|
peas
Aug 16, 2004, 9:57 PM
Post #1 of 63
(13373 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 30, 2002
Posts: 400
|
I don't know if the news has hit here yet, but if you're interested, you should read this article.
http://www.thetyee.ca/...nt/ChiefGondolas.htm
If you're really interested, you should sign the petition in the Squamish Valhalla Pure, and write to these people:
Ian Sutherland
Squamish Mayor
isutherland@squamish.ca
Sonja Lebans
Acting Mayor of Squamish
admdept@squamish.ca
(The Honourable) Bill Barisoff
Minister of Water Land and Air Protection
WLAP.Minister@gems9.gov.bc.ca
|
|
|
|
|
onemistakebigpancake
Aug 16, 2004, 10:10 PM
Post #2 of 63
(13373 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 10, 2002
Posts: 162
|
OR... if you are in the area, Valhallpure (the gear shop in the plaza) has a petition going.
|
|
|
|
|
verticallaw
Aug 16, 2004, 10:30 PM
Post #3 of 63
(13373 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 21, 2002
Posts: 552
|
Dude that's rough!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Stupid lazy people trying to modernize their way to the top. (Might as well suggest escalators to the smoke bluffs as the trails are sooooooooo dificult)
the emails are on their way.
|
|
|
|
|
wormly81
Aug 16, 2004, 10:31 PM
Post #4 of 63
(13373 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 9, 2004
Posts: 280
|
Oh thank god. I thought I was going to have to climb my first ascent of the Chief.
:shock:
|
|
|
|
|
barc
Aug 16, 2004, 10:45 PM
Post #5 of 63
(13373 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 19, 2002
Posts: 116
|
This kind of stuff drives me crazy. From the article:
In reply to: “Why not just carve our initials in the rock at the top? Why not turn the Grand Wall into a large screen plasma TV for advertising? Why not put up some waterslides on the Apron?
Elliott
|
|
|
|
|
findingit
Aug 16, 2004, 11:15 PM
Post #6 of 63
(13373 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 6, 2003
Posts: 155
|
This is the link to the firm that is pushing the project.
http://www.ecosign.com/
Not that they give a rat's ass if you email them, they will be in business regardless. It's the politicians that need us for their jobs. Petition the hell out of them, I'm personally delivering my letter to the mayor's office.
|
|
|
|
|
moose_jaw
Aug 17, 2004, 12:17 AM
Post #7 of 63
(13373 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 2, 2004
Posts: 16
|
I LOVE how people can justify almost anything to generate revenue, or because they are just lazy. People should get their priorities straight.
|
|
|
|
|
scrapedape
Aug 17, 2004, 5:19 PM
Post #8 of 63
(13373 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 24, 2004
Posts: 2392
|
Okay, I know I'm going to incur the wrath of a lot of people here, but is this really that bad an idea? Hear me out...
1. This is not a wilderness area. It's right next to a highway that's going to be getting a lot bigger in the near future. The view from the top overlooks a logging town and not one but two pulp mills. We're not talking about the Bugaboos here.
2. Tourons are there already. I've been one of them. I've never climbed the Chief but I've hiked it. So do a lot of other people on any given sunny day.
3. The hike up is nice, but the hike down sucks. What does hiking down get you, other than sore knees? Having a cable car might be nice - like the Grouse Grind, it would be another place to go for a quick hike up and be able to get down fast, and in the dark.
4. It doesn't have to hurt the climbing. Are they going to put this thing right up the face, or out of sight up the back or side? This is key, I think. They've got these things all over Europe, including places like Chamonix, and people still flock there to climb. No one's talking about closing climbing routes for this thing, are they?
5. Yeah, people are lazy. It happens. If they have any money left after the trip to McD's, I'm happy for them to leave it in my home province.
Ok, that's my bit.
Bring on the flames.
:tinfoilhat:
|
|
|
|
|
fiend
Aug 17, 2004, 5:34 PM
Post #9 of 63
(13373 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 25, 2001
Posts: 3669
|
Plans call for the lift to pass directly over the first summit and to have a 12 foot high fence enclosing most of the second summit so that employees and tourons won't fall off.
It would be an eyesore from town and for those who hike up it. If you don't like hiking then go to Whistler or do the Grouse Grind like everyone else.
|
|
|
|
|
peas
Aug 17, 2004, 7:07 PM
Post #10 of 63
(13373 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 30, 2002
Posts: 400
|
According to the article, the top station would be on the South Summit, which would be the first summit. So it would only be the South Summit that would be completely dedicated to a commercial venture. There is a beautiful crag up there called Raven's Castle that is home to my favourite 5.7 in Squamish and a bunch of nice other climbs. These would definitely be put in Jeopardy.
Addressing Scrapedape's points:
1) Although Squamish started out as a logging town, it is increasingly selling itself as Canada's Outdoor Recreation Capital. Putting a gondola to the top of the Chief might not be the brand that people put with outdoor rec capital and may effect people's view of Squamish.
2) The article mentioned some ridiculous number of people that would be able to be transported to the summit. If you think there are a lot of tourons there now, just wait for the gondola to be put in.
3) Hiking down is just another part of hiking up. What it gets you is down the mountain without having a gondola running up the frontside of the Chief. I'll gladly trade sore knees for no gondola. My guess is that most tourons don't know that up is the easy part and that down is the hard part, and you'll have quite a few McDonald's fed people wallowing their way down the backside trail. Suck it up, and make the hike down.
4) The proposal I've heard is for the gondola to run up above the Bulletheads and Tantalus wall, which would put it in direct view of the highway and would potentially effect a number of climbing areas. I don't think they're at the stage of talking about closing climbing routes. I can imagine that constructiong wouldn't be very climber friendly. Any sort of debris coming down the front face would put a damper on climbing in the Bulletheads, Tantalus Wall, the Dihedrals and over onto at least the southern half of the Grand Wall. Might get rid of a few Peregrines while they're at it, which after all would help climbers too.
5) I'm happy having a better experience in my home province and not having one of my favourite places wrecked so that people don't have to put a little effort into getting an amazing experience.
|
|
|
|
|
findingit
Aug 18, 2004, 12:02 PM
Post #11 of 63
(13373 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 6, 2003
Posts: 155
|
I sent this to the mayor, see below for his response........
Dear Mr. Sutherland,
I've recently heard a disturbing rumour that someone (Ecosign, Peter Alder) is pushing a project involving the construction of a gondola up the Stawamus Chief. I cannot express how much this disturbs me and all of my friends many of whom visit your town every year to climb, bike and hike. Projects like this are perpetuating the act of reducing nature's challenge and mystique to the lowest common denominator. People must be driven to experience nature on a personal, physical and mental level to realize the emotion that is present when you have accomplished something so grand as ascending the Chief. If you visit a place and can ride a gondola up a mountain you will not return for that experience, you will say "oh I've been there done that, nice view but no big deal really". If you visit a place and ascend a mountain under your own power, regardless of the technical difficulty of your ascent, you will be amazed by the experience and always dream of returning to challenge yourself further.
Sir you are sitting on a gold mine in Squamish. With the exponential increase in the climbing population and the expansion of the highway you will already be experiencing a large increase in visitors in the near future. Please, if you intend to maintain the integrity of your majestic surroundings, oppose the installation of this mechanical eyesore proposed by the money hungry developers.
We are counting on you and your colleagues to protect one of Canada's greatest treasures from this threat. I'm not sure of your personal involvment in outdoor recreation, but I know for a fact if you are a climber or hiker you will feel as strongly as I regarding this topic.
My sincerest regards,
This is his reply (I'm guessing he's been replying to many emails, or has some half witted subordinate doing it for him)..........I'm trying to decide if it's a positive response or a brush-off.......i'm guessing the latter.
Dear Clinton,
Thank you for your letter.
Be assured most of your views.
Best,
Ian
Anyone else have a reply to a letter sent?
later
Clint.
|
|
|
|
|
peas
Aug 18, 2004, 6:34 PM
Post #12 of 63
(13373 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 30, 2002
Posts: 400
|
Be assured most of your views???
Does that even make sense?
I haven't sent a letter yet, but will be doing so soon.
|
|
|
|
|
beesty511
Aug 18, 2004, 6:47 PM
Post #13 of 63
(13373 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 4, 2004
Posts: 336
|
In reply to: Addressing Scrapedape's points: 1) Although Squamish started out as a logging town, it is increasingly selling itself as Canada's Outdoor Recreation Capital. Putting a gondola to the top of the Chief might not be the brand that people put with outdoor rec capital and may effect people's view of Squamish.
The new casino in town proves that Squamish really does want to be the Outdoor Recreation Capital. In addition, any place that becomes popular with climbers gets turned into a trash heap, so the "brand" is already tarnished. You can't even drink the water anymore because climbers polluted it.
In reply to: 3. The hike up is nice, but the hike down sucks. What does hiking down get you, other than sore knees?
Hmmm...I would think the hike up would be the thing that would give you sore knees. Hiking down is good training for any skiing you might want to do at Whistler.
|
|
|
|
|
simplistic
Aug 18, 2004, 7:39 PM
Post #14 of 63
(13373 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 15, 2004
Posts: 53
|
In response to the talk surrounding a Gondola to the top of the chief in Squamish I must add my two cents to the entire ordeal. First, I am a hiker, climber, and advocate of self proppelled wilderness adventures. That said I am also an advocate of change. As a local in the area I understand and can appreciatte the view points of those in oppositiion to such a project, however, the number of persons that climb and hike in squamish must pale in comparison to those that pass through squamish on an annual basis. The relatively small number of hikers and even smaller numbers of climbers that feel that their experiences in squamish would be impacted by the presence of the gondola should, in my opinion, consider that from the top of the chief right now one can view one of the most heavily traveled roadways in the province, a pulp mill, a growing downtown core, new golf courses, new retail outlets, and even the local of a proposed new university in squamish. My point here is that squamish although a great climbing destination is hardly pristine. It is also a community that is going through a time of change and is working towards having tourism as the driving economic machine of the town. The local government and business community has embraced this change which is evident in many ways including supporting the 2010 games, hosting world class bike races, and posting new climbing and park related signage.
The origin of the proposed gondola is unknown to me, and if its economic benefits are to be felt in the community of squamish I am all for it. It appears to me, at this point, that the hiking trails and classic climbs of squamish will not be impacted and as such the gondola would only increase economic activity and also increase the numbers of those who are able to enjoy the majestic beauty of the chiefs summit.
To all those that feel that it is cheating or somehow undermines self proppelled wilderness, I respectfully suggest that we all consider how fortunate we are to have discovered climbing and its rewards and suggest further that bringing people to the top of the chief may have positive impacts for the climbing community.
Simplistic.
|
|
|
|
|
michell_e
Aug 18, 2004, 7:51 PM
Post #15 of 63
(13373 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 22, 2002
Posts: 49
|
please excuse the bad composition style, sentence structure, etc...
assuming this isn't a troll (sorry, i didn't research all the links).
Regarding the person who said a gondola wouldn't be so bad, and that it would 'only' be like the grouse grind... sounds like this person has no problem with the grouse grind, but in my experience that's definitely not the opinion of most people who actually enjoy hiking and climbing.
Going up the grouse grind, you may as well be on a stairmaster in some busy meatmarket gym in kitsilano. It's a completely gym-culture, lululemon-uniformed, yuppie abomination of an "outdoor experience" which (I would guess) vancouverites who enjoy squamish for its true recreation value avoid like the plague. I'm not completely trashing it because it does have its value - but so does the chief trail - they're just different.
The fact that the two trails are different (and are currently filling two separate niches) actually brings more business to squamish BECAUSE it's not the grouse grind. I bring visitors to squish preferentially even though it's not always the most convenient day trip. If they put a gondola on the chief, why even bother leaving the city - go to grouse, the view is better, the road up there is less busy, you'll save gas, and you can have a martini at the top when you're done and watch the sunset.
I personally think this gondola idea is ridiculous. However, Gondola or not, the highway, the olympics, etc are going to increase traffic in squamish, and increase the number of visitors to the chief. By NOT building a gondola, we save the crowding of the trail from those too out-of-shape (or too lazy, rushed, whatever) to get to the top without it (because they wouldn't be hiking it anyway). But the number of hikers to the back of the chief will STILL increase (of course by much less), and with that, the impact on the trails, etc.. so maybe we should think a little bit about the increase in maintenance that will be required for the trails, how to keep people from wandering off and completely de-vegetizing (good word, eh?) the access valley and the trails from peak -to-peak?
So who pays for all of this increased maintenance? are we going to see user fees introduced even for hikers with the excuse that the trails need to be maintained?
blah, blah blah, i could go on, but i won't except to say...
Those who think the gondola will only affect the first peak, sorry, you're probably wrong...
If the gondola does go up, we will see a big increase in the number of people heading up to the second and third peaks - these trails are relatively flat and will get the 'offensively large number of people' away from the nasty crowd at the first peak. result - the 1st peak - to 2nd and 3rd peak trails would go from being the least-used to being the most-used segments of trails - so then does the gondola dude have to help pay for the upkeep? what about toilets, does he now have to install toilets on the second and third peaks, too (you know they're going up on the first peak)
okay, now i'm running away on myself i'll stop.
have a great day, everyone. :D
|
|
|
|
|
scrapedape
Aug 18, 2004, 8:11 PM
Post #16 of 63
(13373 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 24, 2004
Posts: 2392
|
In reply to: The new casino in town proves that Squamish really does want to be the Outdoor Recreation Capital. In addition, any place that becomes popular with climbers gets turned into a trash heap, so the "brand" is already tarnished. You can't even drink the water anymore because climbers polluted it.
Um, I think there's some sarcasm in here, but I'm having a hard time piecing together your message. What does this say on the topic of whether or not the gondola should be built?
In reply to: In reply to: 3. The hike up is nice, but the hike down sucks. What does hiking down get you, other than sore knees? Hmmm...I would think the hike up would be the thing that would give you sore knees.
Hmmm... I'm thinking you've never hiked up anything steep and sustained. Or more to the point, you haven't hiked down it.
In reply to: Hiking down is good training for any skiing you might want to do at Whistler.
simplistic makes some good points. Fact is, people come in all shapes, sizes, ages, and levels of motivation. Lots of people would be happy to shell out money to ride up a gondola, have a drink at the top, etc, who just wouldn't be inclined to hike or climb up the Chief. Does that mean they won't enjoy the scenery as much as the next person? Or that their money's not as green (or blue, or purple, or red, or brown...) as someone else's?
Developing ways to make the scenery available to everyone helps to build the BC brand around the world, making it a destination with appeal to a broader range of people. It means a greater number of visitors get something more out of their experience, and will recommend BC to their friends and families. BC's economy is in the tank right now. That's why I moved to DC. Tourism offers a great source of revenue and jobs but to derive the maximum benefit from it you have to appeal to a wide variety of visitors.
Protecting wilderness is important, but if a project like this can be done without causing undue harm to the existing stakeholders, I say go for it. If it's going to mean the closure of a lot of climbing routes, then it's another matter. But the folks in Squamish know that the Chief as a climbing destination is probably the no.1 thing their town is known for, and they'd be fools to do anything to hurt that reputation.
So go ahead and let them know how you feel.
|
|
|
|
|
peas
Aug 18, 2004, 11:40 PM
Post #17 of 63
(13373 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 30, 2002
Posts: 400
|
In reply to: But the folks in Squamish know that the Chief as a climbing destination is probably the no.1 thing their town is known for, and they'd be fools to do anything to hurt that reputation.
I don't think this is true. The average person in Squamish is not aware of just how world famous the Chief is. The average non-climber knows Squamish as a pit stop up to Whistler with a large mountain out in front.
|
|
|
|
|
virtual
Aug 21, 2004, 5:39 PM
Post #18 of 63
(13373 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 21, 2004
Posts: 4
|
The gondola proposal is picking up steam, but so is opposition to it. Around Squamish, it's hard to find anyone who supports the plan. A local resident and climber, Megan Olesky, has decided to mobilize the opposition to help kill the proposal, and has formed a group called 'Friends of the Chief'. Although the group is in its infancy, it has begun to tap the increasing anger about the proposal and is growing fast.
Megan has penned an open letter to opponents of the gondola plan. The letter can be found here. It reads in part:
In reply to: The Park Management Plan of the Chief was completed in 1997 after two years of community consultation. It was an important and time-consuming process that determined the Chief as a natural and unique landmark of cultural importance for British Columbians. Mechanical lift access is not permitted under the management plan. There has been a proposal put forward to the Ministry of Water, Land and Air Protection by a group of Whistler developers to construct a gondola up to the second summit of the Chief. This proposal includes 14-16 tram towers, and the capacity to carry 880 people per hour to the summit. Two acres of usable land at the second summit will be fenced off to accommodate an observation deck and visitor facilities. The current hiking trails on the Chief are some of the most popular and heavily used trails in the province, and the climbing at the Chief is some of the best in the world. To the recreational community, this proposal is akin to suggesting a gondola to the top of El Capitan in Yosemite. It will introduce Industrial Tourism on a large scale to one of the crown jewels of recreation in Squamish and British Columbia. Thank you for your support in our attempt to maintain and protect the Stawamus Chief Provincial Park. If you would like to be involved in our fight to make sure this gondola does not happen, please write a letter to the following: Honourable Bill Barisoff, Minister of Water Land and Air Protection Box 9047 Stn Prov Gov’t, Victoria, BC V8W 9E2 Phone: (250) 387-1187 email: WLAP.Minister@gems9.gov.bc.ca Honourable Gordon Campbell, Premier of British Columbia Box 9041 Stn Prov Gov’t, Victoria, BC V8W 9E1 Phone: (250) 387-1715 email: premier@gov.bc.ca Mayor Ian Sutherland, District of Squamish Box 310, Squamish, BC V0N 3G0 Phone: 1-877-892-5217 email: isutherland@squamish.ca Thank you for all of your efforts and support! Sincerely, Megan Olesky Friends of the Chief
If you wish to contact Megan directly, you can do so at friendsofthechief@yahoo.ca.
Megan will be appearing on Vancouver radio on the Rafe Mair show Monday, August 23rd at 9:15 on AM 600. If you wish to call to express your support, the studio number is (604) 280-0600.
I think Megan's El Cap comparison is apt. I would also compare it to putting a tram on Ayers Rock. Please pass the word.
|
|
|
|
|
c-money
Deleted
Aug 21, 2004, 7:29 PM
Post #19 of 63
(13373 views)
Shortcut
Registered:
Posts:
|
It is hard to believe that this proposal would be seriously considered... well, money is involved so I guess it is not so hard to believe.
The visual impact of such a project would be huge and would affect every visitor to the area. Sure, there are mills, roads, powerlines, etc. in the vicinity (these are not excuses to further alter the area), but the Chief dominates the Squamish area. Any change to it would have an immediate impact, not just to those climbing on it (a minoity of area users), but to all those simply driving through who place an asthetic value on front-country wilderness features such as the Chief.
What affect would this proposal have on businesses in the Squamish area who, in part, rely on the view of the Chief as a selling feature of their balcony's, patio's, windows, etc? What would the affect be on the property owners who have situated their homes for views of the Chief? Certainly not positive.
|
|
|
|
|
virtual
Aug 21, 2004, 7:43 PM
Post #20 of 63
(13373 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 21, 2004
Posts: 4
|
In reply to: What affect would this proposal have on businesses in the Squamish area who, in part, rely on the view of the Chief as a selling feature of their balcony's, patio's, windows, etc? What would the affect be on the property owners who have situated their homes for views of the Chief? Certainly not positive.
The outdoor-oriented businesses in town, such as Valhalla Pure and Climb On, certainly agree. And it's difficult to believe the owners of the Brew Pub support having their signature view ruined.
The best information we have for this proposal has the gondola line beginning near Shannon Falls and travelling up the Bulletheads, across the top of Tantalus Wall and the Grand Wall, right over the First Summit, and across the South Gully to the Second Summit. Not only will it be visible from everywhere in town, but it will dominate visitors' first view of the Chief, as they approach the town on highway 99 from the south.
As I said, it's hard to find anyone in town who thinks the gondola is a good idea. Except perhaps the former mayor - she's the one who tried to destroy the downtown by sticking a chip mill in the middle of it a couple of years back. Her views on Squamish's future are bizarre enough that she just might support it.
|
|
|
|
|
iclimbtoo
Aug 21, 2004, 7:51 PM
Post #21 of 63
(13373 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 10, 2002
Posts: 645
|
All right! Gondolas are good...but's let's clear cut everything too so that people can get a better view, and to make room for possibly MULTIPLE gondolas on one peak! :shock: :? :roll:
|
|
|
|
|
simplistic
Aug 21, 2004, 8:18 PM
Post #22 of 63
(13373 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 15, 2004
Posts: 53
|
there are some good points made about the asthetics of the chief and its ability to represent the town and region overall. The point is especially strong considering squamishs' mandate to represent itself as the outdoor capital of Canada. In my previous comments I failed to consider the asthetics and the value it has for the town overall. That said, I still feel that it (the gondola) may have some economic benefit if the asthetic issue could be considered in the design of the project. For example, the Gondola could potentially ascend the southeast portion of the chief and in doing so the current park area and trail system could remain intact, no climbs could be impacted, bulletheads or otherwise, and the users of the Gondola could still enjoy majestic views to the south of howe sound and the suprise of the top could be part of the draw. In this manner the gondola would not impact the asthetics of the town( at least not on the surface, because arguments could be made for the soul of the town being impacted), but thats an entirely new set of ideas........ If this were accomplished the town could still benefit economically and on the surface the town would remain in its current asthetic state. The only issue that would remain is the big one, how do we measure the value of the landscape to our communities if it does not create economic activity. Unfortunately, as we all know our current system does not allow for this type of value system. IE) valuing air water and pristine beauty for its fundamental purpose, sustaining life. We live in a world that requires the movement of MONEY! I do not neccesarily agree with it, but I do not know how to change it, so i am forced to work within the current system. It is for this reason I suggest they built it out of plain view to the town. Great point of asthetics. Anyone interested in valuing our natural world should check out a book called " ecology of commerce', good read. I look forward to more insight on this topic, until my next post........
|
|
|
|
|
virtual
Aug 21, 2004, 9:47 PM
Post #23 of 63
(13373 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 21, 2004
Posts: 4
|
A few random points:
Is anyone suggesting that people will drive an hour up the Sea to Sky just to ride a tram to the top of the Chief? They can get better views by taking trams in Vancouver or Whistler. The only people that will ride the gondola are people who are driving by here anyway. They are likely to stop, ride the tram, perhaps eat dinner at the top, then carry on to Whistler. There are many other ways we can encourage tourists to stop, and stay, in Squamish, ways that don't involve throwing huge metal contrapions all over the skyline of our primary landmark.
The benefit to Squamish will be limited to a few, mostly low-paying jobs. Squamish residents have, with the chip mill fight, already flatly refused to be bribed by the promise of 'jobs'. Just as with the chip mill, the majority of the work will be low-paying and will be more than offset by the job loss that ruining the appearance of our town's centrepiece will cause.
It has been suggested that the tram will open up the summit of the Chief to those who are unable to climb it unaided. True as far as it goes; but is anyone suggesting that the real reason for the gondola is concern for disabled people? Of course not. The reason is profit, whatever the cost to the town of Squamish. It is unfortunate that there are people who are prevented from enjoying the experience of climbing the Chief. Is the only way we can help them to ruin it for everyone else?
The issue of economic development is a red herring. The Olympics are coming to the Sea to Sky corridor. A university is being built in Squamish. We are in the middle of our biggest ever real estate boom. Anyone who drives the highway to Whistler can see all the new businesses springing up. Economic development is coming to Squamish, and will continue to come. We don't need the gondola.
There is also the objection that there are tons of gondolas in mountain resorts like Chamonix, yet people still climb there. Again, I think this is a red herring. In most cases the trams were there long before the climbing. And those places are quite different. They don't have one central, beautiful, focal point that draws tourists, they have a valley full of ski runs. Does anyone want to put a gondola up Ayers Rock? How about a roller coaster around the Taj Mahal?
In reply to: For example, the Gondola could potentially ascend the southeast portion of the chief and in doing so the current park area and trail system could remain intact, no climbs could be impacted, bulletheads or otherwise
Yes it could, but that's not what's on the table. The proposal has the tram going right up the rim of the Tantalus and Grand walls, presumably to increase the feeling of vertigo, over the first summit, and on to a restaurant on the second summit. There is no way this can avoid making the skyline of the Chief look silly. And even if the tram did go up the back side, the terminus and restaurant would still be highly visible from the town.
Sorry for venting. I live in Squamish, and this is a bit of a sore point with most of us. Frankly, by far the most common reaction when people first hear of this is laughter. No one can believe that any developer would have such chutzpah.
|
|
|
|
|
jefffski
Aug 22, 2004, 1:36 AM
Post #24 of 63
(13373 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 10, 2002
Posts: 286
|
Squamish has billed itself as "The Outdoor Recreation Capital of Canada." How does a gondola up its focal point promote that ideal?
This summer in squamish i have met people from all over the world, including south africa, britain and spain. in the paring lots there are always cars with license plates from all over the US. Squamish has become a mecca for climbers and more recently for bouldering, not to mention kite boarding, windsurfing, moutaineering, mountan biking and other outdoor activities.
Squamish is enjoying a boom, perhaps not in its traditional industry, but it is slowly making its way back up the economic ladder.
People come to Canada and BC specifically for its pristine wilderness, or at least the perception of it. The gondola proposal does "Natural BC" a disservice.
My american friends, although i take every opportunity to poke fun at your country, it is always ina good hearted way. You are our best friend.
Pleae write to the Mayor of Squamish and let him know that you might not visit (again) if this proposal is accepted.
Mayor: Ian Sutherland
Phone: 604 815-5030
Toll Free: 1-877-892-5217
Fax: 604 815-5032
E-mail: isutherland@squamish.ca
peace
jeff
|
|
|
|
|
bubba
Aug 24, 2004, 6:16 AM
Post #25 of 63
(13373 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 17, 2002
Posts: 284
|
From Gripped.com/ CASBC (www.access-society.ca/)
Gondola on the Chief. Now the fight is for real.
The BC Provincial government has recently announced it intends to allow a group of Whistler-based ski developers to formally solicit public support for their proposal to build a sight-seeing gondola to the Centre (Second) summit of the Chief. This proposition has been mooted for much of the last year, but of late had appeared to be dormant. Now is it coming forward with the encouragement of the BC Government.
The gondola would have its base at the large gravel pit beside the Highway, south of the Chief campground, and would employ 15 or so towers to reach the Centre Peak where the summit area would be fenced off for tourists to shop and unload their money. The lift would hold 22 gondola cabins, look rather like the Excalibur lift on Blackcomb, and carry 880 tourists per hour to the top. It would cross over the Backside trail several times, and skim close by the South summit on its way to the top of the Centre Chief. Ironically, the place chosen for the top station, shopping and restaurant is precisely where, over the years, the ashes of many people have been spread, including Ben De Menche. Climbers descending off Bellygood Ledge would be greeted as they exit the trees by gondolas skimming close overhead with gawking tourists, and people on the South Summit would actually become a tourist attraction for those passing by on the gondola. It is quite reasonable to speculate that over time, the Chief would become branded as a defacto private enterprise, marketed and sold, and what is presently a public space would slowly become a private domain.
An extract from the Minister of Land, Water and Air Protection's August 6th letter to the SAS (in response to our letter of May 28th) is:
...The ministry has informed the proponents that they may choose to seek community support for an amendment to the management plan. In order to do so, the proponent will be required to consult in an open and transparent manner with the local community, First Nations, interested or affected public agencies, users and stakeholder groups. The proponent has indicated that they are interested in pursuing this option. It is expected that public consultations may occur in the fall of this year, in which case I encourage you to participate in the process to ensure your perspectives are brought forward. Should those consultations demonstrate broad community support for a continuation of the park's management plan to restrict mechanized access on the Chief, then we would reflect those wishes....
Although the words are somewhat innocuous the curious way this is coming forward, after much delay and in the teeth of what they must surely know will be major opposition, holds inference of other motives (why stick their necks out so far for such a small project?). One possibility being mooted by some close to the government is that they may be using this as a test opportunity--on the back of the 2010 Olympics--to try and pry open the Park Act to make it politically easier for much larger commercial and industrial exploitation of the provinces park system. If that is so, this is an issue of province-wide concern and it could be a long fight. The government may be quietly intending to proceed unless opposition is overwhelming and politically damaging to them. They will be judge and jury of what constitutes broad community support, with no requirement to measure it in democratic terms, or publish public response results.
A new Squamish community group headed by Megan Olesky; The Friends of the Chief, is developing a campaign to try and derail the gondola, but very considerable support from a coalition of interests will be needed. If you wish to be placed onto their email broadcast list, please write to Megan at: friendsofthechief@yahoo.ca Megan and Squamish Acting Mayor Sonja Lebans are guests on the CKNW's Rafe Mair radio show at 9:15am on Monday August 23rd (tomorrow!) Listeners can call in on (604) 280-0600. We will also send out periodic emails to climbers. There are two attachments with this email for your interest and information: one is the letter written by the Squamish Access Society to Minister Barisoff on May 28th; the other is the excellent "Good Letter Writing Guide" from the Sierra Club. An excellent article on the situation by Lisa Richardson was posted on August 12th on The Tyee, an online news website: http://www.thetyee.ca/News/current/ChiefGondolas.htm
Please forward this email to those you consider appropriate, read the attachments, and write to express your opposition to the gondola and mechanized access into Stawamus Chief Provincial Park. The two organizations that may carry the greatest influence on the provincial government are The District of Squamish (which stands to lose its title of Outdoor Recreation Capital of Canada if the gondola is built), and Squamish Nation.
For now, we suggest emails be sent to the following:
Hon. Bill Barisoff, Minister of Water, Land and Air Protection
(250) 387-1187
WLAP.Minister@gems9.gov.bc.ca
Mayor Ian Sutherland
877-892-5217
isutherland@squamish.ca
Hon. Gordon Campbell, Premier
(250) 387-1715
premier@gov.bc.ca
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1
