Long Branch Lake, East Fork, Little Chariton River, Missouri

FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT LONG BRANCH LAKE EAST FORK. LITTLE CHARITON RIVER MISSOURI Prepared by U.S. Army Engineer District Kansas City, Missouri October 1971 Long Branch Lake, East Fork, Little Chariton Lver, Missouri ( ) Draft (X) Final Environmental Statement Responsible Office: U.S. Army Engineer District, Kansas City, Missouri 1. Name of Action; (X) Administrative ( ) Legislative 2. Description of the Action: Initiate construction on receipt of funds for a dam and lake in Macon County. 3. a. Environmental Impacts: Provide flood protection, water quality control, fish and wildlife conservation, water supply storage and recreation; inundate 20 miles of stream while encouraging intensified agricultural practices downstream and residential and commercial development in the area. b. Adverse Environmental Effects: The lake will inundate 2,430 acres of land, eliminate 20 miles of East Fork of Little Chariton River and associated habitat, and adversely affect forest cover and fish and wildlife habitat downstream. 4. Alternatives; a. Alternative lake sites. b. Doing nothing. c. Small Impoundments in upstream area. d. Nonstructural measures. e. Channelization. 5. Comments Requested; U.S. Department of the Interior Missouri Water Resources Board National Park Service Missouri Department of Bureau of Mines Conservation Bureau of Outdoor Recreation Missouri Inter-Agency Council Bureau of Sport Fisheries and for Outdoor Recreation Wildlife Missouri State Park Board U.S. Department of Agriculture Missouri Department of Health Soil Conservation Service Conservation Federation of Missouri Forest Service Missouri Chapter, American Fisheries Environmental Protection Agency Society Missouri Chapter, Wildlife Society 6. Draft statement to CEQ 29 July 19LL Final statement to CEQ £ 7 JAN 197 2 FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT LONG BRANCH LAKE EAST FORK. LITTLE CHARITON RIVER. MISSOURI 1. Project description. The Long Branch Lake project was authorized by the Flood Control Act of 1965 (Public Law 89-298) and is now in precon struction planning. The project, with a benefit-cost ratio of 2.1 at 1971 price levels, was authorized to include flood control, water supply, recre ation, fish and wildlife conservation, and water quality control in the Little Chariton River basin. The Long Branch damsite is located on the East Fork of the Little Chariton River in south-central Macon County about 3 miles northwest of the city of Macon, Missouri. The damsite is located about 2 miles downstream from the junction of East Fork and Long Branch, a principal tributary of East Fork. The dam would consist of an earthfill embankment 74 feet high and 3,550 feet long. The outlet works would be located near the toe of the right abutment and would consist of a concrete arch conduit and an uncontrolled hooded drop inlet structure with provision for controlled low flow and downstream water supply releases. On the basis of present planning, the lower intake would be located at eleva tion 767.0 feet, mean sea level, (m.s.l.), and the upper intake at eleva tion 779.0 feet, m.s.l., to permit mixing of any thermally stratified water to maintain downstream water quality. The project would control the runoff from a drainage area of 109 square miles, creating a lake of 2,430 acres at the top of the multipurpose pool and 3,670 acres at full pool. The capacity of the top of the multipurpose pool, elevation 791 feet, m.s.l., would be 35,000 acre-feet. The capacity of the flood control, at the top elevation of 801 feet, m.s.l., would be 30,000 acre-feet. The project would involve the purchase of 7,975 acres of land in fee simple. ^*^®H®ltiary studies indicate four public use areas need to be developed com prising approximately 1,500 acres above multipurpose pool level, including some 300 acres above the normal acquisition line. Environmental setting wlthout the project. Significant channelization has been carried out in the lower basin to reduce flooding. Impoundments in the basin are limited to small water supply reservoirs with the exception of Thomas Hill Reservoir, which was developed privately on the Middle Fork of the Little Chariton River about 20 miles southwest of the Long Branch l*®ke site. The reservoir is used for cooling water supply for a power generating plant of the fossil fuel type. Because groundwater supplies are either of insufficient volume or too highly mineralized for municipal and industrial use, surface water resources are used as the primary water source in the area. High grade bituminous coal is the most important mineral resource in. the basin. Coal, with an average sulphur content of about 4 percent, is strip-mined in the basin south of the Long Branch Lake site to supply markets in Iowa and Missouri. The value of the mineral and related employment is important to the economy of the basin. Historically, acid drainage from the mines destroyed much of the aquatic life in the lower portion of Middle and East Forks of the Little Chariton River. Some acid drainage is continuing in the East Fork. Since construction of Thomas Hill Reservoir on the Middle Fork, acid drainage has ceased to be a problem on that stream. Based on the 1970 census, the population of the general project area has remained relatively stable over the past several years. Agriculture continues to be the main land use in the rural areas, while some small industries are located in nearby towns. Not much change in land use could be expected in the future without the project. The East Fork and Long Branch are naturally meandering streams and have low gradients resulting in extensive flooding of farmlands during periods of high runoff. In recent years, timber clearing has resulted in logjams which have increased flooding and contributed to extensive bank cutting. The wooded bottom lands along the stream, with the heavy oak stands in the steeper tributary draws, provide good habitat for small game and other '"Midlife, The cultivated lands between the stream and wooded uplands pro vide a good food source for wildlife. Muskrat, raccoon, beaver, and mink are the principal economically important fur animals. The basin furnishes habitat for expanding white-tailed deer and wild turkey populations and high quality nesting habitat for an indigenous wood duck population as well as a wide variety of migratory birds which include waterfowl, marsh birds, and shore birds. Snipe and woodcock are common along the valleys during the fall migration period. The Missouri Department of Conservation owns and operates the Atlanta Wildlife Area at the upper end of the Long Branch Lake site. This 1,845-acre area contains excellent habitat for bobwhite quail, cottontail rabbits, and other upland game. The area is important in providing public hunting opportunities in this section of Missouri. An archeological reconnaissance of the Long Branch Lake site has been com pleted by the University of Missouri. No archeological sites were found on the flood plain, but seven small camping sites revealing the presence of prehistoric man were located on lands above the flood plain. A detailed study will be m..de prior to impoundment. 3. The environmental Impacts of the proposed action, a. Impacts. (1) The project would provide downstream flood protection in the Little Chariton Pdver basin, resulting in intensified agricultural practices, loss of wildlife habitat, and loss of forest cover. (2) The lake of 2,430 acres (at top of multipurpose pool) would provide opportunity for public recreational use. (3 The project would destroy through inundation 20 miles of free- flowing stream and associated fish habitat and 2,430 acres of wildlife habitat. There would also be losses of forest land, pasture, and cropland through inundation. (4) The project would adversely affect, through periodic inunda tion, about 40 acres of the Atlanta Wildlife Area, owned and operated by the Missouri Department of Conservation. (5) Harvesting of timber crops above the multipurpose pool elevation on project lands would be eliminated. (0) Water supply storage would be provided. (7) Low-flow augmentation would be provided. (8) Mud flats in the upper reaches of the lake would be developed. (9) There would be a change in ownership of land from private to public. b . Discussion of impacts. (1) The downstream flood protection would allow a higher economic production for the affected agricultural units through reduction of crop losses caused by flooding. However, the reduction in flooding would also encourage landowners to clear streambanks and lowland areas and put them into production. Although difficult to predict accurately, a loss of wild life habitat would result in the downstream areas in the future. Even though water quality would be improved, loss of streambank vegetation would contribute to deterioration of the downstream fisheries through increased erosion and siltation. Clearing by agricultural interests would cause the loss of forested areas eliminating much of the future timber harvest in the downstream area. (2) The impoundment would create a 2,430-acre lake (at multipurpose pool elevation) which would furnish potential for water-based general recre ation, lake fishing, and certain types of hunting. Preliminary plans call for the development of four public use areas. Currently, only one sponsor for recreational development has indicated an intent to share in the costs and to administer one area. Although turbid water conditions probably would be the rule, initial use at Long Branch Lake with four public use areas developed is estimated at 250,000 recreation days while ultimate use is projected at 650,000 recreation days annually. In addition, this type of lake has typically induced residential development in the area, providing weekend recreational opportunities for city-based residents. The lake would provide needed fishing opportunities in north-central Missouri. Game fishes which could be expected in the lake include large- mouth bass, white crappie, white bass, bluegill, and channel catfish.

Load more