I am very much against the 2nd crossing. Not only for the effect it will have on the wetlands, but for other reason as well.
1,) A large bridge going smack dab through the center of the wetlands WILL affect the movement of waterfowl as they get pushed around the wetlands. This I predict will cause a decrease it success. Also, we'll lose a large portion of the wetlands for hunting, and a spot that is rather popular.
2.) A second crossing is not needed. We do not gain anything from doing it, instead we're wasting money when there are other things in town that need it more.
The main arguements I hear for the second crossing is "Improved access," "Quicker emergency response," and "Increase the development in Douglas."
- Improved Access - Is it really that far to drive out N. Douglas? No, its not. When you compare communte times to get out N. Douglas to Commute times for people to get to work down South, its not EVEN close to a long drive. On top of that, the people living out N. Douglas KNEW what they were buying into when they purchased their homes out there. If they didn't want to do the drive there are plenty of homes for sale in town and in the valley.
- Quicker Emergency Response - I can speak from experirence on this on as I work in the Emergecy field. The difference in response times is not going to make a single bit of difference.