Geeveston History

This is a very interesting paper written in 2010 by Denbeigh Armstrong for her PhD Thesis. It is a publicly available document. You can download a pdf copy directly from this link.

Denbeigh's focus was on how local government restructuring affected local communities, and she zeroed in on Geeveston as her local community case study. 

For newcomers to the Geeveston area, Denbeigh's thesis provides invaluable insight into the character of Geeveston and how it was shaped by historic and economic circumstances, making for a compassionate appreciation for some of our older long term residents. It also provides insight into community's relationship with our local council which still linger to this day. 

But, most importantly, it also highlights the resilience and determination of the town to not stay defeated, and the recent actions that were taken that resulted in Geeveston's current distinctive charm.

Quick overview

Three key moments affecting Geeveston are explored:


The cumulative effects of these changes resulted in a dramatic decline in social wellbeing and economic prosperity in Geeveston. Many Geeveston people characterised the changes experienced as negative and described feeling demoralised by their perceived poor treatment at the hands of government, business and the media; all of which contributed to their defensiveness and anger.


Importantly for Geeveston, a few of the town’s people—community leaders and champions—consistently worked to improve the prospects of realising economic security and social wellbeing .  The Geeveston Streetscape Reference Group emerged as one example of how community and local government actors invested in, accommodated, resisted, adapted and sought to use shifting local governing processes to provide opportunities for enduring and viable local futures.


The activities of the GSRG significantly improved the presentation and amenity of the town’s physical environment; strengthened and externalised a sense of local identity; built the administrative, entrepreneurial and political capacities of group members; and partially improved social wellbeing in Geeveston. The group’s activities also contributed to other local and State Government projects aimed at improving the economic prosperity in Geeveston, thus adding value to council investments with in- kind support from community actors and financial support from external actors and organisations. As well, the group contributed to building positive relations between the council and community actors. Significantly, the extent to which the GSRG was able to achieve its goals depended on numerous factors, many of which were unique.

GSRG = Geeveston Streetscape Reference Group

Copy of Public Copy (Untouched) Armstrong_thesis.pdf

Town Identity

In the 1996 Huon Valley Council strategic plan a goal of the planning services program was ‘to build on the strengths of individual towns to enhance their amenity and improve their economies’ . Developing town identities and preparing an urban design plan for each town were considered key to achieving this goal. 

The specific identities to be developed were as follows: 

Timber Statues

The idea of the GSRG sculpture project was first raised in June 2000, when Councillor Dillon detailed a proposal for the development of timber displays within the town, which was supported by the group. In July 2000, the GSRG agreed to approach three local artisans to provide submissions to the group and, as with the development of the landscape plan, a subcommittee was appointed to co-ordinate the development of timber displays throughout the town. 

In September 2000, the GSRG commissioned Geeveston resident Bernie Tarr to carve the sculptures for Geeveston. The first of eight sculptures (including a bas relief) commissioned by the Group was unveiled in March 2001. In his submission to the GSRG Mr Tarr expressed a keen desire to see Geeveston return to days of greater prosperity and community spirit. 

During the life of the sculpture project, the sub-committee worked extensively with Mr Tarr over numerous meetings to develop the form and location of each sculpture. Subjects for the sculptures were mostly chosen for their historical significance and it was decided they would be located in the ‘commercial’ part of the town in locations where they would be relatively secure and have access to power for floodlighting (Huon Valley Council, 2000: 26 July). The results of such meetings were then put to a full meeting of the GSRG for final approval. Between July 2000 and May 2002, 20 meetings of the sub-committee were held. It was not uncommon for members to meet two or three times in a month, demonstrating the commitment of sub-committee members and of the sculptor. Additionally, research for the bas relief and the sculptures prompted GSRG members and other Geeveston people to re-engage with Geeveston’s history and strengthen their sense of identity-in-place. The impact of the sculpture project in Geeveston was noted by Paul Lennon, then Deputy Premier, (later serving as Premier of Tasmania from 21 March 2004 to 27 May 2008) at an event to unveil one of the sculptures.

We now have five former residents returned to this community in recognition of the contribution they made to shaping Geeveston and giving it the strong local identity it has always had (Paul Lennon Speech notes, unveiling of Jess Hannabury Sculpture 7 Aug 2003).

During the sculpture project numerous actors became interested and involved in the project. In particular, the GSRG was able to secure the support of Forestry Tasmania, Gunns Limited (the largest integrated softwood and hardwood forest products company in Australia) and, as already noted Paul Lennon.

GSRG projects and the associated developments of major enterprises such as the Forestry Tasmania Tahune AirWalk provided State Government with an opening to inject $400,000 of State Government money into promoting Geeveston as a major tourist gateway in Southern Tasmania. Paul Lennon used the numerous sculpture unveiling events in Geeveston to promote himself, his government and forest industries in Tasmania, and to highlight Geeveston’s central place in those industries. On one occasion he was reported as stating that the streetscape sculpture series had done much to firmly establish Geeveston as a focal point of Tasmania’s timber production effort ... Local residents say that

visitors regularly remark on the sculptures, indicating that the streetscape project is delivering positive benefits to the local community, as well as fostering local pride and building a greater sense of identity (Huon Valley News, 13.08.2003, pp.1 & 3).

The GSRG also used the opportunity presented by the unveiling of each sculpture to promote Geeveston, bring Geeveston people together and celebrate the achievements of the Group. These events were attended by local and State government actors who used the opportunity to strengthen their networks. Gathering in the main streets of Geeveston also enabled local and State government actors to strengthen their support among Geeveston people, an activity no doubt designed to pay dividends in subsequent elections. These occasions were also opportunities to provide publicity for Geeveston and reconstitute Geeveston’s identity to internal and external observers as a strong and vibrant community making positive change; a place Tasmanians and tourists alike would want to visit.

Forestry Tasmania, which provided extensive support to Geeveston and the GSRG over many years through their Huon District branch, supplied timber for five of the Geeveston sculptures. Additionally, Forestry Tasmania separately commissioned Mr Tarr to provide a sculpture at the Tahune AirWalk, a forest canopy walkway and associated activities situated in the southern forests 45 minutes drive from Geeveston. 

The strength of the relationship between Geeveston people and Forestry Tasmania was further demonstrated by the company’s recognition of the efforts of Geeveston people who have supported the work of Forestry Tasmania in the district. Forestry Tasmania dedicated a new walking track to the members of the Geeveston community who help out in Geeveston and in particular their contribution to the revitalisation of the Geeveston township area following the opening of the Tahune AirWalk (Huon Valley News, 14.01.2004, p.1). The efforts of the GSRG have 

enabled the promotion of Geeveston as ‘the gateway to the far south and to the southern forests’ and the Forest and Heritage Centre in the town has become a chief point of sale for tickets to the AirWalk (The Sunday Tasmanian, 13.10.2002, p. 21).

The GSRG was also able to secure funding from Gunns Limited who provided $12,500 to pay for the carving of five of the sculptures. In a letter sent to the sculptor by the company’s external relations coordinator (Price, 2001, no page) it was stated that 

Gunns have [sic] a strong link to the Geeveston and Dover communities with Mr Gay’s (executive chairman and managing director) family operating sawmills in the region over many years, even playing football for the local team. Gunns have already committed substantial funds to the development of the “AirWalk” and with this in mind, will provide funding of $12 500 payable in instalments of $2500.

As the leading forest industries company in Tasmania it is no surprise that they chose to invest in this project. Such investments and support for community are useful to a company that remains at the centre of conflict over forest industries in the State.

The sculpture project, while successful in many ways, tested the capacity of the GSRG to manage what became a complex process of negotiations among the sculptor, the sculpture sub-committee and the GSRG. As recorded in a Huon Valley Council file note (Doyle not date), questions were raised about the effectiveness of the sub-committee, the members of which appeared to be unduly influenced by the sculptor who was found to have unrealistic expectations about the management of the sculptures. 

Conflicts emerged between the sub-committee and the wider GSRG when a difference of opinion emerged about how and to what extent the sculptures could be maintained once installed in the main street. Further tensions were generated by the sculptor ‘expressing views and receiving feedback from a number of other community members outside any sort of committee structure’ (Doyle no date, no page). A dispute also emerged between the GSRG and the sculptor over the copyright issues in relation to the sculptures when a proposal was put forward by the managers of the Forest and Heritage Centre to develop postcards and key rings based on images of the sculptures. These were to be sold in the Forest and Heritage Centre with a proportion of the profits returned to the GSRG.

It will be necessary if this project is to continue for there to be an acceptance by Bernie that the Streetscape Reference Group (as a collective body) has the final say on issues relating to the presentation of sculptures. It will also be necessary for Bernie to understand that he has no maintenance obligations and that an outside art piece will be subject to weathering by the elements (Doyle no date, no page).

These issues were resolved through the negotiating skills of the then manager community development services. An agreement was reached between the Huon Valley Council and the sculptor over copyright and the ongoing maintenance that allowed for the production of the postcards and key rings and ensured that any requests for ongoing maintenance by the sculptor would be appropriately remunerated.