Tourist boom turns isolated coastline into battleground

Bay of Fires, Tasmania

When Lonely Planet declared Tasmania's little known Bay of Fires the world's most desirable destination for 2009, many locals rejoiced. But while the accolade has brought international recognition, it has also transformed the stretch of coast into a battleground, fought over by tourism operators, conservationists and Aboriginal groups.

The focus of contention is a state Government plan, announced earlier this year, to turn the Bay of Fires - a 30km strip of deserted white beaches and picturesque coves - into a national park. While environmentalists are delighted, Aboriginal activists say the land, in northeast Tasmania, belongs to them and are threatening to mount a blockade unless it is handed back.

Local businesses are also opposed to a national park, claiming it will prevent them from capitalising on the area's new-found celebrity. Peter Paulsen, who owns a dive shop in one of the resorts, Binalong Bay, accused the Government of acting without consultation. "It was just a kneejerk reaction to the Lonely Planet listing," said Paulsen, who heads the local tourism association.

Indigenous groups, meanwhile, say that, with their traditional land management skills, they are best equipped to look after the region and its natural resources. The Bay of Fires is dotted with Aboriginal burial grounds and middens.

Michael Mansell, legal director of the Tasmanian Aboriginal Centre, said Aborigines were waiting for the state Government to honour a promise to return the land.

"It's our land, and our people have been there since time began," said Mansell. "It's such a sensitive area that tourism has got to be managed in a very strict way, and the only way to do that is to have Aboriginal people controlling it."

That, however, is disputed by environmentalists such as Todd Dudley, who points out that nowadays most Tasmanian Aborigines live in cities and also have European heritage. Dudley, of the North East Bioregional Network, said: "If you want to have credibility in terms of claiming some affinity with the land, or knowledge of land management, you need to have a track record in the last 20 years and they don't.

"In all the time I've lived here, they have never shown much interest in getting involved in conservation issues. They seem to be more interested in getting the land back for its tourism potential."

Paulsen echoes the criticism, claiming that a portion of the Bay of Fires already handed back to Aboriginal groups has been poorly managed. But he is equally opposed to the national park plan, calling it a distraction from the area's real needs, such as upgraded roads and commercial precincts.

"We've been trying to raise recognition of the Bay of Fires for years now, and we were ignored. It wasn't until Lonely Planet decided it was important that everyone got excited."

Mansell said that Aborigines were prepared to blockade the area in order to reclaim it by force. "We've used that tactic elsewhere in the past, and while it's very confrontational, we would have no qualms whatsoever about taking that approach. It's our land and if people are denying us ownership, we have to do something about it."

LAST REFUGE OF THE TORMENTED

The Bay of Fires was named by an English naval captain, Tobias Furneaux, who saw fires burning along the beaches in 1773. Furneaux accompanied Captain James Cook on his second voyage of exploration.

The bay was the last refuge of Tasmania's original inhabitants, who were rounded up and killed or shipped to offshore islands by colonial forces in the early 19th century.