Wandering lonely as a vegan amid a host of humdrum lakes
8 September 2013
United Nations world heritage sites were created so that important cultural and natural landmarks could be preserved for all humanity for all time. Or until the Taliban blow them up.
It was a good idea, but after all the big stuff had been covered ? which didn?t take very long ? the scheme became nothing more than an ego boost for smaller, less important countries that could rush about saying, ?You lot in the developed world may have your nuclear weapons and your literature and your space programmes, but we have these jolly interesting rock formations.?
Plus, as an added bonus, when a landmark is awarded world heritage status, the UN gives the country?s government some money, all of which can be used by the official in charge to buy a shiny new Mercedes.
Naturally, the latest small and unimportant country to leap onto the bandwagon is Britain. There are 28 sites in the UK and its overseas territories; places such as Blenheim Palace and Bath, and the Giant?s Causeway in Co Antrim. But now, people with titles and CBEs are campaigning for more to be added to the list. And it seems the No 1 contender is the Lake District.
They argue that when the former resident William Wordsworth claimed that the Lake District was ?a sort of national property in which every man has a right and interest?, he created the very essence of conservationism and that for this alone, the area deserves recognition. And some money. Please.
They concede that the cost of staking the claim could be as high as ?570,000 but say that if they are successful, the award could increase visitor numbers from the current annual level of about 8m by as much as 1%. This, they say, would bring an extra ?20m a year to the region.
Yeah. Right. But only if the extra 1% is made up of Roman Abramovich, Elton John and the Sultan of Brunei. Because a 1% increase would see 80,000 more visitors a year, and for them to dump ?20m into the local economy, they?d each need to spend ?250 in the sweet shops of Keswick.
It?s not the wonky cost benefits, though, that worry me about making the Lake District a world heritage site. Or the slightly tragic notion that we now think such things matter. No. My main concern is that I really don?t think the award would be justified.
Because while Buttermere is very pretty, it doesn?t cause you to bite the back of your hand in the same way that the Grand Canyon does, or the Pyramids. Or Ha Long Bay in Vietnam. And, I?m sorry, but the centre of Ambleside is in no way a match for the centre of Rome.
Writing last week in The Guardian, the mad old eco-fool George Monbiot went even further, saying that the Lake District is a chemical desert, devoid of wildlife and that the tradition of hill farming ? the very thing the people with titles and CBEs want to preserve ? is responsible. Because the sheep are eating the trees and the mountains and causing floods. Earthquakes, too, I should imagine.
The fact is then that no one who takes a global view could see the Lake District as being a world heritage site. But I wonder: could it be something else?
At present, it is popular among ramblers and tenting enthusiasts; bitter, lonely people with wizened legs who strut about pointing at stuff that doesn?t matter and telling everyone that they enjoy the constant rain. These people add absolutely nothing to the local economy, and with their cagoules and bobble hats are actually an eyesore. Nothing ruins a view quite so comprehensively as a tent full of Keith and Candice Marie.
And to make matters worse, the local authorities actively encourage such people to tarry awhile. They create camp sites, and build footpaths and discourage anything that might be boisterous or fun. Which, if it?s money they?re after, seems to be muddleheaded and stupid.
I recently spent a week on the shores of Lake Como in Italy. This is prettier and more dramatic than any of the British lakes but is not a world heritage site. It?s not being preserved by the UN for all humanity for all time. Nature will do that. And in the meantime, all humanity can play with it.
As you may know, there is now a speed limit of 10 knots on all the lakes in the Lake District. This means that water-skiing and jet skis and powerboats are pretty much banned. So that the aquatic ramblers in their idiotic dinghies can have a bit of peace and quiet.
On Lake Como things are rather different. Every day I was woken to the glorious sound of someone parting the morning mist with their wondrous Riva Aquarama speedboat. Then the ferry would go by, its jets turning the tranquil green water into a foaming, vibrant white spume. There are no speed limits on Lake Como and, providing your speedboat has less than 40 brake horsepower, you don?t even need a licence.
This attitude attracts people with spending power, and to help them along, the nearby towns are rammed with shops selling expensive trinketry and restaurants full of beautiful people eating the beautiful wildlife. Let me put it this way: when George Clooney was looking for a house in Europe, he chose Como, not Derwent Water.
This then is what the people with titles and CBEs should be doing; getting rid of the coach tour mentality, and replacing the vegans and the ramblers with Hollywood high-rollers and billionaire speed freaks. They should accept that there are plenty of places in Britain where the lonely can go to be by themselves and that the Lake District should be a playground for the young and the interesting.
It?s time to forget about what Wordsworth did for the Lake District and concentrate more on the contribution made by Donald Campbell. Because blasting across Coniston Water at 297mph is more appealing to more people than wandering through a field of daffodils. Which you can?t do any more, anyway, because the sheep have eaten them.