The Disturbing Saga of the Sea-to-Sky Gondola Cable Sabotage

Another chapter has unfolded in the disturbing saga of the Sea-to-Sky Gondola cable sabotage. This incident is raising alarm bells across the security industry.

According to this Vancouver Sun article, no arrests have been made since the second incident in 2020. In this case, someone deliberately cut the gondola’s main cable once again. Now, Unified, the company operating the gondola, is turning to the courts. In a recent filing, Unified is pointing fingers not just at the unknown saboteur but also at two third-party subcontractors. These subcontractors, Black Tusk Fire and Security and Lanvac Monitoring, were tasked with keeping the site secure.

Shocking Allegations

Here’s what’s most shocking from the legal claim:

“The Black Tusk security guard saw the vandal approach and climb the gondola and cut the gondola cable, but failed to take any steps to prevent or stop the vandal,” Unified alleges in its filing.

Unified further alleges that Black Tusk’s guards didn’t patrol properly. Additionally, Lanvac failed to monitor the security cameras effectively. These are serious accusations. If true, they represent a breakdown at multiple levels — from physical presence to remote surveillance.

My Take: Security Is More Than Just Presence — It’s Responsibility

As someone deeply involved in safety and security systems, I see this as a case study in due diligence and transparency — or the lack thereof.

Security is not just about showing up. It’s about designing a system that works, staying alert, and being trained and empowered to act when a threat presents itself. It’s also about being honest with clients and stakeholders about what your system can and cannot do.

Too often, security firms and monitoring companies oversell their capabilities or undertrain their personnel. When something goes wrong, they rely on vague contracts and liability waivers to avoid responsibility. That’s not acceptable.

A Call for Reflection

This isn’t just a story about a gondola and a saboteur — it’s about accountability in our industry. If the allegations are true, a guard witnessed someone approach, climb, and cut the main cable — and did nothing. That’s not just a lapse in judgment; it’s a catastrophic failure of preparedness, escalation training, and situational awareness.

Here are three things we should take away from this:

1. System Design Must Match Real Threats

Security plans that look good on paper mean nothing if they don’t reflect the reality on the ground. Did anyone truly think a single guard or passive camera monitoring was enough to protect critical infrastructure?

2. Empowerment and Clarity of Role

If a guard doesn’t act, we have to ask — were they trained? Were they told to avoid confrontation? Did they know how to escalate the situation?

3. Transparency with Clients

If the monitoring company missed the event in real time, was the client told what level of coverage they were actually getting? Were alerts active? Was anyone watching live feeds?

The Importance of Accountability

The incident highlights the need for accountability in the security sector. Security is not just about having personnel on-site; it’s about ensuring they are equipped to handle emergencies. The failure to act in this case raises questions about the training and protocols in place.

Moving Forward: Lessons to Learn

As we reflect on this incident, it’s crucial to learn from it. Security firms must reassess their strategies and ensure they are prepared for real threats. This includes regular training, clear communication, and a commitment to transparency with clients.

The Role of Technology

Technology plays a vital role in modern security systems. However, it must be complemented by human oversight. Security cameras and alarms are only effective if monitored and acted upon. The integration of technology and human vigilance is essential for effective security.

Building Trust with Clients

Building trust with clients is paramount. Security firms must communicate openly about their capabilities and limitations. Clients deserve to know what measures are in place to protect them. This transparency fosters trust and accountability.

Final Thought

At the end of the day, this incident is a harsh reminder: You don’t just outsource security — you delegate risk. With that comes the need for oversight, verification, and above all, transparency. For clients, vendors, and the public alike.

The gondola’s cable may have been cut — but the real break might be in how we approach accountability in private security.

In conclusion, we must strive for a security framework that prioritizes responsibility and transparency. Only then can we ensure the safety of critical infrastructure and the trust of the public.