BEYOND BANNING DAMS

BENEFITS OF WILD AND SCENIC RIVER DESIGNATION FOR NORTHWEST AND NATIONAL RIVER SYSTEMS
CASE STUDIES
ALLISON MCGRATH
FEBRUARY 2009
American Rivers

INTRODUCTION
The movement to protect the nation’s remaining free-flowing rivers was born out of America’s “big dam” era from the 1930s to the 1960s. Concerned at the rapid pace of development of many of the country’s rivers for power, flood control, and irrigation, people across the United States acted to ensure that at least some of the nation’s most treasured rivers would remain in their natural state. In 1968, the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act was passed into law, stating:

“It is hereby declared to be the policy of the United States that certain selected rivers of the Nation, which, with their immediate environments, possess outstandingly remarkable scenic, recreational, geologic, fish and wildlife, historic, cultural or other similar values, shall be preserved in free-flowing condition, and that they and their immediate environments shall be protected for the benefit and enjoyment of present and futuregenerations. The Congress declares that the established national policy of dam and otherconstruction at appropriate sections of the rivers of the United States needs to be complemented by a policy that would preserve other selected rivers or sections thereof in their free-flowing condition to protect the water quality of such rivers and to fulfill other national conservation purposes.”

The Wild and Scenic Rivers Act passed by Congress in 1968 included eight rivers in the original legislation. Today, the national Wild and Scenic Rivers System includes 252 rivers.

Communities and local governments came together to recognize the importance of these natural resources: they took the key first step of designating the rivers. But what happens to the rivers after designation – what tangible benefits has Wild and Scenic River designation brought to these rivers?

The most well-known and tangible protection of Wild and Scenic River designation is a direct ban on dams and other water projects licensed under the Federal Power Act, or any other federally-assisted water project that would have a “direct and adverse” effect on the river’s freeflowing character, water quality, or outstanding values. But there are many other important, less easily-quantified benefits that result from Wild and Scenic River designation.

This report compiles a number of specific examples of the ways in which designation has effected positive change for rivers, beyond banning dams and other harmful federally-assisted water projects. It focuses mainly on river systems in the Northwest, but includes examples from other parts of the country. While designation can benefit a river in a wide variety of ways, this report focuses on three general areas through which designation under the Wild and Scenic
Rivers Act brings resources to protect the free-flowing character, water quality and outstanding values of rivers. Profiled rivers are organized into the section that describes the primary benefit Wild and Scenic River designation has brought to the river.

Section One discusses the management planning required for designated rivers under the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act. Each river designated as Wild and Scenic is required to undergo a comprehensive planning process involving all interested river stakeholders that yields a formal management plan for the river. Among other results, this plan encourages managing agencies to pursue more “river-friendly” solutions; for example, employing organic materials such as downed trees in restoration projects instead of rock and concrete, or natural materials instead of riprap for bank stabilization. The management plan also serves to coordinate efforts by different agencies at the local, state and federal levels. Local communities and individuals help to develop the management plan, and they can use the guidance provided in the plan to become better stewards of the river.

Section Two examines rivers where Wild and Scenic River designation has generated an increase in public awareness and appreciation of the river. Increased knowledge of the importance of the river can foster goodwill in the community and be a positive, powerful force for river restoration. Public interest and support can also bring together stakeholders with diverse interests that might not otherwise cooperate, for the sake of the river.

Section Three explores areas where designation has resulted in increased funding for protection, restoration and management of the river. In many cases, designation will prioritize a particular river project in the eyes of government agencies and other funding organizations. Because a Wild and Scenic River has been vetted through the designation process and has a management plan in place, funding agencies know their money is more likely to be used effectively.

The increased public awareness generated by designation can also help to bring additional funds to a Wild and Scenic River; people who care about the river can be powerful and effective lobbyists for additional funding to better manage, protect and restore the river.

SECTION 1: BENEFITS OF WILD AND SCENIC RIVER
MANAGEMENT PLANNING
DESCHUTES WILD AND SCENIC RIVER, OR
For the Deschutes River, the river management plan generated as a requirement of the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act worked as a powerful organizing tool, particularly in the arena of management for water quality and fish restoration.
The rugged Deschutes River possesses high quality scenic values, supports a variety of recreation opportunities, and supplies the resources for a popular sport fishery of brown trout, rainbow trout, and steelhead. Before the Deschutes Wild and Scenic River management plan was generated, over a dozen agencies in Oregon were conducting water monitoring in different ways and with
different standards. Through the process of developing the river management plan, 17 agencies came together to coordinate their efforts by developing an interagency-focused regional water quality management strategy. The
leverage provided by Wild and Scenic River designation helped the U. S. Forest Service (USFS) and the county to adopt a coordinated bioengineering approach to streambed restoration.

The Wild and Scenic designation also helped the Oregon Water Resources Department and local irrigation districts develop an adaptive flow management strategy for the dams on the Deschutes that adjusts ramping rates in the
spring and fall to reduce the impact on sedimentation and fish populations. Groups such as the Upper Deschutes Watershed Council have also used increased awareness of the river generated by Wild and Scenic designation to obtain funding for steelhead restoration projects in Whychus Creek, a tributary of the Deschutes. Ryan Houston, Executive Director of the Upper Deschutes Watershed Council, says the Wild and Scenic designation “empowers the Forest Service to work in the entire watershed, beyond the boundaries of the Wild and Scenic designation.”
American Rivers
ers
Tom Walker, a fisheries biologist with the USFS, notes that the Wild and Scenic River management plan helped them generate effective projects for river restoration, including projects to manage dispersed recreation, control user-created roads, and work with organizations such as the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife, the Deschutes Watershed Council, and the Deschutes River Mitigation and Enhancement Board to reduce erosion on the river.

The plan has also motivated the USFS to use trees and plantings instead of rip rap on the banks of the river for stablization. Because of Wild and Scenic designation, they have the authority as the federal river managing agency to encourage bioengineering rather than hard engineering approaches to river management, which has led to the use of organic material instead of traditional rip rap on public and private land. Under Section 7 of the Wild and Scenic Rivers
Act, projects that occur in the bed or banks of a designated Wild and Scenic River and that are federally-assisted (through loan, grant, license, permit, etc.) must be reviewed by the federal river managing agency. Examples include riprap, diversions, fisheries restoration projects, boat docks, etc. The review process provides an opportunity to suggest other, more river-friendly
approaches. Walker affirms that the USFS would not have a role in the permit process for these projects without Wild and Scenic River designation.

NORTH FORK JOHN DAY WILD AND SCENIC RIVER, OR
For the North Fork John Day River, the management plan generated as a result of Wild and Scenic designation inspired the use of non-engineering solutions, and it proved to be a key tool for the healthy restoration of the river.

The North Fork John Day Wild and Scenic River, part of the Umatilla North Fork in Oregon, is one of the only rivers left in the Columbia River Basin that still maintains wild runs of anadromous Chinook salmon and steelhead. An important natural resource, it also sustains key populations of bull trout.

For over 50 years dredge tailings from past mining operations lined the bottom of an mile stretch of the river, severely affecting its integrity. Over the years, these tailings forced water toward the stream banks and caused the banks to erode into the river.

Wild and Scenic designation of the river contributed to the withdrawal of mining
operations. As Kathy Ramsey of the USFS explains, “the designation protected it from further disturbance [and] from new mineral entry.” Additionally, the designation later became a factor in the active restoration of fish and watershed habitat. In 1993, five years after the North Fork John Day was designated as a Wild and Scenic River, the Umatilla National Forest staff initiated a pilot
program to remove the tailings. This project, as called for by Section 7(a) of the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act (WSRA), was designed to have a minimum of further impact on the river.

The environmental analysis process included extensive public outreach; because the North Fork John Day is also a State Scenic Waterway, actions affecting the river required coordination between a number of different parties, including the Oregon Division of State Lands, the Army Corps of Engineers, the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife, the Oregon Parks and Recreation Department, and various county and tribal governments.

The non-engineering solution entailed manually removing the dredge tailings. It was designed to facilitate the connection of the river with its floodplain over a period of time with as minimum effects to riparian vegetation as possible. This project was successful in its goals: after the implementation of the project the river retained most of its pre-project vegetation, the floodplain was restored, and new vegetation has grown on the improved floodplain.

John Sanchez of the USFS worked in the Umatilla National Forest for 17 years. He spent over eight of those years working on removing dredge tailings from the Wild and Scenic North Fork John Day River. The USFS worked closely with Bonneville Power Company to restore fish to the river, and, according to Sanchez, the Wild and Scenic designation was part of the attractiveness of the river to Bonneville for funding. According to Sanchez, “The Wild and Scenic designation definitely played a role; … one of the nice things we were able to do was return the stream to a more natural flow.”

One of the most substantial impacts of Wild and Scenic designation on the river, however, has been the influence of the management plan over the direction of subsequent projects on the river. The Wild and Scenic River management plan outlines the goal of protecting and restoring the free-flowing character of the river. Susan Sater, the regional Wild and Scenic River coordinator for the USFS, explains that time and time again the first solution people reach for is an
engineered solution. This course is often more costly in addition to its negative effects on the river. There is “no question in [her] mind that the designation drives further thinking and better solutions.”

SALMON WILD AND SCENIC RIVER, OR
For the Salmon River, the Wild and Scenic designation and resulting river management plan not only encouraged non-engineering solutions, it also provided leverage for managing agencies to back up their decision to pursue these non-engineering approaches.

The Salmon River is one of the only rivers in the WSRA system to be designated along its entire length. It is home to important chinook, coho, and steelhead populations and supports oldgrowth forests along its banks.

Duane Bishop of the USFS describes how a flood in 1964 affected the area surrounding the river. In response, federal agencies channelized the lower seven miles of the river in 1965, drastically affecting its ecological health for decades. November 6th, 2006 brought another significant flood event, in the process mobilizing large woody debris into the river.

The USFS, along with Clackamas County, decided that past efforts to clear and channelize the river had been ineffective. The Wild and Scenic designation
motivated them to look at natural management practices. To that end, they decided not to remove the wood that had been swept into the river, despite
strong opposition from private landowners. Duane Bishop avers that the Wild and Scenic designation gave them leverage to back up their stance and do
what was right for the health of the river. In 1992, the USFS began working on restoring side channels in the upper Salmon River. They originally identified six side channels and have since added 23 more, including ten in 2008.

Partners in this effort include the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife, Oregon Trout, the Bureau of Land Management (BLM), the Sandy River Basin Watershed Council, and ten other Sandy Basin partners.

The BLM, which oversees management of the lower Salmon Wild and Scenic River, has also been leading side channel restoration efforts, primarily in the lower river. They recognize how flood control channelization implemented over 30 years ago has continually harmed the important habitat that the Salmon Wild and Scenic River provides for anadromous fish. In addition to the channelization, a constructed dike in the lower Salmon River blocked water flow to a side channel in Wildwood Park which provides key spawning and over-wintering rearing habitat for winter steelhead, cutthroat trout, and coho salmon. Subsequent to the 1988 designation of the Salmon River as Wild and Scenic, the BLM designed a plan to address this situation. Comprehensive, multi-disciplinary analysis of the river as laid out by Section 7 of the WSRA fulfilled the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife, Oregon Department of Water Resources, and the Army Corps of Engineers review processes. The plan generated from this
analysis put an emphasis on lowering sediment levels in the side channel and minimizing bed and bank disturbance in the main channel.

As a result, the BLM implemented a project to breach the 30-year-old dike and create a surface flow diversion structure with a headgate screened by natural or natural looking materials. This restored flow to the side channel in a controlled manner that reduced the impact of the structure on the main channel. Overall, the project has re-established roughly 2,700 square meters of important anadromous fish habitat. It received high accolades for restoring habitat essential in the region for research, environmental education, aesthetic values and ecological health. The Wild and Scenic River designation has also encouraged the USFS to pursue natural project designs. The mandate for natural restoration set up in the Wild and Scenic River management plan caused the USFS to drop several rock or hard material projects in favor of more natural designs with organic materials. In one case, the USFS designed a heavily engineered multiboulder bank revetment structure for a side channel improvement project in the upper Salmon.

Duane Bishop explains that “because the Salmon was Wild and Scenic, we opted to drop that design for a more natural” approach. He also emphasizes that local counties recognized the importance of the Wild and Scenic nature of the river. Clackamas County, for example, has designed a specific county zoning map based on the designation, which mandates a 100-foot setback along the river. All of this effectively promotes the health of the river for fish, wildlife
and future generations.

SECTION 2: INCREASE IN PUBLIC AWARENESS AND
THE FACILITATION OF MULTI-PARTY COOPERATION
CASCADE WILD AND SCENIC RIVER, WA
On the Cascade Wild and Scenic River, designation brought recognition to the river and led to a public push for restoration.

The Cascade River was designated as Wild and Scenic in 1978. A component of the Skagit River System, the high-quality water of the Cascade River flows through highly scenic lands, and the river provides valuable recreational and ecological habitat.

In 1980 a flood washed Lookout Bridge into the river, where it stayed for another two decades. The large steel beams gave the name to “Bridge Drop”—a class V rapid where the bridge debris may have been a contributing factor in three fatalities and many other close calls over the years. As Thomas O’Keefe of American Whitewater, an organization devoted to conserving, restoring and providing access to America’s whitewater resources, pointed out, “leaving the debris in the river directly conflicted with the nondegradation and enhancement policy of the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act.”

Starting in 2000, Chris Joosse and Nick Newhall of the Washington Kayak Club
catalogued the site and began educating river management staff about the problem. They made a compelling case to Jim Chu, then Wild and Scenic River manager of Mount Baker– Snoqualmie National Forest, that removing the
debris “would clearly be consistent with the language and spirit of the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act” and “if it could be safely accomplished, it was their obligation to do so.”

“The action would enhance aesthetic and scenic attributes of the river and potentially improve safety for members of the public who use and
enjoy this river for recreation.”
Barb Hathaway –
Working with Skagit County engineers Janice Mariega and Barb Hathaway and local loggers, USFS staff coordinated the removal of the large steel beams, thus restoring the free-flowing character and visual beauty of this reach of the river.

MISSOURI NATIONAL RECREATIONAL WILD AND SCENIC RIVER, MO
Above all, Wild and Scenic River designation of the Missouri National Recreational River helped bring together partners to restore this national treasure. The designation motivated people to form partnerships to restore the river that would not exist had it not been designated.

Wayne Werkmeister, the Acting Superintendent of the Missouri/Niobrara River Units and the Chief of Resources Management for the National Park Service (NPS) explains that on the Missouri National Recreational River, the WSR designation has enabled the NPS staff to “coordinate some pretty amazing events.” For example, the U.S. Coast Guard was a good ally in the removal of “a behemoth of a concrete pier” abandoned in the river over 40 years ago; other
partners included the Army Corps of Engineers, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and Northern Natural Gas (who owned the pier).

As George Berndt, also with the NPS, explains: “park management saw removal of the structure [as] well within congressional intent embodied in the 1968 National Wild and Scenic Rivers Act to preserve and enhance designated rivers and their immediate environments for present and future generations.” In his article on the project, he goes on to emphasize that “removal of the
abandoned pier proved to be an outstanding example of a public-private partnership.

“The park—Missouri National Recreational River—, however, has benefited the most. It witnessed another step in the national campaign to enhance the natural and recreational values, among others, of this unique and worthy unit of both the National Park System and the National Wild and Scenic Rivers System.”

Another way in which the WSR designation helps is by generating public awareness and support for the river. Wayne Werkmeister elaborated on one particularly impressive example. “Working with the local [Yankton] community along the river, we helped orchestrate the removal of over 300 old rusty
car bodies that were placed along the banks over 30 years ago as rip rap” (for bank stabilization).

This project was jump-started by a river trip the National Park Service set up with the mayor of Yankton. The mayor values the nearby natural resources as economic tools for the development of the city due to the awareness generated by these protective designations.

After seeing this stretch of the river, and with the Wild and Scenic River designation in mind, U.S. Senator Ben Nelson called the Missouri National Recreational River “the Mt. Rushmore of NE Nebraska.”

ST. CROIX NATIONAL SCENIC RIVERWAY, MN AND WI
For the St. Croix River, the Wild and Scenic designation has facilitated coordination among multiple agencies, helping to ensure that the river is managed in a holistic manner. It also sparked public awareness of and education about the health of the river, particularly with regard to water quality.

The 154-mile St. Croix River was one of the first eight rivers to be designated Wild and Scenic as part of the original Act in 1968. Its watershed covers almost 800 miles and contains both key habitat for native species and important recreational values. According to Kate Hanson of the National Park Service (NPS), which manages the Riverway in cooperation with the states of
Minnesota and Wisconsin, its “status as a Wild and Scenic River has been critical in protecting and preserving the scenic, recreational, geologic and biological values of the Riverway.”

Hanson explains “good water quality was one of the significant features leading to the St. Croix’s designation as Wild and Scenic.” The river supports 40 species of native mussels and a variety of other aquatic life, and it provides swimming, boating, fishing, and other river recreation.

Water quality is affected by actions throughout the watershed, far beyond the narrow Riverway, and the National Park Service has no regulatory authority over water quality. Water quality protection can be accomplished only through cooperation with other agencies and government jurisdictions. More than 10 years ago, the NPS and other agencies formed the St. Croix Basin Water Resources Team to address water quality issues. In addition to the NPS, the Team includes representatives from Minnesota Pollution Control Agency,
Wisconsin and Minnesota departments of natural resources, U.S. Geological
Survey, Metropolitan Council, the Science Museum of Minnesota’s St.
Croix Watershed Research Station, counties and watershed districts.
Together, these agencies have substantial technical knowledge as
well as research, monitoring, analysis and public outreach capabilities.
Basin Team members have pooled funding from agency budgets and grants, as well as in-kind staff resources, to develop baseline water quality information, document historic trends in water quality, monitor water quality, and identify threats to water quality. Their work has shown that nutrient loading is the primary threat and that phosphorous and other nutrients entering the St. Croix must be reduced by 20 percent by 2020 in order to protect water quality. Data on the
amount of phosphorous loading led Minnesota and Wisconsin regulatory agencies to list the lower 25 miles of the St. Croix impaired by excess phosphorous and chlorophyll-a. Presently, the St. Croix Watershed Research Station is developing a model that will predict nutrient loading from tributaries and help establish Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs) for phosphorous, which must be established in response to the recent impaired listing. This work is
made possible by a $200,000 NPS Centennial grant to the St. Croix National Scenic Riverway that is being matched by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency and Metropolitan Council. The St. Croix’s status as a Wild and Scenic River has helped secure interagency commitment and funding for the Basin Team’s work to protect water quality, and it focused public attention on
water quality concerns.
Alexander Byers
SECTION 3: INCREASED FUNDING FOR RIVER
RESTORATION AND PUBLIC ACCESS
BIG MARSH CREEK WILD AND SCENIC RIVER, OR
On Big Marsh Creek, Wild and Scenic River designation motivated the formation of partnerships focused on restoration, and it bumped Big Marsh Creek projects up on grant priority lists.

The Big Marsh Creek watershed houses the largest high-altitude marsh in the country and as such, is a natural resource gem for the region. Its unique ecology and diversity of wildlife contribute to its outstanding values.

In 1946, private landowners diverted water from the river into two ditches along the marsh to contribute to grazing land for cattle and sheep, disrupting the flow of the creek and negatively impacting the marsh. After the river was federally designated as Wild and Scenic in 1988, specialists looked at ways to restore the marsh by removing the two diversion ditches. The Forest Service oversaw the implementation of a plan to fill and re-vegetate certain sections, while breaching others in order to re-establish the natural floodplain.

Wild and Scenic River designation provided the impetus for these important projects. Positive results have included a lowered water temperature, the rejoining of the springs, a decrease in the encroachment of lodgepole pines with an increase in more hydrophilic plants, and the elimination of bare and compacted patches of soil along the river.

Chris Mickle of the USFS has no doubt that Wild and Scenic designation has helped the Forest Service obtain funds for restoration efforts. Additionally, Wild and Scenic designation of Big Marsh Creek drove the formation of partnerships between groups including the USFS, the Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation, the Oregon Water Enhancement Board, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and many others. In particular, the USFS partnered with the U.S. Geological Survey
and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to create more spotted frog habitat pools as part of their restoration effort. As Mickle explains: “Wild and Scenic designation always makes it easier for us to get grants and form partnerships” that come together to enhance the rivers.

METOLIUS WILD AND SCENIC RIVER, OR
For the Metolius River, the Wild and Scenic designation has prioritized the river for grants, galvanized public support, and improved the overall direction of river management.

As one of the biggest spring-fed rivers in the U.S., the Metolius River is an important resource. It was designated as a Wild and Scenic River in 1988, and for many decades it has provided outstanding n boating and fly-fishing opportunities natural habitat and other scenic and recreational services.

Rod Bonacker, planner for the USFS Sisters Ranger District, explains that the
management plan required as a result of Wild and Scenic River designation has
provided instrumental leverage in attracting both attention and funding to the river. He points out that the Forest Service has never had problems receiving grant money for river-related projects. There is no question in his mind that the planning and attention the Wild and Scenic designation attracts is significantly greater than had the river not been designated.

For a clear contrast, he compares the Wild and Scenic Metolius River with the undesignated Fall River, a tributary of the upper Deschutes Wild and Scenic River. This tributary is akin to a small scale Metolius River in the rich natural resources it possesses; however, the Fall River has not been designated Wild and Scenic and “has not had the attention or heightened sense of care” that
continues to benefit the Metolius.

Mike Riehle, fish biologist for the U.S. Forest Service, agrees that the Wild and Scenic designation has been a useful tool. He worked on a project to restore large wood to the Metolius River in order to aid in anadromous fish recovery. The Wild and Scenic designation “opens doors to grants and projects by giving them a higher level ranking” than would occur without the designation; “I definitely think it highlights the importance of the river.” He goes on to say that, for the Forest Service, the Wild and Scenic designation “helps us do a lot more than [simply]
recruit funding.” Particularly, the planning for the river required by the WSRA has “helped define the issues for the wood restoration and direct future anagement.”

SKAGIT WILD AND SCENIC RIVER, WA
The Skagit’s designation as a Wild and Scenic River in 1978 has played a key role in attracting more funding for land acquisition and restoration projects and increasing public awareness about the special nature of the Skagit system. The river management plan has proved to be a very useful tool for river protection.

The Skagit River flows through a diversity of lands, and it offers outstanding scenic and recreational values to a number of communities. Visitors enjoy boating and other recreation opportunities all along the river; in the winter,
one of the largest bald eagle populations in the lower 48 flocks to the Skagit River for its strong salmon runs.

Perry Welch, project manager of the Skagit Fisheries Enhancement Group (SFEG), describes how the SFEG Wild and Scenic designation affects their work on the Skagit: “We find this designation very helpful when seeking grant funds for working on the Skagit because funders generally like to fund projects on productive systems, and the WSR designation helps in the characterization of the Skagit as an important resource. The designation also helps to create a
nexus between the federal government and non-federal property along the river and makes some projects on private or other public lands eligible for Forest Service funding such as Title II Resource Advisory Committee (RAC) funds. This also enables restoration proponents to pull in the USFS as project partners on non-federally owned parcels.

“Examples from SFEG include the Morgan Creek Assessment and Restoration Design, which was funded by RAC and which led to a FishAmerica grant using National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Restoration funds to remove a partial fish passage barrier on private land near Ross Island Slough in 2007. [This] enabled access to over 3 miles of habitat. Another example is Suiattle Slough Fish Passage repair, funded by RAC, which led to the replacement of
a deteriorating WA Department of Fish and Wildlife fishway on WA Department of Natural Resources—[a region] that provides great Coho spawning and rearing habitat on the lower Suiattle River, which drains into the Sauk River.”

Phil Kincare, the Forest Service Skagit Assistant River Manager, values the designation for the way it facilitates coordination. The USFS works with the SFEG, the Skagit River System Cooperative (Sauk-Suiattle and Swinomish Indian Tribes), the Upper Skagit Indian Tribe, Seattle City Light, other state and local agencies, non-governmental organizations and interagency committees to oversee the management of this Wild and Scenic river. The designation also gives the USFS, as the federal river managing agency, a voice on the Skagit Watershed Council (the lead entity for Salmon Recovery Fund Board grants) and can help when, for example, the Army Corps of Engineers and the Federal Emergency Management Agency are planning and implementing projects in the river corridor. In addition, the designation has “helped us get a better handle on some of the downstream” areas of the river, outside of the designated section
but still affecting the river. “We have the opportunity to have at least some type of a voice” over the entire length of the river.
Thomas O’Ke–
The designation has been helpful “particularly for land acquisition and land conservation.” It has allowed the USFS to compete for funds to acquire land within the Wild and Scenic River corridor but outside the national forest boundary. As a result of the designation, the USFS has been able to acquire land, implement habitat restoration projects and develop areas for river
access, and it “helped [them] get some funding to assist the Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife with access management.”

Wild and Scenic designation has also resulted in garnering resources that increase general public awareness about the special nature of the Skagit River system. The USFS has produced a large, attractive map of the Skagit Wild and Scenic River system that denotes its whitewater, fisheries and other features. The Forest Service also maintains an informative web site specifically on the
Skagit Wild and Scenic River system, and has placed informative signs at boater put-in spots.

In 2000, Congress passed the Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act, which works to restore funds lost to counties by the reduction of logging in national forests. In the Mt. Baker-Snoqualmie National Forest, the USFS works with the Whatcom County Sheriff’s Office Work Crew funded through the Act to work on river restoration and other recreation projects. The crew is a very useful resource and, because of the Wild and Scenic River designation, the USFS can assign the crew to do work in the Wild and Scenic River corridor area on other (nonfederal) public lands. Kincare appreciates how “the WSR designation has helped us share this crew across administrative boundaries within the corridor.”

WHITE SALMON WILD AND SCENIC RIVER, WA
Wild and Scenic designation of the White Salmon River has increased public awareness and appreciation for the river, enabled more public access to the river and brought it significant, tangible restoration resources.

Flowing into the spectacular Columbia River Gorge, the White Salmon River is described by the Interagency Wild and Scenic Rivers Coordinating
Council as follows: “Churning rapids and unique beauty draw visitors to the clear, blue White Salmon River. Glacial waters combine with cold, clear springs, supporting a lush, green ribbon of plant life through the dry, pine-oak woodlands. Continuous rapids, waterfalls, and abrupt drops challenge boaters
of advanced skill.”

Unfortunately, funding has been fairly crimped with the USFS in the past several years, making it difficult to protect all of these natural resources to their full
due. In this difficult funding climate, Wild and Scenic designation garners attention when agencies are developing priorities for land acquisition in river
corridors. Acquisition of the BZ Corners boating access point on the White Salmon River is a good example of the influence that Wild and Scenic designation can have on the river.

BZ Corners is one of the primary access points for public use of the White Salmon River; over 18,000 boaters come through this point every year. Historically, a private parcel at BZ Corners housed this critical public access point to the river. When the owner was ready to sell, the framework of the White Salmon River Management Plan provided the mechanism to bring this parcel into public ownership. In 2000, the Trust for Public Land acquired the parcel at a value of $306,000. Resources from the federal Land and Water Conservation Fund were then used to transfer the land to public ownership in the summer of 2001. The 11-acre parcel is now managed by the USFS as part of the Lower White Salmon Wild and Scenic River. The USFS built a new access trail and raft slide and, as of June 2002, had completed $100,000 worth of upgrades to the
site including removal of old buildings, landscaping, a new river launch, and a popular short hiking trail within this spectacular reach of the Lower White Salmon Gorge.
American Rivers
CONCLUSION
These Wild and Scenic River case studies illustrate several important benefits of Wild and Scenic River designation, beyond the direct ban on dams and other federally-assisted water projects that could have a harmful effect on the designated river.

Comprehensive River Management Planning
Multiple benefits are derived from the comprehensive river management plan required under the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act after a river is designated. Through the planning process, river stakeholders and local communities are invited to help craft a vision for the river’s future and determine how the river should be managed in order to protect its water quality and outstanding
values such as fisheries, recreational, cultural, scenic and other resources. This process can help to build public awareness of and appreciation for a healthy river. In addition, the completed management plan is an important tool for attracting funds from donors who know their money will be used effectively because there is a plan in place to protect the river.

Increased Funding For River Restoration, River Protection and Public Access

River Restoration: Several of the case studies demonstrate how Wild and Scenic designation can help to garner additional resources for river-related restoration projects. These can include resources in the form of agency personnel’s time and expertise, and/or actual funding. Wild and Scenic River designation typically helps to make the river stand out and elevate it when it comes to distribution of funds.

Land acquisitions: A Wild and Scenic designation can be instrumental in attracting funding for acquisitions of key parcels in the river corridor from funding sources such as the Land and Water Conservation Fund. Parcels may need to be acquired in the river corridor to ensure their protection or to provide additional public access to the river, among other reasons.

New Partnerships for River Protection and Restoration
Wild and Scenic designation naturally lends itself to the formation of partnerships. Local, state and federal agencies, landowners, recreation users, non-profit organizations and others have a framework through Wild and Scenic designation and the river management plan to come together and work to protect, restore and ensure public access to the river. Partners can work
collaboratively together to ensure that the management plan is implemented effectively.

Specific Voice for the Health of the River

Without Wild and Scenic River designation, there is no overarching entity whose main interest is the health of the river. When a river is designated as Wild and Scenic, a federal river managing agency is determined. As noted in several of the examples, Wild and Scenic designation provides a nexus for the river managing agency’s involvement when water development projects or restoration projects are proposed, to ensure that the health of the river is ultimately protected

It is important to remember that once a river is designated, community involvement and education is key. There is no way for the river managing agency to be able to monitor everything that happens on the river; the surrounding community must be educated and engaged in its protection. Local river communities can also be a powerful force for restoration in terms of
both funding and people power. Local, state and federal agencies, river users, landowners and others must work together to ensure the river’s health over the long term. Wild and Scenic River designation provides an excellent framework and incentive to accomplish this goal.

These are only a few examples of how Wild and Scenic River designation can benefit rivers, fish and wildlife, and communities. We are interested in gathering additional examples for another version of this report in the future. If you have an example or case study that you would like to share, please contact Bonnie Rice at brice@americanrivers.org/(206) 213-0330
x14..
Kavita Heyn – American Rivers
SOURCES
Big Marsh Creek
Diedrich, Jackie. (October 2004). “Big Marsh Case Study.” Interagency Wild and Scenic Rivers Coordinating Council Section 7 Training Curriculum. Retrieved from http://www.rivers.gov/publications.html#guidelines
Mickle, Chris; US Forest Service. Personal Communication. November 21, 2008.

Cascade River
O’Keefe, Thomas; American Whitewater. Personal communication. October 6, 2008.
O’Keefe, Thomas. (December 2003). “Cascade River (WA) Bridge Debris Removal Update.”
Retrieved from http://www.americanwhitewater.org/content/Article_view_articleid_1064
_display_full_

Deschutes River
Chaudet, Mollie; US Forest Service. Personal communication. October 16, 2008.
“Deschutes River – Oregon.” Interagency Wild and Scenic Rivers Council. Retrieved from http://www.rivers.gov/wsr-deschutes.html
Houston, Ryan; Upper Deschutes Watershed Council. Personal Communication. November 20, 2008.

John Day River
Diedrich, Jackie. (October 2004). “Wild and Scenic Rivers Act: Section 7.” Technical Report of the Interagency Wild and Scenic Rivers Coordinating Council. Retrieved from http://www.rivers.gov/publications.html#guidelines
Ramsey, Kathy; US Forest Service. Personal communication. October 2, 2008.
Sanchez, John; US Forest Service. Personal communication. September 25, 2008.
Sanchez, John. (December 2002). “North Fork John Day Dredge Tailings Restoration Project,”
Project No. 1996-05300, 22 electronic pages, (BPA Report DOE/BP-00004994-1).
Sater, Susan; US Forest Service. Personal communication. October 2, 2008.

Metolius River
Bonacker, Rod; US Forest Service. Personal communication. September 11, 2008.
Riehle, Mike. (November 2006). “Metolius River Wood Restoration Update.” US Forest Service.
Riehle, Mike; US Forest Service. Personal communication. September 23, 2008.

Missouri National Recreational River
Berndt, George (2007). “A Cleansing on the Missouri River.” River Management Society News, 20(2). Retrieved from http://www.river-management.org/pdfs/Vol-20-No-2-2007.pdf
Grube, Steve. (July 2006). “Coordinator Comments.” Missouri River Futures.
Werkmeister, Wayne; National Park Service. Personal correspondence, May and September, 2008.

Salmon River
Bishop, Duane; US Forest Service. Personal communication. September 20, 2008.
Diedrich, Jackie. (October 2004). “Wild and Scenic Rivers Act: Section 7.” Technical Report of the Interagency Wild and Scenic Rivers Coordinating Council. Retrieved from http://www.rivers.gov/publications.html#guidelines

Skagit River
Kincare, Phil; US Forest Service. Personal communication. October 24, 2008.
Welch, Perry; Skagit Fisheries Enhancement Group. Personal communication. December 10, 2007.

St. Croix River
Ferrin, Randy. “Water Resources Protection through Interagency Collaboration.” River Management Society News, 20(2). Retrieved from http://www.river-management.org/pdfs
Hanson, Kate; National Park Service. Personal correspondence, October 14 and 22, 2008.
“St. Croix National Scenic Riverway – Disturbed Lands” (May 11, 2008). National Park Service. Retrieved from http://www.nps.gov/sacn/naturescience/disturbedlands.htm

White Salmon River
O’Keefe, Thomas (June 2002). “White Salmon River (BZ) Access.” American Whitewater.
Retrieved from http://www.americanwhitewater.org/content/Article_view_articleid_492
_display_full_
O’Keefe, Thomas; American Whitewater. Personal communication. October 6, 2008.
“White Salmon River – Washington” (January 2007). Interagency Wild and Scenic Rivers
Coordinating Council. Retrieved from http://www.rivers.gov/wsr-white-salmon.html

Wilson Creek
Colburn, Kevin. (August 2007). “Wilson Creek Development Proposal Withdrawn!” American Whitewater.
Retrieved from http://www.americanwhitewater.org/content/Article_view_
articleid_29811_display_full_
O’Keefe, Thomas; American Whitewater. Personal communication. October 6, 2008.
Teague, Paul. (August 2007). “Wilson Creek development proposal withdraw.” News-Topic:
Caldwell County. Retrieved from http://newstopic.net/articles/2007/08/22/news/30
wilson.txt

Visit made to Tilwara village (Greater NOIDA) at the confluence point of River Yamuna and Hindon

Field visit report
(River Health Index Project)

Visit made to Tilwara village (Greater NOIDA) at the confluence point of

Date: 10 April 2009
Venue: Village Tilwara (Greater NOIDA)

Purpose: The purpose of the visit was to familiarize oneself with the ground situation at one of the 14 grid sites on the river Yamuna. This is to focus attention at one site with an objective to develop the suggested guidelines for field work aimed at the formulation of Micro (local level) Action Plan/s in a consistent manner at all the 14 sites along the river in collaboration with the local partner organizations.

The Micro-Plans for the identified river stretches thus selected would have the following two outputs:

A plan for action for the river as developed by the villagers themselves
Potential ‘Principles’, ‘Indicators’ and ‘Verifiers’ as they emerge through the participatory Micro (local level)-planning exercise leading to the formulation of a River Health Index (RHI)

Methodology:

A perusal of the topo map and the road map enabled us to identify the location of the confluence of river Hindon (the only tributary of river Yamuna in the plains) with the river Yamuna, as well as the human habitations nearby and the probable route to it. (see enclosed topo map). It was found that village Tilwara, which sits almost on the river bank of both river Hindon and river Yamuna on the left of the river Yamuna, is the site to visit.

It was decided that it being more of a recce visit, the emphasis will be on developing a visual picture of the site, interact with the local villagers and determine their level of interest in working towards a common objective of improved understanding of the reasons for the current sad fate of both the river Hindon and the Yamuna and jointly agree on the most feasible size of the grid around the river (covering both the left and the right bank of river Yamuna) where the larger consultation process would be put in place leading to the development of a participatory Micro Plan for the river.

Report:

A five member team comprising of Mr. Pushp Jain (PJ); Mr Bhim Rawat (BR); Ms Sudha Mohan (SM); Sri Bhoop Singh ji (BS), an elderly villager from Samaspur Jagir village in east Delhi and Mr. Manoj Misra (MM) made a visit to the confluence point of River Yamuna with River Hindon.

The team left for the place in the wee hours of morning of 10 April 2009. Having driven on Greator Noida Express way for about an hour it reached the point where River Hindon passes under the Greater Noida Express way next to village Kondli. Before turning towards a bund being used as a temporary road, which ultimately leads to the confluence point, we stopped by the road side to take stock of the state of the River Hindon. (see pics).

The state of the river Hindon was found to be a typical picture of careless disregard for our rivers with its waters full of pollutants of all kinds and its flood plain being used as a dumping site for dead livestock as confirmed by the swarming stray dogs devouring a carcass of a skinned livestock. (see pics). Not only was agriculture seen being practiced in the river Hindon flood plains, but beginnings of urbanization slowly creeping in through fancy resorts could be seen.

Later as we travelled over a bund that cuts through the flood plain of the river Hindon before reaching its confluence with the river Yamuna we could sight Nilgai (Boselaphus tragocamelus) roaming on the farm lands within the flood plains. (see pics).Views of Nilgai against the back drop of high rises of Greater NOIDA presented a compelling yet ironical sight and only bears testimony to the hardy nature of Nilgai as a wild species.

At the confluence the river Yamuna (after receiving waste waters of Faridabad township courtesy the Bhuriya nala or Tilpat drain meeting it on its right bank) carried a reasonable amount of water but its flow was almost imperceptible. On the other hand the river Hindon carried less water but greater flow velocity. (see pics).

It was fortuitous that we met few young farmers belonging to the village Tilwara (on their way to their village along the river and using a buffalo cart to cross over the river Hindon – see pics) and during conversations encouraged us to visit their village. They also informed us that despite the river Hindon being quite polluted still as compared to river Yamuna they preferred to use River Hindon water for cattle cleaning etc. Herd of cattle could be seen roaming along the shores of river Yamuna, grazing and even drinking the water. That they could easily cross the river over to the other bank indicated the low depth of the river. Use of tube-wells, tractors and harvesters in nearby fields (see pics) indicated the extent of mechanization in agriculture that has reached the rural areas in question.

We re-tracked the dusty bund to get into the village Gharbara and further onto Tilwara to meet the other villagers there. (see pics). Soon a group of farmers gathered around for an informal round of discussions and familiarization with each other.

The interaction started with a rough participatory mapping of the area (see pic) by the villagers sharing information about other nearby villages and notable physical features (including a Reserve Forest) on either side of the river Yamuna. Slowly a picture emerged as did the probable size of the grid that we were looking forward to. It was agreed that a grid with 10 km on either side of the river is the viable size to arrive at a fairly good understanding of the state of the river as well as of the proximate and non proximate causes that are impacting the river and the manner in which the river is impacting the people who live on its banks.

Discussions revealed that Tilwara on the river bank is more than 100 year old village but now majority of the villagers from there have shifted to the nearby Garbhara village which is as a result grown into a 1000 plus household village. A view from Tilwara towards Greater NOIDA provides a good indicator of the manner in which the urban settlements are slowly eating into the rural landscapes (see pics).

We were informed that the water table at Tilwara despite it lying close to both river Hindon as well as the river Yamuna has plummeted down to 120 feet from an earlier depth of around 40 feet. A dried well, which at one point met the entire fresh water needs of the village was a sad commentary on the manner in which the ground water sources have been over exploited over time. (see pics). That the quality of the ground water is also suspect (due primarily to the polluted state of both the river Hindon and Yamuna) was made evident by the villagers in no uncertain terms. They were also critical of the rampant pollution let loose into the Kasna nala by the industries upstream that on occasions make even breathing impossible due to the stench emanating from the nala. The nala it may be noted drains into the river Hindon. (see pics).

Further discussions revealed about the extent of the flood plains on either side of the river Yamuna and the fact that the entire area (including upland villages of Kasna and Dankaur) had gone under deep waters during the 1978 floods which has been the most severe floods in river Yamuna in recent times. It was seen as a sad irony that the only well that had sustained the entire village during said floods was today in a state of utter disuse as a result of lowering of the water table.

There were two hand pumps in the village compound one drawing water from shallow depth (called Kacha Pani) and the other from greater depths. (The meaning and usefulness of Kacha pani and Pakka pani needs further elaboration during future visits).

On the adverse impact from pollution in the river the villagers shared their experience of cracks developing in the skins of their livestock and rashes on their own skin once they come in touch with the river’s water.

Hari lumbardar who was the oldest man (see pic) (over 80 years in age) in the group remembered fondly of the times when the river waters were crystal clear and what a pleasure was it to be living along side such a life giving river. In contrast the present situation of the river had made the majority of the farmers to abandon the village. The villagers also attributed a significant change in the frequency and intensity of rains in the region over the years as a cause for the sad state of the river.

Before leaving, we shared contact details with the villagers and were reassured with their eagerness to share their understanding about the situation with us and to then take required steps for the revival of the river.

As a first measure the villagers expressed great interest in a suggestion from one of our team members that they (the villagers) may make a beginning by questioning the potential candidates (when they visit their village seeking votes) at the ensuing General Elections, as to where did they stand on the question of the river’s pollution and whether they (the candidates) were willing to make a written commitment for doing the needful, once they were elected to the Parliament.

Over all it proved to be a good first visit to a site with all the requisite features of a proposed Grid for Micro (local level)- action planning purposes under the project.




Key observations from the visit


River Hindon as well as river Yamuna is in a highly polluted state.

Rampant construction activity including for industries, townships, roads and bridges have not only obstructed the free flowing waters of the rivers but also polluted the river’s water.

River bed is being used for agriculture and sand mining as well as wantonly abused for civil constructions.

There is hardly any discernible riparian zone (with representative natural vegetation of khaddar) available along the river, with agriculture being practiced almost till the river channel.

Agriculture in the area is overwhelmingly inorganic in nature with high use of fertilizers, pesticides and weedicides. Wheat crop could be seen under harvest.

Farmers reportedly lift water directly form the river for agriculture purposes.

Floods plain has been restricted through bunds and roads and agriculture is being practiced on either side of the bunds.

Tilwara is an old village with few remaining households. Pollution and floods in the river have compelled most villagers to shift to the other villages.

Most villagers are semi-literate.

There is significant reduction in annual rain-fall as per the observations of the local villagers.

25-30 years ago both the rivers were quite clean. The pollution in Kasna nala that feeds the river Hindon has increased manifolds from the industrial effluents being dumped into it.

People are suffering as a result of pollution in the river but feel generally helpless. There was a general feeling that the incidence of diseases in the region has increased attributed to the high pollution levels in the river/s.


NEXT STEPS

a) Devise a framework Guidelines document for Micro (local level)-Action Planning within an identified Grid based on the learnings from the current visit.
b) Hold a larger and longer (over a number of days at a stretch) consultation in and around the village Tilwara on the left bank of river Yamuna.
c) Identify volunteers from within the community who can help the field researcher gather a set of relevant information (see the attached list of things to do). This group of not more 5 on either side of the river within the Grid shall be termed as the Local task team.
d) Visit areas (village Aminpur) across the river Yamuna (in Haryana) and set up a task team on the right bank too.

PROJECT AT A GLANCE

Project Title:
“Develop, Design and Test in a Participatory manner a "River Health Index" (RHI) as a tool for Prioritization, Restoration and Conservation of River Ecosystems”.

Project Executant:
PEACE Institute Charitable Trust,
178-F, Pocket IV
Mayur Vihar I
DELHI – 110091
Telefax: 91-11-22719005

Project Support:

UNDP – GEF

Project Duration:

Two Years (Nov 08 – October 10)

Project Rationale and Methodology:
Why and How of River Health Index (RHI)
It has been experienced that currently rivers are looked upon merely as channels of water passage and as entities that need little care other than purification of water therein. The truth is much greater. Unless the unique ecosystem identity and irreplaceable ecological services and economic/livelihood returns that rivers provide is understood and appreciated based on sound knowledge, information base and applied science the fate and future of rivers would remain at best uncertain.
It has also to be understood that while a river as an aqueous system has broad general characteristics which are common to all rivers, ecologically speaking no two rivers are like. Nor are different sections in the same river alike.
Presently there is no broad based technique or tool available with planners to assess the health in terms of:
- degree of threat to its sustainability in terms of quantity, quality of water and its integrity in terms of flood plains
- ability to meander, to recharge the ground water or provide unique aquatic habitats to distinctive flora and fauna
- to act as an environment friendly means of transport and recreation,
- ecological value of open space (specially in urban stretches) that the river flood plains provide
- Flood records and economic value of rivers and flood plains
- Presence of and planned / likely ‘developmental’ pressures on a river either in its entirety or in its distinguishable sections.
- Susceptibility to changes in the event of climate change
While pollution control boards do provide information on water quality in rivers in terms of BOD (Biochemical Oxygen Demand), DO (Dissolved Oxygen) and Faecal Coliform Number, but it has been found to only reinforce stereotypic image of a river as a channel for passage of water.
To mitigate such a situation an objective and scientific Index that assimilates ‘river health’ indicators is proposed to be developed in a systematic manner through an intensive expert consultation, literature review and multi stage field testing.
It is intended to use river Yamuna as a test case from its origin to its confluence with river Ganga at Prayag (Allahabad), to plan, devise, develop and test a ‘river health index’ (RHI) as a tool for Prioritization, Restoration and Conservation of River Ecosystems.
Proposed Composition of RHI
Project shall involve working with partners within and outside of the relevant government agencies and relevant local NGOs / CBOs for devising of the following as part of the proposed RHI
a) Define “Standard” of river health which is sought to be benchmarked for referencing purposes
v “Principles” which are sub set of the Standard and serve as the basis for reasoning and various actions. (Eg., Maintaining water quality standards in the river; maintaining navigability of river channel; etc)
· “Criteria” which define aspect of a process which needs to be in place to meet the requirement of a Principle (Eg., Pollution levels conform to bathing quality standards, etc )

o “Indicators” which are quantitative and qualitative parameters which require assessment in relation to a Criterion (Eg., Effluent Treatment plants are in place; etc)
- “Verifiers” (Control forms/methods, participatory methods of testing / recording / verification, objective and subjective assessments, like “is the fish in the river worthy of consumption”? etc).
Community involvement in assessments shall mainly be operative at the “Indicator” and the “Verifiers” level.
Proposed Project Outputs:

a) River Health Index (RHI) developed as a handy tool to assess the state of rivers in the country
b) RHI report on river Yamuna as a test case
c) Network of experts (within and outside of government agencies), NGOs, CBOs and other interested people willing to take the initiative forward beyond the project’s life, in terms of capacity enhancement, application of RHI to other rivers and utilisation of RHI as a monitoring tool in light of impacts from Climate Change


Project Replicability and Sustainability:

Replicability and sustainability of the project’s outputs is the very essence of the project. RHI (River Health Index) once developed is expected to be applied to as many rivers in the country and by as many groups as possible to come up with a first list of most threatened and hence high priority rivers in the country. In due course it shall be turned into community led and periodic exercise to document and inform progress under national and state level river conservation programs.