Bristlecone Wilderness and 

Goshute Canyon 

Wilderness 

Final Wilderness Management Plan and 

Environmental Assessment 

U.S. Department of the Interior 

Bureau of Land Management 

Nevada State Office 

Ely District Office 

December 18, 2014 
TABLE OF CONTENTS 

Wilderness Management Plan 

1.0. Introduction ........................................................................................................................ 1
	

1.1. Purpose of and Need for the Wilderness Management Plan.......................................... 2
	

1.2. Wilderness Overview ......................................................................................................... 2
	

1.3. Wilderness Management Strategy.................................................................................... 5
	

1.4. Wilderness Management Actions ..................................................................................... 7
	

1.5. Management Action Tables............................................................................................. 19
	

1.6. Monitoring Program........................................................................................................ 23
	

1.7. Plan Evaluation ................................................................................................................ 24
	

1.8. Activites Associated with Plan Implementation ............................................................ 24
	

Environmental Assessment ........................................................................................................ 26
	

2.0. Introduction and Background ........................................................................................ 27
	

2.1. Descriptions of Alternatives ............................................................................................ 31
	

2.2. Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences........................................... 34
	

2.3. Cumulative Effects ........................................................................................................... 50
	

2.4. Consultation and Coordination ...................................................................................... 51
	

Appendix A - Maps ..................................................................................................................... 54
	

Map 1 – Overview
	

Map 2 – Current Conditions Bristlecone Wilderness
	

Map 3 – Current Conditions Goshute Canyon Wilderness
	

Appendix B. References.............................................................................................................. 57
	

FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT........................................................................... 59
	

DECISION RECORD ................................................................................................................ 62
	

i 
 

 

 

1.0. Introduction 

On December 20, 2006, Congress passed the White Pine County Conservation, Recreation, and 

Development Act of 2006 (WPCCRDA) (Public Law 109-432). Subtitle B specifically addresses 

Wilderness. Section 323(a) designates citizen-proposed Bristlecone Wilderness at 14,095 acres 

and Goshute Canyon Wilderness at 42,544 acres in White Pine County, Nevada. The two 

wilderness areas total 56,639 acres. Map 1 in Appendix A provides a general overview of the 

two wilderness areas. 

The WPCCRDA states that designated wilderness areas shall be managed in accordance with the 

Wilderness Act of September 3, 1964 (16 U.S.C. 1131-1136). Section 4(b) of the Wilderness Act 

sets forth BLM’s responsibilities in administering wilderness areas, with the primary mandate 

being the preservation of wilderness character. The Wilderness Act states: “Except as otherwise 

provided..., each agency administering any area designated as wilderness shall be responsible 

for preserving the wilderness character of the area.” 

Wilderness Background 

The Wilderness Act established the National Wilderness Preservation System to ensure that an 

increasing population, accompanied by expanding settlement and growing mechanization, does 

not occupy and modify all areas of the United States. The Wilderness Act defines wilderness, the 

uses of wilderness, and the activities prohibited within its boundaries. 

Congress designates wilderness areas to protect and preserve the lands in their natural state. As 

such, wilderness areas provide a contrast to lands where human activities dominate the 

landscape. 

Wilderness areas are managed for the use and enjoyment of the American people in a manner 

that will: 

 leave them unimpaired for future use and enjoyment as wilderness, 

 protect and preserve wilderness character, and 

 allow for the gathering and dissemination of information regarding their use and 

enjoyment as wilderness. 

 Section 4(c) of the Wilderness Act describes uses that are generally prohibited in 

order to preserve wilderness character, as follows: 

“Except as specifically provided for in this Act, and subject to existing 

private rights, there shall be no commercial enterprise and no permanent 

road within any wilderness area designated by this Act and, except as 

necessary to meet minimum requirements for the administration of the 

area for the purpose of this Act (including measures required in 

emergencies involving the health and safety of persons within the area), 

there shall be no temporary road, no use of motor vehicles, motorized 

equipment or motorboats, no landing of aircraft, no other form of 

mechanical transport, and no structure or installation within any such 

area.” 

Because the above-described uses are prohibited as a rule, limited (rare and occasional) 

exceptions to the rule must meet the minimum necessary to administer the areas for the purposes 

of the Wilderness Act, and must occur in a manner that preserves wilderness character. Thus, a 

B&GC-WMP| 1 
 

Minimum Requirements Analysis (MRA) is used in conjunction with the National 

Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) analysis. The MRA is described in BLM Manual 6340, 

Management of BLM Wilderness, Appendix B Minimum Requirements Analysis. It is used to 

assist in documenting any decisions involving uses and is organized around answering two 

fundamental questions: 1) Is any action necessary (regardless of the tool or other use employed); 

and 2) if so, what is the minimum amount of a prohibited use necessary to address the issue at 

hand. The Minimum Requirements Decision Guide (MRDG) is used to assist in documenting 

any decisions. 

1.1. Purpose of and Need for the Wilderness Management Plan 

Bureau of Land Management (BLM) Manual 8561 Wilderness Management Plans requires that 

wilderness areas be managed pursuant to a specific management plan. In fulfillment of the above 

requirement, the BLM Ely District has prepared this Wilderness Management Plan (WMP) to 

address future management of Bristlecone and Goshute Canyon Wilderness areas. A 

consolidated plan was determined appropriate for the two areas due to their relative proximity, 

comparable natural and cultural resources and values, and similar management issues. 

The need for the Proposed Action stems from Section 4(b) of the Wilderness Act, which requires 

administering agencies to preserve wilderness character. Further, Section 1.4.C. of BLM Manual 

6340 (Management of Designated Wilderness Areas) requires BLM District and Field Managers 

to develop and implement land use and activity-level plans addressing wilderness areas that 

conform to the Wilderness Act, the establishing legislation, WPCCRDA and BLM wilderness 

policies and guidance. 

Based on the analysis herein, the BLM will decide whether to manage the wilderness areas 

strictly according to legislative and regulatory requirements, or whether to implement a 

management plan that provides additional management actions to manage approved uses while 

ensuring adequate protection and preservation of resources and values, as well as mitigation for 

potential impacts to those resources and values. 

This WMP describes the existing environment in the wilderness, defined in various sections. The 

plan proposes management actions to address specific management issues or concerns. The 

Environmental Assessment (EA) that follows the WMP describes and analyzes potential effects 

to wilderness character of imposing differing levels of management. This WMP is analyzed as 

the Proposed Action, which is compared to the Minimal Management Alternative because it 

incorporates the maximum land use restrictions considered necessary to protect and preserve 

wilderness character. The Minimal Management Alternative does not include optional 

management actions. The Proposed Action includes directives from BLM Manual 6340. 

1.2 Wilderness Overview 

Wilderness Character 

The Wilderness Act defines wilderness and mandates that the primary management direction is 

to preserve wilderness character. The definition of wilderness is found in Section 2(c) of the 

Wilderness Act, and the qualities of wilderness character are commonly described as follows 

(Arthur Carhart National Wilderness Training Center, 2011): 

B&GC-WMP | 2 
 

	 Untrammeled - The "earth and its community of life" are essentially unhindered and free 

from modern human control or manipulation in wilderness areas, "in contrast with those 

areas where man and his own works dominate the landscape." This quality is important 

because it helps insure that wilderness management respects the autonomy of nature that 

allows a place to be wild and free. This quality is impaired by human activities or actions 

that control or manipulate the components or processes of wilderness ecological systems. 

	 Natural - Wilderness ecological systems are substantially free from the effects of modern 

civilization. Preserving this quality ensures that indigenous species, patterns and 

ecological processes are protected and allows us to understand and learn from natural 

features. This quality is impaired by human actions or activities that leave scars on the 

landscape that would not be there naturally, like roads, trails, and seeded areas. 

	 Undeveloped - Wilderness retains its "primeval character and influence," and is 

essentially "without permanent improvements" or modern human occupation. Preserving 

this quality keeps areas free from “expanding settlement and growing mechanization” 

and “with the imprint of man’s work substantially unnoticeable” as required by the 

Wilderness Act. Human developments, such as fences, water troughs, developed springs, 

degrade this quality. 

	 Outstanding opportunities for solitude or a primitive and unconfined type of 

recreation - The Wilderness Act provides individuals with opportunities to experience 

primitive recreation and use traditional skills free from the constraints of modern culture, 

as well as natural sights and sounds, solitude, freedom, risk, and the physical and mental 

challenges of self-discovery and self-reliance.. This quality is impaired by settings that 

reduce these opportunities, such as visitor encounters, signs of modern civilization, 

recreation facilities, and management restrictions on visitor behavior. 

	 Unique, Supplemental, or Other Features - The Wilderness Act states that wilderness 

areas “may also contain ecological, geological, or other features of scientific, educational, 

scenic, or historical value.” Though these supplemental values need not be present for an 

area to meet the definition of wilderness, where they are present they are part of that 

area’s wilderness character, and must be protected as rigorously as any of the four 

required qualities. 

Descriptions of the Wilderness Areas 

The two wilderness areas lie within the Central Basin and Range, a mosaic of basins, scattered 

low and high mountains, and salt flats. The area contains diverse landforms and vegetation types, 

ranging from sagebrush-covered valleys to pinyon and juniper in higher elevations. Bristlecone 

Wilderness spans 14,095 acres and ranges in elevation from 7,400 feet to 9,800 feet in the central 

Egan Range. Goshute Canyon Wilderness encompasses 42,544 acres and ranges from 6,000 feet 

to 10,400 feet in the Cherry Creek Range. See Map 1 Overview, Appendix A. These wilderness 

areas are located within a two-hour drive from Ely, Nevada. They are located in White Pine 

County in Nevada. 

In 2009, the Bureau of Land Management Ely District Office acquired five parcels of private 

land within or adjacent to the Goshute Canyon Wilderness. This brought the total acres for 

Goshute Canyon Wilderness to 45,779 acres. One of these parcels is an inholding, or land that is 

surrounded by the designated wilderness boundary, and as such, it is incorporated into the 

B&GC-WMP | 3 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

wilderness. The addition provides pristine habitat for a developing Rocky Mountain elk (Cervus 

Canadensis nelsoni) herd that was reintroduced in 1932 into the Cherry Creek Range. Dusky 

(Dendragapus obscurus) grouse and sage grouse (Centrocercus urophasianus) are also on the 

property. The Bristlecone pine stands on the upper parcels are a unique ecosystem. 

The areas exhibit characteristics valued for wilderness designation. The two areas have retained 

their natural and untrammeled qualities, but all four qualities of wilderness character are present 

in each wilderness. 

These areas in White Pine County are at the heart of the Great Basin, where magnificent 

mountain ranges tower over wide valleys of sagebrush. The rugged and scenic landscape 

supports diverse plant and wildlife species, including mule deer (Odocoileus hemionus), cougar 

(Felis concolor), pronghorn (Antilocapra Americana), Greater sage grouse (Centrocercus 

urophasianus), raptors, and a host of other birds, mammals, and reptiles. There are numerous 

small game and furbearers in the project area such as black-tailed jackrabbit (Lepus californicus), 

gray fox (Urocyon cinereoargenteus), bobcat (Lynx rufus), and coyote (Canis latrans). Raptors 

are commonly found nesting and foraging in the wilderness areas, and these areas provide habitat 

for numerous non-game species of small mammals, reptiles, and birds. 

Preliminary Priority Habitat and Preliminary General Habitat for the Greater sage-grouse, a 

candidate species for federal listing, have been identified in the high mountain sagebrush 

communities and along the lower benches of the wildernesses. Other special status species that 

may occupy or utilize these wilderness areas are ferruginous (Buteo regalis) and Swainson’s 

(Buteo swainsoni) hawks, golden eagle (Aquila chrysaetos), Northern goshawk (Accipiter 

gentilis), peregrine falcon (Falco peregrinus), sage thrasher (Oreoscoptes montanus), brewer’s 

sparrow (Spizella breweri), pinyon jay (Gymnorhinus cyanocephalus ), black rosy-finch 

(Leucosticte atrata), pygmy rabbit (Brachylagus idahoensis) and numerous bat species. 

Water sources include some developed and undeveloped springs and Goshute Creek, in Goshute 

Canyon Wilderness. There are no developed or undeveloped water sources in Bristlecone 

Wilderness. 

Both of the wilderness areas support livestock grazing. Active grazing permits existed at the time 

of wilderness designation, therefore are authorized to continue under the direction of the 

Congressional Grazing Guidelines. 

The vegetation is various species of sagebrush, grasses and juniper trees at lower elevations, 

mixed with aspen stands in the middle elevations, and bristlecone pine and fir stands mixed with 

grasses and forbs at the upper elevations. 

Visitors will experience very low levels of human impacts, abundant solitude, and may enjoy 

several primitive recreational opportunities, such as hiking, hunting, camping, scenic viewing 

and photography. The wilderness areas provide opportunities to experience a sense of 

detachment and isolation. The numerous draws, ravines, rocky outcrops, and ridges create 

secluded locales that provide outstanding opportunities for solitude, particularly when combined 

with the remoteness of the wilderness areas and the low visitor numbers. Wilderness is managed 

under Visual Resource Management (VRM) Class I Management Objectives, the objective of 

this class is to preserve the existing character of the landscape. This class provides for natural 

ecological changes; however, it does not preclude very limited management activity. The level of 

change to the characteristic landscape should be very low and must not attract attention. 

B&GC-WMP | 4 
 

Two cherry-stem routes provide public access to Bristlecone Wilderness. Cherry-stem routes are 

usually defined as dead-end routes where the boundary of the wilderness extends up one side of 

the route, around its terminus, and down the other side. Goshute Canyon Wilderness has nine 

cherry-stem routes. One of the cherry-stem roads in Goshute Canyon Wilderness provides access 

to a portion of Goshute Creek, which provides habitat for a refuge population of Bonneville 

cutthroat trout (Oncorhynchus clarki utah), a subspecies once thought to be extinct. 

Wilderness Issues and Concerns Being Addressed 

This WMP was prepared to address issues identified through internal agency and public scoping. 

Interested publics were involved in this process through letters, email, the BLM website, and 

personal contact. Initial scoping meetings were held during the fall of 2013 in Ely, Nevada. 

Issues and concerns raised during scoping were considered during development of this WMP and 

are described in the following sections: 

1) Protecting and preserving the untrammeled, undeveloped, and natural appearance of 

wilderness areas 

 Long boundary perimeters increase the amount of wilderness that may be impacted by 

human-influenced changes to vegetative structure and composition in areas immediately 

adjacent to the wilderness areas. 

 Wildfire suppression and post-fire rehabilitation may affect the natural and undeveloped 

wilderness character by disturbing soil and changing vegetative composition and 

structure. 

 Human activities may increase the establishment of noxious and invasive plant species, 

the following in particular: cheatgrass, Canada thistle, Scotch thistle and Bull thistle. 

 Numbers of visitors to wilderness areas may increase, which could result in site-specific 

impacts to wilderness character. 

2) Management of non-conforming land uses allowed by Section 4(d) of the Wilderness Act 

	 Continued livestock grazing-related activities, including access to and maintenance of 

existing structures (i.e., developed springs, pipelines, fences), may adversely affect 

naturalness and undeveloped wilderness character. 

1.3. Wilderness Management Strategy 

The management strategy for designated wilderness is to manage human use in a manner that 

protects and preserves the natural, untrammeled, and undeveloped wilderness character, as well 

as the opportunities for solitude and primitive experience, and protecting the unique and 

supplemental features of wilderness. Some of the unique features in these two areas include; 

Bristlecone Pine trees, Bonneville trout and Goshute Cave. All these qualities are present in 

Bristlecone and Goshute Canyon Wilderness and therefore will be managed to protect them from 

the effects of human-caused disturbances. This WMP considers existing resource and 

management issues within the wilderness to develop management strategy. 

B&GC-WMP | 5 
 

 

 

 

Wilderness Management Goals and Objectives 

This section outlines the goals and objectives that guide this WMP. The goals, along with related 

laws, regulations, and BLM policies, provide broad management direction and are refined into 

specific objectives. Standard Wilderness Goals are identified in BLM Manual 8561, and are 

required to be part of Wilderness Management Plans. The Wilderness Act suggests overall 

objectives such as retaining primeval character, preserving natural conditions and maintaining an 

untrammeled quality. Objectives herein are aimed at following the Wilderness Act and are 

statements of desired conditions stemming from current situations and assumptions about the 

future. 

The Wilderness Act states that wilderness ecosystems should retain their “primeval” character. 

The dictionary definition of primeval, “of or relating to the earliest ages,” suggests that the Act is 

directing managers to maintain wilderness ecosystems in a state that existed at some time in the 

past. The Wilderness Act also states that wilderness ecosystems are to be preserved “in their 

natural condition.” There is general agreement that preserving natural conditions means ensuring 

that the current composition, structure and/or functioning of ecosystems are consistent with the 

conditions that would have prevailed in the absence of humans. Adherence to this direction 

would mean allowing natural ecosystem change to occur, while avoiding or compensating for 

changes caused by the activities of people. 

The Wilderness Act provides for managing wilderness ecosystems that are untrammeled by man. 

Synonymous with unconfined, unfettered and unrestrained, however, “untrammeled” actually 

suggests freedom from human control rather than lack of human influence. Areas qualify as 

wilderness because they are wild and uncontrolled, despite substantial human influence. 

Managing for natural conditions—allowing ecosystems to evolve in novel ways, as long as the 

source of innovation is not human caused—is a more appropriate goal than managing for 

primeval conditions—such as freezing conditions at a certain state (Cole 2000). All goals and 

objectives must conform to the mandate to preserve wilderness character. 

Wilderness Goal 1 

To provide for the long-term protection and preservation of the areas’ wilderness character under 

a principle of non-degradation. The areas’ natural condition, opportunities for solitude, 

opportunities for primitive and unconfined types of recreation, and any ecological, geological, or 

other features of scientific, educational, scenic, or historic value present will be managed so that 

they would remain unimpaired. 

Objectives 

 Avoid restoration activities that influence the entire wilderness and/or must be continued 

indefinitely. This includes restoration activities in which the wilderness goals of 

naturalness and wildness are clearly in conflict, such as a program of scheduled 

management fires set to replace natural fire. 

 Protect and preserve wildlife habitat to support healthy and viable wildlife populations to 

retain the wilderness areas’ natural and undeveloped character. 

 Maintain the natural quality of wilderness character by reducing or eliminating 

infestations of noxious weeds and non-native invasive species. 

B&GC-WMP | 6 
 

Wilderness Goal 2 

To manage the wilderness areas for the use and enjoyment of visitors in a manner that would 

leave the areas unimpaired for future use and enjoyment as wilderness. The wilderness resource 

will be dominant in all management decisions where a choice must be made between 

preservation of wilderness character and visitor use. 

Objectives 

 Utilize education and interpretation as a proactive approach to address agency decisions 

and visitor activities that may impact wilderness character. 

	 Prevent unauthorized use of motorized and mechanized vehicles and equipment by 

managing vehicle access points, posting appropriate boundary and informational signs, 

and blocking and rehabilitating unauthorized routes. 

Wilderness Goal 3 

To manage the wilderness areas using the minimum tool, equipment, or structure necessary to 

successfully, safely, and economically accomplish the objective. The chosen tool, equipment, or 

structure should be the one that least degrades wilderness values temporarily or permanently. 

Management will seek to preserve spontaneity of use and as much freedom from regulation as 

possible. 

Objective 

	 Implement proposed actions as necessary to meet minimum requirements for the 

administration of the areas as wilderness and to have the least impact to wilderness 

character. 

Wilderness Goal 4 

To manage nonconforming but accepted uses permitted by the Wilderness Act and subsequent 

laws in a manner that would prevent unnecessary or undue degradation of the areas’ wilderness 

character. Nonconforming uses are the exception rather than the rule; therefore, emphasis is 

placed on maintaining wilderness character. 

Objectives 

	 Close or limit access to specific areas when resources, such as soils, vegetation, sensitive 

plant or animal populations or habitat, or cultural resources are being negatively affected 

by visitor activities. 

	 Maintain or enhance the natural wilderness character by removing unnecessary facilities 

and minimizing or reclaiming human-caused surface disturbances. 

1.4. Wilderness Management Actions 

Wilderness management actions for these areas are based on national wilderness goals, 

wilderness management objectives, current situation and assumptions, and wilderness-specific 

issues that were identified through internal and external scoping. Except for site-specific 

proposed actions, management actions are the same for all areas because of similar management 

issues. 

Resource programs, such as Fire Management, Noxious and Invasive Weed Management, Range 

and Wild Horses and Burros, have specific plans to guide their programs that individually 

B&GC-WMP | 7 
 

address the management goals and activity plans. This WMP considers all related resources 

involved in wilderness. Non-wilderness resource programs have been evaluated to ensure 

conformity with wilderness management goals and objectives. Management actions are 

described on the following pages. While all of the management actions provide wilderness 

specific direction, several outline site-specific management actions. 

Any ground disturbing activities associated with the following actions would implement Best 

Management Practices outlined in the Ely District Approved Resource Management Plan (2008). 

All actions are supplemental to, and consistent with Wilderness laws, regulations, and policies, 

which must be further consulted in the event of unforeseen issues. 

Education and Interpretation 

The overall goal of wilderness education and interpretation is to promote respectful use and 

enjoyment of the wilderness and preservation of its wilderness character. General interpretive 

information regarding natural and cultural resources and recreation opportunities in wilderness 

would be located on kiosks outside of wilderness, in brochures, on BLM recreation maps, and on 

the BLM Ely and State Office websites. Wilderness fact sheets would include area descriptions, 

maps, interpretive information, and information on wilderness ethics and Leave No Trace 

principles. Leave No Trace ethics would also be emphasized in classes and workshops presented 

at local schools and in the field. Interpretive trails would not exist in wilderness areas. 

When feasible, interpretive and informational materials would be developed in collaboration 

with other agencies, tribes, non-governmental organizations, and interested individuals. 

Wilderness boundary signs are simple installations (e.g., carsonite or metal posts) used to 

delineate wilderness boundaries from adjacent non-wilderness, and would be located in 

accordance with BLM Manual 6340. Boundary signs may also be used to inform visitors about 

additional resource concerns (e.g. no firewood cutting, protecting archeological resources). 

Key entrance signs would identify the name of the wilderness and would be placed where 

visitors are likely to contact the wilderness boundary. Entrance signs are large, BLM-brown 

signs. Currently, there is one key entrance sign at each wilderness area. 

Information boards containing one-panel informational and interpretive signs would exist at 

access points, or at staging areas. These signs would provide local and regional information 

about wilderness, natural and cultural resources, regulatory information, and interpretation. 

There is one information sign at Bristlecone Wilderness: at the end of the cherry-stem on the 

southwest side. There are two information signs at Goshute Canyon Wilderness: one at Goshute 

Creek primitive recreation site and one in Goshute Basin, on the cherry-stem. Additional signs 

would be installed, if visitor needs warrant them. 

Emergency Stabilization and Rehabilitation 

The overall goal of the wilderness Emergency Stabilization and Rehabilitation (ES&R) program 

is to maintain the natural quality of wilderness character by facilitating the natural recovery of 

burned areas, while minimizing or precluding noxious weed and non-native invasive species 

infestations. 

B&GC-WMP | 8 
 

No ES&R treatments have occurred in Bristlecone Wilderness or Goshute Canyon Wilderness 

since designation. 

Pursuant to BLM Manual 6340, ES&R activities should be conducted as part of the fire incident 

and in accordance with current Department of Interior policy (Departmental Manual 620 DM 3 -

Wildland Fire Management Burned Area Emergency Stabilization and Rehabilitation) and BLM 

ES&R policy (H-1742-1 - Burned Area Emergency Stabilization and Rehabilitation Handbook). 

Stabilization, rehabilitation, and restoration activities may be intensive when post-fire processes 

threaten ecological integrity or wilderness character. ES&R activities within wilderness must 

follow the guidance below: 

1.		 Natural recovery of native plant species is preferable to all other treatments. 

2.		 Seeding or planting would be used when objectives for natural recovery cannot otherwise 

be accomplished and there is a threat to wilderness character and values if no action is 

taken. The use of native material, preferably of local or regional genetic stock, would be 

first priority. 

3.		 Non-native species may be seeded or planted if no native species are available and/or the 

non-native species are part of an assisted succession program, which promotes the 

rehabilitation of native vegetation. The proposed action must meet at least one of the 

following criteria: 

a.		 the natural biological diversity of the treated area would not be diminished 

b.		 or exotic and naturalized species can be confined within the treated area 

c.		 or ecological site inventory information indicates that a site would not support 

reestablishment of a species that was historically a part of the natural 

environment. 

The District Manager may approve prohibited uses for ES&R projects on a case-by-case basis 

subject to site-specific NEPA analysis and the use of a MRDG. These may include: 

	 Standard erosion control techniques that prevent or minimize soil movement and loss (i.e. 

straw bales, wattles, mulch) 

	 Stabilize and mitigate post-fire related degradation to cultural resources 

	 Sling loading materials into or out of wilderness using a helicopter 

	 Helicopters or other aircraft used for aerial seeding 

Fire Management 

The overall goal of wilderness fire management is to emphasize protection and preservation of 

wilderness character. This goal requires BLM to facilitate the operation of natural processes and 

ecological change by allowing fire to function in its natural role of disturbance and succession, 

except where life, property, and/or high value resources are threatened. An integral part of this 

process is ensuring that Fire Management Plans (FMPs) are consistent with wilderness 

legislative requirements and BLM management policies, as well as the goals and objectives of 

this WMP. The goals and objectives of this WMP would be incorporated into future FMP 

revisions. 

Since designation, three fires have occurred in the Bristlecone Wilderness - all in 2008: Bassett 

at 0.1 acres, NDF Assist Five at 0.1 acres and Prison at 0.4 acres - all were controlled. Three 

fires have been controlled in Goshute Canyon Wilderness since designation: Barton (2009) at 0.1 

B&GC-WMP | 9 
 

acres, Nat Out Two (2007) at 0.1 acres, Cherry (2007) at 1.5 acres and Snow Creek (2013) at 

1052 acres, although less than a mile of handline was constructed. 

In addition to the Wilderness Act, fire suppression and rehabilitation activities would be 

consistent with current National Interagency Standards for Fire and Fire Aviation Operations 

(NIFC 2011), the FMP and the Ely District RMP. Fire management activities within wilderness 

areas would utilize Minimum Impact Suppression Tactics (MIST) (USDI 2010b). The intent of 

MIST is to manage a wildland fire with the least impact to natural and cultural resources. By 

minimizing impacts of fire management actions, unnecessary resource damage is prevented and 

cost savings can be realized. Response to a wildland fire in or near wilderness would consider 

the full range of fire management strategies and tactics to achieve multiple objectives (ranging 

from monitoring to full suppression). BLM staff would define the set of objectives to protect 

and/or enhance wilderness character, while considering situational factors, such as fuel loading, 

fire behavior, and threats to human life and property. 

Fire Suppression Actions 

Pursuant to Section 4(c) of the Wilderness Act, otherwise prohibited uses may be authorized in 

wilderness areas only when they are determined to be “...necessary to meet minimum 

requirements for the administration of the area for the purpose of this Act...” While 

administrative activities should always be accomplished with economic efficiency, both the 

Wilderness Act and the agency’s wilderness policy direct managers away from using either the 

cost or the time required for implementation as over-riding considerations when evaluating the 

potential use of otherwise prohibited activities. 

An evaluation and approval template for emergency actions has been developed by the Ely 

District. Requirements for prohibited uses should be incorporated into emergency planning so 

that the minimum necessary methods and tools can be used to resolve emergencies while 

preserving wilderness character to the greatest extent possible. Revisions to this approval process 

would be consistent within the Ely District, as well as with this WMP. 

The following process would be used to evaluate the following a ctions (and any others) that may 

be considered during development of a proposed emergency fire response. 

 Assign a resource advisor with knowledge and experience in wilderness stewardship to 

the firefighting team to assist in identifying and protecting wilderness character. 

 Prevent the establishment of noxious weeds and invasive species to preserve the natural 

wilderness character: 

o Inspect and wash all suppression equipment prior to wilderness entry, but locate 

wash-down sites outside of wilderness areas. 

o Locate camps and other assembly points outside of wilderness areas and away 

from areas infested by noxious weeds and invasive species. 

o Avoid using water sources containing invasive species for suppressing fires in 

wilderness. 

 Use MIST when feasible, as long as the safety of firefighters, human life and property is 

protected. 

 Locate support operations, such as helispots, fire camps, and staging areas outside of 

wilderness. 

 Remove or rehabilitate evidence of human intervention to the maximum extent possible. 

o Repair fire suppression-related resource damage immediately. 

B&GC-WMP | 10 
 

o Plan and implement actions prior to the suppression incident demobilization. 

 Repairs to damaged sites or resources may occur with the same type of equipment that 

was used for suppression. For example, if motorized, earth-moving equipment was used to 

construct fire lines, then the same type of equipment may be used to contour and 

rehabilitate. 

The District Manager, as the delegated authority, must document their approval of otherwise 

prohibited uses (listed below), and the documentation must be included with the wilderness fire 

activity reports. 

Type of Prohibited Use: 

 Motorized Water Pumps 

 Aerial Retardant Application 

 Air Transport/Personnel Shuttle (landings) and Supply Drops 

 Fence (Facility) Repair or Temporary Fence Installation 

 Chainsaws 

 Motor Vehicles 

• Engines 

• Helicopter Transports 

• Crew Trucks 

• UTV/ATV 

 Helispot Construction (major ground disturbance) 

 Heavy Equipment (i.e. bulldozers, excavators) 

Livestock Management 

The overall goal of livestock management is to provide for continued livestock grazing in 

wilderness areas in a manner that minimizes impacts to the natural, undeveloped, and 

untrammeled qualities of wilderness character. 

Section 4(d)(4)(2) of the Wilderness Act provides for continued livestock grazing where it 

existed prior to wilderness designation, subject to reasonable regulations deemed necessary by 

the Secretary of Interior. 

Planning related to grazing operations would be guided by the Congressional Grazing Guidelines 

(House Report 105-405 Appendix A, 1990) and BLM Manual 6340. Livestock grazing in 

wilderness areas will be administered pursuant to the Northeastern Great Basin Resource 

Advisory Council Standards so long as the grazing does not conflict with the preservation of 

wilderness character. 

Section 4(c) of the Wilderness Act requires activities in wilderness areas to be accomplished 

without motorized or mechanized vehicles and equipment unless truly necessary to administer 

the area, or when specifically permitted by other provisions of the Wilderness Act. 

Section 2 of the Congressional Grazing Guidelines (Appendix A of House Report 101-405, 

1990) provides the following direction for maintenance of livestock grazing-related facilities and 

the occasional use of motorized equipment in wilderness: 

“The maintenance of supporting facilities, existing in an area prior to its classification as 

wilderness (including fences, line cabins, water wells and lines, stock tanks, etc.) is permissible 

B&GC-WMP | 11 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Allotment Name 

Approximate 

Acres within 

Wilderness 

Approximate Range 

Developments Wilderness 

Goat Ranch 1,804 0 Bristlecone 

Heusser Mountain 9,350 0 Bristlecone 

Steptoe 488 1 - fence Bristlecone 

Thirty Mile Spring 2,451 0 Bristlecone 

Cherry Creek 17,426 3 - 2 fences, pipeline Goshute Canyon 

Goshute Basin 9,696 0 Goshute Canyon 

Indian Creek 2,917 1 - fence Goshute Canyon 

McDermitt Creek 2,465 0 Goshute Canyon 

Medicine Butte 10,001 0 Goshute Canyon 

 Acreage calculated using GIS. 

in wilderness. Where practical alternatives do not exist, maintenance or other activities may be 

accomplished through the occasional use of motorized equipment...Such occasional use of 

motorized equipment should be expressly authorized in the grazing permits for the area involved. 

The use of motorized equipment should be based on a rule of practical necessity and 

reasonableness...Moreover, under the rule of reasonableness, occasional use of motorized 

equipment should be permitted where practical alternatives are not available and such use would 

not have a significant adverse impact on the natural environment. Such motorized equipment 

uses will normally only be permitted in those portions of a wilderness area where they had 

occurred prior to the area’s designation as wilderness or are established by prior agreement.” 

A total of nine grazing allotments are located partially within the two wilderness areas. Livestock 

grazing is currently authorized within the wilderness portions of the allotments. 

Table 1. Grazing Allotments Located Partially Within Wilderness 

Routine livestock management activities in wilderness areas, including project inspection and 

maintenance (e.g. minor fence repairs or small quantity salt distribution) would normally be 

accomplished by non-motorized, non-mechanized means. Motorized or mechanized vehicles and 

equipment would be authorized on a limited basis on existing administrative access routes only 

for major project maintenance or repair, when needed to transport equipment or supplies that 

cannot reasonably be accomplished by foot, pack stock, or other non-motorized or nonmechanized means. 

Requests by grazing permittees for occasional use of motorized or mechanized vehicles and 

equipment will be evaluated on a case-by-case basis through an MRA and site specific NEPA to 

determine whether they are the minimum tool necessary for administration of the area as 

wilderness. 

B&GC-WMP | 12 
 

Removal 

The viability and usefulness of existing wilderness range projects would be evaluated in 

consultation with the permittee during the permit renewal process. Prior to removal of any 

structure by the permittee, BLM staff, or authorized volunteers, an evaluation would take place. 

If a range project or other structure is determined by an Ely District Cultural Resource Specialist 

to be eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places, it will be recorded. All 

activities that would impact or affect cultural resources would be subject to prior National 

Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) review and the Section 106 process. 

New Developments 

Proposals for new livestock water or other developments would not be approved unless they are 

determined to be the minimum necessary to protect or preserve wilderness character. New 

project proposals would require both site-specific NEPA analysis and an MRA. 

Existing Operations 

Specific wilderness access requirements and schedules would be included as terms and 

conditions in affected grazing permits, during renewal periods. Terms and conditions would 

specify the timeframe during which vehicular access would be authorized, as well as the specific 

administrative route(s) and the type(s) of vehicles to be used. 

Prior to a motorized, mechanized vehicle or equipment entry, an MRDG must be conducted and 

a BLM letter of authorization must be issued to the permittee for the conditions described below: 

1. Salt and mineral supplement may be delivered into wilderness areas via motor vehicle in 

quantities sufficient to ensure only one motorized entry annually. Subsequent distribution of 

stockpiled salt would be accomplished by foot, horseback, or pack stock. 

2. Motorized and mechanized inspection and maintenance for pipelines in Goshute Canyon 

Wilderness may occur one time per year prior to livestock entry. Maintenance would be 

identified or accomplished during inspection. For large repair or reconstruction projects, such as 

pipeline replacement, a one-time motorized equipment entry under this plan would be authorized 

in conjunction with a MRDG to determine the equipment necessary. 

3. Fence inspection would primarily be accomplished by foot or stock for fence inside the 

wilderness boundary. Motorized and mechanized access for maintenance for fence in Goshute 

Canyon Wilderness may occur one time per year prior to livestock entry. The use of the 

motorized vehicles or equipment may be allowed for replacement or repair to damage otherwise 

unpreventable through routine inspection and maintenance (i.e. destruction by wildfire, or 

extensive damage from weather, livestock, wild horses and/or wildlife). It is anticipated that 

damage which would require the use of motorized equipment or vehicles would not occur 

frequently. 

Administrative access routes for permittee use would not be maintained or repaired except on a 

site-specific basis with BLM authorization. Prior to authorizing route maintenance, the BLM 

would complete an MRA to ensure that the minimum tool necessary was to be used to 

accomplish the objective. If necessary, a gate or bollard, signed as administrative access, would 

be installed at the entrance to an administrative route to prevent unauthorized motorized access. 

B&GC-WMP | 13 
 

 

 

 

Recreation Management
	

One of the main goals of wilderness management is to provide for visitor use and enjoyment in a 

manner that leaves wilderness areas unimpaired for future use and enjoyment. Thus, the 

protection and preservation of wilderness character, and the protection and enhancement of 

wilderness supplemental values that are of scientific, educational, scenic, or historical value 

would be dominant in all decisions regarding the promotion or management of visitor use. 

Opportunities for solitude and primitive and unconfined recreational opportunities exist in both 

wilderness areas. Although annual visitation is difficult to quantify in these areas, visitor 

encounters are infrequent. Year round visitation is possible, but the wilderness areas’ remoteness 

and ruggedness have historically prohibited high levels of recreational use or development. 

BLM would use public outreach and education about Leave No Trace land use ethics to 

encourage minimum impact practices to accomplish wilderness recreation goals. 

No permits are required for the public to visit the wilderness. The BLM would aim to minimize 

limitations or controls on visitor use in wilderness areas, while still reducing effects on resources 

and maintain compliance with wilderness policy. 

Camping 

There is one developed campground adjacent to the Goshute Canyon Wilderness boundary along 

Goshute Creek. Access to the wilderness is easily obtained from the western end of the camping 

area. No heavily used dispersed campsites exist in either wilderness. Therefore, the following 

restrictions would be enacted on dispersed and unmanaged camping to minimize potential effects 

to wilderness character, including impacts to soils, vegetation, and water quality, and conflicts 

with wildlife and livestock. 

	 The BLM Nevada occupancy rule: A person may not occupy undeveloped public lands or 

designated sites or areas for more than 14 days within a 28 consecutive day period. 

Following the 14 days, a person and their personal property must relocate to a site outside 

of at least a 25-mile radius from the occupied site for a period of 14 days. An occupancy 

limitation rule was established to reduce user conflicts caused by long-term occupancy 

that may hamper reasonable opportunities for other members of the public to camp in or 

use the same area. Additionally, long-term occupancy can result in vegetation trampling, 

erosion, wildlife disruption and improper waste disposal. BLM established occupancy 

limits for camping with the publication of a notice in the Federal Register on Oct. 5, 

1993. 

	 Nevada Revised Statute 503.660, Unlawful manner of camping near water hole. It is 

unlawful for any person to camp within 100 yards of a water hole in such a manner that 

wildlife or domestic stock will be denied access to such water hole. Campers must be 100 

yards from natural springs or developed upland water sources (e.g., troughs, reservoirs) to 

limit potential conflicts with wildlife and livestock. 

	 Campers are encouraged to use Leave No Trace principles and bury human waste in 

catholes dug at least 6” to 8” deep and 200 feet from water, trails, and campsites. Proper 

disposal of human waste will minimize pollution of water sources, avoid the possibility 

of someone else finding it, and minimize the potential to spread disease. In addition, 

visitors are encouraged to utilize pack-in/pack-out land use ethic for all waste to reduce 

noxious odors, insects and/or unwanted animal encounters. 

B&GC-WMP | 14 
 

 

 

 

 

Hunting and Trapping 

Hunting and trapping are allowed in wilderness. They are not a common activity in Bristlecone 

Wilderness, but some hunting occurs in Goshute Canyon Wilderness; all federal and state 

regulations apply. 

	 Personal, non-commercial trapping is permitted, subject to applicable State and Federal 

laws and regulations. A trapping license is required by the State of Nevada to hunt or trap 

any furbearers. Pursuant to the Wilderness Act, access to traps would be limited to foot or 

horseback. Commercial trapping is prohibited in wilderness areas. 

	 Section 4(c) of the Wilderness Act precludes structures and installations in wilderness 

areas. As such, permanent blinds for hunting, photography, or other purposes are 

prohibited. 

	 Temporary, portable or “pop-up” blinds would be permitted for hunting, photography, 

wildlife observation or similar purposes for a 14-day use period. They must be attended 

or occupied at least some portion within the 14 days or will be subject to removal. 

	 Commercial Outfitters and Guides are authorized by permit. 

Trails and Routes 

Hiking to the summit of Heusser Peak in Bristlecone Wilderness is a current recreational 

activity. Pedestrian or equestrian trails would not be constructed within the wilderness; there is 

no need to facilitate visitor use or reduce impacts to wilderness. Signs and structures related to 

recreational use would not be placed in wilderness unless an MRA determined that they are the 

minimum necessary for administration of the area as wilderness. They may be justified due to an 

extraordinary hazard or to protect naturalness where it is being impacted from visitor use, but not 

for visitor convenience. 

Remnant two-track roads and user-created trails would be considered part of the wilderness 

experience and would not be marked or signed, would not receive routine maintenance, and 

would not be displayed on BLM recreation maps or brochures. As time and funding allow, BLM 

may take action to rehabilitate surface disturbances with actions similar to those discussed in the 

fire rehabilitation and weed control sections of this document. Otherwise, trails and two-track 

roads would be allowed to revegetate naturally unless their continued use causes excessive soil 

erosion, poses an unacceptable public safety hazard, or adversely affects wilderness character. 

Access points are defined as locations along wilderness boundaries where focused entry occurs. 

Over time, these and other areas used for parking along boundary roads may be impacted to the 

point at which improvements should be made in order to protect wilderness character. These 

access points and parking areas may be defined by creating a vehicle turn-around at or before the 

wilderness boundary and would not extend into wilderness. To ensure that wilderness areas are 

not impacted by vehicular use of cherry-stem routes, turn-arounds at the end of cherry-stem 

routes will be limited to the total width of the cherry-stem (200’). As necessary, BLM 

appropriate land use authorization or right-of-ways would be obtained. 

Other Visitor Use 

 Traditional geocaching and letterboxing are prohibited to reduce soil and vegetation 

disturbance caused by object burial and leaving items in wilderness. 

B&GC-WMP | 15 
 

	 To reduce weed transport and infestation within the wilderness areas, supplemental feed for 

riding and pack stock should be certified weed-free. Recommend 96 hours before entering 

public lands, feed pack animals only certified weed free feed. Remove weed seeds from pack 

animals by brushing them thoroughly and cleaning their hooves. 

	 Casual collection on foot or horseback (surface only, no digging) of small quantities (<25 

lbs.) of renewable and mineral resources would be permitted (i.e., wood, fruit, vegetation, 

rock and mineral specimens, and common invertebrate and plant fossils). 

	 To reduce impacts to the natural wilderness character and protect the area for future 

generations, individuals may not cut, break, or otherwise destroy standing live and dead trees 

or shrubs for firewood or clear an area for a campsite, visitor convenience, or comfort (RMP 

FP-5, 9). 

	 To preserve the area’s history, vertebrate fossils and cultural, archaeological, and historic 

sites and artifacts may not be damaged or removed without BLM authorization. Prior to any 

action in wilderness, the potential effects on cultural resources will be evaluated per Section 

106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, per Ely District guidelines and the 

BLM Nevada State Protocol Agreement with the State Historic Preservation Office. 

Vegetation Management 

The overall goal of vegetation management is to protect and preserve the natural wilderness 

character by the following means: sustaining native plant communities; reducing or eliminating 

infestations of noxious weeds and non-native invasive species; and making conditions possible 

for natural fire to return to wilderness. 

Restoration of Vegetation 

Manipulation of vegetation through any one or a combination of prescribed fire, chemical 

application, mechanical treatment, or introduced biological agents may be permitted in 

wilderness areas only to preserve wilderness character and values. 

The goal of prescribed fire in wilderness is to make conditions possible for natural fire to return 

to wilderness. Prescribed fire could be used to reestablish the natural role of fire in the 

ecosystem, as described in BLM Manual 6340, Section 1.6.C.7.c. Both of the following 

conditions must be met prior to approving prescribed fire in a wilderness area: 

	 The natural role of fire cannot be returned solely by reliance on wildfire, or relying on 

wildfires might create unacceptable risks to life, property, or natural resources outside the 

wilderness; and 

	 The use of fire or other fuel reduction treatments outside of wilderness is not sufficient to 

reduce the risks from wildfire within the wilderness to life, property, or natural resources 

outside the wilderness. 

Any consideration of restoration treatments must include a requirement for post-treatment 

monitoring to determine the success of the objectives and fire effects on values (Miller, C., 

2005). 

B&GC-WMP | 16 
 

Noxious Weeds and Non-Native Invasive Plants 

The goal of weed management is to protect and preserve the natural wilderness character by 

sustaining native plant communities, and reducing or eliminating infestations of noxious weeds 

and non-native invasive species. 

The Restoration and Vegetation Management section (Section 1.6.C.15.) of BLM Manual 6340 

outlines the protocol and approval process for vegetation treatments in wilderness. Current 

noxious weeds and invasive plant infestations within or adjacent to wilderness areas include, but 

are not limited to Bull thistle (Cirsium vulgare), Canadian thistle (Cirsium arvense), Musk thistle 

(Carduus nutans), Scotch thistle (Onopordum acanthium), Water Hemlock (Conium maculatum) 

and cheatgrass (Bromus tectorum). The potential exists for further infestations of these and other 

species from surrounding areas. 

The Bristlecone and Goshute Canyon Wilderness areas have long perimeters compared to the 

area within their boundaries. These long wilderness boundaries increase the potential for the 

spread of noxious weeds and non-native invasive plants from surrounding areas. The wilderness 

areas must be managed to maintain the degree of wilderness character that existed at the time of 

designation. 

If, through an MRA, the BLM authorized officer determines that weed treatment is necessary, 

emphasis would be placed on controlling small infestations. Treatment methods would include 

#1 and #2 (listed below) and are analyzed in the EA. Infestations requiring treatment methods 

#3-5 (listed below) would be considered separately, requiring site specific NEPA, since they 

could involve several treatment applications or associated tactics. Post-treatment seeding and/or 

transplant projects would follow guidelines contained in the ES&R section of this plan. BLM Ely 

District weed management protocols would guide the use of herbicides. Subsequent to an MRA, 

treatments would be prioritized in the following order, though it is likely that treatment 

combinations would be necessary in some situations: 

1.		 Manual removal with hand tools if weeds can be controlled or eradicated without causing 

re-sprouting, without undue soil disturbance leading to expansion of infestations, and 

where infestations are of a size manageable by hand crews. 

2.		 Herbicides applied by backpack or pack stock (horse, mules, or llamas). 

3.		 Biological control approved by Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) or 

US Fish and Wildlife Service. 

4.		 Herbicides applied aerially or with motorized equipment, where control is feasible, where 

control impacts may be quickly and readily rehabilitated, and where the infestation is of 

such size that herbicide(s) cannot be effectively applied without motorized equipment. 

A wide range of alternative treatments, such as targeted grazing by livestock could be 

considered. 

For treatments involving herbicides, Standard Operating Procedures, the manufacturer’s label, 

and mitigation and conservation measures listed in the Record of Decision for the Vegetation 

Treatments Using Herbicides Programmatic EIS (USDI 2007) (or more current decision), as well 

as the Ely District Integrated Weed Management Plan and Environmental Assessment (DOIBLM-NV-L000-2009-0010-EA) (or more current decision) would be followed. Treatments 

would be designed to facilitate movement toward native vegetative composition and structure. 

B&GC-WMP | 17 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Actions to rehabilitate the effects from fire or other natural disasters are considered emergency 

actions and could be authorized in locations where natural seed sources are inadequate to 

compete with non-native vegetation and/or where substantial unnatural soil loss is expected (also 

see ES&R Section above). Managers would adjust the level of response by considering current 

ecological health and vigor against the potential for invasion by undesirable species. 

Chemical treatment may be necessary to prepare habitat for the reestablishment of native species, 

to protect or recover habitat that supports federally-listed threatened, endangered, or candidate 

species, or to correct unnatural conditions resulting from modern human influence. Management 

actions must comply with label directions and regulatory requirements for chemical application 

near water bodies. 

Wildlife Management 

The overall goal of wildlife management in wilderness areas is to protect, preserve, and where 

appropriate, enhance habitat to retain the wilderness areas’ natural character at the time of 

designation, and to support healthy wildlife populations. To facilitate these efforts, the current 

BLM-Nevada Department of Wildlife (NDOW) Memorandum of Understanding (MOU 6300-

NV-930-0402(2012)), as amended, would be adhered to. Under this agreement, NDOW annually 

submits a letter of proposed projects. In addition, the forthcoming Nevada and Northern 

California Greater Sage Grouse Land Use Plan Amendment and EIS guidance would be adopted. 

While NDOW has the primary and critical role in fish and wildlife population management (43 

CFR 24), fish and wildlife management activities in wilderness would be administered in 

conformance with the Wilderness Act's purpose of securing an "enduring resource of wilderness" 

for the American people through the preservation of wilderness character. It is expected that 

nature, not human intervention, would play the dominant role. Therefore, to be authorized in 

wilderness proposed wildlife actions would need to be determined necessary to protect or 

preserve wilderness character. 

Any ground disturbing activities in wilderness would be restricted by the following wildlife 

timing stipulations: 

 Sage grouse – within four miles of active leks from March 1 – July 15 during breeding, 

nesting, and early brood-rearing seasons. 

 Migratory birds – during the migratory bird nesting season from April 15 - July 15. If 

disturbance occurs during this time, a bird nest survey must be completed one week prior 

to disturbance. 

 Raptors – within a half-mile of active raptor nests and one mile from eagle nests from 

April 15 – July 30; unless the nest has been determined to be inactive for at least 5 years. 

 Big Game – within big game calving/fawning/kidding grounds from April 15 – June 30 

and within crucial winter range from November 1 through March 31. 

Although wilderness overflights are not precluded by the WPCCRDA, every effort would be 

made to coordinate with wildlife managers and researchers so that overflights minimize 

disturbance to both wildlife and visitors. For requests, involving only the management of a 

wildlife population(s) and/or that involve no 4(c) prohibited actions, the MRDG and a letter of 

authorization with associated terms and conditions would suffice as approval. 

According to the BLM-NDOW MOU (2012), wildlife relocation may be permitted if necessary: 

1) to perpetuate or recover a threatened or endangered species; or 2) to restore the population of 

B&GC-WMP | 18 
 

indigenous species eliminated or reduced by human influence. Additionally, NDOW may submit 

requests for use of helicopter in wilderness areas in order to retrieve data from radio telemetry 

collars that have dropped off study animals or from animals that have died. 

Wildlife-Related Facilities 

Water developments for wildlife in wilderness would only be considered to replace existing 

natural sources lost because of human influence. Restoration of existing natural water sources is 

preferred and will be analyzed for wildlife benefit prior to considering artificial water 

developments. Any new facilities would be considered outside of wilderness first. The BLM 

Wilderness Specialist would work with the requesting agency to complete an MRA to evaluate 

the agency’s request. An environmental analysis, MRDG and associated decision document 

would be needed for proposals involving ground disturbance, or 4(c) prohibited actions (e.g. 

motorized or mechanized use). 

There are two wildlife-related developments in Goshute Canyon Wilderness. The BLM built four 

gabion/fish structures, one lower and three upper, on Goshute Creek in 1976 to protect the 

stream from head cutting and support the Bonneville cutthroat trout. The lower structure was lost 

in a violent spring runoff and the fish ladder rendered nonfunctional in 1983. Currently the three 

upper gabion structures still function as gradient controls in the wilderness. There are no wildlife 

water developments in Bristlecone Wilderness. 

Wild Horse Management 

The goal within a Herd Management Area (HMA) is to “maintain and manage healthy, selfsustaining wild horse herds ... within appropriate management levels ... to ensure a thriving 

natural ecological balance” (RMP, 2008b). Management of wild horses is accomplished by 

activity plans created by the BLM Wild Horse & Burro Specialist. The Triple B HMA overlaps 

67% of the Goshute Canyon Wilderness. Bristlecone Wilderness does not overlap a HMA. There 

are no burros in the two wilderness areas. 

During horse gathers aircraft, including helicopters, may be used to survey, capture, and monitor 

wild horses. During gathers, helicopters are likely to fly over wilderness and herd horses across 

them. However, aircraft may not land inside wilderness boundaries except in cases of emergency 

or by approval from the Ely District Manager. BLM and contract personnel participating in the 

gathers may drive along access and cherry-stemmed roads to accomplish their objectives. 

Otherwise, on-the-ground horse management activities would be accomplished on foot or by the 

use of pack stock. In cases where impacts to springs and riparian systems result from wild 

horses, mitigation measures may be employed to prevent further degradation or to restore 

wilderness character. 

1.5. Management Action Tables 

One of BLM’s goals for wilderness management is to provide opportunities for solitude and 

primitive and unconfined recreation by limiting the number and type of land use restrictions that 

visitors must follow, while still maintaining compliance with wilderness policy. To that end, and 

pursuant to the discussions of the affected environment, Table 2 contains a consolidated list of 

B&GC-WMP | 19 
 

 

 

legislatively-required restrictions and proposed visitor use restrictions, and indicates whether a 

use: 1) is authorized without further requirements, 2) is authorized, but restricted in some 

manner, 3) requires prior BLM authorization, or 4) is prohibited. Table 3 contains BLM 

wilderness management decisions not specifically related to use regulation. 

All wilderness actions are subject to a MRA, to determine the action necessary. Any action 

authorizing the use of an action prohibited in Section 4(c) of the Wilderness Act or that would 

significantly impact wilderness character would require site-specific NEPA analysis (see BLM 

Manual 6340 Part 1.6 D. 3.). 

Table 2. Proposed Wilderness Use Restrictions. 

Use is 

authorized 

Motorized or mechanized vehicles and equipment may be used in 

wilderness areas during emergencies involving search and rescue, the 

health or safety of individuals, or the rescuing of sick or stranded 

animals. Individuals must notify the BLM authorized officer 

immediately following completion of emergency activities. The removal 

of downed airplanes or other vehicle accidents, associated equipment, 

parts, or debris is not considered an emergency, and would require prior 

BLM authorization subject to an MRA. 

Use is 

authorized 

Only temporary, portable or “pop-up” blinds would be permitted for 

hunting, photography, wildlife observation or similar purposes for a 14-

day use period. They must be attended or occupied at least some portion 

within the 14 days or will be subject to removal. 

Use is 

authorized 

Casual non-commercial surface collection (no digging) of small 

quantities (<25 lbs.) of renewable and non-renewable resources would be 

permitted (i.e., dead and down wood, fruit, vegetation, rock and mineral 

specimens and common invertebrate and plant fossils). 

Use is 

authorized 

Personal, non-commercial trapping on foot or horseback would be 

permitted subject to State and Federal regulations. 

Use is restricted Backcountry camping would be limited to 14 days in any one location. 

After 14 days, camps must be moved at least 25 miles from the previous 

campsite. 

Use is restricted Campers must pack-in/pack-out all trash. 

Use is restricted Campers may not cut, break, or otherwise destroy standing live and dead 

trees or shrubs for firewood (or clear an area for a campsite, visitor 

convenience, or comfort, such as cutting out poison ivy). Firewood 

collection permits are not issued for wilderness. 

Use is restricted Campers must bury human waste in catholes dug at least 6” to 8” deep 

and 200 feet from water, trails, and campsites. 

Use requires 

authorization 

Administrative access routes for permittee use may not be maintained or 

repaired without BLM authorization. 

B&GC-WMP | 20 
 

 

Use requires 

authorization 

Motorized or mechanized vehicles and equipment may be authorized in 

wilderness areas following an MRA for: 

a. Wildlife management projects 

b. Emergency stabilization and rehabilitation 

c. Weed control projects 

Use requires The scientific study of paleontological resources, such as vertebrate 

authorization fossils, or cultural resources, such as archaeological and historic sites 

and/or artifacts, will be permitted through a fieldwork authorization in 

instances where mitigation measures are determined to be necessary. 

Use requires 

authorization 

Reclamation of surface disturbances associated with mining claims 

would be authorized subject to Federal regulations at 43 CFR 3809. 

Use requires 

authorization 

The Wilderness Act allows some commercial services to be permitted 

"to the extent necessary ... for realizing the recreational or other 

wilderness purposes of the area" (Section 4(d)(6)). BLM would continue 

to issue Special Recreation Permits (SRP) to the following entities as 

long as they operate within the terms and conditions of their SRP: 

a. Licensed commercial outfitters and guides for activities 

involving: 

1. Hunting 

2. Pack trips 

3. Hiking 

4. Camping 

5. Nature viewing 

b. Entities whose mission includes the promotion of wilderness 

ethics, Leave No Trace, or environmental education, and 

c. Entities whose primary purpose is to support individuals with 

disabilities. 

Use requires 

authorization 

Research and monitoring activities and devices may be authorized 

subject to an MRA if the information cannot be collected outside of 

wilderness. 

Use requires 

authorization 

New water or other developments could be permitted for livestock 

management or wildlife purposes if they are determined to be the 

minimum necessary to protect and preserve, or enhance wilderness 

character. 

Use requires 

authorization 

Wildlife management proposals may be authorized subject to an MRA. 

Use is 

prohibited 

Motor vehicles are prohibited for livestock monitoring, herding, and 

gathering. 

Use is 

prohibited 

Motorized and mechanized travel and equipment are prohibited in 

wilderness areas, including, but not limited to: off-highway, over-snow, 

and other vehicles, chainsaws, power drills, suction dredges, generators, 

motorboats, bicycles, game carts, wagons, and wheelbarrows. 

Development of new access routes is also prohibited. 

Use is 

prohibited 

Livestock grazing is prohibited in burned areas until vegetative recovery 

objectives are met. 

B&GC-WMP | 21 
 

Use is 

prohibited 

Motorized vehicles, helicopter landings and trap sites would not be 

constructed in wilderness during wild horse gathers. 

Use is 

prohibited 

Unattended personal property not associated with an active campsite 

may not be left. 

Use is 

prohibited 

Traditional geocaching and letterboxing activities are prohibited. 

Use is 

prohibited 

Collection of any resource for the purpose of commercial sale is 

prohibited. 

Use is 

prohibited 

Communication sites. 

Use is 

prohibited 

Land Use Authorizations (Rights-of-Way, Permits, Leases, Easements, 

and Unauthorized Uses). 

Use is 

prohibited 

Ground-based military maneuvers and associated activities are 

prohibited except in support of emergency actions, as previously 

described. 

Table 3. Proposed BLM Wilderness Management Decisions. 

BLM would continue to authorize livestock grazing in wilderness, and grazing would be 

administered subject to the Northeastern Great Basin Resource Advisory Standards. 

Planning related to grazing operations would be guided by the Congressional Grazing 

Guidelines (House Report 105-405 Appendix A, 1990) and BLM Manual 6340. 

BLM would authorize the livestock-related administrative access according to guidelines 

defined in Livestock Management section of the WMP. Prior to a motorized, mechanized 

vehicle or equipment entry, an MRDG must be conducted and a BLM letter of authorization 

must be issued to the permittee for the conditions described below: 

1. Salt and mineral supplement may be delivered into wilderness areas via motor vehicle in 

quantities sufficient to ensure only one motorized entry annually. Subsequent distribution of 

stockpiled salt would be accomplished by foot, horseback, or pack stock. 

2. Motorized and mechanized inspection and maintenance for pipelines in Goshute Canyon 

Wilderness may occur one time per year prior to livestock entry. Maintenance would be 

identified or accomplished during inspection. For large repair or reconstruction projects, 

such as pipeline replacement, a one-time motorized equipment entry under this plan would 

be authorized in conjunction with a MRDG to determine the equipment necessary. 

3. Fence repair or replacement would be accomplished by foot or pack stock as there is little 

fence inside the wilderness boundary. The use of motorized vehicles or equipment may be 

allowed for replacement or repair to damage otherwise unpreventable through routine 

inspection and maintenance (e.g. destruction by wildfire, or extensive damage from 

livestock, wild horses and/or wildlife). It is anticipated that damage which would require 

the use of motorized equipment or vehicles would not occur frequently. 

BLM would temporarily close or limit access to specific campsites or areas (at its 

discretion) when recreational or other activities are negatively affecting wilderness 

character.
	

B&GC-WMP | 22 
 

 

 

 

 

 

BLM would consider commercial enterprises proper for realizing wilderness recreational 

purposes if the enterprises: 1) are wilderness-dependent, 2) contribute to Leave No Trace or 

environmental or wilderness education, and 3) do not degrade wilderness character. 

Enterprises currently meeting these criteria include commercial outfitting and guide 

services, and therapy pack trips. 

BLM would not place signs and structures in wilderness unless an MRA determines that 

they are the minimum necessary for administration of the area as wilderness. 

BLM would not maintain, repair, or enhance any routes along old roadbeds or game trails. 

BLM managers may consider the full range of fire management strategies and tactics 

(ranging from monitoring to full suppression) to protect multiple values. 

Repairs to resource damage caused by fire suppression activities may be accomplished with 

the same or similar type of equipment that was authorized for fire suppression. 

The following activities may be authorized during ES&R subject to an MRA, site-specific 

NEPA analysis and District Manager approval: 

Install temporary emergency structures (e.g., fences, hydrologic monitoring devices). 

Install erosion control (e.g., straw bales, wattles, mulch). 

Repair or replace burned or damaged facilities (e.g., fences, boundary signs). 

Stabilize and mitigate post-fire related degradation to cultural and historic sites and 

resources. 

BLM would remove existing structures and installations if they: 1) are not associated with a 

valid existing right, 2) are not of historical or cultural value, or 3) are not the minimum 

necessary for the administration of the area as wilderness. 

BLM would treat surface disturbances subject to an MRA, using methods that have the least 

impact to wilderness character. 

1.6 Monitoring Program 

Wilderness Monitoring 

The current wilderness monitoring strategy (BLM Manual 6340, Appendix C) evaluates impacts 

to the four wilderness qualities identified in the Wilderness Act - “untrammeled,” “natural,” 

“undeveloped,” and “solitude or a primitive and unconfined type of recreation.” There is also a 

fifth quality of wilderness identified in the Wilderness Act, Section 2 (c) as “A wilderness...(4) 

may also contain ecological, geological, or other features of scientific, educational, scenic, or 

historical value.” These wilderness qualities form the foundation of the monitoring protocol, and 

each character is divided into monitoring questions, indicators, and measures to allow 

measurement of trends. 

Wilderness monitoring activities would assess the effects to wilderness character from visitor 

use, activities conducted under a valid existing right, activities conducted under BLM permit, 

natural events (e.g., wildfire, floods, insects), and management decisions. A single activity may 

B&GC-WMP | 23 
 

affect several wilderness qualities. Monitoring the effects of activities to multiple qualities of 

wilderness character would improve understanding of the overall effects on wilderness character. 

The monitoring program would provide a greater understanding of the condition and trend of 

each wilderness area. Effects of intentional, unintentional, and unauthorized activities would be 

captured. Information generated during wilderness monitoring would help managers determine: 

 the current state of wilderness character; 

 if and how wilderness character is changing over time; 

 if and how stewardship actions are affecting wilderness character; and 

 what stewardship priorities and decisions would best preserve and sustain wilderness 

character. 

If monitoring reveals that visitor use is damaging cultural resources, BLM staff, in 

consultation with Native American Tribes and the Nevada State Historic Preservation 

Office, would develop a management strategy to minimize further damage, including, but 

not limited to education, signage, and natural barriers. 

All field reports, photographs, and monitoring data, with the exception of archaeological 

information would be maintained in the official file for each wilderness at the BLM Ely District 

Offices. All archaeological information is considered proprietary and confidential and will be 

kept in a separate file for each wilderness area at the BLM Ely District cultural records 

repository. Monitoring will also provide wilderness managers with more complete information, 

which will improve the evaluation of future proposed activities. 

Law Enforcement 

BLM law enforcement rangers would enforce Federal laws and regulations in wilderness areas. 

State and local law enforcement, BLM staff, contractors, and volunteers may indirectly assist 

BLM law enforcement by providing information regarding wilderness-related violations. Law 

enforcement rangers and other BLM staff would patrol the wilderness perimeter with motorized 

vehicles, and would conduct patrols within wilderness on foot or horseback. Motorized vehicles 

and equipment, including helicopters and fixed wing aircraft, may be used for temporary 

emergencies involving search and rescue operations, violations of law, and/or the pursuit of 

fugitives, and would be immediately followed up with notification to the appropriate BLM 

District Manager and subsequent incident report. 

1.7. Plan Evaluation 

The WMP will be revised when the management actions or a change in the existing situation no 

longer meets wilderness management objectives. If the decision were made to revise this plan, it 

would be accomplished with public input. Where it would not conflict with the enabling 

legislation or other pertinent laws and regulations, the WMP may be revised if necessary to 

conform to future land use planning documents or revisions. 

1.8. Activities Associated with Plan Implementation 

The following list reflects the implementation priority for management actions identified in this 

WMP. Actual implementation would be subject to staff and funding availability outside the 

control of this plan. 

B&GC-WMP | 24 
 

Ongoing Activities 

 Maintenance of boundary and road closure signs 

 Visitor information and education
	

 Wilderness monitoring: 

o Wilderness character monitoring 

o Visitor use monitoring 

o Resource condition monitoring 

Future Activities 

 Reclamation: 

o Vehicle routes not used for authorized administrative access 

o Undesirable or highly impacted campsites 

o Unauthorized vehicular impacts
	

 Signs:
	

o Vehicle access points 

o Off-site information signs 

 Modify or remove unused or unnecessary livestock developments or other structures 

 Control infestations of noxious weeds and non-native invasive plant species 

 Monitor noxious weeds and non-native invasive plant infestations and proactively treat 

small infestations to prevent large-scale landscape changes 

 Issue Special Recreation Permits to licensed outfitters and guides for hunting, fishing, 

and other commercial and group activities 

 Subsequent Environmental Analysis 

Subsequent Environmental Analysis 

If in the future, conditions change sufficiently to warrant subsequent actions not already 

addressed in this WMP, additional environmental analysis may be required. 

B&GC-WMP | 25 
 

Environmental Assessment 

Bristlecone Wilderness and Goshute Canyon 

Wilderness Management Plan 

DOI-BLM-NV-L000-2014-0001-EA 

B&GC-WMP | 26 
 

2.0. Introduction and Background 

Section 1503 (a) of the White Pine County Conservation, Recreation, and Development Act of 

2006 (WPCCRDA) (Public Law 109-432) designated approximately 56,639 acres of wilderness 

in White Pine County, Nevada, as Bristlecone and Goshute Canyon Wilderness. The 

WPCCRDA requires the wilderness areas to be managed in accordance with the Wilderness Act 

of 1964 (16 U.S.C. 7202). This Environmental Assessment (EA) covers management actions 

described in the Wilderness Management Plan. 

Wilderness management actions described in the Wilderness Management Plan (WMP) form the 

Proposed Action and are analyzed here. The Proposed Action will be analyzed against an 

alternative that would normally be considered a continuation of current management; however, 

Section 4(b) of the Wilderness Act requires administering agencies to preserve wilderness 

character. Land uses and activities that are inconsistent with this legislative guidance are 

prohibited within the designated areas. 

BLM is required to manage the wilderness areas according to standards that were not in effect 

when the lands were previously managed under FLPMA for multiple use. As such, a No Action 

Alternative (continuation of current management) does not exist, since new requirements were 

imposed through wilderness designation. As such, Alternative A is being termed the Minimal 

Management Alternative because it contains the minimum land use restrictions deemed 

necessary to protect and preserve wilderness character and to comply with applicable laws and 

regulations. Alternative B is the Proposed Action and contains most of the management actions. 

The analysis in this EA will focus mainly on the Proposed Action’s management actions to 

determine: 1) whether the actions individually and cumulatively fulfill legislative requirements 

to protect and preserve wilderness character, and 2) whether the actions individually or 

cumulatively involve significant environmental effects. 

Purpose of and Need for the Proposed Action 

The purpose of the WMP is to implement guidelines and actions designed to preserve wilderness 

character by identifying conditions and opportunities that will be managed for at least the next 

ten years, or as changes in wilderness character and/or resource conditions require. 

The need for the Proposed Action stems from Section 4(b) of the Wilderness Act, which requires 

administering agencies to preserve wilderness character. Further, Section 1.4.C. of BLM Manual 

6340 (Management of Designated Wilderness Areas) requires BLM District and Field Managers, 

among other things, to develop and implement land use and activity-level plans addressing 

wilderness areas that conform to the Wilderness Act, the establishing legislation, and BLM 

wilderness policies and guidance. 

Based on the analysis herein, the BLM will decide whether to manage the wilderness areas 

strictly according to legislative and regulatory requirements, or whether to implement a 

management plan that provides additional management actions to ensure adequate protection and 

preservation of resources and values, as well as mitigation for potential impacts to those 

resources and values. 

B&GC-WMP | 27 
 

Compliance with Existing Laws and Regulations 

The WMP complies with the Wilderness Act and the enabling WPCCRDA, as well as numerous 

other applicable laws, regulations, and executive orders, including 43 CFR Parts 6300 and 8560. 

The WPCCRDA states, “the boundary of any portion of a wilderness area designated by 

subsection (a) that is bordered by a road shall be at least 100 feet from the edge of the road to 

allow public access; (d) Withdrawal- Subject to valid existing rights, the wilderness areas 

designated by subsection (a) are withdrawn from (1) all forms of entry, appropriation, and 

disposal under the public land laws; (2) location, entry, and patent under the mining laws; and (3) 

operation of the mineral leasing and geothermal leasing laws.” Further, subsection 324(d) states 

“Nothing in this subtitle shall affect any water rights in the State (including any water rights held 

by the United States) in existence on the date of enactment of this Act.” 

Bristlecone Wilderness does not contain private and/or State-owned inholding properties within 

its boundaries. Goshute Canyon Wilderness contains three private edge holdings. These three 

private parcels, located in the northern half of Goshute Canyon Wilderness are not true 

inholdings since there are cherry-stem routes into them. There are no authorized Right of Ways 

(ROW) inside Bristlecone Wilderness. However, in Goshute Canyon Wilderness there is a 

county 60’ road ROW (N-62834) authorized to the White Pine County Commissioners (Rd # 

1024-Goshute Road), it occurs entirely inside the cherry-stem. Nothing in this Plan negates valid 

and existing rights. 

There are no valid or active mining claims located within Bristlecone or Goshute Canyon 

Wilderness. 

Conformance to Existing BLM Land Use Plan 

This WMP has been analyzed within the scope of the Ely District Approved Resource 

Management Plan (2008) and has been found to be in conformance with the goals, objectives, 

and decisions of the Decision Summary and Record of Decision. 

BLM planning regulations (43 Code of Federal Regulations 1610.3.2[a]) require that BLM 

resource management plans be consistent with officially approved plans of other federal, state, 

local, and tribal governments to the extent those plans are consistent with federal laws and 

regulations applicable to public lands. Although this regulation does not apply to other official 

plans created after the land use plan is implemented, the BLM strives for management decisions 

to be consistent with other official plans. 

Specific management actions from the RMP (listed below) provide direction to meet the goals 

and objectives of wilderness management. 

 Visual Resources: VR-1: Manage designated wilderness...for scenic qualities under 

Visual Resource Management Class I objectives. 

 Communication Sites: LR-37: Establish designated wilderness as exclusion areas. 

 Land Use Authorizations: LR-41: Establish designated wilderness as exclusion areas. 

 Renewable Energy: RE-5: Establish designated wilderness as exclusion areas. 

 Travel Management: TM-1: Close designated wilderness to motorized and mechanized 

travel according to policy and enabling legislation. 

B&GC-WMP | 28 
 

	 Recreation: REC-5: Manage for recreation facilities and services such as trails, trailheads, 

staging areas, and associated structures in extensive recreation management areas 

following activity-level plans and NEPA analysis for the management of designated 

wilderness...for management of recreational impacts to natural and cultural resources. 

	 Fuelwood Collection: 

o	 FP-5: Allow collection of fuel wood from both live and dead trees for personal 

use (pinyon, juniper, and mountain mahogany) and commercial use (pinyon and 

juniper) throughout the planning area, except in closed areas (e.g., wilderness 

study areas, designated wilderness). 

o	 FP-9: Make pinyon, juniper, and white fir available for personal use throughout 

the planning area, except in closed areas (e.g., wilderness study areas, designated 

wilderness). 

	 Minerals: 

o	 MIN-7: Closed to leasing – Close approximately 1.5 million acres to leasing 

including designated wilderness and wilderness study areas. 

o	 MIN - 12: Closed to leasing – Close approximately 1.6 million acres to solid 

mineral leasing. This includes designated wilderness and wilderness study areas. 

	 Special Designations: SD-5: Manage 22 designated wilderness areas in accordance with 

the Wilderness Act of 1964; the Nevada Wilderness Protection Act of 1989; the Lincoln 

County Conservation, Recreation, and Development Act of 2004; the White Pine County 

Conservation, Recreation and Development Act of 2006. Twenty-two designated 

wilderness areas totaling approximately 1.1 million acres have been designated by 

Congress in this decision area. This includes six citizen-proposed areas of wilderness 

quality that were not managed by the Ely District Office as wilderness study areas. 

	 Monitoring – Special Designations Management - Areas managed under a special 

designation (such as ACECs, backcountry byways, and designated wilderness) will be 

monitored annually to determine if the resource values for which the area was designated 

are stable. Monitoring will focus on threats to resource values and the effectiveness of 

management provisions in protecting and preserving those resource values. Monitoring 

will assist the BLM in tracking resource conditions and making effective decisions to 

improve conditions for the special resource over time. Where necessary, the monitoring 

strategy for special designation areas will be refined during activity level planning, e.g., 

designated wilderness management plans. 

Consistency with State and Local Plan 

The WMP is consistent with the management direction contained in the 2007 White Pine County 

Public Lands Policy Plan. 

Consistency with BLM Policy Manuals and Handbooks 

The WMP is consistent with the requirements and management direction contained in the 

following BLM and Departmental policy manuals and handbooks: 

	 BLM Manual 1626 - Travel and Transportation Manual 

	 BLM Manual 6340 - Management of Designated Wilderness Areas 

B&GC-WMP | 29 
 

	 BLM Manual 6842 - Special Status Species Management 

	 BLM Manual 8100 - The Foundations for Managing Cultural Resources 

	 BLM Manual 8140 - Protecting Cultural Resources 

	 BLM Manual 8150 - Permitting Uses of Cultural Resources 

	 BLM Manual 8400 - Visual Resources Management 

	 BLM Manual 8561 - Wilderness Management Plans 

	 BLM Handbook H1742-1 - Burned Area Emergency Stabilization and Rehabilitation 

	 BLM Handbook 1790-1 - National Environmental Policy Act 

Decisions to be made 

The WMP implements legislative and regulatory direction from the Wilderness Act and the 

WPCCRDA. Management actions common to both alternatives consist of restrictions on 

activities that could potentially affect wilderness character. Use restrictions common to both 

alternatives that implement legislative and regulatory direction to preserve wilderness character 

will not be analyzed herein. 

The following management categories contain management actions that address issues identified 

during scoping related to the following uses: 

	 Fire management 

	 Hunting and trapping 

	 Livestock management 

	 Noxious weed and non-native invasive plant management 

 Wildlife management 

The EA will focus on the potential environmental effects of management actions, as well as their 

effect on wilderness character. Based on their potential effects, the authorized officer will decide 

whether to implement some or all of the proposed actions. 

Scoping and Alternative Development 

Internal meetings were held, and a public notification was mailed in November 2013. The BLM 

held a public meeting in October 2014 at the Ely District Office to solicit comments on 

wilderness and BLM management objectives for these areas. The meeting will provide a forum 

for public input regarding specific wilderness issues. BLM also posted information on its website 

about the planning process, which provided the public with another venue for submitting 

comments or information regarding their use of and interest in these areas. Additionally, BLM 

staff consulted directly with individuals and organizations interested in wilderness. The proposed 

action addresses relevant internal and public issues and concerns. 

Based on an analysis of the issues raised during public and internal scoping, the BLM 

Interdisciplinary Team identified the following issues: 

	 Long boundary perimeters increase the amount of wilderness that may be impacted by 

human-influenced changes to vegetative structure and composition in areas immediately 

adjacent to the wilderness areas, especially following large-scale wildfires. 

B&GC-WMP | 30 
 

 Continued livestock grazing-related activities, including access to and maintenance of 

existing structures (e.g., pipelines, fences), may adversely affect naturalness and 

undeveloped wilderness character. 

	 Human activities may increase noxious weed and invasive plant infestation and spread. 

	 Visitor use activities may affect wilderness character. 

Management guidelines for resolution of these issues are included in the Proposed Action. 

2.1. Descriptions of Alternatives 

Wilderness areas are designated by Congress for the purpose of protecting and preserving 

wilderness character. BLM must manage various land uses and activities consistent with the 

purposes for which the Wilderness Areas were designated. Land uses and activities that are 

inconsistent with guidance provided by the Wilderness Act, the WPCCRDA, and House Report 

No. 101-405 are prohibited within the affected areas. 

Based on the above guidance, a true No Action Alternative does not exist, since BLM is required 

to manage designated wilderness areas according to standards that were not in effect prior to 

their designation. Alternative A is described as the Minimal Management Alternative because it 

contains the minimum land use restrictions deemed necessary to protect and preserve wilderness 

character and to comply with applicable laws and regulations. Alternative A contains no 

discretionary management actions. 

Alternative B is the Proposed Action. The difference between the two alternatives is that the 

Proposed Action includes management actions designed to preserve wilderness character 

including: 1) addressing the effects of past human activities, 2) managing or responding to 

natural processes, such as wildfire, and their effects on wilderness character, and 3) providing 

limited authorizations for otherwise prohibited activities. The WMP contains specific details of 

the Proposed Action. 

Management Actions Common to Both Alternatives 

The following management actions are either expressly authorized by the enabling legislation or 

are standard land use authorizations and/or restrictions deemed necessary for the proper 

management of the designated wilderness areas. As such, the actions are incorporated in both 

alternatives. Table B in the WMP contains a consolidated list of legislatively-required actions 

and proposed visitor use restrictions, and indicates whether a use: 1) is authorized without further 

requirements, 2) is authorized, but restricted in some manner, 3) requires prior BLM 

authorization, or 4) is prohibited. Table C in the WMP contains BLM wilderness management 

decisions not specifically related to use regulation. 

Management Actions Common to Both Alternatives: 

1.		 Pursuant to WPCCRDA Section 324(b), livestock grazing would continue to be 

authorized in allotments located wholly or partially in wilderness areas that existed prior 

to designation, consistent with Section 4(d)(4) of the Wilderness Act and the guidelines 

B&GC-WMP | 31 
 

in Appendix A of House Report 101-405. Grazing would continue to be administered 

subject to the Northeastern Great Basin Resource Advisory Standards. 

2.		 Motorized or mechanized vehicles and equipment may be used in wilderness areas during 

emergencies involving search and rescue, the health or safety of individuals, or the 

rescuing of sick or stranded animals. Individuals must notify the BLM authorized officer 

immediately following completion of emergency activities. The removal of downed 

airplanes (or other vehicle accidents) and associated equipment, parts, or debris is not 

considered an emergency, and would require prior BLM authorization subject to a MRA. 

3.		 Pursuant to Section 4(c) of the Wilderness Act, the use of motor vehicles for livestock 

monitoring, herding, and gathering is prohibited. 

4.		 Livestock grazing would be prohibited in burned areas until vegetative recovery 

objectives are met. 

5.		 Existing structures and developments would be removed if they: 1) are not associated 

with a valid existing right, 2) are not of historical or cultural value, or 3) are not the 

minimum necessary for the administration of the area as wilderness. Eligible structures 

and installations would be retained in accordance with BLM Manual 6340, Section 5.d. 

6.		 Traditional geocaching and letterboxing would be prohibited. 

7.		 Casual non-commercial surface collection (no digging) of small quantities (<25 lb.) of 

renewable and non-renewable resources would be permitted (i.e., wood, fruit, vegetation, 

rock and mineral specimens, shed antlers, and common invertebrate and plant fossils) 

unless or until it results in unacceptable effects to wilderness character. 

8.		 Vertebrate fossils and cultural, archaeological, and historic sites and artifacts, may not be 

damaged or removed without prior BLM authorization. 

9.		 Temporary, portable or “pop-up” blinds would be permitted for 14 days. They must be 

occupied at least some portion of the 14 days. 

10. The Wilderness Act allows some commercial services to be permitted "to the extent 

necessary ... for realizing the recreational or other wilderness purposes of the area" 

(Section 4(d)(6)). BLM would continue to issue Special Recreation Permits to the 

following entities as long as they operate within the terms and conditions of their permits: 

a.		 Licensed commercial outfitters and guides for activities involving: 

1. Hunting 

2. Fishing 

3. Pack trips 

4. Hiking 

5. Camping 

6. Nature viewing 

b.		 Entities whose mission includes the promotion of wilderness ethics, Tread 

Lightly!, Leave No Trace, or environmental education, and 

c.		 Entities whose primary purpose is to support individuals with disabilities. 

B&GC-WMP | 32 
 

11. Commercial filming is considered a “commercial service,” and is not permitted in 

wilderness unless it is necessary for realizing the recreational or other wilderness 

purposes of the area and does not otherwise utilize a prohibited use. 

12. Campers must pack-in/pack-out all trash. 

Alternative A – Minimal Management 

The Minimal Management Alternative represents the baseline condition of managing designated 

wilderness areas with the fewest restrictions possible consistent with legislatively authorized 

activities, as well as those deemed necessary to protect and preserve wilderness character. 

Requirements or restrictions imposed in this alternative are those that are either: 1) specifically 

mandated by legislation, or 2) are designed to preclude or minimize, but not treat, the impacts of 

human use on wilderness. 

Alternative A includes the following management actions in addition to the common 

management actions identified in the previous section: 

1.		 Off-road and over-snow travel and development of new routes would be prohibited, and 

existing administrative routes would not be maintained or repaired. 

2.		 Motorized or mechanized vehicles and equipment would not be authorized for: 

a.		 Project or facility inspection, maintenance, or repair 

b.		 Delivery of livestock salt and/or supplement 

c.		 Wildlife management proposals 

d.		 Wildfire suppression 

e.		 Emergency stabilization and rehabilitation 

f.		 Weed control projects 

3.		 Pedestrian or equestrian trails would not be designated, maintained, or repaired. 

4.		 No new water or other developments would be permitted for livestock or wildlife
	

purposes.
	

Alternative B – Proposed Action 

The WMP is the Proposed Action and incorporates the common management actions identified 

in sections of the WMP. In addition, the Proposed Action incorporates management actions to 

address otherwise prohibited uses in a manner that best preserves wilderness character. Future 

proposals not discussed herein would be evaluated through an MRA and subject to site-specific 

NEPA, to determine if they utilize the minimum tools needed to protect or enhance wilderness 

character. 

Alternative B includes the following management actions in addition to the common 

management actions identified in the previous section: 

1.		 BLM would continue to authorize livestock grazing in wilderness, and grazing would be 

administered subject to the Northeastern Great Basin Resource Advisory Standards. 

2.		 BLM would authorize the livestock-related administrative access according to guidelines 

defined in Livestock Management section of the WMP. Authorizations would be subject 

B&GC-WMP | 33 
 

to an MRA, and if approved, would be added as terms and conditions to existing grazing 

permits. 

3.		 BLM would temporarily close or limit access to specific dispersed camp areas (at its 

discretion) when recreational or other activities are negatively affecting wilderness 

character. 

4.		 BLM would consider commercial enterprises proper for realizing wilderness recreational 

purposes if the enterprises: 1) are wilderness-dependent, 2) contribute to Leave No Trace 

or environmental education, and 3) do not degrade wilderness character. Enterprises 

currently meeting these criteria include commercial outfitting and guide services, and 

therapy pack trips. 

5.		 BLM would not place signs and structures in wilderness unless an MRA determines that 

they are the minimum necessary for administration of the area as wilderness. 

6.		 BLM would not maintain, repair or enhance any routes along old roadbeds or game trails. 

7.		 BLM managers may consider the full range of fire management strategies and tactics 

(ranging from monitoring to full suppression) to protect multiple values. 

8.		 Repairs to facilities or resources may be accomplished with the same or similar type of 

equipment that was authorized for fire suppression. 

9.		 Temporary structures, erosion control, repair of facilities and cultural site stabilization 

may be authorized during ES&R subject to an MRA, site-specific NEPA analysis and 

District Manager approval. 

10. BLM would remove existing structures and installations if they: 1) are not associated 

with a valid existing right, 2) are not of historical or cultural value, or 3) are not the 

minimum necessary for the administration of the area as wilderness. 

11. BLM would treat surface disturbances subject to an MRA, using methods that have the 

least impact to wilderness character. 

2.2. The Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

The Wilderness Act requires land managers to preserve wilderness character. As such, both 

alternatives contain basic and requisite land use restrictions designed to carry out this legislative 

direction by precluding or minimizing, but not treating, the effects of human use on wilderness. 

The Proposed Action includes measures designed to manage approved uses on these areas. 

This environmental analysis focuses on the environmental effects of the management actions 

described in Alternative B, while also describing their effect on wilderness character. Since 

wilderness character reflects the natural and undeveloped nature of designated areas, they are 

representative of the resources that would normally be considered in the effects analysis section 

of an environmental document. 

The cumulative effects analysis considers the past, current, and potential future conditions of 

resources affected by a given action as the result of past, ongoing, and future foreseeable actions. 

The enabling legislation limits the management of wilderness character to the areas incorporated 

within the designated boundaries. 

The effects analysis for wilderness evaluates proposed actions on wilderness character. 

Specifically, the analysis will determine if actions proposed in the WMP will affect the natural, 

untrammeled, and undeveloped character of wilderness, including associated opportunities for 

solitude or primitive and unconfined recreation. 

B&GC-WMP | 34 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Resource or 

Concern 

Analyzed 

(Y/N) 

Rationale for dismissal from Analysis or requiring 

detailed Analysis 

Air Quality N No effect. Proposed action would not increase air 

pollutant concentrations. 

Cultural Resources N 

May affect. Proposed projects that have the potential to 

affect cultural resources would be subject to an MRA, as 

well as a National Historic Preservation Act, Section 106 

review, including SHPO and Tribal consultation. Affected 

areas would be inventoried to identify cultural resources, 

and if approved, activities must avoid adversely affecting 

cultural resources. Cultural resources within the 

designated wilderness areas would be analyzed on a caseby-case basis. 

Environmental 

Justice N 

No effect. No minority or low-income groups would be 

affected by disproportionately high and adverse health or 

environmental effects. 

Fish and Wildlife Y 

May affect. The proposed action through NDOW 

proposals (collar retrieval, overflights, facilities) may 

affect fish and wildlife populations or habitat. 

Floodplains N Resource is present but not affected. 

Forest and 

Rangeland N 

No effect. The proposed action and minimal action would 

not have a direct impact to Forests and Rangelands. 

Project does not meet HFRA criteria. 

Migratory Birds N 

No effect. Following BLM’s management guidance for 

the Migratory Bird Treaty Act would prevent or diminish 

impacts to migratory birds. 

Native American 

Religious Concerns N No effect. There are no known specific concerns to local tribes. 

Threated and 

Endangered Species N Not present. No federally listed plants or animal species are identified in these two wilderness areas. 

Wastes, Hazardous 

or Solid N 

No effect. Human waste may be generated during visitor 

use of the areas. Proposed monitoring would track this 

element, and public education and adaptive management 

would manage for this element to protect Wilderness 

character and natural resources. 

Description of the Affected Environment 

The two wilderness areas covered by the Proposed Action are located in White Pine County in 

the Great Basin ecoregion. The critical elements of the human environment, as identified by the 

BLM Manual 1790-1, are listed in EA Table 4. Elements that may be affected are further 

described in this Environmental Assessment. Rationales for those elements that would not be 

affected are also listed in EA Table 4. These critical elements will not be considered further in 

this document. Some of these items are being considered to ensure compliance with laws, 

Supplemental Authorities, Executive Orders, or regulations that impose requirements on all 

Federal actions. 

EA Table 4. Critical Elements of the Human Environment and Rationale 

B&GC-WMP | 35 
 

Water Quality, 

Drinking/Ground N No effect. No actions to affect. 

Wetlands-Riparian 

Zones N May affect. Control measures for fire or rehabilitation may enhance riparian zones. 

Wild and Scenic 

Rivers N Resource is not present. 

Wilderness Y May affect. Proposed actions seek to maintain, restore, or 

enhance wilderness character. 

In addition to the Critical Elements of the Human Environment, the BLM considers other 

resources that occur on public lands, or issues that may result from the implementation of the 

Proposed Action. A brief rationale for either considering or not considering the issue or resource 

further is provided. 

EA Table 5. Other Resources and Issues and Rationale for Analysis 

Resource or 

Concern 

Analyzed 

(Y/N) 

Rationale for dismissal from Analysis or requiring 

detailed Analysis 

Fire Management Y 

May affect. Fire suppression and management actions 

may affect wilderness character through suppression 

actions. Under the proposed action, management tools that 

would otherwise be prohibited within the wilderness areas 

may be allowed for fire management. 

Livestock Grazing 

Uses Y 

May affect. The WPCCRDA provides for continued 

livestock grazing in wilderness areas. Appendix A of 

House Report 101-405 describes allowable uses and 

maintenance of range developments in wilderness. 

Invasive Non-native 

Plant Species 

(includes noxious 

weeds) 

Y 

May affect. The proposed action may allow tools when 

necessary to potentially reduce the risk of increased 

invasive annual grasses, reduce the potential need for 

ES&R treatments and protect wilderness character where 

it is determined that it is being threatened. 

Recreation N 

The proposed action to implement the wilderness 

management plan would not restrict current recreation 

uses; however, the structure and framework of the 

proposed action would better manage current and future 

uses benefitting recreational uses while protecting 

wilderness values. 

Special Status 

Animal Species Y 

May affect. The proposed action does not affect special 

status animal species in the wilderness areas. However, 

special status animal species are present and future 

activities may modify habitat. 

Special Status Plant 

Species N There are no documented special status plant species in the Wilderness Areas. 

B&GC-WMP | 36 
 

 

Vegetation/Soils/ 

Watershed Y 

May affect. Constructing staging areas and route 

decommissioning would affect small areas of vegetation. 

Soils would not be destroyed or removed and watershed 

function would not be affected. Fire management, weed 

management, reclamation, and recreational activities may 

affect soils and vegetation. 

Visual Resource 

Management N The proposed action is consistent with Visual Resource Management (VRM) Class I objectives for wilderness. 

Water Resources 

(Water Rights) N BLM is subject to State of Nevada water right laws. 

Assumptions for Environmental Consequences Analysis 

The impact analysis is based on the following reasonable assumptions for the foreseeable future: 

Noxious weeds and invasive plant species could become more established in these 

wilderness areas. 

In the event of a fire, active emergency stabilization and rehabilitation treatments may be 

necessary to preserve ecosystem function and integrity. 

Recreational visitor use will slowly increase and types of popular use will become more 

diversified over the life of the Plan. More user-created primitive campsites may develop in and 

around the boundaries of these areas to accommodate higher levels of use. User-created trails 

may also develop in these wilderness areas. 

Increased visitation would result in increased impacts to resources. 

Opportunities for solitude will most likely continue to be readily available in these 

wilderness areas over the life of the Plan. 

Vehicle access to the wilderness would be maintained to the conditions existing at time of 

designation. 

The BLM will continue to manage for dispersed access points and staging areas for these 

wilderness areas. The BLM will also continue to attempt to deter motorized trespass into these 

areas. 

Educating the public about wilderness is an important component of protecting wilderness 

resources and preserving wilderness character. 

There will be a need for emergency, programmatic, or administrative use of mechanized or 

motorized equipment in one or more of the wilderness areas during the life of this plan. 

Livestock grazing will continue in these wilderness areas subject to the terms and conditions 

of the relevant grazing permits, which may include limited motorized access for management of 

livestock and in cases of emergency. Active range developments in these wilderness areas will 

remain and be maintained based on grazing permit conditions. 

Small-scale surface disturbances, such as former motorized routes in wilderness areas, will 

be rehabilitated unless those disturbances are associated with periodic motorized administrative 

access allowed by the terms of grazing permits. When human structures or artifacts do not have a 

historic value or a permitted use, they will be removed. 

Hunting guide services and outfitters will continue to be permitted to operate in these 

wilderness areas. Other commercial uses that may be permitted include academically oriented 

organizations whose primary purpose is wilderness or environmental education and 

organizations whose service is primarily for the support of people with disabilities. 

B&GC-WMP | 37 
 

Fire Management
	

Affected Environment 

The Bristlecone Wilderness area lies within the Ely/Lund Watershed & WUI and Northern 

Benches Fire Management Units (FMUs) as designated within the Ely District Fire Management 

Plan (FMP). The Goshute Canyon Wilderness occurs within the Kern/Snake/Cherry Creek/Park 

Mtn and the Northern Benches FMUs. All of these FMUs allow for the use of wildland fire for 

resource benefit as an option for fire management. Since designation, three fires have occurred in 

the Bristlecone Wilderness - all in 2008 and were controlled at less than an acre. Four fires have 

been controlled in Goshute Canyon Wilderness since designation at less than 1,054 acres. 

The fire season generally occurs between May and October. The primary cause is lightning 

strikes. Fires in these FMUs are wind-driven, and live fuel moisture plays a very small role in 

variability of fire size. Most lightning-caused fires are associated with the summer monsoon 

season. 

Fuel trends within the wilderness areas are typical of most of the northern Ely District where, 

due to past influences on the historic fire regime, vegetation has shifted to later seral 

communities dominated by shrubs and/or conifers. Fuels in this state have the potential to 

support large higher severity fires than are thought to have occurred within these vegetative 

communities prior to human influence. Fire behavior that occurs at these levels combined with 

the presence of invasive annual grasses can lead to an increased potential for invasions and 

vegetative conversions. Fires that occur at moderate to low intensity and severity have a smaller 

chance of promoting invasive species while promoting early seral vegetation with good 

representation of native species. 

Consequences of Proposed Action 

Fire management objectives in these wilderness areas would be structured in accordance with the 

Ely District Fire Management Plan (FMP) as updated. Following fire, Emergency Stabilization 

and Rehabilitation (ES&R) activities may be undertaken in accordance with current Department 

of Interior policy (620 DM 3 Wildland Fire Management Burned Area Emergency Stabilization 

and Rehabilitation) and Bureau of Land Management policy (H-1742-1 Burned Areas 

Emergency Stabilization and Rehabilitation Handbook). BLM Manual 6340 provides detailed 

categories related to fire management are as follows: 

 Fire Use Guidelines 

 Fire Suppression Guidelines 

 Suppression Activity Damage 

 Emergency Stabilization and Rehabilitation Activities 

The overall emphasis of managing fire in wilderness is to allow the frequency and intensity of an 

ecosystems natural fire regime to play its inherent role in that system. 

Consequences of Minimal Management Alternative 

Fire management activities would occur without the guidance of a comprehensive wilderness 

management plan and only to enhance wilderness character. 

Impacts of Proposed Action 

The environmental impacts associated with the Proposed Action would include a reduced 

capacity to manage wildland fires regardless of the potential impacts. These restrictions on fire 

management may result in fires growing larger and burning at higher severity levels than would 

B&GC-WMP | 38 
 

occur if additional management tools were available. This would only apply to fires where the 

Ely District would engage in suppression or fire management activities where the potential 

impacts of the fire would outweigh the impacts to the untrammeled character of the wilderness 

areas. These impacts may also extend outside of the wilderness boundaries. Fires have the 

potential to grow to a more complex level prior to crossing outside of the wilderness where these 

tools would then become available for suppression and fire management. 

Under the proposed action, management tools that would otherwise be prohibited within the 

wilderness areas may be allowed for fire management. These tools would provide the authorized 

officer greater ability to respond with either suppression or other management actions once the 

potential risks and benefits of the fire have been evaluated. Suppression tactics would continue to 

follow MIST standards and thereby attempt to minimize the impacts of the actions upon 

wilderness character. The ability of managers to utilize these tools when necessary would 

potentially reduce the risk of increased invasive annual grasses, reduce the potential need for 

ES&R treatments and protect wilderness character where it is determined that it is being 

threatened. 

The re-introduction of fire to the landscape using prescribed fire and allowing naturally ignited 

fires to burn would further enhance the naturalness of the wilderness. The implementation of 

prescribed fires would minimize the risk of negative impacts resulting from wildfire as well as 

increase the rate at which the desired future condition would be achieved. 

There is potential for vegetation treatments to occur within the wilderness areas as reference 

within the proposed action. Any proposed treatments would be conducted in accordance with all 

applicable laws, policies and regulations. Proposed treatments would be subject to site specific 

NEPA and would be covered in additional analysis. Currently, there are no proposals within the 

wilderness and therefore no impacts to fuels or fire management. 

Impacts of Minimal Management Alternative 

The Minimal Management Alternative would not allow prohibited uses in wilderness, which 

would eliminate the impacts associated with normal suppression tactics. However, limiting 

suppression to the use of MIST could substantially increase fire size, which could increase the 

spread of invasive species or noxious weeds. 

Fish and Wildlife 

Affected Environment 

Wildlife species characteristic of the Great Basin are supported by the diverse habitat types 

found in these wilderness areas. Key habitats, as defined in the Nevada Wildlife Action Plan 

(2006), can be used to infer likely occurrences of wildlife species assemblages when survey data 

is lacking, as is the case for many species in these wilderness areas. Key Habitats include 

primarily lower montane woodlands and sagebrush, and Inter-mountain conifer forests and 

woodlands (Nevada Wildlife Plan Action Team 2006). 

The big game species that occupy these wilderness areas are Rocky Mountain elk, for which 

almost the entire western portion is crucial summer habitat; mule deer, for which most of the 

interior is crucial summer and the outside crucial winter habitat; and pronghorn, for which there 

is a small amount of crucial winter habitat in the Cottonwood Bench area. There are numerous 

small game and furbearer species in the project area such as black-tailed jackrabbit, gray fox, 

B&GC-WMP | 39 
 

 

 

 

 

bobcat, mountain lion and coyote. Raptors are commonly found nesting and foraging in the 

wilderness areas, and these areas provide habitat for numerous non-game species of small 

mammals, reptiles, and birds. 

Consequences of Proposed Action 

Management of wildlife populations is the responsibility of the Nevada Department of Wildlife 

(NDOW) and management of wildlife habitat is the responsibility of the BLM. The BLM policy, 

Manual 6340, includes direction on many aspects of wildlife management that requires BLM to 

ascertain whether the proposed action is necessary to preserve wilderness character before 

granting approval. Any phrases in policy that seem to direct agency deference to the states 

should not be taken out of context of the Constitutional authority, legislation, case law, or the 

whole of the policy. Over the life of this plan, it may be necessary to implement wildlife or 

habitat management activities to prevent degradation to or allow enhancement of wilderness 

character by promoting healthy, viable and more naturally distributed wildlife populations. 

Under the NDOW/BLM MOU, specific proposed projects are submitted annually for review. No 

new water developments are proposed. Detailed guidelines are found in the Wildlife section of 

the WMP. 

Consequences of Minimal Management Alternative 

A comprehensive wilderness management plan would not guide wildlife or habitat related 

management actions. Activities within these wilderness areas would be conducted in 

conformance with the current and subsequent BLM-NDOW Memorandum of Understanding 

(MOU) and guided by the BLM Manual 6340. 

Impacts of Proposed Action 

Authorized livestock activities and ground-disturbing methods relating to fire management 

activities, vegetation treatments, noxious and invasive weed treatments and ES&R could have 

short-term impacts on behavior and movement of individuals. Wildlife would be temporarily 

displaced, however once these actions have concluded, wildlife may return to these areas. 

Wildlife timing stipulations outlined in the WMP will lessen these impacts. 

Vegetation treatments, noxious and invasive weed treatments, and emergency stabilization and 

rehabilitation would improve habitat for all wildlife by increasing native plant composition for 

forage and cover, as well as increasing habitat diversity. Vegetation treatments that remove 

encroaching trees from riparian areas, sagebrush communities, and aspen stands will improve 

habitat for all wildlife. Route decommissioning and restoration will reduce habitat fragmentation 

in the wilderness for all wildlife species. 

Impacts of Minimal Management Alternative 

Under the Minimal Management Alternative, wildlife habitat quality has the potential to 

deteriorate without limiting or excluding motorized and mechanized vehicles and equipment for 

wildfire suppression, ES&R, and weed control. While certain areas may benefit from wildfire, 

large and intense fires could remove important wildlife habitat, prolong natural recovery in 

desert ecosystems, and increase the risk of invasive nonnative grasses. 

B&GC-WMP | 40 
 

Livestock Grazing 

Affected Environment 

There are nine grazing allotments partially located within the wilderness areas. Livestock grazing 

allotments in the wilderness are managed entirely by the Ely District Office and the Egan Field 

Office. Livestock numbers may vary based on rotational grazing systems and the terms and 

conditions of the individual term grazing permits. Range developments currently exist in support 

of rangeland health and the management of livestock grazing. Existing range developments 

identified through administrative records and field reconnaissance within the wilderness areas 

are depicted in Maps 2 & 3. The grazing permittee is responsible for maintenance of all livestock 

grazing facilities in the wilderness areas by cooperative agreements. Detailed descriptions are 

found in the Livestock Management section of the WMP. 

Consequences of Proposed Action 

Both alternatives prohibit the use of motorized or mechanized vehicles and equipment for 

livestock monitoring, herding, and gathering. As such, livestock grazing that meets rangeland 

health standards is consistent and compatible with the protection and preservation of wilderness 

character. However, constraints on vehicles and equipment would not prohibit maintenance of 

existing facilities or response to emergencies, both alternatives would inhibit the trend toward 

mechanization in livestock monitoring and management. The Proposed Action would allow for 

the minimum motorized access needed for livestock grazing-related purposes and specific 

guidance for the maintenance and repair of livestock grazing-related facilities. Regular 

maintenance of range improvements and facilities would be distinguished from emergency 

operations. 

Consequences of Minimal Management Alternative 

No difference from the proposed action except all requests would be required to have sitespecific NEPA analysis for each repair or maintenance action. 

Impacts of Proposed Action 

The Proposed Action for management of livestock grazing provides specific guidance for the 

maintenance of facilities and activities in support of a livestock-grazing program. Administrative 

access routes would be clearly defined and regular maintenance of structures in support of 

livestock grazing would be distinguished from emergency operations. This may enhance the 

ability of the BLM to manage livestock grazing activities within wilderness and eliminate time 

delays in approval for access to maintain range developments and respond to emergency 

situations. The proposed action intends to minimize the spread of invasive, non-native plant 

species. Wildlife may benefit from the maintenance of rangeland water developments as they 

provide additional sources of water. 

Impacts of Minimal Management Alternative 

Administrative access and maintenance needs for livestock grazing operations would occur on a 

case-by-case basis. Site-specific NEPA for developments would be required for all inspection, 

maintenance and repair. Impacts to and from other resources would not differ from the proposed 

action. 

B&GC-WMP | 41 
 

Invasive Non-Native Plant Species
	

Affected Environment 

Noxious and non-native invasive weeds are frequent obstacles to maintaining wilderness 

character in the Central Basin Ecoregion. Current noxious and invasive weeds in or near 

wilderness include, but may not be limited to, Bull thistle (Cirsium vulgare), Canadian thistle 

(Cirsium arvense), Musk thistle (Carduus nutans), Scotch thistle (Onopordum acanthium), 

Water Hemlock (Conium maculatum) and cheatgrass (Bromus tectorum). The ongoing 

recreational and grazing activities may contribute to the spread of noxious and invasive species. 

Rehabilitating small-scale surface disturbances would include methods such as soil 

decompaction, scarification, and pitting that could stimulate the growth of noxious and invasive 

weeds. Vegetation restoration projects may cause disturbances that increase noxious and invasive 

weed populations. Motorized access could be authorized for ES&R, wildlife management, range 

project maintenance, or fire-management; all of which could exacerbate weed establishment and 

spread. The adaptive management provided for in the Proposed Action for managing weeds and 

invasive plants, combined with proper grazing management, would optimize the protection and 

restoration of wildlife habitat. Vegetation treatments and proper grazing management would help 

re-establish and maintain a balanced mixture of vegetation stages (age classes) and types 

essential for the habitat needs of wildlife species within the wilderness areas. 

Consequences of Proposed Action 

Management emphasis in wilderness would be placed on controlling small infestations with the 

potential to spread and displace native plants. Treatments for large infestations (defined by the 

BLM Ely District Weeds Program) would be considered separately. Treatment methods include 

hand-pulling, herbicides, biological control, reseeding, and alternatives such as targeted grazing 

would be considered for infestations. 

Consequences of Minimal Action Alternative 

Noxious weeds would be treated on a case-by-case basis as per the District Noxious Weed Plan 

and BLM Manual 6340. When a vegetation treatment is deemed appropriate following an 

environmental analysis and a MRA, management activities would emphasize protection and 

enhancement of wilderness character. 

Impacts of Proposed Action 

In general, the management actions outlined in the proposed action, apply best management 

practices and standard operating procedures that are focused on preventing the spread of weeds 

by vectors such as vehicles or equipment. Weed treatment procedures within these areas would 

be clearly defined and compatible with limiting or eliminating noxious and invasive weeds. The 

continued presence and anticipated increase of recreational activities, including hunting, 

camping, hiking, and horse packing, may contribute to the spread of noxious and invasive 

species as a result of trampling of native species and the possibility of spreading noxious and 

invasive seeds into wilderness. Allowable motorized access could occur through emergency 

stabilization and rehabilitation, wildlife management and livestock access projects may cause 

small, local disturbances that could increase local noxious and invasive weed populations. 

Impacts of Minimal Management Alternative 

Weed introduction from individuals hiking and from vehicles along cherry-stemmed routes and 

wilderness boundary roads may occur. Compared to the proposed action, weed treatment would 

be sporadic and would not occur in a timely manner. Additionally, when weeds are found, site 

B&GC-WMP | 42 
 

specific NEPA would be guided by the noxious weed program as outlined in the RMP without 

the additional benefit of specific wilderness guidance provided by the WMP, further slowing 

down the ability to treat weeds in a timely manner. 

Special Status Animal Species 

Affected Environment 

The wilderness areas provide habitat for numerous special status species. Preliminary primary 

habitat (PPH) and preliminary general habitat (PGH) for the Greater sage grouse, a candidate 

species for federal listing, may occur in the high mountain sagebrush communities and along the 

lower benches of the Goshute Canyon and Bristlecone Wilderness areas. Other BLM special 

status species that may occupy or utilize these wilderness areas are Swainson’s hawk, golden 

eagle, Northern goshawk, peregrine falcon, sage thrasher, brewer’s sparrow, pinyon jay, black 

rosy-finch, pygmy rabbit and numerous bat species. 

Consequences of Proposed Action 

Over the life of this plan, it may be necessary to implement wildlife or habitat management 

activities to prevent degradation or enhance wilderness character by promoting healthy, viable, 

and more naturally distributed populations of special status species. Future Nevada and Northern 

California Greater Sage Grouse Land Use Plan Amendment guidance would be adopted. 

Consequences of Minimal Management Alternative 

Wildlife activities would rely solely upon the (2012) BLM-NDOW Memoranda of 

Understanding (MOU) (BLM-MOU-6300-NV-930-0402), as amended, and the RMP without 

specific wilderness oriented guidance that the WMP provides. Activities within these wilderness 

areas would be conducted in conformance with the current and subsequent MOU and guided by 

the BLM Manual 6340. 

Impacts of Proposed Action 

The impacts of the Proposed Action to special status species are the same as fish and wildlife. 

None of the actions outlined in the WMP would cause a special status species to become listed 

under the Endangered Species Act (ESA). Greater sage grouse and migratory bird timing 

stipulations outlined in the WMP will lessen impacts to these species. 

Impacts of Minimal Management Alternative 

The impacts of the Minimal Management Alternative to special status species are the same as 

fish and wildlife. Important Greater sage grouse habitat could be lost without adequate wildfire 

suppression. This alternative would not cause a special status species to become listed under the 

ESA. 

Vegetation/Soils/Watersheds 

Affected Environment
	

These wilderness areas lie entirely within the Central Basin and Range Ecoregion (Great Basin). 

(U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 2007). Biophysical setting (BPS) models have been 

developed for most major vegetation types. These models describe the vegetation, geography, 

biophysical characteristics, succession stages, disturbance regimes, and assumptions for each 

vegetation type. Great Basin pinyon-juniper woodlands prevail throughout the areas, with 

B&GC-WMP | 43 
 

 

mountain ascents and peaks marked with montane seral aspen, mixed conifer forests and 

montane sagebrush communities. Descending from range to valley, foothill mountain mahogany 

communities transform to shrub land. 

Sagebrush communities are dispersed throughout the two wilderness areas. On higher elevation, 

deep-soil slopes consist of sagebrush communities composed of mountain sagebrush with 

snowberry, serviceberry, and abundant perennial grasses. In the lower elevations, well-drained 

alluvial fans and valley floors consist of sagebrush shrub land communities composed of Basin 

big sagebrush with greasewood, saltbrush, and a few perennial grasses. 

The rocky outcrops of mountain foothills are marked by mountain mahogany, associated 

antelope bitterbrush, green leaf manzanita, and currants. On the dry rocky ridges and slopes of 

higher west-facing slopes, limber and bristlecone pines are found. 

Consequences of Proposed Action 

The proposed action outlines management actions designed to protect wilderness character near 

access points, cherry-stem roads and old vehicle routes where access impacts from recreational, 

livestock grazing and other activities would have the most impact on vegetation. Trails and two 

tracks would be allowed to regenerate. Parking areas would be defined as necessary to prevent 

vehicles from unauthorized travel inside wilderness, thus limiting impacts to vegetation. 

Consequences of Minimal Management Alternative 

Visitors would be able to park their vehicles and access wilderness from any public point outside 

of the wilderness boundary. No vehicle staging areas would be designated or defined to direct 

recreational use to most desired and suitable access points. 

Impacts of Proposed Action 

These actions are proposed on relatively disturbed sites; thus, there would be nominal impacts to 

vegetation communities. Vehicle barriers would be constructed outside of wilderness to prevent 

vehicles from unauthorized travel inside wilderness, thus further limiting impacts to vegetation. 

Small amounts of vegetation may be temporarily impacted along cherry-stemmed or 

administrative access routes from authorized motorized access that may occur through future 

emergency stabilization and rehabilitation, wildlife management, grazing permittee 

administrative access, or fire management actions. Rehabilitating decommissioned routes will 

reduce or eliminate further unauthorized incursions and new plant growth will enhance the 

vegetation communities in proximity to these former routes. Small areas of vegetation could be 

disturbed or destroyed if vegetation is cut back or removed to protect sensitive archaeological 

and historic resources, such as prehistoric rock art, from wildland fire. 

Approved research on native plant communities or wildland fire for resource benefit and 

monitoring could improve and restore vegetation communities within wilderness. The 

prohibition of geocaching would prevent disturbance to vegetation that could occur through 

object burial and the development of social trails relating to geocaching. 

Impacts of Minimal Management Alternative 

Without the guidance of a management plan and subsequent monitoring, altered vegetation 

communities may persist or further degrade impacting wildlife habitat and increasing fire 

frequency and severity. Unmonitored recreational use of the wilderness areas could result in 

impacts to vegetation on foot-worn paths and at campsites. Not designating administrative access 

B&GC-WMP | 44 
 

routes, staging areas, or pullouts, could lead to degradation of vegetative communities through an 

increase in motorized trespass and poor wilderness ethics from recreational users. 

Wilderness 

Affected Environment 

The Wilderness Management Plan addresses management of the Bristlecone and Goshute 

Canyon Wilderness areas. Wilderness character is described by five qualities: untrammeled, 

naturalness and primeval character, undeveloped, outstanding opportunities for solitude or a 

primitive unconfined form of recreation, and other features of scientific, educational, scenic, or 

historical value. 

Trammels are modern human controls or manipulations, which hinder and restrict components or 

processes of wilderness. These areas have few trammeling activities. Trammeling activities 

include various measures in the management of wildland fire and weeds, the presence of 

authorized allotment fences and pipelines, the presence of former vehicle routes and the 

rehabilitation work that has been done on them. 

These areas appear be substantially free from the effects of modern civilization, having been 

primarily affected by the forces of nature, and their primeval character is mostly preserved. 

Some changes to the native vegetation composition have occurred, including the introduction of 

the invasive annual cheatgrass. These areas have few permanent improvements or other evidence 

of modern human presence. Structures include range developments such as fence lines and 

pipelines, as well as wildlife water developments, abandoned mining claims, and former vehicle 

routes. 

Outstanding opportunities for solitude and primitive, unconfined recreation are present in all 

wilderness areas. Remote ridges, canyons, and drainages in these areas provide excellent 

opportunities for solitude. The rugged terrain, scattered rocky outcrops, and valleys provide for 

recreation opportunities such as hiking, camping, hunting, nature study, and horseback riding. 

Only the 14-day stay limit for camping confines recreational opportunities. 

Consequences of Proposed Action 

Untrammeled: Current trammeling structures and actions, as noted above, would continue under 

the guidance of the wilderness management plan. The use of the MRA process is essential, and 

emphasized throughout the management action section of the WMP, to ensure the actions taken 

are truly the minimum necessary for the preservation of wilderness character. 

Naturalness and Primeval Character: Management prescriptions detailed in the proposed action 

would ensure protection of wilderness areas’ naturalness. 

Undeveloped: Several management actions described in the WMP, such as use of motorized 

vehicles for fire management, livestock grazing, ES&R or other restoration actions, including 

aerial dropping of supplies or equipment, would have short term impacts to the undeveloped 

quality for the duration of their use. 

Outstanding Opportunities for Solitude or a Primitive and Unconfined Form of Recreation: 

No additional regulations would be put in place to confine or restrict recreational activities. 

Management actions that confine use may be implemented if visitor use and encounters increase 

to an extent that wilderness character is negatively impacted. Short term impacts to solitude may 

B&GC-WMP | 45 
 

 

 

 

occur when management actions (e.g. fire management, livestock grazing, ES&R or other 

restoration actions) take place with personnel and, potentially, equipment in the area. 

Consequences of Minimal Management Alternative 

Under this alternative, management of the Bristlecone Wilderness and Goshute Canyon 

Wilderness would be considered on a case-by-case basis as directed by the Ely District Resource 

Management Plan as well as guidance from 43 CFR 6300 and the National BLM Wilderness 

policy as set forth in BLM Manual 6340. Management would remain generally passive, and react 

only as issues arise. All other programs operating within wilderness such as recreation, wildlife, 

range, cultural resources and fire would operate without consolidated guidance and all new 

actions would be considered in a separate environmental analysis, following the requirements of 

the National Environmental Policy Act. 

Untrammeled: No new actions would be proposed that would trammel these wilderness areas. 

Current management activities that may continue include the management and suppression of 

wildland fire or non-native invasive weed treatments. New trammeling activities would be 

considered on a case-by-case basis. 

Naturalness and Primeval Character: The naturalness and primeval character would remain 

mostly intact. Non-native plants such as cheatgrass would remain in and/or spread in portions of 

the wilderness. Fewer actions may be taken in fire management to prevent further conversion of 

native to non-native vegetation communities compared to the Proposed Action. 

Undeveloped: Personal property, unauthorized structures, or installations would be removed as 

encountered as long as they are not historically significant. Removal of these items would 

maintain or improve the existing undeveloped character. 

Outstanding Opportunities for Solitude or a Primitive and Unconfined Form of Recreation: No 

additional regulations would be put in place to confine or restrict recreational activities. 

Management actions that confine use may be implemented if visitor use and encounters increase. 

Under this alternative, there would less public information available regarding these areas. This 

may result in greater opportunities for solitude than the other action alternative. 

Impacts of Proposed Action 

Impacts of the Proposed Action result primarily from the six categories below: 

1) Fire Management, including ES&R 

Untrammeled: Activities associated with fire suppression degrade the untrammeled quality. 

When compared to the range of possible trammeling actions, the use of MIST would be the 

minimum requirement once a decision is made to suppress a fire to preserve the other qualities of 

wilderness character is made. A reduction in ground-disturbing actions that aggressively 

manipulate ecological processes would reduce the trammeling effects. Prohibited uses, including 

vehicles and equipment, are more efficient, but aggressively manipulate ecological processes that 

cause longer-term trammeling effects. Post-fire ES&R projects would degrade the untrammeled 

quality of wilderness. 

Natural: Actions may be taken in fire and fuels management as well as restoration and 

reclamation projects to prevent further conversion of native to non-native vegetation 

communities. Consequently, the natural and primeval character would be enhanced. Fire 

suppression detracts from the natural role of fire as an ecological process. Suppression activities 

B&GC-WMP | 46 
 

 

 

 

 

 

affect soils, vegetation, wildlife, and possibly cultural resources. Fireline construction, even 

using MIST, would disturb soils and displace vegetation, and would change the natural course of 

a wildfire. Although fire suppression and fireline construction degrade the natural quality of 

wilderness, the activity could reduce infestation and spread of noxious weeds and non-native 

invasive plants. The degree of effect would depend on the current ecological condition of the 

affected area(s), fuels and climatic conditions at the time. The use of MIST would limit 

suppression-related impacts to soil and vegetation, and thus better balance the degradation to 

naturalness by minimizing the spread and density of noxious or invasive weeds and maintaining 

native vegetation diversity. The use of retardant is considered less of an impact than heavy 

equipment (e.g. bulldozers). 

Undeveloped: Preserving this quality prevents a noticeable imprint from “man’s work.” The use 

of any prohibited, motorized, or mechanized activity degrades this quality. Using MIST would 

minimize or eliminate the use of equipment that would modify the environment. The 

undeveloped character would not be substantially affected by managing fire using MIST. 

Outstanding opportunities for solitude and primitive and unconfined recreation: The presence of 

fire suppression resources, even those using MIST, would reduce solitude in the short-term, 

during fire suppression activity. The use of motorized and mechanized vehicles and equipment 

adversely affect solitude in the short-term to a greater degree than fire personnel with hand tools. 

These actions would also be a movement away from the use of traditional skills. 

2) Wildlife Management 

Untrammeled: In general, wildlife management activities, including transplants (i.e., removal, 

augmentation, or reintroduction) would degrade the untrammeled quality of wilderness character. 

Habitat alteration needed to address adverse impacts of human activities on wildlife populations 

would cause trammeling effects. The extent of the impacts would depend on the type of 

alteration and how quickly the affected area responded to the treatment. 

Natural: Wildlife actions would be designed to preserve the diversity of wildlife and the 

resilience of special status species, and as such, would serve to protect and preserve the natural 

quality of wilderness character. 

Undeveloped: The use of motorized equipment, the landing of aircraft, and the development of 

any facility would degrade the undeveloped character in the short- or long-term, depending on 

the type of facility or structure. 

Outstanding opportunities for solitude and primitive and unconfined recreation: Personnel 

working on a wildlife project, the use of motorized equipment, landing of aircraft, or the 

temporary use of a structure would adversely affect wilderness solitude in the short-term. Noise, 

visual impact and disruption of unconfined recreation experience may result in the short-term. 

Installations would affect the primitive wilderness experience of visitors. 

3) Livestock Management 

Untrammeled: Livestock grazing and project maintenance manipulate the environment and cause 

trammeling effects (e.g. removal of vegetation or manipulation of water resources), especially 

along administrative travel routes and at livestock concentration points. Although legislatively 

permitted, livestock management reflects man’s influence on the landscape. Since grazing 

occurred long before wilderness designation, trammeling would not change substantially under 

the proposed action. 

B&GC-WMP | 47 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Natural: Livestock grazing conducted within rangeland health standards would have minimal 

effects to naturalness, except for the long-term effects around livestock concentration areas, such 

as salt licks and water sources. Livestock grazing could result in overgrazing of vegetation, 

incised “cow paths”, manure-strewn slopes and trampling, all of which degrade recreation and 

scenic values. There is a potential for livestock to contribute to the spread of invasive weed seeds 

into wilderness. 

Undeveloped: Livestock grazing would not affect the undeveloped quality of wilderness 

character; however, the presence of grazing-related structures and improvements, and the 

motorized/mechanized maintenance of, degrades the undeveloped quality. Permanent structures 

and projects would have the same adverse effect. The continued use of motorized and 

mechanized vehicles and equipment for project maintenance impacts the undeveloped quality for 

as long as permittees continue their operations. Administrative access routes would remain and 

would affect the undeveloped quality of wilderness character. 

Outstanding opportunities for solitude and primitive and unconfined recreation: Some 

individuals regard livestock as being unnatural intruders on the native ecosystem, and thus, an 

impact to their solitude. Temporary effects would include livestock-related impacts that detract 

from both solitude and unconfined primitive recreation. 

4) Vegetation Management 

Untrammeled: Any actions taken to restore native vegetation composition or resilience would 

impair the untrammeled quality. Noxious and invasive weed control activities also negatively 

impact the untrammeled quality, although both would be undertaken only to preserve the natural 

quality. 

Natural: Preserving the natural quality of wilderness character through the preservation of native 

plant communities or the prevention of the spread of noxious weeds and invasive species in 

wilderness areas would minimize the effects of modern civilization, thus improving naturalness. 

Undeveloped: Motorized or mechanized activities (e.g. motorized aerial- or ground-based 

herbicide delivery, or mechanized equipment) would degrade the undeveloped quality of 

wilderness character for the duration of their use. Weed or restoration treatments that use 

backpack or horse pack delivery methods would not degrade this quality. Motorized or 

mechanized vehicle use has a higher likelihood to increase the spread of noxious and invasive 

weeds if standard prevention procedures are not taken (e.g. washing down equipment prior to 

use). This may then require more aggressive methods at a later date that could include prohibited 

uses, thus further degrading the undeveloped quality. 

Outstanding opportunities for solitude and primitive and unconfined recreation: Vegetation 

treatments for weeds or restoration would temporarily impair opportunities for solitude while 

personnel are in the area. The use of any detect and destroy methods for weeds would include 

employees and/or equipment in the wilderness, which would degrade this quality. 

5) Recreation Management 

Untrammeled: Management actions described in the proposed action for recreation would not 

impact – positively or negatively – the untrammeled quality of wilderness character. 

Natural: Encouraging the use of certified weed-free feed for recreational livestock use in 

wilderness would ensure preservation of the natural quality by reducing a source of weed influx. 

B&GC-WMP | 48 
 

 

 

 

 

Management direction to preserve the native vegetation and to protect vertebrate fossils would 

preserve the natural quality. 

Undeveloped: Requirements for temporary hunting blinds would reduce the use of permanent 

blinds thereby maintaining the undeveloped quality. Further the prohibition of geocaching or 

letterboxing would help maintain the undeveloped quality. 

Outstanding opportunities for solitude and primitive and unconfined recreation: Minimizing 

limitations or restrictions on visitation (e.g. requiring permits) preserves the opportunity for 

unconfined recreation in these areas. The recreation management restrictions defined in the 

WMP (14-day stay limit, camping near water hole, Leave No Trace) are considered the 

minimum necessary to preserve wilderness character, and overall pose little impact to the 

unconfined quality. No developments (trails, signs) are proposed at this time to maintain the 

unconfined quality. 

6) Wild Horse Management 

Untrammeled & Natural: Management actions described in the proposed action for wild horse 

management would not impact – positively or negatively – the untrammeled or natural qualities 

of wilderness character. 

Undeveloped: Keeping gather activities for wild horses outside wilderness will help preserve this 

quality. Requiring on-the-ground activities to utilize primitive skills (hiking or horseback riding) 

would preserve the undeveloped quality. 

Outstanding opportunities for solitude and primitive and unconfined recreation: Wild horse 

gather operations may be visible from portions of the wildernesses, particularly during 

overflights. 

Impacts of Minimal Management Alternative 

Untrammeled: Impacts to the untrammeled quality of wilderness would remain as under the 

Proposed Action. These trammeling actions include suppression of fires, ES&R activities, and 

control of non-native invasive plants including noxious weeds. 

Natural: The naturalness and primeval quality of wilderness character would remain mostly 

unchanged under this alternative, or may be degraded. Invasive non-native plants including 

noxious weeds would remain and may spread in portions of the wilderness areas. Fewer actions 

may be taken in fire management and ES&R to prevent further conversion of native to nonnative vegetation communities compared to the Proposed Action. Weed-free feed for recreational 

livestock would not be recommended which may impact the naturalness. 

Undeveloped: No trails would be designated, but former vehicle routes would be available for 

use by hikers and equestrian riders. Personal property, unauthorized structures, or installations 

would be removed as long as they are not culturally significant. Removal of these items would 

improve the undeveloped quality of wilderness character. When compared to the Proposed 

Action, the undeveloped quality may be better preserved under the Minimal Management 

Alternative as fewer allowances are made for motorized/mechanize use. However, each action 

would need to be analyzed separately and in reaction to each individual issue as it arose without 

the comprehensive guidance provided in the management plan. 

B&GC-WMP | 49 
 

Outstanding opportunities for solitude and primitive and unconfined recreation: Opportunities 

for primitive and unconfined recreation would remain throughout the wilderness areas. No 

additional regulations would be implemented to confine or restrict recreational activities. 

2.3. Cumulative Effects 

Cumulative impacts result from the incremental impact of an action when added to other past, 

present, and future actions, regardless of what agency or other person undertakes such other 

actions. Cumulative impacts could result from individually inconsequential but collectively 

significant actions taking place over a period of time. 

This section identifies past, present and reasonably foreseeable future actions so that their 

contribution to cumulative impacts can be considered. Past actions are those that have been 

completed to date, present actions may have been started in the past but are ongoing and are not 

yet completed, and future actions are those for which there is a reasonable confidence they will 

occur. 

The purpose of the cumulative effects analysis for the Proposed Action is to evaluate the 

combined, incremental effects of human activity within the scope of the project. The Council on 

Environmental Quality (CEQ) regulations define scope and state that connected actions, 

cumulative actions, and similar actions should be included in the effects analysis (40 CFR 

1508.25). The cumulative impacts analysis should be limited to those issues and resource values 

identified during scoping that are of major importance. Issues of major importance identified 

during internal and external scoping focused on the qualities that give these areas their value as 

wilderness: untrammeled, naturalness, primitive and unconfined recreation, and solitude. 

Wilderness character, therefore, is the focus of the cumulative impact analysis. 

The geographic area of analysis is the area encompassed by each of the wilderness areas and the 

timeframe for analysis, which is the projected life of this Wilderness Management Plan, is 10 

years. 

Past Actions 

These two wilderness areas were designated in November of 2006. Prior to designation, 

opportunities for solitude and primitive, unconfined recreation were outstanding. There were 

vehicle routes within the areas, which were closed by wilderness designation. Most routes have 

been actively reclaimed. There are some portions of the areas that have annual invasive 

cheatgrass. Livestock grazing is an authorized use. Fire suppression was common. 

Present Actions 

Current actions include increased educational programs regarding wilderness ethics and Leave 

No Trace principles, increased signing efforts, as well as BLM staff and volunteer monitoring 

patrols. There has been a small increase in public interest in these wilderness areas for their 

recreational opportunities. Livestock grazing operations, adjacent fuels treatments, hunting and 

commercial outfitting and guiding, are all ongoing activities. 

Reasonably Foreseeable Future Actions 

Populations in Nevada continue to grow and expand. It is expected that opportunities for solitude 

in these areas could decrease in the future as the result of increased population growth. Other 

B&GC-WMP | 50 
 

anticipated results of population growth and subsequent increased use of these wilderness areas 

include increased impacts to vegetation, wildlife and cultural resources, as well as the possibility 

that more cultural resources may be discovered. It is expected that the invasive annual cheatgrass 

would continue to expand within these wilderness areas. It is expected that wildland fire would 

continue to require some trammeling management actions. Livestock grazing would also 

continue to be an authorized use in these wilderness areas, and maintenance of the existing range 

developments would be required over time. 

There are few activities in the Proposed Action that, when combined with other activities, result 

in a cumulative impact. These include: 

1. Actions that may include motorized incursions. 

2. Actions that may disturb soils, vegetation, or other natural or cultural resources. 

Motorized wilderness use may cause direct and indirect effects usually associated with noise 

and/or visitor experience and would impact the undeveloped and opportunities for solitude 

quality of wilderness character. Such operations pertain to grazing, emergency access situations, 

wildfire suppression, emergency stabilization and rehabilitation, treatment of large weed 

infestations, or vegetation manipulation. 

Cumulative impact may result from activities that occur simultaneously even when separated by 

space. However, there is a low probability for this cumulative impact to occur due to the low 

frequency of motorized incursions into the wilderness. The impact is considered negligible and is 

related mostly to authorized livestock operations. 

Authorized actions in wilderness may involve disturbance to soils, vegetation, or other natural or 

cultural resources. Actions considered for their contribution to cumulative impacts to natural 

resources include wildfire suppression, emergency stabilization and rehabilitation, weed 

treatments, and livestock concentration areas. 

In conclusion, cumulative impacts associated with past, present, or reasonably foreseeable 

actions within the analysis area would have an estimated negligible, but net positive effect on the 

environment. When added to other foreseeable actions in the analysis area, management actions 

included in the Proposed Action would preclude, minimize, or mitigate natural and humancaused impacts to natural resources and wilderness character. 

2.4. Consultation and Coordination 

Public Involvement 

Input was solicited during the planning process on several occasions. A Notice Of Proposed 

Action (NOPA) was sent in November 2013, as well as a public comment period for the 

preliminary Wilderness Management Plan in August 2014 seeking wilderness-related issues and 

concerns. A public meeting was held in Ely, NV. in October 2014 during the final public 

comment period. Public input was used in the development of alternatives and management 

actions proposed in the WMP. 

B&GC-WMP | 51 
 

List of Preparers 

S. Gus Malon, Wilderness Planner, Ely District Office 

Emily Simpson, Wilderness Planner, Ely District Office 

List of Specialists Consulted 

Rob Frisk, Fire Management Specialist, Ely District Office 

Miles Kreidler, Geologist, Egan Field Office 

Erica Husse, Rehabilitation Manager, Ely District Office 

Marian Lichtler, Wildlife Biologist, Egan Field Office 

Cynthia Longinetti, Realty Specialist, Ely District Office 

Chris McVicars, Natural Resource Specialist, Ely District Office 

Dave Mermejo, Wilderness Coordinator, Nevada State Office 

Jill Moore, Field Manager, Egan Field Office 

Erin Rajala, Outdoor Recreation Planner, Egan Field Office 

Leslie Riley, Archaeologist, Egan Field Office 

Mindy Seal, Assistant Field Manager, Egan Field Office 

Scott Standfill, Rangeland Management Specialist, Egan Field Office 

Garett Swisher, Rangeland Management Specialist, Egan Field Office 

Ruth Thompson, Wild Horse Specialist, Egan Field Office 

Stephanie Trujillo, Realty Specialist, Egan Field Office 

Elvis Wall, Native American Coordinator, Ely District Office 

Travis Young, Planning and Environmental Coordinator, Ely District Office 

B&GC-WMP | 52 
 

 

 

Agencies and Groups Consulted 

The following agencies, organizations, and individuals were briefed or consulted with during 

preparation of the Final WMP: 

Nevada Department of Wildlife 

Nevada Outfitter & Guide Association 

Local Councils & Tribes of Nevada 

Southern Nevada Water Authority 

U.S. Forest Service 

White Pine County 

B&GC-WMP | 53 
 

Appendix A. Maps
	

B&GC-WMP | 54
 
B&GC-WMP | 55
 
B&GC-WMP | 56
 
 

 

 

Appendix B. References 

Arthur Carhart National Wilderness Training Center. 2011. "Minimum Requirements Analysis."
	

Wilderness.net. 30/07/2012. <http://wilderness.net/MRDG/documents/MRDG_instructions.pdf>. 

(October 3, 2012).
	

BLM 2008. White Pine County Wilderness Ground Disturbance Reclamation Plan. U.S. 

Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management, Ely District Office, Ely, Nevada. April
	

2008. 

BLM 2008b. Ely District Approved Resource Management Plan. U.S. Department of the
	

Interior, Bureau of Land Management, Ely District Office, Ely, Nevada. November 2008. 

BLM 2009. Wilderness Signs & Information Kiosks Categorical Exclusion. U.S. Department of 

the Interior, Bureau of Land Management, Ely District Office, Ely, Nevada. 

BLM, 2010. Ely District Integrated Weed Management Plan, U.S. Department of the Interior, 

Bureau of Land Management, Ely District Office, Ely, Nevada.
	

BLM, 2010. Ely Fire Management Plan, U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land 

Management, Ely District Office, Ely, Nevada.
	

BLM 2011. Updated Bureau of Land Management (BLM) Sensitive Species List for Nevada. 

Instruction Memorandum NV-2011-059. June 27, 2011. 

BLM 2012. Manual 6340 - Management of Designated Wilderness. July 13, 2012. 

Cole, David N. 2000. Paradox of the primeval: Ecological restoration in wilderness.
	

Ecological Restoration. 18(2): 77-86.
	

Cole, David N. , Young, Laurie. 2010. Beyond Naturalness: Rethinking Park and Wilderness 

Stewardship in an Era of Rapid Change. Island Press: 88-101. 

Landres, P., C. Barns, J. Dennis, T. Devine, P. Geissler, C. McCasland, L. Merigliano, J. 

Seastrand, and R. Swain. 2008. Keeping it Wild: an interagency strategy to monitor trends in 

wilderness character across the National Wilderness Preservation System. Gen. Tech Rep. 

RMRS-GTR-212. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky
	

Mountain Research Station. 77 pp.
	

Landres, P., 2008. “Preserving Wilderness Character” Powerpoint. Accessed at 

http://www.wilderness.net/toolboxes/documents/WC/Presentation%20(with%20notes)%20preser
	

ving%20wilderness%20character.pdf on February 19, 2014.
	

Lucas, Robert C. 1973. Wilderness: A management framework. Journal of Soil and Water
	

Conservation 28:150-154. 

Miller, C. 2005. When to prescribe. Wildfire Magazine July/August. Pages 16-21.
	

B&GC-WMP | 57 
 

NIFC. 2011. Interagency Standards for Fire and Fire Aviation Operations. National Fire 

Equipment System (NFES) Publication 2724. Produced by the Federal Fire and Aviation Task 

Group, National Interagency Fire Center, Boise, Idaho. 

USDI. 2007. Record of Decision – Vegetation Treatments Using Herbicides on Bureau of Land 

Management Lands in 17 Western States. U.S. Department of Interior, Bureau of Land 

Management, Washington D.C. 

USDI. 2010b. Incident Response Pocket Guide 2010. National Wildfire Coordinating Group, 

Product Management System #461. < http://www.nwcg.gov/pms/pubs/pubs.htm>. (October 3, 

2012). 

B&GC-WMP | 58 
 

FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT
 

For the 

Bristlecone and Goshute Canyon
 

Wilderness Management Plan
 

Bureau of Land Management
 

Environmental Assessment # DOI-BLM-NV-L000-2014-0001-EA
 

Finding of No Significant Impact 

I have reviewed Environmental Assessment (EA), dated December 9, 2014. After consideration 

of the environmental impacts as described in the EA, which is incorporated herein, I have 

determined that the proposed action (wilderness management plan) as described in the EA will 

not significantly affect the quality of the human environment and that an environmental impact 

statement (EIS) is not required. This finding and conclusion is based on my consideration of the 

Council on Environmental Quality’s (CEQ) criteria for significance (40 Code of Federal 

Regulations 1508.27), both with regard to the context and the intensity of impacts described in 

the EA. 

Context 

The Bristlecone and Goshute Canyon Wilderness areas are part of the National Wilderness 

Preservation System. These areas are of most interest to residents in Nevada, Idaho and Utah. 

Intensity 

1) Impacts that may be both beneficial and adverse. 

The environmental assessment has considered both beneficial and adverse 

impacts of the wilderness management plan. Overall, the plan will result in 

enhancements to the wilderness character, which includes untrammeled, 

naturalness, undeveloped, and outstanding opportunities for solitude or a 

primitive and unconfined type of recreation, and various special features 

including cultural resources. Preserving a more natural system is considered 

improving the quality of the human environment through proactive 

management, and is not considered a significant effect both in the short or long 

term. 

2) The degree to which the proposed action affects public health or safety. 

Implementation components of the proposed wilderness management plan will 

not result in potentially substantial or adverse impacts to public health and 

safety. 

B&GC-WMP | 59 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

3) Unique characteristics of the geographic area such as proximity to historic or cultural 

resources, park lands, prime farmlands, wetlands, wild and scenic rivers, or ecologically 

critical areas. 

The action areas are within and adjacent to designated wilderness. These two 

areas were designated for their unique characteristics including high scenic 

qualities, diverse cultural resources, important wildlife habitat, and 

opportunities for solitude and primitive recreational pursuits. 

4) The degree to which the effects on the quality of the human environment are likely to 

be highly controversial. 

The effects of implementing decisions of the wilderness management plan are 

well known and documented and not highly controversial in that wilderness 

management plans are essential to maintaining the natural condition of 

wilderness as required by the Wilderness Act. The methods chosen to complete 

implementation actions are accepted methods to meet resource and 

management objectives and are not considered highly controversial. 

5) The degree to which the possible effects on the human environment are highly 

uncertain or involve unique or unknown risks. 

There are no effects of the proposed action identified in the EA which are 

considered uncertain or involve unknown risks. All actions proposed to be 

employed are accepted standard practices. 

6) The degree to which the action may establish a precedent for future actions with 

significant effects or represents a decision in principle about a future consideration. 

The proposed action does not establish a precedent for future actions with 

significant effects and does not represent a decision in principle about a future 

consideration. 

7) Whether the action is related to other actions with individually insignificant but 

cumulatively significant impacts. 

No significant cumulative impacts have been identified in the EA. 

8) The degree to which the action may adversely affect districts, sites, highways, 

structures, or objects listed in or eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic 

Places or may cause loss or destruction of significant scientific, cultural, or historical 

resources. 

The proposed action will not cause the loss or destruction of significant scientific, 

cultural or historical resources. 

9) The degree to which the action may adversely affect an endangered or threatened 

species or its habitat that has been determined to be critical under the Endangered 

Species Act of 1973. 

There are no known federally listed species in these two wildernesses. 

B&GC-WMP | 60 
 

 

 

 

 

10) Whether the action threatens a violation of Federal, State, or local law or requirement 

imposed for the protection of the environment. 

The proposed action will not violate or threaten to violate any Federal, State, or 

local law or requirement imposed for the protection of the environment. 

B&GC-WMP | 61 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

DECISION RECORD
 

For the 

Bristlecone and Goshute Canyon
 

Wilderness Management Plan
 

Bureau of Land Management
 

Environmental Assessment # DOI-BLM-NV-L000-2014-0001-EA
 

Decision 

It is my decision to approve and implement the wilderness management plan for the 

Bristlecone and Goshute Canyon Wildernesses (which is the proposed action and contains all 

identified mitigation measures). The proposed action is in conformance with the Ely District 

Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan (2008). 

Legal Compliance 

 The Wilderness Act of 1964 (16 U.S.C. §§ 1131-1136, September 3, 1964, as amended 

1978). 

 The Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 (43 U.S.C. §§ 1701-1782, October 

21, 1976, as amended 1978, 1984, 1986, 1988, 1990-1992, 1994 and 1996). 

 The National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. §§ 4321-4347, January 1, 1970, 

as amended 1975 and 1994). 

 The White Pine County Conservation, Recreation and Development Act of 2006 (public 

Law 109-432). 

 The Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16 U.S.C. §§ 1531-1544, December 28, 1973, as 

amended 1976-1982, 1984, and 1988). 

 Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act (16 U.S.C. §§ 668-668d, June 8, 1940, as amended 

1959, 1962, 1972, and 1978). 

 Migratory Bird Treaty Act (16 U.S.C. §§ 703-712, July 3, 1918, as amended 1936, 1960, 

1968, 1969, 1974, 1978, 1986 and 1989). 

 Executive Order 13186─Responsibilities of Federal Agencies to Protect Migratory Birds 

(2001). 

 Management of Designated Wilderness Areas (43 CFR Part 6300). 

 Recreation Management Restrictions: Occupancy Stay Limitation (43 CFR 8365.1-2(a) 

and Federal Register Notice NV-930-4333-02. 

 Unlawful Manner of Camping Near Water Hole (Nevada Revised Statute 503.660). 

B&GC-WMP | 62 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Public Involvement 

A Notice of Proposed Action was mailed to known interested parties on November 5, 2013. A 

public scoping meeting was held in Ely, NV on October 08, 2014. A 30-day public comment 

period for the Preliminary Plan was completed on August 7, 2014. A 45-day public comment 

period for the Final Plan and Environmental Assessment was completed on November 7, 2014. 

Public Comment 

Two parties provided written comments received during the comment period. Comments 

received during the public meeting and with specialists during the management plan process 

were given serious consideration. Some comments related to associated programs were not 

incorporated as they are beyond the scope of this plan. Changes were made to the plan based 

on significant public comments including, but not limited to: 

	 Protecting biological communities in wilderness. 

	 The role of natural fire in wilderness. 

	 Livestock grazing activities. 

Rationale for Decision 

The purpose of creating a Wilderness Management Plan is to preserve the areas’ wilderness 

character by identifying the conditions and opportunities that will be managed for within the 

wilderness areas over a ten-year span. Wilderness Management Plans must be prepared for all 

wilderness areas on public lands. Management direction must be based on the pertinent 

objectives of the BLM wilderness management policy as identified in BLM Manual 6340. 

The need for the plan stems from the Wilderness Act of 1964, which defines wilderness and 

mandates that the primary management direction is to preserve wilderness character. The plan 

creates specific management guidance addressing resources and activities in these wilderness 

areas. Wilderness character is a complex idea and is not explicitly defined in the Wilderness Act; 

however wilderness character is commonly described as: 

 Untrammeled ─ area is unhindered and free from modern human control or 

manipulation. 

 Natural ─ area appears to have been primarily affected by the forces of nature. 

 Undeveloped ─ area is essentially without permanent improvements or human 

occupation and retains its primeval character. 

 Outstanding opportunities for solitude or a primitive and unconfined type of 

recreation ─ area provides outstanding opportunities for people to experience solitude 

or primitive and unconfined recreation, including the values associated with physical 

and mental inspiration and challenge. 

B&GC-WMP | 63 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Supplemental values ─ complementary features of scientific, educational, scenic, or 

historic values. 

The proposed action (wilderness management plan) was selected over the alternative 

because it met the need and objectives outlined in the plan. The proposed action has been 

analyzed and determined that there is no significant impact as referenced in the (FONSI) 

attached to the EA. The proposed plan will guide management so that the preservation 

objectives of the Wilderness Act can be met. 

Appeal Opportunities 

This decision may be appealed to the Interior Board of Land Appeals, Office of the Secretary, in 

accordance with the regulations contained in 43 CFR, Part 4 and Form 1842-1 (enclosed). If an 

appeal is taken, a notice of appeal and/or request for stay must be filed in writing, on paper, in 

this office, either by mail or personal delivery. Notices of appeal and/or request for stay that 

are electronically transmitted (e.g., email, facsimile, or social media) will not be accepted as 

timely filed. The notice of appeal is considered filed as of the date our office receives the hard 

copy and places our BLM date stamp on the document. 

If you wish to file a petition pursuant to regulation 43 CFR 4.21 (58 FR 4939, January 19, 1993) 

(request) for a stay (suspension) of the effectiveness of this decision during the time that your 

appeal is being reviewed by the Board, the petition for a stay must accompany your notice of 

appeal. A petition for a stay is required to show sufficient justification based on the standards 

listed below. Copies of the notice of appeal and petition for a stay must also be submitted to 

each party named in this decision and to the Interior Board of Land Appeals and to the 

appropriate office of the Solicitor (see 43 CFR 4.413) at the same time the original documents 

are filed with this office. If you request a stay, you have the burden of proof to demonstrate 

that a stay should be granted. 

Standards for Obtaining a Stay 

Except as otherwise provided by law or other pertinent regulation, a petition for a stay of a 

decision pending appeal shall show sufficient justification based on the following standards: 

(1) The relative harm to the parties if the stay is granted or denied, 

(2) The likelihood of the appellant's success on the merits, 

B&GC-WMP | 64 
 

 

 

(3) The likelihood of immediate and irreparable harm if the stay is not granted, and 

(4) Whether the public interest favors granting the stay. 

B&GC-WMP | 65