So, given my long stint in the airport, where there is amazingly, free internet, which I plan on abusing for the next 6 hours, I thought I’d udpate everyone with a post about the Parks of the Northern Territory – didn’t really get a chance to go into my work here, other than a minute or two, and I’m sure everyone is dying to hear more of my philosophical musings.
That was a long sentance.
And that was a short one – I promise I’ll try to keep the musings and the length under control this time. So I visited two Parks in the Northern Territory – Litchfield NP and Kakadu NP. Australia is interesting, because Litchfield is run by the NT gov’t, so it’s actually comparable to a state park in the states, but they call them NP, and I won’t argue. This alone completely changes how they’re managed – Litchfield has 10 rangers and Kakadu has 70, the funding from the federal gov’t is a lot more, etc. etc. Kakadu currently has a joint management plan (one of the first, and considered the best), and Litchfield wants one, but faces a big problem with it – a problem typical of joint-management schemes. The problem is that there are 4 completely separate clans of aboriginal people in Litchfield, and the Park wants to have ONE single joint-management plan. Now, when I say clans, I mean different languages, different traditions, different histories. These are not relatively new distinctions.
And say the Park is trying to do something on the land of Clan A, hypothetically. Under the joint-management scheme, the Park consults Clans A,B,C,D all of whom have an equal vote. Now Clan A thinks that Clans B,C,D have no right to interfere with their land (“not your country, not your business” has been often quoted to me), so they’re unhappy. But they can’t really do anything about it, because the majority just out votes them. So what ends up happening in the end is that the clan that actually is affected doesn’t see the results they want.
The impression that most people have is that the aboriginees are a unified group – that’s what I thought before I came. A lot of this is because almost every aboriginal action goes through the Northern Land Council, an organization set up with the Land Rights movement to give the aboriginees a political organization with know-how and everything. This is universally understood (political organizing, that is) to be a necessity if indigenous people are to be successful in getting any rights or benefits.
Anyway, because they have this organization, almost every decision that happens on a Park level has already gone through this myriad system of the NLC, and what started out as a crazy complicated issue comes out as a nicely packaged policy statement that gives the illusion that aboriginees are united. And this is a really big obstacle for Parks. Because if they are serious about caring about local peoples, and about preserving cultural heritage (which they say they are) then the current system isn’t working. And Kakadu, whose management plan says that one of the best indicators to how well they’re doing is how satisfied the aboriginal owners are, is definitely not doing a great job. And everyone says that even though it’s horrible, it’s the best there is. Litchfield is, to some, completely hopeless.
And this is something that I’ve seen in countless places. National Parks are obviously a centralized system of lands, managed at various levels, but ultimately by a federal organization. And there’s too often a refusal to acknowledge the complexities that exist at local levels that undermines the Parks. Nowadays, as Park rangers and managers move really quickly in between jobs (just looking for that next promotion – it is happening in the NPS in the States too), there’s a lack of focus on a local level at fostering the communication and relationships with locals that will reveal those complexities and hopefully reveal their solution.