The following sections summarize the recreation access areas and facilities for each lake within the Catawba-Wateree Project area. The recreation use characteristics, based on the survey and interview data, are described for each lake. The boat carrying capacity is assessed for each lake based on the aerial boat count data collected during the 1999 study period. Finally, the survey respondents' comments about recreation facility needs and concerns and comments about their recreational experiences are summarized for each lake.

Lake James is the northernmost reservoir in the Catawba-Wateree system, located northwest of Morganton in Burke and McDowell counties, North Carolina. Lake James has a surface area of about 6,812 acres and 137.3 shoreline miles at full pond elevation of 1,200 feet mean sea level (msl). Table 4.1-1 summarizes the shoreline classification for Lake James, based on the SMP maps.

There are 5 developed Duke Power-owned public recreation access locations (with two leased to NCDPR) on Lake James and 1 state park, Lake James State Park. Figure 4.1-1 shows the public recreation access locations. In addition, there are 4 commercial non-residential marinas that provide additional public access on Lake James. The following sections describe the Duke-owned public access areas, summarize the facilities at the state park, and provide estimates of the number and type of commercial recreational access facilities at Lake James.

Click Here to View Full Figure 4.1-1 Lake James Public Recreation Access Areas

Existing Duke-Owned Public Access Areas

The developed Duke-owned public access areas provide about 404 acres and about 32,139 feet of shoreline frontage of public access at Lake James. Combined, the developed access areas have 13 public boat ramps, 6 loading piers, and about 23 car and 345 vehicle/trailer parking spaces. Table 4.1-2 summarizes the facilities at the public access areas.

In the 1994 SMP Duke Power proposed to improve the Canal Bridge access area (replace the 2 boat ramps with 3 new boat ramps and install a loading pier), relocate the North Fork access area (install 6 new boat ramps, 3 loading piers, 165 paved parking spaces, light the area and provide bank fishing), and construct a canoe portage. In addition, Duke Power said it would provide 180 acres at the relocated North Fork site (164 acres provided), add 109 acres to the Linville site (174 acres added) and add 25 acres to the Bridgewater Fishing Area (35 added). All of the recreation commitments from the 1994 SMP have been met.

* Vehicle/Trailer parking areas

State and County Public Recreation Facilities

There is one state park, Lake James State Park, located in the central portion Lake James and owned and operated by the North Carolina Department of Environmental Health and Natural Resources (DEHNR), Division of Parks and Recreation (DPR). Table 4.1-3 summarizes the site acreage, shoreline footage, and recreational facilities provided at the Lake James State Park (not including Hidden Cove and Canal Bridge access areas). The state has leased the Hidden Cove and Canal Bridge access areas, and these areas are run in conjunction with Lake James State Park.

Existing Commercial and Private Recreation Access

In addition to the Duke-owned public access areas and the state park, the public can gain access to Lake James through commercial non-residential and commercial residential marinas. Private access to Lake James is through private marinas and private piers along the Lake James shoreline. Table 4.1-4 summarizes the number and type of public and private commercial non-residential and commercial residential marina facilities. Table 4.1-5 shows the estimated number of private piers.

Site-Specific Descriptions of Existing Duke-owned Public Access Areas at Lake James

The following section provides a description of each Duke-owned public access area located on Lake James, including a photograph, site characterisitics, site recreation facilities, and key recreation activities.

Black Bear Access Area

The Black Bear access area is located in the upper portion of Lake James along the northern shoreline near Hankins, North Carolina. Table 4.1-6 summarizes key site characteristics for the Black Bear access area.

Hidden Cove Access Area

The Hidden Cove access area is located in the middle portion of Lake James along the southern shoreline on Highway 126 in McDowell County, North Carolina. Table 4.1-7 summarizes key site characteristics for the Hidden Cove access area. This site is leased to the State of North Carolina.

Canal Bridge Access Area

The Canal Bridge access area is located in the middle portion of Lake James on the southern shoreline, off Highway 126 in Burke County, North Carolina. Table 4.1-8 summarizes key site characteristics for the Canal Bridge access area. This site is leased to the State of North Carolina.

Linville Access Area

The Linville access area is located off Highway 126 in the lower portion of Lake James along the northern shoreline in Burke County, North Carolina. Table 4.1-9 summarizes key site characteristics for the Linville access area.

Bridgewater Fishing Area

The Bridgewater Fishing Area is located below the tailrace of Bridgewater Hydroelectric Station in Burke County, North Carolina. Table 4.1-10 summarizes key site characteristics for the Bridgewater Fishing Area.

Recreation Use

Visitation at the public access areas on Lake James was derived based on estimates of the traffic entering the Duke-owned public access areas. Total estimated visitation during the 1999 study period for Lake James at these sites was about 220,143 visits. Figure 4.1-7 shows the distribution of the visitation for each month at Lake James for the Duke-owned public access areas during the 1999 study period. A visit is considered a vehicle or vehicle/trailer entering the site for any part of a day.

Table 4.1-11 provides a summary of the estimated recreation visitation based on the traffic counter data for the sampled sites during the 1999 study period. Of the Lake James Duke Power-owned access areas, Black Bear, Canal Bridge, and Linville were estimated to have the greatest amount of use at about 37 percent, 27 percent, and 21 percent, respectively, of the total estimated use at the Lake James Duke-owned access areas.

Spot counts were conducted at two sites for Lake James, Black Bear and Linville Access areas. Table 4.1-12 lists the number of sample days per month for the spot count data collection.

Click Here to View Full

Based on survey data input, the estimated ratio for annual visits to the project area for Survey B respondents (respondents that use both public and private access areas) as compared to Survey C respondents (respondents at the public access areas) was about a ratio of 1.41 to 1. Accordingly, the estimated overall recreational visitation for Lake James for the 1999 study period totaled 311,258 visits.

The total number of surveys received for each survey is listed in Table 4.1-13. Survey D was conducted of marina operators, therefore numbers of surveys sent and received were low. Figure 4.1-8 shows the distribution of recreation activity type for Survey A, Survey B, and Survey C categories. Figure 4.1-9 shows the distribution of recreation activity type combining data from Surveys A, B, and C; spot counts; and tailrace counts. Based on the combined data sources, the primary recreation activities for Lake James during the 1999 study period were boat fishing, bank/pier fishing, motor boating, and swimming. For Lake James, respondents indicated that for Survey A, about 22 percent recreated on the islands, for Survey B about 46 percent, and 0 percent for Survey C. The combined responses to Surveys A, B, and C indicated that about 19 percent overall recreated on the islands of Lake James. The respondents indicated that the majority of the island activity included swimming, picnicking, and camping.

For Lake James, the average party size (average number of recreators in each party) for respondents to Survey A was 4.0 people, Survey B was 4.7 people, and Survey C was 2.9. The average party size for all three groups (A, B, and C) was 3.7. The average number of visits per year for Survey B was 51.6, Survey C was 20.8, and combined Survey B and C respondents was 33.6. The average length of stay for Survey B respondents was 8.3 hours, for Survey C respondents was 4.3 hours, and for combined Survey B and C respondents was 5.9 hours. In response to which lake they primarily recreated on within the Catawba-Wateree system, respondents to Surveys A and B indicated that Lake James received about 5 percent of the total visitation.

Table 4.1-14 summarizes the perceived crowding ratings for Lake James for each survey type, including responses to Surveys D and E and a combined rating for Survey A, B, and C responses. Recreators on Lake James (Surveys A, B, and C) indicated that weekday crowding was about mid-range (on a scale of 1 to 5). Weekend crowding was rated as upper mid-range for survey respondents to Surveys A and B, and low for respondents at the public access areas (Survey C). The marina owners indicated low crowding levels during the week and mid-range on the weekends, while the lake rescue and management groups indicated mid-range crowding ratings for weekdays and weekends.

* Weighted Averages

Boating Use

Figure 4.1-10 shows the distribution of boating activity type for Lake James based on Surveys A, B, and C when comparing the percentage of each boating activity type to the overall boating use. The average boating party size was 3.1 for Survey A; 3.6 for Survey B; 2.4 for Survey C; and 2.9 for the combined responses for Surveys A, B, and C. The average number of hours boating was indicated as 3.8 hours for Survey A; 5.6 hours for Survey B; 4.5 hours for Survey C; and 4.9 hours for the combined responses for Surveys A, B, and C.

Of the individuals surveyed who primarily recreated on Lake James, 100 percent of the Survey A respondents owned boats. For Survey B respondents, about 85 percent owned boats; about 76 percent of the Survey C respondents owned boats; and for the combined responses for Surveys A, B, and C, about 82 percent of the respondents owned boats.

Table 4.1-15 summarizes the distribution of boat ownership by type of boat for Lake James. Motor boats comprised over 50 percent of the boat ownership compared to other boat categories, followed by jet skis at about 14 percent. The ownership of motor boat types was about 38 percent for small motor boats (ranging between 20 feet or less in size) and about 23 percent for medium motor boats (ranging between 21 to 40 feet in size).

Figure 4.1-11 shows the period of the day the respondents indicated they primarily boated at Lake James, for Surveys A, B, and C. Lake James was indicated to be the fifth most often used boat launching lake within the Catawba-Wateree system for the survey respondents. For Survey A about 3 percent, for Survey B about 7 percent, and for Survey C about 10 percent indicated they primarily launched boats at Lake James. For the combined responses for Surveys A, B, and C, about 7 percent of the respondents launched boats at Lake James, as compared to the other lakes within the Catawba-Wateree system.

The overall boat carrying capacity is assessed based on the peak boating use estimates obtained during the aerial flyovers in the 1999 study period. The available boating acreage was adjusted from the base boats per acreage estimate (see Table 4.1-16) by the following factors (Warren and Rea, 1989):

Table 4.1-17 summarizes the assessment of the allowable overall boat capacity based on the usable water surface acreage and the boating activity mix identified from the surveys. Table 4.1-18 provides the assessment of the percent capacity of the boat use for Lake James on the peak day during the 1999 study period. Lake James during the weekday was estimated at 19 percent capacity, during the weekend at 24 percent capacity, and during the peak holiday period at 42 percent capacity for overall boating use.

The overall boat carrying capacity assessment provides an assessment of the total surface area available for boating use. To assess the areas of the lakes where higher density of boating use occurred, the general location of boating activity was recorded during the aerial flyovers for each day of aerial coverage. Figure 4.1-12 shows the location of boats during the peak use day for Lake James. Figure 4.1-13 shows the boating density on Lake James for the peak use day and denotes areas where the greatest clustering of boating activity occurred. Figure 4.1-14 shows the boat density map based on the composite of the five highest boating use days. This figure illustrates the areas where boating use most often occurred during the peak use days during the study period and provides an assessment of areas where high density boating occurred during the study period.

Click Here to View Full Figure 4.1-12 Lake James Peak Use Day Boat Counts

Click Here to View Full Figure 4.1-13 Lake James Peak Use Day Boat Density Map

Click Here to View Full Figure 4.1-14 Lake James Composite Peak Use Boat Density Map

Lake James Estimated Future Recreational Demand

Table 4.1-19 provides the population projections for the counties within 50-60 miles of Lake James reservoir. Population projections were conducted for these impact zones using population data from the Office of State Planning for the counties in North Carolina and from the Office of Research and Statistics for the counties in South Carolina for 1970 through 1990 and population projections from the U.S. Census Bureau for 2000, 2010, and 2020. An average percentage increase for each ten year period was calculated. The impact zone populations were then projected to the year 2050 using the average percentage growth for the entire time period.

Table 4.1-20 provides the estimated recreational use for the impact zone through the year 2050. Current use estimates are based on spot counts and responses to surveys. The recreational use projections were estimated by multiplying the projected population increase for the impact zone and incorporating indexed values for future recreational use for the various activities. The index values for each activity were obtained from "Outdoor Recreation in American Life: A National Assessment of Demand and Supply Trends" (Cordell, 1999). The indices are based on models that incorporate a number of variables, including age structure of the population, income, race, sex, and population density, as well as other explanatory variables. Full model parameters and estimates are available from the author.

Table 4.1-21 shows the estimated absorption percentage for the four major recreation activities that require specific lands and facilities. Picnicking, swimming, camping, and boating are activities that require specific developed facilities. The other activities listed are dispersed activities that can take place at a variety of undeveloped areas. The estimated 1999 use levels are from Table 4.1-20. The estimated demand is based on the impact zone population (population of all counties within 50-60 miles of the lake). The impact zone population is multiplied by the participation rate for the activity, which was obtained from "Emerging Markets for Outdoor Recreation in the United States: Based on the National Survey on Recreation and the Environment" by H. Ken Cordell, et al. Participation rates are for the South and are similar to 1995 North Carolina SCORP data. Specific participation rates are as follows: swimming, 37.3%; picnicking, 44.8%; camping 22.4%; boating, 45.0%. The product of the impact zone population and participation rates are then multiplied by the estimated of number of days of participation for each activity, which were obtained from the 1995 North Carolina SCORP. The 1999 estimated number of participants for each activity was then divided by the 1999 estimated demand to obtain the estimated absorption percentage. Absorption percentage is defined as the percent of total demand for the impact zone that is met by the individual lake. Table 4.1-22 provides the estimate of the recreational facilities land acreage needed to meet the future recreational demand through the year 2050. The weighted population is the estimated impact zone population multiplied by the participation rate for each activity. The facility standards and estimated acreage needs for the facility class are based on State SCORPS and FERC Guidelines for Outdoor Recreational Facilities. The facility need is the total facility need for the impact zone based on the weighted population and the facility standards. The total facility need is then multiplied by the absorption percentage to determine the facility need for Lake James. The acreage needs are then based on the Lake James facility need multiplied by per unit acreage needs that are based on State SCORPS and FERC Guidelines for Outdoor Recreation Facilities. For Lake James, it is estimated that 36 acres are required to accommodate future recreational facilities demand through the year 2050. This includes 2 acres of beaches, 3 acres of picnic areas, 12 acres of campsites, and 19 acres of boat ramps.

The estimated acreage needs for the reservoir are total usable acreage needs. Usable land acreage at existing developed public recreational facilities can be counted toward meeting these needs. Duke Power sites, county and state parks, and other private and public agencies will meet these needs. There are a number of state and county parks that are located on lands leased from Duke Power. These areas are not included in the discussion, as Duke Power owned access areas. Duke Power is expected to meet a portion of the future recreational land needs. The entire estimated need will be met by a combination of opportunities from all sources.

For Lake James, the most frequently identified recreational facility needs mentioned were for restrooms, campsites, picnic areas and bank fishing areas. The Lake James State Park is in the planning process for development of restroom facilities at the Canal Bridge access area. McDowell County has proposed to provide restrooms at the Black Bear Access Area once they lease the site and begin construction. Additional restrooms will be provided at the other access areas if they are leased by non-agency operators.

McDowell County's plans for the Black Bear access area also include 8 primitive campsites, trails and bank fishing facilities for the public. Duke Power will work with the agencies and non-agency operators of access areas to provide the additional 7 campsites for Lake James.

* Boating Activities

Recreators were asked in the surveys if the existing recreational facilities within the Catawba-Wateree system met their recreational needs. For Lake James, about 78 percent for Survey A (n=9); 77 percent for Survey B (n=39); 73 percent for Survey C (n=55); and 75 percent for combined Surveys A, B, and C (n=103) of the respondents stated that the existing facilities met their needs. The primary facilities that were indicated as needed at Lake James included more picnic areas, camping areas, swimming areas, and a jogging and bicycle trail. In response to whether additional boating facilities were needed, about 78 percent for Survey A; 64 percent for Survey B; 93 percent for Survey C; and 75 percent for combined Surveys A, B, and C, felt that the existing boating facilities were adequate. The boating facilities that were indicated as needed at Lake James included additional mooring sites and gas pumps.

About 11 percent for Survey A (n=9); 28 percent for Survey B (n=39); 13 percent for Survey C (n=55); and 18 percent for the combined Surveys A, B, and C (n=103), indicated they had a negative experience while recreating. About 22 percent for Survey A (n=9); 23 percent for Survey B (n=39); 5 percent for Survey C (n=55); and 14 percent for the combined Surveys A, B, and C (n=103), indicated they had felt jeopardized while recreating. The primary reasons listed for the negative experiences and incidences when recreators felt jeopardized were the result of reckless and inconsiderate boating and jet ski use by other recreators.

In terms of responses to additional comments, many respondents to Surveys A, B, and C commented they would like to see Lake James' undeveloped shoreline areas maintained in a natural condition and would like to see more law enforcement implemented. When asked if they could change one thing, respondents to Surveys A, B, and C stated they would like to see more controls on jet skiing on Lake James and more boat regulation in terms of speed limits on the lake. Several respondents commented shoreline development should be slowed down or stopped and more shoreline development regulations should be implemented.

Comments from the Survey D respondents indicated there should be more regulation of no wake buoys on Lake James. Respondents to Survey E felt boating traffic was congested in some areas, no wake zones should be posted at several locations, additional restroom facilities should be provided, and a flow predictability and warning system was needed at the Lake James tailrace area.