445
Residents in wealthy California town block access to public hot springs with boulders
(www.theguardian.com)
this post was submitted on 10 Apr 2024
445 points (99.1% liked)
News
23397 readers
3591 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
On one hand, fuck those rich people who live there. On the other hand, fuck those assholes that ruin places like this because they want to take pictures for social media.
The courts agreed they have to remove the barriers.
Of course, they didn't have the right to do that, and everyone has the right to visit the place. The problem is that when too many people visit somewhere, then it ruins the experience. It leads the place getting destroyed or permit lotteries.
Public places are for everyone.... If the rich don't like it, they shouldn't have bought a house near a public area. Just like when our neighbors complain about airplane noise, I remind them that they bought the home near the airport.
Public places being for everyone ≠ public places are for everyone to destroy.
That being said, another person commented that there was no push on social media or anything and that these people were locals. If the locals were trashing the place there are any number of ways they could have gone about stopping it besides infringing on others rights. How the rich people went about doing this was absolutely wrong.
That sounds like a problem that would solve itself. The local area could invest in amenities and staff to keep it clean if they cared that much, probably be cheaper than the $850 daily fines plus future prosecutions on top of legal fees.
Or .... And just hear me out.... People actually like walking through scenic nature and visiting hot springs because they simply enjoy it
It's become a problem in the past few years. Hopefully the trend will taper off.
https://consumerenergyalliance.org/2022/02/too-many-people-tale-national-parks
If it were just people naturally finding these places, that's one thing, but social media seems to fix its gaze like the Eye of Sauron on specific places and suddenly they explode in popularity. The Eye inevitably shifts its gaze elsewhere, and the orcs follow. What's left behind is usually for the locals to clean up.
Idk, it seems like every time there's a patch of flowers near trails I use that eventually some idiot is going to trample all over it looking for a nice photoshoot. If it were simply people visiting these things for enjoyment, there wouldn't be so much destruction left in their wake.
I live here. No one is driving across country to visit our hot springs because they saw it on social media, and even if they did, more power to them. These are locals that want to visit our public spaces. There are supposed to be 20+ parking spots at the trailhead. The people that live in the area eliminated over half of the spots with planters and rocks.
I sympathize with the notion that human activity can ruin an area, but I will not endorse the idea that public space is only for certain members of the public. We have trails and signage in this area. It is meant for public use. Whether or not it is popular is not the point. The point is that we all decide how to use it through our local government, not through the lawless actions of a few rich people.
Oh, I should have clarified my message, I especially dislike the fact that the rich people nearby think it's ok to close off public places. I just felt the need to point out that, while they chose the wrong way to react to it, the problem they're reacting to is a legitimate one.
It's like the Reddit hug of death. Someone share's something, it goes viral, suddenly a business used to handling 50 costumers a week is trying to support 10000 and can't.
I would never advocate for allowing rich people to do whatever they want because their motivations are undoubtedly "filthy poors". What you're saying makes it very clear that they were just being selfish. Especially with the added mention that there was no social media push, and it is effectively just locals being blocked.
Edit: that being said, human beings are dirty. Take care of the spaces you occupy.
It is a difficult issue for sure, but California has a sore history with individuals or small groups cutting off access to public spaces.
Personally, I think the solution lies in infrastructure and other investments that increase access while protecting the natural wonders around us. This particular location is not exactly pristine wilds; it lies among several sprawling estates in the foothills.
What I want to resist is the notion that some 'others' are the problem when a good location becomes popular. All too often when you ask someone "Who should not be allowed?" the answer is "Someone else, but not me!"
I'm right there with you, 100%.
An area near my home was blocked off by assholes with massive fallen tree trunks. A popular swimming hole was completely blocked off by the rich assholes who live along the river.
Same thing, it's not like it was ever pristine, but it just so happens that it's right next to rich people's land.
And here I thought letting people know about neat new places to visit/hike would be a good thing.
Popularity is not the problem, at least not directly. The problem is the state has to engineer that area to handle the traffic, and seems to not want to, hence the residents trying to take matters into their own hands.
Reminds me of stories I've read in the past of residences in an area with a lot of speeding traffic, and their city doesn't want to do anything about it, so the residents themselves try to fix the problem by constructing their own speed bumps.