Choose State Change Location

Recreational Use & Carrying Capacity Assessment

Fishing Creek Lake Existing Recreational Areas

There are 2 developed Duke Power-owned public recreational access locations on Fishing Creek Lake. There is one state park facility and one SCDNR boating access area located along Fishing Creek Lake. Figure 3.8-1 shows the public recreational access locations. There are no public commercial non-residential or commercial residential marinas located on Fishing Creek Lake. The following sections describe the Duke Power-owned public access area facilities at Fishing Creek Lake.

In the 1994 SMP, Duke Power did not propose to make any improvements to the two access areas on the lake. Duke Power did add 16 acres of land to the Fishing Creek access area.

Existing Duke Power-Owned Public Access Areas

The developed Duke Power-owned public access areas provide about 25 acres and 4,395 feet of shoreline frontage of public access at Fishing Creek Lake. Combined, the developed access areas have 2 public boat ramps and about 93 vehicle/trailer parking spaces. Table 3.8-3 summarizes the facilities at the public access areas.

Table 3.8-3
Fishing Creek Lake Duke Power-Owned Public Access Areas

Access Area Name Acreage Shoreline
Frontage (ft)
Boat Ramps Loading Piers Fishing Piers Car
Parking
(Spaces)
V/T*
Parking
(Spaces)
Cane Creek 4.1 1,129 1 0 0 0 35
Fishing Creek 20.4 3,266 1 0 0 0 58
Total 24.5 4,395 2 0 0 0 93

State and County Public Recreational Facilities

There is one state park, Landsford Canal State Park, in the northern portion of Fishing Creek Lake and one SCDNR boat access area in the middle portion of Fishing Creek Lake. Table 3.8-4 summarizes the recreational facilities provided at the Landsford Canal State Park. The SCDNR boat access provides a parking area and boat launch.

Table 3.8-4
Summary of Landsford Canal State Park Public Recreational Facilities

Site Description/Facility Number
Picnic shelter 1
Community building 1
Picnic tables 20
Nature trail 1 mile
Canoe trail 2.5 miles
Museum 1 (by appointment)
Playground 1
River fishing 1

Existing Commercial and Private Recreational Access

There are no public commercial non-residential or commercial residential marinas located on Fishing Creek Lake. Private access to Fishing Creek Lake is through private marinas and private piers along the Fishing Creek Lake shoreline. Table 3.8-5 shows the estimated number of private piers.

Table 3.8-5
Summary of Fishing Creek Lake Private Recreational Access Facilities

Type of Facility No. Private Facilities
Piers 110

Fishing Creek Lake Recreational Use Assessment

Visitation figures for the public access areas on Fishing Creek Lake were derived based on estimates of the traffic entering the Duke Power-owned public access areas. Total estimated visitation during the 1999 study period for Fishing Creek Lake at these sites was 58,802 visits. Figure 3.8-2 shows the distribution of the visitation for each month at Fishing Creek Lake for the Duke Power-owned public access areas during the 1999 study period. A visit is considered a vehicle or vehicle/trailer entering the site for any part of a day.

Table 3.8-6 summarizes the estimated recreational visitation based on traffic counter data for the sampled sites during the 1999 study period. Of the recreational visitation on Fishing Creek Lake, about 64 percent of the recreational visitation occurred at the Fishing Creek access area. Based on survey data input, the estimated ratio for annual visits to the project area for Survey B respondents (respondents that use both public and private access areas) compared to Survey C respondents (respondents at the public access areas) was a ratio of 1.1 to 1. The estimated overall recreational visitation for Fishing Creek Lake for the 1999 study period totaled 64,067 visits.

Fishing Creek Lake Boat Carrying Capacity Assessment

The overall boat carrying capacity is assessed based on the peak boating use estimates obtained during the flyovers in the 1999 study period. The available boating acreage was adjusted from the base boats per acreage estimate (see Table 3.8-7) by the following factors (Warren and Rea, 1989, as modified):

Factor Adjustment
1. Location of the lake in relation to population served 0
2. Multiple use of water area -
3. Shoreline configuration -
4. Amount of open water -
5. Amount of facility and shoreline development 0
6. Crowding rating 0
  Total -3

Table 3.8-7
Boat Type Acreage Adjustment
(Source:  Modified from Warren and Rea, 1989)

Boat Activity Type Low -4 -3 -2 -1 Base 1 2 3 4 High
Fishing 10.0 9.0 8.0 6.0 5.0 4.3 4.0 3.3 3.0 2.3 2.0
Canoe/kayak 2.5 2.3 2.0 1.8 1.5 1.3 1.1 1.0 0.8 0.7 0.5
Motor boating 18.0 17.0 15.0 13.0 11.0 9.0 8.0 7.0 6.0 5.0 3.0
Sailing 10.0 9.0 8.0 6.0 5.0 4.3 4.0 3.3 3.0 2.3 2.0
Jet skiing 10.0 9.0 8.0 6.0 5.0 4.3 4.0 3.3 3.0 2.3 2.0
Water skiing 20.0 18.0 17.0 15.0 14.0 12.0 11.0 10.0 9.0 8.0 7.0

Table 3.8-8 summarizes the assessment of the optimum overall boat capacity based on the usable water surface acreage and the boating activity mix identified from the surveys. Table 3.8-9 provides the assessment of the percent capacity of the boat use for Fishing Creek Lake on the peak day during the 1999 study period. Fishing Creek Lake during the weekday was estimated at 1 percent capacity, during the weekend at 4 percent capacity, and during the peak holiday period at 5 percent capacity for overall boating use.

Table 3.8-8
Fishing Creek Lake Boat Carrying Capacity Assessment

Boat Activity Usable Acreage Use Factor Opt. No. Boats % Usage Boat Activity Mix Persons/ Boat Total Users
Fishing 3,112 8.0 389 52% 202 3.14 634
Canoe/Kayak 3,112 2.0 1,556 14% 218 3.26 711
Motor Boating 2,282 15.0 152 19% 29 3.90 113
Sailing 2,282 8.0 285 0% - 3.36 -
Jet Skiing 2,282 8.0 285 0% - 3.85 -
Water Skiing 2,282 17.0 134 14% 19 4.39 84
Total 100% 468 1,542

Table 3.8-9
Fishing Creek Lake Estimated 1999 Study Period Boat Capacity

Peak Use Weekday % Capacity Weekend % Capacity Holiday % Capacity
No. Boats 4 1% 21 4% 23 5%

The overall boat carrying capacity assessment provides an assessment of the total surface area available for boating use. To assess the areas of the lakes with higher density of boating use, the general location of boating activity was recorded during the flyovers for each day of aerial coverage. Figure 3.8-3 shows the location of boats during the peak use day for Fishing Creek Lake. Figure 3.8-4 shows the boating density on Fishing Creek Lake for the peak use day and areas with the greatest clustering of boating activity. Figure 3.8-5 shows the boat density map based on the composite of the five highest boating use days. This figure illustrates the areas with the most boating use during the peak use days during the study period and provides an assessment of areas with high density boating during this same period.

Based on the boat capacity study in Table 3.8-9, there are no crowding problems on Fishing Creek Lake. The highest capacity reached was about 5% capacity on a holiday weekend and 4% capacity on weekends. The Peak Use Day Boat Density map, Figure 3.8-4 (for only one day), does not show any areas where the boat density is higher than the rest of the lake. When averaging the four highest boat count days, Figure 3.8-5, there are no areas where boat densities are higher than the rest of the lake. For all of the remaining times during the year the boat density levels are extremely low.

Fishing Creek Lake Estimated Future Recreational Demand

Table 3.8-10 provides the population projections for the counties within 50-60 miles of Fishing Creek Lake. Population projections were conducted for the impact zone using a combination of 1970 - 1990 population data and 2000 and 2010 population projections from U.S. Census Bureau data; these figures were used to make projections for 2030, 2040, and 2050.

Table 3.8-10
Fishing Creek Lake Estimated Population Projections for the Impact Zone

County 1999 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050
Lancaster 51,750 57,500 58,500 64,250 69,694 5,598 82,003
Chester 30,690 34,100 36,100 39,150 41,354 43,682 46,142
York 144,990 161,100 198,600 214,710 258,662 311,612 375,401
Kershaw 44,820 49,800 55,300 60,280 67,317 75,176 83,951
Lee 18,270 20,300 20,400 22,430 23,384 24,378 25,414
Fairfield 21,150 23,500 25,000 27,350 29,122 31,009 33,018
Total 311,670 346,300 393,900 428,170 489,533 561,445 645,929

Table 3.8-11 provides the estimated recreational use for the impact zone through the year 2050. Current use estimates are based on spot counts and responses to surveys. The recreational use projections were estimated by computing the projected population increase for the impact zone and incorporating indexed values for future recreational use for the various activities. The index values for each activity were obtained from "Outdoor Recreation in American Life: A National Assessment of Demand and Supply Trends" (Cordell, 1999). The indices are based on models that incorporate a number of variables, including age structure of the population, income, race, sex, and population density, as well as other explanatory variables. Full model parameters and estimates are available from the author.

Table 3.8-12 shows the estimated absorption percentage for the four major recreation activities that require specific lands and facilities. Picnicking, swimming, camping, and boating are activities that require specific developed facilities. The other activities listed are dispersed activities that can take place at a variety of undeveloped areas. The estimated 1999 use levels are from Table 3.8-11. The estimated demand is based on the impact zone population (population of all counties within 50-60 miles of the lake). The impact zone population is multiplied by the participation rate for the activity, which was obtained from "Emerging Markets for Outdoor Recreation in the United States: Based on the National Survey on Recreation and the Environment" (Cordell et al., 1996). Participation rates are for the South and are similar to 1995 North Carolina SCORP data and 1995 South Carolina SCORP data. Specific participation rates are as follows: swimming, 37.3%; picnicking, 44.8%; camping, 22.4%; and boating, 45.0%. The product of the impact zone population and participation rates are then multiplied by the estimated of number of days of participation for each activity, which were obtained from the 1995 North Carolina SCORP (days of participation numbers specific to South Carolina are not available). The 1999 estimated number of participants for each activity was then divided by the 1999 estimated demand to obtain the estimated absorption percentage. Absorption percentage is defined as the percent of total demand for the impact zone that is met by the individual lake.

Table 3.8-13 provides the estimate of the recreational facilities land acreage needed to meet the future recreational demand through the year 2050. The weighted population is the estimated impact zone population multiplied by the participation rate for each activity. The facility standards and estimated acreage needs for the facility class are based on State SCORPS and FERC Guidelines for Outdoor Recreational Facilities. The facility need is the total facility need for the impact zone based on the weighted population and the facility standards. The total facility need is then multiplied by the absorption percentage to determine the facility need for Fishing Creek Lake. The acreage needs are then based on the Fishing Creek Lake facility need multiplied by per unit acreage needs that are based on State SCORPS and FERC Guidelines for Outdoor Recreation Facilities. Current use of Fishing Creek Lake does not include picnicking or camping. It is anticipated that Fishing Creek Lake could provide opportunities that would meet a small amount of the regional demand for these activities. For Fishing Creek Lake, it is estimated that 6 acres is required to accommodate future recreational facilities demand through the year 2050. This includes 0 acres of beaches, 0 acres of picnic areas, 0 acres of campsites, and 6 acres of boat ramps.

The estimated acreage needs for the reservoir are total usable acreage needs. Usable land acreage at existing developed public recreational facilities can be counted toward meeting these needs. Duke Power sites, county and state parks, and other private and public agencies will meet these needs. Duke Power is expected to meet a portion of the future recreational land needs. The entire estimated need will be met by a combination of opportunities from all sources.

Because of Fishing Creek Lake's small size there were not a large number of survey respondents for Fishing Creek Lake, the most frequently identified recreational facility needs mentioned were for more boat ramps and toilets. In the next five-year improvement plan, Duke Power plans to replace the one ramp at the Fishing Creek access area with two new boat ramps and to install a loading pier. Duke Power does not plan to install restrooms at either of the access areas due to the vandalism the sites receive.

Table 3.8-11
Fishing Creek Lake Estimated Future Recreational Use

Activity Est. 1999 Rec Use Rec Use 2010 Rec Use 2020 Rec Use 2030 Rec Use 2040 Rec Use 2050
Motor Boating* 11,125 12,765 14,131 16,401 19,335 22,927
Boat Fishing* 34,467 42,246 48,966 58,273 67,308 76,142
Bank/Pier Fish 18,475 22,645 26,247 31,236 36,079 40,814
Lake Swimming 9,833 11,800 13,520 16,171 19,559 23,861
Canoeing* 9,833 11,658 13,100 15,747 19,635 25,412
Jet Skiing* 0 0 0 0 0 0
Kayaking* 0 0 0 0 0 0
Tailrace Fishing 2,483 3,044 3,528 4,198 4,849 5,486
Sailing* 0 0 0 0 0 0
Water Ski/Tubing* 8,642 9,916 10,977 12,740 15,019 17,810
Backpacking 0 0 0 0 0 0
Hunting 2,483 2,744 2,890 3,135 3,317 3,490
Tent/Vehicle Camp 0 0 0 0 0 0
Windsurfing 0 0 0 0 0 0
Bicycling 0 0 0 0 0 0
Picnicking 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sightseeing 2,483 3,196 3,916 4,933 6,205 7,751
Hiking 3,675 4,867 6,095 7,802 9,743 11,945
Wildlife Viewing 0 0 0 0 0 0
Using Playgrounds 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sub-total* 64,067 76,585 87,174 103,161 121,297 142,291
Total 103,500 124,881 143,370 170,636 201,049 235,638

* Boating activities

Table 3.8-12
Fishing Creek Lake Estimated Absorption Percentage for Reservoir

Activity Estimated 1999 Participants Estimated 1999 Demand Absorption Percentage
Swimming 9,833 966,061 1.0%
Picnicking 0 600,401 0%
Camping 0 233,877 0%
Boating 64,067 771,383 8.3%

Table 3.8-13
Fishing Creek Lake Estimated Recreational Facility Land Acreage Needs

A B C D E F G H
Activity Year Weighted Population Facility Standard Facility Need Facility Class Fishing Creek Lake Share Acreage
Swimming 2010 295,425 1 per 50,000 6 beaches 0.03 0.16
  2020 321,128 1 per 50,000 6 beaches 0.03 0.18
  2030 367,150 1 per 50,000 7 beaches 0.04 0.20
  2040 415,337 1 per 50,000 8 beaches 0.04 0.23
  2050 469,849 1 per 50,000 9 beaches 0.05 0.27
Picnicking 2010 295,425 1 per 500 591 tables 0.00 0.00
  2020 321,128 1 per 500 642 tables 0.00 0.00
  2030 367,150 1 per 500 734 tables 0.00 0.00
  2040 415,337 1 per 500 831 tables 0.00 0.00
  2050 469,849 1 per 500 940 tables 0.00 0.00
Camping 2010 295,425 6 per 1,000 1,773 campsites 0.00 0.00
  2020 321,128 6 per 1,000 1,927 campsites 0.00 0.00
  2030 367,150 6 per 1,000 2,203 campsites 0.00 0.00
  2040 415,337 6 per 1,000 2,492 campsites 0.00 0.00
  2050 469,849 6 per 1,000 2,819 campsites 0.00 0.00
Boating 2010 295,425 1 per 4000 74 boat ramps 3.81 3.81
  2020 321,128 1 per 4000 80 boat ramps 4.14 4.14
  2030 367,150 1 per 4000 92 boat ramps 4.74 4.74
  2040 415,337 1 per 4000 104 boat ramps 5.43 5.43
  2050 469,849 1 per 4000 117 boat ramps 6.25 6.25
          Total Acreage for 2050 6.51