20080303 Ver 1_WRC Comments_20080324

n R - 0:03
®North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission
March 24, 2008
Ms. Loretta Beckwith
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Regulatory Branch
151 Patton Avenue, Room 208
Asheville, North Carolina 28801-5006
Ms. Cyndi Karoly
NCDENR, Division of Water Quality, 401 Unit
1628 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1628
SUBJECT: Legasus of North Carolina, LLC, Mr. Robert Corliss Individua1404 Permit Application
Webster Creek golf courses and subdivision, Jackson County
Action ID No. 2008-00492
Dear Ms. Beckwith and Ms. Karoly:
Wetland and Natural Resource Consultants requested an Individua1404 Permit for Mr. Robert Corliss of
Legasus of North Carolina, LLC. Biologists with the North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission
(Commission) visited the project area and are familiar with the fish and wildlife resources in the region.
Comments from the Commission are provided under provisions of the Clean Water Act of 1977 (33
U.S.C. 466 et. seq.) and the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (48 Stat. 401, as amended; 16 U.S.C.
661-667d).
The project would require about 3,890 feet of stream and 0.48 acre of wetland fills to build roads and golf
courses in the 1,810 acre Webster Creek development near Tuckaseegee in Jackson County. Most
streams on the property are in the Webster Creek, Mine Branch, Mill Creek, Cherry Gap Branch, and
Cullowhee Creek watersheds. Most impacts would be for the championship golf course in the Mill Creek
and Mine Branch watersheds. To offset impacts, 4,542 feet of stream restoration or enhancement is
proposed on site. There also would be 40,689 feet of stream channels formally preserved, though only
14% of those would maintain a buffer in excess of 30 feet. A 0.96 acre area between two ponds would be
restored or enhanced as a wetland, though this may actually constitute creation.
Mailing Address: Division of Inland Fisheries 1721 Mail Service Center Raleigh, NC 27699-1721
Telephone: [phone] Fax: [phone]

Legasus of North Carolina, LLC Page 2 March 24, 2008
Jackson County
Good quality, cold water streams originate on the property. Sampling by the consultant found
reproducing rainbow and brown trout in Webster Creek, but no fish in the Mill Creek watershed. Mine
Branch, where a large portion of the impacts are proposed, was not sampled, so whether it supports trout is
unknown. Most tributaries draining this property should support trout in their lower reaches; the headwater of
Cullowhee Creek supports wild brook trout. The project may harm trout habitat directly from work in
Webster Creek as well as indirectly because of sedimentation there and in other streams. Any stream work
such as culvert placement and replacement permitted in this development should be prohibited during the
October 15 to April 15 trout spawning season.
The streams on the property ultimately drain to the Tuckaseegee River, which is designated an Aquatic
Significant Natural Heritage Area of national significance because of numerous rare aquatic species. It also is
designated critical habitat for the federally endangered Appalachian elktoe (Alasmidonta raveneliana) under
the Endangered Species Act. Other rare aquatic species in the river include hellbender (Cryptobranchus
alleganiensis, FSC, NC-SC), wounded darter (Etheostoma vulneratum, FSC, NC-SC), olive darter (Percina
squamata, FSC, NC-SC), and wavy-rayed lampmussel (Lampsilis fasciola, NC-SC). As with trout, the
project has the potential to harm habitat for these species if it causes downstream sedimentation.
Because the project could harm such important aquatic habitats on and off the property, it is particularly
important that direct stream losses be avoided or minimized as much as possible. In steep terrain, finding
suitable areas for buildings and parking presumably should be easier than finding relatively gently sloped
fairway and driving range locations. Nevertheless, as stated in the application narrative, holes 1 and 18 and
the range, which together account for about 50 % of the entire development's stream impacts, were situated so
they would be near the site chosen for the club house. The Commission believes that a thorough reevaluation
of site designs is warranted in the vicinity of the club house because so much of the overall impacts are
associated with such a small part of the golf course. Impacts for holes 1, 7, and 11 also might be reduced by
using play-over rather than piping and by narrowing and slightly shortening fairways (e.g. hole 11). Use of a
bridge for crossing number 21, which is the main channel of Mill Creek, would eliminate stream fills by
another 100 feet.
There also is what appears to be pond or lake proposed for the golf course, but information about how water
levels would be maintained, if it is used for irrigation, was not noted in the application. If it draws water from
adjacent streams, then it could cause considerable stream flow reductions during droughts. Some streams in
the region were dewatered or had flow reduced considerably during the recent drought because of
withdrawals for golf course irrigation. Therefore, the Commission recommends that intake design and
operation, if applicable, be evaluated to help ensure that water quality standards in the affected streams can
be perpetually maintained.
This project will likely cause sedimentation, increased run-off, and stream channel instability because of steep
topography, extensive soil disturbance for road and fairway construction, no or too narrow of riparian buffer
protection, and the limited effectiveness of erosion control practices in these situations. Commission staff has
observed this in similar recent development projects in the region. Moreover, staff has documented declines,
and in some cases extirpation, of trout populations under these circumstances (Brown 1982; Mickey 1993;
Besler, NCWRC unpublished data 2002; McHenry, NCWRC unpublished data 2007).
Best management practices that exceed conventional approaches can reduce the magnitude of aquatic habitat
degradation from projects like this. Design standards for sensitive watersheds (15A NCAC 04B .0124) and

Legasus of North Carolina, LLC Page 3 March 24, 2008
Jackson County
staged construction where only a few acres are disturbed/unstable at any one time can reduce erosion
and sedimentation. Similarly, the Commission recommends that a post construction stormwater management
plan be required and that stormwater conveyances discharge to vegetated filters, rather than directly to
streams. Drainage from relatively small roadway areas via inside road ditches causes most of the increased
peak discharge and resulting channel degradation of high elevation mountain streams in developed
watersheds.
Overall, the compensatory mitigation proposal, which mostly involves enhancement of riparian vegetation
and spot bank repairs on Webster Creek and some of its tributaries, should improve aquatic habitat for trout
and reduce downstream sedimentation. However, with any on-site enhancement work, it is important that the
ecological damage it causes not exceed the anticipated long-term benefits. Wherever riparian vegetation
(except grass) is present, small equipment and hand labor should be used to construct in-stream structures and
to slope banks. Maintenance of existing vegetation is important because it promotes the stability of channel
work and provides seed sources for natural regeneration, organic material to the stream, and riparian habitat
complexity until planted vegetation matures. Also, where trees must be removed, their use in vanes or other
structures should be considered because they create good habitat and can also reduce the need to bring in rock
with heavy equipment.
Although the proposed stream enhancement will should improve stream habitat, the credit requested for this
work is not commensurate with the functional improvements anticipated and the level of effort that is
warranted to achieve them. For example, about 67% (26081inear feet of Enhancement I) would involve
enhancement work that only restores the profile and possibly dimension on a fraction of the stream footage in
each segment (see Enhancement Overview plan). Most of the enhancement reaches would only receive, and
only need, riparian vegetation planting, particularly on much of the lower and middle Webster sections. Yet,
a 1 or 1.5 multiplier is used to calculate the credit for the entire reaches. The calculated credit is excessive
under current guidance because relatively little effort is necessary to achieve the functional improvements.
Moreover, the enhanced functions, if achieved, would not directly compensate for the complete loss of stream
and riparian habitat function from the stream filling in the development. It also is important to consider the
potential adverse effects that the short golf course, which would be constructed upstream of the primary
enhancement area, will have on the anticipated stream improvements.
As with the enhancement work, excessive credit is also requested for preservation of avoided stream channels
and riparian areas. The Commission supports the use of preservation as a component of compensatory
mitigation proposals when the integrity and functions of the streams or wetlands are vulnerable to future
impacts and when they will actually be preserved. In this case, the streams proposed for preservation have
been avoided to authorize permitted impacts and already have buffers subject to some protection under trout
buffer and water supply requirements administered by Jackson County. Moreover, as already described, the
quality of the preserved streams will to some extent degrade as a result of sedimentation and stormwater run-
off from the development. Another consideration is that preserved, and in some cases restored or enhanced
streams, become bisected by culverts, including very long culverts for golf course construction. This
diminishes the functions of fragmented stream reaches because of impeded or blocked aquatic life movements
and reduced organic material inputs and invertebrate drift to reaches downstream of culverts. Therefore,
preserved streams and buffers for projects like this should receive little credit towards compensating for
permanent stream losses.

Legasus of North Carolina, LLC Page 4 March 24, 2008
Jackson County
Therefore, the Commission recommends that the mitigation proposal be augmented with additional
opportunities off the site, such as through the Ecosystem Enhancement Program or a mitigation bank. At a
minimum, impacts should be offset as outlined by current guidance at a 2:1 ratio using restoration and/or
enhancement. As an example, if the 3,890 feet of stream impacts are permitted, then there should be at least
7,780 feet of restoration work on stream reaches that meet the guidance criteria.
The Commission requests that the concerns outlined above be addressed before issuing a permit for the
proposed project. Commission staff also requests additional opportunity to further assist the Corps and
Division of Water Quality with a review of additional project information and plans should they become
available. Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment on this permit action. If there are any
questions regarding these comments, please contact Dave McHenry at [phone] extension 24.
Sincerely,
`~''.' .
Dave McHenry
Mountain Region Coordinator
Habitat Conservation Program
cc: Mrs. Becky Fox, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Mr. B. Tompkins, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Asheville
Mr. Kevin Barnett, NC Division of Water Quality, Asheville
Wetland and Natural Resource Consultants
Citations
Brown, R.J. 1984. The decline of wild trout populations resulting from accelerated erosion caused by
mountain development on the Elk River. North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission,
Federal Aid in Fish Restoration Project F-24-9, 8 p.
Mickey, J.H. 1993. Monitoring of wild trout populations in the upper Mitchell River impacted by
accelerated sedimentation caused by the "Old Beau" development, Alleghany County. Summary
Report, North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission, Raleigh, 8 p.