History Wild and Scenic Rivers Act

Creation of the Inventory

Eastern Wild and Scenic Rivers Study - Phase I
Eastern Recreational Rivers Study - Phase II
Western Wild and Scenic Rivers Study - Phase I
Western Recreational Rivers Study - Phase II

Updating and revising the NRI

Presidential Directive and Council on Environmental Quality Regulations

Basis in Wild and Scenic Rivers Act

With the passage of Public Law 90-542 (the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act of 1968), Congress called for the identification of potential wild, scenic, and recreational river areas within the nation:

"In all planning for the use and development of water and related land resources, consideration shall be given by all Federal agencies involved to potential national wild, scenic and recreational river areas, and all river basin and project plan reports submitted to the Congress shall consider and discuss any such potential. The Secretary of the Interior and the Secretary of Agriculture shall make specific studies and investigations to determine which additional wild, scenic and recreational river areas within the United States shall be evaluated in planning reports by all Federal agencies as potential alternative uses of the water and related land resources involved."

- Wild and Scenic Rivers Act, Section 5(d), 1968

In partial fulfillment of Section 5(d), NPS maintains the NRI as a national listing of potentially eligible river segments. A river segment may be listed on the NRI if it is free-flowing and has one or more "outstandingly remarkable values" (ORVs). The kinds of ORVs that can qualify a river for listing include: exceptional scenery, fishing or boating, unusual geological formations, rare plant and animal life, and cultural or historical artifacts that are judged to be of more than local or regional significance.

The NRI's roots can be traced back to 1969 when the Department of the Interior's Associate Solicitor for Parks and Recreation informed the Acting Director of the Bureau of Outdoor Recreation (BOR) that Section 5(d) authorized the Secretary of the Interior to "conduct studies and investigations for the purpose of identifying additional wild, scenic and recreational river areas." Less than a year later, BOR's Assistant Director for State Grants and Resource Studies drafted a memo to all Regional Directors that provided a legal interpretation of Section 5(d), and proposed 44 rivers for inclusion in a national list. A year later, the Assistant Director for State Grants and Resource Studies sent a memo to all Regional Directors providing the procedures for adding and deleting rivers on the Section 5(d) list, and an outline for compiling a Summary Report to determine a river's eligibility for inclusion on the list. Data collected for the Summary Reports included river length, significant ORVs, and surrounding land ownership. return to top

Creation of the Inventory

The creation of the NRI began in the mid-1970's under then-Director of BOR, James Watt. The concept of a national inventory of potential wild and scenic rivers was proposed by BOR's Southeast Regional Director Bob Baker who reportedly acquired a strong belief in resource inventories as fundamental to natural resources planning and management from the future NPS Director, William Penn Mott, while working under him in the California State Parks System. The NRI idea was presented to Watt and the Office of Management and Budget as a way of putting limits on the eventual size of the National Wild and Scenic Rivers System. The inventory was first conducted in the eastern states, and then in the western states. NPS published and distributed an initial draft of the eastern states' segments in March, 1980, and a final version of the completed NRI (which included east and west segments) in August, 1982.
return to top

Eastern Wild and Scenic Rivers Study - Phase I

BOR initiated the Eastern Wild and Scenic Rivers Study in 1976 in cooperation with state and local agencies. BOR southeast regional staff collected US Geological Survey (USGS) topographic maps (1:500,000) east of the Mississippi and identified free-flowing river segments 25 miles or longer. In some cases, rivers less than 25 miles in length were included if the rivers were thought to be regionally or nationally significant. Maps and lists of these rivers were sent to other eastern regional offices of BOR to identify segments of rivers impounded by dams or channelized, and to delete them from the list. BOR created a point system to assess development impacts within one-quarter mile of the rivers' banks. River segments having a cumulative point-per-mile total of 100 or more were deleted, as were most intermittent streams. BOR circulated the resulting list of rivers to Federal and state resource agencies, citizen groups, and individuals, for review and revision. Public meetings were held in each region and additional nominations and deletions were considered at that time. BOR staff flew over the river segments on the list and recorded them on videotape to evaluate cultural and water resource developments, scenic quality, and flow, and to delete ineligible segments. Following field and aerial evaluation, the revised list of segments was again circulated for review, and comments were used to prepare the final list of rivers.
return to top

Eastern Recreational Rivers Study - Phase II

Seventy-five percent of the rivers initially listed were deleted through the course of "Phase I" largely due to the amount of development within the river corridor. Some of these rivers were potentially eligible as recreational rivers as defined by the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act. In 1978, the Department of the Interior's Heritage Conservation and Recreation Service (HCRS), the predecessor agency to BOR, surveyed thirteen states in the northeast for their opinions and ideas regarding the potential for an additional inventory of urban, cultural and recreational rivers. Nine states, five of which had their own wild and scenic river programs, responded with support for conducting the study. HCRS held a regional workshop in December, 1979, to coordinate collecting data for the study. Public and private officials were notified of the study's objectives and solicited for potential candidate rivers, and HCRS regional offices conducted literature reviews to assess existing data. Additional data was collected in-house and by subcontractors using uniform data sheets. HCRS regional offices also conducted workshops with state river agencies to collect public comments and information. HCRS staff flew over and videotaped the top five segments in each physiographic section, and summarized river information by physiographic section and river category (urban, cultural, and recreational). Upon review of additional public comments, the final list of urban, cultural, and recreational rivers was compiled by the regions and submitted to the Washington office.
return to top

Western Wild and Scenic Rivers Study - Phase I

While HCRS completed "Phase II" in the East, the agency started "Phase I" in the West. In January 1979, HCRS's Northeast Regional Director suggested that HCRS could conduct a western rivers inventory that built upon the lessons learned from the eastern inventory. By April, general information and data sheets were mailed out to public and private sector officials soliciting them for their involvement in the western inventory. The western inventory used six steps, or filters, to conduct the inventory process, much like the eastern inventory:

• Length (segments greater than/equal to .5 miles)
• Water Resource Development (rivers free of existing impoundments or other alterations such as channelization, straightening, dikes, and levees)
• Cultural Development (a point system was used to grade projects found within ¼ mile on each side of the river bank)
• Input by Experts (the river list was circulated for comment)
• Aerial Survey (approximately 20% of the total river mileage in each physiographic section was videotaped)
• River Evaluation (a list of the top free-flowing segments for each physiographic region was developed) return to top

Western Recreational Rivers Study - Phase II

In 1980, HCRS western Regional Directors began mailing out general information and data collection sheets to public and private sector officials to collect data for the "Western Recreational Rivers Study." One goal of the study was to obtain a full range of data on the stream segments listed during the wild and scenic rivers study. The other goal was to add any stream segments with outstanding or multiple natural or scientific resource features that were either overlooked or did not qualify under Phase I of the wild and scenic study process. return to top

Updating and Revising the NRI

On May 17, 1982, the Director of NPS issued a memo to the Regional Directors informing them of the procedures for revising the NRI. (This occurred three months prior to NPS's distribution of the initial version of the NRI in August, 1982.) The Director instructed the regional offices to submit requests for changes to the NRI to the Rivers and Trails Division. Requests for deletions had to contain justification for the proposed deletion (e.g., construction of a dam, diversion project, or any additional development that diminished the "outstandingly remarkable" values of the river, etc.). Requests for additions had to contain the same information gathered for the original NRI. No changes were considered effective until transmitted to Federal agency heads by the Assistant Secretary for Fish, Wildlife and Parks or other responsible departmental official in Washington. NPS envisioned an annual update of the NRI, but the Director decided that "a large number of change requests could lead to a somewhat more frequent revision," and updating the NRI had to be performed within the existing budgetary allocations.

Between 1982 and 1988, there were at least two groups of additions made to the original NRI using these procedures. Although data on the number of segments added in the first revision cannot be located (other than the Manumuskin River, NJ), the second revision added the Chester (MD), Merrimack (NH), and Connecticut (CT) rivers to the NRI with Director Mott's signature on January 26, 1988. Three years later, the NRI was republished and distributed with the additional revisions.

In 1990, NPS officials at the national and regional levels began to discuss an official update of the NRI. NPS national river policy staff created goals and objectives for the NRI update and decided the update should take place in two phases: 1) identification of segments on Federal lands found eligible for wild and scenic river designation through agency studies, and 2) identification of segments which the states believed contained ORVs.

The Federal lands update was initiated as part of the celebration of the 25th anniversary of the National Wild and Scenic Rivers Act, in 1993. The update added new information on existing listings and added new river segments found on lands managed by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM), NPS, and United States Forest Service (USFS). NPS hired six interns over the course of a year to compile segment information from natural resource agency management plans (see Table 1). With NPS Director Roger Kennedy's signature, 1,012 segments equaling 12,713 river miles were added, and 464 river segments were updated. return to top

Presidential Directive

THE WHITEHOUSE
Washington
August 2, 1979

MEMORANDUM FOR THE HEADS OF DEPARTMEnts AND AGENCIES

In my environmental message of August 2, 1979, I recognized the important natural, historic, and recreational values of our Nation's river corridors. It is important for the federal agencies to set an example of sound management for state, local, and private landowners by taking an aggressive role in protecting Wild and Scenic Rivers which flow through public lands.

In addition, I recognize that the 1968 National Trails System Act is designed to promote the develop of recreational, scenic, and historic trails for persons of diverse interests and abilities -- including the young, the handicapped, and the aged -- and that the National Trails System is in its fledgling stage. The act provides for designating trails on state, local, and private lands, but only 130 trails have been established since enactment of the Act. In my Environmental Message I stressed the importance of expanding the National Trails System.

Therefore, I am directing that each of you take the following actions:

Each federal agency shall encourage states, localities, and private land holders to designate trails on their lands and to participate with federal agencies and trail users in designating and creating an overall National Trails System which will provide more fully for the trail needs of America.
Each federal agency shall, as part of its normal planning and environmental review process, take care to avoid or mitigate adverse effects on rivers identified in the Nationwide Inventory, prepared by the Heritage Conservation and Recreation Service in the Department of the Interior. Agencies shall, as part of their normal environmental process, consult with the Heritage Conservation and Recreation Service (now the the National Park Service's Rivers, Trails & Conservation Assistance Program) prior to taking actions which could effectively foreclose wild, scenic, or recreational river status on rivers in the Inventory.
Each Federal agency with responsibility for administering public lands shall, as part of its ongoing land use planning and management activities and environmental review process, make an assessment of whether the rivers identified in the Nationwide Inventory and which are on their lands are suitable for inclusion in the Wild and Scenic Rivers System, the agency shall, to the extent of the agency's authority, promptly take such steps as are needed to protect and manage the river and the surrounding area in a fashion comparable to rivers already included in the Wild and Scenic Rivers System. In addition, the agency is encouraged, pursuant to the revised Guidelines, to work with the Agriculture and the Interior Departments to prepare legislation to designate the river as part of the Wild and Scenic Rivers System if appropriate.
Please give these assignments your immediate attention.

Jimmy Carter

return to top

Council on Environmental Quality

Procedures for Interagency Consultation to Avoid or Mitigate Adverse Effects on Rivers in the Nationwide Inventory

Determine whether the proposed action could affect an Inventory river.
Determine whether the proposed action could have an adverse effect on the natural, cultural and recreational values of the Inventory river segment.
Determine whether the proposed action could foreclose options to classify any portion of the Inventory segment as wild, scenic, or recreation river areas.
Incorporate avoidance/mitigation measures into the proposed action to maximum extent feasible within the agency's authority.

APPENDIX
Examples of developments that require consultation with NPS.
Examples of projects that would most likely cause adverse effects.

These procedures are designed to assist federal officials in complying with the President's directive (attached) to protect rivers in the Nationwide Inventory through the normal environmental analysis process. NEOA, E.O. 11514, CEQ's NEPA Regulations, and agency implementing procedures should be used to meet the President's directive.

Although the steps outlined below pertain to wild and scenic river protection, they also fit clearly within agencies' existing environmental analysis processes. Agencies are already required: to identify and analyze the environmental effects of their actions; to consult with agencies with jurisdiction by law or special expertise (in this case, the National Park Service (NPS)); to develop and study alternatives; and to use all practicable means and measures to preserve important historic, cultural, and natural aspects of our national heritage.

The procedures outlined below simply link the appropriate elements of the normal environmental analysis process with the President's directive "to take care to avoid or mitigate adverse effects on rivers identified in the Nationwide Inventory." Federal officials should promptly take steps to incorporate the actions specified below into their planning and decision making activities and the conduct of their environmental analyses.

Determine whether the proposed action could affect an Inventory river.

Check the current regional Inventory list to determine whether the proposed action could affect an Inventory river.

If an Inventory river could be affected by the proposed action, and environmental assessment or an environmental impact statement may be required depending upon the significance of the effects.

If their action would not affect an Inventory river, no further action is necessary under these procedures. (The agency is still required to fulfill any other responsibilities under NEPA.)

Determine whether the proposed action could have an adverse effect on the natural, cultural and recreational values of the Inventory river segment.

Using the Guide for Identifying Potential Adverse Effects, which is appended to these procedures, you should determine whether the proposed action could adversely affect the natural, cultural, or recreational values of the Inventory river segment. Adverse effects on inventoried rivers may occur under conditions which include, but are not limited to:

Destruction or alteration of all or part of the free flowing nature or the river;
Introduction of visual, audible, or other sensory intrusions which are out of character with the river or alter its setting;
Deterioration of water quality; or
Transfer or sale of property adjacent to an inventoried river without adequate conditions or restrictions for protecting the river and its surrounding environment.
If you have prepared a document which finds that there would be no adverse effects - such as a Finding of No Significant Impact under the CEQ NEPA regulations - you should send a courtesy copy to the NPS filed office in your region.

Determine whether the proposed action could foreclose options to classify any portion of the Inventory segment as wild, scenic, or recreation river areas.
In some cases, impacts of a proposed action could be severe enough to preclude inclusion in the Wild and Scenic Rivers System, or lower the quality of the classification (e.g. from wild to recreational). If the proposed undertaking could effectively downgrade any portion of the Inventory segment you should consult with NPS.

Proposed action (whether uses or physical changes), which are theoretically reversible, but which are not likely to be reversed in the short term, should be considered to have the effect of foreclosing for all practical purposes wild and scenic river status. This is because a river segment, when studied for possible inclusion in the Wild and Scenic River System, must be judged as it is found to exist at the time of the study, rather than as it may exist as some future time.

If a proposal, including one or more alternatives, could have an adverse effect on a river in the Inventory, an environmental assessment or, if the effects are significant, an environmental impact statement must be prepared. NPS staff is available to assist you in determining the significance or severity of the effects in connection with your assessment, scoping process, and EIS, if one is needed. A detailed analysis of each of the rivers in the Inventory is available from NPS for your use.

You should request assistance in writing from NPS, as early as you can, providing sufficient information about the proposal to allow NPS to assist you in determining whether any of the alternatives under consideration would foreclose designation. NPS will in turn provide you with an analysis of the impacts on natural, cultural and recreational values which should enable you to make a determination as to whether or now designation would be foreclosed. NPS is available to assist you in developing appropriate avoidance/mitigation measures.

When environmental assessments are prepared on proposals that affect Inventory rivers, copies should be sent in a timely fashion to the NPS field office in your area before a proposed action is taken and while there is still time to avoid or mitigate adverse effects. When environmental impact statements are prepared on proposals that affect Inventory rivers, the lead agency should request NPS and the affected land managing agency to be cooperating agencies as soon as the Notice of Intent to prepare an EIS has been published.

If NPS does not respond to your request for assistance within 30 days, you many proceed with completing preparation and circulation of the environmental assessment or EIS as planned. Even where NPS has been unable to comment on the environmental assessment or DRAFT EIS, you are still obligated by the President's directive to "…take care to avoid or mitigate adverse effects on the rivers identified in the Nationwide Inventory…"

Incorporate avoidance/mitigation measures into the proposed action to maximum extent feasible within the agency's authority.
Environmental documents prepared on the proposed action should identify the impact on natural, cultural and recreational values, address the comments submitted by NPS, and state the avoidance/mitigation measures adopted. Any disagreements will be resolved through existing procedures. For projects requiring environmental impact statements, the record of decision must adopt appropriate avoidance/mitigation measures and a monitoring and enforcement program as required by the CEQ regulations (40 CFR Sec. 1505.2(c)).

A Note on the Meaning of "Federal Actions"

The above procedures are meant to apply to all federal actions that could adversely affect a river in the Nationwide Inventory (see Section 1508.18 of CEQ's NEPA Regulations (40 CFR 1508.18) for the meaning of "major federal actions"). For actions which are known in advance to require an environmental assessment or environmental impact statement, these procedures would be followed in the normal course of NEPA compliance. If a federal action would not normally require an environmental assessment or an environmental impact statement, but could adversely affect a river in the Nationwide Inventory, the action should either (1) not be "categorically excluded" under agency implementing procedures, or (2) be considered an "extraordinary circumstance" in which a normally excluded action must be subjected to environmental analysis (see Section 1508.4 of NEPA Regulations).

The above procedures should be used for any proposals (including the evaluation of alternative courses of action) for which the NEPA process is not yet completed. The above procedures should therefore also be applied to a proposed modification or supplement to a previously authorized or implemented action.

APPENDIX I. Guide for Identifying Potential Adverse Effects
The impact of a proposed action should be assessed in relation to the eligibility and classification criteria of the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act, 16 U.S.C. 1271-1287, as amended.

In order to be eligible for inclusion in the National System, a river must:

Be "free-flowing," i.e. "existing or flowing in natural condition without impoundment, diversion, straightening, rip-rapping, or other modification of the waterway. The existence, however, of low dams, diversion works, and other minor structures at the time any river is proposed for inclusion in the National Wild and Scenic Rivers System shall not automatically bar its consideration for such inclusion: Provided, that this shall not be construed to authorize, intend, or encourage future construction of such structures within components of the National Wild and Scenic Rivers System". (U.S.C. Sec. 1286)
Possess "outstandingly remarkable scenic, recreational, geologic, fish and wildlife, historic, cultural, or other similar values". (U.S.C. Sec. 1271)
Eligible river segments are classified according to the extent of evidence of man's activity as one of the following:

"Wild river areas-Those rivers or sections of rivers that are free of impoundments and generally inaccessible except by trail, with watersheds or shorelines essentially primitive and waters unpolluted. These represent vestiges of primitive America."
"Scenic river areas-Those rivers or sections of rivers that are free of impoundments, with shorelines or watersheds still largely primitive and shorelines largely undeveloped, but accessible in places by roads."
"Recreational river areas-Those rivers or sections of river that are readily accessible by road or railroad, that may have some development along their shorelines, and that may have undergone some impoundment or diversion in the past." (16 U.S.C. Sec. 1273 (b))
Any action which could alter the river segment's ability to meet the above eligibility and classification criteria should be considered an adverse impact. Actions which diminish the free-flowing characteristics or outstandingly remarkable values or a river segment could prevent the segment from qualifying for including in the national system. Actions which increase the degree of evidence of man's activity, i.e. level of development, could change the classification of the river segment.

The effect of all proposed developments within the river corridor should be assessed in terms of severity of effect and extent of area affected. Developments outside the corridor which would cause visual, noise, or air quality impacts on the river corridor should also be examined.

Only proposed new construction or proposed expansion of existing developments need be considered in assessing impacts. Repair or rehabilitation of existing structures would not have a negative impact except if the action would result in significant expansion of the facility or if the construction process itself would cause an irreversible impact on the environment.

Placement of navigation aids such as buoys and channel markers will not be considered as causing adverse effects.

The following are examples of types of developments which would generally require consultation with NPS because of the potential for adverse effects on the values of a potential wild, scenic, or recreational river. This list is not exhaustive.

Small dock
Small bulkhead
Clearing and snagging
Drainage canal, culvert or fall
Irrigation canal
Levee or dike
Rip-rap, bank stabilization Or erosion control structure
Small reservoir
Increase in commercial Navigation
Dredging or filling
Run-of-the-river dam or Diversion structure
Radio tower, windmill
Clear-cut timber harvest

Road
Railroad
Building (any type)
Pipeline, transmission line
Bridge or ford
Gas, oil or water well
Subsurface mine opening
Quarry
Power substation
Recreation area
Dump or junkyard
Change in flow regime

The following are examples of types of development which appear most likely to cause serious adverse effects if they are constructed adjacent to or in close proximity to an Inventory river. Such development proposals will almost always require consultation with NPS because their effects are likely to conflict with the values of a potential wild, scenic, or recreational river. These effects could be severe enough to foreclose designation of the affected river segment. This list is not exhaustive.

Impoundment
Channelization
Instream or surface mining
Lock and dam
Airport
Landfill
Factory
Gas or oil field
Major highway
Railroad yard
Power plant
Sewage treatment plant
Housing development
Shopping center
Industrial park
Marina
Commercial dock

return to top