An Open Letter to Kevin Good, Paddy Munro and other Mountain View County councillors:You called yourselves ìRural Rootsî and were elected on the platform of listening to rural taxpayers, but have quickly forgotten your commitment in the controversy regarding the dangerous intersections of Twp. Rd. 340 and range roads 43 and 44.In the Nov 15 issue of the Mountain View Gazette, Kevin Good is quoted as asking, ìIf we have two people on a road who love gophers, do we reduce the speed and say don't use your engine retarder brakes because they might hurt gophers?î Well Kevin, I'm here to tell you it's not the gophers' safety I'm worried about, it's the safety of my family and my neighbours. Your carelessness in this matter does not mitigate the facts. Let me review the facts for you.In early 2010, a concerned group of taxpayers (not gophers) approached a former council and requested changes to the road, due to its inherent danger. That council listened to the taxpayers and did their homework by contracting an AMEC engineering study which we taxpayers paid for (not gophers).The study, done by expert engineers, found the intersections to be dangerous.During the last year in general, but the last six months in particular, the increase in oilfield traffic on this road, mostly semi-trucks, has been exponential. Two of the three proposed oil wells on the north end of Rge. Rd. 44 have been drilled, and from July 1 until today there have been more than 1,000 semi-trailer trips over this one mile of narrow, gravel, no-exit road. They all came through one or both of the intersections in question.I am not an urban gopher. My great-grandfather homesteaded this land in 1905. He now has a grandson and four great-grandchildren and their families who live within one mile of the intersections in question. That makes five taxpayers who have been paying taxes for a long time. Are you listening yet?Do not misconstrue the intent of this letter. I am not philosophically opposed to oilfield development. I understand the economic benefits that result from development to everyone, including me. I also recognize that oilfield personnel, too, are at risk when using this poorly designed road. It's just that when a crash happens, a car, a pickup, or a school bus are more likely to come out on the ìhurtin' endî than a semi.Many of the councillors in question have no idea where this intersection is or what is at stake. Worse yet, people with no knowledge of the problem, who have not read the engineering study, have been polled for their personal opinion. Clearly, their opinion has little value; they are not engineers. The people who did the AMEC study are. This well-educated, arm's-length group prepared a study which is very clear. The road needs to be changed before human tragedy results. The rollover that occurred on a weekend last month indicates what can happen.The photo accompanying this letter illustrates what happened at this intersection on Saturday, Nov 19. It shows an oilfield supply load lying on its side. It had tipped over about 1 p.m. Thankfully, no one was injured. The accident was not reported by the driver, by the trucking company or by any oilfield personnel and the equipment lay on its side blocking the road until 9 p.m. when it was reported by a local resident. Like county council, it appears all the people involved in this accident were more concerned about the dollar consequence than the danger to local residents. The road was partially blocked all day and was not cleared until after 10 p.m. that night.It won't cost any less to fix the road after a human tragedy. It's time for county council to do the job they were elected for; listen to taxpayers, read the AMEC engineering study and fix the road.Peggy JohnsonParent, farmer, and taxpayerEagle Valley
