Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1]   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Antarctica Tourism - "Deplorable Conduct"  (Read 5202 times)
dburdeny
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 29


« on: December 07, 2007, 03:54:50 PM »
ReplyReply

This fellow seems to have a chip on his shoulder. As a soon to be Antarctic tourist I found it an interesting read....next stop Hell!!!Huh

see link...

http://www.statesmanjournal.com/apps/pbcs....18/1046/OPINION
Logged
Geoff Wittig
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1017


« Reply #1 on: December 08, 2007, 02:19:42 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
This fellow seems to have a chip on his shoulder. As a soon to be Antarctic tourist I found it an interesting read....next stop Hell!!!Huh

see link...

http://www.statesmanjournal.com/apps/pbcs....18/1046/OPINION
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=159085\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


Um. Well. He may be a bit caustic, but can you really disagree with his fundamental point? Ecotourism does have potential to provide enough economic incentive to preserve something like, say, the mountain gorillas of Rwanda. But Antarctica? The presence of wealthy Western tourists adds to the toxic burden already imposed by hundreds of "scientists" (many there to maintain a claim to Antarctica's resources when the treaty expires) where the cold climate and minimal microbe population mean pollution is essentially permanent.
Logged
jjj
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3649



WWW
« Reply #2 on: December 08, 2007, 02:54:50 PM »
ReplyReply

Cannnot say I entirely disagree with his main argument either. Though the hypbole regarding a special place in hell is somewhat for the tourists is a bit over the top.
Is there an extra special place for those who responsible for let's say...genocide?

"There's little if any regulation down in Antarctica but, as always, there's lots of money to be made even if it means debasing the last unspoiled place on earth." - Making money regardless of the consequences to the environment or to other humans, sadly sums up mankind I'd say.
Yesterday in the UK, the big supermarkets were fined silly amounts of money for screwing the public. Their ridiculous defence, "it was to benefit the farmers", would have come as a major surprise to the farmers, as UK farmers are more likely to be driven bankrupt by the supermarket's lack of generosity, than to recieve any extra dosh from the customers who were being diddled.
« Last Edit: December 08, 2007, 02:55:42 PM by jjj » Logged

Tradition is the Backbone of the Spineless.   Futt Futt Futt Photography
wolfnowl
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5807



WWW
« Reply #3 on: December 08, 2007, 05:15:04 PM »
ReplyReply

"If there were in the world today any large number of people who desired their own happiness more than they desired the unhappiness of others, we could have a paradise in a few years."
Bertrand Russell (1872-1970)

Maybe idealistic, maybe worth considering...

Mike.
Logged

If your mind is attuned to beauty, you find beauty in everything.
~ Jean Cooke ~


My Flickr site / Random Thoughts and Other Meanderings at M&M's Musings
Provokot
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 57


WWW
« Reply #4 on: December 21, 2007, 05:41:14 AM »
ReplyReply

I don't know the writer of the article, but as a very keen conservationist I have come across his type many times, pontificating from their armchairs about things they know little about.

It would be stupid to try to ban tourists from visiting the Antarctic, which seems to be what he wants. Instead of whining he should be putting forward practical ideas of how the impact of tourism can be lowered as the number of tourists inevitably and unavoidably rises.

Having been raised in Africa amongst hunters and safari guides I have had a bellyful of couch potato conservationists whose prescriptions, if ever allowed to happen, could see the destruction of the very places/creatures they think they are saving.

The Antarctic is special. I deserves extra-special treatment as an unspoiled wilderness. But it also deserves rational thinkers.  And I, as a citizen of the world, deserve to go there if I so choose.

Regards

Paul
Logged

Robert Roaldi
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 499


WWW
« Reply #5 on: December 21, 2007, 07:18:28 AM »
ReplyReply

It may occasionally help to explain the macro by examining the micro.

I spent a summer of my youth working in the fast food sector. Ask anyone who had ever worked in that industry and has had to clean up after the general public and they will tell you that people are PIGS when they don't have to clean up after themselves (and that may be an insult to livestock).

A group I belonged to once used to participate in adopt-a-highway roadside cleanup campaigns. That was quite an eye-opening exercise. I am in no doubt that there are large numbers of people who deliberately dump their household garbage by the side of the road as a matter of course.

I am 54 and I started doing something when I was in university in the late 70's. I would check underneath tables and chairs in public places, classrooms, later restaurant tables, I would check behind those handrails in elevators in office towers and hotels, and I have yet to be in a public building where I DID NOT find chewing gum stuck somewhere. These are all places frequented by adults.
Logged

--
Robert
robertroaldi.zenfolio.com
thewanderer
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 106


« Reply #6 on: December 21, 2007, 09:54:16 AM »
ReplyReply

probably just jealous he cant go,, rather sit in oregon and farm pine nuts,
« Last Edit: December 21, 2007, 09:55:45 AM by thewanderer » Logged
Misirlou
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 657


WWW
« Reply #7 on: December 21, 2007, 11:02:30 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
"If there were in the world today any large number of people who desired their own happiness more than they desired the unhappiness of others, we could have a paradise in a few years."
Bertrand Russell (1872-1970)

Maybe idealistic, maybe worth considering...

Mike.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=159335\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Good one Mike. I'm going to keep that one in my list of favorite quotes. Do you know what Russell work that came from?

I'll have plenty of time to read it, since I can't go anywhere or do anything now without outraging someone else.
Logged
Bill Caulfeild-Browne
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 310


WWW
« Reply #8 on: December 21, 2007, 07:21:34 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
I don't know the writer of the article, but as a very keen conservationist I have come across his type many times, pontificating from their armchairs about things they know little about.

It would be stupid to try to ban tourists from visiting the Antarctic, which seems to be what he wants. Instead of whining he should be putting forward practical ideas of how the impact of tourism can be lowered as the number of tourists inevitably and unavoidably rises.

Having been raised in Africa amongst hunters and safari guides I have had a bellyful of couch potato conservationists whose prescriptions, if ever allowed to happen, could see the destruction of the very places/creatures they think they are saving.

The Antarctic is special. I deserves extra-special treatment as an unspoiled wilderness. But it also deserves rational thinkers.  And I, as a citizen of the world, deserve to go there if I so choose.

Regards

Paul
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=162258\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Paul, I thoroughly agree. I am a conservationist and have been to Antarctica twice with different tour companies. The conservation ethics practiced by both (and I think all) operators was of the highest standard. For example, hosing off our rubber boots immediately upon returning to the vessel so as not to track matter from one part of the continent to another when we next went ashore.

I NEVER saw a single piece of garbage of any sort (other than guano!) and apart from the very occasional research stations, saw NO evidence of human visitation. Our guides were religious about enforcing the internationally accepted tourism rules for this unspoiled place. I came back even more determined to be a good conservationist - as I suspect most visitors do.

Seeing a pristine place inculcates a conservation-minded approach. The only negative I can see is that voyaging there does require burning fossil fuels. We need more nuclear ships!

Bill
Logged
John Camp
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1260


« Reply #9 on: December 22, 2007, 11:03:54 AM »
ReplyReply

There is a story in one of the current US's men's magazines -- I think Men's Journal, but I'm not sure (I just saw it on a newsstand) -- that has a cover story about the first Antarctica marathon and how tough it was, etc. I think it's unnecessary to go to Antarctica to run a marathon for the sake of having been first to do it.

JC
Logged
Provokot
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 57


WWW
« Reply #10 on: December 22, 2007, 04:03:37 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Paul, I thoroughly agree. I am a conservationist and have been to Antarctica twice with different tour companies. The conservation ethics practiced by both (and I think all) operators was of the highest standard. For example, hosing off our rubber boots immediately upon returning to the vessel so as not to track matter from one part of the continent to another when we next went ashore.

I NEVER saw a single piece of garbage of any sort (other than guano!) and apart from the very occasional research stations, saw NO evidence of human visitation. Our guides were religious about enforcing the internationally accepted tourism rules for this unspoiled place. I came back even more determined to be a good conservationist - as I suspect most visitors do.

Seeing a pristine place inculcates a conservation-minded approach. The only negative I can see is that voyaging there does require burning fossil fuels. We need more nuclear ships!

Bill
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=162407\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

The whole point of eco tourism is to expose places to those who will become their ambassadors and protectors. But no matter where tourists go there is bound to be some level of impact.

The Antarctic by virtue of its location will always be accessible to only a few compared to other places.

Botswana operates a "low impact-high yield" tourism policy, where pricing deters all but the wealthy. Fewer tourists do less damage while their spending provides meaningful funding for ongoing conservation. And it is largely successful.

Compare that to Kenya where there is much more of a "stack 'em high, sell 'em cheap" approach and you encounter sad sights such as pride of lions totally surrounded by tourist vehicles, which have been known to accidentally crush lion or cheetah cubs as they rest in their shade. Eco tourism it most certainly ain't! (I do point out that Kenya does also have some outstanding eco-tourism projects that are leading the way - but the mass market safaris are in my opinion, abominable).
Logged

Rob C
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 12213


« Reply #11 on: December 22, 2007, 04:21:08 PM »
ReplyReply

Gentlemen, hold your fire.

Im sitting here in Spain with swamp pop rock coming into my ears from Lerose, Louisiana, where yesterday I listened to a local lady going ballistic about the price of gasoline in the States.

I have before me the credit slip from my last purchase of gas here in the Med: 30.09 litres cost 35.78 Euros. With the more or less the same as the dollar, and with 4.55 litres to the imperial gallon (the US gallon is smaller, I think) how would you appreciate those prices in America? And compared with France and the UK we are lucky!

The point? That all that travelling to exotic places will soon be but a fantasy. We have beach-side appartments fetching a fortune here - has nobody buying these thought that in a few years they might serve as nothing better than moorings? And from where will the raw materials for all those plastic yachts come from? Who, indeed, will be able to fuel one?

Have fun while you can.

Rob C
Logged

larryg
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 468



WWW
« Reply #12 on: December 22, 2007, 04:40:35 PM »
ReplyReply

Rather self righteous (or it appears that way to me?)

Wonder how he knows so much detail   has he also done the trip?

Most serious photographers that I know are very consciencious in regards to protecting the environment.

Then there are the extemists who would not have humans go into any pristine areas (including national parks) so as not to disturb the wildlife etc. etc  except of course a chosen few guardians of which they would surely be one.
Logged
Pages: [1]   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad