In an article publish by reputable news source The Guardian on Monday, reporter Gabrielle Canon discusses the controversy surrounding the opening of a “hidden Starbucks” in Yosemite National Park. Canon describes that outside of the typical urban feel of the Starbucks, consumers and park visitors can hear the beautiful, natural sounds of Yosemite falls. Despite any signage for the new Starbucks location, park visitors have managed to find the 27,000-franchise strong coffee shop. While many people are outraged at the installation of a commercial coffee giant, other park visitors have enjoyed a hot coffee or tea during their cold or rainy visit to Yosemite.

David Freireich, who is a spokesperson for Yosemite Hospitality, the group that works to provide upgrades for “concessions and facilities” at the national park, described to Canon that his group was responding to park visitor requests for a facility such as Starbucks, and that it is the responsibility of Yosemite Hospitality to meet visitor needs and requests. He described that the installation of the Starbucks was part of a recent and ongoing upgrade project to the infrastructure of Yosemite, which includes concessions options and availability. According to Freireich, these updates were long overdue.

Photo taken from the article.

Photo taken from the article.

In response to the planned opening of the Starbucks, former Yosemite National Park tour guide Freddy Brewster organized a petition to try and stop it from happening. He was able to gather more than 25,000 signatures on his petition. While the opening of the Starbucks still happened as planned, Brewster and his colleagues are still working tirelessly to protect the purity of Yosemite and to prevent any more infrastructure and commercial changes to the National Park.

I thought this article was very interesting, and it relates to many of the topics that we have been discussing in our class this semester. The opening of a Starbucks franchise in Yosemite National Park represents the challenge between government (which includes big business) and the environment. As Brewster mentioned in the article, “The government is increasingly dependent on major corporations. Time and time again.”. This serves as another example of big business infiltrating the preservation and purity of there natural settings we are so fortunate to have in the United States, such as Yosemite. Furthermore, when looking at the chain of consumption, pollution will be brought into the national park as deliveries come to the Starbucks, bringing coffee, processed foods and syrups, and coffee cups. These coffee cups are not recyclable, and contribute to the disposal arrow of the linear chain. More trash is introduced into the park, resulting in the ultimate degradation of the natural setting, even if not intentional by consumers and park visitors. Many people do not see how the small action of getting a coffee at Starbucks contributes to the pollution and degradation of the environment.

Thinking about the nutrition lecture that we had in class today, the Yosemite Hospitality group could have decided upon a healthier alternative to have in the national park rather than a Starbucks. Starbucks sells many processed, fat and sugar heavy food products that can lead to the development of chronic disease. In a national park where visitors come to experience nature and get exercise, healthier foods, such as whole, plant based foods, should be those offered to park visitors.

If the Yosemite Hospitality group still found it necessary to have a coffee shop as part of the concessions offerings at the park, they could have instead chose a local coffee business, that would have then contributed to the stimulation and sustainability of the local economy.

I believe that this battle between big business and the environment will be one that continues to cause problems and controversy until everyone realizes the importance of conserving the beautiful natural world.