I AM writing to express my disappointment at “Fight about cards” reported on Friday, February 8.
The coverage of the disagreement between Bathurst Council and Wiradyuri Elders about the land at the top of the Mount was anything but unbiased.
The only views provided are those of council.
This does nothing to inform me, the general public, nor to further reconciliation.
When will you report the other side of the story?
The fact is that the Mount is a site of great cultural significance to local people, and is rich with Aboriginal ceremonial heritage.
It is part of our collective history and is extremely precious to Wiradyuri people.
Council has largely ignored this in its intended use of the Mount. Most recently, this was shown by the complete breakdown of consultation and negotiation with Elders over the proposed go-kart track.
In your article, the issuing of site cards is reported as leading council to unpredictable financial costs and inconvenience, a nuisance. What is the other side to this story?
Perhaps the reason that site cards come as a surprise (and need to be issued in the first place) is because talk between council and Elders has broken down and site cards are a way to protect heritage.
Your article (and council, it would appear from the report) fail to recognise that there are more than financial costs at stake here.