Efforts to gain approval for a four-lane bridge over the St. Croix River not only represent a significant threat to the St. Croix National Scenic Riverway, but if successful would set a dangerous precedent for Wild and Scenic rivers nationwide, according to a national rivers advocacy group.
At issue is a new bridge across the St. Croix River that divides Minnesota and Wisconsin, one that is expected to cost at least $700 million to build, and which would require an exemption to the Wild & Scenic River Act as that section of the scenic riverway is covered by that act.
Last fall the National Park Service, after considering the project for a fourth time, refused to permit the new bridge, holding that it would present direct and adverse impacts to the river that could not be "avoided or eliminated."
But U.S. Rep. Michele Bachmann, a Republican representing Minnesota's 6th Congressional District, has been pushing legislation in Congress to, in effect, overrule that Park Service decision. Her legislation would dictate that the proposed bridge is "consistent with the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act."
American Rivers, in its annual Most Endangered Rivers list, today said that effort "would undermine the values that make the river a regional and national treasure – and set a dangerous precedent for other Wild and Scenic Rivers nationwide."
While the group doesn't deny there's a need for a new bridge over the river, it believes that "(A)lternative designs with less impact on the river and lower costs should be evaluated..."
Story Categories:
A copy of National Parks Traveler's financial statements may be obtained by sending a stamped, self-addressed envelope to: National Parks Traveler, P.O. Box 980452, Park City, Utah 84098. National Parks Traveler was formed in the state of Utah for the purpose of informing and educating about national parks and protected areas.
Residents of the following states may obtain a copy of our financial and additional information as stated below:
- Florida: A COPY OF THE OFFICIAL REGISTRATION AND FINANCIAL INFORMATION FOR NATIONAL PARKS TRAVELER, (REGISTRATION NO. CH 51659), MAY BE OBTAINED FROM THE DIVISION OF CONSUMER SERVICES BY CALLING 800-435-7352 OR VISITING THEIR WEBSITE. REGISTRATION DOES NOT IMPLY ENDORSEMENT, APPROVAL, OR RECOMMENDATION BY THE STATE.
- Georgia: A full and fair description of the programs and financial statement summary of National Parks Traveler is available upon request at the office and phone number indicated above.
- Maryland: Documents and information submitted under the Maryland Solicitations Act are also available, for the cost of postage and copies, from the Secretary of State, State House, Annapolis, MD 21401 (410-974-5534).
- North Carolina: Financial information about this organization and a copy of its license are available from the State Solicitation Licensing Branch at 888-830-4989 or 919-807-2214. The license is not an endorsement by the State.
- Pennsylvania: The official registration and financial information of National Parks Traveler may be obtained from the Pennsylvania Department of State by calling 800-732-0999. Registration does not imply endorsement.
- Virginia: Financial statements are available from the Virginia Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services, 102 Governor Street, Richmond, Virginia 23219.
- Washington: National Parks Traveler is registered with Washington State’s Charities Program as required by law and additional information is available by calling 800-332-4483 or visiting www.sos.wa.gov/charities, or on file at Charities Division, Office of the Secretary of State, State of Washington, Olympia, WA 98504.
Comments
I really enjoy your blogging and reading all of these informative posts.
Why would they over-rule the national park? Not a good precedent.
If this is about replacing the existing I-94 thoroughfare then I might be persuaded to alter my view but if this is just another river crossing up or downstream from the highway bridge then crap-can the idea now before we waste any more taxpayer dollars. The populace in this area isn't sufficient to warrant additional crossings. If, on the other hand, replacement of the current, miserable structure is the issue then it MUST be made to limit or be completely in compliance with the environmental impact studies pertinent to this highly sensitive area. There are few, if any, waterways remaining in this nation that are as pristine as the Upper Croix. To trash this resource in the name of "progress" would not just be a travesty, it would demonstrate sufficiently man's inability to coexist within any limits in any environment.
Michelle Bachman -- Tea Party darling.
"Don't spend taxpayer dollars on anything other than my pet projects."