UKC

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-cumbria-40547691
This sounds very grand but what does it mean for walkers & climbers - if anything?

In reply to keith-ratcliffe:

I'd hope it means better care and custody of the environment, so better maintenance of paths to reduce visible impact, greater effort in nature conservation and so forth. I also hope it gives all relevant agencies a bigger stick with which to beat the Treasury for funding to prevent, alleviate and remediate the effects of flash flooding of the sort seen recently.

Less chocolate-box, more vibrant and inspirational living landscape would be my overall aim. I shall watch and see.

T.

In reply to Pursued by a bear:

Sadly winning the status will likely mean chocolate box status forever. Reforestation which will help reduce flooding won't fit with the over grazing of the hill sides etc.. personally i think it's a disaster for the lakes in all respects. The place is rammed with tourist anyway, how can it cope with more.

In reply to keith-ratcliffe:

Bad news was my first reaction.
The Lake District will appear on more "must do" lists. This is partly borne out by the notion that it will bring £20m more to the local area, which can only come from more tourists. So prices go up and the cost of housing goes up-even those that are set aside for locals.

I would think that the freak flooding assessment and treatment will not be affected by the new classification.

The area will just be on more people's radar.

In reply to summo:

I think that we agree.
Having just come back from there, I wonder if National Trust car parks will be more full?
I think that we can still be surprised-we were the only ones climbing on Quayfoot buttress today.

In reply to veteye:

It will be slightly busier, probably barely noticeable, but think it will just add more weight to the planning officers resisting any change in what is a man made scenery anyway.

With CAP ending and Brexit many farms might look to other options to improve their profit etc.. But their hands will be tied to continue the over grazing of the hills and new construction around their farms even more restricted.

In reply to veteye:

I've been there twice this year and had at least one other team there, if it was as hot in the lakes as it was on dartmoor today I'd imagine everyone had fled to the mountain crags for some coolness!

In reply to keith-ratcliffe:
I have lived in the area for four years in the 1970/80s and when I first saw this story I was quite upbeat about its effect on an area that I love - words like preservation seemed to offer a restrained future. Then I read the quotes by the CEO of the National Park who talked about increasing the tourist numbers - Ambleside is now gridlocked on most summer days & Bank Holidays - do we want that every day? Tourists spend money but they don't add value to the area - its residents, landowners, tenants, farmers do that. What does the new status offer them for the future? Please give me hope that it is not Disneyland - Lakes in the making.

In reply to keith-ratcliffe:

I personally think this will be a mistake for the Lakes from an environmental point of view. There will be literally zero chance of the fells ever returning to anywhere near healthy in terms of ecology and biodiversity.

We had a golden opportunity in the next few years after Brexit to find a way to manage the land better for humans and nature. Doesn't look like that will be possible now for the nature bit that is!

In reply to keith-ratcliffe:
I've lived in the Lakes for 11 years (Ambleside for 7) and can't say I notice much difference with visitor numbers / congestion. Yes it's busy, but that's been the case for many years and will continue to be the case.
Visitors most definitely add value. They help local businesses flourish, anc via employment they help local folk to remain in the area.
It is a bit of a Disney land, but that's what National Parks are, like it or not, agree or not. They are here for the sanity of city dwellers.
Reforesting, whilst a reasonable idea and certainly helpful for the ecology and environment locally, would also ruin the Lakes as we all know it. None of us alive today know the Lakes in its 'natural' form so how can we comment on it?
The place is beautiful. I was in Eskdale yesterday, by the Esk gorge, this is one of the finest, most beautiful places in the country. Let's keep it that way.
Let's hope the UNESCO is positive, I'm sure it will be

In reply to Mark Eddy:


Because we've seen other places that are still (relatively) in their natural state?

In reply to Mark Eddy:



How do the next generation even afford a home in the area? The wages of those working in the tourist industry are so low compared to house prices in the park?


Stuff the city dwellers; what about the people there? Many don't wish to live in an ill managed museum piece.


Maybe the right thing for an area won't always please people who don't live there. Sometimes the right thing involves tough choices.


There are areas there with quite a bit of ancient forest etc.. perhaps some of other areas need this rewilding? In 50years time forest management would provide far more employment and better pay than another tea room or tat shop.


The current parks policy isn't generally positive for the environment or the next generation of Lakeland folk and the UNESCO badge just reinforces their current plans.

(Ex YDNP resident).

In reply to Mark Eddy:


I believe this is called shifting baseline syndrome. The baseline you refer to (the lakes in its current state) is an uplands ecological wasteland.

Surely it is our duty within the boundaries of a National Park to improve/enhance the ecological potential and conservation value that area could provide? Isn't that the point of a NP?

In reply to keith-ratcliffe:

I’ve struggled to understand why the Lakes authorities have invested so much commitment, time and money to achieving World Heritage status. At the global level the currency of WH has been gradually debased over recent years, with sites being recognised for political reasons despite evidently not meeting the UNESCO criteria, and with the designation being used essentially for heavy tourist promotion rather than for enhanced conservation. At the UK national level there’s scant evidence of Government support for improved protection and management of our World Heritage sites.

But for the sake of the Lakes I hope I’m wrong …

In reply to summo:


Certain honeypots are, and the access in and out at certain time can be a little fraught, but where I walk and climb (on Bank Hols) I rarely see anyone unless in the distance. I heard a statistic many years ago that most visitors do not go more than 300 yards or something from their car and I can well believe that.
I am not over chuffed with the UNESCO status, just more aspic poured on the Lakes.

In reply to keith-ratcliffe:

I definitely think there is a question about whether the area's road can cope with more traffic. Was sat outside the Brit in Elterwater yesterday lunchtime and I counted 10 quarry lorries going past in an hour. Now I know the quarry is one of the few non-tourist employers in the region, but surely that is excessive.

And possibly because I've been out on my road bike more often I've encountered more issues on the narrow roads with cars - especially the number of SUVs/4x4s. That said when I rode up Wrynose last Sunday every car I met was very considerate- most pulled over to make things easier for me and gave me much needed encouragement !