The real Problem at ULURU is a lack of meaningful alternative attractions.

The NT Govt must build a mini Eiffel Tower not only so tourists can see the rock in all its glory but also so they can ponder the vastness of this continent from its very heart.

But perhaps the most important reason to build a tower is so this 'WALK UP ULURU', this important 'TOUIRIST DRAW' is not stolen away without a reasonable alternative that interests tourists enough to go to such a "tourist" hell hole in the first place.

It's good to think of native Australian's rights it really is. But who cares the heck if no one is going to PAY to go see it because its been NANNYFIED.

I know these people and the NT govt. They need the money yet lack the experience to see into the future. But what they don't lack is a healthy greed and that's good. Because the whole area will die if they don't get their act together and build that ULURU tower now.

Why bother with a tower?

Simply tunnel under the rock, or rather tunnel into the rock below ground level and then bore upwards, install lifts, a terminus below the top of the rock and unobtrusive exits to viewing areas?

Why on earth would you want to build something like the
Eiffel Tower near Uluru. For starters the rock is bigger
than the Eiffel Tower - and it's already awesome enough
as it stands. If you really want a bird's eye view -
helicopter rides are available - as are tours of every
description, as are walks to soak in the entire beauty
of the place. It attracts more than 250,000 visitors
a year and rather than further ruin it - perhaps we should
simply enjoy it as is and respect it for its uniqueness.
Its awesomeness.

If you want to soar to various heights - go to Disneyland.

Maybe we need to build a mega red rock near the Eiffel Tower in France.

That should solve the problem

Those who climb Uluru would likely regard the view as boring. Somehow or other climbing the rock became a tourist thing to do. You'd have to be capable of convincing yourself that it was a 'significant event'. About as enjoyable, individualistic and meaningful as getting a tattoo.

A number have died through heat and lack of fitness. There has to be some advisories, and prevention where heat and wind conditions make it more risky.

I happen to like desert country (and sea and scrub and well, anything outdoors and away from any signs of civilisation). So we were usually well away from the treated pine corrals for people, viewing platforms, endless signage and fees. -Not referring to avoiding fees but going elsewhere instead.

In most areas of Oz it would be an 'Eyeful' Tower. An eyeful of litter, drink containers and graffiti ,'Bogan X wuz here'.

It is the memory of rubbish, trash everywhere, that visitors take away with them. The biggest problem is always people who did not care and must have been raised that way. Mind you, some tourists are notorious for litter. We really should be helping people to comply. Not by more government brochures, but by clever nudges in the right direction. For example big bins with a hole marked like a target and wry humour on signs suggesting that they don't use the immediate vicinity of a rest area as a toilet. Maybe a free small shovel with how and where to use as well.

The 'real problem' with Ayers Rock is that it is in the hands of the people who call it Uluru.

Anangu would prefer that the climbing stopped. The commentariat and media sensationalised that request.

However it is the damage from graffiti, vandalism, defacing, tagging that most were and are, worried about.

I've seen that everywhere and the lesser problems like stupidly nailing items of apparel over trees in pristine locations. I never post photos of damage because idiots go off and copycat. And they get to know the places of art and so on.

But even apart from that, visitors can 'love' a place to death.

Malcolm in Canberra probably still has final say, not Anangu.

I wonder what the law is about climbing trees in many national parks ? Swimming in pools and creeks in national parks ? Not allowed ? Fair enough. Then why allow any yob to climb Uluru, take a dump up there, and chuck his rubbish wherever he likes ?

Walk around it, at a distance of a kilometre or so, if you feel you have to, but have enough respect to leave it alone.

Joe

Loudmouth,

The approach is to discourage and the climbing will be forgotten over time. Problem with a hard approach is that rescue will be occupied with thrill seekers doing it out of hours and probably leaving their paint and scratched tags to prove same. Don't want to make a 'Welcome back Kotter' graffitied railcar out of the rock.

I shrug and carry extra bags for other people's rubbish. Long handled $5.95 pick-up tongs are available from car parts discount places. Useful around camps anyhow. There is a canvas carrier slung on the back of the vehicle. Our rule is to quietly clean a site and never to act as though we are setting any lessons or being judgemental. Later we might see kids from other camps thoughtfully using the bins.

As well, where possible we may use a shovel to tidy the multiple ash pits to one fireplace with something to encourage use. But of course some people do not understand and establish new fire sites wherever they go.

Authorities could do well by using gentle nudges, not the heavy-handed US Park Ranger authoritarianism, to encourage people to do the right thing.
It is more effective. A bit of cheap equipment and maintenance helps wonders.

Smart local councils should realise that where treated well (cheap to do), the youthful backpackers will likely be back soon as tourists with their family in tow.

I should have added that in many cases, it is actually the country town locals who are responsible for the vandalism and rubbish.

'Petrol head' yobbos with their booze and takeaway binges. Rubbish placed on the ground from a open car door. They also seem to be mainly responsible for the trashing of tourist facilities and for annoying tourists.

Which is why many of us advise campervan and other touring folk to avoid overnights at sites within 30mins drive of a town. And preferably to park out of easy sight from the road. Girls and elderly to find company, check on others staying over, a quick hello with cup of tea in hand and ask the question.

Dear Joe,

I believe that Uluru is considered a sacred site
by the Indigenous people so tourists visiting
the area should be made aware of that and only
guided tours be allowed and due respect shown.
I haven't been to the
top-end - yet, but it is on my to-do list. And
I hope that we shall be able to get the full
history of the place from an Indigenous perspective.

Have you visited the area?

Dear Foxy,

No, only to Alice Springs: not impressed. I went to high school in Darwin in the late fifties, when the population was 7-12,000 (it was growing very fast). I'm happy to leave Uluru to the people whose country it's in.

Love,

Joe

I'm not sure what the hooo=haaa is all about but 'EYRES ROCK' is just that. A rock! Now I don't speak this funny lingo that the abo's speak and I don't do political correctness, so I say to everyone it's proper name is Eyres Rock. Personally I don't see the attraction then you add all the pain and expense involved in going anywhere near it, you can keep it. Australia is not a tourist destination. We have a FEW places worth seeing but the truth is the time it takes to get here then the expense once you are here, it's just not worth it. Europe, USA, Canada, and so the list goes on. Now these are countries worth seeing I know so I suppose if your into big rocks and flies, snakes, spiders, oh I won't go on, you get it.

Dear ALTRAV,

Ayers Rock is more than just "a rock."

It is the world's largest monolith - millions of years old.
It also happens to be Australia's mot famous natural
landmark and an Aboriginal sacred site. The oxidized iron
in the sandstone gives it its rusty-red colour.

It happens to attract over 250,000 tourists a year. Why?
Because Australia's red heart has fun, adventure, and
excitement to offer for all.

There are over 65 tours and experiences on offer both at
Uluru (Ayer's Rock) and around the Ayers Rock Resort.
There's plenty to pick and choose from.

There's helicopter tours, camel rides and wildlife experiences,
All sorts of cultural experiences, walking tours, small tour
experiences, Sunrise experiences, Sunset experiences,
Kings Canyon Day tours, Adventures beyond Uluru, and the list
goes on and on.

Still some people I suppose may agree with you that -
Ayers Rock is just a "rock." Same as they may also view
Australia in the following way:

"I love this ripper country
Of funnel-webs and sharks
With blowers big as eagles
Where your car gets booked by narks
Where your team gets trounced each Saturday
And the pubs run out of beer
Where there's redbacks on the toilet seat
And you're nagged by Germaine Greer."

Whereas, "I love a sunburnt country
A land of sweeping plains ..."
You know the rest.

To me Uluru is and will remain
something very special.

No offence intended, but Uluru wouldn't make 100th on the list for me and then not for the days/weeks we like to spend travelling, exploring and savouring.

Uluru is more along the Clark Griswold 'must sees', had there even been a National Lampoon 'Oztralian Vacation'

I guess when all's said and done - there's
nothing more Australian than spending time in
somebody else's country.

Foxy your reply reads like a travel brochure. I afford you the right to make your case. I do appologise for wandering off topic though. I was not focusing but I would, never-the-less like to retain my points. The real problem at Ayers Rock is just as the name suggests. It does not belong to any minority whether or not they say they were here before us. They may be capable of managing issues pertaining to their culture and history, but aborigines have absolutely no history in business and management in the twenty first century. By 'giving' land back to them has alienated the rest of the population and made to feel like outsiders. Ayers Rock, is just another 'asset' owned by all Australians not just a few. If we are to accept the demands made by the abo's we would find ourselves beholding to them as tenants and they being the Landlords. The British landed and colonised Australia and therefore as far as I am concerned we are ALL Australian! That's that!

Alt-Rav,

You need to distinguish between British sovereignty and ownership of/relationship to land. At least in SA (and why not the other colonies ?) Aboriginal rights to use the land as they always had done were recognised from the outset, as part of the English Common Law, and recognising Aboriginal people as British subjects (which, when you think about it, is no more absurd than assuming some tenant in Galway or Scottish crofter are 'British subjects'). Those rights were formally written into the SA Pastoral Act of (?) 1851.

Ayers Rock, as part of the NT, came under SA administration in about 1865, so those laws would have extended to Ayers Rock: that Aboriginal people had the right to use that area as they always had done. Those rights were re-affirmed in the NT Aboriginal Lands Act in (?) 1981 - in fact, extended to recognise their ownership in a more Western sense, ownership, group ownership, not just land-use rights. So it's not public property, it belongs to the Pitjantjatjara. End of.

Joe