Comment EI-18148
Received or sent (printed as 5/9/2010)
May 9, 2010 To: David Navecky STB Finance Docket No. 35095 Surface Transportation Board 395 E Street S.W. Washington, D.C. 20423-001 Re: Proposed Alaska Rail Line Extension to Port MacKenzie; Draft EIS After review of the Draft EIS it appears as if the Willow route makes the least sense from many perspectives. As noted in the Draft EIS, it is the most expensive, crosses the most streams and rivers and cuts through the most recreation areas. Of particular concern is the impact on Recreation Areas. On occasion we find a rare place worth more than another for some inherent qualities that exist within that area and we attempt to preserve those qualities and that area so that they may be enjoyed. Such is the case with the Recreation Areas that the Willow route proposes to cut through. The Draft EIS points out the obvious drawbacks, such as noise, vibration, negative hunting and wildlife impacts, access restriction across RR right of way (trespass) and other limitations that will be imposed on the recreation areas referenced. The affected recreation areas are close enough to population centers that they actually get used by many people for the purpose that they were intended and not as preserves or refuges where access is limited by a more remote situation. In short, people use and enjoy these places for the qualities they have to offer. I know of no one who currently defines their recreation activities in these areas to include the presence of a railroad. The Willow railroad spur will not enhance recreational activities. A railroad corridor through these recreational areas will in fact have an adverse affect on all recreation activities. Recreation, be it in the form of snowmachine riding, skiing, hunting, fishing, or just the quiet enjoyment of a unique area, is the purpose for which these Recreation Areas were established. Please select a route other than the Willow route. Sincerely, Daniel E. Smith 8945 Emerald Dr. Anchorage, Alaska 99502 (907) 244-1811
Submitted by: Daniel E. Smith · Anchorage, Alaska
The Board publishes this comment in its environmental-comment table for this proceeding. It is quoted here as printed; nothing is inferred from it, and it states the commenter's own position in their own words, not this record's.
Permanent address docketyard.org/d/FD-35095/comment/EI-18148 · back to the docket sheet