Here we go again (Squamish Gondola proposal)

[squamish climber]

Good discussion here, let's keep it going but keep the tone civil, I don't want it to degenerate into one side slamming the other.

I'm also leaning towards supporting the Gondola proposal on the basis that we need to make access into the back-country easier for some segments of the population. I see two potential pay-offs. As c-plus mentions there is a growing disconnect with nature as more of the world lives in urban centres. There's a good chance that views of old growth and second growth forests, stunning glaciers (that are melting) and a cleaned-up fjord (with a closed down pulp-mill and properly re-mediated copper mine) will impact some of those couch potatoes to value the wilderness more. Heck, a ride up the side of the Chief with the family could inspire a young kid at risk of child-hood obesity to take up climbing or inspire a future environmental leader.

As for Dru and others who don't want US style permits and fees that go with back-country access I feel that is unlikely to happen on a wide-scale in BC because there is just not the population pressure or wilderness scarcity that you have in California and Colorado. There are more people in California (36 million) than in all of Canada (34 million). And BC is bigger than California, Oregon and Washington combined. So there is still plenty of crown land and pristine to semi-pristine wilderness. No the threat on wilderness areas in BC is not from recreational users. It's from resource companies who want access to the trees, minerals, hydro and water. If we want to protect the wilderness from that type of exploitation we may have to give up some of it for commercial / mechanized recreation in order to increase environmental conciousness / awareness.

The other potential pay-off is that we may be able to keep mechanized recreation contained or at least slow its expansion into wilderness areas by creating zones where it's accepted. So you have commercial snowmobile and ATV operations on Cougar Mountain in Whistler and in the vicinity of the proposed gondola in Squamish. But you don't allow them on the Pemberton Ice Cap (hopefully) or in Garibaldi Park.

What do people think of the poll on this forum? Is it accurately gauging opinion in the climbing community?

[avit]

Good points Dru, I also love wild places and want to see much of them protected, or rather ignored by man. For recreation it's pretty exclusive if you really want to go backcountry around here.

Is there room for compromises in select places? Sure, I think so. I'm not opposed to opening up some more front-country areas in the region.

Upper Shannon Creek was already logged out once. If this proposal carries through, it could mean that the area gains some protection in the future since they would not want to bring people up to view active logging from the upper station. In terms of protecting wilderness habitat, it's an intrusion, sure, but it's relatively minor and it might remain more wild this way, rather than possible second-growth logging in the future.

[Dru]

Personally I'd rather see sustainable forestry (which means harvesting second-growth trees) and the attendant stumpage fees going to the government, than some gondola causing increasing NIMBYism and Squamish continuing to pretend it wasn't ever a mill town.

[al pine]

I'm a bit confused Dru...you are advocating less access unless it is logging? Or do you just don't want Squamish to move past its (spiraling down) resource-fueled economic base

Less access = more wilderness

I mean, in most of BC you have to fight to get there, or pay heli fees but the benefit when you do is that it's free and unregulated. There just aren't enough people on Crown land in most of the province to make permits and so on cost-effective. If you sh*t in the woods it will decay long before another party comes along and steps in it.

Personally I'd rather see sustainable forestry (which means harvesting second-growth trees) and the attendant stumpage fees going to the government, than some gondola causing increasing NIMBYism and Squamish continuing to pretend it wasn't ever a mill town.

[BK]

- I wonder if the proponents have considered something on Goat Ridge, which would be higher, and maybe a better sell? It would also spread things out, given that the Shannon-Chief area is already rather crowded with things.

Anders, I asked them specifically about this as like you it seems obvious to me that a base area south of shannon falls / Papoose would be far superior in terms of crowding existing assets. The answer i got was that there were difficulties involving acquiring property and building over hydro lines.
I suspect that the real reason would be that the location dosn't have the same "street appeal" and opportunistic proximity to existing attractions of shannon falls, Klahannie, etc.

If there is a issue that should be pressed with these guys i think this is it. If they could build to the south the issues of base area crowding would be greatly alleviated. The "strip mall" effect is the real risk here i think.

Regarding Dru's logging comments: I don't think its an either / or issue. we need it all - sustainable logging, good paying blue collar job base, a gondola in the right spot, a thriving service center, tech and business, intelligent transportation options, ... diversity both culturally and economic.

[psi4ce]

The "strip mall" effect is the real risk here i think.

Ya! But, seriously? From the sounds of it, that's what everybody wants anyways.

Quick hits from the crack pipe.

People, if you want it, I hope you enjoy it.

[BK]

If you were to put down the crack pipe, you might understand the conversation with a bit more clarity

[psi4ce]

I understand it perfectly well, thanks.

[jipstyle]

I agree with psi4ce.

I honestly don't understand why we, as a community, want more people in our playground. Huts and outhouses are convenient but far from necessary and detract from the adventure, imo.

[BK]

well i've got a question for you. How do you intend to keep all those "more people" out of "your play ground"? They're coming wether you like it or not. Furthermore since when is it just our or your playground? since when is this valley nothing more than a play ground? If its a granite playground that you want with no pesky business, tourists, and other variables what are you doing here? shouldn't you be living up in the Eldrid valley, Princess Louisa Inlet or Bella Coola? Up there you'll find some minor problems to do with earning a living etc but there won't be a single gondola proposal or tour bus to find objectionable

I think you'll find that no one here is happily embracing the idea of a strip mall at the base of the chief and there is nothing in the conversation to suggest that there is. No one is suggesting that this valley isn't full of complex issues which will require much careful consideration and compromise to arrive at the best possible option. To paint these issues in terms of either/or, black or white, them or us is self defeating, delussional and just plain wrong.

[psi4ce]

They're coming wether you like it or not.

They're coming? Or are they just on their way to Whistler?

[BK]

your prediction of dancing bears and starbucks could very well come true and thats what this is all about. Getting involved politically is bang on but if by doing so you are only interested in serving you or your little tribes interest in all this then i don't think the term 'community " is of much use. The real community will observe and conclude that such self serving narcicism can go take a flying phuck at a rolling donnut and pass our interests by when the decisions are made.

The old proposal for the chief was rightly kicked right out of the ring back in 2004. One of their fatal errors was being dismissive of the existing values and their arrogance was delivered a swift kick in the nuts. The question now is is it our turn to be so self serving? If this proposal is no good then what ever will be? The need to hook in some of that whistler tourist flow has been well known and much debated for years... at least by those who actually have an interest in the community

[avit]

If this proposal is no good then what ever will be?

Anyone have proposals for what else you'd like to see in that empty lot then?

A Costco? A hotel? Waterslides? More parking?

It's a valuable spot because of the traffic. Eventually something will go in there, keep that in mind.

[jipstyle]

well i've got a question for you. How do you intend to keep all those "more people" out of "your play ground"? They're coming wether you like it or not.

What makes you think that I intend to do anything of the sort?

Furthermore since when is it just our or your playground? since when is this valley nothing more than a play ground?

It is my playground because it is where I play. You're putting the emphasis where it doesn't belong. I didn't say my playground in the sense of ownership. Rather, I said my playground as a description.

If its a granite playground that you want with no pesky business, tourists, and other variables what are you doing here? shouldn't you be living up in the Eldrid valley, Princess Louisa Inlet or Bella Coola? Up there you'll find some minor problems to do with earning a living etc but there won't be a single gondola proposal or tour bus to find objectionable.

Hyperbole is a lousy way to present an argument. :fyi:

Sure, there are trade-offs. There are less tourists in Bella Coola but there is no work in my field. Obviously, I understood that when I moved here. Hell, I could have moved to Montreal instead ... there are less climbers in the Laurentians.

I prefer to avoid motorized access to the backcountry because I prefer to earn my turns, earn my summits and enjoy my hikes with less people. If that makes you angry, I suggest you try to care a little less about my opinion.

I think you'll find that no one here is happily embracing the idea of a strip mall at the base of the chief and there is nothing in the conversation to suggest that there is.

... so why mention it?

No one is suggesting that this valley isn't full of complex issues which will require much careful consideration and compromise to arrive at the best possible option. To paint these issues in terms of either/or, black or white, them or us is self defeating, delussional and just plain wrong.

And yet you bring up strip malls and Bella Coola.

[Dru]

I'm a bit confused Dru...you are advocating less access unless it is logging? Or do you just don't want Squamish to move past its (spiraling down) resource-fueled economic base

Less access = more wilderness

I mean, in most of BC you have to fight to get there, or pay heli fees but the benefit when you do is that it's free and unregulated. There just aren't enough people on Crown land in most of the province to make permits and so on cost-effective. If you sh*t in the woods it will decay long before another party comes along and steps in it.

Personally I'd rather see sustainable forestry (which means harvesting second-growth trees) and the attendant stumpage fees going to the government, than some gondola causing increasing NIMBYism and Squamish continuing to pretend it wasn't ever a mill town.

Al, I'm sorry I confused you. I'll try to make my point clearer.

If a gondola is built, it will result in tourist traffic. Then the gondola owners will complain about clearcuts nearby ruining the views of their user base and it will result in a de facto no logging zone for much of the Shannon Creek area. The gondola owners will pay taxes, but not stumpage. The existing logging roads will never be rebuilt or reused and become fully overgrown and unusable. Net result, a small increase in access to one point, decreased access elsewhere (like to north side of Goat Ridge), less revenue to the Crown, marginally higher taxes, less overall employment in Squamish.

No gondola, continued sustainable logging, old roads get rebuilt and reused over time, loggers pay taxes and pay stumpage, possibly better access overall to the Sky Pilot Group albeit none of it as convenient as a gondola ride to the top station, more revenue to the Crown and hence lower tax bills for you and me, plus possibly more employment within Squamish itself (logging jobs pay more than service job concessionaires taking tickets at a kiosk too).

Bruce's scenario, which involves both the gondola and continued logging of the area, I am skeptical of as I doubt that the cake can both be had and eaten. Specifically I don't think you can build a gondola and still reasonably expect to log any of the second growth coming to merchantable age in the viewshed of the gondola.