Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
Mighty Hiker
climber
Vancouver, B.C.
|
|
No, it will be a private chat - we may talk about some things that need not be public. But Hamish can come too, if he wants.
|
|
RyanD
climber
Squamish
|
|
Ok bearbreeder,
here's a few comments from the article you linked(which is from mid march btw-old news) from ppl who support the plan, as you can tell the misinformed are not only those opposed:
Go for it...I'm too old and fat to climb, but I pay tax dollars to maintain it. Allow all who pay for it to use it. Good for the local economy as well.
The climbers can climb. The non-climber can ride. The locals get jobs. win-win-win.
See you at the top!
^^ this guy thinks taxpayers are building the gondola!
Good Idea.
Here's why
1) There will be controlled access to the summit.
2) The natural habitat of the summit area will be thr responsibility of the operators
3) Access to a ridge bike trail.
4) Good for the local economy.
5) Provides good argument for the Brohm Ridge Resort proposal.
6) A lovely restaurant will no doubt be at the summit. (Long overdue).
^^^Summit?? What summit, does he think it's going to the summit of Habrich? Or the Chief itself? Either way he is clueless on many counts.
Typical attitude in BC
If we don't build it, they won't come.
Then later when they are all here anyway, we will have a bigger more private company come along and buy the whole thing because it wasn't managed correctly and we will pay more.
Gotta love that mindset that people are not going to move here if we do nothing.'
How's that working for us so far? Crappy and there is no money for parks, well you can't have it both ways.
Stop the exclusionary thinking and invite some people to enjoy more! And let it pay for more than just it'self.
^^^ So the current proposal is not private according to this guy. As well he makes zero sense.
I really think this is a good idea as long as they will have to help pay for the park in order to get their gondola and keep it there.
Access for everyone healthy enough to hike or bike down a mountain too. Not just up. That's got to add another 20% of the pop, just guessing.
And it's not that bad for the environment because most of the people who will use this gondola are usually very good at respecting parks and their importance.
I don't believe it will overly bisect the park and the animals don't care, in Alberta for instance that's where you will get a good photo op of big horn sheep.
Thumbs up!
^^^^ ummmmmmmmm, is this your comment bearbreeder??
Fantastic! My tourism business is in desperate need of more kid-friendly "outdoorsy" attractions. I can virtually guarantee them 300-400 annual visitors if a group rate price is in the $20 range.
Folks, this is a tiny fraction of the park. The more we are able to exploit tiny fractions of our parks, the more resources we are able to devote to protecting the rest of the park - or setting aside more land as parkland.
There is a reason that the richest countries in the world have the most, and best protected parks in the world.
^^^ i think this man must be a professor of logic at some prestigious university.
|
|
Hoser
climber
vancouver
|
|
I looked on the blog and it doesnt say a thing about the chief, so I guess that leaves you as the industry shill.
|
|
Mighty Hiker
climber
Vancouver, B.C.
|
|
People can, and will, believe whatever they want. Such is life. There are even people who believe that the proposal, if it went ahead, would be entirely positive for everyone, would have no negative impacts, and that everything that the proponent has said should be believed. Public debate in a democracy isn't always a precise thing.
FOSC has always been clear in its communications that the gondola wouldn't go to the top of the Chief, but that it would go through and significantly impact the park, and that treating the Chief and Shannon Falls as a continguous unit, that it would go through the middle of the parks. We've even included a link to the proponent's website, for those interested, although as always what is said and shown there may not correspond with reality.
As Greg says, there are real issues around the proposal and the process - let's talk about them.
|
|
Mighty Hiker
climber
Vancouver, B.C.
|
|
All part of the same picture, Bruce. Harper and his allies don't want a critical look at their various initiatives, just as some seem not to want a critical look at the gondola proposal. Harper is perhaps driven by ideology, but at least has been public about his clumsy attempts to change the various laws and processes which are used to review such proposals. Whatever the motives of the BC government, it hasn't been so forthright, and instead has largely disregarded its own policy.
|
|
RyanD
climber
Squamish
|
|
Hey thanks for posting that up here Bruce, some things that we should all be aware of. Terrifying as well. God bless you :-)
GF, thanks for putting us back on track.
|
|
georox
Sport climber
Vancouver, BC
|
|
Hi, I'm new here, have gym climbed and took a climbing course in Squamish. Not a lot of background, but I'd like to get back to it and do more. Anyways hearing of the gondola, I have a question.
The access society is neutral on the basis that this will not hinder access to any climbing, but is there any more to this? Is there any possibility the gondola could still interfere with climbing, even though it does not block access to it?
People point out that it does not go up the Chief so should not affect it, however, once up top people can walk along the proposed gravel road which connects with trails up to the Chief. Although there is some walking, it will become the easiest way to get up the Chief by far. If they do get the hoped for 300,000 people, that is 820 per day. If say one quarter or 205 walk over to the summit of the Chief, that would result in about 30 to 40 additional visitors on the Chief at any one time during some times of the day? So even though it does not go on the Chief, it will about double the number of visitors on the Chief. This may not be much different and therefore of no concern, but have there been any incidents where kids have thrown say rocks, apples, or whatever off the cliff while climbers are below, or in any way have visitors made climbing difficult?? I don't know, but I don't think so?
So although I personally think the gondola does not make sense to me, and I am not supportive of it myself, at the same time I find it difficult to feel strongly against it. I like the idea that many people would like the gondola, even though it is sad that so many people would never go up any mountain without a gondola.
|
|
Ghost
climber
A long way from where I started
|
|
Although there is some walking, it will become the easiest way to get up the Chief by far.
Uh... No, it won't
|
|
hamish f
Social climber
squamish
|
|
It most definitely won't.
|
|
georox
Sport climber
Vancouver, BC
|
|
Maybe it would not become the easiest way up, but an access road will be built down to connect with the existing road. I am not sure how close this would come to the northeast side of the Chief, but that would be about 400 m elevation, making it attractive to start from. So if people drive up part way then walk to the Chief a new trail would soon be developed through to the summit, or they would connect to an existing one. The map on the gondola site does not show the road very far, so maybe I'm completely wrong. Maybe they could be asked to route the road far enough away that this is not an attractive option, however, there likely are not many differing routes for a road.
Comparing it with the Whistler peak to peak gondola summer price, which is $46 plus tax, or $75 for a pass. That may be about what the cost would be. Sounds to me like the talk of $30, was just to help sell the idea, not to be taken seriously. The other gondolas were built primarily for skiing, but in this case the primary use would be for summer access, so it may be likely that any passes would be at a higher price.
|
|
YesToCarrots
climber
Squamish, BC
|
|
|
Jun 11, 2012 - 09:45pm PT
|
For those who hike the Chief trail, have you noticed the BC Parks yellow plaque by Olesen Creek that says "No access. Drinking water source" or something to that effect? If we're meant to take this seriously, we have to consider the impact of anything that will be leaching into Olesen Creek through the ground waters from the top of Habrich mountain, during construction and long after. This is partly what makes the area unique: the close proximity of two creeks, one of which is apparently a drinking water source. A location further south would not have the same sensitivity, if a gondola absolutely must be built (others have addressed this latter point already so I won't, tempting as it is).
|
|
Ghost
climber
A long way from where I started
|
|
|
Jun 12, 2012 - 12:04pm PT
|
When did Oleson Creek become a "drinking water source"?
|
|
thekidcormier
Gym climber
squamish, b.c.
|
|
|
Jun 12, 2012 - 12:09pm PT
|
The sign was erected last summer...
|
|
RyanD
climber
Squamish
|
|
|
Jun 12, 2012 - 12:26pm PT
|
The park uses water from the creek. I believe that little tap by the ranger hut spews Oelsen creek water. Whether ppl drink it or not is debatable. I'm sure the gondola could not possibly affect it, because we have been told the gondola will do no environmental damage. That is why there is no need for a current independent environment assessment. Or at least one that the details could be made available to the public.
|
|
Mighty Hiker
climber
Vancouver, B.C.
|
|
|
Jun 12, 2012 - 12:29pm PT
|
Olesen Creek has been the water source for the campground ever since before it officially became a campground, in 1996. The intake is a few hundred m up the trail. Hence the signage and fencing, to keep people (and dogs!) out of the water there.
The proposed upper terminal is quite a distance from that point; still, perhaps there should be concerns with regard to water supply, sewage disposal, percolation, and so on.
It may be possible to build a trail down from the proposed upper terminal, connecting into the backside trails at about the halfway point. It would take some effort, and there is a quite bluffy section, and it's not like there's any need for more use on the backside trails. (A trail up to the Chief/Slhanay saddle, then linking around behind, seems a much more plausible idea.) I wouldn't hold my breath on the proponents actually building it - there certaily aren't any binding promises, apart from little trails at the bottom and top stations. An entirely new trail, well south of Shannon Falls, seems a more feasible option, and would spread out users - highlighting again the viability of a Goat Ridge location.
|
|
hamish f
Social climber
squamish
|
|
|
Jun 12, 2012 - 03:51pm PT
|
That water does go to the Ranger cabin and the campground but also passes through an expensive water filter, or series of filters. Given the number of dogs and hikers in the peak season, I'd be a little hesitant on drinking it, even though I'm sure Parks has it tested from time to time. Scary.
It might be a good idea for Parks to run more pipe and grab the water from higher up the creek, once the trail has veered away somewhat.
|
|
Tricouni
Mountain climber
Vancouver
|
|
|
Jun 12, 2012 - 03:58pm PT
|
It's not the number of dogs that makes it scary, it's the number of people crapping in the bush.
|
|
YesToCarrots
climber
Squamish, BC
|
|
|
Jun 12, 2012 - 05:08pm PT
|
Thanks for the detailed information. That's what was looking for. I wasn't even aware of formulated arguments against the gondola based on threat to water quality. But if they exist, I don't see how they fail to be relevant.
Out of interest I mentioned the proposed cost of the gondola ticket to my boyfriend, and he rolled his eyes and laughed. It might make sense if people can buy seasonal tickets, but that excludes the entire population of tourists who only visit once and have the competitive choices of Grouse or Whistler. To me this gondola looks like a venture attractive to *local* hikers and mountain bikers, which is fine as long as it generates enough business to keep it from becoming an abandoned rusting eyesore. I very much doubt it's about giving seniors and disabled people access to the top of the mountain. How many of them have been longing to do this? What are they going to do once they're up there - freeze their butts off for a few minutes before they ride down again? Or, take shelter in a cafe? And that's another can of worms.
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
seasonal or year round???
Let us know!