SavageLlama
01-06-2006, 21:14
NPS plows ahead with controversial Great Smoky road project
By Daniel Cusick
Greenwire ("")
January 5, 2006
The National Park Service is forging ahead with plans to complete a controversial road project through Great Smoky Mountains National Park despite its own findings of major and lasting effects to the environment, according to a draft environmental impact statement issued yesterday.
The North Shore Road project, if fully developed along a roughly 32-mile right-of-way skirting the park's Lake Fontana, would cost the government $590 million, according to Park Service estimates. Scaled back versions of the project, while less environmentally damaging, could still run into the hundreds of millions of dollars.
Yet despite the high costs to taxpayers and the park's natural resources, the Park Service concluded in its draft EIS that "none of the alternatives would harm the integrity" of the Great Smoky Mountains National Park or the nearby Appalachian Trail, several miles of which would be plowed under to complete the North Shore Road.
Several major environmental organizations -- including the National Parks Conservation Association, the Sierra Club and the Appalachian Trail Conservancy -- responded yesterday with calls that Congress pull the plug on the road project, which they described as "a boondoggle for American taxpayers and an environmental disaster for America's favorite national park."
The park, which straddles the Tennessee-North Carolina border in the highest elevations of the Appalachian Mountains, receives upwards of 9 million visitors a year, more than any other park property, and is already beset by a number of threats, among them traffic congestion, persistent air and water pollution, invasive species and encroaching commercial and residential development (Greenwire, June 30, 2005).
Critics of the North Shore Road proposal argue that a major road-building project on the park's south side near Bryson City, N.C. would only exacerbate those problems.
"Blasting a road through the most rugged, remote part of the Great Smoky Mountains National Park that will serve no transportation need is an economic and environmental debacle that will affect all Americans," said D.J. Gerkin, an attorney with the Southern Environmental Law Center, which represents the environmental groups, in a statement.
The Park Service, while conceding the project poses myriad engineering challenges and increased threats to park resources, maintains it may have no choice but to build the road, or at least some portion of it.
Plan is linked to 1943 agreement
The federal government is bound to a 1943 agreement it signed with the state of North Carolina and Swain County calling for a new road to be built as compensation for damming the Little Tennessee River and flooding more than 10,000 upland acres in the construction of Fontana Reservoir. Among the formerly dry land ceded to Fontana Lake was State Highway 288, which linked Bryson City to several historic communities north of the lake and now within the park's boundary.
World War II delayed initial construction of the North Shore Road, the Park Service between 1948 and 1970 managed to build 7.2 miles of the road before encountering problems with rugged and unstable terrain, acid drainage from exposed rock formations, and rapidly escalating costs. In 1972, work on the project stopped indefinitely, and things remained quiet until October 2000, when Congress appropriated $16 million to the Department of Transportation "for construction of, and improvements to, North Shore Road in Swain County, North Carolina."
"Advocates of building a road maintain that the government has an obligation to uphold the 1943 agreement as a matter of principle and credibility," the Park Service states in its draft EIS. But others argue the government has taken other sufficient steps to mitigate the loss of the highway.
Since the late 1970s, for instance, the Park Service has ferried Swain County residents and others across Fontana Lake to visit ancestral settlements and old family cemeteries, some of which date to the Smokies' pioneer days. While such concerns were paramount 63 years ago, when the Park Service initially acquired the former settlements, critics maintain that today there is insufficient demand for a new road to the settlements, and even some descendants of those early settlers are opposed to its construction.
In 2003, the Swain County Commission passed a resolution calling for a monetary settlement in lieu of the road-building project, an idea endorsed by North Carolina Gov. Mike Easley (D). For $52 million, Swain County said it would waive its right to a federally built road around Fontana Lake. Instead, it would use the settlement proceeds to pursue other local economic development projects.
Yet despite what many perceived as an amenable exit strategy for all parties, the Interior Department has held fast to the notion that all options must be considered.
Nancy Gray, an NPS spokeswoman at Great Smoky Mountains National Park, said that regardless of the Swain County resolution, the Park Service is obligated to consider all alternatives because the 1943 agreement involved other parties -- including the Tennessee Valley Authority, which designed Fontana Dam to produce electricity during World War II and continues to generate hydropower there. Fontana Dam, at 480 feet, is the highest dam east of the Rocky Mountains, according to TVA.
Greg Kidd, associate Southeast regional director for the National Parks Conservation Association, said the monetary settlement would meet two overarching goals -- preserving the Great Smoky National Park while giving Swain County more flexibility in its future development. At the same time, Kidd said in a statement, "The environmental cost for building a road through the park is simply not worth it."
EIS warns of long-term effects
Findings in the draft EIS suggest the Park Service also recognizes the environmental costs are high, particularly under the full build-out alternative. Under such a scenario, referred to as the "Northern Shore Corridor," the road would have to span some of the roughest terrain in the park, including a series of high-elevation streams and deep valleys, known as "gaps." The road surface could be paved or gravel, depending upon how it is engineered, but neither option would be environmentally benign.
Gray, the Park Service spokeswoman, said that while the study raises important issues for the public and park managers to consider, officials remain confident that the environmental effects from road-building could be "sufficiently mitigated." She said the draft EIS does not provide "a full realistic view of mitigation practices that would be necessary" if the project goes forward.
Despite such assurances, language in the EIS suggests the park experience would be greatly diminished by the construction of the North Shore Road.
Under the summary heading "Visitor Use and Experience," the EIS plainly states: "The majority of impacts would be felt by the casual and active visitor. In most cases, the active visitor would be displaced to other areas of [the park]. Over time, the loss of this backcountry area and the displacement of visitors to other areas would deteriorate resources, causing some active users to no longer recreate in [the park].
In another section of the document titled "Land Use Impacts," the EIS states that any of the road-building alternatives "would change land use within the Park, resulting in major an moderate impacts ... that would be adverse and long-term." Such alternatives, the document states, are not in compliance with the general management plan for the Great Smoky Mountains National Park.
The Park Service will accept public comments on the draft EIS through March 20, and a series of public meetings are scheduled during the month of February.
Click here for more information on the North Shore Road proposal, including dates and locations of public meetings.
# # #
By Daniel Cusick
Greenwire ("")
January 5, 2006
The National Park Service is forging ahead with plans to complete a controversial road project through Great Smoky Mountains National Park despite its own findings of major and lasting effects to the environment, according to a draft environmental impact statement issued yesterday.
The North Shore Road project, if fully developed along a roughly 32-mile right-of-way skirting the park's Lake Fontana, would cost the government $590 million, according to Park Service estimates. Scaled back versions of the project, while less environmentally damaging, could still run into the hundreds of millions of dollars.
Yet despite the high costs to taxpayers and the park's natural resources, the Park Service concluded in its draft EIS that "none of the alternatives would harm the integrity" of the Great Smoky Mountains National Park or the nearby Appalachian Trail, several miles of which would be plowed under to complete the North Shore Road.
Several major environmental organizations -- including the National Parks Conservation Association, the Sierra Club and the Appalachian Trail Conservancy -- responded yesterday with calls that Congress pull the plug on the road project, which they described as "a boondoggle for American taxpayers and an environmental disaster for America's favorite national park."
The park, which straddles the Tennessee-North Carolina border in the highest elevations of the Appalachian Mountains, receives upwards of 9 million visitors a year, more than any other park property, and is already beset by a number of threats, among them traffic congestion, persistent air and water pollution, invasive species and encroaching commercial and residential development (Greenwire, June 30, 2005).
Critics of the North Shore Road proposal argue that a major road-building project on the park's south side near Bryson City, N.C. would only exacerbate those problems.
"Blasting a road through the most rugged, remote part of the Great Smoky Mountains National Park that will serve no transportation need is an economic and environmental debacle that will affect all Americans," said D.J. Gerkin, an attorney with the Southern Environmental Law Center, which represents the environmental groups, in a statement.
The Park Service, while conceding the project poses myriad engineering challenges and increased threats to park resources, maintains it may have no choice but to build the road, or at least some portion of it.
Plan is linked to 1943 agreement
The federal government is bound to a 1943 agreement it signed with the state of North Carolina and Swain County calling for a new road to be built as compensation for damming the Little Tennessee River and flooding more than 10,000 upland acres in the construction of Fontana Reservoir. Among the formerly dry land ceded to Fontana Lake was State Highway 288, which linked Bryson City to several historic communities north of the lake and now within the park's boundary.
World War II delayed initial construction of the North Shore Road, the Park Service between 1948 and 1970 managed to build 7.2 miles of the road before encountering problems with rugged and unstable terrain, acid drainage from exposed rock formations, and rapidly escalating costs. In 1972, work on the project stopped indefinitely, and things remained quiet until October 2000, when Congress appropriated $16 million to the Department of Transportation "for construction of, and improvements to, North Shore Road in Swain County, North Carolina."
"Advocates of building a road maintain that the government has an obligation to uphold the 1943 agreement as a matter of principle and credibility," the Park Service states in its draft EIS. But others argue the government has taken other sufficient steps to mitigate the loss of the highway.
Since the late 1970s, for instance, the Park Service has ferried Swain County residents and others across Fontana Lake to visit ancestral settlements and old family cemeteries, some of which date to the Smokies' pioneer days. While such concerns were paramount 63 years ago, when the Park Service initially acquired the former settlements, critics maintain that today there is insufficient demand for a new road to the settlements, and even some descendants of those early settlers are opposed to its construction.
In 2003, the Swain County Commission passed a resolution calling for a monetary settlement in lieu of the road-building project, an idea endorsed by North Carolina Gov. Mike Easley (D). For $52 million, Swain County said it would waive its right to a federally built road around Fontana Lake. Instead, it would use the settlement proceeds to pursue other local economic development projects.
Yet despite what many perceived as an amenable exit strategy for all parties, the Interior Department has held fast to the notion that all options must be considered.
Nancy Gray, an NPS spokeswoman at Great Smoky Mountains National Park, said that regardless of the Swain County resolution, the Park Service is obligated to consider all alternatives because the 1943 agreement involved other parties -- including the Tennessee Valley Authority, which designed Fontana Dam to produce electricity during World War II and continues to generate hydropower there. Fontana Dam, at 480 feet, is the highest dam east of the Rocky Mountains, according to TVA.
Greg Kidd, associate Southeast regional director for the National Parks Conservation Association, said the monetary settlement would meet two overarching goals -- preserving the Great Smoky National Park while giving Swain County more flexibility in its future development. At the same time, Kidd said in a statement, "The environmental cost for building a road through the park is simply not worth it."
EIS warns of long-term effects
Findings in the draft EIS suggest the Park Service also recognizes the environmental costs are high, particularly under the full build-out alternative. Under such a scenario, referred to as the "Northern Shore Corridor," the road would have to span some of the roughest terrain in the park, including a series of high-elevation streams and deep valleys, known as "gaps." The road surface could be paved or gravel, depending upon how it is engineered, but neither option would be environmentally benign.
Gray, the Park Service spokeswoman, said that while the study raises important issues for the public and park managers to consider, officials remain confident that the environmental effects from road-building could be "sufficiently mitigated." She said the draft EIS does not provide "a full realistic view of mitigation practices that would be necessary" if the project goes forward.
Despite such assurances, language in the EIS suggests the park experience would be greatly diminished by the construction of the North Shore Road.
Under the summary heading "Visitor Use and Experience," the EIS plainly states: "The majority of impacts would be felt by the casual and active visitor. In most cases, the active visitor would be displaced to other areas of [the park]. Over time, the loss of this backcountry area and the displacement of visitors to other areas would deteriorate resources, causing some active users to no longer recreate in [the park].
In another section of the document titled "Land Use Impacts," the EIS states that any of the road-building alternatives "would change land use within the Park, resulting in major an moderate impacts ... that would be adverse and long-term." Such alternatives, the document states, are not in compliance with the general management plan for the Great Smoky Mountains National Park.
The Park Service will accept public comments on the draft EIS through March 20, and a series of public meetings are scheduled during the month of February.
Click here for more information on the North Shore Road proposal, including dates and locations of public meetings.
# # #