OPINION: The ‘inaccessible’ West Susitna area

I have been reading and listening to sponsors and supporters of the West Susitna Access Road Project saying that the main benefit of this industrial road would be “access” for all Alaskans. The issue I’m having, aside from our current state government’s lack of fiscal conservatism, is the misleading and mischaracterized use of the word “access.”

Unfortunately, the majority of society that wants to experience the outdoors in Alaska has gotten soft and lazy. This has created the idea that for outdoor recreation to be fair, the state is responsible for developing and exploiting an area to obtain the ordinary residents’ level of “access” they feel they deserve. The West Susitna area has already been accessible — and accessed — for many years. Recreational vehicle technology and ability have come leaps and bounds in the last 30 years, making the ability to access the area even more manageable. It all comes down to one’s definition of “access.”

Now, I want to be clear. I own recreational property in the West Su and enjoy it to the fullest every weekend possible. That is why I care so much for the resources the area can provide if one were to have enough ambition, sacrifice, and prioritize one’s lifestyle to have the ability to “access” the area. Folks nowadays drive an $80,000 vehicle with an RV and UTVs in tow and complain that the West Su is for the wealthy and should be made “accessible” to everyone. I drive a 20-year-old truck and own a boat that costs twice what I paid for the truck towing it. These are the choices one needs to make when prioritizing what’s important to them. If a resident of this state were to choose differently, is that reason enough to support and justify the state of Alaska spending well more than a half-billion dollars on a road for them to be able to “access” an area of Alaska? As a conservative, blue-collar lifelong resident of Wasilla, I don’t think so.

My opposition to this project is not a case of ‘not in my backyard.’ It’s a firm stance against corporate welfare and a belief in the principles of capitalism. I find it particularly egregious when the corporations standing to gain the most are not based in Alaska or even the U.S. If the juice were worth the squeeze, the resource development companies would pay for “access” to Alaska’s resources.

With the current financial situation in our state and the elimination or reduction of basic governmental services across the board, I think spending Alaska’s money to increase the profits of a foreign mining corporation and selling it to Alaskans as “access” is fiscally irresponsible and wrong. If the state plans to continue advertising to the public that this half-a-billion-dollar project is in place mainly for “access,” I would like to see an accurate economic study to show the return on investment for the recreational “access” this project claims to provide. I would like to see the revenue the state plans to generate from the recreational “access” provided to the West Su over and above the thousands of folks who have historically and are currently accessing it.

This is Alaska, the “Last Frontier,” and if “access” needs to be redefined as being able to drive a 50-foot Class A motorhome to an area, we should look at rewording our state motto. The true Alaska lifestyle and way of life is why many of us live here and refuse to live elsewhere. Allowing and supporting the construction of this taxpayer-funded, half-billion-dollar road would be the first step toward removing the grit and tenacity that true Alaskans share and are proud to characterize ourselves with. It will be the first step toward stripping Alaska of the reason we live here in the first place.

And we all know that while we’re being sold the idea of “access,” this expensive project paid for by Alaskans is really to increase the profits of foreign mining corporations. Talk about a lose-lose project.

Gabe Kitter is a lifelong Alaskan; he has worked and played in the Mat-Su his entire life. He is an avid outdoorsman, hunting guide, husband and father of two children.

The views expressed here are the writer’s and are not necessarily endorsed by the Anchorage Daily News, which welcomes a broad range of viewpoints. To submit a piece for consideration, email commentary(at)adn.com. Send submissions shorter than 200 words to letters@adn.com or click here to submit via any web browser. Read our full guidelines for letters and commentaries here.