Welcome to Netrider ... Connecting Riders!

Interested in talking motorbikes with a terrific community of riders?
Signup (it's quick and free) to join the discussions and access the full suite of tools and information that Netrider has to offer.

Federal Authorities Want to close Ayres Rock.

Discussion in 'The Pub' at netrider.net.au started by 2up, Jul 9, 2009.

  1. Thursday, July 09, 2009

    Federal authorities want to ban people from climbing one of Australia's great natural wonders - Uluru.

    An estimated 100,000 people make the steep ascent each year.

    The Director of National Parks wants to close the climb for 'visitor safety, cultural and environmental' reasons.

    A 10-year draft management plan for the park says authorities will work towards closing the track.

    The plan quotes Kunmanara, a traditional owner.

    'That's a really important sacred thing that you are climbing ... you shouldn't climb,' Kunmanara is quoted as saying.

    'The real thing is listening to everything.'

    Uluru, which is located in Australia's 'Red Centre' and used to be known as Ayers Rock, attracts about 300,000 tourists a year. Most are from overseas.

    Visitors are free to ascend the path up Uluru most of the time. But signs urge people not to do so out of respect for indigenous culture.

    At least 35 people have died on the track.

    The federal opposition doesn't want the climb closed.

    'Big Brother is coming to Uluru to slam the gate closed on an Australian tourism icon, the climb,' said the opposition's environment spokesman Greg Hunt.

    'I support allowing people to make up their own minds about whether to make the climb.'

    Mr Hunt said the climb was majestic and a major tourism drawcard.

    Environment Minister Peter Garrett has to sign off on the plan. A spokesman would not be drawn on whether Mr Garrett supported closing the track.



    The spokesman said 'there will obviously be a range of views' about the Uluru climb, and urged people to take part in the public comment period on the plan, which closes on September 4.

    The draft plan says the track would remain open at the start of the 10-year period, subject to restrictions including 'improved graphic signage'.


    http://bigpondnews.com/articles/Nat...09/Calls_to_close_the_Uluru_climb_350595.html
     
     Top
  2. So if you want to do the climb or have your kids do it then get there quick.
     
     Top
  3. Good on 'em.
    It's got to be one of the silliest ideas on earth, to walk to the top of a big rock. Kind of like jogging, for fun.
     
     Top
  4. We should stick this in the religion threads too.

    Its funny, the rock has been around a lot longer than the "traditional land owners".

    I have no problem climbing it.
     
     Top
  5. I thought they'd closed it a few years back - apparently only some of the time.

    I think it's a good thing - tourism is one thing, but it's a seriously significant issue for the local aboriginal people.

    You can't walk up the roof of the Taj Mahal...

    Oh, and Greg Hunt - you are possibly the most insensitive ignorant wanker I have ever heard quoted.
     
     Top
  6. ummmmmmm...it's a rock.
    It belongs to all Australians.
     
     Top
  7. Climbed it once. Bloody hard slog, for the first bit.
     
     Top
  8. I'll pass on your kind thoughts next time I catch up with him for a beer.
     
     Top
  9. Exactly, it long predates any human religion.

    Upon reading the articles, all the rational reasons for closure are minimal, its mainly a religious reason. This being a secular society and all....
     
     Top
  10. Shit. I better get there fast.
     
     Top
  11. Another PC issue that's destroying our way of life.
    The rock has been there before people, they didn't BUILD the ficking thing.
     
     Top
  12. Yeah they were talking about closing it 10 years ago.... when i climbed it.
     
     Top
  13. If its still open in december i'll think about going and climbing it in my holidays. Group trip? :D
     
     Top
  14. I thought the same thing. Then when I thought about it I wondered, "Could this be a way to boost tourism during a slump?" What better way to get the tourists in than those who fear missing the opportunity to do something they could have done for years but may soon miss out on? :cool:
     
     Top
  15. The Director of National Parks wants to close the climb for 'visitor safety, cultural and environmental' reasons.

    "Visitor safety"...another victim of possible litigation.
    When will someone stop these men in suits from wrecking all the fun stuff in life.
     
     Top
  16. But think of the children. If it saves the life of one child then we should do whatever the authorities ask....
     
     Top
  17. Azaria would have been safer on top.
     
     Top
  18. LOL

    I was over there just a month ago and climbed up it. Very hard work.

    I'm surprised it is open to climb, it would be so easy to fall. I'm surprised they haven't been sued yet.

    It was amazing to see how I'll prepared some were that were climbing it. Apparently some one fell to their death just 6 weeks before we were there.
     
     Top
  19. lol just like ANY national park?? theres always a million and one ways to kill yourself, its called nature.

    I nearly lost my footing and slid off a small cliff face once, boy did I shart my pants good and proper :LOL:

    Nature is the last bastion of freedom from the Gubberment Biege Pants Patrol, and they need to GTFO and MYOFB
     
     Top
  20. I'd rather they just gave people a brief talk that explains the danger (which is very real) , the views of the indigenous community and then let 'em make up there own minds. You can't make people give a sh*t about such things. Especially some of the foreign tour groups.

    The rock has claimed many lives, and it struck me that the Northern Territory is the only place in Australia where something like this would be allowed at all. Different attitude to personal responsibility up there.

    I believe that, once again, it's about someone in a position of some kind of authority deciding that his/her views need to be obeyed by the lowly masses.

    Actually, doesn't the whole area legally belong to the local Aboriginal community? They could make it a condition of the lease, surely. What's some jumped up Director of Parks doing making a decision like this?
     
     Top