The end of the Climb

In April I was interviewed by Sam Duncan from Australian Geographic Magazine. We spent a little over half an hour talking about the coming ban on climbing Ayers Rock. A small portion of our discussion ended up in Sam's article "The end of the Climb" that appeared in the July-August print edition but it's now available on line. An edited transcript of our interview appears below an extract from the article.

From The end of the Climb 
THE DECISION TO END the climb has met with a divided response. The views of the people I meet out here are split 50:50.

Marc Hendrickx, a former NT surveyor (ed actually former NTGS mapping Geologist), is the most prominent voice opposing the ban. He says evidence shows traditional owners in the past have climbed and had no issues with others climbing and that is critical information Parks Australia has misrepresented.

Since the creation of Ayers Rock-Mount Olga National Park in 1958, more than 7 million visitors have “experienced the joy, wonder and exhilaration of the climb, and the remarkable views over the desert it provides”, Marc wrote in a letter to the UNESCO World Heritage Centre earlier this year.

He says the safety risks have been grossly exaggerated: “Rather than inform people about risk, Parks Australia and state authorities just shut things down to make it easier for themselves.” An outdoor enthusiast, Marc fears the closure of the climb represents a broader threat for people wanting to “get out of our mundane cities to seek awe, wonder and inspiration”.

The Uluru climbing ban is, however, in keeping with a trend occurring across many of Australia’s Aboriginal sites popular with tourists.

For example, at St Mary Peak in the Flinders Ranges, National Parks South Australia suggests visitors do not climb the summit out of respect for the Adnyamathanha people. Climbing the summit at Mt Warning, in the Northern Rivers region of NSW, is contentious too because it is a sacred men’s ground for the Arakwal people.

Some tourism operators there are concerned about the impact an official ban might have. And earlier this year, Parks Victoria banned climbing in eight areas of the Grampians National Park to protect ancient Aboriginal rock art.

Marc has lodged a complaint with the Australian Human Rights Commission, claiming the Uluru climbing ban breaches the Racial Discrimination Act because only Anangu will be permitted to practise their culture. He says it’s also in breach of the lease agreement with Parks Australia that requires it to preserve, manage and protect all cultural heritage: he has nominated the chain, summit monument and five memorial plaques for placement on the National Heritage List, to prevent removal.

An edited transcript of Interview with Sam Duncan for a piece in Australia Geographic conducted 11 April 2019.

SD: There’s heaps of your stuff online I’ve been reading through and I’ve seen you quoted in a few articles so I’ve got a fair idea of how you come to your conclusions so no need to kind of go into all the depths of that. The piece I’m doing is for July…

MH: Right?

SD: ... and it’s trying to be as balanced as it can. Looking at all sides of how the ban has come about and what the future might hold, and a key part of that really is, I guess, do you see yourself as leading the push to reverse the ban? Is that right?

MH: Doesn’t seem to be anyone else. 

SD: yeah, yeah sure. Have you got anyone that’s on board with you actively doing much, or is it really a one man band?

MH: Look there are a few people, a few close contacts that I can’t name who are working with me, yeah.

SD: Sure

MH: ... and there’s an undercurrent that’s brewing that depends on what happens with a couple of things from a legal perspective as well. For instance the one year anniversary of my claim with the Human Rights Commission came up this week. So I’m guessing that the outcome of that is going to be decided reasonably soon, although the election may get in the way of that. I don’t know how the Commission are faced with change of government provisions and things like that so that could hold it up for another month or so. Depending on the outcome, that might follow on with further legal action down the track. Or if by some miracle the HRC decide in my favour then I’m guessing the other side may look at taking some legal action, so we will see how we go. 

SD: So you’re not hopeful in that regard? You think your chances are not good?

MH: Just based on the history of the Human Rights Commission, yeah I’m fairly pessimistic but I’m still hoping that they judge the claim fairly and they don’t let their own biases influence their decision. I think there is a very strong case that the ban is discriminatory but we’ll wait and see what the HRC say.

SD: Sorry I’m just typing as we go. Give me one sec…. And basically that’s on the grounds that the ban breaches the age discrimination act, the race discrimination act and the sex discrimination act?

MH: That’s correct. So my claim is to do with the Race discrimination act. I can’t claim on grounds of sex or age because I fit into the age group of the senior Anangu men these days, being over 50. I initially put in on behalf of other people. On behalf for instance of my daughters who won’t be able to climb after the ban is enforced and on behalf of female climbers. I don’t know if you have been following the Instagram tag Ayers Rock or Uluru, if you have you can get a glimpse of the sort of people who are climbing at the moment and it is a broad range of people from all over the world. Boys, girls, families, individuals…

SD: I was out there for the whole of last week and saw it each day.

MH: Did you climb yourself?

SD: I didn’t but I spoke with a huge range of people that have…

MH: Ohh, it’s a pity...

SD: …come down.

MH: One of the frustrating things for me is to try and get journalists to actually go up there and actually do the climb. Because it’s very hard for you to write about the experience of climbing if you haven’t done it. You know. It’s sad 

SD: Well as a reporter we do it through the voice of others.

MH: Well if you actually had the chance of putting your own voice in there it would probably be quite compelling from the view of Australian Geographic. For instance it would be fascinating to hear what… That was one of the frustrating things with Trent Dalton’s article because he didn’t climb either. And there’s been a few articles by some international journalists as well who have written on the subject remotely. There was an article in Der Speigel that was written without even visiting the rock so you know if you are not prepared to go out there and experience what other people are feeling when they are doing the climb, and looking at those wonderful views then I think it's lacking a bit. You are saying you want to be balanced but for that balance someone really needs to go up there and defy the totalitarian, authoritarian edicts of Parks Australia and just get up there and do it. I know it’s very hard to get access there as a journalist. The amount of hoops they make you go through it’s like the place is North Korea or something, it’s ridiculous. But it would be fascinating to get a journalist’s insights, especially you know, if you are writing for Australian Geographic obviously you have a bit of a bent on experiencing the natural world and experiencing those wonderful views it would have been good to get your opinion of it so…. Oh well, another missed opportunity. 

SD: Have you read any article well written where someone has gone up:

MH: Mainly by people who have climbed. There are a lot of blog articles. There is a wonderful one written by … I can sent you the links… There’s one that deals with the feelings of guilt that these guys experienced initially climbing and then they were really overcome by just how fantastic the experience is and why would you lock anyone out of it?  That’s by an American adventure couple, and there’s a bit written by a US comic Fred Reiss I think his name is. And he, it’s a wonderful story, he is a cancer survivor and just one of the things he wanted to do as part of his cancer treatment when he went into remission was to, one of the driving forces behind his healing was this concept he had of climbing Uluru. And his story is just fascinating and I‘ll send you a link to his as well. Just in terms of people who have climbed.

SD: One of the couples that I interviewed just as they finished, that was her story as well. She was basically trying to recover from skin cancer and had it all over her face and was waiting on a bowel cancer prognosis later that week so she was on a pilgrimage of sorts and the climb had given her the feeling if she could do that, she could do anything so that voice is definitely going to be there I’d say. From people I spoke to that was a compelling reason as to why some people want to do it.

SD: Can I just go back on the history of your claim.  So you were saying you initially claimed on behalf of your daughters and other females?

MH: The basis of my claim was that the ban will breach the race discrimination act the sex discrimination act and the age discrimination act but because I don’t fit into those later two categories I could only claim on racial grounds.

SD: Yeah ok, So it’s an individual claim to the human rights commission. 

MH: That’s correct. That’s the way the Human Rights commission works. You can’t claim on behalf of someone else. 

SD:  So timeframe wise when are you expecting a response? Is it pretty loose?

MH: Well, how long is a piece of string? 

SD: Pretty lose then.

MH: I’m expecting to get something back before the 26th of October I suppose. Else there would be grounds for the Human Rights Commission, if they were unable to complete the processing of that claim before then they would have to on my behalf institute an injunction to prevent the ban from occurring, and more to the point to prevent removal of the chain, and the destruction of the summit monument and five memorial plaques on the rock which are also wrapped up with this whole ban of climbing on the rock.

SD: yeah sure. OK. SO if they find in your favour what’s the next step?

MH: Well then I guess it would be up to Parks Australia to respond to that in some way. Whether or not they accept that they have breached the act. For the local Anangu People, the people who are leasing the Park to Parks Australia, which is the Uluru Kata Tjuta land trust, I Think. They would be able to do a couple of things. Admit the lease has been breached and run the Park Privately. That would be one outcome. And I would support them in that decision. It would be private land then and would not have the issue of being leased or rented out and they would no longer be subject to the racial discrimination act as it would be private property and they could enforce the ban in that way.  That would mean they would have to kick off Parks Australia and they would have to go about running the park themselves in some way, which I fully support.   I think it would be a great way for them to gain self-determination in the area. This is one hidden thing about it, how they are constantly talking about wanting to run the place and ironically in a way if they lose the case then it would give them a great opportunity to do that. And I would fully support them doing that. That would take away any grounds I would have of claiming a right to climb the rock. 

SD: So if that was to happen. What do you think they would do in terms of the climb? Do you think they would ban it or is there room to come to some sort of agreement running it as a private arrangement and allowing some sort of climb to happen? 

MH: I think there are wonderful opportunities for the local Anangu people to really showcase the Park. One of my arguments you would have read is that the climb is actually inherent to Anangu Culture. It’s a very important part of Anangu culture and sharing the climb has been an important part of the culture of the locals up until 1991. So you would have read about men like Tiger Tjalkalyirri, Paddy Uluru, Toby Naninga, Mitjenkeri Mick. This cast of characters who actually guided people up the Rock and supported people climbing the rock so I think if they had a look at their recent history perhaps they may come to the decision that ok we did climb, we do climb and we support visitors climbing. The thing they are worried about are more of the safety aspects of it. If they can manage the safety aspects in a different way to lower the risks even further. The risks of climbing are already very low and I hope your article stresses this. When you look at the actual numbers and compare it to other tourist activities, things like visiting the Grand canyon or going to the great barrier reef and snorkelling the risks of climbing are very low and Parks Australia and the Board have exaggerated those risks. If they are able to manage that a little bit better, perhaps by doing a safety induction at the base before people climb, or offering to do guided climbing. So in the 40s and 50s Tiger Tjalkalyirri was a man who would go up there with you. Perhaps that’s an opportunity and that could be a paid attraction at a re-kindled park which would be very attractive to tourists. To climb with an Aboriginal guide would be wonderful.

SD: That’s interesting. Have you spoken with the Anangu much?

MH: I have been totally blocked from speaking with them. Every attempt I have made I have been blocked by Parks Australia.

SD: Right, OK, so we’re talking Steve Baldwin?

MH: I have tried to go through Steve Baldwin. He has been helpful in terms of passing on messages to people like Sammy Wilson. But I’ve never heard back from anyone from the board. I’ve tried going through Steve but it’s been totally unsuccessful. 

SD: Have you ever tried to get into the community to have a chat, get a permit to get in there. 

MH: If I had a limitless bucket of money to do that, I’d love to be able to do that but I don’t. It’s very costly to go out there. I have worked in the Northern Territory and am aware of the time it takes to gain trust and I just don’t the have the time. Unfortunately I’d love to be able to do it. Maybe in another universe it would be possible but I just don’t have the time and I don’t have the money to be able to do that. It’s been one of the most frustrating aspects of this whole saga for me is not being able to communicate directly with the board and the Anangu people there. One of the men I am trying to track down at the moment and Steve has not been able to help is the grandson of Tiger Tjalkalyirri. Just to get his opinion. At the moment people are told they are disrespecting the views of the Anangu if you climb but here’s Tiger Tjalkalyirri, Mitjenkeri Mick, here’s this cast of characters. I argue by climbing you are respecting their views. I’d love to get Tiger’s grandson’s opinion on what he thinks about the climb, in the context of what his grandfather did at the Rock. Are people disrespecting Tiger? Tiger encouraged people to climb. He was a person who was able to stand in both worlds and if he was still around he would have been much more in favour of a shared environment, a balance between tourism and Aboriginal sacred beliefs. 

SD: Just to go back to the safety side of things. When I’m out there Parks Australia will say the amount of deaths associated with climbing the rock is upward of 30 and unofficially some people day the numbers are closer to 70, but you’re saying two this century. Is that right?

MH: That’s right and if you speak with Steve Baldwin he’ll admit there have only been two people who have died on the rock this century. Interestingly there’s been two people who have died at Kata Tjuta as well. 15:43

SD: I don’t understand why there’s not just one locked in figure that is what it is. What’s the grey area in terms of the exact figures? Is it people going away from the rock and dying later?

MH: Yeah, well Mike Misso, I’m not sure whether he’s still there or not, but he was the Park Manager in late 2017. I quote him in an interview he did with Tim Webster and he says and I’ll quote him. So I asked for all the figures. That’s another bug bear not being able to get some detailed figures from them about who died, where they died, what they died of. It’s quite disappointing that they have not been able to come up with the data. I know there is an incident book which nominally should, and by law they are required to run that, but they were not able to provide me with any numbers. So Mike said this “Yeah, look over 30 people have known to have died from climbing, and what I mean by that, people could, um, you know, potentially climb it, go to the resort and then you know, could have a heart attack later.” To me I’m saying if that’s all you’ve got. There are a few people who have had heart attacks in the resort. We don’t know if they climbed. They “Potentially” climbed it and they have had a heart attack later. So the numbers seem to be very rubbery. A death on the rock is a significant event and tends to get a lot of media coverage. So I did a lot of research looking at digging up newspaper reports. There was an article that was published in the Medical Journal of Australia which also did a bit of a survey on deaths on the rock, and using those sources I came up with a figure of 18. That was 6 falls and 12 heart attacks. So 18 I have corroboration for. They are deaths on the rock itself. There may have been people who died in the resort later, they may have climbed, who knows, they may have also done the base walk, they may have had a dodgy salad. I don’t know?  You’d think with something so important as this they would have a report. Here are the numbers, here are the names and here is where they died on the rock. But they don’t because they apparently have made a lot of it up. Part of the Aura of the safety claims is to try and scare people from climbing. You know here’s another reason we are banning it because it’s such a dangerous activity but it isn’t. And this is where if you had climbed and if you were an experienced bush walker you’d know there’s nothing that big about climbing it. There’s nothing that dangerous about it. If you keep to that main climbing spur and you follow the path to the top and you don’t wander around the rock too much at the summit it’s perfectly safe. And that’s why there have been so few people who have died doing the responsible thing. So when I looked at numbers of people who died under 50 there is only one person. People who fell were not acting responsibly and were doing silly things. If you look at the people who were being sensible there’s only one in that category under the age of 50 who died of a heart related issue. He was a 44 year old. And doing the complete risk assessment which I do for work I get a risk of only 0.2 micromorts. Which is miniscule. So it’s a total beat up. So if they have said to you it’s a major safety issue it’s not true. From an adventure tourist perspective there ae much more dangerous places in Australia. These are risks that people are willing to put up with and 0.2 micromorts for people under 50 is nothing. 

SD: In your words why should people have the right to climb? 

MH: It’s not only Ayers Rock it’s all these other natural places.  The reason we go and explore the natural world is to gain awe and wonder, inspiration to get out of our mundane everyday inner city worlds. These places are extraordinary. The reason that Uluru was first listed for its world heritage values, and I’ve got a copy of the original nomination, it mentions the views that are visible from the summit. The fact that the UNHCR, the world heritage committee recognised the wonderful nature of those desert views is why people want to do it. It’s something you really can’t put into words. The sad thing though you’ve got Uluru but you’ve also got other places that are listed for being banned as well.   Places like Mt Warning in northern NSW which are under similar threat of being banned. So the climb up Mt Warning attracts around 100000 tourists a year and they go for the same reasons to get that awe inspiring vision of nature that just makes your life so much better. St Mary’s Peak in the Flinders Ranges is another one, another wonderful geological area as well that is under threat of being banned. It’s sad to see that the locals don’t take that into account when they are considering visitor intentions or what people can do at the Rock. I said recently in a speech: Australia is going to become the only country that bans awe and wonder. What a place to live!

SD: Is it the canary in the coal mine for what’s coming? Is Uluru the first of many? If something doesn’t happen to reverse it?

MH: Well it's already happening in the Grampians. The Grampians recently had had climbing bans announced in the National Park only a month ago. These again are climbs that are of an international importance to the technical rock climbing community. So they are being banned with very little consultation with climbers. 

SD: So what’s the main threat? Is it nanny state over safety or is it the indigenous claim of sacred sites that is the threat here? Or both those things?

MH: I think it’s a bit of both. The Aboriginal People in Australia are reclaiming a power base and rightly so. They may swing around and we can get back to some sort of shared arrangement again but for the meantime we are seeing the expression of Aboriginal frustration with long term processes, and hope for reconciliation. Once that’s gone through we may see a rebalancing. In terms of the bureaucracy there’s pretty much a risk averse attitude that’s been ripping through Federal Parks Australia and also state parks authorities for some time and rather than inform people about the risk they shut things down and ban things to make management easier for them.

 SD: So the Grampians that’s obviously just safety.

MH: No Grampians isn’t safety. I mean rock climbing is inherently, technical rock climbing is 10 times more dangerous than climbing Ayers rock. Arthur Groom described that in the 1940s as nothing more than a strenuous uphill walk. If they are using safety as an excuse in the Grampians they may as well shut the Park down. 

SD: 25:15 So for those three examples you listed the Grampians, Flinders Ranges and Mt Warning, what are the reasons for those ones?

MH: Mount Warning I understand is due to the locals. There is some conflict between two groups of Aboriginal owners there. You have one group saying it’s a traditional men’s area and they only want initiated men of that particular group to climb. Flinders Ranges, so it’s St Mary’s Peak which is the highest point in the Flinders Ranges. The views again are extraordinary. You have this extraordinary vista looking over the Proterozoic Flinders Ranges. The rocks include sedimentary rocks that contain the Cambrian Explosion. It’s an amazing geological vista that is laid out for you at the top of St Mary’s Peak and there is because the head of two serpents are at that point and the local Adnyamathanha people don’t want people going there because they believe it will disturb the two serpents. That’s my understanding about that one. St Mary’s Peak is a little different because it’s at least a 4.5 hr walk in, so it’s a 9 hour return walk. So it’s a much more demanding bushwalk compared to the other two. The Ayers Rock climb is only 1.5 km to the summit where St Mary’s Peak is about 20km. It’s people who really appreciate those areas that are going to do it. That’s the sad aspect to the proposed bans. These are responsible people who are doing these walks. The other thing that Parks Australia and locals stress about the (Ayers Rock) Climb is a lack of respect. They say there have been strippers up there and people playing golf. But again if you look at the numbers there’s been one French stripper who bizarrely took her clothes off in honour of the locals and Sam Newman shot one golf ball off the top. So you’ve had two incidents in 60 years of climbing. And they dole these out as evidence for disrespect and claim everyone is doing this but the vast majority of climbers, 99.999% recurring are doing the right thing. They respect climb and the natural world for the wonder that it is. For Parks Australia and the Park Board to carry on like they do about people disrespecting the Rock is just a load of nonsense. The numbers again just don’t add up. What I say about it is that just about everything that Parks Australia and the Park Board say about the Climb is a myth.

SD: How is it best to describe you in an article? Is it as a geologist and ahh…?

MH: Outdoor enthusiast, lover of the Natural world. 

MH: The previous owner of Australian Geographic Dick Smith would be an interesting person to provide a view on this as well. Dick has been quite supportive of the book I wrote. His quote about the book appears on the back. Dick wrote: “An important book on how hard won freedoms of adventure are being whittled away. A must read for everyone.”  So get in touch with Dick. He would be another interesting person to talk to from Australian Geographic’s point of view. 

SD: Yeah, OK. I didn’t realise that. 

MH: In terms of other supporters. I don’t know if you know Anthony Dillon as well. Anthony provided a comment about the book, and also Adam Giles, former Chief Minister of the NT, provided a comment supporting the notion of people being able to access the climb. It’s not just me. It’s them and the 1000’s of people climbing at the moment. 

SD: Seemed to me to be pretty much 50:50 of everyone I spoke to. Half were there to do it and half weren’t. 

MH: I think you need to remember is that all they have to go on is the information that Parks Australia have given them. So if they were more fully aware of the history of climbing. That Anangu for instance used to act as climbing guides, that they supported people climbing. That in 1983 for instance the Central Land Council and the Pitjantjatjara Land Council came out and said that once Aboriginal People take over ownership of the Rock that as far as tourism goes it would be Business as usual.  And Business and Usual at that time meant that 75% of people climbed. If that information was more freely available I think you’d find those numbers would swing a lot more in favour of people being able to climb. Part of the problem is as I have said is that there has been a campaign of overwhelming negative propaganda about the climb by Parks Australia and the Board that have really denied that locals at one point actually supported the climb. So if that information was available people would be much more in tune or would be able to make a much more informed decision about whether they respect the views of the current board or not. 

SD: So going back to the management decision in 1991 who do you think was the main driver for that? Did it initiate with the Anangu, or did it initiate with Parks Australia? And if so for what reason?

MH: I’ve had comments on both sides of that. David Hewitt who is another person you should talk to, he worked around the Ayers Rock – Docker River area in the 1960s, 70s through to the present day. He’s an Alice Springs resident who has been there for quite a long time. He’s written a few articles and been quoted by the Alice Springs News. In the 1980s he asked the Parks Staff then about the Climb and they said it was all about safety and they were afraid of being sued, and if that view was transferred over to the Aboriginal Owners in the form of threats of being sued and losing a lot of money that may have influenced them early on, and it’s since been carried over by successive board members. I think the initial call for the climb to be banned was through Parks Australia and then it’s been pushed onto the board later. 

SD: As in Parks Australia potentially suggesting that through litigation they could lose a lot of money which obviously impacts the Anangu as well?

MH: Yeah.

SD: And you reckon that, that could be the origin of it?

MH: That’s where I think it came from. I think then there’s also been some change in Aboriginal Owners that has had an impact. There’s a man named Tony Tjamiwa who was the senior Anangu person following on from people like Tiger Tjalkalyirri. He was a board member and his words are used to outline that Anangu don’t climb. His views can be challenged as well. So in 1985 at the handover ceremony he drew a map of all the sacred sites around the Rock, and he drew them all at the base and then he has a single line being the climbing trail that people use to get to the top and that leads to a little box he has drawn at the summit that is marked Minga Line, where tourists walk, and Anangu didn’t walk there, so it grew perhaps from that, that Anangu didn’t go there. The worrying thing though is that if Anangu no longer believe that they climb then the Oral history that is recorded by Charles Mountford of all these stories on the summit has likely been lost. If you read Charles Mountford’s book about Ayers Rock, about the myths and legends and people, he recounts a number of interesting, colourful legends about the summit area which were passed onto him by local Anangu people. It would be really sad if through that transition of owners in the early 1980s   that those myths and legends weren’t transferred over. I fear that given they say that Anangu never climb that might be the case and those stories are lost to all of humanity. How do you go about reclaiming that, I’ve got no idea.

SD:  Last question. What are plans about the closure? Do you want to climb it one last time, or would you potentially do it anyway and risk fine? 

MH: I told my daughters when we climbed last July that we’ll be back in 20 years to climb again. So when I turn 70 I’ll be back to climb it again. If there’s a locked gate I know a couple of other ways up there. So as a seventy year old I’ll work out a way to get to the top somehow. In terms of visiting central Australia in the meantime though I will probably be taking them out to Haasts Bluff in the West MacDonnell Ranges where the Aboriginal people have something called Memory Mountain and they are planning on building a 20m high cross on it. So I’m going to take my kids out to that place and the locals there are saying that visitors can climb Haast Bluff and undertake a range of other activities. They are planning on really developing tourism at Haasts Bluff. If they do it right it may replace Ayers Rock for a while because the views from the top of Haasts Bluff offer these amazing, extraordinary central desert vistas. 37:04