/ Honister zip wire

This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
armus on 09 Nov 2012
http://www.ukclimbing.com/forums/t.php?t=524753&v=1

I was suprised to see so many posters unable to understand that tourism per se, is not what those of us who live in national parks want.
What locals need are permanent jobs, not temporary jobs taken by summer visitors.
It is ridiculous to say that summer tourist jobs help locals to permanent employment. It is ridiculous to say that tourism provides houses for locals. It provides holiday homes. Used how many weeks of the year?

There have been some very good aspects of tourism, incoming money obviously, but not least opening up rural areas to tourists who bring a variety of cultures etc. which have informed people from rural tourist areas about other people. But those lessons have been learnt now.
Is it neccessary to have only one industry which, if unchecked, destroys our heritage?
The problem with uber tourismo (I just made that phrase up) is that it becomes to be seen as " those folk are OK, they have tourism" when permanent jobs and more cheaper homes are needed.
Someone (Ridge?) suggested that I guide tourists around the UK when in fact the opposite is true. I have shown people who are interested in the bad side of tourism what happens in the UK.
I suggest that opening the old mines in mountain areas would provide longer term employment. THE MINING WASTE!! some say, on the HILLSIDE!!
So? It is covered in vegetation in twenty years after the mining stops, and has done some good in the meantime.
Tom McNally - on 09 Nov 2012
In reply to armus: your own words from the other thread you have linked:

"As for local jobs, the zipline won't provide anything for locals"

In that case, who do you think constructs, maintains and staffs the facilities at Honister?


Gael Force - on 09 Nov 2012
In reply to armus: I am not clear if you support the zip wire or oppose it, it's quite hard to understand your post. I think you oppose it.
I live quite near it, don't care wither it goes up or not, if it provides a few jobs for locals, which presently it does, I am more in favour than not.
armus on 09 Nov 2012
In reply to Tom McNally:
> (In reply to armus) your own words from the other thread you have linked:
>
> "As for local jobs, the zipline won't provide anything for locals"
>
> In that case, who do you think constructs, maintains and staffs the facilities at Honister?

>> When you have a large construction job such as installing a zip wire on a cliff face, then it must be done by the best firms, not perhaps Cumbrian but depending on experience. Temporary jobs whoever gets the contract. If a company that is not Cumbrian gets the installation, then it is most likely that they will get the maintenance too, that makes sense.
Staffing it, i.e. tourist guides. How many permanent jobs do you think that that will provide for locals? It is a seasonal job after all, and see my previous posts re. overseas staff being employed. Locals don't often get jobs guiding people who speak other languages.
There is a shortage of minerals worldwide today, but enough to be found in mines which were abandonded only because there were other mining sites worldwide more easily mined.
xplorer on 09 Nov 2012
In reply to armus:

Give it a rest
armus on 09 Nov 2012
In reply to xplorer:

Don't bother yourself with posts that you don't understand lad.
xplorer on 09 Nov 2012
In reply to armus:

I'm finding it hard to believe you even understand your own post.

I must say I'm rather confused by you.
purplemonkeyelephant - on 09 Nov 2012
In reply to armus:

For me the mountains are a place to get away from the intense city life and frankly anything artificial IE a theme park. Its a place to get back to nature. I know humans are always stepping further and further into these areas and setting up things like ski-lifts or cable cars but I just don't see why its neccesary. The whole point of a national park is to leave it untouched. If you want a zip-wire you can visit GO APE or something, why spoil such a gorgeous place like Buttermere. Climbing is interacting with the environment, building on it isn't. And yes you could argue the mine is much more damage than a zipwire but I'm not sure I would have voted for a mine in a national park even if this was 1850.

I remember seeing people talk about coming up with new ways to bring people to the lakes and make it more accessible for young people, but thats just missing the point in my opinion. People shoudn't need convincing to visit some jaw dropping natural beauty.
armus on 09 Nov 2012
In reply to xplorer:
> (In reply to armus)
>
> I'm finding it hard to believe you even understand your own post.
>
> I must say I'm rather confused by you.

Oh, well, there you go then. You've just explained yourself.

xplorer on 09 Nov 2012
In reply to armus:

Your local, and obviously angry, and I get that I really do

The place used to be a working mine, and they used to have a drag line, in pretty much the same spot.

What are your true reasons for not wanting the zip line or probably anything this company has or wants to do????
Tom McNally - on 09 Nov 2012
In reply to armus: I suggest you do some research
Bruce Hooker - on 09 Nov 2012
In reply to xplorer:

Why stop at a zip line, there's room for a whole disneyland GB?
xplorer on 09 Nov 2012
In reply to Bruce Hooker:

Completly agree! There's plenty of room ;-)

But that's not at all what I said brucie.

Good game good game

abcdefg - on 09 Nov 2012
If you would like to make a representation about this proposal, see: http://tinyurl.com/cvrmpqu
mockerkin on 12 Nov 2012
In reply to xplorer:
> (In reply to armus)

> What are your true reasons for not wanting the zip line or probably anything this company has or wants to do????

I don't know armus and I'm a fellow Cumbrian, but I think that he has put his case badly.
His main point is that extra tourist attractions do not provide permanent jobs for people living in the lake district. That is true, especially when languages are involved. So what's the point of a Honister zipwire plus extra tourists who don't provide permanent jobs? The crag is more important than the tourists. http://www.ukclimbing.com/articles/page.php?id=799
The mining thing was probably based on an academic geolgical survey which said that there were many small mines around the edges of the pennines/ lakes which could be re-opened, there are several minerals which can be mined, economically for between ten and 25 tears.
Greening over mine spoil, he was right, what is a 20 year wait?
Tourism will continue, but they don't want it increased beyond current levels, they want permanent jobs.

bluebealach - on 12 Nov 2012
In reply to mockerkin:
> (In reply to xplorer)

> Greening over mine spoil, he was right, what is a 20 year wait?

I'm not sure your correct with that one. There is evidence over much of Lakeland from mine workings centuries ago, which have not 'greened' up and possible never will. Copper Mine valley at Coniston being one example but there are many.
Ampthill - on 12 Nov 2012
In reply to armus:

I'm a tourist in Cumbria at least once a year. I can visualise quite a few jobs that are year round and many others businesses that might not through the winter without the summer boost.

I'm fairly sure that the cottage company office is staffed year round. Lots of cottages seemed to be refurbished presumably by local companies. i think that the Langdale Hotel and Country club are open all year. The shope trade year round, presumably with more staff in the summer

I met a man whilst on holiday in New Zealand. He ran a Pizza place in the lakes all year. He'd taken a month of as he did each january as it was of the few times he felt he could get away.


As far as i can see the Honister outfit is open 7 days a week from January 21st

So i percieve that seasonal employment is an isssue, but not all the money from toursm produces jobs that entirely seasonal
mockerkin on 12 Nov 2012
In reply to bluebealach:
> (In reply to mockerkin)
> [...]
>
> [...]
>
> I'm not sure your correct with that one, There is evidence over much of Lakeland from mine workings centuries ago, which have not 'greened' up and possible never will. Copper Mine valley at Coniston being one example but there are many.

>> Yes, that is true also for say, Honister which is so big and black and wonderful (especially in the rain) with slate spoil. But even Honister has greened, on the Butteremere side, over the last 20 years. So mine spoil can be beautiful. There are projects afoot to scatter alpine seeds onto some fells to cover bare areas. Copper Mine is less seen. But the lakes have been changed so much by mankind's mining, foresting and sheep grazing, which we were all taught about in school, and visitors don't seem to realise that these changes are part of our history, mine spoils included. Cumbria shouldn't expand it's tourist trade, it should find alternatives. (Not nuclear waste dumps)
Howard J - on 12 Nov 2012
In reply to mockerkin:
> (In reply to xplorer)
> His main point is that extra tourist attractions do not provide permanent jobs for people living in the lake district. That is true, especially when languages are involved.

Aren't Cumbrians incapable of learning languages then?

Part of the trouble is that in this country tourism still isn't seen as a 'proper job'. Places like Mallorca take tourism seriously, and there are colleges where locals can go to learn the skills, including languages. However in the UK the idea of providing a service to visitors doesn't seem to have registered with a lot of people.

Of course seasonality is an issue, but the Lake District attracts visitors all the year round - far fewer in winter admittedly, but it's not like a seaside resort. The problem with weekend visitors is that they don't spend enough locally, but they have to be given the opportunity to do so. If the supermarkets shut at 9pm on a Friday evening then you can't blame visitors for bringing all their supplies with them.

I'm not sure that re-opening the mines would make much of a difference either. If it were to happen, most likely it would be "outsider" companies who would bring in skilled labour from elsewhere rather than trying to train the locals.



Simmy - on 07 Dec 2012
In reply to armus:

Just received the bellow spam email. Im afraid I didnt support it and did the opposite.

"Please support our Zip Wire Application, NOW !

We have been advised by the Lake District National Park Authority Planning Board that letters or emails in support of our new application should be submitted immediately.

Proposal:
"Installation of a 1,035m zip wire, in two lengths, starting from Honister Crags and landing at Honister Slate Mine Car Park for a temporary period of 18 months to allow for the completion of a visitor perception study by the University of Cumbria"

You may have written in support of our previous applications before and for this we are most sincerely grateful. However, as this is a brand new proposal the LDNPA require existing and any further support to be forwarded direct to them quoting the reference below.

Application Number: 7/2012/2243
Email: planning@lake-district.gov.uk
Copy: info@honister.com
Lake District National Park Authority,
Murley Moss,
Oxenholme Road,
Kendal,
LA9 7RL

As ive said I email planning with my reasons why I didn't want a zipwire. Sorry Honister but its a no from me.
Trangia - on 07 Dec 2012
In reply to xplorer:
> (In reply to armus)
>

>
> The place used to be a working mine, and they used to have a drag line, in pretty much the same spot.
>
> What are your true reasons for not wanting the zip line or probably anything this company has or wants to do????

Very sound point and one I have raised in previous threads on this subject.

The opposition is just Nimbyism

Rob Exile Ward on 07 Dec 2012
In reply to Trangia: I don't think that's fair. Britain's uplands are a unique and fragile resource, that provide an intense and unreproducible experience. They have cultural and historic significance.

'I wandered lonely as a cloud
'until I came upon a
'a cloud of shrieking, well heeled thrill seekers on a stag weekend.'
Ridge - on 07 Dec 2012
In reply to Rob Exile Ward:
> (In reply to Trangia) I don't think that's fair. Britain's uplands are a unique and fragile resource, that provide an intense and unreproducible experience. They have cultural and historic significance.
>
> 'I wandered lonely as a cloud
> 'until I came upon a
> 'a cloud of shrieking, well heeled thrill seekers on a stag weekend.'

I'd normally agree with you, but I wouldn't describe Honister as being particularly fragile or unique. It's a working mine, with attendant thundering trucks etc, located next to a road that's normally bumper to bumper with tourists. It's probably better for the Lakes as a whole to 'sacrifice', (bit too drastic a word IMHO), Honister in the same way as Grizedale and Whinlatter have been to accomodate tourists seeking an 'adventure experience'.
Rob Exile Ward on 07 Dec 2012
In reply to Ridge: Well their you go, Grizedale, Whinlatter, Honister ... then Grasmere, Langdale, Wasdale...

'don't it always seem to go
that you don't know what you got till it's gone...'
Ridge - on 07 Dec 2012
In reply to Rob Exile Ward:
> (In reply to Ridge) Well their you go, Grizedale, Whinlatter, Honister ... then Grasmere, Langdale, Wasdale...
>
> 'don't it always seem to go
> that you don't know what you got till it's gone...'

TBH Grasmere and Langdale went ages ago ;-)

Fair point, but the LDNP needs to decide if they want to go the way of limiting visitors and controlling vehicle access, (which I can see the logic of), or it's current direction of cramming as many people in as possible.
Colin Wells - on 08 Dec 2012
In reply to Ridge:
> (In reply to Rob Exile Ward)
> [...]
>
> I'd normally agree with you, but I wouldn't describe Honister as being particularly fragile or unique.

Unfortunately, contrary to perhaps understandable superficial impressions, Honister Crag is in fact the very reverse.

The site is an SSSI primarily because it is a stronghold of an extremely scarce vegetation community that is both extremely vulnerable to disturbance and, in terms the area it covers at Honister, unique south of the border.

Most of the broad ledge systems you see as you look up at the crag from the road carry extensive stands of what's known as 'Tall herb' communities. These are scarce habitat types, related to the alpine meadows of continental Europe. They are typically found on un- or lightly grazed upland cliff ledges, and restricted to base-rich substrates and sheltered situations.

Tall herb is highly valued for both representing one of the few totally natural habitats surviving in Britain and for providing a refuge for rare, grazing-sensitive, montane plants. As you can imagine, the bulk of the habitat - which is never abundant anywhere in the UK, is to be found in the Scottish Highlands. Honister is therefore outstanding in possessing a relative large amount of these plant communities; it is likely to possess more than half the Tall Herb to be found south of the border.

Unfortunately, it is incredibly easy to scuff away the plant cover by repeated footfall. The reason Honister Crag is such a stronghold is that the steep north-facing cliff ledges have been mostly inaccessible to grazing animals and humans, apart from, until now, the occasional adventurous scrambler or climber.

The advent of the cableways and stapled rock that the Honister company have put in has changed all that however and the reason why the company got fined nearly £30,000 by Natural England was because they originally put in a new 'Via Ferrata' without consultation - which resulted in a large amount of damage to the Tall herb stands.

This is why controversy over the proposed Zip Wire development isn't just about aesthetics - increasing the numbers of people traversing formerly untrodden ground is going to increase the risk of degrading an already-threatened part of our natural heritage. (The new application advocates using the existing Via Ferratae to gain access to the launching point - which itself would now be constructed on the Crag itself, rather than on the summit slopes as in the previous application. Implicit in this application therefore is that there will be a large increase in users and therefore potential footfall in sensitive areas).

Ridge - on 09 Jan 2013
In reply to armus:

Planning permission refused:

Http://tinyurl.com/Honister
Milesy - on 09 Jan 2013
cant you post the real URL?
Mikkel - on 09 Jan 2013
In reply to Milesy:

UKC will not accept the original url as its a verylongwordswithoutanyspaces
Mikkel - on 09 Jan 2013
In reply to Mikkel:

but its from here
http://www.thewestmorlandgazette.co.uk

a quick search should find it
winhill - on 09 Jan 2013
Ridge - on 09 Jan 2013
In reply to winhill:
Not confirmed as yet, IIRC.
TheDrunkenBakers - on 09 Jan 2013
In reply to purplemonkeyelephant:
> (In reply to armus)
>
> For me the mountains are a place to get away from the intense city life and frankly anything artificial IE a theme park. Its a place to get back to nature. I know humans are always stepping further and further into these areas and setting up things like ski-lifts or cable cars but I just don't see why its neccesary. The whole point of a national park is to leave it untouched. If you want a zip-wire you can visit GO APE or something, why spoil such a gorgeous place like Buttermere. Climbing is interacting with the environment, building on it isn't. And yes you could argue the mine is much more damage than a zipwire but I'm not sure I would have voted for a mine in a national park even if this was 1850.
>
> I remember seeing people talk about coming up with new ways to bring people to the lakes and make it more accessible for young people, but thats just missing the point in my opinion. People shoudn't need convincing to visit some jaw dropping natural beauty.

Problem with Go-Ape is that is spoils what was previously a lovely forest. OK, I accept that Sherwood Pines is somewhat artificial in itself but i'd sooner have regimented pines interspersed with indiginous species as the forest reclaims itself than Go-Ape.

http://goape.co.uk/days-out/sherwood


Allan Young on 09 Jan 2013
In reply to winhill:

I think that the owner suggesting that Honister may have to close because of this decision beats Sir Christian!

Does this mean that Honister's business strategy is so weak that it had to rely on a proposal for which gaining planning approval was always going to be risky?

Or maybe she's just spitting her own dummy?
toad - on 09 Jan 2013
In reply to TheDrunkenBakers:
> (In reply to purplemonkeyelephant)
> [...]
>
> Problem with Go-Ape is that is spoils what was previously a lovely forest. OK, I accept that Sherwood Pines is somewhat artificial in itself but i'd sooner have regimented pines interspersed with indiginous species as the forest reclaims itself than Go-Ape.
>
> http://goape.co.uk/days-out/sherwood

Sherwood Pines is entirely artificial. There never was woodland there before it was planted up. Corsican Pines planted primarily to provide pit props and reduce reliance on timber imports post World wars. It's intensively managed for timber production and (latterly) visitor activity - MTBs, concerts, Go Ape are all part of that mix. Big areas of Clipstone are being restored to heathland, as it used to be, but the area around the visitor car parks/ bike hire/ go ape isn't part of that scheme. If you want to to see "proper" Sherwood, go further north beyond the Sherwood Forest visitor centre and go to Budby Heath - open (CROW) heathland which was a former MOD training area.
winhill - on 09 Jan 2013
In reply to toad:
> (In reply to TheDrunkenBakers)
> [...]
>
> Sherwood Pines is entirely artificial. There never was woodland there before it was planted up. Corsican Pines planted primarily to provide pit props and reduce reliance on timber imports post World wars. It's intensively managed for timber production and (latterly) visitor activity - MTBs, concerts, Go Ape are all part of that mix. Big areas of Clipstone are being restored to heathland, as it used to be, but the area around the visitor car parks/ bike hire/ go ape isn't part of that scheme. If you want to to see "proper" Sherwood, go further north beyond the Sherwood Forest visitor centre and go to Budby Heath - open (CROW) heathland which was a former MOD training area.

If it was heathland where did Robin Hood hide?
toad - on 09 Jan 2013
In reply to winhill:
> (In reply to toad)
> [...]
>
> If it was heathland where did Robin Hood hide?

South Yorkshire?

<runs away and hides>
Michael Ryan - on 10 Jan 2013
It would be interesting to hear Sir Chris's opinion on the zip-wire proposal.

There is a lot going on in the Lakes at the moment, what with the nuclear waste disposal plans in Ennerdale.

I can also hear the cries of hypocrisy from the supporters of the Honister Zipwire as the Lake District National Park increases their own commercial activity at the National Park Centre at Brockhole:

Hoteliers lash 'unfair' competition as Brockhole masterplan is unveiled

See: http://tinyurl.com/bfh92k9

START

Plans include:

* an indoor venue for weddings and other functions for up to 500;

* an ‘outdoor event’ space for up to 5,000;

* a watersports centre complete with a new lake and building for staff and equipment;

* a hostel for visitors; and

* a lakeside education classroom.

Mr Denby, who runs South Lakes Hotels, said it was not the job of the LDNPA to run commercial activities in competition with local businesses and called for the authority to consider selling off Brockhole.

“It is being subsidised to the tune of £300,000 a year and more public money is being pumped in to pay for the redevelopment. It puts the centre at an unfair advantage.”

Thomas Noblett, who runs the Langdale Chase Hotel, claimed a wedding venue at Brockhole would end up ‘looting the business’ from other hotels.

ENDS

Mick
Gordon Stainforth - on 10 Jan 2013
In reply to winhill:
> (In reply to toad)
> [...]
>
> If it was heathland where did Robin Hood hide?

'Forest', in early Norman times, simply meant an area of wild land that was outside of Common Law. So you could talk about, e.g, 'a wood within a forest'.

Robin Hood and many outlaws hid in caves on the border of Derbyshire and Yorkshire (eg. at Stanage Edge). That way, you could literally jump from one jurisdiction to another. Plus it was very wild and remote. Stanage was particularly clever because on the Yorkshire side you were in Hallamshire, which was a 'shire within a shire', having a different jurisdiction again from either Yorks or Derbys.

Final note. The full title of Robin Hood's arch rival was not the 'Sheriff of Nottingham' but the 'Sheriff of Nottinghamshire and Derbyshire'. So that's why outlaws being chased by this Sheriff typically ended up on that border at Stanage etc. If they went into Yorkshire, they were beyond the remit of the aforesaid Sheriff ... but of course, if they were particularly notorious, they would be equally wanted on the other side of the border.

Gael Force - on 10 Jan 2013
In reply to Gordon Stainforth: Did they do much on grit in those days?
deepstar - on 10 Jan 2013
In reply to Gael Force:
> (In reply to Gordon Stainforth) Did they do much on grit in those days?

Well they had the tights.
krikoman - on 10 Jan 2013
In reply to Mick Ryan - UKC and UKH:

> Thomas Noblett...


Are you shure this is a real name?

Carolyn - on 10 Jan 2013
In reply to armus:

All the paperwork that went to the committee is here:
http://www.lakedistrict.gov.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0006/297438/2013_01_09-Allerdale-Schedule-of-P...

According to this, it would create 2.5 FTE jobs.

The Friends of the Lake District objection is also in there. Bits of it seem pretty ill-informed - for example, suggesting it'd be easier (cheaper) for a young person with limited income to experience parascending than the zip wire....

No minutes of the meeting up yet - they might be more interesting ;-)
Ridge - on 10 Jan 2013
In reply to Carolyn:

BBC Cumbria was reporting that an MP would be raising questions about the impartiality of the LDNP, but I can't find a link.
ebygomm - on 10 Jan 2013
In reply to Carolyn:

Bearing in mind the officer recommendation was for approval, I wouldn't be surprised if it was allowed on appeal.
Carolyn - on 10 Jan 2013
In reply to ebygomm:

Yes, although I don't think the officer explicitly identified any legal issues with refusing it, which would have made any appeal more straightforward.
Carolyn - on 10 Jan 2013
In reply to Ridge:

Whose constituency is it at the moment? Tony or Jamie? I lost track of which random unconnected bit got lumped in with Copeland in the last lot of boundary changes.....
Carolyn - on 10 Jan 2013
In reply to Carolyn:

Indeed, Tim Farron's supported it in the past, it seems. Can't find a decent map of the current boundaries that'll load on my phone...
Ridge - on 10 Jan 2013
In reply to Carolyn:
Not sure, aren't they currently moving them about a bit?
Carolyn - on 10 Jan 2013
In reply to Ridge:

They're consulting on it at the moment, no decision as yet. Honister, along with Keswick and Cockermouth, would end up with Penrith (so probably stay safe Tory - Rory Stewart) under those proposals. Labour are objecting as they'd probably end up losing a seat in Cumbria (we end up with 1 less MP, which is the point of it).

But I still haven't worked out whose it is at the moment. I know Copeland ended up with a random bit that looks joined on on the map in the last reorganisation, but has no road link to the rest of the constituency (well apart from driving miles round through other constituencies, obviously).
Carolyn - on 10 Jan 2013
In reply to armus:

Ah, this one mentions the Chris B resignation from FoLD..
http://www.itv.com/news/border/update/2013-01-10/reaction-to-honister-zipwire-rejection/

This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.