TOURISM IMPACT ON ULURU
Uluru and its tourism impact
Uluru rock, also known as Ayers Rock,
is a massive sandstone monolith in the
Northern Territory’s “red area”. Uluru is sacred
to Indigenous Australians, specifically the
Anangu people, and is thought to have started
forming around 550 million years ago. Uluru
rock has been a large tourism site in Australia
at the Kata-Tjuta National Park for many years
where tourists would climb the site daily. Uluru
is littered with rubbish and at times human
faeces as tourists take on the one hour climb
to tick climbing Uluru off their bucket list.
However, the Senior traditional owner and
chairman of the park board Sammy Wilson
stated in a written speech that the site had
deep cultural significance and was not a
“theme park”. Traditional owners of Uluru rock
have been asking visitors not to climb Uluru
since 1985 and have continued to be a long
topic of debate in Australia
Existing policies
Uluru-Kata Tjuta National Park board of
management announced tourists will be
banned from climbing Uluru from 25th October
2019. Under Commonwealth laws, there are
steep fines for people who ride or walk in a
Commonwealth reserve and go off track, the
management board could have all walking
tracks on the rock removed, making any climb
illegal. Under NT legislation, sacred sites
including Uluru have indeed special
protections, and a serious breach of the
Sacred Sites Act can lead to penalties of more
than $60,000 and two years in jail. Although
banning the Uluru climb would discourage
tourist climbers, the rich cultural significance
behind Uluru is not addressed. There are
cultural, social, and economic implications of
tourism in Uluru that needs to be addressed.
Purely banning tourists from climbing Uluru
raises the question on whether its cultural
significance will be appreciated by tourists.
The tourism industry has commodified
landmarks of cultural and spiritual connection
to the host population. Capitalism has
encouraged the consumption of experiences,
sensations, and experiences. Uluru has
become a mere object of
consumption. Policies to ban tourists from
climbing and fine those who breach the law,
making it an experience that cannot be
consumed, would only further increase it’s
commodification without acknowledging its
cultural significance to the traditional owners
of the land.
Policy Options
In order to prevent further commodification of
Uluru, the recommended course of action
include:
 Public tourist awareness and
educational programs of Uluru and its
significance. Tourists need to
understand why they are unable to
climb it, viewing Uluru as more than a
sightseeing attraction, but it’s cultural,
spiritual and social significance to the
Indigenous Australians. As a
significant symbol of the Indigenous
Australian culture, Uluru should be
used as a platform for educating
tourists on this culture. Public
awareness campaigns about Uluru’s
cultural, spiritual and social
significance would be able to divert the
idea of the need to pay for a sensory
experience in climbing Uluru. An
acceptance by the public to no longer
climb the sacred site will be rich in
symbolism as it involves non-
Indigenous Australians providing
respect and recognition to Indigenous
 2

 culture, and can be viewed as a landmark Australian tourism advertisement

in Australia’s formation as a largely
multicultural nation.
 An action plan to be drawn up for the
conservation of Uluru. This would include
a committee dedicated to the continuous
monitoring of Uluru. The committee
should include a majority of Aboriginal
local to the land working alongside
member(s) of the tourism and Uluru-Kata
Tjuta National Park board. The needs of
Indigenous Australians need to be taken
into account, comprising of subsistence
resource use, to the extent that they do
not conflict with these principles. The New
Zealand government has created the
Treaty of Waitangi Responsibility guiding
the outline of the importance and
partnership with the Maori people in their
national parks. Similar action needs to be
implemented in the Uluru-Kata Tjuta
National Park.
campaign uses words such as ‘magical
presence’ and ‘spectacular nature show’
to sell a sensory and authentic experience
to consumers. By working more closely
with the tourism industry, this will ensure
that marketing of reserves are culturally
appropriate and consistent with
conservation of the natural and cultural
values
 To reduce relying on tourists to generate
income to conserve Uluru. Participation
and voluntary programs to maintain Uluru
should be available for those interested.
Encouragement in schools by the
education board for students to participate
during their holidays, as a class field trip,
or as work experience placement. Both
New Zealand and Australia national park
agencies have agreed that public
participation is crucial for the management
of protected areas.

 Almost 400,000 people a year visit Uluru The implementations of these policies are
Kata-Tjuta National Park. Following what crucial, as it will ensure that Uluru remains
the US government National Parks conserved and protected in the age of consumer
Service has implemented, Uluru-Kata capitalism of experience and sensory buying
Tjuta National Park is to encourage encouragement.
ecologically sustainable development
through the conservation and ecologically
sustainable use of natural resources (ie.
Bring your own reusable water bottle,
bag, recycle and Compost). Rubbish bins
separating solid waste and recycle waste,
and public bathrooms is also to be built on
site close to Uluru to prevent littering and
to protect the environment around Uluru.

 Advertising efforts by the tourism board

needs to focus more on portraying real
images of Uluru and the culture around it
rather than selling and promising
experience to tourists. Uluru-Kata Tjuta
national parks generate more than $320
million a year due to tourism. The mass
profit made from the tourist attraction has
consequently turned in into a commodity
and it has been advertised as an
experience to buy.
 3

Appendices Sholly, E. 2019. The cultural significance

Depart of Conservation for the New Zealand
Conservatory Authority 2005, General Policy for
National Parks, viewed 31 May 2019,
https://www.doc.govt.nz/Documents/about-
doc/role/policies-and-plans/general-policy-for-
national-parks.pdf
Director of National Parks, Volunteers (Including
work experience), Australian Government, viewed
31 May 2019, https://parksaustralia.gov.au/botanic-
gardens/pub/parks-aust-policy-2004.pdf.
behind the Uluru climbing ban. Australian
Traveller, viewed 27 May, 2019,
https://www.australiantraveller.com/nt/red-
centre/uluru/cultural-signifigance-uluru-
climbing-ban/
Tlozek 2011, ‘Image from the Tourism Australia
campaign’, ABC News, viewed 31 May 2019,
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2011-09-
13/20110913uluru-park-guide-rule-
change/2896930.

Gillespie,E & BDA 2008. Economic activity of

Australia’s World Heritage areas, report to the
Department of the Environment, Water, Heritage
and the Arts. Department of the Environment,
Water, Heritage and the Arts, viewed 31 May 2019,
www.emvironment.gov.au/heritage/publications/rep
ort/pubs/economic-activity-report.pdf

Hitch, J & Hose, N. 2017, ‘Uluru climbs banned

from October 2019 after unanimous board decision
to ‘close the playground’, ABC News, viewed 27
May, 2019, https://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-11-
01/uluru-climbs-banned-after-unanimous-board-
decision/9103512

Norman, J. 2019. ‘Why we are banning tourists

from climbing Uluru’, The Conversation, viewed 31
May 2019, https://theconversation.com/why-we-
are-banning-tourists-from-climbing-uluru-86755