Following Ms Turbane’s letter, activist legal firm Environmental Defenders Office (EDO) sent additional letters on behalf of seven traditional owners who also opposed the works. Adani on Sunday issued a joint statement with the Clermont Belyando cultural heritage committee, claiming opposing voices did not represent the majority and the works were managed in an “appropriate, legal and respectful way”.

Native title acting coordinator Irene Simpson criticised the EDO for “questioning our authority as traditional owners” in an approach she described as “offensive and paternalistic”.

“It is important that groups like the EDO and the media acknowledge our views and rights as the traditional custodians of the lands and any decisions that are made respectfully by the majority of the claim group,” Ms Simpson said.

An Adani spokesman said the clearance works were managed according to legally binding agreements and objections were based on misleading allegations. “We are pleased to see the government has found we complied with our obligations under the cultural heritage management plan.”

The archaeologists, Archaeo, had told Adani in late-September the artefact excavation process was rushed and the site was of “high cultural significant and potential scientific significance” and could be an important source of knowledge of “traditional times”. However, Adani said this report was based on opinion and without technical mining expertise.

Loading

Ms Turbane said the entire site was significant, not just the artefacts, and the state government’s response had been too slow and inadequate. “I don’t have any faith or trust in the system at all,” she said. “You do the right thing, you go through the right channels, put in the right complaints, cross all the t’s and dot all the i’s but you still don’t get anywhere.”

Ms Turbane is a registered Clermont Belyando native title applicant but is not part of Adani’s cultural heritage committee, meaning she is not provided with information about construction works.

In 2016, the Wangan and Jagalingou people voted 294 to one in favour of the Carmichael project’s land-use agreement. Since then, five traditional owners, including Ms Turbane, launched a Federal Court case to challenge the native title claims of these traditional owners, but the appeal was dismissed in 2019.

“I do feel dispirited,” she said. “But that’s my cultural heritage. That’s my history. That’s my family’s footprint there. And as long as they keep doing the wrong thing I’m going to keep on speaking out. They need to include me, they need to let me know. I need to know what’s going on. I need to be included, not excluded.”

“How can we pass on information onto the next generation if we don’t know what’s there? We’re being excluded from there.

Loading

The ancient artefacts have now been relocated to Red Hill – which Archaeo had initially warned was opposed by the cultural heritage committee because the site is surrounded by construction works and difficult to reach. The archaeologists had also objected to the Red Hill site even temporarily because multiple moves could damage the artefacts’ integrity.

The dispute over Adani’s works comes as the 16-month federal inquiry, launched in the aftermath of Rio Tinto’s destruction of Western Australia’s 46,000-year-old Juukan Gorge rock shelters, identified “serious deficiencies” in legislation to protect Aboriginal cultural heritage.