United States 

Department of 

Agriculture 

Forest 

Service 

Southwestern 

Region 

Cibola 

National 

Forest and 

National 

Grasslands 

May 2011

Scenic Resources 

Specialist Report 

Kiowa, Rita Blanca, Black Kettle 

and McClellan Creek National 

Grasslands Plan Revision 

Environmental Impact Statement 

Analysis 

Submitted by: __/s/ Nancy Brunswick_________________________ 

 Forest Landscape Architect and Recreation Program 

Manager 

Cibola National Forest and National Grasslands 

Printed on recycled paper • Month Year 3 

Executive Summary

The scenic resources and rural setting of the Grasslands strongly influences the experience of 

visitors. The Grasslands are generally characterized by pastoral agricultural landscape from vast 

open grasslands of the Kiowa and Rita Blanca to the rolling hills of the Black Kettle. Many 

visitors also have a deep appreciation of the rural character of the plains grasslands landscapes. 

The presence of farms and ranches contributes to the “sense of place” or “cultural identity” that 

these areas provide for residents and visitors alike. 

Overview of the Affected Environment 

The current condition, with a few exceptions, meets a moderate to high scenic integrity, where the 

existing condition meets or is trending toward the desired condition. The local communities are 

marketing the scenic quality of the grasslands to attract travel, tourism, and motion picture 

projects to the area for economic development. 

Summary of Environmental Consequences 

Alternative A, No Action provided very limited direction and guidance for management of the 

scenic resources. Some anticipated projects would benefit from increased direction and emphasis 

on scenic resource management to reduce impacts. 

Alternative B, Proposed Action provides increased direction and guidance for managing scenic 

resources. Where there is high concern for scenic quality High Scenic Integrity Objectives are 

assigned with guidelines to maintain or enhance scenic quality in those areas, which includes 

designated Scenic Byways, the Santa Fe National Historic Trail and developed recreation sites. 

Some of the proposed vegetation management objectives and guidelines have the potential to 

impact the quality and character of the scenery. 

The wilderness recommendation in Alternative C would not impact scenic quality. 

Specialist Report 

Introduction 

This report discloses and evaluates the potential environmental consequences on the scenic 

resource that may result with the adoption of a revised land management plan. It examines, in 

detail, three different alternatives for revising the management direction from the 1985 Cibola 

National Forest Land Management Plan (only that which is relevant to the National Grasslands). 

Relevant Laws, Regulations, and Policy that Apply 

There are policies that apply to management of scenic resources. FSH 1909.12 (13.13a), Land 

Management Planning Handbook, directs the agency to use the “Scenery Management System 

(SMS) to describe recreational desired conditions and objectives.” FSM 2380.61 provides 

guidance for managing scenic resources. 
Printed on recycled paper • Month Year 4 

Methodology and Analysis Process 

The Scenery Management System process defined in “Landscape Aesthetics: A Handbook for 

Scenery Management” was used to develop scenic integrity objectives for this draft plan. 

Valued Landscape Character descriptions were developed and incorporated into the desired 

condition for scenic resources. Developed recreation sites, roads, trails and other special areas 

were analyzed to establish concern levels. Special areas were also assigned Concern Level 1, 

including national and state designated scenic byway corridors, Important Bird Areas, and the 

Santa Fe National Historic Trail corridor. Since the Canadian River through Mills Canyon has 

been found eligible for designation as a Scenic River under the Wild and Scenic River legislation, 

the National Grasslands portion of the canyon was classified as a High Scenic Integrity objective 

area. Concern levels determine the relative importance of scenic quality to people who visit the 

grasslands. 

There was a variation from the GIS mapping process described in the SMS manual. Due to the 

relatively flat nature of the topography covered with low growing vegetation (grasses, shrubs and 

forbs) the landscape is generally visible with few variations that would obstruct views. Also taken 

into account is the fragmented ownership patterns. Generally, an entire grassland unit was 

assigned a Scenic Integrity Objective (SIO) rather than making distinctions based on the distance 

from Concern Level 1 roads or areas. This was in lieu of the more common approach of a GIS 

analysis to determine landscape visibility that would have further fragmented the management of 

these often discreet units. However, distance was a factor when determining SIO classes. For 

example if a unit was generally within the 1⁄2 mile foreground of a Concern Level 1 route or area, 

the entire unit would be selected for High Scenic Integrity. 

Assumptions 

In the analysis for this resource, the following assumptions have been made: 

• The land management plan provides a programmatic framework for future site-specific 

actions. 

• Land management plans do not have direct effects. They do not authorize or mandate any 

site-specific projects or activities (including ground-disturbing actions). 

• Land management plans may have implications, or environmental consequences, of 

managing the forests under a programmatic framework. 

• The plan decisions (desired conditions, objectives, standards, guidelines, management 

areas, monitoring) will be followed when planning or implementing site-specific projects 

and activities. 

• Law, policy, and regulations will be followed when planning or implementing sitespecific projects and activities. 

• Monitoring will occur and the land management plan will be amended, as needed. 

• We will be funded similar to past budget levels (past 5 years). 

• The planning timeframe is 15 years; other timeframes may be analyzed depending on the 

resource (usually a discussion of anticipated trends into the future). 

• Specific to scenic resources, most of the grasslands is has been modified for agricultural. 

However, this is often a scenic landscape, valued for the pastoral qualities. 
Printed on recycled paper • Month Year 5 

Revision Topics Addressed in this Analysis 

Changing the management of scenic resources was identified as a need for change: “Revised plan 

will provide direction for management of scenic resources based on objectives for specific areas, 

particularly those identified as having high scenic integrity.” 

The Forest Service was directed to use the Scenery Management System for forest plan revisions 

beginning with a letter from Deputy Chief Gray F. Reynolds on August 22, 1994 and in FS 

Manual direction 2380.61. The SMS system is also an improved system for addressing the 

characteristics of the grasslands. The SMS system recognizes the potential value of cultural 

modified landscapes. The VMS system used in the 1985 plan operates on the assumption that a 

natural appearing landscape is always preferable and that human modifications are detraction 

from the landscape character. As a result, scenic quality was not given much emphasis or 

guidance in the 1986 plan. In the case of the grasslands, the pastoral landscapes are often highly 

valued for their scenic quality. The SMS provides a process for identifying valued qualities in a 

culturally modified landscape, and setting goals and objectives to maintain or enhance those 

characteristics. 

There are potential changes in the 15 year planning horizon that could change the scenic quality, 

including the potential for large industrial wind turbines. The increased emphasis on the valued 

pastoral landscape character where there is high concern will help to protect the important scenic 

resources on the grasslands. 

Summary of Alternatives 

The following table summarizes the differences in scenic resource management between 

alternatives. See pages 8- 9 for an explanation of the differences between the two different 

scenery management systems and a crosswalk that explains the similarities in the objectives. The 

acreages reported below for Alternative A are different than the acreages actually stated in the 

1985 Forest Plan. The VQO acres were recently digitized and recalculated using GIS versus the 

general estimates of area done for the original planning effort. 

Black Kettle and McClellan Creek National Grasslands 

Visual Quality Objectives 

Retention Partial Retention Modification Maximum 

Modification 

Alternative A 

No Action 

0 3,673 29,051 0

Scenic Integrity Objectives 

 High Scenic 

Integrity 

Moderate Scenic 

Integrity 

Low Scenic 

Integrity 

Very Low Scenic 

Integrity 

Alternative B 

Proposed Action 

7,082 25,630 0 0

Alternative C 7,082 25,630 0 0
Printed on recycled paper • Month Year 6 

Kiowa and Rita Blanca National Grasslands 

Visual Quality Objectives 

Retention Partial Retention Modification Maximum 

Modification 

Alternative A 

No Action 

0 8,081 221,611 0 

Scenic Integrity Objectives 

 High Scenic 

Integrity 

Moderate Scenic 

Integrity 

Low Scenic 

Integrity 

Very Low Scenic 

Integrity 

Alternative B 

Proposed Action 

75,929 114,249 40,705 0 

Alternative C 

Wilderness 

Recommendation 

75,929 114,249 40,705 0 
Printed on recycled paper • Month Year 7 

Description of Affected Environment (Existing Condition) 

The scenic resources and rural setting of the Grasslands strongly influences the experience of 

visitors. The Grasslands are generally characterized by pastoral agricultural landscape from vast 

open grasslands of the Kiowa and Rita Blanca to the rolling hills of the Black Kettle. Views from 

Grassland units often include homes, barns, tractors, trucks, windmills, cattle, stock tanks, and 

other private ranchland features. Grasslands residents are accustomed to viewing these structures 

and features and see them as a highly-valued part of the traditional landscape. Many visitors also 

have a deep appreciation of the rural character of the plains grasslands landscapes. The presence 

of farms and ranches contributes to the “sense of place” or “cultural identity” that these areas 

provide for residents and visitors alike. Scenic resources and scenic quality are important to local 

residents and visitors as identified in the National Visitor Use Monitoring Survey. In the 2006 

survey (the first year that the grasslands were analyzed separately from the Cibola mountain 

districts) 51.5% said that part of the purpose of their visit was to view wildlife or birds, and 

47.5% stated that part of the purpose of their visit was to view scenery. Recreationists at 

developed sites were largely satisfied with the quality of the scenery. In the Attitudes, Values and 

Beliefs study, respondents indicated that the scenic quality was important to residents and they 

value the sense of place (Russell and Adams-Russell 2005). 

On the Black Kettle and McClellan Creek National Grasslands, the many lakes, ponds, wetlands, 

and riparian vegetation are wonderful surprises to prairie visitors and add to the rich diversity of 

the rolling red hills, patches of oaks and shrubs, and other vegetation interspersed with the 

cultivated fields on surrounding private lands. The landscape has changed little over the past 20 

years. While some new oil and gas wells have been drilled, others have been plugged and 

abandoned. Closed oil and gas sites were rehabilitated to minimize evidence of the past operation. 

In the past 20 years, Grasslands managers have created some trails to improve the public’s 

opportunity to view scenic landscapes and wildlife. 

East Kiowa and Rita Blanca National Grasslands areas greet the traveler with the vast expanse of 

an undulating plain of grass, punctuated by windmills and farmsteads. An area on the Rita Blanca 

National Grassland typifies the “High Lonesome” prairie of lore. One of the most distinctive and 

beautiful landscapes enjoyed by many visitors is Mills Canyon, with its mosaic of evergreen 

trees, red-rock cliffs, and free-flowing river at the bottom of a deep canyon. These features are 

unique to this part of the plains grasslands. Two scenic byways traverse this part of the Grasslands 

and management of scenic resources along these viewsheds can have a significant impact on the 

recreational experience of drivers (see Special Areas). The Great Plains Trail of Oklahoma directs 

visitors to roads within the Black Kettle National Grasslands to watch for wildlife and enjoy the 

scenic resources. There has been very limited development that has impacted scenery on the 

Grasslands in the last decade. While there are several small (less than two acres) caliche 

extraction pits, most of them retired and rehabilitated, they are not located in areas viewed from 

scenic travel ways or recreation sites. It is projected that future developments along these 

corridors and other areas developed to highlight scenic resources will further enhance enjoyment 

and the marketability of the Grassland’s scenic resources. 
Printed on recycled paper • Month Year 8 

Local communities are beginning to capitalize on the value of scenery in the grasslands. Scenic 

byways and other travel and tourism efforts are incorporating scenery as a way to draw in visitors 

from outside the local area. The Santa Fe National Historic Trail on the Kiowa National 

Grasslands has legislation directing the agency to protect the historic character and scenic quality 

of this corridor. For local residents, scenery defines their “sense of place” and has an intrinsic 

impact on their quality of life. Protecting and highlighting scenic resources is also becoming 

increasingly important to the Grassland counties in contributing to rural economic development. 

The current condition, with a few exceptions, meets a moderate to high scenic integrity, where the 

existing condition meets or is trending toward the desired condition. 

While there have been few developments that have had an adverse effect on the scenic quality of 

the grasslands, the current forest plan had little management direction to protect or enhance 

scenic quality. There was potential for substantial negative effects on scenic quality. Ninety six 

percent of the grasslands is assigned the Visual Quality Objective (VQO) of Modification. In a 

Modification VQO, management activities may visually dominate the characteristic landscape. 

However, landform and vegetative alterations must borrow from naturally established form, line, 

color or texture so as to blend in with the surrounding landscape character. The objective should 

be met within one year of project completion. Four percent of the grasslands were assigned a 

VQO of partial retention where the management objective is to Partial Retention, Management 

activities must remain visually subordinate to the characteristic landscape. Associated visual 

impacts in form, line, color, and texture must be reduced as soon after project completion as 

possible but within the first year (11,574 acres in the analysis area). There were no VQOs of 

Preservation or Retention assigned to the grasslands, where there would be a management 

emphasis to maintain or enhance the valued landscape character. 

Environmental Consequences

The land management plan provides a programmatic framework that guides site-specific actions 

but does not authorize, fund, or carryout any project or activity. Because the land management 

plan does not authorize or mandate any site-specific activities or ground-disturbing actions there 

can be no direct effects. However, there may be implications, or longer term environmental 

consequences, of managing the forests under this programmatic framework. 

Comparison of the Scenery Management System (proposed action) to the Visual 

Management System (no action) 

National Forest Scenery Management System

The National Forest Scenery Management System is the process used for planning and design of 

the visual elements of multiple use land management. Scenery management is based on the 

criteria and guidelines in the Landscape Aesthetics Handbook for Scenery Management, USDA 

Handbook Number 701. This system was implemented in 1996, superseding the Visual 

Management System and replacing National Forest Landscape Management, Vol. 2, USDA 

Handbook Number 462. 

The eleven fundamental principles in the Scenery Management System are: 
Printed on recycled paper • Month Year 9 

• Biological, physical, and social factors create and influence scenery and interact to 

determine landscape character. 

• Landscape character varies greatly with the interaction of environmental factors. 

• People have the ability to perceive landscape character and develop expected images. 

• Through various activities, people have the ability to modify landscape character and 

scenic conditions and have often done so. 

• Such changes in landscape character and scenic condition often modify, suppress, or 

replace the original landscape character. 

• People value most highly the more scenic landscapes. 

• Generally, natural-appearing landscapes are the most valued. 

• Resource managers can design their activities to reduce adverse impacts on landscape 

character and scenic integrity. 

• People have the ability to establish goals to maintain or create desired landscape 

character. 

• People have the ability to apply ecological, technical, and design knowledge to meet 

scenery management goals and objectives. 

• In some situations, resource managers perpetuate or create desired scenic environments to 

provide an improved quality of life. (USDA 1995) 

The Scenery Management System (SMS) began with the basic premises established in the Visual 

Management System, but has been revised to better accommodate ecosystem management and 

the time frames and disturbance patterns of natural systems. This system places greater 

importance on identifying which scenic elements forest constituency most value, and developing 

management strategies to maintain or improve on those qualities. 

The 1986 Cibola Forest Land Resource Management Plan (LRMP) specified Visual Quality 

Objectives (VQO) from the Visual Management System associated with the Management Areas. 

SMS uses Scenic Integrity Objectives (SIO) to establish the desired condition for management of 

an area instead of VQO's. A crosswalk is described in the "Landscape Aesthetics: A Handbook 

for Scenery Management (USDA 1995).” This process was followed, with adaptations to adjust 

for the grasslands character, and used to assign the SIOs presented in the proposed action. 

Scenic Integrity is defined as "a measure of the degree to which a landscape is visually perceived 

to be `complete.’ The highest scenic integrity ratings are given to those landscapes that have little 

or no deviation from the character valued by constituents for its aesthetic appeal (USDA 1995). 

Scenic Integrity Levels describe the current condition of the scenic resource. Scenic Integrity 

Objectives describe the objectives for management, or the desired future conditions. 
Printed on recycled paper • Month Year 10 

This table shows a cross walk of the VQOs to the SIOs. 

The Visual Quality Objective -Scenic Integrity Objective Transition

Visual Quality Objective Scenic Integrity Objective Definition

Preservation Very High Unaltered-Valued landscape character "is" intact with 

only minute if any deviations. The existing landscape 

character and sense of place is expressed at the 

highest possible level.

Retention High Appears unaltered- Landscapes where the valued 

landscape character "appears" intact. Deviations may 

be present but must repeat the form, line color, 

texture, and pattern common to the landscape 

character so completely and at such scale that they are 

not evident. 

Partial Retention Moderate Appears Slightly Altered- Noticeable deviations must 

remain visually subordinate to the landscape 

character being viewed. 

Modification Low Appears Moderately Altered- Deviations begin to 

dominate the valued landscape character being 

viewed but they borrow valued attributes such as size, 

shape, edge effect and pattern of natural openings,

vegetative type changes or architectural styles outside 

of the landscape being viewed.

The crosswalk demonstrates the relative relationships between the SMS and VMS objectives. However, 

there are substantial differences. The VQO defines objectives for the acceptable degree of change from the 

natural condition, regardless of scenic quality of the natural condition. The SIO defines objectives for the 

acceptable degree of change from the valued landscape character, and can include ecological conditions or 

the architectural styles and built environment features such as fences and agricultural scale windmills. 

Alternative A – No Action 

Current Land and Resource Management Plan Direction

The Cibola National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan (1985) direction (standards and 

guidelines) below is applicable to scenic resource management. 

General Guidelines for All Management Areas 

• Acceptable variations in VQO classifications from the acreages presented in the standards 

and guidelines for specific management areas are as follows: 

 Preservation: No Change 

 Retention: + or – 2 percent in foreground, + or – 5 percent in middle 

ground and background

 Partial Retention: + or – 5 percent in foreground, + or – 10 percent in 

middle ground and background

 Modification: + or – 10 percent in all zones
Printed on recycled paper • Month Year 11 

Most of the management direction applied to management of forest cover primarily through 

harvesting trees: 

• Manage for the visual quality objectives of retention or partial retention for developed site 

plan perimeter using a definition of characteristic landscape which includes manmade 

features. 

• Accomplish viewshed corridor planning as needed for timber sales. 

• Inventory for existing visual condition (EVC) and visual absorption capability (VAC). 

• Dispose of all activity slash within seen area or up to approximately 200 feet on either side 

of roads and trails where the VQO is retention. Retain/enhance retention by Landscape 

Architect (LA) specifying GSL, DBH and vista opportunities appropriate to each site and 

coordinated with special GSL and old growth requirements for wildlife. Use slash disposal 

techniques appropriate for given area. 

• Where the foreground VQO is partial retention, the following will be required: Dispose of 

all activity slash occurring within 200 feet of recreation sites, forest trails, forest roads, and 

paved or all-weather roads. Slash will be disposed of within 1 growing season after 

completion of the project which generates the slash. Regain/enhance partial retention areas 

by LS specifying GSL, DBH and vista opportunities appropriate to a given site. Use slash 

disposal techniques appropriate for given area. 

• Newly created tree stumps in thinning areas will have cut-face away from any recreation 

sites, trails, or roads within 200 feet of the stumps. 

Management Area 4 – Black Kettle and McClellan Creek National Grasslands 

The following are the acreages assigned VQOs in the current forest plan: 

 4,100 acres Partial Retention 

 29,012 acres Modification 

No additional scenic resource direction is given to this management area. 

Management Area 5 – Kiowa and Rita Blanca National Grasslands 

 

The following are the acreages assigned VQOs in the current forest plan: 

 8,186 acres Partial Retention (Mills Canyon) 

222,656 acres Modification 

Manage Canadian River to preserve its wild, scenic, or recreation river potential. 

Effects from Alternative A, No Action 

Since most of the grasslands are managed for a VQO of Modification there is little emphasis on 

managing to retain/enhance scenic quality. Most of the scenic resource direction in the existing 

plan focuses on the timber harvest related to vegetation management. Most of this direction has 
Printed on recycled paper • Month Year 12 

limited if any consequence to grasslands management. There is some minor timber harvest for 

firewood and management of invasive species such as Siberian Elm and red cedar, and this 

direction would apply to these management initiatives. 

There is a potential for large industrial wind energy and additional oil and gas development. 

These are the anticipated activities that most likely would negatively impact scenic quality. These 

activities could detract from the scenic quality of those areas that have been determined to have 

high concern for scenic quality, such as designated scenic byways and the Santa Fe National 

Historic Trail. 

Action Alternatives B & C 

Alternative B provides more direction and emphasis on managing the scenic quality of the 

pastoral/agricultural landscapes than Alternative A. This includes providing desired conditions, 

objectives and guidelines for maintaining and enhancing the scenic resources, especially in areas 

assigned High Scenic Integrity Objectives. 

On the Kiowa National Grasslands, High SIO is assigned to Mills Canyon area, including the 

Mills Canyon and Mills Rim Campgrounds and the Sauz Creek and Sugar Loaf Mountain area. In 

the eastern Kiowa and the Rita Blanca, High SIO is assigned to Thompson Grove and Felt Picnic 

areas, the area known as the “High Lonesome” and the unit that contains the Santa Fe Trail. 

Future management emphasis will include managing for high scenic integrity where the valued 

landscape character "appears" intact. Deviations may be present but must repeat the form, line 

color, texture, and pattern common to the landscape character so completely and at such scale that 

they are not evident. 

The remainder of the Western Kiowa National Grasslands is proposed for a Moderate SIO where 

noticeable deviations must remain visually subordinate to the landscape character being viewed. 

The eastern Kiowa and the Rita Blanca is managed for both Moderate and Low SIOs. (See the 

proposed SIO map, included with this report.) 

On the Black Kettle National Grassland the units near the developed recreation sites are proposed 

for High SIOs, and the area around Croton Creek. All of McClellan Creek National Grassland is 

proposed for High Scenic Integrity. The remaining units on the Black Kettle are proposed for 

Moderate SIOs. 

The direction given will serve to improve management of scenic resources for the Grasslands, 

and increase the emphasis for this resource. Given community efforts to attract tourism to these 

areas, this will be a benefit to the Grasslands. This will also provide increased effort to Grasslands 

partnerships with scenic byway organizations and others groups that are marketing the scenic 

resources of the prairie. 

In areas with high scenic integrity objectives, only minimal alterations from landscape character 

goals described in the desired conditions should be allowed. This will help to maintain the vast 

open views in these areas. Mitigations are proposed for High SIOs to reduce the impacts from oil 

and gas exploration and extraction. 

Black Kettle and McClellan Creek National Grasslands 

Scenic Integrity Objectives 

 High Scenic Moderate Scenic Low Scenic Very Low Scenic 
Printed on recycled paper • Month Year 13 

Integrity Integrity Integrity Integrity 

Alternative B 

Proposed Action 

7,082 25,630 0 0

Alternative C 7,082 25,630 0 0

Kiowa and Rita Blanca National Grasslands 

Scenic Integrity Levels 

 High Scenic 

Integrity 

Moderate Scenic 

Integrity 

Low Scenic 

Integrity 

Very Low Scenic 

Integrity 

Alternative B 

Proposed Action 

75,929 114,249 40,705 0 

Alternative C 

Wilderness 

Recommendation 

75,929 114,249 40,705 0 

Scenic Resource Impacts Related to other Proposed Actions: 

Other management proposals in Alternatives B & C may impact the scenic resources, and would 

be analyzed on a project specific basis before proceeding. This includes removing shelter belts in 

some locations, removing invasive species of trees such as red cedar and Siberian Elms, and 

promoting additional patches of Shinery Oak. While all of these proposals can be designed to 

meet the SIO through project design and mitigation, they have the potential of changing the 

scenic quality of the landscapes in the short term. Especially projects where there is a tree harvest 

element will change the views, since trees are a prominent component on the grasslands 

landscape. 

Alternative C 

There are no additional impacts to scenic resources to from Mills Canyon being recommended for 

wilderness. The recommendation would exclude Forest Road K600 and the developed 

campground. A recommendation of wilderness and associated management would complement 

the High Scenic Integrity Objective of the Mills Canyon area. 

Cumulative Environmental Consequences 

The cumulative effects area includes adjacent public and private lands within the viewshed of the 

Concern Level 1 roads, trails and areas. Due to the fragmented nature of the grasslands 

ownership, development and management activities on adjacent private lands has the potential to 

negatively impact scenic quality as seen from the grasslands. The action alternatives increase 

emphasis for managing scenic resources across the grasslands, but do not influence the private 

and public lands managed by other agencies. 
Printed on recycled paper • Month Year 14 

Unavoidable Adverse Impacts 

The land management plan provides a programmatic framework that guides site-specific actions 

but does not authorize, fund, or carryout any project or activity. Before any ground-disturbing 

actions take place, they must be authorized in a subsequent environmental analysis. Therefore 

none of the alternatives cause unavoidable adverse impacts. 

Irreversible and Irretrievable Commitment of Resources 

The land management plan provides a programmatic framework that guides site-specific actions 

but does not authorize, fund, or carryout any project or activity. Because the land management 

plan does not authorize or mandate any ground-disturbing actions, none of the alternatives cause 

an irreversible or irretrievable commitment of resources. 

Adaptive Management 

All alternatives assume the use of adaptive management principles. Forest Service decisions are 

made as part of an on-going process, including planning, implementing projects, and monitoring 

and evaluation. The land management plan identifies a monitoring program. Monitoring the 

results of actions will provide a flow of information that may indicate the need to change a course 

of action or the land management plan. Scientific findings and the needs of society may also 

indicate the need to adapt resource management to new information. The Forest Supervisor 

annually evaluates the monitoring information displayed in the evaluation reports through a 

management review and determines if any changes are needed in management actions or the plan 

itself. In general, annual evaluations of the monitoring information consider the following 

questions: 

• What are the effects of resource management activities on the productivity of the land? 

• To what degree are resource management activities maintaining or making progress 

toward the desired conditions and objectives for the plan? 

• What changes are needed to account for unanticipated changes in conditions? 

In addition to annual monitoring and evaluation, the Forest Supervisor reviews the conditions on 

the land covered by the plan at least every 5 years to determine whether conditions or demands of 

the public have changed significantly. The forest plan is ordinarily revised on a 10-year cycle and 

the Forest Supervisor may amend the plan at any time. 

Consistency with Law, Regulation, and Policy 

All alternatives are designed to guide the Kiowa, Rita Blanca, Black Kettle and McClellan Creek 

National Grasslands’ management activities in meeting federal law, regulations, and policy. 

Other Planning Efforts 

There are no known potential conflicts between the proposed action and the objectives of Federal, 

regional, State, local, or Tribal land use plans, policies, and controls related to scenic resource 

management. 
Printed on recycled paper • Month Year 15 

List of Preparers 

 Nancy Brunswick, M.L.A. Landscape Architecture, 20 years experience in landscape architecture 

and recreation management working for the USFS. 

References 

Russell, John C. and Adams-Russell, Peggy. 2005. Values, Attitudes and Beliefs Toward 

National Forest System Lands: The Black Kettle, Kiowa, and Rita Blanca National 

Grasslands. Placerville, CA. USDA Forest Service, Southwestern Region. 

USDA, Forest Service. 1973. National Forest Landscape Management Volume 1. Forest Service 

Handbook No. 434. Washington DC. 

USDA, Forest Service. 1974. National Forest Landscape Management Volume 2, Chapter 1 The 

Visual Management System. Forest Service Handbook No. 462. Washington DC. 

USFS 1985. USDA Forest Service. 1985. Cibola National Forest Land and Resource 

Management Plan, as Amended in 1987, 1990, 1991 and 1996. USDA Forest Service, 

Southwestern Region. 

USDA, Forest Service. 1995. Landscape Aesthetics: A Handbook for Scenery Management. 

Agriculture Handbook No. 701. Washington DC. 

USDA Forest Service. 2009. National Visitor Use Monitoring Results: Cibola National Forest; 

May 2009, USDA Forest Service. Unpublished Manuscript.