3.4

3.4 Existing Natural Environment
3.4.1 Wetlands
"Waters of the United States," or jurisdictional waters, are defined in the CWA (32 USC 1251 et seq) as
waterbodies including lakes, rivers and streams, and wetlands. Wetlands, for the purposes of the CWA, are
those areas that are inundated or saturated by surface water or groundwater at a frequency and duration
sufficient to support, and under normal circumstances do support, a prevalence of vegetation typically
adapted for life in saturated soil conditions (33 CFR 328.3). Under Section 404 of the CWA, the USACE
issues permits for activities that result in discharge of dredged or fill material into "Waters of the United
States," including wetlands. EO 11990, establishes the "Protection of Wetlands" for federal agencies and
covers a broader range of actions that can have adverse impacts on wetlands, including groundwater
withdrawals, water diversions, and nutrient enrichment.
NPS uses tbe wetlands definition that was developed by tbe United States Fish and Wildlife Service
(USFWS), which view wetlands from a more ecological standpoint. This definition includes wetlands
defined by USACE under the CWA, plus some additional areas. The USFWS classification system is found
in Classification of Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats of the United States (Cowardin et al. 1979). The
USFWS classification system is used for mapping wetlands for the NWI Project.
For the purposes of this report, wetland areas regulated by the USACE are strictly referred to as jurisdictional
wetlands. Any additional areas classified as wetlands by tbe USFWS system, but not jurisdictional wetlands,
are referred to in this document as special aquatic habitats. In this report, the general term `wetland' will be
used to refer to the combined jurisdictional wetlands and special aquatic habitats found in the project study
corridor.
3.4.1.1 Wetlands in Project Area
The Wetlands Section of the ECR summarizes the existing wet habitats within the project study area based
on USFWS NWI maps. These maps show the location, size, and type of wet habitats within defined
geographical areas and are typically used for planning purposes only. NWI maps attempt to show all rypes
of wetlands and deepwater habitats. NWI identifications are limited to ihe scale, quality, and time of year of
the aerial photographs. These maps are not field-verified and tend to omit drier or forested wetlands and
wetlands less than 3.0 ac (7.4 ha) in size (Tiner 1997). Digital NWI mapping indicates approximately 10,333
acres (4,182 ha) of wetlands or deepwater habitats are within the project study area, co�nprising three
different systems: lacustrine, riverine, and palustrine. The open waters of Fontana and Cheoah lalces are
classified as lacustine deepwater habitats and comprise 10,232 ac (4,140 ha), or 99 percent of the N WI
mapped wet habitats within the project study area. No riverine or palustrine wetlands were identified on
NWI maps within the project study corridors.
Since NWI mapping tends to omit forested wetlands and smaller wetlands and in order to obtain more
accurate results, field investigations were conducted in the project study corridors to determine the
approximate location, type, and acreage of any unmapped wetlands. Wetland locations were determined by
a single GPS (Global Positioning System) point taken near the center of the wetland. The approximate size
Affected Environment — 3-37
North Shore Road Final Environmental Impact Statement

of each wetland was estimated in the field by estimating the average length and width of the wetland. Most
wetlands were less than 0. ] acre (0.4 ha) in size. It is necessary to show wetland acreage to two decimal
places to account for the small size of wetlands. However, the area is approximate and if a partial-build or
build alternative is selected, wetland delineations would have to be conducted to determine the precise
location and size of each wetland. Sixty-nine wetlands were identified within the project study corridors, 49
of the��n jurisdictional wetlands totaling approximately 6.15 ac (2.49 ha) and 20 of them special aquatic
habitat totaling approXimately 0.78 ac (032 ha). A complete list of all identified wetlands is in Attachment
M-3 (Water Resources Technical Report). The majority of these wetlands are associated with large stream
systems such as Forney Creek, Chambers Creek, Shehan Branch, and Gray Wolf Creek. A summary of all
identified wetlands based on the USFWS classification system is listed in Table 3-5.
Table 3-5. Approximate Area by USFWS Classification of All Wetlands
within the Project Study Corridors
Wetland Area'
Classification
PEM1B
PEM1C
PF01A
PF016
PRB1F
PSS16
PSS1J
PSS3J
USFWS Description
1.54 ac (0.62 ha) Palustrine, emergent, persistent, saturated
0.87 ac (0.35 ha) Palustrine, emergent, persistent, seasonally flooded
0.41 ac (0.17 ha) Palustrine, forested, broad-leaved deciduous, temporarily flooded
2.19 ac (0.89 ha) Palustrine, forested, broad-leaved deciduous, saturated
0.04ac (0.02 ha) Palustrine, rock bottom, bedrock, semi-permanently flooded
0.70 ac (0.28 ha) Palustrine, scrub shrub, broad-leaved deciduous, saturated
0.40 ac (0.16 ha)
0.71 ac (0.29 ha)
Palustrine, scrub shrub, broad-leaved deciduous, intermittently
flooded
Palustrine, scrub shrub, broad-leaved evergreen, intermittently
flooded
PUB1 F 0.07 ac (0.03 ha) Palustrine, unconsolidated bottom, cobble-gravel, semi-permanently
flooded
Note:
1 Wetland areas are approximate and individual wetland areas are generally less than 0.1 acre (0.04 ha).
Delineations would have to be conducted to determine the precise size of all wetlands.
Wetlands can also be classified by the vegetation communiry within which they occur. For this report, a
vegetation classification system developed by The Nature Conservancy (TNC) as reported in White et al.
(2003) was used. Each vegetation classification is given a conservation status rank based on a global (G)
scale of 1 to 5, with 1 indicating critical imperilment and 5 indicating little or no risk of elimination
(Grossman et al. 1998; Anderson et al. l 998). A question mark (?) added to a ranlc expresses an uncertainty
about the rank in the range of 1 either way on the 1-5 scale. Five different vegetation communities of
wetlands exist within the project study corridors. Three out of the five vegetation communities are
considered rare (G1 or G2) due to the low level of known occurrences. One communiry is classified as GW,
indicating that invasive exotic species dominate the vegetation of that wetland communiry. Table 3-6
summarizes all wetlands communities and their conservation status ranking (global rank).
Affected Environment — 3-38
North Shore Road Final Environmental Impact Statement

Table 3-6. Approximate Area by TNC Vegetation Classification of All
Wetlands within the Project Study Corridors
Global Ranking Area' Vegetation Classification
GW 0.14 ac (0.06 ha) Artificial Lake Drawdown Zone
G2? 1.73 ac (0.70 ha) Appalachian Montane Alluvial Forest
G2? 3.42 ac (1.39 ha) Montane Low-Elevation Seep
G2G3 0.25 ac (0.10 ha) Southern Appalachian Wetland Seep
G4? 1.06 ac (0.43 ha) Southern Blue Ridge Beaver Marsh
Note:
1 Wetland areas are approximate and individual wetland areas are generally less than 0.1 acre (0.04 ha).
Delineations would have to be conducted to determine the precise size of all wetlands.
3.4.1.2 Regulatory Requirements
Actions that affect wetlands are guided and regulated by EO ] 1990 and the CWA. Section 3.4.2.3 has
additional information on permit requirements.
EO 11990 requires the protection of wetlands by federal agencies in order to "avoid to the extent possible the
long and short-term adverse impacts associated with the destruction or modification of wetlands and to avoid
the direct or indirect support of new construction in wetlands wherever there is a practicable alternative." In
compliance with EO 11990, the NPS has developed policies and procedures in DO 77-1: Wetland
Protection. Included in DO 77-1 were a goal of "no net loss of wetlands" and adoption of tbe USFWS's
classification system for defining, classifying, and inventorying wetlands.
The CWA, enacted in October of 1972, requires regulation of discharges into "Waters of the United States."
The objective of the CWA is to maintain and restare the chemical, physical, and biological integriry of the
"Waters of the United States." The USEPA is the principal administrative agency of the CWA. However,
the USACE has responsibility for administering, implementating, permitting, and enforcing Section 404 of
the CWA. Section 404 of the CWA requires a permit from the USACE for the discharge of dredged or fill
material into "Water of the United States" including jurisdictional wetlands, rivers, lakes, and streams.
Based on the potential impacts to "Waters of the United States," it likely that a Section 404 permit would be
required for any of the partial-build or build alternatives. A 404 permit would require that all impacts be
avoided and minimized to the eRtent practicable and require mitigation for all unavoidable impacts.
Section 401 of the CWA requires a Water Quality Certification for any activity that requires a federal permit.
In North Carolina, the North Carolina Division of Water Quality (NCDWQ) is responsible for issuing a
Section 40 ] Water Quality Certification. The USACE cannot issue a Section 404 permit until a Section 401
certification is issued or waived. The Section 401 Water Quality Certification process is the mechanism by
which the state assures that a project will not violate the applicable water qualiry standards and that
appropriate measures are in place to avoid violations. A 401 permit would likely require that all impacts be
avoided and minimized to the extent practicable. Special coordination with the NCWRC is required for
projects occurring impacting trout waters. In addition, NCDWQ would also require a 25-foot (7.6-m)
riparian buffer on Trout waters.
Affected Environment — 3-39
North Shore Road Final Environmental Impact Statement

Section 402 of the CWA requires a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit for
stormwater discharges into "Water of the United States" when the discharges are associated with
construction activities. Therefore, a NPDES permit would be required for any construction activities
resulting from the proposed project.
If a partial-build ar build alternative were selected for implementation, all necessary permits would be
requested from the appropriate regulatory agencies upon the completion of final design. NPS would comply
with the conditions and requirements associated with the issuance of these permits.
3.4.2 Lakes, Rivers, and Streams
The project study area is situated in USGS hydrologic units 06010202, 06010203, and 06010204 and
NCDWQ Subbasin 04-04-02. The project study area is located within portions of three different drainage
systems: the Little Tennessee River, the Nantahala River, and the Tuckasegee River. The Little Tennessee
River flows into Fontana Lake at the southeastem edge of the study area; however, no fre�flowing portions
of the river are within the study area. Cheoah Lake begins immediately downstream of Fontana Dam.
Tributaries to both Fontana and Cheoah lakes are part of the Little Tennessee River system. The Nantahala
and Tuckasegee rivers drain portions of the study area and drain into the Little Tennessee River at Fontana
Lake.
3.4.2.1 Lakes
Both Fontana and Cheoah lakes are impoundments or reservoirs on the Little Tennessee River. TVA
impounded the Little Tennessee River to form Fontana Lake in 1944. Fontana Lake extends for 29 mi (24
km) along the southern boundary of GSMNP and has a perimeter of approximately 240 mi (386 km).
Although the mean depth of Fontana Lake is approximately 135 ft(41 m), it reaches a maximum depth of
approximately 440 ft(134 m) at the dam. More than 1,570 mi� (4,066 km�) of mountainous terrain drain into
Fontana Lake (TVA no date). There is a water supply intake located on Fontana Lake near the dam that
supplies drinking water to the Fontana Village. It averages a daily intake of approximately 500,000 gallons
(1,852,000 liters). Cheoah Dam was completed in 1919 by the Tallassee Power Company (now Tapoco,
Inc.). Cheoah Lake has a normal pool area of approximately 615 ac (249 ha) and a drainage area of 1,608 mi�
(4,165 km�) (Alcoa 2005).
3.4.2.2 Rivers and Streams
The NCDWQ is the principal administrative agency of the Section
401 of the CWA Surface Water and Wetland Standards, which are
defined in North Carolina Administration Code 15A NCAC 02B
.0100 and .0200. NCDWQ has created definitions far the
identification of jurisdictional streams as perennial or intermittent
(NCDENR 2004). NCDWQ defines a perennial stream as a clearly
defined channel that contains water year-round during a year of
normal rainfall and has aquatic bed located below the water table for
Streams within the study corridor are
classified as trout and water supply
waters.
Affected Environment — 3-40
North Shore Road Final Environmental Impact Statement

most of the year (15A NCAC 02B .0233[2][i]). NCDWQ defines an intermittent stream as a well-defined
channel that contains water for only part of the year, typically during the winter and spring when the aquatic
bed is below the water table (15A NCAC 02B .0233[2][g]).
The Water Resources Section of the ECR summarizes the named, perennial streams as depicted on the
USGS 7.5-minute topographic quadrangle maps of the project study area. In order to obtain more accurate
results, field surveys were conducted from May through October 2004 to identify jurisdictional streams
within the project study corridors. Field investigations involved pedestrian surveys within the project study
corridors and focused on low-lying areas and valleys to identify jurisdictional streams. The length and
location of stream features are approximate. If a partial-build or build alternative is selected, stream
delineations may need to be conducted to determine the exact location and classification of stream features.
Four hundred and five (405) streams totaling approximately 77.5 linear mi (124.7 km) were identified within
the project study corridors. Of these, 292 streams were not previously delineated on USGS topographic
maps, which total approximately 34.3 linear mi (55.2 km). The remaining 113 streams that were on existing
USGS maps were field verified and total approximately 43.2 linear mi (69.5 km). The streams are located
on Figure 3-5 and detailed descriptions are in the Water Resources Technical Report (Appendix M). Table
3-7 summarizes the flow classification of the streams. The stream classification is based on definitions by
the NCDWQ (] SA NCAC 02B .0100 and .0200).
Classification
Ephemeral
Intermittent
Perennial
Table 3-7. Summary of Stream Flow Classifications
within the Project Study Corridors'
Count
71
332
Length (miles)
0.1
6.4
71.0
Length (kilometers)
0.2
10.3
114.3
Note:
1 All classifications and lengths are approximate and based on general determinations.
3.4.2.3 Regulatory Requirements
"Waters of the United States," or jurisdictional waters, are defined in the CWA (32 USC 1251 et seq.) as
waterbodies including lakes, rivers and streams, and wetlands. Actions that affect streams are guided and
regulated by EO 11990, the CWA, the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899, and the TVA Act. EO 11990 and
the CWA are described in Section 3.4.1 of this report.
The Rivers and Harbars Act of 1899 (33 USC 403) prohibits the creation of any obstruction to the navigable
capacity of any "Waters of the United States" without approval of Congress. Section 9 of the Act provides
for permitting the clearances for bridges over navigable waters. The United States Coast Guard (USCG) has
the overall responsibility of determining whether or not a permit is required and, in those cases where a
bridge permit is required, has the approval authority for the bridge location, alignment, and appropriate
navigational clearances; however, 23 USC 144(h) gave the FHWA the responsibility of determining whether
or not a Federal-aid highway bridge requires a USCG permit. A USCG permit is not required if the FHWA
determines that the proposed federal-aid highway bridge is over waters which are not used or are not
Affected Environment — 3-41
North Shore Road Final Environmental Impact Statement

susceptible to be used in their natural condition, or by reasonable improvement, as a means to transport
interstate or foreign commerce and which are not tidal. Fontana Lake has been determined to be navigable
waters; however, it is neither used nor likely to be used for interstate or foreign commerce and it is not tidal.
Therefore, it is anticipated that a USCG permit would not be required for any bridge being considered that
would cross an embayment of Fontana Lalce.
Section ] 0 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899 requires a permit for the building of any wharfs, piers,
jetties, and other structures in navigable waters. A Section 10 permit would be required if the proposed
project includes the building of boat ramp, dock, or other structure in the waters of Fontana Lake.
Section 26a of the Tennessee Valley Authoriry Act of 1933 requires approval from TVA before any
construction activities may be conducted that affect navigation, flood control, or public lands along the
shoreline of the TVA reservoirs including Fontana Lake. Therefore, prior approval would be required from
TVA if the proposed project includes the building of boat ramp, dock, bridges, or other structures that would
affect Fontana Lake. In addition, bridges or stream relocations or other obstructions on Tennessee River
tributary streams would also require Section 26a approval.
A Sedimentation and Erosion Control Plan would be required for land-disturbing activities and would meet
the requirements of state and local ordinances, as applicable. General requirements of this plan include
buffer zones on streams and lakes sufficient to confine visible siltation and ground cover requirements on
disturbed areas. The plan is required to address stormwater runoff and meet minimum design and
performance standards. Special provisions may be required for the NPDES permit for stormwater runoff that
drains to Outstanding Resource Waters (ORWs) (15A NCAC 02H .1007). Land-disturbing activities in the
Water Supply Watershed will comply with state and local ordinances, as applicable.
National wild and scenic rivers (WSR) are designated by 16 USC 1271-1287. Selected waterbodies possess
outstandingly remarkable scenic, recreational, geological, fish and wildlife, historic, cultural, ar other similar
values, and shall be preserved in free-flowing conditions. There are no WSR designations within the project
study area (NPS 2003c).
The Nationwide Rivers Inventory (NRI) is a register of river segments that potentially qualify as national
wild, scenic, or recreational rivers areas under Section 5(d) of the National Wild and Scenic Rivers Act.
Two river segments within the study area are listed on the NRI. These two segments are the Nantahala River
from Nantahala Lake to Fontana Lake and the Tuckasegee River between Bryson Ciry and Lake Cedar Cliff.
The Nantahala River is located approximately 10 mi (16 km) south of the project study corridors, and the
Tuckasegee River is located approximately 5 mi (8 km) east of the project study corridors. There are no
streams or rivers within the project study corridors included on the NRI (NPS 2001c).
The USEPA protects waters that are designated as a sole source aquifer and has developed the Wellhead
Protection Program (WPP). No sole source aquifer areas are designated (USEPA 2003b) and no wellhead
protection plans have been approved far any community within the project study area (NCDENR 2005a).
The entire project study area also is considered a recharge zone. Additional discussion on recharge areas is
included in the Groundwater Recharge Areas Section of Appendix M, Section 6.3.
Affected Environment — 3-42
North Shore Road Final Environmental Impact Statement

3.4.3 Water Quality
The ECR summarizes the existing water quality data for streams and lakes within the project study area.
The data is based on published and unpublished reports, literature searches, and personal communications.
Complete results and discussion are located in the Water Resources Technical Report (Appendix M).
3.4.3.1 Streams
Based on published data from NCDWQ (] 997), the Little Tennessee River within the project study area
contains some of the cleanest water in North Carolina. The portion of the basin surrounding Fontana Lake
also contains some of the most famous trout streams in the state, including Hazel, Forney, and Noland
creeks. Streams in the Little Tennessee River subbasin are characterized as having slightly acidic pH, being
low in nutrient concentrations, and having low conductivity.
The NCDWQ classifies surfaces waters based on their existing or proposed uses. The primary classification
system distinguishes the following basic usage categories: water used for public water supply and food
processing (Classes WS-I through WS-V); waters used for frequent swimming or bathing (Class B); and
waters used for neither of these purposes (Class C). The supplemental classifications CA and Tr denote
water supply critical areas and trout waters, respectively. A list of jurisdictional streams and their NCDWQ
primary use classification found within the project study corridors is in Attachment M-5. More information
on this classification system is in Appendix M.
On June 21, 2005, the North Carolina Legislature ratified a bill to reclassify all the streams tbat drain to the
north shore of Fontana Lake between Eagle and Forney creeks as ORWs based upon the excellent water
quality of these streams and that these waters are a special and unique resource. Public hearings on the draft
rules were held by NCDWQ on June 5, 2006. Effective January 1, 2007, NCDWQ, under order of the North
Carolina Legislature and with concurrence from the Environmenta] Management Commission, amended
15A NCAC 02B.0225 to establish the Fontana Lake North Shore ORW Area. The Fontana Lake North
Shore ORW Area consists of the entire watersheds of all creeks that drain to the north shore of Fontana Lake
between Eagle and Forney creeks (inclusive). All of these streams are located within the project study
corridors (Figure 3-5).
According to NCAC 02B .0225, ORWs exhibit values or uses that are of exceptional state or national
recreational ar ecological significance. In general, water qualiry conditions should be protected to maintain
the outstanding resource values of these waters. No new dischargers or expansions of existing dischargers
should be petmitted and new development activities must follow the provisions as specified in 15A NCAC
02H .1000. Refer to 15A NCAC 02B.0225 far the specific requirements.
The main water quality concerns for the construction of a road in the project study area would be the
presence of potentially acid-producing (AP) rock and sedimentation due to land-disturbing activities.
Exposure or disturbance of AP rock could result in increased acidiry (reduced pH), increased sulfates,
increased heavy metals, and aquatic wildlife mortality. Additional information on AP rock is provided in
Section 33.1 of this report.
Affected Environment — 3-43
North Shore Road Final Environmental Impact Statement

The pH level serves as an overall indicator of the ability of a waterbody to sustain aquatic life. High
concentrations of the anions sulfate and nitrate (found in bedrock and rainwater) will reduce stream pH. The
pH level is measured on a scale of 0 to ] 4 with less than 7 being acidic and greater than 7 being basic. NPS
has conducted studies of the streams within GSMNP to monitor the potential impacts from acidic
atmospheric deposition (NCDWQ 2000; Flum et al. 1997; Robinson et al. 2002; Robinson et al. 2003). The
effects of acid deposition are greatest at higher elevations that have become saturated witb nitrogen.
GSMNP streams are experiencing chronic and episodic acidification that is caused, in a large part, by acidic
deposition. Noland Divide watershed is currently at "stage 2" nitrogen saturation, exporting large amounts
of nitrogen into Park streams during the growing season (NPS and USFWS 2000). A main concern is that
nitrogen saturation and subsequent increases in stream acidiry at higher elevations will eventually impact
lower elevation streams and lakes. Stream pH is declining at all elevations in the park (NPS and USFWS
2000). Compounding the problem in the study area is the absence of available cations (such as calcium and
magnesium) to safely buffer anions (nitrates and sulfates). Instead, anions could cause the leaching of
potentially toxic metal ions such as aluminum. Leaching rates are thus the key to understanding the loss of
base cations, soil acidification, and ultimately stream acidification in GSMNP (Flum et al. 1997).
Discussions of nitrogen and sulfur deposition rates are presented in Section 3.3.4, Air Quality.
Streams carry a certain load of sediment in a state of equilibrium. When this sediment load increases,
deposition can occur in the stream channeL Conversely, when this sediment load is reduced, the stream may
erode its channel to r�establish the original sediment load. Construction is a land-disturbing activity and
would be a significant source of sedimentation in the short-term and long-term durations of the project. The
severity and extent of sedimentation would depend upon many factors, including rainfall intensity and
frequency, distance from stream, slope (steepness), soil type (stability and erodibility), characteristics of
vegetated buffer (width and density), and time of year.
USGS has conducted studies of the effects of historical mining operations on the groundwater and surface
waters in the area surrounding the mines (Hammarstrom et al. 2003; Seal et al. 1997). The two historical
mines that were researched and studied are the Fontana Mine, located east of the Eagle Creek Arm of
Fontana Lake, and the Hazel Creelc Mine, located near the headwaters of Hazel Creek. Results from
sampling the waters near the mines reveal variability in the water qualiry both upstream and downstream of
the mine sites. With the exceptions of iron and aluminum, the dissolved constituent concentrations in
streams near the mines were lower than those in the mine waters and higher than those in the waters situated
away from known mining activiry (Seal et al. 1997). However, elevated metal concentrations in stream
sediment was detected downstream of the mines (Hammarstrom et al. 2003). In the cases of iron and
aluminum, the waters away from the mines contain higher concentrations than do the waters near the mines.
It is presumed that areas of natural "acid-rock drainage" within the geological formation away from the
mines are the cause of the elevated levels of dissolved iron and aluminum in these waters (Seal et al. 1997).
3.4.3.2 Lakes
The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) sampled portions of Fontana Lake in arder to determine the effects of
the mining activities on its water quality (Hammarstrom et al. 2003; Seal et al. 1997). From these data, it is
concluded that the historic mining activity in the Fontana Lake watershed area is negatively impacting the
water qualiry of nearby surface waters; however, the mining activity is not currently having a negative
Affected Environment — 3-44
North Shore Road Final Environmental Impact Statement

impact on the waters of Fontana Lake. Natural dilution of the stream waters as they flow toward the lake
appears to be an effective mitigation process. However, sediments in the Hazel Creek and Eagle Creelc arms
of Fontana Lake have higher concentrations of inetals compared to sediments elsewhere in Fontana Lake
(Hammarstorm et al. 2003; Abernathy et al. 1984).
The TVA and tbe NCDWQ have monitored the water qualiry in Fontana Lake far several years. The North
Carolina Trophic State Index (NCTSI) is based on total phosphorus, total organic nitrogen, secchi dislc depth,
and chlorophyll-a collected within the photic zone of a lake. NCTSI rates a lake based on its productivity,
which can range from oligotrophic (infertile) to mesotrophic (moderately infertile) to eutrophic (fertile).
Overall, Fontana Lake is classified as oligotrophic by both TVA (TVA 2003) and NCDWQ (NCDWQ
2004). Water qualiry sampling is not conducted on Cheoah Lake. The North Carolina Wildlife Resources
Commission (NCWRC) stocks Cheoah Lake with brook, rainbow, and brown trout between March and July
(NCWRC 2004). Based on the undeveloped nature of the watershed and fish stocking, current water quality
is believed to be good for Cheoah Lake.
3.4.3.3 Benthic Macroinvertebrates
Monitoring of benthic macroinvertebrates (aquatic insects) provides a reliable tool for determining water
quality conditions. Some benthic macroinvertebrates are sensitive to subtle changes in water quality and
have life cycles ranging from six months to a few years. The NCDWQ bas developed the North Carolina
Biotic Index (NCB� and uses it in conjunction with taxa richness to classify the water quality of streams as
Excellent, Good, Good-Fair, Fair, and Poor. The NCDWQ developed the NCBI specifically for North
Carolina, and it is based on the abundance and tolerance value of species. NCBI is inversely related to
stream water quality meaning a low NCBI value indicates high stream water qualiry (NCDWQ 2001). The
NCDWQ has benthic macroinvertebrate monitoring stations on Hazel Creek, Forney Creek, and Noland
Creek. Based on the NCBI, all three sites rated Excellent in 1999 (NCDWQ 2007a). However, Noland
Creek rated only Good in 2004 with Hazel and Forney creeks still Excellent (NCDENR 2005b; NCDWQ
2007a).
To supplement these data, 13 streams within the project study corridars were selected by the NPS and
sampled for benthic macroinvertebrates in 2004. The streams sampled were Augerhole Branch, Calhoun
Branch, Chambers Creek, Eagle Creek, Gray Wolf Creek, Kirkland Branch, Laurel Branch, Lewellyn
Branch, Lost Cove Branch, Matt Branch, Pilkey Creek, Shehan Branch, and Welch Branch. Sampling and
analysis procedures developed by the NCDWQ Biological Assessment Unit were used (NCDWQ 2001). All
streams sampled had a bioclassification of Excellent. NCBI values ranged from 2.04 at Chambers Creek to
3.13 at Kirkland Branch. Complete results and a detailed discussion of the findings are in the Attachment
M-7.
3.4.4 Aquatic Ecology
Aquatic organisms such as fish, crayfish, aquatic salamanders, and aquatic invertebrates exist in a variery of
aquatic habitats throughout the project study area. These habitats include wetlands (jurisdictional wetlands
and special aquatic habitats), streams, and open water impoundments (Fontana and Cheoah lakes).
Affected Environment — 3-45
North Shore Road Final Environmental Impact Statement

The Aquatic Wildlife Section of tbe ECR summarizes aquatic communities within the project study area.
Detailed field investigations were conducted from May through October 2004 within the project study
corridors. Active searches were conducted in streams and wetlands for aquatic invertebrates, amphibians,
reptiles, mammal signs, and fish by turning over rocks and leaf/root mats and using hand-held dip nets.
Specialized surveys were conducted for targeted aquatic species in the project study corridors including fish,
freshwater mussels, crayfish, streamside and aquatic salamanders, and aquatic invertebrates. Detailed
methodologies and results are discussed in the Water Resources Technical Report (Appendix M).
3.4.4.1 Fontana Lake
Sport fishing is a major use by visitors to Fontana Lake. Management of these fishery resources is essential
to the continued survival of fish and the enjoyment of anglers. Fish observed within Fontana Lake include
smallmouth bass, largemouth bass, walleye, bluegill (Leponzis macrochirus), common carp (Cyprinus
carpio), channel catfish (Ictalurus punctatus), and flathead catfish (Pylodictis olivaris). Other major sport
fish that were found in the larger streams of the project study corridors and in Fontana Lake are the rainbow
trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) and brown trout (Salmo trutta). Different aquatic macroinvertebrates may be
found within the limnetic, littoral, and profundal zones of Fontana Lake. Aquatic macroinvertebrates that
may be found in Fontana Lake include Hexagenia sp., Ephemera sp., Chironomus sp., Tanytarsus sp., and
Megaloptera sp. (Merritt and Cummins 1984).
3.4.4.2 Streams
Streams within the project study corridors provide habitat for organisms such as fish, crayfish, amphibians,
reptiles, and invertebrates. Targeted aquatic species subject to federal or state protection were surveyed as a
part of the natural resources investigations conducted from May to October 2004. Table 3-8 provides the
scientific and common name, the federal and state protection status, and whether the species was observed in
2004. Section 3.4. ] 0 of this report discusses known records for all federally and state protected species.
One aquatic salamander species was found during stream surveys. The eastem hellbender (Cryptobranchus
alleganiensis), which reaches lengths of up to 2 ft(0.6 m), was found in Forney Creelc, Hazel Creek, and
Chambers Creek. Although not found in 2004 surveys, the eastern hellbender is suspected to be in Eagle
Creek (see Attachment N-8). The hellbender consumes crayfish and aquatic insects and inhabits rivers and
larger streams where water is running and shelter such as large rocks, limbs, or debris is available (Conant
and Collins 1998). Streamside salamanders observed include the spotted dusky salamander (Desmognathus
fuscus), seal salamander (D. monticola), black-bellied salamander (D. quadramaculatus), seepage
salamander (D. aeneus), Blue Ridge two-lined salamander (Eurycea wilderae), and the thre�lined
salamander (E. guttolineata). Although not observed in 2004, tbe Junaluska salamander (E. junaluska) is
known to occur within Lower Hazel Creek (Dodd 2004). This species is difficult to find until late summer
and fall, which may account for why this species was not found in 2004 surveys.
Three species of crayfish were observed in the project study corridors, including the Appalachian brook
crayfsh (Cambarus bartoni), also known as the eastern crayfish, Cambarus asperimanus (no common
name), and an undescribed crayfsh species. The Appalachian brook crayfish was found in the following
streams: Laurel Branch, Forney Creek, Chambers Creek, Upper Pilkey Creek, Lower Pilkey Creek, Hazel
Affected Environment — 3-46
North Shore Road Final Environmental Impact Statement

Table 3-8. Targeted Aquatic Species List
Group Scientific Name Common Name Federal NC Observed
Status' StatusZ During
2004
Surveys3
Fish Cyprinella monacha4 Spoifin chub T T No
Fish Etheostoma vulneratum Wounded darter None SC No
Fish Noturus flavus Stonecat None E No
Fish Percina squamata Olive darter FSC SC Yes
Fish Clinostomus funduloides Smokey daces FSC SC Yes
ssp.1
Fish Moxostoma sp.1 Sicklefin redhorse C SR (PT) No
Freshwater Alasmidonta raveneliana Appalachian E E No
mussel elktoe
Freshwater Alasmidonta viridis Slippershell None E No
mussel mussel
Freshwater Elliptio dilatata Spike None SC No
mussel
Freshwater Fusconaia barnesiana Tennessee pigtoe None E No
mussel
Freshwater Lampsilis fasciola Wavy-rayed None SC No
mussel lampmussel
Freshwater Pegias fabula Little-wing E E No
mussel pearlymussel
Freshwater Villosa iris Rainbow None SC No
mussel
Aquatic Cryptobranchus Hellbender FSC SC Yes
salamander alleganiensis
Streamside Desmognathus aeneus Seepage FSC6 SR Yes
salamander salamander
Streamside Eurycea junaluska Junaluska FSC T No
salamander salamander
Streamside Eurycea longicauda Long-tailed None SC No
salamander longicauda salamander
Cra�sh Cambarus sp. Undescribed None None Yes
(Puncticambarus sp.) species
Notes:
1 E= Endangered; T= Threatened; FSC = Federal Species of Concern; C= Candidate
2 T=Threatened; E=Endangered; SC = Special Concern; SR = Significantly Rare; P= Proposed
3 Observed in 2004 Surveys (Appendix M)
4 Synonyms: Hybopsis monacha or Erimonax monachus
5 Little Tennessee River rosyside dace
6 NCNHP lists this federal status for this species.
Affected Environment — 3-47
North Shore Road Final Environmental Impact Statement

Creek, Shehan Branch, Eagle Creek, Lost Cove Creek, and Lewellyn Branch. Cambarus asperimanus was
observed only in Lost Cove Creek, and the undescribed crayfish species was observed in Hazel Creek.
The Tennessee River system has the most diverse mussel population in the United States (Stein et al. 2000);
however, no mussels were observed within the project study corridors. Mussels possibly existed in lower
portions of Hazel Creek prior to logging activities that took place within the study area in the early 1900s.
The USFWS determined that Hazel Creek is potential habitat for several protected mussel species and could
be used as a potential reintroduction site (Fridell, pers. comm. 2005). However, Mr. Fridell also stated that
the USFWS has made no additional determinations or evaluations regarding the feasibility of reintroductions
at this site. Any potential reintroductions would have to be coordinated with the NPS, and the USFWS has
not initiated coordination.
Aquatic invertebrates, otherwise referred to as benthic macroinvertebrates, are very abundant in the streams
within the project study area. The NCDWQ (2002) found over 186 species of macroinvertebrates in the
streams within the project study area. GSMNP records indicate there are approximately 665 species of
macroinvertebrates within the Park (Discover Life in America [DLIA] 2004). Approximately 148 species
were identified in the 13 streams that ARCADIS surveyed in 2004 (Water Resources Technical Report,
Appendix M). No new Park or state records were collected in the surveys conducted in 2004.
3.4.4.3 Wetlands
Wetlands, Section 3.4.1 explains the definitions far jurisdictional wetlands as defined by tbe USACE and
special aquatic habitats as defined by the USFWS. Both provide habitat for similar aquatic species, and they
will be collectively referred to as wetlands in this section. These natural communities provide food and
dense cover for small and large animals. Animals residing in these communities must cope with periodic
flooding but adjust poorly to a changing environment caused by human activity.
Species such as crayfish, mayflies, caddisflies, dobsonflies, and springtails were found in wetlands as well as
streams during field surveys within the project study corridors. Mammals that are expected to occur within
the project study corridors and are accustomed to life partially spent in water include the beaver (Castor
canadensis), muskrat (Ondata zibethicus), mink (Mustela vison), and northern river otter (Lutra canadensis).
The wild hog (Sus scrofa) is not an aquatic species, but its presence within wetlands was obvious fram
tracks, wallows, and rooting signs observed. Hogs damage wetlands by digging for roots, tubers, and
insects. Most of the wetlands observed within the project study corridors appeared to have been disturbed by
wild hogs.
GSMNP is known to contain approximately 30 species of salamanders (Tilley and Huheey 2001). The moist
environment of wetlands is ideal for salamanders and other amphibians, and most are associated with small
streams and seepages. Salamanders observed within the project study corridors included the spotted dusky
salamander, seal salamander, black-bellied salamander, seepage salamander, Blue Ridge two-lined
salamander, and three-lined salamander (see Water Resources Technical Report, Appendix M).
Snakes observed in wetlands include the northern water snake (Nerodia sipedon) and the copperhead
(Agkistr°odon contortrix). Other species that may be found within wetlands, but were not observed, include
Affected Environment — 3-48
North Shore Road Final Environmental Impact Statement

the queen snake (Regina septemvittata) and the northern rough greensnake (Opheodrys aestivus aestivus).
Turtle species that may be found within the wetland habitats include the bog turtle (Glyptenzys
nzuhlenbergii), snapping turtle (Chelydra serpentina), and eastern spiny softshell (Apalone spinifera
spinifera). However, none of these reptilian species were observed within the project study corridors.
3.4.5 Vegetation Communities
3.4.5.1 Methodology
The Center for Remote Sensing and Mapping Science (CRSM) at the Universiry of Geargia created a
detailed vegetation database and maps by utilizing 1:12,000- and 1:40,000-scale color infrared aerial
photographs. The data for GSMNP include 100 overstory and 70 understory association-level vegetation
classes. The vegetation classification is based on the USGS Biological Resources Division/NPS National
Vegetation Classification System developed by T'NC as part of a nationwid�vegetation mapping program
(Welch et al. 2002). Detailed descriptions of the vegetation communities found in GSMNP are available as
part of TNC's nationwide vegetation classification and may be accessed at www.NatureServe.org or in the
International Classifzcation of Ecological Comrv�unities: Terrestrial I�egetation — Great S�noky Mountains
National Park subset (ICEC-GSMNP) (White et al. 2003). The vegetation database and maps are utilized in
this report to describe the vegetation of the project study corridors. Additional information regarding the
database and maps is available in Appendix N.
From May to October 2004, biologists conducted field surveys in the project study corridors, primarily from
west to east. These surveys were intended to collect general information on vegetation communities and
wildlife, and to identify the locations of unmapped wetlands and streams in the project study corridors.
Additional information on these surveys is available in Appendix M and N.
Scientific names of plant species generally follow Weakley (2004) or species list provided by NPS (2004e).
Scientific nomenclature and com�non names (when applicable) are provided for each plant species listed.
Subsequent references to the same species use the common name.
3.4.5.2 Existing Conditions
3.4.5.2.1 General Conditions
The project study corridors are located entirely within GSMNP and consists of at least 93 percent forested
vegetation (CRSM 2004).
The distribution and camposition of the vegetation communities in the Great Smoky Mountains is essentially
driven by abiotic factors. This relationship between the environment and disturbance influencing plant
communities has been widely studied. The primary factors are elevation, moisture regime, and exposure
(Whittaker 1956). Soil characteristics, microclimate, slope, and atmospheric moisture (Mowbray and
Oosting 1968), and ecosystem disturbance (Hannon et al. 1983) also influence the distribution of vegetation
and thus a vegetation community's plant assemblage.
Affected Environment — 3-49
North Shore Road Final Environmental Impact Statement

Much of tbe Southern Appalachians, which includes the project study corridors, was intensively logged in
the first quarter of the 20th century, and most of the forest is young (less than 100 years old) (Brown 2000).
In GSMNP, approximately on�fifth of the forests were not logged, and they are primary in nature. While
the process of reforestation of the cleared areas has occurred, the forest in the region has been shaped by a
series of disturbances that have altered the composition of the forest from that which occurred in the late 19th
and early 20tb centuries. Invasions of exotic diseases and pests, such as chestnut blight (Cryphonectria
parasitica), butternut canker (Sirococcus clavigignenti juglandacearum), dogwood anthracnose (Discula
destructiva), and hemlock woolly adelgid (HWA) (Adelges tsugae), have and continue to modify the
composition of the forest. Alterations in forest composition are important because they have influenced the
ability of the forest to support wildlife and to provide for often unrecognized human needs such as clean
water, clean air and wood products (Brown 2000; Barbour et al. 1987).
While forests in GSMNP are protected from timber harvesting and development, a large portion of the
surrounding region is part of the national forest system in which timber harvesting is a part of forest
management. The remaining lands are privately held and are pressured for timber harvesting and
development. GSMNP is the largest block of protected forested land in the region and is the area most likely
in the future to support mature ar old growth forest. Scattered old trees, greater than 125 years old, can be
found in the project study corridor. One example is the 312-year-old (estimated age) white oak (Quercus
alba) (NPS 2004e). While these individual trees do not form an intact stand, they are unique biological
resources that are an important habitat component for wildlife such as the black bear (Ursus americanus) and
Indiana bat (Myotis sodalis). Mature farest and/or contiguous tracts of unfragmented forest are necessary
habitat for many wildlife species. As a protected landscape, the maturing forest habitats in GSMNP,
including areas within the project study corridors, provide an important source of a diverse population of
wildlife species.
The forested ecosystems of the Eastem United States, including those in GSMNP, are experiencing air
quality related impacts from two sources: atmospheric deposition inputs that alter forest soil and water
chemistry, and ozone foliar damage. Air quality is discussed in Section 3.3.4 of this report. Two
atmospheric inputs are contributing to tree stress in the forests: nitrogen deposition and acid deposition.
Nitrogen deposition contributes to nitrogen saturation of the ecosystem. Nitrogen saturation in eastern forest
ecosystems occurs when atmospheric sources (N deposition) and biological sources (N mineralization) of
nitrogen exceed the N uptake capacity by biotic organisms (NPS and USFWS 2000). Nitrogen saturation is
induced when increased rates of N deposition cause increased leaching (export) of nitrate, which in turn
causes soil and water acidification. Losses of base cations (Ca and Mg) from soils and the mobilization of
soil Al, then contribute to nutritional imbalances and growth decreases in trees along with water quality
degradation. Acidic deposition is also causing forest ecosystems to experience chemical imbalances that are
contributing to tree stress (NPS and USFWS 2000). Additional information on nitrogen and acid deposition
changes in the ecosystem are included in Water Quality (Section 3.4.3 and Appendix M). Foliar ozone
damage is discussed below.
Affected Environment — 3-50
North Shore Road Final Environmental Impact Statement

3.4.5.22 Foliar Ozone Damage
The following text was taken from Sections 2 and 3 of Technical Information in Support of the Department
of the Interior's Reguest for a Rule to Restore and Protect Air Quality Related Values (NPS and USFWS
2000).
Ozone is one of the most phytotoxic air pollutants, and causes considerable damage to vegetation throughout
the world. Data have shown that plants are more sensitive to ozone than are humans. Although most ozone
effects research has been on crops, and large economic losses have been documented for U.S. agriculture,
many native plants in natural ecosystems are sensitive to ozone.
Ozone enters plants through leaf stomata and oxidizes plant tissue, causing changes in biochemical and
physiological processes. The injured plant cells eventually die, resulting in visible foliar injury. In the case
of broadleaf plants, this injury is visible as a small blacic or brown interveinal necrotic lesion on the upper
surface of the leaf, called "oxidant stipple." In conifers, ozone injury appears as yellow or chlorotic spots on
needles.
Ozone also causes premature leaf loss; reduced photosynthesis; and reduced leaf, root, and total dry weights
in sensitive plant species. These physiological changes can occur in the absence of foliar injury, and vice
versa. In a natural ecosystem, many other factors can ameliarate or magnify the extent of ozone injury at
various times and places such as soil moisture, presence of other air pollutants, insects or diseases, and other
environmental stresses.
In the past few years, there have been a number of attempts to evaluate the geographic extent, and
environmental consequences, of ozone exposure. All of these efforts have focused on the eastern United
States. The Southern Appalachian Mountains Initiative (SAMI), with funding from the USEPA, initiated a
series of projects evaluating the effects of current, increased, and decreased ozone concentrations on
vegetation found in the Southern Appalachian Mountains. Recent studies summarized previous ozone
effects wark in the area and concluded (1) ozone-induced foliar injury has been documented on a number of
tree species throughout much of the eastern United States, and (2) growth losses at ambient ozone levels in
the eastern United States tend to be in the range of 0 to 10 percent per year. Scientists have linked
TREGRO, a mechanistic model of an individual tree, to ZELIG, a forest stand model, to examine the
responses of loblolly pine (Pinus taeda) and tulip poplar (Liriodendron tulipifera) to various ozone exposure
regimes. They found that even moderate levels of ozone can have a significant effect on tree and forest
response if adequate soil moisture is a�ailable. The models predicted substantial changes in basal area of
both species in small areas of their range. Others have also examined the interacting effects of ozone
exposure and soil moisture in the Southern Appalachian Mountains and concluded that in a small number of
areas, sensitive species, such as black cherry (Prunus serotina), could experience growth losses. USEPA
used a GIS to prepare a spatially based risk assessment for the eastern United States. They concluded that
for sensitive species, such as black cherry and aspen (Populus tremuloides), there could be a 14 to 33 percent
biomass loss over 50 percent of their distribution due to current ozone concentrations.
Based on reports in the late 1970s of foliar symptoms consistent with ozone injury in GSMNP, an ozone
fumigation facility was established in the Park, at Twin Creeks, in 1987. The purpose of the fumigations was
Affected Environment — 3-51
North Shore Road Final Environmental Impact Statement

to evaluate the effects of ambient and elevated ozone concentrations on species found in the Park and to
verify if foliar symptoms observed in the field were due to ozone. Between l 987 and 1991, 39 species were
tested in the fumigation chambers. Visible injury similar to that in the field was observed on 25 of the 39
species. Subsequent work identified five additional species with confirmed ozone-induced foliar injury.
For some of the fumigated species, biomass loss increased with ozone exposure. Black cherry seedlings
were particularly sensitive to ozone concentrations rypical of high elevation sites in GSMNP. Of the
parameters examined, ozon�induced reductions in leaf and root biomass were most significant. Scientists
have concluded that while annual growth reduction of black cherry might be minor, large cumulative
reductions could occur over the long lifespan of a tree. The conclusions about blacic cherry sensitivity to
ozone in GSMNP are supported by work conducted in other places which indicates ozone can reduce
photosynthesis and accelerate leaf senescence in this species.
Concurrent with the trend plot work in Shenandoah National Parlc discussed above, plots were established
near ozone monitors at Cove Mountain, Look Rock, and Twin Creeks in GSMNP. Black cherry, tulip
poplar, and sassafras (Sassafi°as albidum) trees were examined in 1991, 1992, and 1993. Foliar injury was
observed on trees of all species at all locations during all years of the study. Ozone injury on black cherry
and sassafras was greatest at Cove Mountain, the highest elevation site, which also had the highest ozone
concentrations. Concurrent tree coring indicated tulip poplar and black cherry trees exhibiting ozone-
induced foliar injury also had reduced radial growth. For black cherry, the cores showed a 12 percent
reduction over 5 years and an 8 percent reduction over 10 years. Results were even more dramatic for tulip
poplar, with the cores showing a 43 percent reduction over 5 years and a 30 percent reduction over 10 years.
Scientists examined the combined data from the GSMNP and Shenandoah National Park trend plots. They
found a clear correlation between elevational gradients of ozone exposure and foliar injury of black cherry,
with higher ozone concentrations, and a greater percent of trees injured, at higher elevations. The correlation
was particularly strong for the GSMNP data. A similar correlation, although not as strong, was found for
sassafras.
In addition to the trend plots, foliar injury surveys were conducted along hiking trails in GSMNP. In 1992,
black cherry and tall milkweed (Asclepias exaltata) along 500 km of trail were examined for ozone-induced
foliar injury. Injured plants were widely distributed throughout the park and the percent of injured plants
was quite high, i.e., 47 percent of the black cherry trees exhibited ozone-induced foliar injury and 74 percent
of the milkweed plants were injured.
Ambient ozone data collected by the NPS indicate maximum 3-month, 8:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m., ozone
concentrations ranged between 1 1 and 34 ppm-hr during the years the trend plots were evaluated.
Subsequent data show ozone concentrations have been increasing significantly since 1993, which suggests
ozone injury has continued in GSMNP.
In summary, both fumigation studies and foliar injury surveys have shown that there are a number of species
in GSMNP that are sensitive to ozone. The fumigation studies showed that in addition to foliar injury, ozone
concentrations typical of higher elevations in the park are sufficient to cause biomass loss in sensitive
species.
Affected Environment — 3-52
North Shore Road Final Environmental Impact Statement

3.4.5.2.3 Vegetation in the Project Study Corridors
Vegetation documented on ARCADIS' general observation datasheets from May to October 2004 is listed in
Appendix N(Attachment N-3). While this list is not comprehensive of all of the plant species growing in the
project study corridors, it does provide a general overview.
The GSMNP vegetation distribution map is depicted in Figure 3-6. The GSMNP vegetation communities
for the study corridars were segregated into 12 community categories, based on a GSMNP generalized
vegetation communities map legend. Eleven of the generalized community categories include one or more
detailed vegetation communities in the ICEC-GSMNP, for a total of 22 detailed vegetation communities
(Table 3-9). Some mapped areas are not defined by the vegetation classification system or it is unclear
which detailed community corresponds to the ruapping unit, since more than one is indicated. These
undefined and unclear areas were allocated to the twelfth category of "Other/Miscellaneous." Examples of
undefined areas are "dead vegetation," "road," and "water." The areas for which categarization is unclear
include "sparse vegetation" and "rock outcrops." The range of possible community options far these map-
units include disturbed areas such as road-fill rubble or landslide scars, or naturally occurring communities
such as Southern Blue Ridge Spray Cliff or Appalachian Felsic Cliff. The 11 remaining vegetation
community categories are Montane Alluvial Forest, Hemlock Forest, Cove Mixed Hardwoods, Mesic
Hardwood Forest, Sub-mesic to Mesic Oak and Oak-Hickory Forest, Sub-xeric Oak and Oak-Hickory
Forest, Mesic Pine and Pin�Oak Forest, Xeric Pine and Pin�Oak Forests/Woodlands, Early Successional
Hardwood Forest, Nonalluvial Herbaceous Wetlands, and Cultivated Meadow. The 12 categories and their
associated detailed vegetation communities are described in detail in Appendix N.
Upland hardwood forests, consisting of Cove Mixed Hardwoods, Mesic Hardwood Farest, Sub-mesic to
Mesic Oak and Oak-Hickory Forest, Sub-xeric Oak and Oak-Hickory Forest, and Early Successional
Hardwood Forest, are the most prevalent forest types in the project study corridars and cover approximately
70 percent of the project study corridors. The forest dominated by eastem hemlock (Tsuga canadensis),
Hemlock Forest, is the least prevalent, covering less than 1 percent of the project study corridors.
Global Ranking
Within the ICEC-GSMNP classification system (White et al. 2003), communities are given a conservation
status ranlc based on factors such as present geographic extent, threats, number of distinct occurrences,
degree of decline from historic extent, and degree of alteration of natural processes affecting the dynamics,
cotnposition, or function of the type. Communities are ranked on a global (G) scale of 1 to 5, with 1
indicating critical imperilment and 5 indicating little or no rislc of extirpation or elimination in most of its
range (Anderson et al. 1998; Grossman et al. l 998). Additional modifiers may be added to the rank to
indicate a degree of uncertainty in the assigned rank or to indicate modification or disturbance of the
community. Table 3-9lists the assigned ranks.
Affected Environment — 3-53
North Shore Road Final Environmental Impact Statement

Table 3-9. Detailed Vegetation Communities and Their Global Ranking
Generalized Community Category Detailed Vegetation Community (ICEC-GSMNP)
Montane Alluvial Forest
Hemlock Forest
Cove Mixed Hardwood Forests
Mesic Hardwood Forests
Appalachian Montane Alluvial Forest
Southern Appalachian Eastern Hemlock Forest
Southern Appalachian Cove Forest - Typic Montane Type
Southern Appalachian Cove Forest - Rich Montane Type
Southern Appalachian Acid Cove Forest - Typic Type
Southern Appalachian Red Oak Cove Forest
Southern Appalachian Mixed Hardwood Forest
Sub-Mesic to Mesic Oak and Oak-Hickory Forest Appalachian Montane Oak Hickory Forest - Typic Acidic Type
Sub-xeric Oak and Oak-Hickory Forest
Mesic Pine and Pine-Oak Forests
Xeric Pine and Pine-Oak Forests/Woodlands
Early Successional Hardwood Forest
Nonalluvial Herbaceous Wetlands
Cultivated Meadow
Other/Miscellaneous�
Notes:
Appalachian Montane Oak Hickory Forest - Red Oak Type
Appalachian Montane Oak Hickory Forest - Rich Type
Appalachian Montane Oak-Hickory Forest - Chestnut Oak Type
Chestnut Oak Forest - Xeric Ridge Type
Eastern White Pine Successional Forest
Appalachian White Pine - Mesic Oak Forest
Appalachian Low Elevation Mixed Pine/Hillside Blueberry Forest
Blue Ridge Table Mountain Pine-Pitch Pine Woodland
Pitch Pine Xeric Woodlands�
Yellow Pine Xeric Woodlands�
Early Successional Appalachian Hardwood Forest
Rush Marsh
Cultivated Meadow
Human Influence, Roads, Sparse Vegetation��, Rock Outcrop��, etc.
Global
Rank
G2?
G3G4
G4
G3G4
G5
G3?
GM
G5
G4?
G3
G4G5
G5
GD
G2G3
G4?
G3
NA
NA
GD
G5
GW
NA
* Community is not linked to a detailed vegetation community as described in the ICEC-GSMNP or is linked to multiple community
options as to be unclear which is intended by a specific mapping unit.
'* Some of the detailed plant communities linked to these mapping units are ranked as G1 or G2; however, as the mapping units are
linked to more than one community option it is unclear which is intended by a specific mapping unit.
NA = Not Available
G1 CRITICALLY IMPERILED - Generally 5 or fewer occurrences and/or very few remaining acres or very vulnerable to elimination throughout its
range due to other factor(s).
G2 IMPERILED - Generally 6-20 occurrences and/or few remaining acres or very vulnerable to elimination throughout its range due to other factor(s).
G3 VULNERABLE - Generally 21-100 occurrences. Both very rare and local throughout its range or found locally, even abundantly, within a restricted
range or vulnerable to elimination throughout its range due to specific factors.
G4 APPARENTLY SECURE - Uncommon, but not rare (although it may be quite rare in parts of its range, especially at the periphery). Apparently
not vulnerable in most of its range.
G5 SECURE - Common, widespread, and abundant (though it may be quite rare in parts of its range, especially at the periphery). Not vulnerable in
most of its range.
?- A question mark added to a rank expresses an uncertainty about the rank in the range of 1 either way on the 1-5 scale. For example, a G2? rank
indicates that the rank is thought to be a G2, but could be a G1 or a G3.
GD - RUDERAL - Vegetation resulting from succession following anthropogenic disturbance of an area. Generally characterized by unnatural
combinations of species (primarily native species, though often containing slight to substantial numbers and amounts of species alien to the region.)
GM - MODIFIED/MANAGED - Vegetation resulting from the management or modification of natural/near natural vegetation, but producing a
structural and floristic combination not clearly known to have a natural analogue.
GW — INVASIVE — Vegetation dominated by invasive alien species; the vegetation is spontaneous, self-perpetuating, and is not the (immediate)
result of planting, cultivation, or human maintenance.
Affected Environment — 3-54
North Shore Road Final Environmental Impact Statement

3.4.6 Terrestrial Wildlife
3.4.6.1 Methodology
Terrestrial wildlife surveys were based on active search and capture practices, including the use of binoculars
and recognition of scat. Recommendations far lists of target species and their survey locations came from
GSMNP staff, ARCADIS staff, USFWS, NCNHP, NCWRC, and experts of each of the target species.
Targeted groups included small mammals, bats, birds, reptiles, streamside salamanders, dragonflies,
butterflies, moths, duff invertebrates, and land snails (Table 3-10). This list of species or groups of species
targeted for detailed surveys was based on the likelihood of habitat being present to support these animals in
the project study corridors. Site locations were selected according to the habitat requirement for each species
(ARCADIS 2004a). Detailed sampling methodologies are in Appendix N.
Surveys for small mammals were conducted at eight sites utilizing trapping and visual searches conducted
between June and September 2004. Four state listed species (North Carolina Species of Special Concern)
were targeted for survey: long-tailed shrew (Sorex dispar), southern water shrew (S. palust�^is punctulatus),
southern Appalachian woodrat (Neoton2a floridana haematoreia), and southern rock vole (Microtus
chrotorrhinus carolinensis). The Appalachian cottontail (Sylvilagus obscurus), which is endemic to the
Appalachian Mountains, was also targeted. Techniques for bat surveys included the Anabat system (acoustic
identification), mist-netting, and visual surveys. Mist-nets were set up on six consecutive nights in July 2004
at six different sites within the project study corridors. An abandoned metal boiler, known to be inhabited by
Rafinesque's big-eared bats (Corynorhinus Nafinesquii) during summer, was also examined far bat presence.
Bird populations were estimated using variable circular plots (VCP) throughout the western portions of the
project study corridors during three weeks in May and June, 2004. A VCP census is conducted by an
observer standing in one central position for 10 minutes and recording all birds detected aurally and visually.
These data augmented an existing data set for the eastern portion of the project study corridors (Shriner
2001). Individual species were not targeted during these surveys.
Reptilian sampling occurred for three target species: the bog turtle, timber rattlesnake (Crotalus horridus),
and the northern pinesnake (Pituophis melanoleucus melanoleucus) between May and September 2004.
Sampling methods for reptiles included scanning with binoculars, searching for signs such as shed skins and
shells, use of funnel traps placed along natural drift lines such as downed trees or large rocks, probing mud
pockets and sphagnum/grass tussocks with small metal rods, and checking under rocks and downed
vegetation.
Streamside salamander surveys were conducted at 12 stream sites within the project study corridors between
June ] 5 and July 5, 2004. The three species of special interest sought within the project study corridors were
the seepage salamander, Junaluska salamander, and the long-tailed salamander (E. longicauda longicauda).
Search efforts were concentrated beneath cover objects (rocks, logs, vegetation mats, etc.), in rock crevices,
and in seeps. Individuals were captured using dip nets.
Affected Environment — 3-55
North Shore Road Final Environmental Impact Statement

Table 3-10. Targeted Terrestrial Species List
Group Scientific Name
Small mammal Microtus chrotorrhinus
carolinensis
Small mammal Neotoma floridana haematoreia
Small mammal Sorex dispar
Small mammal Sorex palustris punctulatus
Small mammal Sylvilagus transitionalis4
Bat Corynorhinus rafinesquii
Bat Myotis leibii
Bat Myotis septentrionalis
Bat Myotis sodalis
Reptile Crotalus horridus
Reptile Clemmys muhlenbergii
Reptile Pituophis melanoleucus
melanoleucus
Dragonfly Macromia margarita
ButterFly Phyciodes batesii
ButterFly Speyeria diana
Land Snail Appalachina chilhoweensis
Land Snail Fumonelix wheatleyi
clingmanicuss
C •,�u•� �FTui-a
Southern rock vole
Southern Appalachian woodrat
Long-tailed shrew
Southern water shrew
Appalachian cottontail
Rafinesque's big-eared bats
Eastern small-footed bat
Northern long-eared bat
Indiana bat
Timber rattlesnake
Bog turtle
Northern pinesnake
Mountain river cruiser
Tawny cresent
Diana fritillary
Queen crater
Clingman covert
Federal NC
Status' StatusZ
FSC
FSC
None
FSC
FSC
FSC
FSC
None
E
None
T (S/A)
FSC
FSC
FSC
FSC
None
FSC
SC
SC
SC
SC
SR
T
SC
SC
E
SC
T
SC
None
SR
SR
SC
T
Observed
During 2004
Surveys3
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
No
Yes
No
Yes
No
No
No
No
Yes
Yes
No
Land Snail Glyphyalinia junaluskana Dark glyph None SC Yes
Land Snail Glyphyalinia pentadelphia Pink glyph None SC No
Land Snail Haplotrema kendeighi Blue-footed lancetooth None SC No
Land Snail Helicodiscus bonamicus Spiral coil None SC No
Land Snail Helicodiscus fimbriatus Fringed coil None SC Yes
Land Snail Inflectarius ferrissi Smoky Mountain covert None T No
Land Snail Paravitrea lacteodens Ramp Cove supercoil None SC No
Land Snail Paravitrea lamellidens Lamellate supercoil None SC No
Land Snail Paravitrea placentula Glossy supercoil None SC No
Land Snail Paravitrea umbilicaris Open supercoil None SC No
Land Snail Patera clarki DwarF proud globe None SC Yes
Land Snail Patera clarki nantahala Noonday globe T T No
Land Snail Stenotrema depilatum Great Smoky slitmouth None SC No
Land Snail Zonitoides patuloides Appalachian gloss None SC No
Notes:
1 E= Endangered; T= Threatened; FSC = Federal Species of Concern; T(S/A) = Threatened Due to Similarity of Appearance
2 T=Threatened; E=Endangered; SC = Special Concern; SR = Significantly Rare
3 Observed in 2004 Surveys (Appendix N)
4 Synonym Sylvilagus obscurus
5 Synonym Mesodon wheatleyi clingmanicus
Affected Environment — 3-56
North Shore Road Final Environmental Impact Statement

Dragonfly specimens were collected in June and July 2004 using a large insect net in riparian zones along
three streams (Forney, Hazel, and Eagle creeks). The mountain river cruiser (Macromia margarita) was
targeted. All dragonfly specimens were preserved and labeled far later identification. Butterfly surveys
were conducted according to the peak flight periods for the tawny cresent (Phyciodes batesii) and the Diana
fritillary (Speyeria diana) during the week of May 31 and the week of July 5, 2004. Crews targeted areas of
suitable habitat throughout the project study corridors using binoculars to identify specimens or collecting
individuals with nets. Moth species were collected at six sites by using 15-watt blacic-light bucket traps that
were operated for one night each in both June and July of 2004. Trapping was confined to the week of the
new moon in order to maximize trapping success. Twenty soil and ]itter samples containing duff
invertebrates were collected from a variety of habitats between April and July 2004. Each sample was
placed in a Tullgren funnel apparatus for three days (until samples were dry) to allow for the extraction of
arthropods. Specimens were then preserved and identified. Land snail investigations were conducted at 94
survey locations (129 samples) evenly spaced throughout tbe project study corridors. Areas surveyed
included: under leaf litter, rocks, logs, bark, hollow and damaged trees, fungus/moss matts, man-made
features, discarded bottles or other discarded refuse, and boulder fields. Individual species were not targeted
during moth or duff invertebrate sampling.
3.4.6.2 Existing Conditions
The following information provides summaries of findings from surveys conducted far terrestrial wildlife,
including small mammals, birds, reptiles, amphibians, dragonflies, butterflies, moths, duff invertebrates, and
land snails. Table 3-10 lists the targeted species and if they were observed in surveys conducted in 2004.
Complete results on all species are in Appendix N.
3.4.6.2.1 Mammals
A diverse mammal population is expected to be associated with the vegetation communities found within the
project study corridors. Currently, 66 species of mammals inhabit GSMNP (DLiA 2005; Linzey ] 995).
Three of the five targeted mammal species were captured. The capture included five southern Appalachian
woodrats, one long-tailed shrew, and one southern water shrew. Other small mammals captured included the
white-footed mouse (Pero�nyscus leucopus), cotton mouse (P. gossypinus), smoky shrew (Sorex furneus),
masked shrew (S. cinereus), short-tailed shrew (Blarina brevicauda), and golden mouse (Ochrotomys
nuttalli). The white-footed mouse was the most common, representing 36 percent of the total small
mammals documented. Complete results of small mammal surveys are found in Attachment N-6.
Two of the four targeted bat species were found during field surveys: Rafinesque's big-eared bat and
northern long-eared bat (Myotis septent�ionalis). Seven species of bats were identified from six survey sites.
Mist-netting resulted in the capture of 67 individuals of 5 species including; 1 big brown bat (Eptesicus
fuscus), 3 eastern red bats (Lasiurus borealis), 20 Rafinesque's big-eared bats, 36 little brown bats (Myotis
lucifugus), and 7 northern long-eared bats. Anabat sampling resulted in the recording of 5,247 bat calls,
representing six species: big brown bat, eastern red bat, little brown bat, northern long-eared bat, eastern
pipistrelle (Pipistrellus subflavus), and hoary bat (Lasiurus cinereus). An abandoned metal boiler, located
near the copper mine on Eagle Creek, housed approximately 50 Rafinesque's big-eared bats. Indiana bats
Affected Environment — 3-57
North Shore Road Final Environmental Impact Statement

(Myotis sodalis), listed as endangered by the USFWS, and eastern small-footed bats (M. leibii), listed as a
federal species of concern by the USFWS, were not netted or detected during this study. Attachment N-5
contains more information on bat surveys.
3.4.6.22 Birds
Detailed results fram the Neotropical Migratory Bird (NTMB) survey are discussed in Section 3.4.8 of this
report. Additional information about protected species of birds is in Section 3.4.10 of this report. In general,
bird species diversity in the southern Appalachians is related to the complex of vegetation communiry rypes
present. Game species such as wild turkey (Meleagris gallopavo) and ruffed grouse (Bonasa umbellus) are
found throughout GSMNP. Red-tailed hawk (Buteo jamaicensis) and broad-winged hawk (B. platypter�us)
forage and nest in and adjacent to tbe project study corridors, while osprey (Pandion haliaetus) and bald
eagles (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) use Fontana and Cheoah lakes and their tributaries for forage. Barred
owls (Strix varia) and screech owls (Otus asio) are additional farest predators present. Other species found
to utilize lakes, shorelines and tributaries include belted kingfisher (Ceryle alcyon), great-blue heron (Ardea
herodias), and wood duck (Aix sponsa). A list of all bird species observed during investigations is in
Attachment N-3.
3.4.6.2.3 Reptiles
Of the three target reptilian species, only the tiinber rattlesnake was found within the project study corridors.
Eastern box turtles (Terrapene carolina carolina) were the most common terrestrial species of turtle
identified during these surveys. Northern fenc�lizards (Scelopo�^us undulatus hyacinthinus) and broad-
headed skinks (Eumeces laticeps) were observed across the project study corridors as well. Snakes were the
most common reptiles encountered during the field investigations. Timber rattlesnake, northern copperhead
(Agkistr°odon contortrix mokasen), and northern watersnake (Nerodia sipedon sipedoh) were most often
observed in close proximity to stream systems, while eastern gartersnakes (Thamnophis sirtalis sirtalis) and
northern black racers (Coluber constrictor constrictor) tended to be seen in upland areas. Additional
information on reptiles is contained in Attachment N-3 and Attachment N-7.
3.4.6.2.4 Amphibians
A total of 403 individuals of 9 species of amphibians was identified at the 12 survey locations. Sea]
salamander dominated species abundance in nearly every site. Other species were scattered in distribution
and occurred in much lower abundance. Of the three streamside salamander target species, only one, the
seepage salamander, was found, although suitable habitat for the long-tailed and Junaluska salamanders was
present in all of the sample sites. Complete results for salamanders are discussed in Aquatic Ecology,
Section 3.4.4.
Few frog and toad species are known from the southern portion of GSMNP. Eastern American toad (Bufo
americanus americanus) and Fowler's toad (B. fowleri) were observed during general field surveys.
American bullfrogs (Rana catesbeiana) were evident along streams and the shore of Fontana Lake. One
sighting of Rana species other than the bullfrog was possibly the pickerel frog (R. palustris) or the northern
Affected Environment — 3-58
North Shore Road Final Environmental Impact Statement

leopard frog (R. pipiens); however, investigators were unable to capture the individual for positive
identification.
3.4.6.2.5 I nverte brates
Twelve species of dragonflies were found during the surveys: common green darner (Anax junius), stream
cruiser (Didymops transversa), tiger spiketail (Cordulegaster erronea), an unidentified spiketail
(Cordulegaster sp.), sable clubtail (Gomphus rogersi), widow skimmer (Libellula luctuosa), great blue
skimmer (Ladona vibrans), blue corporal (L. deplanta), blue dasher (Pachydiplax longipennis), eastern
amberwing (Perithemis tenera), an unidentified emerald (Somatochlora sp.), and gray petaltail (Tachopteryx
thoreyi). The mountain river cruiser, a target species, was not observed. None of the species identified are
considered to be rare or are protected. For additional information on dragonfly surveys refer to Attachment
N-8.
Fifty butterfly species were identified during field surveys. The tawny cresent and Diana fritillary are federal
species of concern and were targeted in this study. The tawny cresent was not found within the project study
corridors. Eight Diana fritillaries were observed within the Hazel Creek and Shehan Branch riparian areas
on three occasions. Three species listed as Significantly Rare (SR) by the NCNHP were also identified:
mottled duskywing (Erynnis �nartialis), gold-banded skipper (Autochton cellus), and reversed roadside
skipper (Amblyscirtes reversa). Additional information on butterflies is in Section 7 and Attachment N-8.
Moth sampling produced 347 species within the project study corridors. Of these species, 104 are
considered unique. Euchlaena milnei, found at the Goldmine Creek site, was the first specimen of this rare
species taken in North Carolina since the 1940s. Quinter genus 2, species 4, an undescribed species, was
found at Welch Ridge associated with large stands of cane (Arundinaria sp.). The Welch Ridge site
produced a disproportionate number of unique species, while Hazel and Forney creeks had the fewest unique
species. In general, the macromoth fauna found within the project study corridors is rypical of the rich,
mixed canopy woodlands occurring below 2,500 ft(762 m) in GSMNP on the North Carolina side. Because
the study was limited to two months, little can be said of the remainder of the seasonal fauna. For additional
information on moths found within the project study corridors refer to Attachment N-9.
Even though 20 samples represent a very modest collecting effort for enumerating soil artbropods (duff
invertebrates) along the project study corridors, the results demonstrate a high diversity of Coleoptera,
Collembola, Pauropoda, and Protura in this area of GSMNP. Apparent endemism is proven high in the
project study corridors, with 25 undescribed species of the 171 total collected species. Two collembolan
taxa, Folsomia.fimetaria and Neotropiella sp., are new records for the United States, and one collembolan in
the family Neanuridae cannot be placed in any known genus. For additional information on duff
invertebrates refer to Attachment N-10.
Land snails provide forage for a range of small mammals, salamanders and songbirds. Surveys for land
snails found 3,800 specimens from 129 sample sites and represented 72 native snail species and 1 exotic slug
(Arion subfuscus). Five of the 16 targeted species were collected including queen crater (Appalachina
chilhoweensis), dark glyph (Glyphyalinia junaluskana), fringed coil (Helicodiscus fimbriatus), open
Affected Environment — 3-59
North Shore Road Final Environmental Impact Statement

supercoil (Paravitrea umbilicaris), and dwarf proud globe (Patera clarki). Four species, a Stenotreina, a
Helicodiscus, a Pilsbryna, and a Carychium, are likely new to science. Five species are new records for
GSMNP: copper dome (Ventridens theloides), toga mantleslug (Philomycus togatus), obese thorn
(Carychium exiguum), toothed hive (Euconulus dentatus), and club supercoil (Paravit�^ea bellona). In
addition, 5 species are new records for North Carolina; 29 species are new records for Swain County; and 5
species are listed as Special Concern by NCNHP. For additional information on land snails, refer to
Attachment N-11.
� t �: �.�: � � [ 1 �l : Z � � 1 ' i. �
There were 25 species found that were new to science: 21 duff invertebrates, and four land snails. There is
little information about the distribution or range of these species. It is likely that larger populations of these
species exist; however, they have not been surveyed for in similar habitats. There were 32 species identified
that were new records for the Park: 23 duff invertebrates, 6 land snails, and 3 butterflies. Many of these
species are new records to the Park but are known from other locations. Some of these species are secure in
other portions of tbeir range. There is limited information available about the range and distribution of tbese
species within the Park. There is one species, the Euchlaena n�ilnei, that was last observed in the Park over
50 years ago. This would indicate that this species is truly rare and it will most likely be added to the state's
FSC list (Ratzlaff, pers. comm. 2005).
3.4.7 Black Bears
3.4.7.1 Methodology
Information regarding the existing conditions for black bears within the project study area was derived by
reviewing literature from the NCWRC, USFS, Proceedings of the International Conference on Ecology and
Transportation, credited journals, and dissertations. Information was also obtained through personal contact
with biologists and resource managers.
A general assessment of the existing conditions and black bear habitat was conducted between May and
September 2003 within the study area and between May and October 2004 within the project study corridors.
Teams of natural resource specialists walked the project study corridors to allow for the greatest extent of
survey coverage, including stream valleys, ridges, lakeshore and valley slopes. Observations of black bears
and their sign during these general surveys of communities were recarded on data sheets.
3.4.7.2 Existing Conditions
Black bears are creatures of forested habitats (Eason 2002). Short, curved claws allow them to climb trees
suggesting their compatibility with the forest environment (Seibert l 989). Black bears occur throughout all
elevations of the Park witb greater activity occurring in the warmer months (Stiver 199]). Activity is highest
during the day time in all seasons with night time activity highest during the fall. Changing activity patterns
are influenced by breeding activity as well as seasonal food supplies (Quigley 1982). In GSMNP, Van
Manen (] 994) estimated that a blacic bear's home range is between 2.0 and 27.5 mi� (5.3 and 71.2 km�) for
females and 9.5 and 39.3 mi� (24.5 and ] 01.7 km�) far males. Larger home ranges in the fall as compared to
Affected Environment — 3-60
North Shore Road Final Environmental Impact Statement

spring/summer reflect increased feeding activity prior to denning (Quigley 1982). Settlage et al. (2004)
estimate the black bear population in GSMNP to be approximately 1,600 individuals (with a 95 percent
confidence interval of 908-2,368).
Black bears are opportunistic omnivores that require large contiguous forested tracts for extensive home
ranges (Quigley 1982). Black bears may shift the locations of their home ranges to avoid roads. Information
on roads and their influence on bear behavior is located in Section 4.4.7.1. Prime blacic bear habitat is
� � —� �
':
� � ,�,���
Bears forage on nuts, grasses,
fruits, and insects in GSMNP.
characterized by relatively inaccessible terrain, thick understory vegetation,
and abundant sources of food in the form of shrub or tree-borne soft or
hard mast (Pelton l 982). During the fall, bears feed mainly on hard mast
(acorns) to store fat in preparation for winter denning. In the spring and
summer, black bears eat a variety of grasses, and fruits of buckleberries,
blackberries, and blueberries. In addition, they will eat a variery of insects,
including beetles, yellow jackets, wasps, hornets, and ants. Human-created
food sources in the form of garbage and handouts from campgrounds and
picnic areas are also known to be consumed by bears in the GSMNP with
the greatest nuisance activity occurring in the summer months (Stiver, pers.
comm. 2005).
In GSMNP, Van Manen (1994) found that female black bears frequently used habitats characterized by
mixed mesic hardwood or xeric oak vegetation types, middle elevations (1,970 to 3,280 ft[600 to 1,000 m]
msl), moderately steep slopes (greater than 15 degrees), northwestern aspects, proximity to historic
settlement areas, proximiry to trails (less than 738 ft[225 m]), and large distances from human activity sites
(greater than 3.6 mi [5.7 km]) and improved roads (greater than 1.5 mi [2S km]). Male black bears used
similar habitat, but were also frequently found in pine woodlands and cove hardwood vegetation, historically
uncut areas, and areas between 2.3 and 4.9 mi (3.7 and 8.0 km) from human activity centers (human activity
centers include campgrounds, other heavily used visitor attractions, and residential areas) and less than 3.7
mi (59 km) from improved roads. Upland hardwood forests, consisting of Cove Mixed Hardwoods, Mesic
Hardwood Forest, Sub-mesic to Mesic Oak and Oak-Hickory Forest, Sub-xeric Oak and Oalc-Hickory
Forest, and Early Successional Hardwood Forest, cover approximately 70 percent of the project study
corridors. See Section 3.4.5 for more detailed information on vegetative communities. These community
types dominate more interior areas of the southern portion of GSMNP and provide highly valuable bear
habitat (Van Manen, pers. comm. 2005). The high quality bear habitat is due to the hard and soft mast
producing plants found here.
Bears in the southern Appalachians exist primarily on federally owned lands such as national forests or
national parks (Seibert 1989). Often, black bears will travel outside these boundaries if their habitat is
disturbed, human presence is increased, or food becomes less available, where they become susceptible to
mortality and habitat impacts. Consequently, nuisance activities, road kills, and hunter harvest of bears
outside GSMNP are affected by the dynamics of bears within GSMNP and vice versa (Eason 2002). See
Appendix N far more information about black bears.
Affected Environment — 3-61
North Shore Road Final Environmental Impact Statement

3.4.8 Migratory Birds
GSMNP is known for a high diversiry (MacArthur 1972) and species richness of forest-breeding NTMBs
(Terborgh 1989). NTMBs include warblers, vireos, and flycatchers. NTMBs undergo two long-distance
migrations annually. They breed in temperate regions (e.g., parts of tbe United States) and winter in areas with
less seasonaliry (e.g., Central and South America). Many NTMBs are considered area-sensitive; in order to
successfully reproduce, they require large, unfragmented tracts of breeding habitat. Just such expanses of
forest occur in GSMNP, and thus, the Park harbors an exceptionally high species richness and abundance of
forest-breeding NTMBs. Indeed in some habitats in the park, NTMBs represent 80 percent of the breeding
avifauna (Terborgh 1989).
3.4.8.1 Methodology
From 1996 through 1999, an in-depth study of the breeding bird communities of GSMNP was conducted by
Shriner (2001). This study assessedbreeding bird populations throughout the Park using trails as access for
conducting variable circular plot (VCP) censuses. However, Shriner collected no data within the western
portion of the project study corridars on either side of Eagle Creek and Hazel Creek including Welch Ridge.
In 2004, ARCADIS collected additional inigratory bird data within this portion of the project study corridors.
Surveys were conducted near the approximate center of the project study corridars with the center of each
plot at least 820 ft (250 m) apart. These data were intended to supplement data from Sbriner (2001), such
that a complete picture of migratory bird communities within the project study corridors could be estimated.
Both surveys used the standardized VCP bird-counting methods developed by Ralph et al. (1997). Detailed
methodologies are outlined in Attachment N-12.
During the summers of 2003 and 2004, biologists conducted field surveys in the project study corridors.
These surveys were intended to collect general information on vegetation communities and wildlife, and to
identify the locations of unmapped wetlands and streams in the project study corridors. Bird species
observed by sight and sound were recorded.
3.4.8.2 Existing Conditions
The VCP study conducted by Shriner (2001) detected 113 migratory bird species occurring throughout
GSMNP. In 2003, initial screening for bird species resulted in identification of 23 species within the project
study area. Due to the fact that observations were conducted over a longer period of time, more species were
detected in the general 2004 observations (52 species). During VCP bird censuses in 2004, 47 species were
observed, 44 of which were also observed by Shriner (2001). Furthermore, 2004 VCP bird data were
divided based upon whether the birds were detected in the interior (42 species) or shoreline corridors (38
species) in the section of the project study corridors between Eagle and Hazel creeks. Complete results are
listed in Appendix N and a list of species observed in Attachment N-3. In general, results of VCP censuses
in the 2004 study and the Shriner study are similar. Of the four dominant species observed by ARCADIS [in
descending arder: red-eyed vireo (Vireo olivaceus), ovenbird (Seiurus aurocapilla), black-throated green
warbler (Dendroica virens), and black-and-white warbler (Mniotilta varia)], three were also among the
dominant four species observed by Shriner (red-eyed vireo, dark-eyed junco [Junco hyemalis], ovenbird, and
black-throated green warbler).
Affected Environment — 3-62
North Shore Road Final Environmental Impact Statement

Birds of Conservation Concern 2002 (USFWS 2002b) is the most recent effort to carry out the Fish and
Wildlife Conservation Act that mandates the USFWS to identify species, subspecies, and populations of all
migratory, nongame birds that, without additional conservation actions, are likely to become candidates for
listing under the ESA (USFWS 2002b). GSMNP is located in bird conservation region (BCR) 28 for the
Appalachian Mountains. Birds of Conservation Concern 20021ists 27 birds within BCR 28. Of these 27
birds, 6 were identified within the project study corridors: Acadian flycatcher (Empidona� virescens), wood
thrush (Hylocichla mustelina), cerulean warbler (Dendroica cerulea), worm-eating warbler (Helmitheros
vermivorus), Louisiana warbler (Seiurus motacilla), and Kentucky warbler (Oporornis formosus).
There are two federally protected species and seven state protected species listed as potentially occurring
within the study area (see Section 3.4.10). There is evidence of three of these protected species occurring
within the study area: sightings of cerulean warbler and bald eagle, and evidence of yellow-bellied
sapsucker (Sphyrapicus varius).
The USFWS has delisted the bald eagle in the lower 48 states of the United States from the federal list of
endangered and threatened wildlife, effective August 8, 2007. Prior to delisting, the bald eagle had been
listed as a threatened species. Surveys, resulting documentation and information discussed in the FEIS were
conducted and developed while this species was federally listed as threatened. Text pertaining to the bald
eagle has been retained for informative purposes. Information pertaining to the current protection status of
the bald eagle is found in the errata for Appendix N.
One male cerulean warbler was detected by VCP bird census in 2004. The individual was observed on two
separate days and was determined not to be paired with a female. This individual may have been in
suboptimal or marginal habitat that had not yet attracted females. However, the presence of this individual
indicates that there is potential cerulean warbler habitat in the project study corridars.
Yellow-bellied sapsuckers were not observed in the project study area (Shriner 2001; Attachment N-12). In
the Southern Appalachians, yellow-bellied sapsuckers breed exclusively above 3,500 ft(1,067 m) msl. The
project study corridors are not within this elevation range. However, an abundance of sap wells were
observed in mature trees throughout the project study corridors. The yellow-bellied sapsucker is known to
occupy lower elevations in the winter (Simpson 1992). Based on winter census data from the Tennessee side
of GSMNP within the same elevation range as the project study corridors, yellow-bellied sapsuckers have
been recorded for over the last 20 years (National Audubon Sociery 2002). Therefore, it is likely that the
yellow-bellied sapsucker winters in the project study corridors. It is unknown if these birds consist of the
protected subspecies (Sphyrapicus varius appalachienesis).
No censuses of wintering species in the project study corridors have been conducted to assess the use of this
area by these species. Historic bird records indicate the birds expected to be found in the area (Appendix N).
However, far fewer species winter in the areas proximal to the project study corridors than breed there due
the relatively harsh winter climates. Examples of wintering bird species likely to be found in the project
study corridars include the ruby-crowned kinglet (Regulus calendula), hermit thrush (Catharus guttatus),
yellow-rumped warbler (Dendroica coronata), white-throated sparrow (Zonotrichia albicollis), and white-
crowned sparrow (Zonotrichia leucophrys).
Affected Environment — 3-63
North Shore Road Final Environmental Impact Statement

3.4.9 Invasive Exotics
3.4.9.1 Methodology
Data were obtained from published reports (including websites), literature searches, and personal
communications. Information on invasive exotics in the project study corridors was collected and is
summarized here. GIS data, provided by GSMNP, was used to determine known locations of invasive exotic
plants and invertebrates within the project study corridors (NPS 2005c). In this case, location refers to an
area where an invasive exotic plant or HWA currently exists or previously existed and is being monitored to
prevent population re-establishment. Data gathered by the Illinois Natural History Survey (INHS), which
systematically inventoried vascular plants and lichens of the GSMNP in 2003 and 2004, was used to find
invasive exotic plant locations within the project study corridors (Marcum 2005). This information does not
include vertebrates, forest diseases, and invertebrates. Detailed field investigations were conducted from
May through October 2004 in the project study corridors. Invasive exotic species observed within the
project study corridors were recorded on field data sheets during the field investigations. The invasive exotic
plants observed were found mostly in areas where disturbance has occurred such as trails, old home sites,
and along stream corridors. Invasive exotics are divided into four groups (vertebrates, invertebrates, plants,
and diseases) for the purpose of discussions.
3.4.9.2 Existing Conditions
There are approximately 35 invasive exotic species known to occur within GSMNP. Of these, 31 are known
to occur within the project study corridars, including 5 vertebrates, 3 invertebrates, 19 plants, and 4 forest
diseases. There are three aquatic and two terrestrial species of vertebrates. The three aquatic vertebrates are
rainbow trout, brown trout, and the common carp. The two terrestrial vertebrates are the house mouse (Mus
nzusculus) and tbe wild hog. Tbe invertebrates found within the project corridor are the dusky slug (Arion
subfuscus), beech scale (Cryptococcus fagisuga), and the HWA.
There are 19 invasive exotic plant species that have been observed within the project study corridors. Exotic
plant species are discussed according to their rank provided in the revised 2004 Invasive Exotic Pest Plants
in Tennessee list. Rank 1 species are a severe threat, meaning these exotic species bave characteristics of
invasive species and spread easily into native plant communities and displace native vegetation. Rank 2
species are a significant threat, meaning these exotic species have characteristics of invasive species but are
not considered to spread as easily into native plant communities as the Rank l species. Rank 3 species are a
lesser threat, meaning these exotic species spread in or near disturbed areas, and are not presently considered
a threat to native plant communities (TN-EPPC 2004).
Eleven Rank 1 species are known to occur within the project study corridors. These species are: mimosa
(Albizia julibrissin), Japanese honeysuckle (Lonicera japonica), Oriental bittersweet (Celastrus orbiculatus),
kudzu (Pueraria montana var. lobata), common privet (Ligustr�um vulgare), Chinese privet (L. sinense),
multiflora rose (Rosa multiflora), Japanese stilt grass (Microstegium vimineum), cuneate bush-clover
(Lespedeza cuneata), Johnson grass (So�ghum halepense), and English ivy (Hedera helix). Six Rank 2
species known to occur within the Park include: white poplar (Populus alba), Japanese wisteria (Wisteria
Affected Environment — 3-64
North Shore Road Final Environmental Impact Statement

,floribunda), common mullein (Verbascum thapsus), periwinkle (Vinca minor), Queen Anne's lace (Daucus
carota), and white sweet-clover (Melilotus albus). Two Rank 3 species include: wineberry (Rubus
phoenicolasius) and daisy (Leucanthemum vulgare).
Invasive forest diseases exist witbin the project study corridors, for example, the butternut canker, dogwood
anthracnose, chesmut blight, and beecb bark disease (Necti^ia sp.), all of which are different forms of fungi.
There are 3] invasive exotic species found within the project study corridors. Of these species, 10 invasive
exotic plant species and one invasive exotic invertebrate species are currently being monitored by GSMNP.
Unknown locations of invasive exotic species may exist within the project study corridors. Monitored
populations of invasive plant species are mostly found near trails, streams, and old home sites. There are
nine locations of kudzu populations, seven locations of periwinkle populations, three locations of Oriental
bittersweet populations, four locations of white poplar, three locations of English ivy, one location of
wineberry, one location of Japanese wisteria, one location of Japanese honeysuckle, three locations of
common privet, one location of mimosa and one location of HWA.
See Appendix N for the location of these invasive exotic species.
Populations of HWA and Japanese stilt grass are ubiquitous
throughout the project study corridors. Multiflora rose, common
privet, and Japanese honeysuckle are very common along the shore
of Fontana Lake.
The goal of the Park's invasive plant management action is not just
to kill alien plants but also to protect and/or restore the function,
structure, and composition of the systems NPS is entrusted to
Hemlock woolly adelgid has become
a serious threat to the survival of
hemlock trees.
manage. NPS has four general inventory and monitoring goals for
invasive plant efforts. The first goa] is to determine the distribution and abundance of known plant species
within the Park and its surroundings and assessing which have high potential to be invasive. The second
goal is to prevent, detect, and eradicate new alien plant invasions. The third goal is to evaluate the effects of
management actions on targeted plant species and the ecosystems that they have invaded and determine
whether strategic goals have been accomplished. Finally, the goal is to determine the status and trends of
plant invasion over time and space and develop predictive capabilities to better guide future monitoring and
management efforts (NPS 2002c).
3.4.10 Protected Species
3.4.10.1 Federally Protected
Some populations of fauna and flora have been or are in the process of decline due to either natural farces or
their inability to coexist with humans. Federal law (under the provisions of Section 7 of the Endangered
Species Act [ESA] of 1973, as amended) requires that any federal action likely to adversely affect a species
classified as federally protected be subject to review by the USFWS. Other species may receive additional
protection under separate laws.
Affected Environment — 3-65
North Shore Road Final Environmental Impact Statement

3.4.10.1.1 Methodology
General field surveys and detailed surveys for targeted species were conducted between May and October
2004 within the project study corridors. The methodologies for these surveys are described in Aquatic
Wildlife, Section 3.4.4.1; Vegetation Communities, Section 3.4.5. ]; and Terrestrial Wildlife, Section 3.4.6.1.
3.4.10.12 Existing Conditions
As of May 2007, the USFWS had identified eight endangered species, four threatened species, and one
species threatened due to similarity of appearance as potentially occurring in Swain Counry, North Carolina.
The USFWS also identified four endangered species, one threatened species, and one species threatened due
to similarity of appearance as potentially occurring in Graham County, North Carolina (Table 3-11). Three
additional federally protected species that have historic ranges near the project study area were also included.
These additional species are red wolf (Canis rufus), red-cockaded woodpecker (Picoides borealis), and
small-whorled pogonia (Isotria medeoloides).
In the July 9, 2007, Federal Register, the USFWS announced that the bald eagle was delisted in the lower 48
states of the United States from the federal list of endangered and threatened wildlife with an effective date
of August 8, 2007. Prior to delisting, the bald eagle had been listed as a threatened species. Surveys,
resulting documentation and information discussed in the FEIS were conducted and developed while this
species was federally listed as threatened. Text pertaining to the bald eagle has been retained for informative
purposes. Information pertaining to the current protection status of the bald eagle is found in the errata for
Appendix N.
All federally protected species listed in Table 3-1 ] are described in Appendix N. Habitat is available in the
project study corridors for all federally protected species listed in Table 3-11 except for the Carolina northern
flying squirrel (Glaucomys sabrinus coloratus), noonday globe (Paterna clarki nantahala), spruc�fir moss
spider (Microhexura montivaga) and rock gnome lichen (Gymnoderina lineare) due to elevation
requirements. Historic records exist far the spotfin chub (Cyprinella monacha) and eastern cougar (Puma
concolor couguar) in or near the project study corridor; however, neither has been recorded as occurring
within the project study corridors in over 20 years. The eastern cougar, the red-cockaded woodpecker and
the red wolf are thought to be extirpated from GSMNP. These three species and the spotfin cbub are not
considered to be occurring with the project study area. Only two federally protected species are discussed in
detail in this report. These species are the bald eagle, which is known to be present, and the Indiana bat,
which is likely to be present within 2 mi (3.2 km) of the project study corridors.
THIS SPACE HAS BEEN LEFT 1NTENTIONALLY BLANK.
Affected Environment — 3-66
North Shore Road Final Environmental Impact Statement

Table 3-11. Federally Listed Threatened and Endangered Species and Their State Status
Evaluated for Potential Occurrence within the Project Study Corridors
Federal State Habitat Identified In or
Common Name Scientific Name Status Status Available Near Project
Corridors
Vertebrates
Bald Eaglez
Bog turtle
Carolina northern flying
squirrel
Eastern cougar
Gray bat
Indiana bat
Red Wolf
Red-cockaded
woodpecker
Spoifin chub
Invertebrates
Appalachian elktoe
Little-wing pearlymussel
Noonday globe
Spruce-fir moss spider
Vascular Plants
Small-whorled pogonia
Virginia spiraea
Nonvascular Plants
Rock gnome lichen
Haliaeetus leucocephalus
Clemmys muhlenbergii
Glaucomys sabrinus
coloratus
Puma concolor couguar�
Myotis grisescens
Myotis sodalis
Canis rufus3
Picoides borealis3
Cyprinella monacha'
Alasmidonta raveneliana
Pegias fabula
Patera clarki nantahala
Microhexura montivaga
---- T Yes
T(S/A) T Yes
E E No
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
SR4
E4
T T
E E
E E
T T
E SR
Isofria medeoloides3 T E4
Spiraea virginiana T E
Gymnoderma lineare
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
Yes
Yes
E T No
Yes
No
No
Yes (> 20 years)6
No
No
No
No
Yes (>20 years)
No
No
No
No
�
f►f.7
Notes: E= Endangered; T= Threatened; T(S/A) = Threatened Due to Similarity of Appearance; SR = State Rare
1 Populations of these species have been identified in the project study corridors or within a 2-mi (3.2-km) radius of the
project study corridors, based on information from USFWS, GSMNP, NCNHP and other data sources as applicable within
the last 20 years.
2 In the July 9, 2007, Federal Register, the USFWS announced that the bald eagle was delisted in the lower 48 states of the
United States from the federal list of endangered and threatened wildlife with an effective date of August 8, 2007. However,
information peRaining to this species has been retained for informative purposes.
3 Species added at the request of NPS biologists.
4 Not state listed as existing in Graham or Swain Counties, North Carolina.
5 Synonym: Felis concolor couguar
6 Cougars, according to NPS biologists, are not currently known to occur in the GSMNP portion of the project study area.
The last known documented sighting, based on USFWS and NCNHP records, was over 20 years ago. There have been
regular sightings of an animal thought to be a cougar within GSMNP in the past few years; however, the sightings have
not be scientifically proven to be a cougar.
7 Synonyms: Hybopsis monacha or Erimonax monachus.
Affected Environment — 3-67
North Shore Road Final Environmental Impact Statement

Bald Eagle
As noted previously, the USFWS delisted the bald eagle from the federal list of endangered and threatened
wildlife, effective August 8, 2007. Surveys, resulting documentation, and information discussed in this
chapter were conducted and developed while this species was federally listed as threatened. The following
text pertaining to the bald eagle has been retained for informative purposes.
Bald eagles are primarily associated with large bodies of water such as Fontana Lake and Cheoah Lake,
where food is plentiful. Eagle nests are found in proximiry to water (usually within 0.5 mi [0.8 km]) with a
clear flight path to the water, in the largest living tree in an area, with an open view of the surrounding land.
Fontana Lake is the only body of water in GSMNP that provides foraging habitat for bald eagles. Human
disturbance can cause nest abandonment. In this region, the breeding season for the bald eagle begins in
December and January.
This raptar is protected under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act and the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act.
Also, under provisions of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (ESA), populations will continue
to be monitored for at least 5 years after delisting.
The Habitat Management Guidelines for the Bald Eagle in the Southeast Region (USFWS 1987) were put in
place in order to protect critical habitat required for the survival of bald eagles in the Southeastern United
States. It is the nesting site that is of critical importance to this species. Abandoned nests are likely to be
reoccupied and when nests are destroyed (e.g., blown from trees by storms), the resident bald eagle pair are
likely to r�nest in the same tree. The Habitat Management Guidelines implement management zones
(primary and secondary) around bald eagle nests to protect them from disturbance. The primary zone
encompasses 750 to 1,500 ft(229 to 457 m) outward from the nest site. Restrictions in this area include
development, tree cutting, and construction. The secondary zone extends from the edge of the primary zone
750 ft to 1.0 mi (229 to ],609 m). The USFWS has issued Final National Bald Eagle Management
Guidelines, dated June 5, 2007, to promote continued conservation of the bald eagle.
For several years prior to this report, bald eagles have been regularly sighted utilizing Fontana Lake. A
potential nesting site was observed during the summer of 2004, on the southem shore of Fontana Lake on
Nantahala National Farest property near the eastern portion of the project study corridors. A helicopter
survey in February 2005 by NCWRC of the shoreline of Fontana Lake confirmed that this is an active nest
site (McGrath, pers. comm. 2005). However, the nest is located in a dead pine tree.
Indiana Bat
Indiana bats hibernate for the winter in limestone caverns and abandoned mines, usually near water, and in
large colonies. The bats roost during the summer months in snags or in shaggy-barked live trees near water
and exposed to the sun. These "roost trees" can be found within riparian areas, bottomland hardwoods, and
upland hardwoods. Mating generally occurs from late August to early October priar to hibernation.
Ovulation takes place after the bats emerge from hibernation in the spring, and young are bom in June and
July. One young is born to each mother, and they leave the roost approximately 30 days after birth (USFWS
1999).
Affected Environment — 3-68
North Shore Road Final Environmental Impact Statement

In 2000, surveys resulted in the capture of three Indiana bats at two sites located approximately 6 mi (9.6
km) west of the project study area (Eco-Tech, Inc. 2000). Two materniry colonies are known to be present in
the Forge Creek and Parson Branch areas of GSMNP, a few miles north of the project study corridors
(Harvey and Britzke 2002). A large wintering colony consisting of more than 5,000 Indiana bats hibernates
in GSMNP and nearby caves. Indiana bats have been observed in eastern and western Swain County, and
the potential exists for additional Indiana bat materniry colonies to occur in the GSMNP area (Appendix N,
Attachment N-5).
Suitable summering habitat for the Indiana bat is found within the project study corridors. Surveys for bats,
utilizing both mist nets and an Anabat system were conducted in the project study corridors during the
summer of 2004 (Appendix N, Attachment N-5). No Indiana bats were captured or recorded during this
survey. There are no documented populations of this species within a 2-m (3.2-km) radius of the project
study area.
3.4.10.2 Federal Species of Concern and State Protected Species
3.4.102.1 Methodology
General surveys and detailed surveys for targeted species were conducted between May and October 2004
within the project study corridors. The methodologies for these surveys are described in Section 3.4.4.1
(Aquatic Wildlife), Section 3.4.5.1 (Vegetation Communities), Section 3.4.6.1 (Terrestrial Wildlife), and
Section 3.4.8.1 (Migratory Birds).
3.4.10.2.2 Existing Conditions
As of May 2007, the USFWS has identified 24 Federal Species of Concern (FSC) for Graham County, North
Carolina and 39 FSC for Swain County, North Carolina. These species are not protected under the
provisions of Section 7 of the ESA, but are defined as species under consideration for listing as threatened or
endangered (formerly C2 candidate species). The North Carolina General Statutes 113-331 to 113-337 and
the Plant Protection and Conservation Act authorize NCWRC and North Carolina Department of Agriculture
to monitor and protect rare animals and plants, respectively. NCNHP lists these rare species and have
identified 58 species receiving protection under state laws far Graham and Swain Counties, North Carolina
(NCNHP 2007). State laws do not normally apply to a federal project. All of these species, their federal and
state status, presence of available habitat, and presence within the project study corridors are listed in
Appendix N. Only the species that have been found within the project study corridors are discussed in this
report and are listed in Table 3-12.
THIS SPACE HAS BEEN LEFT INTENTIONALLY BLANK.
Affected Environment — 3-69
North Shore Road Final Environmental Impact Statement

Table 3-12. Federal Species of Concern and State Protected Species Found
within the Project Study Corridors
Federal State
Common Name Scientific Name Status' StatusZ Preferred Habitat
Vertebrates
Mammals
Rafinesque's big-eared bat Corynorhinus rafinesquii FSC T
Northern long-eared bat
Southern Appalachian
woodrat
Long-tailed shrew
Southern water shrew
Amphibians
Hellbender
Junaluska salamander
Seepage salamander
Reptiles
Timber rattlesnake
Northern pine snake
Fish
Smoky dace
Sicklefin redhorse
Olive darter
Birds3
Cerulean warbler
Invertebrates
Terrestrial Snails/Slugs
Queen crater
Dark glyph
Myotis septentrionalis -
Neotoma floridana FSC
haematoreia
Sorex dispar -
Sorex palustris punctulatus FSC
Cryptobranchus
alleganiensis
Eurycea junaluska
Desmognathus aeneus
Crotalus horridus
Pituophis melanoleucus
melanoleucus
FSC
FSC
SC
SC
SC
SC
SC
T
FSC SR
FSC
Trees, caves, and buildings along
bodies of water
Caves, mines, buildings, or
hollow trees
Rocky areas at elevations up to
2,500 ft (762 m)
High elevation talus slopes and
rockslides
Swiftly flowing streams under
overhanging banks and crevices
Rivers and large streams with
large rocks, snags, or debris
Low elevations under rocks or
objects along streams
Wet leaf litter, rocks, and surface
debris
Dry rocky hillsides, forested
SC wetlands, and grassy meadows
SC Dry upland forests
Clinostomus funduloides FSC SC Rocky flowing pools of
ssp.1 headwaters and creeks
Moxostoma sp. C SR (PT) Silty to rocky pools and slow runs
of small to medium rivers
Percina squamata FSC SC Deep boulder riffles and runs of
small to medium rivers
Dendroica cerulea FSC SR Mature hardwood forests on steep
slopes and coves
- Low elevation mixed hardwood
Appalachina chilhoweensis SC forests or on dry acid ridges
Upland area under leaf litter in
Glyphyalinia junaluskana - SC mixed hardwood forests
Affected Environment — 3-70
North Shore Road Final Environmental Impact Statement

Common Name
Fringed coil
DwarF proud globe
Insects°
Diana fritillary
Vascular Plants
Butternut
Sweet pinesap
Carolina saxifrage
Scientific Name
Helicodiscus fimbriatus
Patera clarki
Speyeria diana
Juglans cinerea
Monotropsis odorata
Saxifraga caroliniana
Federal State
Status' StatusZ
- SC
- SC
FSC -
FSC -
FSC SR-T
FSC SR-T
Preferred Habitat
Leaf litter and under rocks on
wooded hillsides
Leaf litter in mesic woods near
streams and rock talus
Openings in wet, forested valleys
or mountainsides
Along stream banks, in mesic
bottomlands and hillsides
Dry to mesic upland woods,
heath-covered slopes
Organic layer and moss on the
surface of exposed rocks
Notes:
1 FSC — Federal Species of Concern; C- Candidate
2 T— Threatened; SR — Significantly Rare; SC — Special Concern; -T — Throughout
3 Southern Appalachian yellow-bellied sapsucker (Sphyrapicus varius appalachiensis) is not considered as "found" in the project
study corridors since it breeds above 3,500 ft (1,065 m), which is above the elevation of the study corridors. Sap-wells attributed
to yellow-bellied sapsuckers (S. varius) are visible in the project study corridors, suggesting utilization of the area by a wintering
population; however, it is unknown which sub-species is creating this evidence.
4 Euchlaena milnei, a moth, was found within the project study corridors. It had not been observed in the state in over 50 years.
However, with this rediscovery, it will most likely be added to the state's FSC list (Ratzlaff, pers. comm. 2005).
Vertebrates
There are 14 vertebrate species listed as FSC, candidate, or state protected that have been identified as
occurring directly in or within 2 mi (3.2 km) of the project study corridors. Of these vertebrates, the
following species were found in terrestrial landscapes: Rafinesque's big-eared bat, northern long-eared bat,
Southern Appalachian woodrat, long-tailed shrew, southern water shrew, timber rattlesnake, Northern
pinesnake, and Cerulean warbler. The remaining vertebrates are found in aquatic ecosystems: hellbender,
Junaluska salamander, seepage salamander, smoky dace (Clinostomus funduloides ssp. l), sicklefin redharse
(Moxostoma sp.), and olive darter (Percina squamata). Habitat is available for eight additional vertebrate
species within the project study corridors: southern rock vole (Microtus chrotorrhinus carolinensis), small-
footed myotis (Myotis leibii), Appalachian cottontail (Sylvilagus transitionalis), long-tailed salamander, four-
toed salamander (Hemidactylium scutaturrz), pygmy salamander (Desrnognathus wrightii), wounded darter
(Etheostoma vulneratum), and stonecat (Noturus flavus). Details regarding preferred habitat for these species
are located in Appendix N.
Invertebrates
Five invertebrate species listed as FSC or state protected have been identified as occurring directly in or
within 2 mi (3.2 km) of the project study corridors. Four of these species are terrestrial snails (queen crater,
dark glyph, fringed coil, and dwarf proud globe), and one species is the Diana fritillary. Habitat is available
within the project study corridors for additional invertebrate species. These species include six mussels:
slippershell mussel (Alasinidonata viridis), spike (Elliptio dilatata), Tennessee pigtoe (Fusconaia
Affected Environment — 3-71
North Shore Road Final Environmental Impact Statement

barnesiana), wavy-rayed lampmussel (Lampsilis fasciola), Little Tennessee mussel (Lexingtonia sp. cf.
dolabelloides), and rainbow (Villosa iris); one crustacean: French Broad crayfish (Cambarus reburr�us); nine
terrestrial snails and slugs: pink glyph (Glyphyalinia pentadelphia), blu�footed lancetooth (Haplotrema
kendeighi), spiral coil (Helicodiscus bonamicus), Smoky Mountain covert (Inflectarius ferrissi), ramp cove
supercoil (Paravitrea lacteodens), lamellate supercoil (P. lamellidens), open supercoil (P. umbilicaris),
glossy supercoil (P. placentula), and Appalachian gloss (Zonitoides patuloides); one spider-like specimen: a
harvestman (Fumontana deprehendor); and one dragonfly: mountain river cruiser. During field surveys,
Euchlaena milnei, a moth, was found within the project study corridors. This species had not been observed
in the state in over 50 years. However, with this discovery, it will most likely be added to the state's FSC list
(Ratzlaff, pers. comm. 2005).
Plants
There are three vascular plants listed as FSC or state protected that have been identified as occurring directly
in or within 2 mi (3.2 km) of the project study corridors. These species include the butternut (Juglans
cinerea), sweet pinesap (Monotropsis odorata), and Carolina saxifrage (Saxifi°aga caroliniana). No non-
vascular plants with special protection are known to occur within the project study corridors. Two additional
vascular plants including piratebush (Buckleya distichophylla) and hairy blueberry (T�accinium hirsutum),
and three non-vascular plants including Plagiochila sharpii (no common name), Plagiochila sullivantii var.
sullivanti (no common name) and Porella wataugensis (no common name) have available habitat within the
project study corridors.
3.5 Aesthetics and Visual Resources
Aesthetics and scenic views are important characteristics of GSMNP and the study area. The preservation of
the land in its natural state has attracted tourists from all over the world in search of the unfettered scenery at
GSNINP. The scenic environment of the study area is also integral to recreational resources throughout the
area.
Federal land management (FLM) agencies, such as the NPS and the FHWA-EFLHD, are charged with
managing the nation's federally-owned lands in an effort to protect our natural resources for passive and
active recreational purposes. In addition, NEPA mandaYes the assessment of impacts to visual resources as
part of the EIS process. Therefore, the aesthetic and visual resources in the study area were analyzed to
comply with NEPA and satisfy the requirements of the FLM agencies that are affected by the project.
Special areas of concern include those areas that have high visual quality or should not be visually impacted
for reasons of resource protection. Some landscape components are considered visually sensitive far
historic, scientific, or recreational reasons, while other landscapes and resources may be important only to
the local community. The GSMNP's standing as an International Biosphere Reserve and World Heritage
Site and the local community's historical connection to the study area make it particularly sensitive to visual
resource impacts.
Citizen participation activities and interagency coordination revealed that special areas of concern are views
along the AT, the view from High Rocks, and the aesthetic character at Proctor. Within the interior of
Affected Environment — 3-72
North Shore Road Final Environmental Impact Statement