UKC

Lake district potential issues

New Topic
This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
sodapop239 08 Jul 2014
Hi,

I was wondering if anyone who lives or climbs/hikes/bikes etc. in the lakes had any issues or problems with the area.
I'm doing a buiness course and we are looking into setting up hypothetical buisness that helps to solve problems in the area.
Is transport an issue for people? accomodation? things to do in the rain? would you like to see more organised sports events (triathlons, marathons etc.) or activities to do with kids? anything else?

Thanks for your help!
In reply to sodapop239:

You're a bit late - the disneyfication and cash generation retail scheme of the "Lakes" has already happened. The place is fcukd.
Somewhere along the line, a lot of people forgot what a National Park is supposed to be. The founders, benefactors and legators would turn in their graves to see how it is being currently mis-managed.
No we don't need any more "organised sports". Or dogs, or "challenges", or parking meters.
The locals need to reclaim their lands.
DC.
 mockerkin 08 Jul 2014
In reply to sodapop239:

If you mean within the boundaries of the Lake District National Park then what type of business do you envisage? There are many restrictions on industries in the park.
Public transport is poor throughout Cumbria and is about to get worse when the County Council remove bus subsidies.
Accomodation, there is a national shortage of housing. Second homes have restricted the locals' ability to buy and the LDNP rules are strict on building new homes.
What to do on a rainy day. There are plenty sports centres, climbing walls, cinemas, exhibitions etc but most just outside the park.
There are many organised sports events in the county.
People who live within the park boundaries rely on places just outside the park, within the county, already, so you can't really isolate the park from the rest of the county. People use towns just outside the LDNP for most amenities, Kendal, Workington, Penrith etc. You will be restricting yourself artificially not to consider that.
 Wesley Orvis 08 Jul 2014
In reply to Dave Cumberland:
Agree with DC.
Post edited at 11:34
 Sir Chasm 08 Jul 2014
In reply to sodapop239: I'd like more parking (and cheaper) and fewer people.

 GrahamD 08 Jul 2014
In reply to sodapop239:

Can we just stick with what a National Park is for ? its for enjoying nature. Anything that tries to turn it into Alton Towers is a bad thing.
J1234 08 Jul 2014
In reply to Dave Cumberland:

>

>

> The locals need to reclaim their lands.

>

It`s a National Park, you have no more claim to it than I do.
 Neil Williams 08 Jul 2014
In reply to sodapop239:

While better than North Wales, the public transport is badly co-ordinated. You can't for instance take a train at 7pm-ish from London and get to your hotel/campsite without taking a taxi.

Would be better if it was better planned to allow what people want to do and therefore reduce car traffic. And perhaps to carry bicycles as well.

Neil
 Carolyn 08 Jul 2014
In reply to sodapop239:

Public Transport - yes, poor, and likely to get worse. County Council are looking for "community transport" solutions (dial a ride schemes, community run minibuses), so there's something to work on....

Accomodation - don't really use in the Lakes as we live on the edge, but generally, a lack of cheap (hostel-style) accomodation with family friendly rooms.

Organised activities - from my viewpoint, I think we've probably reached saturation point, at least for cycle sportives...although there still seems to be plenty of appetite for organised events from visitors.

How about an outpost of the National Mountain Centre, or an equivalent organisation. That's been mooted before - not least as it might help get local young people trained for jobs in the area (and that is a local problem) - but also activities for visitors, accomdation. It's a fairly defined idea for a business that you could use for the project. If you Google it, you'd probably find something on what's been suggested already, and the problems it aims to solve.
eg http://www.rorystewart.co.uk/rory-works-with-newton-rigg-to-develop-satelli...
 1poundSOCKS 08 Jul 2014
In reply to GrahamD:

What would you say is making it like Alton Towers?
 mockerkin 08 Jul 2014
In reply to 1poundSOCKS:

> What would you say is making it like Alton Towers?

Nothing at the moment, but the refused Honister zip wire was a try.

In reply to SCrossley:

> It`s a National Park, you have no more claim to it than I do.

That is not strictly true - under the Environment Act 1995 and the "Vision" agreed 2006, emphasis is placed on:
".. conserving and enhancing the cultural heritage .. foster economic and social well being of local communities .."
There would not be a National Park without its local people, local culture, local economy and character and the effects they have all had on the landscape. That is why the area became a National Park.
 1poundSOCKS 08 Jul 2014
In reply to mockerkin:

I was wondering why it's f****d. Been up to Langdale a few times this year, and I can't see it.
sodapop239 08 Jul 2014
In reply to sodapop239:

Thanks for your replies. Ideally we want to find a problem first and then design the buiness around helping to solve it. Our aim is to create a social enterprise, so ideally something to benefit the local community as well as visitors. It's interesting to see that travel and public transport seems to be a big problem and I agree that the place seems to be saturated with organised sports activities etc.
I assume that erosion of footpaths and litter is an issue in popular walking/climbing areas?

Thanks again for all your replies, it's really helping us to narrow down a problem!
 1poundSOCKS 08 Jul 2014
In reply to Dave Cumberland:

That doesn't make it your land though, does it?
 GrahamD 08 Jul 2014
In reply to 1poundSOCKS:

> What would you say is making it like Alton Towers?

Its a mindset thing. At the moment it isn't Alton Towers. Let's keep it that way.
 1poundSOCKS 08 Jul 2014
In reply to GrahamD:

So you think they'll be building rollercoasters, unless we fight it?
In reply to sodapop239:

> I assume that erosion of footpaths and litter is an issue in popular walking/climbing areas?

Stopping the rampant path-building would be a very good move, this policy is out of control and changing the character of the area for ever backed up by fake quasi-pseudo-environmentalism.

Parking is a major issue for locals who are now disenfranchised - the Lake District should be free at the point of use to locals - not a cash grab or a land grab for vultures as at present.
In reply to 1poundSOCKS:

> That doesn't make it your land though, does it?

96% of the land is owned by other than the NPA.
 1poundSOCKS 08 Jul 2014
In reply to Dave Cumberland:

What do you mean by 'reclaim their lands' then?
 duchessofmalfi 08 Jul 2014
In reply to sodapop239:

How about fixing the "paying to book" problem with NT campsites?

 Neil Williams 08 Jul 2014
In reply to sodapop239:
One thing I'd beware of, though, is that Stagecoach don't take kindly to competitors. They *will* try to run any competing public transport operation off the road, and are likely to succeed due to their financial clout.

I think any substantial change here will require legislation and subsidy.

Neil
Post edited at 13:01
MattDTC 08 Jul 2014
In reply to sodapop239:

Maybe you could supply us with some info about who you are. Are you an interested individual? A consultant? A multinational company!?
 Carolyn 08 Jul 2014
In reply to sodapop239:

Transport to school and hospital/health servics are a big issue across Cumbria (cuts to bus subsidies, changes in eligibility for ambulance transport to appointments), more so in the most rural areans - if you could come up with a social enterprise that can combine that with transport for visitors, and which makes enough money to run, that'd be a winner.

The downside is that the existing comunity transport organisations struggle to break even (they currently use volunteer drivers, but are finding this harder), and certainly can't put money aside to replace minibuses when they get old (in the past, County Council has had a grant fund for bus replacement, but this isn't likely to continue). So making the finances add up could be a challenge.

Another possibility might be maintaining essential services in the rural areas - everything is being withdrawn to larger towns - so something along the lines of a community centre/service hub in a rural area might work - eg village shop/library/public internet access/space for agencies such as health, DWP to provide services/tourist information/cafe. Again, probably some examples, though can't think of one combining all of these.
 Carolyn 08 Jul 2014
In reply to sodapop239:

Or - something equivalent to the French "Bureau des Guides"? ie linking visitors to local "guides" (in this case, most likely mountain leaders/MIAs) and activities. Although a number of companies that do something fairly similar - not sure how much of a gap there is.
Tim Chappell 08 Jul 2014
In reply to sodapop239:

I wish people would stop using the word "issue" as if it meant "problem". It doesn't. It just doesn't.
 mockerkin 08 Jul 2014
In reply to 1poundSOCKS:

> I was wondering why it's f****d. Been up to Langdale a few times this year, and I can't see it.

I didn't say it was.
 armus 08 Jul 2014
In reply to sodapop239:

'Ideally we want to find a problem first and then design the buiness around helping to solve it. Our aim is to create a social enterprise, so ideally something to benefit the local community as well as visitors'

Shall I tell you what 'ideal' means in this scenario to many of us in Cumbria? It means creating an enterprise that employs locals, so reducing dependence on tourism which is now oppressive in the region. We would like our economy not to be reliant on tourists, of which there are too many. To us tourism is the problem. Tall order though.
 chrisa87 08 Jul 2014
In reply to duchessofmalfi:

Book over the phone, not by internet and you don't have to pay booking
 imkevinmc 08 Jul 2014
In reply to armus:



> Shall I tell you what 'ideal' means in this scenario to many of us in Cumbria? It means creating an enterprise that employs locals, so reducing dependence on tourism which is now oppressive in the region. We would like our economy not to be reliant on tourists, of which there are too many. To us tourism is the problem. Tall order though.

And what would the lakes economy be based upon if it wasn't for tourism?
 armus 08 Jul 2014
In reply to imkevinmc:

And what would the lakes economy be based upon if it wasn't for tourism?

As I said, that is the problem. We don't like to rely on tourism but we do.

In reply to imkevinmc:

> And what would the lakes economy be based upon if it wasn't for tourism?

Tourism kills everything it touches.
This area has a mixed economy always has and that is healthy, not dominated by nuclear, tourism or one group.
Agree with Armus, tourism is destroying the area.
On the one hand the Cumbria Tourist Board et al are selling hard to get people here (world Heritage status God forbid!), then on the other hand the locals are taxed to hell due to overcrowding - double death.
 Ramblin dave 08 Jul 2014
In reply to armus:

> And what would the lakes economy be based upon if it wasn't for tourism?

> As I said, that is the problem. We don't like to rely on tourism but we do.

Out of interest, what are the specific problems with tourism that make it such a bad thing to have to rely on? Are there things that could be done to mitigate those problems and improve the situation without just building a wall around the region?
In reply to Carolyn:

> Transport to school and hospital/health servics are a big issue across Cumbria (cuts to bus subsidies, changes in eligibility for ambulance transport to appointments), more so in the most rural areas

Wake up and taste the coffee - we all use cars - a car is one's Oxygen here. Fact of life that will not change.
DC

In reply to Ramblin dave:

> Out of interest, what are the specific problems with tourism that make it such a bad thing to have to rely on? Are there things that could be done to mitigate those problems and improve the situation without just building a wall around the region?

Specific problems created:
1. Locals are disenfranchised and have to pay to park across their home area because of parking restrictions - berms, barriers, boulders and yellow lines. So they don't go out as much as when we were young and all you had to spend was on an ice cream.
2. 2nd homes and buy to let kill the area like cancer and remove the opportunity for young locals to have a place to live. A two-tier housing market would stop that with 20x council Tax for second homes.
3. Predatory organisations like UU and the National Trust rip off people for parking on previous common land that was historically free. £7 a day at Thirlmere - an insult to Cumbrians everywhere.
4. Death by Pedestrianisation in Keswick, Cockermouth and elsewhere - no way for locals to use their market towns as market towns any more - i.e. a 20 minute visit to spend. Basic local businesses suffer at the expense of more national retail outlets.
Many other issues.
DC
 Wesley Orvis 08 Jul 2014
In reply to Dave Cumberland:

Totally agree with everything DC has said as do many others.
 Bob 08 Jul 2014
In reply to Dave Cumberland:

Pedestrianisation per se isn't bad, it's more the implementation and what happens around it. There's a pedestrianised area in Hebden Bridge. A bit of "anti" before it but footfall has increased by around 100% and those (local) businesses outside the area want it extending to include them.

I agree with the second homes point: the village next to where I grew up (Lindale) on the edge of the Park has a huge percentage of second homes. The high price of houses in the Lakes is hardly a recent phenomenon though - even back in the 1970s the only place that could match it for prices was London.
J1234 08 Jul 2014
In reply to Dave Cumberland:

>

> 1. Locals are disenfranchised and have to pay to park across their home area because of parking restrictions - berms, barriers, boulders and yellow lines. So they don't go out as much as when we were young and all you had to spend was on an ice cream.

This happens everwhere, there are more cars.

> 2. 2nd homes and buy to let kill the area like cancer and remove the opportunity for young locals to have a place to live. A two-tier housing market would stop that with 20x council Tax for second homes.

I think you will find "locals" sold the homes to 2nd home owners.

> 3. Predatory organisations like UU and the National Trust rip off people for parking on previous common land that was historically free. £7 a day at Thirlmere - an insult to Cumbrians everywhere.

Not a fan of UU or NT to be honest.

> 4. Death by Pedestrianisation in Keswick, Cockermouth and elsewhere - no way for locals to use their market towns as market towns any more - i.e. a 20 minute visit to spend. Basic local businesses suffer at the expense of more national retail outlets.


Same all over the country






 John Kelly 08 Jul 2014
In reply to duchessofmalfi:

> How about fixing the "paying to book" problem with NT campsites?

you don't have to book, just turn up on a first come first served basis - if there is room you're welcome, same as last 50 yrs, reckon you will be safe doing that for 95% of the year
john
manager
nt campsite ;langdale

 Neil Williams 08 Jul 2014
In reply to Bob:

It's not so much pedestrianisation, it's insufficient/inconvenient/expensive parking that directs people to out of town shopping centres instead. But in a tourist area people mostly just cough up - so these towns suffer less than similar towns in non-tourist areas.

If you had a nice pedestrianised area lined with shops worth going to, cafes, pubs etc, and a convenient car park at each end, people will still come.

Neil
 Neil Williams 08 Jul 2014
In reply to Bob:

You can buy a house almost in the Lakes by going south out of the national park (and probably north as well). House prices in Ulverston and Barrow are for example reasonably affordable.

Neil
 j0ntyg 08 Jul 2014
In reply to Ramblin dave:


Out of interest, what are the specific problems with tourism that make it such a bad thing to have to rely on?

>> Locals feel overwhelmed by the numbers, dislike the wear and tear on the infrastructure & "improvements" to accommodate more tourists, improvements that are seen as detrimental to the area. But most of all dislike the local economy being dictated by tourism & feel that they are no longer in control of their own society. It's rather like the American Indians' dismay when thousands of strangers descended on their territory, pride of place, it could be called. No-one is asking for walls to keep them out, only that the economy should not be dominated by tourists but more balanced.
Don't ask me how. that's the OP's job.
 j0ntyg 08 Jul 2014
In reply to Dave Cumberland:

> Wake up and taste the coffee - we all use cars - a car is one's Oxygen here. Fact of life that will not change.

Not true. Rural villages need buses to take the children to school and back, people need them to go into town, old folk who don't drive, families with only one car etc. The removal of subsidies means that each child will cost their parents up to £1000 p.a. for school bus fares for over sixteens.

 1poundSOCKS 08 Jul 2014
In reply to mockerkin:

Not you. So you don't think it is?
In reply to SCrossley:

> This happens everwhere, there are more cars.
> I think you will find "locals" sold the homes to 2nd home owners.
> Not a fan of UU or NT to be honest.
> Same all over the country

Agree - but for points 1 and 4 the best engine of economic activity and job creation is to let cars right into the town centres for free to spend. That is the essence of a market town. If horses had been banned from Penrith a 100 years ago Penrith would have ceased to exist. Massive boost for local businesses - look at Carlisle centre - you could put 500 cars at the market cross in centre of town outside the tourist place. The town would be reborn. No charges! Locals would love it - result no boarded up shops.

Agree locals have sold their properties mistakenly, because there is no incentive from the fiscal system to keep it in the family (bit like no incentive for young people to pay £3.30 a pint in a licensed controlled supervised magistrate-approved pub when it is 30p a pint in a discount supermarket - so no young people in local pubs), so the area becomes culturally denuded and sold to the highest bidder - sanitised, dead, moribund, end of traditional life, end of schools, local young families etc . A 2-tier market is better late than never - I would be first in line to put my house in the lower tier.

Point 3 - DO NOT PAY! They can not enforce it. Why are people so stupid? The numerous pull-offs, laybys, common ground areas were historically free for all.

Point 4 - Do not vote for Councillors who support anti-car policies and pedestrianisation schemes, these are the death of towns, any local business person will confirm.
 Wesley Orvis 08 Jul 2014
In reply to sodapop239:

United Utilities should be giving free parking out to locals anyways, as payment for the theft of the water supply that has been happening over the last 50 years, that they then charge Manchester and other areas for at a high rate and give nothing back to the local economy.
 1poundSOCKS 08 Jul 2014
In reply to Dave Cumberland:

Every area has it's problems Dave, personally I think you've got it good in the Lake District. Many people would happily trade if they could afford it.

Wake up and smell the coffee.
 Bob 08 Jul 2014
In reply to Dave Cumberland:

You seem to have a bee in your bonnet about pedestrianisation. As I indicated above, it's not the pedestrianised areas that are the problem but the lack of infrastructure, i.e. car parking, around it. Kendal has had pedestrianised areas for many years and is hardly struggling.

I remember towns like Keswick in the 1970s when cars were allowed free access in the main centre and frankly it was a nightmare even with the levels of traffic back then.
 John Kelly 08 Jul 2014
In reply to sodapop239:

Best place to live in the country

of course there are problems about balance, how many bike races are enough, should land owners make an income from parking fees, should NT charge for providing a booking service?, will locals benefit from pedestrianised shopping ares, how many rural buses are sufficient, the tension between tourism and industry

but

great countryside, great economy, great schools, great lifestyle

In contrast i have just returned from the west end of newcastle and i would suggest that the issues the residents there suffer make the free parking issue seem a little tame
 biscuit 08 Jul 2014
In reply to MattDTC:

As he says in his first post he is a student on a business course tasked with finding a realife problem and creating a HYPOTHETICAL solution to it.

So he won't be driving a bus over Scafell or building a roller coaster anytime soon.
In reply to 1poundSOCKS:

> I was wondering why it's f****d. Been up to Langdale a few times this year, and I can't see it.

Agreed. Langdale is one of the most beautiful and least f****d up places in the whole of the UK. There seems to be very harmonious relationship between farmer and tourist/walker/climber too.
 1poundSOCKS 08 Jul 2014
In reply to Gordon Stainforth:

If only the staff in the Old Dungeon Ghyll pub were a bit less grumpy. The food in the Wainwright is better anyway.
 Rick Graham 08 Jul 2014
In reply to Gordon Stainforth:

Like DC, I am not a fan generally of the Nat Trust or Nat Park.

However, this year they have started opening the field next to the ODG for parking at busy times. So usually sufficient parking at most times.

Common sense for once.
 John Kelly 08 Jul 2014
In reply to Gordon Stainforth:

IMO Langdale farmers are very tolerant of the hoards of visitors who walk through, climb over and generally muck about on their land. There is some self interest as most have some investment in the tourist industry, a sensible combination.
 John Kelly 08 Jul 2014
In reply to 1poundSOCKS:

they get some tough shifts in there - i like the food - cheese chips and beans is worth 3 michellin stars imo
 1poundSOCKS 08 Jul 2014
In reply to John Kelly:

I like the food too, it's just not the best in Langdale (*).

(*) based on one meal in ODG, and one the the Wainwright.
 John Kelly 08 Jul 2014
In reply to Rick Graham:

Neither of these organisations get it all right and on occasion think both these organisations have felt remote and bureaucratic but the planning control of the Park and the conservation by the Trust have provided a rich legacy of buildings, landscape and land use in the district, we should support them
 John Kelly 08 Jul 2014
In reply to 1poundSOCKS:

we need someone to do the stats - i'm off climbing
john
In reply to John Kelly:

Also, the path restoration work has been superb. A really fantastic job, deserving the highest praise.
In reply to sodapop239:

Could you move the whole thing closer to Derbyshire !

That would be awesome , also loads more cell phone towers.

I can never speak to anyone in the Duddon valley or get weather updates.

Just kidding
 John Kelly 08 Jul 2014
In reply to MGC:
would it not make more sense to move Stanage to Stavely
Post edited at 21:59
 Carolyn 08 Jul 2014
In reply to Dave Cumberland:

> Wake up and taste the coffee - we all use cars - a car is one's Oxygen here. Fact of life that will not change.

Not the people I'm talking to.

Sure, those of with a reasonable income and a driving licence find it much easier. But not everyone has that option.
In reply to John Kelly:

That's defeating the object.



 mark catcher 08 Jul 2014
In reply to sodapop239: Totally agree with comments above regarding footpath and bridleway erosion. The current policy of turning the above into smooth, gravel super-highways is not only short-sighted but looks just plain wrong in the natural landscape. I say short-sighted as walkers don't come to the Lakes for manicured paths. Similarly, once interesting and technical biking on bridleways has been totally destroyed in many areas; this just drives bikers back onto footpaths, aggravating the walker/cyclist relationship and allegedly increasing erosion elsewhere. If the people responsible for these policies read this, please have a rapid rethink as it is destroying the Lakes.

 Ridge 08 Jul 2014
In reply to Carolyn:

> Not the people I'm talking to.

> Sure, those of with a reasonable income and a driving licence find it much easier. But not everyone has that option.

+1

Significant problem for young people to get to work or older people to get to shops/doctors etc.
 Ridge 08 Jul 2014
In reply to Neil Williams:

> You can buy a house almost in the Lakes by going south out of the national park (and probably north as well). House prices in Ulverston and Barrow are for example reasonably affordable.

> Neil

But don't go west or north west. No siree, it's horrible, a desolate wasteland, nothing to see, move along, keep away....

Ridge
West Cumbria
In reply to Gordon Stainforth:

> Also, the path restoration work has been superb. A really fantastic job, deserving the highest praise.

You really are mad!
Landscape 1 - 7 stone staircases.

If you want a staircase stay in yr house. You can not walk down them in winter so the path becomes 3x wider.
In reply to Carolyn:

> Not the people I'm talking to.

> Sure, those of with a reasonable income and a driving licence find it much easier. But not everyone has that option.

Sorry, you can't plead poverty on this one - it's a matter of practicalities. All the local hard-working people here need a car each just to survive, AND they manage to afford it by very hard work.
 Ridge 09 Jul 2014
In reply to Dave Cumberland:

> Sorry, you can't plead poverty on this one - it's a matter of practicalities. All the local hard-working people here need a car each just to survive, AND they manage to afford it by very hard work.

You make it sound like lack of a decent transport system that results in locals who are unable to drive, (people do get sick and elderly you know), being virtually housebound is some fantastic virtue. It's nothing to be proud of.
 Carolyn 09 Jul 2014
In reply to Dave Cumberland:

But what about the 16 year olds trying to get to apprenticeships so they can get a decent job? The adult with epilepsy who can't drive? The 80 year old, whose spouse used to do all the driving but is now dead, trying to get to doctors appointments?

I'm not sure which bit of Cumbria you're in Dave, but I'm hearing those kind of stories from Muncaster to Garrigill.
 Carolyn 09 Jul 2014
In reply to Ridge:

> But don't go west or north west. No siree, it's horrible, a desolate wasteland, nothing to see, move along, keep away....

Yes, really horrible out here, best not to venture beyond the comfort of Keswick
 mockerkin 09 Jul 2014
In reply to Dave Cumberland:


>> Dave, as Wesley Orvis has said "Totally agree with everything DC has said as do many others." So do I, but you are not the most articulate advocate for our cause i.e. reduce/replace tourism, because you get too emotional and don't know some facts e.g. how public transport effects rural areas. Keep up the good work though.
Post edited at 13:06
 tim carruthers 09 Jul 2014
In reply to John Kelly:

With the exception of the notorious "dog shooter of Langdale". Or has he ceased to exist?
 Bulls Crack 09 Jul 2014
In reply to Dave Cumberland:

> You're a bit late - the disneyfication and cash generation retail scheme of the "Lakes" has already happened. The place is fcukd.

Really? Looked ok last time I was there



 John Kelly 09 Jul 2014
In reply to tim carruthers:

> With the exception of the notorious "dog shooter of Langdale".<
we all have the odd bad day
>Or has he ceased to exist?<
still hale and hearty
 mockerkin 09 Jul 2014
In reply to Bulls Crack:

> Really? Looked ok last time I was there

He means for locals not visitors
 John Kelly 09 Jul 2014
In reply to Bulls Crack:
been on Raven Langdale last 2 nights, 7pm warm and sunny July evening, not a soul, not even a local
Post edited at 16:13
 tim carruthers 09 Jul 2014
In reply to John Kelly:
That's a shame. That the dog shooter is still in good health, I mean.
Post edited at 16:16
 John Kelly 09 Jul 2014
In reply to tim carruthers:

it's a point of view i suppose
 j0ntyg 09 Jul 2014
In reply to John Kelly:

> been on Raven Langdale last 2 nights, 7pm warm and sunny July evening, not a soul, not even a local

What has that got to do with the OP? So you had a nice day in Langdale, does that post contribute to the question that the OP asked? It was about starting a business in the Lakes.
 Michael Gordon 09 Jul 2014
In reply to j0ntyg:

doesn't look like he was replying to the OP
 John Kelly 09 Jul 2014
In reply to j0ntyg:
you're of course right i had drifted off abit but i think the point was that even in the most popular locations at the busiest times of the year the disneyfication and the steady stream of visitors doesn't stop me or anyone else getting on the hill and enjoying the solitude, the sounds, the smells, the gravel in the approach shoes, the sweating, the verticality, the fear, the rock

but your right i'm off the point

cycled over a pass this evening and swam across a lake - I enjoyed it a lot
Post edited at 21:00
 GrahamD 10 Jul 2014
In reply to 1poundSOCKS:

> So you think they'll be building rollercoasters, unless we fight it?

Not to begin with. It starts with lower key 'Go Ape' or zip wire developments and extends to funnicular railways and cable cars because someone decided they could turn a profit from the place.
 1poundSOCKS 10 Jul 2014
In reply to GrahamD:

I thought the zip wire wasn't allowed. And if you're only problem is a local Go Ape, then I really don't think you've got any problems.
 GrahamD 10 Jul 2014
In reply to 1poundSOCKS:

Are you deliberately trying to be obtuse ? its all about the principal what a National Park is for. For enjoying nature. Not for turning a profit or bringing nature down to the lowest common denominator.

The Lakes has done pretty well at incorporating its visitor 'attractions' to date without intruding too much on the experience of those just wanting to enjoy the nature. Except for the traffic jams of course. Lets keep it that way.
 1poundSOCKS 10 Jul 2014
In reply to GrahamD:

I did write a well considered reply, but I keep getting internet errors. Sorry, really can't be bothered typing it again, life is too short.
 Bulls Crack 10 Jul 2014
In reply to mockerkin:

> He means for locals not visitors

Do 'the locals' not make a living out of the visitors?
 PATTISON Bill 10 Jul 2014
In reply to sodapop239:

To get back to the question why not start with toilets in Whitehaven or Clooless Copeland as I call it,controlling Bracken and 3 Peakers,often seen in equal profusion and removing ridiculous parking charges at Park Authority car parks .I pay for the upkeep of visitors car parking in the village but never use it apart from carting the recycling I also pay for that Clooless Copeland doesnt collect.PS There is also a free toilet for visitors that I also pay for. Totally agree with DC .
In reply to PATTISON Bill:

> To get back to the question why not start with toilets in Whitehaven or Clooless Copeland as I call it,controlling Bracken and 3 Peakers .. .. .. ..visitors that I also pay for. Totally agree with DC .

Bill - Hear hear!
We should form a team.

However, when I applied for a job as lay member of the NPA (with every credential in the book that should have made someone like me an asset) - I got a polite letter back saying, "this position is no longer available".

They figured out somehow that I might try and put them all - and myself out of a job. If you know what I mean.
DC
 PATTISON Bill 10 Jul 2014
In reply to Dave Cumberland:

Keep it in the club time.Got the T shirt.Dont let the so and sos grind you down.A little drop of water weareth away the stone.
 mockerkin 10 Jul 2014
In reply to Bulls Crack:

> Do 'the locals' not make a living out of the visitors?

>> Yes, but not all of them. Many commute outside the park to work. When the tourist season starts there is a huge influx of workers from elsewhere. Seasonal jobs are advertised overseas. Many tourist businesses are owned by companies from well outside the area.

 j0ntyg 26 Jul 2014
 John Kelly 26 Jul 2014
In reply to j0ntyg:

the walkers or the path builders?
 armus 29 Jul 2014
In reply to John Kelly:

> the walkers or the path builders?

>> I think he means both.
 John Kelly 30 Jul 2014
In reply to armus:

no prejudice then - just people generally
 armus 30 Jul 2014
In reply to John Kelly:

Yes, that's true I'm afraid. (I shouldn't be replying for someone else but I know what he means.)
So many people remember the fells when they were not crowded, empty in fact compared to that photo. I am one of them. More path maintenance results in better paths, so more tourists, resulting in a self defeating cycle for the fells.
To hope that the tourist numbers can be well reduced is implausible, wishful thinking and won't happen.
Thank God that some famous climbers and their sponsors who had business interests in the zip wire down honister were refused. They have now been reduced to having routes within the mine. Good, we don't want Blackpool here.
It will eventually happen though.
 John Kelly 30 Jul 2014
In reply to armus:

there is still loads of opportunities to get on the fells when it's quiet
if you avoid middle of the day on summer weekends you can often enjoy total solitude, i was on raven crag a couple of times last week and not a soul, similarly greenburn twice, no one.

that said i think it's great that as many people as possible get a chance to experience the fells and mountains, its just the best experience going

Paths -i remember as a kid in the late 60's the path up the band and beside stickle ghyll were huge scars on the landscape and the work to fix that must be applauded but pure access work in a sense detracts from the original appeal of the fell being a 'difficult' place to access

don't think blackpool is inevitable, Friends of lakes, Nat Park, NT etc all trying to preserve the essence, don't always agree in detail but we don't have to

New Topic
This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
Loading Notifications...