Issues Concerning Wild and Scenic River Designations

Home Browse Search

i 0 CWCB 9/25/85 ISSUES CONCERNING WILD AND SCENIC RIVER DESIGNATIONS Background The National Wild and Scenic Rivers Act (P.L. 90 -542), which was passed in 1968, established the policy that certain of the Nation's rivers should be preserved in their free - flowing condition. No Colorado rivers were included in the original act either for designation or study. A 1975 amendment (P.L. 93 -621) to the original act designated twelve Colorado rivers for study: the Big Thompson, Cache la Poudre, Colorado, Conejos, Dolores, Elk, Encampment, Green, Gunnison, Los Pinos, Piedra, and Yampa Rivers. The studies on the Colorado rivers are completed. However, none have been designated by Congress for inclusion in the national system. Discussion of General Issues 1. What are the benefits of designation? To be eligible for wild and scenic river designation, a river must exhibit not only a "free- flowing" condition, but also have "outstandingly remarkable values," as defined in the statute. Generally speaking, many people feel that designation, and the land management authorities which it entails, will tend to preserve rivers and their environs (i.e., the environment of the river corridor) in their present state and preserve the recreational opportunities associated therewith. However, others fear that designation will attract more people and result in over -use and degradation of the very environment which one seeks to preserve. Local land- owners often express this latter point of view. To the extent recreational opportunities are preserved, associated tourism could be maintained or even increased, with the attendant benefits to local and state tax revenues and general economic activity. However, the recreational activities which would be associated with a designated river would be relatively low intensity uses compared to other activities. Economic benefits would vary accordingly. 2. What is the effect of designation on water resource development? Designation would foreclose development of water resources facilities (e.g., dams, water conduits, 319 riv