Starbucks faces a latte opposition in Yosemite
John Muir probably never pictured Yosemite National Park like this: crashing waterfalls, remote hiking trails and — gasp — a Starbucks.
Neither do more than 13,000 people who have signed a Change.org petition against the commercial coffee shop. Officials plan to open a Starbucks outlet this spring in a renovated food court in Yosemite Valley Lodge.
It’s not a free-standing store, and there’s no drive-through. The shop will serve soups, salads, sandwiches and, of course, coffee beverages.
None of that passes muster for the irritated nature aficionados. Neither vanilla lattes nor caramel frappuccinos from the multinational chain will pass their lips, they say. Their thinking goes like this: First comes Starbucks, then comes the commercialization of the rest of Yosemite in one big slippery, wet slope of tackiness.
“The park will lose its essence, making it hardly distinguishable from a chaotic and bustling commercial city,” reads the petition, which is addressed to Rep. Tom McClintock, R-Elk Grove (Sacramento County), and Democratic Sen. Kamala Harris.
Never mind Yosemite Valley’s rush-hour traffic and parking lots snarled with campers and minivans, already reminiscent of a small city or Disneyland. Starbucks cups are too much to bear, petitioners say.
However, park officials say this is not the end of the trail for Starbucks — the shop is opening whether park-goers like it or not.
Those against it were alerted to the new location by job postings online, including one seeking a store manager for the new location. Fred Brewster, a 31-year-old who used to live in Groveland, a small town right outside the park, started the petition. Thousands soon signed it.
“I am afraid that this set a precedent that will essentially allow the concessionaire to rent out spaces to other corporations,” Brewster said. “This is also part of a growing trend that has seen meadows ’dozed, trees cut and the forest floor paved to make way for more parking lots. The Visitor Center in the Valley literally has advertisements for Budweiser, Subaru and REI. I am concerned about where this is going.”
The reasoning behind the petition isn’t quite accurate, though, said David Freireich, a spokesman for Aramark, the food giant that oversees park concessions.
There will be no neon flashing signs on the roof, and there will be no construction of a new building. The Starbucks will fill an existing structure, Freireich said. Plus, he added, everyone knows Starbucks — guests from near and far like the coffee and recognize the brand.
“As part of the offerings, we wanted to make sure we include choices that resonate with them on a global scale,” Freireich said. “Certainly Starbucks fits that criteria . ... It’s worth noting Starbucks has a long track record and deep commitment to social and environmental impact, which we believe will benefit (the park).”
The argument falls on deaf ears for the nature lovers trying to squelch the idea. They aren’t interested in grabbing a cappuccino before heading out onto the trail or a hot chocolate to sip at a bonfire. Too cosmopolitan, some say. Just not right, others add. Nature just plain doesn’t mean Starbucks, they insist.
“The only tall, extra foamy anything we should order from Yosemite is waterfalls,” said Karl Robillard, 41, of San Francisco. “Starbucks hardly counts as leaving only footprints.”
What’s more, the irritation comes on the heels of another slap at Yosemite’s identity, said Hayley Goerish of Ventura. In 2016, the national park had to rename five of its sites after deciding not to pay $1.7 million to its former concessionaire, which had patented the names. The “Yosemite National Park” T-shirts were renamed to read simply “Yosemite.” Ahwahnee Hotel, Curry Village, the Wawona Hotel and others also got new monikers.
And now a Starbucks? No way, said Goerish, 31. She only visits the park every few years to go backpacking, but when she does, she doesn’t want to see a Starbucks there.
“It’s just continued commercialization of our natural spaces that are so important to our country,” Goerish said. “It’s representative of monoculture.”
OK, but if you take a closer look, that monoculture already permeates the parks, others say. What would installing a Starbucks really do?
“I don’t think people realize that every amenity in the park is already run by a multibillion-dollar corporation,” said Kyle Frost, 28, of Boulder, Colo. “I’m not necessarily for Starbucks, but Yosemite is absolutely a unique outlier among parks. If we’re so into ‘wilderness,’ do we also get rid of the Ahwahnee, the Lodge, Curry Village?
“The Valley is basically Disneyland already.”