My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
WSP04519
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
Backfile
>
4001-5000
>
WSP04519
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/26/2010 12:55:50 PM
Creation date
10/12/2006 12:24:43 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
File Number
7630.285
Description
Wild and Scenic - General
State
CO
Basin
Statewide
Date
5/22/1978
Author
US GAO
Title
Federal Protection and Preservation of Wild and Scenic Rivers is Slow and Costly - By the Comptroller General - Report to the Congress of the United States
Water Supply Pro - Doc Type
Report/Study
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
64
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
<br />0004u6 <br /> <br />Delay of ttle Skagit, Tuolumne, and Pele Marquette ~tudies <br />is also partially attributable to the Forest Service policy of <br />assigning study responsibility to onsite personnel at the <br />Forest Supervisor's Office level. Person'l~l assigned to con- <br />duct these three studiES did not have pla,;ning eXDeri~nce and <br />were not aware of the difficulties involved in conducting <br />planninq 'studies at the authcrizati0n level. Specialize~ <br />planning expertise is often ~ot available at the Forest Su- <br />pervisor level, and ~tudy leaders must work throuqh a time- <br />consuming chain of command to oblain technical planning <br />advice anr policy determi~ations from forest Service region- <br />al offices. (See apps. II~ and IV.) <br /> <br />A number of secondary problems have also contributed <br />to delays in river studies. Preporation and printing of <br />separate study reports and enviro~mental impact statements <br />were a cause of ~~necEssary.delay in four of the seven stu- <br />dies reviewed. The Skagit,'Bruneau, Pere M3rquette, and <br />Lower St. Croix studi~ were delayed while the same infor- <br />mation that was in the ~tudy reports was collected, analyzed, <br />written, and reviewed in ordec to prepare an enviro~mental <br />impact statement. ~nree study teams--on the Snake, Tuolumner <br />and Upper Mississippi studies--plan to save study prepara- <br />tion tim~ by combining study r2por~s and envir.onmental im- <br />pact statements into a single docufuent. BOR a.,d Forest Ser- <br />vice headquarters have not issued instructions requiring <br />t~is time-saving integration for all studies. The Depart- <br />ments of Agriculture and the Interior, in commenting on our <br />draft report, stated that all future re~orts will be pre- <br />pared in this manner. (See apps. I-IV.) <br /> <br />The Skagit River study might have been completed <br />quicker if the Forest Service had used cutside agency per- <br />sonnel and expertise more e!fectively. Study team members <br />from other Federal and State agencies were liillited to provid- <br />ing technical data upon request ~nd to commenting on Forest <br />Service-prepared drafts. Forest Service personnel also spent <br />considerable study time researchj~g and developing data that <br />was readily available from other Federal and State agencies. <br />(See app. IV.) <br /> <br />SECRETARIAL DESIGNATION PROCESS <br />NOT WORKING AS INTENDED <br /> <br />Wild and scenic rivers that are presently included <br />within a State river protection program can be designated <br />into the national system by the S~cretary of the Interior. <br />To date, only five river segments have been ~dded to the <br />national syst2m througll t~is process. Most States have not <br /> <br />IG <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.