A moratorium on Chilkoot River corridor tour permits ended Tuesday after the Haines Borough Assembly reversed its July 29 decision and issued a canoe tour permit to Alaska Mountain Guides.
The assembly voted 4-2 to reconsider the motion passed at the July 29 meeting, which postponed action on the AMG permit and placed a moratorium on Chilkoot River corridor permits until a management plan addressing carrying capacity is established for the area.
Assembly members Joanne Waterman and Debra Schnabel opposed the reversal of the moratorium and issuance of the AMG permit.
Schnabel balked at the reversal, upset by the assembly’s unwillingness to stick to its guns. “We’ve been having this conversation for decades and no one has the backbone to make the decision to stop expanding,” she said.
Assembly member Diana Lapham initiated the reconsideration, saying the moratorium “will create an atmosphere to the cruise ships that they’re not welcome.”
Lapham said she “did not have complete information” when she voted for the moratorium, and that she felt the borough “may have overstepped our boundary” by trying to manage state property.
The July 29 public hearing on the AMG permit application drew comments from several tour operators supporting the moratorium. Tuesday’s reconsideration came without public notice. AMG owner Sean Gaffney was the only member of the public to comment on the reconsideration.
Assembly members defended the reconsideration as a last-minute decision, though manager David Sosa sent an email to assembly members at 8 a.m. Tuesday recommending the moratorium “be lifted at the earliest opportunity.”
“I feel that the assembly had not been provided with a full understanding of the situation when the decision on a moratorium was made,” Sosa wrote in the email. “This was in part caused by my not fully understanding the sensitivity of the issue, the tourism director’s newness to her position, and (Gaffney) not engaging with assembly members individually before the assembly meeting.”
In an interview Wednesday, Sosa said he came to his conclusion after several emails and conversations with tourism director Leslie Ross and Mayor Stephanie Scott. Conversations with Gaffney, tour operators (who publicly opposed the moratorium) and state parks area superintendent Mike Eberhardt also influenced his recommendation, Sosa said.
“One potential impact of a moratorium is a delay in the cruise lines agreeing to increase ship visits,” Sosa said. “(Ross) will be heading to Miami in October to have discussion with the industry. These discussions have the potential to be impacted by a moratorium.”
In an interview Wednesday, Sosa said the word “moratorium” is problematic because it could be “misread” by cruise ship companies and other industries seeking to do business here. “(The moratorium) could create a situation where it could be more difficult for our representatives to engage with them,” he said.
In an interview Wednesday, Ross said she supported assembly approval of a permit to AMG. Ross submitted an initial letter to the assembly supporting the permit, but subsequently sent a letter still supporting the permit but identifying concerns that had been brought to her attention.
“As tourism director I don’t want a moratorium on an area where we have tours operating,” Ross said. “What I would rather do as tourism director is work as much as possible with state parks and with the invested entities, including the tour operators, to make it work,” she said.
Ross wouldn’t directly answer a question about whether she thought a moratorium would deter cruise ships from coming to Haines, as assembly member Lapham asserted. “If I was dealing with a moratorium – which I’m not – I would present it to the cruise ships… We’d have to deal with explaining the moratorium,” Ross responded.
AMG’s permit application seeks tours four times per day with a maximum of 24 people per trip, using a combination of paddle-powered canoes and ones with small, outboard motors.
When the assembly voted 4-1 to put the moratorium in place, members cited the congestion on the road and at the lake’s parking lot as reasons for not allowing more tours in the area. Assembly member Jerry Lapp voted against the moratorium. Member George Campbell was absent.
On Monday, the Chilkoot Bear Foundation submitted a letter to the borough commending the assembly for its decision to implement the moratorium. Twenty-eight people signed the letter.
Both Schnabel and Waterman said they have been approached by residents and tour operators congratulating them on the moratorium decision.
Tour operator Thom Ely, who publicly opposed the moratorium, called the flip-flop “ridiculous.”
“Unfortunately, it looks like they bent under political pressure to approve the permit,” Ely said.
At Tuesday’s meeting, Gaffney repeatedly pointed to the state’s Chilkoot River Corridor Final Site Plan, released in May. Development of the plan has been underway for several years and went through several public comment sessions, Gaffney said, and is already funded at $1 million.
“The concerns the assembly has raised have been addressed,” Gaffney said of the plan.
However, Lucille Baranko, state parks’ landscape specialist who is in charge of the plan, said construction won’t address congestion at the parking lot, nor will it expand the road.
“We have a lot of constraints within the corridor, and that basically leaves us to our existing footprint,” Baranko said. “The road is not going to be wider.”
Phase one of the project is currently in the design phase and will be put out to bid this fall with construction slated for next spring, Baranko said. The work will involve upgrading the existing road, installing bear-viewing platforms, striping the pavement and installing signage.
About $700,000 is left for construction from the $1 million appropriated by the Alaska Legislature in fiscal year 2012, Baranko said.
Assembly member Waterman repeatedly expressed her opinion during the meeting that by allowing more tours in the Chilkoot corridor, the borough would create a situation it wouldn’t be proud of.
Waterman denied Lapham’s claim that the moratorium was somehow anti-business, and said the moratorium would help preserve the area for residents and visitors until a plan addressing carrying capacity could be completed. “I think what we’re trying to do is create a better product,” Waterman said.