Right: Uluru is far from a routine upwards walk, as this rescued Taiwanese tourist found.
Arguments in favour of allowing tourists to climb Uluru 1. Some of Uluru's traditional owners are not opposed to tourists climbing it Critics of tourists being deterred from climbing Uluru argue that there is no clear consensus among the traditional owners prohibiting or discouraging the climb. An article written by Erwin Chlanda and published in the Alice Springs News Online on January 27, 2015, argues that the claims made about Indigenous opposition to climbing the rock do not clearly identify which group or groups are opposed. Chlanda contends that Parks Australia is opposed to the climb because of the difficulties and expense involved in managing it and attempting to ensure climber safety. He further argues that when he questioned Charles Darwin University which conducts the training course for Uluru-Kata Tjuta National Park guides he could get no detail regarding which Indigenous spokespeople had indicated that the rock should not be climbed. Chlanda observes, 'In its management plan 2010 to 2020, Parks quotes the names of just two traditional owners on the subject of climbing: Kunmanara Nguraritja ("This is the proper way: no climbing") and Tony Tjamiwa ("Climbing is not a proper tradition for this place").' He suggests that this is too narrow a basis on which to establish a policy of no climbing. He cites his own 1974 interview with Paddy Uluru who was the custodian of the rock at that time. Chlanda paraphrases Mr Uluru as saying, 'if tourists are stupid enough to climb the Rock, they're welcome to it.' Chlanda further notes, 'For him there was nothing of practical value up there such as water, game nor edible plants. He made it clear that knowledge of certain elements of the Rock's dreaming must remain secret, to be known only by a strictly defined circle of people. That knowledge would be passed on to outsiders at the pain of serious punishment and perhaps death. But the physical act of climbing was of no cultural interest...' In an article published on Traveller in June 2013 John Sweeney, a guide at Uluru was quoted as saying, 'There are plans in place to close the climb completely. Then some Anangu would like to develop the climbing route, increase the safety standards to something similar to the Sydney Harbour Bridge Climb, and reopen it to those willing to pay for the experience.' The author of the article, Ben Groundwater has stated, 'Some Anangu want the climb closed entirely. Others want it developed as a tourist attraction. And most of us will never be told one of the reasons behind all of this because it's private knowledge.' 2. Banning the climbing of Uluru would damage the tourist industry It is claimed that climbing Uluru is a major tourist attraction. Numerous tourist sites stress the appeal of climbing the rock either for those who have done so or for those who intend to visit the area. On April 20, 2016, one of the posters on Patrol 4X4.com - Nissan Patrol Forum noted, 'Money can't buy the sense of wonder and appreciation of Australia's natural beauty that you can instil in your kids with this kind of opportunity, and banning the climb should be fought tooth and nail. I'd be very disappointed to be a grumpy old grandad telling stories of when you used to be allowed to climb the rock.' On the same site the following day another poster commented, 'The view from the top is spectacular, and well worth the climb. It's an unforgettable experience. I've been fortunate enough to climb it twice, and would like to do it again. We should be free to climb Ayers Rock and enjoy the outlook from the top. We're sacrificing too many of our freedoms for political correctness and that is a pity.' Those who argue for the economic importance of tourists being able to climb Uluru contend that claims tourists are no longer interested in doing so are inaccurate. The numbers of tourists attempting to climb Uluru in recent years has declined; however, supporters of the climb argue that care has to be taken in interpreting such figures. Maria Billias, writing an opinion piece for The Daily Telegraph published on April 25, 2016, notes, 'Keep in mind however that would-be climbers don't always a "choice" given the climb is frequently closed due to weather conditions or [for] cultural reasons.' Billias also observes, 'Also blurring these not so watertight statistics is tourist numbers to Uluru have dropped significantly in recent years so it's hard to measure the impact that any discouraged climb could be having on potential holiday-makers to Central Australia.' Billias's implication here is that the number of visitors to Uluru may have declined precisely because climbing the rock is being discouraged. A similar point was made by a poster on Patrol 4X4.com - Nissan Patrol Forum on April 21, 2016. He observed, 'When I was there approx two years ago we were speaking to a few employees at the resort who said they don't want to stop climbing yet because less people will visit. The resort needs more visitors.' When banning the climb was proposed in 2009, the then federal Opposition environment spokesperson, Greg Hunt, stated, 'Big Brother is coming to Uluru to slam the gate closed on an Australian tourism icon.' 3. Tourists climbing Uluru contribute to the economic wellbeing of the traditional owners Supporters of climbing Uluru argue that the traditional owners should give their consent, take an active part in the management of tours and receive much of the income that would derive from them. They argue that this is particularly important given the relative impoverishment of Indigenous people living in this area and the low living standards they endure. Maria Billias, writing an opinion piece for The Daily Telegraph published on April 25, 2016, noted, 'a [recent] report by the Lowitja Institute ... found the gap in life expectancy between Indigenous and non-Indigenous Australians to be comparable to the life expectancy gap in Kenya. Or Cameroon... Indigenous children are sicker, receive poorer educational outcomes, are more likely to live in poverty and be victims of child abuse and neglect, have fewer job prospects ... the list goes on.' Billias concluded that for the Indigenous population in the Uluru-Kata Tjuta National Park area part of the solution to their economic, social and health disadvantage would be more fully exploiting the tourism potential of Uluru. Billias argues, 'Why should we not be encouraging our Indigenous Australians to take control of their destiny and harness any economic opportunity that comes their way to help "close the gap"? Economic prospects in remote areas are few and far between and bringing Indigenous people on board, in turn creating fulfilling jobs and injecting potentially millions in revenue back into where it's needed most, can only be positive.' In April, 2016, the Northern Territory's Chief Minister, Adam Giles, indicated that he supports tourists climbing Uluru, and that if it was better regulated it might become a money-maker for the local people. Mr Giles stated, 'That would see a great opportunity for local Anangu to participate in a lucrative business and create much-needed local jobs on that culturally significant site.' Then federal Opposition environment spokesperson, Greg Hunt, stated, 'Big Brother is coming to Uluru to slam the gate closed on an Australian tourism icon.' Supporters have compared better organised climbs of Uluru with the Ayres Rock Resort which supplies employment for hundreds of Indigenous people. 4. Measures can be taken to reduce the risk to tourists Those who support the climbing of Uluru argue that more can be done to ensure that the potential risk to tourists is reduced. Maria Billias, writing an opinion piece for The Daily Telegraph published on April 25, 2016, noted, 'The Anangu have a deep spiritual attachment to Uluru and are genuinely pained when visitors lose their lives attempting the arduous climb... But if safety issues were addressed and more guides were employed to make sure tourists oblige by strict cultural protocols - even if it means keeping the climb closed on certain days or even during entire seasons - then I can only see a potential profitable business opportunity that should be explored.' In April, 2016, the Northern Territory's Chief Minister, Adam Giles, told the Territory parliament, 'I believe that we should explore the idea of creating a climb with stringent safety conditions and rules enforcing spiritual respect that will be endorsed, supported and even managed by the local Aboriginal community.' Uluru has been compared to other World Heritage sites such as the Grand Canyon which attracts nearly five million tourists annually. There are designated tracks; however, tourists are allowed to climb down to the valley floor and up again. Tours are carefully managed and regulated. There have been over 600 deaths of people climbing in the Grand Canyon, though promoters of climbing argue that this is a small number relative to the number of tourists that visit the Canyon each year. Supporters of climbing argue that risks can be moderated and that some level of danger is acceptable given the excitement and challenge of the climbing experience. 5. Measures can be taken to reduce the impact of climbers on the environment It has been claimed that there are techniques available that would vastly reduce the impact of tourists on the ecology of Uluru. These include an absolute prohibition on taking materials, including food, on the climb as nothing should be taken to the top of the rock which could be left behind as refuse that would degrade the environment. The question of human waste management is a difficult one; however, there are techniques available that would reduce the impact of human waste on the rock's ecology. In some United States wilderness sites the regulations require packing out human waste. There are waste pack-out kits available to make it very easy to carry out your waste. They have odour-fighting chemicals or natural ingredients with liquid-absorbing powder in double-bag containers. The New Zealand government also encourages tourists in remote, environmentally sensitive areas to 'Carry out human waste in a container such as poo tube, pot or re-sealable bags'. Many of those who support continued climbing of Uluru claim that this can be done without significant environmental degradation and that the damage that has so far occurred is the result of insufficiently rigorous management practices. |