ROD-1 Record of Decision 

RECORD OF DECISION (ROD) 

FOR KASHA-KATUWE TENT ROCKS NATIONAL MONUMENT 

RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PLAN 

United States Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management 

Albuquerque District, Rio Puerco Field Office 

In Cooperation with the Pueblo de Cochiti 

INTRODUCTION 

This volume includes a Record of Decision 

(ROD) and a Resource Management Plan 

(RMP) for Kasha-Katuwe Tent Rocks National 

Monument (KKTR). The decision has been 

reached by managers of the Bureau of Land 

Management (BLM) to select the Proposed Plan 

of the October 2006 Proposed RMP and Final 

Environmental Impact Statement (Proposed 

RMP/Final EIS) as the RMP for managing the 

5,402-acre Monument and an additional 10,233 

acres of adjoining lands. The adjoining lands 

contain resources that complement the resource 

values of the Monument. The BLM has recently 

acquired the adjoining 965-acre “Southwest Acquisition.” Acquisition of the adjoining 9,268-

acre “North Edgeholding,” as well as the remaining 1,278 acres of non-Federal land within 

the Monument boundaries, from willing sellers 

would contribute to effective and efficient 

Monument management. The entire Planning 

Area includes 15,635 acres; however, RMP implementation can only take place on the 5,089 

acres of public land within the Planning Area. 

Decisions in this document are applicable to 

lands acquired within the Planning Area or lands 

covered by cooperative management agreements 

with non-Federal landowners. 

DECISION

The decision is hereby made to approve the attached plan as the resource management plan for 

Kasha-Katuwe Tent Rocks National Monument 

and Planning Area. It is the Proposed Action 

(Alternative B) of the Proposed RMP/Final EIS 

of October 2006, with changes only to accommodate the stand-alone format of the attached 

RMP. This RMP was prepared under the regulations implementing the Federal Land Policy and 

Management Act (FLPMA) of 1976 (43 CFR 

1600). The EIS was prepared in accordance 

with the National Environmental Policy Act of 

1969 (NEPA) to assess the effects of implementing the RMP. Specific management decisions 

for public lands under the jurisdiction of the Rio 

Puerco Field Office are presented in Chapter 2, 

“Management Decisions,” of the attached RMP. 

Key approved decisions include the following: 

Land Tenure Adjustment identifies lands for 

acquisition or for other management options. 

• Continue to acquire land and easements 

within the Planning Area, protect the resources for which the Monument was established, and ensure that any rights-of-way or 

land use permits issued are consistent with 

management goals for other resource programs and uses. 

• The Monument is subject to valid existing 

rights. 

• Nothing in the Proclamation revokes any 

existing withdrawal, reservation, or appropriation; however, the Monument is the 

dominant reservation. 

• No person may use, injure, destroy, or remove any feature of the Monument without 

authorization, nor locate nor settle upon any 

of the lands. 

• If willing sellers are available in the long 

term, the BLM will seek to acquire through 

exchange or purchase the 1,278 acres of 

non-Federal land within the Monument and 

the 9,268-acre North Edgeholding to complement management of Monument values. 

• Seek Cooperative Management Agreements 

with non-Federal landowners to provide for 

some level of public use if acquisition is not 

possible. 

• The Federal government owns 4,565 acres 

of minerals beneath the Monument. This 
Record of Decision ROD-2

acreage has been withdrawn from mineral 

entry by conditions of the Proclamation. 

• The 837 acres (521 acres State, 316 acres 

private) of non-Federal mineral ownership 

in the Monument will be acquired if owners 

are willing. As other minerals are acquired 

within the Monument, they will also be 

withdrawn from mineral entry under the 

Proclamation. 

• All minerals under the 965-acre Southwest 

Acquisition are in Federal ownership. The 

North Edgeholding (9,268 acres) has split 

mineral ownership, with gold, silver, and 

quicksilver/mercury in Federal ownership 

and all other minerals in non-Federal ownership. The BLM will seek to acquire these 

mineral rights along with the surface. The 

BLM will withdraw all Federal minerals 

within the Planning Area, subject to valid 

existing rights. 

• The 5,402 acres designated by Presidential 

Proclamation 7394 as the National Monument will continue to be designated as an 

Area of Critical Environmental Concern 

(ACEC). 

• The Monument/ACEC will be managed for 

Proclamation and ACEC resource values. 

Management emphasis for the area will continue to be on the interpretation of geologic 

and scenic values, and on intensive recreational uses, especially semi-primitive nonmotorized recreation opportunities. 

• The 965-acre Southwest Acquisition recently purchased by the BLM will be managed in conjunction with the Monument, and 

is recommended for inclusion as part of the 

Monument (which would require Congressional legislation). 

• Lands and interests in lands acquired within 

the Monument boundary will become part of 

the Monument and ACEC. These will be 

withdrawn from entry or disposal except by 

exchange, as provided in the Proclamation. 

• If acquired, the 9,268-acre North Edgeholding is recommended for inclusion in the 

Monument (which would require Congressional legislation). 

• If acquisitions within the Monument 

boundaries are not completed, the BLM will 

seek to acquire a 1.05-mile easement on the 

portion of BLM Road 1011 that crosses private surface through the Monument. 

• While recognizing valid existing rights, the 

BLM will consider the Planning Area to be a 

right-of-way exclusion area. Rights-of-way 

for uses that do not currently exist will not 

be considered except for those that would 

support Monument purposes. 

Access and Transportation identifies BLM 

vehicle routes and hiking/equestrian trails and 

limits motorized and mechanized use to designated roads and trails. 

• Designate 5.95 miles of “Open” transportation routes, 7.8 miles as “Limited” to authorized administrative and emergency use only, 

and close 11.5 miles of roads. 

• Designate 6.33 miles of “Open” trails, 0.2 

mile of trail as limited to authorized administrative or emergency use, and close 1.9 

miles of trails to public use. 

• Designate 0.9 mile of new trail “Open” and 

0.7 mile of converted road to “Open” trail. 

• Designate the Planning Area as limited to 

designated roads and trails for motorized 

and mechanized modes of travel. 

• Access for research permits will be considered as authorized administrative use and 

will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. 

• If the North Edgeholding is acquired, close 

the area to public entry except access on existing public roads or with prior authorization from the Rio Puerco Field Manager. 

Allow a two-year period of resource survey 

and evaluation before making land and resource allocations. Provide guided tours in 

the interim. After consulting with potentially affected American Indian tribes, carrying out resource data inventory, including 

assessment of cultural resources, and after 

implementing measures to mitigate potential 

adverse effects to cultural resources and 

other resources, open the area with appropriate restrictions. 

Recreational Uses will be managed using adequate facilities to minimize resource degradation. 
ROD-3 Record of Decision 

• Provide a broad spectrum of resourcedependent recreational opportunities to meet 

public needs and demands. 

• Maintain high-quality recreation facilities to 

meet public needs and enhance the image of 

the agency. 

• The Recreation Opportunity Spectrum system divides the area into three visitor experience zones—semi-primitive motorized 

use (2,048 acres), semi-primitive nonmotorized use (1,054 acres), and roaded 

natural use (1,987 acres). 

• The designation of the Planning Area is 

“OHV use limited to designated roads and 

trails” for motorized and mechanized modes 

of travel. 

• Allow mountain bikes and limited forms of 

motorized vehicles (except all-terrain vehicles and dirt bikes) on BLM Road 1011 

through the Planning Area when the road is 

open to public use. 

• Authorize equestrian use on a case-by-case 

basis and direct to Federal lands in the 

Monument and Southwest Acquisition that 

are south and west of BLM Road 1011. 

• Build new facilities, including hardsurfacing 5.9 miles of BLM Road 1011, as 

needed for resource protection, and visitor 

health, safety and convenience. 

• Make drinking water available for visitors in 

or near the Monument. 

• Designate Federal lands within the Planning 

Area (including any acquired lands) as a 

Special Recreation Management Area. 

Ecosystem Restoration identifies actions that 

will benefit land health and Monument resource 

values. 

• Ensure that proposed land uses avoid inadvertent damage to Federal and non-Federal 

cultural resources. 

• No person may use, injure, destroy, or remove any feature of this Monument without 

authorization, nor locate nor settle upon any 

of the lands. 

• More stringent inventory requirements will 

be in effect, with larger buffers and Class III 

inventory, in all questionable cases. 

• Inventory for cultural resources 0.65 mile of 

“open” roads and 7.8 miles of roads limited 

to authorized administrative and emergency 

use only before further maintenance is done. 

• The 11.5 miles of “closed” roads will be 

inventoried for cultural resources if rehabilitation is needed following closure. 

• 1.72 miles of “closed” trails will be inventoried for cultural resources if rehabilitation is 

needed following closure. 

• Address the secondary effects of recreational use on cultural resources by requiring 

inventory of expanded buffer areas around 

recreational developments. Inventories for 

parking areas, scenic viewing areas, picnic 

areas, and similar developments will include 

a minimum 100-meter-wide buffer. 

• For hiking trails, a minimum 30-meter-wide 

buffer will be inventoried on each side of the 

trail, resulting in examination of a 60-meterwide corridor. 

• Inventory of the 6.32 miles of “open” and 

“limited” trails that have not yet been inventoried will be completed by the end of September 2008. 

• Vegetation treatments in sensitive settings 

will be subject to Class III inventory if the 

use of fire or any form of surface disturbance is proposed, including vehicle use off 

road and dragging of slash. 

• If lands containing water wells are acquired, 

the BLM will perform cultural resource inventories to ensure that no damage occurs in 

association with well use or maintenance. 

• Discourage activities that involve excavation 

or collection of cultural materials. Such activities will ordinarily be considered only 

when such materials face an immediate 

threat. 

• Archeological resources within the Monument and Southwest Acquisition will be 

available for scientific study that does not 

involve excavation or collection of cultural 

materials. Exceptions to this policy will be 

made only after extensive consultation with 

all concerned American Indian tribes. 

• Apply mechanical fuel reduction and prescribed fire where applicable around vulnerable recreational facilities and prehistoric 
Record of Decision ROD-4

and historic cultural resources to avoid or 

reduce the probability of damage from wildland fire. 

• Manage the Planning Area to treat Fire Regime Condition Class II and Class III lands 

to move their condition toward Class I. 

• Kasha-Katuwe Tent Rocks National Monument is a separate Fire Management Unit 

(FMU). The Planning Area will be managed 

as FMU B/4. 

• The Appropriate Management Response 

(AMR) for FMU B/4 is to prevent wildland 

fires from spreading to private lands, cultural resources or improvements on BLM 

lands, other agencies’ lands, and to protect 

the public users. AMR will be used to manage all fires in accordance with management 

objectives based on current conditions and 

fire location. 

• Comply with the NM Standards for Public 

Land Health in implementing fire management treatments. 

• Discontinue livestock grazing use on the 

4,088 acres of Federal land currently under 

two Federal grazing permits within the 

Monument. 

• Acreage closed to grazing will be fenced 

and range developments removed if they are 

not converted to another purpose (e.g., wildlife waters, recreational uses). 

• Short-duration grazing on Federal land 

within the Planning Area may be allowed 

under a non-renewable grazing permit if the 

BLM determines it will advance the purposes of the Proclamation. 

• Privately owned range improvements will be 

removed by the permittee or purchased by 

the BLM, at fair market value, if they can be 

converted to other uses. 

• No grazing permit will be issued for the 

965-acre Southwest Acquisition, unless the 

BLM determines that short-duration grazing 

would help to achieve specific vegetative or 

ecological objectives. 

• Monitoring and a vigorous integrated weed 

management program will be a part of Planning Area management (including on acquired land), in accordance with Standard 

Operating Procedures found in Instruction 

Memorandum NM-010-99-01 (“Noxious 

Weed Prevention Schedule for Albuquerque 

Field Office”). 

• Emphasize noxious weed identification and 

treatment in the 241-acre intensive visitor 

use area to reduce weed introduction by recreation users. 

• No person may use, injure, destroy, or remove any fossils—invertebrate and vertebrate fossils, and plant fossils. 

• Evaluate, manage, and protect any fossils 

identified on a case-by-case basis. Visitors 

will be encouraged to report fossil discoveries to the BLM. 

• The New Mexico Standards for Public Land 

Health and Guidelines for Livestock Grazing Management are carried forward. These 

standards include: (1) the upland sites standard; (2) the biotic communities standard 

(including native, threatened, endangered, 

and special status species); and (3) the riparian sites standard. 

• Conduct hydrologic studies and analysis, 

including appropriate stream flow monitoring of the channel to assess the potential of 

Peralta Canyon to support riparian habitat. 

A riparian monitoring plan for these actions 

has been developed. 

• Pursue a more intense riparian restoration 

program if potential is shown. Cottonwood, 

willow, and other riparian species will be 

planted if riparian conditions develop. Riparian habitat will be expanded to the extent 

that potential is indicated. 

• Ensure that BLM management actions and 

objectives are consistent with soil resource 

capabilities. 

• Maintain or improve surface and ground 

water quality consistent with existing and 

anticipated uses and applicable State and 

Federal water quality standards. 

• Provide for the physical and legal availability of water to facilitate authorized uses of 

the public lands. 

• Assess physical water availability and quality for visitor use, acquire water rights (if 

needed), and ensure continued compliance 

with the Safe Drinking Water Act. 

• The BLM’s management goal for special 

geologic features is to protect these important, environmentally sensitive geologic re-
ROD-5 Record of Decision 

sources in their natural condition (subject to 

ecological processes), while allowing recreation, and scientific research and collection. 

• Protect special geologic features on 167 

acres of Federally owned Monument lands 

for visitor viewing and observation. Identified acquisitions could increase this area to 

2,284 acres. 

• No special status plant species have been 

identified within the Monument or Southwest Acquisition. Any plants located will be 

managed on a case-by-case basis. Consultation with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 

for listed species will be carried out as required by the Endangered Species Act. 

• Ensure that BLM activities that affect the 

habitat of candidate (and sensitive) species 

are carried out in a manner consistent with 

the objectives for those species. 

• Where needed, vegetation and woodland 

treatments will consist of prescribed fire, 

mechanical methods, physical removal of 

excess vegetation, and chemical methods. 

• Follow Best Management Practices for 

vegetation treatment methods. Some treatments may need to be combined with others 

for best results, and some areas may need to 

be treated repeatedly to achieve the desired 

results. 

• In areas of intensive recreational use and 

along BLM Road 1011 through the Monument, VRM Class III has been assigned to 

the 1,202 acres that encompass the immediate foreground surrounding the developed 

facilities. On the Class III lands, only activities and structures that would attract attention but not dominate the view of the casual 

observer will be allowed. Any changes 

would borrow from the basic elements found 

in the natural features of the surrounding 

characteristic landscape. 

• VRM Class II has been assigned to the remaining 3,887 acres of public lands, where 

the intent will be to retain the existing character of the landscape by keeping implementation actions from attracting attention. 

• Promote awareness of wildlife values. 

• Nothing in the Proclamation enlarges or diminishes the jurisdiction of the State of New 

Mexico over fish and wildlife management. 

American Indian Uses and Traditional 

Cultural Values will be protected in the 

Monument and remain available for American 

Indian use. 

• Developments and recreation management 

policies will be oriented, in part, toward discouraging visitor use in sensitive areas identified by American Indians. 

• With appropriate advance notice, the BLM 

will consider brief, temporary closures of all 

or portions of the Monument and Southwest 

Acquisition to ensure privacy for traditional 

uses. 

• Roads and trails will be minimized in traditional use areas by road and trail closures 

and relocations. 

• The Pueblo de Cochiti will continue to be 

involved in management of the Monument 

and Planning Area through Cooperative 

Management Agreements. The Pueblo will 

continue to have close day-to-day participation in managing the Monument. 

This ROD serves as the final decision establishing the land use plan decisions outlined in the 

attached Approved Plan and is effective on the 

date it is signed. 

ALTERNATIVES 

Alternatives Considered But Not Analyzed 

In Detail 

The BLM considered two management strategies that were eliminated from detailed consideration in the planning process. 

The BLM considered leaving the area as a pristine and peaceful environment. This alternative 

would require the removal of existing facilities 

and the restriction of visitor use in an attempt to 

return the area to a pristine appearance and provide a peaceful environment. This alternative 
Record of Decision ROD-6

would not be feasible or prudent since the Federal government has already made a substantial 

investment in providing facilities and services to 

accommodate public use, visitor health and 

safety, and resource protection. In addition, this 

alternative is not consistent with Presidential 

Proclamation 7394. Therefore, this alternative 

was dismissed from further consideration. 

The BLM also considered maximizing recreational use of the Monument. Emphasizing recreation over protection of the biological, scientific, and historical objects of interest within the 

Monument boundaries would not be a reasonable alternative. Such use would lead to increased recreational visits and user conflicts 

throughout the Monument, which would in turn 

lead to additional impacts on the resources for 

which the Monument was designated. These 

resources would not be protected as required by 

Presidential Proclamation 7394 if recreational 

use of the Monument were maximized. Therefore, this alternative was also dismissed from 

further consideration.

Alternatives Considered in the EIS 

Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, were analyzed in detail in the Draft 

RMP/EIS (USDI, BLM 2005a) and in the Proposed RMP/Final EIS (USDI, BLM 2006). The 

alternatives were developed to address the planning issues and to provide direction for resource 

programs influencing management of the Monument. Each of the three alternatives presented a 

different blend or balance of resource allocations, uses, and protection. 

Alternative A was the No Action Alternative, 

representing continuation of the existing management plans, policies, and decisions established in the 1986 Rio Puerco RMP (USDI, 

BLM 1986), as amended, and as implemented 

through the Tent Rocks ACEC Protection Plan 

(USDI, BLM 1987), that are in compliance with 

the Proclamation. Alternative A also served as 

the baseline for comparison with the other two 

alternatives. 

Alternative B was the BLM’s Proposed Action. 

Under this alternative, the agency’s focus would 

be to make resource allocations that would resolve the resource use issues and management 

concerns associated with the Monument and 

Planning Area, while complying with the Proclamation and current BLM policies, initiatives, 

and guidance. This alternative was also the Environmentally Preferred Alternative. It would 

provide facilities for intensive recreation use and 

enjoyment while protecting visitor health, safety, 

and natural resources. It would also provide for 

meeting land health standards, research and environmental education opportunities, and protecting American Indian uses and traditional cultural practices. It would result in few impacts 

that could not be fully mitigated and would provide the maximum public use of the outstanding 

Monument values without degradation of the 

natural resources and health of the land. 

Alternative C emphasized an Adaptive Management approach (particularly for recreation 

management), with the inclusion of additional 

monitoring. Of the three alternatives, this alternative represented the highest accommodation of 

visitor access to and within the Monument and 

highest potential for facility development. It 

would require regular and specific monitoring of 

recreation use and natural resource conditions. 

The objectives of the monitoring and evaluation 

program would be to provide the basis for longterm adaptive management changes and ongoing 

planning. The monitoring results would trigger 

management changes to maximize recreational 

use, facility development, and visitors’ beneficial experiences while minimizing resource degradation and depletion. 

MANAGEMENT CONSIDERATIONS

Rationale for the Decision 

The Proposed Action (now the RMP) provides 

an effective balance between protecting Monument resource values and providing opportunities for the public to observe, study, and enjoy 

those values. It is consistent with the BLM’s 

policy guidance and requirements, including the 

multiple use and sustained yield mandates of the 

Federal Land Policy and Management Act 

(FLPMA) and the more recently established 

New Mexico Standards for Public Land Health 
ROD-7 Record of Decision 

and Guidelines for Livestock Grazing Management (USDI, BLM 2000a). Implementation of 

the Proposed Action is expected to improve resource conditions and result in more consistent 

management of recreation and public access, as 

well as promote public safety and resource protection in Kasha-Katuwe Tent Rocks National 

Monument. The lack of facilities and access 

control under the No Action Alternative would 

have resulted in uncontrolled use and resource 

degradation. Although Alternative C proposed 

adaptive management for the protection of resource values and the dispersal of visitors, it 

would have also resulted in additional disruption 

of and intrusion on Cochiti traditional cultural 

uses. For these reasons, the Proposed Action 

has been selected as the RMP for the Monument. 

MITIGATION MEASURES

The BLM has developed Best Management 

Practices (BMPs; see Appendix C) designed to 

minimize surface disturbance and effects on resources and to improve resource conditions 

where disturbance has occurred. The BMPs are 

effective, practical ways of accomplishing the 

management goals and objectives of the BLM 

and will be used as a guide when preparing plans 

for individual projects. Individual projects may 

be subject to additional NEPA analysis and additional, project-specific mitigation measures. 

PLAN MONITORING 

As outlined in the attached RMP, the BLM will 

monitor and evaluate management strategies and 

resource conditions and trends to determine the 

effectiveness of the RMP and to ensure that its 

implementation is achieving the desired results. 

Information on resource conditions obtained 

through monitoring will be used to assess the 

effectiveness of management strategies and 

evaluate whether or not management should be 

adapted to accommodate new information, 

changes in demands on resources, or other considerations. This is especially important for the 

riparian area monitoring that could lead to riparian area expansion if potential is demonstrated 

and to recreational use and resource condition 

monitoring which could lead to changes in allowed visitor use if resource conditions are being degraded. 

The BLM will monitor the Monument and 

Southwest Acquisition to quantify the number of 

recreational visits, types of recreational activities 

and use patterns, accomplishment of management objectives, and potential adverse impacts 

to resources and visitor experiences from use of 

the areas. The results of the monitoring will 

provide an opportunity to identify actions to protect resources, enhance visitor experiences, and 

deal with health and safety needs in the area. 

The monitoring program will include such actions as: 

• Patrolling roads, trails, and areas to observe 

recreation use where it is concentrated; 

• Installing trail and road traffic counters and 

site registers; 

• Establishing photo points in critical areas to 

monitor change; and 

• Surveying visitors to better understand their 

values and expectations while using the area. 

Monitoring will help the BLM to detect and 

document natural and human-induced changes in 

resource conditions and visitor experiences, and 

offer insights into the effectiveness of resource 

management policies and objectives. It will also 

help agency personnel understand what might be 

driving the changes requiring intervention (corrective management actions or strategies). Both 

the Monument and Southwest Acquisition are 

experiencing increasing use that is affecting resources, infrastructure, and management. Monitoring will be directed at areas in which specific 

and important resource values and visitor experiences could be threatened. 

PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT 

Opportunities for Public Involvement in the 

Planning Process 

Throughout the planning process, the BLM used 

various means to inform the public about the 

RMP/EIS and solicit input. The public involvement process for this effort included the 

following: 
Record of Decision ROD-8

• Notice of Intent (NOI)—Published in the 

Federal Register (Vol. 69, No. 14; Thursday, January 22, 2004; pp. 3167-3169). The 

notice announced the BLM’s intent to prepare an RMP/EIS, and included information 

on the upcoming public scoping meetings, 

newsletter, availability of information on the 

BLM’s website, points of contact, area description, and preliminary issues and criteria. 

• Newsletter (February 4, 2004)—Mailed to 

about 230 individuals, organizations, and 

government officials who had expressed interest in the BLM’s planning efforts. The 

newsletter invited public participation, provided information similar to that contained 

in the NOI, and supplied a self-addressed, 

postage-paid form for submitting written 

comments. 

• Press Release (February 19, 2004)—Issued 

to 13 media contacts, announcing the dates, 

times, and locations of the scoping meetings. 

• Website (made available on January 22, 

2004)—The website provided information 

similar to that contained in the NOI and 

newsletter. The site was linked to another 

that offered information about the Monument itself. 

• Public Scoping Meetings—Held in communities near the Monument on February 24 

(Peña Blanca), February 25 (Rio Rancho), 

and February 26 (Santa Fe), 2004, from 6:00 

to 8:00 p.m. Although no formal presentations were made nor notes kept, attendees 

were encouraged to write down their comments for the record. Each open house featured maps, resource information, comment 

forms, copies of the newsletter and Presidential Proclamation, and an interdisciplinary team of BLM resource specialists who 

provided information and answered questions. The BLM invited a representative of 

the Pueblo de Cochiti to attend these meetings. In addition to BLM representatives, 

seven individuals registered their attendance 

at the three meetings. One of those individuals, representing ConservAmerica, attended all three meetings. 

• Scoping Comments—The BLM received 30 

submissions from interested individuals or 

groups during the scoping period, which 

ended March 12, 2004. Most of the submissions contained constructive comments 

ranging in content from requests to be 

placed on the mailing list to multiple-paged 

comments with attachments. Commentors 

provided ideas for the Planning Team to 

consider in finalizing the planning criteria 

and formulating alternative ways of managing the Monument that would resolve resource use conflicts and define management 

decisions. 

• Draft RMP/EIS Review—The public was 

given an opportunity to contribute to development of the Proposed RMP/Final EIS during the public comment period on the Draft 

RMP/EIS, which extended from November 

4, 2005 to February 2, 2006. Copies of the 

Draft RMP/EIS were sent to a mailing list of 

333 addresses, with an additional 76 copies 

sent to 22 Federal agencies. Additionally, 

the document was available for review on 

the BLM’s website. The BLM received 16 

comments during the 90-day public comment period. These submissions contained 

48 substantive comments for which responses were prepared and published in the 

Proposed RMP/Final EIS. The BLM revised the document to address comments as 

appropriate. 

• Governor’s Consistency Review—A 60-day 

Governor’s Consistency Review was initiated with the delivery of the printer-ready 

Proposed RMP/Final EIS to the Governor’s 

Office on September 8, 2006. Printed copies were mailed to the Governor’s Office 

and 17 other State agencies in early November 2006. No comments regarding potential 

inconsistencies with State and local plans, 

programs, and policies were received from 

the Governor’s Office. 

• Proposed Plan/Final EIS Protest Period—In 

accordance with 43 CFR 1610.5-2, a 30-day 

protest period (November 24, 2006 to December 26, 2006) followed publication of 

the Proposed Plan/Final EIS in October 

2006. One letter was received during the 

protest period. After careful consideration 

of the points raised in this letter, the BLM 

Director concluded that the Planning Team 
ROD-9 Record of Decision 

and decision makers followed all applicable 

laws, regulations, policies, and pertinent resource considerations in developing the Proposed Plan, and that the letter did not constitute an official protest. The BLM Field 

Manager contacted those who wrote the letter and addressed with them the concerns 

expressed in the letter. The reestablishment 

of communication has provided for the 

elimination of the concerns. 

Cooperating Agency 

To provide for more consistent, effective, and 

collaborative management of the Federal and 

Pueblo lands within and adjacent to the area 

known as Tent Rocks, the U.S. Department of 

the Interior/BLM and the Pueblo de Cochiti entered into an Inter-Governmental Cooperative 

Agreement in 1997. This agreement was followed in 2002 by a five-year Assistance Agreement between the Pueblo de Cochiti and the 

BLM. A second five-year Assistance Agreement was signed in January 2007. Under these 

agreements, the BLM seeks the Pueblo’s participation and involvement in public land use planning by personal invitation to agency activities 

and meetings. The Pueblo has agreed to identify 

and provide appropriate staff for planning and 

implementing the initiatives developed under the 

agreement. 

Scoping for the RMP/EIS began in spring 2003 

with a meeting of BLM staff from a variety of 

professional specialties (the “Interdisciplinary 

Team”) to discuss resource needs, program requirements, and management concerns for the 

Planning Area. Soon after this initial meeting, 

the BLM held a pre-planning meeting with officials from the Pueblo in May 2003, to talk about 

the planning process, steps, and preliminary issues to be addressed in the plan. The BLM and 

the Pueblo de Cochiti met again in August 2003 

regarding traditional cultural properties. Those 

in attendance at this meeting included Pueblo 

officials, Pueblo Council members, BLM managers, the KKTR Manager, and a Cultural Resource Specialist. The Pueblo has been a cooperating agency in the preparation of the RMP. 

Tribal Consultation and Coordination 

The BLM mailed certified, return-receipt form 

letters to nine local pueblos and tribes. A separate, more detailed letter was sent to the Governor of the Pueblo de Cochiti. Through these 

letters, the BLM asked these groups to submit 

any concerns about traditional cultural practices 

or other issues that might be affected by this 

land use plan, information on how they would 

like to be involved in the planning process, and 

names of other individuals or organizations that 

should be notified or consulted concerning this 

plan. A copy of the NOI, a map of the Planning 

Area, and a brief description of the preliminary 

issues to be considered in the plan were enclosed 

with each of these 10 letters. 

The BLM received two responses to this request, 

one from the Hopi Tribe and the other from the 

Jicarilla Apache Nation. The Jicarilla Nation 

did not request further involvement in the plan, 

but wished to be kept informed under the provisions of the Native American Graves Protection 

and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA). The Hopi 

Tribe expressed concern about the moral, spiritual, and financial responsibility on local pueblos for the disposition of any ancestral remains 

and cultural items discovered on ancestral lands 

as a result of this Federal undertaking. The 

Tribe also supported the road closures and travel 

restrictions proposed for the Monument to protect natural and cultural resources. The Hopi 

Tribe deferred to the Pueblos of Cochiti, Jemez, 

and Santo Domingo for identification of places 

of cultural importance. Additionally, the Hopi 

Tribe supported the rights of the local Pueblos to 

access and use areas under Executive Order 

13007 and the American Indian Religious Freedom Act. 

In addition to formal tribal consultation, the 

various documents were sent to nine other Indian tribes. 

Agency Consultation

The BLM must consult with the U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service under Section 7 of the 
Record of Decision ROD-10

Endangered Species Act of 1973 before beginning any project that may affect any Federally 

listed, special status plant or wildlife species or 

its habitat. This Plan is considered to be a major 

Federal action, so the BLM initiated the informal consultation process. Letters documenting 

this consultation are contained in Appendix F. 

The BLM has made a “No Affect” determination 

for this RMP for all Federally listed species. 

Under Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, the BLM must consider 

the effects of its actions on sites eligible for the 

National Register of Historic Places before a 

decision is made. In New Mexico, the BLM 

complies with Section 106 through a Protocol 

Agreement between the BLM and the New Mexico State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) 

signed in June 2004. The BLM has submitted 

the various planning documents to the SHPO 

with no response. 

Although the Pueblo de Cochiti was the only 

formal cooperating agency, and consultation was 

required legislatively only with the U.S. Fish 

and Wildlife Service and the New Mexico State 

Historic Preservation Officer, the BLM worked 

closely with many other agencies throughout the 

planning process. The New Mexico Governor’s 

Office and affiliated State agencies have been 

involved and provided input into the Draft 

RMP/EIS and the Proposed RMP/Final EIS. 

The Sandoval County Board of Commissioners 

has also been involved and kept up to date on 

the development of the RMP. 

Public Participation in Implementation 

Land use plans and planning decisions are the 

basis for every on-the-ground action the BLM 

undertakes. They provide a framework to guide 

subsequent actions or plan implementation decisions. Implementation decisions are generally 

site-specific land management projects or actions designed to meet direction in the planning 

documents and decisions. Chapter 4, “Management Plan Implementation” of the attached 

RMP, identifies future implementation priorities, 

which of course, are dependent on funding levels. Each project will be subject to additional 

site-specific NEPA analysis and documentation, 

associated Native American consultation, and 

appropriate National Historic Preservation Act 

and Endangered Species Act compliance. As 

each project is considered, the public will be 

given the opportunity to be involved in projectlevel planning and review. 

In addition to project planning and review as an 

opportunity for public participation, the Rio 

Puerco Field Office has an active volunteer program. There will be numerous opportunities for 

volunteers as the Kasha-Katuwe Tent Rocks 

Resource Management Plan is implemented.
ROD-11 Record of Decision