This comes in the wake of the implementation in summer 2025 of new rules on entering the mountain. Read more at straitstimes.com. Read more at straitstimes.com.
  • parpol@programming.devEnglish
    41·
    2 months ago

    This is what happens when a country doesn’t have the freedom to roam rights that most European countries do. You can’t just enter wilderness or climb mountains here. You can’t swim in lakes all willy nilly either. It is probably what I like the least about Japan, but that’s just the way it is. It is their culture, not mine.

    • Cikos@lemmy.worldEnglish
      2·
      2 months ago

      i like japan on a lot of stuff but one thing that encapsulates their society is when i visited their convenience store and there seems hundreds of “rules” plastered all over on the register. i keep hearing the native says it like “a nail that sticks out will get hammered down” and after visiting there, i understand…

  • Mesophar@pawb.socialEnglish
    3·
    2 months ago

    Maybe it is my Western, American perspective, and maybe I misinterpreted from the article, but it seems like the entrance fee was implemented mostly to cover upkeep costs of maintaining the trail and surrounding area. It also seems like the entrance fee is what is causing people to use the trail less, which makes sense if they didn’t have to pay for it previously. I don’t see any mention of any other rules that may have caused people to use it less.

    Am I missing anything? From my perspective, which totally could be completely warped since I don’t live in a Freedom to Roam country (or at least it isn’t viewed that way), this seems perfectly reasonable. I’m open to hearing why it isn’t, or other ways it could have been implemented. Especially if there was mention of a rule I missed that had more impact than the entrance fee.