No headline

The people who are against a second railroad bridge across Pend Oreille have built their arguments on fallacy and emotion, not facts. The facts have been presented quite clearly by BNSF and private citizens who have taken the effort to check them out.

A consistent argument is that a second bridge will “greatly increase” the amount of trains coming through here. They’ve got the cart before the horse. A second bridge is not going to increase train traffic. Our population has increased, hence an increased demand for goods, and so, more trains. Trains haul a lot more than coal and oil; for example: appliances, cars, clothing, tools and food. Would you prefer everything being hauled by truck? Can you imagine what our highways would be like? Vehicle traffic grew so much in our area that Highway 95 underwent a major overhaul to enlarge it not long ago. This is what BNSF wants to do by putting in a second bridge and perhaps a second track all the way from Hauser to Bonners Ferry, to avoid trains standing anywhere from 15 minutes to two hours, waiting for tracks to clear down the line somewhere.

The bridge across Pend Oreille is a major east-west link. If something happened to it, we’d be “up the crick.” A second bridge would not only alleviate the wailting problem, but would also be a backup, just in case. You’re not going to get perfection this side of heaven, so let’s quit squabbling and get on with the business of life.

EVALYN FINNEY

Sandpoint