Most supporters of project are in affiliated industries; more than half of opposing comments are copies of a form letter, some featuring additional remarks

By Mark Sabbatini

Juneau Independent

This is a developing story.

Overwhelming opposition to a proposed road for a new gold mine near Herbert Glacier north of Juneau is remarkably similar to public comments about the Cascade Point Ferry Terminal — perhaps to be expected since the mine is a focal point of both projects.

Opposition is expressed in 88% of 200 comments about the proposed road submitted to the Alaska Department of Natural Resources between Feb. 17 and March 13, according to documents provided in a records request by the Juneau Independent for all comments submitted during the period they were being accepted.

About 100 of the 176 comments opposing the proposed road are a form letter, many of which contain additional remarks. Of the 22 comments favoring the project, most are from companies and officials with mining-related ties that highlight economic benefits of industrial and other development in the area. The remaining two comments are analytical statements by government entities that do not take a formal position on the road.

A 10-week public comment period about the proposed Cascade Point terminal that ended in January saw 92% of the 622 respondents opposing the terminal.

The first two comments about the proposed mine road provide an effective point-counterpoint by people on opposing sides. (All comments in this story are published as provided, without grammar or punctuation edits.)

"This area holds some of the most incredible forested wetlands in Juneau," wrote John Block in a Feb. 17 comment. "There’s an abundance of habitat for Beaver, migratory, birds, wolves, bears, deer and mustelids and not to mention the multitude of salmon spawning in the area. This is a phenomenal place to go hiking, running and mountain biking when not covered in snow. In the winter, it’s hard to beat the backcountry cross-country skiing through the Herbert glacier Trail and out along the frozen beaver ponds."

"The current mining activity that’s going on around the Herbert glacier is already becoming disruptive to the area. Don’t take it any further by authorizing a destructive projection such as this. The mining activity needs to stop."

Opining in favor of the road, also on Feb. 17, is Colter Boehm, who states he is the owner of Bobcat of Juneau and Ketchikan.

"As an avid outdoorsman and a local business owner of Juneau I would like to express my support for this road and the project," he wrote. "Opening this road up to the general public for outdoor enthusiasts will allow us access to areas that are currently unreachable by certain handicapped persons. In addition will make it much easier to reach farther into the wilderness for more extreme adventurers. As a Business owner, this project will provide lots of Jobs for our locals. And these will be excellent, long-term paying Jobs."

Notice of the proposed road about 21 miles north of Juneau, between Herbert and Eagle glaciers, was published Feb. 11 by the state. That came after the U.S. Forest Service put on hold a recreational cabin near Herbert Glacier in a draft decision in January.

If the road about 21 miles north of Juneau is approved, construction could start as soon as this spring, with an anticipated completion date of fall 2027. The application seeks use of the road until 2061.

The proposed mine is the New Amalga Gold Project by Canada-based Grande Portage Resources Ltd. It is already under under intense scrutiny from state legislators, as well as many residents who are questioning if a strong push by Gov. Mike Dunleavy for the Cascade Point terminal is because it will provide an ore shipping facility for the company. A state study of the terminal has stated it will have negligible benefits for ferry travelers, but will benefit the mine as well as Goldbelt Inc. as the property owner.

The Forest Service submitted one of the analytical letters about the proposed road, noting there may be impacts to certain species that should be mitigated if the project is approved.

"This development compromises the quality of winter habitat in the Forest within a mile of the boundary, and any activity in the area from November to May could disturb goats when they are vulnerable to physiological and behavioral impacts," part of the comment notes. Another section describes actions sought to avoid disturbing nesting goshawks, including "I would like to see a broadcast survey completed on USFS lands within 600 feet of the second staging area (lying close to our boundary) and recommend felling trees between mid-August (after fledging) and November (to avoid bear dens)."

The other analytical comment — which doesn’t take a yes/no stance, but makes a definitive demand — is by the Central Council of the Tlingit and Haida Indian Tribes of Alaska. It urges the state to assess environmental and cultural impacts of the project on the "traditional territory of the Áak’w Kwáan Lingít people" — including disruptions of subsistence resources and sacred burial sites — "engage in formal government-to-government consultation with affected Tribal governments prior to authorizing any easement."

• Contact Mark Sabbatini at editor@juneauindependent.com or (907) 957-2306.