There’s a planning application to install several zip wires across Thirlmere. Part of the supporting arguments are that it will increase visitor numbers (already 18 million per annum) to the Lakes. Also part of the application are plans to restrict parking at existing sites and charge for currently free cycle facilities around Thirlmere.

In my view this is a totally inappropriate development for the central Lake District. You can find more information at zipoff (I’ve no association with them) along with how to register complaints against the application.

Who on earth thinks it is a good idea to install zip wires in such a manner in areas of loveliness ? hide it in the trees, build it in quarries as per Blanaeu – but across a lake ?

Not my back yard but I wouldn’t like it

what cycle facilities?

what cycle facilities?

There’s “a family friendly cycleway around the lake” that’s currently free of charge.

I’ve no experience of zip wires but 8 of them does sound excessive. These days it appears anything that promises employment opportunities is given a green light. Nevertheless as it’s recently been designated by UNESCO as a World Heritage Site does that not come with “rules” otherwise that status could just as easily be taken away?

Try being around one of the GoApe places – our nearby one is a constant noise of zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzp / scream / zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzp / thunk / scream etc.

Silly idea in such a place.

NO..JUST NO!!!

‘There’s “a family friendly cycleway around the lake” that’s currently free of charge.’

The road?

Is there a link to the actual proposal or planning application? Couldn’t find one on the link you had.

Follow the FoTLD link on this page and you get to the planning application – be warned, there’s a lot of supporting documentation.

Overall plan

The last document are comments from the local parish council (St John’s in the Vale) – unanimous objection. There’s also rejection from Mungrisedale Parish Council.

The applicant applied for, and was rejected, a similar proposal in Glenridding.

They’ve been on about doing it for ages. Ridiculous idea. The West side of Thirlmere is an absolute treat on a bike; wide, flat and pretty much traffic free. Install the zip lines and it’ll be packed full of townies with screaming kids, it’s not a theme park FFS.

Is thirlmere the one at the bottom of Helvellyn on the road between Ambleside and Keswick?
I can’t see much problem. I disagree about charging for use of the cycle path, that’s ridiculous. But not sure I would be against the building of a zip line purely because I would pretty much enjoy having a go. Would it cause that big an issue?

The Lakes are hardly quiet now, this is just another way to fleece tourists.
🙁
The plus side is that other places will be quieter.
😀

Wasn’t there several applications for zip wires at Honister rejected a few years back before the guy that ran the place died?
Can’t see the locals being on board with this one if they wouldn’t accept one at the mines.
Although it’d be pretty cool to ride one over Thirlmere, I don’t think it’s the right place for one.

I think it sounds ace.

Wasn’t there several applications for zip wires at Honister rejected a few years back before the guy that ran the place died?

And since then but sadly never gone through as apparently it would distract drivers.

I think it sounds ace.

Me too.

Do all 18 million visitors go to Thirlme or as does it just mean the Lakes which is pretty big.

No objection from me. Thirlmere is a product of Victorian engineering that saw the water level raised by over ten metres in order to supply Manchester. The Lakes is a working landscape, much of it the product of sheep farming on the fells. Good luck to them although I think Honistor would be a better location.

Sanny

http://www.lakedistrict.gov.uk/swiftlg/MediaTemp/68365-265743.pdf

Here is the link to the summary of the full proposal.

https://www.treetoptrek.co.uk/thirlmere

And the page on the proposers webpage

Sanny +1

Honister would have been a much better location but the then owner overdid the application and refused to back down, typically.

Thirlmere is not a suitable location. Although there is a busy road on one side of the lake, the other side and the surrounding fells are a pretty peaceful part of the Lakes, and the better for it. The sounds associated with the zips would be pretty intrusive.

The origins of the reservoir haven’t got much to do with it IMO, and I doubt it would create the kind of jobs that the locals actually need, just a small amount of seasonal work.

No objection from me. Thirlmere is a product of Victorian engineering that saw the water level raised by over ten metres in order to supply Manchester. The Lakes is a working landscape, much of it the product of sheep farming on the fells. Good luck to them although I think Honistor would be a better location.

Exactly my good man.

So you use one piece of vandalism to justify another? The Lake District is, and has been for several hundred years, a “working” landscape. That doesn’t mean “anything goes”, each application should be considered on its merit. That raises the question of why choose the Lake District for this? Why not one of the areas on the edge of the park like West Cumbria? BTW The zip wire in North Wales isn’t within the Snowdonia national park and is actually wholly within an industrial landscape.

How are the customers going to get to the start point? By a fleet of military vehicles supposedly, Humvees so I’ve heard. I doubt you’ll hear the zip wire over the noise of that lot.

Mark Weir (the now deceased owner of Honister Mines) might best be described as “colourful”, I imagine those who had to deal with him might use a different phrase. 😀

I’m no friend of either LDNPPB or FLD, neither are likely to be on my Christmas card list, it’s my love of the Lakes that makes me side with the latter about this. Cumbria Tourism have backed the scheme though of course this has nothing to do with the fact that the director of Treetoptreks sits on their executive board.

We should aim to leave things in a better state for future generations than we find them. This development does the exact opposite. The Lake District recently gained World Heritage status, this flies directly in the face of that.

It sounds like good fun, and I’d like to have a go, but not where they are planning to put it. They do make a decent amount of quite annoying noise. The big one in North Wales I’ve been to and that’s in a location where no-one can walk (old mine) – been to that one and I can confirm it is noisy.

I never want my fun to be at the expense of anyone else’s peace and quiet.. Let’s try and keep some beautiful areas with natural noises in them please?

And the argument that becausr the reservoir was built there then anything else is ok is the dumbest bit of logic I have heard this year.

Just off the A591 only 2 zip wires not quite how the petition puts it and not sure why you’d struggle to get just of A591 in anything but a Humvee.

The Fun-Police are on patrol again. First grid girls, now zip-lines over lakes.

From the submitted plans it looks like two sets of four wires, one lower set heading west across the lake from around 200m east of the main road across to the western lake shore with the other higher set coming down from a height of roughly 300 metres somewhere in the vicinity of Fisher Crag The bottom end of this set of wires is close to the main road.

I’m not against zip wires, it’s just this isn’t the location for such a venture.

Aren’t they next to car parks?

Aren’t they next to car parks?

Thought of looking at the provided information? 🙄 Roughly 200 metres from car park to west bound wires and 500 metres to the return point.

I reckon it’s a daft spot for it. There’ll be drivers rubber necking whilst driving up a busy main road and folk pulling over for a good look.

Thought of looking at the provided information? Roughly 200 metres from car park to west bound wires and 500 metres to the return point.

Yeah that’s pretty close I’d say, cheers for confirming. Can’t say that requires military vehicles to transport you around.

Hopefully common sense will win the day ..if one of the most scenic spots in the entire Lake District gets turned into a glorified amusement arcade then that’s planning permission gone mad ..

Driving back from work alongside Thirlmere last week the scene was truly stunning with two sea kayakers paddling down the middle of the lake surrounded by wooded slopes and snow covered mountains with the sun catching Steel Fell at the end. I know both the forestry and reservoir are aspects of our industrial landscape but it seems a shame to take something away from the dramatic beauty that is this valley.

There is very little in the way of development beyond Swirls with just the old chapel and a farm. It really can feel wild and a zip wire tourist attraction is not in keeping.

Prefer we left some areas unspoiled, Thirlmere is the wrong place.

There’s loads of ex industrial places in the UK where this would be ace, both for punters and the local communities. The Lake District doesn’t need this. I think most of the people visiting the Lakes wouldn’t want this either, so it begs the question why Cumbria Tourism is a supporter of the proposal…?

That’s easy to answer ..one of the directors of the zip wire company is also on the Cumbria Tourism board ..
Back scratch ..?

@Neb – one of the directors of the company sits on the Cumbria Tourism board. Conflict of interest? Nah, shirley not.

Cumbria tourism exists to PROMOTE TOURISM numbskulls.

Yes it does. But when CT are trustees of a charity that exists to protect the Lake District and that charity then prevents its patron from speaking out against the proposal then something is rotten in the kingdom of Dunmail.

Ohh, lovely place.. I see Tourism and Entertainment for Tourists a good thing. Brings both income and regeneration into the area, can’t see any reason not to support it. Yet have to agree that it’s possibly the wrong place, certainly an ANOB/World Heritage site requires further proof of concept and plenty of local planning issues to go through. Also, having such a “spectacle” close to a main road does mean there is a bit of infrastructure already there, so no new roads in/out BUT that does also mean Driver distraction and surely this is all within the planning application for infrastructure services etc..
Are any other sites planned if this doesn’t get the go ahead?

A lot of people are getting very exercised about it, but as Honister couldn’t get theirs in a landscape that’s still recogniseably industrial, I can’t see there’s much danger of it going ahead.