147 



decided to allow floaters exclusive access to the wild river one week, and power 

 boaters the next; power boat launches were severely limited. In spite of 

 overwhelming public support for shared use, incompatibility between floaters 

 and power boaters was cited as the reason for their choice. The public reaction 

 was massive, imanimously against the plan which would essentially halve 

 everyone's access to the wild river. Most of the public input, about 75%, 

 supported the LAC alternative with some adjustments for faulty data. 



The Final EIS was released on August 11, 1994, conjuring up a plan worse 

 for most of Hells Canyon's boaters than the DEIS's every-other-week fiasco. 

 This time power boaters were eliminated from the heart of Hells Canyon for 

 three days a week in July and August to provide a near-wildemess experience 

 for floaters. The Forest Service conceded that the plan was based on social, not 

 resource concerns. An opportunity was given for further input of new 

 information, and masses of input were received, although qualifiers placed on 

 the nature of the input assured that most of it would be disregarded. 



On November 9, 1994 the final plan and decision notice were made public 

 with only minor changes. The Hells Canyon Alliance, 3 pilot's associations, 2 

 state agencies, 4 environmental organizations, 3 individuals and 18 of the 19 

 commercial power boaters, appealed the plan. After reviewing the appeals, the 

 Regional Forester (R-6) granted a stay, delaying implementation of the plan 

 until September 15, 1995. 



Appeal decisions began showing up on July 20, 1995. For the most part, all 

 31 were identical. Part of the plan was to be implemented in September, 1995 

 after the stay was lifted, a few items were dumped and the rest was sent back to 

 planning. Those things affirmed by the decision, such as removal of picnic 

 tables, pit toilets and navigational markers in the wild river section, were to 

 happen with lifting of the stay. 



Everything not affirmed or reversed was returned for more analysis. The 

 issues concerning numbers for commercial power boaters were to be studied 

 some more, the planning process to be conducted by the Wallowa- Whitman 

 with some sort of oversight by the Regional Office. 



There were two areas of special concern to power boaters. One, the 

 Regional Forester upheld use of visitor data from 1988-1992. Those numbers 

 are flawed and inaccurate for private use, based on guesses of compliance. 

 They do not provide a clear picture of the canyon usage and no amount of 

 review would provide accurate data; it simply doesn' t exist. Two, the concept 

 of a nonmotorized window was upheld. However, the exact timing and 

 duration was to be studied. -"" 



Other plan features that Deputy Regional Forester Richard Ferraro affirmed 

 include: 



33 



