It's not hard to get people to agree that the Coastal Trail is one of the better things that have happened to Anchorage in the past 20 years. As citizens we use it on a year-round basis. We routinely tout it to visitors as one of our key attractions. National publications mention it. So why are we having so much trouble deciding to extend it along the coast in South Anchorage? If you think it's the NIMBY'S, guess again. It's us&emdash;all of us&emdash;and a few public servants who have taken it upon themselves to substitute their judgement for ours.
The idea of a "coastal" trail has been around for over 20 years. It began back in 1980 when the northern section of the trail was built, along the coast. Since 1980, the coastal routing of the trail has been openly acknowledged and specifically incorporated in coastal management plans, refuge management plans and trail plans. In 1996, the coastal routing of the trail rose to the top of the AMATS list, where it has been ever since. It is funded by federal money that must be used for trails, not other roads. Clearly, the community as a whole has been saying the coastal trail is a priority, in many ways--for many years.
The next step in the process is to prepare an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). The EIS is supposed to investigate alternatives, assess impacts and identify mitigation measures. If you think a coastal route will come out of this process, don't count your chickens yet. As the trail gets closer to reality, it is also getting further from the coast.
There are four routes being considered for further study in the EIS. None of them are coastal routes like the existing trail. Instead, all the routes include unlikely inland segments over much of their length such as Conners Bog, Klatt Bog and the Sand Lake gravel pits. Amazingly, the one route that is coastal has been removed from further study. This has been done well before all the issues have been evaluated.
The reason the coastal route is not being considered is because our public servants in the local fish, game and wildlife offices, in misplaced fits of protectionism, have made the choice for us by substituting their value judgements for ours. They claim there will be wildlife and habitat impacts if we build a coastal route. Some impacts may well occur. But the fish and game folks haven't told us, with any specificity, what the impacts are. Nor do they seem willing to give their concurrence to an EIS process that includes a coastal route, which is truly puzzling.
The logical way to understand the impacts claimed by the fish and game folks is to allow the EIS to study them. The EIS is supposed to identify impacts, quantify them, explore ways to mitigate them, and ultimately understand the costs, benefits and disadvantages of each option. The end result is reliable, objective data that the decision-makers can use to find the best solution. It is incomprehensible why anyone would want to preclude such a process, but that's where we are headed.
The vast majority of those that support the coastal route don't want to see wildlife impacts either. But before we decide not to build a coastal route, we want to understand those impacts better. We want to know if there are ways to minimize those impacts so we can balance them against the greater good that accrues to the community. We believe the EIS can help us answer these questions.
None of the coastal trail supporters want to see the existing uses of the coastal habitat change in any way. The rifle range should stay right where it is. The airplanes should still take off from Campbell Lake. The bird watchers should still observe the spring migrations. And the hunters should still hunt birds in the fall. These are the diverse interests that make living in Anchorage such a good thing. Trail users are not out to replace the interests of others with their own. Adding a trail along the coast creates awareness and may be the best way to preserve the interests of all users in the community.
If we don't include a coastal route in the EIS, we are on the verge of losing a golden opportunity to add a wonderful element to an already world class trail system right here in Anchorage. We can stand by and let it happen or we can make our choices known. If you want to know the facts and keep the options open, then let Jim Childers, the DOT Project Manager know how you feel. You can contact him at the local DOT office or send him an e-mail at Jim_Childers@dot.state.ak.us.