Park isn't ruling out explosives for avalanche control

Hungry Horse News

Glacier National Park isn't ruling out the use of explosives to control avalanches to protect Burlington Northern Santa Fe trains on the southern border of the park.

Park superintendent Mick Holm said the park has not ruled out issuing emergency permits for use of explosives, as it did in January 2004, if an environmental impact statement on the issue is not completed before next winter's avalanche season begins. He also would not rule out the use of helicopters, artillery or other launch means for explosives.

"It's too early in the process," he said last week.

Park project leader Mary Riddle said the EIS is on a tight schedule but could be completed before next winter's avalanche season begins.

Although scoping has not been done yet, Riddle said several issues have already been identified, including impacts to endangered species, water quality and proposed or de facto wilderness in the park; socio-economic conditions-particularly for the railroad; and the threat of hazardous chemical spills caused by train derailments.

Human safety is a big consideration.

Two avalanches hit and derailed a freight train Jan. 28, 2004, only hours after an Amtrak passenger train passed through the area.

"We dodged a bullet with Amtrak," BNSF's Whitefish trainmaster Lane Ross said. "Their cars are taller and more unstable than freight cars. This is a big safety issue."

"Train crews also need to walk the track after a train stops to see what's happened," said BNSF's Randy Wolff. "That leaves them vulnerable to additional slides."

Ted Steiner, BNSF's avalanche consultant, differentiated between avalanche control and avalanche mitigation.

"In ski areas, every hazard is eliminated," he said. "In the Canyon, the level of protection is more limited."

Steiner said a tiered avalanche-warning system has been in place since the January 2004 incident. This includes remote-telemetry weather equipment located west of Marias Pass at 7,000 feet elevation.

"Looking back, the only thing BNSF could have done was cut way back in train traffic-but how could they do that?" Steiner said.

The 100 to 300 trains on the BNSF line between Seattle and Chicago are all affected if traffic is stopped in the Middle Fork canyon, said BNSF division engineer Rick Harmon, but human safety is paramount.

"If we knew the level of the danger, we would have stopped Amtrak at West Glacier and called the buses," he said.

U.S. Geological Survey avalanche expert Blase Reardon said avalanche forecasting is not an exact science. He said he and park backcountry ranger Stephen Willis suspected conditions were already bad when they saw the Amtrak train pass overhead at the West Glacier viaduct.

"When one avalanche path has gone critical, so are numerous other paths," he said.

Reardon said the highway reopened one hour after the two avalanches hit the freight train. Avalanches continued to come down after that.

"The railroad should have waited before sending out the clean-up crews," he said.

Coram-resident and avalanche-control expert Darwon Stoneman said the railroad and U.S. Highway 2 could have been closed sooner during the January 2004 storm. Heli-bombing was impossible at the time due to lack of visibility.

"This is one of the few mountain corridors in the U.S. with major transportation routes that doesn't have a comprehensive avalanche warning and control system in place," he said.