Laserfiche WebLink
<br />0J29 )6 <br /> <br />Cll.apter 1 <br />lnlroduction <br /> <br />In addition to these two study requirements, the study agency must also <br />include in its report maps and illustrations of the study area; identify <br />what federal agency would administer the area should it be added to the <br />system; discuss the extent to which the proposed administration could <br />be shared with state or local agencies; and describe cun'ent land owner- <br />ship and use and how land and water use would be curtailed, enhanced, <br />or foreclosed if the river became part of the national wild ,md scenic <br />rivers system. The studies must also indicate the potential classification <br />of the river (or segment) into one of three categories defined in the <br />act-wild, scenic, or recreational-' depending upon the type and <br />extent of development at the time of study. <br /> <br />The act. states that a river being studied for potential addition to the <br />national system will be protected f.-om federally licensed or assisted <br />water resource projects up to 3 years after the President submits the <br />repOlt to the Congress. The act also prohibits minerals development and <br />restricts timber harvesting. road construction, and similar activities on <br />adjacent federal lands for the same time ~riod while rivers are being <br />considered for potential addition. <br /> <br />While requiring the President to make a recommendation to the Con- <br />gress on whether a studied river should be included in the national <br />system. the act affords him broad discretion to make a posit.ive or nega- <br />tive recommendation regarding designation. Thus. the President. may <br />find that a river met all eligibility requirements fOl- designation as a <br />national wild and scenic river and yet conclude that the river was not <br />suitable for designation and make a recommendaton against inclusion. <br />In recent years the President has made negative recommendations on <br />eligible rivers for various reasons, including his belief that the river <br />would be more ,lppropriately protected as part of state or local pro- <br />grams or that land acquisition costs would be excessive. The Congress is <br />not bound by the President's recommendation. Similarly, whether a <br /> <br />;"IWlld-those nVf'I"S or sectIOns that arc free-nOWtrlg ,Uld generally inaccessible exct'fJt by tfilit, arc <br />unpolluted, and ha....e t'ssenlially primitive shoreline.. thaI show little or no evidence of human <br />actIvity (such a<; timber harvest or agriculture). <br /> <br />SCl:nic-th(l~l': rivf>r<, or sectltln:<; that are frce-fl{Jwing, accessible in place!' by roarl~ or J"ailroatls (with <br />occasIOnal bridge crossings or short stretches of conspicuo\l~ or lnn,[!t~r stretches of lnCOnSpICll()U~ <br />roads or rallr(Jads), and ha\"(~ targdy undl~\'el(lped sh(lr~hne~. H(lwev~r, small cnmmunillcc:. and sc,,\- <br />tercu .<;tnlctures are aCl.'eptahle, as are Sl1nle agricultural ;lIld nearby timbl'r harvest actIvities. <br /> <br />Recreational-those nvers or sections that m~y have some dams or dlH'rsion (provlderl the <br />\....atcrway remains g4;'ner{lII~' natural) and show substantial {'VIdence of 11Illllan actiVIties. Thesc milV <br />incluoe extl:'llSIVe residential development. a rangt~ <<If agrirultllral u.<<es allcl tirnbl!r h:lrve,<;rlllg. ilnd the <br />existence Hf parallcl rO~lds or railroads and bridge cro<;sings. <br /> <br />Pagf> 1:1 <br /> <br />GAO/RCgn-H7-:l9 Wild and Scenic Riw'rs <br />