This information focuses on riparian and aquatic resource management, which is one of the six significant issues raised in response to the June 2011 proposed action. In the 1988 forest plan, two rivers were deemed eligible as Wild and Scenic Rivers – the South Fork Salmo River (Wild; 5 miles) and Kettle River (Recreational; 3 miles). Both rivers are still eligible in this forest plan revision effort; eligibility does not vary by alternative.
Alternatives vary by whether they would use one of three general aquatic management strategies. Each strategy would employ either INFISH priority watersheds or a key watershed network to prioritize activities that restore aquatic and riparian systems to a healthier and more resilient state.
Alternatives vary by whether they would use one of three general management strategies:
- The No Action Alternative and Alternative B would use the Inland Native Fish Strategy (INFISH) and INFISH priority watersheds to prioritize aquatic restoration. INFISH is an interim strategy to provide additional watershed direction to restore and maintain the ecological health of watersheds and aquatic ecosystems on National Forest lands for native resident fisheries; it does not provide a comprehensive management strategy that is integrated with land-based (i.e., terrestrial) ecosystem management. Read more about INFISH here (7MB).
- The Proposed Action Alternative and Alternative O would use the Aquatic and Riparian Conservation Strategy (ARCS) and a key watershed network to prioritize aquatic restoration. ARCS is a comprehensive strategy integrated with terrestrial ecosystem management; it designates riparian management areas, a key watershed network, and a core set of desired conditions, objectives, standards and guidelines to sustain aquatic and riparian-dependent species on the forest.Read more about ARCS here.
- Alternatives P and R would use ARCS-modified and an expanded key watershed network to prioritize aquatic restoration. ARCS-modified expands ARCS to include aquatic and riparian issues specific to the Colville National Forest. For example, ARCS-modified refines standards and guidelines to prevent the introduction and spread of aquatic invasive species. ARCS-modified also minimizes new infrastructure such as roads, trails, administrative and recreation areas, and grazing facilities in riparian management areas. Read more about ARCS-modified in Chapter 2 and Chapter 3 (3 MB) of the DEIS.
Want to see a quick comparison of how these strategies differ? Check out this table.
Want to know the options for a particular subwatershed? Check out this table.
The map below shows where INFISH and key watersheds overlap, by alternative. To see the INFISH priority watersheds and key watersheds side-by-side, click the map. A separate document will open in a new tab.
Location of key and INFISH priority watersheds proposed under each alternative