Glacier avalanche control questioned

Burlington Northern Santa Fe railroad officials say a proposal to control avalanches with explosives on Glacier National Park's southern boundary is necessary for human safety on the busy rails that cross the Continental Divide.

But at least one organization is questioning the effectiveness of avalanche-control methods that will be outlined in a draft environmental-impact statement that will be released by the park this summer.

The avalanche control proposal was one of the main topics of discussion Wednesday during the annual meeting of the Great Northern Environmental Stewardship Area, a partnership among the railroad and state and federal agencies that focuses on wildlife and transportation issues in the Middle Flathead River corridor.

Burlington Northern Santa Fe representative Lane Ross explained that avalanche safety, forecasting and mitigation measures became a priority after avalanches caused a substantial derailment in 2004.

"Awareness jumped up" because of that incident, he said.

Railroad officials "realized what we had been doing for years - putting our people in harm's way," he added. "The issue for the railroad is safety. We didn't realize up until recently how lucky we've been."

Since then, the railroad has aggressively pursued education programs for its personnel, hiring a consultant to conduct avalanche training and forecasting. In May, the railroad approached Glacier officials with a proposal for active avalanche control with explosives on the slopes that tower above the Middle Fork corridor.

In February, the railroad obtained a special permit from the park to carry out experimental avalanche control by dropping 10 explosive charges from a helicopter.

"It was the first time we've done it," Ross said, adding that the communication with park and Montana Department of Transportation officials "worked very well." The charges triggered avalanches as expected, while train traffic was stopped, and U.S. 2 was temporarily closed.

But Steve Thompson, the Glacier field representative for the National Parks Conservation Association, questions whether the avalanche control measures would be effective in the conditions that led to the 2004 avalanche derailment.

Those slides occurred during a storm that delivered heavy snow and low-visibility conditions.

Thompson asked the railroad's consultant, Ted Steiner, how avalanche control could avert avalanches in similar conditions.

"It would be limited to artillery," Steiner responded.

Thompson said future avalanche hazards likely will result from similar storms over the Middle Fork.

"That's the kind of event you get there," he said. "You can't blast your way out of that problem."

Thompson said the NPCA is going to urge an alternative approach.

"We think there's a better way of doing it that's safer, more effective and a long-term solution - and that's more snowsheds," he said.

Ross said the railroad has conducted cost studies showing that periodic avalanche control would be far less expensive than building additional snowsheds. Currently nine sheds are in an avalanche-hazard zone that covers several miles and involves 12 major avalanche chutes.

Thompson said the association is urging the railroad to consider snowshed designs that would serve a dual purpose of providing wildlife crossings at the base of major avalanche chutes. He said the railroad earns substantial profits and should be able to afford more snowsheds.

"I think they can afford to hire some Montana workers to build snowsheds instead of blasting Glacier's avalanche slopes with artillery shells," he said.

Mary Riddle, Glacier's environmental protection and compliance specialist, said the draft impact statement will offer alternative approaches to the issue, including "no action" and combinations of limited explosives use, artillery explosives and snowshed improvements.

The impact statement, which is being developed with the Montana Department of Transportation, also will provide a cost analysis for the various alternatives, Riddle said.

A public comment period will begin after the statement is released in June or July, followed by a final impact statement and a decision on an avalanche-control program before the end of the year, Riddle said.

Reporter Jim Mann may be reached at 758-4407 or by e-mail at jmann@dailyinterlake.com.