March 08, 2007
Thursday AM

Mr. Gregory Vickery, I talked with Greg Staunton, the project engineer for the state division of forestry, about the logging road on Gravina. He says it meets state and forest service requirements for the type of road that it is. Perhaps the reason the corps of engineers has taken no action on your cease and desist order is because when someone higher up reviewed it they realized that one person from the corps and you, are not the be all end all on road standards. I drove that road and it doesn't look any different than any other logging road I have ever seen.

The funny thing is they all seem to recover nicely after a few years. If you want a public access road made out of it, (as I would love to see) maybe you should look into raising some money to get it upgraded after it has served its current purpose, and every one could enjoy it. However I don't see why the logging industry or the forest service should foot the bill for a public access road, and here is why. Every time they build a logging road you and your organization and others like it, start crying about how much it costs. If you force the forest service or the logging industry to build a higher standard road than necessary to meet state and forest service standards, the first thing you will say is "look how much the road costs, logging just isn't profitable, we have to do something". They should only have to build the road to the standards required, not something you dreamed up. By the way the project engineer told me that the stumpage sold should cover the cost of the road.

When I found out about the road being built, I took the time (about the same time you were looking into it apparently) to call around and find out about public access. I was told that it would not be open to the public unless the road was upgraded and some issues with mental health were worked out. I am wondering how we got two, so very different stories? Be that as it may, all the information I ever received on the road is exactly what it ended up being.

To quote your organization, You may not be aware of this, but the agencies involved now say the road will be closed after logging is complete. Although this is backtracking from original (and publicly stated) plans - and provides a justification, wrong or right, for the lack of permitting - it makes your statement inconsistent with the story now told by the State and Borough.

Perhaps you could clue me in on "the original and publicly stated plans for the logging road". I know that a few people at the borough have told me they would like to see a public access road to Bostwick but I never heard one word about the logging road being it. Maybe you could provide me some documentation. I must have missed it. I try to keep up on this type of information but I guess this just slipped by me. My point is, building a logging road and dreaming about a public access road are two different things. I would hate to see someone try to confuse the two so they could try to push another agenda. Just a sneaking suspicion on my part, but when you refer me to the proper documentation I am sure I can put my fears to rest.

Thank you.

Eric Tyson
Ketchikan, AK

Received March 08, 2007 - Published March 08, 2007

Related Viewpoint:

Gravina Viewpoint Appreciated By Gregory Vickery - Ketchikan, AK

All Eyes on Gravina By Gregory Vickrey - Ketchikan, AK

 

 

Send A Letter -------Read Letters

E-mail the Editor at editor@sitnews.us

Sitnews
Stories In The News
Ketchikan, Alaska