By It looks like the Korea Times is trying to stir something up between Koreans and foreigners:
The rule meant to give foreigners easier access to the top of Mt. Nam in Seoul is creating a dispute over “reverse discrimination” against Korean visitors. It is also raising the question: does convenience for foreign tourists worsen the environment?
The 2005 regulation obliges Korean citizens to walk, take a cable car, or ride a shuttle bus up the parkway leading to the main tower, for nature preservation. However, foreigners are allowed an additional and much more convenient option ― taxis. [Korea Times]
If you read the rest of the article at the link you will see that it was the taxi drivers that advocated to be allowed to bring foreign tourists to the top of Namsan. It was probably because it gives them some business as well as giving tourists an easy option to access the peak if they don’t have time to walk up it or figureout how to use the bus system. Sorry Korea Times I just can’t get worked up over this issue.
8:07 pm on June 20th, 2011 1
I’m not worked up about it, but taxis could just as easily drop foreigners off at the Namsan Cable Car building and they’d probably have a more enjoyable experience. Having been all over Namsan, I think that the ride up on the cable car gives much better view than you get on the roads leading up there. I’d have no beef with turning Namsan park into a car free zone.
9:11 pm on June 20th, 2011 2
Where’s the “No dogs or Koreans” sign?
9:11 pm on June 20th, 2011 3
The Seoul City Bus Tour bus takes you very close to the base of the Seoul Tower.
9:17 pm on June 20th, 2011 4
What exactly does this “law” allow and prohibit?
5:39 am on June 21st, 2011 5
Reverse discrimination – until the taxi faree comes up
7:31 am on June 21st, 2011 6
“It is also raising the question: does convenience for foreign tourists worsen the environment?”
Does it matter? It’s in the middle of Seoul? How much worse can it get?