25 September 1970

Environmental Statement

Western , Tennessee and Kentucky

Prepared by

U. S. Army Engineer District, Memphis, Tennessee 25 September 1970

WESTERN TENNESSEE TRIBUTARIES, TENNESSEE AND KENTUCKY

ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT

1. Protect Description. The Western Tennessee Tributaries Basin com­ prises the major portion of the area that lies along the east bank of the between Hickman, Kentucky and Dyersburg, Tennessee, and is hereinafter referred to as Basin. The recommended projects are designed to provide flood protection to highly developed agricultural areas subject to periodic flooding by overflow from inade­ quate channels and insufficient outlets and at the same time prevent the increased flows from being discharged into Reelfoot Lake, where sedimenta­ tion is already a serious problem.

The Committee on Public Works of the House of Representa­ tives requested this study by resolution adopted on 19 June 1963. The basic requirement of the resolution was to determine the advisability of modifying authorized channel improvements in the area which were never constructed because of certain objectionable aspects of the project. The Flood Control Act of 24 July 1946 authorized construction of channel im­ provements with an inlet into Reelfoot for the impounded runoff and seep­ age in the vicinity of Lake No. 9 , which lies about 8 miles directly north of the lake. It further authorized the improvement of the lower end of Running Reelfoot Bayou, which is the outlet for Reelfoot Lake, and the construction of Harris Ditch to provide drainage for an area southwest of the lake. The Flood Control Act of 3 September 1954 authorized improve­ ment of Bayou du Chien, which is a to Reelfoot Lake, and the upper portion of Running Reelfoot Bayou. Except for Harris Ditch, the authorized works directly relate to Reelfoot Lake. Improvement of Running Reelfoot Bayou is the only authorized flood control item which has been const .-ucted. The channel improvements for Bayou du Chien and the Lake No. 9 area would bisect extensive wooded marsh lands to dump directly into the lake, and this is the aspect to which overwhelming opposition has been generated.

Construction of both of the channels was opposed by local interests as well as the Tennessee Game and Fish Commission and the U. S. Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife. The objections of these interests concerned primarily the elimination of wildlife habitat as a result of channel right- of-way clearing in the lower reaches and increased sedimentation resulting from construction and subsequent degradation of the improved channels.

Field studies to determine the feasibility of modifying authorized channel improvements have been completed. Recommendations in the plans of improvement, which are now being reviewed in the 0MB office, eliminate the objectionable features of the authorized project. Two separate projects, entitled "Lake No. 9-Bayou du Chien" and "Mud Lake" are now recommended as the Lake No. 9-Bayou du Chien project was formulated to provide the needed flood control that would be effected by the authorized improvements on those streams with provisions for discharging their runoff into the Mississippi River instead of into Reelfoot Lake. The plan includes channel improvement beginning at the Illinois Central Railroad tracks at Hickman and generally following the Bayou du Chien channel for 6.3 miles downstream to a diversion and from this point a diversion channel for 3.0 miles in a northwesterly direction to enter the Lake No. 9 channel in the Fish Pond area. From this point, the Lake No. 9 channel will be improved, consisting of enlargement and realinement downstream to the north end of Lake No. 9. Another new channel will be constructed 2 miles below the Kentucky-Tennessee State line to divert drainage north to the pumping station. From a point along this channel and immediately north of the state line, a diver­ sion ditch will be constructed to the Mississippi River levee where a gravity outlet structure and 500 cfs pumping station will be provided to discharge into an outlet ditch to the Mississippi River. The benefit- to-cost ratio of the project is 1.2.

The Mud Lake project is completely divorced from the problem of siltation in Reelfoot Lake and the recommended improvement of Lake No. 9 and Bayou du Chien. The Mud Lake project consists of a pumping station to evacuate ponded water from that area when high stages on the Missis­ sippi River prevent gravity drainage. A new inlet channel will be con­ structed from a point about 2,000 feet upstream from the existing Mud Lake culverts in a northerly direction to the Mississippi River levee, sand a 150 cfs pumping station without a gravity outlet will be con­ structed to discharge into the Mississippi River. The benefit-to-cost ratio of the project is 1.1.

2. Environmental Setting Without the Project. The Reelfoot Lake Basin is an area located in the extreme northwest corner of Tennessee and southwest comer of Kentucky, which is tributary to the . The area is bounded on the east and south by the watershed divide of the Obion River and the north and west by Mississippi River project levees. The basin extends 35 miles in a southerly direction from Hickman, Kentucky to the Obion River, has a maximum width of 20 miles and covers a total area of 280 square miles. About 130 square miles are in the alluvial plains of the Mississippi River while the remainder of the basin to the east consists of rolling ridges and hills.

There are no major urbanized areas within the Reelfoot Lake Basin. Principal trade centers are Tiptonville and Ridgely, Tennessee, and Hickman, Kentucky, all having a 1 9 7 0 population of less than 3,500. About 60 percent of the total 1 9 7 0 population of the basin is classified as rural. Practically all tillable lands in the alluvial valley portion of the basin are in cultivation. Primary land use is for the production of row crops, hay and pasture land. The leading crop in acreage produced is soybeans, followed by cotton and com. In addition to farming, stock raising and dairying as the primary source of income to basin inhabitants, many people supplement their income by employment in local factories. A dominant feature of the basin is Reelfoot Lake itself, consist­ ing of a 23,000-acre complex of water, cypress , saw grass and water lillies. The lake has long been a haven for sportsmen, natural­ ists and general recreationists. The excellence of its fishery has earned it the unofficial title of "world's largest natural fish hatchery." Adjoining lands are unique in their variety of plant, bird and animal life. Scenery is one of the lake's greatest assets. The natural beauty of the area with its primitive wilderness quality is novel in this sec­ tion of the country. Since its birth as a result of the New Madrid earthquake in 1812, Reelfoot Lake has diminished from over 40,000 sur­ face acres to an open water surface of about 18,000 acres. Siltation and vegetation encroachment have turned vast areas of the lake into wooded marshland. Sedimentation is a menace to the life expectancy of Reelfoot. Based on past siltation trends which have reduced lake capac­ ity by 1,000 acre-feet per year, the lake will cease to exist in 70 years.

From a regional viewpoint, Reelfoot Lake provides an excellent habi­ tat for waterfowl and it annually attracts usage from areas far removed from the basin itself. Because of the excellent fishing and waterfowl hunting opportunities and the esthetic appeal, a high value has been placed on the existing wildlife habitat. The Reelfoot State Wildlife Management Area and the Reelfoot National Wildlife Refuge encompass a major portion of the lake area.

Other areas of significant fish and wildlife value within the basin are the channels of Bayou du Chien, Lake No. 9 and the Fish Pond area. Flows of the upper portion of Bayou du Chien are low to almost non­ existent during drouth periods, resulting in fish and wildlife habitat of low quality. However, the lower reaches which are affected by Reel­ foot Lake contain high quality habitat. lake No. 9 is an old partially filled chute of the Mississippi River, now entirely cut off from the river b y a levee. This open, shallow lake (maximum depth is 7 feet) is about 2-1/2 miles long, 100 to 900 feet wide, and 200 acres in area. The lake provides poor to fair quality fishing and hunting. Fish Pond is a low marshy area about 3 miles north of Lake No. 9 and is considered to be of minimal value as fish and wildlife habitat. Mad Lake Ditch is of little or no value from a fish and wildlife standpoint.

Mineral resources in the basin consist of sand, clay and gravel. There are no known historical or archeological sites in this area that would be endangered by the proposed projects. No rare or endangered species of botanical and zoological origin are known to exist in the project area.

3. Impact Statement. The following information is furnished in response to Section 102(2)(c) of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969:

a. Identify "the environmental impacts of the proposed action." The physical changes in the existing environmental setting are as follows: The Lake No. 9-Bayou du Chien project will result in channels being enlarged to bottom widths varying from 6 to 70 feet with spoil being mounded on either or both sides of the excavation. About 17 acres of woodland and 243 acres of cleared land will be required for channel excavation and spoil placement. Spoil adjacent to the Highway 94- crossing will be given special landscaping consideration. Though spoil will not be spread throughout the remainder of the project area during construction, the local farmers will likely accomplish this individually in order that they may place the spoil areas in cultiva­ tion. A plug will be constructed in the existing channel of Bayou du Chien immediately downstream from the point of diversion over to Lake No. 9. This will result in flows into Lake No. 9 which normally would have gone into Reelfoot Lake. The construction of the 500 cfs pumping station will prevent increased flooding in the Lake No. 9 area as a result of the diversion. The pumping station will also prevent normal Lake No. 9 stages from exceeding the storage capacity of the lake and overflowing into Reelfoot Lake. Diversion of these flows should result in a decrease of sedimentation in Reelfoot Lake.

The Mud Lake project will result in about 2,000 feet of minor channeling to convey flows from Mud Lake Ditch to a 150 cfs pumping station. The pumping station will prevent excessive overbank stages in the Mud Lake area during periods when Mississippi River stages are high.

The construction of the channels will accelerate run off from the adjacent areas and will increase the concentration of flows in the Lake No. 9 area. The pumping station will discharge from Lake No. 9 into the Mississippi River resulting in a decrease in stages of Lake No. 9 and no material change in Mississippi River stages or flows. There will be a slight local lowering of ground water levels adjacent to the improved channels. The quality of water in the channels will be lowered during construction but should be restored after the channels have had a chance to stabilize.

The major environmental impact of the recommended plan will be the preservation and improvement of agricultural lands and the elimination of many marginal operations and attendant poor land management prac­ tices which result from the economically depressing effects of annual crop flooding. The protection provided the southwest portion of Hickman, Kentucky, will allow the residents, generally of the lower income group, opportunity to improve the appearance of their general surroundings.

The jobs generated by the construction of the project and the reduc­ tion of flood damages to crops will have a favorable impact on the low level of incomes throughout the entire project area.

b. Identify "any adverse environmental effects which cannot be avoided should be project be implemented.11 Implementation of the recommended improvements will have minor adverse effects on environ­ mental quality, considerably less than would result from construction of the authorized projects. The area primarily affected by the recom­ mended plan is mostly agricultural. Woodlands are limited to a narrow, intermittent margin of willow and hardwoods along the stream bank and small remaining pockets of cypress around Lake No. 9 and in the marshy area comprising Fish Pond. Some of this timber will be lost in the course of channel improvement. It is feasible to preserve the identity of Fish Pond, other than the portion affected by channel requirements, by spoil placement and a water level control structure. Though not considered major, perhaps one of the greatest impacts of the recommended plan will be the increased sedimentation of Lake No. 9.

Adverse environmental effects will result from the loss of a por­ tion of the marshy woodland adjacent to Lake No. 9 in the vicinity of Fish Pond through which Bayou du Chien would be diverted and losses to stream bank timber where it occurs within the channel right-of-way. Although damage will occur to fish and wildlife in the Lake No. 9 area with implementation of the recommended plan, most of this damage could be prevented by providing gates on the outlet structure to regulate and maintain minimum water levels in the lake during winter months.

c . Identify "alternatives to the proposed action." An alterna­ tive to the recommended plan would be to forego construction of the proposed project. This alternative would probably retain the exist­ ing environment for many years hence. There is little likelihood that the authorized improvements of Bayou du Chien or Lake No. 9 would be constructed for many years to come even though the flood control pro­ vided by these projects is needed. The need to modify these projects for the protection of Reelfoot Lake is recognized by most people con­ cerned and for this reason construction of these projects as presently authorized is not desired. However, to forego construction of the recommended improvements will result in continued damage to the local farming operations. Increased income and employment which enhance man's social well-being would be the basic tradeoffs for retaining the existing environmental setting. Since the recommended plans do not cause significant adverse changes in the existing environment, it is the preferred plan of action from an overall environmental point of view.

The flatness of the topography in the alluvial valley limits the alternative solutions to the problem of flooding. Other alternatives to the recommended plan such as varying the design dimensions of the channel improvements, different channel alinements, gravity outlets with and without pumping stations of various capacities are engineer­ ing solutions evaluated in the planning process. However, these alternatives do not appear to offer any significant environmental advantages that would favor any of these choices over the plan which has been selected in the planning process. d . Discuss "the relationship between local short-term uses of man's environment and the maintenance and enhancement of long-term productivity." The Reelfoot Lake Basin serves two primary interests, agriculture and recreation. The latter is centered around Reelfoot Lake itself and is complimented by adjacent lands administered by the Department of Interior, Tennesseee Game and Fish Commission, and the Tennessee Department of Conservation. Remaining lands are primarily agricultural and there is little or no changed land use anticipated as a result of the project.

The recommended flood control plan will enhance agricultural lands and will contribute significantly to the economy of the basin with no damage to environmental quality of Reelfoot Lake or related public lands. The plan recommends mitigation measures for the relatively small damages which will occur to fish and wildlife in the vicinity of Lake No. 9 and has been either approved or concurred with by respons­ ible Federal,-^St^te and local interests. The recommended plan provides for maintenance tod enhancement of long-term agricultural productivity, and at the same time considers the rapidly growing recreation demands of the people of western Tennessee by reducing damages to the unique ecological and esthetic characteristics of Reelfoot Lake from sedimentation.

e . Identify "any irreversible and irretrievable commitment of resources which would be involved in the proposed action should it be implemented. The plan recommended will provide total benefits in excess of economic and natural resources committed to its implementa­ tion. Furthermore, the plan provides these benefits with a minimum negative impact on environmental quality. Land and water resources which will be altered or displaced by channel enlargement, realinement and diversion cannot be considered to be entirely irreversible or irretrievable either during or at the end of the economic life of the project. The present flow of water through Bayou du Chien into Reel­ foot Lake can be restored simply by removal of the earthen plug at the point of diversion. The channel created for implementation of the plan if left unmaintained for a period of years would, through natural degradation and siltation, eventually return to a near-natural condi­ tion of the area affected. Lake No. 9 and Fish Pond would also be restored to the equivalent of their present condition by removal of the drainage outlet through the Mississippi River main line levee. Perhaps the nearest thing to an irretrievable condition would be the siltation of Lake No. 9. Even this condition could conceivably be reversed by dredging, though the economic feasibility of such an action is unlikely. The only clearly irretrievable or irreversible commitment that can be recognized at this time is the labor resources associated with construction of the improvements.

4. Coordination of Plan. IXiring the planning process, the proposed plan of improvement was coordinated with interested Federal and State agencies and local interests. Comments concerning the environmental aspects of the project were received from the Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife of the Department of Interior, Tennessee Game and Fish Commission, and Kentucky Department of Fish and Wildlife Resources. Each of these agencies stated their appreciation of our efforts to pre­ serve the quality of Reelfoot Lake and gave their support to the entire plan with one minor exception.

The Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife and the Kentucky Depart­ ment of Fish and Wildlife Resources emphasized the necessity of main­ taining normal water levels in Lake No. 9 to minimize losses in that area. Since Lake No. 9 will serve as a segment of the proposed drainage channel, it will be necessary to essentially drain the lake to provide flood protection during the cropping season. Studies show that waterfowl and fishery losses in Lake No. 9 will be relatively minor in comparison with other environmental aspects of the project and no specific mitigation measures were included in the recommended plan. The necessity of drain­ ing Lake No. 9 during the cropping season precludes the need for guaran­ teeing a minimum water level sufficient to support a fishery. However, we believe that waterfowl losses can be prevented by maintaining water in Lake No. 9 during the winter months (to include the waterfowl hunting season). The Kentucky Department of Fish and Wildlife Resources has been informed that should they desire that Lake No. 9 be flooded during the winter, meetings could be held during the post-authorization design studies to assure that the necessary water level maintenance capability is a part of the project. Also during these design studies, the possi­ bilities of minimizing losses to Fish Pond by strategic placement of spoil could be considered.

The report was also reviewed by the Bureau of Outdoor Recreation and the Federal Water Quality Administration, and they indicated little interest in the proposed project.

At the conclusion of the study, the recommended plan was publicly presented at a meeting in Tiptonville, Tennessee, on 26 March 1968. Announcement of the meeting was widely advertised and representatives of Federal, State and municipal governments, and agricultural interests were in attendance. In general, the recommended plans were enthusiasti­ cally supported by all present and no environmental problems were brought up at this meeting.

Attached are copies of comments and reports received from the follow­ ing agencies:

(1) Bureau of Outdoor Recreation, Southeast Regional Office.

(2) Bureau of Outdoor Recreation, Lake Central Region. (3) Federal Water Pollution Control Administration (Federal Water Quality Administration).

(4) Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife.

(5) Tennessee Game and Fish Commission.

(6) Kentucky Department of Fish and Wildlife Resources. UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR BUREAU OF OUTDOOR RECREATION SOUTHEAST REGIONAL OFFICE •10 NEW WALTON BUILDING ATLANTA, GEORGIA 30303

Your reference: LMMED-P

District Engineer U.S. Army Engineer District, Memphis 668 Federal Building Memphis, Tennessee 38103

Dear Sir:

Receipt is acknowledged of Mr. J. W. Dement's letter of September 3, 1968, and a draft copy of your review report entitled "Western Tennessee Tributaries, Tennessee and Kentucky," concerning drainage in Lake and Obion Counties, Tennessee, and Fulton County, Kentucky.

This office concurs with your alternate plans for the removal of drainage during high Mississippi River stages through outlet structures installed in the Mississippi River levees. Necessary pumping stations will also be installed. The adoption of this alternate plan will prevent damage by the project to the fishery at Reelfoot Lake.

Based on information received by Mr. Wilson of this office in a telephone conversation with Mr. Stephen S. Wilson of your staff, it is apparent that the recreation potential of the project area is limited. We, therefore, have no further comments at this time.

We appreciate the opportunity of reviewing this report and would appreciate your keeping us informed of any changes.

Sincerely yours,

Aotltoy K. Woo

October 9* 1968

District Engineer U.S. Army Engineer District, Memphis 668 Federal Office Building Memphis, Tennessee 38103

Dear Sir:

Thank you for the opportunity of reviewing your report on Western

Tennessee Tributaries, Kentucky and Tennessee. As indicated during our October 2 telephone contact with Mr. Paul Metz of your staff, we have no comments to offer.

Sincerely yours,

ROMAN H. KOENINGS Regional Director • .

John D. Cherry Acting UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR FEDERAL WATER POLLUTION CONTROL ADMINISTRATION SOUTH CENTRAL REGION 1402 ELM S TR E E T, 3RD FLOOR DALLAS. 76202

October 2, 1968 Your Reference: IMED-P

District Engineer Memphis District, Corps of Engineers 668 Federal Building Memphis, Tennessee 38103

Attn: Mr. J. W. Dement Chief, Engineering Division

Dear S i r :

In accordance with your letter of September 3, 1968, this office has reviewed the draft of your report entitled, "Western Tennessee Tributaries, Tennessee and Kentucky."

It is found that this report covers an improvement plan for flood control for the area involved; water supply storage is not part of the plan. The pumping of the flood waters from outside the levees of tiie Mississippi River into the river will not have an affect upon the quality of the water.

It is pointed out that the provisions of Executive Order 11288 are to be complied with.

Sincerely yours,

WILLIAM C. GALEGAR Regional Director UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE BUREAU OF SPORT FISHERIES AND WILDLIFE MUCHTRBC'MVKNTH aUlLDINfl ATLANTA. GEORGIA 30323

March 13, 1968

District Engineer U. S. Army, Corps of Engineers Memphis, Tennessee

Dear Sir:

Reference is made to Mr. Gene A. Dodson*s letter of September 26, 1967, anito discussions with members of your staff regarding planning for the Mississippi River, Western Tennessee Tributaries, Lake and Obion Counties, Tennessee, and Fulton County, Kentucky, drainage and flood control project. Your studies of this project are in response to a resolution by the Committee on public Works of the House of Representatives, adopted June 19, 1963. Our study of this project is in cooperation with the Kentucky Department of Fish arid Wildlife Resources and the Tennessee Game and Fish Commission, and in accordance with the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (48 Stat. 401, as amended; l6 U.S.C. 66l et seq.).

According to project information provided us, you are considering several alternate plans for providing improved drainage and flood control in three segments of the Reelfoot Lake Basin in northwestern Tennessee and south­ western Kentucky. These areas are: (l) the Bayou du Chien drainage in the alluvial area between Hickman, Kentucky, and Reelfoot Lake, (2) the Lake No. 9 drainage area lying northwest of Reelfoot Lake and Bayou du Chien, and (3) the Mud Lake drainage area lying south of Reelfoot Lake between Ridgely, Tennessee, and the Mississippi River.

Already authorized as part of the Mississippi River and Tributaries project are plans which provide for the enlargement and cleanout of 16.5 miles of the Bayou du Chien channel from near Hickman, Kentucky, to Reelfoot Lake and the excavation of a drainage channel from Lake No. 9 in Kentucky along Black Bayou to Reelfoot Lake. The Bureau has previously studied and reported on fish and wildlife resources in relation to flood control and drainage plans affecting Reelfoot Lake and vicinity, including the above- authorized features, in our report of June 1954. This study was followed by our report of March 1957, evaluating fish and wildlife resources associated with Reelfoot Lake and presenting recommendations for control of sediment entering the lake from tributary hill streams.

In order to preserve Reelfoot Lake and associated high-value fish and wildlife resources which have great significance locally and nationally, a project for control of upland, sediment entering Reelfoot Lake from Indian Creek and Reelfoot Creek has been authorized for implementation by the Soil Conservation Service in cooperation with the State of Tennessee, through the Game and Fish Commission. This project, involving the construction of sediment-detention reservoirs and the establishing of other erosion-control features in the Reelfoot Lake watershed, has been initiated.

At the public hearing held in Tiptonville, Tennessee, January 13, 1965, the Tennessee Game and Fish Commission and other fish and wildlife and recreation interests voiced objection to the construction of drainage channels in Bayou du Chien and in the Lake No. 9 area draining into Reelfoot Lake, because they will add unwanted sediment and turbidity. Fish and wildlife interests expressed a desire that wherever possible, flood control and drainage affecting the Reelfoot Lake area be accomplished in a manner resulting in minimum damage to fish and wildlife and recreation resources of Reelfoot Lake.

To overcome objectionable features of the authorized project, you are presently considering alternate plans to provide for drainage and flood control in the Bayou du Chien, Lake No. 9, and Mud Lake areas by means of floodgates, pumping plants, and connecting channels, discharging floodwaters directly into the Mississippi River. Under these plans, Bayou du Chien downstream from Kentucky State Highway No. 9 ^ would not be affected by channel works, and the authorized drainage canal from Lake No. 9 to Reelfoot Lake would be omitted. Specifically, the alternate plans you are considering in detailed studies include the following items which would be constructed separately or in various combinations (plate l):

1. The Hickman plan, providing a floodgate and pumping station in the Mississippi River levee a short distance below Hickman, Kentucky, furnishes an out­ let for upper Bayou du Chien. Under this plan, a dam would be constructed in Bayou du Chien below the floodgate to aid in diversion of headwater drainage to the Mississippi River.

2. The Lake No. 9 plan, providing for construction of about 5 miles of drainage channel entering the up­ stream end of Lake No. 9 in Kentucky; about 2.5 miles of drainage channel in Tennessee flowing toward Lake No. 9J a floodgate and pumping station in the Mississippi River levee near the Kentucky-Tennessee State line; and a connecting outlet channel from the lower end of Lake No. 9 . ' 3* The Bayou du Chien diversion plan, providing for the cleanout and enlargement of a segment of Bayou du Chien from near Hickman, Kentucky, to above the Kentucky State Highway No. 94 crossing; a new diversion cnannel connect­ ing this segment of Bayou du Chien to the Lake No. 9 drainage area; the essential features of the Lake No. 9 plan, including the floodgate and pumping station and associated drainage system; and a closure dam in Bayou du Chien below the point of diversion.

4. The Mud Lake plan, providing for about 4 miles of channel enlargement and a pumping station at an existing floodgate in the Mississippi River levee west of Ridgely, Tennessee.

Essentially all of Reelfoot Lake, including 23,178 acres of the lake, islands, and shorelands, is owned by the State of Tennessee and is administered by the Tennessee Game and Fish Commission and the Tennessee Department of Conservation. About 9*585 acres of the lake and adjacent lands in Tennessee have been acquired by the Bureau for administration as the Reelfoot National Wildlife Refuge. The Bureau has since acquired about 2,040 acres of the Reelfoot Lake area in Kentucky as an addition to Reelfoot Refuge, and a separate tract of nearly 1,850 acres, in Tennessee below Reelfoot Lake, known as the National Wildlife Refuge.

Our prior studies and reports on Reelfoot Lake have indicated the high value of fish and wildlife resources of the Reelfoot Lake area. Reelfoot Lake annually winters large concentrations of migratory ducks and geese, and Reelfoot National Wildlife Refuge is an important unit in the system of national wildlife refuges maintained for protecting and managing water- fowl resources. High-quality public waterfowl hunting is provided on parts of the lake managed by the Tennessee Game and Fish Commission. Reelfoot Lake is highly productive of both sport and commercial fish, and is widely known for its exceptionally good sport fishing. Both public . and privately-operated facilities for hunting, fishing, and other recreation are highly developed at Reelfoot Lake.

An indication of the economic value of Reelfoot Lake to the local economy is shown in a survey conducted by this Bureau and the Tennessee Game and Fish Commission in i960. The results of this survey are tabulated in table 1. The Tennessee Department of Conservation is presently conducting a new survey of natural resources and recreational use of Reelfoot Lake, and is preparing plans for future development of recreational facilities.

Bayou du Chien, originating near Hickman, Kentucky, drains about 3*200 acres of loessial uplands and about 19*200 acres of Mississippi River bottom lands lying between Hickman and Reelfoot Lake, or about 15 percent of the total Reelfoot Lake watershed (154,000 acres). Bayou du Chien presently contributes water with tolerable turbidity and little sediment load to Reelfoot Lake during periods of significant rainfall and flooding. Table 1 Reelfoot Lake's Contribution to Local Economy^

Waterfowl Hunting:

Ducks killed - 1958-59 29,025 Geese killed - 1958-59 1*07 Total hunters hunting on Reelfoot 11,448 Average daily hunters 164

Total income derived from hunting, not $220,538 including duck picking and hunting licenses

Duck Picking 7,841

Turtle Harvest 24,950

Fur Harvest 8,370

Sport Fishing:

Fish Caught 510,224 lbs.

Fishing Trips 104,954

Spent for food, bait, souvenirs, etc. $448,055 Paid for boat rentals 178,422 Guides, lodging, etc. 409,318

Total spent by sport fishermen ($1,033,795)

Commercial Fishing:

Total fish caught 392,627 lbs. Total income to fishermen l6^ per lb. $ 62,820 Total income to fish dealers 10^ per lb. 39,263

Total fish caught by sports and commercial fishermen 902,851 lbs.

Grand Total of Revenues from Reelfoot Lake $1,397,577

1958-59 income $1,397,577 1957-58 Income 1,257,220 Increase $ 140,357

1. The above information compiled by personnel of Reelfoot National Wildlife Refuge, Samburg, Tennessee, in cooperation with Tennessee Game and Fish Commission. During dry periods, this stream becomes intermittent. Lake No. 9 is an ’old chute of the Mississippi River, now entirely cut off from the river by a levee. This open, shallow lake (maximum depth is 7 feet) is about 2j miles long, 100 to 900 feet wide, and 200 acres in area. Drainage from its 7,700-acre watershed, primarily farmlands, finds its way to Reelfoot Lake through several small natural drainage courses.

The Bureau believes that the initial construction and future maintenance of the authorized channel enlargement project on Bayou du Chien and the authorized drainage canal extending from the Lake No. 9 drainage area in­ to Reelfoot Lake will result in damages to Reelfoot Lake and associated fish and wildlife habitat. Damage to the lake area will result from channel enlargement, excavation, and spoil deposition which will destroy desirable natural qualities of affected wild areas. The enlarged channels, draining from intensively developed agricultural lands, will convey storm runoff at an accelerated rate and will aggravate turbidity problems in the lake. Part of the authorized channel works will traverse lands owned by the State of Tennessee and this Bureau, and will disrupt fish and wildlife and recreational management objectives and plans for these lands. Therefore, this Bureau and the Tennessee Game and Fish Commission do not favor the authorized plan.

It is our opinion that three of the alternate drainage plans considered in your study; i.e., the floodgate and pumping plant near Hickman, the Lake No. 9 plan, and the Bayou du Chien diversion plan could be constructed and operated so as to result in little adverse effect on Reelfoot Lake and associated fish and wildlife resources.

The Mud Lake plan, designed to provide improved drainage for essentially agricultural lands below Reelfoot Lake near Ridgely, Tennessee, would not affect Reelfoot Lake, and would not significantly affect fish and wildlife resources in the Ridgely area. Fish and wildlife interests would not object to this plan.

The channel works associated with the Hickman floodgate and pumping station and the Bayou du Chien diversion would affect only the upper reaches of Bayou du Chien where fish and wildlife habitat is of low quality. The lower reaches of Ba.you du Chien, which have high quality fish and wildlife habitat, would remain essentially unaltered. Except during extreme floods, the more turbid drainage from the loessial hills would be diverted to the Mississippi and would not enter lower Bayou du Chien. This would be of some advantage in improving Reelfoot Lake. We believe that quantity of water diverted from Reelfoot Lake during nonflood periods by either alternate plan would be of little significance, in view of the inter­ mittent character of Bayou du Chien and the minor part of the total Reelfoot Lake drainage area and water supply that would be diverted.

A serious loss of wildlife resources that will result from the authorized plan would be prevented by the Lake No. 9 plan. Lake No. 9, which provides about 200 acres of poor to fair quality fishing and waterfowl hunting area, would be damaged by the channel work, in that the normal water level would be lowered and the area of the lake diminished. If effective measures to maintain normal water levels in Lake No. 9 could feasibly be included in the project design, most of the damage to fish and wildlife resources of this area could be prevented. The inclusion of such measures for maintaining satisfactory minimum levels should be considered during further detailed design studies of this project.

In accordance with your request, we are providing our evaluation of fish and wildlife resources which will be affected by the authorized project and the alternate plans being considered. Our estimate of changes in values which will result from project construction and maintenance under the authorized and alternate plans is summarized in table 2.

The Bureau concludes that implementation of the authorized project plan for flood control and drainage will result in serious and irreplaceable losses of fish and wildlife resources associated with Reelfoot Lake. Implementation of the alternate plans for the Bayou du Chien and Lake No. 9 drainage area considered in this report would result in negligible damage to fish and wildlife resources. Their adoption in lieu of the authorized plan would be acceptable to all fish and wildlife interests, concerned. The Bureau has no objection to the Mud Lake plan.

This report has been reviewed and concurred in by the Tennessee Game and Fish Commission and Kentucky Department of Fish and Wildlife Resources. Copies of letters from the State agencies are attached.

Your efforts to preserve the quality of Reelfoot Lake and the assistance provided us by your staff during our preliminary studies of this project are appreciated. We shall continue to work with you as may be appropriate during further project planning, in the interest of preserving and developing fish and wildlife resources in the Reelfoot Lake areas of Tennessee and Kentucky.

Sincerely yours,

C. Edward Carlson Regional Director Table 2 Annual Fish and Wildlife Evaluation of Reelfoot Lake and Vicinity Without and With Authorized Project Plan and Alternate Project Plans T "2 Without Project w/Authorized Proj. Loss W/Altem. Plans^ Loss Item Use Harvest Use Harvest Use tla rvest Use Harvest Use Harvest (M.D.) (Lbs.) (M.D.) (Lbs.) (M.D.) (M.D.) (Lbs.) (M.D.) (Lbs.)

Wildlife Resources

Big game Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible> Negligible Small game Not Eval. Not Eval. Negligiblea Not Eval. Negligible Waterfowl 12,000 10,000 2,000 11,800 200 Fur animals Not Eval. Not Eval. Negligible1 Not Eval. Negligible

Totals 12,000 10,000 2,000 11,800 200

Fishery Resources

Sport 120,000 108,000 12,000 119,700 300 Commercial 300,000 270,000 30,000 298,000 2,000

Totals 120,000 300,000 108,000 270,000 12,000 30,000 119,700 298,000 300 2,000 Waterfowl Use Reelfoot Nat'l Wildlife Refuge Without Project W/Authorized Proj. Loss- W/Altem. Plans Loss

Duck-days use 25,000,000 22,500,000 2,500,000 25,000,000 None

Goose-days use 2,200,000 1,980,000 220,000 2,200,000 f None

1. Lake No. 9 plan with Bayou du Chien diversion. 2. Losses to Lake No. 9. These losses could be prevented by including in project design features to maintain normal minimum water level in Lake No. 9* Negligible losses to Reelfoot Lake.

rCHNESSEC GAME ABO FISH CO iMISSIl(f D oaott m o o . • m cmmcn m m * m aim viui, trm ^

ERS o r COMMISSION W M A LL8Y. JA . . JACBBON M • H SON AN O N . COOBBV'LkC *AftL T SM ITH BBlBTOk Ok W M A L A C K D U A N . . . CAHOCM |M iTH M OW AAO . . BWWABBI 3 C LO W * CHATVAHAABA H U G H r MCOAOC . . . AkCAA OR DACCA AlCKtTtON . . . k a a m v il lB AAV 8 TA O M S . - . «CMB«MA

AAtD W BTANACAAY. DlMCVAB

DAVID M. AOOOAICM. AM T Di«

MAAOLD K W AAVK ABB V DtB March 8, 1968

Mr. Ernest C. Martin Assistant Regional Director Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife Peachtree-Seventh Building Atlanta, Georgia 30323

Dear Mr. Martin:

We concur with and think that your report for the Mississippi River, Western Tennessee Tributaries, Lake and Obion Counties, Tennessee, and Fulton County, Ken­ tucky, is an excellent one. We will plan to have a representative from the Game and Fish Commission attend the public hearing scheduled in late March.

lours very truly,

Harold E. Warvel, Acting Director Tennessee Game and Fish Commission fish a w i l d l i f e * COMMISSION SV DISTRICTS it'-BO’Ct P P » 0 u c » « •• o P P C o w i n ' O p c i n v i a C o - «•■!(•< c P o 'm o t t o m . l o w ivikki .'» -D * j i a i l Sa.aTo. Co l l - bi* 9t«- 0« Face Sc»oo»>«*. Da* Pioac 6 I » - j O « « FcaTHf BtTON. LIK iMOTON Q'aoiTT, H'l'ao BtM-O* Poacar C Wt»«. Gm 'IOn 9TM-0a J L. S lG a a lL L . M»ae«f»TIB Commonwealth or Kentucky State Office Bldg Annex Department or Fish & Wildlife Resources Frankfort Ky a o so i M inor C l a r k , C ommissioner Phone 564-3400 March 5, 1968

Mr. Ernest C. Martin Assistant Regional Director Bureau of Sport Fisheries k Wildlife Peachtree and Seventh Building Atlanta, Georgia 30323

Dear Mr. Martin:

W e have reviewed the copy of your proposed report for the Mississippi River, Western Tennessee Tributaries, Lake and Obion Counties, Tennessee, and Fulton County, Kentucky, which was trans­ mitted by your letter of February 26, 1968. W e concur with the findings presented therein.

W e recognise the importance of the diversion of Bayou du Chien from Reelfoot Lake and we are happy that this appears to be feasible without essentially altering the lower reaches of Bayou du Chien. W e would like to emphasize the necessity of maintaining normal water levels in Lake No. 9.

Sincerely,

Minor Clark Commissioner