Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Who Can Save the Grand Canyon?

smithsonianmag.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 134 posts

Re: Who Can Save the Grand Canyon?

#21

Post by narrowrail »

VieElm wrote: post #9
sosuke wrote: post #7

I couldn't get a real sense of just where this development wanted to be, what it looked like: http://grandcanyonescalade.com/comparison-chart-grand-canyon... That monstrosity should absolutely not be built.

Do you live in Arizona? Are you affected by this in any sense? Why shouldn't the people who live there have the say in it. It's jobs for them, it's their home. The Grand Canyon is thousands of feet deep and hundreds of miles long, it formed millions of years ago. It doesn't need to be "saved" from a tourist attraction that will be a blip on a tiny side of the canyon and an even smaller blip in the history of it. The…

Well, there're plenty of people who frequent this National Park and live in the area who are against the building of this project. It just cheapens the whole place for a handful of jobs (think of the jobs!1). To you it may just be a "blip on a tiny side of the canyon," but to many of us who treasure the place as one of the few great places without giant monuments to human existence, it is an atrocity.

Re: Who Can Save the Grand Canyon?

#23

Post by astazangasta »

VieElm wrote: post #9
sosuke wrote: post #7

I couldn't get a real sense of just where this development wanted to be, what it looked like: http://grandcanyonescalade.com/comparison-chart-grand-canyon... That monstrosity should absolutely not be built.

Do you live in Arizona? Are you affected by this in any sense? Why shouldn't the people who live there have the say in it. It's jobs for them, it's their home. The Grand Canyon is thousands of feet deep and hundreds of miles long, it formed millions of years ago. It doesn't need to be "saved" from a tourist attraction that will be a blip on a tiny side of the canyon and an even smaller blip in the history of it. The…

You're right, you totally have the right to ruin one of Earth's great treasures because your state needs jobs.

Re: Who Can Save the Grand Canyon?

#24

Post by sp332 »

gambiting wrote: post #17
sp332 wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A gondola ride to the top of Everest would be awesome. Right now, 1.4% of the people who try to summit it die. That's ludicrous and totally indefensible. Anyway it's not as wild as it used to be. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mount_Everest#Everest_economy

>> Right now, 1.4% of the people who try to summit it die. That's ludicrous and totally indefensible. The only problem I have with it is that bodies are rarely taken back and therefore contribute to the pollution of the mountain. Other than that....as long as everyone climbing knows that there is a 1.4% chance of dying, it's fine. I imagine there are extreme sports which have a similar if not higher death ratio,and I…

I'm not saying we should forbid climbing. But offering a way to make the trip without dying would be nice. Also, having a gondola that goes up there would make it easier to remove dead bodies of climbers.

Re: Who Can Save the Grand Canyon?

#25

Post by jasonjei »

sosuke wrote: post #7

I couldn't get a real sense of just where this development wanted to be, what it looked like: http://grandcanyonescalade.com/comparison-chart-grand-canyon... That monstrosity should absolutely not be built.

Having lived both in Phoenix and Tucson, I can say for sure state politicians will be in no hurry to protect the Grand Canyon. Sen. McCain wanted to dig up the canyon for resources. The argument will be "job creation," and anyone that opposes this project is against jobs. Not that I agree with it, but AZ is a big red state that also taxes solar panels even though sunlight is cheap.

Re: Who Can Save the Grand Canyon?

#26

Post by Fede_V »

sp332 wrote: post #10
japhyr wrote: post #4

A gondola ride to the bottom of the Grand Canyon would be like a gondola ride to the top of Everest. These projects are deeply frustrating because all the developers have to do is get them built once - they can essentially fail as many times as they need to in order to get their project built. If you oppose this kind of project, you have to succeed in your efforts over and over again. If you fail once, the wild natur…

A gondola ride to the top of Everest would be awesome. Right now, 1.4% of the people who try to summit it die. That's ludicrous and totally indefensible. Anyway it's not as wild as it used to be. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mount_Everest#Everest_economy

That's because those people have no business being there. Those mountains are for genuine climbers that can earn their ascent there, not idiots with too much money and no respect for a mountain, who have sherpas basically push them to the top.

I hate this ridiculously entitled attitude. If you aren't a great climber in fantastic physical shape, just don't go to Everest. I have the same kind of contempt for people who pay crazy sums of money to go on a Safari in Africa with loads of guides to shoot lions or elephants, so they can show their friends back home the pictures and the carcasses.

Actually - in that same vein. Those are the same people that show up to Burning Man spending insane sums of money and completely defeating the spirit of that event.

I am not a climber, a hunter, or someone who has ever gone to Burning Man, but if you want to take part in those cultures, you should do so with respect and humility.

Re: Who Can Save the Grand Canyon?

#27

Post by leereeves »

sosuke wrote: post #7

I couldn't get a real sense of just where this development wanted to be, what it looked like: http://grandcanyonescalade.com/comparison-chart-grand-canyon... That monstrosity should absolutely not be built.

That's Grand Canyon Village, the existing visitor center in the National Park.

I spent a week there once for a wilderness first responder course; it's very much a small town.

Re: Who Can Save the Grand Canyon?

#28

Post by drzaiusapelord »

sosuke wrote: post #7

I couldn't get a real sense of just where this development wanted to be, what it looked like: http://grandcanyonescalade.com/comparison-chart-grand-canyon... That monstrosity should absolutely not be built.

The Canyon is huge; about 250 miles long. There's room for some tourist friendly stuff there, especially if it gets people interested in geology and conservation. I feel like anytime there's a proposal to do anything of value there's always some, largely, neckbeardish outrage.

This all just sounds like overly political correct, and often corrupt, tribal politics. A cable-car ride would be a wonderful experience. If I was a kid I'd lose my mind on something like this.

>To Dave Nimkin of the National Parks Conservation Assn., the developments represent "profound and enormous threats to the park. It's a grim forecast."

Oh come on, lets not be hysterical. If these guys really cared that much, how about stopping all these asshole hikers and campers who drop garbage all over the place? It seems like the line in the sand drawn here is pretty arbitrary. Heck, there's a massive development right on the Canyon, called the Canyon Village. This area is not this pristine, untouched thing, its very much been developed in significant ways.

Re: Who Can Save the Grand Canyon?

#29

Post by arethuza »

npongratz wrote: post #18
codyb wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A gondola ride to Everest would be awful. A quick ascent to that height would virtually guarantee some pretty awful side effects for most passengers. I certainly wouldn't want to be on it.

Millions of people ascend to the height of Everest's summit every day, extremely quickly. I imagine that such a purpose-built gondola would, like modern jets, have a pressurized cabin.

I'd go for a solution inside the mountain - maybe a train (like the Jungfrau - not to the top though) or a funicular then a elevator to take you to the very top (like Les Deux Alpes - though that is a glacier dome rather than a peak).

Re: Who Can Save the Grand Canyon?

#30

Post by [deleted] »

npongratz wrote: post #18
codyb wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A gondola ride to Everest would be awful. A quick ascent to that height would virtually guarantee some pretty awful side effects for most passengers. I certainly wouldn't want to be on it.

Millions of people ascend to the height of Everest's summit every day, extremely quickly. I imagine that such a purpose-built gondola would, like modern jets, have a pressurized cabin.

[deleted]
Post reply on HN