Aboriginal people who have won a landmark native title case in the heart of the Pilbara are calling on the WA Government to drop litigation.

This follows the full Federal Court's ruling that the Ngarla people's native title rights will be re-instated or returned when mining activities have ended.

The decision is likely to have implications for mining and pastoral leases around the nation.

The case involved mining leases at Mount Goldsworthy where Western Australia's first major iron ore operations started in the 1960s.

The West Australian government and mining company BHP had argued that mining leases completely extinguished native title.

But, the Ngarla people successfully argued against it.

The native title claim was largely resolved five years ago but there were still issues surrounding improvements carried out by mining companies.

The chief executive of the Yamatji-Marlpa Aboriginal Corporation, Simon Hawkins, says it is a good win.

"The mining lease prevails over native title but once the mining lease has finished, the native title rights and interests arise and return to the Ngarla people," he said.

"And, with the state's position whereby they're stating that improvements to pastoral leases extinguishes native title, this position obviously supports our position that no, it doesn't extinguish native title.

"The native title rights and interest co-exist or return to the traditional owners once that land use has finished."

Implications

The decision has no apparent implications for existing mines until they close down.

Mr Hawkins says freeing up land can only be of benefit to Indigenous people.

"If the mining activity in the tenement doesn't go ahead, then I suppose it gives rights to the traditional owners," he said.

"If a proponent wants to come along and mine several years later, then perhaps they have to re-negotiate with traditional owners.

"When you've got a lease and you've got a mine, the mine is only a small part of the overall lease but there is also a significant amount of land that could be utilised."

BHP and the WA Chamber of Minerals and Energy would not comment on the full Federal Court's decision.

The State Government says it's reviewing the court's determination to assess the wider implications.

The ruling has received little attention from the mainstream media.

It's true that much of the heat has gone out of the native title debate since legislative amendments following the Wik decision in the 1990s.

Native title does not give a right to veto development, it only provides a right to negotiate.

The idea that Indigenous people can use native title to block a mine doesn't run well as a scare campaign these days.

Yet, it's probably not the end of the legal battles over Mount Goldsworthy.

Pragmatism

The full Federal Court's decision was 2-1.

The state may consider there is still too much uncertainty and may pursue it to the High Court, where the issue will likely gain a sharper national focus.

Mr Hawkins has called on the state to stop the litigation.

"When you think a mine has completely mined its resource, handed the tenements in, and you've got the State Government still sort of saying native title's extinguished and we don't want traditional owners having rights and interests across that land, it just doesn't seem to make sense," he said.

"Other states aren't necessarily pursuing these matters.

"They have a lot more pragmatic and practical approaches to how they deal with traditional owners, which I ultimately think is a more sustainable and more constructive way of doing business."

Mr Hawkins believes the WA Government is too focused on litigation.

"It's forgotten about how to be more pro-active in this space and supporting those native title rights and interests that traditional owners have to assist them in building a capacity and assisting matters like closing the gap."

He says the Ngarla people remain open to negotiation and mediation.