As much as previously it was a reasonably good 4x4 track, it was recently scoured out by a decent flash flood, in which the river left the original river bed and flowed down the road leaving it fairly bony. So much so that a friend crashed his motorbike and spent a month and a half in a cast, unable to ride his bike. One of the reasons (and one which I personally support) is that the erosion of the upper areas due to stormwater not being treated effectively, is degrading the area completely.

Being a grassland scientist with a passion for the Berg, I can say that most of the upper lying areas are quite sensitive in that as soon as the topsoil is removed, the toxicity of the soil (as a result of free aluminium due to the high rainfall) is increased to the point where nothing grows. This is true of the upper zigzags of Sani Pass, and upgrading the pass will upgrade the stormwater which will have a positive impact on the continued decay of the surrounds to the pass.

@BB. Currently it is a little more technical, but still do-able!

Hey BB, good to see you on the forums again.

I guess the Roads Department should protect themselves better legally when it comes to Sani Pass and other similar ones. This case does set a bit of a precedent. Though Sani Pass is classified as more than simply a 4x4 track - it is an established route, and border point.

I Drive 4x4 Roads in Colorado where we rate them on a scale of 1-5, 5 being almost impassable, 1 being doable by a 4x2 with enough power. I've driven Sani Pass many times and it is a 1. I understand about conditions, we get huge snows in Colorado. I cannot fathom anyone being blamed for leaving the road except the driver.

Where is the court thinkning?