Search
Go

Discussion Topic

Return to Forum List
Post a Reply
Messages 41 - 60 of total 1522 in this topic << First  |  < Previous  |  Show All  |  Next >  |  Last >>
Tami

Social climber
Canada
Mar 27, 2012 - 01:28pm PT
If we had a bc parks act with any amount of back bone, precedents woudn't be such a bugaboo.

Hell, if we had a fisheries act, environmental protection legislation etc etc with any back bone we could probably tar and feather both the liberals and conservatives


The way I see it too. IT's not about "being against all development" ; it's about sound & sustainable development. And as Greg writes about leaving class A parks alone.

There have been some stupid decisions made about development in BC which has given us charming things like the fish farms or stupid things like Yaletown being build without public schools ( it has one elementary school now ). And many of us remember Brohm Ridge and the mess left behind there right in yer back yard Squamish !

Small wonder there is a knee jerk reaction.
Mighty Hiker

climber
Vancouver, B.C.
Mar 27, 2012 - 03:08pm PT
photo not found
Missing photo ID#242439
Here is an excellent photo of the Chief and area, taken by Ed Cooper from the top of the Papoose. I believe the photo is from some years ago, but you can see clearly the gravel pit, and the area where the lower part of the proposed gondola would go.
WBraun

climber
Mar 27, 2012 - 03:19pm PT
The gondola should go straight up the middle of the Chief.

They should build a McDonald's and a huge shopping mall at the top.

Then it would good.

If you're gonna do sumthin, do it right and grand!!!!!
Mighty Hiker

climber
Vancouver, B.C.
Mar 27, 2012 - 03:59pm PT
Thanks, Werner - you're right. The death of 1,000 cuts just prolongs the agony. Let's get it over with.

The gondolas will be from Yosemite Lodge to the north rim, from Happy Isles to Glacier Point, and (of course) from El Cap Meadow to El Capitan. All will feature restaurants, gift shops, mountain biking, native displays, hiking, circus rides for the kids, and other attractions which have great popular support, with all the right pacifiers. It may be necessary to change the National Parks Act to let it all happen, but hey, that's only paper from those easterners anyway. The Valley's pretty much all developed already, isn't it? There won't be any direct impact on climbers, as the Lodge gondola won't start right at Camp 4, it'll only pass overhead, and no climbing routes will be affected. So it's not really a climbers' problem, is it?
WBraun

climber
Mar 27, 2012 - 04:14pm PT
lol .....
bmacd

Boulder climber
100% Canadian
Mar 27, 2012 - 04:43pm PT
This sh#t show should be installed farther south and make use of the abandonded Woodfiber ferry complex
hamish f

Social climber
squamish
Mar 27, 2012 - 05:17pm PT
The easement they're seeking totals less than 0.4% of that park.
Silver

Big Wall climber
Nor Nev
Mar 27, 2012 - 05:49pm PT
How rad would it be to top out on the capitan and have a $18.00 cheeseburger with a $8.00 milk shake, $6.00 garlic fries, and then ride a $20.00 tram ticket back to your car.


Mighty Hiker

climber
Vancouver, B.C.
Mar 27, 2012 - 06:56pm PT
The easement they're seeking totals less than 0.4% of that park.

Kind of a key 0.4%, I'd say, and probably rather more, once the dust settles. Like being a little bit pregnant. And calling it an easement instead of a deletion is unconvincing - trying to make a silk purse out of a sow's ear. (Not that I have anything against pigs.)
hamish f

Social climber
squamish
Mar 27, 2012 - 07:14pm PT
Well I had to try, as it sounded a little friendlier.
adrian korosec

climber
Mar 27, 2012 - 08:18pm PT
Sounds like a gondola would be a great idea.

A nice hut on top serving gulasch, wine, and other treats would be fantastic.

Kalimon

Trad climber
Ridgway, CO
Mar 27, 2012 - 10:02pm PT
What's wrong with gondolas? They have them all over Europe. The free of charge gondola between Telluride and the Mountain Village, CO saves tons of carbon emissions every year.
Mighty Hiker

climber
Vancouver, B.C.
Mar 27, 2012 - 10:22pm PT
Thanks, Adrian. Have you been to/climbed at Squamish, or do you live there?

Kalimon: Does everywhere need to be like Europe? The mountains of Europe seem rather over-developed, and people come here from Europe specifically to experience something less developed.

As some know from their in-boxes, I sent the message in the original post quite widely. In fact, to over 300 individuals and groups - essentially, every Squamish climber for whom I had an e-mail address, world-wide, every climbers' and conservation group that might be interested, and a lot of people in B.C. Parks and other government bodies. Including a lot living or based in Squamish, and a number known to be in favour of the proposal. Quite a number asked if they could forward the message, and I said sure. It appears it has gone quite widely, and some of the replies were from groups or individuals I hadn't heard of or met.

I've gotten about 30 replies. In my experience, a 10% reply rate to such a message is quite effective. (Most replies agreed with me, and opposed a gondola in or near the Parks.) I suspect the message has generated considerably more interest, though. I wonder how many messages the politicians are getting, how many hits forum discussions are generating, and so forth?

Don't forget to write, with your thoughts on the proposal:

• Premier Christy Clark: premier@gov.bc.ca or (604) 775-1003
• Terry Lake, Minister of Environment: env.minister@gov.bc.ca or (250) 387-1187
• Joan McIntyre, MLA: joan.mcintyre.mla@leg.bc.ca or (604) 981-0045
• Chief Ian Campbell, Squamish Nation: chief_ian_campbell@squamish.net or (604) 982-8646
• Mayor Rob Kirkham: rkirkham@squamish.ca or (604) 892-5217
• Chair Susan Gimse, Squamish-Lillooet Regional District: sgimse@telus.net or (604) 894-6371
• Sea to Sky Gondola Corp.: info@seatoskygondola.com

State your views, the reasons you have them, why you’re interested in this issue, who you are, and where you live. Remind them that government’s job is to protect and manage parks, in the public interest.

You can also write to:

• Vancouver Sun: sunletters@vancouversun.com
• Squamish Chief (newspaper) dburke@squamishchief.com
• Globe & Mail letters@globeandmail.ca
• Georgia Straight letters@straight.com
• Vancouver Province provletters@theprovince.com

For those interested, there's some additional discussion at:

http://squamishclimbing.com/squamish_climbing_bb/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=3402
http://squamishclimbing.com/squamish_climbing_bb/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=3765
http://squamishclimbing.com/squamish_climbing_bb/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=3406
Tricouni

Mountain climber
Vancouver
Mar 27, 2012 - 10:53pm PT
I'm not opposed to development, and I'm not opposed to gondolas (in the right areas). I'm opposed to this particular proposal, because it involves whittling away at a Class A Park. To quote the recent BC Parks Annual Report,

Class A parks are Crown lands dedicated to the preservation of their natural environment for the inspiration, use and enjoyment of the public. Development in Class A parks is limited to that which is necessary for the maintenance of its recreational values. Activities such as grazing, hay cutting and other uses (except commercial logging, mining or hydro electric development) that existed at the time the park was established may be allowed to continue in certain parks.

It seems clear that this proposal falls outside what's permitted in a Class A park. To those that say "they only want to take out 0.4% of the land area", I say that's happened all too often in the past. It's analogous to what happened with the Agricultural Land Reserve, where bit after bit of the prime farmland was taken out of the ALR, a bit at a time, so that we wind up with far less agricultural land and hundreds of acres after hundreds of acres of sprawling suburbs. I don't want that to happen here.
Ghost

climber
A long way from where I started
Mar 27, 2012 - 10:58pm PT
I'm not intending any malice here at all but M.H. should probably start using the 2nd narrows bridge for all his Squamish trips. That 3 lane paved easement through the center of Stanley Park must've been a little controversial at the time.

If I remember correctly, that 3-lane bridge, the Lions Gate Bridge, was built by the Guinness company (the ones that make beer). Yes. A private company. And they built it because they owned a bunch of land across the inlet -- the British Properties -- that they thought would be a whole lot easier to sell if people could get to it without a boat.

I have no idea whose palms they had to grease to get a right-of-way through Stanley Park, or indeed if they had to grease any palms. But if there is a complaint about that bridge now, it's that it isn't wide enough. Not that it should never have been built.

So maybe there's a lesson here. Maybe Squamish should sell a bunch of land way up on that hill to... hmmm... New Belgium Brewing? And then they'll build the gondola so that people will be able to justify purchasing lots up there, and...

...and they'll also build a brew pub!

Which renders all other arguments moot.
Rolfr

Social climber
North Vancouver BC
Mar 27, 2012 - 11:37pm PT
"Well, it doesn't seem that anyone here is opposed to every development." quote MH

But, there is a vocal enough opposition, that some leverage and advantage may be gained for the local climbing community. After a film crew chopped some bolts, on one of my non de script routes in the Bluffs( for filming convenience), the SAS managed to negotiate that a Certified Squamish guide must oversee any filming in future.

The question should now be, what advantage can we bargain into the Gondola Proposal. If the opponents to the gondola feel, that it infringes on their enjoyment/experience,what concessions do you want, so it enhances your wilderness experience?

This issue has been polarized, into perceived black and white positions, the outdoor/climbing community verses economic development . There must be some attainable middle ground.

The last opposition to a gondola was during a time of economic growth, now with an economic downturn, I doubt whether the average Squamish resident will oppose the development. That may be the crux of the whole issue, as climbers we see route, trail, climbing , DEVELOPMENT as acceptable in our community, but fail to see what is "acceptable development," to the general public.

I agree, alternate location proposals should be considered, but drawing a line in the sand , yes or no, will only get you drowned when the tide turns against you.

mike m

Trad climber
black hills
Mar 27, 2012 - 11:44pm PT
Wouldn't Waddington have a much larger economic impact. Just trollin, but just sayin. It would create a lot of climber type jobs. Who's turning down $150k a year to harg up ther for a year or two?
Kalimon

Trad climber
Ridgway, CO
Mar 27, 2012 - 11:47pm PT
What's with the the gravel pit in the "Class A" park?
mike m

Trad climber
black hills
Mar 27, 2012 - 11:48pm PT
Hey lets do Denali too!
mike m

Trad climber
black hills
Mar 27, 2012 - 11:53pm PT
Where else?

Half dome definately needs a second set of cables..... that moves.

Cerro Torre would be good.

Superpin with a really good zip line.

Grand Canyon with Grand Foam pit for base practice.

Not every dream needs to be realized.

Messages 41 - 60 of total 1522 in this topic << First  |  < Previous  |  Show All  |  Next >  |  Last >>
Return to Forum List
Post a Reply
 
Our Guidebooks
Check 'em out!
SuperTopo Guidebooks


Try a free sample topo!

 
SuperTopo on the Web

Review Categories
Recent Route Beta
Recent Gear Reviews