Australia canceled an AI data center project near Mandoon Bilya following a campaign for the rights of an Indigenous community
In May 2026, a company canceled plans for a 120MW AI data center near Mandoon Bilya in Perth following a campaign by Bibbul Ngarma Aboriginal Association over threats to sacred sites and a water source. Similar disputes are also emerging elsewhere in Australia and in North America.
The company planning a hyperscale AI data center with a capacity of 120 megawatts near Mandoon Bilya (Helena River) in the eastern suburbs of Perth canceled the project in May 2026, before it was due to be assessed by the Development Assessment Panel of Western Australia. The project was set to be among the largest planned AI facilities in the country. Bibbul Ngarma Aboriginal Association campaigned against the construction alongside environmental and community groups – they argued that the developer planned to build on land containing Indigenous cultural sites and that the data center would threaten the river, which holds cultural significance for local Indigenous groups and also supplies Perth with drinking water during the warmer months and supports local ecosystems. The campaign also questioned whether the community's free, prior and informed consent had been respected.
In July 2026, over 200 community members gathered at the site and planted more than 3 000 native plants as part of wetland restoration; since the project was canceled, the campaign has shifted to broader plans for ecological restoration of the site.
According to the source, this is not an isolated case – a similar dispute over cultural heritage and environmental impacts also concerns the proposed AI Hub in Victoria, and similar conflicts between AI infrastructure and the rights of Indigenous communities are also emerging in North America, where Indigenous communities are challenging planned data centers over threats to rights, sacred sites and water resources, citing the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. The source also mentions contrasting examples of Indigenous community involvement – the largest data center in Western Australia is being built under a land use agreement (Indigenous Land Use Agreement) with Karajarri People, who are its co-owners, and Energy North says it is consulting Traditional Owners about a planned hyperscale data center in the Northern Territory.
According to Kaley Nicholson, executive director of Federation of Victorian Traditional Owner Corporations, current government requirements for data centers represent an “investment failure” because they do not include collaboration with Traditional Owner groups despite lasting impacts on their lands. Drawing on their own research into the experiences of Indigenous communities with agreements in the mining industry, the authors of the source add that consultation processes do not always translate into real influence over decision-making and that the burden of negotiation and administration often falls on unpaid community elders and leaders.
Why it matters
The case shows that planning AI infrastructure in Australia and elsewhere increasingly faces opposition from Indigenous and local communities over impacts on cultural heritage, water and land, which can lead to the cancellation of even projects already underway with substantial investment. For companies building data centers, this means a growing risk of delays or loss of investment if they do not involve communities in decision-making early; examples of co-ownership with Traditional Owner groups suggest an alternative approach that reduces this risk.
Relevant practical impact
What this means
For a business
Operators and investors in AI data centers in Australia and elsewhere face a growing risk of project cancellation or delays due to opposition from Indigenous and local communities; examples such as the agreement with Karajarri People show that co-ownership and early community involvement can reduce this risk.
Risks and complianceCheck the original
Event sources
only one source so far · 1 publisher, 1 independent. We count feeds from the same owner only once.