PDA

View Full Version : NPS plows ahead with controversial Great Smoky road project



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.

# # #

Lone Wolf
01-06-2006, 21:24
Cool! I love road walks.:)

smokymtnsteve
01-06-2006, 21:27
accept it ..it'S gonna happen,,,too much money to be made,

heck hikers don't bring in $$$ to areas they walk thru,,,and Amerika is about $$$ and FREE MARKETS!

liek our prezident sez "BRING IT ON"

Max Power
01-06-2006, 21:37
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.

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.


I would have to say these statements are completely untrue. The NPS is not "forging ahead," and I have not read anywhere that they said anything close to "none of the alternatives would harm the integrity."

The latest development on this topic was two days ago when Great Smoky Superintendent Dale Ditmanson stated that a preferred alternative will be identified in early 2007, after the final environmental impact statement has been released. The big story at this point is they haven't committed to a preference.

I really wish your link worked so I could see where this information is coming from. According to what I have been reading your post jumped to many conclusions. Something we really don't want to do on an important topic such as this. I really appreciate your concern in the matter. We really need to show our support in saving these mountains.

Sly
01-06-2006, 22:50
I heard this guy on the local conservative radio station today that was complaining the Southshore route was prone to bottlenecks and they needed the Northshore road as an escape route!

Terrorist attack, hurricane, angry wife?

Cookerhiker
01-07-2006, 07:51
accept it ..it'S gonna happen,,,too much money to be made,

heck hikers don't bring in $$$ to areas they walk thru,,,and Amerika is about $$$ and FREE MARKETS!

liek our prezident sez "BRING IT ON"

Well you're sure right about the $$$$$$$$$ in America. But let's call the hypocrisy: spending millions of taxpayers dollars to benefit the largest landowner who happens to be the local Congressman pushing for the project isn't exactly "free market."

generoll
01-07-2006, 09:58
No one knows just how this project will finally shake down, but Lamar Alexander, who does swing some weight in Tennessee at least, has come out in favor of the settlement and in opposition to the road.

Pacific Tortuga
01-07-2006, 15:26
SURPRISE! SURPRISE! SURPRISE! Thank all of you that voted for GW, without his leadership I'm sure this couldn't happen :banana

Can we feel it now?

Max Power
01-07-2006, 15:45
SURPRISE! SURPRISE! SURPRISE! Thank all of you that voted for GW, without his leadership I'm sure this couldn't happen.


Franklin D. Roosevelt
Harry S. Truman
Dwight D. Eisenhower
John F Kennedy
Lyndon B. Johnson
Richard M. Nixon
Gerald R. Ford
Jimmy Carter
Ronald Reagan
George H.W Bush
William J. Clinton
George W. Bush

There really isn't any relevancy to George W. Bush. If you want to look at Presidents on this, you can point fingers to each of the above. This issue has been a debate during all of their terms.

Pacific Tortuga
01-07-2006, 16:21
I think debate is the key word and like most believe impliment is the word we are looking at with GW. I agree you can point to any administraton and say SEE! I just believe with George we will see the destruction of our natural resources sooner but as Regan said"you seen one redwood,you've seen them all" and with fuzzy math you can justify it all.

Max Power
01-07-2006, 20:27
I think this issue will be around much longer the dubaya (is that how you spell "W"?) In 07 there will be a release of information on the environmental impact. This more then likely isn't going to support the road since the environmental impact is why the stopped the original road.
After the 07 info there will be a year of evaluation, and then debating over the topic for a good time after that. I don't see this being resolved till after Bush. As well I don't ever think they will build a road. I'm just an outdoor enthusiast, so what do I know. I will keep my eye on it though, as well as the GA road, and continue to support nature.

ketchup
01-11-2006, 12:30
So, hilarious, does anyone doubt the value of a stack of letters from concerned citizens to the NPS? The value is that they are amunition for freindly forces within the NPS who run with 'em for all their worth. The NPS is always divided and hellaciously political inside and there are some wildnerness advocates still employed behind those lines. Where's the health or humor in saying there's nothing we can do except bend over? The hard part is figuring out where/who to address the letters to.

Tha Wookie
01-12-2006, 03:08
So, hilarious, does anyone doubt the value of a stack of letters from concerned citizens to the NPS? The value is that they are amunition for freindly forces within the NPS who run with 'em for all their worth. The NPS is always divided and hellaciously political inside and there are some wildnerness advocates still employed behind those lines. Where's the health or humor in saying there's nothing we can do except bend over? The hard part is figuring out where/who to address the letters to.

I'm glad to see someone has some sense out there.:)

frieden
01-12-2006, 07:32
accept it ..it'S gonna happen,,,too much money to be made,

heck hikers don't bring in $$$ to areas they walk thru,,,and Amerika is about $$$ and FREE MARKETS!

liek our prezident sez "BRING IT ON"

Granted, we should pick our battles, but not fighting for anything doesn't help. Change only comes from effort and sacrifice. Rarely do the ones who sacrifice get to benefit from the change, but without them, the change would never happen. Some people believe in immediate personal gain at the expense of others, and there are those who believe their focus is better spent on the greater good, which benefits everyone. Even if you only care about you and yours, it is worth your time to fight for the environment.

MarcnNJ
01-12-2006, 12:54
I just believe with George we will see the destruction of our natural resources sooner


Like in the next 2 1/2 years? Cause George wont be around after that....

timhines
01-12-2006, 13:05
Living in Bryson City I hear about this all too often.

I don't want the road built because it would put more traffic in our town. Yet I know that more traffic in town would generate more business and more money in the community. Personally, I don't need it. My job may benefit from the traffic, but we get enough business as it is.

I agree with the above post-er, we can't pin this one on George Bush. This has been kicked around since 1943.

I do know people that had family displaced due to the damn being built and communities flooding. But times change, sometimes you have to cut string with your anger and move on with your life.

Smile
01-12-2006, 16:02
Growth for the sake of growth is the ideology of cancer.

gsmnpmtguyot
01-17-2006, 22:59
accept it ..it'S gonna happen,,,too much money to be made

heck hikers don't bring in $$$ to areas they walk thru,,,and Amerika is about $$$ and FREE MARKETS!

liek our prezident sez "BRING IT ON" Got a project for you: Hike on up to the ANWR and give us a status report on how many $$$ W. and his Texas oil buddies are making on the free market. It's your choice how many $$$ you leave in the areas you hike through. I always leave a few $$$ behind so that the locals will see their wildlands as a valuble resource as it is instead of seeing how many $$$ they can make off a timber harvest, or even worse, condos and weekend( 1 or 2 a year) cabins. Stop being cheap, treat the locals with the respect they deserve. Folks, it is time to step up to the plate on this issue. Construction of this road is totally contradictory to the mission statement of the NPS and just a terrible idea period. Can anyone say pork barrel? The locals don't want it. Swain County NC does not want it, they (Swain county comission) voted 4-1 to take the $$$ 52 mil settlement in lieu of the road. Expected economic impact of the road is $$$300,000/ yr. Payment in lieu held in trust by the the state of NC will yield $$$ 1.5 million/ year off the interest. I think any good Republican could figure that out. That will pave a lot of existing roads and build a lot of schools etc. in a county like Swain. Respect the wishes of the locals. For those looking for further information check these sites: www.nps.gov/grsm (http://www.nps.gov/grsm) click on in depth, click on Northshore road info.; www.Tennessee.sierraclub.org (http://www.Tennessee.sierraclub.org) ; and for those of you that voted for W. go to: www.northshoreroad.info (http://www.northshoreroad.info) If anyone thinks that this is not happening because of the enviromental policies of the current presidential administration, I want some of what it is you're smoking. Whatever you think of W., you have to say W. is the most divisive president since Nixon, with all the challenges this country faces that's no good. Finally, sorry this is such long response but it is a matter very dear to my heart and being a trail maintainer within the GSMNP I put my $$$ where my mouth is, so to speak.

halibut15
01-17-2006, 23:33
Does anyone have the section of the actual EIS from the NPS where they decide to go along with building the road? I read the sections that stated all the adverse effects of building and the greater cost of it, and where they said the monetary settlement would be the least impacting, but I never found the conclusion of looking at building the road. Maybe I missed it, or it wasn't in there.

gsmnpmtguyot
01-18-2006, 04:02
To Halibut15 and all others: The Enviromental Impact Statement has only recently been released, a week or two, so not many people have seen it. However, just yesterday I received a mailing from the NPS concerning the EIS, here is a paragraph from page 1. "The upcoming public hearings will give you an opportunity to provide comments on the Draft Enviromental Impact Statement (DEIS). While the DEIS includes an Enviromentally Preferred Alternative, It does not identify a Prefered Alternative. The U.S. Department of the Interior has waived the NPS policy regarding the selection of Prefered Alternative in the DEIS. Selection of the Prefered Alternative has been postponed to allow time for the public and resource agencies to review the DEIS. Comments on the DEIS will be considered in the selection of the Prefered Alternative and will be adressed in the Final EIS (FEIS)." An online copy of the DEIS is available @ www.northshoreroad.info/documents.htm (http://www.northshoreroad.info/documents.htm) I have not read the document, don't have to, my mind is made up. I expect the NPS to adhere to the fundamental policies of their mission statement. They don't cut me any slack on breaking the rules, and I am holding them to the same standard. I expect the DEIS is rather lengthy, technical and dry. For you folks that do not live in ETN or WNC, please submit your comments to : Northshore Road Project PO Box 30185 Raleigh, NC 27622 or, www.NorthShoreRoad.info/comments.htm (http://www.NorthShoreRoad.info/comments.htm) Please speak up, this is not a done deal either way, however, they can't find a couple hundred $$$ to repair the footbridge over Abrams creek @ Abrams ranger station but they found $$$16 million to fund the DEIS. Only under the current political climate could the NPS trash their most fundamental policies and misplace spending priorities. The entire GSMNP annual budget is $$$10 million, with a $$$16 million maintenance backlog, i.e. maintenance not done due to budgetary shortfalls. I could go on forever about the things the GSMNP needs (footbridge over Abrams creek) and a $$$600 million road is not one of them. Misplaced priorities, political apointments, $$$ and free markets. Hope the info is helpful.

halibut15
01-18-2006, 09:26
Thanks! That's what I was wondering. I read as much as I could of the DEIS on the NPS website the other day and wondering if I was crazy not seeing what everyone says to be the NPS deciding to build the road in there. Seems to me they're leaning pretty strongly towards the monetary settlement, even if they never officially chose an Alternative.

Max Power
01-18-2006, 12:09
Thanks gsmnpmtguyot for your input. I appreciate your sticking to the facts and links. You can see that this post started with an article created by someone who "jumped to conclusions." If you read my posts on all forums related to this you can find that I have pretty much said the same thing, or that I have suggested visiting my site where I give the same info you released. I have a great interest as a hiker, and as well since I will be moving to Fontana where this issue will become so close to home.
It may sound selfish, but if I was to move to the Mountains and then have a road built where I planned on hiking for solitude, I would be pist.
With all the info I have read and people I have spoke with, I don't see this ever happening. We still have to take action and be a voice to show that we care.
Thanks again for the info.