This is a classic conundrum (preservation vs. usage) that has embattled organizations such as UNESCO, the British National Trust, the National Park Service in the USA, etc, for years. Though I have not been there, Askernish sounds like quite a special place, deserving of some form of preservation. However, drawing in crowds will undoubtedly change that experience.
For example, by 1860, there were only a dozen or so people who visited what would become Yosemite National Park, due in part it's relative inaccessibility. In contrast, over 3 million people visit the park annually these days, compromising watershed-wide environmental characteristics and incontrovertibly spoiling any real notion of "wilderness." Or how about the Caves of Lascaux in France? Due to overuse, by both tourists and serious scholars, the wall paintings have degraded to the degree where authorities have closed the caves, which seems to be the only real recourse for its preservation of this window into a two thousand year old past.
The opening of Askernish as a more accessible tourist destination, even with the noble intention of exposing interested golfers to such a unique playing experience, and providing a fair living to the town residents, may (and I will emphasize MAY) have the result of ultimately damaging the very thing that was supposed to be protected. Suggestions by any architect may seem wonderful, but it is entirely possible that Askernish was never meant to be anything more than it is, or beyond that, that it might ultimately be destined to fade off into oblivion on its own accord, again. Nothing is certain. Really, though, I suspect that it is up to the local community to make those decisions to either bring in help or to do it themselves, and then time will tell what happens.