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 (see also NRI Consultation Instructions)
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 |