ISSUE 14 : Jan/Feb - 1979 - Australian Defence Force Journal

THE SURVEILLANCE OF NORTHERN AUSTRALIA 23groves and mudflats. Linking the platoon forsupplies and relief, there also was a rivermotor vessel to travel to Bradshaw and downto Blunder Bay. And all of this was the responsibilityof one platoon. The officers, each alieutenant, in command of each such platoon,were exceptional men with endless energy,initiative and reserves of personal substanceand resource.The arrangement in the northern Kimberleysis another example well worth studying. Herea platoon HQ was located at the Bremla Farmon the Forrest River. The site is not markedon the new Survey Corps maps (1964-69 series),but was on the southern side of the ForrestRiver, not too far away from the Forrest RiverMission Station (which lay over on the northside of the river), and was tucked away in thecurling foothills of a branch of the MilliganRanges; a site well supplied with fresh waterand well chosen from the point of view ofconcealment both from the land or from theair. One section of the platoon was stationedback at Wyndham with its lookout on the topof the hill behind the Wyndham Hotel, whichis a hill in its own right and not to be confusedwith the outcrops of the Bastions. From theHQ at Bremla Farm, patrols moved out toinspect and seek a path for a tactical withdrawalof the HO. if one should be needed inthe weeks ahead if the Japanese came, to anew site south of the Milligan Ranges nearthe water supply of Nulla Nulla Creek, a sitewhich was protected, should an invader occupyWyndham, by the large areas of mudflats betweenthe Steere Hills on its north and theDurack River on its south.A vers important wet-season mounted patroldeparted from the HO at Bremla to cross theForrest River going north and west of theCollison Ranges, across the wild country westof the Seppelt Ranges, over creeks and riversthrough hilly and stony country to reach theold Drysdale Mission at Mission Bay. Thispatrol was an important one because it was aclassic example of how a smul] patrol of aboutfour men. mounted on horseback and withtheir supplies on packhorses could set out inthe midst of the 'Wet' to make their way crosscountry, persisting in their purpose, sliding inthe mud. swimming across rivers and 'gettingthrough', no matter what the terrain or theseason. Two sorts of horses were found by theNAOU, the small footed mountain bred horsewhich would try hard enough in the 'Wet', andthe heavy-muscled, big footed horse whichwould revel in the water-logged land with feetso big even the biggest horseshoes the Armycould supply would barely fit. Between the twosorts, of course, was the average, good, dependablestockhorse purchased from the stations ofthe cattle country.Notable in the use of mounted surveillancepatrols was the absence of the noise whichrings out across the plains when armoured ortracked, or even transport vehicles are used.There was a big factor which modified theoperations of the sub-units. This was themaintenance of the health of the great numberof horses. The WE did not provide for aVeterinary Oflicer, as did the Establishmentsof pre-war mounted units, but officially therewere sergeant-farriers but not horse-breakers.The unit was lucky, just the same, and hadsome excellent farriers and horse-breakers whowere particularly good at handling raw, unbrokenbush horses. The horses had to be keptshod constantly and the platoons became adeptin the art of shoeing horses as well as otheraspects of horsemastership. The bushman'sskill in caring for his horses was soon to belearned by all. The horses were fed in the mainby grazing on grass, with a certain amount ofhard feeding with bran and oats. Even withgrazing, the feed bill must have been enormous.A reserve of remounts and packhorses had tobe kept at remount depots, such as at NutwoodDowns, some distance back from the areas oflikely first-contact.A certain amount of experimentalism had tobe allowed for Stanner's plans to be carriedout. He had to consider the functional efficiencyof the 'drover's plant' or 'mustering plant'concept for those regions in which there wouldbe no conventional Army back-up of the kindwhich would accompany the use of mountedtroops under ordinary conditions of service.Even so the care of the horses was very goodand a matter of pride. Looking back, Stannerhas said that he might have done better withmules for pack-work rather than horses. Theymay have carried as much, longer and fartherthan pack-horses would. None the less there aremany bushmen who do say they will worklonger, better, happier and with more courage