4.4.7

Reduction of the construction footprint could be accomplished through additional use of retaining walls or
construction of a viaduct. This would reduce direct impacts to terrestrial wildlife habitat, although not
necessarily indirect impacts. The cost of such additional structures, especially viaducts, has not been
calculated, but could be significant.
Mitigation Technigues
Mitigation of impacts that cannot be avoided or minimized may include funding for habitat creation and
restoration, rare species management, and the establishment of interpretive programs related to interactions
between the natural environment and development within GSMNP. GSMNP is committed to mitigation of
impacts as part of its ongoing Park policies; however, mitigation opportunities for impacts to terrestrial
wildlife within GSMNP are limited. Specific needs for mitigation would be identified as necessary.
Enhancement Measures
Enhancement measures are additional forms of mitigation that may be used to reduce impacts that result
from project construction. Enhancement actions allow for improvements of terrestrial wildlife and their
habitat that may have become degraded in the Park. Additional funding for invasive exotic species
management, increased law enforcement, and public awareness educational programs are examples of
enhancement measures.
4.4.6.4 Impairment Evaluation
Impairment (as defined by NPS policy) to the terrestrial wildlife of GSMNP and the AT would not occur
under the No-Action Alternative, Monetary Settlement Alternative, Laurel Branch Picnic Area, and ihe
Partial-Build Alternative to Bushnell. The Northern Shore Corridor is not likely to impair the terrestrial
wildlife of GSMNP or the AT based on the information obtained to date. Due to the magnitude of this
alternative, it is likely that additional NEPA documentation would be required to address sit�specific
impacts not currently known, to determine detailed avoidance, minimization, and mitigation measures as
they relate to final design, and to re-evaluate the impairment determination related to terrestrial wildlife.
4.4.7 Black Bears
All of the lands in the project study corridors are considered to be habitat for the black bear. Impact amounts
were calculated based on the approximate area of construction footprint for each alternative. Detailed
methodology and discussion of impacts is listed in Appendix N.
Type
There are two types of impacts, beneficial and adverse. Beneficial impacts have a positive effect on the
black bear population. Adverse impacts have a negative effect on the black bear population.
Clarification of the term "baseline" for this project:
The Partial-Build Alternative to Bushnell and the Northern Shore Corridor include a baseline route, as well as options to that route.
Baseline routes and options are detailed in Section 2.5 and shown on Figure 2-8. Baseline routes have been compared to existing
conditions. Impact analyses for the options are shown as a difference from the associated baseline route.
Environmental Consequences — 4-217
North Shore Road Final Environmental Impact Statement

Context
Context is defined as sit�specific, local, or regional. Sit�specific impacts would occur within the
construction footprint of the road. Local impacts would occur within 2 mi (3.2 km) of the construction
footprint or the northern shore of Fontana Lake (whichever is less). Regional impacts would occur outside
of the localized impacts and in the area north of Fontana Lake, south of the North CarolinaJTennessee state
line, east of Twenrymile Ridge, and west of Noland Creek.
Duration
Short-term impacts are those that would occur for less than 1 year, typically as an episodic or temporary
event. Long-term effects occur as a result of construction activities at a specific location throughout the life
of construction (this is assumed to be between 1 year and 15 years), but the impact is more than that of a
temporary event. Permanent impacts are considered to be anything that persists throughout the construction
period. These impacts include the permanent loss of black bear habitat and function.
Intensity
Intensity is the degree to which resources would be affected and is categorized as no/negligible, minor,
moderate, or major. The intensity definitions for black bear habitat were based on consideration of a wide
range of factors including the breadth of home range size, avoidance and attraction behaviors, direct loss of
habitat and indirect modifications to the remaining bisected habitat, and the potential for habitat
fragmentation. The average home range for bears is 15 mi� (38 km�) for females and 24 mi� (63 km�) for
males (Van Manen 1994). Larger home ranges in the fall as compared to spring/summer reflect increased
feeding activity prior to denning (Quigley 1982). It is well known that black bears are attracted to and may
become "nuisance" animals at facilities where human food waste becomes available, such as picnic areas
(Stiver ] 991). Roads and other facilities can modify the surrounding habitat making it less suitable for
terrestrial wildlife. Changes in animal behavior ha�e been noted in areas adjoining roads. Human
disturbance and road noise can lead to animal avoidance behavior (Clevenger and Waltho 2000; Trombulak
and Frissel 2000). Roads, as narrow as 10 ft(3 m), may act as a physical barrier to animal movements
(Trambulak and Frisse12000). In addition, the road may lead to increased bear mortality due to vehicular
strikes (Oxley et al. 1974).
The following intensity definitions apply to black bear habitat found within or adjacent to the construction
footprint of the proposed project. 1'he construction footprint includes the proposed area of pavement, the
adjoining cut and fill slopes, and the surrounding construction access buffer. In addition to the acreage of
habitat present within the construction footprint, the presence of concentrated visitor use areas, such as picnic
areas, increases the intensity impact to at least moderate or if already minor ar moderate based on acreage
then the intensity is major. There is no scientific literature available that provides a scale to define or rank
the severity of impacts from a project. Therefore, the following intensity definitions are based on best
professional judgment of what is reasonable considering the complex interactions of the factors noted above.
Clarification of the term "baseline" for this project:
The Partial-Build Alternative to Bushnell and the Northern Shore Corridor include a baseline route, as well as options to that route.
Baseline routes and options are detailed in Section 2.5 and shown on Figure 2-8. Baseline routes have been compared to existing
conditions. Impact analyses for the options are shown as a difference from the associated baseline route.
Environmental Consequences — 4-218
North Shore Road Final Environmental Impact Statement

No/Negligible
No/negligible impacts are those that would occur to less than 25 ac (10 ha) of black bear habitat and no
concentrated visitor use areas.
Minor
Minor is defined as any impacts to black bear habitat greater than 25 ac (10 ha) but less than 100 ac (40.5 ha)
and no concentrated visitor use areas.
Moderate
Moderate is defined as any impacts to black bear habitat greater than 100 ac (40.5 ha) but less than 200 ac
(81 ha) or less than 25 ac (10 ha) of impacted bear habitat associated with the presence of one concentrated
visitor use area.
Major
Major is defined as any impacts to black bear habitat greater than 200 ac (80 ha) or greater than 25 ac (10 ha)
of impacted bear habitat associated with the presence of one concentrated visitor use area.
4.4.7.1 Summary of Impacts
Habitat Loss and Frag�nentation
Avoidance behavior may occur during and after construction of a road. As traffic volume increases, so may
a bear's avoidance behaviar. Black bears are deterred by human activity more so than noise disturbance.
Van Manen (1994) found that black bears tend to avoid areas up to 3.5 mi (5.7 km) away from human
activity and up to 3.6 mi (5.8 km) away from improved roads. An average of other studies (Clark 1991;
Kasworm and Manley 1990; Reagan 1991) shows a width of 1,640 ft(500 m) of avoided habitat along roads.
This width is significantly less than that found by Van Manen. The degree of avoidance depends on traffic
volume (Carr and Pelton 1984; Clark 1991; Rogers and Allen 1987), concealment cover along the road
(Rogers and Allen 1987), sex of the bear (Brown 1980; Young and Beechum 1986), season (Clark 1991;
Kasworm and Manley 1990), food abundance along the road (Clark 1991), and time of day (McLellan and
Shackleton 1998). Large, roadless areas with minimal human presence are the most critical habitat elements
for these animals.
Roads may fragment black bear habitat. Brody and Pelton (1989) suggest that bears may shift the locations
of their hame ranges to avoid roads. Traffic appears to inhibit bear movements when volumes are greater
than 10,000 VPD (Beringer et al. 1990). Bear movements were not inhibited by traffic volumes less than or
equal to 100 VPD (Beringer et al. 1990). The only option with an AADT less than ] 00 VPD is Laurel
Clarification of the term "baseline" for this project:
The Partial-Build Alternative to Bushnell and the Northern Shore Corridor include a baseline route, as well as options to that route.
Baseline routes and options are detailed in Section 2.5 and shown on Figure 2-8. Baseline routes have been compared to existing
conditions. Impact analyses for the options are shown as a difference from the associated baseline route.
Environmental Consequences — 4-219
North Shore Road Final Environmental Impact Statement

Branch Picnic Area with 64 VPD. However, during the tourist season (June —September) traffic volumes are
estimated to be 140 VPD, with peak day traffic of 298 VPD. Bears will either avoid or under-utilize the
fragmented areas or become exposed to an elevated risk of mortaliry. Mortality can be attributed to roadkill
or poaching. Maintained highway rights-of-way provide rare open habitat compared to the rest of the project
study corridor that are conducive to the growth of grasses, berries, and forbs favored by bears (Gibeau and
Heuer 1996). Bears scavenging for both natural and unnatural food sources in and adjacent to the
transportation corridors are more susceptible to vehicle collision.
Poaching
Between ] 993 and 2005, there have been 103 documented incidents of wildlife poaching in the Park. Forty-
four (44) of these incidents occurred within the project vicinity. However, with limited staff to patrol this
area and over 70 mi (] 12.7 km) of shoreline that provides easy access, it is likely that more poaching occurs
than these documented incidents. Deer, turkey, bear, and wild hogs are the most targeted species. Selection
of a build alternative would provide additional access for illegal poacbers and likely increase the amount of
animals removed from the Park. As in other areas of the Park, most poaching occurs at night, and is difficult
to prevent.
Nuisance Bears
Human foods and garbage associated with developed areas, such as campgrounds and picnic areas can attract
bears creating what is referred to as "problem bears" or "nuisance bears." Historically, most captures of
problem bears are associated with areas of high public use (Stiver 1991). Wild bears, those that are afraid of
people, are first attracted to and visit developed areas at night, when visitar use is minimal. If bears
continually obtain human food and garbage at night and no corrective actions are taken, they can quickly
lose their instinctive fear of people, and become active in developed areas during the day when visitor use is
the greatest; these animals can be bold in their attempts to get human food and garbage and may pose a
potential threat to Park visitors. NPS spends a significant amount of resources managing bears with the
objective of allowing wild bears to live naturally, and providing for safe visitor use by minimizing conflicts
between people and bears. Strategies for managing people/bear conflicts include information and education,
sanitation and garbage disposal, law enforcement and management/control actions (NPS 2000). When NPS
learns of a potential bear problem, they address the situation as quickly as possible. Options NPS is using to
manage problem bears include monitoring, warning signs, area closures, aversive conditioning, relocation
and euthanasia (NPS 2000).
4.4.7.1.1 No-Action
The No-Action Alternative would involve no construction or alteration to the natural environment within the
project study corridors. For this reason, no impacts to black bears and their habitat are anticipated within
GSMNP.
Clarification of the term "baseline" for this project:
The Partial-Build Alternative to Bushnell and the Northern Shore Corridor include a baseline route, as well as options to that route.
Baseline routes and options are detailed in Section 2.5 and shown on Figure 2-8. Baseline routes have been compared to existing
conditions. Impact analyses for the options are shown as a difference from the associated baseline route.
Environmental Consequences — 4-220
North Shore Road Final Environmental Impact Statement

4.4.7.12 Monetary Settlement
The Monetary Settlement Alternative would not directly impact black bears or their habitat within GSMNP.
4.4.7.1.3 Laurel Branch Picnic Area
The Laurel Branch Picnic Area would directly impact approximately 9.0 ac (3.6 ha) of black bear habitat and
includes a concentrated visitor-use area. Picnic areas are the biggest problem areas for nuisance bears. This
alternative would increase the number of nuisance bears each year. Therefore, moderate, adverse, site-
specific, and permanent impacts are anticipated. hnpacts due to avoidance behavior would be moderate,
adverse, local, and permanent. However, negligible impacts would be anticipated from habitat fragmentation
since the area of impact is less than the average home range of a bear. Impacts due to increased noise and
changes to the distribution of individual bears (home ranges) would be moderate, adverse, local, and
permanent.
4.4.7.1.4 Partial-Build Alternative to Bushnell (Primitive and Principal Park Roads)
The baseline Partial-Build Alternative to Bushnell would impact approximately 99.4 ac (40.2 ha) and 92.4 ac
(37.4 ha) of black bear habitat for the Primitive and Principal Park Road, respectively and includes a
concentrated visitor-use area. As noted in Section 2.5.4, this alternative's visitor-use area includes a multi-
use picnic shelter and picnic tables. Picnic areas are the biggest problem areas for nuisance bears. This
alternative would increase the number of nuisance bears each year. Impacts would be major, adverse, sit�
specific, and permanent for both road types. Impacts due to habitat fragmentation and avoidance behavior
would be major, adverse, local, and permanent.
Southern Option at Forney Creek Embayment (Primitive and Principal Park Roads)
The Southern Option at Forney Creek Embayment would reduce the amount of bear habitat impacted by an
estimated 9.5 ac (3.8 ha) for the Primitive Park Road and 15.9 ac (6.4 ha) for the Principal Park Road as
compared to the baseline Partial-Build Alternative to Bushnell. This option would reduce the potential
impacts to the farested, interior (non-edge) areas of the Park around Forney and Gray Wolf creeks, but would
increase the potential impacts to the ridges on tbe either side of the embayment crossings. This option would
reduce impacts from fragmentation of bear habitat by creating smaller areas of isolation. There would be no
change from the baseline Partial-Build Alternative to Bushnell far impacts from nuisance bears at the
concentrated visitor use area.
4.4.7.1.5 Northern Shore Corridor (Primitive and Principal Park Roads)
The baseline Northern Shore Corridor would travel through more interior areas of GSMNP than would other
alternatives and contains highly valuable bear habitat around Hazel Creek (Van Manen, pers. comm. 2005).
Clarification of the term "baseline" for this project:
The Partial-Build Alternative to Bushnell and the Northern Shore Corridor include a baseline route, as well as options to that route.
Baseline routes and options are detailed in Section 2.5 and shown on Figure 2-8. Baseline routes have been compared to existing
conditions. Impact analyses for the options are shown as a difference from the associated baseline route.
Environmental Consequences — 4-221
North Shore Road Final Environmental Impact Statement

The construction footprint of this alternative would impact approximately 400.6 ac (162.2 ha) of bear habitat
for the Primitive Park Road and 392.2 ac (l 58.8 ha) of bear habitat for the Principal Park Road. As a result,
the impacts for both road rypes would be classified as major, adverse, sit�specific, and permanent due to
loss of habitat within the construction footprints. Impacts due to habitat fragmentation, avoidance behavior,
or increased roadside foraging would be major, adverse, local, long-term, and permanent for both road types.
Nuisance bear activiry may occur at restroom facilities included with this alternative.
Southern Option at Forney Creek Embayment (Primitive and Principal Park Roads)
As compared to the baseline Northern Shore Corridor, the Southern Option at Forney Creelc Embayment
would reduce the amount of impacted bear habitat by an estimated 9.5 ac (3.8 ha) for the Primitive Park
Road and by 15.9 ac (6.4 ha) far the Principal Park Road. This option would reduce the potential impacts to
the interior areas around Forney and Gray Wolf creeks thus reducing impacts due to habitat fragmentation
and avoidance behavior. However, this option would increase the potential impacts to the ridges on the
either side of the embayment crossings. There would be a slight reduction from roadside foraging by
reducing the length of the road.
Southern Option at Hazel and Eagle Creek Embayments (Primitive and Principal Park Roads)
As compared to the baseline Northern Shore Corridor, the Southern Option at Hazel and Eagle Creek
Embayments would reduce the amount of impacted bear habitat by approximately 25.4 ac (10.3 ha) and 37.1
ac (15.0 ha) for the Primitive Park Road and Principal Park Road, respectively. This option would avoid the
impacts to the highly valuable bear habitat associated with Hazel Creek and other interior areas of tbe project
study corridors reducing impacts due to habitat fragmentation. In addition, the reduction in direct habitat
loss would lead to a reduction in the area avoided by bears due to increased noise. There would be a slight
reduction from roadside foraging by reducing the length of the road.
Southern Option Crossing Fontana Dam (Primitive and Principal Park Roads)
As compared to the baseline Northern Shore Corridor, the Southern Option Crossing Fontana Dam would
reduce the amount of impacted bear habitat by approximately 20.7 ac (8.4 ha) for the Primitive Park Road
and 21.2 ac (8.6 ha) for the Principa] Park Road. This option would decrease the potential for impacts by
intersecting less bear habitat and utilizing existing roadways.
4.4.7.1.6 Cumulative Impacts
Some of the projects listed in Section 4.1.2 have affected or have the potential to affect black bears in the
study area. In the past, areas of historically forested landscapes have been divided by roads and reduced by
commercial and residential development. Ongoing and future projects (including NCDOT STIP projects,
local thoroughfare plan roadway projects, construction on the Ravensford site, and completion of Foothills
Parkway) would also result in habitat loss and fragmentation. Private development, although greatly limited
Clarification of the term "baseline" for this project:
The Partial-Build Alternative to Bushnell and the Northern Shore Corridor include a baseline route, as well as options to that route.
Baseline routes and options are detailed in Section 2.5 and shown on Figure 2-8. Baseline routes have been compared to existing
conditions. Impact analyses for the options are shown as a difference from the associated baseline route.
Environmental Consequences — 4-222
North Shore Road Final Environmental Impact Statement

in the study area due to the amount of publicly-owned land, would also reduce and fragment black bear
habitat.
When added to those projects it is possible that the moderate to major impacts resulting from the partial-
build and build alternatives could constitute cumulative impacts to black bear habitat in the region. These
cumulative effects have occurred and will continue to occur in the foreseeable future as a result of landscape
modification. Mitigation to protect, enhance, and restore these habitats would minimize the potential
cumulative effects on the region's black bear habitat.
4.4.7.2 Options to Address Potential Impacts
NPS would employ a sequence of avoiding adverse impacts to black bears to the extent practicable,
minimizing impacts that could not be avoided, and compensating for remaining adverse impacts via habitat
restoration. It will not be possible to avoid or mitigate for all impacts to black bears.
Avoidance Techniques
It would not be possible to completely avoid impacts to black bear habitat in GSMNP if a partial-build or
build alternative is selected. Therefore, it is important to identify subsets of habitat, such as travel corridors
and food sources, which are most important to black bear populations. Tra�el corridors can be determined
by conducting track counts and ditch-crossing surveys or monitoring with infrared cameras (Van Manen et
al. 2001). Oak and hickory forest and ridgelines are important bear habitat that the road could bypass to
avoid impacts.
Mini�nization Techniques
Various practices can be implemented to minimize impacts to black bears. Practices include warning signs
at bear crossings, barrier fencing, and regulations that prohibit feeding of bears (Wooding and Maddrey
1994). NPS already has practices in place to minimize bear-human interactions. NPS prohibits feeding of
bears and issue citations for feeding bears and for improper food storage. NPS provides bear-proof trash
receptacles at recreational facilities and has educational information on bear-human interactions throughout
the Park (NPS 2000). These programs would need to receive mare funding to be effective �ninimization
techniques for this project.
Wildlife overpasses and underpasses, along with landscape connectors, are another option for minimizing
impacts to black bears. Proper placement of wildlife crossings is essential for their success. Bears will cross
at specific locations that are correlated to habitat suitability, how the road interacts with habitat and
landscape, and roadway features that will attract or repel bears (Barnum 2003). An overpass in Banff
National Park, Alberta, Canada was readily used by black bears to cross a multilane highway (Clevenger et
al. 2001). Black bears also utilized a crossing over a tunnel on I-40 in the Pisgah National Forest, North
Carolina rather than contend with traffic (Brody 1984; Beringer 1986; Brody and Pelton ] 989). Other
Clarification of the term "baseline" for this project:
The Partial-Build Alternative to Bushnell and the Northern Shore Corridor include a baseline route, as well as options to that route.
Baseline routes and options are detailed in Section 2.5 and shown on Figure 2-8. Baseline routes have been compared to existing
conditions. Impact analyses for the options are shown as a difference from the associated baseline route.
Environmental Consequences — 4-223
North Shore Road Final Environmental Impact Statement

management tactics include eXpanding highway structures across pr�existing drainages to facilitate wildlife
movement and tunneling through ridges instead of making cuts (Ruediger 2000). To effectively implement
these techniques, coordination between experts on these techniques and NPS would be necessary to
determine the best location and rype of structures.
Mitigation Technigues
GSMNP is committed to mitigation of impacts that can not be avoided or minimized, as part of its ongoing
Park policies. It will not be possible to avoid and/or minimize all impacts to black bears or their habitat by
the selection of a partial-build ar build alternative. Mitigation of impacts that cannot be avoided ar
minimized may include funding for habitat restoration and enhancement within GSMNP; however, the sites
where mitigation could occur are limited.
4.4.7.3 Impairment Evaluation
Impairment (as defined by NPS policy) of black bears in GSMNP and along the AT would not occur under
the No-Action Alternative, Monetary Settlement Alternative, Laurel Branch Picnic Area, and the Partial-
Build Alternative to Bushnell. The Northern Shore Corridor is not likely to impair black bears in GSMNP or
along the AT based on the information obtained to date. Due to the magnitude of this alternative, it is likely
that additional NEPA documentation would be required to address sit�specific impacts not currently known,
to determine detailed avoidance, minimization, and mitigation measures as they relate to final design, and to
re-evaluate the impairment determination related to black bears.
4.4.8 Migratory Birds
4.4.8.1 Methodology for Assessing Impacts
Migratory bird species that winter and breed in the project study area are critical components of ecosystems
within GSMNP. Assessment of impacts to migratory birds and their habitats is required by law prior to any
action, as directed by Executive Order 13186 and the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA). Secondly, these
impacts are outlined due to the importance of migratory birds to biodiversiry, ecosystem functions and to
human monitoring of environmental conditions. Impacts of each of the alternatives on migratory birds were
assessed using current, scientific literature regarding impacts of human activity on migratory birds and bird
habitats and consultation with experts in the field of avian ecology. Additional details are provided in
Appendix N.
Type
Type describes whether a possible impact would benefit (be beneficial to) or harm (be adverse to) migratory
bird populations.
Clarification of the term "baseline" for this project:
The Partial-Build Alternative to Bushnell and the Northern Shore Corridor include a baseline route, as well as options to that route.
Baseline routes and options are detailed in Section 2.5 and shown on Figure 2-8. Baseline routes have been compared to existing
conditions. Impact analyses for the options are shown as a difference from the associated baseline route.
Environmental Consequences — 4-224
North Shore Road Final Environmental Impact Statement