The greatest threat to the wetlands
is a proposed Second Crossing across the wildlife Refuge, a second bridge between Douglas Island and Juneau. There are viable options (including Salmon Creek and No Build) that are off-Refuge.
The PEL (Planning and Environmental Linkage) Study – intended to identify and remove the most environmentally degrading options from consideration for development – has been fatally flawed.
is a proposed Second Crossing across the wildlife Refuge, a second bridge between Douglas Island and Juneau. There are viable options (including Salmon Creek and No Build) that are off-Refuge.
The PEL (Planning and Environmental Linkage) Study – intended to identify and remove the most environmentally degrading options from consideration for development – has been fatally flawed.
You Answered.
The Juneau community said no. The Final PEL Study Report included thousands of pages of public comments - overwhelmingly in support of the continued protection of the wetlands and the wildlife Refuge.
Paving Over Priorities
“Across Alaska, roads are falling apart. Potholes deepen in Fairbanks, washed-out culverts block salmon in the Mat-Su, and rural communities from Ketchikan to Kotzebue are left waiting on repairs that may never come….
And yet the state is poised to spend at least half a billion dollars building a second bridge across one of Alaska’s most ecologically significant and beloved wetlands: the Mendenhall Wetlands in Juneau.”
Current Stage: PEL Study Draft #2
Comments from Stakeholders + Experts
Mitigation isn't that simple.
The Southeast Alaska Land Trust
The PEL study assumes mitigation as a simple given, seemingly failing to understand “avoid, minimize, and mitigate” is a legal process, not a suite of options.
“…. the mitigation sites would be profoundly more expensive, time consuming, and difficult to establish than any other mitigation sites we have protected in the last 27 years of operating a mitigation program for developers across Southeast Alaska. It would cost taxpayers $20 million….DOWL’s suggestion that mitigation is a simple solution to the build alternatives’ impacts is a naïve and incompetent answer to a complex problem.“
Numerous Miscalculations
Ron Somerville, Wildlife Biologist
“All of the gigantic mistakes made during this process show a complete lack of an adequate scientific and technical background needed to provide a credible product… Illogical field studies were conducted in September for 2-3 weeks to somehow equate wildlife uses for an entire year….
[DOWL conducted a public poll where] info given to the public did not even provide the basics such as the fact that a Wildlife Refuge occupied the area. This is deceptive marketing.”
The Mendenhall Wetlands Study Group
“Restricting analysis of impacts to just the foot of each crossing also leads to significant underestimation of the negative impacts… on wetland functions and uses of the Refuge. These impacts can extend laterally beyond a bridge.. depending upon such factors as sea floor substrate and habitat type, tidal dynamics, and disturbance to movement and use by wildlife….Many of the issues identified by Technical Advisory participants in relation to scoring the various alternatives have been seemingly ignored or dismissed without explanation.”
Feasible Off-Refuge Alternatives Exist
Audubon Alaska
“Bridge development through the Refuge would cause irreversible impact to these birds by altering the Refuge’s estuarine hydrology, fragmenting habitat, and introducing permanent sources of noise, light, and human disturbance [that] would undermine the ecological functions that make the Refuge valuable …. moreover, [the Salmon Creek and No Build] alternatives are better aligned with climate resilience goals and responsible land-use planning. Intact wetlands provide critical services such as flood protection, carbon storage, and climate buffering…”
Missing + Incomplete Data
alaska backcountry hunters & anglers
The PEL draft fails to adequately differentiate impacts. “A narrow and inconsistently applied scoring rubric obscures real differences between routes… additional shortcomings include ignoring Douglas Island impacts, failing to assess habitat fragmentation and hydrological effects, and omitting key datasets such as updated wetland assessments, bird usage data, and recently identified anadromous streams.”
Incremental Development
“Airport growth and urban sprawl are reducing the wetlands…. There was a time when the best spot for duck shooting is where the Western Auto now sits… the Refuge and associated wetlands today are just a small shadow of what once was…. ”
~ Juneau resident Tom Boutin
Heart of Juneau is here to give Alaskans information.
Read past comments and reports from the PEL process here.