Resource Name (Heading 1) - USDA Forest Service - US ...
Resource Name (Heading 1) - USDA Forest Service - US ...
Resource Name (Heading 1) - USDA Forest Service - US ...
You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles
YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.
Summary of Public Comments - Managing Recreation Uses in the<br />
Upper Segment of the Chattooga Wild and Scenic River Corridor EA<br />
the rate of population increases for the region, which may exceed 20% over the next decade”<br />
(Whittaker and Shelby 2007). The forests are seeking to take appropriate action now to reduce<br />
existing or prevent future unacceptable impacts to the river’s values from increasing use levels,<br />
and thus preserve the river’s free-flowing condition, protect water quality and protect and<br />
enhance the river’s outstandingly remarkable values in addition to protecting its wilderness<br />
characteristics.<br />
Sample Public Comment(s) for PC 62:<br />
Subconcern # A<br />
The proposed alternative eliminates restrictions on boating in North Carolina, without assessing the<br />
associated impacts of such action. Where in the EA are the restrictions on boating in North Carolina? If<br />
there are none, where is the assessment associated with the elimination of the current boating restrictions?<br />
(Ltr# 92, Cmt# 24)<br />
Subconcern # B<br />
It's true that a minority of boaters drag their boats. I think making putting a ban on boat-dragging would<br />
be a wonderful idea. It really seems that so few people drag boats in the first place and the ones that do<br />
drag would honor a drag-ban. But if boat dragging really did turn out to be a problem, which I doubt it<br />
would, there are solutions to that. Some places use a pair of close-together hand rails (like those you see on<br />
stairs) that paddlers can place their boat across and walk to the river without the boat touching the ground<br />
or having to be carried. (Ltr# 97, Cmt# 2)<br />
Subconcern # C<br />
Given that, there are several compromises that can be made to allow access to boaters and the other<br />
traditionally allowed river users (fishermen and hikers). To protect the resource, the following criteria<br />
must be adhered to: No construction of additional trails to create new access points; No boating above<br />
Hwy 28 unless the Hwy 76 <strong>US</strong>GS gauge is >= 3.0 feet at some point on the day that the boating takes<br />
places; Boating parties should be kept to six people or less; No inflatable crafts that are designed to hold<br />
more than 2 people (i.e., no rafts, only inflatable kayaks); and No more than 50 boaters should be allowed<br />
per day – this could be enforced by having a sign in log in addition to the permit so that other potential<br />
boaters would know that the limit had been reached. If these restrictions are kept in place and enforced, the<br />
resource will be protected and the wilderness experience of other river users will be kept to an acceptable<br />
level. It is time to admit the no boating clause on these upper sections was done in arbitrary manner and<br />
that there acceptable uses on these sections other than just fishing and hiking. The primary goal should be<br />
to protect the resource, not just the current human experience. These restrictions allow both. (Ltr# 120,<br />
Cmt# 1)<br />
Subconcern # D<br />
The Preferred Alternative will encourage the expansion of existing unauthorized boating. The EA fails to<br />
consider the likely increase in unauthorized boating on the Upper Chattooga that will result if any boating<br />
is allowed. Were the Chattooga opened for some boating use, unofficial guidebooks and information on the<br />
Internet and by word of mouth about its course would become more commonplace. A known river is<br />
available to more skill levels because challenges can be anticipated. Also, as the River becomes more<br />
familiar to some boaters who use it legally, they may want to run it on other days of the year when it is<br />
illegal to do so. Anyone familiar with boating on the Lower Chattooga knows what unregulated (or<br />
unmanaged) boating is likely to look like: it would be comparable to Section 4 of the Lower Chattooga,<br />
where maximum use can exceed 180 boaters a day in the summer and reach as high as 100 boaters a day<br />
from January through April. Even “low use” days see anywhere from 10 to 50 boaters a day. This demand<br />
is particularly out of proportion to the boating proposed in Alternative 12, which sets no limits on the<br />
number of boating trips per day or the numbers of boaters that would be permitted on the Upper Chattooga<br />
or the possibility of boaters establishing new campsites along the more remote stretches of the headwaters.<br />
This will present a significant enforcement challenge and threat to the resource. The <strong>Forest</strong> <strong>Service</strong> must<br />
consider the likely increase in illegal boating under any alternative allowing boating in segments of the<br />
River where it is currently prohibited. If any part of the Upper Chattooga is opened to legal boating, some<br />
boaters will be spurred to greater use of the River, whether legally or not. As the River becomes more<br />
148