Does a visualisation of what the development would look like exist ?
I've not seen one and am curious, it's difficult to make balanced judgement without all the fore and against information.
Peace and quiet of Thirlmere to be disturbed by RAF, who are objecting to the Zip Wire proposal.
http://www.newsandstar.co.uk/news/Defence-bosses-say-Lake-District-zipwire-...
Oh the irony of those objectors who claim the area will be spoiled by a few screams.
Any high/long Zip Wire in the National Park should be located at Honister, which has working quarry vehicles, AND the Via Ferrata, which would be a very attractive combination for thrill seekers who wish to experience the thrills of climbing without the risk and exertion.
> The Lake District National Park is a unique in the UK: similar, but different to other NPs. Fabulous countryside, mountains, rivers, and all rightly protected, and access encouraged, through being a NP. The proximity to northern connerbations brings people by the million to enjoy this countryside. With the people comes other industries, retail, hospitality, and so on, all carefully (and rightly) regulated. With the people come others, keen to relieve them of their tourist £, zip wire types for example. What is the connection between the zip wire folk and Thirlmere? The tourist £. This proposal is on a par, given the location and national importance of the LDNP with proposing building a UCI complex, complete with McDonalds, Ben & Jerry’s etc on the lower slopes in Thirlmere. Why not? I’m sure it would create lots of jobs for the locals.....
Or a cafe on the top of Snowdon? Errmmm....
Is that OK just because it's been there for years?
Whereas Honister itself would be a good venue, the access is difficult. How much more traffic can Keswick and Borrowdale really handle ?
The need for low flying through terrain is slightly different to that of a zipwire.
> Whereas Honister itself would be a good venue, the access is difficult. How much more traffic can Keswick and Borrowdale really handle ?
The Borrowdale road is in need of upgrading for the benefit of locals and visitors alike. The present road (and some of the drivers that use it) struggles to cope, and as a Cumbria council tax payer, I feel it is about time the county council ook it's responsibilities seriously, instead of paying it's chief officers vast sums of money!
> Is that OK just because it's been there for years?
There are many such things that proponents of the zipwire are trying to use for support - ah but they built a reservoir there/there are unnatural conifer plantations/there's a ski tow on Raise/railway on Snowdon/car park at Cairngorm/etc. But what they miss is that none of these would stand a chance of getting approval now. For good or ill, attitudes have changed.
I guess that is it, yes. I think they could probably find a better place to put it than this, FWIW.
> The Borrowdale road is in need of upgrading for the benefit of locals and visitors alike. The present road (and some of the drivers that use it) struggles to cope, and as a Cumbria council tax payer, I feel it is about time the county council ook it's responsibilities seriously, instead of paying it's chief officers vast sums of money!
I think a tourist tax would be a good idea to fund things like this rather than whacking it mostly onto the locals. Many other countries have one. I particularly like the Swiss approach where it includes a mandatory public transport ticket, which makes bus/local train use effectively free, which means many more people use it because they might as well because it's free. I'd very much support something like that for the Lakes.
A Borrowdale road 'upgrade' which would seriously improve traffic throughput would put a far bigger dint into the character of that part of the Lakes than any amount of zipwires would.
Very misleading piece on R2 yesterday, describing thirlmere as iconic and a natural environment(there and the lakes in general).
> Very misleading piece on R2 yesterday, describing thirlmere as iconic and a natural environment(there and the lakes in general).
For the majority of listeners, the Lakes is a natural environment because it contains mainly nature, not because it is original.
> For the majority of listeners, the Lakes is a natural environment because it contains mainly nature, not because it is original.
But that's misleading the public. They will now no doubt be receiving hundreds of extra letters of objection, because of this being perceived as a wild and natural place, when the reality is 95% of the lakes isn't. Planning should be based on facts, no uneducated emotion and sentiment.
So let's concrete over the whole lot and build fun rides down all of the hills because it isn't 100% natural ??? Over egging things obviously but just because the NP is predominantly 'man' influenced doesn't mean we should build anything anywhere somebody wants within the NP.
I don't think calling the Lakes natural is misleading in the context of the UK, which is all man made to a degree. To say its not the same as it was a thousand years ago is irrelevent to the debate as to whether it should be preserved in its current form, a form which is as near to nature as many people get.
> So let's concrete over the whole lot and build fun rides down all of the hills because it isn't 100% natural ??? Over egging things obviously but just because the NP is predominantly 'man' influenced doesn't mean we should build anything anywhere somebody wants within the NP.
No, but the UK can't treat its parks like other countries, most of which are vast uninhabited natural wildernesses(yellowstone etc), there are in large number of people living and working in the parks, with even more people on their doorsteps. To pretend thirlmere is some vast iconic remote wilderness bristling with rare native species is the stuff of dreams, it could become that, but other park policies are doing their utmost to prevent that too. The NPs are in the main trapped in the Victorian era, as though that style of landscape management was or is the absolute pinnacle.
Or Shap quarries, an area that has the distance and vertical drop, a great big scary cliff edge, bulldozed quarry tracks for access top and bottom, is in an area that would benefit from more visitors, has easy access to the M6 and isn't aesthetically sensitive in the way that Thirlmere is.
Shap quarries would do it. Or even the abandoned Middlebarrow Quarry across the railway from Trowbarrow.
Better still would be one from the top of the Blackpool Tower - after all, that's the spiritual home of the fair ground ride.
Agreed, plenty of far more appropriate options than Thirlmere.
Would be good if this does get built somewhere suitable. National Parks and those who plan and administer them do need to stay relevant. The argument on here about a "natural" environment is largely irrelevant. What does that really mean anyway in an English, if not UK context?
Its not really a matter of keeping the Parks the same for ever, its more how they are protected from us (visitors), rather than for us.
> You're right, man made is pretty much everywhere in the UK, but to accept that something so damaged and lacking in bio diversity is beautiful and worthy of "World Heritage Status" is nonsensical.
World heritage designation doesn't depend upon the site in question being "undamaged". Incidentally, arguments about such issues should avoid the use of emotive language like damaged. W H sites are often pristine natural areas (do such areas still exist?) but the list includes many sites which are totally or largely man-made such as the city of Bath and an area of very old established vineyards on the northern hillsides of Lake Geneva. The Lakes shouldn't try to compete with the pristine sites and indeed has more in common with totally man made sites. My view, FWIW, has always been that the uniqueness, and beauty, of the Lakes lies in the subtle interweaving of the natural and the man made and for that reason I oppose Monbiot's position.
> You're right, man made is pretty much everywhere in the UK, but to accept that something so damaged and lacking in bio diversity is beautiful and worthy of "World Heritage Status" is nonsensical.
The designation of a World Heritage Site does not depend on the site being “undamaged” (which vague and value-laden term is just one of several words that have in my opinion no place in a rational discussion on a matter such as this because it masquerades as something it is not). WH sites, of course, include pristine (if that word is appropriate anywhere on the planet now) places, but there are also many which are completely or nearly completely human artifice, for example the city of Bath and some of the ancient vineyards on the slopes above the northern shore of Lake Geneva. The Lake District merely occupies a point somewhere in this wide spectrum of sites. For what my opinion is worth, the essence of the beauty and unique character of the Lake District lies in the subtle interweaving of the human and natural features of the landscape, and for this reason I disagree strongly with Monbiot who, it seems, can see no value in anything wrought by man.
They'd have to plant a lot of quick growing leylandii
> Better still would be one from the top of the Blackpool Tower - after all, that's the spiritual home of the fair ground ride.
Would the end of it be in the sea?
I wonder why my contributions to this thread don't appear in Recent Postings on my user profile page? As a result I thought I'd failed to send my first response and so rewrote it and posted almost the same thing again.
" . . . Would the end of it be in the sea? . . . "
Perhaps at the end of the pier where you would take a donkey back to the start.
Appropriate development and green!