Land-Use Conflicts

One of the major sources of mining-related dispute in Australia has been land use. This conflict has escalated in recent years, partly because of increased public support for conservation and partly because of the more intense search for resource deposits as less controversial deposits are used up. Such conflicts are now considered to be the major problem facing the mining industry, although this is disputed by environmental groups who argue that only a small amount of land is subject to dispute.

According to the working group on mining, mining is prohibited in approximately 3 per cent of the land area in Australia, mainly in conservation areas (the conservation estate). Mining is restricted or subject to special conditions in another 23 per cent of the country. Additionally, urban expansion has rendered some land unavailable for mining. For example, in NSW much urban development is built over rich coal deposits.

The mining industry argues that some conservation areas should be considered as multiple land-use areas to allow exploration and mining in them. These areas would still be managed 'primarily for their conservation values' but also could allow for mining if it did not permanently damage those values.

Conservationists disagree with this concept of multiple use, arguing that conservation areas are already catering for a multitude of uses, including ecological, scientific, recreational, aesthetic and spiritual, and that any mining in such areas would not be compatible with these uses, no matter how 'environmentally sensitive' it was. The ESD working group on mining states that:

There are also different attitudes in relation to values. For example, the mining industry generally believes that the economic benefits available from its activities are of national importance and can be gained whilst protecting environmental and other values. The conservation movement, however, believes that the aesthetics, cultural values or recreational uses of an area may be more important than any economic benefits to be gained by mining that area. (ESD Working Groups 1991b, p. 139)

Aborigines

Another source of conflict over land use is between Aborigines, who live on, own or have claim to land, and the mining companies that want to mine that land. This conflict has intensified since the Mabo High Court decision recognised native title to traditional aboriginal landowners. Industry groups are opposed to Aborigines having the power to veto mining access to land granted to them under land-rights legislation and the Mabo decision, and they also see some claims on sacred sites as not being genuine. They argue that minerals belong to all Australians, and that the decision over whether they should be mined should take account of 'general community as well as Aboriginal values'. They are backed up by the Northern Territory Government and by most other state administrations in this view.

Although there are some differences between Aboriginal groups, Aborigines generally want secure title to their land; they also want mining companies to respect Aboriginal cultural values. They argue that they should have some rights to the minerals on their land, and they do not believe that state governments or the Commonwealth Government should be able to override the wishes of traditional owners of the land.

Back...