Great Falls Lake and Rocky Creek Lake are located downstream of Fishing Creek Lake in Chester, Lancaster, and Fairfield counties, South Carolina. Combined Great Falls Lake and Rocky Creek Lake have a surface area of about 1,020 acres and about 37 shoreline miles at a full pond elevation of 355.8 feet MSL for Great Falls Lake and 284.4 for Rocky Creek Lake.

3.9.1 Great Falls Lake and Rocky Creek Lake Shoreline Classification

Table 3.9-1 summarizes the shoreline classification for Great Falls Lake and Rocky Creek Lake, based on the July 2001 SMP maps.

Table 3.9-1. Shoreline Classification for Great Falls Lake and Rocky Creek Lake

3.9.2 Great Falls Lake and Rocky Creek Lake Shallow Water Fish Habitat Survey

Table 3.9-2 summarizes the shoreline classification for Great Falls/Rocky Creek, based on the results of the SWFHS.

Table 3.9.2 Great Falls Lake and Rocky Creek Lake Shallow Water Habitat Shoreline Classifications (Miles)

Back to Top

3.9.3 Great Falls Lake and Rocky Creek Lake Cultural Resources Assessment

Within the Great Falls Lake and Rocky Creek Lake Study Area, there are 15 cultural resources listed in the state files. These include 11 architectural resources and 3 archaeological sites. Architectural resources include 2 single dwellings, a railroad depot, a theater, 3 cemeteries, a commercial building, a military site, and 2 industrial buildings. The architectural resources range in date from the eighteenth to the twentieth centuries, with several of the sites dating from the last quarter of the eighteenth century and the first quarter of the nineteenth century. The archaeological sites range in date from the Early Archaic to the Historic periods. In addition to the sites in the state files, there are two additional historic sites of which Duke Power staff are aware that Duke Power considers to be potential cultural resources. They are the Kingsbury cemetery and the Armory.

One of the archeological sites span from the Early Archaic through the Late Archaic periods. One site is associated with the Middle Archaic period. The third site is from the historic period.

The Rocky Mount Lock-keeper’s House site is the only recorded archaeological site listed in the National Register. It is a Lock-keeper’s house constructed in the 1840s, but it may have been moved from its original location.

Three architectural resources have been listed in the National Register. They are the Great Falls Depot, the Republic Theater, and the Republic Cotton Mill Bank & Store Building.

Back to Top

The information on both the archaeological and architectural sites from the state files is being used in preparation of the predictive model to assign the shoreline on Great Falls Lake and Rocky Creek Lake either a High, Medium, Low, or No probability for the occurrence of cultural resources. Prior to the completion of the model non-exempt activities such as excavation projects, commercial marina development, and certain conveyance projects will be provided to the appropriate SHPO for review before construction or excavation activity begins within the project boundary. To ensure the potential impact to cultural resources is properly evaluated after completion of the predictive model, Lake Management will review the predictive model for all non-exempt activities. Applicants for all non-exempt lake use permitting activities in medium and high probability areas will be required to consult with the appropriate SHPO regarding their proposal.

3.9.4 Great Falls Lake and Rocky Creek Lake Recreational Use and Carrying Capacity Assessment

Great Falls Lake and Rocky Creek Lake Existing Recreational Areas

There are 2 developed Duke Power-owned public recreational access locations on Rocky Creek Lake and there is no public access to Great Falls Lake (see Figure 3.9-1).

Click Here to View Full Figure 3.9-1. Great Falls Lake and Rocky Creek Lake Public Recreational Access Areas

Back to Top

There are no public commercial non-residential or commercial residential marinas, and no private piers on either Great Falls Lake or Rocky Creek Lake.

Existing Duke Power-Owned Public Access Areas

The developed Duke Power-owned public access areas provide 21 acres and about 2,046 feet of shoreline frontage of public access on Rocky Creek Lake and none on Great Falls Lake. Combined, the developed access areas have 2 public boat ramps and about 43 parking spaces. Table 3.9-3 summarizes the facilities at the public access areas.

In the 1994 SMP, Duke Power did not propose to make any improvements because there are only two access areas on Rocky Creek Lake.

Table 3.9-3. Rocky Creek Lake Duke Power-Owned Public Access Areas

Back to Top

Great Falls Lake and Rocky Creek Lake Recreational Use Assessment

Visitation figures for the public access areas on Great Falls Lake and Rocky Creek Lake were derived based on estimates of the traffic entering the Duke Power-owned public access areas. Total estimated visitation during the 1999 study period for Great Falls Lake and Rocky Creek Lake at these sites was 23,447 visits. Figure 3.9-2 shows the distribution of the visitation for each month at Great Falls Lake and Rocky Creek Lake for the Duke Power-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.

Duke Power-Owned Access Areas

Table 3.9-4 provides a summary of the estimated recreational visitation based on the traffic counter data for the sampled sites during the 1999 study period. There are no private piers on Great Falls or Rocky Creek Lakes. Therefore, the total visitation estimate is based on the visitation at the public access areas, which was estimated at 23,447 visits.

Table 3.9-4 1999 Rocky Creek Lake Estimated Recreational Visitation at Duke Power-Owned Access Areas

Back to Top

Figure 3.9-2 Great Falls Lake and Rocky Creek Lake Estimate of Recreational Visitation at the Duke Power-Owned Access Areas

Back to Top

Great Falls Lake and Rocky Creek Lake Boat Carrying Capacity Assessment

The overall boat carrying capacity is assessed based on the peak boating use estimates obtained during the flyovers in the 1999 study period. The available boating acreage was adjusted from the base boats per acreage estimate (see Table 3.9-5) by the following factors (Warren and Rea, 1989, as modified):

Table 3.9-5. Boat Type Acreage Adjustment
(Source: Modified from Warren and Rea, 1989)

Table 3.9-6 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. Because no respondents commented on the Great Falls Lake or Rocky Creek Lake for Surveys A and B, the percent usage distribution values were substituted from Mountain Island Lake. Table 3.9-7 provides the assessment of the percent capacity of the boat use for Great Falls Lake and Rocky Creek Lake on the peak day during the 1999 study period. Great Falls Lake and Rocky Creek Lake during the weekday was estimated at 2 percent capacity, during the weekend at 6 percent capacity, and during the peak holiday period at 8 percent capacity for overall boating use.

Back to Top

Table 3.9-6. Great Falls Lake and Rocky Creek Lake Boat Carrying Capacity Assessment

Table 3.9-7. Great Falls Lake and Rocky Creek Lake Estimated 1999 Study Period Boat Capacity

The overall boat carrying capacity assessment provides an assessment of the total surface area for available boating use. To assess the areas of the lakes with higher density of boating use, the general location of boating activity was recorded during the flyovers for each day of aerial coverage. Figure 3.9-3 shows the location of boats during the peak use day for Great Falls Lake and Rocky Creek Lake. Figure 3.9-4 shows the boating density on Great Falls Lake and Rocky Creek Lake for the peak use day and denotes areas with the greatest clustering of boating activity occurred. Figure 3.9-5 shows the boat density map based on the composite of the four highest boating use days. This figure shows the areas with the most boating use during the peak use days during the study period and provides an assessment of areas with high density boating during this same period.

Based on the boat capacity study in Table 3.9-7, there are no crowding problems on Great Falls Lake and Rocky Creek Lake. The highest capacity reached was about 7% capacity on a holiday weekend and 5% capacity on weekends. The Peak Use Day Boat Density map, Figure 3.9-4 (for only one day), does not show any areas where the boat density is higher than the rest of the lake. When averaging the four highest boat count days, Figure 3.9-5, there are no areas where boat densities are higher than the rest of the lake. For all of the remaining times during the year the boat density levels are extremely low.

Back to Top

Great Falls Lake and Rocky Creek Lake Estimated Future Recreational Demand

Table 3.9-8 provides the population projections for the counties within 50-60 miles of Great Falls Lake and Rocky Creek Lake. Population projections were conducted for the impact zone using a combination of 1970 – 1990 population data and 2000 and 2010 population projections from U.S. Census Bureau data; these figures were used to make projections for 2030, 2040, and 2050.

Table 3.9-8. Great Falls Lake and Rocky Creek Lake Estimated Population Projections for the Impact Zone

Click Here to View Full Figure 3.9-3. Great Falls Lake and Rocky Creek Lake Peak Use Day Boat Counts

Back to Top

Click Here to View Full Figure 3.9-4. Great Falls Lake and Rocky Creek Lake Peak Use Day Boat Density Map

Click Here to View Full Figure 3.9-5. Great Falls Lake and Rocky Creek Lake Composite Peak Use Boat Density Map

Back to Top

Table 3.9-9 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 computing 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 3.9-10 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 3.9-9. 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" (Cordell et al., 1996). Participation rates are for the South and are similar to 1995 North Carolina SCORP data and 1995 South Carolina SCORP data. Specific participation rates are as follows: swimming, 37.3%; picnicking, 44.8%; camping, 22.4%; and 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 (days of participation numbers specific to South Carolina are not available). 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.

Back to Top

Table 3.9-11 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 Great Falls and Rocky Creek Lakes. The acreage needs are then based on the Great Falls and Rocky Creek Lakes facility need multiplied by per unit acreage needs that are based on State SCORPS and FERC Guidelines for Outdoor Recreation Facilities. Great Falls and Rocky Creek Lakes are relatively remote areas that offer a more primitive experience. The number of roads that access areas near the shoreline is low, especially on the eastern side of the lake. The lakes receive relatively low levels of use for most activities and no camping occurs. More than one-quarter of the shoreline has been set aside for future public recreation. It would be anticipated that much of this land would remain in an undeveloped state to be used by the public for activities such as bank fishing that do not require large scale facilities. For Great Falls and Rocky Creek Lakes, it is estimated that 2 acres are required to accommodate future recreational facilities demand through the year 2050. This includes 0 acres of beaches, 1 acres of picnic areas, 0 acres of campsites, and 1 acre of boat ramps.

The estimated acreage needs for the reservoir are total usable acreage needs. Usable land acreage at existing 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 Rocky Creek Lake, the most frequently identified recreational facility needs mentioned were for picnic tables and better boat ramps. Duke Power does not propose to install picnic tables at either of the sites because of the potential vandalism that could occur at unsupervised access areas. Duke Power has planned for the improvement of the Stumpy Pond access area during the next five-year period. In addition Duke Power relocated the Debutary boat ramp because of silting problems at the old ramp location.

Back to Top

Table 3.9-9. Great Falls Lake and Rocky Creek Lake Estimated Future Recreational Use

*Boating Activities

Back to Top

Table 3.9-10. Great Falls Lake and Rocky Creek Lake Estimated Absorption Percentages for Reservoir

Table 3.9-11. Great Falls Lake and Rocky Creek Lake Estimated Recreational Facility Land Acreage Needs

Back to Top

3.9.5 Great Falls Lake and Rocky Creek Lake Proposed Recreational Enhancements

Based on comments received from the Recreation Use and Needs Survey conducted for Duke Power in 1999, the respondents indicated a need for picnicking, better boat ramps, more parking areas, more trash pick up and restroom facilities on Rocky Creek Lake. Through Duke Power’s general improvement plan the boat ramps will be improved in the next 5 years to meet the identified needs.

Additional picnicking, more parking areas and other facilities may be installed as Duke Power begins accepting access area lease requests by non-agency groups for the access areas not leased to the agencies. The non-agency groups had to wait until after June 1, 2000 (the deadline for agencies to submit an application, plan and schedule) before Duke Power would consider accepting their applications.

Based on the projected population increases, facility standards and estimated acreage needs for the facility class, approximately 2 acres will be needed through 2050 to meet future recreational facility demand. Currently 21 acres of mainland and 995 acres of islands have been reserved for recreational use. The land is good topographically and will be able to support the facilities identified by the survey respondents in the Recreation Use and Needs Study.

Currently there are two boat ramps on Rocky Creek Lake with one on each side of the reservoir. The reservoir’s small size, remote location and low visitation do not indicate a need for additional boat ramps. If a future need arises, the Debutary Creek access area can be expanded to add 1 boat ramp.

Survey respondents indicated they would like to see restrooms and better boat ramps. Duke Power does not propose to provide restrooms at these unsupervised sites because of the potential vandalism to the facilities. One boat ramp location was upgraded in the first five-year SMP and the remaining boat ramp will be improved in the next SMP period.

Back to Top

The following is a description of the known proposed recreational changes for Rocky Creek Lake:

Duke Power Access

Stumpy Pond Access Area, Lancaster County, South Carolina

Duke Power proposes to replace the existing boat ramp at this site within the next 5 years.

3.10 Lake Wateree

Lake Wateree, the second largest reservoir in the Catawba-Wateree system, is located northeast of Columbia, South Carolina in Lancaster, Kershaw, and Fairfield counties. Lake Wateree has a surface area of about 12,891 acres and 214.9 shoreline miles at full pond elevation of 225.5 feet MSL.

3.10.1 Lake Wateree Shoreline Classification

Table 3.10-1 summarizes the shoreline classification for Lake Wateree, based on the July 2001 SMP maps.

Table 3.10-1. Shoreline Classification for Lake Wateree

Back to Top

3.10.2 Lake Wateree Shallow Water Fish Habitat Survey

Table 3.10-2 summarizes the shoreline classification for Lake Wateree, based on the
results of the SWFHS.

Table 3.10-2 Lake Wateree Shallow Water Habitat Shoreline Classifications (Miles)

3.10.3 Lake Wateree Cultural Resources Assessment

Within the Lake Wateree Study Area, there are 37 previously recorded cultural resources all of which are archaeological sites. There are no architectural resources associated with Lake Wateree. The archeological resources span from the Early Archaic through the Historic time periods. In addition to the sites in the state files, there are three additional historic sites of which Duke Power staff are aware that Duke considers to be potential cultural resources. They are the canal remains below Rocky Creek Hydroelectric Project, the Harrison Cemetery, and the town site near the Cedar Creek Access Area.

The majority of the archaeological sites include occupations of the Archaic period including several single component Early Archaic and Late Archaic sites. Many of the other sites are multicomponent habitation sites with ceramic and/or lithic artifacts. There are two mounds in the area. One is located underwater. The second, known as Blanding’s Mound, is a Mississippian Mound questionable in its location. Two other sites are partially underwater.

Back to Top

There are no archaeological sites listed in the National Register. There are two sites that are potentially eligible within the study area. The first site, spanning from the Early Archaic to the Historic period, is a lithic scatter site. The second site is a Middle to Late Archaic site that contains lithic artifacts.

The information on both the archaeological and architectural sites from the state files is being used in preparation of the predictive model to assign the shoreline on Lake Wateree either a High, Medium, Low, or No probability for the occurrence of cultural resources. Prior to the completion of the model non-exempt activities such as excavation projects, commercial marina development, and certain conveyance projects will be provided to the appropriate SHPO for review before construction or excavation activity begins within the project boundary. To ensure the potential impact to cultural resources is properly evaluated after completion of the predictive model, Lake Management will review the predictive model for all non-exempt activities. Applicants for all non-exempt lake use permitting activities in medium and high probability areas will be required to consult with the appropriate SHPO regarding their proposal.

3.10.4 Lake Wateree Recreational Use and Carrying Capacity Assessment

Lake Wateree Existing Recreational Areas

There are 8 developed Duke Power-owned public recreational access areas on Lake Wateree, one state park, Lake Wateree State Park, and one SCDNR boat access area. Figure 3.10-1 shows the public recreational access locations. In addition, there are six commercial non-residential marinas that provide additional public access to Lake Wateree. The following sections describe the Duke Power-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 Wateree.

Back to Top

Existing Duke Power-Owned Public Access Areas

The developed Duke Power-owned public access areas provide about 144 acres and 9,971 feet of shoreline frontage of public access at Lake Wateree. Combined, the developed access areas have 17 public boat ramps, 3 loading piers, 1 fishing pier, and 452 parking spaces. Table 3.10-3 summarizes the facilities at the public access areas.

Click Here to View Full Figure 3.10-1. Lake Wateree Public Recreational Access Areas

In the 1994 SMP, Duke Power proposed to improve the White Oak Creek access area (replace the ramp with a 4-lane boat ramp, install 2 loading piers and pave and light the parking lot), June Creek access area (replace the 2 ramps with 2 new boat ramps and pave the parking lot) and Taylor Creek access area (replace the existing ramp with 2 new boat ramps). In addition, Duke Power said it would add 25 acres of land to the Cedar Creek access area (24 acres added) and add 20 acres of land to the White Oak Creek access area (52 acres added). All of the recreation commitments from the 1994 SMP will be completed by the end of 2001.

Back to Top

Table 3.10-3. Lake Wateree Duke Power-Owned Public Access Areas

State Park Public Recreational Facilities

Table 3.10-4 shows the site acreage, amount of shoreline and recreational facilities provided at the Lake Wateree State Park, located in the upper portion of Lake Wateree. The SCDNR Beaver Creek access area provides parking and a boat launch access to Lake Wateree.

Back to Top

Table 3.10-4. Summary of Lake Wateree State Park Public Recreational Facilities

Existing Commercial and Private Recreational Access

In addition to the Duke Power-owned public access areas and the state park, the public can gain access to Lake Wateree through commercial non-residential marinas. Private access to Lake Wateree is through private marinas and private piers located along the Lake Wateree shoreline. Table 3.10-5 summarizes the number and type of public and private commercial non-residential and commercial residential marina facilities. Table 3.10-5 summarizes the estimated number of private piers.

Back to Top

Table 3.10-5. Summary of Lake Wateree Commercial Recreational Access Facilities

Table 3.10-6. Summary of Lake Wateree Private Recreational Access Facilities

Lake Wateree Recreational Use Assessment

Visitation figures for the public access areas on Lake Wateree were derived based on estimates of the traffic entering the Duke Power-owned public access areas. Total estimated visitation during the 1999 study period for Lake Wateree at these sites was 295,183 visits. Figure 3.10-2 shows the distribution of the visitation for each month at Lake Wateree for the Duke Power-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.

Back to Top

Figure 3.10-2. Lake Wateree Estimate of Recreational Visitation at the Duke Power-Owned Access Areas

Table 3.10-7 provides a summary of the estimated recreational visitation based on the traffic counter data for the sampled sites during the 1999 study period. Of the Lake Wateree Duke Power-owned access areas, White Oak Creek and Colonel’s Creek were estimated to have the greatest amount of use at 23 percent and 19 percent, respectively, of the total estimated use at the Lake Wateree Duke Power-owned access areas.

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) compared to Survey C respondents (respondents at the public access areas) was a ratio of 1.1 to 1. Accordingly, the estimated overall recreational visitation for Lake Wateree for the 1999 study period totaled 306,076 visits.

Site	Jan	Feb	Mar	Apr	May	Jun	Jul	Aug	Sep	Oct	Nov	Dec	Total
Cedar Creek	1,138	1,272	2,948	6,999	4,071	3,795	3,020	2,320	1,578	1,148	1,011	689	29,990
Wateree Creek	828	925	2,144	5,090	2,961	2,760	2,196	1,688	1,148	835	735	501	21,811
Taylor Creek	1,407	1,572	3,645	8,653	5,034	4,693	3,734	2,869	1,952	1,419	1,249	852	37,079
Colonel's Creek	3,153	2,194	4,032	6,950	8,491	5,384	7,294	5,322	3,537	4,753	3,028	1,741	55,880
June Creek	704	1,041	2,167	4,432	2,517	2,346	1,867	1,434	976	710	625	426	19,244
White Oak Creek	3,766	2,621	4,816	8,302	10,142	6,431	8,713	6,357	4,225	5,677	3,617	2,079	66,746
Buck Hill	2,190	1,524	2,800	4,827	5,897	3,739	5,065	3,696	2,456	3,301	2,103	1,209	38,806
Lugoff	973	1,087	2,519	5,981	3,479	3,243	2,581	1,983	1,349	981	864	589	25,628
Total	14,158	12,236	25,070	51,234	42,592	32,391	34,470	25,668	17,221	18,824	13,232	8,086	295,183

Back to Top

Lake Wateree Boat Carrying Capacity Assessment

The overall boat carrying capacity is assessed based on the peak boating use estimates obtained during the flyovers in the 1999 study period. The available boating acreage was adjusted from the base boats per acreage estimate (see Table 3.10-8) by the following factors (Warren and Rea, 1989, as modified):

Back to Top

Table 3.10-8. Boat Type Acreage Adjustment

(Source: Modified from Warren and Rea, 1989)

Table 3.10-9 shows the optimum overall boat capacity based on the usable water surface acreage and the boating activity mix identified from the surveys. Table 3.10-10 provides the assessment of the percent capacity of the boat use for Lake Wateree on the peak day during the 1999 study period. Lake Wateree during the weekday was estimated at 10 percent capacity, during the weekend at 12 percent capacity, and during the peak holiday period at 18 percent capacity for overall boating use.

Table 3.10-9. Lake Wateree Boat Carrying Capacity Assessment

Back to Top

Table 3.10-10. Lake Wateree Estimated 1999 Study Period Boat Capacity

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 with higher density of boating use, the general location of boating activity was recorded during the flyovers for each day of aerial coverage. Figure 3.10-3 shows the location of boats during the peak use day for Lake Wateree. Figure 3.10-4 shows the boating density on Lake Wateree for the peak use day and denotes areas with the greatest clustering of boating activity. Figure 3.10-5 shows the boat density map based on the composite of the four highest boating use days. This figure illustrates the areas with the most boating use during the peak use days during the study period and provides an assessment of areas with high density boating during this same period.

Based on the boat capacity study in Table 3.10-10, there are no crowding problems on Lake Wateree. The highest capacity reached was 18% on a holiday weekend and 12% on other weekends. The Peak Use Day Boat Density map, Figure 3.10-4 (for only one day), does show three areas where the boat density is higher than the rest of the lake, but the acres available per boat for are adequate for most boating activities. When averaging the four highest boat count days, Figure 3.10-5, there are only two areas where boat density is higher than the rest of the lake. For all of the remaining times during the year the boat density levels are low to moderate.

Back to Top

Click Here to View Full Figure 3.10-3. Lake Wateree Peak Use Day Boat Counts

Click Here to View Full Figure 3.10-4. Lake Wateree Peak Use Day Boat Density Map

Back to Top

Click Here to View Full Figure 3.10-5. Lake Wateree Composite Peak Use Boat Density Map

Back to Top

Lake Wateree Estimated Future Recreational Demand

Table 3.10-11 provides the population projections for the counties within 50-60 miles of Lake Wateree. Population projections were conducted for the impact zone using a combination of 1970 – 1990 population data and 2000 and 2010 population projections from U.S. Census Bureau data; these figures were used to make projections for 2030, 2040, and 2050.

Table 3.10-11. Lake Wateree Estimated Population Projections for the Impact Zone

Table 3.10-12 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 computing 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.

Back to Top

Table 3.10-13 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 3.10-12. 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" (Cordell et al., 1996). Participation rates are for the South and are similar to 1995 North Carolina and South Carolina SCORP data. Specific participation rates are as follows: swimming, 37.3%; picnicking, 44.8%; camping, 22.4%; and 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 (days of participation numbers specific to South Carolina are not available). 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 3.10-14 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 Wateree. The acreage needs are then based on the Lake Wateree facility need multiplied by per unit acreage needs that are based on State SCORPS and FERC Guidelines for Outdoor Recreation Facilities. For Lake Wateree, it is estimated that 36 acres are required to accommodate future recreational facilities demand through the year 2050. This includes 2 acres of beaches, 4 acres of picnic areas, 8 acres of campsites, and 22 acres of boat ramps.

Back to Top

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 Wateree, the most frequently identified recreational facility needs mentioned were for restrooms and boat ramps. Duke Power will not be providing restrooms at unsupervised access area because of the potential for vandalism at the sites. By the end of the next five-year period, Duke Power will have improved all of the boat launching facilities on Lake Wateree.

Table 3.10-12. Lake Wateree Estimated Future Recreational Use

*Boating activities

Back to Top

Table 3.10-13. Lake Wateree Estimated Absorption Percentages for Reservoir

Back to Top

Table 3.10-14. Lake Wateree Estimated Recreational Facility Land Acreage Needs

Back to Top

3.10.5 Lake Wateree Proposed Recreational Enhancements

Based on comments received from the Recreation Use and Needs Survey conducted for Duke Power in 1999, the respondents indicated a need for camping, picnicking, swimming, gas pumps, more boat ramps, marinas, restaurants, pump out station and restroom facilities on Lake Wateree. Through Duke Power’s general improvement plan the boat ramps will be improved in the next 5 years to meet the identified needs.

Additional camping, picnicking, marinas, gas pumps and other facilities may also be installed as Duke Power begins accepting access area lease requests by non-agency groups for the access areas not leased to the agencies. The non-agency groups had to wait until after June 1, 2000 (the deadline for agencies to submit an application, plan and schedule) before Duke Power would consider accepting their applications.

Based on the projected population projections and facility standards and estimated acreage needs for the facility class, approximately 36 acres will be needed through 2050 to meet future recreational facility demand. Currently 144 acres of mainland and 94 acres of islands have been reserved for recreational use. The land is good topographically and will be able to support the facilities identified by the survey respondents in the Recreation Use and Needs Study. There is also one South Carolina State Park and one SCDNR boat ramp located on the lake.

Survey respondents indicated they would like to the proper use of jet skis and boats and more boat patrol on the lake. Additional safety items concerning safe use of jet skis and controlling boat speed will be including in the Duke Power’s lake map publication. Duke Power will support efforts to positively address the issue of additional patrolling of the lake.

The known proposed recreational changes for Lake Wateree follow:

Duke Power Access

Buck Hill Access Area, Kershaw County, South Carolina

The changes proposed by Duke Power for this site in the next 5 years are:

• Replace the existing boat ramp with 2 new ramps.
• Install a loading pier.

Back to Top

Next