Posted by: Sydney Meriwether, Glasgow on 11:09am Wed 18 Jun 08
[bold]If Go Ape was a credible, competent company they would not choose their sites based on what they could scavenge off of existing public facilities... like some drunken dosser stumbling around the city centre looking for somewhere to bed down for the night.[/bold]
If Go Ape was a credible, competent company they would not choose their sites based on what they could scavenge off of existing public facilities... like some drunken dosser stumbling around the city centre looking for somewhere to bed down for the night. Posted by: Brad, Glasgow on 11:29am Wed 18 Jun 08
Based on their existing operation at Aberfoyle, Go Ape do look a credible company. The Aberfoyle operation appears to work well, seems popular and isn't especially disruptive or damaging.
Pollok Park is an excellent site from their perspective - well-known, relatively accessible to a wide catchment, and has plenty suitable woodland. We'll soon see if the Government agrees that it's for the wider good.
Parking and toliets can be dealt with through planning conditions. And given that there's already a mountain bike course in the Park, it might be difficult to reject the principle of a less-than entirely tranquil development.
Based on their existing operation at Aberfoyle, Go Ape do look a credible company. The Aberfoyle operation appears to work well, seems popular and isn't especially disruptive or damaging.
Pollok Park is an excellent site from their perspective - well-known, relatively accessible to a wide catchment, and has plenty suitable woodland. We'll soon see if the Government agrees that it's for the wider good.
Parking and toliets can be dealt with through planning conditions. And given that there's already a mountain bike course in the Park, it might be difficult to reject the principle of a less-than entirely tranquil development.
Posted by: People Power, Glasgow on 11:42am Wed 18 Jun 08
What an apathetic - spin & rhetoric swallowing bunch some folk of people are - Pete, Brad, among so many others previously posting!
Those who stand up against the Council - Go vernment and authorities for what they believe in, wherever, and whatever the issue are to be commended - not berated.
Others who simply moan and do nothing, or slate the opinion of those who are actually doing something need to think twice!
All of those following this story, with the spin from "Go Ape"s 2 publicity companies thrown in know the facts.
The difference is the protesters, campaigners, and people standing up for their rights, what they believe in and raising the issues that are of so much importance have no major publicity companies to back them - just their own gritty determination.
To me that speaks far louder volumes than any Council, or public numpties who seriously believe that there is any comparison between Pollok Park & Aberfoyle.
The two places are miles apart in their differences - and an inner city location - out of convenience, and a severe lack of fore-thought from G.C.C. is a shameful indictment upon an un - representative Glasgow City Council.
What an apathetic - spin & rhetoric swallowing bunch some folk of people are - Pete, Brad, among so many others previously posting!
Those who stand up against the Council - Go vernment and authorities for what they believe in, wherever, and whatever the issue are to be commended - not berated.
Others who simply moan and do nothing, or slate the opinion of those who are actually doing something need to think twice!
All of those following this story, with the spin from "Go Ape"s 2 publicity companies thrown in know the facts.
The difference is the protesters, campaigners, and people standing up for their rights, what they believe in and raising the issues that are of so much importance have no major publicity companies to back them - just their own gritty determination.
To me that speaks far louder volumes than any Council, or public numpties who seriously believe that there is any comparison between Pollok Park & Aberfoyle.
The two places are miles apart in their differences - and an inner city location - out of convenience, and a severe lack of fore-thought from G.C.C. is a shameful indictment upon an un - representative Glasgow City Council.
Posted by: Brad, Glasgow on 11:59am Wed 18 Jun 08
Typically garbled rant from the pompously-self-title
d People Power. Like a lot of hard-left types, you seem to think you have a monopoly on truth. Got a job yet?
Typically garbled rant from the pompously-self-title
d People Power. Like a lot of hard-left types, you seem to think you have a monopoly on truth. Got a job yet?
Posted by: JH, Glasgow on 12:47pm Wed 18 Jun 08
Couldn't agree more Brad. Think it's the same Jill Ferguson whose monotonous rants against SPT, the Council, Steven Purcell etc pervade more than one newspaper.
Hilariously she seems to think that because she has support in most issues from Sydney - this is a good thing!
Couldn't agree more Brad. Think it's the same Jill Ferguson whose monotonous rants against SPT, the Council, Steven Purcell etc pervade more than one newspaper.
Hilariously she seems to think that because she has support in most issues from Sydney - this is a good thing!
Posted by: mulross, Glasgow on 12:53pm Wed 18 Jun 08
Brad - there are numerous differences between the North Wood in Pollok Park and the Aberfoyle Site. I don't think that in stating that [bold]FACT[/bold]I have shown myself to be a "hard-left type" nor to believe that I have a "monopoly on the truth".
There are also numerous [bold]relevant[/bold] (planning, legal, environmental etc) objections to the siting of Go Ape in the North Wood of Pollok Park which the council has chosen to ignore. I can only hope that the Scottish Ministers will show a bit more integrity in their consideration of this application.
Brad - there are numerous differences between the North Wood in Pollok Park and the Aberfoyle Site. I don't think that in stating that
FACTI have shown myself to be a "hard-left type" nor to believe that I have a "monopoly on the truth".
There are also numerous
relevant (planning, legal, environmental etc) objections to the siting of Go Ape in the North Wood of Pollok Park which the council has chosen to ignore. I can only hope that the Scottish Ministers will show a bit more integrity in their consideration of this application.
Posted by: Brad, Glasgow on 1:03pm Wed 18 Jun 08
Mulross, I entirely agree. Aberfoyle and Pollok Park are different - that is a fact. I didn't say they wasn't. I only suggested that Go Ape probably were a credible company because they seem to run a good operation in Aberfoyle. If you have evidence that they are not a creditble outfit (e.g. they treat their staff badly, run a dangerous operation, their financial affairs are a mess, or they don't adhere to planning and other regulations, etc), I will happily defer to your greater knowledge. I've no idea your politics and I don't have any reason to believe you think you have a "monopoly on the truth". I wasn't referring to you (unless you are also People Power).
And - unless someone has evidence to the contrary - I am confident the Scottish Government's decision will be honest and competent.
Mulross, I entirely agree. Aberfoyle and Pollok Park are different - that is a fact. I didn't say they wasn't. I only suggested that Go Ape probably were a credible company because they seem to run a good operation in Aberfoyle. If you have evidence that they are not a creditble outfit (e.g. they treat their staff badly, run a dangerous operation, their financial affairs are a mess, or they don't adhere to planning and other regulations, etc), I will happily defer to your greater knowledge. I've no idea your politics and I don't have any reason to believe you think you have a "monopoly on the truth". I wasn't referring to you (unless you are also People Power).
And - unless someone has evidence to the contrary - I am confident the Scottish Government's decision will be honest and competent.
Posted by: witterquick, Glasgow on 1:04pm Wed 18 Jun 08
The minute people start making arguments personal, I stop reading. It's like they're pushing an auto-fail button.
I believe that Glasgow certainly does need more outdoor activities for those living in and around Glasgow, but this is certainly not it. The costs alone will prevent those who need this most from participating, leaving it only to those privileged few who can afford it. The location of the park does bother me, as it will ruin the tranquil view from inside the Burrel Collection, and the noise generated will also be a problem, but what bothers me most is the way that GCC has handled the "consultation". The whole thing is anutterly shambolic, unrepresentative, profiteering exercise and my faith in those who govern us will be seriously hampered if this madness is not stopped and this plan given the go-ahead.
If ears don't open then heads should roll...
The minute people start making arguments personal, I stop reading. It's like they're pushing an auto-fail button.
I believe that Glasgow certainly does need more outdoor activities for those living in and around Glasgow, but this is certainly not it. The costs alone will prevent those who need this most from participating, leaving it only to those privileged few who can afford it. The location of the park does bother me, as it will ruin the tranquil view from inside the Burrel Collection, and the noise generated will also be a problem, but what bothers me most is the way that GCC has handled the "consultation". The whole thing is anutterly shambolic, unrepresentative, profiteering exercise and my faith in those who govern us will be seriously hampered if this madness is not stopped and this plan given the go-ahead.
If ears don't open then heads should roll...
Posted by: People Power, GLasgow on 1:05pm Wed 18 Jun 08
Whats the matter Brad, have I upset your comfortable right wing, apathetic stance ?
Go join Purcell, Booth, McConnell, and cronies.
Sure they'll welcome you with open pincers - ready to grab you by the short and curlys.
Too many naive fools are blinkered to the truth, and in bed with the council. I'm just pleased to say I'm not one of them.
Whats the matter Brad, have I upset your comfortable right wing, apathetic stance ?
Go join Purcell, Booth, McConnell, and cronies.
Sure they'll welcome you with open pincers - ready to grab you by the short and curlys.
Too many naive fools are blinkered to the truth, and in bed with the council. I'm just pleased to say I'm not one of them.
Posted by: Seymour Hope, Glasgow on 1:18pm Wed 18 Jun 08
Lets not loose sight of the issue.
1. Glasgow Council failed to hold robust or adequate consultation
2. Glasgow Council's planning commitee failed the people of Glasgow by not considering the objections
3. Go ape is a brilliant idea but not for the Glade.
4. The Park belongs to the people.
Lets not loose sight of the issue.
1. Glasgow Council failed to hold robust or adequate consultation
2. Glasgow Council's planning commitee failed the people of Glasgow by not considering the objections
3. Go ape is a brilliant idea but not for the Glade.
4. The Park belongs to the people.
Posted by: mulross, Glasgow on 1:20pm Wed 18 Jun 08
Brad, I have no arguments against Go Ape being a "credible" company. I personally don't know any of the campaigners who question the company's credibility. It's simply that we believe North Wood is the wrong location, for all kinds of reasons.
I admit though that it does also annoy me that a private company is being given the green light by GCC to make profits from the Park (including free use of the toilets and car park) when people like [bold]ME[/bold] are paying for it through our council tax!
The company is being allocated something like 42 parking spaces for their customers and staff. In the West End controlled parking zones, businesses are having to pay an annual price of [bold]£700 per permit[/bold].
Brad, I have no arguments against Go Ape being a "credible" company. I personally don't know any of the campaigners who question the company's credibility. It's simply that we believe North Wood is the wrong location, for all kinds of reasons.
I admit though that it does also annoy me that a private company is being given the green light by GCC to make profits from the Park (including free use of the toilets and car park) when people like
ME are paying for it through our council tax!
The company is being allocated something like 42 parking spaces for their customers and staff. In the West End controlled parking zones, businesses are having to pay an annual price of
£700 per permit.
Posted by: People Power, Glasgow on 1:21pm Wed 18 Jun 08
[quote][bold]JH[/bold] wrote:
Couldn't agree more Brad. Think it's the same Jill Ferguson whose monotonous rants against SPT, the Council, Steven Purcell etc pervade more than one newspaper. Hilariously she seems to think that because she has support in most issues from Sydney - this is a good thing! [/quote]
Whether "People Power" - I am who you state or not is irrelevant to the subject matter being discussed.
Let me also assure you that whilst I am aware of Sydney's similar criticisms of the council and standing up for what they believe in - that is by no means what drives me, or makes me think ( in your words) [quote] this is a good thing![/quote]
Also the number of papers in which someone writes to or otherwise is hardly relevant either. Many people reguarly write to several papers - do they get the same criticism ?
Or is it that JH is too scared to criticise those who they know they won't stand a chance against ?
People post on these comments pages for a wide variety of reasons, and because thankfully our freedom of speech has not yet been stripped from us.
I notice how you do not target The Missing City, or any other critics of the council - I wonder why ?
Lets keep this topical, not personal, as I'm sick of cheap gags against each other, which basically just proves posters cannot accept the truth hurts, or they are unable to argue the points raised.
JH wrote:
Couldn't agree more Brad. Think it's the same Jill Ferguson whose monotonous rants against SPT, the Council, Steven Purcell etc pervade more than one newspaper. Hilariously she seems to think that because she has support in most issues from Sydney - this is a good thing!
Whether "People Power" - I am who you state or not is irrelevant to the subject matter being discussed.
Let me also assure you that whilst I am aware of Sydney's similar criticisms of the council and standing up for what they believe in - that is by no means what drives me, or makes me think ( in your words)
this is a good thing!
Also the number of papers in which someone writes to or otherwise is hardly relevant either. Many people reguarly write to several papers - do they get the same criticism ?
Or is it that JH is too scared to criticise those who they know they won't stand a chance against ?
People post on these comments pages for a wide variety of reasons, and because thankfully our freedom of speech has not yet been stripped from us.
I notice how you do not target The Missing City, or any other critics of the council - I wonder why ?
Lets keep this topical, not personal, as I'm sick of cheap gags against each other, which basically just proves posters cannot accept the truth hurts, or they are unable to argue the points raised.
Posted by: People Power, Glasgow on 1:40pm Wed 18 Jun 08
For those interested in the details of "Save Pollok Parks" petition being taken to Holyrood :
[bold]SAVE POLLOK PARK PETITION GOES TO HOLYROOD[/bold]
[italic]Nicola Sturgeon MSP has arranged for us to present the 5000-signature petition to her at Holyrood on 25th June at 4pm. She will accept it as our MSP and pledge to bring it to the attention of Planning Ministers.
Ministers are unable to accept it personally as the application is still under review.
We hope as many of you as possible will come along and provide the usual enthusiastic visual and vocal support outside the Parliament building. We will be allowed to demonstrate outside with the press in attendance. There may also be an opportunity to get inside as individuals or in a small group although this would have to be arranged in advance.
We are sure we will attract media attention and there may also be an opportunity to join with some Edinburgh groups who are concerned about similar devious council behaviour at The Meadows.
For security and organisational reasons we need to provide the parliamentary authorities with an approximate number of attendees, so if you can join us please e-mail northwoodaction@gmai
l.com by Friday, 21 June. We should meet at approx 3pm and the proceedings will be over by 5pm"[/italic]
For those interested in the details of "Save Pollok Parks" petition being taken to Holyrood :
SAVE POLLOK PARK PETITION GOES TO HOLYROOD
Nicola Sturgeon MSP has arranged for us to present the 5000-signature petition to her at Holyrood on 25th June at 4pm. She will accept it as our MSP and pledge to bring it to the attention of Planning Ministers.
Ministers are unable to accept it personally as the application is still under review.
We hope as many of you as possible will come along and provide the usual enthusiastic visual and vocal support outside the Parliament building. We will be allowed to demonstrate outside with the press in attendance. There may also be an opportunity to get inside as individuals or in a small group although this would have to be arranged in advance.
We are sure we will attract media attention and there may also be an opportunity to join with some Edinburgh groups who are concerned about similar devious council behaviour at The Meadows.
For security and organisational reasons we need to provide the parliamentary authorities with an approximate number of attendees, so if you can join us please e-mail northwoodaction@gmai
l.com by Friday, 21 June. We should meet at approx 3pm and the proceedings will be over by 5pm"
Posted by: Brad, Glasgow on 1:49pm Wed 18 Jun 08
Mulross, there are good arguments for and against, I've never denied it, and I entirely respect your stance and the way you put it.
On the other hand, PP, your appeal to "keep this topical, not personal" in the context of all your other comments...
Anyway, I'm done!
Mulross, there are good arguments for and against, I've never denied it, and I entirely respect your stance and the way you put it.
On the other hand, PP, your appeal to "keep this topical, not personal" in the context of all your other comments...
Anyway, I'm done!
Posted by: People Power, Glasgow on 2:13pm Wed 18 Jun 08
Well then Brad, if thats how you feel, lets call a truce, and swear to keeping criticisms focussed on the topic's in hand.....
No harm in a touch of sarcasm, meant as a joke from time to time, but personal attacks, or questions which bear no relevance to the topic:
i.e. [quote]Got a job yet?[/quote] go too far.
Agree with Witterquick, in their earlier comment:
[quote]The minute people start making arguments personal, I stop reading. It's like they're pushing an auto-fail button.[/quote]
If some folk cannot accept that we'll just have to agree to disagree, and accept our councils, authorities, organisations (SPT, First, First Scotrail etc) are far from perfect, and are in bad need of improvements.
Have a nice day.....
* Hey - Edna Bucket - think we need a touch of humour injected into this thread. As clearly the serious posts are running out of new, relevant, or topical material.
Well then Brad, if thats how you feel, lets call a truce, and swear to keeping criticisms focussed on the topic's in hand.....
No harm in a touch of sarcasm, meant as a joke from time to time, but personal attacks, or questions which bear no relevance to the topic:
i.e.
Got a job yet?
go too far.
Agree with Witterquick, in their earlier comment:
The minute people start making arguments personal, I stop reading. It's like they're pushing an auto-fail button.
If some folk cannot accept that we'll just have to agree to disagree, and accept our councils, authorities, organisations (SPT, First, First Scotrail etc) are far from perfect, and are in bad need of improvements.
Have a nice day.....
* Hey - Edna Bucket - think we need a touch of humour injected into this thread. As clearly the serious posts are running out of new, relevant, or topical material.
Posted by: bAzTNM, Glasgow on 2:30pm Wed 18 Jun 08
Deepest darkest Pollok Park is like Rambo country.
Deepest darkest Pollok Park is like Rambo country.
Posted by: cee, Glasgow on 2:37pm Wed 18 Jun 08
How about some of you folk that are protesting against Go Ape in Pollok Park - put your money where your mouths are and sign the Save Paddy's Market petition?
www.savepaddys.org
How about some of you folk that are protesting against Go Ape in Pollok Park - put your money where your mouths are and sign the Save Paddy's Market petition?
www.savepaddys.org
Posted by: People Power on 2:39pm Wed 18 Jun 08
Aye - and, The film was promoted with the slogan:
[italic]"They sent him on a mission and set him up to fail. But they made one mistake.
They forgot they were dealing with Rambo."[/italic]
Lets just hope that Bill Fraser (Save Pollok Park spokesman) will be our next best thing to Rambo.
Perhaps the reason this whole saga is taking so long, is that Glasgow City Council are realising the level of public opposition, and feeling against "Go Ape" - Lets hope so!
Aye - and, The film was promoted with the slogan:
"They sent him on a mission and set him up to fail. But they made one mistake.
They forgot they were dealing with Rambo."
Lets just hope that Bill Fraser (Save Pollok Park spokesman) will be our next best thing to Rambo.
Perhaps the reason this whole saga is taking so long, is that Glasgow City Council are realising the level of public opposition, and feeling against "Go Ape" - Lets hope so!
Posted by: Sydney Meriwether, Glasgow on 3:03pm Wed 18 Jun 08
Here's a genuine review of a visitor experience to a Go Ape debacle in England:
[quote]Our visit in April 2007 was [bold]disappointing[/bold] - seems like Go Ape are what you might say "[italic]sweating their assets[/italic]" and running [bold]far too many people through the course at a time[/bold].
We had [bold]long delays[/bold] and it took us an incredibly long and [bold]frustrating 4 hours 20 minutes to complete. There were long periods spent hanging on lines or standing around on the tree platforms behind a traffic jam of other users[/bold].
It was [bold]so busy, that customers were crowding onto tree platforms[/bold] with four and five people on them instead of three, and with others hanging around on the middle of lines.
This was [bold]not good value[/bold] for something that cost our party of two adults and four kids £130 as a birthday treat. Bad also was the fact that by the time our tired and hungry party eventually got to the end, at around 6:30pm, [bold]all the facilities at the park were closed[/bold] so there were no drinks nor food to buy and only one toilet available.
[bold]Very disappointing[/bold] :( [/quote]
Let's see Go Ape's media monkeys explain that one then... come on old Sydney's standing by to deal with you again!!!
Here's a genuine review of a visitor experience to a Go Ape debacle in England:
Our visit in April 2007 was disappointing - seems like Go Ape are what you might say "sweating their assets" and running far too many people through the course at a time.
We had long delays and it took us an incredibly long and frustrating 4 hours 20 minutes to complete. There were long periods spent hanging on lines or standing around on the tree platforms behind a traffic jam of other users.
It was so busy, that customers were crowding onto tree platforms with four and five people on them instead of three, and with others hanging around on the middle of lines.
This was not good value for something that cost our party of two adults and four kids £130 as a birthday treat. Bad also was the fact that by the time our tired and hungry party eventually got to the end, at around 6:30pm, all the facilities at the park were closed so there were no drinks nor food to buy and only one toilet available.
Very disappointing :(
Let's see Go Ape's media monkeys explain that one then... come on old Sydney's standing by to deal with you again!!!
Posted by: yerauldda, West End Exile on 3:05pm Wed 18 Jun 08
people still care about this?
people still care about this?
Posted by: Sydney Meriwether, Glasgow on 3:06pm Wed 18 Jun 08
Source:
[bold]Tree Traffic Jam[/bold]
http://travel.ciao.c
o.uk/Go_Ape_Thetford
_Forest__Review_5643
096
Source:
Tree Traffic Jam
http://travel.ciao.c
o.uk/Go_Ape_Thetford
_Forest__Review_5643
096
Posted by: bAzTNM, Glasgow on 3:21pm Wed 18 Jun 08
[quote][bold]cee[/bold] wrote:
How about some of you folk that are protesting against Go Ape in Pollok
Park - put your money where your mouths are and sign the Save Paddy's
Market petition? www.savepaddys.org[/quote] Why can't the people in charge of Glasgow get it into their idiot heads that if they closed that homeless shelter next to Paddy's then the market would thrive again. I'd rather they closed that shelter, than Paddy's.
cee wrote:
How about some of you folk that are protesting against Go Ape in Pollok
Park - put your money where your mouths are and sign the Save Paddy's
Market petition? www.savepaddys.org
Why can't the people in charge of Glasgow get it into their idiot heads that if they closed that homeless shelter next to Paddy's then the market would thrive again. I'd rather they closed that shelter, than Paddy's.
Posted by: People Power, Glasgow on 3:59pm Wed 18 Jun 08
[quote][bold]bAzTNM[/bold] wrote:
[quote][bold]cee[/bold] wrote: How about some of you folk that are protesting against Go Ape in Pollok Park - put your money where your mouths are and sign the Save Paddy's Market petition? www.savepaddys.org[/quote] Why can't the people in charge of Glasgow get it into their idiot heads that if they closed that homeless shelter next to Paddy's then the market would thrive again. I'd rather they closed that shelter, than Paddy's.[/quote] I'm afraid that with the regeneration of the East end of the city, re the Commonwealth village, velodrome (etc) - Paddys Market just does not fit into the pretty picture the Councillors envisage for our city come 2014!
The sad fact is that these 2 weeks of our lives come 2014 are having an increasingly negative impact on how this city is being run, modified, ignored in parts, with areas being swept under the proverbial carpet.
Lets see just how well charities fair, when they apply for funding/grants from the national lottery in years to come. I mean just how much is being allocated to the Olympic Games, in London, and Commonwealth Games in Glasgow ?
Paddys Market may well be a worth while cause to fight for, and I'd like to think councillors would see this is the case.
Unfortunately, its all about superficial imagery, sensationalised storylines, and wiping out parts of Glasgows History when it suits.
Sad, but true!
bAzTNM wrote:
cee wrote: How about some of you folk that are protesting against Go Ape in Pollok Park - put your money where your mouths are and sign the Save Paddy's Market petition? www.savepaddys.org
Why can't the people in charge of Glasgow get it into their idiot heads that if they closed that homeless shelter next to Paddy's then the market would thrive again. I'd rather they closed that shelter, than Paddy's.
I'm afraid that with the regeneration of the East end of the city, re the Commonwealth village, velodrome (etc) - Paddys Market just does not fit into the pretty picture the Councillors envisage for our city come 2014!
The sad fact is that these 2 weeks of our lives come 2014 are having an increasingly negative impact on how this city is being run, modified, ignored in parts, with areas being swept under the proverbial carpet.
Lets see just how well charities fair, when they apply for funding/grants from the national lottery in years to come. I mean just how much is being allocated to the Olympic Games, in London, and Commonwealth Games in Glasgow ?
Paddys Market may well be a worth while cause to fight for, and I'd like to think councillors would see this is the case.
Unfortunately, its all about superficial imagery, sensationalised storylines, and wiping out parts of Glasgows History when it suits.
Sad, but true!
Posted by: hamandegg, glasvegas on 6:09pm Wed 18 Jun 08
Sydney you seem to miss the fact that the review you quote says their first TWO trips to go ape had been excellent. I think you'll find that any activity can have good days and bad?
Sydney you seem to miss the fact that the review you quote says their first TWO trips to go ape had been excellent. I think you'll find that any activity can have good days and bad?
Posted by: People Power on 6:33pm Wed 18 Jun 08
[quote][bold]Sydney Meriwether[/bold] wrote:
Here's a genuine review of a visitor experience to a Go Ape debacle in England: [quote]Our visit in April 2007 was [bold]disappointing[/bold] - seems like Go Ape are what you might say "[italic]sweating their assets[/italic]" and running [bold]far too many people through the course at a time[/bold]. We had [bold]long delays[/bold] and it took us an incredibly long and [bold]frustrating 4 hours 20 minutes to complete. There were long periods spent hanging on lines or standing around on the tree platforms behind a traffic jam of other users[/bold]. It was [bold]so busy, that customers were crowding onto tree platforms[/bold] with four and five people on them instead of three, and with others hanging around on the middle of lines. This was [bold]not good value[/bold] for something that cost our party of two adults and four kids £130 as a birthday treat. Bad also was the fact that by the time our tired and hungry party eventually got to the end, at around 6:30pm, [bold]all the facilities at the park were closed[/bold] so there were no drinks nor food to buy and only one toilet available. [bold]Very disappointing[/bold] :( [/quote] Let's see Go Ape's media monkeys explain that one then... come on old Sydney's standing by to deal with you again!!![/quote] Sydney,
Much as I agree with some of this posting, in terms of poor value for money (that goes without saying) it's also true whathamandegg says, that[italic] "any activity can have good days and bad!"[/italic]
What I would say however is that the risk with this whole [bold]"Go Ape"[/bold] saga is that should this go ahead (heaven forbid) where does the council stop ?
If it comes to making more money out of higher earners, at the expense of low wagers who are excluded our council are experts at this.
I mean what will we end up with next ?
We must be very careful about what kind of message this would give out to other potential commercial developers, when clearly our council has lost any respect for Glasgows [bold]"Dear Green Space."[/bold]
with the success of the [bold]"Save Our Botanics"[/bold] Campaign in the West End, lets hope that Bill Fraser has equal levels of success in this [bold]"Save Pollok Park"[/bold] Campaign, for the sake of maintaining what belongs to the people of Glasgow.
[bold]OUR PARKS ARE NOT FOR SALE - AT ANY PRICE![/bold]
Sydney Meriwether wrote:
Here's a genuine review of a visitor experience to a Go Ape debacle in England: Our visit in April 2007 was disappointing - seems like Go Ape are what you might say "sweating their assets" and running far too many people through the course at a time. We had long delays and it took us an incredibly long and frustrating 4 hours 20 minutes to complete. There were long periods spent hanging on lines or standing around on the tree platforms behind a traffic jam of other users. It was so busy, that customers were crowding onto tree platforms with four and five people on them instead of three, and with others hanging around on the middle of lines. This was not good value for something that cost our party of two adults and four kids £130 as a birthday treat. Bad also was the fact that by the time our tired and hungry party eventually got to the end, at around 6:30pm, all the facilities at the park were closed so there were no drinks nor food to buy and only one toilet available. Very disappointing :(
Let's see Go Ape's media monkeys explain that one then... come on old Sydney's standing by to deal with you again!!!
Sydney,
Much as I agree with some of this posting, in terms of poor value for money (that goes without saying) it's also true whathamandegg says, that
"any activity can have good days and bad!"
What I would say however is that the risk with this whole
"Go Ape" saga is that should this go ahead (heaven forbid) where does the council stop ?
If it comes to making more money out of higher earners, at the expense of low wagers who are excluded our council are experts at this.
I mean what will we end up with next ?
We must be very careful about what kind of message this would give out to other potential commercial developers, when clearly our council has lost any respect for Glasgows
"Dear Green Space."
with the success of the
"Save Our Botanics" Campaign in the West End, lets hope that Bill Fraser has equal levels of success in this
"Save Pollok Park" Campaign, for the sake of maintaining what belongs to the people of Glasgow.
OUR PARKS ARE NOT FOR SALE - AT ANY PRICE! Posted by: hamandegg, glasvegas on 8:45pm Wed 18 Jun 08
to be honest people power, and yes I support go ape but - I reckon this is the best option we could of got from the councils plan to use the green space? Considering the undeniably green credentials of the company etc...
to be honest people power, and yes I support go ape but - I reckon this is the best option we could of got from the councils plan to use the green space? Considering the undeniably green credentials of the company etc...
Posted by: mulross, Glasgow on 8:55pm Wed 18 Jun 08
[quote][bold]hamandegg[/bold] wrote:
Sydney you seem to miss the fact that the review you quote says their first TWO trips to go ape had been excellent. I think you'll find that any activity can have good days and bad?[/quote] This is not just about "good and bad days". It's the fact that right from the start Go Ape has sought to play down the effect this would have on the Park and especially the car parking requirements.
They have repeatedly quoted their "booking system" as evidence that the numbers involved will be strictly controlled. Also, the council's so-called "parking assessment" was based in a large part on the numbers provided to them by Go Ape.
The debate has never been about whether Go Ape is a "good" or a "bad" experience. It's about whether or not it is appropriate for Pollok Park.
hamandegg wrote:
Sydney you seem to miss the fact that the review you quote says their first TWO trips to go ape had been excellent. I think you'll find that any activity can have good days and bad?
This is not just about "good and bad days". It's the fact that right from the start Go Ape has sought to play down the effect this would have on the Park and especially the car parking requirements.
They have repeatedly quoted their "booking system" as evidence that the numbers involved will be strictly controlled. Also, the council's so-called "parking assessment" was based in a large part on the numbers provided to them by Go Ape.
The debate has never been about whether Go Ape is a "good" or a "bad" experience. It's about whether or not it is appropriate for Pollok Park.
Posted by: People Power, Glasgow on 9:09pm Wed 18 Jun 08
[quote][bold]hamandegg[/bold] wrote:
to be honest people power, and yes I support go ape but - I reckon this is the best option we could of got from the councils plan to use the green space? Considering the undeniably green credentials of the company etc...[/quote]
....and your point is exactly ?
this is not about any kind of genuine care or interest our council has about improving our parks, or providing such facilities for us hard working ordinary people.
this is about financial dealing, with commercial organisations, selling off the rights to use our [bold]"Dear Green Space"[/bold and looking at whatever our council thinks it can get away with to raise the money - capital etc to fill their black hole, and carry on
funding their sickening expenses.
...................
Lets not fool ourselves here.....
I'm sure those who have opposed this from the outset are under absolutely no illusion of the real aims our council has.
I'm also sure that Glasgow City Council never has the genuine interests of the people at heart, or first in any of its plans, projects or decisions.
Its all (as the lyrics state): [italic]"money, money money, In a richmans world."[/italic]
hamandegg wrote:
to be honest people power, and yes I support go ape but - I reckon this is the best option we could of got from the councils plan to use the green space? Considering the undeniably green credentials of the company etc...
....and your point is exactly ?
this is not about any kind of genuine care or interest our council has about improving our parks, or providing such facilities for us hard working ordinary people.
this is about financial dealing, with commercial organisations, selling off the rights to use our "Dear Green Space"[/bold and looking at whatever our council thinks it can get away with to raise the money - capital etc to fill their black hole, and carry on
funding their sickening expenses.
...................
Lets not fool ourselves here.....
I'm sure those who have opposed this from the outset are under absolutely no illusion of the real aims our council has.
I'm also sure that Glasgow City Council never has the genuine interests of the people at heart, or first in any of its plans, projects or decisions.
Its all (as the lyrics state):
"money, money money, In a richmans world."
Posted by: I hear your pain, me,me,me on 9:56pm Wed 18 Jun 08
Whats all the panic for?, this build will not happen & I can assure you of that..In-case anyone starts shouting about dirty tactics or illegalities, this will & is all above board..GO APE WONT HAPPEN IN POLLOK PARK so relax people,the parks are ours..
Whats all the panic for?, this build will not happen & I can assure you of that..In-case anyone starts shouting about dirty tactics or illegalities, this will & is all above board..GO APE WONT HAPPEN IN POLLOK PARK so relax people,the parks are ours..
Posted by: People Power, Glasgow on 10:22pm Wed 18 Jun 08
[quote][bold]I hear your pain[/bold] wrote:
Whats all the panic for?, this build will not happen & I can assure you of that..In-case anyone starts shouting about dirty tactics or illegalities, this will & is all above board..GO APE WONT HAPPEN IN POLLOK PARK so relax people,the parks are ours..[/quote]
I notice that little has been said directly about Bill Fraser. He is for many a real fighter and saviour of those who want what is right and just for our society, and for others their locality. The effort, committment and time he has put into the "Save Pollok Park" campaign can only be admired, and praised.
I just hope and pray that: (I hear your pain) you are right with what you say, as this decision will be the benchmark for Glasgow City Council to either prove its worth, and ligitamacy to its people - or yet again have another embarrassing U - turn, ( and I hope it is the latter!)
I hear your pain, your optimism on this the right decision is most welcome. Roll on July.
I hear your pain wrote:
Whats all the panic for?, this build will not happen & I can assure you of that..In-case anyone starts shouting about dirty tactics or illegalities, this will & is all above board..GO APE WONT HAPPEN IN POLLOK PARK so relax people,the parks are ours..
I notice that little has been said directly about Bill Fraser. He is for many a real fighter and saviour of those who want what is right and just for our society, and for others their locality. The effort, committment and time he has put into the "Save Pollok Park" campaign can only be admired, and praised.
I just hope and pray that: (I hear your pain) you are right with what you say, as this decision will be the benchmark for Glasgow City Council to either prove its worth, and ligitamacy to its people - or yet again have another embarrassing U - turn, ( and I hope it is the latter!)
I hear your pain, your optimism on this the right decision is most welcome. Roll on July.
Posted by: Sydney Meriwether, Glasgow on 10:54am Thu 19 Jun 08
Mulross, you're a wise man/woman: you got exactly what I meant that it undermines Go Ape's entire sham of lies and spin that they are in full control, when of course they are not, like any business they are driven by greed and that means cutting corners, etc.
Mulross, you're a wise man/woman: you got exactly what I meant that it undermines Go Ape's entire sham of lies and spin that they are in full control, when of course they are not, like any business they are driven by greed and that means cutting corners, etc.
Posted by: Luggie, Glasgow on 11:14pm Thu 19 Jun 08
Hi Guys. To help with current amnesia - lets revise. GCC sent out letters to all pupils in surrounding areas (special attention given to them) and the parents didn't heed and did not respond.
Consultation process continued and found the public in favour - to the horror of the local residents. Now locals decide to respond. They invite councillor out to meeting and video her response being barraged by the locals. Video of said barrage appears on YouTube with music suggesting 'tell me lies, tell me sweet, sweet lies' and generally ridiculing her. Distorted capmpaigns ensue. Though it is clear that less than 1% of the park will be used (in an area that was out of bounds anyway) nevertheless a pathetic Save Pollok Park site emerges (as if Pollok Park itself was in danger.
Locals do not own park anymore than anyone else and had the chance to respond. Petitions are not valid as they do not contain names of people who are happy for it to go ahead. Also the Scottish Exec. confirms that petitions are insufficient. Consultation process has ended and due process should continue. The people of Glasgow want Go Ape and while one is allowed to express dissatisfaction - that is all it is.
I'm afraid many will have to accept that it is not right for a minority of people to not follow the rules of consultation, be so direspectful to reps, distort the facts and then think they can get their way. Soon the people who asked for Go Ape will get it and will come to the park more often. It is a park for all Glasgow people and it has been kept and looked after extremely well by GCC - the reason why the locals have had the pleasure in the first place.
Hi Guys. To help with current amnesia - lets revise. GCC sent out letters to all pupils in surrounding areas (special attention given to them) and the parents didn't heed and did not respond.
Consultation process continued and found the public in favour - to the horror of the local residents. Now locals decide to respond. They invite councillor out to meeting and video her response being barraged by the locals. Video of said barrage appears on YouTube with music suggesting 'tell me lies, tell me sweet, sweet lies' and generally ridiculing her. Distorted capmpaigns ensue. Though it is clear that less than 1% of the park will be used (in an area that was out of bounds anyway) nevertheless a pathetic Save Pollok Park site emerges (as if Pollok Park itself was in danger.
Locals do not own park anymore than anyone else and had the chance to respond. Petitions are not valid as they do not contain names of people who are happy for it to go ahead. Also the Scottish Exec. confirms that petitions are insufficient. Consultation process has ended and due process should continue. The people of Glasgow want Go Ape and while one is allowed to express dissatisfaction - that is all it is.
I'm afraid many will have to accept that it is not right for a minority of people to not follow the rules of consultation, be so direspectful to reps, distort the facts and then think they can get their way. Soon the people who asked for Go Ape will get it and will come to the park more often. It is a park for all Glasgow people and it has been kept and looked after extremely well by GCC - the reason why the locals have had the pleasure in the first place.
Posted by: Vera Smart, Partick on 6:13am Fri 20 Jun 08
Looks like work has started already, [bold]before[/bold] the final decision. :
[quote]In the past few days work has commenced on another ancient ring works site, ironically in the immediate vicinity of the controversial Go Ape assault course proposed for the park's North Wood.[/quote]
http://tinyurl.com/6
dq9mx
Looks like work has started already,
before the final decision. :
In the past few days work has commenced on another ancient ring works site, ironically in the immediate vicinity of the controversial Go Ape assault course proposed for the park's North Wood.
http://tinyurl.com/6
dq9mx
Posted by: Vera Smart on 6:16am Fri 20 Jun 08
Ignore my comment avove - silly cow me, not had my coffee yet!
*embarrassed*
Ignore my comment avove - silly cow me, not had my coffee yet!
*embarrassed*
Posted by: backslash, glasgow on 11:10am Fri 20 Jun 08
Hello Luggie,
It has been shown again and again over the consulatation was inadequate. Yes, meetings were held, pupils were given a form to fill in but many, many folk in the surroundiung area had no idea that it was being planned. it was only when the SPP campaign started that we were made aware of it.
One planning notice on one lampost does not a consultation make.
Hello Luggie,
It has been shown again and again over the consulatation was inadequate. Yes, meetings were held, pupils were given a form to fill in but many, many folk in the surroundiung area had no idea that it was being planned. it was only when the SPP campaign started that we were made aware of it.
One planning notice on one lampost does not a consultation make.
Posted by: Luggie, Glasgow on 10:48am Sat 21 Jun 08
One planning notice on one lampost...
And the pupils forms? Not every parent in Glasgow got that! But still that's not consultation? Would the minority of the locals against it prefer that the council personally chap their doors?
I think you'll find that the consultation process was as good as any. There's no excuse for ignoring special attention and then complaining that it was insufficient.
One planning notice on one lampost...
And the pupils forms? Not every parent in Glasgow got that! But still that's not consultation? Would the minority of the locals against it prefer that the council personally chap their doors?
I think you'll find that the consultation process was as good as any. There's no excuse for ignoring special attention and then complaining that it was insufficient.
Comment | Read Comments (36)
