By Belson, Ken. 13 Aug 2013
Review by Pearl:
As the title suggests, the popularity of Mount Fuji might, or rather, is hurting the environment around Mount Fuji. Here, Belson informs us about the Japanese government’s decision to add Mount Fuji into the list of UNESCO’s World Heritage Site, which because of overcrowding, might aggravate the problem of preserving the nature of Mount Fuji already at hand. As he described it, “Illegally dumped garbage fills the forests. Traffic chokes surrounding roads and paths to the peak.” Even “big events like the jazz festival at Kawaguchiko [that] draw thousands of fans” to the area was contributing to the resultant degradation of the mountain as a cultural heritage site.
Alluding to his personal experience to Mount Fuji, Belson puts across the overcrowding issue fully. The resonance of Mount Fuji was reduced to tourists’ snapping away of a picturesque view of Mount Fuji. The sound of nature surrounding Mount Fuji was also polluted by the congested traffic below. It seems that the preservation of Mount Fuji runs incompatible with human activities near and about it. Thus, I believe Belson’s idea of “green” and “preserving the nature of Mount Fuji” is protecting the natural state of the mountain itself, without any or limited human interference.
Perhaps so, the issue of reconciling the protection of the natural environment with tourism and human activities, that is undesirable to the area, is so contentious. It is notable that restricting access to nature like Mount Fuji is impossible, especially in the present world of globalization. The Japanese government might need tighter control with regards to regulating the number of visitors per year, but it is highly unlikely they’ll stop tourism altogether in the name of “preserving the nature”.
To me then, “being green” represents the relationship between nature and human. One is not subordinate to another, for one’s action will ultimately prompt a response from the other. Human activities are not necessarily detrimental to the environment, but at the same time too much of it would result nature “crying out” through its degradation. Therefore, we humans have a responsibility to ensure the balance in this relationship.
Belson, Ken “Mount Fuji, So Popular It Hurts” [The New York Time 13 Aug 2013.] accessed on 3 Sep 2013. http://travel.nytimes.com/2013/08/18/travel/mount-fuji-so-popular-it-hurts.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0
additional article read: http://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2013/08/22/national/volunteers-work-to-clean-up-reforest-kyotos-poets-mount/#.UiQH8LxVsap
This is a classic tale of too much of a good thing. There is no doubt that Mt Fuji is one of the most recognizable and culturally significant landmarks in Japan. In fact, it is just as much a cultural icon as a space of nature. So it is no surprise that its inclusion as a UNESCO World Heritage Site will lead to more visitors, and potentially more environmental stress.
For someone like me who can be cynical about ecotourism, this problems found on Mt Fuji are no surprise, and I never understood why a UNESCO designation was important. The mountain is already visited by so many people. The only reason to increase that number is to increase profits, but any increase in visitors will speed up damage to the object of admiration. Tourists tend to love nature to death.
The large number of geographically dispersed stakeholders (from tour bus companies and travel agents in Tokyo, to mom-and-pop shops and inns near the mountain in two different prefectures) will make it incredibly difficult to create any kind of coherent policy to protect the mountain. Take the suggestion to limit hikers in winter, which the two prefectures disagree on. This is only a decision by two stakeholders. Imagine trying to implement a broader effort at “green” change.
Mountains are large and impressive, but they are not impervious to damage. Will the decision to register Mt Fuji as a heritage site be the decision that comes to haunt people for generations to come? What will be its unintended consequences?