BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT 

The Bureau of Land Management is responsible for the balanced 

management of the public lands and resources and their values so that they 

are considered in a combination of multiple use and sustained yield, a 

combination of uses that takes into account the long-term needs of future 

generations for renewable and nonrenewable resources. These resources 

include recreation, range, timber, minerals, watershed, fish and wildlife, 

wilderness and natural, scenic, scientific, and cultural values. 

BLM/NM/PL-10-03-1617 
United States Department of the Interior

BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT

Socorro Field Office

901 S Highway 85

Socorro, New Mexico 87801

www.blm.gov/nm/st/en.html

1617 (A020) 

 

 July 28, 2010 

Dear Reader: 

I am pleased to present the Approved Resource Management Plan (RMP or the plan) for the Socorro 

Field Office. The signed Record of Decision (ROD) approves the Socorro RMP. The Approved RMP is 

the Proposed Alternative in the Proposed Socorro RMP with some minor decision modifications. The 

plan provides guidance for managing approximately 1.5 million surface acres and 6 million acres of 

Federal mineral estate in Socorro and Catron Counties. 

The Approved RMP was prepared under the regulations implementing the Federal Land Policy and 

Management Act of 1976 and the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969. The RMP contains new 

decisions and management actions for special designations such as Areas of Critical Environmental 

Concern, off-highway vehicle (OHV) use and designations, land tenure, visual resource management, 

minerals and renewable energy development, and avoidance and exclusion areas for rights-of-way. The 

Approved RMP replaces the 1989 Socorro RMP. 

Copies of the ROD and RMP are also on the BLM website at http://www.blm.gov/nm/st/en.html. For 

additional information on the RMP, you may also contact the Socorro Field Office at 575-835-0412. 

 Now that the RMP is completed, the hard work has only just started. We look forward to your continued 

assistance and participation as we move forward to implement the decisions in the Approved RMP. 

 Sincerely, 

 Danita Burns 

 Field Manager
Socorro Resource Management Plan i Table of Contents 

TABLE OF CONTENTS 

LIST OF ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS .............................................................................................................. 7

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................................... 1

PURPOSE AND NEED FOR THE RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PLAN............................................................................................ 1

LOCATION AND SIZE OF THE PLANNING AREA................................................................................................................... 1

Table 1: Surface Management In Socorro And Catron Counties ........................................................................ 1

Table 2 : Federal Mineral Estate Acreages by Surface Management Responsibility in Socorro and Catron 

Counties ........................................................................................................................................................... 2

Map 1 .............................................................................................................................................................. 3

PLANNING PROCESS AND COLLABORATION ON PLAN DEVELOPMENT..................................................................................... 4

Step 1 – Public Scoping ..................................................................................................................................... 4

Step 2 – Identification of Issues ........................................................................................................................ 4

Step 3 – Development of Planning Criteria ....................................................................................................... 5

Step 4 – Data and Information Collection ......................................................................................................... 5

Step 5 – Management Situation Analysis.......................................................................................................... 5

Step 6 –Formulation of Alternatives ................................................................................................................. 5

Step 7 – Release of the Draft RMP/EIS for Public Comment .............................................................................. 5

Step 8 – Release of the Proposed RMP/Final EIS ............................................................................................... 5

Step 9 – Selection of the Approved RMP........................................................................................................... 6

Step 10 – RMP Implementation ........................................................................................................................ 6

Step 11 – Monitoring and Evaluation ............................................................................................................... 6

RELATED PLANS........................................................................................................................................................ 6

Relationship to BLM Policies, Plans, and Programs ........................................................................................... 6

Cooperating Agencies ...................................................................................................................................... 7

VISION AND GOALS OF THE RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PLAN............................................................................................... 7

BLM Strategic Plan ........................................................................................................................................... 7

State Director Priorities .................................................................................................................................... 8

RMP Goals ....................................................................................................................................................... 8

CHAPTER 2: MANAGEMENT DECISIONS AND LEGAL MANDATES ............................................................................ 9

AIR QUALITY AND CLIMATE CHANGE ............................................................................................................................. 9

CAVE AND KARST RESOURCES .................................................................................................................................... 10

CULTURAL RESOURCES ............................................................................................................................................. 10

Ongoing Regulatory Compliance Activities ..................................................................................................... 11

Land Acquisition and Heritage Tourism .......................................................................................................... 12

Areas of Critical Environmental Concern and Special Management Areas ...................................................... 13

FORESTRY AND WOODLAND MANAGEMENT.................................................................................................................. 13

Vegetative Sales and Woodcutting ................................................................................................................. 16

HAZARDOUS MATERIALS AND PUBLIC SAFETY ................................................................................................................ 17

LANDS AND REALTY ................................................................................................................................................. 17

Land Tenure ................................................................................................................................................... 18

Rights-of-Way ................................................................................................................................................ 18

Withdrawals .................................................................................................................................................. 19

Map 2 ............................................................................................................................................................ 20

MINERALS............................................................................................................................................................. 21

Leasable Minerals .......................................................................................................................................... 22

Locatable Minerals ......................................................................................................................................... 23

Salable Minerals............................................................................................................................................. 23

Map 3 ............................................................................................................................................................ 24

NOXIOUS WEEDS AND INVASIVE SPECIES ...................................................................................................................... 25

PALEONTOLOGICAL RESOURCES.................................................................................................................................. 25
Socorro Resource Management Plan ii Table of Contents 

RANGELAND MANAGEMENT...................................................................................................................................... 26

Table 3: Areas Closed to Livestock grazing...................................................................................................... 28

RECREATION .......................................................................................................................................................... 29

RENEWABLE ENERGY ............................................................................................................................................... 31

SOIL AND WATER RESOURCES.................................................................................................................................... 32

Water Quantity .............................................................................................................................................. 32

Water Quality ................................................................................................................................................ 32

Soils and Watershed ....................................................................................................................................... 33

Special Management Areas ............................................................................................................................ 33

SPECIAL DESIGNATIONS ............................................................................................................................................ 34

Map 4 ............................................................................................................................................................ 36

TRANSPORTATION AND TRAVEL MANAGEMENT ............................................................................................................. 37

Designation of OHV Areas .............................................................................................................................. 37

Route Designations ........................................................................................................................................ 38

Table 4: Route Designations in Wilderness Study Areas .................................................................................. 38

Future Travel Management Planning ............................................................................................................. 38

Map 5 ............................................................................................................................................................ 40

VEGETATION (INCLUDING SPECIAL STATUS SPECIES) ........................................................................................................ 41

VISUAL RESOURCES ................................................................................................................................................. 42

Map 6 ............................................................................................................................................................ 44

WILD HORSES ........................................................................................................................................................ 45

WILDERNESS CHARACTERISTICS .................................................................................................................................. 45

Table 5: Wilderness Characteristics of Acquired Lands.................................................................................... 46

WILDLAND FIRE ECOLOGY AND MANAGEMENT.............................................................................................................. 47

WILDLIFE, RIPARIAN HABITAT, AND SPECIAL STATUS SPECIES ............................................................................................ 48

Wildlife and Riparian Habitat ......................................................................................................................... 48

Special Status Species ..................................................................................................................................... 50

Areas of Critical Environmental Concern ......................................................................................................... 51

CHAPTER 3: SPECIAL DESIGNATIONS ..................................................................................................................... 52

AREAS OF CRITICAL ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERN ............................................................................................................. 52

Cerro Pomo ACEC ........................................................................................................................................... 52

Horse Mountain ACEC .................................................................................................................................... 53

Ladron Mountain – Devil’s Backbone Complex ACEC ...................................................................................... 53

Mockingbird Gap Proprietary ACEC ................................................................................................................ 54

Pelona Mountain ACEC................................................................................................................................... 54

Sawtooth Proprietary ACEC ............................................................................................................................ 54

Zuni Salt Lake Proprietary ACEC ..................................................................................................................... 55

SPECIAL MANAGEMENT AREAS .................................................................................................................................. 55

Continental Divide National Scenic Trail SMA ................................................................................................. 55

Fort Craig SMA ............................................................................................................................................... 56

Newton Site Proprietary SMA ......................................................................................................................... 56

Penjeacu SMA (formerly Teypama) ................................................................................................................ 56

Playa Pueblos Proprietary SMA ...................................................................................................................... 57

Puertecito SMA .............................................................................................................................................. 57

San Pedro Proprietary SMA ............................................................................................................................ 57

Stallion SMA ................................................................................................................................................... 57

Soaptree SMA ................................................................................................................................................ 58

SPECIAL RECREATION MANAGEMENT AREAS.................................................................................................................. 58

The Box SRMA ................................................................................................................................................ 58

Datil Well SRMA ............................................................................................................................................. 58

Gordy’s Hill SRMA .......................................................................................................................................... 59

Quebradas Back Country Byway SRMA........................................................................................................... 59
Socorro Resource Management Plan iii Table of Contents 

Socorro Nature Area SRMA ............................................................................................................................ 59

SUMMARY OF CULTURAL RESOURCE USE CATEGORIES..................................................................................................... 59

CHAPTER 4: PLAN IMPLEMENTATION, MONITORING, AND EVALUATION ............................................................. 61

IMPLEMENTATION OF THE RMP ................................................................................................................................. 61

PUBLIC INOVLVEMENT IN THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE RMP .......................................................................................... 61

MONITORING......................................................................................................................................................... 61

Implementation Monitoring ........................................................................................................................... 62

Effectiveness Monitoring ................................................................................................................................ 62

PLAN EVALUATION AND ADAPTIVE MANAGEMENT ......................................................................................................... 63

Plan Evaluation .............................................................................................................................................. 63

Adaptive Management .................................................................................................................................. 63

AMENDING THE PLAN .............................................................................................................................................. 64

GLOSSARY OF TERMS ............................................................................................................................................. 65

REFERENCES ........................................................................................................................................................... 81

APPENDIX A: PLANNING CRITERIA ......................................................................................................................... 83

PLANNING ISSUES FOR THE RMP/EIS .......................................................................................................................... 83

Issue 1 ............................................................................................................................................................ 83

Issue 2 ............................................................................................................................................................ 83

Issue 3 ............................................................................................................................................................ 83

Issue 4 ............................................................................................................................................................ 84

Issue 5 ............................................................................................................................................................ 84

Issue 6 ............................................................................................................................................................ 84

Issues Considered but Eliminated from Detailed Analysis................................................................................ 85

GENERAL PLANNING CRITERIA.................................................................................................................................... 86

APPENDIX B: ACTS OF AUTHORITY AND MANDATES FOR THE BLM ...................................................................... 88

APPENDIX C: BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES ...................................................................................................... 96

INTRODUCTION....................................................................................................................................................... 96

DEVELOPED RECREATION.......................................................................................................................................... 96

FIRE SUPPRESSION .................................................................................................................................................. 97

FOREST MANAGEMENT ............................................................................................................................................ 97

FOREST WETLANDS ................................................................................................................................................. 99

INVASIVE/NOXIOUS WEEDS MANAGEMENT................................................................................................................ 100

LIVESTOCK GRAZING MANAGEMENT ......................................................................................................................... 100

MINING.............................................................................................................................................................. 100

OIL AND GAS ACTIVITIES......................................................................................................................................... 101

PRELIMINARY INVESTIGATIONS ................................................................................................................................. 102

PRESCRIBED BURNING............................................................................................................................................ 103

RENEWABLE ENERGY ............................................................................................................................................. 103

RIGHTS-OF-WAY AND UTILITY CORRIDORS.................................................................................................................. 103

ROAD DESIGN AND MAINTENANCE ........................................................................................................................... 104

SURFACE-DISTURBING ACTIVITIES ............................................................................................................................. 106

VISUAL RESOURCE MANAGEMENT ............................................................................................................................ 107

WILDLIFE AND RIPARIAN HABITAT............................................................................................................................. 107

APPENDIX D: MONITORING................................................................................................................................. 110

AIR QUALITY AND CLIMATE CHANGE.......................................................................................................................... 110

CAVES AND KARST RESOURCES................................................................................................................................. 110

CULTURAL RESOURCES ........................................................................................................................................... 110
Socorro Resource Management Plan iv Table of Contents 

FIRE MANAGEMENT .............................................................................................................................................. 111

FORESTRY AND WOODLANDS................................................................................................................................... 111

LAND AND REALTY................................................................................................................................................. 111

MINERALS........................................................................................................................................................... 112

OUTDOOR RECREATION.......................................................................................................................................... 112

RANGELAND ........................................................................................................................................................ 113

RIPARIAN HABITAT ................................................................................................................................................ 113

SOILS ................................................................................................................................................................. 114

SPECIAL DESIGNATIONS MANAGEMENT ...................................................................................................................... 114

SPECIAL MANAGEMENT AREAS ................................................................................................................................. 114

Wilderness Study Areas ................................................................................................................................ 114

TRANSPORTATION/ACCESS – OFF-HIGHWAY VEHICLES.................................................................................................. 114

VEGETATION........................................................................................................................................................ 115

Special Status Plants .................................................................................................................................... 115

Invasive/Noxious Weeds .............................................................................................................................. 115

VISUAL RESOURCES ............................................................................................................................................... 115

WATER RESOURCES............................................................................................................................................... 116

WILD HORSES ...................................................................................................................................................... 116

WILDLIFE HABITAT AND SPECIAL STATUS SPECIES ......................................................................................................... 116

APPENDIX E: ROS DEFINITIONS AND VRM CLASS OBJECTIVES ............................................................................. 118

RECREATIONAL OPPORTUNITY SPECTRUM................................................................................................................... 118

Primitive....................................................................................................................................................... 118

Semi-primitive Non-motorized ...................................................................................................................... 118

Semi-primitive Motorized ............................................................................................................................. 118

Roaded Natural ............................................................................................................................................ 118

Rural ............................................................................................................................................................ 118

Urban ........................................................................................................................................................... 119

VISUAL RESOURCE MANGEMENT CLASS OBJECTIVES ..................................................................................................... 119

Class I ........................................................................................................................................................... 119

Class II .......................................................................................................................................................... 119

Class III ......................................................................................................................................................... 119

Class IV......................................................................................................................................................... 119

APPENDIX F: LAND/MINERALS DISPOSAL POLICY AND ROW EXCLUSION/AVOIDANCE AREA PLAN ................... 120

SURFACE ESTATE DISPOSAL POLICY ........................................................................................................................... 120

Exchanges .................................................................................................................................................... 120

Sales ............................................................................................................................................................ 121

Recreation and Public Purposes Patents ....................................................................................................... 123

Mineral Estate Disposal Policy ...................................................................................................................... 123

RIGHT-OF-WAY AVOIDANCE AND EXCLUSION AREAS PLAN............................................................................................. 125

APPENDIX G: BLM STEWARDSHIP CONTRACTING GUIDANCE ............................................................................. 129

APPENDIX H: RANGELAND MANAGEMENT.......................................................................................................... 135

RANGELAND UTILIZATION AND CONDITION.................................................................................................................. 135

NEW MEXICO STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES ............................................................................................................... 135

ALLOTMENT STATISTICS.......................................................................................................................................... 137

Maintain (M) Category ................................................................................................................................. 137

Improve (I) Category .................................................................................................................................... 137

Custodial (C) Category .................................................................................................................................. 137

Table H-1: Grazing Allotment Statistics........................................................................................................ 138
Socorro Resource Management Plan v Table of Contents 

APPENDIX I: MINERALS MANAGEMENT .............................................................................................................. 144

APPLICATION OF SUITABILITY CRITERIA FOR COAL LEASING............................................................................................. 144

Summary...................................................................................................................................................... 144

Unsuitability Criteria .................................................................................................................................... 144

Multiple-Use Conflict Analysis ...................................................................................................................... 150

Multiple-Use Screening Analysis ................................................................................................................... 151

FLUID MINERALS LEASING....................................................................................................................................... 154

Standard Lease Terms and Conditions .......................................................................................................... 155

Fluid Mineral Lease Stipulations ................................................................................................................... 155

Table I-1: Fluid Mineral Lease Stipulation Codes ........................................................................................... 155

Withdrawals From Mineral Entry ................................................................................................................. 165

Table I-2: Withdrawals from Mineral Entry................................................................................................... 166

APPENDIX J: OHV AREAS AND ROUTE DESIGNATIONS ........................................................................................ 168

DEFINITIONS ........................................................................................................................................................ 168

ROUTE DESIGNATION AND CLOSURE CRITERIA............................................................................................................. 170

Route Designation Criteria ........................................................................................................................... 170

Route Closure Criteria .................................................................................................................................. 170

WILDERNESS STUDY AREAS ROUTE INVENTORY............................................................................................................ 171

Table J-1: Socorro Field Office Wilderness Study Areas ................................................................................. 171

Data Used .................................................................................................................................................... 171

Data Interpretation and Review ................................................................................................................... 172

Wilderness Study Area Route Designations .................................................................................................. 173

Table J-2: Route Lengths and Designations ................................................................................................... 174

Map J-1 ........................................................................................................................................................ 175

Map J-2 ........................................................................................................................................................ 176

Map J-3 ........................................................................................................................................................ 177

Map J-4 ........................................................................................................................................................ 178

Map J-5 ........................................................................................................................................................ 179

Map J-6 ........................................................................................................................................................ 180

Map J-7 ........................................................................................................................................................ 181

Map J-8 ........................................................................................................................................................ 182

Map J-9 ........................................................................................................................................................ 183

Map J-10...................................................................................................................................................... 184

Map J-11...................................................................................................................................................... 185

Map J-12...................................................................................................................................................... 186

APPENDIX K: SPECIAL DESIGNATIONS AND JUSTIFICATION FOR PROPOSED SPECIAL DESIGNATIONS ................ 187

AREAS OF CRITICAL ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERN .......................................................................................................... 187

BACK COUNTRY BYWAY.......................................................................................................................................... 188

NATIONAL TRAILS ................................................................................................................................................. 188

WILD AND SCENIC RIVERS....................................................................................................................................... 189

WILDERNESS........................................................................................................................................................ 189

WILDERNESS STUDY AREAS ..................................................................................................................................... 189

SPECIAL MANAGEMENT AREAS ................................................................................................................................ 189

APPENDIX L: WILDLIFE AND SPECIAL STATUS SPECIES ......................................................................................... 194

HABITAT ENHANCEMENT PROJECTS AND GENERAL BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES............................................................. 194

Map L-1........................................................................................................................................................ 196

NORTHERN APLOMADO FALCON MANAGEMENT GUIDELINES.......................................................................................... 197

Surface Occupancy Requirements for Northern Aplomado Falcon Habitat.................................................... 197

BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES FOR SPECIAL STATUS SPECIES ........................................................................................ 199
Socorro Resource Management Plan vi Table of Contents 

Tracking the Reasonably Foreseeable Development ..................................................................................... 199

Preliminary Investigations ............................................................................................................................ 199

Surface-Disturbing Activities ........................................................................................................................ 200

FEDERALLY LISTED SPECIAL STATUS SPECIES ................................................................................................................ 201

Table L-1: Federal And State-Listed Species In Planning Area........................................................................ 203

NOXIOUS WEEDS.................................................................................................................................................. 207

Table L-2: Noxious Weeds Potentially Occurring In Planning Area ................................................................ 207

APPENDIX M: PALEONTOLOGICAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT .......................................................................... 209

MANAGEMENT PRESCRIPTIONS BY CLASS ................................................................................................................... 209

PRESENCE OF RESOURCES....................................................................................................................................... 210

APPENDIX N: OLD GROWTH FOREST DEFINITIONS .............................................................................................. 212

OVERVIEW .......................................................................................................................................................... 212

ATTRIBUTES AND CLASSIFICATION............................................................................................................................. 213

OLD GROWTH DEFINITIONS..................................................................................................................................... 214

Piñon-juniper Forest Cover Type ................................................................................................................... 214

Ponderosa Pine Forest Cover Type ................................................................................................................ 214

Aspen Forest Cover Type .............................................................................................................................. 215

Mixed-species Group Forest Cover Types ...................................................................................................... 216

Engelmann Spruce-Subalpine Fir Forest Cover Type ...................................................................................... 218

Table N-1: Old-Growth Descriptions ............................................................................................................. 220

Table N-2: Old-Growth Attributes By Forest Cover Type................................................................................ 222

INDEX ................................................................................................................................................................... 223
Socorro Resource Management Plan vii List of Acronyms and Abbreviations 

LIST OF ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS

ACEC Area of Critical Environmental Concern

AML Appropriate Management Level

AMP Allotment Management Plan

APHIS-WS Animal Plant Health Inspection Services-Wildlife Services 

ATV All-Terrain Vehicle

AUM Animal Unit Month

BLM Bureau of Land Management 

BMP Best Management Practice

BPS Budget Planning System

CDNST Continental Divide National Scenic Trail

CFR Code of Federal Regulations

COR Contracting Officer's Representative

CWA Clean Water Act of 1987, as amended

EA Environmental Assessment

EIS Environmental Impact Statement

EO Executive Order

EPA Environmental Protection Agency

ERMA Extensive Recreation Management Area 

ESA Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended

FIA Forest Inventory and Analysis

FLPMA Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 

Forest Service USDA. Forest Service

FRCC Fire Regime Condition Class

GHG Greenhouse Gas

GIS Geographic Information System

GPS Global Positioning System

HCA Head of Contracting Activity

HFRA Healthy Forests Restoration Act

HMA Herd Management Area

HMP Habitat Management Plan

IDT Interdisciplinary Team

IPCC Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change

IWIR Intensive Wilderness Inventory Report

LUP Land Use Plan

MIS Management Information System

MSA Management Situation Analysis

National Register National Register of Historic Places

NBC National Business Center

NEPA National Environmental Policy Act of 1969

NM Standards and Guidelines New Mexico Standards for Public Land Health and Guidelines for 

Livestock and Grazing Management 

NHPA National Historic Preservation Act

NMDGF New Mexico Department of Game and Fish

NMED New Mexico Environment Department

OHV Off-Highway Vehicle

PEIS Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement

PI Project Inspector

P.L. Public Law
Socorro Resource Management Plan viii List of Acronyms and Abbreviations 

LIST OF ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS

POD Plan of Development

RMP Resource Management Plan 

RMPA Resource Management Plan Amendment

ROD Record of Decision

ROS Recreation Opportunity Spectrum

ROW Right-of-Way

SAF Society of American Foresters

SHPO State Historic Preservation Office

SMA Special Management Area

SMZ Streamside Management Zone

SRMA Special Recreation Management Area

SSS Special Status Species

TDS Total Dissolved Solids

USC United States Code

USDA U.S. Department of Agriculture

USFWS U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

USGS U.S. Geological Survey

VRM Visual Resource Management

WO Washington Office

WSA Wilderness Study Area

WSMR White Sands Missile Range

WUI Wildland-Urban Interface
Socorro Resource Management Plan 1 Chapter 1: Introduction 

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION 

PURPOSE AND NEED FOR THE RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PLAN 

This Resource Management Plan (RMP) provides management guidance to the Bureau of Land 

Management (BLM) Socorro Field Office for public land under the BLM‘s jurisdiction in Socorro and 

Catron counties, New Mexico. The RMP provides a comprehensive framework for managing public land 

and allocating resources in accordance with the principles of multiple use and sustained yield of public 

lands set forth in the Federal Land Management and Policy Act of 1976 (FLMPA). The decisions in this 

RMP replace the 1989 Socorro RMP to reflect current conditions and management priorities. 

Over the past twenty years, population growth and changing resource demands in the planning area and 

surrounding environs generated the need for this RMP. For example, recreation such as off-highway 

vehicle (OHV) use is expected to increase at a greater rate than over the past 20 years, and fire 

management will become of increasing concern as populations move closer to the rural open space 

adjoining BLM-managed public land. In addition, the public land managed by the Socorro Field Office 

has the potential for some renewable energy and minerals development. At the same time and in response 

to changing circumstances, the BLM is increasing its policy emphasis on control of noxious weeds and 

invasive species, fire management, and protecting areas with unique values through special designations. 

LOCATION AND SIZE OF THE PLANNING AREA 

The public land managed by the BLM Socorro Field Office is located in the west-central portion of New 

Mexico within Socorro and Catron Counties (see Map 1: Surface Management). Generally, public land is 

consolidated in the Quemado, Pelona Mountain, Ladron, and Stallion areas. However, in large portions of 

the two counties, public land is isolated and scattered. The area that this RMP pertains to includes all 

BLM-managed surface land and federal mineral estate within Socorro and Catron Counties. 

Table 1 and Table 2 show the BLM-managed public land, as well as public lands managed by other 

federal agencies in the two counties. Use of the term ―BLM-managed surface estate‖ refers to the surface 

acres managed by the BLM, exclusive of acres of Federal mineral estate that underlie land owned or 

managed by other entities. While the BLM‘s management decisions apply only to lands under its 

jurisdiction, the BLM is responsible for collaboratively planning with adjacent jurisdictions and the 

public to encourage compatible land uses within a regional context. 

Table 1: Surface Management In Socorro And Catron Counties 

Surface Administrator/Owner Socorro County

(acres)

Catron County

(acres)

Total

(acres)

Percent of

Planning Area

Bureau of Land Management 920,410 583,660 1,504,070 17.3

Forest Service 614,660 2,193,982 2,808,642 32.3

National Park Service 373 407 780 0.0

Bureau of Reclamation 14,055 0 14,055 0.2

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 284,721 0 284,721 3.3

Department of Defense 442,090 0 442,090 5.1

American Indian Reservations 106,852 13,126 119,978 1.4

State of New Mexico 529,814 515,058 1,044,872 12.0

Private 1,339,830 1,135,282 2,475,112 28.5

Totals 4,252,805 4,441,515 8,694,320 100.0

Derived from BLM 2003. Acreage based on best available GIS data.
Socorro Resource Management Plan 2 Chapter 1: Introduction 

Table 2 : Federal Mineral Estate Acreages by Surface Management Responsibility in Socorro and 

Catron Counties 

Administrator/Owner Socorro County

(acres)

Catron County

(acres)

Total

(acres)

Percent of Federal 

Mineral Estate

Bureau of Land Management 900,992 540,994 1,441,986 23.7

Forest Service 612,492 2,180,935 2,793,427 45.8

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 227,599 0 227,599 3.7

Department of Defense 441,507 0 441,507 7.2

Bureau of Reclamation 1,046 0 1,046 0.0

National Park Service 375 407 782 0.0

American Indian Reservations 48,722 4,187 52,909 0.9

State of New Mexico 51,425 18,222 69,647 1.1

Private 490,557 575,963 1,066,520 17.5

Totals 2,774,715 3,320,708 6,095,423 100.0

Derived from BLM 2003. Acreage based on best available GIS data.
Socorro Resource Management Plan 3 Chapter 1: Introduction 

Map 1
Socorro Resource Management Plan 4 Chapter 1: Introduction 

PLANNING PROCESS AND COLLABORATION ON PLAN DEVELOPMENT 

This section outlines the steps of the planning process that occurred to prepare this RMP, highlighting 

collaboration with other jurisdictions and agencies, Tribes, and other stakeholders. 

Step 1 – Public Scoping 

Scoping and the RMP process began with the publication of the Notice of Intent in the Federal Register

to revise the RMP, prepare an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS), and conduct public scoping 

meetings. The Notice of Intent was published in May 2002. In addition to using other media outlets, three 

public scoping meetings were conducted by the BLM in August 2002 in Socorro, Quemado, and Zuni, 

New Mexico. Local, state, and federal government consultation, as well as tribal consultation, was also 

initiated at the beginning of the planning process. All of the comments and questions received were 

compiled, reviewed, and analyzed to identify the issues to be addressed in the RMP and EIS. 

Based on the nature of comments on OHV use that were received during scoping, the BLM Socorro Field 

Office later held three focused meetings to solicit further comments from the public on issues and 

concerns related to OHV use in the Planning Area. Meetings were held during March 2003 and the 

comments received from the public meetings primarily expressed concerns about OHV use and provided 

suggestions for future OHV management. 

Step 2 – Identification of Issues 

A planning issue is defined as an opportunity, conflict, or problem regarding the use or management of 

public land and resources. The BLM interdisciplinary team, cooperating agencies, other State and Federal 

agencies, and the general public raised a number of issues and concerns to be addressed in the RMP. The 

BLM land use planning process is issue-driven in that it is undertaken to resolve resource management 

problems and take advantage of management opportunities. The following is a summary of six issues 

identified by the public and agencies during scoping. 

Issue 1 – Which areas, if any, should be designated for special management, what designations 

should apply (areas of critical environmental concern [ACEC], special management areas [SMA], 

or other), and how should these areas be managed? 

Issue 2 – What type of management should be undertaken at the watershed level to reduce 

erosion, improve surface water quality, maintain and improve vegetation, and reduce nonpointsource pollution? 

Issue 3 – How should potential energy, fluid, and solid mineral development in the Planning Area 

be managed? 

Issue 4 – How should travel and transportation—including motorized vehicle use, OHV use, 

mountain biking, hiking, horseback riding and others—be managed to satisfy public demand 

while protecting the natural values of the public land? 

Issue 5 – What land use allocations or lands and realty program initiatives need to be addressed 

in the Plan to accommodate the effective management and support of other resource programs 

within the Planning Area? 

Issue 6 – How should the BLM best pursue cultural and recreational initiatives to provide the 

public with quality tourism and cultural heritage tourism opportunities? 

Further details of these planning issues are provided in Appendix A, along with issues considered but not 

further analyzed as part of the planning process. 
Socorro Resource Management Plan 5 Chapter 1: Introduction 

In developing the RMP, the BLM also considered other program or resource areas, including special 

status species in coordination with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service; appropriate management of 

woodland areas and noxious weeds; lands and realty issues; and socioeconomic implications for the area. 

Step 3 – Development of Planning Criteria 

Planning criteria establish the ―side-boards‖ for decision making, provide focus for data collection efforts, 

and ensure compliance with legal mandates. (For a list of the Planning Criteria used, refer to Appendix A 

in this document.) 

In addition, a number of federal statutes have been developed over time to establish and define the BLM‘s 

authority to make decisions regarding the management and use of resources on public land. Appendix B 

includes a brief description of the major legal authorities relevant to BLM land use planning. 

Step 4 – Data and Information Collection 

The majority of data and information were extracted from existing data on file at the BLM Socorro Field 

Office and within the BLM. Other data were obtained from relevant sources to update and/or supplement 

the BLM‘s data, as appropriate for each resource. Data included published and unpublished reports, maps, 

and digital format (geographic information systems). 

Step 5 – Management Situation Analysis 

The purpose of the Management Situation Analysis is to conduct an assessment of the current situation as 

it relates to the overall management and resource use on BLM-managed public lands within Socorro and 

Catron Counties. The Management Situation Analysis provides a profile of the resource concerns on 

public lands within Socorro and Catron Counties, a description of the existing management situation as it 

pertains to management of the resources, and an analysis of opportunities to modify the existing 

management situation. 

Step 6 –Formulation of Alternatives 

Four alternatives were developed during the planning process, with Alternative B being the BLM‘s 

Preferred Alternative and subsequent Proposed Alternative or Proposed Plan. The alternatives were 

developed to respond to the RMP‘s purpose and need, management concerns, consideration of the 

affected environment, and issues identified through public scoping. 

Step 7 – Release of the Draft RMP/EIS for Public Comment 

A Notice of Availability was published in the Federal Register announcing the availability of the Draft 

RMP/EIS for a 90-day public comment period in April 2007. In the Draft RMP/EIS, the potential effects 

resulting from each of the alternatives were analyzed. Mitigation measures also were considered in 

evaluating impacts. 

The BLM conducted public hearings on the Draft RMP/EIS in May of the same year. In addition to 

making the Draft RMP/EIS available to the public, the plan was sent to the cooperating agencies (Zuni 

Tribe and Catron County) and other governmental agencies as required through consultation. All written 

and oral comments received during the comment period were reviewed, analyzed, and summarized. 

Step 8 – Release of the Proposed RMP/Final EIS 

A Notice of Availability in the Federal Register and the Proposed RMP/Final EIS were released to the 

public for a 30-day protest period and 60-day Governor‘s consistency review in December 2009. Based 

on public comment on the Draft RMP/EIS, some minor changes were made to the Preferred Alternative, 

as documented in the Proposed RMP/Final EIS. Chapter 6 of the Proposed RMP/Final EIS describes the 
Socorro Resource Management Plan 6 Chapter 1: Introduction 

comments received by the BLM on the Draft RMP/EIS, and provides responses to the substantive 

comments. 

Step 9 – Selection of the Approved RMP 

This RMP was approved after resolving the protests and Governor‘s consistency review of the Proposed 

RMP/Final EIS. The BLM issued a Record of Decision selecting Alternative B (Proposed Alternative) as 

the Approved RMP with some modifications. (For additional information, please refer to the ROD.) 

Step 10 – RMP Implementation 

Planning and decision making for the management of BLM-administered land is a tiered, ongoing 

process. Upon approval of this RMP, subsequent implementation decisions are carried out by developing 

activity-level or project-specific plans with supporting environmental analysis. Consequently, , activityand project-level plans and additional NEPA analysis are not considered or developed further in this 

document. 

Step 11 – Monitoring and Evaluation 

The BLM will monitor and evaluate actions, resource conditions, and trends to determine if 

implementation of the RMP is occurring as planned, management goals and objectives are being met, and 

whether there are unanticipated results from implementation. Monitoring and evaluation are essential 

components to an adaptive management approach, through which the BLM can detect issues early enough 

to adjust implementation strategies as necessary to ensure that goals and objectives are achieved. The 

RMP will be kept current through plan maintenance, amendments, or revisions as demands on resources 

change or new information is acquired. A plan evaluation will be performed every 5 years as required by 

the BLM‘s Land Use Planning Handbook (H-1610-1). 

RELATED PLANS 

Relationship to BLM Policies, Plans, and Programs 

This RMP has been prepared to reflect and be consistent with current federal laws, regulations, plans, and 

guidance, as well as with local government plans and policies to the extent feasible. The decisions in the 

1989 Socorro RMP and its subsequent amendments, as well as other more recent BLM plans, were 

reevaluated to determine if they should be carried forward in this RMP. Since 1989, some of these 

documents that were considered during the planning process include the: 

Resource Management Plan Amendment (RMPA) and Environmental Assessment (EA) for the 

Continental Divide National Scenic Trail, 1993. This amendment provided for the route selection 

for the Continental Divide National Scenic Trail between Pie Town and Cuba in Catron, Cibola, 

McKinley, and Sandoval Counties, New Mexico. 

The El Camino Real International Heritage Center RMPA/EA, 2001. This amendment provided 

for the construction and management of the El Camino Real International Heritage Center. 

Ownership of approximately 120 acres of public land was transferred to New Mexico for 

construction and operation of the interpretive center. 

The El Camino Real Tierra Adentro National Historic Trail Comprehensive Management Plan 

and Final EIS, 2004, provides guidance for administering the trail. 

The New Mexico Standards for Public Land Health and Guidelines for Livestock and Grazing 

Management (New Mexico Standards and Guidelines) also amended the 1989 RMP. The 

standards of land health are expressions of physical and biological condition or functions required 

for healthy and sustainable ecosystems on public lands, and define the minimum resource 

conditions that must be achieved. 
Socorro Resource Management Plan 7 Chapter 1: Introduction 

The Fire and Fuels Management Plan Amendment and EA for BLM Lands in New Mexico and 

Texas, 2004. This document amended fire management in all New Mexico BLM RMPs and 

RMPAs. 

The Programmatic Emergency Stabilization and Rehabilitation Plan and EA, 2005, provides an 

integrated program for burned areas in New Mexico. 

The Final Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement on Wind Energy Development on 

BLM-Administered Lands in the Western United States, 2005. The Socorro Planning Area was 

identified in the EIS as primarily having only a low potential for wind energy development.. (The 

previous Socorro RMP was not amended by the Wind Energy Programmatic EIS.) 

Thirteen Wilderness Study Areas (WSAs) are also located within the Planning Area and are associated 

with additional management guidance. WSAs are designated by Congress and managed in accordance 

with the Interim Management Policy and Guidelines for Land Under Wilderness Review (BLM 1995), 

which allows some recreation and other uses and requires protection of wilderness values. If formally 

added to the Wilderness Preservation System, these areas will be managed in accordance with BLM 

regulations for wilderness management in 43 CFR 6300. If a WSA is released by Congress from 

consideration for wilderness designation, the area will be managed in accordance with this RMP. 

Cooperating Agencies 

Jurisdictions in the area with land use plans include Socorro County (1998) and Catron County (1992). 

Catron County served as a cooperating agency during preparation of the RMP and EIS. 

Throughout the planning process, the BLM worked closely with the Pueblo of Zuni. The Zuni Pueblo also 

accepted an invitation to participate as a cooperating agency, and similar to Catron County, a 

Memorandum of Understanding established the role of the Zuni‘s participation in the process. In 

accordance with the RMP, the BLM and the Zuni Pueblo will initiate an updated Memorandum of 

Understanding to outline the procedures for consultation related to future actions that might affect the 

Zuni Salt Lake, a site of religious and historical importance to the Zuni.

VISION AND GOALS OF THE RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PLAN 

The RMP is intended to guide future management actions based on the vision and resource goals for 

managing the public land in the Socorro Field Office. The vision for this RMP is provided by the BLM‘s 

mission, strategic plan, the BLM State Director‘s priorities, and goals identified specifically in this RMP. 

BLM Strategic Plan 

The mission of the BLM is to sustain the health, diversity, and productivity of the public lands for the use 

and enjoyment of present and future generations. In order to accomplish that mission, the BLM develops 

strategic plans containing a comprehensive set of broad goal statements and a subset of mission goals. 

These plans are publicly available on the BLM web site. The BLM Strategic Plan 2000-2005 provided 

guidance during the planning process . This plan includes the following two goal statements with their 

supporting subset of mission goals: 

Goal 1: Serve Current and Future Publics 

– Provide opportunities for environmentally responsible recreation 

– Provide opportunities for environmentally responsible commercial activities 

– Preserve natural and cultural heritage resources 

– Reduce threats to public health, safety, and property 

– Provide land, resource, and title information 
Socorro Resource Management Plan 8 Chapter 1: Introduction 

– Provide economic and technical assistance 

Goal 2: Restore and Maintain the Health of the Land 

– Understand and plan for the condition and use of the public lands 

– Restore at-risk resources and maintain functioning systems 

State Director Priorities 

The State Director has identified several priorities for the management of BLM-administered lands in 

New Mexico to be accomplished: 

Restore watershed health 

Protect special landscapes 

Reclaim ―legacy‖ lands (lands that have been damaged by historic use or extraction of public 

resources) 

Help communities meet future needs 

Enhance habitat for special status species 

Consolidate land ownership patterns 

Resolve mineral conflicts 

RMP Goals 

Based on the BLM‘s Strategic Plan, the State Director‘s priorities, and the issues identified in the Socorro 

Planning Area, the goals for this RMP include the following: 

Manage for long-term sustainability and, where necessary, restore the health of the woodland, 

rangeland, and riparian landscapes in the Planning Area; 

Manage sensitive species and communities to ensure long-term viability, and promote delisting of 

threatened or endangered species; 

Within the capability of the Planning Area‘s natural and cultural resources, provide tourism, 

recreational, educational, and research opportunities; 

Within the capability of the Planning Area resources, provide a predictable, sustained flow of 

economic benefits to individuals and local communities; and 

Work with local American Indian Tribes and local communities to meet their needs within the 

mission of the BLM.
Socorro Resource Management Plan 9 Chapter 2: Management Decisions and Legal Mandates

CHAPTER 2: MANAGEMENT DECISIONS AND LEGAL MANDATES 

This RMP is composed of land use plan-level decisions as defined in the BLM‘s Land Use Planning 

Handbook H-1601-1 (dated March 2005). Future proposals for site-specific actions may require more 

detailed environmental review in compliance with the NEPA. 

This chapter provides detailed information for the management of each resource, resource use, or 

program. The section for each resource, resource use, or program addresses both (1) continuing 

management guidance, or the applicable laws, regulations, and policy guidance with which the BLM must 

comply; and (2) discretionary management decisions. 

AIR QUALITY AND CLIMATE CHANGE 

All BLM actions and use authorizations that may affect air quality must comply with applicable local, 

State, Tribal, and Federal air quality laws, statutes, regulations, standards, and implementation plans. The 

State of New Mexico air quality regulations are provided in the New Mexico Administrative Code, Title 

20, Chapter 2. These regulations establish New Mexico Ambient Air Quality Standards that are equal to or 

more stringent than the National Ambient Air Quality Standards. In addition to the criteria pollutants 

covered by the National Standards, New Mexico has promulgated ambient air quality standards for total 

suspended particulates and hydrogen sulfide, and added a 24-hour nitrogen dioxide standard. New 

Mexico also requires that all pollutant concentrations be expressed in parts per million and adjusted for 

altitude and temperature at the measurement location. The New Mexico Environment Department 

(NMED) also regulates smoke management through requirements for the use of prescribed fires (Title 20, 

Chapter 2, Part 65 of the New Mexico Administrative Code). 

Air quality issues in the Planning Area are generally related to fire management. Best Management 

Practices related to air quality are prescribed in the 2004 Fire and Fuels Management Plan Amendment 

and Environmental Assessment for Public Lands in New Mexico and Texas (also referred to as the 

Statewide Fire and Fuels Management Plan Amendment) and BLM Manual 7000, and are common to all 

alternatives (Appendix C: Best Management Practices). In addition prescribed burning must comply with 

the requirements of the state Smoke Management Program. 

The Socorro Field Office will follow climate change guidance as it is issued. Climate is the composite of 

generally prevailing weather conditions of a particular region throughout the year, averaged over a series 

of years. Greenhouse gases (GHGs) have the potential to impact climate and in turn, climate has the 

potential to influence resource management. GHGs include carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), nitrous 

oxide (N2O), water vapor, and several trace gases. 

Ongoing scientific research has identified the potential impacts of GHG emissions on global climate. 

Through complex interactions on a regional and global scale, GHG emissions cause a net warming effect 

on the atmosphere, primarily because greenhouse gases absorb heat energy that would otherwise be 

radiated by the earth back into space. Although GHG levels and corresponding variations in climatic 

conditions have varied for millennia, industrialization and the burning of fossil carbon sources have 

caused GHG concentrations to increase measurably, and may contribute to overall climatic changes, 

typically referred to as climate change. Increasing CO2 concentrations also lead to fertilization and growth 

of specific plant species. 

A 2007 U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) report on climate change found that ―federal land 

and water resources are vulnerable to a wide range of effects from climate change, some of which are 
Socorro Resource Management Plan 10 Chapter 2: Management Decisions and Legal Mandates

already occurring. It is not possible at this time to predict with any certainty the local or regional effects 

of this RMP‘s proposed actions on climate. 

CAVE AND KARST RESOURCES 

Management Goal

Protect, preserve, study, and identify karst features and significant caves, and ensure that they are available for 

appropriate uses by present and future generations.

Resource and Planning Issues Supporting Management Decisions

Significant Caves and Karst

Features (Issues 1 and 5)

1

Develop a plan to manage caves and karst within 2 years of the Record of 

Decision for this RMP.

The BLM manages caves and karst on public land according to the Federal Cave Resource Protection Act 

of 1988 (Title 16, United States Code, Sections 4301-4309 [16 U.S.C. 4301-4309]). The law is intended 

to: (1) secure, protect, and preserve significant caves on Federal land, and (2) to foster collaboration and 

exchange of information between government authorities and those who use caves on Federal land for 

scientific, educational, or recreational purposes. The statute directs that significant caves be identified on 

public land, and that use of those significant caves be regulated as appropriate. The criteria for identifying 

significant caves are found in 43 CFR 37.11 (C). The BLM has the authority to administratively designate 

significant caves based on those criteria and develop management plans for their protection. The Onshore 

Oil and Gas Order No. 1 also provides authority for protection of cave resources. 

Eighteen significant caves have been identified consistent with the Federal Cave Resource Protection Act. 

Cave and karst resources will be delineated and mapped and a management plan will be prepared within 

two years of the Record of Decision on this RMP. 

Imminent threats from natural or human-caused deterioration, or potential conflict with other resource 

uses will be reduced by identifying priority geographic areas for new field inventory, based on a 

probability for unrecorded significant resources. In addition, some areas are associated with stipulations 

on fluid minerals leasing for the purpose of protecting caves and karst regions (see 

section below). 

CULTURAL RESOURCES 

Management Goal

Preserve, protect, study, and interpret significant cultural resources and ensure that they are available for 

appropriate uses by present and future generations. Imminent threats from natural or human-caused deterioration, 

or potential conflict with other resource uses, are reduced by identifying priority geographic areas for new field 

inventory, based on a probability for unrecorded significant resources and known or suspected risk factors.

Resource and Planning Issues Supporting Management Decisions

Land Acquisition

(Issues 5 And 6)

Acquire non-Federal cultural resource areas based on identified criteria:

o Site significance

o Site management feasibility

o Partnership potential

o Community/public support

o Heritage tourism potential

 

1

 Planning issues are described in the Chapter 1: Introduction on pages 4 and 5, and in Appendix A: Planning criteria.
Socorro Resource Management Plan 11 Chapter 2: Management Decisions and Legal Mandates

Heritage Tourism

(Issue 6)

Promote heritage tourism at sites or areas that meet the following criteria:

o Low resource vulnerability to effects from Heritage Tourism

o Potential for site protection through physical ―site hardening‖

measures, administrative measures or other means of mitigation

o Community/public support and interest

o Partnership opportunities

Cultural Resources Protection

Designate four ACECs (Cerro Pomo, Ladron Mountain-Devil‘s Backbone, 

Mockingbird Gap, and Zuni Salt Lake) and identify four SMAs (Fort 

Craig, Newton Site, Playa Pueblos, and Teypama/Penjeacu) to protect and 

manage cultural resources.

Ongoing Regulatory Compliance Activities 

The BLM complies with numerous Federal laws, regulations, Executive Orders, and other directives 

regarding cultural resources and historic preservation (see Appendix B). The requirement to appropriately 

manage cultural resources was incorporated into FLPMA, and this law remains the primary basis for the 

BLM‘s program for managing cultural resources in conjunction within the agency‘s mandate to promote 

multiple, sustainable uses of resources on public land. 

Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act stipulates that Federal agencies give due 

consideration to historic properties (e.g., resources eligible for the National Register of Historic Places 

[National Register]) as Federal undertakings (i.e., Federal projects or federally funded or licensed 

projects) are planned and implemented. Regulations for Protection of Historic Properties [36 CFR 800] 

define a process for consulting with State Historic Preservation Officers, the Federal Advisory Council on 

Historic Preservation, and other interested organizations and individuals. In 1997, the BLM negotiated a 

National Programmatic Agreement with the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation and the National 

Conference of State Historic Preservation Officers regarding the manner in which the BLM will comply 

with the National Historic Preservation Act. This nationwide agreement replaced a similar, earlier, Statelevel agreement that was in place when the 1989 RMP was prepared. The National Programmatic 

Agreement is implemented through a state-specific protocol negotiated with the State Historic 

Preservation Officer. 

In December 2006, the BLM issued Instruction Memorandum No. 2007-030, which provides clarification 

of cultural resource considerations for OHV designation and travel management. This Instruction 

Memorandum recognizes that inventory requirements, priorities, and strategies will vary depending on the 

effect and nature of the proposed OHV activity and the expected density and nature of historic properties 

(based on existing inventory information) and will be followed under this RMP to ensure Section 106 

compliance. 

Because the vast majority of the cultural resources on land managed by the Socorro Field Office are 

archaeological sites, the Archaeological Resources Protection Act is an important basis for the Socorro 

Field Office cultural resource program. This Act and implementing regulations (43 CFR 7) gives the 

BLM authority to permit uses of archaeological resources on public land and specifies that such permits 

can only be issued for scholarly research or resource preservation. Human remains, funerary objects, 

sacred objects, and objects of cultural patrimony affiliated with American Indians are sometimes 

associated with archaeological sites. The Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act 

stipulates how such remains and objects on Federal land are to be treated. 

The BLM applies a ―rule of reason‖ in considering how potential effects of BLM actions on cultural 

resources will be considered on non-Federal land, as directed by BLM Manual 8100.07 and the National 

Programmatic Agreement. Under this policy, the BLM inventories, evaluates, and assesses potential 

effects on cultural resources on nonpublic land to the extent that effects stem from BLM decisions. These 
Socorro Resource Management Plan 12 Chapter 2: Management Decisions and Legal Mandates

situations may arise for linear projects that cross land of various jurisdictions, including public land, or 

issuance of permits to drill on split-estate land. Cross-jurisdictional activities also may be subject to the 

New Mexico Cultural Properties Act, which addresses cultural resources on State land. 

Cultural resource surveys will continue to be conducted prior to authorization of any ground-disturbing 

activity or land disposal, with the possible exception of land disposed of to the State of New Mexico 

under an existing memorandum of understanding. This will be done in accordance with the National 

Programmatic Agreement and New Mexico protocol. In accordance with the protocol, the BLM approves 

and proceeds with projects that do not affect properties listed on or identified as eligible for the National 

Register without consulting with the New Mexico State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO). The BLM 

submits documentation of such projects to the SHPO quarterly and also submits an annual report of the 

program. 

Affiliated American Indian Tribes will be consulted for all actions that may affect their interests. 

The BLM will continue to fund and conduct proactive cultural resource inventories in compliance with 

Section 110 of the National Historic Preservation Act and in accordance with cultural resource goals and 

evolving management priorities. Inventories will be conducted in the following areas, as funding is 

available: 

High Priority – Rural/urban interface areas and other areas identified as at-risk from vandalism or 

development, areas where highly significant or vulnerable resources are suspected, survey 

necessary for understanding or identifying cultural landscapes, and other areas as identified based 

on evolving management priorities. 

Medium Priority – Assess potential value of unreported late-1970s Class II survey data and 

analyze, if warranted, areas in the vicinity of large prehistoric villages where other sites are likely 

to be concentrated; management areas designated by other resource programs with potential 

conflicts with cultural resource program goals; or other areas as identified based on evolving 

management priorities. 

Low Priority – Management areas designated by other resource programs with little potential for 

conflict with cultural resource program goals, and other areas as identified based on evolving 

management priorities. 

Land Acquisition and Heritage Tourism 

The cultural resources program in Socorro will emphasize a balance between site protection and site use, 

for public enjoyment and economic benefit to communities. If appropriate, at least one new site shall be 

developed for public visitation over the life of the plan, and some programs and products will be 

developed for sites already designated for public use, such as Fort Craig and Penjeacu. 

Land acquisition may be pursued in support of cultural resource management goals as opportunities arise. 

These opportunities will be evaluated according to the following criteria: 

Site significance 

Site management feasibility 

Partnership potential for site management 

Community/public support for acquisition 

Heritage tourism potential 

The Socorro Field Office will promote heritage tourism sites and projects to raise public awareness and 

appreciation for cultural resource values, provide for public enjoyment of cultural resources on public 
Socorro Resource Management Plan 13 Chapter 2: Management Decisions and Legal Mandates

land, and support rural economies. Potential heritage tourism sites and/or projects will be evaluated 

according to the following criteria: 

Degree of resource vulnerability to effects from heritage tourism 

Potential for site protection through physical ―site hardening‖ measures, administrative measures, 

or other means of mitigation 

Community/public support and interest 

Partnership opportunities for site management 

Existing sites that are or could be managed for heritage tourism values and benefits include Magdalena 

Stock Driveway, Fort Craig, El Camino Real de Tierra Adentro National Historic Trail, and Penjeacu. 

Other sites may be identified over the life of this RMP. 

The BLM will partner with the State of New Mexico on regional tourism opportunities, including Boots 

and Saddles, Magdalena Trail Project, and activities associated with El Camino Real International 

Heritage Center. In addition, the BLM will cooperate with the National Park Service, other agencies, 

Mexico, interested groups, and landowners in protecting and interpreting El Camino Real de Tierra 

Adentro National Historic Trail in accordance with a comprehensive management plan (National Park 

Service and BLM 2004). 

Areas of Critical Environmental Concern and Special Management Areas 

Several areas have sensitive or unique cultural resources will be managed under special designations. 

Generally, management will protect resources in these areas by reducing access and restricting surfacedisturbing activities. The following Areas of Critical Environmental Concern (ACECs) and Special 

Management Areas (SMAs) are specifically related to cultural resources management and protection: 

Mockingbird Gap Proprietary ACEC (8,685 acres) 

Zuni Salt Lake Proprietary ACEC (46,746 acres) – incorporates most of the former Fence Lake 

SMA 

Fort Craig SMA (149 acres) 

Newton Site Proprietary SMA (6,789 acres) 

Penjeacu SMA (11 acres) – formerly Teypama 

Playa Pueblos Proprietary SMA (203 acres) 

ACECs and SMAs (that are not proprietary) are shown on Map 4, and further information on the 

management of specially designated areas is provided in Chapter 3: Special Designations.

The BLM also identified an SMA to support the Continental Divide National Scenic Trail (see Recreation 

section below). Cultural site protection will be considered in planning the location of this trail. Some fluid 

mineral leasing stipulations (see Minerals section below) were developed in part for protection of cultural 

resources and will be applied as appropriate. 

FORESTRY AND WOODLAND MANAGEMENT 

Management Goal

Maintain sustainable uses and improve woodland and forest health by implementing Best Management Practices. 

Employ silvicultural practices that will reduce encroachment of woodland species, encourage natural 

regeneration, and increase individual tree vigor.
Socorro Resource Management Plan 14 Chapter 2: Management Decisions and Legal Mandates

Resource and Planning Issues Supporting Management Decisions

Woodland Management

(Issues 2 and 5)

 Manage piñon-juniper, ponderosa, savannah, and mixed conifer cover 

types to improve ecological condition, provide for needs of local 

communities, and improve wildlife habitat.

Commercial Wood Cutting 

and Personal Fuel-Wood 

Cutting

(Issues 2 and 5)

 Permit commercial woodcutting in areas that meet following criteria:

o Accessibility – There must be a road into the general area of the 

site, though not necessarily to the site itself; access may require 

building temporary roads that can be removed or rehabilitated 

when the project is completed.

o Site has been identified for treatment (using New Mexico 

Standards and Guidelines and Standard Forest Inventory)

o Stable soils (resilient to disturbance)

o Slopes of less than 40 percent

o Excepted areas – areas identified for no woodcutting

 Permit personal-use woodcutting in areas according to the same criteria, 

except that there must be a road into the site. Silvicultural practices in 

WSAs will conform to the Interim Management Policy (see 

Section 2.3.15).

Plant Or Plant Materials 

Sales Areas

(Issues 2 and 5)

 Permit personal-use plant or plant materials sales if public demand 

warrants, in areas that meet identified criteria:

o Accessibility

o Availability of plant species

o Type of removal work

o Potential of other use areas – the BLM may consider public 

salvage of native plant species from a proposed project area 

(gravel pit, etc.) depending on public demand, location of the 

particular project (accessibility), and staffing levels. 

o Excepted areas – areas identified for no plant collecting.

The Mineral Material Disposal Act of 1947, as amended, establishes the authority under which the BLM 

disposes of timber and other forest products. The Mineral Material Disposal Act and FLPMA direct that 

Ponderosa Pine stands be managed on a multiple-use, sustained-yield basis (see Appendix B: Acts of 

Authority and Mandates for the BLM). In addition, the Departmental Manual Part 586, Timber 

Management, Section 1.3, policy states: 

―Forest lands are to be managed to yield the highest combination of products and benefits 

consistent with the purposes specified by Congress. All Forest management activities are 

directed in accordance with sound silvicultural practices, multiple uses, and 

environmental enhancement. The protection of streams, wildlife, and other forest values 

are taken into account in developing a forest management plan.‖ 

Section 1.3 (C) 2, Forest Regeneration, further defines timber management: 

―non-stocked forest lands resulting from harvesting or fire will be promptly regenerated. 

The method of regeneration may be natural or artificial seeding or planting. The tree 

species used for reforestation purposes should be suitable to the site and climatic 

conditions so as to produce optimum growth and yield.‖ 

Under Section 1.3 C (3), ―Every reasonable effort will be made to protect forest values from destruction 

by fire, insects, diseases, and other destructive agents....‖ Other forest program information can be found 

in the Code of Federal Regulations at 43 CFR 5000. 

Silvicultural practices in WSAs shall conform with the 1995 Interim Management Policy. In accordance 

with this guidance, pruning, site preparation, and reforestation will be permitted only in cases that satisfy 
Socorro Resource Management Plan 15 Chapter 2: Management Decisions and Legal Mandates

the non-impairment criteria as identified in H-8550-1. Reforestation using native species may be done 

following fire or other natural disaster if natural seeding is not adequate. In 2001, the U.S. Congress 

funded the National Fire Plan to reduce hazardous fuel and restore forests and rangeland. In response, the 

Secretaries of Agriculture and the Interior, along with western Governors and other interested parties, 

developed a 10-year strategy and implementation plan for protecting communities and the environment. 

National plans, together with the Federal Wildland Fire Management Policy (2001), form a framework for 

Federal agencies, States, Tribes, local governments, and communities to reduce the threat of fire, improve 

the condition of the land, restore forest and rangeland health, and reduce risk to communities. Both the 

forestry and fire programs operate under the 2004 Statewide Fire and Fuels Management Plan 

Amendment. 

Several tools to attain management goals have been developed in two pieces of legislation passed since 

2002. The Healthy Forest Initiative of 2002 expands stewardship contracting authority with communities, 

the private sector, and others to allow the BLM and the Forest Service to enter into long-term contracts to 

meet land management objectives, including reducing wildland fire risk and improving forest and 

woodland health (Appendix G: BLM Stewardship Contracting Guidance). Among other things, the new 

stewardship contracting authority allows forest products to be exchanged for ecological restoration 

services, which may include thinning and removing brush and trees. The 2003 Healthy Forests 

Restoration Act contains a variety of provisions to expedite hazardous-fuel reduction and forestrestoration projects on specific types of Federal land that are at risk of wildland fire or insect and disease 

epidemics. 

Partnerships and working relationships with local communities will continue and increase, along with 

partnerships with State and Federal entities to accomplish woodland and forest health management. 

Stewardship and service contracts will be used whenever feasible, thereby encouraging local small 

business opportunities. 

The forestry management program will maintain sustainable uses and improve woodland and forest health 

in the Socorro Field Office by implementing Best Management Practices (see Appendix C: Best 

Management Practices), through application of the New Mexico Standards and Guidelines and Fire 

Regime Condition Class (FRCC). FRCC is an interagency, standardized tool for determining the degree 

of departure from reference condition vegetation, fuels, and disturbance regimes. Assessing FRCC can 

help guide management objectives and set priorities for treatments. The forestry program will work with 

the fire management program to manage the use of fire in the woodland and forest ecosystems to achieve 

the following resource goals: 

Ensure forests and woodlands are healthy, functioning ecosystems that provide habitat for the 

wildlife species within New Mexico. 

Manage forests and woodlands within a historic range of density and structure to achieve healthy 

and productive watersheds. 

Return woodland stands to a condition where ecological processes, such as fire and insects, can 

exist without uncharacteristic effects.

Provide local communities with special forest products and business opportunities, while 

protecting cultural and other natural resources. 

Use management tools to implement the Healthy Forest Restoration Act of 2003, the National 

Fire Plan, and the President‘s Healthy Forests Initiative and the BLM‘s New Mexico Fire and 

Fuels Management Plan. 

Contribute to the Nation‘s energy supply consistent with the National Energy Policy. 
Socorro Resource Management Plan 16 Chapter 2: Management Decisions and Legal Mandates

The forestry program for the Socorro Field Office will be driven primarily by ecological objectives while 

promoting economic and social benefits. The goal is to restore pre-suppression forest and woodlands 

structure, composition, and processes on lands managed by the New Mexico BLM to maximize the 

resilience of the ecosystem. 

Piñon-juniper, ponderosa, and mixed conifer cover types will be managed to improve ecological 

condition, provide the needs of local communities, and improve wildlife habitat. These cover types 

include potential old-growth stands (Appendix N: Old Growth Forest Definitions). High-tree-density 

woodland sites will be managed to reduce woody species and allow for increases in herbaceous 

understory. Savannah grassland sites will be treated to remove encroaching woody species, to restore 

them to the historical grassland reference condition based on potential from ecological site description. 

Dominance of Ponderosa Pine will be reestablished in the sites that will support it. Retention of larger, 

fire tolerant trees will be a management goal, along with uneven management. Woodland and forest sites 

will be evaluated for meeting standards for forest health and those identified as not meeting the standard 

will be managed in accordance with Best Management Practices to become properly functioning (see 

Appendix C: Best Management Practices). Assessment also will utilize the Fire Regime Condition Class 

(FRCC). Treatment techniques may include wildland fire use, prescribed fire, mechanical treatment, 

chemical treatment, or biological treatment to achieve management goals for woodland and forest health. 

Vegetative Sales and Woodcutting 

The Socorro Field Office vegetative sales program will strive to provide commercial opportunities for 

local industry with commercial fuelwood areas and other potential wood products, accessible public 

fuelwood areas, Christmas tree collection sites, and plant adoption sites. The vegetative material sales 

program will provide opportunities for vegetative sales to meet local and regional needs in a manner that 

minimizes impacts on resources. Vegetative materials may include fence posts, Christmas trees, piñon 

nuts, seeds, and wildlings (native perennial species such as yuccas, cactus species, etc.). A portion of 

wood harvested annually on BLM-administered public land could be used for biomass consumption for 

alternative energy development depending on demand and ecological site limitations. 

The Pie Town Fuelwood Area will be managed as a designated fuelwood cutting area as appropriate to 

conform with sustainable harvesting guidelines. The Socorro Field Office will exclude or restrict 

woodcutting and plant materials sales in special designations as identified below, in the section Special 

Designations. 

Areas will be designated for commercial and personal woodcutting based on the following criteria: 

Accessibility – For personal woodcutting, there must be a road into the site. For commercial 

woodcutting, there must be a road into the general area of the site, though not necessarily to the 

site itself; access may require building temporary roads that can be removed or rehabilitated when 

the project is completed. 

Site has been identified for treatment (using New Mexico Standards and Guidelines and Standard 

Forest Inventory). 

Stable soils (resilient to disturbance). 

Slopes of less than 40 percent (except where technology, economics, and environmental concerns 

are mitigated to achieve resource management goals). 

No woodcutting in excepted areas – areas identified for no woodcutting for the protection of other 

resources. 
Socorro Resource Management Plan 17 Chapter 2: Management Decisions and Legal Mandates

If public demand warrants, areas will be designated for personal-use plant or plant materials sales based 

on the following criteria: 

Accessibility. 

Availability of plant species. 

Type of removal work. 

Potential of other use areas – the BLM may consider public salvage of native plant species from a 

proposed project area (gravel pit, etc.) depending on public demand, location of the particular 

project (accessibility), and staffing levels. 

No sales in excepted areas – areas identified for no plant collecting for the protection of other 

resources. 

HAZARDOUS MATERIALS AND PUBLIC SAFETY 

The BLM Manual Section 1703, Hazardous Materials Management, provides a framework for hazardous 

materials management by describing the BLM‘s objectives, defining policy and responsibilities, and 

citing authority for management of hazardous materials. 

All decisions comply with Federal and State hazardous materials management laws and regulations (see 

Appendix B: Acts of Authority and Mandates for the BLM). Management priorities would include 

maintenance of the health of ecosystems through assessment, cleanup, and restoration of contaminated 

sites; management of hazardous materials related risks, costs, and liabilities; and integration of 

environmental protection and compliance with all environmental statutes into all BLM activities. 

LANDS AND REALTY 

Management Goal

Respond to public requests for land use authorization, sales, and exchanges; support the multiple-use 

management goals and objectives of other resource programs as they relate to land and realty actions; and acquire 

access to provide continuing administrative and public needs and to facilitate the acquisition and disposal of 

public land, or interests in public land, in order to promote enhanced management and multiple uses of resources.

Resource and Planning Issues Supporting Management Decisions

Right-of-way Avoidance and 

Exclusion Areas 

(Issues 4 And 5)

Manage 406,289 acres as right-of-way exclusion areas, and 342,363 acres 

as right-of-way avoidance areas. 

Utility Corridors 

(Issue 5)

Designate one north-south utility corridor. The width of the corridor is be 1 

mile on each side of centerline of the corridor. 

Land Tenure 

(Issue 5)

Retain approximately 1,415,913 acres in Federal ownership. 

Approximately 85,591acres have been identified as suitable for disposal in 

accordance with the Land and Mineral Disposal Policy (Appendix F). 

Acquisition 

(Issues 4 And 5)

Acquire non-Federal land from willing sellers within WSAs, ACECs, 

special management areas, cultural resource sites, or other areas that are 

identified based on resource and program objectives. 

Acquire legal access as needed throughout the planning area based on 

resource objectives as acquisition opportunities arise to support all resource 

programs. 

Land generally will remain in Federal ownership unless it meets specific criteria for disposal in FLPMA 

and existing land use plans. The primary mission of the lands and realty program in regard to land tenure 
Socorro Resource Management Plan 18 Chapter 2: Management Decisions and Legal Mandates

is to conserve Federal ownership and consolidate administrative boundaries to create a more efficient and 

economical land ownership pattern. The acquisition of land that will enhance and protect important 

resources is an established priority for the Socorro Field Office. Land will be acquired only from owners 

willing to dispose of them. In addition, land exchanges between the BLM and the State of New Mexico 

will occur when the exchange improves the management potential of State and Federal land. 

Land identified for disposal prior to July 2000 may be sold in accordance with the Federal Land 

Transaction Facilitation Act. This Act allows the BLM to retain the receipts from land sales that will be 

used to cover administrative costs and to acquire properties that will improve the nation's land 

management pattern. Land identified for disposal in the 1989 RMP will be subject to the Act. 

All existing valid rights including leases, permits, easements, and withdrawals are recognized and will be 

carried forward under this RMP. 

Land Tenure 

All land and mineral disposal actions will conform to the criteria established in the Land and Mineral 

Disposal Policy (Appendix F: Land/Minerals Disposal Policy and ROW Exclusion/Avoidance Area 

Plan). Proposed realty actions are subject to additional NEPA analysis, which considers a number of 

resources and uses when considering the merits of any disposal or acquisition. Acquisition of nonpublic 

land to support wildlife and other programs will occur as needed, such as land adjacent to HMP areas, 

ACECs, SMAs, or other areas of concern. 

Approximately 85,591 acres of isolated parcels are identified as suitable for disposal pending 

environmental analysis, in accordance with the Land and Mineral Disposal Policy in Appendix F (see 

Map 2). Approximately 1,413,913acres are designated as areas to be retained in Federal ownership (see 

Map 2). Nonpublic land will be acquired from willing sellers to the extent possible within WSAs, 

ACECs, SMAs, cultural resource sites, or other areas, as identified, to achieve resource objectives. 

Rights-of-Way 

Under the authority of FLPMA and the Mineral Leasing Act of 1920 (see Appendix B: Acts of Authority 

and Mandates for the BLM), the Socorro Field Office will continue to grant right-of-way leases and 

permits to qualified individuals, businesses, and government entities for use of public land. Right-of-way 

grants will include authorizations for access, utilities and telephone lines, fiber-optic lines, and other 

communication sites. All right-of-way applications will continue to receive environmental review on a 

case-by-case basis and will be coordinated, to the fullest extent possible, with all potentially affected 

interest groups and agencies. 

The Record of Decision for the Westwide Energy Corridor Programmatic Environmental Impact 

Statement (PEIS) designates energy corridors on Federal lands in 11 western states in accordance with the 

Energy Policy Act of 2005. The proposed corridors will facilitate the future siting of energy related 

pipelines and electrical transmission and distribution, while minimizing dispersed impacts to the 

environment. The Socorro RMP has incorporated the applicable decisions from this PEIS. 

Right-of-way exclusion areas are closed to all forms of new right-of-way development, unless mandated 

by law. Right-of-way avoidance areas are areas where future rights-of-way may be granted only when no 

feasible alternative route is available. A plan for managing right-of-way exclusion and avoidance areas is 

provided as part of Appendix F: Land/Minerals Disposal Policy and ROW Exclusion/Avoidance Area 

Plan. Under this RMP, 406,289 acres will be managed as right-of-way exclusion areas and 342,363 acres 

will be managed as right-of-way avoidance areas (see Map 2). Lands identified as exclusion areas are 

within WSAs or Class I VRM areas. Lands identified as avoidance areas are within special designations 
Socorro Resource Management Plan 19 Chapter 2: Management Decisions and Legal Mandates

other than WSAs and in VRM Class II areas. A total of 50 percent of BLM-managed surface land are 

subject to restrictions on right-of-way development (either exclusion or avoidance).

A utility corridor that is generally two miles wide is established along the Interstate 25 corridor (see Map 

2). This corridor was one of the four recommended in the Western Utility Group Study (Michael Clayton 

and Associates, 1992). Applicants requesting new rights-of-way are encouraged to use this corridor. 

The area within a one-half-mile of Highway 380 in Socorro County will be excluded from the 

management decisions identified for the Aplomado Falcon habitat area, including the right-of-way 

exclusion area and closures to fluid mineral leasing and mineral material disposals. 

Withdrawals 

Approximately 11,408 acres of land has been withdrawn from entry under all or some of the land or 

mining laws. In some cases withdrawals may transfer jurisdiction to another Federal agency. Additional 

land with rare or sensitive resources may be identified for withdrawal if criteria are met (see Appendix F: 

Land/Minerals Disposal Policy and ROW Exclusion/Avoidance Area Plan) and will be addressed on a 

case-by-case basis. 

All withdrawals have been or will be reviewed according to the requirements of laws and existing 

guidance. The review is to ensure the reasons for the withdrawals are still valid; concurrence of 

appropriate agency or landowner; and the necessary acreage needed is retained in withdrawn status. All 

unused or unnecessary withdrawals will either be terminated or modified to reduce the affected area. 

Upon revocation or modification of a withdrawal, all or part of the withdrawn land could be restored to 

multiple uses. 
Socorro Resource Management Plan 20 Chapter 2: Management Decisions and Legal Mandates

Map 2
Socorro Resource Management Plan 21 Chapter 2: Management Decisions and Legal Mandates

MINERALS 

Management Goal

Make mineral resources available for development or extraction and encourage development of these resources to 

meet national, regional, and local needs, consistent with national objectives of an adequate supply of minerals at 

market prices. At the same time, strive to assure that mineral development is carried out in a manner that reduces 

environmental impacts and provides for the reclamation of affected land.

Resource and Planning Issues Supporting Management Decisions

Fluid mineral leasing

(Issues 2 and 3)

 1,543,095 acres closed to fluid mineral leasing (which includes 1,418,415 

acres of nondiscretionary closures). 3,035,925 acres will be open to leasing 

with standard terms and conditions; and 1,516,824 acres are open to leasing 

with stipulations in addition to the standard terms and conditions. 

Coal leasing

(Issues 2 and 3)

 Coal leasing may occur on about 3,200 acres in accordance with applicable 

laws subject to surface owner consultation and additional NEPA analysis, 

as appropriate.

Salable minerals

(Issues 2 and 3)

 Exclude 340,066 acres from mineral material disposals in special 

designations. 

Mineral withdrawal

(Issues 1, 2, and 3)

 Manage 11,408 acres currently withdrawn from mineral entry. Petition to 

withdraw 70,869 acres of Federal mineral estate from location and entry 

under the mining laws.

The BLM is responsible for managing all 6 million acres of subsurface Federal mineral estate within the 

Planning Area, including minerals underlying land managed by private, State, and other Federal agencies. 

The BLM coordinates closely with other surface and subsurface owners or managers to ensure surface 

resource issues are considered before Federal surface development or mineral development occurs on 

split estate land. It is BLM policy to make mineral resources available for disposal and to encourage 

development of mineral resources to meet national, regional, and local needs, consistent with the national 

objective of maintaining an adequate supply of minerals at reasonable market prices. In addition, the 

BLM regulates mineral development to reduce environmental impacts in accordance with applicable law. 

Applicable laws are summarized in Appendix B: Acts of Authority and Mandates for the BLM. 

Policy guidance for managing mineral resources is provided in several pieces of legislation as well as 

BLM manuals and handbooks. Many of these are described in Appendix B. The key directives are that 

(1) public land is to be managed for multiple use and (2) if it is determined to be necessary to place 

certain areas under special management, then that management must be the least restrictive necessary to 

protect the resource of concern to ensure that the area remains open to other uses.

Recent instruction memoranda have provided bureau wide guidance regarding management of abandoned 

mine land. These have provided specific instruction for State and field offices to develop work plans for 

abandoned mine land program activities to foster long-range planning for interagency program 

coordination, strategic program support, and budget justifications. In New Mexico, the BLM works 

closely with the abandoned mine lands program in the State Energy Mineral and Natural Resources 

Department to reclaim abandoned mines on public land. 

The planning analysis is based on the reasonably foreseeable development for leasable, locatable, and 

salable minerals, which includes forecasts of future exploration and development activity (BLM 2003g). 

If the actual level of intensity or amount or type of surface disturbance varies substantially from the 

forecasts, the Socorro Field Office may determine it is appropriate to amend the RMP in the future and/or 

prepare additional NEPA documentation to analyze potential impacts of the variation in the forecasts. 
Socorro Resource Management Plan 22 Chapter 2: Management Decisions and Legal Mandates

In accordance with Instruction Memorandum 2005-219, the BLM‘s New Mexico State Office will 

develop work plans for abandoned mine land program activities. Initial plans will cover an extended 

period from Fiscal Year 2007 through Fiscal Year 2013. These plans will determine the extent and type of 

program regarding abandoned mine land that will be carried out in the BLM‘s Planning Area. As noted 

above and contingent upon funding, work will continue to be done according to the Memorandum of 

Understanding between the BLM and the New Mexico Energy, Minerals and Natural Resources 

Department, Abandoned Mine Lands Bureau. 

Leasable Minerals 

Leasable minerals include nonrenewable energy fluid minerals (oil and gas), nonrenewable energy solid 

minerals (coal), and nonrenewable non energy fluid minerals (carbon dioxide and helium). The BLM is 

responsible for managing all leasable Federal mineral estate—approximately 6 million acres in the 

Planning Area—regardless of surface area management or ownership. 

Nondiscretionary closures include land that is closed to fluid mineral leasing for reasons that are beyond 

the discretion of the BLM. In the Planning Area, these closures include all WSAs; the White Sands 

Missile Range and other military installations; National Park Service land; land managed by USFWS and 

NMDGF; and towns, villages, and incorporated cities. 

Approximately 1,543,095 acres of Federal mineral estate will be closed to fluid mineral leasing to protect 

sensitive resources. This includes 1,418,415 acres of Federal mineral estate that is closed nondiscretionarily. Approximately 3,035,925 acres will be open to mineral leasing with standard terms and 

conditions, and 1,516,824 acres will be open to leasing with stipulations in addition to the standard terms 

and conditions. Federal mineral estate underlying surface area managed or owned by private, State, or 

other Federal agencies will be managed in close coordination with the landowners or agencies. 

The Governor of New Mexico has designated a conservation easement at Horse Springs Ranch to protect 

wildlife habitat. Within this Horse Springs Conservation Easement (CE), the New Mexico State Director 

of the BLM maintains the discretion to decline to issue fluid mineral leases on a case-by-case basis. In 

recognition of the particular resource concerns of this CE, the State Director will carefully exercise this 

discretion for any lease proposal in the surface area covered by the CE. Additional details about this 

conservation easement can be found within the Record of Decision for this RMP. 

Existing leases in areas identified as proposed for discretionary closure will not be renewed after the term 

of the lease is complete. Outside of the closures, public land is open to fluid mineral leasing under 

standard terms and conditions established in the lease unless additional stipulations are determined 

necessary to protect resources. A description of standard lease terms and conditions and stipulations are in 

Appendix I: Minerals Management. A total of 496,000 acres will be associated with NM-5, a lease notice 

for lessees in the White Sands Missile Range Evacuation Area (see Appendix I). In areas of split estate, 

the surface owner or manager is responsible for determining strategies to protect surface resources. Fluid 

leasing beneath Federal land other than those administered by the BLM will be subject to land use 

planning determinations and/or withdrawal provisions. Federal mineral estate underlying land managed or 

owned by other entities will be managed by the BLM in accordance with applicable plans and in 

cooperation with the surface owner or manager. Additional NEPA analysis may be required to address 

site-specific considerations related to a proposed action. 

Surface and mineral estate withdrawals, disposals, or BLM development will be restricted within coal 

fields. Coal leasing will occur in accordance with applicable laws in areas identified as potentially 

suitable for coal leasing. 
Socorro Resource Management Plan 23 Chapter 2: Management Decisions and Legal Mandates

A total of about 3,200 acres in the BLM‘s Planning Area have been identified as not unsuitable for coal 

leasing (see Appendix I: Minerals Management). Coal leasing in these areas will occur in accordance with 

applicable laws subject to surface owner consultation and additional NEPA analysis, as appropriate. 

Locatable Minerals 

Locatable mineral resources include metallic minerals (e.g., gold, silver, uranium) and nonmetallic 

minerals (e.g., gemstones, fluorspar, perlite). Unless identified as withdrawn to location and entry under 

the mining laws, public land will be open to mineral exploration and development activities in accordance 

with applicable laws. WSAs are managed for locatable minerals pursuant to 43 CFR 3802. 

A total of 11,408 acres of BLM-administered surface land will continue to be managed as withdrawn 

from mineral entry (see Appendix I: Minerals Management). The BLM will petition to withdraw up to an 

additional 70,869 acres of Federal mineral estate from location and entry under the mining laws as 

follows: a total of 43,952 acres within potential Aplomado Falcon habitat areas; 149 acres within the Fort 

Craig SMA; 23,567 acres of medium and high potential within the Ladron Mountain ACEC; 2,881 acres 

within the Protection Zone of the Zuni Salt Lake ACEC; and an additional 320 acres within The Box 

SRMA. The remainder of public land within the Planning Area is open for mineral entry unless restricted 

by law and policy. 

Salable Minerals 

Salable mineral resources include sand, gravel, limestone, cinders, and building stone. Federal land in the 

Planning Area is an important source of mineral materials for construction projects in the region, 

including sand and gravel, rock and stone, and other fill materials. The Socorro Field Office issues 

Contracts and Free Use Permits for the removal of mineral materials managed under 43 CFR 3600. These 

contracts and permits can be issued for up to 5 years and 200,000 cubic yards of material per year, for a 

total contract quantity of 1 million cubic yards of material. Any material in excess of this quantity must be 

offered through a competitive bid. A mining plan, reclamation plan, and weed management plan are 

required with the contract or permit application, and plans must conform to modern mining and 

reclamation standards. The proposed operation plan is analyzed through the NEPA process with the 

preparation of an environmental assessment. The Socorro Field Office is responsible for inspection and 

enforcement of all contracts and permits. 

The 1989 decision to designate pits for the sale of sand and gravel, consistent with other resources, is

carried forward under this RMP. 

On BLM-administered land, 340,066 acres will be excluded from mineral material disposals, which 

includes all WSAs and other special designations as indicated in Chapter 3: Special Designations. This 

total includes 40,104 acres of potential Aplomado Falcon habitat areas on BLM-managed surface estate 

that will be excluded from mineral material disposals with the exception of public land within 0.5 mile of 

existing highways. The remainder of the BLM‘s jurisdiction will be open for extraction of mineral 

material unless restricted by law or policy. 
Socorro Resource Management Plan 24 Chapter 2: Management Decisions and Legal Mandates

Map 3
Socorro Resource Management Plan 25 Chapter 2: Management Decisions and Legal Mandates

NOXIOUS WEEDS AND IN VASIVE SPECIES 

Executive Order (EO) 13112, Invasive Species; the Federal Noxious Weed Act of 1974; the New Mexico 

Noxious Weed Management Act of 1978; and the Federal Plant Protection Act of 2000 require the 

development of a weed management program. This program focuses on the inventory of existing 

infestations, prevention of noxious weed invasion, monitoring revegetation efforts for invasive weeds, 

and assessment of the success of weed control efforts. 

EO 13112 also requires Federal agencies to: (1) identify actions that may affect invasive species; (2) use 

relevant programs to prevent introduction of invasive species; (3) detect, respond, and control such 

species; (4) monitor invasive species populations; (5) provide for restoration of native species; 

(6) conduct research on invasive species; and (7) promote public education. 

Management of noxious weeds will include: (1) conducting field searches and inventories of invasive and 

noxious weeds throughout the year, (2) preventing the establishment of new infestations by closely 

monitoring newly disturbed and burn areas, (3) using an integrated weed-management approach that 

includes Best Management Practices to prevent and control weed infestations, and (4) developing and 

continuing public outreach programs for invasive and noxious weed management. 

Noxious weed management will continue under the guidelines established in the following governing 

instruments: 

Socorro County Voluntary Noxious Plant Control Program 

Memorandum of Understanding among many parties, including the City of Socorro, Socorro 

County Commissioners, Socorro Soil and Water Conservation District, Natural Resource 

Conservation Service, the BLM, New Mexico Highway Department, New Mexico State Land 

Office, and Cooperative Extension Service 

Assistance Agreement between the Socorro Soil and Water Conservation District and the BLM 

Socorro County‘s Integrated Weed Management Plan for the Control and Management of 

Invasive/Noxious Weeds 

Socorro County‘s Invasive/Noxious Weed Rapid Response Plan 

PALEONTOLOGICAL RESO URCES 

Management Goal

Manage and protect paleontological resources found on public land.

Resource and Planning Issues Supporting Management Decisions

Paleontological Resources

(Issue 5)

Locate and evaluate paleontological resources based on management 

prescriptions by class and potential for occurrence.

The BLM has developed objectives for paleontological resources (BLM Manual 8270, Paleontological 

Resource Management; BLM Handbook H-8270-1, General Procedural Guidance for Paleontological 

Resource Management) to provide protection of the resources. It is the policy of the BLM to manage 

paleontological resources to facilitate research and scientific and/or authorized collection on public land, 

and to avoid or mitigate adverse impacts that could result from other activities. 

The BLM State Office has an assistance agreement with the New Mexico Museum of Natural History and 

Science and the New Mexico Museum of Natural History Foundation to ensure the care, protection, and 
Socorro Resource Management Plan 26 Chapter 2: Management Decisions and Legal Mandates

storage of paleontological resources collected from public land in New Mexico. The museum holds a 

statewide permit with the BLM for the collection of vertebrate fossils from public land. 

The overall objectives for the paleontological resources program are to facilitate scientific, educational, 

and recreational uses of fossils, foster public awareness and appreciation for the area‘s paleontological 

heritage, and manage paleontological values to protect and preserve specimens that are present in the 

Planning Area. The BLM will continue to use existing partnerships and information collected from the 

paleontological collection permits to evaluate the importance of specific areas on public land. 

To achieve resource protection objectives, public land has been assigned to management classes related to 

the potential for paleontological resources based on geology. When surface-disturbing activities are 

proposed, appropriate management prescriptions will be applied for each potentially affected management 

class. Mitigation for proposed actions will be addressed on a case-by-case basis, as needed. 

RANGELAND MANAGEMENT 

Management Goal

Manage the rangeland in an efficient manner by providing effective management on those allotments where it is 

needed most to maintain, improve, and monitor the rangeland health. The program will follow current BLM 

policy, regulation, and law.

Resource and Planning Issues Supporting Management Decisions

Rangeland Management (Issues 

2 and 5)

 Allocate long-term increases in vegetation to wildlife, watershed, and 

livestock. The allocations will usually be 50 percent to wildlife/watershed 

and 50 percent to livestock. 

 Conduct rangeland improvements and vegetation treatments to meet BLM 

policy and resource objectives. 

 Develop allotment management plans to resolve identified resource 

problems or conflicts.

Unallotted Areas (Issue 5)

 Maintain five areas totaling 5,768 acres as unallotted and closed to 

livestock grazing – the Magdalena Administrative Site, the former Cerro 

Colorado Allotment, the former North Horse Mountain Allotment, the 

former Marshall Individual Allotment, and the former San Lorenzo 

Canyon Allotment.

Rangeland management is authorized by FLPMA, the Taylor Grazing Act of 1934, and the Public 

Rangelands Improvement Act of 1978 (see Appendix B). Public rangeland is managed to meet the 

standards of public land health as established in the New Mexico Standards and Guidelines (see Appendix 

H: Rangeland Management). If standards are not being met, the livestock grazing management guidelines 

offer tools to guide the Socorro Field Office in improving those areas. The livestock grazing guidelines 

are to be implemented at the watershed, allotment, or pasture level if it is determined that the standards 

are not being met, and that livestock grazing is the cause. Specific application of these guidelines occurs 

at the field office level in consultation, coordination, and cooperation with lessees, permittees, the 

interested public, and landowners. Guidelines for activities other than livestock grazing are not mandated 

through regulation; however, they may be developed should the need arise. If it is determined that the 

standards are not being met as a result of another activity (e.g., road placement, recreation, etc.), BLM 

resource specialists will determine the appropriate actions to ensure that standards can be met or that 

significant progress can be made towards meeting those standards. 

Under this RMP, no changes are proposed to Animal Unit Months (AUMs), grazing allotments, or other 

grazing management decisions that were established through the East Socorro Grazing EIS and the West 

Socorro Rangeland Management Program EIS. Site-specific Environmental Assessments are ongoing for 

each allotment. (For additional information on the East Socorro Grazing EIS and the West Socorro 
Socorro Resource Management Plan 27 Chapter 2: Management Decisions and Legal Mandates

Rangeland Management Program EIS, refer to Appendix B: Acts of Authority and Mandates for the 

BLM.) 

Long-term increases in forage allocation will be allocated to wildlife, watershed, and livestock based on 

monitoring and other studies to support such increases. The allocations typically will be 50 percent to 

wildlife/watershed and 50 percent to livestock. In addition, the Soaptree SMA (1,296 acres) will be 

managed to enhance the ecosystem, while managing for grazing use. 

All allotments have been placed into one of three management categories based upon the categorization 

criteria (see Appendix H: Rangeland Management). The allotments are prioritized within each 

management category based on similar resource characteristics, management needs, and resource and 

economic potential. However, allotments may be recategorized as additional resource information 

becomes available. 

The three selective management categories are: Maintain (M), Improve (I), and Custodial (C). The ―M‖

category allotments will be managed to maintain the current satisfactory condition. The ―I‖ category 

allotments will be managed intensively to improve unsatisfactory condition and/or to resolve resource 

conflicts. The ―C‖ category allotments will be managed to prevent resource degradation. They have a low 

potential for improved ecological condition, improvement is not economically feasible, and/or current 

management is satisfactory, considering the current resource conditions. Initial categorization will be 46 

―I‖, allotments, 201 ―M‖ allotments, and 5 ―C‖ allotments. 

The first priority for funding new rangeland improvements will be given to those allotments that have 

been identified as not meeting the rangeland standard. The next priority will be given to allotments 

according to their categorization, beginning with ―I‖ category, followed by ―M‖ and ―C‖ categories. On 

―I‖ category allotments that contain crucial wildlife habitat and/or critical watershed, the allocation may 

be greater than 50 percent for wildlife and watershed. Where forage increases occur on allotments with no 

resource problems or conflicts, the allocation of forage to livestock may be greater than 50 percent. Each 

case will be handled individually based on site-specific analysis and to conform to the multiple-use 

objectives of the RMP. 

Contributions for rangeland improvement work in the form of labor, material, equipment, and funding 

will be encouraged, and will be a factor in determining priority ranking for allocating funds. 

Vegetative treatments will be conducted to control the growth and spread of undesirable vegetation or to 

increase the abundance of desirable vegetation. Vegetative treatments could include prescribed fire, 

mechanical treatment by hand (chainsaws) or heavy equipment (chaining, mowing, mulching, grubbing, 

etc.), or chemical treatment. Areas that are potentially suitable for treatment will be analyzed in 

accordance with NEPA. All projects will be consistent with multiple-use objectives and this RMP. 

Allotment management plans will be developed as necessary to resolve identified resource problems or 

conflicts. The level of intensity and the suggested management actions for each allotment management 

plans will vary depending on the problems encountered and the objectives outlined for the allotment. 

Management actions may include proper placement of rangeland improvements, distribution of livestock, 

kind and class of livestock, salting, grazing systems, and vegetative land treatments. These plans will be 

prepared in accordance with Section 8 of the Public Rangeland Improvement Act of 1978, in ―careful and 

considered, consultation, cooperation, and coordination‖ with affected allottees, affected interest and 

other interested parties (target group). Involvement of the target group will be at the request of the 

allottee. The target group consists of landowners, such as the State Land Commissioner or other lessees, 

New Mexico Department of Agriculture, NMDGF, Range Improvement Task Force, Natural Resource 

Conservation Service, the Forest Service, and other interested parties. 
Socorro Resource Management Plan 28 Chapter 2: Management Decisions and Legal Mandates

Allotment management plans will include a grazing system to provide periodic rest to plants from 

livestock grazing. The type of system implemented will be tailored to meet the needs of the allotment and 

will be developed through consultation with the allottee. Consideration will be given to allottee needs, 

level of management, vegetation objectives, the degree and type of resource conflicts, initial costs to 

implement the system, and other factors. 

Grazing allotments within areas identified as potential Aplomado Falcon habitat will be managed for a 

stable or increasing trend in range condition or desired plant community. Monitoring of trend plots will be 

prioritized in the area identified for special management for Aplomado Falcon. 

The 1989 RMP directed the development, review, and revision of allotment management plan; this 

decision as well as the areas that have been closed to livestock grazing will be continue under this RMP. 

The following table shows the area and the acreage closed to grazing. 

Table 3: Areas Closed to Livestock grazing 

Description of Area Acres

Magdalena Administrative Site 1,207

Former Cerro Colorado Allotment 1,456

Former North Horse Mountain Allotment 1,120

Former Marshall Individual Allotment 403

Former San Lorenzo Canyon Allotment 1,072

Acres Unalloted and Closed to Grazing 5,258

Fort Craig 149

Portions of Datil Well Campground 160

Socorro Nature Area 201

Acres Never Allotted 510

Total Acres Closed to Livestock Grazing 5,768

 

Since the implementation of the 1989 RMP, there have been land exchanges involving New Mexico State 

Land and private land. Due to these exchanges, federal Animal Unit Months (AUMs) have changed on 

these allotments to reflect the increase or decrease of public land within the allotment boundary. The 

actual number of livestock has not changed only the percentage of AUMs associated with the change on 

the allotment. Some allotments have been eliminated due to land exchanges involving the exchange of all 

the public land within the allotment. 

Also, other allotments such as the Monte Negro, Blackington Mountain West, and the Stokes Flat 

Allotments were combined with adjoining allotments. This action facilitated grazing management on the 

allotments. An example of this action is The Monte Negro Allotment. The Monte Negro Allotment 

was combined with the Canada Colorado and Canon Alamito Allotments. There was no change of total 

livestock numbers on the allotment. The carrying capacities of the allotments were 73 cattle year long 

(CYL), 47 CYL, and 61 CYL. The total number of cattle that are authorized on the Monte Negro 

Allotment is 181 CYL. The numbers of AUMs authorized on the individual allotments were 720 AUMs, 

480 AUMs, and 720 AUMs in the 1989 RMP for a combined total of 1,920. (Note: The Draft RMP listed

the number of AUMs at 1,929 AUMs. The difference of nine AUMs is due to a change of land tenure. 

The BLM acquired a portion of the State Land within the allotment and this acquisition increased the 

amount of public land and the number of AUMs by nine. The total permitted livestock did not change and 

is still at 181 CYL. The overall carrying capacity was not changed on the allotments but were combined 

and allowed for enhanced grazing management.) 
Socorro Resource Management Plan 29 Chapter 2: Management Decisions and Legal Mandates

RECREATION 

Management Goal

Provide for a wide range of highly desirable recreation experiences commensurate with demand, both nonmotorized and motorized, for visitor and community residents, while protecting other resource values. Manage 

recreational use to protect the health and safety of visitors and resolve user conflicts. Capitalize on the unique 

resources and diverse management situations of the Field Office by providing uncommon recreation opportunities 

and experiences.

Resource and Planning Issues Supporting Management Decisions

Special Recreation

Management Areas (SRMAs)

and other special designations

(Issue 1)

 Designate five SRMAs (The Box, Datil Well, Gordy‘s Hill, Quebradas 

Back Country Byway, Socorro Nature Area) with 12,633 total acres and 

one ACEC (Cerro Pomo) to manage for recreation use. Identify one SMA

(Continental Divide National Scenic Trail) to manage for recreation use.

FLPMA provides for management of outdoor recreation on public land. Section 202(c)(9) calls for land 

use planning consistent with statewide outdoor recreation plans. Other national laws that govern 

recreation management in the BLM‘s Planning Area include the National Trails System Act of 1968, 

Land and Water Conservation Fund of 1964, and Recreation and Public Purposes Act. The BLM‘s 

outdoor recreation program strives to provide a broad spectrum of resource-dependent recreation 

opportunities to meet the needs and demands of the public and visitors; to foster agency-wide efforts to 

improve services to the visiting public; to maintain high-quality recreation facilities to meet public needs 

and enhance the image of the agency; and to improve the public understanding and support of the BLM 

by effectively communicating the agency‘s multiple-use management approach to the recreation visitor. 

Most public land is managed to maintain a freedom of recreational choice with a minimum of regulatory 

constraints. Current management direction for dispersed recreation is provided in 43 CFR 8300 and 

subsequent BLM manuals, guidance, and policy. The BLM‘s Priorities for Recreation and Visitor 

Services are described in the ―Purple Book,‖ dated May 2003, a work plan for fiscal years 2003-2007. 

Extensive Recreation Management Areas (ERMAs) are managed for custodial outcomes where visitor 

health and safety, user conflict and resource protection are emphasized. Where the nature of the resource 

attracts intensive recreational use, public land may be managed as a Special Recreation Management Area 

(SRMA). SRMAs are managed for structured recreation outcomes consisting of activities, experiences, 

and benefits along with the previously mentioned ERMA responsibilities. 

Recreation use in the BLM‘s Planning Area will be managed to protect the health and safety of visitors; 

protect natural, cultural, and other resource values; facilitate public enjoyment of public land; and resolve 

or mitigate user conflicts. The recreation opportunity spectrum provides management objectives for 

different types of recreation settings, and public land will be managed in accordance with those 

classifications (see Appendix E: ROS Definitions and VRM Class Objectives).

The Socorro Field Office issues Special Recreation Permits to authorize certain recreational uses of land 

administered by the BLM. Authority to issue these permits is provided in 43 CFR 2932. Permits are 

issued for competitive events, commercial events, and educational use. Commercial use is recreational 

use of public land for business or financial gain. Competitive use is any formally organized or structured 

use, event, or activity on public land in which there are elements of competition between two or more 

contestants, registration of participants, and/or a predetermined course or area is designated. Competitive 

use also includes individuals contesting an established record such as speed or endurance. Educational use 

is an academic activity sponsored by an accredited institution of learning. The Socorro Field Office will 

continue to issue special recreation permits after appropriate environmental assessments are completed. 
Socorro Resource Management Plan 30 Chapter 2: Management Decisions and Legal Mandates

The BLM will continue to cooperate with other agencies in the management of the El Camino Real de 

Tierra Adentro National Historic Trail in accordance with a comprehensive management plan (National 

Park Service and BLM 2004). As portions of the trail within the BLM‘s Planning Area are verified, they 

will be managed as VRM Class I or II, as prescribed in the El Camino Real de Tierra Adentro National 

Historic Trail Comprehensive Management Plan. That plan provides management guidance for the trail 

and implements the provisions of the National Trail Systems Act, which reflects the public‘s vision for 

the administration and management of the trail. Specifically, trail administration and partners will work 

cooperatively to provide coordinated programming and activities that integrate themes, resources, and 

landscapes at certified sites on private land or protected sites on public land. Resources that best illustrate 

the trail‘s significance will be identified and protected on both public and private land (high-potential 

historic sites and segments). Certification priorities will be assigned to sites and segments that will 

support interpretive and educational programming and protect significant resources (National Park 

Service and BLM 2004). 

Management direction for the Continental Divide National Scenic Trail (CDNST) SMA is administered 

by the Forest Service. The BLM will continue to cooperate with the Forest Service to manage sections of 

the trail within the BLM‘s Planning Area. In June 2007, the Forest Service initiated a Proposed Directive 

for the trail in compliance with the National Trails System Act and Study Report. With regard to OHV 

use on the trail, the following summarizes the management direction for the trail: 

A CDNST segment may be located only on a road (16 USC 1244 (5)) where the following 

conditions are met: (a) the road is primitive in nature and offers a recreation experience not 

materially different in quality than that extended by a bona fide hiking and equestrian trail; (b) an 

affirmative determination has been made that motor vehicle use would not substantially interfere 

with the nature and purposes of the CDNST; and (c) motor vehicle use would not constitute a 

safety hazard to hikers-pedestrians and equestrians. 

Motor vehicle use may be allowed on trail segment (16 USC 1246 (c)) of the CDNST: (a) if 

necessary to meet emergencies; (b) to enable land adjacent landowners or land users to have 

reasonable access to their lands or where there are valid existing rights; and (c) on a designated 

motor vehicle route that crosses the CDNST where an affirmative determination has been made 

that such use would not substantially interfere with the nature and purpose of the CDNST. Motor 

vehicle use must also be allowed by the overall management direction for the land management 

plan area. 

Motor vehicle use will be allowed on the a trail segment (16 USC 1246(c)) of the CDNST where 

the following conditions are met: (a) an affirmative determination has been made that motor 

vehicle use would not substantially interfere with the nature and purpose of CDNST; and 

(b) motor vehicle use was allowed by administrative regulations on a National Forest System 

travel route that was developed prior to November 10, 1978, which is the time of designation of 

the CDNST by Public Law 95-625. 

To manage and protect recreational resources, five SRMAs and one ACEC are designated and one SMA 

is identified, as listed below: 

The Box SRMA (1,107 acres) – Manage to enhance the areas unique recreational values, 

primarily rock climbing and bouldering, maintain the scenic quality and ensure protection for 

cultural sites as well as Desert Bighorn Sheep and bats and their habitats. 

Datil Well SRMA (669 acres) – Manage to provide recreation opportunities (including day use, 

camping, and group outings), basic services including visitor safety and comfort, facility and 

grounds maintenance, coordination of employee and volunteer schedules and projects, and 

development and implementation of interpretation and environmental education programs. 
Socorro Resource Management Plan 31 Chapter 2: Management Decisions and Legal Mandates

Gordy‘s Hill SRMA (7,647 acres) – Manage for recreation uses, including OHV, races, and group 

events. 

Quebradas Back country Byway SRMA (area within 0.25 mile of the Byway, or a total of 

3,130 acres) – Manage for a variety of recreation opportunities and experiences such as driving 

for pleasure, high scenic quality, geologic sightseeing, interpretation and environmental 

education, mountain biking, and access to hiking areas such as Presilla and Sierra de Las Cañas 

WSAs with an emphasis on the development of interpretation opportunities. 

Socorro Nature Area SRMA (80 acres) – Manage for recreational use and to provide 

environmental education and interpretation opportunities; experiences will be primarily 

picnicking, hiking, sightseeing in Bosque Habitat, access to the Rio Grande, camping, and 

mountain biking. 

Cerro Pomo ACEC (28,248 acres, includes the former Mogollon Pueblo SMA) – Manage to 

protect unique geologic features, paleontological resources, cultural resources, and high scenic 

quality while preserving appropriate recreation opportunities. 

Continental Divide National Scenic Trail SMA (59,434 acres) – Manage to meet the objectives of 

the enabling legislation, establish and maintain a trail route through the Planning Area that will 

meet up with trail routes to the south and the north, and provide a long distance trail hiking 

experience for the users. 

ACECs, SRMAs, and SMAs are shown on Map 4, and further information on management of specially 

designated areas is provided in Chapter 3: Special Designations. Protection of primitive recreation 

resources is noted as a management concern in the Cerro Pomo ACEC, Ladron Mountain-Devil‘s 

Backbone Complex ACEC, and Pelona Mountain ACEC.

The Continental Divide National Scenic Trail will be managed for recreational use and to protect scenic 

values on the 34 miles of its length within the BLM‘s Planning Area. Trail corridors will be identified and 

legal access acquisition in the Pie Town and Quemado areas pursued to the extent possible from willing 

sellers. Acquisition of legal access will facilitate establishing an unbroken trail route throughout the state. 

RENEWABLE ENERGY 

In December 2005, the BLM published a Record of Decision for Implementation of a Wind Energy 

Program and Associated Land Use Plans. This project is a part of the BLM‘s National Energy Policy 

Implementation Plan, an outgrowth of the President‘s National Energy Policy, which addresses both 

renewable and nonrenewable energy sources. Under the proposed action of the Final Programmatic EIS, 

the BLM has developed a Wind Energy Development Program to establish comprehensive policies and 

Best Management Practices for wind energy development, including right-of-way authorizations, on 

BLM-managed land. The Socorro Planning Area was identified in the EIS as having a low potential for 

wind energy development. However, the policies, guidance, and procedures contained in the Record of 

Decision will be applied to guide development of any future wind energy project that may occur in areas 

under the Socorro Field Office‘s jurisdiction. 

Renewable energy projects may be proposed on BLM-managed land in the future. These applications will 

undergo site-specific environmental analysis as part of the right-of-way or commercial lease process. 

Where applicable, any proposed project could be tiered from the Final Programmatic EIS on Wind 

Energy Development. The policies, Best Management Practices, and programmatic mitigation identified 

in the Record of Decision will also apply to any proposed wind energy project in the Socorro Field Office 

Planning Area. The location of any potential wind energy projects will be determined by the wind 

resource level and by the location of avoidance and exclusion areas. 
Socorro Resource Management Plan 32 Chapter 2: Management Decisions and Legal Mandates

There is potential for future harvesting of woodland products on public land for biomass-fueled power 

generation. If such a project is proposed, it will undergo a site-specific environmental analysis as part of 

the project development process. 

SOIL AND WATER RESOURCES 

Soil Management Goals

Manage uses to minimize and mitigate disturbances to soils and loss of soil sediments from erosion. Maintain soil 

stability to protect soil ecological health and long-term productivity.

Water Resources Management Goals

Manage uses to maintain or improve overall watershed health by maximizing infiltration for groundwater

recharge. Manage uses to maintain or improve surface water quality in watersheds, and watersheds that affect 

streams that are listed as water quality limited under the Clean Water Act, Section 303 (d). Manage resources to 

maintain or reduce salinity loading in accomplishing the goals and objectives outlined in the Colorado River

Salinity Control Act.

Surface Water Management Goals

Maintain and enhance the existing beneficial uses of surface water and protect the function of watersheds for 

habitat, grazing, and other ecological needs.

Resource and Planning Issues Supporting Management Decisions

Watershed Rehabilitation 

(Issue 2)

 Identify Puertecito and Stallion SMAs to manage use and activities in 

critical watersheds. Designate Zuni Salt Lake ACEC to protect resources 

associated with Zuni Salt Lake. 

 Balance commodity production while providing for the attainment and 

maintenance of good watershed health, and proper functioning 

conditions. 

 Rehabilitate areas identified as priority areas through Standard 

Assessments, and site-specific analysis will be completed.

Water Quantity 

All water rights are acquired in accordance with New Mexico substantive and procedural law, except 

where Congress or the Executive Branch has created a Federal reservation with a reserved water right. 

Surface water rights in New Mexico are based upon the principles of beneficial use and first 

appropriation, meaning that water rights are ranked in priority according to first beneficial use and all 

unappropriated water belongs to the State. The New Mexico Office of the State Engineer (State Engineer) 

administers water rights for the use of ground and surface water in New Mexico. To ensure orderly 

development of groundwater resources, the State Engineer designates groundwater basins as declared or 

undeclared. Within a declared groundwater basin, an application to appropriate groundwater must be filed 

with and approved by the State Engineer. In an undeclared groundwater basin, water is not appropriated 

and wells may be drilled without approval from the State Engineer. The State Engineer assists the court in 

the determination of surface water rights and administers water conservation programs. 

Water Quality 

The Clean Water Act is the primary law in controlling water quality (see Appendix B: Acts of Authority 

and Mandates for the BLM), and provides instream water quality standards and maximum permissible 

pollution discharge levels. In New Mexico, water quality authority is vested in the New Mexico Water 

Quality Control Commission and primarily administered by the various units of the NMED. Surface 

water quality standards are established by NMED and approved by the Environmental Protection Agency. 

Under Section 401 of the Clean Water Act, the State can deny certification of Federal permits based on 

anticipated water quality impacts. The BLM manages its resources to ensure that development practices 

comply with State water quality standards. 
Socorro Resource Management Plan 33 Chapter 2: Management Decisions and Legal Mandates

The BLM partners with New Mexico to control nonpoint-source pollution in accordance with the State‘s 

Nonpoint Source Management Program (NMED 1999), which emphasizes the improvement of water 

quality in degraded stream systems. A memorandum of understanding between the BLM and the State of 

New Mexico confirms that the BLM is the agency designated by the State of New Mexico for the 

reduction of nonpoint-source pollution on and from public land. This RMP is the primary document 

establishing the BLM‘s compliance with the New Mexico nonpoint-source program. In the past, the 

Socorro Field Office has met this obligation by committing to specific watershed management programs 

and by a general policy of preventing excess erosion and sediment transport off public land. Nonpointsource pollution is seen as optimally controlled by a spectrum of Best Management Practices as 

prescribed by the Clean Water Act (see Appendix C: Best Management Practices).

Riparian restoration in New Mexico, where not driven by the Endangered Species Act, is accomplished 

primarily under a variety of State-regulated Clean Water Act programs. The BLM is a major independent 

contributor to Clean Water Act-related restoration projects. Riparian sites must meet the riparian standard 

as outlined in the New Mexico Standards and Guidelines. Standards of land health are expressions of 

physical and biological condition or degree of function required for healthy and sustainable lands, and 

defines minimum resource conditions that must be achieved. Public land will be assessed to determine if 

the land is meeting the standard, moving toward the standard, or not achieving or moving toward the 

standard. Assessments will rely on the best data and information available. The standards for the Field 

Office are described in Appendix H: Rangeland Management, and include the upland, riparian, and biotic 

standard. These standards apply to all resource uses on public land. 

Soils and Watershed 

The BLM‘s soil and watershed program emphasizes preventing or avoiding further degradation of soil 

and water resources, and managing for their conservation. The program supports and influences, and is 

influenced by other resource programs (i.e., range management, vegetation, and habitat). Policy and 

guidance for the management of both soil and water resources associated with land administered by the 

BLM are provided in Manual Sections 7000 and 7100. 

The BLM will continue to monitor and assess public land health in accordance with the New Mexico 

Standards and Guidelines (see Appendix B: Acts of Authority and Mandates for the BLM). As part of the 

implementation of the New Mexico Standards and Guidelines, we will monitor and restrict surfacedisturbing activities on land where potential erosion is a critical concern, and to reduce erosion on 

allotments. 

The BLM‘s general policy of preventing excess erosion and sediment transport off public land would be 

realized primarily through the implementation of Best Management Practices (see Appendix C: Best 

Management Practices). In addition, the BLM will continue the 1989 RMP decision to control water 

runoff by constructing detention dams, diversions, water spreaders, weirs, and wire checks as needed to 

reduce erosion. 

Special Management Areas 

Two SMAs will be managed in critical watersheds to balance commodity production with the attainment 

and maintenance of good watershed health and proper functioning conditions. The SMAs are: 
Socorro Resource Management Plan 34 Chapter 2: Management Decisions and Legal Mandates

Puertecito SMA (7,156 acres) 

Stallion SMA (10,883 acres) 

SMAs are shown on Map 4, and further information on management of specially designated areas is 

provided in Chapter 3: Special Designations. In addition, watershed rehabilitation activities will be 

identified through assessment of the New Mexico Standards and Guidelines. 

SPECIAL DESIGNATIONS 

ACEC Management Goals

Identify and designate areas on public land where special management attention is required to protect and prevent 

irreparable damage to important historic, cultural, paleontological, or scenic values, fish and wildlife resources, or 

other natural system or processes, or to protect life and safety from natural hazards.

Agua Fria ACEC

(Issues 1 and 6)

 Eliminate the Agua Fria ACEC and incorporate the area into the Cerro Pomo

ACEC.

Cerro Pomo ACEC

(Issues 1 and 6)

 Designate 28,248 acres as the Cerro Pomo ACEC for protection and 

management of recreational, cultural, and other resources. 

Horse Mountain ACEC

(Issue 1 and 5)

 Designate 5,388 acres as Horse Mountain ACEC for the protection and 

management of wildlife habitat and recreational resources.

Ladron MountainDevil‘s Backbone

Complex ACEC

(Issues 1 and 5)

 Designate 57,474 acres as Ladron Mountain-Devil‘s Backbone Complex ACEC

for the protection and management of wildlife habitat, scenic resources and 

cultural resources. 

Mockingbird Gap ACEC

(Issues 1 and 6)

 Manage 8,685 acres as the Mockingbird Gap Proprietary ACEC for the 

protection and management of cultural resources.

Pelona Mountain ACEC

(Issues 1 and 5)

 Designate 51,091 acres as the Pelona Mountain ACEC for the protection and 

management of wildlife habitat, recreation, and other resources.

Sawtooth ACEC

(Issues 1 and 5)

 Designate 125 acres as the Sawtooth Proprietary ACEC to protect and manage 

special status plants.

Zuni Salt Lake ACEC

(Issues 1, 3, 5, and 6)

 Designate 46,746 acres as the Zuni Salt Lake ACEC for the protection and 

management of cultural resources, sacred sites, and hydrologic resources. 

Total  Propose a total of 197,757 acres of BLM-managed surface estate for designation 

as ACECs.

Back Country Byway Management Goals

Provide back country areas where people can drive for pleasure to experience scenic corridors and a variety of 

outdoor activities.

SMA Management Goals

Identify and designate areas on public land that requires special management by the BLM to protect one or more 

resource values. SMAs may include nonpublic land that the BLM wishes to acquire or bring under a Cooperative 

Management Agreement to manage the valued resource better.

Continental Divide 

National Scenic Trail

SMA

(Issues 1 and 4)

 Designate 59,434 acres as the Continental Divide National Scenic Trail SMA

and establish corridors to pursue legal access (from willing sellers) in the Pie 

Town and Quemado areas.

Fort Craig SMA

(Issues 1 and 6)

 Manage 149 acres as the Fort Craig SMA to protect, preserve, and interpret the 

Fort Craig Historical Site.

Newton Site SMA

(Issues 1 and 6)

 Designate 6,789 acres as the Newton Site Proprietary SMA for the protection 

and management of cultural resources.

Playa Pueblos SMA

(Issues 1 and 6)

 Identify 203 acres as the Playa Pueblos Proprietary SMA to protect cultural 

resources.

Puertecito SMA

(Issues 1 and 2 )

 Manage 7,156 acres as the Puertecito SMA for the management of critical 

watershed.
Socorro Resource Management Plan 35 Chapter 2: Management Decisions and Legal Mandates

San Pedro SMA

(Issue 1)

 Manage 1,201 acres as the San Pedro Proprietary SMA for the protection of 

special status plants.

Soaptree SMA

(Issues 1 and 2)

 Manage 1,296 acres as the Soaptree SMA for the protection and management of 

vegetation resources.

Stallion SMA

(Issues 1 and 2 )

 Designate 10,883 acres as the Stallion SMA for the management of watershed

resources. 

Teypama/Penjeacu SMA

(Issues 1 and 6)

 Designate 11 acres as the Penjeacu SMA for the protection and management of 

cultural resources.

Total  Identify a total of 85,351 acres of BLM-managed surface estate as SMAs.

SRMA Management Goals

Provide opportunities for a variety of outdoor recreation opportunities in designated areas while protecting other 

resources.

The Box SMA/SRMA

(Issue 1)

 Designate 1,107 acres as The Box SRMA for the protection and management of 

recreation, wildlife, and cultural resources.

Datil Well SRMA/SMA

(Issue 1)

 Designate 669 acres including the campground as the Datil Well SRMA for the 

protection and management of recreation and cultural resources.

Gordy‘s Hill SRMA

(Issues 1 and 4)

 Designate 7,647 acres as the Gordy‘s Hill SRMA for management of 

recreational uses, including OHV.

Quebradas Back Country 

Byway SRMA

(Issues 1 and 4)

 Designate 24 miles of road and 3,130 acres as the Quebradas Back Country 

Byway SRMA for management of recreation and scenic resources.

Socorro Nature Area

(Issue 1)

 Designate 80 acres as the Socorro Nature Area SRMA for protection and 

management of recreation resources and environmental education purposes.

Total  Designate a total of 12,633 acres of BLM-managed surface estate as SRMAs.

Trail Management Goals

Provide a variety of diverse motorized and non-motorized opportunities along trails, which may include 

recreational, scenic, historic or cultural values.

WSA Management Goals

Manage WSAs in accordance with the Interim Policy and Management Guidelines for Lands Under Wilderness

Review. Manage WSAs in a manner that does not impair their suitability for designation as wilderness; subject to 

valid existing rights.

WSAs

(Issue 1)

 Manage all 13 WSAs totaling 291,826 acres according to the Interim 

Management Policy. Any WSAs released from wilderness review would be 

managed as described below. 
Socorro Resource Management Plan 36 Chapter 2: Management Decisions and Legal Mandates

Map 4
Socorro Resource Management Plan 37 Chapter 2: Management Decisions and Legal Mandates

TRANSPORTATION AND T RAVEL MANAGEMENT 

Management Goal

Manage OHV use to protect resource values, promote public safety, provide OHV use opportunities where 

appropriate, and minimize conflicts among various users. Address all resource use aspects and accompanying 

modes and conditions of access and travel across public land; including motorized, non-motorized, and 

mechanized forms of travel.

Resource and Planning Issues Supporting Management Decisions

OHV Area Designations

(Issues 2 and 4)

 Designate 117,921 acres as closed to motorized travel; 486,842 acres as 

limited to existing routes; and 902,782 acres limited to designated routes. 

No public land will be designated as open to cross-country travel.

Routes Designations 

within WSAs

(Issues 1, 2, and 4)

 Designate 79.25 miles of routes as open, 76.75 miles as closed (except for 

authorized uses), and 98.38 miles as closed and rehabilitated within 

WSAs.

Route closures outside of 

WSAs (Issues 2 and 4)

 Close approximately 26 miles of routes outside of WSAs to address 

wildlife concerns 

The policy set forth in 43 CFR 8340 provides for OHV use as a legitimate activity on public land 

wherever it is compatible with other resource management objectives. Additional policy guidance, 

definitions, and other information on OHV designations are provided in Appendix J: OHV Areas and 

Route Designations. 

Management direction associated with access typically is intended to enhance land management and 

protect unique resources or values where the BLM determines it necessary. Guidance for OHV 

designations in the land use planning process is provided in Appendix C of BLM Handbook H-1601-1, 

Land Use Planning Handbook. BLM Handbook 9113 – Roads provides guidelines and standards for the 

construction and maintenance of transportation system roads on public land. 

OHV use will be managed in accordance with applicable laws, which include the designation of areas that 

are open, limited, or closed to OHV use. Additionally, 43 CFR 8341 prohibits the operation of an off-road 

vehicle (now referred to as an off-highway vehicle, or OHV) in violation of state laws and regulations 

relating to use, standards, registration, operation, and inspection of off-road vehicles. To the extent that 

state laws and regulations do not exist or are less stringent, the regulations in this part are controlling. The 

State of New Mexico passed legislation to require registration of OHV, successful completion an offhighway vehicle safety training course by persons under age 18, and provide regulations for safe 

operation of OHVs including requiring the use of safety helmets. 

Designation of OHV Areas 

Cross-country use is permitted in areas designated as open for such travel; however, undue and 

unnecessary degradation of resources is not permitted on any area of public land under 43 CFR 8340. 

Exceptions may be made to OHV designations to accommodate emergency or permitted or authorized 

uses. This use is allowed for by the regulations governing OHV operations on public land. An off-road 

vehicle or OHV is defined by 43 CFR 8340.05 as any motorized vehicle capable of, or designed for travel 

on or immediately over land, water, or other natural terrain, excluding (1) any non amphibious registered 

motorboat; (2) any military, fire, emergency, or law enforcement vehicle while being used for emergency 

purposes; (3) any vehicle whose use is expressly authorized by the authorized officer, or otherwise 

officially approved or permitted; (4) vehicles in official use by administering agencies such as the BLM 

or other agency; and (5) any combat or combat support vehicle when used in times of national defense 

emergencies. 
Socorro Resource Management Plan 38 Chapter 2: Management Decisions and Legal Mandates

All public land is required to be designated for OHV use (43 CFR 8342.1). Areas must be classified as 

open, limited, or closed to motorized travel activities. These designations are shown on the maps in 

Appendix J: OHV Areas and Route Designations, along with the definitions for these designations. As 

shown in Map 5, 486,842 acres will be limited to existing routes, 902,782 acres will be limited to 

designated routes, and 117,921 acres will be closed to motorized travel (for definitions, see Appendix J: 

OHV Areas and Route Designations). No public land is designated as open to cross-country travel. 

Route Designations 

A travel management network within the 13 WSAs is identified in this RMP. Throughout all WSAs, 

about 79 miles of routes will be open to motorized travel, 98 miles will be closed for rehabilitation, 77 

miles will be available for authorized uses only, and 175 miles will be closed. See Table 4. 

Table 4: Route Designations in Wilderness Study Areas 

Wilderness Study Area Open Closed 

(Rehabilitate)

Closed

(Authorized Use Only) Total Closed

Antelope 4.00 10.50 4.50 15.00

Continental Divide 23.00 12.50 26.50 39.00

Devil‘s Backbone 0.00 5.00 3.50 8.50

Devil‘s Reach 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Eagle Peak 21.00 16.50 13.00 29.50

Horse Mountain 0.00 7.00 1.50 8.50

Jornada del Muerto 9.75 2.50 2.75 5.25

Mesita Blanca 4.00 6.50 3.00 9.50

Presilla 0.00 11.00 0.00 11.00

Sierra de Las Cañas 0.00 0.38 0.25 0.63

Sierra Ladrones 15.50 9.00 15.25 24.25

Stallion 2.00 6.00 11.00 17.00

Veranito 0.00 6.50 2.50 9.00

Totals 79.25 93.38 83.75 177.13

NOTE: Maps are included in Appendix J. 

Maps of route designations are provided for each WSA in Appendix J: OHV Areas and Route 

Designations. Cross-country motorized travel will not be permitted within WSAs, nor will motorized 

travel on unauthorized routes. Outside of WSAs, travel will be managed and planned as described below. 

In addition, approximately 26 miles of routes outside areas with special designations will be closed to 

address wildlife concerns (see Wildlife, Riparian Habitat, and Special Status Species). Where impacts to 

other resources are occurring as a result of roads or vehicle use, additional miles of roads could be closed 

as necessary to protect or recover resources. 

Future Travel Management Planning 

Appendix C of H-1601-1, Land Use Planning Handbook, states that a defined travel management network 

must be completed during the development of the land use plan to the extent practical. If it is not practical 

to define or delineate the travel management network during the land use planning process, a preliminary 

network must be identified and a process established to select a final travel management network. During 

the planning process for this RMP, a definitive route inventory and route designation could not be 

completed except in the WSAs. The current route network is shown on Map 3-14 of the Proposed 

RMP/Final EIS. Until the final travel management network is established, motorized travel will be limited 

to designated routes within the BLM‘s Planning Area as defined by Map 3-14, unless specifically 

identified otherwise within this RMP. It should be noted that mountain bikes and other mechanized 
Socorro Resource Management Plan 39 Chapter 2: Management Decisions and Legal Mandates

modes will be regulated as OHVs or other motorized uses in this plan. Mechanized modes (i.e., mountain 

bikes, wagons, wheeled-game carriers) and designations will be further defined in upcoming travel 

management planning for the Socorro Field Office in collaboration with user and interest groups. 

Preliminary travel management plan networks will be developed for areas outside of WSAs within 5 

years of the Record of Decision for this RMP (contingent upon available funding and staff resources). 

Priority areas for completing these travel management plans are as follows: (1) Gordy‘s Hill, (2) ACECs, 

(3) SRMAs, (4) SMAs, and (5) all other BLM-managed land. 
Socorro Resource Management Plan 40 Chapter 2: Management Decisions and Legal Mandates

Map 5
Socorro Resource Management Plan 41 Chapter 2: Management Decisions and Legal Mandates

VEGETATION (INCLUDIN G SPECIAL STATUS SPECIES) 

Management Goal

Achieve healthy, productive, and sustainable upland and riparian communities within the capability of a site 

through Best Management Practices and appropriate public use. Vegetation will be managed to achieve the type, 

amount, and/or pattern of vegetation that minimizes erosion and assists in meeting rangeland health standards and 

State and Tribal water quality standards. Desired conditions for upland plant communities include soils that are 

stabilized and exhibit infiltration and permeability rates that are appropriate for the soil type, climate, and 

landform. Riparian vegetation will be managed to achieve a diverse age and structural composition that 

withstands high stream flows, captures sediment, recharges groundwater, and provides high-quality habitat for 

wildlife.

Resource and Planning Issues Supporting Management Decisions

Vegetation Condition (Issue 2)

 Manage plant communities to achieve multiple use goals and meet or 

move toward the upland standard.

 Manage some special status species through special designations

Desired Plant Community

(Issue 2)

 Identify desired plant community based on ecological sites for plant 

community involved when developing activity plans to meet resource 

objectives.

Special Status Species

(Issues 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5)

 Designate one ACEC (Sawtooth) and identify two SMAs (San Pedro and 

Soaptree) to manage for protection of special status species.

All BLM activities are expected to meet the New Mexico Standards and Guidelines (see Appendix B: 

Acts of Authority and Mandates for the BLM). These standards describe conditions needed for healthy 

sustainable public land and must be maintained by all users of the public land. They provide the measures 

of resource quality, condition, or function by which public land health will be assessed. These standards 

describe the conditions needed for healthy public land under three categories: upland sites, biotic 

communities, and riparian sites. In accordance with BLM policy, the Socorro Field Office must evaluate 

activities on public land against indicators developed for each standard. 

For example, standards for riparian sites indicate that these areas should be in a ―productive, properly 

functioning, and sustainable condition, within the capability of that site‖ and should consist of ―adequate 

vegetation of diverse age and composition.‖ Indicators for these standards include factors that determine 

stream channel morphology and stability, streambank stability, and structural diversity of vegetation. 

Guidelines are either activity-specific or use-specific. Guidelines for livestock grazing are management 

tools, methods, strategies, and techniques designed to maintain or achieve standards. If current grazing 

practices prevent an area from moving toward or reaching the standard, then the livestock guidelines will 

be used. When activities other than grazing are determined to be the factor in an area not moving toward 

or reaching the standard, then the BLM uses existing policy and manuals from its programs to implement 

corrective practices. 

Objectives for vegetation management are established in the Socorro Field Office and are described in 

general terms as kinds, types, amount, or appearance of vegetation that will provide the goods, values, 

and services needed in a geographic area. Specific objectives for monitoring, resource objectives, and 

management of sensitive areas are developed at the activity plan level (e.g., allotment management plan, 

habitat management plan, fire management plan, etc.). The ecological site descriptions will provide the 

template for determining the appropriate amount, type, and distribution of vegetation reflecting the 

desired plant community. 
Socorro Resource Management Plan 42 Chapter 2: Management Decisions and Legal Mandates

The standard practices that will be employed to meet vegetation objectives are as follows: 

Maintain average utilization levels at or below 50 percent of annual production of key species. 

Construct projects such as fences, water developments, and erosion control structures. 

Implement grazing management treatments such as changes in season of use, class of livestock, 

or stocking rates. 

Implement vegetation treatments, including prescribed fire, fuelwood sales, or chemical or 

mechanical treatments. 

Plant communities will be managed to achieve multiple-use goals and to meet or move towards the 

upland, riparian, or biotic standard (for definitions, see Appendix H: Rangeland Management). The 

desired plant community will be identified based on ecological sites for the plant communities that are 

involved when developing activity plans to meet resource objectives. The goal of defining a desired plant 

community is to obtain the specific plant community that is possible on a site (defined by climate, soil 

type, and landform) to best meet a management plan‘s objectives, considering all the potential values and 

uses for that site (Council for Agricultural Science and Technology 1996). In all cases, an ecological site 

must be capable of attaining the desired plant community through natural succession, management action, 

or both. 

Generally, special status plants would be managed through (1) conducting inventory and survey and 

(2) acquiring access for management purposes. 

One ACEC and two SMAs are designated to protect special-status plant species: 

Sawtooth Proprietary ACEC (125 acres) – manage to protect the Zuni fleabane, a federally listed 

species. 

San Pedro Proprietary SMA (1,201 acres) – manage to protect Fugate‘s Blue Star (special status 

plant species). 

Soaptree SMA (1,296 acres) – manage to protect the soaptree yucca ecosystem. 

ACECs and SMAs are shown on Map 4, and further information on management of specially designated 

areas is provided in Chapter 3: Special Designations.

VISUAL RESOURCES 

Management Goal

Maintain the Visual Resource Management (VRM) database and the quality of visual values in accordance with 

VRM class objectives.

Resource and Planning 

Issues

Supporting Management Decisions

VRM Classes

(Issue 5)

Manage 28,533 acres as Class I; 520,024 acres as Class II; 448,910 acres as 

Class III; and the remaining 509,432 acres as Class IV.

The BLM has developed a comprehensive system for visual resource management (VRM) for the purpose 

of carrying out NEPA- and FLPMA-prescribed visual management objectives and preserving the natural 

scenic quality of Federal land. The BLM‘s policy, described in BLM Manual Section 8400 – Visual 

Resource Management, is that the BLM has a basic stewardship responsibility to identify and protect 

visual values on all BLM-managed public land. 
Socorro Resource Management Plan 43 Chapter 2: Management Decisions and Legal Mandates

BLM Handbook H-8410-1, Visual Resources Inventory, provides additional guidance on managing visual 

resources. The inventory consists of a scenic quality evaluation, a visual sensitivity level analysis, and a 

delineation of distance zones. Based on these three factors, BLM-administered land is placed into one of 

four visual resource inventory classes (Appendix E: ROS Definitions and VRM Class Objectives). 

VRM classes have been applied to all land within the BLM‘s Planning Area. The acreage associated with 

the different management classes will vary, as described for each alternative. VRM classes acknowledge 

existing visual contrasts. More restrictive requirements will not be retroactively applied to existing 

projects should VRM classifications change as a result of this planning effort. New proposals will be 

managed to meet the intent of the VRM designations determined by this plan. Visual design 

considerations will be incorporated into all surface-disturbing projects regardless of size or potential 

impact and is a management responsibility shared by all resource management programs. 

Existing VRM inventory data was used in this plan that is similar to that used in the 1989 RMP (dated 

between 1979 and 1988). Additional data will be collected for activity-level planning and VRM could be 

updated in certain areas in the future through implementation of activity plans. 

Portions of the El Camino Real de Tierra Adentro National Historic Trail that are BLM-administered land 

within the Planning Area will continue to be managed as VRM Class I or II, as prescribed in the El 

Camino Real de Tierra Adentro National Historic Trail Comprehensive Management Plan and Final EIS. 

Under this RMP, 28,533 acres (2 percent of the surface area managed by the BLM) would be managed as 

VRM Class I; 520,024 acres (36 percent) as Class II; and 448,910 acres (28 percent) as Class III. The 

remaining 509,432 acres (34 percent) would be managed as Class IV (see Map 6). 
Socorro Resource Management Plan 44 Chapter 2: Management Decisions and Legal Mandates

Map 6
Socorro Resource Management Plan 45 Chapter 2: Management Decisions and Legal Mandates

WILD HORSES 

The Wild and Free-Roaming Horse and Burro Act of 1971 (Public Law 92-195) requires the BLM to 

protect and manage wild horses in the areas where they were found at the time of the Act, in a manner 

designed to achieve a thriving natural ecological balance in keeping with the multiple-use management 

concept of the public land. A wild horse or burro herd area is the public land identified as having been 

used by a herd as its habitat at the time of the passage of the Wild and Free-Roaming Horse and Burro 

Act. A herd management area (HMA) is that portion of a herd area identified for maintenance or 

management of wild horses or burros. The BLM manages wild horses and burros in designated herd areas 

as free-roaming, self-sustaining populations that contain the optimum number of animals in a thriving 

natural ecological balance with other multiple-use resource components. This is determined through a 

manageability determination based on monitoring, research, and analysis of resource use. 

The Bordo Atravesado Wild Horse Herd Management Area will be managed pursuant to decisions 

established in the Herd Management Area Plan. 

WILDERNESS CHARACTERISTICS 

The Wilderness Act of 1964, Section 2(c), defines wilderness as undeveloped Federal land in natural 

condition having outstanding opportunities or solitude or primitive and unconfined recreation. These three 

requirements (naturalness, opportunity for solitude, or opportunity for primitive and unconfined 

recreation), are wilderness characteristics. 

Naturalness measures the degree to which an area has been primarily affected by the forces of natures 

with the imprint of man‘s work substantially unnoticeable. Evidence of man‘s work includes travel routes 

or trails, fences, or other landscape modifications. Naturalness is further characterized by the presence of 

native vegetation communities and the degree to which the area contributes to the connectivity of habitats. 

Of the final two characteristics, opportunities for solitude or primitive and unconfined recreation, only 

one must be present (although both may be present.) Solitude is the state of being alone or remote from 

others. Primitive and unconfined recreation is defined by the BLM as non-motorized and non-developed 

types of recreation activities. 

WSAs will continue to be managed in accordance with the Interim Management Policy and Guidelines 

for Lands Under Wilderness Review until an area is either added to the National Wilderness Preservation 

System by Congress or released from further consideration. The purpose of the BLM‘s 1995 Interim 

Management Policy is to protect existing wilderness values, and manage valid existing rights and 

grandfathered activities until final wilderness suitability determinations have been made. If an area is 

designated as wilderness, it will be managed in accordance with the Wilderness Act of 1964 and the 

BLM‘s Wilderness Management Regulations (43 CFR 6300 and manual 8560). 

Section 603 of FLPMA authorized the BLM to classify and recommend suitable BLM land as Wilderness 

Study Areas. As of 1993, the BLM no longer has the authority to designate new WSAs administratively 

or manage additional land under the non-impairment standard prescribed by Section 603 of FLPMA. 

In accordance with Instruction Memorandum 2003-275 – Change 1 Consideration of Wilderness 

Characteristics in Land-Use Plans, wilderness characteristics may be protected administratively. These 

administrative methods may include: 

the establishment of VRM classifications to guide the consideration of proposals that will adversely 

affect wilderness characteristics or guide the placement of roads, trails, and other facilities 
Socorro Resource Management Plan 46 Chapter 2: Management Decisions and Legal Mandates

protective conditions of use on permits, leases, or other use authorizations 

designating land as open, closed, or limited to OHV use 

 If appropriate, the BLM also may designate ACECs, back country byways, watchable wildlife viewing 

sites, or other BLM administrative designations through the land-use planning process in order to protect 

wilderness values. 

Lands acquired since the 1989 RMP that were identified as having wilderness characteristics are included 

within ACECs, and would be managed in accordance with the prescriptions outlined in Chapter 3: Special 

Designations. Lands acquired since the 1989 RMP were primarily acquired in land exchanges with the 

New Mexico State Land Department that took place prior to 2003. Any WSAs released from wilderness 

study would be managed in accordance with the RMP and, if adjacent to a specially-designated area such 

as an ACEC, would be evaluated for meeting the nomination criteria for the designation. 

Wilderness characteristics on acquired lands have been identified in the table below. All of the acquired 

lands identified as having wilderness character are within proposed ACECs. A land exchange with the 

State of New Mexico resulted in the BLM‘s acquisition on August 20, 1996 of about 52,230 acres, 

including lands within and adjacent to the Sierra Ladrones, Continental Divide, Devil‘s Backbone, and 

Horse Mountain WSAs. 

Table 5: Wilderness Characteristics of Acquired Lands 

Unit Name Unit 

Number

Wilderness 

Character 

Identified

No Wilderness 

Character 

Identified

Batton Canyon 020 X

Coyote Canyon 030 X

Devil‘s Backbone

051 X

052 X

053 X

054 X

Horse Mountain

061 X

062 X

063 X

Pelona Mountain

041 X

042 X

043 X

044 X

045 X

046 X

047 X

048 X

049 X

141 X

142 X

143 X

144 X

Shaw Mountain 010 X

Sierra Ladrones

071 X

072 X

073 X

074 X
Socorro Resource Management Plan 47 Chapter 2: Management Decisions and Legal Mandates

Unit Name Unit 

Number

Wilderness 

Character 

Identified

No Wilderness 

Character 

Identified

075 X

076 X

171 X

172 X

173 X

174 X

As part of the protest resolution process, an additional review of the planning area was conducted to 

determine if wilderness characteristics were present. Approximately 600 acres of BLM-managed public 

land was found to contain wilderness characteristics because they adjoin the Chupadera Wilderness, 

which the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service manages. The Socorro Proposed RMP/Final EIS did not identify 

the approximately 600-acre area as including wilderness characteristics. Therefore, the BLM will select 

Alternative C for this area, which has a higher level of protection through a Lands and Realty decision. 

WILDLAND FIRE ECOLOGY AND MANAGEMENT 

BLM policy, described in Manual 9211, provides guidance for identifying resource management 

objectives that consider and take advantage of natural processes, particularly fire. Fire Management Plans 

must be completed for all burnable acres in accordance with Federal fire policy. In 2004, the BLM‘s New 

Mexico State Office prepared the Statewide Fire and Fuels Management Plan Amendment, which amends 

all of the BLM‘s New Mexico RMPs. The purpose of the amendment is to incorporate current fire 

management policy into RMPs, restore fires as an integral part of fire-adapted ecosystems in order to 

meet resource management objectives, improve the protection of human life and property through the 

reduction of hazardous fuels, and establish consistent methods of managing fire and fuels on public land 

in New Mexico and Texas. The amendment establishes objectives for fire and fuels management, 

delineates fire management categories (as defined in Appendix A.2 of the Resource Management Plan 

Amendment for Fire and Fuels Management on Public Land in New Mexico and Texas), identifies broad 

vegetation treatments, identifies general restrictions on fire management practices, and determines criteria 

for changing Fire Management Units. 

Fire management strategies will be guided by the resource objectives set forth in this RMP. Overall goals 

for fire management are to reduce the risk to human life and property from wildland fire; reduce the risk 

and cost of fire suppression in areas of hazardous fuels buildup; and improve landscape health by 

returning fire to its natural role in the ecosystem. Fires on public lands within the Planning Area will be 

managed according to the Statewide Fire and Fuels Management Plan Amendment and to meet resource 

objectives. The amendment prescribes a range of proactive and preventative measures for the incidence of 

fire on public land including prescribed fire to achieve resource objectives, fire suppression, and reduction 

of fuels to diminish the severity of wildland fires and contain prescribed burns. Remedies for fuel buildup include manual, mechanical, and chemical means, depending on the need and circumstance (e.g., 

chemical treatment is preferred where other treatment would encourage expansion of noxious weeds or 

other invasive species). Methods to reduce density of trees and wildland fuels can include commercial 

thinning. 

Decisions are guided by annual assignment of lands to fire management units (areas identified by 

geographic, social, and political characteristics with specific objectives for fire and fuels management) 

with specific fire management categories that dictate a management approach for each unit as outlined in 

the Socorro Resource Area Fire Management Plan. The Fire Management Plan is reviewed yearly and 

updated as needed. A site-specific fire prescription will be prepared prior to the use of prescribed fires, 
Socorro Resource Management Plan 48 Chapter 2: Management Decisions and Legal Mandates

and emergency stabilization treatments implemented and completed within 1 calendar year from the date 

of the containment of fire. Plans for rehabilitation of wildland fires must be completed within 3 years of 

the date of the control of fire with funding for rehabilitation prioritized using common criteria (BLM 

1999). Wildland and prescribed fires are monitored according to variables described in the Monitoring 

and Adaptive Management Plan for the Statewide Fire and Fuels Management Plan. 

WILDLIFE, RIPARIAN H ABITAT, AND SPECIAL STATUS SPECIES 

Management Goal

Ensure optimum populations of and a natural abundance and diversity of wildlife resources on public land by 

restoring, maintaining, and enhancing habitat conditions through management plans and actions integrated with 

other uses of public land through coordination with other programs, management initiatives, and habitat 

enhancement projects, while mitigating and/or reducing adverse impacts of other resource uses and humanwildlife interactions.

Resource and Planning Issues Supporting Management Decisions

Wildlife Habitat  Enhance and protect wildlife in priority areas (including ACECs and 

SMAs).

Bighorn Sheep 

(Issues 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5)

 To protect Desert Bighorn Sheep, establish a 10-mile special buffer to 

exclude domestic sheep and goats from occupied and historic habitat

areas. 

 Manage resource uses to minimize surface disturbance and unnecessary 

human/wildlife interactions in the Desert Bighorn Sheep corridor to 

reduce adverse impacts to Desert Bighorn Sheep and their habitat.

Special Status Species

(Issues 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5)

 Close approximately 37,254 acres of Federal mineral estate (this includes 

33,779 BLM-managed surface acres) within potential Aplomado Falcon

habitat to fluid mineral leasing. In these areas, also exclude mineral 

material disposals (except within 0.5 mile of Highway 380) and right-ofway authorizations, limit OHV use to designated routes, and petition to 

withdraw from location and entry. 

 Close to fluid mineral leasing, exclude from mineral material disposals, 

and exclude from rights-of-way an additional 6,698 acres of potential 

Aplomado Falcon habitat on Federal mineral estate (including 6,325 

acres of BLM-managed surface acres). The affected area will not include

areas within one-half mile of Highway 380. Also limit OHV use to 

designated routes, and petition to withdraw from mineral location and 

entry to support the release of an experimental, nonessential population of 

Aplomado Falcons. 

 In areas that meet criteria for Aplomado Falcon habitat, apply fluid 

mineral leasing stipulations and other measures to regulate surface use 

and occupancy. As additional data become available, these prescriptions 

may be revisited to assess their effectiveness in protection of this species. 

 Designate three ACECs (Horse Mountain, Ladron Mountain-Devil‘s 

Backbone, and Pelona Mountain) to manage wildlife habitat and special 

status species.

Wildlife and Riparian Habitat 

The Federal Land Policy and Management Act, along with other Federal legislation, provides guidance 

and direction to the BLM on the management of public land and its natural resources. Legislation directs 

that the BLM is responsible primarily for protecting and improving wildlife habitat on public land. 

However, management of resident fish and wildlife species (with the exception of migratory birds and 

threatened and endangered species) is by the appropriate State agencies. This requires close cooperation 
Socorro Resource Management Plan 49 Chapter 2: Management Decisions and Legal Mandates

between the two agencies. Memorandum of Understanding No. NMSO-41 between the BLM and New 

Mexico Department of Game and Fish (NMDGF) provides for the cooperative development of fish and 

wildlife resource plans, sets forth responsibilities for coordination, identifies issues of concern, and 

establishes methods of coordination. 

The Socorro Field Office identifies opportunities to maintain, improve, and expand wildlife habitat on 

public land. This is generally guided by NMDGF big game and nongame species management plans, in a 

manner consistent with the principles of multiple-use management. The New Mexico Habitat Stamp 

Program is a process authorized under the Sikes Act (Public Law 93-452) and establishes a mechanism to 

fund projects and programs to achieve the conservation, rehabilitation, and ecological diversification of 

wildlife habitats on land administered by the U.S. Forest Service (Forest Service) and the BLM. The New 

Mexico Habitat Stamp Program is the primary funding source for habitat enhancement projects on public 

land within the Socorro Field Office. Under the BLM‘s multiple-use management, program activities can 

affect the quality and health of riparian areas that are important to fish and wildlife. Management of 

riparian areas has the objective of restoring and protecting these areas within the context of authorizing 

other land management activities. 

The objective of the Socorro Field Office‘s wildlife management program is to facilitate the maintenance, 

restoration, and enhancement of all wildlife populations and habitat on public land through management 

plans and actions integrated with other uses of public land. In accordance with the New Mexico Standards 

and Guidelines, BLM actions should promote progress towards improved public land health through 

management that restores, protects, and enhances the resources necessary to support native wildlife 

species and their associated habitats in their historical proportions (as site potential allows). The Socorro 

Field Office will continue to implement habitat enhancement projects in cooperation with NMDGF and 

other partners including the Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation, National Wild Turkey Federation, 

Foundation for North American Wild Sheep, Quail Unlimited, and the Mule Deer Foundation. These 

projects include, but are not limited to, vegetative treatments (prescribed fire, mechanical and chemical 

treatments), watershed protection and restoration, riparian protection and restoration, wildlife transplants, 

wildlife watering facilities, environmental education, access management, fence modification, and 

wildlife project maintenance. 

The Socorro Field Office will continue to develop, implement, and maintain wildlife habitat management 

plans (HMPs) and Coordinated RMPs for the benefit of wildlife, special status species, and riparian areas. 

Other management direction that will be carried forward include developing new projects to benefit 

wildlife or improve wildlife habitat, modifying existing projects to benefit wildlife, and continuing 

studies, surveys, and inventories to identify and protect crucial habitats. Policy direction includes 

Executive Order 13443 on Facilitation of Hunting Heritage and Wildlife Conservation. 

 

Animal damage control on BLM-administered land is conducted by U.S. Department of Agriculture 

Animal Plant Health Inspection Services-Wildlife Services (APHIS-WS) in accordance with a nationallevel Memorandum of Understanding between APHIS-WS and the BLM. Department of the Interior 

policy and the annual Animal Damage Control Plan for the Socorro Field Office, prepared jointly by the 

APHIS-WS and the BLM, guide animal damage control activities on public land within the Planning 

Area. The APHIS-WS has overall responsibility for the program and supervises all control activities. The 

BLM has approval responsibility for the specific control actions on public land. The BLM and APHISWS will continue to meet annually to develop and implement a work plan for the Socorro Field Office. 

The goal of the Socorro Field Office‘s riparian monitoring is to document the progress toward achieving 

and then maintaining proper functioning condition while being managed under multiple-use and adaptive 

management concepts (Appendix D: Monitoring). Riparian and wetland areas are considered to be 

functioning properly when adequate vegetation, landform, or large woody debris are present to dissipate 
Socorro Resource Management Plan 50 Chapter 2: Management Decisions and Legal Mandates

the stream energy associated with high water flows, thereby reducing erosion and improving water 

quality. 

There are a number of conditions related to wildlife habitat that will be applied for approval of permits to 

extract resources including fluid mineral leasing. These measures, in addition to appropriate Best 

Management Practices (see Appendix C), will be implemented. 

Approximately 26 miles of roads outside of specially-designated lands will be closed to address wildlife 

concerns. 

Special Status Species 

The Endangered Species Act requires special protection and management for federally listed threatened 

and endangered species, species proposed to be listed as threatened and endangered, and designated and 

proposed critical habitat. The act also requires the development and implementation of recovery plans for 

the conservation and survival of threatened and endangered species. 

The BLM‘s special status species policy applies to management for Endangered Species Act listed, 

proposed, or candidate species; BLM sensitive species; and State-listed species as directed in BLM 

Manual 6840. In accordance with BLM Manual 6840, State-listed species should be managed to the level 

of protection required by State law or under BLM policy for species of concern (formerly known as 

candidate species) under the Endangered Species Act, whichever would provide the better opportunity for 

conservation. Although BLM sensitive and candidate species have no legal status or protection under the 

Endangered Species Act, it is BLM policy to manage such species to ensure that actions authorized, 

funded, or carried out by the BLM do not contribute to the need to list those species. 

State laws protecting State-listed species apply to all BLM programs and actions to the extent that they 

are consistent with Federal authority. Applicable State legislation in the Planning Area includes the New 

Mexico Endangered Plant Species Act and the Wildlife Conservation Act. In accordance with these laws, 

lists of species that require protective measures are maintained by the State. 

Federal legislation requires actions by Federal agencies to protect other protected, non-Federally-listed 

species and habitats. Executive Order 13186 ―Responsibilities of Federal Agencies to Protect Migratory 

Birds,‖ highlights the need for Federal agencies, including the BLM, to conserve migratory birds 

protected by the migratory bird conventions such as the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (Title 16, 

Parts 703-711 of the United States Code [16 USC 703-711]), the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Acts 

(16 USC 668-668d), and the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (16 USC 661-666c). This responsibility 

includes the need to ensure that environmental analyses of Federal actions evaluate the effects of actions 

on migratory birds, with special emphasis on species of concern as identified in the periodic report 

 ̳ ̳Migratory Nongame Birds of Management Concern in the United States,‘‘ priority migratory bird 

species as documented by established plans (such as Bird Conservation Regions in the North American 

Bird Conservation Initiative or Partners in Flight physiographic areas), and those species listed in 

50 CFR 17.11. 

Federal- and State-listed species are protected by requiring site-specific evaluations and clearances and by 

applying more stringent management prescriptions in areas that have been specially designated to protect 

target species. This map is updated as new species are identified as threatened, endangered, or proposed 

for listing under the Endangered Species Act. When a proposed project is located within habitat that has 

been designated as having the potential to support a protected species, a field survey is required prior to 

authorization of the project. Any action that may affect federally listed species also requires consultation 

with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) under Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act. 
Socorro Resource Management Plan 51 Chapter 2: Management Decisions and Legal Mandates

Within the Chihuahuan semi-desert grasslands in the Planning Area, approximately 37,254 acres of 

Federal mineral estate will be excluded from fluid mineral leasing (this includes 33,779 acres of BLMmanaged surface estate) for the protection of Aplomado Falcon habitat. These areas also will be excluded 

from mineral material disposals and right-of-way authorizations (except for areas within 0.5 mile of 

Highway 380), OHV use will be limited to designated routes, and the BLM will petition to withdraw the 

area from location and entry under the mining laws. The same management will be applied to an 

additional 6,698 acres of potential Aplomado Falcon habitat on Federal mineral estate (including 6,325 

acres of BLM-managed surface estate) to support the release of an experimental, nonessential population 

of Aplomado Falcons under the 10j rule. Under a 10j rule, populations are treated as proposed for listing

outside of National Wildlife Refuges and National Parks. Lands managed by the Socorro Field Office are 

identified under the 10j rule as habitat. In addition, the Armendaris Ranch, which is adjacent to BLMadministered land in the Planning Area, has been identified as a potential release site (USFWS 2005). 

Areas that meet the criteria for Aplomado Falcon habitat will be managed to minimize potential impacts 

from surface-disturbing activities. This management will include the implementation of fluid mineral 

leasing stipulations and other measures to regulate surface use and occupancy (see Minerals section 

below) in areas that are determined to be potential Aplomado Falcon habitat. Grazing allotments within 

areas identified as potential Aplomado Falcon habitat will be managed for a stable or increasing trend in 

range condition or desired plant community. For additional information on habitat and habitat criteria, 

please refer to the Biological Assessment and the 2005 habitat suitability model (New Mexico 

Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit 2005). Monitoring of trend plots will be prioritized in areas 

identified for management of the Aplomado Falcon. As additional data become available, these 

management prescriptions may be revisited to assess their effectiveness in protection of this species. 

To protect Desert Bighorn Sheep, a 10-mile-wide special buffer has been established around occupied and 

historic habitat areas within which domestic sheep and goats will be excluded. In addition, the Desert 

Bighorn Sheep travel corridor between Ladron Mountain and the Devil‘s Backbone Mountains will be 

managed to reduce impacts to bighorn habitat resulting from access and surface disturbance. 

Areas of Critical Environmental Concern 

Three ACECs have been designated primarily for the management of wildlife habitat, wilderness 

characteristics, and special status species. These include: 

Horse Mountain ACEC (5,388 acres) – manage to protect wildlife values by reducing habitat 

fragmentation through access management. In addition, potential habitat for a federally listed 

threatened species (bald eagle) and a federally listed species of concern (Peregrine Falcon) is 

present within the ACEC. 

Ladron Mountain-Devil‘s Backbone Complex ACEC (57,474 acres) – manage to enhance and 

protect diverse wildlife habitat, with emphasis on habitat for Desert Bighorn Sheep. This ACEC 

will be expanded to incorporate the former Rio Salado and San Lorenzo SMAs, and the Devil‘s 

Backbone and Polvadera Mountain areas. 

Pelona Mountain ACEC (51,091 acres) – manage to protect diverse wildlife habitat, including a 

federally listed threatened species (the Bald Eagle), a federally listed species of concern 

(Peregrine Falcon), and one of New Mexico‘s largest elk herds. 

ACECs are shown on Map 4, and further information on management of specially designated areas is 

provided in Chapter 3: Special Designations.
Socorro Resource Management Plan 52 Chapter 3: Special Designations 

CHAPTER 3: SPECIAL DESIGNATIONS 

BLM Manual 1613 and 43 CFR 1610.7-2 require that areas having potential for designation and 

protection as ACECs be identified and considered during the planning process. ACECs must meet 

relevance and importance criteria, and require special management to (1) protect the area and prevent 

irreparable damage to resources or the natural system or (2) protect life and promote safety in areas where 

natural hazards exist. 

SMAs are not provided for in the regulations as a specific designation. However, H-1601-1, Land Use 

Planning Handbook, provides for ―other BLM administrative designations‖ in addition to ACECs, Wild 

and Scenic Rivers, Back Country Byways, etc. SMAs are areas containing natural or cultural values that 

do not meet the ACEC or other regulatory or legislative criteria, but are areas that the BLM wishes to 

identify in order to protect or manage the resources associated with the area. As with the management of 

ACECs and other designations and subject to valid existing rights, proposed actions that potentially 

would degrade the values within SMAs would be avoided. 

Map 4 shows all special designations that are not proprietary. A total of 197,757 acres (about 13 percent 

of the BLM-managed surface area in the Planning Area) will be designated as ACECs. With the 

exception of Cerro Pomo ACEC, ACECs do not overlap with WSAs. A total of 12,633 acres (about 

1 percent of the surface area managed by the BLM in the Planning Area) will be designated as SRMAs, 

and an additional 85,351 acres (6 percent) will be identified as SMAs. The specific acreages and 

management for each area is summarized below. 

NOTE: Fluid mineral leasing stipulations are described in detail in the Fluid Mineral Lease Stipulations

section of Appendix I: Minerals Management. Cultural Resource Use Categories are described in BLM 

Manual 8110.42; brief synopses of Categories A and D can be found at the end of this chapter. 

AREAS OF CRITICAL EN VIRONMENTAL CONCERN 

Cerro Pomo ACEC 

Cerro Pomo ACEC covers 28, 248 acres, including 25,200 acres that overlap with WSAs. The following 

management decisions apply specifically to Cerro Pomo ACEC: 

1. Limit motor vehicle use to designated routes. 

2. Exclude the authorization of right-of-way within the ACEC. 

3. Allow mineral material disposals within the ACEC contingent upon site-specific assessment of 

resources and mitigation as necessary (except in the areas that overlap WSAs). 

4. Pursue acquisition of nonpublic land within and contiguous to the ACEC. 

5. Apply fluid mineral leasing stipulation S-VRM-II2 within the ACEC. 

6. Research, study, and protect cultural sites and apply Cultural Resource Use Category A:

Scientific Use3. 

 

2

 Fluid mineral leasing stipulations are described in detail in the Fluid Mineral Lease Stipulations section of Appendix I. 

3

 Cultural Resource Allocations are described in BLM Manual 8110.42; brief synopses of each allocations type can be found at the end of this 

chapter. 
Socorro Resource Management Plan 53 Chapter 3: Special Designations 

7. Permit commercial woodcutting only to support BLM-authorized projects to meet resource 

management objectives (except in those areas that overlap WSAs). 

8. Provide opportunities for heritage tourism with appropriate mitigation measures as determined in 

coordination with SHPO and Tribes. 

Horse Mountain ACEC 

The following management decisions apply to Horse Mountain ACEC, which covers 5,388 acres: 

1. Limit motor vehicle use to designated routes within the ACEC. 

2. Exclude the authorization of right-of-way and leases within the ACEC. 

3. Pursue acquisition of nonpublic land within and contiguous to the ACEC. 

4. Apply fluid mineral leasing stipulation S-NSO-W within the ACEC. 

5. Allow mineral material disposals within the ACEC contingent upon site-specific assessment of resources 

and mitigation as necessary.

6. Permit commercial woodcutting only to support BLM-authorized projects to meet resource 

management objectives. 

7. Exclude grazing on land that have not been allotted. 

Ladron Mountain – Devil’s Backbone Complex ACEC 

The following management decisions apply to the Ladron Mountain – Devil‘s Backbone Complex 

ACEC, which covers 57,474 acres: 

1. Limit motor vehicle use to designated routes within the ACEC. 

2. Exclude the authorization of right-of-way and leases within the ACEC. Avoid the authorization of 

right-of-way and leases within the Desert Bighorn Sheep Corridor. 

3. Apply fluid mineral leasing stipulation S-NSO-W within the ACEC. 

4. Allow mineral material disposals within the ACEC contingent upon site-specific assessment of 

resources and mitigation as necessary. 

5. Pursue acquisition of nonpublic land within and contiguous to the ACEC. 

6. Exclude grazing on land that has not been allotted. 

7. Maintain and/or implement closure to domestic sheep and goats within 10 miles of bighorn 

habitat. 

8. Maintain viable populations of Desert Bighorn Sheep through activities such as habitat 

improvements and coordination with NMDGF on Desert Bighorn Sheep transplants and 

reintroductions. 

9. Withdraw from location and entry for locatable minerals under the mining laws all land with 

medium and high mineral potential (23,567 acres) for the protection of Desert Bighorn Sheep 

within the ACEC (see Maps 3-9, 3-10, and 3-11). 

10. Encourage inventory and research of cultural resource sites and apply Cultural Resource Use 

Category A: Scientific Use. to cultural resource sites. 

11. Permit commercial woodcutting only to support BLM-authorized projects to meet resource 

management objectives. 
Socorro Resource Management Plan 54 Chapter 3: Special Designations 

12. Exclude the San Lorenzo area from vegetative material sales, with the exception of exotic 

species. Allow vegetative sales elsewhere within the ACEC contingent upon site-specific 

assessment of resources and mitigation as necessary. 

Mockingbird Gap Proprietary ACEC 

The following management decisions apply to Mockingbird Gap Proprietary ACEC, which covers 8,685 

acres: 

1. Limit motor vehicle use to designated routes. 

2. Avoid the authorization of right-of-way and leases. 

3. Allow mineral material disposals contingent upon site-specific assessment of resources and 

mitigation as necessary. 

4. Apply fluid mineral leasing stipulations S-CSU-C3 and Lease Notice NM-5.

5. Apply Cultural Resource Use Category A: Scientific Use. to cultural sites. 

6. Research, study, and protect cultural resource sites. 

Pelona Mountain ACEC 

The following management decisions apply to Pelona Mountain ACEC, which covers 51,091 acres: 

1. Limit motor vehicle use to designated routes within the ACEC. 

2. Exclude authorization of right-of-way and leases within the ACEC. 

3. Apply fluid mineral leasing stipulations S-CSU-W1 and S-VRM-II within the ACEC. 

4. Pursue acquisition of nonpublic land within and contiguous to the ACEC. 

5. Pursue legal access for the ACEC. 

6. Allow mineral material disposals within the ACEC contingent upon site-specific assessment of 

resources and mitigation as necessary. 

7. Permit commercial woodcutting only to support BLM-authorized projects to meet resource 

management objectives. 

8. Apply Cultural Resource Use Category A: Scientific Use to Bat Cave Cultural Site. 

Sawtooth Proprietary ACEC 

The following management decisions apply to Sawtooth Proprietary ACEC, which covers 125 acres: 

1. Limit motor vehicle use to designated routes. 

2. Exclude the authorization of right-of-way and leases. 

3. Apply fluid mineral leasing stipulation S-NSO-T&E. 

4. Maintain withdrawal from locatable mineral entry. 

5. Acquire legal access. 

6. Exclude from vegetative material sales. 

7. Exclude mineral material disposals. 

8. Develop an allotment management plan. 
Socorro Resource Management Plan 55 Chapter 3: Special Designations 

Zuni Salt Lake Proprietary ACEC 

The following management decisions apply to Zuni Salt Lake Proprietary ACEC, which covers 46,746 

acres: 

1. Limit motor vehicle use to designated routes. Avoid designations that will impact the values of 

Zuni Salt Lake. 

2. Avoid or mitigate actions that will impact the cultural resources (including TCPs) through 

consultation with SHPO and the Zuni Heritage and Historic Preservation Office. Avoid or 

mitigate actions that will impact natural resources. 

3. Restrict actions that alter, in a way that degrades the uses and values of the Zuni Salt Lake, the 

quality and quantity of water resources that supply the lake. 

4. The ACEC area is closed to fluid and solid mineral leasing. 

5. Withdraw the Zuni Salt Lake Protection Zone, an area of 4,839 federal surface acres that 

surround the salt lake, from location and entry under the mining laws. 

6. Exclude the authorization of right-of-way and leases within the ACEC except for #7 below. 

7. Allow geophysical, geologic, or hydrologic and related operations only for research or monitoring 

to understand and protect the Zuni Salt Lake or for regional scientific study. 

8. Exclude mineral material disposals within the Zuni Salt Lake Protection Zone (4,839 acres that 

surround the Salt Lake). Allow mineral material disposals in the remainder of the ACEC 

contingent upon site-specific assessment of resources and mitigation as necessary. 

9. The BLM will consult with the Governor of Zuni and other tribes based on agreed upon 

provisions of a joint memorandum of understanding for any proposed actions within the ACEC, 

or outside the ACEC that may impact the Zuni Salt Lake, to be initiated by the BLM within six 

months of the signing of the Record of Decision for the RMP. 

10. Acquire nonpublic land within and contiguous to the ACEC. 

11. Exclude woodcutting. 

SPECIAL MANAGEMENT AREAS 

Continental Divide National Scenic Trail SMA 

The following management decisions apply to the Continental Divide National Scenic Trail SMA, which 

covers 59,434 acres: 

1. Limit motor vehicle use to designated routes on the northern portion of the trail. On the southern 

portion of the trail, close to motor vehicle use within the Continental Divide WSA, and limit 

motor vehicle use to designated routes elsewhere in the SMA. 

2. Exclude the authorization of right-of-way and leases within the WSA. Avoid the authorization of 

right-of-way and leases within the SMA and outside the WSA. 

3. Outside of the WSA, permit commercial woodcutting within only to support BLM-authorized 

projects to meet resource management objectives. 

4. Allow mineral material disposals contingent upon site-specific assessment of resources and 

mitigation as necessary. 

5. Exclude mineral leasing in the Continental Divide WSA. Apply fluid mineral leasing stipulations 

S-VRM-II and Lease Notice NM-6 within the SMA and outside the WSA. 
Socorro Resource Management Plan 56 Chapter 3: Special Designations 

6. Pursue acquisition of legal access. 

7. Retain all land within the corridors identified for the Continental Divide National Scenic Trail in 

the SMA. 

8. Management prescriptions listed to CDNST herein apply only to BLM-managed land. 

Fort Craig SMA 

The following management decisions apply to the Fort Craig SMA, which covers 149 acres: 

1. Limit motor vehicle use to designated routes. 

2. Acquire all minerals. When acquired, petition for mineral withdrawal from location and entry 

under the mining laws. 

3. Exclude grazing on land that has not been allotted. 

4. Exclude fluid mineral leasing. 

5. Avoid authorization of right-of-way and leases. 

6. Exclude mineral material disposals. 

7. Develop visitor facilities and public interpretation values. 

8. Apply Cultural Resource Use Category D. Public Use.

Newton Site Proprietary SMA 

The following management decisions apply to Newton Site Proprietary SMA, which covers 6,789 acres: 

1. Limit motor vehicle use to designated routes. 

2. Avoid the authorization of right-of-way and leases. 

3. Apply fluid mineral leasing stipulation S-NSO-C.

4. Allow mineral material disposals contingent upon site-specific assessment of resources and 

mitigation as necessary. 

5. Provide opportunity for research. 

6. Apply Cultural Resource Use Category A: Scientific Use. to Newton Site and associated complex 

of sites. 

7. Acquire administrative access. 

Penjeacu SMA (formerly Teypama) 

The following management decisions apply to Penjeacu SMA, which covers 11 acres:

1. Limit vehicle use to designated routes. 

2. Avoid the authorization of right-of-way and leases. 

3. Exclude mineral material disposals. 

4. Maintain non-grazing status. 

5. Apply fluid mineral leasing stipulation S-NSO-C.

6. Conduct cadastral survey to determine boundaries. 

7. Pursue acquisition of non-Federal portion of the cultural site. 

8. Apply Cultural Resource Use Category D: Public Use. 
Socorro Resource Management Plan 57 Chapter 3: Special Designations 

9. Research, study, and protect the pueblo. 

Playa Pueblos Proprietary SMA 

The following management decisions apply to Playa Pueblos Proprietary SMA, which covers 203 acres: 

1. Limit motor vehicle use to designated routes. 

2. Avoid the authorization of right-of-way and leases. 

3. Pursue the acquisition of nonpublic land. 

4. Allow mineral material disposals contingent upon site-specific assessment of resources and 

mitigation as necessary. 

5. Apply fluid mineral leasing stipulations S-NSO-C and Lease Notice NM-5.

6. Exclude livestock grazing by fencing. 

7. Apply Cultural Resource Use Category A: Scientific Use to Playa Pueblos. 

8. Include in thematic Tompiro National Register Nomination. 

Puertecito SMA 

The following management decisions apply to Puertecito SMA, which covers 7,156 acres: 

1. Limit motor vehicle use to designated routes. 

2. Avoid the authorizations of right-of-way and leases. 

3. Apply fluid mineral leasing stipulations S-CSU-C1 and S-CSU-S. 

4. Apply Cultural Resource Use Category A: Scientific Use to cultural sites within Puertecito SMA. 

5. Research, study, and protect cultural sites within the SMA. 

San Pedro Proprietary SMA 

The following management decisions apply to San Pedro Proprietary SMA, which covers 1,201 acres: 

1. Limit motor vehicle use to designated routes. 

2. Avoid the authorization of right-of-way and leases. 

3. Apply fluid mineral leasing stipulations S-NSO-T&E and Lease Notice NM-5.

4. Exclude mineral material disposals. 

5. Exclude from vegetative material sales. 

Stallion SMA 

The following management decisions apply to Stallion SMA, which covers 10,883 acres: 

1. Close to motor vehicle use within the WSAs (Sierra de Las Cañas and Presilla). Limit motor 

vehicle use to designated routes elsewhere within the SMA. 

2. Exclude the authorization of right-of-way and leases within Sierra de Las Cañas and Presilla 

WSA. Avoid the authorization of right-of-way and leases within the SMA and outside the WSA. 

3. Exclude mineral leasing within the WSA. 

4. Apply fluid mineral leasing stipulations S-CSU-S, S-CSU-K, and Lease Notice NM-5 within the 

SMA and outside the WSA. 
Socorro Resource Management Plan 58 Chapter 3: Special Designations 

Soaptree SMA 

The following management decisions apply to Soaptree SMA, which covers 1,296 acres: 

1. Limit motor vehicle use to designated routes. 

2. Avoid authorization of right-of-way and leases. 

3. Apply fluid mineral leasing stipulations S-VRM-II. and S-CSU-V.

4. Exclude from vegetative material sales. 

5. Allow mineral material disposals contingent upon site-specific assessment of resources and 

mitigation as necessary. 

SPECIAL RECREATION M ANAGEMENT AREAS 

The Box SRMA 

. The following management decisions apply to The Box SRMA, which covers 1,107 acres: 

1. Limit motor vehicle use to designated routes. 

2. Exclude the authorizations of right-of-way and leases. 

3. Maintain the existing 40-acre withdrawal from location and entry under the mining laws, and 

withdraw an additional 320 acres. 

4. Apply fluid mineral leasing stipulation S-VRM-II

5. Allow mineral material disposals contingent upon site-specific assessment of resources and 

mitigation as necessary. 

6. Inventory for cultural resources. 

7. Implement actions to protect significant at-risk cultural resources from other conflicting uses. 

8. Maintain closure to shooting of weapons within SRMA. 

9. Pursue renewal of the existing road easement across private land, and continue to maintain road.

Datil Well SRMA 

The following management decisions apply to Datil Well SRMA, which covers 669 acres: 

1. Limit motor vehicle use to designated routes. 

2. Avoid the authorization of right-of-way and leases. 

3. Within the SRMA, permit commercial woodcutting only to support BLM-authorized projects to 

meet resource management objectives. 

4. Apply fluid mineral leasing stipulation S-VRM-II. 

5. Maintain 80-acre withdrawal from location and entry under the mining laws. 

6. Exclude mineral material disposals. 

7. Maintain closure to weapons shooting within SRMA. 

8. Apply Cultural Resource Use Category D: Public Use to Datil Well and related Cultural Resource 

sites. 

9. Pursue acquisition of private land contiguous to the SRMA. 
Socorro Resource Management Plan 59 Chapter 3: Special Designations 

Gordy’s Hill SRMA

The following management decisions apply to Gordy‘s Hill SRMA, which covers 7,647 acres:

1. Limit motor vehicle use to designated routes. 

2. Prepare Recreation Area Management Plan. 

3. Exclude target shooting within 0.5 mile of designated trails. 

4. Avoid authorization of right-of-ways and leases. 

Quebradas Back Country Byway SRMA

The following management decisions apply to the Quebradas Back Country Byway SRMA, which covers 

3,130 acres: 

1. Maintain the byway open to motor vehicle use. Close the buffer area surrounding the byway (i.e., 

0.25 mile from centerline in each direction, for a buffer area that is 0.5 mile wide overall) to OHV 

within the WSA boundaries, and limit OHV use to designated routes elsewhere in the buffer 

zone. 

2. Provide for interpretation and signing. 

3. Exclude the authorization of right-of-way and leases within the WSA. Avoid the authorizations of 

right-of-way and leases in the remainder of the buffer area. 

4. Allow mineral material disposals within the buffer area contingent upon site-specific assessment 

of resources and mitigation as necessary. 

5. Exclude mineral leasing within the Presilla and Sierra de Las Cañas WSAs. Apply fluid mineral 

leasing stipulation S-VRM-II within the buffer area and outside the WSAs. 

6. Exclude from vegetative material sales within the buffer area. 

7. Maintain existing Socorro County Road Maintenance Agreement. 

Socorro Nature Area SRMA 

The following management decisions apply to the Socorro Nature Area SRMA, which covers 80 acres: 

1. Complete a comprehensive management plan. 

2. Limit motor vehicle use to designated routes. 

3. Avoid the authorization of right-of-way and leases. 

4. Apply fluid mineral leasing stipulation S-NSO-R.

5. Exclude mineral material disposals. 

6. Exclude grazing on land that has not been allotted. 

SUMMARY OF CULTURAL RESOURCE USE CATEGORIES 

The following information is summarized from BLM Manual 8110.42. 

A: Scientific Use: This category applies to any cultural property determined to be available for 

consideration as the subject of scientific or historical study at the present time, using currently 

available research techniques....Properties in this category need not be conserved in the face of a 

research or data recovery (mitigation) proposal that would make adequate and appropriate use of 

the property's research importance. 
Socorro Resource Management Plan 60 Chapter 3: Special Designations 

D: Public Use: This category may be applied to any cultural property found to be appropriate for use 

as an interpretive exhibit in place, or for related educational and recreational uses by members of 

the general public. The category may also be applied to buildings suitable for continued use or 

adaptive use, for example as staff housing or administrative facilities at a visitor contact or 

interpretive site, or as shelter along a cross-country ski trail. 
Socorro Resource Management Plan 61 Chapter 4: Plan Implementation, Monitoring, and Eval. 

CHAPTER 4: PLAN IMPLEMENTATION, MONITORING, AND EVALUATION 

This chapter outlines the strategy for implementing, monitoring, and amending this RMP, including 

opportunities for future involvement by stakeholders in these activities. 

IMPLEMENTATION OF THE RMP 

Management decisions identified in Chapter 2 are effective immediately upon approval of the Record of 

Decision. All future resource management authorizations must conform with or, at a minimum, not 

conflict with, this RMP. 

Further implementation-level decision making may include the preparation of activity-level or projectspecific plans as well as administrative decisions that do not require plan approval. The following 

priorities for implementation plans are identified: 

Travel management planning – Priority areas for completing travel management plans are as 

follows: (1) Gordy‘s Hill, (2) ACECs, (3) SRMAs, (4) SMAs, and (5) all other BLM land. They 

will be completed within 5 years of the Record of Decision. 

Activity plans – for ACECs, SRMAs, and SMAs (in that order of priority). 

Management plan for significant caves and karst resources – Cave and karst resources will be 

delineated and mapped and a management plan will be prepared within 2 years of the Record of 

Decision. 

All due dates are contingent upon the availability of funding and/or staff resources. Other key priorities in 

implementing the plan include: 

Establishing a memorandum of understanding with the Zuni Tribe with regard to future 

management of the Zuni Salt Lake ACEC. 

Design procedures for and initiate monitoring programs and prepare first annual implementation 

monitoring report during the second year of plan implementation (See Appendix D: Monitoring 

and discussion below.) 

PUBLIC INOVLVEMENT IN THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE RMP 

It is expected that robust public and stakeholder involvement efforts will accompany implementation 

planning. These outreach efforts will be designed for each specific activity or travel management 

planning process to ensure that the approach is targeted to each unique set of stakeholders and issues. 

The monitoring programs for specific resources, resource uses, or programs may benefit from input from 

stakeholders and the public. Reporting on annual implementation monitoring will be available for public 

review (please see Monitoring discussion, below). 

MONITORING 

The BLM‘s planning regulations (43 CFR 1610.4-9) call for the monitoring of RMPs on a continual basis 

with a formal evaluation to be completed at 5-year intervals. The Socorro RMP will be monitored on a 

continual basis to (1) ensure that decisions described in this RMP are being implemented, (2) allow up-todate evaluations, and (3) respond to changing situations. 

A detailed monitoring and evaluation plan is provided as Appendix D: Monitoring. All plan monitoring 

will assess the following: 
Socorro Resource Management Plan 62 Chapter 4: Plan Implementation, Monitoring, and Eval. 

Whether management actions are resulting in satisfactory progress toward management goals 

Whether actions are consistent with current policy 

Whether original assumptions were correctly applied and impacts correctly predicted 

Whether mitigation measures are satisfactory 

Whether the RMP is consistent with the plans and policies of state and local government, other 

Federal agencies, and American Indian Tribes 

Whether new data are available that will require alteration of the plan 

Monitoring is an essential component of natural resource management because it provides information on 

the relative success of management strategies. Land use plan monitoring is the process of (1) tracking the 

implementation of land use planning decisions (implementation monitoring) and (2) collecting 

data/information necessary to evaluate the effectiveness of land use planning decisions (effectiveness 

monitoring). 

Implementation Monitoring 

Implementation monitoring is the process of tracking and documenting the implementation (or the 

progress toward implementation) of land use decisions. This will be done annually throughout the life of 

the RMP and will be documented in the form of a tracking log or report. The report will be available for 

public review (H-1601-1, Land Use Planning Handbook, BLM 2005). 

The monitoring plan will be evaluated periodically to ascertain that the monitoring questions and 

standards are still relevant, and will be adjusted as appropriate. Some monitoring items may be 

discontinued and others may be added as knowledge and issues change with implementation. 

RMP monitoring will be conducted at multiple levels and scales and in the most cost-effective manner. 

Monitoring will be conducted in a manner that allows localized information to be compiled and 

considered in a broader regional context, thereby address both local and regional issues. At project level, 

monitoring will examine how well specific management direction has been applied on the ground and 

how effectively it produces expected results. Monitoring at broader levels will measure how successfully 

projects and other activities have achieved the objectives for those management areas. 

Monitoring will be coordinated with other appropriate agencies and organizations in order to enhance 

efficiency and usefulness of the results across a variety of administrative units and provinces. The 

approach will build on past and present monitoring work. 

Monitoring results will be reported in an annual program summary (such as a Socorro Field Office 

Update), which will be published on the field office web site, the second year following initial 

implementation of this RMP. The annual program summary will track and assess the process of RMP 

implementation, state the findings made through monitoring, and serve as a report to the public. 

Effectiveness Monitoring 

Effectiveness monitoring is the process of collecting data and information for specific resources or 

programs to determine whether or not desired outcomes (expressed as goals and objectives in the land use 

plan) are being met (or progress is being made toward meeting them) as the allowable uses and 

management actions are implemented. A brief discussion of the effectiveness monitoring that will be 

carried out for each resource or program to determine if the actions described in the RMP are meeting or 

moving toward management goals is provided in Appendix D: Monitoring.
Socorro Resource Management Plan 63 Chapter 4: Plan Implementation, Monitoring, and Eval. 

PLAN EVALUATION AND ADAPTIVE MANAGEMENT 

In addition to monitoring, the BLM‘s planning regulations (43 CFR 1610.4-9) call for a formal evaluation 

to be completed at 5-year intervals. Management actions or projects arising either internally or externally 

will be evaluated to determine conformance with the RMP. If the project is in conformance, it could 

proceed contingent upon environmental analysis or, if not in conformance, the project would be 

abandoned or the RMP amended to allow the project or action. 

Plan Evaluation 

Land use plans are evaluated to determine if (1) decisions remain relevant to current issues, (2) decisions 

are effective in achieving (or making progress toward achieving) management goals, (3) any decisions 

need to be revised, (4) any decisions need to be dropped from further consideration, and (5) any areas 

require new decisions. The Socorro RMP will be formally evaluated at least every 5 years. These 

evaluations may identify resource need and means for correcting deficiencies and addressing issues 

through plan maintenance, amendments, or new starts. Evaluations should also identify where new and 

emerging resource issues and other values have surfaced. 

The process for completing plan evaluations is outlined in H-1601-1 - Land Use Planning Handbook. 

Adaptive Management 

Adaptive management is a procedure in which decisions and changes in management are made as part of 

an ongoing process in response to changing conditions. It is a continuous process of planning, 

implementing, monitoring, evaluating, and incorporating new information into strategies to meet the goals 

and objectives of the management described in the RMP. A continuous feedback loop allows for midcourse corrections in management to meet goals and objectives. It also provides a model for adjusting 

goals and objectives as new information develops and public desires change. 

The complex interrelationships of physical, biological, and social components of the ecosystem and how 

they react to land management practices are often not fully understood when a land use management plan 

is developed. To be successful, plans must have the flexibility to adapt and respond to new knowledge or 

conditions. 

The following briefly describes the four parts of adaptive management: 

Planning/Decision – Plan development or revision is the process leading to decision making. It 

starts with issue identification and goal development. The next step is to gather information 

necessary to develop alternatives for management direction that address the issues and goals. The 

final stage is to develop alternative management strategies to address issues and meet the 

management goals, analyze the consequences of the alternatives, and choose a Proposed 

Alternative for implementation. 

Implementation – The process of putting a plan or decision into effect. Implementation includes 

short- and long-term actions. It is assumed that all management direction will be implemented 

within 10 years. Standards are defined addressing how to achieve management goals; standards 

can include requirements to refrain from taking action in certain situations. 

Monitoring – Detects changes so management activities can be modified to achieve management 

goals. Monitoring data provide information on the condition and trend of the ecosystem. 

Monitoring data would be collected to determine if plan objectives are being met. This is 

discussed further in Appendix D: Monitoring.

Evaluation/Assessment – The point where plans and monitoring data are reviewed. This phase of 

adaptive management is used to judge the success of existing plans in meeting goals and 
Socorro Resource Management Plan 64 Chapter 4: Plan Implementation, Monitoring, and Eval. 

objectives, and makes recommendations for corrections. The understanding gained through 

evaluations is critical to managing sustainable, healthy, and productive ecosystems. Evaluations 

are a key component of the adaptive management process. An evaluation may lead to a change in 

management actions. 

Monitoring is integral to adaptive management. Monitoring results will provide managers with the 

information to determine whether an objective has been met, and whether to continue or modify the 

management direction. Findings obtained through monitoring, together with research and other new data, 

will provide a basis for adaptive management changes to the RMP. The processes of monitoring and 

adaptive management share the goal of improving effectiveness and permitting dynamic response to 

increased knowledge and a changing landscape. 

As part of the Evaluation/Assessment section above and upon completion of periodic evaluations, the 

Socorro Field Office Manager will determine what, if any, changes are necessary to ensure that 

management actions are consistent with management goals. It is possible that a plan amendment or 

revision may be initiated because of a need to consider monitoring findings, new data, new or revised 

policy, or a proposed action that may result in a change in the terms, conditions, or decisions of the 

approved RMP. 

AMENDING THE PLAN 

If monitoring and evaluation indicate that modifying an RMP is necessary, the RMP may be changed 

through the amendment process. Monitoring and evaluation findings, new data, and new or revised 

policies will be evaluated to determine if there is a need for an amendment. Any changes in circumstances 

or conditions which affect the scope, terms, or conditions of the RMP may warrant an amendment. 

Generally, an RMP amendment is site-specific or involves only one planning issue. An RMP revision, if 

necessary, will involve the preparation of a new RMP for the entire Planning Area. 

Potential minor changes, refinements, or clarifications to the RMP may take the form of maintenance 

actions. Maintenance actions incorporate minor data changes and are usually limited to minor refinements 

and documentation such as correction of acreages or other numbers, clarifying language, refining known 

habitat of special status species addressed in the RMP and similar refinements (H-1601-1 Land Use 

Planning Handbook, BLM 2005). RMP maintenance would not result in expansion of the scope of 

resource uses or restrictions or change the terms, conditions and decisions of approved RMP. 

Maintenance actions are not considered plan amendments and do not require a formal public involvement 

and interagency coordination process.
Socorro Resource Management Plan 65 Glossary of Terms 

GLOSSARY OF TERMS 

Acre-foot: The volume (as of irrigation water) that would cover 1 acre to a depth of 1 foot (43,560 cubic 

feet). 

Agency: Any Federal, State, or county government organization with jurisdictional responsibilities. 

Air quality: A measure of the health-related and visual characteristics of the air, often derived from 

quantitative measurements of the concentrations of specific injurious or contaminating substances. 

Air quality standard: Levels of air pollutants prescribed by regulations that may not be exceeded during 

a specified time in a defined area. 

Allocated uses: Bureau of Land Management allocates cultural resources to one of five categories 

including (1) scientific use, (2) conservation for future use, (3) traditional use, (4) public use, or 

(5) experimental use. If cultural resources are evaluated as lacking significant values, they are categorized 

as discharged from management. 

Allotment (range): A designated area of land available for livestock grazing upon which a specified 

number and kind of livestock may be grazed under management of an authorized agency. An allotment 

generally consists of Federal rangelands, but may include intermingled parcels of private, State, or 

Federal lands. The BLM and the Forest Service stipulate the number of livestock and season of use for 

each allotment. 

Allotment Management Plan (AMP): A written program of livestock grazing management including 

supportive measures, if required. An AMP is designed to attain specific management goals in a grazing 

allotment and is prepared cooperatively with the permittee(s) or lessee(s). 

All-Terrain Vehicle (ATV): A small motor vehicle with wheels or tractor treads often used for crosscountry travel including traveling over rough ground, snow, or ice. For the purposes of this document, an 

all-terrain vehicle is defined as a motor vehicle that: (a) is designed primarily for recreational nonhighway all-terrain travel, (b) is fifty or fewer inches in width, (c) has an unladen weight of eight hundred 

pounds or less, (d) travels on three or more low pressure tires, and (e) has a seat designed to be straddled 

by the operator, and handlebars for steering control. An ATV is a type of off-highway vehicle. 

Ambient (air): The surrounding atmospheric conditions to which the general public has access. 

American Indian tribe (or tribe): Any American Indian group in the conterminous United States that 

the Secretary of the Interior recognizes as possessing tribal status (listed periodically in the Federal 

Register). 

Animal unit: A unit of measure for rangeland livestock equivalent to one mature cow or five sheep or 

five goats, all over 6 months of age. An animal unit is based on an average daily forage consumption of 

26 pounds of dry matter per day. 

Animal Unit Month (AUM): The amount of forage needed to sustain one cow, five sheep, or five goats, 

for a month. A full AUM‘s fee is charged for each month of grazing by adult animals if the grazing 

animal (1) is weaned, (2) is 6 months old or older when entering public land, or (3) will become 

12 months old during the period of use. For fee purposes, an AUM is the amount of forage used by five 

weaned or adult sheep or goats or one cow, bull, steer, heifer, horse, or mule. The term AUM is 
Socorro Resource Management Plan 66 Glossary of Terms 

commonly used in three ways: (1) stocking rate as X acres per AUM, (b) forage allocation as in X AUM‘s 

in allotment A, and (3) utilization as in X AUMs consumed from Unit B. 

Appropriate Management Level (AML): The median number of adult wild horses or burros determined 

through the BLM‘s planning process to be consistent with the objective of achieving and maintaining a 

thriving ecological balance and multiple-use relationship in a particular herd area. 

Aquifer: A water-bearing rock unit (unconsolidated or bedrock) that will yield water in a usable quantity 

to a well or spring. 

Archaeology: The scientific study of the life and culture of past, especially ancient, peoples, by 

excavation of ancient cities, relics, artifacts, etc. 

Archaeological site: A discrete location that provides physical evidence of past human use. 

Area of Critical Environmental Concern (ACEC): An area of public lands designated by Bureau of 

Land Management for special management attention to protect and prevent irreparable damage to 

important historic, cultural, or scenic values, fish and wildlife resources, or other natural systems or 

processes, or to protect life/provide safety from natural hazards. Areas designated as ACECs have met 

criteria for importance and relevance that are outlined in 43 CFR 1610.7-2(b). 

Artifact: A human-made object. 

Attainment area: An area that meets a Federal primary or secondary ambient air quality standard for the 

pollutant. 

Authorized Officer: The BLM employee to whom the authority and responsibility to manage a specific 

activity has been delegated. Within the Socorro Field Office, the Field Manager is the Authorized Officer 

of highest authority and may delegate certain responsibilities to other Socorro Field Office employees. 

Avoidance area: An environmentally sensitive area where rights-of-way may be granted only when no 

feasible alternative route is available. 

Back Country Byway: A secondary or country road that is rarely traveled. A designated Back Country 

Byway is associated with scenic, historic, or recreational opportunities. 

Basin: A depressed area having no surface outlet (topographic basin); a physiographic feature or 

subsurface structure that is capable of collecting, storing, or discharging water by reason of its shape and 

the characteristics of its confining material (water); a depression in the earth‘s surface, the lowest part 

often filled by a lake or pond (lake basin); a part of a river or canal widened (drainage, river, stream 

basin).

Best Management Practices (BMPs): A suite of techniques that guide, or may be applied to, 

management actions to aid in achieving desired outcomes and help to protect the environmental resources 

by avoiding or minimizing the impacts of an action. BMPs are often developed in conjunction with land 

use plans, but they are not considered a land use plan decision unless the land use plan specifies that they 

are mandatory. They may be updated or modified without a plan amendment if they are not mandatory. 

Bureau of Land Management (BLM): An agency of the U.S. Department of the Interior responsible for 

managing most Federal government subsurface minerals. It has surface management responsibility for 

Federal lands designated under the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976. 
Socorro Resource Management Plan 67 Glossary of Terms 

Cave: The Federal Cave Resources Protection Act (FCRPA) of 1988 defines a cave as any natural 

occurring void, cavity, recess, or system of interconnected passages which occurs beneath the surface of 

the earth or within a cliff or ledge (including any cave resource therein, but not including any vug, mine, 

tunnel, aqueduct, or other manmade excavation), and which is large enough to permit an individual to 

enter, whether or not the entrance is naturally formed or manmade. 

Chemical treatment: Involves the use of herbicides to target species to reduce their competitive effect on 

more desirable species as well as to reduce fuel loadings and wildfire risk.

Clean Air Act of 1990: Federal legislation governing air pollution. The Clean Air Act established 

National Ambient Air Quality Standards for carbon monoxide, nitrogen dioxide, ozone, particulate 

matter, sulfur dioxide, and lead. Prevention of Significant Deterioration classifications define the 

allowable increased levels of air quality deterioration above legally established levels. They include the 

following: 

Class I – minimal additional deterioration in air quality (certain national parks and wilderness areas) 

Class II – moderate additional deterioration in air quality (most lands) 

Class III – greater deterioration for planned maximum growth (industrial areas) 

Clean Water Act (CWA) of 1987: Federal legislation governing water quality. The CWA refers to a 

series of Federal laws and regulations that attempt to restore the beneficial uses of surface waters of the 

United States (also referred to as ―waters of the U.S.‖). The CWA regulates such programs as the 

National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System, a permit-based set of regulations that control the 

discharge of pollution to U.S. waterways from an individual point (for example, the end of a pipe) and the 

discharge of concentrated storm water from highways, cities, and other built environments. The CWA 

also regulates the placing of fill in streams and washes for the construction of road crossings, pipelines, 

and power lines. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 

which in some cases has extended responsibilities to the individual States, regulate these programs. 

Closed: Generally denotes that an area is not available for a particular use or uses; refer to specific 

definitions found in law, regulations, or policy guidance for application to individual programs. For 

example, 43 CFR 8340.0-5 sets forth the specific meaning of ―closed‖ as it relates to off-highway vehicle 

use, and 43 CFR 8364 defines ―closed‖ as it relates to closure and restriction orders. 

Community (natural community): The living part of an ecosystem. Communities change with 

succession, thereby forming distinctive ecological units both in time and space. The plant community and 

the animal community together form the biotic community. Size is not implied (i.e., organisms associated 

with a decaying log or with an entire forest each represent communities). 

Cross-country travel: Wheeled, motorized travel by any vehicle (recreational or other), off of roads and 

trails. 

Cubic foot/feet per second (cfs): As a rate of stream flow, a cubic foot of water passing a reference 

section in one second of time. One cfs flowing for 24 hours will yield 7.983 acre-feet of water.

Cultural resources: Any definite location of past human activity, occupation, or use, identifiable through 

inventory, historical documentation, or oral evidence. Cultural resources include archaeological, historic, 

or architectural sites, structures, places, objects, and artifacts. 

Cumulative effect (or impact): Cumulative impacts result from the accumulation of the individually 

minor impacts of past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions within the human environment. 
Socorro Resource Management Plan 68 Glossary of Terms 

These impacts may be significant when considered collectively. It is therefore necessary to consider the 

incremental impact of the proposed action (and its alternatives) in conjunction with other, unrelated 

actions occurring within the same geographic area as the proposed action. 

Developed recreation: Recreation that requires facilities that result in further concentrated use of the 

area. For example, off-road vehicles require parking lots and trails; campgrounds require roads, picnic 

tables, and toilet facilities. 

Direct effect (or impact): Effects that occur at the location of the proposed action and at that specific 

point in time. 

Dispersed recreation: Recreation that does not occur in a developed recreation site, such as hunting, 

backpacking, and scenic driving. 

Distance zones: A subdivision of the landscape as viewed from an observer position. The subdivision 

(zones) includes foreground-middleground, background, and seldom seen. 

Foreground-middleground zone – The area that can be seen from each travel route for a distance 

of 3 to 5 miles where management activities might be viewed in detail. The outer boundary of this 

distance zone is defined as the point where the texture and form of individual plants are no longer 

apparent in the landscape. 

Background zone – The remaining area that can be seen from each travel route to approximately 

15 miles. In order to be included within the distance zone, vegetation should be visible at least as 

patterns of light and dark.

Seldom-seen zone – Areas that are not visible within the foreground-middleground and 

background zones, and areas beyond the background zones. 

Easement: A right afforded a person, agency, or organization to make limited use of another‘s real 

property for access or other purposes. 

Ecosystem: Any area or volume in which there is an exchange of matter and energy between living and 

nonliving parts; that is, the biotic community together with soil, air, water, and sunlight form an 

ecosystem. Ecosystems are the best units for studying the flow of energy and matter. 

Edge effect: Edge effects occur when natural habitats are interrupted by development or other humaninduced disturbances, including roads, structures, and trampling or vehicle tracks. Edge effects affect 

wildlife species in very different ways, depending on the life history of the species, and cause behavioral 

modifications that can lead to fragmentation of habitat. Some disturbance-adapted species, especially 

shrub/scrub bird species, thrive along edges of roads and other developed areas. Other wildlife species, 

especially large mammals, avoid human-disturbed areas and do not tend to cross roads. Roads also 

increase mortality of small mammals from both increased vehicle collisions and increased predation from 

large mammals, while roads increase mortality of large mammals as a result of vehicle collisions. 

Pollution and bioaccumulation are secondary effects of roads and other development that increase edge 

effects on wildlife and wildlife habitats.

Endangered species: A plant or animal that is in danger of extinction throughout all or a significant 

portion of its range. 

Environmental Impact Statement (EIS): An analytical document that portrays potential impacts on the 

human environment of a particular course of action and its possible alternatives. Required by the National 
Socorro Resource Management Plan 69 Glossary of Terms 

Environmental Policy Act, an EIS is prepared for use by decision makers to assess the environmental 

consequences of a potential decision. 

Ephemeral stream: A stream that flows only in direct response to precipitation in the immediate 

watershed or in response to the melting of a cover of snow and ice and has a channel bottom that is 

always above the local water table.

Erosion: The wearing away of the land surface by running water, wind, ice, or other geologic agents and 

by such processes as gravitation creep.

Exclusion area: An environmentally sensitive area where rights-of-way will be granted only in cases 

where there is a legal requirement to provide such access. 

Extraction: The removal of mineral resources from the land by mining, quarrying, or excavation. 

Federal lands: Lands, or interests in lands (such as easements and rights-of-way), owned by the United 

States. 

Fire regimes: The characteristics of fire in a given ecosystem, including factors such as frequency, 

intensity, severity, and patch size. The terms used for the different fire regimes are: Nonlethal, Mixed 1, 

Mixed 2, and Lethal. Nonlethal fires are generally of the lowest intensity and severity with the smallest 

patches of mortality, while lethal fires are generally of the highest intensity and severity with the largest 

patches of mortality. The others fall in between. 

Fire Regime Condition Class (FRCC): An interagency, standardized tool for determining the degree of 

departure from reference condition vegetation, fuels, and disturbance regimes. Assessing FRCC can help 

guide management objectives and set priorities for treatments.

Fire intensity: The effects of fire on the above-ground vegetation generally described in terms of 

mortality. 

Fire severity: Fire effects at and below the ground surface. Describes the impacts to organic material on 

the ground surface, changes to soils, and mortality of below-ground vegetative buds, roots, rhizomes, and 

other organisms. 

Fire suppression tactics: The tactical approaches regarding suppression of a wildland fire. These range 

from Control, Confine, Contain, and Monitor. Control is the most aggressive tactic, while Monitor is the 

least. 

Fire use: The combination of wildland fire use and prescribed fire application to meet resource 

objectives. 

Floodplain: The land that borders a water body and is subject to flooding on a periodic basis. 

Fluid minerals: In this case, oil, gas, geothermal resources, carbon dioxide, helium, and coal bed 

methane. 

Fossil: Any remains, trace, or imprint of a plant or animal that has been preserved by natural process in 

the earth‘s crust since some past geologic time.
Socorro Resource Management Plan 70 Glossary of Terms 

Geographic Information System (GIS): A system of computer hardware, software, data, people and 

applications that capture, store, edit, analyze, and graphically display a potentially wide array of 

geospatial information.

Grazing: Consumption of native forage from rangelands or pastures by livestock or wildlife. 

Grazing allotment: An area where one or more livestock operators graze their livestock. An allotment 

generally consists of Federal land but may include parcels of private or State-owned land. 

Grazing district: An administrative unit of BLM-managed rangelands established by the Secretary of the 

Interior under the Taylor Grazing Act of 1934. Grazing units are not the same as BLM administrative 

districts. 

Grazing fee: A charge, usually on a monthly basis, for grazing a specific kind of livestock. 

Grazing lease: A document authorizing use of the public lands outside of an established grazing district. 

Grazing leases specify all authorized use including livestock grazing, suspended use, and conservation 

use. Leases specify the total number of animal unit months apportioned, the area authorized for grazing 

use, or both. 

Grazing permit: An authorization that allows grazing on public lands. Permits specify class of livestock 

on a designated area during specified seasons each year. Permits are of two types: preference (10-year) 

and temporary nonrenewable (1 year). 

Grazing preference: The total number (active and suspended non-use) of animal unit months of livestock 

grazing on public land, apportioned and attached to base property owned or controlled by a permittee. 

Grazing season: On Federal lands, an established period for which grazing permits or leases are issued. 

Grazing system: A systematic sequence of grazing use and nonuse of an allotment (pasture or 

management unit) to meet multiple use goals by improving the quality and amount of vegetation. 

Ground water: Subsurface water that fills available openings in rock or soil materials to the extent that 

they are considered water saturated.

Guidelines: Actions or management practices that may be used to achieve desired outcomes, sometimes 

expressed as Best Management Practices. Guidelines may be identified during the land use planning 

process, but they are not considered a land use plan decision unless the plan specifies that they are 

mandatory. Guidelines for grazing administration must conform to 43 CFR4180.2. Guidelines: 

(1) typically identify and prescribe methods of influencing or controlling specific public land uses; (2) are 

developed and applied consistent with the desired condition and within site capability; and (3) may be 

adjusted over time. 

Habitat: A specific set of physical conditions in a geographic area(s) that surrounds a single species, a 

group of species, or a large community. In wildlife management, the major components of habitat are 

food, water, cover, and living space. 

Habitat corridors: A strip or block of habitat connecting otherwise isolated units of similar habitat that 

allows the dispersal of organisms and the consequent mixing of genes. 
Socorro Resource Management Plan 71 Glossary of Terms 

Habitat fragmentation: The division of large, continuous areas of habitat into smaller patches isolated 

from one another. The effects of habitat fragmentation include loss of habitat area and the creation of 

smaller, more isolated patches of remaining habitat. 

Habitat Management Plan (HMP): A written and officially approved plan for a specific geographical 

area of public land that identifies wildlife habitat and related objectives, establishes the sequence of 

actions for achieving objectives, and outlines procedures for evaluating accomplishments. 

Hazardous materials: Substances or mixtures of substances that have the capability of either causing or 

significantly contributing to an increase in mortality or an increase in serious irreversible or incapacitating 

reversible illness, or posing a substantial present or potential risk to human health or the environment. 

Hazardous substance: Term used by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency for chemicals that must 

be reported if released into the environment above a certain amount and, depending on the threat to the 

environment, Federal involvement in handling the incident can be authorized under the Comprehensive 

Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act. 

Hazardous waste: The Resource Conservation and Recovery Act defines hazardous waste as a solid 

waste that may cause an increase in mortality or serious illness or pose a substantial threat to human 

health and the environment when improperly treated, stored, transported, disposed of, or otherwise 

managed. A waste is hazardous if it appears on a series of lists compiled by the U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency or exhibits characteristics of ignitability, corrosivity, reactivity, and/or toxicity. 

Herd Management Area (HMA): The habitat occupied by a wild horse herd on the date of the signing 

of the Wild Free-Roaming Horses and Burros Act. The Bordo Atravesado HMA boundary was delineated 

by the following: wild horse movements and use patterns; horse population and vegetation inventories; 

allotment terrain, water sources and existing fences. 

Herd Management Plan: An activity plan for a wild horse HMA that addresses herd and habitat 

objectives, monitoring methods and schedules, the AML, criteria for selective removal of animals, the 

methods of population control and any restrictions on other resource uses or users. (BLM Manual 4710.3 

A.) 

Heritage tourism: The business and practice of attracting and accommodating visitors to a place or area 

based especially on the unique or special aspects of that locale's history, landscape (including trail 

systems), and culture.

Hydrology: The study of the movement, distribution, and quality of water throughout the earth, addresses 

both the hydrologic cycle and water resources.

Indirect effect (or impact): Secondary effects that occur in locations other than the initial action or later 

in time, but that are caused by the proposed action.

Interdisciplinary Team (IDT): A team of varied land use and resource specialists formed to provide a 

coordinated, integrated information base for overall land use planning and management. 

Interim Management Policy and Guidelines for Lands Under Wilderness Review: This policy 

provides guidance for managing existing Wilderness Study Areas to ensure that an area‘s wilderness 

values are not impaired prior to the establishment of a wilderness area or an area‘s release from 

consideration for this status. 
Socorro Resource Management Plan 72 Glossary of Terms 

Invasive species: A species that is not native to an ecosystem whose introduction does or is likely to 

cause economic or environmental harm or harm to human health. 

Issue: Describes the relationship between actions (proposed, connected, cumulative, similar) and 

environmental (natural, cultural, and socioeconomic) resources. Issues may be questions, concerns, 

problems, or other relationships, including beneficial ones. Issues do not predict the degree or intensity of 

harm the action might cause, but alert the reader as to what the environmental problems might be. 

Jurisdiction: The legal right to control or regulate use of land or a facility. Jurisdiction requires authority, 

but not necessarily ownership. 

Karst: Irregular limestone region with sinks, underground streams, and caverns. Karst landscapes owe 

their existence to the removal of bedrock in solution and to the development of underground drainage 

without the development of surface stream valleys. Within these broad constraints, karst landscapes show 

much variation and are usually described in terms of a dominant landform. 

Karst feature: Cavities, sinkholes, or other solution features in karst terrain that seem to be a cave, but 

do not quite fit the definition given above. Lava tubes and bubbles, while not karst, are included as caves 

if they meet the cave definition. 

Known mineral value: Defined in 43 CFR 2720.0-5: ―...means mineral rights in lands containing 

geologic formations that are valuable in the monetary sense for exploring, developing, or producing 

natural mineral deposits. The presence of such mineral deposits with potential for mineral development 

may be known because of previous exploration, or may be inferred based on geologic information.‖

Landform: A discernible natural landscape that exists as a result of geological activity, such as a plateau, 

plain, basin, or mountain. 

Land Use Plan (LUP): A set of decisions that establish management direction for land within an 

administrative area, as prescribed under the planning provisions of Federal Land Policy and Management 

Act; an assimilation of land-use-plan-level decisions developed through the planning process outlined in 

43 CFR 1600, regardless of the scale at which the decisions were developed. Resource management plans 

are land use plans. 

Landscape: An area composed of interacting ecosystems that are repeated because of geology, landform, 

soils, climate, biota, and human influences throughout the area. Landscapes are generally of a size, shape, 

and pattern, which is determined by interacting ecosystems. 

Lease: An authorization or contract by which one party (lessor) conveys the use of property, such as real 

estate, to another (lessee) in return for rental payments. In addition to rental payments, lessees also pay 

royalties (a percentage of value) to the lessor from resource production. 

Leasable minerals: Those minerals or materials designated as leasable under the Mineral Leasing Act of 

1920. They include coal, phosphate, asphalt, sulfur, potassium and sodium minerals, and oil, gas, and 

geothermal resources. 

Limited area designation: An area restricted at certain times in certain areas, and/or to certain vehicular 

use. 

Locatable mineral: Any valuable mineral that is not salable or leasable, including gold, silver, copper, 

uranium, etc., that may be developed under the General Mining Law of 1872. 
Socorro Resource Management Plan 73 Glossary of Terms 

Management Situation Analysis (MSA): Assessment of the current management direction. It includes a 

consolidation of existing data needed to analyze and resolve identified issues, a description of current 

BLM management guidance, and a discussion of existing problems and the opportunities for solving 

them.

Mechanical treatment: Involves the use of various types of mechanized equipment to clear out 

understory, brush, and/or trees and then pile and burn it to reduce fuel loadings and wildfire risk.

Mineral entry: The location of mining claims by an individual to protect his/her right to a valuable 

mineral. 

Mineral potential: The four categories of mineral potential are defined in BLM Manual 3031 and are 

based on the geologic environment, inferred geologic processes, and reported mineral occurrences. 

Mineral potential is designated as none, low, moderate, or high. In addition, each mineral potential 

category is supplemented with a designation of the level of certainty regarding the level of confidence in 

the assessed data.

Mineral rights: Outstanding third-party rights or an interest in minerals not owned by the person or party 

conveying the land to the United States. Mineral rights are an exception in a deed that is the result of prior 

conveyance separating title of certain minerals from the surface estate. 

Mineral withdrawal: A withdrawal of public lands, which are potentially valuable for leasable minerals. 

This precludes the disposal of the lands except with a mineral reservation, or unless the lands are found to 

not be valuable for minerals. 

Multiple use: Multiple use as defined by the Multiple Use – Sustained Yield Act of 1960 means, (1) the 

management of all the various renewable surface resources so that they are used in the combination that 

will best meet the needs of the American people, (2) making the most judicious use of the land for some 

or all of these resources or related services over areas large enough to provide sufficient latitude for 

periodic adjustments in use to conform to changing needs and conditions, (3) that some land will be used 

for less than all of the resources, and (4) harmonious and coordinated management of the various 

resources, each with the other, without impairment of the productivity of the land, with consideration 

being given to the relative values of the various resources, and not necessarily the combination of uses 

that will be given the greatest dollar return or the greatest unit output. 

Multiple Use Conflict Analysis: 43 CFR 3420.1-4(e) requires the BLM to analyze potential coal leasing 

areas to assess whether the lands are actually unsuitable for coal leasing due to conflicts with other 

resource concerns. This analysis is included in Multiple-Use Screening Analysis.

National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS): The allowable concentrations of air pollutants in 

the air specified by the Federal government. The air quality standards are divided into primary standards 

(based on the air quality criteria and allowing an adequate margin of safety and requisite to protect the 

public health) and secondary standards (based on the air quality criteria and allowing an adequate margin 

of safety and requisite to protect the public welfare) from any unknown or expected adverse effects of air 

pollutants. 

National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA): An Act that encourages productive and enjoyable 

harmony between man and his environment and promotes efforts to prevent or eliminate damage to the 

environment and biosphere and stimulate the health and welfare of man; enriches understanding of the 

ecological systems and natural resources important to the Nation, and established the Council on 

Environmental Quality.
Socorro Resource Management Plan 74 Glossary of Terms 

National Register of Historic Places (National Register): A listing of architectural, historical, 

archaeological, and cultural sites of local, State, or national significance. The list of sites was established 

by the Historic Preservation Act of 1966 and is maintained by the National Park Service. 

Native species: With respect to a particular ecosystem, a species that, other than as a result of an 

introduction, historically occurred or currently occurs in that ecosystem. 

Nonpoint source pollution: Pollution from diffuse sources caused by rainfall or snowmelt moving over 

and through the ground. 

Noxious weeds: Plant species that have been legally designated as unwanted or undesirable. This 

includes national, State, and county or local designations. Typically, an undesirable noxious weed species 

can crowd out more desirable species. According to the Federal Noxious Weed Law, native plant species 

are not designated ―noxious.‖ Native plant species that may be of management concern, such as 

poisonous plants or desert shrub and subshrub species, are not considered priorities for noxious weed 

work or funding. 

Off-Highway Vehicle (OHV): A vehicle (including four-wheel drive, trail bikes, all-terrain vehicles, and 

snowmobiles, but excluding helicopters, fixed-wing aircraft, and boats) capable of traveling off road over 

land, water, ice, snow, sand, marshes, and other terrain. OHV designations are defined in Appendix J. 

Open: Generally denotes that an area is available for a particular use or uses. Refer to specific program 

definitions found in law, regulations, or policy guidance for application to individual programs. For 

example, 43 CFR 8340.0-5 defines the specific meaning of ―open‖ as it relates to off-highway vehicle 

use. 

Paleontology: The science of animal and plant fossil remains. 

Particulate matter: Includes dust, soot, and other tiny bits of solid materials that are released into and 

move around in the air. Particulates are produced by many sources, including burning of diesel fuels by 

trucks and buses, incineration of garbage, mixing, and application of fertilizers and pesticides, road 

construction, industrial processes such as steel making, mining operations, agricultural burning (field and 

slash burning), and operation of fireplaces and woodstoves. 

Perennial plant: A plant that has a life cycle of 3 or more years. 

Perennial stream: A stream or that part of a stream that flows continuously during all of the calendar 

year as a result of ground-water discharge or surface runoff.

Permeability: The ease with which gases, liquids (water), or plant roots penetrate or pass through a bulk 

mass of soil or a layer of soil. Since different soil horizons vary in permeability, the particular horizon 

under question should be designated. 

Permit: Permits are one of three forms of a land use authorization (the others are leases and easements). 

Permits are short-term, revocable authorizations to use public lands for specific purposes that involve 

either little or no land improvement, construction, or investment that can be amortized within the term of 

the permit. A permit conveys no possessory interest. The permit is renewable at the discretion of the 

authorized officer and may be revoked in accordance with its terms and applicable regulations. 

Permitted livestock use: The forage allocated by, or under the guidance of, an applicable land use plan 

for livestock grazing in an allotment under a permit or lease and expressed in animal unit months.
Socorro Resource Management Plan 75 Glossary of Terms 

Planning criteria: The standards, rules, and other factors developed by managers and interdisciplinary 

teams for their use in forming judgments about decision making, analysis, and data collection during 

planning. Planning criteria streamline and simplify the resource management planning actions. 

Point-source pollution: Pollution that comes from an identified source or location—―end-of-the-pipe‖

pollution. 

Potable water: Water suitable for drinking. 

Preliminary Investigations: Geophysical exploratory activities meant to locate potential oil, gas, or other 

fluid mineral resources prior to applying for a lease. Operators seeking to perform such investigations 

must complete and file at Form 3150-4, ―Notice of Intent to Conduct Oil and Gas Exploration 

Operations‖ for all operations on public lands.

Prescribed fire: Fire set intentionally in wildland fuels under prescribed conditions and circumstances. 

Prescribed fire should be used to mitigate the suppression of natural fires. 

Prevention of significant deterioration: A Clean Air Act requirement to include a permit review process 

applicable to the construction and operation of new and modified stationary sources in attainment areas. 

Primitive: An unmodified natural environment of fairly large size. Use of motor vehicles is prohibited. 

There is an extremely high probability of experiencing isolation, closeness to nature, and self-reliance on 

outdoor skills. 

Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement (PEIS): A comprehensive National Environmental 

Policy Act document prepared to analyze the environmental consequences of alternative programs or 

management strategies under consideration. A programmatic EIS is prepared to help determine a 

consistent, broad management approach that can be used by BLM field-level staff for local land use 

planning. The programmatic environmental impact statement is intended to support and expedite sitespecific analysis or NEPA efforts for individual projects. 

Public land: Land or interest in land owned by the United States and administered by the Secretary of the 

Interior through the BLM without regard to how the United States acquired ownership, except lands 

located on the Outer Continental Shelf, and land held for the benefit of Indians, Aleuts, and Eskimos.

Raptors: Birds of prey, such as the eagle, falcon, hawk, owl, or vulture. 

Raptor nest: For the purposes of this RMP, a raptor nest is defined as any raptor or corvid nest. 

Reclaim/reclamation: The process of converting disturbed land to its former use or other productive 

uses. In some instances, the term is also used for the act of adapting wild or natural resources to serve a 

utilitarian purpose such as converting riparian habitats to agriculture. 

Recreation experiences: Psychological outcomes realized either by recreation-tourism participants as a 

direct result of their onsite leisure engagements and recreation-tourism activity participation or by nonparticipating community residents as a result of their interaction with visitors and guests within their 

community and/or interaction with the BLM and other public and private recreation-tourism providers 

and their actions. 

Recreation opportunities: Favorable circumstances enabling visitors‘ engagement in a leisure activity to 

realize immediate psychological experiences and attain more lasting, value-added beneficial outcomes. 
Socorro Resource Management Plan 76 Glossary of Terms 

Recreational Opportunity Spectrum (ROS): A conceptual planning tool that characterizes recreation 

opportunities in terms of setting, activity, and experience opportunities. ROS is based on a set of criteria 

according to a land‘s physical, social, and managerial settings, which in combination define a land area‘s 

capability and suitability for providing a particular range of recreational experience opportunities. In 

ROS, the setting, activities, and opportunities for experiences are arranged along a spectrum of six 

classes: 

(1) primitive, 

(2) semi-primitive non-motorized, 

(3) semi-primitive motorized, 

(4) roaded natural, 

(5) rural, and 

(6) urban. 

The resulting ROS analysis defines specific geographic areas on the ground, each of which encompasses 

one of the six classes. 

Recreation settings. The collective, distinguishing attributes of landscapes that influence, and sometimes 

actually determine, what kinds of recreation opportunities are produced. These include opportunities for 

engaging in specific recreation activities, attaining both satisfying and dissatisfying recreation 

experiences, and attaining both beneficial and unbeneficial outcomes. 

Rehabilitate: Restore to a state of good condition or operation (e.g., a management alternative and/or 

practice that restores landscapes to a desired condition). 

Reserved mineral rights: The retention of ownership of all or part of the mineral rights by a person or 

party conveying land to the United States. Conditions for the exercising of these rights have been defined 

in the Secretary of the Interior‘s ―Rules and Regulations to Govern Exercising of Mineral Rights 

Reserved Conveyance to the United States‖ attached to and made a part of deeds reserving mineral rights. 

Restore/restoration: The process of restoring site conditions as they were before land disturbance. Note: 

restoration involves restoring a site to a specific point in time. 

Resource management plan (RMP): A land use plan that establishes land use allocations, multiple-use 

guidelines, and management objectives for a given planning area. The RMP planning system has been 

used by the BLM since 1980. 

Revision: The process of completely rewriting the land use plan due to changes in the planning area 

affecting major portions of the plan or the entire plan. 

Right-of-Way (ROW): Land authorized to be used or occupied for the construction, operation, 

maintenance, and termination of a project, pursuant to a right-of-way authorization. 

Riparian: Areas of wetland transition between permanently saturated wetlands and upland areas. These 

areas exhibit vegetation or physical characteristics reflective of permanent surface or subsurface water 

influence. 

Riparian habitat: Riparian habitat is an ecological transition between an in-stream community of plants 

and animals and the adjacent, upland community. Normally the term is used for perennial, or year-round 
Socorro Resource Management Plan 77 Glossary of Terms 

flowing streams. The term xeroriparian habitat is used to describe the distinct plant and animal 

communities that concentrate around dry washes and are sustained by desert storms. 

Roaded natural: a predominantly natural-appearing environment with moderate evidence of humans. 

Evidence usually harmonizes with the natural environment. Management provides for the use of 

conventional motorized vehicles. There is an equal probability to experience affiliation with other user 

groups and for isolation and interaction with the natural environment. 

Roadless: Refers to the absence of roads constructed and maintained by mechanical means. 

Roads: Vehicle routes that are improved and maintained by mechanical means to ensure relatively regular 

and continuous use. (A way maintained strictly by the passage of vehicles does not constitute a road.)

Rural: This is a substantially modified environment. Resource modifications and utilization practices are 

to enhance specific recreation activities. Facilities are designed for use by a large number of people. 

Motorized use and parking opportunities are available. The probability of user interaction is moderate to 

high, as is the convenience of sites and opportunities. 

Sacred sites (American Indian): Defined in Executive Order 13007 as ―any specific, discrete, narrowly 

delineated location on Federal land that is identified by an Indian tribe, or Indian individual determined to 

be an appropriately authoritative representative of an Indian religion, as sacred by virtue of its established 

religious significance to, or ceremonial use by, an Indian religion; provided that the tribe or appropriately 

authoritative representative of an Indian religion has informed the agency of the existence of such a site.‖

Salable minerals: Minerals that may be sold under the Material Sale Act of 1947, as amended. Included 

are common varieties of sand, stone, gravel, and clay. 

Saturated: When referring to soil, the maximum amount of water that can be held either when the soil is 

frozen or the spaces between the soil particles are filled with water. Any additional seepage over saturated 

soil will result in runoff. 

Scenic area: An area with a landscape character that exhibits a high degree of variety and harmony 

among the basic elements that results in a pleasant landscape to view. 

Scenic quality: The relative worth of a landscape from a visual perception point of view. The seven 

factors (landform, vegetation, water, color, adjacent scenery, scarcity, and cultural modifications) used to 

evaluate the scenic quality of a landscape. The relative scenic quality (A, B, or C) assigned to a landscape 

by applying the scenic quality evaluation key factors, with scenic quality A being the highest rating. The 

scenic-quality-rating unit is defined as a portion of the landscape that displays primarily homogenous 

visual characteristics of the basic landscape features (land and water form, vegetation, and structures). 

Season of use: The time during which livestock grazing is permitted on a given range area, as specified in 

the grazing permit. 

Semi-primitive Motorized: This is a predominantly natural or natural-appearing environment of 

moderate to large size. User interaction is low, but there is evidence of other users. Minimum on-site 

controls and restrictions may be present. Use of motorized vehicles is permitted. There is a moderate 

probability of experiencing isolation, closeness to nature, and self-reliance in outdoor skills. 

Semi-primitive Non-motorized: This is a predominantly natural or natural-appearing environment of 

moderate to large size. Minimum on-site controls and restrictions may be present. Use of motorized 
Socorro Resource Management Plan 78 Glossary of Terms 

vehicles is prohibited. There is a high probability of experiencing isolation, closeness to nature, and selfreliance in outdoor skills 

Sensitive species: Species not yet officially listed but that are undergoing status review for listing on the 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service official Threatened and Endangered list; species whose populations are 

small and widely dispersed or restricted to a few localities; and species whose numbers are declining so 

rapidly that official listing may be necessary. 

Site hardening: Site hardening is a measure, or combination of measures, taken to make an 

archaeological or historic site less vulnerable to effects from visitation. These measures may include 

surface collection, signing, on-site hosts, vehicle barriers, data recovery, or other means. 

Special Management Area (SMA): An area identified by the BLM for the management of a specific 

resource or resources. 

Special Recreation Management Area (SRMA): A public lands unit identified in land use plans to 

direct recreation funding and personnel to fulfill commitments made to provide specific, structured 

recreation opportunities (i.e., activity, experience, and benefit opportunities). The BLM recognizes three 

distinct types of SRMAs: community-based, intensive, and undeveloped big open. 

Special Status Species (SSS): Includes proposed species, listed species, and candidate species under the 

Endangered Species Act; state-listed species; and BLM state director-designated sensitive species (see 

BLM Manual 6840, Special Status Species Policy). 

Standard: A description of the physical and biological conditions or degree of function required for 

healthy, sustainable lands (e.g., Land Health Standards). To be expressed as a desired outcome (goal). 

Streamside Management Zone (SMZ): Those areas adjacent to natural streams and rivers that serve as 

buffer zones to filter sedimentation from land-disturbing activities. 

Structural diversity: The diversity of the composition, abundance, spacing, and other attributes of plants 

in a community. 

Sustainable use (production): The continuation of livestock grazing at a uniform level while 

maintaining a healthy desired plant community. 

Terms and conditions: Stipulations contained in livestock grazing permits and leases as determined by 

the Authorized Officer to be appropriate to achieve management and resource condition objectives for the 

public lands and other lands administered by the BLM and to achieve standards for rangeland health and 

ensure conformance with guidelines for grazing administration. Terms and conditions also apply to fluid 

mineral leases, as defined in Appendix D. 

Threatened species: Any animal or plant species likely to become endangered within the foreseeable 

future throughout all of a significant portion of its range. These species are listed by the U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service. 

Total Dissolved Solids (TDS): A water quality criterion defining the concentration of dissolved organic 

and inorganic chemicals in water. 

Travel and transportation management system: A program to be developed by the BLM to manage 

access for motorized, mechanized, and non-motorized recreation. Travel will be managed through a 
Socorro Resource Management Plan 79 Glossary of Terms 

network of authorized routes and access points. A management plan will be developed to provide policy 

and guidance for addressing the regulation, maintenance, and monitoring of the routes and other 

components of the travel and transportation system. 

Unclassified area (for air quality): An area that cannot be classified on the basis of available 

information as meeting or not meeting the Federal primary or secondary ambient air quality standard for 

the pollutant. 

Urban: This is a substantially urbanized environment, although the background may have naturalappearing elements. Renewable resource modernization and urbanization practices are to enhance specific 

recreation opportunities. Vegetative cover is often exotic and manicured. Large numbers of users can be 

expected on site and in nearby areas. Facilities for highly intensified motor-vehicle use and parking are 

available. The probability of user interaction is high, as is the convenience of sites and opportunities. 

Utility corridor: A linear corridor usually designated for facilities such as power lines, pipelines, fiberoptic cables, roads, etc. 

Viable: A [wildlife] population that has the estimated numbers and distribution of reproductive 

individuals to ensure its continued existence. 

Viewshed: The landscape that can be directly seen under favorable atmospheric conditions, from a 

viewpoint or along a transportation corridor. 

Visual resources: The visible physical features on a landscape (e.g., land, water, vegetation, animals, 

structures, and other features). Visual resources are managed by inventory and planning actions taken to 

identify resource values and to establish objectives for managing those values; and the management 

actions taken to achieve the visual management objectives. 

Visual Resource Management (VRM): The inventory and planning actions taken to identify visual 

resource values and to establish objectives for managing those values, and management actions taken to 

achieve the established objectives. 

Visual resource management classes: Categories assigned to public lands based on scenic quality, 

sensitivity level, and distance zones. There are four classes. Each class has an objective that prescribes the 

amount of change allowed in the characteristic landscape. 

Water Trapping: Sometimes referred to as bait trapping, this refers to the process of capturing wild 

horses and burros by using bait to lure animals into a trap. This method is the least stressful to the animals 

and shall be used whenever practical. 

Watershed: A watershed is the area of land where all of the water that is under it or drains off of it goes 

into the same place 

Ways: Primitive two-track trails located within wilderness study areas.

Wetlands: Areas that are inundated or saturated by surface or ground water at a frequency and duration 

sufficient to support, and that under normal circumstances do support, a prevalence of vegetation typically 

adapted for life in saturated soil conditions. Examples of wetlands include marshes, shallow swamps, 

lakeshores, bogs, muskegs, wet meadows, estuaries, and riparian areas. 
Socorro Resource Management Plan 80 Glossary of Terms 

Wilderness area: An area officially designated as wilderness by Congress. Wilderness areas will be 

managed to preserve wilderness characteristics and shall be devoted to ―the public purposes of recreation, 

scenic, scientific, educational, conservation, and historical use.‖

Wilderness Characteristics: Areas with wilderness characteristics include roadless areas of at least 

5,000 acres of public lands or of a manageable size and may be summarized as land that is: 

Untrammeled – essentially unhindered and free from modern human control or manipulation that 

generally appears to have been affected primarily by the forces of nature; Natural – ecological systems are 

substantially free from the effects of modern civilization; Undeveloped – essentially without permanent 

improvement or modern human occupation; and, has Outstanding Opportunities for solitude or primitive 

and unconfined recreation. (Section 2(c) of the Wilderness Act). 

Wilderness Study Area (WSA): Areas under study for possible inclusion as a wilderness area in the 

National Wilderness Preservation System. 

Wildland fire (or wildfire): Any unplanned fire, as opposed to a prescribed fire, that occurs in a natural 

or wildland setting and does not involve a home or other structure. These fires may require suppression 

actions. 

Wildland fire use (for resource benefits): The management of naturally ignited wildland fires to 

accomplish specific, pre-stated resource management objectives in predefined geographic areas outlined 

in fire management plans, such as in areas that will benefit from fuels reduction. 

Wildland-Urban Interface (WUI): The line, area, or zone where structures and other human 

developments meet or intermingle with wildland or vegetative fuel. Interface is further delineated by (1) 

developed areas with residential structures where many structures border wildland on a broad front or (2) 

developed areas with private residential structures where developments are few in number scattered over 

a large area surrounded by wildland. 

Windrow: Woody debris that has been piled into a long continuous row, as if by the wind.
Socorro Resource Management Plan 81 References 

REFERENCES 

BLM: See U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management 

Capp, J., B. Van Zee, P. Alaback, J. Boughton, M. Copenhagen, and J. Martin. 1992. Final Report, 

Ecological Definitions for Old-Growth Forest Types in the Alaska Region. Prepared by the 

Ecology Steering Committee, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Alaska Region 

(Region 10). 

Catron County. 1992. Catron County Comprehensive Land Use Plan. Published by the National Federal 

Lands Conference. October. 

Elzinga, C.L., D.W. Salazer, and J.W. Willoughby. 1998. Measuring and Monitoring Plant 

Populations. BLM Technical Reference 1730-1. Copies available from BLM National Business 

Center. Denver, Colorado. 

Green, P., J. Joy, D. Sirucek, W. Hann, A. Zack, and B. Naumann. 1992. Old-Growth Forest Types of 

the Northern Region. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Northern Region, Missoula, 

Montana (Region 1). 

Hamilton, R.G., compiler. 1993. Characteristics of Old-Growth Forests in the Intermountain Region. 

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Region, Ogden, Utah (Region 4). 

Mehl, Mel S. 1992. Old-Growth Descriptions for the Major Forest Cover Types in the Rocky Mountain 

Region, In Old-Growth Forests in the Southwest and Rocky Mountain Regions: Proceedings of a 

Workshop, Kaufmann, M.R., W.H. Moir, and R.L. Bassett, technical coordinators. U.S. 

Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station, 

Fort Collins, Colorado. General Technical Report RM 213 (Region 2). 

National Park Service and Bureau of Land Management: See U.S. Department of the Interior, 

National Park Service and Bureau of Land Management 

New Mexico Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit. 2005. Assessment of Predictive Values 

from the Aplomado Falcon Habitat Suitability Model: Validation Information for Conservation 

Planning in the Northern Chihuahuan Desert. August. http://fws-nmcfwru.nmsu.edu/aplomado/ 

falcon_deliverables/Final_report/Young_et_al_FAFE_model_assessment_2005.pdf. 

New Mexico Environment Department (NMED). 1999. New Mexico Nonpoint Source Management 

Program. Surface Water Quality Bureau, NPS Pollution Section. Santa Fe, New Mexico. 

December. 

Shaver P., M. Pellant, D.A. Pyke, and J.E. Herrick. 2000. Interpreting Indicators of Rangeland 

Health, version 3. Technical Reference 1734-6. USDI, BLM, National Science and Technology 

Center, Denver, Colorado.

Socorro County. 1998. Socorro County Comprehensive Plan. Socorro, New Mexico. 

U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Region. 1993. Region 6 

Interim Old Growth Definitions for the Douglas-Fir Series, Grand Fir/White Fir Series, Interior 

Douglas-Fir Series, Lodgepole Pine Series, Pacific Silver Fir Series, Ponderosa Pine Series, Port 

Orford Cedar Series, Tanoak (Redwood) Series, Western Hemlock Series. U.S. Department of 

Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Region, Portland, Oregon (Region 6). 
Socorro Resource Management Plan 82 References 

U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), Forest Service, Pacific Southwest Region. 1992. Old 

Growth Definitions/Characteristics for Eleven Forest Cover Types. Pacific Southwest Region, 

San Francisco, California (Region 5). 

______. 1992. Recommended Old-Growth Definitions and Descriptions and Old-Growth Allocation 

Procedure (Region 3).

U.S. Department of Interior (USDI), Bureau of Land Management (BLM). 2001. H-4180-1 

Rangeland Health Standards Handbook. Washington, D.C. 

____. 1979. East Socorro Grazing Environmental Statement. 

____. 1982. West Socorro Rangeland Management Program and Final Environmental Impact Statement. 

Socorro, NM: San Augustine Resource Area. 

____. 1984. Visual Resource Management, BLM Manual Handbook 8400. Washington, D.C.

____. 1992. Old Growth Definitions/Characteristics for Eleven Forest Cover Types. Pacific Southwest 

Region, San Francisco, California (Region 5). 

____. 1993. Riparian Area Management, Process for Assessing Proper Functioning Condition. Technical 

Reference 1737-9. USDI, BLM, Service Center, Denver, Colorado. 

____. 1995. H-8550-1 Interim Management Policy for Lands Under Wilderness Review. Washington 

D.C.

____. 1997. Bureau of Land Management Strategic Plan. September 30. 

____. 1998. A User Guide To Assess Proper Functioning Condition And Support Science For Lotic Areas

(supplement to T-1737-9). USDI, BLM, Service Center, Denver, Colorado. 

____. 1999. Emergency Fire Rehabilitation Handbook. H-1742-1. July. 

____. 2001. Rangeland Health Standards Handbook. H-4180-1. Washington, D.C. 

____. 2003. Mapping of Land Tenure, Ownership, and Other Existing Data. Socorro Field Office, 

Socorro, New Mexico. 

____. 2004. Decision Record and Resource Management Plan Amendment for Fire and Fuels 

Management on Public Land in New Mexico and Texas. BLM-NM-PL-013-2824. U.S. 

Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management, New Mexico State Office. 

____.2005. Land Use Planning Handbook H-1601-1. (Supersedes Rel. 1-1667) March 2005. 

U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service and Bureau of Land Management. 2004. El 

Camino Real de Tierra Adentro National Historic Trail Comprehensive Management Plan/Final 

Environmental Impact Statement. Long Distance Trails Group—Santa Fe, National Park Service, 

and New Mexico State Office, Bureau of Land Management, Santa Fe.\ 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2005. Draft Environmental Assessment for Reestablishment 

of the Endangered Northern Aplomado Falcon into New Mexico and Arizona. 

Waichler, W.S., R.F. Miller, and P.S. Doescher. 2001. Community characteristics of old-growth 

western juniper woodlands. Journal of Range Management, 54:518-527. 
Socorro Resource Management Plan 83 Appendix A: Planning Criteria 

APPENDIX A: PLANNING CRITERIA 

PLANNING ISSUES FOR THE RMP/EIS 

As noted in Chapter 1: Introduction, six issues have been identified that need to be resolved through the 

planning process. In addition to the general planning criteria identified above, other specific planning 

criteria have been developed to aid in resolving the issues. These criteria are described below and are the 

standards that the BLM will consider in developing resolutions to the issues. 

Issue 1 

Which areas, if any, should be designated for special management, what designations should apply 

(areas of critical environmental concern, special management areas, or other), and how should they 

be managed? 

To resolve this issue, the BLM considered: 

Resource to be managed

Manageability of the areas

Existing areas of critical environmental 

concern representation

Current and potential land uses

Effects of designation on other resources 

and uses

Social and economic effects

Public interests and attitudes

Consistency of designation with resource 

plans of other agencies, local government, 

or Tribes

Long-term versus short-term benefit

Public health and safety

Effects of non-designation on resources

Issue 2 

What type of management should be undertaken at the watershed level to reduce erosion, improve 

surface water quality, maintain and improve vegetation, and reduce nonpoint-source pollution? 

To resolve this issue, the BLM considered: 

Watershed condition and trend and 

productivity potential

Resource values

Current and potential land uses

Social and economic effects

Public interests and attitudes

Condition and trend of native plant 

communities

Presence of special status species, both 

plants and animals

Input from the scientific community

Need for increased vegetation cover to 

reduce soil erosion, increase livestock 

forage, improve wildlife habitat and 

improve water quality

Habitat fragmentation/connectivity for all 

wildlife species

Use of land treatments to maintain or 

improve plant communities

Maintenance or enhancement of biological 

diversity

Presence of noxious weeds and conflicts 

between exotic and native species

Issue 3 

How should potential energy, fluid, and solid mineral development in the Planning Area be managed? 

To resolve this issue, the BLM considered: 
Socorro Resource Management Plan 84 Appendix A: Planning Criteria 

Resource values

Current and potential land uses

Social and economic effects

Public interests and attitudes

National energy policy

Potential for alternative energy sources

Input from the scientific community

Reasonable foreseeable development of the 

resource

Effects on other resources

Habitat fragmentation/connectivity for all 

wildlife species

Presence of special status species, both 

plant and animal and their habitats

Issue 4 

How should travel and transportation including motorized vehicle use, off-highway vehicles, mountain 

biking, hiking, horseback riding, and others be managed to satisfy public demand while protecting the 

natural values of the public land? 

To resolve this issue, the BLM considered: 

Existing route network and designations

Public demand for additional activities and 

locations

Compatibility with adjacent land uses and 

resources

Effects of vehicle uses on other resources 

and uses

Public health and safety

Social and economic effects

Public access to public land

Needs of other resource uses

Route designation and closure criteria (as 

described in Appendix J)

Issue 5 

What land use allocations or lands and realty program initiatives need to be addressed in the plan to 

accommodate the effective management and support of other resource programs within the area? 

To resolve this issue, the BLM considered: 

Current and future uses of public land

Social and economic effects

Public interest and attitudes

Compatibility of adjacent land uses and 

resources

Public access to public lands

Long-term versus short-term benefit

Issue 6 

How should the BLM best pursue cultural and recreational initiatives to provide the public with 

quality tourism and cultural heritage tourism opportunities? 

To resolve this issue, the BLM considered: 

Current and future uses of public land

Public interest and attitudes

Social and economic effects

Public access to public lands

Local community and Tribal needs and 

interests

Input from the scientific community

Opportunities for local partnerships

Long-term versus short-term benefit

Site hardening and vulnerability to effects 

from visitation
Socorro Resource Management Plan 85 Appendix A: Planning Criteria 

Issues Considered but Eliminated from Detailed Analysis 

During the scoping process and the initial phases of plan development, a number of potential alternatives 

and issues were identified. However, some of these issues were determined to be beyond the scope of the 

plan and thus were eliminated from further consideration. These issues included: 

WSA Designations – During public scoping, it was suggested that the BLM consider designating 

additional lands with wilderness values as Wilderness Study Areas (WSAs). However, BLM 

policy does not allow for the designation of WSAs through the land use planning process. 

Therefore, designation of WSAs was not considered in the RMP. Any areas with wilderness 

characteristics—areas that are essentially natural, of adequate size, and providing opportunities 

for either solitude or primitive, unconfined recreation—may be managed under another 

designation such as ACEC or SMA. 

Bioaccumulation of Contaminates in Fish and Wildlife Species – Bioaccumulation of 

contaminates in fish and wildlife species as a result of power plant emissions was raised as a 

concern during public scoping. This was not addressed as an issue in the RMP for a number of 

reasons. Power plants outside of the Planning Area are beyond the scope of this RMP, and 

therefore their emissions cannot be addressed. At this time, there is no proposal for the 

development of a coal-fired power plant anywhere in the Planning Area. If such a proposal were 

to come forth in the future, an EIS will be required as part of the permitting process. Such an EIS 

will consider all cumulative impacts to the Planning Area, including contaminate emissions, 

before a decision is made regarding the proposed plant 

Urban Interface Problems – During the scoping process, urban interface problems were raised as 

a possible issue. These issues centered on the second home/retirement home subdivisions in 

Catron County. In analyzing this concern, the planning team determined it is primarily a 

recreation issue. It was concluded that these problems could be adequately addressed through 

special designation management, OHV management, and trail and access management. 

Through this planning process, the BLM considered and evaluated public land for ACEC designation. 

BLM policy (BLM Manual 1613 and Title 43 Code of Federal Regulations Part 1610.7-2 [43 CFR 

1610.7-2]) requires that before an ACEC can be designated, it must meet certain criteria to establish the 

area‘s relevance and importance. If the area meets the relevance and importance criteria, it must then be 

demonstrated to require special management attention to protect the important and relevant values. That 

is, the area must require management prescriptions or measures to protect the important and relevant 

values from the potential effect of actions permitted by the RMP. 

Initially, the BLM identified broad areas of public land to evaluate under the ACEC designation criteria. 

These areas were identified by individual resource specialists under specific resource programs including 

wildlife, threatened and endangered species, cultural resources, and recreation. As the evaluation and 

coordination process progressed, multiple resource values were recognized in some areas, consolidating 

some ACEC designation proposals. During this process, some proposed ACEC areas were eliminated 

because they did not meet the ACEC designation criteria. Acreages and special management prescriptions 

were modified throughout the process with the goal of identifying only those areas most suitable for 

ACEC designation. These areas were carried forward under the alternative plans considered. 

Some of the management strategies considered, such as implementation of various Best Management 

Practices, development of watershed management plans, and development of partnerships, do not require 

RMP-level decisions to implement. These decisions can be implemented at any time without amending or 

revising the RMP; therefore, they were not included in the alternatives descriptions. Other proposed 

management strategies, such as maintaining vegetative cover and soil conditions, are managed under the 
Socorro Resource Management Plan 86 Appendix A: Planning Criteria 

New Mexico Standards for Public Land Health and Guidelines for Livestock and Grazing Management 

(New Mexico Standards and Guidelines) and do not require separate management decisions. 

Lastly, some management strategies were considered but eliminated because they are out of the scope of 

this RMP, and/or not within the BLM‘s decision framework and authority. For example, requiring 

licenses and permits or imposing fees on OHV use is not within the scope of this RMP. Likewise, 

providing access across private land or authorizing or restricting activities on nonpublic land (except 

activities associated with Federal subsurface minerals) is not within the BLM‘s decision framework and 

authority. 

GENERAL PLANNING CRITERIA 

The following general planning criteria have guided the preparation of this Resource Management Plan 

and will continue to guide land use decisions made in the future. 

Apply the principles of multiple use and sustained yield as set forth in the Federal Land Policy 

and Management Act and other applicable laws. 

Use a systematic, interdisciplinary approach to achieve integrated consideration of physical, 

biological, economic, social, and environmental aspects of public land management. 

Give priority to the identification, designation, protection, and special management of areas of 

critical environmental concern. 

Consider the relative significance of the public land products, services, and uses to local 

economies. 

Rely on available inventories of the public lands, their resources, and other values with updating 

the inventory to the extent necessary to reach sound management decisions. 

Consider present and potential uses of the public lands. 

Consider impacts of uses on adjacent or nearby non-Federal lands and on nonpublic land surface 

over federally owned minerals. 

Consider the relative scarcity of the values involved and the availability of alternative means 

(including recycling) and sites for realization of those values. 

Weigh long-term benefits and detriments against short-term benefits and detriments. 

Comply fully with applicable pollution control laws, regulations, and policies, including State and 

Federal air, water, noise, or other pollution standards or implementation plans. 

Coordinate Bureau of Land Management (BLM) resource inventory, planning, and management 

activities with the resource planning and management programs of other Federal departments and 

agencies, State and local governments, and Native American Tribes to the extent consistent with 

the laws governing the administration of the public lands. 

Provide for public involvement including early notice and frequent opportunity for citizens and 

interested groups and others including Native American Tribes to participate in and comment on 

the preparation of plans and related guidance. 

Comply fully with all Federal laws that guide management of specific resources such as the 

Endangered Species Act, Clean Water Act, National Historic Preservation Act, Taylor Grazing 

Act, and others. 
Socorro Resource Management Plan 87 Appendix A: Planning Criteria 

Comply fully with the BLM national policy on special status species that states ―the BLM shall 

carry out management consistent with the principles of multiple use, for the conservation of 

candidate (and sensitive) species and their habitats and shall ensure that actions authorized, 

funded, or carried out do not contribute to the need to list any of these species as threatened or 

endangered.‖ (BLM 6840 Manual) 

Reflect Federal land management agency obligations under applicable Tribal treaties and laws or 

executive orders relating to Native American reserved rights, religious freedoms, traditional use 

areas, etc. 

Comply with EO 13443 – Facilitation of Hunting Heritage and Wildlife Conservation. 
Socorro Resource Management Plan 88 Appendix B: Acts of Authority and Mandates for the BLM 

APPENDIX B: ACTS OF AUTHORITY AND MANDATES FOR THE BLM 

A number of Federal statutes have been enacted over time to establish and define the authority of the 

Bureau of Land Management (BLM) to make decisions on the management and use of resources on 

public land. Following is a list of major legal authorities relevant to BLM land use planning. 

Federal Land Policy and Management Act (FLPMA) of 1976, as amended (43 United States Code 

[U.S.C.] 1701 et seq.) provides the authority for BLM land use planning. This statute and its 

implementing regulations define principles for the management of public land and its resources. This Act 

directs the Secretary of the Interior to develop, maintain, and, when appropriate, revise land use plans that 

provide for the use of public land managed on the basis of multiple use and sustained yield unless 

otherwise specified by law. Through FLPMA, the BLM is responsible for the balanced management of 

the public land and resources and their various values. FLPMA specifically states that public land will be 

managed under the principles of multiple use, and, further, indicates that multiple use includes 

harmonious and coordinated management of the various resources without permanent impairment of the 

productivity of the land and the quality of the environment. 

Section 102 (a) (7) and (8) sets forth the policy of the United States concerning the management 

of BLM-managed lands. 

Section 201 requires the Secretary to prepare and maintain an inventory of all BLM-managed 

public lands and their resource and other values, giving priority to areas of critical environmental 

concern, and, as funding and workforce are available, to determine the boundaries of the public 

lands, provide signs and maps to the public, and provide inventory data to state and local 

governments. 

Section 202 (a) requires the Secretary, with public involvement, to develop, maintain, and when 

appropriate, revise land use plans that provide by tracts or areas for the use of the BLM lands. 

Section 202 (c) (9) requires that land use plans for BLM-managed public lands be consistent with 

Tribal plans and, to the maximum extent consistent with applicable Federal laws, with State and 

local plans. 

Section 202 (d) provides that all public lands, regardless of classification, are subject to inclusion 

in land use plans, and that the Secretary may modify or terminate classifications consistent with 

land use plans. 

Section 202 (f) and 309 (e) provide that Federal, State, and local governments and the public be 

given adequate notice and an opportunity to comment on the formulation of standards and criteria 

for, and to participate in, the preparation and execution of plans and programs for the 

management of the public lands. 

Section 302 (a) requires the Secretary to manage BLM-managed public lands under the principles 

of multiple use and sustained yield, in accordance with, when available, land use plans developed 

under Section 202 of FLPMA, except that where a tract of BLM-managed public lands has been 

dedicated to specific uses according to any other provisions of law, it shall be managed in 

accordance with such laws. 

Section 302 (b) recognizes the entry and development rights of mining claimants, while directing 

the Secretary to prevent unnecessary or undue degradation of the public lands. 

Section 603 specifically directs the BLM to carry out a wilderness review of public land and 

directs the BLM to manage such lands in a manner so as not to impair the suitability of such areas 

for preservation as wilderness. 
Socorro Resource Management Plan 89 Appendix B: Acts of Authority and Mandates for the BLM 

The National Environment Policy Act of 1969, as amended (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) requires the 

consideration and public availability of information regarding the environmental impacts of major Federal 

actions significantly affecting the quality of the human environment. The law further requires the Federal 

Authorized Officers to identify and describe the significant environmental issues associated with their 

decisions and to develop alternatives to a proposed action (including the alternative of no action). Federal 

Authorized Officers must disclose the direct, indirect, and cumulative effects of the decisions; adverse 

environmental effects that cannot be avoided; the relationship between short-term uses of the human 

environment and the maintenance of long-term productivity; and any irreversible or irretrievable 

commitments of resources made by the decision. 

The Clean Air Act of 1990, as amended (42 U.S.C. 7418) requires Federal agencies to comply with all 

Federal, state, and local requirements regarding the control and abatement of air pollution. This includes 

abiding by the requirements of state implementation plans. The Clean Air Act provides that each state is 

responsible for ensuring achievement and maintenance of air quality standards within its borders so long 

as such standards are at least as stringent as Federal standards established by the U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency. 

The Clean Water Act (CWA) of 1987, as amended (33 U.S.C. 1251) establishes objectives to restore and 

maintain the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of the Nation‘s water. Upon passage of the 

Environmental Quality Acts and adoption of the water quality standards, State agencies were empowered 

to enforce water quality standards as long as they are at least as stringent as the Federal standards 

established by the Environmental Protection Agency. The State of New Mexico has not been delegated 

authority from the Federal Government for any of the major water quality programs under the CWA, 

including the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System, Pretreatment, Sludge Management, and 

Wetlands. Also, Section 404 of the CWA, administered by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, requires 

that ―waters of the U.S.‖ be protected by permits prior to dredge or fill activities occurring in such areas. 

Waters include intermittent streams, mud flats, and sand flats. Wetlands that meet jurisdictional criteria of 

Section 404 of the CWA are partially protected in that a permit is required prior to any dredge or fill 

activity occurring in such areas. 

The Endangered Species Act (ESA) of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) provides a means 

whereby the ecosystems upon which threatened and endangered species depend may be conserved and to 

provide a program for the conservation of such threatened and endangered species (Sec. 1531 (b), 

Purposes). The ESA requires all Federal agencies to seek to conserve threatened and endangered species, 

utilize applicable authorities in furtherance of the purposes of the ESA (Sec. 1531 (c) (1), Policy), and 

avoid jeopardizing the continued existence of any species that is listed or proposed for listing as 

threatened and endangered or destroying or adversely modifying its designated or proposed critical 

habitat (Sec. 1536 (a), Interagency Cooperation). 

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) is responsible for administration of this Act, which also 

requires all Federal agencies to consult (or confer) in accordance with Section 7 of the ESA with the 

Secretary of the Interior, through the USFWS and/or the National Marine Fisheries Service, to ensure that 

any Federal action (including land use plans) or activity is not likely to jeopardize the continued existence 

of any species listed or proposed to be listed under the provisions of the ESA, or result in the destruction 

or adverse modification of designated or proposed critical habitat (Sec. 1536 (a), Interagency 

Cooperation, and 50 Code of Federal Regulation [CFR] 402). Mitigation measures are developed through 

the consultation process and are put forth as suggested conservation measures included in a formal 

USFWS Biological Opinion, which addresses whether the proposed action will jeopardize the continued 

existence of any officially listed endangered or threatened species.
Socorro Resource Management Plan 90 Appendix B: Acts of Authority and Mandates for the BLM 

BLM Handbook H-1601-1, Land Use Planning Handbook, provides supplemental guidance for 

implementing the BLM land use planning requirements established by Sections 201 and 202 of FLPMA 

and the regulations in 43 CFR 1600. The handbook provides guidance for preparing and amending land 

use plan decisions through the planning process, and for maintaining resource management plans. The 

handbook also provides guidance for developing implementation plans and program-specific and 

resource-specific decisions. 

The Statewide Resource Management Plan Amendment/Environmental Impact Statement for New Mexico 

Standards for Public Land Health and Guidelines for Livestock Grazing Management (Standards and 

Guidelines) established a set of standards and guidelines for public land health and guidelines for 

livestock grazing management in New Mexico. Standards of land health are expressions of physical and 

biological conditions or degree of function required for healthy and sustainable lands, and define 

minimum resource conditions that must be achieved. Standards describe conditions needed for healthy 

sustainable public rangelands and relate to all uses of public land. They provide the measure of resource 

quality and functioning condition by which the health of public lands will be assessed. In order to 

measure the effectiveness of each standard, a set of measurable indicators and associated criteria were 

identified. Specific standards and indicators are defined for upland sites, biotic communities (including 

native, threatened, endangered, and special status species), and riparian sites. 

Guidelines are practices, methods, or techniques determined to be appropriate to ensure that standards can 

be met or that significant progress can be made toward meeting those standards. Guidelines are tools such 

as grazing systems, vegetative treatments, or improvement projects that help managers and permittees 

achieve standards. Guidelines for livestock grazing are described in the Standards and Guidelines. The 

livestock grazing guidelines were designed to improve public land health and are to be implemented at the 

watershed, allotment, or pasture level if it is determined that the standards are not being met, and 

livestock grazing is the cause. Guidelines for activities other than livestock grazing are not mandated 

through regulation; however, they may be developed should the need arise. If it is determined that the 

standards are not being met as a result of another activity (i.e., road placement, recreation, etc.), program 

leads will determine appropriate actions to ensure that standards can be met or that significant progress 

can be made toward meeting those standards. 

The Socorro East Grazing Environmental Impact Statement (BLM 1979) established a grazing 

management and implementation program for the Socorro District Office based on growth requirements 

for vegetation. Objectives for a 20-year period are to enhance the vegetative resource, improve range 

conditions, reduce erosion and sedimentation drainage, improve water quality, provide quality habitat for 

wildlife and wild horses, improve the recreation and visual resources, provide a continuous supply of 

livestock forage, and protect archaeological and historical sites. These objectives are taken into account in 

the development of each Allotment Management Plan (AMP). Each AMP may be reviewed at the BLM 

Socorro District Office. 

The West Socorro Rangeland Management Program Environmental Impact Statement (BLM 1982)

established a grazing management and implementation program for the Divide Planning Area located in 

Catron, Cibola, Valencia, and Socorro Counties. This program will implement specific management 

actions on 187 grazing allotments within six categories, designed to improve and maintain rangeland 

conditions, enhance vegetative resources, provide a sustained yield of livestock forage, quality habitat for 

wildlife, reduce soil erosion, and improve water quality. 

The Federal Water Pollution Control Act (33 U.S.C. 1323) requires the Federal land manager to comply 

with all Federal, State, and local requirements, administrative authority, process, and sanctions regarding 

the control and abatement of water pollution in the same manner and to the same extent as any 

nongovernmental entity. 
Socorro Resource Management Plan 91 Appendix B: Acts of Authority and Mandates for the BLM 

The Safe Drinking Water Act (42 U.S.C. 201) is designed to make the Nation‘s waters ―drinkable‖ as well 

as ―swimmable.‖ Amendments in 1996 established a direct connection between safe drinking water and 

watershed protection and management. 

The Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976 (Public Law [P.L.] 89-72) gave the Environmental 

Protection Agency the authority to control hazardous waste from "cradle-to-grave." This includes the 

generation, transportation, treatment, storage, and disposal of hazardous waste. The Act also set forth a 

framework for the management of non-hazardous wastes. 

The National Trails System Act of 1968, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1241-1249) provides that the 

establishment of National Recreation and National Scenic Trails would closely follow original routes of 

national historic significance and national scenic trails, including the Continental Divide National Scenic 

Trail, that will provide for maximum outdoor recreation potential. The purpose of the Act is to provide for 

the ever-increasing outdoor recreation needs of an expanding population and to promote the preservation 

of public access to, travel within, and enjoyment and appreciation of the open-air, outdoor areas, and 

historic resources of the Nation. 

The Wild and Scenic Rivers Act, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1271 et seq.) requires the Federal land 

management agencies to identify potential river systems and then study them for potential designation as 

wild, scenic, or recreational rivers. 

The Wilderness Act, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1131 et seq.) authorizes the President to make 

recommendations to the Congress for Federal lands to be set aside for preservation as wilderness. 

The Antiquities Act of 1906 (16 U.S.C. 431-433) protects cultural and paleontological resources on 

Federal lands and authorizes the President to designate national monuments on Federal lands. 

The Archaeological Resources Protection Act of 1979 (16 U.S.C 470) secures, for the present and future 

benefit of the American people, the protection of archaeological resources and sites which are on public 

lands and Indian lands, to foster increased cooperation and exchange of information between 

governmental authorities, the professional archaeological community, and private individuals having 

collections of archaeological resources and data which were obtained before October 31, 1979. 

The National Historic Preservation Act, as amended (16 U.S.C. 470) expands protection of historic and 

archaeological properties to include those of national, state, and local significance and directs Federal 

agencies to consider the effects of proposed actions on properties eligible for or included in the National 

Register of Historic Places. The Act mandates that when Federal undertakings (i.e., Federal projects or 

Federally funded or licensed projects) are planned and implemented, the responsible Federal agencies 

give due consideration to historic properties (i.e., resources eligible for the National Register of Historic 

Places), regardless of land status. Regulations for Protection of Historic Properties (36 CFR Part 800) 

define a process for demonstrating such consideration by consulting with the State Historic Preservation 

Officers, Federal Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, and other interested organizations and 

individuals. 

The American Indian Religious Freedom Act of 1978 (42 U.S.C. 1996) establishes a national policy to 

protect and preserve the right of American Indians to exercise traditional Indian religious beliefs or 

practices. 
Socorro Resource Management Plan 92 Appendix B: Acts of Authority and Mandates for the BLM 

The Historic Sites Act of 1935 (16 U.S.C. §461-467) defines a national policy to identify and preserve 

historic sites, buildings, objects, and antiquities of national significance. The law authorizes the Secretary 

of the Interior to conduct surveys, collect and preserve data, and acquire historic and archaeological sites. 

The Archaeological and Historic Preservation Act of 1974 (16 U.S.C. §§469-469c) provides for 

preservation of archaeological and historical information that might otherwise be lost as a result of 

Federal construction projects and other Federally licensed activities and programs. This Act stipulates that 

up to one percent of the funding appropriated by Congress for Federal undertakings can be spent to 

recover, preserve, and protect archaeological and historical data. A subsequent amendment authorized the 

one percent limit to be administratively exceeded under certain circumstances. 

The Native American Grave Protection and Repatriation Act of 1990 (25 U.S.C. §§3001-3013) protects 

the human remains of indigenous peoples and funerary objects, sacred objects, and items of cultural 

patrimony on Federal lands. The Act also provides for the repatriation of such remains and cultural items 

previously collected from Federal lands and in the possession or control of a Federal agency or Federally 

funded repository. 

The Curation of Federally Owned and Administered Archaeological Collections (36 CFR Part 79) 

stipulates standards for facilities that curate Federally owned archaeological collections, which include 

not only artifacts but also all associated records and reports, in order to ensure long-term preservation of 

such collections. 

The White House Memorandum on Government-to-Government Relations with Native American Tribal 

Governments of 1994 set forth guidelines requiring Federal agencies to adhere to directives designed to 

ensure that the rights of sovereign tribal governments are fully respected. 

The Tribal Forest Protection Act of 2004 (P.L. 108-278) authorizes the Secretary of the Interior (with 

respect to land under the jurisdiction of the BLM) or the Secretary of Agriculture (with respect to land 

under the jurisdiction of the Forest Service), within 120 days after the request of an Indian tribe to enter 

into an agreement or contract to carry out a project to protect Indian forest land or rangeland (including a 

project to restore Federal land that borders on or is adjacent to such land) that meets specified criteria, to 

issue public notice of initiation of any necessary environmental review or of the potential of entering into 

such an agreement or contract under which the Indian tribe will carry out activities to achieve land 

management goals for Federal land under the Secretary's jurisdiction and bordering or adjacent to the 

Indian forest land or rangeland under the Indian tribe's jurisdiction. 

The Recreation and Public Purposes Act of 1926, as amended (43 U.S.C. 869 et seq.) authorizes the 

Secretary of the Interior to lease or convey BLM-managed public lands for recreational and public 

purposes under specified conditions. 

The Land and Water Conservation Fund of 1964 (16 U.S.C. 460l-4, et seq.) provides funding to assist in 

preserving, developing, and assuring accessibility to outdoor recreation resources including but not 

limited to parks, trails, wildlife lands, and other lands and facilities desirable for individual active 

participation. 

The Federal Coal Leasing Amendments Act of 1976 (30 U.S.C. 201 [a] [3] [A] [i]) requires that coal 

leases be issued in conformance with a comprehensive land use plan. 

The Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act of 1977 (30 U.S.C. 1201 et seq.) requires application of 

unsuitability criteria prior to coal leasing and also to proposed mining operations for minerals or mineral 

materials other than coal. 
Socorro Resource Management Plan 93 Appendix B: Acts of Authority and Mandates for the BLM 

The Mineral Leasing Act of 1920, as amended (30 U.S.C. 181 et seq.) authorizes the development and 

conservation of oil and gas resources. 

The Onshore Oil and Gas Leasing Reform Act of 1987 (30 U.S.C. 181 et seq.) requires that potential oil 

and gas resources be adequately addressed in planning documents; the social, economic, and 

environmental consequences of exploration and development of oil and gas resources be determined; and 

any stipulations to be applied to oil and gas leases be clearly identified. 

The General Mining Law of 1872, as amended (30 U.S.C. 21 et seq.) allows the location, use, and 

patenting of mining claims on sites on public domain lands of the United States. 

The Mining and Mineral Policy Act of 1970 (30 U.S.C. 21a) establishes a policy of fostering development 

of economically stable mining and minerals industries, their orderly and economic development, and 

studying methods for disposal of waste and reclamation. 

The Geothermal Steam Act of 1970 (30 U.S.C. 1001-1027) governs the lease of geothermal steam and 

related resources on public lands. The Act prohibits issuing geothermal leases on virtually all USFWSadministered lands. 

The Minerals Material Disposal Act of 1947, as amended establishes the authority under which the BLM 

disposes of timber and other vegetative and forest products. 

The Taylor Grazing Act of 1934 (43 U.S.C. 315) establishes grazing districts of vacant, unappropriated 

and unreserved land from any parts of the public domain, excluding Alaska, which are not national 

forests, parks and monuments, Indian reservations, railroad grant lands, or revested Coos Bay Wagon 

Road grant lands, and which are valuable chiefly for grazing and raising forage crops, and uses a 

permitting system to manage livestock grazing in the districts. In addition, the Act provides for the 

protection, administration, regulation and improvement of the grazing districts; promotes the adoption of 

regulations and cooperative agreements necessary to accomplish the purposes of the Act; regulates 

occupancy and use; preserves the land and resources from destruction or unnecessary injury; and provides 

for orderly improvement and development of the range. The Act also allows for the continuing study of 

erosion and flood control and performance of work to protect and rehabilitate areas subject to the Act. 

Willful violations of the Act, or of its rules and regulations, are punishable by fine. 

The Public Rangelands Improvement Act of 1978 (43 U.S.C. 1901) provides that the public rangelands be 

managed so that they become as productive as feasible in accordance with management objectives and the 

land use planning process established pursuant to 43 U.S.C. 1712. 

The Federal Cave Resource Protection Act of 1988 (43 CFR 37.11[C] & [F]) provides protection for 

caves containing significant resources such as geological, biological, historical, cultural, etc. 

The Healthy Forest Initiative Act of 2002 expanded stewardship contracting authority, among other 

provisions including accelerating unnecessary delays and removing barriers to forest and rangeland 

restoration activities. 

The Healthy Forests Restoration Act of 2003 (P.L. 108-148) outlines administrative procedures for 

hazardous-fuel-reduction projects on Forest Service and BLM-managed public lands to reduce wildfire 

risks to communities, municipal water supplies, and other at-risk Federal land and to protect, enhance, 

and restore forest ecosystem components. 
Socorro Resource Management Plan 94 Appendix B: Acts of Authority and Mandates for the BLM 

The Carlson-Foley Act of 1968 (P.L. 90-583) directs Federal agencies to enter upon lands under their 

jurisdiction having noxious plants (weeds), and destroy noxious plants growing on such land. 

The Federal Noxious Weed Act of 1974 (7 U.S.C. 2801-2814) provides for the control and management 

of non-indigenous weeds that injure or have the potential to injure the interests of agriculture and 

commerce, wildlife resources, or the public health. The Act requires that each Federal agency develop a 

management program to control undesirable plants on Federal lands under the agency's jurisdiction; 

establish and adequately fund the program; implement cooperative agreements with state agencies to 

coordinate management of undesirable plants on Federal lands; establish integrated management systems 

to control undesirable plants targeted under cooperative agreements. A Federal agency is not required to 

carry out management programs on Federal lands unless similar programs are being implemented on state 

or private lands in the same area. 

The Act also directs the Secretaries of Agriculture and the Interior to coordinate programs for control, 

research, and educational efforts associated with noxious weeds. The Secretaries must identify regional 

control priorities and disseminate technical information to interested State, local, and private entities. 

The Plant Protection Act of 2000 (P.L. 106-224) prohibits the import, export, and movement in interstate 

commerce, or mailing of any plant pest unless authorized by the Secretary of Agriculture; authorizes the 

Secretary to prohibit or restrict the import, export, or movement in interstate commerce of any plant, plant 

product, biological control organism, noxious weed, or means of conveyance to prevent the introduction 

or dissemination of a plant pest or noxious weed; and combines all or a portion of 11 acts or resolutions 

into one act. 

The Migratory Bird Treaty Act of 1918, as amended (16 U.S.C. 703-712) implements various treaties and 

conventions between the United States and Canada, Japan, Mexico, and the former Soviet Union for the 

protection of migratory birds. Under the Act, taking, killing, or possessing migratory birds is unlawful. 

The Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act of 1958, as amended (16 U.S.C 661-667) proposes to assure that 

fish and wildlife resources receive equal consideration with other values during the planning of water 

resources development projects. The Act requires coordination with USFWS by the U.S. Department of 

Energy when a project is planned that may affect a body of water. It also requires coordination with the 

head of the state agency that administers wildlife resources in the affected state. 

The Sikes Act of 1960, as amended (16 U.S.C. 670 et seq.) seeks to promote effectual planning, 

development, maintenance, and coordination of wildlife, fish, and game conservation and rehabilitation in 

military reservations. 

The Fish and Wildlife Conservation Act of 1980 (16 U.S.C. 2901-2911) authorizes financial and technical 

assistance to the states for the development, revision, and implementation of conservation plans and 

programs for nongame fish and wildlife. 

The Wild and Free Roaming Horse and Burro Act of 1971 (16 U.S.C. 1331) places all wild and free 

roaming horses and burros under the jurisdiction of the Secretary of Interior for the purpose of 

management and protection to achieve and maintain a thriving natural ecological balance on the public 

lands. The Act calls for the maintenance of current population inventories, provides for the humane 

destruction of sick or lame animals, and allows for adoption by qualified individuals in the case of excess 

populations. 
Socorro Resource Management Plan 95 Appendix B: Acts of Authority and Mandates for the BLM 

Executive Order 3226 (Amendment 1) – This Order provides guidance to bureaus and offices within the 

Department of the Interior (DOI) on how to provide leadership by developing timely responses to 

emerging climate change issues. 

Executive Order 11644 - Use of Off-Road Vehicles on the Public Lands (as amended by Executive Order 

11989) (37 Federal Register 2877 [1971]), establishes policies and provides for procedures that will 

ensure that the use of off-road vehicles on public lands will be controlled and directed so as to protect the 

resources of those lands, promote the safety of all users of those lands, and minimize conflicts among the 

various uses of those lands. 

Executive Order 12898 – Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and 

Low-Income Populations (49 Federal Register 7629 [1994]) requires that each Federal agency consider 

the impacts of its programs on minority populations and low-income populations. 

Executive Order 13007 – Indian Sacred Sites (61 Federal Register 26771 [1996]), requires Federal 

agencies to the extent practicable, permitted by law, and not clearly inconsistent with essential agency 

functions to accommodate access to and ceremonial use of Indian sacred sites by Indian religious 

practitioners and avoid adversely affecting the physical integrity of such sacred sites. 

Executive Order 13287 – Preserve America directs Federal agencies to provide leadership in preserving 

America‘s heritage by actively advancing the protection, enhancement and contemporary use of historic 

and paleontological properties owned by the government, emphasizing partnerships. Under this order, 

agencies shall cooperate with communities to increase opportunities for public benefit from, and access 

to, Federally owned historic and paleontological properties. 

Executive Order 13084 – Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments provides, in 

part, that each Federal agency shall establish regular and meaningful consultation and collaboration with 

Indian Tribal governments in the development of regulatory practices on Federal matters that significantly 

or uniquely affect their communities. 

Executive Order 13112 – Invasive Species provides that no Federal agency shall authorize, fund, or carry 

out actions that it believes are likely to cause or promote the introduction or spread of invasive species 

unless, pursuant to guidelines that it has prescribed, the agency has determined and made public its 

determination that the benefits of such actions clearly outweigh the potential harm caused by invasive 

species; and that all feasible and prudent measures to minimize risk or harm will be taken in conjunction 

with the actions. 

Secretarial Order 3175 (incorporated into the Departmental Manual at 512 DM 2) requires that if 

Department of the Interior agency actions might impact Indian trust resources, the agency explicitly 

address those potential impacts in planning and decision documents, and the agency consult with the 

Tribal government whose trust resources are potentially affected by the Federal action. 

Secretarial Order 3206 – American Indian Tribal Rights, Federal-Tribal Trust Responsibilities, and the 

Endangered Species Act requires the U.S. Department of the Interior agencies to consult with Indian 

Tribes when agency actions to protect a listed species, as a result of compliance with the ESA, affect or 

may affect of Indian lands, Tribal trust resources, or the exercise of American Indian Tribal rights.
Socorro Resource Management Plan 96 Appendix C: Best Management Practices 

APPENDIX C: BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES 

INTRODUCTION 

Best Management Practices (BMPs) are those land and resource management techniques designed to 

maximize beneficial results and minimize negative impacts of management actions. BMPs are defined as 

methods, measures, or practices selected on the basis of site-specific conditions to provide the most 

effective, environmentally sound, and economically feasible means of managing an activity and 

mitigating its impacts. Interdisciplinary site-specific analysis is necessary to determine which 

management practices would be necessary to meet specific goals. BMPs include, but are not limited to, 

structural and nonstructural controls, operations, and maintenance procedures. BMPs can be applied 

before, during, and after pollution-producing or surface disturbing activities to reduce or eliminate the 

introduction of pollutants into receiving waters (40 Code of Federal Regulation 130.2(m), Environmental 

Protection Agency Water Quality Standards Regulation) or to prevent unnecessary or undue degradation 

of resources. 

BMPs are identified as part of the National Environmental Policy Act process, with interdisciplinary 

involvement. Because the control of nonpoint sources of pollution and prevention of damage to other 

resources is an ongoing process, continual refinement of BMP design is necessary. This process can be 

described in five steps, which are: (1) selection of design of a specific BMP; (2) application of BMP; 

(3) monitoring; (4) evaluation; and (5) feedback. Data gathered through monitoring is evaluated and used 

to identify changes needed in BMP design, application, or in the monitoring program. 

BMPs described in this appendix are a compilation of existing policies and guidelines and commonlyemployed practices designed to assist in achieving the objectives for maintaining or minimizing water 

quality degradation from nonpoint sources, loss of soil productivity, providing guidelines for aesthetic 

conditions within watersheds, and mitigating impacts to soil, vegetation, or wildlife habitat from surface 

disturbing activities. BMPs are selected and implemented as necessary, based on site-specific conditions, 

to meet a variety of resource objectives for specific management actions. Therefore, this document does 

not provide an exhaustive list of BMPs, as additional BMPs or modifications may be identified to 

minimize the potential for negative impacts when evaluating site-specific management actions through an 

interdisciplinary process. 

In addition, implementation and effectiveness of BMPs need to be monitored to determine whether the 

practices are achieving resource objectives and accomplishing desired goals. Adjustments will be made as 

necessary. 

Each of the following BMPs are a part of the coordinated development of this Resource Management 

Plan and may be updated as new information becomes available to ensure objectives are met and to 

conform with changes in BLM regulations, policy, direction, or new scientific information. Applicants 

also may suggest alternate procedures that could accomplish the same result. These guidelines will apply, 

where appropriate, to all use authorizations, including BLM-initiated projects. Any BMP listed may be 

used in any program wherever it may be effective. 

DEVELOPED RECREATION 

1) Construct recreation sites and provide appropriate sanitation facilities to minimize impacts to 

resource values, public health and safety, and minimize user conflicts of approved activities and 

access within an area as appropriate. 
Socorro Resource Management Plan 97 Appendix C: Best Management Practices 

2) Minimize impacts to resource values or to enhance a recreational setting and recreation 

experience. Harden sites and locations subject to prolonged/repetitive concentrated recreational 

uses with selective placement of gravel or other porous materials and allow for dust abatement, 

paving, and engineered road construction. 

3) Use public education and/or physical barriers (such as rocks, posts, vegetation) to direct or 

preclude uses and to minimize impacts to resource values and the quality of recreation 

experience. 

4) As appropriate, employ limitations of specific activities to avoid or correct adverse impacts to 

resource values, public safety issues, and/or conflicts between recreational uses. 

5) Employ land use ethics programs and techniques such as ―Leave No Trace‖ and ―Tread Lightly‖ 

programs. Use outreach efforts of such programs to lessen needs to implement more stringent 

regulatory measures to obtain resource protection and a quality recreation experience. 

FIRE SUPPRESSION 

1) Minimize surface disturbances and avoid the use of heavy earth-moving equipment where 

possible, on all fire suppression and rehabilitation activities, including mop-up, except where high 

value resources (including lives and property), are being protected. 

2) Install waterbars and seed all constructed firelines with native or adapted nonnative species as 

appropriate and in accordance with the BLM Emergency Fire Rehabilitation Handbook (BLM 

1999). 

3) Avoid dropping fire retardant detrimental to aquatic communities on streams, lakes, ponds and in 

riparian/wetland areas. 

4) The location and construction of handlines should result in minimal surface disturbance while 

effectively controlling the fire. Hand crews should locate lines to take full advantage of existing 

land features that represent natural fire barriers. Whenever possible, handlines should follow the 

contour of the slope to protect the soil, provide sufficient residual vegetation to capture and retain 

sediment, and maintain site productivity. 

5) Suppression in riparian areas should be by hand crews when possible. 

FOREST MANAGEMENT 

1) Design harvest units and forest health treatments to blend with natural terrain. 

2) Utilize silvicultural regeneration systems that are most appropriate for treatment objectives. 

Utilize uneven-aged silviculture for most treatments; however, even-aged systems may be 

appropriate in situations to accomplish insect and disease control, aspen regeneration, or other 

site-specific objectives. Consider a range of maximum stand density index by species to 

accomplish forest health goals. 

3) When soils or road surfaces become saturated to a depth of 3 inches, BLM-authorized activities, 

such as log yarding and hauling, should be limited or cease unless otherwise approved by the 

authorized officer. 

4) Scatter unmerchantable material (tops, limbs, etc.) in cutting units and treatment areas, consistent 

with fuel loading limitations. 

5) Locate skid trails on upper slope positions, as far as possible from surface water. Avoid skidding 

across drainage bottoms or creating conditions that concentrate and channelize surface flow. 
Socorro Resource Management Plan 98 Appendix C: Best Management Practices 

6) Use directional felling, when applicable, to minimize skidding distance and locate skid trails as 

far as possible from sensitive areas. 

7) Install waterbars and apply native seed, when available, to skid trails and landings prior to 

temporary seasonal closures and following harvest operations. Consider ripping or subsoiling on 

skid trails and abandoned haul roads to reduce compaction where soil and slope conditions 

permit. 

8) Locate landings away from surface water. Design landings to minimize disturbance consistent 

with safety and efficiency of operation. 

9) Use low pressure grapple equipment, if possible, when piling slash. 

10) Conduct forested land treatments when soil surfaces are either frozen, dry, or have adequate 

snowpack to minimize impacts to soil and water resources. 

11) Prepare pre-harvest plan for efficient forest and site harvesting and road systems. Use topographic 

maps, aerial photographs, soil surveys, and field trips to determine site conditions. Use global 

positioning system to geolocate field data for incorporation into the geographic information 

system. Plan should clearly outline BMPs to be followed before, during, and after harvest; 

identify area to be harvested; locate special areas of protection (wetlands and streamside 

vegetation); allow for proper timing of activities; describe management measures for road layout, 

design, construction, maintenance, harvesting methods, and forest regeneration. As part of plan: 

Consider natural drainage channels; threatened, endangered, and special status species 

habitat; topography; and soil types in determining boundaries of timber harvest activities, 

location and design of roads and landings, selection of harvesting method, reforestation 

techniques. 

Avoid sensitive areas such as wetlands and important wildlife habitats. If avoidance is not 

possible, choose harvest practices with least serious effects or schedule to avoid areas during 

critical time periods (e.g., nesting or breeding seasons). Where access to adjacent land would 

allow for more efficient road system or avoidance, consider working with landowner to 

obtain an easement. 

Time construction and harvest activities to take advantage of seasonal conditions. When 

possible, avoid construction during heavy rains or freeze/thaw conditions to avoid potential 

for runoff and erosion. 

12) Conduct rapid revegetation of areas disturbed by harvesting operations or road construction to 

reduce erosion and sedimentation. Equipment and site preparation methods must consider site 

topography, soil type, natural drainage, amount of rainfall, and kind of vegetation. Site 

preparation may include: 

Removal of logging roads, landings, and drainage structures. 

Mechanical activities to chop, root rake, disk and blade the soil in the disturbed areas in 

preparation for planting. 

Prescribed fires to reduce logging residue and undesirable trees and vegetation. 

13) Establish vegetative cover planting on erodible areas that were cultivated in the fall but will not 

be planted until spring. 

14) Stabilize steep slopes prior to planting. 

15) Use native grasses or other plant species to reseed bare-erodible areas; do not introduce invasive 

non-native plants under any circumstance. 

16) Windrow logging debris along contours, in gullies, and on skid trails to stabilize these areas. 
Socorro Resource Management Plan 99 Appendix C: Best Management Practices 

17) Remove unneeded logging roads and skid trails immediately. Do not wait for entire harvest 

operation to be completed. 

18) Smooth, grade, and revegetate landings and, where appropriate, main haul roads. 

19) Remove temporary drainage structures and clean permanent drainage structures. 

20) Minimize the use and maximize the benefit of chemicals through skilled and appropriate 

management and application. To ensure safe use of chemicals, consider the following: 

Transportation, handling, storage, application and disposal of pesticides, fire retardants, and 

fertilizers must comply with applicable local, state and federal regulations. 

Monitor weather conditions such as rain, wind speed, temperature and humidity during 

application to prevent drift, volatilization, and surface water runoff. 

Do not apply chemicals in streamside management zones or wetlands. 

Note that fertilizers and fire retardants contain high amounts of both nitrogen and phosphorus 

and are easily transported overland and deposited in streams along with the sediment. These 

compounds can accelerate eutrophication (a process whereby water bodies are choked by 

overabundant plant life and algae due to higher levels of nutrients such as nitrogen and 

phosphorus). 

FOREST WETLANDS 

1) Establish and maintain a streamside management zone (SMZ) along surface waters to buffer 

against detrimental changes in the temperature regime of the water body, provide bank stability, 

provide a filter to keep sediment and pollutants out of the stream, and withstand wind damage. 

The SMZ should be sufficiently wide, and should include a sufficient number of canopy species. 

The width should be based on erosiveness of the soil, steepness of bank slopes, proximity to 

municipal watersheds, protection of adjacent wetlands, and sensitivity of fish and wildlife habitat 

and other critical areas. The SMZ should incorporate nearby wetlands. 

2) Limit disturbances in SMZs by the following methods: restrict road construction except at 

designated stream or wetland crossings; operate vehicles only on roads; do not deposit road 

construction material, waste timber, or slash into SMZs; do not handle, store, apply, or dispose of 

hazardous chemicals, fertilizers, or pesticides in SMZs. Timber harvesting should be conducted 

only selectively if at all, and should consider following practices: 

Retain the appropriate diversity and size of tree and shrub species. 

Protect and retain trees and shrubs and snags that are below harvest quality. 

Retain bank edge trees for stream channel stability and to shade stream. 

Maintain sufficient ground cover to trap sediment. 

Immediately remove any logging debris that enters the stream channel. 

3) Use ultrawide, high-flotation tires on logging trucks and skidders to reduce soil compaction and 

erosion. 

4) Suspend or limit forest operations when soils become saturated. 

5) Maintain natural contour of the site and take action to ensure that forestry activities do not 

immediately or gradually convert the wetland to dry land. 

6) Where roads are constructed, provide cross drainage to maintain natural surface and subsurface 

flow. 
Socorro Resource Management Plan 100 Appendix C: Best Management Practices 

7) Construct road fills only when absolutely necessary. Use gravel or crushed rock as fill to provide 

for water movement. 

INVASIVE/NOXIOUS WEEDS MANAGEMENT 

1) All surface disturbing equipment should be inspected and cleaned prior to coming onto public 

lands. This is especially important on vehicles from out of state or if coming from a weed infested 

area. 

2) If fill dirt or gravel is brought onto public lands, the source must be noxious weed free. 

3) Construction sites should be monitored for the life of the project for the presence of 

Invasive/Noxious weeds (includes maintenance and construction activities). If weeds are found, 

the Socorro Field Office will be notified and it will determine the best method for the control of 

the particular weed species. 

4) All seed shall be certified noxious weed free. Areas will be monitored to determine the success of 

re-vegetation, the presents of invasive/noxious weeds, and will be reseeded if necessary. 

5) Consider livestock quarantine, removal, or timing limitations in invasive/noxious weed-infested 

areas. 

6) All seed, hay, straw, mulch, or other vegetation material transported and used on public land for 

site stability, rehabilitation, or project facilitation shall be certified noxious weed free of all 

reproductive parts upon the passage of a weed free law in the state of New Mexico. All baled 

feed, pelletized feed, and grain used to feed livestock shall also be certified as free of noxious 

weed seed. 

7) It is recommended that all vehicles, including off-road and all-terrain, traveling in or out of weedinfested areas should clean their equipment before and after use on public land. 

LIVESTOCK GRAZING MANAGEMENT 

All rangeland projects and vegetative land treatments will meet current BLM policy and objectives of this 

Resource Management Plan. Rangeland improvements projects and vegetative treatments are constructed 

as a portion of adaptive management to reduce resource conflicts and to achieve multiple-use objectives. 

They have been standardized over time to mitigate impacts and will be adhered to in the construction and 

maintenance of rangeland projects within the planning area. Rangeland improvements are structures, 

facilities and practices to improve or facilitate the grazing management and improve the resources. 

Grazing Management Practices are developed through consultation on an allotment specific objectives 

and progress toward multiple use objectives and sustainability of resources. Grazing Management 

Practices may include herding, grazing and deferment periods, use of supplement, change of class of 

livestock and increase or decrease of livestock numbers. 

MINING 

1) Reclaim all disturbed surface areas promptly, performing concurrent reclamation as necessary, 

and minimize the total amount of all surface disturbance. 

2) All surface soil should be stripped prior to conducting operations, stockpiled, and reapplied 

during reclamation, regardless of soil quality. Minimize the length of time soil remains in 

stockpiles and the depth or thickness of stockpiles. When slopes on topsoil stockpiles exceed 

five percent, a berm or trench should be constructed below the stockpile to prevent sediment 

transport offsite. 
Socorro Resource Management Plan 101 Appendix C: Best Management Practices 

3) Strip and separate soil surface horizons where feasible and reapply in proper sequence during 

reclamation. 

4) Locate soil stockpiles and waste rock disposal areas away from surface water to minimize off-site 

drainage effects. 

5) Establish vegetation cover on soil stockpiles that are to be in place longer than one year. 

6) Construct and rehabilitate temporary roads to minimize total surface disturbance, consistent with 

intended use. 

7) Consider temporary measures such as silt fences, straw bales, or mulching to trap sediment in 

sensitive areas until reclaimed areas are stabilized with vegetation. 

8) Reshape to the approximate original contour all areas to be permanently reclaimed, providing for 

proper surface drainage. 

9) Leave reclaimed surfaces in a roughened condition following soil application. 

10) Complete reclamation and seeding during the fall if possible. 

OIL AND GAS ACTIVITIES

1) Plans of Development (PODs) are encouraged to minimize unnecessary disturbance. Field 

development plans should address sensitive area avoidance or mitigation, potential road, utility, 

and well locations, road classes, and plans for interim and final reclamation. 

2) Dual completion, re-completion, commingling (both downhole and at the surface), the drilling of 

multiple wells from a single location, and centralized tank batteries will be encouraged and 

permitted in order to reduce the number of new well pads and consequent surface disturbance. 

This will reduce impacts to soil and vegetation, reduce air impacts caused by dust, reduce habitat 

fragmentation, and offer less opportunity for the spread of noxious weeds. 

3) Operators will be encouraged to unitize in areas of dense development to increase management 

efficiency and facilitate operations in sensitive areas. Unitization is the process by which multiple 

lease holders in a geographic area share facilities so as to reduce surface disturbance caused by 

multiple duplicate facilities such as pipelines and compressor stations. 

4) Reduce the size of the well pad whenever possible, without compromising safety. 

5) Remote monitoring of wells and related production equipment is encouraged to reduce wildlife 

disturbance and road deterioration. 

6) Pipelines associated with oil and gas activities will follow existing roads and rights-of-way 

corridors where possible to minimize surface disturbance. 

7) The burial of pipelines associated with oil and gas exploration, development, production, and 

transportation is preferred. Pipelines greater than 4 inches in nominal diameter, all injection lines, 

and gas lines with a pressure greater than 125 pounds per square inch must be buried and 

constructed of steel. The use of plastic pipe will be approved by the authorized officer on a caseby-case basis. A waiver of the requirement to bury pipelines will be considered in the following 

situations: 

The temporary (one year or less) surface installation of plastic pipelines, after considering the 

length of the pipeline, its proposed location, the potential hazards present, the characteristics 

of the pipe regarding deterioration, the American Society for Testing and Materials or similar 

specifications for the pipe, the intended use of the pipeline, and other appropriate factors 

Where rock outcrops at the surface make the burial of pipeline impractical, such as when 

unreasonable and unreclaimable surface disturbance would result. Where the pipeline is 
Socorro Resource Management Plan 102 Appendix C: Best Management Practices 

exposed, painting may be required in accordance with the painting policy for visual resource 

management areas and Notice to Lessees 87-1, New Mexico. Waiver of the requirement for 

painting will be considered on a case-by-case basis. 

Where the surface ownership along the pipeline route is mixed, and the majority of surface 

ownership is not public. In those cases, the installation of pipelines on public land will 

conform to the practice to be employed on the remainder of the pipeline, unless special 

resource management concerns dictate strict adherence to this policy. 

8) Minimize noise in sensitive wildlife habitats. Consider using noise reduction mufflers, earthen 

berms, walls, sheds, and/or distance to reduce sound levels. Consider requiring vent stack/exhaust 

stack coverings on heater treater/separator units to prevent wildlife from entering. 

9) All production related pits and tanks, regardless of size, would be covered and fenced to exclude 

wildlife. 

PRELIMINARY INVESTIG ATIONS 

Activities occurring during preliminary investigations may include remote sensing; mapping of rock 

outcrops and seeps (either of which result in little or no surface disturbance); and seismic, gravity, and 

magnetic surveys. 

A lease is not required to conduct such preliminary investigations. However, the geophysical operator is 

required to file a completed Form 3150-4, ―Notice of Intent to Conduct Oil and Gas Exploration 

Operations‖ for all operations on public lands. 

In general, the BLM requires an examination of resource values and development of appropriate surface 

protection and reclamation measures prior to the geophysical contractor beginning surface-disturbing 

activities associated with preliminary investigations. The BLM will solicit involvement from public land 

users (e.g., grazing allottees) to develop site-specific protection measures and reclamation specifications. 

Compliance monitoring should occur during and after seismic exploration activities when or if necessary. 

Compliance inspections during the operation ensure that requirements and guidelines are being followed. 

Compliance inspections upon completion of work ensure that the lines are clean and drill holes are 

plugged properly. 

The frequency of authorized seismic exploration will be dependent upon resource conditions and seasonal 

restrictions (timing limitations) that may be imposed to reduce conflicts with watershed conditions, 

wildlife, and hunting. Management practices specific to wildlife and vegetation resources include the 

following: 

Prior to surveying/flagging routes for geophysical surveys or other preliminary activities, the 

project area shall be surveyed for raptor nests. Surveys will be conducted by professional 

biologists approved by the Authorized Officer. The Universal Transmercator grid locations of all 

raptor nests will be reported to the Authorized Officer. All raptor nests will be avoided by the 

required distances described under the Well Sites section. A ―raptor nest‖ is defined as any raptor 

or corvid nest. 

In areas that constitute occupied or potential Aplomado Falcon habitat, a protocol survey for this 

species will be conducted along with the general raptor nest survey described above, prior to 

surveying/flagging lines. 

During operations at any time, large (greater than 6 feet in height) trees or shrubs containing or 

capable of containing a raptor nest will be avoided by vehicular traffic or other activities likely to 

destroy them. 
Socorro Resource Management Plan 103 Appendix C: Best Management Practices 

In areas that allow for off-road travel, minimize the off-road impact of large vehicles. Use wide, 

flat-tread, balloon tires (especially on seismic thumper trucks) where possible. Use all-terrain 

vehicles rather than large vehicles where possible. 

Occupied habitat for special status species will be avoided in a manner similar to surface use 

requirements (avoid occupied habitat up to 0.5 mile) unless impacts adequately mitigated. 

PRESCRIBED BURNING 

1) To protect soil productivity, burning should be conducted, if possible, under conditions when a 

low intensity burn can accomplish stated objectives. Burn only when conditions of organic 

surface or duff layer have adequate moisture to minimize effects to the physical and chemical 

properties of the soil. When possible, maximize the retention of the organic surface or duff layer. 

2) Slash should not be piled and burned within riparian/wetland areas. If riparian/wetland areas are 

within or adjacent to the prescribed burn unit, piles should be firelined or scattered prior to 

burning. 

3) When preparing the unit for burning, avoid piling concentrations of large logs and stumps; pile 

small material (3 to 8 inches diameter). Slash piles should be burned when soil and duff moisture 

are adequate to reduce potential damage to soil resources. 

4) All fire management activities will be subject to the BMP‘s identified in the Decision Record and 

Resource Management Plan Amendment for Fire and Fuels Management on Public Land in New 

Mexico and Texas, U.S. Department of Interior, BLM New Mexico State Office, September 

2004. BMPs are identified in Chapter 2 of that document4. 

RENEWABLE ENERGY 

1) All renewable wind energy projects will be subject to the BMP‘s identified in the Final 

Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement on Wind Energy Development on BLMAdministered Lands in the Western United States, U.S. Department of Interior, BLM, June 2005. 

BMP‘s are identified in Section 2.2.3.2 of that document5. 

RIGHTS-OF-WAY AND UTILITY CORR IDORS 

1) Rights-of-way and utility corridors should use areas adjoining or adjacent to previously disturbed 

areas whenever possible, rather than traverse undisturbed vegetation communities. 

2) Waterbars or dikes should be constructed on all of the rights-of-way and utility corridors, and 

across the full width of the disturbed area, as directed by the authorized officer. 

3) Disturbed areas within road rights-of-way and utility corridors should be stabilized by vegetation 

practices designed to hold soil in place and minimize erosion. 

4) Sediment barriers should be constructed when needed to slow runoff, allow deposition of 

sediment, and prevent transport from the site. Straining or filtration mechanisms may also be 

employed for the removal of sediment from runoff. 

 

4

 At the time of printing, this document can be found online at: http://www.blm.gov/nm/st/en/prog/planning.1.html#new_mexico 

5

 At the time of printing, this document can be found online at: http://www.windeis.anl.gov/
Socorro Resource Management Plan 104 Appendix C: Best Management Practices 

ROAD DESIGN AND MAIN TENANCE 

1) Design roads to minimize total disturbance, to conform with topography, and to minimize 

disruption of natural drainage patterns. 

2) Base road design criteria and standards on road management objectives such as traffic 

requirements of the proposed activity and the overall transportation objectives, and minimizing 

damage to the environment. 

3) Locate roads on stable terrain such as ridgetops, natural benches, and flatter transitional slopes 

near ridges and valley bottoms and moderate sideslopes and away from slumps, slide prone areas, 

concave slopes, clay beds, and where rock layers dip parallel to the slope. Locate roads on welldrained soil types; avoid wet areas. 

4) Construct cut and fill slopes to be approximately 3(h):1(v) or flatter where feasible. Locate roads 

to minimize heights of cutbanks. Avoid high, steeply sloping cutbanks in highly fractured 

bedrock. 

5) Avoid head walls, midslope locations on steep, unstable slopes, fragile soils, seeps, old 

landslides, sideslopes in excess of 70 percent, and areas where the geologic bedding planes or 

weathering surfaces are inclined with the slope. Implement extra mitigation measures when these 

areas cannot be avoided. 

6) Construct roads for surface drainage by using outslopes, crowns, grade changes, drain dips, 

waterbars and/or insloping to ditches as appropriate. 

7) Sloping the road base to the outside edge for surface drainage is normally recommended for local 

spurs or minor collector roads where traffic volume is low and lower traffic speeds are 

anticipated. This is also recommended in situations where long intervals between maintenance 

will occur and where minimum excavation is wanted. Out-sloping is not recommended on steep 

slopes. Sloping the road base to the inside edge is an acceptable practice on roads with steep 

sideslopes and where the underlying soil formation is very rocky and not subject to appreciable 

erosion or failure. 

8) Crowning and ditching are recommended for arterial and collector roads where traffic volume, 

speed, intensity and user comfort are considerations. Recommended gradients range from 0 to 15 

percent where crowning and ditching may be applied, as long as adequate drainage away from the 

road surface and ditch lines is maintained. 

9) Minimize excavation when constructing roads through the use of balanced earthwork, narrowing 

road widths, and end hauling where sideslopes are between 50 and 70 percent. 

10) If possible, construct roads when soils are dry and not frozen. When soils or road surfaces 

become saturated to a depth of 3 inches, BLM-authorized activities should be limited or cease 

unless otherwise approved by the authorized officer. 

11) Consider improving inadequately surfaced roads that are to be left open to public traffic during 

wet weather with gravel or pavement to minimize sediment production and maximize safety. 

12) Retain vegetation on cut slopes unless it poses a safety hazard or restricts maintenance activities. 

Roadside brushing of vegetation should be done in a way that prevents disturbance to root 

systems and visual intrusions (i.e., avoid using excavators for brushing). 

13) Retain adequate vegetation between roads and streams to filter runoff caused by roads. 

14) Avoid riparian/wetland areas where feasible; locate in these areas only if the roads do not 

interfere with the attainment of proper functioning condition and riparian management objectives. 
Socorro Resource Management Plan 105 Appendix C: Best Management Practices 

15) Minimize the number of unimproved stream crossings. When a culvert or bridge is not feasible, 

locate drive-through (low water crossings) on stable rock portions of the drainage channel. 

Harden crossings with the addition of rock and gravel if necessary. Use angular rock if available. 

16) Locate roads and limit activities of mechanized equipment within stream channels to minimize 

their influence on riparian areas. When stream crossing is necessary, design the approach and 

crossing perpendicular to the channel where practical. Locate the crossing where the channel is 

well defined, unobstructed, and straight. 

17) Avoid placing fill material in floodplain unless the material is large enough to remain in place 

during flood events. 

18) Use drainage dips instead of culverts on roads where gradients would not present a safety issue. 

Locate drainage dips in such a way so water would not accumulate or where outside berms 

prevent drainage from the roadway. Locate and design drainage dips immediately upgrade of 

stream crossings and provide buffer areas and catchment basins to prevent sediment from 

entering the stream. 

19) Construct catchment basins, brush windrows, and culverts in a way to minimize sediment 

transport from road surfaces to stream channels. Install culverts in natural drainage channels in a 

way to conform with the natural streambed gradients to outlets that discharge onto rocky or 

hardened protected areas. 

20) Design and locate water crossing structures in natural drainage channels to accommodate 

adequate fish passage, provide for minimum impacts to water quality, and capable of handling a 

100-year event for runoff and floodwaters. 

21) Use culverts that pass, at a minimum, a 50-year storm event and/or have a minimum diameter of 

24 inches for permanent stream crossings and a minimum diameter of 18 inches for road cross 

drains. 

22) Replace undersized culverts and repair or replace damaged culverts and downspouts. Provide 

energy dissipaters at culvert outlets or drainage dips. 

23) Locate culverts or drainage dips in such a manner as to avoid discharge onto unstable terrain such 

as head walls or slumps. Provide adequate spacing to avoid accumulation of water in ditches or 

road surfaces. Culverts should be placed on solid ground to avoid road failures. 

24) Proper sized aggregate and riprap should be used during culvert construction. Place riprap at 

culvert entrance to streamline water flow and reduce erosion. 

25) Establish adapted vegetation on all cuts and fill immediately following road construction and 

maintenance. 

26) Remove berms from the downslope side of roads, consistent with safety considerations. 

27) Leave abandoned roads in a condition that provides adequate drainage without further 

maintenance. Close abandoned roads to traffic. Physically obstruct the road with gates, large 

berms, trenches, logs, stumps, or rock boulders as necessary to accomplish permanent closure. 

28) Abandon and rehabilitate roads no longer needed. Leave these roads in a condition that provides 

adequate drainage. Remove culverts. 

29) When plowing snow for winter use of roads, provide breaks in snow berms to allow for road 

drainage. Avoid plowing snow into streams. Plow snow only on existing roads. 

30) Maintenance should be performed to conserve existing surface material, retain the original 

crowned or out-sloped, self-draining cross section, prevent or remove rutting berms (except those 

designed for slope protection) and other irregularities that retard normal surface runoff. Avoid 
Socorro Resource Management Plan 106 Appendix C: Best Management Practices 

wasting loose ditch or surface material over the shoulder where it can cause stream sedimentation 

or weaken slump-prone areas. Avoid undercutting back slopes. 

31) Do not disturb the toe of cut slopes while pulling ditches or grading roads. Avoid sidecasting road 

material into streams. 

32) Grade roads only as necessary. Maintain drain dips, waterbars, road crown, in-sloping and outsloping, as appropriate, during road maintenance. 

33) Maintain roads in special management areas according to special management area guidance. 

Generally, retain roads within existing disturbed areas and side cast material away from the 

special management area. 

34) When landslides occur, save all soil and material usable for reclamation or stockpile for future 

reclamation needs. Avoid side casting of slide material where it can damage, overload, and 

saturate embankments, or flow into down-slope drainage courses. Reestablish vegetation as 

needed in areas where vegetation has been destroyed due to side casting. 

35) Strip and stockpile topsoil ahead of construction of new roads, if feasible. Reapply soil to cut and 

fill slopes prior to revegetation. 

SURFACE-DISTURBING ACTIVITIES 

1) Special design and reclamation measures may be required to protect scenic and natural landscape 

values. This may include transplanting trees and shrubs, mulching and fertilizing disturbed areas, 

removal of surfacing material, imprinting, irrigation, use of low profile permanent facilities, and 

painting to minimize visual contrasts. Surface-disturbing activities may be moved to avoid 

sensitive areas or to reduce the visual effects of the proposal. 

2) Above ground facilities requiring painting should be designed to blend in with the surrounding 

environment. 

3) Surface disturbance will be restricted in areas that have special topographic (steep or broken 

terrain and/or benches) and soil concerns in order to reduce impacts caused by soil erosion and 

habitat disturbance. Development in these areas will be considered on a case-by-case basis and 

will contain site-specific mitigation designed to prevent increased sediment from being 

transported into drainages and to prevent fragmentation of areas determined to provide important 

wildlife habitat. 

4) In areas that allow for off-road travel, minimize the off-road impact of large vehicles. Use wide, 

flat-tread, balloon tires (especially on seismic thumper trucks) where possible. Use all-terrain 

vehicles rather than large vehicles where possible. 

5) Only excavate topsoil and subsoil where it is absolutely necessary. Consider brush-beating, 

mowing, and/or parking on vegetation for surface disturbing activities. 

6) Disturbed areas should be contoured to blend with the natural topography. Blending is defined as 

reducing form, line, and color contrast associated with the surface disturbance. Disturbance 

should be contoured to match the original topography, where matching is defined as reproducing 

the original topography and eliminating form, line, and color caused by the disturbance as much 

as possible. 

7) Interim reclamation should be implemented concurrent with construction and site operations to 

the fullest extent possible. Final reclamation actions shall be initiated within 6 months of the 

termination of operations unless otherwise approved in writing by the authorized officer. 
Socorro Resource Management Plan 107 Appendix C: Best Management Practices 

8) Fill material should be pushed into cut areas and up over back slopes. Depressions should not be 

left that would trap water or form ponds unless the Authorized Officer has determined that dips or 

depressions may be used to assist reclamation efforts and seed propagation. 

9) Reclaimed soil will be free of contaminants and will have adequate depth, texture, and structure 

to provide for successful vegetation reclamation. Vegetation reclamation will be considered 

successful when healthy, mature perennials are established with a composition and density that 

closely approximates the surrounding vegetation as prescribed by the BLM, and the reclamation 

area is free of noxious weeds. 

10) If necessary after reclamation, a BLM-standard barbed wire fence will be constructed to exclude 

livestock for a minimum of at least two successful growing seasons. 

11) The project proponent will include a restoration plan for habitat of special status species when the 

BLM determines it is appropriate. The restoration plan will be developed in consultation with, 

and approved by, the BLM. 

12) Additional reclamation measures may be required based on the conditions existing at the time of 

abandonment. 

13) Oil and fuel for equipment and vehicles must be carefully handled and disposed to prevent soil or 

water contamination. 

14) Develop a spill contingency plan which identifies all actions to be taken in the event of a 

chemical spill including phone numbers for Federal, State, and local agencies which must be 

notified. 

15) Time activities to avoid wet periods. 

VISUAL RESOURCE MANAGEMENT 

BMPs to address visual resource concerns have been incorporated into the above resource discussions, as 

appropriate. Additional BMPs dealing with visual resource management considerations in oil and gas 

development can be found on the BLM website6

. BMPs dealing with visual resource management 

considerations in general are also available online7

. 

WILDLIFE AND RIPARIAN HABITAT 

1) Prior to the initiation of a surface-disturbing activity, the project area will be surveyed for raptor 

nests or active prairie dog towns. Surveys will be conducted by professional biologists approved 

by the Authorized Officer. All raptor nests and active prairie dog towns will be avoided by the 

distances and seasonal periods listed below. 

Species Minimum Distance Season

Aplomado Falcon 0.5 mile January 1-July 31

Eagle 0.5 mile February 1-July 15

Ferruginous Hawk 0.5 mile February 1-July 15

Prairie Falcon 0.5 mile March 1-August 1

 

6

 At the time of printing, the current web address is: 

http://www.blm.gov/wo/st/en/prog/energy/oil_and_gas/best_management_practices.html 

7

 At the time of printing, the web address is: http://www.blm.gov/nstc/VRM
Socorro Resource Management Plan 108 Appendix C: Best Management Practices 

All other raptor species 0.5 mile during observed nest establishment 

through fledgling

Black-Tailed Prairie Dog 0.25 mile January 1-June 15

Gunnison Prairie Dog 0.25 mile February 15-June 15

Long duration land use activities will not be allowed to occur within the species-specific spatial 

buffer zone of active nests or occupied prairie dog towns listed above. Short duration activities 

will be avoided within the species-specific spatial buffer zones during the dates listed above. 

Short duration activities will be limited to the spatial buffer zone outside of the boundary of the 

occupied prairie dog town and will not occur within the occupied town. All other raptor species 

nests will be avoided by the spatial buffer zone only during the period listed above, regardless of 

the duration of the activity. Before land use activities can commence a raptor and prairie dog 

survey must be completed. 

A short duration activity is defined as an activity, which would begin outside of a given breeding 

season and end prior to initiation of a given breeding season. A long duration activity is defined 

as an activity which would continue into or beyond a given nesting/breeding season. An active 

nest is defined as any nest that has been occupied in the last seven years. A nest will be 

determined active or inactive by the Authorized Officer. Surveys will be conducted by 

professional biologists approved by the Authorized Officer. 

2) Ensure that all fences are constructed to BLM Socorro Field Office Fence Specifications to 

mitigate impacts to wildlife. 

3) Ensure that escape wildlife escape ramps are installed and maintained on all applicable water 

development projects on public lands (see BLM Manual Handbook H-1741-2 Water 

Developments November 6, 1990). 

4) Construct all new water improvements so that they are located a minimum of 30 meters away 

from fences or other structures likely to pose a collision threat to bats. 

5) Surface disturbance will not be allowed within up to 0.5 mile of the outer edge of 100-year 

floodplains, playas, all artificial water developments (tanks, guzzlers, etc.), and riparian habitat 

(seeps, arroyos, etc.). Exceptions to this requirement will be considered on a case-by case basis. 

6) In areas where habitat and/or rangeland enhancement projects have been implemented, with the 

exception of large landscape projects (prescribed burns, chemical treatments, and mechanical 

treatments), adverse impacts to the landscape will be avoided by minimizing or excluding certain 

surface-disturbing activities that may degrade the objectives or intent of the project. Exceptions to 

this requirement will be considered on a case-by-case basis. 

7) In all crucial calving, lambing, kidding, and fawning areas and wintering ranges, all surfacedisturbing activities, permanent or temporary, will be avoided during the appropriate time 

periods. 

8) Prior to initiating geophysical or other preliminary surveys during the raptor breeding season, the 

area will be surveyed for the presence of raptor nests. 

9) In siting facilities, the following measures must be followed: 

In areas that constitute occupied or potential Aplomado Falcon habitat, a protocol survey for 

this species will be conducted along with the above general raptor nest survey prior to 

surveying/flagging locations. 

During operations at any time, all habitat features (pinnacles, cliffs, ledges, caves, and trees 

and shrubs greater than six feet in height) containing or capable of containing raptor nests or 

bat habitat will be avoided by vehicular traffic or other surface-disturbing activities likely to 

remove or destroy them unless authorized by BLM authorized officer. 
Socorro Resource Management Plan 109 Appendix C: Best Management Practices 

Tree and vegetation clearing will be limited to the minimum area required, except where 

vegetative objectives have been established for elimination or reduction in vegetative density. 

Construction activities will be timed to avoid wet periods. 

Powerlines will be constructed to standards outlined in the most recent version of ―Suggested 

Practices for Raptor Protection on Power Lines‖ published by the Edison Electric 

Institute/Raptor Research Foundation, unless otherwise agreed to by the Authorized Officer. 

The holder is responsible for demonstrating that power pole designs not meeting these 

standards are raptor safe. Such proof will be provided by a raptor expert approved by the 

Authorized Officer. The BLM reserves the right to require modifications or additions to 

powerline structures constructed under this authorization, should they be necessary to ensure 

the safety of large perching birds. The modifications and/or additions will be made by the 

holder without liability or expense to the United States. 

All equipment installed on Federal lands will be constructed to prevent birds and bats from 

entering them and, to the extent practical, to discourage perching and nesting. 

Open top tanks, reserve pits, disposal pits, or other open pits will be required to be equipped 

to deter entry by birds, bats, or other wildlife. 
Socorro Resource Management Plan 110 Appendix D: Monitoring 

APPENDIX D: MONITORING

Monitoring is the process of collecting data and information in order to determine whether or not desired 

outcomes (expressed as goals and objectives in the land use plan) are being met (or progress is being 

made toward meeting them) as the allowable uses and management actions are being implemented. This 

appendix describes the process for effectiveness monitoring that will be carried out for each resource or 

program to determine if the actions described in the Resource Management Plan are meeting or moving 

toward management goals. 

AIR QUALITY AND CLIMATE CHANGE 

No specific air monitoring is planned. The Socorro Field Office will ensure that authorizations and 

management activities comply with Federal, State, and local air quality regulations, requirements, and 

implementation plans. Ground cover will be protected in order to minimize wind erosion of soils.. 

CAVES AND KARST RESO URCES 

The purpose of a monitoring program for Cave and Karst areas is to facilitate improved management 

through monitoring and research and to protect natural and scenic values while allowing for recreation, 

and educational and scientific uses where such use does not conflict with protecting unique values. 

Conduct inventories and long-term general and specific ecological studies relating to the 

requirements of cave habitats for special status species. 

Determine population trends, threats, and habitat change by monitoring populations of all special 

status species using cave or karst habitats. 

Gather baseline information on habitat use by all species. 

Establish photo monitoring points and periodically take photos to record any changes. 

Use Limit of Acceptable Change techniques to monitor impacts from visitor use. 

Employ visitor surveys to determine visitor use, visitor satisfaction with their experience, and 

effectiveness of any interpretation or educational programs and facilities. 

Monitor the effects of any constructed projects or developments on wildlife and habitat use. 

CULTURAL RESOURCES 

There are two kinds of cultural resource site monitoring: one consists of field examination to assess 

whether any impacts have occurred resulting from Section 106 undertakings, and the other is to assess 

any natural or human-caused impacts that are not related to authorized Federal undertakings. 

Section 106 monitoring will be conducted when deemed appropriate by the Resource Area archaeologist 

or the Socorro Field Office Manager (i.e., when project design constraints do not allow for standard 

buffers for site avoidance).

Non-Section 106 monitoring of BLM-administered cultural resources in the Socorro Field Office area of 

jurisdiction will be conducted as staffing levels and workload permit, with a minimum of 10 site visits per 

year. Sites for non-Section 106 monitoring will be prioritized as follows: 

1. National Register eligible sites reported to be undergoing effects from natural or human caused 

phenomena. 

2. Sites of outstanding significance, particularly if they are considered vulnerable or at-risk such as 

sites in areas of intense recreation use and sites in urban interface areas. 
Socorro Resource Management Plan 111 Appendix D: Monitoring 

3. Sites chosen based on accessibility to staff or volunteers. For example, sites near a current project 

area. 

FIRE MANAGEMENT 

Monitoring studies would be encouraged on all emergency fire rehabilitation projects to determine 

whether emergency fire rehabilitation objectives were met. 

Monitoring would be implemented on all projects that employ new techniques, seed mixes, or 

rehabilitation methods. Emergency fire rehabilitation funds may be used to fund monitoring studies for up 

to three growing seasons following fire control. 

Pre-fire condition and post-fire effects would be determined by monitoring plant community composition 

and trend in burn areas to determine natural recovery, responses from seed planting, and weed and 

cheatgrass invasion. Monitoring methods would include establishing photo points, density, cover, 

frequency plots (pre- and post-burn), and ocular estimates. 

FORESTRY AND WOODLANDS

The forestry program will be monitored prior to and following silvicultural treatments utilizing standard 

forest stand exams to determine forest or woodland species, trees per acre, size classes, and overall forest 

or woodland health. Permanent plots will be established, including photo points. Line transects will also 

be utilized to determine cover and composition changes over time. These plots will be read on a schedule 

that reflects condition of the site and goals for future desired condition of the vegetation. 

The vegetative sales program would be monitored prior to and following establishment of vegetative sales 

collection sites using permanent plots established for photo points. These plots will be read on a schedule 

that reflects condition of the site, to ensure no undue resource damage has occurred from harvesting plant 

materials. 

For both the forestry and vegetative sales programs, regular site visits throughout the year would be a part 

of the monitoring program to ensure signs are in place, the public is properly permitted, and the public is 

not entering areas under wet conditions. 

LAND AND REALTY 

All authorized rights-of-way, permits, and leases including recreational and public proposes 

authorizations will be monitored by both the holder and the Authorized Officer. The holder will be 

responsible for complying with the terms and conditions of the grant and 43 Code of Federal Regulations 

(CFR) 2805.12 to ensure that public health, safety, and welfare are protected, and that the right-of-way, 

permit, or lease is in accordance with the State and local laws and that the terms and conditions of the 

authorization are being followed. The monitoring may involve but not be limited to conducting repetitive 

inspections, data gathering, or technical investigation. The frequency and type will depend on the 

resource values at risk, the holder‘s past performance record, and the ability to obtain monitoring services. 

The Authorized Officer will periodically conduct inspections of the area to ensure the protection of 

resources and that the management objectives in the land use plan are being met. These inspections will 

also confirm the holder is in compliance with the terms and conditions of the authorization, rental fees are 

being properly calculated, and the protection of the public health and safety is not being jeopardized. The 

Authorized Officer may conduct joint inspections with the holder. Written documentation of the 

inspections will be file in the casefile. 
Socorro Resource Management Plan 112 Appendix D: Monitoring 

Prior to surface-disturbing activities, the Authorized Office may require the holder not to proceed until the 

Authorized Officer has issued written notice to proceed. The Authorized Officer may conduct inspections 

during construction. The frequency and type of inspection will be depend on the resource values at risk, 

type of activities involved with the authorization, and the holder‘s previous performance record. 

Each Recreation and Public Purpose Act lease and patent will periodically receive an examination as to 

the terms, plan of development, timetable for construction plan of management, etc., in order to comply 

with the law. According to the BLM Handbook H-2740-1 Chapter 8, compliance checks should be 

scheduled at a minimum at intervals of five years after a lease or patent has been issued. Additional 

checks may be required in circumstances where the plan of development shows completion or substantial 

development of the proposed project in less than five years, the lease specifies a nonuse period shorter 

than five years, or receipt of a complaint alleging lands are being used for a purpose not authorized in the 

lease or patent. The compliance checks may be conducted by the holder, a third-party contractor, or other 

regulatory entity. 

MINERALS 

Monitoring of activities on mining claims will be conducted to ensure compliance with the 43 CFR 

3802/3809 regulations. These regulations provide for locatable mineral activities on public lands while 

preventing unnecessary or undue degradation, and provide for reclamation of disturbed areas and 

coordination with State agencies. BLM policy establishes minimum inspection frequencies for mining 

operations as follows: quarterly inspections are required for all operations using cyanide, and biannual 

inspections are required for all other active operations. Operations in sensitive areas or operations with a 

high potential for greater than usual impacts are inspected more often.

For fluid mineral leases, inspections will be conducted to determine compliance with applicable laws, 

regulations, conditions of leases, and the requirements of approved exploration and development plans. 

Where mineral production is occurring, inspections will ensure (1) an accurate accounting of materials 

removed; (2) proper compensation to the Federal government; (3) protection of the environment, public 

health and safety; and (4) identification and resolution of salable mineral trespass. Operations in sensitive 

areas or operations with a high potential for greater than usual impacts will be inspected more frequently. 

For saleable mineral operations, inspections will be conducted to determine compliance with applicable 

laws, regulations, and the requirements of approved mining plans. Where mineral production is occurring, 

the goals of the salable mineral inspection and enforcement/production verification program are (1) an 

accurate accounting of materials removed; (2) proper compensation to the Federal government; 

(3) protection of the environment, public health and safety; and (4) identification and resolution of salable 

mineral trespass. Operations in sensitive environmental areas or operations with a high potential for 

greater than usual impacts will be inspected more often. 

OUTDOOR RECREATION 

Monitoring will occur on an ongoing annual basis and will include periodic patrols to check boundaries of 

recreation areas and signing; ensure visitor compliance with rules and regulations; establish baseline data, 

as needed; determine current impacts from recreational use; and record data to help determine appropriate 

levels and patterns of recreational use and the influences of other resource uses. Monitoring will focus on 

visitation levels; compliance with rules, regulations, and permit stipulations for developed sites; dispersed 

uses; permits; and prescribed standards and guidelines as set forth in planning documents and the 

recreation opportunity spectrum classes. Methods of monitoring could include one or more of the 

following: traffic counters; surveillance at developed sites; limits of acceptable change studies, as needed; 

user contacts; monitoring of permitted events; and photo documentation of changes in resource condition 
Socorro Resource Management Plan 113 Appendix D: Monitoring 

over time. These data will be used to manage visitor use, develop plans and projects to reduce visitor 

impacts, and meet visitor expectations and demands. The level of monitoring will be contingent on 

available funding. 

RANGELAND 

Monitoring studies have been established on all allotments in BLM‘s Planning Area. Data such as actual 

livestock use, utilization of forage species, climatic data, rangeland condition, and trend will continue to 

be collected from these studies. The intensity and frequency of monitoring data collection will vary by 

management category. Allotments in the ―I‖ category are monitored at a greater intensity than the 

allotments in categories ―M‖ and ―C.‖ The monitoring schedule will be dependent on staffing and budget. 

The frequency of evaluations will likewise vary due to staffing and budget. At a minimum, evaluations 

should be coordinated with the renewal schedule of the 10-year permit. Where allotment management 

plans are in place, the evaluation will coincide with the end grazing cycle. Since 1999, 129 allotments 

have been evaluated as a result of the permit renewal process. 

RIPARIAN HABITAT 

The goal of the Socorro Field Office riparian monitoring is to document the progress toward achieving 

and then maintaining Proper Functioning Condition while being managed under the multiple use and 

adaptive management concepts. Riparian and wetland areas are considered to be functioning properly 

when adequate vegetation, landform, or large woody debris are present to dissipate stream energy 

associated with high water flows, thereby reducing erosion and improving water quality. The process used 

to assess Proper Functioning Condition is described in BLM Technical References 1737-9 and 1737-15. 

Proper Functioning Condition is reassessed on a three-year rotating basis. A binder containing monitoring 

information, such as Proper Functioning Condition results, reassessment schedules, and photo-point 

monitoring photos, for each designated riparian reach is being compiled and maintained in the Socorro 

Field Office. 

Although the BLM standard is to use proper functioning condition assessments, trend assessments can 

quickly provide initial information about progress toward desired conditions. Trend assessments include 

the following: wildlife and aquatic monitoring, water quality monitoring, Rosgen channel typing, riparian 

site classification, assessment of change over time towards meeting desired range of conditions, low-level 

aerial photography, and remote-sensing technologies. Riparian areas also are required to meet the riparian 

standard of the New Mexico Standards and Guidelines (see Appendix E). 

Attainment of Proper Functioning Condition (BLM 1993, 1998) objectives is considered a minimum step 

in the process of achieving desired range of conditions. Proper Functioning Condition and other riparian 

objectives in most cases do not equate to the desired range of conditions. Determination of Proper 

Functioning Condition and riparian management objectives is an interdisciplinary process. To determine 

improvement in conditions relating to lotic proper functioning condition, monitoring methods are 

described for all assessment categories in BLM Technical Reference 1737-15 (1998). 

Photo Points and Aerial Photos – Photo points are established during Proper Functioning Condition 

assessments. Photo sets taken at specific repeatable locations subjectively show changes in stream 

channels and vegetation over time. Photo points can be very useful to illustrate changes at specific points 

over time. Aerial photos show changes in channel and vegetation over the length of a stream. They 

include enough detail to monitor woody species changes over time. 
Socorro Resource Management Plan 114 Appendix D: Monitoring 

SOILS 

Manage uses to minimize and mitigate disturbances to soils and loss of soil sediments from erosion. 

Maintain soil stability to protect soil ecological health and long-term productivity. 

Soil health will be monitored through the use of the Rangeland Standards assessments that assess 

vegetative and soil conditions. The schedule of monitoring varies for allotment evaluations. These 

evaluations monitor utilization, vegetative trends, and ground cover. Specific localized soil erosion areas 

will be evaluated for rehabilitation efforts. 

SPECIAL DESIGNATIONS MANAGEMENT 

All the special designations including areas of critical environmental concern, special recreation 

management areas, and special management areas will be assessed on a periodic schedule in order to 

evaluate maintenance and enhancement of relevant and important values, in the case of areas of critical 

environmental concern, and the other values for which other areas were designated for special 

management. All areas also will be evaluated to determine the effectiveness of management in 

maintaining those values. Monitoring may include collection of both qualitative and quantitative data. 

Monitoring methods will be the same or similar to those described above for the various resource 

management programs. 

SPECIAL MANAGEMENT AREAS 

Wilderness Study Areas 

Wilderness Study Areas (WSAs) will be managed under the Interim Policy and Guidelines for Lands 

Under Wilderness Review (BLM 1995). The interim management policy requires monitoring of all WSAs 

on a regular basis to ensure wilderness characteristics are maintained. Monitoring levels could vary by 

WSA depending on use, access, conflicts, and other considerations. Monitoring boundaries and OHV area 

and route designations is a priority action during patrols of WSAs. Methods of monitoring could be both 

motorized along WSA boundaries and open routes, and non-motorized. Aerial surveillance, visitor 

contact, and permit compliance also will be used as part of monitoring. Projects or uses allowed under the 

interim management policy also will be closely monitored to ensure compliance and protection of 

wilderness characteristics. WSAs also will be monitored to ensure any unauthorized activities are 

documented and rehabilitated as needed. 

TRANSPORTATION/ACCESS – OFF-HIGHWAY VEHICLES 

Overall monitoring and evaluation of the Socorro Field Office‘s Transportation System will be reviewed 

and updated as needed. 

Monitoring OHV uses within the Planning Area will be ongoing with a focus on compliance with specific 

designations, as well as determining whether these uses are in compliance and/or causing adverse effects 

on various resources. Methods of monitoring will include visitor contacts, permit review, visual 

surveillance, traffic counters, periodic patrols to check area boundaries and routes, signing, and visitor 

use. Aerial reconnaissance and use of satellite imagery could be used as well. Closures will be monitored 

to ensure public safety and protect affected roadbeds or areas. Baseline data will be established for sites 

where OHV use is occurring, and sites will be rehabilitated or closed as necessary, contingent on 

available funding. 
Socorro Resource Management Plan 115 Appendix D: Monitoring 

VEGETATION 

Monitoring to determine success in meeting vegetation management objectives will include periodic 

measurements of plant composition, vigor, and productivity, as well as measurement of the amount and 

distribution of plant cover and litter which protects the soil surface from raindrop impact, detains overland 

flow, protects the surface from wind erosion, and retards soils moisture loss through evaporation. 

Additional data to determine the effectiveness of established tools in meeting objectives may include 

herbaceous or woody utilization, actual use, and climatic conditions. 

Determination of trends in production, structure, composition of vegetation and determination of soil/site 

stability, watershed function, and integrity of biotic community will be done through the rangeland health 

assessment process prescribed in the most current versions of Interpreting Indicators of Rangeland Health 

(Shaver et al. 2000), and Bureau of Land Management (BLM) Manual 4180 and Handbook H-4180-1 

guiding implementation of the rangeland health standards (BLM 2001). 

Special Status Plants 

Monitoring will include surveys to determine the distribution, resource conditions, and trends of special 

status plant species and representative habitats. This will include determining plant composition at the 

site, checking for invasion of exotic species, monitoring localized disturbances (from off-highway vehicle 

[OHV] use, recreational use, etc.), and determining trends in special status plant attributes. Monitoring 

methods will include establishing photo points and doing periodic ocular surveillance. Any new grounddisturbing activities or National Environmental Policy Act actions will require a survey clearance for 

presence or absence of special status plants. Trends in special status plants and vegetation will be 

determined and could include such things as demographic studies, density, cover, and frequency (in 

exclosures versus open areas). Methods to accomplish this could include establishing new exclosures to 

determine effects of use versus nonuse, developing conservation agreements/conservation strategies, and 

conducting vegetative attribute sampling in accordance with Measuring and Monitoring Plant Populations 

(Elzinga et al. 1998). 

Invasive/Noxious Weeds 

Evaluation of treatments will continue in cooperation with the State of New Mexico, Socorro and Catron 

Counties, and private interests as well as neighboring counties and Federal jurisdictions. Inventories to 

identify new introductions, distribution, and density of noxious weed populations will be carried out on an 

annual basis in cooperation with the aforementioned entities. Known noxious weed sites, which are 

identified for treatment, will be visited each year and evaluated for effectiveness of control. Known sites 

not identified for treatment will be visited on a rotational basis over three years. All known sites visited 

will be located with a global positioning system (GPS) unit, photographed, measured, and a determination 

of the need for future treatment will be made. 

Inventories for new noxious weeds will be conducted each year on a three-year rotation through the 

resource area. All burned areas (natural and prescribed) will be surveyed for noxious weeds for three 

years following the burn. Any newly discovered sites will be located with a GPS unit, photographed, 

measured, and a determination of the need for future treatment will be made. Ecological trends due to 

changes in vegetation composition over time, in areas dominated by competing undesirable plant species, 

will be measured through periodic rangeland health assessments following procedures outlined in 

Interpreting Indicators of Rangeland Health (Shaver et al. 2000). 

VISUAL RESOURCES 

Monitoring will be ongoing for all projects (including but not limited to projects associated with any 

developments, land alterations, vegetation manipulation, etc.), which could potentially affect visual 
Socorro Resource Management Plan 116 Appendix D: Monitoring 

resources. These projects will be monitored to ensure compliance with established visual resource 

management classes. Monitoring will include use of the visual contrast rating system, described in BLM 

Manual 8400 (BLM 1984), where appropriate, during project review. 

WATER RESOURCES 

Manage uses to maintain or improve overall watershed health by maximizing infiltration for groundwater 

recharge. Manage uses to maintain or improve surface water quality in watersheds, and watersheds which 

affect streams that are listed as water quality limited under the Clean Water Act, Section 303 (d). Manage 

resources to maintain or reduce salinity loading in accomplishing the goals and objectives outlined in the 

Colorado River Salinity Control Act. 

Watershed health will be monitored through the use of the Rangeland Standards assessments that assess 

vegetative and soil conditions. The schedule of monitoring varies for allotment evaluations. These 

evaluations monitor utilization, vegetative trends, and ground cover. 

WILD HORSES 

A monitoring plan will be developed to measure the achievement or non-achievement of objectives. 

Routine monitoring within the Herd Management Area will be conducted on habitat and wild horses at a 

minimum of once every three years or prior to the next gather. Monitoring of habitat may consist of 

utilization of key forage species, trend of vegetation, precipitation, and water availability. 

Various types of census methods may be used to determine the number and distribution of wild horses. 

Census methods recommended by the National Academy of Science Committee on Wild Free-Roaming 

Horses and Burros will be used to determine population size. 

Data used to assess herd condition and health will be collected during the census, when conducting 

gathers, or from routine observations. This can include age and sex structure of the herd, lactation and 

pregnancy, distribution, band size, color, height, physical condition, and behavior. At times, blood 

samples may be drawn from horses to test genetic diversity. 

WILDLIFE HABITAT AND SPECIAL STATUS SPECIES

Monitoring of wildlife enhancement projects will be implemented annually or semiannually as time, 

funding, and availability of personnel allows. Data will be used to help determine areas where habitat is 

limited and where special management may be needed. Where vegetation treatments are applied, annually 

or semiannually monitor results with photo points and vegetation sampling that includes species and 

structural composition of the sites both pre-and post-treatment, if possible. Baseline big game and nongame use patterns and estimated population levels will be calculated using information collected annually 

from the New Mexico Department of Game and Fish. These will be compared with post-treatment use 

patterns and population numbers, along with vegetation sampling, and will be used to determine the 

relative effectiveness of the treatment. This monitoring will be accomplished by contract or with the aid 

of Federal, State, and private employees. Every five years or as time, funding, and availability of 

personnel allows, the number of acres of Desert Bighorn Sheep, mule deer, elk, and Pronghorn Antelope 

habitat that has undergone vegetation treatments will be evaluated to determine what percentage of the 

proposed treatment has been completed. In addition, every five years, population levels and distribution 

of these species within the resource area will be evaluated using annual observations and herd counts 

conducted by the New Mexico Department of Game and Fish. 

Monitoring could consist of intensive research projects or passive population inventories designed to help 

identify the extent of the populations and the habitats that are being used. Inventories of special status 
Socorro Resource Management Plan 117 Appendix D: Monitoring 

species will be completed once every one-to-three years for species known to occur within the Planning 

Area. 

Annually or semi-annually assess landscape changes in a variety of vegetative communities from wildfire, 

prescribed fire, vegetation treatments, insect infestation, or other major influences. These changes will be 

mapped using GPS, geographic information system, and remote sensing technologies. The number of 

acres will be reported for each type of action. Assessments will be based on changes in the size and 

composition of each major vegetative community. Changes will reflect suitability for dependent/obligate 

species for each vegetative community. Each vegetative community will be evaluated periodically during 

Rangeland Health Assessments and after major catastrophic events such as large-scale wildfires. Where 

necessary, recommendations will be made for protection and restoration of damaged or degraded habitats. 
Socorro Resource Management Plan 118 Appendix E: ROS Definitions and VRM Class Objectives 

APPENDIX E: ROS DEFINITIONS AND VRM CLASS OBJECTIVES 

RECREATIONAL OPPORTUNITY SPECTRUM 

The recreation opportunity spectrum (ROS) provides the conceptual framework for inventory, planning, 

and management of recreation resources. The ROS recognizes that people differ in their needs and the 

experience they desire. Also, the resource base is not uniform; it varies in its potential for providing 

recreation experiences. The ROS provides a way to characterize either the capability of a resource to 

provide an experience or the demand for an experience in terms of the activity opportunity and setting 

opportunity provided or demanded. Therefore, recreation opportunities can be expressed in terms of three 

components: (1) the activities, (2) the setting, and (3) the experience. The possible combinations of these 

three components are arranged along a continuum or spectrum. The ROS is divided into six classes, with 

each class defined in terms of its combination of activity, setting, and experience opportunities. The six 

classes are primitive, semi-primitive non-motorized, semi-primitive motorized, roaded natural, rural, and 

urban. As conceived, the spectrum has application to all land, regardless of ownership or jurisdiction. 

Classes are described as follows. 

Primitive 

This is essentially an unmodified natural environment of fairly large size. Use of motorized vehicles is 

prohibited. There is an extremely high probability of experiencing isolation, closeness to nature, and selfreliance on outdoor skills. Activities may include hiking, nature study, fishing, cross-country skiing, and 

floatboating. 

Semi-primitive Non-motorized 

This is a predominantly natural or natural-appearing environment of moderate to large size. Minimum onsite controls and restrictions may be present. Use of motorized vehicles is prohibited. There is a high 

probability of experiencing isolation, closeness to nature, and self-reliance in outdoor skills. Activities 

may include camping, hunting, snowshoeing, and floatboating. 

Semi-primitive Motorized 

This is a predominantly natural or natural-appearing environment of moderate to large size. User 

interaction is low, but there is evidence of other users. Minimum on-site controls and restrictions may be 

present. Use of motorized vehicles is permitted. There is a moderate probability of experiencing isolation, 

closeness to nature, and self-reliance in outdoor skills. Activities may include boating, motor biking, 

specialized landcraft use, mountain climbing, driving for pleasure, camping, and picnicking. 

Roaded Natural 

This is a predominantly natural-appearing environment with moderate evidence of humans. Evidence 

usually harmonizes with the natural environment. Management provides for the use of conventional 

motorized vehicles. There is an equal probability to experience affiliation with other user groups and for 

isolation and interaction with the natural environment. Challenge and risk opportunities are not very 

important, although testing of outdoor skills may be. Opportunities for both motorized and non-motorized 

recreation are available. Activities may include bus touring, water skiing, walking, canoeing, sledding, 

and driving for pleasure. 

Rural 

This is a substantially modified environment. Resource modifications and utilization practices are to 

enhance specific recreation activities. Facilities are designed for use by a large number of people. 

Motorized use and parking opportunities are available. The probability of user interaction is moderate to 

high, as is the convenience of sites and opportunities. These factors are generally more important than the 
Socorro Resource Management Plan 119 Appendix E: ROS Definitions and VRM Class Objectives 

physical setting. Wildland challenges and testing of outdoor skills are generally unimportant. Activities 

may include interpretive services, swimming, bicycling, recreation cabin use, and skiing. 

Urban 

This is a substantially urbanized environment, although the background may have natural-appearing 

elements. Renewable resource modernization and urbanization practices are to enhance specific recreation 

opportunities. Vegetative cover is often exotic and manicured. Large numbers of users can be expected on 

site and in nearby areas. Facilities for highly intensified motor-vehicle use and parking are available. The 

probability of user interaction is high, as is the convenience of sites and opportunities. Experiencing 

natural environments and uses of outdoor skills are relatively unimportant. Opportunities for competitive 

and spectator sports and for passive uses are common. Activities may include resort lodging, ice skating, 

team sports participation, tour boat use, and picnicking. 

VISUAL RESOURCE MANG EMENT CLASS OBJECTIVES

The Federal Land Policy and Management Act requires the Bureau of Land Management to consider the 

effects of management actions on the visual quality of the landscape. To protect visual resources, all 

public land is inventoried to determine its Visual Resource Management classification. The Visual 

Resource Management objectives for each of the four possible classifications are described below. 

Class I 

The objective of this classification is the preservation of the existing landscape‘s character. Providing for 

natural ecological changes, this class allows limited management activity. The very low level of change 

must not attract attention. Class I is assigned to those areas in which management decisions have been 

made to preserve a natural landscape. Thus, the class includes wilderness study areas and other 

congressionally and administratively designated areas. 

Class II 

The retention of the existing character of the landscape is the objective of this classification. The level of 

change to landscape characteristics should be low; management activities may be seen but should not 

attract the attention of a casual observer. Any alterations must conform to the basic elements of form, line, 

color, and texture found in the predominant natural features of the characteristic landscape. 

Class III 

The objective of Class III is the partial retention of the existing landscape character. Moderate levels of 

change are acceptable. Management activities may attract attention but should not dominate the casual 

observer‘s view. Changes should conform to the basic elements of the predominant natural features of the 

characteristic landscape. 

Class IV 

Class IV provides for major landscape modification management activities. These management activities 

may dominate the view and become the focus of viewer attention. Every effort should be made to 

minimize the impact of these projects by carefully locating activities, minimizing disturbance, and 

designing the projects to conform to the characteristic landscape. 
Socorro Resource Management Plan 120 Appendix F: Disposal Policy and ROW Area Plan 

APPENDIX F: LAND/MINERALS DISPOSAL POLICY AND ROW 

EXCLUSION/AVOIDANCE AREA PLAN 

SURFACE ESTATE DISPO SAL POLICY 

All surface estate disposal actions require the preparation of a mineral report to assess the mineral 

potential of the property prior to disposal. 

Any potential interference with mineral development will be considered through the disposal process. The 

creation of a split surface-mineral estate causing surface interference with Federal mineral development 

will be avoided to the extent possible. Any surface disposal action will closely analyze potential impacts 

to Federal mineral material development. All surface estate patents within areas of known coal potential 

will carry a reservation of surface owner consent rights under the Surface Mining Control and 

Reclamation Act of 1977. 

The following items will be examined when considering the merits of any disposal: 

Consistency and conformance with current planning 

Consistency with mineral resource policy and fluid mineral leasing procedures 

Potential effects on special status species and their habitat 

Potential effects on recreation and wilderness values 

Potential effects on prime and unique farmland 

Floodplain and flood hazard evaluation 

Potential effects on cultural and paleontological resource values 

Potential effects on American Indian religious values 

Potential effects on visual resources 

Potential effects on ACECs 

Potential effects on wetlands 

Potential effects on existing rights and uses 

Public controversy 

Potential effects on health and safety 

Potential effects on adjacent uses and ownership 

Potential effects on air resources 

The following procedures will be followed for the various types of surface estate land disposal actions in 

the Socorro Field Office Area: 

Exchanges 

Disposal by exchange must meet the criteria outlined in the Federal Land Policy and Management Act 

(FLPMA) Sec. 206, whereby it is determined that the public interest will be well served by making the 

proposed exchange. Exchanges within designated retention areas may be possible if it is clearly 

determined that it is in the best interest of the public. The following principles will guide the Socorro 

Field Office in its land exchange program: 
Socorro Resource Management Plan 121 Appendix F: Disposal Policy and ROW Area Plan 

1. The Socorro Field Office will continue to strive to process mutually benefiting, public interest land 

exchanges in a timely and efficient manner. 

2. Acquisition through exchange rather than purchase of lands or interests in lands required for resource 

management programs will always be the preferred method of acquisition, as this will reduce the 

expansion of Federal real estate holdings and help to assure the integrity of State and local tax basis. 

3. Comments from State and local governments and the general public shall be sought and considered 

before completion of each exchange. 

4. Patent and deed reservations and conditions will be kept to the absolute minimum necessary to 

complete the transaction. Rights of third-party right-of-way holders and other legal interests in the 

exchanged lands will be protected. 

5. The generally preferred rule is for both surface and subsurface (mineral) estates to be traded in an 

exchange. However, due to third-party encumbrances, or difficulties in the valuation process, it may 

be preferable to complete certain exchanges with reservations. Such exceptions to the generally 

preferred rule are to be made on a case-by-case basis. 

6. Exchanges shall be utilized to consolidate the surface and subsurface estates for both the Federal 

government and non-Federal owners in split estate situations. 

7. Exchanges may be utilized to affect ownership and management area boundary changes or 

adjustments and to form more logical and efficient land and resource management areas for both the 

Federal government and non-Federal owners. 

8. As the law permits, expenses incurred by the BLM on exchange actions for the benefit of other 

Federal agencies shall be recovered from the benefiting agency. The BLM shall not attempt to 

recover nominal costs. 

9. When an exchange involves the cancellation in hold or in part of a grazing permit or lease, the 

compensation for rangeland improvements and 2-year notification requirements of Section 402(g) of 

the FLPMA and 43 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR 4110 will be met. 

10. The acquisition of nonpublic lands containing unique or unusual historic, cultural, mineral, 

recreational, scientific, and scenic or wildlife habitat values will be pursued when formulating any 

exchange proposal. 

Sales 

Property selected for sale must be identified as being potentially suitable for disposal in an approved land 

use plan and must meet one or more of the criteria outlined in the FLPMA Sec. 203. In addition, if the 

tract is 2,500 acres or more, procedures outlined in Sec. 203(c) must also be followed. The disposal 

criteria are as follows: 

Such tract because of its location or other characteristics is difficult and uneconomic to manage as 

part of the public lands, and is not suitable for management by another Federal department or agency; 

or

Such tract was acquired for a specific purpose, and the tract is no longer needed for that or any other 

Federal purpose; or 

Disposal of such tract will serve important public objectives, including but not limited to expansion of 

communities and economic development, which cannot be achieved prudently or feasibly on land 

other than public land and which outweighs other public objectives and values, including but not 

limited to recreation and scenic values, which would be served by maintaining such tract in Federal 

ownership. 
Socorro Resource Management Plan 122 Appendix F: Disposal Policy and ROW Area Plan 

Anticipated environmental impacts to existing resources such as minerals, wildlife, recreation, range, 

cultural resources, wilderness values, floodplains, paleontological values, visual resources, areas of 

critical environmental concern, wetlands, threatened or endangered rivers, prime or unique farm lands, 

and social and economic conditions, will be considered during the preparation of each environmental 

assessment. The environmental assessment will be used to determine whether the subject parcel is 

suitable to be offered for sale. Once this determination has been made, a fair market appraisal of the 

property will be completed to set the minimum acceptable bid. 

If a tract is determined suitable for sale, the environmental assessment will analyze the method of sale that 

will be used to dispose of the tract. Several factors are considered in determining the method of sale 

which include but are not limited to the needs of State and/or local governments, adjoining landowners‘ 

interests and concerns, public policies, historical uses, and equitable distribution of the land. In 

accordance with 43 CFR 2711.3, the Socorro Field Office policy for determining the sale method is as 

follows: 

1. Competitive bidding is the preferred method of sale and will be used where clearly there will be a 

number of interested parties bidding for the land and they could make practicable use of the land 

regardless of adjoining landownership. Competitive bidding will also be used where the land is 

clearly within a developing or urbanizing area and land values are increasing due to their location 

and interest on the competitive market. If there are no overriding bases for modifying competition 

or direct sale, the land will be offered through competitive bidding. The normal practice for 

competitive sales is to first offer the land for sale by sealed bids; if unsold, the tract is offered for 

sale over-the-counter. 

2. Modified competitive bidding may be used to permit the existing grazing user or adjoining 

landowner to meet the high bid or to limit the number of persons permitted to bid on the land. 

These sales will normally be for lands not located near urban expansion areas or in areas with 

rapidly increasing land values, when there is a need to avoid jeopardizing existing use of adjacent 

land, to assure compatibility of the possible uses with adjacent lands, and avoid dislocation of 

existing users. This procedure will allow for limited competitive bidding to protect ongoing use. 

3. Direct (without competition) sales may be used when, in the opinion of the Authorized Officer, 

the public interest would best be served. Examples include but are not limited to: 

A tract identified for transfer to State or local governments or nonprofit organizations; or 

A tract identified for sale that is an integral part of a project or of public importance and 

speculative bidding would jeopardize the timely completion and economic viability of the 

project; or 

There is a need to recognize authorized use such as an existing business which would be 

threatened if the tract were purchased by other than the authorized user, or 

A tract is surrounded by land in non-Federal ownership and does not have public access; or 

The lands support inadvertent unauthorized use or occupancy. 

4. When lands have been offered for sale under direct or modified bidding procedures and they 

remain unsold, then the land will be re-offered by the competitive bidding procedure. In no case 

will the land be sold for less than fair market value. 

Public participation and intergovernmental coordination will be sought and encouraged during the 

development of each sale. Where a decision is made to dispose of land within a grazing allotment, 

permittees and lessees shall be given 2 years prior notification before their grazing preference may be 

cancelled in whole or part. A permittee or lessee may unconditionally waive the two-year prior 

notification. 
Socorro Resource Management Plan 123 Appendix F: Disposal Policy and ROW Area Plan 

The lands may be disposed at any time, provided a condition of the exchange or sale allows the existing 

grazing user to continue grazing livestock on the land for at least two years from the date the two-year 

notice is received. 43 CFR 2711.1-3 addresses sales requiring grazing permit or lease cancellations. 

In such cases, the condition of the disposal will include the same terms and conditions as the permit/lease 

in regard to numbers, kind of livestock, season-of-use, animal unit months, and maintenance of range 

improvements. Fees must be the same as the Federal grazing fees. 

Grazing permittees/lessees will receive fair market value (less salvage value) for their interest in 

authorized permanent rangeland improvements located on public lands in accordance with 43 CFR 

4120.3-6. Compensation for grazing improvements under the land sale action is addressed in 43 CFR 

2711.4-1. If floodplain tracts are designated for disposal, the patent will contain language indemnifying 

the United States against any claims for loss or injury due to flooding. 

Lands designated as retention areas may be offered for disposal through a competitive sale unless the 

authorized officer determines the interest of the public would best be served by modified competitive 

bidding or direct sale (WO IM-2002-143). Land ownership pattern within these areas are moderately 

consolidated and contain small tracts of land. Land sale may be pursued if the disposal of lands within 

designated retention areas, not including ACECs, special management areas (SMAs), and special 

recreational management areas (SRMAs) would help enhance manageability and consolidate land status. 

Several parcels have no legal public access which makes manageability difficult. The parcels offered for 

disposal shall contain no known significant resources values. 

Wilderness study areas (WSAs) and retention areas within ACECs, SMAs, and SRMAs shall be excluded 

and unavailable for disposal through sales and/or exchanges. Consolidation of ownership within these 

specially managed areas would be through acquisition of state and private lands to continue improving the 

ownership and manageability. Any exchange involving lands within retention areas must be exchanged 

for lands with a higher resource value than lands being disposed. 

Direct sales must be clearly determined by the authorized officer to ensure that the sale is in the best 

interest of the public. When lands have been offered for direct or modified bidding and they remain 

unsold, the land will be re-offered under competitive bidding procedures. Mineral (subsurface) estate will 

be retained for all sales that occur within designated retention areas. Permittees will be given 2 years prior 

notification to disposal of lands within a grazing allotment (permits/leases) before their grazing may be 

cancelled in whole or part. 

Recreation and Public Purposes Patents 

The Socorro Field Office will continue to issue patents to qualified governmental and nonprofit entities 

for public parks and recreations sites under the Recreation and Public Purposes (R&PP) Act. These 

patents may be issued at less than fair market value as outlined in 43 CFR 2740. Applications for patent 

of public lands under the R&PP Act will be processed as a Socorro Field Office priority under the 

requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act and will be subject to public review. Current 

policy dictates that new sanitary landfill sites will be patented and no new lease will be issued in the 

Socorro Resource Area pursuant to the R&PP Act. R&PP applications may be entertained in either 

retention or disposal zones; yet, a determination must always be made that the disposal action is in the 

public's interest. 

Mineral Estate Disposal Policy 

Disposal of the mineral estate is possible under Sections 206 and 209 of the FLPMA. It is the policy of 

the BLM to avoid disposing of the surface estate while retaining the mineral estate unless there are areas 

of ―known mineral value,‖ as defined in 43 CFR 2720.0.5. In areas of ―known mineral value,‖ the mineral 
Socorro Resource Management Plan 124 Appendix F: Disposal Policy and ROW Area Plan 

estate (and the surface estate if substantial interference to development will result) should be retained 

except as described below. 

Prior to any land disposal a ―mineral value‖ determination must be made following a field reconnaissance 

by a BLM mineral examiner. A mineral report must be written to evaluate the leasable, locatable, and 

saleable mineral potential of each proposed sale or exchange. Under the FLPMA, the conclusion of the 

mineral examiner will include an opinion as to whether the lands have ―known mineral values.‖ If 

professional judgment concludes that the land does not contain ―known mineral values,‖ the surface and 

subsurface estate may be conveyed, subject to any existing mining claim(s) or mineral leases. 

A mining claim of record under Section 314 of the FLPMA generally prevents an exchange or sale. If the 

land is under mining claim, the surface should be retained under Federal ownership or the claim examined 

for validity. However, a validity examination may be waived and the BLM may proceed with the sale or 

exchange of both the surface and the mineral estate, subject to the existing mining claim(s) if: 

The land meets the criteria for disposal as determined through land-use planning; and 

The land has no ―known mineral value‖ as determined by a BLM geologist or mining engineer; 

and 

The prospective patentee is willing to accept defensible title, preserving whatever rights the 

mining claimant may have. Conveyance of the surface and mineral estate will be subject to 

―existing mining claim(s),‖ allowing the mining claimant to apply for and receive full fee patent 

if a valid discovery were made prior to the date of transfer under Sections 206 or 209, or 

alternatively, receive patent to the mineral estate only if discovery were made after the original 

conveyance. 

The BLM will proceed with a sale or exchange only after reasonable efforts have been made to secure 

relinquishment of the mining claims(s). If the mining claimant opposes the action, the Notice of Realty 

Action protest procedures will apply. 

For a direct sale or an exchange, the proponent must be informed early and fully of the potential title 

conflicts and rights of the mining claimant under the law. The BLM should then proceed only if these 

conditions are acceptable to the proponent. For a proposed competitive sale, the field office must 

carefully consider the effect on sale price, likelihood of success, and interests to be served if the sale is 

made subject to the rights of the mining claimant. If it is clearly in the public interest to proceed, the BLM 

must secure purchaser waiver of any liability against the United States in the event of subsequent title 

litigation. 

In cases where lands are patented without a reservation of locatable minerals, a FLPMA patent is believed 

to have standing to bring private contest (43 CFR 4.450) against the mining claim(s). Should he or she do 

so, the burden is upon the patentee to prove lack of discovery. If the patentee is successful, or if the 

claims are abandoned or relinquished, the land will not be open to further location, and the patentee will 

receive full title to the involved locatable minerals. 

Mining claim locations and mineral leases for lands in which the surface title has passed under the 

FLPMA disposal authority may be made only after regulations providing for such locations or leasing 

have been promulgated. Because these regulations have not as yet been issued, lands disposed of under 

the FLPMA are subject to de facto withdrawal. Lands disposed of under the FLMPA are not withdrawn 

from mineral material sales or free-use permits. 

All minerals must be reserved if the Federal lands are conveyed out of Federal ownership pursuant to the 

FLPMA disposal authority, except in the limited instances that follow: 
Socorro Resource Management Plan 125 Appendix F: Disposal Policy and ROW Area Plan 

1. Sales 

a. If the public lands proposed for sale are determined to have ―known mineral values‖ for 

locatable, leasable, or saleable minerals, one of the following courses of action may be 

taken: 

(1) Reject the offer to purchase or cancel the offer of sale. 

(2) Dispose of the surface estate and reserve all of the mineral interests to the United 

States. 

(3) Dispose of the surface and convey all or part of the mineral interests under terms 

set forth in Section 209(b) of the FLPMA. 

b. If the lands have no ―known mineral value,‖ the mineral interests may be simultaneously 

disposed of with the surface estate under authority of Section 209(b) of the FLPMA. 

2. Exchanges 

a. Public lands which do not have ―known mineral values‖ may be offered to exchange 

without any mineral reservation. This will apply whether or not the non-Federal party in 

an exchange controls the minerals under his or her land. 

b. If the public lands have some potential for mineral development, reserving the mineral 

interests is not mandatory as long as the values can be equalized by the payment of 

money and so long as the payment does not exceed 25 percent of the total value of the 

land. 

 In any case, it is normally desirable to keep surface and mineral ownership together in an 

exchange, whenever possible, to eliminate future problems associated with split estate 

ownership. 

c. If the public lands in an exchange are determined to have ―known mineral values‖ for 

locatable, leasable, or saleable minerals, it may be in the public interest to cancel the 

offer, depending upon the significance of the deposits. The leasable minerals alone can be 

reserved if significant. 

RIGHT-OF-WAY AVOIDANCE AND EXCLUSION AREAS PLAN 

This RMP identifies a number of right-of-way avoidance and exclusion areas within the Socorro Planning 

Area. This approach will allow a right-of-way applicant to review resource area maps to determine what 

areas are closed to development and which open areas are subject to thorough examination with the 

potential for application rejection. All applicants will be notified that their project, if placed in an 

avoidance area, may be subject but not limited to requirements for recontouring and/or revegetating 

disturbed areas, painting certain above-ground structures to blend with the surrounding landscape and 

vegetation, and using special tower design and/or pole color. 

All designated right-of-way exclusion areas will be closed to all forms of new right-of-way development. 

BLM Manual 1623.51 A. 1c states that right-of-way exclusion areas are areas where future right-of-way 

may be granted only when mandated by law. Mining claimants cannot be denied reasonable access to an 

exclusion area unless the land is withdrawn from mineral entry (see 43 CFR§ 3809.0-6). The majority of 

the right-of-way exclusion areas are within WSAs, ACECs, and areas assigned Visual Resource 

Management Class I. As a point of clarification, it should be recognized that many of the areas or portions 

thereof discussed within this plan are presently under wilderness review and designated as WSAs. There 

are 13 WSAs totaling approximately 291,826 acres within the Socorro Planning Area. These lands are 

presently being managed under the Interim Policy and Guidelines for Land Under Wilderness Review
Socorro Resource Management Plan 126 Appendix F: Disposal Policy and ROW Area Plan 

dated July 5, 1995, and will continue to be managed until they are either added to the National Wilderness 

Preservation System or removed from wilderness review. Any right-of-way authorizations granted in 

these areas after they are removed from wilderness review will be managed under the prescriptions within 

this plan. 

All right-of-way applicants should be aware that a mining claimant may refuse to allow a right-of-way to 

cross a claim if such claim was located prior to July 23, 1955. In such cases, the BLM will reject a rightof-way application request or will help the applicant in the consideration of an alternative route which 

would be acceptable. 

The right-of-way avoidance areas are defined in the BLM Manual 1623.52 as areas where future rightsof-way may be granted only when no feasible alternative route is available. The purpose of the right-ofway avoidance areas is to reduce the likelihood of rights-of-way being placed in these areas. When 

possible, alternative routes and sites will be considered. The Authorized Officer will closely review goals 

and objectives for specially-designated areas identified as avoidance areas in the resource management 

plan. This process will guide the Authorized Officer to determine which right-of-way applications will be 

rejected upon submittal or processed for issue. All issued right-of-way grants will be subject to special 

resource mitigating measures or stipulations. The terms and conditions of all right-of-way grants depend 

upon the sensitivity of the affected resource, applicable laws and regulations, and management objectives 

of special designated areas identified in the Socorro Resource Management Plan. All right-of-way 

proposals will require the preparation of a site-specific environmental analysis to determine impacts and 

mitigating measures needed to specifically protect sensitive resource values. 

The right-of-way avoidance areas also apply to land use leases and permits in accordance with 

Section 302 of the FLMPA. The specially-designated areas identified in the Resource Management Plan, 

including areas of critical environmental concern, special recreation management areas, and special 

management areas, include management prescriptions which exclude or avoid leases as well as rights-ofway. Leases and permits related to realty or land actions will be discouraged within avoidance areas. In 

cases when the location of the proposed activity cannot be avoided, the Authorized Officer will analyze it 

on a case-by-case basis. All leases and permits will be subject to the same review as stated in the 

paragraph above. All issued leases and permits will be subject to special resource mitigating measures 

and/or stipulations. These mitigation measures and/or stipulations prescribed will depend on the 

sensitivity of the affected resources, applicable laws and regulations, and the objective identified in the 

Resource Management Plan. 

All expansions of existing right-of-ways, permits, and leases located within the avoidance areas will be 

avoided. When avoidance is impossible, the proposed expansion will be subject to mitigation measures. 

The Authorized Officer will closely review the goals and objectives of the management area in which the 

proposed expansion will occur. This will help determine whether to reject or authorize the proposed 

expansion. All expansions which significantly conflict with the goals and objectives for special 

designated areas identified in the Resource Management Plan will be rejected upon submittal. 

When the number of facilities within an avoidance area reaches the point of saturation, the Authorized 

Officer may determine that no additional authorization will be granted. This determination will be made 

on the basis of whether the management objectives for the Visual Resource Management class for the 

area can no longer support additional facilities without jeopardizing the visual quality of the area. 

This plan may be modified by the Authorized Officer at any time and is intended strictly as a guideline 

for the authorization of new proposed right-of-way project within the Socorro Resource Area. 
Socorro Resource Management Plan 127 Appendix F: Disposal Policy and ROW Area Plan 

Right-of-way application requests for the following uses in avoidance areas will be rejected upon 

submittal: 

Power lines larger than 14 kilovolt 

Aboveground oil, gas, and water pipelines 

Radio telescopes 

Airport runways 

New roads with more than a 14-foot-wide driving surface 

Advertisement signs 

Artillery testing 

Dams/reservoirs 

Railroads 

Tramways and conveyors 

Communications sites 

Solar energy development projects greater than 5 acres 

Wind power energy facilities 

The following right-of-way applications may be issued on a case-by-case basis within avoidance areas: 

Solar energy facilities such as photovoltaic systems 

Irrigation ditches and canals 

Buried oil, gas, and water pipelines 

Power lines smaller than 14 kilovolt 

Telephone lines (buried preferred) 

Water storage tanks 

Air quality monitoring stations 

Staging areas 

Fiber optics (buried preferred) 

Water wells 

New roads with equal to or less than a 14-foot-wide driving surface 

Monitoring and testing facilities 

Filming permits 

Biomass facilities 

Wind energy facilities 

The above lists are not all-inclusive and further analysis may result in denial of the right-of-way 

application or mitigation of the proposed right-of-way to meet management objectives for avoidance 

areas. 
Socorro Resource Management Plan 128 Appendix F: Disposal Policy and ROW Area Plan 

The above criteria apply to all avoidance areas included within any special designation boundaries. The 

avoidance areas within special designations will have different criteria to allow for issuance of rights-ofway, permits, and leases. The special designated area goals and resource avoidance criteria are identified 

in the management prescriptions for wilderness study areas, areas of critical environmental concern, 

special recreation management areas, and Special Management Areas. 
Socorro Resource Management Plan 129 Appendix G: BLM Stewardship Contracting Guide 

APPENDIX G: BLM STEWARDSHIP CONTRACTING GUIDANCE 

The following information provides guidance on the preparation, implementation, and tracking of BLM 

stewardship projects, in accordance with Section 323 of Public Law 108-7, the Consolidated 

Appropriations Resolution, 2003. 

Authorization: Section 323 of Public Law 108-7 (Title 16, United States Code, Section 2104 as revised 

February 28, 2003 to reflect Sec. 323 of H.J. Res. 2 as enrolled [16 U.S.C. 2104]), the Consolidated 

Appropriations Resolution, 2003, amended Pub. L. 105-277, sec. 347, to grant the Forest Service (FS) 

and the BLM authority until September 30, 2013, to enter into stewardship projects with private persons 

or public or private entities, by contract or by agreement, to perform services to achieve land management 

goals for the National Forests or public lands that meet local and rural community needs. 

A. GENERAL 

1. Definition – Stewardship projects are those activities used to accomplish one or more of the 

goals (section B (1)) listed in P.L. 108-7, Section 323 (b) where the BLM would enter into 

contract or agreement for services to achieve land management goals and meet local and rural 

community needs. In addition, a source for performance under a contract must be selected on 

a best value basis. The legislation authorizes the value of vegetative material to be applied as 

an offset against the cost of services received; and multi-year contract authority greater than 

five years but not to exceed 10 years. 

2. Stewardship Contracting is not a replacement for the BLM‘s established timber sale program. 

Forest management projects designed primarily to enhance volume are not suitable for 

stewardship contracting. 

3. Ensure all stewardship projects comply with applicable environmental laws and regulations, 

including the appropriate level of environmental review under the National Environmental 

Policy Act (NEPA), and are consistent with the applicable land use plans. 

4. Field units may use stewardship contracting as a tool to achieve resource work identified 

through the normal planning processes and as described in the 10-year Implementation Plan 

for the National Fire Plan. 

5. Any vegetative material removal must be a by-product of meeting the stewardship 

contracting project goals as stated in section B (1). Removal of these products must be 

consistent with the objectives developed through the collaborative process and the applicable 

land use plan objectives. 

B. PROJECT DESIGN 

1. The primary objective of a stewardship contracting project is to achieve one or more of the 

land management goals that meet local and rural community needs. These goals as identified 

in the authorizing legislation may include but are not limited to: 

a. road and trail maintenance or obliteration for improved water quality; 

b. soil productivity, habitat for wildlife and fisheries, or other resource values; 

c. setting prescribed fires to improve composition, structure, condition, and health of 

stands or to improve wildlife habitat; 

d. removing vegetation or other activities to promote healthy forest stands, reduce fire 

hazards or achieve other land management objectives; 

e. watershed restoration and maintenance; 
Socorro Resource Management Plan 130 Appendix G: BLM Stewardship Contracting Guide 

f. restoration and maintenance of wildlife and fish habitat; and control of noxious and 

exotic weeds and reestablishing native plant species. 

2. When designing stewardship contracting projects, consider projects involving treatments and 

techniques available to make forests, woodlands, and rangelands more resilient to natural 

disturbances such as fire, insects, disease, wind, and flood. 

3. For contracts exceeding five years in duration, Field Managers will include a concise 

rationale for contracts in project documentation. This rationale should consider such factors 

as the scope of the project, the type of the material to be treated, the availability of local 

capacity to process and use the material removed from the land, and the potential 

development of new markets for small diameter material, as well as operational factors such 

as local weather patterns, sensitive wildlife species habitat use cycles, and seasonal 

restrictions for wildfire prevention. 

4. An open, collaborative process shall be used to identify local and rural community needs. 

Seek early involvement of tribal governments and local government agencies, and any 

interested groups or individuals in various phases of project development and 

implementation. Utilize existing processes (publication of legal notices, newsletters, web 

based information, etc.) to publicize the opportunity for public involvement and the 

availability of environmental documents. 

C. ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES 

1. Washington Office 

a. The responsibility of the Washington Office (WO), AD-200 Directorate, is to work 

with the WO AD-800 Directorate, the National Office of Fire and Aviation, and the 

BLM National Business Center to develop and implement automated methodology to 

track the value of goods exchanged and services provided in conjunction with 

stewardship contracting projects. 

b. AD 200 will produce the annual report to Congress required by the authorizing 

legislation. 

c. The BLM national headquarters office (AD 200) will review and the U.S. 

Department of the Interior Assistant Secretary for Land and Minerals Management 

will approve proposed stewardship contracts. 

d. The national office will assign unique project numbers from a block reserved by the 

National Business Center (NBC). See F (2). 

2. State Director 

a. State Director approval for proposed stewardship contracting projects will be required 

prior to submission to the Washington Office. 

b. BLM State Directors must ensure that field offices complete the reporting and tracking 

requirements identified in this directive. 

c. State Directors will set priorities for stewardship contracting projects within their state. 

d. The proper use and management of stewardship contracting authority must be assessed as 

a normal part of BLM statewide or national resource program and activity reviews for 

those programs utilizing the authority. Particular programs of interest include Forest and 

Woodland Management, and Fire/Fuels Management. 
Socorro Resource Management Plan 131 Appendix G: BLM Stewardship Contracting Guide 

3. State Coordinators – Each State Office has assigned a stewardship contracting project 

coordinator for their respective state. Responsibilities of the stewardship contracting project 

coordinator include: 

a. clarifying stewardship contracting project guidance 

b. obtaining State Director review and approval 

c. monitoring project status 

d. ensuring that project reporting is accurate and timely 

e. soliciting Field Office feedback and making recommendations to the WO on ways to 

improve the effectiveness of the stewardship contracting tool. 

4. Field Office 

a. Submit proposed stewardship contracting contracts to the state coordinators using the 

Budget Planning System (BPS) format (Attachment 1) Stewardship Proposal Format, 

including fuels funded projects. All submissions must contain project objectives, 

location/size, type of treatment in detail, partners and collaborative processes used, 

length of project, status of NEPA, issues and highlights and a list of contacts. 

b. During all phases of stewardship contracting (i.e. planning, contract development, 

funding, implementation and monitoring), the process will be integrated with other 

Field Office programs and activities, utilizing multiple resource specialists, including 

contracting personnel. 

5. Contracting Officers 

a. Contracting Officers with Level III and IV warrants in the BLM National Business 

Center and Oregon State Office are delegated stewardship contracting authority 

according to the attached Delegation of Authority memorandum (Attachment 2), 

dated September 16, 2003, from the Assistant Secretary, Policy, Management and 

Budget. 

b. After successful implementation of stewardship contracting projects, the BLM may 

consider authorizing contracting officers in additional locations to assist in awarding 

stewardship contracts and agreements. At that time, the Head of Contracting Activity 

(HCA) should submit nomination(s) to the Office of Acquisition and Property 

Management for review and approval. 

6. Contracting Officer‘s Representative – The ―Contracting Officer's Representative (COR)‖ is 

the on-the-ground administrator for the Contracting Officer. 

The COR‘s authorities and responsibilities are defined in the COR‘s Designation Letter. The 

COR is authorized to clarify technical requirements, and to review and approve work clearly 

within the scope of work. The COR is NOT authorized to issue changes pursuant to the 

changes clause or to in any other way modify the scope of work. 

7. Project Inspector – ―Project Inspector‖ (PI) means the person designated by the COR to 

perform, as needed, on-the-job government inspection of work accomplished by the 

Contractor. 

The PI is responsible for checking the Contractor‘s compliance with the technical 

specifications, drawings, work schedule, and labor provisions at the site of the work. 
Socorro Resource Management Plan 132 Appendix G: BLM Stewardship Contracting Guide 

D. VALUE OFFSET 

1. The value of vegetative material may be used to offset the amount of appropriated funds 

necessary to accomplish service work as part of a stewardship contracting project. 

2. Products that may be removed under stewardship contracting authority include vegetative 

material, such as, but not limited to sawlogs, firewood, post and poles, biomass, seed, shrubs, 

forage, fungi, and Christmas trees. See Special Forest Product Handbook, H-5400-2 or state 

specific Miscellaneous Forest Products Price Schedule, H-9352.

3. Vegetative material removed will be appraised at fair market value. Where practicable, and 

warranted by the market for such material, the value of the material will either be determined 

through a competitive bidding process or will be a specific required element of the best value 

criteria. In all cases, the value of the by-product for exchange must equal or exceed the 

appraised fair market value. Guidance on appraising the value of this material is provided in 

Attachment 3, Forest Products Appraisal Guidance for Stewardship Contracting. 

4. The value of the vegetative material and the cost of the services to be performed must be 

clearly documented in the contract and on the Product Removal Report (see section J (1)). 

Before work can begin, the contractor must provide the government a proposed schedule of 

work (for a minimum of one work season), consistent with the contract for product removal, 

service work and net payments. As the contract is performed, the Field Office will record the 

actual volume and value (based on the contract bid price) removed, services performed, and 

net payments made as outlined in "Product Tracking Requirements," Section J. 

E. EXCESS RECEIPTS 

1. When the value of the vegetative material exceeds the cost of the service work being 

performed in a stewardship project, the BLM is authorized to retain the excess receipts and to 

apply them to other stewardship projects without further appropriation. 

2. Excess receipt collections from stewardship contracting projects shall be deposited according 

to BLM collection procedures into the Stewardship Project Fund and managed according to 

the definition and requirements contained in the BLM Fund Coding Handbook, H-1684-1.

See Attachment 4, Subactivity 5921 Description. 

3. In general, excess receipts shall be used to fund other stewardship projects within the State 

where the receipts were generated, as allocated by the State Director. 

4. Funds generated as excess offset values (Section E (2)) from other stewardship contracting 

projects may also be used to fund the collaborative process used for multi-party monitoring 

and direct on-the-ground implementation costs. Excess offset values shall not be used to fund 

program planning, environmental assessments, overhead, administrative, or indirect costs. 

Managers should consult with the public and interested stakeholders early in the collaborative 

process for input on where excess offset values could be utilized within a stewardship project. 

F. PROJECT SUBMISSION, FUNDING AND ACCOMPLISHMENT 

1. Funds from a number of appropriated subactivities and permanent operating accounts may 

fund stewardship contracting project planning, preparation, implementation, administration, 

and monitoring. Offices should use the benefiting subactivity concept in determining which 

funding is appropriate to use. 

2. All approved stewardship contracting projects will tracked in the appropriate budget 

submission and accomplishment tracking database, applicable to the funding used. Fuels – 

NFPORS, all other subactivities – BPS/MIS, see B(4)(a). 
Socorro Resource Management Plan 133 Appendix G: BLM Stewardship Contracting Guide 

3. Each stewardship contracting project will be assigned a project code by the national office 

from a specific set of codes reserved for stewardship contracting projects for the purpose of 

tracking project costs and accomplishments in the Management Information System (MIS). 

Where other projects codes have already been assigned, such as in the Fuels Program, those 

assigned project codes will be reported to the Headquarters Office and used to track the costs 

associated with those projects The workload measure appropriate for the project will maintain 

the sub-activity specific tracking requirements. 

G. CONTRACTING/PRODUCT SALES 

1. Stewardship contracting authority provides for the sale or exchange of vegetative material 

and the procurement of service work within one contract or agreement. 

2. For stewardship contracting projects to be completed by contract with a combined value in 

excess of $100,000 (services plus product value), the contracts must be prepared using the 

Performance Based Acquisition format (under development – will be available on the 

National Acquisition webpage8). 

3. For stewardship projects below the $100,000 threshold in G (2), either a service contract or 

an approved product sale instrument may be used. Typical prescriptive contract language 

(provisions or stipulations) would be used as appropriate for the contract/instrument and 

objectives of the project. 

4. In addition to cost or price, the contracting officer must consider other ―best value‖ factors, 

such as contractor past performance, technical approach, and local community benefits in 

determining contract award. 

5. The use of nontraditional contractors, such as counties or not-for-profit or nongovernmental 

organizations, should be considered where interest is expressed and is consistent with existing 

authorities. Stewardship contracting contracts should not be automatically set aside for small 

business concerns. 

6. For performance based contracts, the government reserves the right to review and revise the 

performance standards annually over the life of the contract by contract modification. 

7. A stewardship contracting contract is not a timber sale contract and, as such, is not subject to 

the requirements contained in 43 CFR, Part 5400, Sale of Forest Products. However, it does 

not preclude including these requirements within a stewardship contract to adequately protect 

the government‘s interests (i.e. export restriction and Non-substitution provisions). 

8. Service Contract Act wage rates apply to the stewardship contracting contract. Contract 

solicitations should be arranged to separate bid prices, specifications, and payments for 

service work, construction work, and product removal work to help distinguish where these 

wage rates apply. 

9. When required by law, bonding must be used to protect the public interest. When not required 

by law, bonding may be used when deemed necessary. 

a. Payment protection in the form of payment bonds should be used to protect the value 

of the by-product to be removed when the product will be removed prior to cash 

payment or the contractor‘s earning of conservation credits under the contract. 

b. If necessary, performance bonds should be used to cover the value of the service to 

be provided. 

 

8

 At the time of writing, this web address is: http://web.blm.gov/natacq/
Socorro Resource Management Plan 134 Appendix G: BLM Stewardship Contracting Guide 

c. In either case: (i) performance bond value should be set at no less than 20% of the 

value of the awarded service work; and (ii) payment bonds should be at least equal to 

20% of the value of the by-product not covered by cash payment and/or earned 

conservation credits. 

d. Contracting officers are encouraged to strive toward the concept of a single bond to 

cover "performance", which would include the product value (payment) and the 

service work rolled into one bond. The value of the bond would be the larger of the 

performance bond or payment bond as described above. 

e. If construction activities are included, bonding for the construction activities shall be 

in accordance with the Miller Act. 

10. Offices must ensure that the value of the product cut and/or removed does not exceed the 

value of the performance bond (not including the portion used to cover 20% of the awarded 

service work or Miller Act requirements) plus the value of any unpaid service work 

completed (conservation credits) plus any cash deposits made by the contractor. Field Offices 

should use the Stewardship Project Tracking Report, Attachment 4, to track the volume and 

value of the products removed to ensure that contract bonding and service work cover the 

government‘s interests. 

11. If utilized, conservation credits (the value of unpaid service work completed) earned by a 

contractor are not transferable to another stewardship contract held by the same contractor. 

Conservation credits will be tracked via the Stewardship Project Tracking Report (page 2, 

Service Completion Form), Attachment 5. 

H. AGREEMENTS 

1. Assistance agreements are designed to be used when an outside party requests government 

financial assistance to support a public purpose. Stewardship contracting projects are 

designed to achieve specific land management goals, consistent with applicable land use 

plans. As such, use of assistance agreements to implement stewardship contracting project 

treatments must be carefully screened and limited use of such agreements may result. (See 

Agreements Handbook H-1511-1)

2. Decisions to use Assistance Agreements rather than contracts must comply with existing 

BLM guidance implementing the Grants and Cooperative Agreements Act of 1977, as 

amended. 

I. MONITORING 

1. The BLM will use multiparty monitoring, open to all interested parties, to monitor and 

evaluate a representative sampling of projects and programs at the appropriate levels. Project 

level monitoring should be conducted where sufficient public interest exists and funding 

and/or sufficient volunteer workforce permits. Where adequate up-front funding does not 

exist to support multiparty monitoring, excess offset values may be used to conduct multiparty monitoring, Section E (2). 

2. WO-270 will coordinate with the Forest Service, on an appropriate time frame, a process to 

establish and/or conduct interagency multi-party monitoring for evaluating and reporting on 

collaboration and the role of local communities and other external stakeholders in the 

development of stewardship contracting contracts and agreements. One objective of this 

monitoring effort is to analyze the effectiveness of stewardship contracting relative to other 

management tools.
Socorro Resource Management Plan 135 Appendix H: Rangeland Management 

APPENDIX H: RANGELAND MANAGEMENT 

RANGELAND UTILIZATIO N AND CONDITION 

Livestock grazing in the Planning Area is monitored to allow for an average of 50 percent utilization of 

key forage species per years. Utilization is defined as the degree of forage (grass, forbs, and shrubs) 

removed from rangelands by grazing animals, both domestic and wild. Livestock numbers permitted on 

individual allotments are related on forage utilization and the overall balance with management of other 

resources. One tool for examining rangeland health is ecological condition. 

Ecological condition is the present state of the vegetation on a range site in relation to the potential natural 

community for that particular site. It is an expression of the relative degree to which the kinds, 

proportions, and amounts of plants making up a community resemble that of the potential natural 

community. The BLM uses Ecological Site Descriptions – specifically, the similarity index - to describe 

and identify plant communities. The similarity index compares the present plant community to either the 

historic climax plant community or the desired vegetation state. The similarity index is a measure of the 

percentage, by weight, of the historic climax plant community or desired vegetation state that is present 

on a site. Seral stages can be used to identify the ecological conditions of a site as shown in the following 

table: 

Seral Stage Estimated Percentage of Resemblance to 

Potential Natural Community

Historic Climax Plant Community 76-100

Late 51-75

Mid 26-50

Early 0-25

NEW MEXICO STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES 

The 1989 Socorro Resource Management Plan was amended by the New Mexico Standards for Public 

Land Health and Guidelines for Livestock Grazing Management Statewide Resource Management Plan 

Amendment and Environmental Impact Statement (New Mexico Standards and Guidelines). As a result of 

the amendment, the New Mexico Standards and Guidelines were incorporated into the 1989 Resource 

Management Plan, and will be carried forward in this Resource Management Plan Revision/

Environmental Impact Statement. 

The standards of land health are expressions of physical and biological condition or degree of function 

required for healthy, sustainable lands and define the minimum resource conditions that must be achieved. 

The three standards that apply to the Planning Area are: 

 1. Upland Sites Standard: 

Upland ecological sites are in a productive and sustainable condition within the capability 

of the site. Upland soils are stabilized and exhibit infiltration and permeability rates that 

are appropriate for the soil type, climate, and landform. The kind, amount, and/or pattern 

of vegetation provides protection on a given site to minimize erosion and assist in 

meeting State and Tribal water quality standards. 

Indicators for this standard may include but are not limited to: 

Consistent with the capability of the ecological site, soils are stabilized by appropriate 

amounts of standing live vegetation, protective litter, and/or rock cover. 
Socorro Resource Management Plan 136 Appendix H: Rangeland Management 

Erosion is indicated by flow patterns characteristic of surface litter soil movement, gullies 

and rills, and plant pedestalling. 

Satisfactory plant protection is indicated by the amount and distribution of desired 

species necessary to prevent accelerated erosion. 

2. Biotic Communities, Including Native, Threatened-Endangered, and Special Status Species 

Standard: 

Ecological processes such as hydrologic cycle, nutrient cycle, and energy flow support 

productive and diverse native biotic communities, including special status, threatened, 

and endangered species appropriate to site and species. Desired plant communities goals 

maintain and conserve productive and diverse populations of plants and animals, which 

sustain ecological functions and processes. 

Indicators for this standard may include but are not limited to: 

Commensurate with the capability of the ecological site, plant and animal populations are 

productive, resilient, diverse and sustainable. 

Landscapes are composed of communities in a variety of successional stages and 

patterns. 

Diversity and composition of communities are indicated by the kinds and amount of 

species. 

Endangered and special status species are secure and recovering, with the goal of 

delisting and ensuring that additional species need not be listed within New Mexico. 

3. Riparian Sites Standard 

Riparian areas are in a productive, properly functioning, and sustainable condition, within 

the capability of that site. Adequate vegetation of diverse age and composition is present 

that will withstand high stream flow, capture sediment, provide for groundwater recharge, 

provide habitat, and assist in meeting State and Tribal water quality standards. 

Indicators for this standard may include but are not limited to: 

Stream channel morphology and stability as determined by gradient, width/depth 

ratio, cannel roughness, and sinuosity. 

Streambank stability as determined by degree of shearing and sloughing, vegetative 

cover on the bank. 

Appropriate riparian vegetation includes a mix of communities of species with a 

range of age, density and growth form. 

When an evaluation determines that one or more standards are not being met, then the causal factor or 

factors will be determined. As stated in the Record of Decision for the Standards for Public Land Health 

and Guidelines for Livestock Grazing Management: 

―When an evaluation concludes that an area does not meet one or more standard(s), the 

Bureau of Land Management will determine the causal factor(s) in not meeting the 

standard(s). When current livestock grazing practices or levels of grazing use are 

determined to be significant factors, the Bureau of Land Management authorized officer 

shall take appropriate action as soon as practical, but no later than the next grazing year 

(43 Code of Federal Regulations Section 4180.2 (c)).‖

 Guidelines were established for livestock grazing to be implemented when an area was not meeting the 

standard or standards and the causal factor was determined to livestock grazing practices or levels of 
Socorro Resource Management Plan 137 Appendix H: Rangeland Management 

grazing use. Guidelines are tools such as grazing systems, vegetative treatments, or range improvement 

projects designed to assist in grazing management. Implementation of guidelines will be done in 

consultation, cooperation and coordination with the grazing permittee/leasee, involved landowners, and 

interested public. 

Guidelines pertain to livestock grazing only and if the causal factor is determined to be another activity; 

there are not established guidelines to be implemented. When other activities appear to be the reason for 

not meeting the standard, management actions that address that particular activity will be implemented 

that is consistent with policy and regulations governing that activity. 

The processes for assessing the standards are evaluated at the watershed level and are an ongoing process. 

The Socorro Field Office has initiated assessments on approximately 218,000 acres and has determined 

those areas to be meeting the standards. Assessments are completed by utilizing existing data and 

Indicators of Rangeland Health (TR 1734-6). The assessment characterizes the status of the ecological 

processes (water cycle, energy flow and nutrient cycle) by interpreting attributes such as the soil/site 

stability, hydrologic function, and biotic integrity in relation to the ecological site. 

ALLOTMENT STATISTICS 

In the 1980s, the Bureau of Land Management developed classification criteria to assist field offices in 

identifying management priorities by allotment. Allotments are placed in one of three categories—

Maintain, Improve, or Custodial—based on certain criteria, as follows: 

Maintain (M) Category 

Present range condition is satisfactory 

Allotments have moderate to high resource production potential and are producing near their 

potential (or trend is moving in that direction) 

No serious resource-use conflicts and/or controversies exist 

Opportunities may exist for positive economic return from public investment 

Present management appears satisfactory 

Other local criteria

Improve (I) Category 

Present range condition may be satisfactory or unsatisfactory 

Allotments have a moderate or high resource production potential and are producing at low to 

moderate levels 

Serious resource-use conflicts and/or controversies exist 

Opportunities exist for positive economic return for public investment 

Present management appears unsatisfactory 

Other local criteria 

Custodial (C) Category 

Present range condition is not a factor 

Allotments have a low resource production potential and are producing at low to moderate levels 
Socorro Resource Management Plan 138 Appendix H: Rangeland Management 

Limited resource-use conflicts and/or controversies may exist 

Opportunities for positive economic return on public investments do not exist or are constrained 

by technological or economic factors 

Opportunities exist to achieve the allotments‘ potential through changes in management 

Other local criteria 

Table H-1 lists the 2005 grazing allotments that are completely or partially within the Planning Area. 

Grazing allotments are mapped in the Management Situation Analysis, on file in the Socorro Field Office. 

Table H-1: Grazing Allotment Statistics

Allotment

No. Allotment Name Authorization Type9

Management

Code

Permitted 

AUMs

00054 Shaw Canyon 03 M 6,936

00077 Emery 15 M 96

00079 Stokes Flat 03 M 5,017

00080 Box Car 7 03 M 12

00081 Estrada Ranch 15 I 2,100

00083 Cat Mountain 03 M 240

00084 Paul Lund 03 I 204

00085 Patterson Canyon 03 M 192

00087 Cottonwood Spring 03 M 31

00088 Mariano Mesa Ranch 03 M 96

00089 South La Jencia 15 M 564

00090 Panther Canyon 15 M 54

00091 Cerro Prieto 15 M 24

00092 Agua Fria Creek 03 M 3,780

00093 Tres Montosas 03 M 234

00094 Escondido Creek 03 I 1,488

00095 Datil Airstrip 03 M 48

00097 Tanque De Caballos 03 M 108

00098 Chavez Ranch 03 M 70

00099 Florenio Orona 03 I 420

00100 Gatlin Lake 03 M 576

00102 Orona Largo Creek 03 M 678

00103 Lopez Draw 03 M 59

00105 North Fork Alamocito 15 M 24

00106 Santa Rita 03 I 1,618

00107 Summers Community 03 M 271

00107 Summers Community 03 M 173

00107 Summers Community 03 M 233

00107 Summers Community 03 M 1,020

00107 Summers Community 03 M 95

00108 Reynolds 03 M 132

00109 Pattys Hole 03 M 751

00117 North Fox Mountain 03 M 108

00125 Semi Lonesome 03 I 1,682

00127 Bat Cave 03 M 11

 

9

 Authorization Type indicates whether the allotment is classified as a permit (Section 3) or a lease (Section 15) according to the Taylor Grazing 

Act. 
Socorro Resource Management Plan 139 Appendix H: Rangeland Management 

Table H-1: Grazing Allotment Statistics

Allotment

No. Allotment Name Authorization Type9

Management

Code

Permitted 

AUMs

00128 Williams Home 03 M 12

00129 R M Chavez 03 M 60

00132 W Ranch 15 M 48

00133 Tres Lagunas 15 M 288

00134 Coal Canyon 03 M 60

00135 Bill G & W F Green 15 M 252

00136 Silver Creek 15 I 1,284

00137 Pietown Dike 15 M 52

00138 Iron Mountain 15 M 132

00139 Pietown TR 15 15 M 8

00141 Sawtooth Mountain 15 M 120

00144 NM AZ State Line 15 M 48

00146 Monticello Canyon 15 M 72

00147 Kinsely Canyon 15 M 120

00148 Wahoo Ranch 15 M 1,503

00149 Williamson 15 M 60

00150 Cat Lake 15 M 192

00151 Montoya 03 M 109

00152 Dusty Ranch 03 M 24

00154 Nichols Individual 15 M 36

00155 San Ignacio 03 I 156

00164 Lew Daniels 03 M 12

00165 Snake Hill 03 M 354

00168 Tarpley 03 M 48

00192 West Emery 03 M 36

01106 Ojo Saladito 03 M 1,562

01107 Bear Springs 15 M 4

01112 Riley Community 03 M 156

01112 Riley Community 03 M 36

01112 Riley Community 03 M 60

01116 Puertecito Baranco 03 M 1,750

01117 Canon Bonito 15 M 408

01121 Rio Salado West 03 M 756

01122 Abeytas 03 M 300

01123 Abeytas 15 M 48

01125 San Ignacio Creek 03 I 804

01126 Cow Springs 03 I 1,332

01127 Santa Rita 15 M 9

01128 Patterson 03 M 1,588

01129 New Driveway 03 M 201

01136 Rio Puerco 03 M 1,176

01137 North Ladron 03 M 1,620

01140 Monte Negro 03 I 1,929

01143 Comanche Arroyo 15 I 24

01145 D Cross Mountain 15 M 356

01159 La Jencia Creek 03 I 2,013

01177 Ladron Peak 03 M 600

01181 Lopez Community 03 M 575

01181 Lopez Community 03 M 325

01186 West Ladron 03 M 2,574
Socorro Resource Management Plan 140 Appendix H: Rangeland Management 

Table H-1: Grazing Allotment Statistics

Allotment

No. Allotment Name Authorization Type9

Management

Code

Permitted 

AUMs

01250 Buffalo Head 03 I 144

01251 Harless Ranch 03 M 1428

01252 Silver Road 03 I 1,608

01253 Sand Sage 03 I 240

01254 Bordo Atravesado 03 I 2,714

01255 Bosquecito 03 I 312

01256 Llano 03 M 612

01258 Tio Bartolo 03 M 365

01259 Four Hills 03 I 360

01260 Sierra Larga 03 M 2,112

01261 Scott Ranch 03 M 2,163

01262 Las Cañas 03 I 1,296

01263 Black Mesa 03 I 873

01264 Armijo Community 03 I 667

01264 Armijo Community 03 I 308

01266 Coyote Spring 03 M 1,512

01268 Ryan Hill 03 M 246

01269 Torreon Community 03 M 2,822

01269 Torreon Community 03 M 976

01270 Milligan Gulch 03 C 485

01271 Mesa Redonda 03 M 1,704

01272 San Pasqual 03 M 1,836

01273 Bruton River 03 M 1,800

01274 Rock Creek 03 C 198

01275 Oscura 03 M 5,182

01276 Four Sections 03 M 362

01277 San Jose Canyon 03 I 2,135

01278 Anaya Well 03 I 348

01279 Silver Canyon 03 I 1,298

01280 Tecolote Draw 03 I 2,388

01281 So Ranch 03 M 696

01282 Bingham 03 M 180

01283 Blackington Mountain 03 I 1,572

01284 Mesa Well Canyon 03 I 1,287

01285 Sand Mountain 03 M 1,884

01286 Blackington Mountain West 03 M 840

01288 Rio Grande 03 I 315

01289 Jornada Community 03 M 300

01289 Jornada Community 03 M 96

01289 Jornada Community 03 M 600

01289 Jornada Community 03 M 72

01289 Jornada Community 03 M 84

01289 Jornada Community 03 M 144

01290 Rock Springs Canyon 03 M 1,344

01291 Prairie Springs 03 M 1,536

01292 Chaunte Canyon 03 M 543

01293 Malpais 03 M 5,427

01294 Hickman Ranch 03 M 936

01295 Pipe Ranch 03 M 1,632

01296 Antelope West 03 M 247
Socorro Resource Management Plan 141 Appendix H: Rangeland Management 

Table H-1: Grazing Allotment Statistics

Allotment

No. Allotment Name Authorization Type9

Management

Code

Permitted 

AUMs

01297 Puertecito Del Lemitar 03 M 1233

01298 Wineglass 03 M 690

01299 Pequeno 03 C 422

01300 Casas De Piedras 03 M 318

01301 White Sage 03 M 4,727

01302 So Ranch 15 M 544

01303 Jornada Individual 03 M 1,032

01305 Chato 03 M 6

01306 Veranito 03 M 445

01308 San Antonito 03 I 146

01309 S Mesa Redonda 03 M 684

01310 Chupadera Wash 03 M 525

01312 La Arenosa 03 I 535

01315 Polvadera 03 C 102

01317 San Pedro 03 I 240

01318 Pueblito Community 03 C 24

01318 Pueblito Community 03 C 34

01321 Puertecito Gap 03 M 684

01322 Parida 03 M 1,248

01323 Water Canyon 03 M 508

01324 Water Canyon 15 M 240

01327 Cedar Pass 03 M 1,035

01328 Jones 03 M 912

01329 Las Lomas 03 M 240

01330 East Well 03 M 461

01339 Twin Tanks 15 M 65

01340 Twin Tanks 15 M 155

01341 Scholle 15 M 23

01342 Cerro Pelon 15 M 300

01343 Abo 15 M 144

01344 La Jencia Ranch 15 M 708

01345 Oso Flats 15 M 96

01346 La Jencia Ranch 03 M 36

01347 Blue Springs 15 M 15

01348 Cerro Montoso 15 M 407

01349 Dripping Springs 15 M 234

01350 Viejo Arroyo 15 M 237

01351 Rienhardt Individual 15 M 216

01352 U Butte 15 M 624

01353 Red Tanks Canyon 15 M 276

01354 Granite Mountain 15 M 13

01356 Tip Top 15 M 24

01361 Brushy Mountain 15 M 166

01365 Black Hills Ranch 03 M 6,696

01366 Dragoo Tank 03 M 1,968

01367 Lobo Canyon 03 M 2,762

01368 Chupadera Mesa 03 M 7,776

01369 Lincoln County 03 M 132

01370 Cat Mesa East 03 M 1,218

01371 Cuate Canyon 03 M 858
Socorro Resource Management Plan 142 Appendix H: Rangeland Management 

Table H-1: Grazing Allotment Statistics

Allotment

No. Allotment Name Authorization Type9

Management

Code

Permitted 

AUMs

01372 Largo Canyon 03 M 2,592

01373 Carrizozo 03 M 2,160

01374 Red Lake 15 M 48

01375 Claunch Se 15 M 168

01376 Gallacher North 03 M 1,821

10001 Twin Peaks 03 M 134

10002 Qualls 15 M 120

10003 Qualls 03 M 132

10004 Criswell 03 M 744

10005 Horse Springs 03 M 168

10007 McBroom 03 M 180

10008 Quemado Breaks 03 I 162

10009 Sullivan 03 M 408

10010 Kellog Canyon 15 I 2,387

10011 Vevarosa 03 I 1,968

10014 Half Circle D 03 M 72

10015 Mangas 03 M 84

10016 Jones Place 03 M 144

10017 Patterson Canyon 03 M 514

10018 Tejana Mesa 03 M 1,128

10019 East Salt Lake 03 M 132

10020 Wilbur Wadley Draw 03 M 96

10023 Box Lake 03 M 2,688

10024 Coyote Canyon 03 M 4,360

10027 Burnett 03 M 108

10028 Y Ranch 03 I 4,329

10029 Cross Line 03 M 1,152

10030 Butler 03 M 864

10031 Arroyo Baca 03 M 67

10032 Adobe Ranch 03 I 7,973

10033 Castillo 03 M 50

10034 Fria Creek 03 M 168

10035 Mesa Ranch 03 M 504

10036 Toms Rock 15 M 30

10037 Wilbur Wadley Draw 15 M 120

10038 Red Hill South 03 M 1,716

10039 Pedro A Chavez Est 03 M 12

10040 Coyote Canyon 15 M 854

10041 Richard M Chavez 03 M 360

10042 Rito Creek 03 M 60

10043 Zuni Plateau 03 M 540

10045 West Salt Lake 03 M 84

10046 Walker 03 M 499

10047 Durfee 03 M 356

10048 Curtis Ranch 03 M 864

10049 Baca Spring 03 M 76

10050 Eagar Red Hill 03 M 864

10051 Emery 03 I 379

10052 Cemetery Road 15 M 25

10053 Estrada Ranch 03 I 1,764
Socorro Resource Management Plan 143 Appendix H: Rangeland Management 

Table H-1: Grazing Allotment Statistics

Allotment

No. Allotment Name Authorization Type9

Management

Code

Permitted 

AUMs

10055 Kiehne Place 03 M 552

10056 Headquarters 03 I 2,220

10057 Carrizo Creek North 03 M 1,536

10058 Morine-White 03 M 2,232

10059 Sitka Spruce 03 M 48

10062 Red Hill North 03 I 3,607

10063 Anderson Peak 03 M 540

10064 Evans Well 03 M 104

10065 Zuni Plateau 15 M 32

10067 East Rito Creek 03 M 540

10068 Panther Canyon 03 M 192

10069 Cerro Prieto 03 M 588

10070 Rancho Alegre 03 M 8,726

10071 North Fork Alamocito 03 M 543

10072 Mangas Ranch 03 M 2,328

10073 Heavenly Acres 03 M 192

10074 Crosby Canyon 03 M 72

10110 West Horse Mountain 03 I 732

10111 East Horse Mountain 03 I 308

10113 Big Tiny Little 15 M 3

10114 Datil Airstrip 15 M 3

10115 Largo Creek 03 M 168

10116 Spring Canyon Ranch 03 I 514

10118 Alamito Ranch 03 M 6

10119 Windrider 03 M 444

10120 Aragon Well 03 M 264

10121 Big Tiny Little 03 M 3

10122 Shay 15 M 72

10123 Goat Tank Canyon 03 M 228

10124 Hale Well 15 M 6

10126 Limestone Canyon 03 I 1,123

Custodial

0%

Maintain

71%

Improve

29%

Management Code Percentages
Socorro Resource Management Plan 144 Appendix I: Minerals Management 

APPENDIX I: MINERALS MANAGEMENT 

This appendix describes (1) the results of the application of unsuitability criteria for coal leasing that is 

part of the Federal coal lands review process, (2) standard lease terms and conditions and lease 

stipulations for fluid minerals leasing, and (3) existing withdrawals from mineral entry. 

APPLICATION OF SUITABILITY CRITERIA FOR COAL LEASING 

As required by the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act of 1977, the Department of Interior has 

developed criteria to determine whether public lands are unsuitable for further consideration for coal 

leasing. This unsuitability assessment was applied to the portion of the Planning Area identified as having 

high coal potential (see the Energy and Minerals Potential Report dated October 2003). In the following 

discussion, the results of the application of each of the unsuitability criteria and exceptions are described. 

The twenty unsuitability criteria contained in 43 Code of Federal Regulation (CFR 3461.5 were used to 

assess the unsuitability for mining in the area of high coal potential. The intent of the unsuitability criteria 

application is to identify the areas with resources that could not be properly protected or maintained if the 

area were leased for coal mining. 

After initial survey of the high coal potential area, unsuitable areas (as defined by specific criteria) were 

identified. Following the identification and formulation of alternatives to be addressed by this Resource 

Management Plan and as a result of public comments submitted, affected resources within the high coal 

potential area were reexamined in light of the current set of unsuitability criteria. 

Summary 

At this time, the area of high coal potential does not contain lands meeting unsuitability Criteria No. 1, 

Federal Land Systems; No. 2, Rights-of-way; No. 4, Wilderness Study Areas; No. 5, Scenic Class One 

Lands; No. 6, Scientific Study Areas; No. 8, Natural Areas; No. 9, Federal Listed Species/Habitats; 

No. 10, State Listed Species/Habitats; Criteria No. 11, Eagle Nests; No. 12, Eagle Roosts; No. 13, Falcon 

Nests; No. 17, Municipal Watersheds; No. 18, National Resource Waters; No. 19, Alluvial Valley Floors; 

and No. 20, State Criteria. 

Mitigating measures have been developed which would allow lands identified as meeting Criteria No. 3, 

Roads and Dwellings; No. 14, High Interest Federal Species; No. 15, High Interest State Species; and 

No. 16, 100-year Floodplains, to be considered suitable for coal leasing. 

Criteria No. 7, National Register of Historic Places and multiple-use screening criteria; No. 12, Cultural 

Resource Sites Eligible for Inclusion on the National Register of Historic Places; and No. 13, Native 

American Areas of Cultural Significance have removed lands from being suitable to coal leasing. 

After applying the unsuitability criteria and multiple use screening analysis, approximately 3,200 acres 

are carried forward as suitable for coal leasing. 

Unsuitability Criteria 

3461.5(a)(l) Criterion No. 1 

All Federal lands included in the following land systems or categories shall be considered 

unsuitable: National Park System, National Wildlife Refuge System, National System of 

Trails, National Wilderness Preservation System, National Wild and Scenic Rivers 

System, National Recreation Areas, lands acquired with money derived from the Land 
Socorro Resource Management Plan 145 Appendix I: Minerals Management 

and Water Conservation Fund, National Forests, and Federal lands in incorporated cities, 

towns, and villages. 

There are no Federal lands systems within the San Augustine Coal Area; therefore, this criterion does not 

apply. 

3461.5(b)(l) Criterion No. 2 

Federal lands within rights-of-way or easements or within surface leases for residential, 

commercial, industrial, or other public purposes. Federally owned surface shall be 

considered unsuitable. 

There are no Federal lands rights-of-way or easements in the high coal potential area; therefore, this 

criterion does not apply. 

346l.5(c)(l) Criterion No. 3 

Federal lands affected by section 522(e)(4) and (5) of the Surface Mining Control and 

Reclamation Act of 1977 shall be considered unsuitable. This includes lands within 100 

feet of the outside line of the right-of-way of a public road or within 100 feet of a 

cemetery, or within 300 feet of any public building, school, church, community or 

institutional building or public park or within 300 feet of an occupied dwelling. 

Presently there is only one dwelling located on Federal lands within the high coal potential area. No 

cemeteries, including single grave sites or public road rights-of-way, have been identified within the area 

under review. 

Exceptions – Lands within the area of high coal potential, which are affected by this criterion, can be 

considered suitable for further coal lease consideration with the following stipulation: 

1. A lease may be issued for lands for which owners of occupied dwellings have given written 

permission to mine within 300 feet of their buildings. 

346l.5(d)(1) Criterion No. 4 

Federal lands designated as wilderness study areas shall be considered unsuitable while 

under review by the Administration and the Congress for possible wilderness designation. 

For any Federal land which is to be leased or mined prior to completion of the wilderness 

inventory by the surface management agency, the environmental assessment or impact 

statement on the lease sale or mine plan shall consider whether the land possesses the 

characteristics of a wilderness study area. If the finding is affirmative, the land shall be 

considered unsuitable, unless issuance of noncompetitive coal leases and mining on 

leases is authorized under the Wilderness Act and the Federal Land Policy and 

Management Act of 1976. 

There are no WSAs in the high coal potential area; therefore, criterion does not apply. 

3461.5(e)(l) Criterion No. 5 

Scenic Federal lands designated by visual resource management analysis as Class I (an 

area of outstanding scenic quality or high visual sensitivity) but not currently on the 

National Register of Natural Landmarks shall be considered unsuitable. A lease may be 

issued if the surface management agency determines that surface coal mining operations 

will not significantly diminish or adversely affect the scenic quality of the designated 

area. 
Socorro Resource Management Plan 146 Appendix I: Minerals Management 

There are no visual resource management (VRM) Class I areas in the high coal potential area; therefore, 

this criterion does not apply. 

3461.5(f)(1) Criterion No. 6 

Federal lands under permit by the surface management agency, and being used for 

scientific studies involving food or fiber production, natural resources, or technology 

demonstrations and experiments shall be considered unsuitable for the duration of the 

study, demonstration or experiment, except where mining could be conducted in such a 

way as to enhance or not jeopardize the purposes of the study, as determined by the 

surface management agency, or where the principal scientific user or agency gives 

written concurrence to all or certain methods of mining. 

The high coal potential area does not contain lands being utilized for this purpose. 

3461.5(g)(l) Criterion No. 7 

All publicly and privately owned places on Federal lands which are included in the 

National Register of Historic Places shall be considered unsuitable. This shall include any 

areas that the surface management agency determines, after consultation with the 

Advisory Council on Historic Preservation and the State Historic Preservation Officer 

(SHPO), are necessary to protect the inherent values of the property that made it eligible 

for listing in the National Register. 

This area has a high density of recorded and unrecorded cultural resource sites. Much of the high coal 

potential area has been inventoried for cultural resources. All surveyed areas show a high density of sites, 

and many of the sites have been determined eligible or potentially eligible to the National Register of 

Historic Places. 

For the remaining high coal potential areas, a literature search was performed to determine if sites eligible 

to the National Register were present. The literature search was conducted on areas meeting all three of 

the following criteria: 

1. Within boundaries of high coal potential coal areas 

2. Federal mineral ownership 

3. Outside the boundary of the Zuni Salt Lake Sanctuary site 

A total of 181 sites were identified as having been recorded in the areas meeting the three criteria. 

Approximately two-thirds were found to be eligible or potentially eligible to the National Register. 

NOTE: These archaeological sites and socio-cultural sites clearly meet the definition of a resource of a 

unique nature with local or regional importance. These sites are considered under the multiple-use screen. 

346l.5(h)(l) Criterion No. 8 

Federal lands designated as natural areas or as National Natural Landmarks shall be 

considered unsuitable. 

The high coal potential area does not contain lands designated as natural areas or National Natural 

Landmarks. 

3461.5(i)(l) Criterion No. 9 

Federally designated critical habitat for threatened or endangered plant and animal 

species, and habitat for Federal threatened or endangered species which is determined by 
Socorro Resource Management Plan 147 Appendix I: Minerals Management 

the Fish and Wildlife Service and the surface management agency to be of essential value 

and where the presence of threatened or endangered species has been scientifically 

documented, shall be considered unsuitable. 

At this time, the high coal potential area does not contain federally designated critical habitat for 

threatened or endangered plant and animal species or habitat for threatened or endangered species 

determined to be of essential value by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and the surface 

management agency. 

346l.5(j)(l) Criterion No. 10 

Federal lands containing habitat determined to be critical or essential for plant or animal 

species listed by a State pursuant to State law as endangered or threatened shall be 

considered unsuitable. 

At this time, the high coal potential area does not contain Federal lands containing habitat determined to 

be critical or essential for plant or animal species listed by the State of New Mexico as threatened or 

endangered. 

3461.5(k)(l) Criterion No. 11 

A bald or golden eagle nest or site on Federal lands that is determined to be active and an 

appropriate buffer zone of land around the nest site shall be considered unsuitable. 

Consideration of availability of habitat for prey species and of terrain shall be included in 

the determination of buffer zones. Buffer zones shall be determined in consultation with 

the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 

Eagle nesting habitat was surveyed during the summer/fall of 1983. A Raptor Nest Report was initiated 

for each nest or group of nests located. Tentative buffer zones were identified. Following a nesting survey 

conducted during the spring of 1987, those locations identified as active were retained as unsuitable based 

on this criterion. 

Exception – The BLM, with concurrence from the USFWS, has determined that mitigating measures are 

neither practical nor desirable at this time. 

346l.5(l)(l) Criterion No. 12 

Bald and golden eagle roost and concentration areas on Federal lands used during 

migration and wintering shall be considered unsuitable. 

Year-round eagle roosting areas have been identified within the high coal potential area. 

Exception – The BLM, with concurrence from the USFWS, has determined that mitigating measures are 

neither practical nor desirable at this time. 

3461.5(m)(1) Criterion Number 13 

Federal lands containing a falcon (excluding kestrel) cliff nesting site with an active nest 

and a buffer zone of Federal land around the nest site shall be considered unsuitable. 

Consideration of availability of habitat for prey species and of terrain shall be included in 

the determination of buffer zones. Buffer zones shall be determined in consultation with 

the USFWS. 

Falcon nesting habitat located within the high coal potential area was surveyed during the summer/fall of 

1983. A Raptor Nest Report was initiated for each nest or suspected nest located. Following a nesting 

survey conducted during the spring of 1987, those locations determined to be active were retained on the 

unsuitability criterion. Additional spring surveys are conducted within the high coal potential area yearly. 
Socorro Resource Management Plan 148 Appendix I: Minerals Management 

Results of these surveys may change the amount of Federal mineral estate determined unsuitable because 

of this criterion. 

Exception – The BLM, with concurrence from the USFWS, has determined that mitigating measures are 

neither practical nor desirable at this time. 

3461.5(n)(1) Criterion No. 14 

Federal lands that are high priority habitat for migratory bird species of high Federal 

interest on a regional or national basis, as determined jointly by the surface management 

agency and the Fish and Wildlife Service, shall be considered unsuitable. 

High priority habitat is defined as an area containing one or more limited environmental factors needed to 

support a population of at least one of the listed species. All high priority habitat must meet the following 

criteria: 

1. It must be used regularly (use may be limited to one season during the year) by one or more 

of the listed species. 

2. Its availability for uses such as feeding, reproduction, nesting, molting and/or wintering must 

be either limited or supportive of concentrations of a listed species in the indicated coal 

region or sub region. 

3. It must contain a combination of natural or manmade factors; e.g., riparian vegetation, 

reservoirs, cliff sites, tall buildings, etc. that provide an essential quantity or quality of one or 

more of the habitat requirements of a listed species; i.e., food, water, cover or space. 

In order to assess an area as being unsuitable for all or certain stipulated methods of coal mining, both the 

―high Federal interest‖ and the ―high priority habitat‖ aspects of this criterion must be met; e.g., an area 

must support listed species and contain habitat of these species which meet all three of the above 

indicated habitat criteria. 

The areas identified as meeting criterion No. 14 are intermittent wetlands, playas or reservoirs that 

contain water during the spring and early summer, produce forbs during the summer, and contain water 

during the fall and winter. These areas are known to be utilized during the spring and fall migrations by: 

white-faced ibis, western grebe, great blue heron, long-billed curlew, and large concentrations of 

migratory waterfowl which provide a prey base for wintering bald eagles. At this time no ferruginous 

hawk nest locations are known to occur on Federal mineral estate within the high coal potential area. 

Additional surveys will be conducted within the high coal potential area yearly. Results of these surveys 

may change the amount of Federal mineral estate determined to be unsuitable because of this criteria. 

Exceptions – The 640 acres identified as meeting criterion No. 14 within the high coal potential area can 

be considered suitable for further coal lease consideration by applying the following stipulations: 

1. Affected wetlands and appropriate drainages sufficient to provide equal or enhanced habitat 

values will be replaced by the lessee on a site-specific basis. 

2. The lessee will consult with the BLM; the BLM will consult with the surface owner, USFWS 

and New Mexico Department of Game and Fish (NMDGF) prior to alteration of the affected 

wetland. 

3461.5(o)(1) Criterion Number 15 

Federal lands which the surface management agency and the State jointly agree are fish 

and wildlife habitat for resident species of high interest to the State and which are 

essential for maintaining these priority wildlife species shall be considered unsuitable. 
Socorro Resource Management Plan 149 Appendix I: Minerals Management 

The areas identified under criterion No. 14 can also be applicable to criterion No. 15; in addition, the 

NMDGF has identified mule deer and Ferruginous Hawks. Pronghorn Antelope are included under this 

criterion because of the occurrence of an isolated herd utilizing a restricted habitat on a mesa top in the 

area. 

Areas identified as mule deer winter range within the high coal potential area are also 

adjacent to or included in the areas covered by criterion No. 12, eagle roosting areas. 

Mule deer wintering range (80 acres) are included under this criterion. 

Those areas identified under criterion No.14 are included in the exception for that criterion. 

Exceptions – The areas identified as prairie dog locations will be suitable for further coal lease 

consideration by incorporating the following stipulations: 

1. Proposed activities in or adjacent to the identified area will be preceded by a complete blackfooted ferret inventory of the prairie dog colony. 

2. All black-footed ferret inventory and survey procedures conducted by the lessee will be 

reviewed and approved by the BLM, in consultation with the USFWS and the NMDGF. 

3461.5(p)(l) Criterion No. 16 

Federal lands in riverine, coastal and special floodplains (100-year recurrence interval) on 

which the surface management agency determines that mining could not be undertaken 

without substantial threat of loss of life or property shall be considered unsuitable for all 

or certain stipulated methods of coal mining. 

The first drainages that were analyzed for 100-year floodplain determination were those that drained at 

least 10 square miles. Watersheds were delineated and tentative floodplain transect locations established. 

Two or more transects were run for each probable floodplain location using the stadia method. Channel 

cross sections were drawn and flood stages marked on them. The U.S. Geological Survey method from 

Water Resources Investigations 82-24, ―Techniques for Estimated Flood Discharges for Unregulated 

Streams in New Mexico‖, and H. R. Hejl, Jr.‘s (U.S. Geological Survey) draft paper ―Stream flow 

Characteristics as Related to Basin Characteristics in Strippable Coal-Resource Areas of Northwestern 

New Mexico‖ were used to determine the 100-year flood discharge. The resultant discharges computed 

using the two different methods were very close. Using the Manning‘s equation and knowing the channel 

geometry and stage relationship, the 100-year floodplain was then determined and drawn on 7.5-minute 

topographic maps. The floodplains were later verified with aerial photographs. To accurately determine 

the 100-year floodplain, USGS said that about 20 floodplain transects per area are needed and the 

floodplains should be mapped on one-foot contour interval maps. Due to the tight budget, large area, and 

lack of manpower, it was not possible to delineate the floodplains to that degree of accuracy. 

Playas were delineated by aerial photo interpretation, vegetative types, and field observations. Four large 

detention dams that hold between 55 and 152 acre-feet of water were also considered unsuitable. 

Although the 1,800 acres delineated as floodplains are blocked out in 40-acre tracts, the actual floodplain 

usually represents a much smaller area. Actual floodplain boundaries have been digitized and maps are 

available for reviewing at the Socorro Field Office. 

All of the 100-year occurrence floodplains in the high coal potential area can be mitigated because they 

do not represent a substantial threat to life or property. 
Socorro Resource Management Plan 150 Appendix I: Minerals Management 

3461.5(q)(l) Criterion No. 17 

Federal lands which have been committed by the surface management agency to use as 

municipal watersheds shall be considered unsuitable. 

At this time, the high coal potential area does not contain any municipal watersheds. 

346l.5(r)(l) Criterion No. 18 

Federal lands with national resource waters, as identified by states in their water quality 

management plans, and a buffer zone of Federal lands 1⁄4 mile from the outer edge of the 

far banks of the water, shall be unsuitable. 

At this time, the high coal potential area does not contain lands identified by the State of New Mexico as 

meeting this criterion. 

3461.5(s)(1) Criterion No. 19 

Federal lands identified by the surface management agency, in consultation with the State 

in which they are located, as alluvial valley floors according to the definition in 3400.0-

5(a) of this title, the standards in 30 CFR Part 822, the final alluvial valley floor 

guidelines of the Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement when 

published, and approved State programs under the Surface Mining Control and 

Reclamation Act of 1977, where mining would interrupt, discontinue, or preclude 

faming, shall be considered unsuitable. Additionally, when mining Federal land outside 

an alluvial valley floor would materially damage the quantity or quality of water in 

surface or underground water systems that would supply alluvial valley floors, the land 

shall be considered unsuitable. 

At this time, the high coal potential area does not contain lands identified as alluvial valley floors 

(30 CFR Chapter VII). 

3461.5(t)(l) Criterion No. 20 

Federal lands in a state to which is applicable a criterion (i) proposed by that state or 

Indian tribe located in the planning area, and (ii) adopted by rule making by the 

Secretary, shall be considered unsuitable. 

At this time, the State of New Mexico has not proposed nor has the Secretary adopted any special or 

additional criterion other than those criterion presented in Parts 2, 3, and 4 of the New Mexico Coal 

Surface Mining Commission Rule 80-1 which corresponds with segments of the Federal 3461.1 

regulations. 

Multiple-Use Conflict Analysis 

The multiple-resource use screens are intended to eliminate lands from further consideration for coal 

leasing if other resources on those lands are determined to be locally important or unique. In general, a 

multiple-use trade-off is appropriate when one land use (e.g., mining) would be likely to preclude or limit 

use of other valuable resources not otherwise covered by the 20 unsuitability criteria. The readjustments 

at this stage in the land use planning process are made to accommodate unique, site-specific resource 

values clearly superior to coal but which are not included in the unsuitability criteria. A prime recreation 

site or campground might be an example. 

The multiple-use analysis weighs the effects of the additional multiple-use screens on the areas, which 

have passed the previously mentioned screens. The results of these analyses are summarized below. It 
Socorro Resource Management Plan 151 Appendix I: Minerals Management 

should be noted that additional inventory for cultural resources, raptor nests, etc., could require the 

reapplication of multiple-use and unsuitability criteria screens at the coal activity planning stage. 

Multiple-Use Screening Analysis 

No. 1: Wetlands 

Wetlands larger than one acre will be considered unacceptable. 

Definition: BLM Manual 6740 defines wetlands as follows: 

―Permanently wet or intermittently flooded areas where the water table (fresh, saline, or 

brackish) is at, near, or above the soil surface for extended intervals, where hydric wet 

soil conditions are normally exhibited, and where water depths generally do not exceed 

two meters. Vegetation is generally comprised of emergent water-loving forms 

(hydrophytes), which require at least a periodically saturated soil condition for growth 

and reproduction. In certain instances vegetation may be completely lacking. Marshes, 

shallows, swamps, muskegs, lake bogs, and wet meadows are examples of wetlands.‖ 

These are poorly drained areas, as a rule having impervious soils (no substantial groundwater recharge). 

They may on occasion be in contact with the groundwater system, but for the most part they receive water 

from precipitation and overland runoff. 

The above definition will be used for the multiple-use screen with the following modification. Marshes, 

shallows, swamps, and wet meadows less than one acre will not be considered under this definition. It 

will not include saltgrass flats associated with intermittent arroyos or small seasonally flooded livestock 

reservoirs that do not support emergent vegetation. 

Analysis: There are no wetlands larger than one acre in the areas under consideration. This analysis is 

based on field inventories. 

No. 2: Riparian Habitat 

Riparian habitat will be considered unacceptable. 

Definition: Manual 6740 defines riparian habitat as follows: 

―A specialized form of wetland restricted to areas along, adjacent to, or contiguous with 

perennially and intermittently flowing rivers and streams, also, periodically flooded lake 

and reservoir shore areas, as well as lakes with stable water levels with characteristic 

vegetation. This habitat is transitional between true bottomland wetlands and upland 

terrestrial habitats and, while associated with water courses, may extend inland for 

considerable distances. Soils of the riparian habitat may not exhibit typical wet soil 

characteristics of other wetlands. If not, wet soil characteristics will exist close enough to 

the surface for the water to be used directly by vegetation. This vegetation may range 

from water-loving hydrophytes (such as pond weeds) through terrestrial forms (such as 

sycamores, cottonwoods, and willows).‖ 

In these areas, soil and soil structure permit groundwater movement both vertically and horizontally. 

Groundwater recharge can occur. 

For the purpose of the multiple-use screen the above definition will be used with the following condition: 

isolated cottonwood trees, tamarisk stands less than one acre, and desert arroyos with greasewood, 
Socorro Resource Management Plan 152 Appendix I: Minerals Management 

rabbitbrush, or fourwing saltbush borders will not be considered as riparian habitat. They are more 

properly treated as special habitat features. 

Analysis: Using the above definition, there is no riparian habitat in any of the areas under consideration. 

This analysis is based on field inventories. 

No. 3: Proposed Threatened and Endangered Species 

Habitat supporting populations or individuals of species proposed for Federal or State listing as 

threatened or endangered will be considered unacceptable. 

Analysis: There are no proposed threatened or endangered species known to be within any of the areas 

under consideration. This analysis is based on field inventories and consultations with the USFWS and 

NMDGF. 

No. 4: Federal Lands Contiguous to the National Trail System and the National Wilderness System 

Federal lands within 0.5 mile of units of the National System of Trails, and the National Wilderness 

Preservation System, shall be considered unacceptable. 

Analysis: There are no Federal land systems within 0.5 mile of any of the areas under consideration. 

No. 5: Class II VRM Areas 

Areas that contain VRM Class II objectives shall be considered unacceptable for surface coal mining. 

Analysis: There are no areas under consideration that are managed under VRM Class II management 

objectives. 

No. 6: Areas of Significant Recreation Use or Opportunity 

Special Recreation Management Areas and areas that contain Recreation Opportunity Spectrum 

management objective for the primitive class shall be considered unacceptable for surface coal mining. 

Analysis: There are no areas managed as Special Recreation Management Areas or Recreation 

Opportunity Spectrum Primitive class management objectives in the high coal potential area. 

No. 7: Sole-Source Aquifers 

An area formally designated by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) as a sole-source aquifer 

shall be considered unacceptable. 

Analysis: The sole-source aquifer program under the Safe Drinking Water Act permits citizens to petition 

EPA for designation of an area as a sole-source aquifer if it is the principal water supply. If so designated, 

EPA reviews all federally assisted projects, which may affect the quality of groundwater in the solesource aquifer. 

There have been no sole-source aquifer designations in the high coal potential area under this program to 

date. 
Socorro Resource Management Plan 153 Appendix I: Minerals Management 

No. 8: Air Quality 

Lands within 15 miles of air quality Class I Prevention of Significant Deterioration areas shall be 

considered unacceptable. 

Analysis: There are no Class I Prevention of Significant Deterioration areas within or adjacent to the high 

coal potential area. 

No. 9: Reserved Federal Lands 

All Federal lands included in the following land systems or categories shall be considered unacceptable: 

Federal Aviation Administration facilities; all site withdrawals (administrative, school, etc.) for Federal 

agencies and leases acquired under the Recreation and Public Purposes Act. 

Analysis: There are no Federal lands within the high coal potential area under consideration which are 

reserved for Federal Aviation Administration facilities, site withdrawals for Federal agencies 

(administrative, school, etc.) or leases acquired under the Recreation and Public Purposes Act. 

Exception: A lease may be issued and mining operations approved if, after consultation with the affected 

Federal agency or lessee, the surface management agency determines that the facility will not be 

adversely affected by all or certain stipulated methods of coal mining. 

No. 10: Right-of-Way Windows or Corridors 

Federal lands which have been committed by the surface management agency to use as rights-of-way 

windows or corridors shall be considered unacceptable. 

Analysis: No Federal lands that have been designated or recommended for designation, as rights-of-way 

windows or corridors, are within the areas under consideration. 

No. 11: Paleontological Resources 

Any paleontological resources which are type localities for fauna that define regional or larger timestratigraphic units, and special management areas set aside for their paleontological values, shall be 

considered unacceptable. However, coal mining can be allowed if the authorized officer (in consultation 

with affected Federal/State agencies) determines that mining activities will enhance and facilitate access 

and scientific evaluation of paleontological resources. 

Analysis: This multiple-use screen does not apply to any areas under consideration with the high coal 

potential area. 

No. 12: Cultural Resource Sites Eligible for Inclusion on the National Register of Historic Places 

All properties which have been determined eligible for the National Register of Historic Places and which 

are of exceptional complexity, or areas of properties which must be considered together to achieve 

adequate mitigation through data recovery, shall be considered unacceptable. This shall include areas that 

the surface managing agency determines, after consultation with the SHPO and the Advisory Council on 

Historic Preservation, are necessary to protect the inherent values of the property that made it eligible for 

the National Register. 
Socorro Resource Management Plan 154 Appendix I: Minerals Management 

Prior to approval of surface-disturbing activities, Class III inventories will be conducted and subsequent 

mitigation of impacts will be required on all National Register eligible sites. Consultation between the 

BLM, the Office of Surface Management, and SHPO will occur to determine if newly recorded sites are 

eligible for inclusion in the National Register. If adequate mitigating measures for impacts to these site(s) 

cannot be developed, the sites and appropriate buffer zones will not be surface-mined or allowed to be 

disturbed by underground mining activities. 

Analysis: This area has a high density of recorded and unrecorded cultural resource sites. Much of the 

high coal potential area has been inventoried for cultural resources, and much of the inventory related to 

coal extraction proposals. All surveyed areas show a high density of sites, and many of the sites have been 

determined eligible or potentially eligible to the National Register of Historic Places (National Register). 

A large portion of the high coal potential area falls within the boundaries of the Zuni Salt Lake Sanctuary 

site, which has been determined eligible to the National Register. These areas were eliminated from 

further consideration for coal leasing. 

For the remaining high coal potential area, a literature search was performed to determine if sites eligible 

to the National Register were present. The literature search was conducted on areas meeting all three of 

the following criteria: 

1. Within boundaries of high coal potential coal areas 

2. Federal mineral ownership 

3. Outside the boundary of the Zuni Salt Lake Sanctuary site 

A total of 181 sites were identified as having been recorded in the areas meeting the three criteria. 

Approximately two thirds were found to be eligible or potentially eligible to the National Register. These 

areas were eliminated from further consideration for coal leasing. 

No. 13: Native American Areas of Cultural Significance 

Federal lands containing specific sites that have been identified as sacred and essential to the practice of 

traditional Native American religion shall be considered as unacceptable. This shall also include any areas 

that the surface management agency determines, after consultation with the appropriate tribal 

representative, as necessary to protect the inherent values of the area and to ensure that the natural 

character of the area remains unaltered so it may continue to be used for prayer or other religious 

practices. 

Analysis: An overview of Native American traditional use of the original SACA region (Kelly in Camilli 

et al. n.d.) has shown that this screen may apply to sites, localities, and linear features (trails). A large 

portion of the high coal potential area falls within the boundaries of the Zuni Salt Lake Sanctuary site, 

which has been determined eligible to the National Register. These areas were eliminated from further 

consideration for coal leasing. 

FLUID MINERALS LEASING

Federal fluid minerals are made available for leasing through the Minerals Leasing Act of 1920, as 

amended, and the Geothermal Steam Act of 1970. The Minerals Leasing Act of 1920, as amended, 

provides the Secretary of the Interior with authority to issue leases on lands where the mineral rights are 

held by the Federal government. This authority has been delegated to the BLM State Directors. The BLM 

is required to determine (1) which lands are suitable and available for leasing and subsequent 

development and (2) how those leased lands will be managed. On lands administered or owned by an 

entity other than the BLM (referred to as split estate), the BLM‘s environmental objectives and 
Socorro Resource Management Plan 155 Appendix I: Minerals Management 

constraints apply equally to these areas; however, such constraints are developed at the permit stage in 

consultation with the other surface-managing agency or surface owner. Wilderness study areas are closed 

to mineral leasing by the Mineral Leasing Act of 1920. 

A lease is a contract that conveys to an operator the right to develop and produce fluid minerals for a 

specific period of time under certain agreed-upon terms and conditions. The issuance of a lease grants to 

the lessee exclusive rights to as much of the leased land as is needed to conduct exploratory drilling and 

development operations in the leasehold subject to stipulations attached to the lease; restrictions derived 

from specific nondiscretionary statutes; and reasonable measures as may be required by the surfacemanagement agency to minimize adverse impacts on other resource values, land uses, or users. 

Before consent can be given for leases to be issued by the BLM, regulations require (1) verifying that 

leasing on specific lands is consistent with the land use plan; (2) ensuring that conditions of surface 

occupancy are properly included (as stipulations) in resulting leases; and (3) determining that operations 

and development could be allowed somewhere on each proposed lease except where a stipulation would 

prohibit all surface occupancy. 

Standard Lease Terms and Conditions 

Areas may be open to leasing with no specific management decisions defined in a resource management 

plan. However, these areas are subject to the lease terms and conditions as defined on the appropriate 

lease form (Form 3100-11, Offer to Lease and Lease for Oil and Gas; and Form 3200-24, Offer to Lease 

and Lease for Geothermal Resources). The forms include lease terms and conditions that address subjects 

such as bonding, rentals, royalties, inspections, and safety. Of particular interest for this discussion is 

Section 6, Conduct of Operations, of the lease form, which establishes the general and reasonable 

requirements for the protection of surface resources and is referred to as ―standard lease terms and 

conditions.‖ The Authorized Officer has the right to relocate proposed facilities, control timing of 

operations, and impose other mitigation in accordance with Sections 2 and 6 of the standard oil and gas 

lease terms. Each proposed site would be investigated and, if site-specific conditions warrant more 

restrictive protection, such protective measures could be imposed through conditions of approval at the 

time of an application for permit to drill. 

In addition, the standard lease terms and conditions specifically require that the lessee contact the lessor 

prior to disturbing the surface. They also specify that the lessee may be required to complete inventories 

or special studies in accordance with the Endangered Species Act of 1973, National Historic Preservation 

Act (NHPA) of 1966, and other applicable laws. 

Fluid Mineral Lease Stipulations 

Constraints in the form of stipulations are conditions included in a lease when environmental and 

planning analyses have demonstrated that additional and more stringent environmental protection is 

needed. Stipulations are provisions that modify the standard lease rights and are made part of the lease. 

The operator would be expected to comply with the stipulations that are attached to a lease. Lands 

currently under lease would not be affected by the stipulations identified in this Resource Management 

Plan Revision/Environmental Impact Statement. New leases would be required to adhere to the 

stipulations as identified in the Resource Management Plan Revision upon its completion. 

Fluid mineral stipulations that apply to specific locations within the Planning Area include: 

Table I-1: Fluid Mineral Lease Stipulation Codes 

NM-5 White Sands Missile Range Safety Evacuation Zone
Socorro Resource Management Plan 156 Appendix I: Minerals Management 

NM-6 Continental Divide Trail

S-CSU-C1 Protection of Cultural Resources

S-CSU-C2 Protection of Cultural Resources

S-CSU-C3 Protection of Cultural Resources

S-CSU-C4 Protection of Cultural Resources

S-CSU-K Potential Cave or Karst Occurrence Area

S-CSU-P Protection of Paleontological Resources

S-CSU-R Protection of Riparian Areas

S-CSU-S Protection of Slopes and Fragile Soils

S-CSU-V Protection of Natural Values

S-CSU-W1 Protection of Wildlife Resources

S-CSU-W2 Protection of Wildlife Projects

S-CSU-W3 Protection of Raptor and Prairie Dog Habitat

S-CSU-W4 Protection of Potential Northern Aplomado Falcon Habitat

S-CSU-Z Protection of Zuni Salt Lake

S-NSO-C No Surface Occupancy to Protect Cultural Resources

S-NSO-R No Surface Occupancy to Protect Special Recreation Areas

S-NSO-T&E No Surface Occupancy to Protect Threatened or Endangered Species

S-NSO-V Protection of Natural Resources

S-NSO-W No Surface Occupancy to Protect Wildlife Resources

S-VRM-II Protection of Visual Resource Management Class II Areas

Additional information on the purpose of each stipulation and the type of conditions that would be 

applied to a lease are described below. 

NM-5 – White Sands Missile Range Safety Evacuation Zone 

For the purpose of: Providing notice to lessees that they may be required to periodically 

evacuate this area when White Sands Missile Range conducts missile firings. 

Waiver: None 

Exception: None 

Modification: None

Justification: To ensure that the lessee is aware that White Sands Missile Range conducts testing 

of missiles during which times White Sands Missile Range requires that the area be evacuated. 

Closing the area to leasing or attaching a stipulation to this lease is deemed overly restrictive 

since the area is viable for fluid minerals development during other times. 

Stipulation: Prior to beginning exploration activities, the lessee must contact the U.S. Army 

Corps of Engineers in Albuquerque and the Master Planning Branch at White Sands Missile 

Range to be advised of terms of the safety evacuation agreement and missile-firing schedules. 

Specific locations of the White Sands Missile Range Safety Evacuation Zone should be verified 

in the Socorro Field Office. 
Socorro Resource Management Plan 157 Appendix I: Minerals Management 

NM-6 – Continental Divide Trail 

No occupancy or other surface-disturbance will be allowed within 1,000 feet of the Continental 

Divide National Scenic Trail Treadway. This distance may be modified when specifically 

approved in writing by the Socorro Field Office of the BLM.

S–CSU–C1 – Protection of Cultural Resources 

For the purpose of: Protection of highly significant and sensitive historic and prehistoric 

resources that might not be detected by means of standard Class III cultural resource surface 

inventory from direct and indirect effects of lease development. 

Waiver: None 

Exception: Requests for exception would be based on a case-by-case basis sensitivity evaluation 

and on available information regarding site-specific soil stability, site probability and any 

proposal for alternate forms of mitigation. 

Modification: None 

Justification: Nationally significant sites of both prehistoric and historic origin are located in the 

area. Many of these sites are not easily identified through standard Class III cultural resource 

inventory. 

Stipulation: Access to the lease will be limited to routes designated in the approved permit for 

lease operations. Applications for surface disturbing aspects of lease development will be 

evaluated for potential proximity to sensitive nationally significant cultural resources (known and 

suspected) and could require expanded pre-field records search, subsurface testing and/or metal 

detector survey in addition to routine cultural resource surface inventory for compliance with 

Section 106 of the NHPA, the costs of which will be borne by the lessee. This could result in 

extended time frames for processing authorizations for development activities. 

All proposed surface-disturbing aspects of lease development will be located to avoid and/or 

protect the cultural resources present. 

S-CSU-C2 – Protection of Cultural Resources 

For the purpose of: Ensuring that highly sensitive subsurface sites of national significance are 

not destroyed because they lack surface manifestations. 

Waiver: None 

Exception: Requests for exception would be addressed on a case-by-case basis and evaluated 

based on available information regarding site-specific soil stability, site probability, and proposals 

for alternate forms of mitigation. 

Modification: None 

Justification: Archaeological sites in this area are extremely significant, rare, and fragile. 

Standard compliance with Section 106 of the NHPA through Class III surface inventory is not 

sufficient to protect vulnerable resources of national significance. Subsurface testing is necessary 

to ensure that highly sensitive sites are not destroyed due to a lack of surface features and 

artifacts. 

Stipulation: Access will be limited to designated routes. All surface-disturbing aspects of lease 

development will require subsurface testing in addition to cultural resource surface inventory for 

compliance with Section 106 of the NHPA. 

S-CSU-C3 – Protection of Cultural Resources 

For the purpose of: Ensuring that highly sensitive sites of national significance are not 

destroyed. 
Socorro Resource Management Plan 158 Appendix I: Minerals Management 

Waiver: None 

Exception: Requests for exception would be addressed on a case-by-case basis and evaluated 

based on available information regarding site-specific soil stability, site probability, and proposals 

for alternate forms of mitigation. 

Modification: None 

Justification: Archaeological sites in this area are extremely significant, rare, and fragile. 

Standard compliance with Section 106 of the NHPA through Class III surface inventory is not 

sufficient to protect vulnerable resources of national significance. Subsurface testing is necessary 

to ensure that highly sensitive sites are not destroyed due to a lack of surface features and 

artifacts. 

Stipulation: All drill sites will be located adjacent to designated routes. All surface-disturbing 

aspects of lease development will require subsurface testing in addition to cultural resource 

surface inventory for compliance with Section 106 of the NHPA. 

S-CSU-C4 – Protection of Cultural Resources 

For the purpose of: Ensuring that highly sensitive sites of national significance are not 

destroyed. 

Waiver: None 

Exception: None 

Modification: None 

Justification: Archaeological sites in this area are extremely significant, rare, and fragile. 

Standard compliance with Section 106 of the NHPA through Class III surface inventory is not 

sufficient to protect vulnerable resources of national significance. 

Stipulation: All proposed surface-disturbing aspects of lease development may be moved to 

protect the cultural resources present. 

S-CSU-K – Potential Cave or Karst Occurrence Area 

For the purpose of: Protecting cave and karst resources. 

Waiver: Waiver of this requirement will be considered for projects that enhance or protect 

renewable natural resource values, or when an approved plan of operations ensures the protection 

of cave and karst resources. 

Exception: None

Modification: None 

Justification: Stipulating controlled surface use is deemed necessary based on the need to protect 

cave and karst resources in these areas. 

Stipulation: All or portions of the lease are located in a potential cave or karst occurrence area. 

Within this area, cave or karst features such as sinkholes, passages, and large rooms may be 

encountered from the surface to a depth of as much as 2,000 feet, within areas ranging from a few 

acres to hundreds of acres. Due to the sensitive nature of the cave or karst systems of this area, 

special protective measures may be developed during environmental analyses and be required as 

part of approvals for drilling or other operations on this lease. These measures could include 

changes in drilling operations, special casing and cementing programs, modifications in surface 

activities, or other reasonable measures to mitigate impacts to cave or karst values. 
Socorro Resource Management Plan 159 Appendix I: Minerals Management 

Surface disturbance will not be allowed within up to 200 meters of known cave entrances, 

passages or aspects of significant caves, or significant karst features. 

S-CSU-P – Protection of Paleontological Resources 

For the purpose of: Ensuring that sensitive paleontological sites of national significance are not 

destroyed. 

Waiver: None 

Exception: None 

Modification: None 

Justification: Paleontological sites in this area are extremely significant, rare, and fragile. 

Stipulation: A paleontological survey by a qualified paleontologist must be conducted prior to 

any surface-disturbing activities. All proposed surface-disturbing activities of lease development 

must be located to avoid and/or protect the paleontological resources present. 

S-CSU-R – Protection of Riparian Areas 

For the purpose of: Protection of riparian habitat for purposes of preventing further habitat 

fragmentation and loss of use of otherwise suitable/effective habitat. 

Waiver: If circumstances or relative resource values change or if the lessee demonstrates that the 

operations can be conducted without causing unacceptable impacts, or in emergency situations or 

if the disturbance or impacts associated with the proposed activity is of short duration, such as a 

habitat or range improvement project, and will not result in permanent adverse impacts to the 

landscape or degrade wildlife habitat, exceptions or waivers will be considered with appropriate 

mitigation, as determined by the Authorized Officer at the time of permitting. 

Exception: Based on a site-specific evaluation by the Authorized Officer if an approved plan of 

operations assures the protection of water, soil, and habitat resources. 

Modification: Based on a site-specific evaluation by the Authorized Officer if an approved plan 

of operations assures the protection of water, soil, and habitat resources. 

Stipulation: Surface-disturbing or long-term noise producing activities which exceed a noise 

level of 75 A-weighted decibels (75dbA), measured at the perimeter of the 400-meter protective 

spatial buffer, will not be allowed within 400 meters of riparian areas (springs, seeps, tanks, 

rivers, streams, playas, canyon bottoms, and floodplains). If the 75dbA noise level is determined 

to not provide adequate protection from the auditory impact created by lease operations, a stricter 

level shall be applied prior to authorizing lease operations. The BLM Authorized Officer will 

work with lease holder on a case-by-case basis to achieve an acceptable level of noise mitigation. 

A more restrictive spatial buffer may be applied where the 400-meter spatial buffer has been 

documented to not provide adequate protection. Appropriate modifications to the imposed 

restrictions will be made for the maintenance and operations of producing oil and gas wells. 

S-CSU-S – Protection of Slopes and Fragile Soils 

For the purpose: Protection of fragile soils and natural resources. 

Waiver: None 

Exception: Exceptions will be made if the operator can show that operations can be conducted 

without adversely affecting the protected resources. 
Socorro Resource Management Plan 160 Appendix I: Minerals Management 

Modification: Based on a site-specific evaluation by the Authorized Officer, appropriate 

modifications to the imposed restrictions will be made for the maintenance and operations of 

producing oil and gas wells. 

Stipulation: All or portions of the lease area contain slopes over 30 percent and/or fragile soils 

that require special protection to prevent further resource degradation. Surface disturbance will 

not be allowed on slopes over 30 percent. Occupancy upon areas containing fragile soils will be 

evaluated and special measures applied to prevent erosion of fragile soils. 

S-CSU-V – Protection of Natural Values 

For the purpose of: Protection of unique scenic and natural values from the direct and indirect 

impacts of lease development. 

Waiver: Requests for waiver would be addressed on a case-by-case basis and evaluated based on 

available information regarding the proposed activity or disturbance, possible mitigations, and 

considering the site-specific scenic and natural values. 

Exception: Based on an individual case sensitivity evaluation by the Authorized Officer. 

Modification: None

Justification: The protection of the special scenic and natural values. 

Stipulation: Access will be limited to routes designated in the approved permit for lease 

operations. Applications for surface-disturbing activities will be evaluated for their proximity to 

the mature yucca stands and for their short and long-term impacts to the special aesthetic and 

natural values of the dense stands of mature yuccas that dominate the desert scenery. 

S-CSU-W1 – Protection of Wildlife Resources 

For the purpose of: Protection of a designated Area of Critical Environmental Concern for 

wildlife resources. 

Waiver: Upon request, if circumstances or relative resource values change or if the disturbance 

or impacts associated with the proposed activity is of short duration, such as a habitat or range 

improvement project, and will not result in continued activity or permanent adverse impacts to 

the landscape or resources of concern, exceptions or waivers will be considered with appropriate 

mitigation, as determined by the Authorized Officer at the time of permitting. 

Exception: None 

Modification: Based on a site-specific evaluation by the Authorized Officer, appropriate 

modifications to the imposed restrictions will be made for the maintenance and operations of 

producing oil and gas wells.

Stipulation: All or portions of the lease area contain special wildlife habitat features that require 

special protection to prevent further degradation or damage. Applications for surface-disturbing 

or long-term noise producing activities, which exceed a noise level of 75dbA at the edge of the 

well pad, will be authorized only when lessee/operator demonstrates that the area is essential for 

operations and when the lessee/operator submits a satisfactory surface use and operations plan 

that provides protection for these special resource values. If the 75dbA noise level is determined 

to not provide adequate protection from the auditory impact created by lease operations, a stricter 

level shall be applied as a condition of approval for lease operations. The BLM Authorized 

Officer will work with the lease holder on a case-by-case basis to achieve an acceptable level of 

noise mitigation. 
Socorro Resource Management Plan 161 Appendix I: Minerals Management 

S-CSU-W2 – Protection of Wildlife Habitat Projects 

For the purpose of: Protection of wildlife habitat enhancement projects for purposes of 

preventing further habitat fragmentation and loss of use of otherwise suitable/effective habitat. 

Waiver: If circumstances or relative resource values change or if the lessee demonstrates that the 

operations can be conducted without causing unacceptable impacts, or in emergency situations or 

if the disturbance or impacts associated with the proposed activity is of short duration, such as a 

habitat or range improvement project, and will not result in permanent adverse impacts to the 

landscape or degrade wildlife habitat, exceptions or waivers will be considered with appropriate 

mitigation, as determined by the Authorized Officer at the time of permitting. 

Exception: None 

Modification: Based on a site-specific evaluation by the Authorized Officer. 

Stipulation: Surface-disturbing or long-term noise producing activities which exceed a noise 

level of 75dbA, measured at the perimeter of the 400-meter protective spatial buffer, will not be 

allowed within 400 meters of existing or planned wildlife habitat improvement projects. If the 

75dbA noise level is determined to not provide adequate protection from the auditory impact 

created by lease operations, a stricter level shall be applied as a condition of approval for lease 

operations. A more restrictive spatial buffer may be applied where the 400-meter spatial buffer 

has been documented to not provide adequate protection. Use and occupancy within the 400-

meter spatial buffer will be authorized only when lessee/ operator demonstrates that the area is 

essential for operations and when the lessee/operator submits a satisfactory surface use and 

operations plan, which adequately protects resources of concern. This requirement will be 

considered for a waiver with appropriate off-site mitigation, if the proposed activity is of short 

duration (e.g., habitat enhancement project, fences, pipelines), and will not result in continued 

activity in proximity to the habitat project, as determined by the Authorized Officer. 

Appropriate modifications to the imposed restrictions will be made for the maintenance and 

operations of producing oil and gas wells. 

S-CSU-W3 – Protection of Raptor and Prairie Dog Habitat 

For the purpose of: Protection of raptor and prairie dog habitat. 

Waiver: Waivers will be considered with appropriate mitigation, as determined by the 

Authorized Officer at the time of permitting in the following situations: relative resource values 

change, the lessee demonstrates that the operations can be conducted without causing 

unacceptable impacts, in emergency situations, or if the disturbance or impacts associated with 

the proposed activity are of short duration, such as a habitat or range improvement project, and 

will not result in permanent adverse impacts to the landscape or degrade wildlife habitat. 

Exception: Based on a site-specific evaluation by the Authorized Officer. 

Modification: Based on a site-specific evaluation by the Authorized Officer. 

Stipulation: Prior to survey/flagging locations for pads, routes for roads, and any other 

preliminary activity, the project area will be surveyed for raptor nests. Surveys will be conducted 

by professional biologists approved by the Authorized Officer. All raptor nests, Bald Eagle 

wintering areas, and prairie dog colonies, will be avoided by the distances and seasonal periods 

listed below. 

Species Minimum Distance Season

Aplomado Falcon 0.5 mile January 1-July 31
Socorro Resource Management Plan 162 Appendix I: Minerals Management 

Eagle 0.5 mile February 1-July 15

Ferruginous Hawk 0.5 mile February 1-July 15

Prairie Falcon 0.5 mile March 1-August 1

All other raptor species 0.5 mile during observed nest establishment 

through fledgling

Black-Tailed Prairie Dog 0.25 mile January 1-June 15

Gunnison Prairie Dog 0.25 mile February 15-June 15

Long-term surface use activities will not be allowed within the species-specific spatial buffer 

zone of active nests or occupied prairie dog towns listed above. Short-term activities will be 

avoided within the species-specific spatial buffer zones during the dates listed above. All other 

raptor species nests will be avoided by the spatial buffer zone only during the period listed above, 

regardless of the duration of the activity. Before surface use activities may commence a raptor 

and prairie dog survey must be completed. 

A short-term activity is defined as an activity, which would begin outside of a given breeding 

season and end prior to initiation of a given breeding season. A long-term activity is defined as an 

activity which would continue into or beyond a given nesting/breeding season. An active nest is 

defined as any nest that has been occupied in the last seven years. A nest will be determined 

active or inactive by the Authorized Officer. 

S-CSU-W4 – Protection of Potential Northern Aplomado Falcon Habitat 

For the purpose of: Habitat protection for a Federally listed endangered species. 

Waiver: Waivers will be considered with appropriate mitigation, as determined by the 

Authorized Officer at the time of permitting in the following situations: relative resource values 

change, the lessee demonstrates that the operations can be conducted without causing 

unacceptable impacts, in emergency situations, or if the disturbance or impacts associated with 

the proposed activity are of short duration, such as a habitat or range improvement project, and 

will not result in permanent adverse impacts to the landscape or degrade wildlife habitat. 

Exception: Based on a site-specific evaluation by the Authorized Officer. 

Modification: Based on a site-specific evaluation by the Authorized Officer. 

Stipulation: Surface use or occupancy is subject to the following special operating constraints in 

areas identified as having habitat potential for northern Aplomado Falcons. The lease operator is 

required to submit a Plan of Development for the entire leasehold prior to commencing drilling 

activity. Requests for exceptions or changes to the Plan of Development are not allowed without 

approval by the BLM authorized officer. Prior to surveying/flagging locations for pads, routes for 

roads, and other preliminary activities, a protocol northern Aplomado Falcon survey must be 

completed. In areas determined to have potential habitat, specialized surface use and occupancy 

requirements will be applied as conditions of approval for all surface-disturbing activities, 

including preliminary investigations. 

S-CSU-Z – Protection of Zuni Salt Lake 

For the purpose of: To protect the aquifers that feed Zuni Salt Lake. 

Waiver: None 

Exception: None 

Modification: None 

Justification: Protection of Zuni Salt Lake and other significant sites and resources in the area. 
Socorro Resource Management Plan 163 Appendix I: Minerals Management 

Stipulation: No diversions from the Moreno Hill Formation and other underlying aquifers within 

the Carrizo Wash watershed without re-injection and with the following conditions to protect the 

hydrologic balance and chemistry of the Zuni Salt Lake: 

1. Define disposal locations to mitigate all effects on the Zuni Salt Lake. 

2. Produced water must be re-injected into the same aquifer, and water quality must be 

compatible with the injection interval. 

3. Produced water shall be returned by vacuum. 

4. All wells will be plugged and abandoned after use, not converted to water wells, according to 

State and Federal guidelines. 

S-NSO-C – No Surface Occupancy to Protect Cultural Resources 

For the purpose of: Protection of highly sensitive cultural resource sites from direct and indirect 

impacts of lease development, including increased access and erosion. 

Waiver: Requests for waiver would be addressed on a case-by-case basis and evaluated based on 

available information regarding site-specific soil stability, site probability, and proposals for 

alternate forms of mitigation. 

Exception: None 

Modification: None

Justification: Stipulating no surface occupancy is deemed necessary to protect archaeological 

sites which are extremely significant, rare, and fragile. Standard compliance with Section 106 of 

the NHPA through Class III surface inventory is not sufficient to protect vulnerable resources of 

national significance. 

S-NSO-R – No Surface Occupancy to Protect Special Recreation Areas 

For the purpose of: Protection of a high value recreation site and activity area from direct and 

indirect impacts of lease development. 

Waiver: Requests for waiver will be addressed on a case-by-case basis and evaluated based on 

available information regarding the proposed activity or disturbance, possible mitigation and 

considering the site-specific scenic, natural, recreational, and cultural values. 

Exception: Based on an individual case sensitivity evaluation by the Authorized Officer. 

Modification: None 

Justification: The protection of the special scenic, natural, recreational, and cultural values and 

activities inherent in the designated sites. 

S-NSO-T&E – No Surface Occupancy to Protect Threatened or Endangered Species 

For the purpose of: Habitat protection of listed threatened plants, by the USFWS, under the 

Endangered Species Act and nominated by the New Mexico Energy, Minerals and Natural 

Resources Department and the Nature Conservancy for special protection and management. 

Waiver: If circumstances or relative resource values change or if the lessee demonstrates that the 

operations can be conducted without causing unacceptable impacts, or in emergency situations or 

if the disturbance or impacts associated with the proposed activity is of short duration, such as a 

habitat or range improvement project, and will not result in permanent adverse impacts to the 

landscape or degrade wildlife habitat, exceptions or waivers will be considered with appropriate 

mitigation, as determined by the Authorized Officer at the time of permitting. 
Socorro Resource Management Plan 164 Appendix I: Minerals Management 

Exception: None 

Modification: None

Justification: The projection of threatened plants. 

S-NSO-W – No Surface Occupancy to Protect Wildlife Resources 

For the purpose of: Protection of wildlife habitat and other resources of concern.

Waiver: If circumstances or relative resource values change or if the lessee demonstrates that the 

operations can be conducted without causing unacceptable impacts, or in emergency situations or 

if the disturbance or impacts associated with the proposed activity is of short duration, and will 

not result in permanent adverse impacts to the landscape or degrade wildlife habitat, exceptions 

or waivers will be considered with appropriate mitigation, as determined by the Authorized 

Officer at the time of permitting. 

Exception: None

Modification: None

Justification: Protection of wildlife habitat and other resources of concern.

S-NSO-V – Protection of Natural Resources 

As described below, all or a portion of the lease contains natural resource values of concern 

requiring extraordinary protection. No surface occupancy is deemed necessary because standard 

mitigation measures and Best Management Practices are not adequate to protect these significant, 

rare and/or fragile resources. It is the intention of the lessor that this lease be developed by 

directional drilling from or prorationing with adjacent locations. 

For the purpose of: Protection of highly sensitive natural resource values from direct and 

indirect impacts of lease development. 

Waiver: If circumstances or relative resource values change or if the lessee demonstrates that the 

operations can be conducted without causing unacceptable impacts, and will not result in 

permanent adverse impacts to the landscape or degrade resource values, a waiver will be 

considered with appropriate mitigation, as determined by the Authorized Officer at the time of 

permitting. Requests for waiver will be addressed on a case-by-case basis and evaluated based on 

available information regarding the proposed activity or disturbance, possible alternate forms of 

mitigation and consideration of the site-specific natural resource values. 

Exception: No exceptions; see waiver criteria. 

Modification: None

S-VRM-II – Protection of Visual Resource Management Class II Areas 

For the purpose of: To minimize contrasts to the characteristic landscape of each area. 

Waiver: None

Exception: None

Modification: None 

Justification: Stipulating controlled surface use is deemed necessary based on the need to protect 

visual resources in these areas. The objectives for VRM Class II areas are to manage activities so 

that the changes in any of the basic visual elements (form, line, color, and texture) are not evident 

in the landscape. A contrast may be seen but should not attract attention. 
Socorro Resource Management Plan 165 Appendix I: Minerals Management 

Stipulation: To meet the VRM objectives described below, and upon determinations made by the 

BLM Authorized Officer, new disturbance will be minimized as follows: 

1. Painting of facilities in accordance with Notice to Lessees NM-87-1 ―Painting of Oil Field 

Facilities‖ shall be required to meet VRM objectives. 

2. Proposed disturbances may be moved distances greater than 200 meters to meet VRM 

Class II objectives. 

3. Low-profile facilities may be required to reduce visual impacts. 

4. Visual simulations will be required as part of the surface use plan for lease operations in 

sensitive view sheds such as Class II areas along scenic highways, trails, and back country 

byways. 

Specialized Surface Occupancy Requirements for Northern Aplomado Falcon Potential Habitat 

For the purpose of: Protecting grassland habitat and associated special status species of wildlife 

through improved planning for future oil and gas development on a unit.

Requirement: In areas of potential northern Aplomado Falcon habitat that are open to leasing 

with a unitization requirement, new lessees form exploratory units prior to commencing drilling 

activity. This protection measure would allow the BLM to manage the surface in an orderly way 

and control the rate of reservoir development. The BLM has the authority to approve Unit 

Agreements, establish the rate of exploration and development, approve the tract allocation 

formula, and terminate units that cease production (or where production was never established). 

A simple definition of unitization is the operation of multiple leases as a single lease under a 

single operator. Unitization results in reduced surface disturbance because wells would be drilled 

in the most favorable locations without regard for spacing, and the operator and the BLM would 

establish corridors for access roads and pipelines, eliminating the need for redundant facilities. 

Lessee benefits include that individual leases could be extended beyond their primary term 

without actual production, as long as there is production on the unit. 

Withdrawals From Mineral Entry 

Table I-2 displays locations that have been withdrawn from location or entry under the mining laws. 

Additional lands that have been withdrawn are not included in the table because the resources these 

withdrawals protect have been made proprietary information by statute or regulation. 
Socorro Resource Management Plan 166 Appendix I: Minerals Management 

Table I-2: Withdrawals from Mineral Entry 

Serial Number Withdrawn Geographic 

Name Location (NMPM) Type of Withdrawal Segregation Acres

NMNM095102 10/19/1999 Datil Well

Campground

T. 2 S., R. 10 W., sec 10, sec 11. Recreational 

Purpose

Locatable 

Minerals, All 

Surface

680

NMNM0038148 8/5/1960 Middle Rio 

Grande 

Project

T. 3 S., R. 1 E., Reclamation Locatable 

Minerals, All 

Surface

97.645

sec 31, lot 50; 

T. 4 S., R. 1 E., 

sec 5, Eastern Most 1/5 POR L28; lots 26, 27, 33, 36, 37; 

sec 8, lot 54;

sec 17, lot 19;

sec 21, lots 12-14, 17, 18;

sec 28, lots 18, 21;

sec 33 lots 13,14.

NMNM0013651 7/8/1955 White Sands 

Missile 

Range

T. 6 S., R. 7 E., Department of 

Army 

All Minerals, 

All Surface

310

Sec 6, lot 5 

that portion south and west of ROW of US HWY380;

T. 6 S., R. 8 E., 

Sec 18, that portion south and west of ROW of US HWY 380;

Sec 20, that portion south and west of ROW of US HWY 380,

Sec 28, that portion south and west of ROW of US HWY 380.

NMNM095103 1/29/1999 Ladron 

Mountain

ACEC

T. 2 N., R. 2 W, BLM Special 

Designation 

Locatable 

Minerals, All 

Surface

4,556.60

Sec 2 lots 1-8, S1⁄2N1⁄2, N1⁄2S1⁄2;

Sec 32, lots 1-4, W1⁄2SW1⁄4;

T. 3 N., R. 2 W.,

Sec 16,

Sec 32,

Sec 36,

T. 2 N., R. 3 W.,
Socorro Resource Management Plan 167 Appendix I: Minerals Management 

Serial Number Withdrawn Geographic 

Name Location (NMPM) Type of Withdrawal Segregation Acres

Sec 2, lot 4, S1⁄2N1⁄2, S1⁄2;

T. 2 N., R. 3 W., 

Sec 36, SE1⁄4SW1⁄4, NW1⁄2SW1⁄4;

T. 3 N., R. 3 W.,

Sec 36, N1⁄2, SW1⁄4, NE1⁄4SE1⁄4, W1⁄2SE1⁄4.

NMNM095104 3/25/1999 T. 5 S., R. 3 W., BLM Special 

Designation 

Locatable 

Minerals, All 

Surface

5,607.52

Sec 16, lots 5-8, N1⁄2, N1⁄2SW1⁄4;

Sec 21,

Sec 28,

Sec 29,

Sec 32;

T. 6 S., R. 3 W.,

Sec 4, lots 3,4, SW1⁄4,

Sec 9, W1⁄2,

Sec 15, W1⁄2,

Sec 16, 

Sec 22, E1⁄2, N1⁄2NW1⁄4, SE1⁄4NW1⁄4, E1⁄2SW1⁄4;

T. 5 S., R. 4 W,

Sec 25, E1⁄2.

NMNM095118 10/9/2001 Sawtooth 

ACEC

T. 1 N., R. 11 W., BLM 

Miscellaneous

Locatable 

Minerals, All 

Surface

116.12

Sec 6, lot 7, SE1⁄4SW1⁄4, SW1⁄4SE1⁄4.

NMNM08384 6/1/1995 The Box T. 3 S., R. 1 W., BLM 

Miscellaneous

EXC 

Minerals, All 

Surface

39.95

Sec 31, lot 18.
Socorro Resource Management Plan 168 Appendix J: OHV Areas and Route Designation

APPENDIX J: OHV AREAS AND ROUTE DESIGNATIONS 

In 1972, the President issued Executive Order 11644 requiring each Federal agency to designate ―areas 

and trails‖ for off-road vehicle use or restriction and to develop regulations implementing this executive 

order. BLM regulations (43 Code of Federal Regulations [CFR] 8340) established management areas as 

open, limited, or closed to off-road vehicle use. 

 

Off-highway vehicle (OHV) designations are determined through a comprehensive land use planning 

process, which serves as an adaptive and flexible approach to the management of all activities on public 

lands. As circumstances and conditions have changed over the past several decades, the BLM has made a 

concerted effort to focus the agency‘s resources in the development of land use plans by seeking 

additional funding and staff to address issues associated with the increased population growth near the 

public lands. OHV designations are a major component of all future planning efforts. 

In addition, guidance in BLM Handbook H-1601, Appendix C directs BLM offices to delineate travel 

management areas, designate OHV management areas and include route designations, ―where practical.‖

The Handbook further states, ―If it is not practical to define or delineate the travel management network 

during the land use planning process, a preliminary network must be identified and a process established 

to select a final travel management network.‖

This Resource Management Plan (RMP) includes revised OHV area designations and route designations 

within 12 of the 13 wilderness study areas (WSAs) (see Route Designations and Tables J-2 through J-13). 

No routes have been identified for the Devil‘s Reach WSA under any alternative. 

The following appendix provides definitions of OHV area designations and associated terms, a summary 

of the route inventory and designation process within WSAs, and the alternative route designations. 

DEFINITIONS 

Definitions of the BLM‘s OHV designations and associated terms are listed below. OHV designations are 

administrative, allowing management flexibility in response to changes in the environment. All public 

land is designated as ―open,‖ ―limited,‖ or ―closed‖ to motorized vehicles in each field office‘s Resource 

Management Plan (RMP) or travel and transportation management plan. The following terms are defined 

as stated in 43 CFR 8340.0-5.

Off-Highway Vehicle – any motorized vehicle capable of, or designed for, travel on or 

immediately over land, water, or other natural terrain, excluding: (1) any non-amphibious 

registered motorboat; (2) any military, fire, emergency, or law enforcement vehicle while being 

used for emergency purposes; (3) any vehicle whose use is expressly authorized by the authorized 

officer; (4) vehicles in official use; and (5) any combat or combat support vehicle when used in 

times of national defense emergencies. OHV use is subject to operating regulations and vehicle 

standards set forth in 43 CFR 8341 and 8342. 

Open area designation – any area where all types of vehicle use are permitted at all times, 

anywhere in the area subject to the operating regulations and vehicle standards set forth in 43 

CFR 8341 and 8342. Open designations generally include areas where there are no compelling 

resource protection needs, use conflicts, or public safety issues that would warrant limiting OHV 

use. 

Closed area designation – an area where the use of OHVs and mechanized vehicles (mountain 

bikes, wagons, wheeled-game carts) is prohibited. Closures may be necessary to protect 

resources, ensure visitor safety, or reduce use conflicts. Use of OHVs in closed areas may be 
Socorro Resource Management Plan 169 Appendix J: OHV Areas and Route Designation

allowed for certain reasons; however, such use shall be made only with the approval of the 

Authorized Officer. Closed (no rehab) designations are routes that remain usable for travel by 

foot, horse, or authorized vehicles. Vehicle uses that may be authorized by the BLM include 

grandfathered uses, valid existing rights, agency administrative use, or emergency use. 

Limited area designation – an area restricted at certain times in certain areas, and/or to certain 

vehicular use. These restrictions may be of any type, but can generally be accommodated within 

the following categories: number of vehicles, types of vehicles, time or season of vehicle use, 

permitted or licensed use only, use on existing roads and trails, use on designated roads and trails, 

and other restrictions. Limitations may be used to meet specific resource management objectives, 

protect resources, or public safety. 

Cross-country travel – wheeled, motorized travel by any vehicle (recreational or other), off of 

roads and trails. It is difficult to provide one definition of motorized wheeled cross-country travel 

and have that definition fit all the situations that might occur. Roads and trails appear differently 

to individuals because of the variety of terrain, vegetation, and soil type found in the Planning 

Area. 

Motorized travel is considered cross-country when: 

The passage of motorized vehicles depresses undisturbed ground and crushes vegetation. 

The motorized vehicle maximum width (the distance from the outside of the left tire to the 

outside of the right tire or maximum tire width for motorcycles) does not easily fit the road or 

trail profile. However, an All-Terrain Vehicle (ATV) traveling within a two-track route 

established by a pickup truck is not considered cross-country travel. 

Motorized vehicles use livestock and game trails, unless the trails are clearly evident, or 

continuous single-track routes used by motorcycles over a period of years, unless the trail are 

clearly evident. 

Motorized travel is not considered cross-country when: 

Motorized vehicles use constructed roads that are maintained by the oil and gas industry and/or 

the BLM, unless specifically closed to use through signing and/or gates. Constructed roads are 

often characterized by a road prism with cut and fill slopes. 

Motorized vehicles use trails specifically designated for the vehicle being used, unless the trail 

are clearly evident. 

Motorized vehicles use clearly evident two-track and single-track routes with regular use and 

continuous passage of motorized vehicles over a period of years. A route is a track where 

perennial vegetation is devoid or scarce, or where wheel tracks are continuous depressions in the 

ground, evident to the casual observer, but are vegetated. While unauthorized routes are not part 

of the inventory, they are described as post-WSA routes on Table J-2.

The entire route must meet the above specifications. Newly created routes should be easily identified as 

not meeting the specifications because many portions would not show signs of regular and continuous 

passage of motorized vehicles and many areas would still be fully vegetated with no wheel depressions. 

This definition does have some ambiguity that will continue to exist until formal designation of routes, 

trails, and areas within the entire Planning Area is completed. This definition only applies to crosscountry travel in the dispersed area and not to cross-country travel within special management areas. A 

special management area may have its own management plan that defines regulations for cross-country 

travel within its boundaries. 
Socorro Resource Management Plan 170 Appendix J: OHV Areas and Route Designation

ROUTE DESIGNATION AND CLOSURE CRITERIA 

Route Designation Criteria 

The following criteria apply to route designations within WSAs in the Socorro Field Office, to the extent 

specified by law. Designation of routes within WSAs must be in compliance with the Interim Policy and 

Management Guidelines for Lands Under Wilderness Review (1995). 

Designation criteria are listed in 43 CFR 8342.1, a, b, c and d as follows: 

(a) Areas and trails shall be located to minimize damage to soil, watershed, vegetation, air or other 

resources of the public lands, and to prevent impairment of wilderness suitability. 

(b) Areas and trails shall be located to minimize harassment of wildlife or significant disruption of 

wildlife habitats. Special attention will be given to protect endangered or threatened species and 

their habitats. 

(c) Areas and trails shall be located to minimize conflicts between off-road vehicle use and other 

existing or proposed recreational uses of the same or neighboring public lands, and to ensure the 

compatibility of such uses with existing conditions in populated areas, taking into account noise 

and other factors. 

(d) Areas and trails shall not be located in officially designated wilderness areas or primitive areas. 

Areas and trails shall be located in natural areas only if the authorized officer determines that offroad vehicle use in such locations will not adversely affect their natural, esthetic, scenic, or other 

values for which such areas are established. 

Other designation considerations include: 

Routes that provide access to existing rights such as private land. 

Routes that provide known access needs for the maintenance of authorized range improvements 

(pre-Federal Land Policy and Management Act [FLPMA]) or other authorized administrative 

activities. 

Routes that provide access for unique recreational experiences and/or commercial activities 

(primarily outfitting). 

Routes previously closed in the 1989 Socorro RMP. 

Route Closure Criteria 

Route closure criteria include the following: 

Routes causing unacceptable resource damage, erosion (i.e.: wash outs, ruts, detours). 

Routes through soils which are easily eroded or highly susceptible to resource damage. 

Multiple or parallel routes in the same area (route proliferation). 

Routes that are naturally re-vegetating and/or no longer receiving motorized use. 

Routes that have a high potential to negatively affect threatened or endangered or sensitive 

wildlife species or limited and important wildlife habitat. 

Routes that have a high potential to encourage harassment or disruption to wildlife or wild horses. 

Vehicle routes (ways) which did not exist when the area was designated a WSA in 1980 (refer to 

2002 Review of 1980 Ways Inventory of WSA in the Socorro Field Office). 

Routes which may adversely affect areas of cultural or religious concern for Native Americans. 
Socorro Resource Management Plan 171 Appendix J: OHV Areas and Route Designation

Routes which may adversely affect sites which may be eligible for the National Register of 

Historic Places. 

WILDERNESS STUDY AREAS ROUTE INVENTORY 

Completing OHV route designations within the 13 WSAs (Table J-1) is an important goal in the effort to 

revise the Socorro Field Office 1989 RMP. The BLM‘s Land Use Planning Handbook H-16011-1 

(Appendix C, p 18) directs Field Offices that: 

―[at] a minimum, the travel management area designation for wilderness study areas 

(WSAs) must be limited to ways and trails existing at the time the area became a 

WSA...Existing roads, ways and trails must be fully documented and mapped...In 

addition, future designations may be made for a WSA if it is released from study.‖ 

Without formal OHV route designations through the land use planning process, the Socorro Field Office 

would be unable to effectively carry out or enforce motorized OHV regulation and policy within its 

WSAs. 

Table J-1: Socorro Field Office Wilderness Study Areas

Antelope Mesita Blanca

Continental Divide Presilla

Devil‘s Backbone Sierra de Las Cañas

Devil‘s Reach Sierra Ladrones

Eagle Peak Stallion

Horse Mountain Veranito

Jornada del Muerto

The Socorro Field Office completed ―Vehicular Routes [Ways]‖ inventories for its 13 WSAs in 1980. 

Completing a formal designation of vehicle routes in the Socorro Field Office WSAs for this RMP 

required a baseline inventory of those routes (also referred to as ―ways‖) that existed at the time of 

inventory (1980) and/or prior to the enactment of FLPMA (October 21, 1976). While the 1980 inventory 

is generally a good representation of what existed on the ground at the time, the maps pre-date current 

mapping technology and standards. In some cases, the 1980 ―Vehicular Route‖ maps are inaccurate. For 

example, some of the legal descriptions (in text) of ―Vehicle Access Routes‖ do not correspond to 

mapped ―Vehicular Routes.‖ In other instances, routes mapped in the 1980 inventory appear misplaced 

and/or drawn incorrectly. 

To facilitate the goal of route-by-route OHV designations in the WSAs, and to improve the integrity of 

the baseline data used in the planning process, this review was undertaken to integrate the old WSA route 

inventory into the geographic information system (GIS). The following discussion outlines the 

interpretive process and methodology used to make necessary changes and/or corrections in the 1980 

inventory. 

Data Used 

The following sources of information were reviewed during the route inventory. Much of these data has 

been verified on the ground with global positioning system (GPS) technology. Although incomplete, 

these data are the best attempt (to date) at a comprehensive Field Office inventory of routes that are 

suitable for the gamut of motorized vehicle use. A large percentage of the access routes within the 

13 WSAs have been accurately recorded using the GPS over the past 5 to 10 years. 

1) ―Vehicular Routes‖ Maps, Intensive Wilderness Inventory Report (IWIR), March 1980: These 

maps were intended as a complete inventory of existing WSA routes, or Ways (pre-FLPMA). 

Each map was hand drawn at a scale of 1⁄2 inch = 1 mile. The maps are crude, black and white, 
Socorro Resource Management Plan 172 Appendix J: OHV Areas and Route Designation

and show no features other than township and range, the WSA boundary, and approximate 

locations of routes. Upon careful inspection, the path and length of some of the routes are 

incorrectly drawn and located on the map. In a few other instances, mapped routes do not 

correspond to any kind of verifiable intrusion or disturbance when researched against the 

historical record. 

2) ―Vehicle Access Routes‖ Descriptions, IWIR, March, 1980: Each of the mapped routes identified 

above correspond to written descriptions in the IWIR. These written descriptions include the 

approximate length of the route along with a legal description. Routes are sometimes described as 

―two track,‖ ―substantially unnoticeable,‖ and ―jeep trail.‖ In some cases, these descriptions do 

not correspond to the location of the mapped route(s). 

3) Assorted working maps and descriptive text found in the IWIR, March 1980: There are several 

maps and written inventory included in the 1980 IWIR – maps that describe photo-points, maps 

that identify intrusions (other than vehicle routes), county highway maps ―Initial Wilderness 

Inventory Recommendations [maps],‖ photocopied U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), 7.5 Minute 

Series, and maps found in the Las Cruces District, Final Wilderness Inventory Report, Vol. II.‖

The text in the Final Wilderness Inventory Report attempted to quantify the amount of vehicular 

route(s) in each WSA. 

4) 1976 Aerial Photographs: This 1976 flight covers only the Continental Divide and Horse Peak 

WSAs. Most of this flight was developed in black and white, and a small portion in color. The 

scale is poor but the resolution is generally good. Although the coverage is limited, these photos 

were helpful in both confirming and eliminating some of the routes identified in the 1980 

inventory. 

5) Socorro Field Office Digitized Transportation, Road and Trail Inventory: These data are an 

ongoing Field Office inventory of both improved and unimproved roads and trails throughout the 

Socorro Field Office. Transportation system information has been digitized for each 1:250,000 

topographic map (7.5 minute). 

Data Interpretation and Review 

Using the 12 vehicular routes maps included in the 1980 IWIR as baseline data, all routes were reviewed 

in an effort to match/confirm their existence with at least one other data set, historical or current. Most of 

the routes in the 1980 inventory were easily authenticated and are included in the Socorro Field Office 

GIS Database. Data includes both GPS information as well as routes digitized off USGS 7.5 minute 

topographic maps. 

In a few circumstances where mapped vehicular routes did not correspond to the legal descriptions in 

vehicle access routes, and where there was reasonable evidence that the intended location of the route was 

nearby, the route was relocated and digitized. 

In other circumstances, mapped vehicle access routes did not clearly correspond to any route(s) that have 

been mapped or photographed either on or before the 1980 IWIR. Under these circumstances, available 

spatial data were interpreted to discover nearby routes bearing a meaningful resemblance in shape and 

length to the IWIR mapped route(s). These routes were also relocated and digitized. 

In review of the entire record, current conditions on the ground can and do vary from the 1980 inventory. 

Some routes have disappeared or re-vegetated (lack of use), and new routes have appeared as a result of 

unauthorized use, but are not included in this inventory. 

Photocopies of all maps, inventory, text, and aerial photographs used in this review can be found in the 

notebook at the Socorro Field Office of the BLM. Additionally, the OHV Baseline Report, prepared on 
Socorro Resource Management Plan 173 Appendix J: OHV Areas and Route Designation

August 2003, also describes OHV and WSA information which will be carried forward for use in the 

Socorro RMP. 

Wilderness Study Area Route Designations 

In the following table, the length (in miles) and the disposition of each route within the WSAs have been 

identified. Please note that no routes within the Devil‘s Reach WSA have been identified. 
Socorro Resource Management Plan 174 Appendix J: OHV Areas and Route Designation

Table J-2: Route Lengths and Designations 

Antelope Continental 

Divide

Devil's 

Backbone

Eagle 

Peak

Horse 

Mountain

Jornada 

del 

Muerto

Mesita 

Blanca Presilla Sierra de Las Cañas

Sierra 

Ladrones Stallion Veranito

RouteMilesRouteMilesRouteMilesRouteMilesRouteMilesRouteMilesRouteMilesRouteMilesRouteMilesRouteMilesRouteMilesRouteMiles

Open

A4 2.5 C5 5.5 E1 1.0 J1 2.0 M1 2.50 L8 0.3 S1 2.0

A5 1.5 C6 2.5 E9 4.5 J2 1.3 M6 1.50 L12 0.3

C9 2.0 E10 3.0 J4 2.0 L16 9.0

C13 2.0 E12 3.0 J5 3.0 L17 3.5

C14 4.5 E13 2.0 J7 1.5 L19 1.0

C15 1.5 E14 5.0 L20 1.5

C16 5.0 E16 2.5

Total 4.0 23.0 0.0 21.0 0.0 9.8 4.0 0.0 0.0 15.5 2.0 0.0

Closed 

(Rehabilitate)

A2 2.0 C13 2.0 D2 2.0 E1 2.0 H3 2.0 J6 2.0 M1 1.5 P1 3.0 SC2 0.1 L1 1.0 S2 1.0 V3 2.5

A3 3.5 C7 4.0 D5 2.0 E2 1.0 H4 4.0 J8 0.5 M2 1.0 P2 2.5 SC3 0.3 L2 0.5 S4 5.0 V4 0.3

A5 1.5 C11 0.5 D6 1.0 E3 1.0 H5 1.0 M3 1.0 P3 3.0 L3 1.0 V5 0.3

A6 0.5 C18 1.5 E4 3.5 M4 2.5 P4 2.5 L5 1.0 V6 3.5

A7 1.0 C19 4.0 E7 1.5 L6 1.0

A8 2.0 C4 0.5 E9 1.5 L14 1.5

E12 2.0 L15 1.0

E16 2.0 L18 1.0

E19 2.0 L22 1.0

Total 10.5 12.5 5.0 16.5 7.0 2.5 6.0 11.0 0.4 9.0 6.0 6.5

Closed 

(Authorized 

Use Only)

A1 3.0 C12 1.5 D1 1.5 E5 3.5 H1 1.0 J2 0.8 M6 3.0 SC1 0.3 L4 0.5 S3 8.0 V1 1.5

A2 1.5 C1 1.0 D3 1.5 E6 1.5 H2 0.5 J3 2.0 L7 2.5 S5 3.0 V2 0.5

C2 11.0 D4 0.5 E8 1.0 L9 1.0 V3 0.5

C3 2.5 E11 2.0 L10 0.5

C8 2.0 E15 2.0 L11 0.3

C10 3.0 E17 1.0 L12 1.0

C17 2.5 E18 2.0 L13 1.0

L15 5.0

L17 1.0

L21 2.5

Total 4.5 23.5 3.5 13.0 1.5 2.8 3.0 0.0 0.3 15.3 11.0 2.5

Total Closed 15.0 36.0 8.5 29.5 8.5 5.3 9.0 11.0 0.6 24.3 17.0 9.0

Note: The routes listed as “Closed (Authorized Use Only)” in the above table are labeled “Close (No Rehab)” in the following maps. 
Socorro Resource Management Plan 175 Appendix J: OHV Areas and Route Designation

Map J-1
Socorro Resource Management Plan 176 Appendix J: OHV Areas and Route Designation

Map J-2
Socorro Resource Management Plan 177 Appendix J: OHV Areas and Route Designation

Map J-3
Socorro Resource Management Plan 178 Appendix J: OHV Areas and Route Designation

Map J-4
Socorro Resource Management Plan 179 Appendix J: OHV Areas and Route Designation

Map J-5
Socorro Resource Management Plan 180 Appendix J: OHV Areas and Route Designation

 

Map J-6
Socorro Resource Management Plan 181 Appendix J: OHV Areas and Route Designation

Map J-7
Socorro Resource Management Plan 182 Appendix J: OHV Areas and Route Designation

Map J-8
Socorro Resource Management Plan 183 Appendix J: OHV Areas and Route Designation

Map J-9
Socorro Resource Management Plan 184 Appendix J: OHV Areas and Route Designation

Map J-10
Socorro Resource Management Plan 185 Appendix J: OHV Areas and Route Designation

Map J-11
Socorro Resource Management Plan 186 Appendix J: OHV Areas and Route Designation

Map J-12
Socorro Resource Management Plan 187 Appendix K: Special Designations

APPENDIX K: SPECIAL DESIGNATIONS AND JUSTIFICATION FOR 

PROPOSED SPECIAL DESIGNATIONS 

The following appendix contains (1) descriptions of the areas with special designations currently 

managed by the Socorro Field Office, and (2) a description of the criteria and process for nominations for 

areas of critical environmental concern (ACECs). Acreages provided for the existing and proposed special 

designations are based on best available geographical information system (GIS) data and include only 

Bureau of Land Management (BLM)-managed lands. The acreages do not include State or privately 

owned inholdings that may be present within these areas. 

AREAS OF CRITICAL EN VIRONMENTAL CONCERN 

ACECs are designated by the BLM where special management attention is needed to protect and prevent 

irreparable damage to important historic, cultural, and scenic values; fish and wildlife resources, or other 

natural systems or processes; or to protect human life and safety from natural hazards (BLM 2003). The 

six ACECs located within the Planning Area include Sawtooth, Mockingbird Gap, Ladron Mountain, 

Agua Fria, Horse Mountain, and Tinajas. These ACECs, except proprietary areas, are shown on Map 4: 

Special Designations. The boundaries of the Sawtooth ACEC are proprietary due to the sensitivity of the 

resources being protected. A brief description of each ACEC is provided below. 

Sawtooth Proprietary ACEC 

The Sawtooth Proprietary ACEC, located in Catron County northwest of Datil, New Mexico, includes 

125 acres of public land. Steep ridges and foot slopes characterize the area. This ACEC provides habitat 

for a small population of Erigeron rhizomatous (Rhizome fleabane or Zuni fleabane). The U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service (USFWS) listed this species as a threatened plant under the Endangered Species Act in 

1985. The ACEC provides a refuge for this small population by protecting the area from damage from 

off-highway vehicle (OHV) use, right-of-way authorizations, mineral entry, or other potentially disturbing 

activities (BLM 1989). 

Mockingbird Gap Proprietary ACEC 

The Mockingbird Gap Proprietary ACEC (previously managed as an SMA) is located on 8,685 acres of 

public land in Socorro County. The Mockingbird Gap site within the ACEC is listed as a New Mexico 

State Cultural Property and consists of an extensive complex of Paleoindian campsites including both 

Clovis and Folsom elements (ca. 10,000 B.C.) (BLM 1989). Paleoindian sites are rare, and this multicomponent site provides special opportunities for research in the Southwest (BLM 1989). The ACEC 

serves to protect cultural resources for future scientific investigation (BLM 1989). 

Ladron Mountain ACEC 

The Ladron Mountain ACEC, located in the north-central portion of Socorro County, New Mexico, 

includes 57,195 acres of public land; several private and State Trust land inholdings are located within the 

ACEC. The jagged peaks of the Sierra Ladron provide a prominent landmark as they rise from the Rio 

Grande Valley, from approximately 5,200 feet to an elevation of 9,176 feet. This rough topography, 

coupled with extreme vegetative diversity, makes the Sierra Ladron critical to the protection of raptor 

wintering and nesting habitat, and for dwindling mule deer populations (BLM 1989). The Ladron 

Mountain ACEC contains habitat for rare and endemic, State-listed sensitive plant species including the 

threadleaf false carrot (Aletes filifolia), planks catchfly (Silene Dlankii), and Wrights spiderlily 

(Tradescantia wriczhtii) (BLM 1989). The Ladron Mountain ACEC has served as an area for the 

successful reintroduction of Desert Bighorn Sheep, a New Mexico State endangered species. This ACEC 

serves to protect habitat for various species of wildlife and plants, as well as geologic, recreational, 
Socorro Resource Management Plan 188 Appendix K: Special Designations

paleontological, and scenic values. The Ladron Mountain ACEC overlaps with portions of the Sierra 

Ladrones WSA. 

Agua Fria ACEC 

The Agua Fria ACEC, located in Catron County west of Quemado, New Mexico, includes 9,571 acres of 

public land. State Trust land and private inholdings also are present in the ACEC. Elevation varies from 

6,400 feet to 7,600 feet, with the majority of the ACEC characterized by mesas and open grasslands 

enhanced by volcanic features and vertical cliffs (BLM 1989). The Agua Fria Canyon and associated 

rimrocks and cliffs provide habitat for a great number of raptor species including bald eagles, golden 

eagles, peregrine falcons, and prairie falcons (BLM 1989). The ACEC is a long, wide, grass-covered 

valley bottom bordered with vertical basalt and sandstone cliffs, which provide unique visual resources 

and recreation opportunities (BLM 1989). In addition to the habitat values, the ACEC contains a large 

number of archaeological sites (i.e., petroglyphs, campsites, and villages) (BLM 1989). The ACEC serves 

to protect raptor wintering and nesting habitats, recreational opportunities, and geologic and scenic 

values. The Agua Fria ACEC overlaps with portions of the Mesita Blanca WSA and Eagle Peak WSA. 

The area within this ACEC will be incorporated into other designations. 

Horse Mountain ACEC 

The Horse Mountain ACEC, which is located in Catron County, southwest of Datil, New Mexico, 

includes 7,490 acres of public land. The majority of the ACEC is characterized as an area of rugged 

canyons and rough mountainous country with elevations ranging from 7,650 feet to 9,490 feet. The 

ACEC is relatively remote and rarely grazed, resulting in good habitat conditions for a variety of wildlife 

species. This ACEC has been identified as providing potential habitat for bald eagles and peregrine 

falcons (BLM 1989). This ACEC serves to protect wildlife and wildlife habitat, as well as recreational, 

scenic, and geologic values (BLM 1989). The Horse Mountain ACEC overlaps with portions of the Horse 

Mountain WSA. The area managed as an ACEC has been reduced. 

Tinajas ACEC 

The Tinajas ACEC, located east of Socorro, New Mexico, includes 3,463 acres of public land. The ACEC 

centers on a narrow incised canyon, within which lies the Arroyo del Tajo Pictograph Site. This ACEC 

serves to protect the pictographs for public interpretation and sociocultural values (BLM 1989). The 

Tinajas ACEC overlaps with the Presilla WSA. The ACEC designation therefore has been eliminated. 

BACK COUNTRY BYWAY 

The Quebradas Back Country Byway, designated by the BLM in 1990, is located in Socorro County, New 

Mexico. The Quebradas National Back County Byway is a 24-mile drive along scenic colored cliffs, rock 

formations, and badlands with glimpses of the Rio Grande and surrounding mountains. The Byway can be 

accessed from Interstate 25 (I-25) and U.S. Highway 380 (US 380). The Byway currently is used most 

frequently for mountain biking and OHV riding. Surrounding uses include hiking, cultural resources 

viewing, livestock grazing, and wildlife management areas (e.g., wildlife refuges). The area around the 

byway will be managed as a Special Recreation Management Area (SRMA). 

NATIONAL TRAILS 

The Planning Area includes one Congressionally designated National Historic Trail and one National 

Scenic Trail (i.e., El Camino Real de Tierra Adentro National Historic Trail, and Continental Divide 

National Scenic Trail, respectively). A brief description of each follows. 
Socorro Resource Management Plan 189 Appendix K: Special Designations

El Camino Real de Tierra Adentro National Historic Trail

The El Camino Real de Tierra Adentro National Historic Trail recognizes the primary route between the 

colonial Spanish capital of Mexico City and the Spanish provincial capitals at San Juan de Los Caballeros 

(1598-1600), San Gabriel (1600-1609), and then Santa Fe (1610-1821) (BLM 2002). This historic road 

was in existence for more than 300 years and played a vital role in the settlement of the southwestern 

United States. The United States Congress and New Mexico State Legislature appropriated funds for the 

construction of an International Heritage Center to commemorate this historic road (BLM and New 

Mexico State Monuments Division 2001). This trail is shown on Map 3-11. 

Continental Divide National Scenic Trail

The Continental Divide National Scenic Trail climbs and descends the peaks of the Rocky Mountains 

from Canada to Mexico, traversing mountainside meadows, granite peaks, and high desert saddles. As the 

trail winds through New Mexico, it crosses arid desert, rugged forested mountains, canyonlands, and lava 

flows. Two segments of this trail are located within Catron County, but only one is located primarily on 

public land. These segments of the trail are shown on Map 3-11. The southernmost segment is located 

primarily within the Pelona Mountain SMA and Continental Divide WSA, which overlap substantially. 

Within the Pelona Mountain SMA, the BLM developed about 34 miles of primitive trail, between 1990 

and 1991 (Carson 2003). The area around the trail will be managed as an SMA. 

WILD AND SCENIC RIVERS 

The public land within the Planning Area does not contain any river segments listed or suitable for 

inclusion in the National Wild and Scenic River System. 

WILDERNESS 

Wilderness located within the Cibola National Forest includes the Withington and Apache Kid 

Wilderness Areas. Wilderness located within the Gila National Forest includes the Blue Range, Gila, and 

Aldo Leopold Wilderness Areas. Designated wilderness located within the Bosque del Apache National 

Wildlife Refuge includes the Indian Wells, Chupadera, and Little San Pascual Wilderness Areas. There 

are currently no designated BLM wilderness areas within the Planning Area. 

WILDERNESS STUDY AREAS 

The 13 WSAs located on public land within the Planning Area include Antelope, Continental Divide, 

Devil‘s Backbone, Devil‘s Reach, Eagle Peak, Horse Mountain, Jornada del Muerto, Mesita Blanca, 

Presilla, Sierra De Las Cañas, Sierra Ladrones, Stallion, and Veranito. These WSAs are shown on Map 3-

7, Wilderness Study Areas. When the BLM acquires lands within a WSA, that land is managed as part of 

the WSA. Six of the 13 WSAs partially overlap with other specially designated areas. 

SPECIAL MANAGEMENT AREAS 

SMAs are areas that have been identified by the BLM for the management of a specific resource or 

resources. Twenty-one SMAs are located within the Planning Area. Fifteen of these SMAs are shown in 

Chapter 3; the boundaries of six SMAs – Iron Mine Ridge, Taylor Canyon, Newton Site, Playa Pueblos, 

Mogollon Pueblo, and San Pedro – are proprietary due to the sensitivity of the resources being protected. 

A brief description of each SMA is provided below. 

San Pedro Proprietary SMA 

The San Pedro Proprietary SMA, located in Socorro County east of San Antonio, New Mexico, includes 

1,201 acres of public land. Low ridges, slopes, arroyos, and watercourses characterize the area. This SMA 

is habitat to Amsonia fugatei (BLM 1989), a species listed as a New Mexico Rare Plant by the New 
Socorro Resource Management Plan 190 Appendix K: Special Designations

Mexico Rare Plant Technical Council (2003). This species of Amsonia, native to the southwestern United 

States and northwestern Mexico, consists of a few, generally small, isolated populations (BLM 1989). 

Protection of this isolated population is important because ―no two populations are precisely alike and 

classification is a problem when comparing phenotypic variation within and between populations‖

(McLaughlin 1985, as referenced in BLM 1989). 

Soaptree SMA

The Soaptree SMA is located approximately 27 miles southeast of San Antonio, New Mexico. The SMA 

includes 1,296 acres of public land just north of the Jornada del Muerto WSA. The area was designated as 

an SMA because of the large amounts of yucca, which provide aesthetic and recreational values for 

wildlife viewing, sightseeing, and hiking (BLM 1989). 

Harvey Plot SMA

The Harvey Plot SMA is located on 8 acres of public land northeast of Bingham, New Mexico. The area 

was established as a study plot to provide information to determine the effect of rodents on native 

vegetation as well as study the ecology of range for rainfall and soil types (BLM 1989). This SMA serves 

to provide vegetative use data for future scientific use (BLM 1989). This designation has been eliminated 

because it no longer requires special management. 

Stallion SMA

The Stallion SMA, located about 8 miles east of Socorro, New Mexico, includes 19,702 acres of public 

land. Private and State Trust land inholdings occur in the SMA. The western part of the SMA 

encompasses the Sierra de las Cañas and Presilla WSAs. The SMA is varied in landscape with a rugged 

desert mountain range characterized by sheer rock escarpments, deep narrow canyons, ridges, mesa tops, 

broken badlands, rolling piñon-juniper, and grass covered hills (BLM 1989). Resources within the SMA 

include multiple vegetative communities for range and forestry, wildlife, cultural, mineral, and 

recreational resources (BLM 1989). This SMA serves to protect a critical watershed area through erosion 

control and the minimization of surface-disturbing activities. The Stallion SMA overlaps with portions of 

the Sierra de las Cañas WSA. The area managed as an SMA has been reduced. 

Puertecito SMA

The Puertecito SMA is located about 40 miles northwest of Socorro, New Mexico. The SMA includes 

7,153 acres of public land, which does not include inholdings. The central portion of the SMA consists of 

deep alluvial flats, fans, and low hills. There is a series of low basalt dikes running north to northwest 

through this lowland area, while the Rio Salado drains eastward through the southern part of the SMA 

(BLM 1989). This SMA serves to protect a critical watershed area through erosion control and the 

minimization of surface-disturbing activities. 

Fence Lake SMA

The Fence Lake SMA is located about 20 miles northwest of Quemado, New Mexico. The SMA includes 

25,453 acres of public land, which does not include the private and State Trust land inholdings present. 

There are three major landforms: the nearly level mesa tops, steep sandstone and shale escarpments and 

hills, and gently sloping alluvial fans and drainage ways. The soils and topography in the area‘s watershed 

are subject to headcutting, soil piping, and sheet erosion, resulting in numerous continuous and 

discontinuous gullies (BLM 1989). Resources found within the SMA include wildlife, range, forestry, 

cultural, and minerals (a small portion of the SMA lies within the maximum coal-potential area) (BLM 

1989). This SMA serves to protect a critical watershed area through erosion control and the minimization 

of surface-disturbing activities. This area has been incorporated into the Zuni Salt Lake ACEC. 
Socorro Resource Management Plan 191 Appendix K: Special Designations

Pelona Mountain SMA

The Pelona Mountain SMA is located about 29 miles southwest of Datil, New Mexico on 70,838 acres of 

public land. The SMA overlaps with the western portion of the Continental Divide WSA, which is 

characterized by rugged canyons and rough, hilly-to-mountainous country. The SMA has been identified 

as providing potential habitat for bald eagles, peregrine falcons, black-footed ferrets, and many other 

species of wildlife including a large number of big-game species (BLM 1989). Bat Cave, a highly 

significant archaeological site on the National Register, is located within the Pelona Mountain SMA 

(BLM 1989). The Pelona Mountain SMA serves to protect elk, deer, and raptor wintering and nesting 

habitats; geologic, scenic, and recreational values; and the Bat Cave cultural site (BLM 1989). It overlaps 

with portions of the Continental Divide WSA. The area under special management has been designated as 

an ACEC. 

Iron Mine Ridge Proprietary SMA

The Iron Mine Ridge Proprietary SMA, located northeast of Bingham, New Mexico, includes 1,386 acres 

of public land. The SMA serves to protect several species of rare and endemic plants that occur in the 

area, including Wright‘s spiderlily (Tradescantia Wrightii), desert parsley (Pseudocymooterus 

longiradiatus), threadleaf false carrot (Aletes filifolius), and other State-listed sensitive species (BLM 

1989). This designation has been dropped due to downlisting of the special status plant species. 

Taylor Canyon Proprietary SMA

The Taylor Canyon Proprietary SMA, located east of Bingham, New Mexico, includes 384 acres of 

public land. The SMA serves to protect several species of rare and endemic plants that occur in the area, 

including threadleaf horsebrush (Tetradymia filfolia), gypsum blazing star (Mentzelia perrenis), and other 

State-listed sensitive species (BLM 1989). This designation has been dropped due to downlisting of the 

special status plant species. 

Fort Craig SMA

The Fort Craig SMA, located south of San Marcial, New Mexico, occupies 149 acres of public land. Fort 

Craig was founded in 1854 as one of the first and largest military strongholds in the Territory of New 

Mexico (BLM 1989). The Fort Craig SMA serves to protect cultural resource values, public interpretation 

and recreational opportunities, and potential future scientific use (BLM 1989). 

Teypama SMA

The Teypama SMA is located on 37 acres of public land south of Socorro, New Mexico. The Teypama 

Piro pueblo ruin, which is located in the SMA, is a late-prehistoric and early-historic habitation site of the 

Piro Indians, who occupied the central Rio Grande Valley at the time of Spanish contact (BLM 1989). 

Though the SMA has experienced damage in the past from vandals, the area serves to protect cultural 

resources and opportunities for public interpretation and future scientific investigation (BLM 1989). 

The area under special management has been reduced and renamed as the Penjeacu SMA. 

Newton Site Proprietary SMA

The Newton Site Proprietary SMA is located on 37 acres of public land within Catron County. The SMA 

consists of a 150- to 200-room pueblo, a large, double-walled kiva or plaza, and associated outlying room 

blocks (BLM 1989). Though the site has been previously disturbed, the SMA serves to protect cultural 

resources and opportunities for public interpretation and future scientific investigation (BLM 1989). 

This SMA has been expanded.

Playa Pueblos Proprietary SMA

The Playa Pueblos Proprietary SMA is located on 203 acres of public land in Socorro County. The SMA 

consists of two major prehistoric pueblo ruins probably associated with the Tompiro prehistoric culture 
Socorro Resource Management Plan 192 Appendix K: Special Designations

area (BLM 1989). One of the pueblos has been vandalized in the past, but the other is virtually intact 

(BLM 1989). Though the site has been previously disturbed in the past, the SMA serves to protect 

cultural resources and opportunities for public interpretation and future scientific investigation (BLM 

1989). 

Rio Salado SMA

The Rio Salado SMA, located approximately 8 miles west of Ladron Mountain, includes 5,946 acres of 

public land. The Rio Salado SMA includes many known archaeological sites representative of 

developmental and early puebloan occupation along the middle Rio Salado drainage (BLM 1989). In 

addition to these cultural resource values, the SMA serves to protect an unusual plant community and two 

limestone cave formations (BLM 1989). The Rio Salado SMA overlaps with portions of the Sierra 

Ladrones WSA. The area within this SMA has been incorporated into another ACEC. 

Town of Riley SMA

The Town of Riley SMA is located on the Rio Salado, north of Magdalena, New Mexico. This SMA 

includes 533 acres of public land. The SMA surrounds a ghost town originally known as Santa Rita, 

which was a town settled in the 1880s by Spanish-American homesteaders from Socorro and other 

villages along the Rio Grande (BLM 1989). This SMA serves to protect historical properties important to 

the ―Followers of Santa Rita‖ (BLM 1989). This designation has been eliminated in order to evaluate 

whether there is a need for special management in this area. 

Mogollon Pueblo Proprietary SMA

The Mogollon Pueblo Proprietary SMA, located northwest of Quemado, includes 640 acres of public 

land. This SMA includes one of the southernmost Chacoa Great House communities. The site, which was 

occupied from about A.D. 1000 to A.D. 1150, includes a number of large room blocks with internal kivas, 

a great kiva, and numerous associated middens and petroglyph panels (Duff 2002). Vandals have 

damaged the site and the SMA was designated to protect the ruins and petroglyphs for scientific 

investigation and possible public interpretation in the future (BLM 1989). The area within this SMA has 

been incorporated into the Cerro Pomo ACEC. 

Zuni Salt Lake SMA

The Zuni Salt Lake SMA is located northwest of Quemado, New Mexico. The SMA includes 4,839 acres 

of public land. The SMA is a location of traditional religious significance to the Zuni Tribe and to other 

Native American groups in the Southwest (BLM 1989). The lake itself lies in a volcanic crater and 

contains highly saline water, which has been used since prehistoric times. This SMA serves to protect 

sociocultural values and cultural resources (BLM 1989). The Zuni Salt Lake SMA overlaps with portions 

of the Eagle Peak WSA. The area under special management has been expanded and designated as an 

ACEC. 

Cerro Pomo SMA

The Cerro Pomo SMA is located west of Quemado, New Mexico, entirely within the Eagle Peak WSA. 

The SMA includes 8,784 acres of public land and contains significant cultural values. Diverse wildlife, 

vegetation, and landforms occur within the SMA (BLM 1989). The SMA serves to protect cultural and 

geologic resources, while providing and improving wildlife habitat and recreational opportunities. 

The area under special management has been expanded and designated as an ACEC. 

Walnut Canyon SMA

The Walnut Canyon SMA is located about 12 miles south of Socorro, New Mexico. The SMA includes 

1,145 acres of public land, which does not include the State Trust Land inholdings present. The SMA is 

characterized by a rugged canyon and associated rough foothill country. The landscape is rugged and 
Socorro Resource Management Plan 193 Appendix K: Special Designations

exhibits the diversity of color, vegetation, relief, shape, and geology characteristic of desert foothill 

mountain communities dissected with long, deep, and wide-arroyo-type canyons (BLM 1989). The 

diverse vegetation and terrain provide habitat for a variety of big game species and other wildlife 

including golden eagles, prairie falcons, and great horned owls (BLM 1989). The SMA serves to protect 

raptor wintering and nesting habitat and geologic, recreational, and scenic values (BLM 1989). 

This designation has been eliminated since it was determined to not require special management. 

The Box SMA

The Box SMA is located about 6 miles southwest of Socorro, New Mexico, and includes 300 acres. Local 

rock climbers use the area on a regular basis, and climbers from other states and countries also often visit 

the SMA (BLM 1989). The SMA provides recreational opportunities, while serving to protect scenic 

quality in the area (BLM 1989). About 40 acres of this SMA have been withdrawn from entry for 

locatable minerals (Bell 2003). The area under special management has been expanded and designated as 

an SRMA. 

San Lorenzo Canyon SMA

The San Lorenzo Canyon SMA is located about 10 miles northwest of Socorro, New Mexico. It includes 

2,320 acres of public land. The SMA is characterized by the presence of a rugged, scenic canyon 

bordering the Sevilleta National Wildlife Refuge. Due to its proximity to Socorro, it offers excellent day 

use opportunities (BLM 1989). The SMA provides recreational opportunities, while serving to protect 

wildlife habitat, cultural resources, and scenic values (BLM 1989). This area has been incorporated into 

other designations. 

. 

Datil Well Campground SMA

BLM manages the Datil Well Campground SMA to provide camping opportunities in a roaded natural 

setting and to provide interpretative and educational opportunities. Consistent with a 1989 RMP decision, 

BLM developed the Datil Well Campground Recreation Management Plan in 1992. The management 

actions implemented in the SMA include limiting motor vehicle use to existing roads and trails, 

restricting the area from right-of-way authorizations and leases, and prohibiting surface occupancy for 

fluid mineral leasing. In addition, BLM has withdrawn 640 acres of the SMA from entry for locatable 

minerals and prohibits woodcutting in the area, fulfilling 1989 RMP decisions. This area will now be 

managed as an SRMA. 
Socorro Resource Management Plan 194 Appendix L: Wildlife and Special Status Species

APPENDIX L: WILDLIFE AND SPECIAL STATUS SPECIES 

This appendix includes supplementary information on (1) best management practices (BMPs) and 

management parameters that apply to the wildlife habitat management program, (2) Aplomado Falcon 

management guidelines, (3) additional information on federally listed special status species, (4) a table of 

Federal- and State-listed species in the Planning Area (Table L-1 on page L-12), and (5) a table of 

noxious weeds that may be found in the Planning Area (Table L-2 on page L-17). 

HABITAT ENHANCEMENT PROJECTS AND GENERAL BEST MANAGEMENT 

PRACTICES 

Habitat enhancement projects will be implemented at the landscape level. The following management 

parameters and associated BMPs will be utilized as needed to protect and enhance wildlife habitat: 

Upland habitats, including grasslands, shrub steppe, forest, and woodlands, will be managed so 

that the forage, water, cover, structure, and security necessary for wildlife are available on public 

land. Vegetative communities will be managed for the desired plant community based on the 

ecological site. Management will be accomplished by enhancing, restoring, and maintaining 

wildlife habitat by reducing the amount of woody vegetation encroachment. 

Restore, maintain, or improve riparian vegetation, habitat diversity, and associated watershed 

function to achieve healthy and productive riparian areas and wetlands. Management will be 

accomplished by enhancing, restoring, and maintaining, riparian areas which have been degraded 

through the invasion of non-native vegetation, such as Tamarisk and Russian olive. 

Manage livestock forage production to support wildlife population levels identified by the New 

Mexico Department of Game and Fish (NMDGF). 

In addition to continuing management guidance, develop and apply appropriate BMPs, fluid 

mineral stipulations, and/or mitigation measures, as determined through the environmental 

analysis process, for renewable energy development, fluid mineral development, and other 

surface-disturbing activities within the Socorro Field Office resource area for the protection of 

wildlife resources within ACECs, SMAs, and habitat management plan(HMP)/cooperative 

resource management plan management areas, and other crucial habitat areas identified through 

inventory, survey, and study. Areas may include habitat for special status species, nesting areas, 

raptor nests; prairie dog towns; and Desert Bighorn Sheep, mule deer, pronghorn antelope, and 

elk birthing areas. 

Apply seasonal use restrictions within crucial habitat areas or habitat for special status species, 

which may include high-use raptor areas, prairie dog towns, Desert Bighorn Sheep, mule deer, 

pronghorn antelope, elk birthing areas, and other crucial habitat areas identified through 

inventory, survey, and study. 

To protect Desert Bighorn Sheep, domestic sheep, and goats will be excluded within occupied 

and historic habitat areas and the delineated Desert Bighorn Sheep corridor/management area will 

be managed to enhance habitat conditions (Map L-1). 

Limit human and wildlife interactions within crucial habitat areas identified through inventory, 

survey, and study. 

The Bureau of Land Management (BLM) should take actions that further progress towards 

conditions indicating attainment of the Standards for Public Land Health and Guidelines for 

Livestock Grazing Management. Such actions will include management that restores, protects, 

and enhances the resources necessary to support, as site potential allows, native wildlife species 

and their associated habitats in their historical proportions (BLM Manual Section 6840). 
Socorro Resource Management Plan 195 Appendix L: Wildlife and Special Status Species

The following BMPs and/or management parameters will apply to the wildlife habitat management 

program in the Socorro Planning Area. 

Implement vegetative treatments to restore and enhance wildlife habitat. Treatments may include: 

o prescribed fire 

o mechanical treatment 

 hand crews with chain saws 

 heavy equipment (chaining, mowing, mulching, grubbing, etc.) 

o chemical treatments 

Maintain integrity and safety of existing habitat improvement projects. 

o perform annual or biannual inspection of all projects 

o maintain projects as needed 

Increase availability and distribution of year-round water. 

o develop springs/seeps where as necessary 

o construct artificial watering facilities where needed 

Modify fences or other man-made structures to limit impacts to wildlife. 

Construct/maintain watershed rehabilitation structures for purposes of reducing erosion. 

Continue to inventory, survey, and study wildlife populations for purposes of determining habitat 

needs and requirements or areas which require special protection and management. 

Limit adverse human/wildlife interactions. 

o limiting vehicle access into certain areas 

o road closures and obliterations implement seasonal use restrictions into areas of resource 

concern 

Construct protective exclosures/fences around riparian areas, wildlife watering facilities, and 

other areas of resource concern. 

Monitor and inventory all habitat improvement projects to ensure that project objectives are being 

met. 

o global positioning system and incorporate into geographic information system 

o monitor use and effectiveness 

Implement/authorize predator damage management activities to meet species-specific 

management goals and objectives. 

Reintroduce, supplement, or translocate native species in suitable habitat. 

Implement environmental education events to meet management goals and objectives. 

Install/maintain signage where necessary to meet management goals and objectives. 

Implement updated Utah Field Office Guidelines for Raptor Protection From Human and Land 

Disturbance (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Utah Field Office). 

Implement wildlife management BMPs that relate to wildlife management (see Appendix C).
Socorro Resource Management Plan 196 Appendix L: Wildlife and Special Status Species

Map L-1
Socorro Resource Management Plan 197 Appendix L: Wildlife and Special Status Species

NORTHERN APLOMADO FA LCON MANAGEMENT GUIDELINES 

The following requirements would apply within the historic range of the northern Aplomado Falcon, in 

addition to a 15-mile buffer area around it in areas that are determined to be potential habitat. These 

requirements apply to all surface-disturbing activities. BMPs described for special status species will also 

apply to the Northern Aplomado Falcon.

Surface Occupancy Requirements for Northern Aplomado Falcon Habitat 

Unitization

Outside of the areas that are discretionarily closed to fluid mineral leasing, potential northern Aplomado 

Falcon habitat will be open to leasing, but fluid mineral leasing stipulation S-CSU-W4 requires new 

lessees to form exploratory units and to submit a plan of development prior to commencing drilling 

activity. This special protection measure will allow the BLM to manage the surface in an orderly way, as 

well as to control the rate of reservoir development. The BLM has the authority to approve Unit 

Agreements; require specific provisions of Unit Agreements; establish the rate of exploration and 

development; approve the tract allocation formula; and terminate units that cease production (or where 

production was never established). The objective is to protect grassland habitat and associated special 

status species of wildlife through improved planning of future oil and gas development on a unit. A 

simple definition of unitization is the operation of multiple leases as a single lease under a single operator. 

A Federal Oil and Gas Unit would result in less surface disturbance. Wells would be drilled in the most 

favorable locations without regard for spacing. The operator and the BLM would establish corridors for 

access roads and pipelines, and there would be no need for redundant facilities. There are also lease 

benefits in that individual leases could be extended beyond their primary term without actual production, 

as long as there is production on the unit. The Socorro Field Office currently has one existing unit 

(Cathead Mesa Unit). 

Grazing Management Actions for the Protection of Aplomado Falcon Nests

This is not a nest site plan. A nest site plan is site specific. This is a list of potential actions that may be 

undertaken when an Aplomado nest or nest selection activities may be disturbed by livestock grazing and 

related activities. Other actions may be developed and substituted as we gain understanding of 

Aplomados and their management. 

The objective is to avoid disturbance causing the loss of an Aplomado Falcon nest. Disturbance is defined 

here as activities of people or livestock that lead to the abandonment or loss of a potential (i.e., nest 

selection in progress) or existing Aplomado Falcon nest. 

1. The BLM will prepare an annual site plan, in cooperation with the grazing allottee, U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service (USFWS), NMDGF, and other cooperators, for each aplomado nest or perhaps 

nest cluster, pasture, or allotment where nesting is discovered. 

2. Depending on the level of or potential for nest disturbance and the specific grazing allotment 

situation the following measures may be applied with respect to accomplishing the stated 

objectives with the least disturbance to both the falcons and the grazing allottee. 

a. Deactivate all livestock facilities (water troughs, supplement sites, etc.) within 2 miles of 

nest sites to divert cattle use to other areas of a pasture from March (or discovery of nest 

site) thru fledging (fledging may occur as early as May or as late as early August). 

OR

b. Herd livestock away from the nest area. All herding activities must remain at least 0.25 

mile from active nest sites. 

OR
Socorro Resource Management Plan 198 Appendix L: Wildlife and Special Status Species

c. Remove grazing from the nest pasture(s) from March (or discovery of nest site) thru 

fledging (fledging may occur as early as May or as late as early August). 

OR

d. Remove grazing from the allotment from March (or discovery of nest site) thru fledging 

(fledging may occur as early as May or as late as early August). 

OR

e. With US FWS approval, construct a temporary exclosure or drift fence to protect nest. 

Maintain a distance between 1⁄4 and 1⁄2 mile from nest. 

OR

f. With USFWS approval, the BLM may place a small cattle barrier to protect the nest 

tree/yucca (examples: powder river or hog wire panels with t posts; steel L-shaped frames 

wired together and staked to the ground; a small solar electric fence). Use of these 

measures has a high likelihood of causing serious disturbance to the nest. Measures 

would be taken to minimize the impact (minimize time to set up, minimize visual 

impacts, time during the day to prevent egg cooling, time during female feeding forays, 

etc). 

OR

g. Enactment of livestock management measures should be accomplished within 1 week or 

as soon as possible thereafter. 

3. Modify open water storages within 3 to 5 miles of occupied aplomado habitat. Ensure that there is 

some form of open water left available to birds and bats if large water sources are covered. 

a. Cover open water storage units with small mesh netting. 

b. Install floating neoprene covers on open water storages. 

c. Replace open storages with closed ones. 

4. Install and maintain bird escape ramps on all water troughs on public land. 

5. Reduce human disturbance such as construction, working cattle, road, or range improvement 

maintenance within 0.25 to 0.50 mile of a nest. 

6. Reduce threat of wildfire impacting nest structure. 

a. Because allottees are quite often important links in fire suppression and are likely to 

request help from local volunteer fire departments. The Socorro Field Office fire program 

should work closely with volunteer fire departments for quick, but appropriate, response 

to wildfire in nest areas. 

i. Avoid fire operations, including aircraft use, as much as possible in the 

immediate nest area. 

1. Keep ground operations at least 0.5 mile from nest site. 

2. Keep air operations above 2,000 feet above ground level within 0.5 mile 

of nest sites. 

b. Use fire retardant to create fire breaks and protect nest structures (yuccas) during critical 

periods. 
Socorro Resource Management Plan 199 Appendix L: Wildlife and Special Status Species

BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES FOR SPECIAL STATUS SPECIES 

Tracking the Reasonably Foreseeable Development 

The BLM will closely monitor acres disturbed to ensure the reasonably foreseeable development is an 

appropriate planning estimate. The number of acres projected to be disturbed directly from activities is 

420 acres over the next 15 years. For helium and carbon dioxide resources, the approximate number of 

acres that are projected to be disturbed from exploration and development activities is 1,000 acres. 

Preliminary Investigations 

Activities occurring during preliminary investigations may include remote sensing; mapping of rock 

outcrops and seeps (either of which result in little or no surface disturbance); and seismic, gravity, and 

magnetic surveys. 

A lease is not required to conduct such preliminary investigations. However, the geophysical operator is 

required to file a completed Form 3150-4, ―Notice of Intent to Conduct Oil and Gas Exploration 

Operations‖ for all operations on public lands. 

In general, the BLM requires an examination of resource values and development of appropriate surface 

protection and reclamation measures prior to the geophysical contractor beginning surface-disturbing 

activities associated with preliminary investigations. The BLM will solicit involvement from public land 

users (e.g., grazing allottees) to develop site-specific protection measures and reclamation specifications. 

Compliance monitoring should occur during and after seismic exploration activities when or if necessary. 

Compliance inspections during the operation ensure that requirements and guidelines are being followed. 

Compliance inspections upon completion of work ensure that the lines are clean and drill holes are 

plugged properly. 

The frequency of authorized seismic exploration will be dependent upon resource conditions and seasonal 

restrictions (timing limitations) that may be imposed to reduce conflicts with watershed conditions, 

wildlife, and hunting. Management practices specific to wildlife and vegetation resources include the 

following: 

Prior to surveying/flagging routes for geophysical surveys or other preliminary activities, the 

project area shall be surveyed for raptor nests. Surveys will be conducted by professional 

biologists approved by the Authorized Officer. The Universal Transmercator grid locations of all 

raptor nests will be reported to the Authorized Officer. All raptor nests will be avoided by the 

required distances described under the surface disturbing activities section. A raptor nest is 

defined as any raptor or corvid nest. 

In areas that constitute occupied or potential northern Aplomado Falcon habitat, a protocol survey 

for this species will be conducted along with the general raptor nest survey described above, prior 

to surveying/flagging lines. 

During operations at any time, all habitat features (pinnacles, cliffs, ledges, caves, and trees, 

shrubs, and yuccas greater than six feet in height) containing or capable of containing a raptor 

nest will be avoided by vehicular traffic or other activities likely to destroy them. 

Time activities to avoid wet periods. 

In areas that allow for off-road travel, minimize the off-road impact of large vehicles. Use wide, 

flat-tread, balloon tires (especially on seismic thumper trucks) where possible. Use all-terrain 

vehicles rather than large vehicles where possible. 

Occupied habitat for special status species will be avoided in a manner similar to surface use 

requirements (avoid occupied habitat up to 0.5 mile) unless impacts are adequately mitigated. 
Socorro Resource Management Plan 200 Appendix L: Wildlife and Special Status Species

Surface-Disturbing Activities 

In siting facilities, the following measures must be followed: 

Prior to surveying/flagging locations for pads, routes for roads, and any other preliminary activity, the 

project area will be surveyed for raptor nests. Surveys will be conducted by professional biologists 

approved by the Authorized Officer. All raptor nests will be avoided by the distances and seasonal 

periods listed below. 

Species Minimum Distance Season

Aplomado Falcon 0.5 mile January 1-July 31

Eagle 0.5 mile February 1-July 15

Ferruginous Hawk 0.5 mile February 1-July 15

Prairie Falcon 0.5 mile March 1-August 1

All other raptor species 0.5 mile during observed nest establishment 

through fledgling

Black-Tailed Prairie Dog 0.25 mile January 1-June 15

Gunnison Prairie Dog 0.25 mile February 15-June 15

Long duration land use activities will not be allowed to occur within the species-specific spatial buffer 

zone of active nests or occupied prairie dog towns listed above. Short duration activities will be avoided 

within the species-specific spatial buffer zones during the dates listed above. Short duration activities will 

be limited to the spatial buffer zone outside of the boundary of the occupied prairie dog town and will not 

occur within the occupied town. All other raptor species nests will be avoided by the spatial buffer zone 

only during the period listed above, regardless of the duration of the activity. Before land use activities 

can commence a raptor and prairie dog survey must be completed. 

A short duration activity is defined as an activity that would begin outside of a given breeding season and 

end prior to initiation of a given breeding season. A long duration activity is defined as an activity which 

would continue into or beyond a given nesting/breeding season. An active nest is defined as any nest that 

has been occupied in the last seven years. A nest will be determined active or inactive by the Authorized 

Officer. Surveys will be conducted by professional biologists approved by the Authorized Officer. 

In areas that constitute occupied or potential northern Aplomado Falcon habitat, a protocol survey 

for this species will be conducted along with the above general raptor nest survey prior to 

surveying/flagging locations. 

During operations at any time, all habitat features (pinnacles, cliffs, ledges, caves, and trees, 

shrubs, and yuccas greater than six feet in height) containing or capable of containing a raptor 

nest will be avoided by vehicular traffic or other activities likely to destroy them. 

In areas that allow for off-road travel, minimize the off-road impact of large vehicles. Use wide, 

flat-tread, balloon tires (especially on seismic thumper trucks) where possible. Use all-terrain 

vehicles rather than large vehicles where possible. 

Tree and vegetation clearing will be limited to the minimum area required. 

Construction activities will be timed to avoid wet periods. 

Power lines will be constructed to standards outlined in the most recent version of ―Suggested 

Practices for Raptor Protection on Power Lines‖ published by the Edison Electric Institute/Raptor 

Research Foundation, unless otherwise agreed to by the Authorized Officer. The holder is 

responsible for demonstrating that power pole designs not meeting these standards are raptor safe. 
Socorro Resource Management Plan 201 Appendix L: Wildlife and Special Status Species

Such proof will be provided by a raptor expert approved by the Authorized Officer. The BLM 

reserves the right to require modifications or additions to power line structures constructed under 

this authorization, should they be necessary to ensure the safety of large perching birds. The 

modifications and/or additions will be made by the holder without liability or expense to the 

United States. 

Occupied habitat for special status species will be avoided in a manner similar to surface use 

requirements (avoid occupied habitat up to 0.5 mile) unless impacts adequately mitigated. 

All equipment installed on Federal leases will be constructed to prevent birds and bats from 

entering them and, to the extent practical, to discourage perching and nesting. 

Open top tanks, reserve pits, disposal pits, or other open pits will be required to be equipped to 

deter entry by birds, bats, or other wildlife. 

In areas that allow for off-road travel, minimize the off-road impact of large vehicles. Use wide, 

flat-tread, balloon tires (especially on seismic thumper trucks) where possible. Use all-terrain 

vehicles rather than large vehicles where possible. 

Time activities to avoid wet periods. 

FEDERALLY LISTED SPECIAL STATUS SPECIES 

Table L-1 includes Federal- and State-listed species in the Planning Area. Federally listed special status 

species are discussed below. 

Alamosa (springsnail) tryonia (Tryonia alamosae) 

Status: Federally listed as Endangered, State listed as Threatened Habitat: Alamosa spring snail 

is an aquatic species that occurs in low-velocity water near thermal spring sources. 

Bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) 

Status: Federally listed as Threatened, State listed as Threatened Habitat: Occurs in New Mexico 

mainly as a migrant and winter resident. Primarily occurs in riparian areas adjacent to major 

rivers, reservoirs, and ponds. Roosts in large trees that may be close to foraging areas. Other 

potential foraging habitats include grass flats, rolling uplands, and creosote rolling uplands. 

Black-footed ferret (Mustela nigripes) 

Status: Federally listed as Endangered, State Species of Concern Habitat: Black-footed ferret 

occur in mixed shrub habitats. They are associated closely with prairie dog colonies, whose 

burrows provide retreats for ferrets. The dependency of the black-footed ferret on this prey 

species is such that reduction in the number of ferrets is directly related to reduction in prairie dog 

densities. 

Chiricahua leopard frog 

(Rana chiricahuensis) Status: Federally listed as Threatened, State Species of Concern Habitat: 

Occurs in cienegas (wetland communities surrounded by arid lands), pools, livestock tanks, lakes, 

reservoirs, streams, and rivers from 3,200 to 8,900 feet in central and southwestern New Mexico. 

Gila chub (Gila intermedia) 

Status: Federally Proposed Endangered, State listed as Endangered Habitat: Gila River basin. 
Socorro Resource Management Plan 202 Appendix L: Wildlife and Special Status Species

Gila trout (Oncorhynchus gilae) 

Status: Federally listed as Endangered, State listed as Threatened Habitat: Gila trout inhabits 

small, cool, clear mountain streams with riparian vegetation that provides a fairly complete 

canopy. 

Least tern (Sterna antillarum) 

Status: Federally listed as Endangered, State listed as Endangered Habitat: Least tern nest on the 

ground, typically on sites that are sandy and relatively free of vegetation. Such areas include 

sandbars in river floodplains. In New Mexico and other parts of the southern Great Plains, alkali 

flats also are potential nesting areas. 

Loach Minnow (Tiaroga cobitis) 

Status: Federally listed as Threatened, State listed as Threatened Habitat: The loach minnow 

inhabits riffle areas with moderate-to-rapid water velocities and moderate-to-high gradients. 

Mexican gray wolf (Canis lupus baileyi) 

Status: Federally listed as Endangered, State listed as Endangered Habitat: Wolves were once 

found in shortgrass plains, sacaton grassland, sycamore, cottonwood, rabbitbrush, chapparal, and 

oak savanna. 

Mexican spotted owl (Strix occidentalis lucida) 

Status: Federally listed as Threatened, State Species of Concern Habitat: Habitat characteristics 

highly sought by Mexican spotted owls include coniferous forests with high canopy closure, high 

stand density, a multi-layered canopy, uneven-aged stands, numerous snags, and high amounts of 

downed woody matter.

Northern Aplomado Falcon (Falco femoralis septentrionalis) 

Status: Federally listed as Endangered, State listed as Endangered Habitat: Habitat consists of 

grassy plains interspersed with mesquite, cactus, and yucca.

Pecos sunflower (Helianthus paradoxus) 

Status: Federally threatened, State listed as Endangered Habitat: A wetland species that grows on 

wet, alkaline soils at spring seeps, wet meadows, stream courses, and pond margins. 

Piping plover (Charadrius mebdus) 

Status: Federally listed as Threatened, State listed as Endangered Habitat: Piping plover occur on 

sandflats or along bare shorelines of rivers and lakes. 

Rio Grande Silvery Minnow (Hybognathus amarus) 

Status: Federally listed as Endangered, State listed as Endangered Habitat: Rio Grande silvery 

minnow occupy a variety of habitats in low-gradient, large streams with shifting sand or silty 

bottoms. 

Socorro isopod (Thermosphaeroma thermophilus) 

Status: Federally listed as Endangered, State listed as Endangered Habitat: This species exists in 

extremely limited habitat – thermal spring waters with temperatures ranging from 25 to 33 

degrees celcius. 
Socorro Resource Management Plan 203 Appendix L: Wildlife and Special Status Species

Socorro (springsnail) pyrg (Pyrgulopsis neomexicana) 

Status: Federally listed as Endangered, State listed as Endangered Habitat: The Socorro pyrg is 

an aquatic, gilled invertebrate found in springs and brooks, living among aquatic plants, on 

stones, or in the uppermost layer of an organic muck substratum. 

Southwestern willow flycatcher (Empidonax traillii extimus) 

Status: Federally listed as Endangered, State listed as Endangered Habitat: Breeding sites are 

associated closely with dense groves of willows, tamarisk, Russian olive, and other riparian 

woodland vegetation; often associated with a scattered overstory of cottonwood. 

Spikedace (Meda fulgidae) 

Status: Federally listed as Threatened, State listed as Threatened Habitat: The preferred habitat of 

spikedace varies with season and age class. Young fish typically occupy stream-margin habitats, 

where the water velocity is low and the depth is less than 3 inches. Adults are most commonly 

found in main channel areas, where water velocity is higher and with depths of 3 to 8 inches. In 

winter months, the species tends to congregate along cobble-bottomed stream margins where 

such habitats are available. 

Zuni fleabane (Erigeron rhizomatus) 

Status: Federally listed as Threatened, State listed as Endangered Habitat: Nearly barren detrital 

clay hillsides with soils derived from shales of the Chinle or Baca formations (often seleniferous); 

most often on north- or east-facing slopes in open piñon-juniper woodlands at 7,300 to 8,000 feet. 

Table L-1: Federal And State-Listed Species In Planning Area 

Common Name Scientific Name Federal 

Status

State 

Status BLM County

Plants

Abajo penstemon Penstemon lentus Sensitive Catron

Arizona sunflower Helianthus arizonensis Sensitive Sensitive Catron

Cory‘s joint-fir Ephedra coryi Sensitive Sensitive Socorro

Davidson's cliff carrot Pteryxia davidsonii Sensitive Sensitive Catron

Fugate's amsonia Amsonia fugatei Sensitive Sensitive Sensitive Socorro

Gila groundsel Packera quaerens Sensitive Sensitive Catron

Gila thistle Cirsium gilense Sensitive Sensitive Catron

Gooding's bladderpod Lesqerella gooddingii Sensitive Sensitive Catron

Heartleaf groundsel Packera cardamine Sensitive Sensitive Catron

Hess' fleabane Erigeron hesssii Sensitive E Sensitive Catron

Laguna fame flower Talinum brachypodium Sensitive Sensitive Socorro

La Jolla prairie clover Dalea scariosa Sensitive Sensitive Sensitive Socorro

Mogollon clover Trifolium longipes ssp. 

neurophyllum

Sensitive Sensitive Catron

Mogollon death camas Anticlea mogollonensis Sensitive Sensitive Catron

Mogollon dock Rumex tomentellus Sensitive Sensitive Catron

Mogollon hawkweed Hieracium fendleri var. mogollense Sensitive Sensitive Catron

Mogollon whitlow grass Draba mogollonica Sensitive Sensitive Catron, 

Socorro

Mohave panicum Panicum mohavense Sensitive Sensitive Sensitive Socorro

Mount Graham beardtongue Penstemon deaveri Sensitive Sensitive Catron, 

Socorro

New Mexico beardtongue Penstemon neomexicanus D Catron
Socorro Resource Management Plan 204 Appendix L: Wildlife and Special Status Species

Common Name Scientific Name Federal 

Status

State 

Status BLM County

Nutrioso milk-vetch Astragalus nutriosensis Sensitive Sensitive Catron

Organ Mountains giant 

hyssop

Agastache pringlei var. verticillata Sensitive Rare Catron

Organ Mountains paintbrush Castelleja organorum Rare Sensitive Catron, 

Socorro

Parish's alkali grass Puccinellia parishii Sensitive E Sensitive Catron

Pecos sunflower Helianthus paradoxus T E Sensitive Socorro

Plank's campion Silene plankii Sensitive Sensitive Sensitive Socorro

Porter's globe mallow Sphaeralcea procera Rare Sensitive Socorro

Rock fleabane Erigeron scopulinus Sensitive Sensitive Sensitive Catron, 

Socorro

Sacramento groundsel Senecio sacramentanus Rare Catron

San Andres rock daisy Perityle staurophylla var. 

homoflora

Sensitive Sensitive Socorro

San Mateo penstemon Penstemon pseudoparvus Sensitive Sensitive Socorro

Sand pricklypear Opuntia arenaria Sensitive E Sensitive Socorro

Southwest Solomon's seal Polygonatum cobrense Sensitive Catron

Standley's whitlow grass Draba standleyi Sensitive Sensitive Sensitive Socorro

Tall bitterweed Hymenoxys brachyactis Sensitive Sensitive Socorro

Wooton's alumroot Heuchera wootonii Sensitive Sensitive Catron

Wooton‘s hawthorn Crataegus wootoniana Sensitive Sensitive Catron

Wright's campion Silene wrightii Sensitive Sensitive Sensitive Catron, 

Socorro

Wright's globe mallow Sphaeralcea wrightii Sensitive Sensitive Socorro

Wright‘s marsh thistle Cirsium wrightii Sensitive Sensitive Sensitive Socorro

Zuni fleabane Erigeron rhizomatus T E Sensitive Catron

Zuni milk-vetch Astragalusmissouriensis var. 

accumbens

Sensitive Sensitive Sensitive Catron

WILDLIFE

Amphibians

Arizona toad Bufo microscaphus microscaphus Sensitive Sensitive Catron, 

Socorro

Chiricahua leopard frog Rana chiricahuensis C Sensitive Catron, 

Socorro

Lowland leopard frog Rana yavapaiensis Sensitive Catron

Birds

American peregrine falcon Falco peregrinus anatum T Catron, 

Socorro

Northern Aplomado Falcon Falco femoralis septentrionalis E E Socorro

Baird's sparrow Ammodramus bairdii T Sensitive Catron, 

Socorro

Bald eagle Haleaeetus leucocephalus T T Catron, 

Socorro

Bell's vireo Vireo bellii T Catron, 

Socorro

Black tern Chlidonias niger surinamensis Sensitive Socorro

Brown pelican Pelecanus occidentalis carolinensis

E

Catron

Burrowing owl Athene cunicularia hyugaea Sensitive Catron, 

Socorro
Socorro Resource Management Plan 205 Appendix L: Wildlife and Special Status Species

Common Name Scientific Name Federal 

Status

State 

Status BLM County

Common black hawk Buteogallus anthracinus 

anthracinus

T Catron, 

Socorro

Common ground dove Columbina passerina pallescens E Socorro

Ferruginous hawk Buteo regalis Sensitive Catron, 

Socorro

Gila woodpecker Melanerpes uropygialis T Catron

Gray vireo Vireo vicinior T Catron, 

Socorro

Interior least tern Sterna antillarum E E Catron, 

Socorro

Loggerhead shrike Lanius ludovicianus Sensitive Catron, 

Socorro

Mexican spotted owl Strix occidentalis lucida T Sensitive Catron, 

Socorro

Mountain plover Charadrius montanus

Sensitive

Catron, 

Socorro

Neotropic cormorant Phalacrocorax brasilianus T Socorro

Northern goshawk Accipiter gentilis Sensitive Sensitive Catron, 

Socorro

Piping plover Charadrius melodus T E Socorro

Southwestern willow 

flycatcher

Empidonax traillii extimus E E Catron, 

Socorro

Varied bunting Passerina versicolor T Catron

Violet-crowned

hummingbird

Amazilia violiceps ellioti T Socorro

White-faced ibis Plegadis chihi Sensitive Socorro

Whooping crane Grus americana E Socorro

Yellow-billed cuckoo Coccyzus americanus C Catron, 

Socorro

Fish

Chihuahua catfish Ictalurus sp. Sensitive Catron

Desert sucker Catostomus clarki Sensitive Sensitive Catron

Flathead chub Platygobio gracilis Sensitive Socorro

Gila chub Gila intermedia E Sensitive Catron

Gila trout Onchorhynchus gilae E T Catron

Loach minnow Tiaroga cobitis T T Catron

Longfin dace Agosia chyrsogaster Sensitive Catron

Rio Grande chub Gila pandora Sensitive Socorro

Rio Grande shiner Notropis jemezanus Sensitive Sensitive Socorro

Rio Grande silvery minnow Hybognathus amarus E E

Socorro

Roundtail chub Gila robusta

E

Sensitive Catron

Sonora sucker Catostomus insignus

Sensitive

Sensitive Catron

Speckled dace Rhinichthys osculus Sensitive Catron

Spikedace Meda fulgida T T Catron

Mammals

Arizona montane vole Microtus montanus arizonensis E Catron

Allen's big-eared bat Idionycteris phyllotis Sensitive Sensitive Catron, 

Socorro
Socorro Resource Management Plan 206 Appendix L: Wildlife and Special Status Species

Common Name Scientific Name Federal 

Status

State 

Status BLM County

Black-footed ferret Mustela nigripes E Sensitive Catron, 

Socorro

Cave myotis Myotis velifer Sensitive Sensitive Catron, 

Socorro

Common hog-nosed skunk Conepatus leuconotus Sensitive Catron, 

Socorro

Desert Bighorn Sheep Ovis canadensis mexicana E Socorro

Eastern red bat Lasiurus borealis Sensitive Catron

Big free-tailed bat Nyctinomops macrotis Sensitive Sensitive Catron, 

Socorro

Fringed myotis Myotis thysanodes thysanodes Sensitive Sensitive Catron, 

Socorro

Gunnison's prairie dog Cynomys gunnisoni Sensitive Catron, 

Socorro

Desert pocket gopher Geomys bursarius arenarius Sensitive

Hooded skunk Mephitis macroura milleri Sensitive Catron

New Mexico jumping 

mouse

Zapus hudsonius luteus T Sensitive Socorro

Little brown bat Myotis lucifigus occultus Sensitive Sensitive Catron, 

Socorro

Long-eared myotis Mytois evotis evotis Sensitive Sensitive Catron, 

Socorro

Long-legged myotis Myotis volans interior Sensitive Sensitive Catron, 

Socorro

Mexican gray wolf Canis lupus baileyi E E Catron

Organ Mountains Colorado 

chipmunk

Tamias quadrivattatus australis T Sensitive Socorro

Oscura Mountain's Colorado 

chipmunk

Tamias quadrivattatus oscuraensis T Sensitive Socorro

Townsend's big-eared bat Plecotus townsendii pallescens Sensitive Catron, 

Socorro

Pecos River muskrat Ondatra zibethicus ripensis Sensitive Sensitive Socorro

Red fox Vulpes vulpes Sensitive Catron, 

Socorro

Ringtail Bassariscus astutus Sensitive Catron, 

Socorro

Small-footed myotis Myotis ciliolabrum melanorhinus Sensitive Sensitive Catron, 

Socorro

Spotted bat Euderma maculatum T Sensitive Catron, 

Socorro

Western red bat Lasiurus blossevillii Sensitive Catron

Western spotted skunk Spilogale gracilis Sensitive Catron, 

Socorro

White-nosed coati Nasua narica Sensitive Catron

Yuma myotis Mytois yumanensis Sensitive Sensitive Catron, 

Socorro

Reptiles

Narrowhead garter snake Thamnophis rufipunctatus 

rufipunctatus

T Sensitive Catron

Texas horned lizard Phrynosoma cornutum Sensitive Socorro
Socorro Resource Management Plan 207 Appendix L: Wildlife and Special Status Species

Common Name Scientific Name Federal 

Status

State 

Status BLM County

Big Bend slider Trachemys gaigeae Sensitive Socorro

Invertebrates

Alamosa springsnail Tryonia alamosae E T Socorro

Chupadera springsnail Pyrgulopsis chupaderae C E Socorro

Gila springsnail Pyrgulopsis gilae C T Catron

NM hot springsnail Pyrgulopsis thermalis C T Catron

Ovate vertigo snail Vertigo ovata T Socorro

Socorro isopod Thermosphaeroma thermophilus E E Socorro

Socorro mountainsnail Oreohelix neomexicana Sensitive Socorro

Socorro springsnail Pyrgulopsis neomexicana E E Socorro

SOURCE: Federal and State listed species: New Mexico Department of Game and Fish 2005 (BISON-M database); 

NOTES: C = Candidate D = Delisted E = Endangered T = Threatened 

NOXIOUS WEEDS 

Table L-2 includes noxious weeds that may occur in the Planning Area. This list is specific to Socorro 

County; to date, only salt cedar and Russian olive have been found on BLM-managed public land within 

Catron County. 

Table L-2: Noxious Weeds Potentially Occurring In Planning Area 

Class “A” Weeds: Non-native species with a limited distribution in the County. High priority preventing new 

infestations and eliminating existing infestations.

African Rue* Peganum harmala

Alfombrilla Drymaria arenarioides

Black henbane Hyoscyamus niger

Bull thistle* Cirsium vulgare

Camelthorn* Alhagi pseudalhagi

Canada thistle Cirsium arvense

Cheatgrass Bromus tectorum L.

Dalmation toadflax Linaria genisitifolia ssp dalmatica

Diffuse knapweed Centaurea diffusa

Dyer‘s woad Isatis tinctoria

Eurasian watermilfoil Myriophyllum spicatum

Giant salvinia Salvinia molesta

Halogeton Halogeton glomeratus

Hoary cress* Cardaria draba

Hydrilla Hydrilla verticillata

Jointed goatgrass Aegilops cylindrical

Leafy spurge Euphorbia esula

Malta starthistle* Centaurea melitensis

Musk thistle Carduus nutans

Onionweed Asphodelus fistulosus

Poison hemlock Conium maculatum L.

Purple loosestrife Lythrum salicaria

Purple starthistle Centaurea calcitrapa

Scotch thistle Onopordum acanthium

Spotted knapweed Centaurea maculosa

Teasel Dipsacus fullonum

Yellow starthistle Centaurea solstitialis

Yellow toadflax* Linaria vulgaris
Socorro Resource Management Plan 208 Appendix L: Wildlife and Special Status Species

Class “B: Weeds: Non-native species that are presently limited to portions of the County. Designated for control in 

areas where they are not yet widespread. 

Parrot feather* Myriophyllum aquaticum

Perennial pepperweed* Lepidium latifolium

Russian knapweed* Acroptilon repens

Siberian Elm* Ulmus pumila

Tree of Heaven* Ailanthus altissima

Class “C” Weeds: Non-native species widespread in the County and State. Long-term programs are necessary to 

manage these species. 

Field bindweed* Convolvulus arvensis L.

Russian olive* Elaeagnus angustifolia L.

Salt cedar* Tamarix sp.

* Indicates infestations currently found and mapped in Socorro County. 
Socorro Resource Management Plan 209 Appendix M: Paleontological Resources Management

APPENDIX M: PALEONTOLOGICAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT 

BLM manuals H-8270-1, General Procedural Guidance for Paleontological Resource Management, and 

H-1601-1, the Land Use Planning Handbook, provide management guidance for paleontological 

resources within the Planning Area. To protect vertebrate localities and noteworthy invertebrate or plant 

localities, the BLM has developed a geographic information system (GIS) tool to classify the Planning 

Area based on the probability to discover important fossils in a particular area. Management prescriptions 

for specific sensitivity level areas provide procedures for BLM specialists and proponents of actions to 

follow while conducting site-specific analysis for future proposals within the Planning Area. 

The Socorro Field Office manages paleontological resources based on the GIS database maps, other 

ongoing inventories and databases of fossil resources in New Mexico, and in some instances, on a caseby-case basis. Protection of such resources, where appropriate, will be accomplished to facilitate suitable 

scientific, educational, and recreational uses of fossils; foster public awareness and appreciation for the 

area‘s paleontological heritage; and manage paleontological values to protect and preserve specimens that 

are present in the Planning Area. 

MANAGEMENT PRESCRIPTIONS BY CLASS 

Class 1: No concern related to paleontological resources unless other site specific surveys 

note fossil resources in the project area. 

Class 2: No concern related to paleontological resources unless other site-specific surveys 

note fossil resources in the project area. 

Class 3: Concern related to paleontological resources must be evaluated on a case-by-case 

project basis. Existing data available through the New Mexico Museum of 

Natural History and Science and the BLM offices will be used to identify 

possible resources in the area. GIS tools will be used to screen for appropriate 

actions. Assessments and additional mitigation could be done on a case-by-case 

basis. 

Class 4: Concern related to paleontological resources is high and active management 

prescribed. Proposed ground-disturbing activities require assessment to 

determine whether significant paleontological resources occur in the area of a 

proposed action. Notification of requirements will be made to proponents prior to 

commitment of the resources (for example: leasing, land disposals, surface 

mines, pipelines, large scale construction projects). Use existing data, GIS 

screening tools, and site-specific inventories in the assessment. Based on the 

specific assessment, develop additional management actions, including 

mitigation for identified paleontological resources. 

Class 5: Concern related to Class 5 lands is towards identification and protection of 

paleontological resources. Identify Class 5 lands through existing and ongoing 

inventories, known localities, and ongoing refinement of the paleontological GIS 

layer for the Planning Area. 

Currently there are no mapped Class 5 fossils; however, there may be local occurrences of Class 4 or 5 

fossils determined from database searches of existing and ongoing inventories, and on a case-by-case 

basis. 
Socorro Resource Management Plan 210 Appendix M: Paleontological Resources Management

PRESENCE OF RESOURCES 

Rock units representing more than 1.5 billion years of geologic time are present in the Socorro Field 

Office. Many of these units contain paleontological resources and specifically important vertebrate, 

noteworthy invertebrate, and plant fossils. The potential for a given geologic unit to contain 

paleontological resources varies by geologic time and the environment represented by specific rock units. 

As the potential for paleontological resources increases, the need for mitigating surface-disturbing 

activities also increases. 

The BLM has classified geologic formations in the Socorro Field Office according to the Probable Fossil 

Yield Classification. The planning tool provides for the development of sensitivity levels based on 

specific geologic units, usually at the formation level and are classified according to the probability of 

yielding paleontological resources. Probable Fossil Yield Classification is based on probabilities, not 

certainties or special circumstances. There will be exceptions to each criterion used as the basis for 

classification and should be handled as unique situations. Mitigation for these situations are handled on a 

case-by-case basis, as needed. Mitigation requirements may include: (1) additional database searches for 

site specific paleontological resources, (2) site specific on-the-ground surveys prior to surface disturbance 

or construction activities, (3) trained field monitors present during construction or ground disturbing 

activities, (4) recovery, evaluation and curation of the fossil, or (5) avoidance of the site because of the 

extent and significance of the fossil discovery. The classifications with descriptions follow. 

Class Description Basis Comments

1 Igneous and metamorphic (tuffs 

are excluded from this category) 

geologic units or units 

representing heavily disturbed 

preservational environments that 

are not likely to contain 

recognizable fossil remains. 

Fossils of any kind are not 

known to occur except in the 

rarest of circumstances

Igneous or metamorphic 

origin

Landslides deposits 

The land manager‘s concern for 

paleontological resources on 

Class 1 acres is negligible. 

Ground-disturbing activities will

not require mitigation except in 

rare circumstances. 

2 Sedimentary geologic units that 

are not likely to contain 

vertebrate fossils or scientifically 

significant non-vertebrate fossils. 

Vertebrate fossils known to 

occur very rarely or not at all

Age greater than Devonian 

Age younger than 10,000 

years

Deep marine origin

Aeolian origin

Diagenetic alteration

The land manager‘s concern for 

paleontological resources on 

Class 2 acres is low. Grounddisturbing activities are not 

likely to require mitigation.

3 Fossiliferous sedimentary 

geologic units where fossil 

content varies in significance, 

abundance, and predictable 

occurrence. Also sedimentary 

units of unknown fossil potential.

Units with sporadic known 

occurrences of vertebrate 

fossils

Vertebrate fossils and 

significant nonvertebrate 

fossil known to occur 

inconsistently: predictability 

known to be low

Poorly studied/or poorly 

documented

The land manager‘s concern for 

paleontological resources on 

Class 3 acres may extend across 

the entire range of management. 

Ground-disturbing activities 

need to be evaluated on a caseby-case basis for the need to 

mitigate. 
Socorro Resource Management Plan 211 Appendix M: Paleontological Resources Management

Class Description Basis Comments

4 Geologic units that are highly 

fossilferous and have produced 

significant vertebrate fossils

and/or significant invertebrates.

Significant soil/vegetation 

cover; outcrop not likely to be 

impacted

Other characteristics that 

lower the vulnerability of 

both known and unidentified 

fossil sites 

The land manager‘s concern for 

paleontological resources on 

Class 4 acres is toward 

management and away from 

unregulated access. Proposed 

ground-disturbing activities will

require assessment to determine 

whether significant 

paleontological resources occur 

in the area of a proposed action 

and whether the action will 

impact the paleontological 

resources. Mitigation beyond 

initial findings will range from 

no further mitigation necessary 

to full and continuous 

monitoring of significant 

localities during the action. 

5 Highly fossilferous geologic units 

that regularly and predictably 

produce vertebrate fossils and/or 

scientifically significant 

nonvertebrate fossils and that are 

at risk of natural degradation 

and/or human-caused impacts. 

Vertebrate fossils and/or 

scientifically significant 

nonvertebrate fossils are 

known and documented to 

occur consistently, 

predictably, and/or 

abundantly

Unit is exposed: little or no 

soil/vegetative cover

Outcrop areas are extensive, 

outcrop erodes readily, may 

form badlands

Easy access to extensive 

outcrop in remote areas

Other characteristics that 

increase the sensitivity of 

both known and unidentified 

fossil sites

The land manager‘s highest 

concern for paleontological 

resources should focus on Class 

5 acres. Mitigation of grounddisturbing activities is required 

and may be intense. Areas of 

special interest and concern 

should be designated and 

intensely managed. 

SOURCE: Originally developed by the Paleontology Center of Excellence and the Region 2 (U.S. Forest Service) Paleo 

Initiative, 1996. Some modification by Dale Hansen, Regional Paleontologist, Wyoming, 2002 and Patricia M. Hester, Regional 

Paleontologist, New Mexico, 2004. 
Socorro Resource Management Plan 212 Appendix N: Old Growth Forest Definitions

APPENDIX N: OLD GROWTH FOREST DEFINITIONS 

OVERVIEW 

The Bureau of Land Management (BLM) National Science and Technology Center staff was asked to 

develop an information base of old-growth forest descriptions that could contribute to the use of the 

Healthy Forests Restoration Act (HFRA) authorities, and which might be used in BLM land use plans. 

Section 102(e)(2) of the HFRA provides that covered projects using HFRA authority are to ―fully 

maintain, or contribute toward the restoration of, the structure and composition of old-growth stands 

according to the pre-fire suppression of old-growth conditions characteristic of the forest type, taking into 

account the contribution of the stand to landscape fire adaptation and watershed health, and retaining the 

large trees contributing to old-growth structure.‖ The Healthy Forests Initiative and Healthy Forests 

Restoration Act Interim Field Guide address the old-growth and large tree retention requirements on 

pages 25 through 29. 

The library staff at the National Science and Technology Center conducted an exhaustive literature search 

for old-growth descriptions. Although scientific literature citations related to old-growth forests are 

numerous, few publications or published articles contain more than generic definitions of old growth. A 

review of the definitions suggests that old-growth forest is typically distinguished by the following: 

Large size trees of specific species 

Wide variation in age classes and stocking levels 

Accumulations of large-size dead standing and fallen trees 

Decadence in the form of broken or deformed tops and boles 

Multiple canopy layers 

Canopy interspaces and under story patchiness 

In the early 1990s, each region of the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) U.S. Forest Service 

(Forest Service) developed descriptions of old growth for Society of American Foresters (SAF) forest 

cover types found in the region. The Forest Service‘s national standard for the descriptions contains five 

structural attributes for consideration in developing minimum criteria for old-growth determination: live 

trees in the main canopy, variation in tree diameters, dead trees, tree decadence, and number of tree 

canopies. Descriptions did not have to include all five attributes. The descriptions could include additional 

region-specific attributes if they were considered important in determining old-growth stands. 

Copies of the Forest Service‘s descriptions were obtained by the BLM library. They were reviewed for 

applicability to BLM-managed forests and to the HFRA requirement for ―pre-fire suppression old-growth 

conditions.‖ A list of forest cover types for BLM-managed lands was obtained from the Forest Service‘s 

Forest Inventory and Analysis (FIA) database with assistance from FIA staff at the Rocky Mountain and 

Pacific Northwest Research Stations. The FIA and SAF cover types do not correlate one-to-one in all 

cases; FIA lists more cover types for the western United States than does the SAF. However, in most 

cases the relationship between the SAF and FIA cover types was fairly straightforward. 

Table L-1 (at the end of Appendix L) shows old-growth descriptions available by the Forest Service 

Region and SAF Forest Cover Type. It identifies their applicability to the BLM by listing the states or 

portions of a state encompassed within Forest Service regional boundaries. The ―Meets HFRA 

Requirement‖ column identifies which descriptions likely meet the needs of the BLM with respect to the 

HFRA requirement for a pre-fire suppression condition. 
Socorro Resource Management Plan 213 Appendix N: Old Growth Forest Definitions

Most forest types on BLM-managed lands are included in the Forest Service‘s old-growth descriptions. 

One should not take the information in the table at total face value; some generalizations had to be made. 

The Forest Service Region 1 descriptions are not for cover types defined by the SAF; they are regionspecific cover types. Those descriptions were correlated to the most similar SAF cover type for use in the 

table. 

Some forest cover types occur on BLM-managed lands that are not present, or are of minor occurrence, 

on National Forests. Consequently, old-growth descriptions for the several piñon, juniper, and oak cover 

types found on BLM-managed lands are not in the Forest Service‘s descriptions. The FIA also includes a 

mesquite cover type in Arizona; an old-growth description for mesquite is not available. A description for 

old-growth western juniper, as noted in the references, was found in a separate published work from 

Forest Service Region 6 (Waichler et al. 2001) 

Although old-growth descriptions for most BLM cover types are included in the Forest Service work, 

there are some limitations with the descriptions themselves. Most of the descriptions do not explicitly 

describe ―pre-settlement‖ old-growth conditions as per the HFRA requirement. Some descriptions do 

meet the requirement in that they address conditions (such as stocking, age, etc.) as would be found in a 

pre-settlement old-growth forest. For example, the Region 3 southwestern Ponderosa Pine description 

discusses the role of fire in old-growth development. Therefore, one can conclude that the description fits 

conditions before the influence of settlement and fire suppression. 

Each description was judged on its ability to meet the HFRA requirement for a pre-settlement or pre-fire 

suppression condition. In the case of dry forest types, to be HFRA applicable, a description had to include 

a discussion of the effects of fire and the fire return interval in creating old-growth stands. At higher 

elevations with more wet forest types, fire is generally a stand-replacing event which reverts the stand to 

an earlier seral stage or even causes a forest type conversion. All descriptions for high elevation forest 

types are believed to meet HFRA requirements. 

When in doubt about the role of fire, or where the description is vague about the influence of fire 

suppression, descriptions are believed to not meet HFRA requirements. The Region 5 and Region 6 

descriptions clearly identify conditions existing today that they consider old-growth. Their old-growth 

descriptions identify ―average‖ characteristics of ecologically old stands, or stands beyond maturity in a 

timber management context. The descriptions include the effects of modern human influences on the 

forest. They do not describe a pre-settlement condition. 

Because of missing descriptions or descriptions not meeting the HFRA requirement, additional 

descriptions may need to be developed for some BLM cover types. Also, this section does not intend to 

imply that the references descriptions should be used as written – adjustments may be required to fit the 

BLM‘s needs. 

Much of this information cited in this section was developed before the advent of easily transferable 

documents and consequently is only partially available electronically. In some Forest Service Regions the 

information is posted on a website. In other instances, the information is available only in hard copy from 

Regional Offices. Copies of all documents are available from the BLM library but may have to be sent as 

a hard copy. 

ATTRIBUTES AND CLASS IFICATION 

Old growth definition structural attributes were developed for the five primary forest cover types in the 

Southwest (U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Southwestern Region 1992). The attributes 

shown in Table L-2 (at the end of Appendix L) for each of the forest cover types are to be used to 
Socorro Resource Management Plan 214 Appendix N: Old Growth Forest Definitions

inventory and identify candidate stands for old-growth forest classification. The structural attributes will 

help identify stands that meet the minimum threshold characteristics to be considered as old-growth 

forest, excluding any consideration of stand size or location. 

OLD GROWTH DEFINITIONS

Piñon-juniper Forest Cover Type 

The piñon-juniper (239) woodland forest cover typed occupies approximately 6.6 million acres. 

The piñon and juniper species that are in the Southwest are Rocky Mountain piñon, Arizona piñon 

(single-leaf piñon), border piñon, alligator juniper, redberry juniper, Rocky Mountain juniper, one-seed 

juniper, Utah juniper, and Pinchot juniper. Piñon-juniper woodlands commonly integrate to such 

vegetation as chaparral (shrub-dominated communities), grasslands, shrubsteppes (codominant mixtures 

of grasses and shrubs), evergreen oak woodlands (or encinal), and Ponderosa Pine or other forest types. 

There are 70 piñon-juniper associations that can be described in the Southwest (Moir and Carleton 1987). 

The specific species or species mix found at any particular site is largely due to climatic, geographic, and 

elevation differences. Piñon and juniper trees are found on a wide range of soil conditions. 

Description 

Old-growth piñon-juniper will be late successional in development with large, old trees older than 

150 years, on low sites, and 200 years, on high sites. There may be a few standing and down dead trees, 

but dead branches/limbs and even parts of the stems of older piñon and juniper trees may help make up 

the dead material deficit. The piñon-juniper stands usually develop under all-aged conditions (early and 

mid successional stages) until the site becomes fully occupied with older trees (late successional stage). 

As indicated by the large number of associations, old-growth piñon-juniper is variable in composition. 

The typical woodland piñon-juniper old-growth is fairly open with the presence of an understory of grass, 

forbs, and often shrubs. Since existing piñon-juniper stands are developing with reduced herbaceous 

understory competition and without low-intensity ground fires, as occurred prior to the late 1800s, they 

typically have a larger number of stems and a denser canopy structure. The less shade tolerant herbaceous 

understory vegetation is reduced significantly when an overstory reaches around 30 percent. 

Age Longevity 

Swetnam and Brown (1992) recently reported that the mean age for piñon pine was 278 years, as 

represented from 43 sites and 719 old trees in Arizona and New Mexico. The oldest living piñon tree, at 

the time of sampling, was 666 years (Swetnam and Brown 1992). 

Ponderosa Pine Forest Cover Type 

The Ponderosa Pine (237) forest cover type in the Southwestern Region covers approximately 3.9 million 

acres outside of the wilderness areas and an undetermined amount within the reserved areas. 

The dominant tree species in the Ponderosa Pine forest cover type is Ponderosa Pine. Minor tree species 

of piñon pine and juniper occur with Ponderosa Pine at lower elevations adjacent to the piñon-juniper 

forest cover type, although, Rocky Mountain and alligator juniper can occur any place within the 

Ponderosa Pine type. At higher elevations near the mixed-species group, Southwestern white pine and 

Gambel oak can be found in abundance, and frequently small amounts of Douglas-fir, white fir, and aspen 

are present. 

Ponderosa Pine has been referred to as blackjack and yellow pine in the past. The term blackjack 

indicated a younger Ponderosa Pine with dark gray to black bark color. The blackjack‘s bark is deeply 

furrowed with narrow ridges between the fissures. In contrast, the term yellow pine was used to indicate 

an older tree. The older yellow pine‘s bark is reddish brown to yellow, carrying the color well into the top 

of the tree; the plates are usually very wide, long, and smooth. The bark color transition begins sometime 
Socorro Resource Management Plan 215 Appendix N: Old Growth Forest Definitions

between 120 to 150 years of age, depending upon the geographic location. The older trees also have large 

branches in the upper portion of the tree that tend to be perpendicular to the stem. In addition, the tree top 

is flatter than younger more vigorous trees. 

Fire was key in shaping Southwestern Ponderosa Pine forests prior to pre-European settlement. Lowintensity ground fires typically burned through Ponderosa Pine forests at 3- to 15-year intervals, keeping 

forests open in appearance, and removing competing understory vegetation and down material. Frequent 

burning resulted in irregularly-shaped large patches with even-aged groups of trees varying in size, age, 

and density over the landscape. 

Fire suppression, timber harvesting, livestock grazing, mining, and recreational uses have altered the presettlement conditions. Now the Ponderosa Pine forests are generally denser, with many small trees, have 

fewer large trees, have a greater accumulation of down material, and have sparse herbaceous understory. 

Description 

Old-growth Ponderosa Pine will be late successional in development with large trees older than 180 years 

of age; mature tree characteristics will be as described for yellow pine. The size and number of large trees 

will represent the productivity of the site, with fewer and smaller trees on the lower sites. Minimums are 

at least one large dead standing tree and two large-sized dead down trees per acre. More snags and down 

logs will not distract from the late successional old-growth characteristics. The structure may be either 

single-storied or multi-storied. Density will also vary with site productivity; with less basal area and 

canopy cover on the less productive land. 

Age Longevity 

Pearson (1950) states the oldest Ponderosa Pine recorded in the Southwest was 650 years. Trees over 400 

years are found occasionally, but mature trees in general are not much over 300 years old and most are 

less than 200 years old (Pearson 1950). 

White (1985) found that trees in the Gus Pearson Natural Area ranged in age up to 405 years, but the 

majority of the trees were less than 200 years; peak ages were between 145 and 165 years. Covington‘s 

and Moore‘s (1991) data appear to show a rapid decline in the number of large Ponderosa Pine trees at 

about 200 years of age when a dense understory exists. Daniel (1980) states that Ponderosa Pine remains 

physiologically young up to 200 years of age in its response to thinning. 

Swetnam and Brown (1992) recently reported that the mean age for Ponderosa Pine was 279 years. Their 

data set represented 62 sites and 915 old trees in Arizona and New Mexico. The oldest living Ponderosa 

Pine tree, at the time of survey, was 742 years (Swetnam and Brown 1992). 

Aspen Forest Cover Type 

The aspen forest cover type (217) seldom, if ever, occurs as a pure stand of quaking aspen or as the 

climax species in the Southwest; it always appears in association with one or more other tree species as 

the seral species. Species that are associated with it are Ponderosa Pine, Douglas-fir, Engelmann spruce, 

limber pine, subalpine fir, white fir, and Southwestern white pine. 

Aspen is one of the first species that regenerates after a wildfire or similar disturbance, if the clone is 

present. Aspen will quickly sucker from an existing live root system following a disturbance that kills the 

upper portion of the aspen tree (aspen does not normally regenerate from seed in the Southwest). Rapid 

growth occurs after suckering and during the early stand development years. With increasing stand age, 

conifer seedlings, from surrounding conifer seed trees, eventually become established and grow in the 

shade of the aspen, aspen acting like a nurse crop to the conifers. Since aspen is relatively short lived and 
Socorro Resource Management Plan 216 Appendix N: Old Growth Forest Definitions

conifers longer lived, the conifers eventually outgrow aspen, replacing the aspen, first as a mixed type and 

finally as a confer type. 

Description 

Aspen old-growth is characterized as having a single canopy overstory layer of old aspen trees at least 

100 years of age. There would be an understory of conifers; however, there could be instances where the 

understory conifers would be removed by cutting to keep an open appearance for a specific value. There 

would probably be few dead standing and down trees until the old aspen trees begin to degenerate from 

pathogenic causes, then down dead material would begin to accumulate. As the overstory aspen trees 

continue to die, the understory conifers would begin to dominate the stand as an early or mid successional 

stage, depending upon their size and development, and the old-growth stand will no longer exist. Aspen 

old-growth, at the best, is short term in duration. 

Age Longevity 

Aspen is a small- to medium-sized, fast-growing and short-lived tree. Aspen is susceptible to a large 

number of diseases and is host to a wide variety of insects. The insects, many of them defoliators, tend to 

reduce the tree‘s vigor, but are not the major cause of tree death. Diseases are the primary cause for the 

short life of aspen. A few vigorous trees attain a maximum age of about 200 years; the oldest recorded is 

226. The pathological age of aspen in the West ranges from 80 to 120 years (Hunter 1989; Perala 1990). 

No habitat type list was developed for aspen. Aspen does not occur as a habitat type in the Southwest. 

Aspen can occur as a forest cover type in any plant association where aspen is present; however, aspen 

would be considered a seral species (as early successional species). 

Mixed-species Group Forest Cover Types 

There is several forest cover types included in the mixed-species group. The mixed-species group 

includes the Douglas-fir (210), white fir (211), blue spruce (216), and limber pine (219) forest cover 

types. Most often the mixed-species stands have a rich diversity of vegetation, including three or four 

different tree species, sometimes more (Krauch 1956). 

The major tree species found in this group are Douglas-fir and white fir. Often included in minor amounts 

are tree species such as subalpine fir, corkbark fir, Engelmann spruce, blue spruce, Southwestern white 

pine, Ponderosa Pine, aspen, and Gambel oak. 

The mixed-species group is a productive forest component. This group occurs on the landscape at a 

middle elevation between the lower elevation Ponderosa Pine forest cover type and the higher elevation 

Engelmann spruce-subalpine fir forest cover type. The mean annual precipitation in the Douglas-fir zone 

averages a little more than 26 inches and the growing season is of adequate length for good growth 

response (Krauch 1956). 

The various tree species all have different shade tolerance levels, regeneration requirements, and growth 

characteristics. Therefore, for trees, the tolerance of most practical importance is their ability to establish 

and grow satisfactorily in the shade of, and in competition with, other larger trees. Shade tolerant tree 

species express their presence and increase in number as a mixed-species stand grows older (mid and late 

succession stages) and/or becomes denser. There is a gradual change in species composition to the more 

shade tolerant species without natural or man-caused disturbance. 

The tolerance of the associated species has been given as subalpine fir ≥ Englemann spruce ≥ corkbark fir 

≥ white fir ≥ Douglas-fir ≥ blue spruce > Southwestern white pine ≥ limber pine > Ponderosa Pine 

> aspen ≥ Gambel oak (Daniel 1980). Limber pine and Gambel oak were added to Daniel‘s reference as 

observed in the Southwest. 
Socorro Resource Management Plan 217 Appendix N: Old Growth Forest Definitions

Before European settlement of the Southwest, low-intensity ground fires in mixed-species forests 

occurred at lesser intervals than in Ponderosa Pine. Ground fires burned more frequent on dry, low 

elevation sites and less frequent on moist, high elevation sites. The fires keep the forest open, allowing 

less shade tolerant tree species such as Ponderosa Pine, aspen, and Gambel oak to establish and grow. 

Since fire suppression management was started in the early 1900s, mixed-species forest structure and 

composition has changed. The structural change has been to increased crown cover and basal area 

densities, more trees, especially smaller trees, forming a multi-storied condition. The compositional 

change has been to the more shade tolerant species such as white fir and Douglas-fir. Furthermore, the 

lack of fire and change in conditions have increased the susceptibility of the forest to insect and disease 

agents. 

Description 

Old-growth mixed species group forest cover types will be late successional in development with large 

trees older than 150 years. The size and number of large trees will represent the productivity of the site, 

with fewer and smaller trees on the lower sites. The forest should have a diverse composition of tree 

species; aspen may not be present in this stage. At least 3.5 large, dead-standing trees and four large, dead 

down pieces per acre of any species will be present. The forest structure can be either single storied or 

multi-storied. Basal area and canopy cover densities will vary depending upon the productive capability 

of the land. 

Age Longevity 

Douglas-fir – Coastal Douglas-fir is considered very long lived. Ages in excess of 500 years are not 

uncommon and some have exceeded 1,000 years; however, interior Douglas-fir rarely lives more than 400 

years (Hermann and Lavender 1990). Hunter (1989) lists the maximum longevity age for Douglas-fir to 

be 1,000 years and the pathological longevity age of 150 years. Lynch (1990) reported sampling 13 live 

Douglas-fir trees on the Carson National Forest that were greater than 600 years of age; five of the trees 

were 700 to 779 years old. 

Swetnam and Brown (1992) recently reported the mean age for Douglas-fir to be 278 years, as 

represented on 38 sites—526 old trees in Arizona and New Mexico. The oldest living Douglas-fir tree, at 

the time of the sampling, was 930 years. 

White Fir – Coastal white fir does not often exceed 350 years, but 500-year-old trees have been reported; 

however, the maximum age in the interior may be close to 300 years (Markstrom and McElderry 1984). 

Hunter (1989) lists the maximum longevity age for white fir to be 360 years and the pathological 

longevity age of 150 years. The oldest known living white fir tree in Arizona and New Mexico, at the 

time of sampling, was 333 years (Swetnam and Brown 1992). 

Subalpine Fir – The subalpine fir/corkbark fir trees often live for more than 250 years (Markstrom and 

McElderry 1984). Hunter (1989) lists the maximum longevity age for subalpine fir to be 250 years and 

the pathological longevity age of 130 years. Alexander (1987) recognized that the species suffers severely 

from heart rot; many trees either die or are complete culls at an early age. 

Engelmann Spruce – Engelmann spruce matures at about 300 years, often dominant spruce are 250 to 

450 years old, and trees 500 to 600 years are not uncommon (Alexander and Sheppard 1990). 

Blue Spruce – Blue spruce is apparently a long-lived tree, often reaching up to 600 years or more in age 

(Fechner 1990). 

Southwestern White Pine – Southwestern white pine has very little information concerning longevity; 

however, it is observed that Southwestern white pine could have the same longevity attributes as Eastern 

white pine. The maximum longevity is 450 years and the pathological longevity age is 160 to 170 years 
Socorro Resource Management Plan 218 Appendix N: Old Growth Forest Definitions

for Eastern white pine (Hunter 1989). The age of decline for Western white pine is 300 to 400 years and 

the oldest age 500 years (Graham 1990). The oldest known living Southwestern white pine tree in 

Arizona and New Mexico, at the time of the sampling, was 538 years (Swetnam and Brown 1992). 

Limber Pine – Preston (1961) indicates that limber pine reaches maturity in 200 to 300 years. One tree in 

southern California was found to be well over 1,000 years; another in central Idaho was 1,650 years old 

(Steele 1990). Lynch (1990) reported finding limber pine trees on the Carson National Forest that were 

hollow; the outer stem measured 1,500 to 1,700 years old. Lynch is confident that trees measuring 2,000 

years old are located in this area. The oldest known living limber pine found in Arizona and New Mexico 

reported by Swetnam and Brown (1992), at the time of sampling, was 1,670 years. 

Gambel Oak – Gambel Oak is considered a short-lived tree. A study in the Navajo National Monument, 

Arizona, indicated that oak stems rarely live longer than 80 years; 103 was the oldest stem found. In 

addition, 90 percent or more of the stems encountered in long-established clones were less than 10 years 

old (Brotherson et al. 1983). The oldest known living Gambel oak tree in Arizona and New Mexico, at the 

time of sampling, was 401 years (Swetnam and Brown 1992). 

Engelmann Spruce-Subalpine Fir Forest Cover Type 

The dominant tree species in the spruce-fir (206) forest cover type are Engelmann spruce and subalpine 

fir. Minor tree species of Douglas-fir, blue spruce, white fir, limber pine, aspen, and occasionally 

Ponderosa Pine associate at the lower elevations, and corkbark fir and bristlecone pine at the higher 

elevations. The bristlecone pine (209) forest cover type is included with the spruce-fir description. 

Engelmann spruce and subalpine fir occur as codominants or in nearly pure stands of one or the other 

species. Engelmann spruce generally extends above subalpine fir and corkbark fir, forming nearly pure 

stands at timberline. 

Spruce-fir forests have lower fire frequencies than the Ponderosa Pine and mixed-species. The 

frequencies are from 63 to 400 years and are usually stand replacement events. 

Description 

Old-growth spruce-fir will be late successional in development with large trees older than 140 years 

where Engelmann spruce is less than 50 percent composition and 170 years old where Engelmann spruce 

is 50 or more percent composition of the stand. The size and number of large trees will vary with site 

productivity, with fewer and smaller trees on the lower sites. There is usually over-abundance of standing 

dead and down trees. The structure will more than likely be two or more storied with natural regeneration 

appearing in gaps or small openings caused by the death of one or more of the large trees. Density will 

usually be high; but will be slightly less on the less productive sites. 

Bristlecone pine is much less tolerant to shade than Engelmann spruce and subalpine fir and therefore 

would almost always be the pioneer species for spruce-fir stands. However, occasionally old-growth 

bristlecone pine may occur in small-sized patches on very harsh, exposed sites. Where it does occur, it 

would have small tree-sized characteristics. 

Age Longevity 

The pathological and maximum longevity ages for all species in the spruce-fir have been discussed in the 

mixed-species forest cover type except for bristlecone pine. The bristlecone pine grows very slow, 

reaches maturity in 200 to 250 years, obtaining ages of over 2,000 years, possibly the oldest living 

organism (Preston 1961). 
Socorro Resource Management Plan 219 Appendix N: Old Growth Forest Definitions

Swetnam and Brown (1992) recently reported that the oldest known living bristlecone pine and 

Engelmann spruce trees in Arizona and New Mexico, at the time of sampling, was 1,438 and 295 years, 

respectively. 
Socorro Resource Management Plan 220 Appendix N: Old Growth Forest Definitions

Table N-1: Old-Growth Descriptions

References States SAF Cover Types found on BLM with 

Old-growth Descriptions Available

Meets HFRA

Requirement

SAF Cover Types Found 

on BLM without OldGrowth Descriptions

Forest Service Region 1

Green et al. 

1992

Northern 

Idaho, 

Montana,

North Dakota

205 Mountain hemlock

206 Engelmann spruce-subalpine fir

208 Whitebark pine

210 Interior douglas fir

212 Western larch

213 Grand fir

215 Western white pine

218 Lodgepole pine

219 Limber pine

224 Western hemlock

228 Western red cedar

237 Interior Ponderosa Pine

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

217 Aspen*

220 Rocky Mountain 

juniper

Forest Service Region 2

Mehl 1992 Colorado, 

Wyoming, 

South Dakota

206 Engelmann spruce-Subalpine Fir

210 Interior douglas fir

217 Aspen

218 Lodgepole pine

237 Interior Ponderosa Pine (Front Range)

237 Interior Ponderosa Pine (Black Hills)

237 Interior Ponderosa Pine (Southwest)

239 Piñon-juniper

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

208 Whitebark pine*

219 Limber pine*

220 Rocky Mountain 

juniper

Forest Service Region 3

USDA

Forest 

Service, 

Southwestern 

Region 1992

Arizona,

New Mexico

206 Engelmann spruce-subalpine fir

217 Aspen

237 Interior Ponderosa Pine

239 Piñon-juniper

210 Interior douglas fir

211 White fir

216 Blue spruce

219 Limber pine

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

220 Rocky Mountain 

juniper

Forest Service Region 4

Hamilton 

1993

Southern 

Idaho, 

Nevada,

Utah,

Western 

Wyoming

206 Engelmann spruce-subalpine fir

208 Whitebark pine

209 Bristlecone pine

210 Interior douglas fir

216 Blue spruce

217 Aspen

218 Lodgepole pine

219 Limber pine

237 Interior Ponderosa Pine (Northern 

Plateau Race)

237 Interior Ponderosa Pine (Rocky 

Mountain Race)

239 Piñon-juniper 

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

220 Rocky Mountain 

juniper

223 Jeffery pine*

235 Cottonwood-willow
Socorro Resource Management Plan 221 Appendix N: Old Growth Forest Definitions

Table N-1: Old-Growth Descriptions

References States SAF Cover Types found on BLM with 

Old-growth Descriptions Available

Meets HFRA

Requirement

SAF Cover Types Found 

on BLM without OldGrowth Descriptions

Forest Service Region 5

USDA

Forest 

Service, 

Pacific 

Southwest 

Region 1992

California 207 Red Fir

211 White Fir

218 Lodgepole pine

229 Pacific douglas fir

232 Coast redwood

234 Douglas fir/tanoak/madrone

237 Interior Ponderosa Pine

243 Mixed conifer

245 Pacific Ponderosa Pine

247 Jeffery pine

256 California mixed subalpine forests

Yes

No

Yes

No

No

No

No

No

No

No

No

239 Piñon-juniper

233 Oregon white oak

238 Western juniper

246 California black oak

249 Canyon live Oak

Forest Service Region 6

USDA

Forest 

Service, 

Pacific 

Northwest 

Region 1993

Oregon, 

Washington

206 Engelmann spruce-subalpine fir

210 Interior douglas–fir

211 White fir

213 Grand fir

218 Lodgepole pine

224 Western hemlock

226 Coastal true fir-hemlock

229 Pacific douglas-fir

231 Port-orford-cedar

232 Redwood

234 Douglas fir–tanoak-pacific madrone

237 Interior Ponderosa Pine

Yes

Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

No

Yes

No

No

No

Yes

207 Red Fir

238 Western juniper, (see 

Waichler et al. 2001)

Forest Service Region 10

Capp et al. 

1992

Alaska 201 White spruce

204 Black spruce

205 Mountain hemlock

217 Aspen

223 Sitka spruce

224 Western hemlock 

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

*A definition is available from one of the other regions.
Socorro Resource Management Plan 222 Appendix N: Old Growth Forest Definitions

Table N-2: Old-Growth Attributes By Forest Cover Type 

Piñon-Juniper Interior 

Ponderosa Pine Aspen Mixed Species Group

Engelmann 

SpruceSubalpine Fir

Forest Cover Type, 

SAF Code 239 237 217 210, 211, 216, 219 206, 209

Site Capability 

Potential

Break Between Low 

and High Site

55 Minor

50 Douglas-Fir

Edminster and 

Jump

50 Engelmann 

Spruce 

Alexander

Live trees in main 

canopy

Low High Low High All Low High Low High

Trees/acre

DBH/DRC

Age (Years)

12

9"

150

30

12"

200

20

14v

180

20

18"

180

20

14"

100

12

18"

150

16

20"

150

20

10"

1403

30

14"

1704

Variations in tree 

diameters (y/n) No No No No No

Dead trees standing Low High Low High All Low High Low High

 Trees/acre

 Size DBH/DRC

 Height (feet)

0.51

9"

8'

1

10"

10'

1

14"

15'

1

14"

25'

No

10"

No

2.5

14"

20'

2.5

16"

25'

3

12"

20'

4

16"

30'

Dead trees down Low High Low High All Low High Low High

 Pieces/acre

 Size (diam.)

 Length (feet)

2

9"

8'

2

2

10"

10'

2

12"

15'

2

12"

15'

No

No

No

4

12"

16'

4

12"

16'

5

12"

16'

5

12"

16'

Tree decadence Low High Low High All Low High Low High

Trees/acre No No No No No

Number of tree 

canopies SS/MS SS/MS SS SS/MS SS/MS

Total BA, Square feet 

per acre

6 24 70 90 No 80 100 120 140

Total canopy cover (%) 20 35 40 50 50 50 60 60 70

NOTES: 1 Dead limbs help make up dead material deficit. 

2 Unless removed for firewood or fire-burning activities. 

3 In mixed corkbark fir and Engelmann spruce stands where Engelmann spruce is less than 50 percent 

compositions in the stand. 

4 In mixed corkbark fir and Engelmann spruce stands where Engelmann spruce is 50 or more percent 

composition in the stand. 

 No: not determined SS: single storied MS: multi storied L: Live (trees in main canopy) 

 DBH = Diameter at Breast Height. This measurement of tree diameter is taken at 4.5 feet above ground 

level. 

 DRC = Diameter at Root Cellar. 
Socorro Resource Management Plan 223 Index

INDEX 

A

abandoned mine lands ....................................................................................................................................................................21, 22 

ACEC ...... 7, 4, 11, 13, 18, 23, 29, 30, 31, 32, 34, 39, 41, 42, 46, 48, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 61, 66, 85, 120, 123, 125, 160, 166, 167, 187 

Agua Fria ...................................................................................................................................................................................34, 188 

Cerro Pomo .............................................................................................................................................................. 11, 29, 31, 34, 52 

Horse Mountain ........................................................................................................................................................................51, 188 

Ladron Mountain ............................................................................................................................................................................187

Ladron Mountain – Devil’s Backbone Complex.................................................................................. 11, 23, 31, 34, 48, 51, 53, 166 

Mockingbird Gap, Proprietary ...................................................................................................................................... 11, 13, 34, 54 

Pelona Mountain ..............................................................................................................................................................................31

Sawtooth, Proprietary ....................................................................................................................................................................187

Zuni Salt Lake, Proprietary .......................................................................................................................... 11, 13, 23, 32, 34, 55, 61 

air quality ............................................................................................................................................ 9, 65, 66, 67, 73, 79, 89, 110, 153 

allotment 

management categories .............................................................................................................................................................27, 47 

All-Terrain Vehicle .......................................................................................................................................................................See OHV 

American Indian tribe ............................................................................................................................................................................65

AML ................................................................................................................................................ See Appropriate Management Level 

Animal Unit Month ............................................................................................................................................. 7, 26, 28, 65, 66, 70, 74 

annual program summary .....................................................................................................................................................................62

Aplomado Falcon ............................................................................. 19, 23, 28, 48, 51, 81, 82, 102, 107, 108, 156, 161, 162, 165, 200 

Appropriate Management Level .................................................................................................................................................7, 66, 71 

Archaeological Resources Protection Act .......................................................................................................................................11, 91 

ATV ...............................................................................................................................................................................................See OHV 

AUM .................................................................................................................................................................... See Animal Unit Month 

B

Bald Eagle .......................................................................................................................................................................................51, 161 

Best Management Practice ......................................................... 7, 9, 13, 15, 16, 25, 31, 33, 41, 50, 66, 70, 85, 96, 98, 103, 107, 164 

bicycling ...............................................................................................................................................................................................119

BMP........................................................................................................................................................ See Best Management Practice 

C

camping ................................................................................................................................................................................... 30, 31, 118 

carbon dioxide ........................................................................................................................................................................ 22, 69, 199 

cave ........................................................................................................................ 10, 54, 61, 67, 72, 93, 108, 110, 138, 156, 158, 159 

CDNST ...........................................................................................................................................................................................7, 30, 56 

Clean Water Act ................................................................................................................................................ 7, 32, 33, 67, 86, 89, 116 

conservation easement .........................................................................................................................................................................22

Continental Divide National Scenic Trail ............................................................................................................... 7, 6, 13, 91, 157, 189 

Contracting Officer's Representative ..............................................................................................................................................7, 131 

corridor 

habitat ...............................................................................................................................................................................................70

utility ............................................................................................................................................................................ 18, 19, 79, 103 

cross-country travel .................................................................................................................................................... 37, 38, 65, 67, 169 

cultural resources ................................................. 8, 10, 11, 12, 13, 31, 34, 35, 55, 58, 65, 67, 85, 110, 122, 146, 151, 154, 157, 158 

CWA .......................................................................................................................................................................... See Clean Water Act 

D

Desert Bighorn Sheep ......................................................................................................................... 30, 48, 51, 53, 116, 187, 194, 206 
Socorro Resource Management Plan 224 Index

E

El Camino Real de Tierra Adentro National Historic Trail ......................................................................................... 13, 30, 43, 82, 189 

El Camino Real International Heritage Center ................................................................................................................................. 6, 13 

Endangered Species Act ..................................................................................................................... 7, 33, 50, 78, 86, 89, 95, 155, 163 

Energy Policy Act ...................................................................................................................................................................................19

environmental assessment .......................................................................................................................... 7, 6, 9, 23, 29, 82, 122, 145 

Environmental Impact Statement ..................................................... 2, 7, 4, 6, 7, 19, 26, 31, 38, 43, 68, 75, 82, 85, 90, 103, 135, 155 

Environmental Protection Agency ............................................................................................................. 7, 32, 67, 71, 89, 91, 96, 152 

EPA .......................................................................................................................................................................................................152

erosion ............................32, 33, 41, 42, 50, 69, 83, 90, 93, 98, 99, 103, 104, 105, 106, 110, 113, 114, 115, 135, 136, 160, 163, 170 

ESA............................................................................................................................................................... See Endangered Species Act 

Executive Order .......................................................................................................................................... 7, 25, 49, 50, 77, 87, 95, 168 

F

Federal Land Policy and Management Act . 2, 7, 11, 14, 18, 19, 26, 29, 42, 45, 48, 66, 72, 86, 88, 90, 119, 120, 121, 123, 124, 125, 

145, 170, 171 

Federal Noxious Weed Act ..............................................................................................................................................................25, 94 

Federal Wildland Fire Management Policy ..........................................................................................................................................15

fence .....................................................................................................................................................................................................195

fences ...................................................................................................................................................................... 42, 71, 101, 108, 161 

Ferruginous Hawk ............................................................................................................................................................... 107, 162, 200 

fire 

management ......................................................................................................................................................................... 1, 7, 9, 47 

management unit .............................................................................................................................................................................47

prescribed .............................................................................................................................. 16, 27, 42, 47, 49, 69, 75, 80, 117, 195 

regimes..............................................................................................................................................................................................69

rehabilitation ..................................................................................................................................................................................111

wildfire ................................................................................................................................................... 67, 73, 80, 93, 117, 130, 215 

Fire Regime Condition Class................................................................................................................................................. 7, 15, 16, 69 

FLPMA ............................................................................................................................ See Federal Land Policy and Management Act 

Fort Craig ........................................................................................................................................................... 11, 12, 13, 23, 28, 34, 56 

fossil ........................................................................................................................................................................ 26, 69, 209, 210, 211 

FRCC ...................................................................................................................................................... See Fire Regime Condition Class 

fuelwood ..........................................................................................................................................................................................16, 42 

G

Geographic Information System (GIS) ........................................................................................... 7, 1, 2, 5, 70, 98, 117, 171, 172, 209 

geophysical surveys .............................................................................................................................................................................102

GHG ..........................................................................................................................................................................See Greenhouse Gas 

GIS ......................................................................................................................................... See Geographic Information System (GIS) 

Global Positioning System ...................................................................................................................................... 7, 115, 117, 171, 172 

GPS ........................................................................................................................................................... See Global Positioning System 

grazing ......7, 6, 26, 27, 28, 32, 41, 42, 51, 53, 56, 57, 59, 65, 70, 74, 77, 78, 82, 86, 90, 93, 100, 102, 113, 121, 122, 123, 135, 136, 

137, 138, 215 

allotment ............................................ 7, 26, 27, 28, 33, 41, 51, 54, 65, 66, 70, 71, 74, 90, 100, 113, 114, 116, 122, 123, 137, 138 

livestock ......................................................................................................................................................................................26, 41 

Greenhouse Gas ...................................................................................................................................................................................... 7 

groundwater ................................................................................................................................................... 32, 41, 116, 136, 151, 152 

H

habitat ...... 8, 14, 15, 19, 22, 27, 32, 33, 34, 41, 45, 48, 49, 50, 51, 53, 64, 68, 70, 71, 76, 83, 89, 90, 96, 98, 99, 101, 102, 103, 106, 

107, 108, 110, 116, 120, 121, 129, 130, 136, 146, 147, 148, 149, 151, 152, 159, 160, 161, 162, 163, 164, 165, 170, 216 

Special status species ................................................................................................................................................................... 8, 50 

wildlife ...................................................................................................................................................... 49, 188, 192, 193, 194, 195 
Socorro Resource Management Plan 225 Index

Wildlife ................................................................................................................................................................................. 16, 41, 48 

Habitat Management Plan ..........................................................................................................................................................7, 18, 71 

hazardous materials ..............................................................................................................................................................................17

Head of Contracting Activity ...........................................................................................................................................................7, 131 

Healthy Forests Restoration Act ........................................................................................................................ 7, 15, 93, 212, 213, 220 

helium ..................................................................................................................................................................................... 22, 69, 199 

Herd Management Area ..................................................................................................................................................... 7, 45, 71, 116 

heritage tourism ....................................................................................................................................................... 4, 11, 12, 13, 53, 84 

HFRA................................................................................................................................................See Healthy Forests Restoration Act 

hiking ............................................................................................................................................................................. 4, 30, 31, 84, 118 

HMA ............................................................................................................................................................See Herd Management Area 

HMP ......................................................................................................................................................... See Habitat Management Plan 

hunting .................................................................................................................................................................................. 68, 102, 118 

I

issue ......................................................................................................... 4, 8, 11, 18, 25, 26, 29, 32, 34, 35, 41, 42, 49, 72, 83, 84, 85 

J

jurisdiction .......................................................................................................................................... 1, 19, 23, 31, 86, 92, 94, 110, 118 

K

karst ........................................................................................................................................................... 10, 61, 72, 110, 156, 158, 159 

L

Land Use Plan...............................................................................................................................................................................7, 72, 81 

lands and realty 

acquisition ...................................................................................................................................................................................10, 12 

discretionary closure ........................................................................................................................................................................22

disposal ................................................................................................. 12, 17, 18, 21, 73, 91, 93, 99, 101, 120, 121, 123, 124, 163 

easement ....................................................................................................................................................................................22, 68 

exchange ......................................................................................................... 10, 18, 28, 68, 91, 120, 121, 123, 124, 125, 132, 133 

Notice of Realty Action ...................................................................................................................................................................124

patent ............................................................................................................................................................................. 112, 123, 124 

Sales ................................................................................................................................................................................. See Disposal 

withdrawal .................................................................................................... 18, 19, 21, 22, 54, 56, 58, 73, 124, 144, 153, 165, 166 

Leave No Trace ......................................................................................................................................................................................97

LUP ...............................................................................................................................................................................See Land Use Plan 

M

Magdalena Stock Driveway ...................................................................................................................................................................13

methane ................................................................................................................................................................................................. 69

Mexican gray wolf ...................................................................................................................................................................... 202, 206 

Mexican spotted owl .................................................................................................................................................................. 202, 205 

Migratory Bird Treaty Act ......................................................................................................................................................................50

mineral ................................................................................................................................................................................ 21, 23, 69, 75 

coal ....................................................................................................................................................................................... 21, 22, 23 

entry ..................................................................................................................................................................................................73

estate ............................................................................................................................... 2, 1, 21, 22, 23, 48, 51, 120, 123, 124, 148 

fluid .................................................................13, 19, 21, 22, 48, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 69, 78, 112, 120, 144, 197 

leasable ................................................................................................................................................................................ 21, 22, 72 

locatable................................................................................................................................................................. 21, 23, 54, 72, 112 

rights ...........................................................................................................................................................................................73, 76 

salable .................................................................................................................................................................. 21, 23, 77, 112, 124 
Socorro Resource Management Plan 226 Index

value ............................................................................................................................................................................... 123, 124, 125 

mitigation .........................................................................................................................................................................................13, 26 

monitoring .....6, 25, 27, 28, 41, 45, 48, 49, 51, 55, 61, 62, 63, 64, 71, 79, 81, 96, 101, 102, 110, 111, 112, 113, 114, 115, 116, 127, 

131, 132, 134, 211 

N

National Ambient Air Quality Standards ................................................................................................................................................ 9 

National Business Center ................................................................................................................................................. 7, 81, 130, 131 

National Energy Policy Implementation Plan .......................................................................................................................................31

National Environmental Policy Act ................................................... 2, 7, 9, 18, 21, 22, 23, 27, 42, 69, 73, 75, 96, 115, 123, 129, 131

National Fire Plan ..........................................................................................................................................................................15, 129 

National Historic Preservation Act ................................................................................................. 7, 11, 12, 86, 91, 155, 157, 158, 163 

National Park Service ...............................................................................................................................................................1, 2, 13, 22 

National Register of Historic Places ................................................................ 7, 11, 12, 57, 74, 91, 110, 144, 145, 146, 153, 154, 171 

Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act ..................................................................................................................11

Natural Resource Conservation Service .........................................................................................................................................25, 27 

NEPA ............................................................................................................................................See National Environmental Policy Act 

New Mexico Ambient Air Quality Standards .......................................................................................................................................... 9 

New Mexico Department of Game and Fish ......................................................................................... 7, 22, 27, 49, 53, 148, 149, 152 

New Mexico Environment Department...................................................7, 9, 32, 33, 81, See New Mexico Environment Department 

New Mexico Habitat Stamp Program ...................................................................................................................................................49

New Mexico Museum of Natural History and Science ........................................................................................................................25

New Mexico Noxious Weed Management Act ....................................................................................................................................25

New Mexico Water Quality Control Commission ................................................................................................................................32

NHPA ...........................................................................................................................................See National Historic Preservation Act 

NMDGF ........................................................................................................................ See New Mexico Department of Game and Fish 

NMED ..................................................................................................................................See New Mexico Environment Department 

nonpoint source pollution .....................................................................................................................................................................33

O

Off-Highway Vehicle ................. 2, 7, 1, 4, 11, 17, 30, 31, 35, 37, 38, 40, 46, 48, 51, 59, 65, 74, 85, 86, 114, 115, 168, 169, 171, 172 

closed area ......................................................................................................................................................................................168

limited area .....................................................................................................................................................................................169

open area ........................................................................................................................................................................................168

OHV ................................................................................................................................................................... See Off-Highway Vehicle 

oil and gas ...........................................................................................................2, 22, 93, 101, 107, 155, 159, 160, 161, 165, 169, See

drill sites ..........................................................................................................................................................................................158

Onshore Oil and Gas Order No. 1 .........................................................................................................................................................10

P

paleontological resources ..........................................................................................................25, 26, 31, 91, 153, 159, 209, 210, 211 

PEIS ...................................................................................................................................................................................................19, 75 

permit .................................................................................................................................................................................. 14, 53, 54, 74 

Pie Town Fuelwood Area.......................................................................................................................................................................16

plan evaluation ......................................................................................................................................................................................63

Plan of Development ...................................................................................................................................................... 8, 101, 112, 162 

planning criteria ....................................................................................................................................................................................... 6 

planning process ............................................................................................................................................................. 4, 38, 46, 52, 85 

POD .................................................................................................................................................................. See Plan of Development 

prairie dog .................................................................................................................. 107, 108, 149, 156, 161, 162, 194, 200, 201, 206 

Prairie Falcon ...................................................................................................................................................................... 107, 162, 200 

Pronghorn Antelope ............................................................................................................................................................................116

Public Rangelands Improvement Act ..............................................................................................................................................26, 27 
Socorro Resource Management Plan 227 Index

Q

Quebradas Back Country Byway .........................................................................................................................................................188

R

rangeland ......................................................................................... 8, 15, 26, 27, 41, 65, 78, 90, 92, 93, 100, 108, 113, 115, 121, 123 

raptor .................................................................................. 75, 102, 107, 108, 109, 151, 161, 162, 187, 188, 191, 193, 194, 199, 200 

raptor nest .......................................................................... 75, 102, 107, 108, 144, 147, 148, 151, 161, 162, 197, 198, 199, 200, 202 

raptors ....................................................................................................................................................................................................75

Record of Decision .................................................................................................................................. 2, 8, 10, 22, 31, 39, 55, 61, 136 

recreation....... 1, 4, 7, 8, 26, 29, 30, 31, 34, 35, 68, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80, 85, 90, 91, 92, 96, 97, 110, 112, 114, 118, 119, 120, 121, 

122, 126, 128, 150, 163 

developed .........................................................................................................................................................................................68

dispersed .....................................................................................................................................................................................29, 68 

Recreation and Public Purposes (R&PP) Act ......................................................................................................................................123

Recreation Opportunity Spectrum................................................................................................................................... 8, 76, 118, 152 

Resource Management Plan .... 1, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 13, 18, 19, 21, 22, 23, 26, 27, 28, 33, 38, 39, 43, 46, 47, 55, 61, 62, 63, 64, 

75, 76, 85, 86, 125, 168, 170, 171, 173 

Resource Management Plan Amendment ...................................................................................................... 8, 6, 47, 82, 90, 103, 135 

right-of-way ..... 2, 8, 18, 19, 31, 48, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 66, 69, 76, 101, 103, 111, 121, 125, 126, 127, 128, 145, 153, 

166

avoidance area............................................................................................ 2, 18, 19, 31, 66, 98, 101, 110, 125, 126, 127, 128, 210 

exclusion area .............................................................................................................................................. 2, 18, 19, 31, 51, 69, 125 

riparian ..........................8, 33, 41, 42, 49, 75, 79, 90, 97, 103, 104, 105, 108, 113, 136, 148, 151, 152, 159, 194, 195, 201, 202, 203 

RMP.................................................................................................................................................. 2, See Resource Management Plan 

RMPA ...............................................................................................................................See Resource Management Plan Amendment 

road ..... 14, 16, 17, 26, 30, 35, 37, 38, 45, 50, 58, 66, 67, 68, 74, 77, 79, 90, 95, 97, 98, 99, 100, 101, 103, 104, 105, 106, 127, 129, 

145, 161, 162, 165, 168, 169, 170, 171, 172 

ROD .................................................................................................................................................................. 2, See Record of Decision 

ROS ..............................................................................................................................................See Recreation Opportunity Spectrum 

ROW ................................................................................................................................................................................See right-of-way 

S

safety ...................................................................................................................... 29, 37, 83, 84, 96, 97, 111, 112, 114, 120, 168, 169 

seismic exploration ..............................................................................................................................................................................102

SHPO.................................................................................................................................................................. 12, 53, 55, 146, 153, 154 

SMA ................................... 8, 4, 11, 13, 18, 27, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 39, 41, 42, 48, 51, 52, 55, 56, 57, 58, 61, 78, 85, 123, 128 

Cerro Pomo .....................................................................................................................................................................................192

Continental Divide National Scenic Trail .......................................................................................................... 29, 30, 31, 34, 55, 56 

Datil Well Campground ..................................................................................................................................................................193

Fence Lake ................................................................................................................................................................................13, 190 

Fort Craig ...................................................................................................................................................................... 13, 23, 56, 191 

Harvey Plot ......................................................................................................................................................................................190

Iron Mine Ridge, Proprietary..........................................................................................................................................................191

Mogollon Pueblo, Proprietary ........................................................................................................................................................192

Newton Site, Proprietary ....................................................................................................................................... 11, 13, 34, 56, 191 

Pelona Mountain ............................................................................................................................................................................191

Penjeacu ......................................................................................................................................................................... 12, 13, 35, 56 

Playa Pueblos, Proprietary .................................................................................................................................... 11, 13, 34, 57, 191 

Puertecito .................................................................................................................................................................................34, 190 

Rio Salado........................................................................................................................................................................................192

San Lorenzo Canyon .......................................................................................................................................................................193

San Pedro, Proprietary .......................................................................................................................................... 35, 41, 42, 57, 141 

Soaptree ....................................................................................................................................................................................58, 190 

Stallion ......................................................................................................................................................................................57, 190 

Taylor Canyon, Proprietary ............................................................................................................................................................191
Socorro Resource Management Plan 228 Index

Teypama ..........................................................................................................................................................................................191

The Box............................................................................................................................................................................................193

Town of Riley ..................................................................................................................................................................................192

Walnut Canyon ...............................................................................................................................................................................192

Zuni Salt Lake ..................................................................................................................................................................................192

Socorro isopod ............................................................................................................................................................................ 202, 207 

soil 4, 14, 16, 32, 33, 41, 42, 68, 69, 70, 72, 74, 77, 79, 83, 85, 90, 96, 97, 98, 99, 100, 101, 103, 104, 106, 107, 110, 114, 115, 116, 

129, 135, 136, 137, 151, 157, 158, 159, 160, 163, 169, 170, 211, 214 

Southwestern willow flycatcher ................................................................................................................................................ 203, 205 

SRMA ............................................................................................................................................... 8, 23, 29, 30, 31, 35, 58, 59, 78, 188 

Datil Well .......................................................................................................................................................... 28, 29, 30, 35, 58, 166 

Gordy's Hill ......................................................................................................................................................... 29, 31, 35, 39, 59, 61 

Quebradas Back Country Byway ................................................................................................................................... 29, 31, 35, 59 

Socorro Nature Area ................................................................................................................................................ 28, 29, 31, 35, 59 

The Box..............................................................................................................................................................................................58

SSS .......................................................................................................................................................See wildife: special status species 

Standards .............................................. 7, 6, 9, 14, 15, 16, 26, 33, 34, 41, 49, 63, 67, 73, 78, 82, 86, 90, 96, 113, 114, 116, 135, 136 

State Engineer ........................................................................................................................................................................................32

State Historic Preservation Office ..................................................................................................................................................... 8, 12 

stewardship contracting .................................................................................................................15, 93, 129, 130, 131, 132, 133, 134

surface water ................................................................................................................................................ 32, 83, 97, 98, 99, 101, 116 

T

Teypama ...............................................................................................................................................................................See Penjeacu 

Transportation ......................................................................................................................................................................................... 4 

travel management plan .......................................................................................................................................................................39

Tread Lightly ..........................................................................................................................................................................................97

U

U.S. Department of Agriculture ....................................................................................................... 7, 8, 49, 81, 82, 212, 213, 220, 221 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service ............................................................ 8, 1, 2, 5, 22, 50, 51, 78, 82, 89, 93, 94, 147, 148, 149, 152, 163 

U.S. Geological Survey ............................................................................................................................................................ 8, 149, 172 

United States Code ................................................................................................................................................. 8, 10, 30, 50, 88, 129 

US Forest Service ............................................................. 7, 1, 2, 15, 27, 30, 49, 65, 81, 82, 92, 93, 129, 134, 211, 212, 213, 220, 221 

USC ...................................................................................................................................................................... See United States Code 

USDA ..................................................................................................................................................See US Department of Agriculture 

USFWS ................................................................................................................................................... See US Fish and Wildlife Service 

USGS ............................................................................................................................................................... See U.S. Geological Survey 

V

vegetation ................................................................................................................................................................................................ 4 

cheatgrass .......................................................................................................................................................................................111

chemical treatment ......................................................................................................................................................... 49, 108, 195 

invasive species ............................................................................................................................................................... 1, 25, 47, 72 

mechanical treatments ....................................................................................................................................... 16, 27, 42, 108, 195 

noxious weeds ........................................................................................................................................... 1, 25, 47, 74, 94, 100, 115 

sales .................................................................................................................................................................................... 16, 54, 111 

treatments ........................................................................................................................................................... 26, 42, 47, 116, 117 

weed management .....................................................................................................................................................................23, 25 

Visual Resource Management ......... 2, 8, 19, 30, 42, 43, 45, 52, 54, 55, 58, 59, 79, 82, 107, 119, 125, 126, 146, 152, 156, 164, 165 

VRM ....................................................................................................................................................See Visual Resource Management 

W

water quality ..................................................................32, 33, 41, 50, 67, 78, 83, 89, 90, 96, 105, 113, 116, 129, 135, 136, 150, 163 
Socorro Resource Management Plan 229 Index

watershed ............. 1, 4, 8, 15, 26, 27, 32, 33, 34, 35, 49, 69, 79, 83, 85, 90, 91, 96, 99, 102, 115, 116, 129, 137, 150, 163, 170, 212 

wetlands .............................................................................................................................................. 76, 79, 98, 99, 120, 122, 148, 151 

White Sands Missile Range ................................................................................................................................ 8, 17, 22, 155, 156, 166 

evacuation areas ...............................................................................................................................................................................17

Wild and Free-Roaming Horse and Burro Act ......................................................................................................................................45

Wild And Scenic Rivers ........................................................................................................................................................................189

wild horse.........................................................................................................................................................................................45, 71 

Bordo Atravesado HMA....................................................................................................................................................................45

census method ...............................................................................................................................................................................116

genetic diversity..............................................................................................................................................................................116

herd condition ................................................................................................................................................................................116

wilderness ......................... 7, 8, 7, 35, 38, 45, 46, 51, 71, 80, 82, 85, 91, 114, 123, 125, 126, 144, 145, 152, 155, 170, 171, 172, 173 

Wilderness Study Area ............................................................................................................................................................... See WSA 

Wildland-Urban Interface ................................................................................................................................................................. 8, 80 

wildlife 1, 14, 15, 16, 18, 22, 26, 27, 34, 35, 37, 38, 41, 46, 48, 49, 50, 51, 66, 68, 70, 71, 79, 83, 84, 85, 90, 92, 94, 96, 98, 99, 101, 

102, 106, 108, 109, 110, 113, 116, 121, 122, 129, 130, 148, 159, 160, 161, 162, 163, 164, 165, 170 

endangered species ......................................... 7, 8, 33, 48, 50, 68, 78, 82, 85, 86, 89, 95, 136, 146, 147, 152, 155, 156, 162, 163 

special status species ... 8, 5, 8, 34, 35, 41, 42, 48, 49, 50, 51, 64, 78, 83, 84, 87, 90, 98, 103, 107, 110, 115, 116, 120, 136, 165, 

194, 197, 199, 201 

threatened species ...........................................................................................................................................................................78

wind energy .............................................................................................................................................................................. 7, 31, 103 

woodcutting ............................................................................................................................................................ 14, 16, 53, 54, 55, 58 

WSA ...... 8, 7, 14, 18, 19, 22, 23, 31, 35, 37, 38, 39, 45, 46, 52, 55, 57, 59, 80, 85, 114, 123, 125, 145, 168, 169, 170, 171, 172, 173 

Devil’s Backbone.......................................................................................................................................... 11, 31, 34, 38, 48, 51, 53 

Eagle Peak .........................................................................................................................................................................................38

Jornada del Muerto ........................................................................................................................................................................180

WSMR......................................................................................................................................................See White Sands Missile Range 

WUI............................................................................................................................................................See Wildland-Urban Interface 

Z

Zuni Salt Lake .................................................................................................................................................. 7, 146, 154, 156, 162, 163