Acknowledging the Custodians: The Deep History of the ACT

The Australian Capital Territory (ACT) sits within the traditional lands of the Ngunnawal people, whose connection to this country extends back tens of thousands of years. The landscape—from the Molonglo River corridor to the granite tors of Namadgi National Park—holds countless stories, ceremonial sites, and resource-gathering places that form the living archive of Aboriginal occupation. Recognizing this heritage is not simply about preserving physical remnants; it is about honoring the spiritual, social, and ecological knowledge systems that have shaped the region.

The ACT’s Indigenous heritage is legally protected under the Heritage Act 2004 (ACT), which establishes a framework for identifying and conserving places and objects of significance. This legislation, combined with the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Heritage Protection Act 1984 (Cth), provides a dual layer of protection. However, the true strength of preservation lies in the collaboration between government agencies, Traditional Custodians, and the broader community. Without meaningful Indigenous leadership, even the best laws can fall short.

Why Indigenous Heritage Preservation Matters More Than Ever

Cultural Identity and Intergenerational Continuity

For Aboriginal people in the ACT, heritage is inseparable from identity. Rock art, scarred trees, grinding grooves, and burial sites are more than archaeological features—they are classrooms where language, law, and lore are passed down. When a site is damaged or destroyed, a piece of that living knowledge is lost forever. Protecting these places allows Elders to teach younger generations on Country, reinforcing cultural pride and resilience.

Programs such as the Ngunnawal Bush Healing Farm and community-led land management initiatives demonstrate how heritage preservation supports mental health, wellbeing, and cultural revitalization. These efforts show that caring for heritage is an act of sovereignty and self-determination.

The ACT government has progressively strengthened its heritage framework. The ACT Heritage Register now lists dozens of Aboriginal places, from the Birrigai Rock Shelter (one of the oldest dated sites in the region) to sacred stone arrangements in the Tidbinbilla Nature Reserve. Developers must undergo rigorous cultural heritage assessments, and the Heritage Council includes Aboriginal representatives. Yet gaps remain: temporary protection orders are rarely issued, and penalties for unauthorized damage can seem modest compared to the value of development.

Outside the legislative sphere, the ACT Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Elected Body provides a formal voice for community concerns, while the United Ngunnawal Elders Council advises on cultural matters. These bodies are essential for ensuring that preservation is not just a bureaucratic checkbox but a genuine partnership.

Key Challenges to Heritage Preservation in the ACT

Urban Development and Infrastructure Pressures

Canberra’s growth—new suburbs like Molonglo, expansion of the airport, and upgrades to major roads—frequently intersects with cultural landscapes. Even when sites are identified early, the consultation process can be rushed, and mitigation measures (such as salvage excavations) may prioritize recovery over in situ preservation. Community advocates argue that development should avoid significant places entirely, not just move them.

A notable example is the conflict surrounding Kambah Pool and nearby rock shelters, where proposed housing developments threatened important ceremonial grounds. After sustained protest from Ngunnawal representatives, the ACT government revised the zoning, though some cultural areas remain at risk from encroaching suburban growth.

Climate Change and Environmental Degradation

Bushfires, floods, and erosion are accelerating damage to many sites. The 2019–2020 bushfires burned through large parts of Namadgi National Park, scorching rock shelters and destroying fragile artifacts. Post-fire assessments revealed new sites—but also exposed them to looting. Climate adaptation plans for heritage are still in their infancy, lacking dedicated funding for emergency interventions such as protective covers, drainage improvements, or salvage operations.

Lack of Awareness and Under-Resourced Education

Many Canberrans and visitors walk past scarred trees or stone arrangements without recognizing their significance. The ACT school curriculum includes Aboriginal perspectives, but teachers often lack training or resources to deliver deep, place-based learning. Community engagement remains patchy, and tourism signage is inconsistent. Without broad public understanding, political will for stronger protections wanes.

Contemporary Practices in Heritage Preservation

Community-Led Management and Co-Governance

The most effective preservation models place Indigenous knowledge at the center. In the ACT, the Ngunnawal Community increasingly co-manages parks and reserves through joint advisory committees. For instance, the Namadgi National Park Plan of Management includes explicit provisions for cultural burning, protecting rock art sites, and restricting public access to sensitive areas. This approach ensures that cultural priorities (such as seasonal visiting patterns) are respected alongside conservation goals.

Similar co-management exists at Mount Majura and Mount Ainslie, where volunteers work with Ngunnawal rangers to remove invasive species and document heritage features. These partnerships build trust and create employment pathways for Aboriginal people in heritage and land management.

Technology and Digital Documentation

Advanced techniques like 3D laser scanning, photogrammetry, and LiDAR are now used to create high-resolution records of at-risk sites. The ACT Heritage Unit, in collaboration with the Australian National University, has scanned several rock shelters and artifact scatters, producing digital twins that can be studied without physical access. Such records are invaluable after fire or flood events, allowing virtual reconstruction of damaged areas.

Apps like ClanConnect and the ACT Heritage Database also make information accessible to the public, though care is taken to hide the exact locations of sensitive sites to prevent vandalism. Balancing openness with protection remains a challenge.

Repatriation and Cultural Material Management

Museums and institutions across Australia are increasingly returning ancestral remains and secret-sacred objects. The ACT government has supported repatriation from the National Museum of Australia and the Australian Institute of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Studies (AIATSIS), working with Ngunnawal Elders to ensure proper storage and reburial. This process heals historical trauma and reasserts Indigenous control over heritage.

The Role of Education and Public Engagement

School Programs and Curriculum Integration

The ACT Education Directorate has developed resources like the Ngunnawal Language and Culture Program, which introduces students to local languages, bush foods, and traditional land management. Excursions to heritage sites—such as the Tidbinbilla Nature Reserve Aboriginal Heritage Walk or the Pialligo Scarred Tree—bring lessons to life. However, these programs reach only a fraction of students and often depend on passionate individual teachers.

For adults, organizations like the Canberra Environment Centre and the Australian National Botanic Gardens offer workshops on Aboriginal plant use and heritage appreciation. These informal learning opportunities help bridge the knowledge gap, but funding is inconsistent.

Tourism and Economic Sustainability

Cultural tourism presents an opportunity to generate revenue for preservation while sharing stories with a wider audience. The Yarrangobilly Caves and Namadgi National Park already host cultural tours led by Ngunnawal guides. A dedicated Aboriginal Cultural Centre has been discussed for years but remains unfunded. Developing such a centre—with exhibition spaces, a keeping place, and a café—could create jobs and serve as a hub for heritage activities.

Ethical tourism requires careful scripting: visitors must understand that they are guests on Country, not consumers of a spectacle. Tour operators need training in cultural protocols, and profits should be shared with the community.

Moving Forward: A Vision for Enduring Heritage

Strengthening Legislation and Enforcement

The Heritage Act 2004 should be reviewed to increase penalties for unauthorized damage, require mandatory cultural heritage management plans for all major projects, and establish a dedicated Heritage Protection Fund. The ACT could also adopt a Heritage Impact Assessment framework similar to other states, where independent Aboriginal heritage officers are embedded in the planning process.

Investing in Indigenous-Led Organizations

Funding for the Ngunnawal Elders Council and community ranger programs should be indexed to population growth and inflation. Long-term operational grants—rather than short-term project budgets—allow for strategic planning and staff retention. A Cultural Heritage Trust managed by Traditional Custodians could receive payments from developers who impact sites, creating a dedicated revenue stream for preservation.

Expanding Research and Monitoring

There are still many unrecorded heritage places in the ACT, especially in remote parts of the Brindabella Ranges. A systematic survey program, perhaps using citizen science and AI-driven image analysis, could identify sites before they are lost to time or development. Universities should prioritize collaborations that give Indigenous researchers co-authorship and control over data.

Fostering a Culture of Stewardship

Ultimately, heritage preservation depends on every resident and visitor feeling a sense of responsibility. Public art, walking trails with interpretive signage, and annual events like NAIDOC Week and Reconciliation Week can embed Indigenous heritage into the everyday landscape. When a citizen sees a scarred tree and knows its story, they become a steward. When a developer understands that a hill is a birthing site, they might choose a different location.

The ACT is a small jurisdiction, but its approach to Indigenous heritage can set a national standard. With sustained commitment, genuine partnership, and creative funding, the stories etched into this Country will survive for another thousand generations.

For further reading on Indigenous heritage protection in Australia, visit the ACT Heritage website, the Australian Institute of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Studies, and the National Museum of Australia.