Please Comment to NC DEQ by 2/14 on Nolichucky Track Restoration
NC-DEQ/DWR has opened up a comment period on the CSX work within the Nolichucky (link below). Comments are open until 2/14. This is our time to make our voices heard with NC regulators, so please submit a comment ASAP! Below is the comment I submitted that hits all parts open for comment so feel free to use whatever and please share this post as much as you can. This is our chance to save majority of the gorge!The project ID: 20241562
Project name: CSXT Emergency Rebuild Post Hurricane Helene
Version: 2
Link: https://edocs.deq.nc.gov/Forms/401_Public_Notice_Comments
Comment from Dennie Ashford: Hello, I would like to comment on several elements regarding DWR Project #20241562. First, I am very concerned about the proposed work in Embankment Restoration Areas (ERAs), or the large rock and cobble bars that are present throughout the gorge. All of these areas are critical for both the recreational value/quality of the river and providing natural habitat for aquatic and non-aquatic life. The currently proposed work in ERAs C & D, which are known as Rock Garden to the local community, proposes to ‘scalp’ the riverbanks of material 16” (plus or minus 4”) from the current low water level. This is an area of the river that is already challenging to navigate (hence the name Rock Garden), and removing material that will eventually widen the river by channel capture should not be permitted. Any mining/removal of material from this area should only come from above the Ordinary High Water Mark (OHWM) which should be certified by both USACE and an independent third party representing the outdoor recreation community.
Comment from Dennie Ashford: Hello, I would like to comment on several elements regarding DWR Project #20241562. First, I am very concerned about the proposed work in Embankment Restoration Areas (ERAs), or the large rock and cobble bars that are present throughout the gorge. All of these areas are critical for both the recreational value/quality of the river and providing natural habitat for aquatic and non-aquatic life. The currently proposed work in ERAs C & D, which are known as Rock Garden to the local community, proposes to ‘scalp’ the riverbanks of material 16” (plus or minus 4”) from the current low water level. This is an area of the river that is already challenging to navigate (hence the name Rock Garden), and removing material that will eventually widen the river by channel capture should not be permitted. Any mining/removal of material from this area should only come from above the Ordinary High Water Mark (OHWM) which should be certified by both USACE and an independent third party representing the outdoor recreation community.
Also, I would like to express my concern for the other ERAs that will eventually be proposed to be ‘scalped’ by CSX. All of the ERAs A&B (Maggie’s Rock), C&D (Rock Garden), E (Rollercoaster), F (Rooster Tail), G (Quarter Mile), and H (Jaws) make up the most iconic rapids within the Nolichucky Gorge. These boulder and cobble bars are absolutely critical to maintaining the recreational quality of the gorge as they make the features of the rapids, keep the river channelized at lower (summer) flows to maintain navigability, and prevent channel capture during high flow events (widening the river making it less navigable). TDEC has already set the prescient and prohibited removal of material from below the OHWM on the TN side of the gorge and NCDEQ should follow this prescient on the NC side. Also note that all of these rock and cobble bars were present in the river before the flood and are not made up of old rail road bed ballast or artificial/unnatural in any way.
I would also like to comment on the toe access roads that will be constructed across the river from ERAs E and G. Please note that these are cliffed areas next to two of the most iconic rapids on the river (Rollercoaster and Quarter Mile). Extreme care should be taken in constructing these roads for both safety of the workers and maintaining the rivers quality. If possible, it would be better to not have a toe access road in these areas at all due to nature of the river channel here.
Finally, I would like to comment on both the OHWM Identification Plan and the River Safety Plan proposed by CSX. According to the newly released (2025) USACE guidelines “If the OHWM needs to be delineated soon after an extreme flood event, then streamgage records and regional curves can be used to determine the preflood size of the channel. Satellite imagery can also be used to determine how dramatically the channel was altered by the extreme flood event.” CSX is not proposing to do either of these techniques and instead rely on field indicators. This is not an appropriate method as these indicators were whipped out from the flood, and their OHWMIP should include supporting evidence of their high water mark using a separate technique such as hydrology. These are very common calculations done in the field and should be confirmed by a third-party representing the general public. For example, CSX claims the OHWM at ~2.8’ in ERA D, where hydrology calculations show it is significantly higher at ~5.5’ according to third-party experts. This shows a dramatic underestimation of the OHWM, and is a conflict of interest for CSX.
In the River Safety Plan, CSX has proposed to close the river to both private and commercial boating. This is not only not practical, it would also destroy the outdoor recreation industry that thrives around the river. The current hazards in the river are already known by the river community, and if a short section of river needs to be closed for a short period time (to remove rail or something) that could easily be communicated on the river via flaggers or through online portals/communities.
DONE and thanks for the reminder