Harcourt Mountain Bike Historic Heritage Study

Prepared by:

David Bannear, Archaeologist, Heritage VictoriaNovember 2015

1

Executive Summary

The former pine plantation has a scattering of historic heritage features, none of which can be classed as “no go” areas. With sympathetic planning the proposed mountain bike park pose no risk to cultural heritage values and increase understanding of the history of the area.

The oak forest is the standout heritage feature and is included on the Mount Alexander Shire’s heritage overlay and hence there are certain permit requirements to ensure that development does not adversely affect the significance of the place.

In respect to the Heritage Act (1995) there are no places listed on the Victorian Heritage Register. The two sites currently on the Heritage Inventory – H7724-0267, Harcourt Oak Plantation and H7724-0636, Picnic Gully Rd house site – will be delisted as they no longer classify as archaeological sites according to Heritage Victoria’s current archaeology assessment policy.

This report presents management guidelines to ensure that historic heritage features in the area are understood and not unnecessarily impacted upon. The report is a working document which can be upgraded if circumstances require it to be so.

This study acknowledges and pays respects to the Dja Wurrung Clans Aboriginal Corporation (the Registered Aboriginal Party or RAP) for the area and Traditional Owners and the rich culture and intrinsic connection they have to Country.

BACKGROUND

This report covers the historic heritage values of the former pine plantation (See Map 1 for Study area) and undertaken in response to the proposed re-use of the area as a mountain bike park. The investigation was carried out in consultation with Harcourt Valley Heritage and Tourist Centre.

Scope of works Overview of historic land use Current historic heritage legislation and implications Heritage assessment - desk top survey and additional research/survey work, as required Management options and strategies

MMARY HISTORYIntroductionThe Mount Alexander area is the traditional land of the Dja Wurrung people and their name for the mount has been variously recorded as being Lanjanuc or Lanjal or Leanganook. The last known corroboree held on Mount Alexander was in 2006 when Uncle Brien Nelson held a Tanderrum Ceremony.

Exploration and pastoralismThe explorer Major Thomas Mitchell climbed Mount Alexander in late September 1836. Major Mitchell initially named the peak Mount Byng, but later gave it the name of Mount Alexander. Squatters arrived in the area in the late 1830s. One of the main runs established was by William Bowman and his father-in-law William Hutchinson. This run was later broken up into two properties - Sutton Grange and Stratford Lodge. Another large run was established by James Donnithorne and Stuart Donaldson who took 30,000 acres on the west side of Mount Alexander. The Mount Alexander station (also known as Mount Alexander No. 1 or Bullock Creek run) was taken over by

2

William Barker in July 1845. When Robinson visited the area he reported that there has been a decade of ‘casual’ violence against Aborigines.

Gold Rush The squatter period was curtailed due to the discovery of gold on Barker’s property which caused the Mount Alexander Gold Rush to commence in1851. The Mount Alexander area was not gold bearing but due to fertile soils and good climate, it became a food bowl. One of the first to recognise this potential was Samuel Sutton, who arrived in 1853 and started a garden. At first he grew vegetables, which were carted to Castlemaine in a dray for sale to the diggers. Afterwards he grew fruit trees and proved the land suitable for fruit growing. Land for the first commercial orchards was cleared and planted by Nathaniel Vick, Henry Ely, William Ely and William Eagle in 1859. The Lang family were also early orchardists. These families helped pioneer an industry, e.g., the Lang family were exporting fruit to Britain by the 1880s. Harcourt’s fruit industry still continues today.

Forestry A visitor to the area in 1857 described the landscape around Harcourt as being ‘park-like’ with big trees dotted on grassy pastures. During 1867 Robert ‘Redgum' Barbour set up sawmill at Harcourt, near the railway station, part of a chain of sawmills stretching from Macedon to Moama. Barbour employed teams of tree-fellers and sawyers to work in the bush. He had a ready market for timber to be used as wharf piles, mine timbers and railway sleepers, both in Victoria and for export. Using axes, maul, wedges and crosscut saws, the timber getters worked in cooperation with the early settlers, who wished to clear the big trees off their land to establish apple orchards. Timber was also taken to fuel steam engine boilers. In 1870, William Ferguson, Inspector of Forests, reported that Mount Alexander and its adjoining ranges were almost entirely denuded of timber. He urged the protection of and growth of indigenous trees near the goldfields. If this proved impossible he recommended plantings of non-indigenous trees in order that a constant supply of timber would be readily obtainable.

Granite Quarrying In the early 1860s granite quarry commenced on Mount Alexander. Stone quarrying involved such activities as drilling, hammering, digging, turning cranes, pushing carts, splitting rock, carting and blacksmithing. It began on Mount Alexander in response to the construction of the Melbourne to Bendigo railway. Supply initially consisted of stone split from the many exposed surface boulders on the mountain. This surface stone supplied sufficient material to build the local railway bridges, viaducts and platforms. Sub-surface quarrying of granite on Mount Alexander commenced with the activities of Joseph Blight. While Joseph supplied granite for the railway, it was not until 1862 that he began to work the area to be known at ‘Blights quarry’. Soon Joseph Blight was exporting stone as far away as Europe. The site of Blight’s quarry is on private land, outside the mountain bike park area, and is listed on the Victorian Heritage Register.

It was not until the early to mid 20th century that a quarry was established in the pine plantation area. In the early 1940’s Joseph Tingay was approached by a monumental firm in Melbourne to set up a new quarry. A quarry was opened on the upper eastern slope of Mount Alexander and the partnership was known as Tingay and Oliver. For a period the company also traded as ‘Star Granite’. In the late 1980’s an application was lodged to extend the area of the lease. The leasing authority rejected this application and offered an alternative site elsewhere. A new site was chosen and in 1989 the quarry was abandoned.

Oaks Picnic AreaThe Valonia Oak (Quercus aegitops) is one of the principal tan yielders of the world: the tannin coming from the cups of the acorn, not the seeds. In 1900, the Lands Department establish a

3

Valonia Oak plantation in Picnic Gully. An area of about twenty acres was grubbed, fenced and planted with oaks of various species, as well as intermediate rows of elms to protect the oaks till sufficient height. Although proving too wet for the valonia oaks, the other oak varieties became well established. The oak forest is now a local picnic spot.

Pine plantation In 1910 the first pine plantation of 20,000 Radiata Pine was established south of the Oak Forest. Pines were planted eight feet apart, with rows extending for hundreds of metres in straight, even order, right up the hill. Strong demand from Harcourt fruit growers led to an expansion of the pine plantations to provide wood for packing boxes. Much of the Radiata Pine was purchased by the Harcourt Cooperative saw mill and case-making factory which previously had to rely on supplies of timber from outside the district. The pine plantation was completely logged by the 1990s and site rehabilitation through replanting with native species commenced in 1997 (See Map 3) There are some remnant pines still growing in the area. At some time the summit of the northern hill was fenced and never planted with pines. Evidence of the fence still survives today. LEGISLATIVE CONSIDERATIONSLEGISLATION

Victoria has two Acts which administer cultural heritage through statutory processes, the HeritageAct 1995 (Vic) and the Planning and Environment Act 1987 (Vic).

Victorian Heritage RegisterFor structures, sites and places where State-level cultural heritage values have been ratified by the Heritage Council of Victoria and a site, feature or place has been entered into the Victorian Heritage Register (VHR), legislative protection is given under Part 4 of the Heritage Act 1995. A Permit process guides changes to the fabric.

Listing(s): There are no historic or archaeological places within the former pine plantation area listed on the Victorian Heritage Register

Heritage Overlay, Local Planning Scheme For other places, statutory protection available is through the Heritage Overlay of local governmentPlanning Schemes, under the Planning and Environment Act 1987. Local significance must be established and entry into the Heritage Overlay ratified by Council. The Heritage Overlay of the Mount Alexander Shire Planning Scheme states its purpose as:

To implement the State Planning Policy Framework and the Local Planning Policy framework, including the Municipal Strategic Statement and local planning policies.

To conserve and enhance heritage places of natural or cultural significance. To conserve and enhance those elements which contribute to the significance of heritage

places To ensure that development does not adversely affect the significance of heritage places To conserve specifically identified heritage places by allowing a use that would otherwise be

prohibited if this will demonstrably assist with the conservation of the significance of the heritage place.

Listings(s): There is one historic place within the former pine plantation area listed on the Local Heritage Overlay – Harcourt Oak Plantation, HO798. The oak plantation is also listed on the Heritage Inventory (H7724-0267). (See photos 1 & 2 and Map 2 for location)Recommendation: Area be avoided. The cultural heritage value of the oak forest have already been taken into account as one of the design specifications in the development of the Master Plan for the mountain bike park was to avoid the area containing the historic oak forest.

4

Heritage InventoryFor all archaeological sites in Victoria over 50 years old, known and unknown, legislative protection is given under Part 6 of the Act and a Consent process must be followed for damage or destruction. The Heritage Act 1995 (Vic) says that an archaeological site:

Must relate to the non-Aboriginal settlement or visitation of the state. (This means thatContact/Shared Values places are covered under both the Heritage Act and theAboriginal Heritage Act)

Must be 50 or more years old Is not shipwreck related (shipwrecks are covered under separate parts of the Act).

In addition the key word in the Heritage Act definition talks about the word "deposit". So, in determining whether a place or feature or site is eligible for protection under the Archaeology Section (Part 6) of the Act, it is important that it contains some form of deposit. Heritage Victoria advises that this is currently interpreted to mean that: There must be some sort of accumulated deposit that will probably relate to the previous

occupation/use of the site The nature/condition of the deposit is such that its investigation might give us more information

about the use/nature of the place The skills of an archaeologist (such as excavation or detailed survey) might contribute to our

understanding of the place It is likely to have a significant below-ground component A place that is old but substantially intact may not be suitable for consideration as an

archaeological site. Heritage Victoria intends to tighten up the Heritage Act definitions for archaeology the current review of the Heritage Act 1995, including a 75 year old age requirement.

Heritage Victoria’s preferred options for minimising harm to archaeological sites, in order of preference, are: protect fabric (could include isolation of site within a work area) Burial in a careful manner Test excavation or deeper investigation as a risk reduction exercise in assessing sites.

Where damage or destruction is unavoidable, Consents under Part 6 of the Heritage Act 1995 (Vic) must be applied for. Where a Consent is issued, Heritage Victoria will apply high, medium or low response through Consent conditions, along the following lines: High response: Further archaeological investigation prior to destruction + archaeological

monitoring of destruction, to record any previously unrecorded fabric. Artefact recovery may be undertaken

Medium response: Archaeological monitoring of destruction, to record any previously unrecorded fabric. Artefact recovery may be undertaken

Low response: No monitoring or further archaeological investigation required – sufficient site recording in initial assessment.

Part 6 of the Heritage Act 1995 (Vic) also lays out procedures in the event of exposure of previously hidden archaeological deposits during works. Works must stop, the Executive Director of Heritage Victoria must be notified of the find, and works must not proceed until advice is obtained from Heritage Victoria.

5

FIELDWORK/KNOWN ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITES

There are two Heritage Inventory sites in the former pine planation, these being:

H7724-0267, Harcourt Oak Plantation: Hermes No 8567, recorded 1997 – historic plantation with mature species of oak, ash, cedars and pines (See Photos 1 and 2) Assessment: No longer classed as an archaeological site under Heritage Victoria’s current archaeology policy; more appropriate to protect through its listing on the Heritage Overlay (HO798). Recommendation: Request is made to the Executive Director of Heritage Victoria to remove site from Heritage Inventory.

H7724-0636, Picnic Gully House site: Hermes No. 8251, recorded in 1998 – former house site, weatherboard building removed – traces of foundations and garden plants (See Photo 3)Assessment: Since recording of the site in 1998, the area has been subject to disturbance and now possesses low archaeological potential. See Map 2 for locationRecommendation: Request made to the Executive Director of Heritage Victoria to remove site from Heritage Inventory.

Additional fieldwork and assessmentThe former pine plantation contains other historic features that require consideration:

Pine plantation: The area was used as a pine plantation 1900s to c.1990s. Despite comprehensive logging, there still survives some tangible evidence in the form of stumps, original plantings (See photo 4) and original land clearance in the form of ring barked large trees (See Photo 5), and evidence of fence, summit of northern hill. Recommendation: Representative samples be retained and managed as per guidelines. Where possible use to add historical markers to the trail network.

Target Rock: is a notable feature of the north-west slopes, marking the site of a rifle range utilised by the militia between the Boer War & World War I. Clearing of the pine trees in 1998 enabled the rock to be located again. From 1899 this was used a target for a rifle club formed in Harcourt as a response to the outbreak of the Boer War.Description: Upon the flat vertical west face of Target Rock can still be seen the outline of a circular target – probably painted with bitumen (See Photo 6). See Map 2 for locationAssessment: Heritage Place of local significanceRecommendation: Listing on the local heritage overlay when it is next updated and managed as per guidelines

Tingay’s Quarry: mid 20th century quarry known Tingay and Oliver (1940s-1989) Description: Open cut with rock piles. Bordering the north side of the quarry, in a scrubby area, are the foundations of a stone building and a rubbish dump. (See Photos 7, 8 and 9). See Map 2 for locationAssessment: The quarry site is a recent one, with evidence of some recent (post 1989) reprocessing of rock piles Recommendation: Has little cultural heritage significance. The recent date of the quarry means it cannot be considered for the Heritage Inventory. Given the existence of a number of better preserved contemporary quarries on Mount Alexander, the quarry does not warrant listing on the local heritage overlay. If required, stone from this quarry (especially piles associated with most recent reprocessing) may be used for track construction.

6

Other quarry sites: The area does contain a scattering of evidence of small scale or exploratory quarrying ranging from small open cuts & rock piles to splitting of individual boulders (See Photo 10). The most prominent of the small open cuts is the located above (to east) of the oak forest (See Photo 11) Recommendation: Manage as per guidelines

Water race and dams: A water race channel, open and concrete sections, runs past Tingay’s quarry and the southern side of the Oak Forest. (See Photo 12) Because water races follow the contour and have gentle gradients, their banks have commonly been re-used as walking trails, and in recent times, for mountain bike trails. The reuse of water race banks for trails has been supported by Heritage Victoria because the impact to heritage values is seen as minor and acceptable as the trails provide increased scope for interpretation, appreciating the scale of the engineering, the quality of surveying skills, and sheer man power involved. There are four dams situated in the southern section of the former pine plantation (See Photo 13)Recommendation: Manage as per guidelines, and if required, banks can be reused as trails

Management guidelines The key to good management of historic heritage features in the former pine plantation area is: the ability to understand the historical context (underlying human stories) to understand and describe the human activities that have taken place, and to identify and limit damage to the material evidence left behind by these activities respecting the associated landscape setting (e.g., the ambiance of abandonment of ruins in

forest settings) of historic heritage is also another crucial consideration.

The guidelines outlined below apply broadly to the recognition and protection of any historic heritage feature in the area.

Principles disturbance of remains and impact on landscape setting must be considered in deciding how

best to conduct works Avoidance of disturbance should take place if at all possible It is crucial to ensure that the equipment and methods are suitable to the vulnerability of the

site Integrity, type, significance and extent will all influence the level of vulnerability

Avoidance unauthorised disturbance of archaeological and heritage places Do not undertake works on or near archaeological sites so as to avoid disturbance Clearly mark known sites (with temporary tags) ahead of any works program to minimise risk of

disturbance Plan new roads to ensure that they do not make hitherto unreachable historic heritage

accessible to car or 4WD and therefore vulnerable to pilfering of relics. Do not drive vehicles over archaeological sites Where continuation of work could compromise the integrity of relics, work should cease until

advice has been obtained from Heritage Victoria.

ReportingIf archaeological sites or relics are found during the course of works, there is a requirement to report these finds to Heritage Victoria. The notification should include sufficient information to identify the relics and their location. This could include an AMG or Latitude/Longitude reference for any structures found; a map or plan; a description of the structures or artefacts; and photograph(s).

7

InductionInduction should be based on the fundamental assumptions that understanding is the bedrock of conservation and without understanding, conservation is blind and meaningless. It should equip people with the necessary information for them to reach a position where informed decisions can be made about repair, alteration, use and management. Hopefully it will help eliminate inappropriate activities and work practices that have the potential to cause damage to heritage values and also assist in integrating and streamling approvals required under the Heritage Act 1995. All involved in the project should be briefed on the: statutory requirements history of the area known or potential heritage values operational guidelines

8

Map 1: Study area

9

Map 2: Showing key heritage sites

10

Map 3: Replanting with native species from 1997 onwards

11

Photo 1: Oak Forest, looking down in a westerly direction

Photo 2: oak forest

12

Photo 3: 7724-0636 (to be removed from Heritage Inventory)

Photo 4: Pines growing in row

13

Photo 5: Original clearance, ring barking of large trees

Photo 6: Target Rock

14

Photo 7: Tingay’s quarry, rock piles

Photo 8: Foundations of stone building associated with Tingay’s quarry

15

Photo 9: Rubbish associated with ruins of stone building, Tingay’s quarry

Photo 10: Splitting of individual rocks

16

Photo 11: small quarry/stone pile

Photo 12: Water race running along south side of Picnic Gully/oak forest

17

Photo 13: One of the dams located in the southern section of the former plantation area

18