Chapter 5• Consultation & Coordination
BDWNCA • RCNCA • SGFO RMP Amendment Chapter 5 893

Chapter 5: Consultation and Coordination

5.1 INTRODUCTION

This chapter describes the consultation 

and coordination efforts conducted by 

BLM during the development of Draft 

RMPs for the Beaver Dam Wash and 

Red Cliffs NCAs and a focused Draft 

Amendment to the SGFO RMP, supported by a single Draft EIS. This three 

part land use planning effort was undertaken to satisfy specific mandates from 

OPLMA that directed BLM to prepare 

“comprehensive [resource] management 

plans” for two NCAs. The legislation also 

required BLM to take actions and make 

land use allocations on public lands in 

Washington County that require the St. 

George Field Office Record of Decision and 

Resource Management Plan be amended. 

The three planning efforts were initiated 

concurrently, thereby facilitating the 

preparation of a single EIS. 

Land use planning is conducted in accordance with NEPA requirements, CEQ 

regulations, and Departmental and BLM 

policies and procedures that implement 

NEPA. Title II, Section 202 of FLPMA directs BLM to coordinate with American 

Indian tribes, other federal departments, 

and agencies of state and local governments during its land use planning 

process. To comply with these various 

legal and regulatory requirements, BLM 

seeks public involvement at the start of 

and during the land use planning process 

to aid in the development of a reasonable 

range of alternatives of proposed management actions and in the preparation 

of the analyses that disclose the potential 

impacts of proposed actions and alternatives. Tribal, state, and local county 

governments are invited to participate 

in the planning process as Cooperating 

Agencies and consultation and coordination with various governmental entities 

continues throughout this process. The 

proposed RMPs are reviewed by BLM to 

ensure that management decisions are 

consistent with State and county plans to 

the extent that those plans are consistent 

with federal law.

INTRODUCTION

"To do anything in this 

world worth doing, we 

must not stand back 

shivering and thinking 

of the cold and danger, 

but jump in, and 

scramble through as 

well as we can."

–Sydney Smith, 

Clergyman, 1771-1845

Photo 5-1 Gila Monster Scrambling over Navajo Sandstone, Red Cliffs NCA

© Cameron Rognan
894 Chapter 5 BDWNCA • RCNCA • SGFO RMP Amendment BDWNCA • RCNCA • SGFO RMP Amendment Chapter 5 895

5.2 COOPERATING AGENCIES

Other federal agencies, state and local 

governments, and federally-recognized 

American Indian tribes are invited to 

participate as Cooperating Agencies 

during the drafting or revision of RMPs 

(43 CFR 1610.3-1(b)). These agencies are 

invited to participate because they have 

jurisdiction by law or can offer specialized expertise on matters pertinent to the 

planning process. Cooperating Agency 

status provides a formal framework 

for these governmental units to engage 

in active collaboration with BLM during the planning process. Cooperating 

Agencies may assist with issue identification, data collection, the formulation 

of alternatives, and the analysis of the 

environmental consequences associated 

with implementing the alternatives. In 

2010, BLM signed a Memorandum of 

Understanding with Mohave County, AZ, 

Washington County, UT, and the State 

of Utah, designating these entities as 

Cooperating Agencies for the NCA RMP 

and Amendment process.

5.3 COORDINATION WITH OTHER 

FEDERAL AGENCIES, STATE, AND 

LOCAL GOVERNMENTS, AND 

INDIAN TRIBES

Coordination with the USFWS pursuant 

to Section 7 of the Endangered Species 

Act has been ongoing throughout the 

development of the draft RMPs and 

Amendment. A Biological Assessment 

will be completed as part of this planning 

process and consultations will be conducted with the USFWS that will lead to 

the issuance of a Biological Opinion for 

the proposed RMPs and Amendment.

Coordination with the UTSHPO pursuant to 43 CFR 1610.3 and the Utah 

Programmatic Agreement (2001) was 

conducted for these planning efforts. 

Formal consultations under Section 106 

of the NHPA will be conducted related 

to cultural resource eligibility evaluations 

and during the implementationlevel planning.

The planning effort for Beaver Dam 

Wash NCA has been coordinated with 

the NPS-National Trails Intermountain 

Region Office, as it relates to the development of management alternatives for 

the Old Spanish Trail National Historic 

Trail. Coordination has also been conducted with the NPS-National Natural 

Landmark Program Office in the development of management options for possible boundary adjustments to the Joshua 

Tree National Natural Landmark.

5.4 CONSULTATIONS WITH 

FEDERAL, STATE, TRIBAL 

AND LOCAL GOVERNMENTAL 

ENTITIES CONCERNING THE 

“NORTHERN TRANSPORTATION 

ROUTE”

OPLMA 1977 (b) (2) directed that the 

Secretary of the Interior (through BLM) 

“in consultation with appropriate Federal 

agencies, State, tribal, and local governmental entities (including the County 

and City of St. George, Utah), and the 

public, identify one or more alternatives 

for a northern transportation route in the 

County.” On March 30th and April 26th 

of 2011, the BLM hosted meetings to discuss the “northern transportation route” 

and identify possible alignments, as mandated by OPLMA. The following entities 

were represented at these meetings: 

▶ Federal Highway Administration

▶ USFWS

▶ Utah Department of Natural 

Resources

▶ UDWR

▶ UDOT

▶ Five County Association of 

Governments

▶ City of St. George

▶ Washington County

▶ DMPO

The DMPO provided BLM with two 

studies to consider as part of the process 

to identify possible alignments for the 

“northern transportation route”. The 

studies described the purpose and need 

for a multi-lane road to address future 

traffic congestion issues in the greater St. 

George City area and options to reduce 

congestion on specific local roadways 

(studies are available for review at http://

www.dixiempo.org).

5.5 TRIBAL CONSULTATION

In accordance with the NHPA and other 

legal authorities (refer to BLM Manual 

8120), BLM initiated government-togovernment consultations with federallyrecognized American Indian Tribes and 

other Native American groups that claim 

cultural affiliation to the planning areas. 

In June of 2010, BLM initiated these 

consultations, by providing official notification of the land use planning process to 

the following Tribes or Bands:

▶ The Hopi Tribe

▶ The Navajo Nation

▶ The Pueblo of Zuni

▶ The Paiute Indian Tribe of Utah

Shivwits Band 

Cedar Band

Indian Peaks Band

Kanosh Band

Koosharem Band

▶ The Kaibab Band of Paiutes

▶ The Las Vegas Paiute Tribe

▶ The Moapa Band of Paiutes

▶ The Pahrump Band of Paiutes

▶ The Havasupai Tribe 

▶ The Hualapai Tribe

The notification letter invited tribal 

governments to become involved in the 

planning processes and outlined potential consultation opportunities during 

the planning process. The letter also 

requested input on issues and concerns 

to be considered during the planning 

process and initiated efforts to identify 

areas of traditional cultural concern. 

The Shivwits Band of Paiutes and the 

Paiute Indian Tribe of Utah were formally invited to become Cooperating 

Agencies in the process; neither elected 

to be a formal cooperator but agreed to 

participate informally in the alternatives 

development meetings. 

Tribes and Bands were updated about 

the status of the planning efforts through 

newsletters and informal contacts and 

meetings. Copies of the Draft RMPs 

and Amendment/ Draft EIS have been 

provided to all Tribes and groups list 

for review and comment. Consultation 

will continue throughout the planning 

process. This portion of Chapter 5 will be 

updated in the Final EIS to reflect ongoing consultation efforts.

COOPERATING AGENCIES TRIBAL CONSULTATION

"One of the most 

sincere forms of respect 

is actually listening to 

what another has 

to say."

–Bryant H. McGill, 

American Author, 

1969-

"We must keep 

on trying to solve 

problems, one by one, 

stage by stage, if not on 

the basis of confidence 

and cooperation, 

at least on that of 

mutual toleration and 

self-interest."

–Lester B. Pearson, 

Canadian Politician, 

1897-1972

Photo 5-2 Artifact Recovered from Mid-19th Century Orson B. Adams House, Red Cliffs NCA Photo 5-3 St. George Black-on-Grey Bowl 

Recovered from Red Cliffs NCA
896 Chapter 5 BDWNCA • RCNCA • SGFO RMP Amendment BDWNCA • RCNCA • SGFO RMP Amendment Chapter 5 897

5.6 PUBLIC SCOPING

5.6.1 Notice of Intent

In May 2010, the SGFO initiated the 

public scoping period with the publication of a NOI to prepare resource 

management plans for the Beaver Dam 

Wash NCA and the Red Cliffs NCA and 

to amend the SGFO RMP to address 

specific mandates from OPLMA, Subtitle 

O, Section 1974 and 1975. Public scoping 

is required by NEPA in the early stages 

of developing an EIS to determine the 

scope and significance of issues related to 

a proposed action, such as the development of RMPs or an RMP Amendment 

(40 Code of Federal Regulations 1501.7). 

Scoping helps identify issues important 

to the management of the public lands 

of the NCAs and SGFO, as well as issues 

and conflicts to be examined in the planning process and, ultimately, decisions 

in the NCA RMPs or the SGFO RMP 

Amendment. The scoping process is designed to encourage public participation 

and to solicit public input.

5.6.2 Open Houses, Newsletters, 

and Project Website

The NOI announced the dates, meeting 

locations, and times for the three public 

scoping open houses that were held for 

this planning process. It also included instructions for providing comments by the 

end date for the scoping period, July 19, 

2010. This same information was included in a press release published in newspapers throughout the planning area in 

May of 2010. Scoping meetings were held 

in the cities of St. George, Hurricane, 

and Salt Lake City, Utah (Photo 5-4 and 

Photo 5-5); and in Mesquite, Nevada. 

These meetings were announced in the 

local media, as well as through a planning newsletter that was mailed to 

hundreds of individuals, organizations 

and agencies and made available at each 

of the scoping meetings. The newsletter 

provided information about the scoping 

process and instructions for submitting 

comments. It also included information 

about the NCAs, the purposes for which 

Congress had designated them to the 

National Conservation Lands, and their 

resource values. The newsletter requested 

public input related to potential issues 

that could be considered in the planning 

PUBLIC SCOPING PUBLIC SCOPING

process and requested input on alternatives for long-term management of 

the public lands within each NCA. The 

mandates that required amendment of 

the SGFO RMP were identified in the 

newsletter and the public invited to submit nominations for ACECs to provide 

special management attention to priority 

biological species. The newsletter and 

other information about the planning 

process was also posted and updated on 

the BLM’s SGFO website (http:/www.blm.

gov/s7ld). 

The four public open houses were held 

over a one-week period in June 2010, 

and were attended by 269 members of 

the public and representatives from other 

federal agencies, as well as State and local 

governments. BLM resource specialists 

were available to answer questions and 

provide additional information about 

specific issues throughout the meeting. 

Informational posters and maps were on 

display during the open houses and were 

designed to stimulate questions from 

the public and assist the preparation of 

scoping comments, which were accepted 

through written comment forms, emails, 

and postings to the BLM website.

In January of 2011, a second planning 

newsletter was sent out to all governmental agencies, organizations, and 

members of the public who had requested to be placed on the mailing list. This 

newsletter provided an overview of the 

results of scoping, the availability of the 

scoping report, and the announcement 

of an Economic Strategies Workshop 

that was held in St. George, Utah, on 

February 18, 2011. 

5.6.3 Scoping Report

More information on the scoping process is available in the Scoping Report for 

the Resource Management Plans for the 

Beaver Dam Wash and Red Cliffs National 

Conservation Areas and Amendment 

to the St. George Field Office Resource 

Management Plan and Associated 

Environmental Impact Statement (http://

blm.gov/ttld). This report summarized issues identified by the public and includes 

all of the specific comments that resulted 

from the public scoping period.

5.6.4 Economic Strategies 

Workshop

A public Economic Strategies Workshop 

was conducted on February 18, 2011 (facilitated by a USDA TEAMS Enterprise 

"The most 

important thing in 

communication is 

hearing what isn't said."

–Peter Drucker, 

Businessman, 

1909-2005

"We always hear 

about the rights of 

democracy, but the 

major responsibility of 

it is participation. "

–Wynton Marsalis, 

Musician, 1961-

Photo 5-4 Public Scoping Meeting in St. George, Utah Photo 5-5 Public Scoping Meeting in Salt Lake City, Utah
898 Chapter 5 BDWNCA • RCNCA • SGFO RMP Amendment BDWNCA • RCNCA • SGFO RMP Amendment Chapter 5 899

Unit) to identify management opportunities involving public lands that would 

further the social and economic goals of 

area communities. Members of the public 

and representatives of local municipalities and county government attended 

the workshop. Participants explored the 

role of public lands in the socioeconomic 

sector of local communities and helped 

to identify those activities and uses on 

public lands that should be considered 

during the planning process.

Recreation on public lands was identified 

as an important part of the area economy 

and vital to area quality of life (Photo 

5-7). Participants expressed interest in 

a variety of recreation experiences (e.g., 

solitude for hiking, OHV, competitive 

recreation) and sought continued access 

to trails and routes that provided recreation opportunities. Incorporation of 

the motorized High Desert Trail into 

the BLM route system was also suggested. Heritage tourism (Photo 5-6) 

was noted to be an important recreation 

attraction, as well. In addition, marketing and advertising of these routes 

and recreation opportunities by BLM 

was emphasized, since local businesses 

depend on these opportunities and could 

benefit from further marketing (Photo 

5-8). Education and public outreach were 

recommended as methods to help resolve 

conflicts between non-motorized and 

motorized users. 

Access for other uses of public land, such 

as grazing, mineral development, and 

emergency response, was identified as an 

issue of concern for some participants. 

Some who provided comments stated 

that public land should continue to be 

available for the development of new 

power transmission lines, water pipelines, 

and other types of ROWs that support 

community growth. Livestock grazing on 

public land was reported as having direct 

economic benefits for area families who 

had been engaged in this activity 

for generations. 

The designation of new ACECs to promote and protect ecosystem services (e.g., 

water quality and biodiversity), wildlife 

habitat was identified by members of the 

public as important and compatible with 

multiple uses. Some participants identified concerns about the use of special 

PUBLIC SCOPING CONSISTENCY WITH STATE AND LOCAL PLANS

designations, such as ACECs, as a back 

door approach to wilderness designation. 

A report summarizing the comments 

received during this Economic Strategies 

Workshop is available on the planning 

website (http://blm.gov/stld).

5.7 CONSISTENCY WITH STATE 

AND LOCAL PLANS

FLPMA Section 202(b) (9) directs that 

the BLM provide for involvement of State 

and local government officials in the land 

use planning process and consider the 

provisions of tribal, state, and local plans 

that are relevant to the planning areas. 

BLM should attempt to resolve inconsistencies between federal and non-federal 

government plans, in the development of 

land use decisions for public lands, to the 

extent that those plans are consistent with 

the purposes, policies, and programs of 

federal laws and regulations applicable to 

public lands and the purposes of FLPMA. 

As part of this planning effort, the following approved plans were reviewed 

for consistency: 

■Gunlock State Park Resource 

Management Plan (2006);

■Mohave County General Plan (1995, 

revised 2010);

■Sand Hollow State Park Resource 

Management Plan (2010);

■Snow Canyon State Park Resource 

Management Plan (1998);

■Washington County General 

Management Plan (2010, amended 

2012).

Coordination with the Cooperating 

Agencies helps to ensure consistency in 

the development of management actions 

with non-federal land use plans, to the 

extent that those plans are consistent with 

the purposes, policies, and programs of 

federal laws and regulations applicable to 

public lands.

"Whether you’re 

hiking, biking, 

canoeing, or 

camping—exploring 

the outdoors is part of 

the American life."

–Gale Norton, 

Secretary of the Interior 

2001-2006, 1954-

Heritage Tourism

The National Trust for 

Historic Preservation defines 

heritage tourism as “traveling 

to experience the places, 

artifacts and activities that 

authentically represent the 

stories and people of the 

past.” Heritage tourism can 

include cultural, historic, and 

natural resources.

Photo 5-6 Marker on Red Reef East Trail for 

Heritage Tourism, Red Cliffs NCA

Photo 5-8 Marketing and Educational 

Brochures Developed by the SGFO

Photo 5-7 Exploring Cottonwood Canyon

Wilderness, Red Cliffs NCA
900 Chapter 5 BDWNCA • RCNCA • SGFO RMP Amendment BDWNCA • RCNCA • SGFO RMP Amendment Chapter 5 901

LIST OF PREPARERS LIST OF PREPARERS

5.8 LIST OF PREPARERS

Table 5-1 through Table 5-4 display the preparers of the Draft RMPs and Amendment 

to the SGFO RMP/Draft EIS and their areas of responsibility.

"Oh, give me land, lots 

of land under starry 

skies above

Don't fence me in

Let me ride through the 

wide open country that 

I love

Don't fence me in"

–Lyrics by Cole Porter 

and Robert Fletcher

 "Always drink 

upstream from the 

herd."

–Will Rogers, Cowboy 

& Humorist, 1879-1935

Name Title Areas of Responsibility

Tim Croissant NCA Wildlife Biologist Special Status Species, Vegetation, 

Fire and Fuels Management

Dawna Ferris-Rowley NCA Manager Project Management, Heritage 

Resources, Old Spanish Trail, 

Document Assembly, Technical 

Review and Editing

Dave Kiel NCA

Outdoor Recreation Planner

Recreation and Visitor Services, 

Travel Management, VRM, 

Wilderness, Lands with Wilderness 

Characteristics, Natural 

Soundscapes 

Iris Picat NCA Student Land Use 

Planning Assistant

Document Assembly and Editing 

Keith Rigtrup Land Use Planner (Color 

Country District Office)

Project Management, ACECs, 

Document Assembly Technical 

Review

Lynne Scott NCA Landscape Architect Recreation and Visitor Services, 

Interpretation, Document Graphic 

Design and Assembly, and 

Technical Review and Editing

Kyle Voyles NCA

Outdoor Recreation Planner

Geology, Paleontology, Caves and 

Karsts

Name Title Areas of Responsibility

Teresa Burke Realty Specialist, SGFO Lands and Realty

Dave Corry Natural Resource Specialist, 

SGFO

Soil and Water Resources, Livestock 

Grazing, Other Fish and Wildlife

Robert Douglas Wildlife Biologist, SGFO Special Status Species

Leonard Herr Air Quality, Utah State Office Air Quality

Shered Mullins Realty Specialist, SGFO Lands and Realty

Jaqueline Roaque Rangeland Management 

Specialist, SGFO

Livestock Grazing, Noxious Weeds 

and Invasive Species

Bill Stevens Outdoor Recreation Planner, 

Moab District Office

Socioeconomic Conditions, 

Environmental Justice

Jimmy Tyree Field Office Manager, SGFO Project Management, Technical 

Review and Editing

Name Areas of Responsibility

Austin Brewer Special Status Species

Pam Blackmore Technical Review and Editing

Elizabeth Mejicano Special Status Species, Wilderness, Technical Review and Editing

Melissa Buchman Recreation and Visitor Services, Lands with Wilderness 

Characteristics, Technical Review and Editing

Naomi Schoenwelter Vegetation, Livestock Grazing

Tom Lilly GIS Maps and Analyses

Braden Yardley Recreation and Visitor Services, Visitor Use 

Entity Services Provided

Booz, Allen, Hamilton Public Scoping, Scoping Comment Analysis, 

Preparation of Scoping Reports, Administrative 

Record, Socioeconomic Baseline Report and 

Analysis, Environmental Justice

US Forest Service Enterprise Team Economic Strategies Workshop

Photo 5-9 Basalt Strewn Landscape, Red Cliffs NCA

Photo 5-10 Livestock at Water Trough, Beaver Dam Wash NCA

Table 5-1 BLM NCA Core ID Team

Table 5-2 Other BLM Preparers

Table 5-3 American Conservation Experience Public Land Corps

Table 5-4 Contracted Services to Assist Planning Efforts