?Monopine? cell tower can?t hide profit motive
Guest opinion by JOHN G. KELLEY
A typical ?stealth tower? that attempts to blend cell towers into natural settings is the mono pine at the Charlton Service Area on the Massachusetts Turnpike.
|
|
A former resident of Ketchum, John G. Kelley, of Falmouth, Maine, has a summer home in Smiley Creek in Blaine County.
Beware cell phone tower companies bearing promises of ?stealth? invisibility and improved public safety.
Idaho Tower Company, whose Sawtooth Valley proposal has spurred the Sawtooth National Recreation Area to request public comment on cell phone service, has but one purpose: profit. It is for profit alone that ITC seeks to potentially reverse the millions of public dollars expended on preserving and enhancing scenic vistas, and to
lTC, a Ketchum-based business, has submitted a proposal to the SNRA to erect a cell tower on a peak facing Redfish Lake, on the east side of the Salmon River. In addition, the company proposed a second tower on Galena Summit, just above the Sawtooth Valley overlook, at a site that currently houses low-lying telecommunications equipment.
ITC would utilize a ?stealth? design for its towers called a ?monopine.? Each would be a 90-foot tower constructed to resemble a pine tree. (Ridge line trees in the SNRA top-out at considerably less heights.)
I've seen several ?stealth? towers during numerous drives across the country. Typical of attempts to blend cell towers into natural settings is the mono pine at the Charlton Service Area on the Massachusetts Turnpike. This oversized, hideous creation only serves to draw attention and is as stealthy as the proverbial elephant in the room. To further its self-interest, ITC has wrapped its sales pitch in the flag of public safety. ITC has promised Sawtooth Valley residents that its towers will provide Enhanced Emergency Response (E911), allowing emergency personnel to pinpoint the location of a person in distress. Yet, across the country, E911 is in a state of confusion (the Wood River Valley being no exception), with substantial technological and jurisdictional problems confounding efforts to make it work.
What's more, ITC has proposed cell tower locations with an eye to mining the wallets of thousands of Redfish Lake visitors and people traveling the valley floor. Any improved public safety would be an incidental byproduct.
In its eagerness to benefit from the public domain, ITC has resorted to applying political heat. In an Aug. 8, 2003, letter to Idaho's U.S. Sen. Larry Craig, company manager Jennifer Campbell played the public safety card and tossed in some anti-federal malice for good measure.
?Emergency personnel believe that lives can be saved with use of cell phones in remote and rural areas,? she wrote, and she complained that ?the community and private industry are working hard to improve communications but have run into a barrier with the Forest Service.?
Sen. Craig took action within a week, writing then-SNRA Area Ranger Deb Cooper, ?I would appreciate your investigation into this matter.?
In response to all this, the SNRA has wisely decided to step back and take a broad view. Its request last week for public input on Sawtooth Valley cell phone coverage is hopefully the first step in a comprehensive public review. Among the issues to carefully examine are the impacts of cell phone towers on scenic values; on the quality of backcountry experiences, as signals will blanket the mountain front; on the tranquil experience of visiting the valley; and on police, fire and emergency resources, as cell phone coverage emboldens people to take outdoor risks they otherwise would not.
A wrinkle in the SNRA' s review is that cell phone service will be available in Stanley by winter. V.S. Cellular I and the Challis Joint School District have entered into a lease agreement under which U.S. Cellular I will install cell panels on the outside walls of the Stanley Elementary School. Project coordinator Dan McKinney, of Wireless Site Technology in Hayden, Idaho, told me service will be up and running ?before the snow flies. ?
So now the question is: How far up the Sawtooth Valley, and how deep into the mountains, should cell phone service penetrate?
Perhaps service in the Stanley area is good enough.
But if not, here's a suggestion: Make public safety and the preservation of hard-won SNRA values the primary concerns.
Require alternatives to towers for providing highway travelers cell phone service and for providing residents of Sawtooth Valley community areas (Smiley Creek and Fisher Creek) service for times when traditional phone service is interrupted. Hikers, snowmobilers, skiers, hunters and other recreational users must accept the risks of outdoor activity when venturing from the highway corridor and the umbilical of a cell phone.
I've got nothing against making a profit; my livelihood depends on it. However, cell phone towers in the Sawtooth Valley represent the pursuit of private gain at the expense of extraordinary public effort and values.
