Any more talk about shifting N.Idaho to Mountain Time? (Boise: home, construction jobs)

[CMartel2]

One of my great annoyances when I was last in North Idaho was the fact that the panhandle remains on Pacific time. Yes, it has everything to do with having Spokane to the east. So what?

Panhandle residents, how do you like your sun setting at 3:58 in the afternoon this evening? It's completely unnecessary and a royal waste of electricity, a good waste of daylight, and completely fixable.

This is me getting on my own soapbox, but why not just stick with daylight savings the entire year? Want to enjoy the beauty around you? Better not work or better get our really early... And as for seasonal affective disoder...

It just seems bizarre to me that a state running north and south would divide itself into different time zones (I know, giant mountain ranges dividing north from the south...). In my home state of Tennessee, sure, divide the state in half when it's 600 miles east to west. It doesn't effect commerce between Knoxville and Nashville, I promise you.

There was some talk about unifying the state again when I was last in the area. I liked the idea at the time...

And here I go, an outsider considering infiltrating and changing everything. I have a feeling that I'm not entirely alone, though.

[mistyriver]

I like being on Pacific time. We are very centered around CDA and Spokane and it would be inconvenient to be on a different time than Spokane.

[pw72]

Yep, this is all about Spokane, unfortunately.

[brokencrayola]

I like being on Pacific time as well.

[Clark Fork Fantast]

From a (for now) summer resident: I like it, too. It's an inconvenience when traveling over to Montana for appointments etc., but all you have to do is plan ahead. I might feel differently about it in winter, though...

[banjomike]

The 2 time zones have always caused problems within the state boundaries, since Boise and all the cities in the south are on Mountain standard time. If mountain standard was to be used in north Idaho, the mornings would be darker all year round, but the late afternoons would have more daylight during business hours. it's a trade-off.

I don't think changing the time zones would ever become desirable until a major 4-lane is built within state boundaries from Boise to C d'A. That road was a major proposal by Gov. Kempthorne in his last term, but it went nowhere after he became Bush's Sec. of Interior, and Otter has never touched it since. Such a highway would be very expensive, as it would entail literally moving mountains of rock, and the Clearwater and a couple of other rivers would require bridging and possible re-chanelling. It was a big deal to build the old 2-lane in those canyons back in the 30's.

Until there is a modern intrastate highway that is capable of carrying high traffic that connects the north and south, Idaho will continue to remain essentially 2 states forever. Such a highway would benefit the north much more than the south, I believe, as it would allow north Idaho to share in all the high-technology industry and the distribution industries that are now booming in Boise, Idaho Falls and Pocatello. An inn-state route from southern Idaho to C d'A and westward to Spokane, Seattle and Portland would be the fastest and most direct north-south route from Salt Lake City and Denver, and would really help north Idaho grow and prosper.

If I was the boss of everything, I would integrate a new rail line with the construction of a new road. North Idaho has a lot of timber left, and I'm sure that, in time, new logging practices will develop. Moving the big stuff is better done by rail than road, and rail passenger service will eventually come back, I think, as the cost of oil continues to increase.

I don't think high speed rail would work well here, but if a train could average 80+ mph on a modern rail, that speed would be good enough to make passenger service feasible, especially if the railway connected to a high speed system to the west. As it is now, all the rail systems have a big loop around Idaho's mountains. Like the road, a north-south modern rail would be the fastest and cheapest connector to the center of the nation.

[mistyriver]

Originally Posted by banjomike

Until there is a modern intrastate highway that is capable of carrying high traffic that connects the north and south, Idaho will continue to remain essentially 2 states forever.

This is true. I've lived here for almost 11 years and I've been to Boise once. I'm in Spokane at least once a week, and Seattle is easier to get to than Boise (and more desirable to go to, IMO). I really don't care if Boise is in the same time zone or not, it's really irrelevant to my life. But for most people in the Panhandle, Spokane is the city we fly in and out of, the city we go to when we need to "go to the city", the city our radio and TV channels come out of....I don't have any real connection with the southern part of the state. And it doesn't bother me. We are like two different states.

[pw72]

Interesting discussion. The mountain time zone expands east to the middle of the Great Plains, so Northern Idaho would make for very dark mornings if they moved to mountain. Boise already has this issue, but being further south is less of a problem.

A four lane freeway between Boise and NID would be difficult in places, but not sure it would be cost-prohibitive, in fact it may create a lot of construction jobs and increase Idaho's economic potential. Keep in mind that some of US 95 is already four lane, so with some minor upgrades, those stretches would be pretty easy. Bypassing towns would be a problem, for many reasons, and yes, the canyons and some mountain areas would create a problem. Perhaps Idaho should take the approach of 101 in Northern CA, where they have improved the road in stages during the past decades. This would seem to be a good compromise.

However, if all federal standards were eventually met this could be become I-7, I-9, I-11, I-13. Not likely anytime soon.

[banjomike]

Originally Posted by mistyriver

This is true. I've lived here for almost 11 years and I've been to Boise once. I'm in Spokane at least once a week, and Seattle is easier to get to than Boise (and more desirable to go to, IMO). I really don't care if Boise is in the same time zone or not, it's really irrelevant to my life. But for most people in the Panhandle, Spokane is the city we fly in and out of, the city we go to when we need to "go to the city", the city our radio and TV channels come out of....I don't have any real connection with the southern part of the state. And it doesn't bother me. We are like two different states.

Yup.
I've never liked the fact that the north is so isolated from the rest of the state. It would be to all Idahoan's advantage if more of our money and goods were purchased and spent in-state than out of state.

I'm also concerned that N. Idaho could become the poorer sibling because it's cut off from a lot of the growth and development that is happening down here, where the majority of the population live. The north should be, in my opinion, a twin to the south. If that ever happens, Idaho could become a real western powerhouse due to it's location, resources, and advanced technology development. We could grow to the size of Utah or even close to Colorado and still keep all the stuff we treasure here with no problems.

Possibly changing to mountain time could prove to be a good first step in this. For sure, uniting the 2 Idahos would be a long process, but I believe weaning ourselves away from Spokane in the north and Salt Lake City in the south would be a very good thing for us all here.

[jadbad2004]

Pacific time zone is the only thing I dislike about NID, I do not care for it being dark at 4:30. I would think it makes more sense to be the same time zone as the rest of our state.