of respondents

Features Accommodation

History; station and area 12 Accommodation for groups & individuals 8

Keep outback appeal 4 Outback style accommodation, meals & museum 4

Remoteness 4 Station stays 4

Cobra; old gold workings 4 Provide tour group camping areas (pre-book/key access) 4

Dalgety Downs 4 Campsite at Binthalaya 4

Cobra, Mt Augustus 4

Promotion Facilities

Promote what is there 8 Provide access and facilities 4

Maps to indicate local attractions on a self-drive basis

4 Rest areas with toilets 4

Stations need to supply DBB 4

Conclusion It would seem that tour operators accessing the interior of the Gascoyne and Murchison regions are catering to clients seeking a remote wilderness type experience. While just under half of operators indicated the region should remain as is to provide this product, improved marketing, accommodation and access were also common suggestions. Improved access for coach buses would require improved quality and increased capacity of accommodation. Such changes may well erode the feeling of remoteness currently experienced.

The stations purchased by DEC are considered to have significant potential in terms of natural and cultural

heritage. As many of the stations have very basic facilities, improvements were considered as a requirement for tourism development. This includes amenities such as toilets and rest areas, improved accommodation and improved roads. Operators also indicated a need for more effective marketing of the region’s interior as a unique tourism experience. The vast majority of focus for tourism marketing and consequent activity in the region is along the coast while the interior receives little attention. Operators indicated that development of at least basic facilities and improved marketing is key to developing the Gascoyne and Murchison interior as a tourism product.


94

REFERENCES

AGWA (2005). The State Barrier Fence of Western Australia, (Homepage of Dept of Agriculture Western Australia, South Perth, WA, Australia) (Online). Available: http://agspsrv34.agric.wa.gov.au/programs/app/barrier/content.htm (viewed 5/6/05).

Altman, J. & Finlayson, J. (2003). 'Aborigines, tourism and sustainable development', The Journal of Tourism Studies, vol. 14(1) pp. 78–91.

Australian Bureau of Statistics (2005) Themes—Tourism. Retrieved July 15, 2005, from http://www.abs.gov.au/ Blamey, R.K. & Hatch, D. (1998). Profiles and Motivations of Nature Based Tourists Visiting Australia,

Occasional Paper No. 25, Bureau of Tourism Research, Canberra, ACT, Australia. Boston, P. (2004). What's in a Name? Place Names of the Gascoyne, Western Australian Museum, Perth, WA,

Australia. Buckley, R.C. (2003). 'Environmental inputs and outputs in ecotourism: Geotourism with a positive triple bottom

line?' Journal of Ecotourism, vol. 2(1) pp. 76–82. Burbidge, A.H., McKenzie, N.L. & Harvey, M.S. (2000). 'A biogeographic survey of the southern Carnarvon

Basin, Western Australia: background and methods' in: A.H. Burbidge, M.S. Harvey & N.L. McKenzie (Eds.). Biodiversity of the Southern Carnarvon Basin., pp. 1–12, Western Australian Museum, Perth, WA, Australia.

Burns, G. & Howard, P. (2003). 'When wildlife goes wrong: A case study of stakeholder and management issues regarding dingoes on Fraser Island, Australia', Tourism Management, vol. 24(6) pp. 699–712.

DEC (1994). Reading the Remote: Landscape Characters of Western Australia, Dept of Conservation and Land Management, Como, WA, Australia.

DEC (2002 draft). Kennedy Range National Park Recreation and Tourism Master Plan 2002–2007. DEC (2005). Photo's from DEC collection, DEC, Perth, WA, Australia, Personal communication, DEC (2005 draft). Kennedy Range National Park and Proposed Additions Draft Management Plan 2005–2015,

Dept of Conservation and Land Management, Como, WA, Australia. Carson, D. (2003) Self self tourism trails. personal communication. email 1/7/2003. Clark, B. (1992). Yammatji: Aboriginal Memories of the Gascoyne, Hesperian Press, Carlisle, WA, Australia. Curry, P.J., Payne, A.L., Leighton, K.A., Hennig, P. & Blood, D.A. (1994). An Inventory and Condition Survey

of the Murchison River Catchment, Western Australia, Technical Bulletin No. 84, Department of Agriculture, South Perth, WA, Australia.

Davies, J. (2002). 'Exploring Open Spaces and Protecting Natural Places', Journal of Ecotourism, vol. 1 (2&3) pp. 173–180.

DEH (2005). Department of the Environment and Heritage, (Homepage of Australian Heritage Database) (Online). Available: http://www.deh.gov.au/heritage/ahdb/index.html (viewed 7/7/05).

Dept of Heritage and Environment (2005). Australian Plant Collectors and Illustrators: 1780s to 1980s, (Homepage of Dept of Heritage and Environment, Australia) (Online). Available: http://www.anbg.gov.au/bot-biog/bot-biog-G.html (viewed 19/8/05).

Dept of Indigenous Affairs (2005). Aboriginal Heritage Sites Register, (Homepage of Dept of Indigenous Affairs, Canberra, ACT, Australia) (Online). Available:

http://www.dia.wa.gov.au/Heritage/heritage_Sites_Register.aspx (viewed 2/8/05). Dept of Local Government and Regional Development (2003). Regional Indicators for Western Australia, Dept

of Local Government and Regional Development, Perth, WA, Australia. Dept of the Environment and Heritage (2005). Australian Heritage Database, (Homepage of Dept of the

Environment and Heritage, Canberra, ACT, Australia) (Online). Available: http://www.deh.gov.au/cgi-bin/ahdb/search.pl (viewed 28/4/05).

Dixon, J.A., Scura, L.F., Carpenter, R. & Sherman, P.B. (1994). Economic Analysis of Environmental Impacts, Earthscan, London, UK.

Dyer, P., Aberdeen, L. & Schuler, S. (2003). 'Tourism impacts on an Australian indigenous community: a Djabugay case study', Tourism Management, vol. 24(1) pp. 83–95.

EPA (2004). Environmental Protection and Ecological Sustainability of the Rangelands of Western Australia: Position Statement No. 5, Environmental Protection Agency, Perth, WA, Australia.

Fitzpatrick, M.G.J. (2004). Daurie Creek: The Stout Hearts and Pioneer Spirits of the Fitzpatrick Family of 'Dairy Creek' and 'Dalgety Downs' Stations in W.A., Access Press, Bassendean, WA, Australia.

Foo, L.M. & Rossetto, A. (1998). Cultural Tourism in Australia: Characteristics and Motivations, BTR Occasional Paper No. 27, Bureau of Tourism Research, Canberra, ACT, Australia.

http://agspsrv34.agric.wa.gov.au/programs/app/barrier/content.htm�

http://www.deh.gov.au/heritage/ahdb/index.html�

http://www.anbg.gov.au/bot-biog/bot-biog-G.html�

http://www.dia.wa.gov.au/Heritage/heritage_Sites_Register.aspx�

http://www.deh.gov.au/cgi-bin/ahdb/search.pl�

http://www.deh.gov.au/cgi-bin/ahdb/search.pl�


95

Fredline, L. & Faulkner, b. (2001). International Market Analysis of Wildlife Tourism, Technical Report, CRC for Sustainable Tourism, QLD, Australia.

Fuller, D., Buultjens, J. & Cummings, E. (2005). 'Ecotourism and indigenous micro-enterprise formation in northern Australia opportunities and constraints', Tourism Management, vol. 26(6) pp. 891–904.

Galley, G. & Clifton, J. (2004). 'The motivational and door characteristics of search ecotourists: Operation Wallacea volunteers in south-east Sulawesi, Indonesia', Journal of Ecotourism, vol. 3(1) pp. 69–82.

GDC (2004). 2003/2004 Annual Report, Gascoyne Development Commission, Carnarvon, WA, Australia. GDC (2005a). Burringurrah—Mt Augustus, Kingsford Smith Mail Run. Outback Pathways Project Signage,

Gascoyne Development Commission, Carnarvon, WA, Australia. GDC (2005b). Cattle Pool—An Outback Oasis, Kingsford Smith Mail Run. Outback Pathways Project Signage,

Gascoyne Development Commission, Carnarvon, WA, Australia. GDC (2005c). Sir Charles and His Mail Run, Kingsford Smith Mail Run. Outback Pathways Project Signage,

Gascoyne Development Commission, Carnarvon, WA, Australia. GDC (2005d). The Inn at the End of the Mail Run, Kingsford Smith Mail Run. Outback Pathways Project

Signage, Gascoyne Development Commission, Carnarvon, WA, Australia. Gilpin, A. (1999). Environmental Economics: A Critical Review, John Wiley, Chichester, UK. Glasson, J. (1998). 'Economic valuation of environmental impacts' in: European Commission (Ed.) Guidelines

for EIA and SEA for Projects, Programmes, Plans and Policies for Non-EU Member States, European Commission, Brussels, Belgium.

Glasson, J., Therivel, R. & Chadwick, A. (2005). Introduction to Environmental Impact Assessment, 3rd Edition. Routledge, London, UK.

Gough, D. & Bloomer, T. (1995). 'Mount Augustus National Park', Landscope, vol. 10(4) pp. 28–35. Gough, D. & Shepherd, R. (1995). 'Kennedy Range National Park', Landscope, vol. 11(1) pp. 28–35. Green, R., Higginbottom, K. & Jones, D. (1999). 'A tourism classification of Australian wildlife and their

habitats' in: K. Higginbottom & M. Hardy (Eds.). Wildlife Tourism Discussion Document, CRC for Sustainable Tourism, QLD, Australia.

Gregory, A.C. & Gregory, F.T. (1884). Journals of Australian Explorations, The Project Gutenberg EBook of Journals of Australian Explorers. Available: http://ftp.it.net.au/gutenberg. Produced by S. Asscher (ed), 2003.

Halse, S.A., Shiel, R.J., Storey, A.W., Edward, D.H.D., Lansbury, I., Cale, D.J. & Harvey, M.S. (2000). 'Aquatic invertebrates and waterbirds of wetlands and rivers of the southern Carnarvon Basin, Western Australia' in: A.H. Burbidge, M.S. Harvey & N.L. McKenzie (Eds.). Biodiversity of the Southern Carnarvon Basin, pp. 29-76, Western Australian Museum, Perth, WA, Australia.

Hardy, A. (2003). 'An investigation into the key factors necessary for the development of iconic touring routes', Journal of Vacation Marketing, vol. 9(4) pp. 314–330.

Heritage Council of Western Australia (2005). Places Database, (Homepage of Heritage Council of Western Australia, Perth, WA, Australia) (Online). Available: http://register.heritage.wa.gov.au/ (viewed 7/7/05).

Higginbottom, K., Green, R., Leiper, N., Moscardo, G., Tribe, A. & Buckley, R. (2003). Evaluation of Organised Tourism Involving Wild Kangaroos, CRC for Sustainable Tourism, QLD, Australia.

Hughes, M. & Macbeth, J. (2005 in press). Heritage drive trails of the Central Great Southern Region of Western Australia. The 'Heritage of Endeavour' Project, CRC for Sustainable Tourism, QLD, Australia & Great Southern Development Commission, WA, Australia.

IUCN (1998). Economic Values of Protected Areas: Guidelines for Protected Area Managers, Task Force on Economic Benefits of Protected Areas of the World Commission on Protected Areas (WCPA) of IUCN, in collaboration with the Economics Service Unit of IUCN. World Commission on Protected Areas (WCPA). Best Practice Protected Area Guidelines Series No. 2, IUCN, Gland, Switzerland and Cambridge, UK.

Kiernan, K. (2004). 'Book review: Geodiversity. Valuing and conserving abiotic nature', Journal of Quaternary Science, vol. 19(8) pp. 833–838.

Lane, B. (1999). Trails and Tourism: The Missing Link, (Homepage of American Trails) (Online). Available: http://americantrails.org/resources/economics/TourismUKecon.html (viewed 20-4-2003).

Lichfield, N. (1996). Community Impact Evaluation, UCL Press, London, UK. Lichfield, N., Kettle, P.B. & Whitbread, M. (1975). Evaluation in the Planning Process, Pergamon Press,

Oxford, UK. Lucas, R.H. (1992). Protected Landscapes: A Guide for Policy Makers and Planners, IUCN/Chapman Hall,

London, UK. Loudon, E. (2004) Long term impacts of short term volunteering. Volunteering Australia 10th National

Conference on Volunteering: Evolution, Devolution or Revolution? Melbourne, 2-4th June, 2004

http://ftp.it.net.au/gutenberg�

http://register.heritage.wa.gov.au/�

http://americantrails.org/resources/economics/TourismUKecon.html�


96

Manca, G. & Pireddu, L. (2003). 'The geopark in Sardinia: A fuzzy analysis for assessing the development tendency.' in: 7th International Conference on GeoComputation, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK,

McIntosh, A. & Prentice, R. (1999). 'Affirming authenticity: Consuming cultural heritage', Annals of Tourism Research, vol. 26(3) pp. 589–612.

McKercher, B. & duCros, H. (2002). Cultural Tourism: The Partnership Between Tourism and Cultural Heritage Management, The Hawthorn Hospitality Press, New York, USA.

MWDC (2005). Gascoyne Murchison Outback Pathways, (Homepage of Midwest Development Commission (MWDC)) (Online). Available: http://www.mwdc.gov.au (viewed 7/7/05).

Newsome, D., Dowling, R.K. & Moore, S.A. (2005). Wildlife Tourism, Channel View Publications, Clevedon, UK.

Nixon, M. & Lefroy, R.F.B. (n.d.). Road to the Murchison: An Illustrated Story of the District and its People, Shire of Murchison, Murchison, WA, Australia.

NLWRA (2004). 'Chapter 4: Gascoyne Murchison' in: Social and Economic Profiles for Selected Regions within Australia's Rangelands 2004, National Land & Water Resources Audit, Natural Heritage Trust, Canberra, ACT, Australia.

Nuryanti, W. (1996). 'Heritage and post-modern tourism', Annals of Tourism Research, vol. 23(2) pp. 249-260. O'Halloran, M., Cook, S., Sbragi, A. & Buchanan, I. (2000). Rural Tourism in Australia: The Visitor's

Perspective, BTR Occasional Paper No. 30, Bureau of Tourism Research, Canberra, ACT, Australia. OECD (1995). The Economic Appraisal of Environmental Projects and Policies: A Practical Guide, OECD,

Paris, France. Payne, A.L., Curry, P.J. & Spencer, G.F. (1987). An inventory and condition survey of rangelands in the

Carnarvon Basin, Western Australia, Technical Bulletin No. 73, Department of Agriculture, South Perth, WA, Australia.

Payne, A.L., Van Vreeswyk, A.M.E., Pringle, H.J.R., Leighton, K.A. & Hennig, P. (1998). An Inventory and Condition Survey of the Sandstone-Yalgoo-Paynes Find Area, Western Australia, Technical Bulleting No. 90, Agriculture Western Australia, South Perth, WA, Australia.

Price Waterhouse Coopers (2003). Economic Contributions of Victoria's Parks: Conceptual Framework and Approach, Parks Victoria, Melbourne, VIC, Australia.

Prideaux, B. (2002). 'Creating rural heritage visitor attractions—The Queensland Heritage Trails Project', International Journal of Tourism Research, vol. 4(4) pp. 313–323.

Prideaux, B. & Kinnimont, L. J. (1999). 'tourism and heritage are not strangers: A case study of opportunities for rural heritage museums to maximise tourism visitation', Journal of Travel Research, vol. 37(3) pp. 299–303.

Priskin, J. (2003). 'Characteristics and perceptions of coastal and wildflower nature-based tourists in the Central Coast Region of Western Australia', Journal of Sustainable Tourism, vol. 11(6) pp. 499–528.

Poria, Y., Butler, R., & Airey, D. (2004). Links between tourists, heritage, and reasons for visiting heritage sites. Journal of Travel Research, 43, 19–28.

Robinson, E. (1998). 'Tourism in geological landscapes', Geology Today, vol. 14(4) pp. 151–153. Ryan, C. & Huyton, J. (2000). 'Who is Interested in Aboriginal Tourism in the Northern Territory, Australia? A

Cluster Analysis', Journal of Sustainable Tourism, vol. 8(1) pp. 53–88. Ryan, C. and Huyton, J. (2003) Toruists and aboriginal people. Annals of Tourism Research, vol 29(3) pp.631-

647 Ryan, M. & McKenzie, F.H. (2003). 'A monastic tourist experience: The packaging of a place', Tourism

Geographies, vol. 5(1) pp. 54–70. Shackley, M. (1996). Wildlife Tourism, International Thomson Business Press, London, UK. Sharp, E.I. (1985). E.T. Hooley Pioneer Bushman: Stock Route Pioneered by E.T. Hooley from Geraldine Mine

to Nicol Bay, 1866 and 1905 Government Wells, Lamb Printers, West Perth, WA, Australia. Sheppard, S. (2004). Unravelling the complexity of the Gascoyne Complex, Geological Survey of Western

Australia (GSWA), Perth, WA, Australia. Shire of Meekatharra (2005). News and Events, (Homepage of Sire of Meekatharra) (Online). Available:

http://www.meekashire.wa.gov.au (viewed 7/7/05). Shire of Morawa (2005). History, (Homepage of Shire of Morawa) (Online). Available:

http://www.morawa.wa.gov.au/about_morawa/history.html (viewed 14/7/05). Shire of Perenjori (2005). What's on and Where, (Homepage of Shire of Perenjori) (Online). Available:

http://www.perenjori.wa.gov.au/whatson.htm (viewed 14/7/05). Silberberg, T. (1995). 'Cultural tourism and business opportunities for museums and heritage sites', Tourism

Management, vol. 16(5) pp. 361–365. Sorensen, T. & Epps, R. (2003). 'the role of tourism in the economic transformation of the Central West

Queensland economy', Australian Geographer, vol. 34(1) pp. 73–89.

http://www.mwdc.gov.au/�

http://www.meekashire.wa.gov.au/�

http://www.morawa.wa.gov.au/about_morawa/history.html�

http://www.perenjori.wa.gov.au/whatson.htm�


97

Stoddart, H. & Rogerson, C.M. (2004). 'Volunteer tourism: The case of Habitat for Humanity South Africa', GeoJournal, vol. 60(3) pp. 311–318.

Turpie, J. & Joubert, A. (2004). 'The value of flower tourism on the Bokkeveld Plateau—a botanical hotspot', Development Southern Africa, vol. 21(4) pp. 645-662.

Tribe, A. (2001). Captive wildlife tourism in Australia. Wildlife Tourism research Report Series, No. 14. Gold Coast, Australia, CRC Sustainable Tourism.

TWA (2004a). Gascoyne Tourism Fact Sheet, Tourism Western Australia, Perth, WA, Australia. TWA (2004b). Mid West Tourism Fact Sheet 2004, Tourism Western Australia, Perth, WA, Australia. WATC (2003a). Gascoyne Region: Tourism Product and Infrastructure Development Plan 2004–2013, Western

Australian Tourism Commission, Perth, WA, Australia. WATC (2003b). Mid West Region: Tourism Product and Infrastructure Development Plan 2004–2013, Western

Australian Tourism Commission, Perth, WA, Australia. WATC (2003c). Research into the Wildflower Tourism Industry: An Exploration of Consumer and Industry

Perceptions, Western Australian Tourism Commission, Perth, WA, Australia. Western Australian Greenhouse Uni (2004) The Western Australian Greenhouse Strategy. Govenrment of

Western Australia, Perth WA. April 2004 Winpenny, J.T. (1996). 'Economic valuation of environmental impacts: The temptations of EVE', Project

Appraisal, vol. 11(4) pp. 247–253. Zell, L. & Bedford, S. (2005). Shark Bay-Ningaloo Coast & Outback Pathways Western Australia, Wild

Discovery, Brisbane, QLD, Australia.


98

AUTHORS

Amanda J. Smith Amanda Smith is a Research Fellow at Murdoch University, Western Australia. Her research interests include the environmental and social impacts of tourism and recreation in protected areas; campsite impact monitoring; natural area tourism; wildlife tourism; and minimising visitor impacts through resource and visitor management techniques. Email: [email protected]

Michael Hughes Michael Hughes is a Research Fellow in the tourism program at Curtin University, Western Australia. He has a background in Biological Science and Environmental Science and moved into the area of tourism when following an interest in exploring human-nature interactions. Michael currently pursues a diverse range of sustainable tourism research interests that revolve around the relationship between tourism development, regional communities and natural areas. Email: [email protected]

David Wood David Wood is Deputy Executive Dean and Director of International Programs in the Division of Humanities at Curtin University and until June 2004, was Head of Curtin’s Department of Urban and Regional Planning. David is Chair of the State’s Coastal Planning and Coordination Council, Deputy Chair of the Ningaloo Sustainable Development Committee and is a member of the Western Australian Planning Commission. He is a planning practitioner, a supervisor of doctoral students and an active researcher in the areas of coastal tourism, planning and development, and community participation. David has worked extensively in the Ningaloo region of Western Australia having prepared the region’s ecotourism strategy, a Yamatji tourism strategy and background reports for the Ningaloo Coast Regional Strategy and has conducted research into the economic contribution of tourism to the Gascoyne region and the town of Exmouth. Email: [email protected]

John Glasson John Glasson is a Visiting Professor in the Department of Urban and Regional Planning, in the Built Environment Faculty at Curtin University of Technology—where he spends about three months each year. He is also the Research Dean in the School of the Built Environment at Oxford Brookes University in the UK, where he is also the Co-Director of the Oxford Institute of Sustainable Development [OISD]. He was the Chair of the Oxford Centre for Tourism and Leisure Studies [OCTALS], when the Centre hosted the WTTO-sponsored research on the environmental impacts of tourism, which underpinned the international Green Globe initiative. His research interests focus particularly on the socio-economic impacts of major developments, including tourism, energy and transport projects; and the development of EIA, SEA and SA methodologies and policies. He has undertaken over 50 major research projects for a wide range of clients including Research Councils, the European Commission, the UK Government, the West Australian Government, industry and many other agencies. He has published best selling books on Environmental Impact Assessment, and on Regional Planning, plus many articles and influential reports.




Chairman: Stephen GreggChief Executive: Ian KeanDirector of Research: Prof. David Simmons

CRC For Sustainable Tourism Pty LtdGold Coast Campus Griffith University Queensland 4222 Australia ABN 53 077 407 286

Telephone: +61 7 5552 8172 Facsimile: +61 7 5552 8171Website: www.crctourism.com.auBookshop: www.crctourism.com.au/bookshopEmail: [email protected]

I N D U S T R Y P A R T N E R S U N I V E R S I T Y P A R T N E R S C O M M E R C I A L I S A T I O N

EC3, a wholly-owned commercialisation company, takes the outcomes from the relevant STCRC research; develops them for market; and delivers them to industry as products and services. EC3 delivers significant benefits to the STCRC through the provision of a wide range of business services both nationally and internationally.

K E Y E C 3 P R O D U C T S

COMMERCIALISE

RESEARCHAND

DEVELOPMENT

EDUCATIONAND

TRAINING

UTILISE

COLLABORATION

COM

MU

NI C A T I O N

I NN

OV

ATI

ON

• Travel and tourism industry• Academic researchers• Government policy makers

• New products, services and technologies• Uptake of research finding by business, government and academe• Improved business productivity• Industry-ready post-graduate students• Public good benefits for tourism destinations

TOURISM NT NORTHERN TERRITORYAUSTRALIA

The Sustainable Tourism Cooperative Research Centre

(STCRC) is established under the Australian Government’s

Cooperative Research Centres Program. STCRC is the

world’s leading scientific institution delivering research to

support the sustainability of travel and tourism – one of

the world’s largest and fastest growing industries.

Introduction

The STCRC has grown to be the largest, dedicated tourism

research organisation in the world, with $187 million

invested in tourism research programs, commercialisation

and education since 1997.

The STCRC was established in July 2003 under the

Commonwealth Government’s CRC program and is an

extension of the previous Tourism CRC, which operated

from 1997 to 2003.

Role and responsibilities

The Commonwealth CRC program aims to turn research

outcomes into successful new products, services and

technologies. This enables Australian industries to be more

efficient, productive and competitive.

The program emphasises collaboration between businesses

and researchers to maximise the benefits of research

through utilisation, commercialisation and technology

transfer.

An education component focuses on producing graduates

with skills relevant to industry needs.

STCRC’s objectives are to enhance:

• the contribution of long-term scientific

and technological research and innovation

to Australia’s sustainable economic and social

development;

• thetransferofresearchoutputsintooutcomesof

economic, environmental or social benefit to Australia;

• thevalueofgraduateresearcherstoAustralia;

• collaborationamongresearchers,betweenresearchers

and industry or other users; and efficiency in the use of

intellectual and other research outcomes.

Documents

INVENTORY OF TOURISM ASSETS ON …...INVENTORY OF TOURISM ASSETS ON DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT AND CONSERVATION RANGELAND PROPERTIES Gascoyne and Murchison regions, Western Australia