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

[craftsman]

My comments are based on my impressions as a "proportion to the total population". In this regard it is undeniable, for instance, that a much higher proportion of Japanese do not have a garden, and that Japanese cities have a smaller percentage of greenery than in most Western countries. I am pretty sure that if you could the proportion of people going hiking in the country frequently, it will also be lower in Japan than in Europe. On warm and sunny days most of the Ardennes region of Belgium (hilly forest in the south) are fully packed with Flemish and Dutch tourists.

I don't doubt that the Ardennes are packed with tourists. What I don't understand is why you suggest that places like the Fuji-Hakone-Izu National Park are not equally packed (proportionately or not). And I don't understand the necessity to compare hiking patterns with Europe. Why are you so sure that going hiking frequently is more prevalent in Europe? Or even in Belgium? It's just such a bizarre position to take. Surely not just because you see more people doing it in Belgium than you saw in Japan? If so, I think you know my answer by now - you should have got out of Tokyo more. And I still don't quite get what made you think that Japanese don't like nature in the first place?

Exactly ! Belgian people hardly think about their country when they think about nature. YET, since I am back to Belgium, and even in the capital, I have found it to be much greener and a much better place to enjoy nature than Tokyo. Yet the greater Tokyo has 3.5 times the population of Belgium. On a side note, I suppose that like most short-term visitors you haven't been to the nicest part of the Wallonian countryside when you went to Belgium, but stuck to the cities (Brussels, Bruges, Ghent, Antwerp...). Did you know that Brussels had half of the lagest beech forest in Europe within its boundaries ?

No, you're right I didn't explore Belgium properly and just went from city to city. And I didn't know about the Wallonian countryside nor about the beech forests. But this too is exactly my point. It is very difficult to really get to know a total country from the city, especially when based in a capital city like Tokyo.
I think your comparison of Belgium and Tokyo is an odd one. I don't want to state the obvious but is it a fair comparison to compare the nature of a country and a city? Surely you should compare Japan and Belgium. However, no disrespect to you, but I suspect your knowledge would fall short outside of the Tokyo area.

I meant all, according to Alex Kerr in Dogs and Demons. If it isn't correct, complain to him, not to me. But be aware than a river is not the same as a brook or a stream. A river must be wide and deep enough to be navigable.

Now I haven't read Mr.Kerr's book so I can't comment on the figure. It would be interesting to see how he got it and how reliable the information is though. From my perspective, I think he may have meant cities and large towns because of the rivers I've seen, I don't think his argument rings true. This was ten years ago, but I did walk every step of the way from the northern most tip of Hokkaido to the southern most tip of Kuyshu and I saw a lot of rivers - some of them actually without concrete. As I'm sure you're aware by now, I live in a national park and I can walk down to a navigable river which is both deep and wide and see no sign of concrete.
So I would go as far to say that an obscene amount of concrete is unfortunately used to 'protect' rivers in Japan, but not all of them. That would be a generalization too far, even for you, Sir