Do the Japanese really love nature more than all other people ?

[craftsman]

It makes a huge differences whether it is proportional or not. You cannot compare one of Japan's most famous national park (because of Mount Fuji) in the outskirt of the Greater Tokyo (35 million inhabitants), which also happens to be one of Japan's main touristic destination outside cities for foreign tourists, with the more sparsely populated and less famous Ardennes region of Belgium. It is only natural that a national park sitting just outside the biggest metropolis in the world is packed on weekends. But what is the percentage of the Japanese population that actually goes out hiking on weekends ? Imagine, if it is only 1%, it means that 1.27 million local tourists are on the roads at the same time. 1% of Tokyoites alone means 350,000 people. Brussels is by far the largest city within 2h by car of the Ardennes and its population is 1 million with the suburbs (130,000 for the centre). The 2nd biggest city has barely 250,000 inhabitants. In such circumstances it is obvious that proportions do matter.

I think you missed the whole point. You previously claimed the following:

I found that the Japanese are not big fans of hiking in the country at weekends, going to national parks (the US is great for that), work in their garden, watch nature documentaries (the UK is great for that), or fight to preserve their bit of nature and scenery near their house.

So you accept the Fuji-Hakone-Izu national park is packed, well let me tell you that the Kirishima national park is also packed every weekend, the Daisetsuzan national park is packed and no doubt every one of the 28 national parks. So what does my 'intuition' say about this? It says that Japanese people like to take a walk in natural surroundings on the weekends. Whether proportionately more people do that in your tiny country is quite irrelevant. The fact is, your claim that Japanese are not big fans of hiking in the country is plain ludicrous. As of course your claim about nature programmes. BBC Bristol has a dedicated nature department which makes a lot of wildlife programmes even in Japan - I once joined a BBC crew filming monkeys in Nagano - and because of their output on British TV, you appear to be arguing that Japanese people like nature programmes less than British. Can you not see the lunacy?

I have a pretty good intuition about things like that. Then don't forget that I did go around Japan and learn about every touristic attraction and national park in detail to write this website's Japan Sightseeing Guide. I am also writing travel guides about European countries, and I love statistics (e.g. about tourism).

Yes, I think I got the statistics part. But please, intuition? Is that a valid reason to make preposterous claims? It is clear that you have 'learnt about' a great many things about Japan, but, without getting too personal, you seem to have understood very little.

Except if you are writing a guide of Japan and travel around the country for that purpose... I don't know where you have been in Japan, but I certainly have seen more of that country than most foreigners in Japan and most Japanese alike.

Well, no I wasn't writing a guide but was a guest of the Socialist Party of Japan and the Japanese Trades Union Congress and my goal was to meet small communities and groups of social, economic and environmental activists on a 5 month walking trip all across Japan. So statistics or no statistics, the people are out there - it's just you never met them.

Anyway, I never said that Japan was not beautiful for its nature, my criticism is about Japanese people who claim that they love nature more than others because of Shintoism, their long passion for cherry blossoms, etc.

Ah but you did say this:

Japan is a country 13x the size of Belgium (where I live now), with the exact same population density, and I haven't seen a tenth of the natural beauty found in Belgium

And it does seem to be an insinuation that Japan is not as beautiful as Belgium, does it not? If you have been to all the places you claim in Japan, either you need to get your eyes checked or Belgium should sack its tourism minister.

How do you know ? Have you been all the way from the spring to the sea ?

Steady, steady. I read a voice raised.

Kerr's claim is not that all rivers have concrete banks on all their length, but at least at one point or another (even a few hundred metres). At the time he wrote the book, there was only one river in Japan that didn't have concrete anywhere from the beginning to the end (in Shikoku, if I remember well).

So now we have a much better understanding of Kerr's statement than the previous one you made. And yes, considering the concrete used in bridges he may have a point with this.