|
|||||||||
|
|
Prove
It! 2004
is the year those running Scotland's two new National Parks must prove
themselves, according to Simon Willis. It is
astonishing Scotland had to wait so long for a National Park. Now that we have two, you might
expect campaigners to be dancing for joy on the summits. They're not... not yet at least. Many have reserved judgement until
the end of this year, and to understand their hesitancy, you must understand
the history. The first
National Park Service was created in the USA in 1916, a direct result of the
campaigning work of John Muir, the noted environmental campaigner who was
born in the Scottish town of Dunbar.
It wasn't until 1951 that the UK's first National Parks opened, and
none were in Scotland. It seemed
the country of Muir's birth would not benefit from his ideas. UK
National Parks were, and still are, very different from their American
cousins. They encompass farms,
businesses, roads, towns and the homes of many people, so environmental,
scenic and wildlife preservation has to be balanced against the economic
needs of local people. Deciding
where that point of balance should be has been the single most difficult, and
controversial, aspect of running the Parks. Then there is the "honey pot" effect. Draw a circle on a map, mark it as a
"National Park", and the tourists swarm in. For years there has been talk in the
English Lake District National Park of introducing traffic restrictions, even
toll booths, to restrict the crowds of visitors. There are those who argue that the balance here is tipping
away from preservation.
Now Scotland has two National Parks and the people who run
them know they're under the spotlight.
After it opened in July 2002, Loch Lomond and the Trossachs National
Park had a difficult first year, largely due to planning decisions already
made. The Cairngorms National
Park got off to an even worse start in September 2003, when some of the
people who'd campaigned for its creation boycotted the official opening
ceremony. Partly, that was
because it was held at the top of a controversial funicular railway to which
many had objected, but also because many believe the Park boundary was drawn
too small for political, not environmental, reasons. So this is the year Scotland's
Park Authorities must begin to prove themselves. The tourist industry is salivating over the revenues that
can be generated by combining the two simple words, "National" and
"Park". When it comes
to deciding the oh-so-sensitive balance between economy and environment,
perhaps they should adopt the precautionary principle, and position the
fulcrum so it tips more readily towards preservation. The people of Scotland want to see
that we're better with National Parks than without them. This article appears in the 2004 GoLite Catalogue |
||||||||