Ayers Rock Climb

[Thala Dan]

Go Tourism!!
Probably the single biggest reason most places in Australia are now gated, closed, over managed, full of rules, restricted, accident areas and commercialised.
And why a good majority of local (Aussie) people don't go to these tourist traps.

Amen, brother....AMEN!

[DB44]

Mount Kosciuszko is one of the great landmarks of Australia (our highest "mountain") but you can't drive your car to the summit any more....as you once could.

But I can still go there on foot, I gather?

Those who wish it closed believe that they have a several perfectly good reasons for doing so.....just as there are perfectly good reasons for no longer allowing people to drive their cars to the top of Kosciuszko........or tramp all over parts of the Barrier Reef.........or access places from special reserves in the Victorian Alps to islands in Bass Strait and offshore remote W.A

That article gives a few predictable reasons which to me are most unconvincing, before admitting:

The most important reason not to climb Uluru, however, is that it is a sacred site for the Anangu, its significance dating back to the creation time. Anangu believe that during the time when the world was being formed, the Uluru climb was the traditional route taken by Mala men when they arrived at Uluru.

It opens with:

Expect one heck of a celebration on October 26, 2019. On that date, the Uluru climb will close for good. It will be a joyous day for the Anangu people, who have long asked visitors not to climb this sacred site, but that is not the only reason to celebrate.

I for one won't be celebrating.

It closes with:

The dramatic decrease in the number of visitors climbing Uluru shows that Indigenous Australians are not the only ones who see Uluru and its surrounds as a special place. There have always been those, Australian and International visitors alike, who felt the power of this landscape. As far back as 1942, author and art dealer Frank Clune suggested, “As Fujiyama is to Japan, so should Ayers Rock be to Australia, a sacred mountain and place of pilgrimage in the heart of our continent.”

The closure of the climb suggests we are closer than ever before to fulfilling that vision. The date chosen for the event, October 26, is a significant one for the Anangu: it is the anniversary of the day in in 1985 when, during a ceremony at the base of Uluru, the Governor-General, Sir Ninian Stephen, handed the title deeds to the Uluru-Kata Tjuta National Park to the Traditional Owners. Truly a day worth celebrating.

People can still climb Mount Fuji. You are of course free to have and express your views. Personally I call bullshit.

[Thala Dan]

A Strange, Sad History of People Climbing Uluru

How Australia's tourism industry invented a dangerous and disrespectful national pastime.

Hundreds of thousands of people travel to Uluru each year from all over Australia and the world, and up until fairly recently a vast majority of them were choosing to climb the 863m high rock formation that offers literally nothing other than the possibility of a heart attack and an unspectacular view—given you’re standing on the only interesting landmark for miles.

Over time, increasingly large signs at the entrance have asked politely in multiple languages that tourists abstain from the climb, citing concerns from traditional owners that the track falls on a culturally-significant section of the rock traditionally reserved for Indigenous men only. The Anangu people also feel deeply responsible for the frequent injuries and deaths that occur there.

Gradually, the numbers of tourists choosing to climb have dropped, and it was announced last year that the precarious walk will close permanently from November 2019 onwards. But why did the practice of climbing a sacred and dangerous rock persist for so long?

The history of the Uluru climb is a bizarre and tragic lesson in how relentless tourism marketing was able to dispossess Indigenous people from land they’d occupied for tens of thousands of years.

Personally, I fail to see how tramping all over something, or ticking a check-box on a bucket list, gives one a deeper appreciation of the natural wonders of this world.

As I understand it, the 10km walk around the base of the rock is still allowed.......isn't this a sufficiently awe-inspiring experience?

Or is that "I climbed Ayers Rock" T-shirt what it's really all about

[ol' boy]

I think you nailed it here Thala Dan!

Why don't some of these people that cry about losing the potential to climb Ayres Rock, go climb Mt Feathertop or would they only be interested/outraged if that freedom was also being taken away from them??

I find the whole thing so funny... One tiny little thing is about to change, yet the magic of the greater desert parks area (Simpson Desert, NT, etc etc) is its unbridled freedom.
Camp anywhere, have big fires, drink all night, under 1million stars with no neighbours, no cops, no problem.... Geez NT Day you can even let rip with fire works to your hearts content ..... knock yourself out....

But people getting upset over a site of importance to a race of people that were here well before we were......
Seriously.... Talk about disrespectful or just down right ignorant.
(Yes i do understand the hypocrisy as people have been climbing it for years anyway. And i do understand that we are Australians too, and born here)
I had this chat with a friend last year, he served in our Army for years, visited Ayers Rock last year with his Indigenous partner (he is a white born and breed Aussie)
He was happy not to climb it out of respect, but drew the line at the "No Taking Photos" signs in certain places as you walk around the rock... Sighting that, he is an Australian too. So i do see both points.

What is a shame, is there is money involved, in the exact same way as in Southern Jervis Bay, where the Indigenous community are higher ranking then NSW Parks.
But as the park entry money goes to the community, its all ok.

If one Rock is such a contentious issue, what about Woomera!

[Thala Dan]

Looks like we're not the only ones having problems with elevated locations....

Why are Native Hawaiians protesting against construction of a giant telescope on Mauna Kea?

It's not every day Hollywood movie star Dwayne "The Rock" Johnson shows up to your protest.

But the construction of a giant telescope on Hawaii's tallest mountain is catalysing conversations about a much bigger struggle — Native Hawaiian rights.

After a week of tension and dozens of arrests, the actor stood in solidarity with activists blocking construction crews from reaching the summit of Mauna Kea on Thursday.

Johnson, who is Samoan and spent part of his childhood in Honolulu, joins the likes of Aquaman actor Jason Momoa, who is part Hawaiian, in opposing the Thirty Meter Telescope (TMT) project.

So why has a telescope attracted so much attention? And what are the protests about?

I hope that nobody here was planning on doing the Mauna Kea climb in the foreseeable future

[ol' boy]

Very interesting fact about Uluru at end of video in YouTube section
Direct link here:

2 Min mark is your freind.

[DB44]

Very interesting fact about Uluru at end of video in YouTube section
Direct link here:

2 Min mark is your freind.

OMG! But I better stay home. I don't want it to get too big!

[eeprommemory]

bit of shameless cut and paste.
Late last year the board of the Uluru–Kata Tjuta National Park announced that the climb up Ayers Rock would be officially banned from October 26, 2019. Parks Australia and the board argue the climb needs to be closed for safety and cultural reasons.

The ban came as a surprise, as in April 2016 the Turnbull government had stated there were “no plans to change current arrangements”. The ban is especially surprising under a Coalition government given the very strong support for the climb voiced by Malcolm Turnbull as opposition leader and other Coalition spokesmen in 2009. Greg Hunt then equated closing the climb with the arrival of Big Brother, and labelling then Environment Minister Peter Garrett as “the minister who closed the climb”. Obviously nothing to be proud of! One wonders how current Environment Minister Josh Frydenberg feels about the label.

Under scrutiny, the reasons for the closure cannot be substantiated. Additionally it seems there are substantial legal issues in enforcing the ban that the park’s board has not fully realised or disclosed.

The route of the climb crosses the path of the legendary Mala Hare Wallaby Men, who on first arriving at Uluru did the logical thing and climbed to the top—perhaps to get a better view of what the surrounding countryside held, and to provide a vantage point to look out for rival clans or spot game. Given the inclusion of the dingo in Anangu creation myths, arrival of the Anangu at the Rock likely occurred after about 3000 BC. Human habitation in the centre of Australia extends back to around 30,000 years BC. Given human nature, the cultural tradition of climbing probably goes back that far.

In 1973, as part of land rights discussions, the federal government recognised Paddy Uluru as the legitimate, principal owner of Uluru. Paddy Uluru was a fully initiated Anangu man familiar with all the local laws and customs. His views about tourists climbing the Rock were summed up in an interview with Erwin Chlanda of the Alice Springs News which quotes him saying, “if tourists are stupid enough to climb the Rock, they’re welcome to it” and “the physical act of climbing was of no cultural interest”.

Paddy Uluru’s feelings towards the climb were also documented by Derek Roff, the ranger of the park between 1968 and 1985 and close friend of Paddy. In interviews for a Northern Territory Oral History Project in 1997, Roff (now deceased) stated that the issue of tourists climbing never arose, and recounted that Paddy Uluru would tell of climbing the Rock himself.


Another elder, senior Anangu man and owner of the Rock, Tiger Tjalkalyirri, acted as an early tourist guide and climbing partner to early visitors to Ayers Rock. His name appears at least twice on the early climbing logbook at the summit cairn. He assisted Cliff Thomson in 1946 and Arthur Groom in 1947. There is footage of Tiger on top of the Rock splashing in depressions filled with water. Clearly he did not have an issue climbing or showing tourists around his Rock.

Formal requests for tourists not to climb first arose in the 1991 park management plan following the involvement and influence of university anthropologists and sociologists with the local community. Paddy Uluru had died in 1979 and custody of the Rock had passed to others.

Clearly current claims that “Anangu never climb” are false and the highly sacred nature of the climbing route is a very recent invention. The cultural-heritage significance of the climb to both Anangu and millions of non-Aboriginal visitors is something that deserves to be celebrated and maintained, not discouraged or banned.

Parks Australia unfairly describes the climb as dangerous. Arthur Groom described the climb in 1947 as “nothing else but a strenuous and spectacular uphill walk”. This was before the installation of the chain and the summit route markers. Only two people have died in the act of climbing on the Rock this century, both likely from heart failure probably triggered by lack of acclimatisation to the weather conditions. The death rate since 2000, given approximately 5,500,000 visitors and two deaths is 0.11 deaths per annum, or 0.36 deaths per million visitors. In contrast there are about twelve deaths per annum at the Grand Canyon in Arizona. Given 4.5 million people visit the Grand Canyon each year this equates to about 2.6 deaths per million visitors, a rate seven times higher than that at Uluru. The reported deaths at Uluru fall into the lower range for adventure tourism activities, and should not be a reason to ban climbing.

The prospect of a ban, and the long-term management of the climb by the park board since 1991, raise significant legal issues not yet addressed by Parks Australia or the federal government. One issue involves the application of federal anti-discrimination laws. These laws protect Australians against unfair discrimination on the grounds of culture, race, gender and age. Given the traditional owners will not be banned from accessing the summit via the current climbing route, or other means, a ban on everyone but a few elderly Aboriginal men appears to breach the Age Discrimination Act 2004, the Racial Discrimination Act 1975 and the Sex Discrimination Act 1984. The first person prevented from climbing after the ban is introduced in 2019 would seem to have a legitimate discrimination case to take to the Human Rights Commission.


The other legal issue involves the current lease agreement between Parks Australia and the Uluru–Kata Tjuta Land Trust. Section 17 of the lease includes a covenant that requires Parks Australia to preserve, manage and maintain “the flora, fauna, cultural heritage, and natural environment of the Park … according to the best comparable management practices for National Parks anywhere in the world”. Clearly the climb is an important and long-standing cultural tradition of both traditional owners and non-Aboriginal visitors, and under the lease agreement must be “preserved, managed and maintained”. However, since the 1991 management plan Parks Australia and the board of management have actively discouraged climbing, making millions of visitors feel guilty for simply enjoying nature, and denying the right to climb to millions through overly restrictive access protocols.


Discouragement of climbing is encapsulated in Parks Australia’s claims that “Anangu never climb” which, based on the evidence above, is demonstrably false. Discouraging this important cultural-heritage activity is counter to requirements in the lease. Discouraging climbing has substantially reduced the viability of the park to the tune of about 70,000 visitors per annum over the last ten years, compared to the previous ten years. Given an average of about $1000 per person, this comes at a cost to the Northern Territory economy of at least $70 million per annum.


Based on the facts, the ban on climbing is morally wrong, likely illegal and probably breaches the current lease agreement. It prevents millions from practising their cultural heritage. It cannot be supported on the basis of Aboriginal law, or for safety reasons. The ban is absolutely, undeniably wrong!

[Thala Dan]

Very interesting fact about Uluru at end of video in YouTube section
Direct link here:

2 Min mark is your freind.

Mate......I need all the help I can get......where do I book??

[Thala Dan]

bit of shameless cut and paste.
Late last year the board of the Uluru–Kata Tjuta National Park announced that the climb up Ayers Rock would be officially banned from October 26, 2019. Parks Australia and the board argue the climb needs to be closed for safety and cultural reasons.

Now where could such an impartial, balanced and well-researched article have originated?

Oh, dear....The Quandrant:





Quadrant (magazine)

In March 2008, the magazine was describing itself as sceptical of "unthinking Leftism, or political correctness, and its 'smelly little orthodoxies'"

And its editor...?

Keith Windschuttle

In The Fabrication of Aboriginal History and other writings on Australian Aboriginal history, Windschuttle criticises historians who, he claims, have extensively misrepresented and fabricated historical evidence to support a political agenda. He argues that Aboriginal rights, including land rights and the need for reparations for past abuses of Aboriginal people, have been adopted as a left-wing 'cause' and that those he perceives as left-wing historians[10] distort the historical record to support that cause. For Windschuttle, the task of the historian is to provide readers with an empirical history as close to the objective truth as possible, based on an analysis of documentary, or preferably eye-witness, evidence. He questions the value of oral history. His "view is that Aboriginal oral history, when uncorroborated by original documents, is completely unreliable, just like the oral history of white people". A historian has no responsibility for the political implications of an objective, empirical history. One's political beliefs should not influence one's evaluation of archival evidence.

Now don't get me wrong........I'm no bleeding-heart indigenous-hugger........but if you're going to post up a one-eyed political manifesto like this, you might at least acknowledge that the source (The Quadrant) is one from which we might expect no less.

I must say, though, I do love this quote from Windschuttle: His "view is that Aboriginal oral history, when uncorroborated by original documents, is completely unreliable......"

I guess if its an "oral history", that kinda rules out "original documents"

[ol' boy]

For you members that have recently climbed the Rock, are there cameras up the top or on way up?
I was told when we visited 3 or 4 years ago, that (Parks) had cameras up the top to check if people were climbing when it was closed etc

This would mean there would be Solar Panels, Batteries and an RF link..
I can't imagine there would be cameras, but this is what we were told.... Sounds like BS the more i think.

Anyone see any?

[enf]

........................................

I guess if its an "oral history", that kinda rules out "original documents"

I wouldn't quite say that mate. What if they just say they've put'em in a "Secret Womens Business" envolope.

[Thala Dan]

I wouldn't quite say that mate. What if they just say they've put'em in a "Secret Womens Business" envolope.

Why not.....its' worked before

[eeprommemory]

Now where could such an impartial, balanced and well-researched article have originated?

Oh, dear....The Quandrant:

and your cut and paste was from VICE and you complain about my cut and paste.

[eeprommemory]

For you members that have recently climbed the Rock, are there cameras up the top or on way up?
I was told when we visited 3 or 4 years ago, that (Parks) had cameras up the top to check if people were climbing when it was closed etc

This would mean there would be Solar Panels, Batteries and an RF link..
I can't imagine there would be cameras, but this is what we were told.... Sounds like BS the more i think.

Anyone see any?

one camera at the bottom pointing at the start of the chain.

[Thala Dan]

and your cut and paste was from VICE and you complain about my cut and paste.

Your cut and paste was a cut and paste from an unidentified source.......my "cut and paste" (sic) was in fact a LINK to a source document, so there could be no doubt as to the origin of the commentary.

I presume you understand the difference between a cut and paste from an unidentified source, and a link to a clearly identified source.

[admin]

It should be a hoot watching our tourism industry go in to decline. Who wants to walk around a rock ?

The brains trust in Victoria (Daniel Andrews) have decided to ban rock climbing in the Grampians. They made the announcement, then asked the rock climbing association if they had any maps as they werent sure where people were climbing.
Cut and paste due to firewall :

Bureaucrats were still desperately hunting for the location of all rock climbing sites in the Grampians days after banning the sport across a wide expanse of the Victorian national park. Despite secretly plotting since 2017 to evict or restrict climbers in the sport’s Australian heartland, the government was still questioning where all the climbing was #actually occurring, emails have now revealed.


Parks Victoria asked climbers on March 4 for maps of sites to help determine how they fitted within eight new special protection areas that have gutted climbing in the park. The request for maps was made several days after Parks Victoria had first published where climbing was being banned until a new Grampians management plan is finished late next year. The government is also still determining where the most sensitive Aboriginal #cultural heritage sites are, #despite banning climbing in the areas, about 260km west of Melbourne.


The newly-formed Australian Climbing Association Victoria obtained the emails under Freedom of Information. They also show that an agency in Premier Daniel Andrews’ own department was actively involved in the banning process.




On March 4, Parks Victoria manager Lucy Marshall wrote to the Victorian Climbing Club to seek help for the government’s mapping team.She told the VCC’s Tracey Skinner that “to inform future conversations, it would be most useful if you have any mapping information regarding climbing sites you are able to provide us”. This was after Parks Victoria maps were published in late February showing the banned areas but not pointing out the affected routes.


On February 28, the VCC had complained to Parks Victoria that it had been blind#sided by the announcement of the extent of the bans.The VCC had itself sought maps from Parks Victoria #detailing where the eight protection zones were to enable it to tell its members what routes may be affected. Ms Skinner told Ms Marshall that members were “asking all the questions we knew they would with no helpful answers from us”.


“All people can see is that (the) majority of all climbing in the Grampians is now prohibited,” Ms Skinner wrote.


Parks Victoria and Aboriginal Victoria have accused climbers of desecrating important sites by using bolts to support their climbing, damaging indigenous artwork, trampling on vegetation and lighting inappropriate fires. Parks Victoria said that, in partnership with traditional owner groups, it was preparing a new management plan for the Grampians. The plan will provide “longer-term #direction on matters such as recreational activities”. Australian Climbing Association Victoria spokesman Mike Tomkins said the government’s “investigation’’ of climbing sites had been limited to social media and the online climbing site The Crag.

( I read somewhere the other day that the "bolt hole" they found and blamed climbers for was actually done by Parks themselves in the 70's.)

Mount Kosciuszko is one of the great landmarks of Australia (our highest "mountain") but you can't drive your car to the summit any more....as you once could.

My great grandfather took the family in 1932 in a 1929 Fiat.





Imagine if we all just listened to what the government said we can and cant do. I wouldnt be related to a family who pioneered the Wimmera in Victoria.

[alpha0ne]

I reckon the whole of victoria should be designated as a sacred site.................to protect the rest of AU from their insanity, just in case its contagious !!

[Thala Dan]

I reckon the whole of victoria should be designated as a sacred site.................to protect the rest of AU from their insanity, just in case its contagious !!

Aaaawwww.....I dunno.......how would you blokes cope without the ongoing help of the Wise Men from the East

Last I heard you blokes were right out there in front showing the rest of us how to be culturally sensitive

High Court to determine Aboriginal right to exclude public from popular camping beaches

The Federal Court of Australia has already decided that beaches north of Broome are the exclusive possession of native title holders and, although they are popular camping and fishing areas, the public does not have a legal right of access.

[Thala Dan]

My great grandfather took the family in 1932 in a 1929 Fiat.

Great photos, thanks Admin........bring back memories.

The missus and I drove up there on our honeymoon....the road was a bit better then, and our Cortina probably a bit more comfortable than your Greatgramps' Fiat.

And I didn't have to wear a coat and tie either