This ecosystem is unique, the only one like it in the world. It is incredibly beautiful, diverse and fragile. Any disruption of this system or damage to any one species will change the natural balance forever. Governments and politicians at all levels must begin to view these untouched, natural environments as invaluable so that this and future generation can observe and learn about the importance of biodiversity to the sustainability of life on earth, including human life. We owe it to future generations to do no further construction of roads in what is the largest road less area in the southeastern United States .

I have been on Hazel creek many times and those who have been there know that it is not as "Pristine" as some would have us believe. The past sawmills and home sites have left a lot of "Historical Litter" and we need to be honest about how the land was able to recover in 40-50 years to look as great as it does.

The physical damage to the environment of the Park is substantial and understated in the DEIS. And since the cash settlement is the preferred environmental alternative, shouldn't that be given primary consideration? After all this is a national park, the most visited national park in the country, and the area in question is the most “wild” of the entire park. Read the DEIS. It's an amazing document in its statement of the adverse environmental impacts, which I simply don't see how the NPS can ignore. You should act like stewards of the land and protect the Park, not run a road through the heart of its largest roadless area.

Some of these negative impacts that have been described as severe and irreversible include impacts on Visitor Use, Visitor Experience, Archeological Resources, Historical Resources, Air Quality, Wetlands, Streams, Acid Drainage, Heavy Metals, Fishing, Aquatic Wildlife, Vegetation Communities, Terrestrial Wildlife, Black bears, Migratory Birds, Invasive exotics, Aesthetics and Visual Resources and the Appalachian Trail. And the listing of these impacts is by no means a complete accounting of the environmental damage that would result from building this road. There are so many intangible and unforeseen consequences that can not be completely identified and quantified. It is also important to point out that the estimated cost of the full build alternative does not include mitigation costs, which will be substantial.

Nature is easy to destroy, it is so fragile, all of our chemicals and synthetics for daily use are doing irreversible damage. I think that the only way to change this way of thinking is going to be drastic-hands-on in being able to actually see the “before and after” examples, education to young people, teenagers and elementary children, this needs to happen on a regular basis. A field trip once or twice a year for a small percentage of children is not enough to make an impression on them.

Construction of the project would cause irreparable harm to the fragile ecosystems in the area. The individuals who signed the initial agreement in the 1940's to build the road could never have envisioned the environmental pressures the Park would be suffering today.

By now, the forest has grown and building the road would be an environmental disaster.

There's no reason to destroy the environment of the park, which includes neotropical migrating songbirds, the water table, acid drainage from the new road construction, not mention the fact that the road would cost so much money and the park can't even maintain the road it has.

I have observed that there will be impacts just as there were impacts when the first 6-7 miles were built. Nature did not go away, adaptations have occurred, the fittest species have survived and natural selection is at work. I doubt that this road will bring the end of the world to the GSMNP or the AT.

The Park Service study showed there are major adverse long-term impacts from any construction on every resource that it examined, including land use, visitor experience, archeological and historical resources, air quality, wetlands, streams, fishing, aquatic wildlife, migratory songbirds, black bear and other wildlife, rare plant species, the Appalachian Trail, the newly created Benton MacKaye Trail and other trails, view sheds, native flora and fauna due to increased exposure to exotic species.

Commercialization and traffic add to already unhealthy levels of pollution, both in the air and water, and I don't see their efforts to mitigate this damage being a substitute for the natural state of the park.

We urge the Planning Group, a thorough assessment of ecological impacts to the Park's wilderness areas and wildlife, and of impacts to national and regional, recreation and historic assets (such as the Appalachian Trail) before decisions on constructing a Fontana Lake, North Shore Road be made.

With the world supply of potable water declining, building of the North Shore Road only agitates further the divide. This essential part of life. Humans do not have the right to overrun the planet with their selfish intent just because they have the physical ability to do so. I have lived in the area all my life and seen much development. I have used the forests for survival and recreational use.

It is indeed a rarity to have a lake this size without a road around it. It is a treasure to have access to this unspoiled wilderness area without the blights of pavement and the noise and exhaust of automobiles.

The acid drainage that will occur from the cuts and builds that go into the stream; the leaching of heavy metals from these cuts and builds that ends up in the streams; impacts on fishing, butterfly life, vegetation communities, exotic species; and aesthetics and visual resources. The DEIS summarizes this by stating construction of any of the partial build or build alternatives would result in adverse impacts to the geology, soil, back country campsites, trails, visual resources, cultural resources and natural resources that cannot be avoided or fully mitigated.

Regardless of what price the cost-benefit analysis and DEIS places on the value of this part of the park remaining in its current state, the price is infinitely too low. There is no way to place a dollar value on this national jewel or the value of the loss that will be sustained if the proposed road is put through. The few living people who want the road to visit their family cemeteries should look forward, not backward and should be thrilled to have their ancestors buried in this gorgeous park setting. The road would only bring more congestion and air pollution to an already over polluted park. The last thing this country needs is another Gatlinburg area with its clogged streets and foul air. The alternative of a cash settlement to Swain County could be used wisely to upgrade Bryson City and turn it into a more sophisticated town similar to West Jefferson to the north.

A road built along the shore on the park side of the lake will not harm the environment in any way. The Cades Cove Loop Road, the Blue Ridge Parkway and the 441 Highway going into Tennessee has not hurt the environment, nor will the North Shore Road.

People desire to enjoy settings of quality. The portions of land preserved in wilderness is small!! The Southern Appalachian Mountains attract tourists and the dollars that come with them. Why do we have to encroach on this spectacular beauty. Building roads cause changes in water flow patterns. They break the continuity of the land which affects wildlife migrations (migratory routes). Automobiles will cause pollution and garbage along highways. This is the watershed for many towns (water quality). Highways and subsequent automobiles increase pathogens that affect our trees, vegetation and wildlife. The erosion will be sure death for our native trout. The silt and erosion will travel through the headwaters of the smallest streams to the tributaries of large streams. Compaction of the soil is detrimental to our trees and vegetation. CO2 and global warming are extreme issues! Our mountain ecosystem buffer can absorb some of this carbon, but not all! “On a human time scale, this stockpile of CO2 is permanent,” says Peter Tans, a researcher with the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. “We're wreaking havoc with atmospheric equilibrium.”

The DEIS states that there will be major, adverse, long-term, often permanent impacts to soundscapes (dBA's rising from a current “serene” level of 43.3 to over 80 dBA during the 15 years of construction).

Land Use - Any build option would introduce cuts and fills, roadway, retaining walls, bridges and vehicular traffic in a natural environment, loss of wilderness - more than 5000 acres, elimination of 31 miles of trail and several backcountry campsites; Visitor Experience - Loss of solitude and the primitive experience are the major “hits” here. The noise of car and motorcycle traffic would reduce the experience of solitude; Archaeological and Historic Resources - adverse impact to six known archeological and/or historical resources by either road construction option; Air quality - significant reduction; Wetlands - permanent adverse impact to up to 15 wetlands, 13 of which are rare; Streams - many stream crossings, with water quality threatened; Vegetation Communities - impact of fragmentation not addressed. These impacts are long-term and not mitigable. Above all, the GSMNP is lost as an entity.

There is some mention occasionally of the minor impact, largely associated with the Laurel Branch picnic area or the monetary settlement. There's no doubt that environmentally this would be a disaster for that area.