Drakensberg Cable Car

I recorded 50/50 on my computer - I will upload the video in the morning so I don't have to wait up while it uploads.

Damn. I missed the 50/50 programme. Would anyone please give the relevant gist of it.

Here's the 50|50 video as promised:

Some replies to the Drakensberg Cable Car on the 50|50 fb page:

Xolani: As a 2nd year nature conservation student@Unisa, I do not agree with that cablecar initiative, case closed... Let nature be the nature on its own without any cumulative effect of human activities...

Felix: Will enough people visit it to make it feasible? I don't think so. But if it is feasible, go ahead. The more people that can enjoy the beauty the better it will be preserved.

Willem: Thank you for an excellent portrayal on 50/50 tonight. I live in Winterton - not far from the Central Drakensberg and most people that I know are dead against the cable car idea. It will be the first step to uncontrolled commercialism of the pristine beauty of the Drakensberg and if it was allowed it will certainly open the floodgates to consumerism and the unspoilt beauty of the World Heritage Site will be gone forever. A definite no!!!

Carol: I think it is a good idea but at the second option where there is already infra-structure such as roads & hotels in the vicinity. Am not too sure though if there are enough tourists to that area to justify the expense.....

Gus: My late godfather, Bill Barnes, who was warden at Giants Castle talked about this idea many years ago. He was all for it as he believed everyone should be able to access the top of these mountains to enjoy the spectacular views. Obviously enviromental impact studies need to be carried out but I believe there will be many benefits.

Glynis: Table Mountain is accessed by tourists & locals by cable car & on foot. When you go up by cable car there is no distribution of rubbish along the way, plants & nature are left alone. The footpaths are littered with plastic water bottles, etc., plants & animals are disturbed. Sure there is a tourist trap at the top as there is at the bottom ie: restaurants, taxis, etc. More people would be able to enjoy the 'Berg (yes I am ex KZN now in CT). People with knee problems, etc., would be delighted to be able visit the 'Berg as would many others. Think of the income local crafters would be able to make & employment others would gain. C'mon people, let's move forward! Let's share our natural beauty - those who don't appreciate this kind of thing won't come anyway. I vote YES.

Johan: Ag regtig.... The whole of the swiss alps and many others are exploited for tourism..... And still the swiss alps is as beautyfull as 100 years ago. Cable car travelers will in no way affect the splendour of the valley. Please you anti cable car supporters..... Explain how you come to that conclusion. Because if you are right, Table Mountain must be a wreck and shambles by now!

You can check all the comments at www.facebook.com/5050Community - about half are in favour, half against.

I also have come across this discussion page - I don't know this forum, but they seem to be discussing the cableway: www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?s=7cfd1c332fdc9c4c3ea92c747ea6a483&t=1513315

Thanx for the link Chris. It would be quite entertaining reading were it not such a serious topic.

The berg is not the only place that they want to put up a cable car, and the locals are split over it. Mt Wellington Hobart Australia.

www.mtwellingtoncablecar.com/

www.facebook.com/pages/Respect-the-Mountain-No-Cable-Car/443385422375996

Always someone willing to try and cash in.

Just come across this document - www.okhahlamba.org.za/docs/idp/2013/OKhahlamba%20IDP%20%202013-2014.pdf

Its the Bergville tourism plan for 2013-2014. It has a few pages on the cable car:

Additionally increased visitor numbers are putting strain on the limited accesses to the escarpment.

This [more tourists] will unleash the tourism potential of this area without affecting existing attractions such as the Royal Natal and the Amphitheatre, Cathedral Peak or the Mnweni Hiking Centre.

Notice the photo of Sentinel on pg 136 (pdf pg 161) has been heavily stretched - not sure if this is by accident or if they are trying to make the peaks look bigger.

Not much else of not in this, but still another marginally relevant document...

Clearly 8 passes rated in difficulty from 4-10 at Mnweni (plus the 5 unmarked/unrecognised passes - Christmas, South Saddle, Manxome, Madonna and Inner Tower Gully) - ok, I know that Ntonjelana, South Saddle and Christmas Pass are all technically at Didima, but they are usually done from Mnweni, but I digress - aren't enough access routes.

I guess there is no realistic way of getting stats of what people are setting out to do. No one actually looks through trip plans in the mountain register and records what everyone is up to, do they?

Would love to know which passes get the most hiker traffic. I have done Langies so many times, yet I have only once ever seen someone else on the pass. Same with Bannerman, but I haven't done that nearly as many times. Otherwise I can't recall ever seeing someone else on a pass at Giant's Castle when I was doing one. By contrast, every time I have done Mashai I have seen at least one other group on it. My guess for most hikers (not counting locals, but including people who don't get to the top) would be:
1) Chain Ladders
2) Organ Pipes
3) Gray's
4) Rockeries
5) Mashai

I wonder, further, of all the Berg visitors - how many actually have a desire to go to the top when they visit the Berg. I would guess the vast majority are quite happy lounging around near a pool with a book. When I stayed at Drakensville for a week during school holidays a few years back, lots of people are around, but when you walk on the nearby trails in the area you don't see many people. They spend the day at the pools and on the fields watching their kids play. I haven't stayed anywhere else in the Berg during holiday season (aside from being on actual hikes), so I can't really talk from experience on this one. Anyone have any thoughts/stats/estimates? Perhaps experience from places like Mahai, Cathedral Peak Hotel or Thendele.

Correct me if I am wrong in interpreting the section on "4.3.2 FEASIBILITY STUDY AND BUSINESS PLAN FOR A DRAKENSBERG CABLE CAR" P. 135 of the report:

This section appears to be blaming the "increased visitor numbers are putting strain on the limited accesses" on tourists - and everything associated with that, for instance the ever-eroding pathways up the key and relatively accessible passes like Organ Pipes, Mnweni Pass etc. But the study does not account for the local population using them as highways and trading routes. I say this in response to the report stating that "Cableways can have a positive impact on the environment, especially in very fragile environments where increased human footfall can have a negative impact.

I may be stretching my point quite far, but doesn't the report infer that by allowing more people to experience the high berg by Cableways "rather than just the hikers" that it will minimise the impact or human footprint in the proposed areas, when in fact its the local population who have the greater impact?

Perhaps a lame point on my part, but the report just got me thinking that the powers that be are really trying every avenue to motivate the need for a cable way?