Ayers Rock Access - Different Pespective.

Were the police in the 1940s trained anthropologists ? Did they conduct a survey of the local people in that tribal area asking questions in the appropriate manner and language ? Did they have the skills to interpret the answers ?

Or was it more likely they were ordinary blokes more interested in doing their job and that the local aboriginals hid from the police for fear of having their children stolen and taken to mission stations ?

Remember in the 1940s and 50s Aboriginals were not even considered Australian Citizens.

This post has been read by the moderation team and has been moderated due to a breach of The Inappropriate Rule .

Forum Moderation Team

This post has been read by the moderation team and has been moderated due to a breach of The Inappropriate Rule .

Forum Moderation Team

I stayed at the camp ground at Curtain Springs when we were there a few weeks ago.

In the bar at the Roadhouse had the pleasure of meeting, and listening to Peter Severin (Spelling) the original and still current owner of Curtain Springs Station.

He told us that when he came to Curtain Springs, in the early 50's I think, he supplied the water for the people at Ayers Rock, as there was no permanent water supply out there.

We told him about an excited discussion we overheard on the 2 way coming in.
When Mt. Connor came into view, these two women were convinced it was Ayers Rock, but were disapointed that it wasn't red.

His response was "That's happened so often we nicknamed it Mt. Foolaroo", which cracked up all and sundry in bar.

Fred.

all national park and places of interest will eventually have a great big fence around it ..... Had a chat to a NPWS guy yesterday and asked why was cabbage tree road closed ( national park near karajong NSW ) and for how long -- all he could say was it was a management decision and it will be closed INDEFINITELY............ as tax payers , arnt we effectivly "management" ?

How long till the big fence and sign goes up around the big red rock ??

how long till the fence goes up around stockton beach ?

Boc

Good on you for telling it how you see it....this is so rare in a politically correct stupid world.

Yes vote is on the increase...bugger, was hoping to take my boy to the top next year. Might have to invoke my Mines Right to get to the top.

I consider Aboriginals to be Australians.....but things are getting out of hand shutting down areas that belong to "all" Australians, black, white, red or yellow.

Closing it down is not the answer, but is a great bargaining tool for the traditional owners to receive more funding.....lets hope that the funding arrives so all Australians can have a choice to climb or not.

Brett...

This post has been read by the moderation team and has been moderated due to a breach of The Foul Language Rule .

Forum Moderation Team

Hi All

There are lots of places in Australia that we like to Go To, Climb On, Swim In, Dive In, Drive In, Drive Over, ect ect, and I believe we all should Respect our Native Aborigine Culture and Beliefs, the Fair Dinkum Aborigines, not the so called one's that are Shandies, the rest of us who had Ancestors come over in Shackles and Irons, and the Relatives of MEN and WOMEN who fought for all our freedom,
also have a Culture, and that should also be protected, the Imigrants who have settled in Australia and worked hard and helped make the place what it is today should have a Culture,and that should be protected, but the other type we all are aware of who have no respect for anybodies Culture except their own beliefs, should be educated in our ways, and if they dont like it, LEAVE.

Cheers

Robin

Over both of these threads a common theme exists, and that is, how come all of a sudden these sites have cultural significance? Now I’m not going to second guess the answer, nor do I have one, but simply pose the question, who are we to decide what is of ‘cultural significance’ to someone else? Surely if they say it is, then it is.

The length of tenure by the indigenous Australian aborigine prior to the arrival and settlement by modern day Australians gives some basis to any claim that is made and there, in part, lies the problem. How do we recognise that, without offending anyone, whether they be pre or post white-settlement Australians? Telling people to lump it or leave it rarely works…..and that is a two-way street!

One of the biggest divides between our cultures, which are possibly factors in some of the issues you raise from the talk-back program, is language. Our cultures, dare I say, clashed, just over 200 years ago, which is a very short-period. It has taken hundreds of years for adequate translation of the meaning of not just words, but understanding of concepts, between other cultures around the world. Sometimes there is just isn’t a translation that adequately describes the meaning or concept between English and the language that indigenous Australian aborigines understand.

So it should be remembered, that to adequately describe to ‘white-fellas’ the cultural beliefs of these people, there needs to be an adequate translation; all too often there isn’t, so caution needs to be exercised when relying on ‘translations’.



Cheers,

Robin Robin Robin, talkback radio (!!), it's even more sensational than the tabloids.

This post has been read by the moderation team and has been moderated due to a breach of The Personal Attacks Rule .

Forum Moderation Team

This is a sacred site as well........and people climb here also.Image Could Not Be Found

Having been to Eyers Rock twice and climbed it I think that the closure would be detrimental to all Australians and indeed the world.
An awful lot of people come to the rock just to climb it for whatever reason. At the same time these people spend a large amount of money both getting there and whilst there. A lot of this income does go to the Aboriginal Lands Council as it should.
On my 1st visit not one thing was said against climbing, and the resort was in it's infancy, the next visit there was so much regulation and that we were gobsmacked. We were traveling through the Great Central and were asked not to stop and look at the Rock or the Olga's plus not to take any pics.
And yes we had the required permit which were shown at the gate.
So what's next a charge for breathing the air in the vicinity.
I personally think that we should all be allowed to enjoy this monolith and all it has to offer. And indeed be respectful of the local culture without going overboard.

Just My Tuppence.

.

Robin, I generally take your comments with a serious view and on the odd occation enjoy your banter.

However in this case, how can you be serious????
Do you really think they care about "Australians" black or white???

From the tone of your email I got the feeling you thought the government would in some way consider other options than what they have on their agenda?

Surely you can't be serious???
Theres an agenda.
We may not know it or hear of it, but I'd bet my crown jewels and first born that there is.

Usually money!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I of course agree with you as per usual. :) :) :)
I do find it puzzling though that their sacred areas are defined and the climb area has never been identified as one up until now.

Maybe we need to run a new poll.
Who voted for Peter Halfwitt???
Go back to singing and leave minority groups to believe their views are more important than everyone else.

I've walked to the top of the rock, the views from up there are phenomenal and worthy of the walk, there were no Aboriginal people living or in the general area at the time ~1974?

However on the way out there I noticed there were many dozens of homes the Australian government had built specifically for the local Aboriginal people that were timber-less, the metal roof's were removed and used as a roof for their 'humpy' they built up against a tree and all the homes timber framework was being used as firewood.
Same as is happening up in the far North West still.

The problem is we are attempting to assimilate the Aboriginal people into 'our' society with-out ascertaining what it is THEY want.
Many just want to be left alone to live their own lives - but they can't because of the demise of their food source and the 'interference' of the political correctness do-gooders who claim to know what is best for them.

I've some aboriginal friends, they are truly fantastic people..... (fact)

Unfortunately our problems are also their problems too, as alcohol etc is ruining their existence in what we call 'our' civilization.
Many don't want to live the way we want to live, they were not bought up that way, they are forced to live 'our' way by the young uns who are 'educated' by white people to survive on the dole and do nothing useful (as some WHITE kids also do)
Look at the so-called leaders of all the arguments, are they the beautiful full blood Aboriginal people or are they of mixed heritage ??

Maîneÿ . . .

People cans always vote with there wallets and go elsewhere..Like anything else i suppose..

Brief History Lesson...

Quote
The Pitjantjatjara and Yankunytjatjara people are the traditional custodians of the land that encompasses Uluru and Kata Tjuta and like to be referred to as Anangu
While there are no accurate estimates of how long Anangu have lived in the area, Archaeological findings to the east and west indicate that humans settled in the area somewhere around 20,000 – 40,000 years ago
Europeans arrived in the Australian Western Desert in the 1870s. Uluru and Kata Tjuta were first mapped by Europeans in 1872 during the expeditionary period made possible by the construction of the Australian Overland Telegraph Line. In separate expeditions, Ernest Giles and William Gosse were the first European explorers to this area.
While exploring the area in 1872, Giles sighted Kata Tjuta from a location near Kings Canyon and called it Mount Olga, while the following year Gosse observed Uluru and named it Ayers Rock. Further explorations followed with the aim of establishing the possibilities of the area for pastoralism. In the late 1800s, pastoralists attempted to establish themselves in areas adjoining the South western/Petermann Reserve and interaction between Anangu and white people became more frequent and more violent. Due to the effects of grazing and drought, bush food stores became depleted. Competition for these resources created conflict between the two groups, resulting in more frequent police patrols. Later, during the depression in the 1930s, Anangu became involved in dingo scalping with 'doggers' who introduced Anangu to European foods and ways.
unquote

As an "outsider Australian" I have an impartial interest in Aboriginal history and anthropology and have acquired a fair number of authoratitive books on the subject. My interest was first piqued after reading "The Last of the Nomads".
There is a fair bit of anthropological "evidence" that shows that Nomadic Aboriginal people were more than capable of surviving in Central Australian Deserts even in drought conditions (some were still doing so in the 1960's)
The operative word is "nomadic" - ie Aboriginal clans had no fixed abode but moved around the land seeking sustenance according to prevailing conditions... so it is unlikely that Uluru would ever have been a permanent residence for any clans...
Jedo

The closing of Ayres Rock/Uluru for climbing has been coming for a long time.
I've been up it a couple of times and on two other occasions ridden a bike around the base.

Travelling around the base is my better experience, but I loved climbing it.

The rock is an Australian Icon. It is the emotional 'heart' of Australia. To many Aussies, it's a right of passage to climb it.

From my experience and understanding through talking to people from the area, climbing the rock has not been a big worry until recent years. In 1994 we climbed the rock along with a couple of aboriginal families. They were very excited about the experience. I didn't ask them whether they were from the local area or not. It wasn't really an issue, I think.

It is however inevitable that as the indigenous people take up their heritage and make new [or maybe renew] connections and beliefs that they make decisions about things that they have control over.

Things change. I climbed the Organ Pipes [Organ Pipes Nat Park west of Melbourne] in 1974. The next week they shut it down and now you can't climb them. BTW it was just as special as the rock.

A few weeks ago, I climbed up the McDonnell ranges behind the caravan park in Alice Springs.. I promise you.. when you look down into the gap and along the ranges, it's just as special as the rock...

Sigh! Get over it.

Robin my friend (as I believe we are),

Just a suggestion. 3AW is the radio equivalent of the Herald Sun. Grubby tabloid journalism. I'm assuming you were listening to Neil Mitchell, a ratings hungry commentator.

I'd suggest tuning into John Faine on 3LO (774) for a more balanced view of the news.

Also for your early morning listening "AM" on 3LO is superb news coverage, as is "PM" after 6pm.

Regards,

Jim.

this topic has got a few hot under the collar tonight. I dont have any wishes to visit the rock let alone climb it. 200 years ago whites came to Australia. Q if that didnt happen then when would be the right time given the state the world is in now. I believe the do gooders of the past got it wrong but for heavens sake cant we all just get on with living and caring for each other. That will never happen. There is too much blame going on here to people that wernt even born when the lands were taken. What do we do leave to where !!!!

The land we now call Australia always has, does now and always will belong to the people that we now refer to as Aborigines. If you truly believe this statement to be correct then all of this country and not just Ayers Rock/Uluru belong to these people.
If this is the case don't you think that we who are not of Aboriginal decent and hold the above sentiment to be valid are being just a little hypocritical by occupying any part of Australia to the exclusion of the rightful owners? Aren't we being a little hypocritical to hold the view that we can dictate which part of Australia has become not Aboriginal land because of a non continuous connection.

Cheers Pop

I was at Uluru 5 years ago .. and surprised that there was only 1 Aboriginal person working around Uluru .. or at the cafe

the explanation I was given was that the local Aboriginal people were getting to much money from the gate fees that they had no need to work ...

a damned shame when the local group is one of the group targetted by the 'intervention' ...

I have the greatest respect for genuine Aboriginal people .. I know several of them well, including a well recognised 'elder / lawlady' ... but I have little time for the Aboriginal industry ...

I climbed the Rock ... it was a great experience

Hi Robyn,

pop2jocem I believe has the same thoughts running through my head as I was reading, and I really feel I'm wasting my time writing but here goes.
Where do we decide what we can take and what still belongs to the traditional land owners. I see it as all or nothing, either way is the only way we can finally put to bed the split ownership of area's, It's Australia, and should be shared by all, no matter who owns it.

All this ownership debate does is makes it the them and us mentality to continue and for Aboriginals to try to keep non Aboriginals off these sites, and non Aboriginals to express well why should Aboriginals be allowed on Government made roads and area's etc. if they didn't pay taxes towards there construction.

I wonder how many people would think it right for me as a land owner to ban Asians from coming on my land?

It never ends, lets finally call this magnificent land Australia and all share it!

By the way,

Vote is now:

70206 no about banning climbing

27942 supporting the ban

But does this really mean anything or hold any value.. ??

IMHO I think not !

Ayers' Rock.

Its a geological marvel.

Since found by Gosse in 1872 ... it has been one of the countries biggest drawcards ... Prior to that it was just a nomadic, wandering cultures signpost, same as many of their "special" places. As a "signpost" it has considerable worth in regard to the survival of a wandering people, unable to grasp the concept of planting yams in a row for next years food ... and should be respected as such ... but nothing more.

If greed, stupidity, lies, and and new age re-education causing public misconception about its significance/value make it a less than suitable icon for australia .... so be it.

Scratched the place off my list of "go back to's" years ago.

And something to think about ......

If most australian town names are named in deference to the aboriginal term for the area .... isnt it a bit surprising that it took so many years for Ayers' Rock aboriginal importance to facilitate renaming ....... or perhaps it just wasnt originally ... important enough ????

After reading all your points of views on this very touchy subject and yes I do have my own views. I would have liked to have read the moderated threads too to make more of an informative post.
First I would like to make it known that I do not have a white man view or a black fella view (Let it be known that I have an indigineos name and been semi adopted by a mob). I do sit on the post on all issues regarding this touchy subject considering I have seen first hand some very unfair treatment to our native generation by our powers to be.
I have been to the rock 3 times and believe I will be there many times in the future. I have not climbed it, not because of the respects of the traditional owners but because I am not ready to climb it, my body will tell me when I am ready .......... By the way I play the digeridoo fluently
There are many views expressed above and to elaborate on the original post. History does not LIE. I have distinct pictures of artwork (Youngens education) that shows where water is on the rock. In my opinion a painting that may have been painted 250 years is not a place of insignificance. It is an educational tool as to where to find the life giving substance we all strive for........ Now for all of you people (Me included) out there who strive to have the best of everything...... Ask your self what you really NEED in life?????????? a Roof, Water and Food not necessarilly in that order. Unfortuanetly in our society greed has taken over and we must strive to have more than everyone else. So what?????? does it mater when you are dead???????? why accumulate it...... ok sorry I am still no where near my point I wanted to make.
The rock according to dreamtime when I have been there has significant cultural value. Acording to the records of 1974 it was open slather.......... In my opinion 2009 minus 1974 equals 35 years and "What? That Rock?" there is nothing there....... Maybe not then but the paintings showing were water was and I am sure the nomadic people of those days knew how to read the paintings and signs as to where water was.
We do not know what is best for the rock and also the "Custodians" of today do not know what is best.
The one thing I do know and I would like everyone who reads this to think about what I am about to say.
How many times has anybody been to church? Weather it is the St mary's Cathedral in Sydney or St brians in the smallest town in oz? To go to a funeral or a wedding.... Everyone has been to a church at some time or other.....
Now think of this, half way through the service did you have a snack and throw the rubbish of to the side for the wind to pic up or maybe one of the cleaners at a later date?????? How about when u need to go to the toilet? Do u go to the corner and do it in the middle of the service?????? I think the answer to both these questions is NO. So why do people do it on a religous sacred site? Both these examples are done on a daily basis.... Just because in 1974 a few fellas at curtain springs did not know what the significance of the rock was, and maybe some fellas at the rock also did not know????? They must have not been old enough to have been given the "Elders" Teachings. Those paintings have been there for hundreds if not thousands of years and I am sure some of u out there know the aboriginal symbol for water. It is painted on the rock in a few places. All 3 times I have been there, there has been water.
Sorry for a long post but I do have so much more to say b ut need zzzzzzzzz
Peter

Explain this , Uluru /Ayers rock 2nd week of May last year 2008 , signs erected proclaiming that the road and parking area for Sunrise viewing was to be closed and subsequently moved to a newer area .Reason ? All of a sudden the parking area and road had become a "significant and sacred area to the traditional owners" ,,, cynical ? You bet , newer area to hold 4x paying puplic as previously , only sacred thing out there is the $$$$$$$$$ .
As an aside ask why not 1 " traditional owner "works at the cultural centre ?
Would not be that the pay does not compare with $s payed for the entrance to their 'sacred' area would it ?.....

I am *really* annoyed that the rock is to be closed for climbing. And we don't seem to have a say.

I live for my trips away from the city and climbing the rock is the single most exhilarating experience I've had in my travels. Absolutely awesome and significant on a world scale.

If we've got about 14 months before its closed I'll by lobbying all my friends to grab their kids and experience it now.

I went there in 1976, yep, climbed it, walked all the way round the base, explored the caves, climbed many of the ridges, had a very enjoyable time.
Had a look at it on Google Earth recently, and decided I am not going back!

Hi again,

Yes I put my 10 cents worth in previously, but having followed the amount of responses to the original question it becomes obvious that this topic brings strong opinions from all sides.
Some compared the climbing of the "Rock" with desecration of a church, mosque or any similar site of worship. This prompts me to wonder if one was to urinate, defecate or fornicate in said places held sacred by the religious or racial group concerned would paying an admittance fee make such actions acceptable?

Cheers Pop

Many thanks for airing the other argument Robin - it's been said "Beware the sound of one hand clapping" (that is, beware of an argument where you don't hear the other side).

It's interesting that many people trumpet the idea of 'respect' for another culture. Personally, I climbed the Rock and really enjoyed the view but I don't feel so strongly about climbing if I really thought it was going to make the difference between cultural respect or not, but while we're talking about respect, let's remember that there is responsibility on BOTH parties.

For example: It wouldn't take much for them to show a bit of respect for our taxes that are directed to them in welfare (including the cars and houses). Is it too much to ask that they respect our culture by not abusing their children/wives? If we are not going to climb the rock in case it gets 'damaged', how about them refraining from willful damage of public facilities (ie. vandalism). I know that none of these things are limited only to aboriginal people, but it does seem that in all of the aboriginal communities I've passed through in my travels (at least a dozen across different states): anything that can be broken is broken. Everything else is constructed from heavy gauge steel or has a steel 'cage' built around it to protect it. And then they're worried about us having a narrow walking track up the side of a rock?

Rudd wants Uluru climb to stay open.



PETER Garrett has been left looking like a shag on a lonely rock after Kevin Rudd undermined him by saying tourists should continue to be allowed to climb Uluru.
A 10-year draft management plan for the Uluru-Kata Tjuta National Park, released on Tuesday, announced that Parks Australia in conjunction with traditional owners would move towards permanently shutting the 348m climb.

The plan also said seasonal closures of the climb would commence immediately.

The Prime Minister, speaking from Italy this morning, said: “Obviously it's a question of public safety and managing important parts of our natural landscape.

“(But) I think it would be very sad if we got to a stage though where Australians and frankly our guests from abroad weren't able to enjoy that experience ... to climb it.”

The draft report calls for public comment but makes it clear that closing the climb, accessed by 100,000 adults each year and many more children (who are not counted) would be closed at a yet-to-be determined date.

This method of stating a firm position, then calling for comment, does not appear to have impressed the Australian public, or Mr Rudd.

Traditional owners have long requested visitors not climb Uluru, saying the trail to the summit follows an ancestral track taken by the mala (rufous hare-wallaby ) men.

Parks Australia also say the climb is strenuous and risky.

Mr Garrett reportedly said yesterday: "I think you can take in all the fantastic beauty and cultural significance of the site without climbing it."

Opposition politicians have attacked Mr Garrett, saying the planned closure was all his idea.

The Environment Minister wrote to The Australian today, saying that despite his department's firm position he had not taken a decision to close the climb.

Shadow environment minister Greg Hunt said Mr Garrett had been overruled by Mr Rudd and that “Australians and international visitors should be trusted to behave with cultural sensitivity’’.

“The Prime Minister agrees with the Coalition view that visitors should be allowed to continue the climb as long as it is carried out in a manner sensitive and mindful of cultural issues and conditions,’’ Mr Hunt said.

“Mr Garrett is under-estimating the significance of the iconic climb to Australia by even entertaining a plan to shut it down. If international visitors (including Australians abroad) can be trusted to access other culturally-sensitive national icons like the Grand Canyon, Mt Fuji, Machu Picchu (Peru) and Aoraki / Mt Cook (NZ) then I think they should be trusted at Uluru.”


Site Link

I climbed only 1/2 way (scared of heights and chain ended there) back in the late 1980's.
Back then they preferred you didn't climb the rock.

Nice view up there, but wouldn't say it's an essential experience.
I found sunset-sunrise, walking around the rock and bushwalking at Kata Tjuta (The Olgas) more special.

I hate seeing beautiful places over-commercialised.
It leaves a disappointed, ripped-off feeling when everywhere you go, you're forking out money+ just to be there enjoying the natural surroundings.

As for the sacred site=$ argument, I suspect it's a case of a few greedy people giving all Aboriginal people a bad name.

Haven't seen it mentioned so far - but Kata Tjuta (Olga's) is probably every bit as much a 'sacred site' as the Rock... So...
No-one seems to have challenged the concept of charging $$ for entry to view the Rock - and from other comments in the thread, it seems that there's now a permanent population of aboriginal people supported by the entry price... (I wonder where else the takings go..? Certainly not on the local infrastructure..)
So what's to stop them charging for entry to Kata Tjuta in the future... Not to mention Kings Canyon, McDonnell Ranges, Devils Marbles... Hell... they could even have Tolls on the Gunbarrel, Simpson, Birdsville and Oodnadatta Tracks...
(Whoever "they" are...)
It posses me off to the extreme when taxpayers money (my money) is used to purchase land that becomes a "National" Park (remind me of what National means) that I then have to pay an entrance fee to go and see the damn thing... (and probably have to walk a good few kilometers from the dirt/earth car park to actually see anything at all... Rant Over...
Seriously though... Is this yet another example of whipping the majority into line to cater for the wishes of the minority??? How long will it be before my wife has to cover her ankles and wear a veil in public..??
Jedo

Robin,

A couple of comments on your "accurate report".

"From the 40's local police used to undertake regular tourist trips out there
and their logs consistently reported no aboriginal presence anywhere near the area.
(As opposed to Mt Conner some 80km away which had permanent water).
This was a matter of historical record. "

This was a matter of historical record ? Maybe - what was the source ? Anyway these "facts" were interpreted incorrectly by you and the radio station.

This unfounded statement bears has no bearing on the significance of Ayers Rock as a significant sacred site. The aboriginal population of 1940, had absolutely no relationship to what existed before the arrival of Europeans. And it was before 1940, way, way before 1940, that the sacred sites of the Pitjandjara people were developed - over a cultural period spanning 20,000 years.
............................................................................................................

For your information, Aboriginal groups moved from one waterhole to the next, usually not because the water had run out, but because the food was becoming scarce. Tribes were never "permanent" in these desert regions. They visited some waterholes, less than once a year.

Just as a matter of interest, did you know that there was a semi-permanent waterhole up on the rock and many believe that the name Uluru, was actually the name of the rockhole, not the rock itself.
...........................................................................................................

"The current owner of Curtain springs was involved with elders who would assist as guides to the area.
When they were asked why there was no presence their, their recorded comments were - why would anybody wish to be there or go up on top - their is no permanent water nor food."

Obviously, an aboriginal in the modern era, could not survive there, as his descendants had. This statement has no relevance.
............................................................................................................

"Additionally they stated that for the above reasons it was never given any "special place" significance. "

Who were "they" ? More unsubstantiated here say from the radio station.
.............................................................................................................

"The clear statement was made that not one of the people currently living around the base of Ayers rock, was alive then as part of any traditional ownership in that area."

This has no bearing on the deciding if Ayers Rock has a strong cultural significance to the local aboriginal people.
.............................................................................................................

"Other sets of tourist promoters who have operated in the area since the 70's
stated that the relative "special placeness" has increased massive over recent years."

People are prepared to listen now. In my humble opinion, that is a great thing.
.............................................................................................................

"The above is an accurate report of what was said."

An accurate report of inaccurate statements.
..............................................................................................................

Note - I have climbed the rock twice and enjoyed it. If I had the choice, I would like to see the right to climb it, remain.

However, when I see facts misinterpreted and rubbish posted as facts in support of arguments, I cannot sit back and ignore it.

Willie.

Here's some interesting correspondence re Ayres rock I came across a few days ago. These copies will be removed in about 4 days time.
View Here

.





Guy's, how about we give it a break now before we get to 120 posts.....




We are going round in circles going nowhere nice




We're now adding nothing new to the original post




We all have our own opinions and that could be said to be good
but do we need to rehash what's been previously covered ? ? ?




Yes, of course it's only my opinion :-) :-) :-)








Maîneÿ . . .

It is not my intention to ‘re-ignite’ further debate on this particular topic (previous response noted) although I’m sure it isn’t the last we will hear of the issue, and nor will it be the last time it is debated.

Following is a link to a study that was undertaken in 2006 written by Hannah Hueneke. Hannah submitted it in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Bachelor of Arts/Science with Honours in the School of Resources, Environment and Society, Australian National University, Canberra.

As Hannah highlights upfront, the aim of the study was not to assess or interpret Anangu opinion on the climb, but to take the ‘please don’t climb’ message, as it is articulated in UKTNP interpretive literature and to focus on tourists’ responses to the Anangu request.

This is a lengthy document, but I commend it to those who are interested, both for, and against the banning of the climb, as it provides more substance, and colour, than is often offered by the ‘shock-jocks’ of the talk-back radio world. And that is not a sleight at Robin Miller who made the original post, but as is often the case, the ‘shock-jocks’ have their own agenda and will represent (or not) the facts as they choose.

In contrast, this study, in the words of the author, provides a historical perspective and rich empirical research and analysis that highlights that visitors’ decisions to climb or not to climb are deeply situated in wider political contexts and discursive practices that recognize or deny Indigenous claims.

I’m not in a position to debate this thesis, nor is it my place to do so, so I won’t. I’ve posted it for those interested in further reading on the topic.

To Climb or not to Climb

Cheers!

***I say, if the aboriginals don't want us to climb it, we should respect their wishes. It is a very significant site for those people. We have ripped everything else off them, is it so much to ask that we don't climb the Rock ?***

You cant have it both ways Willie,i put up a post about a year ago or so stating how White Man has come in and taken over Indigenous Tribes World Wide etc etc..
As i recall you were one of the ones that said i was full of crap basically...

You becoming mellow with age mate lmao..



Cheers

Can this subject be put on the POLL section so people can vote on it ???????

I thought we had all had enough of that old chestnut of land being a sacred site after the Hind Marsh Island Bridge fiasco. That aside, you speak to people on the North Coast and here about the number of claims, most of which relate to key coastal areas, that are dealt with at council level. It is shocking.

The simple fact is whether we like it or not, we took over the place! The aborigines were not the first race here and there has been some academics saying that the Aborigines wiped them out. I have no idea if this is true or not but in 1788, might beat right!

If we went about setting all the wrongs right from a "we took over" perspective there would be a lot of homeless people out there LOL

The Aborigines have zero credibility. It is not something they created. They used Uluru as we do, but they feel that gives them ownership. Ayers Rock exists for all Australians, including the Aboriginals, but it is not for anyone to decide who should climb it, photograph it or camp near it.

If we are so worried about offending someones culture then we should all women should wear Burkha's! What is the difference? We go out of our way to accomodate one culture at the expense of our own and make no effort in relation to other cultures.

I for one am fed up with the NPWS. They need to understand that they dont own the country, Australian's do, and they have mad elittle effort to manage, plenty of effort to install gates and lock the place up, happy to charge wherever they can, install barriers everywhere to frustrate people camping and in some instances they have removed amenities.

The NPWS rangers try hard to do the right thing I am sure, but they need to abide by the decisions of the cretins they report to, whio hardly represent Australian's considering their conduct.

As for the argument that 30 people have died...so what? Thats like saying we should close the M5 freeway because 30 people have died on that. Considering it is claimed that 100,000 to 350,000 people climb the rock every year, it is a small % of people that die. Unlike the politicians, if I climbed it and had a heart attack as I wasnt fit enough I wouldnt be looking to blame abyone but myself but politicians arent capable of that.

In summary:
NPWS have no credibility
Aborigines have no credibility
All Australians own Ayers Rock
People want to climb it
It is a natural feature and there has been no argument of damage to the rock from climbing
% of risk is minimal
It is an amazing experience for those that climb it

Leave it alone....

So I grew up in the shadow of and under the slopes of Mt Dandenong on Melbourne's east. To me that is as close as I can come to a sacred site, when ever I see the hills it tells me I am almost home and is somehow burned into part of me, to the extent that we bought a house right on the slope of the mountain. Now this is MY sacred site so would everyone please stop walking on, driving around and otherwise using my mountain in any way I don't approve of.
Whats the difference between this and the aborigional idea of a scared site? A short answer is NOTHING, this is my home, my memories and it embodies a large portion of my personal history on the slopes of these hills. I know people were here before I was born and will be here long after I'm gone, I accept that and know that others have different ideas about it but to me it is important that it is there, within view, in reach and always will be. As for Uluru, ever since I was little I have wanted to go there, to see it, to walk up it and generally experience the majestyand grandeur of it, and this was long before it was deemed un PC to want to walk on it. Should I change my idea of how I want to experience it because my belief doesn't fit the right mould? I did manage to get out there a couple of years ago, but for various reasons wasn't able to fulfil my childhood wish of walking up it, I will get back there and I will do the walk, that is part of how I wish to experience that place, it is still an important part of who I am and why I am Australian. We all have different ideas of what OUR own personal "sacred sites" are and we are all entitled to these views but since when were we allowed to force these views on others?
Anyway, rant over....
Brian.