STOP THE NEW PISGAH TOWER

About the Forest Service's Ill-Considered Approval of
a New Television Tower on Top of Mount Pisgah

On May 22, 2001, the US Forest Service decided to allow WLOS to construct a new television transmission tower on top of Mount Pisgah. The Blue Ridge Parkway and several conservation organizations have opposed building a new tower on this extremely prominent, highly-visited peak right next to the Parkway and, at a minimum, have urged the Forest Service publicly to explore alternative locations. The Forest Service has refused even to consider less sensitive sites.

1. Why is Mount Pisgah important?

Mount Pisgah is one of the most beautiful and most visited spot on the Blue Ridge Parkway in western North Carolina. Just 20 miles west of Asheville, this is one of the highest peaks in the area and, aside from the existing television tower, it affords panoramic views for many miles in all directions. Mount Pisgah is the site of the Pisgah Inn, a campground, and many hiking trails. For all of these reasons, it is an extremely important and sensitive site for tourism, recreation, and scenic beauty.

2. Why is the new tower significant?

The existing television tower, at 271 feet in height, festooned with broadcasting equipment, and surrounded by related buildings, is an intrusive scar on this otherwise panoramic landscape. The existing tower was constructed in 1954, before the Blue Ridge Parkway and the tourism and recreation it brings had developed to their present levels. If the Forest Service approves of WLOS investing in and building a new tower, planned to be 274 feet high, that tower is likely to deface this special mountain top for another fifty years or so, condemning our children to the same degraded views that we have endured for decades.

3. What does the Blue Ridge Parkway think about the tower?

In public comments submitted to the Forest Service, the Blue Ridge Parkway has stated this tower "greatly impact[s] sensitive habitats and the scenic quality of a premier recreational destination of the Blue Ridge Parkway." Accordingly, the Parkway offered its help in investigating the "much overdue possibility of relocating this tower to a less sensitive site and putting to rest the numerous complaints we receive."

4. Is it feasible to remove the old tower?

Yes. If the Forest Service denied permission to build the new tower and the current lease and permit were allowed to expire in 2005, WLOS would be required to remove the tower from the mountain at no cost to public. Carl Davis, the assistant general manager of WUNC, which broadcasts from the tower, has stated publicly that other locations are available. These other locations may or may not carry increased costs but, even if they do, isn't freeing Mount Pisgah from the oppressive presence of this tower worth some extra investment?

5. Have the Forest Service and WLOS explored alternative sites?

Absolutely not. Despite the offer of help from the Blue Ridge Parkway and multiple requests to explore other sites from conservation organizations, the Forest Service has refused either to explore other possible sites or to recognize that, in approving the new tower, the agency is in effect determining the appearance of Mount Pisgah for many decades to come. Not only is this a slap in the face to the many tourists and recreational users of the Blue Ridge Parkway and Mount Pisgah, it violates the National Environmental Policy Act, which requires the Forest Service to disclose the full impacts of its decisions and to consider all reasonable alternatives.

6. Is there any public involvement concerning WLOS's lease of this premier site?

No. In fact, although the Forest Service has not bothered to disclose it, the existing lease may well prohibit the construction of the new tower because it explicitly states that “[n]o additional construction or expansion shall be permitted on this site.” Moreover, this sweetheart of a lease allows WLOS to occupy this extremely valuable, premier and sensitive site for the incredibly low rent of $625 per month, less than most of us pay in our mortgage or rent.

7. Is the Forest Service violating Federal law?

Yes. Conservation organizations have appealed the agency's decision, contending that the National Environmental Policy Act requires full public involvement and disclosure concerning the impacts of allowing WLOS to construct a new tower and also requires the Forest Service to consider alternative locations.

8. What can I do about this!?

You can write the Forest Service, letters to the editor of your newpaper, sign the petition, and talk to your family and friends to let them know what is happening.

(See WHAT PEOPLE ARE SAYING and see WHAT YOU CAN DO to take action.)