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 />
River (Whittaker and Shelby 2007) and informed the analysis in the EA. The report Capacity &<br />
Conflict on the Upper Chattooga River (Whittaker and Shelby 2007) discusses backcountry<br />
angling on pages 19-22.<br />
N) The comment "Very little fishing is done from floatable craft" is taken from a reference to a<br />
statement in the March 22, 1976 Federal Register Notice. Boating is restricted to certain craft<br />
type in Alternative 13A. Alternative 13A does not place any restrictions on fishing from craft.<br />
The document Capacity & Conflict on the Upper Chattooga River (Whittaker and Shelby 2007)<br />
was used to inform the effects analysis. In the Environmental Assessment, Managing Recreation<br />
Uses in the Upper Segment of the Chattooga Wild and Scenic River, there is a discussion on the<br />
existing recreation opportunities and recreation effects are described in Section 3.2.1 Recreation<br />
ORV in Chapter 3.<br />
O) Fishing regulations are controlled by the various state agencies based on river habitat<br />
conditions. Impacts to aquatic habitats are described in Section 3.2.2A, Aquatics. The fish<br />
species diversity of the Management Indicator Community in the Chattooga River watershed has<br />
not changed in more than 20 years of sampling the main stem of the river (SCDNR unpublished<br />
data).<br />
P) There is natural reproduction of trout in the Chattooga River. It is not entirely hatchery<br />
dependent. Stocking of trout was occurring in 1971 and in the 1971 Wild and Scenic River Study<br />
Report, Chattooga River (referred to as the Designation Study report) notes that stocking of<br />
catchable size trout was occurring in some of the Chattooga River in all three states. The 1971<br />
Designation Study report includes an action plan for fisheries on pages 87-89 and notes that<br />
Game and Fish State organization recommend managing Chattooga as a “Wild River fishery”;<br />
stocking sub-adults and fingerlings in the wild and scenic sections, stocking any size fish in the<br />
recreation sections; and providing vehicular access for stocking in the recreation sections.<br />
Q) Existing opportunities are described in the Environmental Assessment, Managing Recreation<br />
Uses in the Upper Segment of the Chattooga Wild and Scenic River Corridor and considered<br />
throughout the effects analysis in the EA and in more detail in the Capacity & Conflict on the<br />
Upper Chattooga River (Whittaker and Shelby 2007) (also referred to as the integrated report).<br />
R) The report Capacity & Conflict on the Upper Chattooga River (Whittaker and Shelby 2007)<br />
and public input were used to inform the analysis and effects determinations in the EA.<br />
S) The pair of studies that looked at "substitutability," "involvement," and "place attachment" for<br />
Chattooga non-commercial boaters (on the lower river) and trout anglers, along with additional<br />
analyses of these two groups were discussed on page 25 of the report Capacity & Conflict on the<br />
Upper Chattooga River (Whittaker and Shelby 2007). Whittaker and Shelby qualified some of<br />
the findings in these reports. One problem they noted is that the two groups were sampled<br />
differently (boaters via permits from known visits; anglers via census of two local Trout<br />
Unlimited chapters). Because a "wider net" was cast across the angler population, it may have<br />
included fewer avid Chattooga anglers. In addition, some of the involvement and place<br />
attachment variables were statistically but not substantively different (e.g., 4.39 vs. 4.61 on a five<br />
point "importance"). Finally, boaters were rating the lower segment of the Chattooga WSR<br />
(because they cannot currently boat the upper segment), and it is unclear whether their<br />
assessments will apply to the upper segment. Because of these problems, the data was not<br />
brought forward into the Environmental Assessment, Managing Recreation Uses in the Upper<br />
Segment of the Chattooga Wild and Scenic River.<br />
T) True. This was considered in developing the range of alternatives.<br />
Sample Public Comment(s) for PC 16:<br />
Subconcern # A<br />
59