The Daily Alaska empire. [volume] (Juneau, Alaska) 1926-1964, 1951-01-11

tors. II was recognized as one of
the most feasible sources for huge
hydro-electric power development.
the controlling factor in the estab-
lishment of light metals industry
The aluminium development in
Alaska would have revolutionized
the economy of the territory. 1t
would have created new city of
$4,000 to $4,000 population. II would
have opened the way for the de-
velopment of a long list OF new in
dustries as by-products of the main
aluminium development.
The switching of the project to
Kittimat, BIC, north of Prince Ru-
pert and south OF the Alaska border.
delays but does not kill the Alaska
100000 developments are few and
far between.
| 1t is likely that the reasoning
! behind the aluminium decision may
tnever be known in Alaska. Federal
officials are accountable to no one
in the territory. Alaska has no rep
resentation in Washington with the
prestige and power to thump fist
on desks of cabinet officers and de-
mand answers to their questions
, But Alaskans can speculate that
/ big money made the decision Based
ON past experiences, it is reasonable
/ to conclude that the big money
found it for its own best interests
to have the aluminium plant in
i Canada instead : OF on soil OF the
, United States perhaps for tax pur-
, poses.
, One thing is certain: the switch
to British Columbia could not. pos
sibly be for defense reasons. There
is nothing to support such belief.
The Kittimat project win be more
vulnerable 70 enemy attack than
would the Sksgway project.
Both the Skagway and Kittimat
sites are at the head Of flords. The
fact that Kittimat is few hundred
miles south and east of Skagway
would make no appreciable differ
{ ence from the defense angle. An
2 enemy able to reach one could, just
> as readily, reach the other.
The big difference is in the physi-
} cal structure of the two power de-
velopments, and Skagway has deii-
r mite advantages over Kittimat. The
+ project III Alaska would have tun-
] nels through rugged mountains to
! bring water from interior lakes TIC
J the power plants on the shoreline.
At Kittimat the waters would be
/ impounded by an open dam a
. ready target for enemy bombs.
: If the aluminium plant were at
Skagway or Dyea the enemy could
: fly many days over the sawtoothed
: peaks of the area and be unsuccess-
full in finding a place to drop a
/ bomb that would destroy the power
/ development. But at Kittinat, a
, few well-placed bombs could wreck
} the dam and leave the entire fac
: tory without electricity 10 turn its
wheels.
Too il must be recognized that
the defense line in Alaska is the
defense for Kittimat as well as
, for Skagway That defense line is
J 500 miles west Of Skagway. 1t is
equally effective for either site.
The aluminium deal opens the way
| ! for questioning the sincerity OF the
$ federal government in its program
: for Alaskan development. BY locat-
! ing this plant in the territory the
/ government would have taken the
greatest step possible in expanding
l the economy of Alaska.
q Meanwhile. Alaskans see British
: Columbia developing new pulp mills
while American interests are SUI
fering a series Of gripping delays
III Sufllldf uctclOiJllitittH ~ 'Ao'f>ts'
Alaskans are justified in wonder
ng whether they must wait for the
fun development Of British Colum-
bia before the United States viii
take an interest in her own soil
and people in this great northern
rampant.
History shows that Alaska always
gets the rind when the United
States slices melon. 1t has been
that way ever since the purchase
of Alaska from Russia in 1867
Has anyone ever heard OF the
United States developing a natural
resource in Canada when one OF the
40 states had an equal resource
available for development?
There will be more on this de-
velopment as Skagway is up in