The idea of putting Alaska’s capital city on the road system has been talked about since territorial days. Over the past 14 years, literally thousands of hours of environmental and engineering assessments, energy and economic impact studies and public testimony were devoted to the Juneau Access Project.
This process produced the state’s preferred alternative to build a road from Juneau to Haines and Skagway with a ferry terminal at Katzehin. The process was lengthy, exhaustive and comprehensive. The resulting project — the Lynn Canal Highway — remains sound, correct, and desperately needed.
The project seeks to build a 59-mile road to replace costly, inefficient ferries and reduce travel times and costs, to the state and to those who travel.
Progress on the road was halted in Federal Court in 2009 by U.S. District Court Judege John Sedwick, who granted the Southeast Alaska Conservation Council (SEACC) an injunction to stop all the work on the project. Creative use of existing ferries, Sedwick theorized, could improve transportation without building either additional ferries or the road. The state appealed, but in May 2011, the 9th Circuit Court agreed with Judge Sedwick and SEACC, saying that increased Lynn Canal service could “come at the expense of service elsewhere.”
SEACC’s law firm, EarthJustice, celebrated the 9th Circuit’s decision and called on Gov. Sean Parnell to direct state resources to more ferries and better ferry service.
How exactly will taking money and ferry service from other communities in Southeast benefit anyone in our region or the state of Alaska as a whole? It won’t. The dissenting 9th Circuit Court justice correctly characterize this solution as “robbing Peter to pay Paul.”
Thankfully, the governor directed Alaska Department of Transportation and Public facilities to address this irrational “solution” to Southeast’s transportation challenges by completing a supplemental Environmental Impact Statement. The SEIS will delve even more deeply into the infeasibility of the “no action” or “no-build” alternative that was soundly rejected in the original EIS and justify in even greater detail why ferries are not the answer.
The existing EIS expressly considered “deploying vessels,” “changing schedules” and “experimenting with different levels and types of service in Lynn Canal.” Apparently, both Judge Sedwick and the 9th circuit Court of Appeals missed this section in the EIS. DOT can clarify once again why rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic is never a good strategy for success.
Facts are stubborn. Currently the Alaska Marine Highway System operates 11 ferreis and has proposed building a 12th ferry. But the system carries just two-thirds the traffic it carried when it had seven ferries! More ships, more fuel and more ferry workers are simply not the answer. The cost to travel, in spite of a 2-1 state subsidy, remains exorbitant for users, driving down ridership and depressing local economies.
The 2010 census and resulting redistricting process should be a “Wakeup call” for all residents of Southeast. The region has lost representation in the Alaska Legislature — the same Legislature that funds the marine highway. Roads are exponentially less costly for the state to maintain. Construction of the Lynn Canal Highway remains our best strategy to improve the economic health of the entire Southeast.
In a word, we should build the Lynn Canal Highway now, or Southeast will continue its downward demographic spiral.
• Richard Knapp is chairman of Citizens Pro Road.
