"Corridor H," translated into lay language, means a proposed four-lane highway from Weston, WV, to Interstate 81 in Virginia [this was obviously before our neighbors to the east, showing some sense, backed out of this pork barrel arrangement. Ed.]. Other Appalachian Corridor Highways in West Virginia include L (completed – Sutton to Beckley) [not fully completed then. Ed.], D (completed – Parkersburg to Clarksburg), E (completed – Morgantown to Maryland) and G (proposed – Charleston to Williamson). The highways are intended to promote economic development. Benefits of Corridor H, according to the West Virginia Department of Highways (DOT), include improved medical service and a reduction of gasoline consumption [bold and italics added by editor!]. It is hard to believe the latter.

Earlier in its lifetime, Corridor H caused environmental furor which is beginning to surface again with the release of a Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) on the highway. The DEIS analyzes six major alternatives which delineate five different routing proposals and a no-build alternative. Unfortunately, the common sense alternative of improving existing roads is not considered [bold added by editor].

The 300-plus-page document discusses details of the various routings. It documents that the proposals vary from 110 to 132 miles in length; will displace between 145 to 240 families and 17 to 40 businesses (in the name of economic development): will bridge and/or relocate four to eight Wild and Scenic Rivers; will relocate 14,000 to 60,000 feet of rivers and streams; and will cost $302,000,000 to $359,000,000 in 1975 dollars (at least twice that much in 1985 dollars) [and at least four times that much in 1999 dollars. Ed.]. The money will come mostly from federal sources, with the state share coming out of the general highway fund according to a spokesperson for the DOH. By contrast, this year’s budget from the general fund includes paving 50 miles of two-lane road statewide.

... According to a DOT poll, most people don’t want the highway near them, but do want it somewhere. I believe that the main point is whether to build it or not. Let us not get entangled in a discussion of routings. Each is an expensive, environmental disaster in an area which "should prove to be more attractive to developers of new industry once the highway is constructed" (DEIS, page 5-3, my emphasis).

Let us work for improving the existing road system – that should be the alternative instead of spending our taxes ripping a high-speed cut across beautiful mountains and streams hoping to bring in new industry...