Local opposition halted CP&L's plans for pump storage power plant on Caney Fork

By Lynn Hotaling

A large headline in the June 14 edition that year "Caney Fork Is Possible Site for CP&L Generating Plant," set the stage.

Utility company Carolina Power & Light was seeking permission to conduct a study to determine the feasibility of constructing a pump storage generating plant on Caney Fork, a large tributary of the Tuckaseigee River. The proposed plant would have produced 1 million kilowatts and cost an estimated $200 million.

That initial story outlined CP&L's plan for two reservoirs, one in Caney Fork valley and a second at a significantly higher elevation on Chastine Creek on the "former Mead property" (now part of the Roy Taylor National Forest).

It was projected that the lower lake would cover some 470 acres and extend from .7 miles above Brown's Cemetery to a point just beyond the intersection of Caney Fork and Sugar Creek. The upper reservoir would have had a surface area of 180 acres.

Neither reservoir would have significant value for recreation, the story said, because of "sharp fluctuations in water level that will occur during normal plant operations," though the lakes could offer "some protection against flooding further down Caney Fork."

Pump storage plants, the report stated, operate to provide power during periods of peak consumer usage. In times of lower usage, the turbines are reversed and power made elsewhere is used to pump water back into the upper reservoir so it can be used again.

Organized resistance to CP&L's plans was first reported in the July 26 Sylva Herald. Headlined "Opposition to Power Project Formed by Caney Fork Group," that story reported that some 192 area residents had signed a petition objecting "to the fullest extent" any dam, reservoir or any hydroelectric generating plant being built in Caney Fork Valley - either by CP&L or any other company whether private, state or federal."

Copies of the petition, the report said, were sent to the Federal Power Commission, Gov. Jim Holshouser, Congressman Roy Taylor and state Senator Charles Taylor. The opposition group chose the name "Caney Fork Defense Association."

Construction of a power-producing facility on Caney Fork would require at least 20 families to move and only two had indicated a willingness to sell their property, opponents of the proposed plant said. With regard to the eight parcels needed for the project without homes on them, only one owner was willing to sell.

Noting that power company officials said the need for electricity was expected to triple over the next 10 years, one opponent said, "I know we have got to have the power. But there should be a way to cut through the red tape so that public lands could be used for such projects."

A story in the Aug. 16 edition reported that CP&L was seeking permission for additional pump storage plants in Buncombe and Madison counties, but no mention was made of the utility's Jackson County plans.

The issue came to a head during a forum sponsored by the Jackson County League of Voters reported on Oct. 25, 1973.

Power company officials stated the need for the generating plant, citing figures that indicated CP&L would need to double its generating capacity every six to seven years if demand continued to grow.

Negatives of the proposed project, according to CP&L, were relocation of some 24 residences, six mobile homes, three cemeteries, three churches and relocation of some roads.

Benefits listed by the power company included the addition of some $200 million to the county's tax base and the stimulus to local businesses during the five years of construction.

Opponents argued that the nation already wasted too much power and needed to learn to conserve energy. Cliff Calvert urged the power companies to use their money on researching alternate energy sources, like solar power, and on technology for more efficient machines. He said much of the "current demand" for electricity was created by power company ad campaigns that urged Americans to "live better electrically."

Dan Pittillo of Western Carolina University detailed the rare plant communities that would be impacted and mentioned valuable anthropological sites - some dating back to 2000 B.C. - that would be lost if the proposed power project were allowed to go forward.

The group was interested in preserving Caney Fork - "a rare, priceless and beautiful valley," said Ellerd Hulbert, another WCU professor.

Editor's note: This is the weekly installment of a review of our back issues as The Sylva Herald and Ruralite celebrates its 75th anniversary throughout 2001.

Back to Archive: 02/22/01.