Ancient history - I shipped out somewhere where the hills are more interesting, far quieter and, ironically, where I have more personal freedom than in that nascent police state you call the UK (or England, or whatever the hell you finally agreed upon).
Mining at Honister has a trivial impact on the wider environment compared to the effects of mass tourism in all its glory. Take off your blinkers. And I've no problem with individuals who love the hills (some of my best friends are people...), just the pole wielding hordes that fashion dictates must now congregate on summit cairns to shout loudly at each other.
It's interesting to hear how people seriously begrudge others who have some business acumen and, most importantly, are willing to risk everything to try to achieve something beyond a safe job for a large corporate that will get them nowhere fast. No tourism = no jobs. Better quality tourism = better tourists. And as for the condescending snobbery regarding those who'll use the via ferrata (ie poor city types), such middle class attitudes (I know you think you're working class, I can just feel it, but you're not clearly) receive extremely short shrift with any conservation body, local authority and prevailing way of thinking of the right-minded in the UK (that means England too) today.
Spare me your (incorrect) assumptions. This is not a class issue, or even a UK one (I'm currently living and studying in Asia). The tourists featured in these articles aren't 'poor city types':
See the parallels? This is simply what mass tourism does to places. People in mobs abdicate responsibility for their own actions. Tourism is easy money for the priviliged few that control it in a given area, discouraging the establishment of more robust industries. But it's a fickle friend - when fashion or conditions change, and tourism tanks, it's the little people that get it in the neck. Remember FMD?
Instead of seizing an opportunity to diversify away from tourism after FMD, the Lakes' mafiosa just shit itself and went for the chipeaters instead, who won't be too bothered the next time there's an outbreak of a non-fatal livestock disease that poses no threat to human health.
I sometimes think the Bhutanese have got the right idea - make it so damned expensive that not many people can afford to go there (certainly not me). Make a decent wedge out of the tourists, don't become too dependant on them - and even if they ARE all wankers, at least there aren't too many of them to deal with.
Ultimately it's not that important, nothing stands still and there are many worse problems we'll all be facing soon. Be interesting to see what happens in the coming recession, though.
wow, mate, your a snob!! haha! when I started climbing 12 years ago I could only afford to boulder on brick/stone walls around me and slowly moved into affording the gear to get more experience, climbing friends etc and now I go away monthly for a day to weeks climbing, hiking etc. you know how I started? as a fat Gordie tourist following hordes of people up snowdon. You sound like a judgmental snob! wether we're talking about a world champion, olympic athlete or mountain climber that has been up the likes of K2, everest. They all started somewhere and i think that its great that there are organizations out there that allow people not from a back country life/lifestyle to experience its beauty and excitement. alot of them will go home tell the experience and rarely do it again and there are those that it will trigger in them a desire to learn more, explore more and break away from the safety of the guides to go it alone.
