Gunflint Lodge owner lobbies for better Internet service
August 22, 2010 at 7:00 pm in Duluth News Tribune
You can get broadband Internet service along the North Shore’s Scenic Highway 61, but veer off the corridor, and you’ll lose it. For resorts, farms and other businesses in rural areas, that’s becoming a growing liability as the world becomes increasingly connected. Continue Reading
Am I missing something here? We are still talking about the Gunflint trail, right? Call me crazy, but I thought the whole point was that this was the place you could go that was out in the woods, away from it all. I mean, what next, wifi hotspots on Saganaga Lake? The point is that you moved out into the boonies, specifically because of the “rustic” lifestyle and natural surroundings, and now you are lobbying taxpayers to give you internet access? You say that your are in the “backwaters” of the communication world. Guess what, you’re in the backwaters of the real world, too. So everything is just the way it should be. As far as the argument that “…jobs will go to India and South Korea…” that’s hilariously stupid, and I can’t even believe an intelligent human being would say that. What jobs? Wait, let me get this right—When some fisherman from White Bear Lake wants to go catch fish in the BWCA, he’s going to go to India to do it? Right…Oh, I know. There are thousands of out-of-work programmers up in the Trail’s End area that can’t find any work because the government hasn’t installed a $25 million T1 cable for them. No? What is really going on is that a very select few people are trying to feather their own nests. This is a no win situation for you guys. Think about this before you do it. First off, there is no way that this is economically viable. It would take a thousand years to recover the cost of installing the network up there. Two, if it happens, it will bring the rest of the world to your doorstep, literally and figuratively. It will make the Gunflint that much more accessible, and worse, “developable”. That’s exactly what will happen. No amount of “preservation” will turn back the fact that someone is going to take advantage of the new accessibility by building more condos and all that. Then your nice country, lakes-n-woods lifestyle is gone.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
24 
7
The only thing you’re missing will be several million dollars from “your” tax treasury.
Like or Dislike:
15 
5
Nothing is stopping Kerfoot and company from paying an ISP to run high speed lines up to them….except that Kerfoot doesn’t want to “kerfoot” the bill. I don’t have access to high speed internet, and I don’t live “in the backwaters”. I suggest that the yuppie clientele the claims the boundary waters as their elitist playground be willing to “do without” while enjoying their wilderness. The gov’t should only pay for their internet when they’re willing to return the canoe rests and 10 person parties back to the BWCA. In the 30′s Roosevelt funded the Rural Electrification Administration, but electricity is more of a necessity than high speed internet. How did Kerfoot ever survive before Al Gore invented it, anyway? He probably delivered a high quality experience at a reasonable cost.
Like or Dislike:
16 
8
So, now high speed internet is a right? We all have to pay for the choices of those who choose to live in remote rural areas? Gosh, remember the days when people did things on their own without relying on the collective to support their individual needs? Especially one as ridiculous as this issue. How far do we need to go to support this kind of thing?
Like or Dislike:
16 
4
Far too many people are addicted to their crackberries… maybe Kerfoots could market the resort as a treatment facility dealing with these kind of addictions? This is a resort… a place to get away from stresses… if that is not what you want, go elsewhere.
Like or Dislike:
6 
3