Temple Basin

Press, Volume XCVIII, Issue 29016, 3 October 1959, Page 3

Temple Basin

Sir,—Having made some rather silly comments in his first letter, “Another Face of Janus” now tries to extricate himself by an admirable attempt to confuse the issue. Admirable, yes, but also specious. The public is as entitled to decent access to public ski fields as it is to decent access to a football ground. Financial promises cannot be glibly discounted as unreliable ' assets They are as reliable as the sincerity of the people who make them, and in this case, that sincerity is largely backed by the discomfort of years of backbreaking swagging of fuel, building materials, engines, and food up the hill, and of the sympathy for the injured who are carried down by teams of their fellow ski-ers, angered at the attitude of short-sighted men who oppose necessary development and whose only exercise is jumping to wrong conclusions.—Yours, etc., C. W. REID. October 1, 1959.

Sir, —Using the brilliant theory of “Another Face of Janus” we would have football teams mowing the grounds in Hagley Park,

housewives carrying the rubble* coolie fashion from the blasting of the tunnel road, the Mayor and councillors painting the City Chambers and so on. The simple facts are that Arthur’s Pass is a’ public National Park. The road involves professional blasting and; bulldozing. Ski-ers are prepared, to contribute substantially in lieu of work for which they are not, qualified. Tens of thousands could • derive pleasure from the alpine. ski-ing this area has to offer. — • Yours, etc.,

PETER C. BROWN. October 1, 1959.

Sir,—Those correspondents who deprecated the advocacy of a . road missed the point. Person- « ally 1 abhor the idea of buses J invading the ski-ing areas and I I think the majority of present- ’ day ski-ers would prefer access. to remain as it is. Similarly,; with the implication that ski-ers I are seeking to avoid work which should properly be done by them. For many years ski-ers and • mountaineers have put prodigious, effort into making tracks, packing materials, and building huts. J and the present generation would , not fall short of their predecessors. But I do believe in the * maximum development of the < resources with which we are en- ; dowed. It is axiomatic in New , Zealand that tourist traffic is to be encouraged, and Canterbury I should have its share of the overseas ski-ers who go to Queens- i town or the Chateau. We cannot expect them while only re- * stricted grounds are accessible, • but the necessary development is impossible without a road.— > Yours, etc., JANUS. October 1, 1959.

Sir,—Regarding yesterday’s let- t ter of “Another Face of Janus” I ’ would remind him of the simple facts. Our best alpine village needs an alpine road to its moun- . tain upper basins. The flying fox ' goods lift would be an eyesore ’ and its cost could well be a con- • tribution to the first stage of ’ the road. Better a car road built slowly and surely than no car; access ever. When a road is • finally built the beauty of the ’ alpine heights will be there for the old as well as the young. Why are those with vision ac- , cused of the wrong motives?— Yours, etc., EDELWEISS. ’ October 1, 1959.

Sir, —“Not Too Tired” 80 per cent, of his letter lashing» ski-ers for wanting a road to the Temple Basin, claiming that anyone fit to ski is fit enough to‘ climb up; then he submits his. own idea of a road to the Upper’ Waimakariri. Surely anyone fit enough to climb mountains is fit enough to walk on the flat. Let us face it. Few people enjoy walking for the sake of walking,’ particularly when carrying a! loaded pack and a pair of sevenfoot hickory skis. The fact is Arthur’s Pass should have both roads. The Temple Basin road first, because of its high traffic density, followed by the scenic road suggested by your correspondent. Ski-ers of the world unite! You have nothing to throw away but yout .walking boots.— Yours, etc., . , "KARL MARKER.” October 1, 1959.

Sir, —Altruistic ideas about self-’ reliance are wasted in a welfare state. Why should a few hundred J skiers scrape and scrounge to! pay for amenities which will be! used by thousands? Either the’ Park Board should authorise ski; clubs to build a toll road as at I Lake Ida or they should follow the advice of Mr Lascelles. Why pick on Mr Coberger, with veiled insinuations? Doesn’t he share) the hope, not only of Mr Co-, berger but also of hundreds of others who want to see Arthur’s Pass expand and develop in the years ahead, till it becomes Christchurch’s mountain centre? Maybe there would be less bodgieism and other isms, if Christchurch citizens were to spend more time in the mountains and less sitting around penning nonsensical criticisms of a worthwhile project.—Yours, etc., REALIST. October 1, 1959.

Sir, —“Another Face of Janus” is up against strong forces, which no doubt will prevail in the end. The first is that modern inner technological compulsion which is regarded by some philosophers as having become a blind biological urge; the second is our intense competitive spirit, sensitive to a degree, and the third is the social force, consequent on ski-ing becoming the done thing by the tail-fin brigade. Your correspondent and his supporters (if any) will lose, but they have the better values.— Yours, etc., MONTEM. October 1, 1959. [Karl Burtscher may briefly reply, closing this correspondence.—Ed., “The Press.”]