20070812 Ver 1_21- Recreational use Assessment Final_20080502

Alcoa Power Generating Inc.
Yadkin Division
Yadkin Project Relicensing (FERC No. 2197)
Recreational Use Assessment
Final Report
October 2005
Prepared by
ERM
TABLE OF CONTENTS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ......................................................................................... ES-i
1.0 INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................................1
2.0 METHODOLOGY ................................................................................................3
2.1 Data Collection ...........................................................................................3
2.1.1 Spot Counts ......................................................................................5
2.1.2 Visitor Use Surveys .........................................................................7
2.1.3 Tailwater Use Survey ..................................................................... 10
2.1.4 Canoe/Kayak Registry ................................................................... 11
2.1.5 Resident Use Survey ...................................................................... 11
2.1.6 Private Community Use Survey ..................................................... 13
2.1.7 Business and Organization Survey ................................................ 15
2.1.8 Uwharrie National Forest Survey .................................................. 16
2.1.9 Aerial Photographs ......................................................................... 18
2.2 Recreational Use Data Analysis .............................................................. 19
2.2.1 Public Access Recreational Use ..................................................... 19
2.2.2 Waterfront Resident Recreational Use ........................................... 21
2.2.3 Private Community Recreational Use ............................................ 24
2.2.4 Commercial Business and Private Organization Recreation Use.. 24
2.2.5 Canoe/Kayak Portage Recreational Use ........................................ 26
2.3 Reservoir Water Levels ........................................................................... 27
2.3.1 Precipitation ................................................................................... 27
2.3.2 Reservoir Water Elevations ........................................................... 29
2.3.3 Summary ........................................................................................ 29
3.0 CONSULTATION ...............................................................................................32
4.0 RECREATIONAL USE ASSESSMENT ...........................................................33
4.1 Recreational User Profile ........................................................................33
4. 1.1 Age and Gender .............................................................................33
4.1.2 Place of Residence .........................................................................33
4.1.3 Overnight Stay Location ....................... .........................................34
4.2 High Rock Development Recreational Use ............................................35
4.2.1 Recreational Facility Condition ............ .........................................37
4.2.2 Recreational Activities ...................................................................41
4.2.3 Recreational Use ............................................................................44
4.2.4 Recreational Facility Capacity .......................................................49
4.2.5 Recreational Issues .........................................................................51
4.3 Tuckertown Development Recreational Use .........................................56
4.3.1 Recreational Facility Condition .....................................................56
4.3.2 Recreational Activities ...................................................................62
4.3.3 Recreational Use ................................... .........................................62
4.3.4 Recreational Facility Capacity .......................................................66
4.3.5 Recreational Issues ................................ .........................................68
ERM j Recreational Use Assessment
October 2005
4.4 Narrows Development Recreational Use ...............................................72
4.4.1 Recreational Facility Condition .....................................................72
4.4.2 Recreational Activities ............................................................... ....77
4.4.3 Recreational Use ........................................................................ ....79
4.4.4 Recreational Facility Capacity ................................................... ....83
4.4.5 Recreational Issues ..................................................................... ....86
4.5 Falls Development Recreational Use ......................................................91
4.5.1 Recreational Facility Condition ................................................. ....91
4.5.2 Recreational Activities ............................................................... ....95
4.5.3 Recreational Use ............................................................................95
4.5.4 Recreational Facility Capacity ................................................... ....98
4.5.5 Recreational Issues .........................................................................99
4.6 Total Project Recreational Use .............................................................101
4.6.1 Total Current Yadkin Project Recreation Use .............................101
4.6.2 Previous Recreational Use Studies ..............................................101
4.6.3 Comparison of Results of Existing Study with Prior Studies ...... 102
5.0 RECREATIONAL CARRYING CAPACITY ................................................ 109
5.1 Physical Carrying Capacity .................................................................. 109
5.2 Social Carrying Capacity ...................................................................... 111
5.2.1 High Rock Reservoir .................................................................... 111
5.2.2 Tuckertown Reservoir .................................................................. 113
5.2.3 Narrows Reservoir ....................................................................... 116
5.2.4 Falls Reservoir ............................................................................. 119
5.3 Overall Carrying Capacity .................................................................... 124
5.3.1 High Rock Reservoir .................................................................... 124
5.3.2 Tuckertown Reservoir .................................................................. 125
5.3.3 Narrows Reservoir ....................................................................... 125
5.3.4 Falls Reservoir ............................................................................. 126
5.4 Recreational Use Trends ....................................................................... 127
5.4.1 Demographic Changes ................................................................. 127
5.4.2 Recreational Use Trends .............................................................. 128
5.5 Future Recreational Use Projections ................................................... 131
5.6 Comparison of Carrying Capacity with Future Recreational Use
Projections .............................................................................................. 132
6.0 UWHARRIE NATIONAL FOREST RECREATION USE ..........................133
6.1 Reservoir Visitation ...............................................................................133
6.2 Recreation Experience ...........................................................................133
6.3 Crowding Distances ...............................................................................134
6.4 Principal Reasons to Visit .....................................................................135
6.5 Alternative Recreation Areas ................................................................135
7.0 TAILWATER USE ASSESSMENT ................................................................136
7.1 Physical Description ...............................................................................136
7.2 Existing Recreational Use of Project Tailwaters .................................144
ERM jj Recreational Use Assessment
October 2005
7.3 Potential Recreational Issues ..........
7.3.1 High Rock Dam Tailwaters ...
7.3.2 Tuckertown Dam Tailwaters..
7.3.3 Narrows Dam Tailwaters .......
7.3.4 Falls Dam Tailwaters .............
7.4 Effects of Project Operations..........
..................................................150
..................................................150
..................................................151
..................................................151
..................................................151
..................................................152
8.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ...........................................153
8.1 Conclusions .............................................................................................153
8.1.1 Recreational Use Levels and Carrying Capacity .........................153
8.1.2 Recreational Activities .................................................................153
8.1.3 Seasonality of Recreational Use ..................................................154
8.1.4 Recreational Issues .......................................................................154
8.1.5 Resident versus Visitor Recreational Use ....................................155
8.1.6 Recreational Facilities ..................................................................155
8.2 Recommendations ..................................................................................158
9.0 REFERENCES..........
............................................................................15 9
ERM Recreational Use Assessment
October 2005
LIST OF TABLES
Table 2-1 Summary of Data Collections Methods .......................................................4
Table 2-2 Spot Counts by Month and Type of Day .....................................................5
Table 2-3 Number of Spot Counts at Each Public Access Recreation Area ................6
Table 2-4 Number of Visitor Use Surveys by Month and Day of Week .....................8
Table 2-5 Number of Visitor Use Surveys by Reservoir and Recreation Site ............9
Table 2-6 Tailwater Use Survey by Location ............................................................ 10
Table 2-7 Waterfront Resident Use Survey Responses ............................................. 13
Table 2-8 Waterfront Resident Use Survey Response Rate by Month ...................... 13
Table 2-9 Private Community Resident Use Survey .................................................. 15
Table 2-10 Private Communities Use Survey Response Rate ..................................... 15
Table 2-11 Responses to Commercial Business and Organization Phone Survey....... 17
Table 2-12 Commercial Business/Private Organization Survey Response Rate ......... 16
Table 2-13 Uwharrie National Forest Recreation Surveys by Month .......................... 16
Table 2-14 Type of Days per Month for Study Period ................................................. 20
Table 2-15 Turnover Rates ........................................................................................... 21
Table 2-16 Median Number of Waterfront Household Recreation Days .................... 22
Table 2-17 Median Number of Guest-Days per Household by Month ........................ 23
Table 2-18 Business and Organization Daily Recreation Use by Season and Type
of Day ......................................................................................................... 25
Table 2-19 Historic Monthly Precipitation Data .......................................................... 27
Table 4-1 Recreational User Age Distribution (in %) ...............................................33
Table 4-2 Recreational User Gender (in %) ............................................................. .33
Table 4-3 Place of Residence for Public Access Recreation Area Users .................. .34
Table 4-4 Overnight Stay Location Based on Responses to the Visitor Use
Survey ....................................................................................................... .34
Table 4-5 High Rock Reservoir Public Access Recreation Area Facilities .............. .37
Table 4-6 High Rock Reservoir Private Recreation Facilities ...................................40
Table 4-7 High Rock Resident and Visitor Recreational Activities (percent of
total recreation days) ..................................................................................41
Table 4-8 High Rock Public Access Recreation Participation Rate ..........................43
Table 4-9 High Rock Public Access Recreational Use by Site and Month (in
recreation days) .......................................................................................... 44
Table 4-10 Waterfront Resident and Guest Recreational Use by Month (in
recreation days) .......................................................................................... 45
Table 4-11 High Rock Reservoir Commercial and Organizational Recreation Use
(in recreation days) .................................................................................... 46
Table 4-12 Estimated Annual High Rock Reservoir Recreation Use (in recreation
days) ........................................................................................................... 47
Table 4-13 High Rock Public Access Recreation Sites Parking Capacity ................... 50
Table 4-14 High Rock Public Access Recreation Area Boat Launch Capacity ........... 51
Table 4-15 Potential Recreational Issues at High Rock Reservoir .............................. 52
Table 4-16 Tuckertown Reservoir Public Access Recreation Area Facilities ............. 59
Table 4-17 Tuckertown Reservoir Private Recreational Facilities .............................. 60
ERM iv Recreational (Ise Assessment
October 2005
Table 4-18 Tuckertown Public Access Recreation Participation Rate .........................63
Table 4-19 Tuckertown Public Access Recreation Use by Site and Month (in
recreation days) ..........................................................................................64
Table 4-20 Estimated Annual Tuckertown Reservoir Recreation Use (in recreation
days) ...........................................................................................................65
Table 4-21 Tuckertown Public Access Recreation Sites Parking Capacity .................67
Table 4-22 Tuckertown Public Access Recreation Area Boat Launch Capacity ....... .. 68
Table 4-23 Potential Recreational Issues at Tuckertown Reservoir .............................69
Table 4-24 Narrows Reservoir Public Access Area Recreation Facilities ...................75
Table 4-25 Narrows Reservoir Private Recreational Facilities ....................................76
Table 4-26 Narrows Resident and Visitor Recreational Activities (percent of total
recreation days) ........................................................................................ ..77
Table 4-27 Narrows Public Access Recreation Participation Rates ........................... ..78
Table 4-28 Narrows Public Access Recreational Use by Site and Month (in
recreation days) ........................................................................................ ..79
Table 4-29 Narrows Waterfront Resident and Guest Recreational Use by Month
(in recreation days) .................................................................................. ..80
Table 4-30 Narrows Reservoir Business and Organization Recreational Use (in
recreation days) ........................................................................................ ..81
Table 4-31 Estimated Annual Narrows Reservoir Recreation Use (in recreation
days) ......................................................................................................... ..82
Table 4-32 Narrows Public Access Recreation Sites Parking Capacity .................... ..84
Table 4-33 Narrows Public Access Recreation Area Boat Launch Capacity ............ ..85
Table 4-34 Potential Recreational Issues at Narrows Reservoir ................................ ..89
Table 4-35 Falls Reservoir Public Access Area Recreation Facilities ....................... ..94
Table 4-36 Falls Public Access Recreation Participation Rates ................................. ..96
Table 4-37 Falls Public Access Recreational Use by Site and Month (in recreation
days) ......................................................................................................... ..97
Table 4-38 Estimated Annual Falls Reservoir Recreation Use (in recreation days) .. .. 97
Table 4-39 Potential Issues at Falls Reservoir ........................................................... 100
Table 4-40 Total Project Recreational Use (in recreation days) ................................ 101
Table 4-41 Summary of Historical Annual Recreational Use at the Yadkin Project
(in recreation days) .................................................................................. 102
Table 4-42 Comparison of Public Access Recreational Area Use Estimates (in
recreation days) ........................................................................................ 102
Table 4-43 Comparison of Factors Used in Estimating Recreational Use ................. 103
Table 4-44 Comparison of Number of Spot Counts ................................................... 103
Table 4-45 Comparison of NCWRC Spot Counts with 1997 and 2004 Recreation
Study Spot Counts ................................................................................... 104
Table 4-46 Comparison of Recreational Use Estimates Based on USFS Revenues
and the APGI Survey ............................................................................... 105
Table 4-47 Comparison of Resident Recreational Use Estimates (in recreation
days) ......................................................................................................... 105
Table 4-48 Median Annual Number of Resident Recreation Days per Household ... 107
Table 5-1 Useable Water Surface Area ...................................................................1 10
ERM v Recreational Use Assessment
October 2005
Table 5-2 Watercraft Use Factor .............................................................................. 110
Table 5-3 Watercraft Mix by Reservoir ................................................................... 110
Table 5-4 Project Physical Carrying Capacity by Reservoir .................................... 110
Table 5-5 Survey Responses on Crowding on High Rock Reservoir ...................... 112
Table 5-6 Survey Responses for Crowding on High Rock Reservoir by Season .... 112
Table 5-7 Survey Responses on "Too Many Watercraft on High Rock Reservoir" 112
Table 5-8 Survey Responses for Crowding at High Rock Boat Launches .............. 114
Table 5-9 Survey Responses for "Too Many People along the Shoreline at High
Rock Reservoir" ....................................................................................... 114
Table 5-10 Survey Responses for Crowding on Tuckertown Reservoir .................... 115
Table 5-11 Survey Responses for "Too Many Watercraft on Tuckertown
Reservoir" ................................................................................................ 115
Table 5-12 Survey Responses for Crowding at Tuckertown Boat Launches ............. 117
Table 5-13 Survey Responses for "Too Many People along the Shoreline at
Tuckertown Reservoir" ............................................................................ 117
Table 5-14 Survey Responses for Crowding at Narrows Reservoir .......................... 118
Table 5-15 Survey Responses for Crowding on Narrows Reservoir by Season........ 118
Table 5-16 Survey Responses for "Too Many Watercraft on Narrows Reservoir"... 120
Table 5-17 Survey Responses for Crowding at Narrows Reservoir Boat Launches.. 120
Table 5-18 Survey Responses for "Too Many People along the Shoreline at Narrows
Reservoir" ................................................................................................ 120
Table 5-19 Survey Responses for Crowding at Falls Reservoir ................................ 121
Table 5-20 Survey Responses for "Too Many Watercraft on Falls Reservoir .......... 121
Table 5-21 Survey Responses for "Too Many People along the Shoreline at Falls
Reservoir" ................................................................................................ 123
Table 5-22 Population Projections for Counties within the Project Area .................. 127
Table 5-23 NCSCORP Ranking of Outdoor Recreational Activities ........................ 128
Table 5-24 Projected Indexes of Change in Recreation Days and Participation ....... 130
Table 5-25 Comparison of Estimated Future BAOT with Reservoir Carrying
Capacity ................................................................................................... 131
Table 6-1 Uwharrie National Forest Recreational Experience ................................ 133
Table 6-2 Crowding Responses Relative to Boating ................................................ 134
Table 6-3 Crowding Responses Relative to Camping .............................................. 134
Table 7-1 Tailwater Recreation Participation Rates ................................................. 147
Table 7-2 Primary Tailwater Recreation Activity by Reservoir .............................. 147
Table 7-3 Potential Tailwater Recreational Issues ................................................... 150
Table 7-4 TUS Responses to Whether Project Operations Affect Recreation ......... 152
Table 8-1 Comparison of Public Boat Access Area Facilities ................................. 156
Table 8-2 Comparison of Other Public Access Area Facilities ................................ 157
ERM vi Recreational Use Assessment
October 2005
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 2-1 Canoe/Kayak Registry Photographs ..........................................................12
Figure 2-2 Historic Monthly Precipitation ..................................................................28
Figure 2-3 High Rock Reservoir Water Surface Elevation .........................................30
Figure 2-4 Narrows Reservoir Water Surface Elevation .............................................31
Figure 4-1 High Rock Headwater Elevation: May 10, 2003 to May 9, 2004 .............. 36
Figure 4-2 High Rock Reservoir Public Access Recreation Areas Map ..................... 38
Figure 4-3 Representative High Rock Dam Portage Trail Photographs ...................... 42
Figure 4-4 High Rock Reservoir Water Level vs RUS "Low Water" Rating ............. 54
Figure 4-5 Tuckertown Headwater Elevation: May 10, 2003 to May 9, 2004............ 57
Figure 4-6 Tuckertown Reservoir Public Access Recreation Areas Map ................... 58
Figure 4-7 Representative Photographs of the Tuckertown Dam Portage Trail ......... 61
Figure 4-8 High Rock Dam Tailrace Litter and Trash Photographs ........................... 71
Figure 4-9 Narrows Headwater Elevation: May 10, 2003 to May 9, 2004 ................. 73
Figure 4-10 Narrows Reservoir Public Access Recreation Areas Map ......................... 74
Figure 4-11 Narrows Reservoir Water Level vs RUS "Low Water" Rating ................. 87
Figure 4-12 Falls Headwater Elevation: May 10, 2003 to May 9, 2004 ....................... 92
Figure 4-13 Falls Reservoir Public Access Recreation Areas Map ............................... 93
Figure 7-1 High Rock Dam Photographs ..................................................................137
Figure 7-2 High Rock Tailwater Photographs .......................................................... .138
Figure 7-3 High Rock Tailwater Shoreline Photographs ......................................... .139
Figure 7-4 Tuckertown Dam Photographs ............................................................... .141
Figure 7-5 Narrows Dam and Powerhouse Photographs .......................................... .142
Figure 7-6 Narrows Tailwaters Photographs ............................................................ .143
Figure 7-7 Falls Dam Photographs ........................................................................... .145
Figure 7-8 Falls Tailwater Photographs ................................................................... .146
LIST OF APPENDICES
A Spot Count Form
B Survey Technician Instruction Form
C Visitor Use Survey
D Tailwater Use Survey
E Tailwater Use Survey Instructions
F Canoe Registry
G Resident Use Survey Cover Letter and Survey From
H Private Community Use Survey Cover Letter and Survey From
I Business and Organization Phone Survey
J Uwharrie National Forest Recreation Survey
K Public Access Recreation Area Descriptions and Visitor Use Survey Responses
ERM vii Recreational Use Assessment
October 2005
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Yadkin Hydroelectric Project consists of four developments (High Rock,
Tuckertown, Narrows, and Falls) located along the Yadkin River in central North
Carolina. Alcoa Power Generating Inc. (APGI) is the licensee for the Project. The
Project is currently licensed by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC No.
2197) and the existing license expires on April 30, 2008. As part of the relicensing
process, APGI must assess the effects of the Project on a variety of resources, including
recreation. This study provides baseline information on recreational use, activities,
facilities, and issues.
Recreational data was collected over a one-year period (May 10, 2003 to May 9, 2004)
using a variety of survey instruments including:
• 7,052 Spot Counts
• 966 Visitor Use Surveys,
• 186 Tailwater Use Surveys,
• 5 Canoe/kayak registrations,
• 1,764 Resident Use Surveys,
• 125 Private Community Use Surveys,
• 18 Commercial business and private organization phone surveys, and
• 71 Uwharrie National Forest Recreation Surveys.
All recreational use is measured in terms of recreation days. A Recreation Day is defined
as "each visit by a person to a development for recreation purposes during any portion of
a 24-hour period." In other words, any and all recreation during a 24-hour period by one
person would equal one recreation day.
Annual recreational use for the entire Yadkin Project is estimated at over 2.5 million
recreation days for the one year study period. Recreational use is not evenly distributed
among the four reservoirs, with High Rock and Narrows (Badin Lake) receiving the most
use (60 percent and 37 percent, respectively). Tuckertown Reservoir receives about 2
percent of total project recreational use, and Falls Reservoir is very lightly used (<1
percent of total project use). High Rock and Narrows reservoirs are the largest reservoirs
and both have large resident populations, which are not found at the other two reservoirs.
Waterfront residents at High Rock and Narrows reservoirs are estimated to represent
about 52 percent of the total recreation days at the Project. Non-waterfront residents (28
percent), visitors (10 percent), and commercial businesses and private organizations (9
percent) represent nearly all of the remaining use. The canoe registries that were
established at the portage trails around the four dams receive very light use (estimated at
70 recreation days per year).
The four reservoirs are primarily used for boating and fishing (both from boats and along
the shoreline), with swimming, sunbathing, picnicking, waterskiing, and camping
ERM ES_i Recreational Use Assessment
October 2005
(primarily at the Uwharrie National Forest) also popular. High Rock and Narrows
reservoirs are used for a wide variety of recreational activities. Tuckertown Reservoir is
primarily a fishing destination, while Falls Reservoir is popular for camping and fishing.
Recreational use at High Rock and Narrows reservoirs, with a large resident population
that participates in a relatively diverse set of recreational activities, primarily occurs
between Memorial Day and Labor Day, with still fairly high use during the May and
September shoulder months. These five months (May through September) represents 71
percent of the total recreation days at High Rock Reservoir and 67 percent at Narrows
Reservoir. Tuckertown and Falls Reservoirs do not have any waterfront residents with
pier permits from APGI, are smaller, and are primarily destinations for fishing and
camping. Recreational use at these reservoirs picks up earlier in the year (early April)
than at High Rock and Narrows reservoirs. Recreational use also drops off earlier at
Tuckertown and Falls reservoirs (August) than at High Rock or Narrows reservoirs.
In terms of recreational issues, some users (generally between 10 and 20 percent)
complained about the availability of sanitary facilities and the improper disposal of litter,
trash, and toilet paper at each of the four reservoirs. Low water levels was identified as a
"big" or "moderate" problem by nearly 50 percent of waterfront and non-waterfront
residents at High Rock Reservoir and approximately 40 percent at Narrows Reservoir,
but was not an issue at Tuckertown and Falls reservoirs. On a related note, about 45
percent of waterfront and non-waterfront residents at High Rock Reservoir identified
boating hazards (e.g., stumps, shallow water) as a big or moderate problem, which may
be attributed to the more significant drawdown that occurs at that reservoir. Only about
20 percent of waterfront and non-waterfront residents identified boating hazards as a big
or moderate problem at Narrows Reservoir, where the reservoir drawdown is usually
much less.
There are clear differences in opinion between waterfront residents and visitors regarding
various potential issues at High Rock and Narrows reservoirs. Residents have strong
concerns about low water levels; improper disposal of litter, trash, and toilet paper; and
boating hazards. Most visitors appear pleased with their trips to the reservoirs and raise
few concerns, other than about the availability of toilets.
Overall most respondents indicated that the recreational facilities were in at least
acceptable condition. In most cases when respondents indicated facilities were "mostly"
or "totally" inadequate, it was because the facilities (e.g., toilets) were lacking rather than
not being in good condition. APGI has conducted a separate report, Recreation Facility
Inventory and Condition Assessment, which evaluates facility condition in more detail.
Recreational facilities at the public access recreation areas were evaluated in terms of
their capacity to meet recreational demand. The number of boat launch lanes and amount
of parking generally appear adequate. Several relatively heavily used recreation areas
lacked any trash receptacles and toilets. Given the number of survey respondents who
identified lack of sanitary facilities and improper disposal of litter and trash as big or
moderate problems, additional trash receptacles and toilets are warranted. The
ERM ES-ii Recreational Use Assessment
October 2005
recreational use at some fishing access areas, however, is typically very dispersed, which
makes conveniently locating toilets and trash receptacles so they will be used very
challenging. Provision of these facilities at fishing access areas needs to be made on a
site-specific basis.
Recommendations
The following recommendations are made based on the results of this study:
• Efforts should be made to limit drawdown at High Rock Reservoir between
approximately May through September to the extent possible. The data suggest
that low water becomes a big or moderate problem at between 4 to 5 feet of
drawdown.
• Boating hazards, especially at High Rock Reservoir, may need to be better
marked to alert boaters.
• Recreation use projections indicate that the physical carrying capacity of High
Rock and Narrows reservoirs may be exceeded prior to 2030. APGI should
coordinate with the U.S. Forest Service, North Carolina Wildlife Resources
Commission, and other recreation managers at the reservoirs to determine the best
way to manage recreational growth and to avoid the safety hazards associated
with exceeding a reservoir's carrying capacity.
• Monitor parking at York Hill Boat Access, Flat Creek Fishing Access, and UNF
Cove Boat Landing to determine whether parking capacity is being sufficiently
exceeded to warrant an expansion of the parking area.
• Evaluate whether it is possible to create legal parking at several formerly used
fishing pull-off areas (i.e., Crane Creek Fishing Access, Highway 47 Fishing Pull-
off, Abbotts Creek/NC 8 Bridge Pull-off, and Lick Creek Fishing Pull-off) that
are no longer used because of the lack of legal parking or evaluate whether fishing
access should be provided at other locations on the reservoir.
• Improve collection of trash and litter at public fishing access areas
• Provide additional toilets and trash receptacles at several public access recreation
areas.
ERM ES-iii Recreational Use Assessment
October 2005
1.0 INTRODUCTION
The Yadkin Hydroelectric Project (Project) is located along a 38-mile stretch of the
Yadkin River, in Montgomery, Stanly, Davidson, Davie, and Rowan Counties, North
Carolina. The Project consists of four developments: High Rock, Tuckertown, Narrows,
and Falls. Alcoa Power Generating Inc. (APGI) is the licensee for the Yadkin
Hydroelectric Project. The Project is currently licensed by the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission (FERC) as Project No. 2197 and the existing license expires on
April 30, 2008. Presently, the electricity generated by Alcoa's hydroelectric operations is
used to support Alcoa's other operations at Badin Works and Alcoa's aluminum
operations in other locations, and is also sold to the open market.
The Project lands and waters are used extensively for recreation. The four Project
reservoirs can be accessed five different ways:
• 40 public access recreation areas;
• 4 canoe portage trails;
• 3,729 waterfront residences with piers (as of May 2003);
• Approximately 7,471 non-waterfront residences within private waterfront
communities (as of June 2003); and
• 33 commercial businesses and private organizations.
The purpose of this recreation use assessment is to collect, analyze, and provide
information regarding recreational use of the Yadkin Project as part of the Project's
relicensing process. The specific objectives of the study are summarized below.
1. Collect and analyze sufficient information to make statistically sound estimates of the
following aspects of recreational use at the Yadkin Project:
• Total annual recreation use under varying water levels at each of the four
Project reservoirs;
• Total annual daytime and nighttime use at each of the four Project reservoirs;
• Peak use weekend average recreation use;
• Total annual recreation use at the Yadkin Project by recreational activity type
(e.g. boating, fishing, camping, hiking, swimming, picnicking, etc.);
• Effects of varying water levels on amount and type of recreational use and
recreational safety (e.g., boating hazards);
• Percent utilization of each individual public access recreation area expressed
as percent capacity; and
• Recreational user profile information.
ERM 1 Recreational Use Assessment
October 2005
2. Assess the effects of the Yadkin Project on recreation in the tailwaters of the four
dams that comprise the Project, including the following information needs/issues:
• Characterize existing recreational use within the Project tailwaters;
• Evaluate vehicular, pedestrian, and disabled access to the tailwater areas;
• Evaluate canoe/kayak portage conditions and opportunities;
• Evaluate effects of flow rates, timing, and water quality on
boating/angling/other tailwater recreational uses; and
• Evaluate recreational safety issues such as physical hazards, effects of Project
operations on water currents and depths, and access to tailwater areas.
3. Evaluate the recreational carrying capacity of the Yadkin Project, including the
following aspects:
• Estimate the physical (safety) and social carrying capacities of each of the
four reservoirs, while also noting environmental effects related to recreational
use;
• Identify traditional recreational uses of the Project area; and
• Estimate future recreational use of the Project area.
ERM 2 Recreational Use Assessment
October 2005
2.0 METHODOLOGY
This section describes the methodologies used to collect and analyze recreation use data.
2.1 Data Collection
A variety of data collection measures were used to obtain information regarding
recreational use of the Project area. These measures were designed to collect information
on recreational use for each of the five ways to access the Project reservoirs:
Public Access Recreation Areas
• Spot Counts, which were made at the 40 public access recreation areas;
• Visitor Use Survey, which was administered at the 40 public access recreation
areas; and
• Tailwater Use Survey, which was administered at the tailwaters of the four
Project dams.
Canoe Portages
• Canoe/kayak registry installed at the four canoe portages.
Waterfront Residences
• Resident Use Survey, which was mailed to every waterfront residence with a pier
permit from APGI.
Private Waterfront Communities
• Private Communities Use Survey, which was mailed to a random sample of 1,568
residences in private communities with direct access to a Project reservoir.
Commercial Businesses and Organizations
• Commercial business and private organization phone survey of every business,
organization, and club with direct access to a Project reservoir.
Table 2-1 provides a summary of the methods used to collect recreational data at the
Yadkin Project.
All recreational use is measured in terms of recreation days. A Recreation Day is defined
by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) as "each visit by a person to a
development for recreation purposes during any portion of a 24-hour period." In other
words, any and all recreation during a 24-hour period by one person would equal one
recreation day.
ERM 3 Recreational Use Assessment
October 2005
0
.C i
d
O
U
O
V
ce
A
0
rro^
V/
N
H
a?
V.
,? - o o Q Q o o Q o
? ? z z ? ? z

o>
Ua
c °

V o
\

_'
o
z C N
C D

-'T

N In

In o

N
rte- ?
as
d A N kn

.O
p
?O 00
v-i
N oo

z 9
_ M 'C y

o y
C
o O
o?? C
3 C
3 N
U ?n
u M cC O
l
C
o
+V+ w ? U 0 7 ? C N N ? C ? N ?

?
VJ O M "' L C. O L

A w
C
O
V
O
T
a?
T
N
?
U

ca U

m C s>. a>.,
L
>
7
U
cC
i.
.7 O C C U C
? 7
? ?' q
V1
, C.
?n O
U O
U irf 44
U -?4
U V
C O
U
w
O V y aU+ Y ?
p C
? cC
..o ° N
T
d
CS. ? ,N V N V
i > .N
biO O
•?
'? ry
V •? a
i
>
o :3
O O C
O N
w
V U 2 C13
? C Y N
• '"
CZ
N N (? ..' N C .II C
ti y
o N VI
o U WJ N E
E C vi
N o
3 Z
V U •- L ° C O
C
N
L
U U
s
w 3
a) cq
.
aQ aQ E-a U 3 a 3 WO C4a

T O • pip O T a?i _

U ? T
C C N r p N N •? z y>,
:3
c 0
C > ca
N
VJ
'.7

L U C N

3 >

O
U N 7
CA
cC N•
r-
m `
co
y ° 'V1 L c VI > N 'fn oA
cn > HC/I U Qc a? C0 ?c°
h

i
?" N DJ
. U
?
C y ?

3 ?
o
?

u
kn
v d.
o ?
? y II
N L
oc
O ? T
N ,? N

U ? O

O " C
? O

a

¢
0 N U

f0
3 0
? N
N V
bA j V
n. 3
> [ l
o c?

L
'D 3.L
o.

v?
T V
U a?
y cd O C
C cd N
U ° cd U
y C
N
7
Cl. L
? ? 'C
y y
Cl
tU

d'

O? .

rn
0
iC
, C
1
O
L
N tzi C CN
N
? w
U

CL O

W
1
3 0
cd o C
w
O
C
w) O O L
M y N O

'v o o [
oo
a > H
r-
O o
C
N
L
°
(1) ? E

O 0, O

N C
O ?
U C
:3 N F
L

y
cqj
Q ? ?
3 w
2.1.1 Spot Counts
Spot counts were conducted at 40 public access recreation areas throughout the study period
(May 10, 2003 to May 9, 2004). Sampling dates were selected using a stratified random
sampling methodology, and all calendar days were stratified by holiday weekends (Memorial
Day, 4`h of July, and Labor Day), normal weekends, and weekdays for each month to ensure
adequate representation of all months and peak and off-peak use periods. Each public access
recreation area was sampled approximately 62 days over the year with the following frequency:
3 weekend days and 3 weekdays a month during April, May, June, July, August, September, and
October (including Memorial Day, 4th of July, and Labor Day peak weekends); and 2 weekend
days and 2 weekdays a month during the rest of the year. Table 2-2 lists the Spot Counts by
month and type of day (i.e., weekends, weekdays, holidays). Overall, spot counts were
conducted at some Yadkin public access recreation area on 282 days during the study period
(77% of 366 days in the year).
Table 2-2 Spot Counts by Month and Type of Day
M
nth Number of Day Number of Spot Counts
o Surveyed Weekend Weekday Holiday To
May 27 of 31 285 387 167 839
June 22 of 30 339 363 0 702
Jul 27 of 31 255 402 99 756
August 27 of 31 260 348 57 665
September 24 of 30 256 350 74 680
October 25 of 31 326 350 0 676
November 22 of 30 233 120 0 353
December 20 of 31 135 165 0 300
January 21 of 31 174 249 0 423
February 20 of 29 220 205 0 425
March 20 of 31 291 240 0 531
April 27 of 30 381 321 0 702
Total 282 3,155 3,500 397 7,052
Percent of Total 77% 45% 50% 5% 100%
During each sampling day, staff visited the randomly selected areas (usually between 5 and 20 of
the 40 potential areas) three times (early in the morning, mid-day, and late afternoon/evening) to
determine total daily recreational use and better estimate the turnover rate. Therefore,
approximately 186 spot counts were conducted at each of the 40 public access recreation areas
during the study period. In some cases, bad weather or vehicular problems resulted in fewer
observations. A few areas were surveyed less frequently because of low use and remoteness
(e.g., Highway 601 Access Area and Rowan County Pump Station). A total of 7,052 Spot
Counts were conducted (Table 2-3).
ERM 5 Recreational Use Assessment
October 2005
Table 2-3 Number of Spot Counts at Each Public Access Recreation Area

Site # APGI
Site. Code
#

Reservoir

Location

Sot Counts
1 H1 High Rock Highway 601 Access Area 165
2 H3 High Rock Rowan County Pump Sta. 165
3 H8 High Rock York Hill Boat Access 165
4 H16 High Rock Crane Creek Fishing Access 165
5 H19 High Rock Little Crane Creek Fishing Access 165
7 H28 High Rock Southmont Boat Access 189
8 H31 High Rock High Rock Marina/Cam round 186
9 H36 High Rock Highway 47 Fishing Pull-off 183
10 H39 High Rock Buddle Creek Boat Access 189
12 H44 High Rock Abbots Creek/NC 8 Bridge Pull-off 189
13 H47 High Rock Tamarac Marina 171
14 H48 High Rock Dutch Second Creek Boat Access 171
15 H64 High Rock Flat Swam Boat Access 189
HIGH ROCK SUBTOTAL 2,292
17 T1 Tuckertown High Rock Dam Picnic and Fishing Access 163
18 T2 Tuckertown High Rock Dam Tailrace 163
19 T3 Tuckertown Brin le Ferry Boat Access 170
20 T4 Tuckertown Cedar Creek Fishing Pull-off 163
21 T6 Tuckertown Lick Creek Fishing Pull-off 163
22 T8 Tuckertown Flat Creek Boat Access 164
23 T9 Tuckertown Flat Creek Fishing Access 164
24 T10 Tuckertown Newsome Road Access 163
25 T12 Tuckertown Riles Creek Recreation Area 163
26 T14 Tuckertown Highway 49 Boat Access 181
27 T15 Tuckertown Tuckertown Pull-off Fishing Access 174
TUCKERTOWN SUBTOTAL 1,831
29 N1 Narrows Tuckertown Dam Tailrace 171
30 N2 Narrows Garr Creek Access 181
32/33 N5/6 Narrows Old Whitney 197
34/35 N9/10 Narrows Lake Forest CG/Fish Tales Marina 198
37 N13 Narrows Circle Drive Boat Access 180
38 N16 Narrows Lakemont Access 180
39 N24 Narrows UNF Holt's Cabin Picnic Area 195
40 N25 Narrows L1NF Walk-in Fishing Pier 185
41 N26 Narrows UNF Badin Lake Campground 185
42 N27 Narrows UNF Cove Boat Landing 183
43 N28 Narrows Palmerville Access 181
44 N29 Narrows Badin Lake Swim/Picnic Area 181
45 N30 Narrows Badin Boat Access 176
47 N36 Narrows Badin Lake Group Cam 167
NARROWS SUBTOTAL 2,560
48 F1 Falls LTNF Dee Water Trail Access 188
49 F2 Falls Falls Boat Access 181
FALLS SUBTOTAL 369
GRAND TOTAL 7,052
ERM
Recreational Use Assessment
October 2005
At the public access recreation areas, the number of vehicles, boat trailers, personal watercraft
trailers, mounted roof-top carriers for canoes or kayaks (not including roof-top carriers that come
with vehicles), campers, anglers, swimmers, picnickers, and other recreation users were
recorded. Any capacity issues were noted. A standardized data collection form was used to
ensure completeness of the spot counts and to facilitate data entry into the electronic database
(see Appendix A). Appendix B includes the survey technician instruction sheet for the Spot
Counts and Visitor Use Survey.
2.1.2 Visitor Use Surveys
The purpose of the Visitor Use Survey (VUS) was to obtain information on recreational "visitor"
characteristics, activities, concerns, and overall recreational experience. Although referred to as
a Visitor Use Survey, this survey was intended to survey all users of the public access recreation
areas, including non-locals (tourists), local residents who do not own waterfront property, and
even some waterfront property owners who occasionally use the public access recreation areas
for various reasons (e.g., to put their boats in or take their boats out of the reservoir at the
beginning and end of the recreation season).
This contact survey was administered on-site by trained survey technicians at the same 40 public
access recreation areas where the Spot Counts were conducted. Sampling occurred on the
stratified random sampling days selected for the Spot Counts. After completing the Spot Counts
at each public access recreation area, the survey technicians asked visitors to participate in the
VUS. The surveys were self-administered (i.e., the recreational user filled out the survey
themselves rather than responding to questions by the survey technician). Only one person per
group was given the survey to avoid group bias and only adults (i.e., over 16 years of age) were
asked to complete the survey. The survey was not given to visitors just arriving at the site
because several questions on the survey asked about their experience at the site. Appendix B
includes the survey technician instruction sheet for the Spot Counts and VUS.
A standardized survey form was developed and used (see Appendix C). The VUS was also
available in Spanish because there is a significant Hispanic population that uses the reservoirs
(see Appendix C). The survey form included questions related to user profile and expenditure
information, such as: length of stay, types of recreational activities, party size, adequacy of
recreation facilities, degree of crowding, conflicts with other recreational users, changes in their
visitation frequency to the Yadkin Project over time, and recreation-related expenditures made
on their current trip (e.g., food, lodging, supplies, equipment, entertainment, fuel).
ERM 7 Recreational Use Assessment
October 2005
It was common to observe few people at many of the public access recreation areas for several
reasons:
• Many sites receive very little use, especially during the low use season;
• Many fishing access sites only receive significant use in the spring;
• Anglers were often widely dispersed along the shoreline and sometimes difficult to find
in order to survey; and
• Watercraft users (motor boaters, boat anglers, personal watercraft users, sailors,
windsurfers, water-skiers, canoe i st/kayakers) were usually recreating on the reservoir and
often were difficult to survey.
The majority of the surveys were collected between May and August. A total of 966 VUS were
completed. Ten percent of surveys were collected during holiday periods, 56 percent on
weekend days, and 34 percent on weekdays (Table 2-4).
Table 2-4 Number of Visitor Use Surveys by Month and Day of Week
Month Sun. Mon. Tues. Weds. Thurs. Fria Sat. Holiday Total'??,
May 12 10 12 20 9 15 25 44 147
June 89 15 12 24 19 27 72 NA 258
Jul 49 12 21 20 14 20 67 44 247
August 33 7 1 3 3 18 30 10 105
September 13 7 0 3 2 2 23 2 52
October 11 3 1 0 0 4 15 NA 34
November 10 0 0 1 0 1 4 NA 16
December 2 0 2 0 0 0 2 NA 6
January 1 0 0 0 0 0 3 NA 4
February 2 0 1 0 1 1 1 NA 6
March 22 0 1 0 2 0 5 NA 30
Aril 6 2 6 0 6 2 39 NA 61
Total 250 56 57 71 56 90 286 100 966
NA = Not Applicable
Visitor Use Surveys were collected at each of the four reservoirs as follows:
• High Rock Reservoir - 39 percent
• Tuckertown Reservoir - 23 percent
• Narrows Reservoir- 35 percent
• Falls Reservoir- 2 percent
Table 2-5 lists the number of VUSs collected at each public access recreation area.
ERM 8 Recreational Use Assessment
October 2005
•,r^
Vl
Y
?i
a>
L
u
u
.a
C
CC
L_
•O
L
u
Nu
W
L
y
L
W
L
6>
7
z
N
C?
- ,m„ c, - =°e N = N a N - - - °` oo v v y e _ v a m m i m
j

O l t l

F -
?o -
u
Q

-1 4 1 -1 I L L I d - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - r -

¢
H

v O
O
Q Q
C
v q N ? c U
H Q ? .. a
?
.a
¢
?
v
c
v
¢ n N Q r m w' ¢ m m° ? ? c ° y- ¢ u s ` w E `- ` R ¢
n ¢ U v ? a r A ` u
< Q
'° ¢ ¢ ~ U ? U F" o
Q ¢ r n ? N o
fA c U i° e e aq 'L" c
z z '? v
? " ?
- $ - u ii
Cam! o v a N
ti x .
W u o' Y m '"
C b C m y C p Q Q w Ix y 4 ? ¢ my , y y ¢ w
. y
v
v
E
°'
A. Q v v ¢
Q 3 3' U E oG ; t V i '
?2 y. a U U U U o u 3 m a c v 3 LL 0 2 3 m U ? .-7 m .> ;
s 3 -? z
lmi v a E t i
v .
". oo .? v j " - v v t .a 1 11 w w w w E o o v w ,
= a ? ? ? ?
?
x
m'
¢
H
C'a
?
?
x
z
w`
?
?
?
z
a
'z
=
?
?
F
G
O
U
»
z
c
m
m
m
n
?
?5
2
?z
3
u V
?_G z° z ? z ac
' d a a
°' a a a ? d Z v d a v v v v v v v v v `w i o i ? s Y 5 ? ? Y 3 ? o
e t t c _ ? v r
f- F F N F- F F? F- F- F F- ? Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z 2, li t? ?Qi, O
y - - - - - - - - - z -
fi h
? O
O
N N
h ?
? O
U
h
a
a
U
N
cl?
ON
L1a
2.1.3 Tailwater Use Survey
The purpose of the Tailwater Use Survey (TUS) was to obtain information on user
characteristics, activities, concerns, and overall recreational experience in the tailwaters of the
four dams. Tailwater areas are typically popular fishing areas and may have different user issues
and concerns than the reservoirs. Therefore a survey form was developed that was nearly
identical to the VUS, but had several additional questions that were tailored to tailwater
recreation areas (see Appendix D). The TUS was also available in Spanish because there is a
significant Hispanic population that uses the tailwaters (see Appendix D).
The TUS was conducted two ways. The survey technicians distributed the survey to and
collected the survey from tailwater users along the shoreline using the same procedures as for the
VUS (see Section 2.1.2 above). In addition, the survey was distributed to approximately 89
boaters in the tailwaters by APGI's fisheries consultant (Normandeau Associates or NAI) during
their fieldwork so that both boaters as well as onshore recreational users were surveyed.
Appendix E includes the TUS instructions provided to NAI. Boaters were asked to mail back the
surveys, which were pre-addressed and stamped. Approximately 57 percent of the surveys that
were distributed to boaters were returned.
A total of 186 TUS were collected. Six of the mail back boater surveys did not respond for a
single tailwater, but indicated that they use multiple dam tailwaters. The total number of
responses received was 199. Table 2-6 indicates the number of surveys collected on shore and
by boat at each tailwater.
Table 2-6 Tailwater Use Survey by Location
Location # of On-Shore
Surveys Collected # of Boater
Surveys Collected Total # of Surveys
Collected
High Rock Dam Tailwater 69 8 77
Tuckertown Dam Tailwater 71 16 87
Narrows Dam Tailwater 3 14 17
Falls Dam Tailwater 0 18 18
Total 143 56 199
Data used to describe tailwater physical conditions were gathered from field observation and
inspection at a range of discharges.
ERM 10 Recreational Use Assessment
October 2005
2.1.4 Canoe/Kayak Registry
The purpose of the canoe/kayak registry was to estimate the number of paddlers using the
portage trails around the four dams. Recognizing that the chances of encountering a paddler on
the portage trail were very low and there was not a surrogate measure of use (e.g., counting the
number of vehicles at public access recreation areas), a weather-protected sign and registry form
was used in lieu of conducting spot counts at the canoe portage trails at each of the four dams.
Signs were posted at prominent locations near each take-out requesting all paddlers to sign the
registry (Figure 2-1). Paddlers were asked to register the date, time, number in their party, and to
rate the level of difficulty of the portage (Appendix F). There was also space provided for any
additional comments. These registries were checked periodically (approximately every 2 weeks)
to insure the registries were in good condition and to tally the number of users.
A total of 5 groups signed the registries - three using the High Rock Dam portage and two using
the Narrows Dam portage.
2.1.5 Resident Use Survey
The purpose of the Resident Use Survey (RUS) was to obtain information on waterfront resident
recreational use characteristics, activities, concerns, and overall recreational experience. A non-
contact mail-back survey was developed and sent to 3,729 waterfront residents with APGI pier
permits on High Rock and Narrows reservoirs. Although there are adjacent property owners on
Tuckertown Reservoir, there are no private recreational facilities (e.g., piers) allowed, so for
purposes of this study it was assumed that there were no waterfront property owners on
Tuckertown Reservoir. There are no waterfront property owners on Falls reservoirs. A cover
letter was sent with each survey explaining the purpose of the survey (see Appendix G). The
surveys were distributed 9 times (once a month for the period of March through October and
once for the collective period of November through February). Each residence was randomly
selected to receive one of the 9 mailings requesting information on their recreational use of the
reservoirs over the prior month.
A standardized survey form was used (see Appendix G). The survey form included questions
related to: household size, approximately how many days a year they reside at their waterfront
residence, frequency of recreational use for each recreational activity by season, number of
guests who also recreated at Yadkin reservoirs, average amount of time spent recreating per
outing, adequacy of recreation facilities, degree of crowding, conflicts with other recreational
users, changes in their visitation frequency to the Yadkin Project over time, recreation-related
expenditures for a typical day of recreation, and questions regarding Project area aesthetics.
Table 2-7 lists the responses to the mail back survey. The overall response rate was 47 percent,
which is excellent for a mail back survey. This response rate enables a 98 percent confidence
level with these data. A few surveys (30) were returned by the post office as undeliverable
because of incorrect address. Some surveys (23) were returned by the residents, but none of the
survey questions were answered. Finally, some surveys were returned partially complete, but the
resident did not answer the question as to which reservoir they lived on, so these responses could
not be attributed to a specific reservoir and were not included in the data analysis.
ERM ] ] Recreational Use Assessmen!
October 2005
Yadkin Hydroelectric Project
Project No. 2197
F
Aographs
Photo 1: Canoe Registry Notice and
Box
Photo 2: Canoe Regestry as seen
from the canoe take-out at High
Rock Dam.
ERM
Recreational Use Assessment
October 2005
Table 2-7 Waterfront Resident Use Survey Responses
Reservoir Surveys Surveys Surveys Returned Surveys Surveys ;
Mailed Returned Returned Unknown Returned Not
Complete Incomplete Reservoir Undeliverable Returned
High Rock 2,722 1,243 NA NA NA NA
47%
Narrows 1,007 521 NA NA NA NA
52%
Total 3,729 1,764 23 39 30 1,872
100%
47%
1% %
1%
1%
50%
NA = Not available
The response rate for each mailing was good and ranged from a high of 60 percent for
High Rock Reservoir in June and 60 percent for Narrows Reservoir in September to a
low of 35 percent for High Rock Reservoir in May and 39 percent for Narrows Reservoir
in April. Table 2-8 lists the response rate for each reservoir for each month.
Table 2-8 Waterfront Resident Use Survey Response Rate by Month
Month High Rock Reservoir Narrows: Reservoir
# o Responses Response Rate #' o -Res ones Response Rate
May 105 35% 65 59%
June 179 60% 61 55%
Jul 125 42% 57 51%
August 135 45% 60 54%
September 142 47% 67 60%
October 139 46% 57 51%
Nov, Dec, Jan, Feb 159 49% 65 54%
March 126 42% 57 51%
April 122 41% 43 39%
Total 1,243 47% 521 52%
2.1.6 Private Communities Use Survey
The purpose of the Private Communities Use Survey (PCUS) was to collect information
regarding recreational use by non-waterfront residents of private communities with
access to Yadkin reservoirs via private community boat launches, marinas, or piers.
Based on a search of tax records in Davidson, Rowan, and Montgomery counties by
APGI, it is estimated that there are approximately 4,976 parcels in private communities
with access to High Rock Reservoir and 5,479 parcels in private communities with access
to Narrows Reservoir. There are no private communities with access to Tuckertown or
Falls reservoirs. These estimates of parcels include both waterfront and non-waterfront
parcels. Information is not readily available on the number of these parcels that are
improved (i.e., a residence has been constructed versus simply an undeveloped lot) or
how many of the parcels are waterfront.
ERM 13 Recreational Use Assessment
October 2005
For purposes of this analysis, it was assumed that approximately 80 percent of High Rock
waterfront residences with pier permits from APGI (2,722 waterfront residences x 80
percent = 2,178 waterfront residences) and 80 percent of Narrows waterfront residents
with pier permits from APGI (1,007 waterfront residences x 80 percent = 806 waterfront
residences) are located within these private communities. Subtracting the number of
waterfront residences in these private communities from the total number of residences
leaves the number of non-waterfront residences as follows:
# of Private Community parcels
# of Waterfront residences
# of Non-Waterfront residences
High Rock Narrows
4,976 5,479
-2,178 -806
2,798 4,673
A mail back survey was conducted of a stratified random sample of 1,568 residents
within private communities with boat launches using a mailing list provided by APGI.
Property owners received one of four equal mailings (392 properties per mailing)
requesting information on their recreational use of the reservoirs over the prior season, as
defined as:
• Spring - March, April, and May
• Summer - June, July, and August
• Autumn - September, October, and November
• Winter - December, January, and February.
A standardized survey form was used (see Appendix H). A cover letter was sent with
each survey explaining the purpose of the survey (see Appendix H). The survey form
was nearly identical to the RUS form and included questions related to: household size,
types of recreational activities, approximately how many days a year they reside at their
waterfront residence, frequency of recreational use for each recreational activity by
season, number of guests who also recreated at Yadkin reservoirs, average amount of
time spent recreating per outing, adequacy of recreation facilities, degree of crowding,
conflicts with other recreational users, changes in their visitation frequency to the Yadkin
Project over time, recreation-related expenditures for a typical day of recreation, and
questions regarding Project area aesthetics.
There were 446 responses received for this survey, or a 28 percent response rate.
However, many of these responses (321) either indicated that they owned waterfront
property or did not indicate whether they owned waterfront property. It was not possible
to determine prior to the mailing which properties were waterfront properties, which were
already included in the Resident Use Survey. Therefore the survey asked whether the
respondent was a waterfront property owner. Those responses indicating they were
waterfront property owners and those that did not indicate whether they were waterfront
owners were not included in this analysis because this survey focused on non-waterfront
property owners. Table 2-9 lists the non-waterfront responses to the mail back survey.
The overall non-waterfront response rate was 2 percent. This response rate enables a 92
percent confidence level with these data.
ERM 14 Recreational Use Assessment
October 2005
Table 2-9 Private Community Resident Use Survey
Reservoir Surveys; Surveys, - Surveys_ ,,,o Returned Survey"-' Surveys
Mailed;;' Returned Returned' `""" Unknown = Returned Not
com lete lncom lete:, Reservoir Undeliverable Returned:.
High Rock NA 224 NA NA NA NA
%
Narrows NA 222 NA NA NA NA

Total 1,568 446 6 27 36 1,053
100% 28% <1% 2% 2% 67%
NA = Not available
The response rate for each mailing was good and was relatively consistent for each of the
four seasons, although the spring response was lower than the other three seasons. Table
2-10 lists the response rate for each reservoir for each month.
Table 2-10 Private Communities Use Survey Response Rate
Months High Rock Reservoir. Narrows Reservoir
No. o Res oases Res onse Rate No: o Res oases Response Rate
June, July, August 62 43% 61 25%
Sept, Oct, Nov 57 39% 69 28%
Dec, Jan, Feb 67 46% 56 23%
March, April, May 38 26% 36 15%
Total 224 39% 222 22%
2.1.7 Business and Organization Survey
The purpose of the Business and Organization Survey was to obtain information on
recreational use at commercial marinas and campgrounds and various private
organizations and clubs that have direct recreational access to a Yadkin reservoir via a
boat launch, marina, or pier. There are 35 commercial businesses and organizations with
a recreational component identified by APGI in consultation with the IAG at the Yadkin
Project, including 28 at High Rock Reservoir, 2 on Tuckertown Reservoir, and 5 on
Narrows Reservoir - there are no businesses or organizations with direct access to Falls
Reservoir. Each business and organization was contacted by telephone. Three
standardized surveys were developed - one for private organizations and clubs, one for
commercial marinas, and one for campgrounds (see Appendix I).
The surveys were conducted of the private clubs and organizations within the Project area
to collect information on the organization/club's membership, extent of annual use (e.g.,
all year, summer, hunting season), frequency of use, and type of recreational facilities
and activities at each site. A telephone survey was also conducted of the campground
and commercial facility operators within the Project area to collect information on the
number of campsites, relative number of permanent, seasonal, and occasional residents,
and recreational facilities and opportunities at the campgrounds.
ERM 15 Recreational Use Assessment
October 2005
A total of 23 businesses and organizations agreed to participate in the phone survey (see
Table 2-11). The other 12 businesses and organizations either refused to participate in
the survey or never responded to repeated messages. Surveys were completed with 47
percent of the campgrounds, 50 percent of the marinas, and 93 percent of the
organizations (Table 2-12).
Table 2-12 Commercial Business/Private Organization Survey Response Rate
Reservoir Campgrounds Marinas organizations. Total Response
Rate
# of camp-
,. grounds' - # of
responses - . # of
marinas 46f
- responses # of
or C7ni:ahons 0
res onset -
-
High Rock 14 6 2 0 12 11 17 of28 61%°
Tuckenown 2 1 0 0 0 0 1 of 2 50%
Narrows 1 1 2 2 2 2 5 of 5 100%
Total 17 8 4 2 14 13 23 of35 66%
Response
Rate 47% 50% 93%
2.1.8 Uwharrie National Forest Survey
The purpose of the Uwharrie National Forest Recreation Survey (UNFRS) was to obtain
information specific to the Uwharrie National Forest to help evaluate whether the U.S.
Forest Services' (USFS) Recreation Opportunity Spectrum (ROS) goals for the Uwharrie
National Forest are being attained. The survey asked questions regarding the type of
recreational experience, crowding, and the relative importance of the Project reservoirs to
the overall recreational experience.
A standardized survey form was used (see Appendix J). The survey technicians
distributed the survey to and collected the survey from recreational users within the
Uwharrie National Forest using the same procedures as for the VUS (see Section 2.1.2
above).
A total of 71 UNFRSs were collected. Table 2-13 lists the number of surveys collected
by month.
Table 2-13 Uwharrie National Forest Recreation Surveys by Month
Month No. of Surveys % of Total
May 13 18%
June 34 48%
Jul 24 34%
Total 71 100%
ERM 16 Recreational Use Assessment
October 2005
Table 2-11 Responses to Commercial Business and Organization Phone Survey
Reservoir Site>Name Type Responded to Phone Survey
High Rock Cicero L lerl Rental Property Campground Yes
High Rock Holshouser Property Camping Campground Yes
High Rock Donald Holshouser Camping Rentals Campground Yes
High Rock Marsh Property Rentals Campground Yes
High Rock Miller's Cove Cam ing/Rentals Campground Yes
High Rock High Rock Marina and Campground Marina/cam round Yes
High Rock Boy Scouts Camp Old Hickory and
General Green Troop Club/Organization Yes
High Rock Bo Scouts Cam Old North Council Club/Or anization Yes
High Rock Central Carolina Boat Club Club/Organization Yes
High Rock Clear Lake Water Skiers Club/Or anization Yes
High Rock Eagle Point Nature Preserve Club/Or anization Yes
High Rock High Rock Boat and Ski Club Club/Organization Yes
High Rock Piedmont Boat Club Club/Or anization Yes
High Rock Rowan County Shriners Club/Organization Yes
High Rock Rowan County Voiture No. 115 Club/Or anization Yes
High Rock Salvation Arm Club/Or anization Yes
High Rock Spencer Moose Lodge #2010 Club/Or anization Yes
High Rock Holshouser, Luther Camping Rentals Campground Closed during survey
High Rock Foster's Point Campground Campground Did not respond to hone calls
High Rock JH Poole Campground Rentals Campground Did not respond to hone calls
High Rock Boggs Camping Rentals Campground Declined to participate in survey
High Rock Kesler Cam ing/Rentals Campground Declined to participate in survey
High Rock Pops Carolina River Campground Campground Declined to participate in survey
High Rock South Yadkin Campground Campground Declined to participate in survey
High Rock Barnes Pro e Rentals Campground Unable to contact
High Rock Boat Dock Marina Marina Closed during stud period
High Rock High Rock Yacht Club Marina Did not respond to hone calls
High Rock Elks Lodge #662 Club/Or anization Did not respond to hone calls
Tuckertown HB Newsome Property Campground Yes
Tuckertown J.T. Morgan Campground Campground Declined to participate in survey
Narrows Whi -O-Will Campground Marina Campground Yes
Narrows Old North State Club Marina Marina Yes
Narrows Badin Shores Resort Marina Yes, but only open to residents
Narrows Badin Lake Ski Club Club/Or anization Yes
Narrows Cam Barnhardt Club/Organization Yes
ERM 17 Recreation! Use Assessment
October 2005
2.1.9 Aerial Photographs
Six aerial photographs of High Rock, Tuckertown, Narrows, and Falls reservoirs were
conducted on 2 holiday weekends, 2 summer weekends, and 2 summer weekdays. The
exact dates are as follows:
Holiday weekends
-4 Ih of July weekend - Friday July 4, 2003
- Labor Day weekend - Sunday August 31, 2003
Summer weekends
- Saturday June 21, 2003
- Saturday August 9, 2003
Summer weekdays
- Friday July 18, 2003
- Monday August 18, 2003
The overflights were all conducted between noon and 2 pm and were only conducted
during good weather (sunny and clear). The aerial photographs were taken at an altitude
low enough to allow the number and type of boats to be easily counted.
ERM 18 Recreational Use Assessment
October 2005
2.2 Recreational Use Data Analysis
Overall recreational use at the Yadkin Project was estimated by summing the estimates of
each of its components:
• Public Access Recreational Use
• Waterfront Resident Recreational Use
• Private Communities (non-waterfront properties) Recreational Use
• Commercial Business and Private Organization Recreational Use
• Canoe/Kayak Portage Recreational Use
Tailwater recreational use was not included in this estimate because this use is included
in the Public Access Recreational Use estimates. The canoe/kayak portage use is
included in calculating overall recreational use because these users would not necessarily
be included in any of the other estimates (e.g., they may be thru paddlers that are
beginning and ending outside of the Yadkin Project or may not be putting in or taking out
at any of the public access recreation areas.
The process used in estimating each of these components of overall recreational use is
described below.
2.2.1 Public Access Recreational Use
Recreational use at the 40 public access recreation areas was estimated using data
obtained from the Spot Counts and the Visitor Use Surveys. The following equation was
used to estimate recreational use at each public access recreation area for each month:
Recreational Use = (type of day) x (vehicles/day) x (people/vehicle) x (turnover rate)
Each of these factors is described below.
Type of Day
Table 2-14 identifies the number of each type of day per month during the study period.
ERM 19 Recreational Use Assessment
October 2005
Table 2-14 Type of Days per Month for Study Period
Month-, Weekend Da' s Weekdays. Holidays . Total : .
May 9 19 3 31
June 9 21 0 30
Jul 6 22 3 31
August 8 21 2 31
September 8 21 1 30
October 8 23 0 31
November 10 20 0 30
December 8 23 0 31
January 9 22 0 31
February 9 20 0 29
March 8 23 0 31
Aril 8 22 0 31
Total 100 257 9 366
Vehicles per Day
The number of vehicles per day was estimated based on the Spot Counts at each public
access recreation area. The spot counts were disaggregated to develop specific vehicle
per day estimates for each type of day for each month for each public access recreation
area.
People per Vehicle
The number of people per vehicle was estimated based on the responses to the VUS
question, "How many people came in your vehicle to the reservoir today?" (Appendix C -
Question 43). The average persons per vehicle was calculated for each reservoir and is
listed below:
• High Rock Reservoir - 2.40 persons per vehicle
• Tuckertown Reservoir - 2.42 persons per vehicle
• Narrows Reservoir - 2.87 persons per vehicle
• Falls Reservoir- 2.64 persons per vehicle
Some respondents indicated that as many as 161 persons came in their vehicle to the
reservoir. For purposes of calculating average persons per vehicle, only responses of less
than 8 persons per vehicle were included in the calculations.
Turnover Rate
The Spot Counts identify the number of vehicles present at a public access recreation area
at one moment in time. Three spot counts were conducted each sampling day at each
public access recreation area in order to get a better estimate of average number vehicles
at the site over a full day. In order to translate these three "spot counts" to an estimate of
ERM 20 Recreational Use Assessment
October 2005
the total number of vehicles that were present at a public access recreation area over the
course of a full day a turnover rate is applied.
The turnover rate is an estimate of the average duration of visit divided by the day length
in order to estimate how many times a day the number of vehicles "turns over". The
average duration of visit was determined from the responses to the VUS question, "How
long will you be staying at the reservoir today?" (Appendix C - Question #4). The
average duration of visit was calculated for each reservoir for each month (the months of
November to February were combined) plus holidays. Table 2-15 presents the day
length, average duration of visit, and turnover rate for each reservoir for each month.
Table 2-15 Turnover Rates
Month Day
Length: High Rock
Reservoir Tuckertown
Reservoir Narrows Reservoir Falls Reservoir
(hours)
- Average
Duration
of Visit
(hours Turhover.
Rates Average
Duration
of Visit
hours ' Turnover
Rates Average
Duration
of Visit
(hours) Turnover
Rates Average
Duration
of Visit
hours Turnover
Rates
May 12 4.61 2.60 4.50 2.67 4.97 2.41 4.69 2.56
June 14 5.31 2.64 5.55 2.52 5.24 2.67 5.37 2.61
July 14 4.87 2.87 4.25 3.29 4.57 3.06 4.56 3.07
August 14 4.44 3.15 3.79 3.69 4.44 3.15 4.56 3.07
September 12 5.13 2.34 4.29 2.80 4.92 2.44 4.78 2.51
October 10 5.172 1.93 4.293 2.33 4.535 2.21 4.66 2.51
November
to
February 8 5.47 1.46 4.13 1.94 4.60 1.74 4.73 1.69
March 10 4.72' 2.12 3.69' 2.71 4.95 2.02 4.45 2.25
April 10 4.67 2.14 3.14 3.18 5.30 1.89 4.37 2.29
Holiday
Weekends 14 4.64 3.01 4.18 3.35 4.66 3.00 4.49 3.12
' 2 surveys in March, combined March/April to estimate trip duration
2 11 surveys in October, combined September/October to estimate trip duration
3 9 September and 8 October respondents combined
4 4 surveys in April, combined March/April to estimate trip duration
5 8 surveys in October, combined September/October to estimate trip duration
2.2.2 Waterfront Resident Recreational Use
Recreational use by waterfront residents and their guests was estimated for High Rock
and Narrows reservoirs. There are no waterfront residences with pier permits from APGI
at Tuckertown and Falls reservoirs. The methods use to estimate resident and guest use
are described separately below.
ERM 21 Recreational Use Assessment
October 2005
Recreational Use by Waterfront Residents
Overall waterfront resident recreational use was estimated using data obtained from the
Resident Use Survey. Nine sets of responses were received detailing recreational use for
8 individual months plus the winter (November to February).
The following equation was used to estimate recreational use for High Rock and Narrows
reservoirs for each month:
Resident Recreational Use = (median number of adult recreation days + median
number of child recreation days) x number of waterfront households
Each of these factors is described below.
Median Number of Adult and Child Recreation Days
The median number of adult and child recreation days was calculated based on responses
to the RUS (Appendix G). The number of adults and children for each household
(Question #3) was multiplied by the number of recreation days for the adult and child
from that household whose birthdays were closest to July 1 s` (Question #4) for each of the
1,150 useable responses for High Rock Reservoir and 456 responses for Narrows
Reservoir. These median number of household recreation days was calculated for each
month for each reservoir (Table 2-16).
Table 2-16 Median Number of Waterfront Household Recreation Days
Month High Rock Reservoir Narrows Reservoir
May 40.0 17.0
June 60.0 40.0
Jul 60.0 69.0
August 62.0 40.0
September 49.0 40.0
October 35.0 17.5
November 2.1 5.0
December 2.1 5.0
January 2.1 5.0
February 2.1 5.0
March 12.0 2.5
April 28.0 15.5
Total 354.4 261.5
Number of Households
There are 2,722 High Rock Reservoir households and 1,007 Narrows Reservoir
households with pier permits from APGI at the time of the survey.
ERM 22 Recreational Use Assessment
October 2005
Recreational Use by Guests
The RUS also asked residents about the number of guests that visited their waterfront
residence and recreated at the reservoir during the survey period (Appendix G - Question
#3). The following equation was used to estimate recreational use by guests:
Guest Recreational Use = (Median Number of Guest-days/household/month) x
(Number of Households)
The median number of guest-days per household was calculated by summing the number
of guest-days in the survey responses and dividing by the number of responses. It
appears that Question #3 confused many respondents as 21 percent provided
mathematically impossible answers (i.e., the number of guest days was less than the
number of guests). These responses were not included in estimating the number of guest-
days at the reservoirs. Several respondents indicated that they had an extremely large
number of guests (e.g., as many as 365) during a single month. Many of these were for
special events (e.g., one respondent noted that they had a wedding at their waterfront
house). In order not to let these few special events skew the estimate of the typical
number of guest-days per household per month, the median, rather than the mean,
number of guest-days per household was used to estimate overall recreational use by
waterfront resident guests. Table 2-17 indicates the median number of guest-days per
household per month for each reservoir.
Table 2-17 Median Number of Guest-Days per Household by Month
Month High Rock Reservoir Narrows Reservoir
May 4 2
June 5 4
July 6.5 4.5
August 6 4
September 4 2
October 3 1
November' 0.5 0.5
December' 0.5 0.5
January' 0.5 0.5
February' 0.5 0.5
March 2 1.5
April 2 1.5
The median number of guest-days per household for the winter (November, December, January and
February) was evenly allocated across the four months.
2 The median for this month was 0, so the mean was used instead.
The number of households is 2,722 for High Rock Reservoir and 1,007 for Narrows
Reservoir at the time of the survey.
ERM 23 Recreational Use Assessment
October 2005
2.2.3 Private Communities Recreational Use
Recreational use by non-waterfront residents who live in private communities with water
access was estimated for High Rock and Narrows reservoirs. There are no private
communities with direct access to Tuckertown and Falls reservoirs. The method used to
estimate the recreational use by private community residents is described below.
Overall private community resident recreational use was estimated using data obtained
from the Private Community Use Survey. Four sets of responses were received detailing
recreational use for summer (June, July, and August), fall (September, October, and
November), winter (December, January, and February), and spring (March, April, and
May).
The following equation was used to estimate private community resident recreational use
for High Rock and Narrows reservoirs:
Private Community Recreational Use = (mean number of adult recreation days +
mean number of child recreation days) x number of non-waterfront private
community households
Each of these factors is described below.
Mean Number of Adult and Child Recreation Days
Because of the relatively low number of PCUS response for High Rock Reservoir, the
responses for both High Rock and Narrows were combined to get a more statistically
valid estimate. The number of adults and children for each household (Appendix H,
Question 43) was multiplied by the number of recreation days for the adult and child
from that household whose birthdays were closest to July 1St (Question #4) for each of the
108 useable responses for High Rock and Narrows Reservoirs. The estimate of the
annual number of non-waterfront household recreation days is 85.7 recreation days.
Number of Parcels
There are approximately 2,798 High Rock Reservoir non-waterfront private community
parcels and 4,673 Narrows Reservoir non-waterfront private community parcels with
access to High Rock and Narrows reservoirs via community recreational facilities.
2.2.4 Commercial Business and Private Organization Recreational Use
The Commercial Business and Private Organization phone survey asked respondents
about typical weekend and weekday use (in terms of number of recreation users) during
the spring (including March, April, and May), summer (including June, July, and
August), fall (including September, October, and November), and winter (including
December, January, and February). Table 2-18 presents the estimates obtained from the
phone surveys. These estimates were multiplied by the number of each type of day per
ERM 24 Recreational Use Assessment
October 2005
month (see Table 2-14) to generate total annual recreation use. Peak use estimates were
also obtained and were used to estimate Memorial Day weekend, 4th of July weekend,
and Labor Day weekend use.
Table 2-18 Business and Organization Daily Recreation Use by Season and Type
of Day
Businesses Sin Summer Pall wWer
and

Or anizations Weekend Weekdqv Weekend Weekday. Weekend Weekday' Weekend We kd
Hi h.Rock ,
Boy Scouts Camp
Old Hickory and
30
0
30
0
30
0
30
0
100
General Green
Troop
Boy Scouts Camp
25
0
0
50
25
0
15
0
50
Old N. Council
Central Carolina 40 10 50 20 30 10 15 6 80
Boat Club
Cicero Lylerly
Rental Pro e
50
25
175
75
125
100
40
25
175
Clear Reservoir 15 10 18 10 10 10 0 0 500
Water Skiers
Donald Holshouser 50 4 65 10 10 4 2 0 65
Eagle Point Nature 10 3 10 3 10 3 0 3 15
Preserve
High Rock Boat
and Ski Club
45
20
54
24
16
7
3
1
65
High Rock Marina
200
40
500
40
200
40
2
2
500
& Cam ound
Holsho ,
Pro erties

60

20

65

20

60

20

40

10

125
Marsh Property
70
25
80
30
25
30
5
5
80
Rentals
Miller's Cove
10
8
15
8
8
6
6
5
20
Camping/Rentals
Piedmont Boat
20
4
30
10
15
4
2
1
125
Club
Rowan Co.
Shriners
12
6
20
6
12
4
6
0
100
Rowan County 3 2 4 4 2 0 0 0 35
Voiture #115
Salvation Army 30 0 60 60 0 0 0 0 60
Spencer Moose 12 4 50 12 14 2 1 1 200
Lod e
Tuckertown
H.B.N
ewsome
20
1
40
5
2
1
0
0
60
Pro e
Narrows '
Old North State
l ub Marina
C
150
50
300
100
100
30
20
10
600
Badin Shores
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Resort
Badin Lake Ski
10
4
10
5
6
5
2
0
15
Club
Whip-O-Will
Campground 5 6 125 5 25 4 8 3 375
Marina
Camp Barnhardt 100 5 1,000 1,000 250 25 25 5 1,000
1 Only open Wednesday, Thursday, Friday, and Saturday year round. Assumes 10 percent of users put-in at this location. The
remainder boat-in from other locations.
z The Badin Shores Resort marina only serves residents of the community. This use has already been captured through the waterfront
resident and private community surveys.
ERM 25 Recreational Use Assessment
October 2005
2.2.5 Canoe/Kayak Portage Recreational Use
The response rate (i.e., percentage of groups using the portage that registered) for the
canoe registry is unknown. The canoe registry was prominently posted and it would have
been difficult for a group to use the portage and not notice the registry. The registry was
simple to use and took approximately one minute to complete. For purposes of
estimating use, a 20 percent response rate (1 out of every 5 groups registered) and an
average of 2 people per group (this was the average for the five paddler surveys
collected) were assumed.
ERM 26 Recreation! Use Assessment
October 2005
2.3 Reservoir Water Levels
It is important in evaluating water-based recreational data to understand how
representative the study period was in terms of climatic conditions. Precipitation affects
river flow, which affects reservoir water levels, which in turn can affect recreation use
patterns. The study period (May 10, 2003 thru May 9, 2004) was compared with the
prior 17 years (May 1986 thru April 2003) in terms of precipitation and average reservoir
water elevations.
2.3.1 Precipitation
The study period was wetter than normal (Figure 2-2). Precipitation data was obtained
for central North Carolina for the period from 1895 to 2003 inclusive (NOAA, 2004).
The mean annual precipitation for the Project area over that period was 44.94 inches
(Table 2-19). Precipitation for the study period was 55.31 inches, or 23 percent over
normal. It was the 20th wettest year on record. Eight months (May thru October,
December, and February) had above average precipitation. May 2003 was the second
wettest May on record with 7.73 inches of rainfall.
Table 2-19 Historic Monthly Precipitation Data
Months Mean Precipitation
1895-2003 inches 5/03 to 4/04 , ;
Preci itation inches Rank in terms of
wettest out of 109
May 3.95 7.73 2
June 4.59 5.68 26
Jul 5.78 7.81 18
August 5.33 6.72 22
September 4.34 5.78 22
October 3.27 3.80 40
November 3.04 2.87 56
December 3.67 4.29 36
January 3.80 1.59 104
February 3.86 4.06 50
March 4.31 1.91 106
April 3.52 3.07 74
Total 44.94 55.31 21
ERM 27 Recreational Use Assessment
October 2005
(ui) uoilelidioejd
2.3.2 Reservoir Water Elevations
Tuckertown and Falls reservoirs are operated in a run-of-river mode with relatively little
water level fluctuation (maximum drawdown during the study period was 2.95 feet at
Tuckertown Reservoir and 2.56 feet at Falls Reservoir). Therefore, these two reservoirs
are not significantly affected by precipitation patterns and water levels were nearly
identical to the historic averages. Conversely, water levels at High Rock and Narrows
reservoirs can fluctuate significantly (maximum drawdown during the study period was
18.78 feet at High Rock Reservoir and 16.56 feet at Narrows Reservoir).
Figures 2-3 and 2-4 compare water levels at High Rock and Narrows reservoirs for the
study period with the 17 prior years. As the figures indicate, water levels during the
study period at High Rock Reservoir were higher than average from May through
December, but were then below the historic average from late December until April. A
similar pattern occurred at Narrows Reservoir, where water levels were higher than
average from May through November. Beginning just before Thanksgiving, Narrows
Reservoir was significantly drawn down in order to conduct several FERC relicensing
studies. Water levels were considerably below the historic average from late November
through December. Water levels were restored to historic levels in early January and
remained near the historic average for the rest of the study period.
2.3.3 Summary
Overall, the study period was generally representative of average water levels. Spring
and Summer 2003 were wetter than average, which may have discouraged some
recreational use. Water levels during late summer and fall were higher than average,
which may have encouraged recreational use. Water levels were lower than normal
during the winter at High Rock and Narrows reservoirs.
ERM 29 Recreational Use Assessment
October 2005
N
C
O
?a
m
w
a)
L)
M
C)
ca
N
V ch
O _Q
o C)
N Q
O C O
(d
U) (D Cl)
d 00 O
N
Y cu
u
O
L
2
M
N
w
w
D
0
LL

?h
n
aG
hn
T?
?G
0 CD 0 CD 0 0 CD 0 0 0 C. 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
(D V N O tq (D V _N O CO (D V
N N N N O O O
CD (D (fl CD (D (D (D CD (D (D (D (D
,wnlep sesn 'jj) u01lena19
C
d
W
d
V
N
L
CS
°o
N
Cl) -
L O Q
O N Q
O C O
d (o Cl)
N 00 0
N
>.
N m
3 ?
O
L.
w
z
et
N
W
w
D
0
LL
ab
J?
?J
9a
y
J?
?a
9?aJ
aO
Ja
a?
O?
?
90
O
Jag
aP
°a
S
s?
b
T'
n
aG
?n
Ta
Co Co Co Co °o Co °o Co °o °o
N O OD (O V N O 00 (O V
U) (O LO LO tL0 LO LO 't V 'V
(uun;ep sosn `4) u011en918
3.0 CONSULTATION
As part of the relicensing process, APGI prepared and distributed in September 2002 an
Initial Consultation Document (ICD), which provided a general overview of the Project.
Agencies, municipalities, non-governmental organizations, and members of the public
were given an opportunity to review the ICD and identify information and studies that
were needed to address relicensing issues. To further assist in the identification of issues
and data/study needs, APGI has formed several Issue Advisory Groups (IAGs) to advise
APGI on resource issues throughout the relicensing process. The Recreation, Aesthetics,
and Shoreline Management IAG was one of several IAGs that were formed.
On March 13, 2003 the Recreation, Aesthetics and Shoreline Management IAG met and
discussed objectives for the Recreation Use Assessment Study. Based on written
comments and the discussions at the IAG meeting, the study objectives were identified
for this recreational use assessment study. In addition, the study plan was reviewed,
revised and finalized, incorporating comments and input from the April 10, 2003 IAG
meeting. The study plan for the Recreation Use Assessment was finalized on May 23,
2003 (Appendix H).
The Recreation, Aesthetics, and Shoreline Management IAG received updates on the
Recreation Use Assessment at meetings on July 9, 2003, October 8, 2003, February 4,
2004, May 4, 2004 and November 3, 2004.
A Draft Recreation Use Assessment was provided to Recreation, Aesthetics, and
Shoreline Management IAG members in December 2004 for their review and comment.
The Recreation, Aesthetics, and Shoreline Management IAG met to discuss this report on
February 2, 2005. Written comments were provided by the USFS and the NC WRC.
ERM 32 Recreational Use Assessment
October 2005
4.0 RECREATIONAL USE ASSESSMENT
4.1 Recreational User Profile
This section describes recreational users at the Yadkin Project in terms of age, gender,
residence, and where they stayed while visiting the Project.
4.1.1 Age and Gender
Information on the age of recreational users is only available for those users who
completed the surveys, which generally were adults over 16 years of age. Tables 4-1 and
4-2 present the age distribution and gender for respondents to the VUS, RUS, PCUS, and
TUS, respectively.
Table 4-1 Recreational User Age Distribution (in %)
High Rock Tuckertown Narrows Fails
Age VUS RUS PCUS TUS VUS TUS VUS RUS PCUA '-,JUS. VUS TUS:--
<16 <1 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0
16-21 4 <1 0 4 11 6 7 <1 0 0 0 0
22-45 72 17 27 73 55 48 63 15 19 22 93 29
46-65 23 57 61 19 31 44 28 56 68 78 7 57
>65 1 26 12 3 3 2 2 29 13 0 0 14
Table 4-2 Recreational User Gender (in %)
Hi h Rock Tuckertown Narrows Falls
Gender VUS RUS PCUS TUS VUS TUS VUS RUS: 'PCUA; ;'TUS. VUS TUS
Male 85 73 61 95 87 96 79 72 63 88 67 93
Female 15 27 39 5 13 4 21 28 37 12 33 7
Most recreation users at the public access recreation areas (VUS) and tailwaters (TUS)
are between 27 and 45 years old. Most waterfront (RUS) and non-waterfront (PCUS)
residents tend to be older, between 46 and 65 years old. Most respondents to all of the
surveys tend to be males, but especially at the public access recreation areas and
tai lwaters.
4.1.2 Place of Residence
Most (63 percent) public access recreation area users were from the five-county Project
region. Most of the other users were from elsewhere in North Carolina, with only about 3
percent of recreation users living outside of North Carolina (Table 4-3).
ERM 33 Recreational Use Assessment
October 2005
Table 4-3 Place of Residence for Public Access Recreation Area Users
Location # of Respondents',
'% of Respondents:
5 County Project Region' 592 63%
Rest of North Carolina 314 34%
South Carolina 3 <1%
Other States 27 3%
Total 936 100%
The 5 County Project Region includes Davie, Davidson, Montgomery, Rowan, and Stanly counties.
4.1.3 Overnight Stay Location
The vast majority of all recreational users at the Yadkin Project stayed at either their
permanent residence or vacation home at or near the reservoirs. Overall, approximately 6
percent of recreational users were either tent or RV camping.
Public Access Recreation Areas
Approximately 10 percent of all recreational users accessed the Yadkin reservoirs via
public access recreation areas. Table 4-4 indicates the responses from the VUS regarding
overnight stay location. As these data indicate, most respondents stayed at their own
homes. A relatively high percent of respondents at Narrows and Falls reservoirs
indicated that they were tent camping, either at the Uwharrie National Forest or the
several private campgrounds located on Narrows Reservoir.
Table 4-4 Overnight Stay Location based on Responses to the Visitor Use
Survey
Location High Rock Tuckertown Narrows Falls Total
M house 83.1% 88.4% 48.4% 58.3% 72.7%
Vacation home 3.2% 2.1% 2.5% 8.3% 2.9%
Friend's house 3.2% 5.3% 3.1% 0.0% 3.5%
Rent house nearby 6.4% 3.2% 3.7% 0.0% 4.8%
Hotel/motel 0.4% 0.0% 0.6% 0.0% 0.4%
Tent cam 1.6% 3.2% 34.2% 41.7% 13.0%
Trailer/RV 3.2% 0.0% 8.1% 0.0% 4.1%
Other 0.0% 0.0% 4.7% 0.0% 0.2%
Residents
As indicated in Sections 4.2 through 4.5, approximately 80 percent of recreational users
at the Yadkin reservoirs are waterfront or non-waterfront residents. All of these users are
presumably staying at their own homes while recreating at the Yadkin Reservoirs.
ERM 34 Recreational Use Assessment
October 2005
4.2 High Rock Development Recreational Use
The High Rock Development was the third of the Project developments to be built and
was completed in 1927. The dam is located at River Mile (RM) 253 on the Yadkin
River. The development has approximately 360 miles of shoreline. Much of this
shoreline is undeveloped (57 percent is forested), although there is significant residential
and limited commercial development along approximately 34 percent of the shoreline.
There are 2,722 residences with pier permits from APGI on High Rock Reservoir.
High Rock Dam impounds an available storage capacity of 234,100 acre-feet at a full
pool elevation of 623.9 feet. High Rock Reservoir is the largest of the four Yadkin
reservoirs and covers a water surface area of 15,180 acres. The mean depth of the
reservoir at full pool is 17 feet with a maximum water depth of 62 feet.
The High Rock Development is operated in a store and release mode in accordance with
an operating guide or "rule curve". The operating guide was established in 1968. Within
the limits of available streamflow, the operating guide is designed to maintain higher
water elevations from mid-May to mid-September followed by a fall - winter drawdown
to allow for refill during the late winter and spring. During periods of low water levels
and low streamflow at High Rock Reservoir, the operating guides have overriding
requirements for APGI to discharge a minimum amount of water to satisfy downstream
needs from early March to mid-September. Because of these minimum water discharge
requirements, extensive drawdowns of the reservoir can occur during drought conditions.
Based on historical data, the operating guides will normally limit drawdown of High
Rock Reservoir to five feet or less, greater than 95 percent of the time between Memorial
Day and Labor Day.
High Rock Reservoir has an average daily water level fluctuation of less than one foot
and a maximum daily fluctuation of 2 to 4 feet. Between 1986 and 2002, the maximum
winter drawdown averaged approximately 12 feet, the maximum spring drawdown
averaged 8 feet, the maximum summer drawdown averaged 5 feet, and the maximum fall
drawdown averaged 10 feet. Figure 4-1 shows High Rock Reservoir water levels for the
entire study period.
The discussion of recreational use at High Rock Reservoir is based on the following
information:
• 2,292 Spot Count observations,
• 380 Visitor Use Survey responses,
• 1,243 Resident Use Survey responses,
• 25 Private Community Survey responses,
• 12 Commercial business and private organization phone surveys, and
• 3 canoe portage registrations.
ERM 35 Recreational Use Assessment
October 2005
O
d
W p
L O
.? N
ca ?
d ?
= O
? M
V O
O
N
r ?
i
'
I
i
•
e
f .4Y
I
41

r
R
k k

T
I 4?
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
O LO O LO C7 LO O LO O Ln CJ
Ln V' CT co C7 N N O O
(O CO CO CO CO CO (D (fl CO
Iiady
yaaew
?enaga.l
Ajenuer
aaquaaoaa
aagluanoN
.iegolop
.iagwe4deS
}snf nay
Aink
aunf-
AeW
(sosn `11) u011en818
4.2.1 Recreational Facility Condition
There are 13 public access recreation areas and 26 private recreation areas at High Rock
Reservoir (Figure 4-2).
Public Access Recreation Areas
Table 4-5 lists the recreational facilities present at each public access recreation area
(APGI, 2004). There is also a canoe portage route around High Rock Dam.
Table 4-5 High Rock Reservoir Public Access Recreation Area Facilities

Site
Name

parking Number

of Boat'-
Shoreline

"

Picnic

Trash Boat.

Dock

Camp

Number
Capacity
Launch' Fishing

Capacity
Tables
Receptacles Toilets
/Fishing
sites Beach
Lanes. Pier
1 Highway 601 10 vehicles

Access Area
with trailers 1 6 anglers 0 4 0 0 0 No
2 Rowan County 10 vehicles

Pump Station
with trailers 1 4 anglers 0 0 0 0 0 No
3 York Hill Boat 20 with 2 16 anglers 0 2 0 0 0 No
Access trailers
Crane Creek No legal
4 Fishing Access parking 0 24 anglers 0 0 0 0 0 No
Pull-Off
Little Crane 8 vehicles,
5 Creek Fishing 4 with 2 24 anglers 0 6 0 0 0 No
Access trailers
Southmont Boat 200
7 Access vehicles 5 50 anglers 3 Il 2 1 0 No
and trailers
High Rock
8 Marina and veh100
icles
1
80 anglers
3
2
2
17 slips
106
No
Campground
Highway 47 No
9 Fishing Pull-Off No legal legal 24 anglers 0 0 0 0 0 No
parking parking
Buddle Creek 100
10 Boat Access vehicles 2 12 anglers 7 12 2 1 0 Yes
Area and 50
trailers
Abbotts

12
Creek/NC 8 No legal
0
200 anglers
0
0
0
0
0
No
Bride Pull-Off Parking
13 Tamarac Marina 80 vehicles 1 0 3 5 0 3 0 No
with trailers
Dutch Second 120
14 Creek Boat vehicles 2 36 anglers 0 0 0 2 0 No
Access with trailers
Flat Swamp 30 vehicles
15 Boat Access and 30 3 26 anglers 2 13 1 1 0 Yes
trailers
Shoreline fishing capacity was estimated assuming a capacity of one angler for every 25 feet of shoreline.
ERM 37 Recreational Use Assessment
October 2005
York Hill Boat Access w
Rowan Pump Station Boat Access " r
SALISBURY Crane Creek Fishing Access High Rock Marina & Campground
Buddle Creek Boat
S;
Southmont Boat Access
S F
Little Crane Creek Fishing Access Abbotts Creek/NC 8 Fishii
QUARRY
QUARRY
F Lehe
F W ?otl
Tamarac Marina Flat Swa
ROCKWELL
'" l...-.
Dutch Second Creek Boat Access
Highrock Reservoir
Recreation Sites
Cities
APGI/Yadkin Recreation Study
High Rock Reservoir Public Access
Recreation Areas
20,000 10,000 0 20,000 Feet
Boat
Alcoa Power Generating Inc.
Yadkin Division
Date: October, 2004 +
ERM.
Appendix K provides the VUS responses on facility condition for each of the 13 public
access recreation areas. Most of the facilities were found to be in acceptable to excellent
condition. The VUS respondents identified the following significant problems (defined
as >10 percent of respondents indicating the facility was totally inadequate or >20
percent of respondents indicating the facility was mostly or totally inadequate) with
public recreational facilities at High Rock Reservoir. Please note that for some of these
public access recreation areas the number of responses is low, which reduces the
confidence level of the results.
• Rowan County Pump Station Boat Access (n=8) - 13 percent of respondents
indicated that the boat ramp was totally inadequate and between 13 and 26
percent of respondents complained about the lack of toilets, marinas, fishing piers,
lighting, and picnic tables at this site.
• Crane Creek Fishing Pull-off Access (n=7) - 29 percent of respondents
complained about the lack of toilets at this site.
• Little Crane Creek Fishing Access (n=6) - 34 percent of respondents indicated
that the boat ramp was mostly or totally inadequate and 17 percent indicated that
the parking lot was mostly inadequate at this site. About 17 percent complained
about the lack of beaches, toilets, fishing piers, and picnic tables at this site.
• Flat Swamp Boat Access (n=41) - 20 percent of respondents indicated that the
toilet was mostly or totally inadequate at this site.
Some respondents complained about the lack of toilets, fishing piers, and other
recreational facilities at the Highway 601 Boat Access and the Abbotts Creek/Highway 8
Bridge Pull-off Fishing Access, but there were too few responses to draw any firm
conclusions. The condition of recreational facilities at York Hill Boat Access, Southmont
Boat Access, High Rock Marina and Campground, Buddle Creek Boat Access, Tamarac
Marina, and Dutch Second Creek Boat Access was found to be at least acceptable by
most respondents.
Commercial Businesses and Organizations
Table 4-6 lists the recreational facilities present at each private recreation area.
Customers of these private businesses and members of these organizations were not
surveyed regarding their opinions on the condition of recreational facilities at these
private recreation areas as part of this study, so no information on facility condition is
available.
ERM 39 Recreational Use Assessment
October 2005
Table 4-6 High Rock Reservoir Private Recreation Facilities
Private Recreation •Facilities Boat Ramp Boat _
Pier ' Fishing
Pier SwimBeach Camping'
South Yadkin Campground * Yes Yes No No Yes
Rowan County Shiners Yes Yes No No No
Rowan County Voiture #115 No Yes Yes No No
Spencer Moose Lode Yes Yes No No No
Elks Lodge #662 * Yes Yes No No No
Marsh Property Rentals Yes + 7 private
boat ramps 63
private
sli s No No 82
campsites
High Rock Boat and Ski Club Yes Yes No No No
Central Carolina Boat Club Yes Yes Yes No No
Ski 'ack Marina * Yes Yes No No No
Clear Reservoir Water Skiers Yes Yes No Yes No
Eagle Point Nature Preserve Yes No No No No
Boy Scouts Camp Old Hickory No Yes No No 3
campsites
Boy Scouts Camp-Old North
Council Yes Yes No Yes Yes
Piedmont Boat Club Yes Yes No No No
Foster's Point Campground * Yes Yes No No Yes
Boat Dock Marina * No No No No No
Boggs Camping/Rental * No No No No Yes
Kesler Camping/Rentals * Yes Yes No No Yes
Poole Camping/Rentals Yes Yes No No 12
campsites
Cicero Lyerly Rental Property Yes
(undeveloped) Yes Yes No 50
campsites
Miller's Cove Camping/Rentals Yes No Yes No 40
campsites
Pops Carolina River Campground
Rentals * Yes Yes No No Yes
Luther Holshouser Camping
Rentals * Yes Yes No No Yes
Donald Holshouer Camping
Rentals Yes Yes No No Yes
Holshouser, Property, Barry
Ritchie Camping * Yes Yes No No 34
campsites
Salvation Army Yes Yes No No No
* These commercial businesses and private organizations did not respond to the Commercial Business and Private Organization phone
survey. The information provided is from a previous inventory of recreation facilities.
Canoe Portage
The High Rock Dam canoe portage trail is approximately 1,800 feet long and is located
on the west side of the dam. The takeout is marked with a "Yadkin River Canoe Portage
Trail" sign and the portage trail is marked. Three groups totaling 7 people registered at
the High Rock Dam canoe portage. The three groups each rated the degree of difficulty
of the portage differently, assigning an easy, moderate, and difficult rating. One group
commented that the portage was "way too hard" and that an easier portage was needed.
ERM 40 Recreational Use Assessment
October 2005
Another group seems to be a repeat user and commented on the mowing and new paint.
The third group simply said "thanks" for the portage. Figure 4-3 provides some
representative photographs on the High Rock Dam canoe portage.
4.2.2 Recreational Activities
Residents and visitors generally have similar recreational interests, although motor
boating and swimming tend to be more popular with residents, while fishing (both by
boat and along the riverbank or on piers) is more popular with visitors (Table 4-7).
Table 4-7 High Rock Resident and Visitor Recreational Activities (percent of
total recreation days)
Recreational Activity Public Acces§ Areas Waterfront Residents Non-Waterfront
Residents
Motor boating 15% 26% 22%
Boat fishing 33% 10% 30%
Bank fishing 22% 14% 19%
Canoeing/kayaking 0% 3% 0%
Swimming 9% 13% 11%
Personal Watercraft use 2% 9% 0%
Camping 3% 1% 0%
Windsurfing 0% 0% 0%
W aterski in 1% 4% 1%
Picnicking 3% 5% 2%
Hiking 1% 1% 11%
Sunbathing 8% 11% 3%
Sailing 0% 1% 0%
Other 3% 2% 1%
Total 100% 100% 100%
In terms of public access recreation areas, fishing, both by boat and along the shoreline, is
the primary recreational activity at High Rock Reservoir with nearly 85 percent of all
respondents participating (Table 4-8). Another common recreational activity (over 20
percent participation rate) includes motor boating (as distinct from boat fishing),
especially at High Rock Marina & Campground, Tamarac Marina, and Dutch Second
Creek Boat Access, with an overall participation rate of 23 percent. Occasional
recreational activities (over 5 percent participation rate) include swimming (especially at
Flat Swamp Boat Access), sun bathing (especially at Flat Swamp Boat Access, High
Rock Marina & Campground, and Tamarac Marina), camping (especially at High Rock
Marina & Campground), and picnicking (especially at Flat Swamp Boat Access).
ERM 41 Recreational Use Assessment
October 2005
Yadkin Hydroelectric Project
Project No. 2197
Rock Dam Portage Trail Photographs
Photo 1: High Rock Dam portage trail
l? t ST ''er u1
r-
Photo 2: High Rock Dam portage
trail

-N
? .

Y
? 1.

ERM Recreational Use Assessment
October 2005
U ?
? a
O N
Z
U U
y O
CL?

h
M
u as
u +,
?a
v ?
a c
u
aL
CC
?a
x
? L
et
Z a
0
H
satrap
- 0
O 0
O 0
O 0
O 0
O O
N 0
O 0
-+ o
O 0
M 0
M 0
O 0
N
3ugi ng 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
C) o o r. o ?r cl 0 0 o M
2-.q-s o°
0 o°
0 o
0 0
0 0°
0 0
Cl 0
0 0
0 0
Cl 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0
2ui vqunS- o o 0 0 0 0 -o`? o o

O
O
O
O
O
00
N
O
O
N
ry N
M N
?uixJniJid 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
CD r O o o L, CD M Cl)
n
J,iuspin y. 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
Cl 0
Cl
?ucduiEJ.. o
O 0
N 0
O 0
O 0
O 0 o 0
L? 0 0 0 0 o
M co m O N M
2uTLJ}S Ia4Em;;
- o°
O
O
O
O
O
N
O
N
O
M
10
O o°
N
'aSn }3EIJIB}E?] }EOOSIad

,-

0
O

0
O

0
O

0
O

0
O

0
M

0
O

0
in

°
t+M'i

0
'D

0
M

0
O

0
M
II[IIIIIIIM
S-
- o°
O °
M o°
O o°
O o°
O o°
M
M
N
N 00
O
10
N o° o°

Lo OR

r
-?IIIJjiH o
O 0
O 0
O 0
O 0
O 0
m 0
O 0
d' 0
O 0
O 0
C o
C c
N
?uDjE.?Ex ??UIaOIIE,

o

0

0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
OR

0
0

q *WE[
. 2II 0

L.
0
°O 0

l 0 0

l 0

+ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
.
_
.o
00 C
)
M
`-- C
)
°O r
M. O
In M
Ln M
M IZN
N M
N if1
--
M
8u.q agog 0 0 0
o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
M
M M o
Lf) O L.
ry °o
M M N
10 Lrn
.11 O

N .0

d r+

to
S EO Jo lo

g w o° 00 00 0° o° o° 00
°
80
O M+ 'Lo-+ O O N ? N O M M N N
PajaidWOZ) SAanlnS JO 'ON M °O h o W M M ? W
M
ti
c

v

V
V
c x
u
d d G ¢ O0
R
G
u
c
E
v
N
y
x w
x
y o cu
U u
d 0
R
d X xGl d G z R ° d?
CA d U-)
O W " G R ?° c
a U ° ?-
°
CD

o S

0] x

R

O
x N

1

U C
0

C (jr)
w

3
x
y
U V
?
C
v
°
u'
3
d,
.L x G u .'?. L G R au. w
x r U t ° x ra ¢ FR- Q w O
ate.. O O N M V

cn z
N
M
?M
L?
00
N
r ?
N l
N
a
0
K
R
a
6
G
73
73
r-
R
V
O
H
N O
O
N ?
o
U
N O
O
?zs
N
v
M
I:t
w
Yadkin Hydroelectric Project
Project No. 2197
4.2.3 Recreational Use
Recreation users access High Rock Reservoir via the 13 public access recreation areas,
2,722 waterfront residences with pier permits from APGI, approximately 2,798 non-
waterfront private community residences that can access High Rock Reservoir via
community boat ramps, piers, or marinas, and 28 commercial business or private
organizations with direct reservoir access. There is a canoe portage around High Rock
Dam. Tailwater Use Surveys are discussed below and in Section 6.0, but are not included
in estimating overall recreational use to avoid double counting since these users are
included in the public access recreation area use estimates.
Public Access Recreation Area Use
Annual recreational use at the 13 public access areas on High Rock Reservoir exceeded
80,000 recreation days (Table 4-9). A large percentage (36 percent) of this use occurred
at the Southmont Boat Access, with Dutch Second Creek Boat Access and Tamarac
Marina also receiving relatively heavy use (an additional 31 percent of total High Rock
Reservoir visitor recreational use). Several public access areas are used almost
exclusively in the spring and early summer (April through July) for fishing and receive
little use during the rest of the year.
Table 4-9 High Rock Public Access Recreational Use by Site and Month (in
recreation days)
Site
_
No. Site Name May June Jul Au. ' Sept, Oct. Nov.. Dec. Jan. Feb. Mar. Aril Total
Highway 601
1 Access Area 9 21 50 16 3 12 0 0 0 5 0 0 116
Rowan County
2 Pump Station 234 246 236 59 26 33 6 9 0 0 0 25 874
York Hill Boat
3 Access 739 674 1,051 952 235 715 70 941 178 168 268 410 6,401
Crane Creek Fishing
4 Access 69 87 19 19 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 207
Little Crane Creek
5 -Fishing Access 10 32 51 17 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 37 150
Southmont Boat
7 Access Area 5,368 4,113 4,937 4,528 3,747 2,241 643 344 556 259 336 2,781 29,853
High Rock
8 Marina/Cam round 394 443 398 599 366 88 47 0 0 0 0 112 2,447
Highway 47 Fishing
9 Pull-off 44 6 25 3 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 124 204
Buddle Creek Boat
10 Access Area 1,348 1,597 1,945 1,191 546 291 23 23 13 58 119 1,330 8,484
Abbotts Creek/NC 8
12 Bride 17 391 12 3 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 40 465
Tamarac Marina
13 1,993 2,230 2,251 1,363 774 781 53 403 16 197 484 546 11,091
Dutch Second Creek
14 Boat Access 2,671 2,502 2,403 2,016 1,334 1,010 88 457 42 256 790 11111 14,680
Flat Swamp Boat
15 Access 1,003 1,909 1,547 1,036 518 585 93 127 156 28 106 766 7,874

Total 13,899 14,251 14,925 11,802 7,557 5 756 1,023 2,304 961 971 2,103 7 294 82 846
ERM 44 Recreational Use Assessment
October 2005
Yadkin Hydroelectric Project
Project No. 2197
Waterfront Resident Recreational Use
Recreational use by waterfront residents and their guests was significantly higher than
that by visitors (Table 4-10). This is attributable to the 2,722 waterfront residences with
pier permits. Resident use picks up in April, is high from May through September, and
begins to fall in October. Winter use is very low, which may be attributed to both the
weather and reservoir drawdown. Guest use is also high (about 10 percent of resident
use) and is concentrated in the primary recreation season (Memorial Day weekend to
Labor Day weekend).
Table 4-10 Waterfront Resident and Guest Recreation Use by Month (in
recreation days)
Month Resident
Recreational Use Guest Residential
Use : Total Residential
Use
May 108,880 10,888 119,768
June 163,320 13,610 176,930
Jul 163,320 17,693 181,013
August 168,764 16,332 185,096
September 133,378 10,888 144,266
October 95,270 8,166 103,436
November 5,716 1,361 7,077
December 5,716 1,361 7,077
January 5,716 1,361 7,077
February 5,716 1,361 7,077
March 32,664 5,444 38,108
April 76,216 5,444 81,660
Total 964,676 93,909 1,058,585
Private Waterfront Communities Recreational Use
Recreational use by the approximately 2,798 non-waterfront parcels in private waterfront
communities at High Rock Reservoir was estimated as 269,448 recreation days per year.
This averages about 96 recreation days per household per year. It should be noted that an
undetermined number of these parcels are unimproved (i.e., are not improved with a
residence) and may be rarely used over the course of a year.
Commercial and Organizational Recreational Use
There are 28 commercial businesses or private organizations with direct access to High
Rock Reservoir - 17 of these responded to a phone survey. Based on information
provided by the owner/operator, annual recreational use at each of these businesses and
organizations is presented below. Recreational use was not estimated for the other 11
businesses and organizations that did not respond to the phone survey. Total commercial
business and private organizational use at High Rock Reservoir was estimated at 132,982
recreation days for the study period (Table 4-11).
ERM 45 Recreational Use Assessment
October 2005
Yadkin Hydroelectric Project
Project No. 2197
Table 4-11 High Rock Reservoir Commercial and Organizational Recreation Use
(in recreation days)
High Rock ReservoirTotal Monthly Visitors
Site Name
Total
May June July -Aug. Sept. Oct. Nov. Dec: Jan. Feb. March : April"
Boy Scouts Camp 570 240 480 440 340 240 300 240 270 270 240 240 3,870
Old Hickory and
General Green
Boy Scouts Camp 345 1,050 1,250 1,150 240 200 250 120 135 135 200 200 5,275
Old N. Council
Central Carolina 775 870 980 980 500 470 500 258 267 255 550 540 6,945
Boat Club
Cicero Lyerly 1,225 3,150 3,225 3,325 3,225 3,300 3,250 895 910 860 975 950 25,290
Rental Property
Clear Reservoir 1,225 372 1,828 1,354 340 310 300 0 0 0 350 340 6,419
Water Skiers
Donald Holshouser 721 795 805 860 229 172 180 16 18 18 492 488 4,794
Eagle Point Nature 192 153 171 173 158 149 160 24 27 27 149 146 1,529
Preserve
High Rock Boat and 325 312 347 377 92 107 100 138 20 16 270 293 2,397
Ski Club
High Rock Marina 4,060 5,340 5,380 5,840 2,940 27520 1,400 62 62 58 1,260 2,480 31,402
Holshouser 1,145 1,005 1,205 1,190 975 940 1,000 550 580 580 940 920 11,030
Properties
Marsh Property 1,345 1,350 1,380 1,430 795 1,290 1,750 155 155 145 1,135 1,110 127040
Rentals
Miller's Cove 278 303 326 328 212 202 200 163 164 154 264 256 2,850
Camping/Rentals
Piedmont Boat Club 631 280 775 480 329 212 230 39 40 38 252 248 3,554
Rowan County 522 306 852 486 280 188 200 48 54 54 234 228 3,452
Shriners
Rowan County 170 120 217 186 51 16 20 0 0 0 70 68 918
Voiture # 115
Salvation Army 360 1,800 1,860 1,860 0 0 0 0 0 0 240 240 6,360
Spencer Moose 784 702 1,164 1052 354 158 180 31 31 29 188 184 4,857
Lodge
All Facility Total 14,673 18,148 22,245 21,511 11,060 10,474 10,020 2,739 2,733 2,639 7,809 8,931 132,982
Canoe Portage Use
Three groups totaling 7 people registered as using the canoe portage at High Rock Dam
to access Tuckertown Reservoir during the one year study period. Two of the three
ERM 46 Recreational Use Assessment
October 2005
Yadkin Hydroelectric Project
Project No. 2197
groups identified take-out locations along Tuckertown Reservoir (i.e., River Road and
Tuckertown Dam).
The response rate (i.e., percentage of groups using the portage that registered) for the
canoe registry is unknown. The canoe registry was prominently posted and it would have
been difficult for a group to use the portage and not notice the registry. The registry was
simple to use and took approximately one minute to complete. For purposes of
estimating use, a 20 percent response rate (1 out of every 5 groups registered) and an
average of 2 people per group (this was the average for the five canoe surveys collected
at the four Yadkin portages) were assumed. This would equate to 15 groups of two
persons per group, or 30 recreation days per year at the High Rock Dam canoe portage.
Total Annual Recreational Use
Total annual recreational use at High Rock Reservoir was estimated at 1,543,891
recreation days by summing recreational uses estimates for public access recreational
areas, waterfront residents, private communities, commercial businesses, and
organizations (Table 4-12). Recreational use at High Rock Reservoir varies by month,
type of day, and between overnight and day users, which are discussed below.
Table 4-12 Estimated Annual High Rock Reservoir Recreation Use (in recreation
days)
Public
Access
Rec Use Waterfront
Resident
Rec Use Private
Community
Rec Use Commercial
and Club.
Rec Use Canoe
Portage
Use' Total % of
Total
Use
Mav 13,899 119,768 15,949 14,673 4 164,293 11
June 14,251 176,930 33,576 18,148 4 242,909 16
July 14;925 181,013 33,576 22,245 2 251,761 16
August 11,802 185,096 33,576 21,511 2 251,987 16
September 7,557 144,266 25,555 11,060 4 188,442 12
October 5,756 103,436 25,555 10,474 4 145,225 9
November 1,023 7,077 25,555 10,020 2 43,677 3
December 2,304 7,077 14,736 2,739 2 26,858 2
January 961 7,077 14,736 2,733 0 25,507 2
February 971 7,077 14,736 2,639 0 25,423 2
March 2,103 38,108 15,949 7,809 2 63,971 4
April 7,294 81,660 15,949 8,931 4 113,838 7
Total 82,846 1,058,585 269,448 132,982 30 1,543,891 100
' Total estimated canoe portage use (30 recreation days) was distributed among the study period based on
professional judgment.
Recreational Use by Month
Table 4-12 provides estimates of recreational use by month. Overall, recreational use
was relatively high from April through October, with use peaking in July and August.
Winter use (November through February) was low. Use levels began to increase in
March (presumably for fishing).
ERM 47 Recreational Use Assessment
October 2005
Yadkin Hydroelectric Project
Project No. 2197
Recreational Use by Type of Day
Recreation use data by type of day (e.g., weekend day, weekday, holiday) is only
available for public access recreational use, but this use is assumed to be fairly
representative of total recreational use in this regards. Recreational use was generally
highest during major holidays (i.e., Memorial Day, 4th of July, and Labor Day weekends)
and weekends during the summer, with significantly less use on weekdays. Since
weekdays represent such a large percentage of total days (70 percent), total recreational
use was highest on weekdays. Recreational use by type of day was distributed as
follows:
• Weekdays - 50 percent of total use, 162 recreation days/weekday
• Weekend days - 39 percent of total use, 324 recreation days/weekend day
• Holidays - 11 percent of total use, 977 recreation days/holiday day
Day versus Overnight Recreational Use
Although High Rock Marina & Campground is the only public access recreation area
with camping facilities at High Rock Reservoir, some respondents to the VUS at other
public access recreation areas also indicated that they were camping. Several
respondents at the following public access recreation areas indicated that they were
camping:
• Rowan County Pump Station Boat Access
• Southmont Boat Access
• Buddle Creek Boat Access
• Abbotts Creek Highway 8 Bridge Pull-off Fishing Area
• Tamarac Marina
• Flat Swamp Access
It is not known whether these recreational users were camping at these specific recreation
areas, elsewhere at High Rock Reservoir, or at other campsites not associated with the
Yadkin Project. For purposes of estimating overnight recreational use, however, these
recreational users were all assumed to be camping somewhere along High Rock
Reservoir. The number of campers at the public access recreation areas is estimated at
4,086 recreation days (nights) annually.
There are also several commercial campgrounds as well as private organizations with
camping facilities (e.g., Boy Scout Camps). Overnight recreational use at these facilities
total approximately 65,149 recreation days (nights) per year (see Table 4-11). Therefore,
overnight use represents approximately 4 percent (69,235 recreation days/1,543,891 total
recreation days) of the total High Rock Reservoir recreational use. There may also be
some anglers fishing at night, but we do not have any data on which to base an estimate
of this use. The NC WRC estimates night fishing at approximately 10 to 20 percent of
day fishing use based on other surveys in the region (NC WRC, 2005).
ERM 48 Recreational Use Assessment
October 2005
Yadkin Hydroelectric Project
Project No. 2197
4.2.4 Recreational Facility Capacity
The adequacy of existing recreational facilities in terms of capacity was evaluated for
parking areas and boat launches.
Parking Areas
In terms of parking capacity, in only 7 out of 2,292 observations (<O.1 percent of the
time) did the numbers of vehicles observed during the Spot Counts exceed the capacity of
the parking areas (Table 4-13). In fact, there were only 20 occasions throughout the
study period when the observed number of parked vehicles at the 13 public access areas
exceeded 75 percent of available capacity. The Flat Swamp Boat Access was the site
observed to be most frequently approaching capacity (8 times over 75 percent capacity).
The York Hill Boat Access was the parking area with the highest average annual percent
capacity, but this was only 19 percent of available capacity.
Boat Launches
There are 10 public access recreation areas with boat ramps (see Table 4-5). The
maximum number of boats launched during the study period was estimated based on the
average number of trailers (average of three Spot Count observations) on the peak day
times the assumed turnover rate. The number of launch lanes required to accommodate
this number of boat launches was estimated assuming the capacity of each launch lane is
50 launches and retrievals per day (SOBA, 1989). The number of launch lanes required
to accommodate the estimated peak day boat launches was compared with the number of
existing launch lanes.
Table 4-14 presents the results of this analysis. It indicates that peak day boat launch
demand exceeded existing capacity at Southmont Boat Access, Tamarac Marina, and
Dutch Second Creek Boat Access. Southmont Boat Access already has five launch lanes,
but the peak day during the study period (Memorial Day weekend 2003) required six
lanes. This was the only day surveyed during the study that would have required six
lanes at Southmont, therefore, the existing number of launch lanes is considered
adequate. Tamarac Marina is a commercial business with a single launch lane that allows
the public to launch boats for a fee. Based on the peak day during the study period
(Saturday June 14, 2003), three launch lanes were needed. The observed number of
trailers at Tamarac Marina exceeded the normal capacity of the single launch lane several
times. Tamarac Marina is a private business and APGI cannot require that additional
launch lanes be provided at this location. The Dutch Second Creek Boat Access
exceeded capacity twice during the study period, but normally provides adequate
capacity.
ERM 49 Recreational Use Assessment
October 2005
Yadkin Hydroelectric Project
. Project No. 2197
Table 4-13 High Rock Public Access Recreation Sites Parking Capacity

Maximum Hof Vehicles --100%

C
i
Average # of Vehicles
Annual Average
Site _ Number ofd Parkin a ac
Number. Name Observations g
Capacity # o Percent # o Percent
Number Date Day Times- of '- Weekends Weekdays Vehicles Of
Time Cap hci
Highway ' 10
1 601 Access 165 vehicles 5 7/20/03 Sun. 0 0% 0
2 <0
1 0
1 1%
Area with . . .
trailers
Rowan 10
2 County
Pump 165 vehicles
with 8 6/14/03 Sat
.
0
0% 0.9 0.4 0.6
°
6/0
Station trailers
20
3 York Hill
Boat Access 165 vehicles
with 27 10/12/03 Sun. 3 2% 4.2 3.1 3.7 19%
trailers
Crane Creek
4 Fishing
Access Pull- 165 No legal
parking 2 5/15/03 Thurs. NA NA 0.1 0.2 0.1 NA
Off
Little Crane 8

5 Creek
165 vehicles,
5
7/20/03
Sun
0
0%
0
2
<0
1
0
1 2%
Fishing 4 with . . . .
Access trailers
200
7 Southmont
Boat Access 189 vehicles
and 135 5/25/03 Holiday 0 0% 28.6 9.5 18.2 8%
trailers
High Rock

8
Marina and
186 100
5 7/26/03 Mon.
0
0%
1
9
0
9
4
1
1%
Campground vehicles 6/23/03 Sat. . . .
Highway 47

9
Fishing Pull-
183 No legal
3
4/17/04
Sat.
NA
NA
0
2
0
1
1
0
NA
Off parking . . .
Buddle 100
10 Creek Boat 189 vehicles 58 7/26/03 Sat. 0 0% 8
9 2
5 4
5 5%
Access Area and 50 . . .
trailers
Abbotts
12 Creek/NC 8
Bridge Pull- 189 No legal
parking 23 6/23/03 Mon. NA NA 0.1 0.3 0.2 NA
Off
80

13 Tamarac
Marina
171 vehicles
with
81
6/14/03
Sat.
1
1%
10.6
4.4
7.6
10%
trailers
Dutch 120

14 Second
Creek Boat
171 vehicles
with
57
6/14//03
Sat.
0
0%
10.5
6.5
8.6
7%
Access trailers
30
15 Flat Swamp
Boat Access 189 vehicles
and 30 68 7/26/03 Sat. 2 1% 6.9 2.7 4.6 16%
trailers
ERM 50 Recreational Use Assessment
October 2005
Yadkin Hydroelectric Project
Project No. 2197
Table 4-14 High Rock Public Access Recreation Area Boat Launch Capacity
Peak Day Full .Year
,
Number 7 i00-16
Capacity
Site of
Avg' Number

Number Name Existing

L
h

Number

Turnover Number of
0
f

# of

Percent
aunc
L
ne Date
of
Rate Boats Launch
Times .
i of Times
a
s Trailers Launched Lanes
Needed
Highway 601 %
I
Access Area 1 7/20/03 1 2.87 3 1 0 0
0
2 Rowan County 1 6/14/03 3 2
64 8 1 0 0%
Pump Station .
3 York Hill Boat

Access 2 10/23/03 20 1.93 39 1 0 0%
Little Crane
5 Creek Fishing 2 5/26/03 1 2.60 3 l 0 0%
Access
7 Southmont Boat 5 5/25/03 112 2
60 291 6 1 2%
Access .
High Rock
8 Marina and 1 6/21/03 3 2.64 8 1 0 0%
Campground
Buddle Creek
10 Boat Access 2 7/26/03 34 2.87 98 2 0 0%
Area
13 Tamarac
Marina 1 6/14/03 43 2.64 114 3 6 11%
Dutch Second
14 Creek Boat 2 5/26/03 44 2.64 116 3 2 4%
Access
15 Flat Swamp 3 5/17/03 12 2
87 34 1 0 0%
Boat Access .
* Assumes capacity of each launch lane is 50 boats per SOBA, 1989.
4.2.5 Recreational Issues
Recreational user perceptions of potential problems at High Rock Reservoir were
collected through the VUS, RUS, and PCUS. Respondents to the VUS, RUS, and PCUS
rated six potential recreational issues on a scale of 1 to 4, with 1= big problem,
2=moderate problem, 3=slight problem, 4=no problem (Table 4-15). There were
differences of opinions regarding several of these potential issues between the various
survey responses. Each potential recreational issue is discussed below. For purposes of
this discussion, significant issues are identified, which are defined as > 10 percent of
responses indicating a big problem or > 20 percent of responses indicating a big or
moderate problem at High Rock Reservoir.
ERM 51 Recreational Use Assessment
October 2005
Yadkin Hydroelectric Project
Project No. 2197
Table 4-15 Potential Recreational Issues at High Rock Reservoir
Low Water Levels at this Reservoir
Scores 1 2 3 4
Big Moderate Slight Not a
Number of Average Problem Problem Problem Problem
Surveys Responses Score (%) (%) (%) (%)
Visitor Use Survey 374 3.8 1 3 6 90
Residential Use Survey 1,159 2.3 46 13 8 33
Priv. Comm. Use Survey 25 2.0 52 16 16 16
Improper Dis osal of LitterJrash, or Toilet.Paper
Big Moderate Slight Not a
Number of Average Problem Problem Problem Problem
Surveys Responses Score (%) (% (% (%)
Visitor Use Survey 377 3.7 3 6 13 78
Residential Use Survey 1,129 2.7 17 23 32 27
Priv. Comm. Use Survey 23 2.8 13 17 43 26
Conflicts With,Other Recreational Users
Big Moderate Slight Not a
Number of Average Problem Problem Problem Problem
Surveys Responses Score (%) (%) (%) (%)
Visitor Use Survey 372 3.9 0 2 7 91
Residential Use Survey 1,095 3.7 2 4 14 81
Priv. Comm. Use Survey 22 3.8 0 0 18 82
Loud, Rude or Inconsiderate Behavior b Other Users
Big Moderate Slight Not a
Number of Average Problem Problem Problem Problem
Surveys Responses Score (%) (%) (%) (%)
Visitor Use Survey 373 3.9 0 3 5 92
Residential Use Survey 1,112 3.5 4 8 22 66
Priv. Comm. Use Survey 23 3.7 0 0 35 65
Boating Hazards (e. g, Stu m's, Shallow Areas
Big Moderate Slight Not a
Number of Average Problem Problem Problem Problem
Surveys Responses Score (%) (%) (%) (%)
Visitor Use Survey 371 3.9 0 3 4 93
Residential Use Survey 1,136 2.5 23 26 27 23
Priv. Comm. Use Survey 23 2.6 22 22 35 22
Availability of Sanitary Facilities
Big Moderate Slight Not a
Number of Average Problem Problem Problem Problem
Surveys Responses Score (%) (%) (%) (%)
Visitor Use Survey 373 3.8 4 3 6 87
ERM 52 Recreational Use Assessment
October 2005
Yadkin Hydroelectric Project
Project No. 2197
Low Water Levels
There were significant differences in responses about low water levels at High Rock
Reservoir between visitors and residents. Respondents to the VUS were asked to rate
water levels on the day they were surveyed. Only four percent of respondents indicated
that low water levels were a big or moderate problem. Conversely, respondents to the
RUS and PCUS were asked more generally to rate water levels for the month for which
they were surveyed. About 59 percent of respondents to the RUS and 68 percent of
respondents to the PCUS indicated water levels were a big or moderate problem, despite
the fact that water levels in High Rock Reservoir were unusually high during the study
period.
In order to better understand the relationship between water levels and recreational
experience, the VUS and RUS responses to the question about how big a problem low
water levels were at this reservoir were evaluated by month. As indicated above,
relatively few respondents to the VUS (4 percent) indicated that low water levels were a
big or moderate problem at High Rock Reservoir. In fact, most of those that did indicate
low water levels were a big or moderate problem were interviewed in May, June, and
July 2003 when water levels in High Rock Reservoir were quite high. There were some
respondents in October thru March when water levels were down over 5 feet, however,
that indicated low water levels were a big or moderate problem.
The RUS responses were also evaluated in terms of the effects of water levels on the
recreation experience (Figure 4-4). In general, as water levels declined, especially below
elevation 620 feet, waterfront residents indicated that "low water" was becoming a
moderate to big problem. However, there was no statistically significant relationship
between water levels and the percentage of respondents that indicated low water levels
was a big or moderate problem by month. Many respondents indicated low water levels
were a big or moderate problem during periods when High Rock Reservoir was nearly
full. In addition, the relatively high water levels in High Rock Reservoir through most of
the study period (May through December) diluted any effect water levels would have on
recreational use and the recreational experience during the prime recreation season.
Improper Disposal of Trash, Litter, and Toilet Paper
The improper disposal of trash, litter, and toilet paper was rated as a big or moderate
problem by 40 percent of waterfront residents and 30 percent of non-waterfront residents,
but only 9 percent of visitors. Respondents to the VUS particularly noted trash, litter, and
toilet paper as a problem at Highway 601 Boat Access Area (n=3), Rowan County Pump
Station Boat Access (n=8), and Little Crane Creek Fishing Access (n=6). In all three
cases the number of responses was low and the results not statistically significant.
ERM 53 Recreational Use Assessment
October 2005
LL
L
?J
N
N
>
d
J
d
Y
O
t
2
tt
L
LL
m
J
m
C7
m
0 0
k
J O
(n (n co LO Z

?
IL I
i 41
.., .
0
1,

i

L s.
x
.
rn
`
o a?
cc cn
..
?? + > o

o .

y

I O Q O
N
N _
3 ?? - N Q I

?
Q

?
(6
Q
O
`
? C, o 0
? : N J N -C

P
0
? I
? Y

Y ?

?J?
J?
9a
.r
J?
?G
an
?a
9e<la?
aO
?a
a'1o?
?a90
?a
9?
a?
as
S
fs/6'
b
T'
n
a?
on
Ta
?G
N W O N O 00 to
N N N cli C)
CD C)
(D (D (D (D w (D (D (D (D (D (D
(SJSn `4) u011en818
Yadkin Hydroelectric Project
Project No. 2197
Conflict with Other Recreational Users
Conflicts with other recreational users was not considered a significant problem by
respondents to any of the surveys, with the RUS having the highest percentage of
respondents (6 percent) indicating a big or moderate problem (see Table 4-15).
Inconsiderate Behavior by Other Users
Inconsiderate behavior by other users was also not considered a significant problem by
respondents to any of the surveys, with the RUS again having the highest percentage of
respondents (12 percent) indicating a big or moderate problem (see Table 4-15).
Boating Hazards
"Boating hazards" were identified as a much greater problem by waterfront residents (49
percent of respondents identified boating hazards as a big or moderate problem) and non-
waterfront residents (44 percent of respondents identified it as a big or moderate
problem) than by visitors (only 3 percent of respondents identified it as a big or moderate
problem). Visitors did not identify as boating hazards as significant issue at any of the
public access recreation areas. The resident's response to this potential issue may be
related to their response to the low water level issue. The boating hazards of shallow
areas and stumps are probably more of an issue during low water levels.
Availability of Sanitary Facilities
Only the VUS asked about the availability of sanitary facilities. Approximately 7 percent
of respondents indicated that the lack of sanitary facilities was a big or moderate problem
(see Table 4-15). The lack of sanitary facilities was specifically identified as a significant
problem at the following individual public access recreation sites (see Appendix K for
detailed summaries):
• Rowan County Pump Station Boat Access (n=8) - 25 percent indicated a big
problem; and
• Little Crane Creek Fishing Area (n=6) - 33 percent indicated a big problem.
ERM 55 Recreational Use Assessment
October 2005
Yadkin Hydroelectric Project
Project No. 2197
4.3 Tuckertown Development Recreational Use
The Tuckertown Development was the last of the Project developments to be built and
was completed in 1962. The dam is located at RM 244 on the Yadkin River. The
development has approximately 75 miles of shoreline, most of which is undeveloped (91
percent of the shoreline is either forested or used for recreational purposes). Although
there are adjacent property owners on Tuckertown Reservoir, there are no private
recreational facilities (e.g., piers) allowed, so for purposes of this study it was assumed
that there were no waterfront property owners on. Tuckertown Reservoir. There are two
commercial campgrounds on the reservoir.
Tuckertown Dam impounds approximately 6,700 acre-feet at the full pool elevation of
564.7 feet. The reservoir has a surface area of 2,560 acres at full pool and extends to the
tailwaters of High Rock Dam. The mean depth of the reservoir at full pool is 16 feet with
a maximum depth of 55 feet.
The Tuckertown Development is essentially operated as a run-of-river facility. It has an
average daily water level fluctuation of less than one foot and a maximum daily
fluctuation of 1 to 3 feet. APGI's current license requires that, except under emergency
conditions or for maintenance, the drawdown of Tuckertown Reservoir is limited to 3 feet
below normal full pool elevation. There is no seasonal drawdown at Tuckertown
Reservoir. Figure 4-5 shows Tuckertown Reservoir water levels for the entire study
period.
The discussion of recreational use at Tuckertown Reservoir is based on the following
information:
• 1,831 Spot Count observations,
• 218 Visitor Use Survey responses,
• 1 Commercial business phone survey, and
• 77 Tailwater Use Surveys.
4.3.1 Recreational Facility Condition
There are 11 public access recreation areas and 2 private commercial recreational areas at
Tuckertown Reservoir (Figure 4-6).
Public Access Recreation Areas
Table 4-16 lists the public recreational facilities present at each recreation area (APGI,
2004). In addition, there are canoe portage routes around High Rock and Tuckertown
dams.
ERM 56 Recreational Use Assessment
October 2005

Iiady
a
i

oa
e
4 W

Aienagal

d
i
fu e n u e

L 0

N
?
. aagweoe(]

as ano
quJ N

O aagolop

p M as we d
q ? aS
t: N
o jsnfinV
V r

c? AInr
o
aunr

AeW

•- C) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
g 9 9 q 9 o o q 0 0 0
LO
C) LO C) LO C) LO C) LO o
C)
° °) M U) °° Lo Lo? C° Lo LO U)
LO
(SJSn `11) U014BA810
High Rock Dam
and Powerhouse
1 HR Dam Tailrace - Daviricnn
HR Dam Tailrace - Rowan ,. Bringle Ferry Boat Access
'-' Lick Creek Fishing Pull-off
Ge
Cedar Creek Fishing Pull-off \ r -?
' i
c
Tuckertown Reservoir
Normal Pool 564.7 ft
Flat Creek Boat Access stj ', `g
Flat Creek Fishing Access
ijao?cre? ` Newsome Road Access
?t U11 s Creep
a 4,
Highway 49 Boat Access
Riles Creek Recreation-

Rowan Countyi, . Davidson County
3tanly County -'l, > ?I ?li Montgomery County
I i
j Tuckertown Pull-off Fishing
Tuckertown Dam
and Powerhouse

I I Tuckertown Reservoir
IJ APGI/Yadkin Recreation Study Alcoa Power Generating Inc.
Tuckertown Reservoir Public Access Yadkin Division
Recreation Sites Recreation Areas
;a3 8,500 4250 0 8500 Feet L Dale: October, 2004
7
t Uwharrie National Forest
Yadkin Hydroelectric Project
Project No. 2197
Table 4-16 Tuckertown Reservoir Public Access Recreation Area Facilities

Site
Parking Number
of Boat Shoreline
-
Picnic
Trash Boat

Number.
Name

Capacity

Launch
Fishing

Tables _

Receptacles
Toilets
Dock/Fishing Campsites Beach
Lanes Capacity Pier
High Rock
Dam Picnic
17 and Fishing 40 0 64 4 14 1 0 0 No
Access vehicles anglers
Area
(Rowan)
High Rock

18 Dam
Tailrace 15
vehicles 0 64
anglers _
0
4
0
0
0
No
Access
Bringle 25
19 Ferry Boat vehicles 1 0 0 0 1 0 No

Access and anglers
trailers
Cedar

20 Creek 12 0 24
0
3
0
0
0
No
Fishing vehicles anglers
Puli-Off
Lick Creek
21 Fishing No legal
0 8
0
0
0
0
0
No
Pull-Off p
arking anglers
Flat Creek 70

22 Boat vehicles
2 56
0
3
0
I
0
No
Access with anglers
Area trailers
Flat Creek

23 Fishing 12
0 64
1
3
0
0
0
No
Access vehicles anglers
Area
Newsome
c
40
24 Road vehi
cles 2 ang
lers 6 3 0 0 0 No
Access
15
Riles Creek vehicles
25 Recreation (5 pull- 0 52 5 6 0 0 0 No
Area off anglers
parking
areas)
Highway 60

26 49 Boat vehicles
3 12
0
5
2
2
0
No
Access with anglers
Area trailers
Tuckertown

27 Pull-Off 24 0 24
0
7
0
0
0
No
Fishing vehicles anglers
Accesses
Appendix K provides the VUS responses on facility conditions for each of the 11 public
access recreation areas. The key findings are summarized below. Most of the facilities
were found to be in acceptable to excellent condition. The VUS respondents identified
the following significant problems (defined as >10 percent of respondents indicating the
facility was totally inadequate or >20 percent of respondents indicating the facility was
mostly or totally inadequate) with public recreational facilities at Tuckertown Reservoir:
High Rock Dam Tailrace Access (n=16) - 19 percent of respondents complained
about the lack of sanitary facilities at this site.
ERM 59 Recreational Use Assessment
October 2005
Yadkin Hydroelectric Project
Project No. 2197
• Tuckertown Pull-off Fishing Access (n=10) - 20 percent of respondents
complained about the lack of toilets at this site.
Some respondents complained about the lack of campsites, toilets, parking, fishing piers,
and other recreational facilities at the Cedar Creek Fishing Pull-off, but there were too
few responses (n=4) to draw any firm conclusions. The recreational facilities at the High
Rock Dam Picnic and Fishing Access, Bringle Ferry Boat Access, Cedar Creek Fishing
Pull-off, Lick Creek Fishing Pull-off, Flat Creek Boat Access, Flat Creek Fishing Access,
Newsome Road Access, Riles Creek Recreation Area, and Highway 49 Boat Access were
all found to be acceptable.
The TUS did not identify any problems with the condition of recreational facilities at the
High Rock Dam tailwaters.
Commercial Businesses and Organizations
Table 4-17 lists the recreational facilities present at the two private recreation areas at
Tuckertown Reservoir. Customers of these private businesses and members of these
organizations were not surveyed regarding their opinions on the condition of recreational
facilities at these private recreation areas as part of this study, so no information on
facility condition is available.
Table 4-17 Tuckertown Reservoir Private Recreational Facilities
Commercial".Businesses Boat Ramp
. Boat Fishing
Swim/Beach
Campsites
Pier Pier
J. T. Morgan Campground * Yes Yes No No Yes
H.B. Newsome Property 1 launch lane 1 l Yes 31
- This commercial property did not respond to the Commercial Business and Private Organization phone survey,. The
information provided is from a previous inventory of recreation facilities.
Canoe Portage
The Tuckertown Dam canoe portage trail, which provides canoe and kayak access to
Narrows Reservoir, is approximately 1,600 feet long and is located on the east side of the
dam. The takeout is marked with "Yadkin River Canoe Portage Trail" signs and the
portage trail is marked. No surveys were completed at the Tuckertown Dam canoe
portage during the survey. Figure 4-7 provides some representative photographs of the
Tuckertown Dam canoe portage.
ERM 60 Recreational Use Assessment
October 2005
Yadkin Hydroelectric Project
Project No. 2197
Figure 4-7 Representative Photographs of the Tuckertown Dam Portage Trail
Photo 1: Tuckertown Dam canoe take-out signs
Photo 2: Tuckertown Dam canoe portage trail
ERM Recreational Use Assessment
October 2005
Yadkin Hydroelectric Project
Project No. 2197
4.3.2 Recreational Activities
Fishing, both by boat and on the riverbank, is the primary recreational activity at all 11
public access recreation areas at Tuckertown Reservoir (Table 4-18). Other common
(over 20 percent participation rate) recreational activities include picnicking (primarily at
High Rock Dam Picnic and Fishing Access and Riles Creek Recreation Area),
swimming, and just motor boating (primarily at Highway 49 Boat Access Area).
Occasional (more than 5 percent participation rate) hiking, canoeing/kayaking, personal
watercraft use, camping, and sunbathing occur at various recreation areas.
4.3.3 Recreational Use
Recreation users access Tuckertown Reservoir via the 11 public access recreation areas,
two commercial businesses, and the High Rock Dam canoe portage trail. There are no
waterfront residences, private waterfront communities, or private organizations with pier
permits from APGI or with direct access to Tuckertown Reservoir. Tailwater Recreation
Use surveys are discussed below and in Section 6.0, but are not included in estimating
overall recreational use to avoid double counting since these users are included in the
public access recreation area use estimates.
Public Access Recreation Area Use
Annual recreational use at the 1 I public access areas on Tuckertown Reservoir exceeded
51,000 recreation days (Table 4-19). About 60 percent of this use occurred at the
Highway 49 and Flat Creek Boat Accesses. As indicated above, fishing is the most
popular recreational activity at Tuckertown Reservoir and several of the public recreation
Areas receive relatively heavy use in the spring and early summer, but relatively light use
for the remainder of the year.
Commercial and Organization Use
There are two commercial campgrounds on Tuckertown Reservoir - the J.T. Morgan
Campground and the H.B. Newsome Property. Only the Newsome Property responded
to the phone survey.
The Newsome Property is primarily used for camping on weekends in the spring and
summer. Since these campers are coming to the reservoir, it is assumed that all campers
use the reservoir each day that they are at the campground. Estimates of recreational use
were based on information provided in a phone survey with the owner/operator.
Total annual commercial recreational use at Tuckertown Reservoir is estimated at 2,465
recreation days, exclusive of any recreational use at the J.T. Morgan Campground.
ERM 62 Recreational Use Assessment
October 2005
U n
N
?z
U U
N
p? O

4F
V
RS
O
c?
a?
L
U
a
U
C?
W
C
?i
e^?
L
a
L
O
non
4?
O
L:
v
L
a
0)
W
U
V
O
a
0
L
.yi
V
O
00
1?1
.n
W
C
O
L
a
C
O
y.1
L
v
P4
H
iaklo 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
It O O o O O O O O O N
Su4unH 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
d 0 0 0 0 m m o m m O N
Suii1eg 0
O 0
O 0
O 0
O 0
O 0
O 0
O 0
CD 0
O 0
O 0
O 0
O
SuT E un
. Q S o° 0 0 0° o°
00 0 0° 0 0 0 0
' O eM O O Lo O N co
Sir ?luDid N o a o 0 o a o
M O d O O C3, m O N N N
S*jxnspulm 0
O 0
O 0
O 0
O 0
O 0
O 0
O 0
O 0
O 0
m 0
O 0
O
Suidiue? o° o° 1* ° OR
o°
a°
n \ o N o m C1 0 L o o Ir
?uTiKS EM 0 0 0 0 0 a 0 0 0 0 OR
O O O O O Cl) O O O 'o O N
Suinig la f 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Cl O o O O .D CD O O .D O N
.. 2uTIUUUMS OR
O 0
O 0
O 0
O 0
O
N 0
rn 0
O 0
00 °
my ° o
°O
SuiKiH 0 OR 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
d O O O O \0 Lrn O in co O Cl)
SUAi¢t{Ex pUE SuiaouEJ o O O O Lo O m O m m M.
SuTgsT3g 0 0
00 0 0 0 0 0

N

0
OR 0 0 0 0
n 000 n In N °
O O? 00
-- SUi Sig EO
u ? S
(71
CD
m
00 o°
o o°
N o 00 N
- ugroft 3olow
- -
°y o
O 0
00 0
O 0
O 0
?o 0
0% 0
O 0
O
N o
r-+ 0
D\
pa;ajdiuo:) sdaAxnS JO 'ON N N V N M N ~
N
U)
H

H
U
Q

z o

? O O
G C W
dG
R > N O .. ?. N y y ? U
CJ Q

U
V G
[ V
¢ V R Q G .-?
R^ i O
m y
w o o w c O
m .R v
w
m
w
G
x
rn
'
c
H w
H
C H
C y
y , v
v x x a, y d 3 -? cn
z
R R

-bc U

U w w p
H c. R
x Q
w O
Q Q •? ? V R R v ? _ V (?
x x m U :? w u Z G x E O
.rte. O L? m O- O ti N m d? u7
'z' ?--? N N N N N N N N N
N ?
? o
N 0
w?.
O
?zs
U
N
ce4
M
w
Yadkin Hydroelectric Project
Project No. 2197
Canoe Portage
There were no paddlers that signed the registry at the Tuckertown Dam canoe/kayak
portage trail. Therefore we have no basis for estimating recreational use of the portage
trail.
Table 4-19 Tuckertown Public Access Recreation Use by Site and Month (in
recreation days)
Site
No. Site Name May June Jul Aug. Sept. `Oct. Nov. Dec. Jan. Feb. Mar. Aril Total
High Rock
Dam Picnic
and Fishing
17 Access 1056 927 957 441 160 140 204 31 0 0 75 662 4,653
High Rock
Dam
Tailrace
18 Access 870 727 934 531 194 422 86 6 18 0 0 334 4,121
Bringle
Ferry Boat
19 Access 796 903 1,029 484 258 282 156 36 0 45 102 352 4,443
Cedar Creek
Fishing
20 Pull-off 58 219 44 276 4 43 0 0 0 0 26 236 906
Lick Creek
Fishing
21 Pull-off 14 0 119 0 0 37 15 0 0 0 102 85 372
Flat Creek
Boat Access
22 Area 2,414 1,086 3,446 2,467 1,622 683 431 56 0 91 210 1,637 14,143
Flat Creek
Fishing
23 Access Area 69 240 358 125 25 38 141 0 0 0 0 563 1,559
Newsome
Road
24 Access 207 235 59 82 5 66 56 31 0 0 50 420 1,211
Riles Creek
Recreation
25 Area 473 795 717 345 68 88 70 0 32 0 50 409 3,047
Highway 49
Boat Access
26 Area 2,611 3,281 3,099 2,762 413 395 602 720 48 209 1,013 1,645 16,798
Tuckertown
Pull-off
Fishing
27 Access 106 63 211 0 0 10 0 72 0 63 9 99 633
Total 8,674 8,476 10,973 7,513 2,749 2,204 1,761 952 98 408 1,637 6,442 51,887
Total Recreational Use
The only recreational access to Tuckertown Reservoir is via the 11 public access
recreation areas, the two commercial campgrounds, and the High Rock canoe portage.
Total recreational use at Tuckertown Reservoir is estimated at approximately 54,352
recreation days per year (Table 4-20). Recreational use at Tuckertown Reservoir varies
by month, type of day, and overnight versus day users. These variations in uses are
described below.
ERM 64 Recreational Use Assessment
October 2005
Yadkin Hydroelectric Project
Project No. 2197
Table 4-20 Estimated Annual Tuckertown Reservoir Recreation Use
(in recreation days)
Month Public
Access
Rec_Use Waterfront
Resident'
Ric Use 'Private-
Community,
Rec Use Commercial
and Club
Rec Use Canoe'
Portage
Use '. Total %0V
Total.
Use
May 8,674 0 0 379 0 9,053 17
June 8,476 0 0 465 0 8,941 16
Jul 10,973 0 0 530 0 11,503 21
August 7,513 0 0 550 0 8,063 15
September 2,749 0 0 97 0 2,846 5
October 2,204 0 0 39 0 2,243 4
November 1,761 0 0 40 0 1,801 3
December 952 0 0 0 0 952 2
January 98 0 0 0 0 98 <1
February 408 0 0 0 0 408 1
March 1,637 0 0 183 0 1,820 3
April 6,442 0 0 182 0 6,624 12
Total 51,887 0 0 2,465 0 54,352 100
Recreational Use by Month
In terms of month, recreation use was high from April through August, dropping sharply
after Labor Day. Recreational use remained relatively low over the winter and began to
pick up in March, especially at recreation sites favored by anglers.
Recreational Use by Type of Day
Recreational use was generally highest during major holidays (i.e., Memorial Day, 4th of
July, and Labor Day weekends) and weekends during the summer, with significantly less
use on weekdays. Since weekdays represent such a large percentage of total days (70
percent), total recreational use was highest on weekdays. Visitor recreational use by type
of day was distributed as follows:
Weekdays - 47 percent of total recreational use, 94 recreation days/weekday
Weekend days - 44 percent of total recreational use, 226 recreation days/weekend
day
Holidays - 10 percent of total recreational use, 555 recreation days/holiday
Day versus Overnight Use
Although none of the public access recreation areas provide any camping facilities, some
respondents to the VUS indicated that they were camping. Several respondents at the
following public access recreation areas indicated that they were camping:
• High Rock Dam Picnic and Fishing Access Area
• High Rock Dam Tailrace Access
• Cedar Creek Fishing Pull-off
ERM 65 Recreational Use Assessment
October 2005
Yadkin Hydroelectric Project
Project No. 2197
Flat Creek Boating Access
Flat Creek Fishing Access
Riles Creek Recreation Area
It is not known whether these recreational users were camping at these specific recreation
areas, elsewhere at Tuckertown Reservoir, or at other campsites not associated with the
Yadkin Project. For purposes of estimating overnight recreational use, however, these
recreational users were all assumed to be camping somewhere along Tuckertown
Reservoir. The number of campers at the public access recreation areas is estimated at
1,487 persons annually. The Newsome Campground has 31 campsites and recreational
use was estimated at 2,465 recreation days (nights) per year. Therefore, overnight use
represents approximately 7 percent (3,952 recreation days/54,352 total recreation days) of
the total Tuckertown Reservoir recreational use. There may also be some anglers fishing
at night, but we do not have any data on which to base an estimate of this use.
4.3.4 Recreational Facility Capacity
The adequacy of existing recreational facilities in terms of capacity was evaluated for
parking areas and boat launches.
Parking Areas
In terms of parking capacity at the public access recreation areas on Tuckertown
Reservoir, only 4 out of 1,831 observations did the number of vehicles observed during
Spot Counts exceed the capacity of the parking areas (Table 4-21). In fact, there were
only 13 occasions when the number of observed vehicles at one time exceeded 75 percent
of available capacity. The Flat Creek Fishing Access Area recreation site was the most
frequently at or above capacity, but this still only represented about 2 percent of the time.
The High Rock Dam Tailrace Access was the parking area with the highest average
annual percent capacity, but this was only 17 percent of available capacity.
ERM 66 Recreational Use Assessment
October 2005
Yadkin Hydroelectric Project
Project No. 2197
Table 4-21 Tuckertown Public Access Recreation Sites Parking Capacity

Maximum # of Vehicles > coq°i°

C
i
Average # ,of Vehicles
Annual Average
" Site Number of Parkin apac
ty
Number Name Observations g
Capacity # o
of Percent,
# f
o Percent
Number Date Day
s
Ti of Weekends Weekdays

V of
me Time
ehicles
Ga aci
High Rock
Dam Picnic

17
and Fishing
163 40
23
5/17/03
Sat.
0
0%
4
0
1
6
2
7
5%
Access vehicles . . .
Area
High Rock
18 Dam
Tailrace 163 15
vehicles 11 6/22/03
7/19/03 Sun.
Sat. 0 0% 2.4 1.9 2.1 17%
Access
Bringle 25
19 Ferry Boat 170 vehicles 22 5/17/03 Sat. 0 0% 3
5 8
1 2
7 2%

Access and . . .
trailers
Cedar
20 Fish k 163 12
veh Iles 17 8/3/03 Sun. 1 1% 0.6 0.4 0.5 4%
Pull-Off
Lick Creek

21
Fishing
163 No legal
4
10/26/03
Sun.
NA
NA
0
2
1
0
0
2
NA
Pull-Off Parking . . .
Flat Creek 70
22 Access 164 vehi
with s
62
4/24/04
Sat.
0
0%
10.8
3.3
6.9
10%
Area trailers
Flat Creek
23 AFishin ccess 164 12
veh Iles 23 7/27/03 Sun. 3 2% 1.2 0.6 0.9 8%
Area
Newsome
24 Road 163 vehi20 cles
9
4/13/04
Sun.
0
0%
0.8
0.5
0.7
3%
Access
Riles Creek 7/19/03 Sat

25
Recreation
163 15
vehicles
10
7/27/03 .
Sun.
0
0%
2.1
1.3
1.7
11%
Area 4/03/04 Sat.
Highway 60

26 49 Boat
Access
181 vehicles
with
48
8/23/03
Sat.
0
0%
12.7
5.0
8.6
13%
Area trailers
Tuckertown
27 P

ull-Ongf
Fishi

174 24

veh Iles

10

7/20/03

Sun.

0

0%

0.3

0.3

0.3

1%
Access
Boat Launches
Four public access recreation areas at Tuckertown Reservoir have boat launches (i.e.,
Bringle Ferry and Flat Creek Boat Access areas with a single concrete launch lane each,
Newsome Road Access Area with two launch lanes, and the Highway 49 Boat Access
Area with three concrete launch lanes). Generally, each launch lane will accommodate
approximately 50 launches and retrievals per day (SOBA, 1989). Based on the Spot
Count observations of the number of trailers present, recreational use at the Flat Creek
Boat Access exceeded capacity once (2 percent of the time) during the study period, with
as many as 58 trailers observed at one time. Boating use was also high at the Highway
ERM 67 Recreational Use Assessment
October 2005
Yadkin Hydroelectric Project
Project No. 2197
49 Boat Access area, but this site has three launch lanes, which were adequate to
accommodate demand. In terms of public opinion as expressed in the Visitor Use
Survey, approximately 4 percent of respondents (n=25) identified crowded boat launch
conditions as a big or moderate problem at the Bringle Ferry Boat Access, 12 percent
(n=33) at the Flat Creek Boat Access, 0 percent (n=7) at Newsome Road Access, and 19
percent (n=31) at the Highway 49 Boat Access Area (see Appendix K). Overall, the
existing boat launches appear adequate to meet existing demand (Table 4-22).
Table 4-22 Tuckertown Public Access Recreation Area Boat Launch Capacity
Peak Day Full Year.
Number, > 100% Capacity
Site
--Name of
Existing
Avg Number

,.Number:

Launch .

Number

Turnover
Number of
of

# of

Percent of

Lanes Date
of
Rate Boats Launch
Times
Ti-
Trailers ..Launched Lanes
Needed
19 Bringle Ferry 1 5/17/03 13 2
67 35 1 0 0%
Boat Access .
22 Flat Creek Boat 2 4/24/04 36 3
18 114 3 1 2%
Access Area .
24 Newsome Road 2 8/9/03 2 3
69 7 1 0 0%
Access .
Highway 49
26 Boat Access 3 6/1/03 34 2.52 86 2 0 0%
Area
Assumes capacity of each launch lane is 50 boats per SOBA, 1989.
4.3.5 Recreational Issues
Recreational user perceptions of potential issues at Tuckertown Reservoir were collected
through the VUS and TUS. Respondents to the VUS and the TUS rated six potential
recreational issues on a scale of I to 4, with 1= big problem, 2=moderate problem,
3=slight problem, 4=no problem. As Table 4-23 indicates, the respondents to the VUS
did not identify any significant problems (defined as >10 percent of responses indicating
a big problem or >20 percent of responses indicating a big or moderate problem) at
Tuckertown Reservoir. Respondents to the TUS identified the availability of sanitary
facilities as a significant problem.
ERM 68 Recreational Use Assessment
October 2005
Yadkin Hydroelectric Project
Project No. 2197
Table 4-23 Potential Recreational Issues at Tuckertown Reservoir
Low Water Levels at this:Reservoir
Scores 1 2 3 4
Big Moderate Slight Not a
Number of Average Problem Problem Problem Problem
Surveys Responses Score (%) (%) (%) NO
Visitor Use Survey 208 3.8 1 5 7 87
Tailwater Use Survey 71 3.9 1 3 3 93
Im ro er Dis osal of Litter; Trash; or Toilet Paper
Big Moderate Slight Not a
Number of Average Problem Problem Problem Problem
Surveys Responses Score (%) (%) (%) (%)
Visitor Use Survey 213 3.5 8 8 9 75
Tailwater Use Survey 70 3.7 0 10 13 77
Conflicts With Other Recreational Users
Big Moderate Slight Not a
Number of Average Problem Problem Problem Problem
Surveys Responses Score (%) (%) (%) (%)
Visitor Use Survey 211 3.9 0 3 5 91
Tailwater Use Survey 70 3.8 0 0 15 85
Loud, Rude' or Inconsiderate Behavior b Other Users
Big Moderate Slight Not a
Number of Average Problem Problem Problem Problem
Surveys Responses Score (%) (%) (%) (%)
Visitor Use Survey 209 3.8 2 2 5 91
Tailwater Use Survey 69 3.8 0 0 15 85
Boating Hazards (e. g, Stum PSI Shallow Areas
Big Moderate Slight Not a
Number of Average Problem Problem Problem Problem
Surveys Responses Score (%) (%) (%) (%)
Visitor Use Survey 210 3.8 1 5 7 87
Tailwater Use Survey 66 3.9 2 0 2 97
Availability of Sanitary Facilities
Big Moderate Slight Not a
Number of Average Problem Problem Problem Problem
Surveys Responses Score (%) (%) (%) (%)
Visitor Use Survey 212 3.6 5 5 10 79
Tailwater Use Survey 70 3.6 9 0 13 79
ERM 69 Recreational Use Assessment
October 2005
Yadkin Hydroelectric Project
Project No. 2197
For only two issues did more than 10 percent of respondents indicate a big or moderate
problem:
• Improper disposal of litter and trash;
• Availability of sanitary facilities.
About 16 percent of VUS respondents and about 15 percent of TUS respondents
indicated that the improper disposal of litter and trash was a big or moderate problem.
This was particularly noted as a problem at High Rock Dam Picnic and Fishing Access in
Rowan County (32 percent of VUS respondents identified it as a big or moderate
problem), High Rock Dam Tailrace Access in Davidson County (19 percent of VUS
respondents), Cedar Creek Fishing Pull-off (25 percent of VUS respondents), Riles Creek
Recreation Area (15 percent of VUS respondents), and Tuckertown Pull-off Fishing
Access (40 percent of VUS respondents). There are 14 trash receptacles at High Rock
Dam Picnic and Fishing Access and 4 trash receptacles at the High Rock Dam Tailrace
Access, but nearly all of these are located near the parking and picnic areas. Many
recreation users hike along the fishing trails on both sides of the Yadkin River to reach
the High Rock Dam tailrace, and this is where the trash and litter problems are the worst
(Figure 4-8). Cedar Creek and Riles Creek access areas are located immediately adjacent
to River Road (State Route 2152) and Stokes Ferry Road (State Route 1004) and may
receive illegal dumping in addition to trash generated by recreational users. Tuckertown
Pull-off Fishing Access received the most complaints about litter and trash. Although 5
trash receptacles are provided at this site, recreational use is very dispersed along the
shoreline, which makes it difficult to conveniently locate trash receptacles for all users.
Finally, about 10 percent of VUS respondents and 15 percent of TUS respondents
indicated the availability of sanitary facilities was a big or moderate problem. This was
particularly noted at the High Rock Dam Tailrace Access (26 percent of VUS
respondents and 15 percent of TUS identified it as a big or moderate problem), Riles
Creek Recreation Area (13 percent), the Highway 49 Boat Access Area (16 percent), and
Tuckertown Pull-off Fishing Access (30 percent). High Rock Dam Tailrace Access,
Riles Creek Recreation Area, and Tuckertown Pull-off Fishing Access all do not have
any sanitary facilities, primarily because the dispersed nature of shoreline fishing makes
conveniently locating a toilet for all users at these sites very difficult. Highway 49 Boat
Access has one portable toilet, which may not be adequate for this heavily used
recreational site (over 16,000 annual recreation days). Although only 6 percent of
respondents identified the availability of sanitary facilities a big or moderate problem at
Flat Creek Boating Access, this heavily used recreation site (over 14,000 annual
recreation days) does not offer any sanitary facilities. See Appendix K for detailed
responses for individual public access recreation areas.
ERM 70 Recreational Use Assessment
October 2005
Yadkin Hydroelectric Project
Project No. 2197
Figure 4-8 High Rock Dam Tailrace Litter and Trash Photographs
Photo 1: Trash and litter at the High Rock Dam Tailrace Access
Photo 2: Trash and litter at the High Rock Darn Tailrace Access
ERM Recreational Use Assessment
October 2005
Yadkin Hydroelectric Project
Project No. 2197
4.4 Narrows Development Recreational Use
The Narrows Development was the first of the Project developments to be built and was
completed in 1917. The dam is located at RM 236.5 on the Yadkin River. The
development has approximately 115 miles of shoreline. Much of this shoreline is
undeveloped (approximately 48 percent is forested), although there is significant
residential and some commercial development along approximately 43 percent of the
shoreline. There are 1,007 waterfront residences with pier permits on Narrows Reservoir
(Badin Lake).
Narrows Dam impounds an available storage capacity of approximately 129,100 acre-feet
at the full pool elevation of 509.8 feet. At full pool, the surface area of the reservoir is
approximately 5,353 acres. The mean depth of the reservoir is 45 feet with a maximum
depth of 175 feet.
The Narrows Development is generally operated as a run-of-river facility. Narrows
Reservoir (Badin Lake) has a normal daily water level fluctuation of less than one foot
and a maximum daily fluctuation of 1 to 2 feet. Historically, the maximum annual
drawdown at Narrows Reservoir has averaged approximately 3 feet. Narrows Reservoir
does have available storage, which may be used during periods of very low streamflow to
maintain the required minimum downstream releases. Figure 4-9 shows Narrows
Reservoir water levels for the entire study period.
The discussion of recreational use at Narrows Reservoir is based on the following
information:
• 2,560 Spot Count observations,
• 341 Visitor Use Survey responses,
• 475 Waterfront Resident Use Survey responses,
• 68 Private Community Use Survey responses,
• 5 Commercial Businesses and Clubs Phone Surveys,
• 87 Tailwater Use Survey responses, and
• 2 Canoe Portage registrations.
4.4.1 Recreational Facility Condition
There are 14 public access recreation areas and 5 private recreation areas at Narrows
Reservoir (Figure 4-10).
Public Access Recreation Areas
Table 4-24 lists the recreational facilities present at each recreation area (APGI, 2004).
In addition, there is a canoe portage around Tuckertown Dam.
ERM 72 Recreational Use Assessment
October 2005

judV
A?
? ? va
t'
F?p
wTI"

I

-

a

O
x

a
9

f..

p? a,

`

a

en jqa
1
E ! N =

fuenuer
. SwV
i CV
jagwoooa

aaquaanoN

O
aago;op

f
3 O

s aaq
uaa;daS
O o
N
L
ca
o ;snBny
Z ? I
a Ain
o? c

aunt

? I
? Aew
¦
I.L O O
O O O
O O O O O
O O O O O
O O
O O
O O,
O
LO O
LO LO LO
Lo O_ M O U)
LO M a C) m Cr O
? LO O
? m
(SJSn `W u01 1enGIG
Yadkin Hydroelectric Project
Project No. 2197
Table 4-24 Narrows Reservoir Public Access Area Recreation Facilities
Number Shoreline Boat
Site
Number
Name Parldng
Capacity of Boat
Launch
R'shing Picnic
Tables Trash
Receptacles
Toilets . Dock
%Fishing
Campsites.
Beach
Lanes Capacity, Pier
Tuckertown

29
Dam Tailrace 44
vehicles
0
48 anglers
0
10
1
0
0
No
Access
6
30 Garr Creek vehicles 1 8 anglers 0 2 0 0 0 No
Access Area with
trailers
Old Whitney
32 Fishing Pier 65

33
and Boat
vehicles 2 24 anglers 6 13 1 2 0 No
Access Area
Lake Forest 30
34
CG/Fish vehicles

1

0

0

0

0

l

55

No
35 Tales
Marina
Tales with sl
ips
trailers
Circle Drive 70
37 Boat Access vehicles 3 24 anglers 0 0 2 3 0 No
Area with
trailers
50
38 Lakemont vehicles 2 6 anglers 0 0 0 0 0 No
Access Area with
trailers
UNF Holt's

39
Cabin Picnic 12
vehicles
0
13 anglers
7
4
1
0
0
No
Area
40 UNF Walk-in 15 0 8 anglers 0 0 0 1 0 No
Fishing Pier vehicles
UNF Badin
41 Lake 68 0 >50
34
3
6
0
34
No
Cam round ang
lers
23
42 UNF Cove vehicles 1 32 anglers 16 0 2 1 0 No
Boat Landing with
trailers
43 Palmerville 13 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 No
Access Area vehicles
Badin Lake

44
Swim/Picnic 175
0 130
15
31
4
0
0
Yes
Area vehicles anglers
75
Badin Lake vehicles
45 Boat Access with 3 28 anglers 9 12 2 2 0 No
trailers
Badin Lake -60
47
Group Cam
vehicles 0 0 18 9 4 0 -35 No
Appendix K provides the VUS responses on facility conditions for each of the 14 public
access recreation areas. Most of the facilities were found to be in acceptable to excellent
condition. The VUS respondents identified the following significant problems (defined
as >1 0 percent of responses indicating the facility was totally inadequate or >20 percent
of responses indicating the facility was mostly or totally inadequate) with recreational
facilities at Tuckertown Reservoir:
ERM 75 Recreational Use Assessment
October 2005
Yadkin Hydroelectric Project
Project No. 2197
• Garr Creek Access (n=14) - 21 percent of respondents complained about the lack
of any sanitary facilities and 21 percent indicated that the parking lot was mostly
or totally inadequate;
• Circle Drive Boat Access (n=46) - 20 percent of respondents indicated that the
toilets were mostly or totally inadequate;
• Lakemont Access (n=13) - 46 percent of respondents considered the boat ramp
mostly or totally inadequate, 31 percent considered the parking lot mostly or
totally inadequate, 30 percent complained about the lack of any sanitary facilities
and fishing piers; and
• Badin Lake Campground (n=24) - 21 percent of respondents indicated the toilets
were mostly or totally inadequate.
Some respondents complained about the boat ramp, parking lot, and lack of lighting at
the Palmerville Boat Access, but the number of responses was too low (n=2) to draw any
firm conclusions. The condition of recreational facilities at Tuckertown Dam Tailrace
Access, Old Whitney Fishing Pier and Public Boat Access, Lake Forest
Campground/Fish Tales Marina, Holt's Cabin Picnic Area, Uwharrie National Forest
Walk-in Fishing Pier, Cove Boat Landing, Badin Lake Swim and Picnic Area, Badin
Lake Boat Access, and Badin Lake Group Campground was found to be at least
acceptable by most respondents.
The TUS did not identify any problems with the condition of recreational facilities at the
Tuckertown Dam tailwaters.
Commercial Businesses and Organizations
Table 4-25 lists the recreational facilities present at each private recreation area.
Customers of these private businesses and members of these organizations were not
surveyed regarding their opinions on the condition of recreational facilities at these
private recreation areas as part of this study, so no information on facility condition is
available.
Table 4-25 Narrows Reservoir Private Recreational Facilities
Business or Organization Boat Ramp Boat Fishing Swim/Beach Camping
Pier Pier
Old North State Club Marina Yes Yes No No No
Badin Shores Resort Yes Yes Yes Yes No
Badin Lake Ski Club Yes Yes Yes No No
Whip-O-Will Campground No Yes Yes Yes 63
Marina campsites
Camp Barnhardt Yes No No Yes 15 group
sites
ERM 76 Recreational Use Assessment
October 2005
Yadkin Hydroelectric Project
Project No. 2197
Canoe Portage
The Narrows Dam canoe portage trail, which provides canoe and kayak access from
Narrows to Falls reservoirs, is approximately 1,200 feet long and is located on the west
side of Narrows Dam. The takeout is marked with a "Yadkin River Canoe Portage Trail"
sign and the portage trail is marked.
4.4.2 Recreational Activities
Residents and visitors generally have similar recreational interests, although motor
boating and swimming tend to be more popular with residents, while fishing (both by
boat and along the riverbank) is more popular with visitors (Table 4-26).
Table 4-26 Narrows Resident and Visitor Recreational Activities (percent of total
recreation days)
Recreational Activity Public Access Areas' Waterfront' Residents Non- Waterfront
Residents
Motor boating 9% 26% 23%
Boat fishing 19% 9% 19%
Bank fishing 18% 12% 17%
Canoeing/kayaking 3% 1% 2%
Swimming 12% 16% 13%
Personal Watercraft use 2% 12% 6%
Camping 10% 0% 2%
Windsurfing 0% 0% 0%
W aterskiin 1% 6% 4%
Picnicking 9% 2% 3%
Hiking 4% 1% 2%
Sunbathing 8% 12% 8%
Sailing 0% 0% 1%
Other 5% 3% 0%
Total 100% 100% 100%
The recreation participation rate for each public access recreation area is presented in
Table 4-27. Boat and bank fishing are the primary recreational activities (over 40 percent
participation rate) at public access recreation areas at Narrows Reservoir. Other common
recreational activities (over 20 percent participation rate) include swimming and
picnicking (especially at the UNF Cove Boat Landing and the Badin Lake Swim and
Picnic Area), camping (especially at the recreation areas within the Uwharrie National
Forest), and motor boating (especially at the Badin and Circle Drive boat accesses).
Occasional (more than 5 percent participation rate) sunbathing, hiking, hunting and
canoeing/kayaking occur at various recreation areas.
ERM 77 Recreational Use Assessment
October 2005
U ?
N ?
N
a' O
U Z
U U y-
N ?

? C
O
w
C?
L
u

u
RS
W
bA
?i
M
Qr
.U
F+
L
CC
a
0
0
Ci
u
L
a
W5
V W
u ?
U
C
,p O
3
O +?
L L
ca G..i
zC
? .O
N ?
et u
a? u
? u
H
iaq#O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
- N O cN O O co O <x °o .D O N O

Sunurtg 0 0 0 0 ° 0 0 0 °
10 o 0
o 0 0
N o N o <n d o ?r ° o N
gulp-S 0 0 0 o° 0 0 0° o° o o° o° o° o° o o°
O O N O O O O O O M O O O O --+
??uiyaequng -I 0 0 0 N -. 0 0
0
0
0
0
0 0
O O '.y O )M+ N M O N M
?IIT JIIIJI

?
cI 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
OR
OR
0

0

0

0

0°

o
.
. N 'D O eN O 'Ny
t,
o M
?
O
N
O
N
Jln?mspuiM
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0 0
0
0
0
0
0
V O N O O O o0 O O O O O O +
?ural>z
? 0 0 0 0 e 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
., N N N O N MM
N N n O N N O
H N
2ui.IS .1olum 0 0 0 0 0 OR 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
O O O N O O O W M O O O M
31nrxS as j 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
O o
C4 o\ o o "t 0 0 o N N
M
d
?upuuu!M
S 0 0 0 0 0 OR 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
N N '?-+ O cm-+ m+ cN-+ N M O u N M N
$up O'Z 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 OR
'y C. ? O N N °O N N lo a, m O O m
.SUIT iex Su[aouej , 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
_ N O N O O O N N 'y 'D O M O lD
guiusi3 xuEg 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

- M
d` ID
M N
N m
N N °D °O
Lo
N N
m u) N
lo O N
? °D
N c
M
d

SIIIIiSI1 WOf( 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
_
-.
- p
co
N u)
D u)
N O
N N
N In
N N
'-+ to
M O
O'y c?
N u)
eN M
M M
?IIT}YOg 300,, 0 0° o
ID o°
u) o°
u) o°
M o° 0 0° 0 0° 0 0° 0 0
.. N N
N
N
M
N O O N
N
N
m
N
M
M O
N
palajdtuo's fanmS jo •oH, co d' ?M M N <N g m N m o?

.
N
u)
-,t
r+
r+
N
N
M
u)
N M
M
m
V
`?
F.
v
R
G
?
G
cu R R

^
v p U
w
L=

-
7

m
v
'G
b
G
G .
¢ (n
z Q
F R V G
:E U C C-
o y 1 -5 a & v v d u-)

V o v
V
V
R w
R
o v
V V R O
?7
?L cu y
o > .?L G v .4: N G
c) U 3 w Q x 3 = U v G °' wR Qw
?
R a, v w w w w ? w
U .-i O d

p
w?..
V7
Q
N
O
M M
M
N u)
M
N
M
°D
M,
d`
M
O
rM
N
N
cM
M,
c1•
?
-M
M M
S h
? O
O
N d
? O
Q
O
Q
O

U
00
n
Yadkin Hydroelectric Project
Project No. 2197
4.4.3 Recreational Use
Recreation users access Narrows Reservoir via the 14 public access recreation areas,
1,007 waterfront residences with pier permits from APGI, approximately 4,669 non-
waterfront private community residences, and five commercial business or private
organizations with direct public access. There is a canoe portage around Tuckertown
Dam. The TUS results are discussed below and in Section 6.0, but are not included in
estimating overall recreational use to avoid double counting since these users were
included in the public access recreation area use estimates.
Public Access Area Recreational Use
Annual recreational use at the 14 public access areas on Narrows Reservoir exceeded
127,000 recreation days (Table 4-28). Over half of this use (54 percent) occurred at just
three of the public access areas - Circle Drive Boat Access, Old Whitney Boat Access,
and Badin Boat Access. The UNF Badin Lake Campground also received relatively
heavy use, although less than the other three sites.
Table 4-28 Narrows Public Access Recreational Use by Site and Month (in
recreation days)
Site
No. Site Name May June Jul Aug. Sept. Oct. Nov.: Dec. Jan. Feb. Mar. A rih Total "
Tuckertown
Dam
29 Tailrace 1,493 1,003 1,678 876 266 421 216 91 30 8 285 809 7,176
Garr Creek
30 Access Area 362 596 285 193 432 192 16 0 26 15 187 356 2,660
Old Whitney
Fishing
32/33 PierBoat 3,800 4,234 3,129 3,065 1,365 1,320 857 227 67 424 1,003 1,372 20,863
Lake Forest
CG/Fish
34/35 Tale Marina 782 575 878 389 458 714 200 0 0 15 213 507 4,731
Circle Drive
37 Boat Access 4,016 4,197 3,900 3,050 1,583 1,767 1,332 749 705 397 2,911 3,274 27,881
Lakemont
38 Access Area 560 813 1,292 599 435 105 41 115 134 370 349 839 5,652
UNF Holt's
Cabin Picnic
39 Area 211 122 45 203 7 17 0 0 0 0 222 90 917
UNF Walk-
in Fishing
40 Pier 810 626 1,140 454 237 232 8 0 0 0 103 82 3,692
UNF Badin
Lake
41 Campground 2,948 2,687 2,828 1,854 445 726 66 0 0 60 472 485 12,571
UNF Cove
Boat
42 Landing 1,506 1,492 1,840 1,214 676 235 200 0 0 0 0 5 7,168
Palmerville
43 Access Area 72 240 132 52 14 0 0 0 0 15 15 0 540
Badin Lake
swim/Picnic
44 Area 1,363 2,232 2,279 1,654 441 98 50 40 0 15 255 82 8,509
Badin Boat
45 Access 2,296 4,432 4,234 5,047 842 306 599 160 36 285 1,111 424 19,772
Badin Lake
47 Group Cam 78 567 314 51 3,469 493 225 0 0 0 93 139 5,429
Total 20,297 23,816 23,974 18,701 10,670 6,626 3,810 1,382 998 1,604 7,219 8,464 127,561
ERM 79 Recreational Use Assessment
October 2005
Yadkin Hydroelectric Project
Project No. 2197
Waterfront Resident Recreational Use
Recreational use by waterfront residents and their guests was higher than that by visitors
(Table 4-29). This is attributable to the 1,007 waterfront residences with pier permits.
Resident use increases in April and May, is heavy from June through September, and
begins to fall in October. Winter use is very low. Guest use is also high (about 10
percent of resident use) and is concentrated in the primary recreation season (Memorial
Day weekend to Labor Day weekend).
Table 4-29 Narrows Waterfront Resident and Guest Recreational Use by Month
(in recreation days)
Month Waterfront Resident
Recreational Use ° Waterfront
Guest
Recreational Use ToIAM terfront
Residence Recreational
Use
May 17,119 2,014 19,133
June 40,280 4,028 44,308
Jul 69,483 4,532 74,015
August 40,280 4,028 44;308
September 40,280 2,014 42,294
October 17,623 1,007 18,630
November 5,035 504 5,539
December 5,035 504 5,539
January 5,035 504 5,539
February 5,035 504 5,539
March 2,518 1,511 4,029
April 15,609 1,511 17,120
Total 263,332 22,661 285,993
Private Waterfront. Communities Recreational Use
Recreational use by the approximately 4,673 non-waterfront parcels in private waterfront
communities at Narrows Reservoir was estimated as 450,009 recreation days per year.
This averages about 96 recreation days per household per year. It should be noted that an
undetermined number of these parcels are unimproved (i.e., are not improved with a
residence) and may be rarely used over the course of a year.
Commercial Business and Organization Recreational Use
There are 5 commercial businesses or private organizations with direct access to Narrows
Reservoir - all of these responded to the phone survey. Based on information provided
by the owner/operator, annual recreational use at each of these businesses and
organizations is presented below in Table 4-30. Camp Barnhardt (a Boy Scout Camp)
accounted for nearly 60 percent of the total business and organization recreational use at
Narrows Reservoir.
ERM 80 Recreational Use Assessment
October 2005
Yadkin Hydroelectric Project
Project No. 2197
Table 4-30 Narrows Reservoir Business and Organization Recreational Use (in
recreation days)

Site Name Old North
State Club
Marina.
Badin Lake
Ski Club Whip-O-Will
Campground
Marina ;
Camp
Barnhardt
All Facility
Total
May 2,900 211 759 1,675 5,545
June 4,800 195 1,230 7,805 14,030
Jul 5,800 215 1,985 31,000 39,000
August 5,700 215 1,855 7,705 15,475
September 1,540 161 324 2,305 4,330
October 1,490 163 292 2,315 4,260
November 1,600 160 330 350 2,440
December 390 16 133 315 854
January 400 18 138 325 881
February 380 18 132 325 855
March 2,350 172 178 450 3,150
AIr il 2 ,300 168 172 2,110 4,750
ff
al 29,650 1,712 7,528 56,680 95,570
Canoe Registry
Two surveys were completed by paddlers using the Narrows Dam canoe portage to
access Falls Reservoir. The response rate (i.e., percentage of groups using the portage
that registered) for the canoe registry is unknown. The canoe registry was prominently
posted and it would have been difficult for a group to use the portage and not notice the
registry. The registry was simple to use and took approximately one minute to complete.
For purposes of estimating use, a 20 percent response rate (1 out of every 5 groups
registered) and an average of 2 people per group (this was the average for the five canoe
surveys collected at the four Yadkin portages) were assumed. This would equate to 10
groups of two persons per group, or 20 recreation days per year at the Narrows canoe
portage.
Total Recreational Use
Total annual recreational use at Narrows Reservoir was estimated at 959,153 recreation
days by summing recreational uses estimates for public access recreational areas,
waterfront residents, private communities, commercial businesses, and organizations
(Table 4-31). Recreational use at Narrows Reservoir varies by month, type of day, and
day versus overnight use. Each of these variations in use is discussed below.
ERM 81 Recreational Use Assessment
October 2005
Yadkin Hydroelectric Project
Project No. 2197
Table 4-31 Estimated Annual Narrows Reservoir Recreation Use (in recreation
days)
Month' Public
Access
Rec. Areas Waterfront
Resident
Rec Use Private ,, '
Community
Rec Use Commercial
and Club
Rec Use Canoe
Portage
Use' Total % of
Total
Use
May 20,297 19,133 26,636 5,545 2 71,613 8
June 23,816 44,308 56,076 14,030 2 138,232 14
July 23,974 74,015 56,076 39,000 2 193,067 20
August 18,701 44,308 56,076 15,475 2 134,562 14
September 10,670 42,294 42,680 4,330 2 99,976 11
October 6,626 18,630 42,680 4,260 2 72,198 8
November 3,810 5,539 42,680 2,440 2 54,471 6
December 1,382 5,539 24,611 854 2 32,388 3
January 998 5,539 24,611 881 0 32,029 3
February 1,604 5,539 24,611 855 0 32,609 3
March 7,219 4,029 26,636 3,150 2 41,036 4
April 8,464 17,120 26,636 4,750 2 56,972 6
Total 127,561 285,993 450,009 95,570 20 959,153 100
Total estimated canoe portage use (20 recreation days) was distributed among the study period based on
professional judgment.
Recreational Use by Month
Table 4-31 provides estimates of recreational use by month. Overall, recreational use
was high from June through September, with use peaking in July. Use levels declined
rapidly in October. Winter use (November through February) was generally low. Use
levels increased in the spring (March, April, and May) as air temperatures began to warm
and fishing improved.
Recreational Use by Type of Day
Recreation use data by type of day (e.g., weekend day, weekday, holiday) is only
available for public access recreational use, but this use is assumed to be fairly
representative of total recreational use in this regards. Recreational use was generally
highest during major holidays (i.e., Memorial Day, 4th of July, and Labor Day weekends)
and weekends during the summer, with significantly less use on weekdays. Since
weekdays represent such a large percentage of total days (70 percent), total recreational
use was highest on weekdays. Recreational use by type of day was distributed as
follows:
Weekdays - 42 percent of total recreational use, 207 recreation days/weekday
Weekend days - 43 percent of total recreational use, 543 recreation days/weekend
day
ERM 82 Recreational Use Assessment
October 2005
Yadkin Hydroelectric Project
Project No. 2197
• Holidays - 16 percent of total recreational use, 2,216 recreation days/holiday day
Day versus Overnight Recreational Use
Several of the public access recreation areas (i.e., Lake Forest Campground, Badin Lake
Campground, Palmerville Access Area, and Badin Lake Group Camp) and private
campgrounds (Whip-O-Will Campground and Camp Barnhardt) at Narrows Reservoir
provide facilities for camping.
Some respondents to the VUS at other public access recreation areas also indicated that
they were camping, including:
• Tuckertown Dam Tailrace Access
• Garr Creek Access
• Old Whitney Boat Access
• Circle Drive Boat Access
• Lakemont Boat Access
• UNF Holt's Cabin Picnic Area
• UNF Walk-in Fishing Pier
• UNF Cove Boat Landing
• Badin Lake Swim/Picnic Area
• Badin Boat Access
It is not known whether these recreational users were camping at these specific recreation
areas, elsewhere at Narrows Reservoir (e.g., Uwharrie National Forest), or at other
campsites not associated with the Yadkin Project. For purposes of estimating overnight
recreational use, however, these recreational users were all assumed to be camping
somewhere along Narrows Reservoir. The number of campers at the public access
recreation areas is estimated at 30,864 recreation days (nights) annually.
There are also several commercial campgrounds as well as private organizations with
camping facilities. Overnight recreational use at these facilities total approximately
64,208 recreation days (nights) per year (see Table 4-30). Therefore, overnight use
represents approximately 10 percent (95,072 recreation days/959,153 total recreation
days) of the total Narrows Reservoir recreational use. There may also be some anglers
fishing at night, but we do not have any data on which to base an estimate of this use.
4.4.4 Recreational Facility Capacity
The adequacy of existing recreational facilities in terms of capacity was evaluated for
parking areas and boat launches.
Parking Area
In terms of parking capacity, only 12 times out of 2,560 observations did the number of
vehicles observed during the Spot Counts exceed the capacity of the parking areas (Table
ERM 83 Recreational (Ise Assessment
October 2005
Yadkin Hydroelectric Project
Project No. 2197
4-32). The LJNF Cove Boat Landing was the most frequently at or above capacity, but
this still only represented about 2 percent of the time. The Garr Creek Access Area and
the Circle Drive Access Area were the two parking areas with the highest average annual
percent capacity (22 percent).
Table 4-32 Narrows Public Access Recreation Sites Parking Capacity
-- Number of M1ipximum#ofVehicles
- >.:>Y110%Capacily - Average"jl:of - Annual Average
Site k- Name - Obser- " ...Parking Vehicle's
vations.. Capacity #. - Date Day #of - Percerrr
- Week- iYeelr= -.Niij Percent Df..
`7Srire, a
77me - ends diiys Vehicles Ca'ac'
Tuckenown
29 Dam Tailrace 171 44 34 5/26/03 Holida 0 0% 4
1 2
9 3
5 8%
Access vehicles y . . .

Garr Creek 6 vehicles
4124/04
Sat

30
Access Area
181
with
8
9/28/03 .
Sun
2
1 %
1.6
1.1
1.4
22%
trailers .
Old Whitney

32/33 Fishing Pier
d B
197 65 70 5/24/03 Holida
1
<1 %
14.5
7.0
10
6
17%
an
oat vehicles y .
Access Area

Lake Forest 30
34 35 CG/Fish Tales 198 vehicles 35 4/24/04 Sat. ] <]% 3.5 1,4 2
4 8%
Marina .
trailers
Circle Drive 70 Holida
37 Boat Access 180 vehicles 66 7/5/03 y 0 0% 0
21 8
6 15
2 22%
Area vnth 7/20/03
Sun . . .
trailers .
50
38 Lakemont 180 vehicles
22
7/20/03
Sun
0
0%
4
9
1
5
3
2
7%
Access Area with . . . .
trailers
UNF Holt's
39 Cabin Picnic 195 veh12
icles
15
3/7/04
Sun.
1
1%
1.0
0.2
0.6
5%
Area
40 UNF Walk-in I85 15 41 7/6/03 Holida 2 1 % 2
9 0
8 1
8 12%
Fishin ? Pier vehicles . . .
UNF Badin 5/3/04 Sat.
41 Lake 185 68 35 7/6103 Holida 0 0% 10
1 3
0 6
2 9%
Campground vehicles 10/18/0 y . . .
3 Sat.
30

42 UNF Cove Boat
183 vehicles
42
5/24/03 Holida
4
2%
5
5
1
2
3
3
10%
Landing with y . . .
trailers
43 Palmerville
Access Area 181 13
vehicles 8 7/12/03 Sat. 0 0% 0.5 0.1 0.3 2%
Badin Lake

44
Swim/Picnic
181 17
vehi les
200
7/4/03
H da
1
<I%
7.4
1.4
4.4
3%
Area
75

45 Badin Boat
176 vehicles
72
5/24/03 Holida
0
0%
14
9
5
0
9
8
13%
Access y . . .
trailers
47 Badin Lake
Group Camp 167 '60
vehicles 59 9/27/03 Sat. 0 0% 4.2 0.9 2.5
NA = Not Available
ERM 84 Recreational Use Assessment
October 2005
Yadkin Hydroelectric Project
Project No. 2197
Boat Launches
Eight public access recreation areas at Narrows Reservoir have boat launches, with a total
of 13 launch lanes. Generally, each launch lane will accommodate approximately 50
launches and retrievals per day (SOBA, 1989). Based on the Spot Count observations of
the number of trailers present and the turnover rate, the number of boats launched on the
peak day at each of these 8 recreation areas was estimated and compared with the
physical capacity of the launches. This analysis indicates that the existing number of
launch lanes was adequate to accommodate the peak day boat launch volume at all of the
recreation areas (Table 4-33).
Table 4-33 Narrows Public Access Recreation Area Boat Launch Capacity
Frill Year
Number Peak Day >;100% '

f Ca aci
Site '
Name o
Existing
Avg; Number
Number
Launch
Number
Turnover Number of of
# of Percent

Lanes Date
of .
Rate Boats Lnunclu
Times oj. ,
Trailers
Launched.-
Lanes
Times
Needed
30 Garr Creek 1 4/24/04 5 1
89 9 1 0 0%
Access Area .
Old Whitney
32/33 Fishing Pier and 2 3/28/04 42 2
02 85 2 0 0%
Boat Access .
Area
Lake Forest
34/35 CG/Fish Tales 1 4/24/04 20 1.89 38 1 0 0%
Marina
Circle Drive
37 Boat Access 3 4/24/04 49 2.02 100 2 0 0%
Area
38 Lakemont 2 7/20/03 14 3
06 43 1 0 0%
Access Area .
42 UNF Cove Boat 1 7/22/03 14 06
3 43 1 0 0%
Landing .
43 Palmerville 1 7/12/03 2 3.06 6 1 0 0%
Access Area
45 Badin Boat 3 3/28/04 43 2.25 97 2 0 0%
Access
* Assumes capacity of each launch lane is 50 boats per SOBA, 1989.
According to responses from the VUS, few recreational users perceived crowding as a
big or moderate problem at Narrows Reservoir boat launches (see Appendix K):
• Garr Creek Access Area - 7 percent big or moderate problem (n=14)
• Old Whitney Boat Access - 6 percent big or moderate problem (n=54)
• Circle Drive Boat Access - 11 percent big or moderate problem (n=46)
• Lakemont Access - 8 percent moderate problem (n=13)
• UNF Cove Boat Landing - 6 percent moderate problem (n=33)
• Badin Boat Access - 3 percent moderate problem (n=29)
ERM 85 Recreational Use Assessment
October 2005
Yadkin Hydroelectric Project
Project No. 2197
Some respondents indicated crowding was a big or moderate problem at the Lake Forest
Campground and Palmerville Boat Access, but there were too few responses to draw any
firm conclusions. Overall, these data support the conclusion that the existing boat
launches at Narrows Reservoir are adequate to meet current demand.
4.4.5 Recreational Issues
Recreational user perceptions of potential issues at Narrows Reservoir were collected
through the VUS, RUS, PCUS, and TUS (Table 4-34). Respondents to these surveys at
Narrows Reservoir rated six potential recreational issues on a scale of 1 to 4, with 1= big
problem, 2=moderate problem, 3=slight problem, 4=no problem. There were differences
of opinions regarding several of these potential issues between the various survey
responses. Each potential recreational issue is discussed below. For purposes of this
discussion, significant issues are identified, which are defined as > 10 percent of
responses indicating a big problem or > 20 percent of responses indicating a big or
moderate problem at Narrows Reservoir.
Low Water Levels
There were significant differences in responses about low water levels at Narrows
Reservoir between visitors and residents. Only three percent of VUS and five percent of
TUS respondents indicated that low water levels were a big or moderate problem.
Conversely, about 38 percent of respondents to the RUS and 52 percent of respondents to
the PCUS indicated water levels were a big or moderate problem despite the fact that
water levels in Narrows Reservoir were generally high during the study period (with the
exception of an extreme drawdown in December for FERC relicensing studies).
In order to better understand the relationship between water levels and recreational
experience, the VUS and RUS responses to the question about how big a problem low
water levels were at this reservoir were evaluated by month. As indicated above,
relatively few respondents to the VUS (4 percent) indicated that low water levels were a
big or moderate problem at Narrows Reservoir. In fact, all of those that did indicate low
water levels were a big or moderate problem were interviewed in May, June, and July
2003 when water levels in Narrows Reservoir were quite high.
The RUS responses were also evaluated in terms of the effects of water levels on the
recreation experience (Figure 4-11). In general, most residents considered water levels
acceptable for most of the year. During the December drawdown, however, waterfront
residents indicated "low water" was a moderate to big problem. There was no
statistically significant relationship between water levels and the percentage of
respondents that indicated low water levels was a big or moderate problem by month.
Many respondents indicated low water levels were a big or moderate problem during
periods when Narrows Reservoir was nearly full. This suggests that residents were
responding with historic rather than actual water levels in mind.
ERM 86 Recreational Use Assessment
October 2005

3
O
J
N
D
w
U)
d
CD
N
d
w
N
3.1
O
to
Z
V-
V-
4
w
LL

m m
0 m
0

(?
m (? ~
o
`"' ?" N N M (h V

l
c J!2
R o o

.r
(D

4
r"
o >
Q a
4a?,
N >
N
>
9
N ?
? I I o oo aja
N N
Q ?a
94
'a
'

I o
ti
i 9.10

r O

a
' S
s?
6

? I
4
d

hn
??GG
O N
O
C) 0
LO LO V) Wn iW)
0)
0)
V
O
0)
V
($o$n `4) uOi;enaIa
47
N
Lo
Yadkin Hydroelectric Project
Project No. 2197
Improper Disposal of Trash, Litter, and Toilet Paper
The improper disposal of trash, litter, and toilet paper was rated as a big or moderate
problem by 22 percent of waterfront residents and 25 percent of non-waterfront residents,
but only 12 percent of visitors and 16 percent of tailwater users. Respondents to the VUS
particularly noted trash, litter, and toilet paper as a problem at the Tuckertown Dam
Tailrace Access, Garr Creek Access, and Lake Forest Campground public access
recreation areas (see Appendix K).
Conflicts with Recreational Users
Conflicts with other recreational users was not considered a significant problem by
respondents to any of the surveys, with the PCUS having the highest percentage of
respondents (8 percent) indicating a big or moderate problem (Table 4-34).
Inconsiderate Behavior by Other Users
Inconsiderate behavior by other users was also not considered a significant problem by
respondents to any of the surveys, with the RUS again having the highest percentage of
respondents (15 percent) indicating a big or moderate problem (Table 4-34).
Boating Hazards
"Boating hazards" were identified as a much greater problem by waterfront residents (18
percent of respondents identified boating hazards as a big or moderate problem) and non-
waterfront residents (22 percent of respondents identified it as a big or moderate problem
than by visitors (only 6 percent of respondents identified it as a big or moderate problem)
or tailwater anglers (only 4 percent of respondents identified it as a big or moderate
problem). Visitors only identified boating hazards as significant issue at Lake Forest
Campground, but the survey response rate was low at this recreation site (n=4).
Availability of Sanitary Facilities
Only the VUS and the TUS asked about the availability of sanitary facilities.
Approximately 13 to 14 percent of respondents indicated that the lack of sanitary
facilities was a big or moderate problem (Table 4-34). The lack of sanitary facilities was
specifically identified as a significant problem at the following individual public access
recreation sites (see Appendix K for detailed summaries):
ERM 88 Recreational Use Assessment
October 2005
Yadkin Hydroelectric Project
Project No. 2197
Table 4-34 Potential Recreational Issues at Narrows Reservoir
Low Water Levels at this"Reservoir
Scores 1 2 3 4
Number of Average Big Problem Moderate Slight Not a
Surveys Responses Score % Problem (% Problem Problem
Visitor Use Survey 330 3.8 1 3 8 88
Residential Use Survey 475 2.9 22 16 15 48
Priv. Comm. Use Survey 65 2.7 14 28 31 28
Tailwater Use Survey 81 3.9 0 2 2 95
Imp ro per Dis osal of Litter Trash or Toilet. per
Number of Average Big Problem Moderate Slight Not a
Surveys Responses Score (% Problem (%) Problem (% Problem (%
Visitor Use Survey 337 3.6 6 7 12 75
Residential Use Survey 469 3.2 6 16 29 49
Priv. Comm. Use Survey 69 3.0 9 16 37 38
Tailwater Use Survey 80 3.5 7 7 13 73
Conflicts With Other Recreational Users
Number of Average Big Problem Moderate Slight Not a
Surveys Responses Score Problem Problem (%) Problem (%)
Visitor Use Survey 333 3.9 1 3 6 90
Residential Use Survey 461 3.8 I 3 13 83
Priv. Comm. Use Survey 65 3.6 3 5 23 69
Tailwater Use Survey 21 3.9 3 0 3 93
Loud; Rude or lncou'siderate Behavior b Other Users
Number of Average Big Problem Moderate Slight Not a
Surveys Responses Score (% Problem Problem Problem

Visitor Use Survey 333 3.8 2 2 8 88
Residential Use Survey 466 3.4 5 10 23 63
Priv. Comm. Use Survey 67 3.5 3 6 24 67
Tailwater Use Survey 79 3.9 3 0 3 93
Boating Hazards e. ;Stum s; Shallow Areas
Number of Average Big Problem Moderate Slight Not a
Surveys Responses Score (%) Problem (%) Problem (%) Problem (%

Visitor Use Survey 323 3.8 3 3 7 87
Residential Use Survey 466 3.2 6 12 32 49
Priv. Comm. Use Survey 71 3.2 6 16 37 41
Tailwater Use Survey 78 3.9 1 1 1 96
Availability of Sanitary 'Facilities
Number of Average Big Problem Moderate Slight Not a
Surveys Responses Score (%) Problem (%) Problem (%) Problem (%)

Visitor Use Survey 332 3.6 9 5 6 79
Tailwater Use Survey 78 3.7 6 3 8 83
ERM 89 Recreational Use Assessment
October 2005
Yadkin Hydroelectric Project
Project No. 2197
• Tuckertown Dam Tailrace Access (n=28) - I 1 percent identified the availability
of sanitary facilities as a big problem.
• Lakemont Access (n=13) - 31 percent identified the availability of sanitary
facilities as a big or moderate problem.
• UNF Walk-in Fishing Pier (n=24) - 25 percent identified the availability of
sanitary facilities as a big or moderate problem.
• Badin Lake Boat Access (n=29) - 10 percent identified the availability of
sanitary facilities as a big problem.
Some respondents complained about the lack of sanitary facilities at the Lake Forest
Campground, but there were too few responses to draw any firm conclusions. Lake
Forest Campground and Lakemont Access do not have any public toilets. These sites
receive moderate use (between 3,000 and 5,000 recreation days per year) and may
warrant improved sanitary facilities. There is an existing toilet at the Tuckertown Dam
Tailrace Access, but recreational use is very dispersed at this site and it is difficult to
locate a toilet in a location that is convenient for all recreational users. There are two
port-a-potties at the Badin Lake Boat Access. This is one of the more heavily used
recreational sites (nearly 20,000 recreation days per year) and may warrant a third toilet if
use levels increase much further. During the study period the USFS made substantial
improvements at the Badin Lake Campground, Badin Lake Group Camp, and the UNF
Walk-in Fishing Pier, including toilet facilities, which should address user concerns
regarding facility conditions at these recreation sites.
ERM 90 Recreational Use Assessment
October 2005
Yadkin Hydroelectric Project
Project No. 2197
4.5 Falls Development Recreational Use
Falls Reservoir is the farthest downstream of the four Yadkin Project reservoirs with
Falls Dam located at RM 234. Falls Reservoir is also the smallest of the four Yadkin
reservoirs with a surface area of 204 acres. The development has approximately six
miles of shoreline with no residential or commercial development. The entire east side of
the reservoir is within the Uwharrie National Forest. The west side of the reservoir is
rural. Approximately 94 percent of the shoreline is forested and undeveloped. Morrow
Mountain State Park is located immediately downstream of Falls Dam on the west side of
the Yadkin River.
The Falls Development was completed in 1919 and was fully operational by 1922. The
dam impounds approximately 940 acre-feet at the full pool elevation of 332.8 feet. The
mean depth of the reservoir at full pool is 27 feet with a maximum depth of 52 feet.
Falls Development is essentially operated as a run-of-river facility. It has an average
daily water level fluctuation of approximately one foot and a maximum daily fluctuation
of 3 to 4 feet. There is no seasonal drawdown at Falls Reservoir. Figure 4-12 shows
Falls Reservoir water levels for the entire study period.
The discussion of recreational use at Falls Reservoir is based on the following
information:
369 Spot Count observations,
17 Visitor Use Survey responses, and
35 Tailwater Use Survey responses.
4.5.1 Recreational Facility Condition
There are two public access recreational areas at Falls Reservoir - the Deep Water Trail
Access and the Falls Boat Access Area (Table 4-35 and Figure 4-13). In addition, there
is a canoe portage route around Falls Dam. The Mountain Trail within Morrow
Mountain State Park provides access to the Yadkin River downstream of Falls Dam.
There are unimproved trails that branch from the marked Mountain Trail and provide
views of Falls Dam and access to the Falls Dam tailrace. These trails are not located
within the Yadkin Project boundary and are not Project recreation facilities. There are no
private business or organization recreational facilities on Falls Reservoir.
ERM 91 Recreational Use Assessment
October 2005

liadV

.?? , s y?aew

¦- G
Aienagal
cc Lt -
(D CD G Aienuer
W $.
N
L ? aagweoea
am T ?I I jK
aagwanoN

I

= M
tq O aagwa4deS
O
N
j
i
LL.
I Isnfny
N e- I
4-
AInf

aunt

Aew

0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0
0
o LO
LO T CD
q- Sri 0 LO
M M N o m o
N LO
0 C)
0
M CO CO CO CO CO CO M M M
(SJSn `11) uOijenaja
? v
i _
\
\ t`` I ? i T - it
Narrows Dam and
Powerhouse
it
UWHARRIE NATIONAL
FOREST
BADIN
UNF Deep Water Trail
Falls Dam and
ti
----:-Powerhouse i'
Falls Boat Access (

t ?
t

Fes-

APGI/Yadkin Recreation Study
/t
Recreation Sites Falls Reservoir Public Access Alcoa Power Generating Inc.
T!^17 Recreation Areas
Yadkin Division
1FaUwharrie National Forest 4,900 2.450 0 4900 Feel
>-?"'?Date: October, 2004 +
ERM.
Morrow Mountain Slate Park
Yadkin Hydroelectric Project
Project No. 2197
Table 4-35 Falls Reservoir Public Access Area Recreation Facilities (APGI, 2004)

Site

N
Parking
Boat Shoreline
Picnic
; Trash Boat
Dock
,Number ame Capacity Ramp Fishing Tables Receptacles Toilets /Fishing Campsites Beach
Capacity
Pier
Deep 6 1 dirt Primitive

48 Water vehicles
launch 20 0 2
0
0 (user-
No
Trail with lane anglers created)
Access trailers campsites
Falls 8

49 Boat vehicles 1
launch 1-2
0
4
0
0
0
No
Access with lane anglers
Area trailers
Public Access Recreation Areas
Appendix K provides the VUS responses on facility condition for each of the two public
access recreation areas. The key findings are summarized below.
The Deep Water Trail Access is located within the Uwharrie National Forest in
Montgomery County and provides recreational opportunities for boating, bank fishing,
and primitive camping. Recreational facilities include a dirt access road and parking for
approximately ten vehicles, an unimproved dirt boat launch, and two trash receptacles.
The Falls Boat Access Area is located on the west side of Falls Reservoir off Falls Road
(State Route 1719) in Stanly County and provides recreational opportunities for boating
and bank fishing. Recreational facilities include a single concrete boat ramp, four trash
receptacles, a paved parking area with capacity for approximately eight vehicles with
trailers, and a gravel overflow parking area.
Most recreational users rate the condition of the recreational facilities at Falls Reservoir
as acceptable to excellent. About 13 percent of the respondents at the Deep Water Trail
Access (n=8) rated the boat ramp, parking area, lighting, and toilet as mostly inadequate.
About 25 percent would prefer better swimming facilities (there is no beach at this site).
About 22 percent of respondents (n=9) at the Falls Boat Access complained about the
lack of toilet facilities.
Canoe Portage
The Falls Dam canoe portage trail, which provides canoe and kayak access from Falls
Reservoir to Tillery Reservoir, is approximately 1,200 feet long and is located on the east
side of Falls dam. The takeout is marked with a "Yadkin River Canoe Portage Trail"
signs and the portage trail is marked.
ERM 94 Recreational Use Assessment
October 2005
Yadkin Hydroelectric Project
Project No. 2197
4.5.2 Recreational Activities
According to the responses to the Visitor Use Survey (n=17), the primary (cited by over
40 percent of respondents) recreational activities at Falls Reservoir are camping, boat
fishing, and bank fishing (Table 4-36). Other common (cited by over 20 percent of
respondents) recreational activities included hiking, swimming, and picnicking.
Occasional (cited by at least 5 percent of respondents) canoeing/kayaking, sunbathing,
motor boating, water skiing, and personal watercraft use were cited, but the small size of
this reservoir limits opportunities for these uses. Hunting was indicated as a recreational
activity by approximately 12 percent of respondents, which may explain some spikes in
recreational use observed in the Spot Counts, especially in November.
4.5.3 Recreational Use
Recreational access to Falls Reservoir is limited to the public access recreation areas and
canoe portages because there are no waterfront residents with pier permits from APGI,
private waterfront communities with access to Falls Reservoir, or commercial businesses
or private organizations with direct access to Falls Reservoir. The TUS results are
discussed below and in Section 6.0, but are not included in estimating overall recreational
use to avoid double counting since these users were included in the public access
recreation area use estimates.
Public Access Recreation Area Use
Based on the Spot Counts and Visitor Use Survey responses, total use at the Falls
Reservoir public access recreation areas is estimated at approximately 4,159 recreation
days per year (Table 4-37).
ERM 95 Recreational Use Assessment
October 2005
U ?
N a
O N~j
? Z
U U
N
p? O
CLI

V
C?
w
s.
U
.C
V
C?
W
..w
i+
C?
LL
L
a
{.n
..fir
4-4
d
V
v RS
v G
? a
w ?
M ?
,2] V
u?o o 10
0 0 0
2tIil[ES.. o °° o
Su.q}equnS °o
M o0
2UpIJ1li?id °o N rn
M N N
2ol3mspu-iM e
0 o
0 0
0
2uiduIE, ..
o
8_0
N

L?
I N <N
0
N
..Is 4al a -c
?
N
N 0
N
.--?

3anmmMS 0
°o
co 0
N

N
rn

N
$uIJIIH o
M "
N rn
N

2U!4"Vx /SUPO-D 0-1
M R
N
N 8_5z
°o
SURSH Two c:)
Lo d <r
!RMg_gi3;eog o «
M 't d?
2LITwOg'lOJON[ M N
paaaldwo, sAaA-MS JO -ON,
H
v
u
¢

U
J W
m w Z

z ?W
a, ti V Or"
3 F U)
v
CJ
m°
¢
Z - j V
w O ¢
+: o °o rn
in z
N ?
N
N N
? O
O
Y
U
?i
110
Yadkin Hydroelectric Project
Project No. 2197
Table 4-37 Falls Public Access Recreational Use by Site and Month (in recreation
days)
'Site
No. Site Name May June Jul Aug. Sept. ,. Oct. Nov. Dec. Jan. -Feb. March Aril 'Total'
UNF Deep
Water Trail
48 Access 337 97 157 72 270 107 231 0 0 0 90 168 1,529
Falls Boat
49 Access 269 572 455 460 72 107 119 93 17 76 150 240 2,630
Total 606 669 612 532 342 214 350 93 17 76 240 408 4,159
Canoe Registry
There were no surveys completed at the Falls Reservoir canoe portage, although one
survey from the Narrows Dam canoe portage indicated the intent to take out at Morrow
Mountain State Park. Use of Falls Dam canoe portage appears to be very low and is
estimated at 20 recreation days per year.
Total Recreational Use
The only access to Falls Reservoir is via the two public access recreation areas and the
canoe portage. Tailwater recreational use is not included in estimating overall
recreational use to avoid double counting since these users were captured in the Spot
Count estimates. Therefore, the total recreational use at Falls Reservoir is estimated at
approximately 4,179 recreation days per year (Table 4-38). Recreational use at Falls
Reservoir varies by month, type of day, and overnight versus day users. Each of these
variations in recreational use is discussed below.
Table 4-38 Estimated Annual Falls Reservoir Recreation Use (in recreation days)
Month , Public Access-
Recreation' Areas Canoe Portage Use Grand Total % of Total Use
May 606 2 608 15
June 669 2 671 16
Jul 612 2 614 15
August 532 2 534 13
September 342 2 344 8
October 214 2 216 5
November 350 2 352 8
December 93 2 95 2
January 17 0 17 <1
February 76 0 76 2
March 240 2 242 6
April 408 2 410 10
Total 4,159 20 4,179 100
ERM 97 Recreational Use Assessment
October 2005
Yadkin Hydroelectric Project
Project No. 2197
Recreational Use by Month
In terms of months, recreational use at Falls Reservoir was highest in June. Recreational
use (primarily camping) at the Deep Water Trail Access (Site #48) within the Uwharrie
National Forest tended to be higher in late spring (April through June), while recreational
use at the Falls Boat Access tended to be higher in the summer (June through August).
Recreational use in the fall and winter was generally low, although hunting is a popular
recreational activity in this area and probably accounts for a spike in recreational use in
November.
Recreational Use by Type of Day
Recreational use was generally highest during major holidays (i.e., Easter, Memorial
Day, 4th of July, and Labor Day weekends) and weekends during the spring and summer,
with significantly less use on weekdays. Since weekdays represent such a large
percentage of total days (70 percent), total recreational use was highest on weekdays.
Recreational use by type of day was distributed as follows:
Weekdays - 46 percent of total recreational use, 7 recreation days/weekday
Weekend days - 39 percent of total recreational use, 16 recreation days/weekend day
Holidays - 15 percent of total recreational use, 69 recreation days/holiday day
Day versus Overnight Use
Approximately 84 percent of the recreation users at the Deep Water Trail Access were
camping for at least one night, while the remaining 16 percent were day users using this
site for bank fishing and other activities. The camping equates to approximately 1,284
recreation days (nights) per year. Overnight users represent approximately 31 percent
(1,284 recreation days/4,179 total recreation days) of the total Falls Reservoir
recreational use. There are no facilities for camping or nighttime recreation at the Falls
Boat Access. There may also be some anglers fishing at night, but we do not have any
data on which to base an estimate of this use.
4.5.4 Recreational Facility Capacity
The adequacy of existing recreational facilities in terms of capacity was evaluated for
parking areas and boat launches.
Parking Areas
Vehicle parking at the Deep Water Trail Access exceeded capacity once during 188 Spot
Counts. On Sunday April 25, 2004, 14 vehicles were observed in the parking area, which
exceeded the parking capacity of approximately 10 vehicles. Only three percent of the
spot counts observed more than 6 cars parked at this site. Overall, parking capacity is
adequate at this site.
ERM 98 Recreational Use Assessment
October 2005
Yadkin Hydroelectric Project
Project No. 2197
Boat Launches
Vehicle parking at the Falls Boat Access approached capacity twice during 181 spot
counts. On May 24, 2003 (Memorial Day weekend) and July 12, 2003, nine vehicles
with six to seven boat trailers were observed at this site. The capacity of the Falls Boat
Access is eight vehicles with trailers plus a gravel overflow parking area. Overall,
parking capacity is adequate at this site.
Generally only cartop boats are launched at the Deep Water Trail Access, and capacity is
not an issue based on the relatively light use at this recreation area. Although some users
identified crowding at the Falls Boat Access boat launch as a big problem (11 percent of
respondents), overall use at this facility would not justify adding an additional ramp.
Generally, one ramp will accommodate approximately 50 launches and retrievals per day
(SOBA, 1989). The estimated maximum number of launches and retrievals in one day
during the study was 27.
4.5.5 Recreational Issues
Recreational user perceptions of potential problems at Falls Reservoir were collected
through the VUS and TUS (Table 4-39). Respondents to these surveys rated six potential
recreational issues on a scale of 1 to 4, with 1= big problem, 2=moderate problem,
3=slight problem, 4=no problem. Each potential recreational issue is discussed below.
For purposes of this discussion, significant issues are identified, which are defined as >I 0
percent of responses indicating a big problem or >20 percent of responses indicating a big
or moderate problem at Falls Reservoir. Please note that the results of the surveys
collected at both the Narrows and Falls dam tailraces are discussed in this section,
although recreational use at the Falls Dam tailrace is really more associated with the
downstream Tillery Reservoir than with Falls Reservoir.
Generally, most respondents to the VUS and TUS did not identify any major problems at
Falls Reservoir (Table 4-39). The only significant problems identified were the improper
disposal of litter, trash, or toilet paper (25 percent of VUS responses identified this as a
moderate problem); loud, rude, or inconsiderate behavior by other users (20 percent of
VUS responses identified this as a moderate problem); boating hazards (11 percent of
TUS responses identified this as a big problem at the Falls Dam tailrace); and availability
of sanitary facilities (cited in both the VUS and the TUS).
At the individual recreation site level (see Appendix K), no respondents (n=8) identified
any "big problems" at the Deep Water Trail Access. Improper disposal of litter/trash and
inconsiderate behavior by other recreational users were the most commonly identified
problems and were characterized as moderate problems by 25 percent of respondents.
Several potential issues were identified by over 20 percent of respondents at Falls Boat
Access (n=9) as big or moderate problems, including low water levels (22 percent),
improper disposal of litter/trash (33 percent), conflicts with other recreational users (22
percent), boating hazards (22 percent) and the lack of sanitary facilities (33 percent).
ERM 99 Recreational Use Assessment
October 2005
Yadkin Hydroelectric Project
Project No. 2197
Table 4-39 Potential Issues at Falls Reservoir
Low Water Levels at, this Reservoir,
Big Problem Moderate
Problem (.0/o) Slight
Problem (%) Not a Problem
(0/0)
Visitor Use Survey 6 13 19 63
Tailwater Use Survey (Narrows Dam Tailwaters) 8 0 25 67
Tailwater Use Survey Falls Dam Tailwaters 0 0 15 85
Im ro sr_Dis osal of Litter, Trash, or Toilet Paper
Big Problem
(%) Moderate
Problem (%) Slight
Problem (%) Not a Problem
(%)
Visitor Use Survey 6 25 31 38
Tailwater Use Survey (Narrows Dam Tailwaters) 17 8 8 67
Tailwater Use Survey (Falls Dam Tailwaters) 0 8 23 69
Conflicts With OtherRecreational Users
Big Problem
(%) Moderate
Problem (%) Slight
Problem (%) Not a Problem
(%)
Visitor Use Survey 0 13 13 73
Tailwater Use Survey (Narrows Dam Tailwaters) 0 0 0 100
Tailwater Use Survey (Falls Dam Tailwaters) 0 0 0 100
Loud, Rude or. Inconsiderate Behavior b "Other Users
Big Problem
(%) Moderate
Problem (%) Slight
Problem (%) Not a Problem
(%)
Visitor Use Survey 0 20 20 60
Tailwater Use Survey (Narrows Dam Tailwaters) 0 0 0 100
Tailwater Use Survey (Falls Dam Tailwaters) 0 0 0 100
Boating Hazards (e. g; Stumps, Shallow Areas
Big Problem
(%) Moderate
Problem (%) Slight
Problem (%) Not a Problem
(%)
Visitor Use Survey 6 13 25 56
Tailwater Use Survey (Narrows Dam Tailwaters) 8 8 0 83
Tailwater Use Survey (Falls Dam Tailwaters) 7 7 21 64
Availability. of Sanitary Facility
Big Problem
(%) Moderate
Problem (%) Slight
Problem (%) Not a Problem
(%)
Visitor Use Survey 13 6 25 56
Tailwater Use Survey (Narrows Dam Tailwaters) 0 25 0 75
Tailwater Use Survey (Falls Dam Tailwaters) 9 27 0 64
ERM 100 Recreational Use Assessment
October 2005
Yadkin Hydroelectric Project
Project No. 2197
4.6 Total Project Recreational Use
This section describes the overall recreational use at the Yadkin Project during the 2003-
2004 study period and compares it with previous recreational use estimates.
4.6.1 Total Current Yadkin Project Recreational Use
Recreational use for the overall Yadkin Project is estimated at over 2.5 million recreation
days for the one year study period (Table 4-40). Nearly all (98 percent) of this use occurs
at High Rock and Narrows reservoirs. Waterfront residents and non-waterfront residents
comprise the majority (80 percent) of recreational users.
Table 4-40 Total Project Recreational Use (in recreation days)
Reservoir Visitor
Use 'Waterfront
Resident
Use. Non-
Waterfront
Resident
Use Businesses
and
Organization,
Use Portage
Use Total Use . %:of
Total
High Rock 82,846 1,058,585 269,448 132,982 30 1,543,891 60%
Tuckertown 51,887 0 0 2,465 0 54,352 2%
Narrows 127,561 285,993 450,009 95,570 20 959,153 37%
Falls 4,159 0 0 0 20 4,179 <1%
Total 266,453 1,344,578 719,457 231,017 70 2,561,575 100%
of Total 10% 52% 28% 9% <1% 100%
Tuckertown Reservoir receives less use than High Rock and Narrows reservoirs. This
can be attributed to the following factors:
Tuckertown Reservoir is much smaller than High Rock and Narrows reservoirs;
Tuckertown Reservoir has no waterfront residents, private communities with
water access, and only two commercial businesses with direct water access.
Falls Reservoir receives relatively light recreational use. This can be attributed to several
factors:
• Falls Reservoir is by far the smallest of the four Yadkin reservoirs;
• Falls Reservoir has relatively few recreational facilities;
• Falls Reservoir has no waterfront residents, private communities with water
access, and no commercial businesses or private organizations; and
• Falls Reservoir is relatively remote and access is limited.
4.6.2 Previous Recreational Use Studies
There have been three prior estimates of recreational use at the Yadkin Project in 1991
(EDAW, 1991), 1997 (Berger, 1997), and 2003 (ERM, 2003). The recreation use
estimates for each reservoir from each study are presented in Table 4-41.
ERM 101 Recreational Use Assessment
October 2005
Yadkin Hydroelectric Project
Project No. 2197
Table 4-41 Summary of Historical Annual Recreational Use at the Yadkin
Project (in recreation days)
Rese oir = - 19-91 - 1' 97; - 2003 2064
High Rock 708,500 815,166 410,230 1,543,891
Tuckertown 178,000 110,856 117,476 54,352
Narrows 614,000 365,596 289,521 959,153
Falls 12,000 9,036 10,209 4,179
Total 1,512,500 1,300,654 827,436 2,561,575
4.6.3 Comparison of Results of Existing Study with Prior Studies
As Table 4-41 indicates, the data for this study shows a reduction in recreational use at
Tuckertown and Falls reservoirs and a significant increase in recreational use at High
Rock and Narrows reservoirs. In order to better understand these differences, it is
necessary to examine the components of overall recreational use - public access
recreational area use, waterfront resident use, non-waterfront resident use, business and
organization use, and canoe portage use. Each of these components is evaluated below.
Public Access Recreational Use
The estimates of public access recreational use at the four Project reservoirs were
significantly lower in this survey than previous surveys (Table 4-42). The differences in
the use levels among these surveys are discussed below for each reservoir.
Table 4-42 Comparison of Public Access Recreational Area Use Estimates (in
recreation days)
1991 1997 2003 2004
High Rock 184,210* 215,731 108,566 82,846
Tuckertown 17,800 110,856 117,476 51,887
Narrows 331,440* 199,126 157,691 127,561
Falls 12,000 9,036 10,209 4,179
Total 545,450 534,749 393,942 266,473
* The 1991 recreation survey did not distinguish between residents and visitors. The amount of visitor
use (i.e., public access recreation area use) was estimated using the same ratio of visitor use to total use
found in the 1997 recreation survey.
Public access recreational use was estimated using the following equation for each public
access site:
Recreational Use = (type of day) x (vehicles/day) x (people/vehicle) x (turnover rate)
The 1997, 2003, and 2004 studies all surveyed 40 public access recreation areas, although
the actual sites varied slightly. No data are available on how many and which public
ERM 102 Recreational Use Assessment
October 2005
Yadkin Hydroelectric Project
Project No. 2197
access recreation areas were surveyed in the 1991 study. Therefore the number of public
access recreation areas should not have affected the estimated use levels. Since all four
recreation studies estimated recreational use for an entire year, the type of day would not
vary significantly across the studies. This leaves three factors that may account for the
differences in use levels. Table 4-43 compares the factors used in each study. These data
indicate that in general, the persons per vehicle and the turnover rate factors used in this
study were comparable to those used in the 2003 study and generally higher than those
used in the 1997 study. Therefore, persons per vehicle and the turnover rate factors
would not explain why the use estimates for 2004 were lower than previous studies.
Table 4-43 Comparison of Factors Used in Estimating Recreational Use
Vehicles/Da Peo leNehicle TurnoverRa te
Reservoir 1997 2003. 2004 1997 2003, 2004, 1997 2003 ' 2004
High Rock 134.3 47.1 37.6 2.2 2.63 2.40 2.0 2.40 2.51
Tuckertown 89.3 39.2 20.0 1.7 2.74 2.42 2.0 3.00 2.93
Narrows 129.9 61.8 46.7 2.1 2.62 2.87 2.0 2.67 2.60
Falls 5.0 3.5 1.7 2.5 2.63 2.64 2.0 3.00 2.59
The primary reason for the difference in the use estimates is the vehicles per day counts.
The average vehicle per day counts are discussed below. All four of the recreation
studies used spot counts to estimate the average number of vehicles per day. Obviously
the number of spot counts is an important factor is assessing the accuracy of the spot
count averages. Table 4-44 identifies the number of spot counts conducted for each
study.
Table 4-44 Comparison of Number of Spot Counts
# of Spot Counts Average # of S of Counts/Da
Reservoir, 1991: 1997._ 2003 2004 -1091.,, 1997 2003 2004
High Rock NA 2,747 828 2,292 NA 1 3 3
Tuckertown NA 3,135 987 1,931 NA 1 3 3
Narrows NA 1,753 1,160 2,560 NA 1 3 3
Falls NA 322 165 369 NA 1 3 3
Total NA 7,957 3,140 7,052 NA 1 3 3
The 1997 and 2004 studies both involved a large number of spot counts. The two studies
did differ in the way the counts were scheduled. The 1997 study generally made one visit
per day at a public access recreation area, but visited each site about 15 times a month
and tried to vary the time of the visits. The current 2004 study generally made three
visits per day at a public access recreation area, but only visited the sites between 4 and 6
times a month.
The advantage of the 1997 study approach was that it was less susceptible to the spot
count coinciding with bad weather because it had more spot count days per month than
the 2004 study. The disadvantage of this approach was that there was less confidence
ERM 103 Recreational Use Assessment
October 2005
Yadkin Hydroelectric Project
Project No. 2197
that the number of vehicles observed during the single visit was representative of the
entire day. The 2004 study design incorporated more visits per day so as to get a better
average of the number of vehicles at the site that day. It is impossible to determine based
on available data, which approach provides a better estimate of actual recreational use.
In addition to this methodological issue, other factors that may explain why visitor
recreational use appears to be lower in 2004 include:
A carry-over effect from the drought of 2002 may have discouraged visitors from
returning to the Project reservoirs because of uncertainty regarding water levels.
Some past visitors may have discovered other recreation areas during the drought
of 2002 that they now patronize.
In contrast to 2002, much of the study period was wetter than usual, especially
during May and June of 2003, which may have discouraged recreational use
during these peak recreation months.
There are some independent data to support the 2004 spot count data results. The North
Carolina Wildlife Resource Commission (NCWRC) manages several of the public access
recreation areas and provided some spot vehicle counts for the period of November 2002
through June 2003, which partially overlaps with this study period. Table 4-45 compares
the average number of vehicles per day reported by the NCWRC (2003) with those
observed during this study.
Table 4-45 Comparison of NCWRC Spot Counts with 1997 and 2004 Recreation
Study Spot Counts
Avera e # of Vehicles/Da

Site
#

Recreation Site

Reservoir 2003 NCWRC
Spot=.Counts .- 2004
Recreation
Su 3997-
Recreation
survey
14 Dutch 2nd Creek Boat
Access High Rock 4.1 8.5 27.6
19 Bringle's Ferry Boat
Access Tuckertown 2.9 2.6 8.1
22 Flat Creek Boat Access Tuckertown 7.5 6.8 13.0
23 Flat Creek Fishing
Access Tuckertown 1.2 0.9 5.1
32/33 Old Whitney Narrows 0.0 11.0 30.3
37 Circle Drive Boat Access Narrows 8.3 15.1 35.6
38 Lakemont Boat Access Narrows 1.3 3.4 11.9
39 Holts Cabin Narrows 0.1 0.6 2.4
40 Badin Walk-in Fishing
Pier Narrows 0.0 1.8 NA
The NCWRC spot count data generally found similar, if not fewer, vehicles per day at the
public access recreation areas they manage as compared with this study. These counts
did not include the summer months, but did include the heavily used spring months.
These data, although not systematically collected, still suggest lower use levels than
ERM 104 Recreational Use Assessment
October 2005
Yadkin Hydroelectric Project
Project No. 2197
historically, especially in comparison with the average number of vehicles per day from
the 1997 recreation study.
The U.S. Forest Service provided recreational use revenue figures for several sites within
the Uwharrie National Forest for the federal fiscal years 2002, 2003, and 2004. The
revenue figures for fiscal years 2003 and 2004 were averaged and converted to
recreational use estimates for comparison with the results of this survey (Table 4-46).
Table 4-46 Comparison of Recreational Use Estimates Based on USFS Revenues
and the APGI Survey
Recreation Site' ' Revenue Use Estimate Use Estimate
(2003-2004 (based on U$FS: (based on APGI
average) revenue data data
Badin Lake $22,000 13,750 recreation 12,571 recreation
Cam round days day s
Badin Lake Group $6,500 4,062 recreation 5,429 recreation
Cam days days
The recreational use estimates for this study are quite similar to those based on the U.S.
Forest Service's revenue figures for Badin Lake Campground and Badin Lake Group
Camp. The current estimate for the Cove Boat Landing is considerably lower than the
use estimate based on the adjacent Arrowhead Campground. However, not all campers
used the boat landing so it is expected that the use at the Cove Boat Landing would be
less than at Arrowhead Campground. Overall, the U.S. Forest Service's revenue figures
support the recreational use estimates of this study.
Waterfront Resident Use
The estimates of waterfront resident recreational use at High Rock and Narrows
reservoirs were considerably higher in this survey than previous surveys (Table 4-47).
There are no waterfront residents at Tuckertown or Falls reservoirs.
Table 4-47 Comparison of Resident Recreational Use Estimates (in recreation
days)
Reservoir 1991 1997 2003 2004
High Rock 524,290* 599,435 301,664 1,058,585
Tuckertown 0 0 0 0
Narrows 282,440* 166,470 131,830 285,993
Falls 0 0 0 0
Total 806,730 765,905 433,494 1,344,578
* The 1991 recreation survey did not distinguish between residents and visitors. The amount of resident
use was estimated using the same ratio of resident use to total use found in the 1997 recreation survey.
ERM 105 Recreational Use Assessment
October 2005
Yadkin Hydroelectric Project
Project No. 2197
High Rock Reservoir
As Table 4-47 indicates, the 2004 estimate of resident recreational use was significantly
higher than prior studies. Water levels at High Rock Reservoir were very low during the
2003 survey, which significantly reduced recreational use for that survey. The 2004
estimate is approximately 77 percent higher than the 1997 survey estimate. There has not
been a significant increase in the number of waterfront residences at High Rock
Reservoir since 1997 that would help explain this increase in use.
There were some significant differences in methodology between the 1997 and the 2004
recreation use surveys:
The 1997 recreational use survey estimated waterfront resident recreational use
based on 167 resident interviews total from both High Rock and Narrows
reservoirs (the actual number from each reservoir is not available). The 2004
recreational use survey estimated waterfront resident recreational use based on
1,243 mail-back surveys (47 percent response rate) from High Rock Reservoir
waterfront residents.
The 1997 survey asked residents to estimate their annual recreational use levels
and activities. The 2004 survey asked residents to estimate their recreational use
for the past month, which should result in a more accurate estimate.
The 1997 survey interviewed waterfront residents encountered along the
shoreline. This is not necessarily a representative sample and may not have
captured recreational boaters who represent over 50 percent of the total
recreational use at High Rock Reservoir.
Limited data are available to evaluate the methodology used in the 1991 recreation use
survey.
For these reasons, the current study's estimate of resident recreational use at High Rock
Reservoir, although considerably higher than prior studies, is considered reasonable and
more accurate.
Narrows Reservoir
As Table 4-47 indicates, the 2003-2004 estimate of resident recreational use was
significantly higher than the estimate for 2002-2003, but 2002 was a drought year and
water levels in Narrows Reservoir were unusually low, which reduced recreational use.
The 2003-2004 estimate was higher than the 1997 estimate, but there has been a
significant amount of residential growth around Narrows Reservoir since 1997, and a 14
percent increase in the number of waterfront residences with pier permits from APGI
since 1996.
As discussed above, this survey was much more robust than prior studies in surveying
waterfront residents with 521 responses (52 percent response rate) from Narrows
Reservoir waterfront residents.
ERM 106 Recreational Use Assessment
October 2005
Yadkin Hydroelectric Project
Project No. 2197
Therefore, this estimate of resident recreational use at Narrows Reservoir appears
reasonable.
Non-waterfront Resident Use
None of the previous studies estimated recreational use associated with non-waterfront
residences with access to the Project reservoirs via private community boat launches,
marinas, and piers. The 1997 study stated that it assumed minimal recreational use from
these private community sites. The number of private communities with water access,
however, has increased significantly over the past several years, especially at Narrows
Reservoir.
This current study did survey these private communities and estimated use as 719,457
recreation days per year, or about 28 percent of total use. This estimate of non-waterfront
resident use is based on responses to the PCUS. It should be noted that only 108 useable
survey responses were received (35 for High Rock Reservoir and 73 for Narrows
Reservoir). The responses for the two reservoirs were combined to obtain an acceptably
high confidence level of 92 percent (generally confidence levels above 90 percent are
considered acceptable).
The results seem reasonable when compared with the use estimates for waterfront
residents. We would expect the number of annual household recreation days to be less
for non-waterfront residents than for waterfront residents, and the results support that
finding (Table 4-48).
Table 4-48 Median Annual Number of Resident Recreation Days per Household
Reservoir, Recreation Days Per Waterfront
Resident Household Recreation Days Per Non-Waterfront
Resident: Household .
High Rock 354.4 96.3
Narrows 261.5 96.3
Overall, the estimate of non-waterfront resident use appears reasonable.
Business and Organization Use
None of the previous studies estimated recreational use associated with commercial
businesses and private organizations that have direct access to the reservoirs. In this
current study, this use was estimated as 231,017 recreation days per year, or about 9
percent of total use, with most of this occurring at High Rock and Narrows reservoirs.
This survey was self-reported and it was impossible to independently verify the use
estimates. Therefore, these estimates could be high or low. It should be noted that 12
businesses or organizations did not respond to the survey and were not included in the
ERM 107 Recreational Use Assessment
October 2005
Yadkin Hydroelectric Project
Project No. 2197
estimates of business and organization recreational use. Inclusion of these additional
businesses and organizations would increase the estimate of recreational use.
Canoe Portage Use
None of the previous studies specifically estimated recreational use for the canoe
portages. In this current study, this use was estimated as 70 recreation days per year.
Summary
The 2004 estimate of recreational use is significantly higher than previous estimates.
Based on the analysis above, this estimate is supportable by the data. It appears that the
higher use estimate is primarily due to:
A better estimate of waterfront resident recreational use;
Inclusion of an estimate for private community recreational use; and
Inclusion of an estimate for business and organization recreational use.
ERM 108 Recreational Use Assessment
October 2005
Yadkin Hydroelectric Project
Project No. 2197
5.0 RECREATIONAL CARRYING CAPACITY
Reservoir carrying capacity is a dynamic concept and can be measured several different
ways. For purposes of this study, both physical and social carrying capacity were
considered. Each of these is discussed below.
5.1 Physical Carrying Capacity
Physical carrying capacity is a measure of how much recreational boating a reservoir can
safely accommodate at one time. Estimates of physical carrying capacity are primarily
driven by safety considerations (i.e., maintaining safe distances between boats). There
are several publications that provide guidelines for the area requirements of various types
of water based recreational activities. These reports include:
• Handbook for the Location, Design, Construction, Operation, and Maintenance of
Boat Launching Facilities (SOBA, 1989);
• Guidelines for Understanding and Determining Optimum Recreation Carrying
Capacity (U.S. Department of Interior, 1977);
• Recreation Carrying Capacity Handbook: Methods and Technologies for
Planning, Design, and Management (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 1980);
• Carrying Capacity in Recreation Settings (Oregon State University, 1986); and
• Management of Aquatic Recreation Resources (Warren and Rea, 1989).
Methodology
The overall boat carrying capacity for the Yadkin Project was assessed based on a
modification of standards and procedures identified in Guidelines for Understanding and
Determining Optimum Recreation Carrying Capacity (BOR, 1977) and Management of
Aquatic Recreational Resources (Warren and Rea, 1989). Data included in this analysis
included:
• total usable boating surface area;
• optimum boating acres per boat for each boat activity type; and
• distribution of the type of boating per category (e.g., what percent of the total
boating use is motor boating, sailing, PWC)
The usable boating surface areas for High Rock and Narrows reservoirs were determined
by subtracting a near-shore area of 100 feet, which accounts for shallow water, piers, and
nearshore recreation activities (e.g., bank fishing and swimming) from the total lake
surface areas at the normal maximum water elevations. The usable boating surface areas
for Tuckertown and Falls reservoirs were determined by subtracting a near-shore area of
25 feet, which accounts for shallow water, and nearshore recreation activities (e.g., bank
fishing and swimming) from the total lake surface areas at the normal maximum water
elevations (Table 5-1).
ERM 109 Recreational Use Assessment
October 2005
Yadkin Hydroelectric Project
Project No. 2197
Table 5-1 Useable Water Surface Area
Reservoir : Lake Surface Area Useable Acrea e,
High Rock 15,180 11,895
Tuckertown 2,560 2,362
Narrows 5,353 4,528
Falls 204 185
The recommended surface area per watercraft type is listed in Table 5-2. Because of the
increased horsepower now common with personal watercraft, these are treated the same
as motorboats.
Table 5-2 Watercraft Use Factor
Type of Watercraft ` Use1actor
Motorboats 9.0 acres per boat
Sailboats 4.3 acres per boat
Canoes/kayaks 1.3 acres per boat
Waterskiin boats 12.0 acres per boat
Personal watercraft PWC 9.0 acres per boat
The mix of watercraft is the final factor in the analysis. The boating mix for each
reservoir is based on the results of the RUS and the aerial photographs (Table 5-3).
Table 5-3 Watercraft Mix by Reservoir
Reservoir Power Boats and
PWC Water skiers or
Tubers Sailboats Canoes/kayaks/
Windsurfers
High Rock 88% 6% 2% 4%
Tuckertown 83% 6% 0% 11%
Narrows 88% 8% 0% 4%
Falls 73% 7% 0% 20%
The final carrying capacity calculations for each reservoir take into consideration the
reservoir's useable surface area, watercraft mix, and watercraft use factor. Table 5-4 lists
the physical watercraft carrying capacity for each reservoir.
Table 5-4 Project Physical Carrying Capacity by Reservoir
Reservoir Motor Boats
and PWC Water skiers
or Tubers Sailboats Canoes/
Kayaks/
Windsurfers Total
Watercraft.
High Rock 1191 82 27 55 1355
Tuckertown 235 17 0 31 283
Narrows 446 41 0 20 507
Falls 18 2 0 5 25
ERM 110 Recreational Use Assessment
October 2005
Yadkin Hydroelectric Project
Project No. 2197
5.2 Social Carrying Capacity
Social carrying capacity is a dynamic concept that can change over time with recreational
user's expectations, the mix of boats, and changes in boating regulations. Estimates of
social carrying capacity are a more direct measure of recreational experience and address
crowding issues.
The VUS, RUS, PCUS, and TUS all asked recreational users about crowding.
Recreational users' perceptions of crowding at each reservoir, at public boat launches,
and along the shoreline are discussed below.
5.2.1 High Rock Reservoir
Crowding on High Rock Reservoir
Respondents to the VUS, RUS, and PCUS all rated the degree of crowding on High Rock
Reservoir. The VUS asked recreational users about the extent of crowding at the
reservoir on the day they were surveyed (including weekdays and weekends). The RUS
and PCUS asked recreational users about crowding on High Rock Reservoir on a typical
weekend during the month (for the RUS) or season (for the PCUS) they received the
survey. In order to more fairly compare responses, weekend VUS responses were
identified and evaluated separately (Table 5-5). The results indicate that between 17 and
21 percent of respondents thought that High Rock Reservoir was "quite" or "very
crowded" on weekends.
The VUS, RUS, and PCUS responses on crowding were disaggregated by season. As
Table 5-6 indicates, responses to all three surveys indicate that concerns about crowding
were the greatest during the summer (between 21 and 36 percent of respondents indicated
that High Rock Reservoir was quite or very crowded on typical weekends in the
summer). Few respondents identified any concerns with crowding during the fall and
winter, but nearly 20 percent of visitors and 12 percent of residents indicated that High
Rock Reservoir is "quite" or "very crowded" in the spring.
In response to another question about reservoir crowding, 9 percent of respondents to the
VUS, 18 percent of respondents to the RUS, and 22 percent of respondents to the PCUS
identified "too many watercraft on the reservoir" as a big or moderate problem (Table
5-7).
ERM 111 Recreational Use Assessment
October 2005
U ?
O\
N
? O
ti
U U
N ?
CL?

e

ui v
pd
5

v co 10 Cl
O Z
V
W
>
0

? v
m
2
`- Z
u
m
7
O
0
pm
a
o
`' 00
U
(nm?rnz
U r
N m
m
m

C7 0
Z
v
O N O m Q
N O N N N (h Z
V U
aC T
> v)
w
w o

Y
V
O a
m

N N h Q
K r O `f N N Z
=
? U
o
= Z
0
a7
T N (D n Q
m
01
d N N cV Z
Q
O ?
0
E
E
7 M N N Z
Z 0

c
V
O
l
c
O a
i
2

N N ? ? Z

N
U U D
d a m E 0
d
c
> 0
o o ° U ;
N J
'

N y
N
.
W,0-H
3
a)
c
a
`o
d
E
C
0
c
C
Z ?
O ?
m
t ?
U LL
m
d ?
R m
N C
N g
to S
0
CL w
O ~
m
d
a
N T
CC Z
V?1 N
N N
0-
'a
c
co co`oE
c
H m O
U
N
U
a -
c m
O c
N N d
" 3 3
a a) a)
N N L N
oar
Z N h
N
I-- O) 'q 0 0
[O N
a
a
CC
° Cl) r o
N S
_
Z S
0
N

w E

0 ° 0 °
`
0
l
N
F-
V o 0 0
°
W L
n Lo
w °

o R N ?
r
0
Z LL
D:
_
> OD co
'ON O- O O
O
N

V 0 N°
r
LO
J a
Z E N

Q
E co
Nr?7N^
3 ?
O M
V co
N
? N
-
O
Z
O fA
V
CD C) 0 0
t'
Q a

J M
C tn
N
-N
Q W M
Cl)
>- N
>
LLO °N co
N ?

0 o
W o a) -

O o 0
?-0

Y D 'O
a3C1o?

O V1
)n a) O T -O
3 C) ni o 0
w O m060
c l -6 -00 Z
X CLW z6?C71>
a
S
3
N
a)
E-
-2
Q
0
O
N
E
3
c
c6
O
0
c
C
R
O
a)
°)
a)
r
0
0 0
m a)
O in
N
C
8- 3
0
O Z
E N o
:3 O
m a) 0
C C
-0 3
0
0 c)
Q C ?
N R -O
c R m
U 7
a 0 a)
C N
I 7
N N
0 O
a)
c m ">
N c c
En N
`? 3 3
av0
w 0 N N
N CD LL
o a H F-
Z r N Co
o_
E
a,
0 M ? Q
ao LO L Z
a
R
O
z

d

M C r co N Q
r N N
Z
L
y N
O
U
N
o
E
w
N M N Q
CL Z
O
R
a)
0

E

r ai
7 0
M Z
O
it

m
0) `
R O , M M Q
cu N ri m c'7Z
Q
V r
? O 15
a) a) ? NNMQ
E Q M N Z
7
N Z w
r ?
C
O
W T a)
Z /

T O C/)
U) a) Z3
3 U) in U)

S^ a)?E:D
rn
?c0v

O , o?C1 3
N j

,-
N a) cu

r
d
a
F
R
O
Y ?
Y
O O
N L
m
ca 2
(n c
C ?
U
a) 7
aN
c
a)
N 7
a)
ai
C ?
0
a 3
V O
C
N (n
R
0 3
vi a) a)
O L L
Z r N
N O
N
N N
? O
N
O
O
O
N
U
C?a
i
N_
Ct]
Yadkin Hydroelectric Project
Project No. 2197
Crowding at High Rock Boat Launches
There are 10 public boat launches on High Rock Reservoir (see Table 4-5) as well as
several at private waterfront communities. Only 8 percent of respondents to the VUS
indicated that crowding at the public boat launches at High Rock Reservoir was a big or
moderate problem. About 77 percent indicated that crowding at these launches was not a
problem at all. At none of the 10 public boat launches was crowding identified as a
significant problem (defined as > 10 percent of respondents indicating a big problem or
>20 percent of respondents indicating a big or moderate problem).
Respondents to the PCUS identified more problems with crowding at boat launches with
4 percent indicating it was a big problem and 22 percent a moderate problem. These
private community boat ramps are the responsibility of the respective communities and
not APGI. Table 5-8 presents the responses to these surveys.
Crowding Along High Rock Reservoir Shoreline
Respondents to the VUS, RUS, and PCUS all indicated that crowding along the High
Rock Reservoir shoreline was not a problem. Only 0 to 4 percent of respondents
indicated that this was a big or moderate problem (Table 5-9).
5.2.2 Tuckertown Reservoir
Crowding on Tuckertown Reservoir
In response to the question, "How crowded was this (Tuckertown) reservoir today?", 78
percent of respondents to the Visitor Use Survey (n=218) indicated not crowded or
slightly crowded; 5 percent indicated very crowded (Table 5-10). There are no
waterfront residences or private waterfront communities on Tuckertown Reservoir.
In response to another question about crowding, only 1 percent of respondents to the
VUS identified "too many watercraft on the reservoir" as generally a big problem and 3
percent identified it as a moderate problem (Table 5-11). All but one of these responses
occurred on either 4th of July weekend or on September 13, 2003 when a large fishing
tournament (NCWRC estimates 85 boats) was held on Tuckertown Reservoir. None of
the respondents to the TUS identified too many watercraft on the reservoir as a big or
moderate problem. Most VUS and TUS survey responses indicated that usually the
number of boats on Tuckertown Reservoir was not a problem. Overall, crowding on
Tuckertown Reservoir does not appear to be an issue at this time.
ERM 113 Recreational Use Assessment
October 2005
U l-,
N
? Z
U U
U
? O
Za

\°
E
N

? c

0
Q
Q co
ZITz

w
O
z
O
E
W
co O tO Q (O Q
r Z CN Z
o.

W N

N o
W

N .Q

CL

to Q CV <-
z NZ
r
R
a!

0
E
ar
M
0
` Z Z
a
m

1 W
rn w
i Q

(9 Q CN Q
> W CY) ZC*?Z
a
In
o a
V Gl cfl Q Q
M
R c
E O M Z N Z
J Z
R
O
m
a Q'
4)
N a)
7
C
O U)
E?
V
O c 0

3
O
l >
` o°v3

U

N > -

> a
H
00
a,
.92
F?
()
C_
29
0-
0
R
0
a)
E
7
c
(O
O
tll
w
C
0
0
C
a
c
m
cn
a)
w
c:
0
Q
rn
0
m
E
c
(d
? O
a) Z
O
C O
00
-0
cn L
m
a)
U m
Q N
C
rn
0
to
U
a)
C
N
N o
C
N
o
Q?
O L L
o ~ ~
Z CN
\°
E
N
0 0°
I--
m ao
a
co
0
Z

E
al
co O co 00
N
Z
a
t
rn
u
O
u
N
o
e
i E
a,
i

N ?
O
a

<)NOZ
w
R

0
E
r (U
M --0-
0 Z
a
2M
1 m
d
R
O (n 0) 00 Q
u c?co roZ
Q

v W
0 c
c
a ? a
c
(0
CD COQ
O E Q m r N z

N C
Z W
d D'
s

tm
0
O
a)
O
N
al
CL ? Cn `
a) !3
O ? (n
j
d u)
co
a) E ?

a °U 3
O .? N
H U > D? a
?C
V.
Q'
w
a
s
a
s
O
w
N
c
O
Q.
a
a)
(D
3
N
rn
LO
w
B
H
()
a)
a)
CU
a
0
a)
Q-
0
E
7
C
al
O
CU
C
0
0
c
C
m
U)
C
0
Q
0
a?
0
()
Q
E
Z)
C
? O
L ?
...' Y
00
a?
U L
? I
? c
0 ?
a)
U
a) ?
Q N
rn
m ?
c m
O
Q
N O
N
o
C
a?
o m
Q aa)i
m a?
? L L
o ~
Z -- N
? h
U O
? N
? O
5 O
O
0
0
C?a
U
?r

U ON
N ON
N
Z
U U
O
N ?
Q.

?fi m
?O Q Q Q
O Z Z Z
U
z

0
v
'pm
$

Q Q Q
O Z Z Z
U
(7
0
v
'?3m
N
m p,

V
N Q Q Q
O
T Z Z z
co
R
v
0

Z
_ e
? a
m

N v
C
(V Q Q QQ
u U r z z z
K
O >'
K L
W
W
rc o
z
?

r o
m

(O Q Q Q
O c o z z z
W
Y U
F Z

m
O
U
? f? Q Q
Q
pe ?
r ZZZ
W
Q
N
`o m
Q 4 <
a c
E a -
N Z Z z
7
Z m
O<
? m
A
T
U Z

U)
0 E ?

> ° U 3
N _
N
co
m
0
17
m
a
3
m
c
n
0
W
a
0
d
a
E
C
E N
= O
C
W 'N
o
c m
O L
a r
N
co T
O C
N W
CO
C T
m m
Z
m =
c m
m =
in -
c m
n O
c
1D
N W
N
vi O y
-6
Z r N
a?
N
N
W
LL
"O
m
\°
E
N

rl C - Q Q
O aozZ0)
IL
R
O
2
0

0
M a zch

a.+
s
V
O
N
Spl

4!

N a
O
IL
m <, CD
zz

R
N

0
E

r 4!
<1 C)
O z z
a
40
M d
20 C a0 Q Q O
w u c•?ZZ"r
Q'
V t?+
O C

iy d
Q1 ?
I? Q Q ?-
y E O oN z z
w
TA 3 W
Z
s
it

c
O
a
1/?
+2 (D N
j
Z
u _ CO
a) a)
N
W
a) FE?
?•
C O

O o C)
> -
O?

r
N
N
.C

? O
O
N N
?
O
h

0

? U

C
a)
0-
0

O
a)
.n
E

c
m
O

_L
c
O
0
C
0
C:
m. Z
a
_N
C N

Q 3 VU
0 O
N -t-
-
- (D
O
U
F-
E E
ED
C a
0 a)
y
O
a) N
w

O E
c On)
O
Co
Q U

C .>_
a) Q

Q_ C
C ?

m C
U) a)
c -0
Qw
a)
co
2 o
En C
N N
O N
Q
()
`
a) a
)

o ~
z -: cli
W
Yadkin Hydroelectric Project
Project No. 2197
Crowding at Tuckertown Reservoir Boat Launches
There are three public boat launches on Tuckertown Reservoir (i.e., Bringle Ferry, Flat
Creek, and Highway 49 boat access areas). Over 80 percent of respondents to the VUS
indicated that crowding at the boat launches was not a problem. Five percent of
respondents claimed it was a moderate problem and two percent said it was a big
problem. All of the responses that indicated a big problem and most of the responses that
indicated a moderate problem occurred either on 4th of July weekend or during the fishing
tournament on September 13, 2003 (Table 5-12). Only I percent of the respondents to
the TUS identified crowding at the Tuckertown boat launches as a big or moderate
problem. Overall, crowding at the boat launches at Tuckertown Reservoir does not
appear to be an issue at this time.
Crowding Along the Tuckertown Reservoir Shoreline
Finally, six percent of respondents to the VUS indicated that too many people along the
shoreline were a big or moderate problem (Table 5-13). Nearly 2/3 of these responses
occurred on either 4th of July weekend or during the fishing tournament on September 13,
2003. Similarly, approximately 7 percent of respondents to the TUS identified crowding
along the shoreline as a big or moderate problem. Overall, crowding along the shoreline
does not appear to be an issue at Tuckertown Reservoir at this time.
5.2.3 Narrows Reservoir
Crowding on Narrows Reservoir
Respondents to the VUS, RUS, and PCUS all rated the degree of crowding on the
reservoir, at boat launches, and along the shoreline. The VUS asked recreational users
about the extent of crowding at the reservoir on the day they were surveyed (including
weekdays and weekends), with about 5 percent rating the reservoir as quite or very
crowded. The RUS and the PCUS asked recreational users about crowding on Narrows
Reservoir on a typical weekend during the month (for the RUS) or season (for the PCUS)
they received the survey. Residents tended to consider crowding more of an issue with
18 percent of waterfront residents and 25 percent of non-waterfront residents indicating
Narrows Reservoir was quite or very crowded (Table 5-14).
The VUS, RUS, and PCUS responses on crowding were disaggregated by season. As
Table 5-15 indicates, responses to all three surveys indicate that concerns about crowding
were the greatest during the summer with 8 percent of visitors, 38 percent of waterfront
residents, and 35 percent of non-waterfront residents indicating that Narrows Reservoir
was quite or very crowded on typical weekends in the summer. Few respondents
identified any concerns with crowding during the fall, winter, or spring.
ERM 116 Recreational Use Assessment
October 2005
U ?
N ?
N
Z
U U
p? O
t?

\°
E
N

t* .C m QQ?
a ? Z
z?

m
41
O
Z

E
al

co .II
O
o z Z
CL

a?i
L N

vI
E
d

N .a
O`
CL
U' Q Q
zz
0

ar
V

v
E
Q)
z z
N C)
O
`
a
LM
m
O) w
R 0 I? Q Q O
> 0 c` zz;T
Q
o
C

V ?
d =
:o Q Q
E Q z z
J 7 0
Z 0
O
m
A
4)
y O
°? a) c Z
a) CO
c
a CO
D
C
O N
U)
??

U ?
E?
o
N C 0
3 (D C)
3

V
N (D ^? m
L.1_
N_
Lb
a!
r
a)
N
a)
C_
4)
O_
0
a)
Q
0
E
c
c
0
m
y
c
0
0
c
° 0
a3
a) CO
O_
u) O
a) -C
)
O U
N C
.n F-
E .?
c ?
a)
uJ
L a)
U)
a) 7
0 0
-0 E
a) E
Co o
U
m N
C
a) Q
2 -0
a)
CL c
c c°
`
a)
C
W a)
oc -O
Q in
E o
N c
a) a)
ao
O
Q N
a) a)
Qj L L
o ~ ~

E
a)

v B (N Q Q 0)
O 00 co
a
R
0
Z
°v
E
QI
co z
a z
01
w
L N

E
ar
N aL ?tzZV

R
ar

E

e- W
N z z ch
0
O
L
a
R
co
? ar
L 1- QdCO
0) (j co Z Z co
Q

N tA
0 C
O
?
Gl a
V Q Q r
E 0 N z z f-
L
U) 7 tA
Z
W
t
r
a)
C
O ?

a)
? T
a) C cn L>
a) co
CL
0 0) D
a) (h CO
a u) :
C o
> o a U 3

8
L >
'in-
,
^ ^
5 LL a-
Of
M
r
N
a)
.a
r

? O

O
?
41 O

0
a)
U

a)
C
a)

0
8-
0

E

C
m
0
0
w
c
O
0
C
-0 o
? Z
? a)

C
O C
a ?: .-
O
0
U
N O

E .S
U)
c T
o ?
Q) ?

a) c
A
c ?
o
-o E
E
O
L U
? a)

a) -0
o_ c
c ?
'? n3
a) C
C a)
?
a)
? o
cn c
a) a)
o
a)
0
`
a) a
)
Qj L L
0
Z ? cli
W
U ?
N
U U
N ?

o_

N II
m
N co (D ? Z

V
L,

e
II
92a;
fh V N Z
O
U
m
C 'J
e
m
O L ) ('7 co M co
z
0
y
m A {

(9
z D
o
o ?

O e

U v

K V

Cl
0
' N O N
M N
z
n
W U ?
W
o
?
W
a
e
z a
?pppjd
r
m O (D Lo N N Z
N U

O z
w
re m
<
Z t
U 5
N co CO LO Q

O N N Z
I
m
`
m
a
o m
II
a C
a.0 a°o (^D ( Q
E 0
C 7 ^ z
L
=
z

T
O
N -0

Y
ca a)
H Z
7 N

Z
N (D U)
2 2 N U)

d E
A C O a)
? o 0 o U 3
N >
v
? 5N N
50)
II
3
0
n
0
a`i
n
E
C
10
m
0
o >
N
VI
a) N
L co
U
m LL
f II
m m
0 c
a) g
? b
O
y U
m ?
O ~
co
? N
` T
'Z5 a)
N
1O d
C
o
II C
" E
n C E
W O
y U
m
U ? m
N
CL
c y
y N II
N `
0
0. o
co,-
0 aF?
Z - N (')

ce)
OO
V LOCO B
IL
z -C Lr) 'T (D (D 0
0 LL.

N aaaaa
?
> ,,„,
Z Z Z Z Z
z
w
It N
lo OOO
(D
IL (;? ?-- (V N
LL
o a
.

C7
z 0) (N

0
ti N
V
(Y)
LL .
O
O

CO)
W > r O V O
w

? N
.Z U N O(.0
O
0 N O N
a
O d
E
U
z
E M
? co V N T
O (n
z
O
N
N n co
?- ? V N N O (V
Q

J U)
w U c°ooOVOo
I y a
w cm U)
C ( CY) (Y) N (O N
Q
N
O
?
W
I > (DN IOU')
CO)
LLI
cl:
Y
Q
J 70
F N
z

0
_0
,
-0 3:
?C
a
m °. m 0-0
a ?
-
a
l
CO) W 0 C) 7
u
3: -0
-0
O 10 O
o
°
m
o 0 a U
U)70
t
.
°-) o ?
z a It Zc4:?i Qj
N
Lb
41
R

? O
O
N N
?+ O

O

O

C ?
U
Q.
0
a)
Q-
0
a)

E

0

O
0
c

C

O
Z
a)
Cl)
a)
L
U
M O

O N 00
Cl)
--
(D
C
0 CD
(A O
a) L,

O
a)
E) 0
C O
c Z
-Fu a)
O Co
a)
C O C
o
•
0

U a)
2 Z cn
Q o a)
C (D
m
(n O
O O
Cl)
C '
>
0-0 O
N c c
W (n

a a) a)
o a`) a`)
N a)LL
?a~~
Z ? cv co
W
Yadkin Hydroelectric Project
Project No. 2197
In response to another question about crowding, between 2 percent of TUS respondents,
6 percent of VUS respondents, 24 percent of PCUS respondents, and 28 percent of RUS
respondents identified "too many watercraft on the reservoir" as a big or moderate
problem (Table 5-16).
Crowding at the Narrow Reservoir Boat Launches
There are eight public access boat launches on Narrows Reservoir (see Table 4-24). Over
80 percent of respondents to the VUS and over 90 percent of respondents to the TUS
indicated that crowding at the boat launches was not a problem. Lake Forest
Campground/Fish Tales Marina was the only public boat launch where crowding was
identified as a significant issue (25 percent of VUS respondents identified crowding at
the boat launch as a moderate problem), but the response rate was low at this site (n=4)
and not necessarily indicative of a real problem.
Respondents to the PCUS identified more problems with crowding at private community
boat launches with 8 percent indicating it was a big problem and 11 percent a moderate
problem. These private community boat ramps are the responsibility of the respective
communities and not APGI. Table 5-17 summarizes the responses to these surveys.
Crowding Along the Narrows Reservoir Shoreline
Few recreation users consider the shoreline along Narrows Reservoir crowded. Only
between 2 percent (PCUS) and 7 percent (VUS and TUS) of respondents indicated that
too many people along the shoreline at Narrows Reservoir were a big or moderate
problem (Table 5-18). Most respondents (86 to 90 percent varying by survey) did not
consider crowding along the shoreline to be a problem at all. Overall, crowding along the
shoreline does not appear to be an issue at Narrows Reservoir at this time.
5.2.4 Falls Reservoir
Crowding on Falls Reservoir
In response to the question, "How crowded was this (Falls) reservoir today?", 81 percent
of respondents to the VUS (n=17) indicated not crowded or slightly crowded, and none
indicated very crowded (Table 5-19). Since there are no waterfront residences or private
waterfront communities on Falls Reservoir, no responses were received from these
surveys for Falls Reservoir.
In a separate set of questions regarding potential issues at Falls Reservoir, no respondents
(n=15) to the VUS identified "too many boats on the reservoir" as a big problem and only
6 percent identified it as a moderate problem (Table 5-20). None of the respondents to
the TUS identified too many boats on the reservoir as a big or moderate problem.
ERM 119 Recreational Use Assessment
October 2005
U ?
N ?
N
0.' O
tiz
U U
O
fi
0
!

v p co 0)
a

0
z
0
E
m
M O rnNOC7
IL
Y
w
` ill
O
0
0
E
a
`
N

IL
V

0
2
0
E
a)
T O
` r w o) T
IL
on
? a)
N o a0 4)

' aN m m ? Cl)
o
0

y e
o ?
LO 0)
in E p (o co
z w
c ?
o ?
z a

(n
U) D
a) E
0
R c
U
C)
6
3
g rn >?a?
0
m
Q
0
a)
0
E
0
c
m
0
a)
w
C
0
C
a ?
c ?
W -1
W Y
O
4 m
U) ?
N O
o y
E ?
S
? o
o
O
N Z
R
o ?
w C
C
0
a
0 0
U
? w
U IA
a`) _
n O
? a
m
a
C
C 2
0
a) N
o N
w
6 a) s
?a
z
0
E
C 0 z V 0)

IL
R
0
z
0
E

M C
` ? z M V
a
s

`
O
m
E

N a Lnz?co

w

a,
0
CO
G

E

T w
N

co O'
z
O
`
IL
m
?
d
O

I- Q N O)
t
a ?/1 M Z (oM

v N
O W

C
7 `

C

NQm co
E O MZ(oI?
..
o = In
zw
m
ro
>. a?)
c aa)
r :3

O (n
v (D E ?
`
E

3
a
)
0

O > 6

U =
U) ,` co
a-
a
a?
3
a)
a)
a
aa)
a
o'
n
E
c
m
0
'a)
Y
c
O
O
c
a
C
n3
v,
N
c
O
0 -
ED
a)
0
7
a)
0
a)
Y
0
L
C
0
a
a)
rn
a)
n
N
c
a)
a)
o_
c
0
c
0
I?
O
Q)
m
00
a)
ai 0_
0
E
a)
0
0)mOD
O o
o

?s
0
z
0
E
d
M O
` I-- I- co co
a
t
w N
`
O
N

0
E
G)
a
O
N d (D N N Cl)
w
R
d
?
C
G
0
E
W
T C O V
O
`
a
on
01 a)
R co rn rn co
u
a c) c) c) M
=
• O

O
N .OII C
E O co LONO
c)v(oco
d

w
' z

_
o a)
°?
Q Q)
z ? ?
d a =
w
?:D n
a E :D

_ 0
C O
W
> O a) U 3
S a) .7
co
U) 0
'o
d
w
fY
00
R
z
R
O
s
m
v
s
Y
ao
w
Z
F
a
a)
aLD
Z
a?
a
0
O
Q
0
E
7
C
0
a)
O
0
C
a
c
a)
O
C:
8-
a)
0
E
_o
0
ai
C
0
a
0
v,
N
c
o_
c
a?
O
0
O
0-
a)
m
00
ai
? O
N
? 01
?o
? U
h
O
O
O
N
U
N
?i
O
W