Submitted by Ken Watts.
Let’s look at ITD’s purpose and need statements for US 20 from Ashton to SH 87. They do their purpose and need statements at the project level. So, they address things like congestion, travel time and safety. But let’s look at this highway segment from the 30,000 foot level. What is the purpose and need for this highway segment? Not the project! There are two primary purposes and one secondary purpose for this highway. First, this highway segment provides for tourists to travel to and from Yellowstone National Park/West Yellowstone, Montana. Second, it allows for freight to be moved to and from Montana. US 20 is a freight route. Third, this highway segment allows good and services to be provided to the Island Park area as well as providing access for recreation. The first two purposes/needs provide little economic value to Idaho or Idahoans. Trucks and tourist mostly pass through southeast Idaho and certainly through Island Park. There is marginal economic value, to Idaho and very little to Island Park. The third purpose/need does provide considerable economic value to Idaho and Island Park. Recreation is the economic engine for Island Park. However, this purpose/need does not require a 4 lane freeway and maybe not even a super 2 highway. Why should Idaho taxpayers spend $700,000,000 of their tax money on this highway segment to primarily benefit Montana trucking and the National Park Service/Yellowstone National Park/West Yellowstone, Montana. Idaho would be risking very significant environmental damage while received only a portion of the benefit. Imagine if bridge construction were to damage the fishery. The economic implications would be profound. There is no way to even estimate the damage to the quality of life and livability environment of Island Park. The effect on recreational crossings, ATVs and snowmobiles, caused by a 4 lane freeway would be devastating. ITDs purpose and need statements are totally inadequate. These statements address the highway project and not the real purpose of the route/corridor segment. Idaho should NOT spend $700,000,000 of our highway budget on a highway segment that primarily supports Montana. Is Montana spending $700,000,000 on US 20? The ITD Board should spend Idaho’s road money on highway segments that primarily benefit and serve Idaho and Idahoans. There are many places where this could be done.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Making Sense of It All
This blog will help you make sense out of all the information on the website, how it affects IP, our history, and how efforts continue to put IP into various forms of conservation status. Archives
May 2023
Categories |