To the editor:

Some might look at initial reports of low-ridership, miscalculated spending, and progress on the Washington Bridge as reasons for reducing the scope of the Bristol-Providence ferry. This is prudent in the near-term, but we should not dismiss ferry service as a long-term public transportation option altogether.

I recently conducted a Facebook poll amongst Rhode Islanders who travel from Bristol to Providence for work, but haven't taken the ferry. Despite our car-centric culture, only 22% cited the independence of a car as a reason for not taking the ferry. Out of the poll’s 67 respondents, 57% cited transportation in Providence as a reason for not taking the ferry. 7% of respondents tied their reluctance to the trip’s length; 2% cited a lack of a midday ferry as a reason; one respondent cited weather.

If RIPTA can improve on-land travel logistics and meet Rhode Islanders’ scheduling requests, then permanent ferry service is possible. A ferry service running on clean energy would alleviate road traffic, reduce road accidents and fatalities, and help us meet our climate goals. If, and only if, successful, ferry service from RIPTA could then expand across different points on Narragansett Bay, such as in Warwick.

Ferry service may neither be for everyone nor be a panacea for today’s needs. Yet, it could factor into meeting tomorrow’s needs if the State commits to this long-term vision.”

Matthew Heffner
Riverside