ROANOKE TIMES
Copyright (c) 1996, Roanoke Times
DATE: Wednesday, November 13, 1996 TAG: 9611130036
SECTION: EDITORIAL PAGE: A-12 EDITION: METRO
SOURCE: WILLIAM N. GORDGE
IN HIS OCT. 30 commentary, "Western Virginia needs AEP Line," Ronald Poff, project manager for American Electric Power's proposed 765-kv transmission line, raps the knuckles of the managers of the Appalachian Trail and the U.S. National Forest, accusing them of tunnel vision. In his opinion, their opposition to the line jeopardizes the future well-being and economic prosperity of the people in Southwest Virginia. Poff is a well-regarded company executive, but as project manager for the proposed line, he may be suffering from tunnel vision himself.
The design of the company's preferred transmission route disregards the Forest Service's land-management plan. This plan isn't a casual document, but something that was derived laboriously through due process with much public involvement and with regard to that hot-button issue "multiple use." The proposed route flies in the face of this plan. The route would pass through a region that in Forest Service jargon is classified as semiprimitive nonmotorized - meaning a roadless area with outstanding visual qualities to be protected from the intrusion of man-made structures. There are too few of these areas left in national forests, and they need to be protected.
Throughout the 123 miles of trail, which is maintained by volunteers of the Roanoke Appalachian Trail Club, there are 17 utility-line crossings. So what difference would another line make? First, this would be one huge line. Second, there is a very real danger of successive intrusions - all in the name of the common good - nibbling to death the trail and its protective corridor.
In a realistic effort to reconcile conflicting interests, the Appalachian Trail community supports the philosophy of "no net loss." This means that if a utility line must pass through the Appalachian Trail corridor, the effect should be compensated for (mitigated) by removing a line somewhere else along the trail.
We accept the social and economic realities of our times, and welcome an expanding and prosperous future for the people of Southwest Virginia. With the concept of "no net loss," if something is taken away from the quality of the environment, then something must be given back. This approach isn't tunnel vision.
Pursuing this philosophy, one specific option could be the mitigation of a new line by removing the Matt Funk Line. This is a transmission line that passes down Catawba Valley, carves its way across the flank of Catawba Mountain, is visible for miles around, crosses the Appalachian Trail four times, and is one of the lines that greets southbound travelers on Interstate 81 as they enter the Roanoke Valley.
AEP has resisted this type of proposal, stating that such measures aren't feasible. Since we're not experts in this technical field, we cannot dispute this. However, given the vast technical resources and expertise of this company, one has to be skeptical.
It's unfair to accuse the Forest Service of being cavalier in its decision not to allow the power line to cross federal lands. As far back as 1991, a full-time planning coordinator joined the supervisor's staff with the specific mission of ensuring that the process would be followed correctly in every detail. The nationally recognized and prestigious environmental-consultant firm of Woodward Clyde was retained by the Forest Service to carry out an independent analysis. Public hearings were held, state agencies were consulted, and many resource specialists were involved. The power company had plenty of opportunity to make its case.
As the studies went on, everybody became frustrated with the Forest Service for dragging the process out. Poff claims that Forest Supervisor Bill Damon dismissed the issue "with a wave of his hand." The poor fellow was probably too exhausted to stand up and bow. The clear message, however, was that the environmental impact of this enormous line would be so severe that it was simply inconsistent with the long-term management goals of the national forest.
Damon made a clear statement: "We made a commitment to the American people - in our forest land-management plan - to preserve and enhance the scenic beauty of these magnificent lands. I intend to honor that commitment." His concern is forest-centered but community-oriented. Tunnel vision? I think not. The forest supervisor deserves great credit for standing up for his convictions in the face of AEP's influential opposition.
The Roanoke Appalachian Trail Club experienced a small dose of reality when it decided to enter the legal process as an objector to the route of AEP's proposed line before the State Corporation Commission. Eight legal firms declined to assist us. We finally found a firm that had the motivation to guide us through the maze of SCC procedures.
Let's treasure our mountain domain and preserve it for those to come. After all, it's one big reason that people and businesses are attracted to this area. Let's hope the power company will change its attitude, settle down to seriously considering alternatives to this mega-line, and come up with a proposal that is acceptable to all.
William N. Gordge, a Roanoke pediatrician, is a past member of the Board of Managers of the Appalachian Trail Conference.
LENGTH: Medium: 90 linesby CNB