KEY POINTS:
Furious debate will greet opening of the Grand Canyon Skywalk this spring. Due to jut 70 feet beyond the chasm's rim with a glass floor hovering one mile above the Colorado River below, visiting families will squabble about the virtue of braving it.
Dads may say 'Yes';
vertigo-suffering offspring my cry, 'No way!' What will not be open to question, however, is the architectural audacity of the structure, which represents the latest attempt by the Hualapai Indians to lure tourists to their reservation on the southern edge of the canyon system several miles downstream from the better-known Grand Canyon National Park.
Being built at a cost of US$40 million ($55.44 million), the Skywalk will be a horseshoe-shaped walkway perilously cantilevered out into thin air.
Made of concrete and steel, it will boast a transparent floor made of 90 tonnes of tempered glass offering those courageous enough to walk it a view that only eagles usually enjoy.
With the Skyway almost complete, enormous cranes will put it in position in the coming weeks. Already, however, it has triggered a much broader controversy over the appropriateness of sticking so conspicuous a man-made structure in the midst of what is probably America's most hallowed landscape.
In one camp are the Indians themselves, who argue that the Skyway is an honest attempt to provide access to a greater number of visitors who otherwise have little choice but to see it from the facilities at the National Park that are already gravely overcrowded and clogged.
They also point out that their tribe is down to its last dollars and the attraction will provide it the means financially to survive.
Nor do the Indians make any secret of their desire to parlay the Skywalk, assuming it draws the numbers they are anticipating, into a much bigger development on their site with hotels, restaurants, a golf course and a major visitors' centre.
Not altogether surprisingly, however, assorted environmentalists and defenders of the Grand Canyon are crying foul. They regard the Skywalk as nothing less than a tourist monstrosity that will defile a place they would prefer to remain as pristine and ecologically intact as possible.
"It's the equivalent of an upscale carnival ride," Robert Arnberger, a former superintendent of the National Park, complained to the Los Angeles Times.
"Why would they desecrate this place with this?" He does not buy the argument that this is land that after all belonged to the Indians in the first place and they have a right to develop it as they please.
"I've never been able to resolve the apparent conflict between the tribe's oft-stated claim that there is no better caregiver and steward of the Grand Canyon than their tribe and their approach to the land - which is based on heavy use and economics."
With only about 2,000 members, the tribe continues to suffer from a 50 per cent unemployment rate and the familiar scourges of alcoholism and drug abuse. Its leaders, meanwhile, see hypocrisy in its critics if they think the National Park has done any better in avoiding overdevelopment on the rim.
"You look at the park side, they have 4.5 million people a year - it's Disneyland in itself," retorts Sheri YellowHawk, chief executive of the tribe's business enterprises, which is also seeking to expand its already existing menu of helicopter rides to canyon's floor and boat excursions on the Colorado River.
The longer-term plans for building a tourist hub around the Skywalk may, however, be a bit pie in the sky. Today, water has to be brought to the site by lorry and is there is sewage or even electricity infrastructure. A plan to pump water up a vertical mile from the river faces multiple legal and engineering challenges.
- INDEPENDENT
