Resource Name (Heading 1) - USDA Forest Service - US ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Summary of Public Comments - Managing Recreation Uses in the Upper Segment of the Chattooga Wild and Scenic River Corridor EA T) The Whittaker and Shelby report is biased towards a non-boating perspective. Response to PC 79 A) All boating alternatives address the size of boats and minimum and maximum group for noncommercial boating on the upper segment. A self registration permit for boating is considered in order to be consistent with management on the Chattooga WSR downstream of the highway 28 bridge. Alternatives 8, 11, 12, 13, 13a and 14 consider group size limits for boaters as well as other users. B) Group size limits are considered for all users in the action alternatives. Capacities apply to all users regardless of activity in the action alternatives. C) See Chapter 2 and Appendix G for information on monitoring in the Environmental Assessment, Managing Recreation Uses in the Upper Segment of the Chattooga Wild and Scenic River Corridor. Forest plans do not dictate day to day administration, but provide broad direction through standards and guidelines. Law Enforcement is not a forest plan decision. Boating restrictions would be part of the boating self-registration permit. D) The purpose and need is described in Chapter 1, which is considering recreation use in the upper segment. The decision is made in the context of the entire Chattooga WSR. See Chapter 3 of the Environmental Assessment, Managing Recreation Uses in the Upper Segment of the Chattooga Wild and Scenic River Corridor. There is discussion on the entire Chattooga WSR corridor in the cumulative effects sections of the different resource section. E) This decision is limited to the upper segment. See Environmental Assessment, Managing Recreation Uses in the Upper Segment of the Chattooga Wild and Scenic River Corridor, Chapter 1, Section 1.2 Need for the Proposed Action. F) See the Environmental Assessment, Managing Recreation Uses in the Upper Segment of the Chattooga Wild and Scenic River Corridor, Chapter 3 for a discussion on ORVs. G) While boating below highway 28 is outside the scope of this decision, effects to the entire Chattooga River are considered in the cumulative effects section of each resource area. H) All action alternatives establish group size limits for different recreation activities on the upper segment and the effects are discussed in Chapter 3. I) Indirect measures followed by direct measures would be applied based on monitoring. Monitoring would apply to all users and adjustments would be made accordingly. FSM 2323.12 indicates a preference for using indirect use limits and management actions to address impact problems before employing direct ones. The initial appeal decision (USFS 2005) also suggested that although a plan could apply use restrictions (e.g., “disallow or restrict the number of (private and commercial) on-river and in-corridor recreation users, determine the type of recreation use, or dictate the timing of such use”) this “authority should be exercised only with adequate evidence of the need for such restrictions.” However, the WSRA requires development of a management plan that addresses capacity (i.e., the type and amount of use) that would protect and enhance the OR values for which the river was designated, and the Wilderness Act further requires managers to provide opportunities for solitude, and the Forest Service manual provides further guidance (e.g., FSM 2354.41) on considerations for regulating and distributing public use, including the physical environment’s capabilities, users’ desires for different conditions and recreation opportunities, and agency capability in managing such uses. Chapters 5 and 6 of the Capacity & Conflict on the Upper Chattooga River (Whittaker and Shelby 2007) describe a range of existing and potential impacts from current and new boating use. Chapter 8 describes direct and indirect actions that might be used to address impacts or user 226
Summary of Public Comments - Managing Recreation Uses in the Upper Segment of the Chattooga Wild and Scenic River Corridor EA conflicts that may threaten OR values or the Wilderness resource. The alternatives in the Environmental Assessment, Managing Recreation Uses in the Upper Segment of the Chattooga Wild and Scenic River Corridor combine groups of actions to address these issues from existing use or the reintroduction of boating. These actions include a mix of direct and indirect use restrictions. Existing uses can be managed without use limits through monitoring of parking occupancy to indicate whether capacities are being approached. For the reintroduction of boating, direct measures on flow, time of year, and reach were needed to prevent user conflicts. The monitoring and adaptive management described in all alternatives will assess whether existing or new uses are causing resource impacts. Monitoring will indicate whether capacities or other management actions need to be adjusted. The Forest Service notes that there are daily boating limits on several WSRs (including the lower segment of the Chattooga WSR) but no analogous daily limits on swimmers, anglers, or hikers. J) Alternative 15 considered increasing visitor capacities, but this alternative was not considered in detail because during the Limits of Acceptable Change process there was a general opposition of increased recreation use levels. Alternative 2 did consider decreasing visitor capacity. All users are considered in the visitor capacities including boaters. See Appendix D of the Environmental Assessment, Managing Recreation Uses in the Upper Segment of the Chattooga Wild and Scenic River Corridor for the estimation of capacities and encounters. Backcountry capacities and encounters were derived from manager’s estimates in the Use Estimation Workshop (Berger and CRC 2007). “Logical calculations” in the Capacity & Conflict on the Upper Chattooga River (Whittaker and Shelby 2007) were used to estimate potential boating use and encounter rates on days when both boaters and other users might be present. The capacity for the entire segment refers to all users, and is designed to prevent use from exceeding typical current peaks. Because existing use levels generally do not exceed those capacities, boating alternatives generally try to prevent boating from adding use on days when existing uses would already be high. See Section 2.3 Monitoring and Adaptive Management in Chapter 2 of the Environmental Assessment, Managing Recreation Uses in the Upper Segment of the Chattooga Wild and Scenic River Corridor for information on how all uses will be monitored to identify changes and management actions that will be triggered if capacities are exceeded. Boaters are identified for a self-registration system (as on the lower segment of the Chattooga), but all uses will be monitored and boaters are not singled out for permits that would limit use. K) See Appendix D of the Environmental Assessment, Managing Recreation Uses in the Upper Segment of the Chattooga Wild and Scenic River Corridor for the estimation of capacities and encounters. Backcountry capacities and encounters were derived from manager’s estimates in the Use Estimation Workshop (Berger and CRC 2007). “Logical calculations” in the Capacity & Conflict on the Upper Chattooga River (Whittaker and Shelby 2007) were used to estimate potential boating use and encounter rates on days when both boaters and other users might be present. Some alternatives in the Environmental Assessment, Managing Recreation Uses in the Upper Segment of the Chattooga Wild and Scenic River Corridor include boating prohibitions (assuming a social values conflict), while others vary the proportion of days with boating (assuming “face-to-face” conflict). For boating alternatives, the primary issue is reducing the level of conflict by separating uses by space, time, or flow. After conflict issues have been addressed, boating alternatives consider use limits to prevent backcountry encounters from exceeding the desired condition. All alternatives are trying to reduce user conflicts and maintain certain recreation experiences as described in the purpose and need of the EA. L) As discussed in the Capacity & Conflict on the Upper Chattooga River (Whittaker and Shelby 2007), “no survey data estimate the relative numbers of users who see the boating issue in terms 227
Page 1 and 2:
Managing Recreation Uses in the Upp
Page 3 and 4:
Summary of Public Comments - Managi
Page 5 and 6:
Page 7 and 8:
Page 9 and 10:
Page 11 and 12:
Page 13 and 14:
Page 15 and 16:
Page 17 and 18:
Page 19 and 20:
Page 21 and 22:
Page 23 and 24:
Page 25 and 26:
Page 27 and 28:
Page 29 and 30:
Page 31 and 32:
Page 33 and 34:
Page 35 and 36:
Page 37 and 38:
Page 39 and 40:
Page 41 and 42:
Page 43 and 44:
Page 45 and 46:
Page 47 and 48:
Page 49 and 50:
Page 51 and 52:
Page 53 and 54:
Page 55 and 56:
Page 57 and 58:
Page 59 and 60:
Page 61 and 62:
Page 63 and 64:
Page 65 and 66:
Page 67 and 68:
Page 69 and 70:
Page 71 and 72:
Page 73 and 74:
Page 75 and 76:
Page 77 and 78:
Page 79 and 80:
Page 81 and 82:
Page 83 and 84:
Page 85 and 86:
Page 87 and 88:
Page 89 and 90:
Page 91 and 92:
Page 93 and 94:
Page 95 and 96:
Page 97 and 98:
Page 99 and 100:
Page 101 and 102:
Page 103 and 104:
Page 105 and 106:
Page 107 and 108:
Page 109 and 110:
Page 111 and 112:
Page 113 and 114:
Page 115 and 116:
Page 117 and 118:
Page 119 and 120:
Page 121 and 122:
Page 123 and 124:
Page 125 and 126:
Page 127 and 128:
Page 129 and 130:
Page 131 and 132:
Page 133 and 134:
Page 135 and 136:
Page 137 and 138:
Page 139 and 140:
Page 141 and 142:
Page 143 and 144:
Page 145 and 146:
Page 147 and 148:
Page 149 and 150:
Page 151 and 152:
Page 153 and 154:
Page 155 and 156:
Page 157 and 158:
Page 159 and 160:
Page 161 and 162:
Page 163 and 164:
Page 165 and 166:
Page 167 and 168:
Page 169 and 170:
Page 171 and 172:
Page 173 and 174:
Page 175 and 176:
Page 177 and 178: Summary of Public Comments - Managi
Page 278 and 279:
Page 280 and 281:
Page 282 and 283:
Page 284:
show all

Resource Name (Heading 1) - USDA Forest Service - US ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?