WA rock art expert scolds national counterparts for accepting Woodside donation

A senior WA-based rock art specialist has accused the Australian branch of the International Council on Monuments and Sites of “heritage-washing” after it accepted sponsorship dollars from gas giant Woodside.

ICOMOS International Scientific Committee on Rock Art president and UWA archeologist Professor Ben Smith chastised his Australian counterparts for accepting the money for a symposium in Perth this week.

Murujuga National Park on the Burrup Peninsula in WA abuts major gas processing plants.Credit: Krystle Wright

Smith said heritage organisations should not be taking money from the gas giant as controversy raged over whether emissions from industrial activity including Woodside’s LNG plants on the Burrup Peninsula – or Murujuga – were speeding up the erosion of the thousands of pieces of ancient Aboriginal rock art on the peninsula.

“I don’t believe that this is an organisation that anyone who loves heritage and is concerned with the preservation of heritage should be taking money from,” he said.

“We hear of greenwashing. This is kind of heritage-washing. One of the companies that is doing very serious damage to the heritage of Murujuga is trying to wash its reputation by funding a heritage conference.

“The people who work in the heritage sector should be wiser than this.”

ICOMOS is a global body tasked with preserving human heritage, while Smith’s committee was founded 44 years ago to bring together global rock art experts to fight against the destruction of rock art around the world.

Smith has been a vocal critic of the industrialisation of Murujuga, which has resulted in the removal and erosion of the rock art.

The WA government started monitoring emissions from nearby industrial plants, and their potential impact on the Murujuga rock art, in 2022 after years of disagreement in the scientific community.

Smith said there was more Woodside could do, like installing more emissions-scrubbing technology to mitigate the impacts of its activities on the rock art.

“You’ve got to be a little careful who you take money from. You need to be discerning. This is the moment, in fact, to send a loud and proud message out that the way Woodside behaves in relation to heritage is not acceptable,” he said.

“Woodside should not be associated with [the ICOMOS] heritage conference. It’s not appropriate until they get their act together and stop damaging Murujuga.”

According to ICOMOS Australia, the money from the sponsorship went toward supporting the attendance of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander speakers and participants at the symposium and would pay for a three-night field trip to Murujuga next week hosted by the Murujuga Aboriginal Corporation.

ICOMOS Australia president Professor Tracey Ireland defended the sponsorship deal.

“Australia ICOMOS consults widely about all sponsorship and acts in accordance with our sponsorship policy,” she said.

“As a not-for-profit NGO, made up of heritage professionals and experts from diverse backgrounds, Australia ICOMOS is aware that there are often different views about how to support heritage conservation, heritage custodians and rights holders most effectively.

“Australia ICOMOS is committed to working with and across community, government, and industry sectors to build dialogue, conduct open debates and promote the value of cultural heritage.”

A Woodside spokeswoman would not reveal what the commercial arrangements of the sponsorship deal were.

She also rejected Smith’s criticisms that it was not doing enough to address concerns over the rock art.

“Woodside is continuing to manage our activities in a precautionary way that seeks to reduce emissions to levels as low as reasonably practical,” she said.

“We support a range of initiatives that are identified and led by local communities to research, protect and manage cultural heritage values.”

The spokeswoman said Woodside also supported the World Heritage Listing of the Murujuga cultural landscape, which had been sought on the basis of the coexistence of heritage and industry.

She said scrubber systems were one way emissions could be reduced, but they could introduce new hazards including “risks associated with other emissions, and adverse impacts on greenhouse efficiency”.

“Woodside continues to assess available technologies for emissions reduction,” she said.

Start the day with a summary of the day’s most important and interesting stories, analysis and insights. Sign up for our Morning Edition newsletter.